Dr. Movebhed: I feel... If I am not wrong, I feel that what others have done, that Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. Radhakrishnan, etc., etc., they have taught that Kṛṣṇa of Bhagavad-gītā is very much important for us. Whether He was living or whether He did not live, or anything which was in the name of Kṛṣṇa, that is quite (sic:) impertinent. We want to have the philosophy of Kṛṣṇa as enunciated in Bhagavad-gītā, is just enough to tell others who are in need of...
Prabhupāda: That's all right. But if you do not believe in that person, how do you understand his philosophy?
Dr. Movebhed: That's where... I think I may be wrong. Please correct me if I go wrong. That's where people have taken little, two to three steps, as my friend has told, first advaita. She wanted to have two...
Prabhupāda: No, no, why advaita, dvaita? First of all you take the preliminary things, that you are accepting the philosophy of Kṛṣṇa, Bhagavad-gītā, but you have no knowledge of the person who has spoken Bhagavad-gītā. Then where is your understanding? You do not understand the person who has spoken the Bhagavad-gītā. Then what is the meaning of your understanding Bhagavad-gītā?
Indian man: No, we have to try...
Prabhupāda: No, no. Try, try, another thing.
Indian man: We have to understand it.
Prabhupāda: No, you have to understand it... First of all you have to understand Kṛṣṇa, the person who is speaking.
Indian man: Oh, you mean Kṛṣṇa the person you must understand, then Kṛṣṇa of Bhagavad-gītā you must understand.
Prabhupāda: Yes, that is the way. You read any book; you learn first of all about the author, his life, his everything.
Indian man: Sometimes we need not...
Prabhupāda: No, it is needed. It is needed. No, that is the way.
Indian man: We need not approach the guru. What he speaks that is enough sometimes.
Prabhupāda: No, that is the way. You read any book. You try to understand, to know something about the author. That is natural.
Indian man: When He rips up (unclear) pārtha, that's enough, just we will start out. Then when He say, mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja, again we will go to Him. But we need not go through...
Prabhupāda: No, no. That is needed. That is needed. That is needed. If you do not understand what is Kṛṣṇa, when Kṛṣṇa says, mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja, how you will accept it?
Indian man: I will accept, but not as Kṛṣṇa of Bhāgavata. I may not know anything about Him as of...
Prabhupāda: No, no, this is not very good theory. You do not know anything about Him, and you surrender to Him. What is this?
Indian man: We may have our own idea.
Prabhupāda: No, we don't accept that. If we surrender, we must know Him first of all, what He is. Then we surrender. We are not blind. Suppose you tell me that "You surrender unto me." Shall I do that? Why shall I do it?
Indian man: But...
Prabhupāda: No "but." First of all answer this. If I do not know anything about you and you demand from me, "You surrender," shall I do it?
Indian man: I will be knowing what He has preached, if I... That preaching itself is enough and we need not look anything about Him. We can surrender.
Prabhupāda: That He preaches...
Indian man: That preaching is enough.
Prabhupāda: That's all right.
Indian man: We need not know what He is.
Prabhupāda: That's all right. You accept His preaching?
Indian man: If it is accepted, then we can surrender. I was questioning only this point, whether the Kṛṣṇa of Bhāgavata is necessary to accept...
Prabhupāda: No, no, set aside Bhāgavatam. I have told you that first of all you try to understand Kṛṣṇa from the Bhagavad-gītā.
Indian man: If that is enough, it's enough.
Prabhupāda: Enough. But if you say that you don't believe in the Kṛṣṇa, whether He was living or not, then you have not understood Bhagavad-gītā.
Indian man: I know the living Kṛṣṇa will come in Bhagavad-gītā, I hope.
Prabhupāda: No. He says... He says that mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya: (BG 7.7) "There is no superior authority than Me." Then if you do not understand what is that Kṛṣṇa, then how you accept Him as superior authority?
Guest: I think we have to define the concept of God first, and then only...
Prabhupāda: No, no, concept of God is there in the Bhagavad-gītā.
Guest: What is that concept first, please?
Prabhupāda: That He says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat (BG 7.7). God means the Supreme. So He says, "There is no more superior supreme than Me." Then He is God. And if you accept the teachings of Bhagavad-gītā, then you have to accept He is God. Otherwise what you have understood, Bhagavad-gītā? You have manufactured your own way. He says... If you study Bhagavad-gītā, He says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7). So God means the Supreme. So He says, "I am the Supreme. There is no more superior supreme." Then you have to accept Him God.
Indian man: OK.
Prabhupāda: Then?
Indian man: We have accepted, but Kṛṣṇa need not be one form as somebody else has written...
Prabhupāda: That... Just like... That form is God also.
Indian man: That is also an imagination of Kṛṣṇa.
Prabhupāda: No, no. That form is also God. Accepting your theory that there are many forms of God, so that form is also God.
Indian man: That form, OK, I agree...
Prabhupāda: So we accept Him, God, either way.
Indian man: But need not be a definite form. He need not have a definite form.
Prabhupāda: No, no, no. There may be different form. But that form is God. Then you have to accept Him God.
Indian man: Yes, OK. And when I say one form, it may be formless also, and I may...
Prabhupāda: Whatever it may be, that form is God. You have to accept.
Indian man: OK, I will accept.
Prabhupāda: Then if you accept God, the whole thing is finished.
Indian man: We accept God, but just I was telling...
Indian man: No, same thing as that lady was telling, she sees that God is a light.
Prabhupāda: Whatever it may be... That we accept. God is light, God... There are many forms, but that form is God.
Indian man: Therefore, definition is "a supreme."
