Mankind (Lectures)

Expressions researched:
"mankind" |"mankind's"

Notes from the compiler: VedaBase query: mankind or mankind's not "lowest of the mankind"

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is -- Los Angeles, November 23, 1968 :

Devotee: "Now in the Fourth Chapter the Lord tells Arjuna that this yoga system of the Bhagavad-gītā was first spoken to the sun-god. The Blessed Lord said, 'I instructed this imperishable science, imperishable science of yoga to the sun-god, Vivasvān, and Vivasvān instructed it to Manu, the father of mankind, and Manu in turn instructed it to Ikṣvāku. This supreme science was thus received through the chain of disciplic succession and the saintly kings understood it in that way. But in the course of time the succession was broken and therefore the science as it is appears to be lost.' "

Prabhupāda: That is the instruction in the Bhagavad-gītā, that this science of Bhagavad-gītā has to be accepted by disciplic succession. That is the way of accepting any scientific thing. Just like even in material science, suppose if you have to become medical practitioner or a lawyer. So you have to study the law books by the previous lawyers, by the judgments of the courts. One who has studied the previous records of legal implications, he is best lawyer. Similarly a medical practicer, practitioner, who has studied the previous books and knowledge and experience, he is called experienced physician.

Lecture on BG 2.15 -- London, August 21, 1973:

So Kṛṣṇa is addressing Arjuna, puruṣarṣabha, the best of the men. "O the best of the men." Certainly, Arjuna is the best of the mankind. Because he is directly friend of Kṛṣṇa, who can be better man than him? The best of the men. So the best of the men, why he's distressed in executing his duty? Therefore, this very word is used, that "You are the best of the men." Actually, the best of the men should not be disturbed by any material condition. He should discharge his duties. And what is the duty? Duty is to become immortal. This is the duty. The lowest of the men does not know how to become immortal, amṛta. Mṛta means death and amṛta means no death. The modern rascal civilization cannot understand that there is possibility of becoming immortal. They have taken it, accepted it; "Well, who can stop?" They are simply scientifically calculating that "Some day will come, by science, we shall be immortal, there will be no death." The formula is given here by Kṛṣṇa how to become immortal. That means you should be callous of this so-called happiness and distress of this material world. That is the first qualification. One who doesn't care what is the distress and happiness of this body, he must execute Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That is the qualification. "Oh, I cannot execute Kṛṣṇa consciousness because there are so many inconveniences," he's not fit for becoming immortal.

Lecture on BG 2.20-25 -- Seattle, October 14, 1968:

Viṣṇujana: "...the lawbook for mankind, it is supported that a murderer should be condemned to death so that in his next life he will not have to suffer for the great sin he has committed. Therefore the king's punishment of hanging a murderer is actually beneficial. Similarly when Kṛṣṇa orders fighting, it must be concluded that violence is for the supreme justice, and as such, Arjuna should follow the instruction, knowing well that such violence committed in the act of fighting for justice is not at all violence. Because at any rate the man, or rather, the soul, cannot be killed. For the administration of justice, so-called violence is permitted. A surgical operation is not meant to kill the patient, but is for his cure. Therefore the fighting to be executed by Arjuna under the instruction of Kṛṣṇa is with full knowledge, and so there is no possibility of sinful reaction."

Prabhupāda: This is the distinction between violence and nonviolence. People are very much advocate of nonviolence, but they are committing, according to their estimation, they are committing every moment violence. But from higher standard there is practically no violence and the things which apparently appear to be violence, if it is properly executed... Just like under the order of high-court judge, one body is being executed. So that is not violence. A justice of higher order is not meant for committing violence. It is justice. Similarly, when, under the direction of the supreme justice, Kṛṣṇa, anything is done, apparently, although it appears violence, it is not violence. It is justice. This is to be understood.

Lecture on BG 2.26 -- Los Angeles, December 6, 1968:

Madhudviṣa: Prabhupāda, what is a Manu, and how is Manu the father of mankind, as it is stated in Bhagavad-gītā?

Prabhupāda: Yes, Manu is the name, and because mankind is born, therefore they are called manuṣya. Manuṣya, "born of Manu." Manu is the name. Just like in some parts of England they are called Angels? In the past history during the Roman occupation of England, they are known as Angels? You don't know?

Woman devotee: Anglos?

Prabhupāda: Angles, yes.

Woman devotee: Anglo-Saxon.

Prabhupāda: Yes. So from Angles, they have become English. Similarly, Manu. Manu is the name of the son of Brahmā, Vaivasvata Manu. Just like Nārada is one of the sons. So there are so many sons. Brahmā was the original living being. So he created so many sons, and they created so many sons. In this way the population of the whole universe has increased. So Manu is one of the sons. There are fourteen Manus in one day of Brahmā. These things I have discussed many times. And the mankind, they come from Manu. That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. Imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam, vivasvān manave prāha (BG 4.1). Manu, this Manu, there are different Manus, fourteen Manus in one day. This present Manu under whom we are now living within this universe, he's the son of sun-god, Vivasvān. So he has got his different planet, as the sun has got different planet. So his son Ikṣvāku was given this earthly planet to rule over and from that generation, Mahārāja Ikṣvāku, Lord Rāmacandra appeared. In this way the kṣatriyas, they spread all over the world. I have several times said that most of the Europeans, they belong to the original kṣatriyas.

