Main points made by Srila Prabhupada

1. Saï jaya is seeing the battlefield within his heart. That is another television.

2. Kuruksetra was a place of pilgrimage for the following reasons:

a. Because the Lord was present on the Battlefield of Kurukñ etra, it became a dharma-kñ etra, a place of pilgrimage.

b. Kuru-kñ etre dharmam ä caret. " When you want to perform religious ritualistic ceremonies, go to Kurukñ etra." That is the Vedic version.

c. Still people go for pilgrimage in Kurukñ etra. In candra-grahaë a, in sü rya-grahaë a, hundreds, thousands of people still go there.

d. the station is there, Kurukñ etra, and the place is there.

e. Still among the villagers the system is current in India: when there is some fighting, they go to a saintly person or in a temple to settle up. The battle of Kurukñ etra was dharma-yuddha-religious war hence it was fought in Dharma-ksetre Kuruksetre.

3. Mahabharata is history, it is not fiction; all people from all parts of the world, they joined the battle

4. Previously the whole planet was called Bharat-varsa

5. Bhagavad-gé tä, in each and every verse, the things are very, very clear, as clear as the sunshine. So there is no question of interpretation. It does not require any lamp-bearer to show the Bhagavad-gé tä or Kå ñ ë a.

6. One should take the direct meaning in the Vedic literatures; One should not misinterpret; Commentary or interpretation required when things are not very clear. Then you can suggest, " The meaning may be like this." But when the things are clear, why should you comment? Just like, for example—this is also from Sanskrit scholar's example—that gaì gä yaà ghoñ apalli. Gaì gä yam: " On the Ganges there is a neighborhood which is known as Ghoñ apalli." Now, this statement is in your front. So one may question that " The river Ganges is water. How there can be a neighborhood which is known as Ghoñ apalli? On the water how there can be a quarter or neighborhood of human habitation? " You can question that. Gaì gä yaà ghoñ apalli. Then the interpretation should be, " No, not on the Ganges. 'On the Ganges' means 'on the bank of the Ganges.' " This interpretation is nice.

7. Sometimes “Kuruksetra” is misinterpreted to be “this body” especially by Mahatma Gandhi

8. Why Dhrtarstra was asking: kim akurvata? He was suspicious that because the parties assembled in the dharma-kñ etra(holy place of pilgrimage), so they might have changed their ideas

This is the set-up in the first chapter of the Bhagavad-gé tä. This is the summary. Now saï jaya uvä ca. The Saï jaya is speaking to Dhå tarä ñ ö ra. Saï jaya is seeing the battlefield within his heart. That is another television. And by the grace of Vyä sadeva, he learned the art, that he advanced... He was so much advanced that the... Just like we see television, relay from the battlefield, and he, Dhå tarä ñ ö ra was blind. And his secretary, Saï jaya, he was speaking. He was seeing the activities in the battlefield.

The Lord is the source of the Ganges water, and therefore He is addressed here as té rtha-pä da, indicating that all the holy places are at His lotus feet, or that whatever He touches with His foot becomes a holy place. Bhagavad-gé tä, for example, begins with the words dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre [Bg. 1.1]. Because the Lord was present on the Battlefield of Kurukñ etra, it became a dharma-kñ etra, a place of pilgrimage. Therefore the Pä ë ò avas, who were extremely religious, were assured of victory. Any place where the Supreme Personality of Godhead displays His pastimes, such as Vå ndä vana or Dvä rakä, becomes a holy place. The chanting of the holy name of the Lord—Hare Kå ñ ë a, Hare Kå ñ ë a, Kå ñ ë a Kå ñ ë a, Hare Hare/ Hare Rä ma, Hare Rä ma, Rä ma Rä ma, Hare Hare—is pleasing to the ear, and it expands good fortune to the audience who hears it chanted. Owing to the presence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Aditi was fully assured that the troublesome condition created for her by the demons would now be ended.

(SB 8.17.9)

Dhå tarä ñ ö ra inquired from him:

dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre

samavetä yuyutsavaù

mä makä ù pä ë ò avä ç caiva

kim akurvata saï jaya

[Bg. 1.1]

He was asking Saï jaya: " What did they do? " Kim akurvata saï jaya. That was the question. And first of all, Saï jaya described the arrangement in the battlefield, and then he's speaking. Now, sometimes Bhagavad-gé tä is misinterpreted that this battle, I mean to say, dharma-kñ etra kuru-kñ etra means " this body." We do not misinterpret in that way. There is no question of misinterpretation. We are presenting Bhagavad-gé tä as it is. We do not change by our whimsical imagination, concoction. We do not interpret the words of the Bhagavad-gé tä according to our own desire. No. Actually, from literary point of view, interpretation is required when things are not understood very clearly. The interpretation required. In the law court, when the lawyers try to interpret before the judge, when the terms are not very clear... That is the same way, in, in, amongst the associates and society of learned scholars. Interpretation is not required when the things are very clear. Just like the sun, sunshine, sunlight. There is no need of a lamp to show the sun. The sun is self-effulgent. It is already there. Light is there. Why one should take a lamp to show the sun? This misinterpretation has killed the spirit, the real essence, of Bhagavad-gé tä.

