Justify

Expressions researched:
"justifiably" |"justification" |"justified" |"justifies" |"justify" |"justifying"

BG Chapters 1 - 6

Even if victory awaited the Pāṇḍavas (and their cause was justified), still, if the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra died in battle, it would be very difficult to live in their absence.

BG 2.6, Purport:

Arjuna did not know whether he should fight and risk unnecessary violence, although fighting is the duty of the kṣatriyas, or whether he should refrain and live by begging. If he did not conquer the enemy, begging would be his only means of subsistence. Nor was there certainty of victory, because either side might emerge victorious. Even if victory awaited them (and their cause was justified), still, if the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra died in battle, it would be very difficult to live in their absence. Under the circumstances, that would be another kind of defeat for them. All these considerations by Arjuna definitely proved that not only was he a great devotee of the Lord but he was also highly enlightened and had complete control over his mind and senses.

Though the soul is immortal, violence is not encouraged, but at the time of war it is not discouraged when there is actual need for it. That need must be justified in terms of the sanction of the Lord, and not capriciously.

BG 2.30, Purport:

The Lord now concludes the chapter of instruction on the immutable spirit soul. In describing the immortal soul in various ways, Lord Kṛṣṇa establishes that the soul is immortal and the body is temporary. Therefore Arjuna as a kṣatriya should not abandon his duty out of fear that his grandfather and teacher—Bhīṣma and Droṇa—will die in the battle. On the authority of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, one has to believe that there is a soul different from the material body, not that there is no such thing as soul, or that living symptoms develop at a certain stage of material maturity resulting from the interaction of chemicals. Though the soul is immortal, violence is not encouraged, but at the time of war it is not discouraged when there is actual need for it. That need must be justified in terms of the sanction of the Lord, and not capriciously.

SB Canto 1

A devoted wife, who is according to revealed scripture the better half of her husband, is justified in embracing voluntary death along with her husband if she is without issue.

SB 1.7.45, Purport:

The wife of Droṇācārya, Kṛpī, is the sister of Kṛpācārya. A devoted wife, who is according to revealed scripture the better half of her husband, is justified in embracing voluntary death along with her husband if she is without issue. But in the case of the wife of Droṇācārya, she did not undergo such a trial because she had her son, the representative of her husband. A widow is a widow only in name if there is a son of her husband existing. So in either case Aśvatthāmā was the representative of Droṇācārya, and therefore killing Aśvatthāmā would be like killing Droṇācārya. That was the argument of Draupadī against the killing of Aśvatthāmā.

SB 1.7.49, Translation:

Sūta Gosvāmī said: O brāhmaṇas, King Yudhiṣṭhira fully supported the statements of the Queen, which were in accordance with the principles of religion and were justified, glorious, full of mercy and equity, and without duplicity.

Arjuna and his family were indebted to the family of Droṇācārya because of Arjuna's learning the military science from him. If ingratitude were shown to such a benevolent family, it would not be at all justified from the moral standpoint.

SB 1.7.49, Purport:

Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, who was the son of Dharmarāja, or Yamarāja, fully supported the words of Queen Draupadī in asking Arjuna to release Aśvatthāmā. One should not tolerate the humiliation of a member of a great family. Arjuna and his family were indebted to the family of Droṇācārya because of Arjuna's learning the military science from him. If ingratitude were shown to such a benevolent family, it would not be at all justified from the moral standpoint. The wife of Droṇācārya, who was the half body of the great soul, must be treated with compassion, and she should not be put into grief because of her son's death. That is compassion. Such statements by Draupadī are without duplicity because actions should be taken with full knowledge. The feeling of equality was there because Draupadī spoke out of her personal experience. A barren woman cannot understand the grief of a mother. Draupadī was herself a mother, and therefore her calculation of the depth of Kṛpī's grief was quite to the point. And it was glorious because she wanted to show proper respect to a great family.

The important point in this verse is how it was possible that Arjuna could be defeated by a gang of ignoble cowherd men and how such mundane cowherd men could touch the bodies of the wives of Lord Kṛṣṇa, who were under the protection of Arjuna. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura has justified the contradiction by research in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa and Brahma Purāṇa.

