As soon as we touch stool, even my own stool. I have to take bath immediately to purify myself. But the Vedas says that the stool of cow is pure. We take it to the Deity room and smear it. This is Vedic followers. No interpretation. When it is stated in the Vedas, it is true, fact, perfect, without any defect. That is called Vedic knowledge. Not that interpreting to my convenience, I am, I become a Vedantist. No. That is not. So the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is preaching that you accept what Kṛṣṇa says. Sarva-dharmān parityajya (BG 18.66). You have manufactured so many things for the peace and prosperity of the people. But you have failed. Take Kṛṣṇa's word and you'll be happy.
True (Lectures, Other)
Expressions researched:
"true"
Notes from the compiler:
VedaBase query: true not "true sense of the term" not "not true"
Lectures
Nectar of Devotion Lectures
The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 23, 1972:
Just like when a man is ghostly haunted—in Bengal it is called bhute pava (?)—and he speaks nonsense, even his father is before him, he wants to attack his father without any respect. Madman, crazy. So anyone under this protection of the material energy—more or less, crazy. More or less. It is not only our words. It is scientifically true. I know, there was one case, a man was condemned to death and his pleader presented that "This man was in, in insanity condition. Therefore he committed this act. He may be excused." So the, a civil surgeon was invited to examine him, whether he's, actually he was in sanity condition. The civil surgeon gave evidence that so far he had treated so many patients, he saw everyone is more or less crazy." Under the circumstances, if this man is crazy, that depends on your judgement, what to do. But in my opinion, every man is a crazy man." So this is a fact. This is a fact. Anyone who is under the control of the material energy, he's a crazy man. He's thinking "I am this, I am that, I am this," "I am American," "I am Indian," "I am Hindu," "I am a Muslim," "I am so on, so on, so many things." But he's nothing of all this. These are all creation of māyā.
The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 8, 1972:
We do not say mithyā. Vaiṣṇava philosophers, they do not accept the jagat as mithyā. Why? If it is emanation from the Absolute Truth, it must be true. It is not mithyā, but we accept it as temporary. We do not accept as permanent. The permanent jagat is the spiritual world. Paras tasmāt tu bhāvaḥ anyaḥ (BG 8.20). There is another spiritual world; that is sanātana, that is permanent. This world is not permanent. So even though it is not permanent, it can be utilized for the service of the Lord. Nirbandhe kṛṣṇa-sambandhe yukta-vairāgyam ucyate. That is our philosophy. We don't take the jagat as mithyā; we take it as fact, because it is emanation from the supreme fact. So just like gold earring is also gold—that is not iron—similarly, the, this material world is made of the external energy of Kṛṣṇa. Therefore we do not find anything here wrong. We try to dovetail everything in the service of Kṛṣṇa, because it is Kṛṣṇa's. Just like one's property must be enjoyed by the proprietor. Kṛṣṇa says that bhoktāraṁ yajña-tapasāṁ sarva-loka-maheśvaram (BG 5.29). He's the proprietor of this world. Therefore everything dovetailed in His service for His satisfaction, that is devotional service. That is the professional (perfectional?) stage of serving Kṛṣṇa. So we don't take the world as mithyā.
The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 9, 1972:
It is simply a bondage of some self-interest. The servant is not actually serving the master; it is serving the money which the master gives him. As soon as the payment will be stopped, there will be no more service. Therefore it is a perverted reflection of that service attitude in the Vaikuṇṭha planet. And similarly we have seen there is..., there was high-court cases between mother and the sons, and they spent lots of money. Still they could not come into conclusion. The motherly affection, the paternal affection, just simply a shadow. It appears to be true because the truth is elsewhere. Just like in the desert it appears there is a great, vast mass of water, but actually there is no water. But that does not mean there is no water. The impression of water is there because there is actually water somewhere. Similarly, we are trying to taste the five rasas in this material world. Because actually these rasas are there in the spiritual world. This is only reflection. Ūrdhva-mūlam adhah-śākha. And because in the spiritual world it is a fact, we are taking these false things as fact, these temporary things as fact. Actually it is not fact.
The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 9, 1972:
Kṛṣṇa is called Yogeśvara. He's also the master of all yogic mystic power. Therefore a bhakta, a true devotee of Kṛṣṇa, he does not endeavor personally to achieve all these yogic mystic power. He depends on Kṛṣṇa, and if there is necessity of exhibiting some yogic power, Kṛṣṇa will show. Kṛṣṇa will exhibit. Yatra yogeśvaraḥ hariḥ. So although Arjuna did not manifest any yogic power, but, by Kṛṣṇa's grace everything was so wonderfully performed in the Battle of Kurukṣetra. Otherwise Arjuna was a, an insignificant warrior in front of Bhīṣma, Karṇa, Dronācārya. This is admitted by Mahārāja Parīkṣit, that it is simply by the grace of Kṛṣṇa that his grandfather came out victorious in front of Bhīṣma, Karṇa, Dronācārya and similar great heroes. So if any heroic action has to be shown, the devotee does not endeavor separately for showing such heroic manifestation. Because he depends on Kṛṣṇa, if there is need, then Kṛṣṇa will show. Nimitta-mātraṁ bhava savya-sācin. Actually, the battlefield was conducted by Kṛṣṇa, and He owned the victory, but officially, historically, it is said that Arjuna owned the victory. So a devotee does not require to acquire all the talents, how to own victory. Kṛṣṇa will do that business. A devotee has only to surrender sincerely unto the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. Then everything will be done wonderfully.
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures
Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.1 -- Mayapur, March 1, 1974:
So His prediction is coming to be true. (aside:) Who is talking? His prediction is coming to be true. Now you European and American, African and Australian, so many, all parts of the world, you have come. This is due to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's desire. He wanted it. Pṛthivīte āche yata nagarādi grāma. (CB Antya-khaṇḍa 4.126) He wanted to be famous, to become famous, and people should thank Him. He wanted that. He told that, that "When they will know My philosophy"—that is the desire of Śrī Caitanya—"they'll thank Me." And actually you are already thanking Him by getting the sublime instruction of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. What is Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's instruction. It is the same instruction as Kṛṣṇa gave. Kṛṣṇa wanted sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). That is Kṛṣṇa's mission. Because it is the duty of the living entity because they are part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa, it is the duty of everyone to abide by the orders of Kṛṣṇa. That is the duty. Jīvera svarūpa haya nityera... (CC Madhya 20.108). This is the instruction of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Kṛṣṇa wanted that you should all surrender unto Kṛṣṇa, and Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that your real constitution position is eternal servitude of Kṛṣṇa. There is no difference between Kṛṣṇa's instruction and Caitanya Mahāprabhu's instruction, because He is Kṛṣṇa.
Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.108 -- San Francisco, February 18, 1967:
So yasya prabhā. "Because illuminating light is emanating from His body..." Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi: (Bs. 5.40) "In that effulgence, millions and millions of planets are generating." The same example you can take, that all these planets... This is scientifically true, I mean to say, that all these planets, they have generated from the sunshine. Similarly, spiritual world, that effulgence of the body of Kṛṣṇa, that is spread, and there are hundreds and millions of Vaikuṇṭha planets are there. Mahāntam āditya-varṇam. And then where is that āditya? Where is that supreme sun? Tamasaḥ parastāt. Oh, that is beyond this darkness. This material world is dark by nature. We have several times explained. Therefore in the temporary... Now, just see the arrangement. The sun is there to drive out darkness, but the night is also there so that we can understand that by nature it is dark. Simply by timely appearance of the sun, it becomes day. Therefore there is day and night, day and night, day and night. Tamasaḥ parastāt. And other Vedic literatures-tamasi mā jyotir gamaḥ: "Don't keep yourself in this darkness. Just try to get out of it and go to that Brahman effulgence." Jyotir gamaḥ. Tamasaḥ parastāt.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 8.128 -- Bhuvanesvara, January 24, 1977:
Guest (3): Mahārāja, it is true that one should follow Kṛṣṇa consciousness for spiritual progress, no doubt, but who and why this present society situated which we observe in this world, in the modern civilization?
Prabhupāda: You can come please here. We can hear. You can come. What do you mean by "modern civilization"?
Guest (3): The civilization we are now going through.
Prabhupāda: So what do you mean by "modern civilization"? That means to violate all the rules and regulation? Does it mean modern civilization?
Guest (2): Question was, "Why there is a chaotic situation if...," I think if I'm understanding him correctly, "Why there is a chaotic situation? If God is to uplift the soul of all the persons, all the livings, why there is a chaotic situation?" Lord Kṛṣṇa has said that yadā yadā hi glānir bhavati... That is the answer, guru will say. Why there is a chaotic situation? That is his question, sir.
Prabhupāda: The chaotic sit..., must be there. Kṛṣṇa says one thing and you do other thing. So why there shouldn't be chaotic condition? You hear Kṛṣṇa, you follow Kṛṣṇa; there will be order.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 8.128 -- Bhuvanesvara, January 24, 1977:
Guest (5): Kṛṣṇa, Rāma, Hari...
Prabhupāda: No. Your answer is this, that "Why God does not...?" God wants that "These so-called brāhmaṇas who eat Jagannātha-prasāda with fish, let them remain in darkness, not to understand who is Vaiṣṇava."
Guest (5): That is true...
Prabhupāda: That is true. Take it, that. That's all. (laughter)
Guest (5): But to understand the God...
Prabhupāda: Tān ahaṁ dviṣataḥ krūrān kṣipāmy ajasram andhā-yoniṣu (BG 16.19). Those who are vaiṣṇava-dveṣi, bhagavad-dveṣi, God keeps them in darkness perpetually.
Guest (5): What is the reason between man and God? That is the point we have to understood.
Prabhupāda: We have to understood... Come to this school and learn it, not in a minute.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 8.128 -- Bhuvanesvara, January 24, 1977:
Prabhupāda: Surrender. Who will surrender? Unless you are servant, why shall you surrender? You are servant; God is master. So therefore master and servant different.
Guest (5): No, that is true. I am not God. But God is there within me. God is everybody.
Prabhupāda: That's all... God is everywhere.
Guest (5): He's within ant and dog and elephant and everybody.
Prabhupāda: That...
Guest (5): Due to presence of God, this small living being, due to presence of God...
Prabhupāda: God is within dog. Therefore does it mean God is dog also?
Guest (5): No. God is not dog. God is a ...
Prabhupāda: Then you are putting the same argument. Because God is there within dog, therefore God is dog.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 8.128 -- Bhuvanesvara, January 24, 1977:
Prabhupāda: God is everywhere. That is understood. But that does not mean... God says, mat-sthāni sarva-bhūtāni nāhaṁ teṣu avasthitaḥ (BG 9.4). Why don't you read this?
Guest (5): No. That is true. If we will not believe that, then we will be helping people? We will be helping lot of people? No, that is not...
Prabhupāda: Well, we understand Bhagavad-gītā as it is. We don't make any interpretation.
Guest (5): In Bhagavad-gītā Śrī Kṛṣṇa says, "I live in everybody."
Prabhupāda: Who denies that? That does not mean God is everything.
Guest (5): No. God is not everything.
Prabhupāda: Then dvaitavāda—everything and God is different. That is dvaitavāda.
Guest (5): Then we have to love everybody, everything.
Prabhupāda: So who says no? Unless we love everyone, why we are traveling all over the world?
Guest (5): Love is God, accept, paraṁ dharma.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.108-109 -- New York, July 15, 1976:
So bhedābheda-prakāśa. So the living entity is simultaneously one and different. The two philosophies are going on. One philosophy, Māyāvāda, ahaṁ brahmāsmi, miscalculation, so 'ham—this is to become one. And another philosophy, Vaiṣṇava philosophy—that we are different. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu says that both are true. Bhedābheda-prakāśa. A living entity is one with God and is as different from God. Bhedābheda-prakāśa. One? How one? Because Kṛṣṇa says that "Living entities are My part and parcel." Just like this hand, this finger, is part and parcel of my body, so therefore it is one. But the finger is not the whole body. Different. It is very simple thing. Bhedābheda-prakāśa. Anyone can understand. The finger... The tree... Just like the leaf, the twigs, the flowers, the fruits. They are all tree. But at the same time, it is not tree; it is leaf, it is branch, it is twig, it is flower. It is very simple philosophy. Caitanya Mahāprabhu explained, taṭasthā-śakti, marginal. Marginal means the living entity has to become servant. That is his position. Jīvera svarūpa haya nitya kṛṣṇa dāsa (Cc. Madhya 20.108-109). But when the servant wants to become master, he is under the clutches of māyā. And when he understands that "I am not master; I am servant," he is under Kṛṣṇa. That is taṭasthā. Taṭasthā means marginal. That taṭa... Taṭa means the beach. Sometimes the beach is covered with water, and sometimes it is land. That is called taṭasthā. So that land, sometimes water.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.358-359 -- New York, December 29, 1966:
This is also divine energy, but that is directly. This is indirectly. This is temporary. Nothing, without, nothing can exist without being divine because everything is coming out from the Lord. Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. Therefore the impersonalists, they have taken everything as Brahman. That is their... That is also true. Everything is Brahman. That's right. That's all right. Just like in this store. This whole thing is store. That's all right. But we have to take advantage of the store, not sitting in this, I mean to say, lighted(?)... You have to sit here. If you say, "That is also sitting place. Why not go there? And deliver the lecture from there?" No. We have to utilize here. So you have to take advantage of the best. Everything is energy of Kṛṣṇa. That's all right. But we have to take the advantage of the better energy, superior energy. So na te viduḥ, they do not know how to take advantage of that superior energy. So there are two energies, the superior and inferior, or the spiritual and material. The material energy... This is the definition and the sum and substance of the definition and activities of the supreme summum bonum, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), the Supreme Source of everything.
Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 22.11-15 -- New York, January 9, 1967:
So the Supreme Lord is person, and the lovers, the living entities, they are also persons. They forget who is God, who is not God, but the central focus is in Kṛṣṇa. Everyone loves Kṛṣṇa. Without seeing Kṛṣṇa they are mad. This is the position in the spiritual world. Simply love Kṛṣṇa, that's all. Bhuñje sevā-sukha. And by loving, as we have got a little perverted experience of love affairs, so just imagine when that love is pure and true, how much pleasure there is. So that thing is there in the spiritual world, pure love. And object is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore they are so much in bliss... That is bliss. That is bliss, sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1), eternal love with knowledge that "Here is Kṛṣṇa," and ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). That is perfect stage, lovable object eternal, lover eternal, with knowledge, with eternal life. That is there. In the spiritual world this is going on. They're all in bliss.
Sri Isopanisad Lectures
Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 1 -- Los Angeles, April 29, 1970:
So how you can say that it is not controlled, it is floating out of its own self? No. The answer is there in the Bhagavad-gītā, that "I enter into this material planets, and then I keep it floating." Gām āviśya aham (BG 15.13), dhārayāmy aham ojasā. Dhārayāmy aham ojasā. Something mak... Just like you float this airplane; so somebody has entered within it, that driver or pilot. So actually, he is keeping this airplane floating, not the machine. This is simple truth. So if you take this analogy, then this planet is floating, there must be somebody entering here. Somebody must have entered. So Kṛṣṇa says, "I have entered." So what is the difficulty to understand how it is keeping floating? The analogy is there. Everyone can understand that this big airplane is floating in the sky because the pilot has entered within it. Similarly, if this planet is floating, then somebody, either you or somebody, God, has entered it. And that answer is there in the Bhagavad-gītā, that "I enter into these planets and therefore I keep them floating." That is our answer. And the scientists, they say the law of gravitation... How far it is true...
Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 7 -- Los Angeles, May 9, 1970:
"One who always sees all living entities as spiritual sparks, in quality one with the Lord, becomes a true knower of things. What is there as illusion or anxiety for him?" This realization is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. There are different kinds of realization, but ekatvam, a qualitatively oneness, is always there. The brahmavādi, impersonalist, they think that we are cent percent one with the Lord or the Supreme Absolute Truth, but that is not a fact. If one is cent percent one with the Supreme Lord, then how he has come under the control of māyā? This question, they cannot answer.
Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 7 -- Los Angeles, May 10, 1970:
So their ekatvam, Māyāvāda philosophy's ekatvam, oneness, and our ekatvam of oneness—a little different. They say that the energy's false; the Brahman is real. Brahmā satyaṁ jagan mithyā. We say that because Brahman is truth, therefore His energy's also truth. That is the difference between Vaiṣṇava philosophy and Māyāvāda philosophy. We cannot say that energy is false. Energy is temporary; this external energy is temporary, not false. Although... Suppose we have got some trouble. There are so many kinds of troubles pertaining to the body, mind, external affairs. But that trouble comes and goes. But when the trouble is there, it is true. We feel the consequence. We cannot say it is false. The Māyāvādī philosophers say that it is false. But when he's troubled, why he's so much disturbed? So that is not false. Therefore this very word is used: vijānataḥ, "one who knows." Perfect knowledge must be there, vijānataḥ. When one is actual knower of the things, tatra ko mohaḥ, then there is no illusion. Illusion is for him who does not know things. But one who knows, there is no illusion. Tatra ko mohaḥ kaḥ śoka. No lamentation. When you are perfectly in conviction that there is nothing except Kṛṣṇa, and Kṛṣṇa's energy, the same, then there is no moha—moha means illusion—and śoka.
Festival Lectures
Nrsimha-caturdasi Lord Nrsimhadeva's Appearance Day -- Bombay, May 5, 1974:
So this is very instructive struggle between the atheist and the theist. This story of Prahlāda Mahārāja is eternally true. There is always a struggle between the atheist and the theist. If a person becomes God conscious, Kṛṣṇa conscious, so he will find many enemies. Because the world is full of demons. What to speak of the devotee of Kṛṣṇa, even Kṛṣṇa, when He personally came, He had to kill so many demons. There was His maternal uncle, His mother's brother, very keenly related. Still, he wanted to kill Kṛṣṇa. As soon as any son was born to Devakī, immediately he killed, because he did not know who will be Kṛṣṇa. The prediction was that the eighth child of his sister will kill Kaṁsa. So he began to kill all the children. At last, Kṛṣṇa came. But he could not kill Kṛṣṇa. He was killed by Kṛṣṇa.
Gundica Marjanam Cleansing of the Gundica Temple, Lecture (the day before Ratha-yatra) -- San Francisco, July 4, 1970:
Everything is in connection or has relationship with the Supreme Lord. That is our philosophy. We don't say that this speaker, microphone, is false. Why it is false? The microphone is produced out of the energy of Kṛṣṇa. This matter, this iron, or this wood, that is a production of Kṛṣṇa's energy. If Kṛṣṇa is true, Absolute Truth, then His energy is also true. And anything produced of His energy, that is also truth. But as the energy is utilized for the energetic, similarly anything produced by Kṛṣṇa's energy should be utilized for Kṛṣṇa. That is our philosophy. So we don't say that false. We say reality. Therefore in Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement we accept everything, but accept everything for service of Kṛṣṇa. Nothing for my sense gratification. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. We do not say that "This world is false. Give up."
Ratha-yatra and Press Conference -- San Francisco, July 4, 1970:
Lord Caitanya, when He appeared, He took sannyāsa at the age of twenty-four years, and by His mother's request He was living at Jagannātha Purī. So every year He was taking part in this car festival of Jagannātha. This Jagannātha Deity was established by one King Indradyumna about more than three thousand years ago. This temple is very old. Even in some literatures of your Christian religion I find that Lord Jesus Christ also went to this Jagannātha temple and lived there for sometimes. Of course, how far it is true, that is to be judged by you, but I have read this information in a Christian book, Aquarian Gospel. So if we take this incidence that Lord Jesus Christ also went to Jagannātha temple, then from historical point of view it is two thousand years old. But it is, according to our calculation, it is more than three thousand years old. So this Indradyumna king, he asked Viśvakarma to carve the deity of Kṛṣṇa, Balarāma and Subhadra. And there was a time limit. Viśvakarma made an agreement that "Unless I finish the deity's carving very nicely, you cannot see me." So door was closed, and the king was very much anxious to see the temple is established very soon. So he forcibly opened the door, and he saw that the deities were half finished. The Deity Jagannātha as you see, it appears half finished. The king decided, "Never mind it is half finished. I shall install these deities in the temple." Since then, the three deities Jagannātha, Balarāma and Subhadra are being worshiped in India, Jagannātha Purī. Perhaps you know. And the car festival takes place every year, and millions of people go there to participate in that cart, car festival.
Varaha-dvadasi, Lord Varaha's Appearance Day Lecture Dasavatara-stotra Purport -- Los Angeles, February 18, 1970:
That is predicted in the Vedic literatures, as Lord Buddha's appearance was also predicted in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. And Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam was compiled five thousand years ago, and Lord Buddha appeared about 2,500 years ago. Therefore about Lord Buddha's appearance it is predicted that at the beginning of Kali-yuga Lord Buddha will appear. There was prediction, and that has actually come to be true. Similarly, there is prediction about Kalki avatāra, and that will also come to be true. So at that time Lord Kalki's business will be simply to kill. No instruction. Just like... In Bhagavad-gītā Lord Kṛṣṇa gave instruction in the shape of Bhagavad-gītā. But at the end of Kali-yuga, people will be so much degraded that there is no more possibility to give any instruction. They will not be able to understand even. At that time the only weapon will be to kill them. And one who is killed by the Lord, he also gets salvation. That is God's all-merciful quality. Either He protects or He kills, the result is the same. So that will be the last stage of this Kali-yuga, and after that, again Satya-yuga, the age of religiosity, will begin. These are the statements of Vedic literature. (end)
His Divine Grace Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Prabhupada's Appearance Day, Lecture -- Mayapur, February 8, 1977:
So actually this logic is coming to be true, there is now agitation. People are feeling the pressure of this movement, and in Europe and America there is opposing party. But don't be afraid. Take this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement very seriously. It is not a national movement or some social movement. It is the movement to uplift the position of the whole human society. So that was the mission of Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura. Somehow or other we are taking it little seriously. Let all the Americans, Indians, especially young men... Don't misunderstand these Europeans and Americans C.I.A. Don't be mad, crazy fellow. They have taken Kṛṣṇa consciousness. They have nothing to do with politics. And you also, young men, you also join on the basis of Kṛṣṇa consciousness and do something philanthropic for the whole human society. (end)
Jagannatha Deities Installation Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.2.13-14 -- San Francisco, March 23, 1967:
Guest (2): Somebody said Christ studied in India. Is this true?
Prabhupāda: What is that?
Guest (2): Somebody... I have heard or read somewhere that Christ had studied in India. Is this true?
Prabhupāda: Yes, I have also heard, but I do not know whether it is true. Maybe, because India is the place of learning. From China, from other places, from Greece, the history says, they used to go to India. So quite possible. And I have heard from reliable sources that Christ was absent from his home for twelve years, and he went to India for studying. Maybe. Yes. Yes?
Guest (3): You mentioned about how you should fulfill the supreme law, and you should be what your..., what the spirit tells you or what this Supreme Being, whatever, this tells you? I mean, like, if you, like, if you meditate a lot and you really, well, you feel something, that you should do something...
Prabhupāda: It is not something. It must be actual fact. There is no question of "something." "Something" is vague. You must speak what is that something.
Arrival Addresses and Talks
Arrival Address -- Los Angeles, February 9, 1975:
So if you want satisfaction, then you have to take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Compulsory: "You must." There is no other alternative. Therefore Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura sings, hari hari biphale janama goṅāinu: "My dear Lord Kṛṣṇa, I have simply wasted my time." Actually, anyone who has not taken Kṛṣṇa consciousness—simply wasting time. This is fact, scientifically true. But they do not know it. Māya-mohita. Mohitaṁ nābhijānāti mām ebhyaḥ param avyayam (BG 7.13). Being covered by the illusory energy, they do not know the background of this gigantic cosmic manifestation. That is Kṛṣṇa. So intelligence means to find out Kṛṣṇa. In the Īśopani..., Īśo, it is stated that "My dear Lord, please wind up Your, these dazzling rays so that I can actually see Your face." Within brahma-jyotir the Kṛṣṇa is there. So Kṛṣṇa can be seen only by service. You cannot challenge Kṛṣṇa, "Kṛṣṇa, come here. I shall see You." No. That is not possible. You have to submit. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). That is the way. You have to surrender. So long you don't surrender, that is up to you. Kṛṣṇa will not force you. He is almighty, He can force you, but He does not do that. He says, "You do this. If you do not do it, that is your business. But I say you do it."
Arrival Talk -- Aligarh, October 9, 1976:
Indian man: What are the, our Prime Minister's view regarding this movement?
Prabhupāda: So far I know, she likes this movement. But she is also not independent.
Indian man: That's true. Nobody is independent. Even she.
Prabhupāda: Recently one of my students met the Home Minister. He said, "Yes, this movement should be spread all over the world." They are appreciating. But there are different parties, different circumstances. Our four items—no illicit sex, no meat-eating, no intoxication, no gambling—so I think they are taking some steps on this ground. They are trying to stop cow-killing.
Indian man (2): Yes, they have already banned cow-killing.
Prabhupāda: And they are going to take steps for intoxication.
Indian man (2): Stopping intoxication also. Actually, these are the things which can bring up the character of the nation.
Prabhupāda: We are already intoxicated in material existence, and if more intoxication is there then...
Indian man (2): From bad to worse.
Arrival Talk -- Aligarh, October 9, 1976:
Indian man (2): Swami Mahārāja said that they are forces which when if you want to keep yourself in power, you have to sometimes ban and this...
Indian man (3): That's true.
Prabhupāda: No. Apart from government, the first thing is... Sometimes we say, "Rāma-rājya." The Rāma-rājya means... There is a verse in Bhāgavatam that when Lord Rāmacandra took charge of the, after coming back from the forest, His brother Bhārata surrendered and He took charge of the kingdom. So the residents, the subjects, are described as a varṇāśrama guṇanvita (?).
Indian man (3): Varnāśrama...?
Prabhupāda: Gunanavita. So Rāma-rājya can be established. And it is said there that Lord Rāmacandra was maintaining the kingdom, taking the citizens as His own son. Pitṛvat rāma. It is said there. Pitṛvat. As the father of the family takes charge of the children very nicely, so it is the government's duty to become the sensible father of the citizens. And the citizens will be qualified following the institution of varṇāśrama. Then there will be Rāma-rājya.
Initiation Lectures
Lecture at Initiation Fire Sacrifice -- Los Angeles, July 16, 1969:
So this mantra suggests that either you are contaminated or not contaminated... It is not that... The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that so long we are contaminated in the māyā, we can adopt any means of self-realization, and after self-realization, when we become liberated, we become one with the Supreme and there is no more any work. This is partially true. Partially true means when actually you realize yourself, then you have no material activities. That is the sign of self-realization. This is also stated in the Bhagavad-gītā:
- brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā
- na śocati na kāṅkṣati
- samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu
- mad-bhaktiṁ labhate parām
- (BG 18.54)
Self-realization, liberation, the sign is that he becomes joyful, prasannātmā, immediately. If you have actually realized yourself, simply by bluffing that "I am God, I am this, I am..." No. There are signs. If you are God, then you must be as joyful as God, as Kṛṣṇa. If you are suffering still and you are claiming that you are God, that is nonsense. You needn't become God. You, simply if you become in the light of God, you become joyful. Just like from the darkness of night, if you simply come to the sunshine, immediately your position is changed. It does not require that you have to become the sun. Simply by coming to the sunlight your purpose is fulfilled.
Initiation Lecture -- Hamburg, August 27, 1969:
Guest: Is it completely each individual's choice to be demonic, or...?
Prabhupāda: Yes. Demon means when he is forgotten, when has lost his sense, that is demon. When has lost his sense, that is demon. Demon means māyayāpahṛta-jñānāḥ (BG 7.15). Māyā, by the influence of māyā, the true aspect of knowledge is taken away. Anyone who is trying to establish it that "There is no God," he is demon. That's all. There are so many philosophers, so many atheists, so many scientists. Their only business is to deny God. They are demons. Yes.
Guest: Then is there individual complete choice?
Prabhupāda: That is ignorance. Yes. Apahṛta-jñānāḥ means just like a madman. For the time being, his natural knowledge is taken away. Crazy. What do we mean by crazy? For the time being, his knowledge is taken away. Similarly, when a living entity is in that position, as somebody has taken away his knowledge, that is demonic condition. But he can be reestablished again in knowledge. Just like a crazy man is sent, mental disorder, to hospital for treatment; again he comes as a sane man. Similarly, the demons are just like crazy men. Even they are treated with Kṛṣṇa consciousness, they can be reverted to their own position. So this is temporary. This demoniac nature is temporary due to the contact with māyā. Therefore the whole business is how to get out of the clutches of māyā. Then there is no more demonic nature. It is artificial. (break) ...superficial. It comes and goes. As it comes artificially, so it can go also. And the driving method is this Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
Initiation Lecture -- Caracas, February 22, 1975:
So the most important item is śravaṇam, or hearing. If you do not do anything else, if you simply sincerely hear about God, then gradually you will be God conscious. That is also true in the material science. The students go to the school, college, and hear from the professor, and gradually he becomes learned in that subject matter. Especially in this age, śravaṇam, or hearing, is very, very important. We are therefore opening different centers in different parts of the world, and they are being given the chance of this bhakti-yoga system, śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ smaraṇaṁ pāda-sevanam (SB 7.5.23), like that. So all these devotees present here, they are not Indians. I have not brought them from India; neither I have bribed them here. But by hearing only, they are now coming to God consciousness and devotees. Therefore this śravaṇam item, or hearing item, is very, very important. So if you all, ladies and gentlemen present here, take advantage of hearing about God from this institution, you will also become God conscious. We have got many sense organs, out of which the aural sense, or the hearing sense, is very important. Therefore, for spiritual understanding, we have to use this ear. So therefore the Vedic literature is called śruti. Śruti means to receive the knowledge by hearing. So our process, or the Vedic process, is that... Satāṁ prasaṅgān mama vīrya-saṁvido bhavanti hṛt-karṇa-rasāyanāḥ kathāḥ (SB 3.25.25). If one lends his aural reception of spiritual knowledge through the authorized person, devotee, then he relishes taste in spiritual life. And when you cultivate that stage, then, gradually, he becomes a devotee, he understands what is God.
General Lectures
Lecture to Technology Students (M.I.T.) -- Boston, May 5, 1968:
Prabhupāda: It is not Hindu approach. It is... We are recommending that you chant the holy name of God. Why do you say it is Hindu approach?
Student (1): I didn't. But as I understood you, I thought you said that this was appropriate here because people aren't terribly interested, therefore are lax in spiritual matters, which I feel is true. But if this is true, is there something that would follow? In other words, could you progress to some other form of this more...?
Prabhupāda: There are many other forms, of course, but this form is the easiest, and just suitable for the people of this age. Just like you gather together and chant Hare Kṛṣṇa. Anyone can. Actually we are doing that. In your country, wherever I go I chant this, and the American boys and girls, they take part in it in parks, in our class. So there is no difficulty. And this is the easiest. Simply we do not ask that you must be very highly educated, you must be philosopher, you must be expert in breathing exercise or this way or that way. No. We don't require any qualification. Simply come and sit with us and chant Hare Kṛṣṇa and see the result.
Lecture to Technology Students (M.I.T.) -- Boston, May 5, 1968:
Student (4): Your Holiness?
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Student (4): Could you estimate how many people in India have found true spirituality through Indian religion?
Prabhupāda: What do you mean by Indian religion?
Student (4): By any of the true religions which are offered in India. Not only yours, but...
Prabhupāda: You do not know what is Indian religion. The Indian religion is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. Have you read Bhagavad-gītā? Then you do not know what is Indian religion. Indian religion is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. The Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa says, there is no greater higher authority than Kṛṣṇa. You can accept it. At least, the Indians, they accept. So in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said in the beginning that yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati: (BG 4.7) "Whenever there is discrepancy in the matter of discharging religious principles, I appear." Now, if you accept this religion means the Hindu religion or Muslim religion or Christian religion or Buddhist religion, Kṛṣṇa does not propose such religion. He, at the end of Bhagavad-gītā, He says, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja: (BG 18.66) "You give up all other religious principles. You simply surrender unto Me." So religion, either you take it Hindu religion or Muslim religion or Christian religion, religion means to surrender unto God. And the Bhāgavata explains, sa vai puṁsāṁ paro dharmo yato bhaktir adhokṣaje (SB 1.2.6). That is the perfect type of religion which teaches surrendering unto the Supreme Lord. That is religion. Either you take it Hindu religion or Christian religion or Muslim religion or any religion, real religion means surrendering unto God. If there is no surrender unto God, that is no religion.
Lecture on Teachings of Lord Caitanya -- Seattle, September 25, 1968:
Prabhupāda: This is another point. Even one thinks that he knows everything, still, he, before the spiritual master, he should be blank slate, that "I do not know anything." That is the qualification of the disciple. He should approach the spiritual master as if he does not know anything. Go on.
