Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Monist (Books)

Bhagavad-gita As It Is

BG Chapters 1 - 6

BG 6.20-23, Purport:

Yoga practice is more or less based on the principles of the Patañjali system. Some unauthorized commentators try to identify the individual soul with the Supersoul, and the monists think this to be liberation, but they do not understand the real purpose of the Patañjali system of yoga. There is an acceptance of transcendental pleasure in the Patañjali system, but the monists do not accept this transcendental pleasure, out of fear of jeopardizing the theory of oneness. The duality of knowledge and knower is not accepted by the nondualist, but in this verse transcendental pleasure—realized through transcendental senses—is accepted. And this is corroborated by Patañjali Muni, the famous exponent of the yoga system. The great sage declares in his Yoga-sūtras (3.34): puruṣārtha-śūnyānāṁ guṇānāṁ pratiprasavaḥ kaivalyaṁ svarūpa-pratiṣṭhā vā citi-śaktir iti.

BG 6.20-23, Purport:

This citi-śakti, or internal potency, is transcendental. Puruṣārtha means material religiosity, economic development, sense gratification and, at the end, the attempt to become one with the Supreme. This "oneness with the Supreme" is called kaivalyam by the monist. But according to Patañjali, this kaivalyam is an internal, or transcendental, potency by which the living entity becomes aware of his constitutional position. In the words of Lord Caitanya, this state of affairs is called ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanam (CC Antya 20.12), or clearance of the impure mirror of the mind. This "clearance" is actually liberation, or bhava-mahā-dāvāgni-nirvāpaṇam. The theory of nirvāṇa—also preliminary—corresponds with this principle. In the Bhāgavatam (2.10.6) this is called svarūpeṇa vyavasthitiḥ. The Bhagavad-gītā also confirms this situation in this verse.

BG Chapters 7 - 12

BG 7.5, Purport:

Therefore real liberation entails surrender by the living entities to Your control, and that surrender will make them happy. In that constitutional position only can they be controllers. Therefore, men with limited knowledge who advocate the monistic theory that God and the living entities are equal in all respects are actually guided by a faulty and polluted opinion."

The Supreme Lord, Kṛṣṇa, is the only controller, and all living entities are controlled by Him. These living entities are His superior energy because the quality of their existence is one and the same with the Supreme, but they are never equal to the Lord in quantity of power. While exploiting the gross and subtle inferior energy (matter), the superior energy (the living entity) forgets his real spiritual mind and intelligence.

BG 7.24, Purport:

Clearly, neither the demigods nor Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, are impersonal. They are all persons; Lord Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and He has His own planet, and the demigods have theirs.

Therefore the monistic contention that ultimate truth is formless and that form is imposed does not hold true. It is clearly stated here that it is not imposed. From the Bhagavad-gītā we can clearly understand that the forms of the demigods and the form of the Supreme Lord are simultaneously existing and that Lord Kṛṣṇa is sac-cid-ānanda, eternal blissful knowledge. The Vedas also confirm that the Supreme Absolute Truth is ānanda-mayo 'bhyāsāt, or by nature full of blissful pleasure, and that He is the reservoir of unlimited auspicious qualities. And in the Gītā the Lord says that although He is aja (unborn), He still appears.

BG 7.24, Purport:

The Vedas also confirm that the Supreme Absolute Truth is ānanda-mayo 'bhyāsāt, or by nature full of blissful pleasure, and that He is the reservoir of unlimited auspicious qualities. And in the Gītā the Lord says that although He is aja (unborn), He still appears. These are the facts that we should understand from the Bhagavad-gītā. We cannot understand how the Supreme Personality of Godhead can be impersonal; the imposition theory of the impersonalist monist is false as far as the statements of the Gītā are concerned. It is clear herein that the Supreme Absolute Truth, Lord Kṛṣṇa, has both form and personality.

BG 9.15, Purport:

Out of the above three, the lowest, those who worship themselves as the Supreme Lord, thinking themselves to be monists, are most predominant. Such people think themselves to be the Supreme Lord, and in this mentality they worship themselves. This is also a type of God worship, for they can understand that they are not the material body but are actually spiritual soul; at least, such a sense is prominent. Generally the impersonalists worship the Supreme Lord in this way. The second class includes the worshipers of the demigods, those who by imagination consider any form to be the form of the Supreme Lord. And the third class includes those who cannot conceive of anything beyond the manifestation of this material universe. They consider the universe to be the supreme organism or entity and worship that. The universe is also a form of the Lord.

BG Chapters 13 - 18

BG 13.19, Purport:

The Lord has described in summary the body, knowledge and the knowable. This knowledge is of three things: the knower, the knowable and the process of knowing. Combined, these are called vijñāna, or the science of knowledge. Perfect knowledge can be understood by the unalloyed devotees of the Lord directly. Others are unable to understand. The monists say that at the ultimate stage these three items become one, but the devotees do not accept this. Knowledge and development of knowledge mean understanding oneself in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. We are being led by material consciousness, but as soon as we transfer all consciousness to Kṛṣṇa's activities and realize that Kṛṣṇa is everything, then we attain real knowledge. In other words, knowledge is nothing but the preliminary stage of understanding devotional service perfectly. In the Fifteenth Chapter this will be very clearly explained.

BG 13.23, Purport:

It is stated here that the Supersoul, who is always with the individual soul, is the representation of the Supreme Lord. He is not an ordinary living entity. Because the monist philosophers take the knower of the body to be one, they think that there is no difference between the Supersoul and the individual soul. To clarify this, the Lord says that He is represented as the Paramātmā in every body. He is different from the individual soul; He is para, transcendental. The individual soul enjoys the activities of a particular field, but the Supersoul is present not as finite enjoyer nor as one taking part in bodily activities, but as the witness, overseer, permitter and supreme enjoyer. His name is Paramātmā, not ātmā, and He is transcendental. It is distinctly clear that the ātmā and Paramātmā are different.

BG 18.55, Purport:

Such knowledge is never vanquished, even after liberation. Liberation involves getting free from the concept of material life; in spiritual life the same distinction is there, the same individuality is there, but in pure Kṛṣṇa consciousness. One should not mistakenly think that the word viśate, "enters into Me," supports the monist theory that one becomes homogeneous with the impersonal Brahman. No. Viśate means that one can enter into the abode of the Supreme Lord in one's individuality to engage in His association and render service unto Him. For instance, a green bird enters a green tree not to become one with the tree but to enjoy the fruits of the tree. Impersonalists generally give the example of a river flowing into the ocean and merging. This may be a source of happiness for the impersonalist, but the personalist keeps his personal individuality like an aquatic in the ocean.

Srimad-Bhagavatam

SB Preface and Introduction

SB Introduction:

The Lord taught the Gosvāmī about devotional service, comparing it to a creeper, and advised him to protect the bhakti creeper most carefully against the mad elephant offense against the pure devotees. In addition, the creeper has to be protected from the desires of sense enjoyment, monistic liberation and perfection of the haṭha-yoga system. They are all detrimental on the path of devotional service. Similarly, violence against living beings, and desire for worldly gain, worldly reception and worldly fame are all detrimental to the progress of bhakti, or Bhāgavata-dharma.

SB Introduction:

Pure devotional service must be freed from all desires for sense gratification, fruitive aspirations and culture of monistic knowledge. One must be freed from all kinds of designations, and when one is thus converted to transcendental purity, one can then serve the Lord by purified senses.

As long as there is the desire to enjoy sensually or to become one with the Supreme or to possess the mystic powers, there is no question of attaining the stage of pure devotional service.

Devotional service is conducted under two categories, namely primary practice and spontaneous emotion. When one can rise to the platform of spontaneous emotion, he can make further progress by spiritual attachment, feeling, love, and many higher stages of devotional life for which there are no English words. We have tried to explain the science of devotional service in our book The Nectar of Devotion, based on the authority of Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī.

SB Canto 1

SB 1.4.4, Translation:

His (Vyāsadeva's) son was a great devotee, an equibalanced monist, whose mind was always concentrated in monism. He was transcendental to mundane activities, but being unexposed, he appeared like an ignorant person.

