View source for God cannot (Converations)

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"God, cannot"|"Godhead cannot"|"Lord cannot"|"god can never"|"god can not"|"god cannot"|"godhead can never"|"lord can never"|"lord can not"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Visnu Murti|Serene}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|06Oct12}}
{{last|09Nov12}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=41|Let=0}}
{{total|41}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:God Cannot|1]]
[[Category:Compilations from Conversations]]
</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="1968_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="sub_section" sec_index="1" parent="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" text="1968 Conversations and Morning Walks"><h3>1968 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div id="InterviewMarch91968SanFrancisco_0" class="quote" parent="1968_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="2" link="Interview -- March 9, 1968, San Francisco" link_text="Interview -- March 9, 1968, San Francisco">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Interview -- March 9, 1968, San Francisco|Interview -- March 9, 1968, San Francisco]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Interviewer: Your Grace, what is the basis of your teachings?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: The basis of this teaching is Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. I have already published my book, this Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. This book is not new. It is very old book, at least five thousand years old, and it is very widely read all over the world. In your country I have seen there are about more than twenty-five different editions, English. Similarly, there is in German language, in England, in Japan. Everywhere, all over the country this book is very widely known, Bhagavad-gītā. In other words, this is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. The speaker of this book is Lord Kṛṣṇa, and the subject matter of this book is what is our relationship with God. Then, after understanding what is our relationship with God, we can work accordingly. Just like you are citizen of America, you have got a particular relationship with the state, and you are expected to work according to that relationship, and then you are good citizen, you are law-abiding citizen, and state gives your all protection, and you can improve to the highest perfectional stage. Similarly, if we know our relationship with God, whom we call Kṛṣṇa... Kṛṣṇa means all-attractive, and that is the perfect name of God. Unless God is all-attractive, he cannot be God. God cannot be Hindus' God or Christians' God or Jews' God or Mohammedans' God. No. God is for everyone, and He is all-attractive. He is fully opulent. He is fully in knowledge, perfect in knowledge, perfect in beauty, perfect in renunciation, perfect in fame, perfect in strength. In this way He is all attractive. So we must know our relationship with God. That is the first subject matter of this book, Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. Then if we understand our relationship, we can act accordingly. At the present moment we are, some of us declining God. "There is no God." Some of them have little conception of God, "God is great," but they do not try to understand what is actual relationship with God. They are not very serious.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="1973_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="sub_section" sec_index="6" parent="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" text="1973 Conversations and Morning Walks"><h3>1973 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithIndianGuestsJuly111973London_0" class="quote" parent="1973_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="37" link="Room Conversation with Indian Guests -- July 11, 1973, London" link_text="Room Conversation with Indian Guests -- July 11, 1973, London">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Indian Guests -- July 11, 1973, London|Room Conversation with Indian Guests -- July 11, 1973, London]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: No ignorant. Purposefully.</p>
<p>Guest (7): Purposeful, knowing that, knowingly that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord and Supreme Authority, even then, if they ignore it...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No. Knowingly means that every Indian knows that Kṛṣṇa is accepted as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. At least... The every Indian, at least Hindus, they perform Janmāṣṭamī, accepting Kṛṣṇa. But still, they will not accept Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality. They'll bring many other competitors. "Why Kṛṣṇa shall be...? I have got Durgā. I have got this, Śiva. I have got that. I have got that. I have got that." This is going on as Hinduism. So many gods. So many gods. Although the Vedic literature says, kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam ([[Vanisource:SB 1.3.28|SB 1.3.28]]). Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). In Bhagavad-gītā... Everyone reads Bhagavad-gītā. Bhagavad-gītā it says, Kṛṣṇa says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat: ([[Vanisource:BG 7.7 (1972)|BG 7.7]]) "There is no more superior than Me." Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ: ([[Vanisource:BG 10.8 (1972)|BG 10.8]]) "Everything is emanation from Me." Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja ([[Vanisource:BG 18.66 (1972)|BG 18.66]]). These things are there, but they'll not accept. Therefore they are offenders. Otherwise where is the difficulty? God is one. That is accepted. Eko brahma. God cannot be two. God is one. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām ekaḥ (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). One nitya, one eternal, one living being..., that is Supreme. We are living being. We are also nitya, eternal. But he is nityo nityānām. He is the chief of the nityas. He's the chief of the living entities. So that is chief. Kṛṣṇa personally says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat ([[Vanisource:BG 7.7 (1972)|BG 7.7]]). "There is no more superior living being than Me." So these things are there in the Vedas.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithTwoBuddhistMonksJuly121973London_1" class="quote" parent="1973_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="43" link="Room Conversation with Two Buddhist Monks -- July 12, 1973, London" link_text="Room Conversation with Two Buddhist Monks -- July 12, 1973, London">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Two Buddhist Monks -- July 12, 1973, London|Room Conversation with Two Buddhist Monks -- July 12, 1973, London]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Buddhist Monk (1): What happens when similar statements are made by other people that we have, they have their own god, who is, they made a unique system, and someone else says, "No, we have our own unique system." Someone else says, "No, all those three systems we do not agree with. We have got our unique system." What's going to happen in that thing?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That will... Phalena paricīyate. The system which is accepted more, that is successful. You can present so many system, but the test will be which system is more accepted by the people, by the mass, general people. That is successful. Phalena paricīyate. And if somebody says that "I have got my own god," and some other says, "I have got my own god," but this is a fact: God is one. You may call by different names. That is different thing. But God cannot be manufactured, that "You manufacture your god, I manufacture my god, he manufactures his god." That is not God.