So one, when one is intelligent to get out of the illusion, he surrenders to a spiritual master. That is being exemplified by Arjuna. When he's too much perplexed... He was talking with Kṛṣṇa as friend, but he saw that "This friendly talking will not solve my question." And he selected Kṛṣṇa... Because he knew the value of Kṛṣṇa. At least, he ought to have known. He is friend. And he knows that Kṛṣṇa is accepted... "Although He is acting as my friend, but by great authorities Kṛṣṇa is accepted as the Supreme Personality of Godhead." That was known to Arjuna. So he said that "I'm so much puzzled that I cannot understand. Even accepting that I shall be victorious in this battle, still I shall not be happy. What to speak of being victorious on this planet, if I become the king of all other planets or if I become a demigod in the higher planetary system, still this distress cannot be mitigated." You see?
Ought
Bhagavad-gita As It Is
BG Chapters 13 - 18
False ego means accepting this body as oneself. When one understands that he is not his body and is spirit soul, he comes to his real ego. Ego is there. False ego is condemned, but not real ego. In the Vedic literature (Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.4.10) it is said, ahaṁ brahmāsmi: I am Brahman, I am spirit. This "I am," the sense of self, also exists in the liberated stage of self-realization. This sense of "I am" is ego, but when the sense of "I am" is applied to this false body it is false ego. When the sense of self is applied to reality, that is real ego. There are some philosophers who say we should give up our ego, but we cannot give up our ego, because ego means identity. We ought, of course, to give up the false identification with the body.
O Arjuna, when one performs his prescribed duty only because it ought to be done, and renounces all material association and all attachment to the fruit, his renunciation is said to be in the mode of goodness.
O son of Pṛthā, that understanding by which one knows what ought to be done and what ought not to be done, what is to be feared and what is not to be feared, what is binding and what is liberating, is in the mode of goodness.
Srimad-Bhagavatam
SB Canto 2
Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, being the Supreme Personality of Godhead and fountainhead of all other incarnations, is the only independent person. He enjoys His pastimes by creation as He desires and gives them up to the external energy at the time of annihilation. By His internal potency only, He kills the demon Pūtanā, even though enjoying His pastimes in the lap of His mother Yaśodā. And when He desires to leave this world He creates the pastimes of killing His own family members (Yadu-kula) and remains unaffected by such annihilation. He is the witness of everything that is happening, and yet He has nothing to do with anything. He is independent in every respect. Mahārāja Parīkṣit desired to know more perfectly, for a pure devotee ought to know well.
SB Canto 3
Sons ought to render service to their father exactly to this extent. One should obey the command of his father or spiritual master with due deference, saying, "Yes, sir."
SB Canto 4
The question may be raised here that if everyone engaged in spiritual activities to attain salvation and became indifferent to the activities of the material world, then how could things as they are go on? And if things are to go on as they ought to, how can a head of state be indifferent to such activities? In answer to this question, the word śreyaḥ, auspicious, is used here. The division of activities in society as arranged by the Supreme Personality of Godhead was not blindly or accidentally created, as foolish people say. The brāhmaṇa must do his duty properly, and the kṣatriya, the vaiśya and even the śūdra must do the same. And every one of them can achieve the highest perfection of life-liberation from this material bondage. This is confirmed in Bhagavad-gītā (18.45).
SB Canto 10.1 to 10.13
My dear Baladeva, best of our family, please come immediately with Your younger brother, Kṛṣṇa. You both ate in the morning, and now You ought to eat something more.
Lectures
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures
The living entity, spirit soul, has no birth and death. And anyone who possesses this material body has to undergo the threefold miseries of the material world. A similar passage is there in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The other day, as I was speaking to you, nūnaṁ pramattaḥ kurute vikarma (SB 5.5.4). All these people, they are acting in a way which they ought not to have done. Nūnaṁ pramattaḥ. But they are acting as madmen. Why? Yad indriya-prītaya, for satisfaction of the senses. Nūnaṁ pramattaḥ kurute vikarma yad indriya-prītaya āpṛṇoti na sādhu manye (SB 5.5.4). This is not good. Because he does not know that he has achieved this material body by working in that way in his previous life. Again he is working in that way. So he'll have to accept again this material body, therefore he's miser. He's not properly utilizing. Go on.