Girl: "These are the characteristics of a true devotee. In the Nārada-bhakti-sūtra, it is said that one who is very serious about developing his Kṛṣṇa consciousness by the grace of the Lord has his desire for understanding Kṛṣṇa fulfilled very soon. The Lord said, 'You are a suitable person for protecting the devotional service of the Lord. Therefore it is My duty to instruct you in the science of God.' "
Prabhupāda: Here is another point, that one should not accept somebody as spiritual master all of a sudden. At the same time, the spiritual master also should not accept anybody as his disciple immediately. Now Sanātana Gosvāmī is proving himself that he's qualified disciple, and Lord Caitanya is accepting him, that "You are just the suitable person; therefore I shall accept you as My disciple and teach you the science of Kṛṣṇa consciousness." Yes.
Lecture -- Seattle, September 30, 1968:
Jāhnavā: How and why did we lose our awareness of our true love for Kṛṣṇa in the beginning?
Prabhupāda: Hm?
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: How and why... How and why did we lose our love for Kṛṣṇa in the beginning?
Jāhnavā: No, not the love. Just the awareness of the love, of our true love for Kṛṣṇa.
Prabhupāda: Our awareness is there. You love somebody. But you are meant to love Kṛṣṇa, that you have forgotten. So forgetfulness is also our nature. Sometimes we forget. And especially because we are very small, minute, therefore even I cannot remember exactly what I was doing last night at this time. So forgetfulness is not unnatural for us. And again, if somebody revives our memory, to accept that, that is also not unnatural. So our loving object is Kṛṣṇa. Somehow or other, we have forgotten Him. We don't trace the history when we forgot. That is useless labor. But we have forgotten, that is a fact. Now revive it. Here is reminder. So take opportunity. Don't try to history why you have forgotten and what was the date of my forgetfulness. Even if you know, what is the use? You have forgotten. Take it. Just like if you go to a physician, he'll never ask you how you got this disease, what is the history of this disease, at what date, at what time you were infected.
Lecture -- Seattle, September 30, 1968:
Prabhupāda: Then?
Young man: I don't especially...
Prabhupāda: Anyone.
Young man: I don't think that... Speaking about this specific incident, it isn't necessarily true that I would feel jealous of this guy because he was over me. But I just feel as beings we are more or less all equal. I mean, you know, it's kind of a philosophy that I have. I don't feel that I have to bow down to anybody and I don't feel anybody should bow down to me.
Prabhupāda: Why? Why? Why do not bow down? Why?
Young man: Because I don't feel that I owe him anything or he owes me anything.
Prabhupāda: So that is the disease. We are forced to bow down and we think that "I don't like to bow down." This is the disease.
Lecture -- Seattle, September 30, 1968:
Young man: He isn't forcing me to do anything. I'm just kind of there and he's kind of there.
Prabhupāda: No. Just try to understand. It is a very nice question. You say that "I do not want to bow down." Is it not?
Young man: That's basically true, yes.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Why?
Young man: Because I don't feel like I'm inferior to...
Prabhupāda: That is the disease. You have diagnosed your own disease. That is the disease of materialism. Everyone is thinking that "I want to be master. I don't wish to bow down myself." Everyone is thinking, not only yourself. Just try...
Young man: Uh...
Prabhupāda: Let me finish this. This is the disease, material disease. First of all try to understand. It is not your disease or my disease. Everyone's disease is this, that "Why shall I bow down? Why shall I become subordinate?" But nature is forcing me to become subordinate. Now who wants to meet death? Why people are dying? Can you answer this?
Young man: Why are people dying?
Prabhupāda: Yes. Nobody wants to die.
Lecture -- Los Angeles, December 4, 1968:
That was circumstantial because we have to take into consideration of the situation of the country and the people. Where there is no other food, one must live. Then meat-eating is not bad in that case. Because survival is required. But when there are substitutes... Everyone is eating another life. That is the law of nature. That is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, that sahastānām ahastāni. The animals, animal who has got hands, he eats the animal who has no hand. That means four-legged animals. Ahastāni sahastānām apadāni catuṣ-padām. And the animals or living entities who cannot move, they are foodstuff of the moving. That means the grass, plants, they are the foodstuff for the cows and other animals. Nūnaṁ mahatāṁ tatra. And the big animal eats the small animal. Just like we see a big serpent is eating a small serpent, a big fish eating a small fish. So this is the law, that nūnaṁ mahatāṁ tatra jīvo jīvasya jīvanam. So one life is meant for maintaining another life. This is the law of nature. But Upaniṣad says that īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvam: (ISO 1) everything belongs to the Lord. Just like in a hotel there are many kinds of foodstuff, but they all belong to the hotel keeper. And you can take only on your table what is offered to you. You cannot take anything, anything, whatever you like, no. That is illegal. Similarly, everything is food, that's all right. But you can take only what is allotted for you, that's all. So human being should take, as far as possible, vegetables. The teeth is made for eating vegetables. That is scientifically true. And if you take vegetables all along, then you will never be diseased. And so far we are concerned, we are taking Kṛṣṇa prasādam. That I have already explained, that Kṛṣṇa wants this foodstuff... If Kṛṣṇa says that "Give Me meat," then we shall eat meat. Because we are concerned with Kṛṣṇa prasādam. We are not distinguished that "Vegetable eating is nice, meat eating is not nice." No. The nature's law is that you must eat, and that eating is something living. Vegetable is also living. But we are not concerned, vegetarian or nonvegetarian. We are concerned with Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa says, "You give Me fruits, flowers, grains." We offer that. If Kṛṣṇa says, "You give Me meat, chickens," we shall offer and we shall take.
Lecture at Engagement -- Columbus, may 19, 1969:
My dear boys and girls. I thank you very much for your participating in this great saṅkīrtana movement. This saṅkīrtana movement is recommended for self-realization in this age. This age is called, according to Vedic understanding, it is called Kali-yuga, the age of quarrel and disagreement, this age. So, besides that, there are many other symptoms of this age. They are described in the Vedic literatures, and they are coming exactly true. That is scripture.
So the summary of this age is described that, in this age, the duration of life is very small. Prāyeṇālpāyuṣaḥ kalāv asmin yuge janāḥ. Everyone, we are decreasing our duration of life. You know, every one of you, your forefathers, your grandfather lived for hundreds, at least one hundred years. I have seen my grandmother, she died at the age of ninety-six years. My father died at the age of eighty-four years. So, I do not know how long I shall live—I am now seventy-three—maybe a few years more; but actually the duration of life gradually decreases. This is the symptom of this age, practically. And it is said that at the end of this millennium, that if somebody lives from twenty to thirty years, he will be considered as very old man.
Lecture -- London, September 26, 1969:
So we cannot place everyone on the same level. That is nonsense. As in this world we see that you are richer than me, and somebody is richer than you, and somebody is richer than somebody else... You go on finding out who is the richest, then you'll come to God. You cannot find anyone in this material world as the richest of all. No. Somebody will come who is richer than him, and somebody will come out who is, I mean to say, poorer than him. Any position you stand, you'll find somebody greater and somebody lesser. Even in the lowest stage of life also, you'll find somebody is lesser. In any capacity, either in richness or in knowledge or in beauty or in strength—in so many things we have got. So everyone cannot be placed on the same level, not only materially, but also spiritually. If you say that "This higher status, lower status, are calculated in the material world; in the spiritual world there is no such distinction," that is partially true. In the spiritual world there is no such distinction, but that spiritual distinction is not exactly like material distinction. That distinction is of consciousness, varieties of consciousness. That distinction.
Lecture -- London, September 26, 1969:
Now, amongst all these planets, the sun planet is the chief. How the sun planet is chief? Practically we can see. Everyone, we can see that there are so many glittering planets, illuminating planets, at night, millions and millions, but still, there is darkness. There is darkness at night. In spite of presentation of the moon and millions of other stars, still, you require light. But in the daytime, simply one planet, sunlight, oh, everything is dazzling light. Therefore it is called yac-cakṣur eṣa savitā. Savitā means this sun planet is the eye of God. Yac-cakṣur eṣa savitā sakala-grahāṇāṁ rājā. Rājā means king. Sakala-grahāṇām, all other planets, it is the king. And actually, scientifically, it is true that due to the heat of the sun planet all other planets are rotating; otherwise they'll fall down. But they're floating in the air, in the sky, due to this sunlight. Anyone who knows science, he'll admit, "Yes, that's a fact." And sun is the source of all energy in this material world. All this vegetation, all living condition, minerals—there are so many things—this is due to the sun. So sun in the king of all planets, as it is stated in the Vedic literatures. That's a fact. Aśeṣa-tejāḥ. Aśeṣa-tejāḥ means unlimited tejāḥ. Tejāḥ means temperature. Unlimited temperature.
Lecture at Christian Monastery -- Melbourne, April 6, 1972:
Guest (3): Your Divine Grace, we can know something about God, either through our sense knowledge or true concept, etc., but how do we know God, if I can make that distinction? You know? God isn't something that can be sensed and He isn't something that can be grasped by the finite mind. The infinite, as you said... But how do we know God?
Prabhupāda: Yes. God is unapproachable by your mental concoction. But there is another process: if you understand God by this the paramparā system. Just like on this roof there is some sound, and every one of us making some suggestion what is the sound: "This may be like this. This may be like that. This may be like that." This is one process of knowledge, to understand the unseen by speculation. This is one. It may be successful or may not be successful. There is no certainty. But if somebody from the roof says, "The sound is due to this," then our knowledge is perfect. Similarly, if we speculate about God, who is Adhokṣaja, who is beyond the range of our mind and speculation, then it is very... Then we can come to the conclusion of Brahman realization, impersonal God, no more than. But if we hear from God or His representative, then we get perfect knowledge of God.
Sunday Feast Lecture -- Los Angeles, May 21, 1972:
What is the sound? Hm? You'll play mṛdaṅga, I'll sing. (sings Jaya Rādhā-Mādhava. Prema-dhvanī) So this is the true picture of God: Jaya rādhā-mādhava. Jaya rādhā-mādhava kuñja-vihārī. He is simply enjoying, Rādhā-Mādhava. You have seen the picture, Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa. So eternally engaged in enjoyment, in the association of the gopīs. Gopī-jana-vallabha. And His only business is how to please the gopīs. Just like here, in this material world, the young boy who loves a young girl, he tries to please the girl always. This is natural. Because originally, the same thing is there in God. It is a pleasure. It is a pleasure for the male to please the female counterpart. That is originally created. Rādhā-kṛṣṇa-praṇaya-vikṛtir ahlādinī-śaktiḥ. These Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa love affairs is the originally there. Rādhārāṇī, the female counterpart, is the manifestation of ahlādinī-śakti, pleasure potency of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He has got many potencies. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). God, God means with His potencies. Just like ordinarily, we are part and parcel of God, a minute particle; still, we have got so many potencies. Every man, every living entity... Not only man, the animals also, they have got various potencies, creative energy. So you just imagine how much creative energies and potencies are there in God. This is the understanding.
Rotary Club Lecture -- Ahmedabad, December 8, 1972 'The Present Need of Human Society':
He must be controlling his mind, controlling his senses. Śamo damas titikṣa. He must be tolerant. Titikṣa ārjava. He must be simple. Ārjava, jñānam. He must have full knowledge. Vijñānam, practical application in life. Vijñānam āstikyam. Āstikyam means to accept the Vedic principle as truth. That is called āstikyam. Theism. It is translated as "theism," but it is not. Āstika, āstikya means to have firm faith in the Vedic instruction. That is called āstikyam. But that is a fact. What is stated in the Vedas, they are true. We can save our time. For example, just like the cow dung. The cow dung is said in the Vedas as pure. So if we accept cow dung as pure, we don't require to make research. But actually it is pure. The other day I was passing through a cow shed in Hyderabad. So, so much cow dung stocked there. So I was asking my students, "Suppose so much human stool was stocked here. Could we pass through it?" No, it is not possible. But it was pleasant to pass through. So this is a fact. If we argue that animal stool... (aside:) Stop. Stop him. Don't make noise. ...the animal stool is impure, but when the Vedas says the animal stool of the cow is pure, so this is, this true. Similarly conchshell. Conchshell is the bone of an animal. So according to Vedic instruction, if you touch the bone of an animal, you become impure. But the bone of an animal which is conchshell, it is kept in the Deity room. So Vedic instruction is so perfect. Why this animal bone is pure, why this stool of animal is pure, that is already known. You don't require to make any research. You simply accept and get the fact. This is Vedic truth.
Lecture at World Health Organization -- Geneva, June 6, 1974:
Guest (1) (Indian man): Swamijī, nobody will disagree with you that taking the world's population at its present level, and also the production at its present level, one can see that the distribution is very uneven. And it is also true, just leaving aside the predictions, the pessimistic predictions of demographers as to what will be the human population five hundred years from now or in the year 2,300 or whatever it is, but also leaving aside the deterioration of the environment as a result of wrong technologies that have begun here (?), it is true that, as you said, there is lot of scope of additional sources, food production and other resources if it is evenly distributed over the existing populations. Yet the fact remains that there are areas of the world where people are living in luxury, and they are guarding their rights, territorial ones, as you rightly said, national...
Prabhupāda: Yes. So-called nationalism.
Guest (1): ...and on the other hand, there are river valleys overpopulated in certain parts of the world where people are living in misery. They are willing to work and they are willing to contribute their talent to the world in whatever way they can, and yet they have no opportunity.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Lecture at World Health Organization -- Geneva, June 6, 1974:
Guest (2): They are also... The entrenched(?) people, the monied people, landowners, they also have a strong voice in the government.
Prabhupāda: No. That, that means bad government.
Guest (2): Yes. That is, that is true.
Prabhupāda: That is bad government. Otherwise, it is the duty of the government to see that everyone is employed.
Guest (2): That's what I am looking forward to, the day when the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement can become a real revolutionary movement which will change the face of society.
Prabhupāda: Yes. I think it will bring revolution because the American and European young men, they have taken into hand. I have introduced to them. So I hope the European and American boys, they're very intelligent, and they take anything very seriously. So that... Now we are working for a few years, five, six years. Still, we have spread the movement all over the world. So I am requesting... I am old man. I will die. If they take it seriously, it will go on, and there will be revolution. Because we are not working whimsically, capriciously. We are taking authoritative version from the śāstra. And we are... Our program is to publish at least one hundred books of this size. There are so many information. They can read all these books and take information. And we are now being received. In America especially, the higher circle, in colleges and universities, they are reading now these books, and they are appreciating. So we are trying our best, introducing the literature, practically working, instructing, as far as possible. But I think if the, these boys, young boys, take it very seriously, it will bring revolution.
Sunday Feast Lecture -- Atlanta, March 2, 1975:
Woman: No. What is...? Do...?
Prabhupāda: Yes. We admit that. He is the perfect son, and if you take shelter of the lotus feet of the perfect son, you go to back to home, back to Godhead. That's a fact.
Woman: Is that true of Christ or...
Prabhupāda: Yes. As he advises. Just like he says, "Thou shalt not kill." But if you kill, at the same time take shelter of Christ, what is the meaning? First of all you try to follow him; then you can go through him. But you don't care for him—what is the meaning of go through him?
Woman: Believe in him.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Believe in strongly.
Woman: Believe that he is the son of God.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Believe or not believe, he is son. And if you are fortunate, you follow his path and you become perfect. You believe or not believe, God is there. Similarly, you believe or not believe, God's son is there, God's devotee is there, everyone is there. God is not alone. Just like if you say, "Now here the king is coming," "the king is coming" means he is coming with his ministers, his commander-in-chief, his secretaries and so many, hundreds of men, soldiers... Similarly, when we speak of God, God is not alone. He has got His sons, He has got His friends, He has got His father, He has got His mother, He has got His beloved, everything. That is God.
Speech to Devotees -- Vrndavana, April 7, 1976:
So by His grace it is going on. Now in the remotest part of the world, even in Australia, the southernmost part of this globe, there also we have got four branches-Melbourne, Sydney—and we have got a very big building, very big temple of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Last year I established, and many hundred thousand devotees are coming. So certainly the Caitanya Mahāprabhu foretelling is now spreading.
