Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Disagreement (CC and other books)

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta

CC Preface and Introduction

He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa Himself, and He is worshipable by everyone in this age of disagreement.
CC Preface:

Before accepting sannyāsa (the renounced order), Lord Caitanya was known as Viśvambhara. The word viśvambhara refers to one who maintains the entire universe and who leads all living entities. This maintainer and leader appeared as Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya to give humanity these sublime teachings. Lord Caitanya is the ideal teacher of life's prime necessities. He is the most munificent bestower of love of Kṛṣṇa. He is the complete reservoir of all mercies and good fortune. As confirmed in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the Bhagavad-gītā, the Mahābhārata and the Upaniṣads, He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa Himself, and He is worshipable by everyone in this age of disagreement. Everyone can join in His saṅkīrtana movement. No previous qualification is necessary. Just by following His teachings, anyone can become a perfect human being. If a person is fortunate enough to be attracted by Lord Caitanya, he is sure to be successful in his life's mission. In other words, those who are interested in attaining spiritual existence can easily be released from the clutches of māyā by the grace of Lord Caitanya. The teachings presented in this book are nondifferent from the Lord.

CC Adi-lila

In this age of quarrel and disagreement, the chanting of the holy names is the only way to liberation from the material clutches.
CC Adi 7.95-96, Purport:

If one chants the holy name of the Lord just to make a show, not knowing the secret of success, he may increase his bile secretion, but he will never attain perfection in chanting the holy name. Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu presented himself in this way: “I am a great fool and do not have knowledge of right and wrong. In order to understand the real meaning of the Vedänta-sütra, I never followed the explanation of the Çaìkara-sampradäya or Mäyävädé sannyäsés. I'm very much afraid of the illogical arguments of the Mäyävädé philosophers. Therefore I think I have no authority regarding their explanations of the Vedänta-sütra. I firmly believe that simply chanting the holy name of the Lord can remove all misconceptions of the material world. I believe that simply by chanting the holy name of the Lord one can attain the shelter of the lotus feet of the Lord. In this age of quarrel and disagreement, the chanting of the holy names is the only way to liberation from the material clutches.

Svarüpa Dämodara 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 Svarüpa Dämodara, begging his mercy.
CC Adi 10.135-136, Purport:

Bhagavän Äcärya was very liberal and simple. His father, Çatänanda Khän, was completely materialistic, and his younger brother, Gopäla Bhaööäcärya, was a staunch Mäyävädé philosopher who had studied very elaborately. When his brother came to Jagannätha Puré, Bhagavän Äcärya wanted to hear from him about Mäyäväda philosophy, but Svarüpa Dämodara forbade him to do so, and there the matter stopped. Once a friend of Bhagavän Äcärya's from Bengal wanted to recite a drama that he had written that was against the principles of devotional service, and although Bhagavän Äcärya wanted to recite this drama before Lord Caitanya Mahäprabhu, Svarüpa Dämodara, the Lord's secretary, did not allow him to do so. Later Svarüpa Dämodara 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 Svarüpa Dämodara, begging his mercy. This is described in the Antya-lélä, Chapter Five, verses 91–158.

The words daivera kāraṇa indicate that by dint of providence, or by God's will, the followers of Advaita Ācārya divided into two parties. Such disagreement among the disciples of one ācārya is also found among the members of the Gauḍīya Maṭha.
CC Adi 12.8, Purport:

The words daivera kāraṇa indicate that by dint of providence, or by God's will, the followers of Advaita Ācārya divided into two parties. Such disagreement among the disciples of one ācārya is also found among the members of the Gauḍīya Maṭha. In the beginning, during the presence of Oṁ Viṣṇupāda Paramahaṁsa Parivrājakācārya Aṣṭottara-śata Śrī Śrīmad Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura Prabhupāda, all the disciples worked in agreement; but just after his disappearance, they disagreed. One party strictly followed the instructions of Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, but another group created their own concoction about executing his desires. Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, at the time of his departure, requested all his disciples to form a governing body and conduct missionary activities cooperatively. He did not instruct a particular man to become the next ācārya. But just after his passing away, his leading secretaries made plans, without authority, to occupy the post of ācārya, and they split into two factions over who the next ācārya would be. Consequently, both factions were asāra, or useless, because they had no authority, having disobeyed the order of the spiritual master. Despite the spiritual master's order to form a governing body and execute the missionary activities of the Gauḍīya Maṭha, the two unauthorized factions began litigation that is still going on after forty years with no decision.