That is called vegam, pushing. So there are six vegam, pushing. What is that? Vāco vegam. Vegam, pushing of talking. Unnecessarily talking. That is called pushing of the talks. Krodha-vegam. There is sometimes pushing of the anger. If I am very much angry I cannot check myself. I do something which I ought not to do. Sometimes in anger kills his own men. This is called vegam, pushing. So pushing of the talking, pushing of the anger. Similarly pushing of the mind. Mind dictates, "You must go at once there." Immediately. Pushing of the talking, pushing of the mind, pushing of the anger. Then jihvā-vegam. Jihvā-vegam means tongue. I want to taste such nice things. Some sweetballs or something else which I like very much. So one has to control this. One has to control his talking unnecessarily. One has to control his mind, dictation of mind. The yoga practice only on the mind. But our Kṛṣṇa conscious practice ... except mind there are so many other things.
And how one can become free from reactions and reactions? Simply by acting for Kṛṣṇa. Even externally it appears that you are doing some bad work, still, it will have no reaction. It does not mean that we shall entail our activities with some impious motive. No. Of course, a devotee cannot do that. But even supposing that you have done something which is impious, which you ought not to have done, still, it will have no reaction, because the assurance is there: ahaṁ tvāṁ sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣayiṣyāmi mā śucaḥ (BG 18.66). The Lord will save you from the reactionary result of even impious activities. Sarva-pāpebhyaḥ. Pāpa means sinful activities. So a devotee never acts sinful, but supposing that he sometimes consciously or unconsciously does something, there will be no reaction. That is the formula. Sannyāsa-yoga-yuktātmā vimukto mām upaiṣyasi. And so long you are not liberated from the actions and reactions, you cannot be liberated. You cannot be liberated.
Philosophy Discussions
Hayagrīva: Leibnitz pictures a kind of city of God. He writes, "God is the monarch of the most perfect republic composed of all the spirits, and the happiness of this city of God is His principal purpose. The primary purpose in the moral world, or the city of God, which constitutes the noblest part of the universe, ought to be to extend the greatest happiness possible."
Prabhupāda: Yes. We agree to that. If everyone becomes Kṛṣṇa conscious and acts according to the instruction of Kṛṣṇa, then this hell, hellish world, becomes the city of God.
Hayagrīva: He says we must... "Therefore we must not doubt that God has so ordained everything that spirits not only shall live forever, because this is unavoidable, but that they shall also preserve forever their moral quality so that His city may never lose a person."
Hayagrīva: "Each disputant triumphs in his turn while he carries on an offensive war and exposes the absurdities, barbarities and pernicious tenets of his antagonists. But all of them," that is, all of the religions, "on the whole, prepare a complete triumph for the skeptic who tells them that no system ought ever to be embraced. A total suspense of judgment is here our only reasonable recourse."
Prabhupāda: No. Our principle is to know God from God, and religion means the principles given by God. Just like the law means the principle given by the state, similarly the principles given by God, that is religion. Otherwise it is pseudoreligion. If there is no conception of God, there is no direction of God, that is not religion. Religion is not a kind of blind faith. Religion is factual. That factual religion can be given by God Himself, and if we know God and what is His instruction, then we are religious.
Śyāmasundara: After Kant finished this analysis of the pure reason, then he began his Critique of Practical Reason, of reason applied to practical living, to try to find out what were the limits of that study. This is his idea: moral laws are necessary and universal objects of the human will, which must be accepted as valid for everyone. He calls this his categorical imperative. That means that there are certain moral commandments which are universal, and which must be applied to everyone, and which everyone must obey without exception. Now, he says that we know these moral laws a priori, by intuition, and that the individual fact and the situations have no bearing, and there is no consideration of what I want or what I desire, but what I must do, what I ought to do.
Prabhupāda: No. Morality varies according to the development of the particular society. There are so many immoral things going on in the particular type of society which are very, very immoral, but they do not care for it; they do it.
Śyāmasundara: There is no universal morality?
Prabhupāda: But it is not possible that everyone will be able to do. Just like you become truthful. It may be universal truth, but you do not expect that everyone will be truthful. That is not possible. Therefore it is not universal. It is meant for certain types of men. How can he say this is universal?
