Guidance, Volume 3

Householders and Renunciates

Those who do not possess single-minded dedication to the service of the Lord always waste time debating who should be called a 'householder' (grihi) and who a 'renunciate' (tyagi). "Who is greater, a householder or a renunciate?"—this designation argument possesses the hearts of people who have strayed from the service of the Lord. Whatever group one belongs to, whatever designation, or name, one hides behind, one will think that this group or designation is the 'best' and will want to prove that. Such designation fanaticism is fertile soil for mutual apathy, dissension, envy, hatred and, eventually, many other effects.

For the sampradayas that promote pursuit of material desires, fruitive activities, knowledge, yoga, vows, penance, etc. this dispute is natural. There are also many various stories on this matter in the history. Once, there was this argument ("Who is greater, a householder or a renunciate?") among the disciples of an impersonalist preacher, and the argument ended with bloodshed. There are so many other similar infamous incidents about this—if it was to be openly published at the present time in the newspapers, people would try to denounce it as libel, therefore we shall abstain from mentioning any names.

One false renunciates' sampradaya and one pleasure-seeking householders' sampradaya decided to mark on a board the qualities of renunciates and householders. It turned out that the householders devoted to the service of the Lord and the sannyasis serving the Lord without any attachment to material things are completely different. We hear also that one revered materialist said, "No matter how much you wash a bowl where garlic has been kept, the smell will not go away—in the same way, if a man even once regresses and goes back to live with his lawful wife, no matter how saintly he may become, the stench of his regress will never leave him." This man also advised, "A sannyasi is the one who has never once regressed and who is infallible and unblemished like a pure-blooded person born into a noble caste. Just as when you pop popcorn, all the seeds spatter and open exposing the unblemished insides; and the seeds that do not pop get stained—in the same way, no matter how chaste or devoted the householders may be, they in one way or another get 'reddish' stains, but sannyasis never get stained."

While these people swear to be all-accommodating(?) and non-sectarian(?), one can find such statements in their preaching quite narrow-minded. It is among those who do not accept that the soul is eternal and imagine that the mind and the body are the instruments of the service to the Lord that this argument about designations can be found. The truth is that the soul is neither an enjoyer nor a householder—neither is it a denouncer of enjoyment or a renunciate. Souls, practitioners of Krishna consciousness, may wear the dress of a householder, a renunciate or belong to any other designation. It is for the authors of the scriptures to decide who has the right to compare the extent to which one's soul is awakened. One cannot tell whose true identity is big and whose is small just by looking at the clothes. That is why Sri Chaitanyadev explained that neither a householder, nor a renunciate, nor any other cover is the real self of a practitioner of Krishna consciousness.

naham vipro na cha nara-patir napi vaisyo na sudro
naham varni na cha grha-patir no vanastho yatir va
kintu prodyan-nikhila-paramananda-purnamrtabdher
gopi-bhartuh pada-kamalayor dasa-dasanudasah

"I am not a brahman, I am not a ksatriya, I am not a vaisya or a sudra. Nor am I a brahmachari, a householder, a vanaprastha or a sannyasi. I identify Myself only as the servant of the servant of the servant of the lotus feet of Lord Sri Krishna, the maintainer of the gopis. He is like an ocean of nectar, and He is the cause of universal transcendental bliss. He is always existing with brilliance."

(Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita, 2.13.80)

We must be cautious so that the flow of averse mundane thinking does not enter through the door of the temple of Krishna consciousness. The householders' party and the renunciates' party come from the desire for money, women, and name and fame. We must not allow this party spirit of false sampradayas come anywhere near the temple of Krishna consciousness. So-called householders think, "I have become the master of all my hard-earned wealth, of women, and of name and fame! Sannyasis come to my door to beg—they depend on me, and I am their maintainer, I supply their lodging, food and clothing! If it was not for me (or us, the householders), there would be no sannyasis in this world! I/we keep them alive! We will not tolerate that they must get more fame than us, the wealthy people. Instead of extolling us as their benefactors, they call us 'people attached to their house, wife, son, etc.'—there is no way we will tolerate that!"

