Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung (HAY)
Hayagrīva: This is Carl Jung, Carl Gustav Jung. One interesting point is that the inscription above the door of Jung's house read, in Latin, "Summoned or not summoned, God will be there."
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: And in his book, his autobiography, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, we find most of his thoughts about the, about theology and psychoanalysis. In that book he writes, "I find that all my thoughts circle around God like the planets around the sun and are as irresistibly attracted by Him. I would feel it to be the grossest sin if I were to oppose any resistance to this force." He sees all creatures as parts of God. He says, "Man cannot compare himself with any other creature. He is not a monkey, not a cow, not a tree. I am a man. But what is it to be that? Like every other being, I am a splinter of the infinite Deity."
Prabhupāda: Part and parcel. That is our theory. We are part and parcel of God. Like fire and the sparks.
Hayagrīva: He writes, "It was obedience which brought me grace. One must be utterly abandoned to God. Nothing matters but fulfilling His will. Otherwise all is folly and meaninglessness."
Prabhupāda: Very good. Surrender. Sarva-dharmān parityajya (BG 18.66). That is real life. Śaraṇāgati, to surrender to God, to accept things which is favorable to God, to reject things which are unfavorable to God, always maintaining conviction that "God will give me all protection," and remain humble and meek, and think oneself as one of the members of God's family—that is spiritual communism. As the Communist they think a member of a certain community, similarly a man's duty is to think always as member of God's family. The same idea I was speaking, that God is the supreme father, material nature is the mother, and anything, any living entity coming out of material nature, they are all sons of God. So practically we see that all living entities coming out, either from land or from water or from the air—everywhere there is living entity—so the material nature is the mother. There is no doubt about it. And we have got experience that mother cannot produce child without connection with the father. So this is absurd to think that without father a child can be born. That is foolishness. Father must be there, and that supreme father is God. This conception of a spiritual family is Kṛṣṇa consciousness, God consciousness.
Hayagrīva: Concerning God's personality, he writes, "According to the Bible, God has a personality and is the ego of the universe, just as I myself am the ego of my psyche and physical being." But here...
Prabhupāda: Yes, God... So that is our view, that consciousness, just like I am conscious, but I am conscious about my body. I am not conscious of your body. This is individual consciousness. You are conscious of your body, but you are not conscious of my body. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, kṣetra-kṣetrajña, that individual soul is conscious of his own body, each and every individual soul, but there is another consciousness, that is superconsciousness. That is God. God is in everyone's heart, kṣetra-jñaṁ cāpi māṁ viddhi sarva-kṣetreṣu bhārata (BG 13.3). I am also within the body, but He is not like that individual soul, limited within that body. He is residing in everyone's body, so that He is superconscious, Supersoul, Paramātmā.
Hayagrīva: Continuing on this, God's personality, these are his recollections of his spiritual encounters. He says, "But here I encountered a formidable obstacle. Personality, after all, surely signifies character. Now character is one thing and not another, that is to say, it involves certain specific attributes. But if God is everything, how could He still possess a distinguishable character? On the other hand, if He does have a character He can only be the ego of a subjective, limited world. Moreover, what kind of character or what kind of personality does He have? Everything depends on that, for unless one knows the answer, one cannot establish a relationship to Him."
Prabhupāda: His character is transcendental character, not like the material character. Āprakṛta. It is said, just like bhakta-vatsala, He is very kind to His devotee. This kindness is, is one of His characteristic. Similarly, He has got unlimited qualities, and according to that transcendental quality He is sometimes described, but all those qualities are permanent. Whatever qualities and character we have got, they are minute manifestation of God's character, because we have got character also. That is only a minute manifestation of God's character. He is the origin of all character. That is described in the śāstras. He has got also mind, He has got also feelings, He has got also sensation, He has got senses, sense perception, sense gratification. Everything is there. That is unlimitedly, and we, being part and parcel of God, we possess in minute quantities all the God's quality. Actually our characteristics, qualities are simply atomic manifestation of God's quality. The original qualities are in God.
Hayagrīva: Jung complained that at least the philosophies and theologies of the West...
Prabhupāda: And He, He is person also.
Hayagrīva: Yes.
Prabhupāda: He is person. That is the Vedic description. He is person exactly like us, but His personality is unlimited. The same example I was giving, that I am a person so far I am concerned with this particular body, but He is a person living in every body, Super Person. And in the Bhagavad-gītā it is also said that that personality, either of God or of the individual soul, eternally existing. In the Bhagavad-gītā Kṛṣṇa says that in the past we are existing, at present we are existing, and in the future we shall continue to exist. So past, present, future. That means all the time, eternally, both of them are person. One person is unlimited, and the other person is limited. Finite and infinite. So God is person, but the unlimited qualities, unlimited characteristics, unlimited power, unlimited strength, unlimited influence, unlimited knowledge. That is God. And we are also the same—person—with little power, little influence, little knowledge, everything limited. That is the difference between two personalities. One is limited, another is unlimited, but the qualities are the same.
Hayagrīva: Jung then found that the philosophies and theologies, at least of the West, could not give him a clear picture of God's personality. He concluded, "What is wrong with these philosophers? I wondered. Evidently they know of God only by hearsay."
Prabhupāda: Yes. That I was complaining, that none of these rascals have any clear idea of God. They are simply speculating. Therefore they cannot speak anything about religion or God, because they have no clear conception. But so far we are concerned, we have got clear conception of God: "Here is God, Kṛṣṇa." And we want to give that conception to the world. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Kṛṣṇa is accepted as the Supreme Person, Supreme God, by everyone, all authorities, past, present, future must be. So why they do not accept this personal God? If they have got any reason, if they have got any logic, any philosophy, here is Kṛṣṇa, perfect God. So He, according to Vedic scripture, He is complete, cent percent God. Other incarnation of God, they are not cent percent. It has been analyzed in our Nectar of Devotion. Up to Nārāyaṇa, ninety-four percent God, ah, ninety-six percent God. Lord Śiva, eighty-four percent God, Lord Brahma, er, eighty...
Hari-śauri: Seventy-eight?
Prabhupāda: Seventy-eight percent. That is also very minute quantity of the characteristics and qualities of God. But Kṛṣṇa is full-fledged, cent percent God. That Rūpa Goswami has analyzed in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu. We have given the translation in Nectar of Devotion. So God is person. Simply if we study man's character, then we can study also God, the same character. Loving affairs, as we also want to enjoy with friends, with girls, with parents, with superiors, with servants, as we take pleasure in these relationship, similarly, God also takes pleasure in these similar relationship. He has got five relationship primarily, and seven relationship secondarily. So twelve kinds of relationship, and therefore He is described, akhila-rasāmṛta-sindhu, reservoir of all pleasure. That is His completeness. So the philosophers, they should try to understand, and very, I mean, analytically, what is God. They do not know God, and they speak of God, imaginary. That is not perfect knowledge. One must study what is God with perfect knowledge. That is advancement of knowledge. That is described in the Bhagavad-gītā:
- mayy āsakta-manāḥ pārtha
- yogaṁ yuñjan mad-āśrayaḥ
- asaṁśayaṁ samagraṁ māṁ
- yathā jñāsyasi tac chṛṇu
- (BG 7.1)
Kṛṣṇa addressed Arjuna, "My dear Arjuna, simply by concentrating your attachment for Me," mayy āsakta, "and practicing the bhakti-yoga under My light," mayy āsakta-manāḥ yogam... Mad-āśrayah. You can learn about God by keeping yourself always under the protection of God, or under the protection of the representative of God. Then, asaṁśayam, without any doubt, samagram, perfectly, you can understand God. Otherwise there is no possibility. Mayy āsakta-manāḥ pārtha yogaṁ yuñjan mad-āśrayaḥ, asaṁśayam. Then there will be no doubt whether God is there or not, what is my relationship with God, what is my duty, and so on. Everything you will know. That is perfect life, Kṛṣṇa conscious life.
