Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Commentary on the Vedanta-sutra (CC)

Expressions researched:
"Vedanta commentaries" |"Vedanta commentary" |"Vedanta mentioned is the commentary" |"commentaries of the Vedanta" |"commentaries on Vedanta" |"commentaries on the Vedanta" |"commentary have described the Vedanta" |"commentary of Vedanta" |"commentary of the Vedanta" |"commentary on Vedanta" |"commentary on the Vedanta"

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta

CC Adi-lila

In his commentary on Vedānta-sūtra 2.2.42–45, His Holiness Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya has made a futile attempt to nullify the existence of these quadruple forms in the spiritual world.
CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

The quadruple forms have a spiritual existence that can be realized in vasudeva-sattva (śuddha-sattva), or unqualified goodness, which accompanies complete absorption in the understanding of Vāsudeva. The quadruple forms, who are full in the six opulences of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, are the enjoyers of the internal potency. Thinking the absolute Personality of Godhead to be poverty-stricken or to have no potency—or, in other words, to be impotent—is simply rascaldom. This rascaldom is the profession of the conditioned soul, and it increases his bewilderment. One who cannot understand the distinctions between the spiritual world and the material world has no qualification to examine or know the situation of the transcendental quadruple forms. In his commentary on Vedānta-sūtra 2.2.42–45, His Holiness Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya has made a futile attempt to nullify the existence of these quadruple forms in the spiritual world.

In answer to Śaṅkarācārya's commentary on Vedānta-sūtra 2.2.43, it must be said that the original Viṣṇu of all the Viṣṇu categories, which are distributed in several ways, is Mūla-saṅkarṣaṇa.
CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

(2) In answer to Śaṅkarācārya's commentary on Vedānta-sūtra 2.2.43, it must be said that the original Viṣṇu of all the Viṣṇu categories, which are distributed in several ways, is Mūla-saṅkarṣaṇa. Mūla means "the original." Saṅkarṣaṇa is also Viṣṇu, but from Him all other Viṣṇus expand. This is confirmed in the Brahma-saṁhitā (5.46), wherein it is said that just as a flame transferred from another flame acts like the original, so the Viṣṇus who emanate from Mūlasaṅkarṣaṇa are as good as the original Viṣṇu. One should worship that Supreme Personality of Godhead, Govinda, who thus expands Himself.

To answer Śaṅkarācārya's commentary on Vedānta-sūtra 2.2.45, the substance of the transcendental qualities and their spiritual nature is described in the Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta as follows.
CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

(4) To answer Śaṅkarācārya's commentary on Vedānta-sūtra 2.2.45, the substance of the transcendental qualities and their spiritual nature is described in the Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta (Pūrva 5.208–214) as follows: "Some say that transcendence must be void of all qualities because qualities are manifested only in matter. According to them, all qualities are like temporary, flickering mirages. But this is not acceptable. Since the Supreme Personality of Godhead is absolute, His qualities are nondifferent from Him. His form, name, qualities and everything else pertaining to Him are as spiritual as He is. Every qualitative expansion of the absolute Personality of Godhead is identical with Him. Since the Absolute Truth, the Personality of Godhead, is the reservoir of all pleasure, all the transcendental qualities that expand from Him are also reservoirs of pleasure. This is confirmed in the scripture known as Brahma-tarka, which states that the Supreme Lord Hari is qualified by Himself, and therefore Viṣṇu and His pure devotees and their transcendental qualities cannot be different from their persons. In the Viṣṇu Purāṇa Lord Viṣṇu is worshiped in the following words: "Let the Supreme Personality of Godhead be merciful toward us. His existence is never infected by material qualities." In the same Viṣṇu Purāṇa it is also said that all the qualities attributed to the Supreme Lord, such as knowledge, opulence, beauty, strength and influence, are known to be nondifferent from Him. This is also confirmed in the Padma Purāṇa, which explains that whenever the Supreme Lord is described as having no qualities, this should be understood to indicate that He is devoid of material qualities. In the First Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.16.29) it is said, "O Dharma, protector of religious principles, all noble and sublime qualities are eternally manifested in the person of Kṛṣṇa, and devotees and transcendentalists who aspire to become faithful also desire to possess such transcendental qualities."" It is therefore to be understood that Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the transcendental form of absolute bliss, is the fountainhead of all pleasurable transcendental qualities and inconceivable potencies. In this connection we may recommend references to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Third Canto, Chapter Twenty-six, verses 21, 25, 27 and 28.

