Expressions researched:
"One man wants food, you give him food"
|"One man's food another man's poison"
|"One man's food is another man's poison"
|"One man's food may be poison for others"
|"One man's food, another man's poison"
|"One man's poison is another man's food"
|"food for one is poison for another"
Srimad-Bhagavatam
SB Canto 1
We should always remember the maxim that one man's food is another man's poison. We should not, therefore, reject the stories and histories of the Purāṇas as imaginary.
SB 1.3.41, Translation and Purport: Śrī Vyāsadeva delivered it to his son, who is the most respected among the self-realized, after extracting the cream of all Vedic literatures and histories of the universe.
Men with a poor fund of knowledge only accept the history of the world from the time of Buddha, or since 600 B.C., and prior to this period all histories mentioned in the scriptures are calculated by them to be only imaginary stories. That is not a fact. All the stories mentioned in the Purāṇas and Mahābhārata, etc., are actual histories, not only of this planet but also of millions of other planets within the universe. Sometimes the history of planets beyond this world appear to such men to be unbelievable. But they do not know that different planets are not equal in all respects and that therefore some of the historical facts derived from other planets do not correspond with the experience of this planet. Considering the different situation of different planets and also time and circumstances, there is nothing wonderful in the stories of the Purāṇas, nor are they imaginary. We should always remember the maxim that one man's food is another man's poison. We should not, therefore, reject the stories and histories of the Purāṇas as imaginary. The great ṛṣis like Vyāsa had no business putting some imaginary stories in their literatures.
Because they are injunctions of the Vedas for particular types of persons, such activities by the pravṛttas are not considered adharma. One man's food may be poison for others; similarly, what is recommended for those in the mode of ignorance may be poison for those in the mode of goodness.
SB 1.17.38, Translation and Purport: Sūta Gosvāmī said: Mahārāja Parīkṣit, thus being petitioned by the personality of Kali, gave him permission to reside in places where gambling, drinking, prostitution and animal slaughter were performed.
The basic principles of irreligiosity, such as pride, prostitution, intoxication and falsehood, counteract the four principles of religion, namely austerity, cleanliness, mercy and truthfulness. The personality of Kali was given permission to live in four places particularly mentioned by the King, namely the place of gambling, the place of prostitution, the place of drinking and the place of animal slaughter.
Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī directs that drinking against the principles of scriptures, such as the sautrāmaṇī-yajña, association with women outside marriage, and killing animals against the injunctions of scriptures are irreligious. In the Vedas two different types of injunctions are there for the pravṛttas, or those who are engaged in material enjoyment, and for the nivṛttas, or those who are liberated from material bondage. The Vedic injunction for the pravṛttas is to gradually regulate their activities towards the path of liberation. Therefore, for those who are in the lowest stage of ignorance and who indulge in wine, women and flesh, drinking by performing sautrāmaṇī-yajña, association of women by marriage and flesh-eating by sacrifices are sometimes recommended. Such recommendations in the Vedic literature are meant for a particular class of men, and not for all. But because they are injunctions of the Vedas for particular types of persons, such activities by the pravṛttas are not considered adharma. One man's food may be poison for others; similarly, what is recommended for those in the mode of ignorance may be poison for those in the mode of goodness. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī Prabhu, therefore, affirms that recommendations in the scriptures for a certain class of men are never to be considered adharma, or irreligious. But such activities are factually adharma, and they are never to be encouraged. The recommendations in the scriptures are not meant for the encouragement of such adharma, but for regulating the necessary adharma gradually toward the path of dharma.
One man's food may be poison for others; similarly, what is recommended for those in the mode of ignorance may be poison for those in the mode of goodness.
SB 1.17.38, Purport: The Vedic injunction for the pravṛttas is to gradually regulate their activities towards the path of liberation. Therefore, for those who are in the lowest stage of ignorance and who indulge in wine, women and flesh, drinking by performing sautrāmaṇī-yajña, association of women by marriage and flesh-eating by sacrifices are sometimes recommended. Such recommendations in the Vedic literature are meant for a particular class of men, and not for all. But because they are injunctions of the Vedas for particular types of persons, such activities by the pravṛttas are not considered adharma. One man's food may be poison for others; similarly, what is recommended for those in the mode of ignorance may be poison for those in the mode of goodness.
SB Canto 2
The human being is endowed with two canine teeth as a concession for persons who will eat animal food at any cost. It is known to everyone that one man's food is another man's poison. Human beings are expected to accept the remnants of food offered to Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and the Lord accepts foodstuff from the categories of leaves, flowers, fruits, etc. As prescribed by Vedic scriptures, no animal food is offered to the Lord. Therefore, a human being is meant to eat a particular type of food.
SB 2.3.19, Translation and Purport: Men who are like dogs, hogs, camels and asses praise those men who never listen to the transcendental pastimes of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the deliverer from evils.
The general mass of people, unless they are trained systematically for a higher standard of life in spiritual values, are no better than animals, and in this verse they have particularly been put on the level of dogs, hogs, camels and asses. Modern university education practically prepares one to acquire a doggish mentality with which to accept the service of a greater master. After finishing a so-called education, the so-called educated persons move like dogs from door to door with applications for some service, and mostly they are driven away, informed of no vacancy. As dogs are negligible animals and serve the master faithfully for bits of bread, a man serves a master faithfully without sufficient rewards.
