God is zero - Revision history

SharmisthaK at 18:13, 8 May 2020

2020-05-08T18:13:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:13, 8 May 2020
Line 3:		Line 3:
	{{terms\|"God is zero"}}		{{terms\|"God is zero"}}
	{{notes\|}}		{{notes\|}}
	{{compiler\|MadhuGopaldas}}		{{compiler\|MadhuGopaldas\|Labangalatika}}
	{{complete\|ALL}}		{{complete\|ALL}}
	{{first\|29Jan10}}		{{first\|29Jan10}}
	{{last\|~~29Jan10~~}}		{{last\|04Nov11}}
	{{totals_by_section\|BG=0\|SB=0\|CC=0\|OB=0\|Lec=5\|Con=2\|Let=0}}		{{totals_by_section\|BG=0\|SB=0\|CC=0\|OB=0\|Lec=5\|Con=2\|Let=0}}
	{{total\|7}}		{{total\|7}}
	{{toc right}}		{{toc right}}
	[[Category:God]]		[[Category:God Is Zero]]
	[[Category:Zero]]		[[Category:Zero\|2]]
	</div>		</div>
	<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>		<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
Line 18:		Line 18:
	</div>		</div>
	<div id="LectureonBG61315LosAngelesFebruary161969_0" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="214" link="Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969" link_text="Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969">		<div id="LectureonBG61315LosAngelesFebruary161969_0" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="214" link="Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969" link_text="Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969">
	<div class="heading">If God is zero, then how from zero so many, I mean to say, figures coming out? ~~God is zero.~~		<div class="heading">It is said, "My dear Lord, a person who has received a little favor from You, he can understand You very quickly. And others who are trying to understand You by the ascending process, they may go on speculating for millions of years, they will never understand." They will never understand. They will come to the point of frustration and confusion. "Oh, God is zero." That's all, finished. If God is zero, then how from zero so many, I mean to say, figures coming out?
	</div>		</div>
	<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969\|Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">One process is to understand by the ascending process. And another process is the descending process. Just like in darkness, if you try to understand what is sun by ascending process, by flying your very powerful airplane or sputniks, just go round over the sky, you cannot see. But the descending process, when the sun rises, you understand immediately. Ascending process—my endeavor, what is called inductive process. Inductive process. Just like my father says that man is mortal. I accept it. Now if you want to study whether man is mortal, you study, you see many thousands of men, whether he is immortal or mortal. That will take so much time. But if you take the knowledge from the superior authority, that man is mortal, your knowledge is complete.</p>		<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969\|Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">One process is to understand by the ascending process. And another process is the descending process. Just like in darkness, if you try to understand what is sun by ascending process, by flying your very powerful airplane or sputniks, just go round over the sky, you cannot see. But the descending process, when the sun rises, you understand immediately. Ascending process—my endeavor, what is called inductive process. Inductive process. Just like my father says that man is mortal. I accept it. Now if you want to study whether man is mortal, you study, you see many thousands of men, whether he is immortal or mortal. That will take so much time. But if you take the knowledge from the superior authority, that man is mortal, your knowledge is complete.</p>
Line 29:		Line 29:
	<div class="heading">These śūnyavādīs, the Buddhists, they clearly say there is no God. Zero. Śūnyavādī. So we can understand their position, and the Māyāvādīs, they're so dangerous that they will not say that God is zero. They will say, "Yes, there is God, but He's handless, legless, eyeless, this-less, that-less, that less." What is the meaning? Say zero. We can understand. But why you say indirectly zero?		<div class="heading">These śūnyavādīs, the Buddhists, they clearly say there is no God. Zero. Śūnyavādī. So we can understand their position, and the Māyāvādīs, they're so dangerous that they will not say that God is zero. They will say, "Yes, there is God, but He's handless, legless, eyeless, this-less, that-less, that less." What is the meaning? Say zero. We can understand. But why you say indirectly zero?