SB 1.4.32, Purport:

The vacuum felt by Vyāsadeva was not due to his lack of knowledge. Bhāgavata-dharma is purely devotional service of the Lord to which the monist has no access. The monist is not counted amongst the paramahaṁsas (the most perfect of the renounced order of life). Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is full of narrations of the transcendental activities of the Personality of Godhead. Although Vyāsadeva was an empowered divinity, he still felt dissatisfaction because in none of his works were the transcendental activities of the Lord properly explained. The inspiration was infused by Śrī Kṛṣṇa directly in the heart of Vyāsadeva, and thus he felt the vacuum as explained above. It is definitely expressed herewith that without the transcendental loving service of the Lord, everything is void; but in the transcendental service of the Lord, everything is tangible without any separate attempt at fruitive work or empiric philosophical speculation.

SB 1.7.5, Purport:

If the living being and the Lord were in the same category, then it would have been quite possible for Vyāsadeva to see it, and there would have been no question of material distress on the part of the illusioned being, for the Supreme Being is fully cognizant. So there are so many unscrupulous imaginations on the part of the monists to endeavor to put both the Lord and the living being in the same category. Had the Lord and the living beings been the same, then Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī would not have taken the trouble to describe the transcendental pastimes of the Lord, for they would all be manifestations of illusory energy.

SB 1.7.11, Purport:

The idea is that generally the liberated souls are attached to the feature of impersonal Brahman with a monistic view of becoming one with the supreme whole. But by the association of pure devotees like Vyāsadeva, even the liberated soul becomes attracted to the transcendental qualities of the Lord. By the mercy of Śrī Nārada, Śrīla Vyāsadeva was able to narrate the great epic of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and by the mercy of Vyāsadeva, Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī was able to grasp the import. The transcendental qualities of the Lord are so attractive that Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī became detached from being completely absorbed in impersonal Brahman and positively took up the personal activity of the Lord.

SB 1.8.27, Translation:

My obeisances are unto You, who are the property of the materially impoverished. You have nothing to do with the actions and reactions of the material modes of nature. You are self-satisfied, and therefore You are the most gentle and are master of the monists.

SB 1.8.27, Purport:

That is a natural conclusion. Such unalloyed devotees are distinct from the mixed devotees who approach the Lord for mitigation of miseries and poverty or because of inquisitiveness and speculation. The unalloyed devotees and the Lord are transcendentally attached to one another. For others, the Lord has nothing to reciprocate, and therefore He is called ātmārāma, self-satisfied. Self-satisfied as He is, He is the master of all monists who seek to merge into the existence of the Lord. Such monists merge within the personal effulgence of the Lord called the brahmajyoti, but the devotees enter into the transcendental pastimes of the Lord, which are never to be misunderstood as material.

SB Canto 2

SB 2.1.7, Purport:

Therefore, the highest perfection of transcendental realization is to take pleasure in hearing and describing the transcendental qualities of the Lord and not in merging into His impersonal Brahman existence, for which the impersonalist monist aspires. Real transcendental pleasure is realized in the glorification of the transcendental Lord, and not in the feeling of being situated in His impersonal feature. But there are also others who are not the topmost transcendentalists but are in a lower status, and who do not take pleasure in describing the transcendental activities of the Lord. Rather, they discuss such activities of the Lord formally with the aim of merging into His existence.

SB 2.1.20, Purport:

Effects of the modes of passion and ignorance are manifested by too much hankering after wealth and women. And those who are too much after wealth and women can rectify their leanings only by constant remembrance of Viṣṇu in His potential impersonal feature. Generally the impersonalists or monists are influenced by the modes of passion and ignorance. Such impersonalists think of themselves as liberated souls, but they have no knowledge of the transcendental personal feature of the Absolute Truth. Actually they are impure in heart on account of being devoid of knowledge of the personal feature of the Absolute. In the Bhagavad-gītā, it is said that after many hundreds of births, the impersonal philosopher surrenders unto the Personality of Godhead. To acquire such a qualification of God realization in the personal feature, the neophyte impersonalist is given a chance to realize the relation of the Lord in everything by the philosophy of pantheism.

SB 2.6.21, Purport:

There are different stages of avidyā, and they are called dharma, artha and mokṣa. The idea of mokṣa, or liberation, held by the monist in the matter of oneness of the living entity and the Lord by ultimate merging in one, is also the last stage of materialism or forgetfulness. Knowledge of the qualitative oneness of the self and Superself is partial knowledge and ignorance also because there is no knowledge of quantitative difference, as explained above. The individual self can never be equal to the Lord in cognizance; otherwise he could not be placed in the state of forgetfulness. So, because there is a stage of forgetfulness of the individual selves, or the living entities, there is always a gulf of difference between the Lord and the living entity, as between the part and the whole. The part is never equal to the whole. So the conception of one hundred percent equality of the living being with the Lord is also nescience.

SB 2.7.4, Purport:

The Lord also accepts such service from the devotee, and thus the devotee becomes more than the Lord. The impersonalists desire to become one with the Supreme, but the devotee becomes more than the Lord, surpassing the desire of the greatest monist. Parents and other relatives of the Lord achieve all mystic opulences automatically because of their intimate relationship with the Lord. Such opulences include all details of material enjoyment, salvation and mystic powers. Therefore, the devotee of the Lord does not seek them separately, wasting his valuable time in life. The valuable time of one's life must therefore be fully engaged in the transcendental loving service of the Lord. Then other desirable achievements are automatically gained. But even after obtaining such achievements, one should be on guard against the pitfall of offenses at the feet of the devotees.

SB 2.9.10, Purport:

The whole situation there is one of freedom from the illusory manifestation of the external energy. Although illusory energy is also part and parcel of the Supreme Lord, illusory energy is differentiated from the Lord. The illusory energy is not, however, false, as claimed by the monist philosophers. The rope accepted as a snake may be an illusion to a particular person, but the rope is a fact, and the snake is also a fact. The illusion of water on the hot desert may be illusion for the ignorant animal searching for water in the desert, but the desert and water are actual facts. Therefore the material creation of the Lord may be an illusion to the nondevotee, but to a devotee even the material creation of the Lord is a fact, as the manifestation of His external energy. But this energy of the Lord is not all. The Lord has His internal energy also, which has another creation known to be the Vaikuṇṭhalokas, where there is no ignorance, no passion, no illusion and no past and present.

SB Canto 3

SB 3.4.10, Purport:

Although both Uddhava and Maitreya were great souls, the Lord's attention was more on Uddhava because he was a spotlessly pure devotee. A jñāna-bhakta, or one whose devotion is mixed with the monistic viewpoint, is not a pure devotee. Although Maitreya was a devotee, his devotion was mixed. The Lord reciprocates with His devotees on the basis of transcendental love and not on the basis of philosophical knowledge or fruitive activities. In the transcendental loving service of the Lord, there is no place for monistic knowledge or fruitive activities. The gopīs in Vṛndāvana were neither highly learned scholars nor mystic yogīs. They had spontaneous love for the Lord, and thus He became their heart and soul, and the gopīs also became the heart and soul of the Lord. Lord Caitanya approved the relationship of the gopīs with the Lord as supreme. Herein the Lord's attitude towards Uddhava was more intimate than with Maitreya Muni.

SB 3.4.20, Purport:

The monistic dry speculators have no business in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam because this particular Vedic literature is forbidden for them by the great author himself. Śrīla Vyāsadeva has definitely forbidden persons engaged in religiosity, economic development, sense gratification and, finally, salvation, from trying to understand Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, which is not meant for them (SB 1.1.2). Śrīpāda Śrīdhara Svāmī, the great commentator on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, has definitely forbidden the salvationists or monists to deal in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. It is not for them. Yet such unauthorized persons perversely try to understand Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and thus they commit offenses at the feet of the Lord, which even Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya dared not do. Thus they prepare for their continuation of miserable life. It should be particularly noted herein that Uddhava studied the catuḥ-ślokī Bhāgavatam (SB 2.9.33/34/35/36) directly from the Lord, who spoke them first to Brahmājī, and this time the Lord explained more confidentially the self-knowledge mentioned as the paramāṁ sthitim.