So this bhajana, as our speaker, Bhaktama (?), he said that,
- yeṣāṁ tv anta-gataṁ pāpaṁ
- janānāṁ puṇya-karmaṇām
- te dvanda-moha-nirmuktā
- bhajanti māṁ dṛḍha-vratāḥ
So people say that I have done miracle. Maybe. At least it is the first time in the history that Vedic culture in its true form is bring distributed all over the world. We have got many, many appreciation by the learned scholar circle, big, big professors all over the world. They are accepting that this is the first time that India's traditional spiritual culture is being spread. One professor in France, he has plainly said that even Aurobindo or Dr. Radhakrishnan, they presented this Vedic culture in a modernized way, not in its original traditional form. That is a fact. We don't make any compromise.
Philosophy Discussions
Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:
Prabhupāda: So real truth is that God has got a plan, and one who knows it, that is real truth. One who hasn't got to be taught by another man but by nature, he knows it; that by nature he knows it, that is a symptom of his life, true life. And one who does not know it, that is not. That is explained in Caitanya-caritāmṛta, nitya siddha kṛṣṇa bhakta. That truth is there already, but he has forgotten it. Therefore by this propaganda of devotional service, chanting and hearing, he simply revives the truth. The truth is there, that I am eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa. Therefore the conclusion should be anyone who is cognizant of this truth that I am eternal servant, that is symptom of this truth. There is no other symptom. That is the symptom of truth, that is the symptom of goodness, all good qualities, everything good. He is good by nature. The living entity, he is part and parcel of the supreme good. But by his material association he has become bad. So again he has to draw it to goodness by this propaganda, Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That is our business.
Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:
Prabhupāda: So any mathematical calculation is like that. Why this example? Mathematical means this: Two plus two equals four. That is always the truth.
Śyāmasundara: He is trying to prove that there are certain truths that we cannot deny they exist independent of our knowledge. Fundamental. And there are other truths that people say, like snow is white, which may not be true because our senses deceive us.
Prabhupāda: That is your defective senses. But snow is white, that's a fact. Why should it be red? At least we have no experience with red snow.
Śyāmasundara: I've seen red snow.
Prabhupāda: How it is?
Śyāmasundara: Particles of lava dust gathered in the snow and in the air...
Prabhupāda: That is not pure snow. That is another thing. Pure snow is white. Just like water. Water, by nature, it is crystal. But when it comes in touch with the earth, it becomes muddy. So that muddiness is due to contact with something external. Snow is white by nature, but in contact with something else it looks red. But the truth that snow is white, that is truth. Not that snow becoming red... You are making, or by some other contact it is looking like that. But snow is white, that's a truth.
Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:
Prabhupāda: This is reason, that truth is one. When we find another competitor truth, that is māyā. Truth cannot be two.
Śyāmasundara: This is what he says, that these innate truths are governed by the principle of contradiction. That is, the opposite of the truth is impossible to conceive. If something is true, the opposite of that truth is impossible to conceive.
Prabhupāda: The opposite is māyā. Opposite to truth is māyā.
Śyāmasundara: Just like the sum of the angles of a triangle must equal 180 degrees. It is impossible to conceive of the opposite.
Prabhupāda: Similarly, the other example that snow is white. To think of snow not white, that cannot be conceived.
Śyāmasundara: He says that "snow is white" is not one of these eternal truths; that it is possible to conceive that snow could be red.
Prabhupāda: Why? You say that redness of snow is possible under certain circumstances?
Śyāmasundara: Yes.
Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:
Prabhupāda: So that is possible in every case. Therefore the real feature of snow is not red. It appears to be red under certain conditions, but that is not truth; that is untruth.
Śyāmasundara: What about two plus two equals four?
Prabhupāda: That is true.
Śyāmasundara: It's impossible to conceive of the opposite of that truth. So that is what he would call logically necessary proof, proved by the law of contradiction.
Prabhupāda: My point is that he says that there are two types of truth. No. There cannot be two types of truth. That is my protest. I say there is only one truth. When you think two types of truth, then you are mistaken. Then same thing: when you think that two plus two equals five, then you are mistaken. Two plus two is always four. That is truth. Similarly, snow is white always. That is truth. When you think it is red, it is untruth. But you cannot say it is another type of truth. Mistake cannot be accepted as another type of truth. Mistake is mistake.
Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:
Śyāmasundara: Today we are discussing philosopher David Hume. He is probably the most famous of the British philosophers. He was very skeptical about achieving certain knowledge, so he came to the conclusion that the only knowledge we can possess is a mere sequence of ideas, none of which can be proved to be true. In other words, we can only derive any knowledge from our senses, but even that knowledge is mere assumption.
Prabhupāda: Yes. We say also, because our senses are imperfect, so there is no possibility of achieving perfect knowledge by sense exercise. It is not possible. That is our philosophy.
Śyāmasundara: He says there is no other source of knowledge except the senses.
Prabhupāda: No. We don't agree. Therefore it is called avāṅ-manasā gocaraḥ, adhokṣaja—there are so many names. The senses are imperfect. They cannot reach. Just like we cannot know what is there in the sun, but a geologist or astronomer, he can say, one who has studied. Therefore our process of knowledge is to take from the authorities. That is perfect. Our senses cannot read, that is a fact. But it is not that without senses, no knowledge can be... No. We receive by senses, but from superior authority, one who knows. That is perfect knowledge. According to him, there is no possibility of having perfect knowledge?
Śyāmasundara: Yes.
Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:
Śyāmasundara: We'll discuss that in a minute or two. But he divided human understanding into two classes. The first class is the relationship among ideas, just as mathematical compositions, they are true and certain, whether or not the things they refer to exist in nature. Just like two plus two equals four. This is a relationship among ideas. And the second-relationship among facts. He says that these cannot be proved by reasoning. They are merely assumed on the basis of sense experience. For example, that sun will rise tomorrow. This is a relationship among facts. But it is merely an assumption based upon our sense experience, but it's possible to imagine that the world will end or the sun may not rise. So it's only an assumption that the sun will rise. So this world of facts that we see, we can only assume that they will act in certain ways. There is probability, but there is no certainty.
Prabhupāda: That is already discussed: why it is so, probability, who takes it, who makes it not possible, how it happens. Sun is rising, and sun may not rise, stop. How it is? Accidentally or by somebody's will?
Śyāmasundara: He would say that it's accidental.
Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. Nothing is accidental. Everything is symmetrical. Therefore, we have to admit that supreme direction, and that is Kṛṣṇa, as stated in the Bhagavad-gītā: "Under My direction everything is going on." The sun is rising on His direction, and when He orders, the sun will not rise. But it is not accidental.
Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:
Prabhupāda: Everyone believes that. Materially everyone believes. But if he says none of them are correct, so why he is so..., pose himself as correct? He is rejected immediately.
Hayagrīva: He says, "All the new discoveries in astronomy which prove the immense grandeur and magnificence of the works of nature are so many additional arguments for a Deity according to the true system of theism," that is his natural, what he calls natural religion. In this way Hume rejects the necessity or desirability of miracles as well as the conception of a God transcendental to his creation. He says it's not the being of God that is in question but God's nature. This nature cannot be ascertained through study of the universe itself. However, if the universe can only be studied by imperfect senses, what is the value of our conclusion? How can we ever come to know the nature of God?
Prabhupāda: Nature of God, it can be explained by God Himself. That is our Vedic process. We know who is God, and He explains, "My nature is this." Just like He says, "I am the greatest principle," mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat (BG 7.7). "There is no more higher principle than Me." This is fact. If something is greater than God, then how one can become God? That is not possible. So greatest means He is great in everything. He is great in richness, He is great in reputation, He is great in influence, He is great in bodily power, He is great in beauty and He is great in renunciation. If we can find out somebody that He tallies with this greatness, then He is God. So that we find in Kṛṣṇa; therefore Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord, and what He says in the Bhagavad-gītā we accept as fact. And if we analyze His statements intelligently, pruriently, then we will find that what Kṛṣṇa says, that is fact.
Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:
Śyāmasundara: He says that when you examine material phenomena by your reason, you come to certain contradictions, and he calls them antimonies. He lists four antimonies. An antimony means both sides are true.
Prabhupāda: In Sanskrit it is called bhiruda dharma-words that mean both "yes" and "no." He can adjust-yes and no, both.
Śyāmasundara: He says logically these are not fallacious; both sides are true. For instance, his first antimony is, "The world has a beginning in time and is enclosed in limits of space." This is the thesis. Then the antithesis is, "The world has no beginning in time and no limits in space, but is infinite with regard to both time and space." So he says reasonably both conclusions are true.
Prabhupāda: So how to adjust? How to adjust is there in the Bhagavad-gītā. It says this material phenomenal world is coming into existence and again annihilated. Again coming. Bhūtvā bhūtvā pralīyate (BG 8.19). So this material nature, coming in manifestation and again vanquished, this process, coming into existence and then vanquished, this is also true. Just like day and night, it is coming and going. This is true. But night is not day; day is not night.
Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:
Śyāmasundara: In fact he recognizes three such ideals of pure reason: one is the soul, two is the ultimate world or reality, and three is God. He says that these three ideals are a priori to the reason. They are born with us. We know these things.
Prabhupāda: That is also true. We also accept. Nitya siddha kṛṣṇa bhakti. Our tendency to offer service to the Lord, that is natural. Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that He is eternal servant; therefore that tendency should be natural. But it is some way or another covered by material ignorance.
Śyāmasundara: He says whereas sense perception cannot provide the information about the soul and about God, pure reason can penetrate into the unknowable and provide us with conceptions in order to grasp the whole of reality.
Prabhupāda: This is not very clear, that sense perception cannot reach soul. But he says that reason is beyond the senses.
Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:
Śyāmasundara: Individual circumstances should not have any bearing.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Then the basic principles of civilization should be that those who are unable to do it, they should be trained up. That is our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. We are elevating persons from the lowest level to the highest level. That we are actually doing. So these four classes of men exist, but by education, by training, the lowest class of men can be elevated to the highest class. That is our movement, Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
Śyāmasundara: It is true that if there are certain laws, moral commandments, that I should follow them regardless of individual exception? There are no exceptions, regardless...
Prabhupāda: That is brahminical qualification. A brāhmaṇa shall be truthful in all circumstances. Even before his enemy, he will disclose everything, what is truth. That is brahminical qualification, whereas kṣatriya, he is a diplomat. Although he is truthful, but he will not be truthful before his enemy.
Śyāmasundara: Because his function is different.
Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:
Hayagrīva: Kant writes, "There is only one true religion, but there can be faiths of several kinds. It is therefore more fitting to say, 'This is..., this man is of this or that faith"—Jewish, Muhammadan, Christian, Catholic, Lutheran-'than he is of this or that religion.' "
Prabhupāda: Yes, that is going on. Actually, religion means obedience to God. So religion does not mean some sect. They are trying to understand God some way, but that is not actually religion. That is a method of understanding God. But religion begins when one has actually understood God and giving Him, rendering Him service. That is religion.
Hayagrīva: For Kant, the true religion is the divine ethical state. He is..., he was fond of quoting the Christian Bible. When Christ was demanded of the Pharisees when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation. Neither shall they say, 'Lo here' or 'Lo there,' for behold, the kingdom of God is within you." Now Kant footnotes this passage by saying, "Here a kingdom of God is represented not according to a particular covenant, but moral, knowable through assisted reason." So again he insists on the priority of God within, on the priority of ethical action and the freedom to accept ethical action. And this is epitomized in his famous line, "The starry sky above and the moral law within." The starry sky above is the abode of God, is very far away, but the moral law within is very close. Thus he emphasizes that the kingdom of God is within you.
Prabhupāda: Yes. If one is actually aware of God and His instructions, then the kingdom of God is within himself.
Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:
Śyāmasundara: They say an "image", everything is an image.
Prabhupāda: Yes, we say that, that the same example, just like mirage. Mirage, there is no water but we see a vast sea, or big river is flowing. It is like that. Actually there is no river. No. This is going. This material world is like that. Just Śrīdhara Swami (said that) due to the factual position of the spiritual world, this illusory world appears to be true. Because there is real table.
Śyāmasundara: Yes.
Prabhupāda: The table concept.
Śyāmasundara: Yes.
Prabhupāda: Because there is a real table, therefore I am considering this table. This is not table, this is wood. Somebody (may say), "This is not wood, but it was tree." All right, it is tree. Then what? It is not tree, it is seed. All right it is seed. No, it is not seed, it (indistinct) You see. Therefore it is perverted reflection. But there is a real table.
Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:
Śyāmasundara: He says that the state, I will just read a segment of what he says about the state: "The state is the realization of the ethical idea. The true state is the ethical whole and the realization of freedom. The state is the march of God through the world.
Prabhupāda: March of?
Śyāmasundara: God.
Prabhupāda: God.
Śyāmasundara: Through the world. The state is an organism. The state is real and its reality consists of the interests of the whole being realized in particular ends. The state is the world which the spirit has made for itself. One often speaks of the wisdom of God in nature, but one must not believe that the physical world of nature is higher than the world of spirit. Just as spirit is superior to nature, so the state is superior to the physical life. We must therefore worship the state as the manifestation of the divine on earth.
Prabhupāda: That is very nice idea. We agree to that. Therefore we have to see what is the duty of the state. It is accepted that the state is the representative of God. Therefore the state's first business is to make citizens God-conscious. That is the state's first business. Any state who is neglecting this duty, he immediately becomes unqualified to hold the state office, either he may be president or the king. Because if it is admitted, the king... We say that the king's name is naradeva, God in human form, and king is offered that respect. There are... King is respected, why? Because he is to be considered God's representative. So therefore, as God's representative... Just like we are working as God's representative. We present ourselves as God's representative, Kṛṣṇa's representative, then what is our duty? What is our business? What we are doing? We are trying to lead others to God consciousness.
Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:
Śyāmasundara: So his statement that progress comes through conflict is true, but in the conflict you should take the right side.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is real progress. Right side means on which side Kṛṣṇa is. That is the instruction on the battlefield of Kurukṣetra.
Kīrtanānanda: But what is it that we can make progress on? He is simply thinking in terms of material advancement.
Śyāmasundara: Ethical advancement, he says that there's an ethical element...
Prabhupāda: He has no ethical principle. He does not know what is ethics. Otherwise he would not have supported that animal killing. He does not know what is ethics. He speaks something (indistinct) only. That's all. There is no practical application.
Śyāmasundara: What about the statement that "Peace is stagnation"?
Prabhupāda: Well, nobody is in stagnation, everyone is working. Stagnation means, just like a stagnant water, it has no flow. That is stagnation. But who is, he is not, everyone is acting.
Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:
Śyāmasundara: No, he says that whatever is, is right, and that this good and this reason in its most concrete form is God. God governs the world.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That also we admit because in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, yad yad vibhūtimat sattvam, mama tejo 'ṁśa-sambhavam, whenever there is some extraordinary power, it should be understood that it is derived partially from God's power. That we accept. So the dominance of American nation is God's favor. We can accept that. Now, if you put on the head representative like Mr. Nixon or some other, then it will deteriorate. If you spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness and if you make your president Kṛṣṇa conscious, then actually you will be God's empowered nation. Let the president become Kṛṣṇa conscious man. Why not? You are American, you can also capture the post. You can become senator, you can be congressman. So educate the American public (in) Kṛṣṇa consciousness, elect Kṛṣṇa conscious president and actually you will be God's favored nation is there. You have got the opportunity and the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is also in your hand, now it is up to you to utilize it and become actually the leaders of the world. That was my mission: "I shall go to America, and educate them, and they, if they follow, the whole world will follow." And that is coming to be true. You are all young men, it is in your hand. Now you make policy in that way. Just like the communists. A few communists, Stalin, Lenin, they formed a big communist party, now it is predominating all over the world. Similarly, you are so many nice, young, flowers, intelligent young Americans you have understood the philosophy, and now it is up to you to spread this "ism". You don't become stagnant—"Now I have understood Kṛṣṇa consciousness, I shall sit down and chant Hare Kṛṣṇa."
Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:
Śyāmasundara: No, but he was able to conceptualize that the speed of light squared times the mass equals the energy of an object. And then he was able to experiment in the laboratory and actually find out that it was true. But no one told him that formula. He found it out through process of idealizing, ideas.
Prabhupāda: That is another thing. That is, he is studying science. He is a scientist. You cannot say but he's scientist. He, just like the same you are seeing the mountain from a distance, you are seer. Now the more you make progress you see it is green, then more progress, "Oh, it is (indistinct)." The seer, because he is scientist, he is searching so he is making progress but all of a sudden a layman cannot see like that.
Śyāmasundara: No but doesn't he have an idea before he finds the substantial...
