Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Advocate (Books)

Bhagavad-gita As It Is

BG Chapters 7 - 12

BG 7.5, Purport:

The distinction between the living entities and the Lord is described in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.87.30) as follows:

aparimitā dhruvās tanu-bhṛto yadi sarva-gatās
tarhi na śāsyateti niyamo dhruva netarathā
ajani ca yan-mayaṁ tad avimucya niyantṛ bhavet
samam anujānatāṁ yad amataṁ mata-duṣṭatayā

"O Supreme Eternal! If the embodied living entities were eternal and all-pervading like You, then they would not be under Your control. But if the living entities are accepted as minute energies of Your Lordship, then they are at once subject to Your supreme control. Therefore real liberation entails surrender by the living entities to Your control, and that surrender will make them happy. In that constitutional position only can they be controllers. Therefore, men with limited knowledge who advocate the monistic theory that God and the living entities are equal in all respects are actually guided by a faulty and polluted opinion."

BG Chapters 13 - 18

BG 17.7, Purport:

They are not all conducted on the same level. Those who can understand analytically what kind of performances are in what modes of material nature are actually wise; those who consider all kinds of sacrifice or food or charity to be the same cannot discriminate, and they are foolish. There are missionary workers who advocate that one can do whatever he likes and attain perfection. But these foolish guides are not acting according to the direction of the scripture. They are manufacturing ways and misleading the people in general.

Srimad-Bhagavatam

SB Preface and Introduction

SB Introduction:

Similarly, the Supreme Lord can produce all manifested worlds by His inconceivable energies, and yet He is full and unchanged. He is pūrṇa (complete), and although an unlimited number of pūrṇas emanate from Him, He is still pūrṇa.

"The theory of illusion of the Māyāvāda school is advocated on the ground that the theory of emanation will cause a transformation of the Absolute Truth. If that is the case, Vyāsadeva is wrong. To avoid this, they have skillfully brought in the theory of illusion. But the world or the cosmic creation is not false, as maintained by the Māyāvāda school. It simply has no permanent existence. A nonpermanent thing cannot be called false altogether. But the conception that the material body is the self is certainly wrong.

SB Canto 1

SB 1.17.24, Purport:

All these habits, or so-called advancement of civilization, are the root causes of all irreligiosities, and therefore it is not possible to check corruption, bribery and nepotism. Man cannot check all these evils simply by statutory acts and police vigilance, but he can cure the disease of the mind by the proper medicine, namely advocating the principles of brahminical culture or the principles of austerity, cleanliness, mercy and truthfulness. Modern civilization and economic development are creating a new situation of poverty and scarcity with the result of blackmailing the consumer's commodities. If the leaders and the rich men of the society spend fifty percent of their accumulated wealth mercifully for the misled mass of people and educate them in God consciousness, the knowledge of Bhāgavatam, certainly the age of Kali will be defeated in its attempt to entrap the conditioned souls.

SB Canto 2

SB 2.5.21, Purport:

Similarly although the Supreme Lord maintains everything created by His expansion of energy, He always remains separate. This is accepted even by Śaṅkarācārya, the great advocate of the impersonal form of the Absolute. He says nārāyaṇaḥ paro 'vyaktāt, or Nārāyaṇa exists separately, apart from the impersonal creative energy. The whole creation thus merges within the body of transcendental Nārāyaṇa at the time of annihilation, and the creation emanates from His body again with the same unchanging categories of fate and individual nature. The individual living entities, being parts and parcels of the Lord, are sometimes described as ātmā, qualitatively one in spiritual constitution. But because such living entities are apt to be attracted to the material creation, actively and subjectively, they are therefore different from the Lord.

