Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


That is wrong (Lectures, Other)

Expressions researched:
"This is a wrong" |"that is a wrong" |"that is also wrong" |"that is another wrong" |"that is his wrong" |"that is the wrong" |"that is wrong" |"that is your wrong" |"that is, means wrong" |"this is all wrong" |"this is also wrong" |"this is now wrong" |"this is the wrong" |"this is wrong" |"this is your wrong"

Lectures

Nectar of Devotion Lectures

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 8, 1972:

People are after śānti. This is the formula of śānti. We have to accept Kṛṣṇa as the supreme enjoyer. Not we are enjoyer. At the present moment, all our activities are going on, self-centered: "I am enjoyer. I am leader. I am bhokta." No. This is wrong. Kṛṣṇa is bhokta. Kṛṣṇa is leader. Kṛṣṇa is the friend. Kṛṣṇa is the proprietor. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. This news, this idea, should be spread all over the world. Then automatically, very easily, all the nations will be united. Because Kṛṣṇa consciousness acceptance means ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam (CC Antya 20.12). The difficulty is the members in the United Nations, they assemble together, but their heart is not clean. They meet together with unclean heart; therefore there is no solution. Whereas Kṛṣṇa consciousness means those who are meeting on the platform of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, they are meeting in cleansed heart. That is the difference. Ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam. Therefore that unity is very solid and sound. And with unclean heart, if we meet, officially, there is no possibility of unity. United Nations, it may be, in the name, but in fact, in fact it cannot be established. Go on.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 29, 1973:

There, there are three kinds of so-called spiritual happiness, brahma-sukha, brahmānanda... Three kinds of ānanda, jaḍānanda, brahmānanda. Jaḍānanda means material. As karmīs are trying to possess more and more, more and more—"Let me possess, let me possess"—this is jaḍānanda. Today I have got, say, one lakh of rupees. Idam adya mayā labdham imaṁ prāpsye punar dhanam. This is stated, the asuric vicāra. "Today I have got so much money. And tomorrow I am going to increase it to so much." Ko 'sti āḍhyo 'yam. "I am the richest." This is karmī's conception. And jñānīs, because they're fed up, so they say, brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā: "This world is false." Grapes are sour. You know the story, jackal? He wanted to take the grapes, jumping, jumping, jumping. When he could not get it, he says, "Oh, grapes are sour. I have no necessity. I have no necessity." Similarly these rascals, they renounce the world. What renouncement? What you had? You are renouncing? This is also wrong. The real happiness is sevā. "This is Kṛṣṇa's, and it must be used for Kṛṣṇa's purpose." That is real happiness. Actual, that is the fact. The same example: If you pick up one hundred rupees' note, if you pocket it, then you are a thief. If you don't touch it, then it will be lost; somebody will take it. You pick up and give to the original proprietor, that will be satisfaction. That is Vaiṣṇava philosophy. We do not say anything bad. We do not say. That is Rūpa Gosvāmī's formula. That is Vaiṣṇava formula.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 1.9 -- Mayapur, April 2, 1975:

It is not that we are accepting this verse of Caitanya-caritāmṛta author. No. It is confirmed by the Vedic knowledge. This is the origin of creation, not that this chunk, or... No. Matter cannot expand. Matter, when there is reaction... Just like explosion. We have got experience that there is sometimes explosion like if you mix together two chemicals, acid and alkaline, there is explosion for the time being. But this explosion takes place when a chemist in the laboratory mixes soda, soda bicarb, and citric acid. Otherwise, it is not possible.

So this is wrong theory that matter automatically takes the explosion or something like that. Matter is handled by some superior living being. Then it explodes or whatever you call. It reacts. Otherwise, it is not possible. And because the living being takes the superior position for explosion of matter or reaction of matter, therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā it is admitted that the matter is handled by the living being; it is inferior energy. Both of them are energies of the Supreme Lord, but one is superior energy, another is inferior energy. That is the statement in the Bhagavad-gītā. Bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ (BG 7.4), this material things, earth, water, air, fire, they are inferior energy. And Kṛṣṇa says, apareyam: "They are inferior. There is another, superior energy." Apareyam itas tu viddhi me prakṛtiṁ parām: "There is another, superior energy." And what is that superior energy? Now, jīva-bhūtām, "These living entities." Jīva-bhūtāṁ mahā-bāho. The superior energy is not produced by the inferior energy. That is nonsense. The inferior energy is produced by the superior energy. This is perfect. We have got experience that the superior controls the inferior, not that inferior controls the superior.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.100-108 -- New York, November 22, 1966:

In spite of all changes, you are the same." I think, my childhood, I think that I am the same. I forget that I am so much grown-up. That is my position. So the first lesson, the inquiry of Śrī Caitanya, of Sanātana Gosvāmī, is that "What I am? What I am?" Arjuna did not place himself "What I am?" but here, because the instruction which is given in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta is practically higher than Bhagavad-gītā—it is postgraduate study, higher than Bhagavad-gītā. In the Bhagavad-gītā the, Arjuna, he did not question "What I am?" He was perplexed with this bodily conception. Now here, Sanātana Gosvāmī he, he thinks that "I'm not..., I do not know what I am." So he's advanced than Arjuna. He accepts that "I do not know."

So because he inquired that ke āmi-ke āmi means "What I am?"—therefore Lord Caitanya directly informs him first that jīvera svarūpa haya kṛṣṇera nitya dāsa (CC Madhya 20.108). Jīva, the living entity, is eternally a servitor of the Supreme Lord. Eternal. He gets, He says, jīvera svarūpa haya kṛṣṇera nitya dāsa. That is his identity. So he refused all nonsensical ideas that "I am God, I am equal with God." In the first beginning, he refused this idea, that "This is wrong. You are living entity. Your position is that you are eternally servitor of Kṛṣṇa, or the Supreme Lord."

