Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Avoid (CC)

Expressions researched:
"avoid" |"avoidance" |"avoidances" |"avoided" |"avoiding" |"avoids"

Notes from the compiler: VedaBase query: avoid* not "tr* to avoid" not "should be avoided" not "should avoid" not "cannot avoid"

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta

CC Preface and Introduction

CC Introduction:

To learn how Kṛṣṇa enjoys pleasure, we must study the first nine cantos of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and then we should study the Tenth Canto, in which Kṛṣṇa's pleasure potency is displayed in His pastimes with Rādhārāṇī and the damsels of Vraja. Unfortunately, unintelligent people turn at once to the sports of Kṛṣṇa in the Daśama-skandha, the Tenth Canto. Kṛṣṇa's embracing Rādhārāṇī or His dancing with the cowherd girls in the rāsa dance are generally not understood by ordinary men, because they consider these pastimes in the light of mundane lust. They foolishly think that Kṛṣṇa is like themselves and that He embraces the gopīs just as an ordinary man embraces a young girl. Some people thus become interested in Kṛṣṇa because they think that His religion allows indulgence in sex. This is not kṛṣṇa-bhakti, love of Kṛṣṇa, but prākṛta-sahajiyā—materialistic lust.

To avoid such errors, we should understand what Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa actually is. Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa display Their pastimes through Kṛṣṇa's internal energy. The pleasure potency of Kṛṣṇa's internal energy is a most difficult subject matter, and unless one understands what Kṛṣṇa is, one cannot understand it. Kṛṣṇa does not take any pleasure in this material world, but He has a pleasure potency. Because we are part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa, the pleasure potency is within us also, but we are trying to exhibit that pleasure potency in matter. Kṛṣṇa, however, does not make such a vain attempt. The object of Kṛṣṇa's pleasure potency is Rādhārāṇī; Kṛṣṇa exhibits His potency as Rādhārāṇī and then engages in loving affairs with Her.

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 1.56, Purport:

The next verse (55) instructs that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, by His inconceivable energies, is simultaneously one with and different from the living entities and the material energy. This knowledge is called acintya-bhedābheda-tattva. When an individual living entity surrenders to the Supreme Lord, Kṛṣṇa, he can then develop natural transcendental love for Him. This surrendering process should be the primary concern of a human being. In the next verse (56) it is said that a conditioned soul must ultimately approach a bona fide spiritual master and try to understand perfectly the material and spiritual worlds and his own existential position. Here the words anvaya-vyatirekābhyām, "directly and indirectly," suggest that one must learn the process of devotional service in its two aspects: one must directly execute the process of devotional service and indirectly avoid the impediments to progress.

CC Adi 1.59, Translation:

"One should therefore avoid bad company and associate only with devotees. With their realized instructions, such saints can cut the knot connecting one with activities unfavorable to devotional service."

CC Adi 1.59, Purport:

It is indicated that to learn the transcendental science, it is imperative that one avoid the company of undesirable persons and always seek the company of saints and sages who are able to impart lessons of transcendental knowledge. The potent words of such realized souls penetrate the heart, thereby eradicating all misgivings accumulated through years of undesirable association. For a neophyte devotee there are two kinds of persons whose association is undesirable: (1) gross materialists who constantly engage in sense gratification and (2) unbelievers who do not serve the Supreme Personality of Godhead but serve their senses and their mental whims in terms of their speculative habits. Intelligent persons seeking transcendental realization should very scrupulously avoid their company.

CC Adi 1.105, Translation:

I purposely avoid extensive description for fear of increasing the bulk of this book. I shall describe the essence as concisely as possible.

CC Adi 2.1, Purport:

By the mercy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, even an inexperienced boy with no educational culture can be saved from the ocean of nescience, which is full of various types of philosophical doctrines that are like dangerous aquatic animals. The philosophy of the Buddha, the argumentative presentations of the jñānīs, the yoga systems of Patañjali and Gautama, and the systems of philosophers like Kaṇāda, Kapila and Dattātreya are dangerous creatures in the ocean of nescience. By the grace of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu one can have real understanding of the essence of knowledge by avoiding these sectarian views and accepting the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa as the ultimate goal of life. Let us all worship Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu for His gracious mercy to the conditioned souls.

CC Adi 2.17, Purport:

In this verse from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (11.6.47), vāta-vāsanāḥ refers to mendicants who do not care about anything material, including clothing, but who depend wholly on nature. Such sages do not cover their bodies even in severe winter or scorching sunshine. They take great pains not to avoid any kind of bodily suffering, and they live by begging from door to door. They never discharge their semen, either knowingly or unknowingly. By such celibacy they are able to raise the semen to the brain. Thus they become most intelligent and develop very sharp memories. Their minds are never disturbed or diverted from contemplation on the Absolute Truth, nor are they ever contaminated by desire for material enjoyment. By practicing austerities under strict discipline, such mendicants attain a neutral state transcendental to the modes of nature and merge into the impersonal Brahman.

CC Adi 3.34, Purport:

The great authorities in the disciplic succession had not offered to explain why Lord Caitanya refused to take the name Bhāratī after He took sannyāsa from a Bhāratī, until Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Gosvāmī Mahārāja volunteered the explanation that because a sannyāsī in the Śaṅkara-sampradāya thinks that he has become the Supreme, Lord Caitanya, wanting to avoid such a misconception, kept the name Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya, placing Himself as an eternal servitor. A brahmacārī is supposed to serve the spiritual master; therefore He did not negate that relationship of servitude to His spiritual master. Accepting such a position is favorable for the relationship between the disciple and the spiritual master.

