Interpretation (SB)

Expressions researched:
"interpret" |"interpretated" |"interpretation" |"interpretations" |"interpreted" |"interpreter" |"interpreters" |"interpreting" |"interpretive" |"interprets"

SB Preface and Introduction

SB Introduction:

Those who are followers of the Śaṅkara cult are generally known as Vedāntists. This does not, however, mean that Vedānta is a monopoly study of the Śaṅkara-sampradāya. Vedānta is studied by all the bona fide sampradāyas, but they have their own interpretations. But generally only those in the Śaṅkara-sampradāya are known as Vedāntists, and people have no knowledge of the Vaiṣṇava Vedāntists. For this reason the Bhaktivedanta title was first offered to the author by the Vaiṣṇavas.

SB Introduction:

Upon this, the Lord spoke as follows: "My dear sir, I can understand the meaning of the sūtras like janmādy asya yataḥ, śāstra-yonitvāt, and athāto brahma jijñāsā of the Vedānta-sūtra, but when you explain them in your own way it becomes difficult for Me to follow them. The purpose of the sūtras is already explained in them, but your explanations are covering them with something else. You do not purposely take the direct meaning of the sūtras but indirectly give your own interpretations."

SB Introduction:

The purpose of the sūtras is already explained in them, but your explanations are covering them with something else. You do not purposely take the direct meaning of the sūtras but indirectly give your own interpretations."

The Lord thus attacked all Vedāntists who interpret the Vedānta-sūtra fashionably, according to their limited power of thinking, to serve their own purpose. Such indirect interpretations of the authentic literatures like the Vedānta-sūtra are hereby condemned by the Lord.

SB Introduction:

The Lord continued: "Śrīla Vyāsadeva has summarized the direct meanings of the mantras in the Upaniṣads in the Vedānta-sūtra. Unfortunately you do not take their direct meaning. You indirectly interpret them in a different way.

"The authority of the Vedas is unchallengeable and stands without any question of doubt. And whatever is stated in the Vedas must be accepted completely, otherwise one challenges the authority of the Vedas.

"The conchshell and cow dung are bone and stool of two living beings. But because they have been recommended by the Vedas as pure, people accept them as such because of the authority of the Vedas."

SB Introduction:

The idea is that one cannot set his imperfect reason above the authority of the Vedas. The orders of the Vedas must be obeyed as they stand, without any mundane reasoning. The so-called followers of the Vedic injunctions make their own interpretations of the Vedic injunctions, and thus they establish different parties and sects of the Vedic religion. Lord Buddha directly denied the authority of the Vedas, and he established his own religion. Only for this reason, the Buddhist religion was not accepted by the strict followers of the Vedas. But those who are so-called followers of the Vedas are more harmful than the Buddhists. The Buddhists have the courage to deny the Vedas directly, but the so-called followers of the Vedas have no courage to deny the Vedas, although indirectly they disobey all the injunctions of the Vedas. Lord Caitanya condemned this.

SB Introduction:

"The Vedic injunctions are self-authorized, and if some mundane creature adjusts the interpretations of the Vedas, he defies their authority. It is foolish to think of oneself as more intelligent than Śrīla Vyāsadeva. He has already expressed himself in his sūtras, and there is no need of help from personalities of lesser importance. His work, the Vedānta-sūtra, is as dazzling as the midday sun, and when someone tries to give his own interpretations on the self-effulgent sunlike Vedānta-sūtra, he attempts to cover this sun with the cloud of his imagination.

SB Introduction:

The latter statements definitely suggest the personal features of the Lord, although His hands and legs are distinguished from mundane hands and legs or other senses.

"Brahman, therefore, is never impersonal, but when such mantras are indirectly interpreted, it is wrongly thought that the Absolute Truth is impersonal. The Absolute Truth Personality of Godhead is full of all opulences, and therefore He has a transcendental form of full existence, knowledge and bliss. How then can one establish that the Absolute Truth is impersonal?

SB Introduction:

As such, in the Vedānta there cannot be any human deficiencies like mistake, illusion, cheating or inefficiency. The message of the Upaniṣads is expressed in the Vedānta-sūtra, and understanding the direct meaning of what is said there is certainly glorious. Whatever interpretations have been given by Śaṅkarācārya have no direct bearing on the sūtra, and therefore such commentation spoils everything.

SB Introduction:

"The word Brahman indicates the greatest of all, which is full with transcendental opulences, superior to all. Brahman is ultimately the Personality of Godhead, and He is covered by indirect interpretations and established as impersonal. Everything that is in the spiritual world is full of transcendental bliss, including the form, body, place and paraphernalia of the Lord. All are eternally cognizant and blissful. It is not the fault of the Ācārya Śaṅkara that he has so interpreted Vedānta, but if someone accepts it, then certainly he is doomed. Anyone who accepts the transcendental body of the Personality of Godhead as something mundane certainly commits the greatest blasphemy."

SB Introduction:

The Lord thus spoke to the sannyāsī almost in the same way that He spoke to the Bhaṭṭācārya of Purī, and by forceful arguments He nullified the Māyāvāda interpretations of the Vedānta-sūtra. All the sannyāsīs there claimed that the Lord was the personified Vedas and the Personality of Godhead. All the sannyāsīs were converted to the cult of bhakti, all of them accepted the holy name of the Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and they dined together with the Lord in the midst of them. After this conversion of the sannyāsīs, the popularity of the Lord increased at Vārāṇasī, and thousands of people assembled to see the Lord in person. The Lord thus established the primary importance of Śrīmad-Bhāgavata-dharma, and He defeated all other systems of spiritual realization. After that everyone at Vārāṇasī was overwhelmed with the transcendental saṅkīrtana movement.

SB Canto 1

SB 1.1.2, Purport:

Sometimes professional readers of the Bhāgavatam immediately plunge into the confidential topics of the pastimes of the Supreme Lord, which they seemingly interpret as sex literature. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is meant to be heard from the beginning. Those who are fit to assimilate this work are mentioned in this śloka: "One becomes qualified to hear Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam after many pious deeds." The intelligent person, with thoughtful discretion, can be assured by the great sage Vyāsadeva that he can realize the Supreme Personality directly by hearing Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Without undergoing the different stages of realization set forth in the Vedas, one can be lifted immediately to the position of paramahaṁsa simply by agreeing to receive this message.

