Page four. Six faults that destroy bhakti. One, summary of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura’s essay on atyahara, overeating or too much collecting. So it opens up the question.
So maybe you’re worried that the bucket might be too much. I have a big bucket, so, yeah. Okay. In his Upadesa Amrita, Srila Rupa Gosvami has written the following verse. Was devotional services spoiled when it becomes too entangled in the following six activities? One, eating more than necessary or collecting more funds than required. Two, over-endeavoring for mundane things that are very difficult to obtain. Three, talking unnecessarily about mundane subject matters. Four, practicing the scriptural rules and regulations only for the sake of following them and not for the sake of spiritual advancement. Or rejecting the rules and regulations to the scriptures and working independently or whimsically. Five, associating with worldly-minded persons who are not interested in Krsna consciousness. And six, being greedy for mundane achievements.
It is most important to consider the deep meaning of this verse. Anyone who desires to obtain pure devotional service must follow the instructions in this verse. For one who neglects to follow these instructions, attaining devotion to Lord Hari is extremely rare. We are hereby elaborating on meaning of this verse for the benefit of those who have a strong desire to obtain pure devotional service.
Many people may think that atyahara refers only to overeating, but this is not so. The urge of the stomach mentioned in the first verse of Upadesa Mrida is the desire to overeat. We understand atyahara as overeating the fault of repetition occurs in this condensed collection of essential instructions. Therefore it is the duty of the learned reader to find other meanings of the word atyahara, right? Now if you’re doing a regular writing, you repeat things many, many times, then that shows that it’s very important. But when you’re writing a condensed version where you’re only giving the essence of everything, then repetition of something so major would be a mistake, right? Because when you’re dealing in sutra form, the idea is how succinct you can give everything, then there shouldn’t be any repetition. So his point is atyahara can’t mean just overeating, right? The word’s been used again, so that must mean it has other aspects to it that aren’t brought out in the first verse.
Therefore giving up sense enjoyment is only a figment.
Although bhojana, or eating, is the principal meaning of the word atyahara, the word bhojana also means to enjoy the senses of the five, the objects of the five senses. This type of material enjoyment is compulsory for the embodied soul because without it the living entity cannot survive, right? So he’s expanding, so atyahara, so eating, is the first because that’s where it starts. Anamoya is the basis. But it means the engagement of all the senses, right, because the anamoya platform includes use of all the senses. So someone who is situated in anamoya, their whole body of knowledge, their whole way of interacting with everything is based on their senses, so it means all the senses, right?
Therefore, giving up sense gratification is only a figment of the imagination. It can never be applied in practice, right? So he’s saying this type of material enjoyment is compulsory for the embodied soul. He didn’t say conditioned, right? He said embodied. So this idea that one would give up engagement of the senses with the sense objects, that idea is actually not real. It’s a figment of the imagination. As you remember when we were discussing in the Vedic psychology, right? So then twice we see the point come up. The question is asked, so how do I, when will the mind stop being engaged with the sense objects and I’ll only be able to think of you as if they’re two different things, right? So, so, Krishna makes the point that it’s not a real question, because a real question is something that can be answered, you know? When will the ocean stop being salty and having so many waves and being so vast, you know? Like that, it’s not going to happen, right? So the point is, is that the senses won’t stop acting, but the senses can be engaged in the Lord’s service. That’s the point.
So therefore giving up sense enjoyment is only a figment of the imagination, it can never be applied in practice, right? Because we’re using the term overlapping here, because we’ll take sense enjoyment to be the senses with the sense objects, right? So that’s not going to stop, right? But devotional service means the senses are engaged with the sense objects in connection with Krishna, then it’s not called sense gratification anymore, right? Does that make sense? So just to make sure that we get the bridge, otherwise then, you know, we’ll say, yes, there’s devotional service, we give up sense gratification and take up devotional service, so then many will think that that means the senses aren’t engaged, right? But no, the senses are still engaged, now it’s the senses in the service of the Lord instead of the senses for our own purpose, right? Does that make sense?
