Please join, like or share our Vanipedia Facebook Group
Go to Vaniquotes | Go to Vanipedia| Go to Vanimedia


Vanisource - the complete essence of Vedic knowledge

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud (HAY)

From Vanisource

Philosophy Discussion on Sigmund Freud - 54:49 Minutes


FREUD.HAY
Sigmund Freud
Sigmund Freud (1856 - 1939)

Hayagrīva: ...and on Sigmund Freud, you discussed with Śyāmasundara Prabhu the sexual aspects, but not the theological aspects. Freud wrote two basic books on religion, Future of an Illusion, and there was a great deal in Leonardo da Vinci, A Study in Psycho-sexuality. He writes, "Psychoanalysis, which has taught us the intimate connection between the father complex and belief in God, has shown us that the personal God is psychologically nothing but an exalted father. Youthful persons lose their religious belief as soon as the authority of the father breaks down." So he sees God as basically a father complex arising out of the need of help of the little child.

Prabhupāda: That little child, how he can give up the idea of father? And how Mr. Freud can give up the idea? Was he not born by a father?

Hayagrīva: He feels that...

Prabhupāda: He dropped from the sky? Huh? Did, did he?

Hayagrīva: He feels that this is childish.

Prabhupāda: That childish, what is that childish? He had no father?

Hayagrīva: He had a father, but he believed in ultimate emancipation.

Prabhupāda: No, no, ultimate we shall go later on. First of all, he has to think whether he had his father or not. Or his father's father was not there, and go on searching out. So without father, how can one exist or one can come into being? So that if he cannot understand this simple philosophy, what kind of philosopher he is? He had his father. His father had his father. So this is fact. Even though he might not have seen his dead grandfather, but he was there. That is a fact. So if you go on searching, father's father's father, where you will come there is no father? Which..., which is that point when you can say, "Now here there is no father"? And if you actually come to that point that "Here is a person of whom there is no father," that is God.

Hayagrīva: He says, "After all, is not the destiny of childishness to be overcome? Man cannot remain a child forever."

Prabhupāda: No. What is his definition of childish? Whether he is childish, or he is condemning others?

Hayagrīva: One who needs...

Prabhupāda: Unless you can deny that you have born, you are born without father, then you are a child. You do not have conception how you are in existence without father. What is this argument? That everything must be argued, a sane man. So this is simple logic I am putting forward. Who can refute it, that you have father, your father had father, his father had father, father's father's, all? This is a disciplic succession of fathers. How can you deny the father? Therefore the ultimate father, the supreme father, He is also father but He is supreme father. That is the difference. So father conception of God is very practical, and it is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā (BG 14.4). So how he can defy it if he is a sane man? Who can defy it? Is there any person to defy it?

Hayagrīva: Well, he says, "Man's helplessness remains, and with it his father-longing and the gods."

Prabhupāda: Hopelessness or no hopelessness...

Hayagrīva: Helplessness.

Prabhupāda: Ah. But suppose he is philosophizing. So how he can avoid the conception of father? That is insanity. This is very simple thing. Father's father's, his father, his father... When you go to the supreme father, that is God.

Hayagrīva: Well, he felt that the idea of God arose out of man's helplessness, and the gods...

Prabhupāda: That hopelessness is already there, that's a fact. That is the same logic, that we are finding difficulties in this materialistic way of life. Threefold miseries-miserable condition of this body, this mind, miseries offered by other living entities, and the natural disturbances. So how can you say there is very smooth life? That is not possible. And above these, there is old age, birth, death. So hopelessness is already there. But if one is very rascal, he is hoping against hope and planning that "We shall overcome all these difficulties by this plan, that plan, that plan." That, that is not possible. The nature is so strong, whatever plan you imagine, that will smash into pieces by simply kicking over your face. So you are hopeless but you are so shameless, inspite of becoming hopeless in every step, you are hoping against hope to make adjustment with these material things. You are so rascal and foolish. Hopelessness is always there in every step, and still, out of insanity, you are trying to adjust with another hopeless plan.

