So everyone is īśvara. Just like the modern theory is going on. "Everyone is God." That's all right. God means īśvara, controller. But there are different qualities of controller. I may be controller of my disciples, a few dozen or few hundred. But there are controllers, millions. They are controlling millions. Therefore my control and his control is not equal. Therefore you find out one controller of another. Everyone is relative controller. He controls and he becomes controlled. Nobody's absolute controller. Just like our Minister Saheb. He's controller, but he's also controlled. So when you come to the point, if you find out some person that he's simply controller, not controlled, He's Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is simply controller, not controlled, He's Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is simply controller. When Kṛṣṇa was present on this planet... You see the history of His life. He simply controlled. He never became controlled. He was controller. Therefore the verdict of the śāstra, Vedic literature, is that īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). The supreme controller is Kṛṣṇa. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ.
Absolute (Lectures, Other)
Expressions researched:
"absolute"
Lectures
Nectar of Devotion Lectures
Bhakti-rasa is better than liberation, mukti. Because generally the Māyāvādī philosophers, jñāni-sampradāya, they consider mukti means to merge into the spiritual existence, Brahman. Brahma-sayujya-mukti, to, to merge into the impersonal Brahman effulgence of the Absolute. They consider it, that is the highest. And the Buddha philosophers, they think to make all these activities zero, śūnyavādī. Dismantle. Because on account of this combination of matter, earth, water, fire, air, ether, this body's made, and the body is subjected to pains and pleasure on account of this mixture. So Buddha philosophy is that you dismantle this mixture. Let earth go to the earth portion and water portion to the water portion. Then there is no existence of the body, and there is no pains and pleasure. Make it zero. This is called śūnyavādī. And the Māyāvādī, their philosophy is stop this variegatedness. We are suffering pains and pleasure within this material world on account of these varieties. So these varieties, they are on, built on the foundation of the Supreme Spirit. So merge into the Supreme Spirit and get out of these varieties. This is their philosophy. So the Buddha philosophy or the Māyāvāda philosophy, they're almost one, because their ultimate goal is to make things zero.
Just like you are a medical man. To acquire your knowledge, you had to accept the medical college, the professors. So this is natural. If we want to know something which is not, or which is unknown to me, then we have to accept a guru, a superior man. Guru means superior man. Tad vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet. Guru means "heavy," or "superior." That is the law. So our process of Vedic knowledge is that we get knowledge from the superior just like Brahmā, Lord Brahmā. He's the first, original creature, within this universe. And he got knowledge from God, Kṛṣṇa, the Absolute. The Vedas means the knowledge which he heard... Tene brahma hṛdā ādi-kavaye. So there is sampradāya. Brahmā imparted this knowledge to Nārada. Nārada imparted this knowledge to Vyāsadeva. Evaṁ paramparā. That, this is our process of knowledge. We get knowledge from the superior. Everyone gets knowledge from the superior. Nobody gets knowledge automatically. That is not possible.
So this loving propensity is there, living entity. Every living entity—it doesn't matter whether he is man or animal—the love is there. But at the present moment, it is being pervertedly reflected. Just like love between Kṛṣṇa and Mother Yaśodā, that love is reflected here also between the mother and the child, the same love. Because unless there is love in the Absolute, there cannot be any exhibition of love in the relative world. The Vedānta-sūtra says, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). The, everything is emanating from the Absolute. So there is love. Just like Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa love, Kiśora-kiśorī, young Kṛṣṇa, young Rādhārāṇī. This love is pervertedly reflected in this material world which is in the name of love, but it is lust; therefore it is called perverted reflection. Lust because the, a young boy, a young girl mix together, they love together, but a slight disagreement, they separate. Why? Because that is not love. That is lust. The lust is going on in the name of love. But the reflection is from there. Therefore it is called māyā. The same love between father and mother, father and son, vātsalya-rasa, mādhurya-rasa, sākhya-rasa, friendship... Here, we have got friends, but a slight disagreement, we separate. Master and servant—dāsya-rasa. A servant is very faithful so long you pay. As soon as you stop payment, no more service. Finished.
Therefore it is to be understood that the love with Kṛṣṇa in the platform of mādhurya-rasa, vātsalya-rasa, sākhya-rasa, dāsya-rasa, śānta-rasa, that is the real platform, in the spiritual world. And because the love affairs are there in the Absolute, that is reflected in this relative world. And here is also the same love is there, but it is not very palatable. It is not without any fault. There are so many faults. Therefore real love can be reciprocated with Kṛṣṇa. In the material world, there cannot be any real love. Therefore the real love cannot be appreciated with our, this material senses. Whatever we appreciate or experience by the material senses, that is not love, that is lust. Motive. There is some motive. One is friend of another person, very intimate friends, both of them have got some motive. As soon as the motive is frustrated, they separate. These things, we find. Even husband and wife, as soon as the sense gratification is disturbed, immediately there is divorce between husband and wife. So... (aside, in response to background noise:) What is this outside?
So everyone can have Kṛṣṇa as his sons. Everyone can have Kṛṣṇa as his friend. Everyone can have Kṛṣṇa as his master. Dak, dāsya-rasa, sākhya-rasa, mādhurya-rasa. Even everyone can have Kṛṣṇa as their paramour. These things are very difficult to understand, but these rasas... They are called rasas. Parakīya-rasa. The parakīya-rasa means just like a man or woman has got his husband or wife, but he has got love with others. That is called parakīya-rasa. That is most abominable in this material world, but that is most first-class thing in the spiritual world. Parakīya-rase yāṅhā brajete pracāra. So these things are very higher principles of spiritual life. But we can understand that whatever we are experiencing in this material world, that thing, in its pure form, is existing in the Supreme Absolute. That is the fact. Otherwise they cannot be manifested in this material... Just like on the bank of a tank, pond, there is a tree, and you find the tree just upverted. The upper portion of the tree has gone down. That is described in the Bhagavad-gītā. Find out in the Fifteenth Chapter: ūrdhva-mūlam adhah-śākhaṁ aśvatthaṁ prāhur avyayam (BG 15.1). Find out this verse. This material world is the reflection, urdhva mulam. Generally the tree has got its root down, but the material world... So... It is described as a big banyan tree, but the root is upwards.
So long you have got demand, you cannot be happy. That is one thing. Either you demand to be elevated to the heavenly planet, or you demand to be one with the Brahman, these are demands. Or if you want some mystic power, these are all demands. So, so long you'll have demand, you'll never be happy. You'll never be happy. Therefore Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī says, bhukti-mukti-siddhi-kāmī sakali aśānta. Aśānta. Bhukti means the karmīs, those who are demanding to, to be elevated in the heavenly planets, or higher planetary system for more, more elevated material happiness, they are called bhukti. Bhukti-kāmī-bhoga, enjoyment of the bodily concept of life. They are called bhukti-kāmī. Bhukti and mukti. Mukti means the jñānīs, they want to be liberated from material bondage and merge into the existence of Brahman, Absolute. That is mukti. Bhukti, mukti and siddhi. And the yogis, they want siddhi, aṣṭa-siddhi. Aṇimā, laghimā. They can become more smaller than the smallest, bigger than the biggest. Prāpti, īśitā vaśitā prākāmya. There are eight kinds of siddhis the yogis can attain. But a devotee does not want all these things. He has no demand. These are the three demands: bhukti-mukti-siddhi. But devotee has no demand. That is the special qualification. Devotee never demands anything. Just like Dhruva Mahārāja, as soon as appeared Kṛṣṇa, he said: svāmin kṛtārtho 'smi varaṁ na yāce (CC Madhya 22.42). "I don't say." So this is pure devotee. And as soon as you become pure devotee, then your love for Kṛṣṇa becomes actual fact in the spiritual world, and you can associate with Kṛṣṇa in conjugal love or as parent, or as friend, or as servant, in whatever... Or as trees or flower, as a water, as you desire. That is perfection of life. This is the perfection of bhakti.
So one has to make his determination. Ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānu-śīlanam (CC Madhya 19.167). This bhakti... Ānukūlyena means Kṛṣṇa wants. You serve. You supply. This is ānukūla. Now He says, Kṛṣṇa: man-manā bhava mad-bhakta. Now you become always engaged in thinking of Kṛṣṇa. Chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare... That is man-manā, always thinking of Kṛṣṇa. Because thinking of Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa, there is no difference. Kṛṣṇa is absolute. As soon as you chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, as soon as you remember Kṛṣṇa, that means Kṛṣṇa is on your tongue, dancing. Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa... Abhinnatvād nāma-nāminoḥ. Therefore by constant company with Kṛṣṇa, puṇya-śravaṇa-kīrtanaḥ. Śṛṇvatāṁ sva-kathāḥ kṛṣṇaḥ puṇya-śravaṇa-kīrtanaḥ (SB 1.2.17). If you simply hear about Kṛṣṇa, then you become pious. Puṇya-śravaṇa. Simply by hearing, you become pious. You haven't got to arrange for great, great sacrifices, tons of ghees. No. Simply by hearing Kṛṣṇa-kathāḥ, you'll be purified.
In the Bhagavad-gītā the living entities have been described as prakṛti. Apareyam itas tu vidhi me prakṛtim parā. After describing the material energies—earth, water, air, fire sky, mind, intelligence, ego—Kṛṣṇa says apareyam, all these energies, separated energies, material energies, they are aparā, inferior. But that is also Kṛṣṇa's energies. Inferior means not actually inferior, because they, there cannot be anything inferior which is emanating from Kṛṣṇa. The inferior in this sense: by our absence of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Because we have come here, in this material world, to enjoy to satisfy, sense satisfaction, sense gratification, we have made it inferior. Otherwise it is not inferior. One who knows how to utilize this energy, for him, it is not inferior. Nirbandha-kṛṣṇa-sambandhe yukta-vairāgyam ucyate. One who does not know how to utilize this material energy for the purpose of Kṛṣṇa, for them, it is inferior. Otherwise, advaya-jñāna, absolute... Idaṁ hi viśvaṁ bhagavān ivetaraḥ. Nārada Muni has described before Vyāsadeva: idaṁ hi viśvaṁ bhagavān ivetaraḥ. It appears like different, but actually Kṛṣṇa... A mahā-bhāgavata... This is the vision of mahā-bhāgavata, not ordinary man. Mahā-bhāgavata... Sthāvara-jaṅgama dekhi tāra mūrti (CC Madhya 8.274). A mahā-bhāgavata sees a tree or an animal or a... He does not see the form but he sees his iṣṭa deva mūrti; he sees there Kṛṣṇa. Actually, Kṛṣṇa is there as Paramātmā. So he sees Paramātmā. He does not see the external body.
When one understands Kṛṣṇa in truth, then he's allowed to enter; otherwise, he cannot enter. He remains outside. Just like if we have got capacity to enter into the sun planet then we can enter. Otherwise we remain in the sunshine. To remain in the sunshine and to enter into the sun planet is not the same thing. Although the sun and the sunshine are light, illumination, still there is difference between the sun and the sunshine. Similarly, impersonal Brahman effulgence and Vaikuṇṭha planets, both of them, absolute, but still Brahman effulgence and entering into the Vaikuṇṭha planets or Goloka Vṛndāvana planets are not the same. Or, in other words, those are not, those who are not devotees, but impersonalists, they can stay outside the Vaikuṇṭha planets in the Brahman effulgence, but they cannot enter into the Vaikuṇṭha planets. Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. Because they have not adored or glorified the lotus feet of the Lord, they are not allowed into the Goloka Vṛndāvana or Vaikuṇṭha planet. And they cannot remain perpetually in the impersonal Brahman effulgence. They come down again to these material varieties. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ (SB 10.2.32). They cannot go upwards. They come, come down. That we have practically seen. All big, big swamis, all Vedantists, but they could not find. Even big, big swamis, they are now taking to Bhāgavata and other Vaiṣṇava literature at the present moment. Because their own literature is finished. How long they'll simply call for Brahman? Unless they come to Kṛṣṇa, there is no varieties of enjoyment. Therefore here it is said that "There is no..." Go on.
Therefore one, one who, even coming from low-grade family, if he has become Vaiṣṇava, then he's no longer in the worldly society. He's transcendental. Brahmā-bhūyāya kalpate (BG 14.26). One who is engaged in pure devotional service, he's in the Brahman platform. He should not be neglected. Vaiṣṇave jāti-buddhiḥ, arcye śilā-dhīr, guruṣu nara-mati, vaiṣṇave jāti-buddhiḥ. These are warned. One should not consider the Deity as made of stone, arcye śilā-dhīr. Śālagrāma-śilā. If somebody says, "What is this, a stone chip, or stone ball?" No. These are warned in the śāstra. Vaiṣṇave... Ja... Similarly, to consider a Vaiṣṇava as belonging to certain caste is as abominable as to think that the Deity is made of stone. Everyone knows it is made of stone. But are we worshiping the stone? We are spending so much money for decorating stone? No. Because we have no eyes to see, we see stone. Kṛṣṇa is not stone. Kṛṣṇa is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is absolute. He can appear in any way, any form, as He likes. That is His mercy. Because we cannot see except stone. Similarly, therefore He appears as stone. But He's not stone. If we think that it is stone, then we are gone to hell. You see. No. Arcye śilā-dhīr. Similarly Vaiṣṇava. A Vaiṣṇava should not be considered that "Here is American Vaiṣṇava," or "brāhmaṇa Vaiṣṇava," and "śūdra Vaiṣṇava." No. Vaiṣṇava is Vaiṣṇava. There is no more distinction. Just like Ganges water. So many sewage ditches, water coming, mixing in Calcutta.
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures
So Nityānanda means prakāśa, svayaṁ-prakāśa, Balarāma. Balarāma is, I mean to say, presenting Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Balarāma is guru-tattva. Guru is representative of Balarāma, of Nityānanda, Guru Nityānanda, because He is exhibiting Kṛṣṇa. He is presenting Kṛṣṇa, prakāśa. Just like when there is sunshine you can see everything very correctly. That is called prakāśa. In the darkness everything is covered. At night we cannot see, but during daytime, when there is prakāśa, illumination, then we can see everything. So Nityānanda Prabhu is Balarāma. Balarāma is prakāśa-tattva. He's manifesting Kṛṣṇa. Balarāma hoila nitāi. So vande śrī... Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya is the Supreme Absolute Personality of Godhead, and next, Nityānanda, or, yes, Nityānanda, is exhibiting Him. When Nityānanda was preaching in Bengal, He first of all delivered the Jagāi and Mādhāi. That was his first business. He showed how to serve Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya means Kṛṣṇa Himself. Śrī-kṛṣṇa-caitanya rādha-kṛṣṇa nahe anya. Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa combined together is Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya. And Nityānanda is exhibiting Kṛṣṇa Caitanyadeva.
Everyone is thinking to become the master, prabhu. Prabhu you can become. That is not, I mean to say, extraordinary. Someway or other we are prabhus. Suppose I am a family man. I am managing my family, my wife, my children, my servants, my subordinates, so I may be prabhu. In that sense I am a small prabhu. Similarly, everyone is prabhu, he has got some subordinates. But there is the supreme prabhu, the prabhu of all prabhus. So Mahāprabhu is Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya. He's Kṛṣṇa. As it is stated in the Brahma-saṁhitā: īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Īśvara means ruler or controller. So all of us more or less a little controller or ruler, but not the absolute ruler. The absolute ruler is Kṛṣṇa. Similarly, the absolute prabhu, master, is Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu. So, tāṅhāra caraṇāśrita: The prabhu... Everyone is prabhu—that's all right—but if that prabhu takes shelter of the lotus feet of the Mahāprabhu, sei baḍa dhanya, he becomes glorified. Not to remain satisfied becoming a prabhu of your wife, children, family, country, or this or that, but you should try to become the servant of Mahāprabhu. Tāṅhāra caraṇāśrita (CC Adi 7.2). He's glorified because he receives... To become under the lotus feet of Śrī. If you take shelter of the Supreme Prabhu, Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu, then your life is successful. Sei baḍa dhanya. He is glorified. To become servant of God or Mahāprabhu is very prestigious. It is not very easy thing to become servant of Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu or servant of Kṛṣṇa. So if anyone agrees to become the servant of the Supreme Prabhu, master, then his life is successful. Sei baḍa dhanya. He is glorified.
Pradyumna: Translation: "Spiritually there are no differences between these five tattvas, for on the transcendental platform everything is absolute. Yet there are also varieties in the spiritual world, and in order to taste these spiritual varieties one should distinguish between them." (CC Adi 7.5)
Prabhupāda: Pañca-tattva. The Absolute Truth is divided into five subject matter of relishing transcendental mellow. Advaya-jñāna, without any difference. Vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam: (SB 1.2.11) Asolute Truth is one, but still, there are varieties, transcendental varieties. Just like Brahman, impersonal Brahman; and Paramātmā, localized aspect of the Supreme Lord, Paramātmā; and Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead—they are one. There is no difference. Brahman is not different from Bhagavān, and Bhagavān is not different from Brahman. Bhagavān is addressed by Arjuna as Para-brahman. Brahman realization, gradually... First realization: impersonal Brahman; then localized Brahman; then personal Brahman. The personal Brahman is called Para-brahman, the Supreme Brahman. Impersonal Brahman is the beginning of realization of the Absolute Truth. That is not final. Therefore those who are satisfied with impersonal Brahman, their knowledge is not perfect. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). The realization of the Absolute Truth is the platform of viśuddha-sattva. So unless one comes to the platform of personal realization of the Lord, one is supposed to be aviśuddha-buddhi: intelligence is not yet perfectly pure.
The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand; therefore they think that "This Kṛṣṇa-līlā is māyā." Therefore we call them Māyāvādī. Everything... Māyā māyā, neti neti. They take Kṛṣṇa also as māyā; therefore they are called Māyāvādīs. Because a living entity comes in this material world accepting this material body, similarly, when Kṛṣṇa comes, they think that He has also a material body. This is Māyāvādī. Kṛṣṇa has no such thing. Therefore you'll find in Dr. Radhakrishnan's book, when Kṛṣṇa says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65), he says, "Not to the Kṛṣṇa person, but the Absolute which is within the Kṛṣṇa." He does not know that Kṛṣṇa is not different from His body. That he does not know. Kṛṣṇa is absolute. Sambhavāmy ātma-māyayā (BG 4.6).
- yadā yadā hi dharmasya
- glānir bhavati bhārata
- abhyutthānam adharmasya
- tadātmānaṁ sṛjāmy aham
- (BG 4.7)
Sambhavāmy ātma-māyayā (BG 4.6). He does not accept this mayic body. Etad īśanam īśasya. That is the, I mean to say, power, omnipotency of Kṛṣṇa. Even He accepts this material body, it does not mean that He is material. Just like we see the Deity, the Deity, Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa Deity, in our front. Everyone will say, "Oh, this is a Deity made of brass, material." But no, it is not material. You have to study in that way. Arcye viṣṇu śilā-dhīr guruṣu nara-matiḥ. These are nārakī buddhi. Vaiṣṇave jāti-buddhiḥ. The Deity as material, śiladhiḥ, considering as metal or stone or wood, and guruṣu nara-matiḥ, and guru as ordinary human being. Vaiṣṇave jāti-buddhiḥ: a Vaiṣṇava, to consider, "Here is American Vaiṣṇava and here is a brāhmaṇa vaiṣṇava." No, Vaiṣṇava is Vaiṣṇava. This is absolute. Guruṣu nara-matiḥ. Guru, although he is appearing like human being, he should not be considered. Ācāryaṁ māṁ vijānīyān nāvamanyeta karhicit (SB 11.17.27). These are the injunction of the śāstras. Suppose we are worshiping here. The Māyāvādī will say, "They are worshiping a brass, metal Deity."
So His vision, His presence, His activities, they are all spiritual. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, janma karma me divyaṁ yo jānāti tattvataḥ: "Anyone who understands the absolute nature of My birth, of My appearance, disappearance and activities," tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9), "he becomes immediately liberated." Sa aikṣata. Sa imāḻ lokān asṛjata. This is Aitareya Upaniṣad. What is that? Sa aikṣata. The same thing: "He saw. He put His glance." Sa aikṣata. Sa imāḻ lokān asṛjata: "He has created all this material manifestation, cosmic manifestation." So tad vā īśan vijato tebhya ha prabhur babhūva. In this way, there are so many instances, so many quotations. Apāṇi-pādaḥ. In the Śvetāśvatara, apāṇi-pādaḥ. He has no, I mean to say, hands and legs. If He has no hands and legs, then how can He see? Is there any instance in your experience that something which has no hands and legs, he can see? No. He has no... Whenever... This is impersonal... The impersonalists quotes these authorities, that "He has no hands and... Therefore He's impersonal."
So Caitanya Mahāprabhu concludes, therefore, that cid-ānanda-teṅho, tāṅra sthāna, parivāra. Therefore anything of Kṛṣṇa, or anything of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is spiritual. Spiritual. Deha. Deha means body. His body is spiritual, His abode is spiritual, and His paraphernalia, parivāra, His friends, His mother, His father, His beloved—everything spiritual. Ānanda-cinmaya-rasa-pratibhāvitābhis tābhir ya eva nija-rūpatayā kalābhiḥ (Bs. 5.37). He's expansion of all spiritual. Tāṅre kahe-prākṛta-sattvera vikāra. And Śaṅkarācārya says that "The Absolute is imperson, but when He comes, appears, He assumes a form which is in the modes of goodness." He does not say, of course, in the modes of ignorance. Modes of goodness. No. When Kṛṣṇa comes, He has nothing to do with modes of goodness even. What is this goodness here in this material world? This is also matter. So there is no value, even goodness. One has to transcend the modes of goodness. That is transcendental, or aprakṛta.
In the Kūrma Purāṇa it is said that the Supreme Personality, the Para-brahman, has no distinction between His body and self. There is no... Absolute means there is no duality as we have got duality—"I am," the soul, and this body, they are different. Therefore śāstra says, yasyātma-buddhiḥ kuṇape tri-dhātuke: (SB 10.84.13) "If anyone accepts this body as self..." This body is made of three dhātus: kapha, pitta, vāyu. I am not this. And Bhagavad-gītā also says,
- dehino 'smin yathā dehe
- kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā
- tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ...
- (BG 2.13)
So dehi. Dehi means possessor of this body, the owner of this body. So owner of this body is different from this body. But in case of Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu-tattva, there is no such difference, the self and the body, no difference. That is confirmed in the Kūrma Purāṇa. Unfortunately the Māyāvādīs, they, either due to their poor fund of knowledge of the śāstras or by their whims, they say that "Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu, when comes, or the Absolute Truth when He descends, He assumes, He accepts, a material body." That is not the fact.
We say personality, but this personality is not material personality. Sighram cale evam sakala-vasta grahana kare: "He walks very quickly and He can accept whatever is offered to Him." So these very statements in the Vedas confirm that He has hands and legs, but not hands and legs like us. Apakrta. That we cannot understand. Aprakṛta. Prakṛta and aprakṛta. Prakṛta means things which are created, and aprakṛta means which are never created, sanātana. That we cannot understand. As soon as there is statement of the Absolute Truth's form, transcendental form, we think that He has a form like us. How it can be? That is quite reasonable. God cannot be possessing a form which is like us. No. Therefore Bhagavad-gītā says, sambhavāmy ātma-māyayā (BG 4.6). He descends, He comes down, as He is, ātma-māyayā. He descends, He comes down, as He is, ātma-māyayā. We accept this form given to us by the material energy. Prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni guṇaiḥ karmāṇi sarvaśaḥ (BG 3.27). According to the association of particular type of guṇa, quality, we get a form. But Kṛṣṇa is not within the influence of the material qualities. His form is different.
So ṣaḍ-aiśvarya pūrṇānanda vigrahaḥ yāṅhāra. Caitanya Mahāprabhu says that one who has got transcendental form, full of ānanda... Hena bhagavāne tumi kaha nirākāra. And you think of such Personality of Godhead as impersonal, how it is possible? Without being person, there cannot be ānanda anubhava. Just like we are persons. We can feel pains and pleasure. Unless one is person, there is no question of enjoying ānanda. So that is His challenge, that if the Supreme Personality of Godhead is full of ānanda, as it is stated in all the Vedic scriptures, especially in Vedānta-sūtra, ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt, then how He can be imperson? There is no possibility. And He gives other Vedic evidences also. Apāṇi-pādo javano grahītā, that He has no hand; still, He accepts whatever is given to Him. So there is no possibility of the Absolute Truth's being imperson. He is person. Hena bhagavāne tumi kaha nirākāra.
- svābhāvika tina śakti yei brahma haya
- niḥśaktika kari' tāṅre karaha niścaya
The impersonalists say that the Brahman has no enemy. The difference between Vaiṣṇava philosophy... (aside:) What they are talking? They are not coming here?
So here Caitanya Mahāprabhu quotes one verse from Viṣṇu Purāṇa: viṣṇu-śaktiḥ parā proktā (CC Madhya 6.154). You cannot say that the Absolute Person, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, has no energy. Niḥśakti. The Māyāvādī philosopher says that the energy generates when impersonal Brahman enters into this material energy, or māyā. He has got a body of māyā. No. That's not the fact. Kṛṣṇa hasn't got the body created by this material world as we have got. Kṛṣṇa says, therefore, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam: (BG 9.11) "Those who are foolish persons, poor fund of knowledge, such person thinks that I assume a body with the help of material energy." Kṛṣṇa says Himself that sambhavamy ātma-māyayā (BG 4.6)—His own energy. That own energy is this viṣṇu-śaktiḥ parā, spiritual energy. He does not accept a material energy, a body of material energy. Viṣṇu-śaktiḥ parā proktā kṣetrajñākhyā tathā parā (CC Madhya 6.154). So kṣetrajña, these living entities, they are also parā-śakti, cit-śakti. As we can experience two kinds of śaktis... One is cit-śakti and one is jara-śakti. Just like so long the cit-śakti is there within this body, it is living, it is moving, and as soon as the cit-śakti, the soul, departs from this body, there is no more movement.
We are not independent. Just like in the state, in your country, although you have observed the independence ceremony, but you are not independent. If you go... "Keep to the right," you go to the left, immediately your independence finished. You'll be punished. So this so-called independence is conditional. It is not absolute independence. If you want absolute independence then you have to go back home, back to Godhead. This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. We are hankering after independence, but so long we remain in this material world, there is no question of independence. So intelligent man, when he inquires about, when he thinks over, that "I want independence from so many things, but I am not independent. I am forced to accept, then where is my independence?" When this question arises, then he is human being. Otherwise he's as good as the cats and dogs. Because the cats and dogs, they cannot inquire. Just like an animal is being sent to the slaughterhouse, he cannot say "Why I am... What I have done? Why you are sending me to the slaughterhouse?" He cannot protest. Even he protests, nobody hears him. Nobody hears. He protests by crying, by screaming, but we have made our own theories: "This crying is nothing. It has no soul. We can kill."