Persons who have no discrimination in the matter of foodstuff and who eat all sorts of rubbish are compared to hogs. Hogs are very much attached to eating stools. So stool is a kind of foodstuff for a particular type of animal. And even stones are eatables for a particular type of animal or bird. But the human being is not meant for eating everything and anything; he is meant to eat grains, vegetables, fruits, milk, sugar, etc. Animal food is not meant for the human being. For chewing solid food, the human being has a particular type of teeth meant for cutting fruits and vegetables. The human being is endowed with two canine teeth as a concession for persons who will eat animal food at any cost. It is known to everyone that one man's food is another man's poison. Human beings are expected to accept the remnants of food offered to Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and the Lord accepts foodstuff from the categories of leaves, flowers, fruits, etc. (BG 9.26). As prescribed by Vedic scriptures, no animal food is offered to the Lord. Therefore, a human being is meant to eat a particular type of food. He should not imitate the animals to derive so-called vitamin values. Therefore, a person who has no discrimination in regard to eating is compared to a hog.
Lectures
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures
You cannot say because the other living entity is eating something abominable, therefore I can also eat, it is eatable. No, you cannot do that. If you eat, you will be diseased. Therefore, it is called, "one man's food is another man's poison."
Lecture on BG 13.4 -- Paris, August 12, 1973: The hog can eat stool very nicely, very nicely. But although we say that everything is food, we can eat... Then you eat the stool? You cannot eat. He has got the influence that he can eat the stool very nicely. Therefore we should not consider that all living entities are of the same status. They have different status. You cannot say because the other living entity is eating something abominable, therefore I can also eat, it is eatable. No, you cannot do that. If you eat, you will be diseased. Therefore, it is called, "one man's food is another man's poison." Prabhavaś ca. One can eat anything. Not anything. Nobody can eat anything. His allotted food.
In the living entities lower than the human being, they follow the nature's way, their allotted food. Just like the tiger eats blood and flesh. If you offer him nice fruit, nice sweet rice, he'll not eat. Even the dog, they do not like the sweet rice or nice kachorī and sṛṅgara. You'll see. They cannot eat. If they eat, they will fall diseased. In Bengal it is said, kukkure peṭe ghī sayanaya.(?) Too much fatty things, if you give to the dog, he'll not be able to digest. So similarly, we are also human beings, we have got special food. Special food.
Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, Kṛṣṇa's prasāda will be taken by whom? By the human being. No, it can be offered to any living entities, but worship of Kṛṣṇa is meant for the human being. Therefore, a devotee will take the remnants of foodstuff offered to Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati (BG 9.26).
Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Lord, He can eat anything. He can eat anything because He is all-powerful, omnipotent. But we cannot do that. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, "You give Me this vegetable, fruit, grains, milk, and I will take." Therefore indirectly it is said, these are the foodstuff of the human being. Not any others things. You cannot say that "This is also eatable, therefore I shall eat." Then you become a hog. Those who have no discrimination, of eating, they are going to be hog next life. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, yad vikārī yataś ca yat (BG 13.4). How one becomes a hog, dog, cat or demigod or Indra, or Brahma, that will be explained. You are given the facility of human being and if you misuse your facilities, then according to your mental condition, you'll be offered the next body. Yaṁ yaṁ vāpi smaran loke tyajyaty ante kalevaram (BG 8.6), you'll find.
Therefore, give up doggish mentality. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Train up your mind, God, godly mentality. Then you'll be transferred next life, back to home, back to Godhead. That is required. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is training the people for being promoted to the highest standard of life. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is so important. We are giving chance to the people not to become next life cats and dogs and vultures. But associate of Kṛṣṇa. To become a cowherd boy, to play with Kṛṣṇa, or gopī, to dance with Kṛṣṇa.
So everyone's enjoyment is not on the same standard. We can see that. Somebody is enjoying some way, another is enjoying... "One man's food, another man's poison." What is enjoyed by the hog is not enjoyed by other animal. This is going on.
Lecture on BG 13.21 -- Bombay, October 15, 1973: So bhoktṛtva, my enjoyment, because we have come to this material world for enjoyment. So everyone's enjoyment is not on the same standard. We can see that. Somebody is enjoying some way, another is enjoying... "One man's food, another man's poison." What is enjoyed by the hog is not enjoyed by other animal. This is going on.
Therefore when we get real consciousness by good association, if we can understand that "I am under the clutches of māyā, prakṛti, and I'm dictated according to my association with the quality of the nature and I am getting different types of bodies, different types of situation for my distress or happiness. This is my position, under, fully under the control of the prakṛti." It cannot be changed. Daivī hy eṣā guṇamayī mama māyā duratyayā (BG 7.14). Not possible. Daivī hy eṣā guṇamayī mama māyā duratyayā. You cannot change.
But you can change by one process. What is that? Mām eva ye prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti te (BG 7.14). If you surrender to Kṛṣṇa, then you can get out of this control of māyā. Otherwise it is not pos... Mām eva ye prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti te (BG 7.14). Then what should be our decision? That better not to try for improving our material condition of life. That cannot be changed. It is not possible. According to destiny we have to enjoy or suffer. This is called adṛṣṭa.
Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures
Eat whatever necessity, whatever you can... "One man's food, another man's poison." One man eats, say, so much voraciously. Another man cannot digest. If he imitates, "Oh, he is eating so much? I will also eat so much." No. He can digest it, let him eat. But if you cannot digest, don't eat more.
Lecture on SB 1.10.4 -- London, November 25, 1973: We are trying to give as much possible happiness to our students. Otherwise unless he is, one feels happy, how... It is little difficult. Unless one is very advanced in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, one cannot adjust things. Therefore our policy is that... What is called? Yogo bhavati siddhi. Yuktāhāra-vihārasya. Yuktāhāra-vihārasya yogo bhavati siddhi. We are yogis, but we are not that kind of yogi, unnecessarily giving trouble to the body. No. Yuktāhāra. you eat. You require to eat. You eat. Don't starve. Don't unnecessarily fast. But don't eat voraciously. That is bad. That is not yukta. You eat, but don't eat voraciously: "Because there is something very palatable, let me eat voraciously," and then again fall sick. An if you cannot digest, then you will sleep. You will sleep only. Therefore don't eat more, but eat whatever is necessary. Yuktāhāra. Yuktāhāra-vihārasya yogo bhavati siddhi. Eat whatever necessity, whatever you can... "One man's food, another man's poison." One man eats, say, so much voraciously. Another man cannot digest. If he imitates, "Oh, he is eating so much? I will also eat so much." No. He can digest it, let him eat. But if you cannot digest, don't eat more. That is required.
If you say that everything is food, then why don't you eat stool? One man's food, another man's poison.
Lecture on SB 1.10.5 -- Mayapura, June 20, 1973: Prabhupāda: In the Koran also it is said, yes, that animals are under the control of man. That is naturally. Just like...
Devotee: They say it is for the purpose of eating, fish(?) are created for the purpose of eating.
Prabhupāda: That is also in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam also, that jīvo jīvasya jīvanam. That we also accept. But just like jīvo jīvasya jīvanam, then why don't you eat your own son? He is also jīva. Why do you discriminate? Therefore discrimination is the better part valor. We should know, we are also eating the vegetables. What kind of jīva, living entity we shall eat, that is to be discriminated. Not that because one living entity is food for another living entity, it does not mean I shall eat my own son. I am father. We do not do that. Because we use our discrimination.
Similarly, in the human form of life there should be discrimination. We have to eat. We have to eat. Discrimination means (indistinct), that what kind of food I shall eat. Suppose the hogs, they eat stool. Does it mean because the stool is also food, I shall eat that? That is discrimination. If you say that everything is food, then why don't you eat stool? One man's food, another man's poison. That is... What is to be eaten, what is not to be eaten, that is discrimination. Now our discrimination is, because human life is meant for becoming God conscious, Kṛṣṇa conscious, we have to act in God consciousness. We have taken vow that we shall eat the remnants of foodstuff, prasāda, from Kṛṣṇa.
Kṛṣṇa has given stool for the pigs and so nice foodstuff, fruits and grains and milk, for the human being. Not that every food is for everyone. No. What is called? "One man's food, another man's poison." So the stool is also a kind of food.
Lecture on SB 1.15.47-48 -- Los Angeles, December 25, 1973: Kṛṣṇa has given different foodstuff for different animals and human beings. Kṛṣṇa has given stool for the pigs and so nice foodstuff, fruits and grains and milk, for the human being. Not that every food is for everyone. No. What is called? "One man's food, another man's poison." So the stool is also a kind of food. Everything is a kind of food. Even the stone is also food. You know? The pigeons, they eat the stones particles. They can digest. For them, the hardest peas are supplied. So they can digest. Pāyarā-maṭara. It is called in India, pāyarā-maṭara. Pāyarā means pigeon. Pigeon's peas. They require such thing. Just like the gorilla. The gorilla animal, where they live in the African jungles... We have read book. There are trees, the fruits of that tree are so hard, harder than the iron bullet. You can hammer on the bullet; it may bend. But that fruit will not bend. So those fruits are taken by the gorillas, and they chew it just like you chew peanuts or something like that, yes. (laughter)
The human being is endowed with two canine teeth as a concession for persons who will eat animal food at any cost. It is known to everyone that one man's food is another man's poison.
Lecture on SB 2.3.18-19 -- Bombay, March 23, 1977, At Cross Maidan Pandal: Persons who have no discrimination in the matter of foodstuff and who eat all sorts of rubbish are compared to hogs. Hogs are very much attached to eating stools. So stool is a kind of foodstuff for a particular type of animal. And even stones are eatables for a particular type of animal or bird. But the human being is not meant for eating everything and anything; he is meant to eat grains, vegetables, fruits, milk, sugar, etc. Animal food is not meant for the human being. For chewing solid food, the human being has a particular type of teeth meant for cutting fruits and vegetables. The human being is endowed with two canine teeth as a concession for persons who will eat animal food at any cost. It is known to everyone that one man's food is another man's poison. Human beings are expected to accept the remnants of food offered to Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and the Lord accepts foodstuff from the categories of leaves, flowers, fruits, etc. (BG 9.26). As prescribed by Vedic scriptures, no animal food is offered to the Lord. Therefore, a human being is meant to eat a particular type of food. He should not imitate the animals to derive so-called vitamin values. Therefore, a person who has no discrimination in regard to eating is compared to a hog.