These rascals disagree with us so vehemently that some of them do not allow European and American Vaiṣṇavas to enter the temples of Viṣṇu.
CC Adi 17.217, Purport:

Confirming the potency of the saṅkīrtana movement, these words from the very mouth of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu express how people can be purified simply by chanting the holy name of Lord Kṛṣṇa. The Kazi was a Muslim mleccha, or meat-eater, but because he several times uttered the holy name of Lord Kṛṣṇa, automatically the reactions of his sinful life were vanquished and he was fully purified of all material contamination. We do not know why the pāṣaṇḍīs of the present day protest that we are deteriorating the Hindu religion by spreading Kṛṣṇa consciousness all over the world and claiming all classes of men to the highest standard of Vaiṣṇavism. But these rascals disagree with us so vehemently that some of them do not allow European and American Vaiṣṇavas to enter the temples of Viṣṇu. Thinking religion to be meant for material benefit, these so-called Hindus have actually become vicious by worshiping the numerous forms of the demigods. In the next verse Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu confirms the Kazi's purification.

CC Madhya-lila

It seems that in the temple of Jagannātha there was some disagreement between Jagannātha and Sākṣi-gopāla, a disagreement called prema-kalaha, a quarrel of love.
CC Madhya 5.9, Purport:

The Sākṣi-gopāla temple is situated between the Khurdā Road railway station and the Jagannātha Purī station. The Deity is not presently situated in Kaṭaka, but when Nityānanda Prabhu traveled there, the Deity was present. Kaṭaka is a town in Orissa situated on the Mahānadī River. When Sākṣi-gopāla was brought from Vidyānagara in southern India, He stayed for some time at Kaṭaka. Thereafter, He was situated for some time in the Jagannātha temple. It seems that in the temple of Jagannātha there was some disagreement between Jagannātha and Sākṣi-gopāla, a disagreement called prema-kalaha, a quarrel of love. In order to settle this love quarrel, the King of Orissa constructed a village about eleven miles from Jagannātha Purī. The village was called Satyavādī, and Gopāla was stationed there. Thereafter, a new temple was constructed. Now there is a Sākṣi-gopāla station, and people go to Satyavādī to see the witness Gopāla.

If people actually become God conscious, all quarrels can be settled outside of court, as happened in the case of the two brāhmaṇas whose disagreement was settled by the witness Gopāla.
CC Madhya 5.32, Purport:

By not becoming God conscious, human society is deteriorating to the lowest standard of animal life. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is very essential to reviving God consciousness among the general populace. If people actually become God conscious, all quarrels can be settled outside of court, as happened in the case of the two brāhmaṇas whose disagreement was settled by the witness Gopāla.

CC Madhya 6.108, Translation:

“"I offer my respectful obeisances unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is full of unlimited qualities and whose different potencies bring about agreement and disagreement between disputants. Thus the illusory energy again and again covers the self-realization of both disputants.""

By the side of Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī there was only one Kṛṣṇa. Although this was the case, Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī still manifested disagreement with Kṛṣṇa.
CC Madhya 8.111, Translation and Purport:

“"The progress of loving affairs between a young boy and a young girl is like the movement of a snake. On account of this, two types of anger arise between a young boy and girl—anger with cause and anger without cause.""