Hayagrīva: He felt that the father God is an infantile wish. He says, "The whole thing is so patently infantile, so incongruous with reality, that one whose attitudes..."

Prabhupāda: So what is his reality? Infantile conception of God, but what he is, except the child? Huh? He is also planning something. That is also childish. So how he becomes more than a child? He cannot give us any definite program by which everyone will be hopeful.

Hayagrīva: Well, he felt psychoanalysis was the answer.

Prabhupāda: That is jugglery of word. Psychoanalysis, nobody will, can understand, a common man. Psychoanalysis, if there is meaning, that there is supreme controller, that is psychoanalysis. We see everywhere controller, so it is natural. This is psychoanalysis, that there is a supreme controller. That is natural. Why defying this fact?

Hayagrīva: He says, "If one attempts to assign religion its place in man's evolution, it seems not so much to be a lasting acquisition as a parallel to the neuroses which the civilized individual must pass through on his way from childhood to maturity."

Prabhupāda: Evidently he is frustrated, without any knowledge of religion. He had no idea. He has seen that so many sentimental religious system, and he has concluded like that. But first of all let him understand what is religion. Religion cannot come into existence without understanding the idea of God. Religion without God cannot be religion. According to Vedic system, religion means the order given by God. But if one has no conception of God, that there is no question of religion. So Godless religion is, certainly, it is sentiment. That is not religion. So he has studied something which is not religion; therefore he has got so many doubts about religion. Real religion is that there is God, that is a fact, and whatever orders the God gives, that is religion. So he does not know what is God. How he will know what order He is giving? So for him everything is not religion.

Hayagrīva: It's often been said of Freud that he tried to repress within himself religious feelings that were definitely there. He says, "I cannot..." In a letter he wrote, "I cannot rid myself of certain sceptic materialistic prejudices, and I would carry them over into the research of the occult." He considered religion the occult.

Prabhupāda: Occult, what is that?

Hayagrīva: Occult, something obscure. The...

Prabhupāda: It is not obscure. It is, everything is obscure to the foolish person. So he is a foolish person. He does not know what is God. How he will know what is religion? Our definition of religion is "the order given by God." But if I do not know what is God, then how can I take His order? That is the defect.

Hayagrīva: In the same letter he writes, "I am entirely incapable of considering the survival of the personality after death, even as a mere scientific possibility. I think therefore, it is better if I continue confining myself to psychoanalysis."

Prabhupāda: What is that psy...? He is deficient in psychoanalysis also, because he is practically seeing in his daily life that a child is growing to become a boy, a boy is growing to a young man, but the body is changing and the soul is there. So if he has no sense to understand this, what kind of psychoanalysis he is? The body of the child is finished, then he accepts another body, boy. So how you can deny it? You say it has grown. I say that it is finished. Then what is the difference? Actually the child's body is not there. So you can show..., speak in a different language, but the, when the child's body is finished, there is the boy's body. When the boy's body is finished, the young man's body. So body is changing, but still my child, my son, John, I still call him John, although he has changed his body, because I know my son, the soul John, whom I call John, he is there. So the soul is there; the body is changing, we are experiencing every day. So what kind of psychoanalyst he is, that he cannot understand this simple truth? And still he says, "I cannot believe in the eternity of the soul." That how poor thoughts he is maintaining, and he is proclaiming himself a philosopher. What kind of philosopher he is?

Hayagrīva: He wrote a book called Beyond the Pleasure Principle, and in it he wrote, "The goal of all life is death." For him death is the cessation...

Prabhupāda: But why...

Hayagrīva: ...of suffering.

