John Dewey and Pragmatist Philosophy
A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
Chapters
Pragmatism and the nature of inquiry
Today we're discussing the American philosopher John Dewey. Last time we were discussing William James, who was called a pragmatist; his philosophy deals, believes that the practice is better than theory. Yeah.
So this John Dewey is more or less his successor in this same line of philosophizing. He says that practical consequences are the only valid test of truth.
And he says that the proof of an idea consists in its being subject to predictable results. The idea is not true unless the results of the idea are predictable. Good. Dewey feels this also: truth, that is practical.
No theoretical knowledge is subject. But do the results of an idea have to be predictable? No, idea means it is concocted idea. There cannot be—the result cannot be a thought. If it is fact, then the result can be predicted.
He says that the object of inquiry or asking questions is belief. That because we want to believe something, we ask questions in order to find something to believe in. This is the nature of inquiry.
That is the Vedānta-sūtra. To find out the ultimate cause of everything, the inquiries about the absolute truth. So this inquiry should be made to the person who knows. Otherwise, what is the use of inquiry?
That is basic injunction. If you want to inquire about truth, then you must approach the bona fide spiritual master, guru.
Guru means bona fide, but because there are so many pseudo-gurus at the present moment, therefore you have to add this word 'bona fide'. Otherwise, guru means bona fide. One who is not bona fide, he cannot be guru.
People are misled by such pseudo, false gurus, therefore we have to add this word 'bona fide'. Otherwise, there was no necessity of adding this word.
But he believes that it's the nature of inquiry itself to want to believe something.
Even on the small everyday level, if I want to know who put these flowers here because I want to believe the truth about these flowers, I ask. I inquire. So inquiry means to know the truth.
Therefore our inquiry should be made to a person who knows the truth. Otherwise, the inquiry has no valid position. Tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum evābhigacchet. That is basic interest.
Enquiry should be genuine and the answer should come from a guru, but that needs out. He says that the final outcome of inquiry is the fulfillment of human needs by practical action to change the external environment. Yes.
In human being, unless he is inquisitive about the absolute truth, he is not considered or sufficiently developed in its human form.
Unless this inquiry is there about self, what I am, he is not considered sufficiently developed in his honor. He is still in ignorance.
But his, his, uh, perspective is that, uh, by inquiring we find out what is wrong with our environment, our external environment. Yeah. And we take practical actions to change that environment and thus fulfill human needs.
Yes, that's nice. That enquiry will clear everything. Uh, if a person is serious, he inquires what is the aim of human life, then he is supposed to be intelligent. Otherwise, just like animals, they cannot inquire.
What is the aim of life? They are simply eating, sleeping, that's all. Human beings must be inquisitive. What is the value of life? But is our, is our, uh, is the result of our inquiry to change the external environment?
Consciousness and learning through hearing
Yes. I think we know things as they are, then we can change our activities. What we are preaching. That your business is to know Krishna.
So, if people actually take this movement seriously, this mode of life will be changed. That is practically happening.
All our students, they were leading a certain type of life since they have come to Krishna consciousness. The whole program has been changed. We come to the same question we were discussing with Marx.
Whether changing the external environment is prerequisite to improvement or changing the consciousness is prerequisite.
And you answered before in Marx's case that if we change the consciousness then the environment becomes changed. Yeah. Rather than vice versa.
Also, to a certain extent, the other way: if we change the environment, the consciousness changes. One is the cause of the other; the other is the cause of the effect.
But actually, it is the consciousness that requires to change, either by hearing from authority or by circumstance. There are two processes to achieve knowledge. In Bengali it
is said, "theke shekha, dekhe shekha." When one is actually in awkward circumstances, that this kind of way of life is not good, "I have to change." This is called theke shekha.
When he's actually in danger, he takes the lesson of danger. But one who is intelligent, he understands by hearing that if you do like that, then you will fall in danger.
So that man is intelligent who learns by hearing from the opposition. And one who actually experienced the awkward position and then he changes his consciousness, that is also one of the processes. But this is better.
Our process is to approach the bona fide teachers and learn from them everything. That is paramparā. Not by practical experience. That is Vedic knowledge. The experience is already there. You simply hear and take it.
Then it becomes easier. But if you expect, "First, let me fall down in the ditch, then I shall cry." Better man is, he takes advice: "Don't go there, you'll fall down in the ditch." That's like Kalidas.
Kalidas was a... in the beginning, he was a great fool. So he was cutting a tree while sitting on the branch. So some intelligent man was going: "What are you doing, nonsense? You will fall down." He didn't care.
But practically, he actually fell down. Then he went, "Oh, you are very intelligent. How did you say? How did you foretell?" And then they thought he was a first-class fool.
Sir, these boys will return to the king's daughter to become a husband. Yes. The girl was so intelligent that the challenge was: "Any man who will defeat me in argument, I shall marry."
So she was so intelligent, nobody could defeat her. So all the learned scholars... the father was asking, "Bring him an intelligent boy to marry her." But they couldn't find any intelligent boy. Whoever comes, he defeated.
So they decided, "Now, because she is so determined to have a very nice husband, we shall make this boy her husband, the fool number one." So they took him there. They threatened that girl.
When he showed his finger like this, he showed this. Sir, you are the fool, so I brought the girl. The girl showed one finger, and he showed two fingers. Then all the pandits said, "The answer is given.
Your God says, 'eko brahma'. Brahman is one. And he immediately answered, 'dvitiyam nasti', there is no two. No two Brahman. Brahman is one." She also thought, "Yes."
It was so... this way, this foolish man was made her husband. And at night, when she came to understand that he is a fool number one, she kicked him and asked him, "Get out of my room." So he became very insulted.
