Feeding the poor....

[AncientMariner 0]

"Sometimes so-called svamis are very eager to feed poor people, thinking them to be daridra-narayana, the Lord's incarnations as beggars. They prefer to serve manufactured daridra-narayana than the original, supreme Narayana. They say, "Don't encourage service to Lord Narayana. It is better to serve the starving people of the world." Unfortunately such materialists, either singly or combined in the form of the United Nations, cannot fulfill their plans. The truth is that the many millions of human beings, animals, birds and trees - indeed, all living entities - are maintained solely by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Eko bahunam yo vidadhati kaman: one person, the Supreme Lord, is supplying the necessities of life for all living entities. To challenge the authority of Narayana, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is the business of asuras (demons). Yet sometimes suras, or devotees, are also bewildered by the illusory energy and falsely claim to be the maintainer of the entire universe. Such incidents are described in the Tenth Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam, where Sukadeva Gosvami tells how Lord Brahma and King Indra became puffed up and were eventually chastised by Krsna." [Excerpt from purport of Srila Prabhupada's Srimad Bhagavatam Canto 5 Chapter. 18 Text 27]

[Guest guest]

"No one should go hungry within ten miles of our temples." --ACBSP

 

So if Lord Chaitanya wanted His name in every town and village guess that means there would be a temple in every town and village, if even in the form of some pious person whose body is a temple of God who is chanting one of the hundreds and millions of names of God sincerely... or even if that means the trees, mountains, snow, penguins, aurorea borealis, the wind, the stars, the galaxies, and the sun are all vibrating AUM a name of God somewhere.

 

So seems to me as if the poor should be fed and no one should go hungry anywhere in all of the three worlds. And if they are we should step up to the plate and help them, or help those who are doing that. We can mentally do

an offering so all of the food in Food Banks that are offerable are offered to the Divine. We can mentally do an offering that all of the food ever produced throughout time and space gets offered to the Divine so that all will become purified. So many things we can do to make sure that no one goes hungry and is always getting nice sanctified prasada.

[AncientMariner 0]

 

"No one should go hungry within ten miles of our temples." --ACBSP

 

So if Lord Chaitanya wanted His name in every town and village guess that means there would be a temple in every town and village, if even in the form of some pious person whose body is a temple of God who is chanting one of the hundreds and millions of names of God sincerely... or even if that means the trees, mountains, snow, penguins, aurorea borealis, the wind, the stars, the galaxies, and the sun are all vibrating AUM a name of God somewhere.

 

So seems to me as if the poor should be fed and no one should go hungry anywhere in all of the three worlds. And if they are we should step up to the plate and help them, or help those who are doing that. We can mentally do

an offering so all of the food in Food Banks that are offerable are offered to the Divine. We can mentally do an offering that all of the food ever produced throughout time and space gets offered to the Divine so that all will become purified. So many things we can do to make sure that no one goes hungry and is always getting nice sanctified prasada.

 

 

Well said. I think Prabhupada's issue here was with people that try to feed the poor without acknowledging the supremacy of God.

[Guruvani 0]

I don't have the quote at hand, but in the books somewhere Srila Prabhupada has said that by distributing prasadam all over the world that the face of demonic society can be changed.

Prasadam distribution is right there alongside Harinama Sankirtan as the spearhead of the Krishna consciousness movement.

 

Millions of hungry people could be fed prasadam with the money that is squandered annually by the jet-set Swamis of ISKCON.

 

What a waste....

 

The jet-set Swamis of the modern age are huge waste of valuable resources that could be use to improve the condition of suffering souls all over the world.

[Guest guest]

Duties For Married Men

 

 

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada was traveling through Orissa with some of his disciples.

 

One day as he was coming back from the Sakshi Gopal temple, some beggars asked for alms from the married men who accompanied Srila Prabhupada, but none of them gave anything.

 

Srila Prabhupada, seeing this, stopped, . down and started to talk about the duties of married men.

 

During his chat he said: "If married men think: I must not give any of my money, which I consider reserved for Krishna, to the poor and deprived, then they are really showing symptoms of wretchedness, cruelty, and lack of compassion for others.

 

They should not consider that giving charity to the poor is a fruitive activity. This kind of mentality will make their hearts hard and they will suffer from greed.

 

As a result of this they shall not want to spend their money even on the devotional service of the Supreme Lord, which is the ultimate goal in life. This will invite offenses in service.

 

To save us from this kind of deceit and sinful concept, Sri Gaurasundara used to give money and other things to the poor people during His pastimes as a married man.

 

The money we have, we have only gotten by the

Lord's grace. If we give some of it to the mendicant poor people, then it is not a waste of money rather it is its correct use.

