Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Do not believe (Lectures, Other)

Expressions researched:
"did not believe" |"disbelief" |"disbelieve" |"disbelieved" |"disbeliever" |"disbelieves" |"disbelieving" |"do not believe" |"does not believe" |"don't believe" |"no belief" |"nonbeliever" |"not believable" |"not believe" |"not believing" |"unbelievable" |"unbeliever" |"unbelievers"

Lectures

Nectar of Devotion Lectures

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, December 27, 1972:

Bhagavad-gītā, it is said, Kṛṣṇa says: mṛ tyuḥ sarva-haraś ca aham. At the... By death, everything is taken away by Kṛṣṇa. So the modern civilization, they do not believe in the next birth. That is the basic mistake of the present civilization, that we get information that tathā dehāntaraṁ prāptir dhīras tatra na muhyati. Dehāntaram. Just like we are transmigrating, even in this span of life, from childhood to boyhood, from boyhood to youthhood, from youthhood to old age body. Therefore it is natural to conclude that after this old body's finished, then we get another body, transmigration of the soul. But there is no education, no enlightenment about this transmigration of the soul. But we can, if we think, ponder very deeply on this matter, how transmigration of the soul is taking place, and it is authorized, authorized statement of Bhagavad-gītā: tathā dehāntaraṁ prāptir.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, December 28, 1972:

Prabhupāda: People do not believe this. They think that everything is going on automatically. No. There is everything, account, witness. The Lord...

Devotee: Too windy? (about fan)

Prabhupāda: Yes. Anumantā upadraṣṭā sākṣīni. Sākṣīni. The Lord... Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe (BG 18.61). Everything is being witnessed and that is being recorded. So just like in a office in government service, there is service record, and at the end of the year, everything is considered. So the man is promoted, given some bonus on the proprietor or the directors, they're not meeting that man. But the service record is there. Similarly, whatever we are doing, good or bad, that is being recorded and it is examined. Karmaṇā daiva netreṇa (SB 3.31.1). We are acting and there is superior authority. They are examining what kind of body he has to get next. So that, that, that science is not being taught, that what is our next body? They are thinking that there is no next body, there is no life, this life is finished. But that is not the fact.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 21, 1972:

There are many stories. We have got practical experience that Akbar Shah inquired from his, one of his very confidential ministers that "How long a man is sexually inclined?" So the minister replied that "Up to the point of death." He replied. The Akbar did not believe it. But the minister sometimes took him to a man who was goi..., just going to die, and the minister requested Akbar Shah to get with him his young daughter. So when the Akbar Shah and his daughter was entering, the man on the death bed, he was looking to the young girl, not to the Akbar. So he pointed out, "Just see." And he was convinced, "Yes." So the sex life is so strong that you cannot be satisfied. If you re..., remain in material existence, then this sex desire will never be satisfied. But it can be satisfied only when you come to Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 31, 1972:

Why? Kṛṣṇa says, mām ekam. Why shall I try to put another alternative? Why? What is the reason? That is our misfortune. Kṛṣṇa is offering the fortune. Sarva-dharmān parityaja mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja. This is fortune. But I'll not take that. Kṛṣṇa says, "Get up. Give up all other engagements. Simply take shelter of Me. I shall give you all protection." But I don't believe Kṛṣṇa; therefore it is my misfortune. This fortune, to become fortunate and misfortunate... Just like in English word, "Man is the architect of his own fortune." Is it not? "Man is the architect of his own fortune." But if you, as you are architect of your own fortune, you are architect of your own misfortune also. So if you don't accept Kṛṣṇa's advice, then you must consider yourself unfortunate. We should be cautious: "Why shall I become unfortunate? I must become fortunate." So that, to become fortunate, is not very difficult thing.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 3, 1972:

That is pure devotional service. But that is very difficult to achieve. People will not accept the simple thing. You give them big, big formulas, yoga system, aṣṭāṅga-yoga, they'll like it: "It is something." Just like in homeopathic medicine, because it has no taste, there is no trouble to drink, people do not believe in it. But if you give them some very bitter, pungent medicine, "Oh, it is something." Similarly, if you give the simple process, as Caitanya Mahāprabhu has given us, harer nāma harer nāma harer nāma eva kevalam, kalau nāsty eva nāsty eva nāsty eva gatir anyathā (CC Adi 17.21), they'll not take it very seriously. "Oh, simply by chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, one will be liberated, and he'll go back...? Oh, this is exaggeration." They will say. But if you give them some difficult job, that "You press your nose in this way, you make your head downwards, and you exercise in this way, do...," they'll think, "Yes, it is something."

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 13, 1972:

"Oh, my Nārāyaṇa is so powerful that He can do everything." He believed immediately that "Yes, for Nārāyaṇa it is possible to pull the elephant through the hole of the needle, this side and that." So Nārada Muni inquired, "How do you believe this? The other person, the brāhmaṇa, he's learned person. He did not believe. How do you believe it? What is your conviction?" He said, "Sir, I believe in this way, because I am sitting under this tree. This is a banyan tree. And so many," what is called, "figs are falling down. And each fig there are thousands of small seeds, and in each seed there is a banyan tree. So if Nārāyaṇa can keep thousands of banyan trees within this fig fruit, how it is not possible for Him to pull an elephant through the hole of a needle?"

The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 27, 1973:

Without pious activities, if a man is in a distressed condition, he becomes an agnostic, communist, or something like that. Because he does not firmly believe in God, he thinks that he can adjust his distressed condition by totally disbelieving in Him.

"Lord Kṛṣṇa, however, has explained in the Gītā that out of these four types of neophytes, the one who is very..., who is wise is very dear to Him because a wise man, if he is attached to Kṛṣṇa, is not seeking an exchange of material benefits. A wise man who becomes attached to Kṛṣṇa does not want any return from Him, neither in the form of relieving distress nor in gaining money. This means that from the very beginning the basic principle of attachment to Kṛṣṇa is, more or less, love. Furthermore, due to his wisdom and study of śāstra and scriptures, he can understand also that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead."

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 1.6 -- Mayapur, March 30, 1975:

So this hlādinī-śakti is being described in Caitanya-caritāmṛta. Therefore Caitanya-caritāmṛta is the postgraduate study of highly elevated devotees. Ordinary devotees, they cannot understand. I have seen one professional reader. He was reading Caitanya-caritāmṛta, but he did not believe in it. Because he cannot understand. He cannot understand it. He plainly said, "These are only imaginary descriptions. There is no fact in it." I have seen it. So how one can understand this is fact unless one has understood what is spirit? Just like in your country, big, big professors, they do not believe in the spirit. They simply think of this body. So how they can understand about Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa and Their pastimes, all spiritual affairs? First of all we must understand what is spirit and what is Kṛṣṇa and what is Rādhārāṇī, and then we try to understand what is Kṛṣṇa and Rādhārāṇī's loving affairs.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 1.10 -- Mayapur, April 3, 1975:

Where is the difficulty to understand? You are a tiny soul, and you have got a small body. You can produce one ounce of water by your perspiration. Why God, who has got the gigantic body, He cannot produce water, the Garbhodakaśāyī, the Garbhodaka water? There is no reason to disbelieve. This is called acintya-śakti, inconceivable power.

Unless we accept inconceivable power of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, there is no meaning of God. If you think "a person" means like me or you... Yes, like me or you, God is also person. That is accepted in the Vedas: nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). There are many cetanas, living entities, and they are all eternal. They are many, plural number. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 3.87-88 -- New York, December 27, 1966:

A small needle will go down immediately to the depth of the sea, and a ship with 50,000 tons of loading, it is floating. So if a man can make such arrangement by some way or other that he can float a 50,000 tons of ship floating on this, I mean to say, ocean, is it not possible for God to float a stone on the ocean? Is there any reason to disbelieve it? There is no reason. And we can see. By God's energy these big, big lumps of planet, they are floating in the air. So as He likes... That is called omnipotency. If He likes, one thing will float. If He does not like, it will go down.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.1 -- Atlanta, March 1, 1975:

"A person in the conditional stage of material existence is in an atmosphere of helplessness. But the conditioned soul, under the illusion of māyā or the external energy, thinks that he is completely protected by his country, society, friendship and love, not knowing that at the time of death none of these can save him." This is called māyā. But he does not believe. Under the illusion of māyā, he does not also believe that what is the meaning of saving. Saving. Saving means saving oneself from this repetition, cycle of birth and death. That is real saving. But they do not know. (reading:) "The laws of material nature are so strong that none of our material possessions can save us from the cruel hands of death." Everyone knows it. And that is our real problem. Who is not afraid of death? Everyone is afraid of death.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.1 -- Atlanta, March 1, 1975:

This is not difficult to understand.

But they do not believe in the next life, although it is very common sense. Actually there is next life because Kṛṣṇa says, and we can understand the philosophy by a little intelligence that there is next life. So our proposition is that "If you have got to prepare yourself for the next life, then why don't you take the trouble of preparing for going back to home, back to Godhead?" This is our proposition. You can prepare yourself to go to hell or heaven. That doesn't matter because that is also temporary. Kṣīṇe puṇye punar martya-lokaṁ viṣanti. After you have finished... Just like you may go to jail or to somewhere else. When your visa or time is finished, then you are free from such life.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.39-47 -- San Francisco, February 1, 1967:

Just like in Christian religion, those who do not follow the Bible, they are called heathens. Similarly, in Muslim, those who do not follow the Koran, they are called kafirs. Similarly, those who do not follow the Vedic principles, they are called nāstika or mlecchas. Nāstika means those who do not believe in the Vedic principles, they are called nāstika, atheist. And those whose behavior is not very clean, they are called mlecchas. So in comparison to Hindu mode of living and others in the world, there is very great difference, social sanctity and personal sanctity. So therefore, formerly the mlecchas means the Muhammadans, because they are meat-eaters, they do not take bath daily and there are so many things. So even those persons who were delivered by Lord Caitanya, but the author says that He could not deliver the Māyāvādīs, the impersonalist sannyāsīs.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.107-109 -- San Francisco, February 15, 1967:

Even Gandhi has done this. What Gandhi? Gandhi's nothing. You see? So they are, these rascals are doing and misleading persons. I've recently written one written to Dr. Radhakrishnan that "You are going to retire. Now join this Kṛṣṇa conscious movement. You have written your Bhagavad-gītā, and you don't believe Kṛṣṇa as Supreme Lord, God. Therefore by reading your Bhagavad-gītā people have become godless. So you better rectify your mistake. Now join this." I've written state letter to Dr. Radhakrishnan. "So if you want to, I mean to say, compensate the greatest sin you have committed in your Bhagavad-gītā, then you join this Kṛṣṇa conscious movement and rectify yourself." "Not to Kṛṣṇa."