So there was so many editions and so many misinterpretation. Our, this Kå ñ ë a consciousness movement, our proposition is that we are, I mean to say, presenting Bhagavad-gé tä as it is. We do not misinterpret. So dharma-kñ etra kuru-kñ etra. Kurukñ etra is dharma-kñ etra, the place where religious ritualistic performances are done. Kuru-kñ etre dharmam ä caret. That is the Vedic version. So Kurukñ etra is always... Still people go for pilgrimage in Kurukñ etra, and the station is there, Kurukñ etra, and the place is there. People go there. Kurukñ etra. Why one should interpret that kuru-kñ etra means this body and Pä ë ò avas means these paï ca-indriyas, so many things? There is no question of interpretation.

And this Mahä bhä rata... Mahä bhä rata means " The History of Greater India." That is Mahä bhä rata. History, it is history. It is not a fiction. It is history. Mahä bhä rata. This planet was formerly known as Bhä rata-varñ a. This planet. The whole planet. Not that the piece of land, as we are calling now, Bhä rata-varñ a. No. Before that, this planet was known as Ilä vå ta-varñ a. And after the reign of Mahä rä ja Bharata, the son of Å ñ abhadeva, this planet became Bhä rata-varñ a. So Bhä rata-varñ a means the whole planet. But we have lost... Just like we have lost portion of the present Bhä rata-varñ a as Pakistan. Everyone knows, twenty years before there was no such thing as Pakistan. But circumstantially we have lost. So ..., so the whole Bhä rata-varñ a has been partitioned as this portion is called America, this portion is called Europe, this portion is called Asia. These are modern names. Actually, the whole planet was Bhä rata-varñ a. And the whole planet was being controlled by Vedic culture. So as we have lost our Vedic culture, as we could not control the others, other people in other part of the world, by our culture, by our political maneuver, we have lost. Even up to the day of Battlefield of Kurukñ etra... Why Kurukñ etra? Up to the time of Mahä rä ja Paré kñ it, the whole world was being controlled by one king in New Delhi, Hastinä pura. There was no other kingdom. And when the battlefield was..., the battle was there, all people from all parts of body, all parts of the world, they joined, either this party or that party. That was the battlefield.

So this is the picture of the Battlefield of Kurukñ etra, and Kå ñ ë a is ordered by Arjuna to place the chariot in between the two soldiers. Now, after seeing the soldiers and the kings and other party, Arjuna is aggrieved, so much so that he did not like to fight, and he was crying. Now, Dhå tarä ñ ö ra asked Saï jaya: " Then what happened next? " Dhå tarä ñ ö ra was very much anxious. He said: dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre samavetä yuyutsavaù [Bg. 1.1]. " Now these two parties, yuyutsavaù, they, they, they were, both of them were desirous of fighting, yuyutsavaù. So one party is mä makä ù, my sons, and the other party is Pä ë ò avas, the sons of my brother, Pä ë ò u." Mä makä ù pä ë ò avä ç caiva [Bg. 1.1].

Now, the word is used: yuyutsavaù. " They assembled for fighting." Then what is the use of asking: kim akurvata, " Then what did they do? " It is natural to conclude that when they assemble for fighting, there must be fighting. But why he was asking: kim akurvata? The suspect was that because the parties assembled in the dharma-kñ etra, so they might have changed their ideas. Still, in India, if there is two fighting parties, they go to a temple and ask that " You say the right thing." So in the temple, still, in the villages, they do not dare to speak lies. Yes. The fighting and the misunderstanding becomes settled up. So Dhå tarä ñ ö ra was thinking whether the two parties, they have settled up. He did not like that. He wanted that " These Pä ë ò avas should be killed, and my sons, " I mean to say " the Kauravas, they should come out victorious so that there will be no enemy." He was very much anxious to place his sons on the throne. Because he was blind, he could not acquire the throne. His younger brother was situated on the throne. Now, after the death of his younger brother, he thought that " I missed the opportunity of sitting on the throne. Why not my sons? They have got actual right." That is the background of this Kurukñ etra battle. He was always devising some means, how the sons of Pä ë ò u, his nephews, could be separated and his sons would sit on the throne. That was his idea. Therefore he inquired, kim akurvata. Otherwise, there was no question of inquiring kim akurvata. They went there to fight. They'll fight. But he was suspecting, " If they have made any compromise? " That he did not like. That he did not like. He wanted that " There must be fighting. And they are five brothers. My sons are one hundred in number. So they would be killed, and my sons will be without any rivalry."

