The question may be raised... (Lectures)

Expressions researched:
"question has been raised" |"question is raised" |"question is sometimes raised" |"question may be raised" |"question raised" |"question should be raised" |"question was raised" |"question you can raise" |"questions are raised" |"questions raised" |"raise such foolish question" |"raise this question" |"raised the question" |"raised the same question" |"raised this question" |"raising these questions" |"the question may be"

Notes from the compiler: Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud - quote is from discussion with Hayagriva (Vanisource link points to discussion with Syamasundara)

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Now a question may be raised, what is the way how to approach the supreme abode of the Lord.

Introduction to Gitopanisad (Earliest Recording of Srila Prabhupada in the Bhaktivedanta Archives):

Now a question may be raised, what is the way how to approach the supreme abode of the Lord. That is also described in the Bhagavad-gītā. It is said on the 8th Chapter, verses 5, 6, 7, 8, the process of approaching the Supreme Lord or Supreme Lord's abode is also given there. It is said like this:

anta-kāle ca mām eva

smaran muktvā kalevaram

yaḥ prayāti sa mad-bhāvaṁ

yāti nāsty atra saṁśayaḥ

Anta-kāle, at the end of life, at the time of death. Anta-kāle ca mām eva, one who thinks of Kṛṣṇa, smaran, if he can remember. A dying person, at the time of death, if he remembers the form of Kṛṣṇa and while remembering in that way, if he quits the present body, then surely he approaches the spiritual kingdom, mad-bhāvam.

So people may ask that "By mentioning these great fighter, what spiritual progress we make? Because we are meant for chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra, so by chanting the names of these great fighters, what do we gain?"

Lecture on BG 1.4-5 -- London, July 10, 1973:

So all these heroes are mentioned not only in this verse, in several other verses also. So people may ask that "By mentioning these great fighter, what spiritual progress we make? Because we are meant for chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra, so by chanting the names of these great fighters, what do we gain?" The question may be raised there. But the thing is that nirbandhaḥ kṛṣṇa-sambandhe, whenever there is connection with Kṛṣṇa, that also becomes Kṛṣṇa. This is a subtle form of philosophical understanding. Nirbandhaḥ kṛṣṇa-sambandhe. If there is relationship with Kṛṣṇa... Therefore the sahajiyās, they do not read Bhagavad-gītā. They say, "We have nothing to do with Bhagavad-gītā." They jump over to the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Tenth Canto, Kṛṣṇa's rāsa-līlā, as if Kṛṣṇa is connected with rāsa-līlā and not with this līlā. They make distinction. Kṛṣṇa's this fighting līlā, pastimes, and the rāsa-līlā pastime, they are all the same because Kṛṣṇa is the center. Kṛṣṇa being center, whatever in connection with Kṛṣṇa is there, that becomes also Kṛṣṇa. This is the idea.

This question was raised by Caitanya Mahāprabhu, that "What is the goal of life?" Unless there is goal of life, why there is struggle?

Lecture on BG 1.43 -- London, July 30, 1973:

Brahmādbhiḥ. In this way the living entity is wandering in the cycle of transmigration of the soul. So from this, Mr. Darwin might have taken some hints, but he could not explain properly. He could not catch up that brahmādbhiḥ, who is wandering. So it is a chaos.

So anyway, why this living entity is wandering, not fixed up? So there must be some goal. He is hankering after that. There must be some goal of life. To achieve that goal of life that is called sādhya. Why we are struggling here for happiness or something else? We are struggling. So this question was raised by Caitanya Mahāprabhu, that "What is the goal of life?" Unless there is goal of life, why there is struggle? Why... There must be some goal of life, sādhya.

The question was raised that "Why war takes place?"

Lecture on BG 2.6 -- London, August 6, 1973:

So there is no question of Arjuna's considering whether he would fight or not. It is sanctioned by Kṛṣṇa; so fight must be there. Just like when we were walking, the question was raised that "Why war takes place?" That is not a very difficult subject to understand because everyone of us has got a fighting spirit. Even children fight, cats and dogs fight, birds fight, ants fight. We have seen it. So why not human beings? The fighting spirit is there. That is one of the symptoms of living condition.

Now, here some philosophical question may be raised. There are two classes of philosophers, that after liberation, after getting out of this body, the soul amalgamates with the Supreme Soul.

Lecture on BG 2.13 -- New York, March 11, 1966:

Now, here some philosophical question may be raised. There are two classes of philosophers, that after liberation, after getting out of this body, the soul amalgamates with the Supreme Soul. That question we have already discussed. Still, there is no harm in discussing it again because any, I mean to say, substantial knowledge, if it is discussed one after another, twice, thrice, it is better. Now, Kṛṣṇa points out that every soul is individual soul, every soul. And that is our experience, that every one of us, we have got some individual consciousness, not that my consciousness is just equal to your consciousness. I do not know what is going in your soul. We are all individual souls. But according to Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, "Just like the sky, the ether"—ether is everywhere, within your body and within mine, within everyone's—that "the ether has taken a form due to this particular body, but when the body is vanquished, the ether, I mean to say, amalgamates with the greater ether."

"If we do our duty nicely then what is the use of worshiping God? If we become honest, if we become moral, if we do not do anything which is harmful to anyone, in this way, if we act, then where is the...?"

Lecture on BG 2.26-27 -- London, August 29, 1973:

So the postmaster was talking with me about the paper, Back to Godhead. He raised the same question. He said, "If we do our duty nicely then what is the use of worshiping God? If we become honest, if we become moral, if we do not do anything which is harmful to anyone, in this way, if we act, then where is the...?" Because our paper's name was Back to Godhead. So he was indirectly protesting, that What is the use of propagating this philosophy of Godhead if we act nicely? The Arya-samajists view... They are called... There is a English name, what is called? I forget now. Moralists. The technical name there is. Anyway, this is their point of view, how to avoid God. So I replied that if one is not God conscious, he cannot be moralist, he cannot be truthful, he cannot be honest. This is our point of view. You study the whole world only on these three points, morality, honest, and dutiful. So many nice things are there. But if he's not God conscious, he cannot continue such thing. He must fail.

"Why God and His representative do come? They are in superior nature. They are in the eternal kingdom. Why do they bother themselves to come here? Why do they bother themselves to come here?" This question may be raised.

Lecture on BG 4.6-8 -- New York, July 20, 1966:

Now the question may be "Why God and His representative do come? They are in superior nature. They are in the eternal kingdom. Why do they bother themselves to come here? Why do they bother themselves to come here?" This question may be raised. As soon as we hear that God and His representative come, so next question: "Why do they come?" Because we are, we do not know that they come to reclaim us. Therefore our question is "Why do they come?" Now, here the answer is

yadā yadā hi dharmasya

glānir bhavati bhārata

abhyutthānam adharmasya

tadātmānaṁ sṛjāmy aham

(BG 4.7)

paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ

vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām

dharma-saṁsthāpanārthāya

sambhavāmi yuge yuge

(BG 4.8)

Now, this is the mission, mission of the Lord and His representative. What is that mission? Yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati: "Whenever there is decline of the principle of life."

I do not die even after the annihilation of this body. Then where is my eternal body? This question should be raised by the human form of life.

Lecture on BG 4.12 -- Vrndavana, August 4, 1974:

Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, ābrahma-bhuvanāl lokāḥ punar āvartino 'rjuna (BG 8.16). Even if you, by activities, pious activities, or worshiping different demigods, you go to the Brahmaloka, where the standard of life is very, very great, life is also, duration of life is very, very great, so that is not permanent. But our problem is that we are permanent, eternal, and we are trying to be happy in the nonpermanent condition of life. This is called less brain. My problem is that I am the spirit soul... Nityaḥ śāśvataḥ. I am eternal, śāśvataḥ. Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). I do not die even after the annihilation of this body. Then where is my eternal body? This question should be raised by the human form of life. Athāto brahma jijñāsā.

But instead of athāto... Jīvasya tattva-jijñāsā. Jīvasya, the only business is "How, what is the aim of life, how I shall be eternally happy, how I shall get my eternal life." That is the problem. But they do not consider the real problem. They think, "Immediately I require some money. So let me worship Lord Śiva or Lord..., this, goddess Durgā, or Gaṇeśa, or Sūrya..." There are so many, recommended. So that is condemned in the Bhagavad-gītā that tad bhavaty alpa, antavat tu phalaṁ teṣāṁ tad bhavaty alpa-medhasām (BG 7.23).

But people are... They do not care. Of course, those who are worshiping demigods, apart from them, there are many atheists. They don't care for anything. They want simply sense enjoyment. But it is said that you can get some immediate profit by worshiping different demigods. That is all right. But that is not your permanent benefit.

This question was raised by Parīkṣit Mahārāja :"Kṛṣṇa appeared on this material world, dharma-saṁsthāpanārthāya, paritrāṇāya sādhūnām, dharma-saṁsthāpanārthāya. So why He violated these rules of dharma?"