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.108 -- San Francisco, February 18, 1967:

So where the sun planet... Wherefrom... The sun planet is also a material thing like this earth. Wherefrom the... (break) ...inhabitants, they're all fiery. Therefore their glaring effulgence is being manifested. So if you can see in the material world such effulgence of a certain point, particular planet, how can you disbelieve that Kṛṣṇa planet is more dazzling? Kṛṣṇa planet is more dazzling, and from Kṛṣṇa planet the brahma-jyotir is emanating. Yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi-koṭiṣv aśeṣa-vasudhādi vibhūti-bhinnam (Bs. 5.40). We get this information from Brahma-saṁhitā that, by spreading His effulgence, yasya prabhā... Prabhā means illumination, prakāśa. Just like this light is illuminating. 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."

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.109-114 -- San Francisco, February 20, 1967:

I have got my this own proposition, that ahiṁsā. Nonviolence is the religion. That's all." So he did not accept Vedas. Therefore, those who are Vedantists, those who are followers of Vedas, they called Buddhist religion atheism. Atheism means anyone who does not believe in scriptures, standard scriptures. That is called atheism.

So Caitanya Mahāprabhu says that Buddha philosophy is atheism undoubtedly, but Śaṅkara philosophy is dangerous atheism because he is accepting Vedānta, but he is preaching atheism. He's accepting... Under the shelter of Vedānta, he's preaching atheism. So therefore they are more dangerous. Just like you are fighting with your enemies, that is very clear. "The other party is my enemy." But if somebody's treating as your friend and within he's trying to kill you, enemy, oh, that is very dangerous enemy. So similarly, Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that Buddhism is atheism.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.109-114 -- San Francisco, February 20, 1967:

Woman: If someone who does not believe in scriptures, um, what is his duty, and...?

Prabhupāda: His duty is to go to hell. One who does not believe in scriptures, they are meant for going to hell.

Woman: What can one do to rectify his offenses? (?)

Prabhupāda: Well, just come... (break) That will help you.

Woman: But if a person is not willing to do that, is there any way... (static)

Prabhupāda: Oh, how can you do that? If a person is not willing to take medicine, how he can be cured? He'll go to death. He must be willing to. That is a, I mean to say, explained in the Bhagavad-gītā. So that is very dangerous position, one who does not take care. Suppose if one wants to be educated without going to school. How it is possible? If somebody says, "Oh, I don't care for any school, colleges. I'll be educated at home," this is nonsense. Is it possible?

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.119 -- Gorakhpur, February 17, 1971:

So this process of civilization at the modern times, Rāvaṇa-class, that "Take money which is the property of the Supreme Lord and enjoy," this is going on. "No God. Godless. Defy God. I am God. Who is God? I am so powerful." These things are also explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, Sixteenth Chapter. They don't believe any creator. So these are called āsuriṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ. The āsuriṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ civilization will not make you happy. The āsuri-bhāva... Because āsuri-bhāvam means everyone wants to enjoy. I want to enjoy, you want to enjoy. So there must be clash, there must be friction between you and me, because both of us, we are trying to enjoy. But that is not our position. The enjoyer is Kṛṣṇa. Enjoyer is Kṛṣṇa. Just like Kṛṣṇa in Vṛndāvana, as we sung this song, jaya rādhā-mādhava... Jaya rādhā-mādhava kuñja-bihārī. He is enjoying in Vṛndāvana. His only feature is... That is the real picture of God: simply enjoying.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 6.254 -- Los Angeles, January 8, 1968:

So Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, he was a great logician. He was unfaithful. Not... He was moralist, but he had no faith in God, or impersonalist. There are many persons who have faith in something superior or absolute, but they do not believe in the personal nature of God. But here, from the Bhagavad-gītā, we can clearly understand, from Bhāgavata we can clearly understand, from Vedānta philosophy we clearly understand that God is person, a person like you and me. Take, for example, in the Vedānta-sūtra, the first aphorism is janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). The first sūtra is athāto brahma jijñāsā: "Now you have to understand what is Brahman, or what is the Absolute Truth." The next aphorism is, immediately, that "The Absolute Truth is that from whom everything emanates, the original source of all emanation." Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1).

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.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.113 -- London, July 23, 1976:

So if we bring everything to our conception, that becomes cintya, conceivable, but that is not the fact. Therefore here it is stated, acintya-jñāna-gocarāḥ. We have to receive this knowledge from sources which can inform us about all these things inconceivable by us. It is not possible to bring the inconceivable within our conceivable limit. That is not possible. That is foolishness. Mūḍha. Mūḍha will not believe. We are finding out, try to... This is knowledge. Athāto brahma jijñāsā. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). To find out the source of everything the Absolute Truth, and when the Absolute Truth comes down to inform us, Kṛṣṇa, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate (BG 10.8), we don't believe it. First of all we cannot understand it, and if the Supreme Personality of Godhead comes personally to speak about Himself, we do not believe it.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.113 -- London, July 23, 1976:

First of all we cannot understand it, and if the Supreme Personality of Godhead comes personally to speak about Himself, we do not believe it. This is our position. First of all we shall challenge, "Can you show me God?" And if God comes Himself we don't believe, then what is our position? You want to see God. All right, God has come here. See, here is God. "No, this is idol worship." In the Bengali there is a word, ei gule nipamsa pechlo belo gelo (?). So this is our position. This position will not help us. We must admit our position that in the God's creation everything is inconceivable by us. We cannot calculate within our limitation. That is not possible.

Therefore śāstra says, acintya khalu ye bhava. The same word in another way: na tas tarkyena yojayet. Things which are beyond your conception, don't try to understand it by your so-called logic and argument.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.113 -- London, July 23, 1976:

And the father comes personally and He informs, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7). Ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā (BG 14.4). Then where is the difficulty? Is there any difficulty? But because we are rascals, will not believe mother, will not believe father. We, with our tiny brain, we shall make research and make things topsy-turvy and pass on as great scientist doctor. This is our position. Therefore śāstra says that "You rascals, do not waste your time in that way." Acintyāḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṁs tarkeṇa yojayet.

So according to the Vedic system, the difference between atheist and theist is that the atheist means who do not believe in the version of the śāstra. Yaḥ śāstra-vidhim utsṛjya vartate kāma-kārataḥ na sa siddhim avāpnoti (BG 16.23). So our, this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is not blind. Don't think wrongly. We are confident.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.113 -- London, July 23, 1976:

Try to understand Kṛṣṇa thoroughly. And if you understand Kṛṣṇa thoroughly... Of course, it is not possible thoroughly, but it is possible also. Just like Kṛṣṇa is the source of everything. So if you believe it, it is understanding thoroughly. If you believe that what Kṛṣṇa says is fact, then it is understanding thoroughly. If you don't believe, then it is not thoroughly. Because if you make research that "Kṛṣṇa says 'I am the origin of everything.' Let me make research," that will not be possible. Inconceivable. But if you believe in the words of Kṛṣṇa, then you've studied thoroughly. Where is the difficulty? To study Him thoroughly does not require much education; simply you believe Him. And if you believe Him... Actually, that is the fact. There must be... Just like the same example: there must be a father of all this creation. Mother nature is mother, and we are all creation, born of material nature. Then there must be father.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.121-124 -- New York, November 25, 1966:

The Cāṇakya, the Cārvāka Muni replied, bhasmī-bhūtasya dehasya kutaḥ punar-āgamano bhavet: "Well, when your body will be burnt into ashes, who is coming here and who is going to be responsible? Don't think all these." So this is atheistic theory. They don't believe that there is transmigration of the soul. He has to take another body and he has to take body according to his work, and there are 8,400,000's of different kinds of bodies, and human body is the most benefactory. So they do not know all these things. So this is called āvaraṇātmikā, covering influence.

So covering influence and throwing influence. Out of these two influences, one can come out if he agrees to surrender unto the Supreme Lord. Otherwise there is no other way. He'll be, he'll be always covered or be thrown again.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.137-146 -- Bombay, February 24, 1971:

"They think that I am also ordinary man." Therefore there is controversy, "Why I shall worship Kṛṣṇa? Kṛṣṇa cannot... The Supreme Lord cannot come in this way, just like ordinary man, and making friendship with Arjuna and driving his chariot, or dancing with the gopīs." They cannot conceive. They cannot accommodate within their tiny brain that Kṛṣṇa is so powerful. He's so... We say that Kṛṣṇa, God is all-powerful, God is all omnipotent, but when God shows actually that He's omnipotent, all-powerful, they do not believe. That is their defect. But the manifestation which Kṛṣṇa showed when He was actually present, He's the Supreme Lord.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.137-146 -- Bombay, February 24, 1971:

"I am very big industrialist," "I am prime minister," this, that, so many things. "I am in possession of all I survey. I am the master of my country and everything." That's all right. As soon as death comes, "Oh, I am Jawaharlal Nehru," "I am Gandhi," "Oh! Never mind! Please go away! Finish Stop your all leadership." That is God. You don't believe, you may not believe God, but when death comes you have to believe in God. Let the scientists and let the big leaders and rich men protect himself from death. Then you can say that there is no God. (break) This atheism, denying the existence of God, is not very good. Therefore Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is very important. (pause) Prasāda, you have given prasāda?

