View source for Big scholars would write a commentary on the Gita if he, if it says in the Gita that you must belong to the disciplic succession in order to be able to understand it

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"big scholars would, would write a commentary on the Gita if he, if it says in the Gita that you must belong to the disciplic succession in order to be able to understand it"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Mangalavati}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|24Mar11}}
{{last|24Mar11}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Big]]
[[Category:Scholars]]
[[Category:Would]]
[[Category:Write]]
[[Category:Commentaries]]
[[Category:Bhagavad-gita]]
[[Category:Say]]
[[Category:That]]
[[Category:You Must]]
[[Category:Belong To]]
[[Category:Disciplic Succession]]
[[Category:Order]]
[[Category:Able To Understand]]
[[Category:Prabhupada Responding to Comments]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="0" parent="Lectures" text="Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures"><h3>Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureonBG41andReviewNewYorkJuly131966_1" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="130" link="Lecture on BG 4.1 and Review -- New York, July 13, 1966" link_text="Lecture on BG 4.1 and Review -- New York, July 13, 1966">
<div class="heading">Yes. The trick is that because Gītā is a very reputed literature and Dr. Radhakrishnan, he's also a reputed scholar, so he thought that "I can..." Now, at the present moment, the things are going that everyone can give his own interpretation. That is the modern tendency, that everyone can give his own interpretation in any literature. So that, I mean to say, propensity, is also in Dr. Radhakrishnan, in Gandhi, and many other persons also. They are renowned persons of the world. So they have translated, and they have given their own opinion. But actually, so far Bhagavad-gītā is concerned, it is to be understood in the process as recommended by Kṛṣṇa. That is clear here. Otherwise, Kṛṣṇa would not have said that is lost. Five thousand years before, there were many scholars, but still, Kṛṣṇa said that "The Bhagavad-gītā..., the purport of the Bhagavad-gītā is now lost." Why it is lost? That means simply scholarship will not do.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 4.1 and Review -- New York, July 13, 1966|Lecture on BG 4.1 and Review -- New York, July 13, 1966]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Student: Why is it that he did not know this?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Eh?</p>
<p>Student: Doesn't he know this, that he is not in the disciplic succession? If this is so, why does he do this? Why does he make a translation?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: He wanted to show his scholarship, that's all. Scholarship is not only the asset by which we can understand Bhagavad-gītā. You may be a great scholar. That's all right. But that does not mean that you know the techniques... Mr. Goldsmith, will you wait. Will you come here.</p>
<p>Mr. Goldsmith: No, I got an appointment.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: You can sit down, but I have to talk with you...</p>
<p>Mr. Goldsmith: Yes, as a matter of fact, I wanted to make an announcement.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes.</p>
<p>Mr. Goldsmith: Do you want to make it now? Uh. (break)</p>
<p>Student: ...big scholars would, would write a commentary on the Gītā if he, if it says in the Gītā that you must belong to the disciplic succession in order to be able to understand it.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. The trick is that because Gītā is a very reputed literature and Dr. Radhakrishnan, he's also a reputed scholar, so he thought that "I can..." Now, at the present moment, the things are going that everyone can give his own interpretation. That is the modern tendency, that everyone can give his own interpretation in any literature. So that, I mean to say, propensity, is also in Dr. Radhakrishnan, in Gandhi, and many other persons also. They are renowned persons of the world. So they have translated, and they have given their own opinion. But actually, so far Bhagavad-gītā is concerned, it is to be understood in the process as recommended by Kṛṣṇa. That is clear here. Otherwise, Kṛṣṇa would not have said that is lost. Five thousand years before, there were many scholars, but still, Kṛṣṇa said that "The Bhagavad-gītā..., the purport of the Bhagavad-gītā is now lost." Why it is lost? That means simply scholarship will not do. One has to...</p>
<p>I'll give you one practical example how things are misinterpreted. Now, in India, there was a great dramatist. He was known as Mr. D.L. Raya. He wrote one book which is called Shahjahan. Now this Shahjahan, the theme of this book is that Aurangzeb, the son of Shahjahan, he was the second son of Shahjahan, Emperor Shahjahan, and he made a clique. He killed his elder brother, he killed his younger brother, and he arrested his own father in the fort, and he manipulated things in such a way, politician, and he became the king, emperor, king, emperor. Now, the whole activities of that book is the Aurangzeb's activities. So one friend of the author, D.L. Raya, he inquired from D.L. Raya that "Mr. Raya, you have written this book and this book is full of the activities of Aurangzeb. Now, why you have made the hero Shahjahan? Shahjahan is on the background. The old man is arrested in the fort of Agra. He is sitting there. Why you have named the Shahjahan?" Now, just see the purpose of the author. The author replied, "Yes, I have purposely named this book Shahjahan because actually the hero is Shahjahan." The friend inquired, "Why?" "Now, because the whole activities was being done by Aurangzeb, but the effect was being enjoyed and suffered by Shahjahan. Shahjahan was the father; he could not tolerate that his eldest son was killed, his youngest son was killed, and he was arrested. This was a political maneuver by Aurangzeb. But actually, the hero, the sufferer, was the Shahjahan, Emperor Shahjahan." Now, just see. The mind of the author was disclosed by the author. Nobody could interpret what was the intention.</p>
<p>Similarly, the intention of the Bhagavad-gītā is known by Kṛṣṇa, the author. So we have to understand the intention of the author. We cannot exact any meaning by our own scholarship which is different from the intention of the author. So anyone who is not in the disciplic succession, he cannot understand the intention of Kṛṣṇa, why this Bhagavad-gītā, why this yoga was imparted. You can... You are a good scholar. You can make a... something... Just like our president, Mr. Goldsmith, he knows that expert lawyers, by interpretation, they can do so many things. That is another thing. And in Calcutta, when I was in Calcutta, there was a rent tax passed by the government, and some expert lawyer changed the whole thing by his interpretation. The government had to reenact, you see, because the purpose was foiled by the interpretation of the lawyer. You see? So we are not out for foiling the purpose of Kṛṣṇa for which the Bhagavad-gītā is said. These persons, these unauthorized persons, they are practically trying to foil the purpose of Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, that is unauthorized. All right, Mr. Goldsmith, you can ask anything.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>