The capitalist serves his family and the family serves the head man in terms of the eternal capacity of eternal being. In this way we can see no living being is exempted from the practice of rendering service to other living being, and therefore we can conclude that service is a thing which is the constant companion of the living being, and therefore it may be safely concluded that rendering of service by a living being is the eternal religion of the living being. When a man professes to belong to a particular type of faith with reference to the particular time and circumstances of birth, and thus one claims to be a Hindu, a Muslim, a Christian, Buddhist, or any other sect, and sub-sect, such designations are non-sanātana-dharma.
Concluded that... (Lectures)
Lectures
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures
Lecture on BG 1.10 -- London, July 12, 1973:
But in the previous verse he said, anye ca bahavaḥ śūrā mad-arthe tyakta-jīvitāḥ (BG 1.9). Tyakta-jīvitāḥ means "They have come to lay down their life for me." This is a foretelling because actually, whoever joined the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra, none of them returned. Tyakta-jīvitāḥ. So it is already concluded that although Duryodhana is very much proud of his military strength protected by Bhīṣma, still, tyakta-jīvitāḥ, they would surely die. This is the conclusion. Nānā-śastra-praharaṇāḥ sarve yuddha-viśāradāḥ. No, not a single person inexperienced was there. Yuddha-viśāradāḥ. Viśārada means very expert, fighting. Still, they would have to lay down their life because it is Kṛṣṇa's plan that all these fighting men, they were not ruling properly according to the tenets of Vedic injunctions. Therefore they were demons. Military strength for self-aggrandizement is demoniac. Military strength is required to rule over the kingdom but not to misuse them for aggression to others' country or others' kingdom. That was not allowed.
Lecture on BG 2.1 -- Ahmedabad, December 6, 1972:
So this is the picture of the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra, and Kṛṣṇa is ordered by Arjuna to place the chariot in between the two soldiers. Now, after seeing the soldiers and the kings and other party, Arjuna is aggrieved, so much so that he did not like to fight, and he was crying. Now, Dhṛtarāṣṭra asked Sañjaya: "Then what happened next?" Dhṛtarāṣṭra was very much anxious. He said: dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre samavetā yuyutsavaḥ (BG 1.1). "Now these two parties, yuyutsavaḥ, they, they, they were, both of them were desirous of fighting, yuyutsavaḥ. So one party is māmakāḥ, my sons, and the other party is Pāṇḍavas, the sons of my brother, Pāṇḍu." Māmakāḥ pāṇḍavāś caiva (BG 1.1). Now, the word is used: yuyutsavaḥ. "They assembled for fighting." Then what is the use of asking: kim akurvata, "Then what did they do?" It is natural to conclude that when they assemble for fighting, there must be fighting. But why he was asking: kim akurvata? The suspect was that because the parties assembled in the dharma-kṣetra, so they might have changed their ideas. Still, in India, if there is two fighting parties, they go to a temple and ask that "You say the right thing." So in the temple, still, in the villages, they do not dare to speak lies. Yes. The fighting and the misunderstanding becomes settled up.
Lecture on BG 2.1-10 and Talk -- Los Angeles, November 25, 1968:
Prabhupāda: These are his causes of perplexities, how he was thinking, that has been tried to be explained. Yes, go on.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Even if there were victory awaiting them, because their cause was justified, still if the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra should die in battle, it would be very difficult to live in their absence. Under the circumstances that would be another kind of defeat. All these considerations by Arjuna definitely proved that he was not only a great devotee of the Lord but that he was also highly enlightened and had complete control over his mind and senses. His desire to live by begging although he was born in the royal household is another sign of detachment. He was fully in the quality of forbearance as all these qualities combined with his faith in the words of instruction of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, his spiritual master, give evidence. It is concluded that Arjuna was quite fit for liberation. Unless the senses are controlled, there is no chance of elevation to the platform of knowledge, and without knowledge and devotion there is no chance of liberation. Arjuna was competent in all these attributes over and above his enormous attributes in his material relationships."
Prabhupāda: Go on. (coughs)
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Now I am confused about..."
Prabhupāda: Yes, what is there?
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Now I am confused about duty and have lost all composure because of weakness.
Lecture on BG 2.11 -- Mauritius, October 1, 1975:
So this red light and green light is being manipulated by the police, and the police is working under government. Similarly, this whole material nature is acting like red light or green light, but behind that red light and green light there is the supreme brain. That is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So as a layman or as child cannot understand how the red light and blue light, green light, is working... He sees simply, he thinks automatically it is being done. That is foolishness. It is not being automatically done. There is machine. There is manipulator behind this red light. So this is intelligence. Anyone who is concluding that "On the street the red light and green light is working automatically; there is no brain behind it," he's a rascal. Simi larly, the whole material cosmic manifestation is working... Even the big sun planet, it is also working under certain direction. Yac cakṣur eṣa savitā sakala-grahāṇām. Without sunrise nobody can see, not only in this planet, in other planets also, sakala-grahāṇām. So this sun planet is so important... Day and night, year and millions of years—everything is being calculated on the solar system.
Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 7, 1966:
All living entities—either human being, or animals or birds, or anywhere—you can see that they are individual. Then why should you not believe that in future they will remain individual? Do you follow? In the past they were individuals, in the present they are individuals, and why not in future they'll remain individuals? It is naturally concluded that they will continue to be individuals. Even we do not have any sufficient knowledge in either of these two theories, mixing up or keeping individual, but by our own small reasoning we can understand that in the future history we have information that there were individual persons. At the present moment also, we are seeing that there are individual persons. So why not in the future? How it is that in the future they'll mix up and become one, homogeneous thing? It is quite reasonable. And this conclusion is like this: just like in two hundred years before, in the month of March, the climatic position was like this. And in 1966 we find in March the climatic position is exactly the same. And in future... Naturally I conclude that in future in March the same climatic condition will be there. In astronomy also, if you find that in March, in such and such date, the sun rising is like this, and actually in the present March, month of March, 1966, we see the same exact time... And the whole calculation of astronomy is made like that. They prepare hundred years' astronomical charts. Hundred years'. How they do prepare? By this calculation, that in the past it was like this, at the present it is like this, so naturally, in future it will be like this. Just like you are speaking of the imminent springtime, that the nature, how will be decorate, how springtime, it will be nice, because you had past experience. So you are foretelling. It is not foretelling. From past experience, you are telling that this will take place. This will take place.
Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 7, 1966:
So this is another point, to understand things by our reasoning. But there are things which is beyond our reasoning. There are things, just like God, the existence of God. Of course, by our reasoning, we take it for granted that because everything has a creator... Just like we have this tape recorder before us. So we know that there is a manufacturer. Similarly, the typewriter, there is a manufacturer. In everything there is a father or manufacturer. Myself, I am, I am created by my father. My father was created by his father. Similarly, naturally we can conclude that this whole cosmic situation, the whole material manifestation—there is one creator. You see? So these are simple reasoning. It is not very hard to understand. But at the same time, there are things which are beyond our experience, beyond our reasoning, beyond our, I mean to say, conception. Those things are called acintya. Acintya means inconceivable. Inconceivable.
Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 7, 1966:
We Hindus, we accept Him the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but others, even not accepting Him the Supreme Personality of Godhead, they accept it as, at least, that He was a great personality. Therefore, besides the Hindu community, others, they are also consulting the knowledge. Now, my point is that when such a great personality, and when a..., we accept Him as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, then His version is right. What He says, that from our practical experience we can conclude that every individual persons who were in the past individuals, they are also individuals at the present, and they'll continue to be individuals, and this is by our common sense, but it is confirmed by Śrī Kṛṣṇa, whom we call the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and He is accepted as a great personality. He says, na tu eva ahaṁ jātu nāsam: "Don't think that I was not in existence." That means "I was in existence," not that "Just now I have come before you as God, as Śrī Kṛṣṇa. I was Śrī Kṛṣṇa in the past also, and I am Śrī Kṛṣṇa at the present.
Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 9, 1966:
Yes. How it is possible? They are also living entities. If I, if I take a drop of opium, I die. But they are living and they are eating and they are living there. So because it is impossible for me to eat opium and live, you cannot say that there are other livi..., that there cannot be no living entities there. Similarly you have experience that you cannot live in the fire. That does not mean that in the sun planet there is no living entities. There are living entities. Because in Bhagavad-gītā you'll find that living soul, as it is, it is not burnt by fire. It is not burned by fire. Because it is spiritual. The material elements has no power to destroy it. It is not burnt by fire. So in every planet it is concluded that every planet there are living entities. There are intelligent beings. And because in the higher planets there are more intelligent persons, beings, they are called demigods. The demigods means they have got, practically, qualification almost equal to the Supreme Lord. They have got such qualification.
Lecture on BG 2.13-17 -- Los Angeles, November 29, 1968:
So what is the difficulty of understanding this simple truth that the soul is different from the body? And so far eternity of the soul, that is also, there is proof. Because in childhood I was present, in boyhood I was present, in youthhood I was present, and in this old age I am still present. (baby fussing) So naturally it is concluded that when I change this body, I exist. When I change this body... This body will be changed. Tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ (BG 2.13). As the parents of this child... Now she is, say, one-feet long only. When this child will grow five feet long, the father and mother, will they cry, "Oh, my child! Where is my child, that one-feet long?" He knows. The parents know that my child is there, but changed the body. This is a fact. Similarly, "You are lamenting on the body of your grandfather and teacher, even they change their body, what is the cause of lamentation? They will exist." This is the beginning of instruction of Bhagavad-gītā or spiritual instruction. Unless one understands this simple fact, that the soul is different from this body, the soul is eternal, the body is temporary, changing... Because without understanding this, there is no spiritual education. A false education. If one identifies with this body, there is no understanding of spiritual knowledge.
Lecture on BG 2.13-17 -- Los Angeles, November 29, 1968:
Madhudviṣa: "Those who are seers of the truth have concluded that of the nonexistent there is no endurance and of the eternal there is no cessation. Seers have concluded this by studying the nature of both." Purport: "There is no endurance of the changing body. That the body is changing every moment by the actions and reactions of different cells is admitted by modern medical science, and thus growth and old age are taking place. But the spiritual soul exists permanently, remaining the same in all changing circumstances of the body and mind. That is the difference between matter and spirit. By nature the body is ever-changing and the soul is eternal. This conclusion is established by all classes of seers of the truth, impersonalists and personalists."
Prabhupāda: This is... So far the constitution of the spirit is concerned, it is eternal. That is accepted by all philosophers, personalists and impersonalists. The only difference is that the impersonalist says that after liberation, after getting freed from this bodily contamination, the spirit soul mixes with the Supreme Soul, all-pervading, without any individual existence. Just like the same example, that the small sky within the pitcher. When the pitcher is broken, the small sky within the pitcher mixes with the big sky. The Vaiṣṇava philosopher says that the small sky is individual. It mixes with the big sky, but it keeps its individuality. The example is given in this connection: just like a green bird entering a green tree. So when the bird enters the tree, nobody can find out where is the bird because the leaves of the tree are green and the bird is also green. Nobody can trace out. But that does not mean the bird has lost its individuality. The individuality is there.
Lecture on BG 2.14 -- Mexico, February 14, 1975:
So from last night discussion, it is to be concluded that we are not going to die. Kṛṣṇa said not only He, but also Arjuna and all other who were present in the battlefield, they will continue to exist. So how we shall exist? That is also discussed, that as we are existing now—we have accepted a type of material body and existing—similarly, after finishing this body, I'll accept another body and exist. Now, the question is that "In what kind of body I shall exist after finishing this body?" That is also explained, that if we like, we can exist in the higher planetary system where the duration of life is very, very long, the sense enjoyment is very, very perfect, more than this world. This we can have. Similarly, we can exist in lower grade of life like cats, dogs, insects, trees, aquatics, like that. And we can exist also in the same way as we are existing now. And we can exist also exactly like God—eternal life of bliss and knowledge.
Lecture on BG 2.15 -- Hyderabad, November 21, 1972:
Tattva-darśibhiḥ, those who are, who have seen the Absolute Truth, or those who have realized the Absolute Truth, they have concluded that the matter has no permanent existence and spirit soul has no annihilation. These two things would be understood. Asataḥ. Asataḥ means material. Nāsato vidyate bhāvaḥ. Asataḥ, anything asat... Anything in the material world, that is asat. Asat means will not exist, temporary. So you cannot expect permanent happiness in temporary world. That is not possible. But they are trying to become happy. So many plan-making commissions, utopian. But actually there is no happiness. So many commissions. But there is... Tattva-darśī, they know... Tattva-darśī, one has seen or has realized the Absolute Truth, he knows that in the material world there cannot be any happiness. This conclusion should be made. This is simply phantasmagoria, if you want to become happy in this material world.
Lecture on BG 2.16 -- London, August 22, 1973:
Pradyumna: "Those who are seers of the truth have concluded that of the nonexistent there is no endurance, and of the existent there is no cessation. This seers have concluded by studying the nature of both."
Prabhupāda:
- nāsato vidyate bhāvo
- nābhāvo vidyate sataḥ
- ubhayor api dṛṣṭo 'ntas
- tv anayos tattva-darśibhiḥ
- (BG 2.16)
There are two things, sat and asat. Sat means which exists, and asat means which does not exist, temporary. It appears and again disappears. That is asat. The example is just like the sky and the cloud. Cloud appears, exists for some time, again disappears. But the sky remains always. This is the distinction between sat and asat, try to understand. Sky, this material sky, this also does not exist, but so far our experience is concerned, we can understand the distinction between sat and asat. Permanent and temporary. We cannot say "nonexistent" exactly. Existing.
Lecture on BG 2.20-25 -- Seattle, October 14, 1968:
Prabhupāda: Manu-saṁhitā, yes.
Viṣṇujana: "...the lawbook for mankind, it is supported that a murderer should be condemned to death so that in his next life he will not have to suffer for the great sin he has committed. Therefore the king's punishment of hanging a murderer is actually beneficial. Similarly when Kṛṣṇa orders fighting, it must be concluded that violence is for the supreme justice, and as such, Arjuna should follow the instruction, knowing well that such violence committed in the act of fighting for justice is not at all violence. Because at any rate the man, or rather, the soul, cannot be killed. For the administration of justice, so-called violence is permitted. A surgical operation is not meant to kill the patient, but is for his cure. Therefore the fighting to be executed by Arjuna under the instruction of Kṛṣṇa is with full knowledge, and so there is no possibility of sinful reaction."
Prabhupāda: This is the distinction between violence and nonviolence. People are very much advocate of nonviolence, but they are committing, according to their estimation, they are committing every moment violence. But from higher standard there is practically no violence and the things which apparently appear to be violence, if it is properly executed... Just like under the order of high-court judge, one body is being executed. So that is not violence. A justice of higher order is not meant for committing violence. It is justice. Similarly, when, under the direction of the supreme justice, Kṛṣṇa, anything is done, apparently, although it appears violence, it is not violence. It is justice. This is to be understood.
Lecture on BG 2.26 -- Hyderabad, November 30, 1972:
There are many theories and philosophical speculation all over the world about understanding the soul. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is concluding that "Somebody's explaining wonderfully, somebody is hearing wonderfully, but even after hearing and speaking, it remains a mystery, and less intelligent person cannot understand it." That is the fact. There are so many theories. Therefore we have to accept the reality from the authority. By theorizing, by speculating, we cannot come into any decision. I may be very good logician. You may be greater logician. So you can defeat my logic. I can defeat your logic. So what is the conclusion? This kind of talking, it is called ku-tarka, unnecessarily talking, because you'll not come to my decision, I'll not come to your decision. So everyone is mysterious.
Lecture on BG 4.1 and Review -- New York, July 13, 1966:
Supreme consciousness, He has distinguished in this way, that we, the, in the battlefield... He first of all made this clear, that "My dear Arjuna, yourself, Myself and all these people who have assembled before us for fighting, all of them as living entities, they existed, and they are existing at present, and they'll continue to exist. They will continue to exist." That means the soul is eternal. Then He has described the nature of the soul and the nature of the body very nicely and has concluded that soul is eternal, but the body is not eternal. Antavanta ime dehā nityasyoktāḥ śarīriṇaḥ (BG 2.18). Śarīriṇaḥ means one who possesses this body. This thing we have discussed in the second chapter, and in the third chapter Arjuna is advised to adopt the means of karma-yoga. For spiritual emancipation we have to act on the platform of consciousness, and because we are now engaged in material engagement, it is not possible for us to at once get rid of this material consciousness, but we have gradually to get out of it. And that is called karma-yoga. Karma-yoga means you have to adopt this process of karma-yoga in such a way that even within your material body you shall be able to act on spiritual platform, consciousness. That we have already discussed.
