Mayavadi philosophers (Lectures, BG)

Expressions researched:
"Mayavada philosopher" |"Mayavada philosophers" |"Mayavadi philosopher" |"Mayavadi philosophers" |"Mayavadi sannyasi philosophers" |"Mayavadis and other atheistic philosophers" |"Mayavadis sannyasis and philosophers" |"Philosophers like the Saranatha Mayavadis" |"philosopher, Mayavadi" |"philosophers (Mayavadis" |"philosophers of the Mayavada school" |"philosophers, even they are Mayavadis" |"philosophers, like the Mayavadis" |"philosophers, they are called Mayavadi" |"philosophers. The Mayavadis"

Notes from the compiler: use VedaBase query: "mayavad* philosopher*"@5

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they simply stop these material activities.

Lecture on BG 1.30 -- London, July 23, 1973:

In human life, this is, this intelligence required, vairāgya, not to serve this material world, but to serve Kṛṣṇa. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they simply stop these material activities. Just like Buddha philosophy, nirvāṇa. He simply advises to stop this. But after stopping, what is, sir? "No, zero. Zero." That cannot be. That is not possible. This is their mistake. But the people to whom Buddha philosophy was preached, they are not so intelligent that there can be better service after giving up this service. Therefore Lord Buddha said, "You stop this service. You become happy because ultimately everything is zero." Śūnyavādī. Nirviśeṣavādī.

The Māyāvāda philosophers, monists, they aspire after sāyujya-mukti.

Lecture on BG 2.1 -- Ahmedabad, December 6, 1972:

So there are five kinds of liberation. Sāyujya, the first liberation is supposed to be sāyujya, means, to become one with the Supreme. The Māyāvāda philosophers, monists, they aspire after sāyujya-mukti. But the devotees, Vaiṣṇavas, they do not aspire after sāyujya-mukti. Their, for them, there are other, four kinds of mukti: sārūpya, sālokya, sārṣṭi, sāmīpya. And those who are still further advanced, they do not want any kind of mukti, neither of these five kinds of muktis.

These Māyāvādī philosophers, they are so great rascals they sometimes say like that, that Vyāsadeva is also mistaken.

Lecture on BG 2.2 -- London, August 3, 1973:

Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is supreme. Nobody is equal to Him, nobody is higher than. Everyone is lower. That is the meaning of Bhagavān. Nobody can claim "I am Bhagavān." But nowadays there are so many rascals, they are claiming that everyone is Bhagavān. So Vyāsadeva is mistaken? Actually, these Māyāvādī philosophers, they are so great rascals they sometimes say like that, that Vyāsadeva is also mistaken. They have got the audacity to say Vyāsadeva, he is accepted as incarnation of Nārāyaṇa, who has given us the Vedic literature, so many books he has given, the Vedas, the Purāṇas, the Mahābhārata, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Vedānta-sūtra. Everything is given by Vyāsadeva in writing, and we'll accept it, Nārāyaṇa, incarnation of Nārāyaṇa, mahāmuni-kṛte. He is also Vyāsa-muni, but He is also mahāmuni-kṛte. So there cannot be any mistake in the words of Vyāsadeva.

The Māyāvādī philosopher says that "You stop this thing," but that is not possible.

Lecture on BG 2.6 -- London, August 6, 1973:

We have to understand that fighting spirit is there in everyone. You cannot check it, you cannot stop it. We do not say stop. The Māyāvādī philosopher says that "You stop this thing," but that is not possible. You cannot stop. Because you are living entity, you have got all these propensities. How you can stop it? But it should be utilized properly. That's all. You have got the fighting spirit. How to utilize it? Yes. Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura recommends, krodha bhakta-dveṣī-jane: "Those who are envious of God or God's devotee, you can utilize your anger upon them." You can utilize.

If the Māyāvādī philosopher says that this statement of Kṛṣṇa is in māyā, that "He says that 'Everyone was individual in the past.' No, in the past everyone was one, lump sum, homogeneous. By māyā, we have become individual." If the Māyāvādī says like that, then Kṛṣṇa becomes one of the conditioned souls.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

If the Māyāvādī philosopher says that this statement of Kṛṣṇa is in māyā, that "He says that 'Everyone was individual in the past.' No, in the past everyone was one, lump sum, homogeneous. By māyā, we have become individual." If the Māyāvādī says like that, then Kṛṣṇa becomes one of the conditioned souls. He does not... He loses His authority. Because conditioned soul cannot give you the truth. I am conditioned soul. I cannot say something which is absolute. So Kṛṣṇa is accepted as the Absolute. So if the Māyāvādī theory is accepted, then Kṛṣṇa's theory has to be rejected. If Kṛṣṇa is rejected, then there is no need of reading Kṛṣṇa's book, Bhagavad-gītā. It is useless, waste of time.

Śaṅkarācārya, he's also impersonalist, but he accepts Kṛṣṇa the supreme authority. "Kṛṣṇa is that Supreme Personality of Godhead." The modern Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not disclose this statement of Śaṅkarācārya.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Śaṅkarācārya, he's also impersonalist, but he accepts Kṛṣṇa the supreme authority. Sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇa. "Kṛṣṇa is that Supreme Personality of Godhead." The modern Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not disclose this statement of Śaṅkarācārya. To cheat people. But Śaṅkarācārya's statement is there. We can give evidence. He accepts Kṛṣṇa as the supreme authority. He has written so many nice poems praising or worshiping Kṛṣṇa.