CC Adi 4.41, Purport:

Presentations such as those of the gaura-nāgarīs are only disturbances to the sincere execution of the mission of Lord Caitanya. Lord Caitanya is undoubtedly Kṛṣṇa Himself, and He is always nondifferent from Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī. But the emotion technically called vipralambha-bhāva, which the Lord adopted for confidential reasons, should not be disturbed in the name of service. A mundaner should not unnecessarily intrude into affairs of transcendence and thereby displease the Lord. One must always be on guard against this sort of devotional anomaly. A devotee is not meant to create disturbances to Kṛṣṇa. As Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has explained, devotional service is ānukūlyena, or favorable to Kṛṣṇa. Acting unfavorably toward Kṛṣṇa is not devotion. Kaṁsa was the enemy of Kṛṣṇa. He always thought of Kṛṣṇa, but he thought of Him as an enemy. One should always avoid such unfavorable so-called service.

CC Adi 7.29-30, Translation:

The impersonalists, fruitive workers, false logicians, blasphemers, nondevotees and lowest among the student community are very expert in avoiding the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, and therefore the inundation of Kṛṣṇa consciousness cannot touch them.

CC Adi 7.29-30, Purport:

There are also other unscrupulous persons who exploit the Lord's appearance by posing as incarnations to cheat the innocent public. An incarnation of God should pass the tests of the statements of the śāstras and also perform uncommon activities. One should not accept a rascal as an incarnation of God but should test his ability to act as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. For example, Kṛṣṇa taught Arjuna in the Bhagavad-gītā, and Arjuna also accepted Him as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but for our understanding Arjuna requested the Lord to manifest His universal form, thus testing whether He was actually the Supreme Lord. Similarly, one must test a so-called incarnation of Godhead according to the standard criteria. To avoid being misled by an exhibition of mystic powers, it is best to examine a so-called incarnation of God in the light of the statements of the śāstras. Caitanya Mahāprabhu is described in the śāstras as an incarnation of Kṛṣṇa; therefore if one wants to imitate Lord Caitanya and claim to be an incarnation, he must show evidence from the śāstras about his appearance to substantiate his claim.

CC Adi 7.33, Purport:

The kutārkikas, nindakas, pāṣaṇḍīs and adhama paḍuyās all avoided the benefit of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's movement of developing love of Godhead. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu felt compassion for them, and it is for this reason that He decided to accept the sannyāsa order, for by seeing Him as a sannyāsī they would offer Him respects. The sannyāsa order is still respected in India. Indeed, the very dress of a sannyāsī still commands respect from the Indian public. Therefore Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu accepted sannyāsa to facilitate preaching His devotional cult, although otherwise He had no need to accept the fourth order of spiritual life.

CC Adi 7.41, Purport:

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs neither chant nor dance. Their technical objection is that this method of chanting and dancing is called tauryatrika, which indicates that a sannyāsī should completely avoid such activities and engage his time in the study of Vedānta. Actually, such men do not understand what is meant by Vedānta. In the Bhagavad-gītā (15.15) Kṛṣṇa says, vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyo vedānta-kṛd veda-vid eva cāham: "By all the Vedas I am to be known; indeed I am the compiler of Vedānta, and I am the knower of the Vedas." Lord Kṛṣṇa is the actual compiler of Vedānta, and whatever He speaks is Vedānta philosophy. Although they are lacking the knowledge of Vedānta presented by the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the transcendental form of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the Māyāvādīs are very proud of their study. Foreseeing the bad effects of their presenting Vedānta philosophy in a perverted way, Śrīla Vyāsadeva compiled Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as a commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra.

CC Adi 7.47, Purport:

"As bell metal is turned to gold when mixed with mercury in an alchemical process, so one who is properly trained and initiated by a bona fide spiritual master immediately becomes a brāhmaṇa." Sometimes those born in brāhmaṇa families protest this, but they have no strong arguments against this principle. By the grace of Kṛṣṇa and His devotee, one's life can change. This is confirmed in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam by the words jahāti bandham and śudhyanti. Jahāti bandham indicates that a living entity is conditioned by a particular type of body. The body is certainly an impediment, but one who associates with a pure devotee and follows his instructions can avoid this impediment and become a regular brāhmaṇa by initiation under his strict guidance. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī states how a non-brāhmaṇa can be turned into a brāhmaṇa by the association of a pure devotee. Prabhaviṣṇave namaḥ: Lord Viṣṇu is so powerful that He can do anything He likes. Therefore it is not difficult for Viṣṇu to change the body of a devotee who is under the guidance of a pure devotee of the Lord.

CC Adi 7.51, Purport:

This is a manifestation of real love for Kṛṣṇa and Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. There are three categories of Vaiṣṇavas: kaniṣṭha-adhikārīs, madhyama-adhikārīs and uttama-adhikārīs. The kaniṣṭha-adhikārī, or the devotee in the lowest stage of Vaiṣṇava life, has firm faith but is not familiar with the conclusions of the śāstras. The devotee in the second stage, the madhyama-adhikārī, is completely aware of the śāstric conclusion and has firm faith in his guru and the Lord. He, therefore, avoiding nondevotees, preaches to the innocent. However, the mahā-bhāgavata or uttama-adhikārī, the devotee in the highest stage of devotional life, does not see anyone as being against the Vaiṣṇava principles, for he regards everyone as a Vaiṣṇava but himself. This is the essence of Caitanya Mahāprabhu's instruction that one be more tolerant than a tree and think oneself lower than the straw in the street (tṛṇād api su-nīcena taror iva sahiṣṇunā). However, even if a devotee is in the uttama-bhāgavata status he must come down to the second status of life, madhyama-adhikārī, to be a preacher, for a preacher should not tolerate blasphemy against another Vaiṣṇava. Although a kaniṣṭha-adhikārī also cannot tolerate such blasphemy, he is not competent to stop it by citing śāstric evidences. Therefore Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara are understood to be kaniṣṭha-adhikārīs because they could not refute the arguments of the sannyāsīs in Benares. They appealed to Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu to take action, for they felt that they could not tolerate such criticism although they also could not stop it.

CC Adi 7.67, Translation:

“You belong to our Śaṅkara-sampradāya and live in our village, Vārāṇasī. Why then do You not associate with us? Why is it that You avoid even seeing us?

