So by mental speculation we cannot understand what is our position. Generally, people, they indulge in mental speculation. Different philosophy of the world, they are established on the principle of mental speculation, especially in Europe, Aristotle, Schopenhauer, Kant. They're more or less... And, imitating the Western philosophers, in India also, recently, the persons who are very well known... Perhaps you know Śrī Aurobindo. He's, he's also speculated very nicely on the mental platform. Mental platform cannot give us the actual freedom or the happiness. Therefore Lord says, "One should give up all mental speculation and should be satisfied in the understanding that 'I am consciousness, and there is Supreme Consciousness, and I am subordinate to the Supreme Consciousness. Therefore let me dovetail my consciousness with the Supreme Consciousness.' "
Immanuel Kant
Lectures
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures
Philosophy Discussions
Śyāmasundara: Today we are discussing Immanuel Kant. Basically, his philosophy seeks to trace the relationship between a priori ideas, or those ideas of the mind which are independent of sense experience, and the a posteriori ideas, or sense impressions. He wants to unify these two positions. So he wrote The Critique of Pure Reason, in which he asks the fundamental question, "How are a priori synthetic judgments possible?" In other words, how can we decide anything, judge anything? Where does this facility come from? What is the source of knowledge?
Prabhupāda: Intelligence. The source of knowledge is intelligence. Intelligence acts through mind, and then some conclusion comes. Man is mortal, so here is a man, intelligence; he must be mortal. This a priori idea means "I know man is mortal; therefore here is a man, he must be mortal." A priori means before. And what is the other?
Śyāmasundara: Before, we were discussing Descartes and Hume. Descartes expressed that all knowledge comes through innate ideas, and Hume said just the opposite: "No. All knowledge comes from sense experience." So Kant is trying to unify the two ideas.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Sense experience. Sense experience means purified sense experience. That is seva. Just like I am seeing here Kṛṣṇa, but others will see a stone. So he is also seeing with his eyes; I am also seeing with the eyes, but my eyes are different from his eyes. Premāñjana-cchurita-bhakti-vilocanena (Bs. 5.38). When the eyes are anointed with love of God, ointment of love of God, then he can see. Just like if one's eyes are diseased, if he applies some eye ointment, or lotion, then he sees. So the same senses, the same eyes, unless they are treated and purified, he cannot understand or he cannot see or he cannot know.
Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa is everything, outside and inside. Inside He is Paramātmā, outside He is spiritual master. So Kṛṣṇa is trying to help the conditioned soul both ways-outside and inside. Therefore spiritual master is representative of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa comes outside as spiritual master, and inside He is personally there.
Śyāmasundara: So according to Kant, the first or basic stage is that one perceives objects and gives them concepts of time and space. Then the second step is called transcendental analytic. In other words, human understanding changes these perceptions into conceptions or ideas, which possess analytical unity. In other words, the mind applies categories to whatever it perceives. And there are four categories that he describes: quantity, quality, relationship and modality.
Prabhupāda: What is modality?
Prabhupāda: No. He should go to higher authorities. Why should he remain agnostic? If there is possibility, mind cannot go beyond this, but if the same thing, we say upon the roof there is some sound, now we speculate, but we cannot ascertain what is the sound. But if somebody is actually there, he says, "This sound is due to this." So why I shall remain satisfied with agnostic position, that I could not ascertain what is the sound, and therefore I shall remain satisfied? I shall say, "Is there anybody on the roof?" If somebody says, "Yes. I am here," "Will you kindly say what is the sound?" "Yes: this, that, this, that." Therefore Vedic injunction is tad vijñānārtham: that which is beyond your senses, you must approach a spiritual master. He will give you information. That is our system, accepting guru. Tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam (SB 11.3.21). One who is inquisitive to understand the transcendental subject, he must approach a guru. What is guru? Śābde pare ca niṣṇātam: guru, who is expert or well versed in the Vedic literatures, śruti. And what is the result? How can I understand that he is well versed in Vedic literature? Brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayaḥ. He has forgotten everything material; he is simply concerned with the spirit soul. That's all. Everything is there. So Kant here is imperfect in his knowledge.
Śyāmasundara: He's getting a hint, Kant.
Prabhupāda: Yes. By intellectual speculation one may get some hint, but not perfect knowledge.
