Misc 34 — Srimad-Bhagavatam Lecture, 1971, CAL

А. Ч. Бхактиведанта Свами Прабхупада · Калькутта

Главы

Principles of simple living and renunciation

Oh, I'm not sure what I'm saying. I went the other way. So now the tailor did not accept a new cloth, and somehow he managed to accept an old cloth. This is an example of this.

It is said that: "Don't you get torn-out or used cloth on the street?" Used cloths were, uh, thrown in the street.

Just like in your country, sometimes you throw some huge carpet, huge chair, uh, and the garbage—if anyone wants to use it, take it out.

Formerly, a gentleman, after using a cloth for some time, would throw it out, so that some poor man takes it up. So, uh, Śukadeva Gosvāmī has a command that: "Does not anyone get the used cloth available on the street?

Does he not get fruits from the trees? Does he, uh, not get water from the rivers, and the rivers are, uh, all dried up? Has he not—why does he hanker after a pillow? Is not there nice grass bedding?

Why does he require a bedding?" In this way, uh, uh, has he not, uh, found a room?

The idea is that for living conditions we require a shelter, we require some bedding, we require some utensils, we require some food, we require some water. In this way, uh, Śukadeva Gosvāmī has prescribed that you can get all these things and they are ready.

Why should you go to a rich man and beg for your subsistence? That was Śukadeva Gosvāmī's recommendation. So Sanātana Gosvāmī also follows this. The Gosvāmīs, the six, follow. Of course, madhukarī. Madhukarī means madhukarī.

Madhukarī bees, what is called? Bumblebees collecting honey. So bumblebees collect honey from one flower, one drop; another flower, another drop; another flower, another drop.

In this way, uh, a few drops from here and there, then he satisfies. Similarly, a mendicant strictly following the regulation, he won't, uh, take alms from one house, so much.

Still in Vrindavan this madhukarī system is current.

They will take a half piece of the capātī or one piece of the capātī from someone else, not more. In this way, when there are five, four or six capātīs according to each ahaṅkāra, then stop begging.

Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī is following the same principles, and they followed when they were in Vṛndāvana. They followed strictly this mādhukarī-vṛtti.

Adapting spiritual regulations to modern times

But, but at the present moment, it is very difficult. The society has changed, the mode of living has changed, uh, that is not possible.

If we artificially imitate Sanātana Gosvāmī without that strength of mind and without favorable situation, if you simply try to follow the regulation without any effect, that is called niyamāgraha.

Adhering to the rules and regulations without any practical result. We have to see to the practical result of it. Not that because Sanātana Gosvāmī did it, therefore we have to do it.

As far as we have to do, on the principle we shall not change. But there may be some change according to the time and circumstances, and that change should be adopted by the instruction of authorities, not we start the...

man who... So now why... why time is why so uh... use um... Then... the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and the Mahābhārata. Don't speak so slowly. Who has it too slowly? Big voices are coming. Yes, coming. Yeah. Huh?

Yeah, or two that has got through it. No. Then keep the still here in the Bhāgavata. Bhāgavata-dharma. No. Huh? Yes. So Sanātana is still there. This is five times solar. We never left bottom. Huh? You have two men now is stolen.

It is not so beautiful. Ladies. Uh, ladies who receive well the books of the truth. Even by status too, yes. That's the result. They attacked everyone, including to heaven. Well, the idea is that Sanātana Gosvāmī...

What Sanātana Gosvāmī did, uh, it is not that we have to imitate. According to the time and circumstances we may change the policy, but it should be sanctioned by the spiritual master.

Otherwise, not that we have to do it according to our own whims. The present mode of preaching was introduced by our Guru Mahārāja, Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Mahārāja.

If he would not adopt such a process, then the teachings of Caitanya, such sublime Kṛṣṇa consciousness, could not have been possible to spread all over the world.

Sanātana Gosvāmī received... received one blanket from his brother-in-law while coming to Vārāṇasī that he had discarded. That was costly.

So Caitanya Mahāprabhu was looking over the blanket. Sanātana Gosvāmī, he could understand that "I have accepted one kaupīna, each cloth, and did not I refuse to accept one new cloth? And still I have got a blanket, it is very costly, it is not very good."

