ethos

Syamasundara dasa: When you say that Krsna consciousness is the ultimate goal of life, does this mean always being conscious of Krsna? Srila Prabhupada: Yes, we should always be thinking of Krsna. We should act in such a way that we have to think of Krsna all the time. For instance, we are discussing the philosophy of Socrates in order to strengthen our Krsna consciousness. Therefore the ultimate goal is Krsna. Otherwise, we are not interested in criticizing or accepting anyone’s philosophy. We are neutral. Syamasundara dasa: So the proper use of intelligence is to guide everything in such a way that we become Krsna consciousness? Srila Prabhupada: That is it. Without Krsna consciousness, we remain on the mental platform. Being on the mental platform means hovering. On that platform, we are not fixed. It is the business of the mind to accept this and reject that, but when we are fixed in Krsna consciousness, we are no longer subjected to the mind’s accepting and rejecting. Syamasundara dasa: Right conduct then becomes automatic? Srila Prabhupada: Yes. As soon as the mind wanders, we should immediately drag it back to concentrate on Krsna. While chanting, our mind sometimes wanders far away, but when we become conscious of this, we should immediately bring the mind back to hear the sound vibration of Hare Krsna.. that is called yoga-abhyas, the practice of yoga. We should not allow the mind to wander elsewhere. We should simply chant and hear. That is the best yoga system.

Hayagriva dasa: Socrates believed that through meditation, a person can attain knowledge, and through knowledge he can become virtuous. When he is virtuous, he acts in the right way, and by so doing, becomes happy. Therefore, the enlightened man is meditative, knowledgeable, and virtuous. He is also happy because he acts properly. Srila Prabhupada: Yes, that is confirmed in Bhagavad-gita: “One who is thus transcendentally situated at once realizes the Supreme Brahman. He never laments or desires to have anything; he is equally disposed toward every living entity. In that state he attains pure devotional service unto Me.” (Bg. 18.54) When one is self-realized, he immediately becomes happy, joyful (prasannatma). This is because he is properly situated. A person may labor a long time under some mistaken idea, but when he finally comes to the proper conclusion, he becomes very happy. He thinks, “Oh, what a fool I was, going on so long in such a mistaken way.” Thus, a self-realized person is happy. Happiness means that you no longer have to think of attaining things. For instance, Dhruva Maharaja told the Lord: Svamin krtartho ’smi. “I don’t want any material benediction.” Prahlada Maharaja also said, “My Lord, I don’t want any material benefits. I have seen my father, who was such a big materialist that even the demigods were afraid of him, destroyed by You within a second. Therefore I am not after these things.” Real knowledge means that you no longer hander. The karmis, jnanis and yogis are all hankering after something. The karmis want material wealth, beautiful women and good positions. If one is not hankering for what one does not ahve, he is lamenting for what he has lost. The jnanis are also hankering, expecting to become one with God and merge into His existence. The yogis are hankering after some magical powers to befool others into thinking tha they have become God. In India, some yogis convince people that they can manufacture gold and fly in the sky, and foolish people believe them. Even if a yogi can fly, there are many birds flying. What is the difference? An intelligent person can understand this. If a person says that he can walk on water, thousands of fools will come to see him. People will even pay ten rupees just to see a man bark like a dog, not thinking that there are many dogs barking anyway. In any case, people are always hankering and lamenting, but the devotee is fully satisfied in the service of the Lord. The devotee doesn’t hanker for anything, nor does he lament.

Syamasundara dasa: As far as we know, Socrates was a self-taught man. Is it possible for a person to be self-taught? That is, can self-knowledge be attained through meditation, or introspection? Srila Prabhupada: Yes. Ordinarily, everyone thinks according to the bodily conception. If I begin to study the different parts of my body and seriously begin to consider what I am, I will gradually arrive at the study of the soul. If I ask myself, “Am I this hand?” the answer will be, “No, I am not this hand. Rather, this is my hand.” I can thus continue analyzing each part of the body and discover that all the parts are mine but that I am different. Through this method of self-study, any intelligent man can see that he is not the body. This is the first lesson of Bhagavad-gita: “As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. the self-realized soul is not bewildered by such a change.” (Bg. 2.13) At one time I had the body of a child, but now that body is no longer existing. Still, I am aware that I possessed such a body; therefore from this I can deduce that I am something other than the body. I may rent an apartment, but I do not identify with it. The body may be mine, but I am not the body. By this kind of introspection, a man can teach himself the distinction between the body and the soul. As far as being completely self-taught––according to Bhagavad-gita and the Vedic conception, life is continuous. Since we are always acquiring experience, we cannot say that Socrates was self-taught. Rather, in his pervious lives he cultivated knowledge, and this knowledge is continuing. That is a fact. Otherwise, why is one man intelligent and another man ignorant? This is due to continuity.

Hayagriva dasa: The good of which Socrates speaks is different from sattva-guna. In the Republic, Socrates says that it is the Good which gives truth to the objects of knowledge and the very power of knowing to him who knows them. He speaks of the Form of essential goodness as the cause of knowledge and truth. Although we may consider the Good to be an object of knowledge, it would be better if we regarded it as being beyond truth and knowledge and of higher value. Both knowlede and truth are therefore to be regarded as like unto the Good, but it is incorrect to identify either with the Good. He believes that the Good must hold a higher place of honor. Objects of knowledge derive their very being and reality from the Good, which is beyond being itself and supasses it in dignity and power. Srila Prabhupada: Sattva-guna, the mode of goodness, is a position from which we can receive knowledge. Knowledge cannot be received from the platform of passion and ignorance. If we hear about Krsna, or god, we are gradually freed from the clutches of darkness and passion. Then we can come to the platform of sattva-guna, and when we are perfectly situated there, we are beyond the lower modes. Srimad-Bhagavatam says: “By regularly hearing the Bhagavatam and rendering of service to the pure devotee, all that is troublesome to the heart is practically destroyed, and loving service unto the glorious Lord, who is praised with transcendental songs, is established as an irrevocable fact. At the time loving service is established in the heart, the modes of passion (rajas), and ignorance (tamas), and lust and desire (kama), disappear from the heart. Then the devotee is established in goodness, and he becomes happy.” (Bhag. 1.2.18-19) This process may be gradual, but it is certain. The more we hear about Krsna, the more we become purified. Purification means freedom from the attacks of greed and passion. Then we can become happy. From the brahma-bhüta platform, we can realize ourselves and then realize God. So before realizing the Supreme Good, we must first come to the platform of sattva-guna, goodness. Therefore we have regulations prohibiting illicit sex, meat eating, intoxication, and gambling. Ultimately, we must transcend even the mode of goodness through bhakti. Then we become liberated, gradually develop love of God, and regain our original state. “When the living entity, along with his conditional living tendency, merges with the mystic lying down of the Maha-Visnu, it is called the winding up of the cosmic manifestation. Liberation is the permanent situation of the form of the living entity after he gives up the changeable gross and subtle bodies.” (Bhag. 2.10.6) This means giving up all material engagements and rendering full service to Krsna. then we attain the state where maya cannot touch us. If we keep in touch with Krsna, maya has no jurisdiction. “This divine energy of Mine, consisting of the three modes of material nature, is difficult to overcome. But those who have surrendered unto Me can easily cross beyond it.” (Bg. 7.14) This is perfection.

Syamasundara dasa: In a dialogue with Socrates, Protagoras said, “Truth is relative. It is only a matter of opinion.” Socrates then asked, “Do you mean that truth is mere subjective opinion?” Protagoras replied, “Exactly. What is true for you is true for you, and what is true for me is true for me. Thus truth is subjective.” Socrates then asked, “Do you really mean my opinion is true by virtue of its being my opinion?” Protagoras said, “Indeed I do.” Socrates then said, “My opinion is that truth is absolute, not subjective, and that you, Protagoras, are absolutely in error. Since this is my opinion, you must grant that it is true according to your philosophy.” Protagoras then admitted, “You are quite correct, Socrates.” through this kind of dialogue, or dialectic, Socrates would logically convince many people. Srila Prabhupada: That is what we are also doing. The Absolute Truth is true for everyone, and the relative truth is realative to a particular position. The relative truth depends on the Absolute Truth, which is the summum bonum. God is the Absolute Truth, and the material world is relateive truth. Because the material world is God’s energy, it appears to be real or true, just as teh reflection of the sun in water emits some light. that reflection is not absolute, and as soon as the sun sets, that light will disappear. Since relative truth is a reflection of the Absolute Truth, Srimad-Bhagavatam states: satyam param dhimahi. “I worship the Absolute Truth.” (Bhag 1.1.1) The Absolute Truth is Krsna, Vasudeva. Om namo bhagavate vasudevaya. This cosmic manifestation is relative truth; it is a manifestation of Krsna’s external energy. If Krsna withdrew His energy, the universal creation would not exist. In another sense, Krsna and Krsna’s energy are not different. We cannot separate heat from fire; heat is also fire, yet heat is not fire. This is the position of relative truth. As soon as we experience heat, we understand that there is fire. Yet we cannot say that heat is fire. Relative truth is like heat because it stands on the strength of the Absolute Truth, just as heat stands on the strength of fire. Because the Absolute is true, relative truth also appears to be true, although it has no independent existence. A mirage appears to be water because in actuality there is such a thing as water. Similarly, this material world appears attractive because there is an all-attractive spiritual world.

This excellent article appeared in one of the earliest Back to Gadhead magazines. Bhakti, the Perfect Science O.B.L. Kapoor, Ph.D. As commonly understood, bhakti and science are diametrically opposed. Bhakti (devotion) is supposed to rest on blind faith and absolute surrender of human reason and will, while science is supposed to rest on observation and experiment. The bhakta does not doubt, for he says, samsayatma -- the man who doubts is doomed. Science feeds on doubt, for it says that doubt leads to true knowledge. No wonder, therefore, that in this age of science bhakti is regarded as a sign of backwardness and an effort to escape from the realities of life. But what is strange is that the scientists who swear by truth and open-mindedness, and do not accept or reject anything unless it is scientifically proved or disproved, generally adopt the most unscientific attitude towards bhakti. They reject bhakti and all that it stands for without caring to test its propositions scientifically. BHAKTI AS A SCIENCE The scientists argue that the propositions of bhakti are not amenable to scientific treatment. But they are mistaken. Bhakti is as much a science as physics, chemistry or any other science. It is based on observation and experiment, and its results are capable of verification. But bhakti is a transcendental science, and its experiments are of a different nature. They are also more difficult than the experiments of ordinary science, for while in ordinary science experiments are made on outside objects, in bhakti the object of experiment is one's own self. It is not easy to do with self what we ordinarily do with other objects in scientific experiments. In a scientific experiment the object of study is taken in its pure and original form and in isolation from all other things. Since nature does not always present things in a pure and unmixed form, the object under study has first to be isolated from other things. After this is done, certain changes are made in it, and the results are carefully watched. Under different conditions the thing is found to behave in different ways. In this manner, the laws governing its behavior are discovered. The body of knowledge comprising those laws is called a science. The science of bhakti deals with the self in relation to Bhagavan or Krsna. The self also does not exist in its pure form. It is qualified by its association with the body and the sense objects. Its vision is blurred by egoism, greed, lust, anger, jealousy and hatred. The first condition of a scientific experiment in bhakti, therefore, is the purification of the self. This is not easy to attain. One can easily manipulate the objects outside the self. One can explode a hydrogen bomb or send an object to the moon. But when it comes to doing something that may change the age-old association of the soul with the things that are extraneous to it, that is a different matter. It is human nature to find reasons to ridicule that which is difficult to attain. This partly explains the attitude of the scientist toward bhakti. But there are many persons who have performed the experiments in bhakti in spite of this apparent difficulty. The science of bhakti is the result of generalizations made by them which are described in such works as Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu, Ujjvala-nilamani, Bhakti-sandarblia, Priti-sandarblia and many others. The detailed, precise and systematic treatment in these works of the laws of bhakti, the stages of bhakti, the kinds of bhakti and the conditions of the various experiments in bhakti will easily convince anyone who goes through them that bhakti is, by all standards, a science. ORDINARY SCIENCE FAILS AS AN INSTRUMENT OF KNOWLEDGE There are two questions one must ask while trying to ascertain whether a certain body of knowledge should be called a science: (1) How far has it succeeded in discovering the real nature of the object of its study? (2) How far are the laws it has discovered necessary or absolute? Judging in the light of these questions, we find not only that bhakti is a science, but that it is the only science which deserves to be so called. For it alone gives us real knowledge, and its laws alone are necessary. Developments in modern science have compelled the scientists to acknowledge that they are not able to discover the real nature of anything, nor are the laws they discover necessary. We may illustrate this with reference to the science of physics, which is not only the most advanced science today, but which also basically runs into all other sciences. First, let us take the question relating to the knowledge of the real nature of the object of study and compare, from this point of view, the results obtained by the science of physics with those of bhakti. The physicist, trying to discover the real nature of matter, found that the smallest piece of matter, smaller than even the point of a pin, was composed of millions of electrons. He tried to study the nature of electrons and found that they were "disembodied charges of electricity," that is, electricity existing apart from matter. But though they were disembodied charges of electricity, they seemed to behave sometimes like a particle and sometimes like a wave. Eddington, therefore, suggested that they should be called "wavicles" to indicate their dual character, but their real nature remained unknown. If they were not any thing charged with electricity, but electricity itself, the question remained, what ultimately is electricity? The reply was that it is energy or sakti. Energy, it was further explained, was a process. But energy or sakti always pertains to the saktiman or possesser of energy, and a process is always the process of some thing moving or acting or doing something. What is that which possesses the energy? What is that thing of which the energy is a process? The physicist has not been able to answer these questions. And he will never be able to answer them, for he has reduced everything to energy, and nothing else remains to which he may point in answer to these questions. The real nature of matter thus remains unknown to him. He cannot say anything about it except that it is "he knows not what." Eddington says, "Something unknown is doing we do not know what -- that is what our theory amounts to." BHAKTI HOLDS THE KEY TO KNOWLEDGE All matter or unconscious things having been reduced by the scientist to some kind of energy or sakti, it is obvious that this energy can only be referred to some conscious principle. Scientists like Einstein, Eddington, James Jeans and J. B. S. Haldane have already recognized this. Eddington says, "Modern physics has eliminated the notion of substance. ... I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness." J.B.S. Haldane says, "The material world, which has been taken for a world of blind mechanism, is in reality a spiritual world seen very partially and imperfectly. ... The truth is that not Matter, not Force, not any physical thing, but Mind, Personality, is the central fact of the universe." But the scientists can do no more than guess about the existence of the conscious principle underlying this universe, whereas bhakti provides direct, intimate and certain knowledge of it. The bhakta knows that the sakti which, according to the physicist, pervades the entire universe, is the sakti of para-brahman (the Supreme Absolute). eka-desa-sthitasyagner jyotsna vistarini yatha parasya brahmanah saktis tathedam akhilam jagat "Just as the rays of fire located at one place are spread all over, the sakti of para-brahman extends all over in the form of the world." (Visnu Purana, 1.22.54) The principle behind the sakti manifesting itself in the form of the World is so subtle that it must always remain beyond the reach of the physical sciences. It can be apprehended only by the soul purified by bhakti. yatha yathatma parimrjyate 'sau mat-punya-gatha-sravanabhidhanaih tatha tatha pasyati vastu suksmam caksur yathaivanjana-samprayuktam "Just as by the application of good ointment the eye is slowly cleansed and made capable of seeing finer objects, the soul of a devotee is gradually purified by listening to My divine narratives and is able to see the subtle spiritual principle of Mine." (Srimad-Bhagavatam, 11.14.26) This spiritual principle, which is fundamental to the science of bhakti, can be tested like any other principle of science. It has actually been tested a number of times by bhaktas like Prahlada and Mira Bai who have proved, by making such physical objects as a pillar and a cobra appear as Nrsimha Bhagavan and Salagrama (forms of Krsna), that the physical world is in essence the sakti of Bhagavan or Krsna and that Bhagavan, as the possessor of that sakti, is present in it everywhere. THE LAWS OF ORDINARY SCIENCE ARE ILLUSORY Now let us take the second question relating to the laws. Since the time of Galileo and Newton, scientists have believed that the world is a big machine governed purely by mechanical laws. By the end of the Twentieth Century even the human brain came to be regarded as an intricate machine, governed by the purely mechanical laws of cause and effect. The concept of the free will of man was destroyed, and religion and morality ceased to have any meaning for science. But the emergence of the electron on the stage of science brought about a complete revolution. The myth of the mechanistic structure of the universe was exploded. The electrons, which were recognized as the ultimate units of the physical world, were found not to be governed by mechanical laws. They seemed to be completely free in their behavior. The law of causation which is a presupposition of science was found to have no meaning for them.1 If there was any law at all which governed their behavior, it was the Law of Indeterminacy, as Professor Heisenberg called it. The apparent determinism in events and the uniformity of nature were illusions, created by the functioning of electrons in crowds. James Jeans explains this by means of the following illustration: "If we spin a half-penny, nothing within our knowledge will be able to decide whether it will come down heads or tails, yet if we throw up a million tons of halfpence, we know there will be 500,000 tons of heads and 500,000 tons of tails. The experiment may be repeated time after time and will always give the same result. We may be tempted to instance it as evidence of the uniformity of nature, and to infer the action of an underlying law of causation: in actual fact it is an instance only of the operation of the purely mathematical laws of chance." There is no determinism in events in which electrons are involved singly, but when a huge crowd of them is involved, as in the smallest piece of matter with which the earlier physicists could experiment, the illusion of determinacy creeps in. But this apparent determinism in large-scale events is of a statistical nature. Dirac describes it as follows: "When an observation is made on any atomic system ... in a given state the result will not in general be determinate, i.e., if the experiment is repeated several times under identical conditions several different results may be obtained. If the experiment is repeated a large number of times, it will be found that each particular result will be obtained a definite fraction of the total number of times, so that one can say there is a definite probability of its being obtained any time the experiment is performed. This probability the theory enables one to calculate." The laws of the physical sciences are, thus, not fully determinate or necessary. They are only laws of probability based on the mathematical law of averages. THE LAWS OF BHAKTI ARE REAL The science of bhakti does not, at first sight, seem to be in a more advantageous position than any of the physical sciences in respect of its laws, for it deals with man in loving relationship with God. Both man and God are free in their behavior like the electrons, and thus there can hardly be any laws regarding their behavior, But bhakti has nothing to do with man and God who are free. In bhakti both man and God are bound in love. The God of bhakti is not simply the creator, destroyer and controller of the universe, but the cowherd boy who loves to dance to the tune of the milkmaids of Vraja. The God of bhakti is the God who says, aham bhakta-paradhino hy asvatantra iva dvija: "I am wholly governed by My bhaktas. I am not free in the least." (Srimad-Bhagavatam, 9.4.63) In the realm of bhakti it is not God who reigns but prema, which is but an advanced stage of bhakti. Both bhakta and Bhagavan (God) seek fulfillment in prema. Prema is the summum bonum for the bhakta as well as for Bhagavan. The bhakta does not seek Bhagavan but pure, selfless, dispassionate love for Him. Similarly, Bhagavan does not seek anything but love. He need not seek anything else, for there is nothing which, as the most perfect being, He does not already possess. But as Love He is never perfect. Love is nothing but incessant yearning for more love. Perfection in love means negation of love. Every fulfillment in love creates a gap which calls for further fulfillment. Love is, therefore, essentially dynamic, a vital upward surge through a necessary downward movement. It is self-fulfillment in self-abandonment, self-realization in self-effacement. Since both bhakta and Bhagavan are fully bound by bhakti, the laws of bhakti are fully determinate. They are neither the laws of probability nor the mathematical and illusory laws of averages like the laws of the physical sciences, but they are objective and necessary. To take an example, there is a law of attraction in bhakti which may be compared to the law of gravitation in the physical sciences. According to this law, bhakti attracts Bhagavan as a magnet attracts a piece of iron.3 So Krsna says, naham tisthami vaikunthe yoginam hrdayesu va tattat tisthami narada yatra gayanti mad-bhaktah. "I live neither in My celestial abode nor in the heart of the yogis, but I go and sit wherever My bhaktas sing." (Adi Purana) And again: anuvrajamy aham nityam puyeyetyanghri-renubhih. "I walk on the heels of My bhaktas so that I may be purified by the dust of their feet." (Srimad-Bhagavatam, 11.14.16) The law of gravitation may fail. There is nothing in modern science to guarantee that it will not. But the law of attraction in bhakti can never fail, for it is guaranteed by Bhagavan. It is possible that a fruit may leave the tree and not drop on the ground, but it is not possible that the flower of bhakti may blossom in the heart of a devotee and Krsna may not be attracted by it. As some other examples of laws of bhakti, we may cite the following: (1) The law of reciprocity, according to which Bhagavan fully reciprocates the devotional attitude of the bhakta.4 (2) The law of total self-surrender, according to which Bhagavan fully absolves a bhakta of all his sins the moment he completely surrenders himself to Him. (3) The law of exclusive meditation, according to which Bhagavan Himself provides the means and end of bhakti to a bhakta who exclusively and incessantly meditates on Him. ABSOLUTE NATURE OF BHAKTI Each of these laws is absolute. Anyone who tries them will find that the results are always the same. Thus the laws of bhakti as well as the knowledge obtained through it are absolute. The absoluteness of the laws of bhakti is due to the fact that bhakti itself is an absolute science. It is not conditioned by anything, not even by Bhagavan, who is the Condition of all conditions and Cause of all causes. On the contrary, Bhagavan Himself is conditioned by bhakti. The laws of the other sciences cannot be absolute for the simple reason that those sciences are relative and conditioned, at least by the will of Bhagavan. But the knowledge the science of bhakti provides is ultimate and absolute because it is the knowledge of the real nature of Bhagavan, the center and source of all knowledge. bhaktya mam abhijanati yavan yas casmi tattvatah Truly the bhakta holds within his grasp the very heart and soul of Bhagavan.