When, under the influence of material nature, we become infatuated by ego and proudly consider ourselves to be the masters of all we survey, then one party starts pitying the other drawing the demarcation line between the parties; this can affect the householders' party or the renunciates' party, and whichever party is affected, it starts criticising the other.

The so-called renunciates who are overcome with material desires may feel unhappy with householders thinking, "We have renounced our wives, sons, family life, etc., and these householders crave for this hellish life. We are honey bees, and they are worms in stool. We advise them about their benefit, therefore we deserve more respect than they do." As long as there is this distinction between the two parties, both parties will try to prove, swearing by the scriptures, that their party is the best. Householders say that because they support the three different orders of life they are the best; renunciates say that the Lord compares the sannyas order of life to His own head, therefore their order of life is the highest.

There is also another class of people who make this dispute between the two parties even more complicated—they say, "Nowadays householders and renunciates are two of a kind. Rather, it is better to be a householder. Compared to householders, renunciates are secret sinners. Householders enjoy openly, and renunciates enjoy secretly. At least householders take a legal wife and can get some pious merit, but renunciates secretly behave in a wrong way—full of deceit, they are lower than animals." That class of people tries to daze the householders' and the renunciates' parties by all this verbosity, but this mutual animosity is like a dormant fire that is only increasing within.

The teachers of sincere spiritual teachings do not approve of any of these designation fights and arguments. The great souls who preach the sublime and all-accommodating teachings of Sri Chaitanyadev say,

mahaprabhura bhaktaganera vairagya pradhana
yaha dekhi tusta hana gaura bhagavana

"Renunciation is the main principle in the lives of the devotees of Mahaprabhu. Sri Chaitanyadev, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is pleased to see their renunciation."

If we consider the opinion of the devotees surrendered exclusively to Gauranga Mahaprabhu, we will get a great benefit. There is no reason for householders to be unhappy about that. If one becomes apathetic towards pursuit of fame or individual benefit, this smoking fire of dissatisfaction scorches their heart. The welfare materialists' pursue is not something that sincere devotes would not accept. Service to Krishna and being a master of one's home are two opposite things. The difference between the prakrita-sahajiyas and those who aspire for spiritual benefit following the footsteps of Sri Chaitanya is that they do not encourage mundane householders in their attachment to their homes. The people who call themselves renunciates may encourage materialistic householders in their attachment, and nobody will challenge the saintliness of all these impostor renunciates! Actually, if such householders can help renunciates maintain their life by providing them with food and clothes, then they will become even more engrossed in their attachment. Great souls note that calling 'attachment to home' service to Krishna and Krishna's servitors is cheating.

Many may not be able to grasp the meaning of several teachings of nitya-lila-pravista Om Vishnupad Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur that we present below, so we will try to expound on the meaning of these transcendental teachings of Thakur Bhaktivinod through the little we have had an opportunity to hear at the lotus feet of our spiritual master. It is with the hope that the lotus feet of our Divine Master will overlook our mistakes and correct them that we commence to discuss this matter.

Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur wrote in the seventh chapter of his Jaiva-dharma:

1) In Kali-yuga, one should be a grihastha Vaishnav. One must not be afraid to fall down—it is possible to have a complete and flourishing devotion. There are many transcendental gurus among grihastha Vaishnavs.

2) Some of the grihastha devotees are qualified to become griha-tyagi Vaishnavs (devotees who give up their home). Their number in this world is very small, and it is very difficult to get their association.

3) Vrajanath asks old Babaji Mahasay in the seventeenth chapter of Jaiva-dharma, "If we call one a Vaishnav, does it mean that he is a 'griha-tyagi' (renounced) Vaishnav?" Babaji Mahasay replied, "A Vaishnav is a pure devotee of Krishna, be it a grihastha or a griha-tyagi, a brahman or a chandal (meat-eater), a rich man or a poor man. The extent to which one has devotion to Krishna is the extent to which one is a devotee of Krishna."