Lecture on BG 2.26 -- Los Angeles, December 6, 1968:

So the human history has spread. Not only in this planet, in many other planets. So Manu is the father of mankind. From the word man... This is Latin? Latin word? Man? Sanskrit word is manuṣya, from Manu, that is "man." So Manu is accepted as the father of the mankind in Sanskrit literature. And in Bible it is said the man is made after God. So actually Brahmā is the son of Viṣṇu, and Manu is the son of Brahmā, and we are also son of Manu in different aspect. So gradually, if you go up, God comes to be our original father. And we say also, God is the original father. And the history, Vedic history, also says like that. So God... Because we have got form, therefore God has form, must be. Just like my father had form; so I have got this form. This is commonsense knowledge. How my father can be impersonal? Unless my father was a person, how I am a person? If God is the original father, He must be a person. Otherwise how we are persons? These are common sense, knowledge. There is no need of very great knowledge. A child can understand.

Lecture on BG 4.1 -- Montreal, August 24, 1968:

So when we speak, as Kṛṣṇa is saying, that imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam (BG 4.1), that means this Bhagavad-gītā was spoken long, long before. It is not that Arjuna is the first man who heard Bhagavad-gītā from Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa said that "This yoga system I spoke to Vivasvān, sun-god." And vivasvān manave prāha. "And the sun-god explained this science to his son, Manu." Manu is the forefather of the mankind. In Sanskrit, from Manu, it has come manuṣya or mānava. Mānava-jāti, in Sanskrit. So Manu from "man." And similarly, in English also, from Manu the mankind or the man. The original word is Manu. Here it is said that vivasvān manave prāha. Formerly, there were transportation service from one planet to another. That transportation service is still existing, but not with this planet. But higher planetary system there is transportation service from one planet to another by different kinds of airplanes. And in the Siddhaloka... There is another planet, which is called Siddhaloka. In the Siddhaloka the living entities or human beings are so advanced in yogic practice that they can travel with this body from one planet to another. This description are there in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Second Canto.

Lecture on BG 9.3 -- Melbourne, April 21, 1976:

The best form of human life, the Aryans... Aryans. Aryans means those who are advanced. So the Aryan family, the history of Aryan family... From Central Asia, Caucasian ranges, they divided, the Indo-Aryans, Indo-Europeans. This is the history of mankind. So the Europeans, they belong to the Indo-Europeans, and some of the Europeans, not the uncivilized, the civilized, they came from that side, eastern side, when there was a threatening by Paraśurāma to kill the kṣatriyas. So most of the kṣatriyas, they came to Europe, and some of them settled in the middle, the border of Europe and Asia, Turkey, Greece. There is a big history, Mahābhārata. Mahābhārata means the greater history of India. So on the whole, the conclusion is that the Aryans spread in Europe also, and the Americans, they also spread from Europe. So the intelligent class of human being, they belong to the Aryans, Aryan family. Just like Hitler claimed that he belonged to the Aryan family. Of course, they belonged to the Aryan families.

Lecture on BG 10.1 -- New York, December 30, 1966:

The principle is evaṁ paramparā prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ (BG 4.2). This is stated in the fourth chapter, that this Bhagavad-gītā is coming by disciplic succession from sun-god. Imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam (BG 4.1). "I first of all instructed this yoga system of Bhagavad-gītā to the sun-god." The sun planet, the Vivasvān... The present ruler of the sun planet is known as Vivasvān. So Vivasvān, his son was Manu, and Manu, the father of the mankind, his son was the king, Ikṣvāku, and King Ikṣvāku was the king of this earthly planet and, from him, this paramparā system or disciplic succession is coming down. But it has broken down. Lord said to Arjuna, sa kāleneha yogo naṣṭaḥ parantapa. "In course of time, that disciplic succession has now broken. Therefore I make again you as My disciple."

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

Lecture on SB 6.1.8 -- New York, July 22, 1971:

So this is is not very new. The, in the Manu-saṁhitā... Manu-saṁhitā means Lord Manu, he's the giver of law to the mankind. From Manu, the word man has come. The exact Sanskrit word "manuṣya." Manuṣya means man. So there is some link with Manu, M-a-n-u, and "man." So this Latin word comes from the Sanskrit word, manu. So Manu is supposed to be the law-giver to the humankind. So in the Manu-saṁhitā it is stated there that when the king kills one man, or hangs one man who is a murderer, that is benefit to him. Otherwise, if he's not killed, then he will carry the reaction of his murdering action, and he'll have to suffer in so many ways. The laws of nature are very subtle. They are very diligently administered. People do not know it. So on the whole, the Manu-saṁhitā, life for life is sanctioned. And that is practically observed all over the world. But similarly, there are other laws, that you cannot kill even an ant. Then you are responsible. You have no right to kill. And in the Bible also, we see, Lord Jesus Christ says, "Thou shalt not kill." So killing is not allowed in any religious principle. Anyone who is killing, he's not considered in the human society. You cannot kill.