Hayagrīva: He writes, "The theologians are different from the philosophers in this respect at any rate. At least they are sure that God exists, even though they make contradictory statements about Him. God's existence does not depend on our proofs. I understood that God was, for me at least, one of the most certain and immediate of experiences."
Prabhupāda: Yes, that is transcendental conviction, and it is very easy to understand that God is there. I do not know God, that is another thing. I will have to learn it. But God is there. There is no doubt about it. Any sane man can understand. You cannot say there is no God, because you are under control. So who is that controller? The supreme controller is God. This is sane man's conclusion. Now, I do not know who is God then, but there is God, that's a fact. So he is right when he says I believe or not believe, there is God. Now, it will depend on my personal endeavor to know God. Go on.
Hayagrīva: He writes, "In my darkness I could have wished for nothing better than a real live guru"—he uses the word guru—"someone possessing superior knowledge and ability who would have disentangled for me the involuntary creations of my imagination."
Prabhupāda: Yes. Guru. Guru, that is required: tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum evābhigacchet (MU 1.2.12). That is Vedic process. To have, to possess perfect knowledge one must have guru, and guru means one has..., one is actually representative of God, not theoretically, but one who has practically seen and experienced God. We have to approach such guru then by service and by surrender, and by sincere inquiries we shall be able to understand what is God. That is required. The speculation is no use. Athāpi te deva padāmbuja-dvaya-prasāda-leśānugṛhīta eva hi, jānāti tattvam (SB 10.14.29). This is the statement of Vedic literature. "My Lord, one who has received a little mercy and favor of Your Lordship, he can understand. Others may speculate for millions and millions of years, avacintya-tattve. Still they will remain in the fathom of inconceivable energy. There is no possibility." This is not the process. It clearly described in the Bhāgavata, bhaktyā mām abhijānāti (BG 18.55), simply through the process of bhakti. Bhakti means śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ (SB 7.5.23), hearing, chanting about Viṣṇu, always remembering Him. Satataṁ kīrtayanto mām (BG 9.14). That is the process. Always glorify the Lord, and devotee's only business is to glorify. That is devotee. Naivodvije para duratyaya-vaitaraṇyās tvad-vīrya-gāyana-mahāmṛta-magna-cittaḥ (SB 7.9.43). A devotee's consciousness is always drowned in the ocean of the pastimes of the Supreme Lord, unlimited activities, and devotees always think of that activities. Tvad-vīrya-gāyana-mahāmṛta, that is, means that drowned in the ocean of the activities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So that is transcendental bliss, and one should learn how to be always merged in the ocean of God consciousness. That training is given by the spiritual master; therefore one must have, ācāryavān puruṣo veda. One who is under the direction of ācārya, he knows everything about God. (break)
Hayagrīva: He gave the following criticism of Sigmund Freud. He says, "Sexuality evidently meant more to Freud than to other people. For him it was something to be religiously observed."
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: "One thing was clear. Freud, who had always made much of his irreligiosity, had now constructed a dogma, or rather in the place of God, whom he had lost, he had substituted another compelling image, that of sexuality."
Prabhupāda: Yes, that's a fact. He has taken sexuality as God. But our position is that we must accept a leader. That is our natural tendency. So he gave up the leadership of God and took the leadership of sex. That is his position. Leadership we must have. That is..., this question also I asked to Professor Kotovsky, that "Where is the difference between your philosophy and our philosophy? You accept leader, Lenin. We accept leader, Kṛṣṇa. So where is the difference in the process?" So this is the nature of human being, to accept a leader. But this man, unfortunately, he lost the leadership of God and he took leadership of sex. That is his position.
Hayagrīva: Jung concluded, concerning Freud, he said, "Freud never asked himself why he was compelled to talk continually of sex, why this idea had taken such possession of him. He remained unaware that his monotony of interpretation expressed a flight from himself, or from that other side of him which might perhaps be called mystical. So long as he refused to acknowledge that side," that is the mystical side, "he could never be reconciled with himself."
Prabhupāda: (aside:) You are feeling sleepy. So then sleep. Feeling disturbed. (break)
Hayagrīva: He said that Freud's absorption with sexuality expressed a flight from himself, a fleeing from himself, from the side of himself which might be called mystical. As long as he refused to acknowledge that side, that is the mystical side, he could never be reconciled with himself, could never be at one with himself. So...
Prabhupāda: Yes. He was under the leadership of sexuality. That's a fact. Everyone is under the leadership. Just like sometimes we say, "The material scientists say like this, they say like this." He accepts the leadership. So we have to accept the leadership, but if we accept the leadership of Kṛṣṇa, then our life is perfect. Other leadership is māyā, māyā's leadership. But we have to accept leadership. There is no doubt of it. So he accepted the leadership of sex, but he did not admit it, but going on speaking on sex. And those who have taken the leadership of God, they will speak only of God, nothing else. Jīvera svarūpa haya nitya kṛṣṇa dāsa (CC Madhya 20.108-109), that is Caitanya Mahāprabhu's philosophy, that we are eternal servant of God. So as soon as we give up the service of Lord, then we have to accept the service of māyā. So all these different atheists, scientists, they are all servants of māyā instead of becoming servant of God. He is servant, but he is servant of māyā. That is the difference between devotee and the materialistic person.
Hayagrīva: He saw that the soul was always longing for light, the urge to rise out of the primal darkness, and he says, "That is the pent-up feeling that can be detected in the eyes of primitives," that is primitive people, "and also in the eyes of animals. There is a sadness in animals' eyes, and we never know whether that sadness is bound up with the soul of the animal or is a poignant message which speaks to us out of that existence."
Prabhupāda: Yes. Everyone is seeking, that constitutionally he is servant. He is seeking serve master. That is natural potency. So in the animal kingdom, animal life, just like a small cat... What is called? Child of cat and dog, what is called? Cat? A baby chi..., a baby dog, what is called, puppy?
Devotee: Puppy.
Prabhupāda: The puppy is, you will sometimes find, they try to take shelter of some boy, of some man. Natural tendency. "Give me shelter. Keep me as your pet." They are happy. That means by nature they are wanting some shelter. A child is also wanting some shelter. So that is our constitutional position. So in the human form of life, when consciousness is developed, that tendency to have a leader, to take shelter, that is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is giving direction that "You want shelter, you want guidance, so you take My guidance," sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ (BG 18.66), "then you will be perfect." That is the ultimate instruction of Bhagavad-gītā.
Hayagrīva: In 1938 Jung was invited by the British government to take part in celebrations connected with the twenty-fifth anniversary of the University of Calcutta. He writes, "By that time I had read a great deal."
Prabhupāda: Twenty-fifth anniversary?
Hayagrīva: Hm?
Prabhupāda: Twenty-fifth.
Hayagrīva: Anniversary, 1938.
Prabhupāda: So Calcutta University was started long ago.
Hari-śauri: 1913.
Prabhupāda: Huh?
Devotee: 1913.
Hayagrīva: The University of Calcutta.
Prabhupāda: No. Calcutta University was started long ago.
Hayagrīva: Before that?
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hari-śauri: Must have been misinformation.
Hayagrīva: Hm. Well it could have been mistyped or it could have been mis...
Prabhupāda: Yes. Maybe "eighteen..."
Hayagrīva: Ah-ha.
Prabhupāda: 1813 maybe.
Hayagrīva: 1938. I don't, I'll, I'll have to check these dates.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Calcutta University was started long ago.
Hayagrīva: He writes, "By that time I had read a great deal about..."
Prabhupāda: About 1813. 1813.
Hayagrīva: 1813. So maybe it's the..., maybe it was the anniversary that's wrong. Probably not the year, because he was most famous in '38. He wasn't..., before that he wasn't.
Prabhupāda: Hm. Anniversary maybe. Anniversary is going on.
