# 01 The Greek Foundation ## Socrates [469-399 B.C.] **Hayagrīva:** When a student of Socrates once said, "I cannot refute you, Socrates," Socrates replied, "Say, rather, that you cannot refute the truth, for Socrates is easily refuted." He thus considered the Absolute Truth transcendental to mental speculation and personal opinion. **Prabhupāda:** That is correct. If we accept Kṛṣṇa, God, as the supreme authority, the Absolute Truth, we cannot refute what He says. Kṛṣṇa, or God, is by definition supreme perfection, and philosophy is perfect when it is in harmony with Him. This is our position. The philosophy of this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is religious because it is concerned with carrying out the orders of God. That is the sum and substance of religion. It is not possible to manufacture a religion. In the *Bhagavad-gītā* and *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam,* manufactured religion is called *dharma-kaitava,* just another form of cheating. Our basic principle is given in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*: > dharmaṁ tu sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītaṁ > na vai vidur ṛṣayo nāpi devāḥ > na siddha-mukhyā asurā manuṣyāḥ > kutaś ca vidyādhara-cāraṇādayaḥ “Real religious principles are enacted by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Although fully situated in the mode of goodness, even the great *ṛṣis* who occupy the topmost planets cannot ascertain the real religious principles, nor can the demigods, nor the leaders of Siddha-loka, to say nothing of the *asuras,* ordinary human beings, Vidyādharas and Cāraṇas." [*SB.* 6.3.19] The word "dharma" refers to the orders given by God, and if we follow those orders, we are following dharma. An individual citizen cannot manufacture laws, because laws are given by the government. Our perfection is in following the orders of God cent per cent. Those who have no conception of God or His orders may manufacture religious systems, but our system is different. **Śyāmasundara:** It seems that Socrates was more or less a *dhyāna-yogī* because he thought that we could arrive at the truth by approaching a subject from every mental angle until there was nothing left but the truth. **Prabhupāda:** He was a *muni,* a great thinker. However, the real truth comes to such a *muni* by that process after many, many births. As stated in *Bhagavad-gītā:* > bahūnāṁ janmanām ante > jñānavān māṁ prapadyate > vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti > sa mahātmāsudurlabhaḥ "After many births and deaths, he who is actually in knowledge surrenders unto Me, knowing Me to be the cause of all causes and all that is. Such a great soul is very rare." [*Bg.* 7.19] These people are known as *jñānavān,* wise men, and after many births, they surrender themselves to Kṛṣṇa. They do not do so blindly, but knowing that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the source of everything. However, this process of self-searching for knowledge takes time. If we take the instructions of Kṛṣṇa directly and surrender unto Him, we save time and many, many births. **Śyāmasundara:** Socrates believed that the soul, which is tied up with intelligence, carries knowledge from existence to existence. The truth can be evoked through the *maieutic* method, the Socratic dialectic. Since someone can make us understand the truth and admit it, we must have known the truth in a previous existence. Thus our intelligence is eternal. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, because the soul is eternal, the intelligence, mind, and senses are also eternal. However, they are all now covered by a material coating, which must be cleansed. Once this material coating is washed away, the real mind, intelligence, and senses will emerge. That is stated in the *Nārada Pañcarātra:* tat paratvena *nirmalam.* The purificatory process necessitates being in touch with the transcendental loving service of the Lord. This means chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa *mahā-mantra.* Caitanya Mahāprabhu said: *ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam* [*Śikṣāṣṭaka* 1]. "We must cleanse the heart." All misconceptions come from misunderstanding. We are all part and parcel of God, yet somehow or other we have forgotten this. Previously, our service was rendered to God, but now we are rendering service to something illusory. This is māyā. Whether liberated or conditioned, our constitutional position is to render service. In the material world, we work according to our different capacities—as a politician, an industrialist, a thinker, a poet, or whatever. But if we are not connected with Kṛṣṇa, all of this is māyā. When we perform our duty in order to develop Kṛṣṇa consciousness, our very same duty enables liberation from this bondage. In any case, both life and knowledge are continuous. Consequently, one person can acquire knowledge very quickly, whereas another cannot. This is proof of continuity. **Śyāmasundara:** In a dialogue with Socrates, Protagoras said, "Truth is relative. It is only a matter of opinion." Socrates then asked, "Do you mean that truth is mere subjective opinion?" Protagoras replied, "Exactly. What is true for you is true for you, and what is true for me is true for me. Thus truth is subjective." Socrates then asked, "Do you really mean that my opinion is true by virtue of its being my opinion?" Protagoras said, "Indeed I do." Socrates then said, "My opinion is that truth is absolute, not subjective, and that you, Protagoras, are absolutely in error. Since this is my opinion, you must grant that it is true according to your philosophy." Protagoras then admitted, "You are quite correct, Socrates." Through this kind of dialogue, or dialectic, Socrates would logically convince many people. **Prabhupāda:** That is what we are also doing. The Absolute Truth is true for everyone, and the relative truth is relative to a particular position. The relative truth depends on the Absolute Truth, which is the *summum bonum.* God is the Absolute Truth, and the material world is relative truth. Because the material world is God's energy, it appears to be real or true, just as the reflection of the sun in water emits some light. That reflection is not absolute, and as soon as the sun sets, that light will disappear. Since relative truth is a reflection of the Absolute Truth, *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* states: *satyaṁ paraṁ dhīmahi,* "I worship the Absolute Truth." [*SB.* 1.1.1] The Absolute Truth is Kṛṣṇa, Vāsudeva. Oṁ namo bhagavate *vāsudevāya.* This cosmic manifestation is relative truth; it is a manifestation of Kṛṣṇa's external energy. If Kṛṣṇa withdrew His energy, the universal creation would not exist. In another sense, Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's energy are not different. We cannot separate heat from fire; heat is also fire, yet heat is not fire. This is the position of relative truth. As soon as we experience heat, we understand that there is fire. Yet we cannot say that heat is fire. Relative truth is like heat because it stands on the strength of the Absolute Truth, just as heat stands on the strength of fire. Because the Absolute is true, relative truth also appears to be true, although it has no independent existence. A mirage appears to be water because in actuality there is such a thing as water. Similarly, this material world appears attractive because there is an all-attractive spiritual world. **Hayagrīva:** According to Socrates, the real pursuit of man is the search for the Absolute Good. Basically, Socrates is an impersonalist because he does not ultimately define this Absolute Good as a person, nor does he give it a personal name. **Prabhupāda:** That is the preliminary stage of understanding the Absolute, known as Brahman realization, realization of the impersonal feature. When one is further advanced, he attains Paramātmā realization, realization of the localized feature, whereby he realizes that God is everywhere. It is a fact that God is everywhere, but at the same time God has His own abode. *Goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūtaḥ* [*Brahma-saṁhitā* 5.37]. God is a person, and He has His own abode and associates. Although He is in His abode, He is present everywhere, within every atom. *Aṇḍāntara-stha-paramāṇu-cayāntara-stham* [*Brahma-saṁhitā* 5.35]. Like other impersonalists, Socrates cannot understand how God, through His potency, can remain in His own abode and simultaneously be present in every atom. The material world is His expansion, His energy. > bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ > khaṁ mano buddhir eva ca > ahaṅkāra itīyaṁ me > bhinnā prakṛtir aṣṭadhā "Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intelligence, and false ego—all together these eight constitute My separated material energies." [*Bg.* 7.4] Because His energy is expanded everywhere, He can be present everywhere. Although the energy and the energetic are nondifferent, we cannot say that they are not distinct. They are simultaneously one and different. This is the perfect philosophy of *acintya-bhedābheda-tattva.* **Hayagrīva:** The Good of which Socrates speaks is different from *sattva-guṇa.* In *The Republic,* Socrates says that it is the Good which gives truth to the objects of knowledge and the very power of knowing to him who knows them. He speaks of the Form of essential goodness as the cause of knowledge and truth. Although we may consider the Good to be an object of knowledge, it would be better if we regarded it as being beyond truth and knowledge and of higher value. Both knowledge and truth are therefore to be regarded as like unto the Good, but it is incorrect to identify either with the Good. He believes that the Good must hold a higher place of honor. Objects of knowledge derive their very being and reality from the Good, which is beyond being itself and surpasses it in dignity and power. **Prabhupāda:** *Sattva-guṇa,* the mode of goodness, is a position from which we can receive knowledge. Knowledge cannot be received from the platform of passion and ignorance. If we hear about Kṛṣṇa, or God, we are gradually freed from the clutches of darkness and passion. Then we can come to the platform of *sattva-guṇa,* and when we are perfectly situated there, we are beyond the lower modes. *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* says: > naṣṭa-prāyeṣv abhadreṣu > nityaṁ bhāgavata-sevayā > bhagavaty uttama-śloke > bhaktir bhavati naiṣṭhikī > tadā rajas-tamo-bhāvāḥ > kāma-lobhādayaś ca ye > ceta etair anāviddhaṁ > sthitaṁ sattve prasīdati "By regularly hearing the *Bhāgavatam* and rendering service unto the pure devotee, all that is troublesome to the heart is practically destroyed, and loving service unto the glorious Lord, who is praised with transcendental songs, is established as an irrevocable fact. At the time loving service is established in the heart, the modes of passion [*rajas*], and ignorance [*tamas*], and lust and desire [*kāma*], disappear from the heart. Then the devotee is established in goodness, and he becomes happy." [*SB.* 1.2.18-19] This process may be gradual, but it is certain. The more we hear about Kṛṣṇa, the more we become purified. Purification means freedom from the attacks of greed and passion. Then we can become happy. From the *brahma-bhūta* platform, we can realize ourselves and then realize God. So before realizing the Supreme Good, we must first come to the platform of *sattva-guṇa,* goodness. Therefore we have regulations prohibiting illicit sex, meat eating, intoxication, and gambling. Ultimately, we must transcend even the mode of goodness through *bhakti.* Then we become liberated, gradually develop love of God, and regain our original state. > nirodho 'syānuśayanam > ātmanaḥ saha śaktibhiḥ > muktir hitvānyathā rūpaṁ > sva-rūpeṇa vyavasthitiḥ "When the living entity, along with his conditional living tendency, merges with the mystic lying down of the Mahā-Viṣṇu, it is called the winding up of the cosmic manifestation. Liberation is the permanent situation of the form of the living entity after giving up the changeable material gross and subtle bodies." [*SB.* 2.10.6] This means giving up all material engagements and rendering full service to Kṛṣṇa. Then we attain the state where māyā cannot touch us. If we keep in touch with Kṛṣṇa, māyā has no jurisdiction. > daivī hy eṣā guṇamayī > mama māyā duratyayā > mām eva ye prapadyante > māyām etāṁ taranti te "This divine energy of Mine, consisting of the three modes of material nature, is difficult to overcome. But those who have surrendered unto Me can easily cross beyond it." [*Bg.* 7.14] This is perfection. **Hayagrīva:** Socrates taught a process of liberation comparable to that of *dhyāna-yoga.* For him, liberation meant freedom from passion, and he approved the saying gnothi seauton*—"Know thyself." By knowing ourselves through meditation, or insight, we can gain self-control, and by being self-controlled, we can attain happiness. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, that is a fact. Meditation means analyzing the self and searching for the Absolute Truth. That is described in the Vedic literatures: *dhyānāvasthita-tad-gatena manasā paśyanti yaṁ yoginaḥ* [*SB.* 12.13.1].Through meditation, the yogī sees the Supreme Truth [Kṛṣṇa, or God] within himself. Kṛṣṇa is there. The yogī consults with Kṛṣṇa, and Kṛṣṇa advises him. That is the relationship Kṛṣṇa has with the yogī. Buddhi-yogaṁ *dadāmyaham.* When one is purified, he is always seeing Kṛṣṇa within himself. This is confirmed in *Brahma-saṁhitā:* > premāñjana-cchurita-bhakti-vilocanena > santaḥ sadaiva hṛdayeṣu vilokayanti > yaṁśyāmasundaram acintya-guṇa-svarūpaṁ > govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi "I worship the primeval Lord, Govinda, who is always seen by the devotee whose eyes are anointed with the pulp of love. He is seen in His eternal form of Śyāmasundara situated within the heart of the devotee." [*Brahma-saṁhitā* 5.38] Thus an advanced saintly person is always seeing Kṛṣṇa. In this verse, the word *syāma* means "blackish," but at the same time extraordinarily beautiful. The word *acintya* means that He has unlimited qualities. Although He is situated everywhere, as Govinda He is always dancing in Vṛndāvana with the *gopīs.* In Vṛndāvana, Kṛṣṇa plays with His friends, and sometimes, acting as a naughty boy, teases His mother. These pastimes of the Supreme Person are described in *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.* **Śyāmasundara:** As far as we know, Socrates was a self-taught man. Is it possible for a person to be self-taught? That is, can self-knowledge be attained through meditation, or introspection? **Prabhupāda:** Yes. Ordinarily, everyone thinks according to the bodily conception. If I begin to study the different parts of my body and seriously begin to consider what I am, I will gradually arrive at the study of the soul. If I ask myself, "Am I this hand?" the answer will be, "No, I am not this hand. Rather, this is *my* hand." I can thus continue analyzing each part of the body and discover that all the parts are mine but that I am different. Through this method of self-study, any intelligent man can see that he is not the body. This is the first lesson of Bhagavad-gītā:* > dehino 'smin yathā dehe > kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā > tathā dehāntara-prāptir > dhīras tatra na muhyati "As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change." [*Bg.* 2.13] At one time I had the body of a child, but now that body is no longer existing. Still, I am aware that I possessed such a body; therefore from this I can deduce that I am something other than the body. I may rent an apartment, but I do not identify with it. The body may be mine, but I am not the body. By this kind of introspection, a man can teach himself the distinction between the body and the soul. As far as being completely self-taught—according to *Bhagavad-gītā* and the Vedic conception, life is continuous. Since we are always acquiring experience, we cannot say that Socrates was self-taught. Rather, in his previous lives he cultivated knowledge, and this knowledge is continuing. That is a fact. Otherwise, why is one man intelligent and another man ignorant? This is due to continuity. **Hayagrīva:** Socrates believed that through meditation, a person can attain knowledge, and through knowledge he can become virtuous. When he is virtuous, he acts in the right way, and by so doing, becomes happy. Therefore the enlightened man is meditative, knowledgeable, and virtuous. He is also happy because he acts properly. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, that is confirmed in *Bhagavad-gītā:* > brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā > na śocati na kāṅkṣati > samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu > mad-bhaktiṁ labhate parām **"One who is thus transcendentally situated at once realizes the Supreme Brahman and becomes fully joyful. He never laments or desires to have anything. He is equally disposed toward every living entity. In that state he attains pure devotional service unto Me."** [*Bg.* 18.54] When one is self-realized, he immediately becomes happy, joyful [*prasannātmā*]. This is because he is properly situated. A person may labor a long time under some mistaken idea, but when he finally comes to the proper conclusion, he becomes very happy. He thinks, "Oh, what a fool I was, going on so long in such a mistaken way." Thus a self-realized person is happy. Happiness means that you no longer have to think of attaining things. For instance, Dhruva Mahārāja told the Lord: *Svāmin kṛtārtho 'smi.* "I don't want any material benediction." Prahlada Mahārāja also said, "My Lord, I don't want any material benefits. I have seen my father, who was such a big materialist that even the demigods were afraid of him, destroyed by You within a second. Therefore I am not after these things." Real knowledge means that you no longer hanker. The *karmīs, jñānīs,* and yogīsare all hankering after something. The *karmīs* want material wealth, beautiful women and good positions. If one is not hankering for what one does not have, he is lamenting for what he has lost. The *jñānīs* are also hankering, expecting to become one with God and merge into His existence. The yogīs are hankering after some magical powers to befool others into thinking that they have become God. In India, some yogīs convince people that they can manufacture gold and fly in the sky, and foolish people believe them. Even if a yogī can fly, there are many birds flying. What is the difference? An intelligent person can understand this. If a person says that he can walk on water, thousands of fools will come to see him. People will even pay ten rupees just to see a man bark like a dog, not thinking that there are many dogs barking anyway. In any case, people are always hankering and lamenting, but the devotee is fully satisfied in the service of the Lord. The devotee doesn't hanker for anything, nor does he lament. **Hayagrīva:** Through *jñāna,* the path of meditation, it seems that Socrates realized Brahman. Could he also have realized Paramātmā? **Prabhupāda:** Yes. **Hayagrīva:** But what of the realization of Bhagāvan, Kṛṣṇa? I thought that Kṛṣṇa can be realized only through *bhakti.