Lecture on BG 4.1 -- Montreal, August 24, 1968:
Everywhere the same thing is. Everywhere the same thing. But it is concluded that sarva-guhyatamam: "I am speaking to you." in the Eighteenth Chapter. Just open the Eighteenth Chapter. Sarva, giving up meat-eating, giving up all kinds of intoxicants including coffee and tea, they are giving up illicit sex life—don't you think this is not tapasya? Great tapasya, at least for this country. So idaṁ te nātapaskāya. Without undergoing austerity, this science is difficult to understand. Therefore it is warned, idaṁ te nātapaskāya. Now people ask us, "Swamiji, why you make condition?" The condition, if I don't make condition, he'll not be able to understand it. But I don't make condition in the beginning. I invite everyone to come and chant Hare Kṛṣṇa. Then you automatically accept all conditions. This is so nice. Because he becomes purified. When he's a little bit purified, he immediately accepts all conditions. So those who are not tapasvīs, or voluntarily accepting some, I mean to say, inconvenience... Suppose I am habituated to doing something, liquor or something. If I am stopped, there is inconvenience. But if somebody accepts voluntarily, "Yes, for Kṛṣṇa's sake I shall accept it," then I am stopped, there is inconvenience. But if somebody accepts voluntarily, "Yes, for Kṛṣṇa's sake I shall accept it," that is tapasya.
Lecture on BG 4.7-9 -- New York, July 22, 1966:
So Kṛṣṇa says that "Even if you see a person immoral, but he is completely engaged in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then it should be concluded that he is a saint." He's a saintly person. That is the description given by Kṛṣṇa of sādhu. Api cet su-durācāro bhajate mām ananya-bhāk, sādhur eva sa mantavyaḥ (BG 9.30). So in other words, He says, "Any person who is engaged in Kṛṣṇa consciousness... Never mind, he might have something externally immoral habits due to his past association. It doesn't matter." So some way or other, one should be Kṛṣṇa conscious. And then, gradually, he will become a saintly person; as he goes on executing this process of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then, with his advancement, he becomes a perfect saint. That you'll find in the Bhagavad-gītā. And how Kṛṣṇa says that even if he's externally a little immoral... Of course, a devotee or a person who is Kṛṣṇa conscious, he's never immoral. But it may be that due to his past association he may appear to be immoral or he may fall down, fall down. Due to habits, we may sometimes fall down.
Lecture on BG 4.7-10 -- Los Angeles, January 6, 1969:
That is the highest perfection of spiritual existence attainable without individual personality. This is a fearful stage of life, devoid of perfect knowledge of spiritual existence. Furthermore, there are many persons who cannot understand spiritual existence at all. Being embarrassed by so many theories and by contradictions and various types of philosophical speculation, they become disgusted or angry, and foolishly they conclude that there is no supreme cause and that everything is ultimately void. Such people are in diseased conditions of life. Some of them are too materially attached and therefore do not give attention to spiritual life, some of them want to merge into the supreme spiritual cause, and some of them disbelieve in everything, being angry at all sorts of spiritual speculation out of hopelessness. This last class of men take to the shelter of some kind of intoxication, and their respective hallucinations are sometimes accepted as spiritual visions. One has to get rid of all three stages of attachment to the material world: the negligence of spiritual life, fear of spiritual, personal identity, and the concept of void that underlies the frustration of life. To get free of these three stages in the material concept of life, one has to take complete shelter of the Lord, guided by the bona fide spiritual master, and follow the penances of disciplinary and regulative principles of devotional life. The last stage of such devotional life is called bhāva, or transcendental love of Godhead.
Lecture on BG 4.11 -- New York, July 27, 1966:
Why we select one leader? The leader should be such a leader that they shall, he shall make happy and prosperous persons who follow him. That is the question of leadership. But actually, if we think in sober mind and cool head, we can understand that although we are following leadership, may be whatever he may be, still, we are not happy. Now, the brāhmaṇa concluded that "This following leadership is the following leadership of my lust." I select one leader according to my lust.
Just like in political parties there are many leaders, but I like some particular type of political pursuit. Someone likes Democratic political pursuit; someone likes Congress political pursuit; someone likes Communist political pursuit. So we have got different desires. So practically, if we study very minutely, then we are not following the leadership but we are following our particular lust. I have got a particular lust within me, and when I find somebody corroborating with that particular lust, oh, I accept him, that leader. That is my position. Therefore I do not follow anyone's leadership, but I follow my own leadership. That is the lust. I want to do, I like to do something, and if somebody says, "Oh, yes, it is very nice," "Oh, you are my leader. If you confirm my lust, then you are my leader." That is the material leadership.
Lecture on BG 4.11-12 -- New York, July 28, 1966:
The matter cannot develop. Matter cannot develop. That you have got experience. A dead body does not develop. A living body develops. A child, when it comes out of the mother's womb, if the child is dead, oh, there is no further development, however you can keep the child in a very antiseptic way preserved. No. There is no development. Therefore it is concluded that the supreme spirit, Kṛṣṇa, from Him everything has come out. Everything has come out. Any stage you take, that is Kṛṣṇa.
And whenever I surrender... Because my position is to surrender. I am spiritual, that atom, however big body I can develop. I can develop the body like an elephant, but the elephant is conducted under the direction of a man. You know? Such a big animal is controlled by a small boy of human being. So everyone is under control. We cannot deny that. So we have to... We are under control of different dimensions of that spiritual energy covered by material energy. But the real control is from Kṛṣṇa. That we have to understand.
Lecture on BG 4.34 -- New York, August 14, 1966:
Now, this verse we are discussing in our last meeting. Śrī Kṛṣṇa, Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, has concluded that all kinds of sacrifices that we can expected, we are expected to do, the best sacrifice is to acquire knowledge, acquire knowledge. Because whole, our this material conditioned life is due to ignorance. Therefore the purpose of sacrifice, penance, yoga, and philosophical discussion, everything—the ultimate aim is to acquire knowledge.
And even in that knowledge field also... Of course, transcendental knowledge, as we have discussed already, they are viewed in different, three different angles of vision: the knowledge of Brahmavāda, or impersonal, impersonal Absolute Truth, and the knowledge of Paramātmā, the localized Supersoul, and the knowledge of Bhagavān, or the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There are different stages of development of knowledge. But the first beginning knowledge is that we must understand that "I am not this body. I am spirit soul, and my aim of life should be how to get out of this material entanglement." That is knowledge. That is the beginning of knowledge.
Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Los Angeles, March 12, 1970:
So everything... In the Brahma-saṁhitā, we understand, every planet has a different situation, not that everything of this nature. So it is... It is not complete idea. "Because you can know what is sunshine, therefore you can know what is sun-god or sun disc"—no, that can (not) be done. Similarly, because you have some spiritual light, impersonal light... What is that impersonal light? The whole Buddha philosophy, impersonal philosophy, is looking to that impersonal. What is that? That "Because here in this material world I have got bad experience of this personal existence, therefore I conclude that there must be something impersonal. That is nice." That is thinking in the opposite way. But that is not actual fact. Just like a diseased person. Lying in one side, he is getting pain. He thinks, "If I lie down on the other side I will be relieved." That he is thinking, but so long he is diseased, there is no question of relief. He is thinking like that, this way or that way. Just like in the materialistic way they are... Their last point of happiness is sex life. That's all. So they have enjoyed sex life in this way; now they are trying to enjoy sex life in that way. But the enjoyment is the same. There is no more enjoyment. That is finished. You can eschew in so many ways, but the result is the same. Similarly, unless you have got perfect knowledge of the Absolute Truth, if you think of the Absolute Truth as something opposite of your present status, that is not perfect knowledge. The impersonal knowledge is like that, something opposite of this material world.
Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Auckland, April 15, 1972:
So this is the process of studying Bhagavad-gītā. So if you study Bhagavad-gītā and conclude that the Absolute Truth is nirākāra, I don't think you are making very much progress. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, tad viddhi praṇipātena paripraśnena sevayā (BG 4.34). You try to understand this science by praṇipāta, praṇipātena, by surrendering, not by serving yourself, that "I am very learned scholar. Why shall I surrender?" No. That is the first thing wanted. If you want to understand Bhagavad-gītā, then you must take the direction from the Bhagavad-gītā. The first direction is evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ (BG 4.2). "All the rājarṣis, they understood Bhagavad-gītā by the paramparā system." That paramparā system, Kṛṣṇa also says, imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam: (BG 4.1) "I spoke first of all this system of yoga system mentioned in the Bhagavad-gītā." That is bhakti-yoga. What is that yoga system? Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). This is the ultimate instruction of Bhagavad-gītā. Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ (BG 15.15). "All the Vedas, they are teaching only to understand Me, Kṛṣṇa."
Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Auckland, April 15, 1972:
Indian guest (1): So therefore you conclude that when you become enlightened, you will see the God in form of human nature?
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is after. In the beginning you have to accept this form, but when you make advance, then you will see always.
- premāñjana-cchurita-bhakti-vilocanena
- santaḥ sadaiva hṛdayeṣu vilokayanti
- yaṁ śyāmasundaram acintya-guṇa-svarūpaṁ
- govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi
- (Bs. 5.38)
When you... First of all you begin, how to try to learn how to love God. And when you are actually on the platform of love, prema, premāñjana-cchurita-bhakti, you will see God always in His form. He becomes revealed. You haven't got to try to see, but He will reveal. Svayam eva sphuraty adaḥ. Sevonmukhe hi jihvādau svayam eva sphuraty adaḥ (Brs. 1.2.234). When you engage your tongue... That beginning is tongue. Jihvādau sevonmukhe. If you begin your service... God cannot be understood by our challenging mood. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, "First of all surrender. Then try to understand." Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja, ahaṁ tvāṁ sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣayiṣyāmi (BG 18.66). When you surrender, and by that surrendering process, when you are free from the resultant action of sinful activities, then you can appreciate God, not that God is my order-supplier: "Please come. I will see You." No. Yeṣāṁ tv anta-gataṁ pāpaṁ janānāṁ puṇya. You are reading Bhagavad-gītā. You know all these things.
Lecture on BG 7.7 -- Bombay, April 1, 1971:
So from the ancient literature we understand that kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). There are many incarnation of Kṛṣṇa, expansion of Kṛṣṇa, svāṁśa and vibhinnāṁśa. Some of the expansions are direct personal expansions, just like Lord Rāma, Nṛsiṁha-deva, Varāha. There are many. Rāmādi-mūrtiṣu kalā-niyamena tiṣṭhan (Bs. 5.39). Kṛṣṇa is existing, expanding Himself in various forms like Rāma, Nṛsiṁha, Varāha, and so many others. There are different kinds of incarnations, avatāras—śaktyāveśāvatāra, guṇāvatāra, manvantarāvatāra, yugāvatāra. Many incarnations. And in the Bhāgavata it is concluded that the Lord's incarnations are so numerous that you cannot count. Just like if you sit down on the bank of a river, you cannot keep an account of the waves, how many waves are passing, similarly, there is no account how many incarnations are coming out from Kṛṣṇa. But Kṛṣṇa is above all. Here Kṛṣṇa personally says, and it is confirmed by all the sages, authorities, formerly by great sages like Nārada Muni, Vyāsadeva, Asita, Devala, and in the modern age by all the ācāryas: Śaṅkarācārya, Madhvācārya Rāmānujācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī—so many other ācāryas—Lord Caitanya. Everyone accepts that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. How can you deny? We have to be guided by the ācāryas. Ācāryavān puruṣo veda. One who follows the principles of ācāryas, he knows the things as they are. That is the verdict.
Lecture on BG 8.15-20 -- New York, November 17, 1966:
But there is such planet where living entities like you and me are there. We have got this information from Bhagavad-gītā and other Vedic literatures. All planets, they are full of living entities. Don't think simply on the earth we are here, and in all planets are vacant, no. From your experience, you can see that no place in this earth is vacant, without living entities. Even you dig earth, you'll find some worms. You, you go deep into the water, you'll find some living entities. You just analyze that outer space, air, you'll find so many living entities. So how you can conclude that other planets are without living entities? They are all full of living entities.
Lecture on BG 9.34 -- August 3, 1976, New Mayapur (French farm):
Because we want material happiness, therefore there is difficulty. So, material happiness, you have got experience, it cannot give us satisfaction. The big, big countries, America, in Europe, and so many, they have advanced in material happiness, but actually they are not happy. Material happiness cannot give us happiness. Happiness, when we actually come to Kṛṣṇa and love Him... Happiness means also love. Either you love your family or your country or your society or your wife, your children, by loving there is happiness. But this loving process is not giving us happiness. We are becoming frustrated. Therefore the real lovable object being Kṛṣṇa, if we make progress to that point, then we shall be happy. This is the point. Mām evaiṣyasi asaṁśayaḥ (BG 18.68). So if this is concluded, then where is difficulty to execute Kṛṣṇa consciousness? That is my point. Now it is concluded that if we come to Kṛṣṇa and love Him, then that is the highest perfection of our life. Now to attain that highest perfection of life, where is the difficulty? That is the point I am asking.
Lecture on BG 13.22-24 -- Melbourne, June 25, 1974:
Kṛṣṇa, after analyzing the material elements—earth, water, fire, air, mind, intelligence, ego—he concluded that "These eight kinds of prakṛti, energy, they are My separated energy. But above this energy, there is another superior energy." Apareyam. Aparā means inferior. This matter is inferior and the living entity, on account of having life, it is superior energy. Because the living entities, they are trying to exploit the resources of this material nature. That is going on all over the world. A country is supposed to be very rich which has become able to exploit the material resources. So this is the going on.
Lecture on BG 16.6 -- South Africa, October 18, 1975:
So janmādy asya yataḥ, that is explained in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. What is that janmādy asya yataḥ, the original source of everything? What is that? It is a matter or a living being? But the two things, we have got experience. We see that everything is coming... Suppose this microphone, it has come from matter and... Actually it has not come from matter, it has come from the living being who has manufactured it. But we foolishly concluding that it is a combination of matter. Who has combined this matter to make it usable? So this is less knowledge, that this is combination of several parts of material things and it is working. But who has manufactured those different parts of the electronics and other things? It has not come out all of a sudden from the sky. It has been manufactured by some living entity. So this is knowledge.
Lecture on BG 16.7 -- Sanand, December 26, 1975:
So we should generally conclude that anyone who does not take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, they fall in the groups of duṣkṛtinaḥ, mūḍhāḥ, narādhamāḥ, māyayāpaḥṛta-jñānāḥ. So in the beginning we discussed nāpy ācāraḥ, sadācāra. So even one is short of sadācāra, Kṛṣṇa says, api cet su-durācāro bhajate mām ananya-bhāk, sādhur eva sa mantavyaḥ (BG 9.30). Even one is not fully in sadācāra but if he has taken Kṛṣṇa consciousness fully, he is a sādhu. So to take to this Kṛṣṇa consciousness is made very easy during this Kali-yuga.
Lecture on BG 16.8 -- Tokyo, January 28, 1975:
But you have not seen who is Japanese government, president. How do you conclude there is government? You have not seen the president or the supreme head. So how do you say there is government? We have not seen who is the president, who is the prime minister. Then how do we conclude that "There must be government. Otherwise how it is going on so nicely." You may see, you may not see, so many things, but does it mean... That is not a good logic, that "I have not seen." I have not seen, but the sound is coming. The car is there. There must be somebody there. Even if we do not see, you have to conclude like that. Just like there is sound. The sound is of car, and the car, there must be one driver. You have not seen. So how do you conclude there is a driver? How do you conclude? And why do you give stress on your seeing power? What is the power of your seeing? You cannot see. Now you cannot see the car. It is beyond your seeing range or beyond the wall. Then how you conclude that there is a car? And if there is a car, there is a driver. If there is driver, there are passengers. So how do you conclude all this? Why do you give this... This is childish reason, "I cannot see." You cannot see; therefore there is no existence. That is not good logic.
Lecture on BG 16.8 -- Tokyo, January 28, 1975:
Nitāi: "The demoniac conclude that the world is a phantasmagoria. There is no cause, no effect, no controller, no purpose: everything is unreal. They say that this cosmic manifestation arises due to chance material actions and reactions. They do not think that the world was created by God for a certain purpose. They have their own theory: that the world has come about in its own way and that there is no reason to believe that there is a God behind it. For them there is no difference between spirit and matter, and they do not accept the Supreme Spirit. Everything is matter only, and the whole cosmos is supposed to be a mass of ignorance."
Prabhupāda: Therefore they say chemical evolution. They cannot think of spirit. Go on.
Lecture on BG 16.8 -- Tokyo, January 28, 1975:
Nitāi: "According to them, everything is void, and whatever manifestation exists is due to our ignorance in perception. They take it for granted that all manifestation of diversity is a display of ignorance. Just as in a dream we may create so many things which actually have no existence, so when we are awake we shall see that everything is simply a dream. But factually, although the demons say that life is a dream, they are very expert in enjoying this dream. And so, instead of acquiring knowledge, they become more and more implicated in their dreamland. They conclude that as a child is simply the result of sexual intercourse between man and woman, this world is born without any soul. For them it is only a combination of matter that has produced the living entities, and there is no question of the existence of the soul. As many living creatures come out from the perspiration and from a dead body without any cause, similarly, the whole living world has come out from the material combinations of the cosmic manifestation. Therefore material nature is the cause of this manifestation, and there is no other cause. They do not believe in the words of Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad-gītā, mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ sūyate sa-carācaram: (BG 9.10) 'Under My direction the whole material world is moving.' In other words, amongst the demons there is no perfect knowledge of the creation of this world; every one of them has a particular theory of his own. According to them, one interpretation of the scriptures is as good as another, for they do not believe in a standard understanding of the scriptural injunctions."
