Protest (Books)

Expressions researched:
"protest" |"protested" |"protester" |"protesters" |"protesting" |"protestors" |"protests"

BG Chapters 1 - 6

BG 4.21, Purport:

As a machine part requires oiling and cleaning for maintenance, so a Kṛṣṇa conscious man maintains himself by his work just to remain fit for action in the transcendental loving service of the Lord. He is therefore immune to all the reactions of his endeavors. Like an animal, he has no proprietorship even over his own body. A cruel proprietor of an animal sometimes kills the animal in his possession, yet the animal does not protest. Nor does it have any real independence. A Kṛṣṇa conscious person, fully engaged in self-realization, has very little time to falsely possess any material object. For maintaining body and soul, he does not require unfair means of accumulating money. He does not, therefore, become contaminated by such material sins. He is free from all reactions to his actions.

BG Chapters 7 - 12

BG 12.13-14, Purport:

A pure devotee is never disturbed in any circumstances. Nor is he envious of anyone. Nor does a devotee become his enemy's enemy; he thinks, "This person is acting as my enemy due to my own past misdeeds. So it is better to suffer than to protest." In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.14.8) it is stated: tat te 'nukampāṁ su-samīkṣamāṇo bhuñjāna evātma-kṛtaṁ vipākam. Whenever a devotee is in distress or has fallen into difficulty, he thinks that it is the Lord's mercy upon him.

BG Chapters 13 - 18

BG 18.78, Purport:

There are many less intelligent persons who take Bhagavad-gītā to be a discussion of topics between two friends on a battlefield. But such a book cannot be scripture. Some may protest that Kṛṣṇa incited Arjuna to fight, which is immoral, but the reality of the situation is clearly stated: Bhagavad-gītā is the supreme instruction in morality.

SB Preface and Introduction

SB Introduction:

The next day Nityānanda Prabhu went to see the brothers, and as soon as He approached them one of them threw a piece of earthen pot at Him. This struck Him on the forehead, and immediately blood began to flow. But Nityānanda Prabhu was so kind that instead of protesting this heinous act, He said, "It does not matter that you have thrown this stone at Me.

SB Canto 1

SB 1.2.16, Purport:

They never tolerate being called God. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was God Himself according to the indication of the revealed scriptures, but He played the part of a devotee. People who knew Him to be God addressed Him as God, but He used to block His ears with His hands and chant the name of Lord Viṣṇu. He strongly protested against being called God, although undoubtedly He was God Himself. The Lord behaves so to warn us against unscrupulous men who take pleasure in being addressed as God.

SB 1.7.42, Purport:

Even to date, in a Hindu family a woman shows proper respect to the brāhmaṇa caste, however fallen and heinous a brahma-bandhu may be. But the men have begun to protest against brahma-bandhus who are born in families of good brāhmaṇas but by action are less than śūdras.

SB 1.14.9, Purport:

Personal labor must be there in addition to the Lord's benediction, but without the Lord's benediction no one is successful simply by personal labor. The modernized man of Kali-yuga believes in personal endeavor and denies the benediction of the Supreme Lord. Even a great sannyāsī of India delivered speeches in Chicago protesting the benedictions of the Supreme Lord. But as far as Vedic śāstras are concerned, as we find in the pages of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the ultimate sanction for all success rests in the hands of the Supreme Lord.

SB 1.15.16, Purport:

He tried to take her away forcibly on his chariot, and at first Draupadī gave him a good dashing, and he fell like a cut-root tree. But he was not discouraged, and he was able to force Draupadī to sit on the chariot. This incident was seen by Dhaumya Muni, and he strongly protested the action of Jayadratha. He also followed the chariot, and through Dhātreyikā the matter was brought to the notice of Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira.