* **Prabhupāda:** Yes, no one can enter into Kṛṣṇa's abode without being a purified *bhakta.* That is stated in Bhagavad-gītā*: > bhaktyā mām abhijānāti > yāvān yaś cāsmi tattvataḥ > tato māṁ tattvato jñātvā > viśate tad-anantaram "One can understand the Supreme Personality as He is only by devotional service. And when one is in full consciousness of the Supreme Lord by such devotion, he can enter into the kingdom of God." [*Bg.* 18.55] Kṛṣṇa never says that He can be understood by *jñāna,* karma, or yoga. The personal abode of Kṛṣṇa is especially reserved for the *bhaktas,* and the *jñānīs,* yogīs, and *karmīs* cannot go there. **Śyāmasundara:** When you say that Kṛṣṇa consciousness is the ultimate goal of life, does this mean always being conscious of Kṛṣṇa? **Prabhupāda:** Yes, we should always be thinking of Kṛṣṇa. We should act in such a way that we have to think of Kṛṣṇa all the time. For instance, we are discussing the philosophy of Socrates in order to strengthen our Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Therefore the ultimate goal is Kṛṣṇa. Otherwise, we are not interested in criticizing or accepting anyone's philosophy. We are neutral. **Śyāmasundara:** So the proper use of intelligence is to guide everything in such a way that we become Kṛṣṇa conscious? **Prabhupāda:** That is it. Without Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we remain on the mental platform. Being on the mental platform means hovering. On that platform, we are not fixed. It is the business of the mind to accept this and reject that, but when we are fixed in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we are no longer subjected to the mind's accepting and rejecting. **Śyāmasundara:** Right conduct then becomes automatic? **Prabhupāda:** Yes. As soon as the mind wanders, we should immediately drag it back to concentrate on Kṛṣṇa. While chanting, our mind sometimes wanders far away, but when we become conscious of this, we should immediately bring the mind back to hear the sound vibration of Hare Kṛṣṇa. That is called *yoga-abhyās,* the practice of yoga. We should not allow the mind to wander elsewhere. We should simply chant and hear. That is the best yoga system. **Hayagrīva:** In addition to believing in the value of insight, or meditation, Socrates also believed that knowledge can be imparted from one person to another. He therefore asserted the importance of a *guru,* which he himself was for many people. Sometimes, posing as an ignorant person, Socrates would question his disciples. He would not offer the answers but would try to draw them out of his disciples, a process known as the maieutic method. He considered himself to be a kind of midwife drawing the truth from the repository of the soul. **Prabhupāda:** This is similar to our method because we say that you must approach a guru in order to learn the truth. This is the instruction given in all the Vedic scriptures. In *the Bhagavad-gītā,* Lord Kṛṣṇa Himself advises: > tad viddhi pranipātena > paripraśnena sevayā > upadekṣyanti te jñānaṁ > jñāninaś tattva-darśinaḥ **"Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized souls can impart knowledge unto you because they have seen the truth."** [*Bg.* 4.34] A guru who knows the truth is one who has seen the truth. People say, "Can you show me God?" It is a natural tendency to want to know something by direct perception. This is possible by advanced devotion. As I have already explained: *santaḥ sadaiva hṛdayeṣu vilokayanti.* The realized devotee is constantly seeing the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Śyāmasundara. You can constantly see the Supreme Lord as Paramātmā sitting within your heart, and you can take advice from Him. Kṛṣṇa also confirms this: *buddhi-yogaṁ dadāmyaham.* Yoga means concentrating the mind in order to see the Supersoul within. Therefore you have to control the activities of the senses and withdraw them from material engagement. When your concentration is perfect, when your mind is focused on Paramātmā, you always see Him. In the *Bhagavad-gītā,* Kṛṣṇa says: > yoginām api sarveṣāṁ > mad-gatenāntarātmanā > śraddhāvān bhajate yo māṁ > sa me yuktatamo mataḥ “And of all yogīs, the one with great faith who always abides in Me, thinks of Me within himself, and renders transcendental loving service to Me—he is the most intimately united with Me in yoga and is the highest of all. That is My opinion." [*Bg.* 6.47] The perfect yogī sees God constantly within. That is perfection. The process that Socrates used gave his disciples a good chance to develop their understanding. When a parent raises his child, he first of all takes his hand and teaches him how to walk. Sometimes he gives the child freedom to walk on his own, although he may sometimes fall down. The father then encourages the child, saying, "Ah, you are doing very nicely. Stand up again and walk." Similarly, the guru gives his disciple the chance to think properly in order to go back home, back to Godhead. Sometimes, when a person comes to argue, the guru says, "All right, what do you consider important?" In this way, the person's position is understood. An expert teacher knows how to capture a fool. First, let the fool go on and speak all sorts of nonsense. Then he can understand where he is having difficulty. That is also a process. **Śyāmasundara:** Socrates recommended good association because if one is to develop good qualities, he must associate with those who are virtuous and similarly interested. **Prabhupāda:** That is very valuable. Without good association, we cannot develop Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Narottama Dāsa Ṭhākura sings: *T**ādera caraṇa-sebi-bhakta-sane bās janame janame hoy ei *abhilāṣ.* "My dear Lord, please allow me to live with those devotees who serve the lotus feet of the six Gosvāmīs. This is my desire, life after life." [*Nāma-saṅkīrtana* 7] The aim of this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is to create a society in which devotees can associate with one another. **Hayagrīva:** It has been said that Socrates's philosophy is primarily a philosophy of ethics, pointing to the way of action in the world. *Jñāna,* or knowledge in itself, is not sufficient. It must be applied, and must serve as a basis for activity. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, ethics form the basic principle of purification. We cannot be purified unless we know what is moral and what is immoral. Unfortunately, everything in this material world is more or less immoral, but we still have to distinguish between good and bad. Therefore we have regulative principles. By following them, we can come to the spiritual platform and transcend the influence of the three modes of material nature. Passion is the binding force in the material world. In a prison, prisoners are sometimes shackled, and similarly, material nature provides the shackles of sex life to bind us to this material world. This is the mode of *rajas,* passion. In the *Bhagavad-gītā**, Kṛṣṇa says: > kāma eṣa krodha eṣa > rajoguṇa-samudbhavaḥ > mahā-śano mahā-pāpmā > viddhy enam iha vairiṇam **"It is lust only, Arjuna, which is born of contact with the material mode of passion and later transformed into wrath, and which is the all-devouring sinful enemy of this world." [*Bg.* 3.37] Rajo-guṇa,* the mode of passion, includes *kāma,* lusty desires. When our lusty desires are not fulfilled, we become angry [*krodha*]. All this binds us to the material world. As stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*:** > tadā rajas-tamo-bhāvāḥ > kāma-lobhādayaś ca ye > ceta etair anāviddhaṁ > sthitaṁ sattve prasīdati "As soon as irrevocable loving service is established in the heart, the effects of nature's modes of passion and ignorance, such as lust, desire, and hankering, disappear from the heart. Then the devotee is established in goodness, and he becomes completely happy." [*SB.* 1.2.19] When we are subjected to the lower material modes [*rajo-guṇa* and *tamo-guṇa*], we become greedy and lusty. Ethics provide a way to escape the clutches of greed and lust. Then we can come to the platform of goodness and from there attain the spiritual platform. **Hayagrīva:** Is meditation in itself sufficient to transcend these lower modes? **Prabhupāda:** Yes. If we seek the Supersoul within, our meditation is perfect. But if we manufacture something in the name of transcendental meditation in order to bluff others, it is useless. **Śyāmasundara:** Socrates believed that ignorance results in bad actions, and that the knowledgeable man will automatically act properly. **Prabhupāda:** When an ignorant child touches fire and is burned, he cries. His distress is due to ignorance. An intelligent person will not touch fire because he knows its properties. Thus ignorance is the cause of bondage and suffering. It is due to ignorance that people commit many sinful activities and become entangled. **Śyāmasundara:** Does this mean that when people are enlightened with proper knowledge, they will automatically become good? **Prabhupāda:** Yes. It is stated in *Bhagavad-gītā:* > yathaidhāmsi samiddho 'gnir > bhasmasāt kurute 'rjuna > jñānāgniḥ sarva-karmāṇi > bhasmasāt kurute tathā "As the blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge burn to ashes all reactions to material activities." [*Bg.* 4.37] The fire of knowledge consumes all sinful activities. To this end, there is need for education. People are born ignorant, and education is needed to remove their ignorance. Since they are born illusioned by the bodily conception, people act like animals. They therefore have to be educated to understand that they are different from the material body. **Śyāmasundara:** Why is it that some people who receive this knowledge later reject it? **Prabhupāda:** Then it is not perfect knowledge. When one actually receives perfect knowledge, he becomes good. This is a fact. If one is not good, it is because he has not received perfect knowledge. **Śyāmasundara:** Is there not a class of men that is always evil? **Prabhupāda:** No. **Śyāmasundara:** Can any man be made good? **Prabhupāda:** Certainly, because the soul is by nature good. The living entity is covered by the inferior modes of material nature, by passion and ignorance. When he is cleansed of this covering, his goodness will emerge. The soul is originally good because it is part and parcel of God, and God is all good. That which is part and parcel of gold is also gold. Although the soul is covered by matter, the soul is all good. When a sharpened knife is covered by rust, it loses its sharpness. If we remove the rust, the knife will once again be sharp. **Śyāmasundara:** Does the existence of evil in the world mean that there is absolute evil? **Prabhupāda:** Absolute evil means forgetfulness of the Absolute Truth. Kṛṣṇa is the Absolute Truth, and lack of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is absolute evil. In terms of the absolute evil, we may say that this is good and that is bad, but all this is mental concoction. **Śyāmasundara:** Generally speaking, Socrates was more concerned with God as a moral reality than as a personal conception. **Prabhupāda:** Moral reality is necessarily personal. If a man is moral, we say that he is honest. If he follows no moral principles, we say that he is dishonest. Thus morality and immorality refer to a person. How can we deny personal morality? **Śyāmasundara:** Then if God is pure morality, He must be a person. **Prabhupāda:** Certainly. All good. God is good, and this means that He is full of morality. **Śyāmasundara:** Socrates taught that good deeds bring happiness and that to perform them is the real goal of life. **Prabhupāda:** That is the law of karma. If I work hard in this life, I earn money. If I study hard, I acquire an education. However, if I neither work nor study, I remain poor and uneducated. This is the law of karma. According to the Vedic *varṇāśrama-dharma,* society is divided into four castes: *brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya,* and *śūdra.* Each caste has its particular duty, but that duty is connected to God's service. In other words, everyone can satisfy the Supreme Lord by performing his duty. By walking, the legs perform their duty, and by touching or holding, the hands perform their duty. Every part of the body performs a duty alotted to it. Similarly, we are all part and parcel of God, and if we do our duty, we are serving God. This is the system of *varṇāśrama-dharma.* Kṛṣṇa Himself says in *Bhagavad-gītā:* *cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭaṁ*** guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ** "According to the three modes of material nature and the work ascribed to them, the four divisions of human society were created by Me." [*Bg.* 4.13] **It is further stated:** > yataḥ pravṛttir bhūtānāṁ > yena sarvam idaṁtatam > svakarmaṇā tam abhyarcya > siddhiṁ vindati mānavaḥ "By worship of the Lord, who is the source of all beings and who is all-pervading, a man can attain perfection through performing his own work." [*Bg.* 18.46] Thus the respective duties of the *brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya,* or *śūdra* can be dovetailed to the service of the Lord, and by doing so, any man can attain perfection. **Śyāmasundara:** Is moral improvement the highest goal of mankind, or is there something higher? **Prabhupāda:** First of all, we must understand what morality is. Morality means discharging our prescribed duties without hindering others in the execution of their duties. That is morality. **Śyāmasundara:** What do you consider the shortcomings of a philosophy devoted to moral improvement and knowing oneself through pure reason alone? **Prabhupāda:** Knowing oneself through pure reason alone will take time. Of course, in European philosophy, there is an attempt at more independent thought, but such independent thinking is not approved by the followers of the *Vedas.* The Vedic followers receive knowledge directly from authorities. They do not speculate. We cannot attain knowledge through speculation because everyone is imperfect. A person may be proud of seeing, but he does not know that his eyesight is conditioned. Unless there is sunlight, he cannot see. Therefore, what is the intrinsic value of eyesight? We should not be very proud of seeing or thinking because our senses are imperfect. We therefore have to receive knowledge from the perfect. In this way, we save time. According to the Vedic system, we receive knowledge from Vyāsadeva, Nārada, and Śrī Kṛṣṇa Himself. This knowledge is perfect because these personalities are not subjected to the four defects of conditioned living entities. The conditioned living entity has a tendency to commit mistakes, to be illusioned, to have imperfect senses, and to cheat. These are the four imperfections of conditional life. We therefore have to receive knowledge from those who are liberated. This is the Vedic process. If we receive knowledge from Kṛṣṇa, there cannot be any mistake, nor any question of illusion. Our senses may be imperfect, but Kṛṣṇa's senses are perfect; therefore whatever Kṛṣṇa says, we accept, and that acceptance is our perfection. A person may search for years to find out who his father is, but the immediate answer is available through his mother. The best way to solve this problem is by directly asking the mother. Similarly, all knowledge received from the perfect liberated person or from the mother *Vedas* is perfect. **Śyāmasundara:** Socrates's emphasis was on humanity and ethical action. He said that our lives should be composed of good deeds because we can attain the highest perfection by being virtuous. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, to do good work is also recommended in *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.* It is possible to go home, back to Godhead, if we always work for the benefit of others. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement means benefitting others twenty-four hours a day. People are lacking knowledge of God, and we are preaching this knowledge. This is the highest humanitarian work: to elevate the ignorant to the platform of knowledge. **Śyāmasundara:** But wouldn't you say that there is something more than moral improvement? Isn't that just a by-product of something else? **Prabhupāda:** Yes, real improvement is realizing God and our relationship with Him. In order to come to this platform, morality or purity is required. God is pure, and unless we are also pure, we cannot approach God. Therefore we are prohibiting meat eating, illicit sex, intoxication, and gambling. These are immoral habits that are always keeping UH impure. Unless we abandon these impure habits, we cannot progress in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. **Śyāmasundara:** Then morality is just a qualification for becoming God conscious, isn't it? **Prabhupāda:** If we take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we automatically become moral. On the one hand, we have to observe the regulative moral principles, and on the other hand we have to develop our tendency to serve Kṛṣṇa more and more. By serving Kṛṣṇa, we become moral. However, if we try to be moral without serving Kṛṣṇa, we will fail. Therefore so-called followers of morality are always frustrated. The goal is transcendental to human morality. We have to come to the platform of Kṛṣṇa consciousness in order to be truly moral. According to *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:* > yasyāsti bhaktir bhagavaty akiñcanā > sarvair guṇais tatra samāsate surāḥ > harāv abhaktasya kuto mahad-guṇā > manorathenāsati dhāvato bahiḥ "All the demigods and their exalted qualities, such as religion, knowledge, and renunciation, become manifest in the body of one who has developed unalloyed devotion for the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Vfisudeva. On the other hand, a person devoid of devotional service and engaged in material activities has no good qualities. Even if he is adept at the practice of mystic *yoga* or the honest endeavor of maintaining his family and relatives, he must be driven by his own mental speculations and must engage in the service of the Lord's external energy. How can there be any good qualities in such a man?" [*SB.