SB 1.1.3, Purport:

They usually plunge into the subject matter of the rāsa dance, which is misunderstood by the foolish class of men. Some of them take this to be immoral, while others try to cover it up by their own stupid interpretations. They have no desire to follow in the footsteps of Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī.

One should conclude, therefore, that the serious student of the rasa should receive the message of Bhāgavatam in the chain of disciplic succession from Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī, who describes the Bhāgavatam from its very beginning and not whimsically to satisfy the mundaner who has very little knowledge in transcendental science. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is so carefully presented that a sincere and serious person can at once enjoy the ripened fruit of Vedic knowledge simply by drinking the nectarean juice through the mouth of Śukadeva Gosvāmī or his bona fide representative.

SB 1.2.20, Purport:

One has to surpass the brahminical stage and reach the vasudeva stage to understand the Personality of Godhead Kṛṣṇa. The science of the Personality of Godhead is the subject matter for study by the postgraduate students in the spiritual line. Foolish men, or men with a poor fund of knowledge, do not understand the Supreme Lord, and they interpret Kṛṣṇa according to their respective whims. The fact is, however, that one cannot understand the science of the Personality of Godhead unless one is freed from the contamination of the material modes, even up to the stage of a brāhmaṇa. When a qualified brāhmaṇa factually becomes a Vaiṣṇava, in the enlivened state of liberation he can know what is actually the Personality of Godhead.

SB 1.3.42, Purport:

Vyāsadeva delivered the message to Śukadeva Gosvāmī, and from Śukadeva Gosvāmī, Sūta Gosvāmī received the message. One should therefore receive the message of Bhāgavatam from Sūta Gosvāmī or from his representative and not from any irrelevant interpreter.

Emperor Parīkṣit received the information of his death in time, and he at once left his kingdom and family and sat down on the bank of the Ganges to fast till death. All great sages, ṛṣis, philosophers, mystics, etc., went there due to his imperial position. They offered many suggestions about his immediate duty, and at last it was settled that he would hear from Śukadeva Gosvāmī about Lord Kṛṣṇa. Thus the Bhāgavatam was spoken to him.

SB 1.3.42, Purport:

Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya, who preached Māyāvāda philosophy and stressed the impersonal feature of the Absolute, also at last recommended that one must take shelter at the lotus feet of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, for there is no hope of gain from debating. Indirectly Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya admitted that what he had preached in the flowery grammatical interpretations of the Vedānta-sūtra cannot help one at the time of death. At the critical hour of death one must recite the name of Govinda. This is the recommendation of all great transcendentalists. Śukadeva Gosvāmī had long ago stated the same truth, that at the end one must remember Nārāyaṇa. That is the essence of all spiritual activities. In pursuance of this eternal truth, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam was heard by Emperor Parīkṣit, and it was recited by the able Śukadeva Gosvāmī. And both the speaker and the receiver of the messages of Bhāgavatam were duly delivered by the same medium.

SB 1.3.44, Purport:

One cannot, however, learn Bhāgavatam from a bogus hired reciter whose aim of life is to earn some money out of such recitation and employ the earning in sex indulgence. No one can learn Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam who is associated with persons engaged in sex life. That is the secret of learning Bhāgavatam. Nor can one learn Bhāgavatam from one who interprets the text by his mundane scholarship. One has to learn Bhāgavatam from the representative of Śukadeva Gosvāmī, and no one else, if one at all wants to see Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa in the pages. That is the process, and there is no alternative. Sūta Gosvāmī is a bona fide representative of Śukadeva Gosvāmī because he wants to present the message which he received from the great learned brāhmaṇa. Śukadeva Gosvāmī presented Bhāgavatam as he heard it from his great father, and so also Sūta Gosvāmī is presenting Bhāgavatam as he had heard it from Śukadeva Gosvāmī. Simple hearing is not all; one must realize the text with proper attention.

SB 1.4.2, Purport:

Sūta Gosvāmī is twice addressed herein by Śaunaka Gosvāmī out of great joy because he and the members of the assembly were eager to hear the text of Bhāgavatam uttered by Śukadeva Gosvāmī. They were not interested in hearing it from a bogus person who would interpret in his own way to suit his own purpose. Generally the so-called Bhāgavatam reciters are either professional readers or so-called learned impersonalists who cannot enter into the transcendental personal activities of the Supreme Person. Such impersonalists twist some meanings out of Bhāgavatam to suit and support impersonalist views, and the professional readers at once go to the Tenth Canto to misexplain the most confidential part of the Lord's pastimes. Neither of these reciters are bona fide persons to recite Bhāgavatam.

SB 1.7.10, Purport:

By His personal features and transcendental attributes, the Lord attracts all psychological activities of a pure devotee. Such is the attractive power of Lord Kṛṣṇa. The attraction is so powerful that a pure devotee never hankers for any one of the four principles of religion. These are the attractive features of the transcendental attributes of the Lord. And adding to this the words api and ca, one can increase the imports unlimitedly. According to Sanskrit grammar there are seven synonyms for the word api.

So by interpreting each and every word of this śloka, one can see unlimited numbers of transcendental qualities of Lord Kṛṣṇa that attract the mind of a pure devotee.

SB 1.8.36, Purport:

Generally people hear from unauthorized persons. Such unauthorized persons may be very learned by academic qualifications, but because they do not follow the principles of devotional service, hearing from them becomes a sheer waste of time. Sometimes the texts are interpreted fashionably to suit their own purposes. Therefore, first one should select a competent and bona fide speaker and then hear from him. When the hearing process is perfect and complete, the other processes become automatically perfect in their own way.

SB 1.8.46, Purport:

Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira would not be satisfied, even though he was instructed by the greatest personalities of the time. Kṛṣṇa is designated herein as the performer of superhuman actions, but in this particular instance neither He nor Vyāsa could convince King Yudhiṣṭhira. Does it mean that He failed to be a superhuman actor? No, certainly not. The interpretation is that the Lord as īśvara, or the Supersoul in the hearts of both King Yudhiṣṭhira and Vyāsa, performed still more superhuman action because the Lord desired it. As Supersoul of King Yudhiṣṭhira, He did not allow the King to be convinced by the words of Vyāsa and others, including Himself, because He desired that the King hear instructions from the dying Bhīṣmadeva, who was another great devotee of the Lord. The Lord wanted that at the last stage of his material existence the great warrior Bhīṣmadeva see Him personally and see his beloved grandchildren, King Yudhiṣṭhira, etc., now situated on the throne, and thus pass away very peacefully.