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.108-109 -- New York, July 15, 1976:

That is not bhakti. That is Māyāvāda. That is mistake. Bhakti means to understand that "I am eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa." This conviction is possible when one is brahma-bhūtaḥ. Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā na śocati na kāṅkṣati. Brahma-bhūta means "I am part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa," as it is said, sūryāṁśa-kiraṇa, yaiche agni-jvālā-caya, svābhāvika kṛṣṇera... Oh... When one understands this, that "I am... My position is eternal servant," that is brahma-bhūta (SB 4.30.20). Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā (BG 18.54). Then undoubtedly he becomes immediately jubilant, that "Now I have got my real master to serve. I am serving so many, I mean, items, in the family, in the society, in the community, in the nation. But I could not be satisfied. Neither I am..., persons to whom I have given my service, they are also not satisfied." This is wrong service. Nobody is satisfied. The so-called master is not satisfied, and the so-called servant is not satisfied. The so-called servant means that "Unless you pay me, I am not going to serve you." Strike. "I am your master. You pay me. Then I shall serve you." So nobody is servant actually. Everyone wants to become master, either collectively or individually. That is māyā. This is material world. And when one understands that he is not a master—he is servant—and the real master is Kṛṣṇa, that is liberation.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.111 -- New York, July 19, 1976:

When Kṛṣṇa described about the material energy, bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ (BG 7.4), earth, water, air, fire... These are material energies, gross. And there are subtle material energies, mind, intelligence and egotism. Beyond that, apareyam... These are inferior energies. Beyond that, there is spiritual energy. What is that spiritual energy? Jīva-bhūtaḥ. That you know. (?) That is spiritual energy. That spiritual energy is always different from the material energy. Unfortunately the so-called scientists, they have no sufficient intelligence. On account of poor fund of knowledge, they are mixing up. They are thinking that there is no spiritual energy separately, but by combination of matter, chemicals, the spiritual energy comes into existence. That is wrong; that is not fact. Spiritual energy is completely different from the material energy. That is energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but spiritual energy is direct, and material energy is indirect. Both of them are energies of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and when there is question of energy, śakti, some energy, so we have to accept the source of energy. Just like electric energy. We see there is electric energy, but there is source of electricity, the powerhouse. How can you deny it? Those who are foolish persons, they think that a childish, that this bulb is giving light automatically. No. That is not fact. The fact is, the electric energy is coming from the background, the powerhouse, then about the bulb is giving light.

So whatever intelligence we have got, that is not our intelligence; that is God's intelligence. Mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca (BG 15.15). In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said. That intelligence is coming, but the intelligence, why you'll find different? So just like the bulb. There are fifteen-candle-power, there is fifty-candle-power, hundred-candle-power—according to the bulb, the energy is exhibited. Similarly, according to our power of reception, we can exhibit our intelligence, merit. But actually it is coming from God. Anything... The same principle. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), the Vedānta philosophy, "Absolute Truth means the original source of everything." Everything may be of different varieties, but the original source is Kṛṣṇa.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 22.27-31 -- New York, January 15, 1967:

Now, there are many speculators. After some philosophical speculation, they think, "Now I have realized that 'I am the same. I am same God. I am God.' " So this process is called jñāna system. So Lord Caitanya says that these jñānīs, they artificially think that "Now I have realized myself," but actually that is not self-realization. Self-realization is when you actually engage yourself in the service of the Lord. That is your self-realization. Because you are part and parcel, your duty is to serve the whole. If you think yourself, "I am whole," that is wrong conception. That is wrong conception. You are not whole. How you can be whole? So there are so many examples that think ourself that "I am the Supreme. I am the whole." Just the other day I was speaking to you: it is the last snare. We are not whole. We are part and parcel. Just..., just the hand in healthy condition, as part and parcel of the body, is very nice. When the hand is working in his position, that position is very nice. But when it is not working—it is in diseased condition—do you think it is very nice? No. Paralyzed hand, simply in the name it is hand, but it has no function. So that sort of understanding, without actually reinstated in the healthy state of our spiritual life, simply thinking that "I am now spiritually realized; I am the Supreme," this is not pure. So Lord Caitanya says, vastutaḥ buddhi 'śuddha' nahe: "That sort of conception is not purified intelligence. That is still contaminated intelligence."

Sri Isopanisad Lectures

Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 9 -- Los Angeles, May 13, 1970:

So there are two kinds of education: material education and spiritual education, brahma-vidyā and jaḍa-vidyā. Jaḍa-vidyā means material education. Jaḍa. Jaḍa means "which cannot move," matter. And spiritual education... Spirit can move. Our body is combination of spirit and matter. So long the spirit is there, this body is moving. Just like coat-pant is moving so long a man wears it. It appears that the coat is moving, the pant is moving, but actually the living entity is moving, and the covering, the dress, appears to be moving. Similarly, this body is moving because the spirit soul is moving. This is only... Just like a vehicle. A motorcar is moving; that means the driver is moving. So foolish people will think that the motorcar is moving. Motorcar does not move. In spite of all mechanical arrangement, it cannot move. That is the wrong way of education. People who are thinking that this material nature is working, moving and manifesting so many wonderful things... Just like in the seaside we see the waves are moving. But the waves are not moving; the air moving it. But air is not moving. In this way, you go back, back, back, what is the ultimate cause, then you'll find Kṛṣṇa is the cause of all causes. That is called philosophy, to search out the ultimate cause.

Arrival Addresses and Talks

Arrival Lecture -- San Francisco, July 15, 1975:

And God is the friend of everyone. Why not? He claims that "Everyone, every living entity—never mind in which form he is existing—he is My son." So is not the father the best friend of the son? But no. We are claiming, "I shall become your friend. I shall become your leader. I shall lead you to prosperity." No. That is false. The political leaders or the so-called religious leaders or other many leaders there are. They are taking the position of God, that "I shall become your friend. I shall lead you so that you will become happy." That is wrong. You cannot become friend. To how many people or how many men you can become friend? One, two, three, four, five, thousand, ten thousand, million? But there are unlimited, asāṅkhyā. Jīva bhāva sa..., asāṅkhyā. You cannot count how many. Suppose you can become friend of your children at home or your friend's wife, sons and others. But how you can become friends the elephant in the African jungle? You cannot become. But you will see. There are hundreds and thousands of elephants in the jungle of Africa. They are eating, sleeping, very nicely. Who is supplying their necessities? God is supplying. You will find in your room in a hole that thousands of ants are coming out. Are you giving them food? Who is supplying food?

