Opinion (Lectures, Other)

Expressions researched:
"opinion" |"opinion's" |"opinionated" |"opinions"

Festival Lectures

Nrsimha-caturdasi Lord Nrsimhadeva's Appearance Day -- Bombay, May 5, 1974:

Therefore his name is Svayambhu. Of course, his father is Nārāyaṇa, but not in the usual way. Therefore his name is Svayambhu. Nārada. Nārada Muni is also one of the mahājanas. And Śambhu, Lord Śiva. Kapila, Kapiladeva, the son of Devahūti. Svayaṁbhur nāradaḥ śaṁbhuḥ kapilo manuḥ (SB 6.3.20). And Prahlāda Mahārāja. Prahlāda Mahārāja is our guru in the disciplic succession. So mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). Dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyāṁ mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ. We cannot chalk out what is the path of religion. It is very difficult to find out because there are many different scriptures and there are many philosophers. Nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. Each philosopher has got different opinion. So how to get real path of religious way? That is recommended in the śāstra that mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ (CC Madhya 17.186). You have to follow the footsteps of great personalities. And Prahlāda Mahārāja is one of them.

So Prahlāda Mahārāja was born in a demon's family. His father was a demon. Prahlāda Mahārāja used to address his father as Asura-varya, "the best of the demons." You have seen... He was patting his son, "My dear son, do like this, do like that. Tell me what you have learned the best thing." So Prahlāda Mahārāja said, tat sādhu manye 'sura-varya dehinām. He didn't, never said, "My dear father." "My dear the best of the demons." Tat sādhu manye. "I think that is very nice." What is that? Hitvātma-pātaṁ gṛham āndha-kupaṁ vanaṁ gato yad dharim āśrayeta (SB 7.5.5). "That this worldly life, materialistic life, is self-killing just like a dark well. So one should give it up and go to the forest and take shelter of Kṛṣṇa. That is the best way of life." So his father became very angry. So the atheist and the theist, they will never agree. But theist also never will submit to the atheist. This is the principle. Prahlāda Mahārāja was put into so many troubles by his father, but he never forgot chanting namo bhagavate vāsudevāya namaḥ. He never forgot.

Ratha-yatra -- Los Angeles, July 1, 1971:

So the symptoms of the father and mother, the facial expressions, even a spot in the face, everything becomes manifested in the child. So you can study what is God by studying yourself. That is Māyāvāda philosophy. They take it in a different way that "I am God, reflection." God, they say, God reflection. No. We are reflection. God is not our reflection; we are God's reflection.

So if we actually meditate upon our own constitution, then why we should conclude that God is impersonal? I am person. I am individual. I have got my individual opinion. I do not agree with others. Why? Because I am individual. You do not agree with me, I do not agree with you. Why? Because we are all individuals. So why God should be not individual? He is also individual. That is the statement in the Vedas.

nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām

eko bahūnāṁ (yo) vidadhāti kāmān

(Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13)

Nitya, nitya means eternal. We are eternal form. We change our body. We don't die. As we are changing daily, every moment changing body, so the final change means accept another body. This is also accepting another body, but imperceptibly. The change is so quick. Just like in the cinema spool there are so many pictures changing, but it is changing so quickly that we are seeing one picture moving. So that is our ignorance. But actually there are thousands of pictures changing in a moment, and you see that one picture is moving.

Govardhana Puja Lecture -- New York, November 4, 1966:

Therefore you are killing your mother." So the Kazi replied that "In your Vedic literature also, I have seen. There is cow sacrifice." So Caitanya Mahāprabhu replied, "That is not cow sacrifice. That is rejuvenation of cow. Old cows were sacrificed in the fire, and again a new life was given by the Vedic mantra. But because there is lack of such expert brāhmaṇas to chant that mantra, therefore cow sacrifice in this age is forbidden."

So when the things are not practical, that becomes a forbidden. If you actually get the result by some spiritual or religious rituals, performance, then it is very good. Otherwise it is superstition. Lord Caitanya's opinion is that because all these Vedic injunctions, sacrifices, they are not possible to be performed in this age... They are very difficult. There is no expert leader to perform all these ceremonies and rituals. Therefore, take to this Hare Kṛṣṇa. Take to this. There is no need of rituals. There is no need of expenses. Simply God has given you tongue, and God has given you ear. Just go on chanting: Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare, and it will fulfill your spiritual advancement. Similarly, Kṛṣṇa said, jñātvā ajñātvā ca karmāṇi jano 'yam anutiṣṭhanti: "Generally, mass of people, they are ignorant. They perform some religious rituals knowingly or unknowingly as a matter of superstition or custom." So, viduṣa karma-siddhiḥ syāt. But one who is intelligent, he should know that "By this sacrifice, I must get the result." Viduṣo karma-siddhiḥ syāt tathā na viduṣo bhavet: "And those who are fools, they, simply by superstition, they do it."

So Kṛṣṇa did not recommend that you should do something under superstition. No.

His Divine Grace Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Prabhupada's Disappearance Day, Lecture -- Los Angeles, December 13, 1973:

On the first meeting, just we offer our obeisances. It is the practice. So immediately he began his talking that "You are all educated young men. Why don't you take up Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's cult and preach all over the English knowing public? Why don't you take up this matter?" So I argued with him in so many... At that time I was nationalist. So I told that "Who will accept our message? We are dependent nation. Nobody will care." In this way, in my own way, in these younger days... But we belonged to the Vaiṣṇava family, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Nityānanda, Rādhā-Govinda. That is our worshipable Deity. So I was very glad that "Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa cult, Caitanya Mahāprabhu's cult, this sādhu is trying to preach. It is very nice."

So at that time we had some talks, and of course I was defeated by his argument, my argument. (laughter) And then, when we came out, we were offered prasādam, very nice treatment, the Gauḍīya Matha. And when I came out on the street, this my friend asked me, "What is your opinion of this sādhu?" Then I said that "Here is the right person who has taken up Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's message, and now it will be distributed."

Lord Nityananda Prabhu's Avirbhava Appearance Day Lecture -- Bhuvanesvara, February 2, 1977:

The whole human society is suffering, at least suffering from one disease—anxiety. Ask anybody. Take one small ant and take the big elephant; take the President of United States or take one street beggar. Ask him, "Whether you are free from anxiety?" Nobody will say, "No." "I am full of anxiety." That's a fact. So why they are anxiety, in, full of anxiety? That Prahlāda Mahārāja had replied, sadā samudvigna-dhiyām asad-grahāt. Because we have taken asad-vastu, that will not exist... Everything, whatever you have got... Our, this body will not exist. And this is the main platform of our existence. In the material world, so long the body is there, you exist. So Prahlāda Mahārāja said that "Real solution of problems of life is to get out of this material condition. That is best thing in my opinion." Sada samadvigna-dhiyām asad... That is Vedic injunction also. Asato mā sad gamaya: "Don't live in this asat, in this material condition." Sad gamaya: "Go to real existence." That real existence means spiritual life. Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). So if we actually want life, blissful life, then we must get out of this material existence. That is Prahlāda Mahārāja's instruction. Samudvigna-dhiyām. And if you remain in the material existence, you must suffer some anxiety. There is no excuse.

His Divine Grace Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Prabhupada's Appearance Day, SB 6.3.24 -- Gorakhpur, February 15, 1971:

So Rāmānanda Rāya recommended this verse, that this is the process to satisfy the Supreme Lord Viṣṇu. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that eho bāhya āge kaha āra, "This is external. If you know something more, better than this, you say." Why He said? There is the version, viṣṇur ārādhyate. Does it mean that He is rejecting Viṣṇu worship? No, He's not rejecting. Because generally, they, these impersonalists, Māyāvādīs, they also worship sometimes Viṣṇu, these five demigods and God. But their idea is that ultimately impersonal. The impersonal takes the form by the help of this material world. The formation takes place simply in the material. That is their opinion. Therefore they say, call, saguṇa. Saguṇa-upāsanā.

Just try to understand this. Saguṇa-upāsanā means when Brahman takes a form He takes a form from this material help. Just like we take a form, we spiritual entities. We also take a form, transmigration of the soul according to karma. I create a certain type of mentality, and that continues throughout my life. And at the time of death, because I have got a certain type of mentality, man-mentality or God-mentality or dog-mentality or fly-mentality, any kind of... There are so many. So I have to take a certain type of body. So that body I have to take not by my whim. Daivena. Daiva-netreṇa: by the decision of higher authorities. Daiva, generally, it means the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His agents. He has got many.

His Divine Grace Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Prabhupada's Appearance Day, Evening -- Gorakhpur, February 15, 1971:

Why don't you take up Lord Caitanya's message and preach in the Western world?" In the very first sight, he told me. At that time, I argued with him that "We are dependent nation, and who is going to hear about our message?" So he defeated my argument. (aside:) There is no necessity of closing. Yes. He defeated my argument. He was learned scholar. What I was? I was still boy. So I agreed (chuckles) that I was defeated. So after finishing our visit with Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī, I got some impression that "Here is a person who has taken Lord Caitanya's message very seriously. Now it will be preached." My friend asked my opinion, that "What is your opinion?" So I gave this opinion, that "Here is a person who has taken Lord Caitanya's movement very seriously, and now it will be preached."

So that was in 1922. Then, in 1923, I left Calcutta on business account, and I started my business at Allahabad. But I was always thinking of my Guru Mahārāja, although I was that time not initiated. But the impression was there. I was thinking, "I met a very nice saintly person." So in this way, I passed from 1923 to 1928, I think. Then during Kumbhamelā... (child making noise) Stop that noise he's making. In 1928 my Guru Mahārāja, along with other disciples, came to Allahabad for starting their branch there. So some gentlemen known to me might have told them that "The proprietor of such and such business, Prayāga Pharmacy, he's a very nice gentleman. He can help you in so many ways." So they came to me, and I saw the same saintly persons whom I met 1922. I was very glad to receive. In this way, my connection was more intimate with my Guru Mahārāja. And in 1936, or 1933, I was initiated officially, although I was initiated 1922.

His Divine Grace Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Prabhupada's Appearance Day, Evening -- Gorakhpur, February 15, 1971:

Swamijī has given them." So they appreciate. Actually, these boys, they come from Christian family, Jewish family. There are many churches in America. I was surprised. When I first went to Butler, that's a small county, but I saw there about dozen of churches. So I thought the American people are very religiously-minded. And actually so. The history of the American people, mostly they came from England for this religious purpose. So they migrated in America for being religiously advanced.