4) Old Babaji Mahasay said again in the twenty-second chapter of Jaiva-dharma that as long as one does not get the qualification, or right, to renounce their home (to become a griha-tyagi), one must serve Krishna as a grihastha. The pastimes Mahaprabhu performed during His first twenty-four years are an example for grihastha Vaishnavs, and the pastimes He performed during His last twenty-four years are an example for griha-tyagi Vaishnavs. So, we do not think that one cannot attain the highest love for Krishna while being a grihastha: most of the recipients of Mahaprabhu's mercy are grihasthas, and griha-tyagi Vaishnavs pray for the feet dust of such grihasthas.

Hearing all these instructions of Om Vishnupad Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur, many materialist householders were ready to get signed up as eternal slaves in the religion's ledger. If one can achieve the acme of perfection while carrying on enjoying, what intelligent person will then want to give up this kind of practice where you can have your bread buttered on both sides?

The followers of concocted religions resulting from national sentimentalism as well as covetous materialists mix together enjoyment, renunciation and spiritual practice; this doctrine of prakrita-sahajiyas presented in the disguise of spiritual search has been going on in this world since time immemorial. In fact, such views are distorted reflections of the teachings of great souls in the mirror of sense gratification. To save us from this danger, our spiritual masters explain the distinction between the two terms, 'griha-vrata' and 'grihastha'. Real grihasthas (householders) are not devoted to their homes—they are devoted to Krishna. Real sannyasis are those who do not renounce Krishna and kasna (servant of Krishna)—they live as members of Krishna's family, or they are attached to the house of the Lord and His devotees. There is no difference between the essence of Vaishnava grihasthas and Vaishnava sannyasis.

Those who are attached to their homes are already fallen souls, they are always within the slippery waterfall of spiritual failure, so there is no fear of falling down—this is not what Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur says, and it is confirmed by the following words. Grihastha devotees have the qualification to become griha-tyagi Vaishnavs (i.e. to renounce their home). According to Sriman Mahaprabhu's teachings, the goal of spiritual practice is to become internally initiated into the madhukari vow (living on minimal alms) and accept a kaupin (simple loincloth). Everyone will have to accept such spiritual practice one day or another. The purpose of mendicant life is not what false mayavadi renunciates say (kaupinavantah khalu bhagyavantah—one must accept the renounced order very seriously, wearing nothing but a loincloth); neither does madhukari mean begging to satisfy the urge of your stomach. According to the Gaudiya teachings, accepting a kaupin means service to Sri Svarup and Sri Rupa, who are followers of gopis or self-realised, i.e. have completely given up the ego of an enjoyer or a male, their only ego is that they are maidservants of gopis; and madhukari means that those who are engaged in search for Sri Krishna in separation, or the highest service mood, do not search for things to satisfy their stomaches.

Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur advises both grihasthas and griha-tyagis to follow Sriman Mahaprabhu's example. He explains that even if householders (grihastha) maintain their family life following Mahaprabhu's example (not imitating Mahaprabhu), they should follow the later pastimes of Mahaprabhu in order to become detached and free from any material desires. Mahaprabhu did not tell to always live at home; neither did He show this in His own life. Although Raya Ramananda was an eternally liberated associate of Mahaprabhu, he also showed the pastime of leaving his material life to continually stay with Mahaprabhu. Such devotees never went back to their previous life, neither did Mahaprabhu encourage them to get married. That is why He prohibited Srila Raghunath Bhatta Goswami to take any gifts also. Moreover, when materialists excitedly take up spiritual life, they become eager to practise false renunciation for the sake of name and fame—to prevent that and set the example, Mahaprabhu showed the example of His own eternally liberated associate Srila Raghunath Das Goswami. He first advised him, "Do not show your false renunciation to impress people. Serve accepting material things but without attachment", etc.—but a few days after that, Mahaprabhu revealed the highest example of transcendental renunciation when Raghunath Das Goswami performed the pastime of completely leaving his home.

