Quotes: Ethics (Srila Prabhupada)

Section Description

1. Meta-ethics (The Nature of Morality) This section explores the deepest, most fundamental questions about the essence of ethics, without offering specific rules of conduct.

The ontology of morality: Are there objective moral facts, or is morality a social construct?

Epistemology: How do we know what is good and evil, and can we justify our moral beliefs?

Moral semantics: What exactly do words like "right", "duty" or "good" mean?

2. Normative Ethics (Theories of Right Action) Here, systems are studied that offer specific criteria for determining how one should act.

Ethics of virtue: Focus on human character, the development of inner qualities and the pursuit of the highest good (from classical ancient philosophy to modern and traditional models).

Deontology: Ethics of duty and rules, where the morality of an act is determined by its compliance with universal laws (for example, Kant's categorical imperative).

Consequentialism: Evaluating actions solely based on their results and consequences (for example, utilitarianism).

Quotes from Srila Prabhupada

Meta-ethics

The ontology of morality

The Divine commandment of Morality (sad-dharma)

ШБ 5.3.20 к.: «Дхарма, придуманная людьми, не принесет им никакого блага… Однако истинная дхарма не может быть создана человеком. Дхармам̇ ту са̄кша̄д бхагават-пран̣ӣтам. Дхарму устанавливает Бог, Верховная Личность, так же как законы страны устанавливает правительство». https://vedabase.io/ru/library/sb/5/3/20/

(естественное право) ШБ 6.3.19 Истинные законы морали (дхармам) устанавливаются Самим (са̄кша̄т — непосредственно;) Верховным Господом (бхагават). Этого не могут сделать ни великие риши с высших планет, ни полубоги, ни правители Сиддхалоки, хотя все они пребывают в гуне благости. Что уж говорить об асурах, обычных людях, видьядхарах и чаранах?

The Epistemology of Morality

Transcendental morality

Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.3.20–21. June 17, 1972, Los Angeles. So not you; everyone. Nothing belongs to us. There is no question of morality unless one surrenders to Krsna. Everything immoral for a person who is not Krsna conscious. Everything immoral. Therefore Caitanya-caritamrta says,

'dvaite' bhadrabhadra-sakale samana

'ei bhala, ei manda' saba mana dharma

[Cc Antya 4.176]

In this material world, which is called duality, these, our listing, "These things are good. These things are bad," bhadra abhadra -- bhadra means good; abhadra means bad -- these are all the same. It is simply mental concoction. Here, the so-called morality, ethics -- all nonsense. Because you, you are trying to lord it over on the property of somebody else. So where is your morality? So these sentiments -- morality, immorality, good, bad -- they are simply manufactured. Actually, unless one surrenders to Krsna, there is no question of this ethics and morality. We are now discussing in our philosophical class Huxley's morality. These are all crazy man's proposals. Actually, there is no morality <...> Don't manufacture. You are not so expert that you can manufacture things. That is illegal. Just like we do not read any rascal's book. They are manufacturing so many ideas. We read Bhagavatam, authorized. We read Srimad Bhagavad-gita. We read Brahma-samhita. Not rascal's book. What these rascals can write? They're imperfect.

Knowledge of God, religion - the basis of morality

Morning Walk. April 25, 1973, Los Angeles:

Religion, religion is the source of moral and ethics. Because religion means to come to the perfectional point. So as soon as there is perfection, moral and ethics are already there. So-called moral ethics, that is artificial. Harav abhaktasya kuto mahad-gunah [SB 5.18.12]. If one is not a devotee of the Lord, his morality has no value. That is artificial. Harav abhaktasya kuto mahad-gunah. Mahad-gunah, high qualities, moral, ethics, they are high qualities. So Bhagavata says that unless one is devotee of God, he cannot have high qualities. That is artificial.

by Mahajano

Moral semantics

What is the definition of morality?

Morning Walk. April 25, 1973, Los Angeles:

There is no question of morality. First of all, define what is morality. What is the definition of morality? Value of life, everyone has got his own value of life. A drunkard, he has got his value of life, that "When I drink, it is value." Is that morality?... Why do they not make their own law, that "I have got my own law. I don't care for state law." Will it be accepted?... Suppose the state says, "You must drive to the right." Why don't you drive on the left? Why do you obey the state laws? What does he say? You do whatever you like... Immediately he'll be kicked on his face. "You rascal, why you driving? Kick on your face." [laughter] And what he will say at that time? Can he say that "Yes, it is my law. I'll do this." Can he say like this?... Then, then what is this? The insanity. What you cannot do, if you say, "I can do it," then it is insanity.

Evil means absence of God conscious

Room Conversation With Mr. John Papworth and Mr. E. F. Schumacher. August 4, 1973, London:

When there is no God consciousness that is evil. This is the sum and substance, if you're not God conscious then everything is evil for you. This may be different, but you are in evil or as you say in the Christian, Satan. If you're not under God then you are under Satan. And Satan is evil. So anyone who is not God conscious he is in evil. That's all <...> Anyone who is not God conscious he is overwhelmed with evil, inside and outside both. We have to purify therefore inside and outside both.