During the rāsa dance, one form of Kṛṣṇa was between every two gopīs. But by the side of Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī there was only one Kṛṣṇa. Although this was the case, Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī still manifested disagreement with Kṛṣṇa. This verse is from the Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi (Śṛṅgāra-bheda-kathana 102), written by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī.

By Your auspicious mercy, quarrels and disagreements arising among different scriptures are vanquished.
CC Madhya 10.119, Translation:

"O ocean of mercy, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu! Let there be an awakening of Your auspicious mercy, which easily drives away all kinds of material lamentation by making everything pure and blissful. Indeed, Your mercy awakens transcendental bliss and covers all material pleasures. By Your auspicious mercy, quarrels and disagreements arising among different scriptures are vanquished. Your auspicious mercy pours forth transcendental mellows and thus causes the heart to jubilate. Your mercy, which is full of joy, always stimulates devotional service and glorifies conjugal love of God. May transcendental bliss be awakened within my heart by Your causeless mercy."

The Absolute Truth is one, and when one is situated in the Absolute Truth, there is no disagreement.
CC Madhya 17.184, Purport:

Unless one comes to the Absolute Truth, there is no possibility of agreement. Nāsāv ṛṣir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam: it is said that a great learned scholar or sage cannot be exalted unless he disagrees with other scholars and sages. On the material platform, there is no possibility of agreement; therefore there are different kinds of religious systems. But the Absolute Truth is one, and when one is situated in the Absolute Truth, there is no disagreement. On that absolute platform the Supreme Personality of Godhead is worshipable. As stated in the Bhagavad-gītā (18.55), bhaktyā mām abhijānāti yāvān yaś cāsmi tattvataḥ. On the absolute platform, the worshipful Deity is one, and the process of worship is also one. That process is bhakti.

CC Antya-lila

CC Antya 7.143, Translation:

Jagadānanda Paṇḍita was accustomed to provoking loving quarrels with the Lord. There was always some disagreement between them.

In the pastimes of Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Jagadānanda Paṇḍita was always in disagreement with the Lord like Satyabhāmā, whereas Gadādhara Paṇḍita was always awed by the Lord's opulence and was therefore submissive to the Lord under all circumstances.
CC Antya 7.145, Translation and Purport:

Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu sometimes desired to see Gadādhara Paṇḍita's affectionate anger, but because of his knowledge of the Lord's opulences, his anger was never invoked.

Joking with Rukmiṇīdevī in Dvārakā, Kṛṣṇa once advised her to accept another husband because He was unfit for her. Rukmiṇīdevī, however, unable to understand His joking words, took them very seriously and immediately fell to the ground in fear of separation from Him. In the pastimes of Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Jagadānanda Paṇḍita was always in disagreement with the Lord like Satyabhāmā, whereas Gadādhara Paṇḍita was always awed by the Lord's opulence and was therefore submissive to the Lord under all circumstances.

Other Books by Srila Prabhupada

Teachings of Lord Caitanya

Lord Caitanya is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa Himself, and He is worshipable by everyone in this age of disagreement.
Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter Preface:

Before accepting sannyāsa (the renounced order), Lord Caitanya was known as Viśvambhara. The word viśvambhara refers to one who maintains the entire universe and who leads all living entities. This maintainer and leader appeared as Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya to give humanity these sublime teachings. Lord Caitanya is the ideal teacher of life's prime necessities. He is the most munificent bestower of love of Kṛṣṇa. He is the complete reservoir of all mercies and good fortune. As confirmed in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Bhagavad-gītā, Mahābhārata and the Upaniṣads, He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa Himself, and He is worshipable by everyone in this age of disagreement. Everyone can join in His saṅkīrtana movement. No previous qualification is necessary. just by following His teachings, anyone can become a perfect human being. If one is fortunate enough to be attracted by His features, one is sure to be successful in one's life mission. In other words, those who are interested in attaining spiritual existence can be easily relieved from the clutches of māyā by the grace of Lord Caitanya. These teachings presented in this book are nondifferent from the Lord.