Lecture on SB 6.1.56-62 -- Surat, January 3, 1971, at Adubhai Patel's House:

Prabhupāda: Eh? (break) ...create vitality. Utsāha. Therefore it is called utsāhād dhairyāt tat-tat-karma-pravartanāt, niścayāt. Utsāha requires enthusiasm, vital force.

Guest (3): Devotion also.

Prabhupāda: Hm? All right.

Guest (3): Service to mankind is service to God. Remember.

Revatīnandana: Is that true, Śrīla Prabhupāda?

Prabhupāda: What is that?

Revatīnandana: That service to mankind is service God?

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense.

Guest (3): Doctor. For doctor, I mean.

Prabhupāda: Well, that is another thing. When doctor gives service to man, he does not give service to the man; he gives service to the money.

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- Montreal, June 10, 1968:

Guest: I have here a Holy Bible.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Guest: The Holy Bible is written by the holy spirit of mankind. Should we believe on the Bible or not?

Prabhupāda: But so far I know, that, the man who wrote, he wrote with, on revelation.

Guest: The holy spirit.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Therefore you should read. That... Just try to understand. If somebody, ordinary man writes a book, he'll write book on his own experience. Therefore he's a, because he is imperfect, because his senses are imperfect, he has got a cheating propensity, he is sure to commit mistake and he's sure to be illusioned. His position being such, he cannot give us any perfect knowledge. Because he's imperfect by constitution. Every man will commit mistake. Every man will be illusioned. Just like every one of us illusioned. I am not this body but I'm thinking I'm this body. And the whole activity of my life is based on this body. So therefore whole thing is mistake, illusion.

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- New York, April 9, 1969:

Kapila is the son of Devahūti, and he's also considered as the incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. And svayambhūr nāradaḥ śambhuḥ kapilaḥ kumāraḥ manuḥ (SB 6.3.20). And manuḥ, manuḥ means the father of the mankind. From manuḥ, the word man is derived. Or, in Sanskrit word, manuṣya. So in Latin and Sanskrit, man, manuṣya, and manuḥ, they are almost on the same level. So svayambhūr nāradaḥ śambhuḥ kapilo kumāraḥ manuḥ (SB 6.3.20), then prahlādo janako bhīṣmaḥ. So now this Prahlāda's name comes. Prahlāda's name comes. Prahlāda and Janaka, the great king, Janaka, whose daughter was married to Lord Rāmacandra. Jānakī. Therefore, Sītā's name is Jānakī, daughter of Mahārāja Janaka. So he is also a great authority. Prahlādo janako bhīṣmaḥ, and Bhīṣma, you have heard the name of Bhīṣma, the grandfather of Arjuna. He is also one of the authorities. And, prahlādo janako bhīṣmo balir, Mahārāja Bali, a king. He was a grandson of this Prahlāda Mahārāja. He became mahājana. All these persons, they became authorities by their exemplary character for advancing in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- New York, April 9, 1969:

So Kṛṣṇa says that "First of all, I narrated this yoga system to Vivasvān." Vivasvān means the predominating deity whose name is Vivasvān, Vivasvān. He was instructed Bhagavad-gītā. And He says, vivasvān manave prāha. "And Vivasvān, this gentleman, he spoke the truth about Bhagavad-gītā to Manu." We have already mentioned the name of Manu. Manu means the father of the mankind. Vivasvān manave prāha, that means the, from sun planet the message of Bhagavad-gītā was handed down to the chief man of this planet, the father of the mankind, Manu. Just like in your scripture also it is said Adam and Eve, similarly Manu. So vivasvān manave prāha manur ikṣvākave 'bravit. And Manu handed over this knowledge to his son whose name is Ikṣvāku. This Ikṣvāku, he's also a great king. He happens to be the original king in the family in which Lord Rāmacandra appeared. So it is called sūrya-vaṁśa, the descendant from the sun. There are two classes of kṣatriyas. The one is coming from the sun planet, another is coming down from the moon planet. So the history, Mahābhārata, says that the Indo-European stock, they also belong to this kṣatriya family. That is, that's a long history. Now this, this paramparā system This Vivasvān handed over the knowledge to Manu, Manu handed over this knowledge to his son, Ikṣvāku.

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 -- Madras, January 2, 1976:

Acyutānanda: Another question. (break—repeating question) This is a world of śakti or energy. There is a worldwide rise in prices of energy resources, like oil, coal, gas, and electricity. This means that there is a depletion of these energy resources. Naturally, there will be worldwide destruction of mankind and other living beings and materials in the near future. What are your views?