Prabhupāda: Then idea... Idea means, scientist means they see something, observation. That is called observation. So observation, in the beginning there may be hazy. Just like two scientists, Sir Jagadish Chandra Bose and Marconi were, both of them were trying to capture sound. This, I mean to say, radio. They are theorizing that sound can be captured.
Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:
Svarūpa Dāmodara: Yes. The, normally, what they call the age determination, or how old a species is, they normally find out from this so-called (indistinct). They find some bone or something which contains normally carbonate. And normally they get this age of the elements or age of these findings by so-called Carbon 14 method. Carbon 14 is an isotope of normal carbon, it is called Carbon 12. Carbon 14 is radioactive. It's one in which they put in the radioactive testing, and they find out because it follows the normal chemical laws or physical laws. This is governed by the Lord Himself, by Kṛṣṇa Himself. They're finding the chemical lowest form, and from that chemical lowest they normally try to reduce the, how old the sample is, and that method is very limited, it is not applicable to all findings also, and a test, a very reliable test (indistinct) to about five thousand, six thousand years old but beyond that it is very doubtful whether the findings are really true or not. (break) It is empiric so we cannot fully convince that such-and-such species lives such-and-such long just from that finding. You need more evidence to prove it (indistinct) was existing and it disappeared from such-and-such time but it gives a relative value from so-called modern scientific point of view.
Prabhupāda: But evolution we accept. Evolution we accept but it is not that there was no existence of human being. That we do not accept. Evolution we accept. Just like my childhood manifestation is extinct but there are many other child. Same time. So our point is all the species of life, they are existing simultaneously. Evolution there is, we accept that but it is not that one is missing, one has gone away, and another is come, ten million, thirty millions there was no human being. This is all nonsense. He cannot find in the layer, that is not evidence.
Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:
Prabhupāda: So first thing is that whatever he is speaking, what is the evidence for his word is to be accepted by us?
Karandhara: For most people it is just his word. Whatever his contemporary scientists conclude, he offers some insignificant evidence.
Prabhupāda: If words are to be accepted as true, why not accept the words of Kṛṣṇa? Who can be greater authority than Kṛṣṇa? If your word does not require any evidence, you are a renowned scientist, your words are sufficient, then greater scientist, greater personality is Kṛṣṇa. Then why should we not accept His words? We do not know what it is, but you are presenting there in bombastic words and we have to accept your word. Is it not? So I will say that instead of accepting your words, why not accept Kṛṣṇa's word? He's greater personality.
Karandhara: Someone will come along in a year or a few years and refute everything that this scientist says.
Prabhupāda: Yes, yes. That we say.
Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Devotee: Or they use another word, "insight." There is one (indistinct) to apprehend something immediately, see into it without any reasoning. They think of it in another sense.
Prabhupāda: That is also true. Just like a child does not know that by touching the fire, his hand will be burnt. His father says, "No, no, no. Don't touch this." He has got experience; the child hasn't got experience. That's all.
Devotee: Suppose if there are two people, and if you try to teach them mathematics, one person learns very quickly and one person doesn't learn it.
Prabhupāda: That varieties are always there. Impersonalists, they do not want to see the variety, but we know in everything there is variety. One man is learning (indistinct) and another man is learning very quickly—these are the varieties. But the process is the same.
Devotee: (indistinct)
Prabhupāda: Yes. Whatever it may be, but there must be some cause. (indistinct) the variety, these varieties are existing everywhere.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Prabhupāda: So philosophy without practical application is called mental speculation. It has no value. We agree to that. Philosophy must be practically applied in life. That is real philosophy.
Śyāmasundara: He says that there is a question, "What difference would it make, practically, to anyone, if this notion rather than that notion were true?" He says that the criterion for deciding that question is the practicality of something. If there are two questions, two notions, then the standard of judgment should be which notion is applicable in practice.
Prabhupāda: Which notion should be...?
Śyāmasundara: Which notion will have the better result in practice.
Prabhupāda: Which is factual, not theoretical—that will have good effect in practice. What is his example?
Śyāmasundara: There is no example given, but for instance, if there are two different theories involving a subject, then that theory which is more easily practiced is more true. It has become part of our experience; that is true. He says that anything that is meaningful or real must have some influence on practice on our experience, and vice verse. Anything that is practiced must be meaningful or real.
Prabhupāda: So that is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. We have invited our students, and when they actually practice Kṛṣṇa consciousness, the result is immediately there. Just like you all European and American boys, you were eating meat, and other things were practiced, but since you have taken to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, you have left it. So by practicing, we see the practical result; therefore this is most practical.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Śyāmasundara: He says that, about the nature of truth, that truth is more than just an agreement of idea with reality, but it also has a practical significance, that whatever is practical is true.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Practical we can see from the verse of Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, that anyone who has got a slight merciful glance of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, he thinks that Brahman liberation is as good as hell. Kaivalyaṁ narakāyate. And the heavenly planets, they are phantasmagoria, and yoga-siddhi, that is not a very important thing. And people are suffering on this material condition. (But) for a devotee it is simply pleasing. Everywhere he goes he feels pleased, while others seeing full of anxiety. Devotees, they are seeing everything pleasing. So these things happen simply by a fragment of the merciful glance of Caitanya Mahāprabhu upon His devotees. Viśvaṁ pūrṇam, they do not care for any big scholar or many exalted personalities, just like we challenge anyone, even we don't care for Dr. Radhakrishnan, who is so much exalted. So this is practical. Because one has become Kṛṣṇa conscious, therefore these things happen. (to guest:) Please sit down.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Śyāmasundara: He calls truth a system of verification; in other words, a process whereby ideas become true and they are made true by events in our experience. As we get more experience, then truth is created.
Prabhupāda: Not created. Truth is there. Truth is revealed. As you make progress, so the truth becomes revealed. Ye yathā māṁ prapadyante tāṁs tathaiva bhajāmy aham (BG 4.11). Just like in Bhagavad-gītā it is said that "As one makes his surrendering process complete, I become revealed to him accordingly."
Śyāmasundara: But if an idea works when it is applied to concrete facts of experience, then it becomes a true idea, and we accept it as a true idea. So as we develop our experience, our life progresses, then we develop truth because we see that this idea works in my experience, so then it becomes true. Is this not the process?
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is our process. Just like one enters to Kṛṣṇa consciousness in the beginning by faith. He has on practical experience. But suppose somebody sees that "These people, Kṛṣṇa conscious people, appear to be very bright-faced," just like in your country they may have been known, the bright-faced. So he gets a little interest. So that interest increases. First of all he comes with little faith and interest, but as he associates with us, the interest increases. That is true. Otherwise why are they sticking?
Śyāmasundara: His experience proves that the ideas are true.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Otherwise, how you European and American boys, you are satisfied with the shirt only? Where is your necktie, coat and boot and everything?
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Śyāmasundara: Because their idea doesn't have practical value for us.
Prabhupāda: (laughs) You are practically realizing that a simple life is better than this artificial way of life. So that is true.
Śyāmasundara: But to a businessman a shirt, and a coat and a tie, they have practical value.
Prabhupāda: Practical value is all right. When you go to take some business, then you must satisfy him. Not that I require, but because I am going to get some business from a person, so I have to satisfy him. The Indian word is abruci khana phalusi pay na. When you go to meet somebody, so you must dress yourself so that your dress may attract. So dress is not required for you, but because you are going to attract some person, then you may dress like a gentleman. But when you eat yourself, Kṛṣṇa prasāda, you don't require to constantly think (indistinct) whether he'll be pleased or not. That doesn't require. This is practical.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Śyāmasundara: For instance, James uses the example of God. Whether God exists depends on the extent to which a belief in God affects my life. In other words if it is practical, if it makes me feel happy, if I get some courage and strength by believing in God, then God is true, then God does exist.
Prabhupāda: So one may not feel like that, that means that God does not exist? Suppose one man does not feel very good talking about God. That means God is null and void?
Śyāmasundara: According to James's philosophy...
Prabhupāda: That means he is an atheist. He's a godless.
Śyāmasundara: He considers himself to be a religious man.
Prabhupāda: Considers... He has no idea of God. What kind of a religious man he is? We say he is a nonsense.
Śyāmasundara: In other words, truth is relative, according to him.
Prabhupāda: No. Truth is not relative. Your position is relative. So long you are under the clutches of māyā, your understanding of God is relative. God is not relative. God is absolute. You cannot understand God. Your position is relative. Just like, I will give you a practical example: a man is deaf and he is calling wife, "Mrs. such and such, such and such." She is replying, "Yes. I am coming." But he himself is deaf. He cannot hear the wife is replying. So he is accusing his wife, "Mrs. such and such is very deaf; she cannot hear." She is hearing; she is replying. This rascal cannot hear; therefore she becomes deaf. This is an example. So I cannot understand what is God—therefore there is no God. This is the most rascal position. I cannot see at night the sun-therefore there is no sun. He does not understand that "I am in darkness at night, so there is no possibility of my seeing." He has no such knowledge. But he concludes there is not sun. That is rascaldom.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Śyāmasundara: Because he... Because my observations of the universe are evolving toward a unity. This is his criterion for truth, that only that which I can perceive is true, or which I can experience.
Prabhupāda: Yes. What you can perceive, that may be wrong thing also, because you are not perfect. But because you have got a poor fund of knowledge, therefore you are thinking that imperfect thing it is also perfect.
Śyāmasundara: He says that... This is a quote...
Prabhupāda: Just like in the śāstras it is stated that the human beings, they are being controlled by the modes of passion, so they love to work very hard. And that hard working, they think it is happiness. Actually, everyone is working hard day and night, and because he is getting some money in return, he is thinking that "I am becoming happier." In exchange of a little money he is accepting that hard working is very good. But śāstra says that this hard working for some sense gratification is being done by the hogs and dogs. They are also working hard, and getting some remuneration for food and sense enjoyment. So that business is there already. So does it mean that a human being also works so hard, as a hog, simply to get his food and sense gratification? Suppose a big builder is working hard and getting money. But what will be the result of his work? A little food and sense gratification. A beggar also, he's getting the little food and sense gratification. Then why he's happy working so hard? What is the use? That sense, it does not come to him. He thinks, "I am happy. I am happier than the beggar because I have got so much money, I have got such a big building." But what is in relation to you? You are eating the same four capatis and have your sex life with your wife, that's all. What is the better advantage you are getting than the hog and poor man? This is because he is in the modes of passion, he is thinking, "I am happier than him." This is called māyā, or illusion.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Prabhupāda: Somebody He reveals; sometimes he does not believe—He hides. Everyone has got. Everyone. A human being, every human being has got.
Devānanda: That's true. The only experience...
Prabhupāda: No, no. The atheists, simply artificially they cover. Naturally he has belief. Naturally he has belief. Even in this primitive stage, as soon as there is something wonderful, natural phenomenon, they offer respects, the primitive man. The man in the jungle, as soon as he sees a big ocean, he offers his respects. As soon as he sees a big mountain, he offers his respects. As soon as there is a thunderbolt... This is called realization of the śakti. Parasya brahmaṇaḥ śakti. So this is śakta stage, realization of God by seeing something wonderful. That is śakta stage. Then after this state, śakta, saurīyam. Śakta stage, worshiping the energy of God—everything is energy; then śaktyopāsanam, then śaktasaurīyam, then suryopāsanam, worshiping the sun, because it is the reservoir of all energies according to the material world. Śakta, saurīya then gāṇapatya. The gāṇapatya means that is humanitarian. That energy is distributed-pantheism, humanitarian. Śakta, sauriyam, gāṇapatya, then śaiva, you go on. Then Vaiṣṇava. Impersonal then personalist.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Hayagrīva: He says that the natural existence often proves itself to be basically unhappy. "With such relations between religion and happiness, it is perhaps not surprising that men come to regard the happiness which a religious belief affords as a proof of its truth. If a creed makes a man feel happy he almost inevitably adopts it. Such a belief ought to be true; therefore it is true. Such, rightly or wrongly, is one of the immediate inferences of the religious logic used by ordinary men."
Prabhupāda: Yes. If you are actually in clear conception of God, and if you have decided to obey God and love Him, that is happiness. Sa vai puṁsāṁ paro dharmo yato bhaktir adhokṣaje, ahaituky apratihatā (SB 1.2.6). This process of acting in obedience to the order of God, as we are doing in Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement... We have no other business than to obey the orders of God. God says that you preach this confidential philosophy of Kṛṣṇa consciousness everywhere. So because we are trying to love God, we have got some affection and love for God; therefore we are so much eager to spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Otherwise, "It is Kṛṣṇa's business. Why should we bother about Him?" No. Because we love Kṛṣṇa, and He is happy that His message is being spread, that is our happiness also, that we are trying to serve God, tacitly, without any doubt. So we also feel happy, and God says that He will be very happy if you do this. So this is reciprocation. This is religion. Religion is no sentiment. Actual realization of God, actual carrying out or executing the orders of God, then God is happy, we are happy, and our progress of life is secure.
Philosophy Discussion on William James:
Hayagrīva: Well that's his second conclusion. His second is that "Union or harmonious relation with that higher universe is our true end."
Prabhupāda: Yes. Spiritual realization.
Hayagrīva: Three...
Prabhupāda: There is no material realization. No more material realization means no more forgetfulness of our eternal relationship with God. Then it is spiritual.
Hayagrīva: Three: "That prayer or a communion with the spirit thereof, be that spirit God or law, is a process wherein work is really done and spiritual energy flows in and produces effects, psychological or material, within the phenomenal world, for religion produces a new zest which adds itself like a gift to life and takes the form either of lyrical enchantment or of appeal to earnestness and heroism." In other words, our relation with God in the world gives...
Prabhupāda: That we have al...
Hayagrīva: ...it's like a gift to life.
Prabhupāda: ...already explained. We have got five relationships. To realize the creation of God with awe and veneration, appreciation, that is one relationship. This is called śānta rasa. Then further progress is that to offer himself to serve God. That is called dāsya rasa. And further advancement, to treat God as friend, that is sākhya rasa. Then accept God as son, that is vātsalya rasa. And accept God as the most beloved, that is mādhurya rasa. So in this mādhurya rasa, to accept God as the most beloved includes other relationships; therefore here is the highest perfection of relationship. Although all other relationships they are as good, but it depends on the devotee's choice whichever relationship we like. The result is the same, but by comparative study it has been decided by the saintly persons that our relationship with God as the lover and beloved, that is the highest position.
Philosophy Discussion on John Dewey:
Hayagrīva: He writes, "According to the religious and philosophic tradition of Europe, the valid status of all the highest values, the good, true and beautiful, was bound up with their being properties of ultimate and supreme being, namely God. All went well as long as what passed for natural science gave no offense to this conception. Trouble began when science ceased to disclose in the objects of knowledge the possession of any such properties. Then some roundabout method had to be devised for substantiating them." In other words, science began to investigate the phenomenal universe without admitting the proprietorship of anyone, of God, and this brings a breakdown in morality and value. So Dewey attempts to reassemble these shattered values in a philosophical way, but he, like science, attempts to do so without recognizing the proprietorship of an ultimate and supreme being.
Prabhupāda: That is another lunacy, because everything has a proprietor. So why this big cosmic manifestation will not have a proprietor? To accept the proprietor is natural, and that is logical. And not to accept a proprietor, that is lunacy. How it can be possible? Just like we give this example: We are standing on the land. We know that there is government, there is proprietor. And a few yards after, when this ocean begins, how we can think of that the ocean has no proprietor, no government? How any philosopher and man having logic can believe it? What is the answer?
Hayagrīva: Well, he felt that science dealt a death blow to the religions as we know them, to the orthodox religions.
Prabhupāda: No, religion we have repeatedly explained. Religion means to accept the laws of God. That is religion.
Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:
Śyāmasundara: Kierkegaard, he considers that truth, it's true (indistinct) subjectivity-personal, individual reflections...
Prabhupāda: That is another nonsense. That is another nonsense. Truth is true. Not that... I cannot fashion truth. This statement is nonsense. Truth is true. Fire is hot. That is true. If I imagine that fire is cold, is that philosophy? He does not prove. He does not know what is truth. One who does not know what is truth, therefore they imagine or manufacture truth. Just like Vivekananda, yata mata, Ramakrishna, yata mata tata patha, "You can manufacture your truth." That is going on. That is going on. The hippies, they are manufacturing their truth. So truth cannot be manufactured. Truth is truth. That is called absolute truth. Not relative truth, absolute truth. You can manufacture relative truth, but absolute truth is one: tattvaṁ phalaṁ yena (?), just like Bhāgavata says. Who is meditated upon? Who is worshiped? The Absolute Truth. So they have no knowledge of the absolute.