Lecture on BG 4.14 -- Vrndavana, August 6, 1974:

This question was raised by Parīkṣit Mahārāja when Śukadeva Gosvāmī described the rāsa-līlā. So that... "Kṛṣṇa appeared on this material world, dharma-saṁsthāpanārthāya, paritrāṇāya sādhūnām (BG 4.8), dharma-saṁsthāpanārthāya. So why He violated these rules of dharma?" Violation because, according to Vedic civilization, nobody can mix with other's wife or other woman. Even in moral principle, as Cāṇakya Paṇḍita said, mātṛvat para-dāreṣu. "All women should be treated just like mother." Not like the present society. Formerly, every woman should be addressed as "mother," Mātājī. And now they have invented "Bahinjī." No. Woman should be addressed as "mother." Mātṛvat para-dāreṣu.

The question has been raised, "What is God?" We shall be careful, at least in India, that we may not glide down more and more to the animal platform of life.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Bhuvanesvara, January 22, 1977:

Just like people come to Jagannātha Purī. They take bath in the sea water, salile, salile, but do not associate with experienced men who are advanced in spiritual consciousness—such person is nothing but cow or ass or animals. Therefore the question has been raised, "What is God?" We shall be careful, at least in India, that we may not glide down more and more to the animal platform of life.

"What Nārāyaṇa was doing when you met Him?"

Lecture on BG 7.9-10 -- Bombay, February 24, 1974:

So when he met the brāhmaṇa he said... And he inquired, "What Nārāyaṇa was doing when you met Him?" "I saw that He was pulling one elephant through the hole of a needle." So he immediately said, "All right, sir, namaskāra. Your, all these big, big stories we cannot believe, that an elephant is being drawn through the hole of a needle." And the same question was raised by the cobbler, and he, Nārada Muni replied in the same way. And he began to cry, "Oh, my Lord is so powerful. He can do anything." So Nārada Muni inquired that "How do you believe that the elephant is being drawn through the hole of a needle?" "Now, why not? I am seeing daily. I am sitting under this banyan tree and there is fig, banyan fruit, and there are thousands of seeds, and I know that each seed's containing a big tree like this."

If it is so simple that simply by surrendering unto the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa one becomes immediately liberated from the clutches of māyā, why, then, people do not take to this process? This question may be raised.

Lecture on BG 7.11-13 -- Bombay, April 5, 1971:

Now, the next question is, if... Everyone is trying to become freed from the contamination of material nature, mukti. That is called mukti. Great sages, great saintly persons, simply to get out of the clutches of this material nature, they undertake severe penances and austerity. Then, if it is so simple that simply by surrendering unto the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa one becomes immediately liberated from the clutches of māyā, why, then, people do not take to this process? This question may be raised. They do not believe. They say, "Oh, this is too much. Simply by..." They say, "Sophistry." Simply by surrendering unto Kṛṣṇa one becomes a liberated soul. They do not believe. And who does not believe? That is also stated by Kṛṣṇa Himself. He says, na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ (BG 7.15). Kṛṣṇa says... Once, in a previous verse, He said, mām eva ye prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti te: (BG 7.14) "Anyone who surrenders unto Me, immediately he becomes free from the clutches of māyā." The next paragraph He says, "Unfortunately, those who are miscreants, they do not do it." Na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ.

There are many, many educated persons, highly elevated in discussing philosophy. Why they do not take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness? This question may be raised also.

Lecture on BG 7.11-13 -- Bombay, April 5, 1971:

So such persons, duṣkṛtina, always engaged in mischievous activities, always engaged to work hard like an ass and does not take the advantage of human being, they are called duṣkṛtina, mūḍha, narādhama. Then one may say, "All right, these people are lowest of the mankind or like an ass or miscreant, but there are many, many educated persons, highly elevated in discussing philosophy. Why they do not take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness? Why they say that "God is nirākāra. There is no God. I am God. You are God"? Why do they say? Why do they not take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness? This question may be raised also. "They are not fools. They are very highly learned. They have undergone tapasya, sannyāsī. Why do they not take shelter of Kṛṣṇa?" Kṛṣṇa is answering to that question, māyayāpahṛta-jñānāḥ (BG 7.15). Yes, they are advanced in knowledge undoubtedly, but because they are āsuraṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ... Āsuraṁ bhāvam means atheistic principle: "There is no God. I am God." This is called atheistic or āsura. Just like Rāvaṇa. He was very much materially advanced. He was very good scholar in Vedic literature. He was son of a brāhmaṇa also, very powerful. But he did not believe in Rāma, God. That was his only fault. Therefore he is described as asura, rākṣasa. Similarly, Kaṁsa, Hiraṇyakaśipu. So anyone, however materially he may be advanced in education or knowledge, may be Ph.D. or D.H.C. or something like that, if he does not believe in God, he is to be supposed that māyā has taken away his real knowledge. In spite of his education, he is fool number one. Māyayāpahṛta-jñānāḥ.

"If the Supreme Personality is the ultimate goal and one has to surrender to Him, then why there are so many different processes of worship in the world?" That question may be raised.

Lecture on BG 7.18 -- New York, October 12, 1966:

Now, here the same thing is being presented by the same Supreme Personality of Godhead by His unalloyed mercy to the conditioned souls. We are all conditioned souls. We are under the threefold miseries of this material world, and the Supreme Lord is giving us the opportunity to get out of it by this surrendering process. So if we take up the surrendering process immediately, then God realization is a business for one second. Otherwise, I'll have to go on with this research work for many, many, many, many, many births. Then another question is, may be raised, that "If the Supreme Personality is the ultimate goal and one has to surrender to Him, then why there are so many different processes of worship in the world?" That question may be raised. So that is answered here, in the next verse.

kāmais tais tair hṛta-jñānāḥ

prapadyante 'nya-devatāḥ

taṁ taṁ niyamam āsthāya

prakṛtyā niyatāḥ svayā

(BG 7.20)

There are different kinds of men under different mixture of the modes of nature, and generally, they are not after liberation from this material stage. They want to gain something out of spiritual power.

Now practical person will say "If I think of Kṛṣṇa always, then wherefrom money will come?" This question may be raised. How you'll answer it?

Lecture on BG 9.34 -- August 3, 1976, New Mayapur (French farm):

Now to love Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa never says that "In order to love Me, you have to go to the factory or to work somewhere fifty miles away from home." He does not say all this. Simply, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī. The question may be raised that if I want to love Kṛṣṇa, then how other things will go on? This question may be raised. Kṛṣṇa never says that "You have to go to the factory, earn money, and then you can love me." He never makes this condition. Is there any condition? (laughter) Now practical person will say "If I think of Kṛṣṇa always, then wherefrom money will come?" This question may be raised. How you'll answer it?

Bhagavān: Kṛṣṇa says yoga-kṣemaṁ vahāmy aham (BG 9.22).

Prabhupāda: Ah, find out this verse.

Bhagavān:

ananyāś cintayanto māṁ

ye janāḥ paryupāsate

teṣāṁ nityābhiyuktānāṁ

yoga-kṣemaṁ vahāmy aham

(BG 9.22)

"But those who worship Me with devotion, meditating on My transcendental form—to them I carry what they lack and preserve what they have."

Prabhupāda: The same thing. This meditation is man-manā bhava mad-bhaktaḥ. Always think of Kṛṣṇa. So those who are engaged in this way, always thinking of Kṛṣṇa, worshiping Kṛṣṇa, for such persons, Kṛṣṇa says yoga-kṣemaṁ vahāmy aham (BG 9.22), "I personally carry all the necessities of life. I personally carry."

So this question is raised by Arjuna from his master because the master is accepted to acquire knowledge.

Lecture on BG 13.1-2 -- Miami, February 25, 1975:

So this question is raised by Arjuna from his master because the master is accepted to acquire knowledge. Tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet (MU 1.2.12). To accept one guru is not a fashion. Nowadays it has become a fashion, that accept some guru, Guru Mahārāja. Whether he knows or does not know, it doesn't matter, and whether one is inquisitive or not. It is a fashion. No. Guru is required for a person who is very inquisitive to know about the transcendental subject matter. Tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam (SB 11.3.21). It is not a fashion; it is necessary because human life is meant for understanding the real position of his identity. Athāto brahma jijñāsā. This is necessary.

So when we do something wrong, how Kṛṣṇa as antaryāmī, as Paramātmā, gives permission? This question may be raised.