CC Adi 7.67, Purport:

A Vaiṣṇava sannyāsī or a Vaiṣṇava in the second stage of advancement in spiritual knowledge can understand four principles—namely, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the devotees, the innocent and the jealous—and he behaves differently with each. He tries to increase his love for Godhead, make friendship with devotees and preach Kṛṣṇa consciousness among the innocent, but he avoids the jealous who are envious of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself exemplified such behavior, and this is why Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī inquired why He did not associate or even talk with them. Caitanya Mahāprabhu confirmed by example that a preacher of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement generally should not waste his time talking with Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, but when there are arguments on the basis of śāstra, a Vaiṣṇava must come forward to talk and defeat them in philosophy.

CC Adi 7.67, Purport:

However, even if one is born in a non-brāhmaṇa family, if he has the brahminical qualifications he should be accepted as a brāhmaṇa, as confirmed by Śrīla Nārada Muni and the great saint Śrīdhara Svāmī. This is also stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Both Nārada and Śrīdhara Svāmī completely agree that one cannot be a brāhmaṇa by birthright but must possess the qualities of a brāhmaṇa. Thus in our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement we never offer the sannyāsa order to a person whom we do not find to be qualified in terms of the prescribed brahminical principles. Although it is a fact that unless one is a brāhmaṇa he cannot become a sannyāsī, it is not a valid principle that an unqualified man who is born in a brāhmaṇa family is a brāhmaṇa whereas a brahminically qualified person born in a non-brāhmaṇa family cannot be accepted. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement strictly follows the injunctions of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, avoiding misleading heresy and manufactured conclusions.

CC Adi 7.92, Purport:

One should not attempt to imitate such exalted devotees. Rather, everyone should endeavor to preach the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu in all parts of the world and thus become successful in spiritual life. One who is not very expert in preaching may chant in a secluded place, avoiding bad association, but for one who is actually advanced, preaching and meeting people who are not engaged in devotional service are not disadvantages. A devotee gives the nondevotees his association but is not affected by their misbehavior. Thus by the activities of a pure devotee even those who are bereft of love of Godhead get a chance to become devotees of the Lord one day. In this connection Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura advises that one discuss the verse in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam beginning naitat samācarej jātu manasāpi hy anīśvaraḥ (10.33.30), and the following verse in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu (1.2.255):

anāsaktasya viṣayān yathārham upayuñjataḥ
nirbandhaḥ kṛṣṇa-sambandhe yuktaṁ vairāgyam ucyate

One should not imitate the activities of great personalities. One should be detached from material enjoyment and should accept everything in connection with Kṛṣṇa's service.

CC Adi 7.101, Translation:

"Dear Sir, there is no objection to Your being a great devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa. Everyone is satisfied with this. But why do You avoid discussion on the Vedānta-sūtra? What is the fault in it?"

CC Adi 7.117, Purport:

As already explained, there are three prasthānas on the path of advancement in spiritual knowledge—namely, nyāya-prasthāna (Vedānta philosophy), śruti-prasthāna (the Upaniṣads and Vedic mantras) and smṛti-prasthāna (the Bhagavad-gītā, Mahābhārata, Purāṇas, etc.). Unfortunately, Māyāvādī philosophers do not accept the smṛti-prasthāna. Smṛti refers to the conclusions drawn from the Vedic evidence. Sometimes Māyāvādī philosophers do not accept the authority of the Bhagavad-gītā and the Purāṇas, and this is called ardha-kukkuṭī-nyāya, "the logic of half a hen" (See Ādi-līlā 5.176). If one believes in the Vedic literatures, one must accept all the Vedic literatures recognized by the great ācāryas, but the Māyāvādī philosophers accept only the nyāya-prasthāna and śruti-prasthāna, rejecting the smṛti-prasthāna. Here, however, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu cites evidence from the Gītā, Viṣṇu Purāṇa, etc., which are smṛti-prasthāna. No one can avoid the Personality of Godhead in the statements of the Bhagavad-gītā and other Vedic literatures such as the Mahābhārata and the Purāṇas. Lord Caitanya therefore quotes a passage from the Bhagavad-gītā (7.5).

CC Adi 8.24, Purport:

There are ten offenses to avoid in chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra. The first offense is to blaspheme great personalities who are engaged in distributing the holy name of the Lord. It is said in the śāstra (CC Antya 7.11), kṛṣṇa-śakti vinā nahe tāra pravartana: one cannot distribute the holy names of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra unless he is empowered by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore one should not criticize or blaspheme a devotee who is thus engaged.

CC Adi 8.29-30, Purport:

If one chants the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra offensively, one does not achieve the desired result. Therefore one should carefully avoid the offenses, which have already been described in connection with verse 24.

CC Adi 9.4, Purport:

This is the process for writing transcendental literature. A sentimentalist who has no Vaiṣṇava qualifications cannot produce transcendental writings. There are many fools who consider kṛṣṇa-līlā to be a subject of art and who write or paint pictures about the pastimes of Lord Kṛṣṇa with the gopīs, sometimes depicting them in a manner practically obscene. These fools take pleasure in material sense gratification, but one who wants to make advancement in spiritual life must scrupulously avoid their literature. Unless one is a servant of Kṛṣṇa and the Vaiṣṇavas, as Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī presents himself to be in offering respects to Lord Caitanya, His associates and His disciples, one should not attempt to write transcendental literature.

CC Adi 12.27, Purport:

Therefore a gṛhastha should not falsely adopt the title gosvāmī. The ISKCON movement has never conferred the title gosvāmī upon a householder. Although all the sannyāsīs we have initiated in ISKCON are young, we have awarded them the titles of the renounced order of life, svāmī and gosvāmī, because they have completely dedicated their lives to preach the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura mentions that not only do the householder caste gosvāmīs disrespect the title gosvāmī, but also, following the principles of the smārta Raghunandana, they exhibit great foolishness by burning a straw image of Advaita Ācārya in a śrāddha ceremony, thus acting like Rākṣasas and disrespecting the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa, which is the guide for Vaiṣṇavas. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura says that sometimes these smārta caste gosvāmīs write books on Vaiṣṇava philosophy or commentaries on the original scriptures, but a pure devotee should cautiously avoid reading them.

