Nature's law is so subtle. Uru-damni baddhah. Bhagavata says, uru-damni baddhah. Just like a man is tied up tightly, hands and legs, by the laws of nature we are tied up in that way. Every part of our body is being controlled by some controller. We cannot violate a very insignificant portion of nature's law. Krsna is perfect. We think that, we rogues, "Krsna cannot see." But Krsna has kept so many witnesses, and He is sitting Himself within. How you can hide and seek? No hide and seek. That is another foolishness, illusion. How you can hide yourself from Krsna? That's not possible. And we are violating the laws of nature, and we are suffering. No excuse. Exactly like that: if a child catches fire, the catches fire will no excuse because it is a child. No. It will act. So we should know that, that... (aside:) Yes, yes. Aiye. There cannot be any excuse. Therefore we have to be very, very careful. And the best carefulness is chanting Hare Krsna. Mam eva ye prapadyante mayam etam taranti te [Bg. 7.14]. Simply if we surrender. (aside:) You take this letter and post immediately, immediately after class. In that envelope our Dhruvananda Maharaja has written that "I am enclosing herewith one bird's-eye view plan." Eh? Have you done? If he has done, ask him and put it. If he has not, without that plan we shall send. Aiye. Hare Krsna.

I am very glad the young doctor is attending this meeting. He can cure many patients who are suffering from this material disease. What do you think, Doctor?

So the people do not understand it, and they are declaring, "I am God. I don't care for God. God is dead." How God is dead? You are under so much control, and how God is dead? You can say that there is no government, provided there is nobody to check you. But if you are in every step checked, how you can say that there is no government. That is another foolishness. All men, they have been declared in the Bhagavata, abodha-jata, born fools and rascals. But these are very strong words. But if we state the strong, that is another foolishness. It is so, and if we deny, that "We cannot accept such strong things," then another foolishness. Begin.

[break] Begin from there. Where is Bhagyobhai? (pause) Hare Krsna. [break] Visnuduta, representative of Lord Visnu, challenged the Yamaduta that "If you are representative of Yamaraja, who is supposed to be one of the authorities of religion, then you must explain what is religion, dharma, and what is nonreligion, or adharma, because, according to this principle, one is punished or rewarded. If you become religious, then you are rewarded, and if you are irreligious, then you are punished." That is stated in the Bhagavad-gita also:

So he says, katham svid dhriyate dandah kim vasya sthanam ipsitam. [SB 6.1.39] "According to punishment and reward, a man, a living entity..." Living entity means this dandah, this punishment and reward is meant for the human being, not the animals. Animals are not supposed to be under the stringent laws of material nature. Just like in ordinary way, all the state laws are applicable to the human being, not to the animals. Because if an animal goes to the wrong path or if an animal takes away something from your possession, he is not punished, neither anybody goes to complain in the police court. Similarly, human being... That is also civilized human being, advanced, civilized... That is stated here that dandyah kim karinah sarve aho svit katicin nrnam. Human being... That is also very few human being, because those who are supposed to be advanced, the Aryans... The Aryans are called the advanced human being. The civilization means Aryan civilization. So katicin nrnam. This very word is used here. Not all human beings. Those who are..., they are also punished. But a civilized human being is very much responsible life. The chance is given to get out of this cycle of birth and death. Therefore, for civilized human being, these Vedas, these scriptures, are made for them, not for the rascals and fools, those who are in the lower stage of life, only for the civilized.

So the yamaduta ucuh. Then the reply is given by the Yamadutas, the representatives, the constables of Yamaraja. They are working under Yamaraja, who is an authority. They must know. They must know what is right and wrong. So how nicely they are replying. So the first challenge was given: "What is dharma? What is religion? What is piety?" So they are replying, veda-pranihito dharmah: "Dharma means the injunctions given in the Vedas. That is dharma." Just like if you ask, "What is law?" then the immediate answer is, "Law means the injunction of the state." You cannot make it law. The state, the government, whatever the government orders, that is law. The word of the government is law. Similarly, dharma means the injunctions given in the Vedas. It is clearly said, veda-pranihito dharma hy adharmas tad viparyayah: [SB 6.1.40] "And nonreligions or irreligion, irreligion, or nonreligion, is just the opposite." For example, if you abide by the laws of the Vedas, then you should know that you are following the path of dharma, or religion. But if you do not abide by the laws of Vedas, then you are irreligious. This is the sum and substance.

