Armchair

Expressions researched:
"armchair"

BG Chapters 7 - 12

Study of the Vedas is not meant for the recreation of armchair speculators, but for the formation of character.

BG 8.28, Purport: After the student studies the Vedas under the master for some time—at least from from age five to twenty—he may become a man of perfect character. Study of the Vedas is not meant for the recreation of armchair speculators, but for the formation of character. After this training, the brahmacārī is allowed to enter into household life and marry. When he is a householder, he has to perform many sacrifices so that he may achieve further enlightenment.

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

They simply discuss this voidness impersonalism, but they enjoy as much as possible this material life. Simply armchair philosophical discussion. But as soon as we see their behavior, they're too much attached with the material enjoyment.

Lecture on BG 8.21-22 -- New York, November 19, 1966: The impersonalists, Śaṅkarites, even the Buddhists, they also, some way or other, they accept that there is the voidness. But the Bhagavad-gītā does not disappoint you in that way. That voidness philosophy has created atheism. Because, just try to understand clearly, I am spiritual being. I want enjoyment. That is my life. I want enjoyment. But as soon as my future is void, I must be inclined to enjoy this material life. Therefore they simply discuss this voidness impersonalism, but they enjoy as much as possible this material life. Simply armchair philosophical discussion. But as soon as we see their behavior, they're too much attached with the material enjoyment. So that is simply you can enjoy some speculation. That's all. But there is no benefit. But really if one has any spiritual sense, he'll at once cease from all this nonsense enjoyment. That is the symptom of any idea of spirituality.

Therefore they simply discuss this voidness impersonalism, but they enjoy as much as possible this material life. Simply armchair philosophical discussion. But as soon as we see their behavior, they're too much attached with the material enjoyment.

Lecture on BG 8.21-22 -- New York, November 19, 1966: If you can reach that highest perfectional stage of life, then only you'll no longer be required to come back again to this nonsense material world. Yes. This is the information you get. And where you shall do, what you shall do there? Some philosophers think that that spiritual atmosphere must be impersonal, impersonal, void. There are some philosophers, they think like that, that "There is. We accept the spiritual atmosphere." The impersonalists, Śaṅkarites, even the Buddhists, they also, some way or other, they accept that there is the voidness. But the Bhagavad-gītā does not disappoint you in that way. That voidness philosophy has created atheism. Because, just try to understand clearly, I am spiritual being. I want enjoyment. That is my life. I want enjoyment. But as soon as my future is void, I must be inclined to enjoy this material life. Therefore they simply discuss this voidness impersonalism, but they enjoy as much as possible this material life. Simply armchair philosophical discussion. But as soon as we see their behavior, they're too much attached with the material enjoyment. So that is simply you can enjoy some speculation. That's all. But there is no benefit. But really if one has any spiritual sense, he'll at once cease from all this nonsense enjoyment. That is the symptom of any idea of spirituality.

Simply armchair, I mean to say, mental speculators, discussing on Bhagavad-gītā, that is useless, futile.

Lecture on BG 10.1 -- New York, December 30, 1966: There is a nice verse in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. It is said,

satāṁ prasaṅgān mama vīrya-saṁvido

bhavanti hṛt-karṇa-rasāyanāḥ kathāḥ

taj-joṣaṇād āśv apavarga-vartmani

śraddhā ratir bhaktir anukramiṣyati

[SB 3.25.25]

If one, anyone wants to understand the spiritual science or the science of Kṛṣṇa, then he should associate himself with the satām, those who are pure devotees, those who are pure devotees. Satāṁ prasaṅgāt. When discussions take place between pure devotees, then the potency of spiritual knowledge, as they are depicted in the scriptures and sacred books, they become revealed. Simply armchair, I mean to say, mental speculators, discussing on Bhagavad-gītā, that is useless, futile. Here it is stated that satāṁ prasaṅgān mama vīrya-saṁvido bhavanti hṛt-karṇa-rasāyanāḥ kathāḥ [SB 3.25.25]. If it is discussed in the association of pure devotees, then the potency of that spiritual language will be revealed. Will be revealed.

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

One must practically apply the knowledge, not like armchair politician or armchair Vedantist, smoking cigarette and reading Vedānta. This kind of study of Vedas is useless.

