Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Individuality (Lectures)

Lectures

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Lecture on BG Introduction -- New York, February 19-20, 1966:

Impersonal Brahman realization is the realization of His sat part, eternity. And Paramātmā realization is the realization of sat-cit, eternal knowledge part realization. But realization of the Personality of Godhead as Kṛṣṇa is realization of all the transcendental features like sat, cit, and ānanda, in complete vigraha. Vigraha means form. Vigraha means form. Avyaktaṁ vyaktim āpannaṁ manyante mām abuddhayaḥ (BG 7.24). People with less intelligence, they consider the Supreme Truth as impersonal, but He is a person, a transcendental person. This is confirmed in all Vedic literature. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). So, as we are also persons, individual living beings, we are persons, we have got our individuality, we are all individual, similarly the Supreme Truth, the Supreme Absolute, He is also, at the ultimate issue He is a person.

Lecture on BG 2.7 -- London, August 7, 1973:

If you take a drop of sea water, the quality, the chemical composition is the same. But the quantity is different. It is a drop, and the sea is vast ocean. Similarly, we are exactly of the same quality as Kṛṣṇa. We can study. Why people say God is impersonal? If I am of the same quality, so God is also person, how He can be imperson? If, qualitatively, we are one, then as I feel individually, so why God should be refused individuality? This is another nonsense. The impersonalist rascals, they cannot understand what is the nature of God. In the Bible also it is said: "Man is made after God." You can study God's quality by studying your quality, or anyone's quality. Simply the difference is quantity's different. I have got some quality, some productive capacity. We also produce, every individual soul is producing something. But his production cannot be compared with production of God. That is the difference. We are producing one flying machine.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

So in the past we existed as individual, and in the present there is no doubt. We are existing as individual. You are my disciple, I am your spiritual master, but you have got your individuality, I have got my individuality. If you don't agree with me, you can leave me. That is your individuality. So if you don't like Kṛṣṇa, you cannot become in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that is your individuality. So this individuality continues. Similarly Kṛṣṇa, if He does not like you, He may refuse you Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Not that because you are following all the rules and regulations, Kṛṣṇa is obliged to accept you. No. If He thinks that "He's nonsense; I cannot accept him," He'll reject you.

So He has got individuality, you have got individuality, everyone has got individuality. Where is the question of impersonalism come? There is no possibility. And if you don't believe Kṛṣṇa, you don't believe Vedas, apart from anything else, Kṛṣṇa is accepted as the supreme authority, the Personality of Godhead. Then if we don't believe Him, then where is the possibility of advancing in knowledge? There is no possibility of it. So there is no question of individuality. This is the statement of authority. Now, apart from statement of authority, you have to apply your reason and arguments.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Suppose there is Senate, everyone has got country's interest, but he's thinking in his individual way. One is thinking that "My country's welfare will be in this line." Otherwise, why there is competition during election of president. Everyone is saying that "America needs Nixon." And another person, he also says, "America needs me." So, but why two? If America you, and you are both... No. There is individuality. Mr. Nixon's opinion is something else. Mr. another candidate's opinion is something else. In the assembly, in the Senate, in the Congress, in the United Nations, everyone is fighting with his individual view. Otherwise why there are so many flags in the world? You cannot say anywhere impersonalism. Personality is predominating everywhere. Everywhere, the personality, individuality, is predominant. So we have to accept. We have to apply our reason, arguments, and accept the authority. Then the question is solved. Otherwise it is most difficult.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Devotee: "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the Supreme Individual Person, and Arjuna, the Lord's eternal associate, and all the kings assembled there are individual eternal persons. It is not that they did not exist as individuals in the past, and it is not that they will not remain as eternal persons. Their individuality existed in the past and their individuality will continue in the future without interruption. Therefore there is no cause for lamentation for any one of the individual living entities. The Māyāvādī or impersonal theory that after liberation the individual soul, separate on account of māyā or illusion, will merge into the impersonal Brahman without individual existence..."

Prabhupāda: Now, the Māyāvādī says that this individuality is māyā. So their conception is that spirit, the whole spirit is a lump. Their theory is ghaṭākāśa poṭākāśa. Ghaṭākāśa poṭākāśa means... Just like sky. The sky is an expansion, impersonal expansion. So in a pot, in a waterpot, in a pitcher that is closed... Now, within the pitcher, there is also sky, a small sky. Now as soon as the pitcher is broken, the outside, the bigger sky, and the small sky within the pitcher mixes. That is Māyāvāda theory. But this analogy cannot be applied. Analogy means points of similarity. That is the law of analogy. The sky cannot be compared... The small sky within the pitcher cannot be compared with the living entity. It is material, matter. Sky is matter, and individual living entity is spirit. So how you can say? Just like a small ant, it is spirit soul. It has got its individuality. But a big dead stone, hill or mountain, it has no individuality. So matter has no individuality. Spirit has individuality. So if the points of similarity differ, then there is no analogy. That is the law of analogy. So you cannot analogize with matter and spirit. Therefore this analogy is fallacious.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Devotee: "Nor is the theory that we only think of individuality in the conditioned state supported herein. Kṛṣṇa clearly says that in the future also the individuality of the Lord and others as it is..."

Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa never says that after liberation these individual souls will mix up with the Supreme Soul. Kṛṣṇa never says in the Bhagavad-gītā.

Devotee: "Kṛṣṇa clearly says that in the future also the individuality of the Lord and others, as it is confirmed in the Upaniṣads, will continue eternally. This statement of Kṛṣṇa is authoritative."

Prabhupāda: Yes, Upaniṣad says nityo nityānām. Now, nitya means eternal, and the Supreme Lord is the supreme eternal, and we individual souls, we are also many eternals. So He is the leader eternal. Eko bahūnām... How He is leader? Eko bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān. That one, singular number eternal, person, He is supplying all the needs of other eternals. These things are clearly said in the Vedas. And actually we are experiencing. Just like in Christian theology, the individual goes to the church and prays God, "Give us our daily bread." Why he's asking God? Of course, this atheist class of men are now teaching them, "Where is bread? You are going to church. You come to us; we shall supply you bread." So this Vedic thought is there also.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Devotee: "This statement of Kṛṣṇa is authoritative because Kṛṣṇa cannot be subject to illusion. If individuality..."

Prabhupāda: Yes. If the Māyāvādī philosopher says that this statement of Kṛṣṇa is in māyā, that "He says that 'Everyone was individual in the past.' No, in the past everyone was one, lump sum, homogeneous. By māyā, we have become individual." If the Māyāvādī says like that, then Kṛṣṇa becomes one of the conditioned souls. He does not... He loses His authority. Because conditioned soul cannot give you the truth. I am conditioned soul. I cannot say something which is absolute. So Kṛṣṇa is accepted as the Absolute. So if the Māyāvādī theory is accepted, then Kṛṣṇa's theory has to be rejected. If Kṛṣṇa is rejected, then there is no need of reading Kṛṣṇa's book, Bhagavad-gītā. It is useless, waste of time. If He's a conditioned soul like us... Because we cannot take any instruction from a conditioned soul. So the spiritual master, even if you take that he is conditioned soul, but he does not speak anything from his own side. He speaks from Kṛṣṇa's side.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Devotee: "If individuality is not a fact, then Kṛṣṇa would not have stressed it so much even for the future."

Prabhupāda: Yes. He says that there was no such time when we are not individual, and there will be no such time in the future when we shall not remain individual. And so far present is concerned, we are all individual. You know. So where is the possibility of losing individuality? Become imperson? No. There is no possibility. This voidism, impersonalism, they are artificial ways of negating the perplexing variegatedness of this material existence. That is the negative side only. That is not a positive side. A positive side is that, as Kṛṣṇa says, tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti kaunteya (BG 4.9). "After giving up this material tabernacle, one comes to Me." Just like after leaving this room, you have to enter another room. You cannot say that "After leaving this room, I shall live in the sky." Similarly, after leaving this body, if you go to Kṛṣṇa in the spiritual kingdom, your individuality will be there, but you'll have that spiritual body. When there is spiritual body there is no perplexities. Just like your body is different from the body of the aquatics. The aquatics, they have no disturbance in the water because their body is made like that. They can live there peacefully.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Devotee: "The Māyāvādī may argue that the individuality spoken of by Kṛṣṇa is not spiritual but material. Even accepting the argument that the individuality is material, how can one distinguish Kṛṣṇa's individuality?"

Prabhupāda: They also think of Kṛṣṇa, therefore, as material. That is also condemned by Kṛṣṇa. You'll find, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). "Because I have appeared just like a human being, these rascals deride at Me that I am also one of them." Mūḍha. Mūḍha means rascal. Just like Dr. Radhakrishnan says, "It is not to Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa... It is the soul within the Kṛṣṇa." That means he identifies Kṛṣṇa as one of us. His body and His soul different. But Kṛṣṇa is not... Kṛṣṇa said, sambhavāmy ātma-māyayā (BG 4.6). "I appear in My own, original stature. I do not change." We change. The individual soul... Prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni (BG 3.27). He's conducted by, influenced by this prakṛti, nature, but He's not conducted or influenced by the nature. He comes in His own influence, as He is, ātma-māyayā. This is the distinction. Therefore He does not change body. When I come, I change bodies. This time I may have this body; next time I may have another body. That is material, and therefore I forget. Just like Kṛṣṇa says in the Fourth Chapter that "Many times you and I came. You have forgotten (BG 4.5)." Because we change our material body therefore we forget. These things all will be explained.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Devotee: "Kṛṣṇa affirms His individuality in the past and confirms His individuality in the future also. He has confirmed His individuality in many ways, and impersonal Brahman has been declared as subordinate to Him. Kṛṣṇa has maintained spiritual individuality all along, and if He is accepted as an ordinary conditioned soul in individual consciousness, then His Bhagavad-gītā has no value as authoritative scripture. A common man with all the defects of human frailty is unable to teach that which is worth hearing. Bhagavad-gītā is above such literature. No mundane book compares with the Bhagavad-gītā. When one accepts Kṛṣṇa as an ordinary man, the Bhagavad-gītā loses all importance. The Māyāvādī argues that the plurality mentioned in this verse is conventional and that the plurality thus refers to the body. But previous to this verse such a bodily conception has already been condemned. After condemning the bodily conception of living entities, how was it possible for Kṛṣṇa to place a conventional proposition on the body again? Therefore, the plurality is on spiritual grounds as is confirmed by great teachers like Śrī Rāmānuja. It is clearly mentioned in many places in the Bhagavad-gītā that this spiritual plurality is understood by those who are devotees of the Lord. Those who are envious of Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead have no bona fide access to the great literature. The nondevotee's approach to the teachings of the Bhagavad-gītā is something like a bee licking on a bottle of honey. One cannot have a taste of honey unless one can taste within the bottle. Similarly, the mysticism of the Bhagavad-gītā can be understood only by devotees. No one else can taste it, as is stated in the Fourth Chapter of the book. Nor can the Gītā be touched by persons who envy the very existence of the Lord. Therefore the Māyāvādī explanation of the Gītā is a most misleading presentation of the whole truth. Lord Caitanya has forbidden us to read commentaries made by the Māyāvādīs."

Prabhupāda: Yes. Lord Caitanya has clearly said, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). One meets disaster if he hears a Māyāvādī philosopher to understand Vedic literature. That is His injunction. Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. Sarva-nāśa means disaster. It is actually disaster. A māyāvādi-bhāṣya, Māyāvādī commentary, they have simply tried, (that) the individual, tiny individual spiritual spark that "You are the Supreme." So he's just (like) Dr. Frog. You see. So puffed up, puffed up, when he... At one time, it will burst. Therefore it is disastrous. It is disastrous. (chuckling) Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. So that's all. Finished? Yes.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Devotee: "Therefore the Māyāvādī explanation of the Gītā is a most misleading presentation of the whole truth. Lord Caitanya has forbidden us to read commentaries made by the Māyāvādīs and warns that one who takes to understanding of the Māyāvādī philosophy loses all power to understand the real mystery of the Gītā. If individuality refers to the empirical universe, then there is no need for teachings of the Lord. The plurality of the individual souls and of the Lord is an eternal fact, and it is confirmed by the Vedas as above mentioned."

Prabhupāda: So you read very carefully Bhagavad-gītā. You have to meet so many opposing elements; so you have to argue and convince them. Hm. (saṅkīrtana party enters and offers obeisances) So, what is your report?

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Yesterday we sold 125 magazines and collected twenty dollars. Today, so far, Junior Dave(?), he has sold... How many have you sold today?

Junior Dave: Eighty-five.

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Eighty-five today so far.

Prabhupāda: And there is night.

Lecture on BG 2.11 -- Edinburgh, July 16, 1972:

Now, here, in this world, we have got experience that we want to love somebody. Anyone. Even in animal kingdom. A lion also loves the cubs. The love is there. Prema, it is called prema. So therefore this loving affair is there also in God. And when we come in contact with God our dealings will be simply on the basis of love. I love Kṛṣṇa, or God, and Kṛṣṇa loves me. This is our exchange of feelings. So in this way, the science of God, even without reading any Vedic literature—of course, that will help you—if you have deeply studied what is God, you can understand God. Because I am a sample of God, I am minute particle. Just like the particle of gold is gold. The drop of ocean water is also salty. The ocean is also salty, you can understand. Similarly, by studying our individuality, by studying our propensities, we can understand what is God. This is one side. And here, God personally presents Himself, Kṛṣṇa. "Yadā yadā hi dharmas.... (break)... Saintly devotees and to kill the demons, I appear." But mind that, God is absolute. Either His deliverance of the devotees or killing of the demons, they are the same thing. Because we learn from the Vedic literature that demons who are killed by the Personality of Godhead, they also go to the same salvation, liberation point. Because he is killed by God, he's touched by God.

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 7, 1966:

We are seeing that we are existing. And in the future, we shall also exist in the same way." "In the same way" means individually. Just like I am an individual person. You are an individual person. He is an individual person. So I, you, he, or they—first person, second person and the third person—so that individuality continues. Individuality of every living being is a fact. Therefore in the actual field also, we see that we have got difference of opinion. What I think, you may not agree with me because you have got your individuality. Similarly, your thinking may not be agreed by another gentleman. So everyone has got his individuality. That is a fact. Not that the... Just like there is a class of philosophers who says that the soul is a homogeneous, one entity, and after the destruction, after the annihilation of this body, the soul, as a substance, will mix up. Just like water. You keep in different pots. In different pots you keep water. So the water takes the shape of the pot, the bowl, round bowl. You keep water.

