Please join, like or share our Vanipedia Facebook Group
Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge

We have got proof. Krsna says; we believe in Krsna. You believe in some rascal; we believe in Krsna. That is the difference

From Vaniquotes

Expressions researched:
"We have got proof. Krsna says; we believe in Krsna. You believe in some rascal; we believe in Krsna. That is the difference"

Conversations and Morning Walks

1977 Conversations and Morning Walks

We have got proof. Kṛṣṇa says; we believe in Kṛṣṇa. You believe in some rascal; we believe in Kṛṣṇa. That is the difference. Kṛṣṇa says, tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti (BG 4.9). So we believe that. That's all. We have got evidence. You have no evidence. You are simply suggesting in future you'll do. But we have got evidence.

Satsvarūpa: It is very weak argument to say, "Something doesn't exist because I don't see it."

Prabhupāda: It is childish.

Satsvarūpa: But they can say, "Neither is it a proof that it does exist."

Prabhupāda: How you can prove? You can hear only. There are many things which is beyond your sense perception. The example which I often give, that "Who is your father?" What is proof? The proof is the hearing from mother. That's all. You cannot have any other proof.

Satsvarūpa: "Although celestial beings are not visible to the naked eyes of the inhabitants of this earth, it was due to the influence of Mahārāja Parīkṣit that the demigods also agreed to be visible. The kings used to spend lavishly during such sacrifices, as the cloud distributes rains. A cloud is nothing but another form of water, or, in other words, the waters of the earth transform into clouds. Similarly, the charity made by the kings in such sacrifices are but another form of the taxes collected from the citizens. But as the rains fall down very lavishly and appear to be more than necessary, the charity made by such kings also seems to be more than what the citizen needs. Satisfied citizens will never organize agitation against the king, and thus there was no need of changing the monarchial state. Even for a king like Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira there was needed a spiritual master for guidance. Without such guidance one cannot make progress in spiritual life. The spiritual master must be bona fide, and one who wants to have self-realization must approach and take shelter of a bona fide spiritual master to achieve real success."

nijagrāhaujasā vīraḥ
kaliṁ digvijaye kvacit
nṛpa-liṅga-dharaṁ śūdraṁ
ghnantaṁ go-mithunaṁ padā
(SB 1.16.4)

"Once, when Mahārāja Parīkṣit was on his way to conquer the world, he saw the master of Kali-yuga, who was lower than a śūdra, disguised as a king and hurting the legs of a cow and bull. The King at once caught hold of him to deal sufficient punishment."

Purport: "The purpose of a king's going out to conquer the world is not for self-aggrandizement. Mahārāja Parīkṣit went out to conquer the world after his ascendance on the throne, but this was not for the purpose of aggression on other states. He was the emperor of the world, and all small states were under his regime. His purpose in going out was to see how things were going on in terms of the godly state. The king, being the representative of the Lord, has to execute the will of the Lord duly. There is no question of self-aggrandizement. Thus as soon as Mahārāja Parīkṣit saw that a lower-class man in the dress of a king was hurting the legs of a cow and bull..." (break)

Prabhupāda: ...there the injunction of the śāstra, kṛṣi-go-rakṣya (BG 18.44). Go-rakṣya. Cow should be protected. Kṛṣṇa said, kṛṣi-go-rakṣya. Kṛṣṇa did not say chāgala-rakṣya or hog-rakṣya. Go-rakṣya. So it is the duty of the king or the state or the government to give protection to the cows. This is śāstric injunction. But nowadays neither the state or government is giving protection to the cow. They are becoming implicated with so many problems.

Satsvarūpa: I heard that India again is not slaughtering cows. (break)

Prabhupāda: ...perception. That is experience. Why do you give on seeing only? By seeing one mango you cannot understand what quality it is, but you have to touch with your tongue. Therefore in chemical laboratory the characteristics are there: "This is the color. This is the taste. This is the reaction." So you have to gather experience like that, not by simply seeing. That I gave the example. Now you take one egg. What is there? Some white and some yellow substance. So you make one egg with white and yellow and bring life. So what is the power of your seeing? A small egg. Take a small egg. The covering, some celluloid; within, some white substance, some yellow substance. Or make further analysis and give some chemicals of the same taste, same color, same characteristic. Now bring life. But the same thing, you put under the feather of the chicken, within five days it will bring life. So what is the credit of these rascal doctors, D.H.C., that a small chicken is better than these D.H.C.? Why don't you see practically?

Gargamuni: The chicken is simply sitting, and he is...

Prabhupāda: He is bringing life. What is the answer of these rascal scientists?

Satsvarūpa: No good answer. Bluff.

Prabhupāda: Challenge them like this, that "First of all do it. You are less than the chicken. Why you are claiming so much honor? We treat you, you are fig. You are less important than the chicken. Prove that you have got some power; then claim that you are scientist." Hmm? Is that argument all right? What will be the counterargument?

Gurukṛpā: A sane man would accept.

Prabhupāda: They're all rascals.

Gurukṛpā: They're not sane; they're saying anything.

Prabhupāda: They do not know anything; still, they are claiming very high position.

Gurukṛpā: I heard one scientist on the airplane. There were three scientists sitting behind me, and they were speaking that they hope they are living in the year 2000. One man said, "I become so excited when I think how advanced we will be in the year 2000 that I just hope I do not die before then, 'cause I want to see how everything will be then."

Satsvarūpa: By then they think they will be doing this, creating life.

Prabhupāda: That any insane man can say. Any crazy man can say. "Trust no future, however pleasant." "You are rascal. You are believing in the future. You have not show us. Because in the past you could not do—there is no history—in the present you cannot do. So how shall I believe that in future you'll do?" So any rascal promises like that, so we take him as a rascal. That's all.

Satsvarūpa: What about our promise, in the future also, that you go to Kṛṣṇa in the future?

Prabhupāda: We have got proof. Kṛṣṇa says; we believe in Kṛṣṇa. You believe in some rascal; we believe in Kṛṣṇa. That is the difference. Kṛṣṇa says, tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti (BG 4.9). So we believe that. That's all. We have got evidence. You have no evidence. You are simply suggesting in future you'll do. But we have got evidence.

Gargamuni: Sometimes they ask, "Show us somebody who's come."

Prabhupāda: Hmm?

Gargamuni: "Show us someone who has come from there."

Prabhupāda: Many.

Gargamuni: "But we don't find any."

Prabhupāda: Many. Many. It is in the śāstra. "He was formerly like this, and now he has become this." There are many.

Gargamuni: Well, that's in the śāstra. They say now we want...

Prabhupāda: But śāstra is the proof. Our proof is śāstra. Your proof is your śāstra. Did you go to the moon planet, or you believe the newspapers? Have you gone?

Gargamuni: No.

Prabhupāda: Then if you can believe newspaper, why shall I not believe in the Veda, Vedānta?