Lecture on SB 6.1.56-62 -- Surat, January 3, 1971, at Adubhai Patel's House: So the point is here that Ajāmila was so qualified just as a brāhmaṇa, perfect brāhmaṇa, born of a brāhmaṇa father and educated, qualified, and acquired the qualities. All the qualities are mentioned, that śruta-sampannaḥ. Śruta-sampannaḥ means well studied in Vedas. That is a brāhmaṇa's qualification. Veda-pāṭhād bhaved vipraḥ. Vipra, brāhmaṇa, without any knowledge of the Vedas, (laughs) that is not a brāhmaṇa. So he was actually brāhmaṇa, śruta-sampannaḥ. And after... Simply reading of Vedas as a scholar is useless. Just like foreign Western scholar... (aside:) Now stop. One must practically apply the knowledge, not like armchair politician or armchair Vedantist, smoking cigarette and reading Vedānta. This kind of study of Vedas is useless. Now, we have seen so many sannyāsīs, so-called sannyāsīs, talking on Vedānta and smoking at the same time. You see? So Ajāmila was not like that. He was a scholar in the Vedic literature. Ayaṁ hi śruta-sampannaḥ śīla-vṛtta-guṇālayaḥ. And he was very well behaved and reservoir of all good qualities. Guṇālayaḥ. Dhṛta-vrataḥ, and avowed to follow the regulative principles. This point we have already discussed, that the most important point is that even one is such qualified, there is chance of falldown as Ajāmila.

Philosophy Discussions

I require something to sit down, leaning back side, so I create a chair which is called armchair. So I sense first of all a necessity that "I must sit down very comfortably leaning towards the back." So under such spirit I make this chair, and this is called armchair.

Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:

Śyāmasundara: He says that the mind never creates anything new. It simply rearranges things. Everything already exists...

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Śyāmasundara: ...but the mind, and the mind merely arranges it. It doesn't create anything new.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Just like the economic law says that you cannot create anything. You simply transform. Just like this table is nothing but wood. So wood is not my creation. Wood is there, but I have transformed the wood into a state which is called a table.

Śyāmasundara: So that newness or novelty is merely rearranging. Something new, they say, "Oh, he has created something new." But it is merely a rearrangement of previously existing things.

Prabhupāda: That is that English proverb, "Necessity is the cause of invention." I require something to sit down, leaning back side, so I create a chair which is called armchair. So I sense first of all a necessity that "I must sit down very comfortably leaning towards the back." So under such spirit I make this chair, and this is called armchair. So necessity is the mother of invention.

Yes, in that sense, that I am feeling the necessity of armchair. My predecessors, they might have felt that chair, they invented. But at the present moment, my predecessor is also gone, the chair is also gone. So invention means the things which I create that was not in existence.

Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:

Śyāmasundara: Yet many philosophers would say that this is the reason that religion has come about, that man feels a necessity for God, so he invents God.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Not invents. He knows God. This is natural. Just like if a sane man is there, so who is the original father? Huh? Just like I have got a father. Everyone knows. My father has a father. His father's father's father... Then who is the original father?

Śyāmasundara: So he can invent his original father.

Prabhupāda: No. He can simply know by this philosophical research who is the original father. And the Vedānta-sūtra also says, "God is He who is the original father of everything." Janmādy asya yataḥ [SB 1.1.1].

Śyāmasundara: In a sense, the man is not really inventing a chair either. There is already an idea of chair previously existing. He's just discovering it, something which already exists. Is that correct?

Prabhupāda: Yes, in that sense, that I am feeling the necessity of armchair. My predecessors, they might have felt that chair, they invented. But at the present moment, my predecessor is also gone, the chair is also gone. So invention means the things which I create that was not in existence. That is called invention?

Śyāmasundara: Hm.

Prabhupāda: And discovery: The thing is already there; I simply find it out. So invention and discovery practically convey the same idea.

Śyāmasundara: Yes. Because actually nothing is new. If I...

Prabhupāda: That is discovery.

Śyāmasundara: If I invent something...

Prabhupāda: Similarly, in case of God, it is discovery. It is not invention. It is discovery.

1968 Conversations and Morning Walks

Those who are occupying administration of the country, they should fight. But they are sitting very nicely in their armchair and calling somebody, "Go and fight and be killed." This system is not scientific system.