One man's food is another man's poison." Suppose one man is eating something. Another man will say, "Eh! What he is eating?" But he is also enjoying. He is also.
Lecture on SB 3.26.19 -- Bombay, December 28, 1974: So everywhere there is a president or predominating deity. But above all of them is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore He is called paraḥ pumān, param, not within this material world. So He is controlling everything, and His two energies, material energy and spiritual energy, is acting like the heat and light of the fire.
- eka-deśa-sthitasyāgner
- jyotsnā vistāriṇī yathā
- parasya brahmaṇaḥ śaktis
- tathedam akhilaṁ jagat
So in the material world we can perceive only if we are intelligent. But in the spiritual world there is directly. Now here it is said that ādhatta vīryaṁ sāsūta, vīryam. So the living entities, they are also coming from the paraḥ pumān. He is impregnating this material energy with these living entities, and according to their desires, different desires, they are getting different types of bodies. And he is thinking that he is enjoying. Just like the pig. He is also thinking he is enjoying stool. He is also thinking. Similarly, you will find also, human society. They are eating different types of foodstuff. "One man's poison... One man's food is another man's poison." Suppose one man is eating something. Another man will say, "Eh! What he is eating?" But he is also enjoying. He is also.
So according to different grades of person, the taste is also different. You cannot expect that the taste will be the same. "One man's food, another man's poison."
Lecture on SB 6.1.16 -- Honolulu, May 16, 1976: So according to different grades of person, the taste is also different. You cannot expect that the taste will be the same. "One man's food, another man's poison." This is an English proverb. One man's food is another man's poison. Therefore the society is divided. That is scientific method, class. Cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭaṁ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ (BG 4.13). That is God's creation, four classes, men. And the fifth class is almost rejected. Up to fourth class. First class, second class, third class, fourth class. And below fourth class, from fifth class, they are not human being. So taste of different classes are different. But one thing is that in whichever class we may belong, if you take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then you'll become one. People are wanting unity. There is United Nation organization, but so long we keep ourself on the material platform there cannot be unity. That is not possible. Only in the spiritual platform there can be unity.
"One man's poison is another man's food." Why this difference? A particular type of body. Although we are all human being, but every one of us is under the control of the laws of nature.
Lecture on SB 7.6.3 -- Toronto, June 19, 1976: So we have to understand this, that the sense gratification... In English it is called "One man's poison is another man's food." Why this difference? A particular type of body. Although we are all human being, but every one of us is under the control of the laws of nature. Kāraṇaṁ guṇa saṅgo 'sya sad-asad-yoni-janmasu (BG 13.22). Sad-asad-yoni-janmasu. We are born in a particular family, particular circumstances, particular taste. Everything. That is kāraṇam. What is the..., why there are differences? Kāraṇaṁ guṇa saṅgo 'sya. The kāraṇa, the reason is because we are associated with a particular type of modes of nature. Just like a person, at this time he'll be pleased to come here to understand this Bhāgavata-dharma. At the same time, another person will be pleased to go to a brothel or to a liquor shop. Why? The kāraṇaṁ guṇa-saṅgo 'sya. The reason is that he's interested with the particular modes of nature. So Bhāgavata-dharma means, even one is in the most lower stage of association, he can be raised to the highest stage. That is called bhāgavata-dharma.
General Lectures
One man's food, another man's poison. So everything is food and everything is poison according to the body.
Pandal Lecture -- Delhi, November 12, 1971: So Prahlāda Mahārāja says that according to the body, your happiness and distress or enjoyment. We do not know what is our happiness. According to body, I think this is the standard of happiness. Somebody thinks that "By eating such-and-such thing, I will be happy," just like the hog. And somebody thinks "No, this is not." One man's food, another man's poison. So everything is food and everything is poison according to the body. One thing is poison for me, but the same poison is food for others. That is for enjoyment. Therefore Prahlāda Mahārāja says that don't bother about that thing to satisfy your senses; that is already fixed up according to your body. Instead of wasting your energy in that way for so-called happiness, you just try to understand what is Kṛṣṇa consciousness, what is Bhāgavata-dharma. Just engage your energy. It is very nice instruction. People are busy all over the world for having a certain type of sense gratification. Prahlāda Mahārāja says, "Don't bother yourself for that. It is already there; you will get it."
Philosophy Discussions
Not moral command—the supreme command. What is moral for you, it may be immoral for others. One man's food is another man's poison.
Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant: Śyāmasundara: So ideally it is the moral obligation of everyone to obey the moral command, but...
Prabhupāda: Not moral command—the supreme command. What is moral for you, it may be immoral for others. One man's food is another man's poison. So therefore Kṛṣṇa says to Yudhiṣṭhira, "Go and tell lies." That is moral. Kṛṣṇa says to Arjuna, "What is this nonsense? You fight. Kill them." That is moral. So moral means to obey Kṛṣṇa's order, God's order. That is morality. You cannot create morality. You are imperfect. Your senses are imperfect. You do not know what is actually moral. Therefore we should implicitly, blindly follow the orders of Kṛṣṇa or His representative. That is moral.