	</div>		</div>
	<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 1.7.30-31 -- Vrndavana, September 26, 1976\|Lecture on SB 1.7.30-31 -- Vrndavana, September 26, 1976]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">So what is the use of approaching a guru who is offender to Kṛṣṇa? Tān ahaṁ dviṣataḥ krūrān kṣipāmy ajasram aśubhān āsurīṣv eva yoniṣu ([[Vanisource:BG 16.19\|BG 16.19]])—those who are envious... Kṛṣṇa is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1), and the Māyāvādīs always trying to make Him handless, legless, headless, earless, and this-less, that-less, less, less, less. Then what is remaining? Say zero. Why don't you say zero? No. They are very careful. These śūnyavādīs, the Buddhists, they clearly say there is no God. Zero. Śūnyavādī. So we can understand their position, and the Māyāvādīs, they're so dangerous that they will not say that God is zero. They will say, "Yes, there is God, but He's handless, legless, eyeless, this-less, that-less, that less." What is the meaning? Say zero. We can understand. But why you say indirectly zero? Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu has said that veda nā māniyā bauddha haya ta' nāstika. Nāstika means one who does not believe in the statement of the Vedas. He's nāstika, atheist. Just like here, in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Kṛṣṇa is person. This is Vedic literature. Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa is person, aham. Always He says. Aham ādir hi devānām (Bg 10.2). Man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru ([[Vanisource:BG 18.65\|BG 18.65]]). Sarva-dharmān parityajya ([[Vanisource:BG 18.66\|BG 18.66]]). He's person.</p>		<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 1.7.30-31 -- Vrndavana, September 26, 1976\|Lecture on SB 1.7.30-31 -- Vrndavana, September 26, 1976]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">So what is the use of approaching a guru who is offender to Kṛṣṇa? Tān ahaṁ dviṣataḥ krūrān kṣipāmy ajasram aśubhān āsurīṣv eva yoniṣu ([[Vanisource:BG 16.19 (1972)\|BG 16.19]])—those who are envious... Kṛṣṇa is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1), and the Māyāvādīs always trying to make Him handless, legless, headless, earless, and this-less, that-less, less, less, less. Then what is remaining? Say zero. Why don't you say zero? No. They are very careful. These śūnyavādīs, the Buddhists, they clearly say there is no God. Zero. Śūnyavādī. So we can understand their position, and the Māyāvādīs, they're so dangerous that they will not say that God is zero. They will say, "Yes, there is God, but He's handless, legless, eyeless, this-less, that-less, that less." What is the meaning? Say zero. We can understand. But why you say indirectly zero? Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu has said that veda nā māniyā bauddha haya ta' nāstika. Nāstika means one who does not believe in the statement of the Vedas. He's nāstika, atheist. Just like here, in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Kṛṣṇa is person. This is Vedic literature. Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa is person, aham. Always He says. Aham ādir hi devānām (Bg 10.2). Man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru ([[Vanisource:BG 18.65 (1972)\|BG 18.65]]). Sarva-dharmān parityajya ([[Vanisource:BG 18.66 (1972)\|BG 18.66]]). He's person.</p>
	</div>		</div>
	</div>		</div>
Line 35:		Line 35:
	<div class="heading">"God is imperson. God is zero"—what is this nonsense God? If our great conception, king or president, we understand is a great personality, if in this tiny material world in one corner of this planet there is a big president like Nixon and he has got secretary, his staff, his this and that, so many things, and why God should be without any associates, nirākāra, nirviśeṣa, zero? What kind of God? He must be associated with so many associates.		<div class="heading">"God is imperson. God is zero"—what is this nonsense God? If our great conception, king or president, we understand is a great personality, if in this tiny material world in one corner of this planet there is a big president like Nixon and he has got secretary, his staff, his this and that, so many things, and why God should be without any associates, nirākāra, nirviśeṣa, zero? What kind of God? He must be associated with so many associates.