SB 3.6.7, Purport:

The consciousness of the individual soul becomes one with the supreme consciousness when there is complete synthesis between the two.

The monist believes that there is only one consciousness, whereas the sātvatas, or the devotees, believe that although there is undoubtedly one consciousness, they are one because there is agreement. The individual consciousness is advised to dovetail with the supreme consciousness, as instructed by the Lord in Bhagavad-gītā (18.66): sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja. The individual consciousness (Arjuna) is advised to dovetail with the supreme consciousness and thus maintain his conscious purity. It is foolish to try to stop the activities of consciousness, but they can be purified when they are dovetailed with the Supreme.

SB 3.7.11, Purport:

The light of the sun and moon reflected on matter makes the matter bright and praiseworthy. The living symptoms are compared to the light of the sun and the moon illuminating material manifestations like trees and mountains. The reflection of the sun or moon is accepted as the real sun or moon by less intelligent men, and the pure monistic philosophy develops from these ideas. In fact, the light of the sun and the moon are actually different from the sun and moon themselves, although they are always connected. The light of the moon spread throughout the sky appears to be impersonal, but the moon planet, as it is, is personal, and the living entities on the moon planet are also personal. In the rays of the moon, different material entities appear to be comparatively more or less important. The light of the moon on the Taj Mahal appears to be more beautiful than the same light in the wilderness.

SB 3.7.11, Purport:

Similarly, the light of the Lord is equally distributed everywhere, but due to being differently received, it appears to be different. One should not, therefore, accept the reflection of the moon on the water as actual and misunderstand the whole situation through monistic philosophy. The quivering quality of the moon is also variable. When the water is standing still, there is no quivering. A more settled conditioned soul quivers less, but due to material connection the quivering quality is more or less present everywhere.

SB 3.21.12, Purport:

The yoga system described in the books of Patañjali is authoritative, and the modern so-called yogīs who have manufactured their own ways, not consulting the authorities, are simply ludicrous. The Patañjali yoga system is called aṣṭāṅga-yoga. Sometimes impersonalists pollute the Patañjali yoga system because they are monists. Patañjali describes that the soul is transcendentally pleased when he meets the Supersoul and sees Him. If the existence of the Supersoul and the individual is admitted, then the impersonalist theory of monism is nullified. Therefore some impersonalists and void philosophers twist the Patañjali system in their own way and pollute the whole yoga process.

SB 3.21.12, Purport:

The aspirations of such people are (1) to be religious, (2) to be economically enriched, (3) to be able to gratify the senses and, at last, (4) to become one with the Supreme. According to the monists, when a yogī becomes one with the Supreme and loses his individual existence, he attains the highest stage, called kaivalya. But actually, the stage of realization of the Personality of Godhead is kaivalya. The oneness of understanding that the Supreme Lord is fully spiritual and that in full spiritual realization one can understand what He is—the Supreme Personality of Godhead—is called kaivalya, or, in the language of Patañjali, realization of spiritual power. His proposal is that when one is freed from material desires and fixed in spiritual realization of the self and the Superself, that is called cit-śakti. In full spiritual realization there is a perception of spiritual happiness, and that happiness is described in Bhagavad-gītā as the supreme happiness, which is beyond the material senses. Trance is described to be of two kinds, samprajñāta and asamprajñāta, or mental speculation and self-realization. In samādhi or asamprajñāta one can realize, by his spiritual senses, the spiritual form of the Lord. That is the ultimate goal of spiritual realization.

SB 3.32.12-15, Purport:

It is a great falldown on the part of the impersonalists to think that the Supreme Lord appears within a material body and that one should therefore not meditate upon the form of the Supreme but should meditate instead on the formless. For this particular mistake, even the great mystic yogīs or great stalwart transcendentalists also come back again when there is creation. All living entities other than the impersonalists and monists can directly take to devotional service in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness and become liberated by developing transcendental loving service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Such devotional service develops in the degrees of thinking of the Supreme Lord as master, as friend, as son and, at last, as lover. These distinctions in transcendental variegatedness must always be present.

SB Canto 4

SB 4.7.38, Purport:

It is indicated in this verse that the monists and the great mystics know the Supreme Personality of Godhead as one. This oneness is not the misunderstanding that a living entity is equal in every respect to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This monism is based on pure knowledge as described and confirmed in Bhagavad-gītā (7.17): priyo hi jñānino 'tyartham ahaṁ sa ca mama priyaḥ. The Lord says that those who are advanced in transcendental knowledge and know the science of Kṛṣṇa consciousness are very dear to Him, and He also is very dear to them. Those who are actually in perfect knowledge of the science of God know that the living entities are superior energy of the Supreme Lord. This is stated in Bhagavad-gītā, Seventh Chapter: the material energy is inferior, and the living entities are superior energy. Energy and the energetic are nondifferent; therefore, energies possess the same quality as the energetic.

SB 4.9.10, Purport:

Yogīs generally meditate upon the transcendental form of Viṣṇu, but devotees not only meditate upon Him but actually engage in the direct service of the Lord. In the previous verse we find the phrase bhavāpyaya, which refers to birth and death. The Lord can give relief from the chain of birth and death. It is a misunderstanding to think, as do the monists, that when one gets relief from the process of birth and death he merges into the Supreme Brahman. Here it is clearly said that the transcendental bliss derived from śravaṇaṁ kīrtanam by pure devotees cannot be compared to brahmānanda, or the impersonal conception of transcendental bliss derived by merging into the Absolute.

SB 4.9.29, Purport:

In the opinion of many scholars, this sāyujya-mukti, although counted among the five kinds of mukti, is not actually mukti because from sāyujya-mukti one may again fall down to this material world. This information we have from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.2.32), wherein it is said, patanty adhaḥ, which means "they again fall down." The monist philosopher, after executing severe austerity, merges into the impersonal effulgence of the Lord, but the living entity always wants reciprocation in loving affairs. Therefore, although the monist philosopher is elevated to the status of being one with the effulgence of the Lord, because there is no facility for associating with the Lord and rendering service unto Him, he again falls into this material world, and his service propensity is satisfied by materialistic welfare activities like humanitarianism, altruism and philanthropy. There are many instances of such falldowns, even for great sannyāsīs in the Māyāvāda school.

SB 4.24.40, Purport:

The word amuṣmai is significant in this regard because it indicates the best target one can aim for after attaining the higher planetary systems. Those who are engaged in fruitive activities (karmīs) attain the higher planetary systems as a result of their past activities, and the jñānīs, who seek unification or a monistic merging with the effulgence of the Supreme Lord, also attain their desired end, but in the ultimate issue, the devotees, who desire to personally associate with the Lord, are promoted to the Vaikuṇṭhalokas or Goloka Vṛndāvana. The Lord is described in Bhagavad-gītā (10.12) as pavitraṁ paramam, the supreme pure. This is also confirmed in this verse. Śukadeva Gosvāmī has stated that the cowherd boys who played with Lord Kṛṣṇa were not ordinary living entities. Only after accumulating many pious activities in various births does one get the opportunity to personally associate with the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

SB Canto 5

SB 5.13.1, Translation:

Jaḍa Bharata, who had fully realized Brahman, continued: My dear King Rahūgaṇa, the living entity wanders on the path of the material world, which is very difficult for him to traverse, and he accepts repeated birth and death. Being captivated by the material world under the influence of the three modes of material nature (sattva-guṇa, rajo-guṇa and tamo-guṇa), the living entity can see only the three fruits of activities under the spell of material nature. These fruits are auspicious, inauspicious and mixed. He thus becomes attached to religion, economic development, sense gratification and the monistic theory of liberation (merging with the Supreme). He works very hard day and night exactly like a merchant who enters a forest to acquire some articles to sell later for profit. However, he cannot really achieve happiness within this material world.