So American people, I very much appreciate them. They are religious. They have got very good potency for understanding God consciousness. That is my opinion. And I do not know why I was inclined to go to America. It was also Kṛṣṇa's desire. Because I thought that "If this movement, Caitanya Mahāprabhu's movement... " Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that

pṛthivīte āche yata nagarādi-grāma

sarvatra pracāra haibe mora nāma

(CB Antya-khaṇḍa 4.126)

That is His prediction, that "As many towns and villages are there on the surface of the globe, everywhere, this message of Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra and Lord Caitanya's name will be there." So I thought that "I should go to America. If the American people take it seriously, then other people will take it." So actually, that is happening. These boys are so enthusiastic in preaching that on my word, they are going any part of the world. Any part of the world. They are prepared to go any part of the world. And just now I received one letter from my disciple Śrīmān Upendra dāsa. He does not know Hindi, and in the Fiji Island there are many Indians, but still, he is making propaganda. He's simply chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra door to door. They are also husband and wife. And people are very much appreciating.

Arrival Addresses and Talks

Arrival Lecture -- Gainesville, July 29, 1971:

Prabhupāda: Why the young people go to university?

Woman Guest: I'm sorry?

Prabhupāda: Why in the university you'll find all the students are young boys and girls? Why?

Woman Guest: That's the age of education.

Prabhupāda: That's the age of Kṛṣṇa consciousness (laughter). Old fools, they cannot change their opinion. (laughter)

Woman Guest: Why just in the last five years?

Prabhupāda: Because they have got now. Before this there was no such thing. Now they have got it, they're coming.

Woman Guest: Were you trying before then?

Prabhupāda: No. Before there was no such movement in your country.

Woman Guest: I know, I know. But why did you just now...

Prabhupāda: So now they have got the thing. They are wanting it. As they have got it, they are coming.

Devotee (2): How do you develop a service attitude in Kṛṣṇa consciousness?

Devotee (1): (repeats) How do you develop a service attitude?

Initiation Lectures

Initiation Lecture -- Boston, December 26, 1969:

Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī gives notes on this line that a person born in the family of a brāhmaṇa awaits the sacred thread ceremony. But one who has become surely (?) purified by chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, he immediately becomes a highly qualified brāhmaṇa. So don't misuse the opportunity obtained by you. Use it properly, and the life will be successful. So apavitraḥ pavitro vā. In any condition of life, anyone who remembers Kṛṣṇa, Puṇḍarīkākṣam, so both wise-externally and internally—he becomes purified, śuci. Śuci means pure. And there is a verse written by one Vaiṣṇava in Bengali. Not ordinary. He's Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura. Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura is one of the ācāryas. He has written Caitanya-Bhāgavata. As there is Śrīmad-Bhāgavata, he has written Caitanya-Bhāgavata. Perhaps you have heard the name. So his opinion is, muci haya śuci haya yadi kṛṣṇa bhaje. Muci and śuci, just opposite. Muci means the most nasty cobbler. He eats everything and does all nonsense. He is called muci. Muci means cobbler. In India, when a cow or bull dies, these muci class are called to take away the carcass. So they take it away and they take out the skin and tan it for... This is the original system of shoe-making. And make some shoes and sell in the market. But not by killing cows. When it dies. So this business is done by the muci class. And they take the flesh also. After taking out the skin, the flesh they take. Therefore they are considered very low class, muci. And śuci means brāhmaṇa. So Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura says, muci haya śuci haya.

General Lectures

Lecture on Maha-mantra -- New York, September 8, 1966:

So that policy was followed for two hundred years, so India has lost its original culture. So therefore the original point is that tarko apratiṣṭhaḥ. We cannot realize the Supreme Truth simply by argument or logical presentation or philosophical speculation. No. Tarko apratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā (CC Madhya 17.186). Śrutayo means scriptures. Now say, for example, Bhagavad-gītā and your Bible and the Muhammadans, they'll present Koran. So of course, this Bhagavad-gītā is little different from Vedic scripture. That we have already explained. It is an independent something, universal. So Vedic scripture, Koran, Bible, or Zoroastrian... There are so many religions, Buddhist religion, so many. So there may be some difference of opinion. Śrutayor vibhinnā. Vibhinnā means different. Now, you cannot realize the Absolute Truth simply by your mundane arguments and by your logical strength, neither you can catch up the right thing by reading different scriptures. Śrutayor vibhinnā. Nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. And if you follow great philosophers, great thinkers, then also you will find one thinker is different from another thinker, one philosopher is differing from another philosopher. So whom to follow? This philosopher says that God is a person; another philosopher says God is imperson; another philosopher says that God is everywhere and there is no separate existence of God. So many philosophies there are in the world. And one person is not actually philosopher if he does not differ from other philosophers. That is the philosophical basic principle. You are a philosopher. If I cannot make your philosophical conclusion null and void and make my philosophy established, then I am not a philosopher. You see? That is the way, going on. Nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam: "He is not a philosopher if he cannot present a separate theory." He is not a philosopher.

Lecture on Maha-mantra -- New York, September 8, 1966:

Then how to catch up the Absolute Truth? What is the way? Now, dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyām: "Therefore the Absolute Truth is concealed within your heart." Nihitaṁ guhāyām. Now, mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ: (CC Madhya 17.186) "You just try to follow the great personalities, what they are doing, what they are doing." Now, about this mahājana, there is also difference of opinion who is mahājana. But so far our Vedic culture is concerned, there are specific mention, mahājana. And so far Lord Kṛṣṇa is concerned, so there is no two opinions about His authority throughout the whole world. And so far we are concerned, Hindus, or the followers of the Vedic religion, there is no difference of opinion so far Kṛṣṇa's authority is concerned. There are five authorities, recognized authorities, in India so far this is..., spiritual life is concerned. One of them is Śrī Rāmānujācārya and other is Śaṅkarācārya. The other is Madhvācārya, other is Viṣṇu Svāmī, and other Nimbārka, Nimbāditya (?). Principal. The whole, I mean, some of them flourished, say, two thousand years before; some of them 1,500 years before; some of them eleven hundred years before. Just like there are different ages, they have come. But all of them, in spite of their coming in different ages, they all are in one opinion—kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam: (SB 1.3.28) "Kṛṣṇa, Lord Kṛṣṇa, is the Supreme Personality of Godhead." Just like we have cited, īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1): "The supreme controller, the Supreme Lord, is Kṛṣṇa." Now, we can see from His presentation of this Bhagavad-gītā how supreme He is. He spoke this truth five thousand years before, and continually, for five thousand years, all scholars are studying this scripture, and studying very devotedly to understand it. You know our present president in India, Dr. Radhakrishnan. He is a renowned scholar of the world, Dr. Radhakrishnan.

Lecture Excerpt -- Montreal, July 18, 1968:

Prabhupāda: Cloud cannot cover the sun. There may be a cloud overcast in the sky for hundred miles, but even hundred miles, is it possible to cover the sun, hundred miles cloud? The sun is itself so many hundreds of thousand times more than this earth. So māyā cannot cover the Supreme Brahman. Māyā can cover the small particles Brahman. So we may become covered by māyā or cloud, but the Supreme Brahman is never covered by māyā. That is the difference of opinion between Māyāvāda philosophy and Vaiṣṇava philosophy. The Māyāvāda philosophy says that the Supreme is covered. The Supreme cannot be covered. Then how He becomes supreme? The covering becomes supreme. Oh, there are so many arguments and so many... But we follow that the cloud covers the small particles of sunshine. But sun remains as it is. And we practically see also when we go by jet plane, we are over the cloud. There is no cloud outside. Sun is clear. In the lower status there is some cloud. If you go thousands of miles up, we don't see any cloud. Everything sunshine. Is there any question?

Devotee (1): Is the cloud in our mind or is the cloud in the sky also?

Prabhupāda: Everything is in your mind. Yes. So you have to clear your mind. That's all. Ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam (CC Antya 20.12). The whole process is to clear the mind. Yes?

Devotee (2): Prabhupāda, even when the mind is cleared, does there not continue to be an objective temporary existence of material phenomena? Even when the mind is cleared, the material world still exists for so long as the (indistinct), so there's still temporary existence.

Speech to Indian Audience -- Montreal, July 28, 1968:

That in this age of Kali there are many differences of opinion for self-realization, or transcendental life, or religious life, but this common formula, chanting of the holy name of God, can be accepted by everyone.

Unfortunately, people in the present age, they think that God is dead. And what is the use of chanting something, somebody who is dead, chanting the holy name of God, who is already dead? The other day I was speaking in the church that God is not dead. God cannot be dead. Neither you or me cannot be dead. There is living symptom in your body, and there is living symptom in the cosmic manifestation also. Just try to understand what is God. Then place your verdict, whether God is dead or not. How God can be dead? Just like when a man is lying on the floor, if his vital condition, his pulses, his heart is going on, then how you can say that that man is dead? Similarly, if you study the cosmic manifestation... Of course, it is a subject matter to be learned very scrutinizingly with calm head, that as your body is functioning nicely by physiological arrangement, similarly, the body of the cosmic nature, by physical arrangement it is also moving nicely. Therefore, so long your bodily functions are going on nicely, you are not dead. Similarly, the Supreme Soul is also not dead because by the symptom of His gigantic body, universal body, we see that everything is nicely going on. So God is not dead. This is a statement of the crazy fellow. God is not dead; neither we are dead. Now, we, being part and parcel of the Supreme Lord, our function is just to serve the Supreme.

Lecture -- Seattle, October 4, 1968:

Every planet is so made that it is complete in itself. The water is there, reserved in the seas and oceans. That water is taken away by the sunshine. Not only here, in other planets also, the same process is going on. It is transformed into cloud, then distributed all over the land, and there is growing of vegetables, fruits and plants, everything. So everything is complete arrangement. That we have to understand, that who has made this complete arrangement everywhere. The sun is rising in due time, the moon is rising in due time, the seasons are changing in due time. So how you can say? There is evidence in the Vedas there is God. In every scripture, every great personality, devotee, representative of God... Just like Lord Jesus Christ, he gave information of God. Although he was crucified, he never changed his opinion. So we have evidences from scripture, from Vedas, from great personality, still, if I say, "God is dead. There is no God," then what kind of man I am? This is called demon. They'll never believe it. They'll never believe... Yes. Just the opposite demon is budhā. Budhā means very intelligent, wise man. In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta it is said, therefore, kṛṣṇa ye bhaje se baḍa catura. Anyone who becomes attracted by Kṛṣṇa and loves Him... Worshiping means loving. In the beginning it is worshiping, but at the end it is love. Worshiping.