Lecture on BG 13.23 -- Bombay, October 22, 1973:

So when we do something wrong, how Kṛṣṇa as antaryāmī, as Paramātmā, gives permission? This question may be raised. But He gives permission, when I do something wrong. Because I cannot do anything without His permission. But He gives me permission as a... Kāraṇaṁ guṇa-saṅgo 'sya. That is already explained.

puruṣaḥ prakṛti-stho hi

bhuṅkte prakṛti-jān guṇān

kāraṇaṁ guṇa-saṅgo 'sya

sad-asad-janma-yoniṣu

(BG 13.22)

He can give you permission, but the enjoyment and suffering will have to be taken by you. You insist permission, "I want to do this." And without permission, you cannot do it. Therefore Kṛṣṇa gives you per..., "All right, you do it, but at your risk." Kṛṣṇa does not want that you should do it, but you want to do it. Therefore He gives permission.

We can not raise, ordinary man, but why did you raise this question? What is the purpose?

Lecture on BG 16.5 -- Calcutta, February 23, 1972:

Prabhupāda: So, so long we are not able to come to the platform of thinking the gold and the stone on the equal value, we have to follow these rules and regulation. But that is the highest consideration. Just like Sanatāna Goswāmī, he didn't care for this touchstone. Not for the ordinary man. The ordinary man cannot make that all of a sudden; therefore it is not for him. So what was the purpose of saying that Gītā says sama-loṣṭrāśma-kāñcanaḥ? Why did you raise this question? What is the purpose? We can not raise, ordinary man, but why did you raise this question? What is the purpose?

Guest: I think this is practical for a householder.

Prabhupāda: But I don't think. Then what is the difference? Therefore, household luxury is allowed up to fiftieth year in order to learn, pañcaśordhvaṁ vanaṁ vrajet. That is Vedic system. Not to remain householder until you are fired, you see, or you are taken by death.

Why this question is there? If one is initiated, then he accepted the authority.

Lecture on BG 17.1-3 -- Honolulu, July 4, 1974:

Sudāmā: There also is the position of or some question is raised as to how to actually follow the authority. What is the authority between...?

Prabhupāda: Authority is your spiritual master. You do not know who is authority? Why this question is there? If one is initiated, then he accepted the authority. And if he does not follow the instruction of spiritual master, he is a rascal. He is defying the authority. That's all.

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

The question may be raised that "The original source of everything is knower of everything, accepting, but where He got the knowledge?"

Lecture on SB 1.1.1 -- Caracas, February 21, 1975:

Now, it can be said that abhijñaḥ... perfect knowledge is received from the superior person. Just like I do not know what is the mechanical arrangement of this microphone. But if I want to know it, then I must go to a perfect knower who can explain (to) me that these ingredients or these parts of the machine are there. Therefore the question may be raised that "The original source of everything is knower of everything, accepting, but where He got the knowledge?"

Just like sometimes the atheist class of men enquire that "If God is the original father, the supreme father of everyone, then who is God's father?" The answer is that God has no father; He is self-sufficient. Therefore this word is used, svarāṭ. Svarāṭ means self-sufficient.

The question raised by the sages and saintly persons in Naimiṣāraṇya was, "After departure of Kṛṣṇa, unto whom the charge of religious principle depended?"

Lecture on SB 1.2.2 -- London, August 10, 1971:

So the question raised by the sages and saintly persons in Naimiṣāraṇya was, "After departure of Kṛṣṇa, unto whom the charge of religious principle depended?" So Sūta Gosvāmī, who is a disciple of Śukadeva Gosvāmī... Śukadeva Gosvāmī is his spiritual master. Therefore it is the etiquette, before speaking anything, the disciple should first of all offer respect to the spiritual master.

Here Sūta Gosvāmī says, "The questions raised by you." The Bhagavad-gītā should be read very widely, and should be understood very widely. That is the only source of auspicity for the human society.

Lecture on SB 1.2.5 -- Visakhapatnam, February 20, 1972, At Ladies Club:

Here Sūta Gosvāmī says, yat kṛtaḥ kṛṣṇa-sampraśno loka-maṅgala. "The questions raised by you," bhavadbhiḥ, "by you, loka-maṅgala." The Bhagavad-gītā should be read very widely, and should be understood very widely. That is the only source of auspicity for the human society. But don't misrepresent it. It has become a fashion now to misrepresent, comment on Bhagavad-gītā according to one's whims. That is very dangerous. That is very dangerous. Bhagavad-gītā should be read, should be understood as prescribed in the Bhagavad-gītā.

This question was raised by Hiraṇyakaśipu before Prahlāda, that "Why you are after so much Kṛṣṇa, nonsense God?"

Lecture on SB 1.2.5 -- Vrndavana, October 16, 1972:

This question was raised by Hiraṇyakaśipu before Prahlāda, that "Why you are after so much Kṛṣṇa, nonsense God?" So he replied his father, na te viduḥ svārtha-gatiṁ hi viṣṇum: (SB 7.5.31) "My dear father, generally, demons like you..." (laughter) Yes. He addressed his father, asura-varya. Asura-varya means "the best of the demons." He was not afraid. He was a five-years-old boy. And he inquired some questions, "My dear boy, what you have learned first class from your teachers?" (Hindi) So Prahlāda Mahārāja addressed his father, tat sādhu manye asura-varya. Asura-varya. His father was addressed not "Father." He was addressed, "My dear the best of the asuras..." Asura-varya. Tat sādhu manye 'sura-varya dehinām.

"Why You are entrusting me? I am not a Vedantist. I am not a sannyāsī. I am not very learned scholar. I am military man. So why You are trying to give the instruction of Bhagavad-gītā unto me?" This question may be raised.

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Delhi, November 12, 1973:

So Kṛṣṇa said to Arjuna that at the present moment the paramparā system is now lost. Yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa. Sa kāleneha yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa. "It is the paramparā system has been lost because there have been so many interpretation, wrong interpretation. Therefore I am selecting you to make again paramparā." Bhakto 'si sakhā ceti. "Why You are entrusting me? I am not a Vedantist. I am not a sannyāsī. I am not very learned scholar. I am military man. So why You are trying to give the instruction of Bhagavad-gītā unto me?" This question may be raised. Because Arjuna was a family man. He was not a sannyāsī, neither he was a Vedantist. A military man is not expected to become a Vedantist. Kṣatriya, he knows how to fight. And Kṛṣṇa says that "I will speak to you." Why? Bhakto 'si priyo 'si me: (BG 4.3) "You are My dear friend. Therefore I shall tell you." So this is the process of understanding: you have to become dear friend of Kṛṣṇa. Then you will understand Bhagavad-gītā. Otherwise, for thousands of years you may go on reading Bhagavad-gītā; you will not learn even a word of it. That is the secret. Evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ (BG 4.2).

"How he can become, become liberated? He has not studied Vedānta. He has no sufficient knowledge. We see that he's illiterate, and he cannot read, write. What kind of liberation he has got?" The question may be.

Lecture on SB 1.2.7 -- Vrndavana, October 18, 1972:

Anyone who is engaged in pure devotional service, under the lotus feet of Vāsudeva, Kṛṣṇa, he's already liberated. He doesn't require liberation; he's already liberated. "How he can become, become liberated? He has not studied Vedānta. He has no sufficient knowledge. We see that he's illiterate, and he cannot read, write. What kind of liberation he has got?" The question may be. But because such questions are raised by atheist class of men, they cannot understand that how a so-called illiterate man also elevates himself to the highest platform of knowledge. That is explained here: janayaty āśu vairāgyaṁ jñānaṁ ca. Do not think that a devotee, who is on the adulterated platform of devotional service, can remain without knowledge. He's full of knowledge.

In Western countries, when I speak, these questions are raised and they are so callous, they say, "Never mind. Next time, if I become a dog, what is the harm? I'll forget that I was a man."

Lecture on SB 1.2.23 -- Vrndavana, November 3, 1972:

Now, for our..., solving our problems... What is our problems? That we do not know. There is a great problem. The problem is repetition of birth, death, old age and disease. This is the problem. Janma-mṛtyu-jarā-vyādhi-duḥkha-doṣānudarśanam (BG 13.9). Those who are intelligent, they will..., they will see that these are the real problems. But they do not care. Mṛtyu, they think, "All right, it is coming naturally. Let us die." But they do not know, after death, where he's going? "Never mind. I shall forget." People say like that. In Western countries, when I speak, these questions are raised and they are so callous, they say, "Never mind. Next time, if I become a dog, what is the harm? I'll forget that I was a man." Plainly they say. So many people have gone so much down that they cannot understand that low-grade life is not desirable. They do not make any distinction. In whatever life it may be, if there is sufficient arrangement for eating, sleeping, mating, then they are happy. Viṣayaḥ khalu sarvataḥ syāt. By God's grace, nature has sufficiently given opportunity for enjoying these things: eating, sleeping, mating and defending. Just like these monkeys, they have got enough facilities for eating, sleeping, mating, especially mating, they have got very good facility. Beginning from the morning, they are going on in sex matters. And defending also, they have got nails and teeth.

