Every man should produce his own food

[Guest guest]

> > Pretty narrow and fatalistic guessing. Immediately "not caring

> > to take up Srila Prabhupada's instruction" (btw., do you produce your

> > family food?).

>

> Just being cynical, its quite popular in this conference.

 

Guessing that the persons who don't do farming (producing their

own food) are to be understood as careless of Srila Prabhupada's

instructions, is the actual cynicism. If you already have chosen

to see cynicism, then see it there when you suspect it the

least -- at home.

 

>

> Regarding the food, not right now, but I hope to be within the next few

> months. Right now I am sourcing heirloom seed suppliers, and making

> compost, so it wont be long.

 

Well, I am already eating salad, potatoes, cucumbers, squash,

carrots.. from my own garden. A funny way to be known as a someone

who cares for Srila Prabhupada's instructions, isn't it? Actually,

to be frank and not cynical, Samba prabhu, I do it for the sake of

my own satisfaction and saving some money, and not for the sake of

"following Prabhupada's instructions".

 

 

>

> No, sorry if I implied that *every* man does this, but many many people

> did so. We forget that this culture we live in of town life and abundant

> market supplies is a very modern phenomena. In days of old, cities were

> much smaller, and populated by noblemen and their slaves. There was no

> middle class. So most people subsisted by producing food. It goes on right

> now in Russia.

 

What did those "noblemen" have their slaves for, if they (noblemen

and noblewomen) were themselves digging out their potatoes? Which

exactly "old days" you are having on mind? Can't be varnasrama

dharma days, since we have the information on what classes existed

then.

 

 

I doubt that anybody here is unaware of the modern artificiality and

crazy metropolitan life, as found in LA, NY, Mexico-city, Calcutta, and

all over the globe.

 

Srila Prabhupada himself didn't produce his own food. He was into the

pharmacy business when a family man. How about his father? So, yes,

not *every* man is expected to be growing his own food, obviously.

Not even all vaisyas, what to speak of ksatriyas and many sudras and

perhaps some brahmanas. But certainly other classes than vaisyas

also may be producing their own food. That is fine.

 

Now, am I contradicting Srila Prabhupada himself?

 

 

 

- mnd

[Guest guest]

>

>

> Well, I am already eating salad, potatoes, cucumbers, squash,

> carrots.. from my own garden. A funny way to be known as a someone

> who cares for Srila Prabhupada's instructions, isn't it? Actually,

> to be frank and not cynical, Samba prabhu, I do it for the sake of

> my own satisfaction and saving some money, and not for the sake of

> "following Prabhupada's instructions".

>

 

I hope devotees don't think Srila Prabhupada's instructions are esoteric or

arbitrary. Hopefully we can understand that Srila PRabhupada's instructions

are meant to also save us money and bring us satisfaction. Take "No

intoxication", for example - that is a real money saver.

 

 

>

> Srila Prabhupada himself didn't produce his own food.

 

That is based on...? My guess is that at some point, Srila Prabhupada may

have

grown a little food for himself, or perhaps his wife did. I would be

surprised

if he didn't. We know he did produce his own medicines.

[Guest guest]

>

> I hope devotees don't think Srila Prabhupada's instructions are esoteric

> or arbitrary. Hopefully we can understand that Srila PRabhupada's

> instructions are meant to also save us money and bring us satisfaction.

> Take "No intoxication", for example - that is a real money saver.

>

 

Any such sastric instruction is beneficial for the personal welfare.

But they *are* arbitrary also. Like "no intoxication". Or "no

meat-eating". You do it, good for you. You don't do it, suffer

the sinful reactions. Don't say "ain't arbitrary" when they are.

 

 

But that Prabhupada said "every man should produce his own food"

is no reason to make an another dogma of "not/following acaryas's

instructions". What is the question of *instruction* anyway? To

whom particularly is it directed? To every man? As if in case of

some regulative principles like "no intoxications"...

 

Let's agree at least that if someone doesn't go growing his own

food (or his family food) he is still not necessarily committing

anything sinful, like getting intoxicated. Or perhaps a guru-aparadha

of not caring for the guru's instructions. So, yes, you used a

fairly proper word - arbitrary. So let's not see everything that

Prabhupada happened to say in that light -- "not caring for guru's

instructions". That's arbitrary like anything. Makes life impossible,

since Prabhupada used to say different things on the same topic,

in different occasions.

 

 

 

> > Srila Prabhupada himself didn't produce his own food.

>

> That is based on...?

 

.... on no record of such thing, as far as I am concerned.

 

 

> My guess is that at some point, Srila Prabhupada

> may have grown a little food for himself, or perhaps his wife did. I

> would be surprised if he didn't. We know he did produce his own

> medicines.

