750625 - Morning Walk - Los Angeles
(Redirected from Morning Walk -- June 25, 1975, Los Angeles)
Prabhupāda: . . . theosophist and the theologist, both classes, they have no clear idea of God. Is it not?
Dr. Judah: I think this is . . . Well, I would say they do not have . . . they do not . . . I would make a distinction myself between knowing God and knowing about God. In other words, there is knowledge about God which one has in various books, but one does not know God unless one somehow experiences God. I feel that this is the one thing that the bhakti movement of Caitanya has done, in that it has allowed its devotees to experience Him, to know Him personally in a way that changes their lives.
Prabhupāda: That is the Vedic civilization.
Dr. Judah: Yes.
Prabhupāda: Na te viduḥ svārtha-gatiṁ hi viṣṇum (SB 7.5.31). These materialistic persons, they do not know what is Viṣṇu or they do not know that his ultimate goal of life is to know Viṣṇu, or God. This is human life. But that is missing. They do not care to know that the ultimate . . . what is the ultimate goal of human life. This is the defect. Nobody cares to know, especially in this age. So that is the defeat of human civilization. They must know. This is the process, that . . . by evolution, they have come to nature's way, human form of life. Now they must know what is God. Otherwise it is defeat.
Dr. Judah: That's true.
Prabhupāda: The opportunity given by nature, good consciousness to know God, Viṣṇu. Now, practically, take anyone, especially in the Western world. Nobody can say what is God. Is it not?
Dr. Judah: It's true.
Dr. Judah: That is quite true.
Prabhupāda: So in that position, if we are offering, "Here is God," why do they not accept? What is the objection?
Dr. Judah: There isn't any objection. I think the great problem, of course, in the Western world is that the Western world has always been involved in materialism and . . .
Prabhupāda: The Western world . . . that means they don't want to know God. So this is very horrible condition.
Dr. Judah: That's true.
Prabhupāda: Animal condition. Not only horrible, it is animal condition. They do not want to know God. Just like these animals, they are not interested. So they have no church, the animals, or temple. But in the human society, either he is Hindu or Muslim or Christian, there is some arrangement for understanding God. Now they are also neglecting that, everyone, all over the world. Now they are clearly . . . the Communists, they hate to say anything about God. So ultimately they are coming to such position, the Communists, that "No word about God." So this is the position. Now apart from them, just like theologists and theosophists, they are, at least, after understanding what is God, but they cannot ascertain definitely. So why do they not take? We are offering, "Here is God." Where is the objection? Why they should object? If you do not know something, and if I give you the information, why you should not take?
Dr. Judah: That's a good question.
Prabhupāda: That is my question. (break) Just like in India, for higher technological knowledge they come to foreign countries. So for knowledge, we can take it from anywhere. There should not be sectarianism, "Oh, why shall I take knowledge from here and there?" Wherever knowledge is available, we should take it. That is the real position of seeker of knowledge. Cāṇakya Paṇḍita says, nīcād apy uttamā vidyā strī-ratnaṁ duṣkulād api. He says, viṣād apy amṛtaṁ grāhyam. Viṣa, viṣa means poison. "In the pot of poison, if there is little nectar in, take it." Viṣād apy amṛtaṁ grāhyam. Poison is not to be touched, but if there is little nectar in, take it. And amedhyād api kāñcanam: "And in a filthy place there is gold, take it." Not that gold has been polluted because it is in the filthy place. If there is gold in the filthy place, don't hesitate. Take it. And nīcād apy uttamā vidyā. Generally, people used to take education from brāhmaṇa.
So Cāṇakya Paṇḍita advises that "If there is education, actual education, even he is a lower-class man, śūdra or caṇḍāla, take it. Accept him as master." And nīcād apy uttamā vidyā. Nīcād apy uttamā vidyā strī-ratnaṁ duṣkulād api. And in India, according to Vedic civilization, the marriage is done after seeing the family tradition very scrutinizingly. So here it is advised that duṣkulād api: "In a abominable family, if there is nice girl, educated, beautiful, accept her. Accept her." Nīcād apy uttamā vidyā strī-ratnam. Ratnam means jewel. "Wife, she is like jewel although born of a low family, accept." So anything very good, even it is available from a place which is not desirable, one should accept it. So if you are actually seeking after God, so here is God available from Vedic literature. Why don't you take it? Why you should refuse it? That is not very good sign.