So Sanātana Gosvāmī went to the Ganges ghat, on the bank of the Ganges, and he saw that one mendicant was washing his torn quilt and was lying in the sun. Sanātana Gosvāmī approached him: "If you kindly trade, uh, change this blanket, I shall be very much thankful."

So the man thought that "He appears to be a very nice gentleman and he's joking with me." So he said, "You appear to be a very gentleman. Why you are joking with me? I am a poor man." "No, no, I am not joking.

I am actually seriously saying, please kindly give me that torn quilt and I give you this blanket." That is fine. So he took the opportunity, took the very costly blanket and, uh, gave him that quilt.

When he was present before Caitanya Mahāprabhu with that torn quilt instead of that costly, uh, blanket, Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, "Prabhu, bohot komal katha."

Prabhupāda, this upkoieve very inquired, "What are you, that costly blanket? What do you keep it with?" So he said, "Uh, sir, I would change it in this way." Then Lord Caitanya was very much pleased.

He said, "Ruhupaya ami kodyasi vita, bhishai rok on lai rakrismandam." Viṣaya.

Identity of the soul and Krishna

Viṣaya means eating, sleeping, and mating and defending. This is called viṣaya. Since the viṣayī, uh, if one has got attachment for this, then he's a viṣayī.

So Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura says, "Viṣaya chāḍiyā se mude," one has to give up the attachment for material environment. That is the first.

So by the glance of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu over the costly blanket, it was indicated that Sanātana was attached to this costly blanket. So immediately he understood and changed it. Caitanya

Mahāprabhu is encouraging him that, "By the grace of Kṛṣṇa, your attachment for viṣaya is now completely gone. You are no more attached to everything. So I wanted to see, uh, I am very glad that you have done that."

Gosāñi kahe, "Kone lakubusayho, tari chajalamor shay sh bhishai." Because you are so kind upon me, so by your grace I have given, uh, my last attachment for, uh, material, uh, compound.

Prasanna ha-iyā prabhu tāre kṛpā kailā, tāṅra kṛpāya praśna karite śakti pāilā. Prasannaha Prabhu tāre kṛpā kailā. Tāṅra kṛpāya praśna karite śakti ha-ila.

We are talking about the teachings of Lord Caitanya to Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī. So it is now evident that Lord Caitanya was very much pleased on Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī.

And by his mercy only, Sanātana Gosvāmī was able to question, the question and answer. As soon as there is topics and conversation, there must be question and answer. So this question, not irrelevant question.

The question should be relevant. So by the grace of Lord Caitanya, he could relevant questions. Pūrvavat prabhu-pāśe praśna karilā, tāṅra śakti rāvaṇanda tāre uttara dilā,

Mahāprabhu śakti praśna kari sanātana, āpani mahāprabhu parīkṣā... Formerly, the question-answers were there, uh, but the question, uh, was Caitanya, and answer was given by Rāya Rāmānanda.

Just like sometimes teachers question them and the student replies. Generally the system is the student questions and the teacher replies. But sometimes it so happens that teachers, uh, question.

Now here, uh, this, uh, student is questioning. Sanātana Gosvāmī is student, and Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the teacher, master, Kṛṣṇa svarūpādi. This is a śloka, a verse composed by the author, Kṛṣṇa-dāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī.

He said, "kṛṣṇa-svarūpa," the identity of Lord Kṛṣṇa. What is Kṛṣṇa?

Kṛṣṇa-dāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī, these teachings he'll find, he'll know what is Kṛṣṇa, His svarūpa, His original, uh, transcendental form. Kṛṣṇa-svarūpa-mādhurya, and He is attractive features.

Kṛṣṇa-svarūpa-mādhurya-aiśvarya, and His opulences. Kṛṣṇa is not impersonal, Kṛṣṇa is person. Therefore, He has specific attractive features. He has got opulences and He has got transcendental form.

Kṛṣṇa-rūpa-mādhurya-aiśvarya-bhakti-rasa-trayam. These are the aquatic depth or platform on which execution of devotional service can be acted. Tattvaṁ sanātanāyeśaḥ kṛpayopadiśat prabhuḥ.