In the platform of jñāna there is demand: "I shall become one with God." And karma, there is demand: "I must have the highest form of material happiness." Therefore jñāna-karmādy-anāvṛtam: "without any tinge of jñāna and karma." Anyābhilāṣitā-śūnyam: "all material desires made zero, śūnyam." "Then I become zero?" No. That is your purity. When you are not contaminated by jñāna, karma, yoga, that is your pureness. And that purity, ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānu-śīlanam (CC Madhya 19.167). Simply always be ready to serve Kṛṣṇa. Serve Kṛṣṇa. "Now, where is Kṛṣṇa?" Yes, Kṛṣṇa is there. You can serve. Kṛṣṇa is present before you in His sound representation, Bhagavad-gītā. Kṛṣṇa is absolute, and His words, what He has spoken in the Bhagavad-gītā, they are the same. Kṛṣṇa's words and Kṛṣṇa, they are not different. The material world means my words and me, we are different. But in the spiritual world the words, the name, the form, the pastimes of Kṛṣṇa, they are as good as Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, if you discuss on the instruction of Kṛṣṇa, like Bhagavad-gītā, then you are immediately in touch with Kṛṣṇa. Abhinnatvād nāma-nāminoḥ. There is no difference. So ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānu-śīlanam. If you want to abide by the orders of Kṛṣṇa, anu-śīlanam... Anu-śīlanam means cultivation. The words are there. The words are not different from Kṛṣṇa.
So in course of that instruction He says, "My dear Uddhava, yoga cannot achieve Me, neither sāṅkhya." Yoga means, real yoga means "connect, plus." Real yoga means "plus," "addition," just like in mathematics we have got addition and subtraction. So at the present moment we are in subtraction—God minus myself. I have no sense of God; therefore I am in minus condition. So yoga means God plus I. That is the real meaning of yoga. So long I was God-minus, now God-plus. But you must always remember. In the spiritual, absolute sense, God plus me is also God, and God minus me is also God. When I am minus, that does not mean God has lost some of His capacity. No. He is full. And when I am plus, it does not mean that God has increased in some capacity. No. The very good example is given, āpūryamāṇam acala-pratiṣṭha. Just like the ocean, Atlantic Ocean. In the... During summer season, rainy season, millions of tons water is evaporated by the sun to make, to create cloud, but if you see the Atlantic Ocean, it is the same. Similarly, after rainy season, millions of tons of water are poured into the ocean by overflow of rivers, but still, you see the ocean is the same.
Now, these universes and the brahmāṇḍas, or the Vaikuṇṭhas, they are manifestation of the energy of the Supreme Lord. God is all-pervading. "God is all-pervading" does not mean God has lost His identification. This is the mistake of the impersonalists. "Because God is everywhere, God is all-pervading; therefore there should not be any particular existence of God." This is impersonalism. But this is material thought. They do not study Vedic literature properly. In the Vedic literature it is said, pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate (Īśo Invocation). Just like I have several times explained before you that in the spiritual absolute identity, one minus one equal to one and one plus one equal to one. So although innumerable energies are coming out of the supreme body of the Supreme Lord, still He is full. There is no loss of energy. Just like we can have some material example: the sun. We do not know for how many millions of years the sunshine and temperature is coming out of the sun planet, but still the sun is the same. There is no loss of temperature. So if in a material object this is possible, that in spite of distributing heat and light from the sun disk for millions and millions of years, the sun disk is still of the same temperature, there is no loss of temperature—this is a material thing—so why in the spiritual body of the Supreme there will be any loss? This is a material idea, that "Because God has become all-pervading, therefore He has lost Himself." Why He should lose His identity? This is confirmed in the Vedic literature: pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evavaśiṣyate. If you take from the... He is so full that if you take the whole thing from Him, still, He is whole. Pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate.
So as described here, kṛṣṇa svarūpa ananta vaibhava apāra. So although He is transmitting innumerable energies and although He is expanding Himself in innumerable forms, still, He is one. Still, He is the same and one. That is the spiritual conception, or absolute conception. Absolute is not relative. "Because something has being taken away, therefore it is something less"—it is relative. It is not absolute. This idea is relative. I have got in my pocket ten dollars. So I have taken two dollars. Now it is eight dollars. This is relative truth. This is not absolute idea. Absolute idea is that pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate (Īśo Invocation). Avaśiṣyate means the balance is still full. Whatever you may take, the balance is still.
Of course, for Him there is no superior or inferior. But for us, it is superior, inferior. We cannot say that because everything is emanation from the Supreme, therefore there is no superior or inferior. No. Superior, inferior, in relationship with the energy. Just like īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe 'rjuna tiṣṭhati: (BG 18.61) "Īśvara, the Supreme Lord, is situated in everyone's heart." So He is in the heart of a hog, of a dog, and the learned brāhmaṇa as well. For Him there is no such discrimination—what is hog, what is dog, what is brāhmaṇa, what is good, what is bad—because He is Absolute. But here we have to distinguish between the hog and the dog, at least so far the material body is concerned.
So Lord Caitanya says,
kṛṣṇera svarūpa-vicāra śuna, sanātana
advaya-jñāna-tattva, vraje vrajendra-nandana
He is addressing Sanātana Gosvāmī. You'll remember that this chapter, "Instruction to Sanātana Gosvāmī," was begun when Sanātana Gosvāmī, after his retirement, approached the Lord at Benares and surrendered himself and asked Him, "What I am?" So under that question, He is describing his relationship with Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa.
So that greatness of Lord Kṛṣṇa is being described here by Lord Caitanya to His disciple, Sanātana Gosvāmī. Advaya-jñāna-tattva, vraje vrajendra-nandana. Advaya-jñāna-tattva. Advaya-jñāna-tattva means He is Absolute. He is not relative. Here everything is relative, but God means He is Absolute. He has nothing to be dependent. Here everything, we are all dependent. To understand something, to understand light, we have to understand darkness. To understand good, we have to understand what is bad. So here it is everything duality. So Kṛṣṇa is Absolute. That is the first understanding, that there is no duality. Kṛṣṇa, His name, His fame, His pastimes, His quality, His association, associates—everything is one. One plus one equal to one, always remember. There is no difference between Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's name. That is Absolute. We have got here experience that the thing and the name of the thing, they are different, dual. Suppose here is a glass of water. I am thirsty. I want glass of water. But if I say "water, water, water, water," that will not quench my thirst. I must have the thing, water, and then it will be acting. But Kṛṣṇa is advaya-jñāna. So when we hear Kṛṣṇa's name, then we should understand that "Kṛṣṇa is before me in His sound vibration. He is present before me in sound because He is everything." Why sound (is) not Kṛṣṇa? If He is everything, sound is also Kṛṣṇa.
Svayaṁ-rūpa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself, He is called svayaṁ-rūpa, His personal feature. Then tad-ekātmā. Tad-ekātma-rūpa means not exactly the same person, but almost the same. Tad-ekātma-rūpa. And āveśa. Āveśa means that empowered. There is always difference between the individual soul and the Supreme Absolute Soul. When the individual soul is specially empowered by the Supreme Soul, that is called āveśa. He can act almost like God. We accept, according to this āveśa, āveśa-avatāra incarnation, authorized incarnation, we accept, my Guru Mahārāja accepted Lord Jesus Christ and Hazrat Muhammad, this āveśa incarnation, almost the same power.
Several times just I have explained this thing, but this material, spiritual, or the qualitative differences, that is for us, not for Kṛṣṇa. How it is? Just like government has got different departments. There is criminal department, civil department, and this department, that department, so many departments. Now, for us the criminal department may not be so pleasing or civil department may be very much pleasing, but for the government both the departments are equal because they have to maintain equally, either criminal department or the civil department. The government has no distinction that "This is criminal department; therefore this department should be neglected," or "It is inferior." No. Rather, in criminal department the government may spend more than civil department. Similarly, these distinctions, these qualitative distinctions, matter, spirit, and the different kinds of modes, they are distinction for us, not for Kṛṣṇa. He is Absolute. He is Absolute. To the Absolute, there is no such distinction. Therefore when Kṛṣṇa comes, when Kṛṣṇa comes in this material, He is not affected by this. Suppose the minister, the secretary of the president, goes to the criminal department to see the prison house. He is not affected by the prison rules. It is simple to understand. If the prisoner thinks, "Oh, he is also one of the prisoners because he has come here," this is nonsense. He is not prisoner. Similarly, when Kṛṣṇa comes in this material world, if a foolish man thinks that he is also one of us, he is foolish number one. Therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā it is stated, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritāḥ: (BG 9.11) "Foolish persons, they think that I am one of them." These examples are very nice. We can understand.
Now, gokula, gokula dhāma-'vibhu' kṛṣṇa-sama. Because the Lord is absolute, therefore His name, His fame, His qualities, His form, His associates, His paraphernalia—everything absolute, nondifferent. God and God's name, nondifferent. God and God's place, nondifferent. And for that reason, when Kṛṣṇa comes, the Absolute, the Vṛndāvana, the place where He descends, that is nondifferent. Actually you can see that, that Vṛndāvana-dhāma, that place is a small spot of land, say about eighty-four miles area, but any person, and however atheistic he may be, and however nonsense he may be, if he goes to that place, he'll feel Kṛṣṇa's presence. Still. Still, simply by going there, he'll at once change his mind that "Here is God." He'll accept it. Still. If you like, you can go to India and you can see, make an experiment. So, although Vṛndāvana is a, is a place for the personalists, now all the impersonalists school of India, they're making their āśrama at Vṛndāvana because they have failed to achieve the sense of God anywhere, they are coming to Vṛndāvana. It is such a nice place. Here Lord Caitanya says that goloka, gokula-dhāma-'vibhu' kṛṣṇa-sama. Just like Kṛṣṇa is unlimited, similarly, His place is also unlimited. It is not limited by the material laws. Similarly, His name is unlimited.
So when Kṛṣṇa or God comes, He's not out of His eternal abode, because absolute. Whenever, wherever God is present, His absolute abode is also present there. Just like it is said in the Bhagavad-gītā, īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd deśe 'rjuna tiṣṭhati: (BG 18.61) "The Supreme Lord is situated as Supersoul in everyone's heart." Now suppose there is a dog or there is hog. So there is also God. So does it mean that God is living with a dog or God is living with a hog? No. For Him, even within the heart of a hog, even within the heart of a dog, there is Vaikuṇṭha. The same thing. These are the inconceivable energies of the Supreme Lord. Similarly, a God's pure devotee, wherever he may be, he lives at Vṛndāvana. Vṛndāvana is not limited or God is not so limited that He is under the boundary of certain limitation. No. They can... God and God's devotees, wherever they are, the same transcendental abode, God's place, Goloka Vṛndāvana, is manifested there. So in each and every brahmāṇḍa, or universe, wherever Kṛṣṇa is there, there is Goloka Vṛndāvana there. Brahmāṇḍa-gaṇe krame prākaṭya.
So we are going to open this temple. Those who are in charge, they must take care of the temple. Cleanliness. Tan-mandira-mārjanādau. The more we have got men, engage them. And do not think that temple cleaning and Deity worshiping are different. Do not be envious, that "This person has been given the in charge of decorating the Deity, and I have (been) given to wash the temple where there are not Deity." No. It is the same thing. There is no difference. It is spiritual. In spiritual... Just like either you worship Kṛṣṇa's lotus feet or you offer a garland to Kṛṣṇa on His head, it is the same thing. It is no such thing as "This is head, this is tail." No. This is absolute conception of... So Bhagavān, His līlā, His form, His pastimes, His place, they're all Bhagavān. Even higher, those who are highly elevated devotees, they do not see even this material world different from Bhagavān. Idaṁ hi viśvaṁ bhagavān ivetara. That is described in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Nārada Muni says. The whole universe is Bhagavān, although it appears different from Him. Bhagavān ivetara. So actually everything is Bhagavān, but it is not this Māyāvāda philosophy, that because everything is Bhagavān, there is no Bhagavān. No. Everything is Bhagavān, and still Bhagavān is there. Kṛṣṇa says, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam (BG 9.4). Māyā, a person is there. Otherwise, there is no use of the word māyā. Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam. Vaiṣṇava philosophy is that this material world is expansion of the energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. And the Māyāvāda philosophy is that because God has become everything, there is no more God. Nirviśeṣa. That is called nirviśeṣa—without understanding the beauty.
And each and every Vaikuṇṭha planet, there are living entities, not that they are vacant. But all of them are ānanda. They are all made of sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1), eternity and bliss and full of knowledge. The land is also eternal, blissful and full of knowledge; the inhabitants are also eternal, blissful and full of knowledge; and the presiding Deity expansion of Kṛṣṇa, Nārāyaṇa, He is also eternal, blissful and full of knowledge. This is called absolute. Here in the material world we have got difference. I am spirit soul, but there is difference between me and my body; there is difference between me and this material world. But there, everything is spiritual. Therefore there is no difference. The impersonalists, they cannot understand. Because everything is spiritual, they think that there is no variegatedness. But from this description of Caitanya-caritāmṛta and other scriptures like Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Bhagavad-gītā, we can understand that the spiritual sky is exactly like this, but that is spiritual and this is material.
Yāhāṅ kṛṣṇa: wherever Kṛṣṇa is there. Kṛṣṇa is absolute. He can be present in His various potencies. He can be present by His name only. Just like we chant Hare Kṛṣṇa—He is present, because His name is not different from Him. That is the absolute sense. In relative sense... Suppose somebody calling me in my apartment, "Swamijī." Swamijī is here. The response cannot be. Just like in telephone. Yesterday Raymond was calling us by phone three thousand miles away. As soon as we took the, I mean to say, hanger, we could immediately hear him. If by material ways we can be touch in so swiftly, just see how much spiritual potency has Kṛṣṇa. Although He's not present before us, He can be present in so many ways. He can be present by His name. Otherwise, all these great ācāryas, Caitanya Mahāprabhu, would not have bothered themselves simply by chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare. There is actually presence of Kṛṣṇa. If you take any material thing... Suppose a very nice thing, a rose flower. "Rose flower, rose flower, rose flower"—how long you can chant "rose flower"? Say thrice, four times, ten times, twenty times. Any more, you'll become disgusted. This is the test. But Hare Kṛṣṇa you can chant twenty-four hours, you'll not feel tired. That is the test of absolute and relative.
So relative name and absolute name. Kṛṣṇa, if you always keep Kṛṣṇa in your presence, then where is the possibility of ignorance and delusion? No, there is no possibility. And this is the shortcut way of keeping Kṛṣṇa always with you on your tongue—Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma... And if you are rigidly in this chanting process, you must understand that Kṛṣṇa is with you and there is no danger, there is no illusion, there is no māyā. Kṛṣṇa can be present by His fame. Just like we read something, we discuss something about Kṛṣṇa's activities—"Oh, He was present in the Battle of Kurukṣetra. He became the charioteer and He delivered the lectures on Bhagavad..." These discussions, that is also presence of Kṛṣṇa. Then His pastimes. Just like His līlā in Vṛndāvana or with any other devotees. There are many līlās. Then Kṛṣṇa's associates, those who are devotees of Kṛṣṇa. If you speak about them, that is also a presence of Kṛṣṇa. If you talk about Nārada Muni, if you talk about Vyāsa Muni, if you talk of Lord Caitanya, if you talk Rūpa Gosvāmī—those who are, I mean to say, unalloyed devotees of Kṛṣṇa—if you discuss about them, then Kṛṣṇa is there. He is present by His name, He is present by His fame, He is present by His pastime, He is present by His associates. Anything in Kṛṣṇa connection, that makes Kṛṣṇa present in that spot. This is actual fact. One has to realize it, that's all.
Satsvarūpa: The English?
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Satsvarūpa: "For I am the abode of Brahman, immortal, and the imperishable, of eternal law and of absolute good."
Prabhupāda: That's all? So He's the source of brahma-jyotir. So if we have such realization that Kṛṣṇa is absolute, and if we realize... It is a question of realization.
Now, when you chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, if we chant mechanically, then the effect is different. I have already given you ten kinds of offenses there are in chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. So mechanical way of chanting is also another offense. So offenseless chanting... Of course in the beginning, neophytes, we are apt to commit so many offenses. But we should be careful that the chanting should be offenseless. Then we shall realize that Kṛṣṇa is present by His name. He is present. You'll realize and you'll have the same effect as you expect by meeting Kṛṣṇa personally. You can see Kṛṣṇa and you can hear Kṛṣṇa. Because Kṛṣṇa is absolute, there is no difference between seeing and hearing. That is the absolute sense. People give more stress on the eye: "Oh, can you show me Kṛṣṇa?" Oh, can't you hear Kṛṣṇa? Why do you give...? This is also one sense, that is also another sense. Do you think by seeing you'll understand everything? You are seeing so many things daily. Do you understand? So this is all foolishness, that "Can you show me?" Now we have got so many senses. So perception through any sense, because He is absolute, the same effect. Either you see Him personally or you hear Him. Rather, hearing is better because by seeing you cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. When Kṛṣṇa is present, all people saw Him, but they could not understand Kṛṣṇa. But one who heard of Kṛṣṇa even five thousand years after, just like we are hearing, we can understand Kṛṣṇa as far as possible. So hearing is most important thing.
Sri Brahma-samhita Lectures
Man is made after God. We are imitation of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is not imitation of us. The atheist class, they think that "They have painted a form of God according to one's own feature of the body." What is called? Anthropomorphism. But that is not the fact. Here in this material world we are getting different types of forms of body, 8,400,000's. When we get this human form of body, it is just imitation of Kṛṣṇa's body. Kṛṣṇa has got two hands; we have got two hands. Kṛṣṇa has got two legs; we have got two legs. But the difference of this body and Kṛṣṇa's body is stated in this verse: aṅgāni yasya sakalendriya-vṛtti-manti (Bs. 5.32). Here, with our hands, we can catch something but we cannot walk. But Kṛṣṇa can walk with His hands. Or with our legs we can simply walk, but we cannot catch something. But Kṛṣṇa can catch also. With our eyes we can see, but we cannot eat. But Kṛṣṇa can see with His eyes and eat also and hear also. That is the explanation of this verse. Aṅgāni yasya sakalendriya-vṛtti-manti: (Bs. 5.32) "Each and every limb has got the function of the other limbs." That is called Absolute. He is not dependent. He is not dependent. Just like if we have lost our sight, we become dependent; no more we can see. But Kṛṣṇa can see with His hand, with His leg. Try to understand. Therefore He is Absolute. This is the meaning of Absolute. Everything is complete. Pūrṇam adaḥ. Pūrṇa means complete. So atheist will say that "You offer foodstuff. Where Kṛṣṇa eats? The foodstuff is still there." But they do not know that simply by seeing, Kṛṣṇa can eat. And because He is complete, He eats and again keeps the thing complete. Pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate (Iso Invocation). He can take everything complete, again it remains complete. Just like when we take food, we finish it. No more. But Kṛṣṇa can eat; at the same time, the things may remain as it is. Otherwise where is the difference between ourself and Kṛṣṇa? That is the difference.
So ādi-kavi, ādi-kavi means Brahmā. Brahmā, Ādi-kavi. So tene brahma. Brahmā means śabda-brahman, Vedic literature. So He instructed or imparted in the heart of Brahmā. Because when the creation was there, Brahmā was the only person, living entity, in the beginning. So the question may be that "How Brahmā learned Vedic knowledge?" That is explained: tene brahma... Brahmā. Brahmā means Vedic literature. Śabda-brahman. The information, the description of God is also Brahman. Brahman is absolute. There is no difference between Brahman and the literature which is describing Brahman. The same thing: just like Bhagavad-gītā and Kṛṣṇa, there is no difference. Bhagavad-gītā is also Kṛṣṇa. Otherwise why this book is worshiped since so, for so long time, since five thousand years, unless the Bhagavad-gītā is Kṛṣṇa? There are so many literatures, books, are published nowadays. After one year, two years, three years—finished. Nobody cares for it. Nobody cares for it. Nobody reads for... Any literature you take in the history of the world, no literature can exist for five thousand years, repeatedly being read by many, many scholars, religionists and philosophers, all. Why? Because it is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa... There is no difference between Bhagavad-gītā and Bhagavān. Śabda-brahman. So Bhagavad-gītā should not be taken as ordinary literature, that one can comment on it by so-called ABCD knowledge. No. That is not possible. The fools and rascals, they try to comment on the Bhagavad-gītā by their ABCD scholarship. That is not possible. It is śabda-brahman. It will be revealed to the person who has devotion to Kṛṣṇa. Yasya deve parā bhaktir yathā deve... These are the Vedic instructions.
So this is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So if we want to learn about Kṛṣṇa, then we have to follow the path of mahājanas, great personalities. Just like Brahmā is presenting Brahma-saṁhitā, describing; Vyāsadeva is presenting Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya. Bhagavān, Himself, is describing Himself in the Bhagavad-gītā. So where is the difficulty to understand Bhagavad-gītā or Bhagavān? We don't find any difficulty. Where is the difficulty? The mahājana is there, the śāstra is there, the guru is there, the Veda is there. And why should we make research after God? What is this nonsense? Everything is there. Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyam (BG 15.15). The purpose of Vedas is to know Kṛṣṇa. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Athāto brahma jijñāsā, to inquire about Brahman. Brahman. So there is no need of searching out God. You can simply try to digest whatever is already there. The Bhagavad-gītā is there. All the ācāryas, they have accepted. They have written commentation on Bhagavad-gītā with reference to the Vedic knowledge. The Absolute—kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam—is accepted everywhere by all ācāryas. Why you are searching after God? I do not know.
This is nāma. Abhinnatvād nāma-nāminoḥ. There is no difference between the name and the person. Here, in this material world, there is difference between the name and the thing. Just like if I want water, if I simply chant "Water, water, water..." Sometimes some rascals, these, give the example that if we chant "Coca-cola, Coca-cola, Coca-cola..." It is not like that. They do not know, and they, they, they dare to explain this nāma. Such a rascal they are. They do not know what is name. Here is a description of the name: nāma cintāmaṇiḥ kṛṣṇaś caitanya-rasa-vi... This is caitanya. This is not dead stone. This body is dead stone. Caitanya means the living force. That is caitanya. So nāma is caitanya.
- nāma cintāmaṇiḥ kṛṣṇaś
- caitanya-rasa-vigrahaḥ
- pūrṇaḥ śuddho nitya-mukto
- 'bhinnatvān nāma-nāminoḥ
- (CC Madhya 17.133)
This name is not ordinary name. This is absolute.
Festival Lectures
"I do not find anyone as merciful as You are." Yes. Śrī Caitanya Prabhu... You have seen the picture of Lord Caitanya. Yes, it is on the altar, Lord Caitanya dancing. He, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, appeared as a devotee. You have heard the name of Bhagavad-gītā. In that Bhagavad-gītā the last instruction is Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He is asking everyone, "My dear sons, God is higher." That is accepted in every religion. Especially in your Christian religion, God is the supreme father. In the Vedas also it is said,
- nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām
- eko bahūnāṁ (yo) vidadhāti kāmān
- (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13)
The Supreme Absolute, He is also a living entity like us, just like your father, this material father from whom you have got this body, he is also a person, and you are also a person. You are son of your father. Similarly, although you cannot see God, we can understand from the version of the Vedas and authoritative scriptures if God is father, then He must be a person. He must be a person because I am person. We have to study by analogy, by our reason, our intelligence. Just like you have got experience in this life that "My father is a person. I am also a person." Although the relation is "I am his son; he is my father," but both of us are persons. None of us is imperson. That is nonsense. How my father can become imperson if I am person? This is nonsense.
So therefore in this life we should understand, we should be little sober, that this is our diseased condition. I am eternal. Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). Why I am put into this condition of birth, death, old age, and disease. This is my disease. This is not healthy condition. So one who is sober, dhīra, he understands that "This is my tuberculosis disease state." We should restrict all the so-called material happiness and prepare for the spiritual life, eternal life That is a human consciousness. Otherwise you are in darkness, mūḍha. Duṣkṛtina, mūḍha, narādhama. Life is lost. So Kṛṣṇa has so many līlās, activities. Kṛṣṇa is not different from His activities, He is absolute. So these are the occasions we can hear about His activities. We are benefited. Therefore He plays sometimes as mīna-śarīra, as varāha-śarīra, as kūrma-śarīra. Rāmādi-mūrtiṣu-kalā niyamena. There are hundreds and thousands of incarnations. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam (Bs. 5.33). Just like you cannot count the waves of the river, it is going on continually. Similarly, the incarnation of Kṛṣṇa is going on eternally, so many. If you take the opportunity of hearing-śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ visnoḥ (SB 7.5.23)—about Viṣṇu's līlā activities... And if you simply stick to the nirakāra Brahman, what we shall hear? Therefore they fall down, these Māyāvādīs who simply take seriously the impersonal feature of Kṛṣṇa, because there is no līlā. "Brahman brahman ahaṁ brahman brahman," then how long it will go on? It will be hackneyed. But when we take to Kṛṣṇa's personal activities, then are newer, newer, newer, and multi and many... Then we get the opportunity of hearing Kṛṣṇa. Then you stick. Otherwise, if I simply become understood about the Brahman feature, it will be hackneyed, we want seek ānanda, pleasure. So in the impersonal feature there is no pleasure. Just like in the sky, even if you take a very nice airplane, and simply fly in the sky, you'll be very much displeased. That is our practical experience. If you go in the sea and for months together remain in the sea, you'll be very much sick. We want pleasure. We want pleasure, varieties. That is Kṛṣṇa's desire. He also discover..., varieties of pleasure, and if we join with Him, we also enjoy the varieties of pleasure eternally in the spiritual world. That is success of life.
Suppose if you want to know me or know something about me, you can ask some friend, "Oh, how is Swamiji?" He may say something; other may, something. But when I explain to you myself, "This is my position. I am this," that is perfect. That is perfect. So if you want to know the Absolute Supreme Personality of Godhead, you cannot speculate, neither meditate. It is not possible, because your senses are very imperfect. So what is the way? Just hear from Him. So He has kindly come to say Bhagavad-gītā. Śrotavyaḥ: "Just try to hear." Śrotavyaḥ and kīrtitavyaś ca. If you simply hear and hear in the class of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, and go outside and forget, oh, that is not nice. That will not make you improve. Then what is? Kīrtitavyaś ca: "Whatever you are hearing, you should say to others." That is perfection.
So the opportunity has come by the endeavor of our Mr. Punja. He's to be known as Vāsudeva dāsa henceforward. His wife, Bhagavati, and his mother . So my request is, I of course I am traveling all over the world. It may not be possible for me to see you very frequently. But I expect to come again and again. But I entrust the matter to you all. I'll send help also as far as possible. Now you have to take care of your own business, this temple, and always remember that according to your capacity you can serve the Lord. It is not that one who is worshiping the Deity, decorating the Deity, offering arotik, he's in better position than the person who is cleansing the temple. Both of them equal. In the spiritual world there is no such distinction. Absolute. As here there is distinction between higher grade and lower grade service, in the spiritual world there is no such thing. Everything is spiritual service. So that you realize one after another.
Arrival Addresses and Talks
This young boy and young girl trying to unite for happiness is the natural inclination of the living entity. It is there in the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In the Vedānta-sūtra it is said, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Everything that we see in this material world is there in the spiritual world. Janmādy asya yataḥ. Wherefrom everything is coming? The original source, the original source of this love, is there in the Absolute. Rādhā-kṛṣṇa-praṇaya-vikṛtiḥ. It is the manifestation of the pleasure potency of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So the thing as it is originally is perfect, but here, the same thing is only perverted reflection. Here, the boys and the girls meeting, because it is simply a reflection... Just like a reflection of the tree on the river, it is just topsy-turvied, similarly, that reflection, reality, Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa love, is topsy-turvied here.
So I am especially requesting those who are Indians and those who have now learned Bhagavad-gītā, they should preach this message all over the world. There is good potency. That already we have tested. But don't make adulteration. Then it will be spoiled. You speak Bhagavad-gītā as it is, and it will be effective. Why it will not be effective? Because the Lord's word and the Lord Himself absolute. There is no difference.
