Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Should not tolerate

Expressions researched:
"shall not be tolerant" |"shall not tolerate" |"should never tolerate" |"should not be tolerant" |"should not tolerate"

Srimad-Bhagavatam

SB Canto 1

One should not tolerate the humiliation of a member of a great family.
SB 1.7.49, Translation and Purport:

Sūta Gosvāmī said: O brāhmaṇas, King Yudhiṣṭhira fully supported the statements of the Queen, which were in accordance with the principles of religion and were justified, glorious, full of mercy and equity, and without duplicity.

Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, who was the son of Dharmarāja, or Yamarāja, fully supported the words of Queen Draupadī in asking Arjuna to release Aśvatthāmā. One should not tolerate the humiliation of a member of a great family. Arjuna and his family were indebted to the family of Droṇācārya because of Arjuna's learning the military science from him. If ingratitude were shown to such a benevolent family, it would not be at all justified from the moral standpoint. The wife of Droṇācārya, who was the half body of the great soul, must be treated with compassion, and she should not be put into grief because of her son's death. That is compassion. Such statements by Draupadī are without duplicity because actions should be taken with full knowledge. The feeling of equality was there because Draupadī spoke out of her personal experience. A barren woman cannot understand the grief of a mother. Draupadī was herself a mother, and therefore her calculation of the depth of Kṛpī's grief was quite to the point. And it was glorious because she wanted to show proper respect to a great family.

SB Canto 3

A devotee may be tolerant regarding his own interests, but he should not be tolerant when there is misbehavior toward the Lord or the Lord's devotee.
SB 3.20.2, Translation and Purport:

Śaunaka Ṛṣi inquired about Vidura, who was a great devotee and friend of Lord Kṛṣṇa and who gave up the company of his elder brother because the latter, along with his sons, played tricks against the desires of the Lord.

The incident referred to here is that Vidura left the protection of his elder brother Dhṛtarāṣṭra, went traveling everywhere to sacred places and met Maitreya at Hardwar. Śaunaka Ṛṣi here inquires about the topics of the conversation between Maitreya Ṛṣi and Vidura. Vidura's qualification was that he was not only a friend of the Lord but also a great devotee. When Kṛṣṇa tried to stop the war and mitigate the misunderstanding between the cousin-brothers, they refused to accept His counsel; therefore Kṣattā, or Vidura, was unsatisfied with them, and he left the palace. As a devotee, Vidura showed by example that anywhere that Kṛṣṇa is not honored is a place unfit for human habitation. A devotee may be tolerant regarding his own interests, but he should not be tolerant when there is misbehavior toward the Lord or the Lord's devotee. Here the word aghavān is very significant, for it indicates that the Kauravas, Dhṛtarāṣṭra's sons, lost the war because of being sinful in disobeying the instructions of Kṛṣṇa.

SB Canto 4

One should not be tolerant when a person is offensive towards Viṣṇu or a Vaiṣṇava.
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.

One should not tolerate at any cost the activities of a person who vilifies or blasphemes an authority.
SB 4.4.17, Purport:

Since Lord Śiva is the protector of religion, a person who vilifies him should be killed at once, and after killing such a person, one should give up one's life. That is the process, but because Dakṣa happened to be the father of Satī, she decided not to kill him but to give up her own life in order to compensate for the great sin she had committed by hearing blasphemy of Lord Śiva. The instruction set forth here in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is that one should not tolerate at any cost the activities of a person who vilifies or blasphemes an authority. If one is a brāhmaṇa he should not give up his body because by doing so he would be responsible for killing a brāhmaṇa; therefore a brāhmaṇa should leave the place or block his ears so that he will not hear the blasphemy.

It should be noted herewith that a Vaiṣṇava should not tolerate the blaspheming of Viṣṇu or Vaiṣṇavas, although he should tolerate personal insults to himself.
SB 4.6.47, Translation and Purport:

Persons who observe everything with differentiation, who are simply attached to fruitive activities, who are mean minded, who are always pained to see the flourishing condition of others and who thus give distress to them by uttering harsh and piercing words have already been killed by providence. Thus there is no need for them to be killed again by an exalted personality like you.