SB 5.20.33, Translation:

Lord Brahmā is known as karma-maya, the form of ritualistic ceremonies, because by performing ritualistic ceremonies one may attain his position and because the Vedic ritualistic hymns become manifest from him. He is devoted to the Supreme Personality of Godhead without deviation, and therefore in one sense he is not different from the Lord. Nevertheless, he should be worshiped not as the monists worship him, but in duality. One should always remain a servitor of the Supreme Lord, the supreme worshipable Deity. We therefore offer our respectful obeisances unto Lord Brahmā, the form of manifest Vedic knowledge.

SB Canto 7

SB 7.9.44, Purport:

That is the real target in life. The members of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement are not at all interested in so-called meditation in the Himalayas or the forest, where one will only make a show of meditation, nor are they interested in opening many schools for yoga and meditation in the cities. Rather, every member of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is interested in going door to door to try to convince people about the teachings of Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, the teachings of Lord Caitanya. That is the purpose of the Hare Kṛṣṇa movement. The members of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement must be fully convinced that without Kṛṣṇa one cannot be happy. Thus the Kṛṣṇa conscious person avoids all kinds of pseudo spiritualists, transcendentalists, meditators, monists, philosophers and philanthropists.

SB 7.15 Summary:

The Vedas describe these two paths as pitṛ-yāna and deva-yāna. Those who follow the paths of pitṛ-yāna and deva-yāna are never bewildered, even while in the material body. A monistic philosopher who gradually develops control of the senses understands that the objective of all the different āśramas, the statuses of life, is salvation. One must live and act according to śāstras.

If one who is performing the Vedic ritualistic ceremonies becomes a devotee, even if he is a gṛhastha, he can receive the causeless mercy of Kṛṣṇa. The objective of a devotee is to return home, back to Godhead. Such a devotee, even though not performing ritualistic ceremonies, advances in spiritual consciousness by the supreme will of the Personality of Godhead. One may actually become successful in spiritual consciousness by the mercy of devotees, or one may fall from spiritual consciousness by being disrespectful to devotees. In this regard, Nārada Muni narrated the history of how he had fallen from the Gandharva kingdom, how he was born in a śūdra family, and how by serving exalted brāhmaṇas he become the son of Lord Brahmā and was reinstated in his transcendental position.

SB Canto 9

SB 9.11.19, Purport:

This tribulation in the heart of a devotee cannot be understood by karmīs, jñānīs or yogīs. The devotees, who could not tolerate even thinking of the Lord's lotus feet being pricked by a thorn, were again put into tribulation by thinking of the Lord's disappearance, for the Lord had to return to His abode after finishing His pastimes in this material world.

The word ātma-jyotiḥ is significant. The brahmajyoti, which is greatly appreciated by jñānīs, or monistic philosophers who desire to enter it for liberation, is nothing but the rays of the Lord's body.

SB 9.11.19, Purport:

In other words, the brahmajyoti stays outside the Vaikuṇṭha planets, just as the sunshine stays outside the sun. To enter the sun planet, one must go through the sunshine. Similarly, when the Lord or His devotees enter the Vaikuṇṭha planets, they go through the brahmajyoti. The jñānīs, or monistic philosophers, because of their impersonal conception of the Lord, cannot enter the Vaikuṇṭha planets, but they also cannot stay eternally in the brahmajyoti. Thus after some time they fall again to this material world. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adho 'nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). The Vaikuṇṭha planets are covered by the brahmajyoti, and therefore one cannot properly understand what those Vaikuṇṭha planets are unless one is a pure devotee.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 3.49, Purport:

Lord Caitanya accepted sannyāsa, leaving aside His householder life, to preach His mission. He has equanimity in different senses. First, He describes the confidential truth of the Personality of Godhead, and second, He satisfies everyone by knowledge and attachment to Kṛṣṇa. He is peaceful because He renounces all topics not related to the service of Kṛṣṇa. Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa has explained that the word niṣṭhā indicates His being rigidly fixed in chanting the holy name of Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Lord Caitanya subdued all disturbing opponents of devotional service, especially the monists, who are actually averse to the personal feature of the Supreme Lord.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

The Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Absolute Truth, is not like a material object that can be known by experimental knowledge or sense perception. In the Nārada-pañcarātra this fact has been explained by Nārāyaṇa Himself to Lord Śiva. But Śaṅkarācārya, the incarnation of Śiva, under the order of Nārāyaṇa, his master, had to mislead the monists, who favor ultimate extinction. In the conditioned stage of existence, all living entities have four basic defects, of which one is the cheating propensity. Śaṅkarācārya has carried this cheating propensity to the extreme to mislead the monists.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

The authority of the Vedas is such that even if one does not understand something by his limited perception, he should accept the Vedic injunction and not create interpretations to suit his imperfect understanding. In his Śārīraka-bhāṣya, however, Śaṅkarācārya has increased the misunderstanding of the monists.

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.

CC Adi 6.28, Purport:

Lord Caitanya and Lord Nityānanda also manifested the same principle, although They also belong to the category of Viṣṇu. If Lord Caitanya, Lord Nityānanda and Advaita Prabhu had exhibited Their all-powerful Viṣṇu potencies within this material world, people would have become greater impersonalists, monists and self-worshipers than they had already become under the spell of this age. Therefore the Personality of Godhead and His different incarnations and forms played the parts of devotees to instruct the conditioned souls how to approach the transcendental stage of devotional service. Advaita Ācārya especially intended to teach the conditioned souls about devotional service. The word ācārya means "teacher." The special function of such a teacher is to make people Kṛṣṇa conscious.

CC Adi 7.101, Purport:

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.

CC Adi 14.33, Purport:

If from the beginning of life one is taught the Vaiṣṇava philosophy of duality or variety, the monistic philosophy will not bother him very much. In reality, everything is an emanation from the supreme source (janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1)). The original energy is exhibited in varieties, exactly as the sunshine, the original energy emanating from the sun, exhibits itself in variety as light and heat. One cannot say that light is heat or that heat is light, yet one cannot separate one from the other. Therefore Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu's philosophy is acintya-bhedābheda, inconceivable nonseparation and distinction. Although there is an affinity between the two physical manifestations light and heat, there is also a difference between them. Similarly, although the whole cosmic manifestation is the Lord's energy, the energy is nevertheless exhibited in varieties of manifestations.

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 6.168, Purport:

Although the Buddhists are directly opposed to Vaiṣṇava philosophy, it can easily be understood that the Śaṅkarites are more dangerous because they accept the authority of the Vedas yet act contrary to Vedic instruction. Vedāśraya nāstikya-vāda means "agnosticism under the shelter of Vedic culture" and refers to the monistic philosophy of the Māyāvādīs. Lord Buddha abandoned the authority of the Vedic literature and therefore rejected the ritualistic ceremonies and sacrifices recommended in the Vedas. His nirvāṇa philosophy means stopping all material activities. Lord Buddha did not recognize the presence of transcendental forms and spiritual activities beyond the material world. He simply described voidism beyond this material existence. The Māyāvādī philosophers offer lip service to Vedic authority but try to escape the Vedic ritualistic ceremonies. They concoct some idea of a transcendental position and call themselves Nārāyaṇa, or God.