* 5.18.12] The conclusion is that we cannot be moral without being devotees. We may artificially try to be moral, but ultimately we will fail. **Śyāmasundara:** By virtue of his intelligence, Socrates could keep his passions controlled, but most people do not have such intellectual strength. They are not able to control themselves rationally and act properly. How does Kṛṣṇa consciousness help in this endeavor? **Prabhupāda:** Kṛṣṇa consciousness purifies the intelligence, the mind, and the senses. Since everything is purified, there is no chance in being employed in anything but Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Anyone can do this under the proper guidance, whereas not everyone can do as Socrates did. The common man does not have sufficient intelligence to control himself without spiritual exercise. Yet, despite his intelligence, Socrates had no clear conception of God. In *the *Bhagavad-gītā**, Arjuna tells Śrī Kṛṣṇa: > paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma > pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān > puruṣaṁ śāśvataṁ divyam > ādi-devam ajaṁ vibhum "You are the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the ultimate abode, the purest, the Absolute Truth. You are the eternal, transcendental, original person, the unborn, the greatest." [*Bg.* 10.12] **The word *pavitram* means "the purest." This includes all morality. Acting in Kṛṣṇa consciousness is the best morality, and this is supported in Bhagavad-gītā*:** > api cet sudurācāro > bhajate mām ananya-bhāk > sādhur eva sa mantavyaḥ > samyag vyavasito hi saḥ "Even if one commits the most abominable action, if he is engaged in devotional service he is to be considered saintly because he is properly situated in his determination." [*Bg.* 9.30] Even if a person is considered immoral from the mundane point of view, he should be regarded as moral if he acts on the platform of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Sometimes a person in Kṛṣṇa consciousness may appear to act immorally. For instance, in the dead of night, the young cowherd girls of Vṛndāvana left their husbands and fathers to go to the forest to see Kṛṣṇa. From the materialistic point of view, this is immoral, but because their actions were connected with Kṛṣṇa, they are considered highly moral. By nature, Arjuna was not inclined to kill, even at the risk of his kingdom, but Kṛṣṇa wanted him to fight; therefore Arjuna entered the battle and acted morally, even though he was killing people. **Śyāmasundara:** Then, you are saying that morality is absolute as long as it is in relation with Kṛṣṇa? **Prabhupāda:** If Kṛṣṇa or His representative says, "Do this," that act is moral. We cannot create morality. We cannot say, "I am a devotee of Kṛṣṇa; therefore I can kill." No. We cannot do anything unless we receive a direct order. **Śyāmasundara:** But can leading a life that is honest, or based on doing good to others, lead us to ultimate happiness? **Prabhupāda:** Unless we are Kṛṣṇa conscious, there is no meaning to honesty and morality. They are artificial. People are always saying, "This is mine." But our accepting proprietorship is actually immoral hecause nothing belongs to us. *Īśāvāsyam idaṁ *sarvam* [*Īśopaniṣad* 1]. Everything belongs to Kṛṣṇa. We cannot say, "This table is mine. This wife is mine. This house is mine." It is immoral to claim another's properly as our own. **Śyāmasundara:** Socrates defines right as that which is beneficial to others, and wrong as that which does harm to others. **Prabhupāda:** That is a general definition, but we should know what is beneficial for others. Kṛṣṇa consciousness is beneficial, and anything else is not beneficial. **Śyāmasundara:** For instance, he states that stealing, lying, cheating, hating, and other evils, are absolutely bad. Yet if there is a necessity to cheat or lie in order to serve Kṛṣṇa, would that be bad? **Prabhupāda:** Cheating and lying are not necessary. By cheating, we cannot serve Kṛṣṇa. That is not the principle. However, if Kṛṣṇa directly orders us to cheat, that is a different matter. But we cannot create that order. We cannot say, "Because I am Kṛṣṇa conscious, it is all right for me to cheat." No. However, once Kṛṣṇa asked Yudhiṣṭhira to go tell Droṇācārya that his son was dead, although his son was not. This was a kind of cheating, but because Kṛṣṇa directly ordered it, it was all right. Orders from Kṛṣṇa are transcendental to everything—morality and immorality. In Kṛṣṇa consciousness, there is neither morality nor immorality. There is simply good. **Hayagrīva:** The Athenian government accused Socrates of fostering atheism and blaspheming the gods because he felt that worship of the demigods in the Greek pantheon did not lead to self-realization. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, Socrates was right. Worship of the demigods is also discouraged in *Bhagavad-gītā:* > kāmais tais tair hṛta-jñānāḥ > prapadyante 'nya-devatāḥ > taṁ taṁ niyamam āsthāya > prakṛtyā niyatāḥ svayā "Those whose minds are distorted by material desires surrender unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship according to their own natures." [*Bg.* 7.20] Demigods are worshipped out of lust for some material benefit by one who has lost his intelligence [*hṛta-jñāna*], You may worship the demigod Sarasvatī, the goddess of learning, and thereby become a great scholar, but how long will you remain a scholar? When your body dies, your scholarly knowledge is finished. Then you have to accept another body and act accordingly. So how will scholastic knowledge help you? However, if you worship God Himself, the results are different. > janma karma ca me divyam > evaṁ yo vetti tattvataḥ > tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma > naiti mām eti so 'rjuna **"One who knows the transcendental nature of My appearance and activities does not, upon leaving the body, take his birth again in this material world, but attains My eternal abode, O Arjuna." [*Bg.* 4.9] To worship God means to know God. Knowing God means understanding how material nature is working under His directions. Kṛṣṇa says:** > mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ > sūyate sa-carācaram > hetunānena kaunteya > jagad viparivartate **"This material nature, which is one of My energies, is working under My direction, O son of Kuntī, producing all moving and nonmoving beings. Under its rule this manifestation is created and annihilated again and again." [*Bg.* 9.10] Because impersonalists cannot understand how a person can direct the wonderful activities of material nature, they remain impersonalists. But actually God is a person, and this is the understanding we get from Bhagavad-gītā*:** > mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat > kiñcid asti dhanañjaya > mayi sarvam idaṁ protaṁ > sūtre maṇi-gaṇā iva "O conqueror of wealth, there is no truth superior to Me. Everything rests upon Me, as pearls are strung on a thread." [*Bg.* 7.7] The word *mattaḥ* refers to a person. > ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo > mattaḥ sarvaṁpravartate > iti matvā bhajante māṁ > budhā bhāva-samanvitāḥ "I am the source of all spiritual and material worlds. Everything emanates from Me. The wise who perfectly know this engage in My devotional service and worship Me with all their hearts." [*Bg.* 10.8] **The *Vedānta-sūtra* also confirms that the Absolute Truth is a person, and when Arjuna understood Bhagavad-gītā,* he addressed Kṛṣṇa as *paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ *bhavān.* " You are the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the ultimate abode, the purest, the Absolute Truth. You are the eternal, transcendental, original person, the unborn, the greatest." [*Bg.* 10.12] Understanding the Absolute Truth means understanding the three features of the Absolute Truth:** the impersonal, the localized, and the personal. > vadanti tat tattva-vidas > tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam > brahmeti paramātmeti > bhagavān iti śabdyate "Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this nondual substance Brahman, Paramātmā, and Bhagāvan." [*SB.* 1.2.11] The Absolute Truth is one, but there are different features. One mountain seen from different distances appears different. From a far distance, the Absolute Truth appears impersonal, but as you approach, you see Paramātmā present everywhere. When you come even nearer, you can perceive Bhagāvan, the Supreme Person. **Śyāmasundara:** Socrates deliberately took poison in order not to contradict himself. The government told him that if he retracted his statements, he could live, but he preferred to be a martyr for his own beliefs. **Prabhupāda:** It is good that he stuck to his point, yet regrettable that he lived in a society that would not permit him to think independently. Therefore he was obliged to die. In that sense, Socrates was a great soul. Although he appeared in a society that was not very advanced, he was nonetheless a great philosopher. **Hayagrīva:** Socrates considered the contemplation of beauty to be an activity of the wise man, but relative beauty in the mundane world is simply a reflection of absolute beauty. In the same way, good in the relative world is but a reflection of the absolute good. In any case, absolute good or beauty is transcendental. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, that is also our view. Beauty, knowledge, strength, wealth, fame, and renunciation are all transcendental. In this material world, everything is a perverted reflection. A foolish animal may run after a mirage in the desert, thinking it water, but a sane man knows better. Although there is no water in the desert, we cannot conclude that there is no water at all. Water certainly exists. Similarly, real happiness, beauty, knowledge, strength, and the other opulences exist in the spiritual world, but here they are only reflected pervertedly. Generally, people have no information of the spiritual world; therefore they have to imagine something spiritual. They do not understand that this material world is imaginary. > janma karma ca me divyam > evaṁ yo vetti tattvataḥ > tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma > naiti mām eti so 'rjuna "One who knows the transcendental nature of My appearance and activities does not, upon leaving the body, take his birth again in this material world, but attains My eternal abode, O Arjuna." [*Bg.* 4.9] Although people are reading Bhagavad-gītā,* they cannot understand this very simple point. After giving up the material body, the devotee goes to Kṛṣṇa. Of course, the Christians say that after death, one goes to heaven or hell, and to some extent that is a fact. If we understand Kṛṣṇa in this lifetime, we can go to Kṛṣṇa's eternal abode; otherwise, we remain in this material world to undergo the same cycle of birth and death. That is hell. **Hayagrīva:** At the conclusion of *The Republic,* Socrates gives the analogy of humanity living within a dark cave. The self-realized teacher has seen the light outside the cave. When he returns to the cave to inform the people that they are in darkness, many consider him crazy for speaking of such a thing as the light outside. Thus the teacher often puts himself in a very dangerous position. **Prabhupāda:** That is a fact. We often give the example of a frog within a dark well, thinking that his well is everything. When he is informed that there is an Atlantic Ocean, he cannot conceive of such a great quantity of water. Those who are in the dark well of material existence are surprised to hear that there is light outside. Everyone in the material world is suffering in the dark well of material existence, and we are throwing down this rope called Kṛṣṇa consciousness. If people do not catch hold, what can we do? If you are fortunate, you can capture the Lord with the help of the teacher, but it is up to you to catch hold of the rope. Everyone is trying to get out of the misery of material existence. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says: > sarva-dharmān parityajya > mām ekaṁśaraṇaṁvraja > ahaṁ tvāṁ sarva-pāpebhyo > mokṣayiṣyāmi mā śucaḥ **"Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear." [*Bg.* 18.66] Still, due to obstinance, people refuse, or do not believe Him. The Vedas* also tell us, "Don't remain in the dark well. Come out into the light." Unfortunately, people want to become perfect and yet remain in the dark well. This material universe is by nature dark, and therefore Kṛṣṇa has supplied the sun and moon for light. Yet there is Kṛṣṇa's kingdom, which is different, as Kṛṣṇa Himself tells us in *Bhagavad-gītā*:** > na tad bhāsayate sūryo > na śaśāṅko na pāvakaḥ > yad gatvā na nivartante > tad dhāma paramaṁ mama **"That supreme abode of Mine is not illumined by the sun or moon, nor by fire or electricity. Those who reach it never return to this material world." [*Bg.* 15.6] In Kṛṣṇa's kingdom there is no need for sun, moon, or electricity. His kingdom is all effulgent. In the darkness of this material world, the only happiness is in sleep and sex. As stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*:** > śrotavyādīni rājendra > nṛṇāṁ santi sahasraśaḥ > apaśyatām ātma-tattvaṁ > gṛheṣu gṛha-medhinām > nidrayā hriyate naktaṁ > vyavāyena ca vā vayaḥ > divā cārthehayā rājan > kuṭumba-bharaṇena vā "Those who are materially engrossed, being blind to the knowledge of ultimate truth, are interested in hearing about many different subjects, O Emperor. The lifetime of such envious householders is passed at night either in sleeping or in sex indulgence, and in the day either in making money or maintaining family members." [*SB.* 2.1.2–3] Materialists spend much time reading newspapers, novels, and magazines. They have many forms of engagement because they are ignorant of self-realization. They think that life simply means living in a family surrounded by their wife, children, and friends. They work hard during the day for money, racing their cars at breakneck speed, and at night they either sleep or enjoy sex. This is just like the life of a hog constantly searching for stool. Yet all of this is taking place in the name of civilization. This kind of hoggish civilization is condemned in the Vedic literatures. Kṛṣṇa advises us to produce grains, eat fruits, vegetables, drink milk, and cultivate Kṛṣṇa consciousness. In this way, we can become happy. **Hayagrīva:** Socrates speaks of everyone sitting in the cave, watching a kind of cinema composed of imitation forms. **Prabhupāda:** This means that people are in darkness, and everything seen in darkness is not clear. Therefore the Vedic version is: "Don't remain in darkness. Come to the light." That light is the guru. *oṁ ajñāna-timirāndhasya jñānāñjana-śalākayā*** cakṣur unmīlitaṁ yena tasmai śrī-gurave namaḥ** "I was born in the darkest ignorance, and my spiritual master opened my eyes with the torch of knowledge. I offer my respectful obeisances unto him." [*Śrī Guru Praṇāma*] ## Plato [427-347 B.C.] **Hayagrīva:** For Plato, the spiritual world is not a mental conception; rather, truth is the same as ultimate reality, the ideal or the highest good, and it is from this that all manifestations and cognitions flow. Plato uses the word *eidos* [idea] in order to denote a subject's primordial existence, its archetypal shape. Doesn't Kṛṣṇa use the word *b**ījam* [seed] in much the same way? **Prabhupāda:** Yes. *Bījaṁ māṁ *sarva-bhūtānāṁ.* "I am the original seed of all existences." [*Bg.* 7.10] In the Tenth Chapter of Bhagavad-gītā,* Kṛṣṇa also states: *mattaḥ *sarvaṁpravartate.* "I am the source of all spiritual and material worlds. Everything emanates from Me." [*Bg.* 10.8] Whether we speak of the spiritual or material world, everything emanates from Kṛṣṇa, the origin of all manifestations. The origin is what is factual. God has two energies—material and spiritual. This is also described in Bhagavad-gītā:* > bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ > khaṁ mano buddhir eva ca > ahaṅkāra itīyaṁ me > bhinnā prakṛtir aṣṭadhā > apareyam itas tv anyāṁ > prakṛtiṁ viddhi me parām > jīva-bhūtāṁ mahā-bāho > yayedaṁ dhāryate jagat > etad-yonīni bhūtāni > sarvāṇīty upadhāraya > ahaṁ kṛtsnasya jagataḥ > prabhavaḥ pralayas tathā "Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intelligence, and false ego—all together these eight constitute My separated material energies. Besides this inferior nature, O mighty-armed Arjuna, there is a superior energy of Mine, which comprises the living entities who are exploiting the resources of this material, inferior nature. All created beings have their source in these two natures. Of all that is material and all that is spiritual in this world, know for certain that I am both the origin and the dissolution. " [*Bg.* 7.4–6] Gross matter, as well as the subtle mind, intelligence, and ego, are Kṛṣṇa's separated material energies. The living entity, the individual soul [*jīva*] is also Kṛṣṇa's energy, but he is superior to the material energy. When we make a comparative study of Kṛṣṇa's energies, we find that one energy is superior and that another is inferior, but because both energies are coming from the Absolute Truth, there is no difference. In a higher sense, they are all one. In the material world, everything is created, maintained, and then annihilated, but in the spiritual world, this is not the case. Although the body is created, maintained, and annihilated, the soul is not. > na jāyate mriyate vā kadācin > nāyaṁ bhūtvā bhavitā vā na bhūyaḥ > ajo nityaḥśāśvato 'yaṁ purāṇo > na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre " For the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. He has not come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into being. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain. " [*Bg.* 2.20] At death, the soul may take on another body, but one who is perfect goes directly to Kṛṣṇa. > janma karma ca me divyam > evaṁ yo vetti tattvataḥ > tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma > naiti mām eti so 'rjuna "One who knows the transcendental nature of My appearance and activities does not, upon leaving the body, take his birth again in this material world, but attains My eternal abode, O Arjuna." [*Bg.* 4.9] Or, one may go to the higher planetary systems, or the lower, or one may remain in the middle systems. In any case, it is better to go back to Godhead. This is the course of one who is intelligent. > yānti deva-vratā devān > pitṝn yānti pitṛ-vratāḥ > bhūtāni yānti bhūtejyā > yānti mad-yājino 'pi mām "Those who worship the demigods will take birth among the demigods; those who worship ancestors go to the ancestors; those who worship ghosts and spirits will take birth among such beings; and those who worship Me will live with Me." [*Bg.* 9.25] **Hayagrīva:** What Plato is saying is that everything that exists has its seed or essence [*eidos*]. **Prabhupāda:** That seed is originally with Kṛṣṇa. For instance, before its manifestation, a tree is but a seed. Yet within that seed the whole tree is present. If you sow the seed of a rose plant, roses will manifest. If you sow the seed of a mango tree, a mango tree will manifest. It is not an idea but a fact. The tree is there, but it is not developed. Although it is unmanifest, it is more than an idea. **Śyāmasundara:** The senses perceive the changing phenomenal world, but according to Plato, the noumenal world is perceived by the mind. It is this world that is absolute, ideal, permanent, and universal. Would you say that ultimate reality is ideal in this Platonic sense? **Prabhupāda:** Not ideal—factual. *Paraṁ satyaṁ *dhīmahi.