SB 1.9.18, Purport:

The authorities speak, and the people in general believe them. But in the case of Vedic truths, they have been taught not to believe. Even if they accept them they give a different interpretation. Each and every man wants a direct perception of Vedic knowledge; otherwise, they foolishly refuse to accept it. This means that the misguided man can believe one authority, the scientist, but will reject the authority of the Vedas. The result is that people have degenerated.

SB 1.10.34-35, Purport:

We do not gain any profit simply by researching the analogous provinces of those days up to now, but it appears that the desert of Rajasthan and the provinces of scanty water like Madhya Pradesh were present even five thousand years ago. The theory of soil experts that the desert developed in recent years is not supported by the statements of Bhāgavatam. We may leave the matter for expert geologists to research because the changing universe has different phases of historical development. We are satisfied that the Lord has now reached His own province, Dvārakādhāma, from the Kuru provinces. Kurukṣetra continues to exist since the Vedic age, and it is sheer foolishness when interpreters ignore or deny the existence of Kurukṣetra.

SB 1.11.16-17, Purport:

Because He is as powerful as Lord Kṛṣṇa and can bestow spiritual power to the devotees, He is therefore known as Baladeva. In the Vedas also it is enjoined that no one can know the Supreme Lord without being favored by Baladeva. Bala means spiritual strength not physical. Some less intelligent persons interpret bala as the strength of the body. But no one can have spiritual realization by physical strength. Physical strength ends with the end of the physical body, but spiritual strength follows the spirit soul to the next transmigration, and therefore the strength obtained by Baladeva is never wasted. The strength is eternal, and thus Baladeva is the original spiritual master of all devotees.

SB 1.18.3, Purport:

The Personality of Godhead, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, is known as Ajita, or unconquerable, and He is so in every respect. No one can know His actual position. He is unconquerable by knowledge also. We have heard about His dhāma, or place, eternal Goloka Vṛndāvana, but there are many scholars who interpret this abode in different ways. But by the grace of a spiritual master like Śukadeva Gosvāmī, unto whom the King gave himself up as a most humble disciple, one is able to understand the actual position of the Lord, His eternal abode, and His transcendental paraphernalia in that dhāma, or abode. Knowing the transcendental position of the Lord and the transcendental method by which one can approach that transcendental dhāma, the King was confident about his ultimate destination, and by knowing this he could leave aside everything material, even his own body, without any difficulty of attachment.

SB Canto 2

SB 2.1.11, Purport:

The fourth offense is to vilify scriptures or Vedic knowledge. The fifth offense is to define the holy name of the Lord in terms of one's mundane calculation. The holy name of the Lord is identical with the Lord Himself, and one should understand the holy name of the Lord to be nondifferent from Him. The sixth offense is to interpret the holy name. The Lord is not imaginary, nor is His holy name. There are persons with a poor fund of knowledge who think the Lord to be an imagination of the worshiper and therefore think His holy name to be imaginary. Such a chanter of the name of the Lord cannot achieve the desired success in the matter of chanting the holy name. The seventh offense is to commit sins intentionally on the strength of the holy name. In the scriptures it is said that one can be liberated from the effects of all sinful actions simply by chanting the holy name of the Lord.

SB 2.1.19, Purport:

Otherwise, meditation beginning from the praṇava (oṁkāra) up to the limbs of the personal body of Viṣṇu would not have been recommended by Śukadeva Gosvāmī for the attainment of complete spiritual perfection. The Viṣṇu forms of worship in great temples of India are not, therefore, arrangements of idol worship, as they are wrongly interpreted to be by a class of men with a poor fund of knowledge; rather, they are different spiritual centers of meditation on the transcendental limbs of the body of Viṣṇu. The worshipable Deity in the temple of Viṣṇu is identical with Lord Viṣṇu by the inconceivable potency of the Lord. Therefore, a neophyte's concentration or meditation upon the limbs of Viṣṇu in the temple, as contemplated in the revealed scriptures, is an easy opportunity for meditation for persons who are unable to sit down tightly at one place and then concentrate upon praṇava oṁkāra or the limbs of the body of Viṣṇu, as recommended herein by Śukadeva Gosvāmī, the great authority.

SB 2.2.27, Purport:

Bhagavad-gītā, as it was understood by Arjuna, is also explained (Bg. 10.12-13), but there are many foolish men who do not follow in the footsteps of Arjuna in understanding the spirit of Bhagavad-gītā. They create instead their own interpretations, which are as foolish as they themselves, and thereby only help to put a stumbling block on the path of real understanding, misdirecting the innocent followers who are less intelligent, or the śūdras. It is said that one should become a brāhmaṇa before one can understand the Vedic statements, and this stricture is as important as the stricture that no one shall become a lawyer who has not qualified himself as a graduate. Such a stricture is not an impediment in the path of progress for anyone and everyone, but it is necessary for an unqualified understanding of a particular science. Vedic knowledge is misinterpreted by those who are not qualified brāhmaṇas.

SB 2.2.32, Purport:

So there is no difference between the versions of all the authorities. The truth is eternal, and as such there cannot be any new opinion about the truth. That is the way of knowing the knowledge contained in the Vedas. It is not a thing to be understood by one's erudite scholarship or by the fashionable interpretations of mundane scholars. There is nothing to be added and nothing to be subtracted, because the truth is the truth. One has to accept, after all, some authority. The modern scientists are also authorities for the common man for some scientific truths. The common man follows the version of the scientist. This means that the common man follows the authority. The Vedic knowledge is also received in that way. The common man cannot argue about what is beyond the sky or beyond the universe; he must accept the versions of the Vedas as they are understood by the authorized disciplic succession.

SB 2.3.11, Purport:

Only a pure devotee of the Lord can show one the right way of progressive life. Otherwise both the materialistic way of life, without any information of God or the demigods, and the life engaged in the worship of demigods, in pursuit of temporary material enjoyments, are different phases of phantasmagoria. They are nicely explained in the Bhagavad-gītā also, but the Bhagavad-gītā can be understood in the association of pure devotees only, and not by the interpretations of politicians or dry philosophical speculators.

