Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Henri Bergson

Expressions researched:
"Bergson" |"Henri Bergson"

Lectures

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Śyāmasundara: So Henri Bergson, his philosophy is called vitalism. He believes that there is a life force which is separate from the laws of physics and chemistry. Darwin thought that the life force was made up of physics and chemistry, but he said no, the life force is separate from Darwin's mechanical laws, and that science will never be able to adequately explain what is life, the source of life.

Prabhupāda: That's nice. It is soul. He's learning of soul. But he is unable to capture the..., positively. But the soul is not controlled by the physical laws. That is described in the Bhagavad-gītā. What does He say?

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: Yes, yes. They never choose. They are very experienced. (laughter)

Śyāmasundara: Bergson says that this quality of the soul can only be perceived by man's intuition, not by his senses, but by his intuition.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is nice. Soul cannot be experienced by senses, but we can understand when there is a dead man, we can perceive that there was soul, which is now absent; therefore the body is dead. This is called perception.

Śyāmasundara: The dictionary defines intuition as "immediate apprehension by the mind without any reasoning."

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: No. Realization means when you come to the truth.

Atreya Ṛṣi: Bergson is using the word "insight" in the same way as "realization."

Prabhupāda: No. Insight is not realization. Insight may be the beginning of realization.

Śyāmasundara: Understanding something. He says that insight or understanding something by intuition is higher than understanding something by the intelligence.

Prabhupāda: (indistinct) (pause)

Devotee: (indistinct) the understanding, understand Bhagavad-gītā by our intelligence, (indistinct).

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Atreya Ṛṣi: Has Bergson recognized that we may fall also, or does he think that we are constantly moving up?

Śyāmasundara: He says it's unpredictable, that the life force...

Prabhupāda: He does not know. At the present moment I am fallen, so even if I go to my original position, there is chance of again falling down. Otherwise, how I became fallen? Just like a child once falls and again stands up, he has got chance of again falling down. You cannot say, "Now he has stood up, he'll not fall again." That is not possible.

Devotee: The different kinds of bodies, they're just different phases of the illusion, because the real, spiritual body is always the same, it's not changing.

Prabhupāda: Yes. This is called sanātana, eternal.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Devotee: Did you say once that sometimes Kṛṣṇa will let you work off some of your karma in a dream (indistinct)?

Prabhupāda: So whatever it may be, that is all temporary.

Devotee: Just like Bergson, his idea of the (indistinct) of immortality, does that mean (indistinct), scientific, technological revolution.

Śyāmasundara: Yes, I think so. His idea is that evolution, as it passes through different bodies, the life force, and that eventually on this planet, man will become immortal.

Prabhupāda: That is another nonsense.

Śyāmasundara: That life forms are improving more and more and and more, until some day they'll improve to be perfect.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Atreya Ṛṣi: Prabhupāda, I have another question about... There are certain scientists, who through speculative knowledge, they have acquired some little bit of knowledge through speculation. My question is, Prabhupāda, that yes, maybe through speculation we can get knowledge, some knowledge, but isn't it, as Kṛṣṇa says that He is the source of all knowledge and there is no way to get to any knowledge except through His representative, that that, for example, if Bergson comes to the knowledge, even though he did not accept a spiritual master or a prophet, he acquired it because that knowledge was made available to him through some other way. In other words...

Prabhupāda: How he takes the knowledge, if it comes..., does not come to the final conclusion? That kind of knowledge anyone can get. It does not need a philosophy. To some extent.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: He did not want to be (indistinct). So why does he not stop his disciples to speak like that?

Śyāmasundara: He enjoys it. He enjoys being flattered. His followers are a bunch of shaggy hippies, so who respects their judgment? (break) So Bergson wants to search out what is the pattern of evolution, how it will go in the future, and he says that because men have progressed from the (indistinct).

Prabhupāda: (indistinct)

Śyāmasundara: Since you know beforehand everything before (indistinct).

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: This is Henri Bergson, additional notations. (break) Śrīla Prabhupāda? If you could move. I don't think it would be good to have something between me and the microphone, because it might... Nothing between me and the microphone.

Hari-śauri: Well, can we do this?