So therefore God is actually the friend of everybody. That is a fact. But we rascals, we are claiming, "I shall be your friend. I shall be your leader." Therefore the leader, so-called leader, is not in peace. How it can be? All leaders are trying to keep his position some way or other, and that is very difficult job, no peace. That is not possible. You know. Your president, Mr. Nixon, wanted to keep himself in the position. How much restless he was. These are to be studied, that don't claim yourself as friend of somebody or the people or the nation. No. Teach them that "God is your friend. I am God's servant. I am bringing this message to you. And I can teach you how God can become your friend and you derive friendship result from God." That is guru. A guru does not say, "I am God." That is not guru. Guru will never say.

Arrival Address -- Mauritius, October 1, 1975:

So these things are very nicely explained in the Bhagavad-gītā. If we simply read Bhagavad-gītā carefully, under proper guidance, then everything will be clear, without any difficulty, that "I am not this body, I am spirit soul. My business is different than this bodily concept of life. I shall never be happy taking, accepting this body as self. That is a wrong foundation of knowledge." In this way, if we make progress, then we shall understand, ahaṁ brahmāsmi: "I am spirit soul." Then wherefrom I have come? Everything is described in the Bhagavad-gītā, that the spirit soul, Kṛṣṇa says, the Lord says, mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ: (BG 15.7) "These living entities, they are My part and parcel, fragment, or minute sparks." As the big fire and the small fire, both of them are fire, but big fire and small fire... So far the fire quality is concerned, God and we are the same. So we can understand, we can study God by studying ourselves. That is another meditation. But it will be perfect when we understand that "Although qualitatively I am a sample of God or the same quality, but still, He is the great, I am the small." That is perfect understanding. Anu, vibhu; Brahman, Para-brahman; īśvara, parameśvara—this is perfect understanding. Because I am qualitatively one, it does not mean that I am the Supreme. In the Vedas it is said, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). We are nitya, eternal; God is also eternal. We are living being; God is also a living being. But He is the chief living being; He is the chief eternal. We are also eternal, but we are not chief. Why? Eko yo bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān. Just like we require a leader, similarly, He is the supreme leader. He is maintainer. He is providence. He is providing everyone's necessities. We can see that there are elephants in Africa. Who is providing them food? There are millions of ants within the hole of your room. Who is feeding them? Eko yo bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kaman. So in this way, if we realize ourself, that is self-realization.

Initiation Lectures

Initiation -- Seattle, October 20, 1968:

Prabhupāda: Please wait. Let me finish. Let me finish.

Viṣṇujana: You don't have to speak to him.

Young woman: Yes I do. You are sitting up there and all of these people are sitting here, and you're like you're on a throne. And you're feeling...

Viṣṇujana: No.

Young woman: Pardon? No, this is wrong.

Prabhupāda: That's all right. Let us chant. (kīrtana-prema-dhvanī) Where is that girl? She is gone?

Viṣṇujana: I think Madhudviṣa explained to her. She did not know about the bowing down and everything.

Prabhupāda: What was her question?

Viṣṇujana: She was thinking that we were bowing to you as if you were God. She resents this, because in the Christian religion it says, "Bow down to no man."

Prabhupāda: What did you explain?

Viṣṇujana: I don't know.

Prabhupāda: (laughs) Did you not explain that we are bowing down not as God, as God's representative? Did you..., could not explain like this?

Madhudviṣa: She's over there, I think, if you'd like to talk to her.

Viṣṇujana: You can explain that to her.

Initiation Lecture -- Los Angeles, December 19, 1968:

Prabhupāda: That is different thing. Just like you have got the blood of your father. That does not mean you are father. That is different thing. Everything is one: Kṛṣṇa. That is the difference between the philosophy of Māyāvāda and Vaiṣṇava. They simply take the One, but we take One, but there is diversity. That they do not understand. Actually, unity... Diversity in unity. Monism means they do not accept the diversity. They simply take that oneness. Oneness is certainly—there is nothing but Kṛṣṇa. Just like Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, "I am everywhere spread." Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam. "Everything, whatever you see, that is I am, but I am not there." Nāhaṁ teṣu avasthitaḥ (BG 9.4). They are existing. Everything existing in Kṛṣṇa. But that does not mean... Just like this table. The table is also Kṛṣṇa in one sense, because it is the manifestation of Kṛṣṇa's energy. Therefore this is not different from Kṛṣṇa. But if you think that "Instead of worshiping Kṛṣṇa, let me worship this table," that is wrong, nonsense. This is the difference between Māyāvāda philosophy and Vaiṣṇava philosophy. The Māyāvāda philosophy says that even if I worship the table, it is all right. But Kṛṣṇa does not say. It is Māyāvāda philosophers said. Kṛṣṇa says, "Yes, table is existing in Me. I am also table. But I am not there." You see in the Bhagavad-gītā. So never think like that, that "I am Bhīṣma" or "I am Prahlāda" or "I am..." No. You are always servant of such devotee. That's all.

Bīrabhadra: If we pretend we're the servant of... If we pretend we're the servant of Bhīṣma and...

Prabhupāda: Servant of his servant (CC Madhya 13.80).

Bīrabhadra: Servant of the servant of Bhīṣma...

Prabhupāda: Yes, that's all.