* "We offer our obeisances unto the Absolute Truth." This relative world is a perverted reflection of the absolute world. It is just like a shadow. A tree reflected in the water may appear to be exactly like the tree itself, but it is a perverted reflection. The actual tree is there. Similarly, this relative world is a reflection of the absolute world. In the beginning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*, it is clearly stated that this manifested creation, which is but a reflection, has its beginning in the Supreme Personality of Godhead: > janmādy asya yato 'nvayād itarataś cārtheṣv abhijñaḥ svarāṭ > tene brahma hṛdā ya ādi-kavaye muhyanti yat sūrayaḥ > tejo-vāri-mṛdāṁ yathā vinimayo yatra tri-sargo 'mṛṣā > dhāmnā svena sadā nirasta-kuhakaṁ satyaṁ paraṁ dhīmahi **"I meditate upon Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa because He is the Absolute Truth and the primeval cause of all causes of the creation, sustenance, and destruction of the manifested universes. He is directly and indirectly conscious of all manifestations, and He is independent because there is no other cause beyond Him. It is He only who first imparted the Vedic knowledge unto the heart of Brahmājī, the original living being. By Him, even the great sages and demigods are placed into illusion, as one is bewildered by the illusory representations of water seen in fire, or land seen on water. Only because of Him do the material universes, temporarily manifested by the reactions of the three modes of nature, appear factual, although they are unreal. I therefore meditate upon Him, Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, who is eternally existent in the transcendental abode, which is forever free from the illusory representations of the material world. I meditate upon Him, for He is the Absolute Truth." [*SB.* 1.1.1] In the *Bhagavad-gītā**, the example of the banyan tree is given:** > ūrdhva-mūlam adhaḥ-śākham > aśvatthaṁ prāhur avyayam > chandāṁsi yasya parṇāni > yas taṁ veda sa veda-vit "It is said that there is an imperishable banyan tree that has its roots upward and its branches down and whose leaves are the Vedic hymns. One who knows this tree is the knower of the Vedas." [*Bg.* 15.1] The tree of the phenomenal world has its roots upward, which indicates that it is but a reflection of the real tree. The real tree is there, but because the tree perceived in the phenomenal world is a reflection, it is perverted. So the absolute world is a fact, but we cannot arrive at it by speculation. Our process is to know about the absolute world from the absolute person. That is the difference between our process and Plato's. Plato wants to reach the absolute point through the dialectic process. We, however, receive information from Bhagavad-gītā* that there is a superior world or nature which exists even after this phenomenal cosmic manifestation is annihilated. > paras tasmāt tu bhāvo 'nyo > 'vyakto 'vyaktāt sanātanaḥ > yaḥ sa sarveṣu bhūteṣu > naśyatsu na vinaśyati "Yet there is another unmanifest nature, which is eternal and is transcendental to this manifested and unmanifested matter. It is supreme and is never annihilated. When all in this world is annihilated, that part remains as it is."[*Bg.* 8.20] **Hayagrīva:** Plato considered the material world restricted to limitations of time and space, but the spiritual world transcends both. **Prabhupāda:** Yes. **Hayagrīva:** He also believed that time began with the creation of the material world. How does this relate to the Vedic version? **Prabhupāda:** Time is eternal. The past, present, and future are three features of time, but they are relative. Your past, present, and future are not the same as those of Brahmā. Brahmā lives for millions of years, and within this span we may have many pasts, presents, and futures. These are relative according to the person, but time itself is eternal. Is that clear? Past, present, and future are relative according to the body, but time has no past, present, or future. **Hayagrīva:** Plato considered material nature, or *prakṛti,* to have always been existing in a chaotic state. God takes matter and fashions it into form in order to create the universe. **Prabhupāda:** More precisely, Kṛṣṇa sets *prakṛti* in motion, and the products are manifesting automatically. A printer may set up a press in such a way that many magazines can be printed completely. The seeds, or bijams, are created by God in such a way that creations are manifest automatically. These seeds are God's machines. He has created these seeds only. The seed of the entire universe is coming from Him. Yasyaika niśvasita kālam *athāvalambya* [*Brahma-saṁhitā* 5.48]. When God breathes, millions of seeds of universes emanate from His body, and we call this creation. When He inhales, they return, and we call this annihilation. Things are manifest or unmanifest depending on His breathing. When He exhales, everything is manifest. When He inhales, everything is finished. Only a fool thinks that God's breathing and our breathing are the same. Bhagavad-gītā* says: > avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā > mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam > paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto > mama bhūta-maheśvaram "Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature as the Supreme Lord of all that be." [*Bg.* 9.11] Even Lord Brahma and Lord Indra were bewildered to see that this cowherd boy is God Himself. **Śyāmasundara:** Plato's word for God is *demiurge,* which in Greek means master builder, architect, or hand-worker. **Prabhupāda:** In Sanskrit this is called *sṛṣṭi-kartā,* but this conception is secondary. Lord Brahma is *sṛṣṭi-kartā,* and Brahma is inspired by Kṛṣṇa. The original master, Kṛṣṇa, is not *sṛṣṭi-kartā* because He does not do anything directly. As stated in the Vedas: svā-bhāvikī jñāna-bala-kriyā *ca,* "His potencies are multifarious, and thus His deeds are automatically performed as a natural sequence." [*Śvetāśvatara upaniṣad 6.8*]. As soon as He wants something done, it is actualized. *Sa aikṣata**—sa imāl lokān *asṛjata* [*Aitareya-Upaniṣad* 1.1.1-2]. When He glances at matter, creation takes place immediately. His energy is so perfect that simply by willing and glancing, everything is immediately and perfectly created. For instance, this flower is Kṛṣṇa's energy. It requires a highly talented brain to color it and adjust it in such a way, but it is growing automatically. This is the way of Kṛṣṇa's energy. This flower is a very small thing, but the entire cosmic manifestation is created on the same basis. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva *śrūyate.* Kṛṣṇa has multi-energies, fine and subtle. As soon as Kṛṣṇa thinks, "This thing must come into being immediately," that thing is prepared by so many subtle energies. Kṛṣṇa doesn't have to do anything with His hands. He simply desires something, and it is created. Lord Brahmā is supposed to be the direct creator of the universe, but there are millions of universes and millions of Brahmās. There are also millions of suns and other luminaries. There is no limit, and all this material creation is but the energy of Kṛṣṇa. **Śyāmasundara:** Plato conceives of God as the essence of perfection, the supreme ideal, and the supreme good. **Prabhupāda:** According to Parāśara Muni, perfection belongs to Him who has complete knowledge, wealth, beauty, power, fame, and renunciation. God has everything in full, and there is no vacancy in Him. **Śyāmasundara:** Plato's philosophy points to a personal conception, but there is no idea of what God looks like, or what He says. **Prabhupāda:** The Vedic literatures not only present this person but describe Him. > veṇuṁ kvaṇantam aravinda-dalāyatākṣaṁ > barhāvataṁsam asitāmbuda-sundarāṅgam > kandarpa-koṭi-kaminīya-viśeṣa-śobhaṁ > govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi "I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, who is adept in playing on His flute, whose blossoming eyes are like lotus petals, whose head is bedecked with a peacock's feather, whose figure of beauty is tinged with the hue of blue clouds, and whose unique loveliness charms millions of Cupids." [*Brahma-saṁhitā* 5.30] In this way, Lord Kṛṣṇa's form and activities are concretely described. In the Vedas,* everything is factual. Plato thinks that the creator may be a person, but he does not know what kind of person He is, nor does he know of His engagements. **Hayagrīva:** Later, in *The Republic,* in the allegory of the cave mentioned before, Socrates states that in the world of knowledge, the last thing to be perceived, and only with great difficulty, is the essential form of goodness. He considers this form to be the cause of whatever is right and good. He states that without having had a vision of this form, one cannot act with wisdom, neither in his own life, nor in matters of state. Here again, form is mentioned, but not personality. **Prabhupāda:** That is contradictory. As soon as we understand that there are instructions from God, we must understand that there is form, and when we understand that there is form, we must understand that there is personality. In *the *Bhagavad-gītā**, Kṛṣṇa tells Arjuna: > na tv evāhaṁ jātu nāsaṁ > na tvaṁ neme janādhipāḥ > na caiva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ > sarve vayam ataḥ param "Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be." [*Bg.* 2.12] This means that in the past, present, and future, Kṛṣṇa, Arjuna, and all other living entities exist as personalities and have form. There is no question of formlessness. Kṛṣṇa never said that in the past we were formless and that only in the present we have form. Rather, He condemns the impersonal version that says when God takes on form, that form is illusion, *māyā.* > avyaktaṁ vyaktim āpannaṁ > manyante mām abuddhayaḥ > paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto > mamāvyayam anuttamam "Unintelligent men, who do not know Me perfectly, think that I, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, was impersonal before and have now assumed this personality. Due to their small knowledge, they do not know My higher nature, which is imperishable and supreme." [*Bg.* 7.24] In this way, the impersonalists who claim that God is ultimately formless are condemned as *abuddhayaḥ,* unintelligent. When one maintains that God accepts a body composed of māyā, he is called a Māyāvādī. **Śyāmasundara:** For Plato, God is the ideal of every object, the ideal representation of everything. The individual soul is therefore a tiny portion of this ideal. **Prabhupāda:** The material world is a perverted reflection of the spiritual world. For instance, in this material world there is love, the sex urge. This is also present in the spiritual world, but it is present in its perfection. There is beauty, and there is attraction between Kṛṣṇa, a young boy, and Rādhārāṇī, a young girl. But that attraction is perfection. In this world, that attraction is reflected in a perverted way. A young boy and girl fall in love, become frustrated, and separate. Therefore this is called perverted. Nonetheless, reality is there, and in reality there is no separation. It is perfect. That love is so nice that it is increasing pleasure. **Śyāmasundara:** Plato called love in the material world lust, or sensual love. There was also ideal, Platonic love, or intellectual love. By this, one observes the soul in a person and loves that soul, not the body. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, spiritual love is factual. It is stated in *Bhagavad-gītā:* > vidyā-vinaya-sampanne > brāhmaṇe gavi hastini > śuni caiva śvapāke ca > paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ "The humble sages, by virtue of true knowledge, see with equal vision a learned and gentle *brāhmaṇa,* a cow, an elephant, a dog, and a dog-eater [outcaste]." [*Bg.* 5.18] The learned person sees all these living entities with an equal vision because he does not see the outward covering. He sees the spirit soul within everyone. When we talk to a person, we do not talk to that person's dress but to the person himself. Similarly, those who are learned do not distinguish between outward bodies. The outward body has developed according to the karma of the living entity, but it is ephemeral. It is the soul that is real. **Hayagrīva:** For Plato, perfection within the world of the senses can never be attained. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, that is correct. Everything material has some defect. In *the *Bhagavad-gītā**, Kṛṣṇa tells Arjuna: > saha-jaṁ karma kaunteya > sa-doṣam api na tyajet > sarvārambhāhi doṣeṇa > dhūmenāgnir ivāvṛtāḥ "Every endeavor is covered by some sort of fault, just as fire is covered by smoke. Therefore one should not give up the work born of his nature, O son of Kuntī, even if such work is full of fault." [*Bg.* 18.48] If we execute our prescribed duties according to the *śāstras,* we can still attain perfection, even though there are some defects. Through Kṛṣṇa consciousness, everyone can become perfect, regardless of his situation. A *brāhmaṇa* may give knowledge, a *kṣatriya* may give protection, a *vaiśya* may provide food, and a *śūdra* may provide general help for everyone. Although there may be imperfections in the execution of our duty, perfection can be attained by following the injunctions. **Śyāmasundara:** Plato perceives man's soul in a marginal, intermediate position between two worlds. The soul belongs to the ideal world, but he has taken on a material body. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, we agree that the conditioned soul is marginal energy. He can have a spiritual body or a material body, but until he is trained in acquiring a spiritual body, he will have to have a material body. However, when he engages in devotional service, his so-called material body is transformed into a spiritual body. For instance, if you put an iron rod into fire, it becomes red hot, and when it is red hot, it is no longer iron but fire. Similarly, when you are fully Kṛṣṇa conscious, your body is no longer material but spiritual. **Hayagrīva:** Plato believed that God put intelligence in the soul, and the soul in the body, in order that He might be the creator of a work which is by nature best. **Prabhupāda:** We say that the living entity is part and parcel of God. > mamaivāṁśo jīva-loke > jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ "The living entities in this conditioned world are My eternal fragmental parts." [*Bg.* 15.7] The living entity almost has all the qualities of God, but he has them in minute quantity. We may create large airplanes and take some credit, but we cannot create a fiery ball like the sun and have it float in space. That is the difference between God and us. By God's power, millions and millions of planets are floating in space. We may manufacture some things out of the materials given by God, but we cannot create these materials. For instance, it is not possible to manufacture gold, although God has created so many gold mines. **Śyāmasundara:** Plato reasoned that the soul, being eternal, must have existed previously in the ideal world, where it learned about eternal principles. Because we can recollect the eternal ideas quite easily, they are latent, or dormant within us. **Prabhupāda:** The soul is eternally spiritual, and therefore all goodness resides in it. But due to contact with matter, the soul becomes conditioned. When the soul engages in his original work by rendering service to Kṛṣṇa, he immediately attains all spiritual qualities. **Śyāmasundara:** For Plato, the longing for immortality is inborn. Man is yearning to realize this perfection. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, we desire to live eternally because we are in fact eternal. The living entity does not like changing material bodies. Birth and death are a botheration. He is afraid of taking birth, and he is afraid of dying, but he does not know how to get rid of these botherations. However, according to *Bhagavad-gītā* [4.9], as soon as we understand Kṛṣṇa, we immediately transcend this transmigration. **Hayagrīva:** Plato perceives 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. According to the Vedic version, Kṛṣṇa is the all-attractive object of the universe; therefore all things must be moving toward Him. How is it that the individual soul apparently turns from Kṛṣṇa to participate in the world of birth and death? **Prabhupāda:** That is due to māyā, illusion. He should not have deviated, but due to the influence of māyā, he is deviating and consequently suffering. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, *sarva-dharmān parityajya mām *ekam* [*Bg.* 18.66]. "Stop this material plan-making, surrender unto Me, and do what I say. Then you will be happy." This is very practical. According to Bhagavad-gītā,* the living entities are now forgetful of their relationship with God. They have taken on these material bodies because they have a desire to imitate God. They cannot be God, but simply imitations. A woman may dress like a man, but she cannot become a man despite her dress. The living entity, being part and parcel of God, may believe that he is just like God, the supreme enjoyer, and he may think, "I shall enjoy myself." However, because he is not the actual enjoyer, he is given a false platform for enjoying. That platform is the material world. On this false platform, the individual soul experiences frustration. It cannot be said that this frustration is one step forward towards his real life. If one is actually intelligent, he thinks, "Why am I being frustrated? What is real perfection?" This is the beginning of the *Vedānta-sūtra:* athāto *brahma-jijñāsā.* When he becomes frustrated with the material world, the living entity asks, "What is Brahman?" For instance, Sanātana Gosvāmī was a finance minister, but when he became frustrated, he approached Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Our real life begins when we become frustrated with material existence and approach a real spiritual master. If we do not do this, we will certainly be frustrated in whatever we attempt in this material world. *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* says: > parābhavas tāvad abodha-jāto > yāvan na jijñāsata ātma-tattvam > yāvat kriyās tāvad idaṁ mano vai > karmātmakaṁ yena śarīra-bandhaḥ "As long as one does not inquire about the spiritual values of life, one is defeated and subjected to miseries arising from ignorance. Be it sinful or pious, karma has its resultant actions. If a person is engaged in any kind of karma, his mind is called *karmātmaka,* colored with fruitive activity. As long as the mind is impure, consciousness is unclear, and as long as one is absorbed in fruitive activity, he has to accept a material body." [*SB.