Hayagrīva: It might have been the 50th anniversary also. He writes, "By that time I had read a great deal about Indian philosophy and religious history and was deeply convinced of the value of Oriental wisdom." On this visit Jung had an opportunity to talk with S. Subrahmania Ayer, the guru of the Mahārāja of Mysore, who hosted Jung. Jung says that he studiously avoided the so-called holy men. He says, "I did so because I had to make do with my own truth, not to accept from others what I could not attain on my own. I would have felt it as a theft had I attempted to learn from the holy men and to accept their truth for myself. Neither in Europe can I make any borrowings from the East, but I must shape my life out of myself, out of what my inner being tells me or what nature brings to me."
Prabhupāda: He did not like to accept any guru.
Hayagrīva: Self-reliance.
Prabhupāda: Huh?
Hayagrīva: This seems to be a self-reliance.
Prabhupāda: Then how he accepts Indian pleasure(?)?
Hayagrīva: Well on the one hand at least he didn't accept...
Prabhupāda: He must...
Hayagrīva: On the one hand he says he wanted a guru.
Prabhupāda: Huh.
Hayagrīva: Previously.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: But here, after going to Calcutta, perhaps it was the, the so-called gurus that he met that discouraged...
Prabhupāda: The so-called gurus are there, many. That is no doubt. So he might have seen some bogus guru, he did not like. But the principle of accepting guru cannot be avoided. That is not possible.
Hayagrīva: That contradicts the previous statement.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: Concerning consciousness after death, Jung feels that after death the individual must pick up the level of consciousness which he left.
Prabhupāda: He continues.
Hayagrīva: The level of consciousness.
Prabhupāda: Continues.
Hayagrīva: Continues.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Therefore, according to that consciousness he has to accept a body. That is trasmigration of the soul. That ordinary person, they can only see the body, but along with the body there is mind and there is intelligence, there is ego. One cannot see what is mind, what is intelligence. So there is no reason that when the body is finished why the mind and the intelligence should be finished. But he cannot see the mind, cannot intell..., see the intelligence. He said everything is finished. Why everything should be finished? The body is finished, but the mind is not finished. So the soul is carried by mind, intelligence. That is subtle body. And it is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā, na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). He is not finished, he is there. He is being carried by mind and intelligence. But these foolish person they cannot see. But even in lifetime they cannot see what is mind. They cannot see what is intelligence.
Hayagrīva: He says, "One's spiritual education must continue at the point he left off. If there were to be a conscious existence after death, it would, so it seems to me, have to continue on the level of consciousness attained by humanity, which in any age has an upper thought-variable limit."
Prabhupāda: That is clearly explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, that the past consciousness, that passion, the consciousness is continuing. So even the body is destroyed, the consciousness continuing. So due to the consciousness he gets another body, and again, in that body, the future, past consciousness works. So, if, if, if in the past life he was a devotee, again he becomes devotee, and from the point where he died, the material body became destroyed, again, as soon as he gets a body, the same consciousness begins to work. Therefore we find somebody quickly accepts Kṛṣṇa consciousness and sometime it takes delay. So it is continued, past. In every verse we see that, just like in the Bhagavad-gītā, bahūnāṁ janmanām ante (BG 7.19). Bahūnāṁ janmanaṁ ante means the consciousness is being continued but the body is changing. Therefore it is said, bahūnāṁ janmanām ante. Janma means to accept another gross body, but the consciousness is continuing. Just as Bhārata Mahārāja, he changed so many bodies but the consciousness continued. He remained in full understanding of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So this is clear, but on account of, I mean to say, dull brain they cannot understand. Here is the reason, that you do not see mind. You have not seen. So Mr. John you see daily, but we don't see Mr. John's intelligence. We can perceive that this man is intelligent, but you have not seen what is intelligent. When he talks, you understand, you perceive, that he has got intelligence. So this gross body, when it is no more talking, so why that intelligence will be finished? This is common sense. When a man talks we say he is intelligent man, but we do not see what is intelligent. So the talking instrument is this body. So this body is finished, gross body is finished, does it mean that his consciousness, intelligence finished? No. That continues. Just like you dream. This body is not working—this is practical—but his consciousness is working, his mind is working. So similarly, na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). After the destruction of this gross body, the mind, intelligence continues, and because to work the mind and intelligence he requires a body, so he develops body. That is transmigration of the soul. It is very clear to understand.
Hayagrīva: Well he felt that the level of consciousness could not supersede whatever knowledge is available on this planet. I guess that's clear.
Prabhupāda: No, it can supersede, provided you get knowledge from authority. Just like somebody is sitting here, he has not seen India. But somebody who has full knowledge of India or seen or gone there, he can describe, and he can understand that there is place, India, the place is like this, like that. So similarly, from authority, just like Kṛṣṇa says, there is another nature: paras tasmāt tu bhāvaḥ anyaḥ avyaktaḥ avyaktāt sanātanaḥ (BG 8.20). That nature is eternal. Here, this nature as we find, it is not eternal. It is temporary. It takes birth, it is maintained for sometimes, it changes, it becomes old, and again destroyed, finished. And therefore in this material there is dissolution, but there is another world, which has no dissolution. That information we get from authority, Kṛṣṇa. Sanātanaḥ. Everything finished here, that is not finished. So we have to receive this knowledge from authority, not necessarily by your personal experience. Parokṣa, aparokṣa this is called. There are different stages of knowledge. Pratyakṣa, parokṣa, aparokṣa, adhokṣaja, aprākṛta. So that requires advancement of knowledge. So, not that all knowledge we can have by direct perception. That is not possible.
Hayagrīva: He says, "This is probably why earthly life is of such great significance and why it is that what a human being brings over at the time of his death is so important. Only here in life on earth can the general level of consciousness be raised. That seems to be man's metaphysical task." So since consciousness survives death it must therefore be elevated while man is on earth.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That consciousness should be developed automatically. Paurva-dehikam in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said. What is that verse? In the Sixth Chapter, paurva-dehikam.
Hari-śauri: "The unsuccessful yogi, after many, many years of enjoyment on the planets of the pious living entities, is born into a family of righteous people or into a family of rich aristocracy."
Prabhupāda: Hm. Then?
Hari-śauri:
- atha vā yoginām eva
- kule bhavati dhīmatām
- etaddhi durlabhataraṁ
- loke janma yad īdṛśam
- (BG 6.42)
"Or he takes his birth in a family of transcendentalists who are surely great in wisdom. Verily, such a birth is rare in this world."
Prabhupāda: Hm.
Hari-śauri:
- tatra taṁ buddhi-saṁyogaṁ
- labhate paurva-dehikam
- (BG 6.43)
Prabhupāda: Dehikam.
Hari-śauri:
- yatate ca tato bhūyaḥ
- saṁsiddhau kuru-nandana
"On taking such a birth, he again revives the divine consciousness of his previous life, and he tries to make further progress in order to achieve complete success, O son of Kuru."
Prabhupāda: That is... When the, the incompleteness of his yoga practice, if he dies prematurely, or he could not finish and die, so the consciousness goes with him. So, in the next life again he begins from that point, paurva-dehikam. What is the exact word? Tatra? Buddhi...?
Hari-śauri: Buddhi-saṁyogam, revival.
Prabhupāda: Ah, buddhi-saṁyogam.
Hari-śauri: Revival of such consciousness.
Prabhupāda: The intelligence becomes revived, buddhi-saṁyogam. Then?
Hari-śauri: Labhate paurva-dehikam.
Prabhupāda: Ah, labhate paurva-dehikam. That is everything, spiritual and material. Materially also we find sometime when one person is very extraordinary individual. In the class some student picks up very quickly, some student cannot understand. So this is continuation. One is intelligent means he has got some previous revival of his consciousness. So in this way it is going on. That is the proof, immortality of the soul. Otherwise why? Paurva-dehikam, previous birth. This is the proof.