- nāma cintāmaṇiḥ kṛṣṇaḥ
- caitanya-rasa-vigrahaḥ
- pūrṇaḥ śuddho nitya-mukto
- abhinnatvāt nāma-nāminoḥ
Abhinnatvāt. The Lord's name and the Lord, they are not different—absolute. That is Lord's potency, acintya-śakti. He can present Himself by His name, by His fame, by His form, by His qualities, by His paraphernalia. Anything in connection with Kṛṣṇa is Kṛṣṇa. Anything. That is absolute. Kṛṣṇa is never different from His name. Kṛṣṇa is never different from His form. We are worshiping the form of the Lord. That is Lord Himself. Don't think it is different from Lord. No. We are not wasting time by worshiping some statue. No. It is therefore forbidden in the śāstra, arcye viṣṇau śilā-dhīḥ guruṣu nara-matir vaiṣṇave jāti-buddhir. These are forbidden. So we are, of course, opening so many branches all over the world, and I am very pleased to see this branch. There is wonderful prospective. Utilize it properly and stick to the principle that āmāra ājñāya guru hañā tāra ei deśa (CC Madhya 7.128). The ājñā, Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and ājñā, our Kṛṣṇa, not different. Because Caitanya Mahāprabhu is Kṛṣṇa Himself, and when He appeared as Kṛṣṇa, people misunderstood Him; therefore He has come as a devotee to teach us how to love Kṛṣṇa.
Initiation Lectures
So we should avoid blaspheming the persons who have preached God consciousness all over the world. We should not deprecate the value of scriptures. And the most obstinate sinful activity is to act sinfully on the strength of chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. Because it is said that as soon as you chant Hare Kṛṣṇa you become freed from all sinful activities. There is no difference between Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa name. Absolute. So if somebody thinks that "I am chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, therefore I can continue committing all kinds of sinful activities," that is the greatest... Nāmnād balād yasya hi pāpa-buddhir. Anyone who commits sinful activities... I have already explained the four kinds of sinful activities you should avoid. But if you think that you are chanting, therefore there will be no reaction of sinful activities, that is the greatest sin. Greatest offense. Never. Don't commit any sinful activities. And sāmyaṁ śubha-kriyā api pramādaḥ. This is another great offense. That don't accept this chanting as something auspicious activity. It is transcendental to auspicious and inauspicious activities. It is a vibration from the spiritual sky which will attract you gradually to the spiritual sky, beyond this material sky.
Yes. Unfaithful, those who have no faith, that Lord and His name are absolute. Just like here in this material world, the name and the person is different. Suppose your name is Mr. John. So if I chant "John, John, John," so John may be a hundred miles away. There is no response. But the name, holy name of God, God is present everywhere. Just like the television. Television is being, I mean to say, released in some place. If you have got the machine, immediately the picture is in your room. If it is, materially, it can be so possible, how much possibility there is in spiritual Kṛṣṇa name? Immediately you chant Kṛṣṇa's name, that means Kṛṣṇa is immediately on your tongue. So what is that?
Now the purport of this mantra I have several times explained, again explaining. Namaḥ. Namaḥ means surrender. Namaḥ om namaḥ, this is the way of chanting Vedic mantra. Oṁ means addressing the Absolute, and namaḥ means "I am surrendering." Every Vedic mantra is begun om namaḥ. Oṁ means addressing. So this mantra is chanted with surrender, namaḥ. Nothing can be done without surrender because our, this conditional life is rebellious life. We have rebelled against the supremacy of the Personality of Godhead. That is conditioned life. There are so many theses to support this rebellious condition. Somebody is thinking that "I am one with God"; somebody is thinking, "God is dead"; somebody is thinking, "There is no God"; somebody is thinking, "Why you are searching God? There are so many Gods loitering in the street." So in this way many theses are there. All of them are different symptoms of rebellious condition. The sum and substance... Just like atheists, they are boldly saying, "There is no God." Now..., but the impersonalists saying, "There may be God, but He has no head, He has no tail. That's all." So in this way our condition is rebellious condition.
So we are so-called materially suffering and enjoying according to this body. Therefore this body, this human form of body, is a great opportunity, because God realization begins by engaging the tongue. Sevonmukhe hi jihvādau (Brs. 1.2.234). By engaging the tongue in the loving service of the Lord, one can make advance in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, ultimate realization of God, the tongue. So this tongue in the human body can be engaged. In other body, in the cat's body, dog's body, tiger's body... Tiger may be a very powerful animal. No animal is powerful or better than human beings. That is accepted. So this human form of life is a great boon to the living entity who is traveling through the cycle of birth and death, perpetually changing different sorts of body. Here is the opportunity, human form of body. We can utilize the tongue properly and get out of these clutches. Sevonmukhe hi jihvādau. So sevā, sevā means service; jihvā ādau, beginning from the tongue. So if we can keep our tongue engaged, always chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra... Because "Kṛṣṇa," this sound, is not different from Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is absolute. Nothing is different from Him. Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's name is not different. In the material sense, everything is different. I myself is different from this body. I am not this body. But Kṛṣṇa is not like that. Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's body is the same. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritāḥ (BG 9.11). Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, "Rascals and fools, they deride at Me because I appear as a human being. They are thinking just like I am ordinary human being." Paraṁ bhāvam ajananto. "These rascals do not know what is My influence and what I am." Paraṁ bhāvam. "What is My nature they do not know.
Dayānanda: "Interpreting... Minimizing the authority of scriptures or Vedas." The authority of scriptures or Vedas are also absolute. This is the literary incarnation of the Lord. The Vedas or the scriptures are literary incarnation of the Lord.
Prabhupāda: The example is the same, just like the conchshell. In the Vedic injunction is that you should not touch dead animal's bone. If you touch, you become impure. But Vedas say the conchshell is pure. So that is being practically observed. We followers of Vedic injunction, we are using conchshell in the Deity room because Vedas says it is pure. You cannot argue, "Oh, one place you said that conch..., the bone is impure. Oh, here I can show you the book. You have said like that." Oh, that nonsense will not do. Whatever is said is all right. You have to accept that. Even it is contradictory, you have to accept. That is called no interpretation. That is wanted. There is meaning, but through your brain at the present moment you cannot understand. That is another thing. But you cannot say like that: "Oh, one place you have said this conch, yes, bone of an animal is impure, and now you are saying the conchshell is pure. It is contradictory." So that will not do. Therefore it is said you cannot interpret in that way. That is offense. Then you will not be able to make progress. Yes. Yes.
So ātmā vastu, that ātmā is also part and parcel of the Supreme Truth sat. Now at the present moment I am given to this misunderstanding that "I am this body." Sannyāsa means to give up this false concept of bodily concept of life and surrender, nyāsa. Nyāsa means renounce-renounce everything for the sake of Kṛṣṇa, the Absolute Person. This is called sannyāsa. Actually this is the beginning of my liberated activities. Sannyāsa means that living entity is acting. Living entity for a second cannot be inactive. You know that even in sleeping we are acting: we dream, we go somewhere, we see something. Although the body is silent, I, the spirit soul, I create another subtle body, and with that subtle body I create so many things and try to enjoy it or suffer it. Therefore a living entity is not inactive even for a second. So these activities, when they are performed in the bodily concept of life—"I am this body," "I am Indian," "I am Japanese," "I am Hindu," "I am Muslim," "I am Christian"—in this way, so long we act on this bodily concept of life, it is called material existence. But when we understand that we are not this body—"I am spirit soul"—and on this understanding I understand that I am the part and parcel of the Supreme Absolute Person, that is called brahma-bhūtaḥ situation.
Devotee (1): To take the chanting as auspicious material ritual.
Prabhupāda: Yes. (indistinct)—karma. Just like to..., there are many auspicious activities to counteract inauspicious activities. So this chanting of holy name should not be taken as that. It is just for the matter of pleasing the Absolute Personality of Godhead. So, you chant mantra. Hmm.
Devotee (2): Bhakta Johnny, your name now is Rāmāi dāsa.
Prabhupāda: You know what are the prohibitive rules? Prohibitive rules?
Rāmāi dāsa: (indistinct).
Devotee (2): The four rules.
Prabhupāda: Huh?
Rāmāi dāsa: (indistinct).
Prabhupāda: What is that?
Rāmāi dāsa: No illicit sex. No meat-eating. No gambling. No intoxication.
Prabhupāda: So your spiritual name... How many rounds do you chant?
Rāmāi dāsa: Sixteen rounds.
Prabhupāda: Hm.
General Lectures
So anyone can take it by heart, these three words, and chant it. It is universal. And if you think that "Oh, Kṛṣṇa is the name of Hindu god," if you have got any objection, then you may not chant Kṛṣṇa, but you must have a name for God. Just like somebody, the Muhammadans, call Allah, the Jews call Jehovah, or somebody calls something. That doesn't matter. If you think that "Why shall I chant the Indian name Kṛṣṇa, Sanskrit name Kṛṣṇa?" so Lord Caitanya says that there are millions and billions of names of God. If you think that this Kṛṣṇa name is not very suitable, you can accept any name. That doesn't matter. Our proposition is you chant God's name. That is our proposal. Therefore it is universal. If you like, you can chant Jehovah or you can chant Allah, but we request you that you chant God's name. Is it very difficult? It is not at all difficult. Lord Caitanya said that there are innumerable names of God according to different languages, different countries, different societies. And each and every one of them has the potency of God Himself. If there is any God, so God is Absolute; therefore there is no difference between His name and He Himself. Just like in the material world, in the world of duality there is difference between the name "water" and the substance water. The name water is different from the substance water. If you are thirsty, if you simply chant, "Water, water, water, water," your thirstiness will not be quenched. You require the substance water. That is material, but spiritually, the name Kṛṣṇa or the name Allah or the name Jehovah is as good as the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
If you consult so-called mental speculators, their different views, then dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyām. The ultimate goal of life is very confidential and mysterious. And how to know it? Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). Mahājana means the perfect realized souls who have realized, you have to follow them. That's all. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ. Therefore this process of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is accepting the mahājana, the authority. The first authority is Kṛṣṇa. From Kṛṣṇa, Arjuna is hearing. There is no question about it. Now if you simply understand as Arjuna understood, then you have got the perfect knowledge. And if you speculate, if you try to comment in your own nonsense way, then you are misled immediately. So this is the way. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). Mahājana means those who are perfect personalities. That will give you (?). That will do (?). Now, there are, according to Vedic system, there are twelve mahājanas. They are all in agreement that the supreme power is the Absolute Personality of Godhead. And they have become all devotees, they have served, they have prescribed rules and regulations. You can... So if we follow these rules and regulations and the mahājana, and many... As it is stated in Bhāgavatam, that those who have followed, they have got perfection. You can get also perfection, there is no doubt about it. Simply you have to follow the footprints of the ācāryas. Then your life will be perfect.
Guest: Is Kṛṣṇa consciousness the knowing or the awareness of the Absolute?
Prabhupāda: Certainly. Otherwise, why you are laboring so hard? To know yourself, know the Absolute. Three, five things. Kṛṣṇa consciousness means to know perfectly well five things. What are those? God, living entity, and this material nature, the time factor, and the activities. God, the supreme controller. However you may declare there is no God, there is a supreme controller. That we have to admit. There are so many things that which does not depend on our so-called scientific advancement of knowledge. It depends completely something else. Supreme controller. So that is God. They may call it nature, but they do not know nature, what is nature. So God, and we are living entities. We are godly. We have got the same activity. As God is the creator of the whole universe, we are also creator of some skyscraper building or a city like Montreal or New York. We may do that. But in comparison to the God's creation and my creation, there is no comparison. It is very insignificant. If you go high up on the sky, you will see this globe is just like a point. And there are millions and trillions of globes and planets like this. They are full of all opulences as you find here. So that is God's creation. In comparison to that creation, suppose if you have created a city or a skyscraper building. What is there? That is called living entity, minute; and the Lord: greatest. God is great; you are minute. Understanding of God, understanding of the living entities. Then try to understand this material nature.
Devotees: Hare Kṛṣṇa. (offer obeisances)
Prabhupāda: Any question? (pause) No question? Yes?
Jaya-gopāla: Prabhupāda? These days there are so many men who claim to have found the Absolute, who claim to be spiritual masters in their own way. How does one tell who is a bona fide spiritual master?
Prabhupāda: Yes. What is your idea of bona fide spiritual master?
Jaya-gopāla: One who can teach the Absolute.
Prabhupāda: So a spiritual master... Just like Kṛṣṇa is spiritual master, and Lord Caitanya is spiritual master. We are talking about Lord Caitanya's teaching to Sanātana Gosvāmī. That means Lord Caitanya is the spiritual master. Similarly, in the Bhagavad-gītā we find Arjuna is taught by Kṛṣṇa Bhagavad-gītā. So there is no difficulty to understand who is spiritual master. Is there any difficulty? Because we see that Lord Caitanya is teaching Sanātana Gosvāmī and Kṛṣṇa is teaching Arjuna. So both Lord Caitanya and Kṛṣṇa are spiritual master. Is there any difficulty to understand? So anyone who represents Lord Caitanya and Kṛṣṇa, he is spiritual master. That's all. Anyone who speaks exactly what Lord Caitanya said, exactly what Kṛṣṇa said, then he is spiritual master. Just like a teacher who says that "I have passed M.A." Now what is the proof? That means if he speaks exactly like persons who have passed M.A. examination, then he is M.A. A medical practitioner who is approved by other medical practitioners in the medical college, he is medical practitioner.
Devotee: Prabhupāda, a picture of Kṛṣṇa is absolute, right? That is Kṛṣṇa. Is the picture of a pure devotee absolute in the same way?
Prabhupāda: Picture of devotee?
Devotee: A pure devotee.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Devotee: It's absolute in the same way that a picture...
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Devotee: Let's say a picture of Prahlāda Mahārāja and Lord Nṛsiṁha-deva is also... Prahlāda is there as much as Lord Nṛsiṁha-deva is.
Prabhupāda: Yes. The Lord and the devotee, they are on the same status. Every one of them. Lord, His name, His form, His quality, His associates, His paraphernalia. Everything, they are absolute. Nāma guṇa rūpa līlā pari... And pastimes. Just like we are hearing about Kṛṣṇa, so this is nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa. When there is chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, this Hare Kṛṣṇa, this vibration, is not different from Kṛṣṇa. Everything is absolute. Therefore pure devotee of Kṛṣṇa is nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa. This is simultaneously one and different. Acintya-bhedābheda-tattva. This philosophy has to be understood, that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Person energetic, and everything, what we see, what we experience, they are all different energies of Kṛṣṇa. And the energy and the energetic cannot be separated. Therefore they are all on the absolute platform. Simply when it is covered by māyā or ignorance, it is different. That's all.
Madhudviṣa: Prabhupāda? Is it all right for us to read the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam after we've received your Bhagavad-gītā when it comes out? Or should we just completely devote all our time to studying the Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, and then we..., and then progress from there, or should we continue our study of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam?
Prabhupāda: No. You should read Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. This is only a preliminary division. In the spiritual platform, everything is absolute. If you read Bhagavad-gītā, you'll find the same proposition as in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. It is not that because you are studying Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that you haven't got to study Bhagavad-gītā. It is not like that. You read these literatures and chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, follow the rules and regulations and live happily. Our program is very happy program. We chant, we dance, we eat Kṛṣṇa prasādam, we paint nice pictures of Kṛṣṇa and see them nicely decorated, and we read philosophy. So what you want more? (laughs)
Prabhupāda: Synonymous..., not exactly synonymous, but identical. Synonymous cannot be said, identical.
Woman: Oh, identical.
Prabhupāda: Yes. In the absolute platform everything is identical. In the relative world also. Just like anything you take, it is material. So material identity. Similarly, in the spiritual world everything is spiritual. So in the spiritual world God and God's son or God's friend or God's lover, anyone is the... They're in the same platform, spiritual. Therefore they are identical.
Woman: Doesn't Rāma refer to a man that was born..., I'm not..., in India or somewhere, and Christ was born in Europe? Two different men, but still the same, the same...
Prabhupāda: Yes. The sun is every day born in India, born in Europe, born in America. Does it mean that he's Indian or American or Chinese?
Woman: No, that's not what I mean.
Prabhupāda: Then? Therefore it is like that. When... This is our limited knowledge. We have been taught in that way, that God is great. Just like the sun is great; therefore even the sun is seen in India or in America or China, anywhere, any part of the world, any part of the universe, the sun is one. Nobody can say, "Oh, it is American sun" or "It is Indian sun." So either Jesus Christ or Rāma or Kṛṣṇa, whoever comes from the kingdom of God, they are the same. There is no difference. But the difference is... Just like in your country temperature of sun is less, and in a tropical country the temperature of the sun is very great. Does it mean the sun's temperature is changed? It is according to the reception. The atmosphere of this country is so surcharged that you cannot receive the sunshine properly, but the sunshine distributes its shining everywhere the same. Similarly, according to the country, according to the circumstances, according to the planet, God is manifested differently, but He is not different. You are wrapping your body with some winter clothes. Same time, telegraph in India, oh, they are running fan. Why the temperature is different? Therefore whatever Lord Jesus Christ says or whatever Kṛṣṇa says or what Rāma says, that is in terms of the place, in terms of the circumstances, atmosphere, persons, hearer. There is different.
If you want child as loving friend, he's Arjuna. Just like Arjuna and Kṛṣṇa. So there are twelve kinds of humors. Kṛṣṇa can be accommodated with all the humors; therefore His name is Akhila-rasāmṛta-sindhu. Akhila-rasāmṛta-sindhu. Akhila means universal; rasa means mellow, humor; and the ocean. Just like if you try to find out water and if you go before the Pacific Ocean, oh, unlimited water. There is no comparison how much water is there. (chuckling) Similarly, if you want something and if you approach Kṛṣṇa, you'll find unlimited supply, unlimited supply, just like ocean. Therefore it is said in the Bhagavad-gītā, yaṁ labdhvā cāparaṁ lābhaṁ manyate nādhikaṁ tataḥ. If anyone can approach or gain that Supreme Absolute, then he will be satisfied and he will say, "Oh, I have no more hankering. I have got everything complete, in full satisfaction." Yaṁ labdhvā cāparaṁ lābhaṁ manyate nādhikaṁ tataḥ yasmin sthite. And if one is situated in that transcendental position, then what happens? Guruṇāpi duḥkhena na vicālyate (Bg. 6.20-23). If there is very severe test of distress, he's not, I mean to say, faltering.
So how we can transfer into that kingdom of light? The whole human civilization is based on these principles. The Vedānta says, athāto brahma jijñāsā. Atha ataḥ. "Therefore you should now inquire about Brahman, the Absolute." "Therefore now" means... Every word is significant. "Therefore" means because you have got this human body—"therefore." And ataḥ means "hereafter." "Hereafter" means you have passed through many, many lives, 8,400,000 species of life. Aquatics—900,000. Jalajā nava-lakṣāṇi sthāvarā lakṣa-viṁśati. This is the... Darwin has taken the idea of evolution from this Padma Purāṇa. You won't find any philosophy, any doctrine in the world which is not found in the Vedic literature. It is so perfect, everything is there. So the anthropomorphism or—what is called?—anthropology... Anthropology of Darwin is there in the Padma Purāṇa. It is very nicely described. Darwin cannot explain what are the number of the species of different, but Padma Purāṇa states that there are 900,000 species of life within water, within the ocean. And above the ocean, as soon as the ocean water is dried up, the land is coming out, immediately the vegetation begins. Different types of plants and trees then come out.
When one has reached to the material perfection, then the next business is to inquire. If we do not inquire, if we do not try to understand what is Brahman, then we must be frustrated. Because the hankering is there, advancement, advancement of knowledge. The theory of advancement of knowledge is that nobody should be satisfied by the knowledge, what he already knows. He must know more and more. So in your country in comparison to other countries at the present age, you have advanced materially very nicely. Now you take to this brahma-jijñāsā, inquiry about the Supreme Absolute: What is that Absolute? What I am? I am also Brahman. Because I am part and parcel of Brahman, therefore I am also Brahman. Just like part and parcel, a little particle of gold is also gold. It is no other thing. Similarly, we are also particle of Brahman or the Supreme. Just like the molecules of sunshine, they are also as illuminating as the sun globe, but they are very small. Similarly, we living entities, we are also the same as God. But He is just like as big as the sun globe or the deity in the sun globe, but we are small particles, the molecules of sunshine. This is the comparison between the Supreme and us.
Just like a political creed. Unless it is nationally accepted... Just like there are so many political parties in every country. Everyone is trying to bring in the forefront the party politics because the leader cannot be successful unless the whole country accepts his philosophy, his party. But Kṛṣṇa consciousness is so nice that it does not require that a community or a nation or a family or any group has to accept, then you will be happy. No. Individually, if you accept. If your family does not accept, if your community does not accept, if your country does not accept, it doesn't matter. You will be happy. But if your family accepts, if your community accepts, if your nation..., you will be more happy. So... Because it is absolute, independent, so any person takes to Kṛṣṇa consciousness will be happy immediately. So we invite you. We have got classes, we have got different branches in different cities, we have got books, we have got magazines, and we try to convince you by our morning and evening classes. So my humble request to you all that you try to understand. Caitanyer dayā kathā karaha vicāra. We put for your judgment to understand. We put this Kṛṣṇa consciousness before you for your judgment. And if you scrutinizingly see and try to understand, then you'll feel, "Oh, it is so sublime. It is so nice." That is our request.
Jaya-gopāla: But how does one show such an impersonalist with absolute proof logically? I was told Śrīla Bhaktivinoda has such a proof.
Prabhupāda: Apart from Bhaktivinoda, try to understand in your common sense.
Jaya-gopāla: Yes, I can see this.
Prabhupāda: Just like sun planet, there is sunshine. The sunshine is impersonal, but if you have got power to enter into the sun globe, then you will find there, there are so many persons, they have got fiery body. It is not a fact in other planets there is no life. That is a nonsense. Every planet there is life, but they have got different situation, different atmosphere. The moon planet is very cold. Even the modern scientists, they agree that the temperature in the moon planet is below two hundred degree zero. So it is very cold. Similarly, sun planet is very hot. Similarly, there are other planets which is made of air, some planets made of water. These five elements, earth, water, air, ether, this is the, these are the ingredients of material world. So some planet is made of something, some planet is made of something. But this earth is made of earth only, and water. So in the sunshine you see, you go by airplane, go in the "friendly sky" above the... You see everything impersonal. Simply glaring sunshine, that's all. But that does not mean it is impersonal. There are many planets within the sunshine, millions of planets, but you cannot see. Similarly, persons who cannot see beyond the brahma-jyotir, the transcendental rays of the spiritual sky, they are impersonalists.
Prabhupāda: That's all right.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: This is from Back to Godhead, which is a monthly publication that we put out in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. There's an article in it called "Superconsciousness," by our spiritual master. "Kṛṣṇa consciousness is the highest yoga performance by trained devotional yogis. The yoga system, as it is stated in the standard yoga practice formula given by Lord Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad-gītā and as recommended in the Patañjali yoga discipline, is different from nowadays—practiced haṭha-yoga as it is generally understood in the Western countries. Real yoga practice means to control the senses, and after such control is established, to concentrate the mind on the Nārāyaṇa form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Lord Kṛṣṇa is the original absolute personality, the Godhead, and all the other Viṣṇu forms, with four hands, decorated with conch, lotus, club and wheel, are preliminary expansions of Kṛṣṇa." Should I wait a second? Wait for them to leave?
Prabhupāda: This will go on. They are not comfortably seated.
So we are worshiper of the original Absolute Personality of Godhead, Govindam. Govindam. Go means senses, go means cow, and go means land. And vindam, vindam means who gives pleasure—the pleasure potency of all these three things, senses, cows, and the land. The land. Sarva-loka-maheśvaram (BG 5.29), in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said. The proprietor of all land, the maintainer of all land, to give pleasure to the people of all land, is Govinda, Kṛṣṇa. Govindam. And He is the protector, and pleasing to the cows. You have seen many pictures of Kṛṣṇa, He is loving cow. Why cow is loved by Him? Why not another animal? There are many other animals. Why particularly cow? Because cow protection is the most important business of the human society. In offering obeisances to Kṛṣṇa, it is said, namo brahmaṇya-devāya go-brāhmaṇa-hitāya ca: "I offer my respectful obeisances unto the Supreme Person, who is the protector of the brāhmaṇas and the cows." Go-brāhmaṇa-hitāya ca jagad-dhitāya. The first qualification is that He protects the brāhmaṇas and the cows. Next, He protects the whole world. Jagad-dhitāya kṛṣṇa. And He is Kṛṣṇa, govindāya, this Govinda.
Jāhnavā: Śrī Bhaktivedanta, how is it that the Absolute, which is so, at this point, for me, beyond human comprehension, how can it take this form of Kṛṣṇa-Rādhā?
Prabhupāda: It is His mercy. The Bhāgavata says that if you want to understand God, His name, His quality, His paraphernalia, His form, it is not possible to realize by your present senses. It is not possible. Ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi na bhaved grāhyam indriyaiḥ (CC Madhya 17.136). These present senses, they are so contaminated that it is not possible that you can understand God, His form, His name, His quality, His paraphernalia by speculation. No, it is not possible. Then? How it is possible? Sevonmukhe hi jihvādau svayam eva sphuraty adaḥ. God reveals to you by your service attitude. And that service attitude begins from your tongue, jihvā. Jihvā means tongue. How? You chant Hare Kṛṣṇa and taste Kṛṣṇa prasādam. Then you will realize. Two things. Very simple method. He'll reveal. You cannot understand what is God, but God will reveal to you, "Here I am." Just like you cannot ask the sun, "Please rise up. I want to see you." Oh, he is not your servant. But when sun reveals to you, you see yourself, you see the sun, and the whole world, everything nicely. So you have to wait for that revelation. And you have to practice this, first of all, this tongue. Sevonmukhe hi jihvādau (Brs. 1.2.234). This particular tongue is mentioned. You can begin to reach that stage of revelation by training your tongue. What is that? Chant Hare Kṛṣṇa and taste Kṛṣṇa prasādam. Very simple method. You try it and see. Otherwise it is not possible. God is not so little that you can order Him and He'll... No, that is not possible. But if He's pleased, then He'll reveal Himself. So any other question? Or let us chant. (devotees offer obeisances) (end)
So it is understood from any source of scriptural injunction that the Supreme Lord, or Kṛṣṇa, is the maintainer of the individual living entities, and it is the duty of the individual entity to feel obliged to the Supreme Lord. This is the whole background of religious principle. Without this acknowledgement, there is chaos, as it is happening in our daily experience at the present moment. Everyone is trying to become the Supreme Lord, either socially, politically or individually. Therefore there is competition for this false lordship and there is chaos all over the world, individually, nationally, socially or collectively. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is trying to establish the supremacy of the Absolute Personality of Godhead. The human society is meant for this understanding because this consciousness makes his life successful. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is not a new introduction of the mental speculators. Actually this movement was started by Kṛṣṇa Himself in the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra. At least five thousand years ago the movement was presented by Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad-gītā. From this Bhagavad-gītā we can understand that this system of consciousness was spoken by Him long, long before—He imparted to the sun-god Vivasvān. That calculation goes to show that before the repetition of the Bhagavad-gītā in the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra, it was once before explained at least forty million years ago. So this movement is not at all new.