“Real religious principles are enacted by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Although fully situated in the mode of goodness, even the great rsis who occupy the topmost planets cannot ascertain the real religious principles, nor can the demigods, nor the leaders of Siddhaloka, to say nothing of the asuras, ordinary human beings, Vidyadharas and Caranas.” (Bhag. 6.3.19)

Hayagriva dasa: When a student of Socrates once said, “I cannot refute you, Socrates,” Socrates replied, “Say, rather that you cannot refute the truth, for Socrates is easily refuted.” He thus considered the Absolute Truth transcendental to mental speculation and personal opinion. Srila Prabhupada: That is correct. If we accept Krsna, God, as the supreme authority, the Absolute Truth, we cannot regute what He says. Krsna, or God, is by definition supreme perfection, and philosophy is perfect when it is in harmony with Him. This is our position. The philosophy of this Krsna consciousness movement is religious because it is concerned with carrying out the orders of God. That is the sum and substance of religion. It is not possible to manufacture a religion. In Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam, manufactured religion is called dharma-kaitava, just another form of cheating. Our baasic principle is given in Srimad-Bhagavatam: “Real religious principles are enacted by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Although fully situated in the mode of goodness, even the great rsis who occupy the topmost planets cannot ascertain the real religious principles, nor can the demigods, nor the leaders of Siddhaloka, to say nothing of the asuras, ordinary human beings, Vidyadharas and Caranas.” (Bhag. 6.3.19) The word “dharma” refers to the orders given by God, and if we follow those orders, we are following dharma. An individual citizen cannot manufacture laws, because laws are given by the government. Our perfection is in following the orders of God cent per cent. Those who have no conception of God or His orders may manufacture religious systems, but our system is different.

Hayagriva dasa: For Augustine, the mind, reason, and the soul are one and the same. Srila Prabhupada: No, these are different identities. The mind acts according to the intelligence, but the intelligence of different living entities differs. Similarly, minds also differ. A dog’s intelligence is not equal to that of a human being, but this is not to say that the dog does not have a soul. The soul is placed in different bodies that have different types of intelligence and different ways of thinking, acting, feeling, and willling. So the mind and intelligence differ according to the body, but the soul remains the same. Hayagriva dasa: By identifying the soul with mind and reason, Augustine could justify killing animals. He writes: “Indeed, some people try to stretch the prohibition [“Thou shalt not kill”] to cover beasts and cattle, and make it unlawful to kill any such animal. But then, why not include plants and anything rooted in and feeding on the soil?… Putting this nonsense aside, we do not apply “Thou shalt not kill” to plants, because they have no sensation; nor to irrational animals that fly, swim, walk, or creep, because they are linked to us by no association or common bond. By the creator’s wise ordinance, they are meant for our use, dead or alive. It only remains for us to apply the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill” to man alone, oneself and others.” Srila Prabhupada: The Bible says “Thou shalt not kill,” without qualification. Our Vedic philosophy admits that one living entity serves as food for another living entity. That is natural. As stated in Srimad-Bhagavatam, those animals who have hands eat animals without hands. The four-legged animals eat animals that cannot move, as well as plants and vegetables. Thus the weak is food for the strong. This is a natural law. Our K§øëa consciousness philosophy, however, is not based on the view that plant life is les sensitive than animal life, or animal life is less sensitive than human life. We consider all human beings, animals, plants, and trees to be living entitites, spirit souls. We may eat an animal or a vegetable––whatever the case, we must inevitably eat some living entity. It therefore becomes a question of selection. Apart from vegetarian or nonvegetarian diets, we are basically concerned with Krsna prasadam. We take only the remnants of whatever Krsna eats. In Bhagavad-gita, Krsna says: “If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a flower, fruit or water, I will accept it.” (Bg. 9.26) This is our philosophy. We are concerned with taking the remnants of Krsna’s food, which we call prasadam, mercy. We should not touch meat or anything else not offered to Krsna. “The devotees of the Lord are released from all kinds of sins because they eat food which is offered first for sacrifice. Others, who prepare food for personal sense enjoyment, verily eat only sin.” (Bg. 3.13)

Hayagriva dasa: Augustine felt that neither activity nor meditation should be exclusive but should complement one another: “No man must be so committed to contemplation as, in his contemplation, to give no thought to his neighbor’s needs, nor so absorbed in action as to dispense with the contemplation of God.” Srila Prabhupada: Unless you think of God, how can you be active in the service of God? Real meditation is meditation on the Supreme Personality of Godhead, or the Supersoul within the core of the heart. Activity and meditation should go together, however. If we sit down and think of God, it is commendable, but if we work for God as God desires, our position is superior. If you love me and simply sit and think of me, that is commendable. That may be considered meditation. However, if you love me, it is better that you carry out my orders. That is more important.

Hayagriva dasa: Like Origen, Augustine considerd the soul to be created at a particular time, but unlike Origen, he rejected reincarnation: “Let these Platonists stop threatening us with reincarnatin as punishment for our souls. Reincarnation is ridiculous. There is no such thing as a return to this life for the punishment of souls. If our creation, even as mortals, is due to God, how can ther return to bodies, which are gifts of God, be punishment?” Srila Prabhupada: Does he think that the assumption of the body of a hog or similar lower creature is not punishment? Why does one person get the body of King Indra or Lord Brahma, and another the body of a pig or insect? How does he explain the body of a pig? If the body is a gift from God, it can also be a punishment from God. When one is rewarded, he get the body of a Brahma or a King Indra, and if he is punished, he gets the body of a pig. Hayagriva dasa: What about the body of a man? Is that a gift or punishment? Srila Prabhupada: There are so many men who are well situated, and others who are suffering. Suffereing and enjoyment take place according to the body. As explained in Bhagavad-gita: “O son of Kunti, the nonpermanent appearance of happiness and distress, and their disappearance in due course, are like the appearance and disappearance of winter and summer seasons. They arise from sense perception, O scion of Bharata, and one must learn to tolerate them without being disturbed.” (Bg. 2.14) An old man may perceive cold very acutely, whereas a young child may not perceive it. Perception is relative to the body. An animal may go naked and not feel the cold, whereas man cannot. Thus the body is a source of suffering and enjoyment. Or we may consider this punishment and reward. Hayagriva dasa: For Augustine, the soul of each individual man is not necessarily condemned to earth due to his own desire or sin, but due to the original sin of Adam, the first man. He writes: “When the first couple [Adam and Eve] were punished by the judgment of God, the whole human race… was present in the first man. And what was born was not human nature as it was originally created, but as it became after the first parents’ sin and punishment––as far. at least, as concerns the origin of sin and death.” In this sense, the individual partakes of the karma of the entire race. Srila Prabhupada: If this is the case, why does he call the body a gift? Why does he say that it is not punishment? The original man was punished, as well as the man after him, and so on. sometimes a father’s disease is inherited by the son. Is this not a form of punishment? Hayagriva dasa: Then the human form is a punishment in itself? Srila Prabhupada: Yes. At the same time, you can consider human life a gift because it is given by God. We should think that if God has given us this body for our punishment, it is His mercy, because by undergoing punishment we may become purified and progress toward God. Devotees think in this way. Although the body is a form of punishment, we consider it a reward because by undergoing the punishment, we are progressing toward God realization. Even when the body is given by God for our correction, it can thus be considered a gift.

Host: Well, we’ll consider when we see the Cyclops. What is the procedure? What would society do… Let’s say someone is an evil seed. What would he do with a kid that is bad? Hridy: Well you can try to correct the child. If someone is determined simply to prey upon innocent people and cannot be restrained then I guess that person is out of the ballgame. Just like what happens in a baseball game if someone comes up and you know punches out the umpire? I mean they’re out of the game. Host: I guess ??? What um… Do you advocate corporeal punishment? Hridy: Well, the simple problem is that although America already holds the world record for incarcerating people, uh incarceration is increasing. So it’s a very simple fact that society cannot afford to incarcerate such huge numbers of people and therefore alot of anti-social, criminal people are simply released out on the streets to prey upon innocent women, men and children. So if you do not utilize corporeal punishment or capital punishment, then you cannot afford to incarcerate everybody and therefore you turn loose alot of criminals and therefore you are deciding to inflict corporeal punishment on innocent people. We should understand that. If this society adopts a system in which crime is rampant in the name of compassion for criminals, then that society has consciously decided and is responsible for the decision to inflict corporeal punishment and capital punishment on innocent citizens. So people may think it’s very noble and civilized not to inflict corporeal or capital punishment on criminals, but then you are deciding to inflict it upon innocent citizens. That it is decision, you are responsible, it’s predictable. It’s just like for example I could say Well, I pulled the trigger of this gun and I shot this person, but I didn’t want to shoot them, I just wanted to pull the trigger of the gun. But you’re responsible to know that when you pull a gun’s trigger the bullet goes out. So in the same way when you release criminals out onto the street because of this silly incarceration system… I mean in some cases obviously you incarcerate. But because we want to incarcerate everybody, therefore we know it is entirely predictable that we will overload the prisons, that we cannot afford to build unlimited prisons and that we will release criminals on the street. Those criminals will harm and kill innocent people. So when you choose that system, you are choosing to pull the trigger. You are choosing to inflict corporeal and capital punishment – not on criminals, but – on innocent citizens. So this society is so smart that it’s decided that if you have to choose between inflicting corporeal and capital punishment on criminals or innocent people, let’s inflict it on innocent people. That is the intelligent decision of this society. So thankyou very much. Host: ???, you’re in charge. What would you do? Hridy: Well if there has to… There has to be an ethic in society that you may not abuse another person. You may not steal from another person, you may not rape another person, you may not kill or injure another person. And if you do, the society is gonna punish you so severely that you’ll never do it again. And other people will also not be inclined to do it. The total amount of violence in a society with strong law enforcement is very little compared to the total… For example in Singapore they have heavy laws. So now the question is How many people – criminals or innocent people – actually receive corporeal punishment? And how many in America? Check out the numbers and see which society is compassionate. Host: Well that’s… that’s another concept. How about a person inflicting on the order of the government, inflicting punishment on someone else? Doesn’t he incur in karma as well? Hridy: Not if the person is actually… if the victim is… not the victim. But if the criminal is actually guilty, then it’s a law of nature. Host: Well there’s always uh… Hridy: You see you’re playing God if you don’t do that. Because if there’s a natural law in the universe that someone who perpetrates evil must be punished and if in the name of compassion you don’t punish that person, then you’re playing God because to play God means to invent your own laws. Host: The topic is too hot. I can’t… I can’t get into the music right now. Hridy: My apologies to Shubert. Host: One thing… Perhaps in the background very, very soft. Tell… You are talking about corporeal punishment as if it was diplomas, you know handing out candy. Hridy: No, it’s not candy. NO, it’s not candy. It’s exactly what the defender did to an innocent person. So what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If you think it’s alright to rape or mutilate or injure or kill and innocent person, then maybe you don’t have clear in your mind what you’ve actually done. So perhaps society should show you what it is you did, so next time you’ll have a more realistic understanding of what you’re doing to other people. Host: Ok. Let me play the devil’s advocate. I’m gonna take the side of a so-called criminal, you know so-called cause otherwise I wouldn’t be devil’s advocate. I’ve committed a crime. I… let’s say something minor. I started by shoplifting or you know breaking the laws of traffic or stealing, but without causing any injury. What do you suggest there? Hridy: Uh studies have now shown that… This is actually… I’m speaking of recent studies… that if a government, if a society allows all kinds of minor acts of quote/unquote of anarchy, of vandalism, that in fact it creates an atmosphere in which the people do not take seriously the law and this leads to more serious crime. That’s why governments for example, for example city governments in places like New York are now taking more seriously things they use to think were trivial. So uh it’s like a disease. You can say Well if… For example if I have a fever, but it’s not deadly, it’s not life-threatening, so I don’t have to take care of it. I won’t stay inside, I won’t take any medicine because it’s a small disease. Then what happens? So if you create… What happens is you get sick and die. So if in a society you take all kinds of anarchistic behavior as trivial, it creates an environment, an atmosphere in which law in general, order in general, respect for other people and their property in general is not taken seriously and then you get all kinds of crime. This is actually the fact. So therefore, you can say… It’s like saying I got a small fire in my house, but it’s only a small fire so I’ll just let it burn. Small fires become big fires. So if you allow your responsibility disrespect for other citizens, innocent people and their property, then it’s like a fire that gets out of control That’s exactly what happens. Host: Well, you believe in karma. So if someone is gonna be either stolen from, um maimed or killed by me, it’s their karma. Hridy: That’s playing God. We have to have a system of laws in which people respect other people and their property, do not exploit other people or their property, unfairly, abusively, violently, etc. And that’s the duty of the government, that’s the duty of the society, not to play God and think that you can do anything you want to anybody because if you get away with it, it must be their karma. You have to deal with people according to their behavior in this world. If people are behaving properly, you have to treat them properly. As far as the amount of force that should be used against, the simple point is there should not be crime. And how much force? As little as possible and as much as necessary. Host: Well, let’s say I have these… I’m a cleptomaniac… Still talking about minor offenses. And um… Hridy: As little as possible and as much as necessary. Host: I hear you. I hear you. But let’s say this is a disease. It’s not something I uh… Hridy: Well, you could say serial killing is a disease. Isn’t it? I mean wouldn’t you say a serial killer is a sick person? Or would you say he’s a healthy person? Host: Um, I… as a sick person. Hridy: Well, then it’s a sickness. So just give him some aspirins. Host: Well… Hridy: The point is you cannot abuse innocent people period. Either you accept that principle or you don’t. If you think that sometimes innocent people can be abused, you’re not qualified to be a governor. If you think it’s alright, then you should do something else for a living. (tape jump) Host: I just took a phone call from a listener saying that uh you’re a Nazi. What do you respond to that? Hridy: I would say that to be a bona-fide Nazi, uh someone should abuse innocent people because that’s exactly what the Nazi’s did. They committed violence against innocent people. So therefore if you advocate a system in which large numbers of innocent people become victims, then I’d say you’re a Nazi. So therefore you have to see in which system do significant numbers of innocent people become victims. Host: Now you’re saying that right now in this society, the large majority of innocent people are victims and victimized by criminals… and because of the government? Hridy: At the present time, the government is either unwilling or unable to actually enforce reasonable laws. Therefore, very large numbers of innocent people are killed, are maimed, are injured. And if you think that’s ok and if you don’t stop it, then you’re a Nazi because… Or at least during let’s say Hitler’s regime, there were so-called good citizens that may not have been personally employed in concentration camps, but that condoned or tolerated or thought it was ok the way things were going. So if you think it’s ok in a society that large numbers of innocent people become victimized, then you are a bona-fide Nazi or Nazi sympathizer. Cause that’s the essence of Nazism, to harm innocent people. Host: Obviously you’re being sarcastic. But how many… Hridy: No, I’m being very serious. If you think it’s ok, then you have that in common with the Nazis. The Nazis, let’s ay when they were in power, there were alot of people, so-called good citizens that kind of sat back and thought Well, you know. That’s life. That’s the way the government is. What can you do? That’s the way the world is. So if you think it’s ok that large numbers of innocent people become victimized, then you have alot in common with those people. Host: So my guest today, Hridyananda das Gosvami who’s just defending himself against charges of being called a Nazi. But… Hridy: No, it’s not a question of defending oneself. It’s a question of isolating objective principles and then seeing where they… those principles actually are substantiated. The objective principle here… Let us say or the uh issue here is harming innocent people. So if I perform and act or condone a system in which it is entirely predictable that large numbers of innocent people will become victimized and I think that’s alright as opposed to getting very heavy with people that are not innocent, if I prefer that innocent people be harmed rather than guilty people, then I think there is something warped in my brain. Host: Do you have an example of a society that… in which that system has already proven to work? Hridy: Well, there are many countries in the world that have different systems of law enforcement. Some of them have very little crime, some of them have alot of crime. I think you… Another cause actually of all this crime is what I would call hyper-urbanization. Uh everyone knows or should know that this tremendous urbanization that we’ve experienced in our society especially in this century is of course the classic symptom of decadence. You could see it in ancient Greece, you could see it in ancient Rome. You can see it in America, you can see it in India. You can see it anywhere in the world that when people tend to exaggerate or people tend to expand unnecessarily these anthropocentric environments, they loose touch with reality. They loose touch with nature, they loose touch with God, they begin to think that reality is man-made, that reality is just something created by human beings, including moral reality… and so uh you get these alienated, out of touch hyper-urbanized creatures uh that uh create these decadent societies and become so decadent that they think that victimizing millions of people in the name of you know I don’t know uh… kindness to criminals somehow makes since. And that’s the way you show you’re civilized by condoning a system in which millions of innocent women, children and men are victimized. If you condone that in order to be kind to a criminal, uh that shows you’re a good person. Host: So you propose a society where there are very few jails, if at all, and most people are either killed or… Hridy: Not killed. It’s very simple. People that want to participate in a society have to understand the rules. The rules are you cannot abuse other people. It’s very simple. Host: Ok, what’s the punishment for abusing someone else? As little as possible, as much as necessary. But you can not abuse other people period. And those are the rules. And if you don’t want… if you don’t like the rules don’t play the game. Don’t… you know, you cannot be a member of that society if you don’t accept… Just like ever since you were a kid. You wanna play in the local touch football game in the street, these are the rules. If you don’t accept the rules then you can’t play in the game. It’s very simple. Host: But what… I wonder about the type of people that you need to fill in the government post because they have to be… Hridy: I can tell you what you don’t need. Host: Oh! Ok. Go ahead. Hridy: Well what you’ve got. Host: Ok, what do you need? Hridy: You need people that are honest, that are intelligent. Host: How do you measure that? How do you… I mean intelligence. Do you take an S.A.T. score? An I.Q. test? What do you do? What’s intelligence? Hridy: Uh by intelligence… I think intelligence should start with wisdom. And of course we can fill in all the technical skills. But if there’s no wisdom, there’s no higher understanding of anything. You just have a bunch of animalistic people fighting each other to get power, the what do you expect? I have good friend of mine who graduated from an ultra-prestigious law-school in this country and has been practicing international law in Manhattan for the last six or seven years and uh he made a comment recently that he cannot believe how corrupt the American legal system is. What the lawyers have done to justice in this country in the pursuit of their own… Host: Interest? Hridy: Yes, exactly, their own interest. Host: Well is America an exception to the rule? Hridy: America has I think uh I forget the exact numbers. Perhaps more lawyers than the rest of the world combined or something like that. I forget the exact number, but uh… Of course this country is most advanced materially which unfortunately turns out to be most advanced in terms of decadence. In that sense also maybe America is the best candidate to get better or to lead the world out of this darkness because America has already done it. Like they say in America, been there done that. So because we’ve gone all the way so to speak, maybe we know better now. Host: How do we change society? Hridy: Well you can start with yourself. Host: Well how will I change myself? Hridy: Well, to get religious, we advocate in this age that everyone within their own tradition, within their own culture, should chant the names of God, should meditate on the names of God, that this is the most efficacious way to purify one’s existence and to awaken one’s consciousness to a higher spiritual reality. Host: Is there a choice? Hridy: I just said everyone within their tradition, everyone within their culture… Is there a choice? Can you make god go away? No you can’t make God go away. Is there something as powerful as God or his name? No there’s not. Your choice is you’re free to worship God or to love God or to try to love God within your own tradition. But God is there and you can’t make Him go away. Host: Ok, let’s say by your karma you were born in a particular circle where God wasn’t much of an issue. It’s not because of anger or envy or anything. It’s simply because it’s not a topic ???. Hridy: Well what if you were born in a circle as you call it where there’s no hygiene? What if you’re born in a circle of crack addicts? The point is that we are responsible as human beings, especially in modern society in which we have so much access to information, we are responsible to find out the truth to the best of our ability and to live in accordance with it. By the way, that’s one of the consequences of the information age. Because there is so much information although it’s… people are sort of saturated. But about 99 percent of it you can sort of dump anyway because it’s obviously not the highest truth. And uh so among those things or those claims which at least look like they could be some kind of spiritual truth, then it’s your responsibility to sincerely look for God, to sincerely look for yourself, try to find out what you are, who you are beyond the body. I mean after all the body’s changing at every moment, we are what we eat, so who is that self, who is that eternal person within the body that’s experiencing the various changes and phases of the body? And who’s in control ultimately and why are we here? These are human questions. Not just what’s the latest little gadget I can by for my computer. These are the important questions that we should be asking as human beings. Host: Well, you call that being religious. Maybe you should give up definition of what you consider being religion because I think spirituality goes alot better because many abuses were committed in the name of religion. Wars were fought. Hridy: Well if someone… people… You can use whatever name you want. People abuse everything. People for example abuse on-line e-mail services. So maybe we should banish them or many people abuse cars by driving so fast. We should banish cars. People abuse medicine. We should get rid of all the doctors. So is it a principle that when something is abused you just banish the whole thing or you try to stop the abuse? Host: Good point. So what’s real religion? What’s real spirituality? Hridy: Real religion is to really love God. Host: The whole… You said you chant God’s names. How do you notice… I mean besides yourself, how would other people see that you are actually loving God? What are the visible symptoms? Hridy: Well how do people see me love anyone? Host: Well, because you’re always thinking and talking about that particular person. Hridy: That’s good for a start. Host: How do you… What ??? society’s not – at least at the present moment is not geared toward that total change in consciousness as you may hope or propose. So what’s the uh… What’s the hope, what’s the vision you have for the uh near future. Like since in America we are used to get things right now, right away or forget about them. How… What’s actually a practical solution that we have? Hridy: Well, we have to do the best we can and uh hope for the best. That’s all we can do. Isn’t it? Host: So in an idea society we know how things will probably work. But we haven’t seen anything near what an ideal society should be like and instead we are stuck with America whether… What’s the saying?… England, despite the faults… Hridy: Despite all thy faults I love thee. Host: Yea, so America with all thy faults I love thee, Hridy: Yea, it’s not a question of hating America or being against America. I mean if you’re trying to do what’s best and improve things, it doesn’t mean you don’t care about the place. It means you’re trying to help the place It’s a very simple fact. People simply have to realize that if you make certain decisions, then you are choosing – whether you like it or not – you are choosing to inflict corporeal and capital punishment on large numbers of innocent people. And if you think that’s alright, then have fun with the society you get. Host: Um what do we do with the classic politicians? They don’t seem to be interested… Well, you may say there’s a percentage of them who are correct and it’s obvious there is a percentage of them who are correct and it’s not obvious there is a percentage of them that is… that are not correct. Hridy: I suppose there are a few that aren’t corrupt. Host: Ok, so what do you do with them? What do you do with the corrupt ones and the non-corrupt ones? Hridy: Well, it’s very simple. We live in a democracy. If people come to a higher consciousness, they’ll obviously do the needful. They’ll elect people that are qualified. Host: Well we have two major parties in this country, Republican and Democratic and uh… Hridy: Now it looks like two and ahalf. But anyway, I think we just have to come to consciousness. We have to understand what’s going on and if people understand what’s going on, then they’ll do the right thing. That’s all. I don’t think we have to go into the technical details of how many parties we’ll have and etc., etc., whether it’ll take six months or five years or whatever. The point is as far as possible people should try to understand what God is, what the soul is, what the laws of God are and what has to be done in order to live properly. Host: So none of the parties should be godless? Hridy: Well, a godless people won’t tolerate a godless party and a godless people won’t tolerate a god conscious party. Isn’t it? Host: My guest today is Hridyananda das Gosvami. Unfortunately he’s leaving town, going to Harvard and he’s being so kind as to show up for several of our programs. He’s a renowned scholar, writer, lecturer and he’s been here with us; Touchstone, KCSB 91.9 FM in Santa Brabara. Thankyou very much for coming. Hridy: Thankyou. And thanks to everybody out there.