Śyāmasundara: He says, for instance, that this pure reason or this transcendental reason is there to guide man to an understanding of wider knowledge, to guide his understanding to knowledge, and that the aim of this pure reason is to find the totality of synthesis, in other words, to understand everything. By knowing the ultimate reality, one will understand everything.
Śyāmasundara: To go back to this idea of cause and effect, Kant says that just as time and space are a priori concepts or mental creations—in other words, before we have any sense experience, we still have an idea of time and space—just as this is so, so also cause and effect is a priori category of human understanding.
Prabhupāda: So a priori existence is there, time and space.
Śyāmasundara: Time and space, and cause and effect.
Prabhupāda: I take my birth and at a certain time time. So time was existing before my birth, and after my death time will continue to exist. Similarly, space. But, temporarily, I take some time. That is the duration of my life. Or I am occupying some space. This is temporary. Time and space are eternally there. At least time is eternally there, because space is also born in time.
Prabhupāda: That is nonsensical. Someone will come and make a footprint to mislead you! That is also caused. (laughter) So it is a foolish idea. That is also caused—someone came; there is cause.
Śyāmasundara: This is just what Kant is saying. He says, no, still we are born with an idea of cause and effect. This is a priori...
Prabhupāda: No. This is fact: cause and effect is always there.
Śyāmasundara: He says that intuitively, when we see something, we understand what is cause and what is effect.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That means with material senses you cannot go to the transcendental knowledge. Then how can he form ideas of transcendence?
Śyāmasundara: Well, in this particular attempt Kant is trying to form those ideas purely through the reason. Pure reason.
Prabhupāda: You say that material senses cannot reach transcendence. Then what is the meaning of reasoning? If your senses are imperfect, so if you put some reason by the senses, then that is also imperfect.
Śyāmasundara: He says that reason acts a priori, or separate from the senses, independent of the senses; that reason can understand that there is God, there is soul, etc., without use of the senses.
Prabhupāda: When God speaks, then it is possible. That is our process. We hear from God—what, where, how He is—therefore our knowledge is perfect. According to Kant, one cannot reach by reason and senses. Avāṅ-manasā gocaraḥ. That's a fact. That is admitted in Vedas: avāṅ-manasā gocaraḥ. Vana means words, mana means mind. Neither by words, neither by the mind one can reach. But it is a fact that he is convinced there is God, so if God speaks, God descends by His causeless mercy and speaks, then you can understand about God.
Śyāmasundara: He comes to that point in a way by saying that he has limited all that we can know to mere phenomena, and he has therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge of God, freedom and immortality in order to find a place for faith. In other words, he says that through the reason and the senses we cannot know anything about God, soul, immortality or freedom, so the rest has to be done by faith.
Śyāmasundara: After Kant finished this analysis of the pure reason, then he began his Critique of Practical Reason, of reason applied to practical living, to try to find out what were the limits of that study. This is his idea: moral laws are necessary and universal objects of the human will, which must be accepted as valid for everyone. He calls this his categorical imperative. That means that there are certain moral commandments which are universal, and which must be applied to everyone, and which everyone must obey without exception. Now, he says that we know these moral laws a priori, by intuition, and that the individual fact and the situations have no bearing, and there is no consideration of what I want or what I desire, but what I must do, what I ought to do.
Prabhupāda: No. Morality varies according to the development of the particular society. There are so many immoral things going on in the particular type of society which are very, very immoral, but they do not care for it; they do it.
Prabhupāda: No. From this instance we find that Arjuna was trying to become moral, not killing his own men; but that did not help him. Rather, by directly abiding by the orders of Kṛṣṇa, he transcended morality. So morality does not always help.
Śyāmasundara: In this particular case of Kant, he begins to perceive that behind morality there is something higher. He says that even though a man is sinful...
Prabhupāda: Yes. Certainly there is higher. That highness is within this material world. There are two stages, two platforms: transcendental platform and physical platform. That highness is physical. Just like Mahatma Gandhi. He was known as a very high-class man, but he was a materialist, that's all. By his pious activities he may be elevated materially. Just like if you act piously, giving charity, then next birth you get very nice opulent birth, you are born in a rich family, you get enough money. But that is not the solution of your conditional life. To take birth in this family does not mean he hasn't got to undergo the process of birth, the pains of birth, the pains of death. But real problem is that I want to stop these pains of birth, death, old age and disease. Hari me nana mitinatante (?). Without love of Kṛṣṇa, nobody can escape these material conditions of life.