CC Adi 12.51, Purport:

"O descendant of King Bharata, one who desires to be free from all miseries must hear about, glorify and also remember the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is the Supersoul, the controller and the savior from all miseries." (SB 2.1.5) This is the summary of all the activities of a Vaiṣṇava, and the same instruction is repeated here (kṛṣṇa-smṛti vinu haya niṣphala jīvana). Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī states in his Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, avyartha-kālatvam: (Cc. Madhya 23.18–19) A Vaiṣṇava must be very alert not to waste even a second of his valuable lifetime. This is a symptom of a Vaiṣṇava. But association with pounds-and-shillings men, or viṣayīs, materialists who are simply interested in sense gratification, pollutes one's mind and hampers such continuous remembrance of Lord Kṛṣṇa. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu therefore advised, asat-saṅga-tyāga—ei vaiṣṇava-ācāra: a Vaiṣṇava should behave in such a way as to never associate with nondevotees or materialists (CC Madhya 22.87). One can avoid such association simply by always remembering Kṛṣṇa within his heart.

CC Adi 17.73, Purport:

This is called artha-vāda, and it is one of the ten offenses at the lotus feet of the holy name of the Lord. There are many kinds of offenses, but the offense known as nāma-aparādha, an offense at the lotus feet of the holy name, is extremely dangerous. The Lord therefore warned everyone not to see the face of the offender. The Lord immediately took a bath in the Ganges with all His clothes on to teach everyone to avoid such a nāma-aparādha. The holy name is identical with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There is no difference between the person God and His holy name. This is the absolute position of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore one who distinguishes between the Lord and His name is called a pāṣaṇḍī, or nonbeliever, an atheistic demon. Glorification of the holy name is glorification of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. One should never attempt to distinguish between the Lord and His name or interpret the glories of the holy name as mere exaggerations.

CC Adi 17.128, Purport:

To convert a Hindu into a Muslim was an easy affair in those days. If a Muslim simply sprinkled water on the body of a Hindu, it was supposed that the Hindu had already become a Muslim. During the transition of the British in Bangladesh during the last Hindu-Muslim riots, many Hindus were converted into Muslims by having cows' flesh forcibly pushed into their mouths. Hindu society was so rigid at the time of Lord Caitanya that if a Hindu were converted into a Muslim, there was no chance of his being reformed. In this way the Muslim population in India increased. None of the Muslims came from outside; social customs somehow or other forced Hindus to become Muslims, with no chance of returning to Hindu society. Emperor Aurangzeb also inaugurated a tax that Hindus had to pay because of their being Hindus. Thus all the poor Hindus of the lower class voluntarily became Muslims to avoid the tax. In this way the Muslim population in India increased. Chand Kazi threatened to convert the people into Muslims by the simple process of sprinkling water on their bodies.

CC Adi 17.159, Translation:

Refuting the Kazi's statement, the Lord immediately replied, “The Vedas clearly enjoin that cows should not be killed. Therefore every Hindu, whoever he may be, avoids indulging in cow-killing.

CC Adi 17.245, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is God Himself, but He was playing the part of a preacher. Every preacher should know that being allowed to touch a Vaiṣṇava's feet and take dust may be good for the person who takes it, but it is not good for the person who allows it to be taken. As far as possible, this practice should ordinarily be avoided. Only initiated disciples should be allowed to take this advantage, not others. Those who are full of sinful activities should generally be avoided.

CC Adi 17.276, Purport:

"Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu never even joked with others" wives. As soon as He saw a woman coming, He would immediately give her ample room to pass without talking.’ He was extremely strict regarding the association of women. The sahajiyās, however, pose as followers of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu although they indulge in lusty affairs with women. In His youth Lord Caitanya was very humorous with everyone, but He never joked with any woman, nor in this incarnation did He talk about women. The gaurāṅga-nāgarī party is not approved by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu or Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura. Even though one may offer all kinds of prayers to Caitanya Mahāprabhu, one should strictly avoid worshiping Him as the Gaurāṅga Nāgara. The personal behavior of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and the verses written by Śrī Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura have completely repudiated the lusty desires of the gaurāṅga-nāgarīs.”

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 1.63, Translation:

To avoid turmoil, three great personalities—Haridāsa Ṭhākura, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī—did not enter the temple of Jagannātha.

CC Madhya 1.63, Purport:

Consequently, out of humility they did not enter the temple of Jagannātha, although the Personality of Godhead, Jagannātha, in His form of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, personally came to see them every day. Similarly, the members of this Kṛṣṇa consciousness society are sometimes refused entrance into some of the temples in India. We should not feel sorry about this as long as we engage in chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra. Kṛṣṇa Himself associates with devotees who are chanting His holy name, and there is no need to be unhappy over not being able to enter a certain temple. Such dogmatic prohibitions were not approved by Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Those who were thought unfit to enter the Jagannātha temple were daily visited by Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and this indicates that Caitanya Mahāprabhu did not approve of the prohibitions. To avoid unnecessary turmoil, however, these great personalities would not enter the Jagannātha temple.