Śyāmasundara: But he says that the fact that I ought to do this implies that I can do it, and everyone can do it.
Prabhupāda: That is nice. I ought to do it, but I cannot do it. So there is therefore a scientific method of classification of people. That is varṇāśrama. Certain people cannot do it, although they know they ought to do it. He is a śūdra. And a man who does it practically, he is brāhmaṇa. So therefore there must be classification. This class of men, they know that this is good and they do it, and the other class, either they do not know, or even they do know, they cannot do it. So therefore there must be distinction between these two classes of men. Therefore this classification, as Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭam: (BG 4.13) "The four classes of men, it is designed by Me." But you cannot find all men of the same level. Therefore there must be a class of men who are to be called brāhmaṇa, a class of men who are to be called kṣatriyas, a class of men who are to be called vaiśyas, and a class to be called śūdras. That is a natural division. Because in this world, you cannot find all men of the equal level, on the same platform. That is not possible.
Hayagrīva: In his last work Kant seems to shift his position. He says, "Morality thus leads ineluctably to religion, through which it extends itself to the idea of a powerful moral law-giver outside of mankind for whose will that is the final end of creation, which at the same time can and ought to be man's final end. Make the highest good possible in the world your own final end." So he seems to point to an absolute law-giver or an absolute morality, which is God, but he believes that this knowledge of God is ultimately uncertain.
Prabhupāda: Uncertain—for the man who does not possess the perfect knowledge. But if we believe in God, if we know God, we can get perfect knowledge from Him. Then we become perfect.
Hayagrīva: He says, "If life realizes a plan, it ought to manifest a greater harmony the further it advances, just as the house shows a better and better idea of the architect as stone is set upon stone. If, on the contrary, the unity of life is to be found solely in the beginning in the impetus that pushes it along the road of time, the harmony is not in front but behind. The unity is given at the start as an impulsion, not placed at the end as an attraction." But he's...
Prabhupāda: So this can be utilized. Suppose an artist is trying to improve this building. So if he takes instruction from an experienced artist how to improve, then it becomes easier, and if he tries himself, it takes long, long time. He should take the artistic idea from a person who is perfect in artistic idea, then his work will make progress very swiftly. Otherwise he is already imperfect, he may think "This is better," but it may not be better because he is imperfect. So he has to take instruction from a perfect person, then the progress will be very swift.
Hayagrīva: He says that the natural existence often proves itself to be basically unhappy. "With such relations between religion and happiness, it is perhaps not surprising that men come to regard the happiness which a religious belief affords as a proof of its truth. If a creed makes a man feel happy he almost inevitably adopts it. Such a belief ought to be true; therefore it is true. Such, rightly or wrongly, is one of the immediate inferences of the religious logic used by ordinary men."
Prabhupāda: Yes. If you are actually in clear conception of God, and if you have decided to obey God and love Him, that is happiness. Sa vai puṁsāṁ paro dharmo yato bhaktir adhokṣaje, ahaituky apratihatā (SB 1.2.6). This process of acting in obedience to the order of God, as we are doing in Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement... We have no other business than to obey the orders of God. God says that you preach this confidential philosophy of Kṛṣṇa consciousness everywhere. So because we are trying to love God, we have got some affection and love for God; therefore we are so much eager to spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Otherwise, "It is Kṛṣṇa's business. Why should we bother about Him?" No. Because we love Kṛṣṇa, and He is happy that His message is being spread, that is our happiness also, that we are trying to serve God, tacitly, without any doubt.
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.
Śyāmasundara: So he says that we can remedy the whole situation of bad faith and being an unsavory character and treating myself as an object instead of a person by choosing for myself the person I ought to become.
Prabhupāda: Ideal person.
Śyāmasundara: An ideal person. And become that ideal person.
Prabhupāda: So what is the definition of that ideal person?
Śyāmasundara: Well, in some of his books it would be the very heroic type person who sees things as they are.
Prabhupāda: A big robber is also heroic.
Śyāmasundara: Yes. Many of his heroes are robbers and...
Prabhupāda: So these robbers are ideal persons? Big, big thieves.
Prabhupāda: That means if you are in the modes of goodness, your morality is different from the morality of the man who is in the modes of ignorance.