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithTwoBuddhistMonksJuly121973London_2" class="quote" parent="1973_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="43" link="Room Conversation with Two Buddhist Monks -- July 12, 1973, London" link_text="Room Conversation with Two Buddhist Monks -- July 12, 1973, London">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Two Buddhist Monks -- July 12, 1973, London|Room Conversation with Two Buddhist Monks -- July 12, 1973, London]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Buddhist Monk (1): That's exactly what is happening.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That, happening, that is another thing. We are talking of the principle. God is one. God cannot be two. Then there is no meaning of God. Now, if I present Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, if you disagree, then you'll have to present your god. Now, we have to consider who is actually God. Just like I talked with Professor Kotofsky in Moscow. So I asked him that "Where is the difference between your communist philosophy and our philosophy? The communist philosophy, they have created their own god, Lenin." Lenin is their God. We have seen in Moscow.</p>
<p>Buddhist Monk (1): Yes, I've been...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Every street, every a...</p>
<p>Buddhist Monk (1): Every street. I know, all over.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Lenin, Lenin's picture, Lenin's book.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithMalcolmJuly181973London_3" class="quote" parent="1973_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="46" link="Room Conversation with Malcolm -- July 18, 1973, London" link_text="Room Conversation with Malcolm -- July 18, 1973, London">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Malcolm -- July 18, 1973, London|Room Conversation with Malcolm -- July 18, 1973, London]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Education may be wrong or right, but science is always the fact. "Two plus two equal to four,"—that is equally good in the East and West, not that in the western countries, two plus two will be five. So similarly, any scientific knowledge, it does not depend on East and West understanding. It is good for everywhere. Similarly, to understand the science of God, it does not depend on the Western culture or Eastern culture. One must be serious to understand. Then it is equally available. Ahaituky apratihatā. These material impediments cannot check progress in the science of God, cannot. Apratihatā, without any checking. That we are experiencing, that Kṛṣṇa consciousness is not checked anywhere. We have got branches all over the world. Any country, there is no language difficulty. Wherever we chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, they join, "Hare Kṛṣṇa." There is no checking. Even Africa, they are also chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. Even the child will chant. They clap. You have seen that a small child is...? I think he..., about six months old. So there is no checking. For spiritual understanding there is no checking.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkDecember41973LosAngeles_4" class="quote" parent="1973_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="89" link="Morning Walk -- December 4, 1973, Los Angeles" link_text="Morning Walk -- December 4, 1973, Los Angeles">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- December 4, 1973, Los Angeles|Morning Walk -- December 4, 1973, Los Angeles]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Not to speak like mad man. That you are scientists, you are, "We shall solve all the questions." This nonsense thing should stop. They should come to God and understand what God says. Then their life is successful. God Himself is speaking in the Bhagavad-gītā. Just try to understand. This is not meant for the dogs and cats; this is meant for persons like Arjuna. Because Bhagavad-gītā was taught to Arjuna—for enlightened, ah, topmost class of men. They'll understand. Imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ. Evaṁ paramparā prāptam ([[Vanisource:BG 4.2 (1972)|BG 4.2]]). So be yourself amongst the topmost intelligent class of men and try to understand Bhagavad-gītā. Then you'll be happy.</p>
<p>Devotee (1): Prabhupāda, we should go this way.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. But if you want to remain unhappy by your whims, then what... God cannot help you. But you have got the intelli..., independence.</p>
<p>Hṛdayānanda: So Prabhupāda, if some people say, "Well, I have no free will," that means that they are actually lazy.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. You have got free will, but must utilize it properly. That is free will. Free will means to utilize it properly. That is free will.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkDecember181973LosAngeles_5" class="quote" parent="1973_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="104" link="Morning Walk -- December 18, 1973, Los Angeles" link_text="Morning Walk -- December 18, 1973, Los Angeles">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- December 18, 1973, Los Angeles|Morning Walk -- December 18, 1973, Los Angeles]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Girirāja: Their speaking power, that they are making their political speeches, that is also given by God.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes.</p>
<p>Girirāja: At any moment it can be taken away. So they are under control. But they will raise the point that "We have our concept of God and you have your concept of God."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No. God cannot be "your God" or "my God." God is one. You cannot say that. Just like you cannot say in the United States that "your concept of president, my concept of president." President is one. If you manufacture your concept of president, that means you do not know what is president. President of United States, he has got a status, constitution, that "This is the president." So you must know that. You cannot say, "I have my concept of president." That you cannot say.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkDecember211973LosAngeles_6" class="quote" parent="1973_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="107" link="Morning Walk -- December 21, 1973, Los Angeles" link_text="Morning Walk -- December 21, 1973, Los Angeles">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- December 21, 1973, Los Angeles|Morning Walk -- December 21, 1973, Los Angeles]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: But the one thing is, who is poor? Admitting. We admit, of course, that God is specially interested with the fallen or degraded. But first thing is that who is fallen? Who is poor? That is to be ascertained.</p>