Prabhupāda: That's all right. That means you, why you are afraid of death? Why go to the medical man? Huh? When you are diseased you are afraid of dying. Why go to the medical man? If death is ultimate happiness, then why you are trying to avoid death? What is the psychoanalysis? (break)

Hayagrīva: Now this theory... Freud's principal disciple was the famous psychologist Carl Jung. They had an argument, and Freud once fainted, and when he came to, his words were, Freud's words were, "How sweet it must be to die." And in Beyond the Pleasure Principle, he writes, "The most universal endeavor of all living substance, namely, to return to the quiescence of the inorganic world. We have all experienced how the greatest pleasure attainable by us, that of the sexual act, is associated with the momentary extinction of a highly intensified excitation. Thus the pleasure principle, the sex act itself, is preliminary to the most highly desired nirvāṇa, the extinction of desires, and ultimately the extinction of the life functions themselves. Thus the pleasure principle seems actually to serve the death instincts."

Prabhupāda: So where is the pleasure when he is dead? What is that pleasure?

Hayagrīva: Well there is pleasure, and then when pleasure is cultivated, culminated...

Prabhupāda: That pleasure is in the stone. So why you are...

Hayagrīva: That's inorganic. He spoke of the return, the quiescence of the inorganic world.

Prabhupāda: Yes. So...

Hayagrīva: To become like...

Prabhupāda: Why you are philosophizing? You just sui..., make suicide and become a stonelike death. That why you are philosophizing, taking so much pain? Better you suicide, commit suicide, and immediately become silent, then that's happiness. (laughter) Why you are, rascal, bothering yourself and headaching others? The best thing is that you commit suicide and become dead, and all happiness is there. As some rascal do that, that by committing suicide he will solve all problem. So this is easy process, commit suicide, and why you are writing so many books? If ultimate happiness is to become dead, do that immediately.

Hayagrīva: But isn't... Materialistic pleasure, he says, serves the death instinct, but doesn't materialistic pleasure just bring out more craving for pleasure?

Prabhupāda: He is making death as the ultimate pleasure. Is it not?

Hayagrīva: Death as the ultimate goal of pleasure.

Prabhupāda: That's all, then commit it immediately. Why you are writing so many book? Commit suicide, that everyone can do that.

Hayagrīva: After, after having sex, most people simply go to sleep, and he felt that this was the, sort of the ultimate extinction.

Prabhupāda: That means Freud is a most imperfect person. He is taking sex as very important thing, which the dog enjoys. As a dog's life and a hog's life, the hog has got very good facility. The monkey has got very good facility for sex life, and he is thinking this is ultimate goal, and then sleep. So that is going on. So if sex life is so big thing, the hogs, they have got good facility. The pigeons, they have got very good facility. I think every hour they have four times sex life, these pigeons. So if that is, then you become a pigeon. You pray to God that "Make me a pigeon, make me a hog." Why you are becoming philosopher? Now our philosophy is different—not to become a pig. Nāyaṁ deho deha-bhājāṁ nṛloke kaṣṭān kāmān arhate viḍ-bhujāṁ ye (SB 5.5.1). The life simply for sense gratification, and for that purpose working so hard, but that is the business of the pig. That is not the business of the human being. Human being is tapasya. Tapasya means stop sex life. That is tapasya. Tapasā brahmacaryeṇa (SB 6.1.13). So our philosophy is different from his philosophy. And actually we are suffering. The pig has got good facilities for sex. Does it mean that is ideal life, eating stool and having sex without discrimination? They have no discrimination, whether mother or sister or daughter. That is hog life. So if sex life is final pleasure, then hog is in the greatest pleasure. He has no social obligation. He has no discrimination. But our philosophy says "Don't become a hog, become a sane man." There, there, there is a difference between his philosophy and our philosophy.

Hayagrīva: He says, "Everything in our life is an accident, from our very origin..."

Prabhupāda: Just see how foolishness he is.

Hayagrīva: "...through the meeting of the spermatozoa and ovum, an accident, which nevertheless participates in the lawfulness and fatalities of nature, lacking only the connection to our wishes and illusions."

Prabhupāda: You are so foolish that you cannot avoid even accident. You are subjected to so many accidents. So what you will do by your philosophy? If accident is so prominent, (laughter) so how you will make adjustment with your philosophy? Stop talking philosophy, accept accidents and suffer, that's all.

