Prabhupāda: ..."Unless we see." But you see, but you cannot go. Your argument is, "Unless we see," but you are seeing there is another planet, so many hundred and thousands, millions of planets. But you cannot go there. That is your inefficiency. How can you say? Because your theory is "I must see," but you cannot go there. First of all, admit your inefficiency. Why you conclude, what is it called, abruptly, without seeing. Because seeing is your experience. But you cannot go and see. Why you are trying to go to the moon planet? Just to see. Similarly, there are so many other planets, but you are not efficient to go and see. How can you conclude?
Nitāi: Well, they don't conclude. They say, there may be possibility of higher life.
Prabhupāda: So that's all right. Maybe...
Satsvarūpa: Agnostic, "There may be; we don't know."
Satsvarūpa: "There may be God, but we don't know."
Prabhupāda: That you don't know, but if somebody knows... That is not a proof, that because you cannot see. That is not proof.
Nitāi: No. They just... They make this theory based on the fact that the most advanced that they've seen so far is man.
Prabhupāda: Who is advanced? Nobody is advanced unless one has seen or known God. That is actually advancement. They're putting so many theories... I have not seen. Why shall I believe you? You are talking so many nonsense which is not in my experience. Why shall I believe you? Hm?
Nitāi: Well, then they, then they'll tell you that, "Well, come and we'll show you this experiment."
Nitāi: We show you these experiments, and then you can see too.
Prabhupāda: What is that experience? You show, make experiment, that from the monkey's body a man is coming. Show me the experiment. Nobody has seen the experiment.
Nitāi: Well, in that case they say that the monkey looks so much like man; everything is practically there.
Prabhupāda: Well, that doesn't mean... Every man looks like another man; that does not mean he has come from him. He has got a different father.
Nitāi: One experiment that they've come up with is that they study the embryo within the womb.
Nitāi: They study the embryo within the womb.
Prabhupāda: No, that is your experience, but I have not seen. Why shall I believe you? I have not seen. Why will I believe you? What is the answer? You say so many rascaldom, but I have not seen. Why shall I believe you?
Satsvarūpa: Well, like Professor Kotovsky said to you, "We accept it because a scientific body has presented it. We can't experiment."
Prabhupāda: Ah, so therefore we accept another scientific man. We accept Vyāsadeva. But you don't accept. You say, "Unless we see." So why shall I accept you unless I see?
Satsvarūpa: They would say for you to see everything yourself you'd have to become a trained up scientist.
Prabhupāda: Similarly, similarly, you have to become like me also to see God. You cannot say that in my case you are authority, and your case I am not authority. How can you say? If you oblige me to accept you as authority, you must accept me also authority. Otherwise, why shall I accept you? Why you are obliging me which I do not see? So many rascals says that he has gone to moon planet, but I have not gone with you. Why shall I believe you?
Satsvarūpa: They think that their documentation is something that's more acceptable for...
Prabhupāda: So acceptable to someone. My documentation is acceptable to so many. Why not my many? We have got many followers of the documentation of Vedic literature. As you have got your own ways of documentation, I have got my own ways of documentation. If you do not believe my documentation, why shall I believe without seeing your documentation? And if you set aside your documentation, my documentation, then come to reason. Eh?
Nitāi: If, if what?
Prabhupāda: I don't believe your documentation; you do not believe my documentation. Then let us come to reason. The reason is, as we see varieties—one is better than the other—there must be the best. And that is God. So far documentation is concerned, you do not believe my documentation, I do not believe your documentation. Then? How the conclusion will come? As far as possible, by reasoning. Reasoning is that we find one is better than the other. So go on finding; if you have got power, you will see that the best. (aside:) Give me that. This is reasoning. As the child has a father, the father has his father, the grandfather has his father, then there must be some ultimate father. How can you deny this? By experience you see. Suppose a great-grandchild does not see the great-grandfather, does it mean that he was not there? The reason is as everyone has got father, father's father, his father, his father, his, so go on, find out the ultimate father.
Satsvarūpa: They've just concocted that, that long ago there was no intelligent human life, and that...
Prabhupāda: That is your concoction. We get so many literatures. Huh? The Bhāgavata literature, five thousand years old. You have no history beyond three thousand years. Neither even at the present moment you have got such nice literature. When you say that people are very much advanced, who has produced such literature? Where is a book like Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam or Bhagavad-gītā, whole world? If you say that this book was written, say 1,500 years ago, but where is a similar literature in any other part of the world? Eh? Is there a similar literature? Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa...
Morning Walk -- January 22, 1974, Hawaii