Since maintaining one’s life is not possible without action, one must work to maintain his life. If such activities are performed in a mood of enjoyment, one loses one’s qualifications as a human being and becomes like an animal. Therefore when one transforms all his bodily activities into activities favorable to the devotional service of the Lord, then that is bhakti-yoga, right? And so he’s saying here, transforming, right? Because remember, our philosophy is transformation, not illusion, right? The Mayavada philosophy is the material engagement is illusion, right? While we’re saying it’s transformation.
So another, I guess you could say an example of how that the process of chanting the name is the primary, and hearing the philosophy in that is in support of the chanting.
Yes?
So can we say that these six faults will have their expression in karma and in jnana?
I mean, they’ll always be in those areas. It means karma and jnana is conditioned nature. So any problem is always falling into those two. So anything mundane always falls within those, right? You know, it can be a combination or anything. It’s not that there’s karma and jnana and something else. No, mundane means karma and jnana, like that, you know, so it’s always, so it’s just a matter of which aspect you’re looking at. So now we’re talking about the engagement of the senses, right? So that’s your basic principle of karma, right? So the point is that the idea that the senses won’t be engaged, that’s imagination, right? They’ll always be engaged. But the point is, it’s a matter of transforming it back, their engagements and connection to the Lord, rather than its perversion where it’s transformed into the engagement is for our own particular benefit, right? Just for sense gratification itself, right? When the engagement of the senses is to enjoy the senses, then that’s the mundane transformation, right? So in that situation that if the senses are engaged, you know, in the sense objects to please the Lord, then it becomes devotional, right? So engaged in the senses, the sense objects, then for one’s own personal sense gratification, that’s animalistic, right? So there may be sophisticated animalistic or unsophisticated animalistic, but it’s still animalistic. So only devotional service is actually the standard, right? Otherwise we sometimes think that, oh, the pious activity, devotional service automatically is pious, therefore anything pious is automatically devotional service. We make that mistake, right? Where there’s fire, then there’ll be fire. Where there’s smoke, there’ll be fire, but not where there’s fire, there’ll necessarily be smoke, right? So where there’s devotional service, there’ll be good qualities, but where there’s good qualities doesn’t necessarily mean there’ll be devotional service, so we can make that mistake. So then sense gratification simply means gross, but if it’s pious, then it’s okay. But here the point is that when it’s connected to devotional service, then that’s real, that’s human, and when it’s not, then that’s improper.
One should renounce fruit of activities in mental speculation and should accept the sense objects as the mercy of the Lord. This is known as pure devotional service. Sense objects is the mercy of the Lord, it’s by the Lord’s grace they’re there, and they’re used in the Lord’s service. You engage the senses in the sense objects, that produces further sense objects for the senses to engage in, so all that is by the Lord’s grace.
Does that make sense?
Therefore, Srila Rupa Gosvami has, has rights, could say has writs.
In Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu, 2.255 and 2 .256, when one is not attached to anything but at the same time accepts everything in relation to Krsna, one is rightly situated above possessiveness. On the other hand, one who rejects everything without knowledge of its relationship to Krsna is not as complete in his renunciation, right? So now it’s, we’re defining is that devotional service is engaging the senses in the service of the Lord, right? So in His favor, well, that’s devotional service. So that’s actual renunciation, because it’s not yours. Renunciation means you’re giving up the sense of possession. Now for most, because you give up the sense of possession, you don’t involve yourself with it either, right, because you only interact with something you possess, right? So therefore, for the devotee, he is giving, he is connecting everything to the Lord, therefore it works very nicely. That’s real renunciation. But someone else who renounces something but doesn’t see its connection to the Lord, that renunciation’s not, not as complete. It’s renunciation, but it’s actually not that complete. It’ll be pious, but it’s not, it’s not complete because there’s not an understanding of how to engage it in the Lord’s service, so it won’t be devotional.
The purport of these verses is repeated in Upadesa Mrita by the instruction to reject atyahara. The purport is that one accepts sense objects in the spirit of enjoyment. If one accepts sense objects in the spirit of enjoyment, this is atyahara. So even if it’s a small amount, right, even if it’s just one teaspoon of halava, or let’s, let’s say, one dessert spoon of halava, then still, if it’s for sense gratification, then it’s atyahara. But if one is fully absorbed in Krsna, one can eat a whole bucket of halava and it’s not atyahara, okay?
