Vedic conclusion

Expressions researched:
"conclusion of Vedic" |"conclusion of all Vedic" |"conclusion of all the Vedas" |"conclusion of the vedas" |"conclusions drawn from the Vedic" |"conclusions of the Vedas" |"conclusions of the Vedic" |"vedic conclusion" |"vedic conclusions"

BG Chapters 1 - 6

BG 2.26, Purport:

Arjuna accepted the Vedic conclusion that there is an atomic soul or he did not believe in the existence of the soul, he had no reason to lament.

BG 2.28, Purport:

And if we accept the Vedic conclusion as stated in the Bhagavad-gītā that these material bodies are perishable in due course of time (antavanta ime dehāḥ) but that the soul is eternal (nityasyoktāḥ śarīriṇaḥ), then we must remember always that the body is like a dress; therefore why lament the changing of a dress?

SB Preface and Introduction

SB Introduction:

"The Buddhists are called atheists because they have no respect for the Vedas, but those who defy the Vedic conclusions, as above mentioned, under the pretense of being followers of the Vedas, are verily more dangerous than the Buddhists."

SB Canto 2

SB 2.2.34, Purport:

The Vedic conclusion is thus accepted by all ācāryas, and those who are against this conclusion are only veda-vāda-ratas, as explained in the Bhagavad-gītā (2.42).

SB 2.10.3, Purport:

As mentioned in the previous verse, śrutena (or with reference to the Vedic conclusions), the creation is made possible from the Supreme Personality of Godhead directly by manifestation of His particular energies.

SB 2.10.3, Purport, Purport:

The Vedic conclusion is transcendental light, whereas the non-Vedic conclusion is material darkness.

SB Canto 4

SB 4.2.28, Purport:

Sometimes it is necessary to preach a philosophical doctrine which is against the Vedic conclusion.

SB 4.4.16, Purport:

It is useless to condemn a great personality like Lord Śiva, and this is being stated by his wife, Satī, to establish the supremacy of her husband. First she said, "You call Lord Śiva inauspicious because he associates with demons in crematoriums, covers his body with the ashes of the dead, and garlands himself with the skulls of human beings. You have shown so many defects, but you do not know that his position is always transcendental. Although he appears inauspicious, why do personalities like Brahmā respect the dust of his lotus feet and place on their heads with great respect those very garlands which are condemned by you?" Since Satī was a chaste woman and the wife of Lord Śiva, it was her duty to establish the elevated position of Lord Śiva, not only by sentiment but by facts. Lord Śiva is not an ordinary living entity. This is the conclusion of Vedic scripture. He is neither on the level of the Supreme Personality of Godhead nor on the level of the ordinary living entities. Brahmā is in almost all cases an ordinary living entity. Sometimes, when there is no ordinary living entity available, the post of Brahmā is occupied by an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu, but generally this post is occupied by a greatly pious living entity within this universe. Thus Lord Śiva's position is constitutionally higher than that of Lord Brahmā, although Lord Śiva appeared as the son of Brahmā.

SB 4.9.5, Translation:

At that time Dhruva Mahārāja became perfectly aware of the Vedic conclusion and understood the Absolute Truth and His relationship with all living entities.

SB 4.9.5, Purport:

Dhruva Mahārāja never went to any school or academic teacher to learn the Vedic conclusion, but because of his devotional service to the Lord, as soon as the Lord appeared and touched his forehead with His conchshell, automatically the entire Vedic conclusion was revealed to him. That is the process of understanding Vedic literature. One cannot understand it simply by academic learning. The Vedas indicate that only to one who has unflinching faith in the Supreme Lord as well as in the spiritual master is the Vedic conclusion revealed.

SB 4.9.5, Purport:

Dhruva was only a child. He wanted to offer nice prayers to the Lord, but because he lacked sufficient knowledge, he hesitated; but by the mercy of the Lord, as soon as the Lord's conchshell touched his forehead, he became completely aware of the Vedic conclusion.

SB 4.9.6, Purport:

Dhruva Mahārāja could immediately understand this fact. He was aware that for a very long time he was practically sleeping, and he felt the impetus to glorify the Lord according to the Vedic conclusion. A mundane person cannot offer any prayer or glorify the Supreme Personality of Godhead, because he has no realization of the Vedic conclusion.

SB 4.9.7, Purport:

The Māyāvādī philosopher thinks that the Absolute Truth, being spread throughout the cosmic manifestation, has no personal form. But here Dhruva Mahārāja, upon realization of the Vedic conclusion, says, "You are spread all over the cosmic manifestation by Your energy."

SB 4.21.42, Purport:

A brāhmaṇa must be fully conversant with the Vedic conclusion, which is described in Bhagavad-gītā. Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ (BG 15.15). The Vedic conclusion—the ultimate understanding, or Vedānta understanding—is knowledge of Kṛṣṇa. Actually that is a fact because simply by understanding Kṛṣṇa as He is, as described in Bhagavad-gītā (janma karma ca me divyam evaṁ yo vetti tattvataḥ (BG 4.9)), one becomes a perfect brāhmaṇa.

SB 4.21.42, Purport:

For example, Kṛṣṇa says in Bhagavad-gītā that everyone should always think of Him, everyone should become His devotee, offer Him obeisances and worship Him, and ultimately everyone should surrender unto Him. These devotional activities are transcendental and free from mistakes, illusion, cheating and imperfection. Therefore anyone who is a sincere devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa and who preaches this cult, speaking only on the basis of Kṛṣṇa's instructions, is understood to be virajam, or free from the defects of material contamination. A genuine brāhmaṇa or Vaiṣṇava therefore depends eternally on the conclusion of the Vedas or Vedic versions presented by the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. Only from Vedic knowledge can we understand the actual position of the Absolute Truth, who, as described in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, is manifested in three features—namely impersonal Brahman, localized Paramātmā and, at last, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This knowledge is perfect from time immemorial, and the brahminical or Vaiṣṇava culture depends on this principle eternally. One should therefore study the Vedas with faith, not only for one's personal knowledge, but for the sake of spreading this knowledge and these activities through real faith in the words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the Vedas.