Initiation -- Hawaii, March 25, 1969:

We are not after such thing. But if somebody has got money, he wants to construct temple, it is welcome. We can give nice plan how to do it. In India there are Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa temples, just like one temple is as good as a big fort. They spend so much. You see? But here also, in your country, there are many big churches. So people, formerly they were religiously inclined. So either Christian, Muhammadan or Hindus or anyone, they were constructing temple, churches, mosques. But that mentality is gone. You see? They will spend lots of money for a skyscraper building to get income, and temple is called nonproductive building. You see? They do not wish to engage their money in nonproductive thing because they have become economic. But that is wrong theory. You see? That economic means forgetting God. And that means, I mean to say, animal life. If by becoming a human being, he becomes an animal, if he thinks that he has become economical, that is not very sane conclusion. So godless means animal. The animals, they do not know how to create a church or temple or mosque. The mosque or temple or church, they are done in the human society. So when the human society forgets this responsibility from economic point of view, that means they degrade to the animal life.

Now you can chant, those who are initiated. (ceremony begins, chanting of oṁ apavitraḥ) (break) ...Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. Then take another bead, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. In this way you come to this end. Don't cross this summit. Again begin from this end. In this way chant daily sixteen rounds. One round, two round, three round, four round, fifth round, like that. And you have noted down the rules and regulation? Yes. And the ten kinds of offenses to give up, chanting? Yes. And your Godbrothers will help you. I don't think there is name, any Balabhadra? So your spiritual name is Balabhadra. Just bow down. (devotee repeating each word:)

Initiation Lecture -- Hyderabad, August 22, 1976:

So Kṛṣṇa is always ready to help us provided we are eager to take His help. Then jñāna-dīpena bhāsvatā. When Kṛṣṇa takes charge of making you enlightened in knowledge, who can be better person of knowledge, man of knowledge, or wise, than a devotee? A devotee, they say a devotee... Only the foolish person who has no knowledge, he becomes a devotee. That is a wrong conception. Without full knowledge, nobody can become devotee. Because he has no scarcity of knowledge. Kṛṣṇa says, jñāna-dīpena bhāsvatā. He gives special—teṣām evānukampārtham aham ajñāna-jaṁ tamaḥ (BG 10.11). "Darkness I drive away." Ajñāna-jaṁ nāśayāmy ātma-bhāva-stho. So take shelter of Kṛṣṇa and avoid these four principles of sinful life and chant sixteen rounds. Then easily you become advanced in spiritual consciousness, Kṛṣṇa consciousness. And as soon as you understand Kṛṣṇa, you become liberated immediately. Janma karma ca divyaṁ yo jānāti tattvataḥ, tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9).

General Lectures

Lecture on Maha-mantra -- New York, September 8, 1966:

Similarly, the whole creation, anything... Generally there are three things: the potent, God, and His three energies. This is the sum total: internal energy, external energy, and marginal energy. External energy is this material manifestation. Just like this body is my external energy. I am soul, so my external energy is this body. Similarly, I have got my internal energy. That is my consciousness. Consciousness is my internal energy, and this body and the mind and this material demonstration, or manifestation, is my external energy. The body has developed, the mind has developed, from me, soul, not that I, consciousness, is developed from this body. No. That is a wrong conception. That is a wrong conception. You cannot develop consciousness from this body. Otherwise a dead man could have been again revived to consciousness. Because if matter is the cause of consciousness, then the whole matter is there already. Whole matter. The dead body means, so far material substance is concerned, everything is there, present. Nothing has disappeared. If you say there is no blood-oh, that is not very difficult thing, blood, a red substance. Do you mean to say something red injected within this body will bring back the life? No. If redness is the cause of life or consciousness, then modern chemical can make immediately by chemical combination the whole thing red. Or take example: there are many natural stones, they are by nature red. If you say that "This artificial redness cannot give life; the natural redness is the cause of life," then you take the stone. It has got natural redness, but there is no life. But there is no life. So redness is also not the cause of consciousness of life. That is a wrong theory. That is a complete... Consciousness is completely different thing, qualitatively different. Nothing is different from one to another, just like I have explained already that the earth, wood, then smoke, then fire—everything is linked up, but everything is also different from one another.

Sunday Feast Lecture -- Los Angeles, January 19, 1969:

He was the father of Vyāsadeva. Vyāsadeva is called Veda-Vyāsa. His another name is Veda-Vyāsa. Veda-Vyāsa means... His actual name is Vyāsadeva, but because he compiled all the Vedic knowledge in book form... Before the advent of this present age, which is known as Kali-yuga... He compiled all Vedic knowledge... Before that, there was no necessity of book writing, neither there was facility of printing books. There was no press. People had no necessity of keeping knowledge in writing. There was no necessity. Their memory was so sharp that once heard from the spiritual master, they remembered. But in this age, in this Kali-yuga, memory, duration of life, mercifulness, stature of the body, and so many things, they are reducing. They are reducing. We are not advancing. That is wrong idea. For example, in your country the stature is also reducing. Formerly in our childhood, I saw Europeans and Americans, they were very tall. But not only in your country, every country the stature is reducing. The memory is reducing. The duration of life... Your grandfather or great-grandfather, perhaps he lived for hundred years. I saw. My grandmother lived for ninety-five years. My father lived for eighty-four years. So I do not know how long I shall live. Still I am living. So in this way the age, duration of life, will reduce in this age. And it is also said that at the ultimate stage, at the end of this age, if a man lives for twenty to thirty years, he'll be considered a grand old man. So because our human assets are reducing... Practically there is no mercifulness now, dayā. Formerly a man was very charitable, but here, at the present moment, where is the question of charity? He cannot maintain oneself. So these things are reducing. Therefore Vyāsadeva thought it wise to give the Vedic knowledge in writings so that we can read, we can hear, and we can utilize, we can take benefit out of it. So Vyāsadeva gave us this Vedic literature. His father, Parāśara Muni, gave us the definition, the understanding of God, what we mean by God. So he gave us this definition, that "God is He who is full with six kinds of opulences, of which there is nobody greater or nobody is equal. Then he is God." You try to understand the six kinds of, I mean to say, opulences, and you try to find out a person who has no competitor, neither greater than him. Then you accept him as God. Otherwise reject. Don't accept.