Relativity of the material moral

Morning Walk. January 9, 1974, Los Angeles:

Then what is the good? You cannot protect yourself from death. Then what is the meaning of this "good"? "This is good. This is advancement, and this is not advancement." Relativity, relativity. Law of Relativity. What is..., what is food for one is death for other, the same thing. So how you can say the food is good or bad? Is it not? "One man's food, another man's poison." So how you can distinguish this is food or poison? One man will say, "No, it is food." Another man will say, "It is poison." So how you'll distinguish? So this good and bad is simply mental speculation. Because it is in the material platform, there is nothing good. Everything is bad. Otherwise why Krsna said, sarva-dharman parityajya [Bg 18.66].

Normative Ethics

Transcendental ethics

Argument aginst utilitarizm (karma and dharma vada)

Bhagavad-gita 2.26–27. August 29, 1973, London.

Duty. The same thing is going on. Duty is very important thing. Krsna is stressing on it, that one cannot stop his duty. Then he becomes sinful. That is karma-vada.

If, just like so many people, they argue that if we discharge our duties nicely, then where is the need of accepting God? The karma-vada philosophy is that if there is God, then he's giving us the result of our activities, and if I do nicely, then He gives me nice opportunity, and if I do not do things very nicely, I am put into suffering. So there is a karma-phala-datta, decides... Just like the high-court judge, he is giving judgment according to the case, different cases. Similarly, our goodness or badness will be decided according to our karma. That is also fact. Then what is the use of accepting one God? If I do my duties very nicely, then He must give me nice result. So why shall I worship Him? Why shall I become a devotee of God? It is His duty. This is karma-vada.

There are so many instances, even amongst the devotees, because this material world is made so that you cannot continue this principle perpetually. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gita, you'll find. Because the three modes of material nature is working, even if you are on the platform of goodness, the other modes of material nature will try to attack you. And your goodness, morality, honesty, these things will be polluted by the onslaught of the other two inferior modes of nature. Therefore, sometimes we find that a very nice man committing some sinful activities.

So the decision of the Srimad-Bhagavatam is harav abhaktasya kuto mahad-gunah [SB 5.18.12]. Mahad-gunah. We can find it easily, just like we say that no illicit sex, no meat-eating, we consider this is sinful. But there are others, big, big leaders, politicians, philosophers, even religious priest, they do not think that this is immoral or this is sinful. Meat-eating is sinful. "Why? What is the sin there?" Illicit sex, "What is the wrong there?" Intoxication, "What is wrong there?" They do not find any immorality. So this standard of morality there cannot be fixed up if one is not God conscious. There cannot be. Standard of morality, standard of goodness cannot be. That is the decision of the Srimad-Bhagavatam. Harav abhaktasya kuto mahad-gunah. Lack of Krsna consciousness. They think that animal has no soul. They do not accept this morality that animal cannot be killed, it is sinful, it is immoral. They have created their own theory.

So without being standardized by Krsna consciousness, or God consciousness, you cannot find the standard platform of morality, honesty. These things you cannot find. This is not possible. Therefore, the verdict of the Srimad-Bhagavatam is harav abhaktasya kuto mahad-gunah. Just like if you do not follow a standard law, how you can fix up, "This is morality" or "This is honesty" or "dishonesty"? There must be standard law. And who can give you the law unless he is the greatest authority? So law changes according to different countries, climate, situation. So man-made law cannot give you standard morality, honesty or... It is not possible. Because one will think, "This is morality," another will think, "No, this is not morality." Same thing: "Keep to the left," "Keep to the right." Somebody says, " 'Keep to the left' is right," somebody says " 'Keep to the left,' it is wrong." Manorathenasati dhavato bahih [SB 5.18.12].

Because those who are not Krsna conscious, they are hovering on the mental plane. They cannot be..., there cannot be any fixed-up morality, honesty, dishonesty. No. And rascals will also say, yato mata tato patha. Means, whatever you think is all right, that is all right. According to you, your conception this is right, and according to my conception, both of them are right. How both of them can be right?

So the karma-vada, that you follow morality you'll get good results... But where is your morality? Because you are disobedient to God. In the beginning of your life, you are immoral. You are disobeying the greatest authority.

There is another example, a story, that a gang of thieves, they stolen some property from different houses, then out of the village they are dividing amongst themselves the booties. So one thief is saying, "Please divide it morally so that one may not be cheated." Now just imagine, the property is stolen. Where is the morality there? But when dividing, they are thinking of morality. The basic principle is immoral. Where you can have morality? Similarly, according to Vedic injunction, isavasyam idam sarvam [Iso mantra 1]: everything belongs to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. It is His property. So the whole planet is God's property, whole universe is God's property. But when we are claiming that "This is my property," then where is morality? If you claim others' property as your property, then where is the morality?

