That is nonsense (Other lectures)

From Vaniquotes
Jump to: navigation, search

Lectures

Nectar of Devotion Lectures

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, January 6, 1973:

So God has nothing to do. Kṛṣṇa has nothing to do. So we also have nothing to do. Why we are working? They are taking, "This is pleasure." This material life means... Because mostly they are infected with two qualities of material modes of nature, namely ignorance and passion. So impeded by this ignorance and passion they are working very hard, just like an ass, and still they are thinking that "I am happy." He comes back to home, working very, very hard in the office, and he thinks, "Now I... My successful... I have earned so much money." This is the nature of material life, that he will work very hard and he will think, "That is my life." This is material life. But actually, if you are actually happy, then why you have to work so hard? But that is nonsense. He is nonsense. He does not know. Therefore the karmīs are called mūḍhas, asses. The ass works hard for the washerman, and the washerman gives him a morsel of grass and he thinks, "I am happy." This is ass mentality. He has worked very hard, but getting that little bunch of grass. He can get it anywhere, but he thinks that "This washerman gives it. Therefore I have to work..." Or he does not know that "I'm working for it." This is ass mentality.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 5, 1972:

So ācārya's duty is to point out the śāstric injunction. They're already there in the Vedas. His duty is... Just like there are so many medicines. If you go to a drug shop, all of them are medicines, but the experienced physician, he gives you a medicine which is particularly suitable for you. You cannot say, "Sir, why you are selecting medicine? You can give any one bottle." That is nonsense. Not any one. The particular body, a particular bottle, and a particular medicine which is suitable for you, the experienced physician gives you.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 28, 1973:

He advised, kīrtanīyaḥ sadā hariḥ (CC Adi 17.31). It is not that one who is advanced, he hasn't, hasn't got to take part in kīrtana. That is nonsense. Sadā. Sadā means always, whether you are advanced or not advanced. Kīrtanīyaḥ sadā hariḥ. Śravaṇaṁ, śravaṇaṁ kīrtanam. Kīrtana, as, unless one hears, how he can... Kīrtana also...

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 1.9 -- Mayapur, April 2, 1975:

And what is that superior energy? Now, jīva-bhūtām, "These living entities." Jīva-bhūtāṁ mahā-bāho. The superior energy is not produced by the inferior energy. That is nonsense. The inferior energy is produced by the superior energy. This is perfect. We have got experience that the superior controls the inferior, not that inferior controls the superior. Where you get all this idea? Therefore it has been described as aparā and parā prakṛti.

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

How it is possible? If somebody says, "Oh, I don't care for any school, colleges. I'll be educated at home," this is nonsense. Is it possible? Or will anybody recognize you? Then what is the use? Waste of time. That is the disease. Everyone thinks, "Oh, I am everything. I am perfect." That is the disease, material disease. Everyone is thinking, "I am independent. I am perfect. Whatever I think, oh, that is all right." This is going on. First of all, if anyone wants advancement, he must first of all think just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu is pretending, that "My spiritual master found Me a great fool (CC Adi 7.71)." So one must agree to become a great fool and study these scriptures from bona fide spiritual master. Then there is hope of advancement. Yes?

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.118-121 -- San Francisco, February 24, 1967:

This ignorance cannot cover God. That is nonsense. Ignorance covers the God's energy, living entity. Therefore we say that "We are God, but now we have become dog." That is another ignorance. He's never God. He's the energy of God. This is the difference between Māyāvāda philosophy and Vaiṣṇava philosophy. We should always know that we are energies of God, and because we are energies, we are, there are so many things qualitatively equal. Just the same example: The warmth and the illumination of the sunshine and the sun planet is practically the same, but the sun is never covered by cloud, but the sunshine is covered—sometimes, not always. Just like you see that the sunshine is..., the immense sunshine all over the universe, a part of the sunshine is covered, not all; similarly, a part of the energy, living energy, is covered by this māyā, and not all.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.118-121 -- San Francisco, February 24, 1967:

So therefore cloud is also another energy. So similarly, this material energy is also energy of God, but it cannot cover God. That is the difference. God is never covered by ignorance. This is nonsense. Those fools and rascals say that "God... We are God. We are now covered." It is the most rascaldom. How? If we are God, how we can be covered by ignorance? Then what is your value of your becoming God? You are not God.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 6.154-155 -- Gorakhpur, February 19, 1971 (Krsna Niketan):

There is another śakti, avidyā, avidyā-śakti. That avidyā-śakti is for these living entities, not for Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is never covered by avidyā. Just like I... (break) ...the cloud has covered your eyes. You say, "The cloud has covered the sun." That is nonsense. Sun is very, very, very, very big. What is the cloud? Maybe hundred miles' spread. But the sun globe is fourteen lakhs... (break) ...that correct? So how the cloud, hundred miles' spreading cloud, can cover the sun? It is foolishness that "God is covered by māyā." No. God is never covered by māyā.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.98-99 -- Washington, D.C., July 4, 1976:

Therefore Kṛṣṇa Himself as devotee of Kṛṣṇa appeared. That is Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Caitanya Mahāprabhu is Kṛṣṇa Himself, but He's teaching how to approach Kṛṣṇa. And His disciples, they are also teaching the same philosophy. There is no difference between Kṛṣṇa's philosophy and Caitanya Mahāprabhu's philosophy. It is not that we can manufacture some philosophy. That is nonsense. Philosophy is one; religion is one. Everyone has to follow. There is no second alternative. That is the preaching about... Mām ekam, not that "Whatever you like, you can do." No, that is not. Mām ekam—simply Kṛṣṇa.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.101-104 -- Bombay, November 3, 1975:

We are eternal, we are many, and God is also eternal, but He is one. He is singular number. Not that all of us, we are God. That is nonsense. We are part and parcel of God, but we are not as powerful as God. Anyone can understand it very easily. They are claiming to become God. So does he think that he is equal in power with God? No. That is foolishness. Mūḍha. God is one, but we are... We are also eternal, God is also eternal, but we are many.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.152-154 -- New York, December 5, 1966:

So as we have seen that Lord Caitanya, when He instructs, He gives at once evidence from authoritative scripture, that is the way of presenting. Always you should remember that we cannot imagine about God: "I think God is like this." This is nonsense. You have no thinking power. You are under the grip of material nature.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.281-293 -- New York, December 18, 1966:

It is simple to understand. If the prisoner thinks, "Oh, he is also one of the prisoners because he has come here," this is nonsense. He is not prisoner. Similarly, when Kṛṣṇa comes in this material world, if a foolish man thinks that he is also one of us, he is foolish number one. Therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā it is stated, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritāḥ: (BG 9.11) "Foolish persons, they think that I am one of them."

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 25.19-31 -- San Francisco, January 20, 1967:

Because according to Śaṅkarācārya, anyone who accepts sannyāsa, he becomes immediately Nārāyaṇa, God. He immediately becomes God. So that is being refuted by one of the disciples, that "This is nonsense, that simply by accepting and changing the garment I become God. This is not..." Actually, one has to understand things as they are. So therefore, the explanation as given by Caitanya Mahāprabhu, that is right.

Festival Lectures

Ratha-yatra Lecture at The Family Dog Auditorium -- San Francisco, July 27, 1969:

I am also a person." Although the relation is "I am his son; he is my father," but both of us are persons. None of us is imperson. That is nonsense. How my father can become imperson if I am person? This is nonsense.

Radhastami, Srimati Radharani's Appearance Day -- Montreal, August 30, 1968:

Actually we are experiencing, if we speak something impersonal, they think it is very learned speech, and when we speak of something personal they think it is old, old style. This is nonsense. Practically, the Personality of God is the ultimate knowledge, but men with poor fund of knowledge, a little stock of knowledge, they cannot understand. If He is impersonal, how Brahmā and Śambhu are engaged in His service? He is person.