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 7, 1966:

So there were a great assembly of all worldly kings. Now, Kṛṣṇa says that "Either Myself, either yourself, or these persons who have assembled here, they are individual. They were individuals in the past, they are now individuals, and they will continue to be individual even after annihilation of this body." Now, how you'll adjust? There are two theories, that after liberation all these souls, they become one. Just like all drops of water, if you put into the sea, they become one entity. There is no distinction. And the Lord Kṛṣṇa says that "No, they keep their individuality. They do not mix." Now we are supposed... We are all laymen. We are ignorant, what is actually position, what is the actual position. But we have got our discretion also. Just like every one of you has some knowledge in the history. Now, in the history in the past... Suppose you are now thirty years old or thirty-five years old, and suppose two hundred years before, the history which you read, you find that all people were individuals. And at the present you are experiencing that all individual, they are. All living entities—either human being, or animals or birds, or anywhere—you can see that they are individual. Then why should you not believe that in future they will remain individual? Do you follow? In the past they were individuals, in the present they are individuals, and why not in future they'll remain individuals? It is naturally concluded that they will continue to be individuals.

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 9, 1966:

Yes. I mean to say, any sane man who has got the knowledge that "This is only reflection of the sun; it is not water," he will never go there. He knows that it is useless to search water in the desert. Similarly, if Śrī Kṛṣṇa is in full knowledge, He cannot say that in future also we shall all remain individuals. He says that in the future also we shall continue to be individuals. Now, He cannot give us misdirection. Suppose we, in the future we shall not remain. After liberation, we shall not become, remain, individuals. Then that sort of misguidance cannot be given by Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Just like a sane man cannot direct you that "Just go there. There is water in the desert." A man with perfect knowledge cannot give you that direction. A animal may go there. That is a different thing. Similarly, when Śrī Kṛṣṇa says that "In future also, we, all these, yourself, Myself, and all these, they will keep their individuality," so that is not a misdirection. You want to say anything?

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 9, 1966:

God has no objection. Now, from God we have become many. Now, suppose I or you want that I don't want to keep myself as one of the many. I want to become one with Him. If you like that, that is called sāyujya-mukti. So God does not deny you. "All right, you merge into Me." But that does not mean all other manies also merge into Him. That does... Because, individually, I want to merge into the existence of God, that does not mean all other manies... Because many means not only myself. There are millions and billions and trillions of many. So if out of that trillion, billion, one wants to merge into the existence of God, God is all-powerful; why he should be denied? "All right, you merge into Me. If you don't want to keep your individuality, if you want to merge into Myself, all right, you are welcome." Ye yathā māṁ prapadyante (BG 4.11). In the Bhagavad-gītā you'll find it, "Anyone who wants Me in any way, I fulfill his desire."

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 9, 1966:

J, N, A, N, I. "Jan-nanee. Jan-nanee." The spelling is "Jananee." So the Supreme Truth, the Supreme Truth is Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān, the Supreme Truth. Now, according to... Because we have already explained that each and every individual being has got his individual minute quantity of independence. God has given us. Now, by our independence, I may accept as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I may accept Him that the all-pervading Supersoul, and I may accept Him that the all-pervading Brahman, impersonal brahma-jyotir effulgence. So all these are applicable to the Absolute Truth. Now, it depends on my discretion whether I want to merge into the existence of the Lord, whether I want to keep my individuality and associate with Him as friend, as father, mother, as wife. Just like we have got relation. So that depends on my discretion. But now, comparatively, if we study that if we merge into the existence of God, the, at least, in the opinion of the bhaktas, that is not acceptable. That is not acceptable. They know that, that "God has created me as an individual being, so He has got some purpose. And because He has created me for some purpose, I must fulfill that purpose. I must fulfill that purpose."

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 9, 1966:

Yes, but there are other individuals who... There are other individuals who may not agree with that kind of salvation or liberation. They want to keep their individuality and enjoy the Supreme Personality of Godhead's company. Just like Arjuna. In the Fourth Chapter you will, you will see that Arjuna... When Śrī Kṛṣṇa said to Arjuna that "This system of yoga was first explained to the sun-god, sun-god," now Arjuna inquired, "How is that? You are... You are my contemporary. How You say that You advised or instructed this yoga system to sun? That means crores and crores, I mean, millions and billions of years before. How is that?" This is, mean, a very sane question. Now, in that question the Lord answered, "My dear Arjuna, yourself and Myself, we took birth many times, but you have forgotten. I, I, I have not forgotten."

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 9, 1966:

So these five kinds of muktis are there, and the, the purport is that even after liberation, we, the living entities, they keep their individuality. Just like as associate of the Lord, as the resident of the Lord's planet or to have the bodily features of the Lord, in so many ways. And one can merge into the existence of the Lord. That is also accepted. So simply merging into the existence of God, that is not the only liberation. That is one of the liberation. But the, the devotees of the Lord, they do not accept such kind of... They do not want to merge. They want to enjoy the company. That is the difference between... Both of them become liberated. Merging into the existence of God, that is also liberation. And to keep individuality and enjoy the company of the Lord, that is also liberation. Yes?

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- Hyderabad, December 12, 1976:

It is the bodily rays, impersonal Brahman. But God is person. Here He said that na tu eva aham. Aham means "I am person," jātu, "at any time," nāsam, "we are not annihilated." Na tu, na tvam: "You are also not annihilated." Because Arjuna is jīva, and Kṛṣṇa is God, so both of them are existing, part and parcel. Just like this sunshine. What is the sunshine? It is very small atomic particles of shining material. This is sunshine, combined together. Similarly, we are also a small particle of the rays, bodily rays of God. We are living entities, very minute particle. Mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ jīva-loke sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7). So we are also individual, and God is also individual person. "And all the kings, all the soldiers assembled, they are also individual." So this individuality is never lost. Kṛṣṇa says that "At present we are individuals, and in the past we are individuals." Then one may say, "In the future we may become one, amalgamated," as the Māyāvādī philosopher says that as soon as we become liberated, we become one with the Absolute. No, that is not fact. Here it is said, na ca eva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ: "It is not that in future we shall not remain individual.

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- Hyderabad, December 12, 1976:

So so long we are materially contaminated, we require this material body for enjoying senses. And the spiritual world, we get our spiritual body developed. So there is no question of becoming ghost or... Individual, there is. The person is always existing. That is the purport of this verse. Na caiva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ sarve vayam ataḥ param. Ataḥ param, "after this," means after this body is ended the individuality continues; simply we change our body. This is the version, and it is explained in the next verse, dehino 'smin yathā dehe kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā, tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ (BG 2.13). We are individual always, but we are changing this body from one type of body to another body according to our karma. Karmaṇā daiva-netreṇa jantur deha-upapatti (SB 3.31.1). By superior examination we get a body, karmaṇā. So at the time of death it is decided what kind of body you are going to have next. That is decided by superior authority. You cannot dictate that "Give me this body," or "I don't want this body. I want a body..." No. That is not in your hand.

Lecture on BG 2.13 -- Mombassa, September 13, 1971:

Similarly, this body, this is gross coat. Just like you, when you put on your dress, you have one underwear, shirt, and then over that shirt there is coat. It is very easy to understand, there is no difficulty. Similarly, the spirit soul is within this coat and shirt. What is this coat? This gross body. There are five..., eight material elements: earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intelligence, and ego. These are eight material elements. And out of these eight, gross elements we can see or perceive with your material senses. I can touch this earth; I can taste the water; I can smell the air; I can feel the sky; in this way. These are gross. And still there are finer elements, just like mind. Everyone of us knows that there is a mind, but we cannot see it. What is that mind? Everyone knows that there is intelligence, but nobody can see what is that intelligence. Similarly, everyone has his individuality, "I am this," "I am very learned," "I am very beautiful," "I am white," "I am black," "I am Indian," "I am American," this is called ego.

Lecture on BG 2.13-17 -- Los Angeles, November 29, 1968:

So far the constitution of the spirit is concerned, it is eternal. That is accepted by all philosophers, personalists and impersonalists. The only difference is that the impersonalist says that after liberation, after getting freed from this bodily contamination, the spirit soul mixes with the Supreme Soul, all-pervading, without any individual existence. Just like the same example, that the small sky within the pitcher. When the pitcher is broken, the small sky within the pitcher mixes with the big sky. The Vaiṣṇava philosopher says that the small sky is individual. It mixes with the big sky, but it keeps its individuality. The example is given in this connection: just like a green bird entering a green tree. So when the bird enters the tree, nobody can find out where is the bird because the leaves of the tree are green and the bird is also green. Nobody can trace out. But that does not mean the bird has lost its individuality. The individuality is there. Just like you see one airplane is flying in the air, and when it goes too far, it appears that it has disappeared. It seems to us that there is no more that airplane. It has mixed with the sky. But actually it is not. It is still there, individual existence. It is my ignorance that I see that it is no more separate, it has mixed with the sky. Just like in the daytime we don't find any star in the sky.

Lecture on BG 2.17 -- (with Spanish translator) -- Mexico, February 17, 1975:

Another feature is that your consciousness and my consciousness is different. Therefore we are all individual. Similarly, God is also individual. That has been explained in the Second Chapter of Bhagavad-gītā. Kṛṣṇa says that "Arjuna, you, Me, and all these people who have assembled in this battlefield, they were individual in the past, individual at present, and they'll continue, individual, after death also." Now, that individuality... God is great because His consciousness is big. He is maintaining the whole cosmic manifestation. And I am very small. Therefore my consciousness is also limited, and I am spreading all over this body. So any sensible man, intelligent man, can understand the presence of God by seeing this cosmic manifestation in orderly being maintained. It is said in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa, just like fire remaining in one place spreads the heat and light, similarly, the soul also, being present in some part of our body—it is said in the heart—it spreads his heat and light, the consciousness.

Lecture on BG 2.55-56 -- New York, April 19, 1966:

So Lord can advise the infinitesimal to act in a certain way, but the infinitesimal, because it has got infinitesimal independence, it can reject it also. It can accept it or it can reject it. That we have got. That individuality, that independence... (break) "...that all other occupations you please surrender unto Me. You just try to follow Me. Then I take charge of you so that there will be no reaction of your work, and do not hesitate." Mā śucaḥ. This very word. Mā śucaḥ means "Do not hesitate. Do accept it. Do accept." That is the clear declaration of the Lord. You see. This is not for Arjuna only, but every one of us because we are all in the Arjuna's position. Arjuna is a living entity, individual living entity. So we are also, every one of us, a living entity. And the supreme entity—nityo nityānām. In the Vedic literature you'll find this hymn, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). Description of the Supreme. The Supreme is nityaḥ nityānām. Nityānām means... Nitya means eternal. So we are all eternal. That we have already discussed.

Lecture on BG 3.27 -- Melbourne, June 27, 1974:

Puruṣa. Puruṣa means the enjoyer. Everyone of us sitting in this hall, we have got different mentality to enjoy differently, different dress, different mentality, different opinion, because everyone of us we are individual. So this individuality is both in spiritual world and the material world. But in the material world our individuality is different on account of associating or infecting different qualities of the material nature. Just like there are different types of patients in the hospital. Why? Because each and every one of them is infected by different types of germs of disease.

Here it is explained, puruṣa, the living entity, prakṛti-stha, being in this material world. Prakṛti means this material world. We do not belong to this material world. Just like a person in the prison house, he is a citizen, but when he goes into the prisonhouse, he has got different sense, different, I mean, punishment, different dress. They are also dressed differently. So similarly, we are all criminals. Criminals. What is that criminality? Because we have forgotten God. This is criminality.

Lecture on BG 4.5 -- Montreal, June 10, 1968:

Actually, we are eternal. Both God and the living entities they are qualitatively one, eternal. Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Sat means eternity, and cit means full of knowledge, and ānanda means full of joy. These are the qualifications of God and living entity. Therefore we are hankering after pleasure. All people are working hard, day and night, for pleasure. Because by constitution, he is pleasureful, joyful. As soon as there is little hindrance to the process of his joyfulness he becomes sorry. This is my nature. Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). But God and the living entity, both being sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ... Vigraha means form, individuality. So God has form, and you have got also form, I have got also form, everyone has got form. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). He is the supreme individual personality, and we are subordinate personalities. That is the difference. Otherwise, in quality, God, you and me, are all the same. That Kṛṣṇa says.

Lecture on BG 4.7-10 -- Los Angeles, January 6, 1969:

Similarly, if you can understand yourself, then you can understand even God. If you study yourself, that "Although I am very small..." What to speak of myself? Even a small ant, it has got individuality. A ant is going on. You stop it. It will struggle. That means it wants to keep its individuality. Therefore, if you are the same, then God is also individual. He is not impersonal. Immediately you can understand. How you can...? I have got so much... I am so small, tiny; still, I have got my individuality, personality, and how God can be impersonal? Even a common sense man can understand.

Lecture on BG 4.11-12 -- New York, July 28, 1966:

Woman: Are there individuals in these bodies?

Prabhupāda: You are individual spirit. You are individual spirit. Are you not? Don't you feel it? Don't you feel your individuality?

Woman: Yes, but if one feels love for another(?), I want to be eternally one.

Prabhupāda: Yes. You become one in the quality of spirit. Do you follow?

Woman: No, I don't understand that I have got a spiritual body really.

Prabhupāda: Oh, then... (chuckles) That you take information from Bhagavad-gītā. There is spiritual body. And why it is difficult to understand? You can understand it that your material body has developed from that atomic existence of spirit. You can understand that?

Woman: Yes.

Lecture on BG 4.11-12 -- New York, July 28, 1966:

You are merged in matter; still, you have got your individual existence. What is your body? This is matter. Is it not? Then are you not merged with matter? Then still you have got your individual existence. Don't you agree? Similarly, I may merge in the spiritual existence, but still, my individuality will be there. You are merged already in this matter. Just like when you leave this body, your body will be transformed into earth. That means it is already merged. Still, you have got separate existence. And what is that separate existence? Due to that spirit. So even in the matter, if the spirit can maintain separate existence, don't you think in spirit it cannot maintain its separate existence?

