Happiness Must Be Valued and Cherished

When you want to gift something to someone, what do you do?
Say, a rose.

You walk up to the florist and look for the best flower—what you like in terms of color, size, and elegance—and select one. Or, if you know the taste of the recipient, you choose accordingly. But mostly, you end up choosing what you like, what is appealing to you, what has value to you.

You don’t gift someone something that has no value to you. If you do that, then it is not called gifting anymore—it is dumping. Like how birthday and marriage presents keep moving from one household to another these days. What you get for your anniversary, you wrap it in a new gift wrapper and give it to someone during their griha pravesha.

This is not gifting. This is simply meeting some social obligations, bordering on hypocrisy. If you genuinely want to gift something to someone, it would be something that you cherish.

If you want to give happiness to someone, you should have some value for happiness yourself. If you think happiness is an illusion, then why would you even bother to give it to someone? If happiness has no value for you, then why would you bother giving it to anyone?

If money has no value for you, why would you want your son or daughter to be wealthy? If comforts have no value for you, if luxury has no value for you, why would you put effort into getting them for people close to you? If you think relations are illusions, then why would you bother maintaining them?

We are a very confused society now. We think someone who is not selfish, who is selfless, is good. He doesn’t do anything for himself. So, he does everything for others, for their benefit.

When do I stop doing anything for myself? When I have no value for it. If I consider food to be only for sustaining the body, will I ever waste time cooking a five-course delicacy? No, because I am not even going to enjoy it.

Good cooks themselves relish good food; otherwise, they cannot be good cooks.

Our ancients were very clear about this. When Bhagawan said, Chaturvarnyam Maya Srishtam, society was functionally divided into the intellectual class, the ruling class, the business class, and the working class. The ruling class was given many privileges—the best of dwelling places, food, clothes, ornaments, transport, entertainment, dance, and music.

Right from childhood, the children of the ruling class were trained to develop a taste for all these and to enjoy them. They were trained to develop a liking and value for them. Because only when they value these things will they think, 'Oh, my subjects should also get to enjoy these.'

If the king enjoys a Tansen, he would at least ensure there is some folk music going around in his country. If the king thinks, 'It is only a fistful of rice needed to sustain the body,' why would he work hard to ensure an abundance of fruits, vegetables, and grains in his country? He will think, 'What is this fuss about? Why can’t everyone be like me?'

The kingdoms of such kings perish because the king himself has no value for happiness, comforts, wealth, or abundance. I am not talking about internal happiness or Ananda here.

This is why Bhagawan kept the intellectual class out of power. He said, 'No, you people are prone to all these vairagya-based thoughts; you are not fit to rule.' The rulers should be those who cherish happiness, comforts, and enjoyments. Only then will they work towards passing these on to their subjects.

When a king tends to develop vairagya, he must leave—go to the forest, take vana prastha. Don’t stay around and confuse others.

This was all neatly planned. Now, only we are so confused.

Knowledge Bank

What is Hastinapur called now?

Meerut. Hastinapur, the capital of the Kurus in Mahabharata is identified with Meerut in Uttar Pradesh.

Science vis.a.vis Philosophy

The aim of Science is to describe facts. The aim of Philosophy is to interpret them. Science says how thins happen. Philosophy explains why things happen.