750618 - Conversation - Honolulu

Conversations by Date, 1975

His Divine Grace
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

 Listen to a 'Nectar Drop' created from this lecture

750618R1-HONOLULU - June 18, 1975 - 59:58 Minutes

Prabhupāda: . . . just like big, big tree grows. They have got intelligence, but their intelligence is supplied in a different way. And every . . . everywhere, every field of activity will require intelligence. Best intelligence is how to become Kṛṣṇa conscious. That's all. That is the best intelligence; otherwise every field of activity is requiring intelligence. Without intelligence he cannot make progress. So the best use of intelligence is to become Kṛṣṇa conscious and make life successful. That is real intelligence. Kṛṣṇa ye bhaje se baḍa catura: anyone who is Kṛṣṇa conscious, he is first-class man. That is the solution of life. Otherwise, you become very intelligent—you get some money, you get some prestige, some power—then what is that? Just after death everything is finished; it will not stay.

Then you bring in another chapter, again struggling—either human being or cat, dog or tree or like that. That is nature's law; you cannot avoid it. You are very intelligent, you have made your position very nice—that is all good. (aside) Come on. But . . . (aside) Hare Kṛṣṇa . . . if at the time of death everything is taken away, then where is your intelligence? Huh? Whatever you have got, your position now, in this body, is very good; therefore you have so much bank balance, you have got so much, how you say, so many things according to your desire, you have got it very good. But at any moment death will come and take away everything. Then what is your intelligence? (aside) Thank you. Where is your intelligence? Whatever you have got you could not keep; that you have to leave like that. Just like if you are giving me all these things, and if I know as soon as I go out of this door I cannot take this, (laughs) then what is the use? I cannot keep it.

So take . . . make some asset which you'll take with you. That is intelligence. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Whatever degree of Kṛṣṇa consciousness you have acquired in this life, that will go with you, and all other things you will have to leave behind. Yes. People are trying for these material things which they will have to leave behind. They are not doing anything which they can take with them. Therefore there is a verse . . . find out this verse: tyaktvā sva-dharmaṁ caraṇāmbujaṁ harer. I think it is in the First Canto.

tyaktvā sva-dharmaṁ caraṇāmbujaṁ harer

patet tato yadi bhajann apakvo

kvo yatra vābhadram . . .

(SB 1.5.17)

Tyaktvā sva-dharmaṁ caraṇāmbujaṁ. So the aim should be let us try to become perfect Kṛṣṇa conscious, because even I do not become cent percent advanced in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, still, whatever percentage I have acquired in this life, it will go with me. Then it begins at that point again. It will not go in vain. Other things, whatever you have acquired, that will . . . you will have to leave behind. The materialistic person, they are trying to construct a very big building, and we are also trying to construct a very big temple. So one may ask, then, what is the difference? The difference is that the karmīs, who are working for constructing a skyscraper building, he cannot take the credit with him, but a person who is trying to construct the same way a big temple, he will take the credit with him. The energy is the same—he is also collecting cement, stone, bricks. (aside) No, no. This is not in.

Bali-mardana: Tyaktvā sva-dharmaṁ?

Siddha-svarūpa: That is the First Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

Bali-mardana: Yeah, I looked in the Bhāgavatam. I couldn’t find it. There is another verse.

Prabhupāda: Tyaktvā sva-dharmaṁ. You did not . . . you do not know how to find that index? Call Paramahaṁsa. Tyaktvā sva-dharmaṁ caraṇāmbujaṁ harer.

Bali-mardana: I did not have time to bind it properly . . .

Prabhupāda: That is all right.

Bali-mardana: . . . because it was just off the press. But I wanted just to . . .

Govinda dāsī: Would you like your glasses?

Prabhupāda: Tyaktvā.

Bali-mardana: So, tyaktvā sva-dharmaṁ caraṇāmbujaṁ.

Prabhupāda: Huh?

Bali-mardana: Tyaktvā sva-dharmaṁ caraṇāmbujaṁ harer.

