Prabhupada: Everyone will have to take Krsna's book first to prove their authority.

Yoko Ono: But, er... What...

Prabhupada: Vivekananda has taken, Aurobindo has taken, Dr. Radhakrishnan has taken, Mahatma Gandhi... There are thousands and thousands. So why do they take Bhagavad-gita?

George Harrison: So that we can read it in English.

Prabhupada: No, no. It is not the question of English. It is the question of the thoughts. English it may be or Parsee it may be. That doesn't matter. Why do they take shelter of the thoughts of Bhagavad-gita unless they accept Bhagavad-gita as authority? Why they quote from Bhagavad-gita? So why not directly Bhagavad-gita? If Bhagavad-gita is the authority for everyone, why not Bhagavad-gita as it is? That is our proposition.

George Harrison: But Bhagavad-gita as it is is Sanskrit.

Prabhupada: No, we have made English.

George Harrison: Yes, but they all make it English.

John Lennon: But that must be also a translation, mustn't it? Whoever puts it into English. I mean...

Prabhupada: So you also read any Bhagavad-gita translation only. You don't read the original.

…..

Just like channel you'll understand very easily. You send some money order to your friend. So from which channel he'll receive? He'll receive through the post office, not through any other channel. So if the postal peon delivers it, you are confident, "Yes, the money has come." So why you give the importance to the postal peon? Because he's representative of the post office. Similarly, Krsna is the original authority. So the Krsna's representative is the authority. And who is Krsna's representative? Who is a devotee of Krsna. So therefore the devotee of Krsna is authority, at least of Bhagavad-gita. So you have to receive through the devotee of Krsna about Bhagavad-gita. One who does not know anything about Krsna, how he can preach Bhagavad-gita? This is common sense.

Conversations 690911rc.lon

Guest (1): Siva-linga. You find it all over India, that, a summary of everything, that incorporeal form, jyotir-rupa, incorporeal. Jyotir-linga, the Hindu svarupa.

Prabhupada: That's all right. You are bringing something else besides Bhagavad-gita. Just try to understand. We are preaching... This International Society for Krishna Consciousness, we are preaching...

Guest (1): But you have to understand the relation between the two.

Prabhupada: That's all... That we understand very nicely. It is not that I have to learn from you. We know it very well. But you should know that we are preaching Bhagavad-gita. So this jyotir-linga, all these theories, they are not in the Bhagavad-gita. It may be in other literature, but we are particularly interested in preaching Bhagavad-gita. Because Bhagavad-gita is wrongly preached all over the world by nonsense commentation, we want to rectify it. Therefore our society is specially named "Krishna conscious."

Guest (1): What is wrongly preached about Gita?

Prabhupada: Wrong... Just like yesterday I went that Gita Samiti. There is a lamp. Why there is a lamp instead of Krsna? Why there is a lamp? Krsna is a lamp? And it is Bhagavad...

Guest (1): I don't know...

Prabhupada: You do not know. Therefore I say this is wrongly preaching. Why in the place of Krsna there is a lamp? Does Krsna say?

Guest (1): Lamp has been with us for more than... In our mandira...

……

Prabhupada: That's all right. (Hindi?) Krsna is also there.

Guest (1): They must evolve with that idea because...

Prabhupada: No, no. First thing is that when we speak of Bhagavad-gita, it is spoken by Krsna. So why there is no Krsna photograph?

Guest (1): They didn't put the picture.

Prabhupada: Yes. That means you have not understood Krsna. Therefore your, this so-called Gita society is not bona fide. At least even in ordinary feature, suppose if there is political meeting, you keep Gandhi, this photo, Jawaharlal Nehru's photo because they are the political leaders. You are preaching Bhagavad-gita, Gita Samiti, and there is not a single picture of Krsna.

Guest (1): There is little misunderstanding, that Gita Jayanti is for...

Prabhupada: No, first of all answer me this question. Then you go to Gita Jayanti. That, your Samiti is Gita Samiti and there is not a single picture of Krsna. Yes.

Guest (1): We don't know about that one.

Prabhupada: You were not there present? Oh. That's not... I think you were present.

Guest (2): (indistinct)

Prabhupada: This is misguided.

Guest (2): I never gone there, never been there.

Prabhupada: This is misguided. That's all. Now, "Gita Bhavan," and they have invited me because we are teaching Bhagavad-gita, and that was Gita's Jayanti--and the speaker of Gita is not present? Therefore I say that there are so many places, here also. They are wrongly representing Bhagavad-gita. So our position is to rectify that wrong propaganda of Bhagavad-gita.

Conversations 710118rc.all

The movement of Krsna consciousness is very firm. (makes comment about other room; loud sounds of kirtana and fire yajna) Bhagavad-gita was there, so Krsna consciousness movement was there. India, it was existing. Unfortunately, some of the less intelligent swamis and philosophers, they could not understand what is Krsna, and they misinterpreted the Bhagavad-gita. Therefore people could not understand. In spite of reading Bhagavad-gita all the world over, they were not aware what is Krsna, although Bhagavad-gita is Krsna understanding. You have read Bhagavad-gita?