	</div>		</div>
	<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 2.9.11-15 -- Tokyo, April 28, 1972\|Lecture on SB 2.9.11-15 -- Tokyo, April 28, 1972]]: </span><div ~~style="display: inline;"~~ class="text"><p style="display: inline;">There must be symptoms of God, sarva-śaktimān, with all potency, aiśvaryasya, all riches, aiśvaryasya samagrasya vīryasya, with all strength. If He has all strength, is it very difficult for Him to raise a hill on the finger if He has got all strength? That is the definition of God, all-powerful. So why should I deny that "Ah, this is all story"? It is not story. It is fact. If He is all-powerful, what is the difficulty for Him to lift a mountain? If He is all-strong, then where is the difficulty to maintain sixteen thousand wives? Why sixteen thousand? If He maintains sixteen millions of wives, still, it is insufficient. Because if we say "All potency, all-powerful, all-good," then to maintain sixteen thousand wives with sixteen thousand palaces and all the palaces made of first-class marble and gold and jewels, and the furnitures are made of ivory... These are description. That is God. Why we shall accept a nonsense God simply having a big beard or some...? You see? No. We don't accept. We accept real God. What is the purport?</p>		<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 2.9.11-15 -- Tokyo, April 28, 1972\|Lecture on SB 2.9.11-15 -- Tokyo, April 28, 1972]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: There must be symptoms of God, sarva-śaktimān, with all potency, aiśvaryasya, all riches, aiśvaryasya samagrasya vīryasya, with all strength. If He has all strength, is it very difficult for Him to raise a hill on the finger if He has got all strength? That is the definition of God, all-powerful. So why should I deny that "Ah, this is all story"? It is not story. It is fact. If He is all-powerful, what is the difficulty for Him to lift a mountain? If He is all-strong, then where is the difficulty to maintain sixteen thousand wives? Why sixteen thousand? If He maintains sixteen millions of wives, still, it is insufficient. Because if we say "All potency, all-powerful, all-good," then to maintain sixteen thousand wives with sixteen thousand palaces and all the palaces made of first-class marble and gold and jewels, and the furnitures are made of ivory... These are description. That is God. Why we shall accept a nonsense God simply having a big beard or some...? You see? No. We don't accept. We accept real God. What is the purport?</p>
	<p>Pradyumna: "When we speak of the king, it is naturally understood that the king is accompanied by his confidential associates like his secretary, private secretary, aide-de-camp, ministers, advisors, etc."</p>		<p>Pradyumna: "When we speak of the king, it is naturally understood that the king is accompanied by his confidential associates like his secretary, private secretary, aide-de-camp, ministers, advisors, etc."</p>
	<p>Prabhupāda: Otherwise what is the meaning of king? "God is imperson. God is zero"—what is this nonsense God? If our great conception, king or president, we understand is a great personality, if in this tiny material world in one corner of this planet there is a big president like Nixon and he has got secretary, his staff, his this and that, so many things, and why God should be without any associates, nirākāra, nirviśeṣa, zero? What kind of God? He must be associated with so many associates.</p>		<p>Prabhupāda: Otherwise what is the meaning of king? "God is imperson. God is zero"—what is this nonsense God? If our great conception, king or president, we understand is a great personality, if in this tiny material world in one corner of this planet there is a big president like Nixon and he has got secretary, his staff, his this and that, so many things, and why God should be without any associates, nirākāra, nirviśeṣa, zero? What kind of God? He must be associated with so many associates.</p>
Line 44:		Line 44:
	</div>		</div>