SB Canto 3

SB 3.7.39, Purport:

There are many inexperienced persons who advocate self-realization without the help of a spiritual master. They decry the necessity of the spiritual master and try themselves to take his place by propagating the theory that a spiritual master is not necessary. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, however, does not approve this viewpoint. Even the great transcendental scholar Vyāsadeva had need of a spiritual master, and under the instruction of his spiritual master, Nārada, he prepared this sublime literature, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Even Lord Caitanya, although He is Kṛṣṇa Himself, accepted a spiritual master; even Lord Kṛṣṇa accepted a spiritual master, Sāndīpani Muni, in order to be enlightened; and all the ācāryas and saints of the world had spiritual masters.

SB Canto 4

SB 4.7.44, Purport:

Even if he is born as a worm living within the intestine or abdomen in the midst of urine and stool, still he is satisfied. This is the covering influence of māyā. But the human form of life is a chance to understand, and if one misses this opportunity, he is most unfortunate. The way to get out of illusory māyā is to engage in the topics of Kṛṣṇa. Lord Caitanya advocated a process whereby everyone may remain in his present position without change but simply hear from the proper authoritative sources about Kṛṣṇa. Lord Caitanya advised everyone to spread the word of Kṛṣṇa. He advised, "All of you become spiritual masters. Your duty is simply to talk to whomever you meet of Kṛṣṇa or of the instructions given by Kṛṣṇa."

SB 4.22.24, Purport:

A devotee is the friend not only of human society but of all living entities, for he sees all living entities as sons of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He does not claim himself to be the only son of God and allow all others to be killed, thinking that they have no soul. This kind of philosophy is never advocated by a pure devotee of the Lord. Suhṛdaḥ sarva-dehinām: a true devotee is the friend of all living entities. Kṛṣṇa claims in Bhagavad-gītā to be the father of all species of living entities; consequently the devotee of Kṛṣṇa is always a friend of all. This is called ahiṁsā. Such nonviolence can be practiced only when we follow in the footsteps of great ācāryas. Therefore, according to our Vaiṣṇava philosophy, we have to follow the great ācāryas of the four sampradāyas, or disciplic successions.

SB 4.22.25, Purport:

The word brahmaṇi used in this verse is commented upon by the impersonalists or professional reciters of Bhāgavatam, who are mainly advocates of the caste system by demoniac birthright. They say that brahmaṇi means the impersonal Brahman. But they cannot conclude this with reference to the context of the words bhaktyā and guṇābhidhānena. According to the impersonalists, there are no transcendental qualities in the impersonal Brahman; therefore we should understand that brahmaṇi means "in the Supreme Personality of Godhead." Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as admitted by Arjuna in Bhagavad-gītā; therefore wherever the word brahma is used, it must refer to Kṛṣṇa, not to the impersonal Brahman effulgence. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān can all be taken in total as Brahman, but when there is reference to the word bhakti or remembrance of the transcendental qualities, this indicates the Supreme Personality of Godhead, not the impersonal Brahman.

SB 4.24.71, Purport:

One also has to sit in one place in a particular posture and concentrate his gaze on the tip of the nose. There are so many rules and regulations for the haṭha-yoga system that it is practically impossible to perform it in this age. The alternative system of bhakti-yoga is very easy not only in this age but in others as well, for this yoga system was advocated long ago by Lord Śiva when he advised the princes, the sons of Mahārāja Prācīnabarhiṣat. The bhakti-yoga system is not newly introduced, for even five thousand years ago Lord Kṛṣṇa recommended this bhakti-yoga as the topmost yoga. As Kṛṣṇa tells Arjuna in Bhagavad-gītā (6.47):

yoginām api sarveṣāṁ
mad-gatenāntarātmanā
śraddhāvān bhajate yo māṁ
sa me yuktatamo mataḥ

"Of all yogīs, he who always abides in Me with great faith, worshiping Me in transcendental loving service, is most intimately united with Me in yoga and is the highest of all."

SB 4.25.39, Purport:

The social orders are divided into four parts—brahmacarya, gṛhastha, vānaprastha and sannyāsa—and only in the householder life can the pravṛtti-mārga be encouraged or accepted according to Vedic instructions. In the orders of brahmacarya, vānaprastha and sannyāsa, there are no facilities for sex.

