View source for The body is subjected to birth, death. The body is forgetful. The body is suffering old age. So this is not blissful body. But Krsna's body - just opposite. His body is blissful, full of knowledge, and eternal. So how can you compare with Krsna?

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"The body is subjected to birth, death. The body is forgetful. The body is suffering old age. So this is not blissful body. But Krsna's body"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Krsnadas}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|11Jul12}}
{{last|11Jul12}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:body]]
[[Category:Subjected to Birth and Death]]
[[Category:body]]
[[Category:Forgetfulness]]
[[Category:suffering]]
[[Category:Old Age]]
[[Category:this Is]]
[[Category:is Not]]
[[Category:Blissful]]
[[Category:but]]
[[Category:Body Of Krsna]]
[[Category:just]]
[[Category:Opposite]]
[[Category:His (Krsna)]]
[[Category:Full Knowledge]]
[[Category:Eternity, Knowledge and Bliss]]
[[Category:How Can]]
[[Category:you]]
[[Category:Compared With...]]
[[Category:With Krsna]]
</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="LectureonBG416LosAngelesJanuary31969_0" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="135" link="Lecture on BG 4.1-6 -- Los Angeles, January 3, 1969" link_text="Lecture on BG 4.1-6 -- Los Angeles, January 3, 1969">
<div class="heading">We are not fully aware of everything; neither our body is eternal; neither we are blissful. This body is the source of so many diseases. The body is subjected to birth, death. The body is forgetful. The body is suffering old age. So this is not blissful body. But Kṛṣṇa's body—just opposite. His body is blissful, full of knowledge, and eternal. So how can you compare with Kṛṣṇa? It is not possible.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 4.1-6 -- Los Angeles, January 3, 1969|Lecture on BG 4.1-6 -- Los Angeles, January 3, 1969]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Madhudviṣa: "The Lord remembers because He does not change His sac-cid-ānanda body. He is advaita."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Sac-cid-ānanda body. Sat means eternal. Cit means full of knowledge. Sat, cit, ānanda. Ānanda means blissful. That is His body. Our body is just the opposite. It is not sat; it is not eternal. It is temporary. And it is not full of knowledge. We are full of ignorance. We do not know what is there beyond this wall. Therefore it is full of ignorance. We are proud of our eyes. If the electricity is immediately gone, we cannot see. So we see, we act, under some conditions offered by the material nature. So we are not fully aware of everything; neither our body is eternal; neither we are blissful. This body is the source of so many diseases. The body is subjected to birth, death. The body is forgetful. The body is suffering old age. So this is not blissful body. But Kṛṣṇa's body—just opposite. His body is blissful, full of knowledge, and eternal. So how can you compare with Kṛṣṇa? It is not possible. Go on.</p>
<p>Madhudviṣa: "He is advaita, which means there is no distinction between His body and Himself. Everything is spirit, whereas the conditioned soul is different from His material body. And because the Lord is identical in His body and self, His position is always different from the ordinary living entities, even when He descends to the material platform. The demons cannot adjust themselves to this transcendental nature of the Lord, as the Lord explains in the following verse."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Therefore, if we try to understand God by our limited knowledge, it will be a failure. We have to understand God from God. Then that will be perfect knowledge. So this Bhagavad-gītā is the science of God where God is speaking about Himself. And it is accepted by all great scholars, philosophers, and, I mean to say, religionists, everyone. Go on.</p>
<p>Madhudviṣa: "Although I am unborn and My transcendental body never deteriorates, and although I am the Lord of all sentient beings, I still appear in every millennium in My original transcendental form."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes.</p>
<p>Madhudviṣa: Purport: "The Lord has spoken about the peculiarity of this verse. Although He may appear like an ordinary person, He remembers everything of His many, many past births, whereas a common man cannot remember what he has done even a few hours before. If somebody is asked what he did exactly at the same time one day earlier, it would be very difficult for him to answer immediately. He would have to dredge his memory to recall what he was doing. And yet men often dare to claim to be God or Kṛṣṇa. One should not be misled by such meaningless claims. Then again, the Lord explains His prakṛti or His form. Prakṛti means nature as well as svarūpa, or one's own form. The Lord says that He appears in His own body. He does not change His body as the common living entity does from one to another. The conditioned soul may have one kind of body in the present birth, but he has a different one in the next birth. In the material world the living entity transmigrates in this way. The Lord, however, does not do so. Whenever He appears, He does so in the same original body by His internal potency. In other words, Kṛṣṇa appears in this material world in His original eternal form with two hands and holding a flute."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. In your Bible also it is said that "Man is made after God," not that God is made after man. The atheist class, they say that "You have created a God according to your own feature," but no scripture says like that. God has eternal two hands, two legs. So man... God is so kind that man is also made according to His form. That is a special facility given to man, not that somebody imagines God, "Because man has two hands, therefore God has two hands." No. That is not a fact. Here it is explained nicely. Go on.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>