Śukadeva Gosvāmī welcomed the question of the King, Parīkṣit Mahārāja. Parīkṣit was . . . Parīkṣit Mahārāja was to live there just after seven days, therefore all the learned scholars, saintly persons, Kings because he was Emperor so he was going to die within seven days all these men from all parts of the world came to see him.
And in the assembly of such great personalities he enquired, "What is my duty?" And when he died, just after seven days, then what is my duty now? This is called brahma-jijñāsā everyone should enquire, "What is my duty?" But there is no such enquiry simply they are interested, "where is my bed, where is my sex, where is my buffet . . . meal . . . and where is my defence." These are the . . .
Actually they do not know that after death there is life, the same thing you put in an egg. As I have my past life, so I have got my present life, there must be future life, past present and future finally eternal. So the people do not know the modern education they have no knowledge what, what is the . . . (indistinct) . . . next life. Therefore lost. Therefore this kind of education has no value because after being educated if one does not know what is the value of life, simply for working and to earn livelihood to fill up this belly. This is done by the animals also. They are also busy all day, where is food, where is shelter, where is sex and where is defence?
Therefore when Parīkṣit Mahārāja enquired, so whether I shall devote myself . . . (indistinct) . . . for undestanding Kṛṣṇa . . . (indistinct) . . . because he was a devotee of Kṛṣṇa from his childhood the grandson of the Pāṇḍavas. The Pāṇḍavas were great devotees of Kṛṣṇa so he inherited the family tendency therefore he enquired whether I shall continue my Kṛṣṇa consciousness or I have to do something for the . . . (indistinct) . . . something else. The answer to these questions Śukadeva Gosvāmī says: "Glorious, your question is very nice because you are enquiring about Kṛṣṇa." To enquire about Kṛṣṇa and receive the proper answer that is our life.
The people do not know what is the value of life, so he agreed that your question is varīyān, varīyān means glorious. Why glorious? So because the answer to be given it will be beneficial for the whole people of the world. Just like Arjuna was talking with Kṛṣṇa and putting some questions and he was answering Kṛṣṇa, and that answer is not only for Arjuna, it is for every human being.
When Kṛṣṇa asked Arjuna to "Surrender unto to Me" that: sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁśaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). This was not meant for Arjuna only, it was meant for all human beings. When Kṛṣṇa says: man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65) "You just become My devotee, worship Me, offer your obeisances unto Me," so this is not only for Arjuna this is for the whole human kind.
Although Arjuna is considered a human being who was present. Similarly here also the question is welcome because Kṛṣṇa . . . (indistinct) . . . simply by questioning about Kṛṣṇa, what we can understand what is Kṛṣṇa and when we understand what is Kṛṣṇa then immediately you are liberated. Therefore Śukadeva Gosvāmī says that your praśnaḥ, enquiry is very glorious.
Ātmavit-sammataḥ, ātmavit those who know the value of life it is approved by them. It is approved by persons who know the value of life then it is acceptable, whether . . . (indistinct) . . . approved. Not that I theorise something, where your approval? The atheist class they say: "There is no God," where. Where is the proof of your statement? You say: "There is no God," I say" "There is God." We settle up this . . . (indistinct) . . . approve whether you are right or I am right.
So when man says: "There is no God," where is the evidence? You must say something which is scientific, approved by learned scholars but we find . . . so most of them they will approve that, "Yes there is God, we cannot say that there is no God." Besides that we have got Vedic proof, if you say something, if you cannot quote from the Vedas then it is not accepted. Just like the law court if you propose some legal significance you must quote from the law books. Then it will be accepted by the judge otherwise if you manufacture something it will be not accepted in the law court.
So Indian system of acquiring knowledge means it must be approved by persons who know what is the . . . or the person who is giving some statement he must quote from Vedic literature in support of his claim. That is to be realised otherwise whimsically if you say something, at least we Kṛṣṇa consciousness . . . (indistinct) . . . you will not accept. Unless there is approved scientific statement, we don’t care for any of it. Therefore it is said ātmavit-sammataḥ, ātmavit one who has realised the soul, not for one any other person.
One who has not realised soul, ātma, these statements which are proven will not be accepted because he is a fool. Anyone who says that there is no soul, there is no birth after his death, they are all rascals. Immediately . . . (indistinct) . . . that he is first-class rascal, talking all nonsense. It should not be allowed. Maybe in the estimation of modern people, that man is a great scientist or a great philosopher. He is not actually scientist or philosopher because he does not know what is next, where he will go after the life, he does not know. Then what is the value of his vast knowledge? No value.
Here it is said that, ātmavit-sammataḥ puṁsām and this question is very important therefore he says, śrotavyādiṣu yaḥparaḥ (SB 2.1.1). To prepare . . . we have got to hear so many things . . . (indistinct) . . . that is our life to question just like a child questions his mother, "What is this mother, what is this mother." That child is very intelligent if a child questions than it is to be understood he is going to be a very learned scholar in future, these are the symptoms, inquisitive. Without inquisitiveness the last question should be, "What is God?" That is very nice if the persons do not enquire about God he's animal. The animals cannot enquire, "What is God?"A human being must enquire, "What is God?", and he must try to understand.
So, ātmavit-sammataḥ puṁsāṁ śrotavyādiṣu yaḥ paraḥ (SB 2.1.1), śrotavyādiṣu just like in the morning so many people are interested in the newspapers, bunch of newspapers, all advertisements, so many news, just after reading for half an hour it is thrown. It has no value, sometimes at 10 o’clock the newspapermen they sell at less price because nobody requires anymore. They require some information in the morning, so that kind of information has no value, here it is said, śrotavyādiṣu yaḥ paraḥ, paraḥ means supreme. Supreme enquiry is, "What is God, what I am, what is my relationship with God, what is this material world?"
These are questions and when these questions are discussed in the assembly of sane persons then it becomes kṛto loka-hitaṁ nṛpa, it is beneficial for everyone who will hear. Not that the hearing about the news information, it is śrotavyam, this śrotavyam means beneficial to the human. So if it is not beneficial to the human, it may be beneficial to a certain class of men, suppose those who are businessmen. They are interested to know the market price of certain things that is found in the newspapers.
So it is beneficial to that person but it is beneficial to that person for two hours because market is changing, the price has already changed. That is not permanently . . . (indistinct) . . . but these questions, "What is God, what I am, what is my relationship with God," this is permanently beneficial and so long one does not enquire about these things he is considered as animal. The animals cannot enquire about God.