Merging means just like aeroplane. Aeroplane is flying in the air, in the sky. When it goes too far, it becomes too small, you say, "It has merged into the sky." But it has got, even in that position, it has got its separate existence. Just like a bird, a parrot, enters a tree. The tree is also green, and the bird is also green. When it enters the tree, you see no separate existence of the bird, but it has got a separate existence. Similarly, either you are in material existence or in spiritual existence you are already merged, but you have got your separate existence. Is it clear? Thank you.

Lecture on BG 4.11-18 -- Los Angeles, January 8, 1969:

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "...and they extinguish their individuality."

Prabhupāda: God realization, there are three aspects: brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). The Absolute Truth is realized in three aspects—Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavān. Brahman, the impersonal conception of the absolute truth, that is called Brahman. And Paramātmā is localized aspect of the Absolute Truth. And Bhagavān is the ultimate realization, Personality of Godhead.

The same example as I have given several times in these classes, that the light, sunlight, is realized first of all as sunshine. Then if you can go further the sun planet, up to the sun planet, that is localized aspect. And if you enter into the sun planet then you'll find the sun-god is there. He is person.

Lecture on BG 4.11-18 -- Los Angeles, January 8, 1969:

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Such impersonalists do not agree to accept the eternal, blissful Personality of Godhead and consequently they cannot relish the bliss of transcendental personal service to the Lord, having extinguished their individuality. Some of them who are not situated even in the impersonal existence return to this material field to exhibit their dormant desires for activities. They are not admitted into the spiritual planets but they again are given a chance to act on the material planets. For those who are fruitive workers the Lord awards the desired results of their prescribed duties as the yajñeśvara; and those who are yogis seeking mystic powers are awarded such powers. In other words, everyone is dependent for success upon His mercy alone and all kinds of spiritual processes are but different degrees of success on the same path. Unless, therefore, one comes to the highest perfection of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, all attempts remain imperfect, as is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: 'Whether one is without desire (the condition of the devotees) or is desirous of all fruitive results, or is after liberation, one should with all efforts try to worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead for complete perfection culminating in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.' "

Prabhupāda: Yes. This verse refers to the statement of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam wherein it is stated that

akāmaḥ sarva-kāmo vā
mokṣa-kāma udāra-dhīḥ
tīvreṇa bhakti-yogena
yajeta puruṣaṁ param
(SB 2.3.10)

The idea is that there are three class of men. One class of men they are simply desiring material comforts, desiring. They want nice house, nice wife, nice comfortable life, everything nice for the comfort of this body. They are called sarva-kāma. Sarva-kāma means their desire has no end.

Lecture on BG 4.13-14 -- New York, August 1, 1966:

Māṁ hi pārtha vyapāśritya ye 'pi syuḥ... (BG 9.32). Mām, this mām. Mām means "Me," "Unto Me." Kṛṣṇa says, "Unto Me." But there are many miscreants who are interpreting this mām as "everyone," as "everyone." Just like when I say, "I want a glass of water," does it mean that you want a glass of water? No. My individuality, "I want a glass of water." But they are making, by jugglery of words, that when I say, "I want a glass of water," that means, "everyone wants a glass of water." Is it a fact? Similarly, when Kṛṣṇa says, "I," they identify with the "I" themselves. That is their interpretation. That is misinterpretation.

Bhagavad-gītā... Therefore, although Bhagavad-gītā is very popular in the world, due to this misinterpretation of so many scholars, they have been not properly understood. That is a fact.

Lecture on BG 4.20 -- Bombay, April 9, 1974:

So asuras, they are engaged for fruitive result. They are working, but they are expecting that "I shall enjoy the result." So that freedom is given to everyone, that "You can work at your responsibility and enjoy or suffer." Just like state has given everyone individuality, everyone freedom, "You act as you like. But if you act criminally, then you will be punished." That you cannot avoid. You have been given freedom, "You act whatever you like," but if you violate the laws of the state, then you are to be punished, criminal.

Similarly, the same thing is there in God's kingdom, that we have been given freedom, we have got little freedom because we are part and parcel of God. Mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ (BG 15.7). Kṛṣṇa says, "All these living entities, they are My minute particles, minute part of My body." Just like father is the part of the body, er, son is the part of body of father, similarly, we are also part and parcel of the transcendental body of Kṛṣṇa. That is our real identity, spiritual identity.

Lecture on BG 4.26 -- Bombay, April 15, 1974:

That is explained in the second chapter. This individuality continues. There is no such information that all of them become one by amalgamation. That is not possible because in the Bhagavad-gītā it..., mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ jīva-loke sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7). Aṁśaḥ, the particles of the Supreme, they are sanātanaḥ. It is not that by chance the spirit, whole spirit, has been broken into pieces. No. That is not possible. Because in the Bhagavad-gītā you will find acchedyo 'yam: "It cannot be broken into pieces."

Then how it became pieces? Therefore these piecemeal, the small particles of the original whole, they are sanātanaḥ. It is not that by circumstance it has become small pieces. No. And when they amalgamate... Just like they give the example that the water, when it is put into the water, again it becomes one. But scientifically, they are molecules. They remain separate. Even the sunshine, they are simply combination of shining molecules. Similarly, we are also like that, shining spiritual molecules. So sanātanaḥ, these particles are sanātanaḥ.

Lecture on BG 6.21-27 -- New York, September 9, 1966:

So the conclusion is that that spiritual spark is not impersonal. It is actually personal. The soul is actual person. As God is actual, personal, similarly, because we are part and parcel of the Supreme, therefore, if I am a person, then God must be person. God is the father of everyone. Now, if I am the son—I have got personality; I have got individuality—how can you deny the individuality and personality of the Supreme Lord? So these things require intelligence. Intelligence. Sukham ātyantikaṁ yat tat buddhi-grāhyam atīndriyam (BG 6.21). Atīndriyam. Atīndriyam means you have to transcend these material senses. Then you can actually appreciate what is happiness.

Lecture on BG 7.2 -- San Francisco, September 11, 1968:

Yes. Paramātmā is also personal. Everything is personal. Paramātmā is described as four-handed Nārāyaṇa with śaṇkha, cakra, gadā, padma, with, I mean to say, ornaments. That is the feature of Paramātmā. You have seen the Viṣṇu-mūrti. That is Paramātmā. This voidness is an imagination, voidness. Actually God or Paramātmā or Kṛṣṇa, They are all sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ, transcendental forms. They are not material forms. Transcendental forms. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Vigraha means form. If we, part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa, we have got individuality, forms, how we can say that the Supreme has no form, no individuality? He has got complete individuality. And that is confirmed in the Vedas: nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). He is the supreme living entity of all living entities. Just like we are living entities, but He is the Supreme. That's all. He is also living entity. Nityo nityā cetanaś cetanānām. The difference is eko bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān. That one single There are plural number and singular number.

Lecture on BG 7.3 -- Vrndavana, October 31, 1973:

That is not perfect siddhi. Because we are spiritual sparks, small, very small. That magnitude has been described in the śāstras. Keśāgra-śata-bhāgasya śatadhā kalpitasya ca (CC Madhya 19.140). As spiritual spark, our magnitude is one ten-thousandth part of the upper portion of the hair. We are such a small. And this... Just like the sunshine is combination of bright molecules, shining molecules. They are not one. They are also small, atomic, molecular parts. Similarly, brahma-jyotir means combination of all the living entities, the spiritual sparks. To become one with the brahma-jyotir means... Just like one bird enters into the green tree. It appears that it has become one. The tree is also green and the bird is also green. So when the bird enters the tree, it appears that the bird is now mixed up. But that is not the fact. The bird keeps his individuality, and at any time, when he wants, he can come out of the tree and fly anywhere. That independence is there, although apparently it seems that he has become one with the tree. Similarly, the sāyujya-mukti means apparently he is in Brahman, but factually it is not. Because each individual soul is different.

Lecture on BG 7.6 -- Hyderabad, December 11, 1976:

So this change is going on of the external body, not of the spirit soul. The spirit soul is individual, Kṛṣṇa is individual, and it continues. Every one of us, we were individual in the past, we are individual at the present moment, and we shall continue to be individual in future. But when we are covered by this material body, this individuality becomes differentiated. Otherwise, even though individual—we are spirit soul—we are one, spirit soul. And without any material contamination, our relationship is permanent. Kṛṣṇa is the origin, master, prabhu, and we are emanation from Kṛṣṇa, servants. So and this relationship continues. Then there is no impediment on account of this bodily covering. Hṛṣīkeṇa hṛṣīkeśa-sevanaṁ bhaktir ucyate (CC Madhya 19.170). When we are not contaminated by the body, we remain pure. With that senses, when we serve Kṛṣṇa, that is our liberation. That is called bhakti.

Lecture on BG 8.5 -- New York, October 26, 1966:

Not become Kṛṣṇa. Just like you are spirit soul. When you take the body of a certain type of body, you act according to the body. Just like the dog is acting differently from human body because he has got a different body. Hog is acting differently because he has got a different body. So there are 8,400,000's of different bodies. So mad-bhāva, mad-bhāva means the nature, Kṛṣṇa's nature. You keep your individuality, but you get Kṛṣṇa's nature. And what is Kṛṣṇa's nature? Kṛṣṇa's nature is always blissful. Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). Always joyful. So you get a body of joyful, full of knowledge, and eternal. Not that you become Kṛṣṇa. You get exactly the same bodily constitution as Kṛṣṇa has got. That is sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). As we are, even at the present moment, we are particle Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is vibhu, the whole. We are aṇu, we are small. Similarly, as now we have got this material body, if we pass our life in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we get our spiritual body, which is not different from the soul. A clear example: just like a man put into the water is raised from the water and placed in the land. So in the land he is happy. Similarly, because we are spirit soul, we are in a very unfavorable condition of this material world. As soon as we perfect ourself in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we get into the spiritual platform or body or atmosphere.

Lecture on BG 8.5 -- New York, October 26, 1966:

Yes. You merge means you merge into the spiritual existence, but that does not mean you lose your individuality. You are already merged in the matter. We are all merged. Now your soul, my soul, his soul, you cannot distinguish where is the soul. But body, the material body, we have got everyone. But in spite of our being merged in the matter, we have got our individuality. Similarly, to become merged in spiritual existence does not mean that we lose our individuality. Try to understand. Just like we are all merged into the matter. If you dissect my body, you won't find where is that small particle spirit. It is already merged, but still, we have got individuality. That means spirit soul is individual. Otherwise, so far your body is concerned, my body is concerned, there is blood, you have got blood; you have got muscle, I have got muscle; you have got bones, I have got bones. What is the difference? But why you are individual, I am individual? Because the spirit soul is individual. We are merged in the matter but we keep our individuality. Similarly, you merge in the spirit, you keep your individuality. How can you lose your individuality?

Lecture on BG 8.5 -- New York, October 26, 1966:

Guest (2): Your individuality, you mean?

Prabhupāda: Yes. You are individual always. Just try to understand your present position. Yes. You are merged in the matter. I am merged into the matter. But still you keep your individuality, I keep my individuality. Similarly, when you merge in the spirit, why the individuality should be stopped? Only difference is, at the present moment the soul and the matter, they qualitatively different. And when you get spiritual body, the quality of the body and the soul is the same. But individuality must continue. How can you stop individuality? But that individuality and this individuality is different. In that individuality there is no disagreement. In this individuality there is always disagreement. Therefore in spite of individuality, there is oneness.

So individuality will continue. There is... If there is no display of individuality, then you'll have to come back again to this display of individuality in the material world. Because everyone... Individual means he has got his own choice. If I tell you that "You can come here, but you haven't got any choice," then you won't like to sit down here. You can sit down here, you can go out immediately. That's your choice. But if I make the condition that "You can sit down here without your choice," oh, you will hate to come here. "Oh, I don't care for your meeting." That is individuality. But that choice may be very nice, and that choice may be very bad. That is different thing. But you have got your choice. That is individuality. So in the spiritual world the choice is there to serve Kṛṣṇa. Somebody is thinking, "I shall serve Kṛṣṇa like this." Somebody is thinking, "I shall love Kṛṣṇa like this." The choice is there. The individuality is there. But the center is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore there is no disagreement.

Lecture on BG 8.5 -- New York, October 26, 1966:

Just like in this world there may be dozens of parties. They may fight with one another, but the center is nationalism. Therefore those parties are not null and void. They're accepted by the government. They may be fighting with one another with aims and objects, but because their point is nationalism, they are accepted. There is the agreement. Similarly, in the service of Kṛṣṇa, there may be individuality, the choice of individuality may be, but the center being Kṛṣṇa, that is absolute. There are many authoritative books, means Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Prīti-sandarbha. But generally, if you simply try to understand Bhagavad-gītā as it is, without any malinterpretation, then you get all information of these things.

Lecture on BG 8.12-13 -- New York, November 15, 1966:
Similarly, those who are transferred in the spiritual world, they remain in the effulgence of the Supreme Lord, which is called brahma-jyotir. Brahmajyoti. So those who are not personalists, they are placed in that, into that brahma-jyotir as one of the minute particles. We are minute particles, spiritual spark, and brahma-jyotir is full of spiritual spark. So you become one of the spiritual spark. That is, means you merge into the spiritual existence. Although you keep your individuality constitutionally, but because you don't want any personal form, therefore you are held there, held there in the impersonal brahma-jyotir. Just like the sunshine are small molecules, shining molecules—those who are scientists, they know that—similarly, we are also small, molecular, atomic, less than atom, one ten-thousandth portion of the tip of the hair.
Lecture on BG 8.22-27 -- New York, November 20, 1966:

There are five kinds of liberation: sāyujya, sārūpya, sālokya, sārṣṭi, sāmīpya, five kinds of liberation. So sāyujya-mukti is to merge into the impersonal effulgence of God. That is called sāyujya-mukti. If you like, you can merge your identity with the impersonal feature of the Supreme Lord, which is called Brahman, brahma-jyotir. That you can do. But that is not very palatable. That we have discussed many times. But others... There are two schools of philosophers. One likes to merge into the existence of the Supreme and close his identity, individual identity—no more individuality. That you can do. You close your identity. But that sort of merging is risky also. That we have several times discussed. But if you enter into some planets, spiritual planets, then you can have five kinds of liberation. One kind of liberation is sārūpya. You can have body exactly like God. Sārūpya. Sālokya. You can live in the same planet, sālokya. Sālokya, sālokya and sārṣṭi. Sārṣṭi means you can have similar opulence as God has, similar opulence. So much powerful you can become that you are as powerful as God is. That is called sārṣṭi. And sāmīpya. Sāmīpya means you can always remain with God as one of the associates. Just like Arjuna. Arjuna is always with Kṛṣṇa as friend. This is called sāmīpya.