Host: Seems like that professor didn’t commit a sin except the one of being honest with his students. Hridy: No, he had the virtue of honesty. Host: Yes… Hridy: But why call it philosophy? Philosophy means love of wisdom, not simply love of nit-picking. Host: Ok. What is wisdom? Hridy: Wisdom means you have to understand the important things of life. According to the Vedic understanding, there are three basic entities which we have to understand, which are the soul, ourselves, individual souls, individual people, God, the supreme soul, the supreme conscious being and matter. You know, what is matter, what is the material world? What is earth and water and all that stuff? These are the three basic realities that confront us. And if we can understand these things, get them right, then we are wise. And if we don’t understand these things, then we’re not wise no matter how many degrees we have. Host: You…You’re from Harvard. So do you say that the same thing is going on at Harvard that’s going on at every low college campus. Hridy: Everyone should know that. It goes on in spades. After all a university gets a high rating nowadays by being materialistic, by being very good at materialism. Wisdom, if they attempted to be a wise institution, they would probably loose their rating. Host: ??? philosophy was a sport I’m sure, they would rate a little better. What they do now? (jump?) Um, seems like everytime you speak to us you’re quoting someone else and you’re quoting the Vedic literature, you’re quoting India sages. Are you afraid of giving your own opinion? Hridy: Actually, I haven’t quoted very much and uh am I afraid of giving my own opinion? I think everyone should be afraid of being a fool. I think everyone should be afraid of stupidity and uh misunderstanding life. That I think is actually something to be feared. So we should speak about things we know and we shouldn’t uselessly waste our time speculating about things far beyond our ability to understand. For example let’s say I want to go from Santa Barbara to London. Now what if I take a plane? And you say to me are you afraid of trying to run and swim to London? Yes, I think I am afraid of trying to run and swim to London from Santa Barbara. So what you may call courage may simply be stupidity. WE should take help in areas where we need help and not be falsely proud so that we deny the help that we actually need to be successful. In that way, if we want to understand God and the soul, we should take help from God, from great souls and not be falsely proud or embarrassed to be humble. Host: We’ve talked about this before. I would like you to comment, perhaps expand it a little bit. Uh about pride and about humility. I would like you to give your own definition and also the process by which to get rid of one and entertain the other. Hridy: Well, pride or one may say false pride, the kind that comes before a fall is taking credit for something that you didn’t do. Or taking too much credit for something. Whatever we do in the physical world, we do with our bodies and we didn’t make our bodies, nor do we maintain them really, nor do we have ultimate control over them. A higher power makes the body, keeps the body moving, provides the life in the body. Similarly our brains. No one built their own brain. There’s no build your own brain kits at Walmart. So these brains are created by higher authority, by the supreme, by God, however you want to call it and therefore we should not be so proud of the things that are accomplished by our bodies and brains. For example one may have an attractive body or a shapely body or whatever. But why be proud of this? We didn’t make it. Why not give the credit to the artist? Humility simply means to recognize our real position, that we’re very tiny within… What to speak within the universe? We’re certainly tine within the universe. Imagine what our position is within the entire kingdom of God which goes far beyond this universe. Our position is so tiny, so insignificant. So if we simply open our eyes, stop being egocentric and see what the real situation is, we’ll automatically become humble and that humility will lead us to wisdom. Host: How about this um courses, like unlimited courses offered in self-esteem? What do you think of that? Hridy: Well, uh I think it’s more important to be good that simply to think you’re good. People should try to be good persons and if we are actually good, we’ll fell good about ourselves. Nowadays, no one cares… Uh not no one, but uh there’s some emphasis given not on being good, but simply on feeling good. So I think it’s more important… Just like for example health. You have to actually be healthy, not just feel or think you’re healthy. I sure you can take some kind of designer drugs that will make you feel good even as you’re dying a quick death. So the point is not to feel healthy, the point is to be healthy. If you are healthy I’m sure you’ll also feel healthy. If you are good I’m sure you’ll also feel good. Host: What is to be good? Hridy: To be good means to perform activities, to think thoughts, to speak words, which are beneficial to oneself and others. Host: What is beneficial? Hridy: Beneficial means it leads to real happiness, to permanent life, to knowledge, to understanding. I say those three things: something which leads us to truth, true knowledge, true happiness and true life. For example you may know alot about the history of Galina, California. But a very short time ago there was no such thing. And similarly in the near future – near in terms of cosmic time – there’ll be no such bird. So the point is that it’s not a permanent reality. You may know about it, but your knowledge of the history of Galina does not lead you to any permanent or eternal knowledge. Similarly, let’s say for example I try to get happy by taking crack cocaine. Now it may give me a momentary sensation which I somehow think is happiness. But the long run effect – or even the short run effect actually in this case – will be basically destroying my life. So in that way, things which lead to permanent happiness, true knowledge and permanent existence, those things are beneficial. And one should act, think and speak in a way that leads to this good state of affairs for oneself and for others. Host: Do you see anyone doing that? Hridy: Yes, those who are spiritually minded. It’s not a sectarian thing. It’s not just one… this religion or that religion. Basically uh real happiness, knowledge and existence uh centers around the soul. So one has to first understand there is an eternal soul there is God, there is a relationship between them. And one has to begin to reconstruct one’s life or develop a culture, a career based on this reality of oneself and of God. And around the world thee are many people who are trying to do this in their own way. They may be more or less successful, but the extent to which any of them are sincere there’s certainly benefit. Host: So are there any of these people affiliated with any of the universities or political parties? Hridy: Well, certainly spiritually minded people may enroll in universities and may even teach at universities and for whatever reasons may sometimes get involved in politics, although as we all know, many very crass, materialistic things, maneuvering are done in the name of religion in the political realm. Just like Prabhupada once gave the example or our spiritual master once gave the example that uh in World War 2 when many of the German soldiers were off in foreign lands trying to carry out Hitler’s mad schemes, the soldiers uh their wives their sisters, their mothers, their daughters and so on would go to the church and pray… and of course their sons and brothers or whatever. Anyway so they prayed that their brother, their father, their son or husband or whatever would come back. So many of them didn’t come back. And then many of these men and women who had prayed became atheists. As we know, atheism is quite a popular thing in… especially in North Europe. So Prabhupada’s point was that Why didn’t they consult with God before they started the war? In other words, we can’t just do whatever we want and then pray to God to back us up. Hey God cover me. I’m going out to do this. One should first find out what God wants to be done or not done and then do that or refrain from that. And then one can pray to God for protection, for help because after all, one is carrying out God’s will. Host: What’s the best way to pray? Hridy: One should pray to be engaged in the service of the Lord. One should not pray for selfish things. God knows you need bread. You don’t have to tell him. So we should trust God. We should know that He’s within us, He’s within our heart, He’s with everyone, He pervades everything, every atom. We should ask for service, Please let me serve you. This will please God. As far as the rest, our health, wealth and all that, uh God knows about it. He’ll take care of it. He’s already taken care of… the animals don’t pray and they eat, they get their food. So it’s not that we have to pray to eat. God knows about these things, He… I’m sure He has a Ph.D. in economics or whatever. So we should rather pray for love of God, pray for service. Host: God knows everything. Doesn’t He know that we need service? Hridy: Well, but we may not want to serve. In fact because we are not so inclined to serve God, therefore we got a free all-expense paid vacation in the material world. So now in the act of again praying to God for service, we are acknowledging and confessing or revealing to God – we can also reveal things to God – that uh we want to rectify things. That you know, we want to go back to our real constitutional position, not as wanta be deities of the material world, but as loving servants of God. Host: My guest today, Hridyananda das Goswami uh… Side 2 …between… You are going to Boston now. So besides the weather, what’s the difference between the consciousness of the people in Boston and in Santa Barbara? Hridy: Well, it’s a big city. This is not. Host: So what’s the advice you have for people in Santa Barbara? Do you notice that… In Santa Barbara it seems like people are mostly oriented towards spiritual life, whether… Hridy: Really? Host: Well, that’s my experience. Hridy: Oriented. They’re favorably disposed but orientation means one is facing toward something or looking toward something, moving toward something. So to be spiritually oriented there should be progress, there should be a tangible focus on spiritual values. Not merely on material goodness or piety, but on something which is actually not material. After all, although in colloquial English we say materialistic in reference… We use the word materialistic to describe something which is crassly materialistic, qualities like greed or excessive greed, excessive lust. In other words we accept the basic principle Yes, greed and lust are good, but if it goes too far it’s materialistic. But actually, the desire to exploit this world at any level or degree is material. So spiritual orientation means to go beyond all that entirely and to look towards something which is purely spiritual. Host: How do you measure spiritual advancement? Hridy: Well, how do you measure bodily health? Take the temperature, you feel the pulse. So we have to know what a spiritually pure being or consciousness is and then you just see how far you’ve gone towards that. And then we have to take or consider what… if you wanna use the term pure lust or pure greed is and see how far we’ve gone to that side. So everyone that’s interested has to take stock of their own condition. Host: Who can measure because… An example of medicine is that a doctor can give a test, but any lab technician can read it. Um if ordinary people… Hridy: Anyone can… Anyone can see uh for example this person is self-controlled, this person is not self-controlled. This person is very greedy, this person is relatively self-satisfied. Everyone observes these things. Certainly one can observe these things in oneself. Well without taking the example of oneself, because that depends on sincerity to… Uh how about faking it? Like we can see… Hridy: Uh all the time? You’re gonna fake it your whole life? Host: That’s what politics is about isn’t it? Hridy: No. Politicians… Politicians have such a bad reputation because they can’t fake it. Everyone sees right through it. So someone can fake something their entire life, then in what sense are they faking it? Host: I see. So what is the behavior of someone who is actually successful in spiritual life? Hridy: Uh a successfully spiritual person should be in love and love of God and love of Krsna and love with every soul, seeing every soul as part of God. Just like in a healthy marriage there should be love. Otherwise, people can’t stay together. So we can’t stay with Krsna or stay with God unless there’s love. Host: And uh, what are the symptoms of love? Hridy: Well, I don’t know. You write the person’s name on your notebook. Symptoms are that uh you’re attached to someone, you’re attracted to that person, you always think about and talk about that person. You seek what is best for that person. After all, there’s also the stalker mentality. We can be attracted to someone, but with a desire to exploit that person. So love means not mere attraction which may include exploitative consciousness, but attraction with a sincere desire to do what is best for that beloved person. Host: Well in the case of God being a omnipresent, uh one would be incline toward improvement just because he’s being controlled or looked or observed at all times. Therefore, he can’t hide. Therefore you wanna be good because… Hridy: I didn’t follow that question. Host: Well God has a perfect security system. He can watch you, He can watch your thoughts, He can watch your actions. Uh therefore, it may be in your own interests. But he can’t even deviate because you know you will be caught on camera. Hridy: Yea, I admit nowadays a system which you cannot cheat is not very attractive. Host: (laughter) That’s not what I implied with the question. I’m saying that maybe some people have the tendency to do what is right and because of the guilt. Otherwise… Hridy: Well should we… for example not have qualms about let’s say raping or murdering other people? I mean after all, let’s say someone is about to commit a rape and then they fell guilty about it and don’t do it. Are we gonna preach to that person that that person shouldn’t feel guilty? What about when guilt restrains someone from a malicious or an evil act? Are we against that guilt? Do we just wanna take off… you know, pull out the stops and take off the brakes and let the car go over the cliff? I mean what is it you’re seeking? Host: So there is… Hridy: Some things are actually wrong and if you feel in yourself a tendency to do something which is really harmful or evil and you feel guilty about that tendency, that guilt is a sign of nobility, of piety, of goodness. And someone who lacks that feeling of guilt is a monster. Host: I see. Well I guess we’re not used to someone exposing guilt as a good thing. Well it depends. If you feel guilty about let’s say uh chewing on an apple, then maybe you have to rethink your values. Of course you should offer the apple in sacrifice to God, but… there’s rational guilt and irrational guilt. If you’re feeling guilt unreasonably, irrationally, then you’ve got a problem. If you’re not feeling guilty reasonably you’ve got a problem. There are situations in which if you don’t feel guilt you’ve got a problem. Host: There’s a new concept to us. What about uh people who are born without guilt, like they don’t feel guilt about anything, like um Ted Bundy or Jeffrey Dohmer? They don’t seem to fell any guilt. Or the Mendez brothers. Hridy: Well there… You’ve got uh… I don’t know about the Mendez brothers. But I mean… There are some pretty monstrous people around. Of course, there’s also a soul inside of them, but it’s covered. So due to laws of karma, by our previous activities or former life, cultivation of a particular consciousness, we’re born with alot of baggage in this life. People aren’t just born blank slates as society used to dream… that people are born blank slates. They’re not blank slates. There’s all kinds of writing on them. And so if someone is sort of a little monster, then you have to do something to protect society. Just like you know if the Cyclops walks into downtown Santa Barbara or something, you gotta do something about it.