CC Madhya 1.197, Purport:

There are two kinds of meat-eaters—one who is born in a family of meat-eaters and one who has learned to associate with meat-eaters. From Śrīla Rūpa and Sanātana Gosvāmīs (formerly Dabira Khāsa and Sākara Mallika) we can learn how one attains the character of a meat-eater simply by associating with meat-eaters. At the present moment in India the presidential offices are occupied by many so-called brāhmaṇas, but the state maintains slaughterhouses for killing cows and makes propaganda against Vedic civilization. The first principle of Vedic civilization is the avoidance of meat-eating and intoxication. Presently in India, intoxication and meat-eating are encouraged, and the so-called learned brāhmaṇas presiding over this state of affairs have certainly become degraded according to the standard given herein by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Sanātana Gosvāmī. These so-called brāhmaṇas give sanction to slaughterhouses for the sake of a fat salary, and they do not protest these abominable activities. By deprecating the principles of Vedic civilization and supporting cow-killing, they are immediately degraded to the platform of mlecchas and yavanas. A mleccha is a meat-eater, and a yavana is one who has deviated from Vedic culture.

CC Madhya 1.198, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura has explained ku-viṣaya garta as follows: “Because of the activities of the senses, we become subjected to many sense gratificatory processes and are thus entangled by the laws of material nature. This entanglement is called viṣaya. When the sense gratificatory processes are executed by pious activity, they are called su-viṣaya. The word su means "good," and viṣaya means "sense objects." When the sense gratificatory activities are performed under sinful conditions, they are called ku-viṣaya, bad sense enjoyment. In either case, either ku-viṣaya or su-viṣaya, these are material activities. As such, they are compared to stool. In other words, such things are to be avoided. To become free from su-viṣaya and ku-viṣaya, one must engage himself in the transcendental loving service of Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The activities of devotional service are free from the contamination of material qualities. Therefore, to be free from the reactions of su-viṣaya and ku-viṣaya, one must take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

CC Madhya 2.66, Purport:

The word unmāda is explained in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu as extreme joy, misfortune and bewilderment in the heart due to separation. Symptoms of unmāda are laughing like a madman, dancing, singing, performing ineffectual activities, talking nonsense, running, shouting and sometimes working in contradictory ways. The word praṇaya is explained thus: When there is a possibility of receiving direct honor but it is avoided, that love is called praṇaya. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, in his Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi, explains the word māna thus: When the lover feels novel sweetness by exchanging hearty loving words but wishes to hide his feelings by crooked means, māna is experienced.

CC Madhya 4.123, Translation:

Mādhavendra Purī avoided begging. He was completely unattached and indifferent to material things. If, without his begging, someone offered him some food, he would eat; otherwise he would fast.

CC Madhya 6.109, Purport:

In this verse from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (11.22.4), the Supreme Personality of Godhead explains that His illusory energy can perform the impossible; such is the power of the illusory energy. In many cases philosophical speculators have covered the real truth and have boldly set forth false theories. In ancient times philosophers like Kapila, Gautama, Jaimini, Kaṇāda and similar brāhmaṇas propounded useless philosophical theories, and in modern days so-called scientists are setting forth many false theories about the creation, backed up by seemingly logical arguments. This is all due to the influence of the Supreme Lord's illusory energy. The illusory energy, therefore, sometimes appears correct because it is emanating from the Supreme Correct. To avoid the very bewildering illusory influence, one must accept the words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead as they are. Only then can one escape the influence of the illusory energy.

CC Madhya 6.169, Purport:

Factually, the devotional service of the Lord is described in the Vedānta-sūtra, but the Māyāvādī philosophers, the Śaṅkarites, prepared a commentary known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya, in which the transcendental form of the Lord is denied. The Māyāvādī philosophers think that the living entity is identical with the Supreme Soul, Brahman. Their commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra are completely opposed to the principle of devotional service. Caitanya Mahāprabhu therefore warns us to avoid these commentaries. If one indulges in hearing the Śaṅkarite Śārīraka-bhāṣya, he will certainly be bereft of all real knowledge.

CC Madhya 7.29, Purport:

The personal associates of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu sometimes behaved contrary to regulative principles out of intense love for the Lord, and because of their love Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself sometimes violated the regulative principles of a sannyāsī. In the eyes of the public, such violations are not good, but Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was so controlled by His devotees' love that He was obliged to break some of the rules. Although accusing them, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was indirectly indicating that He was very satisfied with their behavior in pure love of Godhead. Therefore in verse 27 He mentions that His devotees and associates place more importance on love of Kṛṣṇa than on social etiquette. There are many instances of devotional service rendered by previous ācāryas who did not care about social behavior when intensely absorbed in love for Kṛṣṇa. Unfortunately, as long as we are within this material world, we must observe social customs to avoid criticism by the general populace. This is Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's desire.

CC Madhya 9.11, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura points out that the word "Tattvavādī" refers to the followers of Śrīla Madhvācārya. To distinguish his disciplic succession from the Māyāvādī followers of Śaṅkarācārya, Śrīla Madhvācārya named his party the Tattvavādīs. Impersonal monists are always attacked by these Tattvavādīs, who attempt to defeat their philosophy of impersonalism. Generally, they establish the supremacy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Actually the disciplic succession of Madhvācārya is known as the Brahmā Vaiṣṇava sect; that is the sect coming down from Lord Brahmā. Consequently the Tattvavādīs, or followers of Madhvācārya, do not accept the incident of Lord Brahmā’s illusion, which is recorded in the Tenth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Śrīla Madhvācārya has purposefully avoided commenting on that portion of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam in which brahma-mohana, the illusion of Lord Brahmā, is mentioned. Śrīla Mādhavendra Purī was one of the ācāryas in the Tattvavāda disciplic succession, and he established the ultimate goal of transcendentalism to be attainment of pure devotional service, love of Godhead. Those Vaiṣṇavas belonging to the Gauḍīya-sampradāya, the disciplic succession following Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, are distinct from the Tattvavādīs, although they belong to the same Tattvavāda-sampradāya. The followers of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu are therefore known as the Mādhva-Gauḍīya-sampradāya.

