View source for Religious fight

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"real religious fighting"|"religious fight"|"religious fighting"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Visnu Murti}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|29Feb12}}
{{last|29Feb12}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=11|Con=1|Let=0}}
{{total|12}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Religious Fight|1]]
</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="LectureonBG22LondonAugust31973_0" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="34" link="Lecture on BG 2.2 -- London, August 3, 1973" link_text="Lecture on BG 2.2 -- London, August 3, 1973">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 2.2 -- London, August 3, 1973|Lecture on BG 2.2 -- London, August 3, 1973]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">So Bhagavān is criticizing. Arjuna became a very good man: "Why shall I...? Oh, I cannot kill my kinsmen." From material point of view, people will very much appreciate, "Oh, here is Arjuna. He's so nice, nonviolent. He is foregoing his claim. He has given up his astra, bow and arrows. He's no, no longer fighting. He has decided not to fight with kinsmen, kill his own men." So from material point of view, Arjuna is supposed to be very, very good man. But the Supreme Person, Kṛṣṇa, what does He say? Anārya-juṣṭam: "You rascal, you are speaking like anārya." He'll say rascal later on. He posed himself to be very good man, but when he comes to the test of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He refuses to accept him as a good man. He's saying that "You are anārya." There are two kinds of men: anārya and ārya. Āryan. Āryan means advanced in knowledge. He's called Āryan. And anārya means uncivilized. So immediately He rebukes him, anārya-juṣṭam. "You are talking just like non-Āryan, uncivilized person." People are very much, nowadays, eager how to stop war. But Kṛṣṇa says... (break) ... at any case is not required. There is necessity of war. Just like He's trying to convince Arjuna. Our war means... According to Vedic civilization, that is dharma-yuddha, religious fight. When the actual need is there to fight, we must fight. Not that when there is need of fight, one becomes nonviolent. Just like yesterday in the evening, when we were talking with Dr. Shoemaker, so they were supporting that "Why should you kill any animal who is coming to... If you are determined not to kill..." We were talking of not killing, that why should you kill one animal who is coming to attack? No. You must kill. That is necessity. You should not go to the forest to find out some living entities, living beings, to kill. That is not your business. That is hiṁsa. But if a tiger comes to attack you, you must kill. That is self-defense. And that is not hiṁsa. So a devotee knows, a Kṛṣṇa conscious person knows when to kill and when not to kill. But it is not that because we accept not killing, therefore in every case, killing should be stopped. No. If there is necessity, killing should be accepted.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LectureonBG226HyderabadNovember301972_1" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="92" link="Lecture on BG 2.26 -- Hyderabad, November 30, 1972" link_text="Lecture on BG 2.26 -- Hyderabad, November 30, 1972">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 2.26 -- Hyderabad, November 30, 1972|Lecture on BG 2.26 -- Hyderabad, November 30, 1972]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">So the body was not existing before. And it will not exist after death. So in the via media, if the manifestation of body is there, so why it should be the object of lamentation? In this way, Kṛṣṇa is trying to convince Arjuna that he should act as kṣatriya and perform his duty. A kṣatriya is profited, either dead or alive. That will be explained. Because in a, in a fighting, I mean to say, real religious fighting, on principle, it is, a kṣatriya is not responsible for killing. Just like in sacrificial ceremony, if the animal is killed, the brāhmaṇa is not responsible for killing an animal. So because it is duty, it is ordained by the śāstras, therefore they are not ordinary killing. Avyakta-nidhanāny eva tatra kā pari... "It was nonmanifested before, and it will become nonmanifested again. So why should you lament for the via media?"</p>
:āścaryavat paśyati kaścit enam
:āścaryavad vadati tathaiva cānyaḥ
:āścaryavac cainam anyaḥ śṛṇoti
:śrutvāpy enaṁ veda na caiva kaścit
<p>There are many theories and philosophical speculation all over the world about understanding the soul. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is concluding that "Somebody's explaining wonderfully, somebody is hearing wonderfully, but even after hearing and speaking, it remains a mystery, and less intelligent person cannot understand it." That is the fact. There are so many theories. Therefore we have to accept the reality from the authority. By theorizing, by speculating, we cannot come into any decision. I may be very good logician. You may be greater logician. So you can defeat my logic. I can defeat your logic. So what is the conclusion? This kind of talking, it is called ku-tarka, unnecessarily talking, because you'll not come to my decision, I'll not come to your decision. So everyone is mysterious.