Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Three kinds of evidences. So pratyaksa and aitihya is neglected. According to our Vedic system, sruti-pramana, if it is statement, the statement is there in the sruti, in the Vedas, then we accept

Expressions researched:
"Three kinds of evidences. So pratyaksa and aitihya is neglected. According to our Vedic system, sruti-pramana, if it is statement, the statement is there in the sruti, in the Vedas, then we accept"

Lectures

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Three kinds of evidences. So pratyakṣa and aitihya is neglected. According to our Vedic system, śruti-pramāṇa, if it is statement, the statement is there in the śruti, in the Vedas, then we accept. We have got a society in India. They call veda-pramāṇa. "We cannot accept without it is not mentioned in the Vedas." That's a, that's nice. But there is another class who are described in the Bhagavad-gītā by Kṛṣṇa Himself: veda-vāda-ratāḥ. They are simply unnecessarily fight on the basis of so-called Vedic knowledge. Vedic knowledge must be understood from the guru. That is injunction.
Lecture on BG 2.26 -- Hyderabad, November 30, 1972:

There are many theories and philosophical speculation all over the world about understanding the soul. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is concluding that "Somebody's explaining wonderfully, somebody is hearing wonderfully, but even after hearing and speaking, it remains a mystery, and less intelligent person cannot understand it." That is the fact. There are so many theories. Therefore we have to accept the reality from the authority. By theorizing, by speculating, we cannot come into any decision. I may be very good logician. You may be greater logician. So you can defeat my logic. I can defeat your logic. So what is the conclusion? This kind of talking, it is called ku-tarka, unnecessarily talking, because you'll not come to my decision, I'll not come to your decision. So everyone is mysterious.

So in this way we cannot understand which is beyond the perception of our knowledge. Acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṁs tarkeṇa yojayet. Things which are beyond our perception, you, we should not simply try to understand by logic and argument. It is useless waste of time, because nobody can decide theory. The modern so-called scientists, they also write like that: "Perhaps," "It may be," like that. "It may be millions of years. It was like this." "It may be." What is the value of saying "It may be." Say definitely. That they cannot do. All the scientists" theory like "Perhaps," "Maybe." "Perchance, if it comes to be true..." So such kind of argument has no value. Therefore our śāstra says: acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvāḥ. Beyond your perception, beyond your sense perception, don't try to understand it by argument and logic. Then how to know it? Know it from the person who knows it. That is knowledge. Just like we are trying to get knowledge about the soul, not by experiment, but we are trying to understand from the words of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is the authority. So He says, in the beginning: dehino 'smin yathā dehe kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā (BG 2.13). We can... Kṛṣṇa says, and we can think over it and ponder over it. Then we come to conclusion. And the other process, Vedic process, is:

yasya deve parā bhaktir
yathā deve tathā gurau
tasyaite kathitā hy arthāḥ
prakāśante mahātmanaḥ
(ŚU 6.23)

Our process is descending process. We are not trying to understand by the ascending process. Inductive or deductive. We accept the statements of the Vedas. Therefore we haven't got to make much effort to understand a thing. Veda-vacana, śruti, śruti-pramāṇa. There are three kinds of evidences: direct perception, and evidence from the Vedas, and evidence from history. Aitihya. Pratyakṣa, aitihya, śruti. Three kinds of evidences. So pratyakṣa and aitihya is neglected. According to our Vedic system, śruti-pramāṇa, if it is statement, the statement is there in the śruti, in the Vedas, then we accept. We have got a society in India. They call veda-pramāṇa. "We cannot accept without it is not mentioned in the Vedas." That's a, that's nice. But there is another class who are described in the Bhagavad-gītā by Kṛṣṇa Himself: veda-vāda-ratāḥ. They are simply unnecessarily fight on the basis of so-called Vedic knowledge. Vedic knowledge must be understood from the guru. That is injunction. They defy that. They... The Vedic injunction is... Kaṭhopaniśad. Tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet (MU 1.2.12). You... To understand the Vedas, you must approach a guru. Otherwise, you cannot understand. Just like it is forbidden that without becoming a brāhmaṇa, nobody should read Vedas. Because he cannot understand. Unless one is qualified brāhmaṇa, unless one has approached another qualified brāhmaṇa who knows, there is no question of understanding Vedas. Just like Max Muller translated Veda. What does he know about Veda? Such kinds of translation, understanding, is useless. Tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet (MU 1.2.12). Abhigacchet means "He must!" There is not that "I may go or I may not." No, you must. If you really serious. In our vaiṣṇava-paramparā also... vaiṣṇava-paramparā is actually Vedic paramparā. That ādau gurvāśrayam... Ādau gurvāśrayam: "To enter into the spiritual life, first thing is first of all to accept a guru." That is... All big, big stalwarts... Even Vyāsadeva. Vyāsadeva, the wonderful literature. This reading. We are reading Bhagavad-gītā. It is Vyāsadeva's literature. He heard from Kṛṣṇa and wrote it. And not only this. The Mahābhārata, the Purāṇas, the Vedānta-sūtra, and the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Wonderful literatures. There is no possibility of producing such literature by any scholar of these days. It is not possible. But he accepted guru, Nārada, Nārada Muni. When, after compiling all the Vedas, and Purāṇas, even Vedānta-sūtra, Vyāsadeva was not satisfied himself, he was seeming very morose, at that time, his spiritual master, Nārada, came, and he asked that "Why you are morose? You have done so much nice literary work. So why you are not very happy?" So Vyāsadeva replied, "Yes, my lord, I am actually not happy, but I cannot understand why I'm not happy. So you know everything. Kindly describe why I'm not happy." So at that time, Nārada replied him that "All the literatures you have so far made, they are with reference to the body and the mind. You have nothing described very nicely about the Supreme Soul. So now you try to describe something about the Supreme Lord, about the Supreme Soul. That will make you happy." Therefore he described the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. This is the history of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. And his last contribution was mature contribution was Vedānta-sūtra. So from the Vedānta-sūtra, he began writing Śrīmad-Bhāgavata: janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). This is the beginning of Vedānta-sūtra. Athāto brahma jijñāsā. He said, in a different language, jīvasya tattva-jijñāsā.