 

Serving prasadam to others is the necessary duty of every married vaishnava. Even if these people have become poor by their karma, even so they are still a part of the Lord's family. Therefore it is definitively the solemn duty of every honest married man to help them".

 

From a reproduction of a conversation with Major Rana N. J. Bahadur, at

Armadale, Darjeeling, on 14 June 1935. Originally published

in The Harmonist magazine (Vol. XXXI, No.21) on 27 June 1935.

[AncientMariner 0]

 

Duties For Married Men

 

 

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada was traveling through Orissa with some of his disciples.

 

One day as he was coming back from the Sakshi Gopal temple, some beggars asked for alms from the married men who accompanied Srila Prabhupada, but none of them gave anything.

 

Srila Prabhupada, seeing this, stopped, . down and started to talk about the duties of married men.

 

During his chat he said: "If married men think: I must not give any of my money, which I consider reserved for Krishna, to the poor and deprived, then they are really showing symptoms of wretchedness, cruelty, and lack of compassion for others.

 

They should not consider that giving charity to the poor is a fruitive activity. This kind of mentality will make their hearts hard and they will suffer from greed.

 

As a result of this they shall not want to spend their money even on the devotional service of the Supreme Lord, which is the ultimate goal in life. This will invite offenses in service.

 

To save us from this kind of deceit and sinful concept, Sri Gaurasundara used to give money and other things to the poor people during His pastimes as a married man.

 

The money we have, we have only gotten by the

Lord's grace. If we give some of it to the mendicant poor people, then it is not a waste of money rather it is its correct use.

 

Serving prasadam to others is the necessary duty of every married vaishnava. Even if these people have become poor by their karma, even so they are still a part of the Lord's family. Therefore it is definitively the solemn duty of every honest married man to help them".

 

From a reproduction of a conversation with Major Rana N. J. Bahadur, at

Armadale, Darjeeling, on 14 June 1935. Originally published

in The Harmonist magazine (Vol. XXXI, No.21) on 27 June 1935.

 

 

Isn't there somewhere in the Bhagavatam, I remember reading something about how there is charity in different modes of nature? Like some charity is in the mode of goodness and some ignorance etc. I know personally I have had friends in my life that have all sorts of bad habits like smoking etc. and I would always give them a meal if they wanted one but it got to where I would never give them money anymore because they would waste it on sex and cigarettes and I didn't see any point in me working to support their bad habits. Luckily enough once I quit lending them money they never came around anymore at all so I guess it was kind of Krishna's way of saving me from bad association although where I live it is virtually impossible to avoid all bad association.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Isn't there somewhere in the Bhagavatam, I remember reading something about how there is charity in different modes of nature? Like some charity is in the mode of goodness and some ignorance etc. I know personally I have had friends in my life that have all sorts of bad habits like smoking etc. and I would always give them a meal if they wanted one but it got to where I would never give them money anymore because they would waste it on sex and cigarettes and I didn't see any point in me working to support their bad habits. Luckily enough once I quit lending them money they never came around anymore at all so I guess it was kind of Krishna's way of saving me from bad association although where I live it is virtually impossible to avoid all bad association.

 

Bhagavad-gītā As It Is 17.20

 

dātavyam iti yad dānaḿ

dīyate 'nupakāriṇe

deśe kāle ca pātre ca

tad dānaḿ sāttvikaḿ smṛtam

 

SYNONYMS

dātavyam — worth giving; iti — thus; yat — that which; dānam — charity; dīyate — is given; anupakāriṇe — irrespective of return; deśe — in a proper place; kāle — at a proper time; ca — also; pātre — to a suitable person; ca — and; tat — that; dānam — charity; sāttvikam — in the mode of goodness; smṛtam — is considered.

 

TRANSLATION

Charity given out of duty, without expectation of return, at the proper time and place, and to a worthy person is considered to be in the mode of goodness.

 

PURPORT

In the Vedic literature, charity given to a person engaged in spiritual activities is recommended. There is no recommendation for giving charity indiscriminately. Spiritual perfection is always a consideration. Therefore charity is recommended to be given at a place of pilgrimage and at lunar or solar eclipses or at the end of the month or to a qualified brāhmaṇa or a Vaiṣṇava (devotee) or in temples. Such charities should be given without any consideration of return. Charity to the poor is sometimes given out of compassion, but if a poor man is not worth giving charity to, then there is no spiritual advancement. In other words, indiscriminate charity is not recommended in the Vedic literature.

