Plato and Krishna on Seeds and Ideas
A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
Chapters
Platonic archetypes and spiritual reality
This is the additional notations on Plato. For Plato, the spiritual world is not a mental conception.
For Plato, truth is the same as the ultimate reality, the ideal or the highest good, and it is from this that all manifestations... Okay, carry on. Start from the beginning? No. Carry on. Alright.
Plato uses the word "idea" in order to denote a subject's primordial existence or maybe its archetype. I think that Krishna uses the word bījam, bījam — seed. "I am the seed of all existence." Oh yes. Mm-hmm.
For instance, bījaṁ sarva-bhūtānām. Mm-hmm. And in Bhagavad-gītā, it is said, mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate, says that even the spiritual world and material world, everything is managed from the...
differences, and in the material world everything is created and maintained, then annihilated; in the spiritual world that is not the case. Material world is body and spiritual world is soul.
The body is created, maintained, and annihilated. The soul is not. After the destruction of the body, the soul is not destroyed. What happens to him? He takes another one. And when one is perfect, he goes directly to Krishna.
Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti. So we can make this life, because we are preparing for the next life. So why not take advantage of going back to home, back to God? This is our mission. You have to prepare yourself.
I am not going to the higher planets? Yānti deva-vratā devān pitṝn yānti pitṛ-vratāḥ. You can go to the higher planetary system, you can go lower, and you can go to God.
So therefore, if you have to change this body and go elsewhere, why not go to God? That is intelligence. Now, what is advantageous? If you go to God, then you haven't got to change anymore this body.
That is eternal, blissful. Therefore, our intelligence should be to at last help to go back to home. That is intelligence. Now, you said to Śyāmasundara that water existed before our mental conception of H2O.
We conceive of H2O. We think of—well, we begin to analyze water and we say, well, it's two parts hydrogen, one part oxygen. But before we even began to think of this, water existed.
Therefore, H2O is not the permanent essence or the primordial existence of water. But what Plato is saying is that everything that exists has its seed or essence or idea. The seed is originally with Krishna. Yes.
The seed is then... Krishna says, "bījam māṁ... I am the seed." Bījaṁ māṁ sarva-bhūtānām. It is manifest, the original cause. That is the... the bīja is the unmanifest, is the unmanifest essence of an object.
Before manifestation, it is a seed. But within that seed, the whole tree is there. Plato would call that the idea or the archetype. Fact. Not idea, fact. If you sow a seed of a rose flower, it will come as a rose tree.
If you sow a seed of a mango tree, it will come as a mango tree. So it is not idea. It is fact. Simply it is in a nascent stage. But it is a fact. You cannot make your idea. Now, here it is a seed. Let it be a mango tree.
It will not make it. If it is a rose tree, it will come a rose tree. So your idea has no value. Seed means the nascent state. The na... the nascent, what is it called? Nascent. Nascent. Yes. Nascent, what is nascent? Nas...
Nascent. What is it, fellow? N-E-S-C-E-N-T. To begin or not yet developed. Manifest, yes.
Divine creation and the supreme person
Plato states that the material world is restricted to limitations of time and space, whereas the spiritual world transcends time and space. He also states that time began with the creation of the material world.
And how does this comply with the Vedic statement that time is eternal? Yes, time is eternal. The past, present, the three features of time, it is relative. What is your past or your future?
That is not the past, future of Brahmā. Brahmā lives for millions of years. So within millions of years, I had many past, present and future. You see, past, present and future is relative, according to the person.
But the time is eternal. That is the point. It is clear. The past, present, future is relative according to the body. Otherwise, time is eternal. Time has no past, present.
That means like time is actually like presence and no present. It is always present. Just like a small germ. He lives for a few minutes. So his past, present, future is within a few minutes.
While I am living, so I'm not within his past, present, and future. Therefore, past, present, future is relative. My past, present, future is different from the past, present, future of a small germ. That is the idea.
Now concerning the creation, Plato says that material nature or prakṛti has always existed in a chaotic state, but that God takes prakṛti and fashions it into form in order to create the universe.
So in this sense, God is the handworker or the master designer. He, God, is the creator of forms from pre-existent matter. And yet He does not create directly. It's stated. No.
Just like I have created a machine to manufacture something, and I set it in motion, and the products are coming out of it. Products are coming. How do you... I have to set up the machine.