Lecture -- Seattle, October 9, 1968:

Why not to understand the science of so many material things? Why one should be..." No. This is the necessity. That is the Vedānta's injunction. Athāto brahma jijñāsā. This is the opportunity. This human form of life is the opportunity to understand the science of the Absolute. Either you say God or Absolute Truth or the Supersoul, the same thing. But this life is meant for understanding. If we miss this opportunity, we do not know where we are going. The defect of the modern civilization is they don't care. Hedonism, Cārvāka's theory. There was, long, long before, there was an atheist philosopher. As there are many atheist philosophers nowadays, in former days also. He was known as Cārvāka Muni. According to his opinion, he says that don't care for next life. Don't care. Bhasmī-bhūtasya dehasya kuto punar āgamano bhavet. He says... Because according to Vedic system, the body is burned after death. As you bury underground... There are three processes everywhere. Somebody throws away for being eaten up by birds, or somebody puts within the ground, or somebody burns it. So Cārvāka Muni says that "After burning this body, who is coming and who is responsible? You see. You live merrily as far as possible. Ṛṇaṁ kṛtvā ghṛtaṁ pibet. If you have no money, then borrow or steal, but live very nicely for sense pleasure." That is Cārvāka Muni's theory, and mostly, at the present moment, that theory is being followed. But the question is that Cārvāka Muni says there is no next life. What is the proof? Does it mean that his word is proof that there is no next life? Then everyone will say something. Of course, that is being accepted. Anyone discovers or says something nonsense, it is accepted.

Lecture -- Los Angeles, December 4, 1968:

Śuciḥ means cleansed. Therefore we prescribe so many things just to keep you cleansed—cleansed within, cleansed outside. Then there is no affection of māyā. Otherwise, you will be harassed by three kinds of miserable condition: adhyātmika, adhibhautika... I have seen many persons in India, within two or three days, by perspiration, within their coat, they germinate so many germs. Do not take bath, unclean. You see? So cleanliness is the protection from infection. And water is very disinfectant, natural disinfectant. This is the medical opinion, water. Therefore God has supplied unlimited quantity of water. You can spend it as much as you like. Yes?

Lecture -- Boston, April 25, 1969:

When I was in Buffalo, my last lecture was at Buffalo University college. So I began a series of lecture for the young boys and girls. This series of lecture is not manufactured by me. Our process is not manufacturing. The Vedic process is not personal opinion. Our process is simply to carry the transcendental message to the people. Our system is so nice that we haven't got to manufacture daily a new thesis. The difficulty of modern age is... Not modern age. It is also old system, because in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam we find one verse which says, tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ: "Simple arguments and logic will not carry you to the Absolute Truth." Tarkaḥ. Tarkaḥ means arguments. You may be very good logician, you can argue very nice, but another logician may come and defeat you. That is going on. New philosopher, new logician, new thinker means he defeats his previous other scripture in some details. Of course, on nkers, logicians, and philosophers, and becomes prominent. That is the materialistic way of gaining name, fame and popularity. But our process is different. Tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ. We accept that simply by arguments and logic, it is not possible to approach the Absolute Truth. Absolute Truth is not subjected to our deficient logic or argument.

Lecture -- Boston, April 25, 1969:

That's all. That process may be different according to time, circumstances, people. That is natural. Therefore, for a neophyte, simply by consulting scriptures, he will not be able to reach to the absolute goal. Because he will find, "Oh..." Sometimes they become skeptic. Just like in the modern age, the youngsters, you all boys and girls, they are becoming skeptic. They don't believe in any scripture now because they find some differences. Therefore Bhāgavata said that tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā: "Simply by argument you cannot establish what is Absolute Truth, and if you consult different scriptures, you will find difference of opinion, or difference of procedures, rituals." So śrutayo vibhinnā nāsāv munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. And if we consult great thinkers or philosophers, they have got their different opinions. Some philosopher says, "I think this is right. I think this is right." So whom you will accept? They are also of different opinion. Tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā nāsāv munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. You won't find a single philosopher whose opinion is not different from the previous philosopher, or muni. Muni means thinker, thoughtful man, muni, from mind. Nāsāv munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam, dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyām.

Therefore to understand the Absolute Truth, it is very difficult to find out how to have it. But the only one way recommended in the Vedic scripture, that mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ... (CC Madhya 17.186). Mahājana. Mahājana means great personality. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ. That is the real path, if you follow the great personality. Now, there is a difference of great personalities also. You think that he is great personality; he thinks another great personality. But there is a definition of great personality.

Lecture at International Student Society -- Boston, May 3, 1969:

Man (11): Who is the original authority of Bhagavad-gītā?

Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa. Yes. You have read Bhagavad-gītā? You read it thoroughly. Then you will understand.

Man (11): No, but I think (I've seen?) Bhagavad-gītā without...

Prabhupāda: You think. That is a wrong thing. Your thinking is not authority.

Man (12): The man's protesting.

Devotee: That's the man's opinion.

Prabhupāda: That's your opinion. That's all right. Opinion may differ. That's all right. That's your opinion. Opinion may be... You may have one opinion; another have another opinion. But whose opinion should be accepted? That is the question.

Man (13): (indistinct)

Woman (9): He said he can have his opinion.

Prabhupāda: All right. So any other questions? Let us chant. (kīrtana) (end)

Lecture -- London, September 26, 1969:

So simply by Brahman realization, you cannot stay on the platform of understanding that "I am not this body." You'll fall down again. You'll fall down again and accept this body, "Yes, I am this body." Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ (SB 10.2.32). After much meditation or hard work, you realize that you are Brahman. But if you do not go further—Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavān—then you'll fall down again. Again fall down. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa. Just like, take a crude example. You have got very nice sputnik, and at that time you have said that "I have reached moon light, moon planet." But if there is no place to live, you come down again here. What you'll do? You must have some shelter. They must advertise... Just like when I was in San Francisco, so many reporters asked my opinion: "Swamijī, what is your opinion that they have gone to the moon planet?" I told, "It is simply waste of time." Oh, what is the use of going there and catch some sands and come back? You live there, utilize; otherwise, what is the value? What is the use of spending so much money? Similarly, if you simply realize that "I am Brahman," you cannot utilize the opportunity, then what is the use of realization? You'll surely fall down. Just like the man has come down again. He may advertise, "Oh, I went to moon planet." That's all right, but what you have gained? You are liv... You are here, like me, with me. What is your extra qualification? You are now living with me. Why did you... Rather, I did not take so much trouble. You have taken so much trouble, and you have come back again. So what is the use of such realization if you cannot utilize it? So Brahman realization is not sufficient, that "I am not this body," ahaṁ brahma. No. That is clearly stated in Bhagavad-gītā. Brahman realization is not rejected, but if you do not go further, do not make further progress, then it is useless waste of time.

Lecture at Harvard University -- Boston, December 24, 1969:

Devotee: He wants a translation in English.

Prabhupāda: So there are many boys. You can have the translation. We have got our translation in many literatures. In our paper, Back to Godhead, in many books. We have got many books. So translation is there. We are simply publishing so many English translation. So there is no scarcity of translation. Yes?

Student (7): Are you happy always in reflection?(?)

Prabhupāda: What do you think? What do you think? I'm happy or not happy? What is your opinion? And if I say false, why do you believe? If I say falsely, "I am happy," will you believe it? If I say falsely, "I am happy," will you take it?

Student (7): That I don't know.

Prabhupāda: Yes?

Student (6): If I can rephrase that, if you were American, how would you say the chant? In other words, I know it has many translations, but what would it mean to you? How would you say it in English?

Prabhupāda: English, the translation... What is that?

Jadurāṇī: These words are Sanskrit. He wants to know if they were English what would they be?

Lecture -- Gorakhpur, February 18, 1971:

That is not bhakti. That is going on. Great, great scholars, they are trying to kill Kṛṣṇa by reading Bhagavad-gītā. So this has to be stopped. We are preaching Kṛṣṇa consciousness on this basis, that "Don't try to kill Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa cannot be killed. You will be killed. You will be killed. Kṛṣṇa cannot be killed." When I went to Western countries, they said that "God is dead." Here also, in our country so many people says that "Kṛṣṇa came. He is dead and gone. Now I am greater than Kṛṣṇa." So many rascal incarnations: "I am greater than Kṛṣṇa." You see. So this is going on.

So by this way you cannot be happy. You must be Kṛṣṇa conscious. Man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65). This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So if you act like that, as it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ (BG 4.2). We have to understand Bhagavad-gītā through the paramparā system, not whimsically: "I think," "It is my opinion." What you are, nonsense? Throw your opinion. This process should be given up.

Pandal Lecture at Cross Maidan -- Bombay, March 26, 1971:

I think it should be down little. All right. That's all. Yes. (chants maṅgalācaraṇa prayers) So ladies and gentlemen, I thank you very much for your taking so much trouble in participating with us in this great movement of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. As I am repeatedly placing before you with all humbleness that this movement is very, very much essential, not only at the present moment, but also all the time. And specially in this age, Kali-yuga, the age of disagreements and quarrel. Kali-yuga means nobody agrees with anyone. Everyone has got his own opinion, however condemned it may be. And on that point everyone is prepared to fight with one. Therefore it is called Kali-yuga. So putting different theories, philosophical speculations, will not solve the problems of the world, because not only during this age, but in all other ages also, there are different philosophers, different scriptures. That is the law of this material nature. Here there is no oneness. Duality. This world is meant for duality. So it is called dvaita. Dvaita means duality. So Kṛṣṇa dāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī, he says, dvaite bhadrābhadra sakali samāna, ei bhāla ei manda saba manodharma. In the world of dualities, bhadrābhadra, "This is good, this is bad, this is nice, this is not nice," they are simply mental speculation because in this world nothing is nice. Everything is bad because it is not eternal. Therefore Śaṅkarācārya said, jagan mithyā, brahma satya. That's a fact. These, anything, the varieties of this world: temporary. That is the right word. It is not mithyā; it is temporary fact. The Vaiṣṇava philosopher says that this world is not false, but temporary, anitya. Anitya saṁsāra moha janmāile (?).

