MW BOM 1975-11-19 Everyone Knows Your Philosophy
ANNOUNCER: The following is a morning walk conversation
with His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda,
recorded on the 19th of November 1975, in Bombay, India. [splice]
Yes, Sunday, the sun is the center, and I mean,
that is, I recall, first sun, and then Monday is next day,
then Tuesday, which is next to the earth, and Wednesday next to the sun.
Then sun is first, then moon.
But they say moon is first, then sun.
Who says?
The scientists. No. Yes. They say the moon is…
DR. PATEL: So far the distance is concerned,
moon may be nearest. How it is, that?
It is so, sir.
Huh?
Our science says so. Your science may not.
And we don’t want to clash the sciences here.
Let us talk about philosophy. [laughs]
Jump over.
Chandra is the upagraha, isn’t it?
As guru has got many such grahas.
It is one of the celestial planets.
And they say there is no life.
It is not self-luminous.
All grahas are not self-luminous.
When we observe in the sky, those stars are bleeping like this.
The grahas are straight as that, the Sukra behind us,
just steady light. [break]
…philosophy is also incorrect, there is no life after death.
Who says so?
Oh, so many, all Westerners.
The Easterns… That does not mean…
The Eastern philosophy is only with the jāgrati stage.
But the jīva has got three stages, and the fourth stage,
the turīya stage, is the real stage that we understand.
They don’t have idea of it, unfortunately.
So that philosophy is not the real philosophy of life.
Life as a whole should have its own philosophy.
They don’t understand that there is anything beyond the jāgrati stage.
But then there is a svapna stage, there is a sleep stage and the turīya stage.
In that if I am wrong you may correct me, sir.
You cannot be corrected.
I cannot be wrong, say that.
No, I cannot correct you.
You?
You cannot be correct…? Why I should not be corrected?
Because the philosophy must encompass the whole life, not a part of it.
All Western philosophers, only except Schopenhauer and Eckhart,
they only thought about the waking stage.
They have never thought about the dream and the deep sleep stage
and the stage beyond the three.
None of them, excepting Eckhart of Germany.
So the Western philosophers are all wrong
or partially true [break]
The Western philosophers have never thought about the three other stages,
none of them. [break]
…philosophy rejects any philosophy based on thinking.
But you see thinking is an apparatus which takes you beyond thinking.
That is another.
That takes you beyond thinking.
You cannot go beyond thinking without thinking to be taken as a fact.
But thinking must be intelligent thinking. [splice]
under the direction of intelligence. Buddhi [splice]
are separate arrangement, although they are one.
They are the different facets of the same
internal organ as a whole. [aside:] Hare Kṛṣṇa. Jaya [break]
…set is there, but beyond that mental stage there is intellect.
Beyond intellect there is soul.
To go beyond intellect for a body conscious ego,
the ego must dissolve and find itself to be a jīva,
and then he travels further up to find his own identity
and his own relation with God.
Before, I mean, mind is one, you cannot go beyond it.
That is what my conjecture. I may be wrong for all that.
One has to go beyond the mind, but those who are
stuck up with the mind, they are useless.
So the Western philosophers, they are stuck up with the mind.
That is the defect [break]
…bhaktasya kuto mahad-guṇā mano-rathenāsati dhāvato bahiḥ [?].
Manorathena, mental concoction, asataḥ.
Western philosophers, they take the mind as the soul [aside:] Hare Kṛṣṇa. Jaya.
Hm? Yes.
And the Communists think even the matter is more important than the mind.
What do you call? Dialectical materialism,
that the matter produces consciousness.
It is not the consciousness which, I mean, collects matter around it.
That is their philosophy.
That is this dialectical materialism.
They are absolutely wrong.
They are even further down than the Western philosophers,
mental philosophers.
[aside:] Hare Kṛṣṇa [break] …is already mentioned in Bhagavad-gītā.
Indriyāṇi parāṇy āhur indriyebhyaḥ paraṁ
manaḥ manasas tu parā buddhir… [Bg. 3.42].
Buddhi tu… Paraṁ buddhva [?]? [splice]
That mind has to… I mean, isn’t it out for itself that it is false?
That comes to that. Not false.
I mean false so far as higher category is concerned, the jīva.
Nothing is false, but there are different steps.
One step is important than the other, but they are not false.
Just like the water, the sand, then earth, then the building.
You cannot construct a building here.
So these are different stages of reality.
[aside:] Hare Kṛṣṇa. Jaya.
…is taken from the earth.
There is no doubt about it.
Why the scientists cannot take?
This is a fact, that there is aroma,
and the flower has taken the aroma from the earth.
But why the scientists cannot take?
They can make chemicals, the flavors.
They can make flavors, aromas, from chemicals.
As good?
No [laughter]
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: They make a flavor and then say it’s a rose flavor.
That is also not all kinds of flavors.
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: I think if they want to produce rose flavor
they must use the roses somehow or other.
I don’t think they can just produce.
GOPĀLA KṚṢṆA: They use a little bit.
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: Yes.
They must use.
They are taking chemicals, making flavor,
and the flower is coming out without any chemical.
So who is more artist, better artist? [break]
…they will wilt and die.
Hm?
These flowers, they will wilt and die,
but they can make flowers that will not die, will not wilt [laughter]
Of course, they have no smell.
Therefore they make without smell [break] …earth is this side and moon is this side,
then which is first?
