750127 - Conversation - Tokyo

Conversations by Date, 1975

His Divine Grace
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

Listen to a 'Nectar Drop' created from this Conversation

750127R1-TOKYO - January 27, 1975 - 11:47 Minutes

Prabhupāda: . . .flowers, fruits, and temperature is changing. It is rotating. Very fixed up, very timely. How can you say there is no control? How can you say? The animals cannot say, but any human being can say, "Yes, there is control. Otherwise how things are going on like this?" (break) . . .convince him there is surely controller. Convince him. (break) . . .to beginning of this chapter that there is no controller. Asatyam jagad āhur anīśvaram (BG 16.8). Where is that verse, find out. Jagad āhur anīśvaram.

Nitāi: It's text 8.

Prabhupāda: Ah. What does it say?

Nitāi: It says:

asatyam apratiṣṭhaṁ te

jagad āhur anīśvaram

aparaspara-sambhūtaṁ

kim anyat kāma-haitukam

(BG 16.8)

Prabhupāda: Translation.

Nitāi: "They say that this world is unreal, that there is no foundation and there is no God in control. It is produced of sex desire and has no cause other than lust."

Prabhupāda: They think, the asura . . . That is the distinction between asura and sura. The asura will say, "There is no control." Anīśvaram. Īśvaram means controller; anīśvaram means without any controller. Then how it has come into existence, how it is working so nicely? So they answer it: kāma-haitukam. Kāma-haitukam means just like a man and woman mix together, then there is sex desire and there is a production of child. There is no question of controlling. It is timely interaction of different elements. This is called kāma-haitukam. So . . . What is that other? Asatyam . . .

Nitāi: Asatyam apratiṣṭham.

Prabhupāda: And others, other atheist in the dress of very good sannyāsī, they say jagad mithyā, mithyā. But they say also, brahma satya. They accept Brahmān. They are not so atheist; at least they accept. Then?

Nitāi: Jagad āhur anīśvaram (BG 16.8).

Prabhupāda: Ah, jagad āhur anīśvaram. There is no God. It has come automatically by interaction. But even it is so, how the interaction is taking place? That is intelligence. Interaction . . . Just like acid and alkali; just like oil and caustic soda. These are two chemicals, and mixing them, interaction, the result is soap. Accepting this principle, but there must be a mixer, a person who is mixing. Otherwise, how the soap and oil is being mixed? The soap is there, and the . . . Oil is there and the caustic soda is also there, that is material ingredient. But they are not coming together automatically. That is not possible. Where is the evidence? There are so many soap factories, and let them keep oil and caustic soda and there is no question of labor, let them become soap. Where is that evidence? But these rascals say like that. Aparaspara sambhūtam (BG 16.8). Interaction of the two things. But where is the interaction of two things unless it is arranged by some third element? Where is the evidence?

So these are foolish theories, that there is no God, things are taking place automatically and things are coming out. These are all foolish theories. There is no evidence. Pramāṇa: there must be evidence. Otherwise . . . Just like science means simply not to see observation that things are taking place, but experiment. It must be substantiated by experiment. Just like theoretically everyone knows that two chemicals, soda and alkali, mixes together and it is, there is interaction, effervescence. But who is mixing the soda and alkali, er, alkali and acid? There must be. Therefore the answer is there in the Bhagavad-gītā, mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ suyate sa-carācaram (BG 9.10): "Under My superintendence." There is God. Under God's superintendence things are coming. Parasya śaktiḥ vividhaiva śruyate. He has got many multi-powers and, I mean to say, energies, they are working. Just like in nowadays electronic. You type your "a" and thousand miles away another typewriter will strike immediately "a." Is it not? It is called? What is called?

Paramahaṁsa: Telex.

Prabhupāda: Telex? Not telex. Telex is also on the same thing.

Devotees: Teletype.

Prabhupāda: Teletype, yes. You push here "a", and the other end the "a" will immediately strike. There is no need of another person typing. But how it is being done? There is electronic arrangement by higher scientist. Not that . . . Ordinary typewriter will not. No. Suppose if you keep one typewriter at your brother's place and you put it here, will it strike there? (laughter) Why? Because there is no arrangement. There's no arrangement. So these are common sense, but the rascals will not understand that without a touch of the living entity nothing can be done. The supreme living entity is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore it is said, mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ suyate sa-carācaram (BG 9.10): "I am the cause of the material energy working." Parasya śaktiḥ vividhaiva śruyate. There is parasya śaktiḥ. Now who can explain how this flower has come into existence? That is same thing. The energy of Kṛṣṇa is working. Just like you want to paint one nice flower, so you have to take the brush and the color and you have to endeavor. Not that automatically coming, the beautiful flower. So how do you think this beautiful flower has come automatically? This is foolishness. There is also the brush, the paint, but it is so perfect that just like you cannot see how the other typewriter is striking . . . You cannot say it is automatically striking. There is arrangement. But this arrangement you do not understand. Therefore you are foolish, you are thinking that this typewriter is striking automatically. It is not automatically. Here the other typewriter it is stroken and there is electric arrangement, and it is striking.

So you have to understand like . . . That is sura. And asura, they will say, "No, there is no God. It is taking automatically, it is going on." This is foolishness. The asura means foolish, first-class foolish, that's all. Why it has become so? That is explained here, that they do not know how to behave, nāpi cācāraḥ. Na satyaṁ teṣu vidyate (BG 16.7), neither they know what is the actual truth. They are defective themselves, and they are explaining in their defective way that . . . So many rascal chemists, they say that the chemical evolution is the cause of life. What is this nonsense? Chemical evolution, you get the chemicals and make a experiment and produce life. Then your proposal is all right that by chemical evolution there is life. No, that is not possible. You have got all the chemicals. Why don't you revive a dead man by injecting those chemicals again into life? Where is your power? So why do you talk foolishly like that? This should be challenged, that "You are foolish number one."

Actually, it so happened in California. One big chemist, he came there to lecture the chemical evolution, by mixing of chemical life has come into existence. So there was one student, he is my disciple, Dr. Svarūpa Dāmodara, he said that (break) . . .first-class cheater, that's all. Mūḍhā. Mūḍhā na, māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ (BG 7.15). There is no substance . . . (indistinct) . . ., and people are suffering for want of this knowledge. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, that we are trying to bring people in true platform of knowledge, not to increase death like these rascals and fools. That is our proposal. They are trying to obstruct us, because if everyone becomes Kṛṣṇa conscious then they can't cheat anyone.

Now Acyutānanda Swami, he went to some place, there was a big sannyāsī, very well known sannyāsī. So he went to sell some books in their āśrama. So one of his student, one of his disciple, he canvassed Acyutānanda, "Why don't you ask some question to Swāmījī?" He clearly said, "I have nothing to question from your Swāmījī. I know better than him." (laughter) So actually, bring any so-called yogīs, svāmīs or incarnation, our student will challenge him. He does not know anything. We have got such a nice book of knowledge, Bhagavad-gītā. By the arguments and proposition in the Bhagavad-gītā we can capture all these rascals and nonsense.

All right? Yes, question is very good to understand clearly . . . . (indistinct) . . . (end)