Prabhupāda: This is demonic. Now any question? (pause) This demonic conclusion will not help us. Then we shall remain in ignorance; there is no knowledge. Any question? Can you put any question on behalf of the demons? (laughter)
Lecture on BG 16.8 -- Tokyo, January 28, 1975:
Prabhupāda: Any of our friends, Japanese friends here?
Japanese man: Yes, I have one question. You mentioned that we can hear a car from outside, but we cannot see car. But...
Prabhupāda: No, we can see car. But just like here we are sitting. We do not see the car, but the sound is there, but you conclude that there is a car. So therefore seeing is not always the sound reasoning. Even without seeing, we can conclude there is car. That is my point.
Japanese man: And what is the example of sound of God in this world?
Prabhupāda: Hmm?
Japanese man: Just like your example of God and God's sound in this world.
Prabhupāda: Sound is the original ingredient of creation.
Trivikrama: He's asking how can we see God in this world. Although we can't see Him, how can we...?
Japanese man: Can hear His sound.
Prabhupāda: You can see. You can hear the sound Kṛṣṇa. Are you not hearing Hare Kṛṣṇa? So that is a question of realization. You go on hearing, hearing. The child cannot understand what is the sound. The sound is the same. The car is going on. But his father can understand that with this sound this car is going on. But child cannot understand. So you begin hearing. Then gradually your ignorance will be cleansed, and then you understand that the sound is for car. Therefore you have to begin to hear the sound. Everyone is hearing, but those who are not experienced they cannot understand that this sound is of the car. But the... One understands or not understands, that doesn't matter. But the sound is of the car. That's a fact. So those who are experienced, they are understanding; those who are not experienced, they do not understand. That is the difference. It is the difference of experience. But the sound is of the car—that is a fact. Similarly, the Hare Kṛṣṇa sound is God. Those who are advanced, they can understand. And those who are not yet advanced, by hearing, hearing, they will understand. You want to see God. That is your idea?
Lecture on BG 17.1-3 -- Honolulu, July 4, 1974:
First of all we are very minute part and parcel of Bhagavān. Mamaivāṁśaḥ. So, according to our position, we have got our knowledge, we have got our understanding, proportionately. Just like fire, big fire and a small spot fire. Both of them are fire, but you cannot compare the small fragment of fire with the big fire. That is not possible. The big ocean and a small drop of water from the ocean. Because the taste of the small drop of ocean is the same, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they conclude that "I am the same." But they have no common sense that the small drop of water, although the quality is the same, it is very small. So our knowledge is therefore imperfect. Although we are qualitatively one with God, still, being very small quantity, our power, our knowledge, our understanding—everything is proportionately small. You must first of all understand that, that we are simultaneously one and different. One means qualitatively one. A small particle of gold, you can call it gold, but it is not the gold mine, This is called dvaita-vāda, advaita-vāda. The rascals they think "Because I am gold, I am as good as the gold mine." No, That is not. Gold mine is very big, powerful, immense value. So we should not forget this.
Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures
Lecture on SB 1.1.1 -- London, August 6, 1971:
So this Brahma-saṁhitā was written by Lord Brahmā, and in Brahma-saṁhitā the name of Kṛṣṇa is there. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1), beginning. That is the fifth chapter. There were hundred chapters. Only fifth chapter is available. So in the beginning of that fifth chapter, Brahmā says, īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). So how these rascals can conclude that Kṛṣṇa was liv..., some years, some hundred or five hundred years ago there was a beel boy, he was very powerful. So in this way, these rascal so-called scholars they are misleaded public. Therefore we call them simply rascals. They do not know what is the truth, and still, they write books, they write commentaries unauthorizedly and mislead public. This is going on. Kṛṣṇa is not manufactured. In the Brahma-saṁhitā there is complete description of Kṛṣṇa:
- īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ
- sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ
- anādir ādir govindaḥ
- sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam
- (Bs. 5.1)
The cause of all causes. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Vedānta-sūtra says, "The Absolute Truth is that which is the origin, original cause." Original cause. The scientists, they are trying to find out the original cause of creation, but they are creating their own imagination. "There was a chunk, and it burst out, and then planets came out." Like that. (laughter) And wherefrom this chunk came, you nonsense? So this is going on.
Lecture on SB 1.2.10 -- Bombay, December 28, 1972:
So blind man is going, somebody is catching the leg. So they, "Oh, elephant is just like a pillar, a column." And somebody is studying the tail, somebody is studying the trunk. So different knowledge, because they have no eyes. And one who sees the elephant as it is, he can understand that elephant is neither column, nor a trunk, nor this; he is a complete body. Similarly, those who are trying to understand the Absolute Truth by dint of blind knowledge, they come to the understanding of impersonal Brahman, brahmeti. That is also truth, just like you touch the elephant, a blind man touching the elephant, but because he hasn't got eyes he is concluding that elephant is like, just like a column. But he has touched. Similarly, either the impersonalist or the yogi or the bhakta, they have come to the Absolute Truth; therefore it is called advaya-jñāna. There is no difference between impersonal Brahman and localized Paramātmā and the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There is no difference, but still there is difference. This is called acintya-bhedābheda-tattva: inconceivable one and simultaneously different. The same example can be given, that when the sunshine enters into your room, it means that sun has entered, but at the same time the sun is far, far away from you. Similarly, to understand Brahman means the Absolute Truth is sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ, īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). If you simply try to understand impersonal Brahman, then you simply understand sat aṁśa, the eternity; paramātmā, citaṁśa; and ānandāṁśa is Kṛṣṇa. Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12).
Lecture on SB 1.2.13 -- Vrndavana, October 24, 1972:
Pradyumna: Translation: "O best among the twice-born, it is therefore concluded that the highest perfection one can achieve, by discharging his prescribed duties, or dharma, according to caste divisions and order of life, is to please the Lord Hari." (SB 1.2.13)
Prabhupāda: Ataḥ pumbhir-dvija-śreṣṭhā varṇāśrama-vibhāgaśaḥ. Varṇa and āśrama. This varṇāśrama is very important thing in the human society. Unless one accepts these principles of varṇa and āśrama, they're animal society. That is not human society. Four varṇas—the brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya, and śūdra, four divisions of the society; and āśrama, spiritual order—brahmacārī, gṛhastha, vānaprastha, and sannyāsa. This is Vedic culture, varṇa and āśrama. Any society which is devoid of this vedic culture varna and asrama. That is not accepted as human society.
Lecture on SB 1.2.16 -- Vrndavana, October 27, 1972:
So to become Kṛṣṇa conscious, that is the highest perfection of life. Paraṁ Brahman. Paraṁ Brahman. Brahman, impersonal effulgence. Just like the sunshine. Then localized sun, the sun globe. Then further, if you able to enter the sun globe, you'll find there is a predominating deity. There are also cities and palaces—everything, just like this planet. But this planet is made prominently of earth, and that planet is one of the elements, material elements, earth, water, fire, air. So if this planet is made of earth, why not other planet made of fire? What is the scientific reason to deny it? Because I cannot live in the fire, it does not mean other living entities cannot live there. There are different kinds of living entities. Just like you cannot live within the water, within the ocean, but there are other living entities... Just like fish. They live very comfortably within the water. So why should we conclude that there is no life in the sun planet or moon planet? This is not perfect knowledge. From Vedic books we can understand that this moon planet is one of the heavenly planets and people live there. They are demigods. Their duration of life is very long. And one can go to that planet by performing the rituals. They are described. In the Bhagavad-gītā also it is said, yānti deva-vratā devān. If you are serious to go to the planets where demigods live, you can go. There are rules and regulations, rituals. Just like if you want to pass law examination, you prepare for that examination, and you pass, you become a lawyer. You become an engineer. Similarly, any planet you want to go, you prepare in this life. Don't degrade yourself to become again cats and dogs, but you prepare yourself to be promoted to the other, higher planetary system... As it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, ūrdhvaṁ gacchanti sattva-sthāḥ (BG 14.18). You can go there.
Lecture on SB 1.3.28 -- Los Angeles, October 3, 1972:
This is Māyāvāda theory. But the śāstra does not say. Kṛṣṇa Himself says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam: (BG 9.11) "These rascals, they also consider Me like one ordinary human being because I have come here just like human being." He, He has said, mūḍho nābhijānāti: "Deride at Me." This is their... To consider Kṛṣṇa's body as made of flesh and bone, that means minimizing the value of Kṛṣṇa. Dr. Radhakrishnan has done it. No. Kṛṣṇa, the Absolute is, Absolute Truth is always person. Puṁsaḥ, here it is said. Ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ (SB 1.3.28). The incarnation... When some incarnation comes, He's expansion of the person, not that He accepts this material body. Ete ca aṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ. The, all the descriptions of the incarnations have been given before this verse. So therefore, it is concluding that "All these incarnations, they are expansion of the spiritual body of the Supreme Personality of Godhead." Not that the Absolute Truth is imperson, and He, He's accepting a form with material body. No. That is not. That is not. Just like here, Deity. He is also expansion, arcā-vigraha. Arcā-avatāra. Don't think that it is made of stone or metal. It is expansion of Kṛṣṇa. You want to worship. Kṛṣṇa has expanded Himself to come here to accept your service. Don't think it is made of stone. So ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28).
Lecture on SB 1.3.29 -- Los Angeles, October 4, 1972:
This is called phala-śruti,(?) result. This chapter was describing different incarnations of God, and it is concluded that kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). There were many incarnations, and incarnations are coming incessantly just like there are waves in the ocean or in the river. You cannot sit down and count how many waves are flowing. As it is not possible, similarly, you cannot also count how many incarnations are there, how they are coming out. But the most important of them are described. And the conclusion is made that Kṛṣṇa is the origin, as it is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā. Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ. "I am the origin of everything, even the incarnations." Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate (BG 10.8). Everyone, all incarnations, all demigods, all living entities, all energies. The Vedānta-sūtra also confirms, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). The Absolute Truth is that which is the original source of everything.
Lecture on SB 1.5.22 -- Vrndavana, August 3, 1974:
Pradyumna: Translation: "Learned circles have positively concluded that the infallible purpose of the advancement of knowledge, namely austerities, study of the Vedas, sacrifice, chanting of hymns and charity, culminates in the transcendental descriptions of the Lord, who is defined in choice poetry."
Devotee: Would you like the stand to be lower?
Prabhupāda: No.
- idaṁ hi puṁsas tapasaḥ śrutasya vā
- sviṣṭasya sūktasya ca buddhi-dattayoḥ
- avicyuto 'rthaḥ kavibhir nirūpito
- yad-uttamaśloka-guṇānuvarṇanam
- (SB 1.5.22)
So this is our mission, that find out the original cause. That is scientific research. All the scientists, they are trying to find out the original cause. That is advancement of education. They are analyzing one after another. But till now, they could not find it out. Big, big scientists have tried. But they could not... Only theory: "This is the original cause. This is the original cause."
Lecture on SB 1.5.22 -- Vrndavana, August 3, 1974:
Now, to be ascertained, education, that why it is called Kṛṣṇa is the origin. That is research work. How it has been...? Just like I give you the hint of research work that, Kṛṣṇa says that "The earth is my energy, separated energy." And earth is the cause of the wood. And wood is the cause of the fire. Fire is the cause of melting... So many, so many. You can go. So idaṁ hi puṁsas tapasaḥ...kavibhir nirūpitaḥ. Describe the attributes of Kṛṣṇa. You can write. Just like you can write volumes of books on this table. If you are intelligent enough, you can make research work on the table. But in that research work, conclude that Kṛṣṇa is the origin. A carpenter can, he can write about Kṛṣṇa, if he's thoughtful. Anyone. Therefore it is said, yad-uttamaśloka-guṇānuvarṇanam. Whatever your profession is there, you know that the original cause is Kṛṣṇa. Now make research work and find out how Kṛṣṇa is the original cause. That is education. That is wanted. Am I right?
Lecture on SB 1.7.28-29 -- Vrndavana, September 25, 1976:
In this material world there are two energies working: material and spiritual. There cannot be only material. There must be spiritual energy. So they say that there is no life, that means there is no spiritual energy. It cannot be accepted. It cannot be. It is out of question. Because here we find jīva-bhūtāṁ mahā-bāho yayedaṁ dhāryate jagat (BG 7.5). There must be living entity who is conducting this material energy. This body is very beautiful, very useful. Why? Because the spiritual energy, the soul, is there. Otherwise, it has no value. So when there is a planet, when there are other things, how it has developed? This is a reasoning. This is sense. Because the material energy cannot develop without spiritual energy. Jīva-bhūtāṁ mahā-bāho yayedaṁ dhāryate jagat. There cannot be anything material without spiritual energy. What is this body? How this body came into existence? Because the spiritual energy, the soul, is there. A dead child born, it will not grow because the spiritual energy is not there. So it has to be concluded that as soon as there is material, a manifestation of the material energy, there must be spiritual energy.
Lecture on SB 1.7.51-52 -- Vrndavana, October 8, 1976:
So many... Absolute Truth is manifested in so many features. But Kṛṣṇa is the original. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. Ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28).
It is summarized in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that there are so many descriptions of the incarnation of Viṣṇu, but at the end, Vyāsadeva concludes that whatever incarnations are described here, they are aṁśa-kalā. Aṁśa means direct expansion, and kalā means expansion of the expansion. Just like Kṛṣṇa, the first expansion is Balarāma, Baladeva. And the next expansion is Saṅkarṣaṇa, Vāsudeva, Aniruddha, Pradyumna. The next expansion is Nārāyaṇa. The next expansion again second catur-vyūha. Saṅkarṣaṇa again. Dvitīya-catur-vyūha. Then next expansion, Viṣṇu, Mahā-Viṣṇu. Next expansion, Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu. And next expansion is Kṣīrodakaśāyī Viṣṇu. In this way, there are different expansion, but kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. Ādyaṁ puruṣaṁ śāśvatam. Kṛṣṇa is the original person. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat (BG 7.7). "I am not expansion of anybody." Sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). They are all īśvaras, controller. Viṣṇu-tattva is controller always. Mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ sūyate sa-carācaram (BG 9.10). Everywhere Viṣṇu is the Supreme Controller.
Lecture on SB 1.8.32 -- Mayapura, October 12, 1974:
Now, if the Supreme Lord, God, has no hand, no leg, then how He can walk? Just like Sākṣi-gopāla. Sākṣi-gopāla, He was Deity, apparently showing as made of stone, and the devotee's asking, "My Lord, Gopāla, You have to come to give witness." So Gopāla was smiling and said, "How you expect a Deity can walk that I shall go to give witness for you?" The bhakta said, "If the Deity can speak and smile, He can walk also." That is the conviction of devotee. And the other party, they agreed that "If Gopāla comes to give witness, my sister will be given to you." He... Because he's atheist, he is thinking that "How the Deity will come? He'll never come. Then I shall not have to fulfill my promise." He is... He was confident like that. That is the difference between a devotee and nondevotee. The nondevotee cannot understand. They will take it that "Once you say that God has no eyes, then how He can see? God has no leg. Then how can He walk? God has no hand. Then how can He accept your offering?" Therefore the conclusion should be that ajo 'pi, although Kṛṣṇa never takes birth, and again He takes birth. He has taken birth. Therefore His birth is not like our birth. This is to be understood. He has no birth, but He has taken birth. Therefore, an intelligent man will conclude that His birth is not like our birth.
Lecture on SB 1.15.37 -- Los Angeles, December 15, 1973:
So now he concludes that things have deteriorated. It is not for Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira's fault, but the time. Just like when there is winter season, however clever you may be, you cannot check the process of nature's work. So Kali-yuga is also another phase of this material world. So he saw that things have deteriorated... Pure ca rāṣṭre ca gṛhe tathātmani. "Things have deteriorated. They are now full of these sinful activities." What is that? Lobha anṛta jihma and hiṁsa. "People are becoming too much," I mean to say, "jealous, too much diplomatic, too much untruthfulness, and so things are deteriorated, not only state-wise, family-wise, personal-wise. Everything is deteriorating." So after all, one has to retire. One has to re... So he concluded that now he should retire.
Lecture on SB 1.16.12 -- Los Angeles, January 9, 1974:
So actually, everything is existing. We have to simply take the knowledge. The modern method is ascending process. The knowledge is there, but still, they are trying to understand it by āroha-panthā, ascending process. It is called inductive knowledge. Inductive knowledge means that... Suppose a man is mortal. So the so-called scientists, they are trying to discover the law, why man is mortal. They are studying, "This man is mortal, this man is mortal, this man is mortal. Therefore it is concluded that all men are mortal. Nobody is immortal." But another man will argue that "You have not studied all the human society. How you can conclude? Therefore we must study." So this study will go on for life after life. They will never come to a person who is immortal. But they will protest that "We cannot accept." But our process is deductive. We say that man is mortal, first of all. Therefore John is a man. He is also mortal. This is deductive process. First of all we accept, man is mortal. The inductive process is that "Why shall I accept man is mortal? I may not have seen a person who is immortal." So that argument can be given.