 

Bhagavad-gītā As It Is 17.21

 

yat tu pratyupakārārthaḿ

phalam uddiśya vā punaḥ

dīyate ca parikliṣṭaḿ

tad dānaḿ rājasaḿ smṛtam

 

SYNONYMS

yat — that which; tu — but; prati-upakāra-artham — for the sake of getting some return; phalam — a result; uddiśya — desiring; vā — or; punaḥ — again; dīyate — is given; ca — also; parikliṣṭam — grudgingly; tat — that; dānam — charity; rājasam — in the mode of passion; smṛtam — is understood to be.

 

TRANSLATION

But charity performed with the expectation of some return, or with a desire for fruitive results, or in a grudging mood, is said to be charity in the mode of passion.

 

PURPORT

Charity is sometimes performed for elevation to the heavenly kingdom and sometimes with great trouble and with repentance afterwards: "Why have I spent so much in this way?" Charity is also sometimes given under some obligation, at the request of a superior. These kinds of charity are said to be given in the mode of passion.

There are many charitable foundations which offer their gifts to institutions where sense gratification goes on. Such charities are not recommended in the Vedic scripture. Only charity in the mode of goodness is recommended.

 

 

 

Bhagavad-gītā As It Is 17.22

 

adeśa-kāle yad dānam

apātrebhyaś ca dīyate

asat-kṛtam avajñātaḿ

tat tāmasam udāhṛtam

 

SYNONYMS

adeśa — at an unpurified place; kāle — and unpurified time; yat — that which; dānam — charity; upātrebhyaḥ — to unworthy persons; ca — also; dīyate — is given; asat-kṛtam — without respect; avajñātam — without proper attention; tat — that; tāmasam — in the mode of darkness; udāhṛtam — is said to be.

 

TRANSLATION

And charity performed at an impure place, at an improper time, to unworthy persons, or without proper attention and respect is said to be in the mode of ignorance.

 

PURPORT

Contributions for indulgence in intoxication and gambling are not encouraged here. That sort of contribution is in the mode of ignorance. Such charity is not beneficial; rather, sinful persons are encouraged. Similarly, if a person gives charity to a suitable person but without respect and without attention, that sort of charity is also said to be in the mode of darkness.

[AncientMariner 0]

Excellent. Thanks, that clarifies a lot.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Here is an article that was written on this topic some time ago:

 

"Food For Life or Food For Death?"

http://www.bvashram.org/articles/100/1/Food-For-Death

 

If you see Srila Prabhupada's comments in full, everything becomes clear.

[AncientMariner 0]

 

Here is an article that was written on this topic some time ago:

 

"Food For Life or Food For Death?"

http://www.bvashram.org/articles/100/1/Food-For-Death

 

If you see Srila Prabhupada's comments in full, everything becomes clear.

 

 

What exactly was Prabhupada saying in the original quote to this thread?The more I read it my guess is it had something to do with the effect that the only way to actually feed the poor is to satisfy Krishna and those welfare workers that try to feed the poor without satisfying Krishna are not actually successful in feeding the poor? Of course Prabhupada and the acaryas are doing much more than just "feeding the poor" when they give them knowledge of Krishna. I don't know, I could be wrong on that interpretation.

[Guest guest]

The thing Prabhupada was against was some guru back in the day said that your fellow man is Narayana, just a poor Narayana. So basically Prabhupada took umbrance with the idea that Narayana is ever poor, as espoused by a popular guru at the time.

 

However alot has happened since those times. Now when I look over that quote from Bhagavad Gita above, then I get an idea of how India all fell apart. Can't you just see it? Generations of people blindly giving resources to brahmanas and the brahmanas hoarding the wealth. The money never went back into the community.

 

I mean in less than one generation in Western countries neophtye devotees got on a real trip about how we must favor our camp's brahmanas and sannyasis as God's chosen few, for they are people who are "auspicious" and good" and "worthy". Other lowly maggots should sacrifice their lives for them like give them all of your money, your apartment, and your car, then spend 12 hours a day doing the pick and sleeping on the floor for them, etc.

 

Then just a few years later these highly revered people are doing things like flying to London to buy a gold pen with rubies and diamonds, flying back to Paris and throwing it into the River to show how renounced they are. Or absconding with five million and a chateau in Riveria. Or getting ISKCON banned from an Asian country for twenty years, then getting married and starting a business in another Asian country in the meantime. Or jetsetting around the world in a private jet and getting married to the wife of a disciple. Or shooting off rounds of ammo at kids in a padayatra cart. Or asking people to send all of their god jewelry so we can make larger than lifesize idols to worship. Meanwhile pretty much virtually ignoring and neglecting the needs of the rank and file disciples', women's, childrens' and elderlies' welfare.