Hayagrīva: There's a lot of sort of interesting points here.
Prabhupāda: Hm. (break)
Hayagrīva: He points out that there's a paradox surrounding death. "On the one hand, from the point of view of the ego," or what we call the false ego, "death is a horrible catastrophe, a fearful piece of brutality. On the other hand, from the point of view of the psyche, the soul, death is a joyful event, in the life of eternity it is a wedding."
Prabhupāda: Yes. In all cases it is eternal, but it is, death is horrible for the person who is going to accept a lower grade of life, and it is pleasure for the devotee, that he is going back to home, back to God. That is the difference.
Hayagrīva: So it's not always a joyful event for the soul.
Prabhupāda: No.
Hayagrīva: Oh.
Prabhupāda: How it can be? If he is, if he is not developed...
Hayagrīva: Yes.
Prabhupāda: ...to spiritual consciousness, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, it is very horrible for him. But in this life he became very proud, "I don't care for God, I am independent," and so on, so on, so on, talking like a crazy fellow. But after death he has to accept a body as dictated by nature: "My dear sir, you have worked like a dog, you become a dog. You liked this surfing in the sea, now you become a fish." That will be given by the superior order. Karmaṇā daiva-netreṇa (SB 3.31.1). You have worked in a certain way. Now, by superior, super, superior dictation you will accept a type of body naturally. If you have infected some disease, when you are attacked by the disease you cannot protest because you have got already infected. Similarly, we are creating our next body, kāraṇaṁ guṇa-saṅgo 'sya (BG 13.22). We are keeping ourself in touch with a certain type of modes of material nature. That means we are creating our next body. How we..., can you stop it? That is nature's way. The same, if you have infected some disease you must get that disease. Similarly, there are three modes of material nature, tamo-guṇa, rajo-guṇa, sattva-guṇa, and transcendental. As you have kept your association in this life you get the similar body, paurva-dehikam. So even if you fail to achieve the highest goal in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, still, because you have kept yourself in the association of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, so you are going to get the chance to take birth śucīnāṁ śrīmatāṁ gehe (BG 6.41), either in the family of pure, purity, brāhmaṇa, or in the aristocratic family. In both the families, you get the chance of reviving your spiritual consciousness. But we forget that, or we do not get superior guidance, then we again fall. But there is chance. One who is born in rich family, one who is born in high-grade family, he has got the chance, and (indistinct) to take lessons from Bhagavad-gītā that "I have become..., I am born in rich family or in a brāhmaṇa family, so I am well situated. Now I must take where I left my, developed my spiritual consciousness." So if he tries, he gets the chance. So human form in general is a chance for making progress in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, especially when one is born in aristocratic family or a brāhmaṇa family or a Vaisnava family.
Hayagrīva: Despite so many interesting points, Jung appears to have a somewhat limited understanding of Indian philosophy. He did not appear to understand that saṁsāra, although it appears to be endless, can be ended if one surrenders to Kṛṣṇa, that there is mukti, that saṁsāra can be overcome by surrendering unto Mukunda. He writes, "The succession of birth and death is viewed as an endless continuity, as an eternal wheel rolling on forever without a goal. Man lives and attains knowledge and dies and begins again from the beginning." He says, "Only with the Buddha does the idea of a goal emerge, namely the overcoming of earthly existence."
Prabhupāda: Hm. So overcoming the earthly existence means you enter in the spiritual world, because spirit soul is eternal. So from this atmosphere to another. That is explained clearly in the Bhagavad-gītā, tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti kaunteya (BG 4.9). After giving up this present body, this is material, so those who continue to, in the cycle of birth and death, they get another material body, but those who are Kṛṣṇa conscious, they do not get another material body, but he goes to Kṛṣṇa. That is the difference.
Hayagrīva: Kṛṣṇa says that over and over in Bhagavad-gītā. He says it many times.
Prabhupāda: Yes, that, that is for the dviṣataḥ krūrān (BG 16.19), those who are envious of Kṛṣṇa. For them, continuous. And those who are not envious, accepts Kṛṣṇa's instruction, surrenders unto Him and understands Kṛṣṇa, for them this is the last birth, material birth. After this he goes back to home, back to Godhead.
Hayagrīva: Concerning the question whether karma is personal...
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: ...he writes, "The crucial question is whether a man's karma is personal or not. If it is, then the pre-ordained destiny with which a man enters life represents an achievement of previous lives, and a personal continuity therefore exists. If, however, this is not so, and an impersonal karma is seized upon in the act of birth, then that karma is incarnated again without there being any personal continuity."
Prabhupāda: What is that impersonal karma? Karma is always personal.
Hayagrīva: Karma is always personal.
Prabhupāda: Personal.
Hayagrīva: He points out that Buddha was twice asked by His disciples whether man's karma is personal or not. Each time he fended off the question and did not go into the matter. To know this, he said, would not contribute to liberating oneself.
Prabhupāda: Because he did not, he did not teach about the soul. Therefore, how he could touch that personal?
Hayagrīva: He refused to respond to those questions.
Prabhupāda: Yes, because he did not accept the soul. That as soon as he denied the personal aspect of the soul, how there can be personal karma? So he wanted to avoid this; otherwise his whole philosophy becomes different.
Hayagrīva: Well this is Jung's conclusion on the matter. He says, "Have I lived before in the past as a specific person?" (break) (aside:) ...other track?
Hari-śauri: Yes.
Hayagrīva: This is a continuation of Jung. Concerning whether or not karma is personal, Jung concludes, "Have I lived before in the past as a specific personality, and did I progress so far in that life that I am now able to seek a solution?"
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is tle fact.
Hayagrīva: He says, "I do not know."
Prabhupāda: That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, tataḥ paurva-dehikaṁ yatate paurva-dehikam. This is individual.
Hayagrīva: He says, "Buddha left the question open, and I like to assume that he himself did not know with certainty."
Prabhupāda: (chuckles softly while Hayagrīva continues reading)
Hayagrīva: "I could well imagine that I might have lived in former centuries and there encountered questions I was not yet able to answer, that I had to be born again because I had not fulfilled the task that was given to me."
Prabhupāda: That is fact.
Hayagrīva: "When I die, my deeds will follow along with me. That is how I imagine it."
Prabhupāda: That is karma.
Hayagrīva: That's personal karma?
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: "I will bring with me what I have done. In the meantime it is important to insure that I do not stand at the end with empty hands."
Prabhupāda: No. So you are, if you are regularly progressing, that then at the end it is not empty, it is completeness. To go back to home, back to Godhead, that is completeness; that is not empty. The Māyāvādī can not understand the posi..., positivity of God's kingdom, so they simply make empty. There is no positive concept, therefore...
Hayagrīva: No. He says... No. He says, "It is important that I do not stand at the end with empty hands."
Prabhupāda: Yes. That, that nobody has...
Hayagrīva: That, in others words, he has good deeds and...
Prabhupāda: No, not only good deeds, that is our aspiration. We don't want emptiness.
Hayagrīva: Yes.
Prabhupāda: Because these materialistic persons, they do not want emptiness, they think that "After finishing this life everything will be empty. So let me enjoy as much as possible in this life." That is their view, that "I am going to be empty. Now before becoming empty, let me enjoy as far..." And the sense enjoyment is the center of material life. Therefore these materialistic person(s) are so much after sense enjoyment. Propriety is one of them. Because their life is empty after death, so because, be..., "Before it becomes empty, let me enjoy as far as possible."
Hayagrīva: He believes that karma brings rebirth. He says, "If a karma still remains to be disposed of, then the soul relapses again into desires and returns to life once more..."
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: "...perhaps even doing so out of the realization that something remains to be completed. In my case it must have been primarily a passionate urge toward understanding which brought about my birth, for that is the strongest element in my nature."