A man, a drunkard, he, by his drinking liquor, it is tasting so nice. But at least for me, if you give me drop of liquor, it is so pungent, because I tasted rectified spirit when I was in medical practice, you see. It is so pungent, so... Just like burns the tongue. You see? So one man's food is another man's poison.
Philosophy Discussion on William James: Prabhupāda: Viṣayaḥ khalu sarvataḥ syāt, śāstra says. This viṣayasu, eating, sleeping, mating and defending—this is called viṣayasu—that is available in every life. A dog is also enjoying, the hog is also enjoying, a poor man is also enjoying, or a rich man is also enjoying. If a rich man has no hunger, then even very palatable dishes will not be very pleasing to him. But a poor man, if he has got hunger, even a rough foodstuff without any ghee or without any..., he eats like anything, like nectar. So the happiness of this viṣaya-eating, sleeping, mating and defending—they are equal everywhere. That does not mean that a rich man is enjoying eating more than a poor man. No. When one eats if one is hungry, the enjoyment is the same. There is no difference. Similarly the hog eats the stool with great eagerness. You pass stool, and the hog is waiting. As soon as you stand up, two or three hogs, "ruh, ruh, ruh," like this. (laughter) You see? So the happiness of eating stool and the happiness of eating halavā are the same. You see? It depends on the different tongues. Therefore a man, a drunkard, he, by his drinking liquor, it is tasting so nice. But at least for me, if you give me drop of liquor, it is so pungent, because I tasted rectified spirit when I was in medical practice, you see. It is so pungent, so... Just like burns the tongue. You see? So one man's food is another man's poison. That is all. But actually, in this material world this standard of happiness is equal. It is simply, this is called māyā, that he does not know that he is working so hard, but he is thinking that "I am becoming happy."
Therefore what is good to me is not good to you. One man's food is another man's poison. Therefore this is relative good.
Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein: Śyāmasundara: He says it's how we use the word good, not what the word good means.
Prabhupāda: Good means, I already explained, which satisfies my senses. That is good. But God is good. He satisfies my senses and all others' senses. The relative good is it may satisfy my senses but it may not satisfy your senses. Therefore it is not good. Therefore what is good to me is not good to you. One man's food is another man's poison. Therefore this is relative good.
"One man's food another man's poison." What is morality in one society, it may be immorality in another society.
Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander: Śyāmasundara: So this philosopher Bergson, he sees two types of morality. The "closed morality," which is the compulsive forms of behavior, which conform to prevailing convention or social pressure or tradition; static morality, one simply follows the tradition blindly.
Prabhupāda: That can be changed according to the... Just like in some scriptures it is said that "Thou shall not kill." So the killing is ordinary thing there. But in some society killing is already prohibited by so much culture that they do not want to kill even an ant. So that depends on education of the particular society. It is not static, that "This will be like this." No. Not like that. "One man's food another man's poison." What is morality in one society, it may be immorality in another society.
Yes. Just like we have taken, Kṛṣṇa consciousness has value and material consciousness no value.
Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander: Śyāmasundara: He says that values are relative between a particular man and a particular object that one man's food is another man's poison.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Just like we have taken, Kṛṣṇa consciousness has value and material consciousness no value. So value also different according to the different persons.
Conversations and Morning Walks
1973 Conversations and Morning Walks
Simply by having big, big machine and ghastly scenes. And the animal eats simple grass. Does it mean that you are advanced than the animals? There is no logic. Eating is eating. One man's food, another man's poison. That is another thing. But eating is there.
Car Conversation after meeting with Cardinal Danielou -- August 9, 1973, Paris: Yogeśvara: His point was that human beings, they think on higher platforms than animals do.
Prabhupāda: What that higher platform? Eating, you require to maintain the body. I eat something, you eat another. That does not mean higher or lower. You eat, I also eat. That's all. You eat according to your taste. I eat according to my taste. So the eating is the real symptom, not the varieties of eating. By varieties of eating, suppose I... A animal, the cow is eating grass, and you are eating the same animal by keeping a huge slaughterhouse with machines and... Does it mean that you have improved your eating process? Simply by having big, big machine and ghastly scenes. And the animal eats simple grass. Does it mean that you are advanced than the animals? There is no logic. Eating is eating. One man's food, another man's poison. That is another thing. But eating is there. Somebody eats poison. Somebody eats ordinary thing. But eating is there. So nobody can avoid eating. That is the main symptom. Even in human society, there are different varieties of food. We Indians, we like a different type of dish. European, Americans, they like a di... But eating is there. Either American, Indian or cats, dogs, eating must be there. That is real symptom. After eating, you must sleep. That is essential. So where is the difference of real character, characteristic between the animals and the human beings?
One man's food, another man's poison. We must know this philosophy.
Morning Walk -- December 11, 1973, Los Angeles: Prabhupāda: Household life or in city life we should not be extravagant, unnecessarily eating, unnecessarily enjoying. No, that is not the... One man's food, another man's poison. We must know this philosophy.
That can be accepted. "One man's food, another man's poison." That is going on everywhere. But for that reason one cannot accept poison as food.
Morning Walk -- December 20, 1973, Los Angeles: Karandhara: There is one very famous philosopher named Dubrown(?). He said that he had a saying that "Some men say that you become intoxicated by wine, but I become sobered by wine."
