Category:Never Accept
"never accept"|"never accepts "|"never accepted"|"never acceptable"|"never be accepted"|"never have accepted"|"never, however, accept"|"never meant for accepting"|"never to be accepted"|"never agree to accept"|"Never it was accepted"|"never agreed to accept"|"never agree to accept"
Subcategories
This category has only the following subcategory.
Pages in category "Never Accept"
The following 51 pages are in this category, out of 51 total.
A
- A chaste woman will never accept any man other than her husband, even if there be someone equally as handsome and qualified
- A living entity cannot be on the level of a visnu-tattva, or the Personality of Godhead, at any stage; therefore it is ludicrous for a living entity to claim to be God. Advanced spiritualists would never accept such a thing
- A member of the Ventor Gosvami Society, or the caste called gosvami, cannot be accepted as a descendant of the six original Gosvamis. Nor can so-called devotees who manufacture songs about Lord Caitanya, professional priests or paid reciters, be accepted
- A pure devotee engaged in the service of Lord Krsna has no desire for his personal sense gratification, and thus he never accepts anything for that purpose
- A system of human civilization that does not promote varna and asrama is nothing but a polished animal society. Indulgence in sex life by a man or woman living single is never acceptable in human society
- Actually, a qualified brahmana always sticks to his own duties and never accepts those of a sudra or of one less than a sudra
- Advaita Acarya, My spiritual master, should never accept charity from rich men or kings, because if a spiritual master accepts money or grains from such materialists his mind becomes polluted
- Anyone who understands Krsna factually, the result is tyaktva deham, giving up this body, he never accepts again material body. He goes back to home, back to Godhead
I
- In India, a man born in brahmin family, and if he is - mostly they are poverty-stricken at the present moment - if he is asked that, "You can come, you take daily five rupees. You can wash the dishes," oh, he will never accept
- In the Bhagavata also it is stated that if the brahmins, ksatriyas and vaisya, especially the brahmins, they have no livelihood, then they can adopt the business of ksatriya and vaisya, but never accept the occupation of these dog, sudra
- In the sastra it is said that a brahmana, if he's in difficulty, he may accept the profession of a ksatriya or up to vaisya, but never accept the occupation of a sudra. These are described in the sastras
- In this verse (SB 4.20.1) the word atmanam is very significant. It is a custom among yogis and jnanis to address one another (or even an ordinary man) as one's self, for a transcendentalist never accepts a living being to be the body
- It is not that everyone is the Supreme Godhead. Such a theory, which is propounded by the Mayavada philosophy, is always misleading, and Rantideva would never have accepted it
S
- Some devotees are very . . . Hanumanji, he'll never accept Krsna. And the gopis will never accept Rama or Visnu. So far the Krsna and Visnu, They are all the same
- Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Maharaja has remarked that professional spiritual masters, professional Bhagavatam reciters, professional kirtana performers and those engaged in self-concocted devotional service cannot be accepted
- Srila Murari Gupta never accepted charity from friends, nor did he accept money from anyone. He practiced as a physician and maintained his family with his earnings
- Sukadeva Gosvami never accepted any formal spiritual master, nor did he undergo any formal reformatory performances. His father, Vyasadeva, was his natural spiritual master because Sukadeva Gosvami heard Srimad-Bhagavatam from him
T
- The asura-bhava, the atheistic nature, is directly represented by Hiranyakasipu. Such persons, being mudha and naradhama - fools and rascals, the lowest of men - would never accept Visnu as the Supreme and surrender to Him
- The bhagavatas never accept merging in the impersonal rays of the Lord, but always aspire after personal association with the Supreme Lord in one of the Vaikuntha spiritual planets in the spiritual sky
- The central point of Krsna consciousness is that the jiva, the living entity, can never be accepted as Krsna or Visnu. This viewpoint is elaborated in the following verses - from CC Madhya 18.112
- The followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu never accepted the Mayavada order of sannyasa, and for this they cannot be blamed
- The idea of the original enjoyer is explained very nicely in the Isopanisad. One who knows this difference between the Lord and himself never accepts anything without first offering it to the Lord
- The impersonalist may squeeze out any interpretations from them (SB slokas), but such interpretations will never be accepted by those who are taught in the disciplic succession from Brahma, as will be cleared up in the following verses
- The kings and executive heads of government in the Vedic age never accepted their positions for sense enjoyment. Such exalted kings, who were known as rajarsis, ruled only to maintain and protect the kingdom for the welfare of the citizens
- The Lord as Supersoul could detect the lust in the mind of Junior Haridasa, who was at once banished from the Lord's association and was never accepted again, even though the Lord was implored to excuse Haridasa for the mistake
- The Mayavadis never accept the direct meaning. Even big political leaders who are influenced by the Mayavada philosophy cover the meaning of the Vedic literature by speculating, - Kuruksetra means this, and dharma-ksetra means that
- The polytheists' offerings, which are laden with selfish motivations for material gain, are never accepted by the Supreme Lord, even if these offerings are opulent and elaborate
- The Saivites, the devotees of Lord Siva, generally dress like Lord Siva, and sometimes they indulge in smoking and taking intoxicants. Such practices are never accepted by the followers of Vaisnava rituals
- The so-called rascal scientists, they'll never accept that within this body there is the soul, because they're always thinking there is no such thing as soul; only the material, that's all. This is illusion
- The so-called Vedantists, they want to get out of Krsna. They'll never accept Krsna as the Supreme. That is not Vedantist
- The supreme eternal never accepts a body of a temporary material nature, whereas the living entities, who are part and parcel of the supreme eternal, are prone to do so
- The Vaisnava never accepts another Vaisnava on the basis of birthright, just as he never thinks of the Deity of God in a temple as an idol. And to remove all doubts in this connection, Sukadeva has invoked the blessings of the Lord, who is all-powerful
- There are many parties following the path of rasabhasa, and the followers are sometimes adored by ordinary men. Those who adopt the conclusions of rasabhasa and bhakti-siddhanta-viruddha are never accepted as devotees of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu
- There were many atheistic person like Kamsa, Ravana, Hiranyakasipu, Dantavakra, they never accepted existence of God. But they had to accept the existence of God at the time of death
- They (animal-eaters) do not know that goddess Kali never accepts nonvegetarian food because she is the chaste wife of Lord Siva
- This (sac-cid-ananda-vigraha) is God's constitution. This our constitution. The difference between God and ourself is that God never accepts this material body, but sometimes we, under certain circumstances, we have to accept this material body
- This Mayavada interpretation is, explanation, means covering the real meaning. That's all. They do so like that. They'll never accept the direct meaning
- Those who live as brahmacaris must follow in the footsteps of the great sage Narada Muni, who never accepted the proposals of Jara. Those who are too much sexually addicted become victims of jara, and very soon their life-span is shortened
- To such a misguided interpreter we may reply, "Why should you suggest such fallacious logic? An interpretation is never accepted as evidence if it opposes the principles of scripture"