It's like in a press; the machine has to be set up. And automatically you see the magazines are coming all complete. The printing, the binding, everything complete; you simply take it.
There are many machines like that, that you set up the machine and simply stand and see how from the lower stage it is coming to the finishing stage.
So bījāhaṁ sarva-bhūtānām: He has created such a seed that you sow the seed, and it grows into a tree. This is God's machine. He has created the seed only. Now the seed of the universe is coming from Him.
Yasyaika-niśvasita-kālam athāvalambya: He is breathing. And thousands and millions of seeds of universes are coming, and they are becoming manifested. Same way, seed. And when He is inhaling, everything is in it.
So this manifestation and non-manifestation depend on His breathing process. When He is exhaling, He sees the manifestation. When He's inhaling, everything is finished.
This is the cause of creation and annihilation: it is His breathing. So He is breathing always. But the process of creation and annihilation is going on. But if you think Krishna is breathing like me, then it is finished.
Your knowledge is finished. Because I'm speaking to these rascals like a human being, they're thinking me as one of them. This is mūḍha. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā. I try to think, "Oh, He's a person like me.
He's born in Mathurā, and they say He becomes God." Even Brahmā was bewildered. And this boy, this cowherd boy, accepted as... "Why? Let me test." Vṛndāvana-līlā. I mean, big, big demigods, they also be learned.
So Krishna answered them. Brahmā stolen all his calves and cows and friends. And when he came to see what he's doing, he said, he has expanded himself. He surprised.
And I have actually taken his calves and cows. They're sleeping under my spell. Then he answered, yes, he is God. Then he is praying there in the picture.
Plato states that every object in the universe is made with some purpose, and its ideal goal is to move toward the ideal in which its archetype or essence resides.
So according to the Vedic version, Krishna is the all-attractive object of the universe. Therefore, all things must be moving toward him.
How is it the jīva apparently turns from Krishna to participate in the world of birth and death? That is māyā. That is my illusion.
He should not have deviated, but out of the influence of māyā, he's doing that and he's suffering. That's what Krishna said, sarva-dharmān parityajya, you stop this plan making.
You simply surrender to me and do what I say, then you are happy. Then it's practical. Here is a very famous quotation from Plato.
Qualitative differences between soul and god
He says God put intelligence in the soul and the soul in the body that he, that is God, might be the creator of a work which was by nature best. We say that the living entity is part and parcel of God.
Mamaivāṁśo jīva-loke. Under the circumstances, he has got almost all the qualities of God, but partial. Because God is great. And we are minute.
So even though we have got all the qualities of God, not all certain percentages, say seventy-eight percent, in minute quantity. It's like God has creative power. We as God also have creative power.
We have created the 747 flying machine. Alright, get credit for that, but you cannot create a flying ball like the sun floating in the sky. That
is the difference between God and me. You can take credit that you are keeping suspended in the air a big machine, 747, but it is not in your power that you can float millions and millions of planets floating in the air.
That is not. Therefore God is great and I am small. That is real Krishna consciousness. And as soon as he says, "I am as good or as great as God," then he's a rascal. That is māyā. He's in māyā. There is one man in India.
He is showing some jugglery. He makes like this and creates some gold. A little gold. But foolish people, they claim, "Oh, he is God."
But we are not in māyā, but we know that he may create a small piece of gold, but God has created many millions of gold mines. So if creation of gold is the standard of becoming God, then we should accept who is God?
Who has created the mines, not only one mine. In this planet there are hundreds and thousands of gold mines. And there are so many planets.
There is... I was reading this, Trikūṭa, Trikūṭa mountain, 8,000 miles high, 8,000 miles wide and long. And it has got three big, big peaks. One is of iron, one is of silver, and one is of gold.
So the mountain, 8,000 miles high, so peak gold, silver. So who can manufacture such gold? You cannot manufacture gold. That is not possible. Even so-called manufacturing, they cannot manufacture the peak of gold. No.
It tarnishes. It tarnishes in time. It doesn't remain. One king, by the grace of Lord Śiva, he got information in the Himalayas of some spots of gold. So he used to manufacture gold utensils and a jug. Everything is gold.
And the brāhmaṇas are given gold plates and gold. And those brāhmaṇas are not greedy. So they thought, "Who carries this weight? Throw it." It is a bother.
The king thought that "I am giving very valuable contribution, charity." But with this, their thought was: "Then what is this nonsense?" And they have to carry it. Carry it. So they are stacked up.