Arrival Addresses and Talks

Arrival Lecture -- Gainesville, July 29, 1971:

Otherwise, how He can be God? If He is a Hindu God, just like they describe in the dictionary that Kṛṣṇa, a Hindu God—that is nonsense. Kṛṣṇa is for everyone. Kṛṣṇa does not say that "I am a Hindu God." But these rascals say Kṛṣṇa is Hindu God. This is going on. You see in the Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa says, sarva yoniṣu kaunteya. "In all species of life." Sambhavanti mūrtayaḥ. There are as many different forms of life. Tāsāṁ mahad yoni, brahma: "Their mother is this material nature, and I am their seed-giving father." Kṛṣṇa says that. So how can Kṛṣṇa be Indian or Hindu or this or that? No. Kṛṣṇa is for everyone. And the proof is that five years ago in the Western countries nobody knew what is Kṛṣṇa. How they're taking Kṛṣṇa in so loving attitude? This is the proof that Kṛṣṇa is for everyone, and everyone is for Kṛṣṇa.

Arrival Talk -- Aligarh, October 9, 1976:

Because it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, they take it Hindu idea. This is nonsense.

Initiation Lectures

Lecture & Initiation -- Seattle, October 20, 1968:

Yes. Just like there are many nonsense, they say that demigods... Of course, you have no affairs with demigods. Vedic religion there are hundreds and thousands of demigods. Especially it is going on that either you worship Kṛṣṇa or Lord Śiva or Kali, the same thing. This is nonsense. You should not, I mean to, place on the same level with the Supreme Lord. Nobody is greater than Lord. Nobody is equal than the Lord. So this equality should be avoided. Then?

Lecture at Initiation Fire Sacrifice -- Los Angeles, July 16, 1969:

Self-realization, liberation, the sign is that he becomes joyful, prasannātmā, immediately. If you have actually realized yourself, simply by bluffing that "I am God, I am this, I am..." No. There are signs. If you are God, then you must be as joyful as God, as Kṛṣṇa. If you are suffering still and you are claiming that you are God, that is nonsense. You needn't become God. You, simply if you become in the light of God, you become joyful. Just like from the darkness of night, if you simply come to the sunshine, immediately your position is changed. It does not require that you have to become the sun. Simply by coming to the sunlight your purpose is fulfilled. So the sunlight and the sun is not different; they are one unit. But sunlight is not sun. That is knowledge. If we, if simply by coming you can come into the sunlight, if I think that I have become identical with the sun, that is nonsense.

Lecture at Initiation Fire Sacrifice -- Los Angeles, July 16, 1969:

The Supreme is puruṣam. He is not female. Just like some rascal thinks that He's Kālī, He's Durgā. No! Kālī, Durgā are His potencies. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva. The Supreme has many kinds of potencies. Goddess Kālī is also one of the potencies, Durgā is also one of the potencies. Not that Durgā is the Absolute Truth. This is nonsense.

Initiation and Brahma-samhita Lecture -- New York, July 26, 1971:

Brahmā is the original creature within this universe. We, we do not know what is beyond this universe, but within this universe, he's the first creature. He's also known as ādi kavi. Ādi-kavaye. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam you have read: tene hṛdā ādi-kavaye. Ādi-kavi means the original learned person. Brahmā is a learned person. Darwin's theory is that origin is void. That is nonsense. The origin also, even within this universe, is a learned person. Ādi-kavi. Tene brahma hṛdā ādi-kavaye muhyanti yat sūrayaḥ. Ādi-kavi is person. Ādi means original learned person, learned creature, he's person. And his origin also person.

General Lectures

Lecture to College Students -- Seattle, October 20, 1968, Introduction by Tamala Krsna:

It is coming through this last hundred years, more and more men trying to answer the need of American people especially, for some kind of spiritual growth, spiritual realization. These men, unfortunately, are cheating the public. They are presenting the teachings that everything—all people, all objects, everything—is God, and that to enjoy, enjoy in this world, this is the world to enjoy. To increase your consciousness so that you can enjoy more, that we are all God, that all things are God. This is nonsense.