	<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 7.9.3 -- Mayapur, February 17, 1977\|Lecture on SB 7.9.3 -- Mayapur, February 17, 1977]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Only through bhakti you can approach, you can talk with God on equal level just like friend. The cowherd boys, they were treating Kṛṣṇa on the same status: "Kṛṣṇa is like us." But they loved Kṛṣṇa very, very intensely. That is their qualification. Therefore Kṛṣṇa sometimes agreed to take the cowherd boys on His shoulder. So this is the... Kṛṣṇa wants that, that "My bhakta... Be My bhakta and control Me. Everyone worships Me with awe and veneration. I want somebody should come forward and control Me." That He wants. Therefore He has accepted mother Yaśodā to control Him. How God can be controlled? Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). He's the supreme controller. Who can control Him? It is not possible. But He agrees to be controlled by His pure devotee. He agrees, "Yes, mother, you control Me. You bind Me. You show Me your stick so that I may be afraid."</p>		<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 7.9.3 -- Mayapur, February 17, 1977\|Lecture on SB 7.9.3 -- Mayapur, February 17, 1977]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Only through bhakti you can approach, you can talk with God on equal level just like friend. The cowherd boys, they were treating Kṛṣṇa on the same status: "Kṛṣṇa is like us." But they loved Kṛṣṇa very, very intensely. That is their qualification. Therefore Kṛṣṇa sometimes agreed to take the cowherd boys on His shoulder. So this is the... Kṛṣṇa wants that, that "My bhakta... Be My bhakta and control Me. Everyone worships Me with awe and veneration. I want somebody should come forward and control Me." That He wants. Therefore He has accepted mother Yaśodā to control Him. How God can be controlled? Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). He's the supreme controller. Who can control Him? It is not possible. But He agrees to be controlled by His pure devotee. He agrees, "Yes, mother, you control Me. You bind Me. You show Me your stick so that I may be afraid."</p>
	<p>So everything is there. Don't think that God is zero. No. Śūnyavādi. Everything. Janmādy asya yataḥ ([[Vanisource:SB 1.1.1\|SB 1.1.1]]). Athāto brahma jijñāsā. You are inquiring about Brahman. Paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān ([[Vanisource:BG 10.12\|BG 10.12]]). So there must be anger, not that God should be always peaceful. But the difference is His anger and His peaceful attitude produces the same result.</p>		<p>So everything is there. Don't think that God is zero. No. Śūnyavādi. Everything. Janmādy asya yataḥ ([[Vanisource:SB 1.1.1\|SB 1.1.1]]). Athāto brahma jijñāsā. You are inquiring about Brahman. Paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān ([[Vanisource:BG 10.12-13 (1972)\|BG 10.12]]). So there must be anger, not that God should be always peaceful. But the difference is His anger and His peaceful attitude produces the same result.</p>
	</div>		</div>
	</div>		</div>
Line 66:		Line 66:
	<p>Prabhupāda: Whatever it may be.</p>		<p>Prabhupāda: Whatever it may be.</p>
	<p>Guest: Whatever it is...</p>		<p>Guest: Whatever it is...</p>
	<p>Prabhupāda: It is material. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, sarva dharmān parityajya ([[Vanisource:BG 18.66\|BG 18.66]]). "Give up all these types of false religions." Mam ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja. That means come to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Ekam, anyone. So unless one becomes fully Kṛṣṇa conscious, he's in trouble. (indistinct) And our difficulty is that when we want to convince a person on Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he thinks that I am Hindu, I am Christian, I am Mohammedan. I am trying to proselytize, that is (indistinct).</p>		<p>Prabhupāda: It is material. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, sarva dharmān parityajya ([[Vanisource:BG 18.66 (1972)\|BG 18.66]]). "Give up all these types of false religions." Mam ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja. That means come to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Ekam, anyone. So unless one becomes fully Kṛṣṇa conscious, he's in trouble. (indistinct) And our difficulty is that when we want to convince a person on Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he thinks that I am Hindu, I am Christian, I am Mohammedan. I am trying to proselytize, that is (indistinct).</p>
	<p>Guest: No, it was not that I was really saying. Rather that what I have heard from others comes to the same thing as you were saying.</p>		<p>Guest: No, it was not that I was really saying. Rather that what I have heard from others comes to the same thing as you were saying.</p>
