The Absolute Truth is neither impersonal nor without power. The greatest mistake made by the Māyāvādī philosophers is in conceiving the Absolute Truth to be impersonal and without energy. In all the Vedas, the unlimited energies of the Absolute Truth have been accepted. It is also accepted that the Absolute Truth has His transcendental, blissful, eternal form. According to the Vedas, the Lord and the living entity are equal in quality but different quantitatively. The real philosophy of the Absolute Truth states that the Lord and His creation are inconceivably and simultaneously one and different. The conclusion is that the Māyāvādī philosophers are actually atheists. There was much discussion on this issue between Sārvabhauma and Caitanya Mahāprabhu, but despite all his endeavors, the Bhaṭṭācārya was defeated in the end.
Mistake (CC)
Expressions researched:
"mistake"
|"mistaker"
|"mistakes"
|"mistaking"
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta
CC Adi-lila
“Mistakes, illusions, cheating and defective perception do not occur in the sayings of the authoritative sages.
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam has listed the avatāras, the plenary expansions of the puruṣa, and Lord Kṛṣṇa appears among them. But the Bhāgavatam further explains Lord Kṛṣṇa's specific position as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Since Lord Kṛṣṇa is the original Personality of Godhead, reason and argument establish that His position is always supreme.
Had Kṛṣṇa been a plenary expansion of Nārāyaṇa, the original verse would have been differently composed; indeed, its order would have been reversed. But there cannot be mistakes, illusion, cheating or imperfect perception in the words of liberated sages. Therefore there is no mistake in this statement that Lord Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The Sanskrit statements of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam are all transcendental sounds. Śrīla Vyāsadeva revealed these statements after perfect realization, and therefore they are perfect, for liberated sages like Vyāsadeva never commit errors in their rhetorical arrangements. Unless one accepts this fact, there is no use in trying to obtain help from the revealed scriptures.
Bhrama refers to false knowledge or mistakes, such as accepting a rope as a snake or an oyster shell as gold. Pramāda refers to inattention or misunderstanding of reality, and vipralipsā is the cheating propensity. Karaṇāpāṭava refers to imperfectness of the material senses.
By looking at the beautiful gopīs Kṛṣṇa becomes enlivened, and this enlivens the gopīs, whose youthful faces and bodies blossom. This competition of increasing beauty between the gopīs and Kṛṣṇa, which is without limitations, is so delicate that sometimes mundane moralists mistake these dealings to be purely amorous. But these affairs are not at all mundane, because the gopīs' intense desire to satisfy Kṛṣṇa surcharges the entire scene with pure love of Godhead, with not a spot of sexual indulgence.
Less intelligent men create their own "Gods" by advertising a human being as God. This is their mistake. Therefore here the words tāṅra śuddha kalevara warn that Caitanya Mahāprabhu's body is not material but purely spiritual. One should not, therefore, accept Caitanya Mahāprabhu as an ordinary devotee, although He has assumed the form of a devotee. Yet one must certainly know that although Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, because He accepted the ecstasy of a devotee one should not misunderstand His pastimes and place Him in exactly the same position as Kṛṣṇa. It is for this reason only that when Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu was addressed as Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu He blocked His ears, not wanting to hear Himself addressed as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There is a class of devotees called Gaurāṅga-nāgarī, who stage plays of Kṛṣṇa's pastimes using a vigraha, or form, of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. This is a mistake that is technically called rasābhāsa. While Caitanya Mahāprabhu is trying to enjoy as a devotee, one should not disturb Him by addressing Him as the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
It is to be understood that when Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu chanted and danced, He did so by the influence of the pleasure potency of the spiritual world. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu never considered the holy name of the Lord to be a material vibration, nor does any pure devotee mistake the chanting of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra to be a material musical manifestation. Lord Caitanya never tried to be the master of the holy name; rather He taught us how to be servants of the holy name.
A mistake is the acceptance of an object to be different from what it is or the acceptance of false knowledge. For example, one may see a rope in the dark and think it to be a serpent, or one may see a glittering oyster shell and think it to be gold. These are mistakes. Similarly, an illusion is a misunderstanding that arises from inattention while hearing, and cheating is the transmission of such defective knowledge to others. Materialistic scientists and philosophers generally use such words as "maybe" and "perhaps" because they do not have actual knowledge of complete facts.
Śaṅkarācārya, however, unnecessarily fearing that by pariṇāma-vāda (transformation of energy) Brahman would be transformed (vikārī), has imagined both the material world and the living entities to be false and to have no individuality. By word jugglery he has tried to prove that the individual identities of the living entities and the material world are illusory, and he has cited the examples of mistaking a rope for a snake or an oyster shell for gold. Thus he has most abominably cheated people in general.