 

Maybe or maybe not. Such eventual growing a little food in some

point of time would not be fitting even into a "hobby" category

(you do your hobby regularly), what to speak of sustaining the

family on self-produced food.

 

One appears to got to have at least few tomato plants "tucked

into his flower bed", in order to get a rubber-stamp approval:

"self-food-sufficiency_bona_fide_human_being".

 

> We know he did produce his own medicines.

 

Prabhupada was by the profession into the pharmacy business, so no

surprise. It in no way suggests that he produced his own food

also.

 

 

 

- mnd

[Guest guest]

On 29 Jul 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

>

> That is based on...? My guess is that at some point, Srila Prabhupada may

have grown a little food for himself, or perhaps his wife did. I would be

surprised if he didn't. We know he did produce his own medicines.

>

>

 

 

We don't hear him talk about that -- his wife being a gardener and all.

Neither do we hear stories of his parents as gardeners.

 

As for his business, he was also an independent businessman acting as an agent

for Bose's laboratories with regards to marketing a number of lines. He later

owned Prayag Pharmacy, as well as his own medical manufacturing company, but

again, you don't hear him speak about growing his own herbs, etc.

 

Sure, growing you own food is nice. But if everyone were able to do that,

there would seem to be a very limitted market for the surplus produced by the

vaisya's.

 

 

 

 

 

..

[Guest guest]

"COM: Madhava Gosh (das) ACBSP (New Vrindavan - USA)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2516650 from COM]

>

> > Srila Prabhupada himself didn't produce his own food.

>

> That is based on...? My guess is that at some point, Srila Prabhupada may

> have

> grown a little food for himself, or perhaps his wife did. I would be

> surprised

> if he didn't. We know he did produce his own medicines.

 

When Srila Prabhupada is promoting the ideal, we should not insist that he do

that

also. It's nice if he does, but also he was operating in the capitalist system

just like we are. And that often makes things very complicated. Let's not

fantasize that modern India is in every way Vedic society.

 

Nevertheless, you are correct that Srila Prabhupada did produce some food at

one

point. At very least we have his statement in the following passage:

 

 

PARIS, AUGUST 2, 1976 — ROOM CONVERSATION

NEW MÄYÄPUR FARM

 

Bhagavan: There was a question about the cows: At what point should the calf be

separated from the mother? Because sometimes when the calf is separated, the

mother, she cries.

Prabhupada: No, they should not be taken away.

Bhagavan: Shouldn't be.

Hari-sauri: I think in all our farms they do that.

Bhagavan: I heard in New Vrindaban they took them away very early.

Hari-sauri: The problem is that the calves drink so much milk that they become

very sick, so they have to separate.

Prabhupada: Therefore they should not be allowed always. Once in a day, that's

all.

Hari-sauri: Oh.

Prabhupada: Not too much allowed, but once. At least while milking they should

be

allowed to drink little milk, and that will encourage the mother to deliver

more

milk.

Hari-sauri: Oh. At the same time they're milking the cow, the calf can come.

Prabhupada: Yes. They can bring it milk. And while milking, the calf may be

standing before the mother.

Hari-sauri: They do that in India.

Prabhupada: So she will not be sorry. Completely separation is not good. And

after

birth at least for one week the calf should be allowed. Because after this

giving

birth the milk is not fit for human consumption. The calf should not be allowed

to

eat more, but at the same time the mother must see once, twice, then it will be

all right. Of course, we are born in big, big towns, we do not know, but I know

this is the process. In Allahabad I was keeping cow, there was facility.

 

**********************

 

Personally, what I wish I could find out is what he meant when he commented to

Abhirama in the summer of 1977, when Abhirama asked him how he would start

varnasrama:

 

"I will go to Gita-nagari. I will sit down, and I will show you how to live

off

the land."

 

To have seen that would be the practical answer to our present question. As

Abhirama has stated, that surely is the bija mantra of varnasrama dharma.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

>

> When Srila Prabhupada is promoting the ideal, we should not insist that he

> do that also. It's nice if he does, but also he was operating in the

> capitalist system just like we are. And that often makes things very

> complicated. Let's not fantasize that modern India is in every way Vedic

> society.

 

That's how it should have been presented/understood on the first

place -- as Srila Prabhupada's promoting the ideal. That is nice.

 

The moment it is "translated" into (not)following Srila Prabhupada's

instruction, it is an another story. Then one looks what the acarya

does himself when he gives the instruction that everybody got to follow.

Actually, here it is not going for "insisting" that Prabhupada himself

does it, please don't see it like that. It is simply going for freeing

oneself from the accusation of not following the instructions of Srila

Prabhupada. It's quite a difference.

 

So, as Srila Prabhupada is seen as "nice if he does, but also he

was operating in the capitalistic system just like we are", so

everybody else may be seen like that also. As you may say for

Srila Prabhupada's life style and the conditions of life that he

lived in India of some 50 years ago as "let's not fantasize",

so what more is to be said for everybody else here and now?