	<p>Prabhupāda: Others, if they try for the same thing, then it is alright. Because that type of religion, that system of religion, is first-class which teaches people to come to the platform of God consciousness, to love God, then that is first-class religious system. It doesn't matter what is the designation. (indistinct)</p>		<p>Prabhupāda: Others, if they try for the same thing, then it is alright. Because that type of religion, that system of religion, is first-class which teaches people to come to the platform of God consciousness, to love God, then that is first-class religious system. It doesn't matter what is the designation. (indistinct)</p>

MadhuGopaldas: Created page with '

{{terms|"God is zero"}} {{notes|}} {{compiler|MadhuGopaldas}} {{complete|ALL}} {{first|29Jan10}} {{last|29Jan10}} {{totals_by_section|BG=0…'

2010-01-30T10:35:34Z

Created page with '<div id="compilation"> <div id="facts"> {{terms|"God is zero"}} {{notes|}} {{compiler|MadhuGopaldas}} {{complete|ALL}} {{first|29Jan10}} {{last|29Jan10}} {{totals_by_section|BG=0…'

New page

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"God is zero"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|MadhuGopaldas}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|29Jan10}}
{{last|29Jan10}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=5|Con=2|Let=0}}
{{total|7}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:God]]
[[Category:Zero]]
</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="LectureonBG61315LosAngelesFebruary161969_0" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="214" link="Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969" link_text="Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969">
<div class="heading">If God is zero, then how from zero so many, I mean to say, figures coming out? God is zero.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969|Lecture on BG 6.13-15 -- Los Angeles, February 16, 1969]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">One process is to understand by the ascending process. And another process is the descending process. Just like in darkness, if you try to understand what is sun by ascending process, by flying your very powerful airplane or sputniks, just go round over the sky, you cannot see. But the descending process, when the sun rises, you understand immediately. Ascending process—my endeavor, what is called inductive process. Inductive process. Just like my father says that man is mortal. I accept it. Now if you want to study whether man is mortal, you study, you see many thousands of men, whether he is immortal or mortal. That will take so much time. But if you take the knowledge from the superior authority, that man is mortal, your knowledge is complete.</p>
<p>So athāpi te deva padāmbuja-dvaya-prasāda-leśānugṛhīta... jānāti tattvaṁ bhagavan-mahimno na cānya eko 'pi ciraṁ vicinvan ([[Vanisource:SB 10.14.29|SB 10.14.29]]). Therefore it is said, "My dear Lord, a person who has received a little favor from You, he can understand You very quickly. And others who are trying to understand You by the ascending process, they may go on speculating for millions of years, they will never understand." They will never understand. They will come to the point of frustration and confusion. "Oh, God is zero." That's all, finished. If God is zero, then how from zero so many, I mean to say, figures coming out? God is zero. Bhāgavata says, Vedānta says janmādy asya yataḥ ([[Vanisource:SB 1.1.1|SB 1.1.1]]). Everything is generates from the Supreme. Now we have to study how it is generated. That is also explained, what is the way, what is the process, how to know it. This is Vedānta-sūtra. Vedānta means the ultimate knowledge. Veda means knowledge and anta means ultimate. So Vedānta means the ultimate knowledge. The ultimate knowledge is the Supreme Lord.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="1" parent="Lectures" text="Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures"><h3>Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB173031VrndavanaSeptember261976_0" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="184" link="Lecture on SB 1.7.30-31 -- Vrndavana, September 26, 1976" link_text="Lecture on SB 1.7.30-31 -- Vrndavana, September 26, 1976">
<div class="heading">These śūnyavādīs, the Buddhists, they clearly say there is no God. Zero. Śūnyavādī. So we can understand their position, and the Māyāvādīs, they're so dangerous that they will not say that God is zero. They will say, "Yes, there is God, but He's handless, legless, eyeless, this-less, that-less, that less." What is the meaning? Say zero. We can understand. But why you say indirectly zero?