Prabhupāda: Yes. So that understanding, I do not know whether he has fulfilled. That understanding is Kṛṣṇa. That is explained, bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate (BG 7.19). That understanding is full, complete, when he comes to the point of understanding Kṛṣṇa, and as soon as he understands Kṛṣṇa, his life is successful. His, this journey, material journey, stops. Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9). That is full understanding. Vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā su-durlabhaḥ (BG 7.19). When he understands Kṛṣṇa in complete... And Kṛṣṇa is giving lesson how he, one can understand Kṛṣṇa completely. Asaṁśayaṁ samagram māṁ yathā jñāsyasi tac chṛṇu (BG 7.1). Kṛṣṇa says, "Now hear how you can understand Me in complete, without any doubt." That He begins in the Seventh Chapter. So if we understand Kṛṣṇa in complete, without any doubt, then our next birth is in the spiritual world. Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti kaunteya (BG 4.9). This is the version of Bhāgavata. So we have got this opportunity, at least those who have come to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, to understand Kṛṣṇa completely, without any doubt. Then our life is successful.
Hayagrīva: He sees the word of God and God as being the same.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: He says, "It is not that God is a myth, but that myth is the revelation of a divine light in man. It is not we who invent myth; rather, it speaks to us as a word of God. The word of God comes to us, and we have no way of distinguishing whether and to what extent it is different from God."
Prabhupāda: It is not at all different from God. God is absolute; therefore His words are as good as God. That we were discussing this morning, that God's name and God is the same. God's pastimes and God is the same. God's Deity and God is the same. So anything in relationship with God is God, just like Bhagavad-gītā is God. Because everything is God, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam (BG 9.4), everything is God, but when there is God realization, that is God. Otherwise God, everything is God. Without God, nothing can exist.
Hayagrīva: He conceived of what he called a persona. He says, "The persona is the individual system of adaptation to, or the manner he assumes in dealing with, the world. A profession, for example, has its own characteristic persona, only the danger is people become identical with their personas: the professor with his textbook, the tenor with his voice. One can say, with a little exaggeration, that the persona is that which in reality one is not, but which oneself as well as others think one is."
Prabhupāda: That persona—for as I take it from this statement—that persona, when when comes to the understanding that I am eternal servant of God, that persona is salvation, perfection. Persona must be there, but so long one is in the material world, his persona, or identification with some interest, varieties. Sometimes his persona is with the family, his persona is with the community or with the nation or with some idealism, Communism, this "ism," that "ism," this is going on. But when that persona comes to the understanding of Kṛṣṇa, that "I am eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa," that is perfection. Persona must continue.
Hayagrīva: So this persona he's speaking of is like the false ego.
Prabhupāda: The false ego, so long he is in the material world. Otherwise "I am." "I am American," this is false ego, and "I am servant of God, Kṛṣṇa," that is reality, that is real ego. We say, therefore, false ego. Ego must be there. That purified ego is, "I am servant of Kṛṣṇa." Otherwise "I am this," "I am that," "I am this," "I am that."
Hayagrīva: He envisions the self as a personality...
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: ...composed of the conscious and also the subconscious.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Everything is depending on the personality, and he is surrounded by so many conceptions. When the en..., what is called, (indistinct), we see different types of dreams, but when we are purified, then, just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu was dreaming Kṛṣṇa's pastime. So similarly, when we are completely purified we dream also about Kṛṣṇa, His activities, His preaching, so many in connection with reference to Kṛṣṇa. So persona is permanent, but when we apply this persona in the material activities, that is temporary, false, false ego, and when the same persona is engaged as servant of Kṛṣṇa, that is self-realization.
Hayagrīva: He believed that the self, which is basically a personality...
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: ...composed of the conscious and the subconscious, the sub..., can never be fully known by the individual, but it does have individuality.
Prabhupāda: That individual, I, I know that I am individual person, I have got my own ideas, my own activities. Where is the difficulty? Simply it has to be purified. Sarvopādhi-vinirmuktam (CC Madhya 19.170). I am identifying with America or India or Hindu or Muslim or this or that. This should be purified. I should identify with Kṛṣṇa, that "I am only servant of Kṛṣṇa and devotees." Then I am purified.
Hayagrīva: He did... He speaks of the soul in this way. He says, "If the human soul is anything, it must be of unimaginable complexity and diversity, so that it cannot possibly be approached through a mere psychology of instinct."
Prabhupāda: That he does not know. As soon as we train ourself, that just like Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, "I am not a brāhmaṇa, I am not a kṣatriya, I am not a śūdra, I am not a sannyāsī, I am not brahmacārī." By negation. "I am not, I am not, I am not." Then what is your actual? That gopī-bhartuḥ kamalayor dāsa-dāsānu: (CC Madhya 13.80) "I am the servant of the servant of the servant of the maintainer of gopīs." That means Kṛṣṇa. "That is my real identification." So I have, so long we do not identify as the eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa, there will be so many varieties of identification, and bhakti, devotional service, means to become purified from all this false identification.
Hayagrīva: He says, "I can only gaze with wonder and awe at the depths and heights of our psychic nature."
Prabhupāda: Psychic nature means so long you are not Kṛṣṇa conscious there will be varieties of psychic nature, because we are changing constantly to different bodies by transmigration. So we, we are accumulating varieties of experiences. But if we don't change, remain fixed up in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then one identification we have got—that "I am servant of Kṛṣṇa. My duty is to serve Him." Kariṣye vacanaṁ tava (BG 18.73), as Arjuna realized after studying Bhagavad-gītā. "Yes," naṣṭo mohaḥ smṛtir labdhā. "Now I have revived my real consciousness and I will act as You dictate." That is final.
Hayagrīva: Concerning God and God's relation...
Prabhupāda: Find out this verse, naṣṭo mohaḥ smṛtir labdhā tvat-prasādān mayācyuta. Find out.
Hari-śauri: What was that line again, Śrīla Prabhupāda?
Prabhupāda: Naṣṭaḥ, n-a-s-t-a, naṣṭaḥ mohaḥ.
Hari-śauri: Naṣṭo mohaḥ smṛtir labdhā?
Prabhupāda: Hm. Now we, we are passing on through mohaḥ, illusion. By Kṛṣṇa consciousness the delusion should be over.
Hari-śauri: Naṣṭo mohaḥ smṛtir labdhā tvat-prasādān mayācyuta.
Prabhupāda: Tvat-prasādāt.
Hari-śauri: Sthito 'smi.
Prabhupāda: Tvat-prasāda?
Hari-śauri: Yes.
Prabhupāda: Oh.
Hari-śauri: Tvat-prasādān mayācyuta.
Prabhupāda: Oh. Tvat-pradāda, "by Your mercy." This mohaḥ, the illusory existence, that "I am American," "I am Indian," "I am black," "I am white," "Hindu," "Muslim," this is all mohaḥ. So it can be liberated. From this mohaḥ we can be liberated by the mercy of Kṛṣṇa. Naṣṭaḥ mohaḥ smṛtiḥ labdhā prasādāt tvat, "by Your mercy." Then?
Hari-śauri: Sthito 'smi gata-sandehaḥ kariṣye...
Prabhupāda: Sthito 'smi gata-sandehaḥ: "Now all my doubts are over. I am fixed up now in my original position." So what is that original position?
Hari-śauri: Kariṣye vacanaṁ tava.
Prabhupāda: Kariṣye vacanaṁ tava: (BG 18.73) "Now I simply act and do whatever You say, that's all." That is perfection. He is perfect. Everything is there.
Hayagrīva: Concerning God and the individual soul, he writes...