Dr. Judah: No, that is true.
Prabhupāda: Yes. So we are offering here God. Why should you not take it seriously? I am speaking to you, because you have got this Theological . . . what is that?
Prabhupāda: Union. So they should take it. If they have no information of actual God, take it from us.
Dr. Judah: Yes, well, I do. I . . . as I say, as I said last night . . .
Prabhupāda: No, you have got that mentality, I know that. But because you are president or chairman of that center . . . what is that? Union.
Dr. Judah: I'm chairman of the department of the history and phenomenology of religion.
Prabhupāda: So who is the chairman of this union?
Dr. Judah: I'm just the chairman of this one department of the history and phenomenology of religion.
Prabhupāda: That's . . . then you are also important officer. So you can induce them that "Here is God."
Dr. Judah: Well, I'm going to try to do what I can to . . . as I told you, to . . .
Prabhupāda: (laughing) No, no, if they do not take, refuse to take, so what kind of theologians they are? That is my . . . here is the knowledge. Why one should refuse to take it?
Dr. Judah: I want to . . . when you have your temple there in Berkeley, I want to continue on chanting and being with the devotees and doing what I can to further Kṛṣṇa consciousness in the . . .
Prabhupāda: Kṛṣṇa, in the Bhagavad-gītā . . . if you take this, that "Kṛṣṇa is Indian, Kṛṣṇa is Hindu. We shall not take," but the words, Kṛṣṇa, if you take it, "God said," or whatever you . . . so the wordings are God's. Just like Kṛṣṇa says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7): "There is nobody superior element than Me." So God can say that. So you remove the word kṛṣṇa uvāca, but take the words of God. Who can be superior than God?
Dr. Judah: It's true.
Prabhupāda: So in this way, if you read simply Bhagavad-gītā and separating the word Kṛṣṇa, it is God's word. All factual. So why should you not take the science of God?
Dr. Judah: Yes.
Prabhupāda: God can say that "There is no more greater principle than Me." Is it not?
Dr. Judah: That's true.
Prabhupāda: You may accept anyone God, but God can say that. So that is the statement in Bhagavad-gītā:
- mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat
- kiñcid asti dhanañjaya
- mayi sarvam idaṁ protaṁ
- sūtre maṇi-gaṇā iva
- (BG 7.7)
Every word is God's word. You may accept Kṛṣṇa God or not, the words are God's words. That is Bhagavad-gītā. (break)
Bahulāśva: . . . statements like that in the Bible, Śrīla Prabhupāda.
Prabhupāda: Hmm? Hmm?
Bahulāśva: You'll not find statements like that in the Bible, that "There is no one superior to Me." You don't find those things in the Bible.
Bahulāśva: A little indication that there's God, but no real philosophy. (break)
Prabhupāda: . . . manufacturing so many things—United Nation, World Health Organization, and this philanthropism—but the real thing is wanting, that the human life is meant for understanding God. There is no such organization. This is the only organization, Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. (break) . . . and neglectful I do not know. (break)
Devotee: I'm very happy in my new engagement. I'm finding very much success now. We have made four devotees since I have left. Three days.
Prabhupāda: Oh, very good. (break) . . . the definition of God according to the theologicians?
Dr. Judah: (chuckles) Well, there would be many different definitions of God, I suppose, in Christian theology.
Dr. Judah: There would be many different definitions, I guess.
Prabhupāda: Why many?
Dr. Judah: It involves various theologies . . .
Prabhupāda: There is no summary?
Dr. Judah: No.
Prabhupāda: There are many?
Dr. Judah: No. There is no actual statement of any one person or any concept concerning God that would be accepted by all Christians. There are various theologies about God, as I said.
Prabhupāda: No, theologists, some of the prominent theologist, what do they say? How they describe God?
Dr. Judah: Well, it depends upon whether one is a Lutheran or a Calvinist or . . .
Prabhupāda: Let any one of them say something. I want to hear.
Dr. Judah: Yes. Well, this is what the professor yesterday was talking about, that there are many different theologies, and some people accept one and some accept another.
Bahulāśva: Prabhupāda wants to hear one of them, though. What does the Christian . . . what does the Catholic theology say about God? Thomas Aquinas?