SB 4.21.46, Purport:

They all declared that the Vedic conclusion that one can conquer the heavenly planets by the action of a putra, or son, was fulfilled, for the most sinful Vena, who had been killed by the curse of the brāhmaṇas, was now delivered from the darkest region of hellish life by his son, Mahārāja Pṛthu."

SB 4.22.16, Purport:

The word ātmavatām is significant in this verse. There are three different kinds of devotees, namely kaniṣṭha-adhikārī, madhyama-adhikārī and uttama-adhikārī: the neophyte, the preacher and the mahā-bhāgavata, or the highly advanced devotee. The highly advanced devotee is one who knows the conclusion of the Vedas in full knowledge; thus he becomes a devotee. Indeed, not only is he convinced himself, but he can convince others on the strength of Vedic evidence. The advanced devotee can also see all other living entities as part and parcel of the Supreme Lord, without discrimination. The madhyama-adhikārī (preacher) is also well versed in the śāstras and can convince others also, but he discriminates between the favorable and the unfavorable. In other words, the madhyama-adhikārī does not care for the demoniac living entities, and the neophyte kaniṣṭha-adhikārī does not know much about śāstra but has full faith in the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The Kumāras, however, were mahā-bhāgavatas because after scrutinizingly studying the Absolute Truth, they became devotees. In other words, they were in full knowledge of the Vedic conclusion.

SB 4.25.55, Purport:

According to the Vedic conclusion, one's self is situated within the heart.

SB 4.28.65, Purport:

"To learn transcendental subject matter, one must approach the spiritual master. In doing so, he should carry fuel to burn in sacrifice. The symptom of such a spiritual master is that he is expert in understanding the Vedic conclusion, and therefore he constantly engages in the service of the Supreme Personality of Godhead." (Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 1.2.12)

SB 4.29.59, Translation:

The expert knowers of the Vedic conclusions say that one enjoys or suffers the results of his past activities. But practically it is seen that the body that performed the work in the last birth is already lost. So how is it possible to enjoy or suffer the reactions of that work in a different body?

SB Canto 5

SB 5.5.24, Translation:

The Vedas are My eternal transcendental sound incarnation. Therefore the Vedas are śabda-brahma. In this world, the brāhmaṇas thoroughly study all the Vedas, and because they assimilate the Vedic conclusions, they are also to be considered the Vedas personified.

SB 5.5.24, Purport:

This is a true description of a brāhmaṇa. A brāhmaṇa is one who has assimilated the Vedic conclusions by practicing mind and sense control. He speaks the true version of all the Vedas.

SB Canto 7

SB 7.2.37, Purport:

If we accept the Vedic conclusion as stated in the Bhagavad-gītā (antavanta ime dehāḥ) that these material bodies are perishable in due course of time (nityasyoktāḥ śarīriṇaḥ) but that the soul is eternal, then we must remember always that the body is like a dress; therefore why lament the changing of a dress?

SB Canto 10.1 to 10.13

SB 10.3.18, Purport:

Not knowing the conclusions of the Vedas, some people accept the material nature as substance, and others accept the spirit soul as substance, but actually Brahman is the substance. Brahman is the cause of all causes. The ingredients and the immediate cause of this manifested material world are Brahman, and we cannot make the ingredients of this world independent of Brahman. Furthermore, since the ingredients and the immediate cause of this material manifestation are Brahman, both of them are truth, satya; there is no validity to the expression brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. The world is not false.

SB Cantos 10.14 to 12 (Translations Only)

SB 10.47.33, Translation:

According to intelligent authorities, this is the ultimate conclusion of all the Vedas, as well as all practice of yoga, Sāṅkhya, renunciation, austerity, sense control and truthfulness, just as the sea is the ultimate destination of all rivers.

SB 11.16.2, Translation:

My dear Lord, although it is difficult for the impious to understand that You are situated in all superior and inferior creations, those brāhmaṇas who are actual knowers of the Vedic conclusion worship You in truth.

SB 11.21.29-30, Translation:

Those who are sworn to sense gratification cannot understand the confidential conclusion of Vedic knowledge as explained by Me. Taking pleasure in violence, they cruelly slaughter innocent animals in sacrifice for their own sense gratification and thus worship demigods, forefathers and leaders among ghostly creatures. Such passion for violence, however, is never encouraged within the process of Vedic sacrifice.

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

In all Vaiṣṇava literature it is said that worshiping these quadruple forms is as good as worshiping the Supreme Personality of Godhead Vāsudeva, who in His different expansions, complete in six opulences, can accept offerings from His devotees of the results of their prescribed duties. Worshiping the expansions for pastimes, such as Nṛsiṁha, Rāma, Śeṣa and Kūrma, promotes one to the worship of the Saṅkarṣaṇa quadruple. From that position one is raised to the platform of worshiping Vāsudeva, the Supreme Brahman. In the Pauṣkara-saṁhitā it is said, "If one fully worships according to the regulative principles, one can attain the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Vāsudeva." It is to be accepted that Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha are as good as Lord Vāsudeva, for They all have inconceivable power and can accept transcendental forms like Vāsudeva. Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha are never born, but They can manifest Themselves in various incarnations before the eyes of pure devotees. This is the conclusion of all Vedic literature. That the Lord can manifest Himself before His devotees by His inconceivable power is not against the teaching of the Pañcarātras. Since Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha are, respectively, the predominating Deities of all living entities, the total mind and the total ego, the designation of Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha as "jīva," "mind" and "ego" is never contradictory to the statements of the scriptures. These terms identify these Deities, just as the terms "sky" and "light" sometimes identify the Absolute Brahman.