Hayagrīva: Close? Oh, all right. Bergson maintained that God's reality can only be intuited by mystical experience. The creative effort is of God, if it is not God Himself. Knowledge of God leads to activity not passivity.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Knowledge of God is activity. Just like bhakti, we are twenty-four hours active, not that we are meditating on. So it is service. God says that anyone who preaches this message of Bhagavad-gītā, that is activity. That is Caitanya Mahāprabhu's order, that you, all of you, become guru. To become guru means activity, to train the disciples. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is full of activity for giving, rendering service to God, Kṛṣṇa. It is activity.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: Bergson saw the greatest obstacle to this creative evolution to be the struggle with materialism, and he felt that politics and economic reforms cannot help matters.

Prabhupāda: No. These are different subject matter. It... Politics or economic development can help, provided it is guided properly. Otherwise, if the politics, economic development is aimed at understanding God and our relationship with God, then politics is all right. Otherwise it does not help at all. But this, so far Vedic civilization is concerned, the society is divided into eight division, varṇa and āśrama. So the sannyāsī, the brāhmaṇa, they are meant for educating the others to develop dormant God consciousness. And the kṣatriyas, they are to support these teachings of God consciousness because that is the objective of human life. But unfortunately, they have forgotten everything. They think simply taking care of the body and live comfortably and enjoy sense gratification. That is animal civilization; that is not human civilization.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: Bergson felt... He was... Bergson was optimistic in that he felt that eventually the mystics, through love, will help mankind back to Godhead.

Prabhupāda: He has used that word "back to Godhead"?

Hayagrīva: Well, no, but "back to God."

Prabhupāda: Oh.

Hayagrīva: I put "head" there.

Prabhupāda: Yes, that is the real purpose of human life. Nature gives him the opportunity in the evolutionary process to get the human form of body. Now, here is a chance. He can read books, he can read Vedas, he can take instruction from the spiritual master. These opportunities are there. So that should be encouraged. That is human civilization. Simply to keep him in darkness, and that he is body and bodily necessities of life is the only business, it is a very suicidal civilization. That is not civilization. It is animal status of life.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: Within the world Bergson sees nothing but constant, unceasing change. He even sees ego change. He says, "If our existence were composed of separate states with an impassive ego to unite them, for us there would be no duration, for an ego which does not change does not endure, and a psychic state which remains the same so long as it is not replaced by the following state does not endure either." So he sees the psychic state of the individual in the ego and all that the ego contains as cognitively changing.

Prabhupāda: This is false ego, that "I am this body." So it has to be changed by education, that "You are not this body." Then when he understands that he is spirit soul, then the activities of the spirit soul begin, mad-bhaktiṁ labhate parām (BG 18.54). That is stated in Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā, that first of all he has to understand that he is not this material body; he is spirit soul. That is the beginning of Bhagavad-gītā. Dehino 'smin yathā dehe (BG 2.13). Within this body the soul is there, and that soul is Brahman, spiritual. People, if they do not understand this, so they are in the animal status of life. But if he understands that he is not this body, then his struggle for existence, to maintain the body, stops. Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā (BG 18.54).

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: Concerning remembering and forgetting, Bergson writes, "The cerebral mechanism is arranged just so as to drive back into the unconscious"—by unconscious they mean the subconscious—"almost the whole of his past, and to admit beyond the threshold only that which can cast light on the present situation or further the action now being prepared. In short, only that which can give useful work." So that, in other words, man utilizes only those memories or that knowledge which is immediately useful, and in this way man can function in the world. What is the role of Kṛṣṇa in this, as the arranger of this cerebral mechanism?

Prabhupāda: Cerebral mechanism, that is a machine. Just like this microphone is a machine. It helps speaking loudly. It has nothing..., machine has nothing to do with the voice, but it helps the voice louder so we can listen, so far the machine is concerned. Actually the voice is different. Therefore our Vedic śāstra is called voice, śruti. So if the śruti, the voice, vibration of this voice is proper, then the machine can help us to understand that. But if there is no voice, what is the use of the machine?

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: Yes.

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

Prabhupāda: We cannot recall. That is the defect in our life. Therefore the literatures are there to remind us. That opportunity is there in the human form of life to take advantage of this Vedic knowledge which is kept in the literature. Just like Bhagavad-gītā or any Vedic literature. Especially Bhagavad-gītā is the nutshell of all Vedic knowledge. So we have forgotten.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: From this, Bergson concludes that we are evolving, that we learn from an accumulation of experience, that we cannot, in a sense, repeat the same mistake twice. He writes, "From this survival of the past, it follows that consciousness cannot go through the same state twice. Circumstances may still be the same, but they will act no longer on the same person since they find him in a new moment of his history. Our personality, which is being built up each instant with its accumulated experience, changes without ceasing. Thus our personality shoots, grows and ripens without ceasing."

