Dialectic Spiritualism Highlights 4

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Bacon disliked mental speculation about God because we cannot expect God to conform to our own conception. Due to God’s infinitude, no conception of God can be unbelievable. By and large, Bacon relegated theology to the realm of faith, and science to the realm of knowledge of the world.

Srila Prabhupada: It is good to be a master architect and make a house with all modern facilities, but if these facilities cause us to forget life’s real aim, we have lost a great deal. It is better to remain without facilities, evacuate in the field, and bathe in the river, than overly concern ourselves with modern amenities, facilities for a pampered life. If we forget our real business––how to revive God consciousness––we have not advanced but regressed.

Hayagriva dasa: Bacon did not conceive of science as being a disunifying factor as far as religion or God is concerned. Rather, he believed that science could enable civilization to progress. It could be a binding force between man and God.

Srila Prabhupada: That is certainly a very good idea, but many modern scientists are denying the existence of God. Many are claiming that God is dead, that there is no need of God, or that we can manufacture God and man in our own way.

Hayagriva dasa: Bacon considered some knowledge to be supernatural in that it comes from God, whereas other forms of knowledge are attained through man’s own attempts. He admits that the material senses are imperfect and act like false mirrors, which distort the actual world. Thus men are constantly being deceived.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, although they are advancing the cause of material science, they are forgetting God in the process. This is most degrading. Men should prove by scientific methods that God exists and is doing everything. Scientists should use a scientific method to understand how the supreme intelligent Being is working. God’s scientific knowledge is perfect, and knowledge that complies with this is very good. But if men have a little knowledge and defy the existence of God, their knowledge is useless. So their little knowledge has become a dangerous thing.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Bacon says something very much like this. He writes: “It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth mens’ minds about to relgion.”

Srila Prabhupada: Yes. Krsna says in Bhagavad-gita:

 

“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)

 

If we have a little intelligence and think about this verse, we can understand that all living entities are coming from some womb. Since everyone is the child os some mother, there must be a father. When we are grown, we must understand our father, his property, and his desire. How can we deny a universal father?

Hayagriva dasa: This is Bacon’s conclusion: “For a while, the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them, confederate and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Diety.”

Srila Prabhupada: Yes. this is the version given in Bhagavad-gita.

 

“I am the origin of everything. Everything emanates from Me.” (Bg. 10.8)

 

The Vedanta-sutra also states: janmadyasya yatah. “The Supreme Being is He from whom everything is emanating.” It is a fact that there must be a source of everything, and it is the business of philosophy to find that original source. It is neither scientific nor philosophic to try to obscure or ignore the original source.

Hayagriva dasa: Concerning superstition, Bacon writes: “It were better to have no opinion of God at all then such an opinion as is unworthy of Him. For one is unbelief, and the other is contumely.”

Srila Prabhupada: Why should we remain superstitious? Why not introduce education whereby everyone can understand God and His nature? We are trying to establish such an institution with this Krsna consciousness movement. If the government participates and cooperates, the masses of people can understand this science of God and benefit.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: For Aquinas, God is the only single essence that consist of pure form. He felt that matter is only a potential, and, in order to be real, must assume a certain shape or form. In other words, the living entity has to acquire an individual form in order to actualize himself. When matter unites with form, the form gives individuality and personality.

Srila Prabhupada: Matter in itself has no form; it is the spirit soul that has form. Matter is a covering for the actual form of the spirit soul. Because the soul has form, matter appears to ahve form. Matter is like cloth that is cut to fit the body. In the spiritual world, however, everything has form: God and the spirit souls.

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas believed that only God and the angels have nonmaterial form. There is no difference between God’s form and God’s spiritual self.

Srila Prabhupada: Both the individual souls and God have form. That is real form. Material form is but a covering for the spiritual body.

 

...

Hayagriva dasa: Today, some scientists even admit Aquinas’s argument that since nothing can create itself in this material world, something external, or spiritual, is required for initial creation.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, a mountain cannot create anything, but a human being can give form to a stone. A mountain may be very large, but it remains a stone incapable of giving shape to anything.

 

...

Hayagriva dasa: So the soul has a form that is incorruptible. Is this not also the form of the material body?

Srila Prabhupada: The material body is an imitation. It is false. Because the spiritual body has form, the material body, which is a coating, takes on form. As I have already explained, a cloth originally has no form, but a tailor can cut the cloth to fit a form. In actuality, this material form is illusory. It orginally has no form. It takes on form for a while, and when it becomes old and useless, it retruns to its original position. In Bhagavad-gita (18.61), the body is compared to a machine. The soul has his own form, but he is given a machine, the body, which he uses to wander throughout the universe, attempting to enjoy himself.

Hayagriva dasa: I think that part of the problem is that Augustine and Aquinas could not conceive of a spiritual form. When they speak of form, they think that matter must necessarily be involved. Aquinas followed the Augustinian and Platonic doctrines maintaining that if the soul is infependent from matter, man loses his basic unity. He saw man as both body and soul. A man is a particular type of soul in a specific body.

Srila Prabhupada: When you are dressed, it appears that you are not different from your clothes. Your clothes move just as you do, but you are completely different.

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas did not believe that the living entitiy has pure spiritual form as such. Matter is necessary to give the soul form.

Srila Prabhupada: No. He has his original form.

Hayagriva dasa: Is this the form of the body?

Srila Prabhupada: It is the form of the spirit. The body takes on form because the spirit has form. Matter has no form, but it coats the spiritual form of the soul and thus takes on form.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Aqainas set forth five basic aarguments for God’s existence; first, God necessarily exists as the first cause; second, the material world cannot create itself but needs something external, or spiritual, to create it; third, because the world exists, there must be a creator; forth, since there is relative perfection in the world, there must be absolute perfection underlying it; and fifth, since the creation has design and purpose, there must be a designer who planned it.

Srila Prabhupada: We also honor these arguments. Also, without a father and mother, children cannot be brought into existence. Modern philosophers do not consider this strongest argument. According to Brahma-saàhit¢, everything has a cause, and God is the ultimate cause.

 

“Krsna, who is known as Govinda, is the Supreme Godhead. He has an eternal, blissful, spiritual body. He is the origin of all. He has no other origin, and He is the prime cause of all causes.” (Brahma-samhita 5.1)

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Unlike Plato and Aristotle, Aquinas maintained that God created the universe out of nothing.

