View source for Christ consciousness and Krsna consciousness, the words are so similar. Please combine the words, explain how the words came to us

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"Christ consciousness and Krsna consciousness, the words are so similar. Please combine the words, explain how the words came to us"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Mangalavati}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|29Apr11}}
{{last|29Apr11}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Christ - Redirect to Jesus]]
[[Category:Krsna Consciousness]]
[[Category:Words]]
[[Category:Are]]
[[Category:Similar]]
[[Category:Please (Request)]]
[[Category:Combine]]
[[Category:Explain]]
[[Category:How]]
[[Category:Came]]
[[Category:Questions asked to Srila Prabhupada]]
[[Category:Questions asked to SP... 1968]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="General_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="11" parent="Lectures" text="General Lectures"><h3>General Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureSeattleOctober181968_0" class="quote" parent="General_Lectures" book="Lec" index="25" link="Lecture -- Seattle, October 18, 1968" link_text="Lecture -- Seattle, October 18, 1968">
<div class="heading">That I've explained many times: a pocket dictionary and international dictionary. You cannot say that pocket dictionary is no dictionary, but it is meant for a certain class of student. And international dictionary is meant for a certain class of student. They are all student. Was Christ... What was spoken by Christ, that is also God consciousness, but that was meant for a certain class of men. And what class of men they were? They're not even perfectly civilized. Because Christ was explaining God consciousness, that was his fault, and they crucified him. What class of men they were? Judge.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture -- Seattle, October 18, 1968|Lecture -- Seattle, October 18, 1968]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Jāhnavā: Christ consciousness and Kṛṣṇa consciousness, the words are so similar. Please combine the words, explain how the words came to us.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That I've explained many times: a pocket dictionary and international dictionary. You cannot say that pocket dictionary is no dictionary, but it is meant for a certain class of student. And international dictionary is meant for a certain class of student. They are all student. Was Christ... What was spoken by Christ, that is also God consciousness, but that was meant for a certain class of men. And what class of men they were? They're not even perfectly civilized. Because Christ was explaining God consciousness, that was his fault, and they crucified him. What class of men they were? Judge. His only fault was that he was explaining God, and they crucified him. The reward was crucifixion. So what kind of class of men they were? The status of that society, just try to understand. Therefore what spoke..., what was spoken by Lord Jesus Christ, for them, that was sufficient. But when Bhagavad-gītā is spoken to a person like Arjuna, that is different thing. So we have to speak according to the time, according to the circumstances, according to the audience. Don't you see that here only a few persons are attending? Why? They cannot understand this Kṛṣṇa science, Kṛṣṇa consciousness. It is not meant for all classes of men. It is highest standard of God consciousness. Love. Love of God. So there is also teachings of love of God, undoubtedly. That is the difference. The same thing. Always try to understand. The small pocket dictionary for students while in the primary stage, and international dictionary for higher students, postgraduate students—the both of them are dictionaries. But it is meant for somebody, it is meant for somebody. And the test is phalena paricīyate. Phalena paricīyate, you have to understand. Suppose you are traveling in a forest. So many trees are there. But you cannot understand what is this tree, what is that. But as soon as you see the flower, "Oh, here is apple. Oh, this is apple tree." Just like the other day you were telling me, you never saw apple tree? Yes. Now, as soon as you saw the apple, you understood, "This is apple tree. Oh!" The test of any scripture is how one is developing love of God. Phalena paricīyate. If you find that following some religious principles you are developing your love of God, then it is perfect. It doesn't matter whether it is Bible or Koran or Bhagavad-gītā. It doesn't matter. We have to see what is the fruit. If the fruit is that people are developing love of Godhead, then it is perfect. Don't try to understand whether this is good, this is good, this is bad, this is... No. Try to understand by the result. Just like the same way: if you see the fruit, then it is first class. So it doesn't matter whether it is Bible or Gītā. If you can develop love of Godhead by reading Bible, it is first class, and if you can develop love of Godhead by Bhagavad-gītā, it is first class. And if you do not, then either it is Bible or the Koran or Bhagavad-gītā, it has no effect for you. So it is up to you. Not by comparison, but by your own activities. If you actually follow the instruction given by Lord Jesus Christ, you will also develop love of Godhead. There is no doubt. Similarly, if you follow the instruction of Kṛṣṇa, you will also develop. So it is up to you. You try to follow. If you do not follow, simply try to make a comparative study "This is good" or "This is bad," "This is bad" or "This is good," that is called śrama eva hi kevalam ([[Vanisource:SB 1.2.8|SB 1.2.8]])—simply laboring. Why comparative study? Just see how much you are developing love of Godhead, that's all. Phalena paricīyate. "Whether it is apple is there, that's all right; never mind what is this tree. I'm concerned with the apple." Yes.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>