So we should follow... This is called paramparā system. As Arjuna understood Bhagavad-gītā, if we understand in that way, then we are perfect. I may be imperfect, but because I understand Bhagavad-gītā as it was understood by Arjuna, I am perfect. Because the knowledge I am distributing, that is not imperfect. Just like a post peon. A post peon is delivering you one thousand dollars. So he may be poor man, but the one thousand dollars, he is delivering, that is a fact. That is not bogus thing. Because he has not manufactured something. He has received that money order from the post office. He's asked to deliver it to such and such person. His honesty is to deliver the money order as it is to the bona fide person. That is his perfection. He doesn't require... Because he's delivering one thousand dollars, he doesn't require to become a very rich man. He may be a poor man. Similarly, a guru, a guru is perfect when he delivers the words of the superior authority as it is. Then he's perfect. He may be imperfect in your estimation. But that is his perfection, that he is not misleading people by becoming a so-called rascal scholar and interpreting in a different way and misleading the whole population. That is perfection.
Honesty (Lectures)
Lectures
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures
Because our paper's name was Back to Godhead. So he was indirectly protesting, that What is the use of propagating this philosophy of Godhead if we act nicely? The Arya-samajists view... They are called... There is a English name, what is called? I forget now. Moralists. The technical name there is. Anyway, this is their point of view, how to avoid God. So I replied that if one is not God conscious, he cannot be moralist, he cannot be truthful, he cannot be honest. This is our point of view. You study the whole world only on these three points, morality, honest, and dutiful. So many nice things are there. But if he's not God conscious, he cannot continue such thing. He must fail. Even the, there are so many instances, even amongst the devotees, because this material world is made so that you cannot continue this principle perpetually. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, you'll find. Because the three modes of material nature is working, even if you are on the platform of goodness, the other modes of material nature will try to attack you. And your goodness, morality, honesty, these things will be polluted by the onslaught of the other two inferior modes of nature. Therefore, sometimes we find that a very nice man committing some sinful activities.
So the decision of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is harāv abhaktasya kuto mahad-guṇāḥ. Mahad-guṇāḥ. We can find it easily, just like we say that no illicit sex, no meat-eating, we consider this is sinful. But there are others, big, big leaders, politicians, philosophers, even religious priests, they do not think that this is immoral or this is sinful. Meat-eating is sinful. Why? What is the sin there? Illicit sex, what is the wrong there? Intoxication, what is wrong there? They do not find any immorality. So this standard of morality, there cannot be fixed up if one is not God conscious. There cannot be. Standard of morality, standard of goodness, cannot be. That is the decision of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Harāv abhaktasya kuto mahad-guṇāḥ. Lack of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. They think that animal has no soul. They do not accept this morality that animal cannot be killed, it is sinful, it is immoral. They have created their own theory. So without being standardized by Kṛṣṇa consciousness, or God consciousness, you cannot find the standard platform of morality, honesty. These things you cannot find. This is not possible. Therefore, the verdict of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is harāv abhaktasya kuto mahad-guṇāḥ. Just like if you do not follow a standard law, how you can fix up "This is morality" or "This is honesty or dishonesty." There must be standard law. And who can give you the law unless he is the greatest authority? So law changes according to different countries, climate, situation. So man-made law cannot give you standard morality, honesty or... It is not possible. Because one will think "This is morality," another will think, "No, this is not morality." Same thing. Keep to the left, keep to the right. Somebody says "Keep to the left is right," somebody says "Keep to the left, it is wrong." Manorathenāsati dhāvato bahiḥ (SB 5.18.12). Because those who are not Kṛṣṇa conscious, they are hovering on the mental plane. They cannot, there cannot be any fixed up morality, honesty, dishonesty. No. And rascals will also say yato mata tato patha. Means, whatever you think is all right, that is all right. According to you, your conception this is right, and according to my conception, both of them are right. How both of them can be right?
But we must know what is actual morality. There are so many examples. Just like when there is war, to kill the enemies, that is morality. But in peaceful condition if you kill a person that is immorality or sinful. The process is the same, morality or immorality, the process is the same. But sometimes it is moral, sometimes immoral. So how it will be standardized? Therefore Bhāgavata says dharmaṁ tu sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam (SB 6.3.19). Real dharma, real religion, morality, honesty, they can be decided on the words of the Supreme Lord. That is the... When Kṛṣṇa says "This is all right," then it is all right. When Kṛṣṇa says it is not right, then it is not right. This is our decision. We Kṛṣṇa conscious men, we simply accept. And that is a fact. That is a fact in this way because Kṛṣṇa is the greatest authority, Supreme Being. Supreme means the greatest authority.
Everything belongs to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. It is His property. So the whole planet is God's property, whole universe is God's property. But when we are claiming that this is my property, then where is morality? If you claim other's property as your property, then where is the morality?