Prabhupāda: So yes, these material things, they are energies. That is described in the Bhagavad-gītā. Bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ khaṁ mano buddhir eva ca, bhinnā me prakṛtir aṣṭadhā (BG 7.4). The petrol is also another form of Kṛṣṇa's energy. Parasya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). Any energy. There are many millions of energies. Na tasya kāryaṁ kāraṇaṁ ca vidyate. Kṛṣṇa has nothing to do because everything is being done by His energy. Although He is the ultimate source of everything, but He is doing everything by His energy. Parasya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate svabhāvikī jñāna-bala-kriyā ca. And it appears that it is being automatically done. Not. It is not automatically done. It is done by Kṛṣṇa's energy. So this material energy is also Kṛṣṇa's energy. It is not a different energy. Kṛṣṇa says, bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ. Now, this petrol is liquid thing, so āpa. It is a kind of liquid thing, āpa, so it is Kṛṣṇa's energies. So our Vaiṣṇava philosophy is that Kṛṣṇa's energies should be utilized for Kṛṣṇa. This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So everything can be utilized for service of Kṛṣṇa. So when you use this petrol for Kṛṣṇa's, spreading Kṛṣṇa consciousness, if we can use one thousand or one hundred thousand motor cars using petrol for spreading Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that is the proper utilization of petrol.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures

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

So Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's movement is to understand the father. It is nothing new. It is old. But in a new process, convenient for the people of this age. Ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam (CC Antya 20.12). We have forgotten our father. We have forgotten God. The modern civilization, wherever you go, they say that "We are secular state." Secular state. Secular state means without knowing who is the father of the mankind. That is secular state. But the Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, a great logician during the time of Lord Caitanya, he was also godless. And generally, the so-called learned philosophers, scientists, or so-called educators, they deny the existence of God. They depend more or less on their experimental knowledge of science. But actually, the fact is that there is God. There is God. In every religion they accept there is God, and actually, the fact is there is God. In the Vedic literatures it is accepted, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). And in the Bhagavad-gītā it is clearly said by Kṛṣṇa that "I am the father." Not only one place, in many other places. I am especially referring to the Bhagavad-gītā because most of you, you're acquainted with the study of Bhagavad-gītā.

Festival Lectures

Srila Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami's Appearance Day -- Vrndavana, October 19, 1972:

So when he met, he very humbly approached and he said, "My dear Lord, I am born of lower family." Actually, he was born of a sārasvata-brāhmaṇa family, but because he associated with the mlecchas and yavanas, the Muhammadans, so they were rejected from the brāhmaṇa community, and therefore he represented himself as having born of a lower family. "My associations are all abominable." Ordinary men, especially he was mixing with the Mohammedans, they were habituated to drinking, meat-eating, which have become a fashion in the gentleman's society nowadays. So he considered himself as fallen. "The most wretched of mankind..." If a human being does not take advantage of this opportunity to have a human form of life, then he's missing the point.

General Lectures

Lecture on Teachings of Lord Caitanya -- Seattle, September 25, 1968:

Girl: "Teachings to Sanātana Gosvāmī."

Prabhupāda: Yes. Read it.

Girl: "In the instructions of Lord Caitanya to Sanātana Gosvāmī we can understand the science of God in the matter of His transcendental form, His opulences, and His devotional service, where everything is being described to Sanātana Gosvāmī by the Lord Himself. By that time Sanātana fell at the feet of the Lord and in great humility asked about his own real identity."

Prabhupāda: Read little slowly so that..., and loudly, so that others can hear.

Girl: "He spoke as follows. 'I am born of a lower family. My associations are all abominable and I am fallen. The most wretched of mankind, I was suffering in the dark well of material enjoyment, and I never knew the actual goal of my life. I do not know what is beneficial to me. Although in the mundane sphere I am what is known as a great learned man, I am in fact so much of a fool that I even accept that I am learned.' "

Prabhupāda: "I am...? I am so much fool that I accept...?" What is that?

Girl: "...that I am learned."

Lecture -- Seattle, October 7, 1968:

Just like a small child, if he surrenders to the wishes of the parents, his life is very pleasing, very happy. A young girl, if she surrenders to the wishes of the parents, and... That is the system, Vedic system. A woman, by nature, is dependent. Artificially, if woman wants liberty, then his (her) life is unhappy, her life is unhappy. Therefore Vedic system is... I am not manufacturing, I am speaking authorizedly on the Vedic principle. The Manu-saṁhitā, the law of Vedas, Manu, the master of the humankind, Manu... Manu is the father of the mankind. So he has got his lawbook. That Manu-saṁhitā lawbook is still followed in India so far as the Hindus are concerned. So in that book Manu-saṁhitā, it is stated, na striyaṁ svatantram arhati. He gives the law that woman should not be given independence. Then? What should be the life? The life should be so long she's not married, she must live under the guidance, dependent on the parents. And as soon as she is married, she should live dependent on her husband. And when the husband is gone out... Because according to Hindu system, the husband does not remain at home for all the days, till death. No. When children are grown up, he gives up wife and children and becomes a sannyāsī, just like I have become. I have my children, I have my grandsons, I have my wife still exist... But I have given up all connection. So how my wife is being maintained? Oh, she has got grown-up children. So there is no anxiety. So dependence is not bad if there is dependence on the proper place. No father neglects to look after the comforts of an unmarried girl, of his unmarried girls and boys. According to Hindu system, a father, mother responsibility ceases after he gets the children married, either daughter or son. So much obligation.

Lecture -- Seattle, October 9, 1968:

Young man (6): Don't you think that since there are people of different temperaments, different kinds of people, that... How should I say it? Don't you think that by denying rāja and jñāna and some of the other yogas that you're denying the infinite aspect of mankind? Don't you think that by asserting bhakti-yoga as the only way that you're saying that...