Prabhupāda: Now here is the perfection. Kṛṣṇa is speaking; individual soul, Arjuna, is hearing. So hearing, hearing, when he comes to the conclusion that "My all illusion is now over by Your mercy. Now I am fixed up in my original position." And what is that original position? Kariṣye vacanaṁ tava: (BG 18.73) "Whatever You say, I shall do. The Bhagavad-gītā began from the point that Kṛṣṇa said to Arjuna, "You fight," and he denied to fight. He put so many pleas, that "How can I fight with them?" and so on, so on, so on, so on, so on. This whole discussion was made. Now at the end he says, "Now my mohaḥ, illusion, is over. I am situated in my own original constitutional position." What is that? Kariṣye vacanaṁ tava: (BG 18.73) "Whatever You say, I shall do, that's all. That's my position." That conclusive platform, that we shall simply execute the orders of Kṛṣṇa, that is perfect. (break)
Hayagrīva: This is continuation of Jung. Jung noted that there are five types of rebirths, not he that particularly ascribed to them, but that he noted that in religions that there are five types of rebirth. One is called metempsychosis. He says, "According to this view, one's life is prolonged in time by passing through different bodily existences, or from another point of view it is a life sequence interrupted by different reincarnations. It is by no means certain whether continuity of personality is guaranteed or not. There may only be a continuity of karma." So this is like a transmigration of souls.
Prabhupāda: Yes. What is the technical name?
Hayagrīva: But... He called, its metempsychosis.
Prabhupāda: What is the meaning?
Hayagrīva: It means transmigration of souls...
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: ...but through different, passing through different bodily existences.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: The life sequence is interrupted by different reincarnations, but it's not certain whether or not personality survives. There may only continuity of karma.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Personal, personality is there. Suppose a man rebukes a dog. So the dog also responses. Even a small ant, it is going to certain direction, if you check it, it will protest. So personality is there always, either in the body of human being, cats, dogs, even an ant. So the bodily changes do not affect the personality, but one identifies himself according to the body. When a soul is within the, a body of a dog, he thinks in that bodily conception, "I am dog, I have my duty." In the human society also. When one is born in America, he thinks, "I am American, and my duty is like this, my duty is like this, I am..." So this, according to the body the personality manifests, but personality is there.
Hayagrīva: Personality is there certainly, but is it continued? Is there a continuity of personality from the dead body to the new body?
Prabhupāda: Yes, certainly.
Hayagrīva: Well, according to the first theory of rebirth, that's not guaranteed. Now the second theory of rebirth...
Prabhupāda: No. That they do not know. The same soul is, is passing through another gross body with his mental, intellectual identification. He is..., that is nature's gift. That is said in the Bhagavad-gītā: kāraṇaṁ guṇa-saṅgo 'sya (BG 13.22). As we have infected a certain type of modes of nature, he is getting a similar body, but the person is the same.
Hayagrīva: Now the, this would be the view, the second view, that is reincarnation. "This concept of rebirth necessarily implies the continuity of personality. Here the human personality is regarded as continuous and accessible to memory, so that when one is incarnated or born one is able, at least potentially, to remember that one has lived through previous existences, and that these existences were one's own, namely that he had the same ego form as the present life. As a rule, reincarnation means rebirth in a human body."
Prabhupāda: Not human body. Just, we have got historical references in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. A king, Bhārata Mahārāja, he was king, and in next life he became a deer, and the next life he became a brāhmaṇa. So the soul is continuing, changing. The example is given, just like a man changes his dress. The man is the same; the dress may be different. That is going on. Vāsāṁsi jīrṇāni yathā vihāya (BG 2.22). This very word is there. Just when the dress is old it cannot be used any more, he has to change another, to another dress. It is very common sense. So now that next dress you have to purchase or you have to prepare according to your money. Your dress is something now; the next dress you will purchase according to your money. So the exact example is very nice—to change the dress. The man is the same, but he exchanges dress, and the dress is supplied according to the price he can pay. This is common sense. So the price means karma. According to karma he has done, he gets a particular type of body.
Hayagrīva: The third type...
Prabhupāda: Another continuation is that the child changes body. So as he was acting in his childhood, he does not act in the same way when he has got the different body of a young man, but the same soul is there. It can be understood very easily.
Hayagrīva: The third type of rebirth listed is called resurrection. Now there are two types of resurrection. He says, "It may be a carnal, that is gross, material body, as in the Christian assumption that this body will be resurrected." That is the Christian doctrine, is that at the end of the world the..., somehow or other, through the miracle of God, the gross body will reassemble itself and ascend into heaven or descend into hell. Somehow survival of the gross body. He says, "On a higher level..."
Prabhupāda: And what he will do in the meantime?
Hayagrīva: I don't know what happens...
Devotee: (indistinct)
Hayagrīva: ...what happens to the material elements. The material elements disintegrate, disintegrate...
Prabhupāda: The material body...
Hayagrīva: They're distributed in nature.
Prabhupāda: ...it finishes, but of course this idea can be maintained. In the higher sense, that is not gross body; that is spiritual body. That is applicable to God and special representative of God, not to all. Then that is not material body; that is spiritual body. Means when God appears He appears in His spiritual body. It does not change. Just like Kṛṣṇa says that millions of years ago He spoke to the sun-god, and Arjuna questioned, "How it is to be understood that millions of years ago You spoke it?" So He said that "Yes, I did. You were also present, but you do not remember. I remember." So how it is possible? One who does not change the body, He can remember. Just like when we do not change the body, I can remember, but when we change body we do not remember. This is the principle. So this resurrection, I do not know what the exact meaning, but as to the Bhagavad-gītā, it is said, Kṛṣṇa said, sambhavāmy ātma-māyayā (BG 4.6). He comes in His original body, not covered by material body. Therefore, because He has no material body, there is no change.
Hayagrīva: I think the Christian, they must..., they do not have a clear idea of this.
Prabhupāda: No.
Hayagrīva: He says, "On a higher level the process of resurrection is no longer understood in a gross material sense. It is assumed that the resurrection of the dead is the raising up of the corpus glorificaciones, that is the glorified body, the subtle body, in the state of incorruptibility."
Prabhupāda: That I said, the spiritual body. The spiritual body never changes. When one comes with the spiritual body there is no change. Material body changes, but God has no material body. The conception of..., Māyāvādī conception that Absolute Truth is impersonal, when He comes as a person He accepts a material body, that is not understood by those who are advanced in spiritual knowledge or take information from Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritāḥ (BG 9.11). Because He appears as a human being, rascals think that He is a human being, but He is not. Paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto. He has no knowledge of the spiritual body.
Hayagrīva: The fourth form of rebirth is called renovacio and applies to the transformation of a mortal into an immortal being, of a corporeal into a spiritual being, and of a human into a divine being. Well-known prototypes of this change are the transfiguration and ascension of Christ and the assumption of the mother of God into heaven after her death together with her body. In other words, the body is somehow..., it doesn't die, the gross body doesn't die, but it's transformed.
Prabhupāda: Spiritual, spiritual body continues. Spiritual body never dies. Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). So hanyamāne, destruction, is of the material body. The spiritual body is never destroyed. Na jāyate na mriyate vā. The spiritual body, neither it is generated, neither it is dead. Nityaḥ śāśvataḥ: it is eternal. Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre: (BG 2.20) it, it is not destroyed even after the destruction of the material body. That is spiritual body.
Hayagrīva: But is there any example of this ascension into heaven? Didn't Arjuna...
Prabhupāda: Huh?
Hayagrīva: ...ascend into...
Devotee: Yudhiṣṭhira?
Hayagrīva: The higher... Who?
Devotee: Yudhiṣṭhira was...
Hayagrīva: Was it Yudhiṣṭhira?
Prabhupāda: Yes, there are many instances. The special instance is Kṛṣṇa and His associates.
Hayagrīva: They didn't go through any death of any sort.
Prabhupāda: No.
Hayagrīva: But the body traveled to...
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: ...higher spheres.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is...
Hayagrīva: Kṛṣṇa also took Arjuna...
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: ...to...
Prabhupāda: Spiritual body everyone possesses.
Hayagrīva: The fifth... (break) This is the continuation of Carl Jung. The fifth type of rebirth is called transformation, and this is a form of indirect rebirth. One may use the initiation ceremony of the twice-born, of the brāhmaṇa. In other words, one has to witness or take part in some rite of transformation. This may be a ceremony, and through his presence at the ritual the individual participates in divine grace.
