Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 25.40-50 Prabhupada: …samsaresu naradhaman ksipamy ajasram asubhan asurisv eva yonisu This is a verse from Bhagavad-gita, that those who are deriding upon God, “God, there is no God; I am God,” they are called asuras. Asuras, atheists, or demons. The demons… The Krsna, Lord Krsna personally says that tan aham dvisatah kruran. Those who are such envious upon the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the result is that they are thrown into perpetual ignorance, and born life after life where they cannot understand what is God. Because they want to forget God, therefore God puts them into such condition that they will never be able to understand what is God. This is the version from Bhagavad-gita by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That means the condition of the atheists are always abominable. Tan aham dvisatah kruran samsaresu naradhaman. Samsaresu. Samsara means this material entanglement. This is called samsara. And naradhama. They are called the lowest of the human kind, because human life is especially meant for God realization, self- realization. So instead of realizing oneself and the Supreme Self, if one derides, doesn’t want to understand what is God, what is God consciousness, what is Krsna, he is to be understood as the lowest of the mankind, naradhama. Adhama means lowest. Or, in other words, he is an animal in the form of a man. Naradhamesu. And birth after birth, such atheist is put into the species of life where there is no chance of understanding God. There are different species, we have discussed. Even in human society there are some species or class, that it is not possible for them to understand what is God at all. Not even the idea. Generally, even the aborigines, they have got some sense of God. Whenever they find something extraordinary, just like lightening, or a great hill, or a great tree, they offer their respect. So that is sense of God. Sense of God is there in everyone’s heart. Unless he is an animal, everyone heart there is. Artificially, we try to drive away this obedience. But there are other Even in the civilized society, there are persons, they are put into such a circumstances that they will never be able to understand what is God consciousness or what is Krsna consciousness. They are so misfortunate. And as soon as one becomes godless or forgetful (of) his eternal relationship with God, then his life is immediately condemned. sutrera parinama-vada taha na maniya vivarta-vada sthape vyasa bhranta baliya ei ta’ kalpita arthamane nahi bhaya sastra chadi kukalpana pasande bujhaya So that disciple of Prakasananda Sarasvati admitted that godlessness in Vedanta-sutra is not the purpose. Actually, by misinterpreting the Vedanta-sutra they want to establish that “There is no God; we are God.” So after explanation of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, at least there was one convert amongst all the sannyasis, and he was glorifying Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Eta sei kare krsna-sankirtana. And while he was glorifying Lord Caitanya, automatically he began to chant Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna, Krsna Krsna, Hare Hare/ Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare. Suni’ prakasananda kichu kahena vacana. When his disciple was glorifying Lord Caitanya and His process of teaching, his spiritual master, Prakasananda, said like this: acaryera agraha—advaita-vada sthapite. He admitted… Acarya means Sankaracarya. He means here Sankaracarya. Sankaracarya wanted that there is only one Brahman and we are also Brahman, but he wanted his philosophy of monism. Dualism, God and living entity separate, they do not admit. They admit that God and living entity the same. It is simply for the time being covered, which is called maya. Mayavada philosophy. So the Prakasananda Sarasvati also admitted that because Sankaracarya wanted to establish his philosophy of monism, therefore he had to cover the real meaning of Vedanta-sutra. Tate sutrartha vyakhya kare anya rite jani. Anya rite, in a different interpretation. He was a very learned scholar. If a scholar likes to present something in a different way… Just like an expert lawyer, he can get out of the entanglement of law by jugglery of words and interpretation, he is called a big lawyer, similarly, there are philosophers who can put different theories and not admit the existence of God. So Sankaracarya’s real purpose was no existence of God, because he had a very thankless task. He was dealing with the persons who are Buddhists. They did not believe anything except matter. So for them, to establish that there is God, it is very difficult. Therefore he adopted this means that “There is no separate God. We are all God. You are God, I am God.” And a demonic person, if he is addressed, “Oh, you are God,” oh, he becomes very happy because he does not become responsible to any higher authority. He becomes God. He can do anything. He can perform any nonsense. Nobody is going to punish him. It is very nice theory, that “I have