 

So it seems like just to hedge your bets you should give to the poor also, even though the purport says, "a poor man is not worth giving money to." But how do you know a poor man is not worth giving money to? Maybe at the end of the day, the poor man turns out to be the better, more pure, more sincere devotee than some petulant narcissist who has a better PR team, that's all. And maybe some poor nameless anonymous kid will grow up to be a great saint, you just don't see his track record yet.

 

Just from the investment perspective, it doesn't make sense to ONLY give charity to a so-called "qualified brahmana or Vaisnava or temple". Because how can you tell who is qualified? Maybe the qualified people are doing secret sins you don't know about unless you are in the inner circle or until someone exposes it thirty years later or until they get arrested. Seems like it would be better to hedge your bets and have a diversified portfolio of spiritual investments.

 

Then if one "God's pure representative" after another that you were banking on turns out to to a sham [and very good odds of this in Kali Yuga, "past performance is no guarantee of future results" as they say in the investment world], then at least you diversified your spiritual investment portfolio and won't lose it all in the Spiritual Jambuvan Bear Markets.

[AncientMariner 0]

 

The thing Prabhupada was against was some guru back in the day said that your fellow man is Narayana, just a poor Narayana. So basically Prabhupada took umbrance with the idea that Narayana is ever poor, as espoused by a popular guru at the time.

 

However alot has happened since those times. Now when I look over that quote from Bhagavad Gita above, then I get an idea of how India all fell apart. Can't you just see it? Generations of people blindly giving resources to brahmanas and the brahmanas hoarding the wealth. The money never went back into the community.

 

I mean in less than one generation in Western countries neophtye devotees got on a real trip about how we must favor our camp's brahmanas and sannyasis as God's chosen few, for they are people who are "auspicious" and good" and "worthy". Other lowly maggots should sacrifice their lives for them like give them all of your money, your apartment, and your car, then spend 12 hours a day doing the pick and sleeping on the floor for them, etc.

 

Then just a few years later these highly revered people are doing things like flying to London to buy a gold pen with rubies and diamonds, flying back to Paris and throwing it into the River to show how renounced they are. Or absconding with five million and a chateau in Riveria. Or getting ISKCON banned from an Asian country for twenty years, then getting married and starting a business in another Asian country in the meantime. Or jetsetting around the world in a private jet and getting married to the wife of a disciple. Or shooting off rounds of ammo at kids in a padayatra cart. Or asking people to send all of their god jewelry so we can make larger than lifesize idols to worship. Meanwhile pretty much virtually ignoring and neglecting the needs of the rank and file disciples', women's, childrens' and elderlies' welfare.

 

So it seems like just to hedge your bets you should give to the poor also, even though the purport says, "a poor man is not worth giving money to." But how do you know a poor man is not worth giving money to? Maybe at the end of the day, the poor man turns out to be the better, more pure, more sincere devotee than some petulant narcissist who has a better PR team, that's all. And maybe some poor nameless anonymous kid will grow up to be a great saint, you just don't see his track record yet.

 

Just from the investment perspective, it doesn't make sense to ONLY give charity to a so-called "qualified brahmana or Vaisnava or temple". Because how can you tell who is qualified? Maybe the qualified people are doing secret sins you don't know about unless you are in the inner circle or until someone exposes it thirty years later or until they get arrested. Seems like it would be better to hedge your bets and have a diversified portfolio of spiritual investments.

 

Then if one "God's pure representative" after another that you were banking on turns out to to a sham [and very good odds of this in Kali Yuga, "past performance is no guarantee of future results" as they say in the investment world], then at least you diversified your spiritual investment portfolio and won't lose it all in the Spiritual Jambuvan Bear Markets.

 

 

I understand and sympathize with what you are saying but I don't think the Bhagavad Gita is wrong at all in regards of how to give charity. The problem in Kali-yuga is people don't realize that Brahmanas are designated by qualification and not birthright etc. so people are probably confused as to who is really a brahmana. Personally I haven't given a dime to Iskcon and will not until they prove to me they are actually brahmanas by qualification. I have given money to individual devotees that were distributing Prabhupada's books and they told me Srila Prabhupada was their spiritual master. To me they were real brahmanas.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

What exactly was Prabhupada saying in the original quote to this thread?

Srila Prabhupada's point was against the made up idea that poor people are "poor incarnations of narayana".

 

"Sometimes so-called svamis are very eager to feed poor people, thinking them to be daridra-narayana, the Lord's incarnations as beggars."

 

Ramakrishna manufactured this idea of Daridra Narayana ("poor narayana"), saying there is no need to worship in the temples because you can worship the poor narayanas in the street. Srila Prabhupada was against any philosophy that tried to claim Jivas (living entities) as Bhagavan (the Supreme Lord).