Philosophy Without a Standard Leader

Limitations of speculative moral philosophy

0:00This is Fichte. He's not as important as Kant or Hegel, but he followed pretty much in the footsteps of Kant. His first work was entitled "Our Belief in a Divine Government of the Universe."

0:17And he writes: "Our belief in a moral world order must be based on the concept of a supersensible, transcendental world." But the thing is that, what is morality?

0:34If you cannot define what is morality, simply saying "on moral principles." What is this morality? First of all, we have to understand what is morality. Simply, uh, imaginary moral principles.

0:54But we want practical understanding: what is morality? That they have not defined. Not, not specific what? That what is... Everyone will say, "This is morality."

1:10It's like we say, following the Vedic script, we say go-rakṣā, to give protection to the cow. So according to the scripture, we say it is morality.

1:29And somebody will say, "No, uh, killing a cow uh, in some religious place, mosque or synagogue, this is morality." Which one is morality? Well, he, uh, following Kant, he emphasized inner

1:53reality. He may follow Kant, and I may follow Krishna. But if there is contradiction, then which one is morality? How it will be decided? And who will decide?

2:10He may follow somebody. That this question I asked Professor Kotovsky in Moscow, that "You are following communism and we are following, say, Krishnaism. But your leader is Lenin. And our leader is Krishna."

2:31That so far as the philosophy is concerned, we have to accept a leader. So there's no difference in the basic principle of philosophy that we must have a leader. Now, who shall be the leader? And who will decide it?

2:51Leaders... both of us, we have got a leader. Now, which leader is perfect? If both of them are perfect, then why there is difference of opinion? One leader does not agree with the other leader.

3:10So if we'll answer this question, who is the best leader? Leader you have to follow. That you can do it. Either you follow Kant or you follow Krishna. Either you follow Lenin or you follow Krishna. What is the answer?

3:34Who is the perfect leader? You cannot have one leader. Uh, that you say according to Kant. I say according to Krishna. Well, they both emphasize, uh, intuition or conscience. And conscience is prepared.

3:59If you go on drinking, then your conscience will say it is good. And if you go on chanting, the conscience says this is good. The conscience is prepared according to association. There is no standard conscience.

4:22No standard conscience or intuition. So which one we'll follow? Well, they seem to think there is a standard with the...

Vedic definition of absolute truth

4:35There is a standard. We say it's the order of Krishna is standard, that's all. What Krishna says, that is standard. We have got some standard.

4:50Unless there is standard, you say conscience, high sense, morality— hey, what is there? Define it. We have a definition of God. I think nobody has got any definition of God.

5:10What is the standard that a person should be called Bhagavān? I don't think it is only in Vedic literature. We say: aiśvaryasya samagrasya vīryasya yaśasaḥ śriyaḥ, jñāna-vairāgyayoś caiva ṣaṇṇāṁ bhaga itīṅganā.

5:35This dharmaṁ tu sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam. This is the definition of God. And dharma means the order of God. Everything is standard. What is a standard conception?

5:55And if you have no standard conception, simply imaginary morality, imaginary controller, imaginary God, how it will help us?

6:12For Fichte, the world has no objective reality outside of its being an instrument for the enactment of morality. He calls the world of the senses the stuff of duty.

6:26This is already... He says our duty is revealed in the world of the senses. There's no definition of duty. That means I can manufacture my own duty, you can manufacture your own duty. There is no standard.

6:48But our standard is Krishna says: "sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja." Whatever you rascal, whatever you have manufactured, give it up. The Bhāgavata says that: "dharmaḥ pro jjhita-kaitavo 'tra."

7:10The cheating type of religious system is kicked out. Here is the religious system: satyaṁ paraṁ dhīmahi. Oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya. Everything is clear. But when is that clear? Understand? Simply speculating.

7:37That is the difference: the basic standard knowledge and the speculative philosophy. So as far as we are concerned, we refer to the Vedas. Śabda-pramāṇam. Śabda means Veda, śabda-brahman.

8:00So whatever action we do, if it is approved by the Vedic injunctions, then it is standard and perfect. Now, duty, we get back to the same thing.

8:16He writes: "True atheism consists in refusing to obey the voice of one's conscience, until one thinks one can foresee the success of one's actions, and thus elevating one's own judgment above that of God, and in making oneself into God. He who wills to do evil in order to produce good is a godless person."

8:42Now if you do not know what is God, then how will you verify your duty is nice or good? What is the order of God? Who is God? Then where is your duty? You simply manufacture your duty, so everyone can do that.