CC Madhya 9.53, Purport:

The word apavitra anna refers to food that is unacceptable for a Vaiṣṇava. In other words, a Vaiṣṇava cannot accept any food offered by an avaiṣṇava in the name of mahā-prasādam. This should be a principle for all Vaiṣṇavas. When asked, "What is the behavior of a Vaiṣṇava?" Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu replied, "A Vaiṣṇava must avoid the company of an avaiṣṇava (asat)." The word asat refers to an avaiṣṇava, that is, one who is not a Vaiṣṇava. Asat-saṅga-tyāga,—ei vaiṣṇava-ācāra (CC Madhya 22.87). A Vaiṣṇava must be very strict in this respect and should not at all cooperate with an avaiṣṇava. If an avaiṣṇava offers food in the name of mahā-prasādam, it should not be accepted. Such food cannot be prasādam because an avaiṣṇava cannot offer anything to the Lord. Sometimes preachers in the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement have to accept food in a home where the householder is an avaiṣṇava; however, if this food is offered to the Deity, it can be taken. Ordinary food cooked by an avaiṣṇava should not be accepted by a Vaiṣṇava. Even if an avaiṣṇava cooks food without fault, he cannot offer it to Lord Viṣṇu, and it cannot be accepted as mahā-prasādam.

CC Madhya 11.8, Purport:

Thus there is a spiritual nature beyond this material world, and that spiritual nature exists eternally. Spiritual advancement means stopping material activities and entering into spiritual activities. This is the process of bhakti-yoga. In the material world, the via media for sense gratification is mainly a woman. One who is seriously interested in spiritual life should strictly avoid women. A sannyāsī should never see a man or a woman for material benefit. In addition, talks with materialistic men and women are also dangerous, and they are compared to drinking poison. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was very strict on this point. He therefore refused to see King Pratāparudra, who was naturally always engaged in political and economic affairs. The Lord even refused to see the King despite the request of a personality like Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, who was the Lord's intimate friend and devotee.

CC Madhya 11.10, Purport:

Chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra engages the mind at the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa constantly; thus the mind's enemies do not have a chance to strike. Following Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's example in these verses, we should be very careful in dealing with the mind, which should not be indulged in any circumstance. Once we indulge the mind, it can create havoc in this life, even though we may be spiritually advanced. The mind is specifically agitated through the association of materialistic men and women. Therefore Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, through His personal behavior, warns everyone to avoid meeting a materialistic person or a woman.

CC Madhya 12.25, Purport:

A sannyāsī is always subjected to public criticism, and a small fault on his part is taken seriously by the public. People actually expect a sannyāsī to preach and not take part in any social or political matters. If a sannyāsī is subject to public criticism, his preaching will not be fruitful. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu specifically wanted to avoid such criticism so that His preaching work would not be hampered. It so happened that while the Lord was talking to His disciples at that time, the devotee Dāmodara Paṇḍita was present. This Dāmodara Paṇḍita was a very faithful devotee and a staunch lover of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Whenever there was anything that might touch or taint the character of the Lord, Dāmodara Paṇḍita would immediately point it out, not even considering the exalted position of the Lord. It is sometimes said that fools rush in where angels dare not, and Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu wanted to point out Dāmodara Paṇḍita's foolishness in coming forward to criticize the Lord. This is why the Lord stated that if Dāmodara Paṇḍita would give Him permission, He would go to see the King. There was deep meaning in this statement, for it is a warning that Dāmodara should not dare criticize the Lord any more, for it was not befitting his position as a devotee. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was considered the guide and spiritual master of all the devotees living with Him. Dāmodara Paṇḍita was one of them, and the Lord rendered Dāmodara Paṇḍita a special favor by warning him to avoid criticizing Him any further. A devotee or a disciple should never attempt to criticize the Lord or His representative, the spiritual master.

CC Madhya 14.194, Translation:

"When Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī was decorated with the ornament of lalita alaṅkāra, just to increase Śrī Kṛṣṇa"s love, an attractive curve was manifested by Her neck, knees and waist. This was brought about by Her timidity and apparent desire to avoid Kṛṣṇa. The flickering movements of Her eyebrows could conquer the powerful bow of Cupid. To increase the joy of Her beloved, Her body was decorated with the ornaments of lalita alaṅkāra.’

CC Madhya 17.127, Purport:

One may get a little light from these names, but one cannot understand that the holy name of the Lord is identical with the Lord. One considers the Lord's names material due to a poor fund of knowledge. Māyāvādī philosophers and the pañcopāsakas cannot in the least understand the existence of the spiritual world and the blissful variegatedness there. They cannot understand the Absolute Truth and its spiritual varieties—name, form, qualities and pastimes. Consequently they conclude that Kṛṣṇa's transcendental activities are māyā. To avoid this misconception one has to directly cultivate knowledge about the holy name of the Lord. Māyāvādī philosophers do not know this fact, and therefore they commit great offenses. One should not hear anything about Kṛṣṇa or devotional service from the mouths of Māyāvādī impersonalists.

CC Madhya 19.113, Translation:

Vallabha Bhaṭṭācārya avoided the river Yamunā. Putting the Lord on a boat in the river Ganges, he went with Him to Prayāga.

CC Madhya 19.159, Purport:

All these obstructions have been described in this verse as unwanted creepers. They simply present obstacles for the real creeper, the bhakti-latā. One should be very careful to avoid all these unwanted things. Sometimes these unwanted creepers look exactly like the bhakti creeper. They appear to be of the same size and the same species when they are packed together with the bhakti creeper, but in spite of this, the creepers are called upaśākhā. A pure devotee can distinguish between the bhakti creeper and a mundane creeper, and he is very alert to distinguish them and keep them separate.

CC Madhya 22.87, Translation:

A Vaiṣṇava should always avoid the association of ordinary people. Common people are very much materially attached, especially to women. Vaiṣṇavas should also avoid the company of those who are not devotees of Lord Kṛṣṇa.

CC Madhya 22.117, Purport:

There are ten items in the beginning of devotional service, up to the point of worshiping the dhātrī trees, banyan trees, cows, brāhmaṇas and devotees of Lord Viṣṇu. The eleventh item is to avoid offenses when rendering devotional service and chanting the holy names.

