View source for Krsna says, "I am pranavah." So omkara is not different from Krsna. But omkara is pronounced by the impersonalists. That is the difference. Krsna, when He says that "I am pranavah, I am omkara," then where is the objection?

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"Kṛṣṇa says, "I am praṇavaḥ." So oṁkāra is not different from Kṛṣṇa. But oṁkāra is pronounced by the impersonalists. That is the difference. Kṛṣṇa, when He says that "I am praṇavaḥ, I am oṁkāra," then where is the objection"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Soham}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|2024-12-19T17:12:43.000Z}}
{{last|2024-12-19T17:12:43.000Z}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=1|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Krsna Says]]
[[Category:I Am (Krsna)]]
[[Category:Pranava - omkara]]
[[Category:Krsna Is Omkara]]
[[Category:Not Different from Krsna]]
[[Category:Pronounce]]
[[Category:Impersonalist]]
[[Category:That is the Difference]]
[[Category:When Krsna]]
[[Category:Where Is]]
[[Category:Objection]]
[[Category:Pages Needing Audio - SOHAM]]
</div>
<div id="section">
<h2>Conversations and Morning Walks</h2>
</div>
<div id="sub_section">
<h3>1975 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div class="quote">
<div class="quote_heading">
Kṛṣṇa says, "I am praṇavaḥ." So oṁkāra is not different from Kṛṣṇa. But oṁkāra is pronounced by the impersonalists. That is the difference. Kṛṣṇa, when He says that "I am praṇavaḥ, I am oṁkāra," then where is the objection? They foolishly say that "Oṁkāra is better than Kṛṣṇa. There is no need of chanting Kṛṣṇa. That is not good.".
</div>

<div class="quote_link">
[[Vanisource:750506 - Conversation - Perth|750506 - Conversation - Perth]]
</div>
<div class="text">
Paramahaṁsa: I think perhaps the other boy has come back . . . (indistinct) . . . so actually the differences, whatever little differences may arise, those differences amongst the ācāryas, they are due to feelings of . . . different feelings of love for Kṛṣṇa or His manifestations.

Prabhupāda: You'll find in some, among some devotees, they will criticize, "Why you are worshiping Rāmacandra? He could not save even His wife." (laughter) And some will, "Ah, you are worshiping Kṛṣṇa. He was so fond of women." Like that. In Vṛndāvana you'll find they are different. Somebody will say "Hare Kṛṣṇa," another will say: "Sītā Rāma." There will be competition. There is no difference. Both of them know that "Either I worship Rāma or Kṛṣṇa, They are the same.

Amogha: Śrīla Prabhupāda? Here it mentions Brahmān, and as I understood oṁkāra . . . my question is whether oṁkāra is a representation . . .

Prabhupāda: There is no question about oṁkāra there. Discuss on the verse. But oṁkāra is also Kṛṣṇa. Praṇavaḥ sarva vedeṣu. Raso 'ham apsu kaunteya praṇavaḥ sarva vedeṣu ([[Vanisource:BG 7.8 (1972)|BG 7.8]]). Kṛṣṇa says, "I am praṇavaḥ." So oṁkāra is not different from Kṛṣṇa. But oṁkāra is pronounced by the impersonalists. That is the difference. Kṛṣṇa, when He says that "I am praṇavaḥ, I am oṁkāra," then where is the objection? They foolishly say that "Oṁkāra is better than Kṛṣṇa. There is no need of chanting Kṛṣṇa. That is not good." But so far we are concerned, we say there is no difference between oṁkāra and Kṛṣṇa. All other system, Christianism or Buddhism or Muhammadanism, they have got one book—Koran, Bible, or . . . what is the Buddhist book? . . . (indistinct) . . . one book. And we have got so many, dealing with the same subject matter. So which is better? Higher mathematics, or two plus two? They should understand the gravity of this movement, my presentation of books. They haven't got so many books. Two thousand years passed, the Christian religion has got only one book, Bible. And their only pastime of Christ is crucifixion. That's it. There is the cross. Therefore it has become hackneyed. People are no more interested, neither they can explain very nicely. Neither they follow strictly whatever little information they have.
</div>
</div>
</div>