Lecture at International Student Society -- Boston, May 3, 1969:

Man (11): Who is the original authority of Bhagavad-gītā?

Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa. Yes. You have read Bhagavad-gītā? You read it thoroughly. Then you will understand.

Man (11): No, but I think (I've seen?) Bhagavad-gītā without...

Prabhupāda: You think. That is a wrong thing. Your thinking is not authority.

Man (12): The man's protesting.

Devotee: That's the man's opinion.

Prabhupāda: That's your opinion. That's all right. Opinion may differ. That's all right. That's your opinion. Opinion may be... You may have one opinion; another have another opinion. But whose opinion should be accepted? That is the question.

Man (13): (indistinct)

Woman (9): He said he can have his opinion.

Prabhupāda: All right. So any other questions? Let us chant. (kīrtana) (end)

Conway Hall Lecture -- London, September 15, 1969:

Guest (2): Because what I meant... I would like to know... Suppose... This is the point that we want to recommend. We are like drones(?), and we could go to Gokula in any way, in any other way.

Prabhupāda: No. That is not explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, and that is your wrong interpretation. Any way, no. The same way you have to go. Just like in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, mama vartmānuvartante manuṣyāḥ pārtha sarvaśaḥ (BG 4.11): "Everyone is trying to come to Me," but someone has come a few steps, another has come to another few steps, another step. Ultimately... That was... I explained it. You have to reach that Vāsudeva. That comes to the..., or that is possible after many, many births. It is clearly said, "After many, many births," bahūnāṁ janmanām ante (BG 7.19), "one comes to this point." Another verse in the Bhagavad-gītā, it is said that kāmais tais tair hṛta-jñānāḥ prapadyante 'nya-devatāḥ (BG 7.20). Anya-devatāḥ. Those who are bewildered by lust, material lust, they go to worship other demigods. So these things are there. How can you deny it?

Guest (2): I'm sorry, I couldn't agree with you that Śiva is a demigod. I couldn't believe it.

Prabhupāda: That is stated in everywhere. You have to learn it.

Guest (3) (Indian man): (indistinct) ...consciousness, then what is that other Kṛṣṇa? Or, other than Kṛṣṇa, what (indistinct) And wherefrom (indistinct).

Prabhupāda: Yes. I quite follow you. Everywhere is sunshine, but still, the sun's situation is a particular place.

Guest (3) (Indian man): (indistinct)

Lecture -- London, September 26, 1969:

What is the Absolute Truth? That it is stated, Absolute... Vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvam (SB 1.2.11). "Those who are actually in knowledge of the Absolute Truth, they speak of the Absolute Truth in this way." What is that? Advaya-jñānam: nondual. There is no duality. Although there is variety, but there is no duality. Here in the material world, as soon as there is variety, there is duality. But in the spiritual world, there is variety, but there is no duality. How is that? There is crude example. Many, you can try to understand. Just like this sun. You are seeing every day, sun. Now the sun means there are three divisions: the sunlight, sunshine; the sun globe; and the sun deity. Don't think in the sun planet there is no living entities. That is a wrong conception. As in this planet there are living entities, similarly, in the sun planet also, there are living entities, but their bodies are differently constructed. Just like your body is differently constructed. You cannot remain in the water. But the fishes, the aquatics, they can remain in the water. It is the question of construction of the body. But you cannot say that "Because I cannot live in the water, therefore nobody can live in the water." That is nonsense. This is nonsense. So they, our scientists are so-called nonsense only. They say, "No, there cannot be any existence of living entity in the moon pla..., moon planet or sun planet." They say like that. But our Vedic literature does not say like that. Living entities... It is said, sarva-gaḥ. They can go anywhere, and they can live anywhere. Sarva-gaḥ. Sarva means all; gaḥ means going. You can go. Just like here in London city, you are sitting here, you can go any other part, similarly, you can go any other part of the universe or any other part of God's creation. There is material world, spiritual world... You can go everywhere. But you must be capable of going there. Just like we Indians. There are many Indians... Or there are many Englishmen also, some of them want to go to India. Some of the Indians, from India they want to come to London. They think London is very wonderful city. And some Englishmen also think, "Oh, India is very wonderful land." So we are thinking that moon land or sun land or so many other planets, Venus...

Town Hall Lecture -- Auckland, April 14, 1972:

Just like in law court, two lawyers are arguing. One lawyer who quotes from the lawbook various bona fide quotations, the judgment is given in his favor because that is authorized. Similarly, a Vedic statement is accepted in Indian spiritual society. There are hundreds and thousands of men who are still dedicated. Practically the whole population of India, they are dedicated to spiritual life. Perhaps you may not know, but anyone who has taken birth in India, he has got a natural inheritance of spiritual life. Unfortunately, at the present moment the leaders are under wrong impression that in India, being too much spiritually inclined, its material advancement has been checked. But material advancement does not become hampered by spiritual knowledge. That is a wrong impression. Rather, if you become spiritually advanced, your material necessities will be very nicely adjusted. That is the injunction, Bhagavad-gītā, yuktāhāra-vihārasya yogo bhavati siddhi-da. Yoga... Spiritual life means yoga. So yogic life can be very nicely successful if you adjust your material necessities of life. If you become extravagant so far your material necessities of life is concerned, then you cannot make successful in yogic life.

So there are so many rules and regulations. Those who are interested in yoga, you will find in the authorized books, yoga indriya-saṁyamaḥ: "The aim of yogic power, yogic success, is to control the senses." Our senses in this material world have been described as venomous serpents. Indriya-kāla-sarpa-paṭalī. Kāla-sarpa, cobra, black cobra. So these indriyas are like that. Indriya means senses. As soon as touches, immediately it makes him poisonous. And that is the cause of our material conditional life. The more we are indulging unrestrictedly in sense gratification, we are becoming more and more entangled. Therefore those who are very much addicted to the bodily necessities of life, for them this haṭha-yoga system... Haṭha-yoga system means yama, niyama, aṣṭāṅga-yoga. It is called aṣṭāṅga-yoga. Yama, niyama, āsana, prāṇāyāma, dhyāna, dhāraṇā, pratyāhāra, samādhi. These things are in the aṣṭāṅga-yoga. The first thing is yama-niyama. One must have regulated life.