Now, why Vedas should be accepted to seriously? At least we, who are supposed to be followers of the Vedic laws, we take it so seriously. For example, how we accept the injunctions of Vedas seriously? There is example, a stool, animal stool, or any, human being stoolstool is stoolthat stool is supposed to be impious, impure. If you touch stool, then you have to take your bath. You become impure. You have to take your bath, as you do generally. After passing stool we take bath. That is a Hindu injunction. And even a man goes twice for passing stool, he must take twice bath. That is real Hindu religious life. Now, stool, in one place it is said that "It is impure. If you touch, then you have to take your bath." In another place it is said, "This stool, particular, the cow dung, is pure. Cow dung is pure. If there is any impure place, if you smear over it cow dung, then it is pure." That is also injunction of the Vedas. Now, you cannot argue that "One place you say that this stool is impure, and another place you say this is pure. This is contradiction." Sometimes people find this contradiction. But you have to accept because it is injunction of the Vedas. That you are doing practically every day.

Similarly, this bone, any bone, animal bone, if you touch, you have to take bath. You become impure. But this conchshell, which you are sounding, vibrating in the Deity room, that is also bone. But you cannot argue that "You say bone is impure. Why you are taking one bone in the Deity room?" That you cannot say. This is acceptance of Vedas, without any argument. And if you want to know why one is accepted pure and one is accepted impure, if you make, I mean to say, research, you will find that the Vedic injunction is right. Take for..., this cow dung. Perhaps, you doctor, know, that one Dr. Lalman Ghosh in Calcutta, he analyzed this cow dung and he was a professor in the medical college. He has declared that cow dung is full of antiseptic properties. So Vedic injunction is... That is right. But sometimes it appears to be contradictory. But we cannot judge how it is so contradictory. We have to accept like that. That is the following of Vedic rules. Similarly, in the Bhagavad-gita you will find, Krsna has explained so many ways karma-yoga, jnana-yoga, dhyana-yoga, hatha-yoga, so many other things, but ultimately He says bhakti-yoga is the Supreme. Sarva dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja [Bg. 18.66]. Mam ekam saranam vraja means this is bhakti-yoga. One has to simply obey or surrender unto Krsna, giving up all other types of religious principles. So one can say that Lord Krsna said in some places of the Bhagavad-gita that this yoga, karma-yoga is nice, jnana-yoga is nice. No. The last word, what He says, that is to be accepted. You cannot argue that Krsna said karma-yoga is also good. You cannot argue that "I shall take to karma-yoga." That is, karma-yoga, different stages of evolution. One who is fit for simply karma-yoga, that process is recommended for him. But if one ultimately wants the supreme benefit, then this is the injunction of Bhagavad-gita, that sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja [Bg. 18.66].

So we have to follow the Vedic principles. That is dharma. And why Vedic principles are to be accepted as supreme? That is also explained here. Veda-pranihito dharmo hy adharmas tad viparyayah vedo narayanah saksat [SB 6.1.40]. Veda means Narayana, the Supreme Personality of Godhead directly. Just like lawbook is directly government, similarly, veda narayanah saksat svayambhur iti susruma. Again he says, susruma, "I have heard it. I have heard it." When I say, "I have heard it," that means I have heard it from a superior authority. Susruma. No follower of Vedic principle will say, "It is my opinion." Your opinion is nonsense. What you are? This is the way of understanding Vedas. Susruma. Therefore Veda is known as sruti, sruti and smrti. There is no such thing that "In my opinion, I comment like this. I take the meaning like this." No. You have to understand it by the susruma process or srota-pantha, by hearing from the authorities.