Lecture on SB 2.1.2-5 -- Montreal, October 23, 1968:
Now he is concluding that "Don't be misled by so many subject matter of hearing. Just concentrate upon hearing Kṛṣṇa consciousness." Tasmāt. Tasmāt, "Therefore," tasmād bhārata, "O descendant of Bhārata..." Sarvātmā. Sarvātmā means the all-pervading Supersoul; bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead; īśvara, the supreme controller; hariḥ, who can, I mean to say, protect, who can take away all your miseries, who can protect you from all miseries. Tasmād bhārata sarvātmā bhagavān hariḥ, īśvaro hariḥ, śrotavyaḥ: "You have to hear about Him." Instead of hearing so many other news, which will not exist, you just try to hear about Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Because Parīkṣit Mahārāja's question was that "Now I am going to die. What shall I hear about?" Because hearing is our main business. You are hearing. If you go out from this temple you will also hear.
Lecture on SB 2.1.2-5 -- Montreal, October 23, 1968:
So either of them, their aim is how to get out of this fearful material existence. So Śukadeva Gosvāmī says, concludes, that icchatā abhayam. Abhayam means fearful. If you actually want to be free from fear, then you should concentrate your mind, discussing, hearing, remembering, either of the impersonal Brahman... Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti (SB 1.2.11). Either you think of Brahman or Paramātmā or the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but your subject matter should be this: hearing, chanting, discussing, talking, knowing. Don't divert your attention to this flimsy, I mean to say, so-called subject matter which will end. Because everything, whatever we are discussing in the material world, everything will end, nothing will exist, we should concentrate our mind on the subject matter which will exist. Because I am soul, I am ever-existing, eternal, my business is, therefore, "What is my eternal engagement?" This subject matter is proposed by Śukadeva Gosvāmī, and we shall discuss later on, in the next meeting. Thank you very much. Any question?
Lecture on SB 2.3.24 -- Los Angeles, June 22, 1972:
Now, if you, if you are a good logician, you can argue that "Stool of animal is impure. That is already said. Why you make 'The stool of cow is pure'?" Oh, but that's a fact. You analyze the stool of cow. You'll find it is full of antiseptic properties. That is Vedic knowledge. It gives you right knowledge. You cannot conclude that "Stool of animal is impure, so why this animal's stool can be pure?" No. Vedic knowledge is so perfect that you can accept it as it is and you'll be profited. You'll profit. In the Vedic knowledge, the viṣṇoḥ paramaṁ padam. The supreme goal is Viṣṇu. Oṁ tad viṣṇoḥ paramaṁ padaṁ sadā paśyanti sūrayaḥ. This Ṛg Veda mantra. The, some rascals, scholars, so-called, they say, "These Vedas, these mantras, are some primitive. Now we are advanced. We shall create our own mantra." You see? This is going on. The primitive... Primitive, we have to study. Primitive means very, very old. So whether in the days gone by, people were actually happy or now they are happy?
Lecture on SB 2.9.4-8 -- Tokyo, April 23, 1972:
Sudāmā: Cactus. Yes.
Prabhupāda: They grow in desert. Sometimes watermelon, watermelon. Watermelon is grown in desert very nice. So how you can conclude that there is no life. Cactus is also life.
Sudāmā: Śrīla Prabhupāda? If they are really going there in the moon planet, then the bodies of the living entities are different than our bodies because the...
Prabhupāda: No, you cannot go and live there.
Sudāmā: Right. So perhaps if they are really going there, then if they cannot..., and the living entities are living there as it is stated in the scripture, then perhaps they are doing very much damage or intruding, going against the laws of nature.
Prabhupāda: First of all let us admit that they are going. That is my first objection, whether they are actually going or giving bluff.
Lecture on SB 3.25.36 -- Bombay, December 5, 1974:
So Arjuna is person, and Kṛṣṇa is person. Therefore the..., in the sun planet the predominating deity is a person. He is not imperson. So you cannot understand that person simply by seeing the sunshine. That requires better qualification, how to enter the sun planet, how to see the predominating deity. The impersonalists, they simply conclude that, the same way as we foolish persons conclude, that the sun planet is simply a fiery substance, and there is nothing, no... If there is nothing, if there is no sun-god, predominating deity or the president of the sun globe, then how Kṛṣṇa could speak with him? In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān. Just like we talk. We are talking with you. We are not talking in the sky, vacant. We are talking with persons. These are intelligent. These require intelligence. So how we can imagine that "How the sun-god can be person? It is a fiery, big fire substance, and how one can live?" This is also foolishness. "Because I cannot live in the fire, therefore nobody can live in the fire." That is my foolishness.
Lecture on SB 5.5.5 -- Vrndavana, October 27, 1976:
Outwardly you become a very big man—minister, president and so on—and God is seeing within what you are. Within. Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe 'rjuna tiṣṭhati (BG 18.61). Within you are a dog, and outside if you are a president, that will not help you. That will not help you. Abodha-jātaḥ. Therefore whatever plan they are making, that's all defeat. Plan-making is already there. Kṛṣṇa has given plan gradually. The last plan is sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). This is real plan. This is Kṛṣṇa has given so many plans: karma-yogi, dhyāna-yogi, this yogi, that. But everywhere He has concluded that the real plan is how to become Kṛṣṇa conscious. That is real plan. Yoginām api sarveṣām mad-gatenāntarātmānā śraddhāvān... (BG 6.47). You are trying to be yogi, that's all right. This is haṭha-yoga. Go to a secluded place, sit down in this way, looking. Not sleeping. Eyes half-open. See to the point of your nose. So on, so on. Complete celibacy. These things Kṛṣṇa has said everything, how to become a yogi, how to become a jñāni, how to become a karmi. But everywhere He has concluded about Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Jñāni? All right: bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyante (BG 7.19). "They're coming to Me." Yoginām api sarveṣāṁ mad-gatenāntarātmanā (BG 6.47). Yat karoṣi yaj juhoṣi kuruṣva tat mad arpaṇam. The ultimate is Kṛṣṇa. That is real plan. And if you do not know this plan, śrama eva hi kevalam—simply waste of time.
Lecture on SB 6.1.6 -- Bombay, November 6, 1970:
There was topics of the different hellish conditions of life according to different sinful activities. There is description in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Fifth Canto, the different planetary systems of this universe, how each and every planet is different from the other by its atmosphere, by its inhabitants, dealings. Just like modern scientists, they are finding difference between this planet and the moon planet. They say that there is no living entity. That is not fact. They... Even though they have reached the moon planet, it is not a fact that there is no living entity. Accepting they reached the moon planet, they might have gone to the part where it is desert or barren land, because in each and every planet there is such possibility. In our, this planet also, when I was passing through the Suez Canal, it is horrible desert. So if somebody drops in that Arabian desert and concludes that there is no living entity in this planet, it is simply foolish. Similarly, these people are going, maybe going... First of all, I don't believe they have gone, frankly speaking. Even they have gone, they are landing in some part of the moon planet where there is no inhabitation.
Lecture on SB 6.1.10 -- Los Angeles, June 23, 1975:
This was the statement of Prahlāda Mahārāja, that gṛha-vratānām... Those who have concluded that "We shall live in this material world and become happy here by adjustment," they are called gṛha-vratānām. Or those who have concluded that "We shall live very happily in family life," and trying to be happy, and failure, and again trying, and again trying... This is called punaḥ punaś carvita-carvaṇānām (SB 7.5.30). Just like a father engages his son in the same way, the same family life, same business life, same working day and night. But he does not think that "I was a married man. I got children. I have got business. I have got car. Whether I have become happy?" That he does not conclude, that "Again I am engaging my son in the same business? So why shall I be unhappy if my son has joined the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement?" No. He wants, "Please come home and again be doing the same thing. Which I have done and I am frustrated, you do the same thing and be frustrated." (laughter) This is called punaḥ punaś carvita-carvaṇānām (SB 7.5.30). Nobody will advise. His son will become hippie—he will tolerate: "This is modern fashion." And if he joins Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, he is unhappy, because he wants that "My son also be doing the same thing." That is called punaḥ punaś carvita-carvaṇānām (SB 7.5.30). The world is going like that. They are chewing the chewed. We are teaching Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, that "What you will gain by this material way of life? Just try to understand Kṛṣṇa, and then you will get the greatest benefit." Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9). The all troubles which we are suffering, that is due to our accepting this material body. That they do not know. They do not know except this material body anything. Yasyātma-buddhiḥ kunape tri-dhātuke, sa eva go-kharaḥ (SB 10.84.13).
Lecture on SB 6.1.13-14 -- Los Angeles, June 26, 1975:
Therefore we should accept Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme God. It is stated in all śāstras, and Arjuna also, who listened Bhagavad-gītā from Kṛṣṇa, he also accepted. After hearing Bhagavad-gītā, he said, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān, puruṣaṁ śāśvatam ādyam (BG 10.12). So our process is to follow the predecessor. The Arjuna, he accepted. Not only Arjuna. "Arjuna may be His friend. He might have accepted his friend as God." No. Kṛṣṇa is accepted by the greatest learned scholar, Vyāsadeva, and greatest saintly person, Nārada. That is Vyāsadeva writes in his Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that "I have given description of different incarnation of God." He has given so many incarnation. At last, he concludes that "Although Kṛṣṇa came as incarnation, but He is not incarnation. He is the incarnate. From Him, all incarnations come." Ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). As soon as you say "incarnation," the next question will be, "Whose incarnation?" That Vyāsadeva explains, that Kṛṣṇa's incarnation Kṛṣṇa is not incarnation. Kṛṣṇa is personally the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is the statement of Vyāsadeva, the most learned. He is accepted the most, actually. Who can be more learned than Vyāsadeva in this material world? Nobody. You can see his writing, Bhāgavatam, how exalted, scholarly. Nobody can write such verses at the present moment. It is not possible. Each and every word is full of meaning and so nicely set up. Therefore it is said, vidvān cakre sātvata-saṁhitām: "The vidvān, the most learned Vyāsadeva, has given us the sātvata-saṁhitā."
Lecture on SB 6.1.15 -- Nellore, January 8, 1976:
It is said that "A brāhmaṇa who is very well expert in the brahminical activities and mantra-tantra-viśārada, knows all the Vedic mantras, but if he is not a Vaiṣṇava, he cannot become guru. But a person born in a family of dog-eaters, śva-paca, he can become guru if he has become Vaiṣṇava." Sanātana Gosvāmī, one of the big ācāryas of Gauḍīya sampradāya, he has also said that avaiṣṇava gurur na sa syāt. Sa. He says that... I forget that verse That "A person..." Pūta-hari-kathāmṛtaṁ śravaṇaṁ na kartavyam. Avaiṣṇava-mukhodgīrṇa-pūta-hari-kathāmṛtaṁ śravaṇaṁ na kartavyam. He says that "You do not try to hear from a person who is avaiṣṇava hari-kathāmṛtam." The hari-kathā, the message of Kṛṣṇa like Bhagavad-gītā and other, Bhāgavata, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, you should not hear from a person who is not a Vaiṣṇava. In the Bhāgavata also it is said, satāṁ prasaṅgāt mama vīrya-saṁvido bhavanti hṛt-karṇa-rasāyanāḥ-kathāḥ. When we hear from sad-vekti(?), or Vaiṣṇava, then we get real effect. So if one argues that "Hari-kathā is pure. Even a avaiṣṇava speaks, what is the harm there?" so Sanātana Gosvāmī said in connection with this that śravaṇaṁ na kartavyaṁ sarpocchiṣṭaṁ payo yathā. Just like milk: it is very nice food, but if it is touched with the lips of a snake, it becomes poisonous. Therefore it is concluded that we have to hear the transcendental message of Kṛṣṇa from a realized soul, a devotee.
Lecture on SB 6.1.30 -- Philadelphia, July 14, 1975:
Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ, īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). But we are thinking that God has no form. Why? Wherefrom you got your form? You are daily praying, "O God, O Father, give us our daily bread," and we accept God as the supreme father. So if I have got form, the father must have got form. It is reasonable. How you say, "There is no form"? This is all not very reasonable argument. God is also a living entity, but what is the difference between God and all these living entities? They are all dependent on God. That's all. God is great; we are small. Just like father maintains all the children, so we are all children, and the supreme father maintains. So if the children have got forms, so it is naturally concluded the father has got, even though you have not seen the father. Suppose a posthumous child, a child is born after the death or disappearance of the father. So that does not mean because he has not seen the father, he will conclude that "My father had no form." This is not conclusion. He should know from the mother that "Yes, my child, your father had form." So this is intelligence.
Lecture on SB 6.1.32 -- San Francisco, July 17, 1975:
So these are the explanation in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. And it is situated above the sun planet, and above, the distance is also given there: 1,600,000's of miles. And above that, similarly, 1,600,000 miles, there is Mars, there is Jupiter, there is Venus, like that. So universe is not so small that you can ride on your 747 and go. (laughter) It is not so easy. It is not so easy. So therefore, from the circumstances, we can conclude that they could not approach the moon planet. And now they are saying that "It is useless. There is no need of going there. The grapes are sour." (laughter) The jackal jumping, jumping, jumping. When he could not get the grapes, then he is rejecting, "Oh, this is sour. It is no use." So after jumping so many years and spending so much money, they are now rejecting: "The moon planet is not habitable." But we get there. This is one of the heavenly planets, and it is habitable by the most advanced pious men. So these are the difference. Now it is your business to believe the so-called scientist or the śāstra, as you like. But we cannot believe. Because we are Kṛṣṇa conscious, we have to believe what is stated in the śāstra.
Lecture on SB 6.1.33 -- San Francisco, July 18, 1975:
So we get description of the Viṣṇudūtas. Now, at least we can think, if we are transferred to the spiritual world, how much happy we shall be, how much opulent we shall be. Here we are thinking possessing one tin car made of tin, and after one year, it is smashed, and throw it again, and we becoming very opulent. So we do not know what is opulence there in the spiritual world. Not only in the spiritual..., even in this material world. In higher planetary system there are many, many different types, opulence. Svargaloka. This moon planet is also one of the opulent planets within this material world. So that is very, very nice. But these people say they went there and could not find any living entities. So if we believe in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, we have to conclude that these people did not go at all in the moon planet. You have to believe this or that, as you like. But we get information from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the moon planet is one of the heavenly planets. If somebody goes there, he can live there for ten thousands of years. Ten thousands of years means our calculation six times. Then sixty thousands of years like of this planet. So these descriptions are there. So these are the ideas. One can understand what will be our opulence if by chance... Not by chance; by our activities.
Lecture on SB 6.1.33 -- San Francisco, July 18, 1975:
What is that activities? That is also explained in the Bhagavad-gītā... (break) ...janma karma ca me divyaṁ yo jānāti tattvataḥ (BG 4.9). You try to understand Kṛṣṇa. Simply try to understand. Don't conclude that "Kṛṣṇa is like us, ordinary human being, maybe little learned more than us, or little power..." No. He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. By His merciful or causeless mercy, He descends to exhibit His form, His activities, so that he can see. Just like in the Buckingham Palace in London, many people are standing. Sometimes the queen comes and stands on the corridor, and everyone can see. That is queen's mercy, not that because she comes in the audience of so many public men; therefore she is also one of them. This is nonsense conclusion. Similarly Kṛṣṇa, by His causeless mercy if He comes... Some rascals say that God cannot come. Why? Why God cannot come? If He is all-powerful, why He cannot come? Does it mean that God is subject to your dictation that He cannot come? This is foolishness. Yes, God can come; therefore He is all-powerful. He can exhibit Himself to the audience of common man. But only the fortunate man can understand, "Here is God." That is the difference. Kṛṣṇa, when appeared, a few men upon this planet could understand that "Here is the Supreme Personality of Godhead," especially the Pāṇḍavas.
Lecture on SB 6.1.40 -- Surat, December 22, 1970:
Oh, telephone. Oh. That's all right. So Śrīdhara Svāmī says that vedena praṇihita vihita dharmaḥ sa ca veda-pramāṇaka ity arthaḥ.(?) Unless it is verified by the words of the Vedas, that cannot be accepted as authoritative. Anena yo veda-pramakaḥ sa dharmaḥ. Now, it is concluded that "Anything which is supported by the Vedic injunction, that is dharma." Sa dharma yo 'dharmo na veda pramāṇakaḥ: "And any dharma which is not corroborated by the Vedas, that is not dharma. That is not accepted as religion." Iti svarūpaḥ pramāṇaṁ ca ity uktam.(?) Now, that is the characteristic of dharma, svarūpa. So if we want to understand what is dharma, then the test should be whether it is corroborated by the Vedas. Then it is dharma. Otherwise it is...