Pandal Lecture at Cross Maidan -- Bombay, March 26, 1971:

So for others He gives sanction, "All right. You do it." Because He will see. Kṛṣṇa does not say that you do it because He perceives that I must do it. So Kṛṣṇa gives the sanction. That is one sanction. But there is another sanction, as it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. That is sanction for the devotees. Teṣāṁ satata-yuktānāṁ bhajatāṁ prīti-pūrvakam (BG 10.10). Teṣām. "For those who are twenty-four hours engaged in My service." Satata-yukta. Satata means always, without any deviation. Simply in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, thinking everything in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. He is seeing one flower. You'll be surprised... This little girl, the other day we were walking in hanging gardens, and this little girl, as soon as she saw some flower, immediately she expressed her opinion that these flowers should be taken and made into garland for Kṛṣṇa. This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. She is being taught from the very beginning of her life how to become Kṛṣṇa conscious. So it is not difficult. It depends only on training. Even in this old age, and especially in this age this method is very simple. Simply we have to agree to accept it. That's all. Otherwise Kṛṣṇa consciousness is the simplest form of self-realization and advancement in spiritual life.

So Kṛṣṇa, as I was talking, that Kṛṣṇa is sitting in everyone's heart. And as soon as one is inclined to serve Him, He is also ready to respond immediately. Teṣāṁ satata-yuktānāṁ bhajatāṁ prīti-pūrvakam (BG 10.10). One who is engaged twenty-four hours in His service, in Kṛṣṇa's service, bhajatāṁ prīti-pūrvakam , not as a matter of routine... Of course, we have to begin as a matter of routine. But when you develop gradually love for Him, that is called prīti. Just like this Deity worship. Our students, first of all they are engaged in a matter of duty of devotional service. Śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ smaraṇaṁ pāda-sevanam arcanam (SB 7.5.23). This is called arcanam. But by worshiping the Deity he feels an attachment for service. That is natural. Tathāsakti. It is called āsakti. It will develop if you begin Kṛṣṇa consciousness at your home. Then you will feel at a certain stage an attachment for Kṛṣṇa. Āsakti. Ādau śraddhā tato sādhu-saṅga.

Lecture -- Los Angeles, July 20, 1971:

It is very important movement to bring man to his original consciousness. Kṛṣṇa consciousness means to bring a living entity to his original consciousness. Just like there are many mental hospitals. What is that? Bellevue? In your city? The purpose of the hospital is to bring a crazy fellow to his original consciousness. Similarly, this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement means to bring all crazy men to his original consciousness. Anyone who is not Kṛṣṇa conscious, he is to be understood—more or less crazy. There was a case in India, a murder case, and the murderer pleaded that he became mad. He was mad; therefore he, he did not know what did he do. So in order to test him, whether actually he, at that time, was lunatic or turned mad, the expert civil servant, psychiatrist, was brought to examine him. So the doctor gave his opinion that "So far I have studied cases, all patients I've come in contact, they are more or less all crazy. So in that sense, if your lordship wants to excuse him, that is another thing." So that is the fact. In a nice Bengali poetry, one great Vaiṣṇava poet has written,

piśācī pāile yena mati-cchanna haya

māyā-grasta jīvera se dāsa upajaya

Piśācī, ghost, when a man becomes ghostly haunted, he speaks so many nonsense. Similarly, anyone who is under the influence of this material nature, he is ghostly haunted, and whatever he speaks, he speaks nonsense. Never mind he is a great philosopher, great scientist, but because he is ghostly haunted by māyā, so whatever he's theorizing, whatever he's speaking, that is, more or less, nonsense.

Lecture -- Jakarta, February 28, 1973:

The father did not like that his son should be devotee, and father..., son did not like that his father should remain an atheist. So there was misunderstanding. The son was right, but the father will not change his atheistic view. So anyway, after all, father and son, the relation is very affectionate, filial affection. So father asked that whether his son has changed his views. "My dear son, will you kindly explain what you have learned best." So he said, tat sādhu manye-asura-varya. He's addressing his father, asura-varya. Asura means demon, and varya means the top, varyam, the first-class asura. He did not address his father as "father." Asura-varya: "My dear first-class demon, I think you are asking me what is the best thing. So, in my opinion, everyone is very, very anxious." Tat sādhu manye 'sura-varya dehinām. Dehinām. Dehinām means one who has accepted this material body. He's called dehī. Practically we do not require this material body, but we have accepted this material body for enjoying in this material world. In the spiritual world we can simply remain as servant. We cannot become master. Because in the spiritual world the master is one—Kṛṣṇa, or God—and everyone is servant. Jīvera svarūpa haya nitya kṛṣṇa dāsa (Cc. Madhya 20.108-109). That is, that is our real position. Our real position is to serve. Now in the material world we have come here to enjoy, but we are serving. This is called māyā. Actually we are not enjoying; we are serving. Suppose I become president of a certain state. What is my position? My position is to serve the country there. But I am thinking, "Now I am president." Similarly, in family life the head of the family, he's thinking that he's master, but actually he's serving his wife, his children, his servant. So our actual position is servitude.

Lecture What is a Guru? -- London, August 22, 1973:

The Vedas say, tad-vijñānārtham. Tad-vijñāna means spiritual knowledge. Spiritual knowledge; for acquiring spiritual knowledge. Tad-vijñānārtham. Sa—one; gurum eva—eva means must; gurum—to a guru. Must go to guru. Not "a" guru; "the" guru. Guru is one. Because as it is explained by our Revatīnandana Mahārāja, guru is coming from the disciplic succession. What five thousand years ago Vyāsadeva instructed or Kṛṣṇa instructed, the same thing we are also instructing. Therefore there is no difference between instruction. Therefore guru is one. Although hundreds and thousands of ācāryas have come and gone, but the message is one. Therefore guru cannot be two. Real guru will not talk differently. Some guru says that "In my opinion, you should like this," and some guru will say, "In my opinion you'll do this"—they are not guru; they are all rascals. Guru has no "own" opinion. Guru has got only one opinion, the same opinion which was expressed by Kṛṣṇa, Vyāsadeva or Nārada or Arjuna or Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu or the Gosvāmīs. You'll find the same thing. Five thousand years ago, Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa spoke Bhagavad-gītā and Vyāsadeva wrote it, recorded it. Vyāsadeva does not say that "It is my opinion." Vyāsadeva writes, śrī bhagavān uvāca: "Whatever writing, it is spoken by the Supreme Personality of Godhead." He's not giving his own opinion. Śrī bhagavān uvāca. Therefore he is guru. He is not misinterpreting the words of Kṛṣṇa. He's giving as it is. Just like a bearer, peon. Somebody has written you letter, the peon has got the letter. It does not mean he has to correct it or edit it or addition or... No. He'll present it. That is his duty. Then he is guru. He's honest. Similarly, guru cannot be two. Mind that. The person may be different, but the message is the same. Therefore guru is one.

Lecture What is a Guru? -- London, August 22, 1973:

Same thing. Repetition of the same subject matter, no other. Kṛṣṇa said that man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru: (BG 18.65) "Just think of Me," man-manā. "Just become devotee of Me," man-manā bhava mad-bhakto. "Just worship Me and just offer your obeisances unto Me." Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). "Just surrender unto Me." You'll find this instruction in the Bhagavad-gītā. The same thing was spoken by all the ācāryas. Rāmanujācārya also says the same, Madhvācārya says the same thing, Caitanya Mahāprabhu says same thing, the Gosvāmīs say the same thing, and we are also speaking the same thing. There is no difference. We do not interpret the words of Kṛṣṇa, that "In my opinion, Kurukṣetra means this body." This is rascaldom. The whole situation has been spoiled by these so-called rascal gurus who gives his own opinion. This is our plain declaration: Let any rascal guru come. We can convince him that he is not guru, because he is speaking differently. We can challenge any rascal. Just like somebody came here, he said that he's God, every one of us God. (aside:) Stop this. So I asked that "Just find out in the dictionary what is meaning of God. Let us see whether he is God." The dictionary, as soon as dictionary was consulted, the meaning of God is "the supreme being," meaning of God. So I asked him, "Are you supreme? If you cannot understand, then find out the meaning of supreme." Then when he consulted dictionary, the supreme, it is said "the greatest authority." So I asked him, "Are you the greatest authority?" The rascal could not answer. He does not know even the dictionary meaning, and he's claiming that he's God. This rascaldom is going on, whole world. Big, big rascal swamis, they say, "Why you are finding out God anywhere? You do not see so many rascal gods are loitering in the street?" This is going on. If you simply consult dictionary, you can understand what is the meaning of God. God is so cheap thing, huh? Supreme being. Are you supreme being? Supreme means the highest authority. Highest authority means nobody is equal to him, nobody is greater than him. That is supreme. So these rascals who are claiming to become God, is it a fact that nobody is equal to him, nobody is greater than him? There are so many.

Lecture What is a Guru? -- London, August 22, 1973:

So guru is one. Guru cannot be two. As soon as you find two opinions of guru, either both of them are rascals, or one is still at least rascal. There cannot be two. This is guru. Another place it is said,

tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta

jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam

śābde pare ca niṣṇātaṁ

brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayam

(SB 11.3.21)

Who needs a guru? A third-class, fourth-class man, ordinary man, doesn't require a guru. Guru, to keep a guru or to have a guru is not a fashion. One who is very serious to understand spiritual life, he requires a guru. Otherwise, there is no need of guru. Just like you keep a dog as a fashion, don't keep a guru. Guru means..., is a question of necessity. One must be very serious to understand what is spiritual life, what is God, what is my relation with God, how to act. When we are very much serious about this subject matter, then we require a guru. Don't go to a guru as a matter of fashion. That is useless. That is useless. Therefore śāstra says, tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta. Because we have to go to guru and surrender there. Without surrendering, you cannot learn anything. If you want to challenge guru, it is not possible. Then you'll learn nothing. Tasmad guruṁ prapadyeta. Praṇipātena. So, just like Arjuna accepted Kṛṣṇa as guru, he said, śiṣyas te 'haṁ śādhi māṁ tvāṁ prapannam: (BG 2.7) "I am now surrendered to you." That is the process. Tad viddhi praṇipātena paripraśnena sevayā (BG 4.34). To... Guru means Kṛṣṇa's representative, former ācāryas' representative. Kṛṣṇa's... All ācāryas are representative of Kṛṣṇa; therefore guru should be offered the same respect as you offer to God. Tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta (SB 11.3.21).