Srila Prabhupada: No, the universe is created by God, certainly, but God and His energies are always there. You cannot logically say that the universe was created out of nothing.

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas would contend that since the material universe could not have arisen out of God’s spiritual nature, it had to be created out of nothing.

Srila Prabhupada: Material nature is also an energy of God’s. As Krsna states in the Bhagavad-gita:

 

“Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intelligence and false ego—all together, these eight constitute My separated material energies.” (Bg. 7.4)

 

All of these emanate from God, and therefore they are not unreal. They are considered inferior because they are God’s separated material energies. The sound that comes from a tape recorder may sound exactly like the original person’s voice. The sound is not the person’s voice itself, but it has come from the person. If one cannot see where the sound is coming from, one may suppose that the person is actually speaking, although the person may be far away. Similarly, the material world is an expansion of the supreme Lord’s energy, and we should not think that it has been brought into existence out of nothing. It has emanated from the supreme Truth, but it is the inferior, separated energy. The superior energy is found in the spiritual world, which is the world of reality. In any case, we cannot agree that the material world has come from nothing.

Hayagriva dasa: Well, Aquinas would say that it was created by God out of nothing.

Srila Prabhupada: You cannot say that God’s energy is nothing. His energy is exhibited and is eternally existing with Him. God’s energy must be there. If God doesn’t ahve energy, how can He be God?

 

“He does not possess bodily form like that of an ordinary living entity. There is no difference between His body and His soul. He is absolute. All His senses are transcendental. Any one of His senses can perform the action of any other sense. Therefore, no one is greater than Him, or equal to Him. His potencies are multifarious, and thus His deeds are automatically performed as a natureal sequence.” (Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.8)

 

God has multi-energies, and the material energy is but one. Since God is everything, you cannot say that the material universe comes from nothing.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas considered sins to be both venial and mortal. A venial sin is one that can be pardoned, but a mortal sin cannot. A mortal sin stains the soul.

Srila Prabhupada: When a living entity disobeys the orders of God, he is put into this material world, and that is his punishment. he either rectifies himself by good association, or undergoes transmigration. By taking on one body after another, he is subject to the tribulation of material existence. the soul is not stained, but he can participate in sinful activity. Although you cannot mix oil and water, oil floating on water is carried away by water. As soon as we are in contact with material nature, we come under the clutches of the material world.

 

“The bewildered spirit soul, under the influence of the three modes of material nature, thinks himself to be the doer of activities, which are in actuality carried out by nature.” (Bg. 3.27)

 

As soon as the living entity enters the material world, he loses his own power. He is completely under the clutches of material nature. Oil never mixes with water, but it may be carried away by the waves.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas felt that the monastic vows of poverty, celibacy, and obedience give a direct path to God, but he did not think that these austerities were meant for the masses of men. He looked on life as a pilgrimage through the world of the senses to the spiritual world of God, from imperfection to perfecdtion, and the monastic vows are meant to help us on this path.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, according to the Vedic instructions, we must take to the path of tapasya, voluntary self-denial. Tapas¢ brahmacaryena. Tapasya, or austerity, begins with brahmacarya, celibacy. We must first learn to control the sex urge. That is the beginning of tapasya. We must control the senses and the mind, then we should give everything that we have to the Lord’s service. By following the path of truth and remaining clean, we can practice yoga. In this way, it is possible to advance toward the spiritual kingdom. All of this can be realized, however, by engaging in devotional service. If we become devotees of Krsna, we automatically attain the benefits of austerities without having to make a separate effort. By one stroke, devotional service, we can acquire the benefits of all the other processes.

 

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Concerning the state, Aquinas believed like Plato in an enlightened monarchy, but in certain cases, he felt that it is not necessary for man to obey human laws if these laws are opposed to human welfare and are instruments of violence.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, but first of all we must know what our welfare is. Unfortunately, as materialistic education advances, we are missing the aim of life. Life’s main aim is declared openly in the Vedanta-sutra: athato brahma-jijnasa. Life is meant for understanding the Absolute Truth. Vedic civilization is based on this principle, but modern civilization has deviated and is devoting itself to that which cannot possibly relieve us from the tribulations of birth, old age, disease, and death. So-called scientific advancement has not solved life’s real problems. Although we are eternal, we are presently subjected to birth and death. In this age of Kali-yuga, people are slow to learn about self-realization. People create their own way of life, and they are unfortunate and disturbed.

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas concludes that if the laws of God and man conflict, we should obey the laws of God.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes. We can also obey the man who obeys the laws of God. It is useless to obey an imperfect person. That is the blind following the blind. If the leader does not follow the instructions of the supreme controller, he is necessarily blind, and he cannot lead. Why should we risk our lives by following blind men who believe that they are knowledgeable but are not? We should instead decide to take lessons from the Supreme Person, Krsna, who knows everything perfectly. Krsna knows past, present, and future, and what is for our benefit.

Hayagriva dasa: For Aquinas, all earthly powers exist only by God’s permission. Since the Church is God’s emissary on earth, the Church should control secular power as well. He felt that secular rulers should remain subservient to the Church, which should be able to excommunicate a monarch and dethrone him.

Srila Prabhupada: World activities should be regulated so that God is the ultimate goal of understanding. Although the Church, or the brahmanas, may not directly carry out administrative activities, the government should function under their supervision and instructions. That is the Vedic system. The administrators, the køatriyas, used to take instructions from the brahmanas, who could deliver a spiritual message. It is mentioned in Bhagavad-gita (4.1) that millions of years ago, Krsna instructed the sun god in the yoga of Bhagavad-gita. The sun god is the origin of the ksatriyas. If the king follows the instructions of the Vedas or other scriptures through the brahmanas, or through a bona fide church, he is not only a king but a saintly person as well. The ksatriyas should follow the orders of the brahmanas, and the vaisyas should follow the orders of the ksatriyas. The sudras should follow the instructions of the three superior orders.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Concerning the relationship between theology and philosophy, Aquinas writes: “As sacred doctrine is based on the light of faith, so is philosophy founded on the natural light of reason… If any point among the statements of the philosophers is found contrary to faith, this is not philosphy but rather an abuse of philosophy, resulting from a defect in reasoning.”

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, that is correct. Due to material conditional life, every man is defective. The philosophy of defective people cannot help society. perfect philosophy comes from one who is in contact with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and such philosophy is beneficial. Speculative philosophers base their beliefs on imagination.