(Śrīla Prabhupāda corrects pronunciation)

Prabhupāda: You should read these books so nicely. Just like big lawyer—they go to the court and they cite: "Under second such section, such and such clause, it is in my case." Yes. So he is a big lawyer. Similarly, we have got so many books. If we can give reference immediately from the books, that means you are reading. Big lawyer means who can give immediate reference from the law book, not that simply he's got this stamp B.L., Bachelor Honors. That is not lawyer. There are so many lawyers. Why one becomes big lawyer? He can give quotations from the law book immediately. That is the difference. So you have to talk in the court from the law books. If we don't remember all the laws in different section, then simply your B.L. stamp will not help you. (Hindi saying) "I am very rich man, where is your money?" So, "It is in Bali-mardana's hand." So that is not actual position, "I am very learned, but I can speak when I see the book," these are very common. (Hindi saying) One is very learned, but he is learned as long as he sees the book; not without book. So he should be quite conversant with the teachings as they are mentioned in the book, and find out. Therefore the indexes are there. Find out.

Bali-mardana: Shall I read the verse?

Prabhupāda: Hmm.

Bali-mardana:

tyaktvā sva-dharmaṁ caraṇāmbujaṁ harer

bhajann apakvo 'tha patet tato yadi

yatra kva vābhadram abhūd amuṣya kiṁ

ko vārtha āpto 'bhajatāṁ sva-dharmataḥ

(SB 1.5.17)

Translation?

Prabhupāda: Translation and purport.

Bali-mardana: "One who has forsaken his material occupations to engage in the devotional service of the Lord may sometimes fall down while in an immature stage, yet there is no danger of his being unsuccessful. On the other hand, a nondevotee, though fully engaged in occupational duties, does not gain anything."

Purport: "As far as the duties of mankind are concerned, there are innumerable duties. Every man is duty-bound not only to his parents, family members, society, country, humanity, other living beings, the demigods, etc., but also to the great philosophers, poets, scientists, etc. It is enjoined in the scriptures that one can relinquish all such duties and surrender unto the service of the Lord. So if one does so and becomes successful . . ."

Prabhupāda: Sarva-dharmān parityajya (BG 18.66). He gives up everything and surrenders to Kṛṣṇa. And suppose in due course of time he falls down—so the śāstra says that even he has fallen down, he is not in loss, because whatever he has done, that is his permanent asset. And the karmīs, generally they did not take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness all life, they simply become dutiful to the country, to the society, to the family, to the wife and so on—they are thinking that, "We are correct." But śāstra says, "What is that correction? That this man, although he has fallen down, could not finish his business, he is gainer. And this man, although he has not fallen down, he has done his material duties very nicely, what has he obtained?" That is the difference. This fallen man, Kṛṣṇa conscious fallen man, he is gainer than the dutiful man in the material activity. They say, all this material . . . they say that, "This is our duty; we are . . ." They say. We give it up, becoming Kṛṣṇa conscious. We are doing our duty. But they do not know real perfection of duty is when by your duty you have satisfied Kṛṣṇa. That they do not know. Varṇāśramācāra-vatā puruṣeṇa . . . (CC Madhya 8.58)

ataḥ pumbhir dvija-śreṣṭhā

varṇāśrama-vibhāgaśaḥ

svanuṣṭhitasya dharmasya

saṁsiddhir hari-toṣaṇam

(SB 1.2.13)

Everyone has got some duty, but the duty is completed when Kṛṣṇa is satisfied; otherwise not.

Devotee (3): How do we know, Śrīla Prabhupāda, if our duty satisfies Kṛṣṇa?

Prabhupāda: Hmm?

Devotee (3): How do we know when our duty satisfies Kṛṣṇa?

Prabhupāda: Yes. Therefore you have got spiritual master. If you satisfy your spiritual master, then Kṛṣṇa is satisfied. Yasya prasadad bhagavat-prasadah (Śrī Gurv-aṣṭaka 8). You know? When you satisfy your spiritual master, then Kṛṣṇa is satisfied. Just like the king and the commander: the soldier is not in direct touch with the king, but if he has satisfied the commander, then king is satisfied. If the commander recommends, "Yes, this soldier has done very nicely," then he is awarded, he is promoted, he is given medal—not that the king has to see personally. The king has no time to see each and every soldier, how he will be. Commander is in charge, and if he recommends, "Yes, this soldier has done very nice," then he is rewarded. It is very simple thing. We don’t require to contact Kṛṣṇa always. So? You keep this, you read. Somebody read this book.