But if sense objects are accepted as the Lord’s mercy and only as far as required, so if you require a bucket, you eat a bucket, if you don’t require a bucket, then you eat less. So there’s the hitch, right, you know, it’s always, hey, great, oh, okay.
But if the, if sense objects are accepted as the Lord’s mercy and only as far as required and favorable to devotional service, then it is not atyahara, right? So they’re accepted as the Lord’s mercy as far as required and favorable to devotional service. Then the engagement of the senses, doesn’t matter how much the senses are engaged, it’s devotional service, right? It’s not, it’s not over, overindulging the senses, right? So the, the objects are by the mercy of the Lord, right? In other words, someone has, Ambrish Maharaj has an empire, but he understands it’s by the grace of the Lord. It’s all his facility, right? So then there’s no, there’s no problem there. Only as far as required, he’s not trying to get the next planet also, right? If you’re going to be emperor of the world, you have to have the whole planet, but you don’t need the next planet, right?
And favorable to, to, and favorable to devotional service. So therefore he took the whole kingdom and engaged it in devotional service so that it all becomes very nice. If sense objects are honestly accepted as the Lord’s mercy, then yukta-vairagya is easily obtained. Sriman Mahaprabhu’s order is to accept sense, sense objects without attachment and chant Krsna’s name.
All these instructions have two different types of applications, for the householders and for the renunciates, right? So, so it’s the same principle, but now it’s applied in two different ways. The detail will be different for the householder and for the renunciate. Householders can collect in order to maintain their family members. They should earn their livelihood and save according to religious principles. With this savings, they should serve the Lord, the devotees, guests, family members, and themselves.
If a householder collects more than his requirement, then this is an impediment in his devotional service and in his achieving the Lord’s mercy. So saving too much and earning too much are both atyahara. Of this there is no doubt. He doesn’t require so much, but he’s gaining more or he’s kept more than he requires, because more than you require means how much you’re actually engaging.
Does that make sense?
A lot comes easily, more or less. Yeah, if it comes easily, because it also has the point of over-endeavor. So it is also the weakness that his collecting more than necessary is due to over -endeavor, right? So that has to be avoided. Yes? But some kshatriyas would be endeavoring quite a lot.
Kshatriyas would be endeavoring a lot, no, but only how much is their duty. I mean, it’s not easy being a kshatriya.
You know what I’m saying? It’s not like, you know, it’s just, you know, when you feel like it, Saturday morning cartoons aren’t on or the video game is not happening, then, you know, you check out what’s going on in the kingdom, right? No, it’s a big work, right? So to run a kingdom, you have to have facility, because now your people are living peacefully. What happens if the next country decides that they like your peaceful place and they want part of that peacefulness? You have to have an army. That means you had to have money, you had to have training, you have to have infrastructure, all these things. And that means it didn’t just happen today. You’ve had that for, you know, years, you know what I’m saying? So all these things, it’s very great, but that’s why those persons are involved in it. They’re very great, so they can do those kinds of great, because somebody has to do it, so then they do it.
And in our modern society, it seems like everybody wants to be great, but maybe not do all these activities. No, no, no. They just want to be, they want to have opportunity for sense gratification, basically is what they want. So that would require money, social status, facility, but they kind of just want it to happen.
Right? You know, before it was, you worked hard at something and then you gradually got there. But now it is, you know, you make your song and then somehow or another someone finds it and you become famous overnight, and the other guy is actually a better musician, but still nobody knows who he is, you know?
Does that make sense?
Over endeavor means what’s beyond what’s required for your, you know, what’s needed.
Means, technically, like, let’s say, for your occupation, eight hours a day of endeavor is what’s appropriate. Beyond that, that’ll be over endeavor.
Does that make sense? In other words, you make your endeavor to get what you want, but at the end of the day, you have to live according to what you have. You know what I’m saying? Does that make sense? Otherwise then, does that make sense?
