Philosophy of monism

Expressions researched:
"monist philosophy" |"monistic philosophy" |"philosophy of monism"

SB Canto 3

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.

SB 3.7.11, Purport:

The reflection of the moon on the water is the separated rays of the moon and not the actual moon. The separated parts and parcels of the Lord entangled in the water of material existence have the quivering quality, whereas the Lord is like the actual moon in the sky, which is not at all in touch with water. 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. Although the light of the moon is the same everywhere, due to being differently appreciated it appears different. 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.

It appears from this verse that the four Kumāras were impersonalists or protagonists of the philosophy of monism, becoming one with the Lord. But as soon as they saw the Lord's features, their minds changed.

SB 3.15.43, Translation and Purport:

When the breeze carrying the aroma of tulasī leaves from the toes of the lotus feet of the Personality of Godhead entered the nostrils of those sages, they experienced a change both in body and in mind, even though they were attached to the impersonal Brahman understanding.

It appears from this verse that the four Kumāras were impersonalists or protagonists of the philosophy of monism, becoming one with the Lord. But as soon as they saw the Lord's features, their minds changed. In other words, the impersonalist who feels transcendental pleasure in striving to become one with the Lord is defeated when he sees the beautiful transcendental features of the Lord. Because of the fragrance of His lotus feet, carried by the air and mixed with the aroma of tulasī, their minds changed; instead of becoming one with the Supreme Lord, they thought it wise to be devotees. Becoming a servitor of the lotus feet of the Lord is better than becoming one with the Lord.

SB Canto 4

In order to overcome the effects of Buddhist philosophy and spread Vedānta philosophy, Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya had to make some compromise with the Buddhist philosophy, and as such he preached the philosophy of monism, for it was required at that time. Otherwise there was no need for his preaching Māyāvāda philosophy.

SB 4.24.17, Purport:

Lord Śiva, speaking to Pārvatī-devī, foretold that he would spread the Māyāvāda philosophy in the guise of a sannyāsī brāhmaṇa just to eradicate Buddhist philosophy. This sannyāsī was Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya. In order to overcome the effects of Buddhist philosophy and spread Vedānta philosophy, Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya had to make some compromise with the Buddhist philosophy, and as such he preached the philosophy of monism, for it was required at that time. Otherwise there was no need for his preaching Māyāvāda philosophy. At the present moment there is no need for Māyāvāda philosophy or Buddhist philosophy, and Lord Caitanya rejected both of them. This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is spreading the philosophy of Lord Caitanya and rejecting the philosophy of both classes of Māyāvādī. Strictly speaking, both Buddhist philosophy and Śaṅkara's philosophy are but different types of Māyāvāda dealing on the platform of material existence. Neither of these philosophies has spiritual significance. There is spiritual significance only after one accepts the philosophy of Bhagavad-gītā, which culminates in surrendering unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Generally people worship Lord Śiva for some material benefit, and although they cannot see him personally, they derive great material profit by worshiping him.

The philosophy of monism, explained here very clearly, adjusts itself to the fact that the supreme source of all energy is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa.

SB 4.24.60, Purport:

In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam also the Absolute Truth is described as the one without a second, but He is realized in three features—impersonal Brahman, localized Paramātmā and the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the ultimate issue, and in this verse Lord Śiva confirms that ultimately the Absolute Truth is a person. He clearly says: tat tvaṁ brahma paraṁ jyotir ākāśam iva vistṛtam. Here is a common example: a successful businessman may have many factories and offices, and everything rests on his order. If someone says that the entire business rests on such-and-such a person, it does not mean that the person is bearing all the factories and offices on his head. Rather, it is understood that by his brain or his energetic expansion, the business is running without interruption. Similarly, it is the brain and energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead that carry on the complete manifestation of the material and spiritual worlds. The philosophy of monism, explained here very clearly, adjusts itself to the fact that the supreme source of all energy is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. This is described very clearly.