Now, the question may be that the Indians or the followers of the Vedas... Now it has become so. Actually, the followers of Vedas are everyone. Every human being is the followers of Veda because the history of all other religions, they are all recent—one thousand year, two thousand years, three thousand years—but you cannot trace out the history of the Vedic religion. So from historical point of view, suppose one religion is current for the last three thousand years. Then what was their condition before three thousand years? So the natural conclusion is: as there was no such religion three thousand years and the Vedic religion has no history—it is coming from time immemorial—that was the religion. Take for example in India. Twenty years before there was no Pakistan, but now there is Pakistan. Under certain circumstances, the religious principle has changed, but originally every human being on this planet were following the Vedic religion. And another sense, everyone is following the Vedic religion if it is religion.
Lecture on SB 6.1.41-42 -- Surat, December 23, 1970:
So that exhaling and inhaling is the duration of this material existence. When Viṣṇu exhales, whole creation takes place. And when He inhales, the whole creation again is... Prakṛtiṁ yānti māmikām. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, "Then it again enters into the nature of the Supreme." So with the exhaling of breathing, innumerable universes are being generated. Yasyaika-niśvasita-kālam atha. Niśvasita-kāla, that period. Now, imagine what is that period. Jīvanti loma-vilajā jagad-aṇḍa-nāthāḥ. And also from the holes of the body, many universes are coming out. Such Viṣṇu, the Brahma-saṁhitā says, yasya iha kalā-viśeṣaḥ, such Viṣṇu, Lord Viṣṇu, Kāraṇodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, He is also a plenary portion of Govinda. Just imagine what is Govinda. Yasyaika-niśvasita-kālam athāvalambya jīvanti loma-vilajā (Bs. 5.48). That is also confirmed by Govinda, Kṛṣṇa, in the Bhagavad-gītā: ekāṁśena sthito jagat (BG 10.42). When Arjuna inquired from Kṛṣṇa, "What is Your opulence?" then He is describing the opulence, and in that opulence He concludes that "There is no necessity of describing My opulence very much. You simply understand that the whole material creation is existing in one fourth of My energy." So that is understanding of Bhagavad-gītā. We have to understand what is Kṛṣṇa.
Lecture on SB 6.2.11 -- Allahabad, January 16, 1971:
Just like Kamsa. Kamsa was also Kṛṣṇa conscious, always thinking of Kṛṣṇa, but that was unfavorably. His business was how to kill Kṛṣṇa. He was thinking of Kṛṣṇa but his business was he was thinking, "How to kill Kṛṣṇa?" That is prātikūla. Prātikūla is not bhakti. When you think of Kṛṣṇa against His desire, against the principle of satisfying Him, that is not bhakti, although that is also Kṛṣṇa consciousness. An enemy of Kṛṣṇa, he is also thinking of Kṛṣṇa. That does not mean that he is Kṛṣṇa conscious. He is Kṛṣṇa conscious unfavorably. Therefore it is not bhakti. You have to act favorably. So Arjuna became a devotee because he acted favorably for satisfaction of Kṛṣṇa. It was not favorable to the material life but it was favorable to Kṛṣṇa. That should be your business, how Kṛṣṇa should be satisfied. And therefore naturally it is concluded that "How I can satisfy Kṛṣṇa?" You have to satisfy his representative.
Lecture on SB 6.2.12-14 -- Allahabad, January 17, 1971, at Kumbha-mela:
Now, the Viṣṇudūta concludes that "This Ajāmila, we know that throughout his whole life he has simply committed sinful activities. That's a fact. We know. But at the time of his death," mriyamāṇaḥ, yad asau bhagavan-nāma samagrahīt, "simply chanted the name of Hari, Nārāyaṇa," samagrahīt, "perfectly, without any offense." Just try to understand that simply by chanting one name only, Nārāyaṇa, samagrahīt, without any offense, he became immediately purified from all sinful activities. These are not exaggeration. This is the fact. Otherwise why Caitanya Mahāprabhu should encourage,
- harer nāma harer nāma harer nāmaiva kevalam
- kalau nāsty eva nāsty eva nāsty eva gatir anyathā
- (CC Adi 17.21)
You'll never find any disagreement with the śāstra, sādhu, and guru. Therefore Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura says, sādhu-śāstra-guru-vākya. That is our guidance. Sādhu. If you say Caitanya Mahāprabhu was a sādhu or a devotee, so His words and the words of the scriptures are the same. The sādhu will speak only on the authority of śāstra.
Lecture on SB 6.2.16 -- Vrndavana, September 19, 1975:
On the whole, the conclusion is that anyone who is in this material world, he is a sinful man. Anyone. Otherwise he would not have gotten this material body. Just like anyone who is in the prison house, you can conclude that he is a sinful, criminal man. You do not require to study one after another. Because he is in the prison house you can conclude that "Here is a criminal." Similarly, anyone who is in the material world, he is a criminal. But not the superintendent of jail. You cannot conclude, "Because everyone is in the jail, criminal, therefore the superintendent of jail, he is also criminal." Then you are mistaken. Those who are conducting these sinful men to take them back to home, back to Godhead, he is not criminal. His business is how to release this rascal from this prison house and take him back to home, back to Godhead.
Lecture on SB 6.3.25-26 -- Gorakhpur, February 18, 1971:
So the great compiler of religious scripture, headed by Manu and others, without knowing the simple method, they prescribe gorgeous ritualistic ceremonies. Kim ca māyayā divyalam vimohitam matir ayam jana madhu, madhunam yatha bhavati evam puspitayam puṣpa-sthaniya ratavadi mano-harayam trayyam jadi-kṛta abhinivista-matir yasya ata eva mahaty eva karmany agni-stomadau śraddhayā yujyamānaḥ.(?) So being bewildered by the material or external energy, they take to these gorgeous ceremonies or sacrificial performances. Actually there is no need. The whole thing is that Śrīdhara Svāmī is giving stress very strongly that you can simply chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra without undergoing any ritualistic ceremonies. Actually it is very difficult to understand. Mādhavendra Purī, our predecessor ācārya, he also has composed a nice verse. He says, "My dear gāyatrī-mantra, I offer you my respect, but no more I can chant gāyatrī-mantra." In this way... Taking bath early in the morning, that's a good recommendation for spiritual advancement. But Mādhavendra Purī said, "Now I am unable to execute this order. Please excuse me." In this way he has described in many ways. At last, he concludes that "I shall sit down somewhere underneath a tree and simply remember Govinda's name. That is sufficient. Yes." He says, "Please excuse me, please excuse me, please excuse me."
Lecture on SB 7.5.1, Pandal Lecture -- Bombay, January 12, 1973:
So Kṛṣṇa is the supreme nitya, eternal, and we are also eternal. Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, mamaivāṁśa jīva-loke jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7). We are eternal, and Kṛṣṇa is also eternal. That is qualitatively one. Kṛṣṇa is cetana, living force. We are also living force. So in that way, we are one in quality. But His living force and our living force, different in quality. His creative power, my creative power, your creative power, they are different. You can create a few skyscraper buildings, but Kṛṣṇa has created millions and trillions of universes. Yasyaika-niśvasita-kālam athāvalambya jīvanti loma-vilajā jagad-aṇḍa-nāthāḥ (Bs. 5.48). Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). Jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi. We are simply experiencing one jagad-aṇḍa, or universe, but there are jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi, there are millions and trillions of universes. Ekāṁśena sthito jagat.
- atha vā bahunaitena
- kiṁ jñātena tavārjuna
- viṣṭabhyāham idaṁ kṛtsnam
- ekāṁśena sthito jagat
- (BG 10.42)
Kṛṣṇa, when He was inquired about His opulence, about His potencies, vibhūti, Kṛṣṇa explained that "I am like this, I am like this, I am like this." But He concluded that "How much I shall describe? Try to understand this."
Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- Madras, January 2, 1976:
So the bhāgavata-dharmam, bhagavān, kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. In the list of the incarnation given in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam there is name of Kṛṣṇa also. But at the conclusion, Vyāsadeva says, ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). He concludes that "All the incarnation mentioned here, they are aṁśa-kalāḥ, part, partly manifestation or part of partly manifestation." Kalāḥ means part of partly(?) manifestation. "But the name which is mentioned here, Kṛṣṇa, He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead." Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. (break) Ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. So Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is accepted by all the ācāryas. And in the Bhagavad-gītā Arjuna says, asamaurdhva. Asama: "There is no equal to you, asama, and urdhva, nobody is greater than You." That is God. Supreme means who has no equal, neither anyone is greater than. Everyone is under. That is called asama urdhva. This is there. So there cannot be any competitor of God.
Lecture on SB 7.9.12 -- Montreal, August 18, 1968:
"All these living creatures, they are all My parts and parcels." Therefore He is the origin. And in the Brahma-saṁhitā, the Brahmā in his saṁhitā-Saṁhitā means Vedic literature—so he explains that "You are finding out cause. Here is cause." Everywhere you'll find. But the rascal demons are so obstinate that although Kṛṣṇa is confirmed the Supreme God by Brahmā, by Śiva, by Vyāsa, Nārada, Devala, and many, many devotees, Bhīṣma... There are twelve standard ācāryas. They are svayambhūr nārada śaṁbhu... Svayambhūr means Brahmā; Nārada, Nārada Muni; and Śaṁbhu means Lord Śiva. Kapila, Vyāsa, Kumāra—everyone has accepted. And in the recent years Lord Caitanya, He said. And the Bhāgavata says, kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). Bhāgavata gives list of all incarnations of God, and at the last he concludes that in this list the name "Kṛṣṇa," He is the Supreme Personality. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. And all other manifestations, they are incarnations. Ete ca aṁśa-kalāḥ. All these different names of God, they are either parts or part of the parts. The part of parts is called kalā, and part is called aṁśa. We are also amsa, but we are very fragmental aṁśa. We are not as big as Viṣṇu. We are very fragmental. We are also aṁśa. So aṁśa kalā. So all others, they are either aṁśa or kalā, but Kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇas tu... Tu means "but." Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
Nectar of Devotion Lectures
The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, December 27, 1972:
Yes. Bhagavad-gītā, it is said, Kṛṣṇa says: mṛ tyuḥ sarva-haraś ca aham. At the... By death, everything is taken away by Kṛṣṇa. So the modern civilization, they do not believe in the next birth. That is the basic mistake of the present civilization, that we get information that tathā dehāntaraṁ prāptir dhīras tatra na muhyati. Dehāntaram. Just like we are transmigrating, even in this span of life, from childhood to boyhood, from boyhood to youthhood, from youthhood to old age body. Therefore it is natural to conclude that after this old body's finished, then we get another body, transmigration of the soul. But there is no education, no enlightenment about this transmigration of the soul. But we can, if we think, ponder very deeply on this matter, how transmigration of the soul is taking place, and it is authorized, authorized statement of Bhagavad-gītā: tathā dehāntaraṁ prāptir.
The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, December 28, 1972:
Oh yes. Why not? The body... Just like in the water, the bodies of the aquatics are different, but you can see them. Why not? If, if, if it is not visible, how you are seeing the Moon planet? You are seeing the Moon planet. So it is visible. Not invisible. Our point is that these people... First of all, whether they are going to the Moon planet, that is doubtful. At least, I am doubtful. Because we get information from the śāstra , that there is a planet which is called Rāhu. That is very near to Moon. And that Rāhu sometimes comes in front of the Moon planet, and that is called candragrahāṇa. Moon, lunar eclipse. So that, that Rāhu planet is dark. So they might be going to this Rāhu planet, not to the Moon planet. Maybe. Because that is very near. Moon planet is heavenly planet. Heavenly planet. There, there demigods, they live. So we get this information. Or just like if somebody comes to the, this earthly planet and drops in the Arabian desert, he may conclude that this, is desert. But there is Europe, America and nice cities, and nice bungalows. But he has no chance to see them. So these people are going. They had no chance. Maybe they are also diverting them to the deserted portion of the Moon. They are also intelligent. That "These people are coming from Earthly planet unauthorized.
The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 28, 1973:
Mādhavānanda: "He knows that the spirit soul, being subordinate and finite, should always dovetail himself with the infinite and supreme soul, Kṛṣṇa. That is the relationship of the wise man with Kṛṣṇa.
"It can be concluded that a person who is freed from the bodily concept of life is an eligible candidate for pure devotional service."
Prabhupāda: "It can be concluded that a person who is freed from the bodily concept of life is an eligible candidate for pure devotional service." People generally think that by, through devotional service, one rises to the platform of Brahman-jñāna, nirbheda brahmānu-sandhana. Even the so-called devotees—they are called sahajiyās—their ultimate goal is to merge into the existence of Brahman. That Rajani Sena, Bombay, he's also preaching in that way. And their process is very abominable. The, the sahajiyās, they also think like that, that by sex one can rise to that platform of merging into the effulgence of Brahman. Even Vivekananda was talking that "This Vaiṣṇava religion is a religion of sex." They have been so much misrepresented. By sexual indulgence, one can become one with the Supreme. This is their theory, very dangerous theory. Therefore these sahajiyās are amongst the thirteen rejected apa-sampradāyas. In the name of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, there are so many apa-sampradāyas. Apa-sampradāya means they present themselves as belonging to the Caitanya cult. But they are not at all bona fide. They are rejected. (break) Even such sahajiyās, they would not read even Bhagavad-gītā. They think themselves that they are so, I mean to say, elevated, they have surpassed reading of Bhagavad-gītā. Similarly there are sahajiyās, they also say that kīrtana is not required for them. Kīrtana, one who has very much advanced, he doesn't require to chant Hare Kṛṣṇa. I have heard it.
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 6.149-50 -- Gorakhpur, February 13, 1971:
So Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, admitted by all ācāryas. And on the basis of that authority, we are preaching all over the world that "You are searching after God? Here is God." Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. In the Bhāgavata has given different list of different incarnation of God but ultimately concludes that ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam: (SB 1.3.28) "All the incarnations, they are parts or parts of the parts." Aṁśa means part, and kalāḥ means part of the part. "But svayaṁ pūrṇa-bhagavān, ṣoḍaśa-kala pūrṇa, ṣaḍ-aiśvarya-pūrṇa-bhagavān is Kṛṣṇa." That is the verdict all Vedas, all śāstras. So we should also accept in that light. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). And Kṛṣṇa also says personally, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ: (BG 10.8) "I am the origin of even Brahma, Śiva, and Viṣṇu also." Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.137-146 -- Bombay, February 24, 1971:
Simply by devotional service, one becomes purified even he is born in the family of the dog-eaters. That is the Vedic version. Caitanya Mahāprabhu quotes from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Ataeva bhakti kṛṣṇa prāptyera. Therefore He concludes that "If you want at all Kṛṣṇa..." Kṛṣṇa... We should, everyone should want Kṛṣṇa. Because as soon as we get Kṛṣṇa... Yaṁ labdhvā cāparaṁ lābhaṁ manyate nādhikaṁ tataḥ. If actually we get Kṛṣṇa, then we shall not consider any other profit more valuable than Kṛṣṇa. Just like Dhruva Mahārāja. Dhruva Mahārāja went to practice yoga in the forest, Madhuvana. The idea was to get the kingdom of the father. Now, actually when he saw Kṛṣṇa, Viṣṇu... The picture is here. You can see. Actually when he saw by his severe austerities and penances..., a small boy, five-years-old boy, then he said, "My dear Lord, now when You offer benediction that 'You take whatever benediction you want, you take from Me,' " he said, svamin kṛtārtho 'smi varaṁ na yāce (CC Madhya 22.42). That is the process. If one gets Kṛṣṇa, he thinks that no more any other benediction is required. He becomes fully satisfied. Svāmin kṛtārtho 'smi: "I am fully satisfied." Therefore we find a Kṛṣṇa-bhakta is always satisfied because he has no demand.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.152-154 -- New York, December 5, 1966:
So we can understand part and whole. So therefore He is whole, and everything is His part. He is the aṁśī; He is the whole. Sarva-aṁśī. Kiśora-śekhara. This very word, kiśora-śekhara, "the supreme boy." The supreme boy. His feature is just like a fresh boy, but the supreme. Kiśora-śekhara cid-ānanda-deha, spiritual body. Just mark this description of Kṛṣṇa: cid-ānanda-deha. Cid-ānanda-deha means transcendental, spiritual body, not this body. Because the less intelligent persons, they cannot think of personal God... Because they think that whenever there is question of personality, it is material body. They cannot find out the shape of the spirit soul. It is so small that from material eyes, by material instrument, you cannot find out the shape of the soul. Therefore they conclude that there is no shape. The same example: just geometrically, the definition of point is given, "point has no length, no breadth," because a point cannot be measured by any human instrument. But nothing can be without... Even the atom has got its measure. But because we have no power to measure, we set aside, dismiss: "Oh, there is no, nothing." So similarly, "Because we do not know what is spirit, and we think spirit is something just opposite to this matter, and matter we find manifestation, form, therefore spirit should be formless." That is their conclusion.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.154-157 -- New York, December 7, 1966:
So Lord Caitanya has explained the particular features of Kṛṣṇa, and He's giving evidence from Brahma-saṁhitā and other authentic Vedic literatures. So we have concluded that Kṛṣṇa is the origin. Origin. There are many demigods, gods, and living entities, energies, millions and millions. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). There is no estimate. But He is the origin of all. Just like in your New York City there are so many manifestation of electricity, but the origin is the powerhouse, similarly, He is the origin, powerhouse. Sarvādi, sarvāṁśī. He is the whole, and everything is part. And He is always just like a young boy of sixteen years old. And His body is transcendental, spiritual, full of bliss, eternity, and He is the shelter of everything. On Him everything is resting, and sarveśvara, He is the Supreme Lord.
