660309 - Lecture BG 02.12 - New York
Woman: What chapter?
Prabhupāda: The same chapter.
Woman: Chapter Two.
Prabhupāda: Now, the next question is that the Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that "Because I am now covered in ignorance, therefore I see individuals." Yes.
Woman: Is that a main claim?
Prabhupāda: Yes. My . . . this individual experience that you are Mr. Such-and-such, you are Mr. Such-and-such, you are Mrs. Such-and-such, this individual experience is due to my ignorance. And generally, they give the example of a disease. I think it is called, medical terms, myopia. Myopia means they see this moon in two. The eyes become so defective that whenever they see things, they see two.
Woman: No, that's astigmatism.
Prabhupāda: Uh, yes.
Woman: Myopia is when you have to see very near.
Prabhupāda: I said . . . it may not be myopia, but some disease.
Woman: Astigmatism. Some sees, if somebody sees . . .
Prabhupāda: Yes. Sometimes . . .
Woman: Astigmatism. In two, if somebody sees. Astigmatism.
Woman: In two. Is it a sickness?
Prabhupāda: Yes. It is sickness.
Woman: In the eyes.
Prabhupāda: Because, because the thing is one, but due to my disease of the eye, I see one thing, two. That is a disease. There is a disease like that. So . . .
Woman: Usually people who drink.
Prabhupāda: Anyway, that's an abnormal condition. In abnormal condition sometimes we can see one thing into two, divided into two. So now that ignorance, you cannot apply to Kṛṣṇa because He's all-perfect. And if He is not all-perfect, then there is no value of His instruction. A man with defect in knowledge cannot impart instructions. His instructions . . . therefore the whole Vedic process is paramparā system. Paramparā system means that I cannot deviate. I cannot make any interpretation. Evaṁ paramparā-prāptam imaṁ rājarṣayo viduḥ (BG 4.2).
You'll find in the Fourth Chapter.
Now we are reading Second Chapter. You'll find, as we have explained in the Introduction of Bhagavad-gītā, that because . . . just like I am speaking to you. I am an imperfect person. I cannot give you any knowledge. I cannot manufacture any knowledge. If I do that, then I shall deceive you. I can simply present before you the original knowledge. I can explain it in an understandable way, but not deviating from the original text.
Now, here it is clearly stated by the Supreme Personality of Godhead that na tu eva ahaṁ jātu (BG 2.12).
Aham. Aham means Śrī Kṛṣṇa Himself. Now sometimes we make some grammatical jugglery of words, but I cannot understand. Now, aham, "myself," when I speak aham, or "myself," is applicable to me. When you speak, the aham is applicable to you. But that does not mean because there is a common understanding of myself between you and me, therefore I . . . now that "I" and "you" become one. When you speak, you say, "I speak." But I say, I say, "I speak." That does not mean this "I" and that "I" becomes one. So Śrī Kṛṣṇa says like that, na tu aham.
Woman: Ah, yes.
Prabhupāda: He. That means this aham, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. And na tvam: "And you." That means Arjuna. And na ime janādhipāḥ: "Neither all these kings." He's dividing the whole audience into three: "Myself, yourself and they." And again He confirms it, sarve: "all." He never identifies into one. So this is the version of Śrī Kṛṣṇa.
Now, if I say that our interpretation of aham, I, myself, yourself, and he, or she, different vision, this is due to our ignorance. You can say. Because I am ignorant, it may be my mistake that I see differently from you. But Śrī Kṛṣṇa, Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, cannot see like that. He is above all this ignorance, because He's all-perfect. And we have already defined that the Supreme Lord is full of knowledge. So . . . He's full of knowledge, supreme knowledge. Now, if the Supreme Personality, with full knowledge . . . He cannot commit any mistake.
Prabhupāda: How can He commit? Then there is no meaning of full knowledge. If you are in full knowledge, then how you can commit mistake? So this ignorance of duality, because they say that, "We see two because it is due to our ignorance. All, everything is one," but here you cannot apply that ignorance to Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Otherwise, His instruction of whole Bhagavad-gītā, which is so importantly taken by all authorities, all scholars, then it is at once rejected. If it is supposed that Śrī Kṛṣṇa was also to commit mistake, or He was in imperfect knowledge, then whole thing becomes rejected. So it is not . . . not like that.
