Determine (Lectures)

Expressions researched:
"determine" |"determinedly" |"determines" |"determining" |"determinist"

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Lecture on BG 2.59-69 -- New York, April 29, 1966:

If we try to hear glories of the Lord with the ear, then my ear may not be engaged in other songs. Paraṁ dṛṣṭvā nivartate (BG 9.59). Similarly, my tongue. If I determine that "I shall eat only foodstuff which is offered to Kṛṣṇa," then naturally my eating problem becomes restricted and as I go on eating the foodstuff which is offered first to Kṛṣṇa and then I take, then, now, the natural effect will be that my tongue will be controlled. And if I want to control my other senses, then the tongue control is the first business, because if we cannot control the tongue, then other senses is impossible to be controlled.

Lecture on BG 3.18-30 -- Los Angeles, December 30, 1968:

Madhudviṣa: Prabhupāda, in this age of Kali when there is no social structure or varṇāśrama-dharma, how can one discriminate how he is utilizing his energies for his prescribed duties? How can one determine his prescribed duties, as Lord Kṛṣṇa has described here, for Arjuna to follow his prescribed duties.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Before coming to Kṛṣṇa consciousness were you in the varṇāśrama? Then how you have come? How you have come to this position?

Madhudviṣa: Out of misery.

Prabhupāda: No, no, no. You have come to execute Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Before coming to this Kṛṣṇa consciousness, were you in varṇāśrama-dharma? No. So at the present moment, there is no possibility of persons following the principles of varṇāśrama-dharma, either here or anywhere. Everyone is varṇa-saṅkara. Kalau śūdra-sambhavaḥ. In this age, everyone is a śūdra. Nobody is brāhmaṇa, nobody is kṣatriya, nobody is vaiśya. Śūdra. So in this age, you won't find anybody following the varṇāśrama-dharma.

Lecture on BG 3.31-43 -- Los Angeles, January 1, 1969:

Prabhupāda: Yes. So what is your question?

Madhudviṣa: People that are engaged in lusty acts during their life... I thought that Kṛṣṇa is merciful and He will provide them with the body which will have as much lust as they want. I can't see how a person could devolve into that body of a tree due to engaging himself in lusty activities during his lifetime.

Prabhupāda: I don't follow, what is...

Madhudviṣa: The Bhagavad-gītā has stated that whatever one's consciousness is during his lifetime will be at the time of his death, and that will determine his next body. Now, one who is living very lustily during his lifetime, his mind will be on that body.

Prabhupāda: Yes. So there are many varieties of life. Just like somebody is very lusty, and he wants sex enjoyment so many times a day. So there are many animals, many birds. They are given the opportunity like that. Just like the pigeons, the sparrows. Or there are many birds, the swans, the ducks. They have got every day twenty times, sex intercourse. So this facility is given to them. You see? Similarly, somebody wants to eat meats and blood. He is given the chance to become a tiger. So Kṛṣṇa is giving chance everyone. And one who is very dull, cannot understand simply, oh, the sense gratification, they are made the dullest possible, like trees, stand up for thousands of years.

Lecture on BG 4.10 -- Bombay, March 30, 1974:

So everything requires sincerity. Otherwise things are not very difficult. Vīta-rāga-bhaya-krodhā man-mayā mām upāśritāḥ, bahavaḥ (BG 4.10). Kṛṣṇa says, bahavaḥ. Not that one or two. Anyone... "Many who have adopted this means..." Then jñāna-tapasā pūtāḥ: "By knowledge and tapasya, they became purified, and then..." What is that? Mad-bhāvam āgatāḥ. Then come to the stage of bhāva. So to learn this art one, must be first... Just like we are hearing. If one determines, so why not adopt this means? Vīta-rāga-bhaya-krodhāḥ (BG 2.56), jñāna-tapasā pūtāḥ. "Why I am suffering?" Kṛṣṇa is advising. Why not take this step? Then Kṛṣṇa will help you. As soon as you decide to accept this means, Kṛṣṇa will help you. Kṛṣṇa will help you... He'll give you good assistance.

Lecture on BG 6.1 -- Los Angeles, February 13, 1969:

Devotee: Prabhupāda, it is written in the Bhagavad-gītā that we just read from, about how you think that Kṛṣṇa will provide for us. And also further on in the Gītā it is said that God helps those who help themselves.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Devotee: Now, how do we determine what we should...?