Prabhupāda: Yes, that form is supreme. That you have to accept. That you accept. Then there is no quarrel with you. Kṛṣṇa may have many forms, God may have many forms, but that form is God. That you have to accept. That is understanding of Bhagavad-gītā.
Dr. Movebhed: Well, I think, sir, when they say that comment, Rādhākrishnan, when they say that, it's not important to know whether...
Prabhupāda: But Rādhākrishnan says, "It is not to Kṛṣṇa." When Kṛṣṇa says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65), Radhakrishnan says, "It is not to Kṛṣṇa." Then if he accepts Kṛṣṇa as God, why does he say, "It is not to Kṛṣṇa"?
Indian man: This is God. Some may accept Him as Kṛṣṇa, some may accept Him as some other thing.
Prabhupāda: That is accepted. But that form is God.
Indian man: God, he accepts it as God.
Prabhupāda: That he does not accept.
Indian man: God, he will say.
Prabhupāda: No, no. He doesn't accept that. That is the difficulty.
Nitāi: He says, "It is not to Kṛṣṇa."
Prabhupāda: And if he has accepted Kṛṣṇa as God, why does he say "not to Kṛṣṇa"?
Guest: No, he may not call that Kṛṣṇa. He will call it "to the Supreme," what you said now.
Prabhupāda: Why not Supreme? Then he has not accepted Bhagavad-gītā.
Indian man: Guruji, Guruji, even ācāryas, Śaṅkarācārya, when he wrote commentaries on Prasthana(?) prayer...
Prabhupāda: No. Śaṅk...
Indian man: ...he would think towards his own philosophy.
Prabhupāda: No, no. No, no, no. He...
Indian man: Śaṅkarācārya, when he writes on this Bhagavad-gītā, he gives...
Prabhupāda: Śaṅkarācārya says sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ. You refer to the commentary of Bhagavad-gītā of Śaṅkarācārya. So in the beginning he says, sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ. Nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt avyaktād anya-sambhavaḥ. So he has explained. Sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ. And what to speak of other ācāryas, Rāmānujācārya... They accept, all, Kṛṣṇa. Madhvācārya... They worship Kṛṣṇa. So Kṛṣṇa may have many forms, that is accepted. But that form, Kṛṣṇa, He is God. That you have to accept. You cannot deny that.
Guest: He was asking something. Your question was?
Guest (2): I thought when some people say that it wasn't very important to know whether Kṛṣṇa was living or not, they talk to Kṛṣṇa as a historical fact, as an individual, as a person who lived within the framework of time and space. Kṛṣṇa as an individual, as a historical person, might not even important, as they said Aśoka(?) or Christ or...
Prabhupāda: (Aside to devotee:) You come here. I do not follow the accent, you hear and tell.
Guest: What would be important was Kṛṣṇa teachings. One must, could not be confined to any one period of time. He is incarnation of God and somebody who was talking for the truth and in the name of the truth, and... (break)
Prabhupāda: ...fact is that if you have got different views about Kṛṣṇa, then you cannot prove that from the Bhagavad-gītā. That you cannot prove. If you take Bhagavad-gītā, then you must present it as it is. Don't distort it. You may have got some idea, but you explain that idea in your different book. But don't place it as the explanation of Bhagavad-gītā. That is not very good. If you have got different theory, you can write in a different book. But we cannot permit or do not like that as the commentary of Bhagavad-gītā you will place something different. That is not very honest. You put your own theory. Why should you try to put your theory through Bhagavad-gītā? That we protest. Therefore we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. And in the Bhagavad-gītā it is clearly said that "There is no superior authority than Me." Therefore He is the God. Mām eva ya prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti te. Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate (BG 10.8): "I am the origin of everything." And if you have got different idea, that somebody else is the origin, that you can explain differently. But you cannot keep it as explanation of Bhagavad-gītā. Then it is distortion, because in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said,
- ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo
- mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate
He becomes final,
- iti matvā bhajante māṁ
- budhā bhāva-samanvitāḥ
- (BG 10.8)
Iti matvā: "One who knows this perfectly well that Kṛṣṇa is the origin of everything, he becomes a devotee." Iti matvā bhajante māṁ budhā. Budhā mean very learned. Bhāva-samanvitāḥ: "Oh, here is the supreme cause, or Kṛṣṇa." The philosophy means to search out the supreme cause. That is philosophy. Find out the ultimate cause. That is darśana. In Sanskrit it is called darśana, find out what is the supreme cause. So here it is explained, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ (BG 10.8), sarvasya, including whatever you know. Sarvasya means including everything. "So whatever you know, the cause of everything, that cause is also I am." And that is confirmed in the Vedic literature, sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam (Bs. 5.1).
- īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ
- sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ
- anādir ādir govindaḥ
- sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam
- (Bs. 5.1)
And the Vedānta-sūtra, the Absolute Truth, janmādy asya yataḥ: (SB 1.1.1) "the origin of everything." Now, here it is. Kṛṣṇa says, "I am the origin of everything." You are making search, but here is the origin here. Now you study Kṛṣṇa, whether actually He is the origin of everything. At least we know that this universe, the origin is Lord Brahmā. But we know that the Brahmā is also emanation from Kṛṣṇa. Brahmā's knowledge also comes from Kṛṣṇa. That is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Tene brahma hṛdā ādi-kavaye muhyanti yat sūrayaḥ, oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya. And Kṛṣṇa says. Arjuna accepts, sarvam idam ṛtaṁ manye: "Yes, I accept." So that should be the process of understanding Kṛṣṇa. If you manufacture your own way, that is different thing. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). All the ācāryas... Take all the ācāryas. At least in our country we are guided by the ācāryas. Take any ācārya. They have accepted. Brahmā has accepted. So in this way you have to understand. We cannot manufacture our own way.