An analogy will help us understand the distincion between ourselves and God. From the ground we may see only clouds in the sky, but if we fly above the clouds we can see the sun shining. From the sky, skyscrapers and cities seem very tiny; similarly, from God's position this entire material creation is insignificant. The tendency of the living entity is to come down from the heights, where everything can be seen in perspective. God, however, does not have this tendency. The Supreme Lord is not subject to fall down into illusion (māyā) any more than the sun is subject to fall beneath the clouds. Impersonalist philosophers (Māyāvādīs) maintain that both the living entity and God Himself are under the control of māyā when they come into this material world. This is the fallacy of their philosophy.
Impersonalist philosophers
Expressions researched:
"Impersonalist philosopher"
|"Impersonalist philosopher"
|"impersonalist philosopher"
|"impersonalist philosopher"
|"impersonalist philosophers"
|"impersonalist philosophers"
|"impersonalistic philosophers"
|"the impersonalistic philosophers"
Bhagavad-gita As It Is
BG Chapters 7 - 12
The impersonalist philosophers, who wish to maintain that the Absolute Truth is without senses, cannot comprehend this verse of Bhagavad-gītā. To them, it is either a metaphor or proof of the mundane character of Kṛṣṇa, the speaker of the Bhagavad-gītā. But, in actuality, Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Godhead, has senses, and it is stated that His senses are interchangeable; in other words, one sense can perform the function of any other. This is what it means to say that Kṛṣṇa is absolute. Lacking senses, He could hardly be considered full in all opulences. In the Seventh Chapter, Kṛṣṇa has explained that He impregnates the living entities into material nature. This is done by His looking upon material nature. And so in this instance, Kṛṣṇa's hearing the devotee's words of love in offering foodstuffs is wholly identical with His eating and actually tasting. This point should be emphasized: because of His absolute position, His hearing is wholly identical with His eating and tasting. Only the devotee, who accepts Kṛṣṇa as He describes Himself, without interpretation, can understand that the Supreme Absolute Truth can eat food and enjoy it.
Srimad-Bhagavatam
SB Canto 1
Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura specifically deals with the original and pure sex psychology (ādi-rasa), devoid of all mundane inebriety. The whole material creation is moving under the principle of sex life. In modern civilization, sex life is the focal point for all activities. Wherever one turns his face, he sees sex life predominant. Therefore, sex life is not unreal. Its reality is experienced in the spiritual world. The material sex life is but a perverted reflection of the original fact. The original fact is in the Absolute Truth, and thus the Absolute Truth cannot be impersonal. It is not possible to be impersonal and contain pure sex life. Consequently, the impersonalist philosophers have given indirect impetus to the abominable mundane sex life because they have overstressed the impersonality of the ultimate truth. Consequently, man without information of the actual spiritual form of sex has accepted perverted material sex life as the all in all. There is a distinction between sex life in the diseased material condition and spiritual sex life.
SB Canto 2
In Bhagavad-gītā (12.5) it is said that the impersonalist undergoes a series of difficult programs on account of his impersonal meditation. But the devotee, due to the Lord's personal service, progresses very easily. Impersonal meditation is therefore a source of suffering for the impersonalist. Here, the devotee has an advantage over the impersonalist philosopher. The impersonalist is doubtful about the personal feature of the Lord, and therefore he always tries to meditate upon something which is not objective. For this reason there is an authentic statement in the Bhāgavatam regarding the positive concentration of the mind on the factual form of the Lord.
SB Canto 3
This cosmic manifestation is separated from the Supreme Lord as material energy by means of kāla, which is the unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Lord. It is situated as the objective manifestation of the Lord under the influence of the same material energy of Viṣṇu.