If you don’t need much, you don’t work much, and so therefore then that time is freed for other cultivations. You know, one can study, one can do other services like that. You know, it’s like one businessman was telling me, is the business runs for eight hours, so he has to be there for eight hours because his workers are there for eight hours, but he only has two to three hours a day work, right? So then the discussion came up, well, therefore, set up your office in such a way that no one can see what you’re doing, right, but they can see you’re there, and you can see them, and then be studying Bhagavatam all day. You know, chanting, studying Bhagavatam and all that, so they know you’re there. So that means that’s four to five hours a day of hearing and chanting, right? Because that was our sense, you know, selectively.
If there is a householder, means just theoretically, means there aren’t necessarily any, so.
He has some desires. He has some desires, also sounds kind of theoretical. What about the family members? I mean, it brings up this question, you know, as much as you want. Do they have desires, or should they be allowed desires, or? Yeah, they will go all with their desires. Means? Everyone has to work, like, eight hours because he’s an evolution. Yeah, well, that means everybody’s desires has to be fulfilled within that. So, in other words, it’s a cooperation, so the person doing eight hours of work gets that much reward for it. Therefore, that’s what the family has to function with.
That’s the way it is.
Then, then, then it’s atyahara. What, what is, what is the necessity beyond that? You know what I’m saying? Because, I mean, you can only, because if you look at it, is anybody, is, is there anybody in the material world that’s actually satisfied, right? So, you know, the normal person would like to be rich. The rich person wants to be a millionaire. The millionaire wants to be a billionaire. The billionaire would like to have more, but, you know, that’s all they can manipulate at this time in the market. So, so it’s never, it’s never, you can never fulfill the desire. So the point is, is then, that means through education, through association, through devotional service, then the family member should also be satisfied. But that doesn’t mean that the person is not working up to the, means they could do, in other words, they could get more results for their endeavor, but they’re not making the endeavor to get it. So then one can always encourage them to do that, right? Therefore, the standard terms, you know, you’re useless. And other such, you know, how you say, endearing, huh? Yes, they go on in the household discussions.
Yes. Sometimes it’s mentioned that a revolutionary desire, we call it just health, basically. Yeah, but health means, health, what does health mean? Right? He’s in a healthy situation, means the body is functioning, his family environment is functioning properly, you know, his social status is functioning properly, and that’s, that’s all. But it’s the right balance, you know, because, see, the tendency is, if we take any one of these, then we’ll say, oh, so therefore I can go, we can’t just take it in its own, you know what I’m saying? It’s like, if we have, you know, a bucket of halva.
No, no, no, I was just thinking, it’s just that I was going to get more, a bucket of gulab jamuns, you know, a bucket of, you know, so many things like that. And we say, take how much you need. Somebody’s going to walk off with one of the buckets.
No, you said take what I wanted. No, but no, what you, the point is, is what you need it. So that’s the difficulty, is that you always have to deal with these very delicately. You push the side of the renunciation, but then people think, oh, renunciation is devotional, so then you push devotional service, and that’s the problem, oh, we don’t have to renounce anything. Because the thing is, we’re attached to the idea that I’m the controller and enjoyer. So anything that leaves any, the slightest glimmer of hope, you know, we’ll immediately grab it and run with it, you know. So that’s why all these things are very, very analytical and very, very specific, so we can get down to all the things. So the point is, is the sense objects are accepted as the Lord’s mercy. Does the person see all, OK, go back to yours, does the family see all these things as the Lord’s mercy? Are they as far as required, are they favorable to devotional service?
OK, then it’s not, you only said yep for the last one.
What about the first two?
Hm?
If the sense objects are accepted as the Lord’s mercy, by the Lord’s grace you’re getting them. What you have is by the Lord’s grace. Only as far as required, right?
Kind of hearing, but not so much.
Yes, just like that.
If sense objects are honestly accepted, right, you know, you have all these other adjectives that kind of like define it. Are honestly accepted as the Lord’s mercy, right? We can say, because the point is here is it’s self-realization, so each individual has to themselves understand the position of it. We know, because we can say anything. You know, it means if you have two devotees that have a disagreement, and if you call them in separately, they’ll each tell their story. And most of the time, not necessarily most of the time, it’s quite a difference in degrees.
You know, 180 being quite standard.
Sometimes you have something that’s a little bit less, so then you can work with it. But you can have ones that are beyond 180, so it’s just like you can’t even figure out what they’re talking about. Yes, so you can’t even figure out what they’re talking about.