Prabhupāda: No. There is no cessation because the soul is eternal, so his consciousness is also eternal. But it is changing according to the circumstances, association, time, place, and the party changes. Therefore good association required. Sādhu-saṅga (CC Madhya 22.83). It is called sādhu-saṅga, association with the devotees. By good association the consciousness can be changed from material to spiritual. That is the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, how to change the consciousness from matter to Kṛṣṇa. So that requires guidance.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: Now if, as Bergson says, our personality, which by definition would include the mind, the intelligence, the ego, and the soul also, as a person...,

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: ...if it shoots, grows and ripens without ceasing, then why or how could the personality or the individual jīva soul return to a lower life-form? That is to say, how could a greater experience regress to a lesser experience?

Prabhupāda: The..., everything is calculated at the time of death. That is nature's process. That I was talking in the morning, that these boys, they are too much addicted to these water sports. Twenty-four hours they are indulging in this water sport. They are creating a mentality to become aquatic animal. So naturally, at the time of death, he will think of all these things and nature will give him a body. Yes. That you cannot check. After death you are completely under nature's control. You cannot dictate. That these rascal do not understand. Therefore they, "Finish this business. There is no life after death. That's all."

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: Therefore we are trying to keep everyone twenty-four hours engaged in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Hayagrīva: That, that would be what Bergson would call creative evolution.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: He saw, he saw change as maturation. He says, "We are seeking only the precise meaning that our consciousness gives to this word 'exist,' and we find that, for a conscious being, to exist is to change, to change is to mature, to mature is to go on creating oneself endlessly."

Prabhupāda: So, you want..., you are struggling, creating for the highest position, but Kṛṣṇa is giving you the idea. This is the highest position, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66), that "You give up your so-called positions, you simply surrender unto Him..., Me, and I shall give you all protection." This is the idea. But he denies, and that because he thinks Kṛṣṇa is ordinary human being, "Oh, how He can give me the topmost position?"

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: Then you have to change. Therefore Kṛṣṇa's instruction is there, that "Do like this, do like this."

Hayagrīva: In Creative Evolution Bergson writes, "We may conclude then that individuality is never perfect and that it is often difficult, sometimes impossible, to tell what is an individual and what is not, but that life nevertheless manifests a search for individuality as if it strove to constitute systems naturally isolated, naturally closed." A search for...

Prabhupāda: (aside:) You have given the key?

Hayagrīva: What does he mean by "search for individuality"? Isn't the individual always there?

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: This is the continuation of Bergson.

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

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

Prabhupāda: Individual, he is always individual. Perpetually.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: Individual, he is always individual. Perpetually.

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

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

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

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

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

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

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

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: Sometimes Bergson sounds like a Sophist in his contention. He says, "Man might be considered the reason for the existence of the entire organization of life on our planet." Is man the end of evolution on this planet, or is he just simply the highest form of life now present on the planet?

Prabhupāda: He is not highest form of life.

Hayagrīva: On this planet, he is speaking.

Prabhupāda: On this planet also there are different types of men. Not all men are the same position, same as there are intelligent person, there is a foolish person, there is a rich person, there is...

Hayagrīva: He is speaking of men in general, everybody, all mankind.

Prabhupāda: All mankind, what does he mean all? Everyone is individual. What does he mean? This is not very good, intelligent.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: Bergson sees the universe itself as expanding and evolving. He writes, "For the universe is not made but is being made continually."

Prabhupāda: Yes, we also say that, that universes came from the breathing of Mahā-Viṣṇu. So just like we can imagine from breathing with the air, something may come very minute form, then it develops.

Hayagrīva: Bigger then?

Prabhupāda: Bigger, bigger, bigger, bigger.

Hayagrīva: Expanding.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: That expansion goes to a certain extent. Then the expansion stops, then it becomes dwindling and then finished.

Hayagrīva: Well then Bergson is actually incorrect in saying that the universe is evolving toward some grand harmony.

Prabhupāda: That is his imagination. What does he mean by this harmony? Just like I am increasing, your body is increasing, your child's body is increasing. So everybody's body is increasing, so where is the, what does he mean by harmony? It is increasing and it will dwindle and it will finish. That is material nature. If you say this process of increasing and dwindling is going on, that is harmony, then there is no harm, but the, individually everything is going under this process of increasing and decreasing and at the end finished.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: Now this is the last point, and I want to just for the record to correct this on Śyāmasundara's presentation because you took exception to this, and I believe that it was..., you wouldn't take exception to it. I don't know. It says Bergson refers to the "essential function of the universe as being that of a machine for the making of gods."