So these things, śāstra says, viṣayaḥ khalu sarvataḥ syāt. These necessities of life, they can be obtained in any form of life. There is no scarcity. But the human form of life, if it is wasted only for these facilities of life—eating, sleeping, mating and defending—then what is the credit of getting a human form of life?

When there was such question raised in Jaipur that the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava has no commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, at that time, Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, he wrote Govinda-bhāṣya on Vedānta-sūtra.

Lecture on SB 1.2.25 -- Vrndavana, November 5, 1972:

Vyāsadeva is explaining Vedānta-sūtra in his book, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Bhāṣyaṁ brahma-sūtrāṇām. Śrī Vyāsadeva says, "This is the real comment, or bhāṣya, of Vedānta-sūtra, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam." Therefore Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas, Gosvāmīs, they did not write any comment on the Vedānta-sūtra because they accept Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the natural commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. So why they should write again? But still, when there was such question raised in Jaipur that the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava has no commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, at that time, Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, he wrote Govinda-bhāṣya on Vedānta-sūtra. But still, Vedānta-sūtra does not mean to understand impersonalism. No. That's not the fact.

"My dear Kṛṣṇa, we are born very recently. How is that You narrated this yoga system to the sun-god?" Arjuna, of course, knew everything, but in order to clear our doubts, he raised this question.

Lecture on SB 1.2.30 -- Vrndavana, November 9, 1972:

When Arjuna asked Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa said, imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam (BG 4.1). Kṛṣṇa said that, "First of all, I narrated this yoga system of Bhagavad-gītā to the sun-god." So, in order to clear this matter, Arjuna inquired from Him: "My dear Kṛṣṇa, we are born very recently. How is that You narrated this yoga system to the sun-god?" Arjuna, of course, knew everything, but in order to clear our doubts, he raised this question. And Kṛṣṇa answered that "You were also present at that time, but you have forgotten. I have not forgotten." So this is another proof that Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa's body does not change. Kṛṣṇa, when He comes, when He appears, He comes in His original spiritual body.

The question may be raised that if Viśvātmā, the Supersoul, is one, why there are different activities?

Lecture on SB 1.2.32 -- Vrndavana, November 11, 1972:

So the Supersoul, Viśvātmā, He's one. But because we are different, therefore we are acting differently. The question may be raised that if Viśvātmā, the Supersoul, is one, why there are different activities? The different activities due to our will, our selection: "I want to act in this way." So He gives the facility. Just like somebody wants to drink, the government gives license for liquor shop. Now, it is not that everyone is drinking, but there is facility for the drunkards. Because the drunkards want to drink, so government gives facility: "All right. Here is a liquor shop. You drink." But as soon you commit some offense by drinking, you are arrested. So this arrest of the drunkard, is it the government's will or the person created such situation to be arrested? So in this way, the whole world is going on.

You must know what are the indication of incarnation. This question was raised by Sanātana Gosvāmī to Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

Lecture on SB 1.3.11-12 -- Los Angeles, September 17, 1972:

You must accept the incarnation of God according to the description in the śāstras. Not one rascal cheats you and you also become another rascal to accept it. Don't do that. You must know what are the indication of incarnation. This question was raised by Sanātana Gosvāmī to Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Because in this age of Kali, Caitanya Mahāprabhu's incarnation is stated in the śāstra, in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, in the Upaniṣad, in Mahābhārata. There are evidences. He appeared as the son of Jagannātha Miśra, but His incarnation is stated in the śāstra. Therefore we accept Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu as incarnation. Caitanya Mahāprabhu never said that "I am incarnation." Rather, to warn the ordinary people that they should not accept any so-called incarnation, when somebody stated Caitanya Mahāprabhu that "You are incarnation of Kṛṣṇa," He immediately blocked His ears: "Don't say like that. It is great offense, great offense." Because He was playing the part of devotee.

Śukadeva Gosvāmī is congratulating Mahārāja Parīkṣit, that "You have raised the question of Kṛṣṇa, understanding Kṛṣṇa. It is very welcome."

Lecture on SB 1.4.25 -- Montreal, June 20, 1968:

Śukadeva Gosvāmī is congratulating Mahārāja Parīkṣit, that "You have raised the question of Kṛṣṇa, understanding Kṛṣṇa. It is very welcome." Yaḥ praśno 'pi śrotavyādiṣu paraṁ: "Such kind of question is the topmost question, topmost question. There is no more better question than this." In other words, when you become inquisitive to understand the Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then that very questions will elevate you to the highest perfectional stage.

The question may be raised: "The money is the same. How you say that when it is employed in Kṛṣṇa consciousness business, it is nice, and when it is not employed, it is bad? Money is the same."

Lecture on SB 1.5.12-13 -- New Vrindaban, June 11, 1969:

We require money for fulfilling our lust. So it is, beginning, from the beginning to the end, it is abominable. Yadyapy akatak ceti cakarasya anvaya.(?) So therefore we should employ our money for Acyuta, for Kṛṣṇa. Then it will be nice. Otherwise, it will be simply abominable. How money can be utilized for Kṛṣṇa? How? If somebody says, "It is the same money. How, by spending it for Kṛṣṇa consciousness, it become nice?" The question may be raised: "The money is the same. How you say that when it is employed in Kṛṣṇa consciousness business, it is nice, and when it is not employed, it is bad? Money is the same." The reply is there. Bhāgavata says. What is that reply?

Now cikitsitam. The example is given: just like milk. If you take... Milk is very nice food. But if you take more, then there will be disorder of the bowel. If you, by greediness, you take more milk, then there will be bowel complaint. Yes. Then, when there is bowel complaint, you go to physician. Then he gives you prescription: another milk preparation. What is that? Yogurt. If you say to the physician, "Well, I am suffering by taking milk preparation, and you are giving another milk preparation. How it will be cured?" No, it will be cured. Similarly, this material world, there is different type of use. As soon as you use it for your sense gratification, you'll be affected with material disease. And if you use it for Kṛṣṇa consciousness, it will elevate you to the liberated condition.

This question was raised in Parliament also. So how we became fabulously rich? We do not do anything.

Lecture on SB 1.8.18 -- Mayapura, September 28, 1974:

Personally He's teaching us, "Perform this yajña, you rascal, and you'll get everything. You'll get everything." Now, where is the proof? The proof is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. We are simply chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra and spending crores of rupees. Simply. What we are doing? We are not doing any business. We have not many professional men. But why we are getting...? We are spending eight lakhs of rupees per month. And we have got food, we have got milk. We are, rather, feeding others also, bringing food. So why don't you see practically how these Kṛṣṇa conscious people... They... They know that we are fabulously rich. This question was raised in Parliament also. So how we became fabulously rich? We do not do anything. I have not taught you anything magic. I simply request you, "Chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra sixteen times please!" But you... We are not even following that. This is the only remedy. Yajñaiḥ saṅkīrtana-prāyair yajanti hi sumedhasaḥ (SB 11.5.32).

This question was raised by Parīkṣit Mahārāja to Śukadeva Gosvāmī. So "Your Honor, we see just the opposite thing, that one who is devotee of Lord Viṣṇu, the wife, the husband of the goddess of fortune, they become gradually poorer."

Lecture on SB 1.8.26 -- Mayapura, October 6, 1974:

This question was raised by Parīkṣit Mahārāja to Śukadeva Gosvāmī. So "Your Honor, we see just the opposite thing, that one who is devotee of Lord Viṣṇu, the wife, the husband of the goddess of fortune, they become gradually poorer." Because a Vaiṣṇava, generally, they remain humble and poor, brāhmaṇa also. "Whereas the worshiper of Lord Śiva..." Lord Śiva means..., at least, he voluntarily accepts all poverty. His wife is Durgā devī, so powerful. Sṛṣṭi-sthiti-pralaya-sādhana-śaktir ekā (Bs. 5.44). She can make a new universe, she is so powerful. But this couple, Lord Śiva and Pārvatī, they have no house even to live. They live under the tree, so poor, no residential house even. "So when one becomes devotee of Lord Śiva, he gets material opulence. He becomes rich. He gets good wife. He gets all material opulences. And when one becomes the devotee of Viṣṇu, the husband of goddess of fortune, he becomes poor. Why this contradiction? This is contradiction. The worshiper of the Lord of Goddess of Fortune is becoming poorer, and the worshiper of the vagabond, who has no house even, lives underneath a bael tree... That is also not very good. And his devotee becomes so opulent materially. So why this difference?" These are statements. I have stated several times.

"This very question was raised by your grandfather, Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, to Lord Kṛṣṇa, and what He replied I'll say." So in that connection he gave quotation of Kṛṣṇa.