Śrīpāda Rāmānujācārya has also refuted the arguments of Śaṅkara in his own commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, which is known as the Śrī-bhāṣya.
CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

Śrīpāda Rāmānujācārya has also refuted the arguments of Śaṅkara in his own commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, which is known as the Śrī-bhāṣya: "Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya has tried to equate the Pañcarātras with the philosophy of the atheist Kapila, and thus he has tried to prove that the Pañcarātras contradict the Vedic injunctions. The Pañcarātras state that the personality of jīva called Saṅkarṣaṇa has emerged from Vāsudeva, the supreme cause of all causes, that Pradyumna, the mind, has come from Saṅkarṣaṇa, and that Aniruddha, the ego, has come from Pradyumna. But one cannot say that the living entity (jīva) takes birth or is created, for such a statement is against the injunction of the Vedas. As stated in the Kaṭha Upaniṣad (2.18), living entities, as individual spiritual souls, can have neither birth nor death. All Vedic literature declares that the living entities are eternal. Therefore when it is said that Saṅkarṣaṇa is jīva, this indicates that He is the predominating Deity of the living entities. Similarly, Pradyumna is the predominating Deity of the mind, and Aniruddha is the predominating Deity of the ego."

The great Vaiṣṇava philosopher Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa has very nicely explained the materialistic conclusion in his Govinda-bhāṣya, a commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra.
CC Adi 6.14-15, Purport:

The great Vaiṣṇava philosopher Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa has very nicely explained the materialistic conclusion in his Govinda-bhāṣya, a commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. He writes as follows:

"The Sāṅkhya philosopher Kapila has connected the different elementary truths according to his own opinion. Material nature, according to him, consists of the equilibrium of the three material qualities—goodness, passion and ignorance. Material nature produces the material energy, known as mahat, and mahat produces the false ego. The ego produces the five objects of sense perception, which produce the ten senses (five for acquiring knowledge and five for working), the mind and the five gross elements. Counting the puruṣa, or the enjoyer, with these twenty-four elements, there are twenty-five different truths. The nonmanifested stage of these twenty-five elementary truths is called prakṛti, or material nature. The qualities of material nature can associate in three different stages, namely as the cause of happiness, the cause of distress and the cause of illusion. The quality of goodness is the cause of material happiness, the quality of passion is the cause of material distress, and the quality of ignorance is the cause of illusion. Our material experience lies within the boundaries of these three manifestations of happiness, distress and illusion."

Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, in his commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, has tried to nullify this conclusion because he thinks that discrediting these so-called causes of the cosmic manifestation will nullify the entire Sāṅkhya philosophy.
CC Adi 6.14-15, Purport:

The Sāṅkhya system of philosophy identifies three kinds of procedures—namely, pariṇāmāt (transformation), samanvayāt (adjustment) and śaktitaḥ (performance of energies)—as the causes of the cosmic manifestation.”

Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, in his commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, has tried to nullify this conclusion because he thinks that discrediting these so-called causes of the cosmic manifestation will nullify the entire Sāṅkhya philosophy. Materialistic philosophers accept matter to be the material and efficient cause of creation; for them, matter is the cause of every type of manifestation. Generally they give the example of a waterpot and clay. Clay is the cause of the waterpot, but the clay can be found as both cause and effect. The waterpot is the effect and clay itself is the cause, but clay is visible everywhere. A tree is matter, but a tree produces fruit. Water is matter, but water flows. In this way, say the Sāṅkhyites, matter is the cause of movements and production. As such, matter can be considered the material and efficient cause of everything in the cosmic manifestation.