So in this material world, such kind of morality, honesty, is going on. But our morality is if Kṛṣṇa is satisfied, then it is honesty, morality, everything. There are many examples. Just like Prahlāda Mahārāja. Prahlāda Mahārāja is standing and his father is being killed by Nṛsiṁhadeva in his presence. So do you think it is morality that one's father is being killed in the presence of his son, and the son without protest is seeing, with a garland, that "As soon as my father is killed, I shall offer this garland to Nṛsiṁhadeva"? Is it morality? From material point of view? We are worshiping... Prahlāda Mahārāja has become mahājana, the greatest authority in devotional service, but if we study his morality that he did not protest the killing of his father, rather he was waiting with a garland, that "As soon as the killing business is finished I'll reward this." You see? Where is material morality, there is no morality.
Just like we create favorable circumstances to enjoy even in this life. Why this struggle for existence? We are trying to make a favorable condition for enjoyment. This is struggle for existence. Nobody is satisfied with the present position. Everyone is struggling hard. But he does not know that any material arrangement, according to my intelligence, will never make me happy. That we do not know. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, "You rascal, nonsense, give up this business." Sarva-dharmān parityajya (BG 18.66). "You are rascal number one. You have forgotten your constitutional position. Now you give up all these engagements if you want to be happy." Mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja. "Just be under My control." "And what benefit I shall derive?" Ahaṁ tvāṁ sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣayiṣyāmi mā śucaḥ: "I'll give you protection." Because you're suffering for your sinful activities... everything is sinful activities. Everything.
Just like a gang of thieves. A gang of thieves, after plundering booties from some gentleman's house, they came outside the village, and they were dividing. So one of the thieves is saying, "Sir, let us divide it honestly. Let us divide the booty honestly." Now, their basic principle is dishonesty, and now they want to divide honestly. So all these rascals, politicians, they are all dishonest, and they are trying to make adjustment honestly. Honestly. What is this honesty? There cannot be honesty. Harāv abhaktasya kuto mahad-guṇāḥ. Anyone who is not a devotee of the Lord, he cannot be possessing any good qualities. That is not possible. He must be dishonest if he is a not devotee of the Lord. He must be dishonest. This is the verdict of the śāstras.
Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures
Prabhupāda: So the Lord says in the Bhagavad-gītā: paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām (BG 4.8). So two purposes. When God incarnates, He has got two mission. One mission is paritrāṇāya sādhūnām and vināśāya duṣ... One mission is to deliver the faithful devotees, sādhu. Sādhu means saintly persons.
The sādhu... I have explained several times. Sādhu means devotee. Sādhu does not mean the worldly honesty or dishonesty, morality or immorality. It has nothing to do with material activities. It is simply spiritual, sādhu. But sometimes we derive, "sādhu," a person's material goodness, morality. but actually "sādhu" means in the transcendental platform. Those who are engaged in devotional service. Sa guṇān samatītyaitān (BG 14.26). Sādhu is transcendental to the material qualities. So paritrāṇāya sādhūnām. The paritrāṇāya means to deliver.
Festival Lectures
So your senses are imperfect, you are cheating, you are illusioned, and you commit mistake. How you can give perfect knowledge? Therefore we don't accept any knowledge from an imperfect personality. Because that is imperfect knowledge, what is the use of that knowledge? Theorizing. No theory. We want to know fact. That is perfect knowledge. So that perfect knowledge can come from God. And one who distributes that knowledge exactly as God has said, he is perfect. Just like a post peon comes and delivers you, say, one hundred dollars. So he is not delivering that one hundred dollars. Your friend has sent you one hundred dollars, and his business is to hand over that one hundred dollars as it is, without any change, without taking one dollar from it, no, or adding. No addition, no subtraction. His honesty, his perfection, is that he delivers you that hundred dollars which is sent by your friend. That is his honest..., perfection. He may be imperfect in so many others ways, but when he does his business perfectly, he is perfect. Similarly, our, this Vyāsa-pūjā means we receive perfect knowledge from Kṛṣṇa through the agency of spiritual master.
Philosophy Discussions
Śyāmasundara: Yesterday we were discussing Jean-Paul Sartre. His point was that man finds himself responsible for his own actions—not only individually, but he finds that the world is in his own choosing so that he has a social responsibility as well.
Prabhupāda: As soon as we speak of responsibility, there is no question of chance. We cannot say sometimes by chance, sometimes by responsi... Where is the question of chance, if there is responsibility?
Śyāmasundara: He says that by making decisions and choosing this or that, that one becomes responsible for his actions. But ultimately it doesn't really matter what he chooses. The choosing is the important thing.
Prabhupāda: That is whimsical. And still he is responsible.
Śyāmasundara: Yes. Whatever I choose, I must be responsible for it. But it doesn't matter so much what...
Prabhupāda: But if the beginning is irresponsibility, then where is the question of responsibility? This is nonsense philosophy. If the beginning is irresponsibility... Just like there is a story, some thieves stolen some gold, and there were many, four, five thieves, so they were dividing the stolen property, and one them said, "Now let us divide it honestly." (laughter) The whole thing is stolen property, and they are speaking of honesty. Just like you Americans, you came from Europe and other countries, and you have stolen the property. Now you make immigration, "You cannot come, you cannot come." It is like this philosophy. The whole thing is stolen property, and they are talking of honesty; they are citing scripture. So where is the responsibility, if the beginning is irresponsibility, chance?
| Page Title: | Honesty (Lectures) |
| Compiler: | Labangalatika, Jayaram |
| Created: | 25 of Sep, 2009 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=9, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 9 |