Offensive (BG and SB)

Expressions researched:
" offensively" |" offensiveness" |"offensive"

BG Chapters 1 - 6

BG 5.7, Purport:

A man of controlled senses cannot be offensive to anyone. One may ask, "Why then was Arjuna offensive (in battle) to others? Wasn't he in Kṛṣṇa consciousness?" Arjuna was only superficially offensive because (as has already been explained in the Second Chapter) all the assembled persons on the battlefield would continue to live individually, as the soul cannot be slain. So, spiritually, no one was killed on the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra. Only their dresses were changed by the order of Kṛṣṇa, who was personally present. Therefore Arjuna, while fighting on the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra, was not really fighting at all; he was simply carrying out the orders of Kṛṣṇa in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Such a person is never entangled in the reactions of work.

BG Chapters 13 - 18

BG 16.1-3, Purport:

Apaiśunam means that one should not find fault with others or correct them unnecessarily. Of course to call a thief a thief is not faultfinding, but to call an honest person a thief is very much offensive for one who is making advancement in spiritual life.

SB Canto 1

SB 1.18.47, Purport:

A question may be raised herein that since it was the desire of the Lord that Parīkṣit Mahārāja be put into that awkward position so that he might be delivered from material existence, then why was a brāhmaṇa's son made responsible for this offensive act? The answer is that the offensive act was performed by a child only so that he could be excused very easily, and thus the prayer of the father was accepted. But if the question is raised why the brāhmaṇa community as a whole was made responsible for allowing Kali into the world affairs, the answer is given in the Varāha Purāṇa that the demons who acted inimically toward the Personality of Godhead but were not killed by the Lord were allowed to take birth in the families of brāhmaṇas to take advantage of the age of Kali. The all-merciful Lord gave them a chance to have their births in the families of pious brāhmaṇas so that they could progress toward salvation. But the demons, instead of utilizing the good opportunity, misused the brahminical culture due to being puffed up by vanity in becoming brāhmaṇas. The typical example is the son of Śamīka Ṛṣi, and all the foolish sons of brāhmaṇas are warned hereby not to become as foolish as Śṛṅgi and be always on guard against the demoniac qualities which they had in their previous births.

SB Canto 2

SB 2.2.30, Purport:

There are three stages in chanting the holy name of the Lord. The first stage is the offensive chanting of the holy name, and the second is the reflective stage of chanting the holy name. The third stage is the offenseless chanting of the holy name of the Lord. In the second stage only, the stage of reflection, between the offensive and offenseless stages, one automatically attains the stage of emancipation. And in the offenseless stage, one actually enters into the kingdom of God, although physically he may apparently be within the material world.

SB Canto 3

SB 3.5.45, Translation:

O great Supreme Lord, offensive persons whose internal vision has been too affected by external materialistic activities cannot see Your lotus feet, but they are seen by Your pure devotees, whose one and only aim is to transcendentally enjoy Your activities.

SB 3.5.45, Purport:

The theory of the reflection of the Supreme can be clearly understood without difficulty by any sincere common man. When there is a reflection of the sky on the water, both the sky and the stars are seen within the water, but it is understood that the sky and the stars are not to be accepted on the same level. The stars are parts of the sky, and therefore they cannot be equal to the whole. The sky is the whole, and the stars are parts. They cannot be one and the same. Transcendentalists who do not accept the supreme consciousness as separate from the individual consciousness are as offensive as the materialists who deny even the existence of the Lord.

SB 3.9.7, Purport:

The next question is why people are against such auspicious activities as chanting and hearing the glories and pastimes of the Lord, which can bring total freedom from the cares and anxieties of material existence. The only answer to this question is that they are unfortunate because of supernatural control due to their offensive activities performed simply for the sake of sense gratification. The Lord's pure devotees, however, take compassion upon such unfortunate persons and, in a missionary spirit, try to persuade them into the line of devotional service. Only by the grace of pure devotees can such unfortunate men be elevated to the position of transcendental service.

SB 3.15.25, Purport:

When one is free from all ten of these offenses in chanting the holy name of God, he develops the ecstatic bodily features called pulakāśru. Pulaka means "symptoms of happiness," and aśru means "tears in the eyes." The symptoms of happiness and tears in the eyes must appear in a person who has chanted the holy name offenselessly. Here in this verse it is stated that those who have actually developed the symptoms of happiness and tears in the eyes by chanting the glories of the Lord are eligible to enter the kingdom of God. In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta it is said that if one does not develop these symptoms while chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, it is to be understood that he is still offensive.

SB 3.15.39, Purport:

When the Lord came, He was pleased with everyone; therefore it is stated here, kṛtsna-prasāda-sumukham. The Lord knew that even the offensive doormen were His pure devotees, although by chance they committed an offense at the feet of other devotees.

