The impersonalists do not have the power to go beyond the effulgence of God and arrive at the Personality of Godhead, from whom this effulgence is emanating. The Īśopaniṣad is a hymn to that Personality of Godhead. It is not that the impersonal Brahman is denied; it is also described, but that Brahman is revealed to be the glaring effulgence of the body of Lord Kṛṣṇa. And in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta we learn that Lord Caitanya is Kṛṣṇa Himself. In other words, Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya is the basis of the impersonal Brahman. The Paramātmā, or Supersoul, who is present within the heart of every living entity and within every atom of the universe, is but the partial representation of Lord Caitanya. Therefore Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya, being the basis of both Brahman and the all-pervading Paramātmā as well, is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As such, He is full in six opulences: wealth, fame, strength, beauty, knowledge and renunciation. In short, we should know that He is Kṛṣṇa, God, and that nothing is equal to or greater than Him. There is nothing superior to be conceived. He is the Supreme Person.
Deny (CC and Other Books)
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta
CC Preface and Introduction
CC Adi-lila
Pāṣaṇḍas, or atheists, cannot understand the pastimes of the Supreme Lord or transcendental loving service to the Lord. They think that devotional service is no better than ordinary fruitive activities (karma). As the Bhagavad-gītā (4.8) confirms, however, the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His devotees, saving the righteous and chastising the miscreants (paritrāṇāya sādhūnāṁ vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām), always curb these nonsensical atheists. Miscreants always want to deny the Supreme Personality of Godhead and put stumbling blocks in the path of devotional service. The Lord sends His bona fide representatives and appears Himself to curb this nonsense.
“The scriptures completely deny the birth or production of the living entity. In the Parama-saṁhitā it is described that material nature, which is used for others' purposes, is factually inert and always subject to transformation. The field of material nature is the arena of the activities of fruitive actors, and since the material field is externally related with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, it is also eternal. In every saṁhitā, the jīva (living entity) has been accepted as eternal, and in the Pañcarātras the birth of the jīva is completely denied. Anything that is produced must also be annihilated. Therefore if we accept the birth of the living entity, we also have to accept his annihilation. But since the Vedic literatures say that the living entity is eternal, one should not think the living being to be produced at a certain time. In the beginning of the Parama-saṁhitā it is definitely stated that the face of material nature is constantly changeable. Therefore "beginning," "annihilation" and all such terms are applicable only in the material nature.
"Those miscreants who are grossly foolish, who are lowest among mankind, whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the atheistic nature of demons do not surrender unto Me." The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are āsuraṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ, which means that they have taken the path of the asuras (demons), who do not believe in the existence of the form of the Lord. The Māyāvādīs say that the ultimate source of everything is impersonal, and in this way they deny the existence of God. Saying that there is no God is direct denial of God, and saying that God exists but has no head, legs or hands and cannot speak, hear or eat is a negative way of denying His existence. A person who cannot see is called blind, one who cannot walk is called lame, one who has no hands is called helpless, one who cannot speak is called dumb, and one who cannot hear is called deaf. The Māyāvādīs' proposition that God has no legs, no eyes, no ears and no hands is an indirect way of insulting Him by defining Him as blind, deaf, dumb, lame, helpless, etc. Therefore although they present themselves as great Vedāntists, they are factually māyayāpahṛta-jñāna; in other words, they seem to be very learned scholars, but the essence of their knowledge has been taken away.
"The Māyāvāda philosophy," Lord Śiva informed his wife Pārvatī, "is impious (asac chāstra). It is covered Buddhism. My dear Pārvatī, in Kali-yuga I assume the form of a brāhmaṇa and teach this imagined Māyāvāda philosophy. In order to cheat the atheists, I describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead to be without form and without qualities. Similarly, in explaining Vedānta I describe the same Māyāvāda philosophy in order to mislead the entire population toward atheism by denying the personal form of the Lord." In the Śiva Purāṇa the Supreme Personality of Godhead told Lord Śiva:
- dvāparādau yuge bhūtvā kalayā mānuṣādiṣu
- svāgamaiḥ kalpitais tvaṁ ca janān mad-vimukhān kuru
"In Kali-yuga, mislead the people in general by propounding imaginary meanings for the Vedas to bewilder them." These are the descriptions of the Purāṇas.