In this verse the woman is advocating pravṛtti-mārga only and is discouraging the path of nivṛtti-mārga. She clearly says that the yatis, the transcendentalists, who are concerned only with spiritual life (kaivalya), cannot imagine the happiness of pravṛtti-mārga. In other words, the man who follows the Vedic principles enjoys the materialistic way of life not only by becoming happy in this life, but also in the next life by being promoted to the heavenly planets. In this life such a person gets all kinds of material opulences, such as sons and grandsons, because he is always engaged in various religious functions.

SB 4.25.39, Purport:

Although the gṛhastha desires sense gratification, he acts according to Vedic instructions. The gṛhamedhī, however, who is interested only in sense gratification, does not follow any Vedic instruction. The gṛhamedhī engages himself as an advocate of sex life and also allows his sons and daughters to engage in sex and to be deprived of any glorious end in life. A gṛhastha enjoys sex life in this life as well as in the next, but a gṛhamedhī does not know what the next life is about because he is simply interested in sex in this life. On the whole, when one is too much inclined toward sex, he does not care for the transcendental spiritual life. In this age of Kali especially, no one is interested in spiritual advancement. Even though it is sometimes found that one may be interested in spiritual advancement, he is most likely to accept a bogus method of spiritual life, being misguided by so many pretenders.

SB 4.28.33, Purport:

"My dear mind, what kind of devotee are you? Simply for cheap adoration you sit in a solitary place and pretend to chant the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra, but this is all cheating." Thus Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura advocated that every devotee, under the guidance of an expert spiritual master, preach the bhakti cult, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, all over the world. Only when one is mature can he sit in a solitary place and retire from preaching all over the world. Following this example, the devotees of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness now render service as preachers in various parts of the world. Now they can allow the spiritual master to retire from active preaching work. In the last stage of the spiritual master's life, the devotees of the spiritual master should take preaching activities into their own hands. In this way the spiritual master can sit down in a solitary place and render nirjana-bhajana.

SB 4.30.20, Translation:

Always engaging in the activities of devotional service, devotees feel ever-increasingly fresh and new in all their activities. The all-knower, the Supersoul within the heart of the devotee, makes everything increasingly fresh. This is known as the Brahman position by the advocates of the Absolute Truth. In such a liberated stage (brahma-bhūta), one is never bewildered. Nor does one lament or become unnecessarily jubilant. This is due to the brahma-bhūta situation.

SB 4.31.14, Purport:

Sometimes people ask why this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement simply advocates worship of Kṛṣṇa to the exclusion of the demigods. The answer is given in this verse. The example of pouring water on the root of a tree is very appropriate. In Bhagavad-gītā (15.1) it is said, ūrdhva-mūlam adhaḥ-śākham: this cosmic manifestation has expanded downward, and the root is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As the Lord confirms in Bhagavad-gītā (10.8), ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ: "I am the source of all spiritual and material worlds." Kṛṣṇa is the root of everything; therefore rendering service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa (kṛṣṇa-sevā), means automatically serving all the demigods.

SB Canto 5

SB 5.5.10-13, Purport:

One gradually becomes liberated by practicing as mentioned above. All these prescribed methods enable one to give up the material body (liṅgaṁ vyapohet) and be situated in his original spiritual body. First of all one has to accept a bona fide spiritual master. This is advocated by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī in his Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: śrī-guru-pādāśrayaḥ. To be freed from the entanglement of the material world, one has to approach a spiritual master. Tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum evābhigacchet (MU 1.2.12). By questioning the spiritual master and by serving him, one can advance in spiritual life. When one engages in devotional service, naturally the attraction for personal comfort—for eating, sleeping and dressing—is reduced. By associating with the devotee, a spiritual standard is maintained. The word mad-deva-saṅgāt is very important.