Prabhupāda: Yes. Infinite aspect. We are publishing one article, "Dr. Frog." Dr. Frog means... Perhaps you know, everyone. The frog lives in a well. That is only a few feet. And one, another frog, he's giving information to his friend in the well, "My dear friend, I have seen a vast water, Atlantic Ocean." But this frog has never seen Atlantic Ocean. He's calculating, "It may be so much big. It may be so much big. It may be so much big." So how this infinity can be calculated by the frog? So those who are calculating infiniteness of this tiny soul, they're all Dr. Frogs. You are not infinite. You are finite. How you can be infinite? You can be infinite only when you dovetail yourself with the infinite. Individually you are finite. That is the position, real position. In the Bhagavad-gītā in the Fifteenth Chapter... You have read Bhagavad-gītā? So did you not read this verse in the Fifteenth Chapter, mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ jīva-loka sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7)? Have you read this? That "These living entities, they're My parts and parcels, fragmental parts." So you are... God is infinite. You are infinitesimal part and parcel. So how you can be infinite?

Press Release -- Los Angeles, December 22, 1968:

"Manifesto of Kṛṣṇa Consciousness." The International Society for Krishna Consciousness is a movement aiming at the spiritual reorientation of mankind through the simple process of chanting the holy names of God. The human life is meant for ending the miseries of material existence. Our present-day society is trying to do so by material progress. However, it is visible to all that in spite of the extensive material progress, the human society is not in peaceful condition. The reason is that a human being is essentially a spirit soul. It is the spirit soul which is the background of development of the material body. However the materialist scientist may deny the spiritual existence in the background of the living force, there is no better understanding than accepting the spirit soul within the body.

Lecture -- New Vrindaban, June 7, 1969:

So similarly, in every planet there is a president, and this president is called Vivasvān. Vivasvān manave prāha. And Vivasvān spoke this yoga system to his son Manu, the present Manu. He is present, the... The father of the mankind is called Manu. From Manu this word has come, "man," or manuṣya. So vivasvān manave prāha manur ikṣvākave 'bravīt: "And Manu spoke to his son, Ikṣvāku." Evaṁ paramparā-prāptam (BG 4.2). In this way, by disciplic succession, either from the father to the son or from the spiritual master to the disciple, this knowledge is coming. Just like you know your forefather's name—suppose the grandfather of your grandfather. How do you know? By the paramparā system. Your grandfather's grandfather was known to his son, then his son, then his son, then his son, then your father, then you are. You cannot know directly; you have to know by the step. Similarly, you have to know the previous personalities by this paramparā, disciplic succession. You cannot speculate how is your grandfather's grandfather. You have to hear from your father or grandfather. That is the process. Similarly, you cannot imagine what is God. You have to hear from the disciplic succession who is coming from God. Then you will understand what is God. So that is the personal understanding of God.

Pandal Lecture -- Bombay, April 6, 1971:

All mahājanas, they are great devotees of Kṛṣṇa; therefore they have become mahājanas. Just like Svayambhū, Lord Brahmā, Nārada Muni... Svayambhūr nāradaḥ śambhuḥ (SB 6.3.20). Śambhu, Lord Śiva. Svayambhūr nāradaḥ śambhuḥ kapilaḥ kaumāraḥ, kapilo manuḥ. Kaumāra, the four Kumāras, Sanat Kumāra, Sunanda, these four Kumāras, and kumāraḥ kapila, Kapiladeva, the original propounder of Sāṅkhya philosophy, Kapiladeva; and Manu, you know, Manu-saṁhitā, the law-giver to the mankind, Svayambhuva Manu, Manu. And Prahlāda Mahārāja, whose instructions we were discussing in the morning. Prahlādo janaka-rāja bhīṣma, the grandfather of the Kurus. Vaiyāsaki, Śukadeva Gosvāmī; or Bali Mahārāja, a grandson of Prahlāda Mahārāja, he is also an authority. And Yamarāja, he is also authority. So we have to follow these authorities. Otherwise, dharmasya tattvaṁ nihitaṁ guhāyām: we cannot understand the secrecy of religion. So all these twelve mahājanas, they are great devotees of the Lord. Therefore they have become mahājanas, authorized persons.

Pandal Lecture -- Bombay, April 11, 1971:

It is stated by Lord Kṛṣṇa Himself that "First of all I spoke this Kṛṣṇa consciousness philosophy, yogam..." Imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam. And Vivasvān means sun-god. As there is one god in this planet, maybe the president of United States or some other president, the predominating deity, similarly, in every planet there is a predominating deity. And the predominating deity, or the person, in the sun globe is called Vivasvān. So Vivasvān, his son is Manu. Manu means the father of the mankind. Manuṣya. The Sanskrit word, the man, called manuṣya. That means "of Manu." Man or manuṣya, these words have come from Manu. This Manu happened to be the son of Vivasvān. That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā: manur ikṣvākave 'bravīt. Vivasvān manave prāhur manur ikṣvākave 'bravīt. And Ikṣvāku was the son. Mahārāja Ikṣvāku was the son of Manu. Therefore, the dynasty coming from Ikṣvāku Mahārāja, in which Lord Rāmacandra appeared, is called Sūrya-vaṁśa, because it is coming from the sun-god. The kṣatriya family, the royal family in India, there are two groups. One is coming from the sun-god, another coming from the moon-god. That is a long history, of course. But the point is that this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is not new, something manufactured, concocted. It is the oldest because it is coming from sun-god, and taking it from Manu, it comes to the calculation, about forty millions of years ago.