Śyāmasundara: So Kant is beginning to realize that, by observing that if a man does sin, nevertheless, the fact that the moral law is present somewhere in his personality, that he is able to understand it if he is rightly trained, that this in itself must be regarded as holy. This propensity to understand the moral principles is an inborn holy trait that everyone has. And he says that this self-determination is the indispensable condition of all morality, that in order to be moral one must be self-determined.
Prabhupāda: That point we have already discussed, that one should be self-determined. But sometimes it is not possible to become self-determined. So first of all he does not know what is the aim of life. Suppose one becomes moral or becomes immoral. So what is the difference? I say that it is very easy for me to earn my livelihood by becoming immoral. Why shall I become moral? Then should he be condemned? If he is condemned, why is he condemned?
Hayagrīva: Immanuel Kant. Being a son of the Enlightenment, Kant strongly advocated the right and duty of every man to judge for himself in religious and secular matters. Indeed, he considered the motto of the Enlightenment to be, "Have courage to make use of your own intellect." The emphasis here is on individual freedom and on the ability of man to intuit the truth.
Prabhupāda: Does it mean that anyone, whatever he does, that is perfectly right? If he is given that freedom, then anyone will do anything as he likes. So it will be taken as...
Hayagrīva: Well he, at the same time, he considered the Bible to be the best vehicle for the instruction of the public in a truly moral religion.
Prabhupāda: Then he has to accept some authority. Where is freedom?
Hayagrīva: Kant says that speculative reason is unable to attain to a sure or adequate conception of God.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is our..., that the speculator cannot reach vicinity of God. It is not possible. Athāpi te. Only one can understand by the mercy of God, and this mercy is bestowed upon a person who is devotee, who is surrendered to God. Otherwise this mercy is reserved, as it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, nāhaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya yoga-māyā-samāvṛtaḥ: (BG 7.25) "I am not revealed to everyone and anyone; rather, I am covered by yoga-māyā." Because revelation means when one becomes devotee this covering curtain is... What is called, curtain?
Hayagrīva: According to the Christian religion, at the end of the world there is a resurrection of the body, that is the gross material body. Kant does not think very much about this. He writes, "For who is so fond of his body that he would wish to drag it about with him through all eternity if he could get on without it?"
Prabhupāda: That is the nature. Even a hog, pig, he is living so abominable. Still, when he is captured for being killed, he cries. He does not think that "My body is so low-grade that I have to eat stool, I live in filthy place, in a very bad smell, and I am trying to save my, this body?" But he cries. So this is called māyā. Although his body is so abominable, he wants to protect it perpetually. This tendency is there because the living entity has actually..., he is perpetual living condition. He wants that, but he wants that in this material body. That is his mistake.
Hayagrīva: In his last work Kant seems to shift his position. He says, "Morality thus leads ineluctably to religion, through which it extends itself to the idea of a powerful moral law-giver outside of mankind for whose will that is the final end of creation, which at the same time can and ought to be man's final end. Make the highest good possible in the world your own final end." So he seems to point to an absolute law-giver or an absolute morality, which is God, but he believes that this knowledge of God is ultimately uncertain.
Prabhupāda: Uncertain—for the man who does not possess the perfect knowledge. But if we believe in God, if we know God, we can get perfect knowledge from Him. Then we become perfect.
Hayagrīva: He says, "An ethical commonwealth can be followed only as a people under divine commands, that is, as a people of God, and indeed under laws of virtue. We might indeed conceive of a people of God under statutory laws. Under such laws, that obedience to them would concern not the morality but merely the legality of acts."
Hayagrīva: Kant writes, "There is only one true religion, but there can be faiths of several kinds. It is therefore more fitting to say, 'This is..., this man is of this or that faith"—Jewish, Muhammadan, Christian, Catholic, Lutheran-'than he is of this or that religion.' "
Prabhupāda: Yes, that is going on. Actually, religion means obedience to God. So religion does not mean some sect. They are trying to understand God some way, but that is not actually religion. That is a method of understanding God. But religion begins when one has actually understood God and giving Him, rendering Him service. That is religion.
