Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


There is no question (Philosophy Discussions)

Expressions researched:
"no question" |"there can be no question" |"there could be no question" |"there is no question" |"there was no question" |"there will be no question" |"without any question"

Lectures

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Prabhupāda: No. There are two ways-gradual and immediate also. Of course, in one sense... (break) ...little force, it goes quickly. The ball has no power. So wonderful things are happening in the material nature due to the will of the Supreme. Everything happening is the same process; it is undergoing the process, but the method, pushed by God, it takes automatically. Just like He created this material nature. It is in the beginning nonmanifest, then gradually it grows three qualities, and by the interaction of qualities so many things come out—the sky comes, and as soon as the sky comes out, there is sound; sound comes, as soon as sound has come out, the ear comes; the controller of the ear comes..., so many things—one after another, one after another, one after another. So the pushing is so perfect that all other things come automatically in perfect order. But foolish people, they are thinking that things are coming automatically out of it, without any background. They don't think there is God. They think that nature, there was a chunk, and the creation was there. And wherefrom the chunk came? That is imperfect observation. Perfect knowledge is you take Bhagavad-gītā. Kṛṣṇa says, mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ: (BG 9.10) "under My superintendence." And that is our practical experience. When I manufacture this table, the raw materials, matter, is there, but it has not automatically become table. I have made it by instrument, by my brain. Similarly, this cosmic manifestation has not come out automatically; it is the brain of Kṛṣṇa. Therefore He is the creator. That is nature. Nature is instrumental. Just like the potter: his wheel is going around and the clay is making a pot, but the original cause is the potter. He has given force to the wheel. After the wheel is running, then so many pots are coming out. So nature... Foolish people are seeing that the wheel is moving. They do not see that behind the movement of the wheel there is a potter who has given force. So there is no question of nature. Everything is God, Kṛṣṇa. This is imperfect vision, that the wheel is moving without any direction.

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Prabhupāda: But Bhagavad-gītā says that it is the place for miseries only. Kṛṣṇa says, duḥkhālayam aśāśvatam (BG 8.15). It is a place simply for suffering, and that also we cannot stay for a long time. Even if you agree to stay in this uncomfortable situation of life, still you will not be allowed; you have to change this place, change this body, that may go higher or lower. Therefore this life, the material life, is on the whole miserable. There is no question of any happiness.

Śyāmasundara: He says that because God has freedom of will, God decided it would be best to give man such freedom of will.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Because every living entity is part and parcel of God, although very minute portion, similarly proportionately, he has minute proportion of freedom of will. Not absolute. That is natural. Every man has got a little freedom of will, but it is not absolute. A man cannot will as he likes. That is not possible. Therefore it is said, "Man proposes; God disposes." Although the freedom of will is there, it is subordinate to the freedom of will of God. You cannot fulfill your desire unless it is sanctioned and approved by God.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the fact that there is more good than evil in this world justifies its creation.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Śyāmasundara: Is that a higher understanding than understanding the soul by itself?

Prabhupāda: Yes, when soul is liberated, that is higher understanding. The soul should be liberated. He is in awkward position within this material world. He is in awkward position.

Śyāmasundara: Does the condition of being entrapped, enhance the understanding of liberation?

Prabhupāda: Yes, unless one understands that he is entrapped, there is no question of liberation. If he's in ignorance that this is the real life... Just like ordinary man, they think this is real life but we are giving education, "No, this is not real life. The real life is Kṛṣṇa consciousness."

Śyāmasundara: Does someone who has been in prison and then he becomes free, does he appreciate his freedom more than someone who has always been free?

Prabhupāda: So, that's very easy to understand. You can apply the same thing in your life. That is not very difficult. Everyone can understand.

Śyāmasundara: So to enhance the understanding of freedom is it, if someone...

Prabhupāda: You come to the platform of freedom.

Śyāmasundara: But say one has always been free. His understanding...

Prabhupāda: No, why? So long as we are entrapped by this material body you are not free.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Prabhupāda: Because you cannot invent anything which is not in the substance.

Śyāmasundara: Even if I invent, for instance I invent the atomic bomb...

Prabhupāda: There is no question of inventing. The atomic bomb, what is that, it is brahmāstra, it is already made. You are not inventing.

Śyāmasundara: Where does the idea come from?

Prabhupāda: From the origin.

Śyāmasundara: From our past lives?

Prabhupāda: From the origin, yes.

Devotee: (indistinct) one of the chapters of the Bhāgavatam, Śrīla Prabhupāda.

Prabhupāda: That is, that is, I have explained in Bhagavad-gītā that a yogī remembers in due course, past activities, and again he begins. Where he left it, from that point again he begins. Śucīnāṁ śrīmatāṁ gehe yogo bhraṣṭo sañjāyate (BG 6.41). He is given the chance.

Kīrtanānanda: So all ideas can be traced back to the original substance which is Kṛṣṇa.

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: You did not know but you don't know who was there. You did not know. Then three hundred years ago that governments did not know there is a land. But it was there.

Śyāmasundara: But isn't it possible that some day we may be able to discover the source of all these chemicals.

Prabhupāda: No, no, it is... There is no question of discovering. There is already, it is known. It is not known to you. We know. It is not known to you, but it is known to us. And the Vedānta says, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), the original source of everything: Brahman. We know it. Kṛṣṇa says, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate (BG 10.8): "I am the origin of everything." So we know that there is a big brain who is doing everything, mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ (BG 9.10). So we know. Darwin may not know. That is his foolishness.

Śyāmasundara: He might say the same thing about us.

Prabhupāda: No. He cannot say the same thing about us. We accept Kṛṣṇa, not blindly. Our predecessors, our ācāryas, our learned scholars, they have accepted. So we are not blind. Rather, he cannot say anything. As soon as he says chance, that means he has no knowledge. We don't say chance. We have got an original cause. But he says chance; therefore he has no knowledge.

Śyāmasundara: The scientists have found that we grow up out of a set of genes in the sperm of the male. They are called genes, tiny cells.

Prabhupāda: That's all right. Wherefrom the genes came?

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Svarūpa Dāmodara: Just a little change. But another point in that connection is that nature makes its own equilibrium, balance of all the species, and it could have been all a balance. That is why, when nature is balancing all the species, there is no question of making another species fresh or something. This has been already made. It has already been done by nature. What is that nature, you have to ask by going to the real nature, not this false nature.

Śyāmasundara: Just like Darwin first investigated some islands off of Peru, Galapagos Islands, and he found different species of life that exist there that don't exist anywhere else, so that they must have evolved...

Prabhupāda: That means that he has not seen all the species, because he has not traveled all over the universe.

Karandhara: Deductive. It's a deductive conclusion.

Prabhupāda: Yes. He has seen one island but he has not seen the whole creation.

Syamasundara: No.

Prabhupāda: Then? How he can fix up. There may be many others he has not seen.

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.

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: But Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is not on the basic principle of this body. It is basically on the soul; therefore you will find everyone same.

Śyāmasundara: But otherwise it goes...

Prabhupāda: Because it is culture. When one comes to the spiritual platform, there is no question. Even animal you can accept. Just like we worship Vajrāṅgajī, Hanumān. He's animal, but because he is devotee of Lord Rāmacandra, we worship him. But that doesn't mean we are worshiping animals.

Śyāmasundara: You mean like Bengalis are a different species than Gujaratis? Something like that?

Prabhupāda: No, no. Why do you mix, we have already explained? Our jāti means of the same culture. He may be Gujarati, he may be Bengali, he may be American.

Śyāmasundara: So, for instance, carpenters are different than field workers-like that, different interests?

Prabhupāda: Why different interest? The interest is to earn money. So you may earn money in some way, I may earn money in some way, he may earn money in some way.

Karandhara: So is the primary factor of the variation is how much advanced they are in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, and how least advanced they are in Kṛṣṇa consciousness?

Prabhupāda: Yes. Yes.

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: Nobody will survive. (laughter) This is called karma. This is activity. The body is the field of activity. You are given license to act with this body for some time. That's all. No question of survival. Nobody will survive. You can act for some time.

Śyāmasundara: By survival he means species. The species will survive.

Prabhupāda: Any species. Nobody will survive. That is also false theory. Nobody will survive. Where is the species that is surviving?

Śyāmasundara: Just like horses. Horses, they have found in the fossils and millions of years ago, they say millions of years ago horses were there. Slightly different forms, but still they were horses.

Prabhupāda: So different forms, just like human beings, formerly they were very tall, and they are reducing their stature, and at the end of Kali-yuga they will be stature like this. So this is not change of the species. This is changing, just like your father is taller than you, is he not? Is he not taller?

Śyāmasundara: No. I'm taller than he is. But they say because our generation got better foodstuffs than our parents.

Prabhupāda: So therefore, according to circumstances, the stature is changing. It is not the species. It is the same human, but formerly the human being was taller, stouter; now they are reducing in strength, in stature, in memory, in duration of life, span of life, in mercy. That is stated in Bhāgavatam. They do not change every species.

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: That it is a question of time, and it is the beginning.

Hayagrīva: The beginning of the creation was when? No...

Prabhupāda: No. There is no question of when. It may be seven thousand years or seven millions of years, but the beginning should be taken like this, that God created this cosmic manifestation. And wherefrom the living entities came? That also came from God. That is explained clearly in the Bhagavad-gītā, that this material creation is composition of earth, water, air, fire..., like that, that this is also God's energy. The ingredients of this material world coming from God, that is called prakṛti and pradhāna. He is the creator. And then the living entities, they are also coming from God. So this material energy is explained as inferior energy, and the living entity is explained as superior energy, both of them coming from God. So the beginning of life simultaneously. It is not that matter later on developed to become life. That is a wrong theory.

Hayagrīva: So, so much... It's the end of Darwin. (break) ...Thomas, Thomas Henry...

Prabhupāda: In that case, all defect is that nobody could ascertain the beginning of life, but here is the solution. The beginning of life is from the very beginning of creation.

Hayagrīva: Simultaneous creation.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: You can see it is not predictable, it is actually happening. Everyone is trying to be happy, but he is being frustrated. Everyone can see. They are manufacturing different ways of material happiness but becoming frustrated. This is māyā's kicking. There is no question of prediction. Any man who has got a little intelligence, he can see.

Śyāmasundara: So someone can understand, someone can know what the life force is going to do in the future, how it will manifest itself in the future?

Prabhupāda: The future, because he is eternally servant of God, so now he has forgotten. He wants to become master, and the material nature is kicking him, life after life. So one day he'll come to his senses and become again, renovate himself to become servant of God.

Śyāmasundara: So we can predict that everyone will...

Prabhupāda: Oh, yes. Everyone will be. Somebody sooner, somebody later.

Śyāmasundara: So that the purpose of the life force then is to eventually go back...

Prabhupāda: Just like when a man becomes a prisoner, he will be freed, he'll be a free man at the end of his term, and within this term he is simply kicked by the police, so that he may not come back again to prison house.

Śyāmasundara: But we can't predict that the process of punishment will have permanent effect, can we? Can we predict that? Many prisoners leave the prison, but some come back.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: Independence is there. Independence is always there. When he is being kicked, there is also independence.

Devotee: Then he is so many times falling down, again and again, eventually permanently he will come back.

Prabhupāda: No. There is no question of permanent. Because he has got independence, he can misuse his independence, he can fall down. That's why one man is released from the prison house, that does not mean permanently he... He can come back again.

Śyāmasundara: There's no guarantee.

Atreya Ṛṣi: This concept of prediction, Prabhupāda. You just said it's the duty of the material (indistinct) because he's (indistinct) material. Because he's not sure and...

Prabhupāda: (indistinct) by experience (indistinct). Just like you can predict that four months after, there will be winter season. This prediction is like that. You have got experience that last year there was winter season, and again four months after there will be winter season. We call this prediction of experience, that's all.

Atreya Ṛṣi: In the spiritual world everything is permanent.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Atreya Ṛṣi: There is no need for making predictions all the time.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: Eternally, it is not possible. Just like a father and son. It may be, circumstantially, the son is separated from the father, but it is not possible to forget eternally. Sometimes he remembers his father. Father is always remembering the son, and father is looking after the opportunity when the son becomes obedient to his order. So there is no question of perpetually.

Hayagrīva: That's good news (laughing).

