MAN WOMAN INTERACTION LECTURE #11 Eger, Hungary

HH BVPS Maharaja: So any questions from yesterday?

Prabhu: So yesterday we heard about how to improve relationships, and I would like to know how do you... when the relationship ending [indistinct 01:04]

HH BVPS Maharaja: Ended means...?

Mataji: Open...

Prabhu: There is no more need of the relationship, so we can retire.

HH BVPS Maharaja: What's the difference between retiring and the relationship? Do you understand? So when does one... Well, I am going to take the question this way. When does one know when grihastha life ends and vanaprastha starts? So Manu mentions when you see wrinkles, gray hair and your son's son, then that's time for vanaprastha. Vanaprastha means... Then vanaprastha can either be practiced with the wife or without. Meaning, whatever is best, if the wife needs to be in the family, she can be there, if not then she can be with the husband.

Means, the lessons to be learned from grihastha life then have been gained. So that would mean that understanding that there is nothing the material world has to offer, so then one is able to just get down to basic sadhana and other elements of developing character. So that way then husband and wife are very good companions, and so then they work well together in the performance of their daily duties and sadhana. So then it's a natural position to be in, because it's comfortable for performance of spiritual life. Right? Does that make sense? Yes? No? On the same thing?

Prabhu: Yes. It may happen that if there is a bad marriage, the husband thinks, "It's time for vanaprastha," but actually he just wants to get rid of his wife.

HH BVPS Maharaja: Vanaprastha doesn't mean you get rid of this wife and then after a few years get another one. The experience of living with the woman, it doesn't matter which one it is, it's the same. You have a basket of apples, they are all apples, one is a little bit more red, one is a little bit more this shape or that shape. But they are all apples. So vanaprastha is not that... Vanaprastha doesn't mean, "I don't wanna live with this woman any more." It means, "I don't need to live with women." So if your thought is, "I can't handle living with this woman any more, I am out, I am taking vanaprastha," then don't call it vanaprastha, just say, "I am separating from my wife." Vanaprastha means, "I've learned the lesson of the principle of women," not "this woman." I have learned it through this woman, but it applies to women. And because I don't need to live with women, therefore there is no problem if I do." Right? If that makes sense to you, then you can take vanaprastha. If it doesn't make sense to you, you should still be a grihastha.

In other words, the Pandavas are liberated souls, they don't have to be family members. But because they are liberated, it doesn't matter if they are in the family life or not. So if the situation is more favorable, then they are family members. Husband and wife work well together, they are both dedicated to their sadhana, so what's wrong if they assist each other, help each other in their devotional practices? But it's not because one is staying together because one is a man and a woman, one is staying together because you are best friends. Does that make sense? Of course, the consideration in dealings of who is a man, who is a woman, that will always continue, that's Krishna's eternal potencies. But leaving grihastha life means you leave by not needing, not by repulsion. Right?

"Oh, it's so much trouble and so much difficulty and it's not, you get no benefit!" So that's nice. But what it means, if you translate that statement is, "I thought grihastha life would be nice, there would be no trouble, it would be really great." So most likely you think, "Well, because of this woman it's not great, so another woman would be." But of course, I consider myself advanced and want others to see me that way, so I won't say that out loud, so I'll just tell all my friends, "You know, material life and this and that, I just wanna get more serious and more in my service." And all the other uninformed, uneducated men will, "Yes, yes, it's all maya." And then two three years later when a woman comes along that you think, "Well, this could actually work," then you have to take, then find some new way to rationalize a new position. You know what I am saying? "Well, you know, devotional life, service is more important and the position you are in doesn't really matter." Does that make sense? So the point of grihastha life is to learn that there is nothing to gain in grihastha life. So that means, you have directly observed the phenomena. But unless you deal with the household life properly, you won't actually know what can be gained. In other words, if one hasn't dealt properly, there is this all, means the idea, "Well, if I had done this or done that, then it would have been better." But when you follow the directions of shastra, then that's as good as it gets. Then you can see, "Well, that's all the more there is." So it doesn't matter if it's this woman or that woman, it's the limit, whichever will be great on the material platform, but not as great as spiritual activities. Then you can compare. Now it's hard to compare, because we have an underlying concept of what family life would be like. Right? So then trying to get that, if we don't, we get frustrated, but it doesn't necessarily remove the concept of what we think it could be. Does that make sense? So what you wanna do is remove the concept of what it could be and replace that with what it actually is. You know what I am saying? So that's what household life is.

So that's why then it's know that it's maya, but you have to remove that concept from the heart. So maya means that which is not, maya means not being connected to Krishna. So if it's connected to Krishna, then technically it's not maya. So in other words, you want to take, we have our concept of what is family life, which is illusory. Then by connecting it to Krishna, it's no longer illusory, we see it for what it is. Then seeing it for what it actually is in connection with Krishna, we can compare it to direct activities in connection with Krishna. Then one can see that the direct connection with Krishna is much more whole and intense and satisfying than the indirect connection with Krishna. The family life may be nice, but still there is a problem that still it's temporary. You know what I am saying? Means, you only live so long. So that means, the niceness, the security is still temporary, even if it's run very well and one is getting, one is very satisfied in it. But ultimately it's temporary. 20, 30, 50 years, 60 years. Then you compare that to Krishna, that's eternal, it's always getting better, there is no end. So it's completely secure. Does that make sense? So like that one is able to make the comparison. But one can only make a comparison when there is no more infatuation with the process. Infatuation always overwhelms intelligence. So when one is able to view things clearly, then one is able to make that comparison. So therefore one can understand, it's a comfortable position to be in, but it no way compares to Krishna consciousness. You know what I am saying? You could be in a room where you have 2 brahmacharis, or 4 brahmacharis and enough space and all that, or you could be in the same room, stuffed in there with 15 other brahmacharis. But either way, you can still do your service, but just one is more comfortable for doing the service. But not that it's, "Oh, I can only, if there is only 4 people in the room, only then I can do my service." Do you understand the difference? So it's not that being comfortable in Krishna consciousness is maya. If the situation is there, it's favorable, what's the problem? But we don't demand it if we don't need it. The same way is, having lived together with somebody for 30 years then you've worked out relationship, it's comfortable, it's practical for doing your service. It's not that you have to be in that relationship, but it's comfortable, it's favorable. That's vanaprastha. Does that make sense?