SB 2.4.19, Purport:

The examples of Brahmā and Lord Śiva are specifically cited here because Brahmājī, Lord Śiva, Śrīmatī Lakṣmījī and the four Kumāras (Sanaka, Sanātana, etc.) are leaders of the four desireless Vaiṣṇava sampradāyas. They are all freed from all pretensions. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī interprets the word gata-vyalīkaiḥ as projjhita-kaitavaiḥ, or those who are freed from all pretensions (the unalloyed devotees only). In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta (CC Madhya 19.149) it is said:

SB 2.4.23, Purport:

So there is no greater truth than the principles of religion mentioned in the Vedas. Such Vedic knowledge or religion is disseminated by authorities like Śukadeva Gosvāmī because he is a humble devotional servitor of the Lord who has no desire to become a self-appointed interpreter without authority. That is the way of explaining the Vedic knowledge, technically known as the paramparā system, or descending process.

SB 2.6.3, Purport:

The word tīrthānām is sometimes interpreted to mean the places of pilgrimage, but Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī says that it means the reception of the Vedic transcendental knowledge. The propounders of the Vedic knowledge are also known as the tīrthas.

SB 2.7.3, Purport:

The Lord spoke Bhagavad-gītā, and thereby Arjuna achieved self-realization, and even today anyone who follows the path of Arjuna can also attain the same benefit as Śrī Arjuna. The scriptures are meant for this purpose. Foolish, unintelligent persons make their own interpretations by imagination and thus mislead their followers, causing them to remain in the dungeon of material existence. However, simply by following the instructions imparted by Lord Kṛṣṇa or Lord Kapila, one can obtain the highest benefit, even today.

SB 2.8.27, Purport:

Otherwise the real taste of the nectar cannot be relished. Śukadeva Gosvāmī was pleased with Mahārāja Parīkṣit because he was not at all tired of hearing the topics of the Lord and was more and more anxious to hear them on and on with interest. Foolish interpreters unnecessarily tackle the Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam when they have no access to the subject matter. There is no use in nondevotees' meddling with the two topmost Vedic literatures, and therefore Śaṅkarācārya did not touch Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam for commentation. In his commentation on the Bhagavad-gītā, Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya accepted Lord Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but later on he commented from the impersonalist's view. But, being conscious of his position, he did not comment on the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

SB 2.8.28, Purport:

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the science of the Personality of Godhead. The impersonalist always tries to misrepresent the personal feature of the Lord, not knowing the science of this great knowledge, and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is in pursuance of the Vedas and scientific knowledge of the Personality of Godhead. To learn this science one should take shelter of the representative of Śrī Śukadeva and follow in the footsteps of Mahārāja Parīkṣit without foolishly attempting to interpret, thereby committing a great offense at the feet of the Lord. The dangerous ways of interpretations by the nondevotee class of men have played havoc in understanding the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and the careful student should be always alert in this matter if he at all wants to learn the science of Godhead.

SB 2.9.32, Purport:

Such men with a poor fund of knowledge do not know that the Lord is the Lord eternally and that one cannot become the Lord by meditation for millions of years or by mental speculation for billions of years.

The impersonal interpretation of the mundane wranglers is completely refuted in this verse because it is clearly stated here that the Supreme Lord has His qualities, form, pastimes and everything that a person has. All these descriptions of the transcendental nature of the Personality of Godhead are factual realizations by the devotee of the Lord, and by the causeless mercy of the Lord they are revealed to His pure devotee, and to no one else.

SB 2.9.36, Purport:

For example, in the Bhagavad-gītā the whole direction is targeted toward the Personality of Godhead Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, but for want of a bona fide spiritual master in the line of Brahmājī or the direct hearer, Arjuna, there are different distortions of the revealed knowledge by many unauthorized persons who just want to satisfy their own whims. Undoubtedly the Bhagavad-gītā is accepted as one of the most brilliant stars in the horizon of the spiritual sky, yet the interpretations of this great book of knowledge have so grossly been distorted that every student of the Bhagavad-gītā is still in the same darkness of glaring material reflections. Such students are hardly enlightened by the Bhagavad-gītā. In the Gītā practically the same instruction is imparted as in the four prime verses of the Bhāgavatam, but due to wrong and fashionable interpretations by unauthorized persons, one cannot reach the ultimate conclusion. In the Bhagavad-gītā (18.61) it is clearly said:

SB 2.9.36, Purport:

The best and guaranteed path of progress is therefore engagement in bhakti-yoga, pure devotional service.

The cream of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam in the foregoing four ślokas is sometimes squeezed out by the impersonalist for different interpretations in their favor, but it should be carefully noted that the four ślokas were first described by the Personality of Godhead Himself, and thus the impersonalist has no scope to enter into them because he has no conception of the Personality of Godhead. Therefore, the impersonalist may squeeze out any interpretations from them, but such interpretations will never be accepted by those who are taught in the disciplic succession from Brahmā, as will be cleared up in the following verses. Besides that, the śruti confirms that the Supreme Truth Absolute Personality of Godhead never reveals Himself to anyone who is falsely proud of his academic knowledge. The śruti-mantra clearly says (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 1.2.23):

SB 2.9.37, Purport:

There are many grammarians and nondevotee material wranglers who have tried to present false interpretations of these four verses of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam but the Lord Himself advised Brahmājī not to be deviated from the fixed conclusion the Lord had taught him. The Lord was the teacher of the nucleus of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam in four verses, and Brahmā was the receiver of the knowledge. Misinterpretation of the word aham by the word jugglery of the impersonalist should not disturb the mind of the strict followers of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the text of the Personality of Godhead and His unalloyed devotees, who are also known as the bhāgavatas, and any outsider should have no access to this confidential literature of devotional service.

SB 2.9.37, Purport:

Misinterpretation of the word aham by the word jugglery of the impersonalist should not disturb the mind of the strict followers of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the text of the Personality of Godhead and His unalloyed devotees, who are also known as the bhāgavatas, and any outsider should have no access to this confidential literature of devotional service. But unfortunately the impersonalist, who has no relation to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, sometimes tries to interpret Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam by his poor fund of knowledge in grammar and dry speculation. Therefore, the Lord warns Brahmā (and, through Brahmā, all future devotees of the Lord in the disciplic succession of Brahmā) that one should never be misled by the conclusion of the so-called grammarians or by other men with a poor fund of knowledge, but must always fix the mind properly, via the paramparā system. No one should try to give a new interpretation by dint of mundane knowledge.