The verse atattvato ’nyathā-buddhir vivarta ity udāhṛtaḥ describes such an illusion. To not know actual facts and thus to mistake one thing for another (as, for example, to accept the body as oneself) is called vivarta-vāda. Every conditioned living entity who considers the body to be the soul is deluded by this vivarta-vāda. One can be attacked by this vivarta-vāda philosophy when he forgets the inconceivable power of the omnipotent Personality of Godhead.
The Māyāvādī philosophers consider many Vedic mantras to be the mahā-vākya, or principal Vedic mantra, such as tat tvam asi (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.8.7), idaṁ sarvaṁ yad ayam ātmā and brahmedaṁ sarvam (Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 2.5.1), ātmaivedaṁ sarvam (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7.25.2) and neha nānāsti kiñcana (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.1.11). That is a great mistake. Only oṁkāra is the mahā-vākya. All these other mantras that the Māyāvādīs accept as the mahā-vākya are only incidental. They cannot be taken as the mahā-vākya, or mahā-mantra.
To write about the transcendental pastimes of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is not an ordinary endeavor. Unless one is empowered by the higher authorities, or advanced devotees, one cannot write transcendental literature, for all such literature must be above suspicion, or, in other words, it must have none of the defects of conditioned souls, namely mistakes, illusions, cheating and imperfect sense perceptions. The words of Kṛṣṇa and of the disciplic succession that carries the orders of Kṛṣṇa are actually authoritative. To be empowered to write transcendental literature is a privilege in which a writer can take great pride. As a humble Vaiṣṇava, Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī, being thus empowered, felt very much ashamed that it was he who was to narrate the pastimes of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu.
Bhagavān Ācārya was very liberal and simple. His father, Śatānanda Khān, was completely materialistic, and his younger brother, Gopāla Bhaṭṭācārya, was a staunch Māyāvādī philosopher who had studied very elaborately. When his brother came to Jagannātha Purī, Bhagavān Ācārya wanted to hear from him about Māyāvāda philosophy, but Svarūpa Dāmodara forbade him to do so, and there the matter stopped. Once a friend of Bhagavān Ācārya's from Bengal wanted to recite a drama that he had written that was against the principles of devotional service, and although Bhagavān Ācārya wanted to recite this drama before Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Svarūpa Dāmodara, the Lord's secretary, did not allow him to do so. Later Svarūpa Dāmodara pointed out the drama's many mistakes and its disagreements with the conclusion of devotional service, and the author became aware of the faults in his writing and then surrendered to Svarūpa Dāmodara, begging his mercy. This is described in the Antya-līlā, Chapter Five, verses 91–158.
If one wants salvation, one must worship Lord Viṣṇu. This is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (9.4): mat-sthāni sarva-bhūtāni na cāhaṁ teṣv avasthitaḥ. Everything is resting on the Lord, for everything is His energy, yet He is not everywhere. Lord Caitanya's adopting the mood of Lord Śiva is not extraordinary, but one should not therefore think that by worshiping Lord Śiva one is worshiping Lord Caitanya. That would be a mistake.
"There are many mistakes and illusions in your scriptures. Their compilers, not knowing the essence of knowledge, gave orders that were against reason and argument."
The duty of a brāhmaṇa is to become learned in the Vedic literature and teach the Vedic knowledge to other brāhmaṇas. In our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement we are simply teaching our students to become fit brāhmaṇas and Vaiṣṇavas. In our school at Dallas, the students are learning English and Sanskrit, and through these two languages they are studying all our books, such as Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Bhagavad-gītā As It Is and The Nectar of Devotion. It is a mistake to educate every student as a technologist. There must be a group of students who become brāhmaṇas. Without brāhmaṇas who study the Vedic literature, human society will be entirely chaotic.
CC Madhya-lila
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu would also run very fast across the sand dunes, mistaking them for Govardhana. As He ran, He would wail and cry loudly.
When Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was thus unconscious, He happened to meet the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Consequently He got up and immediately made a tumultuous sound, very loudly declaring, "Now Kṛṣṇa, the great personality, is present." In this way, because of Kṛṣṇa's sweet qualities, Caitanya Mahāprabhu made different types of mistakes in His mind. Thus by reciting the following verse, He ascertained the presence of Lord Kṛṣṇa.
After accepting the sannyāsa order of life, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, out of intense love for Kṛṣṇa, wanted to go to Vṛndāvana, but apparently by mistake He wandered in the Rāḍha-deśa. Later He arrived at Śāntipura and enjoyed Himself there with His devotees. I offer my respectful obeisances to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.