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas concluded that divine revelation is absolutely necessary because very few men can arrive at the truth through the philosophical method. It is a path full of errors, and the journey takes a long time.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, that is a fact. We should directly contact the Supreme Person, Krsna, who has complete knowledge. We should understand His instructions and try to follow them.

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas believed that the author of sacred scriptures can be only God Himself, who can not only “adjust words to their meaning, which even man can do, but also adjust things in themselves.” Alas, scriptures are not restricted to one meaning.

the journey takes a long time.

Srila Prabhupada: The meaning of scriptures is one, but the interpretations may be different. In the Bible it is stated that God created the universe, and that is a fact. One may conjecture that the universe was created out of some chunk, or whatever, but we should not interpret scripture in this way. We present Bhagavad-gita as it is without interpretation or motive. We cannot change the words of God. Unfortunately, many interpreters have spoiled the God consciousness of society.

Hayagriva dasa: In this, Aquinas seems to differ from the official Catholic doctrine, which admits only the Pope’s interpretation. For him, the scriptures may contain many meanings according to our degree of realization.

the journey takes a long time.

Srila Prabhupada: The meaning is one, but if we are nt realized, we may interpret many meanings. It is stated both in the Bible and Bhagavad-gita that God created the universe.

 

“I am the source of all spiritual and material worlds. Everything emanates from Me.” (Bg. 10.8)

 

If it is a fact that everything is an emanation of God’s energy, why should we accept a second meaning or interpretation? What is the possible second meaning?

Hayagriva dasa: Well, in the Bible it is stated that after creating the universe, God walked through paradise in the afternoon. Aquinas would consider this to have an interior, or mataphorical, meaning.

the journey takes a long time.

Srila Prabhupada: If God can create, he can also walk, speak, touch, and see. If God is a person, why is a second meaning necessary.? What could it possibly be?

Hayagriva dasa: Impersonal speculation.

the journey takes a long time.

Srila Prabhupada: If God is the creator of all things, He must be a person. Things appear to come from secondary causes, but actually everything is created by the Supreme Creator.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas seems to have encouraged individual interpretation. He writes: “It belongs to the dignity of diving scripture to contain many meanings in one text, so that it may be appropriate to the various understandings of each man to marvel at the fact that he can find the truth he has conceived in his own mind expressed in divine scripture.”

Srila Prabhupada: No. If one’s mind is perfect, he may give a meaning, but, according to our conviction, if one is perfect, why should he try to change the word of God? And if one is imperfect, what is the value of his change?

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas doesn’t say “change.”

Srila Prabhupada: Interpretation means change. If man is imperfect, how can he change the words of God? If the words can be changed, they are not perfect. So there will be doubt whether the words are spoken by God or by an imperfect person.

Hayagriva dasa: The many different Protestant faiths resulted from such individual interpretation. It’s surprising to find this viewpoint in aquinas.

Srila Prabhupada: As soon as you interpret or change the scripture, the scripture loses its authority. Then another man will come and interpret things in his own way. Another will come and then another, and in this way the original purport of the scripture is lost.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas believed that it is not possible to see God in this life. He writes: “God cannot be seen in His essence by one who is merely man, except he be separated from ths mortal life… The divine essence cannot be known through the nature of material things.”

Srila Prabhupada: What does he mean by diving essence? For us, God’s divine essence is personal. When one cannot conceive of the Personality of Godhead, he sees the impersonal feature everywhere. When one advances further, he sees God as the Param¢tm¢ within his heart. That is the result of yoga meditation. Finally, if one is truly advanced, he can see God face to face. When Krsna came, people saw him face to face. Christians accept Christ as the son of God, and when he came, people saw him face to face. Does Aquinas think that Christ is not the divine essence of God?

Srila Prabhupada: And didn’t many people see him? Then how can Aquinas say that God cannot be seen?

Hayagriva dasa: It’s difficult to tell whether Aquinas is basically impersonalist or personalist.

Srila Prabhupada: That means that he is speculating.

Hayagriva dasa: He writes about the personal feature in this way: “Because God’s nature has all prfection and thus every kind of perfection should be attributed to him, it is fitting to use the word ‘person’ to speak of God; yet when used of God it is not used exactly as it is of creaures but in a higher sense… Certainly the dignity of divine nature surpasses every nature, and thus it is entirely suitable to speak of God as a ‘person’.” Aquinas is no more specific that this.

Srila Prabhupada: Christ is accepted as the son of God, and if the son can be seen, why can’t the Father be seen? If Christ is the son of God, who is God? In Bhagavad-gita, Krsna says: aham sarvasya prabhavah. “Everything is emanating from Me.” (Bg. 10.8) Christ says that he is the son of God, and this means that he emanates from God. Just as he has his personality, God also has His personality. Therefore we refer to Krsna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas felt that the less determinate God’s name, the more universal and Srila Prabhupada: Why? If God is active and has created the entire universe, what is wrong in addressing Him according to His activities and attributes?

Hayagriva dasa: Aquinas claims that the very essence of God is the sheer fact of His being, the Srila Prabhupada: He is, certainly, but “He is” means that he is existing in His abode with his servants, playmates, hobbies, and paraphernalia. Everything is there. We must ask what is the meaning or nature of His being.

Hayagriva dasa: It seems that Aquinas was basically impersonalist.

Srila Prabhupada: No. He could not determine whether God was personal or impersonal. His inclination was to serve God as a person, but he had no clear conception of His personality. Therefore he speculates.

Hayagriva dasa: In the Vedas, is there an equivalent to “He who is?”

Srila Prabhupada: Om tat sat is impersonal. This mantra, however, can also be extended as om namo bhagavate vasudevaya. The word vasudeva means “one who lives everywhere,” and refers to Bhagavan, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. God is both personal and impersonal, but the impersonal feature is secondary. According to Bhagavan Sri Krsna in Bhagavad-gita:

 

“And I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman, which is the constitutional position of ultimate happiness, and which is immortal, imperishable, and eternal.” (Bg. 14.27)

 

What is the purport to that?

Hayagriva dasa [reading]: “The constitution of Brahman is the beginning of transcendental realization. Paramatma, the Supersoul, is the middle, the second stage in transcendental realization, and the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the ultimate realization of the Absolute Truth.”

Srila Prabhupada: That is divine essence.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Scotus affirmed that it was the Church’s unfailing authority that provided the criterion of truth. Church dogma was sacred, and philosophy was naturally subordinate to it. Revelation was behind all Church dogma, and therefore sacred dogma is not open for debate.