This is the background of Kurukñ etra. But another thing is the dharma-kñ etra, effect of dharma-kñ etra was visible in Arjuna. Dharma-kñ etra. He, because he's devotee of Kå ñ ë a... Yasyä sti bhaktir bhagavaty akiï canä sarvair guë ais tatra samä sate surä ù [SB 5.18.12]. Because he's devotee of Kå ñ ë a, therefore he felt: " What is this? Why shall I kill these, my brothers? " Because he was devotee. This sentiment came into the mind of Arjuna, not on the other side, Duryodhana. He never thought. Although they were placed, both of them placed at dharma-kñ etra. The effect of dharma-kñ etra was manifest in the body of Arjuna, not Duryodhana. This is the... If one is pure, then the effects of dharma becomes manifest very quickly. Na mä à duñ kå tino mü ò hä ù prapadyante narä dhamä ù... [Bg. 7.15]. Kå ñ ë a says in... that those who are too much sinful, sinful, simply their life is sinful, duñ kå tinaù. Duñ kå tinaù. Kå ti. Kå ti means one who has got good brain. But duñ kå tinaù, but the brain is applied for mischievous activities. For mischievous activities, it also requires good brain. And similarly, for pious activities, that also requires brain. But those who are applying their brain for mischievous activities, they are called duñ kå tinaù. So duñ kå tinaù... Na mä à duñ kå tino mü ò hä ù. Why they do so? Because they are mü ò hä ù, rascals. If one has got good brain, he should apply it for good work, but sometimes they are utilized... Just like a thief, he has got good brain. A rogue, he has got good brain, but he's applying for mischievous activities, for making people unhappy. That is not the right use. Jï ä na-khala. They are called jï ä na-khala. One who has got nice knowledge, it should be utilized for better purpose.

So the effect of Kurukñ etra, dharma-kñ etra, was visible in the person of Arjuna, not in the person of Duryodhana. That is the difference. Therefore he was crying: " So I am put in such a position that I have to fight and I have to kill my brothers, my nephews, my grandfather." He was too much affected. Although it is weakness, but it is not actually weakness. It is compassion. Arjuna was not a coward, neither he was less heroic than the other side. But out of compassion, because he was devotee...

(Bhagavad-gé tä 2.1 Ahmedabad, December 6, 1972)

If we do not accept Bhagavad-gé tä in terms of the statements given by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, then it is useless. It is simply waste of time. You cannot make any commentary of your poor knowledge. There is nothing very difficult to understand in the Bhagavad-gé tä. It is written in very simple Sanskrit word, and things are very clear. As clear as the sunlight. Where is the question of showing the sunlight or the sun-god with your lamp? Suppose now here is sunlight, sufficient light. We can see the sun and everything very clearly. If somebody brings some lamp and says, " Now I shall show you what is sun, " it is useless. Bhagavad-gé tä is clear itself. Just like the sunlight. It does not require any lamp-bearer to show the Bhagavad-gé tä or Kå ñ ë a. It does not require. You try to see Bhagavad-gé tä as it is. Then you will be benefited. Otherwise, you'll be misled.

Just like in the beginning of the Bhagavad-gé tä it is said, dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre samavetä yuyutsavaù, mä makä ù pä ë ò avä ç caiva kim akurvata saï jaya [Bg. 1.1]. It is very clear. Dharma-kñ etre. Kurukñ etra is dharma-kñ etra. Still. There is Kurukñ etra. All of you know. And it is dharma-kñ etra. People go for pilgrimage. And in the Vedas also it is stated that kuru-kñ etre dharmam ä caret. One should go to Kurukñ etra and perform religious rituals there. So it is dharma-kñ etra by Vedic version, by practical example. Dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre [Bg. 1.1]. But somebody's interpreting Kurukñ etra as this body. From which dictionary he can get this meaning, that Kurukñ etra means this body? This kind of interpretation is going on. But our proposition is that if you want to be benefited by reading Bhagavad-gé tä, don't read such malinterpretation. Read Bhagavad-gé tä as it is. Then you will be benefited. Kuru-kñ etre dharma-kñ etre. It is a fact. Kurukñ etra is dharma-kñ etra. Samavetä yuyutsavaù: [Bg. 1.1] And the persons assembled there, namely, the Pä ë ò avas and the Kauravas, they wanted to fight. Yuyutsavaù. That's all right. Where is the interpretation? They wanted to fight. They selected a nice place, dharma-kñ etra, Kurukñ etra, and there they fought. So it is, meaning is clear. Why there should be interpretation that " The Pä ë ò ava means the five senses and the Kurukñ etra means this body"? Why? Why? Where is the necessity of such interpretation? Interpretation is required where things are not clear. Actually, we do interpret. Just like in the law court, if some clause is not very clear, the lawyers interpret: " It may be like this, it may be like that." But when the things are clear, there is no question of interpretation. That is the system. Amongst the scholars, if things are clear, there should be no interpretation.