Śyāmasundara: Their idea is that...
Prabhupāda: All they know is the relative truth.
Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:
Prabhupāda: (aside:) Wind it in the morning.
Hayagrīva: Concerning the purpose of prayer, he writes, "The true relation in prayer is not when God hears what is prayed for, but when the person praying continues to pray until he is the one who hears what God wills."
Prabhupāda: Yes. That's very nice. He becomes qualified to understand God and to talk with God, to take direction of God. That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā:
- teṣāṁ satata-yuktānāṁ
- bhajatāṁ prīti-pūrvakam
- dadāmi buddhi-yogaṁ taṁ
- yena mām upayānti (te)
- (BG 10.10)
Our ultimate goal is to give up this material world and go back to home, back to Godhead. So this being ultimate goal of life, if we offer prayer to the Supreme Lord... Not only prayer. Prayer is one of the service. This is also nine.
Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:
Hayagrīva: He says it's customary to call youth happy and age the sad part of life. This would be true if it were the passions that made a man happy. Youth...
Prabhupāda: Happy, happiness to the modern standard means sense gratification. So that sense gratification continues even in old man. So actually he requires training and acquirement of knowledge. There is a word in Sanskrit, vidya tam (indistinct). One can become old man even without age. That means it is knowledge that is counted, not the age.
Hayagrīva: There's an expression, "The old fool."
Prabhupāda: Old fool, yes.
Hayagrīva: An old goat.
Prabhupāda: Yes. If he is not educated properly, he remains a old fool. Yes.
Philosophy Discussion on Martin Heidegger:
Śyāmasundara: He says that the understanding of my existence, of my being here, is truth. So when this, when all the details of why I am here and what I am here for become revealed, that is truth.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Because I am true, therefore why I am here, that is truth. The basic principle is "I am truth." Therefore "Why I am here?" This is intelligent question. So that... These questions was asked by Sanātana Gosvāmī to Caitanya Mahāprabhu. The first question: "Actually what I am? I don't want miserable condition of life, but this world is full of miserable condition of life. So why this is?" This is actually human understanding, when one comes to this enquiry that "I do not want any miserable condition of life, but why this miserable condition of life is forced upon me?" Nobody wanted the Pakistan war, but somehow or other it was enforced. Similarly, there are so many difficulties. Śītoṣṇa sukha-duḥkha-dāḥ. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, āgamāpāyino, they come and go, but they come and go, or they come, that's a fact. So we have to tolerate. But the question is why these miserable conditions come? Why I should tolerate? But even if I tolerate, that is not finished. So why this is the position? This "Why?" position is actually human life. That is called in the Vedānta-sūtra, brahma-jijñāsā. After trying (indistinct), when one is unable to make any solution, then the question comes "Why?" That is the beginning of human life. That is the beginning. Otherwise animal life. So animal life, this is animal is being slaughtered, but it cannot question, "Why I am being slaughtered?" That's all. "Why you are slaughtering me? I am also a living entity." It has no such (indistinct). That is animal's life. And when there is question "Why?" that is human life.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Śyāmasundara: This morning we are discussing a philosopher called Ludwig Wittgenstein, a contemporary German philosopher. One of his major so-called contributions is what is called a verification principle, which reads, "To understand a proposition means to know what is the case if it is true." That means anyone who wishes to understand a proposition must first know the conditions under which that proposition is true, that is, what information is required by way of evidence of its truth.
Prabhupāda: So the modern world's proposition is that "I am this body." So that is untruth. What does he say about this?
Śyāmasundara: Well, if I claim that I am this body, that means I have to know all of the conditions which make it true that I am this body. Then if all these conditions are true...
Prabhupāda: First of all we must discuss what I am. Then we have to see whether I am this body or not. And what do you mean by "I am"? You are individual, I am individual. How I exact my individuality, and how you exact your individuality? What is the symptom? What is the meaning of "I am"? First of all you have to understand, what do you mean by "I am"? "I am" means my activities, "I am." That is "I am."
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Prabhupāda: Then how do you come to "I am"? "No more" means you came to the existence of "I am." How did you come to exist as "I am"? If you say that after the stoppage of movements of the body, when there is no more "I am," then how this "I am" came into existence? That is the question. Wherefrom this movement came?
Śyāmasundara: They say that the condition or the evidence required to know if this is true, that I came from...
Prabhupāda: The first thing is that if I identify myself with the body, the body means movements of the limbs. Now if something is wanting, and the limbs do not move any more... But that moving force is "I am."
Śyāmasundara: They would say that it is a combination of chemicals or some...
Devānanda: They postulated... The French philosophers at one point postulated that within the matter itself there is a potential of consciousness. They called it elan vital, living potential within matter, and when you put the matter together in certain positions, then that living potential is able to come out, and when the material nature changes again, it is no longer manifested.
Prabhupāda: That is another nonsense, because when the body becomes from the lump of matter, why that living potentiality, consciousness, does not come again?
Devānanda: Because the elements are no longer in suitable arrangement for life to be...
Prabhupāda: If you know the elements, you say that "You add this element." Just like when the motorcar stops for want of gas, you take gasoline from the petroleum store and it starts again. Either you do it, otherwise you are rascal, you are putting some wrong theory. If you say that it is a combination of chemicals, and you know that addition, that these living symptoms are there, then bring that chemical and add to it and let the body go out again. If you cannot do that, then you are nonsense. There is no sense of your statement.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Śyāmasundara: So far that proposition, you said "I am" means that the soul exists. That is your proposition.
Prabhupāda: My proposition is that "I am" means I am the soul, spirit soul, not this body.
Śyāmasundara: So they say that if we are to verify this proposition, to prove that it is true, then we have to know what conditions under which it is true. What are those conditions under which it is true?
Prabhupāda: It is very simple. So long the soul is there, it is moving, and as soon as the soul is out, it is not moving. Anyone can understand. You say something is wanting. I say it is soul, definitely. But you do not know what is that something. Therefore your knowledge is imperfect, my knowledge is perfect. My knowledge is supported by Bhagavad-gītā, but your knowledge has no support; therefore your knowledge is nonsense.
Śyāmasundara: In order for that statement or that proposition to be true, there must be evidence.
Prabhupāda: This is evidence: that there is no soul. The self, the individual soul, is now departed; therefore this body is lump of matter. This is evidence. And because the soul is there, therefore the body changes or develops. Just like if a child is born dead, then the body does not develop or changes. It remains in the same condition. But so long the soul is there, the child grows or changes his body. That is evidence. Because the soul is there, therefore the child is growing or changing body from childhood to boyhood, boyhood to youth. Suppose a child is born, doctor says it is dead child. You say something is wanted, but what is that something? You do not know. Otherwise, if you know, you add it.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Prabhupāda: Ruby. Why it is not alive? Redness is there. Therefore we have to accept your identification with the soul, not with this body; otherwise this is nonsense.
Śyāmasundara: He is not disputing that there is soul or there is not soul. He is merely putting forward a principle to test something, if it is true or false.
Prabhupāda: This is the test. This is the test. Because the soul is there, therefore the body is moving.
Śyāmasundara: So that is the evidence for...
Prabhupāda: That is the evidence. Anyone can see. Now we say, "My father is gone. Oh, my father is gone." Where has he gone? Your father is lying there. Why do you say gone?
Devānanda: They say he has passed away. But what is passed away?
Prabhupāda: Passed away... What is this passed away? That means you have not seen your father. You have not seen your father, still you identify the body as your father. Or your father identifies your body as yourself. Just like the father has not seen the son, the son has not seen the father. Therefore it is illusion.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Prabhupāda: This is sense observation. It not nonsensical; it is complete sense, sensible, that now this soul has passed and quit this body—death. So the body is not the man; the soul is the man. This is quite sensible. It is not nonsensical. Otherwise how do you explain? You explain what is that distinction between dead body and living body. What is your sensible explanation, according to this philosopher?
Śyāmasundara: He isn't quibbling with that. His only philosophy was that he was putting forward ways of determining what is true and what is false.
Prabhupāda: So that is evidence that this body is false, the soul is true. That is our statement. Body is false. Just like this, this (indistinct), this sweater, this is false. It has got a hand but it is false hand. The real hand is within, within the shirt, that is real hand. Similarly, this body also. It is compared with dress. The dress is false. The man who puts on the dress, he is true. Similarly, the soul is the truth and the body is false. If you want to make distinction between false and true, then this is the distinction: the soul is the truth, the body is false.
Śyāmasundara: He says that philosophy is that mental activity which seeks to analyze or clarify the meanings of scientific propositions.
Prabhupāda: This is philosophy: to study what is this body and how it is moving. This is analytical study. And you come to the understanding that the body is a dead lump of matter, there is something which is called the soul. Because the soul is there. This is scientific truth. One who has not this knowledge, he is not scientific; he is foolish.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Prabhupāda: That is..., the mathematics is required for that purpose. You have got two rupees, I have got two rupees; when combined together it becomes four rupees. That is mathematics. This is practical proof. Why does he say that there is no practical use? And philosopher, to become philosopher is not to become a nonsense. But because he theorizes something nonsensical, he's become a philosopher—that is not philosophy. This mathematical truth is practically true.
Śyāmasundara: Let us say the proposition that "The sum of the angles of a triangle equals 180 degrees," that is a proposition. It can be demonstrated on paper but it cannot be verified by experiential data.
Devotee: If you're steering a ship you can make use of it, can't you?
Śyāmasundara: It can be made use of and it can be called valid or invalid.
Prabhupāda: What does he want more?
Śyāmasundara: He wants to know true and false. That this "Sum of the angles equal to 180 degrees" can be said to be valid or invalid, but it cannot be said to be true or false.
Prabhupāda: Then in that way, what he proposes, that is also false, because in this material world there is no truth. Everything is false. So his philosophical proposition is also false.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Prabhupāda: Yes. He wants to accept false, again make botheration.
Śyāmasundara: No. He does not say false, he says that the sum of the...
Prabhupāda: Better thing is that as we say, it is not false, but it is temporary.
Śyāmasundara: He doesn't say true or false, he says that the sum of the angles...
Prabhupāda: Just now you said that it cannot be verified. That means false.
Śyāmasundara: It cannot be verified if it is true or false. But it can...
Prabhupāda: That means doubt. It is doubtful.
Śyāmasundara: Just like the proposition, "The sum of the angles of a triangle equals 180 degrees."
Prabhupāda: That is accepted by the scientists and mathematicians.
Śyāmasundara: Yes. That can be said to be a valid proposition or an invalid proposition. Demonstrated.
Prabhupāda: Why invalid? It is valid because all mathematicians, all scientists, they have accepted it.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Śyāmasundara: Yes. It can be demonstrated that it is valid on paper. But it cannot be said that it is true or false by our experiential data.
Prabhupāda: No. That can be said, it is false, because in this world everything is a temporary manifestation. So this world itself is a temporary manifestation. This big sky and this planet and everything is a temporary manifestation.
Śyāmasundara: So even that law is temporary, that "The sum of the angles equals 180 degrees"?
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: That's only temporary.
Prabhupāda: Temporary in this sense: because the existence of this universe is also temporary. So whatever is there is temporary.
Śyāmasundara: But even when this universe ends, doesn't that law carry on?
Prabhupāda: Just like this waterpot. This waterpot, you can say false or true. False means when it breaks, then it no longer will be waterpot; it becomes earth again. From the earth it is made, and again it becomes earth. Therefore the shape of this waterpot is not false but temporary. That is the right word. It will not remain as earthen pot for very long time. It will break, and when it breaks, it again becomes earth, from which it was made; therefore this shape is temporary.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Śyāmasundara: That example of the pot, we can verify if it is true or false by our senses.
Prabhupāda: The senses, it is also senses. I am taking it as waterpot, that is I am taking it by my senses. But the shape of the waterpot is temporary.
Śyāmasundara: That can be proven.
Prabhupāda: Yes. So whatever there is in this world, even this house, this big house, this is also temporary.
Śyāmasundara: But what about a principle, like "Two plus two equals four"?
Prabhupāda: Principle is truth, but the manifestation is temporary. Principle... Just like earth. Just like we hear from Bhagavad-gītā, bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ khaṁ mano buddhir eva ca: (BG 7.4) "This earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intelligence, ego, they are My separated energies." And because it is Kṛṣṇa's energy, and Kṛṣṇa is true, therefore that energy is true. But this interaction of the energy, manifestation of different things out of that energy, that is temporary. Therefore it is called material energy or external energy, temporary manifestation.
Śyāmasundara: What about the proposition that "Two plus two equals four"?
Prabhupāda: That is also temporary.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Prabhupāda: This is demonstration. Demonstration, this is demonstration, that as soon as I go, actually I go (indistinct). That is demonstration. What do you want more demonstration?
Śyāmasundara: He says we have to know what conditions are required to show that it is true and then satisfy those conditions. So one condition you say is that as soon as the body dies, then there is no more movement. But what is there to prove that the soul has left the body or that there was ever a soul in the body?
Prabhupāda: That is the proof. Because the soul takes shelter into the womb of the mother, the father injects the soul—that is the statement of the śāstras—in the womb of the mother, and the mother gives shelter. So the body develops from the womb of the mother. There is conception, pregnancy. That is the proof.
Śyāmasundara: Ultimately there is nothing to measure, when the body dies, to determine where that soul went.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That you can measure by knowledge. Just like Bhagavad-gītā has said, ūrdhvaṁ gacchanti sattva-sthā (BG 14.18). Just like a man has committed murder, killed somebody. He is arrested, he is taken away from your sight, but you can know that he has committed murder, he will be hanged. That's all. You do not require to go there and see that he is hanged. It doesn't require. That is foolishness. If somebody says that "I did not see that the man was arrested," that's all right, but "I did not see that he was hanged. I cannot believe it," no. You believe or not believe, it is a fact.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Śyāmasundara: So our ultimate verification does not rest with our senses but with the authoritative...
Prabhupāda: Yes. Authoritative knowledge, that is real seeing. That is real seeing. Just like we have not seen Kṛṣṇa, take for example. Then all we are fools and rascals, that we are after Kṛṣṇa? People may say that "You have not seen Kṛṣṇa. Why you are after so much, Kṛṣṇa?" They can say. But then you are all set of fools. Does it mean that we are all set of fools? Then how we have seen Kṛṣṇa?
Śyāmasundara: Wittgenstein, in that respect he answers that these metaphysical or mystical ideas, even though they are not expressed in words, can be felt or appreciated without knowing whether it is true.
Prabhupāda: No. That is knowing. To know through authorities, that is knowing. That is real knowing. That is the process of Vedic knowledge: to know through the authorities. The same example: if somebody is asking, "Who is my father?" then he has to know through the authority of mother; otherwise there is no other way. So therefore to know through authority is perfect knowledge.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Śyāmasundara: He says that atomic propositions, or the components of compound propositions, depend for their validity upon the reliability with which they accurately picture atomic facts. In other words, suppose there is some proposition that this ring is gold. This proposition is part of a compound proposition which tells where the ring came from, how it was originated, who wore it, so many other facts. But only you take one proposition, "this ring is gold," he said this proposition depends upon the reliability with which it accurately pictures the facts, if it is true or false. That statement, "this ring is gold," it must determine how accurately it pictures the facts before we can say if it is valid or invalid proposition.
Prabhupāda: Suppose I say it is gold. What he will say? What is his proposition?
Śyāmasundara: He'll say that first of all you must give us a list of conditions to determine why it is gold, under what conditions it is gold.
Prabhupāda: That is everything. That he is speaking also, that is another condition.
Śyāmasundara: There must be certain conditions met before...
Prabhupāda: But how he is speaking is also fact, that he is speaking under certain conditions. Everything in this material world, that is on condition. So his philosophizing is also under condition. So everything is conditioned. Why does he not understand first of all himself, instead of trying to understand what is gold? Everything is conditioned.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Śyāmasundara: If we listed for some conditions that it must weigh a certain amount, it must have a certain color, it must have a certain texture, like that...
Prabhupāda: That is already there. Those who are chemists, they know what is the characteristics of gold. That is already there, recorded. So what does he want?
Śyāmasundara: This is part of his system for analyzing what is true or untrue.
Prabhupāda: That analysis is there. It may not be with me, it may not be with you, but it is already there. But what he will do with that analysis? What is his aim?
Śyāmasundara: Well, we can satisfy his conditions and then determine if it is true that this ring is gold.