Lecture -- Hong Kong, January 31, 1974:

This is also required, but under regulation. Eating is not prohibited in Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, but eating is regulated. Don't eat anything without Kṛṣṇa's prasādam. Oh, Kṛṣṇa prasādam, there are so many varieties nice foodstuff. Be satisfied taking Kṛṣṇa's prasādam so your eating problem will be solved and you will advance in Kṛṣṇa consciousness to go back to home, back to Godhead. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is very important movement for the human society, and this is not a Utopian thing. It is authorized. For every action of Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement there is support from Vedas, Vedic literature. Just like whenever we speak something we immediately give evidence from the Bhagavad-gītā. It is not that something, "In my opinion it is..." No. We have no opinion. We don't give our opinion. We present Bhagavad-gītā as it is, that's all. As Kṛṣṇa says, we say the same thing. We have no difficulty. Kṛṣṇa says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat, kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7). "There is no more superior truth than Kṛṣṇa," Kṛṣṇa says. We accept that. We preach that, that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). If you are searching after God, that is your duty. Athāto brahma jijñāsā. That is your human life's business, to search out the truth, Absolute Truth. Then that is Kṛṣṇa, that is Kṛṣṇa. In the Vedānta-sūtra it is indirectly said, "The Absolute Truth is janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), from whom everything is generated." That is Absolute Truth. That answer is given in the Bhagavad-gītā, aham sarvasya prabhavaḥ mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate: (BG 10.8) "I am the origin of everything." Aham ādir hi devānām (Bg 10.2). Somebody may say the demigods like Lord Brahma, Siva, they are the beginning demigods. But Kṛṣṇa says, aham ādir hi devānām. "The all the demigods, but their beginning, they are also coming from Me." Sarvasya prabhavaḥ mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate. These things are there. So we are teaching that. It is not difficult. We are not manufacturing anything by fertile brain. Everything is there in the Bhagavad-gītā. And we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā as it is, preaching the Bhagavad-gītā as it is. The Bhāgavata is also further explanation of Bhagavad-gītā, Vedānta-sūtra explanation.

La Trobe University Lecture -- Melbourne, July 1, 1974:

Young man (2): I'm a Christian. I follow Jesus. What is your spiritual master in relation to Jesus, and do you see Jesus as just another prophet like...

Madhudviṣa: The question was, this man is a follower of Lord Jesus Christ, and he would like to know what our opinion is of Jesus Christ.

Prabhupāda: We respect Jesus Christ as you do. Because he is the representative of God, son of God, and we are also speaking of God, so we respect him with our greatest veneration.

Young man (2): So you're comparing Kṛṣṇa, Buddha, Muhammad to Jesus as the same, and Guru Maharaj-ji too, another Jesus. You're saying that.

Prabhupāda: No. I am not Jesus. I am servant of Jesus.

Young man (2): You're a son of Jesus.

Prabhupāda: Yes. I am servant of Jesus.

Young man (2): What does that mean?

Prabhupāda: I don't say I am Jesus.

La Trobe University Lecture -- Melbourne, July 1, 1974:

Madhudviṣa: I think part of the question was this. One other man who comes from the East, Krishnamurti, he stresses that when you are speaking in the Western world, you should speak and present yourself as a Westerner, not as an Indian or not as you would speak in India. Instead of sitting on the raised dais, Vyāsāsana, and dressing in robes of a monk, Krishnamurti would say, "Dress in Western clothes and sit on a chair." The question was, "What is our opinion of this?"

Prabhupāda: Actually a God conscious person is neither Westerner nor Easterner. So anywhere he goes, the devotees, as they receive him, they accept. These devotees, they have arranged the raised seat, so we have accepted this raised seat. If they wanted to sit down on the floor, I would have gladly accepted. I have no objection, this or that. But as the devotees receive and they give honor, that is good for them, because actually we should honor the Supreme Lord, God, and His representative. Nowadays it is different. Students and people are learning not to honor. But that is not actually the system. According to Vedic system, the representative of God must be honored as God. Yasya prasādād bhagavat-prasādaḥ **. Just like in India we had British rule. The governor general, he was viceroy. So he was given honor, as much honor we used to give to the king. So that is the etiquette. That is the system. It is not that the honor given to the viceroy exactly like to the king, he becomes a king. No. He is servant of God. But it is the duty of the citizen to honor the representative of the king as king. That is etiquette. That is our Vedic system.

Madhudviṣa: Yes.

Lecture on Science of Krsna -- Hyderabad, April 14, 1975:

Yes. But still there is specific differences. That is called viśiṣṭa. One with specific difference. And the Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, "No, there is no specific difference. This is māyā." But we Vaiṣṇava, we don't say that. That sunshine is sunshine, sun globe is sun globe, and Sun-god is Sun-god. But taken together, they are all one. Diversity in unity. That is viśiṣṭa-advaitavāda. So actually, all the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, Madhvācārya, Rāmānujācārya, Nimbārka, and Viṣṇu Svāmī, there is no difference of opinion, but they have explained the Absolute Truth more vividly in their own angle of vision. Otherwise there is no difference. They never say that God and the living being are one. They will never say that. That is not Vaiṣṇava philosophy. That is Māyāvāda philosophy. So the propounder of Māyāvāda philosophy is Śaṅkarācārya and other Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, Madhvācārya, Rāmānujācārya, Nimbārka, Viṣṇu Svāmī, practically they are all one opinion. There is no, they differ from Śaṅkarācārya.

Sunday Feast Lecture -- London, July 25, 1976:

It is a great science, vijñānam. Jñānaṁ me parama-guhyaṁ yad vijñāna-samanvitam. Jñānaṁ te 'haṁ pravakṣyāmi yad vijñāna-samanvitam. These are the words. It is vijñāna, a great science. Don't think that "These people are sentimentally chanting and dancing." That is the process, very easy made for this age. But if you think yourself that you are a great scientist, great philosopher, then we have got eighty-four books of four hundred pages. If you have got actually learning, you can study them. We can convince you. And people are becoming convinced. We are selling books all over the world, daily, sixty thousand dollars' worth. People are receiving, and they are appreciating. We have got big, big learned scholars' opinion.

So the idea is that you must take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Otherwise you are drinking poison knowingly. Anyone, it doesn't matter what you are. Either you are Indian or Englishman or American or Hindu or Muslim, it doesn't matter. Kṛṣṇa consciousness means God consciousness. I may say, "Kṛṣṇa;" you may say some other name. But this human form of life is meant for this purpose, to understand Kṛṣṇa, or God. Not vague idea, clear idea what is God, how he looks, what does he do—so many things we have to know. It is not vague idea. Simply to have a vague idea of God, that is also good, but that is not perfect. You must know that is God. So how you can know God? The God is explaining Himself, coming down for your benefit. That is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is explaining Himself, "I am like this. You see Me. You know Me. I am explaining Myself." And still, if we do not take advantage of understanding God, then just imagine how we are drinking poison knowingly. How rascal we are, that God Himself is explaining before me everything about Him, and we are not taking advantage of this opportunity, and I am thinking I am independent and... This is rascaldom. You are not independent. You are completely under the control of the laws of material nature. How you are independent? So this foolishness must be stopped. That is the purpose of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Don't remain rascals fools. Take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness and be happy.

Address to Rotary Club -- Chandigarh, October 17, 1976:

In this age, Kali-yuga, we are living not very long time. In Kali-yuga, the duration of life will be reduced so much, gradually, that if a person lives for twenty to thirty years, he'll be considered a grand old man. That day is coming. Now we have got practical experience. Our grandfather or father lived for so many years, but we are not living for so many years. Our sons will not live so many years. In this way the duration of life, the memory, the mercifulness, the bodily strength—everything will be reduced. This is already foretold in the śāstras. So therefore in this age we are all short-living, mandāḥ, very slow or bad, and sumanda-matayo. Everyone has got a obnoxious opinion about philosophy, about the goal of life. Mandāḥ sumanda-matayo, and manda-bhāgyā, unfortunate also. The description, if we try to describe, it will take long time. The short-cut description is there: mandāḥ sumanda-matayo manda-bhāgyā hy upadrutāḥ. At the same time, disturbed always. This material world means always disturbed condition, but in this age, Kali-yuga, the disturbance is more and more.

So under the circumstances, it is out of Kṛṣṇa's kindness that making Arjuna as a target of His instruction, Bhagavad-gītā, He has given us this valuable instruction. We should accept it as it is. Therefore we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, without any malinterpretation. Take Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. You'll be benefited. And so far as brahma-jijñāsā, the Kṛṣṇa begins with this aphorism of brahma-jijñāsā. When Arjuna submitted to Kṛṣṇa that "I am Your now disciple. There is no need of friendly talks. You can give me instruction seriously because I am surrendered to You, and You give me the real instruction," so the first instruction was, as soon as Arjuna submitted...

Evening Lecture -- Bhuvanesvara, January 19, 1977:

So why one should say daridra-nārāyaṇa? What is the reason? Nārāyaṇa is Lakṣmī-pati, the husband of the goddess of fortune. How He can become daridra-nārāyaṇa? And where is this word in the śāstra, "daridra-nārāyaṇa"? So in this way people are being misled.

So we have to save ourself from this misconception of life. Then we can make progress in the matter of understanding what is God. Therefore we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā as it is, without any deviation, and people are appreciating. Our, this Bhagavad-gītā As It Is is being accepted by big, big scholars and professors. We have got innumerable certificates or their opinion, and it is being well received. And from monetary point of view also, you'll be surprised that we are selling millions of copies of Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. So we have come to your city to say something about Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. If respectable persons of this city will come and attend this meeting, I shall try to explain more and more so long I am present here. Now, if you have got any question on the subject matter I have spoken, you can make. I shall try to answer. (pause) So there is no question, I think. Thank you very much. Hare Kṛṣṇa. Now a kīrtana.

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Prabhupāda: Yes. Paramātmā is a person. Every expansion—just like we are also expansion, atomic expansion of Kṛṣṇa. So we are persons. Every individual soul is a person. But we are expansion of Kṛṣṇa. Paramātmā is another expansion, viṣṇu-tattva. Rāmādi mūrtiṣu. That is another expansion, different kinds of expansions.

Śyāmasundara: Jīva ātmā is also a person?

Prabhupāda: Yes. If not person, then why the difference? You may not agree with my opinion, but if we agree voluntarily, not that exactly what I think you think, but because you have accepted me as your guru, as superior, therefore we agree. You are individual; you may not agree. You are individual and I am individual, Kṛṣṇa is individual. That is stated, nityo nityānām. Plural number. There are many individual souls, but He is the Supreme Individual Person.

Śyāmasundara: This idea of a monad means that...

