Lord Caitanya immediately informed Prakāśānanda that in the modern age people in general are more or less bereft of all spiritual intellect. When such people come under the influence of Śaṅkarācārya's Māyāvādī (impersonalist) philosophy before beginning the most confidential Vedānta-sūtras, their natural tendency toward obedience to the Supreme is checked. The supreme source of everything is naturally respected by everyone, but this natural tendency is hampered when one takes to the impersonalist conceptions of Śaṅkara. Thus the spiritual master of Lord Caitanya suggested that it is better that one not study the Śārīraka-bhāṣya of Śaṅkarācārya, for it is very harmful to people in general. Indeed, the common man does not even have the intelligence to penetrate into the jugglery of words. He is better advised to chant the mahā-mantra: Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. In this quarrelsome age of Kali there is no alternative for self-realization.
Sariraka-bhasya
Bhagavad-gita As It Is
BG Chapters 1 - 6
There are two classes of sannyāsīs, or persons in the renounced order of life. The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are engaged in the study of Sāṅkhya philosophy, whereas the Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs are engaged in the study of Bhāgavatam philosophy, which affords the proper commentary on the Vedānta-sūtras. The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs also study the Vedānta-sūtras, but use their own commentary, called Śārīraka-bhāṣya, written by Śaṅkarācārya. The students of the Bhāgavata school are engaged in the devotional service of the Lord, according to pāñcarātrikī regulations, and therefore the Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs have multiple engagements in the transcendental service of the Lord. The Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs have nothing to do with material activities, and yet they perform various activities in their devotional service to the Lord. But the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, engaged in the studies of Sāṅkhya and Vedānta and speculation, cannot relish the transcendental service of the Lord. Because their studies become very tedious, they sometimes become tired of Brahman speculation, and thus they take shelter of the Bhāgavatam without proper understanding. Consequently their study of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam becomes troublesome.
Srimad-Bhagavatam
SB Canto 1
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the one unrivaled commentary on Vedānta-sūtra. Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya intentionally did not touch it because he knew that the natural commentary would be difficult for him to surpass. He wrote his Śārīraka-bhāṣya, and his so-called followers deprecated the Bhāgavatam as some "new" presentation. One should not be misled by such propaganda directed against the Bhāgavatam by the Māyāvāda school. From this introductory śloka, the beginning student should know that Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the only transcendental literature meant for those who are paramahaṁsas and completely freed from the material disease called malice. The Māyāvādīs are envious of the Personality of Godhead despite Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya's admission that Nārāyaṇa, the Personality of Godhead, is above the material creation. The envious Māyāvādī cannot have access to the Bhāgavatam, but those who are really anxious to get out of this material existence may take shelter of this Bhāgavatam because it is uttered by the liberated Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī. It is the transcendental torchlight by which one can see perfectly the transcendental Absolute Truth realized as Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān.
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta
CC Adi-lila
Actually, the explanation of the quadruple forms in the Vedic literature cannot be understood by the speculation of a conditioned soul. The quadruple forms should therefore be accepted just as They are described. 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.
Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura comments in this connection, "Māyāvādī sannyāsīs accept that the commentary by Śrī Śaṅkarācārya known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya gives the real meaning of the Vedanta-sūtra. In other words, Māyāvādī sannyāsīs accept the meanings expressed in the explanations of the Vedānta-sūtra by Śaṅkarācārya, which are based on monism. Thus they explain the Vedānta-sūtra, the Upaniṣads and all such Vedic literatures in their own impersonal way." The great Māyāvādī sannyāsī Sadānanda Yogīndra has written a book known as Vedānta-sāra, in which he writes, vedānto nāma upaniṣat-pramāṇam. tad-upakārīṇi śārīraka-sūtrādīni ca. According to Sadānanda Yogīndra, the Vedānta-sūtra and Upaniṣads, as presented by Śrī Śaṅkarācārya in his Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary, are the only sources of Vedic evidence. Actually, however, Vedānta refers to the essence of Vedic knowledge, and it is not a fact that there is nothing more than Śaṅkarācārya's Śārīraka-bhāṣya. There are other Vedānta commentaries, written by Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, none of whom follow Śrī Śaṅkarācārya or accept the imaginative commentary of his school.