SB 1.15.20, Purport:

The important point in this verse is how it was possible that Arjuna could be defeated by a gang of ignoble cowherd men and how such mundane cowherd men could touch the bodies of the wives of Lord Kṛṣṇa, who were under the protection of Arjuna. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura has justified the contradiction by research in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa and Brahma Purāṇa. In these Purāṇas it is said that once the fair denizens of heaven pleased Aṣṭāvakra Muni by their service and were blessed by the muni to have the Supreme Lord as their husband. Aṣṭāvakra Muni was curved in eight joints of his body, and thus he used to move in a peculiar curved manner. The daughters of the demigods could not check their laughter upon seeing the movements of the muni, and the muni, being angry at them, cursed them that they would be kidnapped by rogues, even if they would get the Lord as their husband. Later on, the girls again satisfied the muni by their prayers, and the muni blessed them that they would regain their husband even after being robbed by the rogues. So, in order to keep the words of the great muni, the Lord Himself kidnapped His wives from the protection of Arjuna, otherwise they would have at once vanished from the scene as soon as they were touched by the rogues. Besides that, some of the gopīs who prayed to become wives of the Lord returned to their respective positions after their desire was fulfilled. After the departure of Lord Kṛṣṇa, He wanted all His entourage back to Godhead, and they were called back under different conditions only.

The only justification for Mahārāja Parīkṣit's behavior is that it was ordained by the Lord.

SB 1.18.29, Purport:

For a king like Mahārāja Parīkṣit to become angry and envious, especially at a sage and brāhmaṇa, was undoubtedly unprecedented. The King knew well that brāhmaṇas, sages, children, women and old men are always beyond the jurisdiction of punishment. Similarly, the king, even though he commits a great mistake, is never to be considered a wrongdoer. But in this case, Mahārāja Parīkṣit became angry and envious at the sage due to his thirst and hunger, by the will of the Lord. The King was right to punish his subject for coldly receiving him or neglecting him, but because the culprit was a sage and a brāhmaṇa, it was unprecedented. As the Lord is never envious of anyone, so also the Lord's devotee is never envious of anyone. The only justification for Mahārāja Parīkṣit's behavior is that it was ordained by the Lord.

According to the boy's opinion, the King was on the wrong side and not his father, and thus he justified his silent father.

SB 1.18.34, Purport:

The inexperienced brāhmaṇa boy certainly knew that the King asked for water from his father and the father did not respond. He tried to explain away his father's inhospitality in an impertinent manner befitting an uncultured boy. He was not at all sorry for the King's not being well received. On the contrary, he justified the wrong act in a way characteristic of the brāhmaṇas of Kali-yuga. He compared the King to a watchdog, and so it was wrong for the King to enter the home of a brāhmaṇa and ask for water from the same pot. The dog is certainly reared by its master, but that does not mean that the dog shall claim to dine and drink from the same pot. This mentality of false prestige is the cause of downfall of the perfect social order, and we can see that in the beginning it was started by the inexperienced son of a brāhmaṇa. As the dog is never allowed to enter within the room and hearth, although it is reared by the master, similarly, according to Śṛṅgi, the King had no right to enter the house of Śamīka Ṛṣi. According to the boy's opinion, the King was on the wrong side and not his father, and thus he justified his silent father.

SB Canto 4

King Pṛthu desired that his real characteristics in the future might justify such words of praise. Although there was no fault in the prayers offered, Pṛthu Mahārāja indicated that such prayers should not be offered to an unfit person who pretends to be an incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

SB 4.15.22, Purport:

The prayers and praises by the sūta, māgadha and vandī all explained the godly qualities of Mahārāja Pṛthu, for he was a śaktyāveśa incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Because the qualities were not yet manifest, however, King Pṛthu very humbly asked why the devotees should praise him with such exalted words. He did not want anyone to offer him prayers or glorify him unless he possessed the real qualities of which they spoke. The offering of prayers was certainly appropriate, for he was an incarnation of Godhead, but he warned that one should not be accepted as an incarnation of the Personality of Godhead without having the godly qualities. At the present moment there are many so-called incarnations of the Personality of Godhead, but these are merely fools and rascals whom people accept as incarnations of God although they have no godly qualities. King Pṛthu desired that his real characteristics in the future might justify such words of praise. Although there was no fault in the prayers offered, Pṛthu Mahārāja indicated that such prayers should not be offered to an unfit person who pretends to be an incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

As one of the demigods, the earthly planet was taking her share in the yajñas—that is, she was eating green grass—but in return she was not producing sufficient food grains—that is, she was not filling her milk bag. Pṛthu Mahārāja was therefore justified in threatening to punish her for her offense.

SB 4.17.23, Purport:

A cow eats green grasses in the pasture and fills her milk bag with sufficient milk so that the cowherdsmen can milk her. Yajñas (sacrifices) are performed to produce sufficient clouds that will pour water over the earth. The word payaḥ can refer both to milk and to water. As one of the demigods, the earthly planet was taking her share in the yajñas—that is, she was eating green grass—but in return she was not producing sufficient food grains—that is, she was not filling her milk bag. Pṛthu Mahārāja was therefore justified in threatening to punish her for her offense.

King Pṛthu's statements in previous verses regarding his vast knowledge and perfect devotional service are justified here, for he is considered best amongst all mahātmās.

SB 4.22.49, Purport:

King Pṛthu's statements in previous verses regarding his vast knowledge and perfect devotional service are justified here, for he is considered best amongst all mahātmās. In Bhagavad-gītā (9.13) Śrī Kṛṣṇa speaks of mahātmās in this way:

mahātmānas tu māṁ pārtha

daivīṁ prakṛtim āśritāḥ

bhajanty ananya-manaso

jñātvā bhūtādim avyayam

"O son of Pṛthā, those who are not deluded, the great souls, are under the protection of the divine nature. They are fully engaged in devotional service because they know Me as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, original and inexhaustible."

SB Canto 6

Mother Pārvatī was justified in punishing Citraketu, for Citraketu impudently criticized the supreme father, Mahādeva, who is the father of the living entities conditioned within this material world.

SB 6.17.15, Purport:

Mother Pārvatī was justified in punishing Citraketu, for Citraketu impudently criticized the supreme father, Mahādeva, who is the father of the living entities conditioned within this material world. The goddess Durgā is called mother, and Lord Śiva is called father. A pure Vaiṣṇava should be very careful to engage in his specific duty without criticizing others. This is the safest position. Otherwise, if one tends to criticize others, he may commit the great offense of criticizing a Vaiṣṇava.

It is to be understood that mother Durgā was justified in punishing Citraketu.

SB 6.17.15, Purport:

This tendency of a mother to punish her child is found even in mother Yaśodā, who became the mother of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Mother Yaśodā punished Kṛṣṇa by binding Him and showing Him a stick. Thus it is the duty of a mother to chastise her beloved son, even in the case of the Supreme Lord. It is to be understood that mother Durgā was justified in punishing Citraketu. This punishment was a boon to Citraketu because after taking birth as the demon Vṛtrāsura, he was promoted directly to Vaikuṇṭha.

SB Canto 7

Hiraṇyakaśipu, however, being a nondevotee, was so polluted that he was even prepared to kill his own son. He justified this by putting forward the logic of amputation.

SB 7.5.37, Purport:

To be too attached to material existence is ignorance because material existence is temporary and miserable. Therefore devotees who are determined to perform tapasya (penances and austerities) to realize the self, and who are determined to become advanced in spiritual consciousness, must give up the company of atheistic nondevotees. Prahlāda Mahārāja maintained an attitude of noncooperation with the philosophy of his father, Hiraṇyakaśipu, yet he was tolerant and humble. Hiraṇyakaśipu, however, being a nondevotee, was so polluted that he was even prepared to kill his own son. He justified this by putting forward the logic of amputation.