Prabhupāda: You call it by any name, but within the atom there is the force—that is Kṛṣṇa. You call it monad or something else.

Śyāmasundara: He says the lowest type of monad is in matter, material forms, and then it proceeds up through higher monads, which are souls.

Prabhupāda: So we directly say (indistinct) Kṛṣṇa, that is (indistinct) spiritual.

Śyāmasundara: He says that each monad has an inner or mental activity, a spiritual life.

Prabhupāda: That is explained in everything, that as soon as we say there is Kṛṣṇa, so there is everything.

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Śyāmasundara: No creator. He says, however, that if we prefer, we can say that there is a creator, if we like to. In other words, he bases everything on this idea that you can do what you like to do.

Prabhupāda: So that he can go on talking whatever he likes. (laughter) All nonsense. All he wants that license: you can go on talking all nonsense, I can go on talking all nonsense. You are right, I am right, everything is all right. Yata mata tata patha. Yata mata—as many opinions there are, so many (indistinct) are there also. So it does not apply in legal sense. Just like the same example that I give always, "Keep to the right." Then if somebody says, "My opinion is, 'Keep to the left,' " but as soon as he does it, he is arrested.

Śyāmasundara: We'll discuss that in a minute or two. But he divided human understanding into two classes. The first class is the relationship among ideas, just as mathematical compositions, they are true and certain, whether or not the things they refer to exist in nature. Just like two plus two equals four. This is a relationship among ideas. And the second-relationship among facts. He says that these cannot be proved by reasoning. They are merely assumed on the basis of sense experience. For example, that sun will rise tomorrow. This is a relationship among facts. But it is merely an assumption based upon our sense experience, but it's possible to imagine that the world will end or the sun may not rise. So it's only an assumption that the sun will rise. So this world of facts that we see, we can only assume that they will act in certain ways. There is probability, but there is no certainty.

Prabhupāda: That is already discussed: why it is so, probability, who takes it, who makes it not possible, how it happens. Sun is rising, and sun may not rise, stop. How it is? Accidentally or by somebody's will?

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Śyāmasundara: He says that morality consists of values which the individual formulates for himself, as a matter of personal opinion. In other words, I can do whatever my conscience dictates.

Prabhupāda: So another man can also say "what my conscience dictates." So there is a difference.

Śyāmasundara: But in society, moral values are based upon the opinion of the whole society. In other words, my moral values are relative to public opinion.

Prabhupāda: When the majority opinion is something, you have to accept it. That is democracy.

Śyāmasundara: But still he says it's up to the individual whether to accept or reject it. This is where you were talking about the left side of the road and the right side of the road, that even though the law is there as agreed upon by society, still it's up to me whether I want to follow it or not. It's matter of my personal opinion.

Prabhupāda: If you don't follow, then you'll be punished. That will be the effect. You'll be punished. Therefore, the conclusion is that your independent thinking is not absolute; it is also relative.

Śyāmasundara: He says that logic or reason don't determine morality, but sentiment determines morality—how I feel, that's how I should act.

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Prabhupāda: Or in other words, what is accepted by the supreme will, that is morality. You cannot decide what is morality. The supreme will decides whether it is morality or immorality.

Śyāmasundara: According to Hume, it's my sentiment that decides. How I feel at the moment, that's how I should act. It's my personal opinion.

Prabhupāda: But your personal opinion sometimes does not meet with approval. So if you are satisfied with your personal opinion, but if it is not approved by others, then you are in the fool's paradise. That's all.

Śyāmasundara: So he says that the remedy for this is social, that we should try to change the laws of the state or change the opinion of the state to accept a certain type of morality. If I think something is right and the state says it is wrong, then I should act through politics to change it.

Prabhupāda: He agrees to surrender to the supreme-state—so if the supreme state sanctions, it is morality. Is it not that?

Śyāmasundara: Yes. Public opinion.

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Prabhupāda: But anyway, it goes to somebody, public opinion, but this public opinion is not final. Therefore above the public opinion there is the supreme will of Kṛṣṇa. That should be the final, to sanction morality or immorality.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the moral sentiments which are approved by society enhance the social good, whereas immoral attitudes are egoistic and antisocial. So that a society will always approve of a certain set of moral values, and then the individual living in the society must either accept or reject them. And if he rejects them, then he must act through politics, through the social body, to try to change their attitude, their opinion.

Prabhupāda: Therefore it depends on that social body, which is authority. So ultimately we have to depend on the authority for all sanctions. So our proposition is that the supreme authority is Kṛṣṇa. So whatever He sanctions, that is morality; whatever He does not sanction, that is immorality. Just like Arjuna was thinking to become nonviolent, not to fight, is good. But Kṛṣṇa said, "Now you fight." So fight became good. So ultimately it depends on Kṛṣṇa's will, what is morality, what is immorality, what is good, what is bad. Therefore our duty is, instead of depending on social body or political... (break) ...are so many, one is different from the other—we depend on the supreme will of the supreme authority.

Śyāmasundara: He says that there is no absolute morality, that everything is relative.

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Śyāmasundara: That's what has happened.

Prabhupāda: There must be some authority.

Śyāmasundara: He says the only authority is public opinion, and it changes.

Prabhupāda: That's all right. Still it is authority. Public opinion, he says, or without public opinion, the king or royalty. There must be some authority to guide them. Otherwise there will be chaos.

Śyāmasundara: As far as his philosophy of religion, he rejected the idea of absolute matter and the concept of a soul as substance. He rejected the utility of scientific laws, and he rejected moral principles as objective realities. He says all religious ideas are relative. There is no certainty and anything religious may be merely probable but never certain.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That also he says. Therefore religion means love of God. The means may be different in different processes of religion, but ultimately if one develops love of Godhead, that is the prima facie factor, love of God. So if any religious principle love of God is absent, that is simply show, it is not factual religion.

Śyāmasundara: He says that even the idea of God is merely probable but not certain.

Prabhupāda: That he cannot say. As soon as he speaks of authority, there must be a supreme authority. That is God.

Śyāmasundara: For him, the authority is the senses. His authority is the senses.

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Prabhupāda: That he cannot say. As soon as he speaks of authority, there must be a supreme authority. That is God.

Śyāmasundara: For him, the authority is the senses. His authority is the senses.

Prabhupāda: Then why does he say public opinion? Your senses may not be approved by the public opinion. Then where do your senses stand?

Śyāmasundara: That's as far as morality goes, public opinion. But for my understanding of God, I can only rely upon my own senses.

Prabhupāda: Morality, morality means what is sanctioned by... (break)

Śyāmasundara: ...imperfection or finiteness.

Prabhupāda: God is absolute. For Him there is no evil. Absolute good. Otherwise He cannot be absolute. So what you think evil, to God it is good. Just like a father slaps a child and he cries. For the child it is evil, but for the father it is good. Father thinks, "I have done right. He is crying. He will not commit the mistake again." So this chastisement is just like sometimes Aravinda complains he thinks "I was unnecessarily chastised," but I say it is good. (laughter) The same thing. So whose opinion is to be taken?

Śyāmasundara: His idea is that God is limited.

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. If God is limited, then He cannot be God.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Śyāmasundara: Oh.

Prabhupāda: Anything nonsense idea, that is not God. God has created you. You cannot create God. And they are creating God. Just like Vivekananda mission, yata mata tata patha. As many opinion you have got, you can have your religious way. Yata mata, this is their mission, yata mata tata patha, "Whatever you are thinking, all right." Ramakrishna, he wanted to realize God from any way. And later on he wanted to realize God by the Mohammedans' way and he asked the proprietor of the temple to allow him to take meat, cow's flesh. So when he asked, the proprietor said, "Please go out. Get out." Now don't real..., I don't want the (indistinct). This philosophy also you can realize God in any way, yata mata. Now he wanted to realize in the Mohammedan's way, therefore he thought it wise that he must eat cow's flesh. These things are there.

Śyāmasundara: If God is not an idea but He's substance, how do you mean that, substance? How do you define substance?

Prabhupāda: You define substance. What is your definition of substance?

Śyāmasundara: Substance is the...

Prabhupāda: Concrete.

Śyāmasundara: ... the realization of the idea.

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: No, no. Earlier times or modern times, when I see the all different species, 8,400,000 species of life still existing, so what is the question of development? It existed long ago also. You might not have seen, you have not source of knowledge to understand, but you have to accept it, because all these species are now existing. Similarly, millions of years ago all these species existed. You might have missed. That is a different thing.

Śyāmasundara: But then it is simply a matter of one opinion against another, because the scientists say...

Prabhupāda: No. It is not opinion, it is a fact. Do you think that this development has ceased all other species, simply human being is there?

Śyāmasundara: No. But I don't see evidence that all these complex forms...

Prabhupāda: I have said that one, this, by evolution, one after another, the human form is there. Now Darwin's theory is that some forty thousand years ago there was no human being.

Śyāmasundara: Several million years.

Prabhupāda: But we don't see that. Because at the present moment we see that all the species are there existing, including human beings.

Śyāmasundara: But he says they evolved. That's because they evolved.

Prabhupāda: Evolved, but they are still existing. Evolved, that is another thing. But all of them are existing still. So how you can say that millions of years they did not exist, all? His theory is that...

Philosophy Discussion on Jeremy Bentham:

Śyāmasundara: Someone might raise the point, "Well, the man is hungry and he has no food, therefore in order to feel pleasure he must steal it and cause displeasure to someone else." But this Bentham says that there are four natural curves or preventions, preventative forces to keep people from egoistic over-indulgence. One is the physical consequences of over-indulgence. If I eat too much, I get sick. One is political, that I will be imprisoned if I transgress. I will be punished. One is moral, or popular opinion, the public will think badly of me if I over-indulge. And the fourth one is religious, that God will punish me if I am an evil-doer. These four preventions he says, keep us from over-indulging in pleasure.

Prabhupāda: But if there is some happiness, why there is no prevention. That is real happiness. There is no prevention, simply go on increasing.

Śyāmasundara: Indulging.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Just like Kṛṣṇa's happiness, there was no prevention. So that is real happiness. Prevention means material, limited. Just like drinking liquor. There is prevention also. There are no-alcoholic beer. You have seen the signboard? That is prevention.

Śyāmasundara: To be over twenty-one years old.