Īśaḥ, īśaḥ, kṛṣṇa-caitanya-deva, bhakti-rasa. Mahāprabhu, He is īśaḥ. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ. Īśaḥ, īśvaraḥ. Vande. It's Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, īśaḥ, just like, uh, Kṛṣṇa personally taught Arjuna about Himself.

Similarly, here also Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu is īśaḥ, the Supreme Personality, still He appears as a devotee. So as a devotee, He's teaching what is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is teaching what is Kṛṣṇa.

And a devotee is teaching what is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, the teachings of devotees and teachings of Kṛṣṇa, there's no difference. Same thing. Just like Kṛṣṇa said, "sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja."

Kṛṣṇa is person, because He is Supreme Person, because He is the master, He is commanding.

And we devotees, following the footsteps of our ācāryas, we are saying that you surrender. That is the difference between the teachings of the Lord and teachings of His servant.

Therefore, such servants which teach us exactly what is taught by the master, he is representative. Krishna therefore says, "Acharyam mam vijaniyat" — he should be considered as Myself.

Saksad-dharitvena samasta-sastrair, that is already explained. Hmm. Krsna-svarupam dayitam, suddha-bhakti-ratnam, satam sanatanaya, isa-priyaya upadidisat. Now,

Sanatana Gosvami, after being cleanly dressed, having a fresh dhoti or bahirvasa, and that bhuta-kambala given by the kantha, in this way Sanatana Gosvami fell down on the feet of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu very humbly and began to place the statement as follows: "Nica jati, nica sangi, patita," or "I am coming from a low family. I belong to the low caste."

You see, he was a Brahmana, he was a minister, he was a great scholar, but still he is placing himself that "I am coming out of a very low family. My occupation is very low.

And my companions, my associates, they are also low. They are fallen, the lowest of mankind." So, "I have wasted my time in this way," enjoy ku-visaya. Ku-visaya and ku-visaya.

Utilizing material energy in divine service

Ku-visaya means that visaya, I already explained. Visaya means eating, sleeping, mating, and defending. So that is, of course, required.

But one who utilizes this opportunity very lowly under different circumstances, abominable circumstances, that is called ku-visaya. It's like eating is essential. What is that? But eating anything, that is ku-visaya.

In human society, there is a system. You can have very nice preparations made of rice, dahl, wheat, milk products, vegetables, and offer to Krishna. Krishna-prasāda, that is not ku-visaya. That is not su-dusa.

Patram puspam phalam toyam yo me bhaktya prayacchati. Tad aham bhakty-upahrtam asnami. Krishna does not say that to become My devotee, you have to starve. No.

But for the satisfaction of the palate, if anyone eats anything, nonsense, that is true. Similarly, sleeping, similarly, mating, similarly defense.

If these things are done according to the regulated principles, then they are not viṣayas. That is nirbandhaḥ kṛṣṇa-sambandhe yuktaṁ vairāgyam ucyate.

Prapañcikatayā buddhyā hari-sambandhi-vastunaḥ, one is not attached to eating. But eating is required for keeping this body for the service of the Lord. Therefore, one eats kṛṣṇa-prasāda.

It's not attachment that "I shall eat so much, I shall eat palatable." He says, that is attachment. What about Krishna? Whatever Krishna gives pleasingly, whatever Krishna has eaten, I shall take it to exist.

One has no attachment for eating. But one has to eat to render service to Krishna. Not that one is attached for eating so much. Let me see, very palatable this one. That is viṣaya.

Even if it is prasāda, because I have got attachment to satisfy my palate, then it becomes viṣaya. Anāsaktasya viṣayān, that is the very attachment. That we must always...

Even if there is very nice, nice, palatable thing, it is not that I eat sumptuously through my throat. Of course, kṛṣṇa-prasāda can, but we should be very careful that we should not be attached.

All these things—eating, sleeping—but we should not be attached. But the necessary: yuktāhāra-vihārasya yogo bhavati duḥkha-hā. The regulated eating, sleeping, making it help.

But non-regulated eating, sleeping is not... it is desert. But then we cannot make progress in śrī-caraṇa. That naṭana-nartana-viṣaya-āśraya-śrī-caraṇa-śrī-mati-mukha-kamala kañja.