As stated previously by Nārada before Vyāsadeva (SB 1.5.20), idaṁ hi viśvaṁ bhagavān ivetaraḥ: this unmanifested world is the self-same Personality of Godhead, but it appears to be something else beyond or besides the Lord. It appears so because of its being separated from the Lord by means of kāla. It is something like the tape-recorded voice of a person who is now separated from the voice. As the tape recording is situated on the tape, so the whole cosmic manifestation is situated on the material energy and appears separate by means of kāla. The material manifestation is therefore the objective manifestation of the Supreme Lord and exhibits His impersonal feature so much adored by impersonalist philosophers.
Since the Personality of Godhead is in the absolute position, there is no difference between His pastimes and His personality. Anyone who hears about the pastimes of the Lord associates with the Lord directly, and one who associates directly with the Lord is certainly freed from all sinful activities, even to the extent of the killing of a brāhmaṇa, which is considered the most sinful activity in the material world. One should be very eager to hear about the activities of the Lord from the bona fide source, the pure devotee. If one simply gives aural reception to the narration and accepts the glories of the Lord, then he is qualified. The impersonalist philosophers cannot understand the activities of the Lord. They think that all His activities are māyā; therefore they are called Māyāvādīs. Since everything to them is māyā, these narrations are not for them. Some impersonalists are reluctant to hear Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, although many of them are now taking an interest in it just for monetary gain. Actually, however, they have no faith. On the contrary, they describe it in their own way. We should not hear, therefore, from the Māyāvādīs. We have to hear from Sūta Gosvāmī or Maitreya, who actually present the narrations as they are, and only then can we relish the pastimes of the Lord; otherwise the effects on the neophyte audience will be poisonous.
SB Canto 4
The example of Dhruva Mahārāja is that he engaged himself in devotional service to the Lord according to the order of his spiritual master, Nārada Muni. As a result of his rendering such devotional service with great determination and austerity, the Personality of Godhead personally manifested Himself before him. Dhruva was only a child. He wanted to offer nice prayers to the Lord, but because he lacked sufficient knowledge, he hesitated; but by the mercy of the Lord, as soon as the Lord's conchshell touched his forehead, he became completely aware of the Vedic conclusion. That conclusion is based on proper understanding of the difference between jīva and Paramātmā, the individual soul and the Supersoul. The individual soul is forever a servant of the Supersoul, and therefore his relationship with the Supersoul is to offer service. That is called bhakti-yoga, or bhakti-bhāva. Dhruva Mahārāja offered his prayers to the Lord not in the way of the impersonalist philosophers, but as a devotee. Therefore, it is clearly said here, bhakti-bhāva. The only prayers worth offering are those offered to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, whose reputation is spread far and wide. Dhruva Mahārāja wanted to have the kingdom of his father, but his father refused even to allow him to get on his lap. In order to fulfill his desire, the Lord had already created a planet known as the polestar, Dhruvaloka, which was never to be annihilated even at the time of the dissolution of the universe. Dhruva Mahārāja attained this perfection not by acting hastily, but by patiently executing the order of his spiritual master, and therefore he became so successful that he saw the Lord face to face. Now he was further enabled, by the causeless mercy of the Lord, to offer fitting prayers to the Lord. To glorify or offer prayers unto the Supreme, one needs the Lord's mercy. One cannot write to glorify the Lord unless one is endowed with His causeless mercy.
In this verse it is specifically advised that instead of wasting time in the human form of life endeavoring for economic development and sense gratification, one should try to cultivate spiritual values by understanding the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is existing with the individual soul within everyone's heart. The individual soul and the Supreme Personality of Godhead in His Paramātmā feature are both sitting within this body, which is covered by gross and subtle elements. To understand this is to attain actual spiritual culture. There are two ways of advancing in spiritual culture—by the method of the impersonalist philosophers and by devotional service. The impersonalist comes to the conclusion that he and the Supreme Spirit are one, whereas devotees, or personalists, realize the Absolute Truth by understanding that because the Absolute Truth is the supreme predominator and we living entities are predominated, our duty is to serve Him. The Vedic injunctions say, tat tvam asi, "You are the same," and so'ham, "I am the same." The impersonalist conception of these mantras is that the Supreme Lord, or the Absolute Truth, and the living entity are one, but from the devotee's point of view these mantras assert that both the Supreme Lord and ourselves are of the same quality. Tat tvam asi, ayam ātmā brahma. Both the Supreme Lord and the living entity are spirit. Understanding this is self-realization. The human form of life is meant for understanding the Supreme Lord and oneself by spiritual cultivation of knowledge. One should not waste valuable life simply engaged in economic development and sense gratification.
