View source for Just like Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya. He argued with Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu as a scholar. But when he became defeated, he accepted His discipleship. This was the method, that two persons may argue, but one who is defeated, he must become his disciple

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"Just like Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya. He argued with Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu as a scholar. But when he became defeated, he accepted His discipleship. This was the method, that two persons may argue, but one who is defeated, he must become his disciple"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|PoojaA}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|2022-08-21T02:47:36Z}}
{{last|2022-08-21T02:47:36Z}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=1|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Just Like]]
[[Category:Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya]]
[[Category:Argue]]
[[Category:Caitanya As a Scholar]]
[[Category:When]]
[[Category:Become]]
[[Category:Defeat]]
[[Category:Accept]]
[[Category:Discipleship]]
[[Category:This Is]]
[[Category:Method]]
[[Category:Two]]
[[Category:Person]]
[[Category:One Who Is]]
[[Category:Must Become]]
[[Category:Disciple]]
[[Category:Pages Needing Audio - BHAV]]
</div>
<div id="section">
<h2>Lectures</h2>
</div>
<div id="sub_section">
<h3>Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures</h3>
</div>
<div class="quote">
<div class="quote_heading">
Any learned scholar cannot make any injustice. So he admitted his defeat, because he is learned scholar. That is scholarship. Not that . . . just like Sarvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya. He argued with Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu as a scholar. But when he became defeated, he accepted His discipleship. This was the method, that two persons may argue, but one who is defeated, he must become his disciple. Not that simply waste time arguing and no conclusion. Formerly this was the system, to come to a conclusion. If two parties are arguing on a subject matter, the one party will be defeated, he must become his disciple, under control.
</div>

<div class="quote_link">
[[Vanisource:740108 - Lecture SB 01.16.11 - Los Angeles|740108 - Lecture SB 01.16.11 - Los Angeles]]
</div>
<div class="text">
That is mentioned in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta, how He was digvijaya, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. This Keśava Kāśmīrī was a very learned scholar, and he was requested by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu that "You are sitting on the bank of the Ganges. You can compose some prayers for the Mother Ganges." So he was very learned scholar, immediately he composed one hundred ślokas. So out of that one hundred ślokas, He found some fault in the sixty-fourth verse. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that you was such a learned scholar but, "We are simply student, grammarian. We cannot understand your poetic and literary magnitude of knowledge. So will you kindly explain the sixty-fourth verse, which We cannot understand very nicely."

So immediately he was astonished. He thought that, "I have composed these hundred ślokas like wind, immediately. And He catch up . . . He catches up, with sixty-four, one particular śloka. What kind of boy this is?" Then in that śloka, there were so many literary fault. Literary fault. Formerly, amongst the learned scholar, any nonsense you write will not be accepted as poetry. It must be according to the rules and regulation of literary perfection. So there were some literary imperfection, and Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu pointed out, and He was also learned scholar. He admitted that, "He is a wonderful boy." So therefore it is said that, "You make your enemy a learned man, but don't make your friend a fool and rascal." Because an enemy, even though he is enemy, if he is learned, he will not make injustice. That he cannot. Any learned scholar cannot make any injustice. So he admitted his defeat, because he is learned scholar. That is scholarship. Not that . . . just like Sarvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya. He argued with Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu as a scholar. But when he became defeated, he accepted His discipleship. This was the method, that two persons may argue, but one who is defeated, he must become his disciple. Not that simply waste time arguing and no conclusion. Formerly this was the system, to come to a conclusion. If two parties are arguing on a subject matter, the one party will be defeated, he must become his disciple, under control.
</div>
</div>
</div>