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: Regarding karma and transmigration, Bergson writes, "What are we in fact? What is our character if not the condensation of the history that we have lived from our birth, nay, even before our birth, since we bring with us pre-natal dispositions? Doubtless we think with only a small part of our past, but it is with our entire past, including the original bent of our soul that we desire, will and act. Our past, then, as a whole is made manifest to us in its impulse. It is felt in the form of tendency, although a small part of it only is known in the form of idea." That is, although we cannot recall much of the past, the present, our present state, is determined...

Prabhupāda: We cannot recall. That is the defect in our life. Therefore the literatures are there to remind us. That opportunity is there in the human form of life to take advantage of this Vedic knowledge which is kept in the literature. Just like Bhagavad-gītā or any Vedic literature. Especially Bhagavad-gītā is the nutshell of all Vedic knowledge. So we have forgotten. But this forgotten, forgetfulness is not perpetual. He can be reminded and he can come to his real consciousness. That is our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. These rascals, they have forgotten God, Kṛṣṇa, and they are thinking that "We are the master of everything." The so-called scientists, they are decrying God: "Now we shall do everything independently." This is demonic. So he has to be reminded. Therefore śāstras are there, sādhus are there—sādhu, śāstra, guru—guru is there, that you are not independent, you are foolishly thinking like that. You are under the clutches of māyā. So don't remain in this position, then your life will spoil. Take instruction from Bhagavad-gītā. Act accordingly. You will be happy.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: Now, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they, possessing poor fund of knowledge, they want to kill this individuality. But that is not possible. Kṛṣṇa says that you shall remain individual perpetually. There is no question of stopping. Mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūta jīva-loka sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7). They, perpetually you are individual, God is also individual. So to..., killing the individuality is not possible, but this is a false notion that "I kill my individuality and become one with God, then I will be perfect." That is not possible. You cannot become one with God. You keep your individuality. So even though if for the time being you think that "I am now merged in the existence of God," but on account of our individuality you shall again fall down.

Hayagrīva: And there's no need for a search for individuality.

Prabhupāda: Individual, he is always individual. Perpetually.

Hayagrīva: Yes. Concerning the creation, Bergson speaks of impulsion and attraction, and he says, "The causal relation between God and the world is seen as an attraction when regarded from below, as an impulsion or a contact when regarded from above. Therefore we perceive God as an efficient, that is a beginning, cause or as a final cause, according to the point of view." That is, we can see things either..., the creation coming from God or moving toward God, depending on our viewpoint.

Prabhupāda: No. Creation is..., God is always there. Before the creation and when the creation is finished, there is God. So God is not one of the creation. In the creation there are so many things coming out, so God is not one of the products of creation because He is created. He was before creation and He will exist to continue after annihilation. This is the Vedic knowledge.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: No.

Hayagrīva: No.

Prabhupāda: Soul is eternal. Soul is ever-existing. There is no question of evolution or..., that it is according to the body. So long he is in the material existence and bodily concept of life, he is thinking that a better body is evolution and a lower body... But if his consciousness is changed, then there is no chance of changing, different bodies. He remains in his eternal body.

Hayagrīva: Well the basic contradiction, it seems, between Bergson and the Vedic version is that of the evolution of the universe.

Prabhupāda: Evolution of universe means, I have already explained, that anything material, it goes under six changes. So this universe, since its birth, it is increasing in volume. So that is material change. It is nothing to the, to do with the spiritual. Spirit, the soul, as we have got soul within this body, similarly ākāra, Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu is the soul of this universe. He is not changing; the universe is changing, the body is changing.

Hayagrīva: Bergson's theory seems to be that there's greater harmony being realized the further life advances or the further the universe goes on.

Prabhupāda: Harmony is there, certainly. That harmony, just like the child's body is harmonically changing into boy's body, harmonical changes, there is harmony. But the change is there.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: Demigods are already there. Just like in the same example, in the wheel the different parts, they are already there.

Hayagrīva: So there's no question of the making of gods?

Prabhupāda: No, no. That is a wrong theory.

Hayagrīva: But when a man becomes Kṛṣṇa conscious, could you say that he has become like a god or godlike?

Prabhupāda: He, that godlessness is diseased condition. So when he becomes in normal condition, that is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. His normal life is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That is mukti. Mukti means liberation. What is that liberation? A man is suffering from fever. So if the fever is stopped by medicine and treatment, then he becomes in normal health. It does not mean that he, he changes his constitution. He is the same man, but on account of fever he was talking nonsense, in convul..., what is called, convulsion?

Hayagrīva: Convulsions.

Prabhupāda: Huh?

Hayagrīva: Delirium.

Philosophy Discussion on Jeremy Bentham:

Prabhupāda: This is a very nice definition. We accept it, this standard, but if you put material happiness and test by this standard, there is no happiness. There is no happiness. Therefore the conclusion should be, if we test with this acid test of happiness, it is impossible to get happiness in the material world. There is no question of happiness. These testing points are nice but as soon as we put any kind of happiness to this test, you will find it is failed. Take any standard (of) happiness, it will, neither of this test will be there. So the conclusion should be there is no happiness in the material world. These tests are applicable in the spiritual world.

Śyāmasundara: So he says that everything should be utilized to extract the most pleasure from life.

Prabhupāda: That is our theory, to make the best use of a bad bargain. We are already cheated, "Now all right, let me utilize it." That's all. You don't admit that "I have been cheated, now I am utilizing it."

Śyāmasundara: He says that utility is that property in any object whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good or happiness.

Prabhupāda: That is nice, this definition also, but if we put to test all our so-called happiness, it will not be possible to come out successful.

Śyāmasundara: He realizes that this view could give rise to egoistic over-indulgence, that someone could think, "Well, if pleasure is my only goal, let me do anything, never mind others."

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Prabhupāda: Then where is the question of maximum men? A Socrates you will find in millions, one.

Śyāmasundara: But he says that that standard of pleasure that Socrates...

Prabhupāda: Then there is no question of maximum people. The number of Socrates is not maximum. That is minimum. That is minimum. If you come to the question of quality, the quality philosophy, quality understanding, that is for the minimum. Just like Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, manuṣyāṇāṁ sahasreṣu kaścid yatati siddhaye: (BG 7.3) "Out of millions and millions of persons, one person is trying to become perfect." And yatatām api siddhānāṁ kaścid vetthi māṁ tattvataḥ: (BG 7.3) "Out of millions of such perfect men, one may understand Me, Kṛṣṇa." That is not quantity, that is quality. That is quality.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the highest quality pleasure, such as Socrates would enjoy, the high intelligence...

Prabhupāda: That is not for mass of men, not for the greatest number of men. That is the minimum. That philosophy is understood by minimum number.

Śyāmasundara: But he says that this standard should be applied to all men, that all men should be trained to find pleasure in this standard.

Prabhupāda: That is another thing. That means quality pleasure should be introduced to the... What, at the beginning you said maximum pleasure?

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa is all-powerful. So His fighting with the demons is, actually it is play. It doesn't affect His energy. Just like a small child is fighting with his strong father. So one slap by the strong father is sufficient to the small child. Similarly the fighting of the demons with God is like that. He gives some chance to play fighting but one strong slap to the demon is sufficient. So there is no question of fighting with God. He is omni-powerful, omni-competent, omni... But the demons are there disobeying. When the living being becomes too much disobedient and harassing to the obedient persons or devotees, then it is necessary that God kills them. Paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām (BG 4.8). That two business is going on, to chastise severely the demons, non-devotees, and to give protection to the devotees. That is the idea of fighting with the demons and the demigods. Paritrāṇāya sādhūnām, whenever there is such fight, God takes side of the demigods.

Hayagrīva: Mill pictures it more like a struggle but there's no struggle with them.

Prabhupāda: Struggle, the struggle is there, because it is the... Demon means they are always against God's ruling. That is demon. And demigod means who will accept the rulings of God. That is the difference. In the śāstra it is said that there are two kind of human being, one is called demigod and the other is called demon. The demigods are those who are abiding by the Lord, order of Viṣṇu, and just the opposite number, they are called demons.

Hayagrīva: But he pictures God as struggling.

Philosophy Discussion on John Dewey:

Prabhupāda: Yes, that is required. Because in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is also accepted that except a Vedic religion, all others are cheating religion because they have no perfect knowledge. It is clearly stated that cheating type of religion is rejected from the Bhāgavata religion. Bhāgavata... The sum and substance of Bhāgavata religion is accepting God as the supreme controller. Satyaṁ paraṁ dhīmahi. This is beginning. And what is that Absolute Truth? Janmādy asya yataḥ, itarataś ca artheṣu abhijñaḥ svarāṭ: (SB 1.1.1) that there is a principal, Brahman, from whom everything has come. So unless you find out what is the ultimate source of emanation, the knowledge is perfect, hum, imperfect. But you must have to admit, from your experience, that everything has a source of emanation. Anything has. You cannot go beyond your experience. You see this table. This table has got a history. Somebody has collected the wood and he has made into a shape. So everything that you see, it has got a history. So similarly the whole creation, it has got a history, and to know who has created, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), that is perfect knowledge. If you do not know, if you cannot reach, that is your inability. Don't think that it is imaginary, mythological. That is your imperfect of knowledge. You cannot reach, and you make a conclusion like a crazy man. That is not philosophical at all.

So there is no question of starting a new religion. The religion is already there, but poor people, they do not accept it. The simple thing is that somebody must be the supreme controller. He is God. And everything under His control. Actually, if somebody asks, "What is your experience?" so the real experience is that we see two things. One thing is matter, inert matter, without any consciousness.

Philosophy Discussion on John Dewey:

Prabhupāda: No. There is no question of human choice. Can you say that death is my choice? Huh? It is forced. So the, wherefrom the force is coming, that is God. Nobody wants to die, but there is force. You must die. Nobody wants to become old man. You must become old man. The sanity is to find out wherefrom this enforcement is coming. That is Supreme. Just like the government. If you disobey the orders of government, immediately you will be punished. So we can understand there is supreme authority. Similarly, I do not want to die. I am enforced to die. So there must be some supreme authority. That supreme authority is God. Either call nature or God, whatever you call, there is something supreme which is controlling you. How you can philosophize and imagine that man can imagine God, man can imagine this and...? That is insanity.

Hayagrīva: He says, "A humanistic religion, if it excludes our relation to nature, is pale and thin, as it is presumptuous when it takes humanity as an object of worship."

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Prabhupāda: And they have developed this philosophy and this Bible, after the demise of Jesus Christ. More or less it is concoction.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the opposite of faith is sin, that sin is the same as despair. Sin and despair are the same.

Prabhupāda: Well, unless you have got complete sense of God, there is no question of sin or piety. Because if you do not know what is the standard of sin and piety... Just like the same example can be given that in this India-Pakistan war, that party killed so many men and this party killed so many men on the other side. When you take killing as sin, but it's piety. From their side it is piety; from our side it is piety. So how these sinful activities or pious activities are considered? To satisfy the higher authorities.

Śyāmasundara: Yes. He means faith in the orders of God; the opposite of that.

Prabhupāda: It is not a question of faith, it is a question of fact. Then it is, the same example, just like Arjuna. He decided to become nonviolent in the beginning, but at the end he decided to fight and kill. Now which is piety and which is sinful? Actually, this decision to kill by the order of Kṛṣṇa is piety, because he satisfies the higher authorities. So in this material world we concoct that "This is sinful, this is piety," but actual sinful and piety is decided on the order of the Supreme God. That is (indistinct). So if you have no connection with God, so our these thoughts of sinful and piety, they are simply mental concoction. It has no value.

Śyāmasundara: He says that faith in the order of God, that is piety.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: To be itself and not something else.

Śyāmasundara: Just like we might say surrender. The self wills...

Prabhupāda: There is no question of surrender. To become self, that is the Māyāvādī, that I become one with the Supreme Self.

Śyāmasundara: No. He means as a part and parcel of God, because he says, "Faith is the self willing to be itself, authenticity, and to stand transparently..."

Prabhupāda: Then it can be understood that I am part and parcel of the Supreme. So when I remain as part and parcel, that is called faith.

Śyāmasundara: Yes. When I surrender to the idea that I am part and parcel of God, then I am...

Prabhupāda: So that surrender to the idea means, the same example, that a part and parcel of my body, they are engaged in the service of the body. So as soon as you engage yourself in the service of the Lord, that is your self-realization. That is perfect self-realization. Because you remain in your position, your position as part and parcel of the Supreme is to serve Him, practically. So if you engage yourself always in the service of the Lord, that is self-realization. There is no other philosophy.