CC Madhya 9.11, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura points out that the word "Tattvavādī" refers to the followers of Śrīla Madhvācārya. To distinguish his disciplic succession from the Māyāvādī followers of Śaṅkarācārya, Śrīla Madhvācārya named his party the Tattvavādīs. Impersonal monists are always attacked by these Tattvavādīs, who attempt to defeat their philosophy of impersonalism. Generally, they establish the supremacy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Actually the disciplic succession of Madhvācārya is known as the Brahmā Vaiṣṇava sect; that is the sect coming down from Lord Brahmā. Consequently the Tattvavādīs, or followers of Madhvācārya, do not accept the incident of Lord Brahmā’s illusion, which is recorded in the Tenth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

CC Madhya 10.177, Purport:

In his early life, Bilvamaṅgala Ṭhākura was an impersonalistic monist, and he used to meditate upon the impersonal Brahman effulgence. Later he became a devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa, and his explanation for this change is given in a verse (text 178) that is quoted in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu. Sometimes a devotee gradually comes to the stage of Bhagavān realization, realization of the Supreme Person, after having attained the lower stages of realization—impersonal Brahman realization and localized Paramātmā realization. The condition of such a devotee is described in the Caitanya-candrāmṛta (5), by Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī:

CC Madhya 12 Summary:

Advaita Prabhu said that Nityānanda Prabhu was unknown to anyone and that it was not the duty of a householder brāhmaṇa to accept dinner with a person unknown in society. In answer to this humorous statement, Śrī Nityānanda Prabhu replied that Advaita Ācārya was a monist and that one could not know how his mind could be turned by eating with such an impersonalist. The conversation of these two prabhus-Nityānanda Prabhu and Advaita Prabhu-carried a deep meaning that only an intelligent man can understand. After all the Vaiṣṇavas finished their luncheon, Svarūpa Dāmodara and others took their prasādam within the room. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu took great pleasure when He saw the Jagannātha Deity after the period of the Deity's retirement. At that time Lord Caitanya was accompanied by all the devotees, and all of them were very pleased.

CC Madhya 12.193, Translation:

Nityānanda Prabhu immediately refuted Śrīla Advaita Ācārya, saying, “You are a teacher of impersonal monism, and the monistic conclusion is a great hindrance to progressive, pure devotional service.

CC Madhya 12.194, Translation:

"One who participates in Your impersonal monistic philosophy does not accept anything but the one Brahman."

CC Madhya 12.194, Purport:

The impersonal monist does not believe that God is the only object of worship and that the living entities are His eternal servants. According to the monists, God and the devotee may be separate in the material state, but when they are spiritually situated, there is no difference between them. This is called advaita-siddhānta, the conclusion of the monists. Monists consider devotional service of the Lord to be material activity; therefore they consider such devotional activities to be the same as karma, or fruitive activity. This monistic mistake is a great stumbling block on the road to devotional service.

CC Madhya 12.194, Purport:

Actually this discussion between Advaita Ācārya and Nityānanda was a mock fight to serve as a great instruction for all devotees. Śrī Nityānanda Prabhu wanted to point out that Advaita Ācārya, a pure devotee, did not agree with the monistic conclusion. The conclusion of devotional service is:

vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam
brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate

"Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this nondual substance Brahman, Paramātmā or Bhagavān." (SB 1.2.11)

Absolute knowledge consists of Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān. This conclusion is not the same as that of the monists.

CC Madhya 12.194, Purport:

Śrīla Advaita Ācārya was given the title of ācārya because He spread the bhakti cult, not the philosophy of monism. The true conclusion of advaita-siddhānta, expressed at the very beginning of the Caitanya-caritāmṛta (CC Adi 1.3), is not the same as the philosophy of the monists. Here advaita-siddhānta means advaya-jñāna, or oneness in variety. Actually Śrīla Nityānanda Prabhu was praising Śrīla Advaita Ācārya through friendly mock fighting. He was giving the Vaiṣṇava conclusion in terms of the Bhāgavatam's conclusive words, vadanti tat tattva-vidaḥ. This is also the conclusion of a mantra in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, ekam evādvitīyam.

CC Madhya 12.194, Purport:

A devotee knows that there is oneness in diversity. The mantras of the śāstras do not support the monistic conclusions of the impersonalists, nor does Vaiṣṇava philosophy accept impersonalism without variety. Brahman is the greatest, He who includes everything, and that is oneness. As Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.7), mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat: there is no one superior to Kṛṣṇa Himself. He is the original substance because every category emanates from Him. Thus He is simultaneously one with and different from all other categories. The Lord is always engaged in a variety of spiritual activities, but the monist cannot understand spiritual variety. The conclusion is that although the powerful and the power are one and the same, within the energy of the powerful there are varieties. In those varieties there is a distinction between the different parts of one's personal self, between types of the same category, and between types of different categories.

CC Madhya 12.194, Purport:

He is the original substance because every category emanates from Him. Thus He is simultaneously one with and different from all other categories. The Lord is always engaged in a variety of spiritual activities, but the monist cannot understand spiritual variety. The conclusion is that although the powerful and the power are one and the same, within the energy of the powerful there are varieties. In those varieties there is a distinction between the different parts of one's personal self, between types of the same category, and between types of different categories. In other words, there is always variety in the categories, which are understood as knowledge, the knower and the knowable.sre

CC Madhya 12.194, Purport:

The philosophy of monism is an adjustment of the Buddhist philosophy of voidism. In a mock fight with Śrī Advaita Ācārya, Śrī Nityānanda Prabhu was refuting this type of monistic philosophy. Vaiṣṇavas certainly accept Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa as the ultimate "one," and that which is without Kṛṣṇa is called māyā, or that which has no existence. External māyā is exhibited in two phases—jīva-māyā, the living entities, and guṇa-māyā, the material world. In the material world there is prakṛti (material nature) and pradhāna (the ingredients of material nature). However, for one who becomes Kṛṣṇa conscious, the distinction between material and spiritual varieties does not exist. An advanced devotee like Prahlāda Mahārāja sees everything as one—Kṛṣṇa. As stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (7.4.37), kṛṣṇa-graha-gṛhītātmā na veda jagad īdṛśam.

CC Madhya 12.194, Purport:

One who is in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness does not distinguish between things material and spiritual; he takes everything to be related to Kṛṣṇa and therefore spiritual. By advaya-jñāna-darśana, Śrīla Advaita Ācārya has glorified pure devotional service. Śrīla Nityānanda Prabhu herein sarcastically condemns the philosophy of the impersonal monists and praises the correct nondual philosophy of Śrī Advaita Prabhu.

CC Madhya 12.195, Translation:

Nityānanda Prabhu continued, "You are such a monist! And now I am eating beside You. I do not know how My mind will be affected in this way."

CC Madhya 13.141, Purport:

For a pure devotee who has realized Kṛṣṇa consciousness through Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the monistic philosophy by which one becomes one with the Supreme appears hellish. The mystic yoga practice, by which the mind is controlled and the senses are subjugated, also appears ludicrous to a pure devotee. The devotee's mind and senses are already engaged in the transcendental service of the Lord. In this way the poisonous effects of sensory activities are removed. If one's mind is always engaged in the service of the Lord, there is no possibility that one will think, feel or act materially. Similarly, the fruitive workers' attempt to attain to the heavenly planets is nothing more than a phantasmagoria for the devotee.

CC Madhya 18.111, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu immediately stated that a living being, however exalted he may be, should never be compared to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. All of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's preaching protests the monistic philosophy of the Māyāvāda school. The central point of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is that the jīva, the living entity, can never be accepted as Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu. This viewpoint is elaborated in the following verses.

CC Madhya 18.113, Purport:

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs consider themselves Brahman, and they superficially speak of themselves as Nārāyaṇa. The monistic disciples of the Māyāvāda school (known as smārta-brāhmaṇas) are generally householder brāhmaṇas who accept the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs as Nārāyaṇa incarnate; therefore they offer their obeisances to them. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu immediately protested this unauthorized system, specifically mentioning that a sannyāsī is nothing but a fragmental portion of the Supreme (cit-kaṇa jīva). In other words, he is nothing more than an ordinary living being. He is never Nārāyaṇa, just as a molecular portion of sunshine is never the sun itself. The living entity is nothing but a fragmental part of the Absolute Truth; therefore at no stage of perfection can a living entity become the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This Māyāvāda viewpoint is always condemned by the Vaiṣṇava school. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself protested this philosophy. When the Māyāvādīs accept sannyāsa and consider themselves Nārāyaṇa, they become so puffed up that they do not even enter the temple of Nārāyaṇa to offer respects, for they falsely think themselves Nārāyaṇa Himself.

CC Madhya 19.164, Purport:

The highest achievements of the yogīs are the eight material perfections, such as aṇimā, laghimā and prāpti. Yet these are nothing compared to the eternal bliss of the devotee who returns back to Godhead and tastes the fruit of devotional service to the lotus feet of the Lord. The material perfections, even up to the point of liberation, are very insignificant in comparison; therefore the pure devotee is never interested in such things. His only interest is in perfecting his devotional service to the Lord. The pleasure of the impersonalist, monist philosophers is condemned in the following verse, which is also found in Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī’s Lalita-mādhava.