The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, appreciating Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, inquired from Him why He did not discuss Vedānta philosophy. Actually, however, the entire system of Vaiṣṇava activities is based on Vedānta philosophy. Vaiṣṇavas do not neglect Vedānta, but they do not care to understand Vedānta on the basis of the Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary. Therefore, to clarify the situation, Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, with the permission of the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, wanted to speak regarding Vedānta philosophy.
Śrīla Vyāsadeva, a powerful incarnation of Nārāyaṇa, compiled the Vedānta-sūtra, and in order to protect it from unauthorized commentaries, he personally composed Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam on the instruction of his spiritual master, Nārada Muni, as the original commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. Besides Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, there are commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra composed by all the major Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, and in each of them devotional service to the Lord is described very explicitly. Only those who follow Śaṅkara's commentary have described the Vedānta-sūtra in an impersonal way, without reference to viṣṇu-bhakti, or devotional service to the Lord, Viṣṇu. Generally people very much appreciate this Śārīraka-bhāṣya, or impersonal description of the Vedānta-sūtra, but all commentaries that are devoid of devotional service to Lord Viṣṇu must be considered to differ in purport from the original Vedānta-sūtra. In other words, Lord Caitanya definitely confirmed that the commentaries, or bhāṣyas, written by the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas on the basis of devotional service to Lord Viṣṇu, and not the Śārīraka-bhāṣya of Śaṅkarācārya, give the actual explanation of the Vedānta-sūtra.
"Śaṅkarācārya is not at fault, for it is under the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead that he has covered the real purport of the Vedas."
The Vedic literature is to be considered a source of real knowledge, but if one does not take it as it is, one will be misled. For example, the Bhagavad-gītā is an important Vedic literature that has been taught for many years, but because it was commented upon by unscrupulous rascals, people derived no benefit from it, and no one came to the conclusion of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Since the purport of the Bhagavad-gītā is now being presented as it is, however, within four or five short years thousands of people all over the world have become Kṛṣṇa conscious. That is the difference between direct and indirect explanations of the Vedic literature. Therefore Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, mukhya-vṛttye sei artha parama mahattva: "To teach the Vedic literature according to its direct meaning, without false commentary, is glorious." Unfortunately, Śrī Śaṅkarācārya, by the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, compromised between atheism and theism in order to cheat the atheists and bring them to theism, and to do so he gave up the direct method of Vedic knowledge and tried to present a meaning which is indirect. It is with this purpose that he wrote his Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra.
One should not, therefore, attribute very much importance to the Śārīraka-bhāṣya.
In order to understand Vedānta philosophy, one must study Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, which begins with the words oṁ namo bhagavate vāsudevāya, janmādy asya yato ’nvayād itarataś cārtheṣv abhijñaḥ sva-rāṭ: "I offer my obeisances unto Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, son of Vasudeva, who is the Supreme all-pervading Personality of Godhead. I meditate upon Him, the transcendent reality, who is the primeval cause of all causes, from whom all manifested universes arise, in whom they dwell and by whom they are destroyed. I meditate upon that eternally effulgent Lord, who is directly and indirectly conscious of all manifestations and yet is fully independent." (SB 1.1.1) Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the real commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. Unfortunately, if one is attracted to Śrī Śaṅkarācārya's commentary, Śārīraka-bhāṣya, his spiritual life is doomed.
Students of Vedic philosophy know very well how strongly Śrī Rāmānujācārya's viśiṣṭādvaita-vāda and Śrī Madhvācārya's tattva-vāda contest the impersonal Māyāvāda philosophy. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, however, accepted the direct meaning of the Vedānta philosophy and thus defeated the Māyāvāda philosophy immediately. He opined in this connection that anyone who follows the principles of the Śārīraka-bhāṣya is doomed. This is confirmed in the Padma Purāṇa, where Lord Śiva tells Pārvatī:
- śṛṇu devi pravakṣyāmi tāmasāni yathā-kramam
- yeṣāṁ śravaṇa-mātreṇa pātityaṁ jñāninām api
- apārthaṁ śruti-vākyānāṁ darśayal loka-garhitam
- karma-svarūpa-tyājyatvam atra ca pratipādyate
- sarva-karma-paribhraṁśān naiṣkarmyaṁ tatra cocyate
- parātma-jīvayor aikyaṁ mayātra pratipādyate
"My dear wife, hear my explanations of how I have spread ignorance through Māyāvāda philosophy. Simply by hearing it, even an advanced scholar will fall down. In this philosophy, which is certainly very inauspicious for people in general, I have misrepresented the real meaning of the Vedas and recommended that one give up all activities in order to achieve freedom from karma. In this Māyāvāda philosophy I have described the jīvātmā and Paramātmā to be one and the same."