Lecture -- London, July 12, 1972:

Prabhupāda: Material means it is to be finished. Where is the advancement? You do not want to die, but why you die? Where is your advancement?

Indian guest: No, I fully agree with your interpretation of Bhāgavata, but the comparison between Darwin's discoveries and what is mentioned in Bhāgavata, I don't agree with that. It is already mentioned in Bhāgavata, but Swamijī, you are from a different point of view. So...

Prabhupāda: No, that is a wrong theory. Therefore we say. That is a wrong theory. Darwin is studying this body. He does not know. He has no information of the soul; therefore his knowledge is imperfect. His theory is imperfect. It is a long subject matter. If you want to discuss, you come. We shall discuss. It is a wrong theory. That is not scientific advancement. Science means it must be correct. That is science. If science is theory, that is not science. So Darwin is advocating his theory, "May be like this, perhaps like this." This "perhaps," "maybe," is not science. This is only suggestion. We have to deal with the facts. That is science.

Indian guest: Yes, but as you say, there are two ways of reaching the God. Either through the study of Vedas up to...

Prabhupāda: Yes. Through study of Vedas, not study something nonsense. Study of Vedas.

Indian guest: That is up to the level of self-analysis, because it is that time when we compare.(?)

Prabhupāda: Yes. Self-analysis, if you analyze yourself, if you think yourself, meditate, study your finger, "Am I this finger?" the answer will be, "No. My finger." "Am I this hand?" The answer will be, "No, it is my hand." Then where is "I"? That is... If you can study "I," then it is scientific. Simply "my" is not scientific. That is, child knows "It is my finger."

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: This is, this worship and the concept of worship, if actually one believes or knows, so the real worship is that which pleases God. If you manufacture... Just like I want a glass of water, and if my servant gives me a glass of hot milk, is that worship? Worship means what I want, if you give me, then I am satisfied. But if I want a cold glass of water, you give me..., if you think, "No. Milk is better than water," so that, will that satisfy me? So these concocted ideas of worshiping will actually satisfy God, that is wrong theory, that one can worship God according to his own dictation. That means his God is fictitious. He has no idea of God. And he can concoct ideas. But actually if there is God, one should worship according to the dictation of God. But if he does not know what is God, what is the dictation of God, then he is a rascal. What is the use of his so-called worship? It may be to some extent a sentiment, but that is not worship. If you want to worship God, you must worship God according to His dictation. That is real worship. How he can manufacture the way of worship?

Hayagrīva: The prosecutor...

Prabhupāda: What will be the answer? If you want to worship God, you must worship according to the dictation of God. If you have no such dictation, if you have no idea of God, then how you can worship God? You can worship a ghost, according unto you. If freedom is given to your conception, then you can worship a dog instead of God, because you do not know what is God and what God wants you to do. So without the conception of God, real, how one can worship God by whimsical ideas?

Hayagrīva: This has always been a very touchy subject in the schools.

Prabhupāda: This is the real subject.

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: But because both, we say that both of them are ignorant about the beginning. So if both of them are ignorant, so either you say six thousand, seven thousand, or six million, this is all imagination. It is not fact. But the six thousand or seven thousand, that is not the fact-millions and millions of years. But the fact is this, that God created this cosmic manifestation, and He impregnated the living entities to appear in different types of body according to the soul's desire. That I have already explained. The soul... "Man proposes; God disposes." Not only human form of life but all the animal forms of life, they are also from the very beginning. Not like Darwin's theory that there was no human form of life in the beginning. That is a wrong theory. All the forms of life were there, and the, actually the body is external; within the body there is the soul. So the body is created by material nature and the soul is part and parcel of God. This is the real idea. So how they can refute this idea if they have no idea about the beginning of life?

Hayagrīva: It was very difficult on the basis of the Bible. The Vedas date the creation back, oh...

Prabhupāda: That it is a question of time, and it is the beginning.

Hayagrīva: The beginning of the creation was when? No...

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: No. There is no question of when. It may be seven thousand years or seven millions of years, but the beginning should be taken like this, that God created this cosmic manifestation. And wherefrom the living entities came? That also came from God. That is explained clearly in the Bhagavad-gītā, that this material creation is composition of earth, water, air, fire..., like that, that this is also God's energy. The ingredients of this material world coming from God, that is called prakṛti and pradhāna. He is the creator. And then the living entities, they are also coming from God. So this material energy is explained as inferior energy, and the living entity is explained as superior energy, both of them coming from God. So the beginning of life simultaneously. It is not that matter later on developed to become life. That is a wrong theory.

Hayagrīva: So, so much... It's the end of Darwin. (break) ...Thomas, Thomas Henry...

Prabhupāda: In that case, all defect is that nobody could ascertain the beginning of life, but here is the solution. The beginning of life is from the very beginning of creation.

Hayagrīva: Simultaneous creation.

Prabhupāda: Simultaneously. That we see practically. That pregnancy, in the beginning of the body that is the beginning of life also. No that first of all one becomes pregnant and then the life comes. You have got a daily experience. Rather, the life is there, therefore the pregnancy is there. Is it not? But they say, modern rascals, that the, the body develops to a certain extent and then the life comes. So before the life coming, if the body is destroyed there is no killing. Is not that the theory at the present moment, they are killing child?

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: That is his misconception. That I have explained, the wheel. The wheel is going on. The wheel has got different parts but it is resting on the axle.

Hayagrīva: No, but is the universe a machine for the making of gods in the sense that it's a vehicle to make people Kṛṣṇa conscious?

Prabhupāda: No, this is wrong. The machine, the wheel is already depending on the axle. Axle is already there. Without axle, the wheel cannot move.