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.156-163 -- New York, December 11, 1966:

They can say from distant place, "Oh, there is nothing. It is simply fire." But from scripture we understand, "No, that is a planet." And as in this planet we have got so many variegatedness, similarly, in that planet also, there are... In every planet. There is no reason to disbelieve that in, in the, in other planets there is no life, there is no variegatedness. No. According to Vedic literature, it is not acceptable. Each and every planet, there is variegatedness as we find in this planet. The difference is that in some of the planets earthly matter is prominent, some of the planets fiery elements are prominent. So in the sun, sun planet, fiery elements is very prominent. There the living entities and everything, they are made of fire.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.294-298 -- New York, December 19, 1966:

So Lord Caitanya confirms that how many līlāvatāras, incarnations, are there. We want to everything make limited because we are all limited sense, limited understanding, limited... Everything is limited, and God is unlimited. That we do not understand. We try to understand God with our limited means. That is our folly. Therefore we don't believe. "Oh, God is doing like that? Oh, God is lifting hill? How it is possible? This is story." How? Why it is story? God is omnipotent, and God cannot lift a hill? He is floating so many planets in the air, weightlessness, and He cannot lift a hill? Because I do not believe He is God. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā: (BG 9.11) "Foolish rascals, they consider Me as ordinary man: 'Not Kṛṣṇa, but me. You offer your respect to me. I am God. I am competitor Kṛṣṇa.' " So these are foolishness. He is unlimited; His everything, He is unlimited.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 25.40-50 -- San Francisco, January 24, 1967:

Just like an expert lawyer, he can get out of the entanglement of law by jugglery of words and interpretation, he is called a big lawyer, similarly, there are philosophers who can put different theories and not admit the existence of God. So Śaṅkarācārya's real purpose was no existence of God, because he had a very thankless task. He was dealing with the persons who are Buddhists. They did not believe anything except matter. So for them, to establish that there is God, it is very difficult. Therefore he adopted this means that "There is no separate God. We are all God. You are God, I am God." And a demonic person, if he is addressed, "Oh, you are God," oh, he becomes very happy because he does not become responsible to any higher authority. He becomes God. He can do anything. He can perform any nonsense. Nobody is going to punish him. It is very nice theory, that "I have become God. Because I have no more..."

Sri Isopanisad Lectures

Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 1 -- Los Angeles, May 3, 1970:

Lord Buddha's propaganda was to make the rascals at least to stop animal-killing. Ahiṁsā paramo dharma. Lord Buddha's appearance is described in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and many Vedic literatures. Sura-dviṣām. He came to cheat the demons. The demons... He made such a policy that the demons were cheated. How he has cheated? The demons, they are against God. They don't believe in God. So Lord Buddha propagated, "Yes, there is no God. But what I say, you follow." "Yes, sir." But he is God. This is cheating. Yes. They do not believe in God, but they believe in Buddha, and Buddha is God. Keśava-dhṛta-buddha-śarīra jaya jagadīśa hare.

Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 1 -- Los Angeles, May 3, 1970:

Yes. They do not believe in God, but they believe in Buddha, and Buddha is God. Keśava-dhṛta-buddha-śarīra jaya jagadīśa hare. So that is the difference between a demon and a devotee. A devotee sees that how Kṛṣṇa, Keśava, is cheating these rascals. The devotee can understand. But the demons, they think, "Oh, we have got a nice leader. He does not believe in God." (laughter) You see? Sammohāya sura-dviṣām (SB 1.3.24). The exact Sanskrit word is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. You have seen, those who have read: sammohāya, for bewildering sura-dviṣām. Sura-dviṣām means persons who are envious of the Vaiṣṇavas. The atheist class, demons, they are always envious of the devotees. That is the law of nature. You see this father. Father became an enemy of a five-years-old son. What was his fault? He was a devotee. That's all. Innocent boy. Simply he was, I mean to say, attracted with chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra. The father himself, he became a staunch enemy: "Kill this boy."

Sri Brahma-samhita Lectures

Lecture on Brahma-samhita, Verse 35 -- New York, July 31, 1971:

You make your good bank balance, skyscraper house, and wife, children, cigarette, wine, liquor, I am living very peaceful. That's all right, but one day comes, please get out. (laughter) "Why? It is my house, I have got bank balance, I have got everything, I have got factory, why shall I get out?" "Yes, you get out. Don't talk, get out." (laughter) That day he sees God. "I did not believe in God, now here is God, making everything finished." Everything finished. Sarva-haraś cāham, Kṛṣṇa says, that "I am God for the demons when I take away everything from them at the time of death." "You do not believe God, all right, here I am. Today I am here. I have come to you to take away everything, whatever you have got. Now get out!" They will see God on that day.

Festival Lectures

Sri Vyasa-puja -- Hyderabad, August 19, 1976:

Punar janma jayayaḥ. How to conquer over next birth, next material birth, they do not know. Foolish persons they have forgotten Vedic culture, what is the Vedic culture. Vedic culture is to conquer over the next birth, that's all. But they do not believe in the next birth. Ninety-nine percent people, they have gone so down from the Vedic culture. The Bhagavad-gītā also the same philosophy is there. Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti kaunteya (BG 4.9). This is Vedic culture. Vedic culture means by the evolutionary process we come to this human form of life. Here is the chance of stopping transmigration of the soul from one body to another. Tathā dehāntara prāptir, and you do not know what kind of body I am going to get next. This body may be prime minister and next body may be dog by the laws of nature.

Govardhana Puja Lecture -- New York, November 4, 1966:

So when Kṛṣṇa was on this planet and He was playing the part of a cowherd boy, and it was known to all over the universe that "God has come, taken incarnation, and He is on the earth planet, and He is at Vṛndāvana playing the part of a cowherd boy..." So as if somebody, if there is incarnation of God, somebody believes and somebody does not believe, when Kṛṣṇa was actually present on this earth, it is not that everybody understood that Kṛṣṇa was the Supreme Personality of Godhead, not even up to date. Only few persons, the five brothers of the Pāṇḍavas and the damsels of Vṛndāvana, only in the fingers' count, say, out of the whole population, say, hundred or two hundred men knew Him that He was the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Otherwise everyone thought that "He is an ordinary man just like one of us, but most powerful. That's all."

Govardhana Puja Lecture -- New York, November 4, 1966:

"Everyone is born here out of, as the effect of his past deeds." And karmaṇaiva pralīyate: "And he is going to have his next birth according to the work, as he is doing here." This is called karma-mimāṁsā. The karma-mimāṁsā philosophers, they do not believe that "Oh, our liberation from this material world and entrance in the spiritual kingdom to be associated with God, that will make us happy." Their belief is that "You simply do good work. Then you gradually get your promotion." That is also a fact. That is not a misconception. If you do good work, then you get good birth. Janmaiśvarya-śruta-śrī (SB 1.8.26). Four things: good birth, mean a good family or good nationality, and janma... Birth means... Janma means birth, good birth. Janma aiśvarya, and to become rich. Śruta, to become very learned; and śrī, and to become very beautiful—these are results of past good work.

Govardhana Puja Lecture -- New York, November 4, 1966:

"Now, supposing there is somebody." Because these atheists, they do not believe in God, now they are giving arguments. "Now, suppose there is somebody as God or some supervisor or something like that. But still, he is obliged to give Me the effect. Therefore I am not going to ask mercy from that superior personality, God or something else. I have to work." And this is also fact. Suppose you are going to appear in some examination. Now, the university is giving you some designation. Now, that designation practically depends on your passing the examination. What is the use of flattering that examiner? That is the argument. There is no... His argument is that "You are after the sacrifice of satisfying the Indra."

Govardhana Puja Lecture -- New York, November 4, 1966:

That natural tendency is there, and when they combine together there is a birth of a child. So this is a natural sequence. Sāṅkhya philosophy is based on this principle. They do not believe that above this, there is God. Nirīśa. Above this, there is God. There is God's control. Actually there is God. Sexual intercourse is not the cause of a child. According to Bhāgavata, a living entity, before his death he is, by superior judgement it is thought that "Where this living entity, where this particular man or dog or anything... He is dying. Where it will be placed?" So when that place is sanctioned, the place is selected, that "This particular man should go in such and such body," then he is at once transferred to the semina.

Varaha-dvadasi, Lord Varaha's Appearance Day Lecture Dasavatara-stotra Purport -- Los Angeles, February 18, 1970:

He was angry with Yamunā River, and He tried to dry up the Yamunā River. That description is given here. And Yamunā, out of His fear, she agreed to the proposal of Balarāma. And the next incarnation is Lord Buddha. Lord Buddha, He decried the Vedic principles. Therefore He is calculated as atheist. Anyone who does not agree with the Vedic principles, he is considered as atheist. Just like one who does not believe in the Bible, they are called heathens, similarly, those who do not accept the Vedic principles, they are called atheists. So Lord Buddha although incarnation of Kṛṣṇa, He said that "I do not believe in Vedas." What was the reason? The reason was to save the poor animals. At that time people were sacrificing the poor animals under the plea of Vedic sacrifice.

Arrival Addresses and Talks

Arrival Talk in Room -- Mayapur, March 23, 1975:

Unfortunate. Illogical argument means unfortunate. Rascals. Therefore we say plainly, "You are all rascals." That's all. You have no discrimination. Anyone who does not believe as He is, he's a rascal. That's all. He may be happy or sorry. You don't mind. You don't make compromise. At least I do not do. If you have not full faith in Kṛṣṇa, then you are a rascal, that's all, whatever you may be. The Dr. Patel does not like this, but he does not protest to me. As others say, he protests by that. It is a fact. We have no difficulty to understand Kṛṣṇa and thus make our life successful. But we unnecessarily bring arguments, impediments to understand Kṛṣṇa. Therefore we are unfortunate, envious of Kṛṣṇa.

Arrival Lecture -- Philadelphia, July 11, 1975:

Prabhupāda: Skepticism, rascalism. (laughter) We are not going to deal with rascalism. We are going to deal with sense. Skepticism means they do not believe in anything. Everything is false. They are so disappointed, they think everything is false. We are not going to deal with such men. What is the use? Is not that skepticism? What is that skepticism?

Devotee: Disappointment.

Initiation Lectures

Initiation of Satyabhama Dasi and Gayatri Initiation of Devotees Going to London -- Montreal, July 26, 1968:

And summarily I can explain that satāṁ nindā. A Kṛṣṇa conscious person will never blaspheme any person, any religious leader, who is trying to spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness or God consciousness. In any country, in any religion, anyone who has tried to spread God consciousness to the people, they are all respectable persons. Those who are atheist, those who do not believe in God or those who personally declare that "I am God," we have nothing to do with such persons. But anyone in any country who accepts God as the Supreme, Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme, kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28), such persons are respectable persons and we should offer our always respect to them. We have... Unnecessarily we do not want to criticize anyone. But when there is necessity, because we are preacher, it may be sometimes you'll be faced with opposite elements, so we have to criticize in that respect.