Dr. Judah: Well, I'm not too good at interpreting the Catholic theology. But they would . . . the Catholic theology would say that God is the father, that there is the son who was born, who is the son of God, and . . .
Prabhupāda: Now, God has got son. That is all right. But what do you mean by "God"? Everyone has got son, but that does not mean everyone is God. What is the definition of God? You have got son; I have got son. So God has got son—that does not mean He is God. Everyone has got son.
Dr. Judah: Yes. Well, you see, the Roman Catholics, if we were to consider this, then again, would say that the son of God is one with God and the Holy Spirit as the Trinity . . .
Prabhupāda: And again, the description of the son.
Dr. Judah: Yes, the three are one.
Prabhupāda: The son . . . that is all right, but who is God? What is the definition of God? Just like king. We can describe, "King means who has got a big kingdom, a large tract of land. He is ruling over it," some description. So what is the definition of God in that . . .?
Dr. Judah: God is also the creator, they would say.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That's nice.
Dr. Judah: Creator of the world.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Then the next question will be that if He is creator, then He has got nice brain. Otherwise how this wonderful creation is there? Everything is going on . . . just like this big sea. God is creator; therefore although is a vast water, we are safely standing here because we know God has created in such a way, although it is very vast, it cannot go, cannot come up to this.
Dr. Judah: It's true.
Prabhupāda: So how much great brain He has got, He has created in such a way. So we have to understand like that, that "God is creator, so how perfect creator He is." In this way we have to study theology, item by item.
Dr. Judah: Yes. And God is also, they would say, the judge of man, judging man for his sins, and, of course . . .
Prabhupāda: So therefore man is subordinate to God. So why the people are denying the supremacy of God? Just like so-called scientists, rascals, they say, "There is no God." Immediately they should be taken as rascals. Why they should be given this title, "scientist"? He does not know who is his superior. They should be condemned immediately. Anyone who denies God, he is a rascal. He may be scientist, philosopher, amongst the fools, but he is a rascal. He does not know his subordinate position. Immediately designate him, "You are rascal. You have no position because you do not know your superior." In this way you have to study. Then these rascals will be caught up, how great rascals they are, denying the existence of God. So we have to teach people like that, that "Don't follow these rascals." That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā,
- na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ
- prapadyante narādhamāḥ
- āsuraṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ
- (BG 7.15)
Anyone who is not God conscious, Kṛṣṇa conscious, he is immediately grouped amongst the miscreants, duṣkṛtinaḥ. Kṛti means very meritorious. Just like these scientists: they have got good merit, but that merit is being applied for sinful activities. Just like expert thief, rogue: he has got merit, but he is applying the merit for sinful activities. And next word is mūḍha. Why they are misusing in this way? Because they are rascal, mūḍha, ass. You have seen yesterday film, the ass?
Bahulāśva: Last night in the movie?
Brahmānanda: The donkey was carrying that big, heavy load.
Dr. Judah: Oh, yes, yes.
Prabhupāda: So they are heavily loaded, and they agree. So these rascals are asses. They are simply heavily loaded, but they do not know why he should agree to bear so much load. That is ass. (laughter) They take great responsibility. You see? So they are asses. The ass does not know, "Why I am taking so much load? And the master will give me little grass. So grass I can get anywhere. Why I agree to take his load?" Therefore this example, ass, is given. He does not know his real interest. Mūḍha. If you bear some load, you must have some interest in it. But he has no interest, and he is carrying the load. Therefore ass.
Dharmādhyakṣa: So, Śrīla Prabhupāda, all these social problems, then, in society are basically caused by them denying God. That is the ultimate . . .
Prabhupāda: No, because they are asses. Why don't you say like that? (laughter) Because they are big asses, and people are following them. That is the misfortune. They are simply bluffing that "We are very great." Just like these scientists, they simply bluffing that "We went to the moon planet. We are doing this, doing that," and taking large salaries, but they are asses. And people are, they are also asses. Therefore they accept, "Oh, he is a big man, cheating us very nicely."
Bahulāśva: Śrīla Prabhupāda, theologians also say that God is the . . . (break) . . . person He is.
Prabhupāda: So we can describe. (break) Let them take it. If they cannot describe, then take the description from us. We can give. That is knowledge. Nīcād apy uttamā vidyā strī-ratnaṁ duṣkulād api. Why they should hesitate, "No, no, why shall I take from him? He is a Hindu," or "He is a Muslim." What is this nonsense? Knowledge has to be taken wherever it is available.