Thinking that there is no fear of falling down in the grihastha life, and letting the fire of married-life sacrifice go ablaze is not an example of spiritual life; or if one lives in his house and on the pretence of being a member of Krishna's family creates(?) servants and maidservants for Krishna—such prakrita-sahajiya hypocrisy will never lead to spiritual benefit. What did Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur show in his own life? Although he is an eternally liberated associate of Gaura, in his later pastimes he manifested the pastime of accepting kaupin—through that one can get some idea about his hidden inner desire and the meaning of his guidance.

Griha-vrata prakrita-sahajiyas (householder imitators attached to their homes) strive to get you to worship them using renunciates. If the grha-vratas (householders attached to their homes) can get others to serve them, worship them, praise them, wash their feet, etc. using renounced people, then they get a chance to establish their besotted householder religion at an ever higher level. Therefore, among the griha-vratas, there is a class of people that take the garb of pramahamsas (they call themselves babaji and accept all the attributes like kaupin, etc.) and always engage others to do everything—to carry things, make pan (betel nut preparation), bring water, prepare oil, etc.; they even engage their wives, children and other family members in all sorts of works. These so-called fake paramahamsas (nowadays they are known as kaupina-dhari babajis) pay full obeisances to materialists and seeks their blessings, etc. Sometimes they also become very merciful and greet high-class people. We must watch out that we may not resort to deception to make permanent settlement with this religion of materialist householders; we must watch out so that out of ego of a renouncer we may not become involved into competition with such materialist householders.

Although a Vaishnav may wear the cloth of a renunciate (griha-tyagi) or a householder (grihastha), Thakur Bhaktivinod did not teach that one should be a griha-vrata (householder attached to the house) or a false renunciate. He explained that the extent to which one has pure devotion to Krishna is the extent to which one is a devotee of Krishna. Here it is worth noting the phrase 'pure devotion to Krishna'. Having no pure devotion to Lord Krishna but being anxious to obtain the respect of being either a householder or a renunciate, which Vaishnavs consider undesirable, is a certain symptom of a non-devotee (avaisnav). Thakur Bhaktivinod says (here and in many other quotes),

ami ta' vaisnava e buddhi haile
amani' na ha'ba ami
pratisthasa asi hrdaya dusibe
haiba niraya-gami

Just as in the case of karma-jada-smartas who cannot give up discrimination based on the caste of Vaishnavs, if we classify Vaishnavs according to the caste(?) of householders and renunciates, then we will only prove that we are second-rate materialists. That is why Thakur Mahasay (Srila Narottam Das Thakur), who performed the pastimes of a renunciate and a life-long brahmachari, says:

grhe va vanete thake, ha gauranga ba'le dake
narottama mage tara sanga

Whoever cries out, "O Gauranga!" means whoever chants the Holy Names of the Lord being situated in the consciousness of their pure and uncovered self—there is no difference whether it is a grihastha or a vanaprastha. One may consider that a householder is a person in relation with a woman, but Thakur Mahasay had no desire for any association with women. When it comes to practising Krishna consciousness, whether one lives in a house and a forest, it is the same. If one tries to be more partial to the house on pretext of this consideration, i.e. if one is partial to the attachment to hearth and home and tries to disguise it on pretext of devotion, then this is sheer hypocrisy.