SB 5.7.6, Purport:

If we massage a person's legs, we do not really serve the legs but the person who possesses the legs. All the demigods are different parts of the Lord, and if we offer service to them, we actually serve the Lord Himself. Demigod worship is mentioned in Brahma-saṁhitā, but actually the ślokas advocate worship of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Govinda. For instance, worship of the goddess Durgā is mentioned this way in Brahma-saṁhitā (5.44):

sṛṣṭi-sthiti-pralaya-sādhana-śaktir ekā
chāyeva yasya bhuvanāni vibharti durgā
icchānurūpam api yasya ca ceṣṭate sā
govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi

Following the orders of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the goddess Durgā creates, maintains and annihilates. Śrī Kṛṣṇa also confirms this statement in Bhagavad-gītā. Mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ sūyate sa-carācaram: "This material nature is working under My direction, O son of Kuntī, and it is producing all moving and unmoving beings." (BG 9.10)

SB Canto 6

SB 6.10.9, Purport:

Jesus Christ said, "Do not kill," but hypocrites nevertheless maintain thousands of slaughterhouses while posing as Christians. Such hypocrisy is condemned in this verse. One should be happy to see others happy, and one should be unhappy to see others unhappy. This is the principle to be followed. Unfortunately, at the present moment so-called philanthropists and humanitarians advocate the happiness of humanity at the cost of the lives of poor animals. That is not recommended herein. This verse clearly says that one should be compassionate to all living entities. Regardless of whether human, animal, tree or plant, all living entities are sons of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Lord Kṛṣṇa says in Bhagavad-gītā (14.4):

sarva-yoniṣu kaunteya
mūrtayaḥ sambhavanti yāḥ
tāsāṁ brahma mahad yonir
ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā

"It should be understood that all species of life, O son of Kuntī, are made possible by birth in this material nature, and that I am the seed-giving father." The different forms of these living entities are only their external dresses.

SB 6.14 Summary:

By performance of religious rituals one ultimately reaches the supreme goal of knowledge by understanding that Vāsudeva, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is the cause of everything. It is clearly stated in the Bhagavad-gītā that even those who are advocates of knowledge alone, without any religious ritualistic processes, advance in knowledge after many, many lifetimes of speculation and thus come to the conclusion that Vāsudeva is the supreme cause of everything that be. As a result of this achievement of the goal of life, such an advanced learned scholar or philosopher surrenders unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Religious ritualistic performances are actually meant to cleanse the contaminated mind in the material world, and the special feature of this Age of Kali is that one can easily execute the process of cleansing the mind of contamination by chanting the holy names of God—Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare.

SB 6.16.41, Purport:

That is dharma, religion.

If one is actually Kṛṣṇa conscious, he cannot have any enemies. Since his only engagement is to induce others to surrender to Kṛṣṇa, or God, how can he have enemies? If one advocates the Hindu religion, the Muslim religion, the Christian religion, this religion or that religion, there will be conflicts. History shows that the followers of religious systems without a clear conception of God have fought with one another. There are many instances of this in human history, but systems of religion that do not concentrate upon service to the Supreme are temporary and cannot last for long because they are full of envy. There are many activities directed against such religious systems, and therefore one must give up the idea of "my belief" and "your belief."

SB Canto 7

SB 7.7.39, Purport:

This verse describes how the advocates of economic development are frustrated by the laws of nature. As the previous verse asks, kiṁ viṣayopapādanaiḥ: what is the actual benefit of so-called economic development? The history of the world has factually proved that attempts to increase economic development for bodily comfort through the advancement of material civilization have done nothing to remedy the inevitability of birth, death, old age and disease. Everyone has knowledge of huge empires throughout the history of the world—the Roman Empire, the Moghul Empire, the British Empire and so on—but all the societies engaged in such economic development (sarve 'rtha-kāmāḥ) have been frustrated by the laws of nature through periodic wars, pestilence, famine and so on.