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LectureonBG230LondonAugust311973_2" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="96" link="Lecture on BG 2.30 -- London, August 31, 1973" link_text="Lecture on BG 2.30 -- London, August 31, 1973">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 2.30 -- London, August 31, 1973|Lecture on BG 2.30 -- London, August 31, 1973]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">For a kṣatriya who are engaged in fighting, in religious fight... Fight must be religious fight. The cause must be right. Then the fighting is all right. So kṣatriya killing in the religious fight, he's not responsible, he's not sinful. That is stated. Just like brāhmaṇa. He sacri... He puts in sacrifice some animal. That does not mean he's killing. Similarly, kṣatriya, when he's engaged in killing, he's not sinful. This will be explained in the next verse. "So it your duty. Don't be worried that you are killing your kinsmen or your grandfather. Take it from Me, assurance, that the dehī, avadhya, you cannot kill, he's eternal." Now, dehe sarvasya bhārata, this important point you should note it that every living entity, the body has grown on the platform of the spirit soul. The body may be very gigantic or very small, it doesn't matter. But... Therefore matter is produced or grows on the platform of spirit. Not that a spirit comes into existence, or living force come into existence by the combination of matter. This is scientific point. Matter is dependent on spirit. Therefore, it is called inferior. Yayedaṁ dhāryate jagat. Dhāryate, it bears. The spirit is there; therefore, the gigantic universe is resting on the spirit. Either the supreme spirit Kṛṣṇa, or the small spirit. There are two kinds of spirit. Ātmā and paramātmā. Īśvara and parameśvara.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LectureonBG231LondonSeptember11973_3" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="97" link="Lecture on BG 2.31 -- London, September 1, 1973" link_text="Lecture on BG 2.31 -- London, September 1, 1973">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 2.31 -- London, September 1, 1973|Lecture on BG 2.31 -- London, September 1, 1973]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">So kṣatriya cannot be nonviolent. It is not possible. Violence is also required to keep the social system strictly in order. Just like the government has violence department, the police department, the military department. That is required to keep up the society in order. So here Kṛṣṇa says that "You are kṣatriya; your duty is to fight." Dharmyāddhi yuddhāt. "This fight arranged by Me in the battlefield of Kurukṣetra, because it is sanctioned by Me, it is dharma-yuddha, it is religious fighting." It is not the political diplomats declaring war to keep the people in ignorance. No. It is sanctioned by Kṛṣṇa. Whatever is sanctioned by Kṛṣṇa, that is dharma. Dharma, the explanation of dharma I have several times given you. Dharmaṁ hi sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam: Whatever God sanctions, that is dharma. So God, Kṛṣṇa personally has sanctioned this Battle of Kurukṣetra. So therefore it is dharma, dharma-yuddha religious fight. It is not ordinary fighting of the diplomats and the politicians. It is dharma-yuddha. Therefore He says, dharmyāddhi yuddhāc chreyo 'nyat kṣatriyasya na vidyate: "You are kṣatriya. You are fighting for the sake of religious system. That is the, your first-class duty." Śreyaḥ.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LectureonBG23335LondonSeptember31973_4" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="99" link="Lecture on BG 2.33-35 -- London, September 3, 1973" link_text="Lecture on BG 2.33-35 -- London, September 3, 1973">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 2.33-35 -- London, September 3, 1973|Lecture on BG 2.33-35 -- London, September 3, 1973]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">So imaṁ dharmyam, religious fight. Just like even nowadays also, if the soldier disobeys the order of the commander, that soldier is shot down by martial law. Because to disobey the order of the commander is sinful. So Kṛṣṇa says, atha cet tvam imaṁ dharmyaṁ saṅgrāmaṁ na kariṣyasi. This fight is not ordinary fight. It is not the politician's fight. "For the sake of religion, you must fight. And if you do not, then sva-dharmam... You are a kṣatriya. Not only kṣatriya, you are a very well known fighter. You have been recognized by so many demigods." Arjuna got the pāśupata-astra. To test Arjuna's fighting capacity, sometimes Lord Śiva, when Arjuna was hunting in the forest, so Lord Śiva also, as a hunter, he appeared before him, and when a boar was killed by hunting, Lord Śiva claimed that "I have done this killing." Arjuna said, "No, I have done this." So there was controversy, who will claim that hunt, I mean to say, killed animal. So Arjuna was claiming, and Lord Śiva as a hunter, he was also claiming. Then there was fight between Lord Śiva and Arjuna. So Lord Śiva was defeated. So he then disclosed his identity that "I am very much pleased that you (are) such a nice fighter." So he presented him one arrow which is called pāśupata-astra. Similarly, he sometimes fought with Indra. He gave him some astra, weapon. This was the system, that a kṣatriya is presented with a kind of weapon, a brāhmaṇa is presented with Vedas, and so far vaiśyas and śūdras are concerned, they are not very important.