Prabhupāda: That can be accepted. "One man's food, another man's poison." That is going on everywhere. But for that reason one cannot accept poison as food. Is it not? Just like stool is food for the pigs. But that does not mean stool is food. It may be food for a certain class of animals.
1974 Conversations and Morning Walks
"One man's food, another man's poison." So how you can distinguish this is food or poison? One man will say, "No, it is food." Another man will say, "It is poison."
Morning Walk -- January 9, 1974, Los Angeles: Prabhupāda: One who has not advanced in science, he'll also die. And you'll also die, advanced. Then what is the good? You cannot protect yourself from death. Then what is the meaning of this "good"? "This is good. This is advancement, and this is not advancement."
Svarūpa Dāmodara: But the distinction, the good and bad...
Prabhupāda: That is your distinction. You have made such distinction.
Svarūpa Dāmodara: I think that depends on the consciousness of the individual.
Prabhupāda: Relativity, relativity, law of Relativity. What is, what is food for one is death for other, the same thing. So how you can say the food is good or bad? Is it not? "One man's food, another man's poison." So how you can distinguish this is food or poison? One man will say, "No, it is food." Another man will say, "It is poison." So how you'll distinguish? So this good and bad is simply mental speculation. Because it is in the material platform, there is nothing good. Everything is bad. Otherwise why Kṛṣṇa said, sarva-dharmān parityajya (BG 18.66). In the name of "dharma," so many rascaldom is going on. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, sarva-dharmān parityajya. It is not dharma. And Bhāgavata says, dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavo 'tra: (SB 1.1.2) "This cheating type of religious system is rejected from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam."
What is food for one is poison for another.
Morning Walk -- February 20, 1974, Bombay: Dr. Patel: I won't condemn it if it is good, and if it is bad, I will condemn it.
Prabhupāda: No, no. It is bad.
Dr. Patel: Every bad thing has good also. Some good quality must be there.
Prabhupāda: (laughs) No, no, no.
Dr. Patel: So they have taken to it. I don't...
Prabhupāda: That is another thing. That is another thing. Just like opium. Opium, for common man, it is bad. But you are a physician; you can use opium, tincture opium for some certain use.
Dr. Patel: Therefore I say.
Prabhupāda: That is another thing.
Dr. Patel: Same thing, I say. The same reasoning.
Prabhupāda: But they are not physicians. They are ordinary men.
Dr. Patel: So it is bad for them.
Prabhupāda: What is... What is... What is food for one is poison for another.
Dr. Patel: Yes. That is what I said. The worst poisons have got the best qualification in them for saving lives. That is my point and that is what I was speaking of.
Prabhupāda: So when it is ruining life, how you can say it the best?
Dr. Patel: But it doesn't save the live of someone?
Prabhupāda: That I know also. But that is in different use. You cannot take. Just like even a snake poison, venomous, that is also used for saving lives. But that does not mean the snake is good.
Dr. Patel: I mean it is not good for majority.
Prabhupāda: Yes. So I am talking of the majority.
Dr. Patel: Everything made by God is made with an intention of...
Prabhupāda: No, no. We are talking of the majority, not of the small minority.
Yes. So you take the poison and die. Because you do not understand easily, better you take poison and die.
Morning Walk -- June 14, 1974, Paris: Paramahaṁsa: They argue that all paths lead to Kṛṣṇa. So why is one better than another?
Prabhupāda: If you know that all paths leads to Kṛṣṇa, then why don't you take this path? Why you are going round about way? If somebody asks you, "Where is your nose?" What is the use of showing like this. (laughter) Show like this. If you know really nose. But you do not know. Therefore you are going like this.
Guru-gaurāṅga: They say one man's food is another man's poison. So perhaps this process isn't practical for everyone.
Prabhupāda: Yes. So you take the poison and die. Because you do not understand easily, better you take poison and die.
1975 Conversations and Morning Walks
The same something is distress for another. One man's food, another man's poison. So where is the standard of happiness?
Morning Walk -- May 15, 1975, Perth: Paramahaṁsa: We just want to see that everyone is happy, and that way we will know that we are pleasing God.
Prabhupāda: Nobody is happy. Therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā it says, śītoṣṇa-sukha-duḥkha-dāḥ. Now, something is happiness; the same something is distress. So what is the standard of happiness? The same something is distress for another. One man's food, another man's poison. So where is the standard of happiness? What you are thinking, "This is happiness," others are thinking, "This is distress."
It is contradictory. One mans want poison; you give him poison. One man wants food, you give him food.
Morning Walk -- May 15, 1975, Perth: Paramahaṁsa: We can give them what they want, and that will make them happy.
Prabhupāda: It is contradictory. One mans want poison; you give him poison. One man wants food, you give him food. Then what is the standard of your food or poison? Then everything is required. Why do you bother?
Paramahaṁsa: Well, we have to draw the line somewhere.
Prabhupāda: You can do it foolishly. That is another thing. But everything is all right. Poison is all right, and food is all right.
Real good is: "He has forgotten God. Revive his consciousness." That is real good. Then he'll saved from the so-called good and bad and everything. That is wanted. Materially, everything is one man's food, another man's poison.