In the Seventh Chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā the Supreme Personality of Godhead has classified His energies in two distinct divisions—namely, prākṛta and aprākṛta, or parā-prakṛti and aparā-prakṛti. In the Viṣṇu Purāṇa the same distinction is made. The Māyāvādī philosophers cannot understand these two prakṛtis, or natures—material and spiritual—but one who is actually intelligent can understand them. Considering the many varieties and activities in material nature, why should the Māyāvādī philosophers deny the spiritual varieties of the spiritual world? The Bhāgavatam (10.2.32) says:
- ye ’nye ’ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas
- tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ
The intelligence of those who think themselves liberated but have no information of the spiritual world is not yet clear. In this verse the term aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ refers to unclean intelligence. Due to unclean intelligence or a poor fund of knowledge, the Māyāvādī philosophers cannot understand the distinction between material and spiritual varieties; therefore they cannot even think of spiritual varieties because they take it for granted that all variety is material.
Why the daivī-māyā, or illusory energy of Kṛṣṇa, takes away the knowledge of the Māyāvādī philosophers is also explained in the Bhagavad-gīta by the use of the words āsuraṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ, which refer to a person who does not agree to the existence of the Lord. The Māyāvādīs, who are not in agreement with the existence of the Lord, can be classified in two groups, exemplified by the impersonalist Śaṅkarites of Vārāṇasī and the Buddhists of Saranātha. Both groups are Māyāvādīs, and Kṛṣṇa takes away their knowledge due to their atheistic philosophies. Neither group agrees to accept the existence of a personal God. The Buddhist philosophers clearly deny both the soul and God, and although the Śaṅkarites do not openly deny God, they say that the Absolute is nirākāra, or formless. Thus both the Buddhists and the Śaṅkarites are aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32), or imperfect and unclean in their knowledge and intelligence.
According to Sadānanda Yogīndra, because īśvara, the Supreme Lord, is the reservoir of all ignorance, He may be called sarva-jña, or omniscient, but one who denies the existence of the omnipotent Supreme Personality of Godhead is more than īśvara, or the Lord. His conclusion, therefore, is that the Supreme Personality of Godhead (īśvara) is a transformation of material ignorance and that the living entity (jīva) is covered by ignorance. Thus he describes both collective and individual existence in darkness. According to Māyāvādī philosophers, the Vaiṣṇava conception of the Lord as the Supreme Personality of Godhead and of the jīva, or individual soul, as His eternal servant is a manifestation of ignorance. If we accept the judgment of Lord Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad-gītā, however, the Māyāvādīs are to be considered māyayāpahṛta-jñāna, or bereft of all knowledge, because they do not recognize the existence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead or they claim that His existence is a product of the material conception (māyā). These are characteristics of asuras, or demons.
In the Vedanta-sūtra, devotional service is clearly indicated, but the Māyāvādī philosophers refuse to accept the spiritual body of the Supreme Absolute Person and refuse to accept that the living entity has an individual existence separate from that of the Supreme Lord. Thus they have created atheistic havoc all over the world, for such a conclusion is against the very nature of the transcendental process of pure devotional service. The Māyāvādī philosophers' unrealizable ambition to become one with the Supreme through denying the existence of the Personality of Godhead results in a most calamitous misrepresentation of spiritual knowledge, and one who follows this philosophy is doomed to remain perpetually in this material world. Therefore the Māyāvādīs are called aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ, or unclean in knowledge. Because they are unclean in knowledge, all their austerities and penances end in frustration. Thus although they may be honored at first as very learned scholars, ultimately they descend to physical activities of politics, social work, etc. Instead of becoming one with the Supreme Lord, they again become one with these material activities.
They are merely passing remarks. Śaṅkarācārya, however, has never stressed chanting of the mahā-vākya oṁkāra; he has accepted only tat tvam asi as the mahā-vākya. Imagining the living entity to be God, he has misrepresented all the mantras of the Vedānta-sūtra with the motive of proving that there is no separate existence of the living entities and the Supreme Absolute Truth. This is similar to the politician's attempt to prove nonviolence from the Bhagavad-gītā. Kṛṣṇa is violent to demons, and to attempt to prove that Kṛṣṇa is not violent is ultimately to deny Kṛṣṇa. As such explanations of the Bhagavad-gītā are absurd, so also is Śaṅkarācārya's explanation of the Vedānta-sūtra, and no sane and reasonable man will accept it. At present, however, the Vedānta-sūtra is misrepresented not only by the so-called Vedāntīs but also by other unscrupulous persons who are so degraded that they even recommend that sannyāsīs eat meat, fish and eggs. In this way, the so-called followers of Śaṅkara, the impersonalist Māyāvādīs, are sinking lower and lower. How can these degraded men explain the Vedānta-sūtra, which is the essence of all Vedic literature?