Conversations 710718RC.DET

Thank you. That's all right. But thing is that we must know that he has spoken about Ramakrishna and Aurobindo. They also center their propaganda on Krsna. Just like I already told. Ramakrishna said, "I am the same Krishna." That means he takes to Krsna. Aurobindo, he has written "Life Divine." That is his explanation of Bhagavad-gita. He takes to Krsna. This Maharishi, he has also presented Bhagavad-gita; he (has) taken to Krsna. So their importance is by taking to Krsna. Otherwise, they are valueless, nobody.

…..No, teachings of Bhagavad-gita means Krsna. That is the folly of the so-called scholars. They want to study Bhagavad-gita without Krsna. Just like one wants to play Hamlet without Hamlet. (French, mentions Sankara) Sankara has accepted Krsna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Does he know that, that Sankara has accepted Krsna the Supreme Personality? (French)

Conversations 740612rc.par

Yes. So... And all the acaryas, Vaisnava acaryas, they accept Krsna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So practically, amongst the authorities, Indian acaryas, everyone accepts Krsna the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Ramanujacarya has written his bhasya on Bhagavad-gita.

Conversations 740614rc.par

Ramana Maharshi, yes, I am speaking of Ramana Maharshi. He never preached about Krsna's superexcellent position, never preached. This is going on. Everyone is taking advantage of Bhagavad-gita and he's preaching in his own way, foolish way. "Own way" means foolish way. This is going on. You cannot... Suppose you have got your philosophy, but you cannot take my book and preach your philosophy. If you have got philosophy, you write your philosophy. Why do you take advantage of my book and misinterpret? This is cheating. Because my book is very popular, you take advantage of my book and preach your own nonsense philosophy. This is going on. If you want to smoke ganja, you smoke in your own hand. Why you capture my hand and smoke? What is this? So the ganja-smelling will be in my hand, not in your hand. This is going on. Why do they take advantage of Bhagavad-gita and preach their nonsense philosophy? That is our protest. You preach your nonsense philosophy. We have no objection. But don't touch Bhagavad-gita. This is our Krsna consciousness movement. What is the... Do you think it is honesty that you want to preach something of your own philosophy and you take advantage of my book and mislead others? Is that very good, honest business? This is going on. This is going on, very dangerous position. In our country, and what to speak of other countries, all these swamis, yogis, and politicians, and scholars, they are doing like this. Very dangerous position. Why should you touch Bhagavad-gita? You speak, you preach, your own philosophy. There are so many philosophies. But our only objection is that "Why should you preach your nonsense philosophy through Bhagavad-gita?" Do you think it is right?

Conversations 750412rc.hyd

This is to be understood. The same thing, the supremacy of Krsna, is being repeatedly stressed in so many ways, and still, by reading Bhagavad-gita, they do not accept the supremacy of Krsna….

So see. And these fools and rascals are going on as big men. You see? What kind of Bhagavad-gita he has read, that he says that "There was no Krsna, there was no Battlefield of Kuruksetra"? And that is our challenge, "Why do you say like that?"

Conversations 740405mw.bom

Vishva Hindu Parishad. What is this nonsense Vishva Hindu...? (chuckles) He does not know what is the meaning of Hindu. And his jnana-yajna. Gita jnana yajna. He does not understand even a word of Gita, and this rascal is preaching Bhagavad-gita. This is going on. And he has made some name, people after him. People means if you flatter him, that "Whatever you are doing, it is all right."

Conversations 740424mw.hyd

And he is considered to be a great scholar in Bhagavad-gita, and when cow protection was requested, he said that "How can I do it? It is their religious principle." And he is a great big scholar in Bhagavad-gita. All nonsense, going on. Whole world is full of nonsense, mudhas, beginning from Gandhi to any rascal, all of them, rascals. Perhaps it is the first time we are detecting, "Here are all rascals." It is first time. Then we are enemy of everyone. We call everyone rascal--Gandhi rascal, Vivekananda rascal, Aurobindo rascal. So actually they are, but people are thinking, "These people say all big, big men rascals? Therefore they are rascals."

Conversations 751003mw.mau

Because Bhagavad Gita was not presented As It Is, not a single devotee of Krsna was made:

Yes. Because everyone has speculated in his own way. Therefore we have presented Bhagavad-gita As It Is. And if you have got time, we can read some of the portions, how we have presented as it is. So people are liking this As It Is. Otherwise, Bhagavad-gita is well-known in the western country, all over Europe. But because it was not presented as it is, there was not a single devotee of Krsna. You find out, the whole history. Bhagavad-gita is meant for making the reader a devotee of Krsna. Is it not?

