Concerning our use of analogy. We do not bring in imperfect analogy, but we follow the instructions of the Sastras strictly. Our authority is on the basis of Sastra, not analogy. So, Vyasadeva while giving the history of creation says “Janmadyasya . . . adhikavaye” . . . so He impregnated the heart of Brahma with all the designs of creation. So what is wrong there? If I instruct someone you do like this, and he does it, then what is the difficulty? This is the system. Our authority is sastra. We give analogy for the general mass of people who have no faith in sastra. Analogy is not proof; sastra is proof. Foolish people cannot understand or accept, so we use analogy. The conclusion is not drawn from the analogy but from the sastra. We don’t use a combination of logic and authority, we use authority. Logic we use to convince someone who doesn’t accept the authority. The basic principle is authority. Vedas say that cowdung is pure and we accept it. There is no logic, but when we practically use it we see that it is correct. The logic of using analogy is called in the sastra “sakha candra nyaya.” It is easier to focus on the moon through the branches of a tree. The moon is great distance away, and you say that it is just through the branches. So you can focus more easily on the moon because 2 points joined make a straight line. So focusing on the nearby object helps us to focus on the far-away object. This is the use of analogy.

Devotee: Translation: “The humble sage, by virtue of true knowledge, sees with equal vision the learned and gentle brāhmaṇa, a cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog-eater (outcaste).”

Prabhupāda: Equal vision.

Jesuit: Equal vision.

Prabhupāda: Equal vision.

Jesuit: What does that mean, equal vision?

Prabhupāda: Equal vision means that I don’t make any distinction between you and a dog.

Jesuit: You make no distinction…

Prabhupāda: No, this is spiritual vision because a paṇḍita, paṇḍita means learned man, his

Jesuit: Would you think that their souls are of different value, the soul of the dog…?

Prabhupāda: No, soul is of the same value.

Jesuit: That I would find hard to accept.

Prabhupāda: Huh?

Jesuit: ‘Cause as I would understand it, the soul of the man, of any man, is what we would call a spiritual soul, an immortal soul, and the soul of the animal is a principle of life, what the Greeks would call savvy(?), Aristotle would call psyche. But it is not of an immortal soul, therefore the man has higher value than the animal, the dog, something like that.

Prabhupāda: No. What do you think? Just like a child, as a child’s father, the child has got different soul and the father has got different soul?

Jesuit: They’ve got different souls but they’re both immortal, spiritual souls.

Prabhupāda: Who is important, the child or the father?

Jesuit: Both are important, both very important, both more important than…

Prabhupāda: Which one? Which important?

Devotee: He says both are equally important, but they’re both more important than the dog.

Prabhupāda: Important, so far important is concerned, both of them same.

Prabhupāda: So the soul is the same. So there is no difference, mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ [Bg. 15.7], find out this verse. Soul is the part and parcel of the supreme soul, Supersoul, God.

Jesuit: That is what I find hard to understand, your divine grace, that my soul, your soul is part of the supreme soul.

Prabhupāda: Yes, their soul is part and parcel…

Jesuit: I can’t understand that because the supreme soul, God, the deity, is infinite.

Prabhupāda: Yes, infinite, just like your, I’ll let you know, just like the ocean and the drop of ocean.

Jesuit: But even the… No, no, I can’t say that either, the ocean is not infinite, the ocean is not…

Prabhupāda: It is a comparison, a drop of water… He is infinite, God is infinite, we are finite.

Jesuit: We are finite, God is infinite, therefore we cannot, added together, make up God.

Prabhupāda: No. I don’t say that. I don’t say that. That finite and infinite, they… Finite is there, only “in” is not there. That is lacking. They, individual soul, (indistinct) we are not infinite.

Jesuit: No, of course.

Prabhupāda: But God is infinite, and I am finite. So the finite portion is common. The “in” is more in God, infinite. So similarly I am giving the example, just like a drop of ocean water, it contains the same chemical, you find salty, and the whole ocean also salty, but the ocean is big salt and this drop is a small particle. The salt is there.

Jesuit: But I can’t accept the example because the little drops of water which have salt and so on, all together coalesce to form the huge ocean but the ocean is still finite. It is not infinite. But you and I are finite…

Prabhupāda: That is already explained.

Jesuit: If we coalesce together, then that how many of us that there are…

Prabhupāda: No, I’m not comparing that combined together that we shall be equal to God. I don’t say that.

Jesuit: I didn’t follow you then.

Jesuit: Who was the son He sent?