I offer my respectful obeisances unto the spiritual master, who has opened my eyes with the torch of knowledge in my material existence of darkness. Ladies and Gentlemen, please accept my greetings in the happy new year of 1969, and blessings of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, for your kindly participating in this happy meeting of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Kṛṣṇa appeared on this earthly planet five thousand years ago and gave us the unique philosophy and religious principles of Kṛṣṇa consciousness in the shape of the Bhagavad-gītā. Unfortunately, in course of time, as things change and deteriorate in the material world, people deteriorated and forgot the art of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Lord Kṛṣṇa again therefore appeared as Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu at the end of the fifteenth century to revive the same Kṛṣṇa consciousness atmosphere in the human society. Lord Caitanya's special gift to the fallen souls of this age of quarrel and disagreement is to induce the people in general, the religionists, the philosophers and everyone to take to the chanting of the holy name of Kṛṣṇa. He informed us that the Absolute Supreme Personality of Godhead can descend also in transcendental sound vibration, and thus, when you chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra offenselessly, we immediately contact Kṛṣṇa and His internal energy, and thus we become immediately purified from all dirty things in our heart.
So kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). According to Vedic literature, Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, svayam. Svayam means original. Kṛṣṇa has many extension, incarnation. We are also Kṛṣṇa's extension. We are, all living entities, we are also Kṛṣṇa's extension. We are called vibhinnāṁśa, separated extension. Separated extension means just like this finger is the part of your body, but when it is separated from the body for some reason... The finger's name is "finger," but it is separated; it is no longer used for the whole body. Similarly, the conditioned souls, we... We have come to this material world being conditioned by the laws of material nature; therefore our so-called independence is bogus. There is no independence. We are completely under the grip of material nature, so therefore we are separated. When we are again joined with Kṛṣṇa, then we are one with Kṛṣṇa. Just like this finger is one with this body; although it is called finger, but it is the same. The importance of the finger is as good as the whole body. Similarly, when we shall join again with Kṛṣṇa, then we become as good as Kṛṣṇa, advaya-jñāna, absolute. Just yesterday, day before yesterday, I was explaining, aṅgāni yasya sakalendriya-vṛtti-manti (Bs. 5.32). Every part, every limb of Kṛṣṇa has got the potency of acting like other limb. We can only see with our eyes, but Kṛṣṇa can eat also with His eyes. Therefore absolute.
It is very simple. It is sound vibration. Sound is the beginning of all material creation. Everywhere there is sound. So... And God is in everywhere. Therefore He is also in sound. So in sound form we can realize Him. The Kṛṣṇa, the transcendental sound, and the Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Lord, is identical. That we have to realize by practicing.
- nāma cintāmaṇiḥ kṛṣṇaś
- caitanya-rasa-vigrahaḥ
- pūrṇaḥ śuddho nitya-mukto
- abhinnatvān nāma-nāminoḥ
- (CC Madhya 17.133)
There is no, I mean to say, difference between the Supreme Person and His name. Just like in the material conception there is difference. If you want water, simply by chanting, "water, water," your satisfaction will not be there. But in the spiritual world, everything being absolute, there is no difference between the name Kṛṣṇa and the person Kṛṣṇa. Therefore by... And it is the easiest process for you. You can chant this name "Kṛṣṇa." That means by sound contact, you contact the Supreme Person. That is a point of realization. You have to practice it, and you know it really.
So these are explained in the Vedic literature. Na tasya kāryaṁ kāraṇaṁ ca vidyate na tat-samaś cābhyadhikaś ca dṛśyate: "He has nothing to do and nobody is equal or greater than Him." Therefore God is great. Nobody can be equal. You cannot claim that you are God. Then you claim "God," I claim "God," he, she claims "God," he claims "God." Then what is the meaning of "God"? Nobody... God is great. Nobody can be greater than Him. Then how you can claim that you are God, I am God? Then either you do not know what is the definition of God or you are foolishly claiming that you are God. You must... If you claim, if you come here and introduce yourself, "I am President Johnson," oh, you must present your credential that you are President Johnson. Otherwise, we shall say you are crazy. So if you cannot present yourself even like ordinary president—you are claiming that you're God—how much nonsense you are. Don't claim in that way. There is no equal to God. Oh, there are so many equals to you, so many greater than you, lower than you. So you are not absolute. God is absolute. In the Bhagavad-gītā the same thing is described, that mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya: (BG 7.7) "My dear Dhanajaya, Arjuna, nobody's greater than Me." Anyat. Anyat means anyone.
Devotee: God's consciousness is absolute; mine is not.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Therefore you are not God. God consciousness is described in the Bhagavad-gītā: idaṁ śarīraṁ kṣetra. The Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, says that "This body is the field of our activities." Otherwise, it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā that kṣetra-jñaṁ cāpi māṁ viddhi: "I am also conscious. I am also knower." As you are knower, so God is also knower. But the difference of His knowledge—that He's omnipotent, omnipresent; you are not omnipotent, omnipresent. That is the difference. You have got some potency, and you are also present in some limited circle, but He is present everywhere. You are not present in another planet, but God is present everywhere. That is His omnipresence, omnipotent. So He's also conscious, kṣetra-jñaṁ cāpi māṁ viddhi: "Also know that I am also knower, but My knowledge expands everywhere, but your knowledge expands only within this body." That is the difference.
So similarly, in any capacity you analyze, so far the definition of God—wealth... Now, He's the proprietor of all wealth. Now, nobody can claim... Even the, I mean, the biggest rich man of your country, the Rockefeller or the Ford company or..., nobody can claim that he's the only richest man. No. There are many others. So nobody can claim that "I am the richest." No. Nobody can claim that "I am the most famous." No. Nobody can claim that "I am the most beautiful." Nobody can claim that "I am the absolute knower." In this way, you apply the definition in yourself, you'll find that you partly and partially represent all the qualities of God. That you can claim, that you are partial God, or part and parcel of... That is the exact word, part and... Mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūta (BG 15.7). These living entities, jīva-bhūta... There are two definitions of the living entities. One definition is jīva-bhūta, and another definition is Brahmā bhūta (SB 4.30.20). What is the jīva-bhūta? So long the living entity has got the misconception of his existence, that "I am this body," he's called jīva-bhūta. And when he is completely in knowledge that "I am not this body," that is called brahma-bhūtaḥ. The same "I," one is false identification, and another is real identification. The real identification begins—brahma-bhūtaḥ, to know that "I am not this matter; I am spirit soul."
Violence? Kṛṣṇa does not sanction violence, but if there is absolute necessity, then violence is required. Yes. Kṛṣṇa wanted to mitigate the misunderstanding of two groups of cousin-brothers. So Kṛṣṇa personally induced, "All right, they are, your brothers are kṣatriyas. Kṣatriyas, they cannot do any business or take the profession of a brāhmaṇa. So you give them five villages. They will be satisfied." And they replied, "Oh, what do You call five villages? I cannot spare even that land which can hold the tip of this needle." Then Kṛṣṇa says, "You must fight." So Kṛṣṇa or Kṛṣṇa's devotees, they are not after fight, but if there is absolute necessity of fight, then they can fight also. Because they are prepared to do anything. Just like in Rāmāyaṇa also, the same subject matter. Hanumān. Hanumān is a devotee of Lord Rāmacandra. So he fought with Rāvaṇa not for his personal self, but Rāma wanted, that "He has kidnapped the queen of Rāma. She must be delivered." And there was fighting. That is the principle. When one does not agree to the religious principle or to the moral principle or any instruction, he is adamant, then there must be fight.
So any way you do it, it is all the same. Absolute. Tad-arthe akhila-ceṣṭitam, ity ady asmin eva purāṇe tatra tatra pathyate. Śrīdhara Swami says, "In this Purāṇa, Mahā Purāṇa, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, these things are explained everywhere, as well as these things are explained in all other Vedic scriptures. Purāṇantare ca pāpa-kṣayaś ca bhavati smaratāṁ tam ahar-niśam iti. These are the authoritative statements; therefore, we have to follow the ācāryas. They pick up nice authorized verses from various Vedic literature and present before you. So Śrīdhara Swami says, purāṇantare. In other Purāṇas also it is stated, pāpa-kṣayaś ca bhavati smaratāṁ tam ahar-niśam. "Anyone who is always absorbed in Your thought, no material scene can effect him, cannot touch him." Pāpa-kṣayam. "And if he has any sinful activities in his past life, that also becomes nullified." Pāpa-kṣayam. Pāpa-kṣayaṁ bhavati smaratāṁ tam ahar-niśam. "Anyone who is always..." Kṛṣṇa also says in the Bhagavad-gītā that yoginām api sarveṣāṁ mad-gatenāntarātmanā: "One who is always thinking of Me within himself, he is first-class yogi." Yoginām api sarveṣāṁ (BG 6.47). There is no need of speculating. Simply this easy process, thinking of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that yoginām api sarveṣāṁ. All big, big yogis, there may be, but a person who is always absorbed in thought of Kṛṣṇa within himself, he is greater than all such big, big yogis. Greater than the greatest yogi. Yoginām api sarveṣāṁ mad-gatenāntarātmanā. Mad-gata means his life is so molded that he cannot stay without thinking of Kṛṣṇa. Mad-gata. He has become absorbed. That is samādhi. Mad-gatenāntarātmanā śraddhāvān. Not for artificial makeshow, but śraddhāvān, with faith and love. Śraddhāvān bhajate yo māṁ sa me yuktatamo mataḥ.
So we have to take, understand Bhagavad-gītā from paramparā system, not from the rascals! That will not do. So what is that paramparā system? That paramparā system... Take, for example, Kṛṣṇa is speaking to Arjuna. How? Why He is speaking to Arjuna? Arjuna was not a Vedāntist; he was a military man. You do not expect a military man to be highly learned or Vedāntist. And He was talking to him when he was fighting, very busy hour. And still, Kṛṣṇa said, "I'll speak to you this yoga system of Bhagavad-gītā because you are My devotee and dear friend." Therefore the first qualification for understanding Bhagavad-gītā is to become a dear friend of Kṛṣṇa. And if you are a Kaṁsa, what you will understand, Bhagavad-gītā? If your motive is to kill Kṛṣṇa by reading Bhagavad-gītā... Just like Dr. Radhakrishnan says, when he is explaining this verse, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65), "It is not to Kṛṣṇa." He directly says. He's advising not to surrender to Kṛṣṇa. "It is the unborn which is within Kṛṣṇa." He does not know, there is no "within," "without" Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is absolute. He has no knowledge. Still, he's trying to comment on Bhagavad-gītā. This is going on.
This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is a self-purification movement. The method is vibration of transcendental sound. This Hare Kṛṣṇa, this sound, is not material sound. It is descended from the spiritual world. Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's name—not different. Abhinnatvāṁ nāma-nāminoḥ. As in this material world there is difference between the name and the substance... If you are thirsty, then if you simply chant "water, water, water," your thirst will not be quenched. You have to get the substance water. But in the spiritual world it is, being absolute, the name and the person whose name we are chanting, they are the same. Therefore by chanting this holy name of God, Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa... Hare is addressing the spiritual energy of the Lord, and Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord. So by being in touch with the Supreme Lord and His energy directly, we become purified. Exactly like if you take one iron rod, put into the fire, it becomes warner, warmer, and at last it becomes red hot. When it is red hot, it is no longer iron; it is fire. Similarly, if you constantly become in touch with the Supreme Lord by chanting His holy name, which is not different from the Supreme Lord, then you become spiritually purified. And as soon as you are spiritually purified, then all misunderstandings of this material world immediately vanquished. That is called Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
In that case you can interpret. Just like the example is gaṅgāyāṁ ghoṣapali: "There is a neighborhood which is known as ghoṣapali on the Ganges." Now one may question how on the Ganges, Ganges is water, there can be a neighborhood? Then you can interpret that "It is not on the Ganges water, but it is on the bank of the Ganges." Then there is chance of interpretation. But when you can clearly understand that "The thing is like this: Kurukṣetra is a place, and that is a place of pilgrimage," why should you interpret that Kurukṣetra means the body? In this way Bhagavad-gītā is being misinterpreted. In the Ninth Chapter, when Kṛṣṇa says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65), one great commentator, very erudite scholar, he says, "It is not to Kṛṣṇa; it is to the unborn principle which is within Kṛṣṇa." But he does not know what is Kṛṣṇa, and he has the audacity to comment on the Bhagavad-gītā. Kṛṣṇa is not different from within and without. Kṛṣṇa, being Absolute, there is no such difference. As we have got difference, I, the spirit soul, is different from my body, but Kṛṣṇa is not like that. There is no such difference that Kṛṣṇa's soul and Kṛṣṇa's body. Kṛṣṇa is complete whole, pūrṇa. There is no such difference. The person who does not know what is Kṛṣṇa, if he tries to comment upon the transcendental knowledge imparted by Kṛṣṇa, that is simply impudent. So in this way, if we try to understand Bhagavad-gītā as it is, then we become liberated, we become a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, we become fully Kṛṣṇa conscious. That is the objective of Bhagavad-gītā. Kṛṣṇa therefore says, "Arjuna, I am trying to deliver this knowledge of Bhagavad-gītā unto you because you are My devotee." Bhakto 'si priyo 'si me rahasyaṁ hy etad uttamam (BG 4.3). "Without you, nobody can understand what is the mystery of this Bhagavad-gītā knowledge."
So we are... It is a fact that we are in a conditioned life. It is not absolute. And the, Kṛṣṇa, He is absolute. He is never conditioned, as we have explained that the three qualities of this material nature are emanation from Kṛṣṇa, but He is not affected by the qualities. Therefore He is called nirguṇa. Nirguṇa, nirākāra, does not mean that He has no form or He has no quality. He has no material qualities, nor He is affected by the material qualities. And ākāra... He is not nirākāra as we understand. We understand nirākāra means formless. But Kṛṣṇa is not formless. Kṛṣṇa has form. That is transcendental form, sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). His body is eternal and full of bliss, transcendental bliss, and full of knowledge. That is Kṛṣṇa's feature. So we have also got minute quantity of Kṛṣṇa's qualities because we are minute particles of Kṛṣṇa, but that is now covered by māyā. This māyā means... When we forget our actual relationship with Kṛṣṇa, that is called māyā, false egotism. Falsely I am thinking that "I am American," "I am Indian," "I am brāhmaṇa," "I am this," "I am that." These are all false designations. Real identification is "I am Kṛṣṇa's." I have repeatedly said. When this realization is achieved, that mahātmā is su-durlabhaḥ, very rare. Sa mahātmā su-durlabhaḥ. Who? One who understands that vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti: (BG 7.19) "Vāsudeva is the origin of everything." Kṛṣṇa is the origin.
It is not exactly like the human body, but God is so kind that He comes before us as an ordinary human being. Unfortunately one who does not know about Him, he thinks that Kṛṣṇa, or God, is like one of us. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhāḥ (BG 9.11). That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. "Those who are mūḍhas, rascals, they think Me as if one of the human being." Actually He is not. So we have got the chance to know about Him. Provided we read the right literatures under right direction, we can know. That possibility is there. And if we simply can know what is the nature of God, or Kṛṣṇa, simply by understanding this fact one becomes liberated. That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9). A person who has understood the Absolute Supreme Personality of Godhead... It cannot be understood completely. That is not possible with our human intelligence, but with the help of Bhagavad-gītā, the statement given by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and the spiritual master, we can know Him to the best of our capacity. And if we can know Him, then the result is that immediately after leaving this body we enter into the kingdom of God. Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti: (BG 4.9) "After giving up this body he does not come again to this material world, but he enters into the spiritual world and comes to Me." That is the statement.
Our presentation is authoritative because we are guided by the principles of the old knowledge, the ancient knowledge of India, the Vedas. And the process of understanding this science of Kṛṣṇa is also made very easy in this age. The process, as you have already known, the process is chanting the holy name of God: Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. Now this is recommended in the Vedas, that "In this age people are so much fallen that they cannot realize God by the prescribed method; therefore the best chance for them is to chant this holy name of God." That is recommended in the Vedas. You can chant... "If you know any other name of God, you can chant also, because there is no difference between the different names of God. And each name, holy name, is invested with all powers of God." Lord Caitanya says that each and every name, holy name of God, is nondifferent from the Supreme Lord. Therefore all the powers, all the energies that God has, it is also there in His holy name. In the absolute platform there is no such difference, as in this relative world there is difference between the name and the person whose name we are chanting. As such, there is no difference between the holy name of God and God. And Caitanya Mahāprabhu says there is no hard and fast rules and regulations for this chanting.
That is a Vedic verse: aprāṇasyaiva dehasya maṇḍanaṁ loka-rañjanam. Just like this body. Because there is a minute particle of God's part and parcel, the soul, this body is so valuable. One is "Sir such-and-such," or "Lord such-and-such," and big scientist, big philosopher. Why? Because that spark of God's parcel, part and parcel, is there. As soon as that particle is gone, this body is useless. It may be a body of "Sir such-and-such" or "Lord such-and-such," but it is useless. It is simply a lump of matter. But people are giving more importance to this body, which is nothing but lump of matter. But they have no information. I have traveled so many countries, universities also. There is not a single institution where there is a department where scientific knowledge is being given about understanding God or soul. That is not a very good sign for human civilization. Human civilization is especially meant for understanding God. Therefore in any human civilized society there is system of religion. Religion means, as I have already explained, to abide by the orders of God. It may be a little different from one country to another. Just like in the political state management also, it is not exactly the same. But the obedience to the state is everywhere. The state may be, the constitution may be little different, but the obedience to the state is absolute necessity. Similarly, religion may be different according to time, country, position, understanding, but the obedience to God must be there, obedience to God. Otherwise it is not human civilization.
Guest (8): Swamijī, something you said was the connection between the necessity for obedience to the state and necessity for their obedience to God. To take an example that occurs to many young man in this country, and I suppose in America, the question of military service arises where the state demands their absolute obedience, and many young people feels this clashes with their obedience to God. How do you advise people to resolve this sort of conflict?
Śyāmasundara: About the draft. If one has to obey the state and go to war, how is that the same as obeying God?
Prabhupāda: Well, God consciousness does not prohibit war, but it must be for the right cause. Just like in Bhagavad-gītā we see that the instruction of the Bhagavad-gītā was given to Arjuna in the battlefield. And in the beginning Arjuna did not like to fight. He was a good, good man, religious man, devotee. Naturally, he was not inclined to fight with his relatives, kinsmen. He said, "Kṛṣṇa, the opposite side, they are all my brothers and nephews and fathers and grandfathers. So there is no use of fighting like this, to kill them and take the... Let... Let them enjoy." That was his conclusion. But Kṛṣṇa induced them, induced Arjuna, "No. This is the right cause. You must fight." So similarly, war is not always bad. Nothing is bad, nothing is good, unless it is used for God. That's it. Our philosophy is everything is good. God is all-good. So if He advises to fight, that is also good. But we shall depend on the discretion of God. If God wants us to fight, then we shall fight. If God wants us to stop fight, then we shall not fight. Because we are surrendered to God, so whatever God orders, we have to do. That's all. We don't say, "This is good; this is bad." Whatever God says, that is good. What God does not say, prohibit, that is bad. This is our conclusion.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I thank you very much for your coming here and giving us a chance to speak about the absolute artist. Kṛṣṇa's name is Naṭabara, Naṭabara. Naṭabara means the greatest dramatic dancer. And another, His name, is Naṭo nāṭyadharo yathā. He is dancing in such a nice way that He (is) attracting everyone. So in the Vedas it is said about Kṛṣṇa how great artist He is. Na tasya kāryaṁ kāraṇaṁ ca vidyate. The Absolute Personality of Godhead, He has nothing to do personally. Na tasya kāryaṁ kāraṇaṁ ca vidyate. Kāryam means work. He hasn't got to perform any work, although He is the greatest worker. Na tasya kāryaṁ kāraṇaṁ ca vidyate na tasya samaḥ adhikaś ca dṛśyate. And nobody is found greater than Him or equal to Him. In this world every one of us, we know that "Somebody is lower than me, somebody is greater than me, and somebody is equal to me." That is our experience. We cannot say that I am or you are absolute. Nobody is absolute. However you may be great in the estimation of others, you will find somebody is greater than you, and somebody is lower than you, and somebody is equal to you. But so far the greatest Absolute Personality of Godhead is concerned, na tasya samaḥ adhikaś ca dṛśyate. By experimental study, by research work by great saintly persons, sages, they have concluded, na tasya samaḥ adhikaś ca dṛśyate: "Nobody is found samaḥ," means "equal to Him, or adhikaḥ." Adhikaḥ means greater. That is the experience.
So sac-cid-ānanda... There is... In the Vedānta-sūtra there is another aphorism, that ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt: (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12) "By nature the Supreme Absolute Person is ānandamaya." The artistic sense... You are engaged in artistic work just to have a pleasure, ānanda. Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt. That pleasure, rasa, a mellow... By painting one picture, you enjoy some rasa or mellow; otherwise why you are working so hard? There is a pleasure. So Kṛṣṇa is raso vai saḥ. Raso vai saḥ: "He is the reservoir of all pleasure." Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). These words are used. Sat, cit, ānanda. Ānanda means pleasure. His pleasure potency is Rādhārāṇī. You have seen the picture of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. So Rādhārāṇī is the manifestation of Kṛṣṇa's pleasure potency. He has got, as I have already explained, parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). He has got multi-energies, and one of the energy is pleasure potency. That is Rādhārāṇī. Kṛṣṇa is addressed in the Bhagavad-gītā, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān (BG 10.12). So parabrahma. Now, Brahman means biggest. So for Brahman happiness... That you have got experience within this world, that for achieving brahma sukha, or the greatest pleasure, ananta, unlimited pleasure...
- ramante yoginaḥ anante
- satyānande cid-ātmani
- iti rāma-padenāsau
- paraṁ brahma ity abhidhīyate
- (CC Madhya 9.29)
What is the meaning of Rāma, Rāma-Kṛṣṇa? So Rāma means ramante, enjoys, rāma. So who enjoys? Yoginaḥ, big, big yogis. Rāmante yoginaḥ. The greatest of all yogis is the bhakta-yogī.
Just like you are American, but the supreme American is your president, Mr. Nixon. But you cannot say that "Because I am American, therefore I am Mr. Nixon." That you cannot say. Similarly, you, me, every one of us, Brahman, but that does not mean we are Para-brahman. Para-brahman is Kṛṣṇa. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ. Īśvara means controller. So every one of us is controller to some extent. Somebody is controlling his family, controlling his office, business, controlling his disciples. At last, he is controlling a dog. If he hasn't got to control anything, he keeps a dog to control, a pet dog, a pet cat. So everyone wants to be controller. That's a fact. But the supreme controller is Kṛṣṇa. Here the so-called controller is controlled by somebody else. I may control my disciples, but I am controlled by somebody else, by my spiritual master. So nobody can say that "I am the absolute controller." No. Here you will find the so-called controller, certainly controller to some extent, but he is controlled also. But when you find somebody that He is controller only, not controlled by anyone, that is Kṛṣṇa. To understand Kṛṣṇa is not very difficult. Try to understand that everyone is controlling, every one of us, but at the same time being controlled by somebody else. But we find a gentleman whose name is Kṛṣṇa. He is controlling everyone, but He is not controlled by anyone. That is God.
The Supreme Person, or Īśvara... The word īśvara means controller. So everyone is controller. All of you are present here, to some extent, every one of us is a controller to a limited extent. But here it is mentioned, īśvaraḥ paramaḥ. Parama means ultimate. We are controller, every one of us, but we are controlled also. That is our position. Nobody can say... All the gentlemen, ladies present here, nobody can say that "I am controller absolute." That is not possible. Everyone is relative controller. But if you try to find out who is the absolute controller, then He's Kṛṣṇa. This has been analyzed by great scholars in the Vedic śāstras, by the Gosvāmīs, and this is the statement of Lord Brahmā, who's supposed to be the first creature within this universe. So he says, īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1): "Īśvara, the supreme ultimate controller, is Kṛṣṇa. And He's vigraha." Vigraha means person, with body. Just like we have got body, similarly, the Absolute Supreme Person has also body. But His body is different from ours. Sac-cit-ānanda-vigraha. His body is eternal. Our body, this material body, is not eternal. Sat cit. His body is full of knowledge. Our, this body, is full of ignorance. And ānanda. He's full of joyfulness. In the Vedānta-sūtra it is said, ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). The Supreme Person is always joyful, abhyāsāt, naturally. So our, this body is not ānandamaya; it is, rather, always miserable. Therefore we must distinct the body of the Supreme Person from our body.
That we also get from Vedic information. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1): that Supreme Being means Kṛṣṇa. The Kṛṣṇa, the word, means "all-attractive." It is not that God is attractive for the Hindus or God is attractive for the Muslims or the Christians. No. If He is God at all, then He must be attractive for all. That is the meaning of the word Kṛṣṇa, "all-attractive." So that is very nice word. Actually, God has no name, but we call Him by different holy names according to His activity. Just like we believe that God is great. So this is fact. The Vedic instruction is also there, na tasya samaś cābhkyadhikaś ca dṛśyate: "Nobody is equal, nobody is greater than Him." Therefore God is great. Now who is that great? That is decided: īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Being. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ. Īśvaraḥ means controller. That is the exact equivalent for the word God. God means controller, supreme controller. So that supreme controller means He has nobody else to control Him. Here, in this material world or anywhere, we find one controller, he is controlling, but he is also being controlled. He is not absolute controller. Here we find some, say, a president, he's controlling the state, but he's also being controlled by popular votes. If the popular votes are against him, he cannot control any more. So here, you just analyze anyone; he may be controller, but at the same time he is controlled. Not that absolute controller. Nobody you can find. So if in this way you go on searching out where a person is not only controlled, controller, but He is not controlled by anyone, that is God. This is the simple definition of God. God controls everyone or everything, but He is not controlled by anyone. That is God. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1).
So this... We, our, this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is to understand the prabhu, who is prabhu, who is the master, who is the Supreme Absolute. This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement: to understand the supreme prabhu, or master, or controller, and surrender unto Him. This is the process, simple process. That prabhu you can under..., cannot understand by mental speculation. That is not possible. Nāyam ātmā pravacanena labhyo na bahunā śrutena. There are many Vedantists, many scholars in Vedic literature, but they do not know who is his prabhu. They will say, "prabhu," but I ask him, "Who is your prabhu?" That they cannot say. Or they will not utter the name of the prabhu. Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that māyāvādī haya kṛṣṇe aparādhī. They will charge, they will call, "Brahmā," "Caitanya," "Paramātmā," "Prabhu," but he will never utter the name of Kṛṣṇa. This is their disease. This is called Māyāvāda disease. Therefore, because people are so poor in knowledge, alpa-medhasaḥ, brain substance is very little, they cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa Himself appeared as Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu.
Prabhupāda: Well, after all, this is material world. The miserable conditions are there. But as far as possible, try to minimize. Our only aim is how to save time for spiritual cultivation. That is our main aim. So we have to find out the opportunity according to the time, circumstances. We, we do not reject anything. Whatever is favorable, we accept.
Yogeśvara: So, in other words, the absolute platform that you were speaking of where everyone would be engaged in that kind of rural cultivation of the ground isn't any kind of long term goal for us necessarily. We have our small communities, and then there's also activity going on in other areas as well. But the idea in our spiritual master's describing, as far as possible we utilize every opportunity for advancing in spiritual life, whether it be by cultivating the ground or whatever occupational duty we may have to perform.
Guest (6): But I understand that your goal is to have everybody becoming self-supporting in regards to food. But if everyone who is engaged in food production, who will be providing other things?
Yogeśvara: He thinks that we have been saying that ultimately we'd like everyone to be engaged in food production. Is that our...?