become God. Because I have no more…” Suppose you yourself become the government of United States. Then you can do anything. It is very nice. “I am everything: I am president, I am secretary, I am everything. Therefore who is going to check me? I can do any nonsense.” This is the basic principle of godlessness—to avoid the higher authority. Just like already in your country, that class of youngsters who are defying any authority. Not only in your country— in other countries also—that has become a fashion, to defy authorities. So this godlessness is also like that, to defy the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There is no practically difference between Buddha philosophy and Sankara’s philosophy. Buddha philosophy says that the matter is everything. Beyond matter there is nothing, everything void, and the combination of matter is the source of our miseries. So you make a dismantlement of the matter, nirvana— there will be no more miseries. And Sankara’s philosophy says that brahma satyam jagan mithya. It is little, little farther advanced, admitting the spirit, but he says that spirit is impersonal. “There is no God. It is impersonal.” So practically the same thing: ultimately, it is void or there is no God. But Vedanta philosophy does not say that. Vedanta philosophy, from the very beginning it asserts that athato brahma jijnasa, “Now it is the time for discussing on the Absolute Truth.” And what is that Absolute Truth? Janmady asya yatah: [Bhag. 1.1.1] “Absolute Truth is the summum bonum substance from which everything emanates.” yei grantha-karta cahe sva-mata sthapite sastrera sahaja artha nahe tanha haite This is the secret of modern fashionable interpretation. If you want to establish… Suppose you have got some conviction, and if you want to establish it by evidence of an approved literature… An approved literature. Just like Gandhi. Gandhi wanted to establish nonviolence from Bhagavad-gita. He was a… He is known to be a great student of Bhagavad-gita, but he was not at all. His political theory was that he wanted to conquer over the enemies by nonviolence method. Nonviolent noncooperation, that was his, I mean to say, theory. He wanted to get away all kinds of nonviolence from the world, all kinds of violence from the world. So he wanted to prove from Bhagavad-gita nonviolence. But how you can prove nonviolence from Bhagavad-gita? Because Bhagavad-gita is being spoken in the violent battlefield. But because he wanted to prove nonviolence, therefore he says, “Oh, these Pandavas means this. This Krsna means this. This chariot means this. These Kurus means this. Dharmaksetra means this. Kuruksetra means this.” He has invented and manufactured so many rascal meaning that it is very difficult… He said that dharmaksetre… In the beginning of Bhagavad-gita there is the verse, dharmaksetre kuruksetre samaveta yuyutsavah [Bg. 1.1]. Now the very word yuyutsavah means persons who are desiring to fight with one another. Now, how you can prove nonviolence? But he extracts some meaning: “These Pandava means five senses and the Kuruksetra means this body.” In this way, his interpretation. Therefore, all different interpretation… The Vedic literature, either take Bhagavata or Srimad Bhagavad-gita, or any Upanisad, the meaning is very clear. It is sheer foolishness to understand that “The meaning is vague, now I am clearing. I am a great scholar. I can interpret in a different way.” So… As if Vyasadeva left the meaning to be cleared by some rascal. You see? He was not himself competent to clear the meaning, but he left the work to be done by some rascal. That is their interpretation. But actually it is not. In every sloka, if you know Sanskrit, you’ll see the meaning is clear. Just like in the Bhagavad-gita, dharmaksetre kuruksetre samaveta yuyutsavah [Bg. 1.1]. There was actual some fight between the two cousin groups, and they fought at the battlefield of Kuruksetra. That Kuruksetra is still existing. If you go to India that… There is a railway station, Kuruksetra. It is about 150 miles from Delhi. And people go there for pilgrimage. Therefore it is dharmaksetra, a place of religious rites. And in the Vedas, Sama-Veda, I think… I don’t exactly remember. But one of the Vedas it is written that kuruksetre dharma yajayet. In the Kuruksetra, that place, if anyone wants to perform religious rites, he should go to Kuruksetra and perform there. It will have better effect. This is the indication in the Vedic literatures. Therefore Kuruksetra is still accepted. Those who travel, wander in pilgrimages, they go to Kuruksetra still. The system is going on. If there is a lunar eclipse, they go to Kuruksetra to make some charities. So Kuruksetra is accepted from the very, very long period in the Vedic age as the place of pilgrimage. So it is stated there, dharmaksetra. How can I interpret that this Kuruksetra means this body? In which dictionary he finds this meaning? But people are so foolish, because Mahatma Gandhi has interpreted, “Oh, it is right.” So this is going on. So, yei grantha-karta cahe sva-mata… If anyone wants to establish his