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Prabhupāda: Then why they are killing? The freedom of the poor animals, why they encroach on the freedom of others? Īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvaṁ mā gṛdhaḥ kasya svid dhanam (ISO 1). Do not encroach upon others' freedom. That is Vedic injunction. That is nice. But why these people are encroaching upon the freedom of these animals? The birds, they are flying, freedom, the ducks. Why they kill? Encroaching upon other's freedom. Without any harm, the birds are flying, without... If you kill an aggressor then you are right. Suppose somebody is coming to kill you, then you kill first. That is good. But if somebody's not doing anything harm to you, and if you kill, then what is this philosophy? What is this philosophy? Give him some bad name, because I have to kill him. "Oh, he has no soul." You can attack, he has no consciousness, you have no soul. You can attack him. Why you are killing? Let him kill you. So far this philosophy of religion, he says that God is good, but that he is involved in a world which is not his own making. That God didn't create the world, but that he is involved with it. Then we should be judged by Mill. God is good, but not as good as he thinks he is. That is his opinion about God.

Śyāmasundara: No. God is... God is good...

Prabhupāda: God is good in all conditions, or God is good when Stuart Mill accepts? What is the position of God?

Śyāmasundara: He says that the presence of evil indicates that if God were everything, that He would be not so good.

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Prabhupāda: Why? Therefore God has to depend on the free will or on the opinion of Mr. Mill? Is that? He says that God is not so good. God is good, but not so good because he does not approve all of His activities.

Śyāmasundara: No. He says that God is good, but He is limited in His power; otherwise everything would be good.

Prabhupāda: How nonsense he is! And he is philosopher. He is making God limited, and he is philosopher. Just see.

Śyāmasundara: He says if God were good then everything would be good.

Prabhupāda: Everything is good! That is our philosophy. When the God kills the demons, immediately flowers are showered upon Him from the sky. You have not read in...? He is good. He is always good. He has no idea of God, and still he poses himself as philosopher. God is good. Kṛṣṇa chanted, danced with others' wives at dead of night. Any man who does it, he is immediately a debauch, licentious. But still we worship that rasa-līlā. We worship that rasa-līlā. We keep the picture of God's dancing with others' wives. That is God. In all circumstances, God is good. That is worshipable. That is idea of God. Not that I put Him under my judgment: "Oh, yes, you are good, but not so good." Then I am a fool. I create my own God. "I am better than God. I can create God." No. God creates you. You cannot create God.

Śyāmasundara: He says that because there is evil present in the world, that this shows...

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Hayagrīva: And the enormous, what he calls the enormous influence of authority on the human mind. "Authority is the evidence on which the mass of mankind believe everything which they are said to know except facts of which their own senses have taken cognizance. It is the evidence on which even the wisest receive all those truths of science or facts in history or in life of which they have not personally examined the proofs. Whatever is thus certified to them by authority, they believe with a fullness of assurance which they do not accord even to the evidence of their senses when the general opinion of mankind stands in opposition to it."

Prabhupāda: Authority, that is authority. You can not defy it or you can not deny it. That is authority. We are presenting our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement on this principle, that you should carry out the orders of the authority, and Kṛṣṇa or God is the Supreme authority. Whatever He is speaking, instructing to the human society, they must accept it without any wrong interpretation. That will make them happy. So those who are sane persons, they do not hesitate to accept the authority of God and they become happy simply by abiding by the orders of the authority. And those who are following exactly the instruction of the Supreme Authority, they are also authority. So that is the difference between the Supreme Lord and spiritual master. Spiritual master is servant authority, and God is the master authority. Therefore sevyā bhagavān, sevā bhagavān. Just like government officer, a servant authority, and the king is the master authority. So if one follows the instruction of the authority and teaches the people in general the same principles, then he becomes servant authority or the spiritual master.

Hayagrīva: Concerning morality, Mill writes, "Belief then in the supernatural, great as are the services which it rendered in the early stages of human development, that is for children," because he says early religious teachings "has owed its power over mankind rather to its being early than to its being religious." That is you can train a child...

Philosophy Discussion on William James:

Prabhupāda: So philosophy means advancement of knowledge. So we are making progress in knowledge when our knowledge is actually come to the point of perfection of knowledge, that is understanding of God. God is there, but on account of our foolishness, sometimes we deny the existence of God. That is the most foolish platform of living condition. But sometimes we have vague idea, some imagination, and sometimes impersonal, sometimes pantheistic. In this way different philosophies means they are searching after God, but on account of not being perfect, there are differences of opinion or different conception of God. But actually God is person, and when one comes to that platform—to know God, to talk with Him, to see Him, to feel His presence, even to play with Him—that is the highest platform of God realization. And the relationship is God is the great and we are small. So our position is always subordinate. (break)

Hayagrīva: This is the continuation of William James.

Prabhupāda: So to carry the orders of God is religion. So the more this fact is realized, that is perfection of religion, and dharma, religion, is perfect when he understands who is God and how to learn to love Him.

Philosophy Discussion on Jacques Maritain:

Prabhupāda: So that... They say everything is expansion of God's energy. The example is given in the Vedic śāstras, just like the fire is there in one place but the heat and light of the fire expand. Similarly, God, or Kṛṣṇa, is there in Goloka Vṛndāvana, but His energy, external energy and internal energy and marginal energy, they are expanding in this place. So what is his opinion of it?

Śyāmasundara: Well, these two types of energy he would call..., material energy he would call potential energy, and the spiritual energy, he would say is actual energy.

Prabhupāda: Well, actual, the energy is one, but it is working differently. Just like electricity is one, but it is working differently as cooler and heater, although cooling and heating are two opposites. Cooling is just opposite of heating, and heating is just opposite of cooling, but electric energy is working in both the places.

Śyāmasundara: Electric energy is also measured in terms of its potency, its potential.

Prabhupāda: Yes. So for God there is no such distinction; therefore it is called kaivalya. For Him the material energy or the spiritual energy is the same. Therefore the Māyāvādīs, they cannot understand God. They think that Kṛṣṇa, when He comes, He accepts a material body. But even He accepts a material body, for Him there is no such distinction-spiritual body and material body. He is..., He being omnipotent, He can act even in His material body as spiritual. Just like when Kṛṣṇa was present, accepting that He has a material body, but at the age of seven years old He lifted the big hill. That is not possible by the material body. Therefore, as omnipotent He can turn the material energy into spiritual energy and the spiritual energy into material energy. That is omnipotency. But those who are with poor fund of knowledge, they think that Kṛṣṇa has got this material body. Actually He has no such distinction, either material or... Just like electrical engineer, he knows how to tackle electric energy. He can convert the heater into refrigerator, and he can convert the refrigerator into heater, because he knows how to do it.

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:

Prabhupāda: He is saying that he had studied only some crazy people.

Śyāmasundara: No.

Prabhupāda: But that is not the fact. He analyzed some sane people also. But one psychiatrist's opinion is that (indistinct) was a civil servant, he was called to give evidence in a case where the criminal was pleading (indistinct) became insane while he committed the murder. So the civil servant was called to test him, whether actually he was insane or (indistinct) insanity. So he gave evidence that "I have tested so many persons, so I have seen that more or less everyone is insane. More or less. They are bewildered. So in that case, if insanity is the only plea that he should be excused, he can be excused. But so far as I know, everyone is more or less insane." And that is our conclusion. We say (indistinct), anyone who is infected with this material nature is more or less insane, crazy. He is crazy, not more or less. Anyone who has got this material body must be crazy. And therefore everyone is speaking in a different way.

Devotee: As a result of Freud's philosophy he prescribed, and many of his students prescribed, certain activities. This is one thing we forget to mention—that they prescribed certain activities to help relieve the patient of the trauma, and that is called therapy. Actually there is a higher therapy. Actually one of Freud's students would say that we are all involved in therapy in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, which we are, and that therapy is chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. Therapy is a certain kind of activity which will relieve the anxieties and stresses of the mind.

Prabhupāda: That is recommended by Freud?

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Prabhupāda: Mental...

Hayagrīva: ...intellectual and academic speculation.

Prabhupāda: ...speculation. That is our opinion. They are simply mentally speculating. It has no value. Unless you are directly in touch with the Supreme Personality of Godhead and assimilate the instructions given by Him, by all your reason, and then in practical life you execute it, then one can become guru, he can do good to others; otherwise not possible.

Hayagrīva: And on the other hand religion, the Christian religion which was understood in the Middle Ages, has become strange and unintelligible to the man of today.

Prabhupāda: It is because it is simply dogmatic. The preachers of the religion, they have no idea, clear idea, but officially they speak something. Neither he understands, neither he can make others to understand. But Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is not such big thing. It is clear in every respect. Therefore this is the expected movement as Mr. Jung wanted. So every sane man should cooperate with this movement and liberate the human society from the gross darkness of ignorance.

Hayagrīva: He characterizes the true religious man as one who is accustomed to the thought of not being sole master of his own house. He believes that God, and not he himself, decides in the end.

Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:

Śyāmasundara: Just like when we were discussing Hegel, Hegel's belief was everything was synthetic, that it..., for every thesis there was an antithesis, and each combining made a synthesis, so that all things were related and all things combined together were the world. But his idea is the opposite—that everything is separated, everything is individual.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Separated, but there is sympathy. It is not separated abrupt. There is sympathy. Just like here, all our students, they are individual, separately, but there is (indistinct) sympathy, that every one of you are learning Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That is sympathy. Even though you are all separated, you have got your individual opinions, still there is a sympathy in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Otherwise what is the use of this assembly unless there is sympathy? (aside:) What you say, Dr. Rao?

Dr. Rao: (indistinct)

Prabhupāda: What your science says?

Dr. Rao: Science says that matter is composed of atoms; atoms, in turn, they are composed of the smaller particles like electrons, protons, neutrons and so on. And now scientists, they have found out that these smaller particles, they are also composed of still smaller particles. So there is no end to it. I mean...

Prabhupāda: Then what about the bigger? So what is smaller, but then what about the bigger? (laughter)

Dr. Rao: It doesn't mention. Aṇor aṇīyān mahato mahīyān.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:

Prabhupāda: But practically we see that the Communist are also equally failure, even without God. Now these Chinese and Russians, they are not in agreement. So same thing—that those who believed in God and those who did not believe in God the difference existed. And now amongst the Communist there are coming out so many section. So the difference of opinion is still there even denying God, without God. So that is not improvement. The real purpose is to understand what is really God is. That is required both by the Communist or the capitalist. Denying God and acting independently, that has not brought any peaceful condition of the human society.