Srila Prabhupada: If by “church” we mean an institution wherein we can learn about God, then philosophy is certainly subordinate. In such a Church, we can learn what God Himself is, what He is willing, and how he is acting. We may learn this either from the Bible or another scripture. However, if the Church is polluted by imperfect interpretation, and there are different factions, the truth is lost. At such a time, the authority of Christ is no longer imparted. People become free to think and act as they like, and thus God’s kingdom is lost.

Hayagriva dasa: Because the parampara is broken?

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, The Church is the supreme authority provided that it maintains itself in exactly the same way and does not deviate from its beginning. As soon as we interpret and divide, the message is lost.

Hayagriva dasa: The Protestants claimed that the parampara of the Catholic Church was broken, therefore they broke from Catholicism and fragmented into many dfferent sects.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, they condemned the Catholic Church because its parampara was broken, but they concluded, “Let us also break.” Those who first broke away from the message as it is and those who followed them by breaking away themselves are both to blame. Since the original solidarity of the Christian religion is broken, the Christian religion is dwindling and losing its importance.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Scotus argued for the existence of God on the basis of primary cause, but he felt that the proposition “God exists” is not of much use unless we understand what God is and know something of His nature.

Srila Prabhupada: God is the Supreme Father, and He has created everything within our experience. When we are convinced that there is certainly a creator, we can make further progress to understand the nature of that creator. Is he animate or inanimate? Is He matter, or a living being? Further analysis takes up from this point, but first we must understand that God is the creator. That is very well explained in Bhagavad-gita:

 

“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)

 

Everything is coming from the womb (yoni) of material nature. If the earth or material nature is the mother, there must be a father. Of course, atheists think that a mother can give birth without a father, but that thinking is most unnatural. One next asks, “Who is my father? What is his position? How does he talk? How does he live?” First we must understand that there is a creator father, and then we can understand His nature. This understanding must be beyond a doubt.

[ethos 0]

Syamasundara dasa: Conte believed that theology, metaphysics and Positivism constitute three stages through which the perfect society evolves. In the beginniing, the theological stage, man moves from polytheism to monotheism. In the second stage, the metaphysical, man abandons the first stages and places his faith in impersonal forces, like cause and effect, gravity, and so on.

Srila Prabhupada: This philosophy is imperfect. From the personal platform, you have to reach the person, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. How can the law of gravitation save you? It is an energy of God, a natural law. When we speak of law, we predicate the fact that someone makes the law.

Syamasundara dasa: Conte suggests that primitive man worships personal forms in nature, and that as man becomes more sophisticated, he worships impersonal forms.

Srila Prabhupada: That is backwards. The personal aspect is higher. Of course, if one does not know the Supreme Personality of Godhead, that is a different matter. Foolish men attempt to worship the impersonal. Primitive man by nature wants to worship a person. Because people do not know who that person is, out of frustration, they turn to impersonalism. As far a our philosophy is concerned, we know the person because the personal God has told us, “Here I am.” When He is present, He proves that He is God, the Supreme Lord. When people see him, they write books about Him. When Vyasadeva saw Krsna, He abandoned all other literatures to write of Krsna’s activities in Srimad-Bhagavatam. He knew by personal, meditative, and authoritative knowledge that Krsna is God. One who does not know Krsna may turn to impersonalism.

Syamasundara dasa: Conte believed that above teh metaphysical platform is the Positivist stage wherein man abandons theological and metaphysical explanations in order to acquire positive knowledge. In this stage, man is sufficiently competent to ascertain facts and amass scientific data.

Srila Prabhupada: We don’t agree with this. It is not that science is above metaphysics; rather, real scientific knowledge is mataphysical.

Syamasundara dasa: Conte maintained that the more facts that we discover through science, the more complicated science becomes. Thus science advances toward the positive stage.

Srila Prabhupada: We say that it becomes more superficial. Complete knowledge means finding the origianal cause. Sense perception is considered scientific, but the Vedas state that sense perception is misleading and is not independent. For instance, at the moment you can see me, but if there were no sunlight, you would not be able to see me. Your seeing is dependent on the sun, but you have not supplied the sun. The sun has come into being by someone else’s arrangement, and your seeing is dependent on that arrangement. Therefore your seeing has no intrinsic value.

[ethos 0]

Syamasundara dasa: Conte considered sociology to be the most complex science because it depends on all the other sciences for its understanding. It is the science of human behavior, of group relations.

Srila Prabhupada: Sociology is already given by Krsna. It is not Conte’s gift. In Bhagavad-gita, Krsna says:

 

“According to the three modes of material nature and the work associated to them, the four divisions of human society are created by Me. And, although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer, being unchangeable.” (Bg. 4.13)

 

This is perfect sociology. If you try to create some system, that system will be imperfect because you are imperfect. There will not be peace. Certainly, human groups are necessary, but they must have a scientific basis. Krsna says that He has created the varëas; therefore we have to accept the system as it is given. Just as different parts of your body work in order to sustain the body, the different parts of society should work to maintain the social order. It is not that you can artificailly create social orders. When people attempt this, they create only havoc.

 

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Comte believed that man’s scientific attempt to improve nature is more desirable than a passive belief in God. He writes: “Even the laws of the solar system are very far from perfect… the increasing imperfection of the economy of nature becomes a powerful stimulus to all our faculties, whether moral, intellectual, or practical… the conception of man becoming, without fear or boast, the arbiter within certain limits, of his own destiny, has in it something far more satisfying than the old belief in Providence, which implied our remaining passive.”

Srila Prabhupada: This means that he has no knowledge of God. There is no question of passivity.. God is the ultimate controller of everything, and although He may act through different agents, the ultimate decision is given by Him. He is sitting in everyone’s heart observing the activities of the individual soul, and without His permission, no one can act. He gives intelligence, and he also causes one to forget. By God’s grace, we can have the power to remember activities long past. In any case, God is the ultimate director. Man cannot be independent, because man’s actions are impelled by the three modes of material nature.

 

“The bewildered spirit soul, under the influence of the three modes of material nature, thinks himself to be the doer of activities, which are in actuality carried out by nature.” (Bg. 3.27)

 

The ultimate director is the Supersoul situated in the heart of every living entity and within every atom.

Syamasundara dasa: Conte believed that social reforms are implemented more by love than anything else. His motto was: “Love for the principle, order for the basis, progress for the end.”