Side 2 So the simple fact is the very notion of proof is based on some kind of proof in the validity of human testimony. We may disagree on who is qualified to give testimony, but we certainly can’t disagree that the basis of the very notion of evidence, demonstration, proving, objectivity is based on the testimony of some person that saw it or heard it or felt it or whatever. So we have this massive testimony about God and I don’t see philosophically how we can just wave a wand and make it all vanish or pretend that that amount and that quality of human testimony means nothing. I don’t believe that is consistent with our basis notions of proof and evidence. So anyway, to be more simple, if you want to know God and you’re sincere, then you can know God. It’s that simple. And that experience of God is really the most basic experience, it’s self-evident which is another philosophical term, self-evident, like the sun is self-evident. What do we use to light up the sun? The sun lights itself up. No other instrument, no other power or light can reveal the sun as it reveals itself. So there is the notion of self-evidence. Some things just show themselves and God is one of those things. God shows himself and uh… so the question is how do we persuade God to reveal Himself to us? Host: We’re back and Gary called to ask a question directly to Hridyananda das Goswami. Please state the question and the answer. Hridy: Well Gary asked about the fact that the human population seems to be… not seems to be… has increased alot. I think it’s in the last 80 years or so – which we all know – there’s been a technology revolution and also there seems to be increasing misery in the world, increasing poverty. Some people remember the good old days, whatever. And so if we are all ultimately souls, then how could the number of human beings increase like this, why isn’t there a constant population? Basically, because we’re talking about a system which includes not only human beings but all other species of life and in fact all the planets in the universe. The universe as a whole is taken as a system. And so therefore the fact that at a particular time the population increases among human beings doesn’t really mean that the system as a whole has been flooded which new souls or whatever. For example here we are in campus at certain times, at certain days of the week certain buildings become full, at other times they’re empty. And yet you could say the system, taking the system here to be let’s say Santa Barbara County is basically constant. Some people move in, some people move out. But there’s a certain constantcy. So similarly some souls become liberated and go to the spiritual world. Others may come here and try their chances. But there’s a constantcy in the universe as a system. As far as increasing misery, I would say that there’s an increasing materialism and the harder we try to exploit nature, the more nature makes us suffer. And uh I don’t know if anyone has tried as hard to exploit nature as we have here on the earth in the last 100 years or so. Host: Seems like you say that we have reached unprecedented levels of materialism. It seems like uh the ??? have outdone us by a long shot. Hridy: Well, I think we’re competitive. In any case, because – as Gary mentioned – because there’s been a technology revolution, we have the instruments to really do a job on the earth. So the amount of exploitation going on nowadays is remarkable. Host: Do you think there are places which are more conducive than others for the practice of spiritual life? Hridy: Well, it depends on your approach. For example, if someone is a preacher they may find it very conducive to be in a place where there are fallen souls, but fallen souls a little curious about spiritual life. Whereas someone who’s not really a preacher, who just wants to live in peace and meditate on God may not want to be in such a place. So I think to say that a place is conducive for spiritual life means it’s conducive for the particular service we are trying to render to God. Host: Then how do you find Santa Barbara for your work? Hridy: Oh it’s fine. Host: So this is point blank. Go ahead. Hridy: Right. A caller mentioned the fact that he had read or heard that um Ghandi, Mahatma Ghandi was once engaged in a long march and alot of people gave up their jobs or went to some serious inconvenience to go with him. And in the middle of it he decided to quite and decided not to do it. And when asked you know what about the people that came along with you he said Well, I have to obey not human law, but God’s law. So Colin was asking what about situations where human law and God’s law… he used the term grate, grate against each other or are in conflict. And I would say first of all that Ghandi with all due respect, was not really engaged in my opinion in the spiritual program. I don’t think it’s particularly spiritual to have a bunch of corrupt Indian politicians as opposed to a bunch of corrupt British politicians in charge of South Asia. Uh but still Colin raised a good question. What about sometimes there appears to be conflict? I would say that uh the basic laws of God which we should adhere to are not really in conflict with human law or shouldn’t be. They’re certainly not in conflict with human common sense and decency. So that uh for example the basic law in Sanskrit is stated ???, don’t injure any living being. Be kind to everyone. Try to do what is best for everyone. In the application there may be differences of opinion obviously. But I think that one should not exploit a notion of being transcendental or obeying God’s law to simply flaunt human decency or um… I don’t think that’s proper English… to flaunt a disregard for human decency or the welfare of others. So I think that we should try to understand and apply God’s law in a way which also is visibly good for people. Host: Thankyou very much. Hridy: Thankyou Colin by the way. (tape jump) (another interview?) Host: You follow the Bhagavad-gita, so why don’t you explain to our audience what is the Bhagavad-gita. What’s the purpose of it? Hridy: The word Bhagavad-gita means the song of God. The purpose of it is to enlighten us. The song of God, the work is spoken by Krsna who is understood to be God. Lord Krsna appeared in this world approximately 5000 years ago and in the Bhagavad-gita He enlightened his friend and devotee Arjuna who was bewildered, confused, frustrated about life, about what he should do and so on. So uh the first point which Lord Krsna made to Arjuna is that we lament because we take the body to be the self and the body has all kinds of problems. Bodies are imperfect, they’re temporary, they’re subject to all kinds of sufferings, attachments, aversions and so on. But we are eternal souls and if we understand this then we can transcend our material suffering. So this was the first lesson of the Bhagavad-gita. Host: What are the different… The Bhagavad-gita is divided into 18 chapters. Isn’t chapter 18 more important that the other ones. Hridy: Oh, they’re all pretty good. Host: So what would you say… Do you want to more or less make a synopsis for us, what are the different chapters of the Bhagavad-gita? Hridy: Well I explained the first point how we are not the body but rather eternal soul. That’s in the second chapter of the Bhagavad-gita. In the third chapter Lord Krsna introduces the notion of sacrifice. The idea is that this world belongs to God. This land is my land, this land is your land. Not really. Uh the land actually belongs to the creator. We can say this land is my land or your land if we are serving the will of the creator. As the Christians say Thy kingdom come, thy will be done. So third chapter introduces the notion that whatever we do in this world, we should do in a spirit of devotion. That is we perform a particular task, job or we do some work or some activity and that activity has a fruit, a result, a consequence. That result of the activity should be offered to God. So this is explained in the forth chapter. Lord Krsna begins to explain about the yoga system. He explains more about this notion of sacrifice, He explains about how the knowledge is transmitted through what he calls parampara, a chain of succession from great teachers to students and so on. And ultimately – to make a long story short – the Gita culminates in the culmination, in the revelation that Krsna is the Supreme Personality of the Godhead, the Supreme Lord and that ultimately we should simply surrender to Him, to God and work in this world in a spirit of devotion and that will free us from karma, from birth and death, and we shall be elevated to the spiritual world. Host: Should everybody aspire for the same goal. Well everyone wants to be healthy. Should some people aspire to be sick just for the sake of variety? Host: So you’re trying to say the only way to be healthy is to surrender to God spiritually speaking? Guest: Well, if you consider that that’s what we are, we are part of God, we are eternal servants of God, then to be healthy means to be what you really are and to be that well or to do that well, to do what you were really meant to do. So it’s a question of ultimate identity. That’s what we ultimately are. Host: Is the Bhagavad-gita the only book that explains these facts? Hridy: No, of course not. So many great scriptures around the world and so many great traditions give the same basic information. Host: Well I’m speaking only about the Vedic literature in this case. Hridy: Uh Vedic or non-vedic, the point is it’s pretty well understood in many countries, many lands of the world that ultimately we are meant to render loving service to the supreme, to God. The advantage of the Bhagavad-gita is that Lord Krsna is speaking directly, personally. God is personally speaking. So that’s somewhat unique and interesting. Host: What do you attribute beside the fact that God is speaking, what do you attribute to to it’s success because of all the different Vedic literatures, basically the only one which is partially known in the West is the Bhagavad-gita. Hridy: I don’t know, uh the Mahabharata had a very successful theater run. The production wasn’t very spiritual. But still it got alot of media attention, the Mahabharata in which the Gita appears. The Ramayana is becoming increasingly known. The Upanisads are studied by philosophers. Vedanta has it’s followers. So all these books are gradually becoming known in the West. I mean don’t forget that just a few centuries ago, we were in pretty much the dark ages. They didn’t have airplanes or trains and people of different religions were burned at the stake in Europe. So it’s only historically speaking, recently that there is you might say an openness about other cultures. So in the Vedas… the Vedic knowledge is now gradually becoming known also. Host: Can you explain something about the five major topics discussed… what they discuss in the Bhagavad-gita? Hridy: Uh well karma means that we get reactions for our actions. Whatever goes around comes around. Whatever you put out into the world comes back to you. So there’s a discussion of karma of kala which means time, cosmic time, the… how… the schedule for the universe basically and for the Lord’s incarnations. Then besides those two, there’s three basic realities, three basic entities which exists which are God, living beings like ourselves and material nature. This is the basic ontology, the fundamental things, real things that exists. Host: I found that the Gita declares material nature to be eternal. How is that? Hridy: Well, the Gita says that the substance itself always exists as the… Many classical Greek philosophers understood like Parmenities and others, uh whatever exists has always existed. But the particular forms are not eternal. For example this studio we’re in right now is not eternal. But the energy, the matter of which this studio is constituted has always existed. Energy is conserved and it’s always been there. Host: Well I do have a question that uh… that may make alot of people restless. What happens if you do surrender to God? What happens to all your goodies? Hridy: Your goodies? Well God is the supreme good, the sunum-bonum, so it stands to reason that if we achieve God consciousness or if we develop our love, our relationship… our love for our relationship with God that we’ll get the supreme goodies. Host: But in order to get that you have to give the earthly goodies… Hridy: No, I think it’s more a question of using whatever we have, doing whatever we do, for Krsna, for God. That’s the whole point of the Bhagavad-gita which we were discussing. Arjuna was a warrior, a prince. He was engaged in a just fight and Lord Krsna told him that he should do his duty normally, but he should do it in a spirit of devotion offering the fruit to God. So one man’s goodies is another man’s poison. It depends on what you mean. If things are really goodies which of course just means a little good, if things are actually good, then they should benefit us, not simply gratify us at the moment, but they should actually benefit us. They should actually somehow enhance our existence, our consciousness. So if we take a reasonable definition of the good or goodies, then spiritual things are certainly best for us. For example eating. We like to eat but we should eat spiritual food, offering appropriate foods to God and eating… taking the remnants as mercy. Host: Approximately 15 million people in America have registered weapons. So what do we do with an assault rifle. How do you engage that in God’s service? Hridy: Well, uh there are laws. There is right and wrong. And weapons should be used to protect innocent people. If there are no innocent people in danger, then they shouldn’t be used at all. Host: You were explaining some time ago about um, some controversial topic which is that people should be… the rights of people should be defended and you disagreed with the basically the justice system or the penal system now in America. So you say that by um… What happen if we expedite this kind of things and judge people very quickly, quick trials and death penalty and this one, two, three strikes you’re out. Hridy: Well, my point is very simple. It’s the duty of the government to protect people. An innocent person has the right to live a secure, safe life. And if the government can’t provide that, the government is incompetent. It’s a bogus government, it’s not a proper government. So that’s the simple point. It’s not that we have itchy trigger fingers or we’re trying to uh do anything. It’s simple… It’s a simple fact of life. People that are innocently, properly doing their own business, minding their own business, leading their own lives, have a right to security. That’s a basic right. The government is at the present time committing violence against the people by unleashing upon them all kinds of criminal violence. Because the government is not doing it’s duty properly, it does not protect the people. Therefore that is state violence. Host: Should we have some regime like uh Saudi Arabia or North Yeomen where people who steal, their hands are cut off and people who… Hridy: We don’t necessarily have to do things that way. But uh things have to be done. Somehow or other, innocent people have to be protected. For example let’s say you have a house on a mountain top. You know if you jump off the mountain you’re gonna die. So unless you’re suicidal you don’t jump. So people should know that if you bother innocent, if you harass or injure, if you cause significant harm to an innocent person, then basically you’re out of the ballgame. And uh, if that’s clearly established then people just don’t do it just like people don’t jump off mountains or cliffs. Host: I see. I’ve also noticed that most policeman that I see… I see them giving tickets for speeding to other people instead of protecting citizens when there’s crime or… Hridy: Well I mean also if there aren’t speeding tickets and people drive recklessly, that also becomes a cause of death. So it’s not that everyone… We should immediately stop all traffic citations. It’s a simple point that somehow or other the government has to figure out a way to protect the people and if they can’t do that they should resign and admit that they’re incompetent, they can’t do their job and not be greedy, selfish, lusty, pseudo-governors, simply anxious for their own prestige and power… as we have of course nowadays. Host: Uh, has it been any different in the last let’s say 50 years? Hridy: Well I mean anyone can go to a library and look at the crime statistics. It’s not very difficult. Everyone knows what’s going on. Host: So things are getting worse. Hridy: Well, in general I mean you know it goes up and down a little bit the last few years. But in general we live in an age… This age is crime ridden and that’s a simple fact. Host: …about 700 verses in the Bhagavad-gita. Which one or which ones are the most important verses in the Bhagavad-gita and why? Hridy: Well, the 18th chapter, verse 66 there is a verse considered to be the conclusion, the final conclusion of Krsna’s teachings. Lord Krsna says that we should give up all… whatever else we think is our duty and simply take full shelter of Him, of God. So to give up other duties doesn’t mean not to do anything else, but rather we should do everything for Him. We should give up any other strategy for success in life. In other words if we’re trying to perform spiritual duties, then that may include economic activities, uh taking care of family, doing… performing a particular occupation or vocation and so on. But the idea is that all these things should be performed in this spirit of Krsna Consciousness. And we should not attempt or think that we have to do things in the other consciousness. Everything should be dovetailed. All of our duties should be dovetailed in this single consciousness. Host: So can you tell us the verse in the original Sanskrit? Hridy: Well here it goes. ??? Host: So what’s the important word in… in the verse… essentially a key word? Hridy: Well, they’re all pretty nice. Krsna simply says that uh ???, to Me alone come for shelter. So this is just sort of your generic God consciousness. As in the Judeo-Christian tradition we have the injunction to love God with all your heart, soul and might. So if you take this literally it comes out to about the same thing. Host: Uh, how many gods are there? Hridy: How many do you want? Host: How many do we need? Hridy: Well, it depends on whether you want to capitalize the “g” or not. There are many powerful personalities, gods, rulers, deities and so on. But ultimately one Supreme God. Host: So is the same… the same God is then in every tradition? Guest: Well if they mean the Supreme God. Some people don’t really meant that. Host: What do they mean? Explain it. Hridy: Some people just want to worship a particular spirit that will give them a… some material facility they are seeking. Some people aren’t really concerned with going to the supreme ultimate entity, they just want to satisfy a particular desire that they have. Host: But what… What do you ??? everything? In other words, ok you want God and you get to meet God. So what do you do next, shake hands, just prostrate yourself, uh what do you do? Hridy: When you meet God? Host: Yea. Hridy: Well, if one comes to the point of meeting God, this means one has purified one’s consciousness, one is self-realized, one is understood one’s eternal nature, one’s relationship with God and yea you might shake hands. At that point of Krsna Consciousness or God consciousness, uh because the relationship with Krsna or with God is developed, one simply, naturally acts in terms of that relationship. Just like, let’s say a child has been away from home for many, many years and finally goes home to see the mother and father, then there’s a relationship that’s already there. And they simply begin speaking, acting, helping each other in terms of that relationship which already exists. So we already have a relationship with Krsna, with God. It simply has to be revived. And when we revive it, then we know what to do. Host: So what I understand of what you just said is that without knowledge, you can’t surrender to God. Hridy: Well to whom would you surrender without knowledge? You can’t even get out of bed without knowledge. Host: No, I’m being a little more… perhaps a little more specific… without knowledge of God, without full or complete knowledge of God. And also that brings another question. How can you know the infinite? Hridy: Well, regarding your first question. When I was a boy in the 1950’s there was a popular song by a group called the Teddy Bears. Uh the name of the song was to know him is to love him. Anyway, I won’t sing the song now on the air. But uh, that’s the idea. That to know God is to love Him. When you love someone, you love them for what they are. So you have to know what they are. As far as knowing the infinite, we may not know God as well as God knows God, but we can do alot better than we’re doing now. Host: Good answer. Is the only kind of entities humans? I’m referring to that which cannot understand this knowledge. Hridy: Well we don’t want to know God or if we prefer to think there is no God, then God will help us to delude ourselves. There is no one though in principle that cannot understand God. Host: There’s a verse in the Gita that Krsna says from Me come remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness. Why would he give forgetfulness? Hridy: Because you want to forget. To respect your free will. God doesn’t force Himself on anyone. Host: Well if He’s for your own good, why would you want to forget? Hridy: Why would you want to forget? Host: Yes. Hridy: Well, envy probably is a good explanation. I mean why do we want to forget someone that’s better than us or… We don’t want to think someone is better than us. We want to think that we’re the best. So we’ve come to this material world to be the best and therefore we have a natural antipathy or hostility toward the notion that someone else is much better than we are and we should serve that much better person. We prefer to think that we’re the best. Everyone wants to be big number one. Host: Well let me ask this. There’s this sprinter/runner called Carl Lewis. Now maybe he’s not doing so well now. He’s reaching middle age or late twenties. But he used to be the best in the world and I don’t think probably anyone thought about being better than Carl Lewis and everybody enjoyed the way he run or jumped or whatever and… So why do we want to take the position of God and why could we even think that we are better than God and the situation… Hridy: It’s one thing to say that I don’t think I can run as fast as Carl Lewis, but then in another way I find some reason to be proud. It’s not that because people can’t run as fast as Carl Lewis they give up all their pride and become humble, saintly people. So everyone in their own way, finds some good or bad reason to be proud. And the fact that some human being has done that well, we hold out the hope that maybe I could do that. I could do that good someday or maybe my child will do that well o… In other words, someone from our group has done that. The human being has done that, someone who’s one of us. In my own way, I’m also great. That’s a little different that understanding or accepting that there’s actually a supreme being who is infinitely greater than ourselves and is not simply on the wide world of sports to entertain us, but that rather we’re suppose to serve Him. Host: Thankyou very much for coming. That’s a great answer and hopefully you will come back.