When we speak of the Supreme as impersonal, we deny His spiritual potencies. Logically, if you accept half of the truth, you cannot understand the whole.
Partial realization of the Absolute Truth as impersonal Brahman denies the complete opulences of the Lord. This is a hazardous understanding of the Absolute Truth. Unless one accepts all the features of the Absolute Truth—namely impersonal Brahman, localized Paramātmā and ultimately the Supreme Personality of Godhead—one's knowledge is imperfect. Śrīpāda Rāmānujācārya, in his Vedārtha-saṅgraha, says, jñānena dharmeṇa svarūpam api nirūpitam, na tu jñāna-mātraṁ brahmeti katham idam avagamyate. He thus indicates that the real identity of the Absolute Truth must be understood in terms of both His knowledge and His characteristics.
Scientists cannot perfectly explain where the chemicals of the world are manufactured, but one can explain this perfectly by accepting the inconceivable energy of the Supreme Lord. There is no reason for denying this argument. Since there are potencies in the living entities who are samples of the Personality of Godhead, how much potency there must be in the Supreme Godhead Himself. As described in the Vedas, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām: "He is the chief eternal of all eternals and the chief living entity among all living entities." (Kaṭha Upaniṣad, 2.2.13)
Unfortunately, atheistic science will not accept that matter comes from life. Scientists insist upon their most illogical and foolish theory that life comes from matter, although this is quite impossible. They cannot prove in their laboratories that matter can produce life, yet there are thousands and thousands of examples illustrating that matter comes from life. Therefore in Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī says that as soon as one accepts the inconceivable potency of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, no great philosopher or scientist can put forward any thesis to contradict the Lord's power. This is expressed in the following Sanskrit verse.
CC Madhya-lila
You do not have to flatly deny that you spoke such a thing. There is no need to make a false statement. Simply say that you do not remember what you said.
Although the Supreme Lord is described as having no hands and legs, He nonetheless accepts all sacrificial offerings. He has no eyes, yet He sees everything. He has no ears, yet He hears everything. When it is stated that the Supreme Lord has no hands and legs, one should not think that He is impersonal. Rather, He has no mundane hands or legs like ours. "He has no eyes, yet He sees." This means that He does not have mundane, limited eyes like ours. Rather, He has such eyes that He can see past, present and future, everywhere, in every corner of the universe and in every corner of the heart of every living entity. Thus the impersonal descriptions in the Vedas intend to deny mundane characteristics in the Supreme Lord. They do not intend to establish the Supreme Lord as impersonal.
Actually, at the present moment all systems of religion deny the worship of the form of the Lord due to ignorance of His transcendental form. The first-class materialists (the Māyāvādīs) imagine five specific forms of the Lord, but when they try to equate the worship of such imaginary forms with bhakti, they are immediately condemned. Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa confirms this in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.15), where He says, na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ. Bereft of real knowledge due to agnosticism, the Māyāvādī philosophers should not even be seen by the devotees of the Lord, nor touched, because those philosophers are liable to be punished by Yamarāja, the superintendent demigod who judges the activities of sinful men. The Māyāvādī agnostics wander within this universe in different species of life due to their nondevotional activities. Such living entities are subjected to the punishments of Yamarāja. Only the devotees, who are always engaged in the service of the Lord, are exempt from the jurisdiction of Yamarāja.
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.
The ambitious Māyāvādī philosophers desire to merge into the existence of the Lord, and this may be accepted as sāyujya-mukti. However, this form of mukti means denying one's individual existence. In other words, it is a kind of spiritual suicide. This is absolutely opposed to the philosophy of bhakti-yoga. Bhakti-yoga offers immortality to the individual conditioned soul. If one follows the Māyāvādī philosophy, he misses his opportunity to become immortal after giving up the material body. The immortality of the individual person is the highest perfectional stage a living entity can attain.