Siddha-svarūpa: Read it to you?

Prabhupāda: Yes

Bali-mardana: This is, um . . . it's two essays.

Prabhupāda: . . . (indistinct)

Bali-mardana: The first essay is called "Darwinism: The Monkey and Man." And the second essay is called "Contemporary Civilization: Problem and Solution."

Prabhupāda: Very good. So you’ve made some price?

Bali-mardana: No, not . . .

Prabhupāda: Free?

Bali-mardana: Donation.

Prabhupāda: Oh, that's nice. Voluntary donation.

Bali-mardana: Yes. Do you want me to read it?

Prabhupāda: Yes

Bali-mardana: "In the last 150 . . ." This is the Darwinism essay. "In the last 150 years, modern science has wrought many changes upon human civilization. The most significant deal with our conception of life and place within its vast scheme. The ideas of Charles Darwin epitomize the revolution of thought that has accompanied the expansion of the role of science in our lives. Science now replaces God as the object of our worship, and man lives for the here and now rather than the hereafter. The ideas of Darwin have never been proved as being more than a theory, yet millions accept them as fact. In discussing their influence and implications I shall suggest an alternate explanation of life, which does not depend upon imperfect human speculation but is of divine origin. It is uniquely theistic, as well as rational and scientific . . ."

Prabhupāda: These rascals, as soon as they hear "divine," they will reject. (laughs) "Oh, he is a divine man." (devotees laugh)

Siddha-svarūpa: He's on the other side. (laughs) He is enemy

Prabhupāda: Because they always say: "Don’t talk of divine." This very word, as soon as you say "divine," so he will take it, "Oh, he is a divine man." Is it not?

Siddha-svarūpa: Yes.

Prabhupāda: That is their mentality. You cannot talk even of God or divine.

Siddha-svarūpa: Most of them wouldn't read it anyway.

Prabhupāda: As soon as they hear "divine," "Oh, he is a divine man."

Devotee (3): That word should not be there?

Prabhupāda: Huh?

Devotee (3): We should not put that word there?

Prabhupāda: No, no, we must put. But these rascals are so, I mean, advanced in rascaldom, as soon as they hear about God or divine, immediately . . . just like we are, as soon as they call "science," we immediately reject: "Here is another rascal." (laughter) So this is the position. We know what is science—all bogus humbug. And they think they are biased. We say that they are humbug bogus, and they say: "They are biased; they are not scientists." This is going on. Yā niśā sarva-bhūtānāṁ tasyāṁ jāgarti saṁyamī (BG 2.69). Just like I write books at night and others sleep, and at daytime I take some rest, they work. What do you say? So what is their night, that is our day—and what is their day, that is our night. Go on.

Bali-mardana: "It is uniquely theistic as well as rational and scientific. Locked within the confines of the Sanskrit language, its significance has evaded Western man. Throughout the Middle Ages and Renaissance of Western civilization, people in general held strong Christian belief in the existence of one supreme God, and the fabric of life was woven of such faiths. With the ushering in of the Age of Reason, the credibility of Christianity was severely tested on the pedestal of science. Unfortunately, the explanations of the Bible, upon which Christianity depended, were ill suited to scientific and rational standards. Some will recognize in the discovery of the scientific laws an enlivened appreciation of the glory of the supreme law-giver, who has designed this material creation with such finesse. Robert Pelley, a renowned naturalist of 1800s, wrote, 'There cannot be design without designer, contrivance without contrivor.' "

"During the late 1800s Christian doctrines concerning natural science came increasingly under attack. Unable to hold science at bay with its literal interpretations of the Bible, Christianity tried to adjust its theology to scientific change. The scientific community, increasingly materialistic, saw that the time was right to attack the faith of man and God and establish science as the new deity, and scientists as its priests. The battle continues today by promises of life from the laboratory and immortality within the fleshy body. Mankind is hypnotized and deluded, thinking his origin as a molecular accident and his destiny as a god in his self-fashioned paradise."

Prabhupāda: They base their . . . molecular accident. Their science begins from accident. It that a very scientific proposal?

Bali-mardana: No

Prabhupāda: Is accident scientific? They have admitted that from the very beginning of science, accident.

