Assertion (CC and other books)

Expressions researched:
"assert" |"asserted" |"asserting" |"assertion" |"assertions" |"assertive" |"asserts"

CC Adi-lila

Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, asserts that Lord Caitanya is the Supreme Personality of Godhead according to the evidence of the Upaniṣads.

CC Adi 3.49, Purport: In his commentary on the Viṣṇu-sahasra-nāma, called the Nāmārtha-sudhā, Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, commenting upon this verse, asserts that Lord Caitanya is the Supreme Personality of Godhead according to the evidence of the Upaniṣads. He explains that suvarṇa-varṇaḥ means a golden complexion.

The author of Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta asserts with authority that sexual love is a matter of personal sense enjoyment.

CC Adi 4.165, Purport: The author of Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta asserts with authority that sexual love is a matter of personal sense enjoyment. All the regulative principles in the Vedas pertaining to desires for popularity, fatherhood, wealth and so on are different phases of sense gratification. Acts of sense gratification may be performed under the cover of public welfare, nationalism, religion, altruism, ethical codes, Biblical codes, health directives, fruitive action, bashfulness, tolerance, personal comfort, liberation from material bondage, progress, family affection or fear of social ostracism or legal punishment, but all these categories are different subdivisions of one substance—sense gratification. All such good acts are performed basically for one’s own sense gratification, for no one can sacrifice his personal interest while discharging these much-advertised moral and religious principles. But above all this is a transcendental stage in which one feels himself to be only an eternal servitor of Kṛṣṇa, the absolute Personality of Godhead. All acts performed in this sense of servitude are called pure love of God because they are performed for the absolute sense gratification of Śrī Kṛṣṇa. However, any act performed for the purpose of enjoying its fruits or results is an act of sense gratification. Such actions are visible sometimes in gross and sometimes in subtle forms.

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.

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. The living entities are supposed to be freed from material contamination by engaging in prolonged temple worship of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, reading Vedic literature and performing yoga and pious activities to attain the Supreme Lord. But if the living entities had been created from material nature at a certain point, they would be noneternal and would have no chance to be liberated and associate with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. When a cause is nullified, its results are nullified. In the second chapter of the Vedānta-sūtra’s second khaṇḍa, Ācārya Vedavyāsa has also refuted the conception that the living beings were ever born (nātmā śruter nityatvāc ca tābhyaḥ). Because there is no creation for the living entities, they must be eternal.

The Nārada-pañcarātra asserts that the infallible Personality of Godhead can manifest His body in different ways according to different modes of worship.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport: In the Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta (Pūrva 5.86–100), there is a lucid explanation of the inconceivable potencies of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Negating Śaṅkarācārya’s statements, the Mahā-varāha Purāṇa declares:

sarve nityāḥ śāśvatāś ca dehās tasya parātmanaḥ

hānopādāna-rahitā naiva prakṛti-jāḥ kvacit

“All the varied expansions of the Personality of Godhead are transcendental and eternal, and all of them repeatedly descend to all the different universes of the material creation. Their bodies, composed of eternity, bliss and knowledge, are everlasting; there is no chance of their decaying, for they are not creations of the material world. Their forms are concentrated spiritual existence, always complete with all spiritual qualities and devoid of material contamination.”

Confirming these statements, the Nārada-pañcarātra asserts:

maṇir yathā vibhāgena nīla-pītādibhir yutaḥ

rūpa-bhedam avāpnoti dhyāna-bhedāt tathācyutaḥ

“The infallible Personality of Godhead can manifest His body in different ways according to different modes of worship, just as the vaidūrya gem can manifest itself in various colors, such as blue and yellow.” Each incarnation is distinct from all the others. This is possible by the Lord’s inconceivable potency, by which He can simultaneously represent Himself as one, as various partial forms and as the origin of these partial forms. Nothing is impossible for His inconceivable potencies.

Śaṅkarācārya’s statement that Saṅkarṣaṇa is born as a jīva is completely against the Vedic statements. His assertions are completely refuted.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport: “The scriptures completely deny the birth or production of the living entity. In the Parama-saṁhitā it is described that material nature, which is used for others’ purposes, is factually inert and always subject to transformation. The field of material nature is the arena of the activities of fruitive actors, and since the material field is externally related with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, it is also eternal. In every saṁhitā, the jīva (living entity) has been accepted as eternal, and in the Pañcarātras the birth of the jīva is completely denied. Anything that is produced must also be annihilated. Therefore if we accept the birth of the living entity, we also have to accept his annihilation. But since the Vedic literatures say that the living entity is eternal, one should not think the living being to be produced at a certain time. In the beginning of the Parama-saṁhitā it is definitely stated that the face of material nature is constantly changeable. Therefore ‘beginning,’ ‘annihilation’ and all such terms are applicable only in the material nature.