Hayagrīva: Concerning sex, Freud explored the realm of infantile sexuality and found a definite sexual nature in the earlier stages of childhood. He concluded that these sexual activities in childhood were normal phenomena, and finally concluded with his famous dictum, "In a normal sex life, no neurosis is possible."

Prabhupāda: That is also his foolishness, because a child can be trained up to become a brahmacārī so that he will have no inclination for sex. It depends on the child's training. The unscrupulous father and mother, they enjoy sex life before the child, and they imitate. I have seen it. I have seen it in Agra. There are two small children. In life, what do they know? The female child laid down, and the man child, just like they have seen father and mother-sex. He does not know anything, but he is imitating. So imitating, imitating, the sex life is there, it becomes prominent. Similarly, you train the children not to have any sense of sex life, he will become brahmacārī. So he has not studied. He has seen some abominable family's children. So they learn these things. Whatever you teach, they imitate. So if you keep the children aloof from this sex-life society, he will remain a brahmacārī. There is many instances. That is the Vedic civilization. The children are immediately, as soon as four, five years old, he is sent to the gurukula, and under the discipline he forgets sex life, practically. But still if he has little, that is natural when he is young man, so a guru sees that still tendency for sex life, he is allowed, "Go on, marry and become a gṛhastha." Otherwise, if he is perfectly controlled over sex life, he becomes a sannyāsī, vānaprastha, the whole life. Just like my Guru Mahārāja, he was never married. So he could..., that can be trained. Why he is saying the child is? Child can be trained. Even without sex he can live throughout whole life without any disturbance. That can be trained up. It is a question of education.

Hayagrīva: He felt that sexual repression would be harmful, but sexual sublimation can often be beneficial. Sublimation, he says...

Prabhupāda: What is that sublimation? More sex? (indistinct) sex?

Hayagrīva: Sublimation is, well let me read, "The excessive excitations from individual sexual sources are discharged and utilized in other spheres, so that no small enhancement of mental capacity results from a predisposition which is dangerous as such." In other words, he didn't believe that..., in total sexual freedom as it's conceived today, but that a man would be better, instead of trying to totally deny the sex drive, to try to redirect it, oh, perhaps in artistic activity or in, in study, or in some other activity. Not to deny it.

Prabhupāda: That means, in one word, to divert his attention.

Hayagrīva: Yes.

Prabhupāda: That is brahmacārī. That is recommended in the Vedic culture, that from the very beginning of his life, divert his attention for spiritual activities, he, he will forget about sex life. That is the experience. Not only a trained-up child, even a grown-up person, if he takes Kṛṣṇa consciousness seriously, he also forgets sex life. So that is possible by training, one can forget sex life. That, that is experience of Yamunacārya. He expressing, yad-avadhi mama cetaḥ kṛṣṇa-pādāravinde. He says that "Since my, my mind and attention has been diverted to Kṛṣṇa consciousness activities, as soon as I thing of sex life, I spite on it." That is possible. It is simply question of training. And if one indulges in sex life without any restriction, the physical problem is there. He will be impotent. He will not be able to, even though he has got sex organs, he will not be able to use it. That is nature's way of punishing. There are so many impotent person. So it is a question of training. So the Vedic training is to train the small child, from the very beginning of his life, how to avoid sex life. That cannot be artificially done, but there is a process of training. By accepting that training one can remain without sex life throughout the whole life. That is possible.

Hayagrīva: Well he felt it couldn't be stamped out. If it, if you try to stamp out the sex drive, it will manifest itself in neuroses, in undesirable...

Prabhupāda: No, that is..., he is not... That is the defect. He does not know perfectly anything, and he is philosophizing. That is the defect. Not only in him—I find these all mental speculators, that is the defect. Everything is possible, but our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is different from his imagination. Our philosophy is that so long one has the sex inclination, he will have to accept a material body. And as soon as he accepts a material body, he becomes implicated in so many miserable condition of material existence. But there is another life, which is not material, that is spiritual. If one is trained up to accept that spiritual life, there will be no more botheration of this material existence. That he does not know, neither he can understand. But there is such thing. That can be found in the Vedic civilization, not this meat-eating civilization. It is not possible.