The Māyāvādīs are very proud of having monopolized the Vedānta philosophy, but devotees have their own commentaries on Vedānta such as Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and others written by the ācāryas. The commentary of the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas is the Govinda-bhāṣya.
CC Adi 7.41, Purport:

Lord Kṛṣṇa is the actual compiler of Vedānta, and whatever He speaks is Vedānta philosophy. Although they are lacking the knowledge of Vedānta presented by the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the transcendental form of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the Māyāvādīs are very proud of their study. Foreseeing the bad effects of their presenting Vedānta philosophy in a perverted way, Śrīla Vyāsadeva compiled Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as a commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is bhāṣyo ’yaṁ brahma-sūtrāṇām; in other words, all the Vedānta philosophy in the aphorisms of the Brahma-sūtra is thoroughly described in the pages of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Thus the factual propounder of Vedānta philosophy is a Kṛṣṇa conscious person who always engages in reading and understanding the Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and teaching the purport of these books to the entire world. The Māyāvādīs are very proud of having monopolized the Vedānta philosophy, but devotees have their own commentaries on Vedānta such as Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and others written by the ācāryas. The commentary of the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas is the Govinda-bhāṣya.

Those who are Kṛṣṇa conscious actually have full knowledge of the essence of Vedānta philosophy, for they study the real commentary on the Vedānta philosophy, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and follow the actual words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead as found in Bhagavad-gītā As It Is.
CC Adi 7.42, Purport:

Foolish Māyāvādīs, not knowing that the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is based on a solid philosophy of transcendental science, superficially conclude that those who dance and chant do not have philosophical knowledge. Those who are Kṛṣṇa conscious actually have full knowledge of the essence of Vedānta philosophy, for they study the real commentary on the Vedānta philosophy, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and follow the actual words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead as found in Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. After understanding the Bhāgavata philosophy, or bhāgavata-dharma, they become fully spiritually conscious or Kṛṣṇa conscious, and therefore their chanting and dancing is not material but is on the spiritual platform. Although everyone admires the ecstatic chanting and dancing of the devotees, who are therefore popularly known as "the Hare Kṛṣṇa people," Māyāvādīs cannot appreciate these activities because of their poor fund of knowledge.

In the Gauḍīya-sampradāya there is a Vedānta commentary called the Govinda-bhāṣya, but the sahajiyās consider such commentaries to be untouchable philosophical speculation, and they consider the ācāryas to be mixed devotees. Thus they clear their way to hell.
CC Adi 7.72, Purport:

Taking advantage of these verses, there are some sahajiyās who, taking everything very cheaply, consider themselves elevated Vaiṣṇavas but do not care even to touch the Vedānta-sūtra or Vedānta philosophy. A real Vaiṣṇava should, however, study Vedānta philosophy, but if after studying Vedānta one does not adopt the chanting of the holy name of the Lord, he is no better than a Māyāvādī. Therefore, one should not be a Māyāvādī, yet one should not be unaware of the subject matter of Vedānta philosophy. Indeed, Caitanya Mahāprabhu exhibited His knowledge of Vedānta in His discourses with Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī. Thus it is to be understood that a Vaiṣṇava should be completely conversant with Vedānta philosophy, yet he should not think that studying Vedānta is all in all and therefore be unattached to the chanting of the holy name. A devotee must know the importance of simultaneously understanding Vedānta philosophy and chanting the holy names. If by studying Vedānta one becomes an impersonalist, he has not been able to understand Vedānta. This is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (15.15). Vedānta means "the end of knowledge." The ultimate end of knowledge is knowledge of Kṛṣṇa, who is identical with His holy name. Cheap Vaiṣṇavas (sahajiyās) do not care to study the Vedānta philosophy as commented upon by the four ācāryas. In the Gauḍīya-sampradāya there is a Vedānta commentary called the Govinda-bhāṣya, but the sahajiyās consider such commentaries to be untouchable philosophical speculation, and they consider the ācāryas to be mixed devotees. Thus they clear their way to hell.