“Considering all these points, one should understand that Śaṅkarācārya’s statement that Saṅkarṣaṇa is born as a jīva is completely against the Vedic statements. His assertions are completely refuted by the above arguments. In this connection the commentary of Śrīdhara Svāmī on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (3.1.34) is very helpful.”

For a detailed refutation of Śaṅkarācārya’s arguments attempting to prove Saṅkarṣaṇa an ordinary living being, one may refer to Śrīmat Sudarśanācārya’s commentary on the Śrī-bhāṣya, which is known as the Śruta-prakāśikā.

Sāṅkhya philosophy, after describing the nature of prakṛti (material nature) and puruṣa (the enjoyer), asserts that the creation is only a product of their unification or proximity to one another.

CC Adi 6.14-15, Purport: The puruṣa, the enjoyer, is inactive and without material qualities, although at the same time He is the master, existing separately in each and every body as the emblem of knowledge. By understanding the material cause, one can guess that the puruṣa, the enjoyer, being without activity, is aloof from all kinds of enjoyment or superintendence. Sāṅkhya philosophy, after describing the nature of prakṛti (material nature) and puruṣa (the enjoyer), asserts that the creation is only a product of their unification or proximity to one another. With such unification the living symptoms are visible in material nature, but one can guess that in the person of the enjoyer, the puruṣa, there are powers of control and enjoyment. When the puruṣa is illusioned for want of sufficient knowledge, He feels Himself to be the enjoyer, and when He is in full knowledge He is liberated. In the Sāṅkhya philosophy the puruṣa is described to be always indifferent to the activities of prakṛti.

CC Madhya-lila

Brahmānanda Bhāratī herein asserts that Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the Supreme Brahman and that he is the subordinate Brahman.

CC Madhya 10.169, Purport: Brahmānanda Bhāratī herein asserts that Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the Supreme Brahman and that he is the subordinate Brahman. This is confirmed in the Vedas: nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). The Supreme Personality of Godhead is Brahman or Parambrahman, the chief of all living entities. Both the Supreme Brahman, or the Personality of Godhead, and the living entities are persons, but the Supreme Brahman is the predominator, whereas the living entities are predominated.

CC Antya-lila

CC Antya 12.35, Translation: “My uncle is well known as one of the associates of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, but Lord Nityānanda Prabhu asserts His superiority by kicking him.” Antya 12.35

Teachings of Lord Caitanya

The doctrine of by-products, pariṇāma-vāda, is asserted from the very beginning of Vedānta-sūtra, but Śaṅkarācārya has superficially tried to hide it and establish the doctrine of transformation, vivarta-vāda.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 21: The doctrine of by-products, pariṇāma-vāda, is asserted from the very beginning of Vedānta-sūtra, but Śaṅkarācārya has superficially tried to hide it and establish the doctrine of transformation, vivarta-vāda. He also has the audacity to say that Vyāsa is mistaken. All Vedic literatures, including the purāṇas, confirm that the Supreme Lord is the center of all spiritual energy and variegatedness. The Māyāvādī philosopher, puffed-up and incompetent, can not understand variegatedness in spiritual energy. He consequently falsely believes that spiritual variegatedness is no different from material variegatedness. Deluded by this false belief, the Māyāvādīs deride the pastimes of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Such foolish persons, unable to understand the spiritual activities of the Supreme Lord, consider Kṛṣṇa to be a product of this material nature. This is the greatest offense any human being can commit. Lord Caitanya therefore establishes that Kṛṣṇa is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha [Bs. 5.1], the form of eternity, knowledge and bliss, and that He is always engaged in His transcendental pastimes in which there is all spiritual variegatedness.

The Vedānta-sūtra asserts that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is not only transcendental to the material modes of nature but that He also has innumerable transcendental qualities and energies.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 21: The impersonalist tries to explain that the impersonal effulgence of the Supreme Lord (brahmajyoti) is beyond these material modes of nature, but at the same time he tries to establish that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is contaminated by the modes of material nature. The Vedānta-sūtra asserts that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is not only transcendental to the material modes of nature but that He also has innumerable transcendental qualities and energies. All these various speculative philosophers are one in denying the existence of the Supreme Lord Viṣṇu, and they are very much enthused to propagate their own theories and be recognized by the people.