SB Canto 8

SB 8.7.3, Purport:

The demons thought that the front of the snake was auspicious and that catching hold of that portion would be more chivalrous. Moreover, Daityas must always do the opposite of the demigods. That is their nature. We have actually seen this in relation to our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. We are advocating cow protection and encouraging people to drink more milk and eat palatable preparations made of milk, but the demons, just to protest such proposals, are claiming that they are advanced in scientific knowledge, as described here by the words svādhyāya-śruta-sampannāḥ. They say that according to their scientific way, they have discovered that milk is dangerous and that the beef obtained by killing cows is very nutritious. This difference of opinion will always continue. Indeed, it has existed since days of yore. Millions of years ago, there was the same competition.

SB 8.8.11, Purport:

Cow urine and cow dung are uncontaminated, and since even the urine and dung of a cow are important, we can just imagine how important this animal is for human civilization. Therefore the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, directly advocates go-rakṣya, the protection of cows. Civilized men who follow the system of varṇāśrama, especially those of the vaiśya class, who engage in agriculture and trade, must give protection to the cows. Unfortunately, because people in Kali-yuga are mandāḥ, all bad, and sumanda-matayaḥ, misled by false conceptions of life, they are killing cows in the thousands. Therefore they are unfortunate in spiritual consciousness, and nature disturbs them in so many ways, especially through incurable diseases like cancer and through frequent wars and among nations. As long as human society continues to allow cows to be regularly killed in slaughterhouses, there cannot be any question of peace and prosperity.

SB 8.16.20, Purport:

One who trains his subordinate or disciple to worship Vāsudeva is the truly bona fide spiritual master. The word jagad-gurum is very important in this regard. Kaśyapa Muni did not falsely declare himself to be jagad-guru, although he actually was jagad-guru because he advocated the cause of Vāsudeva. Actually, Vāsudeva is jagad-guru, as clearly stated here (vāsudevaṁ jagad-gurum). One who teaches the instructions of Vāsudeva, Bhagavad-gītā, is as good as vāsudevaṁ jagad-gurum. But when one who does not teach this instruction—as it is—declares himself jagad-guru, he simply cheats the public. Kṛṣṇa is jagad-guru, and one who teaches the instruction of Kṛṣṇa as it is, on behalf of Kṛṣṇa, may be accepted as jagad-guru. One who manufactures his own theories cannot be accepted; he becomes jagad-guru falsely.

SB Canto 10.1 to 10.13

SB 10.2.32, Purport:

There are persons who advocate accepting any process and who say that whatever process one accepts will lead to the same goal, but that is refuted in this verse, where such persons are referred to as vimukta-māninaḥ, signifying that although they think they have attained the highest perfection, in fact they have not. In the present day, big, big politicians all over the world think that by scheming they can occupy the highest political post, that of president or prime minister, but we actually see that even in this life such big prime ministers, presidents and other politicians, because of being nondevotees, fall down (patanty adhaḥ). To become president or prime minister is not easy; one must work very hard (āruhya kṛcchreṇa) to achieve the post.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 2.37, Purport:

The Lord is the reservoir of all cosmic manifestation, animate and inanimate. The advocates of Viśiṣṭādvaita-vāda philosophy explain the Vedānta-sūtra by saying that although the living entity has two kinds of bodies—subtle (consisting of mind, intelligence and false ego) and gross (consisting of the five basic elements)—and although he thus lives in three bodily dimensions (gross, subtle and spiritual), he is nevertheless a spiritual soul. Similarly, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who emanates the material and spiritual worlds, is the Supreme Spirit. As an individual spirit soul is almost identical to his gross and subtle bodies, so the Supreme Lord is almost identical to the material and spiritual worlds.

CC Adi 7.39, Purport:

According to their vision, materialism is the only manifestation of the Absolute Truth.

Factually both the Kāśīra and the Saranātha Māyāvādīs, as well as any other philosophers who have no knowledge of the spirit soul, are advocates of utter materialism. None of them have clear knowledge regarding the Absolute or the spiritual world. Philosophers like the Saranātha Māyāvādīs who do not believe in the spiritual existence of the Absolute Truth but consider material varieties to be everything do not believe that there are two kinds of nature, inferior (material) and superior (spiritual), as described in the Bhagavad-gītā. Actually, neither the Vārāṇasī nor Saranātha Māyāvādīs accept the principles of the Bhagavad-gītā, due to a poor fund of knowledge.