Hayagrīva: He felt, like Comte, that the proletariat, the worker, would eventually eliminate religion, and he wrote, "The political emancipation of the Jew, the Christian, the religious man in general is the emancipation of the state from Judaism, from Christianity, and from religion generally." So that the worker would become the savior of mankind in emancipating or freeing man from a religion that worshiped a supernatural being.

Prabhupāda: So that has not actually happened. Marx is dead and gone. The Communist theory is already there, but they are not in agreement. The Russians are not in agreement with the Chinese men. Why it has happened? The God is not there; the working class is there. Then why there is dissension and disagreement?

Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:

Prabhupāda: No, there is no question of separation, that if we accept God as the supreme father. Now the Christian religion believes God as the supreme father. So if the supreme father is there, and if we become obedient to the supreme father, then why, where is the difference of opinion? But we do not know the supreme father and we do not obey the supreme father. That is the cause of dissension. The son's duty is to become obedient to the father and enjoy father's property. So if we know the supreme father, and if we live according to the father's order, so there is question of antagonism, dissension. It is all our own, father being the center. That, the difficulty is that we call supreme father but we do not accept the father's order or what is the order of the supreme father. That is the defect.

Hayagrīva: Well he felt that if man, if man is going to worship God, if man must worship God, he should do so privately, individually, and not communally.

Prabhupāda: No, if God is a fact, and man must worship God, then why not communally? That he, he is pleading that every individual man shall manufacture his own God and worship.

Hayagrīva: Well he would rather do..., do away with the whole thing.

Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung:

Syāmasundara: So the nature of truth is not always derived from phenomenon. In other words, I can tell these people that this certain rock is God often enough so that they will eventually say, "Yes, this rock is God."

Prabhupāda: No, we don't say the rock is God. We say God is God. We are not so foolish that we say rock is God.

Śyāmasundara: But if everything was telling me from the moment of my birth, my parents, slogans on the walls, everything was saying...

Prabhupāda: No. Even if you have not heard... But you cannot change that opinion. Suppose my parents have taught me that "There is God and we are controlled," so you cannot change this. You say that you are not controlled. You prove that you are not controlled. Then you can say, "My parents have taught me wrongly." You are becoming old. You are becoming diseased. You will have to die. You have taken birth under certain system. So you are controlled. My parents have taught me that "There is God, who is supreme controller, and we are all controlled." Now you change this first of all. You are talking so nice thing, but you first of all say that you are not controlled. That is our proposition. If you say that you are not controlled, then you are mad.

Śyāmasundara: No. I would admit that I am controlled. Everyone in my Communist state is controlled because we work under the...

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Prabhupāda: He may, he may follow Kant and I may follow Kṛṣṇa, but if there is contradiction, then which one is morality? How it will be decided, and who will decide? He may follow somebody. That this question I asked Professor Kotovsky in Moscow, that "You are following Communism, and we are following, say, Kṛṣṇa-ism, but your leader is Lenin and our leader is Kṛṣṇa, that so far the philosophy is concerned we have to accept a leader." So there is no difference in the basic principle of philosophy that we must have a leader. Now who shall be the leader and who will decide it? Regards to both of us, we have got a leader. Now which leader is perfect? If both of them are perfect, then why there is difference of opinion—one leader does not agree with the other leader? So who will answer this question that who is the best leader? Leader you have to follow. That you cannot avoid. Either you follow Kant or you follow Kṛṣṇa. Either you follow Lenin or you follow Kṛṣṇa. What is the answer? Who is the perfect leader? You cannot avoid leader, either you say according to Kant, I say according to Kṛṣṇa.

Hayagrīva: Well they both emphasize intuition or conscience. The interior...

Prabhupāda: The conscience is prepared. If you go on drinking, then your conscience will say it is good, and if you go on chanting, your conscience will say this is good. The conscience is prepared according to association. There is no standard conscience.

Hayagrīva: No standard conscience or intuition.

Prabhupāda: So which one will you follow?

Philosophy Discussion on Socrates:

Hayagrīva: ...that Śyāmasundara treated, but they're somewhat incomplete, so I will read. I've gone to the primary sources. He used a college outline series that wasn't really adequate. So I went to the primary sources, and I'll read a little, and if you want to comment on it, comment. If you don't feel like commenting on it, I'll just go on to the next section.

Once a student of Socrates—this is a section on Socrates-said, "I cannot refute you, Socrates." To this Socrates replied, "Say rather that you cannot refute the truth, for Socrates is easily refuted." This is by way of saying that the Absolute Truth is not a subject of mental speculation or personal opinion. The Truth, or the good, for Socrates stands separate from mundane relativities or personal opinion.

Prabhupāda: That is our opinion. We accept Kṛṣṇa as the supreme authority, and therefore we cannot refute what Kṛṣṇa says. And our philosophy is perfect because we follow Kṛṣṇa. He is the Supreme Perfect. This is our position. In other religious system, taking it our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement religious... It is religious, because our religion means the..., to carry out the order of God. That is the sum and substance of religion. We don't manufacture religion, and neither religion can be manufactured. Manufactured religion is useless. That has been described in the Bhagavad-gītā, er, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as dharma kaitava. Means cheating. So this is not cheating religion. Our basic principle is dharmaṁ tu sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam (SB 6.3.19). Dharma means the order which is given by God, and if you execute that, that is dharma. Just like law. Law is given by the government. You cannot manufacture law. That is not law. So our perfection is there, how we are executing the order of God cent percent. One who has no conception of God, neither the order of God, they can manufacture religious system. But our system is different.

Philosophy Discussion on Socrates:

Hayagrīva: (aside:) This is picking up fine, the reading? Socrates considers the contemplation of beauty to be an activity of the wise man, but relative beauty in the mundane world is simply a reflection of absolute beauty. In the same way, good in the relative world is simply a reflection of the absolute good. In either case, absolute good or beauty is transcendental.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is our opinion. Beauty, knowledge, strength and opulence—everything—they are transcendental. Here, in this material world, it is perverted reflection. Just like the example is the mirage. A fool, animal, is thinking there is water in the desert, and he is running after it, and after sometimes he dies of thirst because there is not. But a sane man knows there is no water; it is simply a reflection by the sunshine, and this foolish animal is running after it. So he does not..., a sane man does not go for this false water. But another thing is that because there is no water in the desert, it does not mean there is no water. Water is there, but not there. Similarly happiness, beauty, opulence—everything is there. That is in the spiritual world. Here it is only a perverted reflection. So generally people have no information of the spiritual world; therefore they imagine something God, something spiritual world. They do not take that "This is imagination, this material world." When Kṛṣṇa says, tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti (BG 4.9), they are reading Bhagavad-gītā, but this simple thing they can not understand, that a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, after giving up this body—the body has to be given up—then what happens? Kṛṣṇa says mam eti, "He come to Me." And other system says that after death he goes to hell or goes to heaven. So that is to some extent fact. This human life, if he understands Kṛṣṇa, he goes to the eternal abode—you can take it as heaven or something. Otherwise he remains in this material world to undergo the same cycle of birth and death. That is hell. It can be taken in that way.

Philosophy Discussion on St. Augustine:

Hayagrīva: Augustine disagrees with Origen, who looked on the body as a prison. He says, "If the opinion of Origen and his followers where true, that matter was created, that souls might be enclosed in bodies as in penitentiaries for the punishment of sin, then the higher and lighter bodies should have been for those whose sins were slight, and the lower and heavier ones for those whose crimes were great." So...

Prabhupāda: That is Vedic conception. The soul, he, as he is, he is part and parcel of God, but he is imprisoned in different types of body. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that "I am the seed-giving father of all different forms of life, and the mother, material nature is the mother." That is actually very logical. Through the matter different varieties of living entities are coming out. From water, from earth, from air, even from fire, ether, everywhere, sarva-gataḥ, life, living entities are visible. Therefore the combination of five elements—earth, water, fire, air—that is the body of the living entities. And the soul is the part and parcel of the Supreme, and the souls are impregnated within this material world by God, and they come out through the womb of the mother, nature or individual mother, whatever you say. The soul is coming out of matter but it is not matter. The living entities, part and parcel of God, assuming different types of body, either you say according to pious or impious activities, or according to his pious and impious desires. Vāsanāḥ. So the desire actually is the cause of higher and lower grades of body, but the soul is the same. Therefore those who are advanced in spiritual consciousness, they see the same soul in, in each and every body. Either in the body of a dog or in the body of a brāhmaṇa, the same soul is existing, but according to different desires and karma one gets a different types of body.

Purports to Songs

Purport to Jaya Radha-Madhava -- New York, July 20, 1971:

"I shall love Kṛṣṇa if He is God." "He may be God or He may be whatever He is. It doesn't matter, but we love God, Kṛṣṇa." That's all. That is called unnalloyed love. "If Kṛṣṇa is God, then I shall love Him"—this is conditional love. This is not pure love. Kṛṣṇa may be God or whatever He may be, but by His wonderful acts, the Vrajavāsī, they are thinking, "Oh Kṛṣṇa, He is very wonderful child, maybe some demigod. Maybe some demigod." Because people are generally under impression that the demigods are all-powerful. They're powerful within this material world. But they do not know that Kṛṣṇa is above all of them. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). The highest demigod, Brahmā, is giving his opinion, "The supreme controller is Kṛṣṇa."

So as the residents of Vṛndāvana, they love Kṛṣṇa without any condition, similarly, Kṛṣṇa also loves them without any condition. Vraja-jana-vallabha giri-vara-dhārī. When the inhabitants of Vṛndāvana were in danger because they stopped Indra-yajña and Indra became very angry, and he sent very great, powerful cloud and rained over Vṛndāvana incessantly for seven days, so when the inhabitants became very much disturbed, Kṛṣṇa, although He was only seven years old boy, He saved them by lifting the Govardhana Hill. So He taught Indradeva, demigod, that "To stop your disturbance is the business of My little finger. That's all." So he came down to his knees. These things you'll find in Kṛṣṇa book. So as the Gopī-jana-vallabha, His only business is how to protect gopī-jana. So our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is how to become one of the gopī-jana. Then Kṛṣṇa will save us from any danger, even by lifting a hill or mountain. Kṛṣṇa is so kind and so powerful. When Kṛṣṇa lifted the hill, He did not practice some yoga system. And that is God. Although He was a child, He was playing like a child, He was dealing like a child, but when there was need, He was manifesting as God. That is Kṛṣṇa. That is Kṛṣṇa, not that He has to go and practice some yoga system. Then He becomes God. No. He's not that type of God, not manufactured God. He's God.