SB Canto 9

The Lord worshiped Himself by Himself. This does not, of course, justify the Māyāvāda philosophy, by which one thinks himself the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

SB 9.11.1, Purport:

Here the Supreme Lord worshiped the Supreme Lord. Therefore it is said, bhagavān ātmanātmānam īje: the Lord worshiped Himself by Himself. This does not, of course, justify the Māyāvāda philosophy, by which one thinks himself the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The jīva, the living entity, is always different from the Supreme Lord. The living entities (vibhinnāṁśa) never become one with the Lord, although Māyāvādīs sometimes imitate the Lord's worship of Himself. Lord Kṛṣṇa meditated upon Himself every morning as a gṛhastha, and similarly Lord Rāmacandra performed yajñas to satisfy Himself, but this does not mean that an ordinary living being should imitate the Lord by accepting the process of ahaṅgraha-upāsanā. Such unauthorized worship is not recommended herein.

SB Cantos 10.14 to 12 (Translations Only)

SB 11.25.2-5, Translation:

Mind and sense control, tolerance, discrimination, sticking to one's prescribed duty, truthfulness, mercy, careful study of the past and future, satisfaction in any condition, generosity, renunciation of sense gratification, faith in the spiritual master, being embarrassed at improper action, charity, simplicity, humbleness and satisfaction within oneself are qualities of the mode of goodness. Material desire, great endeavor, audacity, dissatisfaction even in gain, false pride, praying for material advancement, considering oneself different and better than others, sense gratification, rash eagerness to fight, a fondness for hearing oneself praised, the tendency to ridicule others, advertising one's own prowess and justifying one's actions by one's strength are qualities of the mode of passion. Intolerant anger, stinginess, speaking without scriptural authority, violent hatred, living as a parasite, hypocrisy, chronic fatigue, quarrel, lamentation, delusion, unhappiness, depression, sleeping too much, false expectations, fear and laziness constitute the major qualities of the mode of ignorance. Now please hear about the combination of these three modes.

CC Preface and Introduction

One may then justifiably ask, "How can I serve?" It is not simply a matter of meditation, which is just an activity of the mind, but of performing practical work for Kṛṣṇa.

CC Introduction:

The real question is, How can we remain unpolluted by material contamination while in the material world? Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī explains that we can remain uncontaminated while in the world if we simply make it our ambition to serve Kṛṣṇa. One may then justifiably ask, "How can I serve?" It is not simply a matter of meditation, which is just an activity of the mind, but of performing practical work for Kṛṣṇa. In such work, we should leave no resource unused. Whatever is there, whatever we have, should be used for Kṛṣṇa. We can use everything—typewriters, automobiles, airplanes, missiles. If we simply speak to people about Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we are also rendering service.

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 14.30, Translation:

Astonished that the child was speaking Māyāvāda philosophy, mother Śacī replied, "Who has taught You this philosophical speculation that justifies eating dirt?"

Teachings of Lord Caitanya

One may then justifiably ask, "How can I serve?" Obviously this is not simply a matter of meditation, which is just an activity of the mind, but of practical work. Love of Kṛṣṇa's service can only be attained by working for Kṛṣṇa.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter Intoduction:

The real question is how can we remain unpolluted by material contamination while in the material world. It was Rūpa Gosvāmī who explained that we can remain uncontaminated while in the world if we simply make it our ambition to serve Kṛṣṇa. One may then justifiably ask, "How can I serve?" Obviously this is not simply a matter of meditation, which is just an activity of the mind, but of practical work. Love of Kṛṣṇa's service can only be attained by working for Kṛṣṇa. In such work, we should leave no resource unused. Whatever is there, whatever we have, should be used for Kṛṣṇa. We can use everything: typewriters, automobiles, airplanes, missiles—anything. If we simply speak to people about Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we are also rendering service.

Nectar of Devotion

The so-called religionists were falsely using the Vedas to justify such violent acts as meat-eating, and Lord Buddha came to lead the fallen people away from such a false interpretation of the Vedas.