<p>Guest (1) (Indian man): But there is one more thing. I don't think God could be so partial that He would...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, God cannot be partial.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="1974_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="sub_section" sec_index="7" parent="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" text="1974 Conversations and Morning Walks"><h3>1974 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithRichardWebsterchairmanSocietaFilosoficaItalianaMay241974Rome_0" class="quote" parent="1974_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="83" link="Room Conversation with Richard Webster, chairman, Societa Filosofica Italiana -- May 24, 1974, Rome" link_text="Room Conversation with Richard Webster, chairman, Societa Filosofica Italiana -- May 24, 1974, Rome">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Richard Webster, chairman, Societa Filosofica Italiana -- May 24, 1974, Rome|Room Conversation with Richard Webster, chairman, Societa Filosofica Italiana -- May 24, 1974, Rome]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: No, there is no sanction. These are all sinful activities.</p>
<p>Richard Webster: These are material activities.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. You have created all these things. God has not sanctioned. God has not sanctioned for running on a factory. Therefore as soon as you run on a factory, you simply commit sinful activities. In the Bhagavad-gītā we don't find any such sanction that you run on a factory, a slaughterhouse or the brothel and this business and brewery no such sanction. But you have done at your whims. Just like in the last war, Mr. Churchill sanctioned or requested everyone to go to the church. What is that "V"? Victory? Yes. And now... Before starting the war, Mr. Churchill and company did not take any sanction. And when they were in reverse condition, then, that time, they are going to the church for victory. So God cannot be made in such a way as order supplier. That is not possible. This is not prayer. You start war whimsically, and when you are in a precarious condition you go to the church and pray God, "Give us victory." What is this? This is commanding God. But you have to follow the commands of God. That is your position.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkJune111974Paris_1" class="quote" parent="1974_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="106" link="Morning Walk -- June 11, 1974, Paris" link_text="Morning Walk -- June 11, 1974, Paris">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- June 11, 1974, Paris|Morning Walk -- June 11, 1974, Paris]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Eleven. That's all. This is the age. Twelve to fifteen years, the boys become, by bad association, they become rotten. This hellish world is like that. They go to school and become demons.</p>
<p>Paramahaṁsa: Yesterday, in your lecture, you mentioned how in this age it's very difficult to remain chaste or free of...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes, but one who is Kṛṣṇa conscious, he's all right. Teach him Sanskrit and English and let him read our books. Then perfect knowledge. He doesn't require to go to school. And so far mathematics and history concerned, everyone knows. Two plus two equal to four. It doesn't require much education. Even illiterate man who has never gone to school, he can also count. Eh? "How much money you are giving me?" He doesn't want to be cheated. Hare Kṛṣṇa Hare Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa Hare Rāma... So the fact is God cannot be unknown. If you are actually serious to know God, God can be known. This is no argument, that "God cannot be known."</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithdevoteesaboutTwelfthCantoKaliyugaandConversationwithGuestJune151974Paris_2" class="quote" parent="1974_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="119" link="Room Conversation with devotees about Twelfth Canto Kali-yuga, and Conversation with Guest -- June 15, 1974, Paris" link_text="Room Conversation with devotees about Twelfth Canto Kali-yuga, and Conversation with Guest -- June 15, 1974, Paris">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with devotees about Twelfth Canto Kali-yuga, and Conversation with Guest -- June 15, 1974, Paris|Room Conversation with devotees about Twelfth Canto Kali-yuga, and Conversation with Guest -- June 15, 1974, Paris]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">American Man: I understand the light.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no, you understand. You say, "God is word." That means you understand God.</p>
<p>American Man: No.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Then why do you say, "God is word"?</p>
<p>American Man: I say God cannot be explained with words.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no, why do you say? If you do not know God, how do you say like that?</p>
<p>American Man: Because I...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: If you do not know the subject matter... You say that "God is not knowable," then how can you speak of God?</p>
<p>American Man: I do not speak of God.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithdevoteesaboutTwelfthCantoKaliyugaandConversationwithGuestJune151974Paris_3" class="quote" parent="1974_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="119" link="Room Conversation with devotees about Twelfth Canto Kali-yuga, and Conversation with Guest -- June 15, 1974, Paris" link_text="Room Conversation with devotees about Twelfth Canto Kali-yuga, and Conversation with Guest -- June 15, 1974, Paris">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with devotees about Twelfth Canto Kali-yuga, and Conversation with Guest -- June 15, 1974, Paris|Room Conversation with devotees about Twelfth Canto Kali-yuga, and Conversation with Guest -- June 15, 1974, Paris]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Do you say, "God is light"?</p>
<p>American Man: Yes.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Then you know God. Then why do you say, "God cannot be known"?</p>
<p>American Man: I say that "God" is a word.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: You say, "light" or "word." What is the... What is the definite...</p>
<p>American Man: I believe in what I feel right here, and that is God for me.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That means you feel sometimes something else. That is God.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ReportersInterviewJune291974Melbourne_4" class="quote" parent="1974_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="132" link="Reporters Interview -- June 29, 1974, Melbourne" link_text="Reporters Interview -- June 29, 1974, Melbourne">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Reporters Interview -- June 29, 1974, Melbourne|Reporters Interview -- June 29, 1974, Melbourne]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Guest (2): Your Divine Grace, since religion is one, do you think man will enter into a golden age in which he will accept one God?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: If they do not accept, they are foolish, if God is one. God cannot be two.</p>
