View source for Whenever my Guru Maharaja used to designate these Mayavadi philosophers, he would say, "Poor fund of knowledge."

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"Whenever he used to designate these Mayavadi philosophers, he would say"|"my Guru Maharaja"|"poor fund of knowledge"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Labangalatika}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|24Nov10}}
{{last|24Nov10}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=2|Con=1|Let=0}}
{{total|3}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Whenever]]
[[Category:My Guru Maharaja Used to Say...]]
[[Category:Designated]]
[[Category:These]]
[[Category:Mayavadi Philosophers]]
[[Category:Say]]
[[Category:Poor Fund of Knowledge]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="1" parent="Lectures" text="Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures"><h3>Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB551VrndavanaOctober231976_0" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="517" link="Lecture on SB 5.5.1 -- Vrndavana, October 23, 1976" link_text="Lecture on SB 5.5.1 -- Vrndavana, October 23, 1976">
<div class="heading">Brahma-sukha, do not think to become Brahman or to become one with Brahman... That is not sukha. That they do not know. Therefore my Guru Mahārāja used to say, a poor fund of knowledge.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 5.5.1 -- Vrndavana, October 23, 1976|Lecture on SB 5.5.1 -- Vrndavana, October 23, 1976]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Māyāvādī philosophy is to kill himself, to become one with Brahman. So if, suppose I have to eat something to enjoy. So I can eat. That is enjoyment. But if I lose my existence, I become the food, then where is the enjoyment? No. The enjoyment is: "The food is there, I am there, I shall eat and enjoy." That means dvaita. Monism is not enjoyment, and therefore they fall down: āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adho ([[Vanisource:SB 10.2.32|SB 10.2.32]]). Brahma-sukha, do not think to become Brahman or to become one with Brahman... That is not sukha. That they do not know. Therefore my Guru Mahārāja used to say, a poor fund of knowledge. By becoming one with the Brahman, Supreme Brahman, that is not actually sukha. If it is actually sukha, then why in the śāstra it is said, āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adho ([[Vanisource:SB 10.2.32|SB 10.2.32]])? By very severe austerities they come to the Brahman platform, monism, to become one with the Supreme, but from there he falls down. Why falls down? Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. Because they have no information of the shelter of the lotus feet of the Lord. Unless you come to that point, then there is no possibility of eternal happiness.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="Initiation_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="8" parent="Lectures" text="Initiation Lectures"><h3>Initiation Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="InitiationofLokanathadasaNewVrindabanMay211969_0" class="quote" parent="Initiation_Lectures" book="Lec" index="16" link="Initiation of Lokanatha dasa -- New Vrindaban, May 21, 1969" link_text="Initiation of Lokanatha dasa -- New Vrindaban, May 21, 1969">
<div class="heading">If you are the same, why you are fallen in this condition? They will say, "It is māyā. It is illusion." No. Why you are in illusion? If you are great—"God is great"—if you are that great, then why you are captured by illusion? Then illusion is great, not God is great. This commonsense philosophy they do not understand. Therefore my Guru Mahārāja used to say, "Poor fund of knowledge." Whenever he used to designate these Māyāvādī philosophers, he would say, "Poor fund of knowledge."
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Initiation of Lokanatha dasa -- New Vrindaban, May 21, 1969|Initiation of Lokanatha dasa -- New Vrindaban, May 21, 1969]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">God has created this whole universe, and what you can create? You can create, utmost, a city like New York. That's all. You can create. That's all right. In that sense you are god also. Part and parcel of God is also god, but small god. Just like your earring. That is gold. So that gold is not equal to the gold mine. That gold mine is different. Therefore the philosophy is, "simultaneously one and different." We are, every one of us, we are simultaneously one with God and different from God. One in quality. The quality of God is also in me. I am of the same quality. Just like a drop of sea water and the vast water, ocean. The quality analytical, chemical composition, is the same, but the quantity of component parts are different. This is called acintya-bhedābheda-tattva: "inconceivably, simultaneously one and different." The Māyāvāda philosophy, they say that "We are God. Everyone is God." But we say that "Yes, everyone is God, but not that God, the Supreme God." Everyone is American, but not that American like President Nixon. This common sense knowledge the Māyāvādī hasn't got. But they are puffed up: "Oh, I am the same. I am..." So 'ham: "I am the same." How you are the same? If you are the same, why you are fallen in this condition? They will say, "It is māyā. It is illusion." No. Why you are in illusion? If you are great—"God is great"—if you are that great, then why you are captured by illusion? Then illusion is great, not God is great. This commonsense philosophy they do not understand. Therefore my Guru Mahārāja used to say, "Poor fund of knowledge." Whenever he used to designate these Māyāvādī philosophers, he would say, "Poor fund of knowledge."</p>
<p>So this is the opportunity to... You are part and parcel of God. Don't try to become artificially like God. That is not possible. That will be simply waste of energy. This is māyā.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="section" sec_index="5" parent="compilation" text="Conversations and Morning Walks"><h2>Conversations and Morning Walks</h2>
</div>
<div id="1976_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="sub_section" sec_index="9" parent="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" text="1976 Conversations and Morning Walks"><h3>1976 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkJune81976LosAngeles_0" class="quote" parent="1976_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="117" link="Morning Walk -- June 8, 1976, Los Angeles" link_text="Morning Walk -- June 8, 1976, Los Angeles">
<div class="heading">Impersonalists are neophytes. My Guru Mahārāja used to say, "With poor fund of knowledge." Their knowledge is imperfect.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- June 8, 1976, Los Angeles|Morning Walk -- June 8, 1976, Los Angeles]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Rāmeśvara: Kṛṣṇa incarnates into every species of life. He can appear in any form.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. Otherwise, why the form came? Janmādy asya yataḥ ([[Vanisource:SB 1.1.1|SB 1.1.1]]). If we have to accept this sūtra, that everything emanates from Him, so unless Kṛṣṇa has got such similar form...?</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: That's one argument that always defeats the impersonalists. They can't explain how forms have come from something without form.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Impersonalists are neophytes. My Guru Mahārāja used to say, "With poor fund of knowledge." Their knowledge is imperfect.</p>
<p>Rāmeśvara: Yesterday you were telling a reporter that it is not possible for modern man to travel to the moon, but in your Second Canto you describe that in a previous age of Kali the men had created mechanical means for going to other planets, and they were creating havoc all over the universe, and Lord Buddha appeared to stop their nonsense.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>