Don't be viṣayī, don't be attached to viṣaya. Śrī-rasa-madhurya. You should be attached to kṛṣṇa-nāma-smaraṇa. So Sanātana Gosvāmī said that ku-viṣaya, kūpā-pūrī-gāyām, always association,

because he was in the secretary family, big government officers, and you know, that business is simply feasting and talking politics. So therefore he says, "ku-viṣaya." I have simply wasted my time.

Undesirable association, undesirable eating, sweet. Maybe rather he was born of a family, he might have it too as a Mohammedan because he has no manas, an association. So that maybe he says to be sure.

I mean, I was, I think that's like in association of the English as the case. Our people in this country, they learn how to drink, how to drink tea, how to eat meat, how to have illicit sex, they learn all these things.

And that was called civilization. Unless one does so, he was not considered up to date, and that is going on. That something of Western civilization is still going on.

So Caitanya Mahāprabhu, you'd have changed that. Viṣaya, viṣayī prāpta-jana. Those who are too much attached to this viṣaya, they are not very much serious of self-realization. Thank you.

Grāma-vyavahāre, because brāhmaṇa is generally addressed accordingly. So Sanātana Gosvāmī says, grāma-vyavahāre, by this ordinary neighborhood behavior, they say "Paṇḍit-jī," and I also say that I am Paṇḍit-jī.

Because everyone thinks like that. Everyone thinks that "I know," as it may be, everyone knows something, that "I am this, I am that," but that is not sufficient knowledge.

Sanātana Gosvāmī says, "āpanāra hitāhita kichui nā jāni." Although I am addressed by my neighboring people as Paṇḍit, as large scholars, but he can know that "I do not know what is actually beneficial for me, and such a Paṇḍit."

"I do not know my own welfare." But they say that I am very much learned. This is the position of everyone. Sanātana Gosvāmī is representing the ordinary class of man. Everyone thinks that he is most learned.

But if you ask me, not only ordinary man, if you ask any scientist, any scholar, any philosopher, generally of the modern age, they will say, "Well, I have my my existence is some void and I shall become void."

That is going on. Body. I develop from voidness by combination of matter. Uh, my consciousness has developed, my body has developed. So as soon as this combination is separated, there is no more existence.

So if you, you say that, uh, we say, that this reply is given by Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad-gītā, that if you are born now and if you are going to be void again, then why, why you are lamenting for killing your relative?

They came from void, and by your killing they will become void. So from void to void as some temporary manifestation, why you are so much affected with the temporary affection?

If you believe like that, there is no question now. Suppose a man dies and his relative is crying: “Oh, oh, my child is gone, my husband is gone, or my brother is gone.” Why, why lament? He was void in the beginning.

And again he has become void. So is it the cause of lamentation? So this is... Sanātana Gosvāmī says that, “Actually, I am not void.” That much knowledge Sanātana Gosvāmī has.

Because otherwise, how he could approach Caitanya Mahāprabhu? That he knows that “I am not void. I am something. I am spirit, so I am spiritual, but I have forgotten my real identity.

I do not know how to make me actually happy.”

Approaching a guru for spiritual knowledge

That is not so. That this, uh, angle of vision is our vaiṣṇava philosophy, to make a solution of the miserable condition of the present life.

One who does not know the way, blindly, without knowing the destination, they are to be supposed to be deaf or blind. So, “kṛpā kari' yadi more kariyācha uddhāra, āpanāra kṛpāte kaha ‘kartavya’ amāra.”

This is the position of a student surrendering before the spiritual master. He makes him blank in fact: “Actually, I do not know what is my real welfare.

So as you have kindly accepted me as your student, now you kindly describe what is better, what is really actually possible.” Just like Arjuna also to Kṛṣṇa.

The bewilderment which is now created, whether I shall fight or not fight, uh, it is so exhausting that I am now puzzled. I am therefore accepting you as my spiritual master, kindly teach me what is really my duty.

That was done by Arjuna. Similarly, Sanātana Gosvāmī can do that. Approach a bona fide spiritual master. Arjuna can approach a bona fide spiritual... Is it not our duty to approach a bona fide spiritual master?