So a human life should be engaged inquiring about the Absolute Truth, and he should inquire from a person who, who has heard about the Absolute Truth from a realized person. There is a.... Therefore it is called śruti, paramparā, disciplic succession. One... Just like Vyāsadeva is hearing from Nārada. Nārada is authorized. He has heard from Brahmā. Brahmā has heard from Kṛṣṇa. So this is the paramparā system, disciplic succession. So there are four paramparā systems. They are known as, at the present moment, Rāmānuja-sampradāya, Brahma-sampra..., Brahma-samprada..., yes, Madhva-sampradāya, Brahma-sampradāya, Madhva-sampradāya, the same, and Rudra-sampradāya and Śrī-samp..., Śrī, Rāma, Kumāra-sampradāya. These is four sampradāyas. So we should hear from the sampradāya-ācārya by disciplic succession. As Kṛṣṇa recommends in this Bhagavad-gītā: evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ (BG 4.2).

imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ
proktavān aham avyayam
vivasvān manave prāha
manur ikṣvākave 'bravīt
(BG 4.1)

Evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ (BG 4.2). So that is the system. We should receive knowledge by the bona fide, paramparā system. Otherwise it may be bogus. Because without paramparā system, we cannot understand actual fact. And we have to become in the disciplic succession. We must accept a guru. Tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam (SB 11.3.21). If you are actually eager, anxious to understand the spiritual science, then you must approach a guru. Tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam. Uttama means transcendental subject matter. You cannot learn it. Just like if you purchase one pharmacology book from the bookseller's shop, and if you read, at home, do you mean that you become a medical practitioner, pharmacist? No. You must go to the university, you must go to the college. You must hear the experienced professor and learn it and practically experiment it. Then you can learn. Not that by purchasing a book you become a medical practitioner or lawyer. That is not possible. Therefore the direction is that tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet: (MU 1.2.12) "Must." Here also we see, Kṛṣṇa in the beginning was talking with Arjuna just like friends. But when Arjuna understood it that "We are talking like friends. So we cannot come into conclusion." The friend, they talk, they argue, they put logic. In that way, we cannot understand. Na tāṁs tarkeṇa yojayet. Then? Tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet. So therefore Arjuna surrendered himself: śiṣyas te 'haṁ śādhi māṁ prapannam (BG 2.7). Kārpaṇya-doṣopahata-svabhāvaḥ. "I, I can understand that I am a kṣatriya. It is my duty to fight. But in front of my grandfather and relatives, I am declining to fight. Therefore I am affected with kārpaṇya-doṣa. I am deviating from my duty. So why I am deviating from this duty? Therefore I am surrendering myself unto You."