Both of them are both sides.
The sun is larger in the sky, so that means it is nearer to the earth?
Yes. Should be.
Because you calculate about the stars, very, very far away.
Is it not? Oh, yes.
Then which is smaller is far away [break]
YAŚOMAT-NANDANA: …systems are bigger than the smaller ones?
Hm?
The upper planetary systems,
are they bigger than the lower ones?
sun is bigger than the earth, the moon is bigger…
PRABHUPĀDA: Yes, there is measurement [break]
JAYAPATAKA: Some people say that
“You are coming to India for preaching, but we Indians,
we already know all the, about Kṛṣṇa and Rāma.
Why don’t… You should be preaching in the West, where the people don’t know.”
But you know from the Western people.
They are not… They are imitating Western people.
You know from the Western people;
therefore you have to learn from this Western people this also.
They are learning everything else from the Western people,
so why not… PRABHUPĀDA: Yes.
ŚRĪDHARA: Everyone in India knows the līlā of Kṛṣṇa, but the science of Kṛṣṇa,
that they have forgotten.
They know līlā of Kṛṣṇa but they do not know Kṛṣṇa.
Huh? Who was…?
You were telling that Mr. Bajaj, he wants to take the instruction of Kṛṣṇa without Kṛṣṇa.
Yes.
Then how you will take this instruction when Kṛṣṇa says,
man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru [Bg. 18.65]?
If they do not take Kṛṣṇa, then how this instruction will be taken?
It can’t be.
Well, rasa-līlā is more important than those instructions [Prabhupāda laughs]
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: Actually, the real scholars of Bhagavad-gītā,
they admit that later on this Bhagavad-gītā came out,
which was stressing more on bhakti.
Later on. Later on.
These scholars, these mundane scholars, those who have studied Bhagavad-gītā,
they accept that Bhagavad-gītā is based around bhakti principle.
So how it came later on?
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: That they are rascal. That they don’t.
And what was the beginning?
All these Vedas and everything.
No, bhagavad-gītā? They say, “later on.”
Who was the first…
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: He says that it was the Vaisnavites
who introduced Bhagavad-gītā.
Then why Śaṅkarācārya has accepted Bhagavad-gītā?
He is not a Vaiṣṇava.
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: That they cannot answer.
PRABHUPĀDA: Then they’re foolish.
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: That they cannot answer.
Śaṅkarācārya has accepted Bhagavad-gītā.
Śaṅkarācārya accepted Kṛṣṇa the Supreme Lord.
Sa bhagavān svaya kṛṣṇaḥ [?].
He has written… YAŚOMATĪ- NANDANA: It is like that.
They think that Śaṅkarācārya also liked Bhagavad-gītā,
but the personal Kṛṣṇa was not very important.
No. According to his bhāṣya, they think like that.
No, he has written many prayers on Kṛṣṇa.
Bhaja govindaṁ bhaja govindaṁ bhaja govindaṁ mūḍhā-mate [?].
That means those who are not worshiping Govinda, they are mūḍhā-mati.
He is addressing mūḍhā-mati: “You rascal…”
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: This verse, Śrīla Prabhupāda,
vāsudeva sata devam, is also written by him?
Huh?
Vasudevaṁ-sutaṁ devaṁ kaṁsa-cāṇūra-mardanam
devakī paramānandaṁ kṛṣṇaṁ vande jagat-gurum [?].
Maybe, but I do not know.
Because they say, these mundane scholars,
that Bhāgavata was after Śaṅkarācārya
because he did not write a commentary on Bhāgavata.
Because there’s a mention of Kaṁsa and Cāṇūra and Vasudeva and Devakī,
that means that Śaṅkarācārya did believe in the personal of Kṛṣṇa.
But Vedavyāsa is after Śaṅkarācārya?
They don’t accept it is written by Vedavyāsa.
Huh?
They don’t… They are such atheistic people,
they do not accept that it is written by Vedavyāsa.
That’s all right, but others accept it.
Yes, the vast people do accept.
Vedavyāsa is accepted by Śaṅkarācārya.
Vyāsadeva. Vyāsa-guru.
They think that some Vaiṣṇava wrote it and put the name of Vedavyāsa.
They are so demoniac. Yes, they say like that.
Then other ācāryas, they are also fools?
I think they place all the other ācāryas after Śaṅkarācārya.
Ācāryas… But their paramparā system is very old
…Bhagavad-gītā? No.
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: They don’t accept it as…
They do not accept Gītā as spoken by
some person Kṛṣṇa five thousand years ago.
Anyway, do they accept the authority of Bhagavad-gītā or not?
They say it’s a very nice book of knowledge.
They don’t want to pursue spiritual life.
Then why they become authority?
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: Yes, that is their rascaldom.
If they do not accept authority, why they become authority?
Who will accept them?
If everything is depending on mental speculation,
then why they should be accepted as authority?
YAŚOMATĪ-NANDANA: That they cannot answer.
Only insincere people, foolish people, they are misled by them.
Otherwise I don’t think anybody even knows their philosophy.
Everyone knows your philosophy because they see your disciples,
and no one goes to read their books.
Mostly I see in their books, “First edition, copies, two thousand,”
“three thousand,” something like that.
And you never see a second edition.
Subtitles by Gaurāṅga Sundara Dāsa, Causelessmercy.com