Room Conversation -- July 16, 1968, Montreal: Prabhupāda: Whatever your occupation may be, that doesn't matter. But if you worship the Supreme Lord by your occupation, then you are successful. The florist supplies flower to the temple. The potter supplies pots to the temple. The priest chants mantra in the temple. The kṣatriyas, they protect the temple. He supplies the expenditure of the temple. Because the land belongs to the kṣatriya. They are royal class. Because they occupy land, so they have got the obligation to give protection to the country, fight. They shall fight. And here, at the present moment, the arrangement is that you have no land, you are landless, but you are called to fight. Why? This system is condemned system. The kṣatriyas, they are royal class, they possessed land, so they had obligation to protect the country. Therefore they were fighting. How nice arrangement. Those who are occupying administration of the country, they should fight. But they are sitting very nicely in their armchair and calling somebody, "Go and fight and be killed." This system is not scientific system. Therefore the caste system is very nice. They have now been condemned... Not condemned, but they want to revise it. But this is a very scientific system. Why? It is created by Kṛṣṇa.

1974 Conversations and Morning Walks

Why you are opening so many centers? Just to give these rascals intelligence. Why Krsna is recognizing so nicely a preacher? Because He knows that he has to face so many difficulties. It is not easy going. Armchair politician, no. He has to face so many difficulties.

Morning Walk -- June 10, 1974, Paris:

Devotee (3): Everyone thinks in terms of their own relative position.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Even an insignificant bird, because he knows swimming, he knows swimming, so he can (indistinct). Because you do not know swimming, you cannot say like that. Even insignificant bird, just see how nicely he is swimming. He knows the art. Everyone, cent percent of the modern people, they do not believe in God and they do not know what is religion. That is the position. They think religion is sentiment, anyone can manufacture his own sentiment, there is no God. This is going on. So we are in fault. It is folly to be wise where ignorance is bliss. The whole world is under this conception; therefore we are at fault, we are preaching God consciousness.

Devotee (4): Generally they make it difficult.

Prabhupāda: Eh?

Devotee (4): Generally they make it difficult for us to preach.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Devotee (4): They hinder us in so many ways.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Devotee (4): Because they have not realized that we have taken a responsibility. When a man has a responsibility, usually he is given some certain facilities to carry out that responsibility.

Prabhupāda: Everyone cent percent godless, neither they have got intelligence to understand what is God. This is going on.

Yogeśvara: Then we are giving them the intelligence as well as the answers? Because if they have no intelligence to understand...

Prabhupāda: Yes, our organization is that. Why you are opening so many centers? Just to give these rascals intelligence. Why Krsna is recognizing so nicely a preacher? Because He knows that he has to face so many difficulties. It is not easy going. Armchair politician, no. He has to face so many difficulties.

Devotee (3): Therefore, Krsna recognizes by giving knowledge of Himself?

Prabhupāda: Yes. Krsna immediately gives him all facilities.

1975 Conversations and Morning Walks

Armchair theory will not help you. You must be practical and there must be enthusiasm. Then it will be successful.

Room Conversation with Yoga Student -- March 14, 1975, Iran: Prabhupāda: God is always helping, but if you do not accept it... God says, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja: [Bg. 18.66] "You give up all other engagement and take My shelter," but you are not doing that. That is your fault. So it cannot be failure unless you are negligent. You have no utsāhaḥ. This is the process. Utsāhaḥ dhairyaḥ niścayaḥ tat-tat-karma-pravartanaḥ, sato vṛtteḥ. How these boys are advancing? They have got enthusiasm: "Yes, we must make progress in Kṛṣṇa consciousness." They have given up everything. They are young men. They have got... Every young man has to satisfy senses in so many ways. But no. They are so enthusiastic, but... For understanding Kṛṣṇa consciousness they have given up everything. They are Europeans, Americans. They have got so many allurement. But I have told them that "You must give up illicit sex," they have given up; "You must give up meat-eating," they have given up; "You must give up intoxication up to drinking tea and cigarette," and they have given up, these young men. So they are utsāhaḥ. There is enthusiasm: "Yes, we must do it." That is wanted, not theoretically on the armchair of devotional service. That will not be successful. Armchair theory will not help you. You must be practical and there must be enthusiasm. Then it will be successful. You are sitting in the same position and you are thinking that you are making progress. That will fail. You have to come out with enthusiasm. Then it will be successful. That is required. Ciraṁ vicinvan.