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LectureonBG71518NewYorkOctober91966_5" class="quote" parent="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" book="Lec" index="284" link="Lecture on BG 7.15-18 -- New York, October 9, 1966" link_text="Lecture on BG 7.15-18 -- New York, October 9, 1966">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 7.15-18 -- New York, October 9, 1966|Lecture on BG 7.15-18 -- New York, October 9, 1966]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">There are two classes of men: iconoclast and iconographer. Those who imagine the form of God, they are not jñānī, they are iconographer. And those who think that "I have killed God" or "I have finished God," they are iconoclast. Just like in India we have experienced during British days. There were Hindu-Muslim riots. So the Hindus would go to the mosque of the Muslim and break it, and the Muslim would go the temples of the Hindus and break the idol. And they'll think that "We have finished Hindu's God." Just like Hindus also think, "Oh, we have broken their mosque. Therefore I have broken their God." These are foolishness. In another case... I have got experience. When there was, I mean to say, noncooperation movement of Gandhi's, the people became riotous, and they began to break anything government, especially the post boxes on the street. They thought by breaking the post boxes they are finishing the post office.</p>
<p>So these are foolishness. They are not jñānī. One who has got real conception of God, they have no quarrel with each other. All the history of religious fight, Hindu-Muslim or Christian-non-Christian, they are all ignorant. They are all ignorant. One who is in the knowledge, he knows that God is one. God cannot be Hindu. God cannot be Muslim. God cannot be Christian. God is God. He has no material qualification. It is our conception that "God is such and such. God is such and such." That is imagination. That is called iconographer. So they are not jñānī. They are not man in knowledge. Man in knowledge is different. He knows that God is transcendental. Just like even Śaṅkarācārya, the impersonalist, he said, nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt. And in the morning also we have discussed the point that one who knows God transcendental, above this material qualities, he knows.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" class="sub_section" sec_index="1" parent="Lectures" text="Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures"><h3>Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB1846MayapuraOctober261974_0" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="253" link="Lecture on SB 1.8.46 -- Mayapura, October 26, 1974" link_text="Lecture on SB 1.8.46 -- Mayapura, October 26, 1974">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 1.8.46 -- Mayapura, October 26, 1974|Lecture on SB 1.8.46 -- Mayapura, October 26, 1974]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Īśvara means controller. So there are many different types of controller, but the supreme controller is Kṛṣṇa. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). So he also tried to convince Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira that it was duty. For a kṣatriya, in dutiful war, dharma-yuddha... Dharma-yuddha... Therefore the battlefield of Kurukṣetra is called dharma-kṣetra. Although there was fighting, but the fighting arena was not ordinary land. It is dharma-kṣetra because the fighting was being performed under the superintendence of Kṛṣṇa, Dharma-setu, the leader of all religiosity. Under His superintendence, under His care, the fighting was going on. Therefore this fighting was not ordinary fighting. People cannot understand that how fighting can be religious principle. Yes, the fighting can be also religious principle—but not the present fighting. Present fighting, the politicians, out of their whims, they declare war, that is not religious fighting; that is abominable. That is to serve their political ends. When the politicians cannot control the mass of people being dissatisfied, they make a clique to declare some war so that all their attention may be diverted. This is politics.</p>
<p>But the Battle of Kurukṣetra was not that type of battle. One should be aware of the Battle of Kurukṣetra very nicely. It was dharma-yuddha. Dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre samavetā yuyutsavaḥ ([[Vanisource:BG 1.1 (1972)|BG 1.1]]). Why they settled up that the fighting should take place in the dharma-kṣetra? They are to fight, yuyutsavaḥ. It was settled they will fight, but why they selected the dharma-kṣetra? This is Vedic system. Even up to date, in villages, not in the cities... In the cities, as soon as there is some misunderstanding between you and me, we go to the court, either criminal court or civil court, to settle up, and it takes years to settle up the business. It goes on. I have seen for generation. One generation passed another generation; the fighting is going on in the court. But if people are Kṛṣṇa conscious, it could be settled within few minutes.