 

 

 

- mnd

[Guest guest]

> Hari-sauri: They do that in India.

> Prabhupada: So she will not be sorry. Completely separation is not good.

> And after birth at least for one week the calf should be allowed. Because

> after this giving birth the milk is not fit for human consumption. The

> calf should not be allowed to eat more, but at the same time the mother

> must see once, twice, then it will be all right. Of course, we are born in

> big, big towns, we do not know, but I know this is the process. In

> Allahabad I was keeping cow, there was facility.

 

I was reading yesterday in SB how every householder should keep

cows, how that is the way to prosperity and happiness. So I got

that instant idea "So let me get one". But what then? I might even

get together the facilities for keeping one caw, in my present

circumstances (at least I don't live in a building apartment in some

city). But what shall I do with all the calves that got the come every

year? I mean, I can't just let them out on the street to take care of

themselves, as they do it in India. It's still Sweden.

 

How do other householders here do it? Apparently, even Srila

Prabhupada who lived in India of almost a half of century ago did

it when the facilities and circumstances allowed it, and when not,

then he didn't do it. It was something of secondary importance,

his business and the economical situation of the family being on the

first place of consideration.

 

 

- mnd

[Guest guest]

"WWW: Sthita-dhi-muni (Dasa) SDG (Alachua FL - USA)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2518149 from COM]

>

> On 29 Jul 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

>

> >

> > That is based on...? My guess is that at some point, Srila Prabhupada may

> have grown a little food for himself, or perhaps his wife did. I would be

> surprised if he didn't. We know he did produce his own medicines.

> >

> >

>

> We don't hear him talk about that -- his wife being a gardener and all.

> Neither do we hear stories of his parents as gardeners.

 

BPrabhupada: Yes. We can get many wonderful places like this all over the

world.

But they have not been taught how to utilize them.

Bhagavan: But I think in one year they have done nicely. They have built a

greenhouse and planted all the cultivated land.

Prabhupada: No, they are working hard, there is no doubt about it.

Bhagavan: And the temple also, Deity worship and everything.

Prabhupada: Oh, yes, things are going nicely. There is no doubt about it. And

children should be given that much education -- to read and write and chant

Hare

Krsna.

Bhagavan: The devotees are talking how nice it was to sit outside with you and

chant and hear you speak tonight. I remember the last time I was in New

Vrindaban

many years ago, when I first became a devotee. You were sitting outside, giving

some lecture, series of lectures on Vyasadeva and the Srimad-Bhagavatam.

Prabhupada: Yes. No, I like this life, from my very childhood. And on our roof

there were trees, plants, flower plants, and... My grandmother, she... We, all

grandchildren used to water it. So downstairs we took water in, what is called?

A

jhari?

Bhagavan: Sprinkling can?

Prabhupada: Ah, sprinkling can. We all grandchildren, we were about half a

dozen.

So we took very much pleasure in watering. But my special tendency was that

along

with the plants, I, with the bushes, I'll sit down. My tendency. And I'll sit

down

for hours. And like that. In my childhood. In my maternal uncle's house also, I

was doing that. As soon as I find some bush, I make a sitting place.

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Room Conversation -- August 2, 1976, New Mayapur (French

farm)

 

 

 

 

 

So certainly the situation he grew up in, gardening was part of it. Herein he

clearly indicates that, at least in his childhood , he gardened. there is no

evidence that he didn't garden as an adult. He clearly encourages it.

 

>

> Sure, growing you own food is nice. But if everyone were able to do that,

> there would seem to be a very limitted market for the surplus produced by the

> vaisya's.

>

> .

 

Realistically, not everyone will grow all their food. Even if they did,

there

would still be opportunities for vaisyas to be involved with trade of the

surpluses. For instance, I can't grow oranges in West Virginia, and you

can't

grow apples in Florida. So even if both of us were growing food, we would

have

an opportunity for trade.

[Guest guest]

>

>

> When Srila Prabhupada is promoting the ideal, we should not insist that he do

> that

> also. It's nice if he does, but also he was operating in the capitalist

system

> just like we are. And that often makes things very complicated. Let's not

> fantasize that modern India is in every way Vedic society.

>

 

I am not insisting that at all. This whole thing has been one of those

slippery

slope type deals. It is clear that Srila Prabhupada is encouraging an economic

base for his movement developed on the land and the cow. I have never even

implied

everyone should be directly involved - I have always advocated the team

concept,

where devotees would buy from other devotees, or support the endowment of cow

protection programs..

 

 

 

>

> Nevertheless, you are correct that Srila Prabhupada did produce some food at

> one point.

 

It just seems so obvious that he would have.

 

Certainly not as the main focus of his life, but if for no other reason than

that

it was common practice.

