Then again, Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura says, kintu prabhor yah priya eva tasya. Why the spiritual master should be accepted directly as Narayana and God? The Mayavada philosophers, they say, "Yes, spiritual master is God and I am God, you are Godeveryone is God." No. That is rectified. Everyone is not God. God is God, and living entities are living entities. In the Vedas it is..., nityo nityanam cetanas cetananam: (Katha Upanisad 2.2.13) "He is the prime entity of all entities." So there cannot be two Gods. One God. As such, if God is one, there cannot be two religion also, because religion means to understand God, to love God. That is religion. And religion means the words of God, just as it is said. So why there should be two religions? There cannot be two religions. There may be some difference according to climate, country, population. There may be some difference in the execution of religion. But on principle there cannot be two religions because God is one and religion means the words of God. So how there can be two religions? We have made two, three, four, five, six, increasing the number of religion. Just like in New York we have seen the United Nations organization. It is said they are united, but there are thousands of flags. Disunited. Because actually they do not want to unite. It is a farce that they have made a United Nations organization. Nobody wants to unite. In the material world how there can be unity? That is not possible. Material world means everyone wants to enjoy to his satisfaction sense gratification. That is material world. So you want to satisfy your senses, I want to satisfy my senses. Therefore there is struggle: "Oh, this man is enjoying so much; I am unable." Even brother to brother, envious: "Oh, my, this brother has increased so much money. He is enjoying." Envious. That is material envy, to be envious.

Therefore the science of God is for persons who are not envious. That is religion. Bhagavata, in the Bhagavata you will find in the beginning it is said, dharmah projjhita-kaitavah atra paramo nirmatsaranam satam: [SB 1.1.2] "Here the religion of Bhagavata is not a cheating religion." Kaitava. Kaitava means cheating, cheating. And Sridhara Svami has remarked, commented on the statement, kaitava. He says that atra moksa-vancha-paryantam nirastam:(?) "Anyone who is trying to become liberated or merge into the existence of God, that is also cheating." Nirastam: that is also nullified, nirastam. Why? Why the...? A person who is trying to be merged into the existence of God, jnanis... Those who are philosophically advancing, they are called jnanis. The Absolute Truth Idea is that "Because I am Brahman, and God is also Brahman, therefore, as soon as I am freed from maya, I become one with God." In one sense it is all right because God and the living entity, they are of the same quality. As it is stated in the Vedas, nityo nityanam. There are millions and trillions of nityas, eternals. So God is the chief eternal. Therefore quality, eternity, is there both for the living entities and God. Nityo nityanam cetanas cetananam (Katha Upanisad 2.2.13). Knowledge, sense, cetana, life, activities... So God is also active; the living entities are also active. But His actions and my actions are not comparable. Just like God is creator; I am also creator. So in this way I am one. I have got creative power; God has also creative power. But God creates innumerable universes, and you can create a motorcar. That's all, no more. Or atom bombto kill. You cannot create a planet; you can create a sputnik. With great difficulty it flies in the sky. But God's creationinnumerable planets, they are floating without any machine. Still, the rascal says, "There is no God. I am God." You do like God; then you become God. What you have done like God? You have created a toy flying in the sky. Therefore you are so much proud that you compare yourself with God? This is called demons, demonic. Unnecessarily, without any authority, when a man claims that "I am God," that is demonic.

Now, just like Hiranyakasipu, Ravana. Ravana was materially very much powerful, but he defied Rama: "What is Rama? I am more than Rama. I shall kidnap His wife, and I shall enjoy." So this is Ravana, Ravana spirit. Sita... Sita is Laksmi. Laksmi is the goddess of fortune. So God is the husband of the goddess of fortune, and goddess of fortune is under His control. Laksmi-sahasra-sata-sambhrama-sevyamanam [Bs. 5.29]. Thousands and millions of goddesses of fortune are serving the Supreme Lord, and I am thinking that "God has become poor, daridra, daridra-narayana." And what...? Narayana, He is so great authority that His words are accepted as Vedic truth, and He has become daridra? These are all demonic declarations.

So sincere..., those who are actually followers of Vedas, they should understand that there is no difference between the Lord and His wordsabsolute. We read Bhagavad-gita, the words of Krsna. Then how we can change the meaning of Gita when it is spoken by Lord? Does it mean that I am greater than the Lord? "Krsna left something to be told by some rascals later on"is that the meaning of Bhagavad-gita? Then where is the authority of Bhagavad-gita? If the meaning was to be corrected and commented by a conditioned soul, then where is the authority of Bhagavad-gita? Then what is the necessity of reading Bhagavad-gita? Simply because it is written in Sanskrit? No. That is not the fact. The words of Bhagavad-gita are Krsna. That should be taken into consideration. That is real reading of Bhagavad-gita. And if we read Bhagavad-gita according to my whimsI like some stanza; I take it, and other stanza I give upthat is not reading of Bhagavad-gita. You have to take everything, what it is presented. Just like Arjuna says, who has taken Bhagavad-gita as it is. He says, sarvam etad rtam manye yan mam vadasi kesava: [Bg. 10.14] "My dear Lord..." He... Of course, he was friend. "My dear Krsna, whatever You have spoken, I accept in toto." There is no question of eliminating this stanza and that stanza. I accept some, selected, and I become a student of Bhagavad-gita and authority of Bhagavad-gita. No. That is not authority of Bhagavad-gita. You have to accept. And then it is...