Prabhupāda: Helping yourself means you put yourself under Kṛṣṇa; that is helping yourself. And if you think, "Oh I can protect myself," then you are not helping yourself. Just like this finger, so long it is healthy, working, if there is some trouble, I can spend thousands of dollars for this. But if this finger is cut off from my body, if you trample down with your feet this finger, I don't care for it. Similarly, to help oneself means to put oneself in the proper position, as part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa. That is real helping. Otherwise how you can help? The finger can help itself by putting itself in the proper position of the hand and work for the whole body. That is proper position. If the finger thinks that, "I shall remain separated from this body and help myself," it will die. So as soon as you think, that "I shall live independently without caring for Kṛṣṇa," that is my death, and as soon as I engage myself as part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa, that is my life.

So helping oneself means to know one's position and work in that way. That is helping. Without knowing what is his position, how one can help oneself? It is not possible.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Los Angeles, March 12, 1970:

So one has to become very strong. Mām eva ye prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti te (BG 7.14). One who determines, "Yes, I will hear of Kṛṣṇa, nothing," then māyā cannot do anything. Man has defeated. If simply one decides that "I simply hearing..., simply I will hear of Kṛṣṇa and nothing more," then he defeats the māyā, simply by determination, that's all.

Lecture on BG 9.2 -- Melbourne, April 20, 1976:

There is another nature. You cannot deny it. Where God's kingdom, creation, how far it is, and how widespread it is—by your imagination you cannot determine. The so-called advancement of scientific knowledge is useless in the estimation of the total creation. This creation, material creation, is one-fourth exhibition of the total creation. And the three-fourth exhibition of the total creation is the spiritual world. So there are also... Like here we have got so many planets and each planet is full of living entities, as this planet is full of living entities, similarly, in other planets, upper, middle, down, there are millions, millions of different types of living entities. It is a false statement that "Only on this planet there is living entities; in other planets there are no living entities." That is nonsensical. There are living entities exactly like this. Maybe the climate, the situation, little different. Just like your climate, India climate... Even on this planet there are different climatic situations, European, American, Australian, Asian. So that is God's varieties of creation.

Lecture on BG 9.34 -- August 3, 1976, New Mayapur (French farm):

Yogeśvara: Śrīla Prabhupāda? How are we to determine how much of our endeavor should be for our own personal progress?

Prabhupāda: There is no personal endeavor. There is no personal endeavor. Just like these animals, they have no personal endeavor. They are depending on you. If you cut his throat, you can cut. And if you give him protection, you can give him. But they, the animals has no personal endeavor. That is full surrender. That is our position. Remain fully surrendered to Kṛṣṇa and He'll give you protection. That you are thinking, how the animal will live, how these children will live. It is not the children's business, not the animal's business. He is fully surrendered, that's all. Man-manā bhava mad-bhaktaḥ. Other things will be done. Kṛṣṇa says yoga-kṣemaṁ vahāmy aham (BG 9.22). "I shall do that." Why your personal endeavor?

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

Lecture on SB 1.5.17-18 -- New Vrindaban, June 21, 1969:

Just like sometimes we are taken as some crazy fellows. We have no concern with any political movement or social movement. We have taken simply Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. So they may think that "This is a society of crazy fellows. They have given up everything, simply chanting: Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa." But Nārada Muni confirms, it is the first-class thing. He says that "If somebody, giving up everything, simply takes to Kṛṣṇa..." Tyaktvā sva-dharmaṁ caraṇāmbujaṁ hareḥ (SB 1.5.17), caraṇāmbujaṁ hareḥ. He takes, determines: "Now, from this day, I shall simply chant Hare Kṛṣṇa. I shall do nothing." "So," Nārada Muni says, "if somebody does like that..." Bhajana... And Śrīdhara Svāmī says that svadharma tyāgena, nānusvadharma tyāgena bhajana paripakena yadi kṛtārtho bhavet tadā na kadācit cintā:(?) "All right, this boy has taken to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. It is very good. Let him do that. If he comes to the perfectional point of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, it is very good." But yadi punar apakva eva mriyate: "But if he does not prosecute Kṛṣṇa consciousness rightly, maturely, and if he dies..." Because death is expected any moment.