This whole idea is that whenever you think of marriage then you kind-of get sick or something, then that's not exactly vanaprastha. I mean, it may look good on a cover of Rolling Stone magazine, but...

Prabhu: How can someone who is a bachelor come to this understanding and become... achieve the consciousness of the vanaprastha, so one doesn't have the relationship, been in relationship with women for the last 10-20 years, but hasn't achieved this consciousness that you are talking about?

HH BVPS Maharaja: By seeing or hearing, unless one wants to get married. Yes. But by seeing and hearing. Like that. Because the point is is the principle is the same, if one has been in a married situation, it won't change. You know what I am saying? What people experienced thousands of years ago, it's only the same experience today. Right? It doesn't change. You had a question?

Prabhu: Yesterday you mentioned that Prabhupada said that you can't understand women. That means that otherwise [indistinct 19:11] Could you please elaborate on this?

HH BVPS Maharaja: Okay. Which one? [Laughter] Narada Muni, I don't know if I said the story, I don't know if I said or not. Narada Muni, he approached his brother, Lord Shiva and asked him, "Can you please explain to me the nature of women?" Lord Shiva fell silent for a long time. [Laughter] And after a long silence then he said very soberly, "I've been thinking about this question for millions of years." [Laughter] "And I still don't have an answer." Did it answer it on that side? Okay. Shiva is Purusha, he is not prakriti. And Parvati is his expansion, is his consort, so you can take that story as horse's mouth. Do you have anything in your language? You can take that as authority. If he doesn't know, how anyone else is gonna know? Right?

Other side then, in rasa, you have the vishaya and the ashraya. Vishaya is the enjoyer, ashraya is the enjoyed. Okay? So that means, what is an aspect within the nature of the vishaya is appreciated by the ashraya. And so the relationship between the ashraya and vishaya is based on that. Does that make sense? So the ashraya naturally will be attracted to something that is of their own nature that's in the vishaya. And so then that will be the basis of relationship. Okay? So that means the ashraya knows what it means to serve the vishaya. But the vishaya doesn't know what is being tasted by the ashraya in serving the vishaya. Does that make sense? Now, Krishna expands as Balarama. So Balarama is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, so He is Vishaya for the whole cosmic creation, but He is ashraya for Krishna. Do you understand? So that's why Balarama, sometimes you see, is referred to as "The Supreme Personality of Servitor Godhead". So He knows what it means to be vishaya and ashraya. So all expansions of Balarama, Mahanarayana, Sankarshana, Krishna and Balarama in Dvaraka, Sankarshana, Pradyumna, Vasudeva, Aniruddha, all the Vaikuntha murtis, Garbhodakashayi Vishnu and the rest, and so They all know what it means to be ashraya, because They are all ashraya to Krishna. So that means, Krishna in Vraja is the only one, is the only Vishaya, Who doesn't know what it means to be ashraya. So therefore He comes as His own devotee to taste that. But you hear Nitananda just comes as, Balarama comes as Nityananda, He is Himself, Advaita Acarya is Himself. Do you understand? Because They already know what it's like. So Lord Caitanya is taking the mood of worshiping Krishna, but Balarama and Sankarshana are already worshiping Krishna. In the Vaikuntha temples, the room where the Deity sleeps, they have pictures of Radha and Krishna there on the walls. Do you understand? So all the expansions of Krishna are all devotees of Krishna, just as all expansions of energy are all devotees of Radharani. Is that okay? More points?

Prabhu: I apologize but just to clarify, I don't know what ashraya and vishaya means.

HH BVPS Maharaja: We said, vishaya is the enjoyer and ashraya is the enjoyed. We mentioned that the ashraya appreciates some quality in the vishaya and the relationship between the two is based on that. Does that make sense? Mother Yashoda is ashraya, she sees Krishna as her son. Krishna is rasa, He could be related to her in any rasa, but she relates to Him as a parent. Therefore you say, mother Yashoda is in parental rasa. We don't say Krishna is in the rasa, Krishna IS rasa, so He is vishaya, and then the ashraya draws that particular rasa from Krishna. Does that make sense?

You have a basket full of a variety of vegetables, but you want to make French fries, or chips, or whatever you like. So therefore you take, draw from the basket the potatoes. Does that make sense? The basket has anything, but because you want to relate to the basket in that way, that's what you draw from the basket. Does that make sense?

Prabhu: You were speaking that how the man is characterized by four aspects of Sankarshana, Pradyumna, Aniruddha and Vasudeva, and I understand that Sankarshana means that He creates the field. Could you explain more of the other three, and also if these aspects also apply for ladies and what does it mean for them?

HH BVPS Maharaja: Pradyumna means attraction to the field. Aniruddha means, there is a desire to gain something from the field. And Vasudeva means, you are operating the field. So in Vasudeva then we see is all the qualities of Sankarshana, Pradyumna and Aniruddha are present. So there is qualities that go along with each of these four. They are called the kalyana-gunas, I can't explain what they are, I don't remember. So Sankarshana has two, Pradyumna two, Aniruddha has two, so all those two each then are present in Vasudeva, so there is six qualities in Vasudeva. Because to perform an activity you have to know the field, have to be able to identify the different elements of the field, have to be able to be willing to work with the field or particular the result you can get from the field. Does that make sense? Like that.

