View source for You say that because the earth isn't too hot or too cold. But they say that just by chance it came into this order

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"you say that because the earth isn't too hot or too cold. But they say that just by chance it came into this order"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Mangalavati}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|11Apr11}}
{{last|11Apr11}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Prabhupada Said (or Did Not Say)]]
[[Category:That]]
[[Category:Because]]
[[Category:Earth]]
[[Category:Is Not]]
[[Category:Hot]]
[[Category:Cold]]
[[Category:They]]
[[Category:Say]]
[[Category:Just]]
[[Category:By Chance]]
[[Category:Came]]
[[Category:Into]]
[[Category:This]]
[[Category:Order]]
[[Category:Prabhupada Responding to Comments]]
</div>
<div id="Lectures" class="section" sec_index="4" parent="compilation" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="0" parent="Lectures" text="Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures"><h3>Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureonBG168TokyoJanuary281975_0" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="394" link="Lecture on BG 16.8 -- Tokyo, January 28, 1975" link_text="Lecture on BG 16.8 -- Tokyo, January 28, 1975">
<div class="heading">No, no, "by chance." This is childish reason, "by chance." It is not very good reason. A child will say, "(By) chance, it has come." That is childish. You must give solid reason. Chance, you can say anything as chance. Everybody can say like that. That is not reason. When you bring in chance, that is not logic. That is not knowledge. If somebody says, "By chance, I have come in this world," that is not logic. I must have my father. I must have my mother. And on account of father-mother being united, I am... This is scientific.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 16.8 -- Tokyo, January 28, 1975|Lecture on BG 16.8 -- Tokyo, January 28, 1975]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: But you have not seen who is Japanese government, president. How do you conclude there is government? You have not seen the president or the supreme head. So how do you say there is government? We have not seen who is the president, who is the prime minister. Then how do we conclude that "There must be government. Otherwise how it is going on so nicely." You may see, you may not see, so many things, but does it mean... That is not a good logic, that "I have not seen." I have not seen, but the sound is coming. The car is there. There must be somebody there. Even if we do not see, you have to conclude like that. Just like there is sound. The sound is of car, and the car, there must be one driver. You have not seen. So how do you conclude there is a driver? How do you conclude? And why do you give stress on your seeing power? What is the power of your seeing? You cannot see. Now you cannot see the car. It is beyond your seeing range or beyond the wall. Then how you conclude that there is a car? And if there is a car, there is a driver. If there is driver, there are passengers. So how do you conclude all this? Why do you give this... This is childish reason, "I cannot see." You cannot see; therefore there is no existence. That is not good logic.</p>
<p>Trivikrama: They say that it all happened by chance,</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Then that is another foolishness, "chance."</p>
<p>Trivikrama: If given enough time, then everything would work out like this.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, they are working already. There is no question of giving time. They are already working.</p>
<p>Trivikrama: No, but you say that because the earth isn't too hot or too cold. But they say that just by chance it came into this order.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, no, "by chance." This is childish reason, "by chance." It is not very good reason. A child will say, "(By) chance, it has come." That is childish. You must give solid reason. Chance, you can say anything as chance. Everybody can say like that. That is not reason. When you bring in chance, that is not logic. That is not knowledge. If somebody says, "By chance, I have come in this world," that is not logic. I must have my father. I must have my mother. And on account of father-mother being united, I am... This is scientific. "By chance I have dropped from the sky here," (laughter) this is not logic. This kind of logic is vague only. That is no... It has no value. Do you give any value to this logic, nonsensical logic? No sane man will accept, "by chance." When you are caught and you are convicted, then if you say, "By chance, I became convicted"? By chance? No. You committed theft, you were arrested, there were due judgment, and the judge has given you punishment. You must suffer. It is not a chance. And if you say, "By chance, I am now convicted," that is not chance. There is no question of chance. This is a false logic, chance. Nothing takes place by chance. That is sound reasoning. Chance means ignorant. One who does not know, he says chance. That is ignorance. That is not knowledge. Knowledge is different thing. So they are rascals, you can say. This kind of logic, "I have not seen. It has come by chance. There was a chunk," these are all nonsensical proposition. There is īśvara. This is sound knowledge. As you conclude by seeing the arrangement in the Tokyo city there is government, similarly, if you are intelligent enough, then you can understand there must be a controller. That is theism. That is knowledge.</p>
