It is not a question of any personal religion or personal ambition or something manufactured by some imperfect sense enjoyer. It is authorized because Bhagavad-gītā is authorized. Bhagavad-gītā is accepted... First of all, He was, it was accepted by Arjuna in toto. Sarvam etad ṛtaṁ manye yad vadasi keśava (BG 10.14). "My dear Kṛṣṇa, whatever You are saying, I accept it in toto, without any interpretation, without any rejection." Somebody says, somebody may say, "Arjuna was Kṛṣṇa's friend. To praise Him, he might have said like that." No. Arjuna immediately gives evidence that "It is not that I am accepting but you are accepted as, as such by such great personalities as, like Vyāsadeva, Nārada, Asita." He gives authority. So that was five thousand years ago. Later on, all the ācāryas, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī, Nimbārka, even Śaṅkarācārya. We Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, they differ little with Śaṅkarācārya. Impersonalist and personalist. But Śaṅkarācārya even, even though he was impersonalist, he accepted Kṛṣṇa in his commentary on Bhagavad-gītā. Sai bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇa. So Kṛṣṇa is accepted as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There is no doubt about it. By all authorities. And Kṛṣṇa Himself says in the Bhagavad-gītā, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat (BG 7.7). "There is no more superior authority than Me."
Evidence (Lectures, Other)
Expressions researched:
"evidence"
|"evidenced"
|"evidences"
|"evident"
|"evidential"
|"evidentially"
|"evidently"
Lectures
Nectar of Devotion Lectures
So this is the defect. The atheist class of men, they also see God. One, everyone can see God, provided he has got eyes to see. Actually, premāñjana-cchurita-bhakti-vilocanena santaḥ sadaiva hṛdayeṣu vilokayanti (Bs. 5.38). Those who are yogis, bhakta-yogis, because they are in love with God, Kṛṣṇa, they are seeing every moment within their heart the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Anyone you love, you see always within your heart. Similarly, if you have love for God, Kṛṣṇa, then you can see Kṛṣṇa always. That is called yoga system. Dhyānāvasthita-tad-gatena manasā paśyanti yaṁ yoginaḥ (SB 12.13.1). Yoginaḥ, those who are yogis, under meditation, they see the Supreme Personality of Godhead within the heart. Dhyānāvasthita-tad-gatena manasā paśyanti yaṁ yoginaḥ. So there are many evidences in the śāstras. Yoga means to see the Supreme Lord within the heart. Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe arjuna tiṣṭhati (BG 18.61). Īśvara, the Supreme Lord, is situated in everyone's heart. One has to see. One has to develop that visionary power, how to see God within the heart. That is wanted. That is called yoga system. Dhyānāvasthita. Otherwise Īśvara is there in everyone's heart.
But one who is engaged in the devotional service of the Lord, he does not come to these material activities again. The, the factual evidence... Just this, these boys, these European, American boys. Who could enjoy material life better than them? They were all enjoying. But they have given up everything. They are no more going back to that status of life. Paraṁ dṛṣṭvā nivartate (BG 2.59). They have found something better. Therefore they're not going to again that life of meat-eating, illicit sex, intoxication, smoking and drinking. No. They are not, no more going. Give them bribe also: "You come to again to that stage." Will you go?
If you neglect siddhānta, conclusion, given by the ācāryas, then you will misunderstand Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa, therefore Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura says... These are the evidences.
- rūpa-raghunātha-pade haibe ākuti
- kabe hāma bhujhaba se yugala-pīriti
Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura, such an exalted ācārya, he's teaching us, "Don't try to understand yugala-pīriti, the love affairs between Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa, concoctedly, by your own concoction." No. You should first of all try to serve the Six Gosvāmīs, rūpa-raghunātha-pade haibe ākuti, how they are directing. Just like this Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī is not teaching in the beginning the loving affairs of Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa. No. He's training, first of all, the reader, the devotee, how to become first of all pure devotee.
Just like when a man is ghostly haunted—in Bengal it is called bhute pava (?)—and he speaks nonsense, even his father is before him, he wants to attack his father without any respect. Madman, crazy. So anyone under this protection of the material energy—more or less, crazy. More or less. It is not only our words. It is scientifically true. I know, there was one case, a man was condemned to death and his pleader presented that "This man was in, in insanity condition. Therefore he committed this act. He may be excused." So the, a civil surgeon was invited to examine him, whether he's, actually he was in sanity condition. The civil surgeon gave evidence that so far he had treated so many patients, he saw everyone is more or less crazy." Under the circumstances, if this man is crazy, that depends on your judgement, what to do. But in my opinion, every man is a crazy man." So this is a fact. This is a fact. Anyone who is under the control of the material energy, he's a crazy man. He's thinking "I am this, I am that, I am this," "I am American," "I am Indian," "I am Hindu," "I am a Muslim," "I am so on, so on, so many things." But he's nothing of all this. These are all creation of māyā.
So one who becomes engaged immediately in pure devotional service, he immediately becomes liberated. Immediately. Without any distant time. Immediately. Tad kṣaṇāt śraddhā bhavati, śraddhā savanāya kalpate. Jīva Gosvāmī (says) that one who, even one is born in the lowest degree, śva-pācaḥ, śraddhā savanaya kalpate, he becomes immediately eligible for performing sacrifices. There are śāstra evidences. And Śukadeva Gosvāmī says,
- kirāta-hūṇāndhra-pulinda-pulkaśā
- ābhīra-śumbhā yavanāḥ khasādayaḥ
- ye 'nye ca pāpā yad-apāśrayāśrayāḥ
- śudhyanti (tasmai) prabhaviṣṇave namaḥ
- (SB 2.4.18)
Even born in kirāta family, the aborigines... They, these, these names are of the caṇḍālas. They are not Aryans. Non-Aryans. So kirāta-hūṇā... In the Bhagavad-gītā also Kṛṣṇa says, māṁ hi pārtha vyapāśritya ye 'pi syuḥ pāpa-yonayaḥ (BG 9.32). Pāpa-yoni. Striya śūdra tathā vaiśyās te 'pi yānti paraṁ gatim. Immediately. So the devotional service is so nice, practical, that simply if you take to this devotional service, immediately you become sa guṇān samatītyaitān brahma-bhūyāya kalpate (BG 14.26). Then we are describing how to become brahma-bhūtaḥ.
Pradyumna: "In the above statement by Kapiladeva from the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the actual position of a pure devotee is described, and the primary characteristics of devotional service are also defined. Further characteristics of devotional service are described by Rūpa Gosvāmī with evidences from different scriptures. He states that there are six characteristics of pure devotional service, which are as follows: (1) Pure devotional service brings immediate relief from all kinds of material distress. (2) Pure devotional service is the beginning of all auspiciousness."
Prabhupāda: Śrīla Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī has described,
- viśvaṁ pūrṇa-sukhāyate vidhi-mahendrādiś ca kīṭāyate
- yat-kāruṇya-kaṭākṣa-vaibhavavatāṁ gauram eva stumaḥ
- (Caitanya-candrāmṛta 5)
When actually one comes in the platform of devotional service, for him, there is no problem. The whole world is disturbed, agitated with so many problems, but for a devotee, there is no problem. Viśvaṁ pūrṇa-sukhāyate. And they are trying, the whole world is trying to become very big man. Somebody's trying to be very big merchant or big industrialist, or minister, or this or that, and others, they are trying to occupy the post of Indra, Candra, devata. That is competition, going on. As soon as there is some competition, even persons, demigods, like Indra, Candra, they become disturbed, and they try to stop it. But a devotee has no such concern. He's not disturbed.
Pradyumna: "There are many results of past sinful activities for which we are suffering at the present moment, and we may be suffering in the future due to our present sinful activities, but all of these reactions to sinful deeds can immediately be stopped if we take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness."
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Pradyumna: "As evidence for this..."
Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa consciousness, if we take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, automatically we become immune from sinful activities. The devotional service... The mind, being engaged on the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, as Ambarīṣa Mahārāja did: sa vai manaḥ kṛṣṇa-padāravindayor vacāṁsi vaikuṇṭha-guṇānuvarṇane... (SB 9.4.18). Ambarīṣa Mahārāja was very responsible emperor of the world, but he fixed up his mind on the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa and he engaged his words simply: vaikuṇṭha-guṇānuvarṇane, simply describing the qualities, the transcendental qualities of Kṛṣṇa. He used his eyes to see the Deity, he used his legs to go to the temple, he used his hands for cleansing the temple, he used his nose for smelling the flower and tulasī offered to Kṛṣṇa, he used his tongue for tasting Kṛṣṇa-prasādam. In this way, he engaged all his senses in the service of the Lord. So there was no chance of committing sinful activities by his body. It is, it can be done by everyone. Everyone can install Deity at his home and regularly worship the Deity according to the injunction of the śāstras and spiritual master and eat prasādam and hear Vaik..., Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, chant and speak Hare Kṛṣṇa. This is simple life. And one can become immune from all sinful reactions. The simple thing. Go on.
Pradyumna: "As evidence for this, Rūpa Gosvāmī quotes from the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Eleventh Canto, Fourteenth Chapter, 18th verse. This verse is in connection with Lord Kṛṣṇa's instruction to Uddhava, where He says, 'My dear Uddhava, devotional service unto Me is just like a blazing fire, which can burn into ashes unlimited fuel supplied to it.' The purport is that as the blazing fire can burn any amount of fuel to ashes, so devotional service to the Lord in Kṛṣṇa consciousness can burn up all the fuel of sinful activities. For example, in the Gītā, Arjuna thought that fighting was a sinful activity, but Kṛṣṇa engaged him on the battlefield under His order, and so the fighting became devotional service. Therefore, Arjuna was not subjected to any sinful reaction."
Prabhupāda: Yes. So the example is that the, in the fire, you go on giving fuel perpetually, it will burn into ashes. Similarly, it doesn't matter. To become sinful... Without Kṛṣṇa consciousness, everyone is sinful. So to become sinful is not disqualification, because everyone is sinful. But if one takes to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, Kṛṣṇa consciousness is just like the fire, and the sinful activities are just like wood. But when the wood is in touch with the fire, so the fire would burn all the woods, fuel, into ashes. But we should not... Once we take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we should stop the pillars of sinful activities. Whatever we did in our past life, that is excused, but if we take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, and if we go on with our sinful activities, that will not help us. Just like the same fire: you take the fuel and add to the fire, it will burn into ashes. But, at the same time, if you pour some water also, then it will be useless. Similarly, our past sinful activities, that can be burned into ashes provided we don't add any more. Don't take it: "Now it will burn into ashes. So go on, this business and that business." No. That business means pouring water into the fire. It will not burn.
Pradyumna: "There is another evidence in the Fourth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Twenty-second Chapter, 37th verse, wherein Sanat-kumāra says: 'My dear King, the false ego of a human being is so strong that it keeps him in material existence as if tied up by a strong rope. Only the devotees can cut off the knot of this strong rope very easily, by engaging themselves in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Others, who are not in Kṛṣṇa consciousness but are trying to become great mystics or great ritual performers, cannot advance like the devotees. Therefore it is the duty of everyone to engage himself in the activities of Kṛṣṇa consciousness in order to be freed from the tight knot of false ego and engagement in material activities.' "
Prabhupāda: Bhaja vāsudeva. There is a verse like that, that as by taking shelter at the lotus feet of Vāsudeva, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, one can get released from all kinds of material tribulations, such kind of immunization is not possible by practicing yoga, tapasya, jñāna. This is the statement in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. In all ways, it is recommended that we have to, we should take shelter...
- samāśritā ye pada-pallava-plavaṁ
- mahat-padaṁ puṇya-yaśo murāreḥ
- bhavāmbudhir vatsa-padaṁ paraṁ padaṁ
- padaṁ padaṁ yad vipadāṁ na teṣām
- (SB 10.14.58)
If one takes shelter of mahat-padaṁ puṇya-yaśo murāreḥ... Murāri is Kṛṣṇa's another name. So puṇya-yaśo, His name is famous as piety. Puṇya-yaśo murāri. If anyone takes shelter of His lotus feet, then the great ocean of nescience becomes a small pit, and one can jump over it very easily.
Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī is giving evidences from different Vedic literatures to support his statement. Here is a statement from Padma Purāṇa. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī, in his Tattva-sandarbha, has proved it, without any doubt, that the Purāṇas are supplementary to Vedas. They are... Just like Upaniṣads is part and parcel of the Vedas, similarly, Purāṇas are also part and parcel of the Vedic literature. There are philosophers, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not accept Purāṇas as Vedic literature, but Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has proved in his Tattva-sandarbha, in the beginning, that Purāṇas, Mahābhārata, itihāsa-purāṇa, they are part and parcel of the Vedic literature. Supplementary. Purāṇa means that which supplements. So evidences from Purāṇa is as good as the evidence from the Vedic quotation. That is the verdict of Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī is not prepared to accept any statement which does not refer to the Vedic literatures: Vedas, Purāṇas, Upaniṣads, Mahābhārata, Rāmāyaṇa, like that. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī also says in another place, śruti-smṛti-purāṇādi-pāñcarātriki-vidhiṁ vinā (Brs. 1.2.101). So he has taken purāṇas also as evidences, Vedic evidences. So śruti, the Vedas, smṛti, the Purāṇas and other literatures, dharma-śāstra, smṛti-śāstra and Purāṇa, pañcarāti-vidhi—without reference to all these authentic literature, any kind of devotional activities are not accepted by the Gosvāmīs. They say, "Without any reference to these all Vedic literatures, any kind of devotional service is simply disturbance." Pañcarātri-vidhiṁ vinā aikāntikī harer bhaktir upātāyaiva kalpate. Utpāt, disturbance.
Yes. When Caitanya Mahāprabhu was passing through the forest of Jhārikhaṇḍa, in central India, the, all the animals joined with Him. Of course, He's Kṛṣṇa Himself. But if one becomes purified, there is no question that... All animals, living entities, would join in saṅkīrtana movement. There is evidence. But one must be very sincere and powerful preacher. If we cannot preach in the, in the society of the animals, we can preach at least in the human societies, who are supposed to be uncivilized or very lower status of life. Actually, it is so happening. In Africa also, our men are going interior in the village. They are almost naked, these Africans—we have got pictures—with big, big earring. So they are also, their children, and they also dance in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, in the Hare Kṛṣṇa chanting. This is the wonderful movement, that anyone can take part. We see the children take part, the dogs take part, the so-called uncivilized men, they also take part. This is the universality of Caitanya Mahāprabhu's movement.
So this is called faith. The faith is not blind. There is proof. He, the cobbler was not blindly believing that Nārāyaṇa was pulling an elephant through the hole of an needle, but he sees practically the potency, the power of the Lord, bījo 'haṁ sarva-bhūtānām (Bg 7.10), how He keeps all the potencies of the banyan tree within the seed. So otherwise there is no meaning, "all-powerful." He can do whatever He likes. Inconceivable. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī therefore explains that unless we believe (in the) inconceivable potency of the Lord, then we cannot understand that activities... Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate, svābhāvikī-jñāna-bala-kriyā ca (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). We cannot judge how things are happening, but we have to believe. Therefore Vedic knowledge is so important. We cannot make research. We cannot judge. Simply if we take the Vedic truths... Just like we have several times explained, the Vedas accept the cow dung pure, whereas the stool of other animal is impure. So we have to accept like that. So Veda-vāṇī. Veda-vāṇī means you cannot deny it. You cannot argue on it. You have to accept as it is. Therefore learned scholar, when he speaks something, he gives evidence from the Vedas, śruti, śruti-pramāṇa. That is the best evidence.
Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura. These are, Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura's versions are accepted as Vedic versions, śruti-pramāṇa. Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura says that the statements of Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura are as good as Vedic evidences. Therefore we quote from Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura often. Not, not only Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura—Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī and the six Gosvāmīs, they are authorities. So we have no difficulty. Tāṅdera caraṇa-sevi-bhakta-sane vāsa. That's all. Let us follow the footprints of the ācāryas, Gosvāmīs, and live together as sincere, serious devotees. Then our life is successful. It is not very difficult. Bhakta-sane vāsa. Tāṅdera caraṇe. We should live together as devotee and follow the footprints of the ācāryas. Don't manufacture concoction. Then it will be spoiled. Simply try to follow. They'll protect. They'll give protection. Because Kṛṣṇa says, ahaṁ tvāṁ sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣayiṣyāmi (BG 18.66). So if we take shelter of the ācāryas, that means we take shelter of Kṛṣṇa. Yasya prasādād bhagavat-prasādaḥ **. If the ācārya, guru, is satisfied, then we must know certainly that Kṛṣṇa is satisfied. Yasya prasādād bhagavat-prasādaḥ **. Ācāryaṁ māṁ vijānīyāt (SB 11.17.27). So this is the principle, and the ācāryas give us direction. It is not very difficult. Simply we have to be, become very serious and sincere. Then everything is all right.
"The second-class devotee has been defined by the following symptoms: he is not very expert in arguing on the strength of revealed scripture, but he has firm faith in the objective. The purport of this description is that the second-class devotee has firm faith in the procedure of devotional service unto Kṛṣṇa, but he may sometimes fail to offer arguments and decisions on the strength of revealed scripture to an opposing party. But at the same time, he is still undaunted within himself as to his decision that Kṛṣṇa is the supreme object of worship.
"The neophyte, or third-class devotee, is one whose faith is not strong and, at the same time, does not recognize the decision of the revealed scripture. The neophyte's faith can be changed by someone else with strong arguments or by an opposite decision. Unlike the second-class devotee, who also cannot put forward arguments and evidences from the scriptures, but who has still, has all faith in the objective, the neophyte has no firm faith in the objective. Thus he is called a neophyte devotee.
Bhavānanda: "This evidence from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam gives assurance to the pure devotee of being elevated to association with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī remarks in this connection that one who is actually attracted by the beauty of the lotus feet of Śrī Kṛṣṇa or His service and whose heart, by such attraction, is always full with transcendental bliss will naturally never aspire after the liberation which is so valuable to the impersonalists."
Prabhupāda: Yes. Liberation, a devotee never... Why liberation? Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, he says... Liberation means kaivalya. Kaivalyaṁ narakāyate. What is this liberation? It is as good as the hell. Kaivalyaṁ narakāyate. Tri-daṣa-pūr ākāśa-puṣpāyate (Caitanya-candrāmṛta 5). The persons, they are hankering after being elevated to the heavenly planet. So for a devotee, this is will o' the wisp, phantasmagoria, it has no value. Kaivalyaṁ narakāyate tri-daśa-pūr ākāśa-puṣpayate indriya-kāla-sarpa-paṭalī protkhāta-daṁṣṭrāyate. And the yogis... Karmīs, jñānīs, yogis. Karmīs are after heavenly planet; jñānīs are after kaivalya, liberation; yogis are after controlling the senses. So senses are very dangerous. Everyone knows. Our senses are very strong. Therefore the yoga system is recommended for them who are very much in bodily concept of life. Therefore they are advised to exercise the body to come to the point of spiritual platform. But those who are above bodily concept of life, those senses have been purified.
Just see. Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, Rūpa Gosvāmī, he's presenting this Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, quoting from so many scriptures. Nānā-śāstra-vicāraṇaika-nipuṇau. They were very, very expert in studying śāstra very scrutinizingly. Nānā-śāstra-vicāraṇaika-nipuṇau sad-dharma-saṁsthāpakau. Why they studied so much? Because they wanted to establish sad-dharma, real type of religion, bhakti. They are quoting, therefore, from so many, nānā-śāstra. Nānā-śāstra-vicāraṇaika-nipuṇau sad-dharma-saṁsthāpakau lokānāṁ hita-kāriṇau. That is welfare activity. Lokānāṁ hita-kāriṇau. These people are trying to give some service to the daridra-nārāyaṇa, but they do not know actually what is jīve dayā (?). This is jīve daya. Lokānāṁ hita-kāriṇau. They should know things with reference to the authorized scripture. Not that I manufacture some words, according to my whims. That is not service to the hu... That is misleading, disservice. Because, if they are kept in ignorance, what is the value of such service. Here is (service). He does not manufacture anything. He's giving immediately evidence, reference to the authorized scripture. That is the way of presenting things. Not that "I think," "In my opinion." What you are? But in, in Vaiṣṇava philosophy, even Caitanya Mahāprabhu, although He was Kṛṣṇa Himself, whenever He spoke something, immediately He gave evidence from the śāstra. Even Kṛṣṇa. While He was speaking Bhagavad-gītā, He also gave reference to the Vedānta-sūtra: brahma-sūtra-padaiś caiva hetumadbhir viniścitaiḥ (BG 13.5). He was giving reference to the Brahmā-sūtra. That is the way of authorized presentation. Kṛṣṇa is Supreme Personality of Godhead, but He was also giving reference. He also said, yaḥ śāstra-vidhim utsṛjya vartate kāma-kārataḥ (BG 16.23). We cannot give up śāstras. If we give up śāstra, then Kṛṣṇa says, sa siddhiṁ sāvāpnoti na sukhaṁ na parāṁ gatim. If we give up śāstra, if we manufacture our own words, own śāstras, these are all rascaldom. That should not be accepted. So here you see Rūpa Gosvāmī's writing. The śloka, number, Canto, everything is given. Nānā-śāstra-vicāraṇaika-nipuṇau.
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures
So Kṛṣṇa is para-tattva, accepted by all ācāryas. We are not talking of the fools and rascals who are theorizing without any knowledge. We are concerned with the authorities. So authorities... Especially in India, the whole Vedic system is being followed by the people under the authorities of the ācārya. Ācāryavān puruṣo veda. One who is following the path of the ācāryas, he knows. Ācāryavān puruṣo veda. We cannot accept anyone as authority if he does not follow the paramparā, disciplic succession of ācārya. That is the Vedic system. Evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ (BG 4.2). So Kṛṣṇa is para-tattva. Na caitanyāt kṛṣṇāt jagati para-tattvaṁ param iha. He is very emphatically asserting that "There is no more greater truth than Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa Caitanya." So according to the Vedic system, if you say something very emphatically, you must prove by Vedic evidences. Otherwise you can go on talking; nobody will hear. Sometimes people ask us about Kṛṣṇa and Caitanya Mahāprabhu, that "What is the Vedic evidences?" So that Vedic evidences will be given, later chapters of Caitanya-caritāmṛta. He is not falsely asserting. Kavirāja Gosvāmī is very, very advanced devotee and scholar. He is not ordinary human being. He was empowered by Madana-mohana.
Utpātā, simply disturbance. Yata mat tata patha: "I can manufacture my own way." This rascaldom has been condemned by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī. He says that harer bhaktiḥ... You will find many so-called bhaktas crying, falling down on the ground. But immediately after, he is smoking bidi. So why this is going on? Because they do not follow the injunction of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī. Chanting, dancing very loudly, and after the performance is finished—I have seen it—"Can you give me a bidi?" You see? "My throat is now dried up." So this is utpātā. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has described this kind of so-called devotional attitude is simply disturbance. They imitate. Imitate. Therefore Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura has condemned. There are so many apa-sampradāya going on in the name of Caitanya Mahāprabhu's devotee. Who are they? Āula, bāula, kartābhajā, neḍā, daraveśa, sāṅi, sahajiyā, sakhībhekī, smārta, jata-gosāñi. Then ativāḍī, cūḍādhārī, gaurāṅga-nāgarī, tota kahe ei tāra saṅga nāhi kori: Tota Bābājī, he says, "I do not associate with these classes of men." So after disappearance of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, so many apa-sampradāya sprang up. So we should be very much careful that... Sampradāya means who are carefully following the Vedic principle. Therefore Kavirāja Gosvāmī, although asserting the truth, he is prepared to give Vedic evidences. Now he has begun.
Utpātā, simply disturbance. Yata mat tata patha: "I can manufacture my own way." This rascaldom has been condemned by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī. He says that harer bhaktiḥ... You will find many so-called bhaktas crying, falling down on the ground. But immediately after, he is smoking bidi. So why this is going on? Because they do not follow the injunction of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī. Chanting, dancing very loudly, and after the performance is finished—I have seen it—"Can you give me a bidi?" You see? "My throat is now dried up." So this is utpātā. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has described this kind of so-called devotional attitude is simply disturbance. They imitate. Imitate. Therefore Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura has condemned. There are so many apa-sampradāya going on in the name of Caitanya Mahāprabhu's devotee. Who are they? Āula, bāula, kartābhajā, neḍā, daraveśa, sāṅi, sahajiyā, sakhībhekī, smārta, jata-gosāñi. Then ativāḍī, cūḍādhārī, gaurāṅga-nāgarī, tota kahe ei tāra saṅga nāhi kori: Tota Bābājī, he says, "I do not associate with these classes of men." So after disappearance of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, so many apa-sampradāya sprang up. So we should be very much careful that... Sampradāya means who are carefully following the Vedic principle. Therefore Kavirāja Gosvāmī, although asserting the truth, he is prepared to give Vedic evidences. Now he has begun.
They do not see who is behind this explosion. That is their ignorance or poor fund of knowledge. We have got practical experience that no explosion takes place without the touch of a human being. Similarly, even there was explosion going on, but there is a touch of the Supreme Being. That is the statement in the Bhagavad... Mayādhyakṣeṇa (BG 9.10). We are seeing the explosion. Just like child sees the explosion. He does not know that there, behind the explosion, there is a management of a superior being. This is childish observation. Because in śāstra we see that behind everything the hand of the Supreme Being is there, and by our practical experience also, we see that matter does not act automatically without being touched by a living being, so how we can accept this argument, that the explosion is going on automatically? What is the evidence? There is no evidence.
