View source for If they have information that this is not the only life, then won't they automatically become more austere?

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"if they have information that this is not the only life, then won't they automatically become more austere"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|MadhuGopaldas}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|27Jun11}}
{{last|27Jun11}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=1|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Questions asked to Srila Prabhupada]]
[[Category:Questions asked to SP... 1974]]
</div>
<div id="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="section" sec_index="5" parent="compilation" text="Conversations and Morning Walks"><h2>Conversations and Morning Walks</h2>
</div>
<div id="1974_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="sub_section" sec_index="7" parent="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" text="1974 Conversations and Morning Walks"><h3>1974 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div id="MorningWalkJune81974Geneva_0" class="quote" parent="1974_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="102" link="Morning Walk -- June 8, 1974, Geneva" link_text="Morning Walk -- June 8, 1974, Geneva">
<div class="heading">Yes. (indistinct) consider what kind of life I'm going to get. (indistinct) They have made their own rascal philosophy that there is no life after death. Although they're experiencing that I am changing my body in this duration of life. I know that I have a child's body, child's body. That body's finished. Still I'm existing. So why I shall not exist after this body's finished?
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Morning Walk -- June 8, 1974, Geneva|Morning Walk -- June 8, 1974, Geneva]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: ...Vedic culture, Śrīla Prabhupāda, if there was illicit sex going on?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Eh?</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: In Vedic culture, what would King Parīkṣit do?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: We don't find any illicit sex. They were having more than one wife. So there was no question of illicit sex. If one wife is pregnant, then the man, he goes to another wife. Man has got that tendency. So as soon as she is pregnant, she is kept separate. Even we have seen. When the girl is pregnant, she goes to her mother's care, does not live with the husband. What is that?</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: Off in the distance.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: A girl is pregnant, suppose, then, during her pregnancy period, ten months, there is no sex, and unless the child becomes six months old, there is no sex. The thing is that in the modern world, sex life has become the only pleasure. They do not know anything else. Therefore everything is discredited. And another thing is they are afraid of keeping more than one wife for population. But if they produce sufficient food, where is the question of overpopulation? Another thing they have made, especially in the western world, they don't want to produce food because they know, "We shall kill one animal and eat. Why take so much trouble? Let me increase industry, and I shall push my button. Money will come. And the slaughterhouse there. We shall eat." So they are getting money. By money, they are getting women to the choice. They are getting food, meat, and they're enjoying drinking. So money has become the whole thing. "Bring money some way or other and enjoy." This is the purport of civilization. They do not care what is God, that human body is meant for God realization. They have no such ideas. "There is nothing after death. So so long I am living, let me enjoy by the tongue, by the genital and by the belly. Use the tongue for eating anything which is palatable, which I like. Never mind what it is. And then genital also. Bring as many women..." This is civilization, modern. There is no question of sinful life or pious life, next life. (laughs) Another, their theory is that only on this planet there is living entities... (break) If there is sufficient rain in the desert, it will be also hot. (break) ...tells us in the śāstras how to live comfortably and advance in spiritual life. And they should give advice to others. That is the business of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Lokānāṁ hita-kāriṇau. Nānā-śāstra-vicāraṇaika-nipuṇau sad-dharma-saṁsthāpakau. Lokānāṁ hita-kāriṇau tri-bhuvane mānyau śaraṇyākarau. This is the description of the Gosvāmīs. They are well versed in all different types of Vedic scriptures just to establish a peaceful society sad-dharma, very nice gentleman, peaceful society. Lokānāṁ hita-kāriṇau, for the benefit of the whole human society. Therefore they are honored all over the world. This is gosvāmī business, not to exploit (indistinct) live like irresponsible man, eat, drink, be merry and enjoy.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: Prabhupāda, their philosophy is that this is all there is, this life. After death, it's finished. And so they're trying to enjoy, enjoy, enjoy.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: So if they have information that this is not the only life, then won't they automatically become more austere?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. (indistinct) consider what kind of life I'm going to get. (indistinct) They have made their own rascal philosophy that there is no life after death. Although they're experiencing that I am changing my body in this duration of life. I know that I have a child's body, child's body. That body's finished. Still I'm existing. So why I shall not exist after this body's finished? Where is the logic? Where is the... The simple logic they cannot understand. So dull brain. And they're advanced in civilization, big, big professor, big, big Indologist, this logic. The simple reason they cannot understand. What did they say? You have talked to many men about this logic?</p>
<p>Guru-gaurāṅga: About life after death?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes.</p>
<p>Satsvarūpa: They say it doesn't go beyond... They have to agree that the baby's body is gone and the young man's body is gone. They have to agree. But they say that that doesn't mean logically that I have to take another body.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: What is the other logic? If you have changed your body so many times, why not change this body? What is your reason? Natural course it should be that I have changed so many bodies so this body I shall change. This is natural logic. And what is his logic?</p>