Some people like to look for faults in sannyasis, and knowing many examples of people who reap the result of their karma and fall down from sannyas, they remain basic householders considering that they are safe. This is just a sign of very strong illusion and attachment to the material world—there is a class of atheists who, seeing that spiritual practise involves many kinds of trials and tribulations, consider it best to be an atheist. So-called brahmavadis (impersonalists) say that even though householders' attachment to their homes and families transgresses the principles of ethics, it is not necessary to abandon the householder order of life. Followers of this doctrine even think that when Mahaprabhu showed the pastime of leaving His family, He strayed from the moral obligation to serve one's lawful wife! This kind of example is given when one is very attached to the material world and does not have sufficient desire to serve the Lord, so people cover their love for an easy life and enjoyment with the screen of ethics. When we pretend to hear the instructions of great souls exclusively dedicated to spiritual life and in the meantime always look for faults in sannyasis—when we become absolutely free from material attachment and try to diminish the highest goal of bringing full satisfaction to the lotus feet of Sri Guru—i.e. when people who are not able to understand the true meaning of renunciation sway from the path of renunciation (we can refer also to the calamitous examples of Chhota Haridas, Kala Krishna Das; and also that of Bharatchandra Ray Gunakor who accepted mendicant life in his former life but later became inspired by various ideals and fell down, afflicted by mundane thoughts)—and when we can see in various scriptures, books and so many instances from the present day when people stray from sannyas or temporary renunciation—with all this vast experience, if someone is situated amidst an inferior (material) family and is not drawn to the ideal of giving up enjoyment out of love for Krishna and indifference toward the mundane, they think that the best thing to do is to 'divorce'. Perhaps, it is for this reason that Srimad Bhagavatam (5.11.3) said:

na tasya tattva-grahanaya saksad
variyasir api vachah samasan
svapne niruktya grhamedhi-saukhyam
na yasya heyanumitam svayam syat

Purport: We naturally know that a dream shows false and illusory enjoyment, but if we do not feel that the happiness of materialist householders is insignificant, then no amount of Vedas, albeit the best source of transcendental knowledge, is sufficient. It means that if someone is intent on being a materialist householder, then pure (free from material desires) conception of service to the Lord will never enter their ears. Such people make offences to the lotus feet of the true sannyas dharma and become attached to the dharma of materialist householders—it is a befitting reward for them.

As for how one can practise Krishna consciousness living in one's own house and following the religion of the Bhagatavam, we hear the following advice:

yah sat sapatnan vijigisasamano gahesu nirvisya yateta purvam
atyeti durgasrita urjitarin ksinesu kamam vichared vipaschat

(Srimad Bhagavatam, 5.1.18)

Purport: If you want to conquer the six enemies (five senses and the mind), first you must try to stay within grihastha-asram. Just as when you defeat your enemies you stroll at ease in your fortress or any other place, in the same way an intelligent person who conquers the six enemies will be able to freely 'stroll' in his house or any other place—when you first of all take shelter of your fortress, you can defeat very strong enemies.

In fact, the house is like a fortress which you can use to fight against the six enemies, but if you cannot make your house a fortress, if you instead make your house a dwelling place of your enemies, then what to speak of having some place to fight against your external enemies—before advancing in the battle you must first win the place occupied by the enemies within your house. The problem is that we turn almost 100% of the place in the house into a place for enjoyment. How many of us are householders who have a sincere and exclusive attachment to the service of Krishna and who, having won the battle against the six enemies, engage them now in the service of the Lord? Suppose someone has this character and intelligence in their heart, but can they retain this purpose once they fall into the wheel of material existence?

After the relief resulting from the aforementioned sloka from Srimad Bhagavatam, the sloka that follows it (5.1.19) teaches people showing the example of how Priyavrata stayed in the grihastha-asram:

tvam tv abja-nabhanghri-saroja-kosa-
durgasrito nirjita-sat-sapatnah
bhunksveha bhogan purusatidistan
vimukta-sangah prakrtim bhajasva

Purport: O Priyavrata! You have taken shelter within the fortress of the holy lotus feet of Sri Narayan and did your best to defeat the six enemies (the five senses and the mind), so now that you live as a householder, you must serve the Lord with whatever surplus you have from the things given to you by the Lord. Worship the Lord in this way, and after that you can give up the association of your children and wife and go to live in a forest.