Like that. So the thing is, the honesty is that each individual has to be able to look at it from their own perspective of what actually can be gained. So if it can be done, so that’s the point of cooperation, then you work it out. And you have to perceive it. In these times, you’ve seen the ghosts around. So if they can’t come to life, then the life goes on. Then the? The life goes to life. If that’s how they… So many ghosts. Like the man who brings the menu. Eight hours. Without too much of the work. So you make the gap. But the point is, is the gap. How do you define the gap?
No, no, no. What I’m saying is that, but we’re also defining, because there are persons who, for how much the husband is making, they would consider that really good. And there are persons that would consider that the combined amount of the husband and wife’s money wouldn’t be enough. Like I saw an article, when the Kuwait war started, that there were some Kuwaitis, from the nobility, the royal family, were in London at the time. And because of the war, they weren’t able to go back. They had to wait.
And the article was bringing out this element that they were having a lot of problem because they were on a 10,000, I think, pound a day budget.
You know, for the hotel they were in, the casinos, the restaurants, the shopping.
And because of the war, all their assets were frozen. So they didn’t know how they were going to survive.
And they were probably, in their own mind, being very honest about their needs.
You know. So it’s like, you know, they’re not buying a, how do you say?
Yeah, like that. Maybe it’s gold leaf pizza or something like that. So they had problems.
They had serious problems.
It’s like, you know, you can’t take the subways, you’re definitely not going to walk, and you’re not going to hire a taxi, so you’ve got to have your own hired Rolls Royce and all that, you know, with the driver. Like that, on 24-hour call, because you might want to go out any time. So without that, they wouldn’t be able to live.
So that’s the point, is one has to define what the lifestyle is. And then without over-endeavor, one gets that. If it’s over-endeavor, then it’s defined too high.
You know what I’m saying? If the endeavor is beyond what will keep the rest of the family together, and one’s sadhana, then it’s too much. To get the facility, then nobody’s ever there to interact with each other. And the sadhana goes down, that’s too much. So one has to redefine that, okay, we’re not going to buy the 103-inch screen, we’re going to have to settle for the 72-inch screen. You know, very sad.
Does that make sense?
So that’s the point being made here, is if you see it in connection with the Lord, it’s by the Lord’s grace you have it, right? How much is required that, you know, that you could live with that comfortably. And that itself, that lifestyle endeavor is favorable to Krsna. Then it’s fine, then it’s not atihara. It becomes atihara when it’s not necessary, it’s not for Krsna, or you don’t see it as Krsna’s mercy.
Is that okay?
Yes. I heard a story that was from the OG in Slovenia. A person, he came first time for Sunday program, they were serving so much halva that they just fall unconscious and they called the ambulance to save him. And the atihara, was it favorable? Or was it the vairagya because it was connected, he said he came first time, and asked in person.
Okay.
Ghyata atihara. The point is that he liked the prasad so much he’s interacting, but he himself is not very experienced, so therefore, you know, he can’t hold his halva, so he needs some practice.
Yeah.
But he’ll learn, don’t worry.
Yeah.
So he’ll have to settle for one bucket rather than one and a half.
That’s what I’m saying, they can hold their halva.
So is the volume, the volume seems to be a problem.
You know what I’m saying? The definition is, you see it as the Lord’s mercy, so he sees the half bucket of halva as the Lord’s mercy, right? It’s only as far as required, he only needs half a bucket, he’s not taking more, right?
Many preparations, yeah. Yeah.
I mean, they just serve, one place too much, you know, all night, not normal, but you know, I mean, they just go for it.
One hundred and eighty-five.
And they will get very, very disappointed when you have to refresh three times.
And what do you do? You just take it. Yeah, exactly.
I did not realize it at all.
Yeah. No, but we didn’t do it. We just assembled 15 groups.
Yeah.
Yeah.
No, we have long travels, and often we have been traveling for a few minutes, and we were…
I don’t know what to do, it’s going to take several generations.
My family was so tired, there was all this anger, culture, you know, big gathering of people, and they didn’t know what to ask, and they’re going to crash, and it goes into planning, and it’s like, you should have a better car, or something like that.