Hayagrīva: For Kant, the true religion is the divine ethical state. He is..., he was fond of quoting the Christian Bible. When Christ was demanded of the Pharisees when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation. Neither shall they say, 'Lo here' or 'Lo there,' for behold, the kingdom of God is within you." Now Kant footnotes this passage by saying, "Here a kingdom of God is represented not according to a particular covenant, but moral, knowable through assisted reason." So again he insists on the priority of God within, on the priority of ethical action and the freedom to accept ethical action. And this is epitomized in his famous line, "The starry sky above and the moral law within." The starry sky above is the abode of God, is very far away, but the moral law within is very close. Thus he emphasizes that the kingdom of God is within you.
Prabhupāda: Yes. If one is actually aware of God and His instructions, then the kingdom of God is within himself.
Hayagrīva: The Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone—that is one of his last books—he condemns prayer as an inner formal service to God, because God does not need information regarding the inner disposition of the person offering prayers. In other words, God does not need formal prayer to know what man needs. Such a prayer would be, "Give us this day our daily bread." However, Kant believes that it is good to teach children to pray so that in their early years they may accustom themselves to a life pleasing to God. So that prayer might add their...
Prabhupāda: That is religion: how to please God. That is not only restricted among the children, but authorized(?) to the children's father. One must know how to please God. That is real religion.
Śyāmasundara: This was Hegel's idea, too. That everything together is the, as a whole is the truth or the of the spirit. The whole, the summation of everything is the spirit, nothing can be separated from the spiritual whole, everything is related to it. There is one important point that I'd like to clear up. There was one philosopher we discussed named Kant, before. He... It was his idea that the phenomenon are modes of expression of the spirit or the thing in itself, that the thing in itself expresses itself in an object.
Prabhupāda: That we say. Just like the sun is expressed by the sunshine, by the heat and light. We understand sun through all spreading heat and light. Similarly, we understand God, Kṛṣṇa, by His two energies. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, the material energy and the spiritual energy, two energies. The spiritual energy is described as superior energy, and material energy is described as inferior energy. Superior, inferior, that is in our consideration because we cannot understand. Therefore Kṛṣṇa has said. Otherwise there is only one energy, the superior spiritual energy. When the spiritual energy is covered by ignorance, then it is called material energy. Just like the sky, in the sky naturally it is clear but when there is cloud, we cannot see the sun.
Śyāmasundara: But there is a distinction between what Hegel is saying. Hegel is saying that the objects themselves are the spirit expressing itself whereas Kant says the spirit expresses itself through the object. There's a distinction being made between the spirit within the object expressing itself or the spirit as the object.
Prabhupāda: (indistinct)
Śyāmasundara: What is the distinction?
Prabhupāda: Object as it is, it is spirit.
Śyāmasundara: It is spirit, as it is.
Prabhupāda: As it is. Because, just like sunshine. Sunshine is not sun, in one sense, but it is sun because in the sunshine there is heat and light and in the sun there is heat and light. So there is no difference. But still sunshine is not the sun. Therefore that is our philosophy, acintya bhedābheda, simultaneously one and different.
Śyāmasundara: The Kant philosophy, and he took this idea from Plato, is that there is an ideal on which these temporary objects are representatives. For instance the idea of tableness is an abstract idea of perfection. It's represented before me in this table in a perverted form. This table represents the ideal, expresses the ideal, but it is not the ideal.
Prabhupāda: That we say, that this material world is perverted reflection of the spiritual world. This is reflection.
Śyāmasundara: They say an "image", everything is an image.
Prabhupāda: Yes, we say that, that the same example, just like mirage. Mirage, there is no water but we see a vast sea, or big river is flowing. It is like that. Actually there is no river. No. This is going. This material world is like that. Just Śrīdhara Swami (said that) due to the factual position of the spiritual world, this illusory world appears to be true. Because there is real table.
Hayagrīva: At first Darwin was a Christian, but his faith in the existence of a personal God dwindled, and he finally wrote, "The whole subject"—that is the subject of religion, or God—"is beyond the scope of man's intellect. The mystery of the beginning of things is insoluble by us, and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic. I have steadily endeavored to keep my mind free, so as to give up any hypothesis, however much beloved, as soon as facts are shown to be opposed to it." So he didn't argue against Plato or Descartes or Kant or any other philosopher, but he simply presented what evidence he had amassed during a five..., only a five-year voyage, on a British freighter, oh, from 1831 to 1836. But what is considered important is that his book, The Origin of Species, marks what they call the emancipation of science from philosophy.
Prabhupāda: What is that, emancipation?
