The conscience is prepared according to association. There is no standard conscience

Expressions researched:
"Conscience is not standard" |"no such standard as conscience" |"standard conscience"

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Śyāmasundara: He says that acting in accordance with a conscience is the right type of activity.

Prabhupāda: The conscience, the so-called conscience is created. You go on killing, your conscience will be killing conscience, "It is all right." The thief becomes accustomed to steal, the conscience will say, "Yes, I must steal. It is my right." So you can create your conscience in that way. By association, by misguiding, they also create their conscience. Just like the Christian religion says, "Thou shalt not kill," but they are killing, creating a conscience, "Yes, killing is all right." In the religion it is forbidden, "Thou shalt not kill," but they are creating another conscience, "It is right." The conscience is created by association. By good association, conscience is the good conscience and by bad association, a bad conscience is created. So there is no such standard as conscience. Conscience means discriminating power.

Śyāmasundara: He says that there is an absolute conscience, which means pure rationality. Whatever is purely rational is conscience.

Prabhupāda: Pure rationality is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That is purest. Unless one comes to that standard, the so-called conscience, so-called philosophy is of no value.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Prabhupāda: Conscience, yes. A thief, he also prepares his conscience. When he goes to steal he says, "I must, because I have to maintain my family. I do not know any other business, I must." This is his conscience. The other conscious is, "No, no, no I cannot steal. It is sin." So where is the conscience? Conscience is not standard. You make your, manufacture your own conscience. Therefore you have to take advice from Kṛṣṇa conscience. That is real conscience. Whether it is (indistinct) with Kṛṣṇa conscience, that is (indistinct). Otherwise he created own conscience.

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.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Prabhupāda: Then what is immoral? Everyone will say this is morality. Just like we say, following the Vedic scripture, we say kṛṣi-go-rakṣya-vāṇijyam (BG 18.44), go-rakṣya, to give protection to the cows. So according to the scripture we would say it is morality, and somebody will say no, killing a cow in some religious place, mosque or synagogue, this is morality. So which one is morality?

Hayagrīva: Well he, following Kant, he emphasized inner reality...

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?

Hayagrīva: They seem to think there is a standard within everyone.

Prabhupāda: So what is that standard? We say the order of Kṛṣṇa is standard. That's all. What Kṛṣṇa says, that is standard, that we have got some standard. Unless there is standard, you say conscience, high sense, morality... What is that? Define it. Just like we have got definition of God. I think nobody has got any definition of God. What is the standard that a person should be called God? I don't think... it is only in Vedic literature.

aiśvaryasya samagrasya

vīryasya yaśasaḥ śriyaḥ

jñāna-vairāgyayoś caiva

ṣaṇṇām iti bhaga iṅganā

(Viṣṇu Purāṇa 6.5.47)

Clear. What is religion? Dharmaṁ tu sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam (SB 6.3.19). This is the definition of God, and dharma means the order of God. Everything is standard. What is their standard conception? And if you have no standard conception, simply imaginary morality, imaginary controller, imaginary God, how it will help us?