So in a position of perplexity, one must approach a bona fide spiritual master. That is the process, Vedic process. Otherwise, it is not possible. And our Sanātana Gosvāmī, our predecessor, Caitanya Mahāprabhu's direct disciple, he gives his direction that avaiṣṇava-mukhodgīrṇa-pūta-hari-kathāmṛtam, śravaṇaṁ na kartavyam. He says. He says, "Do not hear from a person who is not a Vaiṣṇava." He must, one must become a Vaiṣṇava. Otherwise his so-called ideas and interpretation has no value. Has no value. Just like in your country, South India, Dr. Radhakrishnan, he has done so many works. But to tell you frankly, it is useless labor. Because he has said in one of his writings that Bhagavad-gītā is mental speculation. He is surpassing all the ācāryas who came, who appeared in South India. Rāmānujācārya appeared in South India, Madhvācārya appeared in South India. Nimbārka appeared in South India. Viṣṇu Svāmī appeared in South India. Śaṅkarācārya appeared in South India. South India is so blessed. And he also appeared in South India. He's decrying all the ācāryas. Just see the position. He says, "Bhagavad-gītā is a mental speculation." And he has interpreted in a different way. Kṛṣṇa says that man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65). And if you have seen Dr. Radhakrishnan's translation of Bhagavad-gītā, he says, "It is not to Kṛṣṇa." Kṛṣṇa says directly that man-manā bhava mad-bhaktaḥ. He says, "Not to Kṛṣṇa." You'll see. So this defect will be there, unless one is sadācāra-sampanna-vaiṣṇava, self-realized. Therefore Sanātana Gosvāmī says, avaiṣṇava-mukhodgīrṇa-pūta-hari-kathāmṛtam. Our first guru is Kṛṣṇa. To understand Bhagavad-gītā... Arjuna is understanding that Bhagavad-gītā from Kṛṣṇa directly. So after understanding Bhagavad-gītā, Arjuna accepts Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān, puruṣaṁ sāśvatam ādyam (BG 10.12). These are the words. And Arjuna also accepted "It is very, very difficult to understand Your personality."

Now people may say that Arjuna was Kṛṣṇa's friend. To satisfy his friend, he has accepted Him as paraṁ brahma. But that is not the fact. Arjuna gives evidences that "Not only I, but the great authorities like Vyāsa, Nārada, Asita, Devala, they have also accepted You as the Supreme Personality of Godhead." In the recent ages... This is five thousand years ago. Even one thousand, five hundred... Śaṅkarācārya, who is impersonalist, he has also accepted Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇa. He has written in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā: nārāyaṇaḥ avyakta, avyaktāt, para avyaktāt. Nārāyaṇaḥ para avyaktāt. "Nārāyaṇa is not a creation of this material world. He's transcendental." He has accepted. And what to speak of the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, all. They have written so many nice commentaries on the Bhagavad-gītā, Brahma-sūtra, establishing that the Supreme Absolute Truth is person, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Kṛṣṇa is speaking as person. And He is warning the rascals: avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). "Because I am speaking as a human being, the rascals, they deride." Paraṁ bhāvam ajānantaḥ. They do not know what is My influence, what is My power."

So this Personality of Godhead... It is a fact. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). The last word is Bhagavān. From Bhagavān, the expansion is Paramātmā, localized aspect. Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe arjuna tiṣṭhati (BG 18.61). That is expansion. Ekāṁśena sthito jagat (BG 10.42). That is one of the plenary portions. Viṣṭabhya aham. He enters within this universe, and therefore the universe becomes manifest. Just like I am soul, dehino 'smin yathā dehe (BG 2.13), I enter into this body. You enter into your body. Therefore the body expands. Similarly, the Supreme Personality of Godhead enters as Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu within each and every universe. Then it becomes manifest. So there is no question of impersonal. The original source is person. Kṛṣṇa says,

ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo
mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate
iti matvā bhajante māṁ
budhā bhāva-samanvitāḥ
(BG 10.8)

Budha, not the abudha. Abudha means less intelligent. Those who are intelligent, budhā bhāva-samanvitāḥ, with a bhāva, with an ecstatic position, can understand that Kṛṣṇa is the original person. Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ (BG 10.8). Sarvasya means including Brahmā, Viṣṇu, Maheśvara, all the devatās. Aham ādir hi devānām (BG 10.2). He is the original source of all the devas. The original devas within this... Brahmā is the first deva in the first creation. (aside:) What is that? So aham ādir hi devānām. The Brahmā, Viṣṇu, Maheśvara. So He's the origin of Brahmā, Viṣṇu, Maheśvara. From Kṛṣṇa, for material creation, there are three Puruṣas. First of all, three puruṣas. Not directly from Kṛṣṇa. From Kṛṣṇa, Baladeva. From Baladeva, catur-vyūha: Saṅkarṣaṇa, Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna, Aniruddha. Then from Saṅkarṣaṇa, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Nārāyaṇa. Then second catur-vyūha. From the second catur-vyūha, Saṅkarṣaṇa, the puruṣa-avatāras. Three puruṣa-avatāras, three Viṣṇus: Kāraṇodakaśāyī, Garbhodakaśāyī, and Kṣīrodakaśāyī Viṣṇu. So the, in the Vedic literature all these informations are there. And as Kṛṣṇa says, personally, also... Arjuna accepted that "I accept, on the authority of Vyāsadeva, Nārada, Devala, Asita, You are the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and You also speaking directly. Then where is my doubt?"

Page Title:Three kinds of evidences. So pratyaksa and aitihya is neglected. According to our Vedic system, sruti-pramana, if it is statement, the statement is there in the sruti, in the Vedas, then we accept
Compiler:Krsnadas
Created:12 of Jun, 2012
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=1, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:1