Prahlāda Mahārāja is a vivid example of a pure devotee. Someone might argue that since Prahlāda Mahārāja, even though very old, was attached to his family, and specifically to his grandson Bali Mahārāja, how could he be an ideal example? Therefore this verse uses the word praśāntaḥ. A devotee is always sober. He is never disturbed by any conditions. Even if a devotee remains in gṛhastha life and does not renounce material possessions, he should still be understood to be praśānta, sober, because of his pure devotion to the Lord. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu therefore said:

“Whether one is a brāhmaṇa, a sannyāsī or a śūdra — regardless of what he is — he can become a spiritual master if he knows the science of Kṛṣṇa.” (Cc. Madhya 8.128) Anyone completely aware of the science of Kṛṣṇa, regardless of his status in life, is a guru. Thus Prahlāda Mahārāja is a guru in all circumstances.

Here His Lordship Vāmanadeva also teaches sannyāsīs and brahmacārīs that one should not ask more than necessary. He wanted only three paces of land, although Bali Mahārāja wanted to give Him anything He wanted.

The symptoms of a kṣatriya are given in Bhagavad-gītā. One of the qualifications is the willingness to give charity (dāna). A kṣatriya does not refuse to give charity when requested by a brāhmaṇa, nor can he refuse to fight another kṣatriya. A king who does refuse is called low-minded. In the dynasty of Bali Mahārāja there were no such low-minded kings.

The Supreme Personality of Godhead is already in the core of everyone’s heart. īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe ’rjuna tiṣṭhati (Bg. 18.61). Logically, therefore, it was not at all difficult for Lord Viṣṇu to enter Hiraṇyakaśipu’s body. The word vivigna-cetāḥ, “very anxious,” is significant. It is not that Lord Viṣṇu was afraid of Hiraṇyakaśipu; rather, because of compassion, Lord Viṣṇu was in anxiety about how to act for his welfare.

Atheists generally follow the Bauddha philosophical conclusion that at death everything is finished. Hiraṇyakaśipu, being an atheist, thought this way. Because Lord Viṣṇu was not visible to him, he thought that the Lord was dead. Even today, many people follow the philosophy that God is dead. But God is never dead. Even the living entity, who is part of God, never dies. Na jāyate mriyate vā kadācit: “For the soul there is never birth or death.” This is the statement of Bhagavad-gītā (2.20). Even the ordinary living entity never takes birth or dies. What then is to be said of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the chief of all living entities? He certainly never takes birth or dies. Ajo ’pi sann avyayātmā (Bg. 4.6). Both the Lord and the living entity exist as unborn and inexhaustible personalities. Thus Hiraṇyakaśipu’s conclusion that Viṣṇu was dead was wrong.

As indicated by the words yato nāvartate pumān, there is certainly a spiritual kingdom, and if the living entity goes there, he never returns to this material world. This is also confirmed in Bhagavad-gītā (4.9): tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti so ’rjuna. Materially speaking, every living entity dies; death is inevitable. But those who are karmīs, jñānīs and yogīs return to this material world after death, whereas bhaktas do not. Of course, if a bhakta is not completely perfect he takes birth in the material world again, but in a very exalted position, either in a rich family or a family of the purest brāhmaṇas (śucīnām śrīmatāṁ gehe), just to finish his development in spiritual consciousness. Those who have completed the course of Kṛṣṇa consciousness and are free from material desire return to the abode of the Supreme Personality of Godhead (yad gatvā na nivartante tad dhāma paramaṁ mama). Here the same fact is stated: yato nāvartate pumān. Any person who goes back home, back to Godhead, does not return to this material world.