Vedānta refers to the essence of Vedic knowledge, and it is not a fact that there is nothing more than Śaṅkarācārya's Śārīraka-bhāṣya. There are other Vedānta commentaries, written by Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, none of whom follow Śrī Śaṅkarācārya or accept the imaginative commentary of his school.
CC Adi 7.101, Purport:

The great Māyāvādī sannyāsī Sadānanda Yogīndra has written a book known as Vedānta-sāra, in which he writes, vedānto nāma upaniṣat-pramāṇam. tad-upakārīṇi śārīraka-sūtrādīni ca. According to Sadānanda Yogīndra, the Vedānta-sūtra and Upaniṣads, as presented by Śrī Śaṅkarācārya in his Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary, are the only sources of Vedic evidence. Actually, however, Vedānta refers to the essence of Vedic knowledge, and it is not a fact that there is nothing more than Śaṅkarācārya's Śārīraka-bhāṣya. There are other Vedānta commentaries, written by Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, none of whom follow Śrī Śaṅkarācārya or accept the imaginative commentary of his school. Their commentaries are based on the philosophy of duality. Monist philosophers like Śaṅkarācārya and his followers want to establish that God and the living entity are one, and instead of worshiping the Supreme Personality of Godhead they present themselves as God. They want to be worshiped as God by others. Such persons do not accept the philosophies of the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, which are known as śuddhādvaita (purified monism), śuddha-dvaita (purified dualism), viśiṣṭādvaita (specific monism), dvaitādvaita (monism and dualism) and acintya-bhedābheda (inconceivable oneness and difference). Māyāvādīs do not discuss these philosophies, for they are firmly convinced of their own philosophy of kevalādvaita, exclusive monism. Accepting this system of philosophy as the pure understanding of the Vedānta-sūtra, they believe that Kṛṣṇa has a body made of material elements and that the activities of loving service to Kṛṣṇa are sentimentality. They are known as Māyāvādīs because according to their opinion Kṛṣṇa has a body made of māyā and the loving service of the Lord executed by devotees is also māyā. They consider such devotional service to be an aspect of fruitive activities (karma-kāṇḍa). According to their view, bhakti consists of mental speculation or sometimes meditation. This is the difference between the Māyāvādī and Vaiṣṇava philosophies.

Besides Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, there are commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra composed by all the major Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, and in each of them devotional service to the Lord is described very explicitly. Only those who follow Śaṅkara's commentary have described the Vedānta-sūtra in an impersonal way, without reference to viṣṇu-bhakti, or devotional service to the Lord, Viṣṇu.
CC Adi 7.106, Purport:

Śrīla Vyāsadeva, a powerful incarnation of Nārāyaṇa, compiled the Vedānta-sūtra, and in order to protect it from unauthorized commentaries, he personally composed Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam on the instruction of his spiritual master, Nārada Muni, as the original commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. Besides Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, there are commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra composed by all the major Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, and in each of them devotional service to the Lord is described very explicitly. Only those who follow Śaṅkara's commentary have described the Vedānta-sūtra in an impersonal way, without reference to viṣṇu-bhakti, or devotional service to the Lord, Viṣṇu. Generally people very much appreciate this Śārīraka-bhāṣya, or impersonal description of the Vedānta-sūtra, but all commentaries that are devoid of devotional service to Lord Viṣṇu must be considered to differ in purport from the original Vedānta-sūtra. In other words, Lord Caitanya definitely confirmed that the commentaries, or bhāṣyas, written by the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas on the basis of devotional service to Lord Viṣṇu, and not the Śārīraka-bhāṣya of Śaṅkarācārya, give the actual explanation of the Vedānta-sūtra.

Unfortunately, Śrī Śaṅkarācārya, by the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, compromised between atheism and theism in order to cheat the atheists and bring them to theism, and to do so he gave up the direct method of Vedic knowledge and tried to present a meaning which is indirect. It is with this purpose that he wrote his Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra.
CC Adi 7.110, Purport:

The Vedic literature is to be considered a source of real knowledge, but if one does not take it as it is, one will be misled. For example, the Bhagavad-gītā is an important Vedic literature that has been taught for many years, but because it was commented upon by unscrupulous rascals, people derived no benefit from it, and no one came to the conclusion of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Since the purport of the Bhagavad-gītā is now being presented as it is, however, within four or five short years thousands of people all over the world have become Kṛṣṇa conscious. That is the difference between direct and indirect explanations of the Vedic literature. Therefore Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, mukhya-vṛttye sei artha parama mahattva: "To teach the Vedic literature according to its direct meaning, without false commentary, is glorious." Unfortunately, Śrī Śaṅkarācārya, by the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, compromised between atheism and theism in order to cheat the atheists and bring them to theism, and to do so he gave up the direct method of Vedic knowledge and tried to present a meaning which is indirect. It is with this purpose that he wrote his Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra.