Śyāmasundara: But he says that everything should be understood in terms of what it ought to be, that there is an absolute good.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: And every activity should be understood in terms of that absolute good.
Prabhupāda: That, that we say liberation. One should be free from the material contamination. That is our... Because under material condition, he is in three modes, goodness, passion and ignorance. So one who is in goodness he does not approve conclusion in ignorance. And one who is in ignorance, he thinks it is better.
Śyāmasundara: So if one is looking on the objects of the world in terms of what they ought to be...
Prabhupāda: Ought to be, how you'll know it? Unless he gets information from the higher authority what is ought to be? You cannot manufacture. If you are in the modes of ignorance, your "ought to be", just like they're saying the animals have no soul and we are saying, "No, you cannot kill animals." So we are in different position. So what is "ought to be", who will dictate? If you dictate yourself, your concept of killing, it "ought to be". And my concept of not killing, is "ought to be". So what is the standard?
Then you have to go to the authority, go for judgement.
Śyāmasundara: These German philosophers, they generally accept the Christian standard of morality to be what ought to be.
Śyāmasundara: He also sees things in that way. He sees the unfolding of reality as the fulfillment of duty, that one must always strive for what ought to be, what is fulfillment of his duty.
Prabhupāda: That, that information we are giving that in reality everyone is servant, but he is under misconception, he's thinking he's master and he's forced to serve māyā. This is reality. Just like a outlaw, he is thinking that free from the state law but he's forced to abide by the state law in the kingdom. Similarly my position is I must carry the order. I am inferior. I must carry out the order of the superior. The superior, the supreme superior is Kṛṣṇa. If I voluntarily become the servant and carry out His order, then it is my normal life. Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇam vraja (BG 18.66). Otherwise it is abnormal life. I have to serve māyā. Daivī hy eṣā guṇa-mayī mama māyā duratyayā (BG 7.14). Māyā will kick upon my face and force me to do something, prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni guṇaiḥ karmāṇi (BG 3.27). So I will be servant of prakṛti, material nature. That means I will be servant of my senses. By nature, my senses dictate, "Now you do this," I will be forced to do it. This is my position.
Śyāmasundara: So the standard of what ought to be is that one should fulfill one's duty to Kṛṣṇa.
Prabhupāda: That is good, that is moral, real morality.
Śyāmasundara: So Kṛṣṇa uses the same terminology that one should fulfill his duty and if this is the what ought to be.
Prabhupāda: Duty means superior order. That is duty. You cannot manufacture your duty.
Śyāmasundara: His idea is a little impersonal because he says that we discern what ought to be from the forces of nature around you, reality unfolding.
Prabhupāda: Then he abides by the forces of nature. That is nature is superior. He does not know beyond nature there is another superior being, that is God. That is his lack of knowledge. That is the difficulty. If you are not perfect, where is that philosopher?
Śyāmasundara: Well, to do our duty is to do what ought to be.
Prabhupāda: Who has prescribed that this is ought to be?
Śyāmasundara: Well, the world order prescribes what ought to be.
Prabhupāda: World order, what is that world order? Is it blind?
Śyāmasundara: Harmony, whatever causes harmony...
Prabhupāda: What is harmony, who will define? You say this is harmony, I say this is harmony. Therefore our philosophy is perfect. We are taking our duty from the Supreme. Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66), that is authority, only to surrender to Kṛṣṇa and abide by His order.
Śyāmasundara: Actually his philosophy has that loophole, that there's no
Prabhupāda: Every philosophy will be loophole. Everybody, that we shall find out, others cannot find out, what is that loophole.
Śyāmasundara: That being, being doesn't strive for what is, being is always striving for what ought to be. He always has a sense of duty. There should be something other than this that I must...
Prabhupāda: That Supreme Being, He can be (indistinct) up to. You, you cannot do such. You commit mistake. Therefore you do not know what is ought to be or not to be.
Śyāmasundara: Just like this propensity is there in men not simply to be satisfied with what is but always to strive for something improving, what ought to be.
Prabhupāda: So we, we give that ultimate ought to be that you will become surrendered soul to Kṛṣṇa. That is ultimate ought to be.
Śyāmasundara: And he says that everything should be seen in relation to that what ought to be (indistinct).