So Śrī Kṛṣṇa, He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He's in full knowledge, and therefore as He says that "Either Myself or yourself or all these persons, kings and soldiers, who are assembled here, they're all individuals. In the past they were individuals, in the present we are individuals, and in the future they will continue to be individuals." Now, one thing . . . suppose another argument is that due to ignorance . . . just like an animal. It thinks that there is water in the desert, on the reflec . . .
Prabhupāda: Water in the desert. Now, in the desert, due to sun's reflection . . . you might have experienced in the street also, during blazing sun. It appears like water. Now, that animal, because it has no knowledge, it is, I mean to say, flying towards water in the desert, although there is no water. But a sane man like you and me, or a human being, he knows that there is no water. There is no water. So this direction, that there is water, this mistake is committed by the animal because he . . . it has no sufficient knowledge. But one, a human being who has got sufficient knowledge, he does not commit that mistake. Yes.
Woman: Does an animal make that mistake? I thought the animals . . .
Woman: . . . wouldn't, would, uh . . .
Prabhupāda: No, no. This is a . . .
Woman: . . . not see the water that our eyes tell us that there is a mirage in the desert.
Prabhupāda: Yes. I mean to say, any sane man who has got the knowledge that, "This is only reflection of the sun: it is not water," he will never go there. He knows that it is useless to search water in the desert. Similarly, if Śrī Kṛṣṇa is in full knowledge, He cannot say that in future also we shall all remain individuals. He says that in the future also we shall continue to be individuals. Now, He cannot give us misdirection. Suppose we, in the future, we shall not remain. After liberation, we shall not become, remain, individuals. Then that sort of misguidance cannot be given by Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Just like a sane man cannot direct you that, "Just go there. There is water in the desert." A man with perfect knowledge cannot give you that direction. An animal may go there. That is a different thing. Similarly, when Śrī Kṛṣṇa says that, "In future also, we, all these, yourself, Myself, and all these, they will keep their individuality," so that is not a misdirection.
You want to say anything?
Woman: Sure. But is that what the Bhagavad-gītā's says on . . .
Woman: . . . I mean being a lot to it?
Prabhupāda: Yes. It is, it is . . . I'll . . . I'll . . . I'll give you, I'll give you the exact meaning. Na tu eva aham: "Neither Myself." Aham means "myself." Jātu. Jātu means "at any time." "At any time" means present, past, future. Jātu kadācit. Kadācit means "at any time." Nāsam: "not that we did not exist." So na tvam. So this aham, "myself and yourself," na ime, "neither these janādhipāḥ, all these kings." Now, this plural: "Myself," first person: "yourself," second person: "and these janādhipāḥ," third person. Na caiva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ: "It is not that in future also we shall not exist like this, Myself, yourself and all these." You see?
Sarve. Now, here it is called sarve. They never becomes one. Sarve means all, plural number. Here means janādhipāḥ. "As they are now plural numbers, Myself, yourself, and they, similarly, in future also, we shall remain like that. We shall remain like that." Sarve vayam ataḥ param: "after this." This is the clear version of number—you can note down—number twelve verse of the Second Verse, er, Chapter of Bhagavad-gītā.
Now, now I have already explained that because Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and because He has got clear vision, and because He has full knowledge, He cannot give us misdirection. And what is given, that is perfect. So we have to believe that in future, even after liberation . . . now, one thing we must also explain—the liberation, the conception of liberation. So there are different . . . five kinds of liberation. One of them, liberation, is to become one with the Lord, one with the Supreme. That is called sāyujya-mukti, to merge into the existence of, of the Supreme. That is also another. That is one of the five liberations. That is not the only liberation.
That means we all individual beings, we are individual constitutionally. God is the father or creator or whatever, or the source of all life, or source of our existence. Whatever you like, you can say. So we have . . . we have been created in that way. Eko bahu syāma. God has become many. This is also version of the Vedas that many, all these many, we are also god. Just like the fire diffuses its sparks. The sparks coming out of the fire, it is the . . . they are also part and parcel of the fire. Similarly we, we are all parts and parcels of the Supreme.
Now, He wanted to become many. He wanted to become many, so He has become many, and we are that many. So we are not different from God. We are not different from God, but because He wanted to become many, so we have become many. Now, thing is, when God wanted to become many, there must be some purpose behind this. Otherwise, why did He like to become many? He was one, one without second. That's all right. But why did He become many? So that is a question, one must like to put that, "Why God became many?"
So that is, that answer is that because God is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs 5.1),
He's all-pleasure—therefore, without many, there is no pleasure. Just like here I sit down the whole day alone, but I become more active and more pleasing when you come. Whenever we want to enjoy some pleasure, pleasure is not enjoyed alone. Pleasure is enjoyed with many. Now God is by nature . . . He's ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12).