What do we know? Is it not essential? The people at the present moment, they say, "Oh, what is the use of a spiritual master? How can I know if you are a bona fide spiritual master?" But if you do not know, that's all right.

But still you have to search out a bona fide spiritual master, otherwise you will be bewildered. You will be misled. Tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum evābhigacchet—it is a must.

It is a must duty, not that I may accept or not accept. No. That is... Sanātana Gosvāmī is teaching us how to approach the spiritual master, how to present himself humbly and meekly.

These things are taught by Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī. Ke āmi, kene āmāya jāre tāpa-traya, kahan hijani kāmane hita haya. This is the question, apṛcchat. The same thing as Arjuna.

Arjuna must identify wrongly himself as one of the family members of the Kurus.

That is, so far the skin is concerned, there is skin connection, a material connection, but actually he presented himself as a fool, as Śrī Kṛṣṇa said, that "You are talking so nicely as if you are a very learned scholar.

But the subject matter on which you are lamenting, it is never done by any learned man." Aśocyān anvaśocas tvaṁ prajñā-vādāṁś ca bhāṣase—you are talking just like a learned scholar.

But your behavior shows that you are not learned. Indirectly He says... That's why sometimes it is called... it is called parlance or something in English.

If you want to accuse somebody that he is a thief, you may say, "Something was stolen from my room and the man who took... the man who took, he looks like you."

He looks like you, see? That means this man who has stolen that. Similarly, Arjuna also was... "You're talking very nice, like a learned man, but no learned man talks like this."

That means you are a fool. A very gentlemanly, friendly way, people you say, that you're talking like a learned man, but no learned man talks on this as this. Śiṣyas te 'haṁ śādhi māṁ tvāṁ prapannam.

So as indeed where, uh, Krishna, a spiritual master, he, spiritual master can feel like that, chastising.

Here, uh, frankly, Sanātana Gosvāmī frankly admits that "I do not know actually what is my constitutional position and I am very much eager to get out of the miserable condition of material life, but I do not know how to do it."

This is the position of everyone. Everyone is unhappy. Says this boy, Mr. Dawa, he was telling me that "I am not feeling very satisfaction." Is it not? That is the position of everyone.

Nobody can be satisfied in this material world. That's a fact. Because we, as spiritual, we want spiritual food; material food goes for the protection of this body. But so far I am concerned, I require spiritual food.

Just like you have, uh, uh, got your shirt and coat. Shirt and coat requires to be washed, that's all right.

But at the same time, the, uh, I mean, the wearer of the shirt and coat, the user of the shirt and coat, he requires also food.

If you simply wash your shirt and coat, do not apply to the owner of the shirt and coat, who said how long this business is going, he will be dissatisfied, will get lean and thin. Similarly, human society combination...

Within that subtle and gross body there is actually real soul, so that this, that spirit soul must have food, that is spiritual food. And that spiritual food is Krishna consciousness. Without this, it cannot be happy.

It is not possible. ‘Ke āmi’, ‘kene āmaya jāre tāpa-traya’. The tāpa-traya is three kinds of misery. As I've explained several times, one kind of misery due to my body and mind.

That is called adhyātmika, pertaining to the body and mind. Another kind of misery is inflicted by other living entities. Just like in Gorakhpur, we are so much busy in trouble with flies and mosquitoes.

We did not do any harm to them. Still they attack. Similarly there are many, just like Mr. Goenka's in South Vietnam. The people are being killed without any offense. So this is called adhibhautika.

Unnecessarily, other living entities give trouble. There is trouble due to the mind and body, that I am coughing. This is bodily. I don't like to cough, but because the body is now infected, I'm coughing.

So this is called, or I am not very happy in my mind. Similarly, others giving trouble, that's called adhibhautika. And there is another trouble which is called adhidaivika.

Adhidaivika means misery offered by the demigods, the controllers of the natural affairs. It's like rain is controlled by Indra, the light and heat is controlled by Sūrya. Many devatās, they are controlling everything.

They are in the sour land too much, it becomes at least... It becomes inundated, flooded, but you have no hand. You cannot check. There's no rest in the supply, no rest. There's scorching heat.