Bahulāśva: In the Bible it says that no one has ever seen God.
Prabhupāda: But then why don't you go who has seen God? Why remain foolish? That is the Vedic injunction: tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum eva abhigacchet (MU 1.2.12). If you do not know, if you have not seen, then go to guru. Why should I sit idle, "I have not seen; I will never see"? Is that knowledge? Go there where you can see. That is intelligence. "Nobody has seen. Therefore there is no use of seeing." What is this argument? This is no argument.
Bahulāśva: They also say that no one can ever be pure, that everyone is doomed to be a sinner.
Prabhupāda: Well, that is . . . Ātmavat manyate jagat. That is the conditioned soul's qualification, that if he is a fool, he thinks other, fools. Everyone, he thinks, "He is like me." That is nature. Ātmavat manyate jagat. "Everyone thinks others like himself." If he is a fool, he thinks all are. So these things are no argument. Nobody has seen God? How do you take the statistics? Can you say like that, any statistics, that nobody has . . .? Maybe you have not seen him, one who has seen God. That is quite possible because you have not scrutinizingly studied all the men of the world. Then how you can say, "Nobody has seen"? You have not seen the man who has seen Him. He will not admit his fault. He will accuse others, "Nobody has seen God." Why? You may not have seen, but why you say, "Nobody has seen"? You have not seen that person who has seen God. Therefore you say like that.
Bahulāśva: So those people who wrote the Bible did not see God.
Prabhupāda: That is . . . when God is canvassing, "Here I am, Kṛṣṇa," they will not see it. And still, they accuse, "Nobody has seen."
Dr. Judah: Of course, in Christianity, which many of the Christians, I feel, are not following as closely as they should and have in the past, there is the idea, for example, in the Roman Catholic Church, for example, at the time of the Mass, of experiencing the presence of God. And there have been Christian mystics who have felt that they have experienced God. For example, St. Theresa, St. John of the Cross, Meister Eckhart, and various ones.
Prabhupāda: So they must give description of God. If you have seen this rose flower, then you can give a description. If you cannot give a description, then how you have seen rose flower?
Dr. Judah: Yes. Well, they have tried to give descriptions, but, of course, I think all descriptions that have been given of God are, as descriptions, are inadequate. Because in my own feeling, I believe that the full knowledge of God comes through the actual experience of God, experiencing God in our lives.
Prabhupāda: Yes, that experience you can get. Just like God is describing Himself. Now, why don't you take that? Your description may be defective because you are imperfect. But if God Himself is giving His, I mean to say, identification, why don't you take it? Not only gives description; He acts according to the description. When Kṛṣṇa was present, He says, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat (BG 7.7), "There is no more superior element." He proved it when He was present. There was no more superior power than Him when Kṛṣṇa was present. In His opulence, in His richness, in His strength, in His education—everything, all topmost, Kṛṣṇa. All topmost. The proof is that because you get the topmost knowledge, therefore Bhagavad-gītā is read all over the world, accepted, topmost knowledge. All scholars, all philosophers, all religionists, they read it.
Dr. Judah: Yes. Well I, of course, have always felt that . . .
Prabhupāda: Now big, big scholars, they have taken the trouble to write on Bhagavad-gītā. But nobody has taken the trouble to write on other scriptures like Bible or Koran. Nobody has taken. No scholar, no philosopher have tried to comment or study, because they know it is not very important. Here is important. This is the proof, wisest. And that is only A-B-C-D of God's knowledge. But people should take advantage. It is accepted indirectly. There are so many editions of Bhagavad-gītā in your country, English. Why they take trouble to read Bhagavad-gītā so carefully? Big, big scholars, philosophers, why? (break)
It is impersonal, cloth. So Śaṅkarācārya has tried to impress this fact, but the rascals followed in a different way. Just like a cloth, big cloth, that is impersonal. Now, you cut it into coat, it becomes like person. So similarly, this whole material world is impersonal, but because we have taken a certain portion of it and make my body, it looks like person. And God is not like that. He is spiritual person. He has nothing to do with material. Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). What Śaṅkarācārya impressed, that they are after demigods, so "The demigods, they are not actual person. Real person is Nārāyaṇa." That is Śaṅkarācārya's version. Nārāyaṇa . . . you will find in his comment on the Bhagavad-gītā. First word he writes, nārāyaṇaḥ paro 'vyaktād: "Nārāyaṇa has nothing to do with this material world." And he accepts in his comment, sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ: "That Nārāyaṇa has appeared as Kṛṣṇa." And he has given specific name of His father as "the son of Devakī and Vasudeva" so that nobody can misidentify. If you have got Śaṅkara's bhāṣya, commentary on Bhagavad-gītā, you bring it, I shall show you. (break)
Kṛṣṇa also confirms. That verse, which we were reading last evening . . . Kṛṣṇa says, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvaṁ jagad avyakta-mūrtinā (BG 9.4): "This jagat, this material world, is impersonal. And that is My energy. Therefore the whole world is resting upon Me, but I am not there. As person, I am not there." This is the statement of Bhagavad-gītā. Just like the sunshine is spreading all over the universe, but the sun is aloof. Take this example. Not that because the sunshine is here, we are now getting, the sun has come here. The sun is shining from the distant place. He is aloof. Similarly, God is person, and His shining is all this creation. That is impersonal.