SB 2.9.44, Purport:

Janmādy asya is the beginning, yet the four verses in which it is said that the Lord is the root of everything that be, beginning from the creation up to the supreme abode of the Lord, naturally explain the ten characteristics. One should not misunderstand by wrong interpretations that the Lord spoke only four verses and that therefore all the rest of the 17,994 verses are useless. The ten characteristics, as will be explained in the next chapter, require so many verses just to explain them properly. Brahmājī had also advised Nārada previously that he should expand the idea he had heard from Brahmājī. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu instructed this to Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī in a nutshell, but the disciple Rūpa Gosvāmī expanded this very elaborately, and the same subject was further expanded by Jīva Gosvāmī and even further by Śrī Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura. We are just trying to follow in the footsteps of all these authorities.

SB 2.10.51, Purport:

Any question that is put forward may be answered by quoting the authority, and that satisfies the saner section. That is the system even in the law court. The best lawyer gives evidence from the past judgment of the court without taking much trouble to establish his case. This is called the paramparā system, and learned authorities follow it without manufacturing rubbish interpretations.

SB Canto 3

SB 3.2.22, Purport:

Persons with a poor fund of knowledge belittle the Personality of Godhead, Lord Kṛṣṇa, not knowing His exalted position as the Lord of everything. In Bhagavad-gītā the Lord has explained His position clearly, but the demoniac atheistic student squeezes out an interpretation to suit his own purpose and misleads unfortunate followers into the same mentality. Such unfortunate persons merely pick up some slogans from the great book of knowledge, but are unable to estimate the Lord as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Pure devotees like Uddhava, however, are never misled by such atheistic opportunists.

SB 3.5.13, Purport:

When a sincere devotee reads Bhagavad-gītā, this is as good as seeing the Lord face to face in his personal presence, but this is not so for the mundane wrangler. All the potencies of the Lord are there when one reads Bhagavad-gītā, provided it is read in the way recommended in the Gītā by the Lord Himself. One cannot foolishly manufacture an interpretation of Bhagavad-gītā and still bring about transcendental benefit. Anyone who tries to squeeze some artificial meaning or interpretation from Bhagavad-gītā for an ulterior motive is not śraddadhāna-puṁsaḥ (one engaged anxiously in bona fide hearing of kṛṣṇa-kathā). Such a person cannot derive any benefit from reading Bhagavad-gīta, however great a scholar he may be in the estimation of a layman. The śraddadhāna, or faithful devotee, can actually derive all the benefits of Bhagavad-gītā because by the omnipotency of the Lord he achieves the transcendental bliss which vanquishes attachment and nullifies all concomitant material miseries.

SB 3.5.23, Purport:

The word aham is misinterpreted by the Māyāvāda school into meanings which no one but the interpreter can understand. Here aham is explained as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, not the individual living entities. Before the creation, there was only the Personality of Godhead; there were no puruṣa incarnations and certainly no living entities, nor was there the material energy, by which the manifested creation is effected. The puruṣa incarnations and all the different energies of the Supreme Lord were merged in Him only.

SB 3.6.10, Purport:

puff himself up in order to understand or measure the length and breadth of the Pacific Ocean. Ultimately the frog burst and died. The title Ph.D. can also be interpreted as Plough Department, a title meant for the tillers in the paddy field. The attempt of the tillers in the paddy field to understand the cosmic manifestation and the cause behind such wonderful work can be compared to the endeavor of the frog in the well to calculate the measurement of the Pacific Ocean.

SB 3.12.47, Purport:

The musical notes are ṣa, ṛ, gā, ma, dha, and ni. All these sound vibrations are originally called śabda-brahma, or spiritual sound. It is said, therefore, that Brahmā was created in the Mahā-kalpa as the incarnation of spiritual sound. The Vedas are spiritual sound, and therefore there is no need of material interpretation for the sound vibration of the Vedic literature. The Vedas should be vibrated as they are, although they are symbolically represented with letters which are known to us materially. In the ultimate issue there is nothing material because everything has its origin in the spiritual world. The material manifestation is therefore called illusion in the proper sense of the term. For those who are realized souls there is nothing but spirit.

SB 3.13.30, Purport:

The word rasāyām is sometimes interpreted to mean Rasātala, the lowest planetary system, but that is not applicable in this connection, according to Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura. The earth is seven times superior to the other planetary systems, namely Tala, Atala, Talātala, Vitala, Rasātala, Pātāla, etc. Therefore the earth cannot be situated in the Rasātala planetary system. It is described in the Viṣṇu-dharma:

SB 3.15.25, Purport:

The highest realization of spiritual value is to chant the holy name of God, as prescribed for the age—Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. The sixth offense is to give some interpretation on the holy name of God. The seventh offense is to act sinfully on the strength of chanting the holy name of God. It is understood that one can be freed from all sinful reaction simply by chanting the holy name of God, but if one thinks that he is therefore at liberty to commit all kinds of sinful acts, that is a symptom of offense. The eighth offense is to equate the chanting of Hare Kṛṣṇa with other spiritual activities, such as meditation, austerity, penance or sacrifice. They cannot be equated at any level.

SB 3.15.33, Purport:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, the impersonalists, interpret this verse of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam to mean that the small sky and the big sky are one, but this idea cannot stand. The example of the big sky and the small skies is also applicable within a person's body. The big sky is the body itself, and the intestines and other parts of the body occupy the small sky. Each and every part of the body has individuality, even though occupying a small part of the total body. Similarly, the whole creation is the body of the Supreme Lord, and we created beings, or anything that is created, are but a small part of that body. The parts of the body are never equal to the whole.

SB 3.19.32, Purport:

Here the sage Maitreya admits that he explained the incident of the killing of Hiraṇyākṣa by the Supreme Personality of Godhead as a straight narration; he did not manufacture anything or add interpretation, but explained whatever he had heard from his spiritual master. Thus he accepted as bona fide the system of paramparā, or receiving the transcendental message in disciplic succession. Unless received by this bona fide process of hearing from a spiritual master, the statement of an ācārya or preceptor cannot be valid.

SB 3.19.33, Purport:

Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu has warned that no description of the pastimes of the Lord should be heard from the Māyāvāda, or impersonalist, school. He has clearly said, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva nāśa: if anyone hears the Māyāvādīs' interpretation of the pastimes of the Lord, or their interpretation of Bhagavad-gītā, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam or any other Vedic literature, then he is doomed. Once one is associated with impersonalists, he can never understand the personal feature of the Lord and His transcendental pastimes.

SB 3.24.26, Purport:

According to Śrīdhara Svāmī, His three pairs of opulences are complete riches and complete strength, complete fame and complete beauty, and complete wisdom and complete renunciation. There are different interpretations of tri-yuga, but it is accepted by all learned scholars that tri-yuga means Viṣṇu. When Kardama Muni understood that his son, Kapila, was Viṣṇu Himself, he wanted to offer his obeisances. Therefore, when Kapila was alone he offered his respects and expressed his mind as follows.