Nectar of Devotion 7:

Lord Buddha is accepted as an incarnation of Kṛṣṇa in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, but in the same Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is stated that Lord Buddha appeared in order to bewilder the atheistic class of men. Therefore his philosophy is meant for bewildering the atheists and should not be accepted. If someone asks, "Why should Kṛṣṇa propagate atheistic principles?" the answer is that it was the desire of the Supreme Personality of Godhead to end the violence which was then being committed in the name of the Vedas. The so-called religionists were falsely using the Vedas to justify such violent acts as meat-eating, and Lord Buddha came to lead the fallen people away from such a false interpretation of the Vedas. Also, for the atheists Lord Buddha preached atheism so that they would follow him and thus be tricked into devotional service to Lord Buddha, or Kṛṣṇa.

Message of Godhead

Without knowing the subtle laws of nature, if we tried to justify all our deeds as influenced by the will of the Personality of Godhead, we would be attempting to bring partiality, inebriety, and gracelessness into the acts of the all-good Personality of Godhead.

Message of Godhead 2:

Therefore, without knowing the subtle laws of nature, if we tried to justify all our deeds as influenced by the will of the Personality of Godhead, we would be attempting to bring partiality, inebriety, and gracelessness into the acts of the all-good Personality of Godhead. It should never be imagined that various mundane discrepancies arise by the will of the Personality of Godhead—that some are happy by His will, while others are unhappy by His will. Such differences in the material world are due to the proper or improper use of free will enjoyed by the individual living entity. Kṛṣṇa, the Personality of Godhead, enjoins everyone to give up all such conditional engagements dictated by the various modes of nature.

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Suicide is not justified. It is violation of nature's law. Nature.

Lecture on BG 2.9 -- Auckland, February 21, 1973:

Woman (2): How do you regard suicide, and would there be any exceptional circumstances that might justify it?

Prabhupāda: Suicide is not justified. Suicide is not justified. It is violation of nature's law. Nature gives you a certain type of body to live in it for certain days, and suicide means you go against the laws of nature, you untimely stop the duration of life. Therefore he becomes a criminal. Suicide is criminal even in ordinary state laws. One cannot make suicide.

Everything is good, everything is bad, in this material world, but we have to see. Just like the common phrase goes, "The end justifies the means. The end justifies the means." So that is Kṛṣṇa teaching here that He has nothing to gain.

Lecture on BG 3.21-25 -- New York, May 30, 1966:

You cannot abolish violence from the world. This is the instruction of Kṛṣṇa in Bhagavad-gītā. If required, violence will be taken. And Kṛṣṇa induced Arjuna to be violent. Arjuna wanted to be nonviolent, but He wanted that "You should. You must fight. This fight is arranged by Me." So these examples. These are the examples. Nothing is bad... Nothing is good if it is not purposeful. That is the whole purpose of teaching Bhagavad-gītā. Nothing is good; nothing is bad. Everything is good, everything is bad, in this material world, but we have to see. Just like the common phrase goes, "The end justifies the means. The end justifies the means." So that is Kṛṣṇa teaching here that He has nothing to gain. He is full in Himself. But just to set examples in the world He was taking part in the fighting because He wanted to establish it that fighting for good cause should not be avoided. That was His mission.

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

There may be different types of sources of knowledge, but the means are justified by the end.

Lecture on SB 5.5.29 -- Vrndavana, November 16, 1976:

So there may be different types of sources of knowledge, but the means are justified by the end. What is the end of life? The end of life is to understand Kṛṣṇa. If you don't like to say "Kṛṣṇa"—God. That is end of life. But these rascals, they do not know it. Na te viduḥ svārtha-gatiṁ hi viṣṇum (SB 7.5.31). The general population, they do not know because they are not educated in that way. At the present moment, Kali-yuga... (break) We are educating people atheism, no God, "God is dead." In Europe, America, when I went there, the education was "God is dead." Here also, so many rascals, they have appeared as God. They are also saying, "Now, Kṛṣṇa was God, but He is now dead. I am now God." Yes. They are saying publicly. And they are being accepted.