Because of their poor fund of knowledge, impersonalist philosophers cannot understand how everything comes out from the Supreme person and then merges into Him again. As Brahma-saṁhitā (5.40) confirms:
- yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi-
- koṭiṣv aśeṣa-vasudhādi-vibhūti-bhinnam
- tad brahma niṣkalam anantam aśeṣa-bhūtaṁ
- govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi
Transcendental rays emanate from the body of Kṛṣṇa, and within those rays, which are the Brahman effulgence, everything is existing. This is confirmed in Bhagavad-gītā (9.4). Mat-sthāni sarva-bhūtāni. Although Kṛṣṇa is not personally present everywhere, His energy is the cause of all creation. The entire cosmic manifestation is nothing but a display of Kṛṣṇa's energy.
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta
CC Preface and Introduction
CC Madhya-lila
The Personality of Godhead is worshiped by exalted demigods like Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva. The original Māyāvādī sannyāsī, Śaṅkarācārya, also accepted the fact that the Lord's form is transcendental: nārāyaṇaḥ paro ’vyaktāt. "Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is beyond the avyakta, the unmanifested material energy." Avyaktād aṇḍa-sambhavaḥ: "This material world is a creation of that unmanifested material energy." However, Nārāyaṇa has His own eternal form, which is not created by the material energy. Simply by worshiping the form of the Lord, one is purified. However, Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are impersonalist philosophers, and they describe the form of the Lord as māyā, or false. How can one be purified by worshiping something false? Māyāvādī philosophers have no sufficient reason for being impersonalists. They blindly follow a principle that cannot be supported by reason or argument. This was the situation with Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, the chief Māyāvādī sannyāsī of Benares. He was supposed to teach Vedānta philosophy, but he would not accept the form of the Lord; therefore he was attacked with leprosy. Nonetheless, he continued to commit sins by describing the Absolute Truth as impersonal. The Absolute Truth, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, always displays pastimes and activities, but Māyāvādī sannyāsīs claim that these activities are false.
Other Books by Srila Prabhupada
Teachings of Lord Caitanya
The Supreme Lord is not subject to falling down into illusion (māyā), any more than the sun is subject to falling beneath the clouds. Impersonalist philosophers (Māyāvādīs) maintain that because we fall under the control of māyā when we come into this material world, God must also fall under māyā’s control. This is the fallacy of their philosophy.
During Caitanya Mahāprabhu's time there were also other impersonalist philosophers known as the Māyāvādī philosophers of Saranātha. Saranātha is a place near Benares where Buddhist philosophers used to reside, and even today many stūpas of the Buddhist Māyāvādīs can be seen. The Māyāvādī philosophers of Saranātha are different from the impersonalists who believe in the impersonal manifestation of Brahman. According to the Saranātha philosophers, there is no spiritual existence at all. The fact is that both the Māyāvādī philosophers of Benares and the philosophers of Saranātha are entrapped by material nature. None of them actually know the nature of the absolute transcendence. Although superficially accepting the Vedic principles and considering themselves transcendentalists, the philosophers of Benares do not accept spiritual variegatedness. Because they have no information about devotional service, they are called nondevotees, or those who are against the devotional service of Lord Kṛṣṇa.