Lecture on BG 8.22-27 -- New York, November 20, 1966:

Now, here Lord Kṛṣṇa does not advise you... That is a suicidal policy. That policy is neither recommended by Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in the Bhagavad-gītā, neither the Vaiṣṇava philosophers, they accept it, to merge. They don't wish to close their individuality. They...Lord Caitanya, the stalwart amongst the Vaiṣṇava philosophers, He said that, He prayed that

na dhanaṁ na janaṁ na sundarīṁ
kavitāṁ vā jagadīśa kāmaye
mama janmani janmanīśvare
bhavatād bhaktir ahaitukī tvayi

(Cc. Antya 20.29, Śikṣāṣṭaka 4)

The pure Vaiṣṇava, unadulterated devotee of the Lord, they do not want even liberation. They don't want. They don't care for liberation also. What they want? Just like in this prayer, Lord Caitanya says, mama janmani janmanīśvare bhavatād bhaktir

ahaitukī: "I may remain Your pure devotee birth after birth." That means, when there is birth after birth, there is no liberation. So He doesn't expect even liberation. When you are liberated, there is no birth. Either you remain in the spiritual planet or you merge into the existence of the Supreme, there is no more birth in this material world. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu prays that "Birth after birth." That means He doesn't care whether He is liberated or not liberated; He wants simply to be engaged in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, to serve the Lord, Supreme Lord. That is His philosophy.

Lecture on BG 9.1 -- Melbourne, April 19, 1976:

That's all right? Yes. The Ninth Chapter is the most confidential knowledge. Śrī bhagavān uvāca, (devotees repeat)... All right, you repeat. Idaṁ (devotees repeat) tu te guhyatamaṁ pravakṣyāmy anasūyave. Idaṁ tu te guhyatamaṁ pravakṣyāmy anasūyave, jñānaṁ vijñāna-sahitam, jñānaṁ vijñāna-sahitaṁ yaj jñātvā mokṣyase aśubhāt, yaj jñātvā mokṣyase 'śubhāt. (Recites verse responsively with devotees). Śrī bhagavān uvāca. Bhagavān, the Supreme Being, Bhagavān. In your English dictionary the word God is explained as "the Supreme Being." "Supreme Being" means who is great, greater, or the greatest, of all other beings. We are beings. We are individual persons. It is not very difficult to understand. Every one of us, individual. We think individually. We dress individually. We have got our egotism, individual. Everything... I don't agree with you; you don't agree with me. Voluntarily sometimes we agree. That means every one of us has individuality. This is called being, "I am."

Lecture on BG 9.34 -- New York, December 26, 1966, 'Who is Crazy?':

So this is another craziness. Just see how craziness follows. Void. Why void? I am so much intelligent. I am doing... I am planning so many. Because my body is finished, therefore everything becomes void? This void philosophy was contradicted by the (indistinct). There is no void. There is spirit. Now, if that spirit, when one comes to that spiritual self-realization, out of this body, then, if he's still further advanced in spiritual knowledge, then he'll seek what is my spiritual duty? What is my spiritual work? That is sanity. What is my spiritual work. Sanity, that is sanity. I cannot be void. I cannot lose my individuality and personality. That is nonsense. How can I? So long I am sitting in this body... Or take this same crude example. So long I am sitting on the car, I am displaying so much individuality, and so much discrimination. As soon as there is red signal, I stop my car. There is blue signal, green signal, I start my car. I'm using my consciousness. I'm working. And, simply by getting down from the car, I lose everything. I become void? What is this nonsense? No.

Lecture on BG 9.34 -- New York, December 26, 1966, 'Who is Crazy?':

As soon as the soul is out of this body, no more growth. If the child comes dead, oh, there will be no growth. Oh, the parents will say it is useless. Throw it. So similarly, Lord Kṛṣṇa gave the first example to Arjuna that, "Don't think that the spiritual spark which is within the body, due to his presence, the body is growing from childhood to boyhood, boyhood to youthhood, from youthhood to old age. So therefore, when this body becomes useless, imperceptibly, the soul gives up this body." Vāsāṁsi jīrṇāni yathā vihāya (BG 2.22). Just like we give up old dress and take another new dress, similarly, we accept another body.

And we accepted another body not according to my selection. That selection depends on the law of nature. That selection depends on law of nature. You cannot say at the time of death, but you can think of. You can say that, I mean to say, individuality and that selection is all there. Yaṁ yaṁ vāpi smaran loke tyajaty ante kalevaram (BG 8.6). Just, at the time of your death, your mentality, as your thoughts will develop, you'll get the next birth according to that body. So the intelligent man, who is not crazy, he should understand that I am not this body. First thing. I am not this body. Then he'll understand that what is his duty? Oh, as spirit soul, what is his duty?

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

Lecture on SB 1.1.2 -- London, August 15, 1971:

Now, this liberation, there are different types of liberation, five kinds of liberation: sāyujya-mukti, sārūpya-mukti, sālokya-mukti, sārṣṭi-mukti...hmm...sāyujya, sārūpya, sālokya, sārṣṭi, sāmīpya. Mukti, liberation. There are different kinds of liberation. The first liberation, as the jñānīs or the speculators want, it is another side of voidism, to merge into the existence of the Absolute. They don't want varieties. Because they have got a very bad experience of the varieties in the material world, they, as soon as there is question of varieties, they become shuddered, "Oh, again varieties?" They do not know that there is blissful varieties in association with Kṛṣṇa. They can not accommodate in their brain on account of poor fund of knowledge. Therefore they want sāyujya-mukti, to merge into the existence of the..., to become one with the Supreme. That is possible. You can have it. But it you lose your individuality then you can get eternity, but you cannot get blissful life of knowledge, because you lose your individuality. So that is suicidal. But a living entity being individual soul, he cannot remain in that impersonal state of life. Because the other two factors, namely acquire knowledge and acquire blissful life, is wanting there. It is simply negation of these material varieties. Or eternity only—sat. But there are two other parts, cit and ānanda. That is absent there.

Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Vrndavana, October 17, 1972:

So the bhuktīs, they are bhukti-kāmīs. That is kāma. And when they are unable to satisfy the senses by this material enjoyment, they are mukti-kāmīs. That is also kāma. Void. The Buddha philosophy. Mukti, vacant. Mukti, of course, not void. The same thing, in a different name, "Merge into the effulgence of Brahman, and stop my individuality." That is also voidness, zero. I make myself zero. This is another explanation of nirvāṇa, voidism. "Finish everything. You are suffering from fever. All right, I cut your throat. So your fever is gone? You also gone, finished." This is called śūnyavādi, "Make everything zero. Why you are suffering from fever? The best means is to cut your throat and become happy."

Lecture on SB 1.2.9 -- Hyderabad, April 23, 1974:

The jñānīs, they want to appreciate the Supreme Brahman. Satām. Brahma-sukha, brahma-sukha. They are after brahma-sukha. Here is the source of brahma-sukha. Brahmaṇo 'haṁ pratiṣṭhā. So here is the... Just like the light, illumination—there is a source of light, the sunshine, illumination. The source is the sun globe. Similarly, the brahma-jyotir, what is the source? Kṛṣṇa says, brahmaṇaḥ ahaṁ pratiṣṭhā: "I am the source. From Me it is coming." Therefore the same thing is... Itthaṁ brahma-sukhānubhūtyā: "the source of brahma-sukha." Itthaṁ brahma-sukhānubhūtyā dāsyaṁ gatānāṁ para-daivatena. And dāsyaṁ gatānām: "Those who have accepted the principle of to become servant of God," means the devotees. The devotees, they never want to become one with Brahman effulgence, sāyujya-mukti. They will never accept this. They want to keep their individuality and enjoy with Kṛṣṇa. That is Vaiṣṇava philosophy. Itthaṁ brahma-sukhānubhūtyā dāsyaṁ gatānāṁ para-daivatena. Para-daivata: "the Supreme Lord." And māyāśritānāṁ nara-dārakeṇa: "And those who are under the influence of māyā, they are thinking Kṛṣṇa as ordinary human child," nara-dārakeṇa. But after all, these boys who are playing, sākaṁ vijahruḥ kṛta-puṇya-puñjāḥ: (SB 10.12.11) "After accumulating many lives' pious activities, now they are promoted here at Vṛndāvana to play with Kṛṣṇa."

Lecture on SB 1.2.17 -- Los Angeles, August 20, 1972:

Eka, that one person, supreme personality... There are... We are all personalities. All living entities, we are all personalities. We are not a homogeneous lump. Everyone has got individual, individuality. So every one of is a individual personality. Everyone. So Kṛṣṇa is the supreme personality. That is the difference. He is also an individual. The only difference is that He is supreme; we are all subordinate. We are dependent on Kṛṣṇa. If Kṛṣṇa does not manage things nicely, then we are doomed. Just like we were walking on the sea beach. Such a vast ocean. We are confident that "The sea waves cannot come beyond this line." We are confident. Therefore we are walking. But actually, the vast ocean, within a second, it can succumbic(?), so many cities. But by whose order it is keeping the honor, "No, not beyond this. You may be very great, that's all right, but not beyond this line, demarcated"? This is Kṛṣṇa's order.

Lecture on SB 1.2.21 -- Vrndavana, November 1, 1972:

Prabhupāda: This is doubt, whether there is soul or not. Chidyante sarva-saṁśayāḥ. There are so many doubts for the material scientists. Somebody says, "There must be something." Somebody says, "No, there is no soul. It is the combination of matter. The life symptoms come out." There are so many theories. So actually, when becomes enlightened by Kṛṣṇa consciousness, his all doubts are moved. Go on.

Pradyumna: "...and empiric philosophers believe in the impersonal feature of the whole spirit without individuality of the living beings. But the transcendentalists affirm that the soul and the Supersoul are two different identities qualitatively one..."

Prabhupāda: This is also another doubt. Because the impersonalists, they think, ghaṭākāśa-poṭākāśa. Just like the sky. The sky is within the pot, and the sky is outside the pot. So when the pot is broken, the inside sky becomes one with the outside sky. That is their theory. So these doubts are also dissipated when one comes to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That this poṭākāśa means the sky within the pot, no, ghaṭākāśa, the sky within the pot, it cannot be made analogy with the sky in the pot and outside. Because they are individual souls.

Lecture on SB 1.3.1 -- Vrndavana, November 14, 1972:

Pradyumna: "And in each one of the universes the Lord enters as Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is also mentioned that the material world is created at certain intervals and then again destroyed. This creation and destruction is done by the supreme will because of the conditioned souls, or the nitya-baddha living entities. Nitya-baddha, or the eternally conditioned souls, have the sense of individuality or..."

Prabhupāda: (Hindi) Hmm? Yes.

Pradyumna: "...or ahaṅkāra, which dictates them sense enjoyment, which they are unable to have constitutionally. The Lord is the only enjoyer, and all others are enjoyed. The living entities are predominated enjoyers, but the eternally conditioned souls, forgetful of this constitutional position, have strong aspirations to enjoy. This chance to enjoy matter is given to the conditioned souls in the material world, and side by side they are given the chance to understand their real constitutional position. Those fortunate living entities who catch the truth and surrender unto the lotus feet of Vāsudeva after many, many births in the material world join the eternally liberated souls and thus are allowed to enter into the kingdom of Godhead. After this, such fortunate living entities need not come again within the occasional material creation. But those who cannot catch the constitutional truth are again merged into the mahat-tattva..."

Prabhupāda: So we can very easily understand by the example of our own body. This body, as we, spirit soul, enter into this body, the existence of body continues. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). So the body is not created first. The... Because the living entity enters into the body, therefore the body's created. Similarly, this gigantic body, universal body, cannot come into existence automatically. That is not a very good theory. How...? There is no such example. Unless the living entity is there, this body... We get this experience—it does not grow. If a child is born dead, that body does not grow.

Lecture on SB 1.3.1-3 -- San Francisco, March 28, 1968:

Upendra: "The nitya-baddha or the eternally conditioned souls have the sense of individuality or ahaṅkāra which dictates them for sense enjoyment which they are unable to have constitutionally. The Lord is the only enjoyer and all others are enjoyed. The living beings are predominated enjoyer. But the eternally conditioned souls forgetful of this constitutional position have strong aspiration for enjoying. This chance of enjoying the matter is given to the conditioned souls in the material world and side by side they are given the chance of understanding the real constitutional position. Those fortunate living entities who catch up the truth and surrender unto the Lotus feet of Vāsudeva after many many births in the material world, become one of the eternally liberated souls and thus are allowed to enter into the kingdom of Godhead. After..."

Prabhupāda: We can also become one of them, eternally liberated. But we are not admitted in the spiritual kingdom unless we have given up this false sense of lording it over the material nature. Here, the conditioned souls, everyone is trying to become the lord, imitating. Everyone is trying. But there is clash. You are trying to become lord, I am trying to become lord. Therefore there is clash. And in the spiritual world the Lord is one and there is no competition of lording it over. Therefore in the spiritual world everything is unconditioned, freedom. Yes, go on.

Lecture on SB 1.5.8-9 -- New Vrindaban, May 24, 1969:

The exact analogy of phantasma..., equivalent word in Sanskrit of phantasmagoria, which has no actual existence, is called ākāśa-puṣpa, "flower of the sky." There is no flower in the sky, but you can say. Or in common Bengali words, "eggs of the horse." Now, horse never gives eggs, but there are words like that. (chuckles) Just like Vivekananda has manufactured: daridra-nārāyaṇa. How Nārāyaṇa can be daridra? So it is something like horse eggs. You see? So these words are very... Tri-daśa-pūrākāśa-puṣpāyate. By the grace of Lord Caitanya you'll find to merge into the effulgence, to become one with the Supreme will be considered as hell, actually. If you ask any pure devotee, "Do you want to merge into the existence, impersonal Brahman?" he'll deny. If he has got little Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he'll deny, that "What is this merging? This is hellish. We want to dance with Kṛṣṇa. Why shall I merge and lose my existence, individuality?" And karmīs, they are trying to be elevated in the higher planets. Just like they are trying to go to the higher planets by sputniks, similarly, there are ritualistic ceremonies. Yānti deva-vratā devān (BG 9.25). By performing all the ritualistic ceremonies, sacrifices, you can elevate yourself to the higher planets: yānti deva-vratā devān. That is another method.