Hayagrīva: Concerning religion, he said, "Of the reality value of most of them, of most religions, we cannot judge. Just as they cannot be proved, neither can they be refuted."

Prabhupāda: First of all, he does not know what is religion. That is the defect in him. We say religion means the order given by God. Simple thing. But he has no conception of God. How he can get orders from God? Therefore how he can understand what is religion? He has got some ideas of fictitious religion, which is described in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, kaitava, cheating. Cheating religion. That is not religion. Religion means, just like law. Law means the order given by the government. You cannot manufacture law at your home. That is not... Similarly, if somebody manufactures law at home and says that "I have manufactured one law. You take it," so who, what sane man will accept that law? "Sir, you keep your law in your pocket." Similarly, this so-called religious system, which is not given by God, that is just like outlaws. They are not religion. He has simply studied which is not religion. That is his defect. Real religion is the law given by God. So he has no conception of God, how he can understand what is religion? He has studied only pseudoreligion, cheating religion; therefore he is dissatisfied.

Hayagrīva: He said, "The riddles of the universe only reveal themselves slowly to our inquiry. To many questions, science can as yet give no answer, but scientific work is our only way to the knowledge of external reality. Science is no illusion, but it would be an illusion to suppose that we could get anywhere else what it could not give us." In other words, religion is an illusion, but the answer lies in..., in science, that science will eventually answer all of these questions that religion attempts to answer through...

Prabhupāda: No. The science or philosopher, when they are imperfect in their knowledge, they, whatever they give, that is unscientific and without any basic principle of philosophy. So the, first of all we have to learn what is the objective of knowledge, what we are searching, knowledge. The knowledge that... Vedānta. Vedānta, Veda means knowledge and anta means ultimate. Unless you come to the ultimate point of knowledge, your knowledge is imperfect, insufficient. So the ultimate knowledge is God. So if these people, they cannot define any God, they cannot believe in God, that means they have not reached to the ultimate point of knowledge. God is a fact, but we do not have any clear idea what is that God. That means our knowledge has not reached up to the point of clear understanding of God. So unless one is able to reach that point, everything, what he calls knowledge, is imperfect. God is there, that's a fact, and knowledge means to go to that point. If one has not reached to that point, his knowledge is imperfect. So how he can give us something conclusively if he has imperfect knowledge? Let him be philosopher or scientist; if he has got imperfect knowledge, what is the value of his science, scientific knowledge and that? His knowledge is imperfect. So our, our policy is we don't accept knowledge from an imperfect person. We have received knowledge from the perfect person. Kṛṣṇa is accepted the Supreme Personality of Godhead, perfect, and anyone who follows Kṛṣṇa's knowledge, he is also perfect. So our policy is to accept knowledge from the perfect person, not from the speculators. Speculators are not in perfect knowledge; therefore whatever they say, they are all imperfect. Maybe to some extents it is perfect, but it is not perfect knowledge.

Hayagrīva: He writes, "As it is a delicate task to decide what God has Himself ordained and what derives rather from the authority of an all-powerful parliament or a supreme judicial decision, it would be an indubitable advantage to leave God out of the question altogether and to admit honestly the purely human origin of all cultural laws and instructions." In other words, man is the law-giver...