SB 3.25.34, Purport:

According to them the Absolute Truth is impersonal. Without personal existence, how can there be activity? The impersonalists take the activities mentioned in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Bhagavad-gītā and other Vedic literatures as fictitious stories, and therefore they interpret them most mischievously. They have no idea of the Personality of Godhead. They unnecessarily poke their noses into the scripture and interpret it in a deceptive way in order to mislead the innocent public. The activities of Māyāvāda philosophy are very dangerous to the public, and therefore Lord Caitanya warned us never to hear from any Māyāvādī about any scripture. They will spoil the entire process, and the person hearing them will never be able to come to the path of devotional service to attain the highest perfection, or will be able to do so only after a very long time.

SB 3.25.38, Purport:

In the material world the knowledge which we acquire may change because of the influence of time, but nevertheless the conclusions received from Bhagavad-gītā, directly from the speeches of the Supreme Lord, Kṛṣṇa, can never change. There is no use interpreting Bhagavad-gītā; it is eternal.

Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Lord, should be accepted as one's best friend. He will never cheat. He will always give His friendly advice and friendly protection to the devotee. If Kṛṣṇa is accepted as a son, He will never die. Here we have a very loving son or child, but the father and mother, or those who are affectionate towards him, always hope, "May my son not die." But Kṛṣṇa actually never will die. Therefore those who accept Kṛṣṇa, or the Supreme Lord, as their son will never be bereft of their son.

SB 3.26.2, Purport:

As Kapiladeva explains to His mother, this "seeing" can be done by hearing from the proper authoritative source. Kapiladeva is the greatest authority because He is the Personality of Godhead, and if someone accepts whatever is explained as it is, without interpretation, then he can see himself.

Lord Caitanya explained to Sanātana Gosvāmī the real constitutional position of the individual. He said directly that each and every individual soul is eternally a servitor of Kṛṣṇa. Jīvera 'svarūpa' haya-kṛṣṇera 'nitya-dāsa': (CC Madhya 20.108) every individual soul is eternally a servitor. When one is fixed in the understanding that he is part and parcel of the Supreme Soul and that his eternal position is to serve in association with the Supreme Lord, he becomes self-realized. This position of rightly understanding oneself cuts the knot of material attraction (hṛdaya-granthi-bhedanam).

SB 3.26.7, Purport:

The Māyāvādīs misuse the word and say that even if the living entity has become a stool-eating hog, he is also enjoying his pastimes. This is a most dangerous interpretation. Actually the Supreme Lord is the leader and maintainer of all living entities. His pastimes are transcendental to any material activity. Such pastimes of the Lord cannot be dragged to the level of the conditional activities of the living entities. In conditional life the living entity actually remains as if a captive in the hands of material energy. Whatever the material energy dictates, the conditioned soul does. He has no responsibility; he is simply the witness of the action, but he is forced to act in that way due to his offense in his eternal relationship with Kṛṣṇa. Lord Kṛṣṇa therefore says in Bhagavad-gītā that māyā, His material energy, is so forceful that it is insurmountable.

SB 3.26.8, Purport:

When he wants to engage in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, a suitable body is offered to him by the internal potency, the spiritual energy of the Lord, and when he wants to satisfy his senses, a material body is offered. Thus it is his free choice to accept a spiritual body or a material body, but once the body is accepted he has to enjoy or suffer the consequences. The Māyāvādī philosopher's presentation is that the living entity enjoys his pastimes by accepting the body of a hog. This theory is not acceptable, however, because the word "pastime" implies voluntary acceptance for enjoyment. Therefore this interpretation is most misleading. When there is enforced acceptance for suffering, it is not a pastime. The Lord's pastimes and the conditioned living entity's acceptance of karmic reaction are not on the same level.

SB 3.26.9, Purport:

In other words, she wanted to learn the characteristics of the Supreme Lord in relation to the material nature.

The relationship of the living entities with matter and that of the Supreme Lord with matter are certainly not on the same level, although the Māyāvādīs may interpret it in that way. When it is said that the living entities are bewildered, the Māyāvādī philosophers ascribe this bewilderment to the Supreme Lord. But that is not applicable. The Lord is never bewildered. That is the difference between personalists and impersonalists. Devahūti is not unintelligent. She has enough intelligence to understand that the living entities are not on the level of the Supreme Lord. Because the living entities are infinitesimal, they become bewildered or conditioned by material nature, but this does not mean that the Supreme Lord is also conditioned or bewildered.

SB 3.28.11, Purport:

Sa guṇān samatītyaitān brahma-bhūyāya kalpate (BG 14.26). For every item in the yoga system there is a parallel activity in bhakti-yoga, but the practice of bhakti-yoga is easier for this age. What was introduced by Lord Caitanya is not a new interpretation. Bhakti-yoga is a feasible process that begins with chanting and hearing. Bhakti-yoga and other yogas have as their ultimate goal the same Personality of Godhead, but one is practical, and the others are difficult. One has to purify his physiological condition by concentration and by restraint of the senses; then he can fix his mind upon the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is called samādhi.

SB 3.29.9, Purport:

When the so-called devotee desires material enjoyment, without reference to the interest of the Supreme Lord, or he wants to become famous or opulent by utilizing the mercy or grace of the Supreme Lord, he is in the mode of passion.

Māyāvādīs, however, interpret this word "separatist" in a different way. They say that while worshiping the Lord, one should think himself one with the Supreme Lord. This is another adulterated form of devotion within the modes of material nature. The conception that the living entity is one with the Supreme is in the mode of ignorance. Oneness is actually based on oneness of interest. A pure devotee has no interest but to act on behalf of the Supreme Lord. When one has even a tinge of personal interest, his devotion is mixed with the three modes of material nature.

SB 3.30.34, Purport:

It is stated that such a person, who has fallen from the path of yoga practice, is given a chance in his next life to take birth in a very rich family or in a very pious family. It is interpreted that "rich family" refers to a big mercantile family because generally people who engage in trades and mercantile business are very rich. One who engaged in the process of self-realization, or connecting with the Supreme Absolute Truth, but fell short is allowed to take birth in such a rich family, or he is allowed to take birth in the family of pious brāhmaṇas; either way, he is guaranteed to appear in human society in his next life.