9:07So what do you mean by duty? Duty means the order given by some superior and you follow, you do it. That is duty. But if you have no superior order, if you have no conception who is the superior, what is His order,

9:28then where is your duty? Simply by mental imagination? Is it? Does he say it like that? Well, for him, outside of one's duty... So what is one's duty? Yes. Well, see, that's not... no. That is not... that is, uh, useless.

9:50Because everyone will say, "This is my duty." Who has given him the duty? But it's ambiguous in this way. It says outside the enactment of duty, we cannot know anything else of God. So what is that, I am asking?

10:07What is your duty?

Divine personality and supreme leadership

10:11We have got definite duty. We divide the whole human society into division. That is called varṇāśrama-dharma. Socially: brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya, śūdra; and spiritually: brahmacārī, gṛhastha, vānaprastha and sannyāsī.

10:33Now, it is so nice that whatever you're doing, you must be in one of these eight principles. So there are eight principles that are duties.

10:50So if you act accordingly to the position—say, gṛhastha, you have got a position, or a sannyāsī, they have got a position. So sannyāsī means this. Gṛhastha means this. So if you follow that, means then you are doing it.

11:10But if you have no standing, then what is your duty? And that is very common sense if you go to work in a big office. So the master of the office gives you duty. You do this, you are dispatcher.

11:30You are clerk, you are this, you are that—then it is duty. And if you engage, go to the office, now simply, "Let me do my duty." So what is my duty?

11:44Shall I sit down on the clerk's bench or on the superintendent's bench or on the... what is my duty? The duty must be given. This is your duty. What is that? Did it, uh, indication? It's not in here. But then what is duty?

12:03He says our knowledge of God arises from the enactment of our duty. Well, what is a duty? The God must be giving, giving you the duty to do this. Then you understand God, you know your duty.

12:18But if you have no conception of God, then where is your duty? Well, duty, one's duty—this is a very philosophy. It is ambiguous speculation, yes.

12:36He was also ambiguous when it came to a personal deity, but he seemed to lean toward impersonalism. We shall see: impersonalism, personal, impersonalism.

12:53If you stick to impersonal, then there is no specific understanding of the master who is giving you duty. He looks on the attribution of personality to God as simply a multiplication of one's self in his thoughts.

13:14That's how that... But what is the leadership of impersonal understanding? Is there, is there any leadership in impersonal understanding? Well, he feels that if you attribute personality to God... I'm not attributing.

13:42God cannot be attributed. That is a false concept. I cannot manufacture God by giving my imaginary attributes. That is not God.

13:53Well, he feels that if you attribute personality to God, you are simply projecting yourself onto God. This is what he's saying. He's saying, but it is not... even if you attribute, it must be sensible, just like,

14:13full of sense. Just like we say, "God is great," so at least we have got a conception of greatness. That must be involved. So we suppose a person very big. At least at the

14:33present moment, if one is very rich, then then my attribution to God that He is the supreme richest person— that is quite reasonable. If we say God is supreme wise, that is quite reasonable.

14:59So this definition given by Parāśara Muni, that aiśvaryasya samagrasya, that is perfect. Unless one is the richest of all, how can we say God? We have got some conception of greatness.

15:17So even if we attribute, all the conception of greatness must be in God. That is a reasonable definition. Everyone goes to pray to God, "Give us our daily bread," but if He is a poor man, then how can He supply bread?

15:41And everyone is praying. God has to be kind to everyone to supply bread. He must be very rich. Otherwise, how can He supply bread? This is quite reasonable.

15:56If everyone comes to me to ask something, then I must be able to supply that thing. Otherwise, how can I be God?

16:07But again, he feels like the others that if you apply personality to God, or if you look on God as a person, you necessarily refer to someone who is limited and finite. No. That is his mistake.

16:29He's thinking God is like himself, as he is finite. That is Dr. Frog. He says that if there is water, that water is this well. How can it be more than this? And maybe a big well, that's all. But that is his conception.

16:53So this conception will not help. You cannot create God.

17:07Just like we have God, God Krishna — as soon as there was necessity to give protection to the inhabitants of Vrindavan, the torrents of rain required a big umbrella, He immediately lifted the whole mountain: "Come out under this."

17:28"Let me see how long these torrents of rain go on." "I shall hold." And let it go. He was a seven-year-old boy. He was not a meditation God. Nowadays there are lots of rascals becoming God by meditation. What is meditation?