CC Madhya 19.165, Translation:

“"As long as there is not the slightest fragrance of pure love of Kṛṣṇa, which is the perfect medicinal herb for controlling Lord Kṛṣṇa within the heart, the opulences of the material perfections known as the siddhis, the brahminical perfections (satya, śama, titikṣā and so on), the trance of the yogīs and the monistic bliss of Brahman all seem wonderful for men."

CC Madhya 19.167, Translation:

“"When first-class devotional service develops, one must be devoid of all material desires, knowledge obtained by monistic philosophy, and fruitive action. The devotee must constantly serve Kṛṣṇa favorably, as Kṛṣṇa desires."

CC Madhya 25.47, Translation:

Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī said, “Śaṅkarācārya was very eager to establish the philosophy of monism. Therefore he explained the Vedānta-sūtra, or Vedānta philosophy, in a different way to support monistic philosophy.

Other Books by Srila Prabhupada

Teachings of Lord Caitanya

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 15:

In the cultivation of knowledge there are two kinds of transcendentalists. One of them worships the impersonal Brahman, and the other desires liberation. Since monists worship the impersonal feature of Brahman, they are therefore called worshipers of Brahman. These Brahman worshipers are further divided into three categories: the neophyte, one who is absorbed in Brahman realization, and one who has actually realized himself as Brahman. If devotional service is added, the knower of Brahman can then become liberated; otherwise there is no possibility of liberation. Anyone who is fully engaged in devotional service in Kṛṣṇa consciousness is understood to be already realized in Brahman. Devotional service is so strong that one is attracted to Kṛṣṇa even from the platform of Brahman worship. The Lord awards the devotee the perfection of a spiritual body, and he eternally engages in the transcendental service of Kṛṣṇa.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 15:

Thus one who is actually situated in Brahman realization has no reason to lament or desire. He is equal to everyone and is thus eligible for devotional service. This was also accepted by Bilvamaṅgala Ṭhākura, who, in his later life, lamented: "I was situated as a monist in order to become one with the Supreme, but somehow or other I contacted a naughty boy and became His eternal servitor." In other words, those who attain self-realization by the execution of devotional service attain a transcendental body, and, being attracted to the transcendental qualities of Kṛṣṇa, engage fully in pure devotional service.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 21:

Kapila has even tried to establish that a combination of material elements caused creation. Similarly, Gautama and Kaṇāda have given stress to this theory that the creation resulted from a fortunate combination of material elements, and they have tried to establish that atomic energy is the origin of creation. Similarly, impersonalists and monists like Aṣṭāvakra have tried to establish the impersonal effulgence (brahmajyoti) as the Supreme. And Patañjali, one of the greatest authorities on the yoga system, has tried to conceive an imaginary form of the Supreme Lord.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 23:

Even the Māyāvādī impersonalists who flatter themselves and believe that they have become the Lord themselves are not abhijñaḥ or svarāṭ, fully cognizant or fully independent. The Māyāvādī monists undergo a severe process of austerity and penance to acquire knowledge of becoming one with the Lord, but ultimately they become dependent on some rich follower who supplies them with requisite paraphernalia to construct great monasteries and temples. Atheists like Rāvaṇa and Hiraṇyakaśipu had to undergo severe penances before they could flout the authority of the Lord, but ultimately they were so helpless that they could not save themselves when the Lord appeared before them as cruel death. This is also applicable to the modern atheists who dare flout the authority of the Lord. Such atheists will be dealt the same awards as were given in the past to great atheists like Rāvaṇa and Hiraṇyakaśipu. History repeats itself, and what was occurring in the past will recur again and again when there is necessity.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 23:

Consequently sex life is not unreal; its true reality is experienced in the spiritual world. Material sex is but a perverted reflection of the original; the original is found in the Absolute Truth. This validates the fact that the Absolute Truth is personal, for the Absolute Truth cannot be impersonal and have a sense of pure sex life. The impersonal monist philosophy gives an indirect impetus to abominable mundane sex because it overly stresses the impersonality of the ultimate truth. The result is that men who lack knowledge have accepted the perverted material sex life as all in all because they have no information of the actual spiritual form of sex. There is a distinction between sex in the diseased condition of material life and sex in the spiritual existence. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam gradually elevates the unbiased reader to the highest perfectional stage of transcendence above the three modes of material activities, fruitive actions, speculative philosophy and above worship of functional deities indicated in the Vedas. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the embodiment of devotional service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead Kṛṣṇa and is therefore situated in a position superior to other Vedic literatures.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 28:

"My dear Lord, one should give up monistic speculation and the cultivation of knowledge altogether. He should begin his spiritual life in devotional service by receiving information of the Lord's activities from a realized devotee of the Lord. If one cultivates his spiritual life by following these principles and keeping himself on the honest path in life, then although Your Lordship is never conquered, You become conquered by such a process."

Nectar of Devotion

Nectar of Devotion 16:

Out of these two, the attempt to directly become the father of Kṛṣṇa is not recommended. Such a development can become polluted with Māyāvāda (impersonal) philosophy. The Māyāvādīs, or monists, think that they themselves are Kṛṣṇa, and if one thinks that he himself has become Nanda Mahārāja, then his parental love will become contaminated with the Māyāvāda philosophy. The Māyāvāda philosophical way of thinking is offensive, and no offender can enter into the kingdom of God to associate with Kṛṣṇa.

In the Skanda Purāṇa there is a story of an old man residing in Hastināpura, capital of the kingdom of the Pāṇḍus, who desired Kṛṣṇa as his beloved son. This old man was instructed by Nārada to follow in the footsteps of Nanda Mahārāja, and thus he achieved success.

Nectar of Devotion 18:

This ahaṅgrahopāsanā describes a living entity when he begins spiritual realization by identifying himself with the Supreme Lord. This state of self-realization is technically known as monism. The monist thinks himself one with the Supreme Lord. Thus, because he does not differentiate between himself and the Supreme Lord, it is his view that by worshiping himself he is worshiping the supreme whole.

Sometimes it is found that a neophyte is taking part in chanting and dancing very enthusiastically, but within himself he is under the impression that he has become one with the supreme whole. This conception of monism is completely different from pure, transcendental devotional service. If, however, it is seen that a person has developed a high standard of devotion without having undergone even the regulative principles, it is to be understood that his status of devotional service was achieved in a former life.

Nectar of Devotion 21:

Rāmacandra was immediately prepared to kill the crow. But because later on the crow bowed down before the Lord, the Lord excused his offense. Śrī Yāmunācārya further says in his prayer that the forgiving power of Lord Kṛṣṇa is even greater than that of Lord Rāmacandra, because Śiśupāla was always in the habit of insulting Kṛṣṇa—not only in one lifetime, but continually throughout three lives. Still, Kṛṣṇa was so kind that He gave Śiśupāla the salvation of merging into His existence. From this we can understand that the goal of the monist to merge into the effulgence of the Supreme is not a very difficult problem. Persons like Śiśupāla who are consistently inimical to Kṛṣṇa can also get this liberation.

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Krsna Book 33:

He always appears in a body that is not forced upon Him by the action of His past deeds. His body is a vehicle for His transcendental pleasure pastimes, which are enacted by His internal potency. He has no obligation to the laws of karma. The Māyāvādī monist must accept a certain type of body, being forced by the laws of nature; therefore, his claim to being one with Kṛṣṇa, or God, is only theoretical. Such persons who claim to be equal with Kṛṣṇa and indulge in rāsa-līlā create a dangerous situation for the people in general. Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, was already present as the Supersoul within the bodies of the gopīs and their husbands. He is the guide of all living entities, as is confirmed in the Kaṭha Upaniṣad: nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām. The Supersoul directs the individual soul to act, and the Supersoul is the actor and witness of all action.