Dr. Judah: Like the rays of the sun.
Prabhupāda: Yes. And Śaṅkarācārya's . . . not Śaṅkarācārya. His followers have interpreted, "Because God has become all-pervading, then where is God person? He is finished." But they do not see the sun, that although the sun is all-pervading, still, he is maintaining his identity.
Dr. Judah: Yes. That's the bhedābheda philosophy.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Bhedābheda philosophy, that is actual philosophy. Acintya-bhedābheda.
Dr. Judah: God is both one and dual.
Dr. Judah: Both.
Prabhupāda: Simultaneously. The same example: The sunshine and the sun one, light and heat. But still, the sun is different from the light. (break) . . . to them about going to the moon planet?
Dr. Judah: What happened, do you say, to the . . .
Brahmānanda: To the program of going to the moon.
Dr. Judah: I don't know. But they've stopped it.
Dr. Judah: I don't know. One of the problems has been probably the criticism of the American people that so much money was being spent on going to the moon when there were so many other needs for the money to be used.
Brahmānanda: With such little result coming from it.
Dr. Judah: Yes. The amount, the expense, whether the expense could actually be justified to continue on in the way that they had. (break)
Prabhupāda: . . . to Venus? They say they are going to Venus?
Brahmānanda: The Russians have sent a spaceship to Venus.
Revatīnandana: It's unmanned. There are no men in it. They are going to Venus, but there is no man in the ship.
Prabhupāda: Now, why they are going to Venus? They have failed to achieve anything by going to the moon. Now why another attempt, to go to the Venus?
Dr. Judah: Well, the usual explanation that they have given, as I recall, is that these explorations give man more of a knowledge about how the world was created, our universe was created.
Prabhupāda: That is another speculation.
Dr. Judah: Yes.
Bahulāśva: Why do they have to go to Venus, though, to figure that out? They have a planet here they can't get any information out of.
Prabhupāda: Why they are anxious to know how the world was created? It is already created. What is your credit? (break) . . . and simply bluffing people, that's all. (break) It is already there. The nice creation is already there.
Dr. Judah: Accept it as it is. And be joyful.
Dharmādhyakṣa: But they want to try to imitate the creation.
Prabhupāda: That is their foolishness. "Where angels dare not, foolish rush in." "Where angels dare not, fools rush in." So big, big, giant, saintly persons, they simply admired, and they are going to understand it. Huh? What is that? And they can create, like that? They cannot create even an ant, a small ant, and they are going to create . . . imitate the creation of God. Just see. And we have to believe such fools. (laughter) This is our misfortune.
Dharmādhyakṣa: Śrīla Prabhupāda, because the Christian theologians do not have very much information about God, they are being very much influenced by these scientists and their conceptions.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: sva-viḍ-varāhoṣṭra-kharaiḥ saṁstutaḥ puruṣaḥ paśuḥ (SB 2.3.19). The same example. A lion is accepted as the king. He is considered to be the king of the beasts in the forest. And he is very much praised. But a human being will see that the lion is also an animal, and those who are praising him, they are also animals. Is it not? So if some animals praises another animal, does it mean that the animal is very big? It may be very big for these animals, but lion is not very big thing to the human being. They can capture it. It is nothing. Actually, they capture and keep it in the zoo. So for a human being, both the big animal and a small animal, they are animals, although the small animals praise the big animal. Do you follow what I say?