SB Canto 2

SB 2.5.10, Purport:

If we scrutinize the characters who took part in the Battle of Kurukṣetra, we may find that Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira was no less a pious king than Lord Rāmacandra, and by character study Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira was a better moralist than Lord Kṛṣṇa. Lord Kṛṣṇa asked Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira to lie, but Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira protested. But that does not mean that Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira could be equal to Lord Rāmacandra or Lord Kṛṣṇa.

SB 2.7.8, Purport:

His stepmother did not like the King's patting her stepson, so she dragged him out, saying that he could not claim to sit on the lap of the King because he was not born out of her womb. The little boy felt insulted by this act of his stepmother. Nor did his father make any protest, for he was too attached to his second wife.

SB Canto 3

SB 3.12.29, Purport:

The sages like Marīci were not in the wrong in submitting their protests against the acts of their great father. They knew very well that even though their father committed a mistake, there must have been some great purpose behind the show, otherwise such a great personality could not have committed such a mistake. It might be that Brahmā wanted to warn his subordinates about human frailties in their dealings with women.

SB Canto 4

SB 4.8.14, Translation:

The sage Maitreya continued: My dear Vidura, as a snake, when struck by a stick, breathes very heavily, Dhruva Mahārāja, having been struck by the strong words of his stepmother, began to breathe very heavily because of great anger. When he saw that his father was silent and did not protest, he immediately left the palace and went to his mother.

SB Canto 5

SB 5.9 Summary:

In this chapter Bharata Mahārāja's attainment of the body of a brāhmaṇa is described. In this body he remained like one dull, deaf and dumb, so much so that when he was brought before the goddess Kālī to be killed as a sacrifice, he never protested but remained silent. After having given up the body of a deer, he took birth in the womb of the youngest wife of a brāhmaṇa.

SB 5.9.9-10, Translation:

Degraded men are actually no better than animals. The only difference is that animals have four legs and such men have only two. These two-legged, animalistic men used to call Jaḍa Bharata mad, dull, deaf and dumb. They mistreated him, and Jaḍa Bharata behaved for them like a madman who was deaf, blind or dull. He did not protest or try to convince them that he was not so. If others wanted him to do something, he acted according to their desires.

SB 5.9.14, Purport:

In the body of a brāhmaṇa, Bharata Mahārāja appeared deaf and dumb, yet he was the most intelligent man in the world. Nonetheless, being completely surrendered unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he remained in that condition and did not protest being brought before the deity for slaughter. As we have learned from the previous verses, he was very strong and could have very easily avoided being bound with ropes, but he did not do anything.

SB 5.10 Summary:

A carrier of King Rahūgaṇa's palanquin was needed, and to fulfill this need the chief carriers found Jaḍa Bharata as the most likely person to do the work. He was therefore forced to carry the palanquin. Jaḍa Bharata, however, did not protest this proud order, but humbly accepted the job and carried the palanquin. While carrying it, however, he was very careful to see that he did not step on an ant, and whenever he saw one, he would stop until the ant had passed. Because of this, he could not keep pace with the other carriers.

SB 5.10 Summary:

The King within the palanquin became very disturbed and chastised Jaḍa Bharata with filthy language, but Jaḍa Bharata, being completely freed from the bodily conception, did not protest; he proceeded carrying the palanquin. When he continued as before, the King threatened him with punishment, and being threatened by the King, Jaḍa Bharata began to talk. He protested against the filthy language used by the King when the King chastised him, and the King, hearing the instructions of Jaḍa Bharata, was awakened to his real knowledge.

SB 5.10.6, Purport:

Even if the body were killed, he would not have cared, for he was thoroughly convinced of the proposition found in Bhagavad-gītā (2.20): na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre. He knew that he could not be killed even if his body were killed. Although he did not protest, the Supreme Personality of Godhead in His agent could not tolerate the injustice of the dacoits; therefore he was saved by the mercy of Kṛṣṇa, and the dacoits were killed.