[Guest guest]

>

>

> Realistically, not everyone will grow all their food. Even if they did,

> there would still be opportunities for vaisyas to be involved with trade

> of the surpluses. For instance, I can't grow oranges in West Virginia,

> and you can't grow apples in Florida. So even if both of us were growing

> food, we would have an opportunity for trade.

 

How many hours it would take to transport your apples from West

Virginia to Florida, by a bullock cart? And then the same way

back, with Sthita's oranges. What an opportunity.

 

 

- mnd

[Guest guest]

"COM: Mahanidhi (das) (S)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2524358 from COM]

>

> >

> >

> > Realistically, not everyone will grow all their food. Even if they did,

> > there would still be opportunities for vaisyas to be involved with trade

> > of the surpluses. For instance, I can't grow oranges in West Virginia,

> > and you can't grow apples in Florida. So even if both of us were growing

> > food, we would have an opportunity for trade.

>

> How many hours it would take to transport your apples from West

> Virginia to Florida, by a bullock cart? And then the same way

> back, with Sthita's oranges. What an opportunity.

>

> - mnd

 

According to Mapquest, it is 881 miles one way. At 15 miles a day, that

would be 59 days. probably not a viable proposition. By car, Mapquest says

16 hours, 41 minutes. Economic? As a business venture, 33 cents a mile

deductible mileage, I'm in Florida! A tax write off vacation!

[Guest guest]

>

> But that Prabhupada said "every man should produce his own food"

> is no reason to make an another dogma of "not/following acaryas's

> instructions". What is the question of *instruction* anyway? To

> whom particularly is it directed? To every man? As if in case of

> some regulative principles like "no intoxications"...

 

Relax Mahaniddhi - I'm certainly not making it a dogma. Just saying it should

be encouraged. I'm all for the team concept.

 

>

> One appears to got to have at least few tomato plants "tucked

> into his flower bed", in order to get a rubber-stamp approval:

> "self-food-sufficiency_bona_fide_human_being".

 

No. He does it because they produce a better quality, better tasting tomato

then the pale imitations you can buy in the store.

[Guest guest]

>

> According to Mapquest, it is 881 miles one way. At 15 miles a day,

> that would be 59 days. probably not a viable proposition. By car,

> Mapquest says 16 hours, 41 minutes. Economic? As a business venture,

> 33 cents a mile deductible mileage, I'm in Florida! A tax write off

> vacation!

 

No car or train or airplane options. That's a "blood transport",

the modern age ugra karma that we don't want to go exploring really.

 

So 4 months altogether. With no refrigerating system installed in

your bullock cart. I guess you got to forget trading your apples

for Sthita's oranges (unless you are really in a desperate need of

"a tax write off" splashing in the Mexican Golf on the Florida's

beaches, of course)

 

 

I would be able to assume that such long distance exchanges of

food (especially of the fresh one) would not be occurring in the

self-sufficient communities and households where everyone would

grow/produce their own food. The need of such trade would defeat

the very idea of being self-sufficient in regard to food.

But I would expect that the nearby cities would be suitable for

being supplied with your excess of food, and in return you get all

that nice stuff that one can find in the cities. Like Nanda Maharaja,

when he went to Dvaraka to pay the taxes to Kamsa, and do the trade.

But then you got to have someone in the city being in need for your

food. A someone that is not producing his food on his own. A common

sense.

 

 

 

- mnd

[Guest guest]

On 1 Aug 1999, Mahanidhi das wrote:

 

> > For instance, I can't grow oranges in West Virginia,

> > and you can't grow apples in Florida. So even if both of us were growing

food, we would have an opportunity for trade.

> >

 

> How many hours it would take to transport your apples from West

> Virginia to Florida, by a bullock cart? And then the same way

> back, with Sthita's oranges. What an opportunity.

>

>

 

 

It appears you can grow some varieties of apples, at least in northern

Florida. You generally have to get down towards Orlando before you can grow

oranges without being prepared to offer some protection on those few stray

cold winter nights.

 

So who is going to grow the microwave popcorn -- now that's an important

self-sufficiency issue on my mind.

 

ys,

 

Sthita

[Guest guest]

>

>

> So 4 months altogether. With no refrigerating system installed in

> your bullock cart. I guess you got to forget trading your apples

> for Sthita's oranges (unless you are really in a desperate need of

> "a tax write off" splashing in the Mexican Golf on the Florida's

> beaches, of course)

 

Yes, aplles for oranges probably not viable. But black cohosh for saw

palmetto might have some promise.

 

> But then you got to have someone in the city being in need for your

> food. A someone that is not producing his food on his own. A common

> sense.

>

> - mnd

 

Yes. when Srila Prabhupada says every man should raise his own food, we

need to take that as a relative goal, not an absolute truth.