Bhagavatam says that dharma (religion) is when one becomes qualified to follow the instruction "yatha-yogya visaya-bhunja" (maintain your property for the service; accept material things as required for service) within the grihastha ashram. Those who can turn their house into abode of the holy lotus feet of Lord Narayan can defeat the six enemies—therefore, it is necessary to first have the right to practise proper renunciation before entering the life of a householder. Bhagavatam advises to worship the Supreme Lord having conquered the senses, like Priyavrata did, and only after that to completely leave the association of your wife, sons, et al. and live in a forest.

Sri Narad advised Yudhisthir Maharaj on the religious duties of a householder in the eighteenth chapter of the seventh canto of Srimad Bhagavatam. A householder devotee must not be taught to becomes a basic materialist householder (attached to his hearth and home). One lives in a house to be inspired to eventually learn how to leave attachment to the house, body, wife, sons, etc. and become a devotee, free from material attachments. Men enter into a relationship with their lawful wives within marriage in order to reduce and eventually uproot the desire for such relationship—not to increase their attachment to female association. Householder life is not meant to be permanent—its purpose is to give a favourable ground for practising Krishna consciousness and for giving up attachment to the house, etc.

srnvan bhagavato 'bhiksnam avatara-kathamrtam
sraddadhano yatha-kalam upasanta-janavrtah
sat-sangach chhanakaih sangam atma-jayatmajadisu
vimunchen muchyamanesu svayam svapnavad utthitah

(Srimad Bhagavatam, 7.14.3-4)

Purport: The householders who spend each day surrounded by the devotees of the Lord and always listen with faith to the nectarean discourses about the incarnations of the Lord in the good association must gradually give up attachment to their bodies, wives, sons, etc. just as when a man gradually wakes up from a dream, the dream is naturally severed.

yavad bhriyeta jatharam tavat svatvam hi dehinam
adhikam yo 'bhimanyeta sa steno dandam arhati

(Srimad Bhagavatam, 7.14.8)

Purport: A householder is entitled to accept as much money, etc. as it is necessary to just stop hunger. Those who want to take more than that are thieves and deserve to be punished.

apy ekam atmano daram nrsam svatva-graho yatah

(Srimad Bhagavatam, 7.14.11)

Purport: Instead of using his beloved one and only wife for his own service, a householder should rather utilise her for the service of guests.

jahyad yad-arthe svan pranan hanyad va pitaram gurum
tasyam svatvam striyam jahyad yas tena hy ajito jitah

(Srimad Bhagavatam, 7.14.12)

Purport: If a man gives up possessiveness over his wife for whose sake he kills himself, his father and his guru, he can conquer the unconquerable Supreme Lord.

krmi-vid-bhasma-nisthantam vedam tuchchham kalevaram
kva tadiya-ratir bharya kvayam atma nabhas-chhadih

(Srimad Bhagavatam, 7.14.13)

Purport: Where will this trifle body go when all that remains from it is worms, stool and ashes? And where will the wife go whom one is so besotted with? And where will the soul renowned as all-pervading be?

Did Devarsi Narad tell householder devotees to become more attached to their household duties, or did he explain the qualities and qualification a householder must have in order to leave attachment to his householder religion?

We often, arrogant inside and outside, under pretence of humility, call ourselves 'griha-medhi' (a householder engrossed in the affairs of the household), 'griha-vrata' (a householder attached to his home), but in fact and in practice we have griha-asakti (attachment to our home) established as a worshippable deity at the innermost bottom of our hearts. Such external humility is just a hidden weapon to realise one's envy or anger towards the renunciates. One's attachment to the house only increases through such deceitful humility, and one does not get entrance into the religion of Bhagavatam by getting relief from the grasp of that attachment. At the same time, if we become proud of being a renunciate and think that even a householder devoted to practising Krishna consciousness is just a griha-vrata (materialistic householder), or we imagine that even if a grihastha devotee is engaged in service to the Lord, because we do more service being a 'renunciate', we are greater in comparison with them—the moment this mentality arises in us (as soon as we start posing as greater or consider ourselves a sannyasi or a tyagi, we try to establish the practising sannyasis[?] in the vindictive and competitive chamber of superiority and diminish the value of practising householders[?])—we immediately stray from the true sannyas-dharma. As soon as I step into the world of envy thinking, "I am greater," I am immediately transferred far away from the proximity to the true religion of Bhagavatam. If householders, understanding that renunciates look down upon them, become proud and get involved in the animosity and competition, they will only increase their attachment to the material world, taking to a slippery road.