Just like in the Bhagavad-gita it is said, imam vivasvate yogam proktavan aham avyayam [Bg. 4.1], that "First of all I said this principle of bhagavad-bhakti-yoga, or Bhagavad-gita yoga, to the sun-god." Imam vivasvate yogam proktavan aham: "I spoke." Proktavan. Vivasvan manave prahuh: "And the sun-god said to his son, Manu." Manur iksvakave bravit. Just see. That means the principles of Bhagavad-gita is being accepted by the process of hearing from authority. That is the process. You cannot comment in your own way. That is not authorized. You have to hear from the authority. Therefore Kathopanisad says, tad vijnanartham sa gurum evabhigacchet: [MU 1.2.12] "If anyone wants to learn the transcendental science, he has to accept." Gacchet. This is vidhilin, "must." There is no exception. You cannot say that "Without going to a spiritual master, I shall learn the transcendental science." No, that is not possible. Therefore, in our Vaisnava principles, it is said, adau gurv-asrayam. In the very beginning of understanding spiritual knowledge, one has to take shelter of a guru. Adau gurv-asrayam. Sad-dharma-prcchati: "The next stage is inquiring from the spiritual master about real spiritual life." These are the processes.

In the Srimad-Bhagavatam also it is said that tasmad gurum prapadyeta jijnasuh sreya uttamam: [SB 11.3.21] "One who has actually become serious inquiring about supreme subject, uttamam..." Udgata tamam yasmat. In the material world, all knowledge is covered with illusion, and material world is known as tama. Tamasi ma jyotir gamah. This is darkness. So real knowledge means which has surpassed this province of darkness, uttamam. Jijnasuh sreya uttamam: "Anyone who has become very much inquisitive to learn about the transcendental subject matter, he has to accept a guru." Tasmad gurum prapadyeta [SB 11.3.21]. Guru means you have to find out some personality who is well versed in the Vedic knowledge. Sabde pare ca nisnatam brahmany upasamasrayam. These are the symptoms of guru: that he is well versed, well cognizant in the conclusion of the Vedas. Not only that he is well-versed, but he has actually in his life taken to that path, upasamasrayam, without being deviated by any other ways. Upasama, upasama. He has finished all material hankerings. He has taken simply to the spiritual life and simply surrendered to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. And at the same time, he knows all the Vedic conclusions. This is the description of a guru. Similarly, Kathopanisad it is said, tasmad gurum prapadyeta... [SB 11.3.21]. This is Bhagavata. Tad vijnanartham sa gurum evabhigacchet samit-panih srotriyam [MU 1.2.12]. Srotriyam. One who has very nicely heard, one who has acquired Vedic knowledge by the hearing process, srotriyam brahma-nistham, and the result is that he is fully, firmly fixed up in Brahman. Bhagavad-gita also says that tad viddhi pranipatena pariprasnena sevaya [Bg. 4.34]. Tat. If you want to understand the spiritual knowledge, then you have to learn it by surrender, pranipata. Pranipatena, pariprasnena and sevayathese three things. You have to surrender. You have to inquire or make questions with service, not by challenging way. Upadeksyanti tad-jnanam jnaninas tattva-darsinah. Then you will be able to understand real spiritual knowledge.

So veda-pranihitah, this very word, is implicated with so many ideas of Vedic knowledge, but they have summarized that "Dharma means the injunctions of the Vedas." Dharmo... Veda-pranihito dharmo hy adharmas tad viparyayah, vedo narayanah saksat. Why Vedas should be taken so seriously? People question that "Vedas are written by some man." That's wrong. Vedas are not written by any man. Otherwise, why Vedas should be taken so seriously? Not... Not present moment. It is coming. All the acaryas. All the acaryas. So far we are concerned, we Indians, Hindus, we are very controlled by the acaryas, recent acaryasSankaracarya, Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya, Visnu Svami. They have accepted Vedas as supreme. Lord Caitanya accepted Vedas as the supreme. And Lord Buddha, although he is accepted as incarnation of God, still, because he did not accept Vedas, his philosophy was not accepted in India. Veda na maniya bauddha haila nastika. Our principle, the Vedic principle, is that anyone who does not obey the injunctions of the Vedas, he is called nastika, atheist. He does not believe. Veda na maniya bauddha haila nastika. Caitanya Mahaprabhu's saying that "We consider the Buddhists as atheists because they do not accept the Vedic principles." But Caitanya Mahaprabhu says, vedasraya-nastikya-vada bauddhake adhika: "But persons who superficially says that 'We are being controlled by the Vedas,' but actually they are atheiststhey do not believe in Godthey are more dangerous than these Buddhists." That is the version of Caitanya Mahaprabhu.