Prabhu: Can they be separated for men and women and do they have difficulty in these platforms?

HH BVPS Maharaja: If you wanna be able to turn around your vision and look at it backwards, then yes. Because the man is looking at it from Sankarshana, means, the field, to a result. But women are results, they are looking at the field for security. So they are looking at it from the opposite direction. That's why men get angry or frustrated and then angry when they can't get the results they want. And the women become frustrated and angry when their connection or security to the field is in question. But the two meet in abhideya. Because it's an activity, then results are gained and experiences are had. Means, only if the field is operated, are they connected to it. The generator is running, then there is electricity. If there is a generator, there is the potential for electricity, but until it runs, there is no electricity. So when the energetic is creating energy, then there is a connection. Does that make sense?

Prabhu: The question is that these theoretical things have to be applied. But can they be applied in a situation where the husband and wife have to work hard just to make their living? Let's say the husband is a truck driver and he goes out and the wife is doing something else, and they just meet late in the evening when they get tired or they are gonna [indistinct 34:44]

HH BVPS Maharaja: Yeah. [Laughter] Means, it always applies. We are talking about how men work, how women work and what they are looking for in each other, so it doesn't matter if it's a one second encounter, or it's all day, it doesn't matter. You know what I am saying? Doesn't matter, that's the point is that this theory is the formulas on which it functions. But in Vedas you don't have anything that's just theory, it's always for application. Jnanis, their stuff we call theory, because jnanis don't do anything. But the devotee, and then the karmi he does things, but doesn't think. Karmi does things, doesn't think, the jnani thinks, but doesn't do anything. While the devotee thinks and does stuff, so that's what we are trying to establish. Does that make sense? So that's why theory and practice, they go together. You know what i am saying? There is no such thing as theory without application.

Prabhu: So then nobody can claim that because of the circumstances I didn't have enough time and opportunity to learn this.

HH BVPS Maharaja: Basically. Because it's like this. Because no one asked questions, we haven't gotten into so many other theories. But in sambandha, abhideya, prayojana, sambandha means the field. So that means, arranging the field. So if you could call that as preliminaries to any activity. Prayojana would mean, having completed the activity and then dealings that would go along with that completion, or like conclusion. Then you have the activity itself, abhideya. Does that make sense? Just like you wanna cook, that's the abhideya. That means, you have to plan, you have to buy things, you have to clean the kitchen, you have to prepare all the ingredients, get all the pots and things ready, it's all together. And once that's all been done, then you can cook. As soon as cooking is done, then you have the conclusion. You have to transfer things out of the pots, there may be some final garnishing, things have to be served, you have to clean the kitchen, clean the pots, put everything away, throw out the garbage, clean out the eating place, see that everyone is satisfied and say good bye. So if we are taking cooking as the main thing, you see the bulk of activities is actually before and after. Does that make sense?

So now, if you divide this as masculine and feminine, what's important to the man is the activity. So he will try to get through the preliminaries as quick as possible and the conclusion as quick as possible, because the activity and getting the result of that activity is what's important. But the women are the opposite. The preliminaries and the conclusion is what's important to them. Preliminaries aren't right, there is no activity. And after an activity they don't want it to end immediately. Does that make sense?

So therefore let us say, you have half and hour with the wife. You will find, that half and hour may be quite focused. But if you have all day with the wife, what the man considers the solid activity will still result to only half an hour, because the women will stretch out the preliminaries and the conclusion. So when they are talking to friends and cleaning the bathroom and doing these things that seemingly have nothing to do with you, that's preliminaries to being with you. So therefore if both are working all day and they come home late and are tired, means, the woman will just basically cut out most of the preliminaries and conclusion, it will still be there, but it will be in a short form.

So someone can't say, "I am not all day with the women, I don't get the same experience." You will get the same experience." Means, if you are with them all day then what's expanded there is you have more opportunities to be humble and be tolerant and be respectful and not expect anything back, that aspect you have more of. But dynamic, free-flowing interaction won't be any different. You know what I am saying? Like that. Women are smart. So there is half an hour, that half an hour means something, and if they have all day, that day will mean something to them, but you will still get your half an hour, if you deal properly the whole day. If you don't... [Laughter] Because activity is based on preliminaries. You know what I am saying? You can't do anything unless it's been properly prepared. The man wants to do some work on his car. So he gets right into it in getting the car in the right place and getting out his little mats, getting out his toolbox and getting everything just put perfectly. Then they'll raise the [Indistinct 43:41] So anything the man does, he has to deal with preliminary. But he is so stupid, he thinks if he deals with the woman, he doesn't have to. That's where the foolishness is. Does that make sense?

Mataji: Maharaja, there is this famous quote that women are less intelligent and [indistinct 44:15] like to stress on this point. But once I heard from Srila Prabhupada that they are less intelligent doesn't mean they are stupid to make a business or make a PhD or make a family, that is [indistinct 44:30] to make different opinion [indistinct 44:34]. Can you please clarify on this point?

HH BVPS Maharaja: When you define intelligence, when a feminist defines intelligence, what do they mean by it? Some ideas? Means, they are saying that a woman could do any material activity as well as a man can do. So, are we a material movement, or a spiritual movement? Do you understand? So, being a spiritual movement, therefore our definition of intelligence is connected to spiritual, not material. So when the Vedas say, women are less intelligent, they are not referring to material intelligence. You know what I am saying? Women are 4 times more clever than men. Cleverness is what? It's intelligence, but practical intelligence. So even a girl is not very academic, she has a practical intelligence to get done what she wants to do four times more than a man. The means she uses may or may not be intelligent, but her intelligence is working four times more to get done what she wants. So on the material platform it could go either way. Also, you have to look at it from the point of... Yeah, okay. So, but here we have... Okay, that's one aspect. We'll go through different aspects and then will try to pull it together.