He's always full of pleasure, full of blissfulness. Now, if He wants to become many, it is . . . He's omnipotent. He can become many. Where is the objection there? He can . . . He can manifest Himself in various . . .
Just now we have quoted a verse from Brahma-saṁhitā, advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam (Bs 5.33). Ananta-rūpam means unlimited forms. Unlimited forms. Ad . . . still, they are one. In spite of becoming unlimited, they're one. Just like the sun. If you put here millions of pots, water pots, in every pot you'll find the sun's reflection. But that millions of reflections, sun, does not mean that sun has lost his oneness. Sun is one. That is also a Vedic system, that we are all reflection like that. So anyway, these many, many forms of God is from the desire of God.
Now, out of these . . . because God has got some desire, transcendental desire, to enjoy with many. He enjoys with His own energy because He is all-perfect. Just like if I want to enjoy life, I want family, I want a wife, I want children, I want friends, I want servants. So I have to think before having a wife. You see? Because I am limited, so I think twice, whether I am able to keep a wife, then whether I am able to maintain my children. These things are consideration. And actually, in the present society every young man is thinking like that. You see? Whenever the question of marrying is there, they think like that. But that thinking is due to our imperfectness. Because we are not all-powerful, therefore we think like that.
But when we give the qualification to God that He is all-powerful, omnipotent, so He can maintain any number of children or any number of wives. Otherwise, there is no meaning of omnipotent. So similarly, God has become many, and He has got a plan behind this thinking of many. Now, out of these manies, if one wants to merge again into the existence of God, so God has no objection.
Prabhupāda: God has no objection. Now, from God we have become many. Now, suppose I or you want that I don't want to keep myself as one of the many: I want to become one with you. If you like that, that is called sāyujya-mukti. So God does not deny you. "All right, you merge into Me."But that does not mean all other manies also merge into Him. That does . . . because, individually, I want to merge into the existence of God, that does not mean all other manies . . . because many means not only myself. There are millions and billions and trillions of many. So if out of that trillion, billion, one wants to merge into the existence of God, God is all-powerful: why he should be denied? "All right, you merge into Me. If you don't want to keep your individuality, if you want to merge into Myself, all right, you are welcome." Ye yathā māṁ prapadyante (BG 4.11). In the Bhagavad-gītā you'll find it, "Anyone who wants Me in any way, I fulfill his desire."
So that oneness, merging into the existence of . . . that is not a general rule. That is a specific instance only, that if anyone wants to merge into the existence of God, he can do that. God has no objection. But if others . . . that does (not) mean that everyone gener . . . as a rule merges, merge into the existence of God. No. There are others. Just like another example, you take it. Generally, this example is given that the . . . the rivers, the rivers all flow into the sea, and they become one. Or the drop of the ocean water, when put into the ocean, the drop of the ocean water loses his existence. It become one with the . . . that's all right. Now, if you have seen the ocean, there are always millions and millions of drops coming out by the dashing of the waves. You see? That is going on continually. And some of them again falling into the water. They lose their . . . they lose the drop existence. But that does not mean that that creation of drop is stopped, even from that example. You see? And because the river waters comes and, I mean to say, merges into the sea water, that does not mean the river, all rivers are stopped. The rivers are there.
But, another example: now, there are many aquatic animals within the water. They are also . . . now, as the drop of the water emerges from the sea water and again merges into the sea water, so that is a nice example, but these fishes, these aquatic animals, they are also born in that water. Nobody has given these aquatic animals from anywhere else. They are . . . they have taken their birth from that water. They are also born of the water. Just like the drops of the water also born of the water, similarly, these living aquatic animals, they are also born of the water. Now, the drop of the water merges into the water and loses his existence, that does not mean—there are other living entities within the water, millions and billions—they also lose their identity. They keep their identity.
So some of the living beings may merge into the existence of the God. That is called sāyujya-mukti. But there are many millions and millions and billions of . . . ananta. They want to keep their existence and enjoy the association of God. That is the difference between jñānī and bhakta. The jñānī's ultimate aim is nirveda-brahmānusandhānam. They want to become one with the Supreme. He does not . . . a jñānī does not want to keep himself separately from the Supreme. He wants into the merging.
Woman: You mean the jñānī yogī?
Prabhupāda: Jñānī. Yes. Jñānī, not yogī.