One meets disaster if he hears a Māyāvādī philosopher to understand Vedic literature.

Lecture on BG 2.8-12 -- Los Angeles, November 27, 1968:

Lord Caitanya has clearly said, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). One meets disaster if he hears a Māyāvādī philosopher to understand Vedic literature. That is His injunction. Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. Sarva-nāśa means disaster. It is actually disaster.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that "Because I am now covered in ignorance, therefore I see individuals."

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- New York, March 9, 1966:

Now, the next question is that the Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that "Because I am now covered in ignorance, therefore I see individuals."

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not accept the supremacy of the Personality of Godhead. They think God is as good as they are.

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- Hyderabad, November 17, 1972:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not accept the supremacy of the Personality of Godhead. They think God is as good as they are. Therefore they introduce themselves as Nārāyaṇa. But according to Vaiṣṇava philosophy, Nārāyaṇa cannot be equal to any one of us. What speak of us, Nārāyaṇa cannot be equally estimated even with great demigods like Lord Brahmā, Lord Śiva.

If the Māyāvādī philosopher is right that this differentiation is due to our illusion, then we have to accept Kṛṣṇa is also in illusion. Because He's making differentiation.

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- Hyderabad, November 17, 1972:

The Māyāvādī philosophy, they put forward this argument that "Because we are now in māyā, we are thinking that we are different from God." But Kṛṣṇa is making thus such differentiation that... He's making, He's saying, "You and I and all these." So does it mean that Kṛṣṇa is also covered by māyā or illusion? Because He is very clearly differentiating between Him and the living entities, all individuals. So if the Māyāvādī philosopher is right that this differentiation is due to our illusion, then we have to accept Kṛṣṇa is also in illusion. Because He's making differentiation.

The Māyāvādī philosophers say that we are one. There is no "you" and "me." Everything one. So, then Kṛṣṇa is defective. If Kṛṣṇa says, "You, Me, all others," so it is not one.

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- London, August 18, 1973:

Another thing is that the Māyāvādī philosophers say that we are one. There is no "you" and "me." Everything one. So, then Kṛṣṇa is defective. If Kṛṣṇa says, "You, Me, all others," so it is not one. It is not homogeneous. We are all individuals. "You are individual, I am individual, and all the kings and soldiers, they are all individuals." So the Māyāvādī theory that after liberation everyone becomes one, one lump sum... What is called? Homogeneous spirit. No. Then Kṛṣṇa is false. The Māyāvādī theory accepted, that we become one lump sum, then Kṛṣṇa's theory... Not theory, Kṛṣṇa's actual knowledge. Then it becomes false. And if Kṛṣṇa speaks false, something defective, then where is the use of reading Bhagavad-gītā? Why should we read Bhagavad-gītā which is spoken by a person who is defective? No. That's not... What Kṛṣṇa is speaking, that is fact. Otherwise, why Bhagavad-gītā is given so importance? So, so Māyāvādī philosophers, they try to interpret in a different way, " 'I' means this, 'you' means that," some...

The Māyāvādī philosopher says that as soon as we become liberated, we become one with the Absolute. No, that is not fact.

Lecture on BG 2.12 -- Hyderabad, December 12, 1976:

Individuality is never lost. Kṛṣṇa says that "At present we are individuals, and in the past we are individuals." Then one may say, "In the future we may become one, amalgamated," as the Māyāvādī philosopher says that as soon as we become liberated, we become one with the Absolute. No, that is not fact. Here it is said, na ca eva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ: "It is not that in future we shall not remain individual. We shall remain individual."

Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, "Just like the sky, the ether"—ether is everywhere, within your body and within mine, within everyone's—that "the ether has taken a form due to this particular body, but when the body is vanquished, the ether, I mean to say, amalgamates with the greater ether."

Lecture on BG 2.13 -- New York, March 11, 1966:

Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, "Just like the sky, the ether"—ether is everywhere, within your body and within mine, within everyone's—that "the ether has taken a form due to this particular body, but when the body is vanquished, the ether, I mean to say, amalgamates with the greater ether." This is called ghaṭākāśa-poṭākāśa. Ghaṭākāśa-poṭākāśa means this ākāśa is here.Now, ākāśa means ether. Ether is here. Now, that ether... Now, my this body... Now, this body, there is also ether. "Now, as soon as this body's destroyed, it is burned or it is, another way, destroyed, then this ether within my body becomes amalgamated with the greater ether." So this sort of assertion is not accepted in the Bhagavad-gītā because the first reason is that ether is a material thing. Ether is a material thing. And the soul is spirit.

The Māyāvādī philosopher says, "Yes, I am consciousness. This small consciousness, but as soon as I break this body, the small consciousness will mix up with the supreme consciousness."

Lecture on BG 2.13-17 -- Los Angeles, November 29, 1968:

The Māyāvādī philosopher says, "Yes, I am consciousness. The same theory. This small consciousness, but as soon as I break this body, the small consciousness will mix up with the supreme consciousness." That is their theory. But anyway, whatever that theory may be, at least in my present condition, I, my consciousness, is limited within this body. I cannot say that I am superconscious. Had I been superconscious, then the pains and pleasure going on (in) your body I would have felt.

The Māyāvādī philosopher says the spirit is truth, and this material world, is untruth, false.