And we show them that, and it’s so nice. Yeah.
Usually it’s part of the program, when they feel it that much, they know what’s going to happen. Yeah, no, but several places we go. We go basically several times, I think we stay as long as we want.
Yeah.
But there’s things, when you travel like that, when you’re dancing, you’re always sitting with the Swamis, so you get the same treatment. Yeah, yeah.
It’s kind of weird.
Yeah, yeah, all these things. They wash your feet, so that’s always the outcome, for the best outcome.
Fortunately, that didn’t happen.
No, I didn’t realize it. But there was a lot of programs, a lot of places to visit, and a lot of time to host them, but also very, very often.
So how many places did you go? With?
One program a day?
Approximately one program, and one whole place a week. So one week? Yeah.
And what we do is more like two programs. Very, very much. We still have to go to the Swamis, but there’s actually lots of good places.
Is it just that one group? Groups and arts, and central town, and lots of good places. I’m not sure if it’s a forest place, but there’s a lot of good places. I’m not sure if it’s a conservation place.
What else? Is it just a forest place? Yeah.
OK. All these instructions have two different…
Oh, no. A renunciate will not collect at all. He’s not satisfied with the alms he obtains every day. Then he is guilty of atyahara, because it’s by the Lord’s mercy that comes. It’s like the householder is endeavoring, and then whatever they get, then they’re satisfied with that. If they can make more arrangements, like Mataji said, if both members of the family are doing something to collect, then that’s fine. But for the renunciate, then that’s not there. So whatever he gets, then that’s what he’s satisfied with. If more comes, then fine, if he engages with it. If less comes, then he can’t be dissatisfied. After getting nice foodstuff, he eats more than he needs, then he is guilty of atyahara. Therefore, the household’s renunciates should consider these facts carefully, and after giving up atyahara, when they engage in devotional activities, they will attain Krsna’s mercy. So the point is that the renunciate has very little to take care of, and so therefore, whatever he gets, he’s satisfied and applies that in that area. For the householder, then whatever is the field of their activity, then they have the facility for that. It’s also by the Lord’s mercy. And so their honest endeavor, then that’s what they are engaged.
That doesn’t authorize laziness.
One can be lazy. It’s a matter of one’s making one’s proper endeavor like that and using the intelligence.
Srila Prabhupada describes atyahara as follows. The main problem confronting the conditioned soul is the repetition of birth, old age, disease and death.
In the material world, one has to work for the maintenance of the body and soul. But how can one perform such work in a way that is favorable for the execution of Krsna consciousness?
Everyone requires possessions such as food grains, clothing, money and other things necessary for the maintenance of the body. But one should not collect more than necessary for his actual basic needs. If this natural principle is followed, there will be no difficulty in maintaining the body. So the point is that one should worry about one’s own what is basic. Because everyone has their conditioned nature. And so one should worry about their basic. It’s always very easy to worry about everyone else’s basic or to judge someone else’s basic by our basic. But everyone is different. So that’s not the point.
How do we define our basics?
I guess one would have to be able to actually define why it’s important and find the balance. So it’s like one may define as basic that one requires gold leaf on one’s chapatis.
Because other things are too stiff, gold will flex with the chapati so therefore the gold will be appropriate.
I guess if you put it on one side, if you turned it over and put ghee on it, then you can put extra ghee because it wouldn’t go through because of the gold leaf.
But the point is does one’s endeavor require that? Does the health require that? The amount of endeavor to get that, does that come easily?
You know what I’m saying? So all these different things, you would have to balance all that. So the point for the renunciate is just what he gets he has to be happy with. So it’s pretty straightforward. The householder then has to look at it and see actually from this element. If it’s coming by the Lord’s grace, even if it’s less, it’s still the Lord’s grace. So then even something less can be appreciated.
And if it’s more, then if you don’t require it, then you see that it’s engaged properly. You give it to someone else or something that will be able to use it. Does that make sense? So in other words, how much you require, that’s how much you take care of. And beyond that, that’s why charity is there. So you have a lot more, you give more. You have less, you give less.
Security is generally taken as one quarter is put away. So that’s how much security is there. So if you want to put more than that, then that means you have to reduce out of something else.