own foolish theory, he takes advantage of popular book and tries to explain in his own way. So in other words it is clear that Sankaracarya, he wanted to establish this theory of monism, and therefore he has explained Vedanta-sutra in his own way, but that is not the actual explanation. What Lord Caitanya said, that is real explanation. All of them admitted. And this Prakasananda Sarasvati, he also admitted. Bhagavatta manile advaita na yaya sthapana. Now, they wanted to establish the theory of monism, no difference between living entity and God, one; there is no separate God. Then, if admit, if it is admitted that God is the source of everything, then you have to accept duality. Because the source of everything and the everything emanated—duality. tate sutrartha vyakhya kare anya rite ‘bhagavatta’ manile ‘advaita’ na yaya sthapana ataeva saba sastra karaye khandana Because the whole aim was to get away the existence of God, therefore all the Vedic literature was…, were interpreted by Sankaracarya in his own way. Still it is going on. That process is still going on. Although there are many, I mean to say, explanation of Vedanta-sutra by the Vaisnava sampradayas. Just like Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya… Every Vaisnava sampradaya has his own explanation of Vedanta-sutra. Don’t understand Vedantist means the monopoly by Sankara sampradaya. No. But people in general, they understand Vedantist means Sankara sampradaya. Because the devotee class, they do not give much importance to Vedanta. Because they read Srimad-Bhagavatam, and Srimad-Bhagavatam is accepted by the Vaisnava sampradaya, especially by the sect of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, as the real explanation of Vedanta; therefore they do not give any other explanation of Vedanta than Srimad-Bhagavatam. And because the Vaisnava sampradaya does not give very much importance to Vedanta-sutra— because the explanation is there, they are reading actually Vedanta-sutra—people misunderstand that the Vedantist, followers of Vedanta, is the Sankara sampradaya, not this Vaisnava sampradaya. That is their misunderstanding. Actually, any sampradaya, either the Sankara sampradaya or Vedanta-sampradaya, if they have no standing on the Vedanta-sutra, they are not recognized. They are (not) recognized. In… The Indian system is, in the spiritual society, that if you have got any sampradaya, particular, then you must present your explanation of Vedanta-sutra how do you understand Vedanta-sutra. On the basis of that understanding you will be recognized. So the Vaisnava sampradaya, they are also Vedantists. And because Vaisnava sampradaya, they are concerned with the bhakti, bhakti, I mean to say, cult, therefore our society, the Vaisnavas, they were pleased to give me this title, Bhaktivedanta, that “You will explain the Vedanta-sutra.” So this Bhaktivedanta title was especially offered to me, and I do not know why. That’s all. So that Vedanta means bhakti, devotional service. That is the Vaisnava philosophy. And Vedanta means, for the Sankara sampradaya, that “There is no God. I am God.” Mimamsaka kahe isvara haya karmera anga. You know there are six kinds of philosophies in India: the mimamsaka philosophy; and Sankhya philosophy; and nyaya—nyaya means logic—nyaya philosophy; then Mayavada philosophy; then Patanjali, yoga system, Patanjali philosophy; and at last, this Vedanta philosophy. So there are six kinds of philosophers. Out of them, only the Vedanta philosophy is compiled by Vyasadeva. So it is considered that Vedanta philosophy only establishes the existence of God. All other philosophies, they do not admit the existence of God. They are atheistic philosophies. Mimamsaka. Mimamsaka means they have decided that “There is no necessity of worshiping God. If there is any God, all right, you do your duty nicely, and He will be obliged to award you the required result. Then there is no question of flattering Him.” That is mimamsaka philosophy. Just like in government, there are so many departments. So you need not to flatter him, but you do your duty, you pay your tax, you abide by the laws, then everything will be right. You need not worship any person. That is their philosophy, mimamsa karma-mimamsa. Everyone is… Under the spell of karma, everyone is suffering or enjoying as the result of his past deeds. So the karma-mimamsaka philosopher says, “There is no necessity of worshiping God. You do your duty.” Just like some moralists say that “What is the use of God, God, Hare Krsna? Just do your duty.” But he does not know that what is his duty. The duty is only to worship God, and nothing more. That is the duty. All other duties are maya’s spell only. There is no other duty. Because this human life is meant for that duty. The animals cannot execute that duty. Only the human being. Therefore our only duty is to understand God and engage ourself in that way. So these different kinds of philosophies are there. We shall gradually discuss. Thank you very much. (end)
by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
San Francisco, January 24, 1967