SB 5.13.1, Purport:

The next body has to be immediately accepted according to karma. One will be forced to accept a certain type of body, and protesting will not help. That is the stringent law of nature. Due to the living entity's ignorance of his eternal blissful life, he becomes attracted to material activities under the spell of māyā. In this world, he can never experience happiness, yet he works very hard to do so. This is called māyā.

SB Canto 6

SB 6.1.16, Purport:

Such a devotee is unconcerned with hell and heaven; he is simply attached to rendering service to Kṛṣṇa. When a devotee is put into hellish conditions, he accepts them as Kṛṣṇa's mercy: tat te 'nukampāṁ susamīkṣamāṇaḥ (SB 10.14.8). He does not protest, "Oh, I am such a great devotee of Kṛṣṇa. Why have I been put into this misery?" Instead he thinks, "This is Kṛṣṇa's mercy." Such an attitude is possible for a devotee who engages in the service of Kṛṣṇa's representative. This is the secret of success.

SB 6.12.15, Purport:

He never laments or aspires for anything. Since everything is supplied by the Supreme Lord, the living entity, being fully dependent on Him, should not protest or accept anything in terms of his personal sense gratification; rather, he should receive everything as the mercy of the Lord and remain steady in all circumstances.

SB 6.17.9, Purport:

The members of the assembly surrounding Lord Śiva could also understand Citraketu's purpose. Consequently, following the behavior of Lord Śiva, they did not protest; instead, following their master, they remained silent. If the members of the assembly thought that Citraketu had blasphemed Lord Śiva, they would certainly have left at once, blocking their ears with their hands.

SB Canto 7

SB 7.8.34, Purport:

When the Lord sat on the throne of Hiraṇyakaśipu, there was no one to protest; no enemy came forward on behalf of Hiraṇyakaśipu to fight with the Lord. This means that His supremacy was immediately accepted by the demons. Another point is that although Hiraṇyakaśipu treated the Lord as his bitterest enemy, he was the Lord's faithful servant in Vaikuṇṭha, and therefore the Lord had no hesitation in sitting on the throne that Hiraṇyakaśipu had so laboriously created.

SB 7.11.17, Purport:

Even a kṣatriya cannot accept the duties of a brāhmaṇa unless there is an emergency, and then even if he does so he should not accept charity from anyone else. Sometimes brāhmaṇas protest against our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement for creating brāhmaṇas from Europeans, or, in other words, from mlecchas and yavanas. This movement, however, is here supported in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. At the present moment, society is in a chaotic condition, and everyone has given up the cultivation of spiritual life, which is especially meant for the brāhmaṇas.

SB 7.14.35, Purport:

This is a reference to the Rājasūya sacrifice performed by Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira. In that meeting there was a great turmoil over selecting the best person to be worshiped first. Everyone decided to worship Śrī Kṛṣṇa. The only protest came from Śiśupāla, and because of his vehement opposition he was killed by the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

SB Canto 8

SB 8.7.3, Translation:

The leaders of the demons thought it unwise to hold the tail, the inauspicious portion of the snake. Instead, they wanted to hold the front, which had been taken by the Personality of Godhead and the demigods, because that portion was auspicious and glorious. Thus the demons, on the plea that they were all highly advanced students of Vedic knowledge and were all famous for their birth and activities, protested that they wanted to hold the front of the snake.

SB 8.7.3, Purport:

We have actually seen this in relation to our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. We are advocating cow protection and encouraging people to drink more milk and eat palatable preparations made of milk, but the demons, just to protest such proposals, are claiming that they are advanced in scientific knowledge, as described here by the words svādhyāya-śruta-sampannāḥ. They say that according to their scientific way, they have discovered that milk is dangerous and that the beef obtained by killing cows is very nutritious. This difference of opinion will always continue.