How the Māyāvāda philosophy was condemned by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and His followers is described in Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Antya-līlā, Second Chapter, verses 94 through 99, where Svarūpa-dāmodara Gosvāmī says that anyone who is eager to understand the Māyāvāda philosophy must be considered insane. This especially applies to a Vaiṣṇava who reads the Śārīraka-bhāṣya and considers himself to be one with God. The Māyāvādī philosophers have presented their arguments in such attractive, flowery language that hearing Māyāvāda philosophy may sometimes change the mind of even a mahā-bhāgavata, or very advanced devotee. An actual Vaiṣṇava cannot tolerate any philosophy that claims God and the living being to be one and the same.
In the Brahma-sūtra, Second Chapter, the first aphorism is as follows: tad-ananyatvam ārambhaṇa-śabdādibhyaḥ. Commenting on this sūtra in his Śārīraka-bhāṣya, Śaṅkarācārya has introduced the statement vācārambhaṇaṁ vikāro nāmadheyam from the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (6.1.4) to try to prove that acceptance of the transformation of the energy of the Supreme Lord is faulty. He has tried to defy this transformation of energy in a misguided way, which will be explained later. Since his conception of God is impersonal, he does not believe that the entire cosmic manifestation is a transformation of the energies of the Lord, for as soon as one accepts the various energies of the Absolute Truth, one must immediately accept the Absolute Truth to be personal, not impersonal. A person can create many things by the transformation of his energy. For example, a businessman transforms his energy by establishing many big factories or business organizations, yet he remains a person although his energy has been transformed into these many factories or business concerns. The Māyāvādī philosophers do not understand this simple fact. Their tiny brains and poor fund of knowledge cannot afford them sufficient enlightenment to realize that when a man's energy is transformed, the man himself is not transformed but remains the same person.
Not believing in the fact that the energy of the Absolute Truth is transformed, Śaṅkarācārya has propounded his theory of illusion. This theory states that although the Absolute Truth is never transformed, we think that it is transformed, which is an illusion. Śaṅkarācārya does not believe in the transformation of the energy of the Absolute Truth, for he claims that everything is one and that the living entity is therefore also one with the Supreme. This is the Māyāvāda theory.
CC Madhya-lila
He then began to instruct Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu on Vedānta philosophy, and out of affection and devotion, he spoke to the Lord as follows.
The Vedānta- or Brahma-sūtra, written by Śrīla Vyāsadeva, is a book studied by all advanced spiritual students, especially by the sannyāsīs of all religious communities (sampradāyas). The sannyāsīs must read the Vedānta-sūtra to establish their final conclusions concerning Vedic knowledge. Here, of course, the Vedānta mentioned is the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya. Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya intended to convert Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who was a Vaiṣṇava sannyāsī, into a Māyāvādī sannyāsī. He therefore made this arrangement to instruct Him in the Vedānta-sūtra according to the Śārīraka commentary of Śaṅkarācārya. All the sannyāsīs of the Śaṅkara-sampradāya enjoy seriously studying the Vedānta-sūtra with the Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary. It is said, vedānta-vākyeṣu sadā ramantaḥ: "One should always enjoy the studies of the Vedānta-sūtra."
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu approved of a sannyāsī’s reading the Vedānta-sūtra, or Brahma-sūtra, but He did not approve the Śārīraka commentary of Śaṅkarācārya. Indeed, He said elsewhere, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: (CC Madhya 6.169) "If one hears the Śārīraka-bhāṣya of Śaṅkarācārya, he is doomed." Thus a sannyāsī, a transcendentalist, must read the Vedānta-sūtra regularly, but he should not read the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. This is the conclusion of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. The real commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Artho ’yaṁ brahma-sūtrānām: Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the original commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, written by the author himself, Śrīla Vyāsadeva.
