View source for If you have something, if someone's given you something and someone else wants to use it, then let him. But don't you get into the stage and can't you get to the stage at times that for some reason or other you don't want him to use it?

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"And I believe, if I understand you correctly, what you're saying is that if you have something, if someone's given you something and someone else wants to use it, then let him"|"But don't you get into the stage and can't you get to the stage at times that for some reason or other you don't want him to use it"|"Don't encroach on other people's property"|"I can understand that"|"I can understand when you say"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Marc}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|10Aug11}}
{{last|10Aug11}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=1|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Questions asked to Srila Prabhupada]]
[[Category:Questions asked to SP... 1975]]
</div>
<div id="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="section" sec_index="5" parent="compilation" text="Conversations and Morning Walks"><h2>Conversations and Morning Walks</h2>
</div>
<div id="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" class="sub_section" sec_index="8" parent="Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" text="1975 Conversations and Morning Walks"><h3>1975 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div id="RoomConversationwithTwoLawyersandGuestMay221975Melbourne_0" class="quote" parent="1975_Conversations_and_Morning_Walks" book="Con" index="88" link="Room Conversation with Two Lawyers and Guest -- May 22, 1975, Melbourne" link_text="Room Conversation with Two Lawyers and Guest -- May 22, 1975, Melbourne">
<div class="heading">That is wrong, that I say. That is his wrong conception.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Room Conversation with Two Lawyers and Guest -- May 22, 1975, Melbourne|Room Conversation with Two Lawyers and Guest -- May 22, 1975, Melbourne]]: </span><div class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Guest 1: I can understand when you say, "Don't encroach on other people's property." And I believe, if I understand you correctly, what you're saying is that if you have something, if someone's given you something and someone else wants to use it, then let him. I can understand that. But don't you get into the stage and can't you get to the stage at times that for some reason or other you don't want him to use it?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: I don't want to use my thing?</p>
<p>Madhudviṣa: He's saying that if someone does not want, that you don't want someone to use what you have. If someone tries to forcibly take...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: No, that is another thing.</p>
<p>Guest 1: The situation could arise when you wouldn't want somebody to use what you were using for some particular reason. You might be using it yourself at that time. That situation can arise that you don't want...</p>
<p>Madhudviṣa: We are believing that everything belongs to God. If someone else does not believe in that concept and tries to use...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: That is wrong, that I say. That is his wrong conception.</p>
<p>Guest 2: Well, how do you reconcile or how do you work out a situation... If everything belongs to God, we have to run society, and...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: But you don't forget that everything belongs to God. Because you have to run society, it does not mean that you forget the real thing.</p>
<p>Guest 1: So I really don't object to that idea at all. But the thing is that the system we're working within has got different concepts.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: It should be rectified.</p>
<p>Guest 1: It should be...?</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Rectified.</p>
<p>Madhudviṣa: The system should be rectified.</p>
<p>Guest 1: I suppose Wally and I are thinking on the same wavelength because we can imagine the problems that we'd have.</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Now you have got the United Nations. Now, if they are sane men, they should pass resolution, "The whole world belongs to God, and we are all God's sons. So let us make now United States of the World." That can be easily done. If they can make United States of America, why not United States of the whole world?</p>
<p>Guest 2: I think that would probably solve a lot of problems because...</p>
<p>Prabhupāda: Yes, all problems. Now, suppose in India there is scarcity of foodstuff. In America, in Africa, in Australia, there is enough grain. Produce foodstuff, distribute. Then immediately whole nations become united. Use everything, God's gift—we are all sons—very nicely. Then the, all the problems solved. Now the difficulty is that we have made, "No, this is my property. We shall use it, nation." In the Vedic conception there is no such thing as national. There is no such conception. That is the idea, Vedic conception of society or politics. There is no question of national.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>