Another aspect is how men think, how women think. For men, intellectual, emotional and sensual are three completely separate, not necessarily connected activities. But for women it's one entity, just different aspects. When the woman's emotions are functioning, her intelligence is also working, and that emotion may be expressed through the senses. And even when she is dealing, let's say, in extremely intellectual activities, still it's the experience of that that is important. You know what I am saying? Means, the lady can deal in nuclear physics, if she likes it, the experience is good. But the man will deal in it whether he likes it or not, because it's a intellectual activity, and his emotions don't actually figure in that equation. Or a man is being emotional, generally they are pretty stupid. And when they get really sensual, they are not very emotional. Do you understand? So that has its disadvantages materially. That's why we have all these things that we are explaining to the men, because it doesn't come naturally, because in the emotional and sensual aspect they generally don't use their brains. So they don't understand that the women do use their brains. So the man is thinking, "Why do I have to get into all this intellectual stuff to deal with women? It's an emotional thing or it's a sensual thing." But during that emotional and sensual experience the women are still using their intelligence, so if the man doesn't use his, she can't relate. That's why the machismo male is the epitomy of stupidity. He is tough, he is cool, he is out getting senses engaged, but it means there is zero intelligence being applied, therefore women find it so repulsive, and the men are so stupid, that no matter how many times you tell them, it appears they can never understand this, like that. You know what I am saying?

Still, this audience is sitting here and thinking they do pretty good with women. Therefore they are no asking any more questions. [Laughter]

Mataji: [indistinct 51:29] those women who are fighting for this side...

HH BVPS Maharaja: But what you mean by that?

Mataji: [indistinct 51:37]

HH BVPS Maharaja: So now, in applying this, that means that when the man looks at something spiritually, it's also completely separated from emotion and senses. So that means, spiritual vision will not be clouded by emotion and senses. So that puts them in a stronger position spiritually than the women. That's why spiritually the men have to lead the women. While the women, when they look at the spiritual, still emotional and sensual considerations will flavor it. A man does have the capacity to look at material life or family life that it has nothing there, it's completely mundane, has nothing for the soul and when they have that thought, if it's deep enough, they could walk off. It's a clean cut, because when you go into pure intellectual thought, there is no emotion, therefore they can leave. While the woman, she can understand that material life is a big problem and isn't really worth it, but then she is thinking, "Well, but what about this one and what about that one? And it would probably [indistinct 53:38] oh, we know, I don't wanna upset this one..." That's the difference.

So getting out of the material world being the topmost intellectual understanding of the Vedas, therefore men are more intelligent than women. So that's one way of looking at it. So what it is is, when it comes to spiritual, the men help the women. But when it comes to material, the women help the men. You know, the men thinks, "This is it, we are just here, what is this wretched life we're in? Let's just sell everything, we'll just move to Mayapur and just get right in the spiritual life!" And so then the wife thinks, "This is good, it's nice, it's a nice idea, but what about how we are gonna maintain ourselves? Do we have a place? Do we have a service, do we have this and that?" In other words, is the field going to be there? Right? And if the man can convince the wife that the field exists, then it's great. Because the man is field, so he never thinks about the field. I'm here, they are the field, they go there, they'll be the field. [Laughter] But the woman wants to see the direct logical sequence between this field and that field. You know, like the inchworm. The front puts down, the back foot then can come up.

A man will go from sense gratification into austerity in 1.3 nanoseconds. But women don't work like that. The woman decides, she wants to be austere, that means she starts practicing austerity in the same environment of comfort that she's always been in. Means, she has all the stuff in her kitchen, but now she doesn't eat certain things out of it. But if she wanted, she could, but she doesn't. The man it's, "I am not eating all these things," means he takes them all and throws them into garbage, they are not in the kitchen. Right? See the difference? So therefore the man develops the woman's attitude and that spiritually, because their tendency in viewing spiritual will be clouded by emotion and the senses. The more intellectual the woman the less it is, the less intellectual, the more it is, but in any case it will always be there. And then the man, his dealing with material energy has to be refined. What is the first thing that one woman will notice about another woman's husband after she has married him? How much or less she's been able to domesticate him. When another woman sees that the husband of the other lady is dressing nicely, he looks clean, he doesn't look like a slob anymore, he doesn't smell like the [indistinct 58:14] You know, like that. Doesn't have little black things between his teeth anymore, like that, he speaks nicely, he is considerate of the wife, then the other ladies will say, "Oh, nice husband, you are doing a good job." Don't tell the men that though, because they still have to think that they are the epitome of the full form and manifestation of... How you say? Testosteronic manifestation. So, that's why the women, even though they are absolutely in complete control of the material world, they never let the men know that, you know, like that. So if you really wanna know what the real conspiracy is, conspiracy is here. This is it. Does that make sense from there? There is a third one here.

The last one will be kind of intelligence. As we mentioned, women are clever, so that means practical application, while men can tend to be a bit theoretical. So it works to advantage both ways. So from, in the material point of view you will take the practical application of something and learning from that, the pratyaksha, that's the highest. But on the spiritual then by hearing, that's the highest, so that's first class intelligence. Learning by seeing, that's second class intelligence. Learning by experiencing , that's third class intelligence. So men can learn by first and second class intelligence, but much of the time they don't. Women exclusively learn by third-class intelligence. They have to do it. They would have had to have gotten that really skimpy disgusting outfit and tried it on in the dressing room to be convinced that they don't wanna wear it. Right? They are convinced, "I look great in it, I would be a knock-out on the street in it, but I am not gonna wear it." So the husband thinks, she just told the wife, "Don't dress like this, it's not good," and she doesn't. And he thinks, "Wow, she understood like that." But she actually had to try it. So since the best way to learn something is by hearing, then it's said, women are less intelligent in that. But it never means that they won't have more knowledge or better memory or even better skills than the men in material endeavor. Does that make sense? Or even in the spiritual endeavor, we are talking realization. You know, they may be better at Deity worship or cooking, or like that, but that's not what it means. Does that make sense?