Srila Prabhupada: Unfortunately, he does not know what the end is. he is simply theorizing. The end is Viøëu. Srimad-Bhagavatam states:

 

“Persons who are strongly entrapped by the consciousness of enjoying material life, and who have therefore accepted as their leader or guru a similar blind man attached to external sense objects, cannot understand that the goal of life is to return home, back to Godhead, and engage in the service of Lord Viøëu. As blind men guided by another blind man miss the right path and fall into a ditch, materially attached men led by another materially attached man are bound by the ropes of fruitive labor, which are made of very strong cords, and they continue again and again in materialistic life, suffering the threefold miseries.” (Bhag. 7.5.31)

 

Unless we know the end, all our theorizing will not help. All their humanitarian work will never be successful because they have missed the main point: Krsna.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Comte equated intellectual and moral improvement with material progress. He writes: “A nation that has made no efforts to improve itself materially will take but little interest in moral or mental improvement.”

Srila Prabhupada: The standard of material improvement is not actually fixed. One person may be satisfied with certain material conditions, while another may be dissatisfied with the same conditions. The question is, “What should the standard of material life be?” As far as Vedic civilization is concerned, the material necessitites are eating, sleeping, mating, and defending. These are present in both the animal and hman kingdoms. Standards, however, vary, according to different cultures.

Syamasundara dasa: Conte felt that we should deal only with information that can be verified by experiment, or demonstration.

Srila Prabhupada: Then, how are these planets floating in the air? What is the scientific explanation for that? Who made this cosmic arrangement? If they don’t know, then what is the value of their scientific knowledge? Because they cannot answer these questions, they say that they are not worth knowing.

Syamasundara dasa: Conte would feel that such knowledge is not very useful.

Srila Prabhupada: But knowledge means finding out the source of knowledge, the source of everything. You are seeing only a portion of someone’s actions and reactions, but you do not know who that someone is. If you don’t know, you cannot pose as a man of knowledge.

Syamasundara dasa: Conte is interested in knowledge dealing with sense phenomena, knowledge that can be directly, scientifically utilized.

Srila Prabhupada: Well, naturally you can perceive a tree growing, but a man interested in knowledge wants to know the origin of that tree. One who does not or cannot know says, “It doesn’t matter,” but if you are serious about knowledge, it matters. Knowledge of the tree’s origin is certainly practical. We understand that a tree comes from a seed, but where does the seed come from? How is it that so much potency is given to the seed? Who gives that seed such potency?

Syamasundara dasa: Is that knowledge useful?

Srila Prabhupada: Yes. Of course, it may not be useful for a fool. For a fool, such scientific knowledge is of no use, but for a real scientist, knowledge of the origin of things is most essential. Only a fool would say that such knowledge is useless. A scientific man wants to find the cause of things, whether knowledge of that cause is immeditaely useful or not. Higher knowledge has no value for an ordinary man. In this kali-yuga, the ordinary man is a fool. He thinks, “Why are people wasting their time searching for God?” For a fool, the search for God is unimportant, but for a scientist, it is most important.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Comte felt that it was the working man, the çüdra, who is most apt to be the arbiter of Positivism, not the scientist or philosopher. He writes: “The occupations of working men are evidently far more conducive to philosophical views than those of the middle classes, since they are not so absorbing as to prevent continuous thought, even during the hours of labor.”

Srila Prabhupada: How can the working man become an arbiter? Every working man requires some manager to direct him, and in Communist countries we have seen that there is a managerial class as well as a working class. If this is the case, how can the worker help us? He is always subordinate to some manager.

Hayagriva dasa: Comte wanted to form working men’s clubs that would be dedicated to the philosophy of Positivism. These would form “a provisional substitute for the church of old times, or rather to prepare the way for the religious building of the new form of worship, the worship of humanity.”

Srila Prabhupada: His conception of humanity is not very clear. What does he mean by humanity? What does the working class know of humanity? If by “humanity” he means the totality of all human beings, he must still admit that every human being has some individuality. Even if you consider all humanity to be the same, how will you account for individuality?

Hayagriva dasa: Well, it is his contention and that of cummunism in general that all men are basically the same in relation to the state.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, they are all under the laws of the state, but their thinking, feeling, and willing are not under the state. Men think, feel, and will differently. how, then, can they be one? Of course, human beings have two arms, two legs, and on head, but the working of the brain differs according to the individual. It is not possible to adjust these differences and reconcile all humanity as a whole. Everyone will not be in total agreement. People have their own tates even in eating, sleeping, mating, and defending––to say nothing of thinking, feeling, and willing. If you try to force uniformity, you will create dissatisfaction.

Hayagriva dasa: Comte felt that Positivism and Communism––which was then in it’s formative stage––could go hand in hand. He writes: “Positivism has nothing to fear from Communism; on the contrary, it will probably be accepted by most communists among the working classes… ”

Srila Prabhupada: He speaks of a working class but not a managerial class. He wants a classless society, but he wants it populated only by working men. but the fact is that working men require direction, just as the legs and hands require directio ns from the brain. that is quite natural. It is not possible for the working classes not to be under someone’s direction.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Concerning the different qualities of men and women, Comte wrote: “In all kinds of force, for the physical, intellectual, or practical, it is certain that men surpass women, in accordance with a general law which prevails throughout the animal kingdom… If there were no thing else to do but to love… women would be supreme.”

Srila Prabhupada: This is a natural distinction between men and women. How can it be changed? Women are meant for certain activities, just as men are. You may try to change this artificially, but basically it cannot be changed. A woman becomes pregnant, but a man does not. How can this be changed?

Hayagriva dasa: Well, from this he concludes that women, being dominated by love, are morally superior to men. He envisioned woman as “the spontaneous priestess of humanity. she personifies in the purest form the principle of love upon which the unity of our nature depends.”

Srila Prabhupada: This is Conte’s imagination. When a woman is misguided, she becomes dangerous, and there is no question of love. According to the Vedic conception, women and children are on the same level, and they should both be protected by men. In childhood, a woman is protected by her father, in youth by her husband, and in old age by her grown sons. Women should never be given independence, but they should be given protection. In this way, their natural love for father, husband, and children will develop very smoothly. thus the relationship between women and men should be established very happily so that both can execute their real function: cooperative spiritual life. The woman should look after the comfort of the man, and the man, who works hard, should also look after her comfort. then both will be satisfied, and their spiritual lives will progress. A man is meant to work hard, and a woman is meant to give comfort and love in the home. In this way, man and woman can combine so that both can progress in spiritual life.