Prabhupāda: Jñānī. Jñānī means philosophers, empiric philosophers. Empiric philosophers. Brahma . . . Brahmavādīs, those who want to merge into the existence of Brahman, they are called jñānīs. And those who meditate on God within himself, they are called yogīs. This is general definition. And those, those who worship the Supreme as Personality of Godhead, they are devotees.
Woman: Yes. The name? The name? You say jñānī . . .?
Prabhupāda: Jñānī, yogī and bhakta.
Woman: The other one . . .
Prabhupāda: Yes. Bhakta.
Woman: Jñānī, how do you spell it?
Prabhupāda: J, n, a, n, i. "Jan-nanee. Jan-nanee." The spelling is "Jananee." So the Supreme Truth, the Supreme Truth is Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān, the Supreme Truth. Now, according to . . . because we have already explained that each and every individual being has got his individual minute quantity of independence. God has given us. Now, by our independence, I may accept as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, I may accept Him that the all-pervading Supersoul, and I may accept Him that the all-pervading Brahman, impersonal brahma-jyoti effulgence. So all these are applicable to the Absolute Truth.
Now, it depends on my discretion whether I want to merge into the existence of the Lord, whether I want to keep my individuality and associate with Him as friend, as father, mother, as wife. Just like we have got relation. So that depends on my discretion. But now, comparatively, if we study that if we merge into the existence of God, the, at least, in the opinion of the bhaktas, that is not acceptable. That is not acceptable. They know that, that "God has created me as an individual being, so He has got some purpose. And because He has created me for some purpose, I must fulfill that purpose. I must fulfill that purpose."
Now, I can give you another crude example that a, that a . . . from the mother . . . suppose a few children, half a dozen children, has come. Now, what is the intention of the mother? The mother or the father . . . mother or father, same thing—who has taken the responsibility of the children—they, they want to be happy. Otherwise, why people are taking so much trouble, whole day, for, I mean, maintaining their children? There is some happiness. Nobody wants to take so much trouble, but at home, because there is some happiness by seeing the children, by maintaining the children, but . . . therefore he takes so much time.
Now, at the same time, the children has also some troubles of life. Now, if one of the children requests the mother, "Mother, you have given birth to me, and . . . but I find my life very troublesome. Better you again put me in your belly." (laughs) Is it a good proposal? It is not at all a good proposal. This is a disappointment. "Oh," the mother says, "oh, my dear son, you are in trouble. Therefore you want to come again into my belly? You want to merge into my existence again?" Well, the mother is unable. He cannot . . . she cannot do that. But if, if such kind of request is made to the Supreme Lord, He can accept that. For Him it is not possible . . . impossible. "All right, you want to merge into My existence? Come on. Come on. I, I, I take it."
But the thing is whether the son who requests the mother or the father like that, he is sane person. The sane son, the intelligent son, will think, "Well, my father and my mother, they have brought up me. They have begotten me. They have given us our life. All right, let us serve our parents. Let them be happy, our activities, so that . . ." That is the natural way. That is the natural . . . because God has created us in so many individual living entities, we are all parts and parcel. Just like father and son or mother and son. Sons are the parts of the body of the mother. The, we get this body from mother's body. That's a fact. Similarly, it is, it . . . You'll find in Bhagavad-gītā also that this material nature is the mother, and the Lord is the father, and the father is giving seed into the womb of the mother, and we have all come out from the . . . we have got this material body. Similarly, you see?
Now, this point, that to merge into the existence of the Supreme Lord is, if it is proposed by some individual soul or individual living entity, that can be accepted by the Lord, sāyujya-mukti . . . that is not very difficult. But the thing is whether we should think like that, whether it is good for us. That is my choice. If I want to merge into . . . you follow me, what I say? If I want to merge into the existence of God . . . just like if your son wants again to merge into your existence, because you are human being, it is not possible for you, but it is not impossible for God. God can accept: "All right, you want to merge into Me. All right, come on. I accept it." So that not impossible. So that merging into the existence of God, there is a liberation like that. But that is not the ultimate.
You want to speak something?