Lecture -- Hawaii, March 23, 1969:

This is my state. This is my country." Ahaṁ mameti (SB 5.5.8). Aham means "I," and mama means "mine." This is nonsense. Nothing belongs to you. Everything belongs to God. Everyone has got right to live on God's property. This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. If everyone is taught this God consciousness, there is no need of this artificial United Nations. We are united by nature. God is the center. Why artificial spending so much money?

Lecture -- Hawaii, March 23, 1969:

That is nonsense. So hardly you'll find any sane man or any learned man in this world. You see? So first teaching is that "You are not this body." That is the beginning of Kṛṣṇa's teaching.

Lecture -- London, September 26, 1969:

So Paramātmā and ātmā, or God and Godhead, the Supreme Godhead or Supreme God. So we cannot place everyone on the same level. That is nonsense. As in this world we see that you are richer than me, and somebody is richer than you, and somebody is richer than somebody else... You go on finding out who is the richest, then you'll come to God. You cannot find anyone in this material world as the richest of all.

Lecture -- London, September 26, 1969:

But you cannot say that "Because I cannot live in the water, therefore nobody can live in the water." That is nonsense. This is nonsense. So they, our scientists are so-called nonsense only. They say, "No, there cannot be any existence of living entity in the moon pla..., moon planet or sun planet." They say like that. But our Vedic literature does not say like that. Living entities... It is said, sarva-gaḥ. They can go anywhere, and they can live anywhere. Sarva-gaḥ. Sarva means all; gaḥ means going. You can go.

Lecture -- London, September 26, 1969:

That is nonsense. No. Sun is far, far away, but his energy has entered your room. So much you can say, but if you think that because the sunlight is within the room... Sunlight within your room? Sunlight, if it comes a few millions miles nearer this planet, it will be finished. What about your room? The temperature is so high.

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

If ordinary beauty painted by a, an artist, it takes so much time and labor, do you think that this beauty is done automatically? What is the explanation? This is nonsense, that there is no brain behind it. There is. That is the brain of God. That is explained: na tasya kāryaṁ kāraṇaṁ ca vidyate. Although it is so beautifully done, but He has nothing to do. How? Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śruyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport).

Lecture -- Delhi, December 13, 1971:

So what is the power of your seeing? Why you are so much proud of seeing? This is nonsense. Why do you go to school? To learn how to see. Why you can sit down, anyone who hasn't got, never has gone to school and never taken an education, his seeing and a perfect MA, Ph. D. person's seeing, is that all right, the same thing? Then why you are proud of your nonsense seeing? This will be the answer. You have to prepare your eyes to see. You have these, these eyes have no value. Your argument on the imperfect experience of the senses has no value. Yes?

Lecture at Caitanya Matha -- Visakhapatnam, February 19, 1972:

These varieties of flowers, trees, and leaves, they are developing under direction of Kṛṣṇa, but His direction is so powerful it comes at once, svābhāvikī jñāna-bala-kriyā ca. Just like a great scientist pushing on a button, electronics. Immediately something wonderful happens, but it is not that the machine is working, it is the scientist who is pushing on the button. Similarly, don't take, this is nonsense that nature is producing.

Lecture -- Nellore, January 4, 1976:

So we have to follow mahājana because we are tiny living entities. We cannot speculate. This is nonsense. Speculation is nonsense. Panthās tu koṭi-śata-vatsara-sampragamyo vāyor athāpi manaso (Bs. 5.34). If we speculate we shall never reach the Absolute Truth. That is not possible. But power is very limited. How long I shall speculate? This is called kūpa-maṇḍūka-nyāya. Just like a frog in the well is informed by his friend, "My dear friend, Mr. Frog, or Dr. Frog, I have seen a big, vast mass of water, Atlantic Ocean."