Talk, Initiation Lecture, and Ten Offenses Lecture -- Los Angeles, December 1, 1968:

Yes. Those who do not believe in God, atheists, what is the use of...? But not to bother him, but give him the chance of hearing. That will make him competent to come forward. Therefore we are distributing this holy name. Not that everyone will be immediately turned to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, but we are giving chance. If they hear... You have got practical experience. Somebody's hearing, he's reforming. So we should give chance. But if one is staunch atheist, we should not talk very much with him about Kṛṣṇa. He may say something against, offensive. Yes. Then?

Brahmana Initiation Lecture -- New Vrindaban, May 25, 1969:

We should firmly believe what Kṛṣṇa says, not interpretation. This is called āstikyam. And nāstikyam means not firm belief, atheism. Just like Lord Buddha. Lord Buddha simply said that "I don't believe in the Vedas." Therefore he is immediately calculated as atheist, nāstikyam. Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, veda nā māniyā bauddha haila nāstika: "The followers of Buddha, they did not accept Vedic, I mean to say, direction; therefore they are nāstika." What is that Vedic direction? In the Dāsavatāra-stotra by Jayadeva Gosvāmī, he says, nindasi yajña-vidher ahaha śruti-jātam. In the śruti, in the Vedas, there is prescription of sacrifice, and in some of the sacrifice there is recommendation for sacrifice of some animals, goats. So that is... But Lord Buddha says, "No. I want to introduce nonviolence, no animal killing.

General Lectures

Lecture to Technology Students (M.I.T.) -- Boston, May 5, 1968:

Say, for fifty years or hundred years, at most. Then... But we do not know what is going to happen in my next life because we do not believe in the next life. But actually there is next life. So if you don't take care of my next life and if we irresponsibly waste our valuable human form of life like ordinary animals... The ordinary animals, they demand something for eating, they want to sleep, they want to defend, and they want to mate. So similarly, if human being is also busy with the four principles of bodily demands, namely eating, sleeping, mating and defending, then, according to Vedic literature, it is said that he is not human being. Dharmeṇa hīna paśubhiḥ samānāḥ. If the human being does not understand his real spiritual identity and simply busy with the four demands of bodily necessities, then paśubhiḥ samānāḥ—he's as equal as with lower animals, cats and dogs.

Lecture at Engagement -- Boston, May 8, 1968:

They are called persons with pious activities on the background. Without pious activities on the background, nobody is interested in the science of God. And those who are unfortunate or impelled by impious activities, they do not believe in God. They never care for God. And this class of men are always known as atheist class of men.

So, so far atheist class of men, it is very difficult for them to understand. But atheist or theist, it doesn't matter. Everyone is conscious. That is a fact. It doesn't matter whether you believe in God or do not believe in God, but you are conscious. As soon as I pinch in any part of your body, you at once protest. You feel that "Somebody is pinching me. I am feeling pain." This consciousness is there even in the animal or in man and everyone. Now what is this consciousness?

Lecture at Engagement -- Boston, May 8, 1968:

If you purify your consciousness, as by impure consciousness we are transmigrating from... Now this time, you may be very happy that you have got a very nice body, American body, or you are enjoying life. But do you know what is the next life? That you do not know. Either you do not believe in the next life or you do not know. But you should know that life is continuity. This platform is a flash only. Why there are so many species of life if it is not a flash? You are changing. So these questions are there.

So this movement, Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, is the movement for purifying consciousness. If you take to this movement, it is very simple. Just like our president, Brahmānanda, explained to you, that it is simply sixteen words: Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare.

Lecture -- Seattle, October 9, 1968:

Now in our childhood... Not childhood. We were at that time college student, Scottish Churches College in Calcutta. So that is Christian college, Scottish Churches. So we had to read Bible also. There was a Bible class from 1:00 to 1:30. So I remember our professor, he was a great philosopher also, Dr. W.S. Urquhart. He was very nice man, very friendly. So he was explaining from Bible. I do not know... The Christians, they do not believe in karma. Is it a fact? They do not believe in karma?

Lecture -- Los Angeles, November 13, 1968:

Again the sutā, the son, son of Nanda, and Rādhārāṇī, the daughter of Vṛṣabhānu, They are standing. Kṛṣṇa... Vaiṣṇava, they do not worship Kṛṣṇa alone without Rādhārāṇī. They do not worship Rāma without Sītā. They do not worship Nārāyaṇa without Lakṣmī, because the Lord and the energy must be there. We don't say..., we don't believe that God is without any energy. No. "Hare Kṛṣṇa." First the energy is addressed, Harā, Hare, then Kṛṣṇa. So here also, Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura prays, "My dear Lord Kṛṣṇa, You are now present before me with Your internal potency, Your pleasure potency, Rādhārāṇī. So I am surrendering unto You." Hā hā prabhu nanda-sutā. "Don't neglect me because I am so sinful, my past life is so black. Don't neglect me. Please accept me. Don't kick me away. I surrender unto You." This is the purport of this song.

Lecture Excerpt -- Los Angeles, February 10, 1969:

Others, those whose background is not piety, simply mischief, they cannot go. Therefore even one goes to God for praying something material, they're better than those who do not go to God. Just like in Communist country, they do not believe in God: "Why we shall go to God? We shall create things. We shall create bread." In the Communist country the propaganda was that these Communists would go to villages, ask the villagers to come to church and pray to God, "Give us our daily bread," and they would ask, "Whether you have got bread?" Of course, in the church where is the bread? They will say, "No, we haven't got bread." "All right, you ask us." And they ask the Communist leader, "Give us our daily bread," and they give sumptuously. "Why should you go to church?" They preached godlessness in this way, that "You are not getting bread from the church. You are getting bread from us. Why not worship Lenin and his followers?

Lecture -- Hawaii, March 23, 1969:

This knowledge is in full because Kṛṣṇa consciousness teaches all these things, what is God, what you are, and then what is this nature, beyond the nature, what other things are there. Those who are not Kṛṣṇa conscious, they do not know. They are frogs of the well, simply calculating, "This three feet, water, space, is my habitation." And when he's given information of the Atlantic Ocean, he does not believe. "Oh, there is Atlantic Ocean? What is that nonsense?" "Oh, it is very, very big," somebody says. He's simply calculating his well water. "Oh, it may be four foot?" "No, very big." "All right, ten feet? How...?" He's calculating, this. These materialistic scientists, they are simply speculating like the frog in the well. They do not know; neither they have means. But a Kṛṣṇa conscious person knows. He gets information from Kṛṣṇa.

Lecture -- Boston, April 25, 1969:

That is natural. Therefore, for a neophyte, simply by consulting scriptures, he will not be able to reach to the absolute goal. Because he will find, "Oh..." Sometimes they become skeptic. Just like in the modern age, the youngsters, you all boys and girls, they are becoming skeptic. They don't believe in any scripture now because they find some differences. Therefore Bhāgavata said that tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā: "Simply by argument you cannot establish what is Absolute Truth, and if you consult different scriptures, you will find difference of opinion, or difference of procedures, rituals." So śrutayo vibhinnā nāsāv munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam. And if we consult great thinkers or philosophers, they have got their different opinions. Some philosopher says, "I think this is right. I think this is right." So whom you will accept? They are also of different opinion. Tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ śrutayo vibhinnā nāsāv munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam.

Conway Hall Lecture -- London, September 15, 1969:

Mahātmā means great soul. Mahātmā is not created. Mahātmā means... That is also explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, who is mahātmā. Kṛṣṇa says, bahūnāṁ janmanām ante: (BG 7.19): "After many, many births." Of course, at the present moment they do not believe whether there is birth after birth. But it is not the question of whether you believe or not believe. The truth is truth. So there is birth after death. Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). You do not die after finishing this body. You accept another body. That you can experience daily. In your childhood... You can remember that you had a body just like this child. Now you are grown up. Where is that body? That body is gone. Now you have got a new body. But you know that "I had a childhood body like this. I was attending such and such meeting," but that body is now no longer existing.

Lecture 'Nobody Wants to Die' -- Boston, May 7, 1968:

That he knows. You have to accept that he knows that... Your mother knows. You have to accept it. Otherwise, there is no question of believing your mother. Unless you believe that your mother knows who is your father, then there is no question of asking her who is your father. If you don't believe your mother, then you have no necessity of questioning who is your father. First of all, you have to believe that your mother is the only authority to let you know who is your father. If you are not convinced in that point, then don't ask. Then always remain in oblivion who is your father.

Lecture 'Nobody Wants to Die' -- Boston, May 7, 1968:

Prabhupāda: But, if you don't believe your mother, then there is no other way to know your father.

Young woman: I understand that.

Prabhupāda: That's all. Similarly, here are scriptures who are telling, speaking about God. If you have no faith in scripture, there is no other process to know God.

Young woman: I see. But I understand why I should have faith in my mother for biological reasons, and I don't see why I should have faith in...

Lecture at Harvard University -- Boston, December 24, 1969:

Prabhupāda: Not believe. Is practical.

Student (2): And I think the reason I don't believe that is because history has told me differently. History has told me that people who have managed to achieve freedom for themselves have not achieved it by doing something like chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. And I refer you to...

Prabhupāda: You can show in the history there was chanting of Hare Kṛṣṇa? Is there any history?

Lecture (Day after Lord Rama's Appearance Day) -- Los Angeles, April 16, 1970:

So we have to prepare for eternal life, blissful life, and life full of knowledge. If we do not do that, then our this human form of life is missing, is misused. That is the philosophy not only of Lord Buddha, but Lord Caitanya, Śaṅkarācārya, or Lord Jesus Christ. Anyone you take, nobody will recommend that you make your plan and live in this material world very happily. Nobody has recommended. Everyone has said that this life is the preparation stage of your next best life. If you do not believe in that, if you think that this life you can make this world happy by arrangement, by scientific advancement, that is not possible. That is not possible.

Pandal Lecture -- Bombay, April 10, 1971:

"There is no more superior factor than Me." Then how we can think of Kṛṣṇa as ordinary human being? What is your answer? How do you form such idea? These are the challenges by Kṛṣṇa. And I cannot understand how Kṛṣṇa is accepted as ordinary person. Then either you don't believe in Bhagavad-gītā... That is a different thing. But don't try to malinterpret, wrongly interpret Bhagavad-gītā in your own way. That will not help you. You can propound your own philosophy as you like. Everyone has got the right. Nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam: "One cannot be a philosopher, muni, thoughtful man, unless he has got a different philosophy." That's a fact. Everyone wants to propound a type of philosophical method and tries to become famous. That is the natural way. But you make your philosophical presentation in different way. You have got right. But don't try to interpret in Bhagavad-gītā in your own way. That cannot be accepted.