Prabhupāda: That, that means he has no clear conception of God, because God has to take power from some parliament. God does not take power from anyone. He is God. That is described in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, that janmādy asya yataḥ anvayād itarataḥ ca artheṣu abhijñaḥ svarāṭ (SB 1.1.1), that the Supreme, God, or Supreme Truth, Brahman, He knows everything. He knows everything in details. And wherefrom? Abhijñaḥ. He is, abhijñaḥ means completely in awareness. Then the question may be raised that "How He got this complete knowledge? From whom He received?" The answer is immediate, svarāṭ. Svarāṭ means independent. That is God. If one has to take knowledge from Mr. Freud, then he is not God. Anyone, if you come to that person that He is independent, parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate svābhāvikī (CC Madhya 13.65, purport), naturally He is all-perfect. He hasn't got to become perfect by some process or from some authority. That is God. He is all-perfect automatically. That is God. So anyone who is trying to be perfect, he is not God. One who is... That, that, that is in the history, we find in the history of life of Kṛṣṇa. When He was three-months-old child He, He could kill big giant like Pūtanā. That is automatic. Either He is child or He is a young man or He is old man, the godly power is there. The nowadays these so-called yogis, they are becoming God by meditation, but the three-months-old child in the lap of His mother, how He became God? The God is God always. He hasn't got to learn it from anyone. That is His svarāṭ, independent. So these people have no conception of God; therefore they are simply speculating and misleading persons. God is not the subject matter of speculation. We, if we want to know God, then we must know it from God Himself or a person who knows Him. That is the direction in the Bhagavad-gītā:

tad viddhi praṇipātena
paripraśnena sevayā
upadekṣyanti tad jñānaṁ
jñāninas tattva-darśinaḥ
(BG 4.34)

Tattva-darśinaḥ, one who has learned about God as fact, as you see eye to eye and you believe it. Similarly, one who has seen God eye to eye, you have to let..., get lessons of God from him. Just like Arjuna. Arjuna is talking with God. So if you have to understand God, then understand how Arjuna has taken his instruction from God and what he's understood. So Arjuna says, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān, puruṣaṁ śāśvatam ādyam (BG 10.12). So we have to take lesson from Arjuna not from Mr. Freud, who has no knowledge of God. That is the way.

Hayagrīva: Concerning early religious training, he writes, "So long as a man's early years are influenced by the religious thought inhibition, and by the lore one derived from it, as well as by the sexual one, we cannot really say what he," that is man, "is actually like." So he feels that early religious education actually warps a man's development, that you can't say what man can truly be like if you educate him to believe in a transcendental being.

Prabhupāda: That's a fact. If a child is given lesson that there is a supreme being controlling the whole cosmic situation, what is the wrong there? He should learn it.

Hayagrīva: But Freud felt that this inhibited man's natural development, that you can't know what man is naturally like as long as you inculcate him with these religious ideas.

Prabhupāda: Then why do you send your son to a school for education?

Hayagrīva: Well he felt that...

Prabhupāda: Naturally...

Hayagrīva: Some education, there has to be education.

Prabhupāda: That's all. This is also the most important education.

Hayagrīva: So therefore, they are following this line of thought now in the schools, because they've cut out religious education...

Prabhupāda: That, that this is the important education in human life—to learn about God. That is the only business, because in other lives, the animal life, cat's and dog's life, they cannot understand. But in the human form of life there is possibility; therefore that is the first education. The animals, they cannot think of God, but in the human society, why there are religions? Not in the animal society. To understand God, that is the civilized form of human civilization.

Hayagrīva: He agrees with Marx in his belief that religion is a form of narcotic. He says, "The believer...," that is in God...

Prabhupāda: Well first of all, these men do not know what is religion. That is the defeat. That is their defect, either Marx or Freud of so many so-called philosophers, they do not know what is religion. They have to learn what is religion. Without knowing what is religion, why they are talking of religion and God? They have no knowledge about.

Hayagrīva: He says, "The believer will not let his faith be taken from him, neither by argument nor by prohibitions, and even if it did succeed with some, it would be a cruel thing to do."

Prabhupāda: No. Anything, artificial teaching, that is cruelty. So that is being done by Mr. Freud also. Artificially he is stressing on sex and death and so on, so on, but that is not life. Real life is that to understand the simple truth. Just like..., who was protesting against father conception? That Mr. John, so and so?

Hari-śauri: Freud.

Hayagrīva: Freud.