Address to Rotary Club -- Chandigarh, October 17, 1976:

Sarvam etad ṛtaṁ manye. This is actually student of Bhagavad-gītā, not that "The portion which I like, I accept, and the portion I do not like, I reject." This is nonsense. If you want to become the student of Bhagavad-gītā, if you want to derive some benefit out of it, then you should be like Arjuna, like this. He said, sarvam etad ṛtaṁ manye: (BG 10.14) "Whatever You say, I accept it." Ṛtam means truth. "Not that I am accepting, but previous to me..." What is the next line?

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. The supreme cause is God. Sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam (Bs. 5.1).

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Prabhupāda: This is nonsense. This argument is called in Sanskrit kaka-tal-nyāya. There was a tal tree, and one crow came, and immediately the fruit fell down. And there were two arguers: one said that the crow sat down on the fruit and it was so light it fell down, and the other said no, the crow was trying to sit down on the fruit but in the meantime the fruit fell and he could not sit. It is like that. It may be coincidence, the crow was just trying to sit on the fruit and the fruit fell. But these people's answer is no, the crow first sat down, then is was fallen. Another says no, the fruit has fallen down; therefore the crow could not sit.

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. Nothing is accidental. Everything is symmetrical. Therefore, we have to admit that supreme direction, and that is Kṛṣṇa, as stated in the Bhagavad-gītā: "Under My direction everything is going on." The sun is rising on His direction, and when He orders, the sun will not rise. But it is not accidental.

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. If God is limited, then He cannot be God.

Śyāmasundara: He says either God is limited in His goodness, in order to allow evil to exist...

Prabhupāda: No. He is unlimitedly good.

Śyāmasundara: Then He must be limited in His power, because He cannot stop evil from existing.

Prabhupāda: No. Evil works under His guidance. Good and evil, both are control] by Him. Therefore He is called supreme controller. He is not limited. The exact word used in Sanskrit is called ananta, unlimited. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam (Bs. 5.33). Ananta. Advaita, non-dual; acyuta, infallible; and ananta, unlimited. (end)

Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:

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.

Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:

Prabhupāda: Yes. But that will has to be trained. Otherwise he will manufacture that "I am doing this in good sense; therefore it is good." He will manufacture his idea. That is nonsense. Therefore you require guidance.

Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:

Prabhupāda: ...to do something which will be universally accepted. That is nonsense. That is not possible.

Hayagrīva: A man cannot establish a universal law by his own action.

Prabhupāda: No. So God can do it. Just like God says, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām e.. (BG 18.66).. Because God says, it has to be accepted. But if some individual soul said, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām, who will do that? Nobody will do it. That's why we are preaching that "You surrender to Kṛṣṇa." We do not say that "You surrender to me." Who will hear me? "Who are you? Why shall I surrender to you?" But if one understands that God wants this surrender, then he will agree.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Śyāmasundara: An idea, born out of an idea.

Prabhupāda: Idea. This is nonsense. If son is a person, his father must be a person.

Śyāmasundara: He says that in philosophy we approach closest to the absolute or God, whereas art is the form of the absolute.

Prabhupāda: Then his statement that Christianity is perfect, that is refuted.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Śyāmasundara: But I have an idea, I want to make something...

Prabhupāda: No, no, that is false. As soon as you speak of idea, that is nonsense. You cannot make an idea of God. That is nonsense. What do you think?

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Śyāmasundara: His answer to that is chance variation.

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. There is no such chance. If he says chance, that means he is a nonsense.

Śyāmasundara: He examines that...

Prabhupāda: He examines what is already existing. But our question is, who has made these circumstances, different circumstances for the existence of different animals? That is our question.

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: No. That is nonsense. Nature is not working mechanically. There is a plan. The sun is rising exactly according to calculation. Calculation not first; first of all sun rises. But we get experience than in such-and-such season the sun rises at such-and-such time, so in that season, exactly to the minute, to the second, the sun rises. So it is neither chance nor whimsical. There is a plan. There is a plan.

