View source for Supposing someone else is in danger and you go and rescue them. Isn't that being a hero? Or you decide not to and you go away

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"Supposing someone else is in danger and you go and rescue them. Isn't that being a hero? Or you decide not to and you go away"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|MadhuGopaldas}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|01Aug11}}
{{last|01Aug11}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Questions asked to Srila Prabhupada]]
[[Category:Questions asked to SP... 1971]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="Philosophy_Discussions" class="sub_section" sec_index="13" parent="Lectures" text="Philosophy Discussions"><h3>Philosophy Discussions</h3>
</div>
<div id="PhilosophyDiscussiononJeanPaulSartre_0" class="quote" parent="Philosophy_Discussions" book="Lec" index="19" link="Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre" link_text="Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre">
<div class="heading">But you cannot rescue. You rescue... Just like one man is drowning, and you become hero and jump over the water and take out his shirt and coat, and you come on the shore that "I've saved him." (laughter) This is not saving him. Similarly, you have no eyes to see whom to save. You are simply seeing the dress. So saving the dress, that is not heroism, neither it is protection.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre|Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: That means he is in an awkward position. He wants to be in a peaceful position, but he does not know how to get that position. So because he does not know, that does not mean that there is no peaceful position. Suppose some... It is something like that, that a man in the market, he has been cheated simply by counterfeit currency. He is disappointed that there is no real money. But actually that is not a fact. The government is there, and the currency is there, the real currency.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: His idea is that once I understand that whatever I choose, I have to be responsible for that, then I become full of anxiety because I am always thinking I have to choose right in order to enjoy something. If I choose wrongly, I must suffer. I am responsible both ways. So he says this feeling of responsibility makes me always dreading and anxious about the future.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. The responsibility is there, certainly, but why you do not take the responsibility of transferring yourself in a safety place where you will have no anxiety? It may be you do not know where is a safety place. But why don't you ask somebody who knows it? Why you are becoming disappointed? As you say that we have got responsibility, why, as a responsible man, so search out  somebody who can say you about the safety place where there is no anxiety. We can give. That is called Vaikuṇṭha: no anxiety. Vaikuṇṭha means no anxiety. There is a place.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: His claim is that we are tossed into the world and we are abandoned by God; that God is dead.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. Abandoned by God does not mean God is dead. You are condemned, that we have admitted, so your condemnation does not mean God is also condemned. God is always, who has condemned you, He is always safe. So He cannot be dead.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: He says because we have been abandoned by God, therefore we must rely on ourselves alone.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No. Abandoned by God—why? God is not partial, that He is accepting somebody and abandoning somebody. You have done something for which you are abandoned. So if you rectify your position, you will be accepted again. (aside as someone enters:) Yes?</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: His idea is that because we have to choose for ourselves, everything is in our hands. That for instance we can become in a situation either a coward or a hero. This is in our hands, some situation that we must confront.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Then what you can do? If you say that you are being tossed by some superior power, how you can become a hero? If you become a hero, then you will be more kicked, because you are under superior power. Therefore a man who is culprit, he is under police custody, so if he becomes hero he will be simply beaten and punished, that's all.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: I remember one example he gave was that supposing there is wartime, and you are called upon to go to war. He said it wouldn't matter if you went or didn't go. If you went, then you must choose to be a hero; you must fight very bravely, and not a coward. But if you don't go, then you must choose to be a hero to resist the war. You must choose to be a hero resisting the war. One way or the other, you have to choose to be a hero and not a coward.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Coward... You are neither coward nor hero. You are simply an instrument. You are... Just like a child plays with a doll. A doll is placed sometimes on this side, that side, sometimes so, sometimes on his breast. So you are just like a doll. You can neither become hero nor become coward. You are completely under the control of somebody who is superior.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: Suppose someone is attacking you, ready to kill you. You have the power to choose whether to be a hero and defend or whether to run.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: It is not hero to defend. It is a natural action. Even a dog can become hero when he is attacked by somebody. Even an ant can become hero. One ant is walking on the table, so if you check his way, he also becomes hero. So there is no use of becoming hero like that. That heroism and cowardice are the same. It is simply mental concoction. Because after, all you are under the control of somebody. He can do as he likes with you. So what is the use of your becoming hero or coward?</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: Supposing someone else is in danger and you go and rescue them. Isn't that being a hero? Or you decide not to and you go away.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: But you cannot rescue. You rescue... Just like one man is drowning, and you become hero and jump over the water and take out his shirt and coat, and you come on the shore that "I've saved him." (laughter) This is not saving him. Similarly, you have no eyes to see whom to save. You are simply seeing the dress. So saving the dress, that is not heroism, neither it is  protection.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: So the real heroes are the devotees, who save actually.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: His idea is that in any situation you have to be the hero. If you're a businessman you have to valiantly do your business and make a good business, and then you are a hero.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So a real hero, one can be, when he is fully empowered or he is fully protected. So that hero is a devotee, who is fully protected by Kṛṣṇa.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: Sometimes when they portray heroes in different ways...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That kind of hero you find in the insect also, that very heroically following on the path: "Put, put, put, put." That is foolishness.</p>
<p>Śyāmasundara: It always appears that the hero is protected, that nothing can stop him. He is so heroic nothing can stop him.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That heroism is just like insect heroism. There is blazing fire, and all kinds of ants and insects are falling in. So what is the use of such heroism? He has no sound knowledge. He is talking speculation. (break)</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>