Lecture on BG 2.16 -- London, August 22, 1973:

The Māyāvādī philosopher says brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. The spirit is truth, and jagat, this material world, is untruth, mithyā, false. We say that everything is emanating from the Supreme. Yato vā imāni bhūtāni jāyante. Everything is emanating from Brahman, the Supreme Absolute Truth. So that cannot be false. Because Absolute Truth, how from truth, false will come? This is our philosophy. The matter may be temporary, but it is not false.

There is no such thing as the Māyāvādī philosophers or rascals, they say that after liberation they all intermingle, becomes a homogeneous lump.

Lecture on BG 2.17 -- London, August 23, 1973:

Kṛṣṇa has said previously that we, I, you and all others, we existed in the past. So we existed in the past. That means we are all individuals. In the past also, we were individuals, and at the present, we are individuals, and we shall continue to be individuals in the future. There is no such thing as the Māyāvādī philosophers or rascals, they say that after liberation they all intermingle, becomes a homogeneous lump. No. Even after liberation, we remain individual, particles.

"I am drop of water. Now I shall merge into the big ocean. Therefore I shall become ocean." This example is generally given by the Māyāvādī philosophers.

Lecture on BG 2.20 -- Hyderabad, November 25, 1972:

Therefore this desire, that I shall merge into the existence of God, I shall become... Just like the example is given that "I am drop of water. Now I shall merge into the big ocean. Therefore I shall become ocean." This example is generally given by the Māyāvādī philosophers. The drop of water is, when mixed up with the ocean water, they become one. That is only imagination. Every water, molecular. There are, there are so many individual molecular parts. Apart from that, suppose you mix up with the water, and merge into the Brahman existence, the samudra, the sea, or the ocean. Then again you'll be evaporated, because the water is evaporated from the ocean and it become cloud and again falls down on the ground, and it goes down again to the ocean. This is going on. This is called āgamana-gamana, coming and again mixing.

In impersonal zero standard there cannot be any ānanda. But because we have no information, the Māyāvādī philosophers, of the Vaikuṇṭha planets, they come back again to these material planets.

Lecture on BG 2.20 -- Hyderabad, November 25, 1972:

There are innumerable planets in the Brahman effulgence. They are called Vaikuṇṭhaloka. And the topmost Vaikuṇṭhaloka is called Goloka Vṛndāvana. So if you are fortunate enough to take shelter in one of these planets, then you are eternally happy in blissful condition of knowledge. Otherwise, simply to merge into the Brahman effulgence is not very safe. Because we want ānanda. So in impersonal zero standard there cannot be any ānanda. But because we have no information, the Māyāvādī philosophers, of the Vaikuṇṭha planets, they come back again to these material planets.

If anyone tries to understand these impersonalist Māyāvādī philosophers, then his progress is blocked for good.

Lecture on BG 2.20-25 -- Seattle, October 14, 1968:

Those who are not devotees, their understanding of God is blocked forever. They cannot understand. It is a fact. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, māyāvādī-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). If anyone tries to understand these impersonalist Māyāvādī philosophers, then his, I mean to say, progress is blocked for good. Not for good, of course. Nothing can be for good. But for the present at least his progress is blocked.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that when impersonal Absolute Truth comes, appears, they also accept the incarnation, but their philosophy is that ultimately the Absolute Truth is impersonal.

Lecture on BG 2.28 -- London, August 30, 1973:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that when impersonal Absolute Truth comes, appears, they also accept the incarnation, but their philosophy is that ultimately the Absolute Truth is impersonal. When He appears as a person, He accepts the māyā body. This is Māyāvāda. Kṛṣṇa may be accepted as the Supreme God, but He has accepted a material body. That means they want to compare Kṛṣṇa with ordinary living entity, and that is condemned in the Bhagavad-gītā.

These Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to merge into the existence of the Supreme One.

Lecture on BG 3.6-10 -- Los Angeles, December 23, 1968:

it is the war of sense gratification, that's all. One leader is presenting a program of sense gratification, another leader is presenting another program of sense gratification, and there is clash. This is going on. This is the history of the world. And another class, they are thinking "Oh, there are so much trouble simply for sense gratification. Let us control our senses." Brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā, just like Māyāvādī philosophers, Śaṅkarācārya. They say this world is useless. This world is useless. Only Brahman, the Supreme Brahman, impersonal Brahman, that is truth. That is also another sense gratification. That is bigger sense gratification. Why? These Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to merge into the existence of the Supreme One. That means by becoming Hitler, Churchill or Roosevelt, their senses were not very much satisfied. "Now," they say, "this world is false. Now let me become the Supreme." That is another sense gratification.

The Māyāvādī philosopher, whenever they think of form they think in terms of his own form. That is their defect.

Lecture on BG 4.1 -- Montreal, August 24, 1968:

In the Vedic literature it is said that the Absolute Truth has no hand or leg, that means He has no hand and leg as we conceive in this material world. When we speak of hand, immediately I think "my hand" or "your hand," but this is limited. So when we cannot adjust that God has got hands and also legs... In the Upaniṣads it is said that God, the Absolute Truth, Brahman, can walk so fast that even air cannot go so fast. In this way, there are descriptions. So that means, as stated in the Brahma-saṁhitā, that īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). His form, He has got form undoubtedly, but His form is different. The Māyāvādī philosopher, whenever they think of form they think in terms of his own form. That is their defect.

These Māyāvādī philosophers, they are declaring that "I am God." How you can? What is your qualification that you become God?