Woman: Jñānī, you say, liberation from . . . (indistinct)
Prabhupāda: Yes, but there are other individuals who . . . there are other individuals who may not agree with that kind of salvation or liberation. They want to keep their individuality and enjoy the Supreme Personality of Godhead's company. Just like Arjuna. In the Fourth Chapter you will . . . you will see that Arjuna . . . when Śrī Kṛṣṇa said to Arjuna that "This system of yoga was first explained to the sun-god"—sun-god—now Arjuna inquired, "How is that? You are . . . you are my contemporary. How You say that You advised or instructed this yoga system to sun? That means crores and crores, I mean, millions and billions of years before. How is that?" This is, mean, a sane question. Now, in that question the Lord answered, "My dear Arjuna, yourself and Myself, we took birth many times, but you have forgotten. I, I, I have not forgotten."
Now . . . now, here you see that because Arjuna has taken up that transcendental bliss, that he wants to keep with the company of the Lord. So if anyone wants to keep company with the Lord, he's welcome. There are five different kinds of relation with God: śānta, dāsya, sākhya, vātsalya . . . I think I gave you one day . . .
Woman: Yes. Could you give them by name, the five kinds of liberation? In English?
Prabhupāda: Yes. Yes. I'll give.
Woman: One is with the Lord, we merge, we merge . . .
Prabhupāda: Mergence means . . . the merging into the existence, this is called sāyujya-mukti. Sāyujya-mukti.
Woman: No, but in English.
Prabhupāda: English, there is . . . Sāyujya, to become one.
Woman: Yes, to become one.
Prabhupāda: Sāyujya-mukti means liberation by becoming one with the Lord.
Woman: Yes. Okay. What is number two?
Prabhupāda: Yes. I'll explain. Yes.
Prabhupāda: Mukti means liberation. Mukti means . . . now we are in egoistic condition in this material body. Now, mukti means when we shall be liberated from the material existence and we shall get our spiritual life proper. That is called mukti. Just like a person is suffering from disease, fever. Now, when he, he's out of feverish attack, he's called mukta. Rogya-mukta. Rogya-mukta means he's free from the disease. Similarly, mukti means because we are now encumbered with this material body, as soon as we become free of this material conception of life, that is called mukti. That is called brahma-bhūta. Brahma-bhūta. Generally, Dr. Mishra is teaching this, that you, what you think of yourself, "What I am? I am not this body." that is the whole process of this teaching.
So we have already discussed. And this is same point is being discussed nicely in Bhagavad-gītā, that we are not this body. Our material identification is wrong.
So we have come to that point, come to that stage, you see, that I am not this body. And because I am not this body, therefore I have no connection with this world—because my connection with this world is due to my body, is due to my body. I consider one woman my wife because I have got bodily connection. I, I consider somebody my son because bodily connection. I consider this town, this country my country because my body has grown up from this land. So in this way, as soon as one becomes free from the conception of identification of this body, he becomes a liberated soul.
Therefore you'll find in Bhagavad-gītā in the later chapters that as soon as one emerges out from this conception, he is prasannātmā: "Oh, I have no responsibility. I have no responsibility." Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā na śocati na kāṅkṣati (BG 18.54). As soon as he is liberated . . . just like a man freed from the attack of fever or any disease, when he's recovered, he finds himself happy: "Oh, now my disease is now gone. I am happy." Similarly, as soon as we come to the spiritual understanding of our existence, then our life will be joyful. That is a sign whether a man is freed from this material existence, mukti.
Mukti can be achieved even in this life. Mukti. Mukti. It is, it is, it is a question of conviction. Now we are convinced firmly that, "I am this material body. And as soon as . . ." I gave you the other day the example of Socrates. He was convinced that "I am not this body." So he was offered poison. He gladly took it, that "What is that? I shall take it!" Because he was mukta-puruṣa. It is . . . he is liberated soul. "Never mind you want to kill me. Kill me. I don't like [mind]. All right." So this liberation. This is liberation.
Now, this liberation is divided into five. There are five kinds of liberation. One of the liberation is to merge into the existence. We, we, we . . . our birth was from the Supreme Absolute. Now, after liberation, we merge into the existence of the Supreme. That is called sāyujya-mukti. Now, besides this sāyujya-mukti, there are other five muktis which with, the Vaiṣṇava sampradāya, or the devotees, the Lord's devotees, they accept. They, they practically, those who are pure devotees, they do not want any kind of mukti. They do not, even they are offered. They are simply after the service of the Lord. They are prepared to suffer any kind of suffering. They are not affected by all those sufferings. What they want, pure devotees? They want that "I must serve the Supreme Lord." That is their mission.