CC Adi 5.66, Purport:

The Vedic conclusion is that the cosmic manifestation visible to the eyes of the conditioned soul is caused by the Absolute Truth, the Personality of Godhead

CC Adi 6.14-15, Purport:

“A Vedic injunction states, sarve vedā yat padam āmananti (Kaṭha Up. 1.2.15): all Vedic knowledge is searching after the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Similarly, another Vedic injunction states, nārāyaṇa-parā vedāḥ: the Vedas are meant for understanding Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Lord. Similarly, the Bhagavad-gītā also confirms, vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ: (BG 15.15) by all the Vedas, Kṛṣṇa is to be known. Therefore, the main purpose of understanding the Vedas, performing Vedic sacrifices and speculating on the Vedānta-sūtra is to understand Kṛṣṇa. Accepting the impersonalist view of voidness or the nonexistence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead negates all study of the Vedas. Impersonal speculation aims at disproving the conclusion of the Vedas. Therefore any impersonal speculative presentation should be understood to be against the principles of the Vedas, or standard scriptures. Since the speculation of the impersonalists does not follow the principles of the Vedas, their conclusion must be considered to be against the Vedic principles. Anything not supported by the Vedic principles must be considered imaginary and lacking in standard proof. Therefore no impersonalist explanation of any Vedic literature can be accepted.

CC Adi 6.14-15, Purport:

“If one tries to nullify the conclusions of the Vedas by accepting an unauthorized scripture or so-called scripture, it will be very hard for him to come to the right conclusion about the Absolute Truth. The system for adjusting two contradictory scriptures is to refer to the Vedas, for references from the Vedas are accepted as final judgments. When we refer to a particular scripture, it must be authorized, and for this authority it must strictly follow the Vedic injunctions. If someone presents an alternative doctrine he himself has manufactured, that doctrine will prove itself useless, for any doctrine that tries to prove that Vedic evidence is meaningless immediately proves itself meaningless. The followers of the Vedas unanimously accept the authority of Manu and Parāśara in the disciplic succession. Their statements, however, do not support the atheistic Kapila, because the Kapila mentioned in the Vedas is a different Kapila, the son of Kardama and Devahūti. The atheist Kapila is a descendant of the dynasty of Agni and is one of the conditioned souls. But the Kapila who is the son of Kardama Muni is accepted as an incarnation of Vāsudeva. The Padma Purāṇa gives evidence that the Supreme Personality of Godhead Vāsudeva takes birth in the incarnation of Kapila and, by His expansion of theistic Sāṅkhya philosophy, teaches all the demigods and a brāhmaṇa of the name Āsuri.

CC Adi 7.117, Purport:

As already explained, there are three prasthānas on the path of advancement in spiritual knowledge—namely, nyāya-prasthāna (Vedānta philosophy), śruti-prasthāna (the Upaniṣads and Vedic mantras) and smṛti-prasthāna (the Bhagavad-gītā, Mahābhārata, Purāṇas, etc.). Unfortunately, Māyāvādī philosophers do not accept the smṛti-prasthāna. Smṛti refers to the conclusions drawn from the Vedic evidence. Sometimes Māyāvādī philosophers do not accept the authority of the Bhagavad-gītā and the Purāṇas, and this is called ardha-kukkuṭī-nyāya, "the logic of half a hen" (See Ādi-līlā 5.176). If one believes in the Vedic literatures, one must accept all the Vedic literatures recognized by the great ācāryas, but the Māyāvādī philosophers accept only the nyāya-prasthāna and śruti-prasthāna, rejecting the smṛti-prasthāna. Here, however, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu cites evidence from the Gītā, Viṣṇu Purāṇa, etc., which are smṛti-prasthāna. No one can avoid the Personality of Godhead in the statements of the Bhagavad-gītā and other Vedic literatures such as the Mahābhārata and the Purāṇas. Lord Caitanya therefore quotes a passage from the Bhagavad-gītā (7.5).

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 1.34, Translation and Purport:

The Gosvāmīs carried out the preaching work of devotional service on the basis of an analytical study of all confidential Vedic literatures. This was in compliance with the order of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Thus one can understand the most confidential devotional service of Vṛndāvana.

This proves that bona fide devotional service is based on the conclusions of the Vedic literature. It is not based on the type of sentiment exhibited by the prākṛta-sahajiyās. The prākṛta-sahajiyās do not consult the Vedic literatures, and they are debauchees, woman-hunters and smokers of gañjā. Sometimes they give a theatrical performance and cry for the Lord with tears in their eyes. Of course, all scriptural conclusions are washed off by these tears. The prākṛta-sahajiyās do not realize that they are violating the orders of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who specifically said that to understand Vṛndāvana and the pastimes of Vṛndāvana one must have sufficient knowledge of the śāstras (Vedic literatures).

CC Madhya 8.83, Purport:

In this regard, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura explains that this verse does not advocate the whimsical invention of some methods of love of Godhead. Such inventions cannot be accepted as topmost. Indeed, such concoctions are not recommended in these verses. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has said in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu (1.2.101):

śruti-smṛti-purāṇādi-pañcarātra-vidhiṁ vinā

aikāntikī harer bhaktir utpātāyaiva kalpate

He clearly mentions in this verse that one must refer to the Vedic literatures and other, supplementary literatures and follow the conclusion of the Vedas. An invented devotional attitude simply creates disturbances in the transcendental realm. If a person overly addicted to family life takes to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam or Kṛṣṇa consciousness to earn a livelihood, his activity is certainly offensive. One should not become a caste guru and sell mantras for the benefit of mundane customers, nor should one make disciples for a livelihood. All these activities are offensive. One should not make a livelihood by forming a professional band to carry out congregational chanting, nor should one perform devotional service when one is attached to mundane society, friendship and love. Nor should one be dependent on so-called social etiquette.