Lecture on SB 1.8.26 -- Mayapura, October 6, 1974:

So Śukadeva Gosvāmī said to Parīkṣit that "This very question was raised by your grandfather, Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, to Lord Kṛṣṇa, and what He replied I'll say." So in that connection he gave quotation of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa said to Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira... Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, by hint, asked Kṛṣṇa that "We are Your friend, and why we are put into such tribulations that we have lost our kingdom? We are now living in the forest. Our wife is insulted. Why?" So the reply was that yasyāham anugṛhṇāmi hariṣye tad-dhanaṁ śanaiḥ (SB 10.88.8). Means... Kṛṣṇa said that "When I make one especially favored, then I take away all his riches to make him niṣkiñcana." Niṣkiñcana means one becomes almost poverty-stricken. Nobody cares for him. Then he become fully surrendered to Kṛṣṇa. Just like Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura says, hā hā prabhu nanda-suta, vṛṣabhānu-sutā-juta, koruṇā karoho ei-bāro, narottama-dāsa koy..., koruṇā..., nā ṭheliho rāṅgā pāy, tomā bine ke āche āmāra. This position is very nice, niṣkiñcana. "I have lost everything. I am now not cared by my family, my friends. So everything I have lost. Therefore I am forced to come to You, surrender. So don't kick me, kick me out. Please give me shelter because I have no other shelter." Tomā bine ke āche āmāra: "I... There is nobody else to take my care except Your Lordship." This is called niṣkiñcana.

This question was raised by Arjuna also, that "I understand that I am not this body and my grandfather is not this body. Still, I am affected when my body or my grandfather is in danger." So what Kṛṣṇa advised?

Lecture on SB 1.8.47 -- Los Angeles, May 9, 1973:

This question was raised by Arjuna also, that "I understand that I am not this body and my grandfather is not this body. Still, I am affected when my body or my grandfather is in danger." So what Kṛṣṇa advised? Kṛṣṇa advised, "Yes, that affection is possible." I know that I am not this body. Theoretically or... But if somebody comes to cut my body, I will be very much protective. Although I know... I cannot feel that "I am not this body; let the body be cut off. I don't mind." No. Then Kṛṣṇa said that this position... Āgamāpāyinaḥ anityās tāṁs titikṣasva bhārata. Mātrā-sparśās tu kaunteya śītoṣṇa-sukha-duḥkha-dāḥ (BG 2.14). "These temporary happiness and distress which come and go like seasonal changes..." Seasonal changes. Just like there is summer season, there is winter season. So sometimes it is very cold, sometimes it is very warm. And how these feelings are appreciated? Due to this body. The water is the same, but in summer season water is very pleasing to take bath. The same water is very troublesome to take bath in winter season. So according to the changes of the season and according to the affection of this material body, we are feeling pains and pleasure. Otherwise there is no pains and pleasure.

"Such a king, why he should retire?" That question was raised by the Naimiṣāraṇya ṛṣis about Parīkṣit Mahārāja.

Lecture on SB 1.15.37 -- Los Angeles, December 15, 1973:

Now question may be: "Such a king, why he should retire?" That question was raised by the Naimiṣāraṇya ṛṣis about Parīkṣit Mahārāja. But the answer is that you have to do your duty. So long you are, you must try your best to do things according to the prescription, according to the injunction. But it is also your duty to retire from family life. Therefore Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja... It is not that he has to work up the end point of his life. No. The life is divided... That is Vedic civilization: brahmacārī, gṛhastha, vānaprastha, sannyāsa. So at the end of life, one must retire from family life. Therefore Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja decided, "Now things are deteriorating." But that was taken care of, Parīkṣit Mahārāja, his next descendant. That is king's duty. But so far Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja is concerned, he did not like to bother any more, because he has his personal duty also. That is retirement, completely engage himself to the service of the Lord.

When Parīkṣit Mahārāja was cursed by a brāhmaṇa to die within seven days, why Kṛṣṇa did not save him, or why he did not seek Kṛṣṇa's protection? This question may be raised.

Lecture on SB 2.4.1 -- Los Angeles, June 24, 1972:

Now, Parīkṣit Mahārāja is recognized devotee; otherwise Kṛṣṇa would not have taken so much trouble. He wanted that Parīkṣit Mahārāja. Now, when he was cursed by a brāhmaṇa to die within seven days, why Kṛṣṇa did not save him, or why he did not seek Kṛṣṇa's protection? This question may be raised. He was young man. He was not old man. He could live. That question was made also: "The Parīkṣit Mahārāja, such a nice king, his life was dedicated for the welfare of his subjects. So actually, his body was meant for the benefit of others.

Why did he leave it, did he quit it?" This question was there. Because anyone who has dedicated his body for the service of all humanity, that is, means, that means he has dedicated the body for Kṛṣṇa, because Kṛṣṇa, He is suhṛdaṁ sarva-bhūtānām (BG 5.29). Suhṛdaṁ sarva-bhūtānām. Kṛṣṇa is the sincere friend of everyone, so one who is trying to spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that means he's also trying to make others to feel that Kṛṣṇa is the supreme friend. So that body is Kṛṣṇa's body. Now, why Parīkṣit Mahārāja decided that? He could counteract the brāhmaṇa boy. It was not difficult for him. But he did not act it counter, and he agreed to die. And Kṛṣṇa also, from within dictated, "Parīkṣit, now agree to die." Why? If Parīkṣit Mahārāja was not in this position, that he was to die within seven days, this Bhāgavata would not have come. This is the purport. That was the purpose. Otherwise, he could counteract. He could save himself, personally or with the help of Kṛṣṇa.

Many people inquired that "How the living entity was with Kṛṣṇa, he became fallen in this material world?" Is not done? This question is raised.

Lecture on SB 2.9.1 -- Tokyo, April 20, 1972:

Prabhupāda: It is a very important question. Parīkṣit Mahārāja inquired... Many people inquired that "How the living entity was with Kṛṣṇa, he became fallen in this material world?" Is not done? This question is raised? So this question is answered here, that "How the living entity who was with Kṛṣṇa became fallen down in contact with this material qualities?" So this is the answer. Read the translation.

Karandhara: "Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: O king, unless one is influenced by the energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead..."

Prabhupāda: It is simply the influence of the material energy, nothing. Actually he has not fallen. Another example given is given. Just like the moon is covered with scattered cloud, the passing cloud. You have seen. Everyone has experience. The cloud passes, and it appears that the moon is moving. Have you seen this?

Devotees: Yes.

Prabhupāda: Actually the moon is not moving. It is a māyā, illusion. It appears that the moon is moving. But similarly, the living entity, because he is spiritual spark of the Supreme, it has not fallen. It has not fallen. But he is thinking, "I am fallen. I am material." That is the reason. He is thinking, "I am this body."

"The spirit soul is originally spiritual spark. Why he has come here?"—this question is sometimes raised.

Lecture on SB 2.9.14 -- Melbourne, April 13, 1972:

Nowadays they are not even for dharma or artha. They are simply kāma, sense gratification. Sense gratification because every one of us, we come here for sense gratification. The spirit soul is originally spiritual spark." Why he has come here?"—this question is sometimes raised. That is answered. We are reading. Ātma-māyām ṛte rājan. It is a māyā. We cannot enjoy. It is māyā. We have created. "Can I not enjoy like Kṛṣṇa? Can I not become God?" This is māyā. This is māyā. Therefore we are reading this verse, ātma-māyām ṛte rājan parasya... What is that?

Devotees: Parasyānubhavātmanaḥ.

Prabhupāda: Parasyānubhavātmanaḥ. The spiritual, spirit soul has no other business than to serve the Supreme Lord, but creating an illusion, he has come here, svapna-draṣṭur ivāñjasā, just like creating a mentality and sleeping: "Oh, I have become king." That is not king. That is simply svapna, false. So this material world is simply a nightmare, that's all, hallucination. Ātma-māyām. It is nothing but a hallucination, but we have become so fool, we want to stick to it. We want to stick to it. In spite of so many instructions, so many literatures, still we want. The māyā is so strong.

Now the question may be raised that both ways I have to accept some painful situation, so why shall I accept painful situation for realizing God?

Lecture on SB 5.5.1-2 -- Paris, August 12, 1973:

Tapo divyam, for God realization. (break) ...that everyone is working hard day and night, but that is for sense gratification. Similarly, if you take little trouble, if you accept voluntarily some painful condition for realizing God, divyam, that is the human mission. Now the question may be raised that both ways I have to accept some painful situation, so why shall I accept painful situation for realizing God? For material sense gratification, although I am working very hard, I am getting, immediately, some pleasure, sense pleasure. So why shall I work hard or accept some painful situation for realizing God which is unknown and fictitious to me? So the reply is, tapo divyaṁ putrakā yena śuddhyed sattvam (SB 5.5.1), "My dear boys, if you accept a little trouble for realizing God, then your existential condition will be purified."

I raised this question in the Massachusetts Technical Institution when I was asked to speak, that "Where is your technical department where a man after death can be alive again?"