<p>Satsvarūpa: So he said... They say it may be or it may not be.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: But that is your rascaldom. But this is the real logic.</p>
<p>Guru-gaurāṅga: They also say that it is not... It is the same body, more or less...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Same body...</p>
<p>Guru-gaurāṅga: But it is just developed, but it is not a different body.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No. Developed means different body. Development means different body. They cannot say it is not different body. Then if it is not different, then go to childhood again. That means they're not human being. Human being means with logic. According to their definition, man is rational animal. They're not even rational. Like cats and dogs. There is no rationality. Cats and dogs also they have got rationality. Logic plus authority, Kṛṣṇa says. How you can deny? That means they don't agree with Kṛṣṇa's instruction. You see? This logic, I am not giving this logic. This logic is given by Kṛṣṇa. So unless... The difficulty is that unless they accept the authority, it is very difficult. Logic is there. The authority is there.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: They feel, Prabhupāda, that they've been cheated so much by so many philosophies that when we say that the Vedas are written by a person who's not contaminated by the modes of nature, they say, "Well, how is this possible? My experience is that everyone who's written books, they're all materialistic and therefore the philosophy must be like that."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: But you must be following some philosophy. You're not without philosophy. Even the hippies they're also follow... They've got their own philosophy.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: Yes.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: So you cannot give up philosophy. Now it is misfortune that you met with the cheaters. So make your fortune now. Believe in Kṛṣṇa's philosophy. Then you'll be happy.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: Jaya.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That argument that we don't believe... But you're believing in Lenin's philosophy, the communist. And what is this hippies, their philosophy, Allen Ginsberg's philosophy? Ha? Debauch number one. (laughter)</p>
<p>Satsvarūpa: Ultimately, they don't follow anyone, although they may like people, they...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, they follow.</p>
<p>Devotee: They say our only...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: But they are manufacture their own philosophy. Philosophy there must be. They've become their own authority. That is a chaotic condition. Authority he has made himself. Yes. I am my authority. Authority has to accept. But he does not know that I am fool No. 1, what is the value of my authority? Authority he must accept. But he makes himself his authority. That is the tendency now. "In my opinion." All rascals say like that. "In my opinion." He does not... He's rascal No. 1, what is the value of his opinion? But he'll say, "In my opinion." That is the difficulty. And this is called creative philosophy. Is it not?</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: Yes.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: This is going on. All rascals have creative philosophy.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: When I hear in the United States there's a saying, a slogan, amongst the young people: "Do your own thing." And also in India now when I go there they say, "So many men, so many minds."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes, that is Vivekananda. Yata mata tata patha. That means everyone can become authority. This is their philosophy.</p>
<p>Satsvarūpa: And this they praised as good.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Ha?</p>
<p>Satsvarūpa: And others praise this as...</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: Very tolerant, liberal.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes, but our philosophy, Kṛṣṇa says, "You rascal, give up everything. Just surrender unto Me." This is our philosophy. "You rascal, you give up everything and surrender unto Me." This is our philosophy.</p>
<p>Devotee: Haribol.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekam ([[Vanisource:BG 18.66|BG 18.66]]). He's decrying this Vivekananda philosophy. Rascal philosophy. There was a suggestion when I (indistinct) international, I was going to register, they suggested, "Why don't you make God conscious? Why you make Kṛṣṇa conscious?" And if I had made God conscious so many rascals will bring so many Gods. Therefore specifically only Kṛṣṇa God. That's all. That is authorized. If you like, you take other's God. But this is our philosophy, mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja. Was it not wise conclusion?</p>
<p>Guru-gaurāṅga: Yes.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: If I have made a little liberal, God conscious, all rascals would have brought... "Here is my God." To stop this nonsense I made it Kṛṣṇa conscious. Kṛṣṇa is God only. Nobody is God. If you like this philosophy, come others' God. I don't want your cooperation. What is the use of cooperation of some rascaldom?</p>
<p>Guru-gaurāṅga: That man yesterday wanted to know if we collaborated with other groups.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. There is collaboration. We are proposing this collaboration. All religion, they're after... Religion means to accept God. So if you accept God, we accept God. Then where is no cooperation? This is cooperation. But if you don't know what is God, we know. That is the difference. Ask this Christians, Mohammedans, and any other religious group, they have got a conception of God, ask them what is the form of God, what does He do, what is His..., so many things. They do not know. But we know.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: They simply say He is spirit.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. That's all, vague idea. We say, "Here is God." So if you actually believe in God, why don't you take this God and the whole, all different types of religions become one? If you accept God, then we say, "Here is God." So where is the point of difference? How do you differ? Why do you say that you are different religion, my religion? Why do you say, "My religion"? Everyone... This is the only religion: to know God and love Him. What is their objection? To accept God, Kṛṣṇa? What is their object? What is their reason?</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: They want to gratify their senses.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Why do you make a different God? If you actually believe in God, I say, "Here is God." Why don't you accept? Eh?</p>