Lecture at Wayside Chapel -- Sydney, May 13, 1971:

So why don't you accept this formula? You have nothing to lose, and there is no loss, but the gain is very great. So our request is that here is a nice place. You assemble here. You chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra and see the result. That is our request. And if you want to know more, if you don't believe that Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra is powerful, if you want to know about this movement through science, philosophy, logic, we have got ample books. We have got already published at least twelve books, four hundred pages. You try to understand. If you want to understand this movement through science and philosophy, we are ready. But if you take it as a simple method, without any expenditure, without any loss, chant Hare Kṛṣṇa. Two sides. Any side you can accept. You will be benefited. That is our request. I don't wish to take much of your time, but our method is very simple, and your life will be sublime. There is no loss. The gain is very great. So if you like, you can take it.

Speech at Olympia Theater -- Paris, June 26, 1971, (with translator):

We don't charge anything for giving you this name. It is open to everyone. You can take it and make an experiment. By chanting, you will feel how much you are advancing in spiritual knowledge. This is the shortcut way of understanding God realization. But if you don't believe in the simple method, if you want to understand this philosophy through science and philosophy, we have got books, about one dozen books, four hundred pages each, to explain this science of chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra. We have got our magazine, Back to Godhead, and our books, Kṛṣṇa book, Nectar of Devotion, Bhagavad-gītā, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. So many books we have got. So those who are very much serious... And everyone should be serious because if we miss this opportunity, then after death we do not know what is going to happen. I may have a human form of body or we may have a body of the animals or of a tree.

Lecture -- Delhi, December 13, 1971:

Therefore you must approach a spiritual master in order to understand that science. Samit-pāniḥ śrotriyaṁ brahma-niṣṭham (MU 1.2.12). This is the injunction. These things, how you can calculate by argument? Therefore they are called nāstika. Atheist means one who does not believe in the verdict of the Vedas. That is called atheist, atheist. Just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, veda nā māniyā bauddha haya ta' nāstika. Bauddha, the Buddhists... Buddhists, although they accept Lord Buddha as incarnation, but at the same time we accept them as nāstika, atheist. How Kṛṣṇa becomes atheist? But that is Kṛṣṇa's concern, but we have to study what He is doing. One side He is acting as atheist, that is His policy. That is also explained in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, sammohāya sura-dviṣām (SB 1.3.24), just to teach other atheists, he has become atheist.

Lecture at Christian Monastery -- Melbourne, April 6, 1972:

That is mentioned in the Bhagavad-gītā.

Now, it is a question of believe or not believe. That is a different thing. We believe. We take it. Because it is said by Kṛṣṇa, we take it, accept it. And we apply our reason also, not blindly take it, that if I see that in every planet, in our this planet there is a president... Formerly, in this planet also, there was only one king, and he was ruling over all the planets. Gradually, people have divided their interests and become different nations. From Vedic history we can see... I understand... Somebody was telling me that in Australia also there is some Śiva temple here. Who was telling me that? He was telling me. So the archaeological investigation has found so many relics, and in the Vedic literature we also find the mention of all the island, sapta-dvīpa, seven islands.

Lecture at Art Gallery -- Auckland, April 16, 1972:

So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is a great science of understanding what is God. Simply with vague idea, "There is God," that is not sufficient. That is good, simply to understand "There is God." Generally, they do not believe that there is God. But if somebody says, "Yes, there is God, but I have no business with Him," no, you should know God, actually what is His name, what does He do, where is His residence, what is His business. You should know this. And these things are possible to understand in this human form of life. We go to the human society to speak of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. We do not go to the society of animals, because they have no capacity to understand. Their body does not permit to understand what is God. But the human society... It doesn't matter whether he is born in India or Czechoslovakia or Russia. I have been in Russia also. It is not that, that they are godless.

Lecture at Auckland University -- Auckland, April 17, 1972:

Similarly, this body is moving because the soul within it is moving. As soon as the soul is out of this body, this body will not move. So this science is very important science. That is the basic principle of understanding. It is not the question of thinking that one may believe in the existence of soul or one may not believe. But fact is fact. "Two plus two equal to four"—that is science. If somebody does not believe, if somebody says, "Two plus two equal to five" or "three," that is not scientist. Similarly, we may not believe in the existence of soul, but that is a fact. But if we want to study the subject matter very seriously and scientifically, then it will be possible to understand. But the simple method recommended in the Vedic literatures, that if you chant this Hare Kṛṣṇa, mantra then gradually your intelligence or consciousness will be cleansed and you will be able to understand that you are not this body, that you are spirit soul... Ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanaṁ bhava-mahā-dāvāgni-nirvāpaṇam (CC Antya 20.12).

Lecture -- Tokyo, April 20, 1972:

For want of, lack of Kṛṣṇa consciousness they do not know what is the aim of life, what is to be achieved. Simply they are working hard like hogs and dogs for sense gratification. They have no other ambition. They do not believe in the next life although it is a fact there is next life. And they do not know. They are not educated there is next life. How much irresponsibly we are working. Nature's law is very stringent. If you work irresponsibly, then you can, you have to accept... Sadā tad-bhāva-bhāvitaḥ (BG 8.6). If you become attached to this material enjoyment, then you will have to accept a body, and there are 8,400,000 different forms of body. You have to accept. But this education is not there, whole world. So simply these Kṛṣṇa conscious people, they are trying to educate people on this point. So it is sometimes very distressing, but never mind. Nothing is be distressed.

Hare Krishna Festival Address -- San Diego, July 1, 1972, At Balboa Park Bowl:

Guest (1): ... I don't believe that that's the truth there. I don't believe that is the truth. Get out of here!

Guest (2): Talk louder!

Prabhupāda: What does he say? (chuckles) (devotees laugh nervously)

Guest (1): I'm talking about sex...

Revatīnandana: Says he's talking about death.

Girl: Why don't you get up here and say it?

Viśvareta: Prabhupāda, he says he wants to have sex more than once a month.

Prabhupāda: Hm?

Viśvareta: The man says he wants to have sex life more than once a month.

Prabhupāda: No... He's creating disturbance. (pause) So as this man is talking about sex, so this world's, material world, is enchanted by sex. That is material world.

Lecture -- London, July 12, 1972:

As we have advertised, bhāgavata-dharma. This is part of bhāgavata-dharma. Bhāgavata-dharma was explained by Prahlāda Mahārāja, a great devotee of Lord Nṛsiṁha-deva, Nārāyaṇa, some millions of years ago. His father was Hiraṇyakaśipu, atheist. He did not believe in God. But by the grace of Nārada Muni, his son, from the very womb of his mother, he was initiated in this Kṛṣṇa consciousness. And after his birth he became a great devotee. And when he was only five years old he was preaching this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement amongst his class fellows. He was little boy, king's son. He had no opportunity to go out of the palace. Still, he took the opportunity of speaking something about this bhāgavata-dharma amongst his class fellows. So he was canvassing his class fellows, "Chant Hare Kṛṣṇa."

Lecture at Indo-American Society 'East and West' -- Calcutta, January 31, 1973:

There is no guarantee. There is no scientific guarantee that "You are not going to be tree, you are again going to become American." No, there is no guarantee. But there is guarantee. Because the so-called scientists cannot make solution of this problem, they do not believe in next life. That is their defect of knowledge, lack of knowledge. They cannot make any solution. He wants to live permanently, but he cannot live by the laws of nature. Why does he not make a solution of this? But we can give the solution. Everyone does not want to become old. But he becomes forced to become old. Why he does not make any solution? But that solution we can give. This is Eastern culture.

Arrival -- Dallas, May 19, 1973:

That system of religion is first class wherein the followers are given lessons how to love God. Unfortunately, at the present moment there is no question of how to teach them for loving God. They deny the existence of God. This is the present situation. People have become so rascal that they do not believe in the existence of God. Or somebody believes... Not believes. That is affirmed. Some of them say, "God is dead. Now we have to take to social work, political work. Let the subject matter of God be set aside." Especially in India. In India, the country where still God consciousness is so strong, the government wants that they should forget about this God business. So this is Kali-yuga. Kali-yuga means simply for fight on trifling things and forget God.

Lecture -- London, August 23, 1973:

You cannot say, "No, I'll not obey the orders of the state." That is not possible. If you voluntarily do not abide by the orders of the state, then you will be forced to abide by the state in the prison house. Similarly, those who have declared independence, so-called independence—nobody can be independent—that "I do not believe in God, I do not want any type of religion or serving God," such persons will be under the guidance or under the influence or power of the material nature, māyā. Māyā-mohita. Tribhir guṇa-māyāir bhāvair. We are now illusioned by the influence of māyā, material energy, in three ways: by goodness, by passion, and by ignorance. But instead of serving God, we are now serving māyā. And so long we shall be going on serving māyā, or serving in the prison house, we cannot be happy.

Lecture -- London, August 23, 1973:

We are human being. There are other beings. They are called asuras. They are very powerful, asuras, but godless. Just like nowadays some portion of the world is occupied by the asuras. They are materially very powerful, but they are asuras because they do not believe in God. Take, for example, Russia. Of course, the mass of people, they are not like that. A fragmental portion of Russian people, they are godless. So you cannot be godless. If you become godless, if you become without religion, if you become without any intentions to abide by the orders of God, then you will be punished. This is nature's law. Therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā we learn that daivī hy eṣā guṇamayī mama māyā duratyayā (BG 7.14). Every one of us is serving under the order of māyā, illusory energy, material energy, and we are becoming tired, sometimes very much fatigued, every one of us.

Lecture at World Health Organization -- Geneva, June 6, 1974:

Kilos. But they are also eating. There is no scarcity of food for them. So it is a fact that eko yo bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān. But because we don't believe in God, we manufacture our own ideas; therefore we create simply chaotic condition.