CC Madhya 18.115, Purport:

On the whole, a pāṣaṇḍī is a nondevotee who does not accept the Vedic conclusions. In the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa (1.117) there is a verse quoted from the Padma Purāṇa describing the pāṣaṇḍī. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu quotes this verse as the following text.

CC Madhya 21.15, Translation:

“"My Lord, You are unlimited. Even the predominating deities of the higher planetary systems, including Lord Brahmā, cannot find Your limitations. Nor can You Yourself ascertain the limit of Your qualities. Like atoms in the sky, there are multi-universes with seven coverings, and these are rotating in due course of time. All the experts in Vedic understanding are searching for You by eliminating the material elements. In this way, searching and searching, they come to the conclusion that everything is complete in You. Thus You are the resort of everything. This is the conclusion of all Vedic experts."

CC Madhya 24.326, Purport:

The writing of Vaiṣṇava literatures is not a function for ordinary men. Vaiṣṇava literatures are not mental concoctions. They are all authorized literatures meant to guide those who are going to be Vaiṣṇavas. Under these circumstances, an ordinary man cannot give his own opinion. His opinion must always correspond with the conclusion of the Vedas. Unless one is fully qualified in Vaiṣṇava behavior and authorized by superior authority (the Supreme Personality of Godhead), one cannot write Vaiṣṇava literatures or purports and commentaries on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and the Bhagavad-gītā.

CC Madhya 25.98, Purport:

"Vyāsadeva collected whatever Vedic conclusions were in the four Vedas and 108 Upaniṣads and placed them in the aphorisms of the Vedānta-sūtra."

Teachings of Lord Caitanya

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter Intoduction:

It is not possible to imagine how far this material manifestation extends. In the material world everything is calculated by imagination or by some imperfect method, but Vedic literatures give information of what lies beyond the material universe. Those who believe in experimental knowledge may doubt the Vedic conclusions, for they cannot even calculate how far this universe is extended, nor can they reach far into the universe itself.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter Intoduction:

It is not possible to obtain information of anything beyond this material nature by experimental means. That which is beyond our power of conception is called acintya, inconceivable. It is useless to argue or speculate about what is inconceivable. If it is truly inconceivable, it is not subject to speculation or experimentation. Our energy is limited, and our sense perception is limited; therefore we must rely on the Vedic conclusions regarding that subject matter which is inconceivable. Knowledge of the superior nature must simply be accepted without argument.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 19:

"The Māyāvādī philosophy is veiled Buddhism." In other words, the voidist philosophy of Buddha is more or less repeated in the Māyāvādī philosophy of impersonalism, although the Māyāvādī philosophy claims to be directed by the Vedic conclusions. Lord Śiva, however, admits that this philosophy is manufactured by him in the age of Kali in order to mislead the atheists.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 24:

In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (6.2.3), it is said that when the Supreme Personality of Godhead desires to become many, He glances over material nature. As also confirmed in Aitareya Upaniṣad (1.1.1), sa aikṣata: "The Lord glanced at material nature." The cosmic manifestation did not exist before His glance; therefore His glance is not materially contaminated. His seeing power existed before the material creation; therefore His body is not material. His thinking, feeling and acting are all transcendental. In other words, it should be concluded that the mind by which the Lord thinks, feels and wills is transcendental, and that the eyes by which He glances over material nature are also transcendental. Since His transcendental body and all His senses existed before the material creation, the Lord also has a transcendental mind and transcendental thinking, feeling and willing. This is the conclusion of all Vedic literature.

The word Brahman is found everywhere throughout the Upaniṣads. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, are all taken together as the Absolute Truth. Brahman and Paramātmā realization are considered stages toward the ultimate realization, which is realization of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is the real conclusion of all Vedic literature.

Nectar of Devotion

Nectar of Devotion 7:

In this connection, an objection may be raised by those who are not in devotional service and who do not care for the revealed scriptures. An example of this is seen in Buddhist philosophy. Lord Buddha appeared in the family of a high-grade kṣatriya king, but his philosophy was not in accord with the Vedic conclusions and therefore was rejected.

Nectar of Devotion 35:

The impulse of a saintly person is to be engaged in the study of the Vedas, especially the Upaniṣadic portions, to live always in a place where there is no disturbance from the common people, to think always of the eternal form of Kṛṣṇa, to be ready to consider and understand the Absolute Truth, to be always prominent in exhibiting knowledge, to see the Supreme Lord in His universal form (viśva-rūpa), to associate always with learned devotees and to discuss the conclusion of the Vedas with similarly elevated persons. All of these qualifications of a saintly person serve to raise him to the status of śānta-rasa.

Easy Journey to Other Planets

Easy Journey to Other Planets 2:

There are 8,400,000 forms of living entities 900,000 species of living entities are within the water, 2,000,000 species of life are among the plants and vegetables. Unfortunately, this Vedic knowledge is not instructed by any university. But these are facts. Let the botanist and anthropologist research into the Vedic conclusion.

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Krsna Book 87:

One should follow in the footsteps of Śukadeva Gosvāmī and all the other Vaiṣṇavas in the disciplic succession and should pay respectful obeisances unto Lord Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Hari. The four sects of Vaiṣṇava disciplic succession, namely the Madhva-sampradāya, the Rāmānuja-sampradāya, the Viṣṇu-svāmi-sampradāya and the Nimbārka-sampradāya, in pursuance of all Vedic conclusions, agree that one should surrender unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Krsna Book 87:

A woman is first impregnated by a man, and then a child is produced. As such, the child produced by the woman is part and parcel of the man. Similarly, the living entities are apparently produced by the material nature, but not independently. It is due to the impregnation of the material nature by the supreme father that the living entities are present. Therefore the argument that the individual living entities are not parts and parcels of the Supreme cannot stand. For example, the different parts of the body cannot be taken as equal to the whole; rather, the whole body is the controller of the different limbs. Similarly, the parts and parcels of the supreme whole are always dependent and are always controlled by the source of the parts and parcels. It is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā that the living entities are parts and parcels of Kṛṣṇa: mamaivāṁśaḥ. No sane man, therefore, will accept the theory that the Supersoul and the individual soul are of the same category. They are equal in quality, but quantitatively the Supersoul is always the Supreme, and the individual soul is always subordinate to the Supersoul. That is the conclusion of the Vedas.