SB Canto 4

SB 4.2.10, Purport:

The words used against Lord Śiva by Dakṣa can also be understood in a different way, in a good sense. For example, he stated that Śiva is yaśo-ghna, which means "one who spoils name and fame." So this can also be interpreted to mean that he was so famous that his fame killed all other fame. Again, Dakṣa used the word nirapatrapa, which also can be used in two senses. One sense is "one who is stunted," and another sense is "one who is the maintainer of persons who have no other shelter." Generally Lord Śiva is known as the lord of the bhūtas, or lower grade of living creatures. They take shelter of Lord Śiva because he is very kind to everyone and is very quickly satisfied. Therefore he is called Āśutoṣa. To such men, who cannot approach other demigods or Viṣṇu, Lord Śiva gives shelter. Therefore the word nirapatrapa can be used in that sense.

SB 4.3.23, Purport:

The Absolute Truth reveals Himself to the devotee in His form. He is not formless. Vāsudeva is not formless, for it is stated in this verse that as soon as the Lord reveals Himself, the devotee offers his obeisances. Obeisances are offered to a person, not to anything impersonal. One should not accept the Māyāvāda interpretation that Vāsudeva is impersonal. As stated in Bhagavad-gītā, prapadyate, one surrenders. One surrenders to a person, not to impersonal nonduality. Whenever there is a question of surrendering or offering obeisances, there must be an object of surrender or obeisances.

SB 4.7.32, Purport:

Because men in this material world cannot lift a hill, they do not believe that the Lord can lift one. They accept the statements of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam to be allegorical, and they try to interpret them in their own way. But factually the Lord lifted the hill in the presence of all the inhabitants of Vṛndāvana, as corroborated by great ācāryas and authors like Vyāsadeva and Nārada. Everything about the Lord—His activities, pastimes and uncommon features—should be accepted as is, and in this way, even in our present condition, we can understand the Lord. In the instance herein, King Indra confirmed: "Your presence with eight hands is as good as Your presence with four hands." There is no doubt about it.

SB 4.30.10, Purport:

Sometimes foolish people argue that since Kṛṣṇa is not present at the moment, one cannot take direct instructions from Him. Such foolish people do not know that there is no difference between directly hearing Bhagavad-gītā and reading it, as long as one accepts Bhagavad-gītā as it is, spoken by the Lord. However, if one wants to understand Bhagavad-gītā by his imperfect interpretations, one cannot possibly understand the mysteries of Bhagavad-gītā, even though one may be a great scholar according to mundane estimation.

SB Canto 5

SB 5.18.17, Purport:

The word māyāmayam used in this verse should not be understood according to the interpretations of the Māyāvādīs. Māyā means affection as well as illusion. When a mother deals with her child affectionately, she is called māyāmaya. In whatever form the Supreme Lord Viṣṇu appears, He is always affectionate toward His devotees. Thus the word māyāmayam is used here to mean "very affectionate toward the devotees." Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī writes in this regard that māyāmayam can also mean kṛpā-pracuram, deeply merciful. Similarly, Śrīla Vīrarāghava says, māyā-pracuranātmīya-saṅkalpena parigṛhītam ity arthaḥ jñāna-paryāyo'tra māyā-śabdaḥ: when one is very affectionate due to an intimate relationship, one is described as māyāmaya. Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura explains māyāmayam by dividing it into the words māyā and āmayam.

SB 5.19.4, Purport:

This is the meaning of niraham, which means "without material designations." This word cannot possibly be twisted to mean that the Paramātmā has no ahaṅkāra, no "I-ness" or identity. He has His transcendental identity as the Supreme. This is the explanation given by Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī. According to another interpretation, given by Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura, niraham means nirniścayena aham. Niraham does not mean that the Supreme Lord has no identity. Rather, the stress given by the word aham proves strongly that He does have His personal identity because nir not only means "negative" but also means "strong ascertainment."

SB Canto 6

SB 6.16.43, Purport:

We are spreading the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement to try to establish a society the way that Kṛṣṇa wants it. This is the meaning of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. We are therefore presenting Bhagavad-gītā as it is and kicking out all kinds of mental concoction. Fools and rascals interpret Bhagavad-gītā in their own way. When Kṛṣṇa says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65)—"Always think of Me, become My devotee, worship Me and offer your homage unto Me"—they comment that it is not Kṛṣṇa to whom we must surrender. Thus they derive imaginary meanings from Bhagavad-gītā. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, however, strictly follows bhāgavata-dharma, the instructions of Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam for the complete welfare of human society. One who misinterprets Bhagavad-gītā, twisting out some meaning for his sense gratification, is a non-Āryan.

SB Canto 7

SB 7.5.23-24, Purport:

One should therefore be very careful not to commit offenses at the lotus feet of the Lord's holy name. The offenses are described as follows: (a) to blaspheme a devotee, especially a devotee engaged in broadcasting the glories of the holy name, (b) to consider the name of Lord Śiva or any other demigod to be equally as powerful as the holy name of the Supreme Personality of Godhead (no one is equal to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, nor is anyone superior to Him), (c) to disobey the instructions of the spiritual master, (d) to blaspheme the Vedic literatures and literatures compiled in pursuance of the Vedic literatures, (e) to comment that the glories of the holy name of the Lord are exaggerated, (f) to interpret the holy name in a deviant way, (g) to commit sinful activities on the strength of chanting the holy name, (h) to compare the chanting of the holy name to pious activities, (i) to instruct the glories of the holy name to a person who has no understanding of the chanting of the holy name, (j) not to awaken in transcendental attachment for the chanting of the holy name, even after hearing all these scriptural injunctions.

SB 7.8.5, Purport:

Mac-chāsanodvṛttam: Prahlāda Mahārāja was disobedient to the orders of his demoniac father. Yama-kṣayam: every conditioned soul is under the control of Yamarāja, but Hiraṇyakaśipu said that he considered Prahlāda Mahārāja his deliverer, for Prahlāda would stop Hiraṇyakaśipu's repetition of birth and death. Because Prahlāda Mahārāja, being a great devotee, was better than any yogī, Hiraṇyakaśipu was to be brought among the society of bhakti-yogīs. Thus Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura has explained these words in a very interesting way as they can be interpreted from the side of Sarasvatī, the mother of learning.