<p>Guest (3): So, Śrīla Prabhupāda, is the purpose of human life to realize God?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes, that is the only purpose. Except this purpose, fulfilling, anything we are doing, that is animalism. As the dog is jumping we are also jumping like that. It is dog's dancing, that's all. What is the difference? A dog is thinking, "I am very strong dog. I am this." And another man—"I am Englishman. I am..." So what is the difference? Mentality is the same. To think of this body that "I am this body," that is required to the dog, to the man. When one understands that "I am not this body; I am spirit soul," that is humanity.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="sub_section" sec_index="8" parent="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" text="1975 Conversations and Morning Walks"><h3>1975 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithProfessorsFebruary191975Caracas_0" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="8" link="Room Conversation with Professors -- February 19, 1975, Caracas" link_text="Room Conversation with Professors -- February 19, 1975, Caracas">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Professors -- February 19, 1975, Caracas|Room Conversation with Professors -- February 19, 1975, Caracas]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Professor: I know that there is only one God.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: We say that God is one. Whether you accept it or not? Unless God is one, there cannot be God. God cannot be many. God means, in the dictionary it is said, "Supreme Being." The Supreme Being can be one. If there is competition of Supreme Being, then he is not Supreme Being. That is the philosophy. That is the philosophy. Then we have to find out who is that Supreme Being. You cannot say... You find somebody who has got little power. You cannot say, "Now here is God." The supreme power, that is God. Just like money, that is also one of the qualification of God. But money, He has got all the money. You may have got some money, some millions dollars. I may have got little more than that. But nobody can say, "I have got all the money." Or one can say that "I have got all the money," then He is God.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithReporterMarch91975London_1" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="25" link="Room Conversation with Reporter -- March 9, 1975, London" link_text="Room Conversation with Reporter -- March 9, 1975, London">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Reporter -- March 9, 1975, London|Room Conversation with Reporter -- March 9, 1975, London]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Reporter: And is there something that...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So if you have got some name which actually refers to God, then it is all right. But if you have got something, name, which refers to dog, then it is wrong.</p>
<p>Reporter: Is this something that your followers can be aware of constantly?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So we are recommending to chant the name of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa means all-attractive. So God is all-attractive. Otherwise how He can be God? God cannot be attractive for you and not for me. This is very accurate word. God has no name. That's a fact. But we coin His name according to His dealings. Just like we call God Yaśodā-nandana. So God came as the son of Yaśodā. Therefore we call Him Yaśodā-nandana, son of Yaśodā. So you can take it as name. Similarly, God's name the total summarization—"all-attractive." That is perfect name.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithYogaStudentMarch141975Iran_2" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="31" link="Room Conversation with Yoga Student -- March 14, 1975, Iran" link_text="Room Conversation with Yoga Student -- March 14, 1975, Iran">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Yoga Student -- March 14, 1975, Iran|Room Conversation with Yoga Student -- March 14, 1975, Iran]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Yes. India... Formerly your country was part of India, and you belong to the same culture. So far I understand, Iran means Āryan? So Āryan culture was practically all over the world. Āryan culture is based on God consciousness. So amongst the Āryans there is some conception of religion, either Christian religion or Mohammedan religion, Buddhist religion, Vedic religion, based on conception of God. So according to time, country, the ways of understanding may be little different, but the aim is God consciousness. That is Āryan civilization. So God is one; God cannot be two. So the features of God or angle of vision of God may be different. So they have been summarized in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. (Aside:) You can come forward. One feature of God is impersonal. Just like the sunshine. Sunshine is spreading all over the universe. It is impersonal. But the quality of the sunshine is heat and light. The heat and light means energy.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ConversationwithDevoteesonTheologyApril11975Mayapur_3" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="41" link="Conversation with Devotees on Theology -- April 1, 1975, Mayapur" link_text="Conversation with Devotees on Theology -- April 1, 1975, Mayapur">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Conversation with Devotees on Theology -- April 1, 1975, Mayapur|Conversation with Devotees on Theology -- April 1, 1975, Mayapur]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Yes, according to His activities, there are names.</p>
<p>Ravīndra-svarūpa: But all these twelve names, they still make that personality whom they are describing all-attractive. So that means...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. And not only that. When you have names, that means God is person. That must be admitted. God cannot be imperson. You may have twelve names or twelve thousand names, but when He has got name, He's a person. Now, our point is: "Who is that person?"</p>
<p>Trivikrama: Their point is... Well, one of their points is that if Christ was actually the son of God, why didn't he talk about Kṛṣṇa?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Hm?</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkMay121975Perth_4" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="67" link="Morning Walk -- May 12, 1975, Perth" link_text="Morning Walk -- May 12, 1975, Perth">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- May 12, 1975, Perth|Morning Walk -- May 12, 1975, Perth]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Then the other party will go to appeal. Where he is being judged, in the Supreme Court or lower court?</p>
<p>Amogha: I'm not sure. Actually, the judgment is whether or not he put a false picture in the newspaper of his brother with a girl. The older brother is claiming that... First he put a picture in the paper showing the younger Guru Maharaj-ji kissing an American girl. So Guru Maharaj-ji put another counter-photo showing his older brother with an American girl. So the suit is over whether this second picture is a real picture or is it artificially made. That's what the court will decide.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Oh. That is the suit.</p>
<p>Paramahaṁsa: Yes.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So in other words, the case is that God cannot kiss an American girl. (laughs) Is that the case? (laughter)</p>
<p>Amogha: Well, not in public.</p>
<p>Śrutakīrti: The mother's claim is that the Guru Maharaj-ji is not fit to be the leader now because he is...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Because he has kissed one American girl?</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithJustinMurphyGeographerMay141975Perth_5" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="71" link="Room Conversation with Justin Murphy (Geographer) -- May 14, 1975, Perth" link_text="Room Conversation with Justin Murphy (Geographer) -- May 14, 1975, Perth">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Justin Murphy (Geographer) -- May 14, 1975, Perth|Room Conversation with Justin Murphy (Geographer) -- May 14, 1975, Perth]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: So we are asking, "Chant the holy name of God." So if you are Roman Catholic...</p>