In this age of logic, argument and disagreement, the chanting of Hare Kṛṣṇa is the only means for self-realization.
Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 18:

In this age of logic, argument and disagreement, the chanting of Hare Kṛṣṇa is the only means for self-realization. Because this transcendental vibration alone can deliver the conditioned soul, it is considered to be the essence of the Vedānta-sūtra. According to the material conception, there is duality between the name, form, quality, emotions and activities of a person and the person himself, but as far as the transcendental vibration is concerned, there is no such limitation, for it descends from the spiritual world. In the spiritual world there is no difference between the name of the person and the quality of the person. Of course in the material world there is a difference. Because the Māyāvādī philosophers cannot understand this, they cannot utter the transcendental vibration.

The actual devotees of the Lord are always in disagreement with the Māyāvādī philosophers.
Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 25:

The actual devotees of the Lord are always in disagreement with the Māyāvādī philosophers. There is no way that impersonalism can possibly represent eternity, bliss and knowledge. Being situated in imperfect knowledge of liberation, the Māyāvādī decries eternity, knowledge and bliss as materialism. Because they reject devotional service, they are unintelligent and unable to understand the effects of devotional service. The word jugglery they use in an attempt to amalgamate knowledge, the knowable and the knower simply reveals them to be unintelligent. The doctrine of by-product is the real purport of the beginning of Vedānta-sūtra. The Lord is empowered with innumerable unlimited energies, and consequently He displays the by-products of these energies in different ways. Everything is under His control. The Supreme Lord is also the supreme controller, and He is manifested in innumerable energies and expansions.

Nectar of Devotion

When the gopīs were in disagreement with Kṛṣṇa, these friends would support Kṛṣṇa's side in His presence—but when Kṛṣṇa was not present, they would support the side of the gopīs.
Nectar of Devotion 42:

Another business of the friends was that each of them wanted to defeat Kṛṣṇa. Sometimes they used to snatch His clothing or snatch away the flowers from His hands. Sometimes one would try to induce another to decorate his body for him, and failing this, they were always ready to fight, challenging one another to combat in wrestling. These were some of the general activities of Kṛṣṇa and His friends.

Another important pastime of the friends of Kṛṣṇa was that they served as messengers to and from the gopīs; they introduced the gopīs to Kṛṣṇa and canvassed for Kṛṣṇa. When the gopīs were in disagreement with Kṛṣṇa, these friends would support Kṛṣṇa's side in His presence—but when Kṛṣṇa was not present, they would support the side of the gopīs. In this way, sometimes supporting one side, sometimes the other, they would talk very privately, with much whispering in the ears, although none of the business was very serious.

"Hiding Herself behind the creepers, Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī began to express Her sorrow to one of Her consorts." This is an instance of a seeming disagreement.
Nectar of Devotion 44:

As far as māna, or anger, is concerned, there is the following incident described in Gīta-govinda: "When Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī saw Kṛṣṇa enjoying Himself in the company of several other gopīs, She became a little jealous because Her special prestige was being dimmed. Therefore, She immediately left the scene and took shelter in a nice flower bush where the black drones were humming. Then, hiding Herself behind the creepers, She began to express Her sorrow to one of Her consorts." This is an instance of a seeming disagreement.

An example of pravāsa, or being out of contact because of living in a distant place, is given in the Padyāvalī as follows: "Since the auspicious day when Kṛṣṇa left for Mathurā, Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī has been pressing Her head on one of Her hands and constantly shedding tears. Her face is always wet now, and therefore there is no chance of Her sleeping even for a moment." When the face becomes wet, the sleeping tendency is immediately removed. So when Rādhārāṇī was always weeping for Kṛṣṇa because of His separation, there was no chance of Her getting any sleep for Herself.