Renunciation Through Wisdom

Renunciation Through Wisdom 1.7:

Stalwarts of society like Mahātmā Gandhi are trying in various ways to usher in an age of peace, but because such endeavors are not inspired or blessed by the spiritually evolved saints, they are not turning out successful, nor will they be fruitful in the future. The God of the monists, or Māyāvādīs, cannot eat, see, or hear. Such a concocted, formless God can never bring peace to the world. How can a God who has no sensory organs see the miseries of the people or hear their heartfelt prayers? To worship such a formless God in the name of searching for spiritual truth can only produce misfortune in the world, never good fortune. In the Māyāvāda school of philosophy, discussions on pure knowledge can throw some light on the real nature of the Absolute Truth, but they are unable to fully reveal the esoteric and personal aspects of the Supreme Absolute Being.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 2.4:

They end up deifying the process of negation, and that finally leads to absolute monism. In this way, many jñānīs who want to know the Absolute Truth, the Supreme Brahman, get somehow misled by the illusory potency, māyā. Māyā prepares her last fatal trap, liberation, by which she keeps the monists stranded in the ocean of material existence. She deludes them into thinking "I am that," "I am He," as if they were in a drunken daze.

If by some chance the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs can earn a little piety and then be graced by a pure Vaiṣṇava devotee—as the Māyāvādīs of Benares were by Lord Caitanya—then they can easily realize that knowledge of the impersonal Brahman or the Supersoul is incomplete. Then they can be enlightened with the transcendental knowledge of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 2.5:

Generally the tendency of the jñānīs is to veer toward impersonal monistic thought. Their idea of monism is this: having experienced the transience and bitterness of material existence and recognized the futility of fruitive activity, they now realize that they are the Self, Brahman, the Absolute Truth. In fact, when realization of the transcendence is perfectly complete, one perceives the personal aspect of the Absolute Truth in the highest spiritual abode. And when the perception of the personal aspect of the Supreme Godhead deepens, one becomes naturally attracted to the absolute transcendental beauty of Lord Kṛṣṇa. As the Lord says in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.19),

bahūnāṁ janmanām ante
jñānavān māṁ prapadyate
vāsudevaṁ sarvam iti
sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ

After many births and deaths, he who is actually in knowledge surrenders unto Me, knowing Me to be the cause of all causes and all that is. Such a great soul is very rare.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 2.5:

Therefore everything in this world is merely a transformation of Lord Kṛṣṇa's energies. In one sense the energy principle and the energetic principle are nondifferent, just as fire and its burning potency are inseparable and non-different. Unfortunately, the impersonalists, the monistic philosophers, have wreaked havoc in the world with their misguided opinions concerning transformation of the Lord's energy.

Demigods and all other living entities belong to the energy principle, as does the universe itself. No one but the Lord and His plenary expansions are in the category of the energetic principle. Thus the energy and the energetic are one and different. A person who cannot grasp this subtle principle of simultaneous, inconceivable oneness and difference of the Lord and His energies will surely degenerate into an impersonalist, or Māyāvādī. He will be forced from the path of devotion and become silent.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 2.6:

Only when a person performs pious activities and associates with saintly persons does spiritual knowledge dawn on his consciousness. Then, when he transcends the platform of duality—especially when he no longer takes part in the controversy over the Absolute Truth's monistic or dualistic existence—he sees Lord Kṛṣṇa in his enlightenment and worships Him with determination as one without a second, matchless and supreme. In the perfected stage of pious activities, the mode of goodness dominates the consciousness, dissipating the darkness of nescience and illusion, which are products of the mode of ignorance. As soon as the mode of passion is fully subdued, spiritual realization illuminates the sky of one's consciousness.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 2.8:

Thus they embrace monistic, impersonal philosophy. Denying that Lord Kṛṣṇa alone is God, they insist that they are also "Gods." In this manner they embrace grossly foolish ideas about themselves and God and try to compete with Him, completely disregarding all etiquette and sound philosophical conclusions.

Spiritualists from the West often conclude that such atheistic people are possessed by Satan. In bygone ages many such satanic persons—Rāvaṇa, Hiraṇyakaśipu, Jarāsandha, Kaṁsa—challenged the Supreme Lord's authority. In modern times they have steadily multiplied. These demons have dismissed even Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, insulting Him with derogatory name—calling as "son of aunt Śacī."

Renunciation Through Wisdom 2.8:

Although a person may call himself a devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa, if he considers Kṛṣṇa a human being or thinks that He started off as a human being and then evolved into God (as is now in vogue, with so many "incarnations" mushrooming), then such a person is not a devotee but an imposter. One often comes across monists and pseudo-devotees posing as Lord Kṛṣṇa's devotees, but eventually they try to usurp Kṛṣṇa's position. They want to be Lord Kṛṣṇa themselves. Persons with such insidious desires are totally bewildered. If a fruitive worker thinks that Lord Kṛṣṇa is an ordinary mortal, he does not attain the goal of his fruitive work—elevation to the heavenly planets. And if an anthropomorphist happens to be a jñānī, an empirical philosopher, then he also fails to achieve the goal of his pursuit of knowledge—liberation from the material modes.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 2.13:

For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme, advancement is very troublesome. To make progress in that discipline is always difficult for those who are embodied.

The austerities a monist performs are painful both during the initial stage of practice (sādhana) and when he has supposedly reached perfection. The impersonalists suffer excruciating pains trying to establish the oneness of matter and spirit through speculative theories. Thinking that Brahman is impotent, through sophistry they try to equate the Lord's inferior, material energy with His superior, spiritual energy, thus reaping ridicule from truly learned circles. In attempting to prove that the Absolute Truth cannot be the Supreme Personality of Godhead with unlimited energies, they argue that this would mean immutable Brahman is actually mutable.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 2.13:

In trying to refute the established theory of pariṇāma-vāda, or the "transformation of energy," they accuse Śrīla Vyāsadeva of being mistaken when he says that the material universe and the living entities are all transformations of the Lord's energy and are therefore real, not false. Thus in their philosophical discussions the monists reject the main purport and essence of all Vedic scriptures and their corollaries and hang on to nonessential injunctions, such as tat tvam asi, "You are that." They like to deliberate on these subpoints, but when confronted with the arguments of a learned Vaiṣṇava, they turn and run from the battlefront.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 2.13:

Without understanding that the Supreme Lord is a transcendental personality, the monists make futile and grossly mundane attempts at restraining their senses, meditating on the Lord's impersonal aspect as the ultimate and original Absolute Truth. As it is impossible to dam a flooding river, so it is impossible to control the senses by meditating on the impersonal Brahman. As the great sage Sanat Kumāra says in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (4.22.39):

yat-pāda-paṅkaja-palāśa-vilāsa-bhaktyā
karmāśayaṁ grathitam udgrathayanti santaḥ
tadvan na rikta-matayo yatayo 'pi ruddha-
sroto-gaṇās tam araṇaṁ bhaja vāsudevam

The devotees, who are always engaged in the service of the toes of the lotus feet of the Lord, can easily overcome hard-knotted desires for fruitive activities. Because this is very difficult, the nondevotees—the jñānīs and yogīs—although trying to stop the waves of sense gratification, cannot do so. Therefore you are advised to engage in the devotional service of Kṛṣṇa, the son of Vasudeva.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 3.2:

If the infinitesimal soul merges his individuality, or inherent personality, with the infinite being, then that individuality is rendered worthless. Those who want to commit spiritual suicide by sacrificing their individuality are a breed by themselves. Such self-destroyers are known as pure monists. On the other hand, those who desire to maintain their individuality are dualists, or personalists.

Once the jīva manifests his original transcendental nature, he is easily liberated from material conditioning, yet even in such an elevated state he does not lose his individual identity as a spirit soul. In fact, in that pure state he engages in the eternal service of the Supreme Lord and relishes the immortal nectar of sublime bliss.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 3.2:

Learned circles consider a disciplic line bereft of a commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra to be unauthorized and useless. Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya's Vedānta commentary, entitled Śārīraka-bhāṣya, is the main commentary of the impersonal, monistic school. Among the Vaiṣṇavas, besides Śrīpāda Rāmānujācārya's commentary, Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa's Govinda-bhāṣya is the main commentary in the line of Lord Caitanya, known as the Mādhva-Gauḍīya-sampradāya.