The material world, known as brahmāṇḍa, is the creation of the external energy. Between the two creations—the material creation and the spiritual creation—is a river known as Virajā, as well as a place known as Brahmaloka. Virajā-nadī and Brahmaloka are shelters for living entities disgusted with material life and inclined to impersonal existence by way of denying material variegatedness. Since these places are not situated in the Vaikunṭḥalokas, or the spiritual world, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu proclaims them to be external. In the Brahmaloka and Virajā-nadī, one cannot conceive of the Vaikuṇṭhalokas. Brahmaloka and Virajā-nadī are also attained after difficult austerities, but in these realms there is no understanding of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His transcendental loving service. Without such spiritual knowledge, simple detachment from material conditions is but another side of material existence. From the spiritual point of view, it is all external. When Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu rejected this proposal, Rāmānanda Rāya suggested that devotional service based on philosophy and logic is a more advanced position. He therefore quoted the following verse from the Bhagavad-gītā (18.54).
Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura summarizes the Eleventh Chapter in his Amṛta-pravāha-bhāṣya. When Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya tried his best to arrange a meeting between Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and King Pratāparudra, the Lord flatly denied his request. At this time Śrī Rāmānanda Rāya returned from his governmental post, and he praised King Pratāparudra highly in Lord Caitanya's presence. Because of this, the Lord became a little soft. The King also made promises to Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, who hinted how the King might meet the Lord. During Anavasara, while Lord Jagannātha was resting for fifteen days, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, being unable to see Lord Jagannātha, went to Ālālanātha. Later, when the devotees from Bengal came to see Him, He returned to Jagannātha Purī.
In his Amṛta-pravāha-bhāṣya, Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura summarizes this chapter as follows. The King of Orissa, Mahārāja Pratāparudra, tried his best to see Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Śrīla Nityānanda Prabhu and the other devotees informed the Lord about the King's desire, but Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu would not agree to see him. At that time Śrī Nityānanda Prabhu devised a plan, and He sent a piece of the Lord's outward garment to the King. The next day, when Rāmānanda Rāya again entreated Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu to see the King, the Lord, denying the request, asked Rāmānanda Rāya to bring the King's son before Him. The prince visited the Lord dressed like a Vaiṣṇava, and this awakened remembrance of Kṛṣṇa. Thus Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu delivered the son of Mahārāja Pratāparudra.
This refers to the day Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa and His cowherd boys and flocks of animals were present in the pasturing grounds near Mathurā. At that time the cowherd boys, being a little hungry, requested food, and Lord Kṛṣṇa asked them to go to the brāhmaṇas who were engaged nearby in performing yajña, or sacrifice, and to get some food from that yajña. Being so ordered by the Lord, all the cowherd boys went to the brāhmaṇas and asked them for food, but they were denied. After this, the cowherd boys begged food from the wives of the brāhmaṇas. All these wives were very much devoted to Lord Kṛṣṇa in spontaneous love, and as soon as they heard the request of the cowherd boys and understood that Kṛṣṇa wanted some food, they immediately left the place of sacrifice. They were very much chastised for this by their husbands, and they were ready to give up their lives. It is the nature of a pure devotee to sacrifice his life for the transcendental loving service of the Lord.
Being an impersonalist, Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī used to explain the Absolute Truth as being without hands, legs, mouths or eyes. In this way he used to cheat the people by denying the personal form of the Lord. Such a foolish person was Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, whose only business was to sever the limbs of the Lord by proving the Lord impersonal. Although the Lord has form, Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī attempted to cut off the hands and legs of the Lord. This is the business of demons. The Vedas state that people who do not accept the Lord's form are rascals. The form of the Lord is factual, for Kṛṣṇa states in the Bhagavad-gītā (15.15), vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ. When Kṛṣṇa says aham, He says "I am," which means "I," the person. He adds the word eva, which is used for conclusive verification. Thus by studying Vedānta philosophy one must come to know the Supreme Person. Whoever describes Vedic knowledge as impersonal is a demon. One becomes successful in life by worshiping the form of the Lord. The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs deny the form of the Lord, which delivers all fallen souls. Indeed, the Māyāvādī demons try to cut this form to pieces.