Side 2 … about advertisement. And is it advertisement either be by the media or fashion industry or even to sell cars or lawnmowers (I’m sure it is some nakedness) to help sell. Now this… You said that it will incite people to become more promiscuous. I’ll ask you, if there was no advertisement, uh that sex drive will be there? Hridy: Sex drive is there… and other drives are also there. Sex drive is not the only drive. Uh we have sex in overdrive. I think that’s the problem. Uh, there’s also spiritual drive. There’s a drive within the heart to know the highest truth, to know God, to find the supreme love, to satisfy one’s deepest yearnings for peace and so on. These are all drives. And we also get hungry, thirsty and go to the bathroom and sometimes have sex. It’s simply a question of putting things in the proper order. This is actually the whole point of what is probably the most famous philosophical work in Western culture which is Plato’s republic… that things have to be ordered according to higher faculties and lower faculties so that there’s coherence, sanity and ultimately progress for the soul. What do you think about… Do you take sex in overdrive as you call it as uh a disease? This is a diseased condition? What’s the… Hridy: A diseased condition is when you get things out of balance and ???. For example someone who just eats all day or thinks about eating all day has a problem. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t eat. So we should not go to extremes. Rather we should simply get things in the proper perspective. Just as we don’t hopefully think all day long about eating or even worse eat all day, but we eat as much as we require to keep our body healthy. Similarly, sex is a bodily function which should be performed in an appropriate way, not obsessively. Host: Um, what do you think about sex… I think I know the answer. But I wanta hear it. I’m sure my audience is pretty eager as well. What do you think about sex which is… Let’s say within marriage. Let’s say outside of marriage. What do you think about sex which is in any way not done for procreation like homosexuality, masturbation, etc., etc. Hridy: Well, nature offers us an inducement to reproduce. So if you want to sort of run off with the inducement and not take the responsibility, then it’s a type of rip-off. The simple fact is that when you have a child, if you responsibly raise the child it’s alot of work. It’s a very heavy responsibility. And as a type of inducement to assume that responsibility, there’s some sex pleasure. If we want the pleasure but reject the responsibility which is sort of the motto of modern society, uh take the gusto and dump the responsibility. Then basically what we have is what you might… I guess you could call classical decadence. Host: Now once step further. What do you think about sex within marriage which is not for procreation. It’s um… Let’s say we call it the culmination of a loving relationship, whether it be for procreation or not. Hridy: Well love I think properly defined means to… It’s a feeling in which you desire and actively seek the well-being of the person you love. So first we should understand who that other person is that we claim to love. If we understand that person to be spiritual and that that spiritual being has a purpose, an agenda which is ultimately liberation of that eternal soul from all material suffering, if we really love that person we will seek to do things with that person or for that person which actually benefit that person in the highest sense. That’s love. Host: Um, what should we do? What should we do with sex? What’s the conclusion? Ok, we all have sex desire of some kind or other and some people don’t want to admit it. Some are… they’re not uh into like a formal married life, not having children… that we don’t have it. So what should we do with sex in general? Hridy: Uh, I don’t think we can base our life on sex either to do it or not to do it. I think we first of all have to figure out what our spiritual goals are, what we really are. Uh, we should try to understand the importance of understanding God or Krsna. And within that framework sex will just take it’s natural position. Host: That’s it? Hridy: That’s it. Host: Sounds pretty simple but how do you go about it? Hridy: Well, we personally are followers of the Bhagavad-gita spoken by Lord Krsna. It’s a very famous book of wisdom and in that book we learn that our real identity is spiritual and not material, that we are something greater than matter of which the body is composed. And that ultimately we have the opportunity in human life to develop pure of perfect consciousness of ourselves, of God or Krsna and to promote… or to be promoted, elevate ourselves to an eternal position of perfect consciousness. And uh if we accept that purpose of life then all things, eating, sleeping, sex, friendship and so on take their natural places and play their natural roles within that great purpose of human life. Host: I wanna thank my guest again and uh… (jump) (new show?) I was thinking about the modes of nature as those who read the Bhagavad-gita, the modes of nature have a prominent role within the context of the Bhagavad-gita and seems like apparently they affect everyone in the material world. Can you explain something about that? Hridy: Well, what you’re referring to is uh… The Sanskrit word is guna or quality. It’s interesting because here’s a way that we can objectively evaluate material qualities. For example the highest quality is said to be that of goodness. This quality is symptomized by serenity, knowledge, charity, selflessness, the sense of duty that one performs one’s activities not for any particular selfish reason, but because it’s one’s duty to a higher authority, ultimately God. In contrast with this is the mode of passion. And in this mode a person is very active, but for selfish purposes. One works very hard desiring fame, wealth and power basically… and very much… one very much desires the fruits of one’s result. In other words I do something, but whatever good result comes of my work, I want that for my personal gratification. Finally there is the lowest mode, that of ignorance in which one is lethargic, forever procrastinating, unable to really accomplish anything, intoxicated, sleeping too much. In other words stupid. Host: I may not want to say it, but sounds like uh alot of people are so… coming out of the fiesta festival that is happening in downtown Santa Barbara. Hridy: Well these three qualities are there. Now someone may say so what. The so what is if we are seriously interested in understanding ourselves, God, Absolute Truth and so on, then we have to work our way to the mode of goodness. If one is fixed in passion or ignorance, the brain becomes all clogged up and it becomes very hard to understand spiritual reality. Host: I hear an example of the three modes of nature like going swimming. Someone in the mode of ignorance cannot find his locker and uh forgot the swimming trunks… and the mode of passion doesn’t have enough time so he is just running through the hallway trying to get to the pool on time but you know he’s debating if he should go back. And someone in the mode of goodness is at the end of a springboard but still not going into the water. And apparently beyond these three modes of nature is transcendence. So what’s actually transcendence? What’s transcen… Transcend what? Besides the modes of nature, what are you transcending or what are you attaining or what are you attaining? Hridy: Well, these three qualities, goodness, passion and ignorance are all material qualities. They are different dispositions of the mind within this world… and even within the body. Because the body may also be peaceful, passionate or ignorant. Uh, but beyond this of course is the spiritual quality which is sometimes called ??? or pure goodness. Material goodness is desireable because it as you said a springboard for spiritual understanding. But even in material goodness, there’s still a trace amount of passion and ignorance. In other words, someone may be basically a good person, but there’s still at least a little bit of passion or ignorance which surfaces from time to time, getting up so to speak on the wrong side of the bed. Or some days people say they shouldn’t have gotten up at all. So anyway, when you come to the spiritual platform, pure goodness, then there’s no material infection and one becomes a completely realized being. Host: I wanted to talk about this next. What is enlightenment? Hridy: Enlightenment means the bringing of light. Host: So the people that work for Edison, they’re actually enlightened? Hridy: Well they’re enlightening materially. Spiritual enlightenment means to wake up and understand I’m not a physical machine., namely this body. So I shouldn’t waste alot of time looking in the mirror at this machine. But rather I am an eternal spiritual being. I’m part of the supreme spiritual being, God or Krsna. And therefore my real identification is not with this world, but my… I actually should identify myself with the absolute truth. Host: Um, tell me what are the symptoms of an enlightened being. Hridy: Enlightened being should be free of selfish desire and selfish activity prompted by selfish desire. By selfish meaning in a very simple sense, taking oneself to be the center, taking oneself to be the goal or ultimate enjoyer of a particular activity. The simple fact is that we are part of something greater than ourselves. Just like the hand is part of the body and therefore always acts in the interest of the body, so the self, the individual self is part of Krsna or the absolute truth, God. So the hand has no power to eat by itself. The hand has to supply the food to the stomach and nourishes itself through the stomach. Similarly, we are part of Krsna or God and therefore we can so to speak, nourish our existence by satisfying the supreme lord of whom we are a part. So in that sense a selfish activity in the ordinary sense that uh taking ourself to be the center is simply a metaphysical mistake because actually we are not the center. We are part of the center of the absolute. Host: Tell me, people like Albert Schwitzer and Mother Teresa, are they considered enlightened beings because they seem to respond to the kind of qualities you mentioned. Hridy: Uh Mother Teresa said hello to me in the Calcutta airport this year. Uh well, certainly it’s much better to give your life for the benefit of others as opposed to living for selfish purposes or you know, crass purposes. Ultimately however, we have to benefit people spiritually by helping people to understand their eternal nature. Otherwise we… It’s nice to give them all kinds of material facilities, but that won’t ultimately save them because death comes and there is no program for that. At least material… no material program. Host: Well who’s… who’s to decide who knows? …because you’re speaking with such authority which is hard to refute perhaps or… So what’s the principle of authority? How do you know that you know? Or how do you know who knows? Hridy: Well, uh you have to know what your goal is and then you have to see if you’re getting there or not. For example, let’s say I’m trying to get to Isla Vista here in the Santa Barbara area. So I have to know something about it. If I arrive in Phoenix, Arizona and think that’s Isla Vista, that means I didn’t have sufficient information about Isla Vista before I left. So the very notion of searching implies that one has some understanding. If there was no knowledge whatsoever of a particular object or goal or destination, we could hardly search for it. There has to be some clue. So by hearing from those who have some knowledge of God and understanding, within the heart one can understand. Actually God is in the heart. And when we receive eternal wisdom, if we are sincere we can understand that. And once we understand the goal, then we begin to make progress toward the goal and one can measure one’s progress. Just like for example in the Judeo-Christian tradition it’s said that we should love God with all our heart, soul and might. At least that’s the way the translation goes. So now we can measure to see to what extent we are able to love God with all our heart to what extent our heart is still attached to other things. So these are simple processes. If we look at the stated goals of major religious traditions, often they’re very similar. So we can just see what works. Host: You translate books from Sanskrit. I wonder why don’t you write your own books. Why do you have write other… translate other people’s works? Hridy: Actually I am working on one of my quote/unquote own books. But that’s also based on the Sanskrit literature. Well, you don’t have to reinvent the wheel. If someone’s already done it in a perfect and beautiful way, then why not just give it to people? The point is not for me to present myself. The point is for me to present the best thing. So if that’s the best thing then I should give that. Host: I wanted to ask you a concept of universal justice. Is there such a thing? Hridy: Universal justice? Host: In other words, justice which is not man-made. Hridy: Oh! Sure. Host: Because we can see that maybe… Hridy: Well for example… Host: Yeah, go ahead. Hridy: Uh let’s say the simple injunction that we… that thou shalt not kill. In other words a law against murder which you find in every country I hope. So I would say that uh our understanding, our awareness that we should not kill someone else is not something we concoct or fabricate just because it serves some utilitarian end. I think we actually understand within us that there’s something wrong about it. And that wrongness doesn’t emanate from us, it’s just… It’s wrong in the world even if no one… Imagine a society where no one knows it is wrong. It’s still wrong. So that’s I think what we mean by universal justice of… even if let’s say there’s a community of people. Let’s say they’re murderers. And so they’re a community, they live together. They speak their own language and so on. But among them murder is not wrong. So we would say – I hope – that they are wrong. That murder is a bad thing and there is something evil about it to kill innocent people. And even if in that community they don’t know it, they just don’t know it. But it doesn’t depend upon them or us. It’s just something which is bad. Host: Please polemic about one topic by which one rabbi wrote a book called why bad things happen to good people. I… It’s similarly not so uncommon that people even with religious inclination and even quite affirmer(?), they think that God cannot be both all-powerful and all-good, otherwise there wouldn’t be suffering in the world. Can you dispel this doubt for us? Hridy: Well that doubt really arises from materialism. Materialism meaning in this sense taking matter, the body, to be the self. If we understand that matter, the body, is not the self, the soul is the self and that the soul is eternal and has had previous lives, then we can understand that some people… although apparently good, are even actually in this life, have done something bad in the past and that they have to be punished for that. For example it’s very common, we read in the newspapers let’s say that they catch some former war criminal or just someone that committed a crime twenty years ago and for the last twenty years they’ve lived as a very nice citizen in some nice American neighborhood and they’re… everyone thinks Boy this guy is really just you know your average good American. But suddenly the F.B.I. shows up at the door and hauls him away. So you could say why did that bad thing happen to a good person? So there also is a universal F.B.I. and there’s no perfect crime, so bad things don’t really happen undeservedly to good people. Host: Even so, why would God who is all-powerful want to punish? It is so… Hridy: God doesn’t want to punish. God wants a particular result. Namely that we become actually good. It’s not that a good mother or father takes pleasure in punishing the child. Rather it’s simply a duty to train the child. Host: Is there more than one God? Or is one person in charge of everything? Hridy: There’s… There are many gods with a small g. There’s one God with a capital G. Host: And that’s… Does he have veto power? Hridy: Yeah, more than Clinton. Host: I wanted to ask you about the principle of accepting a spiritual master. And why do we have to accept a spiritual master and why can’t we do it ourselves? Why not just buy a book and follow the guidelines, just like… Hridy: Just like when you want to be a doctor, right? You just get a book. Host: Theoretically it’s possible. Hridy: Yeah, theoretically it’s possible to… Host: Like you can also go to a music academy or you can learn it by yourself. Hridy: Theoretically. Uh let’s say you wanted to become a doctor. Theoretically you could just discover everything yourself. But the fact is there are many centuries of patient research and dedication that you can take advantage of. It’s very unlikely that you would just go out… Let’s say without the help of medical books – because that’s also taking help from others – and just discover all the medical principles yourself just walking on the beach or something. So you could say Well that’s possible. But we just don’t do things that way. The real point here is that you have to decide what your goal is. If your goal is to understand God that’s one thing. If your goal is just to do everything yourself, If you’re… if we’re motivated by pride instead of devotion. Then we can’t expect the same result. Host: Why is devotion so important? Hridy: Because devotion is what links us to the absolute truth. After all, what is the relationship with God? It’s one of love. Love is expressed by devotion, by devoted service. Host: So is there anything else worth doing in this world except practicing love and devotion? Hridy: No. Uh for example take a man that loves his wife very much and his children. He works hard, he has a career, but ultimately he’s working out of love for his family. Or… Go ahead. Host: But he has to work. In other words he not a… just he loves his family and even if he could afford to, uh doesn’t want to go out, doesn’t wanta be friends, doesn’t want to go places with other people. Hridy: No, he may do that. But the center is the family. Let’s say that a man who has alot of money doesn’t have to work. Still, he makes arrangements. He takes his children here or there. He takes… He does things for his wife, not only for economic gain, but simply out of love. So of course that’s a crude example because the family is not God. But in the case of God, sure you can go to other places, have other friends. But what are those other places and other friends? That’s also God’s creation. So you can’t really find anything which is not God. Or you can’t find anything which is not part of God. And therefore to love God means to love everything. Host: Well, why is… um you can’t get away. Hridy: Yes, and why would we want to get away from the most beautiful thing? Host: I see. Well why is that there is so much conflict between different religions and spiritual paths? Hridy: Oh, there’s different conflicts between different corporations, between different political associations, there’s conflicts between different computer companies. I mean it’s just the nature of the world that people are in conflict. So whatever people do they fight about it. The cause is not religion. I mean according to simple logic, if the cause of conflict was religion you could just go to an atheistic country like China or Russia and there wouldn’t be conflict. But of course there is. Of course Russia… I mean the former Soviet Union used to be at least officially atheistic. Stalin was not a priest and how many people did he kill? They say Chairman Mao, his activities cause the deaths of tens of millions of people. Just read the history books. Host: Well you just take the bad examples. How about the good examples. Hridy: Well how about the good examples of religion? The point is that human beings tend to fight with each other. So whatever they’re into, they use it as a pretext for fighting. But when people understand religious life properly, they don’t fight with other religious people, they actually are supportive of each other… if they get it right. Host: Is there a standard definition of religion? Hridy: For us religion is the law of God… or to practice the law of God. Of course that leaves out processes that don’t recognize God and some people will yell and scream about that. But still that’s our definition. Host: And who is God and how is God to be known? God is many things. He reveals Himself to particular worshipers or non-worshipers according to their own proclivities. But ultimately we say He’s the supreme person and He’s the reservoir of all beauty, of all pleasure, and He can be known by love. Host: Do you accept other forms of worship and other philosophies just as valid as yours? Hridy: Well, just as valid meaning are other worshipers also worshiping God? Yes. If someone is actually trying to worship the supreme god, then we offer that person respect and give them credit. If they claim that they’re trying to do something else, then of course that’s something else. So if someone for example says I don’t believe in God. My religion has nothing to do with God. Then why should we say that’s the same thing we’re doing? Host: Why is it you have to choose one particular brand? It’s like you go to the ice-cream store and you can’t have the 31 flavors, so you may as well choose one or two. So in religion is the same thing? It will be too overwhelming to get… Hridy: It’s not a truth… It’s not a question of choosing one or not choosing. The point is to actually be successful, to understand and love God. We can’t get hung-up that you know we should have a guru, we shouldn’t have a guru. We should choose one process. We should have 19,000 processes. The point is to get there. If you’re trying to go somewhere, you want to get there as comfortably and efficiently as possible. So in this case you could say the truth is what works. Our simple claim is that this Krsna Consciousness works. That if one chants Hare Krsna, if one understands the Bhagavad-gita, it works. And that’s enough. Host: How do you know that you’ve got there? Hridy: Well, how do you know you’re in Santa Barbara? Host: Well there are signs. Hridy: Well of course. So if you have developed love for God and you’re not interested in other things, then you’ve certainly would be aware of that fact. Host: I wanta thankyou very much. My guest is Hridyananda das Gosvami. Thankyou… (cut off)