<p>Justin Murphy: Any man's God.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Any man's God. God is one. God cannot be two. But we are thinking...</p>
<p>Justin Murphy: Roman Catholics don't agree with you on that, do they? Roman Catholics have their own God.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no. No, no.</p>
<p>Justin Murphy: And this is one of the problems. It's nowhere near as simple as, I am sure, as you suggest, and I wish it were.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no. It is simple. It is simple.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithGanesadasasMotherandSisterMay141975Perth_6" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="72" link="Room Conversation with Ganesa dasa's Mother and Sister -- May 14, 1975, Perth" link_text="Room Conversation with Ganesa dasa's Mother and Sister -- May 14, 1975, Perth">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Ganesa dasa's Mother and Sister -- May 14, 1975, Perth|Room Conversation with Ganesa dasa's Mother and Sister -- May 14, 1975, Perth]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Well, there cannot be Hebrew religion, Christian religion, Hindu... Religion is one. Religion means God's rules. So God is one. So if you are this or that, you can manufacture so many ways, but God's ruling is one, that "You surrender to Me." That's all.</p>
<p>Mother: So we all believe in the one God.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. God is one. God cannot be two. Then He is not God. There cannot be two Gods. God is one. Otherwise how..., what is the meaning of God?</p>
<p>Mother: That's right.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So, find out this, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya ([[Vanisource:BG 7.7 (1972)|BG 7.7]]).</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithDrJohnMizeJune231975LosAngeles_7" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="108" link="Room Conversation with Dr. John Mize -- June 23, 1975, Los Angeles" link_text="Room Conversation with Dr. John Mize -- June 23, 1975, Los Angeles">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Dr. John Mize -- June 23, 1975, Los Angeles|Room Conversation with Dr. John Mize -- June 23, 1975, Los Angeles]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa? Yes, Kṛṣṇa may know because He is omniscient.</p>
<p>Dr. John Mize: Are more souls falling all the time?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Not all the time. But there is the tendency of fall down, not for all, but because there is independence... Everyone is not liking to misuse the independence. The same example: Just like a government constructing a city and constructs also prison house because the government knows that somebody will be criminal. So their shelter must be also constructed. It is very easy to understand. Not that cent percent population will be criminal, but government knows that some of them will be. Otherwise why they construct prison house also? One may say, "Where is the criminal? You are constructing..." Government knows, there will be criminal. So if the ordinary government can know, why God cannot know? Because there is tendency.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="GardenConversationwithProfessorsJune241975LosAngeles_8" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="109" link="Garden Conversation with Professors -- June 24, 1975, Los Angeles" link_text="Garden Conversation with Professors -- June 24, 1975, Los Angeles">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Garden Conversation with Professors -- June 24, 1975, Los Angeles|Garden Conversation with Professors -- June 24, 1975, Los Angeles]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Dr. Crossley: Well, just because you know he's your father, there's still more to know about him. There's more and more to understand.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: It is... Very simple answer is: when the mother certifies, "He is your father," that's all. You don't have to make research. That is futile. By research, you cannot understand who is your real father. You can understand your real father only by the certificate of your mother. That's all. Therefore our Vedic mantra says that religion and God cannot be manufactured by speculation. Acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṁs tarkena yojayet. Just like this example, father. Father was existing before my birth. So after my birth, with limited knowledge I make research who is my father—you will never find your father. But if you take the certificate of your mother, that is there.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="GardenConversationwithProfessorsJune241975LosAngeles_9" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="109" link="Garden Conversation with Professors -- June 24, 1975, Los Angeles" link_text="Garden Conversation with Professors -- June 24, 1975, Los Angeles">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Garden Conversation with Professors -- June 24, 1975, Los Angeles|Garden Conversation with Professors -- June 24, 1975, Los Angeles]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Dr. Pore: Do you believe that Christ said that Kṛṣṇa was his father?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: The name may be different. Just like in our countries we say this flower something. You say something, something. But the subject matter must be the same. Name is not... You can say in a different way, as you understand. But God is one. God cannot be two. You may give Him different names. That is different thing. But God is one. God cannot be two.</p>
<p>Dr. Wolfe: We may assume, Śrīla Prabhupāda, that God has innumerable names.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithwriterSandyNixonJuly131975Philadelphia_10" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="141" link="Room Conversation with writer, Sandy Nixon -- July 13, 1975, Philadelphia" link_text="Room Conversation with writer, Sandy Nixon -- July 13, 1975, Philadelphia">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with writer, Sandy Nixon -- July 13, 1975, Philadelphia|Room Conversation with writer, Sandy Nixon -- July 13, 1975, Philadelphia]]: </span><div class="text">Prabhupāda: We know God gives necessities to everyone, even one who has no religion. Just like cats and dogs. They have no religion. They do not know what is religion. But still, the cats and dogs are supplied with necessities of life. So why we should bother Kṛṣṇa, asking Him, "Give us our daily bread"? He is supplying already. Our business is how to love Him. That is religion. Dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavaḥ atra paramo nirmatsarāṇāṁ satāṁ vāstavaṁ vastu vedyam atra ([[Vanisource:SB 1.1.2|SB 1.1.2]]). Sa vai puṁsāṁ paro dharmaḥ yato bhaktir adhokṣaje: "That is first-class religion which teaches how to love God." And that love—not for any material motive: "God, You give me this. Then I will love." No. Ahaitukī. Love means without any personal profit. If I love God for some profit that is business. That is not love. Ahaituky apratihatā. And such love of God cannot be checked by any material cause. In any condition, one can learn how to love God. It is not conditional, that "I am poor man. How shall I love God? I have got so many things to do." No, it is not like that. Poor, rich or young or old, black or white, there is no impediment. If one wants to love God, he can love God.