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the real commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. Unfortunately, if one is attracted to Śrī Śaṅkarācārya's commentary, Śārīraka-bhāṣya, his spiritual life is doomed.
CC Adi 7.110, Purport:

One should not, therefore, attribute very much importance to the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. In order to understand Vedānta philosophy, one must study Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, which begins with the words oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya, janmādy asya yato ’nvayād itarataś cārtheṣv abhijñaḥ sva-rāṭ: "I offer my obeisances unto Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, son of Vasudeva, who is the Supreme all-pervading Personality of Godhead. I meditate upon Him, the transcendent reality, who is the primeval cause of all causes, from whom all manifested universes arise, in whom they dwell and by whom they are destroyed. I meditate upon that eternally effulgent Lord, who is directly and indirectly conscious of all manifestations and yet is fully independent." (SB 1.1.1) Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the real commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. Unfortunately, if one is attracted to Śrī Śaṅkarācārya's commentary, Śārīraka-bhāṣya, his spiritual life is doomed.

Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has declared, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: "Anyone who hears commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra from the Māyāvāda school is completely doomed."
CC Adi 7.128, Purport:

Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has declared, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: (CC Madhya 6.169) "Anyone who hears commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra from the Māyāvāda school is completely doomed." As explained in the Bhagavad-gītā (15.15), vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ: all Vedic literature aims at understanding Kṛṣṇa. Māyāvāda philosophy, however, has deviated everyone from Kṛṣṇa. Therefore there is a great need for the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement all over the world to save the world from degradation. Every intelligent and sane man must abandon the philosophical explanation of the Māyāvādīs and accept the explanation of Vaiṣṇava ācāryas. One should read Bhagavad-gītā As It Is to try to understand the real purport of the Vedas.

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the original commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, which is called nyāya-prasthāna. It was written to enable one to understand the Absolute Truth through infallible logic and argument, and therefore its natural commentary, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, is extremely elaborate.
CC Adi 8.36, Purport:

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the authoritative reference book from which to understand devotional service, but because it is very elaborate, few men can understand its purport. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the original commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, which is called nyāya-prasthāna. It was written to enable one to understand the Absolute Truth through infallible logic and argument, and therefore its natural commentary, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, is extremely elaborate. Professional reciters have created the impression that Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam deals only with Kṛṣṇa's rāsa-līlā, although Kṛṣṇa's rāsa-līlā is described only in chapters 29 through 33 of the Tenth Canto. They have in this way presented Kṛṣṇa to the Western world as a great woman-hunter, and therefore we sometimes have to deal with such misconceptions in preaching. Another difficulty in understanding Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is that the professional reciters have introduced bhāgavata-saptāha, or seven-day readings of the Bhāgavatam. They want to finish Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam in a week, although it is so sublime that even one verse of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, if properly explained, cannot be completed in three months. Under these circumstances, it is a great aid for the common man to read Śrīla Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura's Caitanya-bhāgavata, for thus he can actually understand devotional service, Kṛṣṇa, Lord Caitanya and Nityānanda.