Lecture on SB 5.5.5 -- London, September 3, 1971:

I raised this question in the Massachusetts Technical Institution when I was asked to speak, that "Where is your technical department where a man after death can be alive again, injecting some...?" Just like motor stops, so a mechanical technologist go and makes the, I mean to say, machine correctly. Then it again runs. That I understand that there is technology. But when a man stops running, where is the technology to give him again the energy to go on? Because it is Massachusetts Institute of Technology, this technology must be there. So I asked the university, "Where is your that department?" The rascal could not answer. (laughter) Yes. And they appreciated, the students. Later on, they surrounded me and they appreciated: "Actually, where is that technology in the university?" That is called parābhava.

"I heard that people suffer such-and-such kind of punishment for such-and-such kind of sinful activities. So how to get them released from this suffering?"

Lecture on SB 6.1.6 -- Sydney, February 17, 1973:

So this question was raised by Parīkṣit Mahārāja, that,

adhuneha mahā-bhāga

yathaiva narakān naraḥ

nānogra-yātanān neyāt

tan me vyākhyātum arhasi

"I heard that people suffer such-and-such kind of punishment for such-and-such kind of sinful activities. So how to get them released from this suffering?" Just like a friend, suppose another friend for criminal activity is put into jail, but the friend is thinking, "Anyway, my friend is now put into jail, suffering. How to get him released?" That is friend's action—father, mother or friend. Similarly, Vaiṣṇava, Vaiṣṇava is patitānāṁ pāvanebhyo vaiṣṇavebhyo namo namaḥ. We offer our respectful obeisances to Vaiṣṇava because Vaiṣṇava is meant for delivering the fallen souls. That is Vaiṣṇava's business. They have taken so much trouble just to deliver the fallen souls from the sinful activities, and those who are being punished, to save them, this is Vaiṣṇava's business.

So this question was raised by Parīkṣit Mahārāja that "You have already described." He did not disbelieve.

Lecture on SB 6.1.6 -- Honolulu, June 8, 1975:

So this question was raised by Parīkṣit Mahārāja that "You have already described." He did not disbelieve. He believed. Because he is Vaiṣṇava, he knows. And he is disciple of Śukadeva Gosvāmī, so he has thorough knowledge. Now he is anxious. This is the symptom of Vaiṣṇava, that he cannot see others are suffering. Therefore he takes.

Parīkṣit Mahārāja does not raise such foolish question that "Who is suffering for..." One who has committed sinful life, he must suffer.

Lecture on SB 6.1.6 -- Honolulu, June 8, 1975:

So here Parīkṣit Mahārāja does not raise such foolish question that "Who is suffering for..." He is suffering. One who has committed sinful life, he must suffer. That is the law. So the answer is, Śukadeva Gosvāmī,

na ced ihaivāpacitiṁ yathāṁhasaḥ

kṛtasya kuryāt mana-ukta-pāṇibhiḥ

dhruvaṁ sa vai pretya narakān upaiti

ye kīrtitā me bhavatas tigma-yātanāḥ

So Śukadeva Gosvāmī replied, "My dear king, the sinful activities must be atoned."

Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, "All right, then you bring him back, you live here. I am leaving this place. I am leaving this place." Then they said, "No, Sir, we shall not raise this question anymore."

Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Honolulu, May 22, 1976:

That is the example given by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. His personal associate, you know, Choṭa Haridāsa, Junior Haridāsa. He was a very nice singer, so he was singing in the assembly of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. One day he went to beg some rice from Śikhi Māhiti's sister, and there was a young woman and he lustfully saw her. That is sometimes natural. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu understand that, just to teach us, while He was eating He said, "Who brought this rice?" "Choṭa Haridāsa." "So ask him not to see Me anymore, finished." Everyone was surprised: "What happened?" Then by inquiry it was found that he lustfully saw one young woman. So just Caitanya Mahāprabhu is so strict that rejected him from His associates. Then other big, big devotees requested Him that "He has committed some mistake. Please excuse him. He is Your servant." Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, "All right, then you bring him back, you live here. I am leaving this place. I am leaving this place." Then they said, "No, Sir, we shall not raise this question anymore."

Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, "All right, then you bring him back. You live with him. I am leaving this place. I am leaving this place." They said, "No, sir, we shall not raise this question anymore."

Lecture on SB 6.1.23 -- Honolulu, May 23, 1976:

That is the example given by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. His personal associate you know, Choṭa Haridāsa, Junior Haridāsa. He was a very nice singer, so he was singing in the assembly of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and one day he went to beg some rice from Śikhi Mahiti's sister, and there was a young woman, and he lustfully saw there. That is sometimes natural. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu understand that. Just to teach us, while He was eating, He said, "Who brought this rice?" "Choṭa Haridāsa." "So ask him not to see Me anymore. Finish." Everyone was surprised. "What happened?" Then by inquiry it was found that he lustfully saw on young woman. So just... Caitanya Mahāprabhu is so strict that He rejected him from His associates. Then other big, big devotees requested him that "He has committed some mistake, and please excuse him. He is your servant." So Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, "All right, then you bring him back. You live with him. I am leaving this place. I am leaving this place." They said, "No, sir, we shall not raise this question anymore."

The next question will be: "Then how Nārāyaṇa learned the Vedas or knowledge?"

Lecture on SB 6.1.40 -- San Francisco, July 21, 1975:

Then the next question will be: "Then how Nārāyaṇa learned the Vedas or knowledge?" Because we have got experience. We receive knowledge from others. So this question may be raised. Therefore it is said, sākṣāt svayambhūḥ. He does not require. That is God. All of us, we require knowledge by somebody, guru. But Kṛṣṇa does not require any guru, although when He comes, He accepts guru just to teach us.

We are now raising these questions. And they were passing on. No. This is not the process.

Lecture on SB 6.1.42 -- Los Angeles, June 8, 1976:

They say that "We have taken photograph on the moon planet. There is no life." What is the value of this photograph? Can you take photograph in the water, how many fishes are there? So what is the value of your photograph? This is the difficulty, that these rascals, they do not accept that they are defective. That is the difficulty. With their defective senses they are thinking, "We are perfect. Because we have got a photograph, telescope, therefore it is sufficient." It is made by you. You are defective, and whatever you make, that is defective. This is the conclusion. This is right conclusion. If blind man, if he creates some telescope or..., can he see? You are blind. What you can see? But they are taking evidence: "We have seen with photograph, with telescope."

So these questions were never raised. We are now raising these questions. And they were passing on. No. This is not the process.

Being suspicious, some of the rascals raised the question in Parliament in India, that "This community are fabulously rich. So it is understood that they belong to the CIA Department of America. Is it a fact?"

Lecture on SB 7.6.1-2 -- Stockholm, September 6, 1973:

Prabhupāda: So, in India there are persons who are very suspicious of this Hare Kṛṣṇa movement, and they are surprised how we are maintaining more than one hundred branches all over the world. "Where you get financial help?" So, they think that America has got a, what is, CID department?

Devotees: CIA.

Prabhupāda: CIA Department. So they are financing us, America. Just see the foolishness. The CIA department has taken this saṅkīrtana movement. But these rascals are thinking like that; that it is a branch of the CIA Movement. So, being suspicious, some of the rascals raised the question in Parliament in India, that "This community are fabulously rich. So it is understood that they belong to the CIA Department of America. Is it a fact?" It was raised in the Parliament and the question was put before the home member. "So if they are CIA Department, they are pushing on this Hare Kṛṣṇa movement under the garb, then what is government's information? This is first question. If not, where they are getting so much money spending?" In this way two, three questions were raised. Fortunately the home member was aware of our movement and he replied that "They do not belong to the CIA Department. We do not have any such information and there is no need of any action. And so far their finance is concerned, we understand that they are selling their literatures and public contribution." That is the fact, actually. We are selling our books about, three, more, not less than three thousand dollars daily, and that is giving us our financial help. We have no other means of income. Although we have got expenditure not less than one hundred thousands of dollars per month throughout the whole world.

The question was that Viṣṇu or Nārāyaṇa, He's the supreme opulent, Lakṣmī-pati, the husband of the goddess of fortune. So persons who are Viṣṇu-bhakta or Vaiṣṇava, why they become poorer?