CC Adi-lila

Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura explains, "In developing his philosophy of monism, Śaṅkarācārya has established vivarta-vāda, or the Māyāvāda theory of illusion."

CC Adi 7.121, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura explains, "In the Vedanta-sūtra of Śrīla Vyāsadeva it is definitely stated that all cosmic manifestations result from transformations of various energies of the Lord. Śaṅkarācārya, however, not accepting the energy of the Lord, thinks that it is the Lord who is transformed. He has taken many clear statements from the Vedic literature and twisted them to try to prove that if the Lord, or the Absolute Truth, were transformed, His oneness would be disturbed. Thus he has accused Śrīla Vyāsadeva of being mistaken. In developing his philosophy of monism, therefore, he has established vivarta-vāda, or the Māyāvāda theory of illusion."

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.

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

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.

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. However, God's position is completely different from their concoction. Such Māyāvādī philosophers consider themselves above the influence of karma-kāṇḍa (fruitive activities and their reactions). For them, the spiritual world is equated with the Buddhist voidism. There is very little difference between impersonalism and voidism. Voidism can be directly understood, but the impersonalism enunciated by Māyāvādī philosophers is not very easily understandable. Of course, Māyāvādī philosophers accept a spiritual existence, but they do not know about the spiritual world and spiritual beings.

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.

CC Madhya 12.194, Translation and Purport:

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

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.

Śrīla Advaita Ācārya was given the title of ācārya because He spread the bhakti cult, not the philosophy of monism.

CC Madhya 12.194, Purport:

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

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.

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. 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.

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.

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. After all, the heavenly planets are material, and in due course of time they will all be dissolved. Devotees do not care for such temporary things. They engage in transcendental devotional activities because they desire elevation to the spiritual world, where they can live eternally and peacefully and with full knowledge of Kṛṣṇa. In Vṛndāvana, the gopīs, cowherd boys and even the calves, cows, trees and water are fully conscious of Kṛṣṇa. They are never satisfied with anything but Kṛṣṇa.

All of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's preaching protests the monistic philosophy of the Māyāvāda school.

CC Madhya 18.111, Translation and Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu immediately exclaimed, “Viṣṇu! Viṣṇu! Do not call Me the Supreme Personality of Godhead. A jīva cannot become Kṛṣṇa at any time. Do not even say such a thing!"

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.

When first-class devotional service develops, one must be devoid of all material desires, knowledge obtained by monistic philosophy and fruitive action.

CC Madhya 19.167, Translation and Purport:

“'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.'"

This verse is also found in Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī's Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu (1.1.11). As we can understand from the Bhagavad-gītā (9.34 and 18.65), the Supreme Personality of Godhead wants everyone to think of Him always (man-manā bhava mad-bhaktaḥ). Everyone should become His devotee, not the devotee of a demigod. Everyone should engage in His devotional service, including arcana (Deity worship) in the temple. Man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru. Everyone should offer obeisances, from moment to moment, to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. These are the desires of the Supreme Lord, and one who fulfills His desires favorably is actually a pure devotee.

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."

Prakāśānanda admitted that Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya, being very eager to establish his philosophy of monism, took shelter of the Vedānta philosophy and tried to explain it in his own way. The fact is, however, that if one accepts the existence of God, one certainly cannot establish the theory of monism.

CC Madhya 25.56, Purport:

Prakāśānanda admitted that Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya, being very eager to establish his philosophy of monism, took shelter of the Vedānta philosophy and tried to explain it in his own way. The fact is, however, that if one accepts the existence of God, one certainly cannot establish the theory of monism. For this reason Śaṅkarācārya refuted all kinds of Vedic literature that establishes the supremacy of the Personality of Godhead. In various ways, Śaṅkarācārya has tried to refute the Vedic literature. Throughout the world, ninety-nine percent of the philosophers following in the footsteps of Śaṅkarācārya refuse to accept the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Instead they try to establish their own opinions. It is typical of mundane philosophers to want to establish their own opinions and refute those of others.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya

One who is poor in devotional service to Kṛṣṇa sometimes suffers the bites of poisonous creatures, and sometimes he is baffled; sometimes he follows the philosophy of monism and thereby loses his identity, and sometimes he is swallowed by a large serpent.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 4:

The only possibility then is to search for the hidden treasure on the eastern side by the process of devotional service in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Indeed, that process of devotional service is the perpetual hidden treasure, and when one attains to it, he becomes perpetually rich. One who is poor in devotional service to Kṛṣṇa is always in need of material gain. Sometimes he suffers the bites of poisonous creatures, and sometimes he is baffled; sometimes he follows the philosophy of monism and thereby loses his identity, and sometimes he is swallowed by a large serpent. It is only by abandoning all this and becoming fixed in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, devotional service to the Lord, that one can actually achieve the perfection of 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.

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter 23:

Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura specifically deals with original and pure sex psychology (ādi-rasa) devoid of all mundane inebriety. The entire material world turns due to the basic principle of sex life. In modern human civilization, sex is the central point of all activities; indeed, wherever we turn our face we see sex life prominent. 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.

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Unfortunately, sometimes a rascal, following the philosophy of monism, or oneness, very irresponsibly takes advantage of this rāsa-līlā to imitate the behavior of Kṛṣṇa with the gopīs, entice many innocent women and mislead them in the name of spiritual realization.

Krsna Book 29:

The instruction given herein by the Supreme Personality of Godhead to the gopīs was not at all sarcastic. Such instructions should be taken very seriously by all honest women. The chastity of women is specifically stressed herein by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore this principle should be followed by any serious woman who wants to be elevated to a higher status of life. Kṛṣṇa is the center of all affection for all living creatures. When this affection is developed for Kṛṣṇa, one surpasses and transcends all Vedic injunctions. This was possible for the gopīs because they saw Kṛṣṇa face to face. This is not possible for any women in the conditioned state. Unfortunately, sometimes a rascal, following the philosophy of monism, or oneness, very irresponsibly takes advantage of this rāsa-līlā to imitate the behavior of Kṛṣṇa with the gopīs, entice many innocent women and mislead them in the name of spiritual realization. As a warning, Lord Kṛṣṇa has herein hinted that what was possible for the gopīs is not possible for ordinary women. Although a woman can actually be elevated by advanced Kṛṣṇa consciousness, she should not be enticed by an imposter who says that he is Kṛṣṇa. She should concentrate her devotional activities in chanting and meditating upon Kṛṣṇa, as is advised herein. One should not follow the men called sahajiyās, the so-called devotees who take everything very lightly.

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

The word "Kṛṣṇa" and the person Kṛṣṇa, or God Kṛṣṇa, is not different, because everything is Kṛṣṇa. The oneness, the philosophy of monism or pantheism, is perfect. When that oneness comes in understanding Kṛṣṇa, that is perfection.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- San Francisco, March 17, 1968:

So this process of chanting is to invoke your remembrance for Kṛṣṇa. That's all. It is not that we are implementing something artificially in you. No. Kṛṣṇa is already connected with you. You have forgotten, and we are trying to give you the process how you can revive your original consciousness. So mayy āsakta-manāḥ. So when you come to this place, temple, this is the beginning. This the beginning of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. If you see Kṛṣṇa or Kṛṣṇa's devotees, if you chant "Kṛṣṇa..." Kṛṣṇa is not different from the name because He's absolute. He is not different. The word "Kṛṣṇa" and the person Kṛṣṇa, or God Kṛṣṇa, is not different, because everything is Kṛṣṇa. The oneness, the philosophy of monism or pantheism, is perfect. When that oneness comes in understanding Kṛṣṇa, that is perfection. If Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Absolute Truth from whom everything is emanating, then everything is Kṛṣṇa.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures

This is impersonal conception. Everyone goes and mixes as every river goes down to the ocean, and there is no more distinction which is the river water and which is the ocean water. They become one. That is the monistic philosophy. But Vaiṣṇava philosophy goes further, that "Why you are satisfied with the water? Why don't you see within the water?"