Lecture on SB 5.5.9 -- Vrndavana, October 31, 1976:

So, if you are free from the resultant action of sinful life, then you are liberated. If you get shelter at the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, and do not act in such a way that you again fall down, then you are liberated. Liberation means, we have several times discussed, hitvā anyathā-rūpaṁ svarūpeṇa vyavasthitiḥ (SB 2.10.6). Our svarūpa means original, constitutional position is jīvera svarūpa haya nitya-kṛṣṇa-dāsa (Cc. Madhya 20.108-109), eternally servant of Kṛṣṇa. So as soon as we place ourselves in our original place, then you are liberated immediately. If we determine, decide finally, that we shall now continuously vehemently (?) fixed up in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, very simple thing.

Lecture on SB 6.1.15 -- Honolulu, May 15, 1976:

Kecit means this determination is very difficult. Therefore it has been said here, kecit, "somebody," not all. Not all can get that determination. But everyone can get determination, provided he likes. It is not determination is monopolized by a certain man. Anyone who determines that "I shall simply serve Kṛṣṇa," that simple determination will save him. Kevalayā bhaktyā. And kecit kevalayā bhaktyā vāsudeva-parāyaṇāḥ (SB 6.1.15). Bhaktyā, bhakti, devotion, to whom? Vāsudeva. Vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ (BG 7.19). If one determines that "Vāsudeva is everything..." Actually Kṛṣṇa is everything. Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagat avyakta-mūrtinā. In everywhere. Īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvam yat kiñcid jagatyāṁ jagat (ISO 1). Everywhere there is Kṛṣṇa's relationship, because without Kṛṣṇa, nothing exists. Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagat avyaktya, mat-sthani sarva-bhūtāni (BG 9.4). Everything is resting on Kṛṣṇa. Īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvam. This is Kṛṣṇa conscious. Without Kṛṣṇa... So that is the fact, but when you come to this understanding, then you become perfectly Kṛṣṇa conscious. Without Kṛṣṇa, nothing can exist.

Lecture on SB 6.3.20-23 -- Gorakhpur, February 14, 1971:

Bhīṣma is stated here as one of the authority, mahājanas. But what did he do? He fought against Kṛṣṇa and pierced with his arrows. You know, in the... We have stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Kṛṣṇa became so much disturbed that... Not disturbed. That is also another... He's pleased. He became pleased, rather. Being pierced by the arrows of Bhīṣma, He became pleased. That I have described in my translation. So being pleased, He came before him. He came before him as if angry, but not... He was so pleased, that "You wanted to break My promise. I have broken it! Please save Arjuna; that is My request to you.' " He promised that "Now tomorrow I shall fight in such a way that either Kṛṣṇa has to break His promise, either, or His most intimate friend, beloved friend, Arjuna, will be killed." So this person is determining to kill Kṛṣṇa's friend, most intimate friend, and he's a mahājana. Just try to understand. Bhīṣma is accepted here as mahājana, as authority. And what was his business? He wanted to kill Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna. Just try to understand. Therefore, we have to follow only the instruction of mahājana; otherwise, we'll be bewildered.

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

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.

Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:

Prabhupāda: He comes to the circumstances. Therefore the morality should be according to the circumstances.

Śyāmasundara: He says the opposite: regardless of individual circumstances, everyone should follow the moral imperative. But we say that circumstances determine how one follows.

Prabhupāda: Then suppose the (indistinct) state, "Thou shalt not kill." So why killing is going on?

Śyāmasundara: In wars.

Prabhupāda: In any circumstances. It is not that killing is stopped, although the state is meant for prohibiting killing. But there is still in the slaughterhouse killing is going on, in war killing is going on, and so many other places killing is going on.

Śyāmasundara: He is thinking of it more as a personal way of determining how to act, like "I should not act counter to this moral imperative."

Prabhupāda: No. Because suppose that a snake is here and it is dangerous; he'll bite. So killing is necessary. But if you say, "No. I shall not kill this snake. Let it bite. All right, let them all die..." These are simply mental speculations. He has no perfect knowledge.

Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:

Śyāmasundara: What he is saying by that is just like if you see a soldier killing, you can't say that the action is good or bad, of his killing; but the will behind it—if his will is to serve the state—then the will is good, so the killing is good. But if you see the man killing someone on the street for his money, then you can say that the will is bad, so the killing is bad. So the action itself of killing is neither good nor bad, but the will behind the killing is what determines if an action is good or bad.