Lecture on SB 7.9.10-11 -- Montreal, July 14, 1968:

Practically this question was raised by Parīkṣit Mahārāja to Śukadeva Gosvāmī. The question was that Viṣṇu or Nārāyaṇa, He's the supreme opulent, Lakṣmī-pati, the husband of the goddess of fortune. So persons who are Viṣṇu-bhakta or Vaiṣṇava, why they become poorer? Why this contradiction? And the devotees of Lord Śiva... Śiva presents himself as the poorest man. He has no dwelling house even. He lives underneath a tree. And his wife Durgā, she is the proprietor of this universe. She is also following the husband. She has also agreed to live underneath the tree. Never complains, "Oh, my dear Śiva, you don't construct a house even. What is this?" She also agrees. That means they live very, in a wretched, poor condition. So this was the question of Parīkṣit Mahārāja, that those who are worshiper of this wretched Lord Śiva—not wretched, but he places himself in such condition—they become very opulent materially. They have got very nice estate, very nice wife, very nice foodstuff. And the Vaiṣṇavas, who are worshiper of Viṣṇu, the most opulent, the controller of Lakṣmī, lakṣmī-sahasra-śata sevyamānaṁ, whom not only one, but millions and billions of goddess of fortune are always in His service, such opulent Kṛṣṇa and Viṣṇu, those who are worshiper of Viṣṇu and Kṛṣṇa, why they become poorer? This contradiction was inquired by Mahārāja Parikṣit to Śukadeva Gosvāmī, and Śukadeva Gosvāmī said that... This is the process of great personality. He said, "I'll not answer this question, but this very question was inquired by your grandfather Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira to Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa. And it is better to take the answer directly from Kṛṣṇa."

So there may be a question that "Then was Prahlāda Mahārāja very glad that his father was killed?" This question may be raised, that "What kind of devotee he is?"

Lecture on SB 7.9.13-14 -- Montreal, August 22, 1968:

So there may be a question that "Then was Prahlāda Mahārāja very glad that his father was killed?" This question may be raised, that "What kind of devotee he is? He's such a great devotee of Lord, and before him his father was killed, and he is requesting the Lord, 'My dear Lord, the disturbing element is already finished.' That means he's glad that his father was killed." So from social conventional point of view, if a son is glad on the death of his father, do you think it is very nice? No. These points are to be considered. But Prahlāda Mahārāja gives very nice evidence. This is the peculiarity of Kṛṣṇa conscious persons, that whatever they will say, they will give full support. What is that? He says, tad yaccha manyum asuraś ca hatas tvayādya. Asura. "My father was asura. So because Your mission was to kill, so that, he is killed. And by this killing process, not only myself, but sādhu, all sādhus they are also pleased." Sādhur api. Just see.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures

Lord Rāmacandra is self-sufficient. Why He should feel separation from Sītā? This question may be raised.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 1.6 -- Mayapur, March 30, 1975:

Lord Rāmacandra, He is Supreme Personality of Godhead. Why He felt so much separation that to rescue Sītādevī He fought with Rāvaṇa? He's self-sufficient. Why He should feel separation from Sītā? This question may be raised. But actually there are different phases of loving affairs, and the separation is also one of them. The separation, feeling of separation, is one of them. We have got experience in our present life that intense love... Still there is feeling of separation. All these things are there in the spiritual world. Only perverted reflection of those spiritual feelings are manifested here in this material world.

Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī raised the question of Vedānta, studying Vedānta, so Caitanya Mahāprabhu is answering, "This is My position. I am just following the instruction of My spiritual master.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.80-95 -- San Francisco, February 10, 1966:

Now Caitanya Mahāprabhu concludes... Because you might always remember that He is speaking to Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī. So He said that "With full faith in the words of My spiritual master, I chant this Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare, and I have no other business." Nirantara kari. Because He was... He raised the question of Vedānta, studying Vedānta, so He is answering, "This is My position. I am just following the instruction of My spiritual master. In the beginning, he taught Me like this. He instructed Me like this. Then I followed. I have developed these symptoms. Then again I approached My spiritual master. He confirmed the same thing. Therefore My business is to follow his instruction, and therefore I am always chanting and dancing."

The same question was raised by Sanātana Gosvāmī that Why there should be struggle for existence? Why not easy life, peaceful life?

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.103 -- Washington, D.C., July 8, 1976:

There are so many things with which we have to struggle. This is called struggle for existence. Even the modern scientists, they call... It is not a very peaceful situation. The same question was raised by Sanātana Gosvāmī that Why there should be struggle for existence? Why not easy life, peaceful life? Why some outer elements, they are giving us opposition? I want to be happy, but there is opposition. That is struggle for existence. This question should be there: Why? Even with a fly we have to fight. I am sitting, without doing any harm to the fly, but it attacks, bothering me. There are so many. Even if you sit down without any offense... Just like you are passing on the street, there is no offense, but from one house all the dogs begin to bark: "Why you are coming here? Why you are coming here?" There was no cause of his barking, but because it is dog, his business is "Why you are coming, why you are coming?" Similarly, we have no freedom to go from one place to another at present moment. There is immigration department: "Why you are coming? Why you are coming?" In many places we have been refused to enter. We have been refused from the airplane. "No, you cannot enter, go back." So I had to go back. So, so many disadvantages. Padaṁ padaṁ yad vipadāṁ na teṣām (SB 10.14.58). In this material world, you cannot live very peacefully. Not very; not peacefully at all. There are so many impediments. The śāstra says, padaṁ padaṁ yad vipadām: every step there is danger. Not only from these lower animals, but from the human society, by nature, on which we have no control. So in this way, our life is not very happy in this material world, and we should be advanced in inquiring about it, that why there are so many impediments. That is human life.

This question was raised that these girls who were already married, how they went to Kṛṣṇa for dancing with Him, and how Kṛṣṇa allowed them to dance with Him, because against religious principles.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.391-405 -- New York, January 2, 1967:

Mahārāja Parīkṣit was hearing the description of rāsa-līlā from Śukadeva Gosvāmī. So he cleared out one question which is generally discussed about the character of Kṛṣṇa because He enjoyed these rāsa-līlā pastimes at dead of night, He played on His flute and all the gopīs of Vṛndāvana, they came into the forest and they had the rāsa dance. So Mahārāja Parīkṣit, or King Parīkṣit, inquired to his teacher, Śukadeva Goswami, that Kṛṣṇa is on this earth, He appeared on this earth for paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām, dharma saṁsthāpanārthāya... Dharma saṁsthāpanārthāya (BG 4.8), just to establish the process of religiosity. And India at least, still, the Vedic principle is that a, a lady or a girl who is especially married, or unmarried, she cannot mix with any other men. So that is against religious principles. So this question was raised that these girls who were already married, how they went to Kṛṣṇa for dancing with Him, and how Kṛṣṇa allowed them to dance with Him, because against religious principles. This question was raised by Parīkṣit Mahārāja. Of course, you cannot imagine that a girl going to a friend and dancing with him, that is not against religious principles. But according to Vedic principles, this is irreligious.

So this was questioned by Mahārāja Parīkṣit to Śukadeva Gosvāmī, and Śukadeva Gosvāmī replied in many ways, but the summary is that "How this can be impure?" That is, "By chanting Kṛṣṇa's name, one becomes pure, how dancing with Kṛṣṇa can be impure?"

Arrival Addresses and Talks

Again the same question was raised. That we have distinction between man and woman, black and white.

Arrival -- Philadelphia, July 11, 1975:

Prabhupāda: So again the same question was raised. So reply was all right?

Brahmānanda: Yes. She was very nice.

Kīrtanānanda: What was the question?

Prabhupāda: That we have distinction between man and woman, black and white. Materially, there is distinction. You are differently dressed; I am differently dressed. But spiritually, there is no distinction.

General Lectures

I am recently born, say, seventy-six years ago. How I became Kṛṣṇa's representative, this question may be raised.

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

Śrīman Hanumān-prasāda Gosvāmī, he has spoken something about Kṛṣṇa's representative. So naturally, question may be raised that how I became Kṛṣṇa's representative. Kṛṣṇa appeared five thousand years ago. I am recently born, say, seventy-six years ago. How I became Kṛṣṇa's representative, this question may be raised. But the answer is also there, ready. We have got a disciplic succession: from Kṛṣṇa, Brahmā; from Brahmā, Nārada; from Nārada, Vyāsadeva; from Vyāsadeva, Madhvācārya; from Madhvācārya, so many disciplic succession. Later, five hundred years ago, Mādhavendra Purī, in the line of Madhvācārya. Then his disciple, Īśvara Purī, his disciple, Lord Caitanya. Lord Caitanya we consider Him Kṛṣṇa Himself, but He also accepted a spiritual master, Īśvara Purī. So Lord Caitanya is everyone's spiritual master, but for the sake of formality, He also accepted a spiritual master so that others may learn that this is essential.

Suppose that due to some reason we fall down. This question was raised by Arjuna, and it was replied by Kṛṣṇa.