Sri Isopanisad Lectures
Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 10 -- Los Angeles, May 15, 1970:
So one who has control over these six things, he is called dhīrāṇām. Dhīra. Hara eva (?) dhīra. Just like in Kumāra-sambhava. There is a nice poetry made by a great poet, Kālidāsa. It is called Kumāra-sambhava. This Kumāra-sambhava, we had our prescribed books in our intermediate I.A. class, Kumāra-sambhava. Kumāra-sambhava, the fact of the Kumāra-sambhava is that when Pārvatī suicided herself in the Dakṣa-yajña, then Lord Śiva was very angry. He left this world. That's a Dakṣa-yajña story. You might have heard from Bhāgavatam. So he was engaged in meditation, and there was fight between the demons and the demigods. They wanted a very nice general. So it was concluded that with the semina of Lord Śiva, if a son is born, then he'll be able to fight this great fight between the demons. So Lord Śiva was in meditation, completely naked. So this Pārvatī was sent to worship the Śiva-liṅga just to agitate him for sex. But he was not agitated. He was still silent. So that particular instance is given by Kālidāsa, "Here is a dhīra." Dhīra. He is naked. A young girl is worshiping the genital, touching it; still he's not agitated. So that is the example of being dhīra. Dhīra means there may be causes for agitation, but one shall not be agitated. That is called dhīra. In spite of presence of the agent of agitating... Just like there is a very nice foodstuff, but still, my tongue should not be agitated. There is a very nice girl or boy, still, I shall not be agitated sexually. In this way, when you are able to control the six agitating elements, then you become dhīra. Dhīra. Not that he had, Lord Śiva had no sexual potency, but he was dhīra. That is the example. Just like Kṛṣṇa danced with so many girls, but there was no sex appetite. That is called dhīra.
Festival Lectures
Ratha-yatra -- San Francisco, June 27, 1971:
Please take advantage of this spiritual movement and make your life blissful and perfect. If you miss this opportunity, you do not know what you are going to have next life. Do not think that there is no next life. Next life, every moment we are changing our body. You know that when your body was a baby, that body was very small. Now that body is no longer there. When you were a boy there was another body. That body is no longer there. Now you are young man there is another body, and when you'll become old man like me, you'll have another body. This means that we are changing bodies in every moment, every second, imperceptibly, but I, the spirit soul, exist in all circumstances. Therefore it is natural to conclude that after leaving this body I shall have another body. That's a fact. That is Vedic truth. Vāsāṁsi jīrṇāni yathā vihāya (BG 2.22). The example is given that as we change our dresses; similarly, we are changing our dresses from one body to another. We have changed dresses as aquatic animals, as many fishes and aquatic animals as there are in the sea, then we are change bodies as creepers, plants and trees for many, many years.
Ratha-yatra -- Los Angeles, July 1, 1971:
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.
Radhastami, Srimati Radharani's Appearance Day -- London, August 29, 1971:
That feature, Paramātmā feature. Aṇḍantara-sthaṁ paramānu-cayāntara-sthaṁ govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi. That Paramātmā feature is one expansion of Kṛṣṇa. It is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, athavā bahunaitena kiṁ jñātena tavārjuna ekāṁṣena viṣṭabhyāham. Ekāṁṣena. When Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna was trying to understand about different potential existence of Kṛṣṇa, so He explained in the Twelfth Chapter, "I am this. Amongst them, I am this. Amongst them..." Like that. And He concluded that "How far I shall go on? Better try to understand that only one plenary portion of Me, by entering this universe, the whole cosmic manifestation is existing." Ekāṁṣena sthito jagat (BG 10.42). Jagat. This material world is existing on one plenary portion of Kṛṣṇa. And Kṛṣṇa enters, aṇḍāntara-sthaṁ paramānu-cayāntara-stham, He enters within this universe. Without His entering, this universe cannot exist. Just like without the spirit soul's entering within this body, this body cannot exist. As soon as the spirit soul goes out, immediately the body's useless. However the body may be prime minister or anything else, as soon as the soul is out of this body, it is not worth even a farthing. Similarly, because Kṛṣṇa enters within this universe, therefore the universe has value. Otherwise it is simply a lump of matter; it has no value. Ekāṁṣena sthito jagat.
Jagannatha Deities Installation Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.2.13-14 -- San Francisco, March 23, 1967:
So if you want to have knowledge of Absolute Truth, the first thing is, basic principle is, faith. Then you must be thoughtful. Then you must be devoted, and you must hear from authentic sources. In this way, these are the different methods. And when you come to the ultimate knowledge, from Brahman platform to Paramātmā platform, then Paramātmā to the Supreme Absolute Personality of Godhead, then your duty shall be to satisfy the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is the perfection of your active life. These are the process. These are the process, and it is concluded that therefore, everyone—never mind what he is—his duty is to satisfy the Supreme Personality of Godhead. And how we can satisfy? We have to hear about Him, we have to speak about Him, we have to think about Him, we have to worship Him, and that is regularly. That will make, help you. If you have no worship, if you have no thought, if you have no hearing, if you have no speaking, and you are simply thinking of something, something, something, that "something, something," it is not God.
Arrival Addresses and Talks
Arrival Conversation -- Los Angeles, June 20, 1975:
Prabhupāda: They are harassing us in so many ways. Only in Bombay.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: That means if we become successful finally, it will be a tremendous success, I think.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Something very big will happen there.
Brahmānanda: They've concluded that the opposition is not from the central government but from the local. Because the projects are going on without being hampered in other places in India. It is only in Bombay that we are getting this difficulty.
Prabhupāda: In central government that Indira Gandhi is now...
Brahmānanda: Her position is now jeopardized.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Really?
Prabhupāda: She is convicted. That election was not properly...
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Who has convicted her?
Brahmānanda: High-court.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: How was... I am surprised they could do that. She's practically like a dictator.
Prabhupāda: And she has been done in his (her) own city, Allahabad.
General Lectures
Lecture -- Seattle, October 7, 1968:
So it is poor fund of knowledge only that these conclude that the ultimate Absolute Truth is impersonal. No. Because Vedānta says, Vedānta-sūtra says, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). The Supreme Absolute Truth, or Brahman, is that from whom everything generates, everything is born. Now, everything is born. Then you have got personality, I have got my personality, everyone has got personality. How you can think of Him that He is not person? We have got experience that a father is person, therefore his son is also person. So if we are born of the supreme father, then if we are person, how He can be imperson? It is simple reason. But His personality is different, our personality is different. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). His body is different, sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ. His power is different, His potency is different. Different means that is all spiritual. The difference of spiritual matter we can understand that spirit is the basic principle of movement of matter. Because the spirit soul is within this body, therefore it is moving. Because the spirit soul is there within this body, therefore it is growing. So spirit soul is the basic principle of all material expansion. Similarly, God being full spirit, whole spirit, He is the basic principle of all cosmic manifestation, but He is person.
Lecture -- Seattle, October 11, 1968:
Yes. There are 8,400,000 species of different kinds of life. So, so far my condition is concerned, I am not this body; I am spirit soul. Just I am changing my body even at the present moment. Just like when you were born from your mother's womb, your body was very small. Now it has grown. You were a boy; now you are young. Now you will become old man like me also. That means the changing body. It is simple fact. You are changing. From your childhood body, this body is different. Either you take it that it has grown or either you take it that the body has changed, the same thing. But actually it has changed. So the changing of body is accepted. Therefore it is concluded that when you change this body, you may get another body.
Pandal Lecture -- Delhi, November 20, 1971:
We are establishing many humanitarian activities. Just like the other day our chief guest, Dr. Atmaram, was speaking that by scientific advancement we are trying to give food to the needy and cloth to the naked. That's all right. But Kṛṣṇa is feeding unlimited number of living entities, beginning from the elephant down to the ant. Suhṛdaṁ sarva-bhūtānām. He is friend of everyone. As friend, He is sitting in the heart of all living entities. He is sitting in your heart, He is sitting in my heart, He is sitting in the ant's heart. The ant has also heart and the elephant has got also heart. Sometimes we find an insect exactly like a full stop. You have got experience. Sometimes when you open your book you find. They are called bookworm, they're very small, but it is moving. And because it is moving, from biological study we must conclude that it has got a heart. Even we do not know about biology, but Kṛṣṇa said that īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe 'rjuna tiṣṭhati (BG 18.61). So, therefore, there must be some heart. We cannot perceive. We cannot see even the whole figure of that insect, and what to speak of study what kind of heart it has got. But we understand Bhagavad-gītā..., from Bhagavad-gītā that there is heart even in the smallest insect, in the microscopic germ, there is heart. So He is sitting in everyone's heart and He is supplying the necessities of that smaller creature or the biggest creature.
Lecture at Art Gallery -- Auckland, April 16, 1972:
Yes. But He summarizes the yoga processes in the Sixth Chapter, last verse, yoginām api sarveṣāṁ: (BG 6.47) "Of all the yogis, one who always thinks of Me with faith and love within himself," yoginām api sarveṣāṁ mad-gata āntarātmanā, "within the heart, within himself, always think of Me, Kṛṣṇa," śraddhāvān bhajate yo mam, "engaged in devotional...," sa me yuktatamo, "he is the highest, topmost yogi." He has described different process of yoga system. That's a fact. But He concludes that one who is thinking of Kṛṣṇa always within himself with faith and love, he is the topmost yogi. So we are teaching our disciples to think of Kṛṣṇa always, twenty-four hours. This Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare, if you chant and hear the word "Kṛṣṇa," then you become the topmost yogi. And simplest method—anyone can practice it. God has given you the tongue, and you can chant "Kṛṣṇa." Actually they are chanting everywhere, in all parts of the world, very easily, even a child. So this yoga system is recommended especially for this age because other yoga systems are very difficult processes for the present age. The haṭha-yoga system, to sit down in a sacred secluded place, straight right—angular, and looking towards the end of the nose, this is not possible for everyone. Therefore the topmost yoga system is to chant the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra. And actually it is happening. Now our students all over the world, simply by chanting this holy name of God, Hare Kṛṣṇa, they are quickly advancing in spiritual knowledge, that's a fact. Now stop. (end)
Rotary Club Lecture -- Hyderabad, November 29, 1972:
That is knowledge. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is also stated, janmādy asya yataḥ anvayād itarataś ca artheṣu abhijñaḥ (SB 1.1.1). Abhijñaḥ: He knows everything. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said also: kṣetra-jñaṁ cāpi māṁ viddhi sarva-kṣetreṣu bhārata. Kṣetrajñaḥ. Kṣetrajña means the proprietor of the body, the owner of the body. Just like you are a spirit soul, owner of your body. I am also a spirit soul. I am owner of the body. I know to some extent the pains and pleasure of my body. You know, to some extent, the... I say "to some extent" because we are not... Although I am the proprietor of this body, still... I do not know how the body is acting, functioning, why there is pain, why there is pleasure. So many things, we do not know—partially we know—although I am the proprietor. If there is some defect in the bodily function, I cannot detect it. I go to another person, a physician. So although I am proprietor of this body, I do not know exactly what is functioning, how it is becoming in happy condition or in morose condition. So... But supposing that I know everything, but still, I do not know what is happening in your body. That is not possible. Therefore it is concluded that we are individuals. We are individuals. I have got my individual pains and pleasures; you have got your individual pains and pleasures. So you are individual person; I am individual person. And the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He is also individual person. Nityo nityānām. This is Vedic information. We are plural number, nityānām. Cetanaś cetanānām. He's the supreme living force amongst all other living forces.
Lecture at the Hare Krsna Festival at La Salle Pleyel -- Paris, June 14, 1974:
So now let us conclude that there is God and God's word, or God's vibration, means God is person. As soon as we accept the word of God, then we have to conclude that God is a person. Just like you are vibrating some words, I am vibrating some words. This means both of us, we are all persons. So the word of God and God is not different. But God is person and He speaks. If He speaks, then He hears, He smells, He eats—everything. All the activities are there. If He cannot hear, then our prayer to Him, "O God, give us our daily bread," is useless. So from this statement of the scripture, either you take it Bible or Bhagavad-gītā, it is understood that God is a person like you. That is the statement of the Vedas, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām eko yo bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13), namely that God means He is the supreme being. In the dictionary also it is stated, "God means the Supreme Being." We are all beings, but God is the Supreme Being. Just like in every state, there are citizens, but there is one chief citizen. He is president or something like that.
Lecture Engagement at Birla House -- Bombay, December 17, 1975:
So their business was, these Gosvāmīs, kṛṣṇotkīrtana-gāna-nartana-parau: they were always engaged in chanting "Kṛṣṇa." That is the real purpose of human life, especially in this age. It is stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam to Parīkṣit Mahārāja by Śukadeva Goswami, he described the symptoms of Kali-yuga: it is very, very faulty. But he concluded that kalau doṣa-nidhe rājann asti hy eko mahān guṇaḥ. In this age of Kali it is very fallen age, mandāḥ sumanda-matayo manda-bhāgyā hy upadrutāḥ (SB 1.1.10). The population in this age, they are, almost all of them they are manda-manda means bad or very slow—so they do not understand what is the aim of life, or very slow to understand; therefore they are called manda. And because they do not understand their real interest of life, they can be called very bad, manda. So these are the symptoms: mandāḥ sumanda-matayo manda-bhāgyā hy upadrutāḥ. So in this age, although it is so fallen, the śāstra says, doṣa-nidhe rājann, kalau doṣa-nidhe rājann asti hy eko mahān guṇaḥ. There is one great opportunity. What is that great opportunity? Kīrtanād eva kṛṣṇasya mukta-saṅgaḥ paraṁ vrajet (SB 12.3.51). If one takes to chanting this Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, then he becomes relieved or freed from the all contamination of this age, and mukta-saṅgaḥ, he becomes liberated and he goes back to home, back to Godhead. Simply by chanting. That is mukti.
Tenth Anniversary Address -- Washington, D.C., July 6, 1976:
So we'll find in every Vedic literature, Kṛṣṇa is the supreme father. When Arjuna understood Bhagavad-gītā, in the Tenth Chapter you will find, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān puruṣaṁ śāśvatam ādyam (BG 10.12). And he also confirmed that "I am accepting You like this, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma (BG 10.12). So people may be in doubt because I am Your friend. So they may say, 'Out of friendship, regard or affection, out of sentiment, he is speaking like that, that Kṛṣṇa is the supreme person, paraṁ brahma.' " But Arjuna immediately rectifies this impression, that "Not only myself, but great authorities like Vyāsadeva, Nārada, Asita, they are also affirming." Vyāsadeva is authority. Veda-vyāsa, he is the giver of Vedic knowledge. So he is accepting. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam he is writing, ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). He has given description of the incarnation of God, then he concludes that "All these incarnations, they are part and parcel or plenary expansion of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but the name which I have mentioned as Kṛṣṇa, that Godhead, kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam, He is the Supreme Original Personality of Godhead." That is Vyāsadeva's... So we have to accept. And Arjuna also says, svayaṁ caiva bravīṣi me, "You are also personally speaking that mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7), 'There is no more superior authority than Me.' " So this is confirmed.
Philosophy Discussions
Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:
Hayagrīva: This is the conclusion of Hume. He felt that one must first be a philosophical skeptic before accepting the revealed truths of religion. Ultimately Hume maintains that these truths can only be accepted on faith, not experience or reason.
Prabhupāda: No, and why not reason? If we think that everything has some proprietor, owner, so it is quite reasonable to think that this vast land, vast sky, vast water, nature, they must have some proprietor. What is the fault in this logic? Why they conclude that there was a chunk, there was some gas, there was something like that? So why they think like that? Is that very reasonable? Wherefrom the chunk came? Wherefrom the gas came? Wherefrom the fire came? So this is reasonable. So there is a proprietor, as it is described in this Bhagavad-gītā, mayādhyakṣeṇa (BG 9.10), aham ādir hi sarveṣām. So there must be some proprietor. That is logical. That is, that is philosophy. How one can..., one thing can exist without the owner or proprietor? So this is not like, that there is no proprietor. This is illogical, or without any philosophy. But think that there is a proprietor, this is completely logical.
Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:
Śyāmasundara: Yes. So he says that the real world or the ultimate reality becomes a reconstruction of the mind by speculationists; that they take the contents of this world and reproduce it into what they believe to be the real world.
Prabhupāda: By speculation, the real world for them is negation of this world. That is voidism. I am experiencing everything here material, so this material thinking and other material thinking induces him to conclude that it must be opposite. It must be opposite. This is material. So spiritual means not this form, or formless, or void. So that is also material thinking. Just the opposite number.
Śyāmasundara: He is still proceeding in his method. He comes to some good conclusions. He is trying to understand what makes men's minds work. He says that "Thus this real world becomes an ideal construction in the mind of man."