* 5.5.5] In ignorance, the living entity tries to approach the ideal life, but he is ultimately defeated. He must come to the point of understanding himself. When he understands what he is, he knows, "I am not matter; I am spirit." When he understands this, he begins to make spiritual inquiries, and by this, he can again return home, back to Godhead. **Śyāmasundara:** Plato believes that we must mold our lives in such a way as to attain perfection. **Prabhupāda:** That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness, devotional service. We are the eternal servants of God, of Kṛṣṇa, and as long as we are in the material world, we should be trained to serve God. As soon as our apprenticeship is completed, we are promoted to the spiritual world to render the same service in fact. We are chanting here, and in the spiritual world we will also be chanting. We are serving here, and there we will also be serving. However, here we experience a probational apprenticeship. There, that service is factual. But even though this is an apprenticeship, because devotional service is absolute, it is not different from the real world. Therefore if one engages in devotional service, he is already liberated. His very activities are liberated; they are not at all material. One who does not know anything about devotional service thinks, "Oh, what are they doing? Why are they chanting? Anyone can chant. How is this spiritual?" People do not know that the names of Kṛṣṇa are as good as Kṛṣṇa. They are absolute. **Śyāmasundara:** Socrates maintained that one must become perfectly good, but he gives no clear idea of just how this is done. **Prabhupāda:** Being perfectly good means acting for the perfectly good, Kṛṣṇa. In Kṛṣṇa consciousness, we are given an actual occupation by which we can become perfectly good. The activities of a person in Kṛṣṇa consciousness appear to be perfectly good even to a materialistic person. Anyone can appreciate the good character and qualifications of devotees. *Yasyāsti bhaktir bhagavaty *akiñcanā* [*SB.* 5.18.12]. If one has developed Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he will manifest all the good qualities of the demigods. This is a test to tell how we are advancing toward perfection. These qualities will be visible even in this material world. This is not simply a question of the ideal, the inaccessible. This can be factually experienced. And the devotee does not want anything other than engagement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. He doesn't want material sense gratification at all. That is perfection. **Hayagrīva:** For Plato, perfect happiness lies in attempting to become godly. Insofar as man is godly, he is ethical. Evil forces within man combat his efforts to attain this ultimate goal. But Plato was not a determinist; he emphasized freedom of the will, and insisted that evil acts are due to man's failure to meet his responsibilities. Evil does not come from God, who is all good. **Prabhupāda:** Everything comes from God, but we have to make our choice. Both the university and the prison are government institutions, but the prison is meant for criminals, and the university for scholars. The government spends money to maintain both institutions, but we make our choice either to go to prison or the university. That is the minute independence present in every human being. In *the *Bhagavad-gītā**, Kṛṣṇa says: > samo 'haṁ sarva-bhūteṣu > na me dveṣyo 'sti na priyaḥ > ye bhajanti tu māṁ bhaktyā > mayi te teṣu cāpy aham "I envy no one, nor am I partial to anyone. I am equal to all. But whoever renders service unto Me in devotion is a friend, is in Me, and I am also a friend to him." [*Bg.* 9.29] It is not that out of envy God makes someone unhappy and someone else happy. This is not God's business. Happiness and unhappiness are our creation. The government does not tell us to become criminals, but it is our fault if we become criminals and suffer. Of course, God is ultimately responsible. God gives us suffering or happiness, but we create the situation which is made into fact by the potency of God. **Hayagrīva:** Plato conceives of death as being the end of the sensory life of the individual, his thoughts, perceptions, and experiences. The individual then returns to the ideal world from which he came. **Prabhupāda:** This means that he believes in the eternity of the soul. There are three stages: awakening, dreaming, and deep sleep, or unconsciousness. When a man dies, he goes from the awakening state into the dreaming state, and then enters the state of deep sleep. Transmigration means that he gives up the gross body and carries the subtle body—the mind, intelligence, and false ego—into another body. Until the other body is properly prepared, he remains in a state of deep sleep. When the body is prepared after seven months [for the human being], he then regains consciousness. At this point, he thinks, "O my Lord, why am I put into this situation? Why am I packed tightly in this womb?" **In the womb, he feels very uncomfortable, and if he is pious, he prays to God for relief. At this time, he promises God that he will become a devotee. When he comes out of the womb, the different stages of life begin:** childhood, youth, manhood, middle age, old age, and then again death. It is like a flower that goes through different stages. In the beginning, the flower is only a bud, and it eventually blossoms and looks very beautiful. By gradually developing our Kṛṣṇa consciousness, the beauty of our life can eventually be manifest. **Hayagrīva:** Plato also stressed the process of remembering. For instance, a boy may be ignorant of a certain subject, but a teacher can elicit answers from him that will suggest that he acquired this certain knowledge in a previous existence. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, and therefore we find that some students are more intelligent than others. Why is this? One student can grasp the subject very quickly, while another cannot. > pūrvābhyāsena tenaiva > hriyate hy avaśo 'pi saḥ **"By virtue of the divine consciousness of his previous life, he automatically becomes attracted to the yogic principles, even without seeking them." [*Bg.* 6.44] Some men may be born in rich families and may acquire a good education, whereas others may be born in poor families and remain uneducated. If one is extraordinarily rich, educated, aristocratic, and beautiful, we should understand that he is reaping the results of his previous good activities. In any case, regardless of one's position in this world, everyone has to be educated to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. In this sense, everyone has an equal opportunity. As stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*:** > kirāta-hūṇāndhra-pulinda-pulkaśā > ābhīra-śumbhā yavanāḥ khasādayaḥ > ye 'nye ca pāpā yad-apāśrayāśrayāḥ > śudhyanti tasmai prabhaviṣṇave namaḥ "Kirātas, Hūṇas, Āndhras, Pulindas, Pulkaśas, Ābhīras, Śumbhas, Yavanas, and the Khasa races, and even others who are addicted to sinful acts, can be purified by taking shelter of the devotees of the Lord due to His being the supreme power. I beg to offer my respectful obeisances unto Him." [*SB.* 2.4.18] So even if one has the body of an aborigine, he can be trained in Kṛṣṇa consciousness because that consciousness is on the platform of the soul. **Hayagrīva:** Concerning education, it is stated in *The Republic:* 'The soul of every man possesses the power of learning the truth and the organ to see it with. Just as one might have to turn the whole body around for the eye to 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 the Good. Hence there may well be an art whose aim would be to affect 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 insure that, instead of looking in the wrong direction, it is turned the way it ought to be." **Prabhupāda:** That is the purpose of this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. It is certainly an art. It is a process of purifying the senses. When the senses are purified, our main objective is attained. We do not say that sensory activities are to be stopped. They are to be redirected. Presently, the eyes are seeing things material. The eyes want to see beautiful objects, and we say, "Yes, you can see the beautiful form of Kṛṣṇa." The tongue wants to taste palatable food, and we say, "Yes, you can take this Kṛṣṇa *prasādam,* but do not eat meat or other foods you cannot offer to Kṛṣṇa." Everything is given; we simply have to purify the senses. According to Bhagavad-gītā*: > viṣayā vinivartante > nirāhārasya dehinaḥ > rasa-varjaṁ raso 'py asya > paraṁ dṛṣṭvā nivartate "Though the embodied soul may be restricted from sense enjoyment, the taste for sense objects remains. But ceasing such engagements by experiencing a higher taste, he is fixed in consciousness." [*Bg.* 2.59] **Hayagrīva:** Neither Socrates nor Plato ever mentions service to God, though they speak of the contemplation of God's reality, or the supreme splendor, or good. It is always contemplation or meditation that is stressed, as in *jñāna-yoga.* **Prabhupāda:** This is but one process of knowing God, and it may be partially helpful to know God as He is. However, when we come to know God, we understand, "He is great, and I am small." It is the duty of the small to serve the great. That is nature's way. Everyone is serving in one way or another, but when we realize that we are servants and not the master, we realize our real position. It is our natural position to serve. If someone doesn't have a family to serve, he keeps a dozen dogs and serves them. Especially in Western countries, we see that in old age, when one has no children, he keeps two or three dogs and tries to serve them. Our position as servant is always there, but when we think that we are masters, we are illusioned. The word māyā means that we are serving while thinking that we are masters. Maya means "that which is not," or, "that which is not factual." Through meditation, when we become realized, we can understand, "Oh, I am a servant. Presently I am serving māyā, illusion. Now let me serve Kṛṣṇa." This is perfection. The spiritual master engages us from the very beginning in the service of God. Then we can attain perfection quickly. **Hayagrīva:** In *The Republic,* Plato constructs an ideal state in which the leaders possess nothing of their own, neither property nor family. He fell that people should live together in a community where wives and children are held in common to guard against corruption, bribery, and nepotism in government. Elite philosophers should mate with women of high qualities in order to produce the best children for positions of responsibility. How does this correspond to the Vedic version? **Prabhupāda:** According to Vedic civilization, a man should accept a wife for *putra,* for sons. Putra-piṇḍa-prayojanam*. A *putra,* or son, should offer *piṇḍa* so that after death the father will be elevated if he is in an undesirable position. Marriage is for begetting good sons who will deliver one from the fire of hell. Therefore the *śrāddha* ceremony is there because even if the father is in hell, he will be delivered. It is the son who offers the *śraddhā* oblation, and this is his duty. Therefore one accepts a wife for *putra,* a good son, not for sex enjoyment. One who utilizes his sex life in a religious way will get a good son who can deliver him. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says in Bhagavad-gītā*: *dharmāviruddho bhūteṣu kāmo 'smi *bharatarṣabha.* "I am sex life which is not contrary to religious principles." [*Bg.* 7.11] Sex contrary to religious principle is sense gratification that leads us into a hellish condition. Therefore, according to Vedic civilization, we should marry and beget good progeny. Although my Guru Mahārāja was a sannyāsī *brahmacārī,* he used to say, "If I could produce really Kṛṣṇa conscious children, I would have sex a hundred times. But why should I have sex just to produce cats and dogs?" The *śāstras* also say: > gurur na sa syāt sva-jano na sa syāt > pitā na sa syāj jananī na sā syāt > daivaṁ na tat syān na patiś ca sa syān > na mocayed yaḥ samupeta-mṛtyum "One who cannot deliver his dependents from the path of repeated birth and death should never become a spiritual master, a father, a husband, a mother, or a worshipable demigod." [*SB.* 5.5.18] It is the duty of the father and mother to rescue their children from the cycle of birth and death. If one can do this, he can in turn be rescued by his *putra* if he happens to fall into a hellish condition. **Śyāmasundara:** Plato believed that the perfect state should be organized in such a way that men can strive for the ideal. He equates political activity with moral endeavor, and he says that the ruler of the state must be a wise man [philosopher king], or a group of wise men. In a perfect society, each individual functions to his best capacity according to his natural abilities. This leads to the most harmonious type of society. **Prabhupāda:** This idea is also found in *Bhagavad-gītā,* in which Kṛṣṇa says that the ideal society is a society of four *varṇas: brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya,* and *śūdra.* In human society, as well as animal society, every living being is under the influence of the modes of material nature—*sattva-guṇa, rajo-guṇa,* and *tamo-guṇa*—that is, goodness, passion, and ignorance. By dividing men according to these qualities, society can be perfect. If a man in the mode of ignorance assumes a philosopher's post, havoc will result. Nor can we have a philosopher work as an ordinary laborer. There must be some scientific division in order to perfect society. According to the Vedas,* the *brāhmaṇas,* the most intelligent men interested in transcendental knowledge and philosophy, should be given a topmost post, and the *kṣatriyas,* the administrators, should work under their instructions. The administrators should see that there is law and order and that everyone is doing his duty. The next section is the productive class, the *vaiśyas,* who are engaged in agriculture and cow protection. There are also the *śūdras,* the common laborers, who work for the benefit of the other sections. Of course, now there is industrialization, and large scale industry means exploitation. Such industry was unknown to Vedic civilization. Then, people lived by agriculture and cow protection. If there are healthy cows and enough milk, everyone can get grains, fruits, vegetables, and other foods. That is sufficient in itself. Unfortunately, modern civilization has taken to animal eating, and this is barbarous. This is not even human. **Ideal society is a society of *brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas, vaiśyas,* and *śūdras.* In *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam,* these divisions are compared to the body:** the head, the arms, the belly, and the legs. All parts of the body are meant to keep the body fit. Comparatively, the head is more important than the legs. However, without the help of the legs, the body cannot properly work. The head must give the directions to the body to go to this place or that, but if the legs are unfit to walk, the body cannot move. Therefore there must be cooperation, and this cooperation is found in the ideal state. Nowadays, rascals, fools, and asses are being voted in as administrators. If a person can secure a vote in some way or another, he is given the post of an administrator, even though he may be rascal number one. So what can be done? For this reason, people cannot be happy. The ideal state functions under the directions of the *brāhmaṇas.* The *brāhmaṇas* themselves are not personally interested in political affairs or administration because they have a higher duty. Presently, because the head is missing, the social body is a dead body. The head is very important, and our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is attempting to create some *brāhmaṇas* who can properly direct society. The administrators will be able to rule very nicely under the instructions of the philosophers and theologians—that is, God conscious people. A person who is theistic will never condone the opening of slaughterhouses. Because there are many rascals heading the government, animal slaughter is allowed. When Mahārāja Parīkṣit saw the personification of Kali trying to kill a cow, he immediately drew his sword and said, "Who are you? Why are you trying to kill this cow?" That was a real king. **Śyāmasundara:** A similar social structure was also observed by Plato. However, he advocated three divisions instead of four. The guardians were men of wisdom who ruled and governed. The warriors were courageous, and they protected the others. The artisans performed their services obediently and were motivated to work by their need to satisfy their appetites. In addition, he saw in man a threefold division of intelligence, courage, and appetite, which correspond to the modes of goodness, passion, and ignorance possessed by the soul. **Prabhupāda:** The soul does not possess three qualities. That is a mistake. The soul is by nature pure, but due to his contact with the modes of material nature, he is dressed differently. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement aims at removing this material dress. Therefore our first instruction is, "You are not this body." **Hayagrīva:** In *The Republic,* Plato states that the best form of government is an enlightened monarchy. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, we agree. *Evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo *viduḥ.* "This supreme science was received through the chain of disciplic succession, and the saintly kings understood it in that way." [*Bg.* 4.2] A *rājarṣi* is a saintly king who is an ideal ruler. We offer respect to Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, Mahārāja Parīkṣit, and Lord Rāmacandra because they set examples as ideal kings. **Hayagrīva:** Plato maintained that when a monarchy degenerates, it becomes a tyranny. When an aristocratic rule deteriorates, it becomes an oligarchy, a government ruled by corrupt men. He considered democracy to be one of the worst forms of government because when it deteriorates, it degenerates to mob rule. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, that is now the case. Instead of one saintly king, there are many thousands of so-called kings who are looting the people's hard-earned money by income tax and other means. In the Vedic system, however, there was a way to keep the monarchy from degenerating into tyranny. The monarch was guided by a counsel of learned men, *brāhmaṇas,* great saintly persons. Even Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira and Lord Rāmacandra were guided by *brāhmaṇas.