SB 7.9.35, Purport:

Here the statement of self-realization ahaṁ brahmāsmi, which is interpreted by the Māyāvāda philosophy to mean "I am the Supreme Lord," is explained. The Supreme Lord is the original seed of everything (janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate (BG 10.8)). Thus the Supreme Lord extends everywhere, even throughout our bodies, because our bodies are made of material energy, which is the Lord's separated energy. One should realize that since the Supreme Lord spreads throughout one's body and since the individual soul is a part of the Supreme Lord, everything is Brahman (sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma). This realization was achieved by Lord Brahmā after he was purified, and it is possible for everyone.

SB 7.15.13, Translation:

Religious principles that obstruct one from following his own religion are called vidharma. Religious principles introduced by others are called para-dharma. A new type of religion created by one who is falsely proud and who opposes the principles of the Vedas is called upadharma. And interpretation by one's jugglery of words is called chala-dharma.

SB 7.15.13, Purport:

No one can manufacture actual law at home, nor can one manufacture actual religion. Elsewhere it is said, sa vai puṁsāṁ paro dharmo yato bhaktir adhokṣaje: (SB 1.2.6) the real religious system is that which leads one to become a devotee of the Supreme Lord. Therefore, anything opposed to this religious system of progressive Kṛṣṇa consciousness is called vidharma, para-dharma, upadharma or chala-dharma. Misinterpretation of Bhagavad-gītā is chala-dharma. When Kṛṣṇa directly says something and some rascal interprets it to mean something different, this is chala-dharma—a religious system of cheating—or śabda-bhit, a jugglery of words. One should be extremely careful to avoid these various types of cheating systems of religion.

SB Canto 8

SB 8.4.15, Purport:

Every verse in the Vedic literature, especially in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and Bhagavad-gītā, is a Vedic mantra. Here the words yathānukīrtayanti are used to recommend that this literature be presented as it is. Unscrupulous persons, however, deviate from the actual narration and interpret the text in their own way with grammatical jugglery. Such deviations are to be avoided. This is a Vedic injunction supported by Śukadeva Gosvāmī, one of the mahājanas, or authorities. He says, yathānukīrtayanti: one should recite the mantra as it is, without deviation, for then one will be eligible to rise to the platform of all good fortune. Śukadeva Gosvāmī especially recommends that those who are brāhmaṇas (śucayaḥ) recite all these mantras after rising from bed in the morning.

SB 8.19.42, Purport:

Beggars always present themselves as possessing nothing, and this may be very good for them because in this way they are assured of not losing their money and of always drawing the attention and compassion of others for the sake of collection. But this is also condemned. If one purposely continues this professional begging, he is supposed to be dead while breathing, or, according to another interpretation, such a man of falsity should be killed while still breathing. The Vedic injunction in this regard is as follows: athaitat pūrṇam abhyātmaṁ yan neti sa yat sarvaṁ neti brūyāt pāpikāsya kīrtir jāyate. sainaṁ tatraiva hanyāt. If one continuously poses himself as possessing nothing and collects money by begging, he should be killed (sainaṁ tatraiva hanyāt).

SB Canto 9

SB 9.4.44, Purport:

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura has diverted the entire meaning of this verse as spoken by Durvāsā Muni. Durvāsā Muni used the word nṛ-śaṁsasya to indicate that the King was cruel, but Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura interprets it to mean that the King's character was glorified by all the local people. He says that the word nṛ means "by all the local people" and that śaṁsasya means "of he (Ambarīṣa) whose character was glorified." Similarly, one who is very rich becomes mad because of his wealth and is therefore called śriyā-unmattasya, but Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura interprets these words to mean that although Mahārāja Ambarīṣa was such an opulent king, he was not mad after money, for he had already surpassed the madness of material opulence.

SB 9.4.44, Purport:

Similarly, the word īśa-māninaḥ is interpreted to mean that he was so respectful to the Supreme Personality of Godhead that he did not transgress the laws for observing Ekādaśī-pāraṇa, despite the thinking of Durvāsā Muni, for he only took water. In this way, Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura has supported Ambarīṣa Mahārāja and all his activities.

SB Canto 10.1 to 10.13

SB 10.1 Summary:

Māyā cannot attract Him, but because He is fully independent, He can appear by His spiritual potency wherever He likes. Māyā is fully under the control of Viṣṇu. Because the material potency and yogamāyā mingle in the Lord's appearance, they are described as ekānaṁśā. Sometimes ekānaṁśā is interpreted to mean "without differentiation." Saṅkarṣaṇa and Śeṣa-nāga are identical. As stated by Yamunādevī, "O Rāma, O great-armed master of the world, who have extended Yourself throughout the entire universe by one plenary expansion, it is not possible to understand You fully." Therefore ekāṁśā refers to Śeṣa-nāga. In other words, Baladeva, merely by His partial expansion, sustains the entire universe.

SB 10.3.45, Purport:

Practically everyone commenting on Bhagavad-gītā interprets it for sense gratification. It has become especially fashionable for modern scholars and politicians to interpret Bhagavad-gītā as if it were something fictitious, and by their wrong interpretations they are spoiling their own careers and the careers of others. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, however, is fighting against this principle of regarding Kṛṣṇa as a fictitious person and of accepting that there was no Battle of Kurukṣetra, that everything is symbolic, and that nothing in Bhagavad-gītā is true. In any case, if one truly wants to be successful, one can do so by reading the text of Bhagavad-gītā as it is.

SB 10.13.61, Purport:

The word advayam, meaning "one without a second," is also significant. Because Brahmā was overcast by Kṛṣṇa's māyā, he was thinking himself the Supreme. In the material world, everyone thinks, "I am the best man in this world. I know everything." One thinks, "Why should I read Bhagavad-gītā? I know everything. I have my own interpretation." Brahmā, however, was able to understand that the Supreme Personality is Kṛṣṇa. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Another of Kṛṣṇa's names, therefore, is parameśvara.

SB Cantos 10.14 to 12 (Translations Only)

SB 10.40.8, Translation:

There are still others, who worship You, the Supreme Lord, in the form of Lord Śiva. They follow the path described by him and interpreted in various ways by many teachers.

SB 10.53.29, Translation:

Noting the brāhmaṇa's joyful face and serene movements, saintly Rukmiṇī, who could expertly interpret such symptoms, inquired from him with a pure smile.

SB 12.3.32, Translation:

Cities will be dominated by thieves, the Vedas will be contaminated by speculative interpretations of atheists, political leaders will virtually consume the citizens, and the so-called priests and intellectuals will be devotees of their bellies and genitals.