KCSB Radio Interviews at UCSB Summer & Fall 1995: Santa Barbara, CA Host: Welcome to Touchstone. This is your host Mahatma das. We have a guest today Hridyananda das Gosvami who is with me in the studio. We thank you for being with us. And we had an interview previously and uh I had alot of questions to ask after you were gone. Um we left uh the topic of ??? actually uh, I wonder if you can expand a little bit on why people should suffer at all and also why would God want us to suffer? Hridy: Well, uh suffering of course by definition is undesirable sensation or feeling, state of mind, state of body or whatever and uh if we accept that there is a God who is controlling everything, then this undesirable sensation or experience or feeling or whatever indicates that we are doing something undesirable and that whatever we are doing we should stop and do something which produces a desireable or pleasurable experience. Of course, this is not mere hedonism. I mean the philosophy of hedonism is that if it feels good, do it and if it doesn’t feel good don’t do it. Of course hedonism generally applies this formula on a very superficial level. Something which simply gratifies the body or immediately gratifies the selfish mind. But there is a sense of happiness and distress which is profound which involves the soul and which also is inseparably connected to truths about good and bad, about right and wrong. For example a person that takes pleasure in doing good and a person that feels unhappy upon doing evil, upon causing pain or harm to innocent people, that sort of happiness and distress is more significant and not simply a question of selfishness or pleasure-seeking, but it involves a desire on the part of the soul to do what is right, to be just, to be noble, uh to be pure and to do what is edifying and glorious. And ultimately to do what is pleasing to God. So why do we suffer at all? Because we do stupid things and because we’re responsible for what we do. We are part of God and so therefore although quantitatively in terms of the quantity of our consciousness we are infinitesimal compared to the infinite deity, Krsna or God. In terms of the quality of our existence, we are actually the same as God. We are also spiritual and originally pure consciousness. So as God has free will, we also have free will. Were we not to have free will, we would not even be persons at all. So the responsibility that comes with being a person is that you have to take responsibility for what you do. And so if you do something which is harmful to yourself or others, it will cause pain to you. And if you do something which is beneficial to yourself or others, you’ll feel pleasure. And uh whether or not such a system built into nature by God… uh how would we even know what was right or wrong? So there would be simply chaos in the world and no one could understand what was good and what was bad. Host: Uh I had a question about that. I was planning to ask it a little later. But maybe I should ask it now. Um what’s… You say there is a right and a wrong and since you mentioned we do stupid things, I would like you to clarify what is to do stupid things and what is right and wrong. Hridy: Oh you gotta sort of take your pick nowadays. Just read the newspaper. Uh as far as what is right and wrong, of coarse nowadays it’s considered wrong to think there is no right or wrong and it’s considered right to think that there isn’t a right and wrong which is of course hypocritical. Uh to do what is right, you could say in a simple sense to do what is right is to do what is beneficial, to do what is good, which causes and good effect. And to do what is wrong is to do what causes a harmful effect. Host: But to… that right and wrong for some people is one and for some other people is a different… Hridy: But ultimately it has to be settled on the basis of the facts. Just like for example someone may think that it’s good to eat beef and someone else may say No, it’s not good to eat beef. And there was such a debate for some time but now the debate is more or less settled that no, it’s not good to eat beef. It’s harmful to your health. Uh just like the cigarettes companies use to try to convince us that there was no problem. Uh if you smoked, smoking didn’t really cause any diseases. But you can’t say it nowadays at least among reasonable people… and get away with it. So just as what is good or bad for the body, ultimately it can be settled on the facts of the matter. So also for those who have knowledge, there are facts about the soul, about the real person who is within the body. Host: You are really getting ahead of me. I wrote questions in a particular order and uh… Well, you didn’t know about it. But for example… Hridy: You dropped the idiot cards. Host: Yes. Certainly the ???-prompt is not working for me today. Um let’s talk about vegetarianism since you mentioned about eating beef. Aren’t we killing plants? Hridy: Yes. Sometimes, some plants we kill so other plants like apple trees… you don’t kill apple trees to get apples. Uh the genral rule here… Well one genral principle is ??? which in Sanskrit means life is for life. Meaning that there is a food chain in nature as we know and uh in general, not only human beings but animals nourish themselves by taking other organic matter which was formerly attached to a soul, a living being. Now another general principle is that whatever we eat must be offered in sacrifice to the creator. We don’t really have the right… although we think we have so many rights. We don’t really have the right just to take things from nature for the simple fact that nature doesn’t belong to us. Nature belongs to the creator. So our principle is not simply vegetarianism which is after all a material principle, perhaps at best an ethical principle, at times a health principle. But our principle is ultimately spiritual. That there is a supreme proprietor of all that be and that supreme proprietor is God or Krsna and whatever we eat, we must offer to that supreme proprietor. And Krsna tells us in the Bhagavad-gita what foodstuffs he will accept. So if we cannot offer something to God, to the creator in sacrifice, we cannot eat it. You find this is actually the same principle in the earliest of all Western literature, namely the Iliad and the Odyssey by Homer. It’s very interesting that uh in these books you find that people simply don’t eat or drink without offering their food or drink to the gods. There’s even one nice scene where uh… Well it’s a little gruesome. But the Trojan hero Hector, think that was his name wasn’t it? Hector… was out all day fighting against the Greeks and doing very well and at the end of the day he came home within the city walls covered with dirt and blood… It’s not a very clean business, fighting a war, hand-to-hand combat all day. And so when he came back in his mother, the queen, saw him and was of course moved by compassion to see her son in this condition and she immediately ordered the attendants offer some drink and then bring it to him. Host: So what’s the… Hridy: In other words, my… just to include here. My point was even after spending the whole day in hand-to-hand combat, the mother thought well he has to drink something after it’s offered to the gods. So this is a general understanding. It’s not simply Indian or Vedic or Hindu or anything. It’s just a general spiritual common sense that there is a divine power within the universe and that we cannot simply exploit the earth or take things. But we must take them with the permission and the blessings of the actual creator or proprietor. Host: And that brings up a… Hridy: So to ???, to actually answer your question. Certain foods like vegetables, fruits, milk products and so on have been allotted to us as our quota. It’s stated in the Vedas, Isopanisad ???. You should enjoy or nourish yourself with that which has been set aside for you as you quota. Host: Well what… That brings another question to mind. What is the meaning of sacred? What makes something sacred? Hridy: That… Something is sacred when it is imbued in some way or to some extent with the spiritual nature. There are… There’s more than one nature. We say the word nature in the singular, but there’s not merely one nature. There’s material nature. There’s also spiritual nature. And they can intersect. And when something which normally we call material is in contact with or is imbued with some aspect of the spiritual nature, then we call it sacred. Host: Um, you follow the Bhagavad-gita, as… that’s… Uh, I read the Bhagavad-gita and seems to be… there seems to be a difference between good war and bad war. Can you explain this? Hridy: Good war? Host: Yes. Hridy: And bad war? Yeah, sure. Well there’s… In a sense there’s no good war. I mean the most desireable thing is to have a good society where war is not necessary. But unfortunately there is evil in the world in the sense that there are people who cause harm to innocent people. So to defend the rights of innocent people, to prevent others from harming innocent people is good. It’s not good in the sense that it would be better if there were no… if there was no one in the world that wanted to do harm to innocent people. And then there wouldn’t be a need for war. But even worse than defending innocent people is not to defend them. Bad war of course in this sense simply means to take to violence on some type of institutional or social level simply to fulfill one’s own selfish desires. Host: And another question I had for you was the question of overpopulation. Seems like uh your view on overpopulation is not the regular view. In other words… ??? believe there is any. Hridy: Well, there’s… Yeah, there are various views. It’s not a monolithic question. I think Los Angeles is overpopulated. I think Manhattan is overpopulated. I don’t think the earth is overpopulated. Uh we discussed this issue actually about a week ago on one of our programs. First… Well if you say the earth is overpopulated, it’s very simple. You just figure out how much land there is that’s arable that you can grow food on, how many people there are, you work out the numbers. It’s just a mathematical question. It’s not opinion. Now we know for a fact that a huge proportion of the arable land on this planet or in America also is used for such things as cattle raising, which is extremely uneconomic. It’s a very uneconomic way to use land. Cattle raising, tobacco, another… Of course, warmer climates, coffee and tea production. Uh in the Northwest United States and parts of Canada, huge amounts of land are… land are used to grow trees to slaughter the trees, cut the trees down so we can you know make the world safe for junk mail. So uh actually… Practically most of the land is not being used just to produce good, wholesome food. And if it were, then the numbers would work out alright. Of course, you also have to distribute it properly. That’s another issue. Host: So uh… What’s… The reason I… There is a common understanding that uh animal species are related to each other. And uh man is an animal or the best animal. So tell us what’s the difference between man and animals. Hridy: Um, well on some levels of course we are animals. We also breath and eat food and drink water just like animals do. The difference is that a human being can understand the spiritual nature. Whereas an animal is locked in to the body, the material body. That’s why it’s very unfortunate that the modern human society has largely ignored this great blessing that we have of the intelligence, the ability to understand the spiritual eternal nature. Instead like the lower animals, we are simply absorbed in our bodies. That’s very unfortunate. Host: Um, so the idea of morality then comes within the human race and my question is, If there is such a thing as – in your view – morality without God? Hridy: Uh I think it’s a bluff. If you say there’s no God or we don’t know there is a God, I don’t think you can really demonstrate that there’s any compelling moral law. There’s certainly opinions and one opinion may be that there is such a thing as morality or immorality, but I don’t think it has… it’s going to go beyond an opinion because who’s the authority? So to say there’s no God means there’s no absolute authority. If there’s no absolute authority, then everything… You know, it just depends on what you think because there are only relative authorities. Therefore all the conclusions are relative. Relative means you don’t have to accept it. Host: Seems like you have such an absolutistic position that uh… What do you… If you were in charge of the affairs of the world or even America or just a city, would you allow free press? Do you believe in free press? Hridy: Yes, but… Yeah. It’s not a political issue. To say absolutists position… I think the difference is we’re open by believing there’s a God. For example people that say are against rape… to give an example. They believe that women shouldn’t be raped. Uh I believe they feel that it’s actually wrong to rape women. I don’t think they feel that it’s just their opinion. And if someone has a different opinion, mainly that it’s ok to rape women, that’s all it is, just different opinions. I think they really believe that it’s wrong. Or people let’s say that are against racism. My experience is that people who are against racism really believe it’s wrong. So if you think something is really wrong or really right, that’s an absolute position because you don’t think it’s just relative, it depends on your opinion, Well you know. No, you think it’s really right and wrong. So uh, generally people that are against absolute positions reserve the right to be absolute for issues, they’re pet issues. You know, things they happen to be interested in. And for other things there is no right and wrong. Host: This would especially eliminate alot of hypocrisy in the world if the Vedic system was implemented in this age. Now do you think there are any changes? And is there any sense of producing or of bringing back a system so different from an age which is so uh different from ours. Hridy: Oh, any philosophy or culture which is worth reviving must be full of universals. If there are no universals, then why bother? If there are universals, then you can just apply them according to time and circumstances. Host: What’s an ideal government? Hridy: An ideal government? Government that’s not constituted of fools. A government where the leaders actually know the laws of nature. For example imagine the Congress passes a law annulling the law of gravity. I mean what if… Or President Clinton who is so bright. I mean what if these people declared one day that we’ve now repealled the law of gravity, so everyone is free to jump off buildings and mountains because it’s not the law anymore? Well, people would still die by jumping off buildings and mountains. So in the same way the government can say for example, Sure you can kill animals. Sure, you can engage in this kind of sex or that kind of sex. The government can say that and we can scream that we have our rights, unfortunately it’s against the laws of nature and it’s your tough luck. And you can scream all you want, but it’s still against the laws of nature and it’ll still cause trouble in the world. Host: So in America we have the conservative party and the liberal party. Um could you see… Could you mention some of the pros and cons of either? Hridy: Well there’s certain… Both parties seem to be full of cons. Uh, well I suppose the liberals are tolerant and uh try to give everybody a chance. But uh I would say to… to put it very simply as I sometimes put it, the liberals tend to be tolerant and immoral and the conservatives tend to be moral and intolerant. And Vedic culture is moral and tolerant. Host: Do you vote? Hridy: Yeah, when we feel inspired to. Host: When was the last time you voted? Hridy: Uh, can’t remember. Host: Here today I have an eminent guest. Again, Hridyananda das Gosvami and I wanted to talk to him about sex today. Now I understand that you are celibate. So what do you know about sex? Hridy: Well, I wasn’t always celibate. I uh, made this decision at a certain point in my life to take a spiritual vow. Host: And tell us what’s… Who is to decide what do we do with our bodies? Hridy: We have to decide. But we should make an intelligent decision. Host: I see. So how about um, why God gave humans pleasure in sex life if He didn’t want us to have it? Hridy: Well, there’s pleasure, certain so-called pleasure in sex life which one may interpret as a type of inducement to reproduction. Host: Is sex overrated? Host: Is it overrated? Host: Yeah. Hridy: Well it depends on what league it’s playing in. If you compare sex to chewing bubble gum, people may think it’s a pretty good thing or whatever. But compared to the unlimited pleasure of Krsna or God, it’s not so great. And therefore someone thinks it’s the greatest, then that would definitely be overrating it. Host: Are you in favor of sex education in schools? Hridy: Yes. People should be taught the purpose of life and the role of sex within the purpose of life. Host: So what’s the role of life… uh sex within the purpose of life? Hridy: Well, first of all the purpose of life is to develop perfect consciousness. And that perfect consciousness or pure consciousness… Perfect means pure. Just like if we say perfect water it means water that is perfectly pure. That pure consciousness is consciousness of oneself as a pure being, a spiritual being, consciousness of others also as pure spiritual beings and ultimately it means consciousness of God. So uh sex of course is an activity which we perform with our physical bodies and uh… We are not the bodies. The body covers our real self, covers our consciousness. We are conscious of the body. We are not the body. We cannot say that for example I am the arm, I am the leg, I am any particular part of the body because we are in fact the person, the permanent self who is conscious of the body. So uh sex in that sense is an extrinsic, not an intrinsic activity of the soul. It’s something performed by the outward or external body. But because we are in the body and we are experiencing the body, therefore we are affected by the desires of the body. So if someone cannot live without engaging in sexual intercourse, then they should at least engage in natural sex. Host: What is natural sex? Hridy: Natural sex means you get married and produce a child. That’s natural sex. First of all, our reproductive organs are just that. They are reproductive organs. And therefore if we engage in sex naturally without artificial techniques or devices which we conjure up, the natural result of sex is there is in fact reproduction. And once a child is born it turns out to be psychologically natural for the child to have parents, a mother and a father that don’t hate each other – at one point in their relationship. And so after all is said and done, it turns out that having sex within a committed relationship which we call marriage and then raising a child within that environment turns out to be – when all is said and done – natural. Now the question may be raised how can people stay together? How can a man and a woman actually make a commitment to each other, especially in this age when it seems very difficult? You know most people take two or three shots at it before they figure something out about marriage and then they… But whatever… Meanwhile there is some… they have children along the way. Maybe the children have to go through so many traumatic experiences. The simple fact is that we have to get back to the most basic definition of who and what we are. If we conceive of ourselves fundamentally as enjoyers of this world, we are here to exploit nature, to exploit our own bodies, to exploit everything we can get our hands on or our other senses on, then We’ll think well what is marriage? Marriage is if it feels good do it. If it doesn’t do good then don’t do marriage. But if you understand yourself ultimately to be a loving servant of God, then marriage like everything else is performed as a devotional act. So if you get married or if you develop a relationship with anyone, whatever kind of relationship it may be in that spirit, in a spiritual consciousness, then when the marriage takes place the people involved make a very serious commitment not only to each other but to God. They make a commitment to help the other person, to work for the benefit of the other person. And that type of serious commitment is not so easy left aside. If my commitment is simply Well it feels good now so I’ll do it and then next year or next month it doesn’t feel good anymore, so I won’t do it. This is animal life. On one level you may say we’re animals, but on another level we are a special kind of animal because we have brains – theoretically. And we are supposed to use this developed intelligence to understand the absolute truth. Any animal has knowledge of relative truths, where the water hole is, how to fight and how to reproduce and so on. But human beings have the exclusive or unique capacity to pursue knowledge of a an absolute, something which is always true at all times and all places, universals, whatever you want to call it. And ultimately those universals or absolutes or those things which are always true at all times and places culminate in knowledge of a supreme absolute being whom we call God. So sex performed with this consciousness in a culture based on that awareness is natural because it’s natural by the way for human beings to be religious. A human being may not be religious, but that’s artificial. Of course, nowadays most things people do are artificial and that’s one of them. But under normal conditions it is natural for a human being to seek higher knowledge and ultimately to find and some form or another, to find God and then to adjust or coordinate one’s activities with that supreme being. That is natural for a human being under normal conditions. Host: I uh, well that was a stunning revelation to us. That means basically you propose repression because you may say we have… Hridy: What is repression? Host: Well you say we have a higher nature, but not many people can get to that platform. Hridy: Well repression… I think now what’s happening is that we are repressing our spiritual nature and therefore people are frustrated. I mean after all, let’s remember that we live in a an age which has rejected oppression and succeeded in totally frustrating itself. So theoretically if you don’t repress yourself, you should be very happy and satisfied. But we find as we remove all forms of quote/unquote repression, society becomes more and more frustrated. The simple fact is if you have an exploitative consumer oriented society in which we are constantly being provoked quote/unquote turned on, stimulated in sexual ways by advertising, by… everything. Everyone knows this. You know, radio, television, newspapers, Everything… I mean fashion, music… because capitalists discovered some time ago that people have sex drives and that if you tap into people’s sex drives you can turn them on and once you arouse them you can try to channel that aroused spirit towards the purchase of a product. Therefore, a large part of advertising, of popular culture, tries to exploit our sex drive. However in a society which conceives of the goal of life as something spiritual and people are trained and live in an environment which is not exploitative and crassly appealing to our reproductive urges, people come to a different consciousness and are able in fact to control themselves. Host: That pretty much says alot about the advertising, um, companies and also basically talks about everyone that is involved in the media. Basically I’d like to expand a little more on this. But we’re gonna…

KCSB Radio Interviews at UCSB Summer & Fall 1995, Santa Barabara, CA … and thereby more or less turn the students into apes. Host: So you say that… (jump) university in the United States of America and… give knowledge? Hridy: Well, I haven’t been to every one of them, but I’m just saying in general that the… certainly outside let’s say religious schools. Obviously there are Christian schools or Jewish schools or other kinds of religious schools. But in terms of the general western curriculum, the general secular curriculum tends to be extremely materialistic. For example, I just saw in a philosophy book this morning that a distinguished fool, uh Carl Popper, Philosopher of Scientists… uh Philosopher of Science – so-called – said that the idea of some type of inherent or inner ideas, things that we just know within ourselves, somehow you might say part of the soul or knowledge that comes from God is absurd. He doesn’t give an argument to show it’s absurd. He just says that the idea that somehow we have some type of universal ideas within us as Plato or Socrates thought or as we also believe that God is in the heart, that that’s absurd. Now why is it absurd? He didn’t say why it was. I guess he thought it was absurd because it wasn’t materialistic. Host: This is just one philosopher who’ll say we say… Hridy: No, not just one. He’s uh very prominent and he’s very typical. I gave him as an example. Host: Let me backtrack a little bit. Do you equate knowledge with religion? Hridy: Knowledge? Well what do you mean by religion? Host: Because… Hridy: If there is a God… If there is a God, then if you don’t know that you can’t really be knowledgable because you don’t know the main thing. It’s just like any field history or psychology or biology, if you don’t know the main principle then whatever else you know is not so important. So if there’s a God, that’s the main thing to know and if you don’t know that, you don’t know very much. Host: You were saying something about the music. Could you please explain your views? Hridy: Well, I was saying that uh I think that uh a musical composer, a poet or anyone expressing insights or attempting to express insights to the world, to humanity, would be much more successful, effective, valuable, meaningful, if that person is connected to a higher reality and not simply expressing their own emotions and feelings as in the case of humanism which is basically a trivialization of life. Host: Let’s ???. What do you think about modern music? Hridy: Modern or contemporary music? Host: Yes. Hridy: Well, uh much of it reflects the anthropocentric tilt of modern life. In other words, things like God and the soul are not certainties, we don’t really know, but what we really do know for sure is that we are hear now, we human beings, and therefore let’s just talk about what we feel and what we think. And uh, that’s a trivialization of life. Host: How about… How is it different from music in the past? Hridy: Well, music in the past, some of it was good, some of it was bad. But the extent to which people live in a spiritual universe, the extent to which a society as a society is in some way to the absolute, to God, to the Supreme and uh the extent to which that connection, that insight becomes the foundation, the inspiration for artistic expression, to that extent the artistic expression is far more meaningful, uh much deeper. Host: We were talking about education and religion and you said that knowledge of God basically supersedes all other knowledge. In other words, if you didn’t know about God, then whatever else you know is not very relevant. Can you expand a little bit on that? Hridy: Well, here by God we mean the basic principle, that principle which underlies all other principles, that reality which underlies and explains all other realities. So if there is ultimately something… some kind of God, some Supreme being, some Absolute Truth which underlies, explains everything that exists, if someone doesn’t know that they’ve missed the whole point. What do they know? They may say for example that I know we should be kind to other people. That’s nice, but what does that mean? What does it really mean? Unless you understand who people really are, how can you be kind to them? Just like if you don’t know what the body really is, if you don’t know physiology and biology, how can you treat sick people? You may desire to be nice to them, but you just don’t have the information. Similarly, unless you know what the highest truth is, unless you know what we are ultimately part of, where we come from, where we’re going, if you don’t know our real identity, how can you help us? You may think you’re helping us, you may be harming us. Host: You know that Einstein said that the purpose of science is to learn to understand God. I think that was his most popular theory. Hridy: No, materialistic science. Not science in general. But materialistic science is an attempt to replace God, to become God. And the only real things are those which you can manipulate and control. Host: Now why don’t we… If there is a God and God is all good and all knowledgeable, why would we want to replace him? Why would anyone with common sense want to replace Him? Hridy: Uh egotism can be a very attractive state of mind for low-minded people. First of all, some people think there is no God. They think that they themselves are the greatest. They spend half their life in front of mirrors or trying to promote themselves, trying to promote their reputations. Look at politicians. Their not… Politicians in general don’t dedicate their lives to glorifying God, they’re dedicated to glorifying themselves, they’re promoting themselves. So you have to consider why are we in the material world at all. What are we doing here? From the spiritual point of view, we’re here because we’re trying to promote ourselves. We’re trying to enjoy, we’re trying to exploit nature including our own bodies, therefore you have philosophies like my body belongs to me. Very interesting. I’d be curious to know on what grounds people claim their bodies belong to them. You’d have to have some general principle of proprietorship and then apply it. So what is the general principle by which we assign things to various proprietors? You know what grounds does one claim this body belongs to me? Now in an ordinary sense you could say of course it’s my body. We know what that means. Like get your hands off my body or my body is sick or this or that or my body is tired. We know what those words mean. That’s just ordinary talk just for quick, easy, unphilosophical reference we say my body/your body. But if we’re talking in a very serious vein about ultimate proprietorship and if we’re speaking about the basis of serious moral claims and things like that, then if you… you can’t just say very casually it’s my body. So we shouldn’t confuse those two levels of speech. They’re very different. So in serious speech in which one is required to give good reasons for what one says and to refer to ultimate principles, on what grounds do we say that it’s my body? Host: Who would we trace along that… You were saying that politicians promote themselves. Now maybe their promoting themselves… us representatives of a people. Hridy: Do you believe that? Most people don’t. Host: I’m just… I just work here. Hridy: No, but even a sur… surveys show that very few people believe that politicians are just selfless servants of the people. I mean hardly anyone believes that. Host: How about Ghandi? Hridy: Ghandi, well he was a politician. He wanted an Indian government. He got it. And now that’s to his efforts, one of the most corrupt governments on the face of the earth is there in south Asia. Host: Uh it wasn’t like … it was like that when he was… Hridy: There were obviously problems, but if Ghandi really was spiritual, then why distinguish between this person and that person on the basis of their body? He claimed he was basing his work on the Bhagavad-gita. The first point to the Bhagavad-gita is our real identity is not material but spiritual. The body is simply a covering. The real person’s a soul. That’s the case, then what’s the big deal if someone has an Indian body or a British body if we’re all souls anyway? Host: So you’re saying that he didn’t hate anyone except for the British. Hridy: I don’t think he hated the British. I just think he wanted to achieve a particular political effect which in and of itself has not turned out to be in any way spiritual. Host: So you’re very um… I have to say you’re very accurate as far as I can see pinpointing what the faults are. So now give us the other side. What’s the solution? Hridy: The solution? Host: Yea. Hridy: Well first of all I think we have to proceed in an organized way and decide what we are… what we are, who we are, what this world is, what our duties are, what are rights are and then based on who we are and what we are, we have to decide what’s best for us. After all I think we can agree in very sort of vague but general terms that we should do what is good, we should do what’s best for our own interest and for the interest of others. And if there is ultimately some single underlying principle, some type of God, then very likely it will turn out that what is best for us is best for everyone. After all, on the material level what’s best for me may not be best for you. We may compete for jobs, we may compete for all kinds of material things and the very notion of competition is someone has to win and someone has to loose. But it’s precisely by reference to a higher spiritual principle which is universal that all of us can equally benefit… which is not possible materially. I mean there’s the idea that a rising tide lifts all ships, but we practically see in the material world that someone ends up on top and someone ends up on the bottom. But spiritually everyone can be on top. So that has to be done first. Who are we? What are we? Why are we in this world? What’s the goal of life? What are the natural laws? Never mind all the crazy things that come out of Washington. What is the natural law? What is actually right and wrong? And so if we can understand these things we can make progress. Well according to the Vedic literature, the Bhagawat literature that we study, we are all ultimately conscious beings. Every one of us is individual conscious being and we are part, integral parts, part and parcel of the supreme conscious being. The body which of of course covers all of us… we all have a body is very useful, it’s an important fact at the present time that we have a body that has to be cared for and so on. But the body is still a covering just like the dress we wear… I mean the clothes we wear. We don’t all wear dresses. Just like the clothes we wear. Similarly the body is a type of covering of that eternal conscious being. Host: What’s the next question he asked? Hridy: Oh, perhaps something about what’s the purpose of it all. The purpose is to again revive our pure consciousness. At the present time our consciousness is contaminated by false identification of consciousness with matter. Consciousness is not matter. It’s consciousness, it’s spiritual. So when the consciousness becomes conscious of itself again, self-realization, self-consciousness, when we become aware of our identify as conscious beings beyond dead matter, uh then we have real happiness and we also understand our eternal relationship with all other beings and with the Supreme Being. So the purpose of human life is to revive that understanding. Human life is unique on this planet because it uniquely affords us the opportunity to come to this understanding. Whereas, we have no good reason to think that oak trees or cockroaches or even dogs like Lassie can practice spiritual realization in any sense that we can understand. Host: You mentioned the word consciousness and I’ve read some psychology books and philosophy books and I don’t see much mention of consciousness. You take it for granted. So why don’t you explain what consciousness is and how is it all these intellectuals working full-time – grants or no grants – are… they don’t even address the issue of consciousness. Hridy: Well, that’s not true. There are many branches of psychology. Some of them are sort of born-again materialists and uh deny the existence of consciousness. But most sane people understand there is consciousness and uh they talk about it. Most intelligent people have enough common sense to understand that we are conscious beings and they talk about it. The question is to understand what is our original consciousness, what is our pure consciousness and then to pursue that state of pure original consciousness which we call Krsna Consciousness. So uh what’s your next question? Host: The next question is you mention who we are and what’s the purpose, now explain a little bit about why things are done in such a way. Why for example if we are not material beings… In other words, we don’t… our body is simply a covering and the purpose is to uncover it. Is life like just a game for the over-average intelligence so they can finally figure out Hey, wait a second. I’m not having a good time because I’m not the body? Because my experience is that most people even with alot of effort, they can hardly get to any real spiritual realization or importance. Hridy: Well, that’s important. We have to find the right process. The truth is what works. So we have to find a process by which we can actually come to this consciousness. Uh, it’s not a game. It’s serious and it’s not a question of academic or so-called intellectual qualifications. We find sometimes so-called intellectuals are the biggest asses. That’s not uncommon. And sometimes very common simple people have a very nice insight about what’s important in life. So it’s not… Because this knowledge is not spiritual… uh material. It’s spiritual knowledge. So-called material qualifications are not everything. If one has basic human intelligence and one is sincere, one can understand oneself and God. Host: Well wouldn’t you say that once that consciousness is revived as much as we say in Spanish to blow and make bottles out of glass. It’s ??? and difficult than that just to maintain a good consciousness by which he can pursue spiritual life. Hridy: One has to know how to do it. We adopt the process of chanting meditationally the names of God. One can chant any names of God. It’s not sectarian. It’s not fanatical. Whatever name of God an individual feels comfortable with that’s alright. But the general process is we should call out, we should chant and meditate upon the names of God. And if we do so that will give us spiritual strength and we can make spiritual advancement. Host: You say this process is good for everyone. Is there… Are there any exceptions? Hridy: No, it’s good for everybody if they do it. If they don’t do it, then it’s not good for them. (jump?) Host: Um, we’re gonna talk about education. Um since you’re at Harvard and you’re concerned about education. Tell me what would you change what this system does? Hridy: I think um start teaching people some wisdom. There’s very little wisdom in so-called higher educational system. Basically people learn… oh there’s all the professional careers in which they simply learn how to do something well to make money which people have a right to do. And in the arts and sciences, say history, philosophy and so on, um cultural studies or whatever, the whole approach is very materialistic. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion is known before the game starts. The ground rules for human civilization, history, philosophy and so on are very materialistic and therefore there must be some material outcome. There can’t really be spiritual reasons for things, there must be material reasons. So is it a, b, or c or d? You know which material reason is it? There’s all material motivation or historical causality reduced down to sex or is it economics or you know which material principle is responsible for everything or which combination of material principles? So it’s very predictable and it’s very flat and ultimately empty because of the spiritual vacuum. Host: Aren’t you a little reductionistic? Aren’t you just simply ??? things a little too much? Hridy: No, that’s really the way it is. There may be… I’m sure there are individuals within the educational system who have higher values and so on, but the system has certain ground rules just like maybe baseball players that wish that there were different rules in baseball games. But there are certain rules let’s say in the major leagues and so on and those are the rules, even if all the players don’t like the rules. So even though on an individual level certainly there are teachers, scholars, students that have spiritual values or principles. But the rules are extremely materialistic. Host: Ok, What… If you were in charge, what would be the rules that you would impose on education? Hridy: Well, first of all I don’t want to be in charge of anything. But still, there has to be some wisdom, some spiritual understanding of God, of the soul. This is not a sectarian idea. There are many traditions in the world that understand that there is an eternal soul within the body, that there’s a God, even a personal God. So without this understanding there is no real understanding. In other words, we’re just exploring Plato’s cave. Host: Tell me, is education for everyone? In other words, should anyone have a chance to go to college? Hridy: Everyone should have the chance. But some people shouldn’t even be in high school. I mean unless you are into graffiti and vandalism. The point is that uh those… Let’s say classroom education. A situation where you actually sit down in a chair and listen to someone talking and read books and people write things on blackboards and everything. That kind of classroom situation is really meant for people that want to be in that situation, people that want to read the books, want to study, not simply because they want the money or because there’s a law or whatever. So at a certain point I think there should be vocational training. People should be taught to do something practical to maintain themselves and we shouldn’t entertain any longer the illusion that everyone is a philosopher, that everyone is actually a thinker. That’s simply not true and after a centuries of public education in this country uh the reality hasn’t really changed. Host: That’s an interesting approach. So what do we do with the 20,000 students at this university? Hridy: Well I think uh university schools, they’re just instruments of a civilization. Any particular civilization or society has certain goals and they try to persuade or train the young people to fulfill those goals. So because we have a very materialistic civilization, colleges are basically set up to indoctrinate and assimilate the young people into the materialistic society. So as long as society in general is very materialistic, the schools which are after all tools of the society, will also be very materialistic. So we’re not really just talking about what education, we’re talking about society in general. Host: Who’s qualified to teach? Hridy: Someone that has… Someone who knows something that’s worth knowing and that is able to communicate it. And also someone who lives according to that which is worth knowing. In other words, hypocrisy is not a good thing. If we’re trying to produce first class human beings, we’re trying to produce virtuous, good people, then you need teachers that are virtuous, that are good. If we’re just animals, dogs, cats, rats and we just want to keep the consumption going on, keep turning the wheels of production because we’re animals, we’re producing animals, consuming animals, then you know, what difference does it make? But if you actually want to produce virtuous human beings, then the character of the teacher becomes an issue. Host: By virtues you mean saintly? It’s the same thing? Hridy: Virtue means someone that does not knowingly cause harm to innocent people, someone that rather seeks the good for others and for oneself, someone that has a clear and profound understanding of what is good and what is harmful. Host: What’s the most important subject matter to be taught and uh why? Hridy: The most important subject matter is to understand yourself. If you don’t know who you are then everything else is incoherent. So first of all we should understand who we are and what we are, where we’ve come from, where we’re going, why we are born in this world and so on. Host: Who or what are we? Hridy: Well I can answer in terms of the Bhagavad-gita which is the basic text that we follow. According to the Bhagavad-gita each one of us has always existed and will always exists. We are fully spiritual beings in spite of whatever kind of body we may have. And this spiritual nature is found in every living being, not only those souls that are presently in human bodies, but those souls in all types of bodies from horses to deer to cockroaches to birds to micros, whatever. Every living thing is an eternal living soul and is part of God. However at the present time, because we have decided to try to enjoy the material world according to our material desires, we have accepted a material body and therefore we are subject to birth, death, old age and disease. If we want to transcend these conditions, then we have to realize again our eternal nature in that we are part of the supreme spiritual nature or the supreme spiritual being, God or Krsna. Host: That answers also where do we come from. What happens after death? Hridy: Well, you get what you pay for. Host: So what do you get? Hridy: Well if we perform pious or good activities we get a better material situation. If we are just sort of average, then we just get an average material situation and if we are nasty then we get a nasty material situation. Host: Why is there suffering? If there is a just God that is looking after the well-being of all living entities, why is there suffering? Hridy: Because what goes around comes around. So we put suffering into the world, it comes back to us. Host: How about children? Hridy: Children? You mean eternal souls that have the bodies of children? Host: Ok. Hridy: Well, what about them? Don’t forget we’re talking about souls that exists for a very long time. At a particular moment I may have a child’s body. Imagine for example that in this life I perform all kinds of evil acts, cause suffering to people, just commit all kinds of atrocities. Then in my next life I take birth and for the first several years I’m a very cute little darling, a little child and everyone thinks I’m so sweet and nice and then when something bad happens to me, everyone thinks that bad things happen to good people. Host: What is the purpose of life? Hridy: The purpose of life is to be perfectly happy, to realize our full existence as lovers of God and lovers of each other on the spiritual platform. Host: Now the most important question. How do you know all these things are true? Hridy: How do you know you know you know you know? It’s very simple actually. Uh you know by knowing. That question how do you know is actually a deceptive question. I think we have to rethink that question. Normally, when you use the English word how, you’re requesting information about a process. Like if I say how do you get from the radio station to downtown Santa Barbara? Or how did you get to Santa Barbara? I’m asking someone to tell me the process. So if we say how do you know, if you mean what is the process by which we know, the answer is simple. One has to engage in spiritual life with devotion and according to bona-fide authority. But the question how do you know is often used in a skeptical sense like are you sure you know? Or what gives you the right to say that you know? So uh what gives someone the right to say that they know? Well, if they do know. Now the question really seems to be how do you know you’re not in illusion? How do you know that someone hasn’t tricked you, some evil power or some illusory power may have bewildered you. Or you may be just convincing yourself, maybe you’re deluding yourself. Maybe you’re just imagining all this. So that question how do you know: How do you know you’re not in illusion? Uh what’s the proper response? Just to assert more strongly than before: No, I really do know. I mean the fact is that there is a God and God is within all of us and if we approach God or Krsna and if we are sincere and want to know and love Krsna or God, then God can reveal Himself to us. This has been going on for a long, long time all over the world and has formed the basis really of human civilization in many parts of the world for millennia. So either we accept that massive numbers of people… Massive numbers of intelligent cultured people throughout the world for thousands and thousands of years have all been deluded or we accept that there is something, some kind of God. If we say that Well, the testimony of human beings doesn’t mean anything, even if billions of people through history have said that there is a God, that there is some kind of experience. This doesn’t prove anything. Well, if human testimony doesn’t prove anything, then what does prove anything because any kind of proof, material, spiritual, whatever, depends on the evaluation of a person. So if human testimony in general means nothing, then there’s nothing left of proof at all. In fact, how will we prove that human testimony has no validity cause that’s another human opinion? So…