So dharma-pranihitah. Veda-pranihito dharmo hy adharmas tad viparyayah, vedo narayanah saksat. Vedo narayanah saksat. This is the injunction. You have to accept the Vedic words as the words of Narayana. Now, if you accept Krsna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, then whatever He has said in the Bhagavad-gita, that is Veda. Is it not? If vedo narayanah saksat, if Vedas are to be considered as Narayana directly, then Krsna... He is accepted by the acaryas as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is a conclusion of the Vedas also. Narayana is expansion of Krsna. If you read Caitanya-caritamrtaand there are many other samhitasKrsna is the original Supreme Personality of Godhead.

So in this way we have to accept dharma. As it is said in the recent, say, within five years, five thousand years, the Krsna consciousness is... Actually we are spreading. This Krsna consciousness means what Krsna has said. That we have taken. That is Vedas. Sometimes people argue that Bhagavad-gita is smrti. Professor, Dr. Stahl, he argued with me that Bhagavad-gita is smrti. Smrti means the Vedic conclusion written by somebody else. That is called smrti. He is also authorized. So Bhagavad-gita is also accepted as smrti, but smrti is not different from sruti. Rupa Gosvami says,

So this is a fact, that veda-pranihito dharmah. Dharma... It is to be settled up that dharma means the injunction of the Supreme Narayana. And adharma means that you manufacture something out of your own fertile brain. That is adharma. And dharma means the injunction. Dharmam (tu) saksad bhagavat-pranitam: [SB 6.3.19] "Dharma means what is spoke by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, that is dharma." Therefore we take it for acceptance that Krsna says... That is actually the fact. Mam ekam saranam vraja. To surrender unto Krsna, that is dharma. Sarva-dharman parityajya [Bg. 18.66]. And in another place of the Bhagavad-gita it is said, bahunam janmanam ante jnanavan mam prapadyate [Bg. 7.19]. Those who are thinking themselves as advanced in knowledge, such persons, after many, many births take to the surrendering process to Krsna. So the version of Srimad-Bhagavatam and version of the Vedas and version of Bhagavad-gita, there is no difference. It has to be studied a little carefully.

I think we should finish here. Any questions? Now we have come to the conclusion: dharma means the words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is sum and substance, what we mean by dharma. That means dharma cannot be manufactured by any conditioned soul. Conditioned souls, they are subjected to so many deficiencies; therefore they cannot create any dharma. That will not be accepted as dharma. Here, as the assistants of Yamaraja says, that veda-pranihito dharmo... Dharma means what is stated in the Vedas. And Vedas means the Supreme Personality of Godhead, saksad, directly. Just like when you speak, when you speak or hear Bhagavad-gita, immediately we should knowat least this vision we takethat Krsna is directly speaking. And if we interpret, then the whole thing is lost. That is not Bhagavad-gita, and that is going on, malinterpretation of Bhagavad-gita. Everyone is taking Bhagavad-gita, and he is interpreting in his own way. So that is not Bhagavad-gita. Bhagavad-gita means as Krsna says. Krsna says, man-mana bhava mad-bhakto mad-yaji mam namaskuru [Bg. 18.65]. But a commentator, big commentator, says, "Oh, it is not to Krsna, to the person." Just see. This kind of commentary is going on.