Hayagriva dasa: Comte felt that love of God is inconsistent with love for our fellow men, and that it has always interfeered with man’s love of woman. He writes: “It was impiety for the knight to love his lady better than his God; and thus the best feelings of man’s nature were repressed by his religious faith. Women, therefore, are not really interested in perpetuatiing the old system [of religion]; and the very instincts by which their nature is characterized will soon incline them to abandon it.”

Srila Prabhupada: Generally, women are interested in a comfortable home life. That is their nature. They are not spiritually very advanced or interested, but if a man has spiritual interests, and the woman helps the man––either as a mother, wife, or daughter––both can make spiritual progress. However, the woman must remain subordinate, and the man must make spiritual progress. Because the woman helps the man, she shares his spiritual benefits.

Hayagriva dasa: Comte envisioned women primarily as companions of men. He writes: “The first aspect then, under which Positivism considers woman, is simply as the companion of man, irrespective of her maternal duties… For perfect friendship, difference of sex is essential, as excluding the possibility of rivalry.”

Srila Prabhupada: According to the bodily demands, there are sexual necessities. Women should not only give sex pleasure to their husbands, but should also prepare good food. After coming home from a day of hard work, the man should be supplied good food, comfort, and sex. Then the home becomes very happy, and both husband and wife are satisfied. Then they can improve their real business, which is spiritual understanding. Human life is meant for progressing spiritually, and people must first of all know that the spirit soul is at the basis even of material life. The body is built upon the soul. Although women are generally less intelligent, this understanding is required of both men and women. With the help of the husband, a woman can become more intelligent. In Vedic history, we have the example of Kapila-deva giving spiritual instructions to his mother Devahuti. Whether the woman is a daughter, wife, or mother, if she remains subordinate, she can receive knowledge from either her father, husband, or son. In the Puranas, there is the example of Lord Siva answering the spiritual questions of Parvati. Women supply the comforts of the tongue, belly, and genitals, and, remianing submissive, they are instructed in spiritual life. Thus there is cooperative advancement.

Hayagriva dasa: Comte felt that at least in the beginning stages of Positivism, women should take the place of God as an object of man’s affection and love. He writes: “From childhood, each of us will be taught to regard women’s sex as the principal source of human happiness and improvement, whether in public life or in private… In a word, man will kneel to women, and to women alone… She will be regarded by man as the most perfect personification of humanity… the worship of women, when it has assumed a more systematic shape, will be valued for its own sake as a new instrument of happiness and moral growth… The worship of women satisfies this condiiton, and is so far of greater ifficacy, than the worship of God.”

Srila Prabhupada: It is the duty of men to protect women and maintain them comfortably, not worship them. It is not a very good proposal to worship a woman as God. Then man will be henpecked. worship is reserved for God only, and is not meant for others. However, cooperation between men and women for the sake of worshipping God is desirable. It is not that a man or a woman should be worshipped as God. sometimes, affection is so strong that a person may see another person as God, but that is sentimentalism. God is different from men and women, who are but living entities meant to worship God. A woman should always be engaged in assisting a man in every respect in his religious, social, and family life. That is the real benefit of conjugal love.

Hayagriva dasa: Comte writes that “the whole effect of Positivist worship will be to make men feel clearly how far superior in every respect is the synthesis founded on the love of humanity to that founded on the love of God.”

Srila Prabhupada: Love of humanity means raising humanity to the point where people can understand the real goal of life. We do not serve humanity by keeping people in darkness. We must enlighten others with knowlede, and ultimate knowledge means understanding God, our relationship with God, and the activities of that relationship. That is real humanitarian work. Manking must be informed of the nature of the body and the soul and the ncssities and goal of the soul. In this way, we can really serve humanity. We do not serve it by encouraging the animal propensities.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Mill was particularly interested in the role of authority. In Utility of Religion, he writes, “Consider the enormous influence of authority on the human mind… Authority is the evidence on which the mass of mankind believe everything which they are said to know except facts of which their own senses have taken cognizance. It is the evidence on which even the wisest receive all those truths of science, or facts in history or in life, of which they have not personally examined the proofs… ”

Srila Prabhupada: You can neither defy nor deny real authority. We are presenting our Krsna consciousness movement on this principle. We should carry out the orders of the authority, and Krsna, or god, is the Supreme Authority. Whatever he says must b accepted without interpretation. In this way, everyone can be happy. Those who are sane do not hesitate to accept God’s authority, and they become happy abiding by His orders. Those who exactly follow the instructions of the Supreme Authority are also authorities. The spiritual master is the authoritative servant, and God is the authoritative master. If we follow the instructions of the authoritative servant, we in turn become authoritative servants of the spiritual master.

[ethos 0]

Syamasundara dasa: Mill claimed that the world, or nature, can be improved by man’s efforts, but that perfection is not possible.

Srila Prabhupada: In one sense, that is correct. This world is so made that although you make it perfect today, tomorrow it will deteriorate. Nonetheless, the world can be improved by this Krsna consciousness. You can better the world by bringing people to Krsna consciousness and delivering the message of Krsna to whomever you meet. This is the best social activity you can perform.

Syamasundara dasa: The goal of the utilitarians was more specifically to obtain whatever the people desire or require.

Srila Prabhupada: The people desire happiness. The utilitarians try to give people artificial happiness, happiness separate from Krsna, but we are trying to give direct happiness, happiness that is connected with Krsna. If we purify our existence, we can attain spiritual, eternal happiness and bliss. Everyone is working hard for happiness, but how can happiness be attained in a diseased condition? The material disease is an impediment to happiness. The disease has to be cured.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Mill certainly did not see God as the cause of evil. In fact, he considered God at war against it. Man’s role is to help God end this war. He writes: “If Providence is omnipotent, Providence intends whatever happens, and the fact of its happening proves that Providence intended it. If so, everything which a human being can do is predestined by providence and is a fulfillment of its designs. But if, as is the more religious theory, Providence intends not all which happens, but only what is good, then indeed man has it in his power, by his voluntary actions, to aid the intentions of Providence… ”

Srila Prabhupada: Providence desires only the good. The living entity is in the material world due to the improper utilization of his will. Even though he wants to enjoy this material world, God is so kind that He gives him facilities and directions. When a child wants to play in a certain way, he is guided by some nurse or servant hired by the parents. Our position is something like that. We have given up the company of God to come to this materialo world to enjoy ourselves. So God has allowed us to come here, saying, “All right, enjoy this experience, and when you understand that this material enjoyment is ultimately frustrating, you can come back.“ Thus the Supreme Lord is guiding the enjoyment of all living beings, especially human beings, so that they may again return home, back to Godhead. nature is the agent acting under the instructions of God. If the living entity is overly addicted to misuse his freedom, he is punished. This punishment is a consequence of the living entity’s desire. God does not want a human being to become a pig, but when one develops such a mentality be eating anything and everything, God gives the facility by providing the body of a hog. God is situated in everyone’s heart, and is noting the desires of the living entity from within. According to one’s desires, God orders material nature to provide a particular body.