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB1850LosAngelesMay121973_1" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="259" link="Lecture on SB 1.8.50 -- Los Angeles, May 12, 1973" link_text="Lecture on SB 1.8.50 -- Los Angeles, May 12, 1973">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 1.8.50 -- Los Angeles, May 12, 1973|Lecture on SB 1.8.50 -- Los Angeles, May 12, 1973]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Pradyumna: Nama om... (recites praṇāma mantras) The first part of this verse, the first half of this verse, naino rājñaḥ prajā-bhartur dharma-yuddhe vadho dviṣām iti, this is a statement or an injunction of śāstra, that for the killing, or the vadha, dviṣām, of the enemies, dharma-yuddhe, in religious fight, rājñaḥ prajā-bhartur, of a king who is maintaining his citizens He has to maintain his citizens. So if there is some danger, then he has to eliminate the enemy.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: What is religious fight? Religious fight means you have got right to kill your aggressor. If somebody takes your property, if somebody sets fire in your house, if somebody kidnaps your wife, or somebody is trying to kill you, they are called aggressor. So aggressor should be killed immediately. It is not that somebody has become an aggressor, and if I say, "Now I have become a Vaiṣṇava, I'll not be violent. I shall tolerate. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has taught us to be tolerant like the tree or the grass. So I shall become tolerant. Let him do." Just like Gandhi used to say. Somebody questioned him that "If somebody comes and violates the chastity of your daughter in your presence, what will you do?" He said, "I shall remain nonviolent." But that is not śāstric injunction. This is foolishness.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB1101MayapuraJune161973_2" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="268" link="Lecture on SB 1.10.1 -- Mayapura, June 16, 1973" link_text="Lecture on SB 1.10.1 -- Mayapura, June 16, 1973">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 1.10.1 -- Mayapura, June 16, 1973|Lecture on SB 1.10.1 -- Mayapura, June 16, 1973]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">So here the most important word is yudhiṣṭhiro dharma-bhṛtāṁ variṣṭhaḥ. Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira was known as Dharmarāja, very strictly following religious principles. So he killed... For his sake, sixty-four crores of men were killed in the battlefield of Kurukṣetra. So he was not happy although the battle, the fight, was religious fight. It is not whimsical. Just like in the modern days the politicians, they fight unnecessarily to fulfill their desire... Just like in our country, unnecessarily they divided Pakistan, and to fulfill the whims of the leaders, they are fighting with nobody's gain, neither there is any religious principles.</p>
<p>So fighting whimsically by the politicians, that is not sanctioned. There must be dharma-yuddha. Dharma-yuddha means religious fight, fight on religious principles. So what was the religious principle? (aside:) Hm, where is that mat? (Bengali) Saccidānanda. Here it is said, hatvā ātatāyinaḥ. Ātatāyī means aggressor. If somebody comes to your home to kidnap your wife, to take by force your property or to set fire in your house, he is called ātatāyī. He should immediately be killed. It is not that nonviolence nonsense. If somebody is coming to attack you unnecessarily, you must kill him first. It is not Vaiṣṇavism... "Oh, this man is coming to kill me. Right. All right, let me embrace him." No. That is not the rule. When there is ātatāyī, aggressor, you must fight, you must kill. That is religious.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB11034TehranMarch131975_3" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="271" link="Lecture on SB 1.10.3-4 -- Tehran, March 13, 1975" link_text="Lecture on SB 1.10.3-4 -- Tehran, March 13, 1975">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 1.10.3-4 -- Tehran, March 13, 1975|Lecture on SB 1.10.3-4 -- Tehran, March 13, 1975]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: So introduce this. What is their loss? If everyone, home to home or work to work, factory to factory... Let them... Let there be factory, but chant Hare Kṛṣṇa. Let all the factory members be engaged in chanting and the... supply them prasādam. Just see. There will be no more strike. There will be no more Communistic movement. Everything is there, provided they take it. Everything will be all right. So this is not a sentimental fanaticism, religious movement. This is scientific movement for the good of the whole world. That we have to convince by our character, by our behavior. Then people will accept it. They think it is another type of religious... So religious means fanaticism. It is not that. Just like they fought, the Mohammedans and the Christians. There was fighting? What is that?</p>
<p>Nitāi: The Holy Wars?</p>