</div>
</div>
<div id="ConversationwithProfessorHopkinsJuly131975Philadelphia_11" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="143" link="Conversation with Professor Hopkins -- July 13, 1975, Philadelphia" link_text="Conversation with Professor Hopkins -- July 13, 1975, Philadelphia">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Conversation with Professor Hopkins -- July 13, 1975, Philadelphia|Conversation with Professor Hopkins -- July 13, 1975, Philadelphia]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prof. Hopkins: Well, dogmatic, to call someone else dogmatic means to start with that you don't agree with what they are saying. If I agree with you and you...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, you have to agree. You open any passage of my book.</p>
<p>Prof. Hopkins: Well, some people would say to insist that Kṛṣṇa is the only way, that Kṛṣṇa consciousness is the only way...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no. The only thing that God is one, that you have to accept. God cannot be many. If God has got competitor, then he is not God.</p>
<p>Prof. Hopkins: Okay.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So if we don't admit Kṛṣṇa is the only God then you present who is only God. You say me. Either you have to learn from me or I have to learn from you.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkSeptember261975Ahmedabad_12" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="192" link="Morning Walk -- September 26, 1975, Ahmedabad" link_text="Morning Walk -- September 26, 1975, Ahmedabad">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- September 26, 1975, Ahmedabad|Morning Walk -- September 26, 1975, Ahmedabad]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: No, no, no. If creation of God can act like this, that it...</p>
<p>Indian man (3): Creation of God means some matter.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes, that's all right.</p>
<p>Indian man (3): Now, God has no matter.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That's all right. You see, God... If creation of God can act like this, that he is localized, at the same time he is sarva-vyāpaka and God cannot be localized and sarva-vyāpaka?</p>
<p>Indian man (3): How can God be localized?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Then God is under your rule?</p>
<p>Indian man (3): No, sir. Not under my rule. It is His rule that He...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no. We can see the creation of God. It is localized, at the same time sarva-vyāpaka. And God, according to him, cannot be localized. He is simply sarva-vyāpaka. Why? Why? The creator can create something that he is localized, at the same time sarva-vyāpaka, and the creator cannot be localized and at the same time sarva-vyāpaka?</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkSeptember261975Ahmedabad_13" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="192" link="Morning Walk -- September 26, 1975, Ahmedabad" link_text="Morning Walk -- September 26, 1975, Ahmedabad">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- September 26, 1975, Ahmedabad|Morning Walk -- September 26, 1975, Ahmedabad]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Indian man (3): Yes, I at least understand what is God.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: You want to save yourself.</p>
<p>Indian man (2): His definition is different, absolutely. According to his...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, God cannot be defined differently. God is one.</p>
<p>Indian man (2): But can God be defined? We haven't got a definition of God. I challenge you.</p>
<p>Indian man (3): (Hindi)</p>
<p>Indian man (2): You cannot. Intellectually, you cannot analyse things.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, intellectual level you can. That is definition of God. Ṣaḍ-aiśvarya-pūrṇa. Aiśvaryasya samāgrasya... Parāśara Muni has given. That is God just like you try to understand one thing. We have got some experience that there is a rich man, but that rich man cannot say that "I am the richest man in the world." That he cannot say. So this richness is one opulence, but you cannot find anyone who can say that "I am the richest man." That is not possible. But if you find somebody who can say like that, and if he proves, then he is God. Aiśvaryasya samāgrasya. That Kṛṣṇa says, bhoktāraṁ yajña-tapasāṁ sarva-loka-maheśvaram: ([[Vanisource:BG 5.29 (1972)|BG 5.29]]) "I am the proprietor of everything," that Kṛṣṇa says. And He proved when He was present. He proved it. So therefore He is God.</p>
</div>
</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="MorningWalkMay31976Fiji_0" class="quote" parent="1976_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="93" link="Morning Walk -- May 3, 1976, Fiji" link_text="Morning Walk -- May 3, 1976, Fiji">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- May 3, 1976, Fiji|Morning Walk -- May 3, 1976, Fiji]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: But the innocent souls, they're not surrendered to Kṛṣṇa?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: He'll surrender. You teach him. Because he's innocent, he does not know. But you preach, he will become. That is our duty.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: So persons who we preach to and give the message of Kṛṣṇa consciousness to...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Then let.... If anyone hears very attentively, that means he's innocent. He should be given attention. And one who says, "Why Kṛṣṇa Bhagavān? Ramakrishna Bhagavān." Oh, that's rascal, immediately. Take him, rascal. That's all. Finished. Created God. Huh? This Ramakrishna Mission has created God. God cannot be created. God is God. This is anthropomorphism. Is it not?</p>
<p>Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: Right. Yes.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Zoomorphism.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkMay31976Fiji_1" class="quote" parent="1976_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="93" link="Morning Walk -- May 3, 1976, Fiji" link_text="Morning Walk -- May 3, 1976, Fiji">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- May 3, 1976, Fiji|Morning Walk -- May 3, 1976, Fiji]]: </span><div class="text">Prabhupāda: Just like Dhruva Mahārāja. He'll say, svāmin kṛtārtho 'smi varam..., "Now I'm satisfied. I don't want anything." That is perfect stage. But even one goes to God and prays for something, he's called pious. Because he has approached God. And because he has approached God and he's asking God, there is some transaction in this way, by association of God, he'll be purified. One day he will say, svāmin kṛtārtho 'smi varaṁ na yāce ([[Vanisource:CC Madhya 22.42|CC Madhya 22.42]]), "Now, I am fully satisfied. I don't want anything. I don't trouble You. Let me serve You." (break) Why the devotee will ask from God? Kṛṣṇa says, yoga-kṣemaṁ vahāmy aham, teṣāṁ nityābhiyuktānām ([[Vanisource:BG 9.22 (1972)|BG 9.22]]). He says the responsibility, "I shall supply everything, whatever you want." So why the devotee will ask? If the child knows, "My father is there, my mother is...," why he shall ask? The father will take care whatever he wants. It is unfaithful that "God cannot supply my necessities. I'll have to ask Him." He knows everything. Why shall I ask Him? That is pure knowledge.