Prabhupāda: Yes. But that will has to be trained. Otherwise he will manufacture that "I am doing this in good sense; therefore it is good." He will manufacture his idea. That is nonsense. Therefore you require guidance.

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: Less intelligent or more intelligent does not make any species, because suppose you have got five children, one is less intelligent, more intelligent.

Śyāmasundara: He was just saying levels of consciousness determine the species.

Prabhupāda: Yes. This is levels of consciousness, that just like we divide the human society: some men are brāhmaṇas, some men are kṣatriyas, some men are vaiśyas, that can be found at any time.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Śyāmasundara: Whereas this philosopher thinks that we should just..., that the vital force is guiding everyone and is creating its own evolution, that we should just drift in the course of things and the vital force will determine history or will determine our future.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Vital force will determine. That is somewhat...

Śyāmasundara: Without our doing—without anything of our own doing.

Prabhupāda: No. Vital force must know how to make progress, how to do it. Then he'll be... If he does not know how to do it, how it will be possible? Can you do anything... Suppose you are learning some mechanical business, can you do it without direction? You have to learn. You must get a teacher. So, without teacher, that is not possible.

Philosophy Discussion on Jeremy Bentham:

Śyāmasundara: He says we can determine what is happiness for the whole by examining what is happy for the individual.

Prabhupāda: Happiness, happiness is... What is happiness, that is described in the Bhagavad-gītā. Happiness means absence of distress. That is happiness. So Bhagavad-gītā recommends that janma-mṛtyu-jarā-vyādhi-duḥkha-doṣānudarśanam (BG 13.9). You may think that you are very happy but this is not happiness. You have to see to your distressed condition because you have to take birth, you have to die, you have to suffer diseases and you have to suffer, janma-mṛtyu-jarā, old age. So where is your happiness. If the distresses are present, then where is your happiness? This is another ignorance. This is a... Nobody wants to die but death is there. Then where is your happiness? Nobody wants to become old but the old age is there. You must become old. Then where is your happiness? Nobody wants diseases but disease is there. You cannot avoid it. Then where is your happiness? This is less intelligence. That actually you are not in happiness but by your so-called philosophizing theories, you are trying to be happy, means another illusion and we take it as happiness. Actually it is not happiness. Where is your happiness?

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Śyāmasundara: He says there are five ways. All knowledge, he says, is cause and effect. So he said we can determine what is the cause and what is the effect of anything according to these five methods. One is the method of agreement, that is, if we have two or more instances of a phenomenon and there is one common circumstance behind both of them, that we can conclude that that circumstance is the cause of the effect. Just like if we observe that two stones are thrown into the water, and that each stone is thrown by someone, then we can determine that throwing is the common cause of that stone's going into the water, the common circumstance.

Prabhupāda: Why this example? What is the value of this example?

Śyāmasundara: Any example. Anything that is caused, if there are two instances of it-two balls are dropping—we can conclude, if we studied both of them, that they were both moved by some person, that that person is the cause of their falling. If there is a common circumstance for any phenomenon.

Prabhupāda: Any phenomenon that has natural law, so that is the cause. And if we go on, so what is the cause of that natural law? Then ultimately we find Kṛṣṇa. Everything, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), everything has got a cause, original source. So if you make actually research work what is the cause of this, what is the cause of this, that is called darśana. Darśana means seeing, finding out the cause. Therefore philosophy is called darśana-śāstra, to see the cause of the cause, cause of the cause, cause of the cause. So ultimately they have found Kṛṣṇa is the cause, original cause of everything.

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Prabhupāda: For every phenomenon there is a cause.

Śyāmasundara: But how do we determine that God is the cause behind everything?

Prabhupāda: Because then we know that God is the ultimate pusher, the pushing begins from there. So it may come through various agents. Just like one railway wagon is pushed by the engines, and it strikes another wagon and that is also pushed; another wagon, and that is pushed, that is also pushed. Similarly, the original pusher is the engine. Our study is like that, that the original, sa aikṣata, sa aikṣata... These are the Vedic... He glanced over, He desired; immediately there was creation. Therefore the original pusher is God, Kṛṣṇa. Now, how it is happening, that we cannot see. Just like same example, the wagon is already pushed, it is coming automatically. A child sees, "Oh, this wagon is coming automatically, and it caught another wagon, and it is now moved." He sees the (effect). But he did not see that ultimately there was a big engine that has pushed it.

