________________
Dadashri: You should be like the insurance agent whose company is going liable but not he.
You can have mamata for this body only
So have mamata for only those things that will come with you. Otherwise, is there anything that will no longer be there after one leaves? “This leg is mine, this arm is mine, this nose is mine, ear is mine, this eye is mine, this finger is mine, all these thirty two teeth are mine...'- there are many such things like these in the body. This much mamata is more than enough. Then there is no interference. There is no need for external and extended mamata. People have mistakenly created the extended mamata. It has come about because of a lack of understanding. Otherwise, mamata should not be extended externally.
Questioner: Does that mean that mamata should be for only the body?
Dadashri: Only for this body and have full mamata for it. You should give it food and drink; there is great happiness in such mamata. But people do not enjoy that happiness and instead they take pleasure of, 'This house is mine, that is mine, this is my wife etc.' No body is going to be yours! Whatever you believe to be yours', will not come with you. You are permanent. Temporary things will not suit you.
Ultimately when even your own body is not going to be yours, then how can the wife be yours? Is the wife going to be yours? What if you keep having mamata towards the wife and one day she divorces you? There is no such problem with this body, is there?
Questioner: But what is there in this body that merits having unnecessary mamata?
Dadashri: Then what is worth having more mamata for, on the outside? So there is nothing that is yours. Whatever is yours, will come with you, that is the principle. And anything that is not yours, is not going to come with you. So what is the point of having mamata for anything that in not yours. Is it not meaningless?
Questioner: But how much mamata can there be towards the body?