Hayagriva dasa: Mill further writes: “Limited as, on this showing, the divine power must be by inscrutable but insumountable obstacles, who knows what man could have been created without desires which never are to be, and even which never ought to be, fulfilled?” Thus MIll concludes that the existence of evil, or pain and death, excludes the existence of an omnipotent God. He sees man in a position to “aid the intentions of Providence” by surmounting his evil instincts. God is not infinite in His power, because if He were, there would be no evil.

Srila Prabhupada: Evil is undoubtedly created by God, but this was necessary due to the human being’s misuse of his free will. God gives man good directions, but when man is disobedient, evil is naturally there to punish him. Evil is not desired by God, yet it is created because it is necessary. Although a government constructs prisons, it prefers to construct universities so that people can attain an education and become highly enlightened. Because some people misuse their independence, prisons are necessary. We suffer due to our evil activities. Thus God, being supreme, punishes us. When we are under the protection of God, nothing is evil; everything is good. God does not create evil, but man’s evil activities provoke God to create an evil situation.

Hayagriva dasa: In the Judeo-Christian tradition, God is at war with Satan. In Vedic literatures, there are also wars between the demigods and the demons, as well as Krsna and the demons, but theese wars do not seem to be taken as serious confrontations between God and His enemies. Isn’t Krsna’s mood always playful?

Srila Prabhupada: Since Krsna is all-powerful, when He is fighting with demons, He is actually playing. This fighting does not affect His energy. It is like a father fighting with his small child. One slap is sufficient. Krsna gives the demons a chance to play by fighting Him, but one strong slap is sufficient. There is no question of fighting with God. He is omnipotent. However, when a living entity is disobedient and harasses the devotees, God kills him. Paritranaya sadhunam vinasaya ca duskrtam (Bg. 4.8). When Krsna descends on this earth, He chastises the demons and protects His devotees. Whenever there is a fight between the demons and the demigods, God takes the side of the demigods.

Hayagriva dasa: Mill saw it more like an actual struggle between God and Satan, or evil.

Srila Prabhupada: There is struggle because the demons are always transgressing God’s rules. A demon is one who rejects God’s rules, and a demigod is one who accepts them. That is the main difference, as stated in the sastras.

Hayagriva dasa: But Mill pictures God Himself as struggling hard in the fight to conquer the demons.

Srila Prabhupada: God has no reason to struggle. According to the Vedas, He is so powerful that He has nothing to do. Just as a king may have many servants, ministers, and soldiers to carry out his desires, Krsna has many energies that act according to His order. Krsna Himself has nothing to do. he is playing His flute and enjoying Himself. That is ananda. Although He is enjoying Himself, the universe is going on in accordance with his orders, through the agencies of His multi-energies. There is no question of God struggling. He doesn’t even have to fight. His various agents can easily enough kill all the evil elements in the world.

Syamasundara dasa: Mill believed that God is good, but that He is involved in a world not of His own making.

Srila Prabhupada: Is God to be judged by Mr. Mill? God is good, but not as good as Mr. Mill thinks He ought to be? Is this his opinion of God? Is God good in all conditions? Or is God only good when Mr. Mill considers Him good? What is God’s position.

Syamasundara dasa: Mill says that the presence of evil indicates that if God were everything, He would not be completely good.

Srila Prabhupada: Therefore God has to depend on the opinion of Mr. Mill. Is it that Mr. Mill does not approve of all God’s activities?

Syamasundara dasa: He maintains that God is good, but that He is limited in His power. If His power were absolute, everything would be good.

Srila Prabhupada: How nonsensical! Everything is good! That is our philosophy. When God kills a demon, immediately flowers are showered from the sky. Whatever God does is good. Krsna danced with other men’s wives in the dead of night, and this activity is worshipped as rasa-lila. However, if an ordinary man does this, he is immediately condemned as a debauchee. In all corcumstances, God is good and worshipable. It is not that we subject God to our judgement, saying, “Oh yes, You are good, but not so good.” Fools think, “I am better than God. I can create my own God.” God creates us; we cannot create God. Unfortunately, Mill did not know what is evil and what is good. He should have known that whatever is created by God is good, even if it appears to be evil to us. We may think that such and such is evil, but actually it is good. If we do not know how it is good, that is our fault. God cannot be placed under our judgement. In all circumstances, God is good.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Concerning morality, Mill writes: “Belief , then, in the supernatural, great as are the services which it rendered in the early stages of human development, cannot be considered to be any longer required either for enabling us to know what is right and wrong in social morality, or for supplying us with motives to do right nad to abstain from wrong.”

Srila Prabhupada: Morality means abiding by the orders of God. That is real morality. Other moralities are manufactured, and they differ in different countries. Religion and real morality, however, function according to the same principle. Religion means carrying out the orders of God, and morality means following those principles whereby we can fulfill the deesires of god. Before the Battle of Kuruksetra, Arjuna considered killing to be immoral, but when he understood from the instructins of Krsna that the fight was necessary, he decided to carry out his duty as a køatriya. so this is morality. Ultimately, morality means carrying out the desires of God.

Syamasundara dasa: For Mill, there are two moral sanctions of conduct. One is internal, which is our conscience and sense of duty.

Srila Prabhupada: What does he mean by conscience. It is our duty to receive instructions from higher personalities. If we do not, how can we know our duty?

Syamasundara dasa: Mill felt that our duty is that which produces the most good for the most people.

Srila Prabhupada: That is all so vague. What if everyone wants to take drugs? Is it our duty to help them? How can a rascal understand what his duty is? One has to be trained to know.

Syamasundara dasa: Mill would say that there is a rational or guiding principle for action, and this is the golden rule of the Christians: “Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.”