Thus there are living entities in all types of material elements. Since the entire material universe is composed of five elements—earth, water, fire, air and ether—why should there be living entities on one planet and not others? Such a foolish version can never be accepted by Vedic students. From the Vedic literatures we understand that there are living entities on each and every planet, regardless of whether the planet is composed of earth, water, fire or air. These living entities may not have the same forms that are found on this planet earth, but they have different forms composed of different elements. Even on this earth we can see that the forms of land animals are different from the forms of aquatics. According to the circumstance, living conditions differ, but undoubtedly there are living entities everywhere. Why should we deny the existence of living entities on this or that planet? Those who have claimed to have gone to the moon have not gone there, or else with their imperfect vision they cannot actually perceive the particular type of living entities there.
The soul has nothing to do with the material elements. Any material element can be cut to pieces, especially earth. As far as the living entity is concerned, however, he can be neither burned nor cut to pieces. He can therefore live within fire. We can conclude that there are also living entities within the sun. Why should living entities be denied this planet or that planet? According to the Vedas, the living entities can live anywhere and everywhere—on land, in water, in air and in fire. Whatever the condition, the living entity is unchangeable (sthāṇu). From the statements of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and the Bhagavad-gītā, we are to conclude that living entities exist everywhere throughout the universes. They are distributed as trees, plants, aquatics, birds, human beings and so on.
It appears from this statement that Sanātana Gosvāmī, who was formerly a minister of the Nawab, was trying to cheat the Muslim superintendent. A jail superintendent had only an ordinary education, or practically no education, and he was certainly not supposed to be very advanced in spiritual knowledge. But just to satisfy him, Sanātana Gosvāmī praised him as a very learned scholar of the scriptures. The jailkeeper could not deny that he was a learned scholar, because when one is elevated to an exalted position, one thinks oneself fit for that position. Sanātana Gosvāmī was correctly explaining the effects of spiritual activity, and the jailkeeper connected his statement with his release from jail.
Although Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was Viṣṇu, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, to teach us a lesson He nonetheless denied belonging to the Viṣṇu category. Unfortunately, there are many so-called Viṣṇu incarnations in this Age of Kali. People do not know that posing oneself as an incarnation is most offensive. People should not accept an ordinary man as an incarnation of God, for this also is a very great offense.
CC Antya-lila
The order of Kṛṣṇa is to chant His name incessantly. Therefore one who is chaste and adherent to the husband Kṛṣṇa must chant the Lord's name, for she cannot deny the husband's order.
I cannot go there, however, without the Lord's permission, which at present He denies me. He says, ‘You are going because you are angry at Me.
Other Books by Srila Prabhupada
Teachings of Lord Caitanya
"O my Lord, sustainer of all that lives, Your real face is covered by Your dazzling effulgence. Kindly remove that covering and exhibit Yourself to Your pure devotee." (Śrī Īśopaniṣad 15) The impersonalists do not have the power to go beyond the effulgence of God and arrive at the Personality of Godhead, from whom this effulgence is emanating. The Īśopaniṣad is a hymn to that Personality of Godhead. It is not that the impersonal Brahman is denied; it is also described, but that Brahman is revealed to be the glaring effulgence of the body of Lord Kṛṣṇa. And in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta we learn that Lord Caitanya is Kṛṣṇa Himself. In other words, Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya is the basis of the impersonal Brahman. The Paramātmā, or Supersoul, who is present within the heart of every living entity and within every atom of the universe, is but the partial representation of Lord Caitanya. Therefore Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya, being the basis of both Brahman and the all-pervading Paramātmā as well, is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As such, He is full in six opulences: wealth, fame, strength, beauty, knowledge and renunciation. In short, we should know that He is Kṛṣṇa, God, and that nothing is equal to or greater than Him. There is nothing superior to be conceived. He is the Supreme Person.
An offense to a pure devotee is one of the ten offenses against the holy name. The first offense is to blaspheme the great devotees who have tried to spread the glories of the holy name all over the world. The greatest offender at the feet of the holy name is the rascal who is envious of such devotees. The holy name of Kṛṣṇa is nondifferent from Kṛṣṇa, and Lord Kṛṣṇa cannot tolerate offenses against a pure devotee who, following the order of his spiritual master, is spreading the holy name all over the world. The second offense is to deny that Lord Viṣṇu is the Absolute Truth. Since there is no difference between the Lord and His name, qualities, form and pastimes, or activities, one who sees a difference is considered an offender. The Lord being supreme, no one is equal to or greater than Him. Consequently, one who thinks that the name of some demigod is equal to the