<p>Bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate ([[Vanisource:BG 7.19|BG 7.19]]). Therefore this foolish class of men who are simply studying, they want time to find out, but actually if he is wise, if he is searching out regularly by wise conclusion, then, at some time, he will come to the conclusion, as it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, bahūnāṁ janmanām ante: after many births of research work, he will come to this conclusion that there is God, Vāsudeva. Vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 7.19|BG 7.19]]). Then he is the first-class mahātmā. But that is very rare. Everyone is durātmā, anīśvaram: "There is no īśvara. This is a false manifestation." That is not false. You study everything. You study even one plant. You can see so many arrangement, so many fibers. Fine fibers are coming out, and from one fiber to another. Even a small herb and vegetable, you will find there is craftsmanship. You cannot say it is chance. You cannot do it. So there is brain. That is right conclusion, "There is brain behind it," and that is theism. And that brain, what is the brain behind this, who has this brain behind this, behind this, behind this, behind this, if you come... Bahūnāṁ janmanām ante ([[Vanisource:BG 7.19|BG 7.19]]), after searching out for many, many births, then one comes to the conclusion that vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 7.19|BG 7.19]]). You come to the conclusion, "Kṛṣṇa is the cause of everything." That is already concluded. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1): "Īśvaraḥ, the supreme controller is Kṛṣṇa." Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ... There are so many controllers. Just like this city is being controlled by the police commissioner or somebody else. So above him, above him, above him, there is controller. And the... Above all, the supreme controller is Kṛṣṇa. That is the conclusion.</p>
:īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ
:sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ
:anādir ādir govindaḥ
:sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam
:(Bs. 5.1)
<p>He is the cause of... He is... Alone, He is working. He has expanded alone. He is not alone. Kṛṣṇa means He has got so many energies. Just like a teeny person like me, Bhaktisiddhānta..., Bhaktivedanta Swami... So this movement—I am not alone. I have got so many assistants, so many, all over the world. So as soon as you take up Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement and its originator, founder, so he is not alone. Similarly, as I have expanded with my disciples in so many ways and so many places, so if I can expand—I am a common man—then how Kṛṣṇa can expand, just imagine. He is the Supreme Lord. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam (Bs. 5.33). Ananta-rūpam. He can expand Himself, ananta-rūpam. But He is the only person. He is doing everything.</p>
<p>Just like I am replying dozens of letters from all over the world and trying to manage, similarly, He is also managing alone, ananta-rūpam, by unlimited assistants. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). We have to understand like that. Although He is alone, He has... Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam, ananta-rūpam (Bs. 5.33). He has got ananta-rūpam. Just like He is giving direction everyone. Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe arjuna tiṣṭhati ([[Vanisource:BG 18.61|BG 18.61]]).</p>
<p>There are millions and millions and trillions of living entities, and each heart, He is sitting there. Sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭo mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca ([[Vanisource:BG 15.15|BG 15.15]]). He is managing like that. So if we think that He is a controller like us, that is our misconception. He is controller. There is controller. With unlimited knowledge and unlimited assistants, with unlimited potencies, He is managing. These impersonalists, they cannot think of that a person can be so unlimitedly powerful. Therefore they become impersonalist. They cannot think of. The impersonalists, they cannot imagine... They imagine, "When one is person, he is a person like me. I cannot do this. Therefore He cannot do." Therefore they are mūḍha. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhāḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 9.11|BG 9.11]]). They are comparing Kṛṣṇa with themself. As he is a person, similarly, Kṛṣṇa is a person. He does not know. The Vedas inform that "Although He is person, He is maintaining all unlimited persons." That they do not know. Eko yo bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān. That one singular person, He is maintaining many millions, many millions, trillions of persons. We are each, every one, we are person. I am person. You are person. The ant is person. The cat is person. Dog is person, and the insect is person. The trees are person. Everyone is person. Everyone is person. And there is another person. That is God, Kṛṣṇa. That one person is maintaining all these varieties of millions and trillions of persons. This is the Vedic in... Eko yo bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). This is the information.</p>
<p>So Kṛṣṇa also says in the Bhagavad-gītā,</p>
:ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo
:mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate
:iti matvā bhajante māṁ
:budhā bhāva-samanvitāḥ
:([[Vanisource:BG 10.8|BG 10.8]])
<p>Therefore a devotee, when he understands thoroughly that "Here is one Supreme Person, who is the leader, who is the controller, who is the maintainer of everything," then he surrenders unto Him and becomes His devotee. You see? We, Kṛṣṇa's devotee, we are not fools and rascals. We have got our reason. We have got our philosophy. When we know that Kṛṣṇa is actually the supreme controller, the Supreme Person, the supreme maintainer, then we surrender. Then we become Kṛṣṇa devotee. It is not blind. It is not blind. We are strongly convinced that that one person is the Supreme Person. Therefore we surrender. We are not blind followers. Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravar..., iti matvā budhā bhāva-samanvitāḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 10.8|BG 10.8]]).</p>