Generally speaking, even though the conditioned soul is angry, his anger is not perpetual but temporary. It is due to the influence of ignorance. Hiraṇyakaśipu, however, maintained his enmity and his anger against Lord Viṣṇu until the point of death. He never forgot his vengeful attitude toward Viṣṇu for having killed his brother, Hiraṇyākṣa. Others in the bodily concept of life are angry at their enemies but not at Lord Viṣṇu. Hiraṇyakaśipu, however, was everlastingly angry. He was angry not only because of false prestige but also because of continuous enmity toward Viṣṇu.

Mahārāja Virocana, Bali’s father, was so pleased with the brāhmaṇa community that even though he knew that those approaching him for charity were the demigods in the dress of brāhmaṇas, he nonetheless agreed to give it.

Lord Vāmanadeva wanted three paces of land according to the measurement of His footsteps. He did not want more than necessary. But although He pretended to be an ordinary human child, He actually wanted the land comprising the upper, middle and lower planetary systems. This was just to show the prowess of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

A brāhmaṇa or sannyāsī is qualified to ask charity from others, but if he takes more than necessary he is punishable. No one can use more of the Supreme Lord’s property than necessary. Lord Vāmanadeva indirectly indicated to Bali Mahārāja that he was occupying more land than he needed. In the material world, all distresses are due to extravagance. One acquires money extravagantly and also spends it extravagantly. Such activities are sinful. All property belongs to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and all living beings, who are sons of the Supreme Lord, have the right to use the Supreme Father’s property, but one cannot take more than necessary. This principle should especially be followed by brāhmaṇas and sannyāsīs who live at the cost of others. Thus Vāmanadeva was an ideal beggar, for He asked only three paces of land. Of course, there is a difference between His footsteps and those of an ordinary human being. The Supreme Personality of Godhead, by His inconceivable prowess, can occupy the entire universe, including the upper, lower and middle planetary systems, by the unlimited measurement of His footsteps.

The Supreme Personality of Godhead, being full in Himself, actually has nothing to want for His self-interest. Lord Vāmanadeva, therefore, had not gone to Bali Mahārāja for His own self-interest. As stated in Bhagavad-gītā (5.29), bhoktāraṁ yajña-tapasāṁ sarva-loka-maheśvaram. The Lord is the proprietor of all planets, in both the material and spiritual worlds. Why should He be in want of land? Bali Mahārāja rightly said that Lord Vāmanadeva was not at all prudent in regard to His own personal interests. Lord Vāmanadeva had approached Bali not for His personal welfare but for the welfare of His devotees. Devotees sacrifice all personal interests to satisfy the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and similarly the Supreme Lord, although having no personal interests, can do anything for the interests of His devotees. One who is full in himself has no personal interests.

According to Vedic understanding, the entire universe is regarded as an ocean of space. In that ocean there are innumerable planets, and each planet is called a dvīpa, or island. When approached by Lord Vāmanadeva, Bali Mahārāja was actually in possession of all the dvīpas, or islands in space. Bali Mahārāja was very pleased to see the features of Vāmanadeva and was ready to give Him as much land as He could ask, but because Lord Vāmanadeva asked only three paces of land, Bali Mahārāja considered Him not very intelligent.

The material world is an illusory energy to deviate the living entities from the path of self-realization. Anyone who is in this material world is extremely anxious to get more and more things for sense gratification. Actually, however, the purpose of life is not sense gratification but self-realization. Therefore, those who are too addicted to sense gratification are advised to practice the mystic yoga system, or aṣṭāṅga-yoga system, consisting of yama, niyama, āsana, prāṇāyāma, pratyāhāra and so on. In this way, one can control the senses. The purpose of controlling the senses is to stop one’s implication in the cycle of birth and death. As stated by Ṛṣabhadeva:

“When a person considers sense gratification the aim of life, he certainly becomes mad after materialistic living and engages in all kinds of sinful activity. He does not know that due to his past misdeeds he has already received a body which, although temporary, is the cause of his misery. Actually the living entity should not have taken on a material body, but he has been awarded the material body for sense gratification. Therefore I think it not befitting an intelligent man to involve himself again in the activities of sense gratification, by which he perpetually gets material bodies one after another.” (Bhāg. 5.5.4)

Thus according to Ṛṣabhadeva the human beings in this material world are just like madmen engaged in activities which they should not perform but which they do perform only for sense gratification. Such activities are not good because in this way one creates another body for his next life, as punishment for his nefarious activities. And as soon as he gets another material body, he is put into repeated suffering in material existence. Therefore the Vedic culture or brahminical culture teaches one how to be satisfied with possessing the minimum necessities in life.