Similarly, Vedas, as I gave you the example, that in the Vedas you will find that stools are considered as impure, stool of some animal, but Vedas says that "This stool, the cow stool, is pure." So there is no argument that "Once you said that stool of animal is impure, and another time you say that this stool is pure. Once you said that all bones of animals are impure; again you say that sankha, conchshell... This is also a bone of an animal. You say it is pure." So there cannot be any argument. Veda says, "This is this; this is that." We have to accept it. That is the following of religion. Dharmam tu saksad bhagavat-pranitam [SB 6.3.19]. And vedah saksat... Vedo narayanah saksat svayambhuh. Svayambhur iti susruma. Svayambhu. Svayambhu means which is not created by any man. Just like Brahma is sometimes called Svayambhu. His another name is Svayambhu. Svayambhu means he was not created by father and mother. The father-mother... Ordinarily, a living entity take birth by the combination of father and mother. But Brahma is called Svayambhu because he is not created by father and mother. Then again, you can argue that Brahma was created by Garbhodakasayi Visnu, so He is his father. But the argument can be defied that although He is the father, but he was not born of a mother. That is all-powerful Krsna, Narayana, Visnu. You have seen the picture that Narayana is lying down on the water of Garbhodaka, udaka, and Laksmi is massaging His lotus feet, and Brahma in a lotus flower is born. So generally, when a father begets a son, he takes the advantage of his wife, the help of his wife. But here Garbhodakasayi Visnu, although His wife is present, He did not take the assistance of the wife. A lotus sprouted from His navel, and there was Brahma. That is all-powerful. Generally we understand that whenever there is birth, the man and woman must combine. But that is for ordinary entities or in this material world. But that is not possible in the case of God, or Visnu. Therefore He is called sarva-saktiman, all-powerful. He can do anything, whatever He likes.

In the Brahma-samhita it is stated, angani yasya sakalendriya-vrttimanti pasyanti panti kalayanti ciram jaganti [Bs. 5.32]. So we have to take the help of Vedic literature. Then we understand what is God. Angani yasya sakalendriya-vrttimanti: "The limbs of Krsna or God has got the potency of all other limbs." Just like with eyes we can see only, but Krsna, or God, can eat also with eyes. With ears we simply hear, but... Just like this navel. The navel has got some purpose, but Krsna can beget. Narayana can beget a child also, Brahma. Therefore, in the sastras it is said, angani yasya sakalendriya-vrttimanti. All the potencies of all other limbs can be found in... (aside:) Why it is closed?

So Sridhara Svami says, vedena pranihitah vihita-dharma, vedena pranihitah vihita-dharma, na ca pramana..., sa ca veda-pramanaka ity arthah.(?) So whenever you accept some religion, you have to corroborate with the words of the Vedas. Then that is religion. Veda means knowledge, the knowledge, not ordinary knowledgetranscendental knowledge. Why Vedas' knowledge accepted so rigidly? It is already said, saksad narayanah. Because it is spoken by... In the words of Narayana there are no deficiencies. In the words of conditioned soul there are so many deficiencies. Why? The deficiencies are that bhrama... Any conditioned soul, however great he may be, he must commit mistakes. That is one of the deficiencies. In this material world, however great one may be in the estimation of the general populace, he is not above committing mistakes. "To err is human," as it is said. We commit mistake. Bhrama, pramada. And pramada means to accept something as something, something else. Just like the most erudite scholar, he also accepts that "This body is the self. There is no soul." Others... There are many scholars, they do not accept that there is soul differently. "This body is everything," that is called pramada. Bhrama, pramada, vipralipsa. Vipralipsa means cheating. Every conditioned soul has a cheating propensity. "For my purpose, to fulfill my purpose, I say something to you which is not beneficial to you, but still, I impress that this is right." That is called cheating. And karana-patava. Karana means the senses. The senses are also imperfect. I am seeing the sun daily with my eyes, but still, I have no full knowledge of the sun because my eyes are imperfect. If there is any sound upstairs, and I inquire, "What is this sound?" (aside:) Why he is crying so much? What is that? (man talking loudly outside the room)

Now, the question may be that the Indians or the followers of the Vedas... Now it has become so. Actually, the followers of Vedas are everyone. Every human being is the followers of Veda because the history of all other religions, they are all recentone thousand year, two thousand years, three thousand yearsbut you cannot trace out the history of the Vedic religion. So from historical point of view, suppose one religion is current for the last three thousand years. Then what was their condition before three thousand years? So the natural conclusion is: as there was no such religion three thousand years and the Vedic religion has no historyit is coming from time immemorialthat was the religion. Take for example in India. Twenty years before there was no Pakistan, but now there is Pakistan. Under certain circumstances, the religious principle has changed, but originally every human being on this planet were following the Vedic religion. And another sense, everyone is following the Vedic religion if it is religion.