So that is not the way. Therefore śruti-pramāṇam. Śruti-pramāṇam means from the Vedic evidence we have to understand. Now, just like in the Vedas it is said, jalajā nava-lakṣāṇi. In the Vedas, all knowledge was there, all the living entities described fully and with minute, exact quantity. Now, within the water, we understand from the Vedic literature, there are 900,000 forms of aquatics. Now, the modern scientists, how many they have observed or studied? But it is said exactly, 900,000. Jalajā nava-lakṣāṇi sthāvarā lakṣa-viṁśati. Of course, you cannot enter within the water. But on the land, now different, and that is two million. How many species of plants and trees, and that is two million. How many the botanists have studied? Two million. Sthāvarā lakṣa-viṁśati. Even in your country, in your village, you'll find daily some new vegetable. You see? So these are the Vedic calculation. And not only that, there are different species of life, and how they are working, what senses are predominant in each and every life and everything is described. Everything is very minutely described. Therefore, if we want to have knowledge, you cannot do it by mental speculation. We should know that our mind is very, very limited. Simply by theorizing, it is not possible. Therefore tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet sampit-pāṇiḥ śrotriyaṁ brahma-niṣṭham (MU 1.2.12). So we have to know from the supreme authority or the Vedas. Then the knowledge will be perfect.
We do not accept this nonsense theory that there was no human being, and later on, they became gradually civilized, and for the last two hundred years only they have got the intelligence, scientific knowledge. We do not accept these nonsense theories. We... Our understanding is: the first creation is the most intelligent human being, Brahmā, not that there was no human being, or any living being. No. The first creation is the most perfect or intelligent living being. This is our theory. Not theory; it is the Vedic evidence. And he got full knowledge from the Supreme, tene brahma hṛdā ādi-kavaye, ādi-kavi, the original learned person, and then he compiled Vedas, giving full knowledge, what he experienced. And the Brahma-saṁhitā is there—it is written by Brahmā. And in the Brahma-saṁhitā, the Kāraṇodakaśāyī Viṣṇu is mentioned, yasyaika-niśvasita-kālam athāvalambya jīvanti loma-vilajā (Bs. 5.48). It is not that we are accepting this verse of Caitanya-caritāmṛta author. No. It is confirmed by the Vedic knowledge. This is the origin of creation, not that this chunk, or... No. Matter cannot expand. Matter, when there is reaction... Just like explosion. We have got experience that there is sometimes explosion like if you mix together two chemicals, acid and alkaline, there is explosion for the time being. But this explosion takes place when a chemist in the laboratory mixes soda, soda bicarb, and citric acid. Otherwise, it is not possible.
So that is not human life. Human life is... Here it is described, just Kavirāja Gosvāmī's, mat-sarvasva-padāmbhojau rādhā-madana-mohanau. Our only asset should be the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa along with Rādhārāṇī. Madana-mohana. Kṛṣṇa is so beautiful that He is more attractive than the Cupid. Madana-mohana. Madana means Cupid. Cupid is supposed to be the most beautiful person within the universe, but Kṛṣṇa is still more beautiful. Kandarpa-koṭi-kamanīya-viśeṣa-śobham (Bs. 5.30). That is described in the śāstra. And when Kṛṣṇa was present, we know from the śāstra or from the evidences that Kṛṣṇa was attractive to so many gopīs. The gopīs were the most beautiful women, and Kṛṣṇa was attractive to them. So just imagine how much beautiful was Kṛṣṇa. Not only to the gopīs; there were 16,108 queens of Kṛṣṇa. Therefore His name is Kṛṣṇa. He is attractive to everyone. Jayatam suratau paṅgor mama. So why He should not be attractive to fallen souls like us? So that is the position of Kṛṣṇa.
Now, Caitanya Mahāprabhu says that "Jīva-tattva, the living entities, they are never the energetic; they are energy." Energetic and energy. So how it is so? The evidence is from Bhāgavata, Viṣṇu Purāṇa and Bhagavad-gītā. Because one has to give evidence. How do you say that jīva-tattva, the living entities, they are not the Supreme? Caitanya Mahāprabhu sa..., they are not su... Not to say, I mean to say, speak of Supreme, they are not even of the same category. Because there are different categories. Viṣṇu-tattva, jīva-tattva and śakti-tattva—there are so many categories. So He says that "Jīva, the living entities, they are in the categories of energy. They are not energetic." Energetic and energy, you should try to understand. Just like the fire, fire and its heat. Heat is the energy, and the fire is the energetic. Similarly, the Supreme Lord, He is the energetic, Supreme Person, and we, the living entities, we are energy.
So when you are free from these material clutches, you attain your original quality, spiritual quality. And that spiritual quality you can serve. Because service means the person who is served, he is also person, and the servant is also person. Otherwise there is no question of service. Service, whenever we say service, there must be a person to take, to accept the service, and there must be one person who renders the service. Therefore dvaita-vāda, duality, the, this predominator and the predominated.
So Caitanya Mahāprabhu is giving evidence from Bhagavad-gītā:
- apareyam itas tv anyāṁ
- prakṛtiṁ viddhi me parām
- jīva-bhūtaṁ mahā-bāho
- yayedaṁ dhāryate jagat
- (BG 7.5)
Now, apareyam, iyam. Before this verse, Lord Kṛṣṇa has described that "Earth, water, fire, air and ether, they are My different separated energies, and beyond this separated energy, there is another superior energy. This, these energies are inferior, and there is another superior energy." So therefore jīva, jīva, the living entities, they are described in the Bhagavad-gītā as energy, not the energetic.
So this avidyā, this ignorance, this forgetfulness, is another energy, another energy. So just like a cloud... This is also another energy of the sunshine. It is not different. When the sunshine warms the sea water, it evaporates and becomes cloud. So therefore cloud is also another energy. So similarly, this material energy is also energy of God, but it cannot cover God. That is the difference. God is never covered by ignorance. This is nonsense. Those fools and rascals say that "God... We are God. We are now covered." It is the most rascaldom. How? If we are God, how we can be covered by ignorance? Then what is your value of your becoming God? You are not God. You are... This is very nicely explained here. Try to understand. Caitanya Mahāprabhu says that "Living entities, they are energy of God. They are never God." The Śaṅkarācārya's theory is nullified by evidences from Vedic scripture, just like Bhagavad-gītā, Viṣṇu Purāṇa. So never claim that "We are God." That is most darkest part of your ignorance, when you say that "I am God." There is neither voidness; neither you are God. You are eternal, perpetual blissful, but your blissful is now covered by this māyā. You get out of it, be one with Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Your life is successful. This is this theory.
So Brahmā is admitting that this Kṛṣṇa is parabrahman sanātanam. So we have to take evidence from the authorities. There are twelve authorities according to śāstra. Brahmā is one of the authorities. Twelve authorities means,
- svayambhūr nāradaḥ śambhuḥ
- kapilaḥ kumāro manuḥ
- prahlādo janako bhīṣmo
- (balir) vaiyāsakir vayam
- (SB 6.3.20)
Svayambhūr nāradaḥ. Svayambhūḥ is Brahmā; Nārada; then Śambhu, Lord Śiva. Svayambhūr nāradaḥ śambhuḥ kapilaḥ (SB 6.3.20). Kapila. Kapila is incarnation of God, Kapiladeva, the propounder of the Sāṅkhya philosophy. Kumāra, the four Kumāras, ever brahmacārī. And Manu, Vaivasvata Manu, the father of Mahārāja Ikṣvāku. And Prahlāda, the son of Hiraṇyakaśipu. The father was atheist and the son was a devotee, great devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa. Then Janaka Mahārāja, the father of Sītādevī. And Bhīṣma, the grandfather of the Pāṇḍavas. Prahlādo janako bhīṣmaḥ. Then Vaiyāsaki, Śukadeva Gosvāmī; and Yamarāja, they are authorities.
Ataeva śruti kahe brahma-saviśeṣa: God, Brahma, the great. Brahma means the great. Bṛhatvād bṛhannatvāt. The Absolute Truth is the great and can expand also unlimitedly. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam (Bs. 5.33). Rūpam: He has got His transcendental forms, ananta, unlimited. But they are all one. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam. Ādyam, the original; Purāṇa, the oldest; puruṣam, person. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam. Although He has got innumerable forms, they are advaita, they are one. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam (Bs. 5.33). Ādyam, original; Purāṇa, the oldest; and puruṣam, the person. Nava-yauvanam. The oldest, but nava-yauvana, just beginning of youthful life. That is the description in the Brahma-saṁhitā. And Caitanya Mahāprabhu confirms that brahma saviśeṣa. Saviśeṣa means person with varieties of energy. Not imperson. Ataeva śruti kahe. According to Vedic evidence from the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad, apāṇi pāda, He has proved that when the Upaniṣad says that "The Absolute Truth has no hands and legs, this means that He has no material hands and legs. But He has His hands and legs." (shouting in background) (aside:) Who is shouting? Why they do not come? Why they are shouting there? All right.
The discussion was going with Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, a follower of the Śaṅkarite philosophy. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu has given Vedic evidences that the Supreme Personality of Godhead has His form, transcendental form, sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha, but His form is not material. That is the opinion of Śaṅkarācārya. Nārāyaṇa para avyaktāt: "Nārāyaṇa, He is transcendental to this creation." So in... With reference to this material creation, He is impersonal. But when we speak of the spiritual world, He is a person, sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Ṣaḍ-aiśvarya pūrṇa, pūrṇānanda vigraha yāṅhāra.
So when there is question (of) ānanda... Because Kṛṣṇa has got form, sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1), eternal, cit, full of knowledge, and full of ānanda, bliss. Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt, Vedānta-sūtra says. The Lord is ānanda-mayo. This māyā-prātyaya, there is controversy between the Śaṅkarites and the Vaiṣṇavas. They say that māyā-prātyaya... This prātyaya, from Sanskrit verbal root, is affixed in two cases—when there is excess and when there is transformation. So either cases, the ānanda, or the blissful nature of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is extensive, unlimited. Prācurya. Prācurya means extensive. 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.
He is giving evidence from Viṣṇu Purāṇa. Viṣṇu Purāṇa... There are eighteen Purāṇas. There are sattvika, rajasika, tamasika purāṇas. So sattvika Purāṇa is required for spiritual improvement. So He's giving evidence from the sattvika Purāṇa, Viṣṇu Purāṇa. What is that?
- viṣṇu-śaktir parā proktā
- kṣetrajñākhyā tathā parā
- avidyā-karma-saṁjñānyā
- tṛtīyā śaktir iṣyate
Viṣṇu śaktir parā proktā. All energies of Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu, they are transcendental, parā, or aprakṛta, not prakṛta. Just try to understand what is transcendental śakti. Just like transcendental and mundane, or material. Material world is created by the transcendental desire of Viṣṇu. Just like in the Bible it is said, "Let there be creation," and there was creation. And Kṛṣṇa also says that this material... Ekāṁśena sthito jagat.
So these things are, I mean to say, creating havoc in the matter of understanding Kṛṣṇa. Instead of taking Bhagavad-gītā as it is, persons who have no knowledge practically, or poor fund of knowledge, they are commenting in different way, and people are misled. As sometimes our, these Europeans, Americans, they say frankly that "For many hundreds of years, the Bhagavad-gītā was known in Europe and America, and many swamis went there. They gave reference to the Bhagavad-gītā, but there was no, not a single devotee of Kṛṣṇa. Not a single devotee." Prior to this movement, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, they had not a single devotee of Kṛṣṇa, as you are finding. Now Bhagavad-gītā is being presented as it is, and they are understanding rightly, and they are becoming devotee. Anyone who will read Bhagavad-gītā as it is, without any malcommentation, he'll become devotee of Kṛṣṇa. And when he becomes a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, accepting the principle, "Kṛṣṇa is all in all," vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ (BG 7.19). That position we have to attain. Caitanya Mahāprabhu's preaching is based on that principle. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). That is His... He is Kṛṣṇa also. According to Vedic evidence, Caitanya Mahāprabhu is also Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa-varṇaṁ tviṣākṛṣṇa. He belongs to the category of Kṛṣṇa, but He is playing the part of a devotee of Kṛṣṇa in order to teach us how to love Kṛṣṇa, how to approach Kṛṣṇa. As such, if we accept the process enunciated by Lord Caitanya, then it is very easy to approach Kṛṣṇa.
He may deny it if he doesn't believe his mother. Now what is the proof that one man is my father? The mother is the proof. There is no other source of understanding who is my father. If a boy wants to understand, "Who is my father?" the only authority is the mother. Mother will say, "My dear boy, my dear child, here is your father." You have to accept. If you say, "I don't accept. I must have proof that he is my father." How it is possible? It is not possible. Similarly, the Vedic literature is to be considered the mother and Vedic literature says, janmādy asya yataḥ: (SB 1.1.1) "The Supreme Absolute Truth is that who is the source of all generation, all emanations." And what is that source? Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that "I am the father." So if you believe scriptures, Vedic literatures, if you believe Bhagavad-gītā, then you have to accept Kṛṣṇa as the supreme father because the mother... Vedic literature is considered to be the mother. She gives evidence that Kṛṣṇa is the father. Just like mother gives evidence who is your father, similarly, the Vedic literatures is compared to a mother, and the Vedic literature says that Kṛṣṇa is the father. In your Christian literature, Bible, Jesus Christ is accepted as the son of God. He presented himself as son of God. And here Kṛṣṇa says that "I am the father." So there is no contradiction. The son of God also says about God, and the father also says about the God, Himself. The son of God says that "You surrender unto God," and God says, "You surrender unto Me." Then where there is contradiction? There is no contradiction.
These are the Vedic evidences. So actually nobody can be master; everyone is servant. Either we are servant of God or we are servant of dog. That's all. Nobody can be master. If anyone has no master, then he keeps a pet dog to become his servant. That is nature, we can see. One is servant of his wife, one is servant of his pet or government service or this service. Nobody can claim that "I am the master." That is not possible. That is also temporary. So actually this is the position of all living entities. Everyone is servant. But in the material sense, he is servant of māyā, servant of senses. Servant of māyā means servant of senses. And spiritual life means instead of becoming servant of māyā or servant of senses, we become the servant of Kṛṣṇa or God. That is the position. Servant we shall remain. We have to change the position. And if we become servant of God, then we become happy, and if we remain servant of dog or māyā, then we remain unhappy. This is the position. We have to change the position. Kāmādīnāṁ kati na katidhā pālitā durnideśās teṣāṁ mayi na karuṇā jātā na trapā nopaśāntiḥ. One intelligent brāhmaṇa, he's offering, "My Lord, I have become servant of so many senses, but neither the senses are satisfied, neither I am satisfied. This is the result of my service. Therefore now I have got my intelligence that I want to become Your servant." This is intelligence.
So this, the one, that... We should seek the shelter of the lotus feet of guru. Then everything... And vede gāya yāṅhāra carita. It is not that it is sentiment that one has to become very strong devotee of guru. Therefore Narottama dāsa Tha..., vede gāya yāṅhāra carita. Not that I am talking something nonsense. It is because... Śruti-pramāṇam. Whatever we talk, it must be supported by Vedic injunction. Then it is right. Just like we sometimes challenge these big, big scientists and others, and what is our strength? I am not a scientist, but how I can challenge? The Veda gāya. We have got evidence from the Vedas. Just like so many people are thinking that the moon planet is first. We are challenging, "No, moon planet is second." What is the strength? The strength is Vedic knowledge. We cannot accept it. So vede gāya yāṅhāra carita. Vedic knowledge is so perfect that you can challenge so many scientists. Yes. If it is not in accordance to the Vedic knowledge, then it is... We do not accept. If it is not to the Kṛṣṇa's instruction, we reject immediately. Na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ (BG 7.15). As soon as we see that one man is not Kṛṣṇa conscious, then we immediately group him in four classes: duṣkṛtina, mūḍha, narādhama, māyayāpahṛta-jñānā. Finished, that's all. "No, I am learned, and you are nothing. You have not... You have no degrees of university. I have got degrees." "Yes, that is all right, but your degrees and knowledge have been taken away by māyā. You remain in darkness. Ye timire jeti (?). You remain in the darkness." That's all.
So Caitanya Mahāprabhu... That is the ācārya process. Ācārya. Acinoti śāstra, śāstrārtha. One who knows the śāstra-artha, one who has assimilated the śāstrārtha, he is ācārya. So immediately He is giving evidence from śāstra.
- viṣṇu-śaktiḥ parā proktā
- kṣetrajñākhyā tathā parā
- avidyā-karma-saṁjñānyā
- tṛtīyā śaktir iṣyate
- (CC Madhya 6.154)
The... He has divided the whole energy of Kṛṣṇa into three: cit-śakti, jīva-śakti, and māyā-śakti. So the evidence is quoted from śāstra, Viṣṇu-Purāṇa, that viṣṇu-śaktiḥ parā proktā. Originally the Kṛṣṇa's energy is cit-śakti. Cit-śakti means spiritual energy, originally. Everything... Just like the sun and the sunshine. The sunshine originally shining, but when it is covered by cloud it is not shining. Within the cloud the real sunshine is there. So this material energy means it is covered by ignorance. This is the difference between spiritual energy and material energy. There is no two energies. Energy is one: viṣṇu-śakti parā proktā. That is parā, spiritual energy. Kṣetrajñākhyā tathā parā. Kṣetrajñākhyā tathā parā. Kṣetrajña means jīva-śakti, one who knows kṣetra and kṣetrajña. This subject matter is there in the Thirteenth Chapter of Bhagavad-gītā. Kṣetra-kṣetrajñayor jñānam. So when Arjuna inquired, kṣetra-jñam, Kṛṣṇa replied, idaṁ śarīraṁ kṣetram abhidhīyate: "This body is kṣetra, and one who knows this body..." Just like I say, "It is my body," so I am kṣetrajña.
So one has to accept. Sādhu-śāstra-kṛpāya. They are always merciful. But one has to accept them and become Kṛṣṇa conscious. Sādhu-śāstra-kṛpāya yadi kṛṣṇonmukha haya. And as soon as he agrees to become Kṛṣṇa conscious, then his path becomes clear. He'll get rid of these material clutches and this always full life full of anxiety and problems, he'll kick. These things, sādhu, śāstra, saintly person and scripture, they have to be accepted. If you don't accept them, then there is no other way. Why there is no other way? Daivī hy eṣā guṇa-mayī (BG 7.14). He's citing again from Bhagavad-gītā. The Bhagavad-gītā is the book of evidence. Lord Caitanya is citing. Because it is Vedic. Just like in the law court you have to cite section from the law book, not from your concocted mind. No foolish man can argue in the law court, because he has to refer in every step from the law book. Sādhu means that he has to give evidence from the scriptures. Not that "I think... In my opinion you can do this." He's not a sādhu; he's a fool. What is your opinion? You are a conditioned soul. Can you manufacture something? No. You cannot manufacture anything. You have to give reference from authorized scripture. So Lord Caitanya is giving evidence from Bhagavad-gītā: daivī hy eṣā guṇa-mayī (BG 7.14). Why you cannot yourself get out of these material clutches? The reason is this: daivī hy eṣā. It is, material clutches is so powerful. You cannot get out. It is not possible. Daivī hy eṣā guṇa-mayī mama māyā duratyayā. "This material nature, which is My energy," Lord Kṛṣṇa says, "it is very strong, very strong." In the history you'll never find that anybody has overcome the laws of material nature by his own effort. No. It is not possible.
Now, the Vedas or the scriptures, why they are made? This... It is not practically made, but it is coming down by traditional process, by hearing. Just like we accept our father by hearing. A child is born, and when the child sees his other brothers and sisters calling a gentleman "father," he also begins to say "father." There is no question of studying. By hearing. How does a child learns to call the father a father? Because he hears. Others are calling "father," so he also calls "father." There is no evidence. There is no study. Similarly, the Vedic knowledge was coming by hearing. There was no need of book. But when this age, Kali-yuga, began, five thousand years before, they were recorded, and systematically... Vedas, first there was only one Veda, Atharva Veda. Then Vyāsadeva, just to make it clear, divided into four and entrusted his various disciples to take charge of one school of Veda. Then again he made Mahābhārata, Purāṇas, just to make the Vedic knowledge understandable by the common man in different ways. But the principle is the same.
So that process of reviving... There are different paths, different rituals. So Lord Caitanya says that no other method... Not only... Not Caitanya, but the Vedic literature says. So He is quoting one evidence from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: na sādhayati māṁ yogaḥ. The Lord says that "The yoga process cannot achieve success in reaching Me." Na sāṅkhyam. Sāṅkhyam means philosophical speculation. "That also cannot reach Me." Na dharma. Dharma means religious principles. Uddhava: "O My dear Uddhava." This is an instruction just like Lord Kṛṣṇa gave instruction to Arjuna in the Bhagavad-gītā; similarly, He gave instruction to one of His cousin-brothers whose name was Uddhava. And that is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. 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.
So if you want God, Kṛṣṇa, then there is no other way except this devotional service. Neither yoga, neither philosophical speculation, neither ritualistic performances, nor study in the Vedic literature, neither penance, austerities... All these formulas which are recommended for transcendental realization, they may help us to advance to a certain extent, but if you want personal touch with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, then you have to adopt this devotional service, Kṛṣṇa consciousness. There is no other way.
So Lord Caitanya, giving evidence from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam... He is giving:
- bhaktyāham ekayā grāhyaḥ
- śraddhayātmā priyaḥ sataṁ
- bhaktiḥ punāti man-niṣṭhā
- śva-pākān api sambhavāt
There is another verse in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The Lord says... The same chapter in which Lord Kṛṣṇa instructed Uddhava... Uddhava was also one of His cousin-brothers in the family. He was a great devotee, Uddhava. He was more advanced than Arjuna. There are different grades of devotees. The first-class devotees were the gopīs, the damsels of Vṛndāvana. Nobody could be compared with their devotional service. So next were Uddhava, then Arjuna. There are different grades of devotees also. So Uddhava was also a great devotee of (the) Lord, and he was also instructed similarly, just like Arjuna was instructed.
So you... Impersonal conception of Godhead, localized conception of Godhead or universal form of God, pantheism, monism—they are not perfect. If you want to know perfectly, then bhakti... It is stated in everywhere, in all Vedic literatures, evidentially in Bhagavad-gītā, which is present before us, in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Caitanya-caritāmṛta. Everywhere you will find this only way, that devotional service. Bhaktyā mām abhijānāti yāvān yaś cāsmi tattvataḥ (BG 18.55). Tattvataḥ means "in fact." Partially you can know, but in complete... Of course, God cannot be known in complete, but the highest point a human being or a living entity can reach... That, the only process, through bhakti... Bhaktyāham ekayā grāhyaḥ śraddhayātmā priyaḥ satām. Śraddhā ātmā priyaḥ satām. That bhakti, that process of devotional service, is very dear to the actual transcendentalist, very dear. Bhaktiḥ punāti man-niṣṭhā. Man-niṣṭhā. To know simply "I believe in God," that is not sufficient. The ultimate goal is to attain very intimate relationship or love of Godhead. That is required. Of course, to know, to believe in God, to accept God, that is all right.
So duṣkṛtina class, na māṁ duṣkṛtina mūḍhā. Mūḍha means less intelligent or foolish class men. Na māṁ duṣkṛtina mūḍhā prapadyante. "They do not accept Me," narādhama, "the lowest of the mankind." "No, they have got very much educated." Kṛṣṇa says, māyayāpahṛta-jñānā. "Yes, they are educated, but their knowledge has been taken away by māyā." Why? Āsuri-bhāvam āśritāḥ. "Because they have taken to this view, 'There is no God.' " On this account they cannot understand in spite of high degrees of university education. Māyāyapahrta-jñāna. So Kṛṣṇa says like that. The only reason is because duṣkṛtina mūḍhā māyayāpahṛta-jñānā āsuri-bhāvam... Therefore, in spite of all evidences from the śāstras, they'll not accept Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Lord, Personality of Godhead. That's it. Just like Prahlāda Mahārāja requested his father so many times, but still, he did not agree that there is God. (break) But he agreed there is God when he was killed by God. Yes. That you cannot escape. Then you'll see God: "Here is God." The asuras, they'll never accept God, but when they are killed by God, they understand that "Yes, there is God." That is the difference between asuras and devas. The devas, they accept God while living, and the asuras accept God by being killed. That's all. And who can escape killing? Is there any scientist, is there any philosopher, any great man who can stop being killed by the cruel death? Is there any man? That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, mṛtyuḥ sarva-haraś cāham (BG 10.34).
So as we have seen that Lord Caitanya, when He instructs, He gives at once evidence from authoritative scripture, that is the way of presenting. Always you should remember that we cannot imagine about God: "I think God is like this." This is nonsense. You have no thinking power. You are under the grip of material nature. He is pulling. The material nature is pulling you by the ear, just like this. Prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni guṇaiḥ karmāṇi sarvaśaḥ (BG 3.27). You are being acted, influenced. Just like the same example: You are thrown in the Atlantic Ocean. You have no power. By the waves you will have to work. The waves are tossing this way and that way. You are simply struggling. That's all. So how we can think independently within the tossing of Atlantic Ocean? This is all nonsense. So we cannot imagine, we cannot concoct, about God. We have to hear from authoritative scripture, authoritative version. Then we will understand. So here is authoritative version from Brahma-saṁhitā:
- īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ
- sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ
- anādir ādir govindaḥ
- sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam
- (Bs. 5.1)
The Brahma-saṁhitā describing about Kṛṣṇa, that īśvara, Lord... There are many lords. We have got experience. In England you will find many lords. We had some dealing with Lord Zetland, Marquis of Zetland. There are many lords. In your country also there are many lords. Any rich man is lord. In our country also there are many lords. But Kṛṣṇa is not a lord like them. These lords are under the grip of material nature. They are lord by name. But as soon as the material nature gives a slap on the lord, at once passed, everything lordship finished. So He is not a lord like that. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ. He is Lord, but the Supreme Lord. He is not under anyone's control. Here the stamped lord, rubber-stamped lord, they are under full control. So they may say that "I am lord of all I survey," but it is all foolishness. Nobody is lord. The real Lord is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore it is said, īśvaraḥ paramaḥ. Parama means Supreme. And who is that Supreme Lord? Kṛṣṇa. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1).