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 1.7.30-31 -- Vrndavana, September 26, 1976|Lecture on SB 1.7.30-31 -- Vrndavana, September 26, 1976]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">So what is the use of approaching a guru who is offender to Kṛṣṇa? Tān ahaṁ dviṣataḥ krūrān kṣipāmy ajasram aśubhān āsurīṣv eva yoniṣu ([[Vanisource:BG 16.19|BG 16.19]])—those who are envious... Kṛṣṇa is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1), and the Māyāvādīs always trying to make Him handless, legless, headless, earless, and this-less, that-less, less, less, less. Then what is remaining? Say zero. Why don't you say zero? No. They are very careful. These śūnyavādīs, the Buddhists, they clearly say there is no God. Zero. Śūnyavādī. So we can understand their position, and the Māyāvādīs, they're so dangerous that they will not say that God is zero. They will say, "Yes, there is God, but He's handless, legless, eyeless, this-less, that-less, that less." What is the meaning? Say zero. We can understand. But why you say indirectly zero? Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu has said that veda nā māniyā bauddha haya ta' nāstika. Nāstika means one who does not believe in the statement of the Vedas. He's nāstika, atheist. Just like here, in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Kṛṣṇa is person. This is Vedic literature. Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa is person, aham. Always He says. Aham ādir hi devānām (Bg 10.2). Man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru ([[Vanisource:BG 18.65|BG 18.65]]). Sarva-dharmān parityajya ([[Vanisource:BG 18.66|BG 18.66]]). He's person.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB291115TokyoApril281972_1" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="413" link="Lecture on SB 2.9.11-15 -- Tokyo, April 28, 1972" link_text="Lecture on SB 2.9.11-15 -- Tokyo, April 28, 1972">
<div class="heading">"God is imperson. God is zero"—what is this nonsense God? If our great conception, king or president, we understand is a great personality, if in this tiny material world in one corner of this planet there is a big president like Nixon and he has got secretary, his staff, his this and that, so many things, and why God should be without any associates, nirākāra, nirviśeṣa, zero? What kind of God? He must be associated with so many associates.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 2.9.11-15 -- Tokyo, April 28, 1972|Lecture on SB 2.9.11-15 -- Tokyo, April 28, 1972]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">There must be symptoms of God, sarva-śaktimān, with all potency, aiśvaryasya, all riches, aiśvaryasya samagrasya vīryasya, with all strength. If He has all strength, is it very difficult for Him to raise a hill on the finger if He has got all strength? That is the definition of God, all-powerful. So why should I deny that "Ah, this is all story"? It is not story. It is fact. If He is all-powerful, what is the difficulty for Him to lift a mountain? If He is all-strong, then where is the difficulty to maintain sixteen thousand wives? Why sixteen thousand? If He maintains sixteen millions of wives, still, it is insufficient. Because if we say "All potency, all-powerful, all-good," then to maintain sixteen thousand wives with sixteen thousand palaces and all the palaces made of first-class marble and gold and jewels, and the furnitures are made of ivory... These are description. That is God. Why we shall accept a nonsense God simply having a big beard or some...? You see? No. We don't accept. We accept real God. What is the purport?</p>
<p>Pradyumna: "When we speak of the king, it is naturally understood that the king is accompanied by his confidential associates like his secretary, private secretary, aide-de-camp, ministers, advisors, etc."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Otherwise what is the meaning of king? "God is imperson. God is zero"—what is this nonsense God? If our great conception, king or president, we understand is a great personality, if in this tiny material world in one corner of this planet there is a big president like Nixon and he has got secretary, his staff, his this and that, so many things, and why God should be without any associates, nirākāra, nirviśeṣa, zero? What kind of God? He must be associated with so many associates.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB793MayapurFebruary171977_2" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="787" link="Lecture on SB 7.9.3 -- Mayapur, February 17, 1977" link_text="Lecture on SB 7.9.3 -- Mayapur, February 17, 1977">