There's famines, pestilence, so much. This is the... so who can avoid it? But a human being, he thinks that why these troubles are there? What is the reason?

Unless we question like this, it means that I am not there as as a perfect human being. This question is not there. It means that it's a bear. And if one does not take notice of it, then it's a fool.

Just like the miserable condition. Just like there is a torrent of rain. You take some protection, you have made a shelter or you take some umbrella,

but the animal is standing, it cannot take any protection. At night, there is severe cold, he can't take protection. But the animal is standing on the road, the dog is standing, and he does not know. One dog and...

The doctor, Mr. Astra, said he... it was playing with some ball, the ball, the ball fell down on the pond like there was a small nest, and the dog jumped over it and it was cold season, the water was so cold, immediately the dog died.

This misery is there. But those who are animals or animal life, they do not take notice. They say, "Our life is all... let me adjust."

And this adjustment, uh, for material miserable condition of life, a struggle, that is called struggle for existence. Everyone is trying to adjust, but that is not possible.

So, one should have that, for say, that why these kinds of troubles are there. Why I have been subjected to this miserable condition of life? That praśna, that question should be there.

Unless that question is there, it is to be understood that he has not developed human consciousness, not to speak of Krishna consciousness. "I do not know how to counteract this miserable condition of life. I become your humble student."

But actually I do not know what to ask for. Better you think of me, of my miserable condition, you know everything. You can explain why I'm subjected to the miserable condition of materialistic life.

How I can be relieved of this miserable condition. And whatever is necessary for me, you can explain. You please explain. Come, Mr. John, if you have got any question, you can put. God.

Um, you need a heavy and home and then the day the day out of that. That's the thing. But it seems that, uh, suppose there is a statue of Gandhi. Does it mean, uh, that you are not seeing Gandhi?

I thought, try to understand. Is that statue false? False? Is that statue false? False representation? Do you think it is false? Similarly, here is Krishna's form.

So you might not have seen Krishna, but that form of Krishna, same Krishna, then how it is false? Let it be there. You might not have seen this.

Suppose you have, you have got the, the picture of your forefather, your father's grandfather's grandfather. The picture is there. You have not seen. Does it mean that your great-grandfather was not existing?

Why do you say it Like that? Yes. That's all right. Yes. So he cares. That you have me. He cares. As a human being. So here we have got Krishna's statue or form as human beings, not as a tiger.

So if you admit that Krishna came as a human being and we have His form as human beings, then where is it clause, that God has no form and how we have manufactured this form? Where is the question?

But do we admit Him as God or not? Then where is the trouble? If we admit Krishna as God and He has Krishna's form, then do you think this form is false? No, this is true. Then what is your question?

Many people may say many things, that is another thing. Many people may be foolish. That does not mean their statement has to be accepted. We have to accept reality from authority.

Krishna was personally present on this planet 5,000 years ago.

And everyone saw Him, and Krishna's statue is worshipped in many, many hundreds and thousands of temples, and the description is in the śāstras. Sādhu, śāstra, guru, bhakta —

Vedic authority and logical proofs of God

if anyone has a spiritual master, he or that test. So we have to take whether Krishna's form is there. Whether ācāryas, sādhus, they have accepted.

Whether my guru also accepts these three things in collaboration, that is facts, that is facts.

They say Krishna is like this: veṇuṁ kvaṇantam aravinda-dalāyatākṣaṁ barhāvataṁsam asitāmbuda-sundarāṅgam, kandarpa-koṭi- kamanīya-viśeṣa-śobhaṁ govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ... He is there. And all the ācāryas...

One has seen or may not have seen, it doesn't matter, they say yes, Krishna. Śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ smaraṇaṁ pāda-sevanam... Confirmed.

And directly your spiritual master, if you accept him as spiritual, if he says yes, it is Krishna, then there is no argument. Sādhu starts from guru. We have to pay through these three channels: sādhu, śāstra, and guru.

Śāstra, scripture, by the literature, and confirmed by the two others. If these three things are in collaboration, then it's fine. That's all. There is no argument. This is the process of understanding.