Those who are keen to engage in deep discussions on the esoteric conclusions of the scriptures should certainly delve into the philosophy of the Vedānta-sūtra. The point to be emphasized is that a well-versed Vedānta philosopher is not a philosopher in the line of Śaṅkarācārya but is actually a Vaiṣṇava spiritual preceptor, a liberated soul.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 3.2:

This verse explains the famous saying sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma from the Upaniṣads, meaning "Everything is Brahman." In other words, the Supreme Brahman, Lord Kṛṣṇa, is identical with both the jīva and prakṛti in that they are all Brahman. Thus in one sense the Vaiṣṇavas are pure monists. Previously we deliberated upon another verse from the Bhagavad-gītā (9.10):

mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ
sūyate sa-carācaram
hetunānena kaunteya
jagad viparivartate

This material nature, which is one of My energies, is working under my direction, O son of Kuntī, producing all moving and nonmoving beings. Under its rule this manifestation is created and annihilated again and again.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 3.4:

When Śrī Aurobindo wrote of "the Divine Mother," he was likely referring to this internal, spiritual energy, the predominating Deity of eternal transcendental bliss. He also pointed out that the activities of the inferior, material energy should not be mistaken for those of this spiritual potency. Once the famous impersonalist and monist sannyāsī Ramana Maharshi of Madras was asked by a foreign disciple, "What is the difference between God and man?" His cryptic reply was "God plus desire equals man, and man minus desire equals God." We say that man can never be free of desire. In his eternal conditioned existence the jīva is full of the desire to enjoy matter, while in his eternal liberated state he is full of the desire to render devotional service to the Lord. Thus the jīva can never become God. It is sheer insanity to equate man with God, or vice versa. The Māyāvādī's unnatural desire to deny the inherent characteristics of his conscious self is the very same desire that keeps him from attaining liberation. Hence the Māyāvādīs' false and arrogant claim of liberation is merely a demonstration of their perverted intelligence.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 4.2:

Only saintly souls can perceive the truth of these statements; those whose intelligence has been corrupted by Māyāvāda philosophy cannot understand.

In general, the monists cannot grasp the intricate philosophy of nondualism. So Dr. Radhakrishnan has spun out of his imagination a theory by which he tries to establish dualism in nondualism. When Dr. Radhakrishnan writes that we must surrender to "the Unborn, Beginningless, Eternal who speaks through Kṛṣṇa," he implies that it is the impersonal Brahman within Kṛṣṇa who is speaking about surrender. Once it is established that the impersonal Brahman can speak, then He must also possess the instrument of speech, namely the tongue. Thus we see that Dr. Radhakrishnan's whole concept of impersonalism is immediately undermined. There is sufficient evidence in the scriptures to conclude that one who talks can also walk. And a being capable of speaking and walking must indeed be endowed with all the senses. Then He must also be able to perform other activities, such as eating and sleeping. So how can Dr. Radhakrishnan claim that his beginningless, eternal object is impersonal?

Renunciation Through Wisdom 4.5:

Therefore the severe austerities and penances the impersonalist performs are not equivalent to the eternal religion of devotional service.

16) When monists are so attached to the formless, impersonal aspect of the Lord that they distinguish between Him and His transcendental body, their consciousness becomes contaminated by this blasphemy, and thus they are deprived of a place in the Lord's eternal abode. But if by some good fortune they come in touch with a pure devotee and hear from him with faith about the Lord's transcendental name, qualities, pastimes, and so on, then they will certainly be cleansed of their contamination and become inspired and attracted by the Lord's glorious character, and finally they will surrender to Him fully. Thus the Bhagavad-gītā is such an instructive text that for those who want to enter into the eternal pastimes of the Supreme Lord, its unequivocal message teaches the first stages of surrender, and this surrender is absolutely essential for reaching the ultimate destination.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 5.1:

In recent times we have heard two words being loudly voiced: Māyāvāda (impersonalist) and Advaita-vāda (monist). I deem it proper to write a few words about them. Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya was a brāhmaṇa who propagated the impersonalist philosophy. But if he were to hear the pathetic version of his theory being espoused today, complete with nonbrahminical Western logic and mundane concepts, he would surely be struck dumb. Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya taught and exhibited ideal brahminical behaviour. He propounded irrefutable arguments that destroyed materialistic views. Furthermore, his erudition, realization, and renunciation were of an extremely high caliber. Yet when his so-called followers dilute and mutilate his philosophy, we are moved simultaneously to tears and laughter.

Renunciation Through Wisdom 5.1:

"They say that this world is unreal, with no foundation, no God in control." In fact, the very brain that thinks these childish thoughts is also a most insignificant creation of the Supreme Lord. Hence to expect that such pea-brains can grasp the mysteries behind the Supreme Lord's extraordinary plans is to hope for the impossible. Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya assessed the prevailing trends of his time and concluded that the monistic view, or the impersonal philosophy, was best suited for his contemporaries. But that was not his final conclusion. He went on to say, bhaja govindaṁ mūḍha-mate: "O fools, simply worship Govinda." From his use of the word bhaja, "worship," we understand him to mean that one should worship Lord Govinda's name, form, qualities, pastimes, and do on. The state of transcendence discussed here is far beyond impersonal realization, the ultimate goal of the monists. Indeed, those who worship Govinda enter into Śrī Vṛndāvana in Śrī Mathurā, the highest spiritual realm, where Śrī Śrī Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa enact Their quintessential pastimes.

Message of Godhead

Message of Godhead 2:

We have very little chance of escaping this bondage of action and reaction—work and its fruitive results. Even after abdicating all work and accepting the life of a sannyāsī, or renunciant, one still has to work, if only for his hungry stomach. And thus Śaṅkarācārya, the great monist philosopher and religious reformer, said that simply for the matter of the stomach, one may not adopt the dress of a renunciant. Therefore, there is no way out—no way to avoid doing work, if only for the belly's sake.

As a result, the Personality of Godhead, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, advises Marshal Arjuna in the following words: "O Arjuna, you must always do your duty. To do something is far better than to do nothing. You cannot even secure your everyday sustenance without doing any work."

Light of the Bhagavata

Light of the Bhagavata 1, Purport:

Therefore the Absolute Truth, which is compared to the whole sky, is simultaneously one with the manifested living being and different from him. The living being is only a sample of the Absolute Truth and is Prone to be covered by the circumstantial cloud of ignorance.

There are two parties of philosophers, generally known as the monists and the dualists. The monist believes in the oneness of the Absolute Truth and the living entity, but the dualist believes in the separate identities of the living being and the Absolute Truth. Above these two classes of philosophers is the philosophy of acintya-bhedābheda tattva, or the truth of simultaneous oneness and difference. This philosophy was propounded by Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu in His explanation of the Vedānta-sūtras. The Vedānta is the medium of philosophical interpretations, and thus the Vedānta cannot be the absolute property of any Particular class of philosopher.

Narada-bhakti-sutra (sutras 1 to 8 only)

Narada Bhakti Sutra 8, Purport:

"Activities such as mystic trance, becoming one with the Supreme, and the religious principles of brahminism, such as speaking the truth and tolerance, have their own respective attractions, but when one becomes captivated by love of Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, all attraction for mystic power, monistic pleasure, and mundane religious principles becomes insignificant."

In other words, by discharging pure devotional service one attains the highest stage of love of Godhead and is freed from all other obligations, such as those mentioned in the karma-kāṇḍa, jñāna-kāṇḍa, and yoga-kāṇḍa sections of the Vedas. One who engages in pure devotional service has no desire to improve himself—except in the service of the Lord. In such devotional service there cannot be any worship of the impersonal or localized features of the Supreme Lord.

Page Title:Monist (Books)
Compiler:Visnu Murti, RupaManjari
Created:07 of Sep, 2012
Totals by Section:BG=9, SB=31, CC=27, OB=31, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:98