Factually, the devotional service of the Lord is described in the Vedānta-sūtra, but the Māyāvādī philosophers, the Śaṅkarites, prepared a commentary known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya, in which the transcendental form of the Lord is denied. The Māyāvādī philosophers think that the living entity is identical with the Supreme Soul, Brahman. Their commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra are completely opposed to the principle of devotional service. Caitanya Mahāprabhu therefore warns us to avoid these commentaries. If one indulges in hearing the Śaṅkarite Śārīraka-bhāṣya, he will certainly be bereft of all real knowledge.
Thus Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu criticized Śaṅkarācārya's Śārīraka-bhāṣya as imaginary, and He pointed out hundreds of faults in it. To defend Śaṅkarācārya, however, Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya presented unlimited opposition.
CC Antya-lila
Bhagavān Ācārya's brother, whose name was Gopāla Bhaṭṭācārya, had studied Vedānta philosophy at Benares and had then returned to Bhagavān Ācārya's home.
During those days and also at the present, Vedānta philosophy is understood through the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, which is known as the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. Thus it appears that Gopāla Bhaṭṭācārya, the younger brother of Bhagavān Ācārya, had studied Vedānta according to the way of the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, which expounds the Māyāvāda philosophy of the impersonalists.
“When a Vaiṣṇava listens to the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, the Māyāvāda commentary upon the Vedānta-sūtra, he gives up the Kṛṣṇa conscious attitude that the Lord is the master and the living entity is His servant. Instead, he considers himself the Supreme Lord.
The philosophers known as kevalādvaita-vādīs generally occupy themselves with hearing the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, a commentary by Śaṅkarācārya advocating that one impersonally consider oneself the Supreme Lord. Such Māyāvāda philosophical commentaries upon the Vedānta-sūtra are simply imaginary, but there are other commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra. The commentary by Śrīla Rāmānujācārya, known as Śrī-bhāṣya, establishes the viśiṣṭādvaita-vāda philosophy. Similarly, in the Brahma-sampradāya, Madhvācārya's Pūrṇaprajña-bhāṣya establishes śuddha-dvaita-vāda. In the Kumāra-sampradāya, or Nimbārka-sampradāya, Śrī Nimbārka establishes the philosophy of dvaitādvaita-vāda in the Pārijāta-saurabha-bhāṣya. And in the Viṣṇu-svāmi-sampradāya, or Rudra-sampradāya, which comes from Lord Śiva, Viṣṇu Svāmī has written a commentary called Sarvajña-bhāṣya, which establishes śuddhādvaita-vāda.
A Vaiṣṇava should study the commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra written by the four sampradāya-ācāryas, namely Śrī Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī and Nimbārka, for these commentaries are based upon the philosophy that the Lord is the master and that all living entities are His eternal servants. One interested in studying Vedānta philosophy properly must study these commentaries, especially if he is a Vaiṣṇava. These commentaries are always adored by Vaiṣṇavas. The commentary by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī is elaborately given in the Ādi-līlā, Chapter Seven, text 101. The Māyāvāda commentary Śārīraka-bhāṣya is like poison for a Vaiṣṇava. It should not be touched at all. Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura remarks that even a mahā-bhāgavata, or highly elevated devotee who has surrendered himself unto the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, sometimes falls down from pure devotional service if he hears the Māyāvāda philosophy of the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. This commentary should therefore be shunned by all Vaiṣṇavas.
In spite of Svarūpa Dāmodara's protest, Bhagavān Ācārya continued, "We are all fixed at the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa with our hearts and souls. Therefore the Śārīraka-bhāṣya cannot change our minds."
Other Books by Srila Prabhupada
Teachings of Lord Caitanya
Actually in the first two chapters of Vedānta-sūtra the relationship between the living entities and the Supreme Lord is explained, and in the Third Chapter the discharge of devotional service is explained. The Fourth Chapter deals with the relationship which results from discharging devotional service. The natural commentary on Vedānta-sūtra is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The great ācāryas of the four Vaiṣṇava communities (sampradāyas)—namely, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī and Nimbārka—have also written commentaries on Vedānta-sūtra by following the principles of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. At present the followers of all the ācāryas have written many books following the principles of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as the commentary on the Vedānta. Śaṅkara's commentary on Vedānta-sūtra, known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya, is very much adored by the impersonalist scholars, but commentaries written on the Vedānta written from the materialistic point of view are completely adverse to the transcendental service of the Lord. Consequently Lord Caitanya said that direct commentaries on the Upaniṣads and Vedānta-sūtra are glorious, but that anyone who follows the indirect path of Śaṅkarācārya's Śārīraka-bhāṣya is certainly doomed.