KCSB Radio Interviews at UCSB Summer & Fall 1995, Santa Barbara, CA Host: …and let me ask you, why… why does anyone has to learn anything from anyone else? Why can’t we learn things by ourselves? Hridy: Is that really practical? Host: Well, let’s say I wanna… Let me ??? Hridy: Did you learn to operate this studio by yourself? Host: Uh well, that’s actually a bad question because yea practically speaking… just about. But mostly… Guest: In other words there were no instructions, there were no signs anywhere, no one wrote anything on the buttons, uh there was no equipment. You just came in and built everything, inventing everything and figured everything out yourself. Right? Host: Well, you’re right. So why… But we’re talking about something so calculated and scientific as ??? electronics, electrical outlets. Uh spiritual life I don’t think is that precise, that scientifically… basically it’s inspiration from within or… Hridy: That depends. I mean there are different approaches. For example spiritual life certainly in the ordinary sense would include an appreciation of God’s creation. And we find that the creation is far more advanced technologically than this studio. I mean the people that built this studio probably couldn’t build a universe or even a cockroach actually that actually walks and talks – or whatever cockroaches do to communicate. So it’s clear that there is intelligence behind the universe, the world and so on. And so for… And so in principle there is no reason why we could not establish a very objective and reasonable relationship with that intelligence and upon doing so then the progress of that relationship becomes scientific in the highest sense. Host: Seems like you’re applying materialistic logic to spiritual understanding. Hridy: No I would say rather I’m extracting universal principles or reason which generally are applied to matter and applying them to something beyond matter. The principles themselves are not materialistic, it’s just that so-called human reason has been applied for so long to materialistic things that we think that the reason is somehow embedded in the matter or matter is embedded in reason. But they’re separate principles. Host: Is there… Are there any exceptions in this path that other people who actually don’t have to learn everything from others that already know everything or what they need to know? Hridy: But who knows anything? If people knew something then why would the world be in the state it’s in? Host: Oh well. ??? may listen to plenty of good advice, but not necessarily ???. Hridy: We should be concerned… that is our concerned let’s say if we are concerned with God. If we want to find God or find ourselves or find out the highest truth, we shouldn’t quibble over methodology. If someone is proud and their main concern is to do everything themselves, then they’re not really serious students of the absolute truth, they’re main program is to promote themselves. Even in their own minds they want to promote themselves then. So even Jesus Christ said that this pride was not a good qualification for spiritual advancement. Host: Is there a spiritual pride? Hridy: Spiritual pride means to be proud of God or to be proud of the great servants of God. Host: Well that’s approved, that’s authorized? Hridy: Well one should not be proud of oneself. One should try to be humble because after all it’s a big world out there and we’re not that big. So if someone isn’t humble, they’re really out of touch with reality. Host: Is there a counterpart of every quality that human beings have? Hridy: Counterpart? Host: Like a spiritual counterpart. This… You said there is a spiritual pride if you are proud of God instead of yourself. So how can you be envious or lusty or greedy in the spiritual sense. Hridy: Well by counterpart, there has to be fully counter in the sense that it has to be the opposite. For example it’s well known in the Vedic tradition of India that uh Krsna appeared many thousand of years ago and as a young boy He had many beautiful girlfriends in the village of Vrndavana. So this may appear to ordinary eyes as typical lust, typical affair boys and girls. But actually it wasn’t. It was spiritual. So if a quality is really the counterpart… For example the attraction between Krsna and the young girls of His village, then it should be counter also in the quality of it. It shouldn’t be a question of lust or just hormones and so on. But there should be a spiritual principle operating. Otherwise, it’s not really a counterpart, it’s just more of the same.. Host: I see. Ok. (tape jump) Is there a better motivation to be situated in? Hridy: Basically, there are three modes, goodness, passion and ignorance. When goodness becomes prominent, there’s serenity, knowledge, happiness and prosperity. Host: There is no happiness in passion or ignorance? Hridy: No, not really. It’s not that a particular person is exclusively in one or the other. Of course we have mixtures of these qualities within us. In passion there is simply anticipation and lamentation. We get excited and think something good is gonna happen. Just like for example one goes to the university thinking that it will lead to some type of success in life. So the actual process of going to classes, taking notes, taking test, buying books, returning them and so on… worrying about all these things is not really happiness in and of itself. But we think that we’re getting somewhere. When we get to that somewhere we find that actually there’s a new place we have to get to. So in that way in passion, there’s always anticipation, hankering, expectation and then lamentation as we leave things behind we lament for them. For example in school when I was looking forward to a successful career, but then when we get the career, we find it doesn’t really make us happy. Instead we lament, Boy those were the good old days when I was in school. So the essence of passion is either looking forward to something we think will make us happy in the future or lamenting for something we think made us happy in the past. But when we come to the platform of goodness, there’s actual happiness at every moment. You don’t have to go anywhere. You’re not lamenting for anything in the past, you’re not looking forward to something in the future. You’re just happy. It doesn’t mean you don’t do things or don’t make any plans for the future, but you’re just happy right now because you’re a good person. Host: Is that what you consider to be the goal of life, to be situated in goodness? Hridy: Well, if one is situated in goodness, then that’s the launch pad so to speak for spiritual enlightenment. A person who has come to the material platform of goodness is a prime candidate for spiritual understanding. Host: There is… I’m sorry. Hridy: No, go ahead. Host: Uh is there a chance for someone situated in mostly… as you said that the modes of nature appear mixed in every person… uh to situated most in the mode of passion of the mode of ignorance to be a candidate for spiritual life? Hridy: Well, sometimes people who are affected by passion and ignorance become so frustrated that they take to spiritual life precisely because the mode of passion is ultimately frustrating. What to speak of the mode of ignorance. The mode of ignorance characterized by indolence and just plain ignorance; stupidity. Being very irrational, violent or depressed. In other words not even being passionate or active, but just being sort of paralyzed or procrastinating or down, down, down as they say, in the dumps or the dumpster. So these modes of passion and ignorance just don’t make us happy. It’s the goodness that makes us happy. So people become situated in goodness, they can be happy now – here and now – and they can also understand spiritual life and by spiritual progress actually revive their eternal spiritual happiness based on self-realization and love of God. Host: Now in the mode of passion, um since there is most frustration, when someone takes up spiritual life wouldn’t they be inclined to give it up as soon as they found a little relief? Hridy: Well relief is sort of a negative concept. If someone’s causing me pain and then they stop causing me pain, then that’s a relief. But right now for example no one’s causing me pain, but that’s not ecstatic. I mean I have to do something. I have to do something in life and become happy. So when pain stops, whatever kind of pain it may be, gives a momentary sensation of relief and happiness, but ultimately we have to have a life. And that life has to be based on knowledge, not just on our false egotism. Host: I see. So knowledge seems to be the underlying um pursuit behind anyone who will look for spiritual life because um also people in the mode of goodness are suffering in one way or another, otherwise why would they want to transcend? Hridy: That’s true. The goal is knowledge. Of course some people are looking for a perfect, loving relationship which we can only find with Krsna or God. Some people are looking for relief, some people are looking for knowledge, some people are just curious. So there are different reasons for which people take to spiritual life, but it’s true what you said that even on the platform of material goodness, relatively speaking there’s more happiness, but it’s not perfect. If we want perfect happiness, then of course we have to come to the spiritual platform. There are built-in defects in the material world, built-in obsolescence. Host: So honesty seems to be the only real qualification in order to pursue spiritual life because anything else can come afterwards. Hridy: Honesty? Host: Honesty, like if someone is duplicitous. In other words he’s trying to make a business out of… because it’s convenient for me not to be unhappy, therefore it’s also convenient to cheap or lie or to change things around or do things temporarily with no ulterior purpose except for give myself happiness. So since I can… if there is any selfishness, ??? into any kind of search or whatever the mode they may belong to, then there will eventually fall astray. Is that so? Hridy: Yea, they already are astray. We are by our constitutional nature meant to serve God, Krsna. Just like the hand is part of the body, the hand naturally serves the body. If the hand isn’t serving the interest of the body, it’s just doing something else by itself, it’s got a problem and that’s not what hands are for. So just as a hand is part of the body, we are part of God, Krsna. And by our nature, by what awe are, the quality of existence that we possess, we are meant to serve God. So if we are pursuing selfish interest we won’t be happy. Just like if the hand tries to eat by itself, it can’t. No matter how powerful your hand is you can’t eat… your hand can’t eat even if it pulverizes the food or whatever. The hand has to put the food in the stomach and then the nutrition goes to the hand. Or we water the root of a tree. You can’t water all the little branches and leaves. You have to water the root of the tree. So God or Krsna is the root of all existence. By pleasing God or Krsna, we will become pleased. And you just can’t avoid that process. Host: But… Here’s a question. What is the importance of accepting a spiritual master and what are the qualifications to become one? The importance is that someone who knows about Krsna can tell us about Krsna, Krsna of course meaning God. This is very simple fact that in this world whatever we want to know we have to approach someone that knows that. That’s why we have universities and schools. That’s why there are books. That’s why there’s communication. That’s why there are radios. So if we want perfect knowledge and we are imperfect, we have to approach someone that has perfect knowledge. You may say everyone’s imperfect, so why approach someone else. God is not imperfect. God is perfect. And those who surrender to Him can also convey perfect knowledge. We may be imperfect in the sense of our capacity to invent or create or fashion by ourselves a perfect understanding, but we can perfectly convey or transmit knowledge. For example let’s say there was some problem here in this studio. I know nothing about these matters, but if some expert came and said push this button, turn that dial or whatever, then I could do that. Sometimes even airplanes have been guided down to safe landings when uh a very inexperienced person is at the controls. But they simply follow the directions. So that’s the importance of approaching a spiritual master and uh… What was the second part of your question? Host: What are the qualifications and what’s the importance of… Hridy: A spiritual master should speak the truth and practice what he preaches… what he or she preaches. So that’s the basic thing to know the truth, speak the truth and practice the truth. Host: Well I have another question. ??? started saying that uh there… we are all imperfect in one way or another, so how can an imperfect being choose a perfect one… or receive perfect knowledge? How can he being imperfect, decide who’s not imperfect? Hridy: Well, just like let’s say we want to go to a doctor. We aren’t… Well, most of us aren’t doctors. We certainly have an imperfect understanding of medicine and yet we choose a doctor. So within civilized society if the society is sincere and if there is proper education for the people, then they will come to understand who is an authentic spiritual teacher by seeing the results the teacher has on his followers. Let’s say I follow this spiritual teacher. If as a result of that I’ve reformed my character, I’ve become a good person and I visibly have come to a certain state of God consciousness… And if that happens to alot of other people also, then we’ll come to accept that teacher as genuine. So within human society gradually people come to understand who genuine teachers are by the effects of their teachings and also by seeing to what extent their teachings agree with standard books of wisdom which have withstood the test of time or passed the test of time and aren’t simply someone’s imagination this week. Host: Well, Homer’s ??? different times still have… Guest: Not as I would say spiritual guidebooks. Even back during Homer’s time. Plato was kind of upset by the theology of the Iliad and the Odessy. Everyone admitted that Homer knew how to tell a great story. And I don’t think Homer was really trying to get in the last word on theology anyway. Host: Um, I have two questions. One related to theology. How do you decide what is a bona-fide scripture? Hridy: Well first of all, you have to want a bona-fide scripture. If you don’t want one, then they’re all the same to you. Just like if you don’t like ice cream, then even if there’s 32,000 flavors, they’re all the same to you. They’re all useless. So first we have to agree if we’re so inclined, that there is value in a genuine scripture which is coming down authentically… the word of God and so on. And if we agree, that would be a good thing to have, then we could look for one. Host: So at that point, how do you decide which one is the best? Is there better one than others or is there a better one for you? Hridy: Well, even within scriptures people admit that some instructions are more important than others. For example, laws about how to tether your camel or something like that in an ancient Mideastern book wouldn’t be as important as a direct revelation of the glory of God. So we have to admit that there are more and less important injunctions even within a particular scripture. In fact, all religious traditions do admit this. Therefore, it is possible to derive a type of universal standard. What constitutes important information in a scripture? It should be information which tells us the nature of God, the nature of our own self or identity, what the relationship is between us, what the process is to revive fully our understanding of in relationship with the supreme deity. These things are very significant. So the extent to which a scripture can properly teach us about these things and actually help us to make real tangible spiritual advancement, then it’s a good scripture. We shouldn’t just hoop and howler and get ourselves worked up or affirm that we blindly accept some dogma. Anyone can do that. You know my God can beat up you God. The real point is to see if you personally, in your own life, are transcending material qualities such as lust, greed, envy which afflict all of us and actually are developing love of God, a love for God which takes you beyond affection for temporary things. For example if you get in an airplane, it goes down the runaway and then it turns around and goes back the other way and keeps doing this and you never actually get over the mountains, you better switch airlines. Host: Let me ask, since you mentioned the test of time and also said that something new or new ideas wouldn’t necessarily work, so there is no more scriptures to be written? In other words, everything that is to be revealed is already written and it’s like… just… you don’t have to do anything, you don’t have to wait any new revelations. Whatever is done is done and that should be sufficient. Is that your idea? In other words, there’s no enlightened beings. There won’t be any enlightened beings who can actually write scripture anymore. Hridy: Did I say all that? Host: Well, no. This is what I assume. Hridy: As material history winds it’s way through time, there’ll always be a need for enlightened beings to teach us to apply eternal wisdom in our particular situation. I’m sure there always will be enlightened beings coming here to this world to help us. At the same time there’s certain basic truths which need not be and cannot be reinvented or altered and we just have to face that fact. You know let’s say scriptures aren’t exactly like you know sports cars, they change every year or whatever. You know this year there’s a new sedan or convertible or whatever. And there’s a difference between the car industry or the fashion industry and God. They’re not exactly the same. Thank God. So for example the fact that we’re eternal, we are eternal spiritual beings, God is the supreme eternal spiritual being, there’s a loving relationship between us that we have to rediscover, that we cannot be happy exploiting matter, including our own bodies. We have to satisfy the needs of our bodies, but we cannot be happy by exploiting the bodies. These are simply eternal facts. That’s just the way it is. Host: How is a disciple to be and what is his or her qualifications to be a bona-fide disciple? Hridy: Well, a disciple should be disciplined. If we really want to make progress and we accept a spiritual teacher, then we should serve the teacher nicely. By the way bona-fide spiritual teacher certainly is not exploiting us. But rather a bona-fide teacher is simply engaging us in the Lord’s service. A bona-fide guru or spiritual master – teacher – never thinks that uh this is nice I got some disciples. They’ll work hard and make money for me and take care of my bodily comfort and I can enjoy life. And bona-fide teacher should always be thinking that I myself am a menial servant of God and this disciple of mine is also a servant of God and I am simply helping this person to serve God. So if one finds such a bona-fide spiritual master, guru teacher and so on, one should serve that person humbly, if the person is actually worthy of taking the position of a guru, a teacher and uh this will please God. Host: So what are the specific qualities of a disciple besides being disciplined and loyal, faithful? Hridy: Well a disciple has to want to achieve spiritual perfection. If you enroll in a university but your not really interested in getting a degree, you probably won’t do that well. Or if you’re not interested in learning anything, you just like to hang out at universities. So in the same way, we should accept a spiritual teacher, not because – as my teacher used to say – because it’s a fashion or other people are doing it, so I want one too. It’s like everyone’s got a new kind of tennis shoe, so I got to get that too. I mean it’s not just like trendy tennis shoes. You should accept a teacher if you really want perfect knowledge, if you really want to revive your own spiritual nature and go back to home, back to the spiritual world. Host: What about variety? We see that there’s so much variety in the material world let’s call it. Um when it comes to spiritual matters, it seems be like everything merges into a non-variegated blob. But you know everybody come… had from whatever you want you can just get there. So what is the point of having so much variety, uh ultimately the truth is one? Hridy: Well, ultimately there is variety. There is eternal variety. After all, if the world was all painted one color it’d be pretty drab wouldn’t it, not matter what that color was? Actually it wouldn’t matter what the color was because it would start to look the same anyway. So similarly, I mean who would want the spiritual world, the kingdom of God, to be all painted one color… or to have no variety, no relationships, nothing? It’d be a pretty miserable place to be. I would almost rather be in Brooklyn. So um there is variety, there is eternal variety, colors and shapes and relationships, individual people. In fact this world that we’re in now is merely a reflection, like a perverted reflection of the perfect world, the spiritual world where there is perfect beautiful variety. So these ideas that everything is one are nice. In fact everything is one, but there’s still variety. It’s just like a group of people who are very united, a family, a team, lovers, whatever. When people are very united there is a oneness. At the same time there is individuality. So the oneness of all things in god does not preclude the variety which makes everything worthwhile and beautiful. Host: What is the ultimate authority? Who’s… Who or what is the ultimate authority in um spiritual matters? Hridy: Huh? Host: Like let’s say there are so many traditions, there are so many patriarchs or spiritual leaders and do you think there is such a thing as one united, universal teachings and which one particular person ??? path is actually better than others or supersedes all other philosophy? Hridy: I think it’d be fanatical to say that uh that one path is right and everyone else is a devil or whatever. That’s pretty fanatical. And it’s also fanatical to say that everything is the same. Uh we have to actually examine things and see what their quality is, wee what they lead to, see what the results are, how good they are and make an intelligent decision about them. So if we agree for example that in spiritual life one should overcome, transcend lower qualities like the urge to kill people or rape them or to exploit them even in milder ways. If we agree that a spiritual person should transcend the tendency to exploit others or even exploit himself or herself… And rather a spiritual person should love all creatures and try to help them in the best way. And the extent to which a particular process brings it’s practitioners, it’s followers to that consciousness, to that extent it’s working. The truth is what works. So we have to see what’s going on. If the purpose of a so-called religion is just to take you to some science fiction planet where you can meet – I don’t know – some cosmic person that occasionally visits the earth in flying saucers and help you to do mind travel or something like that, then… It may be nice if that’s what you’re into. It’s just not very spiritual. So we first of all have to separate what is… what are those processes which explicitly aim at selfless love of God, spiritual life and which ones just want to entertain you on a cosmic level. And then among the paths which are actually spiritual, we have to see which of those work or the extent to which they work. Host: Uh yesterday there was a demonstration here on campus about… in favor of affirmative action. So since you always have some radical views on everything, I imagine you have… your opinion on this about affirmative action. So what do you think about that? Hridy: Well, there’s two points. One point is that a society should see that everyone is engaged, everyone has opportunity, that people have the best possible chance to succeed in life, both materially and spiritually. At the same time, it should be done in such a way that other people aren’t punished. If the basic principle behind affirmative action is that people should be given a chance to do the best they can, then that principle should be applied to everyone. We need a system that allows everyone to do the best they can. Host: So you are in favor of merit. I imagine that’s how you would divide society… Hridy: Well I’m in favor of justice. Of course people will say that there were past injustices. Uh so therefore, two wrongs don’t make a right. If there was past injustice, that should be corrected without creating new injustice. Otherwise, we’ll have to have a demonstration ten years from now for the new victims of injustice. So the way to help former victims is not to create new victims. That’s the point. Host: What is justice? Hridy: Justice means that everyone should be given what they deserve. Host: Uh, who will judge that? Hridy: Well, if a society can’t judge those things, then how can it even function as a just society. It’s to be understood or hoped that within a society there are leaders, there are people that can figure these things out. Otherwise, who else can do it except people? Of course we have to be guided and there should be some standard principles on which we can base ourselves. Therefore, there’s a need also for spiritual understanding for wisdom. That’s why it’s very dangerous to have universities that are not interested in wisdom, are interested in economic development, engineering, technology, jobs, money and so on and very uninterested in wisdom. The result is universities don’t actually supply intelligent people to the society, just clever people, shrewd people, skillful people, but not wise people. Host: There’s alot they um… There’s alot actually meant for just a few departments like um philosophy or um religion… Host: The philosophy departments are the last departments that supply wisdom nowadays. Philosophy has sort of degenerated into cribbling over points of logic and so on and so forth. Philosophy as it once was, was an attempt to understand the highest truth utilizing all the cognitive resources of a human being. So how do we actually understand things? For example people claim to have experience of God. So how do we actually understand God? How do we understand the soul? It’s not just by quibbling over detailed points of logic that may not even be relevant to understanding the important things of life. So because philosophy has become very materialistic, it has practically withdrawn even from the competition to find the highest truth. I remember I took one philosophy course at U.C.L.A.. It was in moral philosophy. And the professor announced the first day of class before we’d even begun that we were going to examine the following questions in his class. We will not find the answers, but we will hopefully refine the questions. Now imagine a… the science… not a science, but a discipline so spiritually bankrupt that a professor can successfully and predictably announce before the class even begins that we will not find any answers. So philosophy is definitely doing something wrong.