Dr. Judah: Yes.
Prabhupāda: So here a big animal is being praised by a small animal, but both of them are animals.
Revatīnandana: So in other words, the big leaders and the scientists, they are thinking that "When I am president or when I am scientist—then this time we have landed on Venus—I will be praised."
Prabhupāda: Yes, but who will praise?
Revatīnandana: By other animals.
Prabhupāda: By other animals. Not a human being.
Revatīnandana: Right. But they're thinking, "I will become great," even though we know they are not great.
Prabhupāda: No, how they will know? He is animal. How he can know his position? And especially when the other small animals praise him, he thinks that "I have become very big."
Revatīnandana: So that is their real motivation for going to Venus. But it isn't very intelligent.
Prabhupāda: Yes, "The small animals will praise." That is good policy. I think we shall now go this way. Time is . . .?
Bahulāśva: Twenty to seven.
Prabhupāda: In Bhāgavatam everything has been described.
Dr. Judah: Yes, I received the first part of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that you translated and sent to me, for which I again thank you. I brought it with me to read on the plane. (break)
Dharmādhyakṣa: . . . true that now theologians are trying to make mathematical models to understand God?
Dr. Judah: Mathematical models?
Dharmādhyakṣa: This Whitehead, that Alfred North Whitehead, in process theology?
Dr. Judah: Well, I don't know that that would quite be true. I don't know Whitehead really. But it is a . . . I don't know whether that could be said to be true or not. I really don't know. (break)
Jayādvaita: . . . that Altizer spoke.
Dr. Judah: Oh, yes.
Jayādvaita: That God is, that slogan, "God is dead," that was started by a Christian theologian, Altizer.
Dr. Judah: Yes, that philosophy of Altizer's, and Hamilton and some of the others, so-called "death of God theology," of course, was a phase through which Christianity went through, but I think has lost its, certainly, its efficacy at the present time. I think it's probably had an effect certainly on some, but is not . . . I would not say that is characteristic of Christian theology today. In fact, I see a swinging back to a more conservative position. And, of course, as far as the people are concerned, there is this need for an experiential relationship with God, which has gone through all of the Churches and which is called the charismatic renewal, and this has been very influential in many of the Churches.
Jayādvaita: But he was trying to say that because God is dead, now we have to revive our relationship with Christ. And then he equated that, that everyone is . . . that means we have to have a relationship with all the human beings.
Dr. Judah: Yes. It is put on a, certainly, on a more humanistic scheme.
Jayādvaita: And now people want to know Kṛṣṇa.
Dr. Judah: Yes.
Revatīnandana: Did they actually, seriously think that the Father was dead?
Dr. Judah: Yes, that they . . . (break)
Prabhupāda: . . . dead, then what kind of God he is?
Dr. Judah: Yeah. He wouldn't be any.
Prabhupāda: If the God dies and ordinary animal also dies . . .
Dr. Judah: Yes, it was what they called "atheistic Christianity." (laughter) But as I say, this is not . . . I do not feel that this is representative of Christianity today. And I think that the very fact that this "death of God theology" did become so popular at one particular period is one of the particular reasons why more people have wanted, then have rejected this, and have wanted to find some experience of God, find it in their lives to prove, as it were, that He does exist. I think this has been certainly one of the instruments that has caused people to try to seek the reality of God in various ways. In Sufism, I know, in Berkeley they're seeking God, and in the Vedānta and in many other of the different movements, some of them from India and some of them from Japan, particularly in the case of Zen Buddhism, which has become very popular. And then, of course, there's always the Soka Gakkai in the Bay area, which also is very influential among many of the university students, and which, of course, does chanting also. It's a form of bhakti in Buddhism.
Prabhupāda: Actually, nobody has got clear idea of God. This is the difficulty. Nobody knows. We can challenge them. Nobody knows what is God. We can challenge.
Devotee: (aside) Click off the button when everyone records . . . (break)
Dr. Judah: . . . o'clock this morning.
Prabhupāda: Yes, everyone rises at three o'clock.