Vedānta-sūtra is compiled by Vyāsadeva for the benefit of all living entities. It is through Vedānta-sūtra that the philosophy of bhakti-yoga can be understood. Unfortunately, the Māyāvādī commentary, Śārīraka-bhāṣya, has practically defeated the purpose of Vedānta-sūtra. In the Māyāvādī commentary, the spiritual, transcendental form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead has been denied, and the Supreme Brahman has been dragged down to the level of the individual Brahman, the living entity. Both the Supreme Brahman and the individual Brahman have been denied spiritual form and individuality, although it is clearly stated that the Supreme Lord is the one supreme living entity and the other living entities are the many subordinate living entities. Thus reading the Māyāvādī commentaries on Vedānta-sūtra is always dangerous. The chief danger is that through these commentaries one may come to consider the living entity to be equal to the Supreme Lord. It is easy for a conditioned living entity to be falsely directed in this way, and once he is so directed he can never come to his actual position or enjoy his eternal activity in bhakti yoga. In other words, the Māyāvādī philosophy has rendered the greatest disservice to humanity by promoting the impersonal view of the Supreme Lord. Thus Māyāvādī philosophers deprive human society of the real message of Vedānta-sūtra.
Renunciation Through Wisdom
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.
Lectures
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu therefore says, māyāvādī bhāṣya sunile haya sarva nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). Māyāvādī bhāṣya means Śaṅkara, Śārīraka-bhāṣya of the Brahma-sūtra. If you hear the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, then you'll be doomed, you will be Godless. Therefore it has been forbidden by Caitanya Mahāprabhu. All the Vaiṣṇava sampradāyas, Rāmanujya Sampradāya, Madhvācārya Sampradāya, they all, I mean to say, disagree with the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, Śārīraka-bhāṣya, Brahma-sūtra.
So far we are concerned, Madhva-Gauḍīya Sampradāya, our ācāryas, they took it, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, as the right commentary on Brahma-sūtra. Bhāṣyaṁ brahma-sūtrānāṁ vedārtha-paribṛṁhitam. This Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the real bhāṣya of Brahma-sūtra. So the Gauḍīya Sampradāya did not make any commentary on the Brahma-sūtra because they took it, Caitanya Mahāprabhu took it as, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, as a natural commentary, because Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is also made by Vyāsadeva and Vyāsadeva is the original author of Brahma-sūtra. So author made his own commentary; so there was no need of another commentary. This is the Gauḍīya-siddhānta, Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇava-siddhānta.
Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures
So actually the Vedānta-sūtra, everything is bhakti. But unfortunately, people have taken Vedānta in a different way, after the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. But all the ācāryas, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, they have all, they have commentated on the Vedānta-sūtra. So Vedantist does not mean simply the Māyāvādīs. Actually Vedantists are the devotees. Because veda anta. Veda means knowledge, and anta means the last word. The last word is bhagavān. That is Vedānta. Here it is said, brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). If you understand by studying Vedānta simply Brahman realization, that is not perfect. If you understand Paramātmā realization by studying Vedānta, that is also not perfect. When you come to understand Bhagavān, that is perfect. That is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā: vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ (BG 15.15).