So Lord Caitanya has explained the particular features of Kṛṣṇa, and He's giving evidence from Brahma-saṁhitā and other authentic Vedic literatures. So we have concluded that Kṛṣṇa is the origin. Origin. There are many demigods, gods, and living entities, energies, millions and millions. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). There is no estimate. But He is the origin of all. Just like in your New York City there are so many manifestation of electricity, but the origin is the powerhouse, similarly, He is the origin, powerhouse. Sarvādi, sarvāṁśī. He is the whole, and everything is part. And He is always just like a young boy of sixteen years old. And His body is transcendental, spiritual, full of bliss, eternity, and He is the shelter of everything. On Him everything is resting, and sarveśvara, He is the Supreme Lord.
In that place there are innumerable universes as we are seeing one. And one of these universes, there are millions and billions of planets, of which this earth is only a insignificant fragment. And in that earth, the land of America, United States, is still insignificant. And in that state, New York is still insignificant. And in that New York City, this 26 Second Avenue insignificant. And we are sitting here. So just see how much insignificant we are. And we are claiming "God." Do not know... Ṣaḍ-aiśvarya-pūrṇa. This is called ignorance. We do not know how much insignificant we are in the creation of God, and we are claiming, "God." This is called poor fund of knowledge, poor fund of knowledge.
Now Lord Caitanya says that... He's giving evidence from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is stated,
- ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ
- kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam
- indrāri-vyākulaṁ lokaṁ
- mṛḍayanti yuge yuge
- (SB 1.3.28)
Now, in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, perhaps in the Third Chapter in the First Canto, you'll find there is description of different incarnations, principal incarnations—not all the incarnations, principal, in different yugas. So in that list of incarnations you'll find Lord Kṛṣṇa's name also, Lord Rāma's name also, Lord Buddha's name also. Lord Buddha is mentioned in that list. So we, Vaiṣṇavite, we respect Lord Buddha as incarnation, incarnation. So do not think that the Hindus, they have got disregard for Lord Buddha or for Lord Jesus Christ. No. They have all regard. Anyone who comes as representative of God, or as God, as powerful incarnation, they are all welcome.
There is no reason to disbelieve that in, in the, in other planets there is no life, there is no variegatedness. No. According to Vedic literature, it is not acceptable. Each and every planet, there is variegatedness as we find in this planet. The difference is that in some of the planets earthly matter is prominent, some of the planets fiery elements are prominent. So in the sun, sun planet, fiery elements is very prominent. There the living entities and everything, they are made of fire.
So He's giving another evidence from Brahma-saṁhitā:
- yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi-
- koṭiṣv aśeṣa-vasudhādi-vibhūti-bhinnam
- tad brahma niṣkalam anantam aśeṣa-bhūtaṁ
- govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi
- (Bs. 5.40)
"I worship the primeval Lord, Govinda, whose bodily effulgence is brahma-jyotir." The brahma-jyotir, that is nothing but His bodily effulgence. And in that brahma-jyotir... Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). Or that brahma-jyotir being manifested, there are innumerable planets and universes.
It is called śānta-rasa, peaceful śānta-rasa. There is no exchange. And further development is dāsya-rasa. And further development is sākhya-rasa. And further development is vātsalya-rasa. And further, ultimate development is mādhurya-rasa. So in the spiritual atmosphere there are different degrees of realization. So this Brahman realization is the first step, and the Paramātmā realization is the second step, and Bhagavān realization, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, that is the ultimate stage.
He's giving some evidences from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and Bhagavad-gītā also:
- kṛṣṇam enam avehi tvam
- ātmānam akhilātmanām
- jagad-dhitāya so'py atra
- dehīvābhāti māyayā
Now, in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam some advanced devotee is indicating Kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇam enam avehi: "This Kṛṣṇa..." When Kṛṣṇa was present in person, many persons studied Him in a different way, but one of them, who is pure devotee, he is describing about Kṛṣṇa that enam, "This Kṛṣṇa, this Kṛṣṇa," kṛṣṇam enam avehi, "you should try to understand." What is that? Tvam ātmānam akhilātmanām. Ātmānam akhilātmanām. Ātmā means the self, or soul. So we individual souls, we are part and parcel, fragmental part and parcel of the Supreme. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is to be understood as the source of all individual selves. Akhilātmā. Akhila means all. Then jagad-dhitāya: "Now, He has come, He has descended out of His causeless mercy," jagad-dhitāya, "for the benefit of this world, this planet." Dehīva ābhāti. Just like He appears ordinary person. Ābhāti māyayā. Māyā. This māyā is not illusion. This māyā means by His internal potency. By His internal potency, He can appear just like us, but He's not like us. He's the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
Just like in photograph. In photograph you can expand yourself in millions, but that is not actually expansion. So similarly, the yogi Saubhari Ṛṣi, he expanded into eight, but that was not actually expansion. That was merely a show, just like photograph. But Kṛṣṇa's expansion, here it is compared, He actually expanded in different houses, in different feature, and differently dealing. That is mentioned in the Bhāgavata.
So He is giving evidence from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as it was experienced by Nārada. Nārada doubted that "How Kṛṣṇa is married with sixteen thousand wives, and how He is dealing with them?" So when he came, in whichever house he entered, palace, he saw Kṛṣṇa was there. Somewhere He was taking bath, somewhere He was playing with the children, somewhere... Just like if you go in different houses, the householder, you will find differently engaged.
As the father impregnates the mother, similarly, this material nature is just like mother, and therefore material nature is worshiped as mother, goddess, mother goddess, Durgā, Kālī. Yes. And this worship of the country, nationalism, that is also the same matter—worship. Yasyātma-buddhiḥ kuṇape tri-dhātuke (SB 10.84.13). So, so long we are not enlightened, we are worshiper of this matter, energy. And when we are advanced in knowledge, then we are worshiper of the Supreme. So Kṛṣṇa consciousness means advanced stage of knowledge. It is not in the material platform. Therefore anyone who is in Kṛṣṇa consciousness appropriately and thoroughly, he is liberated from material consciousness.
- svāṅga-viśeṣābhāsa-rūpe prakṛti-sparśana
- jīva-rūpa 'bīja' tāte kailā samarpaṇa
In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam there is this evidence:
- daivāt kṣubhita-dharmiṇyāṁ
- svasyāṁ yonau paraḥ pumān
- ādhatta vīryaṁ sā 'sūta
- mahat-tattvaṁ hiraṇmayam
So from this version of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, that the living entities as seeds they are coming from the spiritual world... They are not product of the matter. Therefore it is not possible to produce living entity with material chemicals and material elements. It is not possible. As some of the modern scientists, they claim that "We shall now give life," or they advertise in that way, so from this verse we can understand that it is not possible, because these living entities, they are just like seeds, and they are coming from the spiritual world, from the body of the Supreme. Those spiritual living entities are desirous of enjoying sense gratification, they are allowed to this material world, and others, they are in the spiritual world.
In this way all the universes, they enter into the body of Mahā-Viṣṇu after the creation is over and again comes out. In this way it is coming and going, coming... Bhūtvā bhūtvā pralīyate (BG 8.19). In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said that they are coming and going within. This is the way of material nature. And here is another evidence from Brahma-saṁhitā:
- yasyaika-niśvasita-kālam athāvalambya
- jīvanti loma-vilajā jagad-aṇḍa-nāthāḥ
- viṣṇur mahān sa iha yasya kalā-viśeṣo
- govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi
- (Bs. 5.48)
Now, such a vast, gigantic Mahā-Viṣṇu, of whose breathing producing these universes and whose inhaling, annihilating all the universes—such vast Mahā-Viṣṇu is only part and part of the expansion of Kṛṣṇa, or Govinda. So Brahmā says, govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi **. So just we have to imagine how much potential is the Lord Kṛṣṇa.
So here it is stated that yasyaika-niśvasita-kālam athāvalambya (Bs. 5.48). "Only just abiding by the breathing period of Mahā-Viṣṇu"—there are millions of Brahmās—"they are living." And each Brahmā's period... That you have read in the Bhagavad-gītā: sahasra-yuga-paryantam arhad yad brahmaṇo viduḥ (BG 8.17). The Brahmā's one day means 4,300,000's times 1000. That is Brahmā's twelve hours. Similarly, twenty-four hours, one day. Now calculate one month, such one years, such hundred years. So that hundred years of Brahmā is only a breathing period of Mahā-Viṣṇu, just like we are breathing, our inhalation and exhalation is going on. So during the breathing period, when the breathing is out, all these brahmāṇḍas become created, and when it is inhaled, all, they are closed, account closed. So this is going on. And such Mahā-Viṣṇu is the part, one of the fourth part of Kṛṣṇa's expansion. That is stated. Lord Caitanya is giving evidence from Brahma-saṁhitā:
- yasyaika-niśvasita-kālam athāvalambya
- jīvanti loma-vilajā jagad-aṇḍa-nāthāḥ
- viṣṇur mahān sa iha yasya kalā-viśeṣo
- govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi
- (Bs. 5.48)
"I worship that Kṛṣṇa, Govinda, whose fourth dimension, fourth expansion, is Mahā-Viṣṇu, in whose breathing period all these Brahmās, or the principal head of each brahmāṇḍa, they live."
So in one breathing of Mahā-Viṣṇu, you cannot calculate how many Manus are there. This is called unlimited. We say "unlimited," but we should have some knowledge how it is unlimited. There is no question of counting the energies displayed by the Supreme Lord in so many ways. Because we cannot explain something, we dismiss the whole thing. "There is void, nothing. Void." Because my mind, my intelligence, cannot go so far, we say, "Perhaps, maybe it was like this." So this is all mental speculation. And how we can say? Now, the opposite party may say, "How you can say?" Now, we have got evidence from the Vedic literature. But the other party, they have no evidence. They are simply speculationist. We can give some evidence. The Vedas are accepted by ācāryas, and they are following, and they are getting the result. So therefore, śruti-pramāṇa. Śruti-pramāṇa. There are three kinds of evidences. Out of that, śruti-pramāṇa, evidence from higher authorities, that is the first-class evidence. What are those evidence? Pratyakṣa, aitihya and śruti. Pratyakṣa means direct perception. Direct perception, that is evidence. People with poor fund of knowledge, they want direct perception of everything. That is not possible. Direct perception of everything is not possible. Therefore aitihya. Aitihya means historical, historical, paramparā, hearing, traditional. And the next first-class evidence is śruti. Śruti means to hear from the authority. That is śruti. Just like the example we have several times cited here that the evidence "Who is my father?" that evidence is to hear from my mother. That's all. There is no other evidence. The mother says that "This is your father. He is your father." This is śruti, hearing from the mother, authority. And we have no other authority to understand father. Similarly, we have to understand our supreme father from the śruti mother, Vedas mother, mother Vedic mother. We have to accept Vedas as mother, śruti. The Vedas are considered as mother, and the Purāṇas are considered as sister. That is explained. So, śruti-pramāṇa, śruti-pramāṇa.
Now śāstra, the scripture, is the most first-class evidence, sarvajña munira vā..., sarvajña... Because śāstras are written not by ordinary person. Not by Rabindranath Tagore, a sex play. (?) No. (laughs) Śāstras are written by liberated persons. Therefore śāstra, scripture, have got so many advantages and so much respect. So therefore Lord said: sarvajña munira vākya-śāstra-'paramāṇa'. Śāstra paramāṇa. Just like (we) see in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, four hundred thousands of years after there will be avatāra, Kalki, and His father's name, His birthplace, is already mentioned there. This is called śāstra. Five thousand years before Bhāgavata was written, and there is indication that in such and such age, in such and such province, in such and such family, Lord Buddha will appear. That is written there. And five thousand years before, ago, the, the symptoms of Kali-yuga is already written there. And we are experiencing.
So here it is said, sarvajña munira vākya-śāstra-'paramāṇa.' Therefore... Tasmāt śāstra pramāṇa ante. In the Bhagavad-gītā also, that everything should act, should be acted in terms of the śāstra. Just like when you go to post something, you are, you are directed by the postal guide. Śāstra pramāṇa only. So Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, as Kṛṣṇa has given stress upon the evidence, on the scripture, similarly, Lord Caitanya also is giving stress. The question is very interesting. The question is how one should accept a person or a body as incarnation. Lord Caitanya says that through śāstra, by the evidence of śāstra. So many fools, they are presenting themselves as incarnation. An intelligent person should see whether this fool is mentioned in the śāstra. He's presenting himself as incarnation. Whether his activities are, his characteristics is mentioned in the śāstra? Then accept. Otherwise, don't accept. This will be discussed more.
There are different kinds of authorities. First authority is śāstra, authorized śāstra, scripture. There the description of avatāra, the characteristics and his work, they are mentioned there. And prabalaiś ca śāstrair. Prabala means the very powerful. Just like Vedānta philosophy, it is very powerful. Bhagavad-gītā, it is very powerful. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, it is very powerful. So even we give evidences from these powerful śāstras, not only that, prakhyāta-daiva-paramārtha-vidāṁ mattaiś ca, with the opinion of great stalwarts like prakhyāta, very famous. Who is that? Just like Vyāsadeva. Who can be more famous than Vyāsadeva? He's the compiler of all Vedic literatures in the world, Vyāsadeva. And Nārada, he's greatest ṛṣi, sage. Asita, Devala—there are many. Vasiṣṭha. There are many stalwarts. And especially these twelve person, just like Brahmā, Lord Śiva, Manu, Kapila, Mahārāja Prahlāda, Bhīṣma. There are authorities. So even their evidences in the authorized scriptures, even they are accepted by great stalwarts and sages and munis, still, the asura prakṛti, those who are atheistic persons, they'll never accept. They'll never accept. They'll simply go on arguing.
Now how the two different characteristics of God can be analyzed, that is mentioned in the beginning of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Lord Caitanya is referring. Lord Caitanya's mission as preaching was based on, cent percent, on the principles of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. And Bhagavad-gītā is the basic, I mean to say, preliminary study of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Therefore in Caitanya-caritāmṛta you'll find most of the parallel passages and evidences offered by Lord Caitanya, they are from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and Bhagavad-gītā and some of the Purāṇas. Just like Viṣṇu Purāṇa, Padma Purāṇa, they are called sattvika purāṇa, purāṇas in the modes of goodness. There are eighteen purāṇas, six for each quality, modes of the nature. Six, six purāṇas for the person who are in the modes of ignorance, six purāṇas for the person who are in the modes of passion, and six purāṇas for persons who are in the mode of goodness, those who are actually qualified brāhmaṇas. So Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is called Mahā-purāṇa. Mahā-purāṇa means the topmost of all the purāṇas. You have seen the review by the Theosophical Society of India of my books. They have stated this very word, Mahā-purāṇa, Bhāgavatam, the Mahā-purāṇa.
So Lord Caitanya gives evidences from the Mahā-purāṇam, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, that the Supreme Lord, the Absolute Truth, is analyzed in two characteristics. What are they? The, the personal characteristics and taṭastha characteristics. Taṭastha means they are sometimes manifested and they are not sometimes manifested. So this material world is the taṭastha characteristics, and the spiritual world is the personal characteristics. So our effort is to get out of this taṭastha, or, I mean to say, taṭastha means marginal, marginal characteristics to the permanent characteristics. That is called spiritual elevation. We should not remain in the marginal state, but we should go to the permanent state.
Āgama-purāṇa means Vedic literature. Āgama, "which is coming from higher plane," not manufactured here. Āgama-purāṇa. And Purāṇa means the old history of the world, Purāṇa. Purāṇa, some of the modern scholars, they take everything as mythology, imagination. That is not fact. They're real history. Purāṇa. Purāṇa means very old. Nityaḥ śāśvato yaṁ purāṇo (BG 2.20). In Hindi it is called Purāṇa. Purāṇa means old. The Purāṇas means the old history, not only of this world, but of the whole universe. Purāṇa is also Vedic evidence. Purāṇa is not ordinary thing. Therefore here it is said, āgama-purāṇa. Vedic literatures. Śrīla Madhvācārya has accepted the Vedic literatures—four Vedas, Vedānta-sūtra, Upaniṣads, Purāṇas, Rāmāyaṇa, Mahābhārata. They're all Vedic literature. So here it is said, kono brahmāṇḍe. (aside:) Come here. This room is very nice. Yes. Although it is not very big, but very comfortable. Dakṣina, dakṣina-rāja.
And in each and every planet there are innumerable devotees. He's surrounded by the innumerable devotees. And He's reciting evidences, verse from Brahma-saṁhitā:
- goloka-nāmni nija-dhāmni tale ca tasya
- devī-maheśa-hari-dhāmasu teṣu teṣu
- te te prabhāva-nicayā vihitāś ca yena
- govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi
- (Bs. 5.43)
His own personal planet is Goloka Vṛndāvana, and below that planet there are many other, innumerable planets which are known as Vaikuṇṭha. And below that spiritual world there is material world. And between material world and spiritual world there is another space, which is called Śivaloka. And below that Śivaloka is this Devī-dhāma. This material is called Devī-dhāma. Durgā. The presiding deity of this Devī-dhāma is Durgā. He's giving evidences from many authentic Vedic literatures. One of them is Brahma-saṁhitā. Then He's giving another evidence from Padma Purāṇa, the existence of spiritual planets. In Indian spiritual society the evidences are given from Vedic literature. Then it is accepted, not that mental speculationist's theory, "I think this. I think that..." No. Just the same example I have several times cited before you, that the law court, they give evidences from the lawbook, sections from the lawbook. Similarly, the process is whenever we speak something transcendental subject, if we can pick up evidences from Vedic literatures... There are many authentic Vedic literatures. They are accepted by the spiritual societies. And one's learning is proved if he can give evidences from these Vedic literatures. Similarly Lord Caitanya, whatever He is speaking, He's giving immediately references from Vedic literature. So, so far the existence of the spiritual world and different planets, spiritual planets, Vaikuṇṭha and Kṛṣṇaloka, one may think... Of course, those who have no knowledge, they may think that these are all stories. No, they are not stories. They are actual facts, and Lord Caitanya is giving evidences from Brahma-saṁhitā, from Padma Purāṇa, and similar other Vedic literatures.
Now He gives again evidence from scriptures. Every step, whatever He says, He gives some evidence from authoritative scripture. Mostly He gives evidence from Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, because for the Vaiṣṇava school these two books are sufficient for acquiring knowledge. So far Vedānta-sūtra is concerned, Bhāgavata is Vedānta-sūtra itself. Bhāgavata is the natural commentary on the, on the Vedānta-sūtra. Therefore one who has sufficient knowledge in Bhāgavata, he has automatically sufficient knowledge in Vedānta-sūtra. According to Vedic system, one must have sufficient knowledge in Vedānta-sūtra. Then he'll be considered as learned in spiritual science. So Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, although the Vaiṣṇavas, they have got their commentaries on Vedānta-sūtra, but this Caitanya Mahāprabhu's sampradāya, they did not make any commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra because they belonged to the disciplic succession of Vyāsadeva. So Vyāsadeva is the spiritual master. So the later ācāryas, they did not think it proper that whatever the... Because their spiritual master has had already made a commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, "Oh, that is sufficient. Why should we do again?" These are some of the etiquette. Anyway, the Vedānta-sūtra... And Bhāgavata is natural commentary on Vedānta-sūtra, and Lord Caitanya therefore gives evidence from the Bhāgavata generally and Purāṇas also, and Mahābhārata and every, I mean to say, Upaniṣad. They are all authorities. But especially He gives evidences from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Now, so far, in confirmation of this statement that knowledge, cultivation of knowledge, is not sufficient to give one liberation—one must take to devotional service. Devotional service past knowledge is just like gold with flavor. Yes. So, of course, those who are engaged in devotional service, their knowledge automatically comes. They are not fools.
So Lord Caitanya gives one evidence from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam from Tenth Canto:
- śreyaḥ-sṛtiṁ bhaktim udasya te vibho
- kliśyanti ye kevala-bodha-labdhaye
- teṣām asau kleśala eva śiṣyate
- nānyad yathā sthūla-tuṣāvaghātinām
Real knowledge means to understand the last word of the Absolute Truth, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and surrender unto Him, after knowledge. As it is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā, bahūnāṁ janmanām ante: (BG 7.19) "After many, many births, one who is actually in knowledge, he surrenders." So Śrīmad-Bhāgavata practically confirms the same, that śreyaḥ-sṛtiṁ bhaktim udasya te vibho. Any person who does not take to the devotional service in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, simply indulge in dry speculation, kliśyanti, takes trouble... Kliśyanti means "takes trouble"; ye, "persons." Kevala-bodha-lab..., simply to understand that "This is not matter, this is not spirit, this is not...," like that, and that there is no separate Supersoul, only one soul is there, and this conception of individual soul is misunderstanding, ignorance—in this way, there are volumes of books of, by Śaṅkarācārya especially, and later on, his disciples.
Similarly, a learned politician, able administrator, minus Kṛṣṇa consciousness... Similarly, a successful businessman minus Kṛṣṇa consciousness... Or the śūdras... Anyone, if he is minus Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then the result is that svakarma karite se raurave paḍi' maje: "By doing, by executing his specific duty, he's going to hell." Hell. It is fact. He's thinking that "I am doing my duty," but he's going to hell. So this is a version of Lord Caitanya Maha... He, even if he does his duty very nicely, still, he's going to hell. Raurave paḍi' maje. Raurave means hell.
And again He gives evidence from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:
- mukha-bāhūru-pādebhyaḥ
- puruṣasyāśramaiḥ saha
- catvāro jajñire varṇā
- guṇair viprādayaḥ pṛthak
- ya eṣāṁ puruṣaṁ sākṣād-
- ātma-prabhavam īśvaram
- na bhajanty avajānanti
- sthānād bhraṣṭāḥ patanty adhaḥ
In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavata, Eleventh Canto, these two verses are there. What is that? Mukha-bāhūru-pādebhyaḥ puruṣasyāśramaiḥ saha. Now, according to Vedic conception of social life, there are four divisions of social order and four divisions of spiritual order. The four divisions of social order is the brāhmaṇas, kṣatriya, vaiśya and śūdra; and spiritual order is the sannyāsī, vānaprastha, gṛhastha and brahmacārī. To become a brahmacārī means to make advance in spiritual life. And the social order is there, the brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas.
You are not whole. How you can be whole? So there are so many examples that think ourself that "I am the Supreme. I am the whole." Just the other day I was speaking to you: it is the last snare. We are not whole. We are part and parcel. Just..., just the hand in healthy condition, as part and parcel of the body, is very nice. When the hand is working in his position, that position is very nice. But when it is not working—it is in diseased condition—do you think it is very nice? No. Paralyzed hand, simply in the name it is hand, but it has no function. So that sort of understanding, without actually reinstated in the healthy state of our spiritual life, simply thinking that "I am now spiritually realized; I am the Supreme," this is not pure. So Lord Caitanya says, vastutaḥ buddhi 'śuddha' nahe: "That sort of conception is not purified intelligence. That is still contaminated intelligence."
Then He is giving an evidence again from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:
- ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas
- tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ
- āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ
- patanty adho 'nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ
- (SB 10.2.32)
This is prayer to the Lord by Brahmā, who says that ye 'ravindākṣa... Kṛṣṇa is sometimes addressed as the lotus-eyed because His eye... He's very beautiful. So anyone who has got his eyes just like petals of the lotus flower, it is considered very beautiful. So He, He's addressed, aravindākṣa, "O the lotus-eyed..." Vimukta-māninaḥ. "Those who are thinking falsely that 'I am now liberated. I have realized myself that I am the same. I am God,' " vimukta-māninaḥ tvayy asta-bhāvāt, "but he has no information of Kṛṣṇa... He's thinking artificially that he is liberated, but he has no information of Kṛṣṇa."
So we may not... Just like the sun is so many millions miles away but he is..., sun can be present before us by his sunshine, his potency, sun's potency, energy. Similarly, these are all Kṛṣṇa's spiritual energies, and He is compared with the sun because He is the original sun. Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). From the spiritual planet, Goloka Vṛndāvana, the glowing effulgence, brahma-jyotir, is coming out. How it is coming out? That we can very easily understand. As the sunshine is coming out, emanating incessantly from the sun disc, similarly the real sunshine, brahma-jyotir, is coming out of the spiritual planet Goloka Vṛndāvana incessantly. That is called brahma-jyotir. Yasya prabhā prabhavato (Bs. 5.40). And due to that incessant shining, all the shining which you are experiencing, even this lamp, even this electricity, fire, moonshine, sunshine, any shining, that is due to that brahma-jyotir. So yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). In that shining, this material world, the spiritual world, they are resting. So impersonalists, they are concerned with the shining, that's all. The difference between the personalists and impersonalists is that impersonalists, they take that shining as final. But the personalists, they take, "No. Kṛṣṇa is final." That is their difference of opinion. Otherwise, both of them in the spiritual realm. And so far Kṛṣṇa is the cause of brahma-jyotir, there are many evidences from Vedic literature. In Īśopaniṣad and other Upaniṣads, in Bhagavad-gītā also, the Lord says, brahmaṇaḥ ahaṁ pratiṣṭhā: "I am the source of brahma-jyotir." You'll find in the Fourteenth Chapter, last verse, brahmaṇaḥ ahaṁ jyoti.
The speciality of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu was that He used to put very sound arguments, and He used to defeat His opponents in such a way that they were satisfied. They were not inimical. And with the evidence of śāstra. Not that argumentum vaculum. He was putting reasonable arguments and evidences from śāstra, scripture. Sarva-śāstra khaṇḍi' prabhu bhakti kare sāra. And the beauty was that He was defeating all other arguments against devotional service. He was establishing only that God is great, and we are meant for serving Him. On this basis He was arguing and He was defeating others.