</div>
</div>
<div id="AnswerstoaQuestionnairefromBhavansJournalJune281976Vrndavana_2" class="quote" parent="1976_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="169" link="Answers to a Questionnaire from Bhavan's Journal -- June 28, 1976, Vrndavana" link_text="Answers to a Questionnaire from Bhavan's Journal -- June 28, 1976, Vrndavana">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Answers to a Questionnaire from Bhavan's Journal -- June 28, 1976, Vrndavana|Answers to a Questionnaire from Bhavan's Journal -- June 28, 1976, Vrndavana]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: Next question, Śrīla Prabhupāda. Question nineteen. "Do you envisage or envision a different role for Hinduism in the Western countries where the influence of other great religions has been felt for centuries?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No. There is no different role. God is one. God cannot be duplicate. As it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā that mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya ([[Vanisource:BG 7.7 (1972)|BG 7.7]]). "There is no more superior authority than Me." That is God. Now people is to understand that Kṛṣṇa is God. There is no different role. The role is the same. Five thousand years Kṛṣṇa said that "I am the supreme authority. There is no more superior authority than Me." Still He is so. So we are simply attempting to introduce Kṛṣṇa. Nobody attempted. Although five thousand years past, nobody attempted to introduce the supreme authority Kṛṣṇa. We are just trying to introduce following the orders of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. He, five hundred years appeared. He is Kṛṣṇa. He wanted that this Kṛṣṇa consciousness should be spread all over the world.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkandRoomConversationAugust91976Tehran_3" class="quote" parent="1976_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="252" link="Morning Walk and Room Conversation -- August 9, 1976, Tehran" link_text="Morning Walk and Room Conversation -- August 9, 1976, Tehran">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk and Room Conversation -- August 9, 1976, Tehran|Morning Walk and Room Conversation -- August 9, 1976, Tehran]]: </span><div class="text">Prabhupāda: A father creates family for his own enjoyment. Wife, children, he wants enjoyment—society, family. Therefore he takes the risk of maintaining so many people. He feels some enjoyment, therefore he takes the risk. Otherwise he has no business. Why should he create unnecessary trouble to maintain a family, maintain wife, children and society? The principle is if you create something, it is created for your personal enjoyment. But I can allow my sons, my wife, my family members to enjoy with me. But the basic principle is for my enjoyment. This is natural. Where do you get this philosophy that...? What you said? That God cannot enjoy.
Nava-yauvana: Yes, He doesn't need to enjoy.
Prabhupāda: Why?
Nava-yauvana: They say because He's not like human being.
Prabhupāda: Because He's not like a human being, therefore He cannot enjoy. There are so many animals, they are not like human beings. Why they enjoy sex? Can you forbid him that "You are not like human being, you cannot enjoy"? This is all nonsense philosophy. Because they do not know what is God, what He is, what is His position, relationship, therefore these nonsense things are said.
</div>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkandRoomConversationAugust91976Tehran_4" class="quote" parent="1976_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="252" link="Morning Walk and Room Conversation -- August 9, 1976, Tehran" link_text="Morning Walk and Room Conversation -- August 9, 1976, Tehran">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk and Room Conversation -- August 9, 1976, Tehran|Morning Walk and Room Conversation -- August 9, 1976, Tehran]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Parivrājakācārya: They think that God is their servant.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Then there is no more God. God cannot be servant of anyone. God is master. As soon as He becomes servant, He's no more God. Then you are God. Then you do not know what is the meaning of God. Therefore you are rascal. You do not know the meaning of God and you are trying to explain God. Therefore you are a rascal. The difficulty is at the present moment, rascals are leading the human society. No sane man, only rascals. Their philosophy, their science, their politics, their sociology, because they are guided by the rascals, everything is bad.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkAugust121976Tehran_5" class="quote" parent="1976_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="259" link="Morning Walk -- August 12, 1976, Tehran" link_text="Morning Walk -- August 12, 1976, Tehran">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- August 12, 1976, Tehran|Morning Walk -- August 12, 1976, Tehran]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Ātreya Ṛṣi: That is true, but also we could have paramparā go all the way to Kṛṣṇa Himself.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes, paramparā is coming from Kṛṣṇa.</p>
<p>Nava-yauvana: In Islam they say that God cannot come to this earth.</p>
<p>Ātreya Ṛṣi: God would not come to this earth.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: God cannot speak? God cannot come. A very big man, he can come, but He cannot speak?</p>
<p>Ātreya Ṛṣi: They agree. He can speak and He can send representatives.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Because He has spoken to Muhammad, and Muhammad has come, he is speaking the same thing. So recently... There is no need of God's coming. If Muhammad is speaking on behalf of God, then that is all right. There is no need of God's coming. This is paramparā.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="1977_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="sub_section" sec_index="10" parent="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" text="1977 Conversations and Morning Walks"><h3>1977 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationJanuary81977Bombay_0" class="quote" parent="1977_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="16" link="Room Conversation -- January 8, 1977, Bombay" link_text="Room Conversation -- January 8, 1977, Bombay">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation -- January 8, 1977, Bombay|Room Conversation -- January 8, 1977, Bombay]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: So this starvation point, we take it as blessing. People generally question that "How God is unfavorable to somebody and favorable to...?" That is foolishness. God is good, but that we do not know. Because we are less intelligent, we think that "One man is in starvation; therefore God is not good." That is our fault. We are not good. We do not understand God. But a Vaiṣṇava says, "Oh, it is blessing." And if he takes like that, then the result is mukti-pade sa dayā-bhāk. His mukti is guaranteed. In any circumstances, if somebody takes God as good, then his mukti is guaranteed. And if he blames God—"Oh, He has put me into starvation"—then he has to suffer. This is the common argument sometimes we meet, "Oh, why God has made somebody so rich and somebody some poor? He is unjust." That is foolishness. God cannot be... He's just, always just. That is God. So unless we have got that firm conviction, then we cannot become devotee.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ConversationonTraintoAllahabadJanuary111977India_1" class="quote" parent="1977_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="27" link="Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India" link_text="Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India|Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Hari-śauri: They have no idea of actually who is God or what is God. They don't know...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. They make God under his condition. That is not God. God cannot be under your condition.</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: God cannot have sixteen thousand wives. God cannot appear at all.</p>