A king named Kāśirāja wanted to fight with Lord Kṛṣṇa, and consequently he took shelter of Lord Śiva to acquire the power to fight the Lord. Being pleased with his worship, Lord Śiva helped him fight Kṛṣṇa. Lord Śiva's name is Āśutoṣa, which indicates that he is very easily satisfied when one worships him, regardless of the purpose, and he gives his devotee whatever benediction the devotee wants. Therefore, people are generally very fond of worshiping Lord Śiva. Thus Kāśirāja was helped by Lord Śiva, but in the fight with Lord Kṛṣṇa he was not only defeated but killed. In this way the weapon known as Pāśupata-astra was baffled, and Kṛṣṇa set fire to the city of Kāśī. Later Lord Śiva became conscious of his mistake in helping Kāśirāja, and he begged Lord Kṛṣṇa's forgiveness. As a benediction from Lord Kṛṣṇa, he received a place known as Ekāmra-kānana. Later, the kings of the Keśarī dynasty established their capital there, and for many hundreds of years they reigned over the state of Orissa.
The verse from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam quoted by Gopīnātha Ācārya was originally spoken by Lord Brahmā when he was defeated by Lord Kṛṣṇa. Lord Brahmā had stolen all the calves and cowherd boys in order to test Kṛṣṇa's power. Lord Brahmā admitted that his own extraordinary powers within the universe were not in the least comparable to the unlimited powers of Lord Kṛṣṇa. If Lord Brahmā can make a mistake in understanding Kṛṣṇa, what to speak of ordinary persons, who either misunderstand Kṛṣṇa or falsely present a so-called incarnation of Kṛṣṇa for their own sense gratification.
Tat tvam asi is a warning to the living entity not to mistake the body for the self. Therefore tat tvam asi is especially meant for the conditioned soul. The chanting of oṁkāra or the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra is meant for the liberated soul. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has said, ayi mukta-kulair upāsyamānam (Nāmāṣṭaka 1). Thus the holy name of the Lord is chanted by the liberated souls. Similarly, Parīkṣit Mahārāja says, nivṛtta-tarṣair upagīyamānāt (SB 10.1.4). The holy name of the Lord can be chanted by those who have fully satisfied their material desires or who are fully situated on the transcendental platform and devoid of material desire.
Our knowledge is fully perfect due to being handed from master to disciple. A Vaiṣṇava is always engaged in the transcendental loving service of the Lord, and thus neither karmīs nor jñānīs can understand the activities of a Vaiṣṇava. It is said, vaiṣṇavera kriyā-mudrā vijñeha nā bujhaya: (CC Madhya 23.39) even the most learned man depending on direct perception of knowledge cannot understand the activities of a Vaiṣṇava. After being initiated into Vaiṣṇavism by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya realized what a mistake he had made in trying to understand Rāmānanda Rāya, who was very learned and whose endeavors were all directed to rendering transcendental loving service to the Lord.
When there is separation, conjugal enjoyment itself acts like a messenger, and that messenger was addressed by Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī as a friend. The essence of this transaction is that transcendental loving affairs are as relishable during separation as during conjugal enjoyment. When Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī was fully absorbed in love of Kṛṣṇa, She mistook a black tamāla tree for Kṛṣṇa and embraced it. Such a mistake is called prema-vilāsa-vivarta.
It is said that in the year 289 of the Age of Kali, the Ālvār of the name Toṇḍaraḍippaḍi was born. While engaged in devotional service he fell victim to a prostitute, and Śrī Raṅganātha, seeing His devotee so degraded, sent one of His servants with a golden plate to that prostitute. When the golden plate was discovered missing from the temple, there was a search, and it was found in the prostitute's house. When the devotee saw Raṅganātha's mercy upon this prostitute, his mistake was rectified. He then prepared the third boundary wall of the Raṅganātha temple and cultivated a tulasī garden there.
Svarūpa said, “My dear Lord, please excuse my offense. I gave up Your company to go elsewhere, and that was my great mistake.
Thus admitting his mistake, Brahmānanda Bhāratī thought, “He spoke well. I put on this deerskin only for prestige. I cannot cross over the ocean of nescience simply by wearing a deerskin.
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu did not regard the son of Mahārāja Pratāparudra with the idea that he was a materialist, being the son of a materialist. Nor did He consider Himself the enjoyer. Māyāvādī philosophers make a great mistake by assuming that the sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1), the transcendental form of the Lord, is like a material body. However, there is no material contamination in transcendence, nor is there any possibility of imagining a spirituality in matter. One cannot accept matter as spirit.
The impersonal monist does not believe that God is the only object of worship and that the living entities are His eternal servants. According to the monists, God and the devotee may be separate in the material state, but when they are spiritually situated, there is no difference between them. This is called advaita-siddhānta, the conclusion of the monists. Monists consider devotional service of the Lord to be material activity; therefore they consider such devotional activities to be the same as karma, or fruitive activity. This monistic mistake is a great stumbling block on the road to devotional service.
As explained in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta (Antya-līlā 4.174), bhadrābhadra-vastu-jñāna nāhika "prākṛte." On the transcendental platform there is no higher or lower, pure or impure. On the material platform, distinction is made between good and bad, but on the spiritual platform everything is of the same quality.