Prabhupāda: No. We don't say that. According to the Bhagavad-gītā, the..., there is a section of men who will produce food, there is a section of men who will be spiritually elevated, and there will be section of men who will manage as the government or the king, and the balance men, they're all śūdras. They'll help these three men. This is Bhagavad-gītā. Not that everyone will be cultivator. No. There must be management, and there must be brain also, and there must be worker also. This should be... This is natural division. But all should combine together for spiritual cultivation. Just like we have got our brain, our arms, our belly, our legs. They're all required. We cannot reject the legs and keep only hands. That is not possible. But the hands, leg, brain and belly should combine together to keep the body healthy. That is the aim.
Question: What is the meaning of this chanting? If you chant all day long, do you reach a certain consciousness?
Prabhupāda: Yes. By chanting the holy name of God, you associate with God. God is Absolute. He is not different from His name. So when you chant God's name, means you immediately become in touch with God. And by chanting more and more, your association becomes more and more intimate. Then everything is disclosed to you. That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā:
- teṣāṁ satata-yuktānāṁ
- bhajatāṁ prīti-pūrvakam
- dadāmi buddhi-yogaṁ taṁ
- yena mām upayānti te
- (BG 10.10)
If you keep in touch with God with faith and love, then God is within yourself. He will give you intelligence how you can go back to home, back to Godhead. There are many different processes or yoga systems to be in touch with God, but for the people in this age, this is the easiest method, to be in touch with God simply by chanting His holy name.
I have already explained that God and His name, the one, Absolute. In the material world your name and you, person, they are two different things. That is difference between God and you. So therefore, by chanting God's name, you actually contact with God. But in the material world that is not possible. Suppose I am thirsty; I want water. If I chant "water, water," it will not act. But in the case of chanting the holy name of God, it is as good as to associate with God. Try to understand. (break) That:
- nāma cintāmaṇiḥ kṛṣṇaś
- caitanya-rasa-vigrahaḥ
- pūrṇaḥ śuddhaḥ nitya-mukta
- abhinnatvāt nāma-nāminoḥ
- (CC Madhya 17.133)
"The name of God and God is equally pūrṇa, perfect, śuddha, purified, pūrṇaḥ śuddhaḥ nitya, eternal, and pūrṇaḥ śuddhaḥ nitya-mukta, and liberated from material contamination." So it is not the question of argument. You can try. There is no loss on your part. Chant the holy name of God and see the result yourself. In India also sometimes "Kṛṣṇa" is announced as "Kṛṣṭa." Or you announce as "Christo." It does not make... Because God will take your mind, not your pronunciation. If you mean to pronounce God's name, even it is not, I mean to say, formally or perfectly pronounced, still, God will understand that you are trying to chant His name. That is your perfection. (break) ..."Christo" or "Kristo" or "Kṛṣṇa," if He understands that you are hankering after Him, He will give the resultant action. And this is the easiest process in this age for God realization. Thank you very much. Let us chant. (end)
Yes. We are lacking in God consciousness on account of being impure. So by chanting, glorifying the Lord's name, you will be purified. The example is, just like you put one iron rod in the fire. It become warm, warmer, at last red-hot. When it is red-hot, it is no longer iron rod; it is fire by association with the fire. Similarly, if you remain always, constantly, in association with God, then you become godly, and you become purified. Then your vision will be clear. So God and God's name, the same, because God is Absolute. If you chant, glorify, God's name, that means you associate with God directly. And if we... Associate with God means you gradually become godly. This is the meaning of chanting the holy name of God.
So if you have got any material desire, that also Kṛṣṇa can fulfill, but you stick to Kṛṣṇa so that your āsakti will be increased. If you divert your attention to other demigods, then this āsakti will fail. Therefore for a devotee who sticks his faith in Kṛṣṇa, he has no chance for worshiping other demigods. So the Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura says, anya devāśraya nāi, tomāre kahinu bhāi, ei parama bhakti karaṇa. For a devotee of Kṛṣṇa there is no scope for worshiping other Deity, because that will not help him to increase his attachment for Kṛṣṇa. But if we want our āsakti, attachment, to increase for Kṛṣṇa, then absolute...
- anyābhilāṣitā-śūnyaṁ
- jñāna-karmādy anāvṛtam
- ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānu-
- śīlanaṁ bhaktir uttamā
- (Brs. 1.1.11)
We have to give up all other material desires, simply stick to Kṛṣṇa to serve Him, always ready to serve Him. Ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānu-śīlanam (CC Madhya 19.167). Just like Arjuna. He was ready to serve Kṛṣṇa. Similarly, everyone should be ready to serve Kṛṣṇa. That is the perfection of life.
So we living entities, we are here in this material world. We are loitering in different bodies. Tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ (BG 2.13). Now I am Indian or American. I am very great leader, Indian leader or American. Next moment I may become a dog or cat. Tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ. Dehāntara-prāptiḥ is absolute. There is no question of... Karmaṇā daiva-netreṇa jantor deha upapatti (SB 3.31.1). As we are working, creating a mentality—just like if I am infecting some disease, then I have to suffer from that disease—so similarly, this material world is consisting of three modes of nature, sattva-guṇa, rajo-guṇa, tamo-guṇa, and mixed. So we are infecting according to our activities. The first-class position is to become a qualified brāhmaṇa. Śamo damo satyaṁ śaucaṁ titikṣa ārjavam, jñānaṁ vijñānam āstikyaṁ brahma-karma svabhāva-jam (BG 18.42). So that is the best quality. And next the kṣatriya quality, next the vaiśya quality... Cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭam (BG 4.13). So according to the infection of different qualities, we are preparing the next body, karmaṇā daiva-netreṇa (SB 3.31.1). This is karma.
Yes. Renunciation is the beginning of this material world. You cannot take, you cannot surrender to Kṛṣṇa, unless you renounce this ma.... If you have got material necessities... Sarva-dharmān parityajva. Kṛṣṇa says, "Absolute surrender." And if you want material necessities, then you have got so many dharmas—this dharma, that dharma, social dharma, family dharma, national dharma, community dharma, and so on, so on. But Kṛṣṇa demands, sarva-dharmān parityajya (BG 18.66). So it is not very easy thing. Therefore renunciation and surrender. Surrender means full renunciation, no reservation. And renunciation means you renounce something and keep something. That is difference.
Philosophy Discussions
Śyāmasundara: This is what he is saying, that there's absolute truth and relative truth.
Prabhupāda: Absolute truth is one. Then he can say that absolute truth and relative truth, not that two types of truth.
Śyāmasundara: That's what he says: there are relative truths and absolute truths.
Prabhupāda: That we accept. There are truths, relative and absolute.
Śyāmasundara: And he says that the test for both types—of absolute truth and relative truth—is that for absolute truth, it is impossible to conceive of the opposite.
Prabhupāda: Opposite is māyā. Māyā is not truth. Māyā is illusion.
Śyāmasundara: Relative truths are governed by the law of sufficient reason. In other words, they can be most reasonably explained by reference to all of the conditions in which they are found.
Prabhupāda: Just like you can explain how the snow is formed-the molecular structure of the water, and how they become compact by temperature...
Śyāmasundara: His idea is that when the bird landed, the fruit coincidentally fell. There is no cause between the bird and the fruit falling.
Prabhupāda: No. We say if Kṛṣṇa desired, it would not have fallen. Kṛṣṇa desired it. Kṛṣṇa desires "Let it fall down"; therefore it falls. That is the cause. Kṛṣṇa desires that "Let the fruit fall down and the crow fly away."
Śyāmasundara: He says that God is absolute necessity because He is governed by the law of contradiction, and it is impossible to conceive of not God.
Prabhupāda: To God there is no contradiction. That is absolute. Whatever He does, whatever He says, that is absolute. There is no contradiction.
Śyāmasundara: Because it is impossible to conceive of not God. In other words, God is absolutely necessary because to conceive not-God is impossible.
Prabhupāda: That is artificial. The atheists say there is no God, so God is there, but he refuses to accept. Otherwise why does he say there is no God? The idea of God is there, but he refuses to accept. And unless God is there, wherefrom the idea is coming? The atheist... God is there, but he is refusing to accept. Just like the impersonalist: unless you have got personal understanding, how will you try to make it impersonal? The first is personal. You try to make it impersonal.
Śyāmasundara: He says that men, because they are...
Prabhupāda: The atheist demons are like that. If he exists to accept God, then he cannot work irresponsibly. To facilitate his sinful activities he is denying that there is a God.
Śyāmasundara: He says that God is an absolute necessity because we cannot conceive not-God. But man, individual men, are relative truths because they are not absolutely necessary. Because I can conceive that I am not here, that I may die. So he says that we are conditioned, that men are conditioned. They are governed by the principle of sufficient (indistinct).
Prabhupāda: That we can see. There are so many politicians, they are very busy. They think that "If I do not remain in the state, everything will collapse." But when he dies, everything goes on nicely without him. That is māyā. So many politicians work so hard, up to the last point of his death he is thinking that "Without me, everything will be topsy turvy." But he dies in spite of his not willing to die. He dies, but things go on without depending on him. Therefore God's will is working, the Supreme Will. You may think so many ways—that is a different thing. Actually God's will is working.
Śyāmasundara: He says that because God has freedom of will, God decided it would be best to give man such freedom of will.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Because every living entity is part and parcel of God, although very minute portion, similarly proportionately, he has minute proportion of freedom of will. Not absolute. That is natural. Every man has got a little freedom of will, but it is not absolute. A man cannot will as he likes. That is not possible. Therefore it is said, "Man proposes; God disposes." Although the freedom of will is there, it is subordinate to the freedom of will of God. You cannot fulfill your desire unless it is sanctioned and approved by God.
Śyāmasundara: He says that the fact that there is more good than evil in this world justifies its creation.
Prabhupāda: Well, good and evil is according to his angle of vision. A devotee sees in this material world everything is good. Viśva pūrṇaṁ sukhaya. People are complaining they are in distressed condition, but a devotee sees that there is no distressed condition, that it is all happy condition, because he lives with Kṛṣṇa, he dovetails everything with Kṛṣṇa, he dovetails himself also with Kṛṣṇa. Therefore for him there is no misery.
Prabhupāda: That is rascal. That means he is imperfect. How he can say so when we practically see that the soul is changing from childhood to boyhood, boyhood to youthhood? How he can say like that? He is transmigrating. That is, every day we have experience. How he can deny that? Otherwise, if he, if the soul does not transmigrate, then how the child becomes a young man? The body is different. The, this is simple understanding, that he has changed the body. The body changes and the soul remains eternal.
Hayagrīva: He further writes on this... He says, "There is strictly speaking neither absolute birth nor complete death consisting in the separation of the soul from the body. What we call birth is development or growth, as what we call death is envelopment and diminution."
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is transmigration. That is transmigration. He hasn't..., he is not dead, but he has developed into another body. That is transmigration. Then why does he deny that?
Hayagrīva: So he says, in other words, as soon as the human soul leaves the body, it must immediately...
Prabhupāda: Enters another body.
Hayagrīva: ...enter another.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: Yes. He believes there is only relativity. He doesn't think there's anything absolute.
Prabhupāda: Relativity... He does not believe that there are other things. But as soon as one says relative, the opposite word is absolute; otherwise wherefrom we take this word relative?
Śyāmasundara: Well, his idea is that things only exist in relation with each other.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Then what is the supreme relative?
Śyāmasundara: He doesn't admit any supreme.
Prabhupāda: His knowledge is imperfect.
Śyāmasundara: He says just like a cherry, say a fruit...
Prabhupāda: In logic there is relative study, and at the end of all relative truth there is absolute truth, the summum bonum. So he has no idea of the summum bonum, or the substance.
Prabhupāda: If you don't follow, then you'll be punished. That will be the effect. You'll be punished. Therefore, the conclusion is that your independent thinking is not absolute; it is also relative.
Śyāmasundara: He says that logic or reason don't determine morality, but sentiment determines morality—how I feel, that's how I should act.
Prabhupāda: Or in other words, what is accepted by the supreme will, that is morality. You cannot decide what is morality. The supreme will decides whether it is morality or immorality.
Śyāmasundara: According to Hume, it's my sentiment that decides. How I feel at the moment, that's how I should act. It's my personal opinion.
Prabhupāda: But your personal opinion sometimes does not meet with approval. So if you are satisfied with your personal opinion, but if it is not approved by others, then you are in the fool's paradise. That's all.
Śyāmasundara: So he says that the remedy for this is social, that we should try to change the laws of the state or change the opinion of the state to accept a certain type of morality. If I think something is right and the state says it is wrong, then I should act through politics to change it.
Prabhupāda: He agrees to surrender to the supreme-state—so if the supreme state sanctions, it is morality. Is it not that?
Śyāmasundara: Yes. Public opinion.
Śyāmasundara: He says that there is no absolute morality, that everything is relative.
Prabhupāda: Yes. We say also. If it is sanctioned by Kṛṣṇa, then it is morality; otherwise the same morality may be immorality. Just like Yudhiṣṭhira was asked by Kṛṣṇa to speak lie—"Go to Droṇācārya and inform him that 'Your son is dead,' " because Droṇācārya had a benediction that unless he was shocked by the dead limbs of his son, he would not die. So he had to be shocked. But he would not believe anybody except King Yudhiṣṭhira because he was known as very honest and truthful. Therefore Kṛṣṇa employed this service that "You go." Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, he said, "Oh, how can I tell a lie?" So this is immorality. Kṛṣṇa is ordering, and he is saying that "How can I say lie?" This is immorality; he is disobeying the order of Kṛṣṇa. But Arjuna, he rejected all morality and immorality. He accepted Kṛṣṇa's order. That is morality. He was personally thinking that "If I kill my brothers, cousins, this, that," so many things, but because he was a pure devotee of Kṛṣṇa, when he understood "Kṛṣṇa wants it," he said, "Yes." This is morality. That is the fact. When your actions are approved by the supreme authority, that is morality. If it is not approved by the supreme authority, that is immorality. Therefore so-called morality-immorality has no fixed position. When it is approved by Kṛṣṇa, it is morality. Even so-called immorality will be morality, and so-called morality will be immorality. That we practically see, the same example as I gave you, that a soldier killing so many human beings, he is awarded, and it is... (break) ...he does what he likes, then it becomes chaos.
Śyāmasundara: He says the only authority is public opinion, and it changes.
Prabhupāda: That's all right. Still it is authority. Public opinion, he says, or without public opinion, the king or royalty. There must be some authority to guide them. Otherwise there will be chaos.
Śyāmasundara: As far as his philosophy of religion, he rejected the idea of absolute matter and the concept of a soul as substance. He rejected the utility of scientific laws, and he rejected moral principles as objective realities. He says all religious ideas are relative. There is no certainty and anything religious may be merely probable but never certain.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That also he says. Therefore religion means love of God. The means may be different in different processes of religion, but ultimately if one develops love of Godhead, that is the prima facie factor, love of God. So if any religious principle love of God is absent, that is simply show, it is not factual religion.
Śyāmasundara: He says that even the idea of God is merely probable but not certain.
Prabhupāda: That he cannot say. As soon as he speaks of authority, there must be a supreme authority. That is God.
Śyāmasundara: ...imperfection or finiteness.
Prabhupāda: God is absolute. For Him there is no evil. Absolute good. Otherwise He cannot be absolute. So what you think evil, to God it is good. Just like a father slaps a child and he cries. For the child it is evil, but for the father it is good. Father thinks, "I have done right. He is crying. He will not commit the mistake again." So this chastisement is just like sometimes Aravinda complains he thinks "I was unnecessarily chastised," but I say it is good. (laughter) The same thing. So whose opinion is to be taken?
Śyāmasundara: His idea is that God is limited.
Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. If God is limited, then He cannot be God.
Śyāmasundara: He says either God is limited in His goodness, in order to allow evil to exist...
Prabhupāda: No. He is unlimitedly good.
Śyāmasundara: Then He must be limited in His power, because He cannot stop evil from existing.
Prabhupāda: No. Evil works under His guidance. Good and evil, both are control] by Him. Therefore He is called supreme controller. He is not limited. The exact word used in Sanskrit is called ananta, unlimited. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam (Bs. 5.33). Ananta. Advaita, non-dual; acyuta, infallible; and ananta, unlimited. (end)
Śyāmasundara: His fourth antimony relates to the modality of the world, whether or not the world requires an absolute being. First of all, that is the thesis: "There exists an absolutely necessary being, which belongs to the world either as a part or as a cause of it," and the antithesis is, "There nowhere exists an absolutely necessary being, either in the world or outside of the world, as its cause." So by reason alone one can either say that there is a God or that there is not a God.
Prabhupāda: There is a God. That is reason. And how can one support that there is no God? What is that reason?
Śyāmasundara: Well, strictly according to these categories of quality, quantity, relation and modality, it is possible also to conclude that there is nothing beyond the material nature. If one uses only the senses...
Prabhupāda: But where do you get your senses?
Śyāmasundara: One could say that they are only a combination of matter.
Prabhupāda: But where does the matter come from?
Śyāmasundara: According to material reasoning, one could say that there is no necessary source of matter; it is not necessary to conclude that there is a cause of matter.
Prabhupāda: But we see that matter is growing. Just like a tree is matter, it is growing.
Śyāmasundara: It may have been eternally existing.
Śyāmasundara: From the father tree.
Prabhupāda: Father tree. Now Kṛṣṇa says, bījaṁ māṁ sarva-bhūtānām (BG 7.10). Therefore Kṛṣṇa is the cause of everything.
Śyāmasundara: Well, his point is that these contradictions-saying that "There is a God," "There is no God"—these contradictions only arise because the reason attempts to apply its categories to the transcendent of the absolute, whereas these categories are only applicable to empirical experience. In other words, by reason alone I cannot...
Prabhupāda: This is by reason only. I see everything is growing; therefore the whole cosmic manifestation must have grown from a source. This is reason.
Śyāmasundara: This is transcendental reason.
Prabhupāda: No. Common reason. Every matter is growing from a certain source, so therefore this material world must have grown from a certain source.
Śyāmasundara: How could some people look at the seed of a tree and come to a different conclusion?
Prabhupāda: From a source. Therefore the perfect reason is that this cosmic manifestation. Also we get from authoritative books, Vedic literature, how it has grown.
Śyāmasundara: So according to one point of view, Hume's point of view, cause and effect are not necessarily related, that they are habitually connected.
Prabhupāda: The scientist, he'll say that the father begets the child. Why it is not related? It is simply lunacy not to believe this. Where is the instance that without father some child has taken birth? Where is such instance? He himself is talking such nonsense. He is born by his father. The cause is his father. Similarly, his father is also the effect of his father. Therefore there is supreme father, father of this cosmic manifestation. How you can deny it? That is the defect of the speculators: they contradict themselves.
Śyāmasundara: This is just what he is saying, that whenever you try to speculate about the Absolute you will run into contradictions.
Prabhupāda: Yes. So contradiction mean imperfect knowledge. Perfect knowledge means who sticks to his principles. That is perfect knowledge. One who does not stick to his original proposal, his knowledge is imperfect.
Śyāmasundara: He comes to that point in a way by saying that he has limited all that we can know to mere phenomena, and he has therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge of God, freedom and immortality in order to find a place for faith. In other words, he says that through the reason and the senses we cannot know anything about God, soul, immortality or freedom, so the rest has to be done by faith.
Prabhupāda: No. Faith, that is a compromise, you see. That is not fact. But this is good that he admits that we cannot approach the final God by our senses or reason. To have faith, that is also not perfect. Therefore the Western philosophers, they have created different faiths, and religion means faith. Somebody may believe in some faith, others may believe in another faith. But that is not factual. The factual is this: if we are actually convinced that there is God, and God is omnipotent, so by His omnipotency He descends. As it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati bhārata (BG 4.7). "Whenever there is discrepancies in the process of religious principles," abhyutthānam adharmasya tadātmānaṁ sṛjāmy aham, "when people become irreligious, at that time I descend." He descends for two reasons: paritrāṇāya sādhūnām (BG 4.8), for relief of the devotees. Devotees are always anxious to see God, but somehow or other they are unable to see. Of course, they are seeing God, but at the same time face to face(?). So in order to give them relief God descends to be seen face to face. The other reason is that vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām: rascals, miscreants, to kill them. Just like Hiraṇyakaśipu, Kaṁsa, Rāvaṇa, they are the symbolic representations of miscreants. So to kill them. Two things. So one may say that God is partial. No. God is not partial. God is kind to everyone, both to the devotees and to the demons. The demons being killed by God, they get immediate salvation, whereas the devotees, by seeing God, they can understand what is actually the position of God. So God displays himself factually as He does in the spiritual world in Vṛndāvana. His nature is to play with the cowherd boys, to dance with the gopīs. These things are actually displayed, and devotees became encouraged that "After finishing this material body, we are going to Kṛṣṇa, or God, to join these pastimes of the Lord." This is called paritrāṇāya sādhūnām. Sādhus, they heard from the śāstras, but Kṛṣṇa practically demonstrates. So they become doubly confirmed, doubly assured what they are going to have next life. So these things, the transcendental world, God, His activities, we hear. By hearing also we realize. Because God is absolute, therefore to see Him and to hear about Him, there is no difference. There cannot be any difference. By seeing eye to eye or to hear about Him, the same thing.
Śyāmasundara: So after he finished his investigation about what the limits are of pure reason, then he began his critique of practical reason.
Prabhupāda: This is to be understood, that however expert logician you may be, this is not possible, by your reasons, by your knowledge, to approach the Supreme Absolute. That is not possible. This process that when God descends Himself and He speaks about Himself, He demonstrates about His pastimes, then it is possible. So the Bhāgavata is the record of God's descents. The whole Bhāgavata is philosophy about God, theology about God, and practical demonstration of God. Therefore anyone who takes to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam or the process of understanding God through Bhagavad-gītā, therefore it is called Bhāgavata, and it is simply about God. Bhagavad-gītā, God speaks Himself about His activities, and Bhāgavata is the record of God's activities, pastimes, and when He appeared on this earth, just like the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Ninth Canto. Nine cantos are devoted for understanding the transcendental nature of God, and the Tenth Canto is practical demonstration of God's activities before the eyes of the people of the world. But those who are miscreants, they think that Kṛṣṇa, or God, He is like an ordinary man but a superhuman being. That's all. But that is actually the position of God. By His causeless mercy He demonstrates Himself to be convincing. So instead of philosophizing, the people take to these two books, Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and if he practices the process, then he will understand God.
Prabhupāda: No. Faith, faith should not be blind. That is useless. Faith... Just like I believe in the government. This is not faith, this is fact. There is government, and I am under government's law, so I have to obey the orders of government. This is not faith; this is fact. Similarly, to one who knows God and becomes dependent on Him, that is not faith; that is fact. He is happy by his depending on God. Just like a child, he knows that "Here is my father and mother." He voluntarily depends on the parents and he is happy.
Hayagrīva: In his last work Kant seems to shift his position. He says, "Morality thus leads ineluctably to religion, through which it extends itself to the idea of a powerful moral law-giver outside of mankind for whose will that is the final end of creation, which at the same time can and ought to be man's final end. Make the highest good possible in the world your own final end." So he seems to point to an absolute law-giver or an absolute morality, which is God, but he believes that this knowledge of God is ultimately uncertain.
Prabhupāda: Uncertain—for the man who does not possess the perfect knowledge. But if we believe in God, if we know God, we can get perfect knowledge from Him. Then we become perfect.
Hayagrīva: He says, "An ethical commonwealth can be followed only as a people under divine commands, that is, as a people of God, and indeed under laws of virtue. We might indeed conceive of a people of God under statutory laws. Under such laws, that obedience to them would concern not the morality but merely the legality of acts."
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: So today we're discussing the philosopher Hegel, a German philosopher. His basic method is that he wants to synthesize all opposites to arrive at the truth and by doing so his conclusion was that everything that exists is reason, whatever exists is reason, whatever is real is rational, whatever is rational is real.
Prabhupāda: So, that means he wants to arrive at the absolute, that there is no duality. That is Kṛṣṇa. That is Kṛṣṇa. Because Kṛṣṇa says that His mission is to protect the devotees, paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām (BG 4.8). And killing the demons. Kṛṣṇa actually did it. Just like He killed the Pūtanā, the great giant Pūtanā. Superficially he killed, but she got salvation exactly like His mother. Kṛṣṇa gave Pūtanā a position like His Mother Yaśodā. Then, what is the difference between loving Yaśodā and killing Pūtanā? Because He is absolute, whatever He does, it is good. God is good. So superficially you may see, "Now God is doing bad," but it is not bad, it is good. Therefore two opposing, viruddhatta samanvaya(?), the Sanskrit word is viruddhata samanvaya(?). Coinciding two opposing elements, and that He can do. Therefore if he comes to Kṛṣṇa, he becomes Kṛṣṇa conscious, he surrenders to Kṛṣṇa, then his philosophical aim will be fulfilled.
Śyāmasundara: Well he says you can find out that absolute world by tracing out all of these black-white relationships in the material world. Eventually you come to the point of understanding the absolute.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is Bhagavad-gītā says: bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate (BG 7.19). After many, many births when actually one comes to the understanding of the Absolute, he surrenders unto Me because I am the Absolute. So our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is teaching to approach the Absolute. That is our...
Śyāmasundara: He says that for instance by relating one idea to its opposite that we discover a different truth about each of them which transcends their separate truths.
Prabhupāda: Yes. It is just like this Bhagavad-gītā says, that dehino 'smin... It says that this dehi, the soul which is within the body, that is immortal and this body is mortal. Two things are there.
Śyāmasundara: Opposites.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: Art is the expression of the spirit in sensuous form.
Prabhupāda: That is there. We are worshiping Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa, there is love of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa, but that is sensuous, sensual. The gopīs are coming to Kṛṣṇa, lusty. Kṛṣṇa is beautiful, they are attracted. So these are there: sensuous, beautiful, art.
Śyāmasundara: What about a tree? We say a tree is the artful display of absolute.
Prabhupāda: Yes, tree, tree is also art. Because in a place, if you find so many green trees to (indistinct) nice. And in a barren land, in a desert, you don't think nice. Therefore there is art.
Śyāmasundara: But the barren desert is not art?
Prabhupāda: That is also art in a different way.
Śyāmasundara: So everything is artful.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: So the second expression of the absolute mind, he calls religion. He says that "This is the absolute expressed as representations in our consciousness."
Prabhupāda: This is (indistinct) mean to accept God. Does he mean like that?
Śyāmasundara: Yes, but he means it as the opposite of sensuous form but as something intangible, something you can only relate to...
Prabhupāda: No. Intangible it may be at the present moment, that is another thing. But religion means understanding of God. Otherwise there is no religion. What do you mean by religion? First of all, you must define.
Śyāmasundara: What he means by religion is that the objects of our religious consciousness are mere representations in your consciousness, nothing more, but they are not tangible, like...
Prabhupāda: So then he has got no clear definition of religion. We define religion, is to abide by the laws of God. That is religion. God says, "You do this." When you do it, that is religion.
Śyāmasundara: So you would say that the absolute expresses itself in the laws of God...
Prabhupāda: Yes, that is religion. And should the absolute gives you direction, and if you follow that direction, then you are religious. You cannot create religion.
Śyāmasundara: That's a tangible...
Prabhupāda: That is tangible, that is tangible. That is every religion, actually. Just like in Christian religion, "Thou shall not kill." That is the order. So if you kill, then you are not religious. When you do not kill, then you are religious. So therefore it is very difficult to find out real Christian because everyone is killing, violating the law of God. In one sense there is no Christian.