Prabhupāda: That is transfer, transformation of the body into knowledge. Dvija, this word, exact word, is dvija. One birth is by the father and mother, and the next birth is by the spiritual master and Vedic knowledge. That means..., that is also liberation. He understands that he is not this material body. That is spiritual education. Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā na śocati na kāṅkṣati (BG 18.54). So birth of knowledge, that is called dvija.
Hayagrīva: Now all of...
Prabhupāda: Uh?
Hayagrīva: All of these preceding quotes were taken from Jung's autobiography.
Prabhupāda: Oh.
Hayagrīva: Now the following quotes are taken from a, a much later book, one of the last books he wrote, called The Undiscovered Self. And it's very popular, and in it he discusses religion, in certain ways almost anticipates the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. At the beginning he defines the purpose of religion. He says, "The meaning and purpose of religion lie in the relationship of the individual to God, or to the path of salvation and liberation." And of the first instance he gives Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and the last instance he gives Buddhism. He says, "From this basic fact, that is the relationship of the individual to God, all ethics is derived, which, without the individual's responsibility before God, can be called nothing more than conventional morality."
Prabhupāda: Yes. Morality, as we understand from Bhagavad-gītā, that nobody can approach God without being purified of all sinful reaction. Yeṣām anta-gataṁ pāpaṁ janānāṁ puṇya-karmaṇām. A person who has finished all sinful activities, and simply standing on the platform of pious activities, they can understand what is God and be engaged in God's service. And another place it is said by Arjuna, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān: (BG 10.12) "You are the Supreme Personality of Godhead, param brahma." Every living being is Brahman, spiritual, but Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Being; therefore He is paraṁ brahma, and the paraṁ dhāma, and the resort of everything, ultimate resort of everything, and pavitra, purified, there is no material contamination. So, what is this? What does he say in this?
Hayagrīva: That, that same point?
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Hayagrīva: All ethics are derived.
Prabhupāda: Yes. So to become completely pure, then he is the necessity of morality and ethics. Just like we prescribe, "No illicit sex, no meat-eating, no intoxication, no gambling." These are the four pillars of sinful life. If we avoid these thing, then we can stay on the platform of purity. And God consciousness, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, is based on this morality. One who cannot follow the principles, he falls down from the spiritual platform, and he cannot make any progress. So purity is the basic principle of God consciousness.
Hayagrīva: Jung sees atheistic Communism as the greatest threat in the world today. He writes that "The Communist revolution has debased man, because it robs him of his freedom, not only in the social but in the moral and spiritual sense. The state has taken the place of God. That is why, seen from this angle, the socialist dictatorships are religions, and state slavery is a form of worship."
Prabhupāda: Yes, I agree with him. That is the degradation of human civilization. But the philosophy of the Communist, that everyone has equal right or everyone must take share of the state equally, that is little, basic principle of real communism. According to our understanding, God is the father, material nature is the mother, and we, all living entities, are sons of the father and mother. So as sons everyone has right to live at the cost of father's property. The whole universe is the property of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and all living entities, they are being supported by the father. But one should be satisfied with the supplies allotted to him. That is, Īśopaniṣad says, tena tyaktena bhuñjīthā (ISO 1). There is no need of encroaching on others' property. We should not become envious of the capitalist or rich man, because everyone is given his allotment by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. I should be satisfied with my allotment. I should not encroach upon others' allotment. But the exploitation idea is not there. The same thing, that nobody should exploit. If one has become rich man, that's all right. That, that is natural. One is born in rich family, from his very birth he is a rich man. So why we should interfere his richness? But everyone should be God conscious. Either the rich man or the poor man, they must be God conscious. And God consciousness means that the property I am owning, or the position I am placed in, that is by God's arrangement. Therefore my duty is to serve God in my position. Sthane sthitāḥ śruti-gatāṁ tanu-vāṅ manobhiḥ. This is the philosophy of, of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, confirmed by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Sthane sthitāḥ. We should stay in our place, as it is allotted by God, but our common culture should be śruti-gatāṁ tanu-vāṅ manobhiḥ. We should hear about God and act accordingly—it doesn't matter in which work—then there will be harmony. If we become envious, that "Why this man has become rich? I shall encroach upon him," that is again, another type of revolution or encroachment. That is not required. You remain in your position as you have been allotted, but everyone be engaged in the service of the Lord. The, another example is that the, there are different position of different parts of the body—the head, arms, the belly, the legs. They are different parts of body doing different function. But the idea is how to maintain this body. So if we, even if we remain in different position, that is we get from the birth, but we, we should be engaged in the service of the Supreme, the owner. Just like the hand is owned by the body; therefore hand must work for the body. The leg is owned by the body; therefore the leg must work for the body. So we are all part and parcel of God, and we should, everyone, we should work for God. And how we shall work, that we have to hear from the position where we are, and act accordingly, then there will be real spiritual communism.
Hayagrīva: In the atheistic Communism he says, "The goals of religion, deliverance from evil, reconciliation with God, rewards in the hereafter, and so on, turns into worldly promises about freedom from care for one's daily bread, the just distribution of material goods, universal prosperity in the future, and shorter working hours." In other words, material, worldly promises are given.
Prabhupāda: In the Communism?
Hayagrīva: In, in atheistic Com..., in Communism.
Prabhupāda: Yes. But they have no idea of spiritual life, neither they can understand that there is spirit with the soul, within the body. Dehino 'smin yathā dehe kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā (BG 2.13). That they cannot understand.
Hayagrīva: But he feels that socialism or Marxism, Communism, cannot possibly replace religion in the proper traditional sense.
Prabhupāda: No, it is not religion. It is simply mental speculation—how to adjust material things. It will never be able to adjust it. That is their simply imagination. It will all fail at the ultimate end.
Hayagrīva: He says, "A natural function which has existed from the beginning like the religious function cannot be disposed of with rationalistic and so-called enlightened criticism."
Prabhupāda: The thing is that these people, they do not understand what is religion. Religion you cannot avoid. That is characteristic. Just like we gave several times this example, that everything has got a particular characteristic. Just like salt, salt is never sweet, and sweet is never salt. It has got a characteristic. A chile is pungent. Similarly, living entity, we are..., what is our characteristic? Our characteristic is to render service. Either you take Communism or this "ism" or that "ism," your real characteristic to render service, that will not change. The, in the capitalist country they are asking people that "You work in the factory and work for me, and whatever I say, you do," and the same thing is being dictated by the Communist leaders. Where is the difference? There is no difference, but it is only difference of nonsensical idea. Therefore a mass of people, they have to render service, either to Mr. Lenin or Mr. Roosevelt, it doesn't matter. He has to render service. But both the services are not being profitable to the mass of people. Therefore we suggest following the footprints of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, that you serve Kṛṣṇa. Service is your essential duty, but because your service is wrongly being executed, you are not happy. But if you render your service to Kṛṣṇa, that is natural and you will be happy. So our Kṛṣṇa conscious men, they are happy when rendering service to Kṛṣṇa, or God. So individually or collectively, if every state, every individual person renders service to Kṛṣṇa, then that is perfect stage of life. He has to render service to somebody, but because it is misplaced, he is never happy, but when the service is rendered to Kṛṣṇa, then he will be happy. Service you have to render, without any failure, but he does not know where to render service. That is the difficulty. Communist dictating, "You, sir, render service to me," and the capitalist dictating, "Give me service, sir." But Kṛṣṇa says, "No. No service to this, no service..." Sarva-dharmān parityajya: (BG 18.66) "You simply give your service to Me, then ahaṁ tvāṁ sarva-pāpebhyo, you will become free from all sinful reaction of life." That is our position.