<div class="heading">Don't think that God is zero. No. Śūnyavādi. Everything. Janmādy asya yataḥ. Athāto brahma jijñāsā. You are inquiring about Brahman. Paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān. So there must be anger, not that God should be always peaceful. But the difference is His anger and His peaceful attitude produces the same result.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 7.9.3 -- Mayapur, February 17, 1977|Lecture on SB 7.9.3 -- Mayapur, February 17, 1977]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Only through bhakti you can approach, you can talk with God on equal level just like friend. The cowherd boys, they were treating Kṛṣṇa on the same status: "Kṛṣṇa is like us." But they loved Kṛṣṇa very, very intensely. That is their qualification. Therefore Kṛṣṇa sometimes agreed to take the cowherd boys on His shoulder. So this is the... Kṛṣṇa wants that, that "My bhakta... Be My bhakta and control Me. Everyone worships Me with awe and veneration. I want somebody should come forward and control Me." That He wants. Therefore He has accepted mother Yaśodā to control Him. How God can be controlled? Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). He's the supreme controller. Who can control Him? It is not possible. But He agrees to be controlled by His pure devotee. He agrees, "Yes, mother, you control Me. You bind Me. You show Me your stick so that I may be afraid."</p>
<p>So everything is there. Don't think that God is zero. No. Śūnyavādi. Everything. Janmādy asya yataḥ ([[Vanisource:SB 1.1.1|SB 1.1.1]]). Athāto brahma jijñāsā. You are inquiring about Brahman. Paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān ([[Vanisource:BG 10.12|BG 10.12]]). So there must be anger, not that God should be always peaceful. But the difference is His anger and His peaceful attitude produces the same result.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="General_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="11" parent="Lectures" text="General Lectures"><h3>General Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureLosAngelesMay181972_0" class="quote" parent="General_Lectures" book="Lec" index="115" link="Lecture -- Los Angeles, May 18, 1972" link_text="Lecture -- Los Angeles, May 18, 1972">
<div class="heading">If there is some mismanagement, you can say there is no government, but if there is nice management, how you can say there is no government? So God is there. You do not know God. Therefore some of you say that "God is dead," "There is no God," "God has no form," "God is zero," so many things. But no. We are firmly convinced that there is God, and Kṛṣṇa is God, and we are worshiping Him. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Try to understand it.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture -- Los Angeles, May 18, 1972|Lecture -- Los Angeles, May 18, 1972]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Real advancement means to know God. That is advancement. If you are lacking that knowledge, what is God... And because you cannot understand... There are so many rascals, they are denying the existence of God. That is very nice. If there is no God, then they can go on with their sinful activities unrestricted: "There is no God. Very nice." But simply by your denying, God will not die. God is there. God is there, His administration is there. By His order, the sun is rising, the moon is rising, the water is flowing. The ocean is abiding by His order. Everything under His order, everything going on nicely, without any change. How you can say God is dead? If there is some mismanagement, you can say there is no government, but if there is nice management, how you can say there is no government? So God is there. You do not know God. Therefore some of you say that "God is dead," "There is no God," "God has no form," "God is zero," so many things. But no. We are firmly convinced that there is God, and Kṛṣṇa is God, and we are worshiping Him. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Try to understand it.</p>
</div>
</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="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="RoomConversationJune201974Germany_0" class="quote" parent="1974_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="125" link="Room Conversation -- June 20, 1974, Germany" link_text="Room Conversation -- June 20, 1974, Germany">
<div class="heading">The Buddhists they think God is zero. And others they think God has no form. So, two classes. The Hindus they think God has not particular form. And you can imagine any of them That is Śaṅkara. The pañcopāsanā. But still Śaṅkara is very careful. He has given five particular forms—the Goddess Durgā, Lord Viṣṇu, Lord Siva, the sun.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation -- June 20, 1974, Germany|Room Conversation -- June 20, 1974, Germany]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: (indistinct) tradition, they are all material. They are also designation. I'm thinking I am Hindu, you are thinking Christian, he is thinking this, these are all designation.</p>
<p>Guest: Within each of these there is the esoteric.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Whatever it may be.</p>
<p>Guest: Whatever it is...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: It is material. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, sarva dharmān parityajya ([[Vanisource:BG 18.66|BG 18.66]]). "Give up all these types of false religions." Mam ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja. That means come to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Ekam, anyone. So unless one becomes fully Kṛṣṇa conscious, he's in trouble. (indistinct) And our difficulty is that when we want to convince a person on Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he thinks that I am Hindu, I am Christian, I am Mohammedan. I am trying to proselytize, that is (indistinct).</p>