And then what would be the necessity of that? The standard is a quarter. Of course, everybody in the family is, what do you call it? What’s that called?
Has all kinds of terminal diseases and everything like that. So then they prick their finger and they bleed to death. They sneeze once and that’s it. So then you might need to give a little bit more money. But the point is, it’s in consideration. Rupesh Goswami’s point is one quarter is put away for emergencies. So that means, generally speaking, it means you can apply that in the overall that you get. One quarter, that’s just put aside. And that’s overall your big things. That’s big things. But it’s also what you would consider your regular running maintenance. The ideal is to put money aside from that for things in regular running that happen that you don’t expect. Because there’s always those little things. On your day-to-day running, something that came up, some extra people came over, or it was a birthday you forgot about, or the car breaks down. That shouldn’t come out of emergency. That should come out of your emergency aspect of your regular running. So in other words, in any case, you’re always having to look at what you’re doing, and it’s not just what you want, it’s what you get. It’s a matter of, yeah, it’s what you see. It’s what you get.
It’s on your table, that’s what you got.
So it’s not so much what you want, it’s what you need. Because want, you can go on. In desire, you can go on unlimitedly. Then need, then that’s what you actually endeavor for. Does that make sense? So one has to very honestly look at it.
But that also might work as a savings account.
Yeah, but they’re talking about the grihasthas here. Yeah, but that’s not a problem. However it’s kept, it means before it’s like, you went in before in houses that they would serve a meal off of solid silver plates. The plate’s a kilo, the glass is 400 grams, the bowls are 200, 300 grams, like that. So you’re talking about they have, just in their set for the dinner, 10, 20 kilos of silver.
And you ask them, what’s that? One is pure, it’s nice to eat off of, but if there’s any emergency, you can sell it. While in the bank, it can only sit there, you can’t do anything with it. So before it would be that, the women who have gold and things like this, but that gold is for them, their emergency, not generally family emergency. Yes?
This big car mechanic, he used to say you always have to expect 20% unexpected. Yeah, so it’s just you put that aside. You work it out. If you have 1,000 euros, then you understand 200 euros is going to be, you just put aside, and the 800 you use. But most people, I’ve got 1,000, they’ll work out a budget for 1,500. Like that. So that’s the point. That’s why bishops make money off of credit cards, because they know that there’s plenty of stupid people. Right.
Yes? This example of Rupa Goswami dividing his wealth, is applicable only for renunciates or becoming renunciates, or it will be passed as general rule?
It’s a general rule.
Some take it as only when you become renounced, or for renounced. It specifically meant when Rupa Goswami was applying that, he was as a grihasta.
It’s for grihastas, that they don’t understand how to deal with it. The point is, who puts money aside? Very few.
Before it was common, you’d always hear about that.
It’s like an emergency came up, and then they would say, wow, great, good, you put some money aside, and this and that. It was standard before. Nowadays, I don’t know if it’s…
It’s a general thing, but it’s meant for…
Everyone requires possessions such as food grains, clothing, money, and other things necessary for the maintenance of the body, but one should not collect more than necessary for his actual basic needs. If this natural principle is followed, there’ll be no difficulty in maintaining the body. It just means what you did, there won’t be any difficulty in maintaining the body, which means all of that. So if there’s no difficulty, it means your understanding of your actual basic needs is probably pretty good. And if it’s a real difficulty maintaining it, then that means that something’s not right. Either our needs are beyond, or we’re not making the proper endeavor.
Or both.
Sorry? If the wife is working in a family.
You want her to work outside the family?
Is working in the family…
Oh, okay. Okay.
So you’re saying if husband and wife have a job, is that out of the ordinary?
Is it baited?
What’s the situation of the children?
They also have a job. Ah.
Would it depend?
If the children are at home and need to be taken care of, and the father and mother are off working, unless they’re really wealthy and they have a living nanny. Right?
You understand? So the point is, if the kids have to be taken care of, then generally the mother is there to take care. But if they’re off at school or at work, like that, so in other words, the son, he’s 40 years old, he’s a lawyer. He lives there with his mom. If she wants to keep a job also because it’s boring at home because nobody else is there, then she could do that.