CC Adi 7.112, Translation:

“Everything about the Supreme Personality of Godhead is spiritual, including His body, opulence and paraphernalia. Māyāvāda philosophy, however, covering His spiritual opulence, advocates the theory of impersonalism.

CC Adi 7.112, Purport:

Māyāvādī philosophers do not know how it is that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is formless. The Supreme Lord does not have a form like ours but has a spiritual form. Not knowing this, Māyāvādī philosophers simply advocate the onesided view that the Supreme Godhead, or Brahman, is formless (nirākāra). In this connection Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura offers many quotes from the Vedic literature. If one accepts the real or direct meaning of these Vedic statements, one can understand that the Supreme Personality of Godhead has a spiritual body (sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1)).

In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (5.1.1) it is said, pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idaṁ pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate. This indicates that the body of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is spiritual, for even though He expands in many ways, He remains the same.

CC Adi 16.107, Purport:

The same process advocated by Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa in His teachings of the Bhagavad-gītā as it is—"Surrender unto Me in all instances"—was advocated by Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. The champion surrendered unto the Lord, and the Lord favored him. One who is favored by the Lord is freed from material bondage, as stated in the Bhagavad-gītā (4.9): tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti so ’rjuna.

CC Adi 17.53, Purport:

As explained here, the real purpose of an incarnation of Godhead is to kill the atheists and maintain the devotees. He does not say, like so many rascal incarnations, that atheists and devotees are on the same platform. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, or Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the real Personality of Godhead, does not advocate such an idea.

Atheists are punishable, whereas devotees are to be protected. To maintain this principle is the mission of all avatāras, or incarnations. One must therefore identify an incarnation by His activities, not by popular votes or mental concoctions. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu gave protection to devotees and killed many demons in the course of His preaching work. He specifically mentioned that the Māyāvādī philosophers are the greatest demons.

CC Adi 17.250, Purport:

Such denunciations, however, reflect an exuberant loving attitude that an ordinary man cannot understand. When the foolish student questioned Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Lord Caitanya similarly rebuked Lord Kṛṣṇa in loving exuberance. When Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was in the mood of the gopīs and the student advocated the cause of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, Lord Caitanya was greatly angry. Seeing His anger, the foolish student, who was an ordinary atheistic smārta-brāhmaṇa, foolishly misjudged Him. Thus he and a party of students were ready to strike the Lord in retaliation. After this incident, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu decided to take sannyāsa so that people would not commit offenses against Him, considering Him an ordinary householder, for in India even now a sannyāsī is naturally offered respect.

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 1.34, Purport:

This means that devotional service is acquired from Vedic knowledge. Tac chraddadhānāḥ munayaḥ. Devotees who are actually serious attain bhakti, scientific devotional service, by hearing Vedic literatures (bhaktyā śruta-gṛhītayā). It is not that one should create something out of sentimentality, become a sahajiyā and advocate such concocted devotional service. However, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura considered such sahajiyās to be more favorable than the impersonalists, who are hopelessly atheistic. The impersonalists have no idea of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The position of the sahajiyās is far better than that of the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs. Although the sahajiyās do not think much of Vedic knowledge, they nonetheless have accepted Lord Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Lord. Unfortunately, they mislead others from authentic devotional service.

CC Madhya 1.51, Purport:

Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu enjoyed the position of the gopīs in separation from Kṛṣṇa. When Kṛṣṇa left the gopīs and went to Mathurā, the gopīs cried for Him the rest of their lives, feeling intense separation from Him. This ecstatic feeling of separation was specifically advocated by Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu through His actual demonstrations.