Prabhupāda: Yes. There are so many conditions. After, at the end, the conditions come to atom, atomic theory. But the atom is also conditioned, aṇḍāntara-sthaṁ paramāṇu cayāntara-stham. Kṛṣṇa is within the atom also; therefore the atom is not absolute or independent. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is the ultimate fact.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Prabhupāda: Yes. These are all matter.
Śyāmasundara: He says that a proposition is a picture of reality, a picture is a model of reality, a picture is a fact, the world is a totality of facts, the totality of true thoughts is a picture of the world.
Prabhupāda: Totality of not facts, that is a combination of gross matter, combination of gross and subtle matter. But this gross and subtle matter are projection of Kṛṣṇa's energy. Therefore totalities, they can be said Kṛṣṇa's external energy. And because Kṛṣṇa's energy, the energy and energetic, sometimes separated, sometimes mixed up; when separated, it manifests as something creation; when it is mixed up, the energy is no longer—it is merged into the energetic. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is the ultimate cause.
Śyāmasundara: So the picture of reality is always changing? There are no set combinations?
Prabhupāda: Reality is not changing. The combination of different energies is changing. Reality is not changing.
Śyāmasundara: So true thoughts are not changing.
Prabhupāda: Reality is Kṛṣṇa, but Kṛṣṇa has got unlimited number of energies, so the combination of different energy is making some manifestation and they are changing.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Śyāmasundara: He says that the totality of true thoughts is the picture of the world. So that picture does not change. The true thoughts do not change. So the world is not actually...
Prabhupāda: Yes. Conservation of energy. Everything rests ultimately in energy, and the energy ultimately rests in Kṛṣṇa. Therefore we say that everything ultimately rests in Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is the ultimate cause, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate: (BG 10.8) "I am the cause of everything."
Śyāmasundara: He says that language is a picture of reality-language, words, a picture of reality. Just like we are speaking now. We are making pictures of reality as we speak with our language, with our words. Do these words have more content in themselves, or are they simply pictures of reality?
Prabhupāda: Language is a sort of expression to understand reality. Language is not reality.
Śyāmasundara: Yes. He says that propositions or statements of ideas provide merely the form, telling us not what things are but how they are, but only how they are.
Prabhupāda: As well as what they are. If they are how they are, then what they are can also be explained.
Śyāmasundara: Just like if I describe this picture, I cannot really say what it is, but only how it is, what it is like, how it is.
Prabhupāda: What is the difference, "how it is" and "what it is"? What is the difference? It is simply jugglery of words. If I can say how it is, I can say what it is.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Prabhupāda: Then why is he after so much nonsensical things? Just to show he's...
Śyāmasundara: In order to find out what is a genuine proposition, he says that a genuine proposition presents the sense content and shows how things stand if it is true.
Prabhupāda: This is sense content, that sarvaṁ khalv, "Everything is Brahman." Everything is Brahman.
Śyāmasundara: But how does that give us sense content? What does that mean to my sense observations?
Devānanda: Isn't there a way... There is a way of perceiving that everything is Brahman. It can be perceived. We cannot perceive it now, but it can be perceived.
Prabhupāda: But the true knowledge, that ultimately Brahman is the ultimate cause. So Brahman has got different energies, and the multiple energies, they are combined together, and they manifest in different phases. Therefore Brahman is the cause of all causes. That is the Vedānta-sūtra, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Brahman means wherefrom everything is emanating.
Śyāmasundara: But this statement, "Everything is Brahman," that seems to me devoid of sensory fact, of sense content. Therefore he says it is nonsensical, because I cannot experience it as a sensory experience. How does that have sense content, that statement?
Prabhupāda: That means whatever does not come through his senses, that is not true.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:
Prabhupāda: It can be shown, but you have no eyes to see. That is my proposal. Your eyes are just as blind man. If he says that "Show me this," how he can see? He is blind man. So you are blind, you cannot see, but those who have eyes, they can see. Therefore they say, śāstra cakṣuṣa: don't believe those eyes. Śāstra cakṣuṣa. Make the śāstra your cakṣuṣa. That is Vedic position. Don't see with these naked eyes. What is the value of your eyes? Why are you so much proud of your eyes? You cannot see. You see under certain conditions. Therefore adhaksi(?) Adhaksi means those who believe only the eyes. And what is the value of the eyes? That you won't admit, that "I am blind." He won't say. He will say simply, "I cannot see." How you can see? You're blind. That he won't admit, that he's blind. He will simply say that "I cannot see; therefore I don't agree." But you are blind!
Śyāmasundara: It seems to me, in all of your propositions, you are also showing by practical example how this is true. You do not... It's not in the air, so we cannot perceive it in some way.
Prabhupāda: Nothing is in the air. Everything is fact. But if somebody says, although it is fact, "I cannot see, therefore it is not fact," that is not a good proposal.
Śyāmasundara: You give the evidence: the body is suddenly stopping moving. That is evidence. Even though we cannot see the soul, perhaps, but the evidence is there.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Just like on a cloudy day we cannot see the sun, but because there is light, so we say, "Yes, there is sun."
Philosophy Discussion on Jacques Maritain:
Śyāmasundara: He says that sense activity occurs on an immediate level of experience, without any conscious awareness of itself, but that true knowledge of reality comes through intuition, and that this reality is called being.
Prabhupāda: Intuity, also past experience. What you call intuition is past experience. Just like when a child is born, by intuition it seeks mother's breast. Because the child does not know where is food, but by intuition, as soon as the mother's breast is given, pushed in its mouth, he is satisfied immediately. So by..., this is called by intuition. But actually it is its past experience. The same child, as the soul, may have taken something else in a different body. So the fact is that the soul is wandering in different types of bodies, and when he comes to a particular type of body, he remembers everything from his past experience. Just like fifty years ago, when I was a businessman, so at that Gauḍīya Math, as soon as I go there, I remember all those things; I am again fifty years back. That is actual... So this, suppose if I say I am going, I do not require to be directed that "Here is this thing, here is that thing." Immediately I enter that town I will understand that if I have to go to the toilet, "Here it is." If I go to the kitchen, "Here it is." So you may call it intuition, but actually it is experience, past experience. There is no, nothing such thing as intuition. That is a vague expression. Actually it is past experience.
Philosophy Discussion on Edmund Husserl:
Prabhupāda: That picture is also phenomenon ultimately, that idea of picture.
Śyāmasundara: That phenomenon. Yes. But if... It's a permanent type of changeless idea, picture. Even it may have many appearances which come and go, but the idea of "picture" is permanent, or changeless. Is it not?
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is confirming our theory of spiritual world as permanent. Just like here, the picture of a tree, that is phenomenon. But the picture, is that now original? Just like sometimes there are dolls, show dolls; that is phenomena. But the idea behind the dolls, that is permanent. Beautiful girl standing on the showcase, that is a doll. That is phenomenon. But a beautiful girl is not phenomenon; that is fact. This is a crude example. Similarly, this material world is phenomenon. That is explained by Śrīdhara Swami, that because the spiritual is true, fact, therefore the phenomenal expression of the spiritual world amidst matter appears to be true. This material world, phenomenal world, is not fact, but because it is representation of a fact, therefore it appears as fact. That is phenomenology.
Philosophy Discussion on Edmund Husserl:
Śyāmasundara: Behind hearing one sound, the proof of that understanding of sound in general is the sky, like that. In an elective process, this is a process for understanding these things.
Prabhupāda: On the whole, his process is mental speculation.
Śyāmasundara: So he says that in things there is a self-evident truth. In everything there is something self-evident that makes it true. Is that not possible?
Prabhupāda: That self-evidence is certain (indistinct). Just like this leaf, that you see the greenness of the leaf, but that is not all. If you actually want to study that leaf, simply the superficial vision of the leaf as green is not all.
Śyāmasundara: No.
Prabhupāda: So a person who has adaksi, sense perception, they cannot have perfect knowledge. He has seen simply phenomenon. Behind this phenomenon they cannot see. Therefore their knowledge is imperfect.
Devotee: So then if we (indistinct), Lord Brahmā took instruction from within his heart, we can understand that he had a pure heart, he was able to take instruction from Kṛṣṇa from within, that his heart was pure.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:
Hayagrīva: Freud's..., this is Freud's final conclusion on this point: "True, without religion man will then find himself in a difficult situation. He will have to confess his utter helplessness and his insignificant part in the working of the universe. He will have to confess that he is no longer the center of creation, no longer the object of the tender care of a benevolent providence. He will be in the same position as the child who has left the home where he was so warm and comfortable. But, after all, is it not the destiny of childishness to be overcome? Man cannot remain a child forever. He must venture at last into the hostile world. This may be called education to reality. Need I tell you that it is the sole aim of my book to draw attention to the necessity for this advance?"
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: The advance to reality.
Prabhupāda: That reality is good advice. But unfortunately, who is taking advantage of his advice? Because here we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā, the real point of religion, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). But these philosophers have misled the world so much that now it is very difficult to convince them that here is God speaking and here is religion. That service he has done. As they were innocent to accept the words of God, now they have become overintelligent. They think sex is God, and that is going on. So to counteract this mentality it will take some time, but anyone who takes, accept the Bhagavad-gītā, the words of God, and the ways and means of life as defined by God, if anyone takes, then he will be happy. That's a fact.
Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:
Prabhupāda: Unconsciousness, of course there is, that is not (indistinct) the same thing. That is not manifest. Unconsciousness, but it will manifest.
Śyāmasundara: He says that there are two kinds of subconscious state. The first one is the personal unconscious, or those personal items which are highly individual from one's previous childhood, from his infantile history, certain things occurred, they were repressed, and so on. These are stored in our own unconscious state and they are aroused into consciousness in dreams and through psychoanalysis. But he also posits another type of unconscious, or subconscious, state called the collective unconscious. He says that evolution has predetermined the human brain to react in terms of basic principles derived from the experience of many generations. In other words, that my ancestors had left impressions in my brain from the time of my birth, how to react according to their experiences. Is this true, that there is a collective experience which is passed on?
Prabhupāda: Yes. That experience we say paramparā. Evaṁ paramparā-prāptam (BG 4.2). That is cultivated.
Revatīnandana: He would be more..., he would say there is a German mentality, Russian mentality, English mentality, (indistinct) cultural.
Śyāmasundara: No, no, no. He says that these archetypal tendencies are tendencies to react in a certain manner originating from the remote past, which are true for all humans whether they are primitive savages or whether they are modern men. Just like, well, any tendency...
Prabhupāda: We don't take any experience from the primitive savages. That is not paramparā. Savages cannot give us any advice or instruction.
Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:
Śyāmasundara: Although the consciousness of a tree...
Prabhupāda: Just like fire. There is fire, so cover it. Covering, covering. When it is true cover, then they don't get the heat and light. But they cleanse the covering, move the covering, the fire is there.
Śyāmasundara: So even the consciousness of the tree is originally higher than (indistinct).
Prabhupāda: Yes. It is simply covered. The potency is there. Just like a flower in the bud stage, the potency is there to become a (indistinct) flower. So the covering by gradually coming out, coming out, finally, very beautiful rose.
Śyāmasundara: But someone would say that that bud is developing into a flower.
Prabhupāda: That is a (indistinct) in the terminology. Just like we say that we are changing bodies, they say developing bodies. So anyway, either you say developing or changing, the original body is not there. That you have to accept. The child's body, either you say it has developed into youth's body, and either you say that is (indistinct) body. I say the child's body is gone; it is another body. In both cases, the child's body is no longer existing. That you have to agree—either you call developed or it has gone.
Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:
Śyāmasundara: I mean my own personality. I think I am this, but actually I am that.
Prabhupāda: That is also true, because when one is not Kṛṣṇa conscious or self conscious, he thinks this body as "I am." Yasyātma-buddhiḥ kuṇape tri-dhātuke (SB 10.84.13), sa eva go-kharaḥ. So such persons who identify the body as the self, he is no better than the ass and the cow.
Śyāmasundara: For instance, I may think that I am like this, I am like that, but I don't realize that I am also like this. There's some other part of me which I'm not aware of which is guiding my behavior, which I repress.
Prabhupāda: Unless one comes to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he thinks (indistinct), that "I am like this," "I am Indian," "I am American," "I am brāhmaṇa," "I am this," "I am that." But when he's fully conscious, he knows that "I am eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa." That is the final (indistinct). Otherwise he (indistinct), "I am this," "I am that," "I am this," "I am that."
Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:
Hayagrīva: He characterizes the true religious man as one who is accustomed to the thought of not being sole master of his own house. He believes that God, and not he himself, decides in the end.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Naturally that is the position. What we can decide? That there is already controller over me, so how I can be Absolute? No. Therefore everyone should depend on the supreme controller. That is called, technical language, it is called śaraṇāgati, full surrender. Full surrender. That is called śaraṇāgati.
Hayagrīva: He feels that the only thing that keeps modern man..., that will keep modern man from simply dissolving into the crowd is, he says, "We must ask, 'Have I any religious experience, an immediate relation to God and hence that certainty which will keep me as an individual from dissolving in the crowd of humanity?' " So one's relation with God assures one of one's individuality.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Everyone is individual. God is also individual. So one individual is subordinate to the chief individual. That is the Vedic version. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13), God is also individual being, but He is the Supreme Being, and we are individual being, innumerable. So the difference is that the supreme living being is maintaining us, and we are being maintained. That we should understand. The same example as I gave, the father and the children in the family. The father is maintainer and the children are maintained. This is the real conception of philosophy. The mother is the material nature and father is God, and we are all children. We have got rights to enjoy the father's property, but not encroaching upon others', but as it is allotted by the father. "You sit down here, you take this, that's all," that, that much right I have got. I do not transgress the order of the father; then it is peaceful situation.
Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:
Devotee: Eight million.
Prabhupāda: Eight million. Does it mean there is only eight million persons?
Acyutānanda: And how do you know they're mortal anyway, by examining?
Śyāmasundara: No. This is his idea, that this type of knowledge may not be always true.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is it. It is not true.
Śyāmasundara: The first type of knowledge, centralized in the senses, such as "This snowball is white," he says that type of knowledge, there is no possibility of error, because it is knowledge that's direct or immediate. There's no mediation between. Immediate.
Prabhupāda: Therefore our proposition, to receive perfect knowledge from the authorities, that is perfect. As Kṛṣṇa says, evaṁ paramparā-praptam (BG 4.2). Kṛṣṇa is perfect, and whatever knowledge He imparts, that is perfect. If we take knowledge from Kṛṣṇa, then our knowledge is perfect. I may not be as perfect as Kṛṣṇa, but if I simply accept the statements of Kṛṣṇa, then my knowledge is perfect.
Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:
Śyāmasundara: His belief for..., the criterion for truth is called the correspondence theory, that a belief is true if it agrees with the facts with which it is supposed to correspond.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Just like this example, we see the snow as white, but it is..., does not correspond with the fact. Therefore it is not knowledge.
Dr. Rao: There is another example. They see water can (indistinct) in several (indistinct). One is the seawater, one is the (indistinct rest of comment)
Śyāmasundara: He also says that besides the correspondence, that fact must correspond with..., that a belief must correspond with the fact if it is to be true. Also he says...
Prabhupāda: So that fact does not correspond by direct perception, (indistinct) that we are seeing the snowball white, but scientifically it is not white; it is a combination of seven colors.
Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:
Śyāmasundara: This Bertrand Russell says that ethics, or what is right and wrong, is simply a set of emotional attitudes, and it cannot be, we cannot regard anything as good or bad. That nothing...
Prabhupāda: He does not make any distinction between good and bad?
Śyāmasundara: That there's no absolute good and bad. Nothing can be said "This is true or false," that "This is good," or that "This is bad."
Prabhupāda: That means he could not observe the distinction between good and bad. Does it mean like that?
Śyāmasundara: He says the only knowledge which is valid is proven scientifically, and he says that since moral right and wrong is not...
Prabhupāda: What is his proposal? What is scientifically proven? What is scientifically bad?
Śyāmasundara: He says good and bad are not subject to scientific proof.
Prabhupāda: But proof to him. But there is proof, what is really good and what is really bad. Has he given any practical example, that "This is scientifically good" and that "this is scientifically bad"?
Śyāmasundara: He says, "What is good is that which is desired," that desirable.
Prabhupāda: But anyone can desire anything. (laughter) So it is nonsense.
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.
Philosophy Discussion on B. F. Skinner:
Śyāmasundara: What about this statement? He says that "I can take any person at young age, any person with me, any person, and I can, at random, and I can train him to be any kind of specialist I might select-doctor, lawyer, even beggarman or thief, regardless of his talents or his nature, his tendencies or abilities."
Prabhupāda: So that means training should be given from childhood. That is the whole idea.