So Bhagavad-gé tä, in each and every verse, the things are very, very clear, as clear as the sunshine. So there is no question of interpretation. Our, this publication of Bhagavad-gé tä, we have therefore mentioned: Bhagavad-gé tä As It Is. Because there are six hundred and forty different editions of Bhagavad-gé tä, and almost every one of them has got a different interpretation. That is the system going on now. Therefore, before me, many persons, many swamis, went to Western countries and they presented Bhagavad-gé tä in their own way, but not a single person became a devotee of Kå ñ ë a. Throughout the whole history. Now Bhagavad-gé tä is being presented as it is, and thousands of them are becoming devotee of Kå ñ ë a. Practical. Thousands of them. The simple thing. I presented Kå ñ ë a as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and they accepted it, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and by following the principles, within the four years, so many devotees of Kå ñ ë a have come out. Because there was no adulteration. So our request is try to understand Bhagavad-gé tä without adulteration. Try to understand Bhagavad-gé tä as it is presented. Then you will get knowledge. Otherwise, you will remain in the same ignorance, before reading Bhagavad-gé tä and after reading Bhagavad-gé tä. This is our proposal.

(Bhagavad-gé tä 2.13 Hyderabad, November 19, 1972)

Now, this Mahä bhä rata... Mahä bhä rata... You have heard the name of Mahä bhä rata. It is a history of the fighting between two parties, Kuru-Pä ë ò ava. So this Mahä bhä rata was especially made, I mean the story... Just like expert writer, they will pick up some historical facts and put it into fiction, so, to create more interest. In Bengal there is a famous writer who is compared with [Sir Walter] Scott of England. So Bankim Chandra Chatterjee. Oh, all his novels are picked up from some historical facts, historical facts. That makes the fiction very interesting. Similarly, Mahä bhä rata, this is a history of fighting between two parties, and that was written especially, stré -ç ü dra-dvijabandhü nä à trayé na ç ruti-gocarä [SB 1.4.25].

….So the Mahä bhä rata was written for such persons who are son of a brä hmaë a, but actually, by qualification, he is less than ç ü dra. So Mahä bhä rata was written for them.

And in the middle of Mahä bhä rata, Bhé ñ ma-parva, this Bhagavad-gé tä is inserted. Not inserted. Practically, in the battlefield of Mahä bhä rata this Bhagavad-gé tä was spoken. And it is... You will be surprised. In those days television was in the heart, television. This, I mean to say, Battlefield of Kurukñ etra was television in the heart of Saï jaya. Dhå tarä ñ ö ra, the father of one party, Duryodhana, and his secretary, Saï jaya, were sitting in the room, and they were discussing what happened after this. Just like you get television or radio message in the football ground what is going on by sound and picture, so the same thing was being reflected in his heart and he was in the room. He was explaining the activities of the battlefield. This is the story, like that. Saï jaya uvä ca. Dhå tarä ñ ö ra uvä ca. The beginning is

dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre

samavetä yuyutsavaù

mä makä ù pä ë ò avä ç caiva

kim akurvata saï jaya

[Bg. 1.1]

Now, the old king and his secretary were sitting in a room, and the first question was, " Well, Saï jaya, what happened again, this, this and that? " And he was speaking like that. That was a television.

So anyway, now this Bhagavad-gé tä was written, was spoken to a family man, Arjuna, military man, and the whole Mahä bhä rata is meant for stré -ç ü dra-dvijabandhu, less qualified men. Just see. In those days less qualified men were meant for understanding Bhagavad-gé tä in half an hour. Just imagine what class of less intelligent persons were at that time. The same Bhagavad-gé tä, now scholars like Dr. Radhakrishnan, and others, so many big big scholars, they are scrutinizingly studying; still they cannot understand. But this Bhagavad-gé tä was meant for the less intelligent class of men of that time. Just you can imagine what class of less intelligent class and women were there. It is specially written, you will see, stré -ç ü dra-dvijabandhü nä à trayé na ç ruti-gocarä [SB 1.4.25]. Because woman class and less intelligent class, and these unworthy sons of the brä hmaë as and kñ atriyas, they will not be able to understand the original Vedic literature, therefore it has been presented in a story form with historical facts so that they can understand. That was the origin of Mahä bhä rata.