SB 8.8.3, Translation:

Thereafter, a horse named Uccaiḥśravā, which was as white as the moon, was generated. Bali Mahārāja desired to possess this horse, and Indra, the King of heaven, did not protest, for he had previously been so advised by the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

SB Canto 9

SB 9.15.25, Purport:

This is the injunction of Bhagavad-gītā. In the matter of protecting the cows, the meat-eaters will protest, but in answer to them we may say that since Kṛṣṇa gives stress to cow protection, those who are inclined to eat meat may eat the flesh of unimportant animals like hogs, dogs, goats and sheep, but they should not touch the life of the cows, for this is destructive to the spiritual advancement of human society.

SB Cantos 10.14 to 12 (Translations Only)

SB 10.61.39, Translation:

When His brother-in-law Rukmī was slain, Lord Kṛṣṇa neither applauded nor protested, O King, for He feared jeopardizing His affectionate ties with either Rukmiṇī or Balarāma.

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

Great souls assert that Nārāyaṇa, who is known as the Paramātmā, or Supersoul, is beyond material nature, and this is in accordance with the statements of the Vedic literature. Māyāvādīs also agree that Nārāyaṇa can expand Himself in various forms. Śaṅkara says that he does not attempt to argue that portion of the devotees' understanding, but he must protest the idea that Saṅkarṣaṇa is produced from Vāsudeva, Pradyumna is produced from Saṅkarṣaṇa, and Aniruddha is produced from Pradyumna, for if Saṅkarṣaṇa is understood to represent the living entities created from the body of Vāsudeva, the living entities would have to be noneternal.

CC Adi 5.132, Purport:

In this connection we may mention an incident that took place between two of our sannyāsīs while we were preaching the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra in Hyderabad. One of them stated that "Hare Rāma" refers to Śrī Balarāma, and the other protested that "Hare Rāma" means Lord Rāma. Ultimately the controversy came to me, and I gave the decision that if someone says that the "Rāma" in "Hare Rāma" is Lord Rāmacandra and someone else says that the "Rāma" in "Hare Rāma" is Śrī Balarāma, both are correct because there is no difference between Śrī Balarāma and Lord Rāma.

CC Adi 7.26, Purport:

Here again it may be emphasized that although jealous rascals protest that Europeans and Americans cannot be given the sacred thread or sannyāsa, there is no need even to consider whether one is a gentleman or a rogue because this is a spiritual movement which is not concerned with the external body of skin and bones. Because it is being properly conducted under the guidance of the Pañca-tattva, strictly following the regulative principles, it has nothing to do with external impediments.

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.

CC Adi 7.144, Purport:

The Māyāvādīs' primary occupation is to offend the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. For example, although Kṛṣṇa demands our surrender in the Bhagavad-gītā, the greatest scholar and so-called philosopher in modern India has protested that it is "not to Kṛṣṇa" that we have to surrender. Therefore, he is envious. Since Māyāvādīs of all different descriptions are envious of Kṛṣṇa, they have no scope for understanding the meaning of the Vedānta-sūtra.

CC Adi 10.60, Purport:

A nephew of Śivānanda Sena's named Śrīkānta left the company in protest of Nityānanda Prabhu's curse and went directly to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu at Jagannātha Purī, where the Lord pacified him. On that occasion, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu allowed His toe to be sucked by Purī dāsa, who was then a child. It is by the order of Caitanya Mahāprabhu that he could immediately compose Sanskrit verses.

CC Adi 10.63, Purport:

When Lord Nityānanda Prabhu rebuked Śivānanda Sena on the way to Purī, these two nephews of Śivānanda left the company as a protest and went to see Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu at Jagannātha Purī. The Lord could understand the feelings of the boys, and He asked His personal assistant, Govinda, to supply them prasādam until the party of Śivānanda arrived.

CC Adi 14.74, Translation:

When mother Śacī saw her boy sitting on the rejected pots, she protested, "Why have You touched these untouchable pots? You have now become impure. Go and bathe in the Ganges."

CC Adi 17.28, Translation:

“For even if one cuts a tree, it never protests, and even if it is drying up and dying, it does not ask anyone for water.