Prabhupāda: Yes. Ideal construction... Here we are frustrated because everything is temporary; therefore ideal is eternal. That much we can understand. Temporary. Just like I want to live; that is my tendency. Nobody wants to die. But I am hopeless, because this body is not eternal. Therefore ideal life is eternal body.
Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:
Prabhupāda: There is a God. That is reason. And how can one support that there is no God? What is that reason?
Śyāmasundara: Well, strictly according to these categories of quality, quantity, relation and modality, it is possible also to conclude that there is nothing beyond the material nature. If one uses only the senses...
Prabhupāda: But where do you get your senses?
Śyāmasundara: One could say that they are only a combination of matter.
Prabhupāda: But where does the matter come from?
Śyāmasundara: According to material reasoning, one could say that there is no necessary source of matter; it is not necessary to conclude that there is a cause of matter.
Prabhupāda: But we see that matter is growing. Just like a tree is matter, it is growing.
Śyāmasundara: It may have been eternally existing.
Prabhupāda: How eternally existing? The tree is not eternally existing. This brass pot is metal. Somebody has made it.
Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:
Śyāmasundara: That's what I mean. They may be extinct on this planet but on some other planet they...
Prabhupāda: At least he has no power to see everything. That is a fact. He's not so powerful that he can see everywhere and everything. That you have to accept. He has limited power to see. By that limited power to see he cannot conclude that one species (is) extinct. That is not possible. No scientist will accept that. After all, your senses by which you are (indistinct), they're limited. So how you can say, "This is finished," or "This is that." That is not to be accepted. Because your senses are imperfect. You cannot see. You cannot search out. Have you searched out all the earthly layers or the 25,000 miles everywhere? That is not possible for you. The whole earthly planet is circumference is 25,000 miles, radius how many, has he discovered that all the places?
Śyāmasundara: No, representative samples in many places.
Prabhupāda: Our first proposition is that he says that there was no human beings some millions of years ago. That's not a fact. Because we see all different species of life existing along with human beings. Therefore it should be concluded this is always existing. Human life is always existing. That is our first charge against him. He cannot say there was no human life.
Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:
Śyāmasundara: But the only thing that I want to get at is...
Prabhupāda: The only thing he has has studied, this earthly planet...
Śyāmasundara: ...how the bodies change.
Prabhupāda: ...but there are many other millions of planets, he has not seen all of them. He has not excavated, dug the depth of all the planets, so how he can conclude that this is all? He has not seen everything, neither it is possible for him.
Śyāmasundara: But according to the conditions, different conditions on this planet, natural conditions, certain animals...
Prabhupāda: Yes. But he has not seen different conditions in different planets. Suppose the sun planet, the condition is fire. So how life can exist in the fire, he has no knowledge.
Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:
Śyāmasundara: If I accept your knowledge, how can I theorize that there were higher forms of life millions of years ago if I have never found any evidence and I have searched...
Prabhupāda: This is the evidence. This is the evidence. You have to see through the evidence, because there are, in the evolution there are so many species of life, say 8,400,000, they are all existing now. They are all existing now. Therefore why should I conclude that millions of years they did not exist?
Śyāmasundara: You say they are all existing now, but I don't see the dinosaur. There are no dinosaurs on this planet.
Prabhupāda: That is not the denied. Dinosaur you may not have seen, it may be existing some other... Neither I have seen the 8,400,000 different species of, different forms of life. But my source of knowledge is different. Your source of knowledge is different. You are experimenter with imperfect senses. I am taking from the perfect who has seen, who knows things. Therefore my knowledge is perfect. Just the same example: I am receiving knowledge from my mother, "Here is your father," and you are trying to search out where is your father. You don't go to the mother, but you are searching out. So therefore, however you may search, your knowledge always will be imperfect.
Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:
Hayagrīva: From this, Bergson concludes that we are evolving, that we learn from an accumulation of experience, that we cannot, in a sense, repeat the same mistake twice. He writes, "From this survival of the past, it follows that consciousness cannot go through the same state twice. Circumstances may still be the same, but they will act no longer on the same person since they find him in a new moment of his history. Our personality, which is being built up each instant with its accumulated experience, changes without ceasing. Thus our personality shoots, grows and ripens without ceasing."
Prabhupāda: No. There is no cessation because the soul is eternal, so his consciousness is also eternal. But it is changing according to the circumstances, association, time, place, and the party changes. Therefore good association required. Sādhu-saṅga (CC Madhya 22.83). It is called sādhu-saṅga, association with the devotees. By good association the consciousness can be changed from material to spiritual. That is the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, how to change the consciousness from matter to Kṛṣṇa. So that requires guidance. The guidance is Kṛṣṇa's instruction and the spiritual master. Kṛṣṇa is so kind that he has given us śāstra and the sādhu and guru. So if we take advantage of that then we become reformed, our life becomes successful.
Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:
Prabhupāda: We have already proved that all his methods are defective.
Śyāmasundara: He says there are five ways. All knowledge, he says, is cause and effect. So he said we can determine what is the cause and what is the effect of anything according to these five methods. One is the method of agreement, that is, if we have two or more instances of a phenomenon and there is one common circumstance behind both of them, that we can conclude that that circumstance is the cause of the effect. Just like if we observe that two stones are thrown into the water, and that each stone is thrown by someone, then we can determine that throwing is the common cause of that stone's going into the water, the common circumstance.
Prabhupāda: Why this example? What is the value of this example?
Śyāmasundara: Any example. Anything that is caused, if there are two instances of it-two balls are dropping—we can conclude, if we studied both of them, that they were both moved by some person, that that person is the cause of their falling. If there is a common circumstance for any phenomenon.
Prabhupāda: Any phenomenon that has natural law, so that is the cause. And if we go on, so what is the cause of that natural law? Then ultimately we find Kṛṣṇa. Everything, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), everything has got a cause, original source. So if you make actually research work what is the cause of this, what is the cause of this, that is called darśana. Darśana means seeing, finding out the cause. Therefore philosophy is called darśana-śāstra, to see the cause of the cause, cause of the cause, cause of the cause. So ultimately they have found Kṛṣṇa is the cause, original cause of everything.
Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:
Prabhupāda: This method of studying the cause, so we take the ultimate cause of everything, with His full independence. The ultimate cause can do anything and everything beyond our calculation. There is cause, but the cause is so powerful that it is beyond our calculation how it is being done. Our knowledge is limited; therefore our calculation may be, may be or almost always, is not perfect.
Śyāmasundara: For instance, he observes if a ball being hit by a bat, it always moves. So he concludes that whenever there is circumstance of a bat hitting a ball, that the ball will always move.
Prabhupāda: But the bat is hitting, it is caused by a living being. The bat is not hitting automatically. And not each hitting is of the same force. Therefore the hitting of the ball by the bat, it depends on the other cause, the man who is handling the bat.
Śyāmasundara: Then using another example, that every apple on the tree will fall, but when it is ripe, it will fall to the ground. There is no man involved with that. What about that?
Prabhupāda: No. That is his imperfect vision. We say that God is everywhere. God is everywhere. Aṇḍāntara-sthaṁ paramāṇu cayāntara-stham. God is present everywhere, even within the atom. Now the modern atomic theory, they will explain from atomic theory about the falldown of the apples. But we say that within the atom there is God; therefore God is the ultimate cause.
Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:
Śyāmasundara: Well, that, our duty is that which produces the most good for the most people.
Prabhupāda: This is also vague. This is also vague. There is no definite understanding.
Śyāmasundara: Just like the golden rule, "Do unto others."
Prabhupāda: Then if I conclude that most of the people are taking LSD, so to take LSD is my duty. Is that all right? He is vague. This is not philosophy. How a rascal can conclude about his duty? Rascal has to be trained to know what is duty. A rascal cannot conclude out of his own accord that "This is my duty" or "This is the best thing." Mr. Stuart... What is his name?
Śyāmasundara: John Stuart Mill.
Prabhupāda: John Stuart, he may be able, but it is not possible for ordinary man to know what is duty. The child plays, he does not know that his duty is to study. So parents teach him that "This is your duty. You must go to school. You must learn." So duty is not created by the rascals and fools. Duty is created by higher authority.
Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:
Prabhupāda: In man dealing, not with any other living beings, only man.
Hayagrīva: Well man, Mill concludes that conformity to nature has no connection whatever with right and wrong, and that man must amend nature. He must not act according to nature, but must—the word he uses is "amend"...
Prabhupāda: Yes, amend. Not only amend. The nature, that we discussed, almost always, the nature is animal nature. But man must be above the animal nature. That is rationality. Normally a man is called rational animal, so he should advance in rationality. Just for eating, eating is common to the man and to the animal, but man should be advanced, what kind of eating it should be. Not only natural, although natural tendency is... Just like man, some of, not all, some of them want to eat meat. So rationality is that "If I have got better foodstuff, why shall I kill that animal?" This is then rationality. But because he can eat meat, he can kill animal, he should go on killing animal, that is less intelligence. God has given so many nice foodstuff. Take for fruits, there are varieties of fruits Kṛṣṇa has given to the mankind, and we can utilize milk in so many nice preparation. So the fruits are not eaten by the animals. The dogs, cats, they do not eat fruit. It is meant for human being, so similarly there must, discrimination is the better part of valor. Is that not English proverb? So man should have discrimination, and especially for eating. I think George Bernard Shaw wrote one book, You are What You are Eating.
Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:
Hayagrīva: This is the continuation of Mill. He writes, "Limited as, on this showing, the Divine power must be, by inscrutable and insurmountable obstacles due to the existence of evil." Mill concludes that the existence of evil in the universe, or what he considers to be evil, pain and death, excludes the existence of an omnipotent God. He sees man in a position to aid the intentions of providence by surmounting his evil instincts. So God is not all-powerful, infinite in His power. If He were, there would be no evil, according to Mill.
Prabhupāda: No. God, evil is created by God undoubtedly, but the, it was necessary on account of the human being as, misuse of his free will. God gives him good direction but when he is disobedient, then naturally the evil power is there to punish him. Therefore the evil is not created by God but still it is created. It is necessary. Just like the government constructs the prison house. So this prison house creation is not the government's intention. Government wants that university is sufficient, people may be educated and highly enlightened, but because some, not all, misuses the independence, little independence, he creates evil circumstances, and he is compulsorily put into the prison house. Similarly, we suffer on account of our own evil activities but God, being Supreme, He punishes us for our evil activities. For God there isn't... When we are under the protection of God, there is nothing evil, only good thing. There is no evil. So God does not create evil but man's evil activities obliges God to create an evil situation.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Prabhupāda: Absolute? False?
Śyāmasundara: No. He says that a unified pattern of things, that the universe as a unified scheme, neat pattern of things, is false because our direct experience informs us of a discontinuity of facts. Our direct experiences sees discontinuity of facts, so we must conclude that the universe is comprised of facts which are not perfect in unity.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Because you are seeing the universe by your imperfect eyes. So it is your imperfectness. Just like you are seeing the sun planet just like a disc, but it is not a disc. But because you cannot see perfectly, you are thinking like that. So your conception of the universe is imperfect, because you are imperfect. Otherwise, everything is complete. Just like Īśopaniṣad, pūrṇam idam (Īśopaniṣad, Invocation). It is complete. That is the first verse of the Īśopaniṣad. But because you are imperfect, you are seeing the universe and everything as imperfect. The universe, because it is made by God, it cannot be imperfect. God is perfect, and anything created by God is perfect.
Śyāmasundara: His idea is that...
Prabhupāda: Because you do not see through the eyes of God—you want to see through your imperfect eyes-therefore you consider this universe as imperfect.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Śyāmasundara: So his definition of reality-reality equals pure experience. He says that reality equals pure...
Prabhupāda: Yes. Therefore we should go to the perfect experienced personality; then we can know reality. From his definition it is concluded that we must go to the perfect experienced person and understand what is reality. That is our process.
Śyāmasundara: The realized person.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Then we can know what is reality. I cannot know what is reality, but if I go to the perfect experienced personality, he can tell me what is reality.
Viśāla: In the Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Your Divine Grace, it mentions that there are three processes: the transcendental process, the speculative philosophical process, and the materialistic process. The devotees go to the transcendental process to get perfect knowledge.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Viśāla: Parampara.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Kṛṣṇa says that 40,000,000..., "Thousands of years before, I spoke this philosophy to Vivasvān"—we accept it. That's all.
Śyāmasundara: He says that there is an aspect of chance in nature.
Prabhupāda: Nature means always changing.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Hayagrīva: James believes that the existence of many religions in the world is not regrettable but is necessary to the existence of different types of men. He says, "All men have, should have... Should all men have the same religion? Ought they to approve the same fruits and follow the same leadings? Are they so like in their inner needs that exactly the same religious incentives are required? Or are different functions allotted to different types of men, so that some may really be the better for a religion of consolation and reassurance whilst others are better for one of terror and reproof?" And he goes on to conclude that he thinks that difference...
Prabhupāda: This is religion. Therefore I was talking in this morning that accept God as the supreme father and the material nature is the mother and we living entities, in 8,400,000 forms, we are all sons of God. So everyone has got the right to live at the cost of the father. The father is the maintainer—that is natural—and we are maintained. So every living being should be satisfied in the condition given by God. Man should live in his own condition, the animal also should live in his own condition. Why the man should encroach upon the rights, living right of other living entities like the animals? No. Nobody should encroach upon other's right. Everyone is son of God. Let him be maintained by the orders of God. That is ideal life, family life. All living entities are the members of the same family. Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura says that kṛṣṇera saṁsāra kara chāḍi' anācāra: just live in the family of Kṛṣṇa without violating the rules and regulation. Then it is family life. Or without violating the orders of God. Just like in the family the father is the chief man, and the sons can live very happily by being obedient to the father. There is no trouble; father will give all supplies and necessities if we remain obedient to the father, and all the brothers can live peacefully. A very common example. But they will not do that. They will encroach upon others' jurisdiction. That is the cause of disturbance: obeying..., disobeying the orders of God.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Prabhupāda: Samādhi means ecstasy, always in God consciousness. That is samādhi. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, yoginām api sarveṣāṁ mad-gata āntarātmanā (BG 6.47). The yogis means they are always remaining in meditation of the Supreme Lord. Dhyānāvasthita-tad-gatena manasā. Mind is always absorbed in God. That is samādhi. He has no other thought than God. So if we can continue in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that is samādhi.
Hayagrīva: Now James equates this mystical union, or samādhi, to be a union in which the individual has lost contact with the external world.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: And he therefore concludes that mystical states cannot be sustained for long, except in rare instances. Half an hour or at most an hour or two seems to be the limit beyond which they fade into the light of common day. "Often, when faded, their quality can be but imperfectly reproduced in memory, but when they recur it is recognized, and from one recurrence to another it is susceptible of continuous development in what is felt as inner richness and importance."
Prabhupāda: Yes. That richness comes to perfection when one thinks of Kṛṣṇa constantly, without any cessation. That is recommended in the yogic chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā:
- yoginām api sarveṣāṁ
- mad-gata āntarātmanā
- śraddhāvān bhajate
- yo māṁ sa me bhak...
- (BG 6.47)
Uh...
Hari-śauri: Yuktatamo mataḥ.
Prabhupāda: Huh?
Hari-śauri: Sa me yuktatamo mataḥ?
Prabhupāda: Hm, yes. You can find out that verse.
Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:
Śyāmasundara: He doesn't believe in rationality at all. Everything is..., no matter how hard we try to be rational, our plans are always upset. There is always some flaw to our reasoning.
Prabhupāda: Your reasoning may be full of flaws, that is the same thing. But why do you think others also reasoning will be with flaws?
Śyāmasundara: He was the first Western philosopher to read some of the Vedas. He read Bhagavad-gītā and other Vedic scriptures. So he concluded that all phenomenon are mere illusions, or māyā. He uses that word māyā. This world is simply illusory.
Prabhupāda: That also we say, but it is not irrational. There is rationality. There is regulation. The sun is moving, the moon is moving—not irrationally, quite in order. Everything is in order. We cannot say it is irrational.
Śyāmasundara: Just like all of our desires that we have are never fulfilled.
Prabhupāda: That will never take place. Just like in a prison house, if the prisoners desire something, no, it will never furnish it. It is meant for punishment. So he'll have to abide by the desires of the jail superintendent. He cannot. Similarly, here every living entity is a prisoner. The superintendent of prisons is Durgā Devī. Durgā means fort: you cannot go out, conditioned. So therefore frustration is the law here.
Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:
Prabhupāda: What does he give..., what does he explain about the nirvāṇa? What?
Hayagrīva: The will to live is the irrational urge that brings about all suffering. And his is a philosophy of extinction. Now in his first book, The World Is Idea, he ascribes to the philosophy of māyā, like a Māyāvādī. He writes, "The Vedas and Purāṇas have no better simile than a dream for the whole knowledge of the actual world, which they call the web of māyā, and they use none more frequently." From this Schopenhauer concludes that life is a long dream. "What is this world of perception besides being my idea? Is that of which I am conscious only as idea exactly like my own body, of which I am doubly conscious, in one aspect as idea, in another aspect as will?" So from this he concludes that life is a projection of the will.