(Bhagavad-gé tä 3.17-20 New York, May 27, 1966)

When Kå ñ ë a says dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre samavetä yuyutsavaù [Bg. 1.1], where is the difficulty? The Kurukñ etra is still there. Everyone knows. There is a railway station of the name Kurukñ etra and there is a place Kurukñ etra. Now it is being developed by the government. So how you can explain Kurukñ etra otherwise? Kurukñ etra is a fact, and it is a dharma-kñ etra. Still many millions of Indians go there to visit, especially during the solar eclipse occasion they go there. And when Kå ñ ë a was staying on this planet He, His brother Balarä ma, and His sister Subhadrä also visited Kurukñ etra. That ceremony is observed as Ratha-yä trä. Three persons, two brothers and one sister. We are celebrating, introduced this Ratha-yä trä system in the Western countries and recently we had this festival in New York. Very successfully. Perhaps you have read in the paper.

Anyway, this movement is strictly based on the ç ä stra and the Vedic knowledge, and the essence of Vedic knowledge is the Bhagavad-gé tä. And we are presenting as it is. We do not explain Kurukñ etra as this body. There is no meaning. There is no dictionary which means Kurukñ etra this body. So Kurukñ etra is a place. Dharmakñ etra, it is a place of religion or as our Vedic instruction, kurukñ etre dharmä n yajayet. You go to Kurukñ etra and perform ritualistic ceremonies, that is recommended. So there is no question of interpreting Kurukñ etra Dharmakñ etra when you can understand it very easily and directly.

There is no use of interpretation. Interpretation is required when you cannot understand one statement. In the law court if one statement is ambiguous then two parties argue on it. " I think it is this, " " I think..." But when it is clear there is no question of interpretation. Unfortunately the Bhagavad-gé tä is being interpreted by unauthorized persons unnecessarily, and people are kept into darkness. We are trying to protest against this process.

We are presenting Bhagavad-gé tä as it is, and people are taking advantage of it in the Western countries. They are taking good interest, they are reading Bhagavad-gé tä and Ç ré mad-Bhä gavatam in very large scale, increasing our book sales every year, millions and millions dollars. we are already selling, I have already stated. unexpected, sixty hundred thousand, sixty thousand dollars per day. People are taking so much interest in this literature.

(Bhagavad-gé tä 13: 22 Hyderabad, August 17, 1976)

So he also tried to convince Mahä rä ja Yudhiñ ö hira that it was duty. For a kñ atriya, in dutiful war, dharma-yuddha... Dharma-yuddha... Therefore the battlefield of Kurukñ etra is called dharma-kñ etra. Although there was fighting, but the fighting arena was not ordinary land. It is dharma-kñ etra because the fighting was being performed under the superintendence of Kå ñ ë a, Dharma-setu, the leader of all religiosity. Under His superintendence, under His care, the fighting was going on. Therefore this fighting was not ordinary fighting. People cannot understand that how fighting can be religious principle. Yes, the fighting can be also religious principle—but not the present fighting. Present fighting, the politicians, out of their whims, they declare war, that is not religious fighting; that is abominable. That is to serve their political ends. When the politicians cannot control the mass of people being dissatisfied, they make a clique to declare some war so that all their attention may be diverted. This is politics.

But the Battle of Kurukñ etra was not that type of battle. One should be aware of the Battle of Kurukñ etra very nicely. It was dharma-yuddha. Dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre samavetä yuyutsavaù [Bg. 1.1]. Why they settled up that the fighting should take place in the dharma-kñ etra? They are to fight, yuyutsavaù. It was settled they will fight, but why they selected the dharma-kñ etra? This is Vedic system. Even up to date, in villages, not in the cities... In the cities, as soon as there is some misunderstanding between you and me, we go to the court, either criminal court or civil court, to settle up, and it takes years to settle up the business. It goes on. I have seen for generation. One generation passed another generation; the fighting is going on in the court. But if people are Kå ñ ë a conscious, it could be settled within few minutes. Still among the villagers the system is current in India: when there is some fighting, they go to a saintly person or in a temple to settle up. Just like when Sanä tana Gosvä mé was there in Vå ndä vana, so in that area, whenever there was some fighting between two parties, they would come to Sanä tana Gosvä mé: bä bä, ap isko phars lakharji.(?) Bä bä means saintly person. So they would come to Sanä tana Gosvä mé, and they would ask him to become mediator, arbitrator, to settle up. And whatever verdict or judgment he will give, they will accept that " Bä bä has said. That's all right." Therefore Ç ré nivä sa Ä cä rya has prayed the Gosvä mé s, dhé rä dhé ra. Kå ñ ë otké rtana-gä na-nartana-parau, dhé radhé ra-priyau.

Dhé rä dhé ra-priyau. …..