* It was the duty of the monarch to act according to the decisions of the learned scholars, *brāhmaṇas,* and *sādhus,* saintly persons. When Vena Mahārāja was not ruling properly, the *brāhmaṇas* came and advised him to act otherwise. When he refused, they cursed him, and he died. The great Pṛthu Mahārāja was his son. A great sage is required to occupy the role of a monarch. Then everything is perfect in government. The present democratic systems are ludicrous because they are composed of rascals who simply bribe one another. When they attain their post, they plunder and take bribes. If the head of the state can understand Bhagavad-gītā,* his government will be automatically perfect. Formerly, *Bhagavad-gītā* was explained to the monarchs for that reason. Imaṁ rājarṣayo *viduḥ* [*Bg.* 4.2]. **Śyāmasundara:** Plato's system was somewhat democratic in that he felt that everyone should be given a chance to occupy the different posts. **Prabhupāda:** You can also say that we are democratic because we are giving even the lowest canddla a chance to become a *brāhmaṇa* by becoming Kṛṣṇa conscious. As soon as one becomes Kṛṣṇa conscious, he can be elevated to the highest position, even though he may be born in a family of *caṇḍālas.* > aho bata śvapaco 'to garīyān > yaj-jihvāgre vartate nāma tubhyam > tepus tapas te juhuvuḥ sasnur āryā > brahmānūcur nāma gṛṇanti ye te "O my Lord, a person who is chanting Your holy name, although born of a low family like that of a *caṇḍāla* [dog eater], is situated on the highest platform of self-realization. Such a person must have performed all kinds of penances and sacrifices according to Vedic rituals and studied the Vedic literatures many, many times after taking his bath in all the holy places of pilgrimage. Such a person is considered to be the best of the Āryan family." [*SB.* 3.33.7] **Also, in *Bhagavad-gītā,* it is stated:** > māṁhi pārtha vyapāśritya > ye 'pi syuḥ pāpa-yonayaḥ > striyo vaiśyās tathā śūdrās > te 'pi yānti parāṁ gatim "O son of Pṛthā, those who take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birth—women, *vaiśyas* [merchants] and *śūdras* [workers]—can attain the supreme destination." [*Bg.* 9.32] Kṛṣṇa says that everyone can go back home, back to Godhead. Samo 'haṁ *sarva-bhūteṣu.* "I am equal to everyone. Everyone can come to Me." [*Bg.* 9.29] There is no hindrance. **Śyāmasundara:** Plato believed that the state should train its citizens to become virtuous. According to his system of education, the first three years of life were spent playing and training the body. From age three to six, the children were taught religious stories. From seven to ten, they were taught gymnastics; from ten to thirteen, reading and writing; from fourteen to sixteen, poetry and music; from sixteen to eighteen, mathematics; and from eighteen to twenty, military drill. From that time on, those who were scientific and philosophical remained in school until they were thirty-five. If they were warriors, they engaged in military exercises. **Prabhupāda:** Was this educational program for all men, or were there different types of education for different men? **Śyāmasundara:** No, this applied to all. **Prabhupāda:** Oh, this is not desirable. If a boy is intelligent and inclined to philosophy and theology, why should he be made to take military training? **Śyāmasundara:** Well, according to Plato's system, everyone took two years of military drill. **Prabhupāda:** But why waste two years? We cannot even waste two days. **Śyāmasundara:** This type of education was designed in order to determine a person's category. It is not that one belongs to a particular class according to qualifications. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, we also say that, but that tendency or disposition is to be ascertained by the spiritual master, by the teacher who trains the boy. The teacher should be able to see whether a boy is fit for military training, for administration, or for philosophy. It is not that everyone should take the same training. One should be trained fully according to his particular tendency. If a boy is by nature inclined to philosophical study, why should he waste his time in the military? And if he is by nature inclined to military training, why should he waste his time with other studies? Arjuna belonged to a *kṣatriya* family, and this family was trained in the military. The Pāṇḍavas were never trained as philosophers. Droṇācārya was their master and teacher, and although he was a *brāhmaṇa,* he taught them the military science, not *brahma-vidyā.* Brahma-vidyā* is theology, philosophy. It is not that everyone should be trained in everything; that is a waste of time. If a student is inclined toward production, business, or agriculture, he should be trained in those fields. If he is philosophical, he should be trained as a philosopher. If he is militaristic, he should be trained as a warrior. And if he is simply dull, he should remain a *śūdra,* a laborer. These four classes are selected by their symptoms and qualifications. Nārada Muni also says that one should be selected according to qualifications. Even if one is born in a *brāhmaṇa* family, he should be considered a *śūdra* if his qualifications are such. And if one is born in a *śūdra* family, he should be considered a *brāhmaṇa* if his symptoms are brahminical. It is not that everyone should be regarded in the same way. The spiritual master should be expert enough to recognize the tendencies of the student, and the student should immediately be trained in that line. This will bring about perfection. **Śyāmasundara:** According to Plato's system, this tendency won't emerge unless one practices everything. **Prabhupāda:** No, that is wrong because the soul is continuous; therefore the soul retains some tendencies from his previous birth. According to Vedic culture, immediately after a boy's birth, astrological calculations were made. Astrology can help if there is a first-class astrologer who can tell what line a boy is coming from and how he should be trained. Of course, logical and physical symptoms are considered. If a boy does not fulfill the role assigned, he can be transferred to another class. Generally, it is ascertained from birth whether a child has a particular tendency, but this tendency may change according to circumstance. Someone may have brahminical training in a previous birth, and the symptoms may be exhibited, but he should not think that because he has taken birth in a *brāhmaṇa* family that he is automatically a *brāhmaṇa.* It is not a question of birth but of qualification. **Śyāmasundara:** Then what would you say is the purpose of the state, of all these social orders, and the state government? **Prabhupāda:** The ultimate purpose is to make everyone Kṛṣṇa conscious. That is the perfection of life. The entire social structure should be molded with this aim in view. Of course, this is not possible for everyone. All students in a university do not receive the Ph. D. degree, but the idea of perfection is to pass the Ph.D. examination. The professors of the university should be maintained, although there are not many high caliber students to pass their classes. It is not that the university should close its higher classes. Similarly, an institution like this Kṛṣṇa consciousness Society should be maintained to make at least a small percentage of the population Kṛṣṇa conscious. **Śyāmasundara:** So the goal of government should be to enable everyone to become Kṛṣṇa conscious? **Prabhupāda:** Yes, Kṛṣṇa consciousness is the highest goal. Everyone should help and take advantage of this. Regardless of our social position, we can come to the temple and worship God. The instructions are for everyone, and *pras***ādam** is distributed to everyone; therefore there is no difficulty. Everyone can contribute to this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. The *brāhmaṇas* can contribute their intelligence, the *kṣatriyas* their charity, the *vaiśyas* grains, milk, fruits, and flowers, and the *śūdras* bodily service. By such joint cooperation, everyone attains the same goal—the highest perfection. ## Aristotle [384-322 B.C.] **Hayagrīva:** Plato made a sharp distinction between the material and spiritual universes, but this dualism is not expressed by Aristotle. Since matter is simply one of God's energies, the finite reflects the infinite. Matter is a potency in the process of realizing itself. **Prabhupāda:** Aristotle may know something of God's energies, but our point is that we can know everything about God from God Himself. Then our knowledge is perfect. In *the *Bhagavad-gītā**, Kṛṣṇa says: > mayy āsakta-manāḥ pārtha > yogaṁ yuñjan mad-āśrayaḥ > asaṁśayaṁ samagraṁ māṁ > yathā jñāsyasi tac chṛṇu "Now hear, O son of Pṛthā, how by practicing yoga in full consciousness of Me, with mind attached to Me, you can know Me in full, free from doubt." [*Bg.* 7.1] This is the process of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Of course, we may speculate about God, and if we just think of God, that will help to some extent. If we are in darkness, we may speculate and concoct ideas about the sun. This is one kind of knowledge. However, if we come out of the darkness and see the sun, if we come to the light, our knowledge is complete. We may contemplate the sun in darkness, but the best process is to come into the sunshine and see for ourselves. **Hayagrīva:** Aristotle does not believe that material objects are trying to realize God, as Plato does, but that God is realizing Himself through material objects, and God does this in a variegated and infinite way. God realizes the potentiality of a flower, or of a man, by creating a flower or a man perceivable by the material senses. So, in a sense, the world is more real to Aristotle than to Plato. **Prabhupāda:** Since God has created the material world with all its variety, He is in full awareness of how to act properly. That is God's perfection. He knows how to do everything perfectly and in a natural way. A child naturally knows how to put food into his mouth. He does not have to learn this. God's knowledge of everything is already there. It is not that He has to receive this knowledge through some source, or by creating. He is already fully aware of these things. He doesn't have to realize Himself or His potentiality through matter. **Hayagrīva:** Aristotle would say that a flower is real because it has its basis in the ultimate reality, God. **Prabhupāda:** If God is the ultimate reality, how is it He is not in full knowledge of everything at all times? There is no question of realizing Himself through matter. **Hayagrīva:** Plato would say that a flower is but a shadow of reality. Which point of view would be closer to the Vedic version? **Prabhupāda:** Whatever is in the material world is but a perverted reflection of the spiritual world. It is our experience that in the material world, objects are created, but in the spiritual world, nothing is created. Everything is there everlastingly. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle says that imperfection is inherent in the substance matter. Because man is made of matter, he must be imperfect. **Prabhupāda:** Man is not made of matter but is covered by matter. Man is made of spirit. If God is spirit, man is also spirit. In the Bible, it is also said that man is made in the image of God; therefore man is originally perfect. A person is generally supposed to be healthy, but if he falls into a diseased condition, it is not his imperfection. It is something external that has attacked a healthy man. According to his original nature, man is healthy. **Śyāmasundara:** For Aristotle, the goal of action is to realize our potential and attain the greatest happiness or pleasure. Since God created man for self-realization, it is realization that will bring him satisfaction. **Prabhupāda:** This means that in the beginning God created man imperfect. Otherwise, why is there need for self-realization? **Śyāmasundara:** A piece of wood has the potential to become fire. It is not fire until it is kindled. Man is similar. **Prabhupāda:** We say that the living entity is part and parcel of God, and if God is all good, the living entity is also all good. A part of gold cannot be iron; it also must be gold. However, the part is not equal to the whole. A gold earring is also gold, but it is not as great as the gold mine. Nevertheless, the quality of the gold earring and the quality of gold in the gold mine are the same. If God is perfect, the living entity must also be perfect in quality. If God has the quality of goodness, the living entity must have it also. Why should he be imperfect? That would indicate that God is unjust. Why should God create something that has to come to the perfectional point by realization? **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle would say that the activities of the mind are pure and perfect, but that those of the body and matter are impure and imperfect. Therefore one must realize himself through the activities of the mind alone. **Prabhupāda:** No, the mind is never perfect. The mind's business is to accept this and reject that, and therefore it is very flickering. The mind is subtler than the body, but the mind is not the soul, nor is the mind perfect. Above the mind there is intelligence, and above the intelligence there is the soul. That soul is perfect in quality, and it has all the qualities of God in minute quantity. **Śyāmasundara:** By mind, Aristotle means the rational faculty of intelligence. **Prabhupāda:** Intelligence is above the mind. Intelligence controls the mind, and intelligence is of the soul. Therefore the whole background is the soul. **Śyāmasundara:** The mind must act or contemplate in accordance with logic. Logic is defined as the method of drawing correct inferences. **Prabhupāda:** The mind may logically accept something and again logically reject it. Where, then, is perfect logic? **Śyāmasundara:** Perfect logic is simply a method for finding the truth. **Prabhupāda:** But the mind is constantly accepting and rejecting. How can it ascertain the truth according to logic? If our authority is the mind, does this mean that the mind of everyone is an authority? The mind may constantly search, but it will never be successful because the truth is beyond its reach. A follower of the *Vedas* does not accept this speculative method as a path to truth or perfection. **Hayagrīva:** For both Plato and Aristotle, God is known by reason, not by revelation or religious experiences. **Prabhupāda:** We are all limited, and God is unlimited; therefore we cannot understand God by our limited sensory powers. Consequently, God must be known by revelation. > ataḥśrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi > na bhaved grāhyam indriyaiḥ > sevonmukhe hi jihvādau > svayam eva sphuraty adaḥ **"Material senses cannot appreciate Kṛṣṇa's holy name, form, qualities, and pastimes. When a conditioned soul is awakened to Kṛṣṇa consciousness and renders service by using his tongue to chant the Lord's holy name and taste the remnants of the Lord's food, the tongue is purified, and one gradually comes to understand who Kṛṣṇa really is." [*Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu* 1.2.234] It is not possible to know God by mental speculation. When we engage in His service, He reveals Himself. Śrī Kṛṣṇa says:** > nāhaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya > yoga-māyā-samāvṛtaḥ > mūḍho 'yaṁ nābhijānāti > loko mām ajam avyayam "I am never manifest to the foolish and unintelligent. For them I am covered by My internal potency, and therefore they do not know that I am unborn and inexhaustible." [*Bg.* 7.25] It is a fact that unless God reveals Himself, He is not known. Therefore He appears, and great authorities like Vyāsadeva, Nārada, Śukadeva Gosvāmī, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, and Caitanya Mahāprabhu— great scholars and transcendentalists—accept Him as He reveals Himself. Arjuna saw God face to face, and he accepted Him. When we are freed by our service, God reveals Himself. **Hayagrīva:** Well, Aristotle emphasizes man's use of reason, and he sees man's happiness depending on acting in a rational way, which is the way of virtue and intellectual insight. There is a suggestion of sense control, but no *bhakti.* Is it possible to attain happiness simply by controlling the senses with the mind? **Prabhupāda:** Yes, and that is the process of becoming a human being. Animals are ignorant of this process, and they act only for their sense gratification. Their only business is eating, sleeping, mating, and defending. Through proper guidance, a human being can engage in contemplation, but he should be guided by authorities, otherwise he may contemplate with his limited senses for many millions of years and not be able to understand God. **Hayagrīva:** But for happiness, or *ānanda,* isn't *bhakti* essential? **Prabhupāda:** God is full *ānanda,* full bliss. Sac-cid-ānanda*. He is eternal and in full knowledge of everything. Unless we come in contact with God, there is no question of *ānanda.* *Raso vai sa**ḥ.* From the Vedic literatures, we understand that God is the unlimited reservoir of all pleasure; consequently, when we come in contact with God, we will taste that pleasure. Material pleasure is only a perverted reflection of the real pleasure. **Śyāmasundara:** Rather than personal guidance, Aristotle emphasized rational logic. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, but when you are guided, you have to sacrifice your logic to accept the superior logic of your guide. **Śyāmasundara:** He felt that the mind can be its own guide. **Prabhupāda:** As I said, the mind will carry you this way and that. In *the *Bhagavad-gītā**, Arjuna says that the mind is more difficult to control than the wind. If a horse is not controlled, if it is allowed to run at will, it will cause some disaster. When the horse is guided, it can take you to your destination. We should therefore know how to control the mind by the intelligence. **Śyāmasundara:** But because the mind is an aspect of God, we find our perfection or happiness in the contemplation of God. **Prabhupāda:** Everything is an aspect of God. In *the *Bhagavad-gītā**, Kṛṣṇa points out that He has eight separated energies. So why stress the mind? Because we have lost God's association, we are all searching after Him. We are struggling, but we do not know why. This is due to ignorance. If, by good fortune, we chance to meet a bona fide guru, the guru can inform us, "You are searching after God. This is the way. You only have to follow." It is then that we can become happy. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle believed that the truth is inherent or innate within everything. For him, truth is the agreement of knowledge with reality. It corresponds with things in the objective world. **Prabhupāda:** If truth is within everything, then it must be drawn out. However, it is not drawn out by matter but by spirit. This means that the help of a superior energy is necessary. According to *Bhagavad-gītā,* the living entity is the superior energy, and matter is the inferior. It is the inferior energy that must be controlled by the superior. Both God and the living entities are eternal, but God is the Supreme Eternal. Living entities are *nitya-k**ṛṣṇa-Dāsa,* eternal servants of God. When they tend to disobey God, they suffer. If we want to use our logic, we can understand that through our independent action, we have failed. Therefore we must take the advice of superior intelligence. That advice is given in Bhagavad-gītā*. It is not that we can attain the truth through our own independent speculation. If we want to know who our father is, we may speculate forever, but it is much simpler to ask our mother. Otherwise we may go on searching and searching for millions of years and never know. What is the point in all this vain research? We should conclude that insofar as we are in the material, illusory condition, it is our duty to take help from God or His representative, who does not set forth anything that is not originally spoken by God. For instance, God says, "Surrender unto Me," and God's representative says, "Surrender unto God." If a rascal says, "I am God," he should be kicked. The living entities are part and parcel of God, and a part can never become the whole. A real representative of God acknowledges himself as the servant of God, and he requests everyone to surrender unto God. For perfect knowledge, we have to take guidance either directly from God, as Arjuna did, or from God's representative. Then we will be successful in ascertaining the truth. **Hayagrīva:** Aristotle outlines three different conceptions of the soul: one, the soul itself is a separate substance; two, the body is but the instrument of the soul; and three, the soul is the actual form of the body. **Prabhupāda:** The body is like the clothes of the soul, and our clothes are designed to fit our body. A coat has arms because we have arms, and pants have legs because we have legs. So the body is like the coat and pants of the soul, and since the body has form, the soul also has the same form. The cloth, which is the body, originally has no shape, but when it comes into contact with the soul, it assumes a shape. **Śyāmasundara:** It appears that Aristotle equates the soul with the intelligence. **Prabhupāda:** The soul has intelligence, but his intelligence is misused if it is limited to the mind. The intelligence should rise above the mind. The mind is superior to gross matter, the intelligence is superior to the mind, and the soul is superior to the intelligence. Superior to the soul is the ultimate cause of the soul, the Supreme Lord. **Śyāmasundara:** Because he equates the soul's immortality with reason, Aristotle believes that it is only the rational soul, the human soul, that is immortal. Animals also have souls, but he saw them limited to sense, desire, and animation. **Prabhupāda:** Animals are also rational. If a dog enters my room, and I say, "Out!" the dog immediately understands and goes away. How can we say that there is no rationality at work? If I place my finger before an ant, that ant will turn away immediately. If you give a cow meat, the cow will not touch it. The cow understands that its food consists of grasses and grains. Animals have rationality, but one aspect of rationality is lacking: an animal cannot think of God. This is the main difference between animals and men. A man's rationality is so developed that he can think of God, whereas an animal cannot. But we should not think that the souls of animals are not immortal. This theory has given the Christians a basis for killing animals, but they cannot prove that an animal's soul is irrational or mortal. A man eats, sleeps, defends, and mates, and an animal does the same. So what is the difference? **Śyāmasundara:** Perhaps the difference is one of mental activity. A man has the capacity to think in a more complicated way. **Prabhupāda:** But mental activity means accepting and rejecting. Animals also accept and reject; therefore they have mental activity. **Śyāmasundara:** But what of developed intelligence? **Prabhupāda:** Of course, man has a more highly developed intelligence, but we should not think that an animal has no intelligence at all. The father has more intelligence than his small child, but this is because the child has not grown to attain that standard. Similarly, an animal is making progress up the evolutionary scale. It has intelligence, but it is not highly developed. Plants, animals, and men possess consciousness. It has been proven by Doctor Jagadish *Candra* Bose that a tree is conscious of your cutting it. However, the tree does not feel it very much. If you hit an animal, the animal feels it more, and if you hit a man, a man feels it even more than an animal. It is a question of developed consciousness, of developed intelligence. That development has to do with the body. As soon as you receive the body of a tree, your consciousness is plugged up. It is not so active. When you attain the human form, consciousness is more developed, and that developed consciousness should be further developed so that you can come to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, which is the highest perfection of the living entity. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle conceived of the soul as having a dual nature. There is an individual soul, which awakens at birth and acquires impressions during one's lifetime. Thus it grows and develops, but it is not eternal. It is subject to conditioning. It is like the souls of animals. Then there is also a rational soul, the active soul, which is eternal, though not perfect. This is man's motivating principle and purpose for living. **Prabhupāda:** Kṛṣṇa is the eternal, changeless soul. In *the *Bhagavad-gītā** Kṛṣṇa tells Arjuna: > bahūni me vyatītāni > janmāni tava cārjuna > tāny ahaṁ veda sarvāṇi > na tvaṁ vettha paran-tapa **"Many, many births both you and I have passed. I can remember all of them, but you cannot, O subduer of the enemy!" [*Bg.* 4.5] That is the real meaning of eternity—eternal knowledge. Thus there are two kinds of souls:** the Supersoul [Paramātmā], who is Kṛṣṇa Himself, and the ordinary soul [*jīva*], which is possessed by every living entity. **Śyāmasundara:** For Aristotle, the rational soul is eternal, yet he says that it is not perfect. **Prabhupāda:** This means that he has to accept two souls, one perfect and rational, and another imperfect and irrational. The soul that is perfect and rational is Kṛṣṇa, the Supersoul. **Śyāmasundara:** He doesn't say anything about the Supersoul accompanying the individual soul. **Prabhupāda:** That is because he does not know. He suggests that there is a dual nature, but he has no idea. The dual nature he refers to is not of the soul but the mind. The soul is one. When you are on the mental platform, it appears that the soul has a dual nature, but when the soul's perfection is attained, you think only of Kṛṣṇa. There is no question of duality. **Hayagrīva:** In *Politics,* Aristotle writes: "The beauty of the body is seen, but the beauty of the soul is not seen." Is this true? **Prabhupāda:** The beauty of the soul is real, and the beauty of the body is superficial. In the material world, we see many ugly and many beautiful bodies, but here ugliness and beauty are artificial. The beauty of the soul, however, is real, not artificial. Unless we see the beauty of the Supersoul, Kṛṣṇa, we have no idea what actual beauty is. Therefore the devotees want to see the beauty of Kṛṣṇa, not the artificial beauty of this material world. **Hayagrīva:** Is there no correspondence between a beautiful body and a beautiful soul? Aren't they linked by karma? **Prabhupāda:** There is some correspondence because we say that this material world is a perverted reflection of the spiritual. Originally, the soul is beautiful, but here that beauty is covered. We can only have a glimpse of the real beauty from the material covering, but we have to wait in order to see the actual beauty of the soul. That beauty is the real form of the body. **Hayagrīva:** It is said that Socrates was physically ugly but that he had a very beautiful soul, and consequently people were attracted to him. **Prabhupāda:** In India, it is said that the quail is black and ugly like a crow, but when it sings, its song is so beautiful that people are attracted. The beauty of the body is secondary, and the beauty of the soul is primary. A beautiful man who is a fool is beautiful only as long as he does not speak. As soon as he speaks, we can understand his actual position. Essentially, external beauty is useless. If an ugly man speaks well, he attracts many people, and if a beautiful man speaks nonsense, no one cares for him. Real attraction is one thing, and artificial attraction is another. **Śyāmasundara:** In man's search for truth, the role of logic is paramount. According to Aristotle's principle of contradiction, a proposition cannot be both true and false at the same time. **Prabhupāda:** That is on the relative platform. At one time we may accept something to be true, and at another time we may reject it as untrue. On the mental platform we cannot know what is true and what is not. Therefore we have to learn the truth from the Supreme Truth. Truth is truth. It is not subject to speculation. In *the *Bhagavad-gītā**, Kṛṣṇa says that after many lives of speculation, the man of wisdom surrenders unto the Supreme Absolute Truth. In the beginning, a man may employ deductive logic, but in the end, he surrenders. He comes to the conclusion: *V**āsudevaḥ sarvam *iti* [*Bg.* 7.19]. "God is everything; therefore I must surrender." This is the perfection and ultimate end of the mental processes of speculation. That is, speculation is abandoned. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle more or less utilizes the process of *saṅkhya*-yoga by analyzing objects and placing them into general categories. These categories become more and more general until one reaches the final cause, or ultimate category. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, this is the process of *neti-neti,* by which one eventually hopes to attain Brahman by understanding what Brahman is not. According to this process, one goes through the universe saying *neti-neti,* "This is not Brahman, that is not Brahman. This is not truth, that is not truth." This is the same inductive process. For instance, if you want to determine whether or not man is mortal, you may search from man to man and conclude whether each man is mortal or not. In this way, you can go on indefinitely seeing that all men are dying. Then why not accept the fact that man is mortal? In your attempt to find an immortal man, you are bound to be frustrated. You will only find mortality. This is the result of the *neti-neti* process. **Śyāmasundara:** The idea is that through this process, we can come to the final cause, the final category. **Prabhupāda:** The final category is that we are part and parcel of God. That's all. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle believed that matter as such has an inherent design. If it did not, it would be devoid of shape or form. Brute matter has to be activated; otherwise it would remain in a dormant state of nonexistence. Matter must be acted upon from without in order to be realized. **Prabhupāda:** This means that the Supreme Absolute must have form. *Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ *sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ* [*Brahma-saṁhitā* 5.1]. The word *vigraha* indicates form. That form is not dead but is the activating spirit. Kṛṣṇa's form is *sac-cid-ānanda,* eternal, fully cognizant, and blissful. Our bodies are neither fully cognizant nor fully blissful, but Kṛṣṇa's is. He knows past, present, and future, and He is always happy. Our knowledge is limited, and we are always full of anxieties. **Śyāmasundara:** For Aristotle, a form has innate purpose, or *entelechy.* Therefore all matter has some form for its actualization. The world is an unfolding of phenomena realizing itself. In other words, nature has a purpose. **Prabhupāda:** We agree with this. According to *Padma Purāṇa,* there are 8,400,000 various forms, and none of them are accidental. By karma, one receives a particular type of form. Brahmā receives his form according to his karma, and the dog or cat receives his form according to his. There is no question of accident. Nature unfolds in accordance with a plan, by virtue of which these various forms are existing. > yas tv indra-gopam athavendram aho sva-karma- > bandhānurūpa-phala-bhājanam ātanoti > karmāṇi nirdahati kintu ca bhakti-bhājāṁ > govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi **"Let me offer my respectful obeisances unto the original Personality of Godhead, Govinda, who regulates the sufferings and enjoyments of fruitive activity for everyone:** from the heavenly King Indra down to the smallest insect [*indra-gopa*]. That very Personality of Godhead destroys the fruitive karma of one engaged in devotional service." [*Brahma-saṁhitā* 5.54] From Indra down to *indra-gopa,* a microscopic germ, all living entities are working out the results of their karma. If one's karma is good, he attains a higher form; if it is not good, he attains a lower form. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle also believed that everything is designed by God for the attainment of some particular objective. This indicates a grand scheme. **Prabhupāda:** This is the process of evolution. The living entity passes from one species to another, from trees to vegetables, to insects, to fish, birds, beasts, and humans. In the human form, evolution is fully manifest. It is like a flower unfolding from a bud. When the living entity attains the human form, his proper duty is to understand his lost relationship with God. If he misses this opportunity, he may regress. Aristotle is correct therefore in saying that everything has a purpose. The whole creative process aims at bringing the living entity back to Godhead. **Śyāmasundara:** Does everything eventually come to that point? **Prabhupāda:** As a human being, you can properly utilize your consciousness, or you can misuse it. That is up to you. Kṛṣṇa gives Arjuna instructions and then tells him that the decision is up to him. Under the orders of Kṛṣṇa, nature has brought you through so many species. Now, as a human, you have a choice whether to return to God or again undergo the cycle of birth and death. If you are fortunate, you make the proper choice according to the instructions of the spiritual master and Kṛṣṇa. Then your life is successful. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle sees a hierarchy of forms extending from minerals, vegetables, animals, to human beings, and ultimately God, who is pure form and pure act. God is devoid of all potentiality, or materiality. **Prabhupāda:** There is no guarantee that we will move upwards in that hierarchy. It is a fact that the individual soul transmigrates from one form to another, but how can you say that the next form you attain will be closer to perfection? If you have a human form in this life, there is no guarantee that you will get a higher form in the next. You accept another form just as you accept another dress. That dress may be valuable, or of no value whatsoever. I get a dress according to the price I pay, and I accept a form according to my work. **Śyāmasundara:** But in order to attain perfection, we must move toward God. This is the goal for which the living entity is initially created. **Prabhupāda:** This is very expertly explained in Vedic literature as karma, *akarma,* and *vikarma.* You bring about your own form. You enjoy or suffer according to your work. In any case, a material form is never perfect because it undergoes six changes. It is born, grows, it stays for a while, it leaves some by-products, dwindles, and then vanishes. When your form vanishes, you have to take on another form, which also undergoes the same processes. When a form vanishes, it decomposes, and various elements return to nature. Water returns to water, earth returns to earth, air returns to air, and so forth. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle's God is the unmoved mover. He is perfect, and He wants nothing. He does not have to actualize Himself because He is completely actualized. **Prabhupāda:** We also agree that God is all perfect. Parāśara Muni defines God as the totality of wisdom, strength, wealth, fame, beauty, and renunciation. All these qualities are possessed by Kṛṣṇa in full, and when Kṛṣṇa was present, anyone could see that He was all perfect. One who is perfect can rule others, and we accept the leadership of a person according to his degree of perfection. If one is not somewhat wise, beautiful, wealthy, and so forth, why should we accept him as a leader? One who is supremely perfect in all these qualities is the supreme leader. That is natural. Since Kṛṣṇa is supremely perfect, we should accept Him as our leader. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle sees God as pure thought [*nous*]. God's life is the life of the mind, but God does not need to do anything to further perfect Himself. **Prabhupāda:** When he says that God is mind, what does he mean? Does he have some conception of God's personality? God must be a person. Otherwise, how could He think? **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle sees God as constantly engaged in self-contemplation. **Prabhupāda:** Does this mean that when one is perfect, he engages in no activity? Does God simply sit down and meditate? If so, what is the difference between a stone and God? A stone sits; it has no activity. How is inactivity perfection? Kṛṣṇa never meditates, yet when He speaks, He delivers perfect knowledge. Kṛṣṇa enacts various pastimes: He fights with demons, protects His devotees, dances with the *gopīs,* and delivers words of enlightenment. There is no question of God sitting down like a stone and engaging in self-meditation. **Śyāmasundara:** But is it not possible to meditate while acting? **Prabhupāda:** Certainly, but God doesn't have to meditate. Why should He meditate? He is perfect. Meditation means coming from the imperfect stage to the perfect stage. Since God is perfect to begin with, what business does He have meditating? Everything is actualized by His will alone. **Śyāmasundara:** Doesn't He contemplate His own activities? **Prabhupāda:** Why should He if He is perfect? Aristotle recommends that a man should meditate to become perfect. This meditation presupposes imperfection. Contemplation is recommended for living entities, but we should understand that whatever God desires or wills immediately comes into being. This information is given in the *Vedas.* Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva *śrūyate.