Krsna Book 87:

In this connection, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī states in his Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu that the person whose only desire is to serve the Supreme Personality of Godhead may be situated in any condition in the material world, but he is to be understood as jīvan-mukta; that is to say, he is to be considered liberated while living within the body or the material world. The conclusion, therefore, is that a person fully engaged in Kṛṣṇa consciousness is a liberated person. Such a person actually has nothing to do with his material body or the material world. Those who are not in Kṛṣṇa consciousness are called karmīs and jñānīs, and they hover on the bodily and mental platforms and thus are not liberated. This situation is called kaivalya-nirasta-yoni. But a person situated on the transcendental platform is freed from the repetition of birth and death. This is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā, Fourth Chapter: "Simply by knowing the transcendental nature of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, one becomes free from the chains of the repetition of birth and death, and after quitting his present body he goes back home, back to Godhead." This is the conclusion of all the Vedas. Thus after understanding the prayers offered by the personified Vedas, one should surrender unto the lotus feet of Lord Kṛṣṇa.

Krsna Book 88:

Mahārāja Parīkṣit's question is very intelligent. The two classes of devotees, namely the devotees of Lord Śiva and the devotees of Lord Viṣṇu, are always in disagreement. Even today in India these two classes of devotees still criticize each other, and especially in South India the followers of Rāmānujācārya and the followers of Śaṅkarācārya hold occasional meetings for understanding the Vedic conclusion. Generally, the followers of Rāmānujācārya come out victorious in such meetings.

Krsna Book 88:

As a great devotee of Kṛṣṇa, King Parīkṣit was already liberated, but for clarification he was asking various questions of Śukadeva Gosvāmī. In the previous chapter, King Parīkṣit's question was, "What is the ultimate goal of the Vedas?" And Śukadeva Gosvāmī explained the matter, giving authoritative descriptions from the disciplic succession, from Sanandana down to Nārāyaṇa Ṛṣi, Nārada, Vyāsadeva and then Śukadeva himself. The conclusion was that devotional service, or bhakti, is the ultimate goal of the Vedas. A neophyte devotee may question, "If the ultimate goal of life, or the conclusion of the Vedas, is to elevate oneself to the platform of devotional service, then why is it observed that a devotee of Lord Viṣṇu is generally not very prosperous materially, whereas a devotee of Lord Śiva is found to be very opulent?" In order to clarify this matter, Parīkṣit Mahārāja asked Śukadeva Gosvāmī, “My dear Śukadeva Gosvāmī, it is generally found that those who engage in the worship of Lord Śiva, whether in human, demoniac or demigod society, become materially very opulent, although Lord Śiva himself lives just like a poverty-stricken person.

Light of the Bhagavata

Light of the Bhagavata 40, Purport:

God is one, but the living entities, including both the liberated and the conditioned, are many and have many different grades of positions. The living entities are never equal to God, but as parts and parcels of the Lord they are eternally His servitors. As long as the living entities are situated normally as His servitors they are happy; otherwise they are always unhappy. That is the Vedic conclusion.

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Lecture on BG 2.26 -- Los Angeles, December 6, 1968:

Devotee: "According to the vaibhāṣika philosophy, the so-called soul or ātmā vanishes along with the deterioration of the body. So, in any case, whether Arjuna accepted the Vedic conclusion that there is an atomic soul or whether he did not believe in the existence of the soul, he had no reason for lamenting. According to this theory, since there are so many entities generating out of matter every moment and so many of them are being vanquished at every moment, there is no need to grieve for such an incidence."

Prabhupāda: Yes. Material creation, just like bubbles in the ocean. You have seen standing on the bank of the Pacific Ocean, oh, so many thousands of bubbles created in a second, and again thousands of bubbles gone, in a second. Now, who is crying there? "Oh, so many bubbles were created, and they are gone, they are gone, they are gone." (laughter) It's nonsense. (laughs) So Kṛṣṇa is very nicely giving argument that "If you think there is no soul, it is being manufactured by the interaction of the physical element, so it is just like bubbles in the ocean. So many bubbles are created and destroyed every moment. So what is there cause of lamentation? What is your reason?" Then?

Lecture on BG 2.28 -- London, August 30, 1973:

Pradyumna: "And if we accept the Vedic conclusion as stated in the Bhagavad-gītā (antavanta ime dehāḥ) that these material bodies are perishable in due course of time (nityasyoktāḥ śarīriṇaḥ) but that soul is eternal, then we must remember always that the body is like a dress...Therefore in either case, whether one believes in the existence of the soul or one does not believe in the existence of the soul, there is no cause for lamentation for loss of the body."

Prabhupāda: One point in this connection is that at night when I am dreaming I forget this body. This body, in dream, I am seeing that I have gone in a different place, talking with different men, and my position is different. But at that time I don't remember that actually my body is lying on the bed in the apartment where I have come. But we don't remember this body. It is everyone's experience....

Lecture on BG 7.7 -- Vrndavana, August 13, 1974:

But from the Vedic literature we understand that Kṛṣṇa in His ananta feature, Anantadeva, or Śeṣaśāyī Nāga... The hoods are expanded, and all the planets are resting on His hood. It is so small, and the hood is very big. In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta... So therefore the planets are resting not on the law of gravitation but on the head of Kṛṣṇa in His form of Śeṣa. This is our Vedic conclusion.