The minister of defense is very comfortably sitting on his chair, and the poor soldiers are fighting. He must go first of all: "Do like this." Not that I sit down in my armchair and I give direction. The poor soldiers are fighting. No. He should go. Courage.

Room Conversation with Two Lawyers and Guest -- May 22, 1975, Melbourne:

Prabhupāda: Soldiers, they should be also trained up. They are being trained up. Kṣatriyas. Just read the kṣatriya...

Amogha:

śauryaṁ tejo dhṛtir dākṣyaṁ

yuddhe cāpy apalāyanam

dānam īśvara-bhāvaś ca

kṣātraṁ karma svabhāva-jam

[Bg. 18.43]

Translation: "Heroism power, determination, resourcefulness, courage in battle, generosity, and..."

Prabhupāda: Courage in battle.

Guest 2: American soldiers.

Prabhupāda: No, whoever may be. Not that I sit down in my armchair and I give direction. The poor soldiers are fighting. No. He should go. Courage. He should personally give direction, "Do like this." Who is doing that? The minister of defense is very comfortably sitting on his chair, and the poor soldiers are fighting. That is not required. He must go first of all: "Do like this." Just like in Battle of Kurukṣetra, Arjuna is in front; the other side, Duryodhana. The real fighters, they are face to face. Soldiers are assistant. Where is that? So they should be trained up. So unless he is by his nature very powerful, śauryam... What is that?

Amogha: Śauryam, heroism.

Prabhupāda: Heroism. Therefore the kṣatriyas are allowed to hunt in the forest to become hero because he has to fight. Just like in medical laboratory they first of all dissect some poor animal before touching human being. Therefore kṣatriyas are allowed to hunt to become hero. Facing the tiger, "Come on." And still, say, about twenty-five years ago, there was a native prince in Jaipur. Every year he would go to the forest and face the tiger, without any weapon. So that is required.

Guest 2: That is good?

Prabhupāda: That is required. Those who are politicians, those who are going to be president, they must be like that.

That has become fashion. "Table chair brahma-jñāna," sitting on the table-chair, smoking and talking of Brahman. "Armchair brahma-jñāna."

Morning Walk -- October 19, 1975, Johannesburg:

Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: Just like so many... In Indian philosophy everyone knows that there is ātmā, but still, people continue to act on the gross bodily platform for sense enjoyment.

Prabhupāda: Then, if he seriously understood, then he will act on ātmā. And otherwise, simply understanding, that is impersonal understanding, Brahman only understanding. But what is after that, Brahman knowledge, that they do not know. So they are almost as good as the animals. Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā [Bg. 18.54]. Therefore they are not happy. Simply theoretical knowledge that "I am Brahman," that's all.

Indian man (1): They know the knowledge but they don't act according to that.

Prabhupāda: Therefore they are not happy. Otherwise one who knows "I am Brahman," brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā—he will be happy always. That has become fashion. "Table chair brahma-jñāna," sitting on the table-chair, smoking and talking of Brahman. "Armchair brahma-jñāna." Although Kṛṣṇa is giving information, brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā na śocati na kāṅkṣati, samaḥ sarveṣu... mad-bhaktiṁ labhate param [Bg. 18.54], so they do not make further progress, mad-bhaktiṁ labhate param, to achieve that platform of bhakti. Therefore it is as good as no knowledge. These will be the symptoms of brahma-jñāna, na śocati na kāṅ..., samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu. If they have got brahma-jñāna, then why they should distinguish? Just like in our country, Mahatma Gandhi, so he is designated as mahātmā, but why he was against the Englishmen, to drive them away? That is not brahma-jñāna. Samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu. They are as good. As these white people, they do not give any chance to the other people, so similarly, Mahatma Gandhi also, he wanted that "These white people should go away." So what is the distinction? The same knowledge. "You want me ... to drive me away; I want to drive you away." So what is the distinction between you and me? The one dog is barking at another dog; another dog is barking, another dog. That's all. Where is knowledge?