So anyway, these bhaktas, or the devotees of the Lord, for them there are other four kinds of mukti. And what is that? This is sāyujya-mukti, to become one with the . . . now, there is . . . then sārūpya, sārūpya-mukti. Sārūpya-mukti means the spiritual body becomes as . . . the features of the spiritual body becomes just like the Supreme Lord. Just like Nārāyaṇa. Nārāyaṇa has got four hands, with śaṅkha, cakra, gadā, padma, and with the lotus flower, conchshell, club and wheel. So, so everyone who takes that sārūpya-mukti just become just like the . . . His feature of the body become just like the Lord. That is called sārūpya-mukti.
Woman: How do you spell it? s, a, r, u . . .
Prabhupāda: S, a, r, u, p, y, a. Sārūpya. Yes. Sārūpya. This is called sārūpya-mukti. And . . .
Woman: Mukti, or mukhi?
Prabhupāda: Mukti, yes.
Woman: And three?
Prabhupāda: And three . . . the two I have explained, sāyujya and sārūpya. Then sālokya. Sālokya. Sālokya means you can . . . one can get habitation, residence, in the same planet where God is there. That is sālokya. And then the next is sārṣṭi. Sārṣṭi. S, a, r, s, t, i, sārṣṭi. Sārṣṭi means to get the same opulence. As I have already explained, opulence, he . . . he gets all the opulences as the Lord has got. He becomes so . . . as good as Lord, becomes so powerful. This is called sārṣṭi.
And, and the last is sāmīpya. Sāmīpya means he is always in the company of the Lord, just like Arjuna. Arjuna is always . . . whenever Lord takes His incarnation, Arjuna is there. Arjuna is there. Sāmīpya. They are never separated. Just like a husband and wife, never separated. You see? Or the father and the son. Of course, nowadays the question is different, but generally, the family members, they all remain together. Sāmīpya. And the father and the boys and wife and . . . they remain together. So there is sāmīpya-mukti. Sāmīpya-mukti means to remain always as associate of the Lord. That is sāmīpya-mukti.
So these five kinds of muktis are there, and the, the purport is that even after liberation, we, the living entities, they keep their individuality. Just like as associate of the Lord, as the resident of the Lord's planet or to have the bodily features of the Lord, in so many ways. And one can merge into the existence of the Lord. That is also accepted. So simply merging into the existence of God, that is not the only liberation. That is one of the liberation.
But the, the devotees of the Lord, they do not accept such kind of . . . they do not want to merge. They want to enjoy the company. That is the difference between . . . both of them become liberated. Merging into the existence of God, that is also liberation. And to keep individuality and enjoy the company of the Lord, that is also liberation. Yes?
Woman: Therefore, may I say that the four other ones are what you call the demigods?
Prabhupāda: No. Demigods, they are not liberated.
Woman: They are not liberated?
Prabhupāda: No. Demigods, they are just like delegated officers for maintaining this material existence. Just like sun. Sun is a demigod. Sun. The moon. The moon is a demigod.
Woman: And what about the masters who are working . . .?
Prabhupāda: Eh? Eh?
Woman: The masters who are working the . . .?
Prabhupāda: Master is the Lord.
Woman: Yeah, but there are different masters, or higher degrees that you were calling. You were mentioning before. And some of different degrees who are working on planets . . .?
Prabhupāda: Yes, different degree. Just like everyone is servant of the Lord.
Woman: Yeah, yeah. Yeah. But did you . . .? That's not what you called . . .
Prabhupāda: Degree. No degrees. Now suppose, suppose, take for example the sun, the chief, chief living entity or the chief man, or chief living being in the sun planet. Now his position and my position, there is vast difference. He has . . . he is maintaining such a planet and he is situated there as the chief man or the chief living being. So his degree of power is far, far greater than the degree of power here like President Johnson or something else. You see? So that degree of power does not make him that he's God. He's not God: he's also servant of God. Anyone, even Brahmā, anyone.
There is a verse in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta: ekale īśvara kṛṣṇa āra saba bhṛtya (CC Adi 5.142), that the individual living entities, there are so many, multi, but all of them, they are servant of the Lord.
(Lord Kṛṣṇa alone is the supreme controller, and all others are His servants. They dance as He makes them do so.)
There may be . . . their position may be upper or lower in different degrees, but that does not make them equal with the Lord. The Lord is different. That is also mentioned in the Patañjali yoga system. Lord is Supreme. He's the great. He's the greatest. Asamordhva. Nobody is equal with Him and nobody is greater than Him. That means nobody's equal with Him, nobody's greater than Him, everybody is lower than Him.
So is that question solved?