So these things are going on. These things are nothing. They are symptoms of falling down, nothing more. They are symptoms of falling down. They cannot do a bit of benefit to the humanity. The laws of nature is so strict that if you have to suffer, nobody can check you. That is realized of Prahlāda Mahārāja. There are so many evidences. Bālasya neha pitarau śaraṇam. So there are children. There are children. Of course, here a different..., but there are many children, they have got their parents, but they are suffering. Actually, children who have got their parents, they take care. But in spite of their parents being present, they are suffering for want of foods, want of proper management. Therefore it is to be understood that father and mother is not actually the, I mean to say, responsible men to take care of children. Then bālasya neha śaraṇaṁ pitarau nārtasya cāgadam. Ārtasya, those who are suffering, for them, those who are suffering from disease, medicine is not all. Suppose one man is suffering. You give him all treatment and medicine. There are many rich men, they can spend like anything. But does it mean that he'll be cured? No. He may not be cured. He may not be cured. The parents, even in the presence of parents, the children may suffer. Udanvato, nauḥ. And suppose you have got very good, nice ship. Do you mean to say that you'll cross over the Atlantic Ocean safely? Oh, at any moment it can be drowned. There is no guarantee. You have got very nice jet plane, you are going to San Francisco. Oh, there is no guarantee that you shall reach there. So therefore, unless there is God's sanction, all these remedies, all these protection is useless. Useless.
So śruti, śruti means the Vedas. The Vedas clearly say that all these manifestation, they are out of the energy. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). From this fountainhead, from the Supreme Source, the energies. Just like the electric light, it is very brilliant, illuminating. But this is energy emanating from the powerhouse. The powerhouse is person. It is managed by a person, executive engineer or resident engineer. So when you go, the government, United States, externally, ephemerally, it appears imperson, but if you go deep into the matter, you see that there is president, a person. So ultimately, a person, Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, ultimately. That is the evidence from all Vedic scriptures. Tāhā nāhi māni, paṇḍita kare upahāsa. And these impersonalists, they do not accept this personal aspect of the Absolute Truth, and they laugh at the devotees, "Oh, what they are doing? They are less..." They are thinking that the devotees are less intelligent. And the devotees, they are also thinking that less intelligent. But you have to decide who is less intelligent. If you, from the Vedic literature, if you do not accept the decision... And the essence of Vedic literature is Bhagavad, Bhagavad-gītā, and it is clearly stated there. When understood..., Arjuna understood Bhagavad-gītā, he clearly accepted Him that paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān (BG 10.12), "You are the Supreme Lord, and nobody knows Your personality." So personality is accepted. Caitanya Mahāprabhu also says that the verdict of all Vedic literatures is to accept the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
This is the secret of modern fashionable interpretation. If you want to establish... Suppose you have got some conviction, and if you want to establish it by evidence of an approved literature... An approved literature. Just like Gandhi. Gandhi wanted to establish nonviolence from Bhagavad-gītā. He was a... He is known to be a great student of Bhagavad-gītā, but he was not at all. His political theory was that he wanted to conquer over the enemies by nonviolence method. Nonviolent noncooperation, that was his, I mean to say, theory. He wanted to get away all kinds of nonviolence from the world, all kinds of violence from the world. So he wanted to prove from Bhagavad-gītā nonviolence. But how you can prove nonviolence from Bhagavad-gītā? Because Bhagavad-gītā is being spoken in the violent battlefield. But because he wanted to prove nonviolence, therefore he says, "Oh, these Pāṇḍavas means this. This Kṛṣṇa means this. This chariot means this. These Kurus means this. Dharmakṣetra means this. Kurukṣetra means this." He has invented and manufactured so many rascal meaning that it is very difficult... He said that dharmakṣetre... In the beginning of Bhagavad-gītā there is the verse, dharmakṣetre kurukṣetre samavetā yuyutsavaḥ (BG 1.1). Now the very word yuyutsavaḥ means persons who are desiring to fight with one another. Now, how you can prove nonviolence? But he extracts some meaning: "These Pāṇḍava means five senses and the Kurukṣetra means this body." In this way, his interpretation.
Sri Isopanisad Lectures
So that is the proof. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). Tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā. If you argue, there is no conclusion. The argument will go on. You put some argument; I put some argument. That is not the process. Śrutayo vibhinnā. Scriptures, in different countries, different circumstances, different scriptures, they're also different. Then tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. And so far philosophical speculation is concerned, one philosopher is putting some theory, another philosopher putting some theory—there is contradiction. And unless you defy another philosopher, you cannot be a famous philosopher. That is the way of philosophical...
Then where, how to get real information? That is stated, that dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyām. The secret of religious process is lying in the cave or within the heart. So how to realize it? Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). You have to follow great personalities. Therefore we are trying to follow Lord Kṛṣṇa or Lord Caitanya. That is perfection. You have to take evidences from the Vedas. You have to follow the instruction. The success is sure. That's all.
So if you want real knowledge, then you have to take shelter of these Vedas, Vedic literature, just like Īśopaniṣad. There are 108 Upaniṣads, out of which, nine are very important. Out of that nine, this Īśopaniṣad stands first, then Taittirīya Upaniṣad, Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad, Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad. So the Upaniṣad... Upa, upa means nearing. So this knowledge will take you nearer to Kṛṣṇa. And amongst the learned society, ācāryas, the śruti-pramāṇa... Evidence is śruti. Śruti means these Vedas. They are not experimental knowledge. They are not knowledge established by the research work of contaminated, conditioned soul. Contaminated, conditioned soul, their senses are imperfect. They cannot see things as they are. Simply they theorize, "It may be like that." So much they can say. So "It may be like that," that is no knowledge. Knowledge definite. There is no mistake. Conditioned souls, they commit mistake, they are illusioned, they cheat... Cheating means one who does not understand what is Bhagavad-gītā but he is writing commentary on Bhagavad-gītā. This is cheating, cheating the public. Somebody has got some name, a scholar, and he takes advantage of the popularity of Bhagavad-gītā, and he writes some comment. And they claim that anyone can give his own opinion. But that is not the process. You cannot give any opinion.
So these planets are covered by the brahma-jyotir effulgence. So here it is prayed that hiraṇmayena pātreṇa satyasya apihitam. Apihitam means covered. Just like you cannot see the sun globe on account of this dazzling sunshine, similarly, the Kṛṣṇa planet, here you have the picture. From the Kṛṣṇa planet the effulgence is coming out. So one has to penetrate this effulgence. That is being prayed here. Hiraṇmayena pātreṇa satyasya. The real Absolute Truth, Kṛṣṇa, His planet is covered by the Brahman effulgence. So the devotee is praying, "Kindly move it. Wind it so that I can see You really." So brahma-jyotir, the Māyāvāda philosophers, they do not know that beyond brahma-jyotir there is anything. Here is the Vedic evidence, that the brahma-jyotir is just like golden effulgence. Hiraṇmayena pātreṇa. This is covering the real face of the Supreme Lord. Tat tvaṁ pūṣann apāvṛṇu. So, "You are sustainer, You are maintainer. Kindly uncover this so that we can see You actually, Your face."
Just like evidence. Evidence... (aside:) Now you can sit down. Evidence, whenever we want to give evidence... Just like in law court, the evidence, you have to cite the section or the preamble of the laws. Similarly, in our human civilization this evidence is Vedas. If you find something stated in the Vedas, that you have to accept. That's all. Axiomatic truth. And because the Vedas were particularly studied by the brāhmaṇas, high-class qualified brāhmaṇas, therefore they are also accepted as authority. Just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu, when He was at Purī, the king of that place, Mahārāja Pratāparudra, he inquired from Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, "Oh, what is your opinion about this Caitanya who has come here?" He said that "He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead." So the king immediately accepted it. King said, "Oh, He is Supreme Personality of Godhead?" So he accepted immediately, just like... There is no question of experimenting. Because an authority like Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya is stating, a brāhmaṇa and... He was very learned scholar. You know Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya's name. So because he said that "He is Supreme Personality..." He did not ask any storekeeper, but he asked a learned brāhmaṇa who knows things. So similarly, we have to accept in that way. In each and every case, if we want to research, it is not possible, because our senses are blunt senses. What you can do? Acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṁs tarkeṇa yojayet. The śāstra says that "Things which are beyond your conception, beyond your mental speculation"—avāṅ-manasā gocaraḥ—"neither you can express by words, neither you can think of." Avāṅ-manasā gocaraḥ.
Festival Lectures
They are hoping against hope to become happy within this material world. That is the whole history. Take the history, any history, modern history. There are so many empires: the Roman Empire, the Carthaginian Empire, the Greek Empire, the British Empire recently, Hitler's Nazism, and so many. For some time they become very powerful. Just like Hiraṇyakaśipu, he's now very powerful. He's thinking, "Nobody can..." Now today he'll be killed. Keśava-dhṛta narahari rūpa is coming. So this demonic civilization will never be successful. That's a fact. But they are so fool, they do not see even historical evidences. So many empires failed. The Roman Empire failed, the British Empire failed. Still, somebody is trying to create another empire, another, different empire. Just like your President Nixon, he's trying to influence all other nations under his control. Why? Of course, I should not speak all these things. There may be criticism. But that is the way, going on. That is the way. We can understand. We can understand politics, economics, everything, but we do not bother about. But our aim is that this way of life, to increase materially happiness, it will never be successful. That is our conclusion. We are not fools that we have given up everything for advance in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Because we know that this, this way we shall never be happy. It is not possible.
So we are creating the descendants of Gosvāmīs here in the Western countries. You are also chanting and dancing, following the footprints of the Gosvāmīs, kṛṣṇotkīrtana-gāna-nartana-parau. And they were chanting and dancing, not dry. Premāmṛtāmbho-nidhi, dipped into the ocean of love of Kṛṣṇa. You cannot chant and dance for a long time unless you are dipped into the ocean of love of Kṛṣṇa. That is the specific qualification of the dancer and chanter. If you ask somebody to chant and dance for one hour, he'll get tired. But this chanting and dancing is so nice that these Gosvāmīs, they can go on chanting and dancing for twenty-four hours. Premāmṛtāmbho-nidhi. Because they were dipped into the ocean of love of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇotkīrtana-gāna-nartana-parau premāmṛtāmbho-nidhi dhīrādhīra-jana-priyau. Dhīra, dhīra means gentle, and adhīra means ruffians, not gentle. So they were affectionate and popular both to the gentle as well as ruffians, these Gosvāmīs. Everyone liked them. Kṛṣṇa consciousness is so nice that unless one is a staunch atheist, everyone will like this Kṛṣṇa conscious movement. As an evidence, people are receiving these boys who are chanting and dancing. Out of their love they are contributing something, they are purchasing magazines. So this is sympathy, sign of love. So they are not, of course, very big business magnate or politicians; they are common men. But it is appealing to the common people. There is no doubt about it.
Arrival Addresses and Talks
Yes. So Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura has also said, chāḍiyā vaiṣṇava-sevā, nistāra pāyeche kebā. Our this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is for nistāra. Nistāra means to be liberated from the capture of māyā. That is called nistāra, release, release from the capture of māyā. So Vaiṣṇava... Chāḍiyā vaiṣṇava-sevā, nistāra pāyeche kebā. Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura, another Vaiṣṇava... As it sung by Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura, similarly, you know that Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura, he also has sung many song, approved songs. Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura says that Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura's songs are Vedic evidence. All Vaiṣṇavas, songs are like that, Vedic evidence. There is no mistake, cheating, imperfectness or illusion. Conditioned soul, they are manufacturing by mental concoction. That is another thing. They are full of imperfection, illusion, mistake and cheating. But when we hear songs by the Vaiṣṇava, that is for liberation.
Initiation Lectures
So the Māyāvāda philosophy... This Buddha philosophy is also another Māyāvāda philosophy. Both of them are, on the face value, atheistic, denying the existence of God. One is saying, "There is no God"; another is saying, "It is impersonal," in this way. But our philosophy is neither atheistic nor impersonal. It is directly person. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Directly we say, "There is no..." Kṛṣṇa, in the Bhagavad-gītā, says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nāsti: "There is nobody greater than Me." If God is great, how anybody can be greater than Him? It is right. Eh? Nānyat parataraṁ nāsti: "There is nothing more greater than Me." Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ: (BG 10.8) "I am the origin of everything." Vedānta-sūtra says, "Brahman, or the Supreme Absolute Truth, is the source of everything." And here is the direct answer by Kṛṣṇa, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ: "I am the source of everything." So we follow this philosophy. Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement means we directly take Bhagavad-gītā as the evidence of existence of God. And if you want to know God, you cannot know God by speculation. He is so great, He is so unlimited, and we have got limited senses, limited capacity. It is not possible. Simply we can understand God by the mercy of God. So here is the mercy of God, Kṛṣṇa, He Himself speaking about Himself. You learn God. God is speaking about Himself. You haven't got to speculate. And He, by His pastimes, by His activities, He... (aside:) What is that sound coming? That is car? Oh. By His activities, He proved Himself that He is complete God. From His childhood.
This is a misconception that especially in your country, in the Western countries, it is advertised that the Hindus have many Gods. We are not concerned with the Hindu-Muslim; we are concerned with Kṛṣṇa. So actually in the Vedas accepted one God. Eka brahma dvitīya nāsti. There is no second. God cannot be two. God is one. It is a misconception, there are many Gods. There are Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that "You worship any demigod. It is the same thing." They misinterpret the Bhagavad-gītā śloka, ye yathā māṁ prapadyante: (BG 4.11). "You can worship Me in any way." The Māyāvādī philosophers, there is a great missionary activities in India. They have got their branch here also. They propagate that "You may worship any demigod, goddess Kali or this or that. Everything is all right." No. God is one, and that is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. That is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān (SB 1.3.28). Even incarnation of God, they are part and parcel. They are bigger part. Just like we are, living entities, we are also part and parcel, Viṣṇu-tattva, they are also part and parcel, but nobody can excel Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. That is the verdict. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). There are so many evidences, Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme. And Kṛṣṇa Himself says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nāsti: "There is no more superior than Me," in the Bhagavad-gītā. So God is one, and that is Kṛṣṇa.
So we have got many śāstric evidences how one can become completely sinless simply by chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra and observing very strictly the four prohibitive rules and regulations. I hope those who are initiated today, you have promised before Kṛṣṇa-Balarāma Deity, before Vaiṣṇava, and before the fire to give up these habits and do not take to... Even if you are practiced now, you do not take it again. This is the process of Caitanya Mahāprabhu's initiation. Caitanya Mahāprabhu appeared to deliver all the sinful men. Pāpī tāpī yata chilo, harināme uddhārilo, tāra sākṣī jagāi and mādhāi. Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura said that "Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu (is) so merciful that He delivered all kinds of sinful men," pāpī tāpī, "all types of suffering from material disease." And what is the medicine? Pāpī tāpī yata chilo, harināme uddhārilo. And evidence? Tāra sākṣī jagāi and mādhāi. You see Jagāi-Mādhāi. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu exhibited one example, to deliver Jagāi-Mādhāi. Jagāi-Mādhāi means they were born in a very aristocratic brāhmaṇa family but by bad association they became illicit sex, woman-hunter, drunkards and meat-eaters and gamblers. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu, through the mercy of Nityānanda Prabhu, delivered them. And the only promise was that "You promise no more this sinful life. Then I accept you." So if we give up our sinful activity, immediately Caitanya Mahāprabhu takes you. There is no condition, because in this age everyone is addicted to sinful life, but he simply promises that "Henceforward I shall not act anything sinfully," these four principles. Then you go back to home, back to Godhead.
Wedding Ceremonies
The boys and girls, they are not allowed free mixing before marriage. Especially... Both the boys... Here, one of our students, he was in India, and he tried to talk with a young girl on the street, and he (she) was insulted. He was surprised. Because the practice is there that no young boy or young girl can talk with... Of course, now it is different. Even up to our young time we have seen that without being married, no girl, no boy, could mix together. So this lust affair, this attraction, was little bit controlled. The father, the parents of the girl, and the parents of the boy would select. They had no personal selection. And that selection was made very scientifically, taking the horoscope of the girl, taking the horoscope of the boy, and calculating, "How this boy and girl will amalgamate? How their lives will be happy?" So many things, they were considered. And when everything was settled, then the marriage would take place. That is the system of old Indian, Vedic principle. And so far free love is concerned, as we understand, that was allowed only very in high circles, princely order. Because the girls were educated and grown up and she was given to select her husband, but not directly. We find in so many historical evidences from the Vedic literature that the girl used to express her desire that "I want to marry with that boy," and the father... This was amongst the kṣatriyas, the princely order, not with others. And the father would give a challenge, a bet. And if somebody will come and become victorious, then the girl would be offered. That was in special cases.
General Lectures
Every planet is so made that it is complete in itself. The water is there, reserved in the seas and oceans. That water is taken away by the sunshine. Not only here, in other planets also, the same process is going on. It is transformed into cloud, then distributed all over the land, and there is growing of vegetables, fruits and plants, everything. So everything is complete arrangement. That we have to understand, that who has made this complete arrangement everywhere. The sun is rising in due time, the moon is rising in due time, the seasons are changing in due time. So how you can say? There is evidence in the Vedas there is God. In every scripture, every great personality, devotee, representative of God... Just like Lord Jesus Christ, he gave information of God. Although he was crucified, he never changed his opinion. So we have evidences from scripture, from Vedas, from great personality, still, if I say, "God is dead. There is no God," then what kind of man I am? This is called demon. They'll never believe it. They'll never believe... Yes. Just the opposite demon is budhā. Budhā means very intelligent, wise man. In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta it is said, therefore, kṛṣṇa ye bhaje se baḍa catura. Anyone who becomes attracted by Kṛṣṇa and loves Him... Worshiping means loving. In the beginning it is worshiping, but at the end it is love. Worshiping.
By your anxiety. (laughter, "Haribol!") If you are anxious to serve Kṛṣṇa, that is the real asset. Kṛṣṇa is unlimited. What service we can offer to Him? And He has got unlimited servants also. What service He requires from you and me? He's perfect in Himself. He doesn't require any service also. But if you are anxious to serve Him, then He does not refuse. That is His mercy; that is His magnanimity. So the more you increase your anxiety to serve Kṛṣṇa, the more it becomes perfect. He's unlimited. Your anxiety, you become unlimited. So there is competition. The more you serve Kṛṣṇa, the more He accepts you and the more He gives you intelligence. You see? So the spiritual world is unlimited. There is no end of service, and there is no end of accepting the service. It is not that. So eagerness. Tatra laulyam eka mūlyam. I am not manufacturing the answer, but I am giving you evidence from Rūpa Gosvāmī, our ācārya. He says, kṛṣṇa-bhakti-rasa-bhāvitā matiḥ krīyatāṁ yadi kuto 'pi labhyate: "My dear gentlemen, my dear boys and girls, if you can purchase a..., your sense of loving Kṛṣṇa—'How I can love Kṛṣṇa more and more'—this, this much, this anxiety, if you can purchase this matiḥ,"—means intelligence; it is very nice intelligence—" 'How I shall serve Kṛṣṇa...' " Kṛṣṇa-bhakti-rasa-bhāvitā matiḥ. Matiḥ means intelligence or status of mind, that "I'll serve Kṛṣṇa." "If you can purchase this status of mind anywhere, please immediately purchase." Then next question will be, "All right, I shall purchase. What is the price, do you know?" "Yes, I know what is the price." "What is that price?" "Laulyam, simply your eagerness, that's all." Laulyam ekaṁ mūlyam. "Ah, that I can have." No. Na janma koṭibhis sukṛtibhir labhyate. This eagerness, how to love Kṛṣṇa, this is not available even after many, many births. So if you have a pinch of that anxiety, "How I can serve Kṛṣṇa?" you must know you are the most fortunate man. A pinch only, laulya, this anxiety, "How I can serve Kṛṣṇa?" it is very nice. Then Kṛṣṇa will give you intelligence.
That requires training; that requires understanding. But the standard of... The same example, that the same state, the same man, when he was fighting in the battlefield, he was being elevated to higher position, rewarded. But same man coming back from the battlefield, he has killed somebody, some of his neighbor, he's hanged. But the same state is there. But man is there, the action is there, the same, but why the judgment is different? Similarly, we have to satisfy the great, and the greatest of the great is God, or Kṛṣṇa. If by your action Kṛṣṇa, God, is satisfied, then it is all right. I don't say that this fight is good, that fight is bad. Fight or no fight. Even without fighting, he may be bad. Just like the instruction which we get from Bhagavad-gītā, Arjuna was denying to fight and he was considered by Kṛṣṇa bad, because He was not satisfied. This is the evidence. And when Arjuna decided to fight to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, it was taken as good. So whole thing should be tested, judged, by the satisfaction of the Supreme Lord. Saṁsiddhir hari-toṣaṇam (SB 1.2.13). The perfection of any action... In the material world, "This thing is good," "This thing is bad," that is our mental concoction. Everything is bad here. Everything is bad. We have simply manufactured by our own imagination that "This is good," "This is bad." But to keep pace with the human society or peace in the human society, there is necessity of doing or adopting something which is approved by somebody, or the state. That is different thing. That is material. But actually at the ultimate end, as we have cited the quotation from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, good or bad means satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the Lord. If any action is approved or gives satisfaction to the Lord, that is good. If any action gives dissatisfaction to the Lord, it is bad. That is the general. Now you have to adopt yourself in the service of the Lord in such a way that you can know that this action is giving satisfaction and this action is not giving satisfaction. Then your life is all right.
Vedic literature is not written. It is before the creation. Vedic, Vedas, before the creation. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, there is statement, tene brahma hṛdā. Brahmā is considered to be the first created living entity, so he learned Vedas from within, from the Supersoul. Tene brahma hṛdā. So Vedic literature is not written at a certain time. It is coming. It is called apauruṣeya. It is not man-made. So you have to study very scrutinizingly, then you will understand. Thank you for your questions. Now chant. An incarnation has to be accepted by the evidence of Vedic literature, by his activities, by his features, and by authorities. There are so many things. Not that if somebody says, "I am incarnation," and therefore I become incarnation. No. Not in that way. If somebody comes here and says, "I am President Johnson," so any sane man will accept him simply because he says? And if somebody accepts him blindly, then he's a fool. Oh, he must... He says. Let us test whether he is bona fide, his credentials, how he is President Johnson. So we cannot accept even a man. How can we accept God without credentials? What is the credential of Ramakrishna that he is incarnation of God? These things are to be considered. Not that because Vivekananda accepted, therefore one has to accept. What is the credential? What is the proof? What is the extraordinary work? Lord Rāma is accepted God. There are so many extraordinary work. Kṛṣṇa is accepted as God. He has got so many extraordinary work.
So here in the Bhagavad-gītā, the Supreme Personality of Godhead explaining Himself, Kṛṣṇa. So if you say, "How can I believe that Kṛṣṇa said? Somebody has written in the name of Kṛṣṇa that 'Kṛṣṇa said,' 'God said.' " No. This is called disciplic succession. You will see in this book, Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa, what Kṛṣṇa said, and how Arjuna understood. These things are described there. And the sādhu, saintly person, beginning from Vyāsadeva, Nārada, down to many ācāryas, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī, and latest, Lord Caitanya, in this way, they have accepted: "Yes. It is spoken by Kṛṣṇa." So this is the proof. If saintly persons have accepted... They have not denied. Authorities, they have accepted, "Yes." This is called sādhu. And because sādhu, saintly persons have accepted, therefore it is scripture. That is the test. Just like... It is common sense affair. If the lawyers accept some book, then it is to be understood that this is lawbook. You cannot say that "How can I accept this is law?" The evidence is the lawyers are accepting. Medical... If the medical practitioners accept, then that is authoritative medical. Similarly, if saintly persons are accepting Bhagavad-gītā as scripture, you cannot deny it. Sādhu śāstra: saintly persons and scriptures, two things, and with spiritual master, three, three parallel lines, who accept the sādhu and the scripture.
Simply by distributing this chanting, He claimed everyone, however fallen he may be. "Come on, chant Hare Kṛṣṇa and become delivered." So nice thing. Pāpī-tāpī yata chilo, hari-nāme uddhārila. What is the evidence that He has? Ta 'ra sākṣī jagāi and mādhāi. Jagāi-Mādhāi, they were two brothers, debauch number one. You see. They were all kinds of sinful affairs. They were drunkards, they were woman hunters, meat-eaters, so many things. And, of course, they were born in a very high brāhmaṇa family, but bad association, they became like that. Similarly, at the present age, this human society, although they are coming from the Aryan family, very nice family, but due to association the only environment is there's woman and intoxication, meat-eating, and gambling. That's all. So Jagāi-Mādhāi is the specimen sample of this population, and Lord Caitanya delivered them simply by this Hare Kṛṣṇa. So this chanting process, Hare Kṛṣṇa, will actually deliver all these fallen souls without any failure. It is not bogus propaganda. Anyone who will take to this chanting process, whatever, you don't consider about his past life. He will become saintly. He will become a pure Kṛṣṇa conscious person. So pāpī-tāpī yata chilo, hari-nāme uddhārilo, ta 'ra sākṣī jagāi-mādhāi. The evidence is Jagāi-Mādhāi.
In the Bhagavad-gītā we can understand five main principles: namely God, the living entity, the material or the spiritual nature, time, and activities. Out of these five items, God, the living entities, nature—material or spiritual—and time are eternal. But activities are not eternal. The activities in the material nature are different from the activities in the spiritual nature. In the material nature, although the spiritual soul is eternal, as we have explained before, the activities are temporary. Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is aiming to place the spirit soul in his eternal activities. The eternal activities can be practiced even when we are materially encaged. It requires simply direction. But it is possible, under the prescribed rules and regulations, to act spiritually. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement teaches these spiritual activities, and if one is trained up in such spiritual activities, one is transferred to the spiritual world, of which we get ample evidence from Vedic literatures and also from the Bhagavad-gītā. And the spiritually trained person can be transferred to the spiritual world easily by change of consciousness. The consciousness is always there because it is the symptom of the living spirit soul. But at the present moment the consciousness is materially contaminated. Just like pouring water, water pouring, down from the cloud is pure, distilled water, but as soon as the water comes in touch with the earth it becomes muddy immediately. Again, by filtering the same water, the original clearness can be regained.
