View source for If I want to supply you something food, it must be fresh and palatable. Then you'll enjoy. But if it is rotten, decomposed, and if we supply you that foodstuff, what you will enjoy and what you will get benefit out of it?

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"if it is rotten, decomposed, and if we supply you that foodstuff, what you will enjoy and what you will get benefit out of it"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Sacchidanand}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|07Sep11}}
{{last|07Sep11}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=1|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:I Want (Prabhupada)]]
[[Category:Supply (verb)]]
[[Category:You]]
[[Category:Something]]
[[Category:Food]]
[[Category:Must Be]]
[[Category:Fresh]]
[[Category:Palatable]]
[[Category:Then]]
[[Category:You Will]]
[[Category:Enjoy]]
[[Category:It Is]]
[[Category:Rotten]]
[[Category:Decomposed]]
[[Category:If We (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:You]]
[[Category:That]]
[[Category:What]]
[[Category:You Will]]
[[Category:Get]]
[[Category:Benefit]]
[[Category:Out Of]]
[[Category:Prasadam]]
[[Category:Cooking]]
</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="RoomConversationDecember291976Bombay_0" class="quote" parent="1976_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="362" link="Room Conversation -- December 29, 1976, Bombay" link_text="Room Conversation -- December 29, 1976, Bombay">
<div class="heading">As soon as you deviate from the disciplic succession system then it will be lost. So what is the use of reading something which is already lost? If I want to supply you something food, it must be fresh and palatable. Then you'll enjoy. But if it is rotten, decomposed, and if we supply you that foodstuff, what you will enjoy and what you will get benefit out of it?
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation -- December 29, 1976, Bombay|Room Conversation -- December 29, 1976, Bombay]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: According to Bhagavad-gītā, if you don't follow the instruction of Bhagavad-gītā, you may be very learned scholar, whatever you write, it is lost. We follow that principle. As stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 4.2|BG 4.2]]). Find out this Fourth Chapter.</p>
<p>Guest (2): Have these books been reviewed in foreign papers?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: It is very widely read.</p>
<p>Gopāla Kṛṣṇa: For example, in the Fourth Chapter Lord Kṛṣṇa says,</p>
:evaṁ paramparā-prāptam
:imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ
:sa kāleneha mahatā
:yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa
:([[Vanisource:BG 4.2|BG 4.2]])
<p>Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa says that this Bhagavad-gītā has to be received by the disciplic succession. And sa kālena yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa. Because that disciplic succession is now broken, that yoga system is now lost. So all these interpreters, they are interpreting in their own way. Therefore it is lost. So there is no use of consulting this lost version.</p>
<p>Guest (3): So you just give it as it is.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That is... Therefore my Bhagavad-gītā is named Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. No interpretation.</p>
<p>Gopāla Kṛṣṇa: Each word is the original Sanskrit śloka, English transliteration, word by word meaning, so there's no room for manipulation. There's a translation and purport. Every book that Śrīla Prabhupāda has written has the same format and each book is illustrated.</p>
<p>Guest (3): Do you believe that the Gītā should be followed as it is or interpretation...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes, yes. If you read somebody's book, you must read the author's version. Why should you bring interpretation? This is... You have no business. If you want to say something of your philosophy, you can say, but why do you take Bhagavad-gītā and give your own interpretation? That is very bad.</p>
<p>Guest (3): But can you not apply your own philos...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Why? Why should you? If you take Bhagavad-gītā, you should speak what Bhagavad-gītā is saying. And interpretation is required when the thing is not understood clearly. There you get interpretation. Unnecessarily, why should you interpret Bhagavad-gītā? You have no right. Dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre samavetā yuyutsavaḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 1.1|BG 1.1]]). So anyone can understand there is a place Kurukṣetra still. Why should you interpret, "Kurukṣetra means this body and this and that," why? What is the necessity? Do you think there is necessity?</p>
<p>Guest (3): But just as...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no. First of all let us settle, that Bhagavad-gītā begins</p>
:dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre
:samavetā yuyutsavaḥ
:māmakāḥ pāṇḍavāś caiva
:kim akurvata sañjaya
:([[Vanisource:BG 1.1|BG 1.1]])
<p>So Mahābhārata is the history and there was Battle of Kurukṣetra. And that Kurukṣetra is mentioned there in the Bhagavad-gītā, and it is dharma-kṣetra since Vedic age. So the word used, dharma-kṣetre and kuru-kṣetre, it is completely understood. Why should you interpret unless you have got a motive. And why a sane man accepts that interpretation? If you have got a different philosophy you can write your own book. Why should you cheat others, taking Bhagavad-gītā and interpreting in your own way? This has spoiled the whole thing. And Kṛṣṇa says that as soon as you deviate from the disciplic succession system then it will be lost. So what is the use of reading something which is already lost? If I want to supply you something food, it must be fresh and palatable. Then you'll enjoy. But if it is rotten, decomposed, and if we supply you that foodstuff, what you will enjoy and what you will get benefit out of it?</p>
<p>Guest (2): Most Hindus, they are not properly able to understand Kṛṣṇa direct.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, I have already explained, that when you cannot understand, then you interpret. But when it is clearly understood why should you interpret?</p>
<p>Guest (2): How you explain the act of Kṛṣṇa taking away the saris of the gopīs?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: First of all, try to understand Bhagavad-gītā. Then go to the sari of gopī. You do not know what is Kṛṣṇa and you are going to His gopīs. This is another malinterpretation. You are studying Bhagavad-gītā, talk of that. In the Bhagavad-gītā the gopīs' saris are not mentioned. So why you are bringing gopīs' saris now? This is our fault.</p>
<p>Guest (2): Normally, you know our people...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no. This is our fault There is no mention of gopīs' saris. We are talking of Bhagavad-gītā, why you are bringing gopīs' saris?</p>
<p>Guest (2): Because that...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Again because. There is no subject matter there. You have no right to bring that. That is our fault. To bring a horse before a cart. We are talking of Bhagavad-gītā. There is no mention of Kṛṣṇa and gopīs' saris there. So let us talk. Finish that.</p>
<p>Guest (3): So you clearly said that interpretation is wrong.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Interpretation means lost.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>