Morning Walk -- May 15, 1975, Perth: Prabhupāda: We are preaching. This is actually good for, that he must know what he is and what is the ultimate goal of life. This is required. Material preaching has no value. That is stated in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta. Ei bhāla ei manda, saba manodharma: " 'This is good; this is bad,' this is all mental concoction." Actually. But real good is: "He has forgotten God. Revive his consciousness." That is real good. Then he'll saved from the so-called good and bad and everything. That is wanted. Materially, everything is one man's food, another man's poison. Therefore there is no distinction—"This is good; this is bad." The stool is very bad, bad smell for you, but it is food for the pig. This is proof—"One man's food, another's poison." So this is only mental concoction, "This is good; this is bad."
Everything is good; everything is bad—materially. The real good for him, that he has forgotten his spiritual identification; revive him to that consciousness. That is real good. Somebody brings just now bucketfuls of water, and if he proposes "I shall drench you," "No, no, no, don't you drench me." But you will find—we are going—the ducks, as soon as they..., immediately jump on the water. So whether water is good or bad? It is all relative. So don't bother about this good and bad. It is simply mental concoction.
Good, what is good for you is not good for me, one man's food is another man's poison.
Room Conversation with Jesuit -- May 19, 1975, Melbourne: Jesuit: That I find so hard to accept because everything that God makes is good. When God makes a man...
Prabhupāda: Good, what is good for you is not good for me, one man's food is another man's poison.
Jesuit: But everything that God makes is good.
Prabhupāda: That's all right, good for somebody. Just like stool, stool is good for the pigs not for the human being.
1976 Conversations and Morning Walks
One man's food is another man's poison. So one should not misplace what he's unable to do.
Conversation with Clergymen -- June 15, 1976, Detroit: Prabhupāda: A fourth-class, fifth-class man is on the first class or second class. Why Nixon had to be dragged down? He's a third-class man.
Scheverman: Third-class man.
Prabhupāda: Yes. (laughter)
Scheverman: That's rather high on the ladder, I'd say, Your Excellency. (laughter)
Prabhupāda: These mistakes are going on.
- avyapare suvyaparam
- yo naraḥ kartum vichati
- sa mula hantate khila
parthiva vanara vartuna (?)
One man's food is another man's poison. So one should not misplace what he's unable to do.
Economic gain for a cobbler is not the economic gain for a brāhmaṇa. "One man's food another man's poison."
Morning Walk -- June 27, 1976, New Vrindaban: Prabhupāda: How to live, they do not know. Animals. There is a class of men in India, they take, I told you, the dead body of a cow.
Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: Cobblers.
Dhṛṣṭadyumna: Mucis?
Prabhupāda: Muci, yes. Their business is shoe maker. So when the cow is dead, they take it, they eat the meat and take the skin and the hoof. They make business without any, what is called, investment. Harer nāma (CC Adi 17.21). That is economic. He gets the skin without any price, and he makes shoes and gets full profit. But that is for a class of men, not for all. Economic gain for a cobbler is not the economic gain for a brāhmaṇa. "One man's food another man's poison."
So my endeavor should be how to become independent of this material body. That is wanted. That is intelligence. Not to make a distinction of different degrees. Different degrees—one position, one man's food, another man's poison.
Evening Conversation -- August 8, 1976, Tehran: Atreya Ṛṣi: Is there a relationship, he's asking, between these disturbances and this age, that this time that we are living in...
Prabhupāda: It is more or less. Sometimes you have got 110 degree temperature and sometimes you have got seventy degree temperature. But the disturbance is there. Either 110 degree or seventy degree or thirty degree, you'll have to feel the disturbance. You cannot stop it. So either you take the cause this age, or this country, or this atmosphere, we can say so, but it will continue. That is the nature of the material world. If you think that 110 degree is too much, let it be one hundred degree... That you concoct like that. In fact any such temperature will disturb you. That's a fact. You can think that if it would have been 100 degree, it would have been very nice, but that's not the fact. Either 110 degree or 100 degree, it is disturbance. Then how can you stop it? Anyone who wants to stop it, he's intelligent. And that is described here, tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mam eti (BG 4.9). One has to understand this fundamentally, that so long I'll get this material body, I'll have to suffer. Maybe differences of degrees, but I will have to suffer. So my endeavor should be how to become independent of this material body. That is wanted. That is intelligence. Not to make a distinction of different degrees. Different degrees—one position, one man's food, another man's poison. The same degree. If you think that it is nice, another man will suffer. So suffering will continue. That is not possible (indistinct). It is the nature of material world, duḥkhālayam aśāśvatam (BG 8.15). Find out this verse. Mām upetya kaunteya duḥkhālayam aśāśvatam. This material world is full of miseries. That they do not understand. Miserable condition they are accepting as pleasing. That is called ignorant.
In your standard you feel happiness, whereas on the street you'll find a pig, he's happy by eating stool. One man's food another man's poison.
Room Conversation -- September 4, 1976, Vrndavana: Prabhupāda: Happiness, suppose if you can get a nice palatable dish for eating, you'll be happy. But the dog also, if he can get some good eating, he'll be happy. So where is the difference between dog's happiness and your happiness?
Indian man: Happiness should be combined with mental peace.
Prabhupāda: What is that mental peace?
Indian man: To rest in yourself only. Don't run after worldly things.