How a man becomes attractive? First of all we have to understand that. Suppose a very rich man is attractive, a very intelligent man is attractive, a beautiful man is attractive, a famous man is attractive, a wise man is attractive, a renounced man is also attractive. These are attractive features. So if we analyze Kṛṣṇa, we find all these six opulences of attractive men fully present in Kṛṣṇa. So even from historical references, there is not a single person who can be compared with Kṛṣṇa. Therefore He is all-attractive. And everything that we experience, that is the manifestation of Kṛṣṇa's energy. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śruyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). His energies are differently manifested. Similarly, in Viṣṇu Purāṇa also, it is said, parasya brahmaṇaḥ śaktis tathaiva akhilaṁ jagat. Akhilaṁ jagat means the whole cosmic manifestation is a display of the multi-energies of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So because He is fully energetic, therefore He is attractive and the cause of all causes. These are the evidences of Vedic literatures. And when He was actually present, He was attractive in so many features. In the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra, when He was speaking the Bhagavad-gītā, the speech which He delivered, although He is not present now in our vision, you cannot find in the whole world such attractive speech of wisdom. Nobody can say. What we have got, practical experience, about His speech, which is still going on, still we are trying to understand. The greatest scholars of the world, the philosophers, they are trying to understand Bhagavad-gītā. There were many, many great scholars and saintly persons all over India, but each and every one of them have tried to understand Bhagavad-gītā. Even Professor Einstein, he was reading Bhagavad-gītā.
So His attractiveness is evidently presented by the wisdom of Bhagavad-gītā. So He is all-attractive. There is no doubt about it. And in the Vedic literature we also understand: tasmin vijñāte sarvam evaṁ vijñātaṁ bhavati: "If you can understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead, or the Absolute Truth, then sarvam evaṁ vijñātaṁ bhavati, you can understand everything, how it is working." Because everything is display of His energy. So if you can understand how His energy is acting, then you can understand the whole cosmic manifestation. That is explained in the Vedic literature. Just like in our presence we have got practical experience, the sun. The whole material world is maintained by sunlight. The planets are rotating by the heat of sunlight; the vegetation, the water, everything is being conducted by the sunlight. It is by scorching sunlight the water is evaporated from the sea. It is formed into gas, cloud, and it is distributing all over the land. Then vegetation is coming, and it is becoming green, yellow, many colorful. So actually, the sun is the cause of all material manifestations. So if anyone can study what is sun, then he can understand how everything is appearing. That is practical.
So many arguments he placed. That means Arjuna was identifying himself with this body. And Kṛṣṇa, when Arjuna submitted to Kṛṣṇa that "I am now puzzled, bewildered. I cannot understand what is my duty at the present moment; therefore I am submitting unto You," śiṣyas te 'ham: (BG 2.7) "I become Your disciple." Śādhi māṁ prapannam: "I am surrendered unto You. You please instruct me." So because they were talking like friends in the beginning, so argument like friends, talking, that cannot give any conclusion. Here is the Vedic process. Just like Arjuna said that śādhi māṁ prapannam, śiṣyas te 'ham: "I become your śiṣya." Śiṣya means disciple. That means "Whatever disciplinary action You will ask me to follow, I shall do it." This is called śiṣya. The word śiṣya comes from the word, Sanskrit word, sas-dhātu, means to rule over, sas-dhātu. So ruling by instruction, ruling by laws, and ruling by force, weapon. There are three kinds of ruling. If instruction fails, then evidences from lawbooks. And when that also fails, then force. That is the whole arrangement everywhere. The instruction is that you should not kill. But if you violate, then according to law you are arrested. If you still violate, then you are punished in so many ways by force. As this is going on in our ordinary life, the same thing is going on by God's will also. The kingdom of God... Here is also kingdom of God, and there is another, spiritual sky. That is also kingdom of God.
s is the real picture of Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead: rādhā-mādhava kuñja-behari. Kṛṣṇa has no other business. Vṛndāvanaṁ parityajya padam ekaṁ na gacchati. Kṛṣṇa means original Kṛṣṇa, or the ādi-puruṣaṁ, which is known as ādi-puruṣaṁ. He's always in Vṛndāvana, but He expands Himself as Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Aniruddha, Pradyumna, so many, unlimited expansions. But the original form is in Vṛndāvana.
- īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ
- sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ
- anādir ādir govindaḥ
- sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam
- (Bs. 5.1)
Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate (BG 10.8). Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). These are the Vedic evidences. Kṛṣṇa Himself says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7).
So our main business should be how to improve in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So far other things are required, bodily necessities, that is recommended by Rūpa Gosvāmī, anāsaktasya: "Don't be attached." Don't take food, don't eat simply for satisfying your palate. That is called sense enjoyment. But you, just to keep yourself fit, just to keep your body fit for giving service to the Lord, you can eat Kṛṣṇa prasāda. And so far Kṛṣṇa prasāda is concerned, it is not very bad; it is very good. We offer... Of course, those who are followers of Vedic principles of life, they know how nice foodstuff can be offered to Kṛṣṇa. There are hundreds and thousands of varieties of fruits. There is nice grains also, there is nice milk also, there is sugar also. So you can prepare nice foodstuff on these ingredients which are considered sattvika, sattvikāhāra. Fruits, grains, vegetables, and sugar, rice, wheat, they are considered as sattvikāhāra. So you can prepare. Kṛṣṇa also says that patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati (BG 9.26). Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord. He can eat everything. Just like we have evidences from His life, sometimes He ate fire. Blazing fire in the forest, He ate up. So He can eat everything because He is God. He has got the potency of accepting anything. That is a different thing. But when He demands from His devotees, He says, patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyam. So we have satisfy Him from these groups. Patraṁ puṣpam means vegetables, fruits, grains; and toyam, water or milk, like that. And you partake the prasāda.
We should consider what are the religion of the world 2,600 years ago because modern history cannot place before you any chronological list of religious evolution within 2,600 years. There was human society before 2,600 years. And what was their religion? We think, from Vedic evidences, the whole world was in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. There was one God, Kṛṣṇa; one scripture, Bhagavad-gītā; one consciousness, Kṛṣṇa consciousness; and one work, service of the Lord. From Mahābhārata, the great history of India, we can understand that up to Mahārāja Parīkṣit, the whole world was ruled by one flag, this Vedic culture. Gradually it deteriorated, as we have practical experience. Twenty years ago there was no Pakistan, but now Pakistan is existing. Similarly, the whole planet was known as Bhārata-varṣa. This Bhārata-varṣa name was after the king Mahārāja Bhārata, the son of Ṛṣabhadeva. Before that, this planet was known as Ilāvṛta-varṣa. And after the king Mahārāja Bhārata—he was a great king—he also left his kingdom at the age of twenty-four years, very young boy, for searching after spiritual realization, self-realization.
So the idea is that... Just like one man is suffering from some disease. The doctor is giving, physician is giving, some medicine and some diet. So if we follow the directions of the physician and eat the diet prescribed by him, there is hope of curing the disease. This is one way. And another person who is suffering from disease but does not care for the physician's instruction or any medicine, he is going on. He is certainly destined to die. As you can understand, similarly, in this material world, both the devotees and nondevotees are there. The devotees, they are trying to be cured from this material disease, and the nondevotees, they do not care for it. They are therefore continuing suffering. We should understand in this way, that... Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana questions that "If by surrendering unto Kṛṣṇa we can become out of the clutches of māyā, why the paṇḍitas, why the learned scholars, scientists, and philosophers do not do that?" So he says that tatrāha na mām iti, duṣṭaś ca te kṛtinaḥ, śāstrārtha-kuśalāś ceti duṣkṛtinaḥ ku-paṇḍitās te māṁ na prapadyante śrutiś caivam āha. He is giving evidence from the Vedas how these rascals, they think of themselves as very learned. In the Vedas it is said, avidyāyām antare vartamānaḥ svayaṁ dhīraḥ paṇḍitaṁ manyamānaḥ: "There is avidyā, nescience, ignorance, within, but they are thinking that 'I am very learned.' " That is our another disease. One disease is the troubles and conditions offered by the material nature. So Kṛṣṇa says that in this material world, so long we are, we have to execute the devotional service. But we may not be disturbed by these material conditions. That was advised to Kṛṣṇa, (to) Arjuna.
We get this information from the Vedic literatures. Paras tasmāt tu bhāvo 'nyo 'vyakto 'vyaktāt sanātanaḥ (BG 8.20). And we living entities, we are the marginal energies. That means if we like, we can live in this material nature; if we like, we can transfer ourselves to the spiritual nature. The spiritual nature is... It is not in..., what is called, incompatible. Compatible. You can adjust yourself in the spiritual nature, but you cannot adjust yourself in the material nature. Therefore material nature, however you can make your plans for becoming happy, it will be frustrated. Because you do not, you cannot adjust yourself with this material nature. Just like this body. This body is a product of this material nature. Now, however you can take care of this body, however you may go on making this body very strong and stout, still, you cannot maintain it. It will be finished today or tomorrow, or a hundred years after. You cannot protect it. This is material nature. But I have got the tendency to keep my body fit, strong, and eternal. That is my tendency. People are taking so much exercise just to become very strong and stout. But nature will not allow you. However stout and strong you may be, you have to die. You have to give up this body. This body is temporary, but our tendency is to live forever. The scientists are trying how to keep this body fit. One Russian scientist said that "By material science we shall be able to keep this body forever." They may say like that, but in the history we do not find any evidence that anyone has ever been able to keep this body forever, immortal. That is not possible.
So our process of knowledge very easy. Kṛṣṇa's book, Bhagavad-gītā, is the knowledge, book of knowledge which is given by the perfect person, Kṛṣṇa. You may argue that "You have accepted Him as a perfect person, but we do not." You may not. But He is perfect person on the evidence of many authorities. It is not by my whims I accept Kṛṣṇa as the perfect person. No. There are many authorities, Vedic authorities. Formerly... Just like Vyāsadeva. He's the author of all Vedic literature, the treasure-house of knowledge, Vedas. He accepts Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. His spiritual master, Nārada, he accepts Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. His spiritual master, Brahmā, he accepts Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Person. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1), Brahmā says. "The supreme controller is Kṛṣṇa." Īśvara. Īśvara means controller. We are controller, everyone. Nobody can say that "I am without controller." No, that is not possible. Everyone has got a controller. However big officer you may be, you have a controller over your head. But Kṛṣṇa has no controller; therefore He is God. He is controller of everyone, but He has no controller; therefore He's God. So there are many so-called Gods nowadays. Very... God has become very cheap, especially they are imported from India. They are not manufactured in here. You are fortunate. But India, they're coming out, "God," practically every day. They are... The other day, Karandhara was telling me that some God was coming to Los Angeles, and they were requested to receive him. So Kṛṣṇa is not that kind of God. I mentioned in my introduction to Kṛṣṇa book that Kṛṣṇa is not that type of God, manufactured in mystic factory. No. He is God. He was not made God, but He is God.
So this Brahma-saṁhitā, the point is, in this Brahma-saṁhitā Kṛṣṇa's name is there. In the Atharva Veda there is Kṛṣṇa's name. So our process of knowledge, if there is Vedic evidence, that is perfect. You don't require to experiment. Experimental knowledge is never perfect. The same example as we have given several times: that which is unknowable, inconceivable, that knowledge you cannot get by experiment. That is not possible. You have to receive the knowledge from authority. Just like you cannot understand who is your father by experiment, laboratory. Bring every man and analyze him whether he is your father. Is it possible? No. How many men you will bring in the laboratory? That is not possible. But if you approach to the authority, the mother, immediately you get the knowledge. Ask your mother, "Who is my father?" She'll say, "Here is your father." That means you receive the knowledge from the authority, not by experimental knowledge. Which is inconceivable, beyond your perception, beyond your imagination, that knowledge you cannot get by experiment. They are trying to make experi... (break) ...soul. The so-called scientists, they say, "We are trying." You can try on, but it is beyond your experience, beyond your knowledge. Your senses are all imperfect. You can... You cannot understand soul by experimental knowledge.
That is material existence. And Prahlāda Mahārāja was asked by his father, "What best thing you have learned, my dear boy?" He said that "If you want to cut down your material anxiety, then you must surrender unto the Lord." Hitvātma-pātaṁ gṛham andha-kūpaṁ vanaṁ gato yad dharim āśrayeta (SB 7.5.5), you must surrender to Kṛṣṇa. So there are evidences, there are gurus, there is no scarcity of facility, it is very simple, and there is no loss. So our request, our only appeal to the people is that you just follow the principles laid down by Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu,
- harer nāma harer nāma harer nāmaiva kevalaṁ
- kalau nāsty eva nāsty eva nāsty eva gatir anyathā
- (CC Adi 17.21)
You cannot execute all expensive yajñas or you cannot meditate, that is not possible. Kṛte yad dhyāyato viṣṇum (SB 12.3.52). That meditation was possible in the Satya-yuga, kṛte. And tretayaṁ yajato makhaiḥ. And costly performance of sacrifices was possible in the Tretā-yuga. And dvāpare paricaryāyām. In the Dvāparā-yuga, it was possible to construct costly temples and worship the Deity there. But in the Kali-yuga, kalau tad dhari-kīrtanāt. Kali, in the Kali, this age, you have to simply take this process, chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra. Then all your desires will be fulfilled and your life will be successful. Thank you very much. Hare Kṛṣṇa. (applause—end)
In the Vedic scriptures, Kathopaniṣad, it is said, tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet (MU 1.2.12). Upaniṣad, whatever is spoken in the Upaniṣad that is gospel truth. That is the system of understanding transcendental knowledge, veda-pramāṇa, evidence from the Vedas. According to Vedic system, amongst the learned scholars, if one presents Vedic evidences, then his position is strong. Just like in law court, two lawyers are arguing. One lawyer who quotes from the lawbook various bona fide quotations, the judgment is given in his favor because that is authorized. Similarly, a Vedic statement is accepted in Indian spiritual society. There are hundreds and thousands of men who are still dedicated. Practically the whole population of India, they are dedicated to spiritual life. Perhaps you may not know, but anyone who has taken birth in India, he has got a natural inheritance of spiritual life. Unfortunately, at the present moment the leaders are under wrong impression that in India, being too much spiritually inclined, its material advancement has been checked. But material advancement does not become hampered by spiritual knowledge. That is a wrong impression.
Therefore our Vedic injunctions are very supreme evidence, Veda-pramāṇam, śabda-pramāṇam. There are three kinds of evidences. First evidence is direct perception—I see personally. And then historical evidence, and then śabda-pramāṇa. Śabda-pramāṇa means evidence from the Vedas. Out of three kinds of evidences, the śabda-pramāṇas, or the evidences received from the Vedas, that is accepted. So for spiritual advancement especially we have to accept the Veda-pramāṇa, or evidences given in Vedic literature. So this disciplic succession, as Gosvāmī Hanumān Prasād said, that is essential. That is the Vedic injunction. Tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet (MU 1.2.12). This word abhigacchet, it is a form of verb which is used where the sense is "You must! You must!" There is no exception. You cannot say that "I may go to a spiritual master or I may not go. I can study at home." No. You must go. Just like in modern age also, if you (are) actually interested to be recognized as educated, you must get your admission in a recognized school or college and take degree.
Source of Kṛṣṇa? Well, Kṛṣṇa is the origin. Sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam (Bs. 5.1). We are trying to understand the source of Kṛṣṇa because we have no other experience. We have got only experience that everything has got a source. You go on searching out. Just like you are caused by your father. Your father is caused by his father. His father is cause of... In this way go on researching, researching, then you come to Brahmā, the original person in this universe. Then Brahmā is also caused by Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu. The Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu is caused by Kāraṇodakaśāyī Viṣṇu. The Kāraṇodakaśāyī Viṣṇu is caused by Saṅkarṣaṇa. Saṅkarṣaṇa is caused by Nārāyaṇa. Nārāyaṇa caused by Baladeva. Baladeva is caused by Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is the origin, cause, of everyone. He has no cause. He has no source. He is the original source of everything. Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ: (BG 10.8) "I am the source of everything." And Brahma-saṁhitā, sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam: (Bs. 5.1) "The cause of all causes." So Supreme Lord is the cause of all causes, but He is not caused by anyone. That is His supremacy. He is not caused by everyone. He is svarāṭ. He is described in the Vedic, svarāṭ, "self-evident." That is God.
Yes. Therefore your material method is imperfect to detect where is the soul. The soul is there, and the dimension is also there: one ten-thousandth part of the tip of your hair. So you have no eyes to see. But soul is there; that is evident. But as soon as the soul is gone, this body—is beautiful body—is a dead lump of matter only. That distinction is there. Therefore we have to hear from the authority what is that soul. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is describing... First of all, He said that there is soul within this body. Dehino 'smin yathā dehaṁ dehī, deha. Dehino 'smin yathā dehe kaumāraṁ yauvanam... (BG 2.13). Because the soul is there, therefore we are changing different types of body. Just like because you are living, therefore there is coat and shirt. But if you are not living, what is the use of this coat and shirt? There is no question of coat and shirt. Similarly, because the soul is there, therefore the body has developed, according to the desire of the soul. But it is very, very minute. With our, these blunt eyes and blunt senses, we cannot capture. But there is. We have to conceive it from the authoritative statement of higher knowledge, knowledgeable person. Just like we are trying to learn from the Bhagavad-gītā as it is. It is being taught by Kṛṣṇa. So things which are beyond your perception, you have to know it from authority. Just like the example: Who is my father? We cannot make any experiment.
Similarly, because the soul is there, therefore the body has developed, according to the desire of the soul. But it is very, very minute. With our, these blunt eyes and blunt senses, we cannot capture. But there is. We have to conceive it from the authoritative statement of higher knowledge, knowledgeable person. Just like we are trying to learn from the Bhagavad-gītā as it is. It is being taught by Kṛṣṇa. So things which are beyond your perception, you have to know it from authority. Just like the example: Who is my father? We cannot make any experiment. We cannot apply experimental knowledge to find out who is my father. That is not possible. But how we can know? The know it, I can know from the authority of the mother. The mother says, "This gentleman is your father," we have to accept. There is no other experimental... Similarly, the soul, which is beyond the perception of your material senses, you cannot make an experiment. You have no means. But you try to perceive that what is that thing, missing, that now the body is dead. Now, there is something. What is that something? That you have to learn from the authority, Kṛṣṇa. Dehino 'smin yathā dehe (BG 2.13). There is a dehī, there is a proprietor of this body, and he's changing from one body to another. This you have to understand from the authority. From experimental, you have not learned it, never you'll be able to learn it, not the scientists can discover. If they could discover, then no man would die. The medical science, if it could discover... So there are so many anomalies. Therefore you have to learn it only from the authority, and there is no other way. Śruti-pramāṇam. Śruti-pramāṇa means evidence from the Vedic knowledge. There is no other way.
So this is our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. We are trying to make fools and rascals and sinful men to become wise. If you take advantage of it, you will be glorified and we shall be glorified. This is our process. And actually it is happening. Caitanya Mahāprabhu's movement is pāpi tāpi yata chila, harināme uddhārila, tāra sākṣī... You want evidence? Jagāi and Mādhāi. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu delivered two Jagāi and Mādhāi. Now you can see how much Caitanya Mahāprabhu's movement is strong. Many thousands of Jagāi-Mādhāi's are being delivered. So His movement is greater than Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Caitanya Mahāprabhu, personally He delivered two Jagāi-Mādhāi. Now, by His movement, thousands Jagāi-Mādhāi's are being... This is the practical. And it is very easy. It is not very difficult. Anyone can take. But if we take knowingly poison, jāniyā śuniyā viṣa khāinu, who can protect you? So it is our appeal to everyone that take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra. Even if you cannot give up your bad habits, sinful activities, still, you take the chanting of Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra and your life will be glorified.
Kṛṣṇa consciousness is so nice, even one takes by sentiment, still he is profited. And person who are very honest in executing his duty but does not take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, śāstra says ko vārtha āpto abhajatām: "What does he gain?" He does not gain anything, because he is bound up by the resultant action of his karma. So it is a great science. One has to understand. Then... But for the present... Of course, a Kṛṣṇa-bhakta never takes the profession of a dacoitry. We have no such evidence. Rather, dacoits were made very great devotees. There are instances. But Kṛṣṇa says, "Even if he is dacoit, but Kṛṣṇa-bhakta," sādhur eva sa mantavyaḥ (BG 9.30), "he is to be considered sādhu." So it is the certificate of Kṛṣṇa. What can I do? (laughter) (break) Ārati. (end)
So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is a movement to educate people how to go back to Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. So our request is that you take advantage of this movement. Don't be fully simply absorbed in the activities of animal life—eating, sleeping, mating, and defending. This is also required, but under regulation. Eating is not prohibited in Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, but eating is regulated. Don't eat anything without Kṛṣṇa's prasādam. Oh, Kṛṣṇa prasādam, there are so many varieties nice foodstuff. Be satisfied taking Kṛṣṇa's prasādam so your eating problem will be solved and you will advance in Kṛṣṇa consciousness to go back to home, back to Godhead. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is very important movement for the human society, and this is not a Utopian thing. It is authorized. For every action of Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement there is support from Vedas, Vedic literature. Just like whenever we speak something we immediately give evidence from the Bhagavad-gītā. It is not that something, "In my opinion it is..." No. We have no opinion. We don't give our opinion. We present Bhagavad-gītā as it is, that's all. As Kṛṣṇa says, we say the same thing. We have no difficulty. Kṛṣṇa says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat, kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7). "There is no more superior truth than Kṛṣṇa," Kṛṣṇa says. We accept that.
As we say—mleccha, yavana. One who does not follow the Vedic principles, they are called mleccha. And those who are meat-eaters, they are called yavana, mleccha, yavana. This is the meaning of mleccha, yavana. It is not a particular class of men. Anyone who eats meat, he's a yavana, and anyone who does not live to the standard of Vedic understanding, he is a mleccha. So everyone will become mleccha. So mleccha-nivaha-nidhane kalayasi karavālam. The Lord will become very much vicious. Asi karavālam. Just like dhūmaketuh, comet. Dhūmaketum iva kim api karālam nidhane. Mleccha-nidhane. That will be the only remedy—to kill all the mlecchas. The avatāra, Kalki avatāra will come. Keśava dhṛta buddha śarīra, ah, keśava dhṛta kalki śarīra. Buddha śarīra is also, keśava dhṛta buddha śarīra, to give protection to the poor animals. Lord Buddha appeared to stop animal-killing. Sadaya-hṛdaya-darśita-paśu-ghātam, nindasi yajña-vidher ahaha śruti-jātaṁ. Lord Buddha, he declined to accept Vedic authority. Why? Because in the Vedas also there is sanction sometimes in yajña, animal sacrifice. But he wanted to stop animal sacrifice, animal-killing. Therefore he denied the authority of Vedas. Because people will give evidence that "You are preaching no animal-killing, but in the Vedas sometimes in sacrifice the animals are sacrificed. How you can stop this?" Therefore Lord Buddha had to deny the authority of Vedas. That is described, nindasi yajña-vidher. The animal-killing is described in the Vedas, in the yajña-vidher, not in the slaughterhouse. In the Yajña-vidher. That also was decried. Nindasi yajña-vidher ahaha śruti-jātam. Because according to Vedic civilization, śruti, Veda, is the evidence. Therefore if Lord Buddha accepts the authority of Vedas, he cannot say, "Stop animal-killing." Then he said, "No. I do not follow Vedic principles." Therefore he is called nāstika.
So He is accepted by the direct disciple, Arjuna; He is accepted by Vyāsadeva; He is accepted by Nārada Muni; and recently, within two thousand years, He is accepted by all the ācāryas of India-Śaṅkarācārya, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī; and lately, five hundred years ago, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. So there is no doubt about Kṛṣṇa's becoming the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is confirmed, ete cāṁśa kalāḥ puṁsāṁ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam: (SB 1.3.28) "The original Personality of Godhead-Kṛṣṇa." Similarly, in the Upaniṣad, in the Vedas, and Brahma-saṁhitā, if you take evidence from the śāstras, everywhere you will find, kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. In the Brahma-saṁhitā, which is supposed to be written by Lord Brahmā, he says in the beginning,
- īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ
- sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ
- anādir ādir govindaḥ
- sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam
- (Bs. 5.1)
So from sastric evidences, from authentic evidences, from the ācāryas, from Bhagavad-gītā itself—everywhere you will find the confirmation, kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). So Caitanya Mahāprabhu's mission is that yāre dekha tāre kaha kṛṣṇa upadeśa (CC Madhya 7.128). It is not difficult. You simply take up the instruction of Bhagavad-gītā and try to preach, yāre dekha tāre. Whomever you meet. You may remain as a businessman, you may remain whatever you are, you remain a family head, but instruct this advice of Kṛṣṇa-yāre dekha tāre kaha kṛṣṇa upadeśa (CC Madhya 7.128). This is our mission.
Prabhupāda: No. One man once.
Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: There are many other people who would like to ask questions.
Prabhupāda: Others should be given opportunity.
Indian man (3): I would like to have this question. Why should one accept this Kṛṣṇa as God?
Prabhupāda: That I have already explained. We have to accept the Vedic evidence. So the Vedic evidence establishes kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). Otherwise you have no opportunity to understand what is God. Then, if you don't accept Kṛṣṇa as God, then present somebody else who is God and whether he is satisfying the definition of God. So considering the Vedic evidences, authorities, we have to accept Kṛṣṇa as God. And when He was present on this planet, He proved that He is God. Then we have no other alternative than to accept Kṛṣṇa as God.
Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: Any other questions? Yes.
Indian man (4): With the present state of the world as it is—it seems to be in a pretty mess—what would you say we are actually advancing spiritually?
Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: "With the present state of the world, in the present mess that it's in today, would you say that we are advancing spiritually?"
Prabhupāda: No. Practically, the present state of the world means without any spiritual knowledge. We are blind; therefore it is very dangerous position. The spiritual knowledge we must have; otherwise we are doomed.