So actually, the Absolute Truth is explained in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, or the Vedānta-sūtra's explanation, natural explanation,... Actually, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam was written by Vyāsadeva. Here it is said, dvaipāyana-sakha. Dvaipāyana means Vyāsadeva. Vyāsadeva compiled this Brahma-sūtra, and he explained it, bhāṣyaṁ brahma-sūtrāṇām **, this Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. If we read some artificial comments on Brahma-sūtra, we'll misunderstand. Generally, these Māyāvādīs give prominence of the comment given by Śaṅkarācārya about Brahma-sūtra, Śārīraka-bhāṣya. But that is unnatural. The natural commentation is given by the author himself, Vyāsadeva. So we have to understand... Vyāsadeva has written Brahma-sūtra, and we have to understand the meaning of Brahma... Brahma-sūtra means codes only. So codes can be explained by the author himself. So our process is to accept the Brahma-sūtra. Brahma-sūtra-padaiś caiva hetumadbhir viniścitaiḥ (BG 13.5). Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā. So Brahma-sūtra is nyāya-prasthāna. Nyāya-prasthāna: very logically, transcendental knowledge. So brahma-sūtra-padaiś caiva hetumadbhir viniścitaiḥ (BG 13.5). So we must... Therefore, according to our Vedic system, the ācārya must understand Brahma-sūtra and explain. Then he'll be accepted as ācārya.
Kṛṣṇa is the original guru. He is Brahmā's guru. Then who can be better guru than Kṛṣṇa? Tene brahma hṛdā ādi-kavaye. He instructed Brahmā. Brahmā instructed Nārada, and Nārada instructed Vyāsadeva, and Vyāsadeva has given us so many literatures. This is called paramparā system. Vedavyāsa. Vyāsadeva has given us four Vedas: Sāma, Yajur, Ṛg, Atharva; then explained them in the 108 Purāṇas. Then again, he has summarized them in Vedānta-sūtra. Then again, he has explained the Vedānta-sūtra by Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya. In every chapter of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam you will find this statement by Vyāsadeva, brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya. Brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya is not that Śaṅkara's bhāṣya, Śārīraka-bhāṣya. That is artificial. Here the brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya. Brahma-sūtra is written by Vyāsadeva, and because he knew that in future so many rascals will misinterpret this Brahma-sūtra, therefore he compiled personally the bhāṣya of Brahma-sūtra. That is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Bhāṣyaṁ brahma-sūtrāṇāṁ vedārtha-paribṛṁhitam: "The meaning of the Vedas is completely described, and it is the original comment on Brahma-sūtra." Therefore you will see Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam begins from the words of Brahma-sūtra: jīvasya tattva-jijñāsā. As it is said in the Brahma-sūtra, athāto brahma jijñāsā, the Bhāgavata says that jīvasya tattva-jijñāsā: "The living entity's only business is to inquire about the Absolute Truth." Na yaś ceha karmabhiḥ: "No other business." Dharmārtha-kāma-mokṣa (SB 4.8.41).
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures
Now Caitanya Mahāprabhu is directly challenging Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī. Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī belonged to the Śaṅkara-sampradāya, Śaṅkara school of thought. Now Caitanya Mahāprabhu is directly challenging that gauna-vṛttye yebā bhāṣya karila ācārya. Ācārya means Śaṅkarācārya. Śaṅkarācārya has made a commentary which is called Śārīraka-bhāṣya of Vedānta-sūtra. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu says this Śārīraka-bhāṣya, gauna-vṛttye, indirectly... Just like we are accustomed to do: "I think the meaning should be like this," grammatical or this way or that way, jugglery of words. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu directly accuses Śaṅkarācārya that the commentary which he has made indirectly, if we read that commentary or if we hear that commentary, then tāhāra śravaṇe nāśa haya sarva kārya, then anyone who is hearing or trying to understand the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, he is going to hell. He's not only wasting his time, but he's going to hell. Sarva nāśa. Sarva nāśa means "all auspicity lost." Why? Why lost? Lost because as soon as you indulge in the reading of the Śaṅkara-bhāṣya, the whole program is you have to think that "I am God." So if I am God, then who is else God, that I have to worship? That means the prospect of devotional service, or Kṛṣṇa consciousness, is killed forever. Such rascal will never be able to come to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Therefore he says, haya sarva nāśa. He is being murdered, you see, because he never will come. He'll always think, "I am God."
Don't try to interpret. According to ordinary, I mean to say, dealings, suppose in the law court there are two parties. Two lawyers are fighting on the principle of one clause or section in the lawbook. One is interpreting in a different way, one is interpreting in a different way, and the judges give their judgment. Now, the opportunity for interpretation is there when the meaning is not clear. A very good example is given by the grammarians, or Sanskrit scholars, that gaṅgayaṁ ghoṣapali, that "There is a neighborhood which is called Ghoṣapali on the Ganges." Now somebody may ask, "How there can be a quarter on the Ganges? Ganges is water." So there is interpretation required. So somebody says, " 'On the Ganges' means on the bank of the Ganges." That makes it clear. "On the Ganges" does not mean that in the middle water there is a, I mean to say, residential quarter. No. "On the Ganges" means on the bank of the Ganges.