Śyāmasundara: This Fichte actually comes to that conclusion because he borrows from Kant and develops this idea of the dialectic that there's thesis, the antithesis and it becomes combined in synthesis. He puts forward the idea that the ego, the subjective identity that the thesis has given and opposing that is the antithesis or material nature. Just like my body is the antithesis of my ego, so it is non-ego. So he says ego, non-ego, there's a continuous struggle.
Prabhupāda: When I think that I am this body, that is false ego. That is false ego. Because I am not this body. So those who are falsely identifying this body, (indistinct) they're animals. They're (indistinct).
Prabhupāda: Yes, that is gradual process of evolution is from animal kingdom to human life. When one comes to the human form of life then the realization (indistinct) is there.
Śyāmasundara: So he seeks to combine these two types of reason, Kant set up. There's pure reason and practical reason or moral reason. In other words speculative reason and practical reason or moral reason.
Prabhupāda: Practical, practical reason is that if I think I am this body, then where is the difference between dead body and living? Living body means I am in this body, that is living body. As soon as I give up this body, I go and accept another body. Then it is dead body. So this is practical reason, that without the soul this body is a lump of matter. It is very practical. Therefore soul is different from this matter.
Prabhupāda: Everyone says, "It is my morality." Everyone can manufacture (indistinct). Just like, for example in India if somebody talks of homosex (indistinct) immoral, and here it is going on. (indistinct). So what is morality? (indistinct).
Śyāmasundara: He uses the categorical imperative that Kant set up, the different categories of goodness and badness.
Prabhupāda: That means if you are in the modes of goodness, your morality is different from the morality of the man who is in the modes of ignorance.
Śyāmasundara: But he says that everything should be understood in terms of what it ought to be, that there is an absolute good.
Śyāmasundara: He says, contrary to Kant, he says that the practical reason is primary, is the first thing, that what is practical is superior to what is...
Prabhupāda: Practical, this means, suppose I want to do something, I do not know, then I go and ask a superior person who knows it. Just like when you drive your car, you are going somewhere, so you take the direction from the signpost, this way go, this point here, this village. Similarly, for practical purpose you have to approach a person who knows. That is practical. And if you think that I shall do it myself, without consulting anyone, that is not practical, that is theoretical. You will be misled. At least we are prone to be misled.
Śyāmasundara: He says that the reason is subordinate to the will.
Prabhupāda: Yes, thinking, feeling, willing, so willing, I want to do something, I apply my reason, that is intelligence. If we do it intelligently then it is good, and if I do it foolishly then it is bad. Will is there.
Hayagrīva: This is Fichte. He's not as important as Kant or Hegel, but he followed pretty much in the footsteps of Kant. His first work was entitled Our Belief in a Divine Government of the Universe, and he writes, "Our belief in a moral world order must be based on the concept of a supersensible transcendental world."
Prabhupāda: But thing is that what is morality? If he cannot define what is morality, simply saying on moral principles, what is this morality? First of all you have to understand what is morality. Simply imaginary moral principle. We want practical understanding what is morality. That they have not defined.
Hayagrīva: Well he, following Kant, he emphasized inner reality...
Prabhupāda: He may, he may follow Kant and I may follow Kṛṣṇa, but if there is contradiction, then which one is morality? How it will be decided, and who will decide? He may follow somebody. That this question I asked Professor Kotovsky in Moscow, that "You are following Communism, and we are following, say, Kṛṣṇa-ism, but your leader is Lenin and our leader is Kṛṣṇa, that so far the philosophy is concerned we have to accept a leader." So there is no difference in the basic principle of philosophy that we must have a leader. Now who shall be the leader and who will decide it? Regards to both of us, we have got a leader. Now which leader is perfect? If both of them are perfect, then why there is difference of opinion—one leader does not agree with the other leader? So who will answer this question that who is the best leader? Leader you have to follow. That you cannot avoid. Either you follow Kant or you follow Kṛṣṇa. Either you follow Lenin or you follow Kṛṣṇa. What is the answer? Who is the perfect leader? You cannot avoid leader, either you say according to Kant, I say according to Kṛṣṇa.
Conversations and Morning Walks
1975 Conversations and Morning Walks
Bahulāśva: Śrīla Prabhupāda, the doctor was saying that he holds to the philosophy of Kant.
Prabhupāda: Hmm? Kant.
Bahulāśva: Kant, yes. He was explaining nicely his point of view downstairs before we came up.