Keśava Kāśmīrī wrote Kaustubha-prabhā, a commentary on the Vedānta commentary of the Nimbārka-sampradāya, which is known as the Pārijāta-bhāṣya.
CC Adi 16.25, Purport:

As in the modern day there are many champions in sports, so in bygone days there were many learned scholars in India who were champions in learning. One such person was Keśava Kāśmīrī, who came from the state of Kashmir. He traveled all over India and at last came to Navadvīpa to challenge the learned scholars there. Unfortunately he could not conquer the learned scholars in Navadvīpa, for he was defeated by the boy scholar Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Later he understood that Caitanya Mahāprabhu is none other than the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Thus he surrendered unto Him and later became a pure Vaiṣṇava in the sampradāya of Nimbārka. He wrote Kaustubha-prabhā, a commentary on the Vedānta commentary of the Nimbārka-sampradāya, which is known as the Pārijāta-bhāṣya.

CC Madhya-lila

Here, of course, the Vedānta mentioned is the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya. Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya intended to convert Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who was a Vaiṣṇava sannyāsī, into a Māyāvādī sannyāsī.
CC Madhya 6.120, Purport:

The Vedānta- or Brahma-sūtra, written by Śrīla Vyāsadeva, is a book studied by all advanced spiritual students, especially by the sannyāsīs of all religious communities (sampradāyas). The sannyāsīs must read the Vedānta-sūtra to establish their final conclusions concerning Vedic knowledge. Here, of course, the Vedānta mentioned is the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya. Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya intended to convert Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who was a Vaiṣṇava sannyāsī, into a Māyāvādī sannyāsī. He therefore made this arrangement to instruct Him in the Vedānta-sūtra according to the Śārīraka commentary of Śaṅkarācārya. All the sannyāsīs of the Śaṅkara-sampradāya enjoy seriously studying the Vedānta-sūtra with the Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary. It is said, vedānta-vākyeṣu sadā ramantaḥ: "One should always enjoy the studies of the Vedānta-sūtra."

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the original commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, written by the author himself, Śrīla Vyāsadeva.
CC Madhya 6.127, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu approved of a sannyāsī’s reading the Vedānta-sūtra, or Brahma-sūtra, but He did not approve the Śārīraka commentary of Śaṅkarācārya. Indeed, He said elsewhere, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: (CC Madhya 6.169) "If one hears the Śārīraka-bhāṣya of Śaṅkarācārya, he is doomed." Thus a sannyāsī, a transcendentalist, must read the Vedānta-sūtra regularly, but he should not read the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. This is the conclusion of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. The real commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Artho ’yaṁ brahma-sūtrānām: Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the original commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, written by the author himself, Śrīla Vyāsadeva.

The Māyāvādī philosophers think that the living entity is identical with the Supreme Soul, Brahman. Their commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra are completely opposed to the principle of devotional service.
CC Madhya 6.169, Purport:

Factually, the devotional service of the Lord is described in the Vedānta-sūtra, but the Māyāvādī philosophers, the Śaṅkarites, prepared a commentary known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya, in which the transcendental form of the Lord is denied. The Māyāvādī philosophers think that the living entity is identical with the Supreme Soul, Brahman. Their commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra are completely opposed to the principle of devotional service. Caitanya Mahāprabhu therefore warns us to avoid these commentaries. If one indulges in hearing the Śaṅkarite Śārīraka-bhāṣya, he will certainly be bereft of all real knowledge.

Viṭhṭhaleśvara completed many of his father's unfinished books, including his commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, the Subodhinī commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Vidvan-maṇḍana, Śṛṅgāra-rasa-maṇḍana and Nyāsādeśa-vivaraṇa.
CC Madhya 18.47, Purport:

Śrī Vallabha Bhaṭṭa had two sons. The elder, Gopīnātha, was born in 1432 Śakābda Era (A.D. 1510), and the younger, Viṭhṭhaleśvara, was born in 1437 (A.D. 1515) and died in 1507 (A.D. 1585). Viṭhṭhaleśvara had seven sons: Giridhara, Govinda, Bālakṛṣṇa, Gokuleśa, Raghunātha, Yadunātha and Ghanaśyāma. Viṭhṭhaleśvara completed many of his father's unfinished books, including his commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, the Subodhinī commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Vidvan-maṇḍana, Śṛṅgāra-rasa-maṇḍana and Nyāsādeśa-vivaraṇa. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu went to Vṛndāvana before the birth of Viṭhṭhaleśvara. As previously mentioned, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī was very old at the time Gopāla stayed at the house of Viṭhṭhaleśvara.