According to Māyāvādī philosophers, the Vedānta refers to the Śārīraka commentary of Śaṅkarācārya. When impersonalist philosophers refer to the Vedānta and the Upaniṣads, they are actually referring to these works as understood through the commentaries of Śaṅkarācārya, the greatest teacher of Māyāvāda philosophy. After Śaṅkarācārya came Sadānanda Yogīndra, who claimed that the Vedānta and Upaniṣads should be understood through the commentaries of Śaṅkarācārya. Factually, this is not so. There are many commentaries on the Vedānta and the Upaniṣads made by Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, and these are preferred to those of Śaṅkarācārya. But the Māyāvādī philosophers, influenced by Śaṅkarācārya, do not attribute any importance to the Vaiṣṇava understandings.
Nectar of Devotion
Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī is trying here to describe the different achievements of the impersonalists and the personalists. Generally, those who are impersonalists and are inimical to the Supreme Personality of Godhead get entrance only into the impersonal Brahman, when and if they reach spiritual perfection. The impersonalist philosophers are in one sense like the enemies of the Lord, because the out-and-out enemies of the Lord and the impersonalists are both allowed to enter only into the impersonal effulgence of the brahma-jyotir. So it is to be understood that they are of similar classification. And actually the impersonalists are enemies of God, because they cannot tolerate the unparalleled opulence of the Lord. They try always to place themselves on the same level with the Lord. That is due to their envious attitude. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has proclaimed the impersonalists to be offenders of the Lord. The Lord is so kind, however, that even though they are His enemies, they are still allowed to enter into the spiritual kingdom and remain in the impersonal brahma-jyotir, the undifferentiated light of the Absolute.
A pure devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa resides in the district of Mathurā or Vṛndāvana and visits all the places where Kṛṣṇa's pastimes were performed. At these sacred places Kṛṣṇa displayed His childhood activities with the cowherd boys and mother Yaśodā. The system of circumambulating all these places is still current among devotees of Lord Kṛṣṇa, and those coming to Mathurā and Vṛndāvana always feel transcendental pleasure. Actually, if someone goes to Vṛndāvana, he will immediately feel separation from Kṛṣṇa, who performed such nice activities when He was present there.
Such attraction for remembering Kṛṣṇa's activities is known as attachment for Kṛṣṇa. There are impersonalist philosophers and mystics, however, who by a show of devotional service want ultimately to merge into the existence of the Supreme Lord. They sometimes try to imitate a pure devotee's sentiment for visiting the holy places where Kṛṣṇa had His pastimes, but they simply have a view for salvation, and so their activities cannot be considered attachment.
Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead
Kṛṣṇa then spoke to His elder brother Balarāma as follows: “My dear brother, You are superior to all of us, and Your lotus feet are worshiped by the demigods. Just see how these trees, full with fruits and flowers, have bent down to worship Your lotus feet. It appears that they are trying to get out of the darkness that has obliged them to accept the form of trees. Actually, the trees born in the land of Vṛndāvana are not ordinary living entities. Having held the impersonal point of view in their past lives, they have been put into this stationary condition of life, but now they have the opportunity of seeing You in Vṛndāvana, and they are praying for further advancement in spiritual life through Your personal association. Generally, living entities in the mode of darkness obtain the bodies of trees. The impersonalist philosophers are in that darkness, but they eradicate it by taking full advantage of Your presence. I think the drones that are buzzing all around You must have been Your devotees in their past lives. They cannot leave Your company because no one can be a better, more affectionate master than You. You are the supreme and original Personality of Godhead, and the drones are just trying to spread Your glories by chanting at every moment. I think some of them must be great sages, devotees of Your Lordship, and they are disguising themselves in the form of drones because they are unable to give up Your company even for a moment. My dear brother, You are the supreme worshipable Godhead. Just see how the peacocks are dancing before You in great ecstasy. The deer, whose behavior is just like that of the gopīs, are welcoming You with the same affection. And the cuckoos who are residing in this forest are welcoming You with their joyful, sweet cries because they consider that Your appearance in their home is so auspicious.
Renunciation Through Wisdom
If an impersonalist philosopher, due to some piety, engages in devotional service to the Supreme Lord, then only does he become dear to the Lord. But as long as the impersonalists try to rob the Supreme Lord of His divine potencies, they can never be dear to Him, nor can they be called mahātmās. They will continue to be counted among the demoniac atheists deluded by the Lord's illusory potency. These atheists are not wise men: they are simply ordinary mortals who are offenders against the Lord.