Prabhupāda: Eh? Just like Jesus, we say “son of God.” So…

Jesuit: That’s the second person made man, become human, becomes a man.

Prabhupāda: Yes, He is very important, but He is son, a very important son. Just like father may have many sons, but one of them may be very important, very good assistant to the father so Christ is like that. He is son of God, very important, He’s helping God coming down to reclaim these fallen souls that “Come to God, why you are suffering here?” Son, He’s very faithful and important son. But the others, they are also sons, but they have forgotten God. Therefore they are suffering. So sometimes He sends His son or His devotee and sometimes He comes Himself, that is Kṛṣṇa.

Jesuit: And He comes in bodily form?

Prabhupāda: Yes. God has… Why, the son has got body then the father has got body. Your son has got body so you have got your body. Without the father having body, how the son can get body?

Jesuit: I don’t understand that.

Prabhupāda: If… Suppose your son, you have got this body, so your father must have body.

Prabhupāda: Similarly if the son of God has body, the God must have body.

Guest: Not necessarily.

Prabhupāda: Why? Can you show any example, a son is born from without body?

Jesuit: That is on a very human level which…

Prabhupāda: Anyway that your experience is on the human field, you have to give some example that “Here is no body but the son has body.” Show me the example.

Jesuit: You can have a man who has a thing in what we would call super-eminence and he has it on a higher form…

Prabhupāda: Higher form maybe, but there is form.

Jesuit: You take a musician like Beethoven, a musician…

Prabhupāda: We also say that the God has got form but not form like this.

Jesuit: No, he hasn’t got form in Aristotle’s idea of the word form either, his higher wathic(?) theory of matter and form. In a sense, form there means spirit and so…

Prabhupāda: Yes, spiritual form.

Jesuit: …but we’re not using it in that sense. When you’re using the word form, you mean a material form like a shape, a body…

Prabhupāda: No, no, I don’t say material form, spiritual form.

Jesuit: Well, I haven’t understood you then. God, you say, has a form.

Prabhupāda: Spiritual form.

Jesuit: Aḥ well, matter of words, I can understand that. He has a…

Prabhupāda: Not this form.

Jesuit: No, not material. He’s not matter, He’s pure…

Prabhupāda: No, no.

Jesuit: We would say He’s pure spirit…

Prabhupāda: Yes, yes, yes, that is stated in the…

Jesuit: There’s no form of passivity in God, there’s no form of change in God, there’s no, no limitations of any sort. Matter has limitations. The soul is immortal because it has no principle of corruption in it. Aristotle would say that matter has parts, outside parts, and so it can, it has in itself the power of dissolving and it would break up, corrupts. The soul never does.

Prabhupāda: We have got this material body and spiritual soul. That is in this material condition there is distinction between the spirit and matter. As soon as the spirit goes from this material body, it has no value.

Jesuit: No life, true.

Prabhupāda: It is matter only, lump of matter, combination of matter. Therefore the spirit is important even in this life.

Jesuit: Oh, I see that, of course.

Prabhupāda: Yes, spirit is important. But God is fully spirit, He has no material quality. Yes. We have got, in this material condition, difference between the matter and spirit, but God has not so, such thing. He is whole spirit. That is the difference between God…

Jesuit: And also, as a result, the human, you, I, all these, we’re all persons separate from one another, distinct from one another, and distinct from God, who is a separate person.

Prabhupāda: Yes, yes, we admit that.

Jesuit: It’s that I haven’t understood. Sometimes you get pantheists who talk as though God is made up of a sum total of…

Prabhupāda: That is a theory, that is a theory, that is not fact.

Jesuit: No, it’s a false theory because it goes against all logic and philosophy.

Prabhupāda: But no, theory in this form that God is everywhere, by His potency but everything is not God. This is our philosophy. God is everywhere. Just like the sunshine. Sunshine is spread everywhere but that does not mean that everything is sun.

Jesuit: That’s true.

Prabhupāda: It is like that. God is all-pervading by His potency. This book, this is also energy of God. Find out this verse, bhūmir āpo ‘nalo vāyuḥ khaṁ mano buddhir eva ca [Bg. 7.4].

Jesuit: Do you, in your creed, do you believe in metempsychosis, that is the soul going through one form of life and then if it lives badly, the person lives badly, it comes back in another form and so on? Do you believe in the metempsychosis?

Prabhupāda: Transmigration.

Jesuit: Transmigration of souls.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is stated here.

Jesuit: I find it hard to accept that……(and it goes on…..)