Hayagrīva: He feels that a materialistic Western capitalism cannot possibly defeat a pseudoreligion like Marxism. He says that the only way to combat atheistic Communism is for the individual to adopt, to adopt a nonmaterialistic religion.
Prabhupāda: That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. It has nothing to do with materialistic "isms." It is directly connect, connected with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. God demands that sarva-dharmān parityajya mām (BG 18.66). So we are teaching that "You, you are servant, but your service is wrongly placed; therefore you are not happy. You place or render the service to Kṛṣṇa, you will be happy." This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. We are neither for capitalism nor for so-called Communism, or not for so-called religion also. We are only for Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
Hayagrīva: Jung laments the fact that such a nonmaterialistic faith does not presently exist in the West. He writes, "Not only does the West lack a uniform faith that could block the progress of a fanatical ideology"—that is Marxism—"but as the father of Marxist philosophy," because Marx was a Westerner, "it makes use of exactly the same spiritual," so-called spiritual, "assumptions, the same arguments and aims." So he feels that man is desperately in need of a religion that has immediate meaning, and he feels that Christianity is no longer effective in combating this.
Prabhupāda: He has predicted very nice. This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, which is above everything, either Christianism or Marxism or capitalism or anything. It is based on Bhagavad-gītā, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). So actually it is a fact. Kṛṣṇa says that if you adopt this principle of life, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then you will remain above all sinful reaction of life and make progress spiritually, gradually.
- mām upetya kaunteya
- duḥkhālayam aśāśvatam
- nāpnuvanti mahātmānaḥ
- saṁsiddhiṁ paramāṁ gatāḥ
- (BG 8.15)
If you cultivate Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then the result will be that "The devotee will come back to Me. And one who attains to Me, he hasn't got to go back again to this material world." In another place the same thing is said: tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti (BG 4.9). "Those who are Kṛṣṇa conscious they, giving, after giving up this body"—everyone has to give up this body—"he does not accept any more the material body. He comes to Me." "Comes to Me" means "He comes to Me in his spiritual body." So Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement means to give up this material world and go back to home, back to Godhead.
Hayagrīva: He says, "If the individual is not truly regenerated in spirit, society cannot be either, for society is the sum total of individuals in need of redemption."
Prabhupāda: Yes. That... It is individual. We are individually initiating to Kṛṣṇa consciousness that the mass of people becomes a majority. If not in majority, at least a less percentage, then the face of the world will change. There is no doubt about it.
Hayagrīva: "The salvation of the world consists in the salvation of the individual soul. Man's individual relation to God would be an effective shield against these pernicious influences," that is, atheistic Marxism.
Prabhupāda: Yes. At least those who have taken Kṛṣṇa consciousness seriously, they never be converted either by Marxism or this "ism" or that "ism." That is not possible. They can convert the Marxist into Kṛṣṇa consciousness, but a Kṛṣṇa conscious person can never be turned into Marxism. That is not possible. Paraṁ dṛṣṭvā nivartate (BG 2.59). That is explained in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Because they have seen the highest perfection of life, they cannot be misled by all these third-class, fourth-class philosophies.
Hayagrīva: He also felt that materialistic progress is a possible hindrance.
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is very good idea. That is confirmed by Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura. Jaḍa-vidyā jato māyāra vaibhava tomāra bhajane bādhā. Material progress means expansion of the external energy, māyā, illusion. So we are already in illusion, and therefore we practically see the so-called scientists, so-called philosophers, because they are materially advanced, they cannot understand even what is God and what is our relationship. So this is hindrance, the so-called advancement of material science, of material knowledge, is undoubtedly hindrance. Tomāra bhajane bādhā. They are all hindrances to the progressive march of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. When we minimize our necessities, that is saintly life—the bare necessities of life. We are not after very luxurious way of life. We are satisfied only with the bare necessities of life. So it is not an attempt for material progress. It is simply an attempt to make spiritual progress, Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
Hayagrīva: Because a favorable environment merely strengthens the dangerous tendency to expect everything to originate from outside,...
Prabhupāda: No, everything originates from inside, from the soul.
Hayagrīva: He says, "There must be a deep-seated change in the inner man." He also sees that modern man needs a guru, or someone, he says, "to explain religion to man. Whereas the man of today can easily think and understand all the 'so-called truths' dished out to him by the State, his understanding of religion is made considerably more difficult owing to the lack of explanations. Do you understand what you are reading?" And he said, "How can I, unless someone guides me?"
Prabhupāda: Yes. That is the Vedic injunction. Tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum evābhigacchet (MU 1.2.12). It is essential that one must go to guru and with guru Guru is representative of God. Sākṣād-dharitvena samasta-śāstrair. He, guru, being representative of God, he is worshiped as God, but he never says that "I am God." He is servant God. He is worshiped as God, but he is servant of God, and God is the master God. This is the conception of Vaiṣṇava philosophy. And who is guru, that is described by Caitanya Mahāprabhu. He asked everyone to become guru. Āmāra ājñāya guru hañā tāra' ei deśa: (CC Madhya 7.128) "Wherever you are staying, it doesn't matter. You become a guru and deliver all these foolish persons who are in ignorance." So one may say that "I am not so learned. How can I become guru?" So Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that you do not require to be a learned scholar. There are many so-called learned foolish scholars. It has no meaning. You just instruct what Kṛṣṇa has instructed. Yāre dekha tāre kaha 'kṛṣṇa'-upadeśa (CC Madhya 7.128). So real instruction is there, Bhagavad-gītā, and any who explains Bhagavad-gītā as it is, he is guru. This is the definition of guru. So if one is fortunate enough to approach such guru, then his life becomes successful. Guru is essential.
Hayagrīva: He feels on the one hand philosophy has degenerated into exclusively...
Prabhupāda: Mental...
Hayagrīva: ...intellectual and academic speculation.
Prabhupāda: ...speculation. That is our opinion. They are simply mentally speculating. It has no value. Unless you are directly in touch with the Supreme Personality of Godhead and assimilate the instructions given by Him, by all your reason, and then in practical life you execute it, then one can become guru, he can do good to others; otherwise not possible.
Hayagrīva: And on the other hand religion, the Christian religion which was understood in the Middle Ages, has become strange and unintelligible to the man of today.
Prabhupāda: It is because it is simply dogmatic. The preachers of the religion, they have no idea, clear idea, but officially they speak something. Neither he understands, neither he can make others to understand. But Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is not such big thing. It is clear in every respect. Therefore this is the expected movement as Mr. Jung wanted. So every sane man should cooperate with this movement and liberate the human society from the gross darkness of ignorance.
Hayagrīva: He characterizes the true religious man as one who is accustomed to the thought of not being sole master of his own house. He believes that God, and not he himself, decides in the end.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Naturally that is the position. What we can decide? That there is already controller over me, so how I can be Absolute? No. Therefore everyone should depend on the supreme controller. That is called, technical language, it is called śaraṇāgati, full surrender. Full surrender. That is called śaraṇāgati.
Hayagrīva: He feels that the only thing that keeps modern man..., that will keep modern man from simply dissolving into the crowd is, he says, "We must ask, 'Have I any religious experience, an immediate relation to God and hence that certainty which will keep me as an individual from dissolving in the crowd of humanity?' " So one's relation with God assures one of one's individuality.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Everyone is individual. God is also individual. So one individual is subordinate to the chief individual. That is the Vedic version. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13), God is also individual being, but He is the Supreme Being, and we are individual being, innumerable. So the difference is that the supreme living being is maintaining us, and we are being maintained. That we should understand. The same example as I gave, the father and the children in the family. The father is maintainer and the children are maintained. This is the real conception of philosophy. The mother is the material nature and father is God, and we are all children. We have got rights to enjoy the father's property, but not encroaching upon others', but as it is allotted by the father. "You sit down here, you take this, that's all," that, that much right I have got. I do not transgress the order of the father; then it is peaceful situation.
Hayagrīva: So that's the end of Jung. (end)