CC Madhya 3.6, Purport:

Therefore they are unable to understand the purport of tridaṇḍa-sannyāsa, and as such they are not inclined to dedicate their lives to the service of Mukunda. They simply think of merging into the existence of Brahman because of their disgust with material existence. The ācāryas who advocate the daiva-varṇāśrama (the social order of cātur-varṇyam mentioned in the Bhagavad-gītā) do not accept the proposition of āsura-varṇāśrama, which maintains that the social order of varṇa is indicated by birth.

CC Madhya 3.6, Purport:

It is said that from this Mādhavācārya the sampradāya known in western India as the Vallabhācārya sampradāya has begun. Śrīla Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī, who is known as a smṛty-ācārya in the Gauḍīya-Vaiṣṇava-sampradāya, later accepted the tridaṇḍa-sannyāsa order from Tridaṇḍipāda Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī. Although acceptance of tridaṇḍa-sannyāsa is not distinctly mentioned in the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava literature, the first verse of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī’s Upadeśāmṛta advocates that one should accept the tridaṇḍa-sannyāsa order by controlling the six forces:

CC Madhya 8.83, Purport:

In this regard, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura explains that this verse does not advocate the whimsical invention of some methods of love of Godhead. Such inventions cannot be accepted as topmost. Indeed, such concoctions are not recommended in these verses. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has said in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu (1.2.101):

śruti-smṛti-purāṇādi-pañcarātra-vidhiṁ vinā
aikāntikī harer bhaktir utpātāyaiva kalpate

He clearly mentions in this verse that one must refer to the Vedic literatures and other, supplementary literatures and follow the conclusion of the Vedas. An invented devotional attitude simply creates disturbances in the transcendental realm.

CC Madhya 17.186, Translation:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu continued, ""Dry arguments are inconclusive. A great personality whose opinion does not differ from others is not considered a great sage. Simply by studying the Vedas, which are variegated, one cannot come to the right path by which religious principles are understood. The solid truth of religious principles is hidden in the heart of an unadulterated, self-realized person. Consequently, as the śāstras confirm, one should accept whatever progressive path the mahājanas advocate.""

CC Madhya 25.57, Translation:

“"Dry arguments are inconclusive. A great personality whose opinion does not differ from others is not considered a great sage. Simply by studying the Vedas, which are variegated, one cannot come to the right path by which religious principles are understood. The solid truth of religious principles is hidden in the heart of an unadulterated, self-realized person. Consequently, as the śāstras confirm, one should accept whatever progressive path the mahājanas advocate."

CC Madhya 25.193, Purport:

From early histories it appears that the entire earth was under one culture, Vedic culture, but gradually, due to religious and cultural divisions, the rule fragmented into many subdivisions. Now the earth is divided into many countries, religions and political parties. Despite these political and religious divisions, we advocate that everyone should unite again under one culture—Kṛṣṇa consciousness. People should accept one God, Kṛṣṇa; one scripture, the Bhagavad-gītā; and one activity, devotional service to the Lord. Thus people may live happily upon this earth and combine to produce sufficient food. In such a society, there would be no question of scarcity, famine or cultural or religious degradation. So-called caste systems and national divisions are artificial. According to our Vaiṣṇava philosophy, these are all external bodily designations.

CC Antya-lila

CC Antya 2.95, Purport:

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.

Other Books by Srila Prabhupada

Teachings of Lord Caitanya

Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter Prologue:

He also admitted that the commentaries of Śaṅkara never gave such natural explanations of the Vedānta-sūtras as those he had obtained from Mahāprabhu. Sārvabhauma then submitted himself as an advocate and follower. In a few days he turned out to be one of the best Vaiṣṇavas of the time. When reports of this came out, the whole of Orissa sang the praise of Kṛṣṇa Caitanya, and hundreds and hundreds came to Him and became His followers. In the meantime Mahāprabhu thought of visiting southern India, and He started with one Kṛṣṇadāsa Brāhmaṇa for the journey.