Lecture on SB 1.5.32 -- Vrndavana, August 13, 1974:

Photons. We have got name. But this is al... We know. Kaṇa, kaṇa, a small particle. So when they are put together, it appears homogeneous. But they are not homogeneous. They keep their individuality. They keep their individuality.

So that is eternal. That's a fact. But we are not only eternal... Kṛṣṇa is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1), and His bodily effulgence, that is only eternal part. Sat means eternal, cit means knowledge, and ānanda. So these three things are required. Simply eternity is not good. There must be knowledge and ānanda. So this monist theory, Advaitavāda, eternity, that may be achieved. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa, by severe penances and austerities, they can be attained. But patanty adhaḥ anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. That is the statement of Bhāgavata. They again fall down. Why? Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. They could not get the information of the shelter of Kṛṣṇa, lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. Without taking shelter of Kṛṣṇa, they fall down again. Patanty adhaḥ. Again.

We have explained many times. There are many Māyāvādīs, they merge, they give up this world, but again fall down, in so many ways. We have several times explained. So that is not very safe.

Lecture on SB 1.7.30-31 -- Vrndavana, September 26, 1976:

So we are eternal. We existed in the past, we are existing now, and we shall continue to exist. And individual. Kṛṣṇa says, "You, Me, and all these soldiers and kings, they are all individual, and they existed as individual in the past, and we are existing now as individuals, and we shall continue to exist as individuals." So there are three phases of time: past, present, and future. So there is no question of being amalgamated at any time. They remain always individuals. And this is in the material..., either material world or spiritual world, the individuality is there. It never ceases. Nitya-yuktā upāsate. Here, we have got temporary life. Therefore we cannot be nitya-yukta. This life will be finished, and the next life we do not know what kind of life we shall have. It may be human form of life or it may be dog's form of life. You have to change this body. Tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ (BG 2.13). Kṛṣṇa does not say that a man after death becomes a man. No. There is no guarantee. He says tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ. There will be change of body. And so far the body is concerned, there are 8,400,000 of different bodies. So any one of them you have to accept. There is no guarantee. Tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ.

Lecture on SB 1.8.30 -- Mayapura, October 10, 1974:

We are also aja because we are part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa. And nitya. Nityaḥ śāśva... Ajo nityaḥ. Nitya... The Māyāvāda philosophy is that we are aja, and Supreme Brahman is aja. So when we are uncovered by this material body, we mix with the aja. That is their theory, monist. We merge into the existence of aja. But that is not fact. You merge. That is like merging a green bird into a green tree. When a green bird enters a green tree it appears that the green bird is now merged and he, it has no more existence. No. That is not... One can understand. The bird enters into the green tree does not mean the bird has lost his existence. His individuality is still there. Similarly, when we merge, even in Brahman effulgence, we do not lose our individuality. Although it appears that we have lost our identity, individuality, but actually that is not the fact. And because it is not fact, therefore our another quality is ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt: (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12) we want ānanda.

Lecture on SB 1.8.43 -- Los Angeles, May 5, 1973:

We are all living beings. And Kṛṣṇa is also a living being. Kṛṣṇa is not impersonal. God is not impersonal. Just like we are persons, you are person, every one of us sitting here, we have got person, personality. We have got individuality. So the impersonalists, they cannot adjust that we are individual persons and how the Supreme, the original cause of everything, He also can be person. Because we have our experience that my knowledge or any individual persons knowledge, opulence, they're limited. But how the unlimited can be person? Because we are limited and God is unlimited, therefore these Māyāvādīs, with poor fund of knowledge, that, because we being persons, we are limited, therefore God, being unlimited, He must be imperson. He must be. They compare the material things. Just like the sky. We think it unlimited. The sky is impersonal. So their philosophy is because God is unlimited, therefore he must be impersonal.

Lecture on SB 1.10.7 -- Mayapura, June 22, 1973:

Tattva-vit, those who are in knowledge of the tattva or the Absolute Truth, they know that ultimately the Absolute Truth is manifested as a person like you, like me. Not exactly like you, like me, but so far personality is concerned, individuality is concerned, He is like us. In the Bible it is said, "Man is made after God." Because God is person, therefore we are person. Otherwise, where from our personality comes? God is the origin of everything. Therefore He is the origin of personality, individuality, otherwise how we are persons? How we are individuals? Wherefrom we get this personality, individuality?

Lecture on SB 2.3.1-3 -- Los Angeles, May 22, 1972:

Demigod worshipers will go to the demigods. There are different planets, 33 crores of demigods, and there are thirty-three crores of planets also. The moon planet, according to Vedic literature, that is also one of the planets belonging to the demigod Candra. It is one of the higher planets. So this is the list. If you want something particular... if you want to merge into the effulgence, brahma-jyotir, then you worship... Yajeta brahmaṇaḥ patim. Brahmaṇaḥ. Brahmaṇaḥ means also Vedas, śabda-brahma. Tene brahma hṛdā, in the Bhāgavata, beginning. Brahma means this sound, transcendental sound of knowledge. That is Veda. So there is Upaniṣad. So Upaniṣad, they generally, those who are scholars in Upaniṣad, they want to become one with the... So that is not a very difficult thing. Anyone can do that. There is a process, but we Vaiṣṇavas, we do not accept that suicidal policy. We want to keep our individuality, not merge. We don't want to finish our identity.

Lecture on SB 3.25.33-34 -- Bombay, December 3, 1974:

In the Bhagavad-gītā Kṛṣṇa has explained that "All these soldiers and kings who have assembled here, you and Me, all of us we existed in the past, and we are now present, and in the future also, we shall exist." But Kṛṣṇa never said that "Arjuna, you and Me and all these soldiers or kings, we shall become one." He never said. He never said. "We shall keep our individuality." This is knowledge. And in another place Kṛṣṇa says, mamaivāṁśo jīva-loke jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7). We are part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa or God sanātana, eternally, not that at the present moment I have become separated from the spirit soul, and when I shall be uncovered by this gross and subtle body, we shall become one. Their theory is like that. Ghaṭākāśa, poṭākāśa. Just like ghaṭa, a pot. In the pot there is also sky, and outside the pot there is also sky. Outside the pot there is big sky, and within the sky, within the pot, a small sky. But if you break the pot, then small sky becomes one with the big sky. This is Māyāvāda theory. But Kṛṣṇa says that "These living entities, they are eternally My parts and parcel, small particle." It is not that sometimes they were one, homogeneous; now they have become part. That we do not get.

Lecture on SB 3.26.3 -- Bombay, December 15, 1974:

Here, in this planet, you are full of anxiety. And if you are transferred to the Vaikuṇṭhaloka, there is no anxiety. Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt: (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12) simply ānanda, no anxiety. Here you must suffer anxiety, asad-grahāt, on account of accepting this asat. Asat means untruth or temporary, which will not exist. Tat sādhu manye 'sura-varya dehināṁ sadā samudvigna-dhiyām asad-grahāt (SB 7.5.5). This is Prahlāda Mahārāja's instruction, that this materialistic individuality, on account of accepting this asad-grahāt, asat, not permanent, not true, sadā samudvigna-dhiyām. Always full of anxiety. So in the material world you are trying to be free of anxiety. That is not possible. That is not... Therefore it is required, ātma-darśanam. Jñānam ātma-darśanam. Jñānaṁ niḥśreyasārthāya puruṣasya ātma-darśanam. First of all you know what is your position. Just like when one man is diseased. The physician first of all diagnose that what is the disease; then he gives medicine. Similarly, first of all you ascertain what is your constitutional position. You try to understand. That is the beginning everywhere. That is Vedic literature.

Lecture on SB 3.26.25 -- Bombay, January 2, 1975:

So to become really ānandamaya, Kṛṣṇa has—ekaṁ bahu syām—He has become many. So don't try to close up this business, "One." That is not very good intelligence. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to become one. "One" means you agree to the Supreme. That is oneness. Just like we are conducting this international society. We have got many workers, many disciples, but we are one. "One" means they are carrying their spiritual master's order. Therefore they are one. "One" means one is agreement, not that they have become amalgamated, no more individuality. Individuality is there always, but they are one, Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's devotees. The devotees are simply trying to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, and Kṛṣṇa is trying to maintain His devotees. This is oneness, not that we lose our individuality.

Individual... Without individuality, there is no ānanda. If we are sitting together, the oneness is the process of service, that's all. But there are joking. They are cutting jokes. There are some varieties of food. That is ānanda. Varieties are there. That is ānanda. But they are for one purpose: satisfaction of Kṛṣṇa. That is oneness, not that we have become amalgamated.

Lecture on SB 3.26.27 -- Bombay, January 4, 1975:

So this kind of attempt is also cheating. You cannot become one. Because eternally, sanātana, eternally, you are different. Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that "Myself, My dear Arjuna, yourself, and all the soldiers and kings who have assembled in this battlefield, they were the same individual in the past, and they are individual now, and they will continue to remain individual." So where there is oneness? In the past, present, future the individuality is there.

So it is a concoction, to finish the individuality. It is called spiritual suicide. Just like if a man becomes disappointed and he cuts his own throat or hangs him, some way or other, eats some poison, to finish, does it mean that he is finished? Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). He is rascal. He does not know. By finishing this body he is finished—no, that is not possible. The result is, because he violated the rules of nature, he becomes a ghost. That is his life. One who commits suicide, he becomes a ghost. Ghost means he does not get this material body. He remains in the subtle body, mind, intelligence.

Lecture on SB 3.26.39 -- Bombay, January 14, 1975:

Nitāi: "My dear mother, the characteristics of form are understood by dimension, quality and individuality. The form of fire is appreciated by its effulgence."

Prabhupāda:

dravyākṛtitvaṁ guṇatā
vyakti-saṁsthātvam eva ca
tejastvaṁ tejasaḥ sādhvi
rūpa-mātrasya vṛttayaḥ
(SB 3.26.39)

So little explanation is there. This is the transformation of the elements, how from sky, the air; from air, the fire; fire, water. Everything in that proportion is explained by Sāṅkhya philosophy, how one after another, the form, taste, smell, touch are appreciated in different objects differently. Just like some eatable things—the form is appreciated by taste. The flower—the form is estimated by its smelling, aroma. So that is being explained.

Lecture on SB 5.5.18 -- Vrndavana, November 6, 1976:

So this is knowledge. Otherwise artificially if I think the same thing, that because I have gone very high in the sky, I have become mixed up with the sky... There is no question of mixing up. Therefore because it is not the question of mixing up, amalgamation, separate identity, but it is light, that is all right. But not that they have lost their individuality. Sanātana. Kṛṣṇa says, "They are individual parts sanātana, eternally." Not that now they are separated, and after liberation they will mix up. No. This is wrong conception. Therefore mixing up means... Just like we are here, mixed together. We have got individuality, but for a certain purpose we are sitting together very peacefully, and the real purpose is to learn how to serve Kṛṣṇa. So when we agree to serve Kṛṣṇa, then that is mixing up of the devotees. Tāṅdera caraṇa-sevi-bhakta-sane vāsa, that is mixing up. When you assemble together with the same purpose... That's why we can understand nation.

Lecture on SB 6.1.27-34 -- Surat, December 17, 1970:

"You are so beautiful-looking that all of your eyes are just like lotus petals." Sarve padma-palāśākṣāḥ pīta-kauśeya-vāsasaḥ: "And you are very nicely dressed with yellow colored garments and ornaments," and kirīṭinaḥ, "with helmet," kirīṭinaḥ kuṇḍalinaḥ, "earrings, nice earrings, nice jewels, helmets," kirīṭinaḥ kuṇḍalino lasat-puṣkara..., "and with nice flower garlands." This is the description of the inhabitants of Vaikuṇṭhaloka. There is no hat-coat-pant. They are dressed in a different way.

All right. Now have... (break) There are five kinds of devotees, liberation. Any one. There are varieties in the spiritual kingdom also, the five kinds of liberation, any one of them. Māyāvādī philosophers, they know only one kind of liberation, sāyujya-mukti, to merge into the existence of brahma-jyotir. That much they know. Or they know... They prefer this kind of liberation, to become with the Supreme. That is taste. But devotees, they do not like. They want to keep their individuality.

Lecture on SB 6.1.33 -- San Francisco, July 18, 1975:

So they are also... The inhabitants of Vaikuṇṭha on the spiritual planet, they are also exactly of the same feature. You everything get exactly like God. This is Vaikuṇṭhaloka. The opulence is also like that. Sārṣṭi. There are five kinds of mukti, liberation. One is sāyujya, to merge into the existence. That is also mukti. But Vaiṣṇava does not like such kind of mukti. They think to merge, to become one with the Supreme and lost our individuality, that is, Vaiṣṇava thinks, as hell. Kaivalyaṁ narakāyate. Why? We shall keep ourself, our individuality, the body exactly like Kṛṣṇa. In the Goloka Vṛndāvana they keep exactly like two-handed Kṛṣṇa. In the Vaikuṇṭha they also keep themselves four-handed as Viṣṇu, Nārāyaṇa. So the Vaiṣṇavas are very intelligent. They want to keep themself in as good as God. Sometimes more than God, Vaiṣṇava. That is very intelligent. What is the use of becoming one? I lose my individuality. So that is jñānī's aspiration. But the bhaktas, they want to keep association with Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu in the same opulence, same prosperity, everything, bodily features the same, everything.