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Thus disagreeing with the King's proposal, the two brāhmaṇas left the place in anger, thinking that their lawful possession had been usurped.
Krsna Book 64:

When both brāhmaṇas charged the King with the same complaint, he was simply puzzled as to how it had happened. Thereafter, with great humility, the King offered each of them 100,000 cows in exchange for the one cow that was causing the fight between them. He prayed to them that he was their servant and that there had been some mistake. Thus, in order to rectify it, he prayed that they be very kind upon him and accept his offer in exchange for the cow. The King fervently appealed to the brāhmaṇas not to cause his downfall into hell because of this mistake. A brāhmaṇa's property is called brahma-sva, and according to Manu's law it cannot be acquired even by the government. Both brāhmaṇas, however, insisted that the cow was theirs and could not be taken back under any condition; neither of them agreed to exchange it for the 100,000 cows. Thus disagreeing with the King's proposal, the two brāhmaṇas left the place in anger, thinking that their lawful possession had been usurped.

All the respectable sages, kings and demigods who assembled there agreed unanimously that King Yudhiṣṭhira was quite competent to take the responsibility of performing the Rājasūya sacrifice; no one was in disagreement on this fact.
Krsna Book 74:

Present by the invitation of King Yudhiṣṭhira to participate in the great sacrifice were all the exalted demigods, including Lord Brahmā, Lord Śiva and Indra, the King of heaven, accompanied by their associates, as well as the predominating deities of the higher planetary systems, including Gandharvaloka, Siddhaloka, Janaloka, Tapoloka, Nāgaloka, Yakṣaloka, Rākṣasaloka, Pakṣiloka and Cāraṇaloka, as well as famous kings and their queens. All the respectable sages, kings and demigods who assembled there agreed unanimously that King Yudhiṣṭhira was quite competent to take the responsibility of performing the Rājasūya sacrifice; no one was in disagreement on this fact. Everyone thoroughly knew the position of King Yudhiṣṭhira; because he was a great devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa, no accomplishment was extraordinary for him. The learned brāhmaṇas and priests saw to it that the sacrifice by Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira was performed in exactly the same way as it had been in bygone ages by the demigod Varuṇa.

Kṛṣṇa should be offered the first worship in this great sacrifice, and no one should disagree.
Krsna Book 74:

"By the grace of Kṛṣṇa only, everyone is engaged in the practice of religion, the development of economic conditions, the satisfaction of the senses and, ultimately, the achievement of liberation from material bondage. These four principles of progressive life can be executed by the mercy of Kṛṣṇa only. He should therefore be offered the first worship in this great sacrifice, and no one should disagree. Just as by watering the root of a tree one automatically waters the branches, twigs, leaves and flowers, or as by supplying food to the stomach one automatically nourishes all parts of the body, so by offering the first worship to Kṛṣṇa we shall satisfy everyone present in this meeting, including the great demigods. If anyone is charitably disposed, it will be very good for him to give charity only to Kṛṣṇa, who is the Supersoul of everyone, regardless of his particular body or individual personality. Kṛṣṇa is present as the Supersoul in every living being, and if we can satisfy Him, then every living being will automatically be satisfied.”

The two classes of devotees, namely the devotees of Lord Śiva and the devotees of Lord Viṣṇu, are always in disagreement.
Krsna Book 88:

Mahārāja Parīkṣit's question is very intelligent. The two classes of devotees, namely the devotees of Lord Śiva and the devotees of Lord Viṣṇu, are always in disagreement. Even today in India these two classes of devotees still criticize each other, and especially in South India the followers of Rāmānujācārya and the followers of Śaṅkarācārya hold occasional meetings for understanding the Vedic conclusion. Generally, the followers of Rāmānujācārya come out victorious in such meetings. So Parīkṣit Mahārāja wanted to clarify the situation by asking this question of Śukadeva Gosvāmī. That Lord Śiva lives as a poor man although his devotees appear very opulent, whereas Lord Kṛṣṇa, or Lord Viṣṇu, is always opulent and yet His devotees appear poverty-stricken, is a situation which appears contradictory and puzzling to a discriminating person.