Prabhupāda: And every religion means connection with God.
Śyāmasundara: But he says that the highest form that the Absolute manifests itself, the highest mode, is in philosophy. He says that this combines art and religion and it synthesizes them so it is highest, philosophy.
Prabhupāda: Philosophy means that there is some order of God. Just like God says "Thou shall not kill." Now if you want to kill, then you must present your philosophy why you are killing, why you are violating the order of God, or why you are accepting the order of God. This is philosophy, not dry speculation.
Śyāmasundara: He says that philosophy is highest because it can...
Prabhupāda: It is highest. But now God says, "Thou shalt not kill." Then you stop killing. That's all right, be religious but did you understand?
Śyāmasundara: Oh, why I (indistinct).
Prabhupāda: Why I shall not kill. That is philosophy. Jñāna, vijñānam(?). Just like devotee, he accept Kṛṣṇa or God, that's all right. He's also devotee but one understands actually what is Kṛṣṇa, therefore he is very dear devotee. Madhyama-adhikārī. He is kaniṣṭha-adhikārī, the lowest stage of devotee. He's as good as the other devotees. He does not like to... Just like gopīs, they are not philosophers and they're, neither they knew that Kṛṣṇa is God, but they loved Kṛṣṇa, that is highest. Without any consideration. Caitanya Mahāprabhu, "Whatever you may be, I love you."
Śyāmasundara: He says that there is an absolute conscience, which means pure rationality. Whatever is purely rational is conscience.
Prabhupāda: Pure rationality is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That is purest. Unless one comes to that standard, the so-called conscience, so-called philosophy is of no value.
Śyāmasundara: He says that punishment for crime is justified because it vindicates justice and restores rights.
Prabhupāda: Yes, therefore when one is killing an animal, he should be prepared for being killed. That will be justice. That is Manu's... Manu-saṁhitā says that when a man, murderer is hanged, that is complete justice, complete justice. That is to save him, because without being hanged in this life, he if he escapes justice, then he will have to suffer next life very severely. So to save him from so many troubles in the next life, if he is killed, I mean to say, hanged, in this life, then he is saved. Therefore the king who is hanging him is doing him justice. Life for life. If this is the justice, then why one should not be prepared of being killed because he is killing an animal? That is justice. That is Vedic philosophy. In Vedic philosophy, when an animal is killed, it is said that "You are animal, you are being sacrificed before goddess Kālī, so you get next chance to become a human being." That means he is given a lift from the evolutionary process to come to the human being because he is giving his life innocent, and one man wants to kill him, he will be killed. So because you are being killed before the deity, you get next chance human being and you have got the right to kill him. This is kālī-da, mantra. So any sane man will understand that "I am going to be killed by him so why shall I take the risk."
Prabhupāda: Yes, tribe and state. Śyāmasundara: He says that the dominant nation in any epoch represents the dominant phase of the absolute idea during that time. Just like now America is the dominant nation in the world so that the dominant phase of the truth is being expressed through America. Prabhupāda: Therefore Mr. Nixon supported Pakistan. (laughter) Everyone knew, all other nations knew that this Pakistan is creating havoc, genocide, they're killing innocent men in Bangladesh, and Nixon, Mr. Nixon publicly supported. And still he is angry about India because India is the richest country. He has withdrawn all help. So he is supporter of mischievous activities. Śyāmasundara: Just like before, the British were the dominant nation and then again some other country would be the dominant nation, he says that this dominant nation expresses at the time what the, the absolute truth expressing itself in time. Prabhupāda: Yes, the dominant nation is, it is connected with the absolute truth that up to Mahārāja Parīkṣit, five thousand years ago, the king of Hastināpur, they were dominating the whole world. Because Mahārāja Parīkṣit, Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira were actually representing God, therefore their domination was possible. Now, that being lost, there are so many small states, they are not God conscious, therefore fighting each other, that's all, like cats and dogs.
Śyāmasundara: Peace.
Prabhupāda: No, we don't want that. Go, spread, preach, and make your nation glorified.
Śyāmasundara: He discusses one more topic, aesthetics, or what is the idea of beauty. He says that beauty is the absolute idea shining through to the sense world, or the spirit shining through to the sense forms.
Prabhupāda: Yes, therefore our Kṛṣṇa is the most beautiful. That beauty. Because Kṛṣṇa is most beautiful. Just like I said the other day that the nice bird was chirping, I say Kṛṣṇa is speaking. So reservoir of all pleasure, all beauty. So beauty is appreciable because it is one of the qualifications of Kṛṣṇa.
Śyāmasundara: So beauty in the material world is Kṛṣṇa's, Kṛṣṇa...
Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa's perverted reflection. Just like now the sky is clear, now the sunshine is bright, but even if the sky is covered by clouds, you will understand it is daytime because the glaring, shining of the sun is still to be understood. Similarly, whatever little beauty we find in this material world, that is a perverted reflection of Kṛṣṇa's beauty.
Śyāmasundara: We still understand it's beauty, but not very much.
Prabhupāda: Yes, not very much.
Śyāmasundara: Poetry.
Prabhupāda: Yes, poetry. Therefore Kṛṣṇa's another name is Uttama-śloka, He is described by first-class poetry. And a devotee is supposed to be poet also, among the twenty-six qualification. So all of us writing, glorifying Kṛṣṇa. Poetry or prose doesn't matter. Anything sublime is called poetry, not that it has to be written in meter. Everything sublime is called poetry.
Śyāmasundara: Then actually he talks about the philosophy of religion. He says that the absolute manifests itself in representations. In other words pure thought is couched in imagery and pictorial contemplation, that this is religion. Religion is pure thought which we imagine in form. We put into form.
Prabhupāda: No, there... He has no knowledge of religion. Religion means imagining pure, not pure thought. Religion means the order coming from the most pure. That is religion. You, you cannot imagine. Your imagination... Imagination (indistinct) best thing. But if you receive the best thing directly from the most pure, that is religion. Just like we are receiving directly from the most pure Kṛṣṇa. He says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65). That is religion. That is religion, he is directly receiving the orders from the most pure, Kṛṣṇa. He is not imagining. It is not imagination.
Śyāmasundara: He says that this son represents nature and the objective world, because it is God incarnate; we can see Him, we know what He looks like...
Prabhupāda: Then he believes in incarnation? So, when there is son incarnation and God incarnation, which is better? Incarnation, He incarnates as son and He incarnates Himself.
Śyāmasundara: He maintains that God is an absolute idea, that he is pure conception.
Kīrtanānanda: Impersonal.
Prabhupāda: That means he has no clear idea of God. If God has got a son, then the father must be a person. Where is a son who is born out of imperson father? Where is the evidence?
Śyāmasundara: An idea, born out of an idea.
Prabhupāda: Idea. This is nonsense. If son is a person, his father must be a person.
Śyāmasundara: He says that in philosophy we approach closest to the absolute or God, whereas art is the form of the absolute.
Prabhupāda: Then his statement that Christianity is perfect, that is refuted.
Śyāmasundara: He says that the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, is just like his philosophy of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. So he says, "Therefore it is perfect."
Prabhupāda: He may think it. Everyone thinks that way, (that) his philosophy is perfect.
Śyāmasundara: He says that even higher than religion is philosophy because you can approach God through pure concept or thought, pure thought, and reach God.
Prabhupāda: Therefore Bhāgavata, Bhagavad-gītā is combination of religion and philosophical thought.
Śyāmasundara: He says that philosophy, knowledge of the absolute idea is unique because it is in and for itself, or is pure idea, that philosophy is pure idea.
Prabhupāda: That we say, that religion without philosophy is sentiment and philosophy without religion is mental speculation.
Śyāmasundara: But he wants to have philosophy without religion. He says that philosophy...
Prabhupāda: That is mental speculation. He says that above religion is philosophy. That means religion supported by philosophy is real religion. Religion supported by philosophy is real religion. Otherwise insufficient. It is same thing. That's all. Actually except Bhāgavata religion, all other religions in the world are sentiments. Therefore in Bhāgavata beginning is said, dharmaḥ projjhita kaitava, all cheating type of religion is kicked out from dharma. Projjhita, kicked out. Except Bhāgavata religion, any religion which is going on in the world, they're all cheating.
Śyāmasundara: He says that philosophy is higher than religion.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Then you apply your philosophy. Then why... Just like Kṛṣṇa says, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). You just surrender unto Me. This is religion. Now try to understand why Kṛṣṇa says that you surrender unto Me, and why we are obliged to surrender. That is philosophy, that is philosophy. And when your philosophy supports, "Yes, we have to surrender to Kṛṣṇa," then it is perfect, it is not sentiment. (break)
Śyāmasundara: So yesterday we were discussing Hegel. He says that the absolute idea or God assumes three forms. The first form is called the idea in itself, the second form is called the idea for itself, the third form is called the idea in and for itself.
Prabhupāda: Idea in?
Śyāmasundara: In and for itself.
Prabhupāda: Hm.
Śyāmasundara: And these three things may also be called...
Prabhupāda: That means he is creating God. Is it not? God is an idea. So his philosophy is that you create by imagination something as God. Actually there is no God. Just like Māyāvādīs, they say, "God is imperson. God is dead." Like that. And you can create a God. Just like Vivekananda, that is their theory. Therefore they create Ramakrishna as God.
Śyāmasundara: But what about the idea that God is evil?
Prabhupāda: He is evil also. He has got His evil also.
Devotee: But not according to our understanding.
Prabhupāda: Yes, but because He is absolute, either He is evil or good, He is God. That is absolute. You cannot say, "God is evil (indistinct) and now, therefore He is evil." No, He is good.
Śyāmasundara: What about the idea that God does not exist?
Prabhupāda: Yes, He does not exist in the rascal. That's a fact. The rascal cannot understand what is God therefore (indistinct) does not exist.
Kīrtanānanda: He is covered by the curtain of māyā.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Devotee: (indistinct) I am God.
Prabhupāda: That is also fact. Because you are part and parcel of God. Gold is gold, gold particle is also gold. If you say, "I am God," that means if you are particle of gold you can say, "I am gold." Just like you can say, "I am American," and President Nixon also can say, "I am American." That does not mean you are President Nixon.
Devotee: So that madness is coming from the spiritual world.
Prabhupāda: That is not madness. You can say like that that I am... It is not clearly said. You can say, "I am as good as President Nixon, as American." That is the explanation.
Śyāmasundara: Anyway whatever I can conceive must exist.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: So he says that this absolute consciousness or the idea in and for itself manifests itself in three forms. The first was the subjective mind. This is the individual who creates abstractions and he...
Prabhupāda: Subjective mind, just like although I have never heard what is God but I can think within my mind that as there is every man there is some controller, some chief man. So all this creation as I have seen, there must be a controller. This is thinking, right way.
Śyāmasundara: Subjectively.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: He says the subjective mind manifests itself again in three ways. First...
Prabhupāda: So that three ways, impersonal, localized and personal.
Śyāmasundara: In a way. First I understand that I relate to this body, somehow, then I get some understanding of outside objects, and then I get intelligence, real and moral choice.
Prabhupāda: Yes, these things are there. These things are there. Supposing the animal, he is thinking that he's body but when he comes to the human form of body he thinks, "Am I really body?" Then he thinks, "No, I am not this body. It is my body." Advanced thinking. "Then what I am?" This is progression.
Śyāmasundara: Then he says that this absolute idea, the in and for itself manifests itself in the objective mind such as our laws, our ideas of morality, our social ethics. In other words the individual consciousness manifests itself as a group consciousness, as we have laws that govern the state. These are extensions of our own...
Prabhupāda: As soon as we accept a controller, all these things will come. The laws must come, the control must come, the morality must come, immorality, everything will come as soon as we accept a controller. The atheistic persons do not accept the controller, they do everything nonsense, immoral.
Śyāmasundara: He says that the free will develops in these three areas of experience of law, morality and social ethics.
Prabhupāda: That's nice. That is the field of free will activities. Unless you have got platform to execute your (indistinct), there is no meaning of free will. So that is the platform. There must be law, there must be system, morality. That is (indistinct). Just like Arjuna was advised by Kṛṣṇa, "Now, whatever you like, you do." That is free will. But He has explained to him, "This is this, this is this, now it is you have your choice."
Śyāmasundara: Just like the state of California's morality may change. It may say gambling is legal tomorrow and then drinking is not legal.
Prabhupāda: Because that law is imperfect but God's law cannot be imperfect. That's perfect. Therefore we don't take others' advice. That is imperfect. We take God's advice because that is perfect. Or God's representative's advice, that is perfect.
Śyāmasundara: Then he says that the idea in and for itself expresses itself as the absolute spirit.
Prabhupāda: That means he is speaking the imperfect perfect. He is speaking from material platform. He has no spiritual platform.
Śyāmasundara: He says the subjective mind deals with inner experience, the objective mind deals with outer experience but the absolute mind deals with both, it unites them.
Prabhupāda: Yes, that is absolute, that we can (indistinct).
Śyāmasundara: And that this absolute expresses itself in three forms again, art, religion, and philosophy. On the first level the absolute assumes a sensuous form which we call beauty, and this is art, that the spirit...
Prabhupāda: So our definition of God (is) He is all-beautiful.
Śyāmasundara: Relative values.
Prabhupāda: Relative values. Now you imagine what is there. This is the mentality.
Śyāmasundara: There's no absolute scale of value in the material world.
Svarūpa Dāmodara: They're speculating that the genes of these supposedly very intelligent people...
Prabhupāda: The superhuman being is already there in what we call demigods. Brahmā, Viṣṇu, Maheśvara, Indra, Candra, they are superhuman beings, already there. What he will make? Let him make one ant first of all. Let me see that you have made one ant; then talk of superhuman. You have not been able to create even an ant, so how do you dare to say superhuman. It is all foolishness.
Karandhara: According to modern information, man now is living longer, is more healthy and is more well off than ever before.
Prabhupāda: That is another nonsense. I have seen my grandmother lived ninety-six years, but I don't expect I shall live ninety-six years. My father did not live more than eighty-one years; so gradually the span of life is decreasing. They are not healthy enough. Decreasing means they are not getting proper food or proper bodily comforts; therefore they're decreasing their life.
Viśāla: That which is practical for both.
Prabhupāda: That means both of them are not practical. It will be proved in due course of time.
Śyāmasundara: He says that terms such as "God" and "matter" and "absolute" and terms like that must have cash value or practical worth. He says, "You must bring out of each work its practical cash value."
Prabhupāda: Yes. Therefore our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement daily brings cash value without any business, without any labor. What do you think?
Viśāla: Yes.
Prabhupāda: Viśāla knows very well.
Śyāmasundara: So when we use the word "God," it has cash value?
Prabhupāda: Cash value. We are going to everyone, we are simply showing some book and taking (indistinct). You can say, somebody may say, you are giving books worth $200 and taking $1,100...
Śyāmasundara: I think this may be one reason why Kṛṣṇa consciousness is thriving in America, because this is a typically American idea, that everything must have a cash value or it is useless.
Prabhupāda: So our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement has cash value. Even in Los Angeles, outsiders, they are surprised: "How these people live in such a nice house, eat such nicely, and have so many cars, and they have no anxieties, although they do not work, they have no business?" So what can be more cash value than this?
Devotee: And no bills for psychoanalysis.
Śyāmasundara: In other words, truth is relative, according to him.
Prabhupāda: No. Truth is not relative. Your position is relative. So long you are under the clutches of māyā, your understanding of God is relative. God is not relative. God is absolute. You cannot understand God. Your position is relative. Just like, I will give you a practical example: a man is deaf and he is calling wife, "Mrs. such and such, such and such." She is replying, "Yes. I am coming." But he himself is deaf. He cannot hear the wife is replying. So he is accusing his wife, "Mrs. such and such is very deaf; she cannot hear." She is hearing; she is replying. This rascal cannot hear; therefore she becomes deaf. This is an example. So I cannot understand what is God—therefore there is no God. This is the most rascal position. I cannot see at night the sun-therefore there is no sun. He does not understand that "I am in darkness at night, so there is no possibility of my seeing." He has no such knowledge. But he concludes there is not sun. That is rascaldom.
Śyāmasundara: I think he would say that a belief in God would...
Prabhupāda: It is not belief. You believe or not believe, God is there.
Prabhupāda: So this depends upon one's education. If one is educated, in one way he may become tender, and another man, if he is educated in a different way, he may be hard. But our proposition is that originally the soul is good. This tenderness and hardness, they are developed later on. But they are not standard. When you come to the platform of soul, there everything is good. In that platform, either tenderness or hardness, both of them are in the absolute. So our philosophy is that, as we understand from Bhagavad-gītā, that every living entity is part and parcel of God. So God is good, pavitra. Just like Arjuna accepts, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitram (BG 10.12). Pavitra means pure. But because we are part and parcel of God, therefore we are pure. The impurities are acquired by our contamination with this material world. So either you become tender or hard—that is impurity of this material world. So we don't give any credit to any person, either he is tender or hard. These are all material qualifications. When he is spiritually placed, then we give him, that he is now liberated, either from tenderness or from hardness. These are all material qualifications. One is hard, one is tender. So that is our material quality. Just like a disease. One is suffering from headache, one is suffering from indigestion, or one is suffering from fever. So one who is suffering from headache, he is thinking, "Instead of having a headache, if I would have suffered from indigestion it was better." You see? And the man who is suffering from indigestion, passing stool every three minutes, he is thinking that "If I would have suffered from headache instead of this nasty disease, I would have been all right." So these rascaldom, either tenderness or something, it is the same thing. It is our mental concoction that he thinks this is a better disease. It is not better. It is bad. Therefore it is explained by Caitanya-caritāmṛta, 'dvaite bhadrābhadra sakali saman, ei bhalo ei manda sab more ghara. 'Dvaite: when you are contaminated, diseased... I will give you one... I heard from one of my medical practitioners friend. So he told me that when he was a student in Calcutta there was a big professor, Colonel Megha, English professor. He was lecturing, and with in talking he said that in our country that seventy-eight percent of the students are infected with syphilis. Yes. So the doctor said as soon as he heard from Professor Megha, he said, "Horrible." And the doctor said, "Why you are saying horrible? In your country ninety-nine percent are suffering from malaria. So as a doctor you should take the disease. Why do you think that this is a horrible and this is not horrible? You are thinking that malaria is not horrible; syphilis is horrible. But in our country we think syphilis is not horrible and malaria is horrible. So as a medical practitioner you should consider the disease, not the aftereffects. Aftereffects of all diseases is suffering, either it is malaria or it is syphilis." So we should be concerned that this soul, pure soul, is affected by these sattva, rajas, tamaguṇa, material modes of nature, and he is suffering. So he should be given relief from this suffering, not that because one is contaminated by this sattva-guṇa, one is a brāhmaṇa, very nice brāhmaṇa, therefore that is, from a material point of view, the brāhmaṇa is better than a śūdra. But from the spiritual platform, either a brāhmaṇa or a śūdra, they are contaminated by this material nature, so they are suffering. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā. Brāhmaṇa is thinking, "Oh, I am so pure. I am learned." So that is, thinking "I am so, I am so, I am so..." he is not thinking that he is part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa, or God. Similarly, others are also thinking. So the fact is, so long as one is affected by these material modes of nature, his position is the same.
Śyāmasundara: William James's position is..., he calls himself a radical empiricist. He says that the unity of the universe as a neat set of interconnected relations in an absolute. It is false, because...
Prabhupāda: Absolute? False?
Śyāmasundara: No. He says that a unified pattern of things, that the universe as a unified scheme, neat pattern of things, is false because our direct experience informs us of a discontinuity of facts. Our direct experiences sees discontinuity of facts, so we must conclude that the universe is comprised of facts which are not perfect in unity.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Because you are seeing the universe by your imperfect eyes. So it is your imperfectness. Just like you are seeing the sun planet just like a disc, but it is not a disc. But because you cannot see perfectly, you are thinking like that. So your conception of the universe is imperfect, because you are imperfect. Otherwise, everything is complete. Just like Īśopaniṣad, pūrṇam idam (Īśopaniṣad, Invocation). It is complete. That is the first verse of the Īśopaniṣad. But because you are imperfect, you are seeing the universe and everything as imperfect. The universe, because it is made by God, it cannot be imperfect. God is perfect, and anything created by God is perfect.
Śyāmasundara: So it is better to believe, even though one doesn't know for sure. It is better to believe because it gives one more chance of discovering the truth. He says that we have the right to believe in God, even in the absence of absolute proof. Even though there is no absolute proof, he says, of the existence of God, still we have the right to believe in God because this helps us to get closer to the truth. It gives us a better chance.
Prabhupāda: That means he accepts God is truth and that He's existing. Does he say like that or not?
Śyāmasundara: Yes. He says there is no absolute proof, but...
Prabhupāda: But that is proof.
Śyāmasundara: ...by my belief I get more...
Prabhupāda: That he is saying, that if somebody believes, he has got greater chance. Unless the fact is there, simply by believing, how there is chance?
Śyāmasundara: He says that by this belief I get some strength, some happiness, some practical advantage; therefore I have the right to believe, because I get a practical benefit.
Prabhupāda: So practical benefit... Suppose you are getting some warmth, so you believe there must be some fire. So I believe. Unless there is fire, how there is warmth?
Śyāmasundara: Yes. So the belief itself is the proof.
Śyāmasundara: But practically, the practical aspect of religion, that it imparts new zest to life, that it produces psychological and material effects, like that. But he didn't believe that God was unlimited. That was his... He believed that God was somehow limited; because there is evil, because evil exists, that God is somehow limited.
Prabhupāda: He does not know that evil does not exist independently. He does not know. In our śāstras it says that evil is the back side of God. But it is not independent of God. But either back side or front side, it is God; therefore it is absolute. I cannot neglect my back side. I cannot say that "You can beat me on my back side. Go on, kick me." That I cannot say. The back side is as important as the front side. But comparatively it is explained that evil is back side, pāpa, sin. That is back side of God.
Śyāmasundara: He says that we can cooperate with God...
Prabhupāda: That means when you are not in front side of God, you are sinful.
Devānanda: If one doesn't stand before God, he stands in darkness.
Śyāmasundara: He says that we can cooperate...
Prabhupāda: Those who are sinful, they cannot stand in front of God. Kṛṣṇa therefore says, yeṣām anta-gataṁ pāpam: unless one has completely uncontaminated from the reaction of pāpa,
- yeṣāṁ tv anta-gataṁ pāpaṁ
- janānāṁ puṇya-karmaṇām
- te dvandva-moha-nirmuktā
- bhajante māṁ dṛḍha-vratāḥ
- (BG 7.28)
So one cannot be Kṛṣṇa conscious unless he is freed from all sinful reactions. But if you say, "Then I am so much sinful. How can I become Kṛṣṇa conscious? It will just take a long, long time." Yes. It will take a long, long time, but if you accept Kṛṣṇa's order immediately, just "You surrender unto Me and I will give you relief from all sinful reactions," so you surrender to Kṛṣṇa, so your sinful life immediately becomes pious life. That is a fact. What you think, Viśāla Prabhu?
Viśāla: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: He says that there is no such thing as absolute good and bad but that each specific situation must be treated individually. There is no absolute good and bad; that each individual situation must be...
Prabhupāda: Yes. So that situation means Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Anything done in Kṛṣṇa consciousness is good. Anything done not for Kṛṣṇa's satisfaction, it may be ethically, so-called ethically right—it has no use.
Śyāmasundara: He says that the greatest good...
Prabhupāda: That situation... (indistinct) That situation means Kṛṣṇa consciousness. In practical life also we see that the soldier's killing, it is supported by the government. The same soldier killing for his personal satisfaction, he is condemned to death.
Śyāmasundara: He says that the greatest good is the elimination of the greatest evil or the fulfillment of man's greatest needs.
Prabhupāda: That's it. We follow that, that the highest objective, the ultimate objective is Kṛṣṇa, Viṣṇu. So becoming a Vaiṣṇava, the highest perfection of human life is achieved.
Śyāmasundara: So that greatest need is...
Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa consciousness. The greatest need is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. (Hindi with guest) Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that is the supreme consciousness. Yes. That is pure consciousness, Kṛṣṇa. Mamaivāṁśo jīva loke jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7). Every living entity is Kṛṣṇa's part and parcel. He always remembers that "I am part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa. It is my duty to serve Kṛṣṇa." This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
Śyāmasundara: So if one follows these moral guidelines, the result is certain, predictable?
Prabhupāda: Yes. Certainly. (Hindi with guest) Good association means to associate with one of the devotees. Sādhu-saṅga (CC Madhya 22.83). (Hindi with guest)
Śyāmasundara: He says that moral laws are not absolute rules which never permit exceptions. He says that moral laws are flexible; that they're not absolute.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Real moral law means the law of the Supreme. Just like Kṛṣṇa has preached dhyāna-yoga, jñāna-yoga, haṭha-yoga, so many yoga systems. Then He says, sarva-dharmān parityajya (BG 18.66). These principles have not less moral, dhyāna-yoga, jñāna-yoga, aṣṭāṅga-yoga, but ultimately He says, "Give up all of them." Then what is moral? His word is moral. Whatever He says, that is moral. Not this dhyāna-yoga, jñāna-yoga. No. Whatever He says, that is morality. So it is changed. Nobody can argue: "Sir, you have prescribed so many kinds of yogas. Now You say to give up all these things. It is contradictory." No. It is not contradictory. Whatever He says, that is morality. That is Vaiṣṇava principle. We don't consider anything moral or immoral. Whatever is ordered by Kṛṣṇa or His representative, that is moral. That is our position.
Prabhupāda: Anyone may be supremely devoted to his wife or sometimes supremely devoted to his dog. The dog is God? Wife is God? So everyone has got one god, and I think that it is supported by Vivekananda, yata mata tata patha: "Whatever you think of God, that's all right." (Hindi with guest) Everyone can manufacture his own God. (laughter) Yes.
Śyāmasundara: He says that we cannot achieve absolute certainty or perfection. So we must rest content...
Prabhupāda: That means he has got a poor fund of knowledge. He does not admit that. But we can say that because his knowledge is not perfect, he's saying like that.
Śyāmasundara: So he says that we must rest content with a faith and a commitment which helps us to face the future resolutely, reconstructing our environment to obtain more satisfactory adjustments. This is the Western philosophy in a nutshell.
Prabhupāda: Why not take directly the words of God? (Hindi with guest)
Śyāmasundara: He says that the idea of God is relative to the observer; that it may be something for one man and something for another. So there is no absolute certainty...
Prabhupāda: That means that none of them know what is God. That is the difference. Therefore Bhagavad-gītā says,
- manuṣyāṇāṁ sahasreṣu
- kaścid yatati siddhaye
- yatatām api siddhānāṁ
- kaścid māṁ vetti tattvataḥ
- (BG 7.3)
Nobody knows God. Only one person in many millions may know.
Śyāmasundara: He finds refuge in a kind of humanitarian welfare idea that by...
Prabhupāda: This is called utilitarian.
Śyāmasundara: Called what?
Prabhupāda: Utilitarian.
Śyāmasundara: His idea was that no philosophy can be fixed or finished or absolute, but that all ideas must be continually revised.
Prabhupāda: Because they have got imperfect philosophy. Imperfect is not perfect; therefore he is thinking of advancing further to make it perfect. So without Kṛṣṇa consciousness he remains always incomplete; therefore imperfect.