Vallabhācārya's book known as Ṣoḍaśa-grantha and his commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra (Anubhāṣya) and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (Subodhinī) are very famous.
CC Madhya 19.61, Purport:

Vallabhācārya had two sons, Gopīnātha and Viṭhṭhaleśvara, and in his old age he accepted the renounced order. In 1452 Śakābda Era (A.D. 1530), he passed away from the material world at Vārāṇasī. His book known as Ṣoḍaśa-grantha and his commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra (Anubhāṣya) and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (Subodhinī) are very famous. He wrote many other books besides.

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu then pointed out that Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the proper commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra.
CC Madhya 25 Summary:

One day Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu went to take a bath at Pañcanada, and afterwards all His devotees began chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra in front of the temple of Bindu Mādhava. At this time Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī and all his devotees approached the Lord. Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī immediately fell down at the lotus feet of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and very much regretted his past behavior toward the Lord. He asked Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu about devotional service in terms of the Vedānta-sūtra, and the Lord told him about devotional service that is approved by great personalities who know the Vedānta-sūtra. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu then pointed out that Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the proper commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. He then explained the catuḥ-ślokī (SB 2.9.33/34/35/36) (four ślokas) of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the essence of that great scripture.

CC Antya-lila

Such Māyāvāda philosophical commentaries upon the Vedānta-sūtra are simply imaginary, but there are other commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra.
CC Antya 2.95, Purport:

The philosophers known as kevalādvaita-vādīs generally occupy themselves with hearing the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, a commentary by Śaṅkarācārya advocating that one impersonally consider oneself the Supreme Lord. Such Māyāvāda philosophical commentaries upon the Vedānta-sūtra are simply imaginary, but there are other commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra. The commentary by Śrīla Rāmānujācārya, known as Śrī-bhāṣya, establishes the viśiṣṭādvaita-vāda philosophy. Similarly, in the Brahma-sampradāya, Madhvācārya's Pūrṇaprajña-bhāṣya establishes śuddha-dvaita-vāda. In the Kumāra-sampradāya, or Nimbārka-sampradāya, Śrī Nimbārka establishes the philosophy of dvaitādvaita-vāda in the Pārijāta-saurabha-bhāṣya. And in the Viṣṇu-svāmi-sampradāya, or Rudra-sampradāya, which comes from Lord Śiva, Viṣṇu Svāmī has written a commentary called Sarvajña-bhāṣya, which establishes śuddhādvaita-vāda.

A Vaiṣṇava should study the commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra written by the four sampradāya-ācāryas, namely Śrī Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī and Nimbārka, for these commentaries are based upon the philosophy that the Lord is the master and that all living entities are His eternal servants.
CC Antya 2.95, Purport:

A Vaiṣṇava should study the commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra written by the four sampradāya-ācāryas, namely Śrī Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī and Nimbārka, for these commentaries are based upon the philosophy that the Lord is the master and that all living entities are His eternal servants. One interested in studying Vedānta philosophy properly must study these commentaries, especially if he is a Vaiṣṇava. These commentaries are always adored by Vaiṣṇavas. The commentary by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī is elaborately given in the Ādi-līlā, Chapter Seven, text 101. The Māyāvāda commentary Śārīraka-bhāṣya is like poison for a Vaiṣṇava. It should not be touched at all. Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura remarks that even a mahā-bhāgavata, or highly elevated devotee who has surrendered himself unto the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, sometimes falls down from pure devotional service if he hears the Māyāvāda philosophy of the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. This commentary should therefore be shunned by all Vaiṣṇavas.

CC Antya 2.96, Translation:

"The Māyāvāda philosophy presents such a jugglery of words that even a highly elevated devotee who has accepted Kṛṣṇa as his life and soul changes his decision when he reads the Māyāvāda commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra."

Page Title:Commentary on the Vedanta-sutra (CC)
Compiler:Labangalatika
Created:23 of Sep, 2010
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=25, OB=0, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:25