Bali-mardana: It is unscientific, because an accident can never be proved by the laws of reason or rationality.

Prabhupāda: Hmm?

Bali-mardana: You can never use reason to prove an accident. Because accident by its nature means . . .

Prabhupāda: And how it is scientific?

Bali-mardana: It is not.

Prabhupāda: Accident may take or may not take. So where is the science? What do they say?

Devotee: I never asked them that.

Prabhupāda: Huh?

Devotee: Never asked them that one.

Prabhupāda: They do not say anything about it?

Devotee: No. Do not question very much.

Prabhupāda: But who will question? Accident, how it is scientific? The basic principle is wrong. Accidents. What is this nonsense ,"accident"? What do you say?

Devotee: They say that science is the study of that accident, not necessarily that science is that accident.

Prabhupāda: Study just like they . . . some . . . there is some aeroplane crash, railway accident. And after the accident is done, then they inaugurate enquiry zone.

Bali-mardana: They try to find out the cause.

Siddha-svarūpa: But "accident" implies existence of action previous to the accident.

Bali-mardana: No. What it is, they don’t recognize that there is any supreme intelligence, so in the beginning they say there was no life, and then life was created. But because they do not admit that there was an intelligence to create life, therefore it had to be an accident.

Prabhupāda: What is that?

Bali-mardana: Once they admit that there was some intelligence to create life, then there has to be God. But if they say there is no intelligence before there was life, then life has to be an accident. Without God, it must be an accident.

Prabhupāda: Then why shall I take to science? Let everything go on with accident. Why do you talk of science? Science means systematic: two plus two equal to four. This is science—not that two plus two sometimes become three. We have no such experience. Mathematic is a science because two plus two equal to four, it is always happening, not by accident it is sometimes three, sometimes five.

Bali-mardana: That is a good argument. That is a very good argument.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Then it is not science. If you base your knowledge on accident, then where is the question of science? Recently . . . what is that place? Belgrade? Where it is?

Bali-mardana: Yes, Belgrade, Yugoslavia. Czechoslovakia.

Prabhupāda: Very big train accident took place. You have read it?

Bali-mardana: Yeah.

Prabhupāda: So they will say it is accident. Actually it is not accident. Then why in a similar condition there is no disaster? It is a railway bridge, so accident took place, that the bridge was not strong enough. The cause was that the constructor made some mistake. Therefore it is not accident; it is due to the mistake the train disaster took place. Where is accident? If on this platform, if you load 3000 kilos, it will break. That is not accident; it is overloaded. Cause is that you do not know how to do things. You loaded which you should not have. It is not accident—it is due to a mistake. Where is the question of accident?

Siddha-svarūpa: It's the same with cars. When two cars hit, they go, "Oh, an accident," but actually . . .

Prabhupāda: It is the mistake of the driver.

Siddha-svarūpa: Yeah, somebody made a mistake, or the car went off, or . . .

Prabhupāda: Moving the car wrong angle.

Siddha-svarūpa: Yes.

Prabhupāda: Angular. Geometrical angular, a little defect. Therefore in every step, the machine worker, they measure whether it is actually right or not. You know that? In India they use, ordinary worker, so one layer of brick, then immediately

Siddha-svarūpa: Oh yes, yes . . .

Prabhupāda: They will drop the thread whether it is right or not. Then another brick. If there is difference, not right angle, then they will adjust. So if you burn right angle, then you can . . . and if the angle is mistaken, then it will gradually cut down and fall down. Every row, if you start from right angle, then it will stand. That is the law of nature. And as soon as you change the angle, you go against the law of nature, it will collapse. There is no question of accident.

Siddha-svarūpa: So there is no such thing as accident?

Prabhupāda: Huh?

Siddha-svarūpa: There's really no such thing as an accident?

Prabhupāda: No. There is no, nothing, as accident. Sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam (Bs. 5.1). Kāraṇa-kāraṇam. Kāraṇa means "cause," cause and effect. Everything is going on with cause and effect. Nothing, not a blade of grass, moves without the . . . (break) It is not accident; there is cause. And one who knows the cause, he is sane.

Siddha-svarūpa: Yes.

Prabhupāda: And one who is a fool, he will say "accident."