Lecture on SB 6.3.16-17 -- Gorakhpur, February 10, 1971:

So there is no question of impersonalism. This oneness with God and the living entity, these are the oneness, that they attain the same quality, the same characteristics, the same feature of the body. That is oneness. Not that they have no individuality. God has got individuality and His devotees or the living entities, even though not devotees, nondevotees, everyone has got individuality. That is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā. Kṛṣṇa says that "I, you, and all these persons who have assembled here in the Battle of Kurukṣetra, they existed in the past, they are existing at the present moment, and they will continue to exist in the future." Now, where is the question of mixing together? They existed as they are existing now, and at the present moment they are existing as individuals, and in the past, they also existed as individuals, and the future, they will continue to exist as individuals. So there is no question of losing the individuality. That's a theory only. No living entity loses his individuality even after liberation. They try to keep mixed up with others. Just like the sunshine is a combination of molecular parts, something shining. Is it not? Similarly, brahma-jyotir is combination of the individual parts and parcels of God.

Lecture on SB 7.6.6-9 -- Montreal, June 23, 1968:

Devotee (1): The son of God.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Therefore relationship is father and son. But there is no difference between father and son. Both of them are authorized. Just like your father, and if you are a trustworthy son of your father, then the work done by your father and by you is the same.

Devotee (2): Swamijī, Kṛṣṇa being the cause of all causes, how can (we) use our individuality if we are always under His direction?

Prabhupāda: Hm?

Devotee (2): If we are always under Kṛṣṇa's direction, how is it we can use our individuality?

Prabhupāda: That is individuality, that even under the direction of Kṛṣṇa, you can use your individuality. Don't you do that? Your father says, "My dear boy, do this." You say, "No, I don't do this." That is your individuality. Otherwise what is the meaning of individuality? Individuality means if I like, I can accept; if I don't like, I do not accept. That is individuality. If I am forced to do something, that is not my individuality.

Janārdana: We are marginal energy.

Lecture on SB 7.6.6-9 -- Montreal, June 23, 1968:

Yes. Marginal energy is that, that by your individuality you can abide by the order of Kṛṣṇa, and if you like, you do not abide by the order of Kṛṣṇa. That is your choice. That is practical everywhere. The father and son—the son may obey the father, and the son may disobey also. That is the choice of the son. That is given there, that every individual living entity has got this minute quantity of independence. And as soon as we misuse this minute quantity of independence we are in the hands of māyā. Just like in every country... You are American. You are considered to be independent. But that does not mean that you are absolutely independent, you can do whatever you like. But you have got the right to do whatever you like. But as soon as you misuse your independence, you are in danger, although you belong to the independent nation. So there is possibility of misusing the independence at every moment. Therefore we have to continue Kṛṣṇa consciousness so this possibility of misusing the independence will no longer live. All right.

Lecture on SB 7.9.19 -- Hamburg, September 7, 1969, (with German Translator):

Similarly, when we are in agreement with the supreme consciousness, then we become immediately peaceful and happy. That is the instruction of Bhagavad-gītā. The Bhagavad-gītā says at the ultimate end, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja: (BG 18.66) "My dear Arjuna..." He is teaching to Arjuna—not only Arjuna, but all human society—that "You give up your all manufactured occupational duties. You simply agree to My proposal, and I shall give you all protection." It does not mean that we lose our individuality. Just like Kṛṣṇa says to Arjuna, "You do it," but He does not force him: "You do it." "If you like, you do it." Kṛṣṇa does not touch your independence. He simply requests you, "You do it."

So we can become happy and peaceful by keeping our individuality if we dovetail our consciousness with the supreme consciousness. That is also explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate (BG 7.19). This surrendering process, this voluntarily surrendering oneself to dovetail his consciousness with Kṛṣṇa, is possible after many, many births. (end)

Lecture on SB 12.2.1 -- San Francisco, March 18, 1968:

That's all. Strītve puṁstve ca hi ratiḥ. Ratiḥ means sex. Formerly it was not the system. The husband and wife combined together as life companion. Even the husband becomes diseased and paralyzed, the wife cannot give, give him up. "Oh, he is my husband." Similarly, wife. Either she becomes diseased or so many things, the husband and wife combined together for life. There was no question of divorce. There was no question of divorce, even they do not like each other, even they fight. Fight there must be, whenever there are two men or woman. That is individuality. Therefore Cāṇakya Paṇḍita says, dāmpatye kālahe caiva bambhārambhe laghu-kriya. Whenever there is fight between husband and wife, it should be neglected. The formula of Cāṇakya Paṇḍita is given like this: Aja-yuddhe. When the goats are fighting, as it is very insignificant... If you understand that in the door two goats are fighting, you don't care for it. You see, a goat fight. So aja-yuddhe muni-śraddhe. And some sages are performing śraddhā ceremony.

Nectar of Devotion Lectures

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 27, 1972:

Therefore Jīva Gosvāmī, this merging principle, he has explained: just like a green bird enters into a green tree, it, it appears that the bird is no more existing. To the imperfect eyes. But the bird is existing. We cannot see. Both the tree and the bird being green, we see it has merged. Because the spiritual sky and the spiritual living being, a small, it merges it does not merge. It is there. The individuality is there. And because this individuality, fragment of the Supreme Brahman, is eternal, is eternal, sanātana... It is not that spirit can be cut into pieces. That is not possible. So we are fragmental parts. That means eternally we are so, individual. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). We are one of the nityas. There are innumerable nityas and cetanaś, the living entities, part and parcel of the supreme living entity, Kṛṣṇa. They're all individual.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 27, 1972:

Kṛṣṇa also says in the Bhagavad-gītā, "My dear Arjuna, do not think that I, you, or all these soldiers and kings who have assembled in this battlefield, they were not existing in the past. They were. And they are existing at present. And similarly they will exist in the future." That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. So where is the question of merging? And loss of individuality? The individuality remains. It remained in the past. It is, at the present moment, it is continuing. And in the future also, they will remain, the same way. This is clearly explained in the second chapter of Bhagavad-gītā. So merging does not mean, always, that losing one's individuality. The individuality's there. Therefore the theory of merging into the existence of impersonal Brahman is to stay there for some time, again fall down. Just like the same example that the water of the rivers, they merge into the ocean, but again it is evaporated, in the sky, and it falls. Again goes through the river, merges. Bhūtvā bhūtvā pralīyate (BG 8.19). This is going on. One mani..., once manifested, and again merging. This is going on.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 31, 1972:

So Kṛṣṇa is not alone. Kṛṣṇa is not nirākāra. Kṛṣṇa is not impersonal, because He has got so many personal associates. Nityo nityānām. All these personal associates, they're individual persons. We are all person. You are person, I am person. We are all individual. I have got my individual opinion; you have got your individual opinion. Oneness means when these individual opinions are coincided in the matter of surrendering to Kṛṣṇa; that is oneness. Oneness does not mean that all these individuals become one, homogeneous. No. They keep their individuality, but they become one in the service of Kṛṣṇa. That is oneness. Now everyone is working for his sense gratification, personal. When everyone becomes agreed that "We shall satisfy Kṛṣṇa," that is oneness. That is oneness. One nation.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 31, 1972:

Similarly, they're working conjointly for the society, or they're working conjointly for the community, or conjointly working for the nation. That is oneness. When we speak, "We are Indian nation, oneness," that oneness does not mean that every individual Indian has become homogeneous with other Indians. No. Every Indian is an individual person, but he has sacrificed his individuality and engaged himself for the service of the country. That is national consciousness. Similarly, Kṛṣṇa consciousness. As there is national consciousness, community consciousness, family consciousness, so many other consciousness, similarly, Kṛṣṇa consciousness means all persons agree to work for the satisfaction of Kṛṣṇa. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That is oneness. Oneness does not mean we lose our individuality. Sometimes, individually we fight. Just like in the legislative assembly, our representative, M.P.'s, they go and fight. There is a deliberation. But that purpose is to serve the country. Therefore, instead of the difference of opinions, they agree to work in this way. That is legislative assembly. Similarly, individuality there must be always, but when we find out a one means to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, that is oneness.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 31, 1972:

That is ekatvam. Why a... In other words, ekatvam... This is the version of the Īśopaniṣad, ekatvam anupaśyataḥ. Ekatvam anupaśyataḥ. Ekatvam, at the same time, anupaśyataḥ. That means we are all spirit soul. We are part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa. That is anupaśyataḥ. And on this basis, when we find ekatvam, oneness, that is the platform of peace, that "We are all servants of Kṛṣṇa." Caitanya Mahāprabhu advised this, jīvera svarūpa haya nitya kṛṣṇa dāsa (Cc. Madhya 20.108-109). When we feel that "Eternally I am servant of Kṛṣṇa, you are servant of Kṛṣṇa," that is ekatvam. Not that we become a lump of thing. No. Impersonality cannot be... Personality cannot be changed. Jīva-loke. Mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ jīva-loke sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7). This individuality is sanātana, eternal. But when we disagree to serve Kṛṣṇa, that is asanātana, not sanātana. That is artificial.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 29, 1973:

"Whatever You like, You can do." Mat-prāṇa-nāthas tu... "Still You are my prāṇa-nātha." This is oneness. I keep my individuality, but I am so surrendered that I have nothing to disagree with Kṛṣṇa. This is oneness. Not that I mix up, I lose my individuality. I have got individuality. I must go on with individuality. And even individuality's never stopped. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said that "All these kings, you and Me, all of us, we existed in the past, we are now existing, and in the future also we shall exist." There is no question of intermingling the individuality. The individuality's there, but individuality sacrificed, full agreement. Full agreement. That is oneness. Just like in our Society, I am the head. So everyone is in agreement with me. That is oneness. Not that my disciples, my students, have lost their individuality. They're using their individuality to improve the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement—but sanctioned by me. That is oneness. That is oneness. Similarly, our devotional service is like that. We, varieties of work we are doing, but we must see whether Kṛṣṇa is satisfied.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 29, 1973:

Svanuṣṭhitasya dharmasya saṁsiddhir hari-toṣaṇam (SB 1.2.13). This is our philosophy. Svanuṣṭhitasya dharmasya. Everyone has got individual capacity to do something, but we must see whether that is satisfactory to Kṛṣṇa or His representative. Yasya prasādād bhagavat-prasādo **. Just (like) in the office, the clerks are working. The office master, superintendent, if he's pleased, then the proprietor is pleased. The clerk hasn't got to show a separate endeavor for pleasing the proprietor. If the man in charge is pleased, then proprietor is pleased. Similarly, we have to please our spiritual master. And if he's pleased, it is to be supposed Kṛṣṇa is pleased. And my only aim is, my only success is to see if Kṛṣṇa is pleased. Svanuṣṭhitasya dharmasya saṁsiddhir hari-toṣaṇam (SB 1.2.13). Others may be displeased or pleased—it doesn't matter. One has to be assured whether Kṛṣṇa is pleased. Then it is all right. That is oneness. Oneness does not mean I lose my individuality. That is not oneness. Go on.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 31, 1973:

Mādhavānanda: "The impersonalists desire to merge into the existence of the Supreme, but without keeping their individuality, they have no chance of hearing and chanting the glories of the Supreme Lord. Because they have no idea of the transcendental form of the Supreme Lord, there is no chance of their chanting and hearing of His transcendental activities."

Prabhupāda: The impersonalists take it, this chanting, as means to attain liberation. They do not know that the chanting is the, real chanting begins after liberation. Not that by chanting one reaches liberation. No. That's not a fact. Satataṁ kīrtayanto māṁ yatantaś ca dṛḍha-vratāḥ (BG 9.14). Satatam. Satatam means after liberation also. This chanting will continue after liberation also. Not that after liberation chanting will finish. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, satatam. Satatam means after liberation also. Before liberation and after liberation. Therefore it is nitya. Nitya means it does not stop, never stops. Satataṁ kīrtayananto māṁ yatantaś ca, tuṣyanti ca ramanti ca. Dṛḍha-vratāḥ. So the, when you actually go to Goloka Vṛndāvana, the same chanting will go on before Kṛṣṇa. Chanting will never stop.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.7 -- Mayapur, March 9, 1974:

Otherwise Kṛṣṇa would have said that in future, when we become liberated, then we shall become one. No. He says, "Even in future also, we shall continue to exist like this. You are individual. You are Arjuna. I am Kṛṣṇa. And all other living entities..." That is real understanding. Every one of us living entities, we are all individual persons, and Kṛṣṇa is also individual person. This is knowledge. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām eko yo bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). Kṛṣṇa, or God, He's also nitya, eternal. We are also nitya, eternal. Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). We do not die. That is the preliminary knowledge of spiritual understanding, that "I am not this body, I am spirit soul, ahaṁ brahmāsmi, but I am individual." Nityo nityānām. Kṛṣṇa is individual person; I am also individual person. When Kṛṣṇa says that sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66), it does not mean that I become one with Kṛṣṇa or merge into the existence of Kṛṣṇa. I keep my individuality, Kṛṣṇa keeps His individuality, but I agree to abide by His order. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā to Arjuna that "I have spoken to you everything. Now what is your decision?" Individual. It is not that Kṛṣṇa is forcing Arjuna. Yathecchasi tathā kuru: (BG 18.63) "Now whatever you like, can do." That is individuality.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.7 -- Mayapur, March 9, 1974:

So this is the ultimate knowledge, that, this Māyāvāda philosophy, that to become one, merge into the existence, merge into the existence means we merge into the order of Kṛṣṇa. Our individuality at the present moment is māyā, because we are planning so many things. Therefore your individuality and my individuality clashes. But when there will be no more clashing—we shall agree, "Central point is Kṛṣṇa"—that is oneness, not that we lose our individuality. So as it is stated in all Vedic literature and spoken by Kṛṣṇa, we are all individual, all individual. Svayaṁ bhagavān ekale īśvara. But the difference is that He is the supreme ruler, īśvara. Īśvara. Īśvara means ruler. Actually He is ruler, and we are also ruler, but we are subordinate ruler . Therefore He is ekale īśvara, one ruler. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇa, in the Brahma-saṁhitā. Ekale īśvara. Īśvara cannot be many. That is not īśvara. The Māyāvāda philosophy that everyone is God, that is not very right conclusion. That is rascaldom.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.110 -- New York, July 17, 1976:

So if you want to merge into the Brahman effulgence, it is not difficult, because you are a small particle of spiritual identity. If you don't want your individuality, you can stay in the Brahman effulgence. That is not very difficult for Kṛṣṇa, if you want to merge into the Brahman effulgence. But what is the profit? There is no profit. Suppose if you are placed in the sky, in the sunshine, and if somebody asks, "Now, you remain in the sky," would you agree? Huh? Will anyone agree that "Let me remain in the sky as a small particle of the sunshine"? No. You can agree out of some sentiment, but you cannot stay there. That is not possible. Therefore, those who merge into the existence of Brahman, impersonal Brahman, they again fall down. Just like they are going moon excursion, Mars excursion. "Stay there." They cannot stay. Because, actually, whether they are going or not—that's another thing—but there is no staying place.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 21.13-49 -- New York, January 4, 1967:

Now these cowherds boys, they have got a cane in the hand, vetra. And each of them has got a flute also. Vetra veṇu dala. And a lotus flower, and a śṛṅgara, a horn. Śṛṅgara vastra, and very nicely dressed. And full of ornaments. Just like Kṛṣṇa is dressed, similarly, His friends, cowherd boys, they are also dressed. In the spiritual world, when you go, you'll not be able to understand who is Kṛṣṇa and who is not Kṛṣṇa. Everyone is like Kṛṣṇa. Similarly, in the Vaikuṇṭha planets everyone is like Viṣṇu. That is called sayujya-mukti. The living entities, when they enter into the spiritual planets, they become as good as Kṛṣṇa and Viṣṇu—there is no difference—because it is absolute world. Here the difference is there. The impersonalists, they cannot understand that even in individuality there is no difference. As soon as they think of individuality, oh, they think that there is a difference. Then what is liberation? Yes. And actually there is no difference. The difference is only that Kṛṣṇa's personality and others' personalities, they are conscious that "Kṛṣṇa is our object of love." That's it. The center is Kṛṣṇa. In this way the individual boys and girls and Kṛṣṇa, everyone is enjoying spiritual bliss.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 22.6 -- New York, January 8, 1967:

The foolish persons, they are satisfied that "I am in the ocean now." That is the less intelligence. Go deep into the ocean and see what is going there. Similarly, those who are satisfied simply by merging into the spiritual existence, impersonalists, they are less intelligent. They have no intelligence to see that within the ocean there is individual expansion, individual life, and they are enjoying. Similarly, in the spiritual sky there is individuality. That individuality is there. And that individuality is reciprocated between Kṛṣṇa and the individual souls. They are called nitya-mukta, eternally liberated. And the other class, who are just like in the river fishes, they are called nitya-baddha. Their, I mean to say, limited sphere in the river or in the pond or in the well... The frog philosophy. They are expanding themselves, frogs: "How much great is Atlantic Ocean?" So they are called conditioned soul. Those who are in this material world, although they are part and parcel of the Supreme Lord energy, but because they are conditioned in this material contamination, they are called, I mean to say, conditioned, conditioned by the laws of nature.

Sri Isopanisad Lectures

Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 9-10 -- Los Angeles, May 14, 1970:

So Bhāgavata says, "One who has accepted this combination of bile, mucus, and air as self, he is an ass." Yes. Actually, this is the fact. If we accept this combination of bile, mucus, and air as myself... So intelligent person, a very great philosopher, very great scientist, does it mean that he's a combination of bile, mucus and air? No. This is the mistake. He's different from this bile or mucus or air. He's soul. And according to his karma, he's exhibiting, manifesting his talent. So they do not understand this karma, the law of karma. Why we find so many different personalities? If it is a combination of bile, mucus, and air, why they are not similar? So they do not cultivate this knowledge. Why there are dissimilarities? One man is born millionaires; another man is born, he cannot even have full meals twice a day, although he's struggling very hard. Why this discrimination? Why one is put into such favorable condition? Why the other is not? So there is law of karma, the individuality.

Festival Lectures

Janmastami Lord Sri Krsna's Appearance Day -- Montreal, August 16, 1968:

So because Kṛṣṇa has personality and because Kṛṣṇa has individuality, we have individuality. Kṛṣṇa's existence, because He is perfect, is the most certain. Imperfect existence has no meaning. Our existence has no meaning except as reference, in reference to Kṛṣṇa's existence. We haven't even got the power to conserve our own existence. Or in other words, we can't understand how we're existing. We can understand in some deluded manner that we're feeding our bodies and so on. We can have some sort of knowledge of ritual. But we don't actually know what we are and what the ritual is, why we're performing it.

Initiation Lectures

Initiation of Jayapataka Dasa -- Montreal, July 24, 1968:

'Vyakto 'vyaktāt sanātanaḥ. Paras tasmād tu bhāva anya. As you get information from the Bhagavad-gītā, there is another nature which is called spiritual nature and the devotees are trying, all the transcendentalists... Some are trying to merge into the spiritual existence only, and we devotees, we want to keep individuality and want to become associate with the Supreme Personality of Godhead Kṛṣṇa. So gradually you can learn it from the lectures and the books and with association with your Godbrothers and sisters. So this is your initiation. Take it very seriously. Chant Hare Kṛṣṇa very faithfully and your life will be successful.

Wedding Ceremonies

Paramananda & Satyabhama's Wedding -- Montreal, July 22, 1968:

So this love between male and female, conjugal love, we Vaiṣṇava philosophers... Because everyone, according to Vedic system, everyone has to follow the Vedānta-sūtra. There are two section of philosophers in India, approved; not, I mean to say, manufactured philosopher, mental speculators, but actually those who are counted valuable. There are two classes of philosophers, namely the impersonalist and personalist. The Vaiṣṇava, they accept that the Absolute Truth is person, and the Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that Absolute Truth is impersonal. That is the difference. Otherwise their process of other paraphernalia, execution of understanding, is almost the same. Now our Vaiṣṇava philosopher's argument is that how the Absolute Truth can be impersonal? Because here, in this world, in our experience, we see everything personal. So unless the personality, the individuality, or the individual attraction is there in the Absolute Truth, how they can be represented here in the relative truth?

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Śyāmasundara: He says that a monad is the force or activity which constitutes the essence of a substance.

Prabhupāda: But Kṛṣṇa is the substance, summum bonum. Aṇḍāntara-stha paramāṇu-cayāntara-stham (Bs. 5.35). He is within everything. That is His all-pervasive nature.

Śyāmasundara: Then how are the individualities accounted for?

Prabhupāda: Every individual soul is awarded a little portion of independence, because every individual soul is part and parcel of God, so he has got the quality of independence, in minute quantity. That is individuality.

Śyāmasundara: Just like, for instance, say, this particulate substance, he would say that there is a force or activity which constitutes the essence of this substance, and that is the monad of this substance. He is attributing it to everything, matter.

Prabhupāda: So we take the atom. Atom is the smallest. So we say within the atom the force is Kṛṣṇa. He is simply suggesting there is some enforcing power. We are giving directly that that is Kṛṣṇa.

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Śyāmasundara: So then this philosophy of Leibnitz is not correct.

Prabhupāda: No.

Śyāmasundara: Because he says in matter there is also this kind of individuality.

Prabhupāda: That individual is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa knows that so many atoms will be combined, then another thing will be formed. It is not the individual soul but Kṛṣṇa directly.

Śyāmasundara: But when you come to the living entities, then the individual soul is also there.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Within the body. Both of them—Kṛṣṇa is also there, and the individual soul is also there.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the definition of substance is a being capable of action. Substance means to be capable of action, and that existence means action.

Prabhupāda: Substance is original. Other things are categories.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Śyāmasundara: And respect others as persons.

Prabhupāda: Yes. So why do they not respect others' person. The animal is also person. What is this philosophy? That is the defect, that one is a rascal and he is taking the position of a philosopher. That is the defect. He's a rascal number one. He does not respect others' individuality, and he philosophizes that ones individuality should be observed.

Śyāmasundara: He says that there are three basic rights. The first is property rights; the second is the right of contract; the third right is the right of redress of wrongs; in the sense that crimes should be punished.

Prabhupāda: Yes. But it is not crime to kill an animal? The animal has no right to live independently?

Śyāmasundara: They say that the standard of what is right is the universal or the rational will...

Prabhupāda: Is that rational, that another living entity like me should be killed for my benefit, for satisfying my tongue?

Śyāmasundara: Their idea is that the animal is not in the same category as myself because it has no...

Prabhupāda: So that's alright; then might is right? Hitler is right? When Hitler, Hitler kills the Jews, he's right? He thinks that they are not in my category.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: The bondage...

Prabhupāda: Then you have to change. Therefore Kṛṣṇa's instruction is there, that "Do like this, do like this."

Hayagrīva: In Creative Evolution Bergson writes, "We may conclude then that individuality is never perfect and that it is often difficult, sometimes impossible, to tell what is an individual and what is not, but that life nevertheless manifests a search for individuality as if it strove to constitute systems naturally isolated, naturally closed." A search for...

Prabhupāda: (aside:) You have given the key?

Hayagrīva: What does he mean by "search for individuality"? Isn't the individual always there?

Prabhupāda: It is no search. We are individual, always. This is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā in the Second Chapter, that we are individual now, we are individual..., were in the past, and we shall continue to remain individual in future. So the individuality is always there, but the living entity, we, we are not as big as Kṛṣṇa. Our intelligence is very meager, is very small, so, so therefore we forget what is our real constitutional position. So to bring to our original constitutional position the..., Kṛṣṇa and His instructions are there. The individuality is always, past, present and future, but when we forget Kṛṣṇa, make our own plan, then we suffer, and when we utilize our individuality properly, little independence, and follow Kṛṣṇa's instruction as His servant, then our life is perfect.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: This is the continuation of Bergson.

Prabhupāda: Now, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they, possessing poor fund of knowledge, they want to kill this individuality. But that is not possible. Kṛṣṇa says that you shall remain individual perpetually. There is no question of stopping. Mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūta jīva-loka sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7). They, perpetually you are individual, God is also individual. So to..., killing the individuality is not possible, but this is a false notion that "I kill my individuality and become one with God, then I will be perfect." That is not possible. You cannot become one with God. You keep your individuality. So even though if for the time being you think that "I am now merged in the existence of God," but on account of our individuality you shall again fall down.

Hayagrīva: And there's no need for a search for individuality.

Prabhupāda: Individual, he is always individual. Perpetually.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: Yes. He sees the material worlds as being isolated. He says, "There is then a bond between the worlds, but this bond may be regarded as infinitely loose in comparison with the mutual dependence which unites the parts of the same world among ourselves," excuse me, "which unites the parts of the same world among themselves. So that it is not artificially for reasons of mere convenience that we isolate our solar system. Nature itself invites us to isolate it." So this, this calls to mind the image of a prison house. The isolation of the world, as far as man is concerned, is isolation imposed by material nature on the conditioned.

Prabhupāda: He is isolated. He is thinking in the wrong way. Just like in the prison house every prisoner, every, every criminal is different from other criminal. So everyone has to suffer the consequence of his criminal activities, so every individual person is suffering or enjoying according to his past deeds. So there cannot be any combination. Then we forget the individuality. That is not possible.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Hayagrīva: Concerning individuality, Kierkegaard writes, "God is the origin and wellspring of all individuality. To have individuality is to believe in the individuality of everyone else, for the individuality in not mine. It is the gift of God through which He permits me to be, and through which He permits everyone to be."

Prabhupāda: That's the fact. He explains..., this fact is explained in the Vedic literature, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13), Kaṭha Upaniṣad, that He is also living being and we are also living being. So He is also eternal; we are also eternal. So qualitatively we are one, but quantitatively we are different, because eko yo bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān: that one, singular number, eternal living being, Kṛṣṇa, or God, He is maintaining everyone. So that is the difference. The one living being, the Supreme Living Being, the great living being, is maintaining other living beings who are part and parcel of the Supreme. So both of us, we are the living beings, individual, eternal, but God is Supreme; we are subordinate. That is difference. So our natural position should be to love God, being part and parcel of God.

Philosophy Discussion on Martin Heidegger:

Śyāmasundara: By this existence or (indistinct) that a man can choose himself or win himself by his own improvement, that he can realize himself. If I exist then I can realize myself, what I am, what is my essence. And there are two types of existence, he says: authentic existence and inauthentic existence. Authentic existence is what one feels when that existence is something of his own. (break) So he says there are two kinds of existence: authentic existence and inauthentic existence. So a man who is leading an authentic existence, then he is something of his own. But he is leading an inauthentic existence, then he is busy, excited, or preoccupied, what they say, when he has lost himself, when he loses himself. That is inauthentic existence. Thus authentic existence is when a man is always aware, self-aware, of his existence: "What I am doing now, what I am doing now, what am I doing now." So he says that an inauthentic existence is fallen existence, that a man falls into averageness or everydayness or what he calls publicness, where he lacks individuality and becomes the group self, and his personal decisions are not based upon a individual...

Prabhupāda: Everyone is living an inauthentic existence because... That is animal existence. He knows only the span of life from birth to death. That's all. That is inauthentic existence. When he knows that this is temporary... Just like suppose we are preacher, living in this apartment, say for a month. (indistinct). So this span of existence, one month or ten days or six months, this is inauthentic. But my preaching work, as preacher, I am (indistinct), that is my authentic existence. Is it not?

Śyāmasundara: Yes.

Prabhupāda: Does he think like that?

Śyāmasundara: Yes. Because whatever you're doing, you are always aware of why I am doing it, what is it for, like that.

Prabhupāda: Yes. So therefore the conclusion is that a human being should know, should distinguish what is authentic existence and what is inauthentic existence. That is human life. At least we should know it. That is the order of the Upaniṣads, that anyone who knows this, he is brāhmaṇa. Etad viditvā yaḥ prayāti. The dog does not know it, but a man can know this. If he knows it, then he's a brāhmaṇa.

Philosophy Discussion on Martin Heidegger:

Prabhupāda: Everyone is looking. Everyone... The struggle for existence means everyone is looking for "How shall I exist forever?" But he does not know. Everyone... Nobody wants to die. Everyone wants to free himself from the clutches of death, but he does not know it.

Śyāmasundara: He wants to find the basis for individuality, strong individuality.

Prabhupāda: Individuality you may keep. It doesn't matter. Every one of us is individual. Every one of us is struggling, but we must know what for we are struggling, what is our existence. These things are required. Individuality is there. We are preaching this individualism. We do not say that impersonalism. No. So is that all right?. No. Still more.