Prabhupāda: This material life?
Hayagrīva: Material life is a projection of the will.
Prabhupāda: Yes, he has read it. It is taken from Indian... It is called vāsanā. Vāsanā means desire. So that desire, material desire, but the living entity cannot be desireless. Desireless..., nirvāṇa means material desires finished. But because living entity is eternal spiritual being, he is, he has got spiritual desire. Now it is covered. The desire is there, desire is constant companion, but because it is materially covered, we are thinking this temporary world as reality, and it is not reality; therefore it is changing. We are having different types of desires according to the body we get, and the soul is transmigrating in this material world from one body to another, and he is creating a certain type of desires, will. And to fulfill that will he is getting a different type of body by the Supreme Will. He is willing, and the Supreme Will, God, Kṛṣṇa, understanding his will, giving him facility to accept a certain pattern of circumstances, body, to fulfill his particular desire. That is going on. Therefore this vāsanā, or will, is the cause of his material existence, constantly changing, and on account of changing will he is changing body. This is the complication of material existence.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Śyāmasundara: Either direct or indirect. But how can I experience that statement that "Everything is Brahman"?
Prabhupāda: Indirect is there. Just like we accept that everything has got some cause. So I am a person; the cause is my person father, and his father is also person. Similarly, the ultimate father, the original father, although I have not seen, I cannot sense perceive, still, I must conclude that He is a person.
Śyāmasundara: But I think behind your statement "Everything is Brahman," there are also statements which show the person how to experience Brahman.
Prabhupāda: This is Brahman. Brahman means the greatest. Greatest.
Śyāmasundara: But when you say "Everything is Brahman," you are also willing to include another set of propositions which show how to experience Brahman, how one can experience this fact, "Everything is Brahman."
Prabhupāda: That is not very difficult. Just like this International Society. Originally I started, so in any center, I am there. I am there. My photograph is there, I am there, accepting, Bhaktivedanta Swami. So personally I am not there, but I still am there by my expansion of energy. So similarly, Kṛṣṇa is the original Brahman. Whatever we see, we perceive, experience, it's all Kṛṣṇa's expansion of energy. That's all.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Viśāla: Śrīla Prabhupāda said sādhu means he is a devotee of Kṛṣṇa. So unless you are a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, how can you be saintly or godly? Unless you are a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, you are not godly.
Devotee: So what he is trying to ascertain is that God is the absolute truth.
Śyāmasundara: (indistinct) as I recall he uses the example of the garden, that he sees in the garden the wisdom of logical arrangement, nice taste, so many things, so he concludes that because man can fill this garden or manipulate this garden, therefore there must be God.
Devotee: We also say like that, that there are so many nice arrangements that are universal, we see so many nice arrangements. There must be a...
Devotee (2): (indistinct)
Devotee (3): But the child will pick up a flower and look it and say, "It is so beautiful. Who has made it?" and then another child will answer, "God." (end)
Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:
Prabhupāda: You are so foolish that you cannot avoid even accident. You are subjected to so many accidents. So what you will do by your philosophy? If accident is so prominent, (laughter) so how you will make adjustment with your philosophy? Stop talking philosophy, accept accidents and suffer, that's all.
Hayagrīva: Concerning sex, Freud explored the realm of infantile sexuality and found a definite sexual nature in the earlier stages of childhood. He concluded that these sexual activities in childhood were normal phenomena, and finally concluded with his famous dictum, "In a normal sex life, no neurosis is possible."
Prabhupāda: That is also his foolishness, because a child can be trained up to become a brahmacārī so that he will have no inclination for sex. It depends on the child's training. The unscrupulous father and mother, they enjoy sex life before the child, and they imitate. I have seen it. I have seen it in Agra. There are two small children. In life, what do they know? The female child laid down, and the man child, just like they have seen father and mother-sex. He does not know anything, but he is imitating. So imitating, imitating, the sex life is there, it becomes prominent. Similarly, you train the children not to have any sense of sex life, he will become brahmacārī. So he has not studied. He has seen some abominable family's children. So they learn these things. Whatever you teach, they imitate. So if you keep the children aloof from this sex-life society, he will remain a brahmacārī. There is many instances. That is the Vedic civilization. The children are immediately, as soon as four, five years old, he is sent to the gurukula, and under the discipline he forgets sex life, practically. But still if he has little, that is natural when he is young man, so a guru sees that still tendency for sex life, he is allowed, "Go on, marry and become a gṛhastha." Otherwise, if he is perfectly controlled over sex life, he becomes a sannyāsī, vānaprastha, the whole life. Just like my Guru Mahārāja, he was never married. So he could..., that can be trained. Why he is saying the child is? Child can be trained. Even without sex he can live throughout whole life without any disturbance. That can be trained up. It is a question of education.
Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:
Prabhupāda: So his value also disappear.
Hayagrīva: So from this he concludes that without God, everything is possible. He says, "Indeed, everything is permissible if God does not exist. If God did not exist, everything would be possible. That is the very starting point of existentialism."
Prabhupāda: But he does not know what, what is the meaning of God. We have several times repeated this. God is the Supreme, Supreme Being. So we have defined in so many ways. Another thing that God is the Supreme, Supreme means He is supreme father. The Supreme everything means He is supreme father also. The conception of father is there. So as we are standing, we are talking with that gentleman priest, that mother nature, nature is giving, producing so many living entities. So she is supposed to be the mother. And as soon as we accept mother, there must be father. Mother cannot, alone cannot give birth to any offspring, so there must be the conception of father. And that is, practically we are seeing that mother nature... We say "mother nature" because she gives birth to so many forms of life, and if we accept mother, then you must to accept father, and that God is supreme father. How he can deny it? Father's duty is to maintain the children. So all living beings are being maintained, so there must be father. How he can deny that?
Hayagrīva: How, how, well, he does. He says, his very words, he says, "Since we have discarded God the father, there has to be someone to invent values. Before you become alive, life is nothing. It's up to you to give it a meaning, and value is nothing else but the meaning that you choose."
Prabhupāda: I will have to give meaning of my life? So what is that idea?
Hayagrīva: You must give meaning to your own life. Since, since there is no God to give life meaning, man must invent his own meaning.
Prabhupāda: Everyone will invent his meaning.
Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:
Devotee: (indistinct)
Prabhupāda: But that is imperfect.
Dr. Rao: That is imperfection.
Prabhupāda: So therefore it is concluded that direct perception is always imperfect. (laughter)
Devotee: (indistinct)
Śyāmasundara: His belief for..., the criterion for truth is called the correspondence theory, that a belief is true if it agrees with the facts with which it is supposed to correspond.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Just like this example, we see the snow as white, but it is..., does not correspond with the fact. Therefore it is not knowledge.
Dr. Rao: There is another example. They see water can (indistinct) in several (indistinct). One is the seawater, one is the (indistinct rest of comment)
Śyāmasundara: He also says that besides the correspondence, that fact must correspond with..., that a belief must correspond with the fact if it is to be true. Also he says...
Prabhupāda: So that fact does not correspond by direct perception, (indistinct) that we are seeing the snowball white, but scientifically it is not white; it is a combination of seven colors.
Philosophy Discussion on Plato:
Prabhupāda: That is from Vedic same. As soon as there is instruction there is form. As Kṛṣṇa is giving instruction, He is always saying "I," "you," like that, it is personal. He says Arjuna, "You," and He says Himself, "I." So Arjuna is also form and Kṛṣṇa is also form, and Kṛṣṇa also says that "Both you, Me, and all these living entities, kings and soldiers who are assembled here, they existed in the past, they are existing now, and they will continue to exist." So you can understand that "In the present I am in form, so I existed in the past in form and I shall continue to exist in the future as form. So where is formless?" From my present position I can understand my past and future. So Kṛṣṇa says that we existed in the past. So we existing now, now I mean to say, continuing. He never said that "In the past we were formless; now we have got form." This is not stated there. Rather, He condemns, that avyaktaṁ vyaktim āpannam manyante mām abuddhayaḥ (BG 7.24): "In the past I was formless, impersonal, and now I am a person," that is Māyāvādī thought, that when God takes the form, He takes the form of māyā. So they have been condemned as abuddhayaḥ, no intelligence. Avyaktaṁ vyaktiṁ āpannaṁ manyante mām abuddhayaḥ (BG 7.24). Those who have less intelligence, they think like that, that "God was formerly formless, now He is talking in form, that means He has accepted the body of māyā." This is called Māyāvāda philosophy.
Hayagrīva: Concerning education, he says, "We must conclude that education is not what it is said to be by some who profess to put knowledge into a soul which does not possess it, as if they can put sight into blind eyes. On the contrary, our own account signifies that the soul of every man does possess the power of learning the truth and the organ to see it with, and that just as one might have to turn the whole body around in order that the eye should see light instead of darkness, so the entire soul must be turned away from this changing world until its eye can bear to contemplate reality and that supreme splendor which we have called good. Hence there may well be an art whose aim would be to effect this very thing, the conversion of the soul, in the readiest way, not to put the power of sight into the soul's eye, which already has it, but to insure that instead of looking in the wrong direction, it is turned the way it ought to be.
Prabhupāda: That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement.
Hayagrīva: That.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Philosophy Discussion on Thomas Aquinas:
Prabhupāda: Yes. That we say, that every man is defective on account of his material condition of life. So philosophy coming from such defect persons cannot be any good for the human society. Philosophy coming from a person who is in contact with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, that is perfect. That will benefit human society. And the speculative philosopher, who has no definite idea, simply basing on his belief or imagination, by following such philosophy nobody will be benefited; rather, he will be deviated from the actual philosophy of life.
Hayagrīva: So he concludes that Divine revelation is absolutely necessary, because by the philosophical method very few men could arrive at the truth, and only after a long time and many errors.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That's a fact. The so-called philosophers, they are imperfect, so there is no need of consulting them. Our path is that you directly contact the Supreme Person in knowledge, who has got complete knowledge—Kṛṣṇa—and we take His instructions and try to follow Him.
Hayagrīva: This knowledge based on revelation or scripture is called sacred doctrine or scripture. He says it, this scripture, "does not provide information about God and about creatures in equal fashion, but about God principally and about creatures as they are related to God as to a source or to an end. Hence the unity of the science is not ended." So scripture for him is the science of God.
Prabhupāda: This is science of God.
Hayagrīva: Yes.
Philosophy Discussion on Rene Descartes:
Hayagrīva: He says reason is by nature equal in all men. Now isn't reasoning power different in different men?
Prabhupāda: Yes. Otherwise why it is called "This man is intelligent," other man is called "You are ass." So when, on this reasoning platform, when one comes to the conclusion that the living force within the body is different from this lump of matter, then he is on the human platform. And if he keeps himself that this life means combination of these material things, then he remains an animal. This is the reasoning. Where is the life? You analyze beginning from the breathing up to the urine and stool—where you will find life? That is human reasoning. Human civilization is now advanced in analyzing things in the chemical laboratory. So if we analyze this breathing, it is air. So you replace this air, let life come again. What is this breathing? Breathing is simply exhaling and inhaling some air. So by machine, by electric, what is called, batteries, let it work and it will act accordingly, breathing. But does it mean it will bring life? So they say breathing is stopped; therefore life is stopped. So breathing can be revived, but where is the life? They say the blood has become white. So blood can be colored. So anything of this body, analyze perfectly and bring life; then you say that life is combination of this matter. You cannot bring it; therefore it must be concluded that life is different from this combination of matter. This is reasoning. This is human reasoning. And if you still keep yourself that this body is, it is everything, then you are animal. This is reasoning. That is the verdict of the Vedic..., sa eva go-kharaḥ. Yasyātma-buddhiḥ kuṇape tri-dhātuke (SB 10.84.13). If one is thinking still that he is this body, he is no better than animal. There is no reasoning. Who can challenge this? Analyze every part of the body. Where is life? Hm? What do you think? Is that reasoning or not?
Hayagrīva: Yes. Now the reason is one thing, but intellection is another there.
Philosophy Discussion on Rene Descartes:
Hayagrīva: He says, "I see that the certainty in truth of all knowledge depends on knowledge of the true God, and that before I knew Him I could have no perfect knowledge of any other thing, and now that I know Him I have a means of acquiring a perfect knowledge of innumerable things, not only in respect of God Himself and other intelligible things, but also in respect of that corporeal nature which is the object of pure mathematics." Now he says he knows God but at the same time he seems to be deceived in matters, certain matters that we haven't come to yet, but, uh...
Prabhupāda: No. If he has actually followed God's instruction and if he has actually knowledge of what is God, then he will never be misled. Either he selects a false God or he has not met God, real God. Then he is... But to save this danger there is God's instruction, Bhagavad-gītā. Anyone who will follow, he will be perfect.
Hayagrīva: Concerning the soul, Descartes concludes that...
Prabhupāda: Now in this connection, regarding the soul, if he has received the knowledge of soul from God, therefore at that time there is no chance of he is thinking. If, as soon as he thinks in his own way, then there may be mistakes, because he is imperfect, finite. But when Kṛṣṇa says directly that "Within this body the soul is there," so if we accept God's instruction, then immediately we understand that the soul is different from this body. Exactly just like if somebody inquires, "Where is Prabhupāda?" If somebody says that "He is in this room," it does not mean this room is Prabhupāda; Prabhupāda is within this room. Similarly, Kṛṣṇa says that this, the owner of the body, the soul, is within this body. So immediately the false impression that "I am this body," the fool's conclusion, immediately it is eradicated. The light is there, but he will not accept. He wants to continue to live as a fool and speculate and waste time and con..., give conclusion in so many ways, so many rascal jugglery, "The living force is like this, like that, like that." But Kṛṣṇa gives instruction immediately that the living force, soul, is within this body; he is not this body. And He gives complete instruction on this at... He says, na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre: (BG 2.20) "This soul is never killed even the body is killed." This is knowledge. In spite of this knowledge, if somebody sticks to his foolish theories, then he remains animal.
Philosophy Discussion on Blaise Pascal:
Hayagrīva: Descartes was more in the jñānī tradition, and Pascal more in the bhakti tradition. He says, "Employ the rule of love not of intellect," and for Pascal, knowledge can only be attained by curbing the passions, submitting to God, and accepting the revelation of God. And he was also Christian. And he said "There is no happiness apart from religion."
Prabhupāda: Yes. We say the same thing, that without religion one is animal. Because the animal society there is no church, there is no religion, there is no discussion about God. So if the human society, as they are doing now, that they are denying discussion about God even in the schools and colleges, so it is the most degraded form of society, and the consequence is there: they are all suffering.
Hayagrīva: Although he was considered a great philosopher, he concluded that philosophy in itself only leads to skepticism, that faith is needed, and he always added here, "God."
Prabhupāda: Philosophy means, real philosophy means to understand the truth. That is philosophy. So without understanding about the truth, if he encourages untruth... Just like some philosophers are philosophizing on sex life. So the people are becoming degraded. So what is philosophy in sex life, that is an (indistinct). It is there in animal and man also. So sex life is not actual life; it is a symptom of life only. So if we stress on this point only, that is not philosophy. Philosophy means, as it is stated, tattva jñānārthaṁ darśanam. To find out the Absolute Truth, tattva, that is philosophy. And tattva means the spirit soul or the spiritual atmosphere. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). So those who are discussing about Brahman or Paramātmā, Supersoul, or Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, they are real philosopher because they are trying to find out the Absolute Truth, and others are bogus.
Hayagrīva: That's, that's all.
Prabhupāda: That's all. (end)
Philosophy Discussion on Auguste Comte:
Prabhupāda: So that is natural distinction between man and woman, so how it can be changed? Woman is meant for certain activities and man is meant for certain activities. So how this can be changed? Artificially if you change it, it cannot be changed. Then, just like woman becomes pregnant, man does not become pregnant. How it will be changed?
Hayagrīva: Well from this he concludes that woman, being dominated by love, is morally superior to man.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: And he considered woman, or all women, to be what he called "The spontaneous priestess of humanity. She personifies in the purest form the principle of love upon which the unity of our nature depends." So the woman is to act almost like the brāhmaṇas, in being a priestess or in charge of the, of the religion of man, being that she's dominated by the heart.
Prabhupāda: These are all imagination. When woman, when she is misguided, she becomes dangerous. There is no question of love. But one thing, according to Vedic conception life, that women and children are on the same level, so they should be given protection by men. In childhood the protection is from the father, in youthhood the protection is from the husband, and in old age the protection is from the grown-up sons. So they should never be given independence. They should be given protection, and their natural love for father or for husband or for children, then that propensity will grow very smoothly, and that will establish the relationship with woman and man very happy, and both of them will be able to execute their real function, spiritual life, by cooperation. The woman is known as his better half, so if she looks after the comfort of the man, a man is working and he is looking after the comfort, then both will be satisfied and their spiritual life will progress.
| Page Title: | Concluded that... (Lectures) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, Mayapur |
| Created: | 18 of Feb, 2012 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=123, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 123 |