CC Madhya 22.131, Purport:

The words sajātīyāśaye snigdhe sādhau saṅgaḥ svato vare are very important. One should not associate with professional Bhāgavatam reciters. A professional Bhāgavatam reciter is one who is not in the disciplic succession or one who has no taste for bhakti-yoga. Simply on the strength of grammatical knowledge and word jugglery, professional reciters maintain their bodies and their desires for sense gratification by reading Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. One should also avoid those who are averse to Lord Viṣṇu and His devotees, those who are Māyāvādīs, those who offend the chanting of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, those who simply dress as Vaiṣṇavas or so-called gosvāmīs, and those who make a business by selling Vedic mantras and reciting Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam to maintain their families. One should not try to understand Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam from such materialistic people. According to the Vedic injunctions, yasya deve parā bhaktiḥ. The Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam can be recited only by one who has unflinching faith in the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa and His devotee, the spiritual master. One should try to understand Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam from the spiritual master. The Vedic injunction states, bhaktyā bhāgavataṁ grāhyaṁ na buddhyā na ca ṭīkayā. One has to understand Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam through the process of devotional service and by hearing the recitation of a pure devotee. These are the injunctions of the Vedic literature—śruti and smṛti. Those who are not in the disciplic succession and who are not pure devotees cannot understand the real mysterious objective of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā.

CC Madhya 22.153, Purport:

An advanced devotee has realized his eternal relationship with the Lord, and consequently he does not accept the logic and arguments of others. Such an advanced devotee has nothing to do with the sahajiyās, who manufacture their own way and commit sins by indulging in illicit sex, intoxication and gambling, if not meat-eating. Sometimes the sahajiyās imitate advanced devotees and live in their own whimsical way, avoiding the principles set down in the revealed scriptures. Unless one follows the Six Gosvāmīs—Śrī Rūpa, Sanātana, Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa, Śrī Jīva, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa and Raghunātha dāsa-one cannot be a bona fide spontaneous lover of Kṛṣṇa. In this connection, Śrīla Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura says, rūpa-raghunātha-pade haibe ākuti kabe hāma bujhaba se yugala pirīti. The sahajiyās' understanding of the love affairs between Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa is not bona fide because they do not follow the principles laid down by the Six Gosvāmīs. Their illicit connection and their imitation of the dress of Rūpa Gosvāmī, as well as their avoidance of the prescribed methods of revealed scriptures, will lead them to the lowest regions of hell. These imitative sahajiyās are cheated and unfortunate. They are not equal to advanced devotees (paramahaṁsas). Debauchees and paramahaṁsas are not on the same level.

CC Madhya 23.105, Purport:

"He who is temperate in his habits of eating, sleeping, recreation and work can mitigate all material pains by practicing the yoga system." To broadcast the cult of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, one has to learn the possibility of renunciation in terms of country, time and candidate. A candidate for Kṛṣṇa consciousness in the Western countries should be taught about the renunciation of material existence, but one would teach candidates from a country like India in a different way. The teacher (ācārya) has to consider time, candidate and country. He must avoid the principle of niyamāgraha—that is, he should not try to perform the impossible. What is possible in one country may not be possible in another. The ācārya's duty is to accept the essence of devotional service. There may be a little change here and there as far as yukta-vairāgya (proper renunciation) is concerned. Dry renunciation is forbidden by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and we have also learned this from our spiritual master, His Divine Grace Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura Gosvāmī Mahārāja. The essence of devotional service must be taken into consideration, and not the outward paraphernalia.

CC Madhya 24.98, Translation:

"The intelligent, who have understood the Supreme Lord in the association of pure devotees and have become free from bad, materialistic association, can never avoid hearing the glories of the Lord, even though they have heard them only once."

CC Madhya 24.342, Translation:

You should recommend the avoidance of mixed Ekādaśī and the performance of pure Ekādaśī. You should also describe the fault in not observing Ekādaśī. One should be very careful as far as these items are concerned. If one is not careful, one will be negligent in executing devotional service.

CC Madhya 25.194, Purport:

It appears that Subuddhi Rāya was a big landholder and a responsible, respectable gentleman. He could not, however, avoid the social misconception that one becomes a Muslim when water is sprinkled on one's face from a Muslim's pitcher. Actually he was planning to give up his material life and leave his family. Hindu culture recommends four divisions—brahmacarya, gṛhastha, vānaprastha and sannyāsa. Subuddhi Rāya was thinking of taking sannyāsa, and by the grace of Kṛṣṇa, he received this opportunity. He therefore left his family and went to Vārāṇasī. The system of varṇāśrama-dharma is very scientific. If one is directed by the varṇāśrama institution, he will naturally think of retiring from family life at the end of his life. Therefore sannyāsa is compulsory at the age of fifty.

CC Antya-lila

CC Antya 3.60, Translation:

“If a devotee once utters the holy name of the Lord, or if it penetrates his mind or enters his ear, which is the channel of aural reception, that holy name will certainly deliver him from material bondage, whether vibrated properly or improperly, with correct or incorrect grammar, or properly joined or vibrated in separate parts. O brāhmaṇa, the potency of the holy name is therefore certainly great. However, if one uses the vibration of the holy name for the benefit of the material body, for material wealth and followers, or under the influence of greed or atheism—in other words, if one utters the name with offenses—such chanting will not produce the desired result very soon. Therefore one should diligently avoid offenses in chanting the holy name of the Lord.’”

CC Antya 3.90, Translation:

Greatly satisfied by the statements of Haridāsa Ṭhākura, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu embraced him. Outwardly, however, He avoided further discussions of these matters.