Philosophy Discussions

Then it is demonic. This is not justified war, this is where two demons, we fight, just like cats and dogs fight.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Śyāmasundara: What about between America and Germany, for instance? Neither one of them were God conscious.

Prabhupāda: Then it is demonic. This is not justified war, this is where two demons, we fight, just like cats and dogs fight. That's all. But there is, according to Vedic literature, yuddha, dharma-yuddha.

If you declare war on the principle of God consciousness, that war is justified and you will become victorious. This is the conclusion.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Prabhupāda: Dharma-yuddha, on behalf of supreme God, that is called dharma-yuddha. Just like Arjuna. Arjuna, they are not for fighting, but Kṛṣṇa said, "Yes, I am on your side, you fight." That is dharma-yuddha. And therefore Arjuna became victorious because God was on his side. That is dharma-yuddha. So if you declare war on the principle of God consciousness, that war is justified and you will become victorious. This is the conclusion.

When we go to please somebody, to get some money, our ultimate aim is to please Kṛṣṇa, the Absolute Truth. Therefore the means adopted, even if it is relative truth, that becomes Absolute Truth. The end justifies the means.

Philosophy Discussion on William James:

Śyāmasundara: What about the businessman who goes to please that man for his...

Prabhupāda: When a businessman goes to please somebody, he wants the money for himself. That is the difference. But when we go to please somebody, to get some money, our ultimate aim is to please Kṛṣṇa, the Absolute Truth. Therefore the means adopted, even if it is relative truth, that becomes Absolute Truth. The end justifies the means. Because the means is adopted, just like Kṛṣṇa advises Arjuna, "Just go and tell Droṇācārya that his son is dead," although his son was not dead. So this is not truth. But because by that action Kṛṣṇa will be pleased—Kṛṣṇa is Absolute Truth-therefore even that lying is also absolute.

That is that the end justifies the means. Means is not very important. What is the end, we have to see.

Philosophy Discussion on William James:

Śyāmasundara: So practicality has to be judged on the result, what is the result of that action?

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is that the end justifies the means. Means is not very important. What is the end, we have to see.

Śyāmasundara: For instance, James uses the example of God. Whether God exists depends on the extent to which a belief in God affects my life. In other words if it is practical, if it makes me feel happy, if I get some courage and strength by believing in God, then God is true, then God does exist.

Prabhupāda: So one may not feel like that, that means that God does not exist? Suppose one man does not feel very good talking about God. That means God is null and void?

1972 Conversations and Morning Walks

Phalena paricīyate, your, that is in English word also, end justifies the means.

Conversation with the GBC -- May 25, 1972, Los Angeles:

Prabhupāda: The human society has come down to such a degraded position. It is astonishing. When I heard from Kīrtanānanda Mahārāja there is a big conference for passing this resolution. In India still, if there somebody hears about homosex (makes sound of breathing out). Homosex is there but nobody will support publicly. (indistinct) People are going down and this is the subject matter for priestly order? It may be subject matter for the legislator, priestly order, they are discussing for one week. Just imagine. Phalena paricīyate, one has to study by the result. Not that superficially you show that "We are very much advanced." Phalena, what is the result? Phalena paricīyate, your, that is in English word also, end justifies the means. The end is this (indistinct) "We are going to support homosex." Getting married. There are many cases the priestly order has actually got married. I read it in that paper, Watch, what is called?

Devotees: Watchtower.

1973 Conversations and Morning Walks

You have to see for what for this karma is being done The end justify the means.

Room Conversation with Reporter from Researchers Magazine -- July 24, 1973, London:

Prabhupāda: More than a... Sannyāsī is akarma, yes. Sannyāsī is also not akarma. Sannyāsa means... That is also described in Bhagavad-gītā. Anāśritaḥ karma-phalaṁ kāryaṁ karma karoti yaḥ (BG 6.1). That is also karma. Kāryaṁ karma karoti yaḥ sa sannyāsī. "It is my duty"—on this principle when one works, he is sannyāsī. He does not work for himself, he works for Kṛṣṇa. And that is sannyāsī. Anāśritaḥ karma-phalam. Because if you are doing something, there must be some result. But you do not take the result. Anāśritaḥ karma-phalam. Kāryam: it is my duty. Kāryam. Karma karot... Karma karoti yaḥ. That is karma. Sa sannyāsī. So how you can say in sannyāsa there is no karma? Karma is always there. But you have to see for what for this karma is being done The end justify the means. What is the end of this karma? So when the end is Kṛṣṇa, to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānuśīlanaṁ bhaktir uttamā (CC Madhya 19.167).