Hayagrīva: Not for the creation of God, not for the making of God.

Prabhupāda: Then?

Hayagrīva: But for the making of small "g" gods, like demigods. You once said...

Prabhupāda: Demigods are already there. Just like in the same example, in the wheel the different parts, they are already there.

Hayagrīva: So there's no question of the making of gods?

Prabhupāda: No, no. That is a wrong theory.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Prabhupāda: Not always suffering. (indistinct) We are, we in religious. Suppose we are in the topmost. Does it means that we are suffering?

Śyāmasundara: He is a Christian religionist. He's a Christian religionist. They give importance to suffering. "Christ suffered for us, so we..." He says that to abstain from sin means suffering, we are suffering.

Prabhupāda: That is also wrong theory. If Christ is God, or God's son, then why he should suffer? God is subjected to suffering? Then what kind of God He is?

Devotee: They say that he did not suffer for God; he suffered for man.

Prabhupāda: Anyway, if there is no suffering, then where is the question of suffering for God or suffering for man?

Śyāmasundara: They say that it's a paradox, that... They say that it's a paradox or an apparent contradiction that the Transcendental came into the material world and appeared to suffer for men, but actually he does not suffer because He is God, that He only appeared to suffer to save us from our sins and remind us always not to sin.

Prabhupāda: But why the Christians are committing sins still? They have given contract to Jesus Christ that "You suffer for us and we go on committing sins." Very good philosophy.

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: What is their concept of God?

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Śyāmasundara: So just like when there are decisions to be made, because a self-realized soul automatically...

Prabhupāda: The decision is that I shall serve Kṛṣṇa as soon as ordered. But the order comes from the superior. Just like Arjuna. Arjuna is ordered by Kṛṣṇa to fight, so he has to fight. That is all. Arjuna's decision was wrong, but when he takes decision from Kṛṣṇa, that is right. So we have to take decision from Kṛṣṇa's representative. That is right. We cannot make our own decisions. That is wrong.

Śyāmasundara: So full will means to follow...

Prabhupāda: Full will means full will to surrender, full will to follow the orders of the superior. That is full will.

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: So how does he ever come to the point of religion if he wants men to make their own decisions? How can we make our own decisions according to him?

Prabhupāda: There is no own decision. If we want to become self, that means I am part and parcel, so I have no personal decision. I have to take decisions from the higher authority.

Śyāmasundara: We were talking about the decision; you were talking about the other levels. The religious stage, you said, is obedience and commitment to God.

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: But to get to that stage, you have to go through the second stage. So how do you get to the second stage by making your own decisions without God's..., without God's representative? In other words, how can you come to the platform of the third stage from the second stage?

Śyāmasundara: It is gradual development. You gradually develop.

Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:

Śyāmasundara: He says that suicide is no escape from evil because the will is indestructible and eternal.

Prabhupāda: Yes, that is a fact. He is putting himself in more. By suicide he becomes a ghost. That is more troublesome. Yes. Because the body given by God, he is killing. So from this body he has to accept another body. So unless that point comes, he has to remain a ghost. No body. Suppose I have to live in this body eighty years. I'll make suicide. So up to five years I have to remain a ghost, no body. Then it may be chance to get another body. This is wrong. Killing of any body, because na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). So one can put this argument, that the soul is everlasting, so what if the body is killed? But that's all right, body is killed, but you cannot kill the body to hamper its progress. One living entity is destined to live in a certain body. If you destroy that body, then he has to wait for the next body. That means you are interfering with his progress. Therefore you are sinful. Just like I am living in this apartment. If somebody by force drives me away, it is criminal. If I go to the police, that "I was living in this apartment and this man by force has driven me," is it not criminal? So I am not lost because I am driven out of this body. But you will be liable for criminal punishment because you have forced me to leave this body. Ramakrishna Mission says that what is the point if a man or animal is killed? The soul is immortal, so what is this? What is that? The rascals, they do not know. The real philosophy is here. The soul is destined to live in a certain body for a certain period. If you immaturely stop it, then you become responsible. Exactly like that. I am living in my apartment. If you by force drive me away, you are criminal. They do not know all these things. Imperfect knowledge.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the bodies are manifestations of the will...

Prabhupāda: Yes, that we also say, but whose will?

Śyāmasundara: "The will," he calls it. "The will," in the abstract.

Philosophy Discussion on Martin Heidegger:

Prabhupāda: Mm.

Śyāmasundara: The possibilities of becoming this or that are his. He can choose. He can elect what he wants to be in the future.

Prabhupāda: That is also not proof. As soon as he gets a body, his thing is settled up. Just like you have got this body—white body. You cannot become black body. Or a man who has got black body, he cannot become white man. This is wrong philosophy. How you can settle up? Because he is considering the of body, he is considering the existence means the manufacture of the body from the womb of mother up to the destruction of the body. So this body, as it is made, there are different types of body. So that cannot be changed.

Śyāmasundara: What about if someone can choose to become a doctor or a lawyer or a physician or anything like that.

Prabhupāda: That is quality; that is not the body.

Śyāmasundara: No. He doesn't say body, he says that he can choose his different kinds of being, how he will be, whether he will be a lawyer or a doctor, like that. He can be good, he can be bad...

Prabhupāda: First thing is that if he has no clear idea of existence, then what he can be, that will depend on the idea of existence. So as he is thinking of to become doctor or lawyer and teacher, similarly he should know that he eternally exists, then he can also make a program what he can become next time.

Śyāmasundara: He says that that is the essence of existence, that we can become something which we choose, of our own choosing.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: No. That is irresponsibility.

Śyāmasundara: That's what he is saying, that because we are free, we are susceptible.

Prabhupāda: We are free means you have to make your choice between right and wrong. That is freedom.

Śyāmasundara: Yes. But his idea is that because we are free, sometimes we neglect to even choose between right and wrong.

Prabhupāda: That is wrong decision. Then you should suffer. That is responsibility. Why you have done wrong?