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:

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."

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: "This would be a commonwealth of which indeed God would be the law-giver."

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is the best quality of state. If we abide by the orders of God, or the king or the government abides by the order of God, that is ideal state.

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Śyāmasundara: No. It does mean something if you accept that forms are evolving from simple to complex. That means that we can expect in the future that mankind will even be of a more superior nature than they are now.

Prabhupāda: Forms are... One form is superior than the other form. (indistinct) you said.

Karandhara: That possibility is also there. We know that by performances of certain types of sacrifices you can become, and go to the demigod planet...

Prabhupāda: That difference is that one apartment is better than the other apartment. Material.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: No, mystical... One who does not know God, for him it is mystical, but one who knows God, he takes orders from God. This is defined, ānukūlyena kṛṣṇānuśīlanam (CC Madhya 19.167), means favorably working for satisfaction of God. But if one's idea of God is not clear, he thinks it is mystical, but one who has got clear idea of God, clear order from God, then it is not mystical but it is practical.

Hayagrīva: He believed that mystics—he uses the words "mystics," not-mystics participate in God's love for mankind and aid the divine purpose.

Prabhupāda: Yes, that is the...

Hayagrīva: This is the real meaning of creative evolution.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Everyone is in ignorance due to long separation from God. In the material world the living entity has forgotten his relationship with God; therefore his activities are only sense gratification, like the animals. And when he is given lesson, instruction how to become God conscious, how to love God, that is activity, and that is real life. Otherwise it is animal life. The religion is a kind of faith, sentiment, but when the religious system is understood on the basis of good logic and philosophy, that becomes perfect understanding of God. Without philosophy, religious understanding is sentiment. That sentiment does not help anyone very much. It continues for some time, then people become disinterested in the matter of religion. So religion means, as it is stated in the Bhāgavata, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, how one has learned to love God. Then it is religion.

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: 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.

Hayagrīva: Yes. He sees the material worlds as being isolated. He says, "There is then a bond between the worlds, but this bond may be regarded as infinitely loose in comparison with the mutual dependence which unites the parts of the same world among ourselves," excuse me, "which unites the parts of the same world among themselves. So that it is not artificially for reasons of mere convenience that we isolate our solar system. Nature itself invites us to isolate it." So this, this calls to mind the image of a prison house. The isolation of the world, as far as man is concerned, is isolation imposed by material nature on the conditioned.

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Hayagrīva: Well man, Mill concludes that conformity to nature has no connection whatever with right and wrong, and that man must amend nature. He must not act according to nature, but must—the word he uses is "amend"...

Prabhupāda: Yes, amend. Not only amend. The nature, that we discussed, almost always, the nature is animal nature. But man must be above the animal nature. That is rationality. Normally a man is called rational animal, so he should advance in rationality. Just for eating, eating is common to the man and to the animal, but man should be advanced, what kind of eating it should be. Not only natural, although natural tendency is... Just like man, some of, not all, some of them want to eat meat. So rationality is that "If I have got better foodstuff, why shall I kill that animal?" This is then rationality. But because he can eat meat, he can kill animal, he should go on killing animal, that is less intelligence. God has given so many nice foodstuff. Take for fruits, there are varieties of fruits Kṛṣṇa has given to the mankind, and we can utilize milk in so many nice preparation. So the fruits are not eaten by the animals. The dogs, cats, they do not eat fruit. It is meant for human being, so similarly there must, discrimination is the better part of valor. Is that not English proverb? So man should have discrimination, and especially for eating. I think George Bernard Shaw wrote one book, You are What You are Eating.

Philosophy Discussion on William James:

Śyāmasundara: Yes. Something like that. He says that experience and not philosophy or theology should form the basis of religious life; that experience should be our religious life and not just philosophy, but actual applied practice.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Philosophy will give us the idea of the goal, and our practical application is to give us the right path.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the life of religion is mankind's most important function.

Prabhupāda: That's nice. We say also, without religion a living entity is no better than an animal. So that is very important.

Śyāmasundara: And he says that the evidence for God's existence is found primarily in one's personal inner experience. One has an intuitive experience that God exists.

Prabhupāda: God exists. Just like we say always that God is supposed to be the supreme father. So as I know, even though I did not see my father, but still I know that I had father, or I have father. So if God is the supreme father, He must be there.

Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:

Prabhupāda: No. Sleeping too much is bad in all circumstances. So, stop the machine. Stop this machine. Tomorrow is good. (break)

Hayagrīva: In The Ages of Life, Schopenhauer writes, "A complete and adequate notion of life can never be attained by anyone who does not reach old age, for it is only the old man who sees life whole and knows its natural course. It is only he who is acquainted, and this is most important, not only with its entrance, like the rest of mankind, but with its exit too, so that he alone has a full sense of its utter vanity, while the others never cease to labor under the false notion that everything will come right in the end.