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. That is nonsense. Ten millions of... You cannot give a history of ten millions. It is your imagination. Where is the history of ten millions of years? You are simply imagining, that is your word. But where is historical evidence? You cannot give history more than three thousand years, and you are speaking of ten millions of years. This is all nonsense. How you can go... There is no history in the human civ... There is no history, ten millions of years.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense.

Śyāmasundara: Whereas this philosopher thinks that we should just..., that the vital force is guiding everyone and is creating its own evolution, that we should just drift in the course of things and the vital force will determine history or will determine our future.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Vital force will determine. That is somewhat...

Śyāmasundara: Without our doing—without anything of our own doing.

Prabhupāda: No. Vital force must know how to make progress, how to do it. Then he'll be... If he does not know how to do it, how it will be possible? Can you do anything...

Philosophy Discussion on John Stuart Mill:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. That is nonsense. That is nonsense. Nobody has got that.

Śyāmasundara: He says that everyone should be free...

Prabhupāda: Then everyone should be philosopher. He has got his own philosophy. Everyone has got his own philosophy.

Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:

Prabhupāda: No, that is nonsense. Will, when he says will, the will must be from a person, of an individual person. That he does not know.

Śyāmasundara: We only have experience that will is coming from a person.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Śyāmasundara: But what about the will of electricity and gravity, these forces of nature. Aren't they also...

Prabhupāda: That is also will of a person. The maker of the computer machine, he has will.

Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:

Prabhupāda: Suppose a child is born, doctor says it is dead child. You say something is wanted, but what is that something? You do not know. Otherwise, if you know, you add it. What is that something? Suggest, what is that something? Simply vague idea something, that is nonsense idea. That is not science. You must give, "This is wanting." Suppose that you say that the blood, the redness, just like nowadays blood supply is the theory, so what is this blood? Blood is a liquid, red liquid, like chemical or something, with some salt. So you can add salt, just like in cholera cases, they add saline injection. So dead body, you give saline injection, make it red by some color, give him life. If you say that "Red blood is now white," so make it red. What is the difficulty? There is no difficulty. There are so many chemicals. If you say the redness is the life, then there are many natural products, just like jewels, by nature it is red. Why is it not alive? Why it is not alive? By natural redness of something, if you say that is the cause of life, then there are many jewels. What is called, jewels?

Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:

Prabhupāda: Ruby. Why it is not alive? Redness is there. Therefore we have to accept your identification with the soul, not with this body; otherwise this is nonsense.

Śyāmasundara: He is not disputing that there is soul or there is not soul. He is merely putting forward a principle to test something, if it is true or false.

Prabhupāda: This is the test. This is the test. Because the soul is there, therefore the body is moving.

Philosophy Discussion on Edmund Husserl:

Prabhupāda: So any, anything, whatever you may be, you cannot become perfect without hearing from another perfect. This is nonsense, that you go on speculating and the proof will come. This is nonsense.

Śyāmasundara: Well, I know. That is nonsense. That isn't what he's saying. He's saying that if you look at an object, the nature of that object will be self-evident; that it isn't that we have to know everything about the object, but the nature of it, the essence of it will be self-evident.

Prabhupāda: No. The nature is... Sometimes a child takes this, asks his father: "What is this, Father? What is this?" "The case of a spectacle." Therefore he gets the knowledge. That is nature.

Philosophy Discussion on Edmund Husserl:

Prabhupāda: Just see. This is nonsense.

Devotee: According to that philosophy, if one looks inside a body, a person's body, the essence of the body is the soul. So by looking at the body can we detect the soul within?

Śyāmasundara: Materially, yes. Just like before... Our Western scientists have never read Vedic literature, but they understand why there is leaves on a tree at a certain time and why not. It's not a very difficult thing to understand.

Prabhupāda: This is speculation. If we do not follow the standard knowledge, (indistinct), then you have to speculate. Same thing, same example: if we do not take this information who is your father from your mother, then you have to speculate. This is the same example. But if there is process to understand who is my father simply by asking my mother, why shall I speculate?