Śyāmasundara: He says that in a way because he said that at this stage one stands transparently before God, and this is his integrity, when he realizes his...

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Prabhupāda: Therefore we require guidance of the spiritual master so that we may not fall down.

Śyāmasundara: ...or defiance, sometimes due to, even though we know the real position, we defy it, then we become sinful.

Prabhupāda: Defiance, there is no question. If you are actually engaged in the service of Kṛṣṇa, where is the question of defiance?

Śyāmasundara: Well, he is talking about someone who may know what is the law of God, but he defies it. Someone who wants to sinfully act. Either due to weakness or defiance we sin, but he says that the self-integrated personality is willing to be himself. He surrenders to what his real position is. This is called self-realization.

Prabhupāda: No. This self-realization practically—to be self means to remain as part and parcel, to serve.

Śyāmasundara: He says that full self equals full will. That when we are fully ourself, then we are fully willed.

Prabhupāda: What you mean? That is Māyāvādī. Full self, what is that? Then what is the question of part and parcel?

Śyāmasundara: That means when we make decisions that they are...

Prabhupāda: You cannot make decision. If you are part and parcel, then you have to take decisions from the whole. You cannot make. The finger does not make decision. I say "Finger, stand up like this, please."

Śyāmasundara: So just like when there are decisions to be made, because a self-realized soul automatically...

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Prabhupāda: Why gradual development? Here Kṛṣṇa says, the Supreme Self, "Surrender unto Me. I give you all protection." Why gradual? Immediate.

Śyāmasundara: He is saying we are motivated by despair to come to this stage.

Prabhupāda: But there is no question. Christ says, or Kṛṣṇa says that "You surrender unto Me, I'll save you," no more disappointment.

Devotee: I haven't heard in this philosophy yet where he has mentioned either guru or śāstra. How... (break)

Prabhupāda: ... dealing factually, scientifically.

Śyāmasundara: You said (indistinct) just the opposite. You said, "Keep me talking. That is my life."

Prabhupāda: Yes. It is a fact. Sa vai puṁsām... Sa vai manaḥ kṛṣṇa-padāravindayoḥ vacāṁsi vaikuṇṭha-guṇānuvarṇane (SB 9.4.18). That is Ambarīṣa Mahārāja, the great saintly king. About him it is described, sa vai manaḥ kṛṣṇa-padāravindayoḥ. He engaged completely, twenty-four hours, his mind unto the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. And vacāṁsi vaikuṇṭha-guṇānuvarṇane, and he engaged his talking simply on Vaikuṇṭha, on the subject matter of Vaikuṇṭha, Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Prahlāda Mahārāja also speaks like that: tad vijñā, tad vijñā sa (indistinct). Glorifying, he is very (indistinct). So they have no conception of God, and whatever you believe, (indistinct). So God is imperson, He is not a person, so where is the (indistinct)? So they come to the (indistinct), scientist, another politician, another this, (indistinct) and they want to become a hero eventually, "I am a great philanthropist," "I am a great nationalist," "I am greatest philosopher." That... And when they finish their talks, then become (indistinct). No more talks—finished. (Hindi) Prahlāda Mahārāja says that (indistinct). He says that śoce tato muni vimukha-cetasa(?): "I am simply thinking of these rascals who are without God consciousness."

Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:

Prabhupāda: You desire or you not desire, that is because you, foolishly, you do not know that you have to live, desire or not desire, because you are eternal. You have to live. But if you don't live in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then you will have to live in abominable condition like cats, hogs, dogs, trees, like that. We have to live. The modern civilization, they do not know that. The tree is also living, I am also living. So why these two different conditions are there? I am living, we are living, every one of us is living eternally, but according to our karma, according to our work, fruitive activities, we are getting different bodies. But we have to live. There is no question of not living.

Śyāmasundara: No, but there's a will...

Prabhupāda: Just like rascal, one who does not know, he commits suicide. He thinks that "If I commit suicide, then everything is finished." That is his ignorance. He is going to get another abominable body. Ghost. He becomes a ghost, so that he suffers more. A ghost means he has got subtle body, mental body, mind, intelligence and everything is there. Mind is there, intelligence, ego is there, but no gross body, so he cannot enjoy. That is ghostly life.

Śyāmasundara: Suppose I am bound up by the desire to live, so that I am always...

Prabhupāda: So you desire good desire, to live good. Change your desire. That is our program. Change your consciousness and live nicely with Kṛṣṇa. That is our program. We don't say, "You die." You live, but live with Kṛṣṇa consciousness, and you will become happy.

Śyāmasundara: So the will to live must not be denied.

Philosophy Discussion on Martin Heidegger:

Prabhupāda: Anxiety is there when I think that I am finite. Just like when I think that Mr. Bhatiwalla(?) is trying to get us out, then we are in anxiety. And if we know that there is no such thing, we can live here... So we want to live infinitely. When that is disturbed, there is anxiety. Therefore it appears that we are infinite. But we have been put into finite condition. That is the cause of anxiety. Now, therefore, the intelligent person should try to come to the platform of infiniteness. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Kṛṣṇa says that tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9). There are many others... There are many devotees, just to avoid this birth, death, old age, many have attained success. These things are stated in Bhagavad-gītā. Therefore the conclusion is it will become anxietyless to have infinite life. One must (indistinct) Kṛṣṇa conscious. This is the conclusion. And there is no question of avoiding. If you avoid, then you..., it must be remain entangled. It is a question of must. You must take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness if you actually... Prahlāda Mahārāja recommends that, that when he was asked by his father what is the best thing he had learned, he said this is the best thing: that he should give up this materialistic way of life and take shelter of the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. That is the best thing. Tat sādhu manye 'sura-varya dehinām. Dehinām means those who have accepted the material body. For them. And dehinām, one who has accepted this body, sadā samudvigna-dhiyām asad-grahāt (SB 7.5.5), because he is eternal, but he has accepted something which is not eternal, asat. It is limited. He is unlimited, but he is entrapped by something which is limited. Therefore, sadā samudvigna-dhiyām. Just like we have got our own land in Māyāpur, so we can go and live there. There is no question of Bhatiwalla. But we won't go there. We have accepted this apartment. Therefore we must change it. Is it not? We are paying three thousand rupees—still anxiety, because we know at any moment he can be a trouble and kick out.

Philosophy Discussion on Martin Heidegger:

Śyāmasundara: He claims that the consciousness of death makes a difference in the choices that an individual makes during his life. He says that the consciousness that this body will end, this consciousness guides him to choose in a certain way.

Prabhupāda: So what is that way? The atheists, they think that "I shall die. That will finish. So let me enjoy to the best capacity. There is no question of pāpa and puṇya." That is atheist philosophy. "I have got this opportunity of sense enjoyment. Let me enjoy, to the best capacity, my senses." Because he has no next life. Void. Because after death everything is zero. So "Why should I care for 'This is pāpa, and this is puṇya.' Whatever is palatable for me, I shall do that." But he has got also consciousness of death. Another, we have also got consciousness of death. So our philosophy is that before death, let us inquire in such a way that we may go back to home, back to Godhead. Both of them have got the death consciousness. The one whose spiritual is zero, he is doing all nonsense. And one who knows that spiritual is not zero—there is real substance—so "Let me prepare for death." (break) (end)

Philosophy Discussion on Jacques Maritain:

Prabhupāda: Yes. That, that personality understanding is the perfect understanding. The Absolute Truth, as it is given in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, is realized in three phases: impersonal Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagavān. Bhagavān is person. So to..., when one comes to Bhagavān understanding, that is the highest perfection. Bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate: (BG 7.19) after many, many births of cultivating knowledge, one actually is wise, he surrenders to Kṛṣṇa. That is the perfection.

Śyāmasundara: He says that this is..., because of this spiritual personality that he can know and love God.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Without person how there can be love? There is no question of love. You cannot love air or sky; you must find out a man or woman in the, under the sky. So therefore if you want to love God then you must accept God is a person; otherwise there is no question of love. Therefore for the Māyāvādī philosopher there is no question of love. They merge. They want sāyujya-mukti, to become one. They have no other conception, because they cannot conceive personal God. So there is no love. Therefore they manufacture an idea that in the material condition of life, you just imagine any form of God and love Him, and ultimately you become one. That is their philosophy. Ultimately you throw away this... The example is given that you want to rise on some top floor you take a ladder and go to the top and throw away the ladder: there is no need of this ladder, now you have come to the position. So their theory is that because you cannot love or worship something impersonal, because it is difficult, it is troublesome... It is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, kleśa adhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām: those who are attached to impersonal deities, their progress in spiritual life is very troublesome because they never fix up.

Philosophy Discussion on Edmund Husserl:

Prabhupāda: No. For others, here he accepts one transcendental ego. We say that transcendental ego appears externally as spiritual master. Then where is the difficulty of finding out spiritual master?

Śyāmasundara: How to find such a person?

Prabhupāda: Because transcendental ego will help. If you accept transcendental ego, he will help: "Here is your spiritual master." There is no difficulty. There is no question of how I shall find it. If you have faith in transcendental ego, he will be able to tell you that "Here is." Where is the difficulty?

Devotee: No difficulty.

Prabhupāda: Otherwise his transcendental ego conception is also faith, which is not fact.

Devotee: If you think that bringing in mental along with transcendental all the time anyway, you just (indistinct) wipe the mind clean and have an intuitive understanding of anything... How can you do that? Everybody's got subjective values. How they can look at something and just understand it intuitively? That's not transcendental; that's mental.

Śyāmasundara: No. It's subjective. Yes. That's intuition-it's subjective.

Devotee: So how can you understand the transcendental with that kind of an instrument?

Devotee (2): That we already described in (indistinct).

Devotee: Well I think his process rests upon that point.

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:

Prabhupāda: (indistinct) our solution is this: Your materialistic life is painful. That's a fact. This materialistic life is painful. (indistinct). As soon as you have this material body, then you must suffer these three kinds of miserable condition of life. So our whole program is to stop. Everyone is looking after happiness. We say that unless you stop your materialistic way of life, repeated birth and death, there is no question of happiness. So the whole Vedic civilization is based on this, how one can get out of this disease. This is a disease, the repetition of birth and death. We are trying to cure this disease. Then all other symptoms will automatically vanquish. If you are a diseased fellow, you are getting sometimes a headache, sometimes leg ache, sometimes some pain in the stomach. But if your disease is cured, then that there are no more symptoms. That is our position.

Śyāmasundara: He says that these neuroses or disorders of the personality are due to repressed sex impulses in childhood, and that these cause traumatic and shock experiences. For instance, he says that at a certain age, around four or five, the son becomes jealous of the father, and he...

Prabhupāda: These are all right, but what is the remedy that he is suggesting? That the child should be allowed to have sex life?

Śyāmasundara: No. The tension that is created by repressing the sex desire...

Prabhupāda: There are so many (indistinct), we established some of them. There are so many problems. But our program is that threefold miseries, everyone who has accepted this body has to undergo the threefold miseries. You may describe in...

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:

Prabhupāda: The Bhagavad-gītā says, (indistinct), by giving up this body, that is death, (indistinct).

Śyāmasundara: Do you attribute accidents and disease to a desire for self-destruction?

Prabhupāda: No. Ultimately we say there is no such thing as accident. Nothing can take place without God's sanction. So there is no question of accidents.

Devotee: If they would have some information of the three kinds of miseries, ādhyātmika, ādibhautika, ādi-daivika, they should stop circulating all these kinds of instincts, because they understand all these different things are categorizing...

Śyāmasundara: I thought I heard you say before that some sicknesses and accidents are caused by the person's desire—the person desires to be sick; the person desires to have accident.

Prabhupāda: (indistinct) person desires to be sick.

Devotee: Suppose somebody says, "Well, I want to be happy." So we say, "You just chant Hare Kṛṣṇa and join us, then you will be happy." So he is saying, "No. I want to keep my job. I want to do this or that." So when we can say that actually he is not serious about becoming happy. If he really were serious about becoming happy, he would join us. So in a sense he actually doesn't want to be happy. That's what he would say.

Prabhupāda: He wants to be happy but he is miserable. That is (indistinct). He wants to be happy but he is misguided in search of happiness. Everyone wants happiness, but when one is misguided, that is called illusion. He is searching happiness without any basis. (break—continues next day)

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:

Prabhupāda: Frustration must be there, because you do not desire the right thing.

Śyāmasundara: So that is the basic cause of anxiety-desire?