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

If you believe in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, even if you are not successful to finish the business of Kṛṣṇa consciousness in this life, next life your birth is guaranteed as human being, either in a very rich family or in a very pure family. Śucīnāṁ śrīmatāṁ gehe yoga-bhraṣṭo sanjāyate (BG 6.41). Yoga-bhraṣṭaḥ. Just like every one of us, we are trying to be successful in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Suppose that due to some reason we fall down. There is possibility because māyā, illusory nature, is very, very strong. So we may become victim. So there is no... This question was raised by Arjuna, and it was replied by Kṛṣṇa. So there is no question of wrong. A person who is in Kṛṣṇa consciousness... Everyone should try to finish this business. Why one should wait for another life? We have got this opportunity. Let us finish. And what is the difficulty to remain always thinking of Kṛṣṇa? Sadā tad-bhāva-bhāvitaḥ (BG 8.6). And the process is very simple. That I already explained: Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. So adopt this process. Then your... In this life you get Kṛṣṇa. But even if you are not successful, then a Kṛṣṇa conscious person is guaranteed next life human form of life, and that is also either in very rich family or... Śucīnāṁ śrīmatāṁ gehe (BG 6.41).

Generally, the question is raised: "How the living entities became fallen in this material world?"

Lecture -- Tokyo, May 1, 1972:

This material existence, which we are now passing through, is not our actual existence. There is a Bengali Vaiṣṇava poet. He said... Generally, the question is raised: "How the living entities became fallen in this material world?" The Māyāvādī philosophy, they say that we are the same with God, but we are now covered by māyā, and as soon as we are free from this māyā's covering, we become again one with the Supreme. This is Māyāvāda philosophy. Practically, the Vaiṣṇava philosophy, also the same, but only difference is that the jīvātmā, he is eternal servant of the Supreme Lord.

So this question was raised by the servants of Yamarāja in the matter of Ajāmila Upākhyāna.

Lecture -- London, August 23, 1973:

So this question was raised by the servants of Yamarāja in the matter of Ajāmila Upākhyāna. And the Yamarāja, who's known as Dharmarāja, master of understanding religious principle, so he explained what is dharma. He said, dharmaṁ tu sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam.

dharmaṁ tu sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam

na vai vidur ṛṣayo nāpi devāḥ

na siddha-mukhyā asurā manuṣyāḥ

kuto na vidyādhara-caraṇādayaḥ

(SB 6.3.19)

These question should be raised by really advanced human being, that "I don't want all these things. I want to enjoy this material world, but I am forced to change into a body. I cannot enjoy. I cannot enjoy." This is real problem.

Lecture at Upsala University Faculty -- Stockholm, September 7, 1973:

Why should we accept one type of body, live there for some time and again change it? That we have experienced. Just like any one of us, we desire that my youthful body may remain. We try to keep that youthfulness by so many medicine, by so many means. But nature will not allow to keep yourself always youthful. That is not possible. You must change. Therefore one should be inquisitive, that "I don't want this type of body, old body, feeble body, more conditioned, with rheumatic disease and other, so many disease, cough disease. I don't want it, but I'm forced to accept this body. This is real problem. I don't want to die, but death is forced upon me." So these question should be raised by really advanced human being, that "I don't want all these things. I want to enjoy this material world, but I am forced to change into a body. I cannot enjoy. I cannot enjoy." This is real problem. That real problem has been discussed in the Bhagavad-gītā: janma-mṛtyu-jarā-vyādhi-duḥkha-doṣānudarśanam (BG 13.9).

Even in Indian parliament, the question was raised, "Wherefrom this ISKCON movement gets their money?" Some Communist member raised this question.

Lecture at World Health Organization -- Geneva, June 6, 1974:

Well, we get money. We sell these books also. If they require money, there is money also. But we live very simple life. Whatever little necessity of money is there, that we can gather by selling these books. Even in Indian parliament, the question was raised, "Wherefrom this ISKCON movement gets their money?" Some Communist member raised this question. And the home member replied, "They get money by selling literature." That's a fact.

The question may be raised that "How I can do welfare activities for the welfare of the whole world?"

City Hall Lecture -- Durban, October 7, 1975:

Para-upakāra. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness is the best welfare activities in the world because people are in ignorance. They are... Everyone, practically 99.9%, at the present moment, they are under the conception, bodily conception: "I am Indian," "I am American," "I am Hindu," "I am Muslim," like that. That is ignorance. That will be discussed in the Bhagavad-gītā very elaborately. So the question may be raised that "How I can do welfare activities for the welfare of the whole world?" The Caitanya Mahāprabhu encourages. He says that āmāra ājñāya hañā tāra ei deśa: "Wherever you are staying," ei deśa, "in that country... You may not go outside, but wherever you are staying," āmāra ājñāya, "by My order," guru hañā, "you must become a guru"—by the order of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. "Then? I have no education. How can I become a guru? How can I instruct?" Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, "Yes, that I know. But you take My order." Āmāra ājñāya guru hañā tāra ei deśa (CC Madhya 7.128). "Then what shall I do?" Yāre dekha tāre kaha kṛṣṇa-upadeśa: "You become guru. You haven't got to manufacture anything, any philosophy. You simply instruct whatever is spoken by Kṛṣṇa. That's all. You become a guru."

From the Bhagavad-gītā, any question you can raise, the answer is there.

Address to Rotary Club -- Chandigarh, October 17, 1976:

If one speaks on behalf of Kṛṣṇa, he is guru. But if one manufactures some idea from the words of Kṛṣṇa by misinterpretation and does not allow Kṛṣṇa to speak, it is a great dangerous position. That has become actually the fact in India. Otherwise such a big culture, complete culture... From the Bhagavad-gītā, any question you can raise, the answer is there. Political, social, religious, philosophical, cultural—any way you study Bhagavad-gītā, the complete answer is there. Therefore our request is that let Kṛṣṇa speak for Himself. Don't try to misinterpret the words of Kṛṣṇa or the words in the Bhagavad-gītā. That will spoil it.

Philosophy Discussions

This question was raised by Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja. So sometimes that is special favor. By special favor Kṛṣṇa draws by force, "Come on. This time."

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Prabhupāda: Actually this is the point: surrender. But they are so rascal they will not do it; therefore māyā is giving them trouble in every way, ultimately. Just like my Guru Mahārāja's plan was that I should come and preach. That was his first instruction. But I wanted that I will not take sannyāsa and remain as a gṛhastha, and then I shall do it. That is special favor. Kṛṣṇa says, yasya anugṛhnī harisye... "Especially if I am very much anxious to get one reformed, by My mercy, the first thing is that I take away all his money."

Śyāmasundara: Where is this stated?

Prabhupāda: It is in Bhāgavata. This question was raised by Yudhiṣṭhira Mahārāja. So sometimes that is special favor. By force the whole plan is like that, but everyone wants to delay. By special favor he draws by force, "Come on. This time."

Arjuna thought that "Kṛṣṇa is my friend, my cousin-brother. He is of my age. How is that I can believe that He taught this philosophy to the sun-god." This was not for Arjuna. This question was raised for us.

Philosophy Discussion on William James:

Prabhupāda: We have to take experience from a person whose experience nobody can surpass. Just like Kṛṣṇa says, vedāhaṁ samatītāni vartamānāni bhaviṣyāni (BG 7.26). He says that "I know past, present, future, everything." So who knows past, present, future, everything? Therefore we have to take experience from Kṛṣṇa. Just like Arjuna inquired from Kṛṣṇa that "You taught this philosophy to the sun-god—how I am to believe this?" Because Kṛṣṇa... Arjuna thought that "Kṛṣṇa is my friend, my cousin-brother. He is of my age. How is that I can believe that He taught this philosophy to the sun-god." This was not for Arjuna. This question was raised for us. So Kṛṣṇa replied that "Both you and Me were present. We took many times appearances. But you have forgotten. I do not forget." That is the difference between Arjuna and Kṛṣṇa, ordinary living entity and God.

Then the question may be raised that "How He got this complete knowledge? From whom He received?"

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:

Prabhupāda: That, that means he has no clear conception of God, because God has to take power from some parliament. God does not take power from anyone. He is God. That is described in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, that janmādy asya yataḥ anvayād itarataḥ ca artheṣu abhijñaḥ svarāṭ (SB 1.1.1), that the Supreme, God, or Supreme Truth, Brahman, He knows everything. He knows everything in details. And wherefrom? Abhijñaḥ. He is, abhijñaḥ means completely in awareness. Then the question may be raised that "How He got this complete knowledge? From whom He received?" The answer is immediate, svarāṭ. Svarāṭ means independent. That is God. If one has to take knowledge from Mr. Freud, then he is not God. Anyone, if you come to that person that He is independent, parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate svābhāvikī (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport), naturally He is all-perfect. He hasn't got to become perfect by some process or from some authority. That is God. He is all-perfect automatically.

If it is accepted the soul is created, then God is also Supreme Soul—the question may be raised that He is also created.

Philosophy Discussion on Thomas Aquinas:

Prabhupāda: So actually the soul is never created. It is always existing with God, and this is nice that if it is accepted the soul is created, then God is also Supreme Soul—the question may be raised that He is also created. So that is not the fact. God is eternal, and His part and parcels are also eternal. The only difference is that God never accepts this material body, but the individual soul, being small particle, it may be sometimes he succumbs by the material energy.