<p>Satsvarūpa: Impersonalism. They don't want...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That is not God. God is person. That means you do not know God.</p>
<p>Devotee: They say Jesus Christ is God too.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. Jesus Christ is God. That's right. But Jesus Christ said, "I'm son of God."</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: Yes. He said, "I'm at the right hand of the Father."</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: So he's different from the Father.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Even not different. But he says that he's son of God. We accept it. Why there are so many religions? If religion means acceptance of God, then here is God. Then make one religion. Why so many different religions?</p>
<p>Guru-gaurāṅga: In America there are two new sects, religious sects, that appear every month.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Every month. Different sect.</p>
<p>Devotee: Two.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Every month, what do you mean by every month?</p>
<p>Guru-gaurāṅga: Every month there are two new religious sects that appear.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Oh. And they'll accept God?</p>
<p>Guru-gaurāṅga: Well, they invent their own God their own way. In Europe they laugh at the Americans and their religions because they know this.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: If religion, new religion, that means new God? Or what it is?</p>
<p>Satsvarūpa: New way of approaching God.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: But you want to approve God, if we agree to that, then this is the easiest process. You chant God's name and you approach. Why again new? This is the easiest proposition. Eh? Chant God's name and you approach.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: In the Bhagavad-gītā it says that those who are different modes of nature, they have different types of charity and different types of religion. So does this mean religions that are already established in the Vedas or...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That is means conditional religion. That is not absolute religion. In order to, what is called, summarize all types of religion... Just like Kṛṣṇa says, mama vartmānuvartante manuṣyāḥ pārtha sarvaśaḥ, "Everyone is trying to come to Me." So they are coming by different paths. So that is accepted. Now, when he says that "I am here. You're coming to Me, now you just surrender. Then everything is all right." Why don't you accept that? Why do you insist, "No, I shall come in a different way, different path"? What is this nonsense? God is saying "All right, you have got different paths, but give up that. Now simply surrender to Me." Where I am objection? If I am a really lover of God, God is saying like that, why not accept that? Why shall I pay for different paths? Eh? Suppose in this jungle you are scattered and you are searching "Where is Prabhupāda? Where is Prabhupāda?" And somebody says, "Come this way. Come this way." And if I say, "Not this way, that way. Come here. Come here." What is your objection? Eh? Either you don't want me... (laughs) Eh? You don't want me. You want to play some whimsical way. You are not serious about me? If you're actually serious about God, God says here, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām e... ([[Vanisource:BG 18.66|BG 18.66]]). "Give up all this nonsense. Just surrender un..." Why they do not accept it. Eh? What is your answer, Satsvarūpa?</p>
<p>Satsvarūpa: I think your answer's that they want to play a kind of hide and seek. They don't really want to go.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. This is their foolishness. They don't want to go.</p>
<p>Guru-gaurāṅga: They say they would rather search than find.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: But search. That's all right. Search means you do not know, therefore searching. But if you're searching for something and you get that something then why you should search any more? Searching means you do not know. You're searching. But if I say "Come here. I am here." Just like child is crying. There is no toys, his mother... Mother says, "Child, come here." He comes here. That's all. That is real searching. Or what is this searching? Either you do not know what you are searching or you are making a false play.</p>
<p>Devotee: Right.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: (aside:) Is this one bathroom? Religion means actually relation with God, to know God. They don't think like that. They say religion does not mean search of God. Is it not?</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: They say that there's one place that you cannot see God.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That's all right but what do you mean by religion first of all? I cannot see God. That is another thing. But that does not mean there is no God.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: Yes.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: I cannot see the president. That does not mean there is no president.</p>
<p>Puṣṭa-kṛṣṇa: Jaya.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Because I cannot see therefore there's no president. Is that very good logic?</p>
<p>Devotee: No.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: You may not see. You're unfit to see. You're not qualified to see. But why there shall be no God?</p>
<p>Satsvarūpa: I was taught that that is God's nature, invisible spirit.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Eh?</p>
<p>Devotee: I was taught in religion that God... That is His nature, not that I can't see Him, but He is a person. But that I can't see Him because He's invisible spirit.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Invisible. That means you have no eyes to see. Even if He is spirit. That's all right. But invisible means you have no capacity to see. That is the meaning of invisible. That I cannot see. So you're disqualified, that does not mean He's dis... not visible. He's visible but not to you because you have no eyes to see Him. That we also say. Therefore we have to prepare the eyes to see. That is religion. I cannot see at the present moment that does not mean I shall stop (indistinct). I must prepare myself how to see. That is real intelligence. (end)</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>