CC Adi 17.31, Purport:

The grass is specifically mentioned in this verse because everyone tramples upon it yet the grass never protests. This example indicates that a spiritual master or leader should not be proud of his position; being always humbler than an ordinary common man, he should go on preaching the cult of Caitanya Mahāprabhu by chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra.

CC Adi 17.70, Purport:

After the mass nagara-saṅkīrtana in protest against the magistrate Chand Kazi, the Kazi was converted to a devotee. Then Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu returned with His saṅkīrtana party to the house of Śrīdhara, and Chand Kazi followed Him. All the devotees rested there for some time and drank water from Śrīdhara's damaged iron pot.

CC Adi 17.141, Translation:

The loud sound of the chanting of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra certainly made the Kazi very much afraid, and he hid himself within his room. Hearing the people thus protesting, murmuring in great anger, the Kazi would not come out of his home.

CC Adi 17.141, Purport:

The Kazi's order not to perform saṅkīrtana could stand only as long as there was no civil disobedience. Under the leadership of the Supreme Lord, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the chanters, increasing in number, disobeyed the order of the Kazi. Thousands assembled together and formed parties, chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra and making a tumultuous sound of protest. Thus the Kazi was very much afraid, as naturally one should be under such circumstances.

CC Adi 17.141, Purport:

In the present day also, people all over the world may join together in the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement and protest against the present degraded governments of the world's godless societies, which are based on all kinds of sinful activities. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam states that in the Age of Kali, thieves, rogues and fourth-class people who have neither education nor culture capture the seats of governments to exploit the citizens. This is a symptom of Kali-yuga that has already appeared.

CC Adi 17.141, Purport:

People cannot feel secure about their lives and property, yet the so-called governments continue, and government ministers get fat salaries, although they are unable to do anything good for society. The only remedy for such conditions is to enhance the saṅkīrtana movement under the banner of Kṛṣṇa consciousness and protest against the sinful activities of all the world's governments.

CC Adi 17.212, Purport:

The pāṣaṇḍīs say that when these lower-class men are allowed to chant, their influence is enhanced. They do not like the idea that others should also develop spiritual qualities, because this would curb their false pride in having taken birth in families of the elevated brāhmaṇa caste, with a monopoly on spiritual activities. But despite all protests from so-called Hindus and members of the brāhmaṇa caste, we are propagating the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement all over the world, according to the injunctions of the śāstras and the order of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

CC Adi 17.217, Purport:

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.

CC Adi 17.218, Purport:

Here the Supreme Lord, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, confirms that anyone who chants the holy names Hari, Kṛṣṇa and Nārāyaṇa without offense is certainly extremely fortunate, and whether Indian or non-Indian, Hindu or non-Hindu, he immediately comes to the level of the most pious personality. We therefore do not care about the statements of pāṣaṇḍīs who protest against our movement's making the members of other cities or countries into Vaiṣṇavas. We have to follow in the footsteps of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, executing our mission peacefully, or, if necessary, kicking the heads of such protesters.

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 1.197, Purport:

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. Unfortunately, such mlecchas and yavanas are in executive power.

CC Madhya 10 Summary:

However, when Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya addressed Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu as Kṛṣṇa, the Lord immediately protested. In the meantime, Kāśīśvara Gosvāmī also came to see Caitanya Mahāprabhu. In this chapter, devotees from many different areas come to see Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and they are exactly like many rivers that come from many places to finally flow into the sea.

CC Madhya 10.182, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was a little embarrassed by the Bhaṭṭācārya's statement; therefore He uttered the name Viṣṇu to save Himself. The Lord herein confirms that if one is overestimated, glorification is just another form of blasphemy. In this way He protests this so-called offensive statement.

CC Madhya 14.200, Translation:

“"Actually She has no desire to stop Kṛṣṇa"s endeavor to touch Her body with His hands, yet Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī, whose thighs are like the trunk of a baby elephant, protests His advances and, sweetly smiling, admonishes Him. At such times She cries without tears on Her charming face.’