Sri Isopanisad
Here is a description of some of the Supreme Lord's transcendental activities, executed by His inconceivable potencies. The contradictions given here prove the inconceivable potencies of the Lord. "He walks, and He does not walk." Ordinarily, if someone can walk, it is illogical to say he cannot walk. But in reference to God, such a contradiction simply serves to indicate His inconceivable power. With our limited fund of knowledge we cannot accommodate such contradictions, and therefore we conceive of the Lord in terms of our limited powers of understanding. For example, the impersonalist philosophers of the Māyāvāda school accept only the Lord's impersonal activities and reject His personal feature. But the members of the Bhāgavata school, adopting the perfect conception of the Lord, accept His inconceivable potencies and thus understand that He is both personal and impersonal. The bhāgavatas know that without inconceivable potencies there can be no meaning to the words "Supreme Lord."
The brahma-jyotir is described in the Brahma-saṁhitā as the rays emanating from that supreme spiritual planet, Goloka Vṛndāvana, just as the sun's rays emanate from the sun globe. Until one surpasses the glare of the brahma-jyotir, one cannot receive information of the land of the Lord. The impersonalist philosophers, blinded as they are by the dazzling brahma-jyotir, can realize neither the factual abode of the Lord nor His transcendental form. Limited by their poor fund of knowledge, such impersonalist thinkers cannot understand the all-blissful transcendental form of Lord Kṛṣṇa. In this prayer, therefore, Śrī Īśopaniṣad petitions the Lord to remove the effulgent rays of the brahma-jyotir so that the pure devotee can see His all-blissful transcendental form.
Conversations and Morning Walks
1973 Conversations and Morning Walks
Karandhara: Well, they say that there is no original. It never began, so there's no original. Hṛdayānanda: They also say that there's no resting place. They say that energy has no resting place. Prabhupāda: But that is absurd because we see the energy is coming from the powerhouse, electric energy. How you cannot deny? Karandhara: The energy is just generated there, but it is not created there. Prabhupāda: Generated, you simply change the name. What is the difference between generated and created? Karandhara: Well, created means to be born or to start. Prabhupāda: Yes, born. The child is created. There was no child. Karandhara: But the energy which makes up this body was always present. Prabhupāda: That we also say, by the formation, when it takes place, it is created. Just like you prepare food. Why do you say, "prepare"? What is the meaning of "prepare"? The ingredients are there, but why do you say, "prepare food"? You cannot say... Huh? What is that? Hṛdayānanda: Before you prepare it, that particular preparation... Prabhupāda: That we say. The energy was... Karandhara: That is just a conventional term in relationship to you. That is just relative to you, relative to your relationship with that food. Prabhupāda: This is called impersonalism... Karandhara: But the food was always there. Prabhupāda: ...that... We talk in relationship, everything, because this is relative world. Everything we talk, that is in relative consideration. That is Māyāvāda philosophy. They do not accept the relativity. Although when there is some toothache, he will go to the doctor. Why does he not..., "No, it is māyā. Why I shall be troubled with the toothache?" Why does he go to the doctor? That is the defect of Māyāvāda philosophy. They are being affected by the change, but still, they will say, "There is no change. It is all the same." Karandhara: Well, that is what they say. They say, "If it is all the same, then I can go to the doctor." Prabhupāda: Yes, but that is foolishness. If they say once that "The suffering and not suffering is all the same," why does he go to the doctor? Karandhara: Well, when you say, "It's all the same," it doesn't matter what you do. You have encompassed everything. Girirāja: But they always go. Karandhara: That doesn't matter. If they don't go or do go, it's all the same. It doesn't matter. Prabhupāda: That means it doesn't matter... If I beat you with shoes, it doesn't matter? Why do you become angry? Karandhara: Well, it doesn't matter that I become angry. Prabhupāda: (laughing) So let me beat you. You don't become angry or become