<p>Parivrājakācārya: Crusades.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Crusades. These Britishers created this religious fight between Hindus and Muslims. Before that, there was no in the history, religious fight, in the history of the whole India. The Mahābhārata, Kurukṣetra fight was... That was political fight. That was not a religious fight on the basis of that "You are Hindu. I am Muslim. Therefore we must fight." There was no such fight. In the material platform your interest, my interest, sometimes clash. There may be fight. But why fight on religious, mean God consciousness? If everyone is God conscious, where is the question of fight? So that's all right. You can take it. (end)</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LectureonSB1164LosAngelesJanuary11974_4" class="quote" parent="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" book="Lec" index="321" link="Lecture on SB 1.16.4 -- Los Angeles, January 1, 1974" link_text="Lecture on SB 1.16.4 -- Los Angeles, January 1, 1974">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 1.16.4 -- Los Angeles, January 1, 1974|Lecture on SB 1.16.4 -- Los Angeles, January 1, 1974]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Parīkṣit Mahārāja was going on tour, and on his way he saw that this rascal is dressed like a king and he's trying to kill cows and bulls. Oh, he immediately chastised him. Nṛpa—he has dressed like a king, but his business is like śūdra or less than śūdra. Butchers, butchers cannot be intelligent class of men, brāhmaṇa. A brāhmaṇa is not butcher. Neither a kṣatriya. Kṣatriya fights, kills, but in regular religious fight. Not that by whimsically he'll fight and kill men. No. So, here it is said, nijagrāhaujasā vīraḥ. A kṣatriya must be vīra, hero. Whenever there is injustice, he must immediately come forward. "Why injustice? These poor animals, they are also my subject. How you can kill them? He's also born in this land." "National" means one is born in that particular land. So they are also born in this land. Why he should be treated differently? Just like in your country, even one Indian gets his child here, the child is counted as USA-born, US citizen, eh? Immediately. So if that is the law, that anyone born in this land should be treated as national, what is this law that the cows and the bulls born in that land, they are to be slaughtered? What is this law?</p>
</div>
</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="1977_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="sub_section" sec_index="10" parent="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" text="1977 Conversations and Morning Walks"><h3>1977 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationFebruary31977Bhuvanesvara_0" class="quote" parent="1977_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="76" link="Room Conversation -- February 3, 1977, Bhuvanesvara" link_text="Room Conversation -- February 3, 1977, Bhuvanesvara">
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation -- February 3, 1977, Bhuvanesvara|Room Conversation -- February 3, 1977, Bhuvanesvara]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Prabhupāda: ...Protestant group was started by him.</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: I don't know anything about their history.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That is the history.</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: There's always been fighting between the Protestants and the Catholics though.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Well, fighting must be there. They protested.</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: There's so many Christian sects.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: There are many. Means they don't want anything genuine. Something imitation. What is the cause of fighting, this Ireland? Unnecessarily. It is going on in Europe since long time. In France it was very terrible fight. I have seen that Church. They would bell, and they'll come and fight Protestant. You have been there? No. Concord. It is... That place is called Concord. So history there is a building, church. The Catholics would come and kill the Protestants. The Joan of Arc.</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: She was burnt.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes.</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: Europe has a big history of...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Fighting.</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: Religious fighting.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Crusade? Crusade?</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: Yes. The Crusades were against the Arabs, though.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That was a religious fight.</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: Yes. Christians against the Mohammedans. That article of Gurudāsa's was very nice.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Hm.</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: They asked him, "Do you think that another religion will help Ireland?" criticizing that "We've already got two religions and they're fighting. What do you think you're going to do?" So then he said, "Well, actually, it's another way of life, and Ireland could certainly use another way of life." It was a good point. We get a good reception there too, our devotees. People are very pious there because Ireland is still very simple.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Everywhere people are simple. That is my opinion. Mass people, they are simple. The leaders spoil them.</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: Yes. That's a fact. Most people are just... They're in ignorance.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes. The human psychology is the same for man, woman. That's all. Amongst the lower animals you see. The pigeons, they are the same. The sparrow, they are the same everywhere. The squirrels, the same, the same. So why men should be different?</p>
<p>Hari-śauri: It's artificial, the differences they've created themselves.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>