Siddha-svarūpa: Accident. Accident just means they do not know the cause.

Prabhupāda: Yes. So all the scientists, therefore, we say fool. They do not know this. Then? We do not accept accident, and they do not accept divine. So this is our position. We won't accept their foolish talk based on accident, and they will not hear us because we talk of divine God. Hah.

Siddha-svarūpa: The reason is because they are being paid to seek out answers still. If the answer was there already, they would lose their job—their job would be finished. Right now they are still trying to investigate the accident and come up with new theories.

Prabhupāda: They may be bright, but why he's selected? Go on.

Bali-mardana: "The scientists would have us believe that they can create the kingdom of God without God. Darwinism is a prime factor in the tide of . . ."

Prabhupāda: (aside to devotee massaging) Less pressure. Not here.

Devotee: Less pressure.

Bali-mardana: ". . . they would have us believe they can create the kingdom of God without God. Darwinism is a prime factor in the tide of atheism. With the help of genetics and modern biochemistry, Darwinism suggests a theory of existence where God is extraneous and human life becomes no more meaningful than various chemicals on the shelf of a laboratory. This was not a new idea, but it existed in various forms in the West from the time of the ancient Greek philosophers Anaximander and Empedocles. Even Darwin's first published paper on the theory of evolution was co-published with an almost identical one arrived at independently by Alfred Russell Wallace. Darwin's achievement was to present his ideas on evolution and natural selection in such a documented and convincing way that other current explanations seemed childish in comparison.

The stranglehold of literal biblical description on scientific thought was broken with Darwin's publication of The Origin of the Species. Up until Darwin's time Church doctrine was expressed by such authorities as Archbishop Ussher, who specified the creation of the world as taking place at 9 a.m., October 23rd, 4004 BC. This calculation is taken from Biblical records tracing the creation back to Adam and Eve. The Church would not accept theories in biology, geology or any other science that contradicted such Biblical calculations. Church spokesmen found it difficult to refute Darwin's encompassing explanations. After some initial skirmishes, most realized the tide of the times and began to praise Darwin for showing how intelligently God had arranged for man to evolve. Darwin avoided mention of God in his writings. Privately he admitted, 'I look upon all human feeling as traceable to some germ in the animal.' Blinded by atheism and ignorance, he was unable to see God's hand . . ."

Prabhupāda: The science is simply a suggestion, subjar.

Devotee: Yeah.

Prabhupāda: Subjar. So if I say the railway accident took place on account of ghost, it is like that. "There are some ghost, and he caused it." It is subjar therefore. Just like I was thinking in my childhood, electric fan, I thought there is, within the—what is called? Motor. There is a ghost.

Bali-mardana: There was a what?

Prabhupāda: Ghost. And I was thinking gramophone, that in the box, and a dog is sitting, I thought that there was is man, he's singing.

Siddha-svarūpa: When I heard the radio I thought there were little people in there. (laughs)

Prabhupāda: Hare Kṛṣṇa.

Bali-mardana: (continues reading) "He was unable to . . ."

Prabhupāda: And this is another foolish theory, how they described the creation of the world taking place on the . . . at 9 a.m., October.

Bali-mardana: That's what the Christians believed.

Siddha-svarūpa: That was also speculation, however. It was simply one man's speculation. From reading the Bible he speculated, but actually there is no such description in the Bible. He's speculating from the Bible that this is the date.

Bali-mardana: (continues reading) "Blinded by atheism and ignorance, he was unable to see God's hand in the wonderful creation that he speculated upon. Darwin theorized that all . . ."

Prabhupāda: Is there any such thing, that creation took place in 9 o’clock, October twenty-fifth?

Siddha-svarūpa: Yeah. In the Bible? No.

Bali-mardana: In the Bible, yes, there is. In the Bible there is a list of . . . er, it says that the first man and woman was Adam and Eve, then it gives a list of their descendants. So he calculated the . . . it gives the years each one of the descendants lived, so he calculated back each one of those descendants, back to the time of Adam and Eve. And then that's how he arrived at his conclusion of the creation.

Siddha-svarūpa: There is no date in the Bible.

Bali-mardana: The date is not given, but the years of the descendants of Adam and Eve are given.