How do you accept that the sun is fourteen hundred thousand times bigger than the earth? Are you seeing that actually? Not yet. We have to believe.

If you believe an expert in geography study or astronomy, then why not Krishna? Why not? What is it about? He reads in the paper that Sputnik has gone through Candraloka. How do you believe? You do not go, you just read.

He read in the newspaper. How do you believe it? By reading. Only reading the Vedic literature, you have to believe. That does not mean because you have not seen that, you cannot believe.

You are believing so many things without seeing. Why not about God, which is impossible to be seen by you? So these are the processes of knowledge. So that we have to learn how to know. Where is the time? Huh?

Yeah, running out of time. So, our process is to take the knowledge from others. Just like the process of knowing your father is to accept the statement of your mother.

The mother has said that this gentleman is your father, you have to believe. You cannot make any experiment. Because that is authority. Similarly, our authority is Vedic literature. And Krishna is the father.

Vedas are the mother. So from the mother we have to learn that Krishna is God. There is no other way. Do you agree to this? Yes. Sādhu-śāstra. There is no other. But there is indication about it in the śāstras.

Janmādy asya yataḥ. Brahman, Parabrahman, Absolute Truth is that from whom everything is born. That's very logical. Logical. Everything is born in this material. Here is a microphone. It is born. It is created by somebody.

This spectacle is created by somebody. This lamp is created by somebody. So why not this vast manifestation created by someone? That is God. What is it difficult to understand?

Because I have not seen, that is not the only other way. Have we seen where manufactured is this spectacle? But it is supposed that somebody has manufactured.

How you can say, because you do not see the manufacturer, there is no manufacturer? Can you say like that? Yes.

If everything in our experience is manufactured, born by somebody, how can you say that this material or this vast manifestation is without a manufacturer? Do you think it is a very sound proposition? No.

Janmādy. Asya yataḥ. Ah. What is that dharma, the original? Is he a dead body or a living body? He cannot have such nice plans from the brain of a dead one. Do things like that.

So nicely, the sun is moving, the moon is moving, the season is doing this to the time. Scientists, they also confirm. Professor Einstein, he said that as we go on seeing, seeing, seeing, there is a big brain behind.

How can I deny this big brain? And as soon as you accept, "Yes, there is some big brain," how can you say that is dead? Matter is dead. You cannot say that this manifestation has come out from matter. Matter is dead.

This is matter. This is matter. Unless there is a manufacturer, there cannot be this, uh, glass; there cannot be this frame. Is it possible without a manufacturer, uh? Does it take place by automatic energy? Huh?

You are back in it. But you are not dead. You are living. Therefore, these material manifestations must have been created by some living being. God is living, not dead. And it's constant.

As soon as we say living, then consciousness, full of knowledge. And this we have to study. How you can say that it is material production without any brain, without any direction? That is the answer.

And that is what we have to read. Bhagavad-gītā says: "mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ sūyate sa-carācaram" — under My superintendence. And brain. Brain is Krishna. Material world is not continuous.

The material world is created by Krishna. Can you deny this? See, where are we? Can you deny this fact? Because He has got such a nice brain, He knows everything directly and indirectly.

Just like, not like us — we can understand directly, but indirectly cannot understand. Just like directly I know this is my hair, but how this is growing we do not know. Do you know how your hair is growing?

You may put some juice in this one, but you do not know. Directly you see that you are eating. But how it is transforming to blood, that you do not know.

Maybe that you can see how the food has gone to the intestine and stomach and all these, forming into secretion and blood. There is a process, but you cannot see. So directly you can see, indirectly you cannot see.

But Krishna directly and indirectly knows. That is also said there. I know everything: past, present, future. That is God. He knows how it is created.

He knows what he spoke to the sun-god forty million, uh, forty millions of years ago. He says, "I told this Bhagavad-gītā to the sun-god." It will be not less than 40 million of years. How could Arjuna hear, man?

Arjuna was saying, "How can I believe that you told this, because you are a contemporary of me?" What Krishna replied? The reply says, "Yes, you and me were born many times, but we have forgotten. I do not forget."