angry, I don't care. Karandhara: Well, they say, "That's going on anyway." Prabhupāda: That's all right. Then there is no question of philosophy. Finish. Everything one. That... This philosophy was discussed by Caitanya Mahāprabhu and His mother. He was eating dirt, and mother gave Him sandeśa. So He did not care to take sandeśa. He was eating dirt. Then mother came, "My dear boy, why you are eating dirt? Here is sandeśa. I have given you." "Mother, what is the difference between sandeśa and dirt? They are all the same. (laughing) They are all the same." "Yes, my dear boy, You are impersonalist philosopher. But it is required. Just like the water jug is also earth, made of earth. It is earth. And this ground is also earth. But when you have to keep water you require this water jug, not this earth." That is relativity. If you have to take work, then you cannot say, "Well, this is also earth, this is also... Why...? The pot is not required. Put water here." Then you will suffer, no water. So this kind of philosophy was discussed when Caitanya Mahāprabhu was a child. (break) ...and the tree is the same thing. But when I walk, I require the stick, not this tree. (break) ...The dogs must be on lash (leash). If somebody does not do that, he is criminal. So if he pleads in the court, "There is no difference, dogs on the lash or without lash. Why you are punishing me?" But will that be accepted? Karandhara: Well, the judge says, "There is no difference whether I put you in jail or not." Prabhupāda: (laughs) That's it. Then he has to accept jail. He should not defend himself. "Never mind. I go to jail." Why he appoints a lawyer to defend himself? Karandhara: Well, that's what the impersonalist philosophers say, that "Go ahead and..." (break) Prajāpati: ...The most famous theologian of this century named Paul Tillich said that all words are symbols, and God is a religious symbol pointing to our ultimate concern. Prabhupāda: Yes, that's nice. We say also. Karandhara: Except Paul Tillich was the ultimate rascal. He was a debaucher. He debauched women all over Europe. Hṛdayānanda: He recently died. Karandhara: There is a book about him, a very inflammatory book about how he would debauch all of his friends. He said he got all of his inspirations after having sex with other women. He said after having sex he would get his inspirations on theology. Prabhupāda: Sometimes the drunkards say also like that. They get inspiration by drinking.
Correspondence
1968 Correspondence
The marginal position of voidness between Brahmajyoti and the material world manifestation is the destination of the Buddhist philosophers. Therefore the voidness philosophy is worse than Impersonalist philosophy. This voidness philosophy is simply nirvana, or absence of material manifestation, but actually it is a material stand whereas Impersonalist monism is transcendental to material manifestation and voidness. Therefore the conception of Brahmajyoti is advanced realization than conception of nirvana. Nobody can be satisfied in void or Impersonalist philosophy; they are against the nature of the spirit soul. We understand from Vedanta philosophy that the spirit soul is by nature joyful. There is no joy in voidness or Impersonalism and because such imperfect philosophers do not know of the association of Krishna which is full of bliss and knowledge, they will fall down repeatedly into voidness and Impersonalism with the result that they cannot stay there and they fall down to the material atmosphere. In Bhagavad-gita it is said by the Lord that these people, void and Impersonalist philosophers, are in great trouble. If they are fortunate enough to meet a pure devotee of Krishna and if they are sincere in their search for the absolute truth, they will find Krishna Consciousness as the last resort of their philosophical researches. Try to help these bewildered philosophers by presentation of your nice Krishna Consciousness thesis which you have prepared, and I am sure Krishna will help you in all respects. Simply your sincerity of service is required and He will dictate from within you how to make your thesis. It will be a great service to the humanity, especially to the Western world.
| Page Title: | Impersonalist philosophers |
| Compiler: | Labangalatika, Marc |
| Created: | 10 of Jul, 2011 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=1, SB=7, CC=3, OB=10, Lec=0, Con=1, Let=2 |
| No. of Quotes: | 24 |