Prabhupāda: Yes. Desiring something which is not permanent. That we call (indistinct). Suppose that I wish to live forever, but if I have accepted this material body, therefore there is no question of living forever. So I am always anxious when death should come. I am afraid of death, when the body will be destroyed. This is (indistinct). So therefore the conclusion is that anxiety is due to our acceptance of something which does not exist. This is the right definition of anxiety.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the ego develops strategies of defense against this anxiety which is entering from the id, and one of the strategies it develops is repression. Whenever there is some strong animalistic desire, the ego represses that desire in order to preserve itself.

Prabhupāda: Repression is always there. We make plans in so many ways, but by nature it is frustrated. That is repression.

Śyāmasundara: Is conscious repression advisable?

Prabhupāda: Conscious repression?

Śyāmasundara: Yes. Of my basic instincts, my desires. Should I consciously strive to repress these desires?

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:

Prabhupāda: Yes. We don't say that. We just say that sometimes there is strong desire, we have to repress it. Just like my Guru Mahārāja used to say that while you get up from bed, you beat your mind a hundred times with your shoe, and when you go to bed, you beat your mind a hundred times with a broomstick. Then you will be able to control your mind. Sometimes, just like wild tiger, they have got him to control by repression. The circus players, they do that. Because it is wild tiger, repression is required. But when it is under control, there is no question of repression. You can play with the tiger; he becomes your friend. So repression is not always bad.

Śyāmasundara: Another field of investigation for Freud was the idea of projection. He said this is a technique for attributing one's own unconscious attitudes onto other people. In other words, X called Y a name, but actually Y is the object of that. In other words, for instance, X may regard Y as being jealous, but in fact X is jealous and he projects that attitude onto someone else.

Prabhupāda: That is accepted. (indistinct) Everyone thinks others like himself.

Śyāmasundara: So he says that this desire to accuse someone else of being the same is sometimes repressed and replaced by the opposite expression. In other words, someone may dislike someone, but they will inhibit that dislike and show overt symptoms of friendliness, where in fact there is no friendliness there but it is only a mock friendliness. This is one of the psychological attitudes he was studying. Sometimes someone who may have dislike for someone, instead of expressing dislike, may express just the opposite, extreme fondness, where in fact he dislikes the person.

Prabhupāda: That is called (indistinct), silliness. What is the meaning of silly?

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:

Prabhupāda: Evidently he is frustrated, without any knowledge of religion. He had no idea. He has seen that so many sentimental religious system, and he has concluded like that. But first of all let him understand what is religion. Religion cannot come into existence without understanding the idea of God. Religion without God cannot be religion. According to Vedic system, religion means the order given by God. But if one has no conception of God, that there is no question of religion. So Godless religion is, certainly, it is sentiment. That is not religion. So he has studied something which is not religion; therefore he has got so many doubts about religion. Real religion is that there is God, that is a fact, and whatever orders the God gives, that is religion. So he does not know what is God. How he will know what order He is giving? So for him everything is not religion.

Hayagrīva: It's often been said of Freud that he tried to repress within himself religious feelings that were definitely there. He says, "I cannot..." In a letter he wrote, "I cannot rid myself of certain sceptic materialistic prejudices, and I would carry them over into the research of the occult." He considered religion the occult.

Prabhupāda: Occult, what is that?

Hayagrīva: Occult, something obscure. The...

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:

Prabhupāda: Man cannot do without education. Without education a man remains an animal. Therefore in the human society there is a school, college, an institution, teacher—not in the animal society. So the principle is, the man is meant for being learned or being educated. That you cannot deny, that man life should not be like cats and dogs, simply eating, sleeping, mating, and dying. That is not man's life. Man's life is to become advanced in knowledge and education. And as I have already described, the ultimate knowledge: to understand God. If he is so-called educated, without any understanding of God, then his education is imperfect. You can deny the existence of God, but the God conception is there in the human society. Some may accept it, some may not accept it—that is another thing—but the conception of God, the whole civilized world, they have got some type of religion. Either you become Christian or Buddhist or Hindu or Muslim, religion means there is some cultivation of knowledge to understand God. And to understand God is the ultimate knowledge. That is called Vedānta. Veda means knowledge, and the ultimate knowledge: Vedānta. So ultimate knowledge, it, what is that? That is the beginning of Vedānta education. What is that ultimate knowledge? Athāto brahma jijñāsā. The Vedānta begins with this word, "Now this human form of life is to acquire the ultimate knowledge." Athāto brahma. Brahma means the ultimate. So, the absolute. Now it is the time to understand. So far understanding of sex, the dog also knows. You don't require to give him any education. So nobody is given education... Now of course they have adopted, but there is a Bengali proverb, "How to cry and how to enjoy sex, it doesn't require any education." When you are aggrieved, you cry automatically. When there is a sex impulse, you enjoy it automatically. It doesn't require any Mr. Freud. Without the help of any educator, everyone knows-cats, dogs, animals, human being—everyone knows how to enjoy sex life. It doesn't require any education.

So the Vedānta says that this kind of education is there in the animal kingdom also, sex philosophy. There is no question of philosophy, it is already there; anyone can enjoy it. Now, at this time, atha ato brahma-jijñāsā, now this human life is to inquire about the Absolute Truth, Brahman, because that is the ultimate knowledge.

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Prabhupāda: That is practically being done. Unconscious or subconscious states sometimes come out. They are not always present. But consciousness is always there.

Śyāmasundara: But if the consciousness is not the predominator, then sometimes a person's activities will be irrational or unconscious.

Prabhupāda: No. There is no question of unconscious. Subconscious, that is there. Yes.

Devotee (3): What is the exact meaning of the term "subconscious"?

Prabhupāda: Mm? Consciousness?

Devotee (3): I understand the principle of consciousness, but what is the exact meaning of the word "subconscious"?

Prabhupāda: Subconscious means is not acting at the present moment but it comes out sometimes.

Śyāmasundara: These psychologists say that quite often the unconscious is acting through the conscious, only we don't know.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That I say. The subconsciousness is there, but they are not manifest. But sometimes they are manifest. All of a sudden coming. There is no connection. Just like a bubble in the pond. All of a sudden a bubble comes up. You see. So the coming out of the bubble, the energy was there within, all of a sudden it comes out, "Pup!" Yes. And even you trace out why it came, but the, it is to be supposed that it was in the subconscious state; all of a sudden it has manifested.

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Prabhupāda: What is that personality? As soon as we come to the personality... Entity, that we call soul. Individual entity, adding personality, that is soul.

Śyāmasundara: He would call personality a set of behavior which is organized...

Prabhupāda: Wherefrom the personality comes? Because you are a living entity, you have got separate identity, therefore I recognize your personality. So without individual soul, how you can think of personality? There is no question of personality unless there is that individual living entity.

Revatīnandana: Is he saying that the self is an entity that tries to coordinate the conscious and unconscious?

Śyāmasundara: Yes.

Revatīnandana: Or is the self the interaction of the conscious and unconscious.

Śyāmasundara: No. He says that the self strives for an integration and a harmonious balance of the conscious and unconscious dispositions.

Prabhupāda: That, that can be explained in this way. Just like a soul who is now in sleeping state, he can be taught into Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So that unconscious, if he says unconsciousness, sleeping state, that is integrated. So in that way you can explain.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: Yes. So if you put yourself in better circumstances, then this uncontrolling feature will not be there. He cannot control himself. Everything is accident for him, because he is mad. But if he is cured to a sane man, there is no question of accident.

Śyāmasundara: Supposing today I am happy and my tomorrow is completely within my hands to choose.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Because you are under different conditions. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā: prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni guṇaiḥ karmāṇi sarvaśaḥ (BG 3.27). You have put yourself under the control of material nature; therefore, according to the modes of the material nature, your position is there. You cannot... When you shall be happy or unhappy, you cannot control.

Śyāmasundara: His idea is that we have the freedom to control it.

Prabhupāda: Yes. You have the freedom, but your freedom is now choked up, being conditioned. Just like you have freedom to move, but if you are thrown into the ocean, your freedom is choked up. Therefore your duty is how to get yourself released from the condition where your freedom is choked up.

Śyāmasundara: Ah, I see. This is one reason why he says that we are nothing, because...

Prabhupāda: Because he cannot explain, he has no such knowledge; therefore it is very easy to say nothing.

Śyāmasundara: Because today we are one thing, tomorrow we are another thing. So therefore we are nothing.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Śyāmasundara: Yesterday we were discussing Jean-Paul Sartre. His point was that man finds himself responsible for his own actions—not only individually, but he finds that the world is in his own choosing so that he has a social responsibility as well.

Prabhupāda: As soon as we speak of responsibility, there is no question of chance. We cannot say sometimes by chance, sometimes by responsi... Where is the question of chance, if there is responsibility?

Śyāmasundara: He says that by making decisions and choosing this or that, that one becomes responsible for his actions. But ultimately it doesn't really matter what he chooses. The choosing is the important thing.

Prabhupāda: That is whimsical. And still he is responsible.

Śyāmasundara: Yes. Whatever I choose, I must be responsible for it. But it doesn't matter so much what...

Prabhupāda: But if the beginning is irresponsibility, then where is the question of responsibility? This is nonsense philosophy. If the beginning is irresponsibility... Just like there is a story, some thieves stolen some gold, and there were many, four, five thieves, so they were dividing the stolen property, and one them said, "Now let us divide it honestly." (laughter) The whole thing is stolen property, and they are speaking of honesty. Just like you Americans, you came from Europe and other countries, and you have stolen the property. Now you make immigration, "You cannot come, you cannot come." It is like this philosophy. The whole thing is stolen property, and they are talking of honesty; they are citing scripture. So where is the responsibility, if the beginning is irresponsibility, chance?

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Śyāmasundara: I make the decisions.

Prabhupāda: So if your decision is wrong?

Śyāmasundara: There's no question of right or wrong in that case.

Prabhupāda: Whatever decision I make, that is final, absolute?

Śyāmasundara: Yes.

Prabhupāda: How it is possible? Then the same philosophy comes with the insect's decision. Absolute decision, even if it is wrong, it's all right. That is seen in lower animals also.

Śyāmasundara: One of Sartre's counterparts, one of his colleagues, Albert Camus, he also wrote about this philosophy, and himself he typifies this type of person. He simply died in an automobile accident by driving 130 or -40 miles an hour on a small road.

Prabhupāda: That is insects' philosophy, that's all. This is "I have my decision to run hundred miles an hour, not caring for others." So this is exactly like the insects.

Śyāmasundara: And they say I'm responsible for my actions, but it's a very irresponsible position because it doesn't take into consideration other people, or supposing he would have killed other people too.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: This philosophy has given rise to these hippies.

Śyāmasundara: Hippies, yes.

Prabhupāda: So they are without any responsibility. Whatever he likes, he can do. So that is animal. There is no question of human civilization or human beings.

Śyāmasundara: He has an optimistic side to his philosophy in that he says the fate of the world depends upon man's decision. Obviously, if men decide to do things properly, the world would be a better place.

Prabhupāda: Yes. We agree with that. We are trying to do that by introducing this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, to make the world Vaikuṇṭha. That is our philosophy. Anyone can come to this Kṛṣṇa consciousness and become happy. But that is not a blind decision. We take decision from higher authority; therefore it is perfect. We are taking decision from the ācārya, Kṛṣṇa.

Śyāmasundara: There is also a pessimistic side to his philosophy in that he says that man is a useless passion, mainly striving in the universe without purpose.

Prabhupāda: That he is, not us. He is that. His is... What is that? Useless?

Śyāmasundara: Useless passion.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: He is desiring to be God, that means he is not God at the present moment. So if he is God, how did he become non-God? Therefore he cannot become God, but he can become godly. That is our philosophy. Just like I am in darkness, I want light, so I can come into the sunshine. That does not mean I become sun. But when I come to the sunshine, I come to the light. Similarly, when you come to perfect knowledge, that is godly. But you cannot become God. If you are God, then there is no question of becoming non-God. Therefore Kṛṣṇa's name is Acyuta. Acyuta means He never becomes non-God. He is God always. When He is three months old on the lap of His mother He is God. When He is seven years old, lifting the hill, He is God. And when He is marrying 16,000 wives He is God. When He is dancing with the gopīs He is God. That is God. God is always God. Not that I am non-God now and I shall become God by some means, mystic factory. No.

Śyāmasundara: I'll just read a quote from one of his books. He says, "To be a man means to reach towards being God; or if you prefer, man, fundamentally, is the desire to be God. Every human reality is a passion in that it projects losing itself so as to found being, and by the same stroke to constitute the..."