Lecture on BG 13.8-12 -- Bombay, October 2, 1973:

I talked with Professor Kotovsky in Moscow. He said, "Swamiji, after annihilation of this body, everything is finished." They have no idea that there is soul. And in India even the poorest man, he knows that, "There is next life. I existed in the past, and I will exist in the future." This Vedic conclusion is known even to the poorest man, illiterate man. That is, of course, the difference between East and West.

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

Lecture on SB 1.5.15 -- New Vrindaban, June 19, 1969:

But our Vaiṣṇava philosophy does not say that. Vaiṣṇava philosophy says, "God is one." Not in... Vaiṣṇava philosophy, you do not think that it is a sectarian. This is based on Vedic conclusion. In the Ṛg Veda also it is said, "God is one." Tad viṣṇoḥ. Viṣṇu is paramaṁ padam. He is Supreme. Vedas does not say that Brahmā is supreme, or Lord Śiva is the supreme, or Goddess Kālī is supreme. No. Tad viṣṇoḥ paramam...

Lecture on SB 1.5.22 -- Vrndavana, August 3, 1974:

But we do not depend on the theories. We depend on the Vedic conclusion. We do not require to make any research. Just like ordinarily we say there are 900,000 forms of body in the water. We get it from Vedic knowledge. Jalajā nava-lakṣāṇi. Now, the biologists, let them confirm it. Or deny it. Because... They cannot confirm it because their knowledge is experimental.

Lecture on SB 1.7.10 -- Vrndavana, September 9, 1976:

We have to spread the transcendental qualities of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇe parama-pūruṣe. Yasyāṁ vai śrūyamāṇāyāṁ kṛṣṇe parama-pūruṣe, bhaktir utpadyate (SB 1.7.7). That is the life's mission. So as far as possible, try to understand. As advised by Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī, siddhānta baliyā citte nā kara alasa, don't be lazy. Always try to understand Kṛṣṇa, siddhānta, by siddhānta, by Vedic conclusion—not by manufacturing ideas. Siddhānta. Don't be lazy. That is the instruction of Kavirāja Gosvāmī.

Lecture on SB 1.7.10 -- Vrndavana, September 9, 1976:

If you study according to the Vedic conclusion, don't manufacture ideas and whims and sentiments. If you go through siddhānta, then you'll be more and more firmly fixed up. Ihā haite kṛṣṇe lāge sudṛḍha mānasa. Then your life is successful.

Lecture on SB 2.1.11 -- Los Angeles, August 1, 1970:

So Śukadeva Gosvāmī gives his judgement. Nṛpa, "My dear king, for all these classes of men," nirṇītam, "it is already decided." This is Vedic conclusion. You haven't got to search out. You have to take information from the authority. So here Śukadeva Gosvāmī is authority, that "For all these classes of men this is decided conclusively." What is that? Harer nāmānukīrtanam. Chant Hare Kṛṣṇa.

Lecture on SB 2.3.1-3 -- Los Angeles, May 22, 1972:

That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā: "Those who want quick success in fulfilling some material desires, they worship the demigods." The Māyāvādī, Shankarites, they have made a hodgepodge. They have made so much blunder in understanding the Vedic conclusion. Misleading, simply. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu has especially warned that "Anyone who hears about the Māyāvāda commentation, he's doomed. He's gone forever, lost." He will have no understanding, either this way or that.

Lecture on SB 2.3.24 -- Los Angeles, June 22, 1972:

Śruti means Vedas, śāstras. Śruti-smṛti. And smṛti means books which follow the Vedic principles. Vedas... Suppose you write one book, or anything. If it is just according to the Vedic conclusion, then it is also... It is called smṛti. By remembering the Vedic conclusion... You cannot go beyond the Vedic conclusion. Then it is useless writing. Vedic conclusion must be there. The guide must be there. On that conclusion, if you write something, that is right, and if you deviate from that conclusion, then it is wrong. So we want to read authorized, right books. Not by imagination. You can write so many nonsense things by imagination. That is useless. You must remember what is the Vedic conclusion. So śruti-smṛti-pañcarātra-vidhim.

Lecture on SB 3.25.4 -- Bombay, November 4, 1974:

Guru means śrotriyaṁ brahma-niṣṭham (MU 1.2.12). Tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam, śābde pare ca niṣṇātam (SB 11.3.21). Guru means who knows the Vedic śāstra, the Vedas. He knows the Vedic conclusion. And the Vedic conclusion is to understand Kṛṣṇa. That is Vedic conclusion. Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ (BG 15.15).

Lecture on SB 5.5.24 -- Vrndavana, November 11, 1976:

Pradyumna: "The Vedas are my eternal, transcendental sound incarnation. Therefore the Vedas are śabda-brahma. In this world, the brāhmaṇas thoroughly study all the Vedas, and because they assimilate the Vedic conclusions, they are also to be considered the Vedas personified.... These are the eight qualifications of the brāhmaṇas. Therefore among all living entities no one is superior to the brāhmaṇas."

Prabhupāda:

dhṛtā tanūr uśatī me purāṇī

yeneha sattvaṁ paramaṁ pavitram

śamo damaḥ satyam anugrahaś ca

tapas titikṣānubhavaś ca yatra

(SB 5.5.24)

So the meaning is clearly described in the translation. So the brāhmaṇas, why they are accepted as the supreme in the human society?....

Lecture on SB 5.5.35 -- Vrndavana, November 22, 1976:

"Yes, I am prepared that 'what is that guru?' " Tasmād... Śābde pare ca niṣṇātaṁ brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayam, this is guru. Śābde pare ca niṣṇātam: "He knows the Vedic conclusion. He knows the Vedic conclusion." Śābde pare. There are two kinds of sounds. Just like we are speaking. This is also sound, but this is para sound, uttama sound, para-prakṛti.