Persons who are materialistic and always engaged in fruitive activities for material profit cannot endure seeing the flourishing life of others. Except for a few persons in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, the entire world is full of such envious persons, who are perpetually full of anxieties because they are attached to the material body and are without self-realization. Since their hearts are always filled with anxiety, it is understood that they have already been killed by providence. Thus Lord Śiva, as a self-realized Vaiṣṇava, was advised not to kill Dakṣa. A Vaiṣṇava is described as para-duḥkha-duḥkhī because although he is never distressed in any condition of life, he is distressed to see others in a distressed condition. Vaiṣṇavas, therefore, should not try to kill by any action of the body or mind, but should try to revive the Kṛṣṇa consciousness of others out of compassion for them. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement has been started to deliver the envious persons of the world from the clutches of māyā, and even though devotees are sometimes put into trouble, they push on the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement in all tolerance. Lord Caitanya advises:

tṛṇād api sunīcena
taror api sahiṣṇunā
amāninā mānadena
kīrtanīyaḥ sadā hariḥ
(CC Adi 17.31)

"One can chant the holy name of the Lord in a humble state of mind, thinking himself lower than the straw in the street. One should be more tolerant than the tree, devoid of all sense of false prestige and ready to offer all respects to others. In such a state of mind one can chant the holy name of the Lord constantly." (Śikṣāṣṭaka 3)

A Vaiṣṇava should follow the examples of such Vaiṣṇavas as Haridāsa Ṭhākura, Nityānanda Prabhu and also Lord Jesus Christ. There is no need to kill anyone who has already been killed. But it should be noted herewith that a Vaiṣṇava should not tolerate the blaspheming of Viṣṇu or Vaiṣṇavas, although he should tolerate personal insults to himself.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta

CC Adi-lila

One should not tolerate blasphemy against a Vaiṣṇava but should immediately take one of three actions. If someone blasphemes a Vaiṣṇava, one should stop him with arguments and higher reason. If one is not expert enough to do this he should give up his life on the spot, and if he cannot do this, he must go away.
CC Adi 7.50, Translation and Purport:

“How long can we tolerate the blasphemy by Your critics against Your conduct? We should give up our lives rather than hear such blasphemy.

One of the most important instructions by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu regarding regular Vaiṣṇava behavior is that a Vaiṣṇava should be tolerant like a tree and submissive like grass.

tṛṇād api su-nīcena taror iva sahiṣṇunā
amāninā māna-dena kīrtanīyaḥ sadā hariḥ
(CC Adi 17.31)

"One should chant the holy name of the Lord in a humble state of mind, thinking oneself lower than the straw in the street; one should be more tolerant than a tree, devoid of all sense of false prestige and ready to offer all respect to others. In such a state of mind one can chant the holy name of the Lord constantly." Nevertheless, the author of these instructions, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, did not tolerate the misbehavior of Jagāi and Mādhāi. When they harmed Lord Nityānanda Prabhu, He immediately became angry and wanted to kill them, and it was only by the mercy of Lord Nityānanda Prabhu that they were saved. One should be very meek and humble in his personal transactions, and if insulted a Vaiṣṇava should be tolerant and not angry. But if there is blasphemy against one's guru or another Vaiṣṇava, one should be as angry as fire. This was exhibited by Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. One should not tolerate blasphemy against a Vaiṣṇava but should immediately take one of three actions. If someone blasphemes a Vaiṣṇava, one should stop him with arguments and higher reason. If one is not expert enough to do this he should give up his life on the spot, and if he cannot do this, he must go away. While Caitanya Mahāprabhu was in Benares or Kāśī, the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs blasphemed Him in many ways because although He was a sannyāsī He was indulging in chanting and dancing. Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara heard this criticism, and it was intolerable for them because they were great devotees of Lord Caitanya. They could not stop it, however, and therefore they appealed to Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu because this blasphemy was so intolerable that they had decided to give up their lives.

Even if a devotee is in the uttama-bhāgavata status he must come down to the second status of life, madhyama-adhikārī, to be a preacher, for a preacher should not tolerate blasphemy against another Vaiṣṇava.
CC Adi 7.51, Translation and Purport:

"The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are all criticizing Your Holiness. We cannot tolerate hearing such criticism, for this blasphemy breaks our hearts."