Prabhupāda: Yes, that is our philosophy. If it is approved and Rūpa Gosvāmī says, ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānu-śīlanaṁ (CC Madhya 19.167), our ought to be is what is Kṛṣṇa approves or His representative approves. That is ought to be. Our standard. Otherwise it is not, not ought to be. Therefore we accept our guidance (indistint). Tad vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet (MU 1.2.12). Therefore Vedas say that one must approach a bona fide spiritual master, in order to be fully in knowledge. Ācāryavān puruṣo veda. These are Vedic injunctions. One who has accepted a bona fide spiritual master, he knows everything. Ācāryavān puruṣo veda. Veda means in knowledge. So ācāryavān, one who has accepted ācārya. Therefore our principle is to follow the ācārya. In Bhagavad-gītā also it is said, ācārya upāsanam, one must worship ācārya, to go to the right knowledge. So that is our philosophy.
Śyāmasundara: In his epistemology or his study of knowledge he said that events are not made necessary by causes, but that everything is motivated by its own purpose. In other words if I drop this...
Hayagrīva: Getting back to conscience, that was..., we said was vague, he says, "This voice of my conscience announces to me precisely what I ought to do and what leave undone, in every particular situation of life. It accompanies me, if I but will listen to it with attention, through all the events of my life, and never refuses me my reward when I am called upon to act. To listen to it, to obey it honestly..."
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: "...and unob..."
Prabhupāda: So that means he wants to listen somebody's dictation. That is, as soon as you say "listen," then somebody is speaking, you listen. So that is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe arjuna tiṣṭhati (BG 18.61). God is situated in everyone's heart, and He is dictating. Even He is dictating to the thief that "You are going to steal. It is not good. If you are arrested you will be punished." That dictation is there, but he disobeys the dictation and he steals, commits sin. That is sin. So the dictator is there, we admit that. Kṛṣṇa, or God, is there within the heart, and He is giving dictation, but you disobey. But if we accept that dictation, then you become devotee. Dictation is already there; otherwise this thief is going to steal at night? Dictation is there that "You don't go at the daytime. You will be captured and be punished." "All right, I shall go at night, when everyone is sleep." So dictation is there.
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.
Hayagrīva: He thinks... He says in many Oriental states this assignment... He says, Hegel, in tle Platonic state, in Plato's Republic, the government assigns each individual his occupation. In Oriental states, in..., for instance in India, he says this assignment results from birth. The subjective choice, which ought to be respected, requires free choice by individuals, and he considers this the basic right.
Prabhupāda: No. The thing is just like Bhagavān Kṛṣṇa said, cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭaṁ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ (BG 4.13). This is going on all over the world. The occupation is that just like engineering occupation. So who can become engineer? Guṇa-karma, one who has acquired the qualification of engineering profession and is actually acting as engineer. That is wanted. Guṇa-karma. Kṛṣṇa never says, "Birth" But later on, because an engineer trains his boy as engineer, so naturally he becomes also engineer. Formerly, as we understand from the history of Ajāmila... He was a son of a brāhmaṇa, and he was being trained up as a brāhmaṇa. That was the system. Not that because he has born in the brāhmaṇa family he becomes brāhmaṇa. No. He has got the chance of being trained up as brāhmaṇa by the brāhmaṇa father. So it became later on as caste, by birth, because naturally a brāhmaṇa father trains his son to become brāhmaṇa.
Conversations and Morning Walks
1971 Conversations and Morning Walks
Prabhupāda: I am not very much interested for sightseeing.
Prof. Kotovsky: But in any case, if you have come, you ought to go somewhere and to see something.
Prabhupāda: I'm not...
Prof. Kotovsky: 'Cause to stay in a hotel, old style hotel like National, is not interesting. Not many people to see. And you are leaving day after tomorrow?
Prabhupāda: That is my program. Day after tomorrow...
Prof. Kotovsky: From here you are going to...?
Prabhupāda: Day after tomorrow or...?
Śyāmasundara: Wednesday.
Prabhupāda: That I do not know.
Interviewer: Well, maybe you ought to find out, because, you know, this is widely distributed in the United States.
Prabhupāda: My book is authority.
Interviewer: Yes, I know.
Prabhupāda: Macmillan's publishes every year fifty thousand. (stage directions going on in background) You can inquire from your side any reading matter from Bhagavad-gītā original. That will be nice. Then I can explain.