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Śyāmasundara: He would agree with that also, but here he says that the higher authorities who determine what is duty, that their rationale or their guiding principles should be what is the greatest good for the greatest number, and that should be our duty.

Prabhupāda: Then how he suggests that a man should know his duty, like that? Then he has to approach that greatest authority. Tad vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum evābhigacchet (MU 1.2.12). That is our philosophy. In order to know our duty, in order to know what is knowledge, we must approach a guru. Gurum evābhigacchet. We must, eva, certainly.

Śyāmasundara: His guiding principle for that, to determine what is the greatest good for the greatest number, is the golden rule of the Christians, "Do unto others as you..."

Prabhupāda: That means you have to approach Christ through... One cannot determine himself. Golden rules of Christianity means that he has to abide by the orders of Christ. That is superior authority.

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Prabhupāda: So without following guru authority, nobody can be learned. That is not possible.

Śyāmasundara: Actually, he accepts authority in both cases of moral, of moral sanctions. One, he says, that the authority should determine what is duty, and also so that my conscience will keep me following the duty.

Prabhupāda: That duty means to take orders from authority. That is real duty. Otherwise, I cannot create my duty.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Prabhupāda: Yes. So they have made decision as soon as they get some money, purchase one bottle whiskey and drink it, and lie down.

Śyāmasundara: Then he would say there is no decision being made there. There is no commitment to any ethical decision there. That is just sense gratification. He says the next higher level above unrestricted sense gratification is to take up a cause, a good cause, and determine...

Prabhupāda: So how he'll make it a good cause? The good cause is relative. You think something good cause, I think something good cause, so what is really good cause? Who will, who will decide that this is good cause?

Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:

Śyāmasundara: He isn't quibbling with that. His only philosophy was that he was putting forward ways of determining what is true and what is false.

Prabhupāda: So that is evidence that this body is false, the soul is true. That is our statement. Body is false. Just like this, this (indistinct), this sweater, this is false. It has got a hand but it is false hand. The real hand is within, within the shirt, that is real hand. Similarly, this body also. It is compared with dress. The dress is false. The man who puts on the dress, he is true. Similarly, the soul is the truth and the body is false. If you want to make distinction between false and true, then this is the distinction: the soul is the truth, the body is false.

Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:

Śyāmasundara: Ultimately there is nothing to measure, when the body dies, to determine where that soul went.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That you can measure by knowledge. Just like Bhagavad-gītā has said, ūrdhvaṁ gacchanti sattva-sthā (BG 14.18). Just like a man has committed murder, killed somebody. He is arrested, he is taken away from your sight, but you can know that he has committed murder, he will be hanged. That's all. You do not require to go there and see that he is hanged. It doesn't require. That is foolishness. If somebody says that "I did not see that the man was arrested," that's all right, but "I did not see that he was hanged. I cannot believe it," no. You believe or not believe, it is a fact.

Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:

Śyāmasundara: He says that atomic propositions, or the components of compound propositions, depend for their validity upon the reliability with which they accurately picture atomic facts. In other words, suppose there is some proposition that this ring is gold. This proposition is part of a compound proposition which tells where the ring came from, how it was originated, who wore it, so many other facts. But only you take one proposition, "this ring is gold," he said this proposition depends upon the reliability with which it accurately pictures the facts, if it is true or false. That statement, "this ring is gold," it must determine how accurately it pictures the facts before we can say if it is valid or invalid proposition.

Prabhupāda: Suppose I say it is gold. What he will say? What is his proposition?

Śyāmasundara: He'll say that first of all you must give us a list of conditions to determine why it is gold, under what conditions it is gold.

Prabhupāda: That is everything. That he is speaking also, that is another condition.

Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:

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.

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Śyāmasundara: So today we'll finish that psychologist Jung, Carl Jung. As we were discussing before, his idea is that there is a collective unconscious, there is an unconscious state of mind and there is a conscious state of mind. The inner, the working between these two, conscious and unconscious, determines the personality of the living entity. The behavior of the living entity is determined by the interaction between his unconscious and his conscious...

Prabhupāda: That is called, in Sanskrit, (indistinct), (indistinct) and suṣupti. When you are fully conscious, that is called (indistinct). And (indistinct), dreaming, that (indistinct). And another state, suṣupti, no consciousness. That is (indistinct). It is called... Operation?