Mataji: [indistinct 01:02:26] an activity can a woman convince another woman who is fighting with this feminist view that it's wrong?

HH BVPS Maharaja: You just have to point out what it means. Because once you've explained it... See the men are explaining it from the masculine viewpoint. So there is no entrance into it for women. So there is no relationship there, so then immediately it will be rejected, so what it is it's a response to the men acting in such a way that their field, the women have no entrance into. It's an exclusive club. So therefore the women create their exclusive club. But if it's dealt with considering the emotions and needs and psychology, then it makes perfect sense. Any intelligent woman would understand this, because women know who they are, men may or may not know who they are, but women know who they are, it's just a matter of whether will they let anybody else know that they know who they are. You know what I am saying?

Like that, in other words, as long as... Yeah, there is another thing here. As long as... Means, a woman doesn't mind revealing aspects of their character to trusted persons if it will not get any bad reaction. But if it will in any way create a disturbance in the way of ego or security... So ego and security are actually the same entity, they are both within sambandha, or field. Means, "Who I am?" and "Is that identity secure?" Just one manifests as coming out and one manifests as feeling bad, and it's not that they can't happen simultaneous. Does that make sense? So in other words, yeah...

Mataji: [In Hungarian]

HH BVPS Maharaja: Just one point. Does that make sense what we said? It's not a problem? Makes sense to you? Not a problem? Okay.

Translator: She had another question...

HH BVPS Maharaja: She has a question?

Translator: She also has a question.

Hh BVPS Maharaja: Oh. But I was just... Will take hers and then we'll come back, I was just, I wanted to make sure, because it's like... In other words, if those who are considered intelligent in the field agree with it, then it has to be okay. What did she say?

Translator: Her question was that if someone loses trust...

HH BVPS Maharaja: Loses trust?

Translator: ...then how can it be regained?

HH BVPS Maharaja: Ah, that's a problem, because the whole basis is trust. Trust. In other words, when you are trying to impress someone, do you show the person everything, or you show them only what you think they will appreciate? Yeah, only what you think they'll appreciate. So that means, the more you trust them, the more you show. So marriage generally means trust, that's why the person seems to look different after marriage than before, because they show you who they actually are. Therefore, for the men here, the more wild it gets, means the more they are confident and trust you. So therefore the more crazy they are, means the more they are attached to you. Not the opposite. So therefore, the more wild it is, it actually means, the better it's going. [Laughter] Not exactly what your 6-year-old, being-taken-care-of-by-your-mother-male attitude on life can relate to, but this is the reality. The woman doesn't trust you, you don't see who she is, so if you see who she is, that means she trusts you. So she expects that you will reciprocate that without going strange on her. So therefore when you give help and support and just that's the way it is, so then that makes them more happy. Then the wildness of it will then switch to the other side, where there is a niceness of it. The wilder it is, the nicer it will be. The nicer it is, the wilder it will be. They go together, that's the, that's why the Vedas talk about the ardha-kukuta-nyaya. Means, the half-a-chicken. The men have this great illusion, right, it's supposed to be that the women are in maya, that everything is just going to be perfect. But the point is is, the chicken eats and it lays golden eggs.

[Laughing-discussion about some funny word in Hungarian translation]

HH BVPS Maharaja: So therefore the more the chicken eats, the more golden eggs. Think about it, everything else in life you look at it that way, the more you invest the more you get out. The man will do this with everything in his life, except women. When it comes to women, men become one of the most stupidest entities in the world. If the man just applied the same processes he used on everything else in his life, he got a great marriage. Why does the car look nice? You have got to polish it, you maintain it regularly, you are being very careful about it, not [indistinct 01:11:50], you know. Right? But with women it's just whatever you do, somehow or another has to be perfect, because, hey, you got some testosterone. [Laughter] Does that make sense? I am still answering her question. There is something on this?

Prabhu: Yes. However nicely we may be dealing with our car, it sometimes breaks down. [Laughter]

HH BVPS Maharaja: Yeah. [Laughter] So when it breaks down, what you do? You say, "Oh, cars shouldn't break down, why is it breaking down, maybe I shouldn't be in the car?" Yes? Or you just think, "Okay, got to get to fix." And what do you fix? Anything? What do you fix? Anything? Or what needs to be fixed? So that's what I am saying? If you would even just apply the logic that you apply in your car, your marriage would go fine. You know what I am saying? The women aren't asking any more consideration than what you give to your car. [Laughter] Or whatever it is, your golf clubs or all your knives and other little [indistinct 01:13:33], or like that, you take out and polish them and put it away. Whatever it is that's important to you, whatever gives no gadget that's important to the man how your consideration of that. If you applied just that much, the women would be quite happy. And even better, more than the gizmo and gadget, they even respond. A plus. You know, you get your fetish taken care of and they respond and are nice. Does that make sense? Okay, we are just finishing her question. Is it on this point? Or it's a different point?

Mataji: On men-women relationship...

HH BVPS Maharaja: Oh, okay, we will get back to that, because we are dealing with trust. So we are just pointing out that when trust is there, it's because trust is there they are going like that. So if the woman is always quite, doesn't do much, doesn't come out much, that means trust is actually less. That's why we were saying yesterday is that you'd have to actually ask the women if it's going well. But somehow is the man thinks it's going well, because it appears there is very minimal problem. But along with minimal problems, there is also minimal interaction, minimal happening. So because it's not going wild, the man thinks he is doing a great job, but actually, if you check, it may not be going well.