And that is the difference between Krishna, although he is born like a human being. That's what Krishna says: avajānanti māṁ mūḍhāḥ. Those who are mūḍhāḥ, that says they think that I'm a human being, I'm nothing.

Paraṁ bhāvam ajānantaḥ. He does not know. But it's my power. Krishna as one of you, then that is foolishness. Krishna is God. It is accepted by all authorities. So what is your question?

God... because we have not seen God, do we know God? Is that your question?

Or we are not seeing, we are simply wasting time having some imaginary form, and all these boys and girls have sacrificed everything to worship some imaginary form? Do you think like that? We are so, uh, crazy?

Do you think like that? Yes. This is the form of Krishna. This is Krishna. Veṇuṁ kvaṇantam aravinda-dalāyatākṣam. He is playing on the flute. His eyes are like lotus petals. He says, kandarpa- koṭi-kamanīya-viśeṣa-śobham.

These things are there in the śāstras. And actually when Krishna is present, he manifested himself, so where is the doubt? This is accepted by the ācāryas. So what is the question of doubt? Huh? Yes. That is good.

There is no question of love. Krishna as He is, exactly we are worshiping. And other things you should know.

Understanding Krishna through his diverse energies

Krishna being absolute, Krishna and Krishna's name, Krishna's form are not different from Krishna. Don't think that we are worshipping Krishna, it is idol worship. No, it is directly Krishna worship.

Directly Krishna worship. That's why you are directly, directly seeing Me. Similarly, Krishna is directly seeing the devotee, and the devotee is directly seeing Krishna. That is absolute.

That will take a little time to understand, but it is a fact. When you put your letter in a mailbox, it is a small box, but it is put in the post office. How it is put there?

You are not going to the post service, you're putting in a box. But how that box is a post service? Yes, there is a link. Krishna has a link everywhere.

Krishna says: "bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ khaṁ mano buddhir eva ca ahaṅkāra itīyaṁ me bhinnā prakṛtir aṣṭadhā." Krishna claims that this matter—earth, water, fire, ether— and that is My energy.

So even if we say that this is a matter, but this matter is energy of Krishna. He is the energy. So He can act through His energy. And He's acting; actually the whole world is going on under His energy.

Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate. Just like the energy of the light is illumination. Although we do not see how the energy is, as much as actually the energy of the light.

Similarly, this material world is also a representation of Krishna. So even if we think that this is a material thing, but for Krishna, it is not material, Krishna. Because energy and the energetic is not different.

Śakti-śaktimator abhedaḥ. Just like this bulb: the original lamp is the light illuminator and energy focused by the lamp. That is also illumination. How can we separate?

Similarly, this matter—earth, water, everything—is Krishna's energy, then how is it not Kṛṣṇa? How can you say it is not Kṛṣṇa? Can you say? Yes. He claims so.

Try to understand, scrutinize me; if not blindly, you should accept blindly this question. So are you satisfied with his replies or is there any other counter-argument? Yes. Kṛṣṇa is not different from this world.

Because the whole world is Kṛṣṇa's. This place, the sun is situated uh miles away. But the sunshine is here. Do you think the sunshine and the sun is the product? Do you think? It is, it is diametrically one and different.

In these ways. But in the absolute one, Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa's name, Kṛṣṇa's form, Kṛṣṇa's quality, Kṛṣṇa's satisfaction, they're all Kṛṣṇa. That, that will take some time.

So if we simply hear of Kṛṣṇa by His name, Hare Kṛṣṇa, harer nāma, we are in direct touch with Kṛṣṇa. Because He is absolute. He can be presented. He's present in this sound. Everything.

Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagad avyakta-mūrtinā. I am spread all over the world in My impersonal feature. But this Kṛṣṇa, uh, to the atheist is not this one.

This uh, simultaneously acintya-bhedābheda-tattva philosophy is very nice. Vedeṣu durlabham adurlabham ātma-bhaktau. Kṛṣṇa is not to be understood by simply studying Vedas, but He is very easily understood by devotees.

Bhaktyā mām abhijānāti yāvān yaś cāsmi tattvataḥ. There are many instances, many instructions like that.

He is readily understood, and so I can request you to come and attend the meeting and satisfy yourself with questions. You are welcome.