Prabhupāda: I could not follow. Old man is perfect?

Hayagrīva: No. But an old man can see the course of life, can see life in its entirety, the ages...

Prabhupāda: As far as different, old men have got different experience. We have seen in Western countries old men, they still follow the path of sense gratification. So where is his experience? Unless there is training, simply to become old man is not sufficient. Training is required. Old man, actual old man should take renunciation. That is Vedic plan. At the end of life one should become a sannyāsa and completely devote his time and energy to understand and serve God. So unless there is training from the very beginning as brahmacārī, simply by age one is not mature. That is not correct.

Philosophy Discussion on B. F. Skinner:

Prabhupāda: Yes. The real point is sense gratification. Freedom of sense gratification. That is their point. But these fools, they do not know that by sense gratification you are entangling yourself in repetition of birth and death.

Śyāmasundara: So Skinner nonetheless allows himself some relaxation. He drinks vodka and tonic in the late afternoon (laughter) and sees an occasional movie. He reads George Simon detective novels once in awhile and enjoys the company of friends. He has two children and his grandchildren. There is a note from his diary: "Sun streams in (indistinct) room. My hi-fi is midway through the first act of Tristan and Isolde. A very pleasant environment. A man would be a fool not to enjoy himself in it. In a moment I will work on a manuscript which may help mankind. So my life is not only pleasant; it is earned or deserved. And yet, yet, I am unhappy."

Prabhupāda: In that sense he is a truthful man. Yes. Truthful.

Śyāmasundara: He wants to... He is trying to understand.

Prabhupāda: He cannot. That is not the way of understanding. The Vedic way is that you first approach a guru. That is the Vedic way. He cannot personally search for the truth. That is not possible.

Philosophy Discussion on Karl Marx:

Prabhupāda: There is no cooperation. In this way, finally the people will non-cooperate and there will be revolution. Just like Gandhi's noncooperation. That stage will come. Nobody will cooperate with them. So these are foolish theories. It has no practical value.

Śyāmasundara: So their idea about... It says that all events are seen as physical reactions aimed at satisfying economic and material needs of mankind. In other words everything that happens historically is seen as a result of economic and material needs required.

Prabhupāda: That is a fact. I have already explained. Because I want to make profit, you want to make profit, so as soon as there will be check in my profit-making or your profit-making, then we shall fight. The reason is that I want to make profit, you want to make profit, nobody is prepared to sacrifice profit. So as soon as our interests clash there is fight.

Philosophy Discussion on Aristotle:

Prabhupāda: (chuckles) This is Aristotle's ignorance, that he does not know what is God and he is speaking about God. That is his ignorance.

Hayagrīva: Nor, he says, nor can God return the love that He receives. He doesn't love or care for mankind.

Prabhupāda: So He is in perfect knowledge, then why He should not reciprocate? So God reciprocates. It is said in the Bhagavad-gītā, ye yathā māṁ prapadyante tāṁs tathaiva bhajāmy aham (BG 4.11). As much as we offer our love to God, He, what is called, cooperates, cooperative response. When we fully surrender and fully in loving service, then we can understand God, what He is actually.

Philosophy Discussion on St. Augustine:

Hayagrīva: Augustine believed that all men came from Adam, that is the first man or one man, and that this one man God created—this one man—and this one man is the root of all mankind. He writes, "God knew how good it would be for this community often to recall that the human race had its roots in one man, precisely to show how pleasing it is to God that men, though many, should be one."

Prabhupāda: They... It is, our Vedic conception is also like that, that the mankind has come from Manu. From Manu, human being, or manuṣya... The Sanskrit word is manuṣya, "coming from Manu." So Manu is also coming from Brahmā. In this way, as the conception of a first creature, Adam, similarly, a first living being is Lord Brahmā. Therefore our proposition is that a living being coming from the living being. Brahmā is living being, or Adam is living being. Then the living being does not come from matter. Brahmā is also coming from the Supreme Lord as raja-guṇa avatāra, incarnation of raja-guṇa. So all living being, they are coming from the Supreme Living Being. So Brahmā is also the first creature within this universe.

Philosophy Discussion on John Locke:

Hayagrīva: And John Locke, Locke is the..., is most famous for his conception of tabula rasa, or blank slate, that a child is born with no innate ideas. He states that "If there are innate or inborn ideas, all men would have them." That is to say, there would be universal consent. He writes, "This argument of universal consent, which is made use of to prove innate principles, seems to me a demonstration that there are none such because there are none to which all mankind give a universal consent." So it cannot be argued that all people have an innate or inborn idea of God since there is no universal consent on this subject. Well, do innate ideas have to be universal? Might not some living entities have some innate ideas and other living entities have others? Why does an innate idea have to be universal and apply to everyone?