Śyāmasundara: He says that "All ideas must be tested in the laboratory of educational experience, where they can be challenged, their consequences evaluated, and where they can be continuously modified or reconstructed."
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Because you see how Arjuna was perfectly good man, because he was Kṛṣṇa conscious. He was not willing to kill his enemy. He was hesitating, "What is the use of taking this kingdom?" This is Kṛṣṇa conscious. Because the other side, they were not thinking, but Arjuna, because he is Kṛṣṇa's devotee, he was considering, "What is the use of taking this kingdom, by killing (indistinct)?" In other words, nobody can be perfect without Kṛṣṇa consciousness. No philosopher, no scientist, no sociologist can be perfect without Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
Śyāmasundara: But in our Kṛṣṇa consciousness philosophy the ideas are not to be re-evaluated. Aren't they absolute, the philosophy of Kṛṣṇa consciousness?
Prabhupāda: Yes, the philosophy is absolute. Kṛṣṇa is absolute, so His consciousness is also absolute.
Śyāmasundara: His idea is that philosophy is always changing, that we always have to revise.
Prabhupāda: That is in the material platform. He has no information what is perfect state. He does not know. Ārādhito yadi haris tapasā tataḥ kim (Nārada Pañcarātra). All tapasya finished. Samsiddhir hari-toṣaṇam (SB 1.2.13). If Kṛṣṇa is satisfied, then the all duty is all right. You don't require to satisfy anyone else. Whether Kṛṣṇa is satisfied. That's all.
Śyāmasundara: So that's all.
Revatīnandana: It seems like his philosophy—he knows what to do with knowledge, but he hasn't got any knowledge.
Prabhupāda: Therefore we say, harāv abhaktasya kuto mahad-guṇā: (SB 5.18.12) anyone who is not Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he has no good knowledge, he has no good qualification. That's all. (end)
Prabhupāda: So man's general position is as good as animal. Therefore in the human society there is system of education. But man, being advanced in consciousness, he can be properly educated so that he can understand what is God by the teachings of authority, and that is our Vedic system. In the human form of life—not generally but in special cases—they are very much inquisitive to understand about God. That is technically called brahma-jijñāsā. inquiring about the Absolute. And that is only possible in the human form of life. Generally, any human being can be educated in the spiritual life or God consciousness, but if anyone awakens his inquiry, as it is stated, tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam (SB 11.3.21), if one is actually anxious to inquire about God or the supreme knowledge, then he has to approach a guru. That's a fact. Without approaching a bona fide guru there is no possibility of understanding the nature of God and our relationship with Him. So one has to approach a guru. To accept a guru is not a fashion, it is necessity. If one is actually inquisitive, it is a necessity. So the qualification of guru is also given there, that what sort of guru you should search out. Śābde pare ca niṣṇātam (SB 11.3.21). A guru is he who has taken full training in the ocean of spiritual knowledge or Vedic knowledge, śābde pare. Śābde means the Vedic words, or vibration of sound, but that is not ordinary sound, material sound, but spiritual sound. Just like we are chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra, this spiritual sound. So one who has taken full bathing in the ocean of spiritual sound, and how he has realized the symptom of his life is that such guru is no more interested in materialistic way of life. Such guru does not manufacture gold or jugglery words to attract some foolish men and make money. That is not guru. Guru means who has no more interest in material things. Śābde pare ca niṣṇātaṁ brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayam. He has taken shelter of the Supreme Lord, completely satiating his material desire. So one should approach such guru, then tad viddhi praṇipātena paripraśnena sevayā (BG 4.34). By serving such guru, bona fide guru, and surrendering unto him, and then questioning him, he can make actual progress in spiritual life, and then he understands properly what is God, what is our relationship with Him. That is perfection of human life.
Prabhupāda: Purport.
Hari-śauri: The group of transcendentalists who follow the path of the inconceivable, unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme Lord are called jñāna-yogīs, and persons who are in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness, engaged in devotional service to the Lord, are called bhakti-yogīs. Now, here the difference between jñāna-yoga and bhakti-yoga is definitely expressed. The process of jñāna-yoga, although ultimately bringing one to the same goal, is very troublesome, whereas the path of bhakti-yoga, the process of being in direct service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is easier and is natural for the embodied soul. The individual soul is embodied since time immemorial. It is very difficult for him to simply theoretically understand that he is not the body. Therefore, the bhakti-yogī accepts the Deity of Kṛṣṇa as worshipable because there is some bodily conception fixed in the mind, which can thus be applied. Of course, worship of the Supreme Personality of Godhead in His form within the temple is not idol worship. There is evidence in the Vedic literature that worship may be saguṇa and nirguṇa—of the Supreme possessing or not possessing attributes. Worship of the Deity in the temple is saguṇa worship, for the Lord is represented by material qualities. But the form of the Lord, though represented by material qualities such as stone, wood, or oil paint, is not actually material. That is the absolute nature of the Supreme Lord.
A crude example may be given here. We may find some mailboxes on the street, and if we post our letters in those boxes, they will naturally go to their destination without difficulty. But any old box, or an imitation, which we may find somewhere, which is not authorized by the post office, will not do the work. Similarly, God has an authorized representation in the Deity form, which is called arca-vigraha. This arca-vigraha is an incarnation of the Supreme Lord. God will accept service through that form. The Lord is omnipotent and all-powerful; therefore, by His incarnation as arca-vigraha, He can accept the services of the devotee, just to make it convenient for the man in conditioned life.
So, for a devotee, there is no difficulty in approaching the Supreme immediately and directly, but for those who are following the impersonal way to spiritual realization, the path is difficult. They have to understand the unmanifested representation of the Supreme through such Vedic literatures as the Upaniṣads, and they have to learn the language, understand the nonperceptual feelings, and they have to realize all these processes. This is not very easy for a common man. A person in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, engaged in devotional service, simply by the guidance of the bona fide spiritual master, simply by offering regulative obeisances unto the Deity, simply by hearing the glories of the Lord, and simply by eating the remnants of foodstuffs offered to the Lord, realizes the Supreme Personality of Godhead very easily. There is no doubt that the impersonalists are unnecessarily taking a troublesome path with the risk of not realizing the Absolute Truth at the ultimate end. But the personalist, without any risk, trouble, or difficulty, approaches the Supreme Personality directly. A similar passage appears in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. It is stated there that if one has to ultimately surrender unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead (This surrendering process is called bhakti.), but instead takes the trouble to understand what is Brahman and what is not Brahman and spends his whole life in that way, the result is simply troublesome. Therefore it is advised here that one should not take up this troublesome path of self-realization because there is uncertainty in the ultimate result.
A living entity is eternally an individual soul, and if he wants to merge into the spiritual whole, he may accomplish the realization of the eternal and knowledgeable aspects of his original nature, but the blissful portion is not realized. By the grace of some devotee, such a transcendentalist, highly learned in the process of jñāna-yoga, may come to the point of bhakti-yoga, or devotional service. At that time, long practice in impersonalism also becomes a source of trouble, because he cannot give up the idea. Therefore an embodied soul is always in difficulty with the unmanifest, both at the time of practice and at the time of realization. Every living soul is partially independant, and one should know for certain that this unmanifested realization is against the nature of his spiritual blissful self. One should not take up this process. For every individual living entity the process of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, which entails full engagement in devotional service, is the best way. If one wants to ignore this devotional service, there is the danger of turning to atheism. Thus this process of centering attention on the unmanifested, the inconceivable, which is beyond the approach of the senses, as already expressed in this verse, should never be encouraged at any time, especially in this age. It is not advised by Lord Kṛṣṇa.
Hayagrīva: He says, "If you throw away His grace, He punishes you by behaving objectively toward you, and in that sense one may say that the world has not got a personal God in spite of all the proofs. But while dons and parsons," that is priests, "drivel on," talk on, "about the millions of truths about God's personality, the truth is that there are no longer the men living who could bear the pressure and weight of having a personal God." Because he feels that a personal God would make demands on man, and so therefore men reject the idea of a personal God.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Personal God means He is demanding, as Kṛṣṇa is demanding, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru: (BG 18.65) "Always think of Me, or offer Me worship, offer Me obeisances, and become My devotee. And give up all other engagement. Simply be engaged in My service." This is the demand of God, and if we carry out His demand, then we are perfect. Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9). If you simply carry out the orders of God then you become qualified, fit for going back to home, back to Godhead. This is clearly stated. Tyaktvā deham. We have to give up this body, but a devotee, a pure devotee, after giving up this body, he doesn't accept another material body, but in his original, spiritual body he goes back to home, back to Godhead.
Hayagrīva: That's the end of Kierkegaard. (end)
Śyāmasundara: Well, we can satisfy his conditions and then determine if it is true that this ring is gold.
Prabhupāda: Yes. There are so many conditions. After, at the end, the conditions come to atom, atomic theory. But the atom is also conditioned, aṇḍāntara-sthaṁ paramāṇu cayāntara-stham. Kṛṣṇa is within the atom also; therefore the atom is not absolute or independent. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is the ultimate fact.
- īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ
- sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ
- anādir ādir govindaḥ
- sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam
- (Bs. 5.1)
That we have know, that He is the cause of all causes.
Śyāmasundara: So, for instance, the ring may be gold under one set of conditions...
Prabhupāda: Yes. It is gold under certain conditions, but the original cause is Kṛṣṇa. Everything. Under certain conditions something is wood, something is gold, something is metal, something is this, something is... These are different conditions. I am also conditioned. Under certain conditions I am talking that "I am human being." Otherwise animal, he is under certain conditions, he is an animal. So everyone is under conditions. Who is not under conditions? Everything is under conditions. Therefore this world is called conditioned world or relative world. Nothing is absolute.
Śyāmasundara: There is a basic element-gold.
Prabhupāda: Not basic. It is a combination of different elements, different metals.
Śyāmasundara: According to the chemists, there are 108 basic elements, and gold is one of them.
Prabhupāda: That may be, but I say that what you call gold is a combination of other metals. So gold, this is not absolute. This is relative. Because other metals have combined together, it is now known as gold. Similarly, the whole world is combination of different material elements, and the gross elements are this earth, water, fire, air, ether.
Śyāmasundara: What about..., they say that there is a basic atom called a hydrogen atom.
Prabhupāda: Whatever you will call it, it is also matter. The minute particles are matter. That's all.
Śyāmasundara: That's right. Inside these molecules there are atoms, and inside the atoms there are more particles, and it goes on, smaller and smaller.
Prabhupāda: Yes. These are all matter.
Śyāmasundara: Earlier in his philosophy he said that there is only one language of terms which portray reality. In other words, there is only one definite set of language terms that portray reality.
Prabhupāda: That is brahma, brahma-sattva. Paraṁ satyaṁ dhīmahi. That is reality.
Śyāmasundara: Later he said that it's the way in which a word is used, not its meaning as a name for some object, which gives a language a statement for validity. In other words, the way we use words, not that words in themselves have absolute meaning, but the way we use them.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Just like when you use one word, it has got some meaning. When you say "Brahman," it has got some meaning. "Brahman" means nothing is greater than Brahman. When you use the word Brahman it means nothing is greater that Brahman.
Śyāmasundara: But that statement, "Nothing is greater than," if you use it in another context, say with three or four objects, and you say that "nothing," meaning these three objects, "is greater than this object," that is another...
Prabhupāda: No. Any object you bring. When I say "God is great," anything you bring, nothing is greater than God. That's all.
Śyāmasundara: Something which satisfies God's senses, that is real good.
Prabhupāda: That is absolute.
Śyāmasundara: So even words, if they are used to satisfy God...
Prabhupāda: That is good. Anything that satisfies God, that is good. Just like Arjuna was thinking fighting is bad, but when he understood that this fighting will be utilized for Kṛṣṇa's satisfaction, therefore it is good. So how the same bad thing becomes good? Because it satisfies Kṛṣṇa. So anything which satisfies Kṛṣṇa, that is good. Anything which does not satisfy Kṛṣṇa, that is bad.
Śyāmasundara: His final statement was that philosophy must describe the actual uses of language, never interfere with it, in order to achieve clarification. In other words...
Prabhupāda: This is clear clarification, that God is the Supreme, God is all-good; therefore what satisfies God, that is good. What will satisfy God, that is nice.
Śyāmasundara: So our philosophy describes the actual uses of words. There may be the word good and several...
Prabhupāda: Otherwise why you are chanting the words Hare Kṛṣṇa? There are also words.
Śyāmasundara: There may be ten philosophies, and each one will purport this same word good differently. But real philosophy is (indistinct).
Prabhupāda: Absolute good means to satisfy God.
Śyāmasundara: He says that God, He is pure actuality. There is no potentiality.
Prabhupāda: Absolute.
Śyāmasundara: He is Absolute. He is pure existence and essence together, but that the..., everything else that exists besides God has these two characteristics of potentiality and actuality.
Prabhupāda: That potentiality, actuality, it is material relativity. In the spiritual world there is same—potentiality, reality—they're one. Just like Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa, the rascal scholars, they think that Kṛṣṇa's body and Kṛṣṇa's soul is different, as it is, what is called, expressed by Dr. Radhakrishnan. But that is not the fact. There is no such difference. Kṛṣṇa also says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā (BG 9.11). Because He comes in a human form, rascals think of Him as ordinary human being. But He is not that. He is absolute. He has nothing to do with the body and soul as we have got. He is body and soul together-potentiality and the actuality. Similarly, anyone who gets a spiritual body, he also gets the same position. There will be no difference between actuality and potentiality.
Śyāmasundara: ...then our potential nature is no more existing; everything is purely actual.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: We have actualized our potential.
Prabhupāda: Absolute platform. Yes. That is absolute platform.
Śyāmasundara: Up to that stage, everything has got some potential...
Prabhupāda: Difference, so potential is actual.
Śyāmasundara: But they are acting on a smaller level. And when they reach that stage of loving God, then there's no more potential, purely actual.
Prabhupāda: That's right. That is higher conception. Saṁsiddhiṁ labhate parām. That is higher conception.
Śyāmasundara: He says... Now here is maybe one degree of difference. He says that ethical life, or knowledge of the Absolute, comes to our conscience or our reason, and the ethical life is to act in accordance or obedience to our conscience or our reason.
Prabhupāda: Conscience..., not ordinary conscience—Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Conscience is pure, but when it is diluted, contaminated, so somebody has got his conscience, consciousness, a different type. Just like Pakistani, Hindustani, they have got Hindustani consciousness or Pakistani consciousness, Muhammadan consciousness.
Prabhupāda: Man cannot do without education. Without education a man remains an animal. Therefore in the human society there is a school, college, an institution, teacher—not in the animal society. So the principle is, the man is meant for being learned or being educated. That you cannot deny, that man life should not be like cats and dogs, simply eating, sleeping, mating, and dying. That is not man's life. Man's life is to become advanced in knowledge and education. And as I have already described, the ultimate knowledge: to understand God. If he is so-called educated, without any understanding of God, then his education is imperfect. You can deny the existence of God, but the God conception is there in the human society. Some may accept it, some may not accept it—that is another thing—but the conception of God, the whole civilized world, they have got some type of religion. Either you become Christian or Buddhist or Hindu or Muslim, religion means there is some cultivation of knowledge to understand God. And to understand God is the ultimate knowledge. That is called Vedānta. Veda means knowledge, and the ultimate knowledge: Vedānta. So ultimate knowledge, it, what is that? That is the beginning of Vedānta education. What is that ultimate knowledge? Athāto brahma jijñāsā. The Vedānta begins with this word, "Now this human form of life is to acquire the ultimate knowledge." Athāto brahma. Brahma means the ultimate. So, the absolute. Now it is the time to understand. So far understanding of sex, the dog also knows. You don't require to give him any education. So nobody is given education... Now of course they have adopted, but there is a Bengali proverb, "How to cry and how to enjoy sex, it doesn't require any education." When you are aggrieved, you cry automatically. When there is a sex impulse, you enjoy it automatically. It doesn't require any Mr. Freud. Without the help of any educator, everyone knows-cats, dogs, animals, human being—everyone knows how to enjoy sex life. It doesn't require any education.
Hayagrīva: He says, "It is not that God is a myth, but that myth is the revelation of a divine light in man. It is not we who invent myth; rather, it speaks to us as a word of God. The word of God comes to us, and we have no way of distinguishing whether and to what extent it is different from God."
Prabhupāda: It is not at all different from God. God is absolute; therefore His words are as good as God. That we were discussing this morning, that God's name and God is the same. God's pastimes and God is the same. God's Deity and God is the same. So anything in relationship with God is God, just like Bhagavad-gītā is God. Because everything is God, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam (BG 9.4), everything is God, but when there is God realization, that is God. Otherwise God, everything is God. Without God, nothing can exist.
Hayagrīva: He conceived of what he called a persona. He says, "The persona is the individual system of adaptation to, or the manner he assumes in dealing with, the world. A profession, for example, has its own characteristic persona, only the danger is people become identical with their personas: the professor with his textbook, the tenor with his voice. One can say, with a little exaggeration, that the persona is that which in reality one is not, but which oneself as well as others think one is."
Prabhupāda: That persona—for as I take it from this statement—that persona, when when comes to the understanding that I am eternal servant of God, that persona is salvation, perfection. Persona must be there, but so long one is in the material world, his persona, or identification with some interest, varieties. Sometimes his persona is with the family, his persona is with the community or with the nation or with some idealism, Communism, this "ism," that "ism," this is going on. But when that persona comes to the understanding of Kṛṣṇa, that "I am eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa," that is perfection. Persona must continue.
Hayagrīva: He characterizes the true religious man as one who is accustomed to the thought of not being sole master of his own house. He believes that God, and not he himself, decides in the end.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Naturally that is the position. What we can decide? That there is already controller over me, so how I can be Absolute? No. Therefore everyone should depend on the supreme controller. That is called, technical language, it is called śaraṇāgati, full surrender. Full surrender. That is called śaraṇāgati.
Hayagrīva: He feels that the only thing that keeps modern man..., that will keep modern man from simply dissolving into the crowd is, he says, "We must ask, 'Have I any religious experience, an immediate relation to God and hence that certainty which will keep me as an individual from dissolving in the crowd of humanity?' " So one's relation with God assures one of one's individuality.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Everyone is individual. God is also individual. So one individual is subordinate to the chief individual. That is the Vedic version. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13), God is also individual being, but He is the Supreme Being, and we are individual being, innumerable. So the difference is that the supreme living being is maintaining us, and we are being maintained. That we should understand. The same example as I gave, the father and the children in the family. The father is maintainer and the children are maintained. This is the real conception of philosophy. The mother is the material nature and father is God, and we are all children. We have got rights to enjoy the father's property, but not encroaching upon others', but as it is allotted by the father. "You sit down here, you take this, that's all," that, that much right I have got. I do not transgress the order of the father; then it is peaceful situation.
Hayagrīva: So that's the end of Jung. (end)
Śyāmasundara: He says that this condition of bad faith must be replaced by solid choosing and faith in our choosing. For instance, if one chooses a certain path of action, that he must have faith that by carrying out this action valiantly, heroically, that he will be doing the right thing.
Prabhupāda: But if his decision is wrong, then what is the use of such heroism?
Śyāmasundara: He says there's no such scale of right and wrong. There is no absolute right and wrong, that everything depends upon how...
Prabhupāda: Then where is the question of responsibility if there is no right and wrong?
Śyāmasundara: Whatever I do, I must do it...
Prabhupāda: Whimsically. Whimsically. Whatever you do, you do it whimsically. Does he mean to say like that?
Śyāmasundara: No. Whatever you do, you do courageously.
Prabhupāda: Courageously... Just like the example I gave, the insect goes very courageously into the fire. Is that a very nice decision, to go forward courageously into the fire? He'll go courageously.
Śyāmasundara: The main thing, though, is that he must abide by his decision. Whatever he chooses, that he must live it.
Prabhupāda: Not necessarily. If I decide to steal, it is better to avoid it. Not that because I have to decided to steal, I must do it just like a hero and then go to prison.
Śyāmasundara: For Sartre there is no absolute right and wrong. Some of his main heroes are great thieves and debauchers, like there's one... What is his name?
Prabhupāda: Alexander. Alexander and the robber. There is a story that a robber was arrested by Alexander and there was talk between Alexander and the robber: "You proved that you are big robber, that's all. Why you are going to punish me?" And he was released: "Yes. I'm a big robber. I have no difference between you and me."
Śyāmasundara: So he says that we can remedy the whole situation of bad faith and being an unsavory character and treating myself as an object instead of a person by choosing for myself the person I ought to become.
Prabhupāda: Ideal person.
Śyāmasundara: I make the decisions.
Prabhupāda: So if your decision is wrong?
Śyāmasundara: There's no question of right or wrong in that case.
Prabhupāda: Whatever decision I make, that is final, absolute?
Śyāmasundara: Yes.
Prabhupāda: How it is possible? Then the same philosophy comes with the insect's decision. Absolute decision, even if it is wrong, it's all right. That is seen in lower animals also.
Śyāmasundara: One of Sartre's counterparts, one of his colleagues, Albert Camus, he also wrote about this philosophy, and himself he typifies this type of person. He simply died in an automobile accident by driving 130 or -40 miles an hour on a small road.
Prabhupāda: That is insects' philosophy, that's all. This is "I have my decision to run hundred miles an hour, not caring for others." So this is exactly like the insects.
Śyāmasundara: He said in the act of giving up, you don't find anything any better.
Prabhupāda: No. He does not find because he is blind, but we find. We take vision from superior person. So our vision is not blind.
Śyāmasundara: He says that we are trying to find the state of escaping contingency, or we are trying to reach an absolute state where we are not conditioned by anything. This is what we are striving for. But we will never be able to find that state.
Prabhupāda: If we are not conditioned, then how are we trying to reach the absolute state?
Śyāmasundara: He says that we are conditioned, but we are trying to be unconditioned. But we can never reach that state.
Prabhupāda: No. That is his hopelessness. That is not our (indistinct). We are giving up something paraṁ dṛṣṭvā nivartate. We are giving something for getting higher position, that's all.
Śyāmasundara: He says that this is an impossible project, to become absolute.
Prabhupāda: Not absolute, but to be the right relationship. Just like I am existing now, but not in right relationship. I am trying to exist as the Lord or master. But when I live as servant, that is my right relationship. I am trying to exist as the Lord or master, but when I live as a servant, that is my right relationship.
Śyāmasundara: This Bertrand Russell says that ethics, or what is right and wrong, is simply a set of emotional attitudes, and it cannot be, we cannot regard anything as good or bad. That nothing...
Prabhupāda: He does not make any distinction between good and bad?
Śyāmasundara: That there's no absolute good and bad. Nothing can be said "This is true or false," that "This is good," or that "This is bad."
Prabhupāda: That means he could not observe the distinction between good and bad. Does it mean like that?
Śyāmasundara: He says the only knowledge which is valid is proven scientifically, and he says that since moral right and wrong is not...
Prabhupāda: What is his proposal? What is scientifically proven? What is scientifically bad?
Śyāmasundara: He says good and bad are not subject to scientific proof.
Prabhupāda: But proof to him. But there is proof, what is really good and what is really bad. Has he given any practical example, that "This is scientifically good" and that "this is scientifically bad"?
Śyāmasundara: He says, "What is good is that which is desired," that desirable.
Prabhupāda: But anyone can desire anything. (laughter) So it is nonsense.
Śyāmasundara: This is their dilemma now, that they cannot find any standard of behavior. Formerly people's behavior was motivated by deprivation. They wanted more economic gain because there was hunger. But now we have everything, so no one wants to work anymore. So now there is nothing that satisfies people enough to make them behave.
Prabhupāda: Therefore the Vedānta gives for him: athāto brahma jijñāsā. Now we have got enough to eat, enough to enjoy. Now we inquire about Brahman. This is the business we should (indistinct). So this is our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. We are giving knowledge about Brahman, or the Supreme. We are not concerned about giving you some scientific invention, some this invention, that invention. We are giving the ultimate benefit. Now, just like I have come to America with this hope, that "Americans are not properly (indistinct), they have no (indistinct) problems. If I go there, if I speak to them about Kṛṣṇa consciousness, they will be able to take." So if we, the human society, has come to such standard, then the next point is, now they should eat peacefully, sleep peacefully and sense gratification peacefully and, making the mind peaceful, inquire about the Supreme Absolute. This is ideal life.
Śyāmasundara: So we have to find out what is really practical.
Prabhupāda: Yes. No, practical, both things practical. But according to the person, the value is different.
Śyāmasundara: Oh. But isn't there an absolute value?
Prabhupāda: The absolute value is God. That is division (?). Satyaṁ paraṁ dhīmahi. That is our objective. We take in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that janmādy asya yataḥ: (SB 1.1.1) "The original source of everything." Satyaṁ paraṁ dhīmahi: "I meditate upon the Supreme Truth, Absolute Truth."
Śyāmasundara: And that is also practical?
Prabhupāda: Yes. Yes. Why not practical? Do you mean to say that you are, all Kṛṣṇa conscious people, you are after something impractical?
Śyāmasundara: Well, they will say...
Prabhupāda: They may say. What is your position? They may say.
Prabhupāda: His father?
Hayagrīva: His father, Marx's father. And Marx's mother, however, remained Jewish, and Marx was raised a Christian. But at the age of twenty-three, after having studied some philosophy at the university, Marx became an avowed atheist. And Hegel, it was Hegel who wrote, "Because the accidental is not God or the Absolute is," and Marx commented on this, "Obviously the reverse can also be said." That is because God is not, the accidental is.
Prabhupāda: God is not?
Hayagrīva: Yes.
Prabhupāda: What, what does...?
Hayagrīva: So everything is accidental.
Prabhupāda: Accidental.
Hayagrīva: Hegel said, "Because the accidental is not,..." because nothing is accidental, "God exists." Marx says you can say it the other way around.
Prabhupāda: How, how we, any sensible man can accept accidental?
Hayagrīva: He thought that...
Prabhupāda: Accidental... Just like a child takes birth, is it accidental? Beginning from the child, so it is not accidental. That there is a father-mother unity, and then, when the child is born, then how you can say accidental? Nothing is accidental.
Śyāmasundara: This man is coming about 1800, 1820. Sartre's contemporary. In those times...
Prabhupāda: Before him.
Śyāmasundara: Much before him, about 150 years ago. He takes as the absolute first principle the self-consciousness or the evil(?), "I am", the awareness that I exist as an absolute a priori first principle.
Prabhupāda: That is Vedānta. We are studying what I am. That is Vedānta philosophy, to study what I am. And the answer is given by us, Vaiṣṇava philosophers, that you are eternal servant of God. This is Vedānta. Everyone is searching what I am, we are giving the answer: "You are eternal servant of God." Now let them refute this that he's not servant, he's absolute(?). Our answer is there. Athāto brahma jijñāsā, to inquire about Brahman, the spirit soul. What is this spirit soul, what I am. What is the supreme. So, Caitanya Mahāprabhu's answer is already there, jīvera svarūpa haya nitya kṛṣṇa dāsa (Cc. Madhya 20.108-109). The real identity of the living entity is that he's eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa.
Śyāmasundara: He says that philosophy or the search for truth begins with the self-conscious demand that one should think thyself, think myself.
