View source for One who is not in awareness of the laws of nature, they commit this mistake. We can say that pouring water on the leaves is also pouring water on the tree

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"One who is not in awareness of the laws of nature, they commit this mistake. We can say that pouring water on the leaves is also pouring water on the tree"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|TariniKalindi}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|2015-12-29T04:41:38Z}}
{{last|2015-12-29T04:41:38Z}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=1|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:One]]
[[Category:Who]]
[[Category:Is Not]]
[[Category:Awareness]]
[[Category:Laws of Nature]]
[[Category:They]]
[[Category:Commit Mistakes]]
[[Category:We Can (Disciples of SP)]]
[[Category:Say]]
[[Category:That]]
[[Category:Pure]]
[[Category:Water]]
[[Category:Leave]]
[[Category:Also]]
[[Category:Tree]]
</div>
<div id="section">
<h2>Conversations and Morning Walks</h2>
</div>
<div id="sub_section">
<h3>1976 Conversations and Morning Walks</h3>
</div>
<div class="quote">
<div class="quote_heading">
One who is not in awareness of the laws of nature, they commit this mistake. We can say that pouring water on the leaves is also pouring water on the tree—by serving human being you can serve the Supreme Lord. But that is not the way.
</div>

<div class="quote_link">
[[Vanisource:761205 - Conversation - Hyderabad|761205 - Conversation - Hyderabad]]
</div>
<div class="text">
So one who is not in awareness of the laws of nature, they commit this mistake. We can say that pouring water on the leaves is also pouring water on the tree—by serving human being you can serve the Supreme Lord. But that is not the way. Another example is that if you supply food to the stomach, then the share is partaken by all the parts of the body. But if you supply food to the part of the body, it is not shared by other part of the body. They are opening hospital for men, human being, but what about the animals? They are also part and parcel of God. They are killing them. So they have no realization of God. God says, sarva-yoniṣu kaunteya sambhavanti mūrtayaḥ, ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā ([[Vanisource:BG 14.4|BG 14.4]]). Suppose I have got several sons. If you take care of my one son and you neglect others I will not be happy, naturally. But if you take care of all my sons, then I'll be happy. For a father there is no such distinction that "My particular son should be taken care of and other should be neglected or they should be killed." That is not father's view. So if God is the father of all living entities, if you take simply care of the human being, then what of the others? There are so many fallacies in this argument, that by taking care of the human being you worship God. There are so many fallacies. Hmm? Is it not? So you have to put this argument, that "By serving human society is to serve God, that is not fact." That may be partially; it is not complete.
</div>
</div>
</div>