Collaborate with us to invoke and fully manifest Srila Prabhupada's Vani-presence.
"argue | argued | argues | arguing | arguer"
- VedaBase query: argue or argued or argues or arguing or arguer not "may argue*"@ 5 not "might argue"@4
This category has the following 3 subcategories, out of 3 total.
Pages in category "Argue"
The following 88 pages are in this category, out of 88 total.
- A Vaisnava, or devotee, must not only be fixed in the service of the Lord, but, if required, must be prepared to argue with the impersonalist Mayavadis with all logic and philosophy and defeat their contention that the Absolute Truth is impersonal
- According to the Mahabharata, there is no point in arguing about the Absolute Truth because there are so many different Vedic scriptures and philosophical understandings that no one philosopher can agree with another
- Arguing about the conclusion of the scriptures
- Before the demon (Vrkasura) could argue that he had no time to take rest, the Lord informed him about the importance of the body, and the demon was convinced
- Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami, after seeing me, said that you all are learned then why don’t you preach the teaching of Caitanya Mahaprabhu in foreign countries, On this I argued with him, I said we are dependent country, who will listen to us?
- Bodily symptoms which express overwhelming ecstatic love: bashfulness, concealment, remembering, argumentativeness, anxiety, thoughtfulness, endurance, happiness, eagerness, haughtiness, envy, impudence, dizziness and alertness
- Both the yogis and Sankhyites have faith in the reality, but are arguing about it from the different viewpoints of material and spiritual identities
- Devotional service with attachment is natural, and one who has been attracted by it does not argue with those who oppose him, even though others may argue by presenting scriptural injunctions
- Diti might argue (against the fact that because Siva would see their sex indulgence, the time was not appropriate) that they would enjoy sex life in a private place, but Kasyapa reminded her that Lord Siva has three eyes, called the sun, moon and fire
- Diti might argue that they would enjoy sex life in a private place, but Kasyapa reminded her that Lord Siva has three eyes, called the sun, moon and fire, and one cannot escape his vigilance any more than one can escape Visnu
- I am prepared to convince you that there is our Eternal Father & He wants you & all of us to go back to our permanent home. If you argue that there is no such Father God at all, then I am still more prepared to argue with you in all seriousness
- I am so sorry to learn that there is a sort of conspiracy by some of our God-brothers as not to give me a place at Mayapur. I do not wish to argue on this point
- I beg their (the neophyte devotees - the devotees who are very expert in arguing though they have no sense of advanced devotional service, who think themselves very advanced because they imitate some smarta-brahmana) pardon with great humility
- If one argues that since cow dung is pure, the stool of a learned brahmana is still more pure, his argument will not be accepted. Cow dung is accepted, and the stool of a highly posted brahmana is rejected
- If one argues, "What is the purpose of this sinful creation and annihilation?" the answer is that to prove His (the Supreme Lord's) omnipotence He can do anything, and no one can question Him
- In the beginning Arjuna was arguing with Krsna to support his decision that he would not fight, but he could not convince Krsna very nicely
- In this age, people are prepared to argue that they can understand that which is beyond their limited knowledge and perception through so-called scientific observations and experiments, not knowing that actual truth comes down to man from authorities
- It is sometimes argued that the sons of King Sagara were burned to ashes by the fire emanating from the eyes of Kapila Muni. This statement, however, is not approved by great learned persons
- It may be argued that because the living entities are born of the material nature they are all equal and independent
- It may be argued that in Kali-yuga modern civilization is mainly situated in the cities. A great city, however, is like a great forest. Actually city life is more dangerous than life in the forest
- Lord Krsna in His personal form is here speaking before Arjuna, and still, due to ignorance, impersonalists argue that the Supreme Lord ultimately has no form
- Lord Siva's punishment was just like that of a cowherd boy, who keeps a stick to frighten his animals. It is commonly said that to give protection to animals, a stick is needed because animals cannot reason and argue
- One gentleman was arguing with me... He was supporting Rama-Krishna Mission. He said, "Even stool I consider God. It is God"
- One might argue that since you (Bali) have already promised, how can you refuse? O best of the demons, just take from me (Sukracarya) the evidence of the Bahvrca-sruti, which says that a promise is truthful preceded by the word om and untruthful if not
- One should not concern oneself with the conclusions of various logicians or philosophers. Of course, those who preach sometimes need to argue with the contentions of opponents, but as much as possible one should avoid an argumentative attitude
- Our method, Vedic method, is as soon as we speak something, we immediately give evidence from the Vedas. Then it is perfect. There is no question of arguing
- Please hear the pastimes of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu with faith and confidence. Do not argue, for arguments will produce a contrary result
- Prajapati Daksa argued that although the renounced order is recommended for liberation, one cannot attain liberation unless one fulfills his obligations to the demigods, the saints and his father
- Sankara has falsely argued that if the transformation of energy is accepted, the Supreme Absolute Truth cannot remain immutable. But this is not true
- Servant's business is to surrender, not to argue with the master or to claim that "I am equal with you." These are all fanatic, mad proposal
- Should you desire to argue with me, then my only request to you will be that for all such arguments we must be always very sincere and serious
- Sisya means under the order, regulation. A person cannot disobey the order of guru. Then he is sisya. If he argues, he's not sisya
- Some atheists argue that the Supreme Lord can never descend upon this material world, but they are unable to give any tangible reasons as to why not
- Some Mayavadi scholars argue that Srimad-Bhagavatam was not compiled by Sri Vyasadeva. And some of them suggest that this book is a modern creation written by someone named Vopadeva