So in this material world, such kind of morality, honesty, is going on. But our morality is if Krsna is satisfied, then it is honesty, morality, everything. There are many example. Just like Prahlada Maharaja. Prahlada Maharaja is standing, and his father is being killed by Nrsimhadeva in his presence. So do you think it is morality that one's father is being killed in the presence of his son, and the son, without protest, is seeing, with a garland, that "As soon as my father is killed, I shall offer this garland to Nrsimhadeva"? Is it morality? From material point of view? We are worshiping... Prahlada Maharaja has become mahajana, the greatest authority in devotional service, but if we study his morality, that he did not protest the killing of his father, rather he was waiting with a garland, that "As soon as the killing business is finished I'll reward this." You see? Where is material morality? There is no morality.

The gopis, they were young girls, wife of somebody, sister of somebody, daughter of somebody, but when Krsna was playing on His flute at dead of night, they gave up all their engagement and began to run, "Where Krsna is present?" So from Vedic standard of view, this is immorality. They are going to another young boy and leaving family. Even somebody, some of the gopis, they left their sons also and went to Krsna. From material point of view this is immoral.

So you'll find in such a way that what is from material point of view immoral, it is the most magnificent morality in relationship with Krsna. And similarly, from material point of view, what is moral, that is most, I mean to say, abominable from the point of... Just like Yudhisthira Maharaja. Yudhisthira Maharaja became very moral. Krsna advised him, "Just go and tell Dronacarya that 'Your son is dead,' " although his son was not dead. Because Dronacarya will not die. Unless he hears the news of the death of his son, he'll not die. So he would not believe anyone, but Yudhisthira Maharaja is famous, very moral. So Krsna asked him that "You go, otherwise he'll not believe anyone." So Yudhisthira Maharaja hesitated, "How can I say lies?" So for this he had to see hell. He became immoral. Man-nimitte krtam papam punyaya eva kalpate.

So our standard of morality and immorality is to see whether Krsna is satisfied. If Krsna is satisfied, then it is morality. If Krsna is dissatisfied, then it is immoral. And Krsna's representative also. Therefore it is said, yasya prasadad bhagavat-prasado yasyaprasadan na gatih kuto 'pi. Our morality is to satisfy Krsna or His representative, guru. Yasya prasada. If he's satisfied, then it is moral. If he's not satisfied, then it is immoral. Na gatih kuto 'pi.

So this karma-vada, that you act nicely and you'll get nice result, that is all right, but there may be some mistakes. There are so many instances. One very great charitable king, he was giving in charity so many cows to the brahmanas. So there was some mistake, and for that purpose, although he was all throughout his whole life he was giving in charity, a little mistake, he became a big lizard in the well. Therefore the conclusion is that this material morality-immorality has no value. Spiritual morality. Spiritual morality means to abide by the order of Krsna. That is morality. Whatever Krsna says, if we accept, samsiddhir hari-tosanam. Many places.

In many places. Svanusthitasya dharmasya samsiddhir hari-tosanam [SB 1.2.13]. In another place, that, if you execute your morality principles, but if by executing such morality principle you do not, I mean to say, awaken your Krsna consciousness, it is simply waste of time. Wherever you go, the Bhagavata conclusion, harav abhaktasya kuto mahad-gunah. We have to keep in point of view that to become... Krsna also says in Bhagavad-gita: api cet su-duracaro bhajate mam ananya-bhak sadhur eva sa mantavyah [Bg 9.30]. Even one is found su-duracarah, not very strictly following moral principles, but he is an unflinching devotee of Krsna, he's sadhu. These things are there.

Therefore the point should be that we should not accept this karma-vada or the bauddha-vada or Mayavada -- there are so many vadas. We shall simply take krsna-vada. Simply, simply accept Krsna. And whatever He orders, whatever He likes, for His satisfaction, we shall do anything and everything. That is our morality.

Ethics of duty (deontology)

(общее благо) ШБ 10.22.35 Долг (ш́рейах̣ — ради вечного блага;) каждого живого существа — действовать на благо другим (дехишу —воплощенных;) своей жизнью, имуществом, разумом и речью

(отклонения от дхармы) ШБ 7.15.13-14 Различные предписания, которые мешают человеку выполнять его религиозные обязанности, называются видхармой. Религиозные принципы, предназначенные для других, именуют пара-дхармой. Новая религия, созданная самолюбивым гордецом и противоречащая принципам Вед, носит название упадхармы. А когда кто-то с помощью казуистики истолковывает религиозные принципы на свой лад, он изобретает чхала-дхарму. https://vedabase.io/ru/library/sb/7/15/13/  Псевдорелигия, выдуманная тем, кто сознательно пренебрегает обязанностями, соответствующими его уровню духовного развития и положению в обществе, называется абхасой [бледным отражением или ложным подобием]. Разве мало человеку исполнять обязанности, которые соответствуют его ашраму и варне, чтобы обрести умиротворение и избавиться от всех материальных страданий?

(дхарма ограничение для дальнейшего роста) ШБ 11.5.11 Обусловленная душа в материальном мире всегда хочет заниматься сексом, есть мясо и пить спиртное. Однако священные писания на самом деле никогда не поощряют ничего подобного. Хотя писания допускают секс в законном браке, а также поедание мяса после заклания животного в соответствующем обряде и употребление алкоголя в виде ритуальных чаш вина, истинная цель этих церемоний — помочь человеку отказаться от таких действий. https://vedabase.io/ru/library/sb/11/5/11/