Prabhupāda: That is his misconception. That I have explained, the wheel. The wheel is going on. The wheel has got different parts but it is resting on the axle.

Hayagrīva: No, but is the universe a machine for the making of gods in the sense that it's a vehicle to make people Kṛṣṇa conscious?

Prabhupāda: No, this is wrong. The machine, the wheel is already depending on the axle. Axle is already there. Without axle, the wheel cannot move.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: Yes. What is the demigods? They are also rotting in this material world. So devotees are not concerned how to become a demigod. They do not care. That is said by Prabodānanda Sarasvatī: vidhi-mahendrādiś ca kīṭāyate. Vidhi means Lord Brahmā, and mahendra means the king of heaven, Indra. So he says, "I think this Brahmā and Indra, Candra, the demigods just like as good as the germs and small insects." He says that. Vidhi-mahendrādiś. You have to attain such a position that you think this Brahmā and Indra and demigods, they are as good as the insects. Vidhi-mahendrādiś ca kīṭa. Kīṭa means a small insect. So actually that is the position. Everyone has got a different type of body according to his karma, either Brahmā's body or ant's body, so he is under material laws. So that is not the position of freedom. One has to become above these material laws. That is brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā (BG 18.54). So anyone who has actually attained that position, what is the importance of Brahmā's body or Indra's body? He is not concerned with the body, just, therefore devotees are not interested to be elevated to the higher planetary system in the heaven. They are not interested. They are interested going back to home, back to Godhead. So devotee's position is different. Just like we can see practically our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, we have got so many members. We are not perfect, but still it is not our ambition how to become a Rockefeller or big rich man. This is not our ambition. Is it our ambition, like that? We don't care for this Rockefeller or big, big man. We want how to become a perfect devotee of Kṛṣṇa. You can see practically. Our endeavors, activities, are not like the karmīs'. The karmīs are trying "How many motorcars I will possess. How many buildings I shall possess." We do not mind, but we are constructing temples. That is for Kṛṣṇa's service. We are getting money by Kṛṣṇa's mercy. You are envious of that money for Kṛṣṇa's service. Not to that to make a big bank balance and declare that "Now I have become as good as Rockefeller," or this or that. We are not interested. So a devotee is not at all interested to be promoted in the higher planetary system or become demigod. That is not their business. Kīṭa janma hau yathā tuyā dāsa. Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura says that bahir-mukha brahma-janme nāhi mora āśa, "I don't care to become a Brahmā, I, better I shall prepare to become a small ant in the house of a devotee." This is our ambition. I shall be very much satisfied remaining a small ant in the house of a devotee, a dog of a devotee, but I don't want, forgetting Kṛṣṇa, to become like Brahmā, Indra, Candra. This is Vaiṣṇava philosophy.

Hayagrīva: So that's the end of Bergson. (end)

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

Śyāmasundara: So this philosopher Bergson, he sees two types of morality. The "closed morality," which is the compulsive forms of behavior, which conform to prevailing convention or social pressure or tradition; static morality, one simply follows the tradition blindly.

Prabhupāda: That can be changed according to the... Just like in some scriptures it is said that "Thou shall not kill." So the killing is ordinary thing there. But in some society killing is already prohibited by so much culture that they do not want to kill even an ant. So that depends on education of the particular society. It is not static, that "This will be like this." No. Not like that. "One man's food another man's poison." What is morality in one society, it may be immorality in another society.

Śyāmasundara: Yes. So the other type of morality he calls "open morality." This is determined by individuals in a dynamic way, blazing new trails, guided by...

Prabhupāda: As soon as it is invented by individual men or society, this is all rascaldom. It has no value.

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

Śyāmasundara: "Mystic means known only to those of special comprehension or especially initiated." Known only to those with special comprehension.

Prabhupāda: What is that? Yes.

Śyāmasundara: So Bergson believed that this mystic who had contacted God, that he can lead others and he can teach others how to become godly.

Prabhupāda: That's it. God's representative. That we are. That is disciplic succession. Yes. That is spiritual... He is accepting spiritual master. He is accepting spiritual master. And that is the definition in the śāstra.

Page Title:Henri Bergson
Compiler:Visnu Murti, RupaManjari
Created:13 of Jun, 2012
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=27, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:27