Philosophy Discussion on Edmund Husserl:

Prabhupāda: And intuition is also wrong way. You cannot come to the perfect knowledge by speculation or intuition. You must approach a person who knows (indistinct). The same example repeated: you cannot understand who is your father by speculation and intuition. You must approach your mother and ask her, "Who is my father?" That will be perfect knowledge. That is the process. But when..., if you insist on that "Without asking my mother I will understand my father by speculation or intuition," that is nonsense. That is stupidity. That stupid he is.

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud:

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

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

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

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: So as soon as the active principle is there, the combination of male and female secretion acts, and it develops into body, mass body. You can develop into an ant or you can develop into a big hill. That is the difference. Just like a seed, a small seed, that is active principle. So from that seed a big tree develops. So this existence of the big tree depends on that small seed. That is the active principle. Why it is nothing? That is nonsense.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. By accident somebody is condemned and somebody is blessed. This is all nonsense. By accident somebody is put into jail and by accident somebody is hanged? Is there any experience like that? That is a judgment. When a man is condemned, that means it is done by some living judgment. So how is this accident? These are all imperfect knowledge, misleading. There is nothing an accident.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: Yes. That we can admit. Anyone who is in this material world, he is condemned. But the next question will be, if one is condemned, then he can be blessed also. The other side of condemnation is blessing. So what is the blessing side? Has he got any knowledge of the blessing side? Then he is imperfect. As soon as you say condemned, there must be blessing. So he does not know what is the blessing side. That he takes as nothing. That is nonsense.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

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?

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is nonsense. If you believe in your existence, you should believe in others' existence also. Actually there is. Human being is not only existing, but there are so many, 8,400,000 different forms of living being. They are existing. So God is also one of them. According to Vedic understanding of God, that God is also one of the living being, but He is the chief, supreme living being. That is the difference.

Philosophy Discussion on Bertrand Russell:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. That is nonsense. That we have already discussed, that if evolution of bodies, then just like this Darwin says that some monkeys, eh? So where is the direct proof that a monkey body is changing to a human body? We say that there are different types of bodies always, just like different types of apartment. But the living entity, the soul, is transferring from one apartment to another just like we change.

Philosophy Discussion on B. F. Skinner:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. Putting signboard. That is just... Caitanya Mahāprabhu's formula: ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam (CC Antya 20.12), cleansing the heart. That is the process. By putting signboard, philosophy cannot be learned. That is no good.

Philosophy Discussion on B. F. Skinner:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. That is the difficulty, that these people are coming as philosophers teaching. Rascals. That is the difficulty with the present society. (indistinct) Dogs, hogs, camels, and asses. They are taking the position of teacher. That is the defect. We don't take (indistinct) like that. Dogs, hogs, we cannot accept.

Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung:

Prabhupāda: Whatever it may be. Darwin's theory we have already discussed, and that is nonsense.

Śyāmasundara: "Might makes right."

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Śyāmasundara: They think whoever wins in a battle of ideas must have the right idea.

Prabhupāda: No. That is based on "might is right," but we do not accept this theory. We say, "right is might," not "might is right." Yes. If you are right, then you have got might. Otherwise, simply if you have got might, that is not right.

Philosophy Discussion on Mao Tse Tung:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. Therefore they are suffering. The whole world is suffering. They do not know what is real progress or what the human life is meant for. They are taking human life is as good as hogs' life or animals' life. We don't take it. We say the human life has got a special importance for spiritual realization. But these people, they have no such idea. So their practical purpose, our practical purpose is different. They are ignorant. What is the aim of life, they do not know. They take animal life and human life is the same. Simply it should be a little polished. That's all.

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

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense.

Śyāmasundara: Whereas this philosopher thinks that we should just..., that the vital force is guiding everyone and creating its own evolution, that we should just drift in the course of things and the vital force will determine history or will determine our future.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Vital force will determine. That is somewhat...