Lecture on BG 4.1-2 -- Columbus, May 9, 1969:

Thousands and thousands of times Kṛṣṇa appeared on this world, but He remembers everything. And I cannot remember about my childhood. So how can I become one with Kṛṣṇa? These Māyāvādī philosophers, they are declaring that "I am God." How you can? What is your qualification that you become God? God is not so cheap thing. People have taken it that "Everyone can become God. Every one of us God." This is another illusion, another māyā, because we do not know what is God.

The Māyāvādī philosopher says that "I am God. Now I am under illusion of māyā. I have forgotten myself, that I am God, and by meditation I shall become God."

Lecture on BG 4.1-6 -- Los Angeles, January 3, 1969:

The Māyāvādī philosopher says that "I am God, but I have forgotten myself, that I am God." So how God can forget? Here it is the evidence. How God can forget? If you forget, then you are not God, immediately. There is no other argument. God cannot forget. God remembers always. Acyuta. Acyuta means infallible. God cannot be entrapped by māyā. The Māyāvādī philosopher says that "I am God. Now I am under illusion of māyā. I have forgotten myself, that I am God, and by meditation I shall become God." This is all nonsense.

The impersonalists, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that because the past, present, and future, and this duality is finished, therefore there is no variegatedness.

Lecture on BG 4.5 -- Montreal, June 10, 1968:

As soon as we are free from this material body, then these questions of past, present, future, pleasure, not pleasure, knowledge, no knowledge, these dualities, this world of duality will finish. The impersonalists, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that because the past, present, and future, and this duality is finished, therefore there is no variegatedness. They cannot understand. They cannot accommodate in their tiny brain that this is possible.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that "Kṛṣṇa, He is God... Or godly." They have got the imagination. "But His body is made of matter."

Lecture on BG 4.6 -- Bombay, March 26, 1974:

Kṛṣṇa's body is avyaya. His mind is avyaya. That means, as we have got difference between our soul and the body, Kṛṣṇa hasn't got that. Avyayātmā. His mind, His body, and His ātmā, His soul, the same thing. Or, or the.... He is Supreme Soul, Whole. There is no difference between His body, His mind and soul. This is to be understood. Avyayātmā. Those who cannot understand, they make difference between His ātmā, Kṛṣṇa's ātmā, and Kṛṣṇa's body. They think... The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that "Kṛṣṇa, He is God... Or godly." They have got the imagination. "But His body is made of matter." No. That is not.

Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they think, "Now I've realized that I am not this body, I am not matter, I am spirit soul, so now I have become Nārāyaṇa. I have become the Supreme."

Lecture on BG 4.9 -- Bombay, March 29, 1974:

Bhakti-yoga means, as I have repeatedly explained, that you have to forget your identification with the matter, sarvopādhi-vinirmuktam (CC Madhya 19.170). You have to forget your body as American, Indian, brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, śūdra, Hindu, Muslim. That you have to forget. Ahaṁ brahmāsmi, "I am spirit soul." That is real identification. And when the spirit soul is active, sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they think, "Now I've realized that I am not this body, I am not matter, I am spirit soul, so now I have become Nārāyaṇa. I have become the Supreme." But no, that is also mistake.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to... Or the Buddhist philosophers, they want to make things zero.

Lecture on BG 4.10 -- Vrndavana, August 2, 1974:

If you accept this void philosophy, to make everything zero, that is artificial. Then again you'll fall down. Because you cannot remain in zero. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to... Or the Buddhist philosophers, they want to make things zero. That is not possible. You cannot remain in zero. Because you are ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). You want ānanda, pleasure. Pleasure cannot be in zero.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are thinking that "Being merged into the, existence of Brahman, I become Brahman."

Lecture on BG 4.11 -- Vrndavana, August 3, 1974:

Prabhupāda: Part of, remains part of the sea. The part of the sea it was, and it remains part of the sea. The sea water means composition of so many molecules of water or...? What is that?

Svarūpa Dāmodara: Yes.

Prabhupāda: So how the molecules can become the whole sea? Therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are thinking that "Being merged into the, existence of Brahman, I become Brahman." No, this is a wrong. You cannot become Brahman. You remain the same.

Because we cannot think of impersonal, meditate upon that, let us imagine some form. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that kalpana, "You just imagine any form."

Lecture on BG 4.20 -- Bombay, April 9, 1974:

Brahmā, Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva, they are demigods of this material world. So if one puts Nārāyaṇa even with the label of Brahmā and Rudra, Lord Śiva and Lord Brahmā... They are very exalted, big demigods. Lord Śiva is almost like Nārāyaṇa. Nārāyaṇa is ninety-five percent complete God, and Lord Śiva is eighty-five percent and Kṛṣṇa is cent percent. There is analysis. So yas tu nārāyaṇaṁ devaṁ brahma-rudrādi-daivataiḥ, samatvenaiva vīkṣeta. Samatvena, equal "Well, whatever is Nārāyaṇa, that is also Lord Śiva, that is also Lord Brahmā, that is also goddess Kālī." This is Māyāvāda. Because the Māyāvāda philosophy is that "The Absolute Truth is impersonal. That is the final understanding. So because we cannot think of impersonal, meditate upon that, let us imagine some form." Sādhakānāṁ hitvārthāya brahmaṇo rūpa-kalpanaḥ.(?) The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that kalpana, "You just imagine any form." Therefore they especially recommend the five forms, the five form: the Sūrya, sun-god, Gaṇeśa and Durgā, Viṣṇu and Lord Śiva.

Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not know that there is relationship that the Parabrahman and Brahman can be engaged in loving transaction.

Lecture on BG 4.21 -- Bombay, April 10, 1974:

When one becomes free from all these upādhis, he understands that "I am spirit soul," ahaṁ brahmāsmi; "Therefore my business is to reciprocate transaction with the Supreme Brahman, Parabrahman." Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not know that there is relationship that the Parabrahman and Brahman can be engaged in loving transaction. That they do not understand.

The Māyāvāda philosophers, they will say it is false. We say,"It is not false. It is temporary, but it can be used for Kṛṣṇa."

Lecture on BG 5.17-25 -- Los Angeles, February 8, 1969:

The Māyāvādī philosopher, they say that "This world is false. This world is false." Some philosophers, they are meditating to the voidness, that "These things are all nonsense. Voidness is best." This is frustration. But we know that everything belongs to Kṛṣṇa and it can be used for Kṛṣṇa. Why void? Why false? Reality. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness, to accept everything in reality, not false. This tape recorder machine, it is material. The Māyāvāda philosophers, they will say it is false. We say,"It is not false. It is temporary, but it can be used for Kṛṣṇa." That is the best use of a bad bargain.

The Māyāvādī philosophers say, "Everything is gold. Everything is Brahman."

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

If Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Absolute Truth from whom everything is emanating, then everything is Kṛṣṇa. Just like you have a gold mine and you are preparing so many golden utensils, ornaments and many other things, but they are all gold because the origin is gold. Similarly, you may name it as "earring," but you have to add "gold" earring. You may name it as "necklace," but "gold." Because originally it is coming from the gold mine. Similarly, originally, everything is coming from Kṛṣṇa. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Because if He is Supreme, He is Absolute Truth, then nothing is different from Him. Just like either you say earrings or necklace or bangle or wristwatch, if they are all made of gold, they are gold. But you cannot say at the same time, "This is gold, this is gold." This is gold necklace. If you say that "Why necklace? It is gold..." The Māyāvādī philosophers say, "Everything is gold. Everything is Brahman." No.

There are so many speculators, theosophist, theologist, philosopher, Māyāvādī. They are speculating about God.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Calcutta, January 27, 1973:

There are so many speculators, theosophist, theologist, philosopher, Māyāvādī. They are speculating about God by... But that, by that process, by speculative process, you cannot understand God. That is not possible.

The Māyāvādī philosopher thinks, that "You can imagine in your mind." No. God cannot be imagined.

Lecture on BG 7.1 -- Hong Kong, January 25, 1975:

Now, Kṛṣṇa is there. We have got Kṛṣṇa's picture, Kṛṣṇa's photo, Kṛṣṇa's temple, so many Kṛṣṇa's. They are not fictitious. They are not imagination, as the Māyāvādī philosopher thinks, that "You can imagine in your mind." No. God cannot be imagined. That is another foolishness. How you can imagine God? Then God become subject matter of your imagination. He is no substance. That is not God. What is imagined, that is not God. God is present before you, Kṛṣṇa. He comes here on this planet.

Vaiṣṇava philosophy never says that this world is false. Why it is false? It is not false. As the Māyāvādī philosopher says that brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā.

Lecture on BG 7.4 -- Vrndavana, August 10, 1974:

Kṛṣṇa's energy should be for Kṛṣṇa's purpose. That is Vaiṣṇava philosophy. Vaiṣṇava philosophy never says that this world is false. Why it is false? It is not false. As the Māyāvādī philosopher says that brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. No. Why jagan mithyā? Just like this temple is constructed. If somebody says, "Yes, it is very nicely constructed, but it is all false," shall I be happy?

There is no need of giving up this bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ, as the Māyāvādī philosopher says. You can utilize.

Lecture on BG 7.4 -- Vrndavana, August 10, 1974:

Although this material world, bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ (BG 7.4), they are separated from Kṛṣṇa, we can use it for Kṛṣṇa. Just like the same example: The tape recorder, it is material, but it can be used for Kṛṣṇa's purpose. We are writing books, recording in the tape recorder. That nirbandhaḥ kṛṣṇa-sambandhe yuktaṁ vairāgyam ucyate. There is no need of giving up this bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ, as the Māyāvādī philosopher says. You can utilize. After all, it is Kṛṣṇa's energy. This is the best philosophy, that one man's property should be used for the proprietor.

Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers they say, "By bhakti one gains brahma-jñāna, and one becomes liberated, merged into Brahman."

Lecture on BG 7.4 -- Nairobi, October 31, 1975:

Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers they say, "By bhakti one gains brahma-jñāna, and one becomes liberated, merged into Brahman," and so on, so on, because they say, "Bhakti is meant for the less intelligent class of men." Their accusation is like that.

Caitanya Mahāprabhu says that one who has undergone the training by a Māyāvādī philosopher, his life is finished.

Lecture on BG 7.4 -- Nairobi, October 31, 1975:

Caitanya Mahāprabhu says that one who has undergone the training by a Māyāvādī philosopher, his life is finished. Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). He says that he is finished because he'll never be able to advance in devotional service, and that is the ultimate goal of life.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that living entity is puruṣa, the Supreme, but that is, that is not the fact.