Prabhupāda: The years?

Bali-mardana: Yeah, the years each family lived, and how . . . and their children, how they lived, going up and up, like that. So he calculated them all together, and arrived at that conclusion, that 4000 BC.

Siddha-svarūpa: So you believe in his calculation?

Bali-mardana: No, I don't believe. But that's what they say. That is there in the Bible.

Siddha-svarūpa: Well, that's his interpretation.

Prabhupāda: We can go inside. It is little . . . (break)

Bali-mardana: Related . . .

Prabhupāda: So what is that ancestor?

Bali-mardana: He theorized that all life was developed from one remote ancestor, from one cause.

Prabhupāda: From God?

Bali-mardana: He does not say God. We say . . . we say the same thing, but we say God.

Prabhupāda: No, no. He does not know who is their original ancestor. He does not know, but his suggestion is right.

Bali-mardana: Yes.

Prabhupāda: His suggestion that there is one ancestor.

Siddha-svarūpa: Who has . . .

Prabhupāda: In Vedānta-sūtra we say janmady asya yatah (SB 1.1.1), that "God" means the original ancestor. There in Vedānta. God means the original ancestor, and that is further explained in Bhagavad-gītā. Find out: aham ādir hi devānām (BG 10.2). Please find out.

Devotee: Aham . . .

Prabhupāda: Where is Paramahaṁsa?

Devotees: . . . (indistinct)

Prabhupāda: . . . ādir hi devānām. (devotees look for verse) (pause) Are you free? Are you free or not?

Paramahaṁsa: Yes.

Prabhupāda: Give him; he knows. You can sit down here, find out verse.

Paramahaṁsa: What is this?

Prabhupāda: Aham ādir hi devānām.

Paramahaṁsa:

na me viduḥ sura-gaṇāḥ

prabhavaṁ na maharṣayaḥ

aham ādir hi devānāṁ

maharṣīṇāṁ ca sarvaśaḥ

(BG 10.2)

Prabhupāda: So, aham ādir hi devānām. Just, if the verses say the original Adam and Eve . . .

Devotee: Yeah.

Prabhupāda: . . . and we say Adam and Eve may be taken as deva. Deva means superior than the human being, or the demigods. So Kṛṣṇa says that their Adam and Eve is not original. "I am the original. I am the origin of Adam and Eve." So when Darwin says that there is one origin, and Kṛṣṇa says that "I am the original puruṣa," then Kṛṣṇa becomes God, and Darwin should accept, the Christians should accept—everyone. Darwin, a scientist, says there is only one origin. It has not . . . (indistinct) . . . and Christians say that Adam and Eve were created from God, by God. And here is, Kṛṣṇa says that, "I am the origin." Then why he does not accept that here is original person? You are searching the origin, I am searching the original person. He comes and says: "Yes, I am the origin." And He's accepted by authority. Then why don’t you accept Kṛṣṇa as the supreme?

Paramahaṁsa: Actually, before Darwin became a demon he was religious; he believed in God. But then he gradually disbelieved, because he saw that there would seem to be some design in nature, but he could not . . . he saw that it was very cruel. So he said that if there was a God, He would be kind. So because there is no beneficence, because there is no kindness in this plan, therefore there is no God.

Prabhupāda: Why there is no God? Find God.

Paramahaṁsa: Just like Dostoevsky, another a great writer, Russian writer, he liked to believe in God, but he could not understand why a little child dies. Because they do not believe in life, in karma, in reincarnation and karma, he could not understand why a little child dies, because a little child is innocent.

Prabhupāda: Why you banished Kruschev, your prime minister? Why you banished him?

Paramahaṁsa: Because he was incompetent. Bogus.

Prabhupāda: You are so kind that you are criticizing God, "He's not kind," but why you become unkind to Kruschev? Nobody can hear his name, where he is. Why you has become so unkind?

Siddha-svarūpa: Or a criminal. Being a criminal in a prison is actually to rehabilitate.

Bali-mardana: They will say that man is imperfect. They will say that man is full of sin.

Prabhupāda: Therefore you are criticizing God, you are imperfect. You are rascal, you are criticizing God. This is the answer. You are imperfect, therefore you are criticizing.