So when Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira finished with all the treasury on account of the war, and he wanted to perform yajña, he asked Arjuna, he would bring some money somewhere. So Arjuna is a little perplexed.
Kṛṣṇa gave him this information. He put a stack of gold. He then says he can bring. So when he brought it, his name was Dhanañjaya, "conquering wealth." There are so many gold peaks, gold mines. Who cares for that?
Those who are materialistic persons, they'll give some value. And those who are Kṛṣṇa conscious, they see, "What I have to do?" I required some money for making propagation. Otherwise, what is the use of a stack of gold?
Transmigration and evolution of consciousness
He believes that at death there is an end of the sensory life of the individual, his thoughts, his perceptions, and experiences. And the individual then returns to the ideal world from which he came.
Then he believed in vitality. This loss of senses, that is, we also have that; there are three stages: jāgrati, awakening, and sleeping, and deep sleeping. So deep sleeping means unconsciousness.
So when a man dies from the waking state, he enters into the dreaming state and then enters into the deep sleeping state.
So, transmigration of the soul means it leaves this gross body, and the subtle body, manas, intelligence, it carries him to another body. And another body, unless the body is prepared properly, he lives in deep sleep.
And when the body is prepared at seven months for human beings, then he comes to consciousness. He feels, when I—when I put into this backtrack stages, he feels, if he's pious, he feels very uncomfortable.
He prays to God: "This end had this time. Kindly rescue me from this awkward position. Now this time I shall become a devotee." This is what the soul is in baddha. But he stays, he enters into different stages of life.
Then when he comes out, the same different stages of body continues in childhood; he is some, uh, something different from his boyhood, by something different from his youthful. And he is there.
But he's passing through the—that is called evolution. So when it comes to the perfect stage of Krishna consciousness, then its life is successful.
It's like a flower in the bud state, in the fructified state, in the blooming state, and it's fully blown, it looks very nice, beautiful.
Similarly, when by gradual development, when you come to the stage of Krishna consciousness, then whole beauty... He also stressed the process of remembering. It's called the—his Plato's Doctrine of Recollection.
And, uh, he says, you can ask a boy who may be ignorant of a subject, you can elicit answers from him. And
this answers—he may give you the right answers, and this would suggest that he acquired this knowledge in a previous existence. Yes. Therefore, we find a student in school is very intelligent and less intelligent.
Otherwise, both of them of the same age, why one is more intelligent, he grabs the matter very quickly, while the other is not so intelligent. This is everything that pūrva-janma, pūrva-janma.
Mahaj-janma-vidyā pūrva-janma mahaj-janma-dhanaṁ agre dhāvati. They—two things, especially knowledge, education, and money.
They are earned in the previous, but not that all of a sudden one has become rich, all of a sudden one has become very learned. No, it is continuous.
So if one man is extraordinarily learned, it is to be understood that it is a result of his previous culture. Similarly, if one man is extraordinarily rich, it is to be understood, it is due to his past activities.
Janmaiśvarya-śruta-śrī, these four things are achieved on account of previous past activities. Good birth, good opulence, high job, and good education and good beauty. These are the results of pious good activities.
So you can see practically in your country, between the black and white, the white men are more advanced in everything. And the black man, although he has got the same facilities, they are in inferior position. Why?
That is pūrva-janma-kṛtam. That is the proof of past life. But so far we are concerned, we are not concerned about one black man or white man. Both of them are in the clutches of māyā.
We want to educate all of them to Krishna consciousness. And they have got equal opportunity as stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: kirāta-hūṇāndhra-pulinda-pulkaśā ābhīra-śumbhā yavanāḥ khasādayaḥ.
Never mind what is his body. If he is willing, we can train him to Krishna consciousness. That is the platform of the soul. That we can do. Now, for Plato, perfect happiness is in attempting to become godlike.
Perfect happiness is in attempting to become godlike. Godlike? Godlike. Godly. Yes. In so far as man resembles God, he is ethical. Evil forces within man combat his efforts to attain this ultimate goal.
Plato is not a determinist. He emphasized freedom of the will and insisted that evil acts are due to man's failure to live up to his responsibility. They do not come from God, who is all good. Everything comes from God.
But we have to make our choice. This I give example: that the university comes from the government and the prison house also comes from the government.
But the prison house is meant for the criminals and university is meant for the highly learned scholar. The government spends money in both the departments to maintain it.