So then trust, trust would have to be established... Trust means that you are not confident of the field. Means if you have trust, you are confident of the field. You lose trust, means you lose or you doubt the connection to the field. So basically trust can be regained if there is proper discussion that it's very clear that that field still exists. In other words, people make mistakes, so you have to deal with what's now and move forward. Someone says, they made a mistake, they are sorry, they wanna move forward, take that, go with it. What will be the gain by, "Oh, but this happened. Oh, but that happened. Oh, but you've been there unlimited lifetimes of Brahma." You know it's like... You know what I am saying? So whatever it is, you just if they want to change it, move forward. Does that make sense? If you find by doing that, but doing carefully, use your intelligence, move forward, avoid getting hurt, but don't not take the risk. Anything you wanna gain, you have to be willing to take the risk. That's what makes, we were discussing before in Varnashrama, the difference between the dvijas and the shudras. The dvija, means, a vaishya will take a risk in money, in other words it's said, if you wanna work on the stock market, you have to be willing to... It would be like going to the balcony of your window and throwing hundred dollar bills out the window and just watching them fly away. You can do that, you can work on the stock market. Because you know, one of those hundred dollar bills is gonna make you a million dollars, and you are willing to try until it does, right? The king, he has to be willing that he may lose the whole kingdom, in other words, Yudhisthira didn't think, "Oh, I don't want to become the emperor, because we could lose it." So kshatriyas, they are willing to take the risk in the political field. They may have everything, they may lose everything. Brahmana means, they are willing to take the risk in knowledge. They may give the knowledge, it may be appreciated, it may not be. So they use their intelligence that it is the best possible investment, the best possible political arrangements, or the best educational situation. But the risk is there, so anything you wanna gain you have to be willing to take the risk. So if you are not willing to risk getting hurt, you won't be able to establish any relationships, because relationships are eternal principle that does work. It's just a matter of when you get it right, so you have to make that step. Does that make sense? Does that answer it?

Mataji: Yes, but it's difficult.

HH BVPS Maharaja: Of course, no one said it's easy. The point is is, anything worth getting is hard work. Prabhupada gives the example that like almonds and macadamia nuts and cashews, they take a long time to grow. So Prabhupada said, anything good takes time. Or you have the saying, Rome was not built in a day. Does that make sense? So you have to be willing to try. Yeah? Does that make sense? You had something?

Mataji: This question is about intelligence. You very nicely explained the difference between the intelligence of men and women. And I know that one of the main duties of women is to raise children, especially until they reach the age of 6, and during this period the children are doing different things, and what is the difference between the [indistinct 01:24:05] are doing, like there are different things, like this is the age when they are learning the language and what's the consequence that we are speaking [indistinct 01:24:16]

HH BVPS Maharaja: And what are they speaking about? [Laughter]

Prabhu: The question was more on, what is the difference between Vedic and modern view of raising children...

HH BVPS Maharaja: Raising the children?

Mataji: Language actually carries culture, and if we are training our kids in our own language, Hungarian, then what is the consequence of that and how early should the children start learning Vedic texts?

HH BVPS Maharaja: Generally in the Vedas they divide between what is preliminary study and what is serious study. So preliminary means, learning letters, learning to read, learning 1,2,3 and basic little interactions of numbers and... So that generally in the Vedic they would start from the 5th year from conception, when they are 4 years old. So before that, they wouldn't try to ... Not like the Japanese who come up with systems to teach them languages at six months or stuff like that. Because up to... yeah. Basically up to 5, means, from birth, then they are kind-of like absorbing the foundation of the lifestyle and the culture, so what is the attitude, what's the mood, what's the religious and spiritual kind-of like determination. The proper basis of interaction, relationships, all the very personal kind-of things. So the more energy that goes into them at that time, means, proper energy, means, the more you can draw from them later. Just like if let's say a student up to the age of 12, if they are prepared very well in all the things that the have to memorize and all the different elements, all the foundational knowledge, then from 13 then you can start drawing from them how to intellectualize on that and find different various ways of manifestation. So if up to 5 they've gotten so much nice, positive input, then after that, then you can start to explain to them what that input actually means. Then they can technically understand and, I mean, it means, use their intelligence in applying it to relationships. So basically you could say is the underlying elements of spiritual, they are established, but the religious aspects are the most important. Religious meaning, what is the inherent nature. Childhood, motherhood, fatherhood, familiness, relationship, like that, what's the concept of right and wrong, like that, so therefore...yeah. Does that make sense?

Kids, Prabhupada makes the statement that the kids can do anything they want up till 5. That doesn't mean bad behavior. That means, you don't need to regulate their eating and sleeping and recreation. A kid up to the age of 5, they wanna eat at midnight, they eat at midnight. They wanna wake up and play at midnight, you play at midnight. You know what I am saying? So that's the point is that whatever comes up naturally to them in the way of eating, sleeping, going to the toilet, playing and interacting, it happens whenever it happens. But from the age of 5, then you can say, "We only eat at these times, you only sleep at these times, you only play at these times." That's what it means that they can do anything. This modern concept that "anything" means they can yell, scream, insult people, just be completely terribly behaved, it doesn't mean that. Because religion means, ultimately what's right and what's wrong. So if they don't know what's right and what's wrong then...