To teach this highest culture, varṇāśrama-dharma is recommended. The aim of the varṇāśrama divisions — brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya, śūdra, brahmacarya, gṛhastha, vānaprastha and sannyāsa — is to train one to control the senses and be content with the bare necessities. Here Lord Vāmanadeva, as an ideal brahmacārī, refuses Bali Mahārāja’s offer to give Him anything He might want. He says that without contentment one could not be happy even if he possessed the property of the entire world or the entire universe. In human society, therefore, the brahminical culture, kṣatriya culture and vaiśya culture must be maintained, and people must be taught how to be satisfied with only what they need. In modern civilization there is no such education; everyone tries to possess more and more, and everyone is dissatisfied and unhappy. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is therefore establishing various farms, especially in America, to show how to be happy and content with minimum necessities of life and to save time for self-realization, which one can very easily achieve by chanting the mahā-mantra — Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare.

If happiness is the ultimate goal of life, one must be satisfied with the position in which he is placed by providence. This instruction is also given by Prahlāda Mahārāja:

“My dear friends born of demoniac families, the happiness perceived with reference to the sense objects by contact with the body can be obtained in any form of life, according to one’s past fruitive activities. Such happiness is automatically obtained without endeavor, just as we obtain distress.” (Bhāg. 7.6.3) This philosophy is perfect in regard to obtaining happiness.

Real happiness is described in Bhagavad-gītā (6.21):

“In the spiritually joyous state, one is situated in boundless transcendental happiness and enjoys himself through transcendental senses. Established thus, one never departs from the truth.” One has to perceive happiness by the supersenses. The supersenses are not the senses of the material elements. Every one of us is a spiritual being (ahaṁ brahmāsmi), and every one of us is an individual person. Our senses are now covered by material elements, and because of ignorance we consider the material senses that cover us to be our real senses. The real senses, however, are within the material covering. Dehino ’smin yathā dehe: within the covering of the material elements are the spiritual senses. Sarvopādhi-vinirmuktaṁ tat-paratvena nirmalam: when the spiritual senses are uncovered, by these senses we can be happy. Satisfaction of the spiritual senses is thus described: hṛṣīkeṇa hṛṣīkeśa-sevanaṁ bhaktir ucyate. When the senses are engaged in devotional service to Hṛṣīkeśa, then the senses are completely satisfied. Without this superior knowledge of sense gratification, one may try to satisfy his material senses, but happiness will never be possible. One may increase his ambition for sense gratification and even achieve what he desires for the gratification of his senses, but because this is on the material platform, he will never achieve satisfaction and contentment.

According to brahminical culture, one should be content with whatever he obtains without special endeavor and should cultivate spiritual consciousness. Then he will be happy. The purpose of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is to spread this understanding. People who do not have scientific spiritual knowledge mistakenly think that the members of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement are escapists trying to avoid material activities. In fact, however, we are engaged in real activities for obtaining the ultimate happiness in life. If one is not trained to satisfy the spiritual senses and continues in material sense gratification, he will never obtain happiness that is eternal and blissful. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (5.5.1) therefore recommends:

One must practice austerity so that his existential position will be purified and he will achieve unlimited blissful life.