Prabhupāda: Father. So how he can avoid this father conception? If you mislead people that there is no father conception, that is not education; that is misleading. Father is there, everyone knows this simple philosophy. And if he is misleading them, then that is not philosopher, that is cruelty. A man is naturally believing that there is father and there is father's father, and he is diverting his attention from this natural belief. So this is cruelty. He is committing cruelty to human understanding, simple understanding.

Hayagrīva: He says, "I disagree with you when you go on to argue that man cannot in general do without the consolation of the religious illusion, that without it he would not endure the troubles of life, the cruelty of reality."

Prabhupāda: Man cannot do without education. Without education a man remains an animal. Therefore in the human society there is a school, college, an institution, teacher—not in the animal society. So the principle is, the man is meant for being learned or being educated. That you cannot deny, that man life should not be like cats and dogs, simply eating, sleeping, mating, and dying. That is not man's life. Man's life is to become advanced in knowledge and education. And as I have already described, the ultimate knowledge: to understand God. If he is so-called educated, without any understanding of God, then his education is imperfect. You can deny the existence of God, but the God conception is there in the human society. Some may accept it, some may not accept it—that is another thing—but the conception of God, the whole civilized world, they have got some type of religion. Either you become Christian or Buddhist or Hindu or Muslim, religion means there is some cultivation of knowledge to understand God. And to understand God is the ultimate knowledge. That is called Vedānta. Veda means knowledge, and the ultimate knowledge: Vedānta. So ultimate knowledge, it, what is that? That is the beginning of Vedānta education. What is that ultimate knowledge? Athāto brahma jijñāsā. The Vedānta begins with this word, "Now this human form of life is to acquire the ultimate knowledge." Athāto brahma. Brahma means the ultimate. So, the absolute. Now it is the time to understand. So far understanding of sex, the dog also knows. You don't require to give him any education. So nobody is given education... Now of course they have adopted, but there is a Bengali proverb, "How to cry and how to enjoy sex, it doesn't require any education." When you are aggrieved, you cry automatically. When there is a sex impulse, you enjoy it automatically. It doesn't require any Mr. Freud. Without the help of any educator, everyone knows-cats, dogs, animals, human being—everyone knows how to enjoy sex life. It doesn't require any education.

So the Vedānta says that this kind of education is there in the animal kingdom also, sex philosophy. There is no question of philosophy, it is already there; anyone can enjoy it. Now, at this time, atha ato brahma-jijñāsā, now this human life is to inquire about the Absolute Truth, Brahman, because that is the ultimate knowledge. This ultimate knowledge can be acquired by the human being, not by the cats and dog. So if a philosopher, without any knowledge of God, doubtful knowledge of God, so he is imperfect, he is not even human being. He is cats and dogs. (break) God means supreme controller. So everything we see is controlled. The government is controller, but the supreme controller there must be. That's a fact. Now, if you want to know it clearly, then be educated. That is Vedānta. That is very reasonably said, that "What is that Brahman, God?" Immediately answer is, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). God means, the Absolute Truth means, Brahman means from whom everything has emanated. We see everything is emanating. Just like we see the trees are emanating from the earth, and by eating the fruits, flowers, grains, the animal, human being, they are also emanating. So ultimate cause is this earth. We are emanating. We can say that "I am emanating from my mother." So the mother does not eat, then how he, his, her body can continue and how she can give another body within the womb? So ultimately we can see that the earth or the water is the source of emanation of everything. Then we can inquire wherefrom the water comes and wherefrom the earth comes, wherefrom the air comes, wherefrom the fire comes. This is philosophy. Then ultimately when we come, come to the supreme point of emanation, janmādy asya yataḥ: (SB 1.1.1) "Here is the person, here is the source of everything." So that we must know. Simply in the middle struggling for understanding without any perfect knowledge, what is the value of this philosophy and knowledge? There is no value. You must come to the ultimate goal, the ultimate source of everything. "By accident," "perhaps," that, that is not knowledge. Definite knowledge. Just like in the Bhagavad-gītā you'll learn, Kṛṣṇa says,

ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo
mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate
iti matvā bhajante māṁ
budhā bhāva-samanvitāḥ
(BG 10.8)

Why one should become a devotee of Kṛṣṇa? When he understands perfectly that "Here is the ultimate source." Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate.