I've seen in brahmana families in India, the chastity in girls is started from the age of two. Because chastity simply means good, and unchaste means bad. So whenever they do something not technically wrong, but culturally wrong, then they are told, "A chaste girl wouldn't do this." So then from the age of two to twelve, that means, 10 years, "chaste" means "properly behaved." Then when they hit puberty, that adds in a new concept of right and wrong. Clever, no? Yeah. But otherwise, you just start talking to them at 12 about being chaste, then it may not be successful. Can't be, because it's not part of right and wrong. Because for a girl, good experience, bad experience, that's right and wrong. So for the teenager being with boys is good and not being with them is bad. So you have already had to put in the concept before they got to that. Example is given, if the river is flooding, and you try to put the sand bags, then the sand bags and the people putting the sand bags will be washed away. But if you know that at this time of the year the river floods, then before that you put the sand bags, then it works. So that's the difference between the Vedic and the modern. You know what is the nature and you are dealing with it today. You are not waiting till the "Oh, no, she is such a good girl, why would we worry about that? Oh, we can get out later." When is that later? When you are 60 years old and they are 30? Right? Which is okay, but problem is is, from 12 to 30 it gets a little wild. So basically that would be... yes.

Of course then...So in other words, also do those things... That means, you are doing the sadhana and other devotional activities, because you like to do them. Don't do them just to set example. Kids are like animals, they pick up on what's underlying. You come up to the dog, "Nice doggy, doggy" they know that you wanna do something to them, so they growl. Right? Means, animals can tell what's underlying it. So kids perceive what you mean, not what you say. So if you do and speak what you mean, that will have the greatest influence on the kids. Therefore you talk to them in language they understand, but you use regular language, you don't talk to them like kids. You know what I am saying? Means, they are kids, they are dealt with as kids, but you don't have to be stupid. You know what I am saying? But say it nicely. So you want them when they grow up to deal nicely, you deal with them nicely. If you want them to grow up and teach their kids by explaining and setting good example, that's what you do for them. So in other words, you raise your kid the way you would want your kid to raise their kid. You know what I am saying? So how you want your grandchildren raised, raise your own kid. Does that make sense? So in other words, use the intelligence, the intelligence should be part of the application. By using the intelligence it will not cut down in any way on the emotional experience. In fact, it will increase it with time, because the more you invest in it, the better results you are getting back. You know what I am saying? Does that make sense?

So in language there, since you mentioned that, means, if you know Sanskrit, great. I mean, you can always get into learning Sanskrit. I've seen families where the two parents, they know two different languages, they speak both languages to the kid, the mother always speaks in one language, the father always speaks in the other. So that way they grow up knowing two languages. Sometimes from three to five they'll tend to mix the languages, they'll use words for both in the same sentence. But by the age of 5 they straighten it out and one language in one and the other in the other one. So it is an option, I mean, if you have always wanted to know Sanskrit, like that... But otherwise, the most important thing is language. Most people learn, let's say here in this country would learn Hungarian, but they don't know what language is. You know what I am saying? So the important thing is is, why Sanskrit is important, because it is language. Every word actually means what it expresses. You know what I am saying? So the word itself is based on root words and root syllables that exactly means what the noun is doing, so in that way it's the best, it's more scientific. But still, understanding that is more important. So in speaking, if you are also explaining to them how language works, how language... Doesn't necessarily mean technical, it means, what's actually going on. Right? Means, you wanna say something, there is a subject, who is going to do... In other words, there is a verb, that means that verb has to do something, verb means it's doing something. Right? So who is doing that? That's the subject. And if something is being done, something has to be receiving the activity, that's your object. From doing any activity you get a result, that's your dative. The activity must take place in some place, that's your locative. And there is a reason why you are doing the activity and why you want that result, that's your ablative. Right? And in performing the activity, the verb, it may have some assistance that make the verb go nicely, that's the instrumental. So therefore depending on what you wanna say, you'll bring out what is the point you want. So language means the expression of these 6 nouns in connection with the verb, that's language. And most likely, that has never been heard of before. Any Hungarian, even the best Hungarian teacher will not explain it to you that way, because they are talking Hungarian, not language. Language is the expression of rasa between two living entities. And rasa is based on activity, that's why the verb is the central point, and then the nouns are connected to that. So that means, the verb is the feminine, the nouns are the masculine, so that's why they are connected to the verb. Depending on the verb, that's how they are then conjugated. Yeah, that's how they'll be declined or conjugated. Do you understand? In other words, we could take language and describe a whole philosophy and culture, because that's language. So that way they can understand, they may understand it through the medium of Hungarian, but if they know that, then when they come in contact with Sanskrit, they'll be very clear that this is where it's from. Does that make sense? Like that.

So culture means that which is based on relationship as established by God. Language is the expression of that, of the culture of rasa established by God. You know what I am saying? So that way then everything actually becomes connected. Does that make sense? So religion is the... From religion then you go from religion to transcendence, to devotional. So that means, the start of life means religion. Prabhupada says, the religious wife, the spiritual husband. Right? So that's why kids start with the mother. She establishes that religion, which then the teachers, which are masculine, then are able to draw out and then establish the spiritual. Does that make sense? Like that. But that religiousness of the mother is in connection to spiritual, but what you are dealing with is more religion than spiritual. You know, it's not like you are sitting down with your 3-year-old and chanting 64 rounds. If you are, let me know. Like that, I wanna know about that. Anyone here is chanting 64 rounds with their 3-year-old? 4-year-old? 5-year-old? Okay, then... [Laughter] Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura at 4 was chanting 64 rounds, was chanting 64 rounds at 4 years old. So it's possible, if you are Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura.

Translator: Before you also meant that kids are chanting 64 rounds?

HH BVPS Maharaja: Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's... No, parents and the kids they sit down and get into this. So I was saying, if they had anybody, I would like to know about it. [Laughter] Does that make sense? So therefore you can see it's the religious aspect that the child is absorbing at that time. Because the transcendental and the devotional are based on that religious. Right? It's much smoother and more consistent for a religious person to be transcendental than a irreligious person. Means, because there is less distraction, so that's why that proper input by the mother is important, but that doesn't mean that the mother's basic spiritual activities stop. It's not that raising the child is one's devotional service, it's a major part of it, but it doesn't replace chanting or like that, but one may be not out doing distributing books or other things, one is... But the chanting and taking prasada, those remain. Does that make sense? So the spiritual is still the most important, but maybe the most important material activity you are doing. You know what I am saying? Just like the husband's attachment to the wife is the most important material relation. But the husband's attachment to Krishna has to be more than that, so the wife never gets disturbed that the husband likes Radha and Krishna more than her. But after all the transcendental personalities, within the material sphere, she better be number one, otherwise there is trouble. After the transcendental personalities then within the material sphere she better be number one, or there is trouble. Is that okay? Yeah? Anything missing?