So Kṛṣṇa appeared as Caitanya Mahāprabhu to teach us practically how to preach Kṛṣṇa consciousness and how to deliver persons from the pāpa-yoni. Śrī Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura, a ācārya of the Gauḍīya sampradāya, he says in his song, śrī-nanda-nandana yei, nanda-suta haila yei, śacī-suta haila sei. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, He appeared as the son of mother Śacī. Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura sings, "The same Personality of Godhead who appeared as the son of Mahārāja Nanda," nanda-suta haila yei, śacī-suta haila sei, "He has now appeared as the son of mother Śacī." And balarāma haila nitāi: "And the same Balarāma has appeared as Nityānanda prabhu." Now, what is Their business? That is described: pāpī tāpī yata chilo, hari-nāme uddhārilo. So pāpī tāpī yata chilo, harinām..., ta'ra sākṣī jagāi and mādhāi. Then he is giving evidence how the pāpī and tāpīs are delivered. "Here is the example of Jagāi-Mādhāi." This Jagāi-Mādhāi, they took birth in a good brāhmaṇa family but by bad association they became drunkard, thief, woman-hunter, and so on, so on. But they were also delivered by Caitanya Mahāprabhu to become first-class Vaiṣṇava.
This is the place for suffering. And if we take this place of suffering as comfortable, that is our ignorance. Therefore Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura sings, biṣāya biṣānale dibā-niśi hiyā jwale taribare nā koinu upāy golokera prema-dhana hari-nāma saṅkīrtana rati nā jaṅmilo kene tāy. (aside:) Explain. (break) So Narottama says that we should take advantage of Caitanya Mahāprabhu's and Nityānanda Prabhu's presence. Pāpī tāpī jata chilo harināme uddhārilo tāra śākṣī jagāi and mādhāi, brajendra nandana jei śacī-suta hoilo sei balarāma hoilo nitāi, that "Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is Kṛṣṇa. Formerly He was Brajendranandana." Brajendranandana. Brajendra is Mahārāja, Nanda Mahārāja. And He accepted father-Nanda Mahārāja. Nandanandana. "Same Nandanandana has now become Śacīnandana." Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's mother's name is Śacīdevī. So brajendra-nandana jei śacī-suta hoilo sei. "Who was formerly Brajendra-nandana, He has now become Śacīnandana. And formerly who was Balarāma, He has become Nitāi." Brajendranandana hei śacī-suta hoilo sei balarāma hoilo nitāi. So why They have come again? Now, pāpī tāpī yata chilo harināme uddhārilo: "They have come to deliver all kinds of sinful men, suffering humanity, just allowing to chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra." Pāpī tāpī jata chilo, harināme uddhārilo. So what is the evidence how papi tapi were delivered? Tāra śākṣī jagāi and mādhāi.
Philosophy Discussions
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: Yes. That stands refuted.
Devotee: As Hegel presents Christianity.
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.
Prabhupāda: Why is he not concerned? If he is putting some theory for understanding, why he is not concerned with some primary principles?
Śyāmasundara: He says that we cannot be certain how everything began.
Prabhupāda: Then how he is certain that this natural circumstance is favorable? How he is making certain?
Śyāmasundara: He made many, many tests; he has much evidence...
Prabhupāda: What is that evidence?
Śyāmasundara: ...to show that animals adapt to their environments, just like if you...
Prabhupāda: Why he takes animals first? Why not others?
Śyāmasundara: Animals, trees, plants, insects, men, he examines all the different varieties. For instance if you put a certain animal in a cold climate, he will develop hair to protect his body against the cold, and he will pass on this characteristic to his sons.
Prabhupāda: So why...? The people in Greenland, do they develop hair?
Śyāmasundara: They don't have so much hair, but they develop very fatty tissues. Their eyes are slitted so there is not so much snow and bright light...
Prabhupāda: Then development of hair is not only the existent; there are other many conditions. You cannot say that development of hair is due to the condition as he says, natural condition.
Śyāmasundara: On the other hand, he has a huge amount of evidence which he has gathered...
Prabhupāda: Evidence, that is all right. Evidence, we have also got evidence. Evidence must be there. As soon as there is evidence, then he should not speak anything of chance.
Śyāmasundara: Just like out of millions of frogs, one frog will be better adapted to living in the water.
Prabhupāda: That is not chance; that is plan. That is plan. That is not chance. He does not know that. As soon as he says chance, that means his knowledge is not perfect. Chance... If a man says chance when he cannot explain, that is evasive. Therefore he is not in perfect knowledge; therefore he is not fit for giving any knowledge. He is cheating, that's all, because he has no perfect knowledge.
Śyāmasundara: Well, he sees a plan or a design also, but he sees it in...
Prabhupāda: Therefore if he sees a plan and design, then whose design? As soon as you call it design, there must be designer. As (soon as) you call a plan, there must be a planner. That he does not know.
Śyāmasundara: They are like branches of the same tree, he calls them.
Prabhupāda: Branches of the tree, just like we see now the monkey is existing and human being is also existing. Similarly, we say what he sees the beginning of life, at that time also there was human being.
Śyāmasundara: They find no evidence of them.
Prabhupāda: Why no evidence?
Śyāmasundara: In the ground. There's no evidence in the ground.
Prabhupāda: In the ground? That means that in the ground is the only evidence? There is no other evidence?
Karandhara: Scientists think that the only way to maintain integrity is not to accept anything until they can see it or understand it with their own senses and mind, by material evidence. That is their whole platform of empiric research, that nothing can be accepted until it's proven by their own sensuous experience.
Prabhupāda: But they cannot prove that there was no human being wherefrom they are starting their study. They cannot prove.
Śyāmasundara: It appears from the evidence that there are apelike men in certain layers of...
Prabhupāda: The apelike man or manlike ape is already existing. If you say development, just like from this, it has developed this, then there should be no existence of this. Kārya-kāraṇam. That's all. Now when I see still both are existing...
Śyāmasundara: The former doesn't exist any more.
Prabhupāda: No, no, no. If from monkey, man is coming, so then when monkey develops into man, the monkey should not exist. Kārya-kāraṇam, kārya-kāraṇam, cause and effect. When the effect is there, the cause is finished now.
Śyāmasundara: The monkey didn't cause the man; they came from the same common ancestor. That is their explanation. They had the same common ancestor.
Prabhupāda: That is, we say that all we come from God, the same ancestors, the same father. What is the difference?
Karandhara: Everyone has the same ancestor.
Prabhupāda: My explanation is that the original father is Kṛṣṇa. As Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, sarva-yoniṣu kaunteya: (BG 14.4) "As many forms are there, I am the bīja pradaḥ pitā, I am the seed-giving father." So what is your objection to this?
Śyāmasundara: Well, if I examine the layers of earth, I find no evidence in any of the layers below of any...
Prabhupāda: You are packed up with the layers of the earth, that's all. That is your boundary of knowledge. That is not knowledge. That is not knowledge. There are many other evidences.
Śyāmasundara: But certainly, if there were men living millions of years ago, they would have...
Prabhupāda: But man is still living. Man is still living.
Śyāmasundara: But they would have left evidence in the earth. They would have left evidence behind them, tangible evidence, that I could see the remains of their civilization.
Prabhupāda: So if I say that the human society, man after death is burned into ashes, so where does he get the bones?
Śyāmasundara: Well, that's possible, but I don't find...
Prabhupāda: According to our Vedic system, when a man is dead, he is burned into ashes. Why the rascal will get the bones?
Svarūpa Dāmodara: There are no bones.
Karandhara: Another thing is that after a certain number of years, bones cease to be bones. They turn back into chemicals and merge into the earth.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: But what about cities and tools, these things? There must be some evidence. In the lowest layer there are clam shells that have become fossilized. In the lower levels millions of years back they find clam shells.
Karandhara: They say it's been millions of years, but how do they prove it's been millions of years?
Śyāmasundara: Through radioactivity.
Karandhara: But that is an imperfect method, devised by imperfect senses.
Svarūpa Dāmodara: It is limited. It is limited. It is very hard to find about five thousand or six thousand years back.
Karandhara: They don't even agree amongst each other about what the age of things are.
Śyāmasundara: Just like if you go down a hundred feet below the soil, that soil has been down there a long time. But there is no evidences of men, actually civilized creatures.
Prabhupāda: Why he is trying to find out men's bones there? What is the...
Śyāmasundara: I'm just saying that it appears, because layer after layer is deposited in the earth's crust, that the animal forms are evolving toward more complex forms, from simple animals to bigger animals, and then more complex, then to the man, civilized man.
Prabhupāda: From where it began?
Śyāmasundara: It began with the simplest forms.
Prabhupāda: But the simplest form is still existing and the complex form is also existing at the present moment. Not that from the simplest form developed, developed, developed. Just like development means, just like I have developed my childhood body. The childhood body is no more there. But it is a fact I have developed from childhood body to this body. There are so many. So similarly, all the species are existing simultaneously, still.
Śyāmasundara: But they find no evidence in the earlier times that these complex forms existed.
Prabhupāda: No, no. Earlier times or modern times, when I see the all different species, 8,400,000 species of life still existing, so what is the question of development? It existed long ago also. You might not have seen, you have not source of knowledge to understand, but you have to accept it, because all these species are now existing. Similarly, millions of years ago all these species existed. You might have missed. That is a different thing.
Śyāmasundara: But then it is simply a matter of one opinion against another, because the scientists say...
Prabhupāda: No. It is not opinion, it is a fact. Do you think that this development has ceased all other species, simply human being is there?
Śyāmasundara: No. But I don't see evidence that all these complex forms...
Prabhupāda: I have said that one, this, by evolution, one after another, the human form is there. Now Darwin's theory is that some forty thousand years ago there was no human being.
Śyāmasundara: But he says they evolved. That's because they evolved.
Prabhupāda: Evolved, but they are still existing. Evolved, that is another thing. But all of them are existing still. So how you can say that millions of years they did not exist, all? His theory is that...
Śyāmasundara: Because there is not evidence that they exist.
Prabhupāda: Evidence, this is the evidence: if now all the species of life are existing, why not millions of years ago? What do you say?
Svarūpa Dāmodara: Yes. It was existing, but simply we did not know.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is one-sided test.
Śyāmasundara: You can say they existed, but show me. I don't see any proof.
Prabhupāda: You do not see the animals, the aquatics, the birds, bees, trees—everything—is existing?
Śyāmasundara: Yes. But ten million years ago, according to my excavations, there were no beasts; there were all aquatics.
Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. That is nonsense. Ten millions of... You cannot give a history of ten millions. It is your imagination. Where is the history of ten millions of years? You are simply imagining, that is your word. But where is historical evidence? You cannot give history more than three thousand years, and you are speaking of ten millions of years. This is all nonsense. How you can go... There is no history in the human civ... There is no history, ten millions of years.
Śyāmasundara: What about the half-life of certain elements?
Svarūpa Dāmodara: Yes. The, normally, what they call the age determination, or how old a species is, they normally find out from this so-called (indistinct). They find some bone or something which contains normally carbonate. And normally they get this age of the elements or age of these findings by so-called Carbon 14 method. Carbon 14 is an isotope of normal carbon, it is called Carbon 12. Carbon 14 is radioactive. It's one in which they put in the radioactive testing, and they find out because it follows the normal chemical laws or physical laws. This is governed by the Lord Himself, by Kṛṣṇa Himself. They're finding the chemical lowest form, and from that chemical lowest they normally try to reduce the, how old the sample is, and that method is very limited, it is not applicable to all findings also, and a test, a very reliable test (indistinct) to about five thousand, six thousand years old but beyond that it is very doubtful whether the findings are really true or not. (break) It is empiric so we cannot fully convince that such-and-such species lives such-and-such long just from that finding. You need more evidence to prove it (indistinct) was existing and it disappeared from such-and-such time but it gives a relative value from so-called modern scientific point of view.
Prabhupāda: But evolution we accept. Evolution we accept but it is not that there was no existence of human being. That we do not accept. Evolution we accept. Just like my childhood manifestation is extinct but there are many other child. Same time. So our point is all the species of life, they are existing simultaneously. Evolution there is, we accept that but it is not that one is missing, one has gone away, and another is come, ten million, thirty millions there was no human being. This is all nonsense. He cannot find in the layer, that is not evidence.
Śyāmasundara: You must admit, though, being a scientist, that supposing you go down to the bottom of the Grand Canyon, you see so many layers of earth going up thousands of feet, that the layers at the bottom are very, very old. You must admit, because the earth takes so many years to deposit soil. Even if it's only one million years, it's still very old. And in that lowest layer we find only evidences of simple...
Prabhupāda: So where is the lowest layer, he has gone? Where is it? Wherefrom it begins?
Śyāmasundara: The Grand Canyon is an example. That's a very deep canyon in the ground in Arizona.
Svarūpa Dāmodara: What happens if there was no human beings in that area so that they don't find any...?
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: Human beings aside, we still find...
Prabhupāda: Just like desert. Desert there is no human beings. If you dig the desert, what you will find?
Śyāmasundara: That's all right. It doesn't matter if it was ocean; still we find gradually the forms become more and more complex toward the...
Prabhupāda: But you cannot say where is the beginning and where is the end.
Śyāmasundara: But from hundreds of different sources of this...
Prabhupāda: But I say, I say that it is still existing. The man is existing, the horse is existing, the snake is existing, the insect is existing, the trees are existing; why not millions of years ago?
Śyāmasundara: Because there's no evidence.
Prabhupāda: This is the evidence. This is the evidence. You cannot give the history of this planet. Now suppose the existence of sun, you cannot give history. The sun is existing millions of years ago. It is not that sun is created now. The sun is existing now, the moon is existing now, so why should not they come from millions of years also? The sun existing, and within the sun everything is existing. So if the sun is existing, then other things must be existing. That is my conclusion.
Śyāmasundara: They may be existing, but on this planet we have no evidence...
Prabhupāda: That doesn't mean... That means you limit your study in one planet. That is not full knowledge.
Śyāmasundara: I just want to find out for the time being about...
Prabhupāda: Why time being? If you are not perfect in your knowledge, then why should I accept your theory? That is my point.
Śyāmasundara: But in the Vedic scriptures...
Prabhupāda: The first creature is Brahmā, the most intelligent, the most learned.
Śyāmasundara: ...and he said, and you say that on this planet there were pastimes, for instance, of Lord Rāmacandra millions of years ago, with His men, His animals, His horses, deers, so many things. But in all of our evidences we find only at that time the most simple forms of life...
Prabhupāda: Your evidence... You will be satisfied with your evidence, but I have got my own evidence. Why shall I accept your evidence? You cannot force your evidence, your so-called evidence upon me. What is evidence? First of all you have to select, what is that evidence.
Śyāmasundara: Terrestrial, archaeological findings...
Prabhupāda: No. No. That is not evidence. That is not evidence.
Karandhara: If you find a bone, how do you know it's not...
Prabhupāda: That is imperfect. You have studied one portion of the creation. That is not evidence. In other portion of the creation there is different. But that is not evidence. Your study, your limited study is not evidence.
Svarūpa Dāmodara: So the evidence posed by Darwin's theory is not enough to explain...
Prabhupāda: Yes.
rabhupāda: Jīva jātiṣu. The Padma Purāṇa says jīva jātiṣu, so different species of life. And they give: from this, this; from this, this; from this, this. Then, just like it is said that from bird's life the beast's life comes. Now the beasts, this category is of three millions types of beasts.
Śyāmasundara: Just like they find evidence of large bird, pterodactyl, which has beastlike properties. It has legs also, and they say from that kind of bird evolved a more beastlike, like you say, beasts.
Prabhupāda: Just like we say that kṛmayo rudra-saṅkhyakāḥ pakṣiṇāṁ daśa-lakṣaṇam. From the insect life the bird's life developed. That we see practically. One have becomes flies, butterflies. In the grass, worm becomes a butterfly. That is, there is evidence.
Śyāmasundara: But at that time were there only insects existing?
Prabhupāda: No. Everything was existing.
Karandhara: That's not evolution of the species, it's evolution of the soul through the existing species.
Prabhupāda: Transmigration from one body to another. The bodies are already existing.
Śyāmasundara: For instance, they say that during the Ice Age, when there were..., the earth became very cold, and there were great ice formations in Europe and America, that this animal they call the mammoth-it's an elephantlike animal but it had long, very long hair for warmth-suddenly this species appears. Does it mean that that body existed always somewhere else, but it just suddenly appeared in order...
Prabhupāda: Yes, yes.
Śyāmasundara: So I understand that, and I'll accept that, but the one thing I'm still puzzled on is that there's no geological evidence that in former times on this planet there were more complex forms...
Prabhupāda: Why you are taking geological evidence as final? Why you are taking that? That is final?
Śyāmasundara: But it's logical...
Prabhupāda: What logic? Science is progressing. You cannot say that this is final.
Karandhara: Scientists couldn't deny; they could just say that we haven't found any evidence.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: But until there's something that disproves it to me, then I must accept it, because it..., because it's logical.
Karandhara: But that's a false platform. I'll conclude on the basis of my limited knowledge because I don't have the perfect knowledge. That's an abortion of the whole scientific...
Śyāmasundara: Yes. All right. You can say that I've never seen a purple man, so there must be no such thing as a purple man. You can say that, but as far as I can operate within my practicality, there are no purple men. I've never seen one; no one has ever seen purple men. So isn't this logical?
Prabhupāda: Purple men?
Śyāmasundara: I'm just using it as an example.
Prabhupāda: What is that purple men? But you have not also seen, why you are speaking like that?
Śyāmasundara: I'm using it as an example of an exception.
Śyāmasundara: How can I theorize there were other or higher forms...
Prabhupāda: You theorize partially, as far as. That is not perfect(?).
Śyāmasundara: If I accept your knowledge, how can I theorize that there were higher forms of life millions of years ago if I have never found any evidence and I have searched...
Prabhupāda: This is the evidence. This is the evidence. You have to see through the evidence, because there are, in the evolution there are so many species of life, say 8,400,000, they are all existing now. They are all existing now. Therefore why should I conclude that millions of years they did not exist?
Śyāmasundara: You say they are all existing now, but I don't see the dinosaur. There are no dinosaurs on this planet.
Prabhupāda: That is not the denied. Dinosaur you may not have seen, it may be existing some other... Neither I have seen the 8,400,000 different species of, different forms of life. But my source of knowledge is different. Your source of knowledge is different. You are experimenter with imperfect senses. I am taking from the perfect who has seen, who knows things. Therefore my knowledge is perfect. Just the same example: I am receiving knowledge from my mother, "Here is your father," and you are trying to search out where is your father. You don't go to the mother, but you are searching out. So therefore, however you may search, your knowledge always will be imperfect.
Śyāmasundara: And your knowledge says that millions of years ago there were higher forms of living entities on this planet.
Prabhupāda: Oh, yes. Because our Vedic information is that the first creation is the most intellect, that is the most intellectual personality within this universe, Brahmā. So how we can say..., how we can accept your theory that intellect develops? We are receiving Vedic knowledge from Brahmā, so perfect. So that is the evidence. The first creature was so perfect.
Karandhara: You are accepting authority anyway. We are accepting Darwin's authority that he went to these islands and found these animals. How do we know he went to the islands and found the animals?
Śyāmasundara: Because you can go there now and find them; they are still there.
Karandhara: But you have to go there to make, to make your point and deduct it. (break)
Svarūpa Dāmodara: ...when it will be cause of all his existence, survival for the fittest, but he is not going into the, who posed this, how it has been done, how it is going to that theory, so his theories are not complete.
Prabhupāda: His theory, it is not science. It is suggestion, guess.
Śyāmasundara: If you expect me to understand this, I have to see it on this planet.
Prabhupāda: That is not knowledge.
Karandhara: Possibly there were and possibly there weren't.
Śyāmasundara: You tell me that Rāma and some other higher creatures lived on this planet so many millions of years ago, so I can expect some day to find evidence of that?
Prabhupāda: The evidence is the authority, Vedic literature.
Karandhara: What other authority will you accept? If you dig up a bone and make a test with your own senses and accept that as an authority...
Prabhupāda: Bone authority. So you will be satisfied with your own authority. We have got our different... If you don't accept my authority, then I don't accept your authority.
Śyāmasundara: It would just seem if there were bones surviving for millions of years, why not cities, why not chariots, why not...?
Prabhupāda: Yes. During Rāmacandra's time there were chariots. Everything was there.
Śyāmasundara: Anyone can argue on that level and say anything, but what I want to know are the facts.
Karandhara: The facts are there, but you can accept the facts as Darwin presents them or as the Vedas present them or as anyone presents them.
Svarūpa Dāmodara: These are all controlled by the force of nature. For example, we do not find evidence, scientific evidence, so-called they've got from eight hundred thousand years ago. That does not mean anything. It is all subject to the course of nature. So maybe it just changed with the earth turning. (indistinct) That does not mean that it did not exist.
Śyāmasundara: If I'm a Darwinist; I'm still not convinced. Because you still haven't proven to me that the layers of earth that are far, far below are not millions of years old. You say that they may be newly formed, but...
Karandhara: They haven't proven that they are millions of years old.
Śyāmasundara: Well, I'm not a geologist...
Prabhupāda: My charge is that you cannot give history of human society more than three thousand years; how you speak of millions of years? That is my charge.
Śyāmasundara: Just like when you are dreaming, you may think it's millions of years, and it's only five minutes. You wake up and you've only been asleep five minutes. even though it seems like millions of years.
Prabhupāda: And actually, according to modern scientists, the law of relativity, so everyone speaks with his relative knowledge. It is not perfect. Everyone speaks to his relative knowledge, that's all. Therefore we should accept knowledge from a person who is not within this relativity.
Śyāmasundara: There is also some scientific evidence that where there is land now, it was once water, and where there is water now, it was once land. That the oceans reversed...
Prabhupāda: Yes. That we accept.
Śyāmasundara: ...so it's quite possible that if there were great civilizations existing, that they are all, all remains are swallowed. There's no trace.
Prabhupāda: That is, everyday you see. One day we walk on the beaches, and the next day it is covered with water. That is not very difficult to understand. But when the covered with water portion you cannot experiment, how you can say what is there within? Has Darwin gone within the sea, layers, studied the bottom of the sea?
Śyāmasundara: Yes. Where it has become land. And you find that there are sea shells, sea animals, in the layer, in the next layer up more complex forms, in the next layer more complex forms...
Prabhupāda: I mean to say, but there is already sea. Has he gone down the sea and excavated the level of the sea, gone down?
Svarūpa Dāmodara: They estimate.
Prabhupāda: Estimate.
Śyāmasundara: They estimate, but there must be some basis for their estimation.
Karandhara: They don't even agree amongst one another. They argue. I attended college with scientists, and they argue amongst one another. They don't agree on their own scientific evidence.
Śyāmasundara: But at least they all agree that there is several million years old, many millions of years old, at least.
Karandhara: No. Not necessarily.
Śyāmasundara: The Pleistocene two hundred million years...
Karandhara: Just an assembly of fools. You can get all the fools to agree on the same thing. It doesn't make anyone...
Śyāmasundara: Well I still want to find out how they...
Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa nāma koro bhai ar sab niche, parai gab pap nahi yoni ache piche (?). Our real problem is birth, death. All these scientist, they could not solve any of these problems, neither they could answer. Maybe Darwin's cam(?) has died. They could not stop death. Kata choto dayana na mari meri jao (?).
Śyāmasundara: ...research. They found that atomic particles vibrate at a certain frequency, a certain rate of vibration, and that elements such as lead, iron, all the different chemical elements, disintegrate gradually. The atomic particles vibrate out of the element and change the structure of the element gradually, and this is a constant—what they call—life of the element, and the constant number of years before it disintegrates into some other element. So this life they have measured, and they have a table or a chart, and by this half-life formula they can determine how old a rock is by how quickly the isotopes are disintegrating. So according to their calculation, the layers of the earth go down for many millions of years; and in those lower layers, millions of years old, there is either no form of life or very, very simple forms of life only. There is no evidence of any complex forms.
Prabhupāda: Bolo... (Bengali—to Svarūpa Dāmodara)
Svarūpa Dāmodara: The age of the rocks, by determining by scientific techniques, find how old the rock (indistinct) is, and how correct it is. So I asked (indistinct) of this department, Professor Roland, and he told me that (indistinct) such and such, I mean the rocks coming from the moon, brought by astronauts. They calculate that by this (indistinct) technique, they find that they are about three to fourteen million years old, these rocks from the moon, the moon samples. But that does not give the real age of the rocks. He told me that what you call the age means how long that crystal... For example they tried to find out the crystals like iridium and strontium crystals, that the method that they use is strontium iridium technique and so he told me that the age, this age, about three times three billion years old, that means that crystal containing that iridium model has crystallized for that long year, that gives the age. They do not know how long it has been there
Śyāmasundara: The rock is at least three billion years; maybe it's older.
Svarūpa Dāmodara: Yes, maybe older, but it does not give the exact age. We do not know.
Śyāmasundara: But the point is that they have determined that there are rock structures in the earth very, very, very, very old and that these contain no evidence of any complex forms of life. So that if there is a statement that there were higher forms of life millions of years ago existing on this planet, there has been no evidence ever found of that.
Prabhupāda: So why they're trying to find out evidence from the rocks, not from any other source?
Śyāmasundara: Well as civilizations come and go, they leave remains, evidence behind of their...
Prabhupāda: "Civilization goes" means? Where goes?
Śyāmasundara: Well, if people come and they...
Prabhupāda: Do they come, and they are still living? They are still there? Just like my great-grand..., great-grandfather was living. So I am his descendant.
Prabhupāda: Who said? You said. You said that there may not, but because my fore... I can make tools; naturally, my grandfather, he can make too. And what is there making tools?
Śyāmasundara: No. But why weren't there any tools left behind for us to find, remnants?
Prabhupāda: What?
Śyāmasundara: Why no remains of tools or other evidence of other men.
Prabhupāda: What is the use of tools? Tools are used for the carpenters, and we are not carpenters.
