If some new devotees want to donate organs, what should we tell them?

Answer Podcast

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
some company which eventually promotes, say, the breaking of four regulatory principles, software companies used for some purposes like that, how to avoid that? See, we live in a very interconnected world where ultimately, everything may have some consequences that we don’t know. Even if we say that, okay, somebody is a professor in a college teaching engineering.
But some students may use that same engineering knowledge to develop some engineering devices for slaughtering animals in future. So, we can’t really go into the karmic chain or karmic connections too far. If we start going too far, then we can become paralyzed.
Duh! If you see, even in Vedic culture, it is not that these… There were people who used to eat meat at that time also. There were people who used to gamble, people used to drink, people used to do illicit sex. In the 11th canto, there is a verse which says that these activities are the general tendency of human beings.
I forget the verse. Anyway, Sanskrit verse is there. Basically, meat-eating, intoxication, illicit sex, these are the general tendency of human beings.
But the wise people refrain from them because they are entangling, because they are degrading. All those reasons are there. So, there may have been in the past, been times when there were very virtuous kings and the kings were great devotees and the citizens were also virtuous, when these activities were not there.
But those are exceptions. What is different between today’s times and in the past times is, these activities, even if they were done, even if they were done by some people, they were never glamorized. Today, not only is sin done, not only is sin widespread, but sin is considered fashionable.
That is the great danger of Kali Yuga. So, as far as devotees are concerned, devotees should not be involved directly in professions which involve violation of the four regulatory principles. But indirectly, if something is there, we, ultimately our purpose is not just to follow the four regulatory principles.
Our purpose is to practice bhakti. So, for example, some devotee has a job that pays well and it may be a little indirectly connected with some breaking of regulatory principles. Not directly.
But with that job, a devotee is able to serve Krishna and help in sharing Krishna’s mission, spreading Krishna’s mission. On the other hand, the devotee tries to follow the regulatory principles very strictly and then gets a job somewhere far away, where what to speak of sharing Krishna’s mission. One is not able to nourish one’s own bhakti also.
Then, that can be detrimental to one’s bhakti. So, from the absolute point of view, or from the ultimate point of view of ultimate consequences, one of the lessons in morality from the Mahabharata, the whole debate which comes, is what is right and wrong? What is right and what is wrong? How is it determined? Generally, there can be three factors. There is intent, there is content, and there is consequence.
Means, say, meeting meet, is it right or is it wrong? Is it just the activity, the content? This is right, this is wrong. Or is it determined by intent? Now, Prabhupada told one devotee, one disciple, I think it was Harikesh Swami, he was, he said, he told that I cannot go into the Russian block and preach because there is no vegetarian food available. Prabhupada said, eat meat, but preach.
There is a, intent is more important than the content of, content of specifically what you are doing. So, one is intent. So, right and wrong, they can be determined by content, they can be determined by intent, and they can be determined by consequence.
Consequence means that, now Bhishma, when Draupadi was being disrobed, he could have said that, yes, actually the issue is very complex. Was Draupadi won by, was Draupadi lost in the gambling match or was she not lost in the gambling match? It’s very difficult to decide. That’s why I can’t take a position.
So, the content of the discussion, content of the issue might have been a matter of dispute. But the consequence there was that an honorable lady was being publicly humiliated. And no civilized person should tolerate such a thing.
And because the consequences were so terrible, Krishna considered that more important. And Krishna actually strongly reproaches that. So, the morality is not, morality of something is not just determined only by the content.
It is intent, content and consequence. So, yes, if somebody is engaged in a profession which is in some steps connected with making the four regulative principles, there is that content which may be immoral, which may be sinful. But we have to see the consequence and the intent also.
So, that is helping in the sharing of Krishna’s mission. And that is also being done with a, with not an intention to perpetuate the wrong things in society, but the intent to try to be a part of the solution. Then, then that should be, that should be given a greater priority.
We have examples of, in South India there is a temple which was built by a saint who worked as a gang member with robbers. But it was only for that one purpose. Not before that, not after that.
So, that is an extreme example that is not to be imitated. But the point is that content is not the only thing that determines. It’s intent and consequence also.
So, overall it’s difficult in today’s society to be entirely free from the, from some connection with the breaking of regulative principles. So, if we are travelling in a flight, often nowadays flight, they don’t allow us to take water also, with us. We don’t, can’t take our liquor.
When we are coming in the flight, they serve water from the same bottle which is next to some liquor bottle or some other bottles. Some other people, they have given us glasses. Who knows what people have drunk from some of those glasses earlier.
They are supposed to give fresh glasses, but we don’t know. So, in that sense, we can’t be paranoid about these things. We do what is in our power, and that means at least directly not be involved in those professions.
So, devotees will not be involved in, say, directly slaughterhouse. But if somebody is developing some software which can have a wide range of applications, one of which might be slaughterhouse, and the devotee is not intending to do that, and then that same software may also have positive consequences elsewhere. So, in an indirect sense, we may be responsible for somebody misusing what we have done also.
But in a more direct sense, if we are trying to contribute in a positive way to Krishna Admission, that will be considered more important ultimately. Does it address the question?