Prabhupāda: Yes. Innate idea is that there is somebody. That is developed consciousness. The animals, they cannot think, on account of nondeveloped consciousness, but even in human society, uncivilized society, they have got the innate idea of some superior form. When there is lightning, they offer obeisances. When they see big ocean, they offer obeisances, something big. So that innate idea is universal, to offer obeisances to something wonderful. But this innate idea of accepting something supreme and offering respect is not developed in the animal. So this innate idea is there. When it is not developed, it is animal, and when it is developed, then it is human being. And a perfect human being is he, when he has developed this innate idea to the fullest stage. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Philosophy Discussion on George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel:

Prabhupāda: This is very important thing, that a man cannot manufacture religion. That is very important point. Therefore we say religion means the words, the order given by God. Just like Kṛṣṇa says, sarva-dharmān parityajya: (BG 18.66) "You have manufactured so many religious systems. You give up, kick it out. It has no value. Here is religion." And in the beginning He said, dharma-saṁsthāpanārthāya: "I have appeared to re-establish the principle of religion." And He says at last that "Give up. Kick out all this so-called religion. Here is religion." What is that? Mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ...: "You just surrender to Me." This is religion. And Bhāgavata says, dharmaṁ tu sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam: (SB 6.3.19) "The order given by God, that is religion." Otherwise, everything is bogus. It has no meaning. The same example: law means which is given by the government. You cannot say, "I have prepared the law." Who will care for you? Even the small law, "Keep to the right," that is religion. If you say, "What is the law? If they keep to the left..." No. That will not be accepted. "Keep to the right" is religion, and "Keep to the left" is criminal. So religion is pious and impious—everything on the order of Kṛṣṇa, or God. If you follow strictly the instruction of Kṛṣṇa, then you are religious, pious, transcendental, devotee, everything. And if you defy Kṛṣṇa, you manufacture your own way, then you are rascal, asura. Na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ (BG 7.15). He is narādhamāḥ. This is the way. Less than the mankind, narādhamāḥ, who do not follow the instruction of Kṛṣṇa, or God.

Philosophy Discussion on George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel:

Hayagrīva: Hegel considered history and theodicy to be integral. He looks on history as a justification of God, and he rejects the Vedic conception of history because he doesn't see it unfolding any particular meaning. That is, universes are created, maintained and annihilated in an apparently meaningless way. For Hegel, history has to tell the story of man's elevation to God. Apart from the history of man, God would be alone and lifeless. God seems to depend on human history. God is not transcendental but is manifest in the world.

Prabhupāda: But if He is dependent on history, how He is God? This is nonsense proposal. (laughing) He is dependent on history!

Hayagrīva: Doesn't the history of mankind necessarily...

Prabhupāda: Whatever it may be, God is independent, satandhara (?). Janmādy asya yataḥ anvayād itarataś ca artheṣu abhijñaḥ svarāṭ (SB 1.1.1). Svarāṭ, independent. He does not depend on anything; still He is God. That is God. If He is dependent on anything, then He is not God.

Philosophy Discussion on George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel:

Hayagrīva: The animals have no right to life, he says, because they have no will.

Prabhupāda: That is his foolishness. He has got will. When you take to the slaughterhouse, he protests.

Hayagrīva: He says, "Mankind has the right of absolute proprietorship. A thing belongs to the accidental first-comer who gets it."

Prabhupāda: What accident?

Hayagrīva: To... A thing belongs... Or whoever comes first. Say there's a gold mine. If I get there first, it's mine, because I'm the first-comer.

Prabhupāda: That means that, then, "Might is right."

Hayagrīva: Yes.

Prabhupāda: But gold, they say, if he says gold is there, whose gold it is?

Hayagrīva: He says the first-comer...

Prabhupāda: No, no. First of all you go and say... First of all you become proprietor. But who is the actual proprietor of the gold, when you did not go? You may go first and claim proprietorship, but the gold was there. So whose property it is? Gold was there. Who made that gold? Who kept that gold? This question must be there.

Philosophy Discussion on Auguste Comte:

Prabhupāda: What is that humanity? The working man does not know...

Hayagrīva: Humanity is all mankind.

Prabhupāda: All mankind to do what?

Hayagrīva: The worship of humanity, he spoke of, that the working man will usher in or introduce...

Prabhupāda: These stamps are not very clear. What does it mean, "humanity"? To supply the necessities of the human being? Or what?

Hayagrīva: Well, humanity for him is all..., simply every man.

Prabhupāda: Every man is already there. So what does he mean by "every man," "humanity"?

Hayagrīva: All mankind.

Prabhupāda: That's all right, all mankind, but what is that humanity? Humanity is some activities? Or simply taking the whole human being together, that is humanity?

Hayagrīva: All human beings together.

Prabhupāda: Hm. So all human beings together, but each and every human being he has got some individuality. So even if you take all humanity, how the individuality will be the same? That is not possible.

Philosophy Discussion on Auguste Comte:

Prabhupāda: We cannot understand what does he mean, "supreme being" and "humanity." The supreme being is God. The human being is also God? Or what does he mean, "humanity"? What is the clear meaning of humanity?

Hayagrīva: Mankind, all mankind.

Prabhupāda: All mankind? There are millions and millions of mankind. So instead of worshiping God you can worship millions of millions of men. Is it possible?

Hayagrīva: He must mean mankind in a generalized sense.

Prabhupāda: That's all right, but how you can serve the mankind? Suppose if I serve one man, does it..., is it worshiping the mankind? If not, then how you can worship millions of men at a time, or in your life? How it is possible?