Formerly Bhä ratavarñ a meant this whole planet, not this small tract of land. Now it is called India. But the Bhä ratavarñ a means the whole planet, this planet. There was one flag. Up to Mahä rä ja Paré kñ it there was one flag, not like at present there are hundreds and thousands of flags. You Americans, you know. In New York, when we pass through that United Nation building, we see so many flags are there. They are united, but everywhere the flag is increasing, disunited. Not like that. Actually, by monarchy, the pious king, there was unity all over the world. All over the world. And in the Battlefield of Kurukñ etra it was a family fight, so all the kings of different parts of the world, they joined this side or that side. That is mentioned in the Bhagavad-gé tä. So... But still, Mahä rä ja Yudhiñ ö hira did not like that so many people would be killed for the sake of enthroning him, but Kå ñ ë a desired. Kå ñ ë a desired. Kå ñ ë a wanted it, that... Duryodhana, they were demonlike, simply making politics and diplomacy. Their only business was... Dhå tarä ñ ö ra along with his sons, they were simply making diplomacy how to kill the Pä ë ò avas and catch over the kingdom. That was their policy.

(Ç ré mad-Bhä gavatam 1.8.46 Mä yä pura, October 26, 1974)

Prabhupä da: What is religious fight? Religious fight means you have got right to kill your aggressor. If somebody takes your property, if somebody sets fire in your house, if somebody kidnaps your wife, or somebody is trying to kill you, they are called aggressor. So aggressor should be killed immediately. It is not that somebody has become an aggressor, and if I say, " Now I have become a Vaiñ ë ava, I'll not be violent. I shall tolerate. Caitanya Mahä prabhu has taught us to be tolerant like the tree or the grass. So I shall become tolerant. Let him do." Just like Gandhi used to say. Somebody questioned him that " If somebody comes and violates the chastity of your daughter in your presence, what will you do? " He said, " I shall remain nonviolent." But that is not ç ä stric injunction. This is foolishness.

If somebody is aggressor, he must be killed immediately. Dharma-yuddha. Yudhiñ ö hira Mahä rä ja is thinking that " Although there was fight, the fight was between our own men, my brother, my nephews, my grandfather. So they are family members. I have killed them for my kingdom." He is thinking in that way. He is a pious man. Violence is required. We don't say nonviolence. Just as Caitanya Mahä prabhu, He gave us the instruction, tå ë ä d api suné cena taror api sahiñ ë unä: " One should be tolerant, forbearing like the tree, like the grass." Amä ninä mä nadena: " One should give respect to others. In this way one should chant Hare Kå ñ ë a mantra." Because in chanting Hare Kå ñ ë a mantra, there will be so many aggressors. The nature is so cruel. Just like Prahlä da Mahä rä ja, a five-years-old boy. His only fault was that he was chanting Hare Kå ñ ë a, and the father was aggressor, giving him trouble so many ways. So we must be prepared.

Therefore as there is danger... Suppose Caitanya Mahä prabhu has taught us that " Be tolerant, " but not that where violence is required we should be tolerant. No. Just like while Nityä nanda Prabhu was injured by Jagä i and Mä dhä i, He wanted to immediately kill him. Similarly, nonviolence does not mean that in right causes also you will remain nonviolent. No. You do not attack anybody unnecessarily. You do not kill unnecessarily animal even, not even an ant. You should be nonviolent by your nature. But when there is aggression, there are enemies, the ç ä stra says, dharma-yuddha. That is dharma-yuddha.

So prajä -bhartur dharma-yuddhe vadho dviñ ä m. Dviñ ä m, envious. So they must be killed. But Yudhiñ ö hira Mahä rä ja was thinking in terms of fight between the family: their friends, their nephews, their grandfather. So he was thinking himself as culprit. But in dharma-yuddha... The Pä ë ò avas, they tried to settle the issue. Actually, the kingdom belonged to Mahä rä ja Yudhiñ ö hira. It was inheritance from his father, Pä ë ò u. But some way or other, they were cheated by the Kurus. They were sent to the forest. In the meantime they grabbed everything. And when they came back, so asked, " Give us some..., our ruling power, " so they would not give. " No. Without fight, we shall not give." So the Pä ë ò avas, even Kå ñ ë a tried their best to settle up the issue, but there was no settlement. So at that time, war was declared. That is dharma-yuddha. They tried to settle up the fight, but it was not possible. When it is not possible, then the last resort is to take to fighting. That is dharma-yuddha.

The battlefield... It is therefore called dharma-kñ etra. Dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre [Bg. 1.1]. That fight was right. And especially when Kå ñ ë a was present, it is already dharma-kñ etra. Wherever... Just like this is temple. Similar houses are there, many. Why it is temple? Because Kå ñ ë a is there. Therefore it is called dharma-kñ etra, temple. What is the difference between temple? In other houses there may be big hall like this. There may be many men eating, sleeping. That is not temple. Where actually God is there, that is called temple. Similarly, although battle of Kurukñ etra was a fighting place, because Kå ñ ë a was there, therefore it is dharma-kñ etra. Wherever Kå ñ ë a is there, that is dharma-kñ etra. Tatra tiñ ö hä mi nä rada yatra gä yanti mad-bhaktä ù. So those who are bhaktas, they can make every place a pilgrimage, because they can sing the glories of the Lord and they can bring the Lord in that place. So it doesn't matter whether if he is here or there, in America or India. Wherever Kå ñ ë a is there, that is dharma-kñ etra. Dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre samavetä yuyutsavaù [Bg. 1.1].