Śyāmasundara: But if there were high forms of men living...
Prabhupāda: Then he's (indistinct) with the carpenters, not the philosophers.
Śyāmasundara: ...they must have lived in cities.
Prabhupāda: My forefathers were philosophers. They did not require any tools.
Śyāmasundara: They required no houses?
Prabhupāda: No. Even they required, they called some carpenter and they did it.
Śyāmasundara: Coal is the remains of trees, plants...
Prabhupāda: Yes. This is the remains.
Svarūpa Dāmodara: Coal, oil, petroleum.
Śyāmasundara: That means there was some evidence that there were... If we look in coal beds we find remains of trees that were very simple, no complex forms of trees. Now trees are much more complex.
Prabhupāda: Complex or simple, it doesn't matter. There were trees.
Svarūpa Dāmodara: Actually, the coal doesn't say whether the tree was complex or not.
Śyāmasundara: No, but they find impressions from leaves and the carboniferous age, they find that the remains of trees, plants, twigs, all very simple forms like our (indistinct). Today they're more...
Prabhupāda: Our evidence is intelligence, not with tools and (indistinct). Our evidence is intelligence. We find, we get Vedic information by disciplic succession-highly intelligent. So that is our evidence. Not the tools.
Śyāmasundara: The Scripture. The evidence which is written and spoken in...
Prabhupāda: Yes. And that is coming by śruti, by hearing. Just like Vyāsadeva heard from Nārada, Nārada heard from Brahmā, millions and millions of years ago. If you take, according to our calculation, Brahmā's age, Brahmā's one day we cannot calculate. It is now some, so many millions of years past, and still it is not even Brahmā's one day. So many millions of years. Because in Brahmā's one day seventy-two..., fourteen, fourteen Manus come and go. And each Manu's age is seventy-two millennium. One millennium means 4,300,000's of years. So such seventy-two millennium makes complete one Manu's life, and there are fourteen Manus in Brahmā's one day. So millions and trillions and billions of years, that is not very astonishing to us, because it is not even one day of Brahmā. That Brahmā was born, and intelligent philosophy is still existing from the date of Brahmā's birth. Brahmā was first educated by God. That is our calculation. So we get in the Vedas such intelligent information; therefore we understand that our forefather was very, very learned(?).
Śyāmasundara: So even though several million years ago they find no evidence in the rocks...
Prabhupāda: That does not mean that there is no civilization. That is their imperfect knowledge.
Svarūpa Dāmodara: Actually, our so-called modern scientific stories, knowledge is so empiric it's now (indistinct) on complete proof. It is always stands to have objectionable work, sides; so it is not perfect at all. Just like from Śrīla Prabhupāda's book on the Easy Journey to Other Planets, Śrīla Prabhupāda mentioned the discovery of the anti-proton, by the scientists who got the Nobel Prizes in 1959, and Prabhupāda gives all information from Bhagavad-gītā, anything, is already there; Prabhupāda has said it. They say anti-proton... They just discovered the anti-proton, but they still think it is some matter, that is not..., they say anti-proton but still they think that it is connected with matter. But Prabhupāda said it is not matter, it is spirit. Differentiation between matter and anti-matter. Matter is material thing; anti-matter is spirit or (indistinct). So Prabhupāda comments so nicely about the so-called modern scientists to do further research on this concept of anti-matter. Perhaps they will come to an understanding about the spirit, they come to a point. Our knowledge is what you call a modern scientific findings or evidences always subject to changes also...
Prabhupāda: This must be changing because the instruments by which we acquire knowledge, they are imperfect. So by our so-called research and sensuous acceptance of knowledge, that is never perfect. It cannot be perfect.
Śyāmasundara: This says, "After the first complement of the atomic species had been formed during the first hour of expansion, nothing of particular interest happened for the next thirty million years." This is the... They have it all...
Prabhupāda: Where is the evidence that he is speaking the truth?
Śyāmasundara: The making of atoms.
Karandhara: They say that something came out of nothing, that originally there was nothing, at a point in history there was nothing, and at a point in history something began.
Śyāmasundara: Well, it says that there was a "frozen equilibrium and a spontaneous break-up of primordial nuclear fluid. The original state of matter is assumed to be a hot nuclear gas, ylen, y-l-e-n."
Prabhupāda: So first thing is that whatever he is speaking, what is the evidence for his word is to be accepted by us?
Karandhara: For most people it is just his word. Whatever his contemporary scientists conclude, he offers some insignificant evidence.
Prabhupāda: If words are to be accepted as true, why not accept the words of Kṛṣṇa? Who can be greater authority than Kṛṣṇa? If your word does not require any evidence, you are a renowned scientist, your words are sufficient, then greater scientist, greater personality is Kṛṣṇa. Then why should we not accept His words? We do not know what it is, but you are presenting there in bombastic words and we have to accept your word. Is it not? So I will say that instead of accepting your words, why not accept Kṛṣṇa's word? He's greater personality.
Prabhupāda: The different forms are already there. Just like the form of monkeys also there, the form of man is also there, other animals, other birds, beasts. So he has no clear conception how the evolution is taking place, neither he has any idea about whose evolution. He simply takes account of the body. A body never evolves. It is the soul within the body—he evolves, transmigrates from one body to another. Just we see that a child becomes a boy. The..., if the child is dead, it no more evolves. So it is the soul that is concerned. The soul is within the body, and he desires and evolves. That is Vedic conception and that is life. For example, if a man is within an apartment, the man desires to change the apartment to another apartment, it does not mean that the apartment evolves, but the man desires a change, and he goes to different apartment. That is (indistinct). So Darwin has no such conception. He has described the idea of evolution from the Vedas in his own way.
Hayagrīva: At first Darwin was a Christian, but his faith in the existence of a personal God dwindled, and he finally wrote, "The whole subject"—that is the subject of religion, or God—"is beyond the scope of man's intellect. The mystery of the beginning of things is insoluble by us, and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic. I have steadily endeavored to keep my mind free, so as to give up any hypothesis, however much beloved, as soon as facts are shown to be opposed to it." So he didn't argue against Plato or Descartes or Kant or any other philosopher, but he simply presented what evidence he had amassed during a five..., only a five-year voyage, on a British freighter, oh, from 1831 to 1836. But what is considered important is that his book, The Origin of Species, marks what they call the emancipation of science from philosophy.
Prabhupāda: What is that, emancipation?
Hayagrīva: That is to say he simply presented what material he found—that is the fossils. He investigated certain life forms on these island during this trip and theorized about evolution.
Prabhupāda: That is philosophic; that is not scientific. He found something and he based his thesis on that. He cannot find out all the bodies, because there are, at the end, some section, some sect they burn the body. So how he can get information of their body, burned? So his theory is not at all scientific. It is always defective.
Prabhupāda: Dissatisfaction is a good thing if it is for better advancement. That is wanted. Dissatisfaction. Just like the karmīs, they are also dissatisfied with 100,000 of dollars. That means they want to make one million thousands of dollars. So that kind of dissatisfaction for the karmī is good, because he can increase further assets. Similarly, if I am dissatisfied spiritually or I am not making advance, I am still on the material platform. That is good. That dissatisfaction is... Socrates also. Yes. And ass, cats, dogs, they are satisfied with a morsel of grass, that's all. You see? A little stool, what is the value of that satisfaction? What is the value of that? That is our philosophy. Just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu is dissatisfied. What is that? Kadā tava-nāma-grahaṇe bhaviṣyate.
- yugāyitaṁ nimeṣeṇa
- cakṣuṣā prāvṛṣāyitam
- śūnyāyitaṁ jagat sarvaṁ
- govinda-viraheṇa me
Nayanaṁ galad-aśru-dhārayā, cakṣuṣā prāvṛṣāyitam. What is that verse? Nayanaṁ galad-aśru-dhārayā? Pulakair nicitaṁ vapuḥ. Gadgada-girā. Kadā tava-nāma-grahaṇe bhaviṣyati. There is dissatisfaction, that "When My heart will be throbbing? When torrents of rain will come out from My eyes? When My speech will be faltering? When that day will come?" That means this ordinary way He's not satisfied. That is the ecstatic summit: one becomes like a madman, chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. So He is expecting, "When that stage will come?" This stage comes when one is in the summit of chanting, this stage, aṣṭa-śakti-vidhā, eight kinds of transformation. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu is putting forward that "When that stage will come?" Dissatisfaction. This is dissatisfaction. He says, "I have not a pinch of devotion to Kṛṣṇa." Even after crying, even coming to that stage of crying, He says, "No, it is not the stage. I am crying just to make a show that I am a great devotee. I do not love Kṛṣṇa. The evidence is that I am still living. Without Kṛṣṇa and still I'm living. That is My imperfection. If I would have been really lover of Kṛṣṇa, without Kṛṣṇa I would have long, long ago died. But that I have not done. I am still living." So who can show dissatisfaction like this? He says that "I am still living. This is the evidence that I do not love Kṛṣṇa." Even coming to the crying stage, first of all He said, "When I shall cry incessantly for want of Kṛṣṇa?" And again coming to that stage, He is still dissatisfied. He says, "I am simply crying just to make a show. I do not love Kṛṣṇa. If there was pinch of love for Kṛṣṇa, then I would have died long, long ago without Kṛṣṇa." This is dissatisfaction. Who can show such kind of dissatisfaction? And who can feel such dissatisfaction? So the best utility is this Kṛṣṇa consciousness, from any philosophical point of view.
Hayagrīva: In his Utility of Religion, Mill writes about the power of authority.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: And the enormous, what he calls the enormous influence of authority on the human mind. "Authority is the evidence on which the mass of mankind believe everything which they are said to know except facts of which their own senses have taken cognizance. It is the evidence on which even the wisest receive all those truths of science or facts in history or in life of which they have not personally examined the proofs. Whatever is thus certified to them by authority, they believe with a fullness of assurance which they do not accord even to the evidence of their senses when the general opinion of mankind stands in opposition to it."
Prabhupāda: Authority, that is authority. You can not defy it or you can not deny it. That is authority. We are presenting our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement on this principle, that you should carry out the orders of the authority, and Kṛṣṇa or God is the Supreme authority. Whatever He is speaking, instructing to the human society, they must accept it without any wrong interpretation. That will make them happy. So those who are sane persons, they do not hesitate to accept the authority of God and they become happy simply by abiding by the orders of the authority. And those who are following exactly the instruction of the Supreme Authority, they are also authority. So that is the difference between the Supreme Lord and spiritual master. Spiritual master is servant authority, and God is the master authority. Therefore sevyā bhagavān, sevā bhagavān. Just like government officer, a servant authority, and the king is the master authority. So if one follows the instruction of the authority and teaches the people in general the same principles, then he becomes servant authority or the spiritual master.
Prabhupāda: So without God, how it can be religion? Religion means, I have already explained, the order of God.
Hayagrīva: Finally on immortality and miracles, he says that there is no evidence for the immortality of the soul and none against it, but...
Prabhupāda: How he can be convinced? There are so many evidences. That is the misfortune of the human society. A learned person like Mill, he cannot understand, what to speak of the others. This is simple truth. Any child can understand but due to misfortune they cannot understand.
Hayagrīva: And finally he says, "The whole domain of the supernatural, the whole domain of the supernatural, of religion is removed from the region of belief into that of simple hope."
Prabhupāda: No. It is neither hope nor belief. It is fact. To us at least, Kṛṣṇa conscious people, it is fact because Kṛṣṇa is coming and giving instruction to Arjuna, and that is recorded, and we are reading that. So where is it is belief or fiction or something? It is fact.
Śyāmasundara: He says that the life of religion is mankind's most important function.
Prabhupāda: That's nice. We say also, without religion a living entity is no better than an animal. So that is very important.
Śyāmasundara: And he says that the evidence for God's existence is found primarily in one's personal inner experience. One has an intuitive experience that God exists.
Prabhupāda: God exists. Just like we say always that God is supposed to be the supreme father. So as I know, even though I did not see my father, but still I know that I had father, or I have father. So if God is the supreme father, He must be there.
Śyāmasundara: So presumably you could not convince someone through logic or...
Prabhupāda: This is logic. This is logic.
Śyāmasundara: ...like that, that God exists, unless he has a personal inner experience that God exists.
Prabhupāda: Yes. It is very simple logic. Because I am born of my father, my father is born of his father, his father is born of his father, go on, go on, and find out the supreme father. After all, there must have been a beginning of all the fathers. So how can I deny the supreme father?
Śyāmasundara: Unless I have the experience, inner experience of that...
Prabhupāda: This is inner experience. It is very simple. Because my father is, therefore I am born of him. He is born of his father, he is born of his father. Go on, that's it. That is, our śāstra says, ultimately you will come to Brahmā, the father of this universe. The Brahmā is also born of Nārāyaṇa, how you say, Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, and the Garbhodakaśāyī, wherefrom He comes? Mahā-Viṣṇu, Kāraṇodakaśāyī Viṣṇu. Wherefrom Mahā-Viṣṇu comes? From Saṅkarṣaṇa. Wherefrom Saṅkarṣaṇa comes? From Nārāyaṇa. Wherefrom Nārāyaṇa comes? He comes from Baladeva. Wherefrom does Baladeva comes? Kṛṣṇa.
Hayagrīva: James saw religion as the source of philosophy. He writes, "Since the relation of man to God may be either moral, physical or ritual, it is evident that out of religion in the sense in which we take it, theologies, philosophies, and ecclesiastical organizations may secondarily grow."
Prabhupāda: So philosophy means advancement of knowledge. So we are making progress in knowledge when our knowledge is actually come to the point of perfection of knowledge, that is understanding of God. God is there, but on account of our foolishness, sometimes we deny the existence of God. That is the most foolish platform of living condition. But sometimes we have vague idea, some imagination, and sometimes impersonal, sometimes pantheistic. In this way different philosophies means they are searching after God, but on account of not being perfect, there are differences of opinion or different conception of God. But actually God is person, and when one comes to that platform—to know God, to talk with Him, to see Him, to feel His presence, even to play with Him—that is the highest platform of God realization. And the relationship is God is the great and we are small. So our position is always subordinate.
Prabhupāda: He can define, but he must be a very, what is called, sane man to define. The sane man's definition of God is there. Just like everyone says, "God is great." So now if he can define what is the greatness... The greatness, if one man is very rich, we consider him great man. If a man is very wise we call him a great man. If a man is very strong or influential or beautiful... Greatness according to our estimation. So all this greatness must be there in God. God must be the richest, God must be the strongest, God must be the most beautiful, God must be wisest. In this way, six opulences calculated, and when these opulences are in completeness, that is God. So that completeness we find in the history Kṛṣṇa. In the history of humanity it is very easy to find out that when Kṛṣṇa was present on this planet, so He proved the strongest, the most influential, the most beautiful, the supreme wise—everything—supreme famous. Kṛṣṇa's fame, fame is still going on. Kṛṣṇa's knowledge, stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, is still being studied all over the world. This is the proof that He is God. And all saintly persons in India, they are not controlled by these foreign Dr. Frogs. So these big, big ācāryas, like Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Nimbārka, Śaṅkarācārya, and Caitanya Mahāprabhu, all big ācāryas, they have accepted Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Lord. So there is complete uniformity of the authorities in the past, present and future. So here is God. If one cannot accept Him God, then he is insane. With so many evidences, and it is practical. Many evidences when Kṛṣṇa was present He showed; that is history. But these imperfect Dr. Frog, when they see God is doing something uncommon, they take it "Myth, mythology."
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: He says this anxiety is evidence of finitude.
Prabhupāda: Mm?
Śyāmasundara: He says that anxiety is evidence of finitude, or that being finite, opposite of infinite.
Prabhupāda: Oh. Yes.
Śyāmasundara: If one is finite, then there is automatically anxiety.
Prabhupāda: But the..., we want to be anxietyless. That means we are infinite, according to that philosophy.
Śyāmasundara: Yes.
Prabhupāda: Anxiety is there when I think that I am finite. Just like when I think that Mr. Bhatiwalla(?) is trying to get us out, then we are in anxiety. And if we know that there is no such thing, we can live here... So we want to live infinitely. When that is disturbed, there is anxiety. Therefore it appears that we are infinite. But we have been put into finite condition. That is the cause of anxiety. Now, therefore, the intelligent person should try to come to the platform of infiniteness. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Kṛṣṇa says that tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9). There are many others... There are many devotees, just to avoid this birth, death, old age, many have attained success. These things are stated in Bhagavad-gītā. Therefore the conclusion is it will become anxietyless to have infinite life. One must (indistinct) Kṛṣṇa conscious. This is the conclusion. And there is no question of avoiding. If you avoid, then you..., it must be remain entangled. It is a question of must. You must take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness if you actually... Prahlāda Mahārāja recommends that, that when he was asked by his father what is the best thing he had learned, he said this is the best thing: that he should give up this materialistic way of life and take shelter of the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. That is the best thing. Tat sādhu manye 'sura-varya dehinām. Dehinām means those who have accepted the material body. For them. And dehinām, one who has accepted this body, sadā samudvigna-dhiyām asad-grahāt (SB 7.5.5), because he is eternal, but he has accepted something which is not eternal, asat. It is limited. He is unlimited, but he is entrapped by something which is limited. Therefore, sadā samudvigna-dhiyām. Just like we have got our own land in Māyāpur, so we can go and live there. There is no question of Bhatiwalla. But we won't go there. We have accepted this apartment.
Śyāmasundara: This morning we are discussing a philosopher called Ludwig Wittgenstein, a contemporary German philosopher. One of his major so-called contributions is what is called a verification principle, which reads, "To understand a proposition means to know what is the case if it is true." That means anyone who wishes to understand a proposition must first know the conditions under which that proposition is true, that is, what information is required by way of evidence of its truth.
Prabhupāda: So the modern world's proposition is that "I am this body." So that is untruth. What does he say about this?
Śyāmasundara: Well, if I claim that I am this body, that means I have to know all of the conditions which make it true that I am this body. Then if all these conditions are true...
Prabhupāda: First of all we must discuss what I am. Then we have to see whether I am this body or not. And what do you mean by "I am"? You are individual, I am individual. How I exact my individuality, and how you exact your individuality? What is the symptom? What is the meaning of "I am"? First of all you have to understand, what do you mean by "I am"? "I am" means my activities, "I am." That is "I am."
Prabhupāda: Then how do you come to "I am"? "No more" means you came to the existence of "I am." How did you come to exist as "I am"? If you say that after the stoppage of movements of the body, when there is no more "I am," then how this "I am" came into existence? That is the question. Wherefrom this movement came?
Śyāmasundara: They say that the condition or the evidence required to know if this is true, that I came from...
Prabhupāda: The first thing is that if I identify myself with the body, the body means movements of the limbs. Now if something is wanting, and the limbs do not move any more... But that moving force is "I am."
Śyāmasundara: They would say that it is a combination of chemicals or some...
Devānanda: They postulated... The French philosophers at one point postulated that within the matter itself there is a potential of consciousness. They called it elan vital, living potential within matter, and when you put the matter together in certain positions, then that living potential is able to come out, and when the material nature changes again, it is no longer manifested.
Prabhupāda: That is another nonsense, because when the body becomes from the lump of matter, why that living potentiality, consciousness, does not come again?
Devānanda: Because the elements are no longer in suitable arrangement for life to be...
Prabhupāda: If you know the elements, you say that "You add this element." Just like when the motorcar stops for want of gas, you take gasoline from the petroleum store and it starts again. Either you do it, otherwise you are rascal, you are putting some wrong theory. If you say that it is a combination of chemicals, and you know that addition, that these living symptoms are there, then bring that chemical and add to it and let the body go out again. If you cannot do that, then you are nonsense. There is no sense of your statement.
Śyāmasundara: In order for that statement or that proposition to be true, there must be evidence.
Prabhupāda: This is evidence: that there is no soul. The self, the individual soul, is now departed; therefore this body is lump of matter. This is evidence. And because the soul is there, therefore the body changes or develops. Just like if a child is born dead, then the body does not develop or changes. It remains in the same condition. But so long the soul is there, the child grows or changes his body. That is evidence. Because the soul is there, therefore the child is growing or changing body from childhood to boyhood, boyhood to youth. Suppose a child is born, doctor says it is dead child. You say something is wanted, but what is that something? You do not know. Otherwise, if you know, you add it. What is that something? Suggest, what is that something? Simply vague idea something, that is nonsense idea. That is not science. You must give, "This is wanting." Suppose that you say that the blood, the redness, just like nowadays blood supply is the theory, so what is this blood? Blood is a liquid, red liquid, like chemical or something, with some salt. So you can add salt, just like in cholera cases, they add saline injection. So dead body, you give saline injection, make it red by some color, give him life. If you say that "Red blood is now white," so make it red. What is the difficulty? There is no difficulty. There are so many chemicals. If you say the redness is the life, then there are many natural products, just like jewels, by nature it is red. Why is it not alive? Why it is not alive? By natural redness of something, if you say that is the cause of life, then there are many jewels. What is called, jewels?
Śyāmasundara: Ruby.
Śyāmasundara: He is not disputing that there is soul or there is not soul. He is merely putting forward a principle to test something, if it is true or false.
Prabhupāda: This is the test. This is the test. Because the soul is there, therefore the body is moving.
Śyāmasundara: So that is the evidence for...
Prabhupāda: That is the evidence. Anyone can see. Now we say, "My father is gone. Oh, my father is gone." Where has he gone? Your father is lying there. Why do you say gone?
Devānanda: They say he has passed away. But what is passed away?
Prabhupāda: Passed away... What is this passed away? That means you have not seen your father. You have not seen your father, still you identify the body as your father. Or your father identifies your body as yourself. Just like the father has not seen the son, the son has not seen the father. Therefore it is illusion.
Śyāmasundara: The movement of the body is evidence that the soul exists.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is the only evidence. Because the soul is there, that individual soul.
Devānanda: Śrīla Prabhupāda, when death comes, at the moment... Before death, the whole body is alive, completely alive and functioning, and in a split second it's all finished, completely dead. That would be an evidence that it is not a chemical combination. If it were a chemical combination it would die slowly.
Prabhupāda: The reason is that the soul, when quitting this body, there is examination what kind of body he is going to get. Superior examination. Either you call nature or God, there is superior... According to his karma he will get a body. Now, that requires a little time. So what kind of body this soul will get? As soon as it is decided, then immediately he's transferred to that kind of body, and this body remains there.
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.
Śyāmasundara: He says that philosophy is that mental activity which seeks to analyze or clarify the meanings of scientific propositions.
Prabhupāda: This is philosophy: to study what is this body and how it is moving. This is analytical study. And you come to the understanding that the body is a dead lump of matter, there is something which is called the soul. Because the soul is there. This is scientific truth. One who has not this knowledge, he is not scientific; he is foolish.
Śyāmasundara: In other words, if you make a scientific proposition that "Because I am, the body moves," that is your scientific proposition?
Prabhupāda: Yes, this is scientific proposition.
Śyāmasundara: So they fall back on kind of a blind faith...
Prabhupāda: But you are in blind faith. Those who do not accept the authorities, they are in blind faith. Just like one who does not know that what is soul, he is in blind faith, accepting this body as self. He is in blind faith.
Śyāmasundara: He has no real evidence that my self is the body either.
Prabhupāda: He is blind, because it is not the fact. The evidence is there, but he is in blind faith. The whole world is working in blind faith—"I am Pakistani," "I am Hindustani," "I am American," "I am Englishman." Simply bodily identification. The whole world is a set of fools only. That's all. That is stated in the śāstras: yasyātma-buddhiḥ kuṇape tri-dhātuke (SB 10.84.13). Anyone who accepts this bag of three dhātus, kapha, pitta, vāyu, as self, he is an ass.
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.
Śyāmasundara: It seems to me, in all of your propositions, you are also showing by practical example how this is true. You do not... It's not in the air, so we cannot perceive it in some way.
Prabhupāda: Nothing is in the air. Everything is fact. But if somebody says, although it is fact, "I cannot see, therefore it is not fact," that is not a good proposal.
Śyāmasundara: You give the evidence: the body is suddenly stopping moving. That is evidence. Even though we cannot see the soul, perhaps, but the evidence is there.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Just like on a cloudy day we cannot see the sun, but because there is light, so we say, "Yes, there is sun."
Śyāmasundara: Evidence.
Prabhupāda: Evidence. Similarly, the evidence is the moving capacity. Because the body is moving, there is soul. It doesn't matter if you can see or not see. It doesn't matter. When the motor is moving, there is gas. You may not see the gas. It is foolishness, that "I have not seen the gas. When it is put in?" (break) ...dark, now it is light. How I am saying there is a darkness? It is (indistinct)
Devotee: (indistinct)
Prabhupāda: What is past, present, future for a man is not the past, present, future for Brahmā. Therefore this past, present, future is relative. And Kṛṣṇa is eternal. He has no past, present and future.
Prabhupāda: That is pure consciousness.
Śyāmasundara: But by examining a phenomenon purely, without any other consideration, he says that each thing has its given content or its principle of principles, as an object of intuition. Or he calls it also a thing of authentic reality. Just like a leaf. If you look at a leaf, and you have no consideration of previous knowledge where do these things come, what is a leaf, anything, then the authentic reality of that leaf will present itself to my consciousness. It will be self-evident what is that leaf.
Prabhupāda: You don't take... That means that analytical study of the leaf.
Śyāmasundara: Yes. But without any previous knowledge—as if I knew nothing about leaves before, but I begin to look at the leaf and it will be self-evident what that leaf is.
Prabhupāda: So you can talk any nonsense. (laughter) Then what is the use of going to school? There is no need of opening so many schools and colleges. You go on studying, you can know all knowledge and talk all kinds of nonsense. Is that perfect?
Śyāmasundara: No. He says that if a man has a clear intelligence that he will be able to understand the essence of that...
Prabhupāda: But why these schools are there? Every day we see, actually, from the most intelligent persons, scientist, he has to go to a school. Not that at home, by speculating and talking nonsense, they have become a scientist. They will never become.