Lecture on SB 6.1.39-40 -- Surat, December 21, 1970:

This Kṛṣṇa consciousness means what Kṛṣṇa has said. That we have taken. That is Vedas. Sometimes people argue that Bhagavad-gītā is smṛti. Professor, Dr. Stahl, he argued with me that Bhagavad-gītā is smṛti. Smṛti means the Vedic conclusion written by somebody else. That is called smṛti. He is also authorized. So Bhagavad-gītā is also accepted as smṛti, but smṛti is not different from śruti.

Lecture on SB 6.1.39-40 -- Surat, December 21, 1970:

So real knowledge means which has surpassed this province of darkness, uttamam. Jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam: "Anyone who has become very much inquisitive to learn about the transcendental subject matter, he has to accept a guru." Tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta (SB 11.3.21). Guru means you have to find out some personality who is well versed in the Vedic knowledge. Śābde pare ca niṣṇātaṁ brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayam. These are the symptoms of guru: that he is well versed, well cognizant in the conclusion of the Vedas. Not only that he is well-versed, but he has actually in his life taken to that path, upaśamāśrayam, without being deviated by any other ways. Upaśama, upaśama. He has finished all material hankerings. He has taken simply to the spiritual life and simply surrendered to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. And at the same time, he knows all the Vedic conclusions. This is the description of a guru. Similarly, Kathopaniṣad it is said, tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta... (SB 11.3.21). This is Bhāgavata. Tad vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum evābhigacchet samit-pāniḥ śrotriyam (MU 1.2.12). Śrotriyam.

Lecture on SB 6.1.39-40 -- Surat, December 21, 1970:

So dharma-praṇihitaḥ. Veda-praṇihito dharmo hy adharmas tad viparyayaḥ, vedo nārāyaṇaḥ sākṣāt. Vedo nārāyaṇaḥ sākṣāt. This is the injunction. You have to accept the Vedic words as the words of Nārāyaṇa. Now, if you accept Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, then whatever He has said in the Bhagavad-gītā, that is Veda. Is it not? If vedo nārāyaṇaḥ sākṣāt, if Vedas are to be considered as Nārāyaṇa directly, then Kṛṣṇa... He is accepted by the ācāryas as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is a conclusion of the Vedas also. Nārāyaṇa is expansion of Kṛṣṇa. If you read Caitanya-caritāmṛta—and there are many other saṁhitās—Kṛṣṇa is the original Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Lecture on SB 7.9.12 -- Montreal, August 18, 1968:

He said that "I find in this temple there is God." "Why? Why you conclude like that?" "That in every temple I saw, that the god, deity, is doing something. But here I see the God is enjoying. He has nothing to do." Very nice conclusion. This is Vedic conclusion.

Nectar of Devotion Lectures

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 19, 1972:

Suppose you are suffering with some disease. So because you are being supplied first-class medicine, there is no guarantee that your disease will be cured. We have seen many cases. Similarly, according to Vedic conclusion, the happiness and distress, they're destined.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, January 2, 1973:

What Bhagavān says. Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ (BG 18.66). This is real dharma. So we request everyone... It is very scientific. It is authorized. We are not talking nonsense. Authorized. We are taking the version of Kṛṣṇa. We are taking the version of the Vedic conclusion. Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyam (BG 15.15). Vedas, study of Veda means to understand Kṛṣṇa. One who does not understand Kṛṣṇa, he's simply wasting his time.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 30, 1972:

God is good. It does not mean when He fights in the Battlefield of Kurkṣetra He becomes bad. No. He's still good. That is the conception of God: absolute. He can do anything and anything. Still, He continues to be the Absolute Truth. That is Absolute Truth. There is no relative understanding, "This is good for God, this is bad for God," as (if) God has come before me to be judged by me. You cannot judge God, Kṛṣṇa. What He does... Just like Arjuna accepted Kṛṣṇa: sarvam etad ṛtaṁ manye yad vadasi keśava (BG 10.14). "I accept whatever You say in toto, without any distinction." That is acceptance of Bhagavad-gītā and Kṛṣṇa. That is the way of understanding Vedas. You cannot judge the conclusion of the Vedas. You have to accept as it is. Because we are conditioned. We have got so many defects—we are illusioned, we commit mistake, our senses are imperfect... So many defects. Bhrama-pramāda-vipralipsā-kara-ṇāpāṭava, we want to cheat others. So therefore we cannot give perfect knowledge. We have to receive knowledge from the perfect. And who is better perfect than Kṛṣṇa? Therefore whatever Kṛṣṇa says, whatever Kṛṣṇa does, that is all good. There is nothing criticizing. You cannot criticize Kṛṣṇa. That is not possible. You cannot say, "Why Kṛṣṇa took part in the Battlefield of Kuruksetra?" Yes, He had business to do it.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 1, 1972:

Whatever you do, the ultimate goal should be realization of Vāsudeva, Kṛṣṇa. Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyam (BG 15.15). All Vedic conclusions should be ultimately to realize Vāsudeva, Kṛṣṇa. Bahūnāṁ janmanām ante (BG 7.19). This realization is achieved after many, many births of philosophical speculation, mystic yogic exercise or fruitive activities.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.113-17 -- San Francisco, February 22, 1967:

If we follow Caitanya Mahāprabhu's instruction, then any impersonal commentary means, if we hear... Because we are not expert. We are not expert. Kaniṣṭha-adhikārī. Kaniṣṭha-adhikārī means neophytes, neophytes who are not conversant with the conclusion of the Vedas. They have got some, I mean to say, faith. That's all. But faith can be changed. Any... If a person, strong in arguments and strong in presenting things in jugglery of words, oh, the neophyte, his idea can be changed. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu warns, therefore, in the Vaiṣṇava philosophy that "You should not worship any other demigods." It does not mean that you should show disrespect to demigods. No. That is not. But because he is in the lower stage, if he is allowed to worship or to show respect to the demigods, he will think that he is also like Kṛṣṇa. "Kṛṣṇa is another demigod, and this Candra is another demigod, Śiva is another demigod." Just like some foolish persons, they propagate that "Whatever deity you worship, oh, that is God." Even, they say, if you worship a cat or a dog, that is also God. So therefore there is stricture. And in the Bhagavad-gītā also, mām ekam, "Simply unto Me, one," Kṛṣṇa says. Because one is a neophyte, he can be turned, his faith can be disturbed at any moment; therefore in the beginning one has to, I mean to say, pin his faith only in Kṛṣṇa, mām ekam. Otherwise, he cannot make progress. And when one understands Kṛṣṇa, janma karma me divyam (BG 4.9), in truth, then he can understand other things also.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.154-157 -- New York, December 7, 1966:

So do not think that the Hindus, they have got disregard for Lord Buddha or for Lord Jesus Christ. No. They have all regard. Anyone who comes as representative of God, or as God, as powerful incarnation, they are all welcome. According to time, according to place, according to the audience, they may speak, speak something which is, which may be different from the Vedic conclusion, but they are accepted as powerful incarnations.

General Lectures

Lecture -- Tokyo, May 1, 1972:

"Māyā is considered as darkness, and Kṛṣṇa is the sunlight, or sun." So wherever there is sun, there is no darkness. Similarly, wherever there is Kṛṣṇa, wherever there is Kṛṣṇa consciousness, there is no more darkness of ignorance. Tasmin vijñāte sarvam idaṁ vijñātaṁ bhavanti. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is very important movement. It is not a sentimental movement. It is authorized. It is based on Vedic conclusion. Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyam (BG 15.15).

General Lecture -- (location & date unknown):

So karmaṇā daiva-netreṇa jantor deha upapattaye (SB 3.31.1). We act, and the result of the action is just by the superior authority, daiva-netreṇa. And then, according to that result, we accept a certain type of body. So there are many discussions about this karmavāda. But these are Vedic conclusions, according to karma.

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Plotinus:

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is the fact. He is right. That is Vedic conclusion. Sarva-yoniṣu, all different forms of life, there is soul, part and parcel of God. How some foolish person can think of animal has no soul? What is the reason? There is no very strong argument. The animals may be less intelligent. A child may be less intelligent than the father; that does not mean there is no soul.

Purports to Songs

Purport to Hari Hari Biphale -- Hamburg, September 10, 1969:

...biphale janama goṅāinu. This is a song sung by Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura, a very stalwart ācārya in the line of Caitanya Mahāprabhu's sampradāya, disciplic succession. He has sung many songs, important songs, and his songs are accepted as Vedic conclusion. (break) ...very authoritative songs. So he says, praying to Lord Kṛṣṇa, "My dear Lord," hari hari, "I have simply spoiled my life."

1972 Conversations and Morning Walks

Room Conversation -- April 18, 1972, Hong Kong:

Prabhupāda: What is that guru? Śrotriyaṁ brahma-niṣṭham: "He is well learned in Vedic literature," and brahma-niṣṭham, "and firm faith in the Supreme Personality of Godhead." These are the two qualifications of guru. He must know all the Vedic conclusions, śrotriyam, not that he has to read, but he must hear from the authoritative sources.

1973 Conversations and Morning Walks

Morning Walk -- April 28, 1973, Los Angeles:

Prabhupāda: And when they are asked wherefrom the zero, varieties come...? Zero means there is nothing. So how the varieties come? Therefore Vedic conclusion, the varieties, there is, eternity variety. And this is only shadow of that variety. It is not eternal because it is shadow. But the real variety spiritual world, is there.

Room Conversation with Indian Ambassador -- September 5, 1973, Stockholm:

Prabhupāda: Harāv abhaktasya kuto mahad-guṇāḥ. Yasyāsti bhaktir bhagavaty akiñcanā sarvair guṇais tatra samāsate surāḥ (SB 5.18.12). If one has got faith and devotion to God, God is one... God is neither Christian nor Hindu nor Muslim. God is one. So religion means according to... Not according to... This is the Vedic conclusion.

Room Conversation with Dr. Christian Hauser, Psychiatrist -- September 10, 1973, Stockholm:

Haṁsadūta: But the point is Vedic, Vedic conclusion is...

Prabhupāda: No, but, apart from Vedic conclusion, this example, that practically, when I go from this apartment to another apartment, so this apartment does not become another apartment. I go from this apartment to another apartment. He's missing that "I". Or "you". That is his nonsense.

1974 Conversations and Morning Walks

Morning Walk -- June 8, 1974, Geneva:

Prabhupāda: But as soon as the pregnancy is there, there should not be any sex life. They have got sex life in pregnancy also. So many things, we have... We can guide them all, all these rascals. From śāstra, we can guide them. Therefore immediately human society, a class of men who are fully conversant with the Vedic conclusion required to guide these rascals, socially, politically, in every respect.

Morning Walk -- June 11, 1974, Paris:

Prabhupāda: The scientists are rascals. What they know? There was no human being? Why not human being? The Brahmā is human being. Then you reject the Vedic conclusion. You take this rascal scientist's conclusion.

1974 Correspondence

Letter to Pancadravida, Aksayananda -- Melbourne 28 June, 1974:

When speaking to Christians we never say our religious system is better than theirs but we speak on the principles of love of God, Sa vai pumsam paro dharmo (SB 1.2.6). They become convinced and pleased to hear our explanations of God consciousness based on the Vedic conclusion—if they are at all sincere. So whenever you come upon such gentlemen or institutions try to place our books there and make them life members also.

Letter to Dr. Santosh Kumar -- Bombay 20 December, 1974:

Therefore if we take Krsna's message we will actually be benefited, otherwise not. It will be partial and insufficient. In reply to the last part of your letter I request you to understand properly the message of Bhagavad-gita and other Vedic literatures. You are an educated Indian. According to Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhus order every Indian should learn properly the Vedic conclusion and preach all over the world. That is the best welfare activities.