Woman: Yes. Now you were using the other day very often the name of demigods, and therefore I . . .
Prabhupāda: Now demigods, demigods are just like you and me. Demigods, just like you and me. But they have got a degree of power than me and you.
Woman: Now you just said the sun.
Prabhupāda: Sun, yes. He's also a living . . .
Woman: The sun is a planet.
Prabhupāda: Sun is a planet, but there is a controlling deity also.
Prabhupāda: There is a control . . . just like here, in this planet, when you go up, you see it is ball, but in this ball there are so many controlling deities here also. President Johnson, prime minister of India, this and that and so many things. But when you go up you see just like a ball. So when you come here you find . . . similarly, from the distance of ninety millions of miles you can see the sun just like a ball, but it is not ball. It is a . . . it is a far, far greater than this planet, and there are cities and there men and there are persons and there are everything. But they are made up of fire. Their body's made of fire. Your body's made of earth. That is the difference.
Just like in the water you cannot live because your body is made differently that you cannot live in the water. Similarly, the aquatics in the water, they cannot live in the land. Similarly, because I cannot live in the sun planet due to this my body, that does not mean there are no living beings. There are living beings. After all, the whole material world is made of five elements—earth, water, fire, air and ether. Now these five elements, in some planet you'll find earth predominant. In some planet you'll find water predominant. In some planet you'll find fire predominant. In some planet you'll find air predominant. But that does not mean that there are no living entities. There are living entities.
The sun planet is a planet where is . . . where fire is predominant. Now, according to medical science that by heat and fire of the germs are killed. But in the fire also there are living entities. Just like Dr. Mishra was giving the example the other day about opium. Now opium is a death poison. Death poison. But in the opium also you'll find some worms.
Woman: Some what?
Prabhupāda: Yes. How it this possible? They are also living entities. If I, if I take a drop of opium, I die. But they are living and they are eating and they are living there. So because it is impossible for me to eat opium and live, you cannot say that there are other livi . . . that there cannot be no living entities there. Similarly, you have experience that you cannot live in the fire. That does not mean that in the sun planet there is no living entities. There are living entities. Because in Bhagavad-gītā you'll find that living soul, as it is, it is not burnt by fire. It is not burned by fire. Because it is spiritual. The material elements has no power to destroy it. It is not burnt by fire.
So in every planet it is concluded that every planet there are living entities. There are intelligent beings. And because in the higher planets there are more intelligent persons, beings, they are called demigods. The demigods means they have got, practically, qualification almost equal to the Supreme Lord. They have got such qualification.
Woman: And deevas.
Woman: And deevas.
Prabhupāda: Dee . . .? Deevas? Devas.
Prabhupāda: That is the Sanskrit word. Real deva means the Supreme Lord, and when you call devas . . . these devas, they are all obedient servant of the Lord. They are very powerful. So when you become obedient devotees of the Lord we can get such post: in the sun planet, in the moon planet, in the heavenly planets, in the Brahmā planets.
So the devotees of the Lord, they are not loser. They get more power, for controlling power. Therefore they are called devas, devas. Devas means those who are the . . . there are two words used in Sanskrit: devas and asuras. Asuras. Now the definition of these devas and asuras are like this: viṣṇu-bhaktaḥ smṛto daiva āsuras tad-viparyayaḥ (Padma Purāṇa). Āsuras tad-viparyayaḥ. Viṣṇu-bhakta. Those who are devotees of the Lord, they are devas. This is the difference between devas.
Devas, devas and asuras does not mean that asura has got a very ugly face. No. Even a very beautiful man, he can be asura. He can be a . . . and even a very ugly man, he can be deva. Just like Hanumān. Hanumān was a beast. He was not even man. He was animal. He, he comes from the monkey species of life. But he's a great devotee of Lord Rāmacandra. So he's deva. So viṣṇu-bhaktaḥ smṛto daiva. Those who are unalloyed devotees of the Lord, they are called devas.
And those who are against the obedience of the Lord, they are called asuras. Anyone. It does not mean human being, or the . . . anyone. But in the higher planets you'll find all the inhabitants there, they're all great devotees of the Lord. Therefore they are called devas, demigods. And therefore they have been entrusted with the management of this material world. Just like confidential persons are given responsible post in government. Similarly, because they are devotees of the Lord they have been awarded this post, just to be sun-god, to be moon-god, to be Indra, heavenly god, to Brahmā, like that, so many, Marīci and so many. You see? Yes?
Woman: Are they working a lot with the vibrations of music?