Lecture on BG 7.5 -- Bombay, February 20, 1974:

Puruṣa is Kṛṣṇa. As it will be admitted by Arjuna after hearing Bhagavad-gītā, puruṣaṁ śāśvatam. Paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān, puruṣam (BG 10.12). "You are puruṣa." Puruṣa means enjoyer, and prakṛti means enjoyed. So here jīva, the living entities, they have been described as prakṛti, not as puruṣa. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that living entity is puruṣa, the Supreme, but that is, that is not the fact.

Māyāvāda philosopher, they say that "God has no form. But because you cannot meditate upon the formless, so you just imagine any form you like."

Lecture on BG 8.5 -- New York, October 26, 1966:

The Māyāvāda philosophers, impersonalists, they answer the Bhagavad-gītā's word that kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām... (BG 12.5). One who is attached to impersonal views, their process of meditation or execution of spiritual activities is very troublesome. Now, therefore Māyāvāda philosopher, they say that "God has no form. But because you cannot meditate upon the formless, so you just imagine any form you like." So God is not subjected to your imagination. That is not God's form.

Ahaṁ brahmāsmi, this is a theory for the māyāvādī philosopher.

Lecture on BG 9.2 -- Calcutta, March 7, 1972:

So bhakti-yoga is so nice that soon as you come to the discipline of bhakti-yoga, you become situated in brahma-bhūta platform. Brahma-bhūta, he doesn't require to make separate effort for becoming brahma-bhūta. Ahaṁ brahmāsmi, this is a theory for the māyāvādī philosopher, ahaṁ brahmāsmi. Actually we are brahma, because we are part and parcel of parambrahma.

These māyāvādī philosophers say, "Because everything is Kṛṣṇa, then why shall I go to temple? Why shall I say 'Worship Kṛṣṇa?"

Lecture on BG 9.2 -- Calcutta, March 8, 1972:

These māyāvādī philosophers say, "Because everything is Kṛṣṇa, then why shall I go to temple? Why shall I say 'Worship Kṛṣṇa'?" But everything is Kṛṣṇa, why not this Kṛṣṇa? This is also Kṛṣṇa. But their poor brain cannot understand. They simply preach impersonalism. But here it is described, what is impersonalism. Impersonalism means expansion of Kṛṣṇa's energy. That is impersonal. That is also Kṛṣṇa, but indirect. Everything is there, mat-sthāni sarva..., but you cannot find out Kṛṣṇa there.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are mistaken, mistaking that when everything is expanded as God's energy, then why there is separate God? This is material conception.

Lecture on BG 9.4 -- Calcutta, March 9, 1972:

Kṛṣṇa says here that mat-sthāni sarva-bhūtāni: (BG 9.4) "Everything is resting on My energy, but I am not them." The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are mistaken, mistaking that when everything is expanded as God's energy, then why there is separate God? This is material conception. God is always separate from His energy. That is distinctly said here: mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam. Everything is emanation of God's energy, but still God is not there. If you worship the energy of God, that is not God-worshiping. Indirectly it is, but directly it is not.

Especially in our Hindu society, they say, the Māyāvāda philosophers, they say that everyone is God.

Lecture on BG 9.11 -- Calcutta, June 30, 1973:

Especially in our Hindu society, they say, the Māyāvāda philosophers, they say that everyone is God. How everyone can be God? If everyone is God, then what is the significance of God?

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not know the secret; they wants to become God, enjoy.

Lecture on BG 13.1-2 -- Paris, August 10, 1973:

So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not know the secret; they wants to become God, enjoy. Our philosophy is different. We do not wish to become enjoyer. We want to be enjoyed. That is our real position. We want to serve Kṛṣṇa. We want to offer everything to Kṛṣṇa. We do not want to enjoy anything ourself. That is Vaiṣṇavism.

The Māyāvādī philosopher (says) that there is only one spirit. No, there are two. Kṛṣṇa says ca. Ca means another.

Lecture on BG 13.1-2 -- Bombay, September 25, 1973:

The Māyāvādī philosopher (says) that there is only one spirit. No, there are two. Kṛṣṇa says ca. Ca means another. "And as the living, individual living soul is the proprietor of this body—not proprietor, he is the occupier—similarly, I also, I have got interest in everybody." Just like a landlord. Landlord has got many houses. I may occupy one of the houses. So I have got only interest in that particular house where I am living. But the landlord has got interest in so many houses. So Kṛṣṇa has got interest not only in my body or your body. He has got interest in each and every body.

These Māyāvādī philosophers are like, They meditate, "I am God, I am God, I am moving the world, I am moving the universe." They say like that. But actually does he do so?

Lecture on BG 13.3 -- Paris, August 11, 1973:

Because he cannot become independent artificially he thinks, "Now let me become God, then I'll become..." But artificial thinking God will help you—no. If you artificially think that, "This bank, this big bank belongs to me." So you can think like that, but does the bank belong to you? So these Māyāvādī philosophers are like, They meditate, "I am God, I am God, I am moving the world, I am moving the universe." They say like that. But actually does he do so? No. This is false thinking.

Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they take it for acceptance that there is one soul only, Supersoul.

Lecture on BG 13.3 -- Bombay, September 26, 1973:

Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they take it for acceptance that there is one soul only, Supersoul. But here we get from Kṛṣṇa, the authoritative source of knowledge, there are two souls: the individual soul and the Supersoul. Not one soul. Ātmā and Paramātmā.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are thinking themselves that they are Kṛṣṇa.