<p>Budhāḥ. Budha means one who has understood thoroughly. So therefore he can become... One who has understood thoroughly Kṛṣṇa as the supreme controller, he is guru. He is guru. Otherwise one cannot be guru. Yei kṛṣṇa-tattva-vettā sei guru haya ([[Vanisource:CC Madhya 8.128|CC Madhya 8.128]]). Who can (be) guru? Guru is not artificial thing, "Guru Mahārāja," "this Mahārāja...," no. One who has firmly understood that Kṛṣṇa is the original cause of everything, He is the Supreme Person—nobody can remove him from that firm convictional position—then he is guru. Otherwise he is not guru. Guru is not so easy thing. Budhā bhāva-samanvitāḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 10.8|BG 10.8]]). One who has understood Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the supreme controller, the supreme maintainer, the Supreme Person, everything, only one, vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti ([[Vanisource:BG 7.19|BG 7.19]])—that is guru. But otherwise, he is not guru, one who has not understood Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu confirms, yei kṛṣṇa-tattva-vettā sei guru haya ([[Vanisource:CC Madhya 8.128|CC Madhya 8.128]]). One who has understood Kṛṣṇa as the supreme controller, the Supreme Person, the supreme maintainer, and everything, the supreme, ultimate, then he can become guru.</p>
<p>Otherwise don't try to become guru. Impersonalists, half-understood, partially understood, he cannot become guru. This is the Caitanya Mahāprabhu's formula. Therefore first of all try to understand Kṛṣṇa. You will understand in such a way that you can refute all others' argument, all others' opposition. There are so many opposing elements. Then you are guru. Otherwise you cannot become a guru. Guru is not so teeny thing or trifle thing that everyone becomes Guru Mahārāja, no. That is not guru. Sa mahātmā... Vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 7.19|BG 7.19]]).</p>
<p>So their theory, this atheistic theory, is aparaspara-sambhūtam. It has taken by mechanical arrangement. Kim anyat kāma-haitukam. Kāma. Just like kāma—a man, a woman becomes lusty, and there is sex, and there is production. So they say like that. The production is like that. There is no other plan. But there is a big plan. That they do not know. The plan is: yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati bhārata, tadātmānaṁ sṛjāmy aham ([[Vanisource:BG 4.7|BG 4.7]]). That is plan. But these rascal, this atheist class, they say, kim anyat kāma-haitukam: "Only lusty desires, that is the only reason. That is the only cause." The atheist class think like that, that "This birth is taking place due to our lusty desires, but we do not want to take responsibility. Then kill him. What is that?" Therefore they are making this abortion, killing of the child, as legal. The kāma... "We had some lusty desires, and we got it, but we don't want it. Kill it." That's all. This is going on. This is atheism. But it is not that. That child has come. It is a living entity. It desired a certain thing, and therefore he has given chance to take birth as human being or as cat, as dog. Kāma-haitukam.</p>
<p>Then why one is born as a cat, one is born as a dog, one is born as a rich man's son, one who is born as..., so many varieties? Why? If kāma-haitukam, then why not one variety? Where is the question of varieties? What is the answer? Why there are so many varieties? Everyone wants to take birth in rich family, in high family. Why one is born as a street dog and there is no food and crying, barking, and somebody is capturing and eating and no protection? Why? Why kāma-haitukam, the dog is also born by the lusty desires of the male dog and the female dog, but why he is dog, and why he is such a rich man's son? Why? What is the answer? If kāma-haitukam, lusty desire is the only cause for birth, production, then why there is one production, street dog, cat or pig or a worm in the stool, and why one is born as demigod, as Indra or Candra, Varuṇa? Why? A Brahmā? Who makes this arrangement? Why one is put into such exalted position, and why one is put into that abominable position? What is the answer? Kāma-haitukam.</p>
<p>Trivikrama: Past activities.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. You cannot say it's by chance. And who is making this chance arrangement, that one is born so exalted, one is born so low? Then again we have to accept somebody is. So these are all foolish theories, "By chance, by kāma-haitukam." No, there is great arrangement. As the same... Just like the traffic control. There is a very big, great arrangement behind this. It is not by chance. By chance there has been not line, and they pass the car in certain line. No, it is not chance. How you can say, "chance"? So these theories are made by the demons. Read the purport.</p>
<p>Nitāi: "The demoniac conclude that the world is a phantasmagoria. There is no cause, no effect, no controller, no purpose: everything is unreal. They say that this cosmic manifestation arises due to chance material actions and reactions. They do not think that the world was created by God for a certain purpose. They have their own theory: that the world has come about in its own way and that there is no reason to believe that there is a God behind it. For them there is no difference between spirit and matter, and they do not accept the Supreme Spirit. Everything is matter only, and the whole cosmos is supposed to be a mass of ignorance."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Therefore they say chemical evolution. They cannot think of spirit. Go on.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>