So according to Bhagavad-gītā, as we are preaching, we are also opening centers, self-help center. In New Vrindaban, West Virginia, we have already opened a very big community center. We are going to open in California also, and we have already opened in India also, that we occupy a certain tract of land, we produce our own food, we keep our cows and take their milk, and there is no scarcity. Everything, there are. We don't require to go outside the land for our livelihood. So we are advising, we are making centers like that, that "Be self-sufficient. Save time for spiritual culture."

Sunday Feast Lecture -- Atlanta, March 2, 1975:

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. Yes?

Life Member House Lecture -- Hyderabad, April 14, 1975:

Asura means against God always. Rāvaṇa was asura. Hiraṇyakaśipu was asura. They are very learned scholar, son of a brāhmaṇa and very powerful. The only fault was they did not believe in God; therefore they are called asuras. So anyone who does not believe in God, he's asura. This is the verdict of the śāstra. And this asuric civilization is going on all over the world. So we are making little effort to make the asuras devotees. That's all. This is our business.

So we are very much thankful to Mr. Kulanidhi(?). He has given us a place, very important place, and you are constructing temple. He's always eager to help us. Therefore he's a bhakta. We are very much thankful to him. He's a bhakta. So at any moment Mr. Kulanidhi will call us. We are ready to come here, because he's a bhakta. Mad-bhakta pūjyā adhikaḥ. Kṛṣṇa likes if you honor the bhakta.

Tenth Anniversary Address -- Washington, D.C., July 6, 1976:

The children are there, the mother is there, the next inquiry should be, "Where is the father?" That is natural. Without father, the mother is sitting with the child, nobody can say the child has no father. If somebody says that "I do not see the father. How I can believe?" that is foolishness. You believe or not believe, you see or not see, there must be father. This is the conclusion. This is theory, that this world is going on, everything is coming out of the mother earth, then there must be father. And that father is present, ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā: (BG 14.4) "I am the father."

So it is our misfortune that we do not recognize the father. So it may be, "How can I recognize my father?" Ask you mother. Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ (BG 15.15). All Vedic literature will say, "Here is father." Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28).

Lecture Excerpt -- London, July 25, 1976:

Those who are free, liberated, so they go beyond this universe. Paras tasmāt tu bhāvo 'nyo 'vyakto 'vyaktāt sanātanaḥ (BG 8.20), yad gatvā na nivartante tad dhāma paramaṁ mama (BG 15.6). So people have no information, no education, no culture. They are put into the darkness and working so hard without knowing what is going to happen next. A civilization of complete darkness, very dangerous. Next life they do not believe, because if they believe, then they are horrible. "Better not to believe. Close your eyes. Don't see what is the danger in front." It is like that.

So those who by fortune have come in contact of this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, so they are supposed to be intelligent. So try to understand the whole situation, the whole universal position, very minutely, that this material world is very, very, very dangerous for you. You may believe or not believe.

Sunday Feast Lecture -- London, July 25, 1976:

This life I maybe born in big nation, America, or English nation or some other nation or family, but if I create a mentality of cats and dogs or if I do not take advantage of this human form of life—I remain dull as the trees or the animals—then next life we have to accept a similar body. This is the law of nature. You can say or I can say that "I do not believe in the next life," but that is not the fact. The fact is... Just like if a child says, "I do not believe the next stage or next life, to become a boy," or if a boy says that "I don't believe next stage, to become a young man," so a young man says, "I do not believe that I shall become an old man," that is concoction. The nature's law will drag him, one after another. Similarly, the old man's body, when it is finished, you'll have to accept another body according to your mentality at the time of death. This is the law of nature.

Sunday Feast Lecture -- London, July 25, 1976:

Karmaṇā daiva-netreṇa jantor deha upapatti (SB 3.31.1). According to karma, the nature... Just like if you infect some disease without any knowledge, so that disease, infection, will develop. If you have infected the small pox germ, then it will develop. You may believe or not believe or you may know or not know. It doesn't matter. Nature's way is like that. Similarly, we are contaminating within this material world different infection of the modes of material nature—sattva-guṇa, rajo-guṇa, tamo-guṇa. So that is also described in the Bhagavad-gītā: kāraṇaṁ guṇa-saṅgaḥ asya sad-asad yoni janmasu. One is getting higher type of birth, one is getting lower type of birth, why? Kāraṇaṁ guṇa saṅgo 'sya: (BG 13.22) the cause is different contamination of the material modes of nature.

Morning Lecture -- Allahabad, January 15, 1977:

"Everyone is God. I am God. You are God..." This is atheism. It is cheating atheism. One class of atheism is Śūnyavādī: "There is no God." That we can understand, that he is atheist. "There is no God." He publicly declares, "We don't believe in God." But the Māyāvādīs are dangerous because they say that there is God, but without any form—no head, no leg. If you make "no, no, no," then where is...? It becomes zero ultimately. Go on making "no, no"—"No head, no tail, no hand, no..." So what remains? So this is another trick for saying there is no God. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu has said that this class, who gives the negative definition of God—"Not this, not this, not this, not this"—the Māyāvādī, Māyā... They say, "Not this. This is māyā." So this Māyāvādī, they are greater atheist.

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

ePrabhupāda: I was speaking like that. If God desires, then the other monads have no independence. The same example as I told you: the stone is falling down in the water, and the monads of the water giving way. It is falling down, but if God desires, the water will not give way, it will float. If God is the ultimate monad, that is possible. Therefore there is no reason for disbelieving that when Rāmacandra threw so many stones on the water of the sea, it began to float. You cannot disbelieve. If Rāmacandra is God and He is the ultimate cause, He can check. Whatever He wills will come into effect.

Śyāmasundara: But the point of whether the monad of the rock causes the monads of the water to part.

Prabhupāda: These causes can be changed—by God's will.

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Prabhupāda: Yes. Everything. So taking the theory, the central monad and the other monad, the central monad is the cause of it. But he does not believe in the cause.

Śyāmasundara: No. He believes that God is the cause, the designer of everything.

Prabhupāda: Then why does he say there is no cause?

Śyāmasundara: He says that there is no cause and effect relationship between monads.

Prabhupāda: That is not clear. Once he says there is no cause. There is cause. There is no other cause than God. That is definite. The real cause is God.

Śyāmasundara: His idea is that when the bird landed, the fruit coincidentally fell. There is no cause between the bird and the fruit falling.

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Hayagrīva: That is he does not believe that the souls in animals transmigrate at death from one body to another.

Prabhupāda: Then what is his understanding of the soul?

Hayagrīva: He says there are no entirely separate souls without bodies.

Prabhupāda: That is rascal. That means he is imperfect. How he can say so when we practically see that the soul is changing from childhood to boyhood, boyhood to youthhood? How he can say like that? He is transmigrating. That is, every day we have experience. How he can deny that? Otherwise, if he, if the soul does not transmigrate, then how the child becomes a young man? The body is different. The, this is simple understanding, that he has changed the body. The body changes and the soul remains eternal.

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Hayagrīva: Leibnitz did not believe that the city of God, what he called the city of God, is divorced from the natural world. Rather, it is a moral world within the natural world. He writes, "The assembling of all spirits must compose the city of God. That is the most perfect state possible and of the most perfect of monarchs," meaning God. "This city of God, this truly universal monarchy, is a moral world within the natural world and the highest and most divine of the works of God."

Prabhupāda: Yes. We can construct such city immediately if the League of Nation—they are trying to be united—they come to their right sense, that this planet does not belong to any particular nation; it belongs to God. This simple fact, if they accept and cultivate on this point, then immediately the whole world will be the city of God. But they will not do this. They have gone to the United Nation to settle up all problems of the world, but they keep themselves in the dog's mentality: "I am this body." "I am American," "I am Indian."

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Prabhupāda: You cannot, but there is a process. You cannot know; that does not mean beyond the mind is relative time and perception. Just like a small insect, he takes birth in the evening, and from evening to morning, his birth, his marriage, his begetting children, everything is done, and in the morning he dies. There are many insects. They are called diwali pokali. At night they will throng together, in India. So for this insect, it is very difficult to understand that there is another animal which is called man, who has got this duration of his lifetime period in only twelve hours of his life. But the insect cannot go beyond that. Just like when we hear from Bhagavad-gītā that Brahmā lives such-and-such, we disbelieve sometimes. But everything is relative. With your relative body, your duration of life, your knowledge, your perception, everything is relative. So you are teeny human being. What is impossible for you is not impossible for others. He is talking from the relative platform.

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Prabhupāda: Relativity... He does not believe that there are other things. But as soon as one says relative, the opposite word is absolute; otherwise wherefrom we take this word relative?

Śyāmasundara: Well, his idea is that things only exist in relation with each other.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Then what is the supreme relative?

Śyāmasundara: He doesn't admit any supreme.

Prabhupāda: His knowledge is imperfect.

Śyāmasundara: He says just like a cherry, say a fruit...

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Prabhupāda: Yes. We say also. If it is sanctioned by Kṛṣṇa, then it is morality; otherwise the same morality may be immorality. Just like Yudhiṣṭhira was asked by Kṛṣṇa to speak lie—"Go to Droṇācārya and inform him that 'Your son is dead,' " because Droṇācārya had a benediction that unless he was shocked by the dead limbs of his son, he would not die. So he had to be shocked. But he would not believe anybody except King Yudhiṣṭhira because he was known as very honest and truthful. Therefore Kṛṣṇa employed this service that "You go." Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, he said, "Oh, how can I tell a lie?" So this is immorality. Kṛṣṇa is ordering, and he is saying that "How can I say lie?" This is immorality; he is disobeying the order of Kṛṣṇa. But Arjuna, he rejected all morality and immorality. He accepted Kṛṣṇa's order. That is morality. He was personally thinking that "If I kill my brothers, cousins, this, that," so many things, but because he was a pure devotee of Kṛṣṇa, when he understood "Kṛṣṇa wants it," he said, "Yes." This is morality. That is the fact.

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Prabhupāda: No, he should not think, because nobody will take his instruction. He does not believe others, does not take others' statement—why his statement should be accepted?

Hayagrīva: Well, well he believes at least in the material senses.

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.

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Prabhupāda: This, then the argument comes. If he does not believe in anyone's statement, why he is thinking his statement will be accepted? Then he is foolish. He is a child. Instead of becoming a philosopher, he is a child, talking all nonsense.

Hayagrīva: He maintains that man cannot know ultimate reality or possess knowledge of anything beyond a mere awareness of phenomenal sensory images.