Lecture on BG 13.3 -- Bombay, September 26, 1973:

Cleansing the heart means to understand that he is not Kṛṣṇa. He's part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa. His duty is to serve Kṛṣṇa. This is cleansing of heart. So long it is not cleansed...Just like the Māyāvādī philosophers, they are thinking themselves that they are Kṛṣṇa. "I am God." That is unclean. Vimukta-māninaḥ. Tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). Because their intelligence is not yet clear, it is still with dirty things, therefore they are thinking that they are Kṛṣṇa. No. Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and we are eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa.

We are eternally servant of Kṛṣṇa. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand. The servant wants to become the master.

Lecture on BG 13.3 -- Bombay, September 26, 1973:

Kṛṣṇa demands in the Bhagavad-gītā, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja: (BG 18.66) "Just surrender to Me." It is the right of the master to ask the servant that "You surrender." Similarly, Kṛṣṇa comes to teach this. Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ. Because we are eternally servant of Kṛṣṇa. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand. The servant wants to become the master. That is not possible. That is not possible. If the servant remains a faithful servant, that is perfection of his life. Artificially, if the servant wants to become master, that is only botheration.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot distinguish between the jīva soul, jīvātmā, and Paramātmā.

Lecture on BG 13.4 -- Paris, August 12, 1973:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot distinguish between the jīva soul, jīvātmā, and Paramātmā. They know it, but because they are monists, to establish their theory, they say there is no two, there is one. No. Kṛṣṇa says two.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they claim that "I am God." But we do not claim. We claim that we are part and parcel of God.

Lecture on BG 13.6-7 -- Montreal, October 25, 1968:

Kṛṣṇa says in the Fifteenth Chapter, mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ jīva-loke sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7), "These jīvas, these living entities, they are My part and parcel." And sanātana, part..., but they are not whole. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they claim to be the whole. But Vaiṣṇava philosophy, we do not claim that we are the whole. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they claim that "I am God." But we do not claim. We claim that we are part and parcel of God.

We are not Māyāvādī philosophers that we say, brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā.

Lecture on BG 13.6-7 -- Bombay, September 29, 1973:

We are not Māyāvādī philosophers that we say, brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. No. Why jagat should be mithyā? If Kṛṣṇa is truth, God is truth, the jagat is also truth because it is the energy of Kṛṣṇa.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that "God, when He comes in this material world, He accepts a material body."

Lecture on BG 13.15 -- Bombay, October 9, 1973:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that "God, when He comes in this material world, He accepts a material body." That is rascaldom. He never accepts material body. That is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). If God also accepts a material body, then what is the difference between God and ourself? He has nothing material. Everything spiritual.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are accepting that Kṛṣṇa, or Parabrahman, or God, because He is in everywhere, He has no personal feature.

Lecture on BG 13.17 -- Bombay, October 11, 1973:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are accepting that Kṛṣṇa, or Parabrahman, or God, because He is in everywhere, He has no personal feature. That is a poor fund of knowledge. That is not God. Because we are thinking materially.

You cannot compare with God. But the Māyāvādī philosophers speculate like that and spoil their own time as spoils others.

Lecture on BG 13.17 -- Bombay, October 11, 1973:

Jīva Gosvāmī says, "Unless you accept inconceivable power of the Supreme Lord, you cannot understand God. That is not possible." If your compare with your conceivable power, that "God may be like this..." That Dr. Frog's calculation of the Atlantic Ocean. That story you know, frog, frog philosophy. Kūpa-maṇḍūka-nyāya. A frog lives within the well, and he's calculating the length and breadth of the Atlantic Ocean. How it is possible? It is not possible. So we are the frogs in the well. We have got limited capacity to understand. Our senses are limited. We are thinking Kṛṣṇa, or God, also, He is also limited. This is our fault. This is called poor fund of knowledge. You cannot compare with God. But the Māyāvādī philosophers speculate like that and spoil their own time as spoils others'.

This material nature is also eternal. It is not... As the Māyāvādī philosopher says, "It is mithyā."

Lecture on BG 13.20 -- Bombay, October 14, 1973:

This material nature is also eternal. It is not... As the Māyāvādī philosopher says, "It is mithyā," jagan mithyā, we don't say. Why it is mithyā? It is fact. Because Kṛṣṇa says that bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ khaṁ mano buddhir eva ca, bhinnā me prakṛtir aṣṭadhā (BG 7.4). Kṛṣṇa says, "It is My prakṛti, My energy." If Kṛṣṇa is fact, why His energy should be mithyā? This is nonsense. The jagat is not mithyā. We don't say. If Kṛṣṇa is truth, then this world is also truth. But the fact that Kṛṣṇa is the enjoyer, we are trying to be enjoyer, that is not true. That is mithyā. The jagat is not mithyā, but the propensity to enjoy this world, that is mithyā because we cannot be enjoyer.

Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that he is God.

Lecture on BG 13.22-24 -- Melbourne, June 25, 1974:

Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that he is God. Their self-realization means when one realizes by their philosophy so 'ham, "I am God, I am the same." That is their philosophy. And our philosophy is so 'ham, "I am the same quality. I am not the same person. But I am the same quality." We are the samples of Kṛṣṇa. Very small particle. Just like if you take a drop of ocean water and you taste it, you can understand what is that ocean, what is the taste of the ocean. But you, as a drop of the ocean, you are not equal to the ocean. You are in quality the same, but in quantity we are different.

Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not distinguish between ātmā and Paramātmā.

Lecture on BG 13.23 -- Bombay, October 22, 1973:

Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not distinguish between ātmā and Paramātmā. But here it is distinctly explained by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, that one puruṣa is enjoying the fruits of his activities, prakṛti-sthaḥ. Being influenced by the quality of the prakṛti, material nature, he is sad-asad-janma-yoniṣu, he is taking birth in different types and species of life. And another puruṣa is there who is upadraṣṭā. Upadraṣṭā means he is overseer. He is simply seeing how the other puruṣa is working. And according to his karma, work, he is giving the result. He is the witness.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are thinking that after Brahman realization there is no more activity.

Lecture on BG 15.1 -- Bombay, October 28, 1973:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are thinking that after Brahman realization there is no more activity. But that is not the fact. Real activity begins after Brahman realization. That is Brahman activity. That is bhakti-yoga.

This material world is avyaya, eternal energy, but it is not false, as the Māyāvādī philosophers say, jagan mithyā.

Lecture on BG 15.1 -- Bombay, October 28, 1973:

This material world is avyaya, eternal energy, but it is not false, as the Māyāvādī philosophers say, jagan mithyā. No. Jagat is not mithyā, but it is fact, but it is temporary. That is Vaiṣṇava philosophy. We don't say that this world is false. Why it should be false? If has come from the truth, actually truth, how it can be? Pūrṇam idaṁ pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idam, pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate (Īśopaniṣad, Invocation). It is perfect. But it is being misused. That is māyā. How it is being misused? Kṛṣṇa says that He is the enjoyer. Bhoktāraṁ yajña-tapasāṁ sarva-loka-maheśvaram (BG 5.29). He is the proprietor of all the lokas, all the brahmāṇḍas, but unfortunately, we are dismissing Kṛṣṇa. We are trying to be the enjoyer of this material world. That is māyā. The world is not māyā, but the intention of the living entities to enjoy this material world, to satisfy his senses, that is māyā.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand. They are thinking that "Why these people are taking so much trouble, dancing jumping?"

Lecture on BG 16.13-15 -- Hawaii, February 8, 1975:

When you do something out of love, that is pleasure. That is not trouble. So in the transcendental platform, devotional service, anything you do, that is pleasure. That is not trouble. Just like you are dancing here. Actually, bodily, there is some trouble because you are perspiring, but you are not feeling the trouble; you are feeling pleasure. Otherwise how you can dance? This is the transcendental platform. So the demons are bound up by material desires, and the devotees-apparently there is desire, but there is no bondage. This is the difference. There is no bondage. Sarvopādhi-vinirmuktaṁ tat-paratvena nirmalam (CC Madhya 19.170). So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand. They are thinking that "Why these people are taking so much trouble, dancing jumping?"

Because the taste of the small drop of ocean is the same, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they conclude that "I am the same." But they have no common sense that the small drop of water, although the quality is the same, it is very small.

Lecture on BG 17.1-3 -- Honolulu, July 4, 1974:

First of all we are very minute part and parcel of Bhagavān. Mamaivāṁśaḥ. So, according to our position, we have got our knowledge, we have got our understanding, proportionately. Just like fire, big fire and a small spot fire. Both of them are fire, but you cannot compare the small fragment of fire with the big fire. That is not possible. The big ocean and a small drop of water from the ocean. Because the taste of the small drop of ocean is the same, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they conclude that "I am the same." But they have no common sense that the small drop of water, although the quality is the same, it is very small. So our knowledge is therefore imperfect. Although we are qualitatively one with God, still, being very small quantity, our power, our knowledge, our understanding—everything is proportionately small. You must first of all understand that, that we are simultaneously one and different. One means qualitatively one. A small particle of gold, you can call it gold, but it is not the gold mine, This is called dvaita-vāda, advaita-vāda. The rascals they think "Because I am gold, I am as good as the gold mine." No, That is not. Gold mine is very big, powerful, immense value. So we should not forget this.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say everyone is Nārāyaṇa. But what is the proof? We find out from the śāstra that Nārāyaṇa has got four hands. So where is your four hands?

Lecture on BG Lecture -- Ahmedabad, December 8, 1972:

Nobody is equal to Kṛṣṇa, nobody's greater than Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is God. There are so many gods nowadays. The... Actually, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they say everyone is Nārāyaṇa. But what is the proof? We find out from the śāstra that Nārāyaṇa has got four hands. So where is your four hands? You are claiming to become Nārāyaṇa. So where are your four hands? Just manifest your four hands at least so that we can understand you are Nārāyaṇa.

The Māyāvāda philosophers, they want to make the prakṛti as puruṣa. No. Kṛṣṇa is Puruṣa; we are all prakṛtis.

Lecture on BG Lecture -- Ahmedabad, December 8, 1972:

The Māyāvāda philosophers, they want to make the prakṛti as puruṣa. No. Kṛṣṇa is Puruṣa; we are all prakṛtis. As I told you, that we have to understand Kṛṣṇa as Arjuna understood. Arjuna understood... That is described in the Tenth Chapter: paraṁ brahma, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān, puruṣam (BG 10.12). "You are the only puruṣa." Enjoyer. Puruṣa means enjoyer. And prakṛti means enjoyed. Puruṣa means the predominator, and prakṛti means the predominated. So we are predominated. We are not predominator. If the predominated wants to become predominator, that is false. That is illusion.