CC Madhya 18.111, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu immediately stated that a living being, however exalted he may be, should never be compared to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. All of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's preaching protests the monistic philosophy of the Māyāvāda school. The central point of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is that the jīva, the living entity, can never be accepted as Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu. This viewpoint is elaborated in the following verses.

CC Madhya 18.113, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu immediately protested this unauthorized system, specifically mentioning that a sannyāsī is nothing but a fragmental portion of the Supreme (cit-kaṇa jīva). In other words, he is nothing more than an ordinary living being. He is never Nārāyaṇa, just as a molecular portion of sunshine is never the sun itself. The living entity is nothing but a fragmental part of the Absolute Truth; therefore at no stage of perfection can a living entity become the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This Māyāvāda viewpoint is always condemned by the Vaiṣṇava school. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself protested this philosophy.

CC Madhya 25.78, Translation:

When Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī supported himself by quoting the verse from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu immediately protested by uttering the holy name of Lord Viṣṇu. The Lord then presented Himself as a most fallen living entity, and He said, "If someone accepts a fallen conditioned soul as Viṣṇu, Bhagavān, or an incarnation, he commits a great offense."

CC Antya-lila

CC Antya 2.97, Translation:

In spite of Svarūpa Dāmodara's protest, Bhagavān Ācārya continued, "We are all fixed at the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa with our hearts and souls. Therefore the Śārīraka-bhāṣya cannot change our minds."

CC Antya 2.157, Translation:

"We cannot see his material form," they said, "but still we hear his sweet singing. Therefore he must have become a ghost." Svarūpa Dāmodara, however, protested, “This is a false guess.

CC Antya 3.178, Translation:

Haridāsa Ṭhākura protested, “These two benedictions are not the true result of chanting the holy name. Actually, by chanting the holy name without offenses, one awakens his ecstatic love for the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa.

CC Antya 9.117, Purport:

When the King heard the details of Gopīnātha Paṭṭanāyaka's unfortunate condemnation, he was induced to excuse his debt, in particular because he felt that Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was very sorry about this incident. The Lord did not like the idea that the money forfeited to Gopīnātha Paṭṭanāyaka was indirectly a contribution to Him. Therefore He immediately protested.

CC Antya 20.23, Translation:

“When a tree is cut down, it does not protest, and even when drying up, it does not ask anyone for water.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 16:

Please tell me how I can get rid of all the offenses and sinful activities which I have accumulated. I am surrendering unto your feet. Please save me from all the reactions of my sinful activities which I have committed in the past, and please direct me to the proper path so that I can be free."

"If you actually want to follow my directions, I can tell you the real path by which you can be freed from sinful reactions."

"I shall follow whatever you say without hesitation," the hunter agreed.

Nārada then told him to first break his bow; only then would he disclose the path of liberation.

"You are asking me to break my bow," the hunter protested, "but if I break it, what will be the means of my livelihood?"

"Don't worry about your livelihood," Nārada said. "I shall send you sufficient grains in order to live.',

The hunter then broke his bow and fell down at the feet of Nārada. Nārada got him to stand up, and he instructed him: "Just go to your home and distribute whatever money and valuables you have to the devotees and the brāhmaṇas. Then just come out and follow me wearing only one cloth.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 17:

The most astonishing fact is that Lord Caitanya, although the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, never displayed Himself as Kṛṣṇa. Rather, whenever He was detected by intelligent devotees as Lord Kṛṣṇa and was addressed as Lord Kṛṣṇa, He denied it. Indeed, He sometimes placed His hands over His ears, protesting that one should not be addressed as the Supreme Lord. Indirectly, He was teaching the Māyāvādī philosophers that one should not falsely pose himself as the Supreme Lord and thereby misguide people. Nor should followers be foolish enough to accept anyone and everyone as the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 22:

When Lord Caitanya thus heard Himself equated with Kṛṣṇa, He mildly protested. He wanted to warn people in general not to compare the Supreme Lord with any living entity, and although He was the Supreme Lord Himself, He protested against this comparison in order to teach us. Thus He said that it is the greatest offense to compare anyone with the Supreme Lord Kṛṣṇa. Lord Caitanya always maintained that Viṣṇu, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is great and the living entities, however great they may be, are but infinitesimal.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 22:

Lord Caitanya protested against being called the Supreme Lord, and He said, "My dear sir, I am an ordinary living entity. I cannot know the real meaning of Vedānta-sūtra, but Vyāsadeva, who is an incarnation of Nārāyaṇa, knows its real meaning. No ordinary living entity can interpret Vedānta-sūtra according to his mundane conceptions.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 24:

Lord Caitanya protested against misinterpretations of the Upaniṣads, and He rejected any explanation which did not give the direct meaning of the Upaniṣads. The direct interpretation is called abhidhā-vṛtti, whereas the indirect interpretation is called lakṣanā-vṛtti, The indirect interpretation serves no purpose. There are four kinds of understanding, called: (1) direct understanding (pratyakṣa), (2) hypothetical understanding (anumāna), (3) historical understanding (aitihya) and (4) understanding through sound (śabda). Of these four, understanding from the Vedic scriptures (which are the sound representations of the Absolute Truth) is the best method. The traditional Vedic students accept understanding through sound to be the best.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 30:

"I am a Māyāvādī sannyāsī," Lord Caitanya protested. "I have no knowledge of the transcendental features of devotional service. By the greatness of Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya My mind has become clear, and I am now trying to understand the nature of devotional service to Lord Kṛṣṇa. Bhaṭṭācārya recommended that I see you in order to understand Kṛṣṇa. Indeed, he said that Rāmānanda Rāya is the only person who knows something about love of Kṛṣṇa. Therefore I have come to you upon the recommendation of Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya. Please, then, do not hesitate to relate to Me all the confidential affairs between Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa."

Nectar of Instruction

Nectar of Instruction 6, Purport:

One should not think, "Oh, here is an American gosvāmī," and discriminate against him. Nor should one think, "Here is a nityānanda-vaṁśa-gosvāmī." There is an undercurrent of protest against our awarding the title gosvāmī to the American Vaiṣṇavas of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Sometimes people flatly tell the American devotees that their sannyāsa or title of gosvāmī is not bona fide. However, according to the statements of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī in this verse, an American gosvāmī and a gosvāmī in a family of ācāryas are nondifferent.

Easy Journey to Other Planets

Easy Journey to Other Planets 2:

We have suffered from the beginning of our birth. As a baby, the human being is tightly placed in the abdomen of the mother in an airtight bag for nine months. He cannot even move, there are insects biting him, and he cannot protest. After the child comes out, the suffering continues. The mother undoubtedly takes much care, but still the child cries because he is suffering. There are bugs biting or there are pains in his stomach; the child is crying, and the mother does not know how to pacify him.

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Krsna Book 23:

Within themselves they began to embrace Kṛṣṇa to their hearts' content, and the distress of separation was mitigated immediately. They were just like great sages who, by their advancement of knowledge, merge into the existence of the Supreme. As the Supersoul living in everyone's heart, Lord Kṛṣṇa could understand their minds; they had come to Him despite all the protests of their relatives, fathers, husbands and brothers, and despite all the duties of household affairs.

Krsna Book 57:

Being inspired by all the members of the conspiracy, Śatadhanvā one night entered the house of Satrājit and killed him while he was sleeping. Śatadhanvā was a sinful man of abominable character, and although due to his sinful activities he was not to live for many days, he decided to kill Satrājit while Satrājit was sleeping at home. When he entered the house to kill Satrājit, all the women there cried very loudly, but in spite of their great protests, Śatadhanvā mercilessly butchered Satrājit without hesitation, exactly as a butcher kills an animal in the slaughterhouse. Since Kṛṣṇa was absent from home, His wife Satyabhāmā was present on the night Satrājit was murdered, and she began to cry, "My dear father! My dear father! How mercilessly you have been killed!" The dead body of Satrājit was not immediately removed for cremation because Satyabhāmā wanted to go to Kṛṣṇa in Hastināpura.