Interviewer: All right. (aside to associate:) You're going to cue me, right?
Woman Interviewer: What worries me slightly is that since the arrival in Britain some while ago of the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, a lot of... He was the first guru that most people ever heard of, and since then there have been a lot of people and a lot of gurus that have suddenly appeared out of nowhere. And one gets the feeling that sometimes they're not all as genuine as they ought to be, and I wondered whether you feel that it's right that you could perhaps issue a warning to people who are seeking some new spiritual life that they should take care to make sure they have a genuine guru to teach them.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Woman Interviewer: Do you feel there's a danger?
Prabhupāda: Of course, to search out guru is very nice. But if you want a cheap guru or if you want to be cheated, then there will be many cheater gurus. But if you are sincere, then you'll have sincere guru. People want to be cheated because they want everything very cheap. But just like we are asking people no illicit sex, no meat-eating, no gambling, no intoxication. So people think it is very difficult, it is botheration. And if somebody says, "No, you do. Whatever nonsense you like do. You simply take my mantra," they will like it. So the thing is that they want to be cheated; therefore cheaters come.
1972 Conversations and Morning Walks
Bob: You know, without being honest, without thinking they're honest because it is God's wishes, they just feel like they ought to be honest.
Prabhupāda: No. God wishes everyone should be honest. Why God should think otherwise?
Bob: So you may follow God's wishes without knowing you are following God's wishes. Like somebody may be in the mode of...
Prabhupāda: No. Without knowing following, that is absurd. Without knowing following that is absurd. You must know that this is the order of God. And if you follow that, then that is honesty.
Bob: But somebody would not be honest without knowing God?
Prabhupāda: Spiritual communism means that these so-called communists they are concerned with the limited thing. Just like the communists in Russia or China, they are thinking of their country main only. They are not thinking of others. Or they're thinking only they human beings, not of the animals. But our spiritual comm... Communist means that we take care, not only of the human being, but of the animals also. We don't think that the human being is only our own community. We think every living is within the community, center being God. Just like spiritual our communism means... Just like I'm living in this house. I shall have to take care even for one lizard, that is also living entity. I shall have to take care of one rat, one mouse, even one snake, if he's living in one's house. That is spiritual community. The idea is nobody should starve. I have to see whether the leader is also given proper food. Just like people generally save foodstuff from the attack of other animals. But spiritual communism... (break) We ought to make them happy. We want to see everyone is happy.
1973 Conversations and Morning Walks
Prabhupāda: All right. (laughs)
Guest (1): Thank you, very, very much. And now perhaps you can guide me and tell me what to do, which one, you know, that I ought to be concerned with?
Pradyumna: Yes.
Guest (1): And I will take my leave of the master, yes. Thank you very much.
Prabhupāda: You can, he wants Bhagavad-gītā?
Pradyumna: Yes.
Prabhupāda: Read.
Guest (1): Thank you very, very much.
1974 Conversations and Morning Walks
Gupta: These (indistinct) ought to be finished. They cannot remain.
Prabhupāda: No! (Hindi) ...that glowworm. Glowworm (Hindi) beautiful (Hindi) darkness hai. (Hindi) So long people were in darkness, they were beautiful. Now there is sunshine.
Gupta: Yes.
Hṛdayānanda: Prabhupāda is the sun.
Prabhupāda: (Hindi) (break) ...the anxiety of Prahlāda Mahārāja, "How these rascals, who have made a plan for happiness of a few men, gorgeous plan." And they're... For happiness of the government servant. That's all. You know in Delhi there is Planning Commission? What is that plan? That people may starve, and Indira Gandhi and company may flourish. That's all.
Cardinal Pignedoli: Yeah, that's wonderful. We ought to see you in India sometimes for real again and...
Bhagavān: Do they have a copy of Bhagavad-gītā?
Dhanañjaya: I don't think you have this.
Cardinal Pignedoli: What is this?
Dhanañjaya: If you like, you can take this.
Cardinal Pignedoli: I have, I have this.
Dhanañjaya: You can have this.
Cardinal Pignedoli: Yes, I have. Thank you.
Bhagavān: There are many copies of Bhagavad-gītā, but the unusual happening with this version is until this was presented, there was no devotee...