<p>Guest: No, it was not that I was really saying. Rather that what I have heard from others comes to the same thing as you were saying.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Others, if they try for the same thing, then it is alright. Because that type of religion, that system of religion, is first-class which teaches people to come to the platform of God consciousness, to love God, then that is first-class religious system. It doesn't matter what is the designation. (indistinct)</p>
<p>Guest: The process of change of consciousness which is actually taking place in you under many influences, I think.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Huh?</p>
<p>Guest: Under many influences.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, influence should be only Kṛṣṇa or God. Kṛṣṇa, when we speak of Kṛṣṇa, God, but they have no clear idea what is God. How does He speak, how does He act. Where does He live. What is His form. What is his color. Nobody knows. Ask any religious people, "Do you know about all these?" (tape too faint to hear) (indistinct) If they think about it at all. First of all, generally they think of something impersonal or void. The Buddhists they think God is zero. And others they think God has no form. So, two classes. The Hindus they think God has not particular form, (indistinct). And you can imagine any of them(?) That is Śaṅkara. The pañcopāsanā. But still Śaṅkara is very careful. He has given five particular forms—the Goddess Durgā, Lord Viṣṇu, Lord Siva, the sun. Therefore there are sections—the sun worshipers, the fire worshipers. Originally, (indistinct). That is Vedic culture. Their Vedic culture means many demigods. But the original God is accepted, Viṣṇu. And original to Viṣṇu is Kṛṣṇa. īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1).</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="RoomConversationwithYogiBhajanJune71975Honolulu_0" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="98" link="Room Conversation with Yogi Bhajan -- June 7, 1975, Honolulu" link_text="Room Conversation with Yogi Bhajan -- June 7, 1975, Honolulu">
<div class="heading">Sunya? Mean zero? God is zero?
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Yogi Bhajan -- June 7, 1975, Honolulu|Room Conversation with Yogi Bhajan -- June 7, 1975, Honolulu]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: Now, in India, I think, people ask me the "How many they are Kṛṣṇa conscious?" "Everyone in India." At least in India everyone is Kṛṣṇa conscious. So the majority of people... And why majority? The whole India. Even there are many Mohammedans who also worship Kṛṣṇa. So if Kṛṣṇa is God, we, in this conference, why not present, "Here is God, whose name is Kṛṣṇa."</p>
<p>Yogi Bhajan: Yeah, but understand one thing. In layer, that Ka-rish-na, when the kar comes to sunya, at that consciousness if a person does not release to himself, he is not...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: What is that, sunya?</p>
<p>Yogi Bhajan: Sunya.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Sunya? Mean zero? God is zero?</p>
<p>Yogi Bhajan: No, it is not zero, it is where the kar, the action, stops.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes.</p>
<p>Yogi Bhajan: That is the Godhead.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes, that is reaction...</p>
<p>Yogi Bhajan: But everybody here in this world, four billion people, everybody does not have that experience...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no, I mean to say that every religious sect believes in God.</p>
<p>Yogi Bhajan: Um hm.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: If we present, "Here is God. You are seeking after God. Here is God," now what they will say?</p>
<p>Yogi Bhajan: Well, some will say, "Yes, it is." Some will say, "No."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Ācchā. So if he says no, "Why do you say no? Then what is your conception of God?"</p>
<p>Yogi Bhajan: Well, that is what we want to understand basically. That's what we are talking about, one thing. Your realization about God is a very universal realization. Somebody on this human level is very limited. After all, the limited and the unlimited have to be brought together.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No. Limited cannot understand God. Limited is limited.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>

God is zero - Revision history

SharmisthaK at 18:13, 8 May 2020

MadhuGopaldas: Created page with ' {{terms|"God is zero"}} {{notes|}} {{compiler|MadhuGopaldas}} {{complete|ALL}} {{first|29Jan10}} {{last|29Jan10}} {{totals_by_section|BG=0…'

MadhuGopaldas: Created page with '

{{terms|"God is zero"}} {{notes|}} {{compiler|MadhuGopaldas}} {{complete|ALL}} {{first|29Jan10}} {{last|29Jan10}} {{totals_by_section|BG=0…'