Woman: With music?
Prabhupāda: Oh, yes. Everything is there. Why do you think that only here in this planet everything is there and there is nothing? This is our foolishness. Just like you have never been to India, but . . .
Woman: Not yet.
Prabhupāda: No, no. I am giving you an example. If you think that the Indians, they do not eat, they do not sleep, they do not marry, that is your madness.
Woman: That is my what?
Prabhupāda: That is your madness. If you think that Indians do not eat or Indians . . . because you have not seen them, but if you . . . As soon as you know they are also human beings like us . . . just like as for my example, when I was in India I was thinking of America something wonderful.
Woman: Then you haven't seen everything yet.
Prabhupāda: Now I see here there is not at all any difference. The only difference is that you people are fair complexioned, your bodies are white and they are colored or they are not so white. But there are white men also. In India you'll find varieties of color, beginning from this American, European color down to the black Negro color. You find in India. We have so many colors.
And actually I give you my frank admission that when I was in India, I was thinking the Americans may be of different type of people or they may be thinking in otherwise, they may be . . . so, so many differences. But here I see there is no difference at all. No difference at all. Only some bodily features. Even I study the pigeons, I see, oh, this same pigeons are here, what, playing just like Indian pigeons. Even I see the sparrow. So there is no difference.
Woman: There is.
Woman: There is. Besides the sparrows, the other birds, as a rule, here in America are bigger than the birds in Europe.
Woman: The same kind of bird are bigger here.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Yes, yes, yes, yes. I admit that. I admit that. They are stout and strong. They are stout and strong. Yes. The squirrel, I see. I saw the squirrel in the park. Oh, they are also bigger.
Woman: They are bigger.
Prabhupāda: They are bigger. That is also natural. You see. Just like in African people. They are taller. They are taller than the Āryan people, even in your . . . this black Negroes, they are taller than American people. So there is little difference of course. That is all right. But on the primary facie, prima facie, there is no difference.
Similarly, in the sun planet, in the moon planet, there are also human beings like us, and they are called devas because they are high, intellectual. They are all very powerful than ourself, and they have got different bodies with different power and everything. Otherwise, there is no question . . . even great scientists like Dr. Meghnad Saha in India, he, he said that there is no reason to disbelieve that in other planets there is no life. How can you?
Just like because you have not seen India you cannot say: "Oh, there, there is no living being. It is vacant." So these people are going to the moon planet. They are saying it is full of dust, it is full of clay, or something like that. All these foolishness. You see? That means they have not reached. Outside they take some photo and they come out.
Woman: They announced today on the radio they've seen a lot of flying saucers.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Let them talk all nonsense. But we have got information that this moon planet is a very nice planet, you see, and the inhabitants there, they are very intelligent, and the people who perform pious work here in this planet, they are promoted, promoted to the moon planet. And it is very cold also. Just like your European countries and American countries because, due to . . . you have come from America. America, European countries, people are accustomed to drink because due to the cold climate. Indians are not accustomed. But your drinking is necessary thing in Europe.
Similarly, this moon planet is so cold that they live by drinking soma-rasa. There is a kind of liquor which is called soma-rasa. Yes. Soma-rasa. Soma-rasa. Soma-rasa, here, it is described in Āyur-veda. That soma-rasa preparation is there. If anyone can prepare that soma-rasa, and anyone can drink that soma-rasa, he becomes immortal. That means his duration of life increases. Increases. So anyway, these descriptions are there. So there are intelligent living beings there also.
Woman: What kind of bodies do they have?
Woman: What kind of bodies . . .
Prabhupāda: The body may be different. Just like your body is different from me.
Woman: Yes, but we're the same in . . .
Prabhupāda: That does not mean, because you have got a different body, therefore you are not a living being. Or because I have got a different body from you, I am not a living being. So body . . . because a living soul is not the body, he might have different body. That doesn't matter. That doesn't matter. Why should we consider . . . identify with the body? The whole question is there. The body, you'll find your body is different from animal body. Animal is different from human body. Or the so many difference of body.
But the four principles of bodily wants, āhāra . . . āhāra means requiring some foodstuff, and nidrā, sleeping, and fearing and mating. These four principles you'll find in the birds, in the animals, in the human beings, or even the devatās, or gods, or everywhere you'll find, these four principles. The only difference between the animal and higher, developed consciousness living being is that they are God conscious. They accept the Supreme Lord. That makes the difference between lower animals and others.
I think we will stop here. (end)