Prabhupāda: Professor Dimock has said very nicely.
1975 Conversations and Morning Walks
Siddha-svarūpa: Well, these particular tests and so on that they're using. So it seems that he ought to change. Because somebody started doing that, right? I mean, they didn't always use those tests. They always change different kinds of tests and everything. Instead of being limited, he should offer a new method of observation, a new method of tests.
Prabhupāda: It is simple, but because of their bad education, they cannot understand the simple thing.
Bahulāśva: They want everything complicated.
Prabhupāda: Complicated. The experiment is there. Observation is there. Everything is there. And the eternity is there. Kṛṣṇa begins like reasonable gentleman, not humbug. He says, tathā-dehāntara-prāptiḥ (BG 2.13), very good example, that "As in this, body is changing from this stage to this stage, this stage, this stage, step by step, similarly," tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ, "similarly another body." So where is the difficulty to understand?
Devotee (2): Śrīla Prabhupāda, our parents in America teach us that we ought to be doing good things for other people. Should we be engaged for our fellow people?
Prabhupāda: But that you do not know, how to do good to the people. Just like a diseased man. The doctor has ordered that he should starve. But if you go in the hospital and you take sympathy with the starving patient, "Oh, you are starving for the last three days," if you give to him some food without the permission of the physician, then you will be punished. So he may think that "Oh, here is a starving man. I must give him some food." But you are liable to be punished. So first of all learn how to do good to others. So that is described here. Tasyaiva hetoḥ prayateta kovido (SB 1.5.18). To bring him to the knowledge of self-realization, that is good. If you can distribute knowledge to bring him back to his consciousness, original consciousness, that is real welfare activity. Otherwise, if you manufacture something that "This man is starving: let me give him some food," it may be wrongly done, and you are liable to be punished. So first of all, you must learn what is actually good to the human society.
Dr. Patel: I have got a killa. (?)
Prabhupāda: Yes. It has dignified.
Dr. Patel: They ought to thicken wall with a little under because this kaccā wall foundation is there. They should make it... This wall. They should dress it up, the foundation, which is above. No? You are going away today?
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Prof. Olivier: Yeah. It is a scholar from Vienna that we have got to teach this course for us. But what he teaches and what kind of basic philosophy, I wouldn't know. There are about thirty or forty students. So in essence, they ought to start by making at least a detailed study, as I see it, of the Bhagavad-gītā as a basis for their whole philosophy.
Prabhupāda: So why not appoint somebody to teach Bhagavad-gītā As It Is? That is essential. And we have got step by step, so many books, fifty books, simply to understand God.
Prof. Olivier: Uh huh. You mean from the beginning right through the...
Prabhupāda: Oh, yes. You can make them pass the entrance examination, the graduate examination, the postgraduate examination by studying these books. Yes.
Prof. Olivier: Well, this is apparently what one needs. This is perhaps what one needs, you know.
1976 Conversations and Morning Walks
Kern: I think you ought to eliminate the second-class man who are soldiers. If you're training a man to be a soldier, he wants to fight.
Prabhupāda: That's all right; fighting is also required. When there is enemy, we are not discarding fighting. Fighting there will be. So long we are in the material world, there will be disagreement and there will be fight. You cannot stop it; that is not possible. So a class of men, they should be trained up fighting. A class of men, they should be trained up for teaching. A class of men for producing food. Kṛṣi-go-rakṣya-vāṇijyaṁ vaiśya-karma svabhāva-jam (BG 18.44). There are so many things. If you take advantage of this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement cooperatively, it will be very, very good for the whole human society. And if your America takes up this call very seriously, others will follow.
Scheverman: Well I would be very interested, as the man who lives across the street right over here, pastor of St. Mark's parish, in talking with your local leadership and discussing whatever programs you are interested in working in this particular community. And I think perhaps...
Guest (3): But it says that if I follow another person's occupation, even if I do it better than my own occupation, that is not as good as following what I ought to be doing.
Prabhupāda: If you are unfit for that occupation, why should you imitate, waste your time? If you are, you are fit for becoming a carpenter, why should you imitate a brāhmaṇa? Better be expert carpenter and serve Kṛṣṇa with the result of carpentry work. Then there is perfection. Saṁsiddhir hari-toṣaṇam.