Prabhupāda: To desire to become God, that is also passion, because he cannot become God. This is simply passion.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the human being has the capacity to give up or sacrifice something in order to reach for something higher.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is called tapasya, austerity.

Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:

Prabhupāda: Torch. Yes. Torchlight. The torchlight. Guru gives the torchlight, jñānāñjana śalākayā. What is that torchlight? By awakening his dormant knowledge. That is torch. Then he can see what is world.

Śyāmasundara: So the proof that one accepts for something which is beyond our sense is not necessarily scientific?

Prabhupāda: Not at all. What to speak of scientific, it is completely ignorant. There is no question of science. It is simply darkness.

Śyāmasundara: No. I mean the proof..., if one accepts the proof of the guru's authority...

Prabhupāda: That is the proof. He gives there. Guru—the next line says who is guru: śrotriyaṁ brahma-niṣṭam. He has heard the truth from the paramparā system, and the result of his hearing-he's firmly convinced and fixed up in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So when one can finally see that one is fixed up in Kṛṣṇa consciousness and he answers all questions on the authority of śāstra, he's guru. This is the proof of it(?). Just like we, whenever we say something, we immediately support it by quoting from Bhagavad-gītā, Bhāgavata, Vedas. This is called knowledge. And the result of knowledge-fixed up in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, firm. Nobody can deviate. That is guru. Two sides: one side is that he knows everything from authoritative source. And he, as the result, is fully Kṛṣṇa conscious. These two things are the symptoms of guru.

Śyāmasundara: This Bertrand Russell says that the world consists of a number of simple facts, each independent of all the others yet related externally to each other.

Prabhupāda: What are those facts?

Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:

Prabhupāda: Yes. Yes. It is forced by the energy. Matter has no form, but by the superior energy, the living entity (indistinct) mixed up (indistinct) matter and make the form. Just like a (indistinct) plate, clay, water, and fire. So the potter makes a form from the clay. Clay means earth and water, mixed up, and it makes a pot and then puts it with fire and it becomes a glass and so on. So tejo-vāri-mṛdāṁ vinimayam. It is simply exchange of earth, water, and fire. But this mixture is being made by the potter. And the instrument is the potter's wheel. So similarly, God is the potter, and the material nature is the wheel, and so many things are coming out. But if there is no potter to turn the wheel or make the clay into pots, this is not (indistinct). There is already water, there is already earth, there is already fire, but unless a spirit, a being, a living being, comes into it, there is no question of (indistinct). Therefore in Bhagavad-gītā it is said, (indistinct). Because the living entities are there, the formation is taking place. A (indistinct), it is a combination of matter. But because we see that the living entity is there, it is taking a certain type of shape. Matter does not out of itself take the shape. That is wrong theory. We have no such experience where matter is taking automatically shape. (indistinct). Is there any exception?

Dr. Rao: (indistinct)

Prabhupāda: How matter can take shape? That is not philosophy, that is childish. That is the defect of the modern civilization. A man has got childish knowledge and he is becoming philosopher.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the cause-effect relationship between things has very little effect on genuine events which can cause reality.

Prabhupāda: No. There must be cause and effect.

Philosophy Discussion on B. F. Skinner:

Prabhupāda: The defect is that these programs are being forwarded by some rascal. Therefore they are defective. If they would have been forwarded by perfect man, then you would have actual (indistinct). Now one rascal is forwarding some program, another rascal next time (indistinct) this is true. So this is going on in Western world. Because according to Bhāgavata we belong to the category of dogs, hogs, camels. So what is the benefit of a dog's program and (indistinct) by camel's program. If they are on the, basically there is nothing but dogs, hogs, camels and asses, then suppose dog has given some program and the camel says, "No. This program is better than this one." And the ass comes, he introduces another program, "This program is better than this program." So either of these programs, because they are made by dogs, hogs, asses and camels, they cannot be perfect. Take a program from a real human being. Then it is perfect. The defect is there. One philosopher is proposing something, another philosopher is proposing something... That is (indistinct) especially in the Western countries, they are doing so independence (?). But the Vedic civilization there is no independence. They must follow the Vedic injunction. As I have said several times, the Vedas says that the stool of cow is completely pure. They do not argue that "Formerly you say that the stool of animal is impure. Now you are saying that the stool of animal, cow, is pure. So how can we accept?" There is no such thing. The Vedas says, even it is stool, but the Vedas says the stool of cow is perfectly pure. Yes. No contradiction. Our presentation of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is like that. But Kṛṣṇa says, "(indistinct), as it is." There is no question of altering or changing according to circumstances. We know Kṛṣṇa is perfect. Whatever He has said, it is all right, in all conditions. That is our belief. We do not deviate. So similarly, if the direction is taken for training from the perfect, that is the best. And if the direction is taken from the process of (indistinct) philosophy, hogs, dogs, and asses, and camels how can you take? (indistinct) something, (indistinct) something, (indistinct) analysis something, so the whole society will be (indistinct).

Philosophy Discussion on B. F. Skinner:

Śyāmasundara: Yes. He says from sunrise (?), he says everyone is conditioned anyway. Everyone is conditioned.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Everyone is conditioned, that is a fact. Unless he is conditioned, there is no question of material life. Material life means conditioned life. There is no question of material life. Material life means conditioned life. There is no question of freedom. Just like prison life. Prison life means conditioned life. You may be a first-class prisoner, a second-class, a third-class prisoner, that is another thing, but as soon as you are put within the walls of the prison house, you are conditioned. That is a fact. Similarly, anyone who has accepted this body (Sanskrit). Just like Bhāgavata says, nayam deha dehabhajam nrloke. Nrloke. Everyone is conditioned, accepting this material body. But he says nayam deha deha-bhajam nrloke. But those who have accepted this material body in the human society, for them it is not good to be engaged in sense gratification like dogs, hogs and camels. Everyone who has got this material body, he is conditioned. But, so when one gets the body of a human being, he should not be so conditioned like the dogs, hogs, camels. This is the truth, that we are conditioned. We have got the body. We have got the bodily necessity. We have to eat, we have to sleep, gratify our senses, protect ourself from fear. The conditions are there, but still, we can make the conditions better. How? Tapo. We have to undergo austerities, penances. Just like we, we don't say, "No sex life," but "No illicit sex life." This is better life.

Devotee: Skinner also believes that we have to control activities, but he himself is not willing to undergo these austerities.

Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:

Prabhupāda: Yes. They get credit. I recall one book, in Mathura one Mr. (indistinct), he was begging his brother, he became a very businessman, so he wrote his history, that I was begging now I am sitting (break) like that. That's all. So, the theory(?) that my propensity is there, that as soon as I get the opportunity I suck the blood of others and become fat. So unless he changes mentality, there is no question of changing capitalist or communist or this or that. It is all useless.

Śyāmasundara: So shall we stop for today or...?

Devotee: Yes, continue tomorrow.

Śyāmasundara: We still have a few more of Marx.

Devotee: We can do it tomorrow. Then we'll do Lenin tomorrow. (break) So, today we will continue with Marx.

Prabhupāda: Marx? Not yet finished?

Śyāmasundara: No.

Prabhupāda: Go on.

Śyāmasundara: He says that since capital is unnecessary for production, that the capitalists should be overthrown violently and the workers of the world should unite and overthrow the capitalists.

Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:

Prabhupāda: The, this thing is not only in Russia, this is going on in other countries. So, people have been taught not to keep accounts. All these big, big business men they don't keep accounts, so there is no question of income tax. Suppose if I want to purchase from you something. No cash memo, no account. I give you money, cash, I take goods, I sell it, no account, then I cash from my (indistinct). That's all. But provided I have my right books, then these things will be applicable-income tax. Just like in our Indian system, there small broker, he has no book; nothing of the sort. He is purchasing one bag or two bags of rice, he is selling, that's all. He does not keep accounts. So as soon as... The whole tendency is, that I want profit. If the government (indistinct), somehow or other, (indistinct), I will get my profit but I will not show government how much profit I am making. He may propose all these nice things according to his philosophy but he cannot change the mind of the people. Therefore all these proposal will be futile. Simply waste of time, that's all.

Śyāmasundara: His idea is that the mind of people can be changed because the conditions...

Prabhupāda: But not in that way, by force. That is not possible. You cannot change the mind even of a child by force, and what to speak of elderly man, educated man. Is it not so? Mind can be changed by our process: ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam (CC Antya 20.12). Otherwise it is not. These things will be made (indistinct) complete, even in the ordinary position. Their utopia—it is not possible.

Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:

Prabhupāda: Yasmin vijñāte sarvam evaṁ vijñātaṁ bhavanti. That is the Vedic injunction, that people are searching after knowledge, knowledge, knowledge, knowledge, knowledge, so when one understands the Absolute Truth, then he understands everything. Yasmin vijñāte sarvam evaṁ vijñātaṁ bhavanti. And Bhāgavata says, na te viduḥ svārtha-gatiṁ hi viṣṇum: (SB 7.5.31) "They are trying to approach the objective, but they do not know the objective is Viṣṇu." Durāśayā ye bahir-artha-māninaḥ: "They are simply trying to adjust by so many revolutions, these material things." But he has no knowledge that he is spiritual being. Unless he goes back to the spiritual world and associates with the supreme spirit, God, there is no question of happiness. Exactly, if you have taken a fish from the water, there is no question of happiness of this fish unless it is again thrown into the water. So we have come... We are part and parcel of the supreme spirit. We have come from the spiritual world with the mentality of enjoying this material world. So unless we divert, reverse ourself to that spiritual conclusion, we understand our spiritual position and go back to home, we go to back... Yad gatvā na nivartante tad dhāma paramam (BG 15.6). When you come to this position, that is happiness. Otherwise you go on theorizing, but one revolution will be... That is the world. "Yielding place to new. Old order changes, yielding place to new." This is revolution. So this will go on. What he is thinking now new, it will be old after some days, and another new thing will come, will be changed. So this is the order. "Old order changes, yielding place to new." Or, in other words, "History repeats itself."

Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:

Hayagrīva: Marx opposed Comte's view of the worship of women, and he also opposed the worship of God in nature. He writes, "There is no question of modern sciences which alone, along with modern industry, have revolutionized the whole of nature and put an end to man's childish attitude toward nature as well as to other forms of childishness. The position as regards to the worship of female is the same as nature worship."

Prabhupāda: But how the science or the scientific brain has surpassed the laws of nature? Has man stopped the nature's action—birth, death, old age, and disease? So how the scientist has conquered over nature? What is the meaning of this conquering? The nature's law is going on. Before Marx, his father died, his mother died, and he also died. So how he has conquered over the nature? The death is continuing.

Hayagrīva: He felt...

Prabhupāda: What is the improvement?

Hayagrīva: Yes.

Prabhupāda: What is the improvement?

Hayagrīva: He felt that there has been no improvement because religion has kept man...

Prabhupāda: It has nothing to do with religion. It is the work of nature...

Hayagrīva: Yes.

Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:

Prabhupāda: There is not the question of antagonism. If we actually know who is God and what He desires... I give always this example: if we know the government and the government laws, then there is no antagonism. The government says that "Keep to the right," so there is no question of antagonism; anyone must keep to the right. So there is no question of antagonism. But the antagonism is there when the so-called religious system does not know what is God and what is actually the desire of God. Then there cannot be any antagonism. That perfectness of understanding God and God's regulation or order is clearly described in the Bhagavad-gītā. We are therefore advocating Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that "Here is God and here is God's instructions." So if we deliver it, and the proposal in the Bhagavad-gītā, they are all practical. Just like God says that you divide the society in four division—not only worker, but also the good brain, good administrator, and good producer of food. That is the actually the divisions of the society. So without division of the society, if you simply keep worker, who will give them instruction to work? These are all imperfect ideas. But the perfect ideas are given in the Bhagavad-gītā. If we follow that, then the human society, humanity will be in perfect order. So either you call it religion or a system to..., following which one can become peaceful. Religion means, to understand God means, a system. A system is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā in three principles. God says that He is the proprietor of everything, sarva-loka-maheśvaram (BG 5.29). So we see this planet, and there is different proprietors-individual proprietor of the land or the state proprietor, the king. So there is a proprietor of this earth, either you divide it nationally or you take it wholly. So similarly there are many, many millions of others, so they are called sarva-loka. So there must be a proprietor.

Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:

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

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

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

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

Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung:

Prabhupāda: And Kṛṣṇa also says in the Bhagavad..., yah śāstra-vidhim. Śāstra from that śas-dhātu. Yaḥ śāstra-vidhim utsṛjya, giving it up, decides by his whims, na siddhim avāpnoti, they'll never get any siddhi, perfection. Therefore the śāstra should be mediator. But these people have no śāstras. They have got simply that barrel of gun. That's all. And that is very rude. And it will never come to perfection. For the temporary time, this party may win or that party may win. That will never... That is the position in the modern world. They have no authoritative śāstra. They manufacture their own way, and therefore there is no peace. First World War, Second World War, Third World War, and there cannot be any peace. As soon as you become strong, you declare war. Hitler thought, "I am now strong. Let me declare war." And another strong party, America came, Russia came. He was killed. So this is no conclusion. And even after Hitler's being killed, there is no conclusion. So this sort of conflict will never bring any peace. That will go on. That is struggle for existence. That is fighting like animals. Two dogs fighting, two hogs fighting, but that is not conclusion. That fighting will go on so long people will remain as dogs and hogs. That will go on. There is no question of peace.

Śyāmasundara: So real progress only comes through...

Prabhupāda: Authoritative decision. If we accept that, then that is real conclusion.

Śyāmasundara: He says that there is conflict, and you say that...

Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung:

Prabhupāda: Yes. One laborer is charging five rupees, another laborer is charging ten rupees. That profiteering, exploiting tendency is everywhere. Why the laborers strike? To make more profit. Do you mean to say because he is laborer he is free from this profit-making desires?

Śyāmasundara: But their idea is that if the means of production are owned by the people, that this condition, this social condition, will wither away.

Prabhupāda: That was perfect in Vedic system, that you... The land is supposed to belong to the government or to the king. The king gives you the land that "You make production and give me tax, one-fourth. That's all." So there is no question of profit. If you have produced one kilo, give one-fourth kilo to the king as tax. That is real social system. Actually, according to our Vedic system, everything belongs to God and the king is supposed to be representative of God to manage things. So for his managerial work he requires some money. Therefore I have taken some land for my livelihood. So whatever production is there, I pay one-fourth to the king for management. This is nice system. As soon as the tax is realized in terms of pound, shillings, pence, whole difficulty arises. I have produced ten mounds of rice and out of that one-fourth I give to the government or to the king. So I have no anxiety. If I produce twenty mounds, I give one-fourth. If I produce ten mounds, I give one-fourth. If I don't produce I don't give. This is perfect system.

Pañcadraviḍa: So if I give one quarter to the king that's the representative of God, what if the brāhmaṇa and the spiritual master...

Prabhupāda: That we shall talk later on.

Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung:

Śyāmasundara: This Mao Tse Tung believes in using a constant ideological struggle as an accepted...

Prabhupāda: No, no. This ideology has no struggle. Whatever is produced, you pay one-fourth. There is no question of struggle. If I have to pay some fixed tax, ten rupees, for this land I have secured, but if I don't produce, I have no ten rupees, there is struggle. Where I get this ten rupees? Then I have to take loan from somebody else. That brings(?) my anxiety. But if this system is accepted, then I, if I produce, I give you one-fourth; if I don't produce, I have no anxiety. That is perfect system.

Śyāmasundara: His idea is that the constant ideological propaganda, you have to remind the people of the fears behind the practice. If there is risk,(?) something, you have to remind them.

Prabhupāda: But why this is a constant struggle for ideological? You accept this ideal. So there is no anxiety. If I produce, I pay. If I don't produce, I don't pay. Is it not better?

Śyāmasundara: The idea is...

Prabhupāda: Why I shall develop an ideological perfection by conflict, by struggle, by talking in the parliament, and talking to the leaders, and... Make this simple method that whatever you produce, you give me one-fourth. That's all.

Śyāmasundara: He believes that whatever is produced, all should be given. Everything.

Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:

Prabhupāda: No.

Bhavānanda: Or a new species may come out.

Śyāmasundara: A new type of man.

Prabhupāda: No. No. That is not possible. Everything is there. That is the Vedic version. They say that so many species in the water, so many species on land, so many moving... It is all fixed up. There is no question of increasing or decreasing.

Bhavānanda: But they have predicted a species of man, a type of man in the future who would have no hair on his body and whose head would be very, very big because of an increased brain capacity, but whose body would be atrophied. The arms and legs of the man they predict in the future is going to become more and more secondary.

Prabhupāda: Who predicted? Who is that fool? (laughter)

Śyāmasundara: They say that man will lose some of his toes because he will cease activities, his activity will become...

Prabhupāda: This is another foolishness. It has never become, neither it will be.

Bhavānanda: Man has always had five toes.

Prabhupāda: That's right.

Bhavānanda: And he always will. However, is there, if there is a species of a type of men that have eight toes on each foot, he's always had eight toes on each foot. He might not be on this planet.

Prabhupāda: We don't care any such things.

Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:

Śyāmasundara: ...then he goes back.

Prabhupāda: Yes. If he has got elevation, he has degradation. This is common sense affairs. If you become rich, you can become poor also. Why that once you become rich and there is no question of becoming poor? Is that guaranteed? These nonsense questions are asked even by so-called theosophist and so many there are. You see. They have no common sense even.

Śyāmasundara: His definition of God is that God is the source in nature to support and produce values. What is good, what is true, values, this is God, the source of these values.

Prabhupāda: Yes. So this is value. Kṛṣṇa says, "You surrender unto Me and all questions solved." So it has value. That we also admit. But it is up to me to accept that value or not. That independence God has given me. Otherwise, everyone would have been Kṛṣṇa conscious and surrendered to Kṛṣṇa. Why they are not doing that? Even God is value, to accept that value depends on me.

Śyāmasundara: He said that God is the whole universe and that we are parts and parcels, that man is part and parcel of God.

Prabhupāda: Part and parcel, that is explained in Bhagavad-gītā. Every living entity. Why man? Every living entity is part and parcel. Mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ (BG 15.7). But they take that "Cow is not living entity. It has no soul. So let us eat. It is eatable." That is their nonsense philosophy. That is not fact. Everyone. Even the... All living entities are part and parcel of God.

Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:

Prabhupāda: This is not striving. By nature's way the lower animals, they come to the platform of man. Jīva-jātiṣu paryayaḥ, it is called. Paryayaḥ means one after another. There is nature's help. Up to the human being, that law works. And human being, being developed conscious, so he has got the power of discrimination. Because originally the soul is given independence. Just like Kṛṣṇa is asking Arjuna, yathecchasi tathā kuru (BG 18.63). "Whatever you like, you do." That is the original connection. God is the Supersoul; we are soul, under Him, subordinate. So we are called taṭastha, means marginal. Marginal means we can remain either way. Either on God's side or māyā's side. That is my choice. So when we don't want to serve God, then we are sent to the māyā, to serve māyā. Māyā means his position as servant remains the same, but he thinks "I am master." That is māyā. He is Just like a child trying to do something father does not like. But when he cries, he's given that. "All right. Do this." But "All right, do this" or "Do that," he is under the father. He is under the control of the father. But when he is given such chance, "Oh, I am independent now. I am independent." So this is called māyā. He's never independent, but he thinks, "I am independent." Similarly, here also Just like we Indians, we have got independence. So what kind of independence? In British period there was not so much dependence. These rascal laws, that you have to go So many things. You cannot move now. In British period the Indians had independence to move all over the world by expenditure. Now we cannot go. So we have got independence, but we have become dependent in so many ways. This is called māyā. So whole world, they are thinking that "I am independent. My nation is independent." Nobody is independent. Everyone is dependent under the laws of material nature. When death comes, nobody is independent. Either American, Indian, or There is no question of independence. But when we think that "I am independent," although I am dependent in so many respects, that is māyā. That is māyā. Māyā means what he is thinking, that is not fact. That is called māyā. Mā-yā. What you are thinking, that is not a fact. So daivī hy eṣā guṇamayī mama māyā duratyayā (BG 7.14). So he is continually serving the māyā, life after life, but still he is thinking, "I am independent." So the right intelligence is, actual independence is, mām eva ye prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti. When you surrender to Kṛṣṇa, that is your real independence.

Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:

Prabhupāda: That two cooperation, two kinds of cooperation is going on. Just like in a state a citizen is cooperating as a free citizen. The same citizen is cooperating in the prison by force. The jail superintendent says, "Now you break these bricks." He has to do; otherwise he'll be punished. He is cooperating by force. But this cooperation is inferior cooperation. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, jīvera svarūpa haya nitya kṛṣṇa dāsa (Cc. Madhya 20.108-109). By constitutional position, a living entity is eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa. In the Vaikuṇṭha jagat, the cooperation, the service is voluntary. And here in this material world the service is forced because it is māyā. Just like in the jail the service is there. One who declares that "I don't care for the government. I break all the laws." But he is put into jail. There is no question of breaking the laws, but by law he has to work forcibly. He has to do it. So here in this material world we are working under force of māyā. That is called daivī hy eṣā guṇamayī mama māyā duratyayā (BG 7.14). That force you cannot avoid. You cannot avoid. Only you can avoid when you voluntarily cooperate with Kṛṣṇa. Mām eva ye prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti te.

Śyāmasundara: He's using the sense of free will in two senses. Just like I would drive down the right side of the road because I know that it's the law. So I want to obey the law. And then the other sense would be I want to drive down the right side of the street in order not to harm anyone and for so many other reasons, a higher type of use of free will. One is automatic, one is more thoughtful.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Prabhupāda: That means there is no chance.

Śyāmasundara: No chance.

Prabhupāda: Yes. There is no question of chance.

Śyāmasundara: If I drop this and there is a reaction, a noise, it is not because this caused the noise but that each thing is motivated by its own purpose.

Prabhupāda: But there is already the law, if he falls down there will be noise(?). The thing is already there, but it becomes manifested under certain circumstances, that's all.

Śyāmasundara: But his idea is that dropping of this does not cause it to be necessary that there is noise, but that because the world purpose is unfolding...

Prabhupāda: Where is that... Causeless means... There are two kinds of causes, efficient(?) cause and (indistinct) So it may be (indistinct) cause where there are many remote causes. But ultimate cause is Kṛṣṇa. Sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam (Bs. 5.1).

Śyāmasundara: That's his idea. He's looking at the ultimate cause, there is a motivation for everything. It's not accidental, that nothing is, no event is...

Prabhupāda: That we say, there is no such thing as accident.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Prabhupāda: This is also kind of meditation, speculating that "God should be like this." What is that? But they cannot define what is that, this.

Hayagrīva: He says, "The concept of God as a separate substance is impossible and contradictory."

Prabhupāda: God is everything. There is no question of separation. That is defined in the Bhagavad-gītā, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam, "I am everything." So how He can be separate?

Hayagrīva: But he rejects God as a separate person.

Prabhupāda: He may reject, but God is everything. How he can reject God? The, the, these are the defects of speculators. They cannot give us tangible leading. That because they are defective themselves, so whatever interpretation they will give, all defective.

Hayagrīva: Oh, he would agree that God is everything.

Prabhupāda: That God is..., how he can reject? If God is everything, then how can he reject?

Hayagrīva: But he would not say that God is more than the creation.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Prabhupāda: Transcendental also God. As soon as you say everything is God, then that, what you call transcendental, and not transcendental, that is also God. Then how you can reject? If everything is God, how you can reject anything? Sarvaṁ khalu idaṁ brahma. There is no question of... The same example: if everything is made of earth, then where is the question of? My body is also earth. So what you can reject? That is our philosophy. We don't reject. We see God in everything. Īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvam (ISO 1). That is intelligence. And Rūpa Goswami said that prāpañcikatayā buddhyā hari-sambandhi-vastunaḥ, that there is everything is related with God. If we think, "This is matter, this is spirit," that is my speculation. That we have to see how God is there and how everything... Material means when you forget God. That is material.

Hayagrīva: Yet we concentrate on the personality of Kṛṣṇa.