So that fight was quite sanctioned by the ç ä stra. It is not the Pä ë ò avas did wrong, no. They did right thing. But Yudhiñ ö hira Mahä rä ja, being too cautious, too religious, he is thinking that " I did not carry out the injunction of the ç ä stra that fighting is meant for the enemies, not for the friends. So I have fought with my friends, with my relatives, with my brothers. Therefore I am most abominable." That is the nature of the Vaiñ ë ava. They always think of themselves as very humble, meek. That is the tå ë ä d api... Personally, one should remain very humble and meek, but that does not mean that when there is... For a kñ atriya, to kill the enemies, that is dharma-yuddha. That is religious. …..

(Ç ré mad-Bhä gavatam 1.8.50 Los Angeles, May 12, 1973)

Ç rotavyä dé ni rä jendra nå ë ä à santi sahasraç aù [SB 2.1.2]. This verse we discussed yesterday, that " Those who are materialistic persons, they have got hundreds and thousands of topics, " and, although we are in Kå ñ ë a consciousness, because we are in the material world, sometimes we have to deal with many unnecessary talks. But mind that our unnecessary talks and others' unnecessary talks are not the same, because we sometimes talk unnecessarily, but the aim is Kå ñ ë a. Just like Battlefield of Kurukñ etra. The Bhagavad-gé tä begins,

dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre

samavetä yuyutsavaù

mä makä ù pä ë ò avä ç caiva

kim akurvata saï jaya

[Bg. 1.1]

The topics began from the warfield, dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre. But it is dharma-kñ etra. " Why dharma-kñ etra? It is battlefield." Because Kå ñ ë a is there. Kå ñ ë a is conducting the battle, therefore it is dharma-kñ etra. Dharma-kñ etra means religious... (end)

(Ç ré mad-Bhä gavatam 2.1.1-6 Excerpts Los Angeles, July 2, 1970)

Guest (7): The first ç loka of the Bhagavad-gé tä says,

dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre

samaveta yuyutsavaù

mä makä ù pä ë ò avä ç caiva

kim akurvata saï jaya

[Bg. 1.1]

I ask you, Prabhu, what is that dharma-kñ etra and kuru-kñ etra?

Prabhupä da: Dharma-kñ etra everyone knows. Kurukñ etra is still dharma-kñ etra. Everyone goes there for religious performances. Where is the difficulty? Why you make it difficult? In candra-grahaë a, in sü rya-grahaë a, hundreds, thousands of people still go there. This is dharma-kñ etra. In the Vedic injunction it is said kurukñ etre dharmaà yajet: " When you want to perform religious ritualistic ceremonies, go to Kurukñ etra." So Kurukñ etra is still there, the place is there, the station is there, and it is mentioned in the Vedas, it is mentioned in the Bhagavad-gé tä. Where is the difficulty? Why you create difficulty? It is your fault that creates difficulty. Otherwise Kurukñ etra is dharma-kñ etra since time immemorial. That's all. Now chant Hare Kå ñ ë a.

(Ç ré mad-Bhä gavatam 2.3.18-19 Bombay, March 23, 1977, At Cross Maidan Pandal)

That is the itihä saà purä tanam. In the Vedic literatures there are itihä sas, or histories. Just like Mahä bhä rata. Mahä bhä rata is the history. Bhä rata means India, and Mahä means greater. Greater India. Just like modern age they use " Greater Britain, " " Greater this, " so many, same thing. Mahä bhä rata means " Greater..." Mahä means great, and Bhä rata means India. " The history of Greater India." Although India is very small now in comparison to... Although it is called subcontinent, still, in comparison to your America or Africa, it is very small. But formerly it was not so small. Greater India means India and outside also. And so far we collect records from the Mahä bhä rata, part of Europe, also India. Up to Greek and Rome. Therefore it is called Mahä bhä rata. And when there was the Battle of Kurukñ etra, all kings and rulers from different parts of the world, they joined either this party or that party. The Kaurava, the dynasty of the Kurus, they were ruling all over the world. The capital was Hastinä pura, which is now known as New Delhi. It is very old. And the emperor, up to Mahä rä ja Paré kñ it, they were ruling all over the world. There was one flag, not many flags. Therefore it is called Mahä bhä rata.