* God's multi-energies are so powerful that everything is immediately actualized as soon as He desires. **Śyāmasundara:** But what about the meditations of the Buddha? **Prabhupāda:** Buddha's mission was different. He was setting an example for miscreants who were engaged in mischievous activities. He was recommending that they sit down and meditate, just as you tell a mischievous child to sit in a corner and be quiet. **Śyāmasundara:** Well, Aristotle isn't saying that we should put an end to our activities. Rather, we should always contemplate God. **Prabhupāda:** That is our process, as recommended by *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam:* > śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ > smaraṇaṁ pāda-sevanam > arcanaṁ vandanaṁ dāsyaṁ > sakhyam ātma-nivedanam > iti puṁsārpitā viṣṇau > bhaktiś cen nava-lakṣaṇā > kriyeta bhagavaty addhā > tan manye 'dhītam uttamam "Hearing and chanting about the transcendental holy name, form, qualities, paraphernalia, and pastimes of Lord Viṣṇu, remembering them, serving the lotus feet of the Lord, offering the Lord respectful worship with sixteen types of paraphernalia, offering prayers to the Lord, becoming His servant, considering the Lord one's best friend, and surrendering everything unto Him [in other words, serving Him with the body, mind, and words]—these nine processes are accepted as pure devotional service. One who has dedicated his life to the service of Kṛṣṇa through these nine methods should be understood to be the most learned person, for he has acquired complete knowledge." [*SB.* 7.5.23-24] We should always think of Viṣṇu. Kṛṣṇa consciousness means remembering Kṛṣṇa and acting for Him. When you sweep Kṛṣṇa's temple, you remember Kṛṣṇa. When you cook for Kṛṣṇa, you remember Kṛṣṇa. When you talk about Kṛṣṇa, you remember Kṛṣṇa. This is also the process recommended in *Bhagavad-gītā.* The topmost yogī is always thinking of Kṛṣṇa. > yoginām api sarveṣāṁ > mad-gatenāntarātmanā > śraddhāvān bhajate yo māṁ > sa me yuktatamo mataḥ "And of all yogīs, the one with great faith who always abides in Me, thinks of Me within himself, and renders transcendental loving service to Me—he is the most intimately united with Me in yoga and is the highest of all. That is My opinion." [*Bg.* 6.47] **Hayagrīva:** For Aristotle, God essentially does not have any knowledge of the world, and consequently He cannot return the love He receives. He neither loves nor cares for mankind. **Prabhupāda:** What kind of God is this? If one knows nothing of God, one should not speak of God. God certainly reciprocates. As we offer our love to God, He responds and cooperates accordingly. In *the *Bhagavad-gītā**, Kṛṣṇa says: > ye yathā māṁ prapadyante > tāṁs tathaiva bhajāmy aham > mama vartmānuvartante > manuṣyāḥ pārtha sarvaśaḥ "As all surrender unto Me, I reward them accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Pṛthā." [*Bg.* 4.11] When we fully surrender to God in loving service, we can understand God's nature. **Hayagrīva:** For Aristotle, God is loved by everything in the universe, and He attracts all objects in the universe just as a magnet attracts nails. Everything is striving toward Him and longing for Him, but there is no mention of Him as a person. Yet Aristotle speaks of God as pure form. Would this be an imagined form like that of the Māyāvādīs? **Prabhupāda:** Yes, it appears that Aristotle is Māyāvādī. One has to speculate if he does not receive perfect knowledge from God Himself. Unless God is all attractive, how can He be God? Therefore the word "Kṛṣṇa," which means "all attractive," is the perfect name for God because God is attracting everyone. In Vṛndāvana, He attracts His parents, the cowherd boys and girls, the animals, the fruits and flowers, the water—everything. You have read the descriptions of how the water of the Yamunā stopped flowing as soon as she saw Kṛṣṇa. So even the water was attracted to Kṛṣṇa. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle believed that thought and activity are one with God. There is no dualism because God is pure act and pure thought. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, that is so. God only needs to think of a thing for that thing to be created or actualized. God's thinking, feeling, willing, and acting are the same. Because I am imperfect, when I think of something, it may or may not happen, but whenever God thinks something it takes place. Because Kṛṣṇa thought that the battle of Kurukṣetra should take place, there was no stopping it. At first, Arjuna declined to fight, but Kṛṣṇa plainly told him that whether he fought or not, most of the people there were destined to die. He therefore told Arjuna to become an instrument and take the credit for killing them. No one can check whatever God decides. It doesn't matter whether you help God or not, but it is for your interest that you become His instrument. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle says that one should perform his activities in such a way that he is always contemplating God. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, that is the process of *bhakti.* Unless one is a devotee, how can he constantly think of God? Rūpa Gosvāmī gives the example of a woman who has a paramour other than her husband. She performs her household chores very nicely, but she is always thinking, "When will my lover come at night?" If it is possible to think of someone like this all the time materially, why not spiritually? It is a question of practice. Despite engaging in so many different types of work, you can think of God incessantly. Now, Aristotle may have some conception of God, but he has no clear idea of Kṛṣṇa's personality. We can think specifically and concretely of God because we receive information from Vedic literature that God is a person and appears a certain way. In the *Bhagavad-gītā**, it is stated that impersonalists experience a great deal of trouble because they have no clear idea of God. > kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām > avyaktāsakta-cetasām > avyaktāhi gatir duḥkhaṁ > dehavadbhir avāpyate "For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme, advancement is very troublesome. To make progress in that discipline is always difficult for those who are embodied." [*Bg.* 12.5] If you have no conception of God's form, your attempt to realize God will be very difficult. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle conceives of God as the greatest good, as pure thought. When we act, we should always contemplate the good. In this way, we can lead a godly life. **Prabhupāda:** You cannot contemplate the good unless you are guided by the good. Arjuna, for instance, was guided by the Supreme Good; therefore despite his activity, which was fighting, he performed the greatest good. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle believes that there is a grand design in the universe because everything is evolving from one form to another to realize its most perfect form. Everything is being attracted by the most perfect form. **Prabhupāda:** Does he say that there is only one perfect form, or a variety of perfect forms? What does he mean? Is everyone striving to come to the perfect form? Is that form one or various? **Śyāmasundara:** Well, since each material form is designed by God and moves toward God in its longing for perfection, there must be a variety of forms. **Prabhupāda:** If that is the case, it tallies with the Vedic conception. We say that Kṛṣṇa and His associates are perfect; therefore this flower, for instance, attains its perfect form when it is in Kṛṣṇa-loka, Kṛṣṇa's planet. Everything in Kṛṣṇa-loka is perfect because everything there is directly related to Kṛṣṇa. Consequently, in Kṛṣṇa-loka, the Yamunā River, the Vṛndāvana forest, the flowers, the beasts, the birds, and the men and women are nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa. > ānanda-cinmaya-rasa-pratibhāvitābhis > tābhir ya eva nija-rūpatayā kalābhiḥ > goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūto > govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi "I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, who resides in His own realm, Goloka, with Rādhā, who resembles His own spiritual figure and who embodies the ecstatic potency [*hlādinī*]. Their companions are Her confidantes, who embody extensions of Her bodily form, and who are imbued and permeated with ever-blissful spiritual *rasa.*" [*Brahma-saṁhitā* 5.37] When Brahmā stole all the cowherd boys and calves, Kṛṣṇa immediately expanded Himself into many cowherd boys and calves, each with different features and mentalities. The mothers of the cowherd boys could not understand that their real sons had been stolen. Because Kṛṣṇa was substituting for them, the mothers' love for their sons increased. Thus Kṛṣṇa can expand Himself in many ways—as cows, calves, trees, boys, girls, and so on. Yet Kṛṣṇa is still one. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle would say that since God has a spiritual form, He is without plurality in the sense that He is composed of no parts. In other words, He is pure spirit. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, God is one without plurality. The sun may be visible to millions of persons, still the sun is one. At noon, millions of men may claim, "The sun is over my head," but does this mean that everyone has a different sun? No, the sun is one, but the sun can represent itself variously. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle gave two arguments for God's existence. One is that there is a design in the universe, and a design presupposes a designer. The other holds that there must be a first cause, a cause of all causes. **Prabhupāda:** That is so. A designer moreover presupposes a person. Kṛṣṇa explains in *Bhagavad-gītā:* > mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ > sūyate sa-carācaram > hetunānena kaunteya > jagad viparivartate "This material nature, which is one of My energies, is working under My direction, O son of Kuntī, producing all moving and nonmoving beings. Under its rule this manifestation is created and annihilated again and again." [*Bg.* 9.10] Kṛṣṇa is also the directing cause, the *puruṣa,* the cause of all causes. *Anādir ādir govindaḥ *sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam.* "Govinda [Kṛṣṇa] is the origin of all. He has no other origin, and He is the prime cause of all causes." [*Brahma-saṁhitā* 5.1] **Hayagrīva:** In *Nicomachean Ethics,* Aristotle writes: "Moral excellence is concerned with pleasure and pain; it is pleasure that makes us perform base action, and pain that prevents us from acting nobly. For that reason, as Plato says, men must be reared from childhood to feel pleasure and pain at the proper things. This is proper education." How does this correspond to the Vedic view of education? **Prabhupāda:** According to the Vedic view, there is no pleasure in this material world. We may make all kinds of arrangements for pleasure, but we may suddenly have to die. So where is the pleasure? If we make arrangements for pleasure and then do not enjoy it, we are disappointed. We are constantly trying to attain pleasure by inventing so many contrivances, but because we are controlled by some superior force, we may at any moment be kicked out of our house of pleasure. The conclusion is that there is no pleasure in this material world. Pleasure here is an illusion, a mirage. In a desert, you may hallucinate water, but ultimately you will die of thirst. **Śyāmasundara:** For Aristotle, virtue is the golden mean, or that activity between two extreme activities. By his intelligence, man can perceive and act upon that golden mean. Ultimately, all virtues are summed up in the virtue of justice, which means doing the right thing for everyone concerned so that everyone's rights will be protected. **Prabhupāda:** But if everyone's rights are to be protected, how can you kill animals? Why shouldn't animals have the right to live? According to the Vedic conception, even if you kill one ant unconsciously, you are responsible. Because we are killing so many ants and microbes unconsciously, we therefore have to perform *pañca-yajña,* sacrifice. We may consciously avoid killing animals, but we may be unconsciously killing many. Therefore, in either case, sacrifice is compulsory. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle believes that virtue can be analyzed, that any situation can be analyzed by the intelligence, and then that intelligence can be applied to correct action. **Prabhupāda:** By intelligence he should try to understand whether or not animals have souls. If an animal doesn't have a soul, how is it he is acting like a human being? He is eating, sleeping, mating and defending. How can you say he has no soul? The life symptoms are the same. **Śyāmasundara:** He equates the immortal soul with rational activity. **Prabhupāda:** Well, animals have rational activities. I have already explained this. A philosopher certainly must know the symptoms of the soul, and these must be defined. We receive perfect information on this subject from *Bhagavad-gītā,* when Kṛṣṇa says: > sarva-yoniṣu kaunteya > mūrtayaḥ sambhavanti yāḥ > tāsāṁ brahma mahad yonir > ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā "It should be understood that all species of life, O son of Kuntī, are made possible by birth in this material nature, and that I am the seed-giving father." [*Bg.* 14.4] **Does this mean that God is the father only of human beings? For instance, the Jews say that they are the only selected people of God. But what kind of God is this who selects some people and condemns others? This is God:** Kṛṣṇa says, *sarva-yoni.* "I am the father of all species of life," Everyone is God's son. How can I kill and eat any living entity? He is my brother in any case. Suppose a man has five sons, and two of them are fools. Does this mean that the intelligent sons have the right to kill and eat the foolish ones? Would the father like this? Who would ask the father, "Father, these two sons are fools and useless rascals. So let us cut them to pieces and eat them."? Will the father agree to this? Or will the state agree? And why should God agree? **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle claims that one can use his intelligence to practice virtue, but you once said that because a thief considers theft a virtue, he can use his intelligence to steal. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, a thief's intelligence has been described as *duṣkṛtina.* The word *kṛti* means "very meritorious," and the word *duṣ* means "misapplied." Is that virtuous when one's intelligence is misapplied? When merit and intelligence are properly used for the proper activity, that is virtue. Such activity will not entangle a man. That is intelligence and virtue. **Śyāmasundara:** Ambition is one of the Aristotelean virtues, but one can have the ambition to steal. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, it was Hitler's ambition to become total ruler of Europe. He killed many people and then finally killed himself. So what was all this ambition worth? All these politicians are very ambitious, but they are ambitious to unlawfully encroach upon the rights of others. We should have the ambition to become the sincere servant of God. That is real ambition. **Śyāmasundara:** Among virtues, Aristotle includes courage, temperance, liberality, magnificence, and ambition. **Prabhupāda:** What is the magnificence of killing animals? How can you have no kindness for poor animals and yet talk of magnificence? *Har***āv abhaktasya** [*SB.* 5.18.12]. If your ultimate conclusion is not God consciousness, you have no good qualities. You can be neither a scientist, nor a philosopher, because you are *nar***ādhamā**, hovering on the mental platform. Thus you concoct so many theories. **Śyāmasundara:** As far as Aristotle's social philosophy is concerned, he says that man is basically a political and social animal and that he must exist in some society in order to fulfill himself. Men live together to transcend their crude natural condition and arrive at a civilized culture of ethical and intellectual life. **Prabhupāda:** If that is done, that is all right, but he is philosophizing that animals have no souls. Following his philosophy, people are saying, "Let's kill the animals and eat them." So what is the benefit of this grouping together in a society? We should instead group together to cultivate knowledge of God. This is what is required. What is the use in living together just to plunder other nations and kill other living entities? Such a group is a group of rogues and gangsters. Even today in the United Nations people are grouping together and planning to encroach upon one another. So what is the point in all these groups of gangsters? **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle is talking about the ideal way a state or a political body should be organized. He says that ideally a state should be formed in order to educate men to the highest level. **Prabhupāda:** But if we do not know what is education, or if we do not know the highest level of education, or if we do not even know the primary principles of a virtuous life, how can we speak of such things? Therefore we should be very careful to take bona fide guidance. According to Vedic civilization, Manu is the law-giver, and he is considered perfect. Manu, for instance, states that a woman should not be given independence. Now, certain groups are asking, "Why not?" Thus there is a confrontation, and Manu is surely being attacked, but Manu's conception is right in any case. Instruction should be taken from liberated persons. What can a group of fools do? One liberated personality like Manu can give the right directions. Presently, in the name of independence, there is havoc. **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle's state would be tightly controlled either by a monarch or a group of men intellectually and morally superior. These would guide the rest of the people. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, that would be very nice. Unless one is morally superior, he cannot guide. Nowadays, in democracies, all kinds of rascals are voted into positions of authority. What is the use in such groups? **Śyāmasundara:** Aristotle condemns democracy because in a democracy each person strives for his own self-interest. **Prabhupāda:** Yes, that is going on. Monarchy is good if the monarch is trained in such a way that he can rule properly. That was the Vedic system. Even then, the monarch was controlled by great sages. In a proper government, the *brāhmaṇas* and sages should form an advisory committee. They should not participate in politics. The *kṣatriyas,* who are ambitious to rule, should rule under the guidance of the *brāhmaṇas* and sages. Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira was very pious, and people were very happy because he acted under the guidance of *brāhmaṇas* and sages. Formerly, the monarch was guided by priestly, religious, or saintly people. That was very nice. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement can guide society, but presently society is in such a state that it does not even want to consider the importance of this movement. This is unfortunate. Still, we have to struggle to spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness because we are representatives of Kṛṣṇa, and Kṛṣṇa's desires are our commands.