Prabhupāda: But that is..., that requires little brain. Those who are less intelligent or those practically no brain, simply cow dung, for them it is little difficult. Therefore this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is to cleanse this cow dung and make the brain pure. Then he will understand. Otherwise he is thinking God, "A person like me." But God is not like that. God is goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūto (Bs. 5.37). He is person. He is in Vṛndāvana, Goloka Vṛndāvana, He is dancing with gopīs, playing with the cowherd boys—still He is everywhere. Not that "Now I am dancing I have no time to go everywhere." That is not. He may be engaged in dancing, but still He is everywhere, īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-de... (BG 18.61). Now if He is in Goloka Vṛndāvana only, a person like us, then how He can say that patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā (BG 9.26)? We are offering some dates to Kṛṣṇa, so He is in Goloka Vṛndāvana, He may say, "I am now busy. How can I go to your temple and eat?" No. He is also temple, in the temple also. That is God. He is everywhere. Goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūto (Bs. 5.37). This is definition, akhilātma-bhūto. So he has no conception of God. He cannot imagine God. He must take the understanding... (break) ...because they have no standard knowledge. Everyone is manufacturing, so then there must be difference, because everyone is imperfect. You propose something imperfect, I propose something imperfect, so there must be disagreement.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Prabhupāda: Yes. Just like here in India, impersonalist, they have got also action. Just like the Māyāvādīs, they have also the same principle. The Śaṅkarācārya is teaching vairāgya, "Sit down under the tree, take thrice bath," so many vairāgya instruction. Rather, their instruction are more difficult than Vaiṣṇava. So vaivāgya-vidyā's teaching. Ours is also, Caitanya Mahāprabhu taught by His personal example. There is no question of inaction, sitting idly and gossiping about God imagination. Even an impersonalist or personalist, they are fully engaged. Just like the impersonalist in India, they are reading Vedānta-sūtra, they are trying to understand. They are not idle.

Hayagrīva: He felt that faith is the basis of action, not knowledge. He felt that knowledge...

Prabhupāda: So faith is...

Hayagrīva: ...is not sufficient for action.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Faith is there. Just like a child, even animals, we have seen in the park the swan... What is called the children of the swan?

Hari-śauri: Cygnets.

Prabhupāda: Hm?

Hari-śauri: Cygnets.

Prabhupāda: Cygnets?

Hayagrīva: Cygnets.

Prabhupāda: What is the meaning of, the spelling?

Philosophy Discussion on Aristotle:

Hayagrīva: But for happiness, or ānanda, isn't bhakti essential, love, or ānanda?

Prabhupāda: Ānanda means... God is full ānanda, sac-cid-ānanda. He is eternal, sat; He is spiritual; and He is ānanda, bliss. So unless one comes in contact with God, there is no question of ānanda. (Sanskrit). In the Vedic literatures we understand that God is reservoir of all pleasure, unlimited. So when you come in contact with God, then you will taste what is pleasure. So material pleasure is only perverted reflection of the real pleasure. Real pleasure is possible when we come in contact with God.

Hayagrīva: In his Ethics, Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle writes, "Moral excellence is concerned with pleasure and pain. It is pleasure that makes us do base or ignoble action, and pain that prevents us from doing noble actions. For that reason," as Plato says, "men must be brought up from childhood to feel pleasure and pain at the proper things, for this is correct education." So how does this correspond to the Vedic view of education?

Prabhupāda: Vedic view of education is, actually there is no pleasure in this material world, because we may arrange for all pleasure artificially in the material world, but all of sudden one has to die. So where is the pleasure? If you make arrangement of all pleasure and all of a sudden death comes upon you, then where is pleasure? So first of all they must, if they are intelligent, they must make arrangement that they will be able to enjoy the pleasures they have created. Otherwise, where is pleasure? It is disappointment. That is going on. They are trying to become pleased by inventing so many things, but because they are controlled by some superior element, so at any moment they will be kicked out of the pleasure platform. Then where is pleasure? Therefore the conclusion should be: there is no pleasure in this material world. If one is searching after pleasure in the material world, then it is the same thing as the animal is searching water in the desert. There is no water in the desert; it is simply illusion, and he is preparing for death. Because he is thirsty, he is searching after water, and in the wrong way he is searching water. The ultimate result will be he will die of thirst.

Hayagrīva: One last statement from Aristotle. He states, in his Politics, he says, "The beauty of the body is seen, whereas the beauty of the soul is not seen." Is this true?

Philosophy Discussion on Rene Descartes:

Prabhupāda: Free will means...

Hayagrīva: ...infallible judgment?

Prabhupāda: Free will means that you can act wrongly. That is free will. Unless there is chance of doing wrong or right, there is no question of free will. Where is free will then? If I act only one sided, that means I have no free will. Because we act sometimes wrongly, that means free will.

Hayagrīva: A man may know better but still act wrongly.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: Yes.

Prabhupāda: But that is free will. He misuses his. Just like a thief, he knows that his stealing, it is bad, but still he does it. That is free will. He cannot check his greediness, so in spite of his knowing that he is doing wrong thing—he will be punished, he knows; he has seen another thief, he was punished, he was put into prison—everything he knows, but still he steals. Why? Misuse of free will. Unless there is misuse of free will, there is no question of free will.

Hayagrīva: In a sense he says that when one knows God he knows everything else, because...

Prabhupāda: Yes. If he knows God and follows the instruction of God then he is right, and as soon as he goes against the instruction of God, then he is wrong. That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā: "Now I have given you all instruction. It is up to you to accept or reject." Yathecchasi tathā kuru (BG 18.63). That is free will. So now it depends on me whether I shall act according to the instruction of God or I shall act according to my whims, according to my sensual inclinations.

Philosophy Discussion on Blaise Pascal:

Prabhupāda: Yes. That just like the father and the child. The father says, "You do this." So that is all-comprehensive. The father's idea is complete; it is good for the son. But the son says, "No. I want to act in this way." That is his folly. Similarly, what God says, that is religion, and... So there is no question of blind following. If you know, "Here is God. He is all-perfect, and whatever He is saying, that is all-perfect. Let me accept it," then you are gainer. And if apply your reasoning and change it according to your whims, then you suffer.

Hayagrīva: He also writes, "The greatness of man is great in that he knows himself to be miserable. A tree does not know itself to be miserable. These miseries prove man's greatness. They are the miseries of a great lord, a deposed king."

Prabhupāda: Yes. The..., that is explained in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, that you are trying to live long, so does the tree not live longer than you? If you are trying by scientific method how to live more than hundred years or (indistinct), but the tree is living for ten thousands of years. Does it mean this is perfection of life, to live long? That is not perfection of life. So in this way, analyze all other living condition. When you come to God consciousness, that living condition is perfect, because by God consciousness or Kṛṣṇa consciousness you understand God—how to behave with Him; what is your relationship with God—then you become perfect and you go to the kingdom of God and live there eternally.

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."

Philosophy Discussion on Thomas Henry Huxley:

Prabhupāda: No, that is not possible. Nature is so strong that either you become Huxley or Einstein or somebody else, you must die. That is nature's law. You cannot dictate nature. The nature will go on dictating to you; then you must die. That is the... There is no question of survival under the regulation of the material nature. There is no... When you go above the dictation of the material nature, then you survive. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, sa guṇān samatītyaitān brahma-bhūyāya kalpate (BG 14.26). When one realizes Brahman understanding, then he survives; otherwise there is no survival.

Hayagrīva: Well, Huxley is typically British. He wrote in...

Prabhupāda: He is a British or Frenchman?

Hayagrīva: Huxley, no, he was English, Englishman.

Prabhupāda: Oh.

Hayagrīva: He says, "By the Ganges ethical man admits that the cosmos is too strong for him..."

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: "...and destroying every bond which ties him to it by ascetic discipline he seeks salvation in absolute renunciation."

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Philosophy Discussion on Thomas Henry Huxley:

Hayagrīva: So that there's no question of independent liberation?

Prabhupāda: No. Therefore that is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, yajña-arthāt karma. Only for yajña or Kṛṣṇa you should work. Yajña-arthāt karma, anyatra karma-bandhanaḥ. Otherwise you are entangled. This is freedom, to work for Kṛṣṇa; then you are not under entanglement. This is..., there are many practical examples. Just that a soldier, he is killing, his business is killing, and the more he kills he gets recognition. But as soon as he kills one man on his own account, he is murderer. Just like when... The soldier's business is to kill, and so long he is killing for the satisfaction of his state, of the government, he is getting recognition medals. The same soldier, as soon as he kills one man for his own sense satisfaction, he is a murderer, he is to be hanged. This is the karma-bandhanaḥ. The business the same—killing. But one killing is on the order of the state and one killing is for his sense gratification. So killing business is the same, but the position is different. Similarly, when you act for Kṛṣṇa, that is not karma-bandhanaḥ; that is freedom. And when you act for yourself, that is karma-bandhanaḥ. That is the teaching of Bhagavad-gītā throughout. Arjuna was thinking, "Killing, and suffer the sinful activities," because he was thinking on account of himself. But when he understood that "I am induced to kill on behalf of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa wants this fight," then he accepted Kṛṣṇa's proposal. That is not karma-bandhanaḥ. That is not killing. One has to understand this.

Hayagrīva: Now there is one interesting point that Huxley makes in Evolution and Ethics. He tries to tie in the theory of karma with the theory of evolution.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Philosophy Discussion on Samuel Alexander:

Prabhupāda: He reciprocates to the advanced devotee. Just like it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, teṣāṁ satata-yuktānāṁ bhajatāṁ prīti-pūrva... (BG 10.10). One who is in full love with God, He talks with him. He does not talk with ordinary rascals. And in the Brahma-saṁhitā it is said, premāñjana-cchurita-bhakti-vilocanena santaḥ sadaiva hṛdayeṣu vilokayanti: (Bs. 5.38) one who has developed love of God, such person always sees God within his heart. So it is a question of Just like Kṛṣṇa says, that "I am talking to you because you are My devotee," bhakto 'si. Why God should talk with nondevotee? He has no business. Just like king, he talks with his immediate officials, minister. He does not talk with the street man. How you can expect? How this street man can express that "I want to talk with the king or the president"? There is no question. He talks. He talks with the qualified devotees, not with others.

Hayagrīva: Wasn't there also something He says, that "As you approach Me...?"

Prabhupāda: Yes. Actually just like you are talking, you can talk with God also. These gopīs in Vṛndāvana, in everything they are playing with Kṛṣṇa. Mother Yaśodā is binding Kṛṣṇa just like ordinary child. But these are not happening ordinarily. That the Bhāgavata says, that "What this gopī Yaśodā did her past life that the Supreme Lord is sucking her breast?" So you cannot expect that the dealings as God is doing with Mother Yaśodā, Mahārāja Nanda, the gopīs. Therefore we have to be qualified to that position to deal with God.

Philosophy Discussion on Samuel Alexander:

Prabhupāda: But here he says reciprocate.

Hayagrīva: He says there's reciprocation. That's what's confusing. But he goes on further to say, "There's always the double relationship of need. If man wants God and depends upon Him, God wants man and is so far dependent."

Prabhupāda: Yes. Everyone is dependent. There is no question about it.

Hayagrīva: But how is God dependent on man?

Prabhupāda: Not. God is not dependent, but...

Hayagrīva: No, but that, he seemed to be saying that.

Prabhupāda: Huh?

Hayagrīva: He says, "If man wants God and depends upon Him, God wants man and is so far dependent."

Prabhupāda: Yes. That, that is acceptable in this sense, that God is independent thoroughly, but sometimes He wants to become dependent. That is His pleasure. And He accepts some of His devotee so that He can depend upon. Just like Mother Yaśodā, that God became dependent on Mother Yaśodā. Unless Mother Yaśodā allows God to suck her breast, God will die. God is thinking like that, and He is crying. That is God's pleasure, that everyone is dependent on Him, and He is not dependent on anyone, so in order to derive this pleasure how a dependent child enjoys the care of mother, He accept to become a son of a devotee. That is not very ordinary thing to understand, but He has In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta it is explained...

Philosophy Discussion on Auguste Comte:

Prabhupāda: So he is..., he does not believe..., there is no belief in God is there? There is no question of? No. But our point of view is different: that God is the ultimate decider of everything. That is called daiva-netreṇa. He may be acting through different agents, but ultimate decision is given by Him. And He is sitting in everyone's heart. He is observing the activities of the individual soul as witness, giving permission. Without God's permission, nobody can act. So He is giving intelligence also, and He is the cause of forgetting. Two things are there, remembering and forgetting. Both these things are coming from God. If He keeps him in forgetfulness, then he cannot remember, and if He gives him the power to remember, he can remember for long, long past activities. So ultimately God is the final director. That is our conception. Man cannot remain independent. Prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni guṇaiḥ karmāṇi sarvaśaḥ (BG 3.27). Everything is being done, impelled by the three material modes of nature, and the ultimate dictator is the Supersoul, or the Personality of Godhead in His localized aspect, situated everywhere in the heart of the living entity, or even within the atom He is there, and His is the supreme director.