Dr. Judah: I had an interesting dream last night, and after dreaming it, I woke up and stayed awake until I got up, until I was called at five. The dream was . . . it seems to be a mixture of the events that occurred last night. I was in a temple and doing kīrtana with a number of devotees, and in the middle of the kīrtana, a little child crawled in on the floor into the temple, and we all stopped and talked to the little child. And I'm reminded . . . and I thought, "Now what does this mean?" And I remember then. I was talking with Dharma just before I went to bed, and there was this little child that came in from next door there, and so he . . . we gave him some prasādam, and so I feel that this all got mixed together in this dream.
Prabhupāda: Dream means some mixed ideas.
Dr. Judah: Yeah. Yes. An interesting mixture of things.
Jayatīrtha: Prabhupāda gives the example that during the day you may see gold and you may see a mountain. So at night you dream of a golden mountain. (break)
Dr. Judah: . . . devotees, I think a long time, haven't you?
Jayatīrtha: Yes, Brahmānanda was one of the original . . .
Dr. Judah: I've seen his picture so often times in the Back to God magazine, playing the mṛdaṅga drum.
Jayatīrtha: What is it, ten years, Brahmānanda? Or nine years?
Brahmānanda: Well, '66. August '66.
Dr. Judah: August '66. You are one of the very earliest.
Prabhupāda: Actually, I began this movement from July '66.
Dr. Judah: July '66.
Prabhupāda: I came in '65, but I could not do anything. I was loitering here and there. Actually, I began my preaching work from '66, June, July, I think. Yes.
Dr. Judah: You must have been one of the hippies he converted there in Tompkins Park then.
Brahmānanda: Well, I wasn't quite a hippie.
Dr. Judah: Not quite. (laughter)
Brahmānanda: There weren't hippies at that time. It was just beginning. So I had been to the university. I graduated NYU. But I'd been to India.
Dr. Judah: You had been to India?
Brahmānanda: Yes. I was planning on going back also. I wanted to take a further degree. I was applying for a Fulbright.
Dr. Judah: I see. (break)
Prabhupāda: . . . by simply inquiring about Kṛṣṇa, you have become Kṛṣṇaized.
Dr. Judah: Yes, I think. Yes.
Prabhupāda: Because several times you had to utter the word "Kṛṣṇa."
Dr. Judah: Kṛṣṇa has been certainly a great influence in my life, the chanting and being with the devotees. It has been a transforming thing.
Brahmānanda: I was looking at your book last evening. I thought it was very nice.
Dr. Judah: Thank you.
Brahmānanda: It's very scholarly and scientific, and at the same time sympathetic. So I think it will make everyone happy.
Dr. Judah: Yes. I hope so. I dedicated it to the devotees and to their parents.
Brahmānanda: Yes. To breach the gap, yoga. (laughter)
Dr. Judah: It might help some reconciliation in some cases.
Jayatīrtha: That's a good idea. The devotees to give them to their parents. (break)
Dr. Judah: . . . it has many imperfections of which I am well aware - mistakes that I hope in another edition can be corrected.
Prabhupāda: But many parents are very happy because their . . .
Dr. Judah: Yes.
Prabhupāda: They are very happy. Some of them come to me to give me thanks.
Dr. Judah: Yes, I'm sure that is the case.
Brahmānanda: We've had recently just some of our devotees . . . there was one boy, senior man, he left the movement for awhile, and his mother told him to go back.
Dr. Judah: She did?
Brahmānanda: Yes. Now he is back, and he is very thankful to his mother.
Dr. Judah: That's interesting.
Jayatīrtha: She said, "When you were in the movement, you were a very nice boy, soft spoken, didn't have any bad habits. Now you've left and you've become a debaucher, drunkard. You should go back." (break)
Dr. Judah: I understand that Keśava, who phoned me last week in Berkeley, that his brother Karāndhara is over in Iran now and working as some kind of an accountancy agency for the Iranian government, and . . .
Brahmānanda: They work on contracts.
Dr. Judah: On the contracts.
Jayatīrtha: One of our members there is a partner in Arthur Young and Company.
Dr. Judah: Of which?
Jayatīrtha: Arthur Young. It's a big accounting firm. So he's one of our elder devotees, and he's manager of the firm there. Karāndhara went there to work with him. (break) . . . article, Brahmānanda Mahārāja?
Brahmānanda: Which article?
Jayatīrtha: That one that Karāndhara sent.
Brahmānanda: Yes. It is all, all right. They deleted . . .
Jayatīrtha: Yes. (break) (end)