Śyāmasundara: But is that true?
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: We can train anyone to become anything.
Prabhupāda: Anything. Just like there is a story, the Tarzan. Tarzan. And he was living in the society of monkeys, and he learned how to jump from one tree to another. (laughter)
Devotee: If someone has a natural kṣatriya tendency, he cannot become a Vaiṣṇava?
Prabhupāda: No. There is no such barrier. Anyone can become Kṛṣṇa conscious. Anyone. Just like...
Devotee: What about brāhmaṇa? Brāhmaṇa too? Someone who is naturally a (indistinct).
Prabhupāda: By coming...
Śyāmasundara: Everyone has become śūdra now. You say everyone is born śūdra.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:
Śyāmasundara: He has another slogan that "Human effort has no true reality." In other words...
Prabhupāda: Because does not know what is reality. He is a fool.
Śyāmasundara: Well he says that man's reality or man's nature changes through history according to material conditions.
Prabhupāda: Well that is the way of..., everything is changing. This tree is changing daily, your body is changing, that is not a very high philosophy.
Śyāmasundara: His idea is that if you mold...
Prabhupāda: Jagat. Jagat means change. Jagat. (indistinct) jagat, everything is changing. Just like wind(?), time and tide. So that is not a very unique proposal. It is the nature's way, it is going on. And therefore I say this theory, this Marx theory, it is all changeable(?). It will not stay.
Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:
Hayagrīva: Marx felt that true philosophy would say, "In simple truth I bear hate for any and every God is its own avowal, its own judgment against all heavenly and earthly gods who do not acknowledge human self-consciousness as the supreme divinity. There must be no other on a level with it."
Prabhupāda: Human intelligence, unless he comes to the point of the Absolute Truth and the original cause of everything, then how his intellect is perfect? One must make progress. Progress means to go to the ultimate goal. If the human being does not know what is the ultimate cause, ultimate goal, then what is the value of his intelligence?
Hayagrīva: Marx felt that religion is a symptom of a degraded man. He wrote, "Religion is the sigh of a distressed creature, the soul of a heartless world, as it is also the spirit of a spiritless condition. It is the opium of the people. The more a man puts into God, the less he retains in himself."
Prabhupāda: But practically we see that the Communist are also equally failure, even without God. Now these Chinese and Russians, they are not in agreement. So same thing—that those who believed in God and those who did not believe in God the difference existed. And now amongst the Communist there are coming out so many section. So the difference of opinion is still there even denying God, without God. So that is not improvement. The real purpose is to understand what is really God is. That is required both by the Communist or the capitalist. Denying God and acting independently, that has not brought any peaceful condition of the human society.
Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung:
Śyāmasundara: He stresses two aspects (in the) theory of dialectical materialism. The one on which he placed the most emphasis is the aspect of the pragmatic element of philosophy, that philosophy must have practical effect. And the other aspect is the contradiction between capitalism and communism, and this contradiction involves conflicts and eventual revolution. He agrees with Hegel that without conflict, there can be no progress. Do we accept this? Without conflict, there is no progress?
Prabhupāda: Our Kurukṣetra battle is a conflict between Kurus and Pāṇḍavas. So after the conflict, the Pāṇḍavas became the kings. So that is admitted; without conflict, you cannot make progress.
Śyāmasundara: Is that true on every level of...?
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: ...chemical law? (?)
Prabhupāda: Oh yes. Mind is saṅkalpa and vikalpa. Mind's business is to accept something and reject something. So in this way, accepting and rejecting, if the mind is sound, then we come to some conclusion by intelligence. Accepting and rejecting, this is conflict. Then by intelligence we take something out of this conflict.
Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung:
Śyāmasundara: He says that all ideas or theories find their verification or their fulfillment through social practice. In other words, if something is a theory, if it's practiced and found to be true, then it is true.
Prabhupāda: Here it is true. In India still, those who are spiritualists. We have seen. Now, they are tolerating severe cold without any difficulty. For a materialist it is very difficult. From practical also, those who are advanced in spiritual life, they have no disease practically. They don't go to doctor. So these are practical. How can you deny these are not practical? They can live any condition, without any food, without any vitamin. Are these not practical? So we take that advancement of spiritual life makes our life more comfortable. That is practical. Without being dependent on doctors and this vitamin and that, so many, so many things. That is practical. If I have to depend on so many things, then where is the practical? Śukadeva Gosvāmī recommends that if you can... (break)
Śyāmasundara: He says that natural laws and ideas, verification of ideas, comes about through class struggle, material production and scientific experiment. That which we know for sure, certainty.
Prabhupāda: (to guest) How are you?
Śyāmasundara: Certain knowledge is gathered from these three sources: class struggle, material production, and scientific experiment.
Prabhupāda: Yes. But so-called scientists, they sometimes put forward wrong theories.
Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung:
Prabhupāda: That we are doing. We are repeatedly said that "You are controlled, you are controlled, you are controlled." (laughter)
Śyāmasundara: But what if you said... Like Mao Tse Tung might say, "I am the leader. I am the leader. I am the leader. I am the leader."
Prabhupāda: That is false. You are not leader.
Śyāmasundara: But they will accept it as true.
Prabhupāda: Why Mao becoming old? He is controlled. Is it that he will not die? Then he is controlled.
Śyāmasundara: He may die, but they will still accept him as the leader.
Prabhupāda: Well... Accept leader, a group of rogues and thieves accept another big thief as leader. (laughter) That is another thing. You see? That does not mean he is leader?
Śyāmasundara: So the nature of truth is not always derived from phenomenon. In other words, I can tell these people that this certain rock is God often enough so that they will eventually say, "Yes, this rock is God."
Prabhupāda: No, we don't say the rock is God. We say God is God. We are not so foolish that we say rock is God.
Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung:
Revatīnandana: That means actually I am not perfect. Therefore what qualification have I got to give truth?
Prabhupāda: Yes. You cannot give. You are cheating only. Because you are imperfect, but you are giving ideas to people. What right you have that you are teaching?
Revatīnandana: Suppose he says, "Yes, it's true, I will die. We all will die. I am just giving a formula for now until I die. Until we die, then we will do like this."
Prabhupāda: Then all will die. Those who will follow, he will also die, they will also die. So first of all, stop yourself from death.
Revatīnandana: They will say "That cannot be done."
Prabhupāda: Why it cannot be done? Search out the cause. You don't want to die, but you are being forced to die. First of all, answer this problem. Otherwise, "Devils cite scripture." You first of all become perfect. Why you remain a devil? How you can cite scripture?
Pañcadraviḍa: Also his (indistinct) that "If we are imperfect, how can we govern?" Their whole slogan, Communist slogan is "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." How can you get from a person according to his ability and how can you give according to his needs? If all the time there are the four errors of cheating propensity and so many other factors of imperfection are there, how can you possibly take a person and treat him as an individual and expect to have any kind of a reasonable conception of what he is capable of doing? (end)
Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:
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:
Śyāmasundara: And actually it may be true that the lower forms are trying to emulate the higher forms, but it is also the reverse is true. Just like the hippies, they are trying to emulate the hogs.
Prabhupāda: Well, the hippies, they are nonsense. What is the value of their anything? They have no value. They are crazy, mad fellows. That's all. There is no philosophy, nothing of the sort.
Śyāmasundara: He calls... What you said is that māyā is the urge within nature to desire the next step of evolution.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Śyāmasundara: He wants this, he wants that. Is that right?
Prabhupāda: Next step... No. Up to human form of life, by nature one is making progress automatically. One after this, one after this. That evolution. Jalajā nava... Just like from aquatics, you become trees, plants. (aside:) Telephone. Telephone. Somebody go. From trees, you become insect. From insect, you become birds or reptiles. From birds, you become beast. From beast, you become a human being. This is going on by nature's way. Just like a goat. A goat has to live in this body for certain years. Then he becomes something, other animal, and he has to live in that body for some years. Then he becomes another body. This is change . In this way he comes to the human form of life when his consciousness is developed. Now, when... Amongst the human form of life, there are many species of human form of life. So when one comes to..., I may say, in India, when he's born in India, that is the highest perfectional point because there is Vedic knowledge. So he can take advantage of the Vedic knowledge. And by taking advantage of Vedic knowledge, he understands that "I am part and parcel of God. Therefore my real business is to go back to God. Why I am suffering in this material world?" That is perfectional stage.
Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:
Hayagrīva: Now duty, we get back to the same thing. He writes, "True atheism consists in refusing to obey the voice of one's conscience until one thinks one can foresee the success of one's actions, and thus elevating one's own judgment above that of God and in making oneself into God. He who wills to do evil in order to produce good is a godless person."
Prabhupāda: Now if you do not know what is God, then how you will verify your duty is nice, all-good? What is the order of God, who is God, then where is your duty? You simply manufacture your duty. So everyone can do that. So what do you mean by duty? Duty means the order given by some superior and you follow, you do it. That is duty. But if you have no superior order, if you have no conception who is the superior, what is his order, then where is your duty? Simply by mental imagination. Is it? Does he say it like that?
Hayagrīva: Well, for him, outside of one's duty...
Prabhupāda: So what is one's duty?
Hayagrīva: Yes, well...
Prabhupāda: That he does not know.
Philosophy Discussion on Aristotle:
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?
Prabhupāda: Beauty of the soul is real beauty, and beauty of the body is superficial. Not every body is beautiful. There are so many bodies very ugly, and there are so many bodies very beautiful. So the material sense, this ugliness and beautifulness, they are all artificial. But the beauty of the soul is real; that is not artificial. So unless we see the beauty of the Supersoul, Kṛṣṇa, we have no idea what is actually beauty. Therefore devotees, they want to see the beauty of Kṛṣṇa, not any artificial beauty of this material world.
Hayagrīva: There's no correspondence there. That is to say, a beautiful body does not necessarily house a beautiful soul. There's no correspondence.
Prabhupāda: No, there is correspondence, because we say this material world is perverted reflection. So originally the soul is beauty, but here the beauty is covered. But we can simply have a glimpse of the real beauty from the material covering, but we have to wait to see the beauty of the soul. That is real point.
Philosophy Discussion on St. Augustine:
Hayagrīva: Augustine disagrees with Origen, who looked on the body as a prison. He says, "If the opinion of Origen and his followers where true, that matter was created, that souls might be enclosed in bodies as in penitentiaries for the punishment of sin, then the higher and lighter bodies should have been for those whose sins were slight, and the lower and heavier ones for those whose crimes were great." So...
Prabhupāda: That is Vedic conception. The soul, he, as he is, he is part and parcel of God, but he is imprisoned in different types of body. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā that "I am the seed-giving father of all different forms of life, and the mother, material nature is the mother." That is actually very logical. Through the matter different varieties of living entities are coming out. From water, from earth, from air, even from fire, ether, everywhere, sarva-gataḥ, life, living entities are visible. Therefore the combination of five elements—earth, water, fire, air—that is the body of the living entities. And the soul is the part and parcel of the Supreme, and the souls are impregnated within this material world by God, and they come out through the womb of the mother, nature or individual mother, whatever you say. The soul is coming out of matter but it is not matter. The living entities, part and parcel of God, assuming different types of body, either you say according to pious or impious activities, or according to his pious and impious desires. Vāsanāḥ. So the desire actually is the cause of higher and lower grades of body, but the soul is the same. Therefore those who are advanced in spiritual consciousness, they see the same soul in, in each and every body. Either in the body of a dog or in the body of a brāhmaṇa, the same soul is existing, but according to different desires and karma one gets a different types of body.
Philosophy Discussion on Rene Descartes:
Hayagrīva: This is the continuation of the notations on Descartes.
Prabhupāda: Hm?
Hayagrīva: Descartes, Rene Descartes, the French... Descartes writes, "The power of forming a good judgment and of distinguishing the true from the false, which is, properly speaking, what is called good sense or reason, is by nature equal in all men. God has given to each of us some light with which to distinguish truth from error." Now in the West this has been called conscience, and Descartes uses the term "reason." Now is this simply a form of mental speculation, or is the...
Prabhupāda: No. Mental speculation should be there. It is not actually speculation but it is reasoning. Just like if we study our own body, whether I am this lump of matter, namely this skin, bone and stool, urine and muscle and blood... If we analyze this body we find practically these things. So the reasoning is that whether combination of these things can give life. So externally we have got all these things. Blood we can get from slaughterhouse, and bone we can collect, or you can manufacture and set up an instrument with these things. Will it be, bring life? So the reasoning is life is different from this lump of matter. That is reasoning.
Philosophy Discussion on Rene Descartes:
Hayagrīva: And this reason... He says, "I fall into error because the power which God has given me of distinguishing the true from the false is not in me an infinite power." So by reason we can never...
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: ...be certain...
Prabhupāda: Yes, infinite. I am, I am finite. I, as soul or as Brahman, am finite Brahman, and therefore there must be one infinite Brahman. That infinite Brahman is God, and finite Brahman is jīva, living entity. Therefore in the Vedic literature the God is accepted as the chief living being. Just like we have got in our family the father is supposedly chief man in the family, and sons and daughters, they are subordinate. These are common understanding. Similarly, God is the origin of all living entities and we are subordinate living entity, just like the father and the sons, and that is accepted by any religious sect, that God is the supreme father and we are son. That is accepted everywhere. And as the sons, children, they exist by the mercy of the father, similarly, our existence is continuing on account of mercy of the supreme father. This is reasoning.
Philosophy Discussion on Rene Descartes:
Hayagrīva: He says, "I see that the certainty in truth of all knowledge depends on knowledge of the true God, and that before I knew Him I could have no perfect knowledge of any other thing, and now that I know Him I have a means of acquiring a perfect knowledge of innumerable things, not only in respect of God Himself and other intelligible things, but also in respect of that corporeal nature which is the object of pure mathematics." Now he says he knows God but at the same time he seems to be deceived in matters, certain matters that we haven't come to yet, but, uh...
Prabhupāda: No. If he has actually followed God's instruction and if he has actually knowledge of what is God, then he will never be misled. Either he selects a false God or he has not met God, real God. Then he is... But to save this danger there is God's instruction, Bhagavad-gītā. Anyone who will follow, he will be perfect.
Philosophy Discussion on Auguste Comte:
Hayagrīva: He draws a distinction between atheism and positivism. He says, "Atheism, even from the intellectual point of view, is a very imperfect form of emancipation, for its tendency is to prolong the metaphysical stage indefinitely by continuing to seek for new solutions of theological problems instead of setting aside all inaccessible researches on the grounds of their utter inutility. In a word, atheism is still concerned with studying the 'why' instead of the 'how,' and positivism, true positivism, is concerned with the 'how' instead of the 'why.' " In other words, he felt that religion quo religion, religion as religion, had best be set aside because religious questions are basically childish. They can never be answered. So atheism is rejected because atheists "occupy themselves with theological problems and yet reject the only appropriate method of handling them." And for him the only appropriate method is to forget the whole thing.
Prabhupāda: So how can he forget? Atheism will help anyone to improve his position? Just like death. Atheist, if he does not believe in God and God sends him death, how he can counteract it? He has no power to counteract it. We understand from Bhagavad-gītā that death is God for the atheist. Atheists do not believe in God, but God comes to him as death to convince him that "Here I am." So how the atheist can avoid? How it will improve his present situation by atheistic speculation? So how the atheist can become independent? That is not possible.
Philosophy Discussion on Auguste Comte:
Hayagrīva: Comte conceives the worship of woman as preparatory for the worship of mankind at large. He says, "The worship of woman begun in private and afterwards publicly celebrated is necessary in man's case to prepare him for any effectual worship of humanity," and that "Only man is the supreme being. It must not, however, be supposes that the new supreme being is like the old, merely a subjective result of our powers of abstraction. Existence in the true sense can only be predicated of humanity."
Prabhupāda: What is the idea?
Hayagrīva: That man is all there is.
Prabhupāda: Huh? Can you explain what is the idea expressed in this sentence?
Hayagrīva: He wants to do away with the Catholic religion and institute the worship of humanity, or the worship of man. He says that everything else is abstraction, is speculation, and that only man is the..., man is the only existence in the true sense. Atheism.
Prabhupāda: Man is existence?
Hayagrīva: Man is the only existence.
Prabhupāda: Then? There is nobody else? What about the animals? Man is the only existence, and what about the animals? They are also...
Hayagrīva: He doesn't seem to consider the animals.
Prabhupāda: So what, what is the position of the animals? They are also living being.
| Page Title: | True (Lectures, Other) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, Mayapur |
| Created: | 23 of Nov, 2011 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=125, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 125 |