Prabhupāda: That is sufficient. But if man cannot have any knowledge, so who is going to take your knowledge? Better you stop, don't talk. Is it not?

Hayagrīva: So much for Hume. (laughs) That's the end of Hume.

Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:

Prabhupāda: Transcendental knowledge means knowledge received from a source which is beyond the reach of my material senses. That is transcendental. Just like we are reading Bhagavad-gītā. So we have no knowledge that there is a spiritual world, but Kṛṣṇa says that there is another nature, a spiritual nature, beyond this material nature. So we understand through the source of transcendental knowledge. We cannot experience. That is explained, ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi. God, His name, His qualities, His pastimes—nothing can be understood by these material senses. But if you engage yourself in service, they become revealed. That will become confirmed: "Yes, there is Vaikuṇṭha, there is Vṛndāvana, where Kṛṣṇa's pastimes are going on, and I am perceiving myself." These things become revealed gradually, not abruptly you can understand. Therefore common men cannot understand that they say " 'Going back to home, back to Godhead?' What nonsense they are saying?" They cannot understand, because it is transcendental, beyond the reach of these gross senses. But it is revealed: sevonmukhe. If you become submissive, if you engage yourself in the service of the Lord, guru-Kṛṣṇa, and the spiritual master, then these things become revealed. Now one who has got the knowledge by revelation, nobody can mislead him. Just like we believe in the transcendental abode, cintāmaṇi, Goloka Vṛndāvana. If somebody pays out millions of dollars and asks you to forget all these things, we cannot do that. If you give him hundreds and thousands of dollars, that "You believe in this," no, he will not believe. That is transcendental knowledge. So transcendental knowledge is not speculation.

Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:

Prabhupāda: So why does he use that word kingdom if there is no king? This is unreasonable. Why does he say kingdom if...

Hayagrīva: Oh, he would say there is a king.

Prabhupāda: ...he does not believe in king? He does not believe in God. The individual souls are ends themselves.

Hayagrīva: Oh, he believes in God...

Prabhupāda: Oh.

Hayagrīva: ...but that he rejects the traditional proofs of God. He says that God is morally necessary in a moral universe. His philosophy is a philosophy of ethics and morality.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

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.

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Prabhupāda: God has made the law so perfect that one after—one cause affects something, and that affects another thing, another thing, one after another, so many things, ultimately. So we do not know so many things. We see the fruit, but how the fruit is growing, under which law, we simply explain nature. But it is not nature. There is a law. It is not only growing, the apples are having this nice color outside the skin, they have been painted; everything is perfectly being done by the laws, by the energy of Kṛṣṇa. Just like if you want to make a beautiful fruit, you paint it yellow or red, you take so much time. You apply your energy. The same energy is being applied there. Otherwise why, wherefrom you get the idea that a nice fruit can be painted like this? God is dictating that "You want to make a fruit, paint, you do like this, do like that." So similarly He is doing. But my doing takes so much time, because my energy is so blunt and limited. But His energy is so perfect that immediately (indistinct). The same example, just like Telex. There are so many methods, now this is latest. Immediately type here, immediately there. So before that, one could not believe that how is it I type here and five thousand miles away the type striking. So there is a law. It is not that it is magic.

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Prabhupāda: It is not belief. It is not the question of belief. It is the question of fact. Just like a man if he says, "I don't believe that I shall become old," then that is his ignorance or foolishness. He must become old man, or the body must become old. So if a man thinks that, when I shall become old, that is immortality of soul, that when I shall become old means when my body will become old. He will continue. It is common sense affair. It is a fact. Where is the question of belief or not belief?

Hayagrīva: Well, wouldn't knowledge...

Prabhupāda: This is knowledge.

Hayagrīva: ...of immortality...

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Prabhupāda: If somebody thinks that "In future, fifty years after, I shall become old man," this is knowledge. And if somebody thinks that "No, no, I shall never become old," that is ignorance. Although it is future—a man of knowledge knows that this will be future. So I shall continue to live in future, and I was a child in the past, and I am a middle aged man at this time, so in these three, past, present and future, I am existing. Where is the difficulty? If this simple truth one cannot understand, that what kind of human being he is? I remain in the past as child, the body is finished. Now I am a middle-aged man or young man, the body is different. And in future I shall become old man, that body will be different. So I, as a child, I, as a young man, as an old man, I am the same, all the bodies changing. This is the fact. Who can deny it? So where is the difficulty to understand it? And in the Bhagavad-gītā, it is said, Kṛṣṇa says to Arjuna, "Both you, Me, and all these soldiers, they existed in the past, and they are present existing, and in future they will continue to exist. This is immortality. He says when, I mean very openly, na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20), na jāyate mriyate vā kadācin. This living soul, he is never born. That body is changed, that is called birth. But the soul is immortal. So he never takes birth, he never dies. "No, I see that he has died." No, that is the annihilation of his body. Take it from me that by the annihilation of the body, the soul is not dead. This, this is authority and this is, we have to accept this authority. If you don't accept authority, if you have no reason to understand how the soul is immortal, then what we are, except like the animals? So one who does not believe or cannot understand, he is no better than animal.

Philosophy Discussion on William James:

Śyāmasundara: I think he would say that a belief in God would...

Prabhupāda: It is not belief. You believe or not believe, God is there.

Śyāmasundara: But he would say that...

Prabhupāda: And that word is another nonsense expression. You believe in God, you don't believe, what does it matter for God?

Śyāmasundara: But I think he would say that if everyone who believes in God gets some strength, some happiness, some courage, so that it would benefit everyone to believe in God...

Philosophy Discussion on William James:

Śyāmasundara: He is a believer, but the extent of his belief we'll discuss in a few moments. He says that the one who disbelieves faces the added risk of losing any chance of discovering the truth.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Śyāmasundara: So it is better to believe, even though one doesn't know for sure. It is better to believe because it gives one more chance of discovering the truth. He says that we have the right to believe in God, even in the absence of absolute proof. Even though there is no absolute proof, he says, of the existence of God, still we have the right to believe in God because this helps us to get closer to the truth. It gives us a better chance.

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.

Philosophy Discussion on John Dewey:

Hayagrīva: He differs from Comte and Marx in that he did not believe that humanity is the object of worship. In fact, he excludes everything as an object of worship. He writes, "Nature produces whatever gives reinforcement and direction, but also it occasions discord and confusion. 'The divine' is thus a term of human choice and aspiration."

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

Philosophy Discussion on John Dewey:

Prabhupāda: Record is there already, Mahābhārata, and those who have seen, they have confirmed it. Vyāsadeva has confirmed, Nārada has confirmed. Arjuna talked with Him personally, he has confirmed, and everything is there in the record, but you don't believe. Then how you can be convinced? Neither you have got perfect senses to see. Then what is the way to convince you? You will remain always in darkness. There is no way out. You can, within your dark well, you can go on imagining, Dr. Frog, but you will never have perfect knowledge.

Hayagrīva: Well that's the conclusion of John Dewey. Most of the other points have already been dealt with.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Prabhupāda: Then why not say not Christian? Modern Christianity... Christianity is Christianity. You cannot make it "modern" and "past." You cannot say "God modern" and "God past." That is not good philosophy. You say there is Christianity or no Christianity. So our system is that if we do not follow the tenets of some religious principle, then how you can claim you belong to that religion? That is applicable everywhere. Just like the so-called Hindus, they did not believe anything, and they are passing on as Hindus, as brāhmaṇas, as (indistinct). That is just passing.

Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:

Prabhupāda: That... They do not believe in the soul. They have no idea.

Śyāmasundara: They desire a state of non-willingness. The Buddhists desire a state of no will.

Prabhupāda: No, their philosophy is that willingness is a symptom at a certain condition of material combination. So you dismantle this material condition so there will be no more willing or no more suffering. That is their philosophy. But that is not fact, that's not fact.

Śyāmasundara: You don't think it's possible to stop willing?

Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:

Prabhupāda: That means nonsense. Anyone who does not believe in, he is a nonsense, rascaldom.

Śyāmasundara: He says that because the world is so mad, it could not possibly have any author. Because if there was a God, that God would have set the world in order.

Prabhupāda: Then why he is mad? We have got experience that there are madmen, but there is hospital also for treating the madmen. Similarly, the world may be mad, but there is hospitalization. That he does not know. From practical experience we see there are many madmen. At the same time there is a hospital, lunatic hospitals also, so treatment is there. So he does not see that. He has no knowledge where is the hospital, how he'll get and be treated. This is accepted, the world is mad, that's all right. But there is treatment also. Because in our experience practically we can show whenever there is disease, there is some treatment of it. But he does not know what is the treatment. He is speaking of sinful life, what he was saying, just like, but he does not accept who is the judge to give me resultant action of my sinful life. The world is mad, but he does not know where the treatment of madman is done. He does not know. Therefore his knowledge is imperfect, and still he is philosophizing.

Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:

Hayagrīva: Although it appears that Schopenhauer does not believe in God, although his stand appears atheistic, he writes, "If a man fears death as his annihilation, it is just as if he were to think that the sun cries out at evening, 'Woe is me, for I go down to eternal night.' Thus even already, suicide appears to us as a vain and therefore a foolish action. When we have carried out our investigation further, it will appear to us in a still less favorable light."

Prabhupāda: Investigation of father, that means God.

Hayagrīva: The what?

Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:

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.

Śyāmasundara: So what he is saying is that because you can't see the soul after it leaves the body, therefore we cannot say if the soul exists or does not exist.

Prabhupāda: But why does he believe of his eyes so much? Why does he not accept that his eyes are so imperfect that he cannot see the soul?

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!

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Prabhupāda: Yes, that is transcendental conviction, and it is very easy to understand that God is there. I do not know God, that is another thing. I will have to learn it. But God is there. There is no doubt about it. Any sane man can understand. You cannot say there is no God, because you are under control. So who is that controller? The supreme controller is God. This is sane man's conclusion. Now, I do not know who is God then, but there is God, that's a fact. So he is right when he says I believe or not believe, there is God. Now, it will depend on my personal endeavor to know God. Go on.

Hayagrīva: He writes, "In my darkness I could have wished for nothing better than a real live guru"—he uses the word guru—"someone possessing superior knowledge and ability who would have disentangled for me the involuntary creations of my imagination."