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura explains in this regard that the very word hariḥ means “one who takes away.” If one connects himself with Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Lord takes away all his miseries, and in the beginning the Lord also superficially appears to take away all his material possessions, reputation, education and beauty. As stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.88.8), yasyāham anugṛhṇāmi hariṣye tad-dhanaṁ śanaiḥ. The Lord said to Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, “The first installment of My mercy toward a devotee is that I take away all his possessions, especially his material opulence, his money.” This is the special favor of the Lord toward a sincere devotee. If a sincere devotee wants Kṛṣṇa above everything but at the same time is attached to material possessions, which hinder his advancement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, by tactics the Lord takes away all his possessions. Here Śukrācārya says that this dwarf brahmacārī would take away everything. Thus he indicates that the Lord will take away all one’s material possessions and also one’s mind. If one delivers his mind to the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa (sa vai manaḥ kṛṣṇa-padāravindayoḥ), one can naturally sacrifice everything to satisfy Him. Although Bali Mahārāja was a devotee, he was attached to material possessions, and therefore the Lord, being very kind to him, showed him special favor by appearing as Lord Vāmana to take away all his material possessions, and his mind as well.

Bali Mahārāja might argue that he had promised only three steps of land. But Śukrācārya, being a very learned brāhmaṇa, immediately understood that this was a plan of Hari, who had falsely appeared there as a brahmacārī. The words mūḍha vartiṣyase katham reveal that Śukrācārya was a brāhmaṇa of the priestly class. Such priestly brāhmaṇas are mostly interested in receiving remuneration from their disciples. Therefore when Śukrācārya saw that Bali Mahārāja had risked all of his possessions, he understood that this would cause havoc not only to the King but also to the family of Śukrācārya, who was dependent on Mahārāja Bali’s mercy. This is the difference between a Vaiṣṇava and a smārta-brāhmaṇa. A smārta-brāhmaṇa is always interested in material profit, whereas a Vaiṣṇava is interested only in satisfying the Supreme Personality of Godhead. From the statement of Śukrācārya, it appears that he was in all respects a smārta-brāhmaṇa interested only in personal gain.

Śukrācārya wanted to tell Bali Mahārāja how he would be cheated by Lord Vāmana. “You have promised three steps,” he said. “But with only two steps, all your possessions will be finished. How then will you give Him a place for His third step?” Śukrācārya did not know how the Lord protects His devotee. The devotee must risk everything in his possession for the service of the Lord, but he is always protected and never defeated. By materialistic calculations, Śukrācārya thought that Bali Mahārāja would under no circumstances be able to keep his promise to the brahmacārī, Lord Vāmanadeva.

The śāstras enjoin that if one has money one should divide all that he has accumulated into five divisions — one part for religion, one part for reputation, one part for opulence, one part for sense gratification and one part to maintain the members of his family. At the present, however, because people are bereft of all knowledge, they spend all their money for the satisfaction of their family. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī taught us by his own example by using fifty percent of his accumulated wealth for Kṛṣṇa, twenty-five percent for his own self, and twenty-five percent for the members of his family. One’s main purpose should be to advance in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. This will include dharma, artha and kāma. However, because one’s family members expect some profit, one should also satisfy them by giving them a portion of one’s accumulated wealth. This is a śāstric injunction.

This śloka explains that in relation to the material body even the factual truth cannot exist without a touch of untruth. The Māyāvādīs say, brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā: “The spirit soul is truth, and the external energy is untruth.” The Vaiṣṇava philosophers, however, do not agree with the Māyāvāda philosophy. Even if for the sake of argument the material world is accepted as untruth, the living entity entangled in the illusory energy cannot come out of it without the help of the body. Without the help of the body, one cannot follow a system of religion, nor can one speculate on philosophical perfection. Therefore, the flower and fruit (puṣpa-phalam) have to be obtained as a result of the body. Without the help of the body, that fruit cannot be gained. The Vaiṣṇava philosophy therefore recommends yukta-vairāgya. It is not that all attention should be diverted for the maintenance of the body, but at the same time one’s bodily maintenance should not be neglected. As long as the body exists one can thoroughly study the Vedic instructions, and thus at the end of life one can achieve perfection. This is explained in Bhagavad-gītā: yaṁ yaṁ vāpi smaran bhāvaṁ tyajaty ante kalevaram. Everything is examined at the time of death. Therefore, although the body is temporary, not eternal, one can take from it the best service and make one’s life perfect.