Prabhupāda: Yes. But that is not possible for the animal. Therefore to remain happy within yourself, that is a prerogative of the human being. But we are not trying for that purpose. We are trying to be happy by eating, by sleeping, by sex or by defense. This is our platform of happiness. A dog cannot go to the restaurant, but a human being, if he goes to a restaurant and he can eat palatable dishes, he thinks he's happy. But what is that eating? In your standard you feel happiness, whereas on the street you'll find a pig, he's happy by eating stool. One man's food another man's poison. So eating happiness is there but the standard different. Therefore this eating is common affair, and happiness derived from eating is as good by the dog as by the pig and human being.
One Indian gentleman, he was eating the intestine of the hog. So it was horrible for me, but he was eating very nice. So in this way the world is going on. "One man's food is another man's poison."
Morning Walk -- December 5, 1976, Hyderabad: Prabhupāda: Man is the architect of his own fortune. Fortune and misfortune you have created. So we have to suffer or so-called enjoy. There is no enjoyment here. It is simply suffering. But because you are under māyā, you are thinking suffering as enjoying. Just like a hog is eating stool. Other man is becoming... "Very abominable!" Oh what nasty thing he is..." But he is enjoying. He is thinking, "I am enjoying the best food." I have seen in airplane. One Indian gentleman, he was eating the intestine of the hog. So it was horrible for me, but he was eating very nice. So in this way the world is going on. "One man's food is another man's poison." So similarly, we are creating our next birth according to our desire.
1977 Conversations and Morning Walks
This is the conclusion. What is food for one is poison for another. If you cannot use sex power how to use it for better purposes, you should not use sex.
Conversation on Train to Allahabad -- January 11, 1977, India: Rāmeśvara: They say that when one man has many different women, then that is immoral.
Prabhupāda: No, first of all answer. Suppose you are a big man, but you are product of sex. Are you born differently or through sex? What is the answer?
Rāmeśvara: Sex.
Prabhupāda: Yes. Sex is not bad. When it is misused, that is the defect. Otherwise, sex is not...
Rāmeśvara: The Western conception is that one man can only have one woman.
Prabhupāda: Why? If he can produce many big men, he can have hundreds of women. But you cannot do that. Therefore you are restrained. You are bad. You better restrain. Don't have sex, because you'll produce cats and dogs. But one who is able to produce great brain, great philosophers, he should produce hundreds. You do not know how to produce good brain. Therefore you stop! Don't produce cats and dogs. For you it is "Stop." You do not know how to use sex. Therefore you should stop. (break) You should not any more use sex. But one who can produce better brains should have hundreds of times. You must know how to produce. That is Vedic civilization, dharmaḥ saṁskāra idam...(?) It is not a secrecy, how to produce brain. And because brain is not produced, therefore there is agitation, that they have no brain. They do not know the value of this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. You have been produced like cats and dogs; therefore you cannot appreciate. Therefore you should stop. But one who has power to produce brain, to produce Kṛṣṇa conscious children, they should be use. Foodstuff is forbidden for a person who cannot digest. One who can digest food, he must eat sumptuously. There is no restriction for him. Food is not bad. One who cannot digest, it is bad for him. This is the conclusion. What is food for one is poison for another. If you cannot use sex power how to use it for better purposes, you should not use sex. What is that verse that Kṛṣṇa says? Sarva-yoniṣu kaunteya... (BG 14.4).
That is going on. One man's food, another man's poison.
Interview with Mr. Koshi (Asst. Editor of The Current Weekly) -- April 5, 1977, Bombay: Prabhupāda: The fundamental principle is that we are teaching about the owner of the body.
Mr. Koshi: Yeah, but what we are in the outside world... I am not in the Society. What I see outside is totally... You see, when I see a group of young people like these boys here dancing in the street, it is something jarring to my eyes. I am not used to it. What is the necessity for the chant and the...
Prabhupāda: That is going on. One man's food, another man's poison.
Correspondence
1973 Correspondence
It is said that "one man's food is another man's poison." Because they have become disgusted with this material world, sometimes our devotees appear to have foolishly disregarded everything, that is seen to be something bad in their eyes, but we should not take these things very seriously.
Letter to Mr. Robert Keene -- Bombay 9 January, 1973: I do not know what are exactly the facts of the matter, but if there are any discrepancies as you say in the temples of ISKCON, they should be immediately rectified by conscientious officers. Of course, we cannot expect to find always any utopia in this material world, that is a fallacy, and it may appear to someone who is materialistically inclined that what we are doing is not only harmful to our materialistic condition, but also that we are not caring for our students and so many other things. But if you inquire from our students more carefully, you will come to understand that these superficial matters are not very serious in the long run, and that the students are becoming very happy by their acquiring spiritual knowledge and serving Krsna in so many ways. It is said that "one man's food is another man's poison." Because they have become disgusted with this material world, sometimes our devotees appear to have foolishly disregarded everything, that is seen to be something bad in their eyes, but we should not take these things very seriously. Main thing is that these boys and girls have understood what is austerity and the difference between spirit and matter, that is the highest knowledge of existence. Because they are engaged in serving Krsna in this way, you have nothing further to worry, their position in life is very secure and sound because they are going back to home, back to Godhead, without any doubt. Though they may be dressed in rags, still they are more exalted than kings.