Watch out! There is no place for the designation party spirit in the temple of spiritual life. Cheap, non-devotional views are not allowed anywhere in the heart of a devotee of the Lord.

The author of Sri Prema-vivarta says (17.22, 17, 48):

grhi hauka, tyagi hauka, bhakte bheda nai
bhakte bheda haile kumbhipaka narakete yai

"There is no difference between devotees—be they householders or renunciates. If someone makes distinctions between them, they go to the hell of boiling oil."

grhastha vaisnava sada namaparadha rakhi' dure
anukulya laya, pratikulya tyaga kare

"Householder devotees always avoid offences to the Name, accept the favourable, and reject the unfavourable.

samsarera gotra tyaji' krsna-gotra bhaje
sei nitya gotra tara, sei vaise vraje

"They give up their worldly families and serve Krishna's family. Those who reside in Vraja are part of that eternal family.

Srila Vrndavan Thakur also says:

"sikha-sutra ghuchaile-i se krsna pai
grhastha tomara mate vaisnava ki nai?"

[Gadadhar Pandit to Mahaprabhu] "You say one gets Krishna by keeping a sikha and having a sacred brahman thread, but is a householder like You not a Vaishnav?"

(Sri Chaitanya-bhagavata, 2.26.172)

grhastha haiya dhare rahuka nimani

"Let Nimai stay at home as a householder."

(Sri Chaitanya-bhagavata, 1.8.94)

Seeing these and other statements, many of us try to imitate householder devotees desiring to enjoy material things. Both devotion to one's home and devotion to renunciation is actually aversion to Krishna—such a concocted religion is typical for the souls who have strayed from the path of devotion to Krishna. However, when one is inclined to the service of Krishna's house, their nature is like this,

grhe aile-o grha-vyabhara na kare
nirabadhi thake visnu-grhera bhitare

"Even if you stay in a house, do not use the house—always stay there as in the house of the Lord."

(Sri Chaitanya-bhagavata, 1.7.69)

Om Vishnupad Srila Gaura Kisor Das Goswami Maharaj advised married people: ** Babu has got married, it is good. Now he can himself cook an offering for the Lord every day and having offered it to the Lord, serve prasad to his pious wife seeing her as a Vaishnav, and after she takes prasad, he can take it himself. Instead of thinking of her as an object of enjoyment, he must think that he can serve her in various ways always thinking about his guru—in this way he can get spiritual benefit. This entire world—all wealth, jewels, women, men of this world—is meant only for Krishna's enjoyment. He must use Krishna's property for the service of Krishna—likewise, he must not see his wife as his maidservant; rather, he must respect her as a maidservant of Krishna.

Therefore, it is not easy to be a householder devotee; rather, it entails many more duties and difficulties than in the sannyas order of life. In essence, there is no difference between ideal householder life and ideal sannyas life. Ideal householder practice is paramahamsa practice. Great devotees such as Janaka, Prithu and Pariksit are examples of this paramahamsa dharma. If a common soul does not become established in the highest designation of the ideal from the beginning, it downplays the ideal and starts the debates. This is unfavourable for Krishna consciousness.

— · ◊ · —

CONTENTS:

• Foreword
• (Preface) Meaning of Festival
• What Is Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math and Its Distinctions
• "Without Lord Krishna Life Is Meaningless"
• The Unrenounceable
• Sri Radhastami
• Proper Renunciation
• Astakala-Lila
• Is Religion the Cause of National Downfall?
• Householders and Renunciates
• Provincialism and Service to the Lord
• Offenders
• Hell
• Devotional Mood (Bhakta-Bhav)
• Home-interest vs Math-interest
• Samsara and Bhakti
• Questions and Answers