Conversations 730905rc.sto

7. Bhagavad Gita and Gandhi:

He never surrendered to Krsna. I wrote him letter. "Mahatma Gandhi, you have got so much influence. You just preach the gospel of Krsna, Bhagavad-gita. Now we have attained svaraj. You don't be in politics." But he was still in politics after attainment of svaraj. And his assistants became disgusted because he was interfering, and therefore he was killed. And that is open secret. If he would have surrendered to Krsna, "All right. Now I have worked for svaraj. My people have got svaraj. Now let me work for Krsna,"... He never did that. You cannot say that he surrendered to Krsna. He should have taken immediately sannyasa and preached Bhagavad-gita if he was actually surrendered to Krsna. What did he do for Krsna? We have to know from practical point of view. I'll tell you another story about Mahatma Gandhi. My Guru Maharaja invited him in our matha, Mahatma Gandhi. So Mahatma Gandhi inquired... The, my godbrothers went to invite him. "What you are doing in your matha?" They replied that "We are worshiping Lord Krsna." So he inquired, "Are you pulling on charka?" They said, "No sir," He said, "Charka is my God. If there is no charka, I am not going there." He said like that.

Conversations 710217rc.gor

We never... The Bhagavad-gita never says that when enemy attacks, you become nonviolent. No, no. Never. Rather, Gandhi said that "Yes, I shall..." Somebody asked Gandhi that "If in your presence your wife or your daughter is ravaged, what you will do?" That question was there, actually. But he said that "I say nonviolence upon..."

Conversations 711110RC.DEL

So we shall remain like a child, being protected by our predecessor. Then there is no worries. And if you want to manufacture something of your concocted brain, then there is worries. Just like Gandhi. Gandhi wanted to prove nonviolence from Bhagavad-gita, which is impossible. Therefore he had worries, because he wanted to prove something which is not in the Bhagavad-gita, and still, he took Bhagavad-gita as evidence.

Conversations 750520rc.mel

Vivekananda lamented at the end of his life, that "I have simply wasted my life." He admitted, "I have not given anything." Balakanam. He was after this body, and he was recorded, government record, as political sannyasi. Yes. He had political purpose, but was acting as a sannyasi. Just like Gandhi, "Saintly statesman." He is recorded, "Saintly statesman." He's a statesman, politician, but he was introducing some morality, non-violence, like that. Actually, his philosophy failed. He wanted Hindu-Muslim unity, but it was divided. The Muslim and Hindu divided. He wanted non-violence. He died out of violence. Therefore all his philosophy failed. And Indian independence was achieved not by Gandhi's non-violence method but (by) Subhas Bose's violence method. And he wanted to explain nonviolence from Bhagavad-gita. Just see, another foolishness. Bhagavad-gita is spoken in the battlefield, and he was screwing some meaning to prove his nonviolence.

Conversations 730517mw.la

I have seen Gandhi's prayer meeting, and I attended. Utmost, five minutes reading Bhagavad-gita, then again politics immediately. Immediately politics. I was in Delhi. I attended the meeting when Nawa Khalia (Noakhali?) fast. So this was his prayer. I have seen. And as a result of this, in that prayer meeting he was killed. (Hindi) So nature punishment are there. (Hindi) The last stage of Kali-yuga means you die.

Conversations 760413mw.bom

That--because you are student of history--Mahatma Gandhi's photograph with Gita. Did he speak anything about Gita or Krsna in the history of his life? Then how he is mahatma?

Conversations 750520rc.mel

Take for example our big leader, Mahatma Gandhi. He was supposed to be very good scholar in Bhagavad-gita. Did he ever preach that "You are not this body?"

Conversations 751103mw.bom

Yes. No, anything, if you can understand very clearly, where is the question of interpretation? But it has become a fashion that "If I can interpret in my own way, I become a big scholar." This is going on. If you have got your philosophy, you can speak. Everyone is free. Why you should take Bhagavad-gita and distort it? Krsna never meant that "In future Gandhi will come," or "Dr. Radhakrishnan will come, and he will explain My ideas." What is this nonsense? Krsna was a foolish person that he left it for Gandhi for distortion? He could not explain Himself that Kuruksetra means this body? Gandhi has to interpret? Do you think it is right?

Conversations 770123ed.bhu

So our, our point is that you may express your own op... Everyone has got right to... Especially Mahatma Gandhi, he was actually a great personality. There is no doubt about it. But so far Bhagavad-gita is concerned, he did not know anything. But from his behavior, it was seen that at heart he was a devotee. Yes. At heart he was a devotee. Yes. Because he was chanting...

Conversations 730905rc.sto

No. He did not know. But because he was chanting raghupati raghava raja rama, that has given him this effect, yes. On account of chanting. But he really did not understand. Just like the same example, the Mohammedan. He said "ha rama." He wanted to speak "harama," but it become "ha rama." That is the... He did not know anything about Rama, but the name Rama is so powerful that although he said, "harama," it effected. Yes. But Gandhi may not know the purpose of Bhagavad-gita, but as he chanted "ha rama," that has been effective.

Conversations 730902rc.lon

Дата добавления: 2015-11-16