"My wife has kicked me. I am so fool. So I shall commit suicide by drowning in the water."
So crying and remembering God, lamenting that "I am so fool", he did not mind... Mother Sarasvati, she did favor, and he tried and felt like great lamentation, he was going to die. At that time, Sarasvati Devi appeared.
Kālidāsa got down to her. "This is my position. I have been insulted by my wife because I am a fool." "All right, from today you will be a very large scholar." "I do not know." "No, whatever you say, it will be all right."
He got this benediction from Mother Sarasvati. When he came back, Then he had nothing to talk. And the wife said, "What are you?" Then he replied, he sees that... It's "asti".
"Asti kaścit vāg-viśeṣaḥ" is somebody who can speak very large. And then whatever he wrote by the grace of Sarasvatī is a highly large, small spinning. So Kalidasa, in this whole world, he wrote four books.
That is very famous. He began with this word, was teaching, and Raghuvamśa was teaching. In this way, he wrote four books and he became very famous. This is the beginning of Kumāra-sambhava.
Kumāra-sambhava means Lord Shiva's marriage with the daughter of Himalaya. He begins describing Himalaya. Asty uttarasyāṁ diśi devatātmā himālayo nāma nagādhirājaḥ.
Uttarasyāṁ diśi, in the northern side, there is the king of mountains known as Mat. Somebody interprets in that Arctic region. Pūrvāparau toyanidhī avagāhya. North and East. There are two oceans.
I think this is Atlantic and Pacific. Avagāhya. Touching. Sthitaḥ pṛthivyā iva mānadaṇḍaḥ, as the measuring rod. These are two scales, and this way he began to start and became pretty much quiet by the very substance.
In the beginning, we are starting the same brains of the seed rather than seeking. So maybe there's some hope for these philosophers, huh? Maybe there's some hope for these philosophies. We sing everything.
There is blessings of higher authority. Everything, everything can be achieved. There's no doubt.
Problem solving and spiritual solutions
He puts forward five steps for solving problems. I just... there's a man, can we have anyone else sitting here? Very elderly down. I thought he maybe could sit in here. Okay, so I think position.
Dewey puts forth five steps for solving problems. The first step is, he says, observe a problem and think of its nature. The second step is intellectualize the problem further to analyze the total difficulties.
Three, you make hypotheses which constitute possible solutions. Four, you analyze these hypotheses in the light of past experience.
And five, you put these possible solutions into practice experimentally and to ascertain the results in actual experience.
So his method is that, so his idea is that problems are only solved when the possible solutions are put into practice and we experiment and get a result.
Then we find solutions to problems, but not simply by theorizing, but by practicing. Yeah. So our process of solving problem is Krishna. Krishna says, kaunteya pratijānīhi na me bhaktaḥ praṇaśyati.
So we take Krishna's center and our problems are solved. As it is mentioned in the Bhagavad-gītā: yatra yogeśvaraḥ kṛṣṇo. Krishna is the reservoir of all mystic power, yogeśvaraḥ.
So bhakti's business is instead of endeavoring to become a yogi, he takes shelter of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is yogeśvara. He is the master of all mystic power.
So we take it that this is the solution of our problem. Mām eva ye prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti te. Still, as I was reciting the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: vālānāṁ iha sad-guruḥ.
So there are different kinds of methods of solving the problem. The best method is to surrender to Krishna and all problems are solved. Is it on a social scale as well? Yeah. Everything. Social scale also.
His idea, John Dewey's idea is that, just like on a political scale, the Pāṇḍavas took shelter of Krishna. That was a political problem. So it was solved in their favor, in the Pāṇḍavas' favor.
Political means socio-political? This Dewey's idea is that all sciences must be subservient to human needs. Yeah. So he believes in the social sciences, the educational sciences.
So our educational system is śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ. One becomes a devotee and executing the nine different processes of devotional sacrifice. Prahlāda Mahārāja says: tan-manye... I think he is a first-class scholar.
He has studied nicely. One who has... Caitanya-caritāmṛta says also: kṛṣṇa yei bhaje sei baḍa catura. Unless one is highly intelligent, he cannot take to Krishna consciousness.
And He says: bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate.
After many, many births of experimenting for solving all problems, well, he is actually... while at that time he takes... vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ. First- class learned scholar.
Ms. Dewey's definition of truth is that truth is the means of satisfying human needs and improving social conditions which create problems. So he sees truth as a practical tool to solve social problems. Social problem.
We have mismanaged social problems because... Krishna is perfect. So whatever He has created, that is perfect. Pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate. Pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idaṁ pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate.
So everything is perfect. But because we want to disturb Krishna by disobeying His order, things have appeared to be imperfect. Bhūta-koṭiḥ, svabhāva-śīlo, sāmya-sayujyam, ekasya... and others.
So if we remain faithful to Krishna, then there is no problem. So we are presenting this Krishna consciousness movement meant for the solution of all problems.
Let any intelligent man come and discuss with us, and we think we shall be able to convince him that this is the only solution.
He said that truth is useful, and it is public, and it is objective, and it benefits the society, not merely the individual. Yes. That truth people do not know. The Bhāgavata gives us the information of that truth.
Na te viduḥ svārtha-gatiṁ hi viṣṇum. They do not know. The ultimate truth, ultimate objective is Viṣṇu. Without reference to Viṣṇu, they are trying to solve the problems of the world differently. And that is not possible.
Social order and ethical development
How does worship of Viṣṇu solve social problems? Just like in Calcutta there are more social problems than practically anywhere.
In the Vishnu Purāṇa, it is said that varṇāśrama-dharma, varṇāśramācāravatā puruṣeṇa paraḥ pumān, any man, uh, who, uh, executes this varṇāśrama-dharma, he satisfies the...
Varṇāśrama-dharma is there, uh, the brāhmaṇa, the kṣatriyas, the vaiśyas and the śūdras.
So according as they are prescribed, according how the brāhmaṇa should live, how the kṣatriyas should live, how the... then there will be no trouble. The whole problem is that they have killed the varṇāśrama- dharma.
They are now all śūdras, śūdras; how they can make solutions? Śūdras means non-intelligent person. What they can do?
They are running a democratic government voted by the śūdras. So what these rascal śūdras will do? They require... Śūdras are meant for serving the higher section, brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya.
And if the śūdras are given government, this like we have seen in Africa. They have been given independence, but what have improved? The Englishman is still controlling, the Indian is still controlling.
What is the meaning of their, uh, self-government? You have seen it. Still they're poor. Because they are śūdras. Śūdras have no brain. And America also. And they all... America was belonging to the Red Indians.
Why they could not improve? The land was there. Why the foreigners, Europeans came and improved? So śūdras cannot do this. They cannot make any solution. Now people are becoming śūdras by so-called education.
So they cannot make any solution of the problem. If that varṇāśrama is not once again established, then the whole problem will be solved. That was the plan of my guru, daiva-varṇāśrama-sthiti.
Daiva-varṇāśrama means as it is stated by Krishna: guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ. By qualification. By work one should be brāhmaṇa, by qualification. By work one should be kṣatriya, by qualification.
By work one should be vaiśya, by qualification, by work one should be śūdra. When this order is gone, then it's karma in the world. But not some karma.
Then we should... Lord will be happy and He'll give us... These are already, actually He's giving us all our necessities of life, but because we are now śūdras and devoid of devotional service,
so Prakṛti is controlling the supply. That is the deal. That is, uh, stated in, in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, in Pṛthu-mahārāja. Uh, Pṛthu Mahārāja, because there's not enough production,
she wanted to kill the... She said that, "That's all right. But I'm controlling because, uh, production is made for performing yajña." These rascals, they are simply eating. They're not performing yajña. They're rampant.
So yajñārthāt karmaṇo 'nyatra. See? The whole plan is that the living entities, especially the human being, they are meant for performing yajña. Yajña means to satisfy the Supreme Person. And
Bhagavad-gītā also says: yajña-dāna-tapaḥ-karma na tyājyam. You cannot give up these three things, even if you are in the renounced order of life. Yajña, dāna, tapaḥ.
Just like our Bhāgavata-śālā, they are performing saṅkīrtana-yajña and they are distributing Kṛṣṇa dharma. And to keep themselves fit, they're observing the rules and regulations and chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa.
This is yajña, dāna, tapaḥ. Following the rules and regulations and regularly chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, that is tapas. And this is the best dāna, charity. That time Caitanya Mahāprabhu is addressed by Rūpa Gosvāmī:
"kṛṣṇa-prema-pradāya te." You are the most magnificent incarnation because You are giving love of Bhagavān. So those who are distributing the idea of love of Bhagavān, they are the best charitable disposal men.
So we have not given up sannyāsa. That is not to be renounced. Because sannyāsa is renounced. Renounce means he should renounce his self-gratification, not renounce these things: yajña-dāna-tapaḥ.
So these three items are necessary to solve social issues? Yes. For everyone should practice. For everyone. Especially if not everyone, yajña for the brahmacārī, dāna for the householder, tyāga, and tapa for the vānaprastha.
If it is not done by all, at least these three classes of men should not give up their occupation. Yajña-dāna-tapaḥ-karma. Pāvanāni manīṣiṇām. Yajña-dāna-tapaḥ-kriyā pāvanāni manīṣiṇām.
Even if you think that you are very highly elevated, still yajña-dāna- tapaḥ-kriyā is necessary for... Dewey says that the ethical goals are fulfillment of human needs and desires.
Then all morality should lead to this goal: the fulfillment of human needs and desires. The human need is to get out of the clutches of māyā. That is the real need. Janma-maraṇa-mokṣāya. That is the need.
But in modern society, we do not know what is needed. They're making simply plans, useless. Śrama eva hi kevalam. Simply laboring hard. They do not know the need.
The real need is to get out of the clutches of limitation, of birth and death in different forms. They do not know this. They're simply concocting ideas. Durāśayā ye bahir-artha-māninaḥ. Durāśayā. Hopeless.
Or they're trying to execute something which is impossible. They are making plans to be happy in this material world by the United Nations. That is impossible. This is intelligence.
We can say in the United Nations clearly that your these attempts will be a failure. It is already a failure. Socialism, communism, colonialism, something... What is the solution?
You cannot make any solution to this birth and death, disease and all that. What do you mean by solution? The real problems are there.
We do not know what are the problems, how to solve. Adānta- dṛgbhir upanīyamānāḥ, some blind leaders, so-called leaders, they're leading.
And then this is dhīma... They do not know what is the aim of life, how to make solution of the problem. They do not know. He says that there must be a continuous growth of human beings in moral sensitivity.
In other words, that people must become more and more sensitive to moral values. And that there must be a practical realization of a better social world. Yes.
And that is Krishna conscious society, International Society for Krishna Consciousness. We come forward and understand. Therefore we have made it a society, Krishna conscious society. But he, he makes one statement.
He says the good man is the man who, no matter how morally unworthy he has been, is moving to become something better. Growth itself is the only moral end. Yes. That is confirming the Bhagavad-gītā. Api cet su-durācāro.
The devotee, even in the beginning, is found not in order, doing something wrong. Still, because he has taken to Krishna consciousness, he is accepted as sādhu. They say, "But there are so many discrepancies in his life."
Yes, he is doing all the items, but he has not corrected his habits. They reply, "Kṣipraṁ bhavati dharmātmā." Śaśvac-chāntiṁ nigacchati.
Because he has taken to Krishna consciousness, all his bad habits will be corrected very soon. So as long as one is improving in his moral nature... Yeah. This is moral argument, moral.
Take to Krishna consciousness and gradually our moral things will come. Yasyāsti bhaktir bhagavaty akiñcanā sarvair guṇais tatra samāsate surāḥ.
All good qualities will come automatically if he sticks to these four principles, these regulative principles, and chanting Hare Krishna, and abiding by the order of spiritual master, then everything will come.
Moral qualities will come. Oh yes. It's not that one has to develop them independently. No, automatically it comes.
Because the good qualities are already there, and as it is being purified, uncovered by the material contamination, the original quality is coming out. That is Krishna... What does the word cult mean? Huh?
Cult means... um, what do you mean by cult? Cult is an audience word. I've always thought cult meant something, uh, sectarian or uh, non-sectarian. That means the, uh, natural, uh, uh, I would just say occupation.
Usually means a group, uh, a group with a common interest is usually called a cult. Some group with some common agreed-upon interests. Yes. That is... I was explaining this. So this Krishna consciousness is not for everyone.
It is made for a certain group that we can take it as cult, although it is meant for everyone. But generally, it's accepted by the high-class intelligent. That we can call it cult. Same word: cultivation or culture? Yeah.
Kṛṣṇa-anuśīlanam. The exact word is kṛṣṇa-anuśīlanam. Ānukūlyena kṛṣṇa-anuśīlanam. That is cult. Cultivation of Krishna consciousness. Favorable. Not Krishna consciousness like Kaṁsa.
All the time thinking of Krishna, how to kill. That is not ānukūlya, that is not favorable. But you have to cultivate Krishna consciousness favorably. How Krishna will be satisfied. How Krishna will be pleased.
And that is the requirement. This culture is: hṛṣīkeṇa hṛṣīkeśa-sevanaṁ bhaktir ucyate. Where your senses will be purified. And they will engage in serving Krishna, sevā Krishna. That is bhakti.
Situational ethics and eternal welfare
He says that there is no such thing as absolute good and bad, uh, but that each specific situation must be treated individually. There's no absolute good and bad, but each individual situation must be... so
that situation is Krishna consciousness. Anything done in Krishna consciousness is good. Anything done not for Krishna's satisfaction, it may be ethically, so-called ethically right, it has no use.
He says that the greatest good... that situation, Mr. Driari has said, that situation means Krishna consciousness. In practical life also, we see that the soldier is killing, it is supported by government.
The same soldier killing for his personal satisfaction, he is condemned to death. He says that the greatest good is the elimination of the greatest evil or the fulfillment of man's greatest need. That's it. We follow it.
That the highest objective, the ultimate objective is Krishna and Viṣṇu. So by becoming a vaiṣṇava, the highest and this perfection of human life is achieved. So their greatest need is Krishna consciousness.
The greatest need is Krishna consciousness. Krishna consciousness is the supreme consciousness. Supreme consciousness. Yes. That is pure concept.
Krishna, mamaivāṃśo jīva-loke, every living entity is Krishna's part and parcel. See, you always remember that I am part and parcel of Krishna. It is my duty to serve Krishna. This is Krishna consciousness. He says that.
He can remember this. Yes. That is the consciousness. It's perfect consciousness. But this they are thinking that "I am Krishna, I am God." That is not good.
He says that the choice between a good and a bad, between good and bad is not made on theoretical grounds, but for reducing specific evils.
In other words, that people accept the accepted form of God, then everything within the universe is part and parcel of that form. Respected.
But say the big tree, every leaf, every branch, every twig, every flower is part and parcel of the whole tree. Similarly, virāṭ-rūpa, apart from Krishna's this personal rūpa, the virāṭ-rūpa is to us manifested.
With the virāṭ, the whole universal form of Viṣṇu, then anything within the universe is part and parcel. So the choice between a good and a bad action should be practiced to reduce evil, not... not just theoretical.
That's his idea, that's his point. Yeah, it's not... it is practical. Now, the screw is a part. So every part, if it works nicely, the machine goes nicely.
So if we understand, just like I think last time I was explaining, virāṭ-rūpa, the gigantic body, the brāhmaṇa class should be at the mouth. So one must do the duty of the mouth. Mouth speaks, vibrates, and eats.
So our practical duty is to chant Hare Krishna mantra and eat Krishna prasāda. Then the mouth's duty, the brāhmaṇa's duty, is perfect. Similarly, the kṣatriya's duty... again we come to that varṇāśrama.
So everyone, if he thinks actually part and parcel of God and executes his prescribed duties, then it's perfect. Viṣṇur ārādhyate panthā.
See, if we want to satisfy the Supreme Lord, then we must execute the functions as they are prescribed in the varṇāśrama system. Then everything is alright.
The same example: if all the parts of the machine are in order, working, then the machine is... there's no trouble.
Once the screw is having slipped or it has fallen down and another part is, I mean, dislocated, then the whole machine stops. We should consider in that way that we are all part and parcel of Krishna.
So according to part and parcel, we must execute all this as brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya, and śūdra. And the brāhmaṇa being head, he should be the direction. Therefore, he is considered the guru of other varṇas.
But if there is no head, no brāhmaṇa, the whole thing is disturbed. That is the position at the present moment. Actually, there is no brāhmaṇa or scarcity of brāhmaṇa. So others are not guided properly.
Therefore, there is chaos in the whole society. So we require to create some brain, and others should understand to align by the direction of the brāhmaṇa. Then you go to the next.
He says that the world can be made better by man's efforts, but that perfection is not possible. No. Yes. In one sense it is all right. Because his world is so made that he make it perfect today, again it deteriorates.
Therefore, in one sense, you cannot make it perfect. That is all that. But you can improve it? Improve, yes. Uh, therefore Krishna says in the Bhagavad-gītā, so it can improve in any bad condition by how?
It can improve by this Krishna consciousness. As Krishna says, I have Krishna, and Krishna consciousness is the sense. If we are in Krishna consciousness, that means we are living with Krishna.
And if you are living with Krishna, then what is your fear? They say, what, you are not fighting with Krishna? We have no fear. Similarly, if you live with Krishna and go on with Krishna, then what do you get?
What is that quote you said last night in the taxi? Pada-padma, pada-padma. Samāśritā ye pada-pallava-plavaṁ mahat-padaṁ puṇya-yaśo-murāreḥ.
And the purpose is: one who has taken shelter of the lotus feet of Krishna, for him, this ocean of nescience, bhava-samudra, becomes just like a small puddle created by the calf's hoof-print.
And this place wherein there is step-by-step danger, this is not that place.
And that Krishna also says, as soon as you understand Krishna, tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti, he immediately becomes eligible to this good janma.
So actually we are removing people from danger, from evil, by making them Krishna conscious. Satan. So this is the welfare. Okay. This is the best welfare actually in the world. What others can do in comparison to this?
They may be able to remove some of the temporary dangers and give some temporary benefits. But again, step by step, I stand. The youth, when we discussed the utilitarian Mahāprabhu idea,
that you know, namo mahā-vadānyāya, you can give some charity to a needy man. It is just for a temporary period. But if you give him kṛṣṇa-premā, then immediately send to the spiritual world.
This is the most really recent part, to distribute Krishna consciousness. Caitanya Mahāprabhu: yāre dekha, tāre kaha 'kṛṣṇa'.
Wherever you meet, just deliver His message of Kṛṣṇa, that his best welfare has to be in the world.
When we were discussing the utilitarians, we discussed that their goal was to achieve what is desired by the people, to do whatever is required. Desired by people: happiness. Yes.
But they are trying to give happiness temporary. And we are giving happiness that, just like Bhagavān said, the yasmān brahma-saukhyaṁ tvanantam.
Śuddhyeta—purify your existence and you get perpetual eternal happiness, bliss. So everyone is working hard for happiness. But how happiness can be attained in diseased conditions? To cure the disease, and he gets it.
That here is a physician. People go and his ailments... People go things. Why? Because it is impediment to happiness. Similarly, the real disease is janma-mṛtyu. If you cure that, then you get happiness. These
these utilitarians said that activity should be to achieve what is desired by the people, but Dewey says that activity should be to achieve what is worthy to be desired.
Then the first thing is people are desiring happiness. Whatever one may desire, the ultimate aim is happiness. Nobody can deny it. But a diseased fellow, if he thinks that "I am happy," that is false happiness.
A diseased man cannot be happy unless the disease is cured. Sometimes you go to a diseased person and ask, "How are you?" Yes, "Today I'm all right." If he's all right, why is he lying down? He's not all right.
He's officially saying that, "Today I'm all right." What is this "all right"? Similarly, as these foolish people, they are thinking, "I am happy," where is your happiness? If you have to die, then where is your happiness?
Real intelligent person will see these are the things which are giving me this duḥkha. So where is the happiness? Foolishly if we accept something as happiness, that is not happiness.
Real happiness is when you are free from these four principles of distresses: janma-mṛtyu-jarā-vyādhi. Otherwise, what is your happiness?
But if you think that although I am dying, I am happy, that is nothing but a fool's paradise.
He says that desirable courses of action must meet specifiable conditions which are subject to prediction, and they must be based on judgments of experience.
In other words, the desirable courses of action should be chalked out by experience, and they must be predictable. Yes, predictable. That's like we don't want death.
So if I get the chance to come to a position not to die, is it not predictable? You don't want to die. Yes. And if I say, "Come to this position, you'll not die." Yes.
Is there some experience that shows me that that is a predictable result? Yes. Experience. You may not have experience,
but others, the superior, has that experience. As Kṛṣṇa says, He says that if you come to Me, you'll never come back again. That's it. You can accept Kṛṣṇa's experience. Vīrarāghavācārya, He knows past, present, future.
So you have to take the answer.
He says that judgments about values are judgments about the conditions and the results of experienced objects, judgments about that which should regulate the formation of our desires, affections, and enjoyments.
In other words, in order to make, to place a value on something, to judge what is the value of a particular item, we should base this judgment upon the results of experience.
And then we can guide those things which we should enjoy, those where our desires should be, where our affections should lie. That experience we may not have personally.
But if we take advice from a person who has got experience, that might be— just like you are going somewhere. You are purchasing a ticket.
You have no experience where you are going, or you do not know whether actually you will go. But because others have gone and come by purchasing a ticket, you take advantage of that experience and you purchase the ticket.
He says that the value, that value equals satisfaction. In other words, the fulfillment of... unless you have got faith in some person, how can you satisfy? Therefore,
you should find out a person in whom you can place your faith. Who can be a better person than Krishna? If certain specific conditions are met, then the satisfaction is transformed into a value.
In other words, if my hunger is satisfied by eating a certain foodstuff, then this foodstuff is given value. Yes. So Krishna gives that value. So by experience, if I experience satisfaction, Krishna gave me value.
Arjuna in the beginning of Bhagavad-gītā denied to fight, but he agreed to the fight. He agreed to fight because he was satisfied by his faith and the result.
Moral laws and transcendental morality
He says that moral laws are comparable to physical laws. In other words, they are guidelines to elicit certain responses under given conditions. Just like if I throw a ball up, I know it's going to come down.
So a moral law will guide me in the same way. If I act in a certain way, there will automatically be a certain result or response. Yes. Sādhu-saṅga, we follow one after another. You get it, isn't it?
If you have got faith, we make association with devotees. The next day, we are eager to execute the service. Then our misgivings are eradicated. Then you become firm in faith, then taste, then attachment.
Unless we experience it, the next result, how can we make progress? Are there any moral guidelines to Krishna consciousness? Moral guidelines to Krishna consciousness? Yes, one of that, that is given by Upadeśāmṛta.
Utsāhān niścayād dhairyāt tat-tat-karma-pravartanāt, with patience, with conviction, with enthusiasm, become very fair in your dealing and in association of saintly persons, devoted to advance.
So the results of following these guidelines is predictable. Results. Automatically certain things happen. Yes, one after another. Like a teacher gives tasks to the students.
One type of task in the beginning, next another task, next another task. It makes progress. What are those again? Patience? Uh, first of all, uh, enthusiasm. First, enthusiasm. Yes.
Unless you are enthusiastic, how you can enter into any activity? Uh, then patience. Not to be impatient. Oh, I am working so hard. I'm getting no deal. No, you get. So niścayāt. It's one conviction.
And because I've taken the path of the mahājana prescribed by Bhagavān or prescribed by Krishna, it must be successful. It may be taking some time. It is delayed. That doesn't matter. It will be success. Niścayāt.
Not that niścayāt is sitting idle. No. Fairly. In good faith, sattvic faith, and in the association. That is, give us impetus. People are coming to our association automatically, just like John came. And I don't have to see.
I'm glad that we don't. So if one follows these moral guidelines, the result is certain. Yeah. Predictable. Sato vṛtteḥ, sādhu-saṅga — it's a śikṣā. Sato vṛtteḥ with a good association.
Good association means that I'm the devotee. He says that, uh, moral laws are not absolute rules which never permit exceptions. Says that moral laws are flexible, but they're not absolute. Yes.
Real dharma means the law of the Supreme. Just like Krishna has preached dhyāna-yoga, jñāna-yoga, aṣṭāṅga-yoga, this so... so many yoga systems. Then he said, "Sarva-dharmān..."
These principles are not less moral than jñāna-yoga, but ultimately he says, "Give up that." Then what is moral? His word is moral. Whatever he says, that is moral. Not this dharma-adharma, no. Whatever he says, sorry.
So it is changed. Nobody can argue, "Sir, you have prescribed so many times some ślokas, now you say that give up all these things." It is contradictory. No, it is not contradictory. Whatever he says, that is moral.
That is Vaishnava principle. We don't consider anything moral or immoral. Whatever is ordered by Krishna or his representative, that is moral. That is our... He says it is the function of intelligence to serve action.
And action benefits man when it obeys the dictates of intelligence. So can we want to intelligence that it's not?
And he says that values must be regarded as goods of practical significance which result from intelligently directed activity.
So that value, something replaced value, must be... or do or don't follow the dictation of Krishna. So there are values: we become victorious and die with Arjuna. And you become a pure devotee.
As a practical result, and it's actually achieved. Parīkṣit Mahārāja said that this Kurukṣetra fight was just a great ocean, and all these Bhīṣma, Droṇa, Karṇa were just big, big animals in the ocean.
So it was impossible for my grandfather to cross the ocean, dangerously infested with all these big, big animals. But by grace of Krishna... This is very... That's why practical. That we show. He says that morality is social.
That besides the personal meaning, it must have a social meaning. Yeah, because that's that... in the... a type of morality which is above social. It is transcendental.
Social means guided by the three modes of material nature. But Krishna-arpaṇa, we have all... Transcendent. Sa guṇān samatītyaitān. So it's... it's asocial, but not anti-social. Our morality is above social.
Sociality is subordinate to this morality. But it is not anti-social. It is not anti-social. No, it is so-called... It is sublime, so-called.
It is not only author, so-called, but sublime. So He says that rights are also social. Just like if I claim a right, a certain social right, then I must also accept my responsibility. Just for instance, free speech.
If I accept free speech as my social right, then I must also accept others' right to free speech.
Because these atheists, they are proud of their national rights, but they are denying the same national rights to the animals that they sell to the slaughter. Why the young should be denied the national right?
They are born in the same country. They have got right to live like the part of God. Why we are interested in the living right? They're asking. The so-called social, moral, good party is all that's that...
Is any harāv abhakta... when he is not a bhakta, he has done... He has no good qualities. Immediately they get... He finds so many defects. It is so-called moral and the so-called sanctions.
Defining God and mental speculation
He says that God... he defines God as the active relation between the ideal and the actual, and God science. People are thinking what scientists they think.
This is a thing, scientists to the country, to society, and they're... the ethics and breath... I don't... let's end it. But for us, it's respected.
But his idea is that there is no particular being who is God, but that God is the unity of all ideal ends which arouses to desire and actions.
In other words, whatever motivates us to higher activity, that is God, that motivation. But that God is not... in another
word, what a man he does for God and then higher activity... well, he would say whatever you do for anyone, for a community or country, whatever is higher activity than man. He says God is not a particular being.
Now why does he name God? Why does he bring the word God? Suppose he concerned it is man only. Now why does it bring the word God? What is the purpose?
Well, it's trying to define that that which motivates us to desire something higher or more. That means God should be an instrument to serve our purpose. That is his love. Not necessarily. He leaves that over.
Why does it bring the name of God? That night, he says he could not accept the term as referring to a particular being.
Said that that, uh, God summons us to intelligent action which calls for deliberate choice, purposive behavior that is selective. In other words,
he's trying to find out why is it that the human intelligence acts in such a way that it selects this over that and guides itself by selecting purposefully.
That purposiveness that he calls back in the name of Allah is given books. He has no practical use of law. He has no clear idea. That means it's Godless. So therefore we say: "Harāv abhaktasya kuto mahad-guṇā".
But he becomes Godless, haris-vid-abhit becomes nanadva. He says that that God, that the word "God" is that ideal which we acknowledge as having authority over our emotions and our will or our volition.
But we say there is no being. It is an idea. It's an idea. So people may not like that idea. Therefore, the communist, that idea. God summons us. He says God summons. He says God summons others.
But I cannot see how a non-being can summon us. That is not anything. He says that God is the idea which, uh, uh, the idea summons. He says idea summons.
And he says that it is the value to which one is supremely devoted that this is God, but for the devotees and can be, uh, uh, Bhagavan without, uh, a, a being.
It's like divorce and wage between the devotee and the person who is offered and sadness. But just like the communists would say that God is the state, my supreme uh, devotion is for the state, to serve the state.
But that's all, but your state, communism has their state, is not over by others. You cannot be God. God is obeyed by everyone. Your state may not be obeyed by other state. God is the supreme controller.
You are not supreme controller. Then how you can make the state as well? Your state. So actually his idea of God would change. For the communist, God means the state. For the primitive savage, God means the... dog. Yes. Yes.
That to which one is supremely devoted, that means God. Yeah. Anyone may be supremely devoted to his wife, or sometimes supremely devoted to his dog. The dog is God. Why is God? So everyone has got one God.
And I think can he support it by yathā mata tathā patha? Yathā mata tathā patha. Yes, whatever one thinks, that's all right. But the God of God is... everyone can manifest one God.
He says that we cannot achieve absolute certainty or perfection. So we must rest content with... that means he has got poor fund of knowledge. He does not admit that.
But we can say that because his knowledge is not perfect, he is thinking so.
So he says we must rest content with a faith and a commitment which helps us to face the future resolutely, reconstructing our environment to attain more satisfactory adjustments.
This is the... this is the Western philosophy in a nutshell. Observe that it may be something for one man, something for another. So there's no absolute certainty. That means that none of them know what is God.
That is tamas. Therefore, Bhagavad-gītā: manuṣyāṇāṁ sahasreṣu kaścid yatati siddhaye, yatatām api siddhānāṁ kaścin māṁ vetti tattvataḥ. Nobody knows God. Only one person in many millions may know. Yes.
So he finds refuge in a kind of humanitarian welfare idea, that by... this is called utilitarian. Utilitarian. Utilitarian.
Well, he differs from the utilitarians because they say that we should be able to be... some idea can utilize, but better position our
society. Then the utilitarians say that everything should be utilized to serve man's desires. But he says everything should be utilized to serve man's worthiest desires. Man. Man's highest desires. Worthy desires.
Well, that someone may desire, uh, more, uh, brothels. Who desire the highest? Everyone said, "My desire is the high." The utilitarians might say that, uh, people desire more brothels, so let us build more brothels.
Yeah, for brothers. That is, that's the highest desire. How can I refute that? There is no standards. Everyone will say, "This is my law." Unless you go to the core. Now he wants to make his desire the highest desire.
He's got a theory now to get this is the highest thing I can think of. So this is, this is God. I need, I am God. He says that, uh, our, our formula is we say that each one is the dog, otherwise read it, um. They
are manorathas, they are mental speculators. They are hovering on the mental plane. Supreme consciousness... He says that we must continually make satisfactory adjustments. And things change. That you cannot do.
Because you are hovering in the mental plane. And man, mind is always imperfect. We take things and accepting. So nothing will be standard. Your mind is accepting something and rejecting it.
So on the mental plane, you cannot come to the standard. There's nothing. He says that Bhagavad-gītā is say: "indriyāṇi parāṇy āhur indriyebhyaḥ paraṁ manaḥ".
We have to go, transcend to the mental platform, go to the intellectual platform, then from intellectual platform come to the spiritual platform.
Bhakti and social reform through education
He, he says that the nature of existence is temporary and so we must make a constant revision to change. This nature is temporary, but there is another nature, sanātana, that he doesn't know.
"paras tasmāt tu bhāvo 'nyo 'vyakto 'vyaktāt sanātanaḥ". Bhakti, bhakti is... That is standard. That doesn't change. That's neither created, nor annihilated. Against that.
So somehow or other we must develop Krishna consciousness. Five thousand years ago, Arjuna became Krishna conscious. The same Krishna consciousness we are also preaching. This is then.
And before that, Arjuna, then Krishna consciousness was preached to the Sun- god, 40 million years ago. This doesn't change. This is unchanged. Avyaya. Param bhāvam. Krishna is avyaya and His bhāva is also avyaya.
He's not changing. He says that we must develop, the whole world must develop a common faith in practical activity. That is Krishna faith.
He says that ours is the responsibility of accepting the precious heritage of values accumulated by the continuous human community at great cost in effort and suffering, and to expand, conserve, transmit, and rectify these values bequeathed to us.
In other words, he says we must take the lessons of history and build upon them in order to transmit these values and preserve them. We are doing that. We are taking from history, upadeśa, and transmitting them.
By guru-paramparā, evaṁ paramparā-prāptam, accepted by great authorities: Vyāsa, Nārada, Devala, 5,000 years ago. And later on, we greet our ācāryas: Rāmānujācārya, Madhva. Lately, 500 years, Caitanya.
We are following bhakti-tattva, Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura's tattva. So the values that are taught to us by history, are they, are they not the same value? The value has not degraded. It has not fluctuated. What is that?
This is not... The price has not fluctuated. The same price. Krishna says: "The same thing I am teaching in the Bhagavad-gītā, which I taught to the Sun-god Vivasvān forty millions of years ago."
The same thing, because it is now broken, the chain, I am teaching again. So it does not change. Krishna consciousness does not change.
He would say that those values which civilizations most cherish or prize, that those are the values that we should accept. Just like that is basic civilization. That is based civilization.
The Vedic civilization still stands. So many civilizations came and were gone. That is valuable. I think all civilizations have cherished those values at their peak. But because they are not factual, they are fair.
But Vedic civilization is still going strong. Just like the Christian civilization, they at their peak, when they were most enlightened, they also prized honesty, uprightness, love of a neighbor, these different social values.
So these are the things that Krishna has held and noted, but they do not follow it. They will not follow it. There is God there.
There is morality, there is ethical laws, there is acceptance of God's authority that is high, but they do not follow it.
Not only Christians, only the so-called Hindus, they are similar to that; that is the world situation.
His idea that the problems of philosophy are rooted in social conditions, so that urgent social reform is required in order to solve the problems of philosophy...
Yeah. By changing social structures through education, then thought problems of philosophy. Then that's why we take the standard method. That like this varṇāśrama, that stands.
You maintain it and there will be no trouble in the society.
Actually, there is natural division: the intelligent class on one hand, the administrative class on one hand, the productive class on one hand, and the labor class. That is prevailing all over the world. There is no doubt.
But they are not doing their duty. The brāhmaṇa intelligent class are bad; they are not following strictly the principles of personal behavior.
Similarly, the administrative class, they are not following strictly the rules and regulations. Therefore it is fallen. Presumably this is from a lack of education.
If you do not follow... just like the administrative class is there. All over the world a class of man is interested in administration, coming to the government or high posts.
But they are not following the principles of the administrative class. No one is doing that. Does this result from a lack of education? Lack of Krishna consciousness. So-called education is death.
Lack of Krishna consciousness. The administrative class is forgetting that they are belonging to the arms of Krishna. Mukha-bāhu. So the administrative class are supposed to be the arms of Krishna.
So they are not thinking in terms of Krishna, they are part and parcel of the body of Krishna. That is forgetfulness of Krishna. Therefore they are in trouble. Though they are separated from Krishna. This hand is my arm.
But if it is separated from my body, it will be called the arm or hand, but it has no value.
Dewey's greatest faith was in the educational system, that the educational system should reflect the real welfare of the community. Yes, his education system, because the best educational system is Krishna consciousness.
So because people are being educated without Krishna consciousness, it is becoming valueless. Therefore we are giving, I would say, people get in method in every department, because value equals satisfaction. Yes.
So it's not equal value. If there is satisfaction, Krishna is one and everything is zero. So if there is one and zero value, then and then it increases that you get what you want; it is all zero.
Thousands of zeros is not carrying anywhere. But they are all zero without Krishna. He says that philosophy has a social responsibility to influence intelligent management of human affairs.
Asking everyone that you become just a bhakta and do things intelligently. Your life is successful. You'll be happy, otherwise you'll be unhappy. That is our program.
But are we also influencing the managers, the intelligent managers of society? This is that I say, the manager, they are forgetful of Krishna. He cannot manage. Cannot manage. Because you have to talk to the difference.
Who to satisfy? You are managing something, but you have to satisfy someone. So that is given in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: saṁsiddhir hari-toṣaṇam.
If you want perfection of your management, then you should try to see whether Krishna is satisfied. If not, you think you are sufficient. You cannot satisfy anyone. That means Krishna is satisfied.
If you satisfy Krishna, then everyone is satisfied. His idea was that no philosophy can be fixed or finished or absolute, but that all ideas must be continually revised because they have got imperfect philosophers.
Imperfect is not perfect, therefore he is thinking of making advancing further to make it perfect. So without Krishna consciousness, he is in mess already. He
says that all ideas must be tested in the laboratory of educational experience where they can be challenged, their consequences evaluated, and where they can be continuously modified or reconstructed. Yes.
That is Krishna consciousness. You see how Arjuna is a perfectly good man because he has Krishna consciousness. He was not willing to kill his enemy. He was hesitating. "What is the use of taking this kingdom?"
This is Krishna consciousness. Because the other side you are not thinking. But Arjuna, because he is Krishna's devotee, he was considering what is... he was taking his thing, "No, my killing my own kinsmen..."
But the... you know, in other words, nobody can be perfect without this.
No philosopher, no science, no sociology can be perfect without this. But in our Krishna consciousness philosophy, the ideas are not to be reevaluated.
They are absolute. Aren't they absolute, the philosophy of Krishna consciousness? Krishna is absolute. So His concepts are also absolute. His idea is that philosophy is always changing, that we always change.
That is in the material platform. He has no idea, information, what is the perfect state. He does not know. Ārādhitaiḥ sa hi haris tatas tad-artham, sarva-bhūtāni. Saṁsiddhiḥ hari-toṣaṇam.
If Krishna is satisfied, then your duty is done. Don't regard to satisfy anyone. That is very satisfied. So that's all. Seems like his philosophy... He knows what to do with knowledge, but he hasn't got any knowledge.
Therefore we say, harāv abhaktasya kuto mahad-guṇā. Anyone who is not Krishna conscious, he has no good knowledge, he has no good quality.