17:54God is always God. Does it require meditation to become God? There are all these rascals preaching, "You meditate and you become God." "You think that I am moving the sun, I am moving the earth, I am this and that."

18:14And done. But Krishna is not that kind of God. He always is God. Now it is necessary. All right, lift. This is God. Saviśeṣa. Whole strength is there. To lift the hill. That is God. He doesn't become by meditation.

18:40He feels that there are others that say that, uh, meditation, he becomes good. Meditation can manufacture God.

18:52Well, his impersonalist stand leads toward, depends on the other kind of meditation, speculative, that God should be like this.

19:02But he cannot define what is that "this." He says the concept of God as a separate substance is impossible and contradictory.

Simultaneous oneness and transcendental separation

19:12God is everything. There is no question of separation. That is defined in the Bhagavad-gītā: mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam. "I am everything." Now, how we can be separate? But he rejects God as a separate person.

19:32How we can reject God? These are the defects of speculators. They cannot give us, uh, tangible leading. Because they are defective themselves, so whatever interpretation they will give, all defective.

19:50Well, he would agree that God is everything. That God is... how you can reject? If God is everything, then who can you reject? But he would not say that God is more than the creation. Now, how everything, uh, you can create?

20:08You cannot create in the Pacific Ocean. But Pacific Ocean is God. So you are limited while you are trying to create God; God is already there. Everything is God. Mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam. Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma.

20:36How you can reject God? Table is God. Table is God. And table is staying on God. The same example: the earthen pot is also earth, and it is kept on earth.

20:59So both of them are... the earthen pot, a tumbler, a water pot made of earth. Everything is made of earth. This table is made of earth. And it is staying on earth. What you can reject?

21:18But he rejects God's transcendental nature. And when you... The thing is that everything is God, that's I have given the example. The floor is God and the temple is God. Now, how we can reject?

21:33He wouldn't disagree with that. Then what is the rejection of God? He would reject the transcendental personality. If you accept that everything is God, what you can literally...

21:47The transcendental personality is separate from the creation. The transcendental is also God. As soon as you say everything is God, then that what you call transcendental and not transcendental, that is also God.

22:07How you can reject if everything is God, how you can reject anything? Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. There is no question. The same example: if everything is made of earth, then where is the question of "my body is also earth"?

22:40So what you can reject? That is our philosophy. We don't reject. We see God in everything. Īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvam. That is intelligence.

22:55And Rūpa Gosvāmī said that, uh, prapañcatayā buddhyā hari-sambandhi-vastunaḥ, that there is everything is related with God. If we think "this is matter, this is spirit", that is my speculation.

23:21That we have to see how God is there and how everything material means when we forget God legitimately. Yet we concentrate on the personality of Krishna. That, that is, that requires little brain.

23:43Those who have, uh, less intelligence or those practically no brain, simply cow dung, for them it is little difficult. Therefore, this Krishna consciousness movement is to cleanse this cow dung and make the brain pure.

24:04Then he learns. Otherwise he is thinking God a person like me. But God is not like that. God is goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūto. His person is in Vrindavan. Goloka eva nivasaty.

24:28He's dancing with gopīs, he's playing with the cowherd boys. Still he's everywhere. Not that "now I'm dancing, I have no time to go everywhere". That is not. He may be engaged in dancing, but still he's everywhere.

24:46Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe 'rjuna tiṣṭhati. Now, if he's in Goloka Vṛndāvana only, a person like us, then how can he say that "patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati"?

25:00Whatever we are offering sometimes to Kṛṣṇa, so if he is in Goloka Vṛndāvana, he may say, "I'm now busy. How can I go to your temple?" And he... No, he is also in the temple. That is God. He's everywhere.

25:20Goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūtaḥ. This is the buddhi. Akhilātma-bhūtaḥ. So he has no conception of God. He cannot imagine God. He must check the understanding differently because they have no standard knowledge.

25:39Everyone is manufacturing. So they must be different. Because everyone is imperfect. You propose something imperfect, I propose something imperfect. So there must be disagreement.

Faith as the foundation for action

25:52Well, he says without action, knowledge has no meaning; not merely to know, but acting according to your knowledge is your vocation, not for idle contemplation of yourself. Yes. No, for action you are here.

26:10Your action and your action alone determines your worth. Yes, that is our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, that we are doing part, then rendering service to Kṛṣṇa. So we do it daily.

26:28From morning four o'clock to night ten o'clock. We are all in this to give service to Kṛṣṇa. This is practical. If you simply sit down, speculate on God and smoke a cigarette, then what is the use of speculation?