- Some of the sages and brahmanas were arguing, and some of them were chanting the Vedic mantras, so the entire atmosphere was surcharged with transcendental sound vibration
- Some of them create wonderful situations by their activities, apparently against Krsna; some of them are very talkative, always arguing with Krsna and creating a debating atmosphere
- Some people argue that if everyone thought of Krsna in that way, the whole universe would be vacated because everyone would go back home, back to Godhead
- Some scholars argue that simply by following the principles of varna and asrama one can gradually rise up to the perfections reached by practicing devotional service, but this argument is not accepted by the great authorities
- Sometimes atheists argue that since God is invisible to their eyes, they do not believe in God. For them the Supreme Lord is describing a method by which one can see God in His impersonal form
- Sometimes it is argued that karma and jnana require a mixture of bhakti in order to be successfully executed, and sometimes it is argued that bhakti also requires karma and jnana for its successful termination
- Sometimes it is argued that people do not know who is a spiritual master and that finding a spiritual master from whom to get enlightenment in regard to the destination of life is very difficult
- Sridhara Swami said in his verse, "Let the mystic yogis engage in their meditational service, and let the different sects engage in unnecessary arguing as to which is the best"
- That which is beyond our power of conception is called acintya, inconceivable. It is useless to argue or speculate about the inconceivable. If something is truly inconceivable, it is not subject to speculation or experimentation
- The Buddhists argue that the world is false, but this is not valid. The world is temporary, but it is not false. As long as we have the body, we must suffer the pleasures and pains of the body, even though we are not the body
- The common man cannot argue about what is beyond the sky or beyond the universe; he must accept the versions of the Vedas as they are understood by the authorized disciplic succession
- The couple was imitating some discussion they heard upon the Vedanta philosophy, and thus were seemingly arguing upon various philosophical points
- The demigods must offer worship in obedience to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but one might argue that since the Supreme Godhead was within the womb of Devaki, He was also coming in a material body. Why then should He be worshiped
- The devotees are not at all interested in arguing with the nondevotees to nullify their theories. Rather than wasting time, they always engage themselves in the transcendental loving service of the Lord in full Krsna consciousness
- The difference between the believers and the faithless is that the devotees accept the incidents mentioned in the Vedic literatures to be true, whereas the demons simply argue and label all these historical incidents mythology
- The false arguer
- The impersonalists argue that Krsna Himself has been transformed into many and that therefore everything is Krsna and worship of anything is worship of Him
- The impersonalists argue that this is fallacious because it is sometimes found that matter is produced from spirit soul and sometimes that spirit soul is produced from matter
- The import of this verse has stopped you from arguing. Now listen to another verse of Srimad-Bhagavatam
- The Lord has a potency called avidya, the illusory energy, which induces the false arguer to think himself perfect and which induces the illusory energy to bewilder the conditioned soul
- The materialistic man of the modern age will argue that life, or part of it, is never meant for discussion of theosophical or theological arguments
- The Mayavadi philosophers are very fond of the Vedanta, and they misinterpret it in their own way. Misunderstanding their own position, they criticized Lord Caitanya as an unauthorized sannyasi, arguing that He was a sentimentalist
- The other day one professor came to see me from Khabudvipa(?). He was very submissive, but still, he would argue like this, that "Whatever Krsna is making me to do, I am doing." So I told him, "Krsna is asking you to surrender. Why don't you surrender?"
- The second-class devotee has been defined by the following symptoms: he is not very expert in arguing on the strength of revealed scripture, but he has firm faith in the objective
- The whole world is going to hell and everyone is suffering. In light of this, how can we argue amongst one another and neglect our responsibility for reclaiming these fallen souls for going Back to Home, Back to Godhead
- There are so many universities, educational institution, big, big professors, scientists, all rascals. All rascals, we declare. Let them come and argue with us. All rascals
- There is no point in arguing that a materialistic man can be happy. No materialistic creature - be he the great Brahma or an insignificant ant - can be happy
- There is no use of interpretation. Interpretation is required when you cannot understand one statement. In the law court if one statement is ambiguous then two parties argue on it. "I think it is this," "I think
- This is another instance of an argumentative presentation of ecstatic love
- This part of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's pastimes is most confidential. One can derive benefit quickly only by faith; otherwise, by arguing one will always remain far away
- We can go on arguing for days together, but there is no decision. That is friendly talk. But when there is talk between a master and disciple, there is no question of arguing. The disciple has to accept what is ordered by the master
- Whatever you say, that's all right. Now, we are seeing the other party; if somebody there, "It is like this," that's all right. I'm not going to test it. So what is the use of arguing?
- When learned sages and brahmanas assemble to chant Vedic mantras, some of them also engage in arguing about the conclusion of the scriptures
- Whoever argues about this is a great fool. He intentionally and personally brings a thunderbolt down upon his head
- You cannot come to the right conclusion simply by arguing. You may be a very good logician and you can argue very nicely, but another man, he may be a greater logician than you. He can nullify all your arguments
- You know all the conclusions of the scriptures very well. You create these logical arguments just to agitate me
- You may be very good logician, you can argue very nice, but another logician may come and defeat you. That is going on