Because even though he’s living there, he may not buy her her new Gucci bag. She has to get it herself.
Okay.
According to nature’s arrangement, living entities on the lower evolutionary scale do not eat or collect more than necessary. Consequently, in the animal kingdom, there is generally no economic problem or scarcity of necessities. The bag of rice is placed in a public place. Birds will come to eat a few grains and go away. A human being, however, will take away the whole bag. He will eat all his stomach can hold and then try to keep the rest in storage. According to scriptures, this collecting of more than necessary, atyahara, is prohibited. Now the entire world is suffering because of it. So everyone’s trying to collect more than they require.
Anything else on atyahara?
Yes, Mayavadis. Collecting knowledge would be atyahara. Useless knowledge.
Because the point is, it has to be by the Lord’s grace, so the Mayavad is not by that. It has to be necessary. Knowledge of the Mayavad philosophy is definitely not necessary. And it should be favorable devotional service. And that it’s not.
So anything that’s not seen in connection to Krishna, by Krishna’s grace and is favorable for Krishna, is atyahara.
Does that make sense?
I heard something about 1st, 2nd, 3rd class brahmana. 1st, 2nd, and 3rd class brahmana. Yeah, I meant about, specifically, Oh, that’s not 1st, 2nd, and 3rd class. That is just in varieties of… That’s in quantity. Someone who keeps enough store for a year, then that’s allowed. Right? So it’s only you would keep beyond that if you’re going to do big yajnas, like we mentioned before. To do a soma yajna, you have to have three years supply. So one year. Or someone could have enough for, I think, the next is three months, and then after that, then so many weeks, so many days, and then just how much you collect there. So you go out begging or collecting, whatever it is, how much you require, you get, and the rest of it you give away. So that’s considered the best, because then you’re dependent upon the Lord. Because the point is, one can say, well, what happens on a day when it doesn’t come? But people who are making full endeavor to get as much as they can and save as much, still have days when there isn’t anything. It’s just the way it works. So the point is, it’s there, they’re dependent on the Lord, so they’ll see it in connection with the Lord. If the Lord gives, it’s His kindness. If He doesn’t give, then He didn’t want to.
No, not so much.
It’s not so much of an importance.
You know, declared means that that’s their determination.
So sankalpa is a determination. So it doesn’t necessarily have to be public. He doesn’t have to go to the village square and announce it. Because the point is, is that if you do that, then one, it will help in that normal, that you wouldn’t be able to go outside of that because the normal people would harass, but the normal person would get less benefit by knowing your vrata than by not knowing it.
Does that make sense? Is that what we discussed this morning? Is that the common person knowing too much about someone else will criticize, and it doesn’t do them any good at all.
Like that. So you also have to know what declare means.
Is that said? Anything else?
I heard that the kings, that was the only time when they could intervene with brahmanas, when brahmanas would not act according to their will. No, it’s when they don’t act according to their varnic dharma. But that’s anybody. But it’s not a matter of that they interfere in the way of, correct, it’s interfere in if their endeavor is not according to their position. Right? The brahmana is doing business. Right? And then, but if there’s no opportunity for doing his regular brahminical activities, that’s fine. But if there is, and he prefers to do business instead of his, then the king can make the point as he has to either go back to his brahminical and define himself as a brahmana or redefine himself as a vaisya. He can continue doing the business, but he has to then define himself as a vaisya.
You know?
Yes.
Everyone can define, but it must be based on shastra. Right? It’s based on shastra, it’s based on what the acharyas say, and it’s what you find works in your life. So that’s how you judge. Right? It’s based on sruti and smriti by the directions of the acharyas, and you know, you’re able to, it’s comfortable in your life. Right? So that’s how you define it. But it’s not whimsical. That was one of the other points that comes up is we give up the rules and whimsically do whatever we like.
But you mentioned that when the brahmana is planning to do a big yajna, he can keep more than he usually does. Yeah, because he’s keeping it for that sacrifice. So it’s similarly when the devotees plan to do a preaching project. Yeah, but he’s keeping the money for the preaching project, not for, you know, something else.
Does that make sense? The point is, but then that is also you can define as what you’re giving in charity.
You get money and you’re going to use it for a project. That’s your charity.
All right.