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: This kind of philosophy is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā as asuric philosophy, demonic philosophy, because the demons, they do not believe in any superior cause. They everything take as accidental. Just like a man and woman unite accidentally and a child is born. It is like that. There is no actually purpose. The Śaṅkara philosophy, atheistic Śaṅkara philosophy is also like that. Prakṛti and puruṣa meets. All of a sudden there is lust and they meet, and there is some product; otherwise there is no other cause. This sort of theory is called asuric.

Śyāmasundara: He says that these things have no reason for existing. There is no purpose.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: No. That is nonsense. Everything has its purpose. Without purpose, nothing is created. And there is a supreme cause. So they have no brain to go farther. That is their defect. So what they superficially see, they take it. They do not find out the farther cause. That is less intelligent. Many modern scientists also say that simply explain "It is nature, nature." But we do not believe in such theory. We understand that the background of nature is God. Nature is not independent. Nature is phenomena; but the noumena is God, Kṛṣṇa.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the phenomena and the noumena are the same. Phenomena are noumena. There is no separation.

Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:

Prabhupāda: Yes. So mathematical calculations, if it is perfect, then it is all right. Just like a child is born: father plus mother equal to child. So this is all right. But if one says that without father, through mother only, child, then how this is mathematical calculation? Whenever there is a child, it is to be understood that there is father and mother. If somebody says "No. Without father, simply mother gives birth to a child," then what kind of calculation is this? Similarly, these so-called philosophers, they simply think the nature is all-in-all, but that's not the fact. Nature is prakṛti, just like mother. There must be father. But they do not believe in father. So what kind of mathematical calculation? That is not mathematical calculation; that is concoction. Mathematical calculation—"Two plus two equal to four"—is a fact everywhere. Either you go to Europe or America or anywhere you go, that mathematical calculation—"Two plus two equal to four"—it can be understood.

Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:

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 Karl Marx:

Hayagrīva: He says, "Since only what is material is perceptible, knowable, nothing is known of the existence of God. I am sure only of my own existence." He feels that material life precedes consciousness and gives rise to consciousness. He says li...

Prabhupāda: But he does not believe in spirit soul, is that not? Hayagrīva: He says, "Life is not determined by consciousness but consciousness by life."

Prabhupāda: So what is that life? When the life is absent why this body, the used body, is dead stone only? Has he got any understanding of that, what is that life?

Hayagrīva: He felt that consciousness is basically social. He says, "Consciousness is from the very beginning a social product and remains so as long as man exists at all."

Prabhupāda: Why? Why he finishes? Why does he not exist? What is his answer to this?

Hayagrīva: What's that?

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Prabhupāda: Where is that faith, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām (BG 18.66)? They are taking advantage of Bhagavad-gītā and pleading their own philosophy. And where is that faith? They never taught that "You surrender unto Kṛṣṇa." Perhaps this is the first time. Of course, the Vaiṣṇava teaching us like that, but we, this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, we are teaching this, that "You catch up Kṛṣṇa." They have no faith and they are teaching Bhagavad-gītā. This is their only... They have no faith in Kṛṣṇa and they are preaching about Kṛṣṇa, they are studying Bhagavad-gītā. This nonsense is going on. They have no faith. They do not believe in the words of Kṛṣṇa. Faithless preachers, rascals, and these yogis, swamis, they are preaching Bhagavad-gītā. So this is a nice point, that faith is the beginning, but they have no faith. Then where is the beginning?

Philosophy Discussion on Socrates:

Hayagrīva: You once mentioned that Greeks, the ancient Greeks were chased out of India where... They were kṣatriyas chased out of India by Parāśara Muni, something like that. But Socrates was confronted with a society that on one hand included what were called Sophists—these were more or less mental speculators; they were paid money to philosophize or to speculate—and humanists, who said, "Man is the measure of all things." They..., no belief in God or any higher force; nothing beside man. And with the demigod worshipers, the Greek pantheon of gods were very much like the demigods described in the Vedic literatures, like Zeus was like Indra, and Athena was like Sarasvatī. They retained..., the Greeks retained their worship of the demigods, but there is no mention of a Supreme God under whom everyone else served, and Socrates, on..., neglected the worship of these demigods. He felt that there was no use in worshiping the demigods, and he stressed meditation on the self, on the highest good which resides in the heart, which must correspond to the Paramātmā.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: And so in teaching this he was teaching something radically different, and this is one of the reasons that he was condemned to death—for blaspheming the demigods, for blaspheming the gods. He felt that the worship of these gods did not lead to self-realization at all.

Philosophy Discussion on Thomas Aquinas:

Hayagrīva: This is a point where Catholic doctrine seems to differ. Aquinas did not believe in a soul per say, or pure soul per say, as divorced from a particular form. God did not simply create a soul. He created an angelic soul, or the soul of a demigod, a human soul, an animal soul, a plant soul, etc. He believed that simply to create a pure soul, a being, would be almost the same as creating God Himself.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: So again we see the Christian conception that God created the soul out of nothing.

Prabhupāda: No. The soul is created and... Actually not created. Soul is existing along with God, just like the sparks of fire is existing with the fire. But the difference between the two fire is that the sparks may be separated from the big fire, and when it is separated, is loses its illumination. Similarly, an individual soul is already there. The master is there and the servants are there, eternally. Just like the body is there, the parts of the body are also there.

Philosophy Discussion on Blaise Pascal:

Prabhupāda: This is, this is instruction of Bhagavad-gītā, that one who does not believe in God or disobeys the orders of God, a day will come when God will come as death, and his all power, all false prestige, all imagination, all plans will be all broken. Then after that, according to the transmigration of the soul, that person, because he did not obey the orders of God, he acted like animals, he gets the body of an animal. This is transmigration. And he suffers.

Hayagrīva: He also writes, "If we submit everything to reason, our religion will have no mysterious and supernatural element. If we offend the principles of reason, our religion will be absurd and ridiculous."

Philosophy Discussion on Benedict Spinoza:

Hayagrīva: It, it seems that he believes in the Paramātmā present within all beings but does not believe in the jīva along with Paramātmā. Is this a typical impersonalist position?

Prabhupāda: That means he does not know what is love. If God loves the living entity, then He must be well-wisher, friend of the living entity. And because God expands Himself unlimitedly, therefore He lives with the living entity, and living entities are unlimited. That is said in the Bhagavad-gītā: īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe arjuna tiṣṭhati (BG 18.61). In Upaniṣads also it is confirmed that two birds are sitting on tree; one is eating the fruit and the other is simply witness. So this witnessing bird is God; therefore Paramātmā and jīvātmā live together. And there are many other places-sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭo (BG 15.15). He reminds the living entity that "Unless Paramātmā is there, I forget everything of my past life." But because I wanted to enjoy something in my past life, God gives him the opportunity and reminds him, "Now you wanted this. Here is the opportunity. You do it." So Paramātmā is always with the jīva.

Philosophy Discussion on Benedict Spinoza:

Hayagrīva: He does not believe that God has a body because by body, he says, we understand a certain quantity possessing life, breadth and depth, limited by some fixed form, and that to attribute these to God, a being absolutely infinite, is the greatest absurdity.

Prabhupāda: No. God has body, but not this material body. The material body is limited. That does not mean... This is imperfect knowledge of the spiritual quality. God has got body. That is confirmed in Vedic literature, sac-cid-ānanda vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Vigraha means body, a form. But His form is eternal. He is all-aware, sat-cit, and He is always blissful. So this body is neither eternal nor blissful nor all-awareness. Therefore this body is different from God's body. But God has got a body which is different in quality. That is spiritual body.

Philosophy Discussion on Thomas Henry Huxley:

Prabhupāda: Nāstika means who does not believe in the Vedas.

Hayagrīva: Ol, this is different: gnostic.

Prabhupāda: Nāstika, it is gnostic.

Hayagrīva: This is gnost..., (sic:) N-O-S-T-I-C. Gnostic is one in the gnostic tradition, or in the church tra..., in the tradition of the Christian Church, and ag..., he used the word a-nost, agnostic. So this word was coined by... Coined.

Prabhupāda: What does, what is the meaning of ag?

Philosophy Discussion on Auguste Comte:

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

Philosophy Discussion on Auguste Comte:

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.

Hayagrīva: His philosophy is one of total materialism. He states, "A nation that has made no efforts to improve itself materially will take but little interest in mental or moral improvement."

Philosophy Discussion on B. F. Skinner and Henry David Thoreau:

Hayagrīva: His most famous book was Walden II, which was... Thoreau lived in Walden, Henry Thoreau. He lived alone. It was a solitary experiment of plain living and high thinking. He writes, "We practice the Thoreauvian principle of avoiding unnecessary possessions." Thoreau pointed out that the average Concord laborer worked ten or fifteen hours of his..., fifteen years of his life just to have a roof over his head. We could say ten weeks and be on the safe side. Food is plentiful and healthful but not expensive." So he goes on to say that "We strike for economic freedom, we do not believe in unnecessary consumption, we consume less than the average American." So it's an attempt to construct a society somewhat similar to New Vrindaban, with the exception of no spiritual basis as such.

Prabhupāda: That is primitive life, jungle life. Monkey civilization. Of course they claim to be descendant of monkey, that they will go on like that. But that is not human civilization, to keep the monkey in the jungle. We want life, very peaceful life without any unnecessary, what is called, necessities. That is all right. But the aim should be spiritual perfection. Therefore the first thing is what is the aim of life, that should be ascertained. Without aim, if you lounge on this ocean, where you are going? That is useless attempt.

Philosophy Discussion on B. F. Skinner and Henry David Thoreau:

Hayagrīva: That's right. His, his theory of, of death, he says, "When I die I shall cease to exist in every sense of the word. As a personal figure I shall be as unidentifiable as my ashes." No belief in immortality at all.

Prabhupāda: So why he is anxious to philosophize? If everyone is going to be finished, then why he is philosophizing? What did he..., why he is taking so much trouble? That is the difficulty—this class of men accepted as philosopher.

Hayagrīva: Oh, he became very popular through this book. I don't know how.

Prabhupāda: Oh, if you prescribe such nonsense book, everyone will like it. (laughs) (break)

Page Title:Do not believe (Lectures, Other)
Compiler:Mayapur, RupaManjari
Created:04 of Oct, 2011
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=122, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:122