Bali-mardana: "Who are you to question God?"

Prabhupāda: Therefore you are rascal, so why should I listen or hear you? Your senses are imperfect; you are criticizing. Is that all right?

Devotee: Yes, very clear.

Siddha-svarūpa: The keys to your . . .

Prabhupāda: Almirā.

Siddha-svarūpa: He is showing me how to pack up now.

Prabhupāda: So one who criticizes God, and we say at the same time he is imperfect, then what is the meaning of this?

Bali-mardana: Yes. Darwin admits, "There are many things that I must speculate. There are many gaps in the facts that I have assembled."

Prabhupāda: So what is the use of speculation? It is imperfect platform.

Bali-mardana: Here it says: "In his diary Darwin admits 'a constant tendency to fill up the wide gaps of knowledge by inaccurate and superficial hypothesis.' " He says this himself.

Siddha-svarūpa: (laughs) At least he's honest enough to say that.

Bali-mardana: But everyone believes him. Everyone accepts it as a fact. They print it in all the textbooks in America, in the high school, college textbooks, they print evolution as a fact. There is no . . . they don’t say: "Oh, this is just a hypothesis." They print it as "You must accept this." Every biologist accepts evolution to some degree.

Prabhupāda: Degree?

Bali-mardana: To such a, to a particular degree, they all accept it. Some accept it more than others, but they all accept it. If they do not accept it, they will not be accepted by the academic community. They will not be able to get a job. They must stick to it.

Siddha-svarūpa: But evolution does not answer the . . . actually the question of where life begins. Like one evolutionist, he says that . . . when he speaks of life, he speaks of life on earth. So he says that life on earth could very easily have begun by someone from another planet coming here in some type of spaceship and leaving some type of living things, and then this began. That is one current theory by prominent scientists.

Prabhupāda: What is that?

Siddha-svarūpa: That the . . . that someone from another planet long time ago came to the earth. There was no life on earth, and some living thing was left on earth, and then the life on earth began from that.

Prabhupāda: What is our proof? The Bhagavad-gītā we learn, vivasvān manave prāha manur ikṣvākave 'bravīt (BG 4.1). Find out this verse. Vivasvān manave prāha. Imam vivasvate yogam . . . (break) We accept that somebody came from the sun planet and somebody came from moon planet. The, that somebody who came from the moon planet, his descendants are from Candra-loka. And that somebody who came from the sun planet, his descendants are from Surya-loka. So there are two descendants—Candra-loka and Surya-loka—within this universe . . . (indistinct) . . . and then it says in the Bhagavad-gītā.

Paramahaṁsa:

imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ

proktavān aham avyayam

vivasvān manave prāha

manur ikṣvākave 'bravīt

(BG 4.1)

"The Blessed Lord said: I instructed this imperishable science of yoga to the sun-god, Vivasvān, and Vivasvān instructed it to Manu, the father of mankind, and Manu in turn instructed it to Ikṣvāku."

Prabhupāda: So Manu, who is the son of sun-god, therefore he came from Manu. And Manu's descendants is called manuṣya: coming from Manu, human dress.

Siddha-svarūpa: When they came, was there anything on earth, any life on earth?

Prabhupāda: Everything was there.

Siddha-svarūpa: It was there previously.

Prabhupāda: That is not this, "the moon walk." There is nothing. Now they . . . if it was not there, then how this world, it came?

Siddha-svarūpa: Were there any humans here, when they came?

Prabhupāda: Human may not be there, but the trees were there; otherwise, how they could live?

Siddha-svarūpa: Yes. So then there wasn’t necessarily . . .

Prabhupāda: It is everywhere you go. Just like I study. I am traveling all over the world, I sometimes study where is the difference between India and this Australia. The same tree, the same land, and the same water, the same bird. So why it is called Australia and that is called India? These are manmade. Now we have come to Hawaii—where is the difference? The same banyan tree, the same mango tree, the coconut tree—the same tree are there in India. So it is our experience wherever we go you will find the same thing—same land, same water, same tree, same birds, same beasts—everything same. Why they did not find anything in the moon planet? What is this barren? Why nature has made it barren, and everywhere else there are trees? How can it be? Everywhere I go, every part of the world, the same thing. But what moon planet has done that it is different? What is that? That . . .