Srila Prabhupada: This means that you have to approach Christ. You cannot manufacture golden rules yourself. You have to abide by the orders of Christ, and that means approaching a superior authority.

Syamasundara dasa: The second sanction of moral conduct is external: the fear of displeasing other men or God. We hope to win favor through acting morally.

Srila Prabhupada: This also means accepting authority. Therefore the Vedas tell us that if we want to be really learned, we must approach a guru. Did John Stuart Mill have a guru?

Syamasundara dasa: his father, James Mill, was also a great philosopher.

Srila Prabhupada: In any case, we must accept some authority, be it Christ or K§øëa. Our duty lies in following the orders of the higher authority. Of course, we accept Krsna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as our authority.

[ethos 0]

Hayagriva dasa: Mill was such a staunch humanist that he wrote: “I will call no being good who is not what I mean when I apply that epithet to my fellow creatures, and if such a being can sentence me to hell for not so calling him, to hell I will go.”

Srila Prabhupada: God is always good, and if one does not know the goodness of God, he is imperfect. According to all Vedic literatures, God is always good and always great. What does Mill consider to be a good man?

Hayagriva dasa: One who works for what he calls “the greatest happiness principle,” that is, the greatest happiness for everyone on earth.

Srila Prabhupada: Is there any man who can do good will for all?

Hayagriva dasa: Christ said that no man is good, that there is only one good, and that is God.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, that is a fact. You may think that this man is good, but he is limited in his power. He may still think in terms of his nation or society. Only a pure devotee of Krsna can be good because he abides by the order of the Supreme Good. Even if one has the desire to be a good man, it is not possible independent of God. In any case, these are all mental concoctions: good and bad. One who is not God conscious is necessarily bad, and one who is God conscious is good. This should be the only criterion.

Syamasundara dasa: But what of Mill’s contention that the good gives the greatest pleasure to the greatest number of people?

Srila Prabhupada: And what if the people are fools and rascals? The greatest number of people may say that cigarettes are very nice, but dows this mean that they are desirable?

Syamasundara dasa: Mill makes a distinction between the quality and the quantity of pleasure. Certain pleasures are superior to others.

Srila Prabhupada: When you have quality, the quantity naturally decreases. For instance, ordinary people take pleasure in eating, sleeping, mating, drinking, smoking, and so on. the pleausre of Krsna consciousness is a transcendental pleasure, but the people who take to it are very few. Generally, since conditioned souls are fools, the pleasure that is most popular is the one followed by the greatest number of fools. According to our Vedic philosophy, man is born a fool, but he can be made intelligent through education and culture.

Syamasundara dasa: Mill advocated utilizing those principles that can give the pleasure of highest quality to the maximum people. He also wrote: “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied. It is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.”

Srila Prabhupada: But how often will you find a Socrates? You cannot find Socrates loitering on every street. There will only be one in millions. There is no question of the maximum number of people. Men of Socrates’s caliber are a minimum. In Bhagavad-gita, Krsna says:

 

“Out of many thousands among men, one may endeavor for perfection, and of those who have achieved perfection, hardly one knows Me in truth.” (Bg. 7.3)

 

This is not a question of quantity, but of quality.

Syamasundara dasa: Mill felt that the highest quality of pleasure might also be enjoyed by a larger number. All men should be trained to find pleasure according to this higher standard.

Srila Prabhupada: This means that the maximum pleasure should be introduced to the maximum number of people. Unfortunately, it is not accepted by the greatest number but by a few only. This Krsna consciousness movement, for instance, cannot be understood by the masses. Only a few who are fortunate can understand. There may be millions of stars in the sky, but there is only one moon, and that is sufficient to drive away the darkness. It is not possible to have many moons, although there may be many glowworms.

Syamasundara dasa: Mill was trying to ascertain that standard of pleasure which is most desirable.

Srila Prabhupada: That he does not know. That he has to learn from the Vedas. Ordinary men take sex to be the highest pleasure, and the entire material world is existing because of sex, but how long does this sex pleasure last? A few minutes only. a man who is wise does not want pleasure that lasts only a few minutes but pleasure that continues perpetually. Nitya means “eternal,” and ananda means “bliss.” The Vedas state that those who are intelligent are not interested in transient pleasure but in eternal pleasure. They know their consittutional position; they know they are not the body. The pleasures of the body are transient and are sought by rascals. If one identifies with the body, he naturally seeks bodily pleasure. One who knows that he is not the body but eternal spirit soul seeks eternal spiritual pleasure.

Syamasundara dasa: Mill believed that a small amount of a higher type of pleasure is superior to a greater amount of a lower type.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, that is our philosophy. In Bhagavad-gita it is said:

 

“In this endeavor there is no loss or diminution, and a little advancement on this path can protect one from the most dangerous type of fear.” (Bg. 2.40)

 

Even if one falls down from Krsna consciousness, he still gains from what little he has experienced. On the other hand, if one works according to the varnasrama dharma but does not take to devotional service. all his labors go in vain. There are many students who come to Krsna consciousness for a few days and then go away, but they return again because the quality is so great. Hare Krsna is so potent. Save for Krsna consciousness, everything is being dissipated by time, by the sun’s progress through the sky. Everything in this world is transient, but because we are eternal spirit souls, we should accept only that which has permanent value. It is foolishness to be satisfid with anything else.

Syamasundara dasa: Mill would have said that the only standard we have for understanding what is desirable is the fact the people desire it.

Srila Prabhupada: We should desire Krsna, but people do not know about Krsna. People are thinking, “I love my country,” or “I love my body.” What is this love? Because we are spirit soul and are within the body, we say, “I love.”

Syamasundara dasa: But Mill reasons that if something is desired, it is desirable per se.

Srila Prabhupada: Living entities desire many things. A hog desires stool, but is that desirable? the men on the Bowery are interested only in drinking. Is that very desirable? Caitanya Mah¢prabhu desires Krsna, and that is a different type of desire. That should be the real standard for desire. We should know what the greatest personalities, the mahajanas, are desiring, and we should make that our standard. We may desire something that is harmful for us, and not desire the good. In Bhagavad-gita, Krsna wanted Arjuna to fight, but this wa not Arjuna’s desire. Arjuna initially wanted to leave the battlefield, but he changed his mind because Krsna wanted him to fight. The point is that we should desire what is desired by the great personalitites, not by ourselves. After all, what are we? We should always consider ourselves to be fools.