So when there is such doubt, one can interpret. But when there is no doubt—everyone can understand clearly the meaning—there is no question of interpreting. That is Caitanya Mahāprabhu's stressing, that gauṇa-vṛttye yebā bhāṣya karila ācārya. Therefore each and every aphorism and verse of Vedānta-sūtra has been indirectly interpreted by the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. Such interpretation, if somebody hears, then his future is doomed. Just like our Gandhi, he wanted to prove, from Bhagavad-gītā, nonviolence. The Bhagavad-gītā is being preached in the battlefield, and it is completely violence. How he can prove? Therefore he is dragging the meaning out of his own con... It is very troublesome, and anyone who will read such interpretation, he is doomed.
So again He supports Śaṅkarācārya, that "It is not his fault. He had to do it under the superior order to explain the Vedic literature in an impersonalist way. But those who are not expert, if they hear the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, Śārīraka-bhāṣya, then he is doomed." In other words, those who are actually aspiring for being elevated in spiritual science, they should avoid to hear any commentary which is impersonal. Any commentary. Then he is doomed. If we follow Caitanya Mahāprabhu's instruction, then any impersonal commentary means, if we hear... Because we are not expert. We are not expert. Kaniṣṭha-adhikārī. Kaniṣṭha-adhikārī means neophytes, neophytes who are not conversant with the conclusion of the Vedas. They have got some, I mean to say, faith. That's all. But faith can be changed. Any... If a person, strong in arguments and strong in presenting things in jugglery of words, oh, the neophyte, his idea can be changed.
Āra yei śune tāra haya sarva-nāśa. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu warns that "Anyone who hears Śaṅkara's bhāṣya, Śārīraka-bhāṣya, he is doomed."
- prākṛta kariyā māne viṣṇu-kalevara
- viṣṇu-nindā āra nāhi ihāra upara
Prākṛta kariyā māne. Prakṛta means material. "If somebody thinks that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, His body is material, that is the greatest offense." The greatest offense is that... To accept a material thing as God, that is the greatest offense, and God..., and to accept a material thing as God or to accept God as material. Just try to understand. Just like they are preaching that "Anything you worship, that is God," or "God is also material. When He comes, when He appears, He is also material." So these kinds of conclusion is the greatest offense. Viṣṇu-nindā āra nāhi ihāra upara. Blasphemy. So this should be avoided.
So the disciple of Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, he addressed Caitanya Mahāprabhu as the chief Nārāyaṇa, sākṣād-nārāyaṇa. "We are all imitation Nārāyaṇa, but You are the chief Nārāyaṇa." Vyāsa-sūtrera artha karena ati-manorama. "And Caitanya's Mahāprabhu's special qualification is that He presents Vedānta-sūtra in such a nice way that it is wonderful."
- upaniṣadera karena mukhyārtha vyākhyāna
- śuniyā paṇḍita-lokera juḍāya mana-kāṇa
"And He presents the import of Upaniṣad in such a way that everyone becomes pleased by hearing His explanation."
- sūtra-upaniṣadera mukhyārtha chāḍiyā
- ācārya 'kalpanā' kare āgraha kariyā
"So long Śaṅkarācārya, he has imagined some meaning, and therefore that is not so pleasing as much as Caitanya Mahāprabhu's interpretation." Not interpretation; "direct explanation."
- ācārya-kalpita artha ye paṇḍita śune
- mukhe 'haya' 'haya' kare, hṛdaya nā māne
"So we belong to this Māyāvādī sect. Although we hear the Śārīraka-bhāṣya of Śaṅkarācārya and we say, 'Yes, yes,' but actually, it does not appeal to us."