Therefore, so far government's recognition is concerned, it has to be maintained. But it is we who make our selection, whether to go to the prison house or go to the university.
That is, that little independence is there in every human being. We have to make our choice.
Social duties and purifying the senses
He says that perfection within the world of the senses can never be attained. Yes. And Krishna says something like that. Um, Krishna said... imperfections, there will always be imperfections, like smoke and fire, something.
Yes. Uh, that, uh, he, he says that everything has got some defect, material. Even the fire, so powerful, so fire has also some defect, this smoke.
So apart from that imperfection, if we, uh, execute our prescribed duties exactly in the way as it is enjoined in the śāstra, even if there is some defect, still we can get perfection.
Just like Krishna consciousness movement is giving chance to everyone to become perfect and by his own work. It doesn't matter: brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya.
Own work means according to Vedic civilization: brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya, śūdra. Brāhmaṇa is giving knowledge. Kṣatriya is giving protection. Vaiśya is giving food. And śūdra as general help to everyone.
So if the whole thing is done under the direction of the brāhmaṇa, uh, kṣatriya executes the orders of the brāhmaṇa, and the vaiśya supplies food because food is required, nourishment is required, then everything's going.
And let's see. Turn it over. There are four tracks or two tracks? Four tracks. This is the last term.
This is, uh, later in the, in the Republic, in the allegory of the cave we mentioned before, Socrates says, "In the world of knowledge the last thing to be perceived and only with great difficulty is the essential form of goodness.
Once it is perceived, the conclusion must follow that for all things, this is the cause of whatever is right and good.
In the visible world, it gives birth to light and to the Lord of light, while it is itself sovereign in the intelligible world, and the parent of the intelligible world, and the parent of intelligence and truth.
Without having had a vision of this form, he uses capital F form, no one can act with wisdom, either in his own life or in matters of state. Now here he, Socrates, mentions form, but he doesn't mention personality.
He mentions the form of goodness, but through intellection or buddhi, how is it possible to perceive the form of God or the form of goodness. What, what could he possibly mean?
As soon as there is a manifestation, there is form. Krishna is giving manifestation. He is always saying I, you, like that. That is upāsanā. He says, "Oh, do you," and he says instead, "I," that
Krishna, Arjuna is also formed, and Krishna is also formed. And Krishna also says that both you, me, and all these living entities, kings and soldiers were assembled here, they existed in the past.
They're existing now and they will continue to exist. So you can understand that in the present I am in form. So I existed in the past in form and I shall continue to exist in the future as form, to where this form less.
From my present position, I can understand my past and future. So Krishna says that we existed in the past. So we are existing now and we shall continue. We never say that in the past we are formless, now we have a form.
This is not stated there. Rather, he condemns that avijānanti mām mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam: "In the past I was formless, impersonal, and now I am a person." That is my abuddhi thought.
Then when God takes the form, he takes the form of māyā. So they have been condemned as abuddhaya, no intelligence, about God, was formerly formless. Now He's talking in form, that means He has accepted the body of māyā.
This is called māyā.
Concerning education, he says we must conclude that education is not what it is said to be by some who profess to put knowledge into a soul which does not possess it, as if they can put sight into blind eyes.
On the contrary, our own account signifies that the soul of every man does possess the power of learning the truth and the organ to see it with, and that just as one might have to turn the whole body around in order that the eye should see light instead of darkness, so the entire soul must be turned away from this changing world until its eye can bear to contemplate reality and that supreme splendor which we have called good.
Hence, there may well be an art whose aim would be to effect this very thing, the conversion of the soul in the readiest way, not to put the power of sight into the soul's eye, which already has it, but to ensure that instead of looking in the wrong direction, it is turned the way it ought to be.
At least he gives the concept as well, that he says, "Yes." That art, he says. It is an art that our aim of life, by these sensually affected senses... At the present moment we are sensually affected.
I want to eat something which is very palatable, I eat it. I do not care whether this palatable eating will mislead me or lead me to the proper way. Therefore, we are making this propaganda.
Your eating process is not stopped. You eat. But don't eat meat, you eat Kṛṣṇa-prasāda. So if we agree to this process, then gradually we become purified. By Kṛṣṇa consciousness, our aim, objective is attained.
This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Don't stop eating. No sensual activities are stopped. The eyes, in the material way, the eyes want to see very beautiful objects. We say, "Yes, you see the beautiful Kṛṣṇa."