Vyāsadeva asserts that Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the original Personality of Godhead and that all others are either His direct or indirect plenary portions or portions of those portions.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 23: In the very beginning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the meaning and purpose of the gāyatrī mantra are also described: "I offer my obeisances unto the Supreme Truth." This is the first introductory verse dealing with the Supreme Truth, which is described in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as the source of creation, maintenance and destruction for the cosmic manifestation. Obeisances unto the Personality of Godhead, Vāsudeva (oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya), directly indicate Lord Sri Kṛṣṇa, who is the divine son of Vasudeva and Devakī. This fact is more explicitly presented later in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Vyāsadeva asserts that Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the original Personality of Godhead and that all others are either His direct or indirect plenary portions or portions of those portions. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has later still more explicitly developed this subject in his Kṛṣṇa-sandarbha, and Brahmā, the original living being, has explained Śrī Kṛṣṇa substantially in his treatise Brahma-saṁhitā. The Sāma Veda also verifies the fact that Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the divine son of Devakī.

The stool and bone of any living entity are considered to be impure according to Vedic literatures, yet the Vedic literatures assert that cow dung and conchshells are pure.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 24: The stool and bone of any living entity are considered to be impure according to Vedic literatures, yet the Vedic literatures assert that cow dung and conchshells are pure. Apparently these statements are contradictory, but because cow dung and conchshells are considered pure by the Vedas, they are accepted as pure by the followers of the Vedas. If we want to understand the statements by indirect interpretation, then we have to challenge the Vedic statements. In other words, Vedic statements cannot be accepted by our imperfect interpretations; they must be accepted as they are. If they are not accepted in this way, there is no authority in the Vedic statements.

Nectar of Devotion

For persons who have a natural taste for understanding books like Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, devotional service is easier than for those who are simply accustomed to mental speculation and argumentative processes. To support this statement there are many authoritative assertions by the learned scholars of bygone ages.

Nectar of Devotion 2: Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī suggests that the person eligible for Kṛṣṇa consciousness, or devotional service, can be classified by his particular taste. He says that devotional service is a continual process from one's previous life. No one can take to devotional service unless he has had some previous connection with it. For example, suppose in this life I practice devotional service to some extent. Even though it is not one-hundred-percent perfectly performed, whatever I have done will not be lost. In my next life, from the very point where I stop in this life, I shall begin again. In this way there is always a continuity. But even if there is no continuity, if only by chance a person takes interest in a pure devotee's instruction, he can be accepted and can advance in devotional service. Anyway, for persons who have a natural taste for understanding books like Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, devotional service is easier than for those who are simply accustomed to mental speculation and argumentative processes. To support this statement there are many authoritative assertions by the learned scholars of bygone ages. According to their general opinion, a person may become governed by certain convictions derived by his own arguments and decisions. Then another person, who may be a greater logician, will nullify these conclusions and establish another thesis. In this way the path of argument will never be safe or conclusive. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam recommends, therefore, that one follow in the footsteps of the authorities.

Nārada asserts, "From the body of any person who claps and dances before the Deity, showing manifestations of ecstasy, all the birds of sinful activities fly away upward."

Nectar of Devotion 9: In the Dvārakā-māhātmya the importance of dancing before the Deity is stated by Lord Kṛṣṇa as follows: "A person who is in a jubilant spirit, who feels profound devotional ecstasy while dancing before Me, and who manifests different features of bodily expression can burn away all the accumulated sinful reactions he has stocked up for many, many thousands of years." In the same book there is a statement by Nārada wherein he asserts, "From the body of any person who claps and dances before the Deity, showing manifestations of ecstasy, all the birds of sinful activities fly away upward." Just as by clapping the hands one can cause many birds to fly away, similarly the birds of all sinful activities which are sitting on the body can be made to fly away simply by dancing and clapping before the Deity of Kṛṣṇa.

Easy Journey to Other Planets

Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, asserts the importance of the antimaterial universe, which is His abode.

Easy Journey to Other Planets 1: The nature of the material world is destructive. According to the Bhagavad-gītā, there is some partial truth to the assumption of the physical scientist that there is annihilation of the material and antimaterial worlds when they chance to clash. The material world is a creation of changing modes of nature. These modes (guṇas) are known as sattva (goodness), rajas (passion) and tamas (ignorance). The material world is created by the mode of rajas, maintained by the mode of sattva, and annihilated by the mode of tamas. These modes are omnipresent in the material world, and as such, at every hour, every minute, every second, the process of creation, maintenance and annihilation is taking place all over the material universe. The highest planet of the material universe, Brahmaloka, is also subjected to these modes of nature, although the duration of life on that planet, due to the predominance of the mode of sattva, is said to be 4,300,000 x 1,000 x 2 x 30 x 12 x 100 solar years. Despite this long duration, however, Brahmaloka is subject to destruction. Although life on Brahmaloka is fantastically long compared to life on Earth, it is only a flash in comparison to the eternal life of the nonmaterial worlds. Consequently, the speaker of the Bhagavad-gītā, Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, asserts the importance of the antimaterial universe, which is His abode.

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Some small children who were entrusted to play with baby Kṛṣṇa informed the crowd that it was due to Kṛṣṇa’s striking His feet against the wheel. They assured the crowd that they had seen how it happened with their own eyes, and they strongly asserted the point.