1976 Conversations and Morning Walks

End justifies the means. End is that everyone should have a Kṛṣṇa literature. Doesn't matter what is the means. Because he has taken one Kṛṣṇa literature, that justifies everything. This is the principle.

Room Conversation -- May 5, 1976, Honolulu:

Bhūrijana: Śrīla Prabhupāda, but I think the thing I understand least, is that if they are not doing what you want... I mean... I'm sitting before you now and you're telling me and I'm listening, and you are my spiritual master. I must accept.

Prabhupāda: We want that book selling must be increased as much as possible. This we want. The same thing. Let the child take medicine. Never mind the father is speaking lies. That is... Because as soon as he takes the medicine he'll be benefited. End justifies the means. End is that everyone should have a Kṛṣṇa literature. Doesn't matter what is the means. Because he has taken one Kṛṣṇa literature, that justifies everything. This is the principle.

The aim is to come to the God consciousness. And the means may be different. So that means is justified by the end. If at the end, you do not come to God consciousness, then whatever process you have, that is bogus. That is not bona fide.

Interview with Newsday Newspaper -- July 14, 1976, New York:

Rāmeśvara: He says, "But you can come to God consciousness by different processes."

Prabhupāda: No, different processes... Our...

Bali-mardana: Can do.

Prabhupāda: No, it is not that. The aim is to come to the God consciousness. And the means may be different. So that means is justified by the end. If at the end, you do not come to God consciousness, then whatever process you have, that is bogus. That is not bona fide.

1969 Correspondence

Our aim should be how to please Krishna. As it is said in English also, the ends justify the means.

Letter to Gopala Krsna -- Los Angeles 31 July, 1969:

In the Srimad-Bhagavatam also it is recommended by Suta Goswami that ultimate perfection of an engagement is tested by the satisfaction of the Lord. Our aim should be how to please Krishna. As it is said in English also, the ends justify the means. So it is my request to you that keep Krishna always in view and accept anything necessary for your worldly affairs. I am very pleased to note that in such things you consult me. This is a very nice habit. You will please always consult me before doing anything, and I shall try to guide you to my best abilities.

It is understood from different sources that Rayarama has written you a letter complaining that the charge of BTG has been taken from him without any justification.

Letter to Satsvarupa -- Hamburg 27 August, 1969:

It is understood from different sources that Rayarama has written you a letter complaining that the charge of BTG has been taken from him without any justification. But the actual fact is that he was spending 600 dollars per month for maintenance of Iskcon Press with the result that the number of subscribers was only somewhere about 300. Most of the BTGs were being sold by our Sankirtana Party in Los Angeles. Anyway, the 600 dollars were to be saved for other useful purposes. Therefore, the staff engaged in Iskcon Press was dispersed, but Rayarama was there in his original position as managing editor. But since this expenditures was stopped, he is little bit sorry; so much so that he does not come regularly and practically he is inclined to give up our relationship.

1974 Correspondence

Our men are doing good, that they do not see. They are so blind. But, the end justifies the means.

Letter to Sri Govinda -- Bombay 6 December, 1974:

Yes, as you have said in your reply they must see what kind of life our men are living. Our books are better than the nonsense books. You have written them to the point. And, even if there is some complaint, they are getting the real thing from our books. they are forgetting the aim of life. Somehow or other, we have to give them the real thing. Why this one man should be envious? In the history of the world, especially the Western countries, there is no record of selling religious books so many daily. It is unique in the history. Our men are doing good, that they do not see. They are so blind. But, the end justifies the means. We have to give them even if they do not want it. That is our duty.