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

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. How life develops from matter? Where is the, evidence? Why do they not manufacture life from matter in the laboratory? It is simply a statement. It has no value. Because you cannot produce living force from matter. Matter is different and living force, soul, is different. (In) one sense, of course, they are the energy of God, but still, categorically, they are different. So far these materialists are concerned, where is the proof that from matter, life has developed? So why they do not manufacture life in the laboratory? Even an ant you cannot manufacture. You have got all the chemicals. Why don't you manufacture life? So this theory cannot be accepted.

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

Prabhupāda: No, no. There is nothing accidental. It is not that accidental, one becomes high-court judge. (laughter) This is nonsense. Accidental(ly) one becomes a very high grade medical man. This is all childish proposal. They have no sense even. It is all childish. Where is the, in our practical life, where is the evidence that accidentally one has become like this? Is there any evidence of how they propose these childish things? I do not know. And they are passing as philosophers.

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

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense because they think, "Whatever we like, by nature's way we shall be promoted." Just like in some meeting in Mombassa somebody asked that, after... Some Aurobindo group, that... No, theosophist. That one man is there; he has no degree. So why not degree?

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. Without being how you can do your duty?

Śyāmasundara: That being, being doesn't strive for what is, being is always striving for what ought to be. He always has a sense of duty. There should be something other than this that I must...

Prabhupāda: That Supreme Being, He can be (indistinct) up to. You, you cannot do such. You commit mistake. Therefore you do not know what is ought to be or not to be.

Philosophy Discussion on Aristotle:

Prabhupāda: That is nonsense. You cannot... God is unlimited. You have got limited power to see or to smell or to touch. You have got all limited, and God is unlimited. So you cannot understand God by your limited power of sensual activities. Therefore God is revelation. We say that ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi na bhaved grāhyam indriyaiḥ (CC Madhya 17.136). You cannot understand by speculating your senses. That is not possible. When you engage yourself in His service, then He reveals. Nāhaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya yoga-māyā-samāvṛtaḥ (BG 7.25).

Philosophy Discussion on George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel:

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

Philosophy Discussion on George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel:

Prabhupāda: Without perfect, whatever I write, that is nonsense. That is nonsense. That is the difference-paramparā system. All these philosophers, they are simply talking nonsense, and whatever we are writing, there is meaning. Why? Because we are studying God from God. This is our perfection. We are not speculating about God. That is the difference. Now we are expanding my knowledge so that you can understand.

Philosophy Discussion on Thomas Henry Huxley:

Prabhupāda: That is his defect. The nature is dead body, matter. So how it can be rational? Just like this table is a dead wood. How it can be rational? That is nonsense. The carpenter is rational, who has made the wood in the shape. So he says the nature is rational. Nature is dead matter. How it can be rational? Therefore there is a rational being behind the nature. That is God. This, the wood, is dead. The wood, out of its own accord, cannot become a table. The carpenter is shaping the wood into table. That is rational. Therefore behind the dead nature, the rational being is God. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā. I think Mr. Huxley is supposed to have read..., understand he has given some comment on the Ramakrishna Mission Bhagavad-gītā, but he has not studied Bhagavad-gītā thoroughly.

Purports to Songs

Purport to Bhajahu Re Mana -- Los Angeles, May 27, 1972:

If you think that "Now I have become very much advanced. Now I shall live alone and chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, imitating Haridāsa Ṭhākura," this is nonsense. You cannot imitate Haridāsa Ṭhākura. You have to associate with devotees. Durlabha manava-janam sat sange. Sat-sange. Satāṁ prasaṅgān mama vīrya-saṁvido (SB 3.25.25). If you remain with the devotees, then by their association, by talking with them, you'll get real understanding of God consciousness. It is very practical to understand.

Compiled byVisnu Murti + and Partha-sarathi +
Completed sectionsALL +
Date of first entryDecember 29, 0008 JL +
Date of last entrySeptember 8, 0010 JL +
Total quotes74 +
Total quotes by sectionBG: 0 +, SB: 0 +, CC: 0 +, OB: 0 +, Lec: 74 +, Conv: 0 + and Let: 0 +