Mataji: So the important thing is bhakti in raising the children, and it's not much technical difference between raising the boy and the girl at this age?

HH BVPS Maharaja: Not really, just for girls cultural right and wrong, you call it chastity. So it's bad behavior and it's unchaste. Well, you don't say it's unchaste, because you don't want them to get the idea to identify "I am unchaste." You say, "A chaste girl wouldn't do that. It's bad behavior, a chaste girl wouldn't do that." That's all the more that's said. So it just goes in. And then when they are older, then that broader kind-of meaning, or more traditional meaning of what we think of as chaste, then is added to that. Because chaste is important because it's correct. Does that make sense? That's why it's important. So correctness in this area is called chastity. So correct behavior and chastity should be thought of as synonymous. Because it's not just, okay, she is chaste, means she is not off with another man. Chaste is also how she dresses, how she talks, how she carries herself, how she behaves. So all those kind-of things. Someone who is committed to the relationship would have so many skills, and cooking and cleaning, so it's a package, so just it's thrown in now and again, generally for really bad behavior. You know, self-centered, just uncalled-for behavior. Then you bring this out. Boys, it's just bad behavior. So otherwise, basically there is no difference. Because they don't actually behave or think too much different, but still the boy is looking at accomplishment, girl is looking at experience. That difference is there from the beginning. Therefore the boys are always out doing things and the girls are always experiencing things. Like that. Boys have to go out and conquer the world and girls will think house-house. Do you call it house-house? Yeah, house-house, doctor-doctor, whatever. Is that okay? Yeah?

Mataji: At very early age, what is more important, Mangala-arati or Guru puja to bring the child? Very early age like one year, one and a half...

HH BVPS Maharaja: Means, point is is, before the kid, who is going to Mangala-aratik and Guru-puja?

Mataji: [silence]

HH BVPS Maharaja: Ha. Then that's why you don't know the answer. Means, who is going to Mangala-aratik, the kid or the parent? The parent is going to Mangala-arati, so then if the parent is going to Mangala-arati, they take the kid with them. So in other words, what's important for the parent, that's what you involve the kids in. Does that make sense? Like that, so in other words, your values is what's going to be transferred to your kids. So whatever values you want your kid to have, you have to have. Don't go because it's good example, go because you want to go. Otherwise they'll know unconsciously that you are only doing example, not that you care. So the Western, "Do as I say, not as I do," doesn't work in the Vedic. Right? Yes, sir?

Prabhu: Devotees have different family system and sometimes it's very different from [indistinct 01:54:52] other family system. Is there [indistinct 01:55:00] for them just to develop family ties, mommy, daddy and baby and not [indistinct 01:55:06] a circle of family members too much?

HH BVPS Maharaja: Is it harmful? Manu describes when he is... in topic of inheritance that either the family can, all the brothers can live together in one house, so therefore the family bounding and unit is very strong, or if they want to get more spiritual benefit, because they would have to do the spiritual activity themselves, the brothers can live separately. So in other words, if the concept is spiritual, the basis is spiritual, then a nuclear family is not bad, but it wouldn't be accepted as a material option. Material option, they should stay together. But spiritual, they could either stay together or separate. So it's always nice if there is more kind-of input. But if the input is not going to be good, then why bother? The idea with kids is samskara, so you are trying to create good impressions. So then their whole life can be based on those good impressions. Just like I will give an example, the husband and wife never fight, at least so the kid never knows, and kid never knows, that means, includes, when they are in the womb. Means, when their age, from 7 months they are conscious, so if the husband and wife are fighting, the kid can hear it. So if the child has never heard the husband and wife fight, or the mother and father fight, then their concept or faith in authority will be unwavering, because the mother is the first authority, father is the second authority. If the first authority argues with the second authority, then the concept is broken. Or, if the parents are arguing about other authorities or this or that, then you break that. So in other words, the reason of that example is to show some... Good samskaras last a lifetime, so especially up to the age of 5, 6, like that, or, latest, up to 8 for a vaishya. In other words, brahmanas start education at 5, kshatriyas at 6, vaishyas at 8. That's if they are interested in spiritual life. You know what I am saying? Is that okay?

But I have seen one interesting thing, just on grandmothers. One parent was telling me that they visited the grandmother and th three-year old kid went to the refrigerator. You know, all the ladies always hang out at the kitchen. And so the kid walked over to the refrigerator and opened the door. And then the kid started screaming as if it was dying, and then naturally grandmother and mother went, "What's wrong?" So the kid was screaming, "Grandmother has dead bodies in the refrigerator!" From that day grandmother became vegetarian [Laughter]. But I only heard about... No, I think I heard that twice. The mother can say all she wants to her mother, and who cares, but when the grandchild freaks, then grandmothers become vegetarian. So sometimes it can work.

Mataji: It's totally different, going back to...

HH BVPS Maharaja: Oh, totally different.

Mataji: Yeah...

HH BVPS Maharaja: Okay, then so why don't we just break now and then will open with your... Jaya!

Srila Prabhupada ki jaya! Samaveta-bhakta-vrinda ki jaya! Jaya Nitai-Gaura-premanande Hari Haribol!

Prabhu: His Holiness Bhaktividya Purna Maharaja ki jaya!