So Mahä bhä rata, the Battle of Kurukñ etra was executed by two section of brothers of the same family. It was the one empire, one king, but Dhå tarä ñ ö ra and his younger brother... They were two brothers. So Dhå tarä ñ ö ra being blind, he was not qualified to occupy the throne, so his younger brother, Pä ë ò u, he was given the throne. And Pä ë ò u died untimely, keeping his children, these five brothers, Pä ë ò avas. Because they were son of Pä ë ò u, they were known as Pä ë ò avas. So Pä ë ò u also belonged to the Kuru family, and Dhå tarä ñ ö ra's son also belonged to the Kuru family. Actually they are Kauravas. But when there was fight between the two brothers' son, one party was known as Kaurava, and the other party was known as Pä ë ò ava. Therefore Dhå tarä ñ ö ra says in the Bhagavad-gé tä beginning, mä makä ù pä ë ò avä ç caiva [Bg. 1.1]. Mä makä ù means " my sons, " and... Because both of them are Kurus, now they are divided, mä makä ù, " my sons, " and Pä ë ò avas, " the Pä ë ò u's sons. " Kim akurvata saï jaya [Bg. 1.1].

And this Kurukñ etra is dharma-kñ etra. Not because the fight was there and Kå ñ ë a was on the battlefield, therefore it is called dharma-kñ etra. Sometimes it is interpreted like that. But actually Kurukñ etra was dharma-kñ etra since very, very long time. In the Vedas it is stated, kuru-kñ etre dharmam ä caret: " If one wants to execute ritualistic ceremony, he should go to Kurukñ etra." And it is the system still now in India, if there is some disagreement or quarrel between two parties, so still they would go to the temple—temple is dharma-kñ etra—so that one may not dare to speak lie in front of the Deity. This was still going on. Even one is very low in mentality, still, if he is challenged that " You are talking this false. Now speak before the Deity, " he will hesitate, " No." This is India still. You cannot speak lies before the Deity. That is offense. Don't consider that Deity is a marble statue. No. Svayaà bhagavä n. Just like Caitanya Mahä prabhu. As soon as He saw Jagannä tha Deity, He immediately fainted. " Oh, here is My Lord." Not like us: " Oh, here is some statue." No. It is the question of appreciation. So you appreciate or not appreciate, the Deity is the Supreme Personality of Godhead personally. We should always remember. So we shall be very careful before the Deity, not to commit offense. In serving Him, in offering Him prasä dam, in dressing Him, we should always think, " Here is personally Kå ñ ë a." He is personally, but due to our lack of knowledge, we cannot understand it.

So everything in the ç ä stra we should follow. This is called brahminical culture. This Kå ñ ë a consciousness movement means brahminical culture—the cultural exhibition of the first-class men, first-class men. The brä hmaë a is to be understood as the first-class man within the human society. Therefore Kå ñ ë a says, cä tur-varë yaà mayä så ñ ö aà guë a-karma-vibhä gaç aù [Bg. 4.13]. Itihä sa, history, history means to understand the activities of the first-class man. That is history. They pick up the most important incidences. Therefore the example is given here that udä haranti imam itihä saà purä tanam. Because it is a first-class incidence... Otherwise, if you record the history of the whole period, then where..., who will read that, and who will appreciate that, and where you will keep that? Daily so many things are happening. Therefore, according to Vedic system, the only important incidences are recorded in the history. Therefore it is called Purä ë a. Purä ë a means old history. Purä tanam. Purä tanam means very, very old. That are recorded. So this Ç ré mad-Bhä gavatam is the collection of very old history, historical incidence. Itihä sa purä ë ä nä à sä raà sä raà samuddhå tya(?). Sä ram means essence. Not that all nonsense records have to be taken. No. Sä raà sä ram, only the important, essence, that are to be recorded. This is called Indian history. Mahä bhä rata... Mahä means Greater India. Greater India, there were so many incidences were there, but the most important incidence, the Battle of Kurukñ etra, is there. Not that all the battles should be recorded.

(Ç ré mad-Bhä gavatam 6.1.20 Chicago, July 4, 1975)

Prabhupä da: There is no interpretation. Kå ñ ë a says. In the Bhä gavata it is said that He lifted the mountain just like a child snatch one flower or the..., what is called? Yes. Mushroom. Yes. So easily. They do not believe.

Guest (3): No, but in Bhä gavata there are many ç lokas interpreted by many teachers and...

Prabhupä da: Those who believe in Bhä gavata, they do not interpret. Those who do not believe in Bhä gavata, they interpret.

Guest (3): But its meaning has to be understood.

Prabhupä da: Meaning is clear. There is nothing to be understood. But the rascals, they draw their own meaning. Just like Bhagavad-gé tä. What is the difficulty to understand this:

dharma-kñ etre kuru-kñ etre

samavetä yuyutsava

mä makä ù pä ë ò avä ç caiva

kim akurvata saï jaya

[Bg. 1.1]

What is the difficulty to understand Kurukñ etra is a religious place, acknowledged by the Vedas, and it is going on still? Why do they interpret, " Kurukñ etra means this body"? Is it not rascal? Why there is interpretation when you understand a thing very clearly? Eh?