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 22.6 -- New York, January 8, 1967:

Sometimes the example is given that as the rivers glide down to the ocean and the water is become one... That's all right. That oneness... This is impersonal conception. Everyone goes and mixes as every river goes down to the ocean, and there is no more distinction which is the river water and which is the ocean water. They become one. That is the monistic philosophy. But Vaiṣṇava philosophy goes farther, that "Why you are satisfied with the water? Why don't you see within the water?" Within the water you will find there are big, big fishes and aquatic animals. They keep their separate identity, and they enjoy in the ocean. The foolish persons, they are satisfied that "I am in the ocean now." That is the less intelligence. Go deep into the ocean and see what is going there. Similarly, those who are satisfied simply by merging into the spiritual existence, impersonalists, they are less intelligent. They have no intelligence to see that within the ocean there is individual expansion, individual life, and they are enjoying. Similarly, in the spiritual sky there is individuality. That individuality is there. And that individuality is reciprocated between Kṛṣṇa and the individual souls. They are called nitya-mukta, eternally liberated. And the other class, who are just like in the river fishes, they are called nitya-baddha. Their, I mean to say, limited sphere in the river or in the pond or in the well...

Śaṅkarācārya wanted that there is only one Brahman and we are also Brahman, but he wanted his philosophy of monism. So the Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī also admitted that because Śaṅkarācārya wanted to establish his philosophy of monism, therefore he had to cover the real meaning of Vedānta-sūtra.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 25.40-50 -- San Francisco, January 24, 1967:

So that disciple of Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī admitted that godlessness in Vedānta-sūtra is not the purpose. Actually, by misinterpreting the Vedānta-sūtra they want to establish that "There is no God; we are God." So after explanation of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, at least there was one convert amongst all the sannyāsīs, and he was glorifying Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Eta sei kare kṛṣṇa-saṅkīrtana. And while he was glorifying Lord Caitanya, automatically he began to chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. Śuni' prakāśānanda kichu kahena vacana. When his disciple was glorifying Lord Caitanya and His process of teaching, his spiritual master, Prakāśānanda, said like this: ācāryera āgraha-advaita-vāda sthāpite. He admitted... Ācārya means Śaṅkarācārya. He means here Śaṅkarācārya. Śaṅkarācārya wanted that there is only one Brahman and we are also Brahman, but he wanted his philosophy of monism. Dualism, God and living entity separate, they do not admit. They admit that God and living entity the same. It is simply for the time being covered, which is called māyā. Māyāvāda philosophy. So the Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī also admitted that because Śaṅkarācārya wanted to establish his philosophy of monism, therefore he had to cover the real meaning of Vedānta-sūtra.

1969 Correspondence

The Goswamis deliver us from the danger of being lost in the philosophy of monism. As I wrote in my prayers to my Spiritual Master, "impersonal calamity Thou hast moved". So this impersonalism is a calamity for the spiritualist.

Letter to Tamala Krsna -- Tittenhurst 13 October, 1969:

Regarding your question about Govinda Ganamrta, Govinda is Krishna, and ganamrta means the nectar of songs. That means anything sung about the activities of Govinda is nectar. You have mentioned that Srila Rupa Goswami has introduced this. Srila Rupa Goswami, assisted by all other Goswamis have left immense literature for singing about the glories of Govinda. Whatever literature we are presenting, following the footsteps of Rupa Goswami and the others, they are also Govinda Ganamrta. So the more Govinda Ganamrta or the glories of Govinda will be spread the more the nonsense of impersonalism and monism will be defeated. It is said kaivalya nistaraka. This means the Goswamis deliver us from the danger of being lost in the philosophy of monism. As I wrote in my prayers to my Spiritual Master, "impersonal calamity Thou hast moved". So this impersonalism is a calamity for the spiritualist.