This is a manifestation of real love for Kṛṣṇa and Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. There are three categories of Vaiṣṇavas: kaniṣṭha-adhikārīs, madhyama-adhikārīs and uttama-adhikārīs. The kaniṣṭha-adhikārī, or the devotee in the lowest stage of Vaiṣṇava life, has firm faith but is not familiar with the conclusions of the śāstras. The devotee in the second stage, the madhyama-adhikārī, is completely aware of the śāstric conclusion and has firm faith in his guru and the Lord. He, therefore, avoiding nondevotees, preaches to the innocent. However, the mahā-bhāgavata or uttama-adhikārī, the devotee in the highest stage of devotional life, does not see anyone as being against the Vaiṣṇava principles, for he regards everyone as a Vaiṣṇava but himself. This is the essence of Caitanya Mahāprabhu's instruction that one be more tolerant than a tree and think oneself lower than the straw in the street (tṛṇād api su-nīcena taror iva sahiṣṇunā). However, even if a devotee is in the uttama-bhāgavata status he must come down to the second status of life, madhyama-adhikārī, to be a preacher, for a preacher should not tolerate blasphemy against another Vaiṣṇava. Although a kaniṣṭha-adhikārī also cannot tolerate such blasphemy, he is not competent to stop it by citing śāstric evidences. Therefore Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara are understood to be kaniṣṭha-adhikārīs because they could not refute the arguments of the sannyāsīs in Benares. They appealed to Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu to take action, for they felt that they could not tolerate such criticism although they also could not stop it.

CC Adi 17.185, Translation:

"But if you perform such activities again, I shall not be tolerant. At that time I shall kill you, your entire family and all the meat-eaters."

CC Madhya-lila

"Foolish people will blaspheme You, but I shall not tolerate the words of such mischievous people."
CC Madhya 17.183, Translation and Purport:

"Foolish people will blaspheme You, but I shall not tolerate the words of such mischievous people."

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura remarks that although the brāhmaṇa did not belong to a superior community, he fearlessly chastised so-called caste brāhmaṇas because he was situated on the platform of pure devotional service. There are people who are opposed to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's accepting a Vaiṣṇava belonging to a lower caste. Such people do not consider mahā-prasādam transcendental, and therefore they are described here as mūrkha (foolish) and duṣṭa (mischievous). A pure devotee has the power to challenge such high-caste people, and his brave statements are not to be considered proud or puffed up. On the contrary, he is to be considered straightforward. Such a person does not like to flatter high-class brāhmaṇas who belong to the non-Vaiṣṇava community.

Other Books by Srila Prabhupada

Nectar of Devotion

One should not tolerate blasphemy of the Lord or His devotees.
Nectar of Devotion 9:

One should not tolerate blasphemy of the Lord or His devotees. In this connection, in the Tenth Canto, Seventy-fourth Chapter, verse 40, of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Śukadeva Gosvāmī tells Parīkṣit Mahārāja, "My dear King, if a person, after hearing blasphemous propaganda against the Lord and His devotees, does not go away from that place, he becomes bereft of the effect of all pious activities."

Correspondence

1969 Correspondence

We should not tolerate any sort of nonsense. One who says that God is not merciful because He has made one person happy and one distressed is most nonsensical.
Letter to Malati -- Los Angeles 28 January, 1969:

I am very much encouraged to learn that you are bold enough to challenge any nondevotee as you did with that impersonalist yoga student. That should be the temperament of all our preachers. We should not be aggressive, but we should not tolerate any sort of nonsense. One who says that God is not merciful because He has made one person happy and one distressed is most nonsensical. This very statement affirms that man as a godless rascal. All of these so-called yogis are therefore rascals because they have no actual realization of God. Falsely they think themselves as God, and their association should be avoided as far as possible.

Page Title:Should not tolerate
Compiler:Labangalatika, Sahadeva
Created:25 of Sep, 2009
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=5, CC=4, OB=1, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=1
No. of Quotes:11