Prabhupāda: What is that Kant's philosophy?
Dr. John Mize: One major difference it seems with the point of view of the eastern Indian philosophies in particular is that the soul of man does not seem to be something eternal, but it seems to be something created.
Prabhupāda: Created?
Jayatīrtha: In today's society that standard is unimaginable.
Prabhupāda: Yes, therefore there is no adjustment. Everyone is suffering in spite of so-called education. Nobody is happy.
Bahulāśva: Śrīla Prabhupāda, the professor was also saying that Kant had a theistic viewpoint also. He believed that there was God and what other things were you saying?
John Mize: The nature of God? Kant's view?
Bahulāśva: Kant's philosophy.
John Mize: That the purpose of the human existence is to improve it's moral nature, to reunite ultimately with God, to be pleasing to God. So it's similar in that sense. He apparently disagrees on the origin...
Bahulāśva: Śrīla Prabhupāda, did you speak about Kant's philosophy in that book also? Yes? He is very popular.
Prabhupāda: Yes, Kant is very popular. I was also a student of philosophy. In my student life my professors were all Europeans. I was student of Scottish Church's College in Calcutta. So one professor, Dr. W.S. Urquhart, he was our professor for psychology, metaphysics. Later on, he became the vice-chancellor of Calcutta University. A very nice gentleman.
Dharmādhyakṣa: Dr. Mize finds that he's chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa a little in the shower now. When he takes a shower, he chants a little.
Correspondence
1947 to 1965 Correspondence
The Western philosophers mostly of the Sankhya school have less acquaintance with the Vedanta Darsana and philosophers like Kant, Mill, Aristotle or Schopenhauer etc all belong to either of the above five Darsanas except Vedanta because limited human thinking power cannot go beyond that stage. But Vedanta Darsana is far beyond the limited mental speculation of the human brain conditioned by material nature. Unfortunately Sankara who belonged to the Mayavada school made a misinterpretation of the Vedanta for his own purpose to convert the Buddhists in India.
1971 Correspondence
I am very pleased that you have accepted the responsibility of managing such an important center as Berkeley. I know that there are many students in that city, so just attract them to our Krishna Consciousness Movement by giving them prasadam and our Krishna philosophy. We can challenge any nonsense philosophy. Socrates, Plato, Kant, Darwin—all of them—so many mental speculators and word jugglers who have misled so many people. Now it is your task to find them out and expose them, so that the people may appreciate the real philosophy. We must become now very serious to save the people of the world from this very dangerous situation. So become very convinced yourself of our philosophy and then your preaching will act. And try to sell as many books as possible at all the schools and colleges. This is scholarly information, flawless science. Kindly assist me in this great work, and know it for certain, that by your sincerely working in this way you shall very soon go back to Home, back to Godhead.
If you can recruit many members there and get German language books published, that is the very best idea. When Mayapur place is organized you can come and see it, but your place is Germany. The German people are very intelligent and advanced in philosophy. Lately we have been discussing some of their philosophers like Kant, Hegel, Marx, and so on, so I can understand that there are many intellectual people in Germany who will appreciate our Krishna philosophy. They have got good respect for India's philosophy, so now we must take advantage and present it purely. Therefore the printing of so many books in German language is very necessary. I have heard that you may be going to Heidelberg, Germany, where there is a very large and important university. That is our best field. Become yourself very convinced and learned in our Krishna philosophy and take it into such university and contaminate everything with it.
1972 Correspondence
If you require assistance for preaching to the student class, I think Revatinandana can come there and preach very nicely to the scholarly class in their own language. Now in our philosophy classes, each day I am discussing one of your western philosophies and so far we have discussed many, many philosophers like Aristotle, Kant, Hegel, Marx, like that, and now we are discussing Darwin and other scientists from your western countries. Because they have missed the central point that we are not the controllers of nature, rather we are controlled by nature, and because they do not see that there is a Supreme Controller who is controlling even the nature, therefore their vast research and display of intelligence is only so much waste of time. It is just like a child. A child may play with the imitation of another child and the child will hold the doll and play with it as if it is real. But the parents who gave the child the doll, they know good and well the child is nonsense but they tolerate and enjoy sometimes.
| Page Title: | Immanuel Kant |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, RupaManjari |
| Created: | 13 of Jun, 2012 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=30, Con=3, Let=4 |
| No. of Quotes: | 37 |