Śyāmasundara: Yes. Oh, yes. Still more. He says that a man finds himself flung into the world, and he finds that he is a fact within this world. He cannot deny that he is here. And he is subject to the resultant mood of fear or dread that comes about when he discovers that there is no escape to being here. "I am here. There is no escape." So there is immediate anxiety always within the man, that "I am here." So...

Prabhupāda: So when one is under some condition, then there is (indistinct). So therefore, this material world, every one of us are living under conditions and everyone is anxious.

Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:

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."

Śyāmasundara: My activities.

Prabhupāda: Yes. So try to understand, "I am" means my activities. So how my activities are going on? Presently we can see my activities are going on by the movements of my senses, of the limbs of the body. Therefore we come to the point that the moving force is "I am."

Śyāmasundara: That which moves the limbs.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That moving force, if "I am," then I am not this body, because as soon as the moving force from the body is gone, the body is of no value.

Philosophy Discussion on Jacques Maritain:

Śyāmasundara: He says that the human being is nature's most perfect creation.

Prabhupāda: That's it. We also accept that. So after many, many births, 8,400,000 species of life, one gets this human form of life, and that also, civilized life, that also, in India, following the Vedic principles, that is the highest birth.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the human being has the material aspect of individuality plus the spiritual aspect of personality.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That, that personality understanding is the perfect understanding. The Absolute Truth, as it is given in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, is realized in three phases: impersonal Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavān. Bhagavān is person. So to..., when one comes to Bhagavān understanding, that is the highest perfection. Bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate: (BG 7.19) after many, many births of cultivating knowledge, one actually is wise, he surrenders to Kṛṣṇa. That is the perfection.

Śyāmasundara: He says that this is..., because of this spiritual personality that he can know and love God.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Without person how there can be love? There is no question of love. You cannot love air or sky; you must find out a man or woman in the, under the sky. So therefore if you want to love God then you must accept God is a person; otherwise there is no question of love. Therefore for the Māyāvādī philosopher there is no question of love. They merge. They want sāyujya-mukti, to become one. They have no other conception, because they cannot conceive personal God. So there is no love. Therefore they manufacture an idea that in the material condition of life, you just imagine any form of God and love Him, and ultimately you become one. That is their philosophy.

Philosophy Discussion on Jacques Maritain:

Śyāmasundara: So he says because men are a combination of spiritual personality and material individuality, he says because of the spiritual personality we can know God, and because of the material individuality evil arises, because of the material body.

Prabhupāda: No. If we have no perfect knowledge of the individuality... Individuality does not mean always evil and good. Just like in Vṛndāvana, the gopīs, they have got individuality, but that individuality is for Kṛṣṇa. Therefore they are all one. The objective is one. The example was given by my Guru Mahārāja that according to Vedic system, when one's husband is away from home, she does not dress herself very nicely, so she does not look very attractive. But the same woman, when the husband is at home, she dresses very nice. Now, this dressing or not dressing, they are two contradictory things, but the aim is the one; therefore that is one. The aim is the husband. For the husband's satisfaction she dresses and sometimes not dresses. So these two things, dressing and not dressing, apparently may be contradictory, but (if) the aim is one, they are the same. Similarly, there is variety in the spiritual world, but all the varieties, their central point is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore the varieties are also one.

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Hayagrīva: ...composed of the conscious and the subconscious, the sub..., can never be fully known by the individual, but it does have individuality.

Prabhupāda: That individual, I, I know that I am individual person, I have got my own ideas, my own activities. Where is the difficulty? Simply it has to be purified. Sarvopādhi-vinirmuktam (CC Madhya 19.170). I am identifying with America or India or Hindu or Muslim or this or that. This should be purified. I should identify with Kṛṣṇa, that "I am only servant of Kṛṣṇa and devotees." Then I am purified.

Hayagrīva: He did... He speaks of the soul in this way. He says, "If the human soul is anything, it must be of unimaginable complexity and diversity, so that it cannot possibly be approached through a mere psychology of instinct."

Prabhupāda: That he does not know. As soon as we train ourself, that just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, "I am not a brāhmaṇa, I am not a kṣatriya, I am not a śūdra, I am not a sannyāsī, I am not brahmacārī." By negation. "I am not, I am not, I am not." Then what is your actual? That gopī-bhartuḥ kamalayor dāsa-dāsānu: (CC Madhya 13.80) "I am the servant of the servant of the servant of the maintainer of gopīs." That means Kṛṣṇa. "That is my real identification." So I have, so long we do not identify as the eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa, there will be so many varieties of identification, and bhakti, devotional service, means to become purified from all this false identification.

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Hayagrīva: He feels that the only thing that keeps modern man..., that will keep modern man from simply dissolving into the crowd is, he says, "We must ask, 'Have I any religious experience, an immediate relation to God and hence that certainty which will keep me as an individual from dissolving in the crowd of humanity?' " So one's relation with God assures one of one's individuality.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Everyone is individual. God is also individual. So one individual is subordinate to the chief individual. That is the Vedic version. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13), God is also individual being, but He is the Supreme Being, and we are individual being, innumerable. So the difference is that the supreme living being is maintaining us, and we are being maintained. That we should understand. The same example as I gave, the father and the children in the family. The father is maintainer and the children are maintained. This is the real conception of philosophy. The mother is the material nature and father is God, and we are all children. We have got rights to enjoy the father's property, but not encroaching upon others', but as it is allotted by the father. "You sit down here, you take this, that's all," that, that much right I have got. I do not transgress the order of the father; then it is peaceful situation.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Śyāmasundara: This existential psychoanalysis is supposed to get down to the root of a man's existence.

Prabhupāda: Has he seen that? Has he gone up to there?

Śyāmasundara: The level that he takes it to is that man is basically a "being for himself."

Prabhupāda: That's all right, that individuality.

Śyāmasundara: And that his decision-making power, his freedom to make decisions, is his real essence, his real nature.

Prabhupāda: So he agrees also at the same time, responsibility.

Śyāmasundara: Yes.

Prabhupāda: So that means he must have the power to make decisions, right and wrong. That is responsible.

Śyāmasundara: The main thing, though, is that he must abide by his decision. Whatever he chooses, that he must live it.

Prabhupāda: Not necessarily. If I decide to steal, it is better to avoid it. Not that because I have to decided to steal, I must do it just like a hero and then go to prison.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Śyāmasundara: But how do I perceive someone as a person? How do I do it?

Prabhupāda: Because he has got discriminating power.

Śyāmasundara: What is the method for doing it? What is the method of seeing someone as a person?

Prabhupāda: There is no method. It is directly perceived. As soon as I see you, you have got individuality.

Śyāmasundara: But I don't see your individuality. I see you as an object.

Prabhupāda: Why do you see like that?

Śyāmasundara: I want to know how I can see you as a person. What is the cure? What is the remedy? What is the solution?

Prabhupāda: I don't follow what you are saying. Everyone is seeing. I am seeing you as a person, you are seeing me as a person.

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

Śyāmasundara: His categories are a little more abstract. He says that the primary category is motion.

Prabhupāda: But wherefrom the motion comes? That is insufficient knowledge. When you... Motion means somebody must move, push on. That is accepted by Professor Einstein. If somebody has pushed, the motion has begun. Now it is going on. Just like in the billiard table, push one ball, "Hut!" And it goes.

Śyāmasundara: Yes. So he says that there are four major categories besides the primary category of motion and they are 1) identity or diversity. Each thing has a personal identity, an individuality, and each thing is different from every other thing.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is called sajātīya-vijātīya bheda in Sanskrit. Different... Sajātīya. Just like two trees, two mango trees, but still there is difference. They are one as mango tree, but this tree is different from that tree. Similarly, the fingers. As finger they are one, but this finger is different from this finger. Although sajātī. Sajātī means of the same category, but there is difference. Although the same category, finger, but this finger is bigger than this finger. The whole body. It's a part of the body. Hand is different from leg. Leg is different from his head. Head is different from palm. Palm is different from sole. There are so many differences. They are called sajātī vijātī.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Śyāmasundara: So he says that the noncaused ego posits the nonego, or it gives them meaning, existence. It gives...

Prabhupāda: That is our philosophy, nonego means although I have got my identification, I am, still I have sacrificed everything for Kṛṣṇa. If Kṛṣṇa says "You do this," I don't say, "I will not do." I don't impose my will. I sacrifice my individuality. Kṛṣṇa says, I must do. Therefore my ego is not there.

Śyāmasundara: He uses the same example of Barthe(?) that essais persice(?) means that this exists because I perceive it, that all these non-ego objects are...

Prabhupāda: No, that we don't agree. It exists independent from our perception.

Śyāmasundara: But it must be perceived by someone to exist.

Prabhupāda: That is different (indictinct) the one who has manufactured it (indistinct). So similarly, God is in (indistinct) of everything, I may not. That is described in the Bhāgavata, anvayād itarataś ca, anvayād (indistinct) sa abhijñaḥ. He is not (indistinct). Nothing can be concealed from the vision of God.

Philosophy Discussion on Thomas Aquinas:

Hayagrīva: Aquinas believed that God is the only single essence that consists of pure form. He felt that matter is only a potential and, in order to be real, must assume a certain shape or form. "Being in the universe have to acquire an individual form in order to actualize themselves. When matter unites with form, the form gives an object its individuality and personality." A form gives an object its individuality and personality.

Prabhupāda: Yes. The mat..., matter has no form. The spirit soul has got form. Though the matter is covering the actual form of the spirit soul, the matter appears to have form. Just like the original cloth has no form, but when the tailor cuts the cloth according to the body of the person, then the shirt and coat takes a form. The matter itself has no form. When you take clay, it has no form, but if you make it like a doll, like a man or woman, then it has a form. When the change the clay, and you manufacture a fort, then the fort has form. So form and formlessness is of the matter, but in the spiritual world everything has got form. The spirit soul has got form. God has got form. This is the truth.

Philosophy Discussion on Thomas Henry Huxley:

Hayagrīva: His understanding was the understanding of the Sankarites, that the ātmā is imprisoned in the body. When the man is enlightened and sees apparent reality as mere illusion, the bubble of illusion will burst, and the freed individual ātmān will lose itself in the universal brahman.

Prabhupāda: Then that does not mean that the ātmā becomes the paramātmā. Just like a drop of water, you put into the sea, it mixes with the sea. It is not mixing. Now suppose it is mixing, but that does not mean that the drop of water has become the sea. He is mixed with the seawater, but that, that does not mean he is the sea. He was not sea before, and after dropping him in the sea, he remains as what he was, but he is mixed up in the sea. Just like an airplane is flying, you see, and going higher and higher, and going very high you do not see. That doesn't mean the airplane is lost. You do not see. So these Sankarites' proposal is defective. Just like a green bird enters a tree but you do not see the bird anymore. You simply foolishly think that he has become one with the tree. But that is foolishness. He keeps his individuality, but your defective eyes cannot see him anymore. The Sankarite theory is like that, a defective understanding, that the individual soul merges into the Supreme. He keeps always his individuality. The foolish man cannot see how he has merged or existing.

Philosophy Discussion on Samuel Alexander:

Hayagrīva: "...and His soul is His Deity. Since God's body is the whole of space/time, God, in respect of His body, is all-inclusive, and all finites are included in Him, and in their continuous connection as pieces of space/time, and linked by spacial-temporal continuity they are fragments of God's body, though their individuality is not lost in it."

Prabhupāda: This is right. This is right. This experience he has got very good work.

Hayagrīva: "God is an individual being just as man or any other finite is..."

Prabhupāda: And now he is coming to that.

Hayagrīva: "...only that He is infinite."

Prabhupāda: He is, He is person, but He is not a person like us. But sometimes, due to our poor fund of knowledge... That is explained, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). "These rascal, because I am here talking with Arjuna just like a human being, they are thinking that I am also a human being." No. He is infinite, Arjuna is finite. That is explained in the Fourth Chapter also, that "Arjuna, you are doubtful how I can remember that I spoke this philosophy to sun-god some millions of years ago." Naturally a finite man cannot remember how one can remember. "That is the difference between you and Me, that I know everything; you forget. So although you are living being eternal, I am also living being eternal, that is the difference between you and Me."

Philosophy Discussion on Samuel Alexander:

Prabhupāda: The last description.

Hayagrīva: That last description. That the living entities are fragments of God's body...

Prabhupāda: Everything...

Hayagrīva: ...but their individuality is not lost.

Prabhupāda: Everything that you will see, they are all part and parcel of God. The other day I was saying that the wheel, the whole wheel is resting on the axle. So axle is there, the wheel is moving, so everything is part and parcel of God. Therefore the Māyāvādī's philosophy that everything is one, yes, but they do not accept the variety. The wheel is one, that's all right, but still the parts, sometimes it is called spokes, sometimes it is called the rim, sometimes it is called the hub, sometimes it is rolling, sometimes it is stopped, but everything the wheel, nothing but wheel.

Hayagrīva: He goes through a lot of, a lot of speculation to arrive at the final point. Concerning the existence of evil and suffering in the world, he writes, "God is not responsible for the miseries endured in working out his providence, but rather...

Prabhupāda: That I have already explained. The miserable condition is created by us, and we suffer.

Philosophy Discussion on Auguste Comte:

Hayagrīva: All human beings together.

Prabhupāda: Hm. So all human beings together, but each and every human being he has got some individuality. So even if you take all humanity, how the individuality will be the same? That is not possible.

Hayagrīva: Well this is the, also the contention of Communism...

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: ...that all men are basically the same in relation to the state.

Prabhupāda: Yes, they are under the law of state, but his thinking, feeling, willing are not under the state. One man may be thinking just in his own way, another man is thinking in his own way. How this thinking, feeling, willing, psychologically how they can be one? As human being, his quota, he has two hands and two legs and one head. That's all right. But the working of the brain, the thinking, feeling of the mind, they are, they are different. Their every activities... I want to eat something; you want to eat something. Āpan ruci khāo, everyone wants to eat according to his taste. How these things can be adjusted, taking the whole human race together? That is not possible. Everyone has got his individual taste. How you can synchronize them? What is called, synchronize?

Hayagrīva: To reconcile all mankind.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is not possible.

Page Title:Individuality (Lectures)
Compiler:Mayapur
Created:07 of Oct, 2011
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=116, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:116