And you taste Kṛṣṇa-prasādam. Everything is there. Simply we purify. Paraṁ dṛṣṭvā nivartate: if this process is accepted, then when he sees real beauty, real food, real, then he becomes satisfied.
Service and family life in devotion
That is what... Well, one last point is that, um, neither Socrates, Plato, or Aristotle ever mentioned service to God. Rather, they always speak of contemplation of God's reality or the supreme splendor.
It's always contemplation, meditation. Is this typical of the jñānī, or... there's no mention of the bhakti process of knowing God? They are partially helpful to know God as He is.
But when he actually comes to know God, he sees that He is the great and the small. So the business of the small is to serve the great. That is nature's way.
We practically see in our daily life: because you are small, you are going to serve a big factory. Otherwise you have no other way. So everyone is serving. But when he realizes that "I am serving, I'm not the master."
That is the position actual. Ask anybody in this world whether he is master or serving. And the conclusion will be that he is serving. His natural position is to serve.
So if one hasn't got a family to serve, he keeps a dozen of dogs to serve. That is going on.
And in the, especially the Western countries, we see at the old age when he has no children, so he gives a dog or two or three and pets to serve. So the serving position is already there.
And when the servant wants to become master, there is māyā. This word, māyā, means actually his serving and his thinking that he is master. That is māyā. Māyā means what is not fact.
So by meditation, when it actually becomes realized, so he will understand that, "Oh, I am servant. So I am serving māyā, let me serve Kṛṣṇa."
So his guide, spiritual master, engages him from the very beginning to serve God, then he becomes quickly perfect. Because he is a servant and he has to serve Krishna. That is his perfection.
He's falsely thinking that he is master; that is māyā. Actually, they are simply serving. Just like President Nixon. He thought himself, "I'm the master of America." But actually he's not. The master is the public.
As soon as the public wanted him to come down, immediately he had to do that.
So if the president of a big state is under the false impression that others are serving him, he's thinking he's the master, then what to speak about others? Everyone is serving, but he's thinking he's the master.
So perfect knowledge is that when he comes to the platform that God is the supreme master, He is great, and we are servants, that is perfection. In his politics, Plato changed his mind later in life.
In the beginning, he believed that in an ideal state, the leaders should possess nothing of their own, neither property nor family.
He felt that they must live together in a community where wives and children are held in common to guard against corruption, bribery, and nepotism in government.
He felt that the elite philosophers should mate with women of high qualities in order to produce the best children for positions of responsibility.
Now, how does this view of common wives and children correspond to the Vedic view? Yes, "putrārthe kriyate bhāryā". A man should accept a wife for a putra, for a son. Wife, son. And "putra piṇḍa-prayojanam".
A putra should be responsible for offering piṇḍa. So that after death, even by mistake or some other reason, I'm in a wrong position, by the piṇḍa that I get. This is the idea.
So marriage is for having a good son, that's a fact. Who will deliver me, even if I am in hell, that the śrāddha ceremony is there. Even if the father is in hell, by the śrāddha ceremony he will be delivered.
This is the idea. Unless one has got a son, nobody is going to offer him the oblation. One may be very benevolent, but it's not expected; but it is the duty of the son. As it is said, putra: pu
means there is a hell, pun. The hell name is Pun-nāma. So pu and tra... tra means one who delivers.
If by chance I am put into Pun-nāma-naraka, trāyate — one who delivers me from that hellish condition of life, he is putra. And for this kind of putra, I accept a wife, not for my sex enjoyment.
And it is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā. One who uses his sex for these religious activities, to get a good father, a good son who can deliver me... Then marriage is required. Otherwise it is useless.
Dharmāviruddho bhūteṣu kāmo 'smi. Krishna says: "Sex life which is not against religious principles..." That is a sex life which is... Which has no religious principle, that is sex gratification, leading one to hell.
So this theory that we should marry, we should have sex life for creating good progeny...
And my Guru Maharaja used to say — he was a sannyāsī brahmacārī — but he said that if I could produce really Krishna conscious children, I can use hundreds of times.
Otherwise, why should I use my sex for producing cats and dogs? Yes, like that. So this is also: pitā na sa syāj jananī na sā syāt.
The father's, mother's duty is how to rescue their children from the cycle of birth and death. That is real father and mother. Otherwise, cats and dogs are also father and mother. That is not what...