Prabhupāda: But why these schools are there? Every day we see, actually, from the most intelligent persons, scientist, he has to go to a school. Not that at home, by speculating and talking nonsense, they have become a scientist. They will never become.
Śyāmasundara: But if evidence from that leaf—that it is the color green, for instance...
Prabhupāda: Still, you have to learn how the color green comes in.
Śyāmasundara: Well, he calls that kind of knowledge—how the color green comes in—you must exclude that kind of consideration; only...
Prabhupāda: That I am saying. Then he doesn't require to ask anybody. He has to speculate himself and think any kind of way he likes. He wants (indistinct).
Śyāmasundara: No. He wants to understand the object in its self-evidence...
Prabhupāda: What is that self-evidence?
Syamasundara: ...not that it's the color green, that...
Prabhupāda: Then what is his study? Color green everyone is seeing. So what is his specific purpose of studying?
Śyāmasundara: By studying the appearance of the leaf, the phenomenon, its nature or its essence will become self-evident—why the leaf is structured in a certain way, what is the...
Prabhupāda: (indistinct) How you can know the structure of this leaf, why it is green some portion, why it is yellow, why there are stem, how it comes...? Do you mean to say that these things should automatically come if I speculate on this?
Śyāmasundara: No. He doesn't say you have to become a botanist.
Prabhupāda: So any, anything, whatever you may be, you cannot become perfect without hearing from another perfect. This is nonsense, that you go on speculating and the proof will come. This is nonsense.
Śyāmasundara: Well, I know. That is nonsense. That isn't what he's saying. He's saying that if you look at an object, the nature of that object will be self-evident; that it isn't that we have to know everything about the object, but the nature of it, the essence of it will be self-evident.
Prabhupāda: No. The nature is... Sometimes a child takes this, asks his father: "What is this, Father? What is this?" "The case of a spectacle." Therefore he gets the knowledge. That is nature.
Śyāmasundara: But if there was no-one...
Prabhupāda: But if the child will speculate, well then (indistinct) speculate?
Śyāmasundara: Well this isn't a philosophy for children exactly. It's supposedly for very intelligent men.
Prabhupāda: Anyone who is following the principle, he's no better than a children. He's a child. This man is no better than a child, because he is speculating something important. He wants to study this leaf without any other sense. Then he is a child.
Śyāmasundara: Well, you were just saying before that if someone analyzes everything scrutinizingly, they will find out that it is part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa. But unless they are able to make that analysis, then what is the point of analyzing? Shouldn't we have the freedom to analyze something?
Prabhupāda: Suppose that when he says to analyze, analyze. When he will not take help? (indistinct) analyze.
Śyāmasundara: This is just the first step of his process. There are three steps. The first step is simply to reduce the phenomenon to their self-evident (indistinct)...
Prabhupāda: What is that self-evidence?
Śyāmasundara: ...that it is green, that it grows on trees—those simple things that anyone can see, they're self-evident.
Prabhupāda: That's all right.
Śyāmasundara: That we don't have to consult any authority about or have any knowledge about previously. We can see those things.
Prabhupāda: That's all right.
Prabhupāda: That's all right.
Śyāmasundara: That's the first step. Then the second step is to make a universal reduction, to find out which things are common to all leaves, what things initially, this single appearance has the same thing in common with all appearances of leaves. Then... He calls these the ideas which underlie the pure phenomenon, like greenness and growth, things like that, basic principles, he calls these the changeless forms, changeless forms. Just like when this leaf is gone, it has disappeared, the color green will still exist somewhere; it is always existing. And the idea of growth will always exist somewhere. So that's the second step. He says that these changeless ideas, like greenness and growth, must be applied to phenomenon to give them stability or a basis, and thus rescue them from a state of constant change and unreality. So he is seeking to find out something permanent inside the temporary appearances of things. So he says that the essence of something is unlike the phenomenon by virtue of its universality. In other words, the experience that this leaf is green can be shared by all persons alike. Everyone will see that the leaf is green, not that one person will see it as yellow or another person will see it as grey. But that greenness that everyone sees, that is its self-evident nature, or essence of that leaf. So as an example, he gives the example of... We see a green object, for example, and green color is imminent in our consciousness, but when we postulate the transcendent color, it is not immediately sensed but merely described scientifically as existing in light waves measuring 550 millimicrons in length. In other words, the knowledge that that greenness is caused by certain light waves as measured by scientists is not important to him. The real idea is that that immediate greenness is shared by everyone, that is the nature of that leaf. Then the third...
Prabhupāda: Direct perception.
Śyāmasundara: (indistinct) Then the third step is an analysis of the correlation between the phenomenon of (sic:) cognitation and the object of cognitation. In other words, he says we must make a distinction between the appearance and that which appears—the leaf in this form and leafness as a permanent idea. So...
Prabhupāda: So why not study why sometimes it is leafless and why there is leaf? Why during winter season there is no leaf, and the springtime the leaves come out? Why? That is also phenomenon, changes. So therefore the next step will be that how the changes take place, and why the changes take place. That is real philosophy. Simply if you are satisfied that leaves are there, green leaves, that's all right; and there is no leaves, that's all right—that is not very intelligent. This is phenomenon. There is no leaf and there is leaf. So this is childish. Childish satisfies... Child does not enquire, "My dear father, why sometimes there is leaf and sometimes no leaf?" He is satisfied there is no leaf, that's all right; there is leaf, that's all right.
Śyāmasundara: His idea is first of all you have to understand what is leaf or what is father. Then you can understand where the leaf came from, where the father came from. He wants to start from the point of having no knowledge about anything and building up gradually. So they begin with only the bare phenomenon, understanding what is the bare phenomenon. Because there's no authority for them to ask, these Western philosophers. They don't know where is the authority. So the only authority you can rely on is that which is self-evident, those things, those intuitive...
Prabhupāda: So if there is no authority, then why he is anxious to become authority? Why he's philosophizing? Let everyone learn from intuition, self-study. Why he's writing such books?
Śyāmasundara: Because he wants to understand the nature of things.
Devotee: He wants to help other people understand the nature of things.
Prabhupāda: He does not want that his books should be read by anyone.
Śyāmasundara: Yes. He wants to understand the nature of things so that he can help others...
Prabhupāda: That means that he becomes authority. He becomes authority. If he wants to become authority, why he should deny other authority?
Śyāmasundara: He doesn't deny another authority, he just doesn't know which authority is the real, correct authority.
Prabhupāda: Well, that we know. Therefore we say that Vedic knowledge is authority. That is the difference between the Western philosophers and the Indian philosophers. They accept the authority of the Vedas.
Śyāmasundara: Behind hearing one sound, the proof of that understanding of sound in general is the sky, like that. In an elective process, this is a process for understanding these things.
Prabhupāda: On the whole, his process is mental speculation.
Śyāmasundara: So he says that in things there is a self-evident truth. In everything there is something self-evident that makes it true. Is that not possible?
Prabhupāda: That self-evidence is certain (indistinct). Just like this leaf, that you see the greenness of the leaf, but that is not all. If you actually want to study that leaf, simply the superficial vision of the leaf as green is not all.
Śyāmasundara: No.
Prabhupāda: So a person who has adaksi, sense perception, they cannot have perfect knowledge. He has seen simply phenomenon. Behind this phenomenon they cannot see. Therefore their knowledge is imperfect.
Devotee: So then if we (indistinct), Lord Brahmā took instruction from within his heart, we can understand that he had a pure heart, he was able to take instruction from Kṛṣṇa from within, that his heart was pure.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Devotee: But when that contaminated consciousness, in..., that kind of knowledge is unacceptable to him, in that contamination.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That's it.
Śyāmasundara: You can understand it up to a certain point. Just like he would..., just like Madhudviṣa was saying, unless you understand the idea of fatherhood, how can anybody tell you, "This is your father"? You won't understand what he's talking about.
Devotee: But the point is, how can you ever understand the father?
Śyāmasundara: Fatherness becomes self-evident if you analyze it.
Devotee: How self-evident, if the mind is a limited instrument? How is it self-evident?
Śyāmasundara: Well, you can see that this child is coming out, that this child is being conceived by a father. You can see that. It's self-evident. That much is self-evident. But who is the father and how the father is there and the activity involved has to be gotten from authority.
Prabhupāda: No. The father may die(?), even your father may... Suppose the child does not know what his father may be. His father, he doesn't care to know. But when he grows up, he can see one man, always constant companion of the mother, he can enquire, "Who is this man?" And the mother will say, "He is your father." So he's not that (indistinct)?
Devotee: What does father mean though?
Prabhupāda: It doesn't matter. He doesn't know. But mother will explain that "He is your father."
Prabhupāda: He is saying that he had studied only some crazy people.
Śyāmasundara: No.
Prabhupāda: But that is not the fact. He analyzed some sane people also. But one psychiatrist's opinion is that (indistinct) was a civil servant, he was called to give evidence in a case where the criminal was pleading (indistinct) became insane while he committed the murder. So the civil servant was called to test him, whether actually he was insane or (indistinct) insanity. So he gave evidence that "I have tested so many persons, so I have seen that more or less everyone is insane. More or less. They are bewildered. So in that case, if insanity is the only plea that he should be excused, he can be excused. But so far as I know, everyone is more or less insane." And that is our conclusion. We say (indistinct), anyone who is infected with this material nature is more or less insane, crazy. He is crazy, not more or less. Anyone who has got this material body must be crazy. And therefore everyone is speaking in a different way.
Devotee: As a result of Freud's philosophy he prescribed, and many of his students prescribed, certain activities. This is one thing we forget to mention—that they prescribed certain activities to help relieve the patient of the trauma, and that is called therapy. Actually there is a higher therapy. Actually one of Freud's students would say that we are all involved in therapy in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, which we are, and that therapy is chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. Therapy is a certain kind of activity which will relieve the anxieties and stresses of the mind.
Prabhupāda: That is recommended by Freud?
Śyāmasundara: No. He wasn't a therapeutical psychologist.
Devotee: No, but as a result of his...
Śyāmasundara: Later on they devised that theory of therapy.
Prabhupāda: (indistinct) in support of our movement.
Hayagrīva: He says, "If one attempts to assign religion its place in man's evolution, it seems not so much to be a lasting acquisition as a parallel to the neuroses which the civilized individual must pass through on his way from childhood to maturity."
Prabhupāda: Evidently he is frustrated, without any knowledge of religion. He had no idea. He has seen that so many sentimental religious system, and he has concluded like that. But first of all let him understand what is religion. Religion cannot come into existence without understanding the idea of God. Religion without God cannot be religion. According to Vedic system, religion means the order given by God. But if one has no conception of God, that there is no question of religion. So Godless religion is, certainly, it is sentiment. That is not religion. So he has studied something which is not religion; therefore he has got so many doubts about religion. Real religion is that there is God, that is a fact, and whatever orders the God gives, that is religion. So he does not know what is God. How he will know what order He is giving? So for him everything is not religion.
Hayagrīva: Jung then found that the philosophies and theologies, at least of the West, could not give him a clear picture of God's personality. He concluded, "What is wrong with these philosophers? I wondered. Evidently they know of God only by hearsay."
Prabhupāda: Yes. That I was complaining, that none of these rascals have any clear idea of God. They are simply speculating. Therefore they cannot speak anything about religion or God, because they have no clear conception. But so far we are concerned, we have got clear conception of God: "Here is God, Kṛṣṇa." And we want to give that conception to the world. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Kṛṣṇa is accepted as the Supreme Person, Supreme God, by everyone, all authorities, past, present, future must be. So why they do not accept this personal God? If they have got any reason, if they have got any logic, any philosophy, here is Kṛṣṇa, perfect God. So He, according to Vedic scripture, He is complete, cent percent God. Other incarnation of God, they are not cent percent. It has been analyzed in our Nectar of Devotion. Up to Nārāyaṇa, ninety-four percent God, ah, ninety-six percent God. Lord Śiva, eighty-four percent God, Lord Brahma, er, eighty...
Hari-śauri: Seventy-eight?
Prabhupāda: Seventy-eight percent. That is also very minute quantity of the characteristics and qualities of God. But Kṛṣṇa is full-fledged, cent percent God. That Rūpa Goswami has analyzed in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu. We have given the translation in Nectar of Devotion. So God is person. Simply if we study man's character, then we can study also God, the same character. Loving affairs, as we also want to enjoy with friends, with girls, with parents, with superiors, with servants, as we take pleasure in these relationship, similarly, God also takes pleasure in these similar relationship. He has got five relationship primarily, and seven relationship secondarily. So twelve kinds of relationship, and therefore He is described, akhila-rasāmṛta-sindhu, reservoir of all pleasure. That is His completeness. So the philosophers, they should try to understand, and very, I mean, analytically, what is God. They do not know God, and they speak of God, imaginary. That is not perfect knowledge. One must study what is God with perfect knowledge. That is advancement of knowledge.
Hayagrīva: He gave the following criticism of Sigmund Freud. He says, "Sexuality evidently meant more to Freud than to other people. For him it was something to be religiously observed."
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: "One thing was clear. Freud, who had always made much of his irreligiosity, had now constructed a dogma, or rather in the place of God, whom he had lost, he had substituted another compelling image, that of sexuality."
Prabhupāda: Yes, that's a fact. He has taken sexuality as God. But our position is that we must accept a leader. That is our natural tendency. So he gave up the leadership of God and took the leadership of sex. That is his position. Leadership we must have. That is..., this question also I asked to Professor Kotovsky, that "Where is the difference between your philosophy and our philosophy? You accept leader, Lenin. We accept leader, Kṛṣṇa. So where is the difference in the process?" So this is the nature of human being, to accept a leader. But this man, unfortunately, he lost the leadership of God and he took leadership of sex. That is his position.
Dr. Rao: Pratyakṣa.
Prabhupāda: So pratyakṣa is third-class knowledge, according to Vedic system. Pratyakṣa is third-class knowledge. Or fifth-class knowledge. There are stages of knowledge-pratyakṣa, parokṣa, aparokṣa, adhokṣaja, aprakṛta-(indistinct)—that when you come to the standard of aprakṛta knowledge, that is perfection. So pratyakṣa knowledge, direct perception, is fifth-class knowledge, and according to Vedic system, pratyakṣa, aitirya, and śabda... Pratyakṣa, direct perception; (Sanskrit), (indistinct); and śabdha. Three. So out of these three kinds of evidences, śabda-pramāṇa, veda-pramāṇa, is perfect. So if pratyakṣa knowledge is perfect, then why a child, a boy, is sent to school? To hear from the teacher. That is śabda. That is śabda. If pratyakṣa, direct perception, would have been perfect, then there was no need of sending these boys to school to hear from the teacher. But this is very scientific, śabda-pramāṇa.
Śyāmasundara: But isn't the understanding of the white light composed of seven other colors, isn't that also a fact of direct sense perception?
Prabhupāda: No. That is śabda. So a man sees this white snowball, he sees snow. He may not see the reflection of the sun, seven colors, but when he goes to a teacher, he can hear that there is seven colors. Therefore śabda-pramāṇa. The word, the sound, then he can be perfect.
Śyāmasundara: Because even if we see the seven colors in the laboratory with instruments, we still don't understand the even simpler facts of which that is composed. There may be seven colors, but how to understand those?
Prabhupāda: Yes. Therefore material knowledge is always imperfect. That is the conclusion.
Śyāmasundara: He says that the mind plays no part in the process of evolution, because the only evidence for the existence of mental phenomena is a fragment of space and time. But this is not a substance; it is simply a set of relations.
Prabhupāda: He does not know it is also matter, but very subtle matter. It is matter. Just like ether—you cannot touch, you cannot see, but still it is matter. And mind is subtler than the ether. But it is matter. Intelligence is subtler than the mind, but still it is matter. So from Vedic authorities we understand that earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intelligence, they are all material.
Dr. Rao: And ahaṅkāra, ego.
Prabhupāda: Ego, that is also matter.
Hayagrīva: Well, evidently Marx never got over the antagonism between his father and his mother—his mother who was Jewish and his father who was a Christian convert. He says, "As soon as Jew and Christian recognize their respective religions, there is nothing more than different stages of evolution of the human spirit, as different snakeskins shed by history, and recognize man as the snake who wore them. They will no longer find themselves in religious antagonism but only in a critical scientific and human relationship. Science constitutes their unity. Contradictions in science, however, are resolved by science itself." So that, in other words, science, material science, is to replace this religion, and religion is to be shed by mankind just as a snake sheds its skin. And in this way the antagonisms created between Jew and Christian or, or Hindu and Muslim are reconciled.
Prabhupāda: Reconciled can be only when you actually know what is God. Simply by stamping oneself Christian, Jewish, or Hindu and Muslim, without knowing who is God and what is his desire, that will naturally create antagonism. Therefore the conclusion is, as Mr. Marx giving stress on science, so we should understand scientifically what is religion, what is God. Then this antagonism will stop.
Hayagrīva: He felt that the state should eventually assume the role of Christ. He said, "As Christ is the mediator on whom man unburdens all his own divinity and his whole religious burden, so also the state is the mediator on which man places all his unholiness and his whole human burden." So, in other words, that Christ, of course, relieves man of all his burdens and his sins through his message of salvation, and instead of Christ it would be the state that would assume this role.
Prabhupāda: So Christ gives the knowledge how one can be relieved of the material burden. That is the business of all religious preacher. The religious preacher should give information to the people in general the exact position of God or idea of God, and when people will learn scientifically about God's existence and his relationship with God, then everything will be adjusted. That is wanted. Our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is trying to give people exact idea of God, exact definition of God, and exact instruction of God. If we take that, take to that, then our religious life will be perfect.
Śyāmasundara: Life develops from inorganic matter is his theory. It is merely a higher level of organization, inorganic life.
Prabhupāda: That means life developed from matter?
Śyāmasundara: Yes.
Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. How life develops from matter? Where is the, evidence? Why do they not manufacture life from matter in the laboratory? It is simply a statement. It has no value. Because you cannot produce living force from matter. Matter is different and living force, soul, is different. (In) one sense, of course, they are the energy of God, but still, categorically, they are different. So far these materialists are concerned, where is the proof that from matter, life has developed? So why they do not manufacture life in the laboratory? Even an ant you cannot manufacture. You have got all the chemicals. Why don't you manufacture life? So this theory cannot be accepted.
Śyāmasundara: They trace back... Their so-called evidence is just mostly see that geological calculations. They see that at a certain period... They go further down into the earth's surface.
Prabhupāda: That's all right.
Śyāmasundara: So even before inorganic life there was...
Prabhupāda: There is no such thing, from inorganic life. Inorganic life... Suppose just like Brahmā is coming from the navel of Viṣṇu. So where is the... We don't get any information. Viṣṇu is origin, and from Viṣṇu, Brahmā came. From Brahmā, other demigods came, other animals came. They create animals and others. The first created being is Brahmā, the most intelligent. He's not animal. Their proposal is from lower to the higher, but our theory is from the higher, from Viṣṇu. Kṛṣṇa says, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ (BG 10.8). "I am the origin of everything." Now, how you can say there is development from the lower creatures? He is the origin. And Vedānta says, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). The origin, Absolute Truth, is that from whom everything is generating. So Absolute Truth means He is the supreme life. From life, life is coming. Where is the evidence that dead stone giving birth to a man or animal? Where is the evidence?
Śyāmasundara: His idea is that in future everyone will be a demigod, that the race of man, because of mental life, will be replaced by a race of superconscious beings.
Prabhupāda: Superconscious beings, there are already existing, just like in Siddhaloka and Gandharvaloka. There are many planets.
Śyāmasundara: It's not that accidentally nature will evolve a race of demigods on this planet.
Prabhupāda: No, no. There is nothing accidental. It is not that accidental, one becomes high-court judge. (laughter) This is nonsense. Accidental(ly) one becomes a very high grade medical man. This is all childish proposal. They have no sense even. It is all childish. Where is the, in our practical life, where is the evidence that accidentally one has become like this? Is there any evidence of how they propose these childish things? I do not know. And they are passing as philosophers.
Śyāmasundara: Occasionally, for instance, there will be some great genius born in a family, and they will say that somehow or other, nature has produced this genius. The parents are not so intelligent.
Prabhupāda: No. Genius means he, in his previous life, he cultured, and next life is being manifested. Just like in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, śucīnāṁ śrīmatāṁ gehe yogo bhraṣṭaḥ sañjāyate (BG 6.41). So yoga-bhraṣṭaḥ, one who could not finish his yogic activities perfectly, he is given chance. Śucīnāṁ śrīmatāṁ gehe. Not that accidental.
Śyāmasundara: So through the practice of some kind of yoga system, men develop higher consciousness.
Prabhupāda: Yes. This is also, we are practicing, bhakti-yoga.
Prabhupāda: Against, against.
Hayagrīva: As theism and atheism.
Prabhupāda: That means against; ag means against.
Hayagrīva: Yeah, against. But according to him, agnosticism holds that man shouldn't assert what he calls a truth without logically satisfactory evidence.
Prabhupāda: We say "without any authority."
Hayagrīva: When Huxley became a Darwinist he rejected a supernatural God and the Bible. In For Argument from Design... He believed in, previously he believed in a Christian God as the designer, but he believed that Darwin's theory gave this Christian conception its death blow. He did not accept a pantheistic God, like Spinoza did, as being identical... Excuse me. He did accept a pantheistic God, like Spinoza did, as being identical with nature. That is, he saw God as nature, and he believed in the divine government of the universe. He believed that the cosmic process is rational, not random...
Prabhupāda: How it becomes rational?
Hayagrīva: ...but he rejected a personal God concerned with morality.
Prabhupāda: That is his defect. The nature is dead body, matter. So how it can be rational? Just like this table is a dead wood. How it can be rational? That is nonsense. The carpenter is rational, who has made the wood in the shape. So he says the nature is rational. Nature is dead matter. How it can be rational? Therefore there is a rational being behind the nature. That is God. This, the wood, is dead. The wood, out of its own accord, cannot become a table. The carpenter is shaping the wood into table. That is rational. Therefore behind the dead nature, the rational being is God. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā. I think Mr. Huxley is supposed to have read..., understand he has given some comment on the Ramakrishna Mission Bhagavad-gītā, but he has not studied Bhagavad-gītā thoroughly.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Gṛhastha. So He was meditating upon Himself. (break)
Hari-śauri:
- arjuna uvāca
- paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma
- pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān
- puruṣaṁ śāśvatam divyam
- ādi-devam ajaṁ vibhum
- (BG 10.12)
- āhus tvām ṛṣayaḥ sarve
- devarṣir nāradas tathā
- asito devalo vyāsaḥ
- svayaṁ caiva bravīṣi me
"Arjuna said: You are the Supreme Brahman, the ultimate, the supreme abode and purifier, the Absolute Truth and the eternal Divine Person. You are the primal God, transcendental and original, and You are the unborn and all-pervading beauty. All the great sages, such as Nārada, Asita, Devala, and Vyāsa, proclaim this of You, and now You Yourself are declaring it to me."
Prabhupāda: Yes. Finished. "All authorities accept, I realize, and You personally say." Then what evidence more? Hm? What is the possible evidence? No evidence, finished. "I personally experience, You personally say, and the authorities accept You. Finished." Things should be simplified. This is...
Hayagrīva: Meanwhile Alexander is saying, uh, he seems to conceive of God in a universal form. He says, "Now the body of God is the whole universe, and there is no body outside His."
Prabhupāda: That is experimented in the Bhagavad-gītā for men like Alexander and company. Arjuna requested that Kṛṣṇa to show His universal form, because he knew that "I am accepting Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme, but there are many persons with poor fund of knowledge, they may not accept." Therefore he requested Kṛṣṇa to show him the universal form. That He showed, so that there is another proof for person like Mr. Alexander and company. The, in the Eleventh Chapter, the universal form is very nicely explained. But the universal form was shown by Kṛṣṇa; therefore Kṛṣṇa is original. Universal form is not original; it was manifested by Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa's natural form is Kṛṣṇa. The universal form is a feature of Him. God... That, that is also confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ.
Hayagrīva: He felt that more..., even more than the vaiśya, the merchant, or the kṣatriya, the administrator, that the man who will usher in positivism will be the working man, or the śūdra. He says, "The occupation of working men are evidently far more conducive to philosophical views than those of the middle classes, since they are not so absorbing as to prevent continuous thought even during the hours of labor." In other words, when a man is working he can think of philosophical issues because he doesn't have to use his mind, oh, like a merchant or a kṣatriya.
Prabhupāda: He, he, he has used this word kṣatriya, brāhmaṇa...?
Hayagrīva: Oh, no. I'm using this.
Prabhupāda: Oh.
Hayagrīva: He says..., he's speaking of the working man.
Prabhupāda: Hm.
Hayagrīva: In this he is a..., he influenced Marx considerably in his belief in the worth of the working man.
Prabhupāda: But so far we have seen that even the working man requires a director. In the present Communist society there is working man and the manager class. So as soon as you have to accept a manager, then simply working man will not help us. There must be a managerial person. Otherwise, how the working man can be, I mean to say, systematically engaged in working?
Hayagrīva: He believed in forming working men's clubs that would be dedicated to the philosophy of positivism. He wrote, "The real intention of the club is to form a provisional substitute for the church of old times." He's referring specifically to the Catholic Church; he's a Frenchman. "Or rather, the working man is to prepare the way for the religious building of the new form of worship, the worship of humanity."
Prabhupāda: What is that humanity? The working man does not know...
Hayagrīva: Humanity is all mankind.
Prabhupāda: All mankind to do what?
Hayagrīva: The worship of humanity, he spoke of, that the working man will usher in or introduce...
Prabhupāda: These stamps are not very clear. What does it mean, "humanity"? To supply the necessities of the human being? Or what?
Hayagrīva: Well, humanity for him is all..., simply every man.
| Page Title: | Evidence (Lectures, Other) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, Mayapur |
| Created: | 22 of Feb, 2012 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=176, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 176 |