The perfect example is Mahārāja Ambarīṣa. He was not a mystic yogī but a great devotee, yet in a disagreement with Mahārāja Ambarīṣa, the great mystic Durvāsā was defeated in the presence of the King's devotional attitude.
Krsna Book 89:

When a devotee realizes the effect of association with the Supreme Lord, he naturally hates the association of so-called society, friendship and love. This detachment is not dry but is due to achieving a higher status of life by relishing transcendental mellows. It is further stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that after attainment of such knowledge and such detachment from material sense gratification, one's advancement in the eight opulences attained through mystic yoga practice, such as the aṇimā, laghimā and prāpti siddhis, is also achieved without separate effort. The perfect example is Mahārāja Ambarīṣa. He was not a mystic yogī but a great devotee, yet in a disagreement with Mahārāja Ambarīṣa, the great mystic Durvāsā was defeated in the presence of the King's devotional attitude. In other words, a devotee does not need to practice the mystic yoga system to achieve power. The power is behind him by the grace of the Lord, just as when a small child is surrendered to a powerful father, all the powers of the father are behind him.

Renunciation Through Wisdom

The owners can then distribute prasādam, offered food, to everyone. This practice will repair any disagreements between worker and owner, because both will become karma-yogīs.
Renunciation Through Wisdom 1.7:

Previously, sages arranged for Lord Viṣṇu's Deity to be worshiped in practically every household, thereby creating the atmosphere for people to become karma-yogīs. Similarly, it is now urgent that similar arrangements be made to worship and serve Lord Viṣṇu in the huge factories, mercantile firms, hospitals, and so on. This can firmly establish true equality among men under a spiritual banner. Lord Nārāyaṇa is not poor; He is the Supreme Lord of Lords. And hence attempts to say that the poor people are "Nārāyaṇas" is foolish. Rather, by widely organizing the worship and service of the Lord, one can greatly benefit everyone, including the poor. The Supreme Personality of Godhead manifests Himself in many forms, but the sages have chosen three of His multifarious forms to serve and worship as the Deity. They are Lakṣmī-Nārāyaṇa, Sītā-Rāma, and Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa. These three Deity couples are widely worshiped all over the Indian subcontinent. Therefore, we request the owners of large factories and business firms to establish the worship and service of any of these three Deities in their establishments. The owners can then distribute prasādam, offered food, to everyone. This practice will repair any disagreements between worker and owner, because both will become karma-yogīs.

Mukunda-mala-stotra (mantras 1 to 6 only)

Prahlāda Mahārāja persisted in disagreeing with his father, the great atheist Hiraṇyakaśipu, and thus voluntarily accepted the cruelties his father inflicted upon him.
Mukunda-mala-stotra mantra 1, Purport:

An example of such a pure devotee is Lord Jesus Christ, who agreed to be mercilessly crucified rather than give up preaching on behalf of God. He was never prepared to compromise on the issue of believing in God. Such a son of God cannot be other than dear to the Lord. Similarly, when Ṭhākura Haridāsa was told to give up chanting the holy name of God, he refused to do so, with the result that he was flogged in twenty-two marketplaces. And Prahlāda Mahārāja persisted in disagreeing with his father, the great atheist Hiraṇyakaśipu, and thus voluntarily accepted the cruelties his father inflicted upon him. These are some examples of renowned devotees of the Lord, and we should simply try to understand how dear such devotees are to Him.

The Lord has emphatically declared that no one can vanquish His devotee under any circumstances. A good example is Ambarīṣa Mahārāja. When the great mystic yogī Durvāsā deliberately attempted to take the life of Ambarīṣa, the Lord suitably punished Durvāsā, even though he was a powerful yogī who could approach all the demigods and even the Lord Himself.

Page Title:Disagreement (CC and other books)
Compiler:Laksmipriya, Serene
Created:23 of Dec, 2008
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=13, OB=12, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:25