SB 3.26.45, Translation:

Odor, although one, becomes many—as mixed, offensive, fragrant, mild, strong, acidic and so on—according to the proportions of associated substances.

SB 3.33.7, Purport:

It is said that those who simply chant the holy name with the tip of the tongue are glorious. One does not even have to chant the holy name and understand the whole procedure, namely the offensive stage, offenseless stage and pure stage; if the holy name is sounded on the tip of the tongue, that is also sufficient.

SB Canto 4

SB 4.4.10, Purport:

When Viṣṇu or a Vaiṣṇava is blasphemed or dishonored, one should be very angry. Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura said, krodha bhakta-dveṣi jane. We have anger, and that anger can be a great quality when directed against a person who is envious of the Supreme Personality of Godhead or His devotee. One should not be tolerant when a person is offensive towards Viṣṇu or a Vaiṣṇava. The anger of Satī towards her father was not objectionable, for although he was her father, he was trying to insult the greatest Vaiṣṇava. Thus Satī's anger against her father was quite applaudable.

SB 4.4.23, Purport:

The word dākṣāyaṇī means "the daughter of King Dakṣa." Sometimes, when there was relaxed conversation between husband and wife, Lord Śiva used to call Satī "the daughter of King Dakṣa," and because this very word reminded her about her family relationship with King Dakṣa, she at once became ashamed because Dakṣa was an incarnation of all offenses. Dakṣa was the embodiment of envy, for he unnecessarily blasphemed a great personality, Lord Śiva. Simply upon hearing the word dākṣāyaṇī, she felt afflicted because of reference to the context because her body was the symbol of all the offensiveness with which Dakṣa was endowed. Since her body was constantly a source of unhappiness, she decided to give it up.

SB 4.8.57, Purport:

In the Brahma-saṁhitā it is said, ānanda-cinmaya-rasa-pratibhāvitābhiḥ: (Bs. 5.37) one should not mistake the appearance of the Lord as a human being or a beast to be the same as the birth of an ordinary conditioned soul, who is forced to appear by the laws of nature, whether as an animal, as a human being or as a demigod. This kind of thinking is offensive. Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu has condemned the Māyāvādīs as offensive to the Supreme Personality of Godhead because of their thinking that the Lord and the conditioned living entities are one and the same.

SB 4.11.33, Purport:

Lord Manu stated that Dhruva Mahārāja had been offensive to Lord Śiva and his brother Kuvera because the Yakṣas belonged to Kuvera's family. They were not ordinary persons. As such, they have been described as puṇya janān, pious men. Somehow or other the mind of Kuvera had been agitated, and Dhruva Mahārāja was advised to pacify him.

SB 4.13.31, Translation:

The head priests said: O King, in this life we do not find any sinful activity, even within your mind, so you are not in the least offensive. But we can see that in your previous life you performed sinful activities due to which, in spite of your having all qualifications, you have no son.

SB 4.24.32, Purport:

When a mantra is chanted by a great devotee, the mantra becomes more powerful. Although the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra is powerful in itself, a disciple upon initiation receives the mantra from his spiritual master, for when the mantra is chanted by the spiritual master, it becomes more powerful. Lord Śiva advised the sons of the King to hear him attentively, for inattentive hearing is offensive.

SB Canto 5

SB 5.13.23, Purport:

King Rahūgaṇa was very repentant because he had forced Jaḍa Bharata to carry his palanquin. He therefore began offering prayers to all kinds of brāhmaṇas and self-realized persons, even though they might be playing like children or hiding in some guises. The four Kumāras walked everywhere in the guise of five-year-old boys, and similarly there are many brāhmaṇas, knowers of Brahman, who traverse the globe either as young men, children or avadhūtas. Being puffed up due to their position, the royal dynasties generally offend these great personalities. Therefore King Rahūgaṇa began to offer his respectful obeisances unto them so that the offensive royal dynasties might not glide down into a hellish condition.

SB 5.13.24, Purport:

A saintly devotee is certainly very tolerant. He is the friend of all living entities, and he does not create enemies within the world. A pure devotee has all the qualities of a sādhu. Jaḍa Bharata is an example of this. Due to the material body, his senses were certainly agitated when he was insulted by King Rahūgaṇa, but later, due to the King's humble submission, Jaḍa Bharata excused him. It is the duty of everyone desiring to return to Godhead to become submissive like King Rahūgaṇa and beg pardon of Vaiṣṇavas one may have offended. Vaiṣṇavas are generally very kindhearted; therefore if one immediately submits himself at the lotus feet of a Vaiṣṇava, one is immediately cleared of offensive reactions. If one does not do so, the reactions will remain, and the results will not be very palatable.