Devotee: That is choice.

Prabhupāda: Eh?

Devotee: He is not recognizing that that is a choice. You could not choose that way unless you had this freedom.

Śyāmasundara: No. It's not like that. Supposing there is a war, a country goes to war. There is the choice whether to say, to choose whether it is right or wrong, but I avoid the choice altogether. I don't enter into it. Apathetic.

Prabhupāda: No. You cannot avoid the choice. At the present age there is democratic government. When we agree to fight with another, that means you have got your assent. Why should you not fight?

Śyāmasundara: I haven't made this very clear, but because we have freedom, we become susceptible to bad faith. Bad faith means that we avoid making any decisions at all, good or bad. We simply drift. He calls it drift. We go day to day without entering and becoming involved with any responsible decision-making.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: Yes. You will be ashamed. If you are not guided by a superior man, you'll be ashamed. But if you are guided by a proper man you won't be ashamed; you'll be glorious.

Śyāmasundara: He says that if a man considers himself as an object, he is afraid to look inside himself, then he will also consider other people as objects. And that is the cause of the basic sickness of the world, that we treat each other as objects instead as persons.

Prabhupāda: That is a wrong conception. Everybody is a person.

Śyāmasundara: What is your remedy for seeing everyone as persons?

Prabhupāda: That is the real vision: everyone is person.

Śyāmasundara: What is the remedy, what is the cure, for seeing everyone as a person?

Prabhupāda: You see or not see, everyone is a person. So what does it mean?

Śyāmasundara: Supposing I want to observe everyone in their personal manifestation, I want to see everyone as a person.

Prabhupāda: You are not seeing everyone as a person?

Śyāmasundara: Now I am seeing everyone as an object—"He is black," "He is American," "He is white"—but I want to see everyone as a person.

Prabhupāda: That means discrimination. Every individual person has got discrimination. That is discrimination. That is discriminating "This is good," "This is bad," "This is black," "This is white." Duality. So he has got this discriminating power.

Śyāmasundara: But I want to see everyone as a person, not as an object. So how do I do that?

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: Not absolute, but to be the right relationship. Just like I am existing now, but not in right relationship. I am trying to exist as the Lord or master. But when I live as servant, that is my right relationship. I am trying to exist as the Lord or master, but when I live as a servant, that is my right relationship.

Śyāmasundara: His idea is that we all want to become God. That is hopeless.

Prabhupāda: No. That is hopeless. That you cannot. That is wrong. We cannot become God. The only answer is that how we can become God? If you are God, then how did you become non-God? God cannot become non-God at any stage.

Śyāmasundara: I think he looks at it that we are not God. We know we are not God, but we are trying to become God.

Prabhupāda: That is Māyāvādī philosophy.

Śyāmasundara: But he says it's impossible to become God.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That's nice. That is our philosophy.

Śyāmasundara: But because it is impossible to become God, that means everything else is useless.

Prabhupāda: No. That is another foolishness. You are not God; you are God's servant. Now you are posing to be God. So give up this idea and become servant. That is right idea. You are actually servant of God, but you are posing yourself as master. So you give up this wrong idea and become servant of God, then you are happy.

Śyāmasundara: So that's all... (break)

Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:

Prabhupāda: Yes. Yes. It is forced by the energy. Matter has no form, but by the superior energy, the living entity (indistinct) mixed up (indistinct) matter and make the form. Just like a (indistinct) plate, clay, water, and fire. So the potter makes a form from the clay. Clay means earth and water, mixed up, and it makes a pot and then puts it with fire and it becomes a glass and so on. So tejo-vāri-mṛdāṁ vinimayam. It is simply exchange of earth, water, and fire. But this mixture is being made by the potter. And the instrument is the potter's wheel. So similarly, God is the potter, and the material nature is the wheel, and so many things are coming out. But if there is no potter to turn the wheel or make the clay into pots, this is not (indistinct). There is already water, there is already earth, there is already fire, but unless a spirit, a being, a living being, comes into it, there is no question of (indistinct). Therefore in Bhagavad-gītā it is said, (indistinct). Because the living entities are there, the formation is taking place. A (indistinct), it is a combination of matter. But because we see that the living entity is there, it is taking a certain type of shape. Matter does not out of itself take the shape. That is wrong theory. We have no such experience where matter is taking automatically shape. (indistinct). Is there any exception?

Dr. Rao: (indistinct)

Prabhupāda: How matter can take shape? That is not philosophy, that is childish. That is the defect of the modern civilization. A man has got childish knowledge and he is becoming philosopher.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the cause-effect relationship between things has very little effect on genuine events which can cause reality.

Prabhupāda: No. There must be cause and effect.

Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung:

Prabhupāda: Yes. And the intelligence. Just like in the same example. Whether it is to be done, it is not to be done, then your intelligence gives you advice that "In the Vedas this is the right point." So you accept it. Intelligence gives you advice that "In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said like this." Then we accept it. Then that conflict is nice.

Śyāmasundara: Some Christians say that in the mind there is a struggle between God and the devil, and this conflict is always continually going on.

Prabhupāda: No, no. That is wrong thing. God does not come down to your mind, God and devil. That is mind's action. Sometimes he accepts, sometimes he rejects. So either you can say God and devil or whatever. That is mind's business. But that is not final conclusion. When you apply your intelligence with reference to the sādhu and śāstra and make a conclusion, that is right.

Śyāmasundara: So on this level progress is made through conflict.

Prabhupāda: Conflict with intelligence. That means conflict is in the lower stage. So to mitigate this conflict you have to take consultation from the higher stage. That is intelligence. That Mao's theory is simply by conflict of the mental concoctioners. That will not come to a conclusion. That will never be right conclusion.

Śyāmasundara: His idea is that all political power comes out of the barrel of a gun. Comes from the barrel of a gun.

Page Title:That is wrong (Lectures, Other)
Compiler:Visnu Murti, RupaManjari
Created:25 of Nov, 2012
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=34, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:34