CC Antya 4 Summary:

Because his disease produced wet sores on his body, Sanātana Gosvāmī used to avoid embracing Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, but nevertheless the Lord would embrace him by force. This made Sanātana Gosvāmī very unhappy, and therefore he consulted Jagadānanda Paṇḍita about what he should do. Jagadānanda advised him to return to Vṛndāvana after the car festival of Jagannātha, but when Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu heard about this instruction, He chastised Jagadānanda Paṇḍita and reminded him that Sanātana Gosvāmī was senior to him and also more learned. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu informed Sanātana Gosvāmī that because Sanātana was a pure devotee, the Lord was never inconvenienced by his bodily condition. Because the Lord was a sannyāsī, He did not consider one body better than another. The Lord also informed him that He was maintaining Sanātana and the other devotees just like a father. Therefore the moisture oozing from Sanātana's itching skin did not affect the Lord at all. After speaking with Sanātana Gosvāmī in this way, the Lord again embraced him, and after this embrace, Sanātana Gosvāmī became free from the disease. The Lord ordered Sanātana Gosvāmī to stay with Him for that year, and the next year, after seeing the Ratha-yātrā festival, he left Puruṣottama-kṣetra and returned to Vṛndāvana.

CC Antya 4.71, Translation:

"Of the nine processes of devotional service, the most important is to always chant the holy name of the Lord. If one does so, avoiding the ten kinds of offenses, one very easily obtains the most valuable love of Godhead."

CC Antya 5.131, Purport:

In the Bhāgavatam (7.5.30), it is said, matir na kṛṣṇe parataḥ svato vā mitho ‘bhipadyeta gṛha-vratānām: the gṛha-vratas, those who are determined to continue following the materialistic way of life, will never awaken their dormant love of Kṛṣṇa, for they hear the Bhāgavatam only to solidify their position in household life and to be happy in family affairs and sex. Condemning this process of hearing the Bhāgavatam from professionals, Svarūpa Dāmodara Gosvāmī says, yāha, bhāgavata paḍa vaiṣṇavera sthāne: "To understand the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, you must approach a self-realized Vaiṣṇava." One should rigidly avoid hearing the Bhāgavatam from a Māyāvādī or other nondevotee who simply performs a grammatical jugglery of words to twist some meaning from the text, collect money from the innocent public, and thus keep people in darkness.

CC Antya 6.278, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura suggests that people who are materialistically inclined and sahajiyās, or so-called Vaiṣṇavas who take everything very casually, are both viṣayīs, or materialists. Eating food offered by them causes contamination, and as a result of such contamination, even a serious devotee becomes like a materialistic man. There are six kinds of association—giving charity, accepting charity, accepting food, offering food, talking confidentially and inquiring confidentially. One should very carefully avoid associating with both the sahajiyās, who are sometimes known as Vaiṣṇavas, and the non-Vaiṣṇavas, or avaiṣṇavas. Their association changes the transcendental devotional service of Lord Kṛṣṇa into sense gratification, and when sense gratification enters the mind of a devotee, he is contaminated. The materialistic person who aspires after sense gratification cannot properly think of Kṛṣṇa.

CC Antya 8.79, Purport:

The above-mentioned verse from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam gives two injunctions. The first, called pūrva-vidhi, is that one should not praise, and the second, para-vidhi, is that one should not criticize. As will be apparent from the following verse, the injunction against praise is less important than the injunction against blasphemy. One should carefully observe the para-vidhi, although one may neglect the pūrva-vidhi. Thus the actual injunction is that one may praise but should not criticize. This is called śleṣokti, or a statement having two meanings. Rāmacandra Purī, however, acted in just the opposite way, for he neglected the para-vidhi but strictly observed the pūrva-vidhi. Since he avoided following the principle of not criticizing, Rāmacandra Purī broke both the rules.

CC Antya 13.39, Purport:

In his Amṛta-pravāha-bhāṣya, Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura advises that one avoid remaining in Vṛndāvana for a very long time. As the saying goes, "Familiarity breeds contempt." If one stays in Vṛndāvana for many days, he may fail to maintain proper respect for its inhabitants. Therefore those who have not attained the stage of spontaneous love for Kṛṣṇa should not live in Vṛndāvana very long. It is better for them to make short visits. One should also avoid climbing Govardhana Hill to see the Gopāla Deity. Since Govardhana Hill itself is identical with Gopāla, one should not step on the hill or touch it with his feet. One may see Gopāla when He goes elsewhere.

CC Antya 13.113, Purport:

Concerning the study of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu clearly advises that one avoid hearing from a non-Vaiṣṇava professional reciter. In this connection Sanātana Gosvāmī quotes a verse from the Padma Purāṇa:

avaiṣṇava-mukhodgīrṇaṁ pūtaṁ hari-kathāmṛtam
śravaṇaṁ naiva kartavyaṁ sarpocchiṣṭaṁ yathā payaḥ

"No one should hear or take lessons from a person who is not a Vaiṣṇava. Even if he speaks about Kṛṣṇa, such a lesson should not be accepted, for it is like milk touched by the lips of a serpent." Nowadays it is fashionable to observe Bhāgavata-saptāha and hear Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam from persons who are anything but advanced devotees or self-realized souls.

CC Antya 13.133, Purport:

Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa never did anything harmful to a Vaiṣṇava. In other words, he was never inattentive in the service of the Lord, nor did he ever violate the rules and regulations of a pure Vaiṣṇava. It is the duty of a Vaiṣṇava ācārya to prevent his disciples and followers from violating the principles of Vaiṣṇava behavior. He should always advise them to strictly follow the regulative principles, which will protect them from falling down. Although a Vaiṣṇava preacher may sometimes criticize others, Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa avoided this. Even if another Vaiṣṇava was actually at fault, Raghunātha Bhaṭṭa would not criticize him; he saw only that everyone was engaged in Kṛṣṇa's service. That is the position of a mahā-bhāgavata. Actually, even if one is serving māyā, in a higher sense he is also a servant of Kṛṣṇa. Because māyā is the servant of Kṛṣṇa, anyone serving māyā serves Kṛṣṇa indirectly.

Page Title:Avoid (CC)
Compiler:Visnu Murti, Mayapur
Created:04 of Mar, 2012
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=67, OB=0, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:67