So when you have got this knowledge, that this knowledge, jñāna, that how this knowledge comes? By researching for many, many life. Then, bahūnāṁ janmanām ante (BG 7.19), in this way researching, researching, researching, after many, many births, when he actually becomes in full awareness that "Here is the source," then He says, vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā su-durlabhaḥ: (BG 7.19) "Oh, here is..., Vasudeva is everything." Sa mahātmā su-durlabhaḥ. Then he begins his bhajana. Mahātmānas tu māṁ pārtha daivīṁ prakṛtim āśritāḥ bhajanty ananya-manaso (BG 9.13). That is life. Simply speculation, coming to know definite knowledge, "perhaps," "maybe," and this and that—what is the value of this knowledge? That is childish. That is childish. He is, he is saying others, for giving him God, that is childish, but he is himself a child. He cannot give us any definite knowledge. "By chance," "by accident," "perhaps." What is the value of that knowledge?

Hayagrīva: Freud's..., this is Freud's final conclusion on this point: "True, without religion man will then find himself in a difficult situation. He will have to confess his utter helplessness and his insignificant part in the working of the universe. He will have to confess that he is no longer the center of creation, no longer the object of the tender care of a benevolent providence. He will be in the same position as the child who has left the home where he was so warm and comfortable. But, after all, is it not the destiny of childishness to be overcome? Man cannot remain a child forever. He must venture at last into the hostile world. This may be called education to reality. Need I tell you that it is the sole aim of my book to draw attention to the necessity for this advance?"

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: The advance to reality.

Prabhupāda: That reality is good advice. But unfortunately, who is taking advantage of his advice? Because here we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā, the real point of religion, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). But these philosophers have misled the world so much that now it is very difficult to convince them that here is God speaking and here is religion. That service he has done. As they were innocent to accept the words of God, now they have become overintelligent. They think sex is God, and that is going on. So to counteract this mentality it will take some time, but anyone who takes, accept the Bhagavad-gītā, the words of God, and the ways and means of life as defined by God, if anyone takes, then he will be happy. That's a fact.

Hayagrīva: Christ said, "Unless he becomes a little child, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God."

Prabhupāda: Child.

Hayagrīva: Unless you become like a little child, you will not enter into the kingdom.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Yes, yes.

Hayagrīva: And Freud says you must grow up.

Prabhupāda: He is a, he is a crazy fellow. That's all. And all these rascal philosophers, they are more or less crazy. One who does not know what is God, what is the value of his knowledge? But our criterion of knowledge is one who has known God. As long as you do not come to that point, your knowledge is useless. Simply misleading. And that is not knowledge. It is a fact that there is some supreme controller. Now if one give education how that supreme controller is working, how He is Supreme, that is real education. And you cannot understand how the Supreme is working, you simply deny the Supreme, that is not knowledge. Supreme is there because you are controlled. How can you avoid the control? How you can say there is no supreme controller? You make a plan and it is frustrated. There is supreme controller. You are making arrangement to live here very happily; next day you die. So you are under controller. How can you deny it? So there is supreme controller. Now, knowledge means, "Who is that supreme controller? How He is controlling?" Not that deny it, "Grapes are sour." Jumping, jumping, jumping, jumping, when he could not reach the grapes, he said, "Oh, there is no need of them. It is sour." Their position is like that. They cannot understand... God is there, that's a fact-supreme controller. But they cannot explain, neither they can understand. There is jackal struggle. Jackal jumping, jumping; when he cannot get the, reach the grapes, he says, " Why (indistinct)? It is sour." Their conclusion is like that. They cannot understand what is God, how He is acting, what is religion, and they are defying, "There is no need of religion, there is no need of God." Jackal struggling, that's all. Jackal struggling is no philosophy. (end)