Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


John Locke

Lectures

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on John Locke:

Hayagrīva: And John Locke, Locke is the..., is most famous for his conception of tabula rasa, or blank slate, that a child is born with no innate ideas. He states that "If there are innate or inborn ideas, all men would have them." That is to say, there would be universal consent. He writes, "This argument of universal consent, which is made use of to prove innate principles, seems to me a demonstration that there are none such because there are none to which all mankind give a universal consent." So it cannot be argued that all people have an innate or inborn idea of God since there is no universal consent on this subject. Well, do innate ideas have to be universal? Might not some living entities have some innate ideas and other living entities have others? Why does an innate idea have to be universal and apply to everyone?

Prabhupāda: Yes. Innate idea is that there is somebody. That is developed consciousness. The animals, they cannot think, on account of nondeveloped consciousness, but even in human society, uncivilized society, they have got the innate idea of some superior form. When there is lightning, they offer obeisances. When they see big ocean, they offer obeisances, something big. So that innate idea is universal, to offer obeisances to something wonderful. But this innate idea of accepting something supreme and offering respect is not developed in the animal. So this innate idea is there. When it is not developed, it is animal, and when it is developed, then it is human being. And a perfect human being is he, when he has developed this innate idea to the fullest stage. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Hayagrīva: Would it not be better to say that the living entity is born with certain tendencies, rather than innate ideas, which carry over from a previous life?

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: And that he needs only meet with some stimulus in order for these tendencies to be manifest?

Prabhupāda: Yes. Just like when the, a dog, cat, is born it has no eyes, and it searches out the nipples of the mother. So although his eyes are all closed—you have seen the dogs—but because in his previous life as dog he had the experience where to find out the food, so even though it cannot see, it traces out where is the food. That is past experience and that is the proof of the continuation of the soul eternally. Just like I am living in this room and, say, for ten years I am absent from this room, but after ten years when I come here, immediately I remember where is the toilet, where is my sitting place, everything. So that remembrance comes from the last visit. So a living entity is passing through different species of form. That is his material life. So in some previous life, millions of years, when he was a dog, he knew where to find out his food, so immediately in the dog's body again, he remembers. (break)

Philosophy Discussion on John Locke:

Hayagrīva: This is the continuation of John Locke. Now you said that from your very birth you knew that Kṛṣṇa was the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Now does this mean that from your very birth you were acquainted with the name Kṛṣṇa, or didn't your father have to at least say the word once? Now Locke would argue that the idea of Kṛṣṇa is not an innate idea because it is not universally assented to.

Prabhupāda: Universally...?

Hayagrīva: Universally, not everyone acknowledges that Kṛṣṇa is God, so he would say that idea is not inborn in the mind.

Philosophy Discussion on John Locke:

Hayagrīva: And Locke argues on behalf of private property given to man by God. That is to say a man may have a certain stewardship over a certain amount of property. Is this in compliance with the Īśopaniṣadic version?

Prabhupāda: Yes, yes. Tena tyaktena bhuñjīthā: (ISO 1) everything belongs to God. Just like the father has got many sons and the father is the proprietor of the house. He gives one son, "This is your room," the other son, "This is your room." So the obedient son is satisfied what the father allows to him. Others, those who are not obedient, they want to disturb other brother that "This room also belongs to me."

Philosophy Discussion on John Locke:

Prabhupāda: Just like Lord Rāmacandra went to Ceylon, or Lanka, and conquered over it, because Rāvaṇa was a demon. So He conquered, Lord Rāmacandra conquered over the property of Rāvaṇa, and gave it to Vibhīṣaṇa, but He did not take anything. Just like Kṛṣṇa conducted, managed this Kurukṣetra war personally, but the kingdom was given to Yudhiṣṭhira. He did not encroach. So this kind of encroachment is all right, that everyone should be Kṛṣṇa conscious, everyone should be highly elevated in spiritual life. For spreading this civilization, encroaching on others' property is quite fit. But if one encroaches upon others' property for self-aggrandizement, for stealing for his own sense gratification, that is sinful.

Hayagrīva: So much for Locke.

Prabhupāda: Hm. That's all. (end)

Page Title:John Locke
Compiler:MadhuGopaldas, RupaManjari
Created:16 of Jan, 2012
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=4, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:4