Streetstraw, I don't know why you replied to me. I'm trying to stay out of things. Remember? I think you didn't understand my intention above. Just for the record, I think everything is a conspiracy, especially where government and business is concerned. Hare Krsna!

As iron has the power to burn when made red-hot in the association of fire, so the body, senses, living force, mind and intelligence, although merely lumps of matter, can function in their activities when infused with a particle of consciousness by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As iron cannot burn unless heated by fire, the bodily senses cannot act unless favored by the Supreme Brahman. (SB 6.16.24)

Hayagriva dasa: For Origen, there are two rebirths. The first is a baptism, which is something like a mystical union between Christ and the soul. Baptism marked the first stage in spiritual life: from there, one could regress or progress. Baptism is compared to a shadow of the ultimate rebirth, which is complete purificaton and rebirth in the spiritual world with Christ. When the soul is reborn with Christ, it receives a spiritual body like Christ and beholds Christ face to face. Srila Prabhupada: What is the position of Christ? Hayagriva dasa: He is seated at the right hand of the Father in the kingdom of God. Srila Prabhupada: But when Christ was present on earth, many people saw him. Hayagriva dasa: They saw him in many different ways, just as the people saw Krsna in many different ways. Srila Prabhupada: Is it that Christ was seen in his full spiritual body? Hayagriva dasa: When the soul is reborn with Christ, it beholds Christ’s spiritual body through its spiritual senses. Srila Prabhupada: Yes. We also think in this way. Hayagriva dasa: Origen did not believe that the individual soul has been existing from all eternity. It was created. He writes: “The rational natures that were made in the beginning did not always exist; they came into being when they were created.” Srila Prabhupada: That is not correct. Both the living entity and God are simultaneously eternally existing, and the living entity is part and parcel of God. Although eternally existing, the living entity is changing his body. Na hanyate hanyamane sarire (Bg. 2.20) One body after another is being created and destroyed, but the living being is eternally existing. So we disagree when Origen says that the soul is created. Our spiritual identity is never created. That is the difference between spirit and matter. Material things are created, but the spiritual tis without beginning. “Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.” (Bg. 2.12) Hayagriva dasa: Origen differed from later Church doctrine in his belief in transmigration. Although he believed that it transmigrated because it could always refuse to give itself to God. So he saw the individual soul as possibly rising and falling perpetually on the evolutionary scale. Later Church doctrine held that one’s choice for eternity is made in this one lifetime. As Origen saw it, the individual soul, falling short of the ultimate goal, is reincarnated again and again. Srila Prabhupada: Yes, that is the Vedic version. Unless one is liberated and goes to the kingdom of God, he must transmigrate from one material body to another. The material body grows, remains for some time, reproduces, grows old, and becomes useless. Then the living entity has to leave one body for another. Once in a new body, he again attempts to fulfill his desires, and again he goes through the process of dying and accepting another material body. This is the process of transmigration. Hayagriva dasa: It is interesting that neither Origen or Christ rejected transmigration. It wasn’t until Augustine that it was denied. Srila Prabhupada: Transmigration is a fact. A person cannot wear the same clothes all of his life. Our clothes become oled and useless, and we have to change them. The living being is certainly eternal, but he has to accept a material body for material sense gratification, and such a body cannot endure perpetually. All of this is thoroughly explained in Bhagavad-gita. “As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. The self-realized soul is not bewildered by such a change.” (Bg. 2.13) “The living entity in the material world carries his different conceptions of life from one body to another as the air carries aromas. Thus he takes one kind of body and again quits it to take another.”

Hayagriva dasa: During his lifetime, Origen was a famous teacher and was very much in demand. For him, preaching meant explaining the word of God and no more. He believed that a preacher must first be a man of prayer and must be in contact with God. He should not pray for material goods but for a better understanding of the scriptures. Srila Prabhupada: Yes, that is a real preacher. As explained in Vedic literatures: sravanam, kirtanah. First of all, we become perfect by hearing. This is called sravanam. When we are thus situated by hearing perfectly from an authorized person, our next stage begins: kirtana, preaching. In this material world, everyone is hearing something from someone else. In order to pass examinations, a student must hear his professor. Then, in his own right, he can become a professor himself. If we hear from a spiritualized person, we become perfect and can become real preachers. We should preach about Visnu for Visnu, not for any person within this material world. We should hear and preach about the Supreme Person, the transcendental Personality of Godhead. That is the duty of a liberated soul. Hayagriva dasa: As far as contradictions and seeming absurdities in scripture are concerned, Origen considered them to be stumbling blocks permitted to exist by God in order for man to pass beyond the literal meaning. He writes that “everything in scripture has a spiritual meaning, but not all of it has a literal meaning.” Srila Prabhupada: Generally speaking, every word in scripture has a literal meaning, but people cannot understand it properly because they do not hear from the proper person. They interpret instead. There is no need to interpret the words of God. Sometimes the words of God cannot be understood by an ordinary person; therefore we may require the transparent medium of the guru. Since the guru is fully cognizant of the words spoken by God, we are advised to receive the words of the scriptures through the guru. There is no ambiguity in the words of God, but due to our imperfect knowledge, we sometimes cannot understand. Not understanding, we try to interpret, but because we are imperfect, our interpretations are also imperfect. The purport is that the words of God, the scriptures, should be understood from a person who has realized God.

Hayagriva dasa: Plotinus accounts for the soul’s conditioning in this way: “How is it, then, that souls forget the divinity that begot them? This evil that has befallen them has its source in self-will, in being born, in becoming different, and desiring to be independent. Once having tasted the pleasures of independence, they use their freedom to go any direction that leads away from their origin. And when they have gone a great distance, they even forget that they came from it.” Srila Prabhupada: That is correct. The more one turns from Krsna, the more degraded one becomes. I have already explained that the living entity may begin his life as Lord Brahma and eventually become so degraded that he becomes a worm in stool. Again, by nature’s way, one may evolve to the human form, which gives him a chance to understand how he has fallen from his original position. By taking to Krsna consciousness, he can put an end to this transmigration. Everyone has to give up the material body, but when a devotee gives up his body, he does not have to accept another. He is immediately transferred to the spiritual world. Mam eti (Bg. 4.9) “He comes to Me.” For a devotee, death means giving up the material body and remaining in the original, spiritual body. It is said that whether a devotee lives or dies, his business is the same: devotional service. Those who are degraded in material life––like butchers, who daily but the throats of many animals––are advised, “Don’t live, and don’t die.” This is because their present life is abominable, and their future life will be filled with suffering. The devotee is liberated because he is indifferent to living or dying. He is jivan-mukta, which indicates that although his body is rotting in the material world, he is liberated. In Bhagavad-gita, Krsna affirms that His devotee is not subject to the modes of material nature. “This divine energy of Mine, consisting of the three modes of material nature, is difficult to overcome, but those who have surrendered unto Me can easily cross beyond it.” (Bg. 7.14) The devotee is therefore situated on the brahman platform. It is our constitutional position to serve: either maya or Krsna. Jivera ‘svarupa’ haya––krsnera ‘nitya-dasa’. Caitanya Mahaprabhu has given our real identity as being the eternal servant of Krsna. Presently everyone is rendering service to his family, community, nation, and so on. When this service is rendered cent per cent to Krsna, we are liberated. due to a poor fund of knowledge, impersonalists think that mukti, liberation, means inactivity., but there is no basis for this belief. The soul is naturally active, and because the soul is within the body, the body is engaged in many activities. the body in itself is inactive, but it acts because the soul is present. When we give up the bodily conception, why should activities stop? Mayavadis cannot understand that the active principle is the soul. When the active principle leaves the body, the body is called dead. Even if one is liberated from the material body, he must act. That is also explained in the Bhakti-sastra: “Bhakti, or devotional service, means engaging all our senses in the service of the Lord, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the master of all the senses. When the spirit soul renders service unto the Supreme, there are two side effects. He is freed from all material designations, and simply by being employed in the service of the Lord, his senses are purified.” (Narada-paæcaratra)

Theist, thankyou. I'm on my way.

Syamasundara dasa: Aristotle believes that virtue can be analyzed, that any situation can be analyzed by the intelligence, and then that intelligence can be applied to correct action. Srila Prabhupada: By intelligence he should try to understand whether or ot animals have souls. If an animal doesn’t have a soul, how is it he is acting like a human being? He is eating, sleeping, mating, and defending. How can you say he has no soul? The life symptoms are the same. Syamasundara dasa: He equates the immortal soul with rational activity. Srila Prabhupada: Well, animals have rational activities. I have already explained this. A philosopher certainly must know the sumptoms of the soul, and these must be defined. We receive perfect information on this subject from Bhagavad-gita, when Krsna says: “It should be understood that all species of life, O son of Kunti, are made possible by birth in this material nature, and that I am the seed-giving father.” (Bg. 14.4) Does this mean that God is the father only of human beings? For instance, the Jews say that they are the only selected people of God. But what kind of God is this who selects some people and condemns others? This is God: Krsna says, sarva-yoni. “I am the father of all species of life.” Everyone is God’s son. How can I kill and eat any living entity? He is my brother in any case. Suppose a man has five sons, and two of them are fools. Does this mean that the intelligent sons have the right to kill and eat the foolish ones? Would the father like this? Who would ask the father, “Father, these two sons are fools and useless rascals. So let us cut them to pieces and eat them.”? Will the father agree to this? Or will the state agree? And why should God agree? Syamasundara dasa: Aristotle claims that one can use his intelligence to practice virtue, but you once said that because a thief considers theft a virtue, he can use his intelligence to steal. Srila Prabhupada: Yes, a thief’s intelligence has been described as duskrtina. The word krti means “very meritorious,” and the word dus means “misapplied.” Is that virtuous when one’s intelligence is misapplied? when merit and intelligence are properly used for the proper activity, that is virtue. Such activity will not entangle a man. That is intelligence and virtue. Syamasundara dasa: Ambition is one of the Aristotelean virtues, but one can have the abition to steal. Srila Prabhupada: Yes, it was Hitler’s ambition to become total ruler of Europe. he killed many people and then finally killed himself. So what was all this ambition worth? all these politicians are very ambitious, but they are ambitious to unlawfully encroach upon the the rights of others. We should have the ambition to become the sincere servant of God. That is real ambition. Syamasundara dasa: Among virtues, Aristotle includes courage, temperance, liberality, magnificence, and ambition. Srila Prabhupada: What is the magnificence of killing animals? How can you have no kindness for poor animals and yet talk of magnificence? Harav abhaktasya (Bhag. 5.18.12) If you ultimate conclusion is not God consciousness, you have no good qualities. You can be neither a scientist, nor a philosopher, because you are naradhama, hovering on the mental platform. Thus you concoct so many theories. Syamasundara dasa: As far as Aristotle’s social philosophy is concerned, he says that man is basically a political and social animal and that he must exist in some society in order to fulfill himself. Men live together to transcend their crude natural condition and arrive at a civilized culture of ethical and intellectual life. Srila Prabhupada: If that is done, that is all right, but he is philosophizing that animals have no souls. Following his philosophy, people are saying, “Let’s kill the animals and eat them.” So what is the benefit of this grouping together in a society? we should instead group together to cultivate knowlege of God. This is what is required. What is the use in living together just to plunder other nations and kill other living entities? such a group is a group of rogues and gangsters. Even today in the United Nations people are grouping together and planning to encroach upon one another. So what is the point in all these groups of gangsters?