Śyāmasundara: Anaesthesia.

Prabhupāda: Anaesthetic.

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Śyāmasundara: In other words, he says that there are many factors which are unconscious which determine our personality that we may not be aware of-many hopes, many fears, many contents of our own consciousness that clarify our personality and which we are not aware of...

Prabhupāda: Yes, (indistinct). Just like when we are in the womb of our mother. Up to seven months we are unconscious. That means to remain unconscious for seven months, that is death. Living entity does not die; he remains unconscious for seven months.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: What does it actually mean, "existential"?

Śyāmasundara: It means that existence is prior to essence. In other words, the fact that I am first of all existing, living here, is the important thing, and that I determine what I am, my essence, as I unfold my life. Existence is the most important thing, prior to essence, what I am, my nature.

Prabhupāda: What is the essence and what is existence?

Śyāmasundara: Well, according to Sartre, existence... All I know when I am analyzing what I am, all I know is that I exist.

Prabhupāda: Everyone knows that.

Śyāmasundara: "I am." This is the first fact. What I am more than that is determined as I live my life, as I grow older...

Prabhupāda: That is no standard of why living. The dog is living. He also exists. The cat is living. He also exists. And man is also living, exists. So different types of living beings are existing in different consciousness. So what is the standard consciousness?

Śyāmasundara: There is no standard. He says that man's essence is nothingness or no-thingness. There is no-thingness about me. I am always changing. There is nothing determinant about my subjectivity.

Prabhupāda: If you are changing, I am changing, then the changing is existence. But I am different from that existence because I am changing. I am changing. Suppose I have just now changed my dress. So I am the same. Actually, I am existing the same, but I am changing different dress or different body. So this changing is not very important because it will be changed. I am important. I am changing.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Śyāmasundara: He says that we cannot escape this situation of freedom, that somehow or other we are therefore responsible for our activities. We cannot escape the situation of being free. Everyone is free to determine what is his future.

Prabhupāda: Then why do you speak of accident? If you are irresponsible, then why do you say accident? The two things cannot go. If he was responsible, he must be responsible to something else, who is condemning you or blessing you. How it can be accident? These are contradictions.

Śyāmasundara: This situation that we find ourselves in, choosing our future, everyone has to choose his future, what is the next step...

Prabhupāda: Then why do you say accident? First of all you withdraw the word accident, then you can talk all this.

Śyāmasundara: There are certain events that we cannot control. They simply happen to us.

Prabhupāda: Cannot control, that can be accepted. But it is supposed that we have controlling power. Nothing is accident. Sometimes, when you are miscontrolling, that is accident. But actually that is not accident; that is your miscontrol, not accident. The reason is miscontrol.

Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:

Śyāmasundara: His idea is that emotions are what are determining good and bad, and if we educate people into scientific reality...

Prabhupāda: No. No emotion. We don't... Just like Arjuna. By emotion he was thinking, "I shall not fight." That was emotion. So "I shall be bad man, taking to these orders"—these are... Anything material, that is emotion, sentiment. Yes. So religion without philosophy is sentiment, and philosophy without religion is mental speculation. So therefore our this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is so sound. We do not go by sentiment. We accept the superior order of Kṛṣṇa (indistinct), it is perfect.

Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:

Śyāmasundara: Whereas this philosopher thinks that we should just..., that the vital force is guiding everyone and creating its own evolution, that we should just drift in the course of things and the vital force will determine history or will determine our future.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Vital force will determine.

Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:

Śyāmasundara: And he says the basis for determining or judging which values are best is by the principle of coherence, that is, by agreement among the most people willing to accept it.

Prabhupāda: That means authority. What is value. Just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu says that "You become Kṛṣṇa bhakta," because He is authority. The Veda says vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyam (BG 15.15). Veda says that "Search out Kṛṣṇa." So the authority, what the authority says, that is valuable.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Hayagrīva: "Know for action you are here. Your action and your action alone determines your worth."

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, that we are meant for rendering service to Kṛṣṇa. So we do it daily from morning, four o'clock, to night, ten o'clock, they are always engaged to give service to Kṛṣṇa. So this is practical. If you simply sit down, speculate on God and smoke cigarette, then what is the use of such speculation? Here is practical life.