"dvaite" bhadrābhadra-jñāna, saba—"manodharma"
"ei bhāla, ei manda",—ei saba "bhrama"
"In the material world, conceptions of good and bad are all mental speculations. Therefore, saying "This is good and that is bad" is all a mistake." (CC Antya 4.176)
Some people falsely claim that Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī later became known as Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, but this is not a fact. Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī was the uncle and spiritual master of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī. In his gṛhastha life, Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī was a resident of Śrī Raṅga-kṣetra, and he belonged to the Vaiṣṇava Rāmānuja-sampradāya. It is a mistake to consider Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī and Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī the same man.
After visiting Nandīśvara, Pāvana-sarovara, Śeṣaśāyī, Khelā-tīrtha, Bhāṇḍīravana, Bhadravana, Lohavana and Mahāvana, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu went to Gokula and then finally returned to Mathurā. Seeing a great crowd in Mathurā, He moved His residence near Akrūra-ghāṭa, and from there He went every day to Vṛndāvana to see Kālīya-hrada, Dvādaśāditya-ghāṭa, Keśī-ghāṭa, Rāsa-sthalī, Cīra-ghāṭa and Āmli-talā. At Kālīya Lake, many people mistook a fisherman for Kṛṣṇa. When some respectable people came to see Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, they expressed their opinion that when one takes sannyāsa, he becomes Nārāyaṇa. Their mistake was corrected by the Lord. In this way, their Kṛṣṇa consciousness was awakened, and they could understand that a sannyāsī is simply a living entity and not the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
One must see things as they are through the mercy of a spiritual master; otherwise, if one tries to see Kṛṣṇa directly, he may mistake an ordinary man for Kṛṣṇa or Kṛṣṇa for an ordinary man. Everyone has to see Kṛṣṇa according to the verdict of Vedic literatures presented by the self-realized spiritual master. A sincere person is able to see Kṛṣṇa through the transparent via medium of Śrī Gurudeva, the spiritual master. Unless one is enlightened by the knowledge given by the spiritual master, he cannot see things as they are, even though he remains constantly with the spiritual master. This incident at Kālīya-daha is very instructive for those eager to advance in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
"But where they are seeing Kṛṣṇa is their mistake. It is like considering a dry tree to be a person."
The word sthāṇu means "a dry tree without leaves." From a distance one may mistake such a tree for a person. This is called sthāṇu-puruṣa. Although Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was living in Vṛndāvana, the inhabitants considered Him an ordinary human being, and they mistook the fisherman to be Kṛṣṇa. Every human being is prone to make such mistakes. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was mistaken for an ordinary sannyāsī, the fisherman was mistaken for Kṛṣṇa, and the torchlight was mistaken for bright jewels on Kālīya's hoods.
CC Antya-lila
"Whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you offer or give away, and whatever austerities you perform—do that, O son of Kuntī, as an offering to Me." Everything actually belongs to Kṛṣṇa, but so-called civilized men unfortunately think that everything belongs to them. This is the mistake of materialistic civilization.
Becoming a devotee of the Lord to serve material purposes is a great mistake. Many people become showbottle devotees for material profits. Indeed, materialistic persons sometimes take to professional devotional service and keep Viṣṇu, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as a means of livelihood. None of this, however, is approved. In the book known as Sapta-śatī, as mentioned by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, one can discover how a person worshiping the goddess Durgā begs her for different varieties of material profit. Such activities are very popular among people in general, but they are the attempts of foolish, blind people (sei jñāna-andha).
Thus I have described Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's pastimes in the garden, which He entered, mistaking it for Vṛndāvana.
"Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the topmost of all devotees. Sometimes, while walking on the beach, He would see a beautiful garden nearby and mistake it for the forest of Vṛndāvana. Thus He would be completely overwhelmed by ecstatic love of Kṛṣṇa and begin to chant the holy name and dance. His tongue worked incessantly as He chanted, "Kṛṣṇa! Kṛṣṇa!" Will He again become visible before the path of my eyes?"
On an autumn evening when the moon was full, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu walked along the seashore near the Āiṭoṭā temple. Mistaking the sea for the Yamunā River, He jumped into it, hoping to see the water pastimes Kṛṣṇa enjoyed with Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī and the other gopīs. As He floated in the sea, however, He was washed away to the Koṇārka temple, where a fisherman, thinking that the Lord's body was a big fish, caught Him in his net and brought Him ashore. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was unconscious, and His body had become unusually transformed.
Mistaking the sea for the Yamunā, the Lord ran swiftly and jumped into the water, unseen by the others.
| Page Title: | Mistake (CC) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, Serene |
| Created: | 23 of Nov, 2011 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=50, OB=0, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 50 |