The Vedic culture is different. Produce them. Such education and such accomplishment that he can be saved from the cycle of birth and death.
And the putra should be so qualified that even if his father goes to the hellish condition of Pun-nāma, he'll deliver him. This is the idea of becoming father and family.
Governance and flaws of modern democracy
He believed that the best form of government is an enlightened monarchy. Enlightened monarchy. That is what he said. Rājarṣi, rājarṣi. Rājarṣi means king, at the same time, saintly. Saintly. There are ideas.
He has taken these ideas, it is basically that. When this form degenerates, it becomes a tyranny. Yes. When it degenerates.
The second best form is an aristocracy, and when it deteriorates, it becomes an oligarchy, rule of corrupt men. And he considered democracy to be one of the worst forms of government.
Yes, that is my... I am for... when it deteriorates, it degenerates into mob rule. Yes, that's fine. That is good. But the best thing is a monarchy, yes, the Mahārāja is Rājarṣi. It's not only king. That is necessary.
Krishna wants that. The government should be a rule. Therefore we praise so much respect to Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, Mahārāja Parīkṣit and Lord Rāmacandra, who had to become an ideal king.
He is Personality of Godhead, and He showed how to be Rāma. So this is very good because it is not expensive. One man is maintained by the state very nicely.
And nowadays this democracy is mob rule, meaning instead of one king, there are 300,000 kings in a state and they are looting the hard-earned money by income tax, and everything is so polluted.
So the condemnation of democracy is supported by us. It is mob rule, it is no good. Socrates and Plato. That's all. They had city-states that were, um, democracy.
They were, they were, but they were so small that everyone could get together. Panchayat, Panchayat. In India. It was Panchayat. Some chief men of the village.
And he started... reduced the responsibility of the state; in their small cases, the Panchayat, some of the important men of the village, they visited, and whatever they decide, that the state will accept.
Court will accept. So minimize the responsibility of the court in deciding several cases. In India the panchayat system is there. The Panchayat. Panchayat means Panchayat. Panchayat. Panchayat. Pancha means five.
Five selected men from the village sit down and decide the case.
Let us accept it as... Greece, Greece was not a country as such, it was composed of small towns or cities, and Athens was the biggest, and everyone got together and the wisest men spoke and they voted on their decisions.
Parliament. So in monarchy also, there was a council of learned men, brāhmaṇas, gently passed. Even Maharaj Yudhisthira was guided like that. Lord Ramachandra was guided. That is the system. Even Maharaj Vena was there.
Still, he was advised by learned scholars and brāhmaṇas and saintly people, and he would do according to their decision. And when Maharaj Vena was not ruling... And when he refused, then he was killed.
And his son, Prthu Maharaja, became king. So-called democracy is ludicrous, exactly.
All fools and rascals bribing and this way and that way, then getting votes, and when they go to the power, simply plunder money, that's all. Yes. They take bribe from big, big men.
"That I give you, repay you ten times if you give me money." The system of continuously changing the government every four years means that every four years...
"For four years, then I'll take advantage as much as possible for my personal gain." And then retire rich. A very dangerous position, the so-called democracy. So it creates one. So sometimes this emergency is required.
But if it is used again for personal aggrandizement, then it is also... Actually, the perfect form of government is a monarchy, and the monarchs are the rājarṣis. That is Indian Vedic system.
The Vedic system was there everywhere. Therefore still there are monarchs. But they are simply maintaining the monarchy. But actually the monarch has no power.
I think in the history of the West, all the monarchs have been ogres, except maybe with the exception of Constantine, who was, um, a Christian monarch. And I think that was the only one. Yeah.
But it was not a monarch that is the idea. Rajarṣi. Rajarṣi: he is in the position of Nārāyaṇa, but he is actually a great sage. That is then everything. Rājarṣayo viduḥ, Kṛṣṇa said.
And in the monarch, the chief man in the state, he understands what Gītā is. Everything immediately. Perfect. Everything immediately. Formerly the kings were understanding. Evaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ is clearly said.
But there's no monarchy, and all lower class, they are taking charge of government. They do not know. Why they know it? They have gone there for getting some money. "I'm now in position. Get my money.
No, after five years I will not be here. So let me accumulate some money through the ministerial post." This is going on. Who cares for the good of the citizens? If we discuss these things, it will be great criticism.
But this is the point.