Hayagrīva: He says, "The universe is to be studied not for its own sake but for the sake of man, or rather of humanity. To study in any other spirit would not only be immoral but also highly irrational." This is the old Greek Sophist position, that man is the measure of all things.

Philosophy Discussion on Auguste Comte:

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. Woman is meant for certain duties; man is meant for... Man is meant for hard working, and woman is meant for homely comfort, love. So both of them, if they are situated in their respective duties under proper training, then this combination of man and woman will help both of them to make progress in spiritual life.

Hayagrīva: Comte felt that love of God has always interfered with man's love of women. He says, "Love of God is inconsistent with love for our fellow men, and it was impiety for the knight to love his lady better than his God. And thus the best feelings of man's nature were repressed by his religious faith. Women, therefore, are not really interested in perpetuating the old system of religion."

Purports to Songs

Purport to Bhajahu Re Mana -- New York, March 30, 1966:

Eh? Yes. Lord... We worship Kṛṣṇa, the symbol of Supreme Consciousness. Because in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said that kleśa adhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām. If you take up impersonal, simply consciousness, then you have to pass through difficult process, but if you accept the symbol, Kṛṣṇa, the symbol of Supreme Consciousness, that will be easier for you. Yes. It is said. So Kṛṣṇa... I can concentrate my mind. I can focus my mental activities in the service of the Lord, Kṛṣṇa. Because He is Supreme Consciousness, therefore automatically I concentrate on the Supreme Consciousness. So

bhajahū re mana śrī-nanda-nandana-
abhaya-caraṇāravinda re
durlabha mānava-janama sat-saṅge
taroho e bhava-sindhu re

Then he says that "What I am doing? What is my present occupation?" The present occupation is:

śīta ātapa bāta bariṣaṇa
e dina jāminī jāgi re
biphale sevinu kṛpaṇa durajana
capala sukha-laba lāgi' re

He says that "I am working hard, day and night. And there is no question of winter or summer or rainy season. I have to work hard, day and night. If there is night duty in the winter season, I have to join my office at twelve o'clock at night. So I must go. There is snowfall. If I don't go, then I'll be absent. So I am working so hard, very hard." Śīta ātapa bāta bariṣaṇa, jāminī jāgi re. "And what for I am working?" Now, biphale sevinu kṛpaṇa durajana: "Just to serve persons who cannot protect me, who cannot protect me." We think that my wife, or my husband, or my children, or my relatives, or my friends, and, oh, so many we have got, relationship with this material world And everyone is working to satisfy his relatives. A family man is working so hard because he has to satisfy his wife, children, friends and so many other persons. But one should be conscious that "These friends and relatives, they cannot protect me ultimately.

Purport to Prayers by King Kulasekhara -- Los Angeles, December 25, 1968:

That is very famous book. It is sung by many devotees. So it does not matter whether a man is king, or a poor mendicant. Everyone has the facility to become the greatest devotee of the Lord. So he's praying "My dear Kṛṣṇa, Your feet is lotus." Generally we say "Lotus feet". But where the lotus flower is there, the white swans, they come to the lotus flower and try to play with the stem. They sport, going down the water, and be entangled with the stem of that lotus flower. That is their sporting. So King Kulaśekhara is praying that "Let the swan of my mind be immediately entered into the network of the stem of Your lotus feet." So that means he wants to engage his mind on the lotus feet of the Lord immediately. There is no question of delaying. He says that "Now I am in sound mind. If I think that I shall think of Your lotus feet at the time of death, there is no certainty. Because, at the time of death, the whole body becomes dislocated. The whole function becomes dismantled."

The body's supposed to be conducted by three elements, kapha pitta vāyu, cold, and bile, and air. So when these three elements work simultaneously, there is no disease in the body, but, as soon as there is overlapping disruption of these three elements, the body becomes diseased. And when it is not possible to bring them again in their regulative principle, a man dies. That is the verdict of Āyurveda śāstra. So death takes place when these three elements become overlapped with one another. And the symptom is that there is a sound on the throat which is called: garhh, garhh. That means the patient cannot speak. The throat is choked up and he becomes suffocated and dies. So this is the last stage, symptom of his body.

Purport to Sri-Sri-Gurv-astakam -- Los Angeles, January 2, 1969:

And it is the principle in the Bible that he accepted all the sins of others. This is the sign of spiritual master, that he voluntarily accepts the sinful activities of others and delivers them. That is the qualification of spiritual master. How it is? Just like ghanāghanatvam. Ghanāghanatvam means dense cloud in the sky. The first example has been said, that this material existence is just like forest blazing fire. Now, to extinguish the forest blazing fire, there is no use of sending fire brigade. The fire brigade cannot approach the forest fire; neither any man can go there to extinguish the fire. One has to depend completely on the mercy of nature. That means one has to completely depend on the cloud in the sky. Otherwise, there is no question of pouring water on that blazing fire. So the example is very appropriate. As man-made engine or fire brigade is unable to extinguish the forest blazing fire, similarly, the material existentional blazing fire cannot be extinguished by any man-made method.

They are planning to be very comfortable in this material existence, but they are still more being confused and failure. That peace movement, that United Nation movement, everything is failure. Why? These miseries of this material existence cannot be stopped by any material means. One has to take shelter of spiritual means. Just like the blazing fire in the forest has to wait for the cloud in the sky, similarly, one has to wait for the merciful cloud as the spiritual master. That is described. Trāṇāya kāruṇya-ghanāghanatvam, prāptasya kalyāṇa-guṇārṇavasya **. So the spiritual master is not self-made. It is not that if anyone comes before you and bluffs you that "I have attained spiritual perfection, and I have realized something by some method." No. The spiritual master, bona fide spiritual, means he has to receive the power from authority. Otherwise it is useless. No It is not that one can become spiritual master overnight. He has to take the power from his spiritual master. Therefore it is called prāptasya. Prāptasya means one who has obtained, one who has got the merciful blessings of his spiritual master.

Purport to Parama Koruna -- Los Angeles, January 16, 1969:

That is the mission of incarnation. Every incarnation you'll find two things. Lord Kṛṣṇa, He's so beautiful, so kind, but He is very dangerous to the demons. The demons were seeing Him as thunderbolt and the gopīs were seeing Him as the most beautiful cupid. So in the Bhagavad-gītā also it is stated, ye yathā māṁ prapadyante (BG 4.11). The God is realized in proportion to one's freedom from the demoniac propensities.

So in this age... Of course, the last incarnation, Kalki, will simply kill. Long, long after, He will come. But here Lord Caitanya, His mission is no killing, simply favoring. That is the specific characteristic of Lord Caitanya. Because in this age, of course, there is very much prominence of irreligiosity. But if Lord Caitanya wanted to kill them, then there was no question of their salvation. They would be... Of course, anyone who is killed by incarnation he also gets salvation. But not to the spiritual planets, but they merge into the Brahman effulgence as the impersonalists desire. In other words, the impersonalist's goal of salvation is as good as the goal of salvation of the enemies of God. That is not a very difficult job. So Lord Caitanya is very merciful because He is embracing everyone by bestowing love of Kṛṣṇa. Rūpa Gosvāmī has described Lord Caitanya as the most munificent of all the incarnations because He is giving Kṛṣṇa to everyone, without any qualification. So Locana dāsa Ṭhākura says that parama koruṇa, pahū dui jana, nitāi gauracandra, that They are essence of all incarnation. Kevala ānanda-kanda. And Their preaching process is very pleasing. Caitanya Mahāprabhu recommends "You chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, dance nicely, and when you feel tired, just take rest and eat Kṛṣṇa prasādam." So His formula is very pleasing. Kevala ānanda-kanda. While He was present in Jagannātha Purī, every day in the evening, dancing was, chanting and dancing continued. And after dancing is finished, He used to distribute sumptuously prasādam of Jagannātha. So many thousands of people used to assemble every night. So simply transcendentally pleasing, this movement. Kevala ānanda-kanda.

Purport to Parama Koruna -- Los Angeles, January 16, 1969:

Lord Caitanya says that "Go on chanting. Simply by chanting, one will get all perfection of life." So this is a fact. Unless we take to chanting, we cannot realize it, but those who are chanting, they are realizing that they're getting all desired perfection of life very quickly. So we should chant this mantra with faith and conviction. But the only qualification required in this connection, he says, viṣaya chāḍiyā, se rase majiyā, mukhe bolo hari hari. We have to chant with faith and conviction at the same time we should take care, we should be guarding against sense enjoyment. Viṣaya chāḍiyā, viṣaya means sense enjoyment. And chāḍiyā means give up. One should give up sense enjoyment. Of course, in this materialistic life we have got our senses and we are practiced to use them. We cannot stop it. But there is no question of stopping, but regulating it. Just like we want to eat. Viṣaya means eating, sleeping, mating, and defending. So these things are not forbidden altogether. But they're adjusted just to make it favorable for executing my Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So we should not take... Just like eating. We should not eat just to satisfy the taste. We should eat only just to keep ourself fit for executing Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So eating is not stopped, but it is regulated favorably. Similarly, mating. Mating is also not stopped. But the regulative principle is that you should marry and you should have sex life only for begetting children Kṛṣṇa conscious. Otherwise don't do it. So everything is regulated. There is no question of stopping defense also. Arjuna was fighting, defending, under the order of Kṛṣṇa. So everything is there.

Purport to Parama Koruna -- Atlanta, February 28, 1975:
First-class religion Religion means to understand God. That is the sum and substance.

The process may be different according to country, men. Just like we worship the Deity in the temple. This is also bhakti. And the Christians go to the church and offers prayer to God. That is also bhakti. That is also bhakti. Nine items of bhakti. Śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ smaraṇaṁ pāda-sevanam, arcanaṁ vandanaṁ dāsyam (SB 7.5.23). Śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ smaraṇaṁ pāda-sevanam, arcanam vandanam. Vandanam is offering prayer. So they go to the church or go to the mosque, they offer prayers to the Supreme. That is also bhakti. So there is no question of what type of religion you are following. That doesn't matter. You follow anything, whatever suits you. But the result should be that. You worship with the result. The result is how to love God. That should be the result. If you have come to that platform, how to love God, mad after God, as Caitanya Mahāprabhu...

yugāyitaṁ nimeṣeṇa
cakṣuṣā prāvṛṣāyitam
śūnyāyitaṁ jagat sarvaṁ
govinda-viraheṇa me

Govinda-viraheṇa: "Being separated from Govinda, God, my life is vacant." This is required. It doesn't matter whether you follow Christianity or Hinduism or Muslimism. Whether you are feeling vacancy, everything vacant without Kṛṣṇa, without God—that is the test. Yugāyitaṁ nimeṣeṇa. Every moment... Because one who is feeling separation from the Lord, he is feeling also, "When I shall see Him?"

Purport to Parama Koruna -- Atlanta, February 28, 1975:

"I am feeling one moment as a millenium, being separated from Kṛṣṇa. And the torrents of tears are coming just like torrents of rain." And śūnyāyitaṁ jagat sarvam: "And the whole world is seeming to Me vacant," govinda-viraheṇa me, "being separated from Govinda." This is love. So it doesn't matter what religious system you are following, but the result should be this, that you should be mad after God. That is the test. Sa vai puṁsāṁ paro... That is first-class religion, yato bhaktir adhokṣaje, to love. Bhakti means love, service, rendering service. Adhokṣaje. Adhokṣaje means beyond the speculation of mind, mental exercise, bodily exercise. Adhokṣaja. Adhakṛta akṣaja jñānam.

So Caitanya Mahāprabhu taught this. And He took sannyāsa. For the benefit of the whole world, He took sannyāsa. He gave up His very opulent position in Navadvīpa, as I have told you, very learned scholar, very beautiful body, very beautiful wife, very affectionate mother, good popularity. There was no scarcity. And He was God Himself. Why there will be any scarcity? There is no question. But in spite of, He took sannyāsa for the benefit of the whole world. That Caitanya Mahāprabhu has come here in Atlanta. So you worship this Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Parama koruṇa, pahū dui jana, They are very, very merciful, and little service will enhance your devotional service to a larger scale.

Page Title:There is no question (Philosophy Discussions)
Compiler:Visnu Murti, RupaManjari
Created:17 of Nov, 2012
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=79, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:79