Krsna Book 60:

You neglected all the princes present, and very politely you sent Me a confidential letter inviting Me to kidnap you. While I was kidnapping you, your elder brother Rukmī violently protested and fought with Me. As a result of the fight, I defeated him mercilessly and disfigured his body. At the time of Aniruddha's marriage, when we were all playing chess, there was another fight with your brother Rukmī on a controversial verbal point, and My elder brother, Balarāma, finally killed him. I was surprised to see that you did not utter even a word of protest over this incident. Because of your great anxiety that you might be separated from Me, you suffered all the consequences without speaking even a word. As the result of this great silence, My dear wife, you have purchased Me for all time; I have come eternally under your control.

Krsna Book 65:

Protesting Kṛṣṇa's absence from Vṛndāvana, another gopī said, “My dear Balarāmajī, we are of course village girls, so Kṛṣṇa could cheat us in that way, but what about the women of Dvārakā? Don’t think they are as foolish as we are! We village women might be misled by Kṛṣṇa, but the women in the city of Dvārakā are very clever and intelligent. Therefore I would be surprised if such city women could be misled by Kṛṣṇa and could believe His words.”

Krsna Book 74:

Śiśupāla went crazy because of Kṛṣṇa's being elected the supreme, first-worshiped person in that meeting, and he spoke so irresponsibly that it appeared he had lost all his good fortune. Being overcast with misfortune, Śiśupāla continued to insult Kṛṣṇa, and Lord Kṛṣṇa patiently heard him without protest. Just as a lion does not care when a flock of jackals howl, Lord Kṛṣṇa remained silent and unprovoked. Kṛṣṇa did not reply to even a single accusation made by Śiśupāla, but all the members present in the meeting, except for a few who agreed with Śiśupāla, were very much agitated because it is the duty of any respectable person not to tolerate blasphemy against God or His devotee.

Krsna Book 74:

Some of them, who thought that they could not properly take action against Śiśupāla, left the assembly in protest, covering their ears with their hands in order not to hear further accusations. Thus they left the meeting, condemning the action of Śiśupāla. It is the Vedic injunction that whenever there is blasphemy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, one must immediately leave. If he does not do so, he becomes bereft of his pious activities and is degraded to a lower condition of life.

Krsna Book 75:

Kṛṣṇa desired that Duryodhana be fooled in that way and that all of them enjoy his foolish behavior. When everyone laughed, Duryodhana felt very insulted, and his bodily hairs stood up in anger. Being thus insulted, he immediately left the palace, bowing his head. He was silent and did not protest. When Duryodhana left in such an angry mood, everyone regretted the incident, and King Yudhiṣṭhira also was very sorry. But despite all these occurrences, Kṛṣṇa was silent. He did not say anything against or in favor of the incident. It appeared that Duryodhana had been put into illusion by the supreme will of Lord Kṛṣṇa, and this was the beginning of the enmity between the two sects of the Kuru dynasty. This appeared to be a part of Kṛṣṇa's plan in His mission to decrease the burden of the world.

Krsna Book 78:

At the death of Romaharṣaṇa Sūta, everyone present became much aggrieved and cried out, "Alas! Alas!" Although all the brāhmaṇas and sages present knew Lord Balarāma to be the Supreme Personality of Godhead, they did not hesitate to protest the Lord's action. They humbly submitted, “Our dear Lord, we think that Your action is not in line with the religious principles. Dear Lord Yadunandana, we may inform You that we brāhmaṇas posted Romaharṣaṇa Sūta on that exalted position for the duration of this great sacrifice.