Nectar of Instruction

Nectar of Instruction 1, Purport:

They are always speaking nonsense and thus inviting death to catch them. Controlling speech, however, does not mean self-imposed silence (the external process of mauna), as Māyāvādī philosophers think. Silence may appear helpful for some time, but ultimately it proves a failure. The meaning of controlled speech conveyed by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī advocates the positive process of kṛṣṇa-kathā, engaging the speaking process in glorifying the Supreme Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa. The tongue can thus glorify the name, form, qualities and pastimes of the Lord. The preacher of kṛṣṇa-kathā is always beyond the clutches of death. This is the significance of controlling the urge to speak.

Nectar of Instruction 2, Purport:

Accepting some of the scriptural rules and regulations for immediate benefit, as utilitarians advocate, is called niyama-āgraha, and neglecting the rules and regulations of the śāstras, which are meant for spiritual development, is called niyama-agraha. The word āgraha means "eagerness to accept," and agraha means "failure to accept." By the addition of either of these two words to the word niyama ("rules and regulations"), the word niyamāgraha is formed. Thus niyamāgraha has a twofold meaning that is understood according to the particular combination of words. Those interested in Kṛṣṇa consciousness should not be eager to accept rules and regulations for economic advancement, yet they should very faithfully accept scriptural rules and regulations for the advancement of Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead

Krsna Book 24:

With this purpose in mind, Kṛṣṇa began to talk as if He were an atheist supporting the philosophy of Karma-mīmāṁsā. Advocates of this philosophy do not accept the supreme authority of the Personality of Godhead. They put forward the argument that if anyone works nicely, the result is sure to come. Their opinion is that even if there is a God who gives man the result of his fruitive activities, there is no need to worship Him, because unless man works He cannot bestow any good result. They say that instead of worshiping a demigod or God, people should give attention to their own duties, and thus the good result will surely come. Lord Kṛṣṇa began to speak to His father according to these principles of the Karma-mīmāṁsā philosophy.

Krsna Book 24:

Similarly, a father's and mother's taking care of their children is not the cause of the children's comfort. Sometimes it is found that in spite of all care by the parents, the children go bad or succumb to death. Therefore material causes are not sufficient for results. There must be the sanction of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Nanda Mahārāja therefore advocated that in order to get good results for agricultural activities, they must satisfy Indra, the superintending deity of the rain supply. Lord Kṛṣṇa nullified this argument, saying that the demigods give results only to persons who have executed their prescribed duties. The demigods cannot give any good results to the person who has not executed the prescribed duties; therefore demigods are dependent on the execution of duties and are not absolute in awarding good results to anyone. So why should one care about them?

Krsna Book 87:

Because of its different conditions of existence, the cosmic manifestation has no fixed position.” Those who advocate acceptance of this material world as false are generally known by the maxim brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. They put forward the argument that everything in the material world is prepared from matter. For example, there are many things made of clay, such as earthen pots, dishes and bowls. After their annihilation, these things may be transformed into many other material objects, but in all cases their existence as clay continues. An earthen water jug, after being broken, may be transformed into a bowl or dish, but either as a dish, bowl or water jug, the earth itself continues to exist. Therefore, the forms of a water jug, bowl or dish are false, but their existence as earth is real. This is the impersonalists' version.

Renunciation Through Wisdom

Renunciation Through Wisdom 1.2:

For any treatment, two important factors are that the patient be in clean surroundings and that his medicine and food be administered punctually. Similarly, to transform the demoniac mentality, people have to be clean, disciplined, and truthful. This end is not served by advocating the theory of yata mat, tata path—that "there are as many ways to salvation as there are opinions"—for in this way one confuses and deceives the populace. By bringing the clean and the unclean, the disciplined and undisciplined, the truthful and the untruthful onto the same level, one will find it impossible to cure or even treat any patient.

Page Title:Advocate (Books)
Compiler:Visnu Murti, RupaManjari
Created:25 of Jun, 2011
Totals by Section:BG=2, SB=23, CC=16, OB=7, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:48