<p>Rāmeśvara: They say that if God had all of these things, then He would have revealed them in the Bible.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Because you cannot, rascal, manage that. That is the difference between him and God. Kṛṣṇa had sixteen thousand wives and sixteen thousand palaces. You cannot maintain one apartment.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ConversationonTraintoAllahabadJanuary111977India_2" class="quote" parent="1977_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="27" link="Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India" link_text="Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India|Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: "This is the Bible," and "This is the Bhagavad-gītā."</p>
<p>Rāmeśvara: "But history documents that Kṛṣṇa came to earth as a man."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. So do you mean to say God cannot come as man? And Jehovah came as God?</p>
<p>Rāmeśvara: "But in the Bible God revealed a certain aspect of Himself, and the personality of Kṛṣṇa seems to be very different from this."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: In which way different?</p>
<p>Rāmeśvara: "Because He had all these affairs with the gopīs. He was very different."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: God will be just like...</p>
<p>Rāmeśvara: "And He was a king with sixteen thousand wives. That seems to be very different from the God that is described in the Bible."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So if God... What is described in the Bible, God symptom, that he has no power to enjoy sixteen thousand wives? He's limited?</p>
<p>Rāmeśvara: No. He's unlimited.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Then, sixteen thousand, sixteen millions He can have. Why, if He's unlimited? What is wrong there? If He's unlimited, why sixteen thousand? If He marries sixteen million, sixteen billion, still, it is not sufficient. Otherwise there is no meaning of unlimited. Why you restrict God to sixteen or one? God is under your restriction, and He's still unlimited? That means you do not know what is God. You do not know what is God. You are mistaken.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ConversationonTraintoAllahabadJanuary111977India_3" class="quote" parent="1977_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="27" link="Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India" link_text="Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India|Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Rāmeśvara: So, actually, their arguments are not very... So therefore it is simply a plan of Kṛṣṇa to help give us some prominence, make us more well known.</p>
<p>Jagadīśa: Give us a chance to preach.</p>
<p>Rāmeśvara: Because their arguments have no substance.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Defeat them. "God cannot come as fish." "Why? What kind of God He is? He likes, He can do. That is God."</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationJanuary211977Bhuvanesvara_4" class="quote" parent="1977_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="38" link="Room Conversation -- January 21, 1977, Bhuvanesvara" link_text="Room Conversation -- January 21, 1977, Bhuvanesvara">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation -- January 21, 1977, Bhuvanesvara|Room Conversation -- January 21, 1977, Bhuvanesvara]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Ten children each. You cannot say that "He was impotent; therefore He could not make the gopīs pregnant." That you cannot say, because when He married, He begot ten children, each wife, sixteen thousand wives, and sixteen thousand, ten.</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: 160,000.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: And their children, their children. The Yadu-vaṁśa was a very big family, one crore. So you cannot say that "He was impotent." And God cannot be impotent. But why they were not pregnant? Hm?</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: 'Cause He never had...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: And why there was no abortion? Contraceptive pills? You dance. Immediately there is sex, and there are so many sinful activities after sex. Mūḍho nābhijānāti mām ebhyaḥ param avyayam. Mūḍhas, how they can understand Kṛṣṇa? Tribhir guṇamāyāir bhavair. Find out this verse. Nāhaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya yoga-māyā-samāvṛtaḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 7.25 (1972)|BG 7.25]]). One boy was asking, "What is God?" I chastised him like anything, that "You are born in India. You're asking what is God? How degraded you have become." First of all I answered like this. "India, where Lord Rāmacandra, appeared, Lord Kṛṣṇa appeared, Cai..., and you are Indian, you are asking what is God. How much degraded you Indians have become. Just imagine first of all."</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationJanuary211977Bhuvanesvara_5" class="quote" parent="1977_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="38" link="Room Conversation -- January 21, 1977, Bhuvanesvara" link_text="Room Conversation -- January 21, 1977, Bhuvanesvara">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation -- January 21, 1977, Bhuvanesvara|Room Conversation -- January 21, 1977, Bhuvanesvara]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Rāmeśvara: Of course, nowadays that is an accident, not planned. If you ask a father, "Why you have made your son?" he will say, "By mistake. I did not want him. I was simply wanting sex."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: But God cannot make mistake. Then He becomes imper... He cannot be good. And not all fathers... According to Vedic civilization, the father creates the son purposefully with some ceremony, garbhādāna ceremony. It is not secret job. Putrethi kriyate bharyā: "One is married to create a good son." That is the purpose. And Bhagavad-gītā says, dharmāviruddha. "Aviruddha, which is not against religion, that kind of lust I am." So how it can be accident? If there is garbhādāna ceremony and son is essential, then how it can be accident?</p>
<p>Gargamuni: Even in the big, rich families, when they want son they perform some pūjā.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationJanuary271977Bhuvanesvara_6" class="quote" parent="1977_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="56" link="Room Conversation -- January 27, 1977, Bhuvanesvara" link_text="Room Conversation -- January 27, 1977, Bhuvanesvara">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation -- January 27, 1977, Bhuvanesvara|Room Conversation -- January 27, 1977, Bhuvanesvara]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Guest (7): I may not have expressed myself correctly. What I meant was...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no, government means who is controlling the activities of the citizens. That's all. That is everywhere the same. There may be little difference in the formula, but the principle is the same, that there is a controller and citizens following that controlling rules. Then it is good government. So similarly, the supreme government—there is God, and He has His rules and regulations—if you follow, then you are religious. And God cannot be two. God is one. Otherwise how He is God? If God has competition, then He's not God.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationJanuary301977Bhuvanesvara_7" class="quote" parent="1977_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="67" link="Room Conversation -- January 30, 1977, Bhuvanesvara" link_text="Room Conversation -- January 30, 1977, Bhuvanesvara">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation -- January 30, 1977, Bhuvanesvara|Room Conversation -- January 30, 1977, Bhuvanesvara]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Yes. Without being (sic:) mercied by the God, how one can become prophet? Then he's ordinary man.</p>
<p>Pṛthu-putra: But they say he was an ordinary man like us up to the time that God revealed Himself to him.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Now, suppose Muhammad has heard God. He is prophet. So whatever he is speaking about his experience, you are accepting. Similarly, if somebody has seen Him, if he says that "God is like this," why you should not accept? In this way talk. God can be seen as God can be heard. You cannot say that God cannot be seen. Why?</p>
<p>Pṛthu-putra: No, what they say is that He Himself doesn't come down here. He can be seen, but He doesn't come down. That is their point.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>