Festival Lectures
Actually we are experiencing, if we speak something impersonal, they think it is very learned speech, and when we speak of something personal they think it is old, old style. This is nonsense. Practically, the Personality of God is the ultimate knowledge, but men with poor fund of knowledge, a little stock of knowledge, they cannot understand. If He is impersonal, how Brahmā and Śambhu are engaged in His service? He is person. Brahmā-śambhu-phanīndras tebhyo 'nīśam vedānta-vedyam. Vedānta-vedyam. These Māyāvādīs, they have Śaṅkarācārya, they have their Śārīraka-bhāṣya. They have tried to prove the Supreme Lord as imperson. This is not actually fact. Vedānta-vedyam. It is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā, vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyam, vedānta-kṛt veda-vid eva cāham (BG 15.15). Kṛṣṇa says that all the Vedas, including Vedānta... If somebody says the Vedānta is describing impersonal Brahman, but Kṛṣṇa says that "How it can do?" Vedānta-vid, "I am the actual knower of Vedānta, I am actual composer of Vedānta. So I am the Supreme." So these Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand.
Conversations and Morning Walks
1974 Conversations and Morning Walks
Professor La Combe: The notions of Brahman and ātman both in Śaṅkara and Rāmānuja. That one is not of out of print. It is called in French L'Absolute selons les Vedānta.
Prabhupāda: But Śaṅkarācārya has accepted Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ devakī-putraḥ. He has written like that in his comment on Bhagavad-gītā.
Professor La Combe: Bhagavad-gītā, yes.
Prabhupāda: Yes. So... And all the ācāryas, Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, they accept Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So practically, amongst the authorities, Indian ācāryas, everyone accepts Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Rāmānujācārya has written his bhāṣya on Bhagavad-gītā.
Professor La Combe: I read it. And Śaṅkara's also, both.
Prabhupāda: Rāmānujācārya has not written. Śaṅkara has written. Śarīraka-bhāṣya, Vedānta-sūtra. He has written comment on Bhagavad-gītā.
Professor La Combe: Yes, and Rāmānuja.
Prabhupāda: Rāmānujācārya also. Also Śrīdhara Svāmī. Śrīdhara Svāmī he has written. He belongs to Viṣṇu Svāmī-sampradāya. And our Gauḍīya-Vaiṣṇava, Viśvanātha Cakravartī, he has written comments. And Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura.
Professor La Combe: Oh yes, there is long list of commentaries on the Gītā.
1976 Conversations and Morning Walks
Prabhupāda: The Vedantists they have come from the impersonal explanation of Śaṅkarācārya. Śārīraka-bhāṣya. But they simply give stress on the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, but there are other bhāṣyas. Bhāṣyas means commentary. And the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the natural commentary by the author himself. Besides that, there are Vedānta-bhāṣyas written by the Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī, and all the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas. Unfortunately, they do not care to read all these Vedānta-bhāṣyas. They simply take Śārīraka-bhāṣya and become impersonalist and call themselves as Vedantist.
Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: What is the reason for that?
Prabhupāda: Reason means people do not know. They cheat. Suppose I present something, a misconception, and if there are others also who can speak something on the... There are two lawyers. One is speaking one point of law, another lawyer is speaking. So if you take one side only, then how you will understand? So they are simply reading this Śārīraka-bhāṣya. They are not reading other bhāṣyas, just like the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, which is natural. And they are cheating people. That's all.
Prabhupāda: I don't make any compromise. All my speaking is also no compromise. Here is guru, here is Kṛṣṇa, here is God, here is Vedānta. Real version they neglect, and they stick to the rascal's version, Śaṅkara's version, Śārīraka-bhāṣya. All over India, they are reading Śārīraka-bhāṣya.
Hari-śauri: Rāmānujācārya is very well known in India, so why don't they read his commentary?
Prabhupāda: They hate Rāmānujācārya because he's Vaiṣṇava.
Hari-śauri: Because he doesn't allow them to speculate.
Prabhupāda: He is very strict. He is a stubborn enemy of Śaṅkarācārya. All the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas. Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, declare it: māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). If you hear the interpretation of Māyāvādīs, then you are doomed. You have no hope for spiritual advancement. This is the statement. Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. Finished, your spiritual life is finished. You can write this also, that Caitanya Mahāprabhu's instruction is strictly to avoid the so-called Vedantists.
| Page Title: | Sariraka-bhasya |
| Compiler: | Labangalatika |
| Created: | 25 of Jan, 2011 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=1, SB=1, CC=16, OB=4, Lec=10, Con=3, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 35 |