Siddha-svarūpa: They would say that, erm, that there is craters . . .

Prabhupāda: They may say whatever they like, but our experience is that here in Hawaii there is crater, there is volcano, but still have you been there? So why I shall believe him? I would like to actually . . . (indistinct)

Siddha-svarūpa: What about a big desert?

Prabhupāda: Desert is also here. It does not mean that the whole world is desert. But they say the whole planet is desert. What is it called? How can I believe it? Desert here is also, the Arabian desert, the Sahara desert, the . . . in India the Rajasthan desert. But because there is desert, it does not mean that everything is finished. There is desert side by side. Even within this desert you will find water in places. You are going to the beach, and then you see even in the sand there are so many living entities, what is called, crabs. They are also living.

Devotee: Even the desert is not lifeless.

Prabhupāda: Huh?

Devotee: Even the desert is not completely lifeless.

Prabhupāda: No. There are so many plants, they grow especially in desert.

Devotee: Cactus.

Prabhupāda: Yes, cactus. They grow. In sandy place the water may not flow but there is . . . (indistinct) . . . then wherefrom the water comes? From the sand. Where is water in the sand? There are so many trees, plants—just go and see.

Devotee: There are many types of desert animals that are just suitable.

Prabhupāda: You get the description from the śāstra, Bhagavad-gītā. There are living entities everywhere. How we can completely just say there is no living entities? Kṛṣṇa says living entity in every . . . (indistinct) . . . we see practically, so why should I . . . (indistinct) . . .?

Siddha-svarūpa: It was . . . it seemed like that whole moon thing was very much a show. One thing that they did was when the United States landed they took pictures, they had the flag, the American flag, and it looked like it was waving. When it was wide open, you know that way, so you could see the whole flag, it was like it was blowing in the wind. But they admit there is no wind, so they actually, they said that they had wired it, somehow they had wired the flag so that it looked like it was blowing, or it looked like it was open like this, then they took the picture in that way. They took a picture in such a way so that it looked like the flag was blowing. (laughs) So it was very staged.

Prabhupāda: Read.

Bali-mardana: "He postulated that some unknown force combined with time . . ."

Prabhupāda: What is that unknown?

Bali-mardana: ". . . and caused life to evolve into different species we see today, man being a current development of the monkey. In the writings of Thomas Malthus, an essay on population . . . (indistinct) . . . empowered a mechanism that seemingly pushed evolution forward. Malthus says that animals and man reproduce in a geometric progression, while the supply of food in the world only increases arithmetically. He proposes that even if one species of life reproduce . . ."

Prabhupāda: The thing is accident. What is that accident? By giving this accident two plus two equal to three, then how you can say there is . . . (indistinct) . . .? Your calculation is based . . . (indistinct)

Bali-mardana: "Just like a supply of chlorine will only increase arithmetically, he proposes that even if one species of life reproduce without any check they would soon overrun the world, for how many thousands of eggs does one fish or insect lay? Malthus describes a constant struggle for existence in which the population of living organisms is trimmed, thus keeping the equilibrium in nature. Darwin suggests a struggle for existence which favors certain variations of life, allowing . . ."

Prabhupāda: Therefore existence, just like one living entity is eating another.

Bali-mardana: Yes, that's true. That is what he is talking about

Prabhupāda: (indistinct) . . . just like they are eating the frogs . . . (indistinct) . . . eating the others. (indistinct—loud kīrtana)

Siddha-svarūpa: This variety actually keeps everything in balance.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Siddha-svarūpa: Is that what you said?

Bali-mardana: Yeah. But Darwin suggests that the struggle for existence favored certain variations in life, allowing quick ones to survive and eliminating less quick ones in terms of food-gathering, defense, reproduction, environmental advantages. In other words, if it became very cold . . .

Prabhupāda: That means that this is arranged by the nature. So what is the benefit we get from Darwin's theory? It is already made by nature. So what is Darwin's theory? Where is Darwin's theory?

Bali-mardana: This . . . well, the scientists, they take credit for uncovering the existence of a law of nature.

Prabhupāda: That's all right. You are studying the law of nature, but the law of nature is very strong, very powerful. You scientists, you are all . . . (break) (end)