In this regard, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī says:

“One who rejects things without knowledge of their relationship to Kṛṣṇa is incomplete in his renunciation.” (Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu 1.2.66) When the body is engaged in the service of the Lord, one should not consider the body material. Sometimes the spiritual body of the spiritual master is misunderstood. But Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī instructs, prāpañcikatayā buddhyā hari-sambandhi-vastunaḥ. The body fully engaged in Kṛṣṇa’s service should not be neglected as material. One who does neglect it is false in his renunciation. If the body is not properly maintained, it falls down and dries up like an uprooted tree, from which flowers and fruit can no longer be obtained. The Vedas therefore enjoin:

The purport is that activities performed with the help of the body for the satisfaction of the Absolute Truth (oṁ tat sat) are never temporary, although performed by the temporary body. Indeed, such activities are everlasting. Therefore, the body should be properly cared for. Because the body is temporary, not permanent, one cannot expose the body to being devoured by a tiger or killed by an enemy. All precautions should be taken to protect the body.

Mahārāja Bali wanted to give everything to Vāmanadeva, who had appeared as a beggar, but Śukrācārya, being Mahārāja Bali’s familial spiritual master in the line of seminal succession, could not appreciate Mahārāja Bali’s promise. Śukrācārya gave Vedic evidence that one should not give everything to a poor man. Rather, when a poor man comes for charity one should untruthfully say, “Whatever I have I have given you. I have no more.” It is not that one should give everything to him. Actually the word om is meant for oṁ tat sat, the Absolute Truth. Oṁkāra is meant for freedom from all attachment to money because money should be spent for the purpose of the Supreme. The tendency of modern civilization is to give money in charity to the poor. Such charity has no spiritual value because we actually see that although there are so many hospitals and other foundations and institutions for the poor, according to the three modes of material nature a class of poor men is always destined to continue. Even though there are so many charitable institutions, poverty has not been driven from human society. Therefore it is recommended here, bhikṣave sarvam oṁ kurvan nālaṁ kāmena cātmane. One should not give everything to the beggars among the poor.

The best solution is that of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. This movement is always kind to the poor, not only because it feeds them but also because it gives them enlightenment by teaching them how to become Kṛṣṇa conscious. We are therefore opening hundreds and thousands of centers for those who are poor, both in money and in knowledge, to enlighten them in Kṛṣṇa consciousness and reform their character by teaching them how to avoid illicit sex, intoxication, meat-eating and gambling, which are the most sinful activities and which cause people to suffer, life after life. The best way to use money is to open such a center, where all may come live and reform their character. They may live very comfortably, without denial of any of the body’s necessities, but they live under spiritual control, and thus they live happily and save time for advancement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. If one has money, it should not be squandered away on nothing. It should be used to push forward the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement so that all of human society will become happy, prosperous and hopeful of being promoted back home, back to Godhead. The Vedic mantra in this regard reads as follows:

Beggars always present themselves as possessing nothing, and this may be very good for them because in this way they are assured of not losing their money and of always drawing the attention and compassion of others for the sake of collection. But this is also condemned. If one purposely continues this professional begging, he is supposed to be dead while breathing, or, according to another interpretation, such a man of falsity should be killed while still breathing. The Vedic injunction in this regard is as follows: athaitat pūrṇam abhyātmaṁ yan neti sa yat sarvaṁ neti brūyāt pāpikāsya kīrtir jāyate. sainaṁ tatraiva hanyāt. If one continuously poses himself as possessing nothing and collects money by begging, he should be killed (sainaṁ tatraiva hanyāt).