How? In the Bhagavad-gita you will find that vedais ca sarvair aham eva vedyah [Bg. 15.15]. Sarvam vedam: "all Vedas." "All Vedas" means originally there was one Veda, Rg Veda, or, somebody says, Atharva Veda. Then, later on it was divided into four: Rg, Sama, Yajur, Atharva. Then, from the Vedic injunction, then it was summarized, which is called Vedanta, summarized in sutras. Janmady asya yatah [SB 1.1.1], athato brahma jijnasa. In the sutra there are so many meanings. Then the Upanisads, 108 Upanisads, they are also Vedic. Then they were explained further for ordinary menthe Puranas. They are also Vedas. Then it was further explained by Mahabharata. So that is also Veda. Ramayana, that is also Veda. So any scripture, any literature, transcendental literature, whose aim is to understand God, that is Veda. Therefore, anyone who is searching after the Supreme Lord, he is following the Vedic religion. This is another conclusion. The searching process may be different according to the country, climate, but if the ultimate goal is God, then that is accepted as religion. Just like Christian religion. Christian religion, they are also searching after GodLord Jesus Christ advising, "Be lover of God." He presents himself as son of God. The Muhammadan, Muhammad, he also presented himself as servant of God. In this way, everyone is accepting. Or if anyone is accepting God as the ultimate goal of religious process, that is also Vedic. Because Krsna says that vedais ca sarvair aham. And a godless scripture, that is not accepted as religion. Therefore in India, although Lord Buddha appeared in Indiahe was a ksatriya, and he started some religious principleit is not accepted because it is not, in the Buddha religion, there is no acceptance of God or soul.

So these are some of the points. But the Bhagavata says that although in the Buddha religion there is no, I mean to say, mention of worshiping God, but Lord Buddha is himself incarnation of God, and he induced his followers to worship him. Therefore in the Bhagavata it is said that he cheated the atheists. The atheists were against God. He appeared before them. He said, "Yes, you are right. You don't worship God. You worship me." And he is incarnation of God. Kesava dhrta-buddha-sarira jaya jagadisa hare. He is accepted in the Vedic literature as incarnation of God, but he says that "There is no God. You worship me. You follow me," because his principle was to stop animal-killing. Sadaya-hrdaya darsita-pasu-ghatam. God became very much compassionate. When people were too much addicted in killing animals unnecessarily, He appeared as Lord Buddha. Sadaya-hrdaya darsita-pasu-ghatam. Pasu-ghatam. The pasu-ghatam means they were being implicated in innumerable sinful activities by this process. Therefore God wanted to... Yada yada hi dharmasya glanir bhavati [Bg. 4.7]. In the name of religion, they were killing so many animals. Therefore to stop this nonsense, he appeared. And he declined to accept the Vedic principles because there was no other way to stop. If he would have accepted Vedic principles, then these animal-killers would have shown him evidences that in the Vedas there is mention of animal-killing in the sacrifice. But he wanted to stop completely animal-killing; so therefore he adopted a new type of religion. But those who were followers of Vedic religion, they did not accept because that is not religion because it is against the Vedas. These are the principles.

Sankaracarya... Sankaracarya, after Buddha, His Holiness Sankaracarya appeared to drive away Buddhism, and he established again Vedic religion. But that Vedic religion, being impersonal, that is also not Vedic religion. That is also another thing, that God is person. Nityo nityanam. Nityanam, the so many living entitiesevery one is person. How God can be imperson? If God is the supreme father... If you are a person, then how your father can be imperson? So that is imperfect knowledge. When we speak of God as imperson, that is imperfect knowledge.

So any highest principle of religion in any religion of the world you take, this is the summarization of all religions, Krsna consciousness. And that is accepted by Srimad-Bhagavatamsa vai pumsam paro dharmo yato bhaktir adhoksaje: [SB 1.2.6] "That is first-class religion which teaches how to love God, how to learn to love God." That is first class, not the rituals, not the formulas. That is another thing. Just like when a man is diseased, the physicians prescribes so many, that "You don't do this. You do this. You take this medicine. You just..." That is according to the particular disease. But the real aim is to be cured from the disease. So any religion which teaches to be cured from the material disease of sense gratification and teaches love of Godhead, that is perfect religion.