Prabhupāda: Yes, that's nice. That is discussed in Bhagavad-gītā that you should meditate actually what I am. You go on analyzing your body, "Am I these hands? No, it is mine. Am I this head? No, it is my head." So naturally, you come to the point, "Then where I am? I am saying everything mine. Ahaṁ mameti (SB 5.5.8). What is that I?" That is replied in the Bhagavad-gītā, (indistinct) kaunteya, kṣetra (indistinct). This body, I am not body, you study, it is the field which is given to me for acting. Just like if you are given one jurisdiction, some field, so act there, work there. Similarly, this body is given to us by nature as field of working. Therefore, this yogic meditation, this is consciousness, and I am not this body. That is the beginning of knowledge. Before that (indistinct) thinking that he's this body, he is no better than animal. Big animal. Here is the knowledge. When one understands that he is not this body, something beyond this body—"I am not this body, this is my body"—that is knowledge.
Śyāmasundara: He uses the categorical imperative that Kant set up, the different categories of goodness and badness.
Prabhupāda: That means if you are in the modes of goodness, your morality is different from the morality of the man who is in the modes of ignorance.
Śyāmasundara: But he says that everything should be understood in terms of what it ought to be, that there is an absolute good.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: And every activity should be understood in terms of that absolute good.
Prabhupāda: That, that we say liberation. One should be free from the material contamination. That is our... Because under material condition, he is in three modes, goodness, passion and ignorance. So one who is in goodness he does not approve conclusion in ignorance. And one who is in ignorance, he thinks it is better.
Śyāmasundara: So if one is looking on the objects of the world in terms of what they ought to be...
Prabhupāda: Ought to be, how you'll know it? Unless he gets information from the higher authority what is ought to be? You cannot manufacture. If you are in the modes of ignorance, your "ought to be", just like they're saying the animals have no soul and we are saying, "No, you cannot kill animals." So we are in different position. So what is "ought to be", who will dictate? If you dictate yourself, your concept of killing, it "ought to be". And my concept of not killing, is "ought to be". So what is the standard?
Then you have to go to the authority, go for judgement.
Śyāmasundara: Any rate, he's more or less investigating just what is the nature of man without going into the goals.
Prabhupāda: That we have got. Nature of man, nature of living entity is that he's eternal servant. He is serving. Everyone is serving. Who is a living entity where in this world he can say that "I am not serving, I am absolute, I am nobody's servant"? Everyone is serving. Either he's serving māyā or Kṛṣṇa, that's all. When he is in knowledge, he is serving Kṛṣṇa and when he's foolish, ignorant, he's serving māyā. That's all. But he must serve. Just like a citizen, he must abide by the order of the state. If he abides by the order of the state in an ordinary way, then he's a good citizen. And if he (indistinct), then he will have to be forced to abide by the order of the state (indistinct). But in all cases he must abide by the order (indistinct).
Śyāmasundara: He also sees things in that way. He sees the unfolding of reality as the fulfillment of duty, that one must always strive for what ought to be, what is fulfillment of his duty.
Prabhupāda: That, that information we are giving that in reality everyone is servant, but he is under misconception, he's thinking he's master and he's forced to serve māyā. This is reality. Just like a outlaw, he is thinking that free from the state law but he's forced to abide by the state law in the kingdom. Similarly my position is I must carry the order. I am inferior. I must carry out the order of the superior. The superior, the supreme superior is Kṛṣṇa. If I voluntarily become the servant and carry out His order, then it is my normal life. Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇam vraja (BG 18.66). Otherwise it is abnormal life. I have to serve māyā. Daivī hy eṣā guṇa-mayī mama māyā duratyayā (BG 7.14). Māyā will kick upon my face and force me to do something, prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni guṇaiḥ karmāṇi (BG 3.27). So I will be servant of prakṛti, material nature. That means I will be servant of my senses. By nature, my senses dictate, "Now you do this," I will be forced to do it. This is my position.
Śyāmasundara: Well, he tells Arjuna...
Prabhupāda: Arjuna. Other words(?) is not for you. Why do you say Kṛṣṇa says to kill?
Śyāmasundara: No, I'm saying that...
Prabhupāda: That is our—Kṛṣṇa is absolute. He can order anything He likes, but you have to carry out Kṛṣṇa's order. If Kṛṣṇa says you to kill, then you can kill. You cannot say that "Kṛṣṇa has said to Arjuna to kill, therefore I shall kill."
Śyāmasundara: So what I mean is instead of saying that this is good and that is bad, all you can say really is what is good is what Kṛṣṇa says.
Prabhupāda: That's it.
Śyāmasundara: Kṛṣṇa's order is what is good.
Prabhupāda: That is actually doing. Actually in our experience also, just like a soldier, he kills by the order, superior order of the state. He is given gold medal. And if the same man, when he comes home, if he kills, he is hanged. Why? Because you can kill under superior order, not whimsically. Generally the order is not to kill, but if he says now kill, you can... that is order, that you have to take. And if you say at that time, "Sir, you told me not to kill," that is (indistinct). General order and specific order. So Kṛṣṇa says, amānitvam adambhitvam ahiṁsā kṣāntir ārjavam (BG 13.8). He is giving the process of knowledge, amānitvam adambhitvam, not to be proud, ahiṁsā, nonviolence. These are there, eighteen qualities for understanding spiritual values. So it is general. Now for particular purposes if Kṛṣṇa says, "Yes, you must kill," you must abide by that order. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
Śyāmasundara: He sees that everything in the world, all nonego objects, all the objects of the world are seeking to realize themselves. Everything is seeking to realize itself.
Prabhupāda: Yes, seeking, therefore if you take advantage of a perfect person, then that seeking will be (indistinct) very soon understand. Otherwise he'll hover in the oblivion. That's all. Our process is we are seeking but we are going to the Absolute Person, Kṛṣṇa, and you are taking the knowledge, immediately. That saves our time. If you are seeking, considering your (indistinct) very great scholar, research scholar, then you are misled. Our process is very nice. Therefore tad vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet (MU 1.2.12), the injunction is you must approach a bona fide spiritual master to make a short cut of the searching.
Śyāmasundara: Because everything is seeking to realize itself, that that means there is a moral order to...
Prabhupāda: Certainly.
Śyāmasundara: So that each individual must act according to his duty and his conscience in this world.
Prabhupāda: No. Conscience, an entity is Kṛṣṇa conscience, it is useless.
Prabhupāda: That universal ego, so just like I have got some ego, "I am the husband of my wife," "I am the chief man in my family," "I am the president of the state"—these are egos. But you cannot say that "I am the master of this whole universe." That is false ego.
Hayagrīva: So he feels that one can go through the universe assimilating everything, until one finally unifies with the impersonal Absolute.
Prabhupāda: Impersonal Absolute means the Absolute, as soon as you say Absolute, there is no distinction between impersonal and personal. Then it is no Absolute. If you have got distinction that "This is personal; this is impersonal," then that is not Absolute. Do you think it is Absolute? It is contradictory.
Hayagrīva: Well for, for him, God is simply the universal ego, nothing more, and that...
Prabhupāda: No. You say Absolute. As soon as say Absolute there is relative also. Otherwise what is the meaning Absolute?
Hayagrīva: Yes. He would say that. He would say that...
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: (aside:) This is picking up fine, the reading? Socrates considers the contemplation of beauty to be an activity of the wise man, but relative beauty in the mundane world is simply a reflection of absolute beauty. In the same way, good in the relative world is simply a reflection of the absolute good. In either case, absolute good or beauty is transcendental.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is our opinion. Beauty, knowledge, strength and opulence—everything—they are transcendental. Here, in this material world, it is perverted reflection. Just like the example is the mirage. A fool, animal, is thinking there is water in the desert, and he is running after it, and after sometimes he dies of thirst because there is not. But a sane man knows there is no water; it is simply a reflection by the sunshine, and this foolish animal is running after it. So he does not..., a sane man does not go for this false water. But another thing is that because there is no water in the desert, it does not mean there is no water. Water is there, but not there. Similarly happiness, beauty, opulence—everything is there. That is in the spiritual world. Here it is only a perverted reflection. So generally people have no information of the spiritual world; therefore they imagine something God, something spiritual world. They do not take that "This is imagination, this material world." When Kṛṣṇa says, tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti (BG 4.9), they are reading Bhagavad-gītā, but this simple thing they can not understand, that a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, after giving up this body—the body has to be given up—then what happens? Kṛṣṇa says mam eti, "He come to Me." And other system says that after death he goes to hell or goes to heaven. So that is to some extent fact. This human life, if he understands Kṛṣṇa, he goes to the eternal abode—you can take it as heaven or something. Otherwise he remains in this material world to undergo the same cycle of birth and death. That is hell. It can be taken in that way.
Hayagrīva: According to Socrates, the pursuit of man is the seeking of this absolute good. Basically Socrates is an impersonalist because he does not ultimately define this absolute good as a person, nor does he give the absolute good a personal name. He just calls it "the good."
Prabhupāda: That is preliminary stage of understanding the Absolute. Because the..., the beginning, Brahman realization, impersonal, and then further advanced Paramātmā realization, localized, God is everywhere. And God is everywhere, that's a fact. That is God. But He has got His place, abode. That is God, that goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhuto (Bs. 5.37), that God is Person, He has His own abode, He has his own associates and everything. Difference is that although He is in His abode, He is present everywhere, even within the atom. Aṇḍāntara-stha-paramāṇu-cayāntara-stham (Bs. 5.35). So Socrates or any other philosopher, they cannot understand the potency of God, how He can remain in His own place, simultaneously in every atom. That is the conception of God. So everywhere He is staying. Everything is His expansion, His energy, the bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ khaṁ mano buddhir eva ca (BG 7.4). The material world is bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ-land, water, earth, air. So these are different expansion of God's energy. So He can be present everywhere because His energy is expanded everywhere. So energy and the energetic, they are not different, but at the same time energy is not the energetic. This simultaneously one and different, acintya-bhedābheda-tattva, this is perfect philosophy.
Hayagrīva: Plato would say that the flower is a shadow of reality, a perverted reflection of reality. So which point of view would be...?
Prabhupāda: Yes, it is... When the flower is in the material world..., material world is perverted reflection of the spiritual world. That's a fact. We have got experience that material things are created, but in the spiritual world things are not created; they are already there, everlasting. So it appears Aristotle has no knowledge of the spiritual world.
Hayagrīva: Aristotle defines God as pure form and pure act and purely nonmaterial. He is absolute spirit and is the unmoved mover.
Prabhupāda: Yes. He is absolute spirit, there is no doubt upon it, but why He should come to know Himself through material world? That is defective.
Hayagrīva: Aristotle's God contemplates Himself. He does not have any knowledge of the world...
Prabhupāda: Who?
Hayagrīva: ...as such.
Prabhupāda: Who has no knowledge?
Hayagrīva: God.
Prabhupāda: What kind of God is that?
Hayagrīva: I don't know.
Prabhupāda: (chuckles) This is Aristotle's ignorance, that he does not know what is God and he is speaking about God. That is his ignorance.
Hayagrīva: Well, this..., thinking in this way Augustine writes, he says, "We do not apply 'Thou shalt not kill' to plants, because they have no sensation, or to irrational animals that fly, swim, walk or creep, because they are linked to us by no association or common bond. By the creator's wise ordinance they are meant for our use, dead or alive. It only remains for us to apply the commandment 'Thou shalt not kill' to man alone, oneself and others." So...
Prabhupāda: So that is imagination of Augustine. But Jesus Christ does not say such qualitative killing. He says frankly, "Thou shalt not kill." When he says that, he means, "You should not kill." But when there is absolute necessity, just like he says that "One life is food for the another life..." Does he not say it like that?
Hayagrīva: He says, uh... (break) He says..., this is, this is Augustine writing. He said, "Some people try to stretch the prohibition 'Thou shalt not kill' to cover beasts and cattle and make it unlawful to kill any such animal, but then why not include plants and anything rooted in and feeding on the soil? After all, things like this, though devoid of feeling, are said to have life and therefore can die and so be killed by violent treatment."
Hayagrīva: Aquinas gives five arguments for God's existence. The first is that there must be a first cause, a first cause of everything. The second is similar in saying the material world cannot create itself but requires something external or spiritual to bring it into existence. And the third argument claims that because the world exists, there must be a creator capable of bringing it into existence. The fourth states that since there is relative perfection in the world, there must be absolute perfection underlying this relative perfection. And the fifth is the argument from design: because the creation has design and purpose there must be a designer and planner. So at this time they were very concerned with arguments for the existence of God, and Aquinas gave these five.
Prabhupāda: Yes. We also forward these kinds of arguments. Just like we say that there is the mother and the children. The mother is the material world, and there are so many forms of children. So when the mother is existing and the children are existing, then the father must exist. Without father, how there can be children? This is your strongest argument, that these foolish philosophers contemplate without God, or "God is dead," or so many godlessness in different way, but our philosophy is strong on the fact that there must be creator of this family, mother and sons. The father must be there. What are the other arguments?
Hayagrīva: Well, the first cause, as in Brahma-saṁhitā.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam (Bs. 5.1). Yes, that is also admitted by us, that everything has got cause, and when you reach to the ultimate cause, that is God.
Hayagrīva: Because we have an idea of perfection in the world, or we see relative perfection...
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: ...there must be some absolute perfection.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That the spiritual world is the absolute perfection, and the reflection of the spiritual world is this temporary material world. So whatever perfection we find in this material world, that is derived from the spiritual world. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), the Vedānta-sūtra, that whatever is generated, that is the param... Whatever is generated, it is from the Absolute Truth.
Hayagrīva: And the, I believe the statement that "Since in the material world we see that nothing can create itself..." It requires something different...
Prabhupāda: Yes. Brain.
Hayagrīva: So he concludes we must obey God rather than men, in terms of laws.
Prabhupāda: Yes. We can obey such man who obeys the laws of God. Otherwise they..., it is useless to obey an imperfect person. Andhā yathāndhair upanīyamānāḥ (SB 7.5.31). To obey the imperfect person means just like a blind man following other blind man. So what benefit he will get? If one blind man is begging help from others, "Please help me in crossing the road," if another blind man comes and he says, "Yes, come on with me," so what will be the result? Both will be crushed by accident. So any, any person who does not follow the instruction of the Supreme Controller, he is a blind person. He cannot lead. As we are concerned, we therefore don't accept the so-called scientist's or philosopher's belief. They say, "We believe," "Perhaps it may be like this." These are all doubtful declaration. There is no truth in it. If there is any truth, that is also doubtful. Why should we risk our life by following such blind man who is thinking, who is believing, but he has no clear knowledge? Therefore we have decided to take lesson from the Supreme Person, Kṛṣṇa, who knows everything perfectly well. Vedāhaṁ samatītāni (BG 7.26). He knows past, present and future, and what is our benefit, welfare, everything. So we should follow Kṛṣṇa instead of so-called blind philosophers.
Hayagrīva: Aquinas writes on beauty and contrasts the absolute beauty of God, which is beautiful in all times and all places, absolute beauty. He contrasts this with the relative beauty that we find in the world, and he says, "He is beautiful in Himself and not in relation to some limited terminus," that is God. "Hence, it is clear that the being of all things is derived from the Divine beauty. By God's own beauty He wishes to multiply it as far as possible; that is to say, by the communication of His likeness. Indeed, all things are made in order to imitate Divine beauty in some fashion."
Prabhupāda: Yes. God is the reservoir of all knowledge, all beauty, all strength, all renunciation, all riches. He is the reservoir of everything; therefore He is God. So beauty, whatever we see beautiful, that is emanation from, a very minute percentage of God's beauty. (aside:) Who paid this?
Hari-śauri: Someone gave it this morning.
Hayagrīva: Leviathan. It initially referred to a sea monster who was defeated by Yahweh in the Judaic scriptures, and the word can refer to anything large or formidable, like a great sea monster, Leviathan. So Hobbes used the word Leviathan to refer to a ruling body or monarch in a state, and he called this Leviathan a mortal God who is under the immortal God. And this Leviathan or king or monarch would rule the government above the law. Now you discussed this with Śyāmasundara, but Śyāmasundara didn't point out that Hobbes felt that the Leviathan, or ruler, need not obey the law. Now according to the Vedic conception, is the king or the monarch above the law?
Prabhupāda: No. The king is also under the law. King, as we understand from Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa instructed the law to Sun-god, and he followed the laws. Therefore he is, to the common man, he is the supreme. The king is supposed to be representative of God in the state. So "above the law" means because king is perfect by abiding the laws of Kṛṣṇa, he cannot be subjected to any subordinate laws. But his perfection is there only when he follows Kṛṣṇa's order. Therefore monarchy, the law, king's order, is final. There cannot be any... Just like king's mercy. Even one is condemned to death, but if the king's mercy is there that he should be excused, he should be free, nobody can check. So why it is? Because king is representative of Kṛṣṇa. Imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam (BG 4.1). He first of all said the laws, the Bhagavad-gītā, which is so important for the human civilization millions of years, at least forty millions of years it was spoken to the sun-god, and sun-god gave it to his son Manu, Manu, and his son Ikṣvāku inherited from Manu. This way the absolute law is coming by disciplic succession. And formerly India was governed by monarchy. They received the law of God by disciplic succession. They executed. Therefore whatever he decides, that is final. He cannot be subjected to any other law. So the king, if he is following the laws given by God, then he is above all laws, material convention.
Hayagrīva: He says, "Some men have pretended for their disobedience to their sovereign a new covenant or a new agreement with God, made not with men but with God. This also is unjust, for there is no covenant or agreement with God but by mediation of somebody that represents God's person, which none does but God's lieutenant, who has this sovereignty under God." Could a monarch use this argument, which is the argument of divine right, in order to discourage his subjects' rebelling under the pretense that they are communing directly with God? What guidelines are there to assure against this? There was... Wasn't there one king, King Vena, King...?
Prabhupāda: Yes. Vena. So everything depends on the king's accepting the absolute instruction of God. So king, in Vedic civilization, the king was absolutely following the regulation given by God, and it was confirmed by saintly persons, sages. Then it was executed; not whimsically. There was advisory board of the monarchy always. They were not politician, diplomat, but they were all saintly person, knew very well the Vedas, and they used to guide the monarch. Therefore the monarch is absolute governing body. The ministers were helping, but the king was educated by God's direct instruction, as Kṛṣṇa said, imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān. Vivasvān, the sun-god, there are tradition two kṣatriya family—one from the sun-god and one from the moon-god. Sūrya-vaṁśa and candra-vaṁśa. The kṣatriyas in India, they claim. And that is a fact, because we see that Sūrya, sun-god, is the original kṣatriya. From him came Manu, Vaivasvata Manu. This is the age of Vaivasvata Manu, and from him came his son, Ikṣvāku. So by the paramparā system, if we take Kṛṣṇa's instruction... Kṛṣṇa's instruction is already there. If the governments all over the world take Kṛṣṇa's instruction, then every government will be perfect and there will be no disturbance of peace and happiness. That will be perfect world. Kṛṣṇa has given instruction in all fields of activities. Simply we have to take it practically. But the people are so foolish that instead of taking the standard way of living, they are manufacturing on account of their demonic tendency. They, the head of the state, they are degraded, either individually or collectively, so how there can be good government? If they become perfect according to the instruction of God, then everything will be perfect.
Hayagrīva: Well, he says no one can hate God, but what about Kaṁsa and others?
Prabhupāda: That is demonic. Naturally one is in love with God. He should love God. But when he is in māyā he thinks himself as separate from God. Instead of loving Him, he thinks himself as separate from God. Instead of loving Him, he thinks that God is hindrance, my competitor of sense gratification, therefore avoid God, kill God, I become absolute sense gratifier. Anyone who hates God means he is a demon.
Hayagrīva: Spinoza writes, "The more we understand individual objects, the more we understand God." Is this the proper process? Wouldn't you say that the more we understand God the more we understand individual objects? Which is uh...
Prabhupāda: Anything you take, that is perfection of knowledge in God. Which thing is not related with God? Everything is related with God. In the material world anything you will take it is made of the five elements, but these five elements, they are expansion of God's energy. So intelligent person sees in everything with reference to God's expansion of energy. That is the position of devotee. He does not think anything separate from God. And as he is lover of God, devotee of God, he wants to engage everything, because if everything is God's property, that should be used for God's benefit. This is devotee's conception. The asuras, they have no conception of God. Neither they are obedient to God, neither lover of God. He thinks the material world is for his enjoyment. He cannot see the material world is expansion of God's energy. Therefore anyone who uses the material product for his personal benefit, he is called a thief. Just like I have created something. If somebody use up that something and does not think of the proprietor, he is a thief.
Hayagrīva: He writes, "The lifting of the spirit to God occurs in the innermost regions of spirit upon the basis of thought. Religion as the innermost affair of man has here its center and the root of its life. God is in his very essence thought and thinking, however His image and configuration be determined otherwise."
Prabhupāda: His image, if God is absolute, His image is also God. If God is absolute, then His words are also God. That is absolute conception. That iw not different. So the image which we worship in the temple, if it is actually image of God, then it is as good as God. God is absolute. God says that "This earth, water..., so everything is My energy." So even if you say, "This image is made of stone," but the stone is God's energy, bhūmi, earth. So there is a regulative principle, just like a wire, a copper wire, it is carrying electricity. Although the copper wire is not electricity, but it is carrying electricity. Similarly, if you take even material-otherwise spiritually everything is God, that is another thing—but materially if we distinguish that the copper wire, it appears as copper wire, but if you touch, "Oh, there is electricity." So it is manipulated. Similarly, by the rules and regulation as enunciated by the experienced spiritual master and guru, then even if you think it is stone, it is God. The same example, you see it is electric wire, but it is electricity. Similarly, arcye viṣṇau śilā-dhir guruṣu nara-matiḥ. It is..., this has been warned: don't think that this śilā, stone. Is God. Just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu, as soon as saw Jagannātha, immediately fainted. So we have to be trained up by the instruction of God how to realize God everywhere.
Hayagrīva: He would see that as instinct.
Prabhupāda: So what is nonsense instinct? The man has got these symptoms and the small ant has got these symptoms. That is life. That vague description, and still they are big philosopher. No perfect knowledge.
Hayagrīva: He associates religion with art. He says religion represents or pictures the absolute, whereas philosophy conceives or thinks of it.
Prabhupāda: Yes. So religion without philosophical basis is sentiment. It has no value.
Hayagrīva: And for him, God is necessarily manifest in the finite; therefore he places the incarnation of Christ, the incarnation of God, as central in the Christian religion. That is, in order to be manifest, God has to become finite. God has to become man.
Prabhupāda: Then if God is man, if He is taken as man, then why His instruction should be followed?
Hayagrīva: Excuse me? Why His instructions...?
Prabhupāda: Should be followed? You are man, I am man. Why should you follow my instructions?
Hayagrīva: Well he says..., he says you shouldn't, because there's no exterior will to be followed. This is Hegel's philosophy.
Prabhupāda: Then if he is godless, God has no use, will. Either he is godless or God has no will. Is it not? Then he is animal, and if he says animal has no will, then God becomes exactly like animal.
Hayagrīva: Yes. If that's the case, why mistreat the animals, animal bodies?
Prabhupāda: Hm?
Hayagrīva: The animals have no right to life, he says, because they have no will.
Prabhupāda: That is his foolishness. He has got will. When you take to the slaughterhouse, he protests.
Hayagrīva: He says, "Mankind has the right of absolute proprietorship. A thing belongs to the accidental first-comer who gets it."
Prabhupāda: What accident?
Hayagrīva: To... A thing belongs... Or whoever comes first. Say there's a gold mine. If I get there first, it's mine, because I'm the first-comer.
Prabhupāda: That means that, then, "Might is right."
Hayagrīva: Yes.
Prabhupāda: But gold, they say, if he says gold is there, whose gold it is?
Hayagrīva: He says the first-comer...
Prabhupāda: No, no. First of all you go and say... First of all you become proprietor. But who is the actual proprietor of the gold, when you did not go? You may go first and claim proprietorship, but the gold was there. So whose property it is? Gold was there. Who made that gold? Who kept that gold? This question must be there.
Hayagrīva: He equates idea, reason, God, and the Absolute very much like the Greeks.
Prabhupāda: Everything is there, but if you take knowledge from God, then that is perfect, and if you make your own ideas—you do not take the ideas of God—that is imperfect.
Hayagrīva: He does say reason is also infinite form, that which sets this material in motion...
Prabhupāda: This is, this is, this is real reasoning, that "I am imperfect or limited. How I can speculate on the unlimited? So better let me learn from the unlimited about the unlimited." That is perfect knowledge.
Hayagrīva: One final point is that he sees the worship of animals and plants to be a form of pantheism. He refers to Indian religion...
Prabhupāda: No. But Indian, that he does not know; still he speaks. That is the most regretful situation.
Hayagrīva: Yes.
Prabhupāda: If God says that "Amongst the plants I am this plant..."
Hayagrīva: Tulasī, Tulasī.
Prabhupāda: Whatever it may be.
Hayagrīva: Yes.
Prabhupāda: So the Hindus, they worship, follow God's instruction. That is they have got in a certain sense. God has said that "Amongst the plants, I am this plant, so worship." They are not worshiping all, every plant.
Prabhupāda: Oh.
Hayagrīva: He says, "By the Ganges ethical man admits that the cosmos is too strong for him..."
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: "...and destroying every bond which ties him to it by ascetic discipline he seeks salvation in absolute renunciation."
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: He says..., but he says, "This attempt to escape from evil has ended in flight from the battlefield." He doesn't advocate this for an Englishman. In a typically British manner he quotes Alfred Lord Tennyson. He says, "We are grown men and must play the man strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield."
Prabhupāda: Rascal, at last you die. (laughter) You do not like to yield, but the nature kicks on your face and says you must die. That he does not like.
Hayagrīva: Well, at any rate he's dead now, so...
Prabhupāda: So therefore he is..., he is not surviving. He was...
Hayagrīva: He admits, he says, "This seems..."
Prabhupāda: Either you be Englishman or Frenchman or this man, you cannot survive. You have to succumb under the dictation of the superior nature. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, that—I think Huxley read Bhagavad-gītā; he does not know-that,
- prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni
- guṇaiḥ karmāṇi sarvaśaḥ
- ahaṅkāra-vimūḍhātmā
- kartāham iti manyate
- (BG 3.27)
This kind of conception, that "I shall survive, I am Englishman," this is a false egotism and bewildered soul. Whatever he may be, Englishman or this man or that man, he must die. That is the law of nature. So intelligent man first of all makes provision "How I shall not die." That is real business of human being. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, that if one simply understands Kṛṣṇa, then he survives; otherwise one has to die. There is no doubt.
Purports to Songs
This verse is particularly important because it describes the significance of sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). The Lord's body is sac-cid-ānanda. His body is not like ours. Our body is acit and..., asat, acit and nirānanda, just the opposite. Asat means it will not exist, and acit means it is full of ignorance and nirānanda... Nirānanda means full of miseries. These three qualification of our body, whereas the Lord's body is sac-cid-ānanda, it is eternal and full of knowledge and full of bliss. Our body and our self... My body and my self are different. But Lord and Lord's body is Absolute. What is Lord, Lord's body is also the same. So that description is given here. Aṅgāni yasya sakalendriya-vṛtti-manti (Bs. 5.32). The Lord is not impersonal. He has got his form. And what sort of form? We should not consider that whenever there is a question of form, the form must be just like one of us. This is foolishness. Now, His form is completely different, just like we have explained. His form is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1), and our, this present material body is asat, acit and nirānanda. Just completely different. So His form, His different parts of the body, described in the Vedas, apāṇi-pādo javano grahītā paśyati... "He has no hands and legs; still, He accepts all that you offer to Him.'
| Page Title: | Absolute (Lectures, Other) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, Mayapur |
| Created: | 19 of Feb, 2012 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=185, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 185 |