View source for It has become a fashion that, "If I can interpret in my own way, I become a big scholar." This is going on

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"it has become a fashion that, "If I can interpret in my own way, I become a big scholar." This is going on"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Soham}}
{{complete|}}
{{goal|0}}
{{first|2023-11-22T10:22:11.000Z}}
{{last|2023-11-22T10:22:11.000Z}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=1|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Have Become]]
[[Category:Fashion]]
[[Category:Interpretation]]
[[Category:Own Way]]
[[Category:Become]]
[[Category:Big]]
[[Category:Scholarly Way]]
[[Category:Going On]]
[[Category:Pages Needing Audio - SOHAM]]
</div>
<div id="section">
<h2>Conversations and Morning Walks</h2>
</div>
<div id="sub_section">
<h3>1977 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div class="quote">
<div class="quote_heading">
Prabhupāda: 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-gītā and distort it? Kṛṣṇa never meant that, "In future Gandhi will come," or "Dr. Radhakrishnan will come, and he will explain My ideas." What is this nonsense? Kṛṣṇa was a foolish person that He left it for Gandhi for distortion? He could not explain Himself that Kurukṣetra means this body? Gandhi has to interpret? Do you think it is right? Mr. Pandiya: Not at all.
</div>

<div class="quote_link">
[[Vanisource:770123 - Conversation C - Bhuvanesvara|770123 - Conversation C - Bhuvanesvara]]
</div>
<div class="text">
Prabhupāda: You read Bhagavad-gītā as it is. Because Gandhi or Vinobha or Vivekananda or Aurobindo, they do not come in the paramparā system. They have made themselves important by their own ideas. That we want to check. Therefore we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. You cannot make any amendment or correction in the Bhagavad-gītā. But these people, unfortunately, they take advantage of the popularity of Bhagavad-gītā and give their own comment.

Mr. Pandiya: To suit their purposes.

Prabhupāda: That's all. This is the dangerous . . . and they are considered as big men, and people follow, and they are misled. Otherwise, in India, so much fallen condition due to these rascal leaders. That I am speaking repeatedly, although it may be very harsh. But we have to say that. Everyone has distorted. Gandhi says Kurukṣetra, "this body." Where is the chance of talking of "this body," the Kurukṣetra? Has he not?

Indian man (1): Yes.

Prabhupāda: Where is the dictionary, "the body means Kurukṣetra, and Kurukṣetra means the body"?

Indian man (3): He has told, karma-kṣetra. Kuru-karma.

Prabhupāda: So you can drag some meaning. That is another thing. But Kurukṣetra is there still.

Mr. Pandiya: (to other guest) That is, sir, that Bhagavad-gītā As It Is.

Indian man (2): That is interpretation.

Prabhupāda: That is interpretation. Interpretation . . . here is a person in the legal way. Interpretation is required when you cannot understand. Is it not?

Indian man (2): Interpretation . . . yes.

Prabhupāda: But when the things are understood very clearly, why interpretation?

Indian man (2): It will, rather, confuse.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Indian man (2): Suppose I will drag this meaning . . .

Prabhupāda: This was protested by Caitanya Mahāprabhu vigorously. Why should you interpret?

Indian man (4): Yes. He told, the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is the ultimate bhāṣya of prasthāna code, Vedānta-sūtra.

Prabhupāda: Yes. No, anything, if you can understand very clearly, where is the question of interpretation?

Mr. Pandiya: That's true.

Prabhupāda: 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-gītā and distort it? Kṛṣṇa never meant that, "In future Gandhi will come," or "Dr. Radhakrishnan will come, and he will explain My ideas." What is this nonsense? Kṛṣṇa was a foolish person that He left it for Gandhi for distortion? He could not explain Himself that Kurukṣetra means this body? Gandhi has to interpret? Do you think it is right?

Mr. Pandiya: Not at all.

Prabhupāda: But this is going on. What right you have got to interpret? If Kurukṣetra means body, Kṛṣṇa would have explained that. Was He not learned? He left it for Gandhi, just see. He left it for Tilak. How harmful these interpretations are. That is going on.
</div>
</div>
</div>