- ataḥ pumbhir dvija-śreṣṭhā
- varṇāśrama-vibhāgaśaḥ
- svanuṣṭhitasya dharmasya
- saṁsiddhir hari-toṣaṇam
- (SB 1.2.13)
So suppose you are a carpenter. You earn something. So out of that your income, you offer something to Kṛṣṇa. If, even you are poor man, you can bring some fruit or flower to Kṛṣṇa. "Kṛṣṇa, I am poor man, I can't give You anything more.
1977 Conversations and Morning Walks
Hari-śauri: We fought with demons once or twice before that have attacked the temple. We ought to give 'em a good hiding.
Prabhupāda: There is civil war. Why not this?
Hari-śauri: Yes. This is... This is a big fight now.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hari-śauri: (laughs) You're the world's greatest revolutionary.
(Prabhupāda laughs) (break)
Hari-śauri: Now that we're being attacked like this physically...
Prabhupāda: So we must attack them also.
Hari-śauri: Should we actually have a training program so that our...
Prabhupāda: No.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Actually this is one way that we ought to be able to... First of all, it would be prestigious on our part to stick to our principles, and secondly, actually people will find that we're convinced when they'll see, "You are Māyāvādī, we have no bus... You are not..." At first they may feel offended, that why shouldn't we let everybody speak.
Prabhupāda: (indistinct)
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Prabhupāda says, in future, henceforward, these people should not be allowed to hold lectures here. Strictly Caitanya Mahāprabhu's teaching forbids. Māyāvādī haya kṛṣṇe aparādhī. You tell them, "You're Māyāvādī. So this is a Kṛṣṇa conscious temple. If you're speaking on Kṛṣṇa consciousness, Vaiṣṇavism..." We don't need their money, neither do we need them to become more prestigious. Rather, they need us. They came here only because of the fact that they're so insignificant that they wanted to be associated with Prabhupāda. Without you they have no substance, Śrīla Prabhupāda. Without your presence the meeting has no substance.
Prabhupāda: (chuckles) Why?
Correspondence
1947 to 1965 Correspondence
I can challenge you that you are not happy in the present set up of your affairs. You may have in your possession your so called accumulated material wealth, health or happiness but still you are always feeling some insufficiency and frustration and thus you are not happy as you ought to have been. If you do not feel like this, then you must be either an abnormal man or a liberated saint or in gross ignorance of lower consciousness. Should you feel yourself abnormally happy, I shall ask you the following plain questions. They are as follows:—
1) Do you like to die?
2) Do you like to take your birth again?
3) Do you like to be an old man?
4) Do you like to be a diseased man?
I am sure you shall reply to all these questions by saying the only word "No." If you think yourself happy then have you solved all the above problems in any way? Have your vast resources of material knowledge helped you in solving these seemingly common but very big problems? Do you think that you shall ever be able to solve the above problems at any length of time? If you say so, I shall again call you in abnormal condition.
1970 Correspondence
You know that Vyasasana is meant for the representative of Vyasadeva, the Spiritual Master, but Mr. Parikh does not come in the Parampara to become the representative of Vyasa, neither he has any sound knowledge of Vaisnava principles. I understand from your letter that sometimes discussions on Aurobindo philosophy are done by Mr. Parikh from the Vyasasana, so I am a little surprised how did you allow like this. I think you should rectify immediately all these mistakes as stated by you in the last two lines of your letter, "I think the best thing to do is stop his class. Nonsense ought not to be tolerated."
1973 Correspondence
I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated December 16, 1972, along with photos from Srimad-Bhagavatam. To answer your questions, "self-deception" means that I know I should have done something, I have knowledge of what I ought to do, and still I don't do it. Just like some of our devotees, we have got certain prohibitions, and everyone knows they will be harmful to me to violate, still they do it, despite everything. It is not like running after a mirage in the desert, thinking something water, that is ignorance, not self-deceit. So I cannot think of any example for your illustration just at this moment, but you have got the idea now what is self-deceit, I think you will be able to draw something nice.
| Page Title: | Ought |
| Compiler: | Sahadeva, RupaManjari |
| Created: | 01 of Nov, 2011 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=3, SB=4, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=23, Con=16, Let=3 |
| No. of Quotes: | 49 |