Krsna Book 7: Baby Kṛṣṇa had been placed underneath a hand-driven cart, and while He was kicking His legs, He accidentally touched the wheel of the cart, and it collapsed. Various kinds of utensils and dishes made of brass and other metals had been piled up in the handcart, and they all fell down with a great noise. The wheel of the cart separated from the axle, and the spokes of the wheel were all broken and scattered hither and thither. Mother Yaśodā and all the gopīs, as well as Mahārāja Nanda and the cowherd men, were astonished as to how the cart could have collapsed by itself. All the men and women who were assembled for the holy function crowded around and began to suggest how the cart might have collapsed. No one could ascertain the cause, but some small children who were entrusted to play with baby Kṛṣṇa informed the crowd that it was due to Kṛṣṇa’s striking His feet against the wheel. They assured the crowd that they had seen how it happened with their own eyes, and they strongly asserted the point. Some were listening to the statement of the small children, but others said, “How can you believe the statements of these children?” The cowherd men and women could not understand that the all-powerful Personality of Godhead was lying there as a baby and that He could do anything. Both the possible and impossible were in His power.

It is foolish to assert that there are no living entities but those on this earth.

Krsna Book 62: Citralekhā, while talking, began to draw many pictures of the demigods inhabiting the higher planetary systems, then pictures of the Gandharvas, Siddhas, Cāraṇas, Pannagas, Daityas, Vidyādharas and Yakṣas, as well as many pictures of human beings. (The statements of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and other Vedic literatures prove definitely that on each and every planet there are living entities of different varieties. Therefore, it is foolish to assert that there are no living entities but those on this earth.) Citralekhā painted many pictures. Among those of the human beings were the members of the Vṛṣṇi dynasty, including Vasudeva, the father of Kṛṣṇa; Śūrasena, the grandfather of Kṛṣṇa; Śrī Balarāmajī; Lord Kṛṣṇa; and many others. When Ūṣā saw the picture of Pradyumna, she became a little bashful, but when she saw the picture of Aniruddha, she became so bashful that she immediately lowered her head and smiled, having found the man she was seeking. She identified the picture to Citralekhā as that of the man who had stolen her heart.

When Lord Balarāma spoke in a commanding tone full of heroic assertion, supremacy and chivalry, the leaders of the Kuru dynasty did not appreciate His statements.

Krsna Book 68: When Lord Balarāma spoke in a commanding tone full of heroic assertion, supremacy and chivalry, the leaders of the Kuru dynasty did not appreciate His statements. Rather, all of them became agitated, and with great anger they said, “Oh! These words are very astonishing but quite befitting the Age of Kali; otherwise how could Balarāma speak so vituperatively? The language and tone used by Balarāma are simply abusive, and due to the influence of this age it appears that the shoes befitting the feet want to rise to the top of the head, where the helmet is worn. We are connected with the Yadu dynasty by marriage, and because of this they have been given the chance to come live with us, dine with us and sleep with us; now they are taking advantage of these privileges."

Message of Godhead

Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī asserted that there is no greater materialistic fool than one who advertises himself and collects the cheap votes of similar fools to gain fame as a great scholar, great leader, great philosopher, great mahātmā, or great paramahaṁsa,

Message of Godhead 1: With these words, Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī presented his case. In fact, he really was learned in transcendental knowledge, but he pretended to be a materialistic fool like us. Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī refused to let himself be called a great leader or erudite scholar, since he had no transcendental knowledge. Indirectly, he asserted that there is no greater materialistic fool than one who advertises himself and collects the cheap votes of similar fools to gain fame as a great scholar, great leader, great philosopher, great mahātmā, or great paramahaṁsa, all without any knowledge of his real self, the spirit soul, and without doing any benefit to the soul proper—simply wasting time in the matter of the happiness and distress of the temporary material body and mind. Sanātana means "eternal." Thus, Sanātana Gosvāmī was interested in the eternal happiness of the living entities more than just the temporary happiness of their temporary body and mind. When one thus becomes interested in the permanent happiness of the permanent soul, he becomes a disciple of Sanātana Gosvāmī, or a real "sanātanist," that is, a transcendentalist.

It is not possible at present to assert that we are unidentified with the body and mind.

Message of Godhead 1: At the present stage of our existence, it is difficult to be unaffected by the temporary happiness and distress pertaining to the body and mind. Nor is it possible at present to assert that we are unidentified with the body and mind. Therefore, in our present state of existence, there is no possibility of our being indifferent in these matters of material happiness and distress. Thus, acquiring transcendental knowledge does not mean that we become indifferent to our present state of affairs, but it means that we should not be overwhelmed by the coming and going of happiness and distress.