SB Canto 6

SB 6.2.8, Purport:

Previously, when engaged in sinful activities to maintain his family, Ajāmila chanted the name of Nārāyaṇa without offenses. To chant the holy name of the Lord just to counteract one's sinful activities, or to commit sinful activities on the strength of chanting the holy name, is offensive (nāmno balād yasya hi pāpa-buddhiḥ). But although Ajāmila engaged in sinful activities, he never chanted the holy name of Nārāyaṇa to counteract them; he simply chanted the name Nārāyaṇa to call his son. Therefore his chanting was effective.

SB 6.3.32, Purport:

Even if one chants the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra offensively, one can avoid offenses by continuously chanting without deviation. One who becomes accustomed to this practice will always remain in a pure transcendental position, untouchable by sinful reactions.

SB Canto 7

SB 7.5.23-24, Purport:

While chanting the holy name of the Lord, one should be careful to avoid ten offenses. From Sanat-kumāra it is understood that even if a person is a severe offender in many ways, he is freed from offensive life if he takes shelter of the Lord's holy name.

SB Canto 8

SB 8.3.2, Purport:

Arcye viṣṇau śilā-dhīḥ: everyone knows that the Deity in the temple is made of stone, but to think that the Deity is merely stone is an offense. Similarly, to think that the body of the spiritual master consists of material ingredients is offensive. Atheists think that devotees foolishly worship a stone statue as God and an ordinary man as the guru. The fact is, however, that by the grace of Kṛṣṇa's omnipotence, the so-called stone statue of the Deity is directly the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and the body of the spiritual master is directly spiritual.

SB 8.3.31, Purport:

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura specifically hints that since Gajendra was in such a difficult position and was praying for the mercy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the demigods, who could have immediately gone to his rescue, hesitated to go there. Since they considered Gajendra's prayer to be directed toward the Lord, they felt offended, and this in itself was offensive. Consequently, when the Lord went there, they also went and offered prayers to the Lord so that their offense might be excused.

SB Canto 9

SB 9.8 Summary:

While searching for the horse, the sons of Sumati extensively dug up the surface of the earth and in this way dug a trench, which later became known as the Sāgara Ocean. In the course of this search, they came upon the great personality Kapiladeva and thought Him to have stolen the horse. With this offensive understanding, they attacked Him and were all burned to ashes.

SB 9.15.23, Purport:

Kārtavīryārjuna had no business going to the residence of Jamadagni, but because he was puffed-up by his extraordinary power, he went there and offended Paraśurāma. This was the prelude to his being killed by Paraśurāma for his offensive act.

SB 9.16.9, Purport:

Jamadagni was certainly very powerful due to his austerities, but because of a slight offense by his poor wife, Reṇukā, he ordered that she be killed. This certainly was a sinful act, and therefore Jamadagni was killed by the sons of Kārtavīryārjuna, as described herein. Lord Paraśurāma was also infected by sin because of killing Kārtavīryārjuna, although this was not very offensive. Therefore, whether one be Kārtavīryārjuna, Lord Paraśurāma, Jamadagni or whoever one may be, one must act very cautiously and sagaciously; otherwise one must suffer the results of sinful activities. This is the lesson we receive from Vedic literature.

SB Canto 10.1 to 10.13

SB 10.9.11, Purport:

Even the most powerful Yamarāja fears Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, as we find in the history of Ajāmila, Yamarāja instructed his followers not even to approach the devotees, what to speak of capturing them. In other words, Yamarāja also fears Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's devotees. Yet this Kṛṣṇa became so dependent on mother Yaśodā that when she simply showed Kṛṣṇa the stick in her hand, Kṛṣṇa admitted to being an offender and began to cry like an ordinary child. Mother Yaśodā, of course, did not want to chastise her beloved child very much, and therefore she immediately threw her stick away and simply rebuked Kṛṣṇa, saying, "Now I shall bind You so that You cannot commit any further offensive activities. Nor for the time being can You play with Your playmates." This shows the position of a pure devotee, in contrast with others, like jñānīs, yogīs and the followers of Vedic ritualistic ceremonies, in regarding the transcendental nature of the Absolute Truth.

SB 10.10.41, Purport:

If by chance one meets a sādhu, a devotee, one's life is immediately successful, and one is freed from material bondage. It may be argued that whereas someone may receive a sādhu with great respect, someone else may not receive a sādhu with such respect. A sādhu, however, is always equipoised toward everyone. Because of being a pure devotee, a sādhu is always ready to deliver Kṛṣṇa consciousness without discrimination. As soon as one sees a sādhu, one naturally becomes free. Nonetheless, persons who are too much offensive, who commit vaiṣṇava-aparādhas, or offenses to a sādhu, will have to take some time before being rectified. This is also indicated herein.