26:50Here is practical life. Well, in this sense, Fichte is closer to Kṛṣṇa consciousness than most impersonalists, because most impersonalists advocate inaction and meditation on the void. No.

27:07But impersonalists... But how can you have action without action directed toward a person or toward... Yes, just like here in India, in impersonalism, they have got also action.

27:24Just like the Māyāvādīs, they have also the same principle. Śaṅkarācārya is teaching vairāgya. Sit down under the tree, take thrice bath, so many vairāgya instructions.

27:45Rather, their instructions are more difficult than Vaiṣṇava. Vairāgya-vidyā's teaching. Caitanya Mahāprabhu taught by His personal example. There is no question of inaction, sitting idly and gossiping about God, imagining.

28:14Even impersonalists or personalists, they're fully engaged. Just like the impersonalists in India, they're reading Vedānta-sūtra. They're trying to understand. They're not tired of it.

28:35Well, he felt that faith is the basis of action, not knowledge. He felt that knowledge is not sufficient for action. Yes. Faith is there. Just like a child. Even animals.

28:57We have seen in the park the swan, what is called the children of the swan. Cygnets. Cygnets. Cygnets. Cygnets. What does it mean? Baby swans, C-Y-G-N-E-T, cygnets. Cygnet. Cygnets. Yeah.

29:23But we have seen it practically: the big swan is moving and they are moving. The big one is jumping into water and they are also jumping. They do not know why they are jumping. But they are jumping. The mother is swimming.

29:46Swimming. This is natural. But in Krishna consciousness, isn't knowledge rather than faith the basis for action? Yes. Krishna says: "Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja."

30:01Giving everything, yes, and give everything. That is faith. Full faith. Now, "I shall have to consider whether I shall give up everything and take the risk." That is not faith. That is faithlessness. Why you should consider?

30:23That is explained in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta. The faith is: 'śraddhā'-śabde — viśvāsa kahe sudṛḍha niścaya. Faith means believing firmly. And what is that believing firmly? Kṛṣṇa-bhakti kaile sarva-karma kṛta haya.

30:50Kṛṣṇa says: sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja. If you have got faith, then you believe firmly that simply by surrendering to Kṛṣṇa you become perfect. Very simple.

31:07If you have still reserves, that is not faith. That is not faith. Here is faith. That faith, how it comes? Bahūnāṁ janmanām ante. This faith is not so easy.

31:32After many, many births, when one actually becomes a wise man, this faith comes in. Therefore it is said: sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ. Such kind of mahātmā is very rare to be seen. But this faith is not so easy.

31:52Na janma-koṭibhiḥ labhyate. Prabhupāda said, this faith... Sukṛti, janma-koṭibhiḥ. Those who are pious, they are candidates. That also requires many, many births to come to this stage. Tatra laulyam ekam ulam.

32:17Na janma-koṭi-sukṛtair labhyate. So this faith is not so easy. Kṛṣṇa is from the battlefield of Kurukṣetra five thousand years ago.

32:38The Bhagavad-gītā is being studied by so many scholars like Gandhi, Dr. Radhakrishnan, Vivekananda, Aurobindo. Where is that faith? They are taking advantage of Gītā and preaching their own philosophy. Where is that faith?

33:02They have never taught to surrender to Kṛṣṇa. But this is the first time. Of course, the vaiṣṇavas are teaching us like that. But we, this Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we are teaching this.

33:23They have no faith and they are teaching Bhagavad-gītā. This is anomaly. They have no faith in Krishna. And they are preaching about Krishna. They are studying Bhagavad-gītā. This nonsense is very good. They have no faith.

33:48They do not believe in the words of Krishna. Faithless Krishna-bhaktas. And these yogis, sannyāsīs, they are treating Bhagavad-gītā. So this is a nice point. The faith is the beginning. But they have no faith.

34:14They were the beginning. The foundation. Foundation is lost. It was a big beginning.

Internal conscience and universal proprietorship

34:32Any man go, it was the Christians, they have no faith in the words of Christ. That I point out every time. That Christ says, "Thou shalt not kill," and their only business is killing. Where is faith?

34:56The Ten Commandments, that is Christ's word. Who has faith in these Ten Commandments? Then where is Christian? This is... bina.

35:12Uh, "Faith is innate in all men," he says, "so has it been with all men who have ever seen the light of the world; without being conscious of it, they apprehend all the reality which has an existence for them through faith alone. This faith forces itself on them simultaneously with their existence."

35:39Yes. It is born with them. How could it be otherwise? Yes. Therefore we should have faith by experience that everything has got some proprietor. Why not the whole cosmic manifestation?

36:01You may not have seen who is the proprietor, but it is a question of faith. Everything I see has got a proprietor. Or owner. So who is the owner of this whole cosmic manifestation? This depends on faith.

36:21He may not have seen it. One says, "I don't see any proprietor." Then however, wherefrom it comes? By accident? Is that any accident? That is faith.

36:35That as everything has got some proprietor or some manufacturer, so why not this whole cosmic manifestation a proprietor? You cannot say that I am proprietor. That is some profit. That is faith.

36:56Just like we go strolling in the morning, Magic Island Park, the Magic Island Park is part of our government. You know, it is the property of the government. Just beyond there is sea, then who is the proprietor of the sea?

37:15If this land is property of the Hawaii government, then who is the proprietor of the water? Then my faith is somebody. I may not know. It is common sense. The land is the property of somebody. So whose property is this sea?

37:38But there must be somebody. That is common sense. But there, now common sense is getting back to conscience that we said was vague. He says,

37:57"This voice of my conscience announces to me precisely what I ought to do and what leave undone in every particular situation of life.

38:10It accompanies me, if I will but listen to it with attention, through all the events of my life and never refuses me my reward when I am called upon to act, to listen to it, to obey it honestly."

38:26And he wants to listen to somebody's dictation. That is, as soon as you say listen, then somebody's speaking, you listen. So that is explained in Bhagavad-gītā:

38:43īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe 'rjuna tiṣṭhati. God is situated in everyone's heart. That is dictating. Even he is dictating to the thief that "You are going to steal, it is not good.

38:58If you are arrested, you will be punished." That dictation is there. But he disobeys the dictation and still commits theft, that is sin. So the dictator is there.

39:14We admit that Kṛṣṇa, God, is there within the heart and is giving dictation, but we disobey it. But if we accept that dictation, then he becomes a devotee. Dictation is always there.

39:33Otherwise, why the thief is going to steal at night? Dictation is there that if you don't go at a daytime, he'll be captured, he will be punished. All that: "I shall go at night." When everyone is sleeping.

39:50The dictation is there. Dictation is there in two ways: from the heart and from the representative. God's representative—saintly person, spiritual master—is dictating: "My dear one, you do not do this."

40:11You do this outside dictation and inside dictation. But he's deserving. Regularly he's deserving. Then how can you be happy? His ultimate goal is to merge into what he calls the universal ego. Um, they have some ego.

40:40So just like I'm not some ego, I'm the husband of my wife, I am the chief man in my family, I am the president of the state. These are egos. But you cannot say that "I am the master of this whole universe."

41:06That is possible. So he feels that one can go through the universe assimilating everything until one finally unifies with the impersonal absolute.

41:24The absolute, absolute, absolute—there is no distinction between impersonal and personal. There it is no absolute. If you have got distinction, that "this is personal, this is impersonal," then that is not absolute.

41:45Do you think it is absolute? It is contradictory. Well, for him, God is simply the universal ego, nothing more. And that you say absolute; as soon as you say absolute, there is relative.

42:03Otherwise, what is the meaning of absolute? Yes, he would say that. He would say there is the ego and the universal ego. Then why is this thing, this thing, discriminating between personal and impersonal?

42:22In the absolute, there is no such difference. That is defined in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. That is absolute. Brahmeti Paramātmeti Bhagavān iti śabdyate. Vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam.

42:41Tattvam, tattvam is reality. There is no duality. So actually, we are searching after the absolute truth. The absolute truth is realized in different ways. Burma ti parmatri bhagavani sadhati.

43:06The same example as the the uh sadh but from a distant place you are seeing this mountain something cloudy. You come little forward, you see it is green. And if you enter the mountain, if in so many values, the one is there.

43:28But it is due to my relative understanding by By distant or near nearer, the absolute is appearing in the Birk. Absolute is one. That is absolute. But it is due to my position, qualitative position,

43:53we see in person or alpha ready or bhagavata. Actually he is Bhagavan. Brahmanah Pratista. The impersonal creature is standing on him. Yes. That is like this, this mountain. You see it from this impersonal.

44:14But you go to the mountain, you see so many houses, so many persons, so many animals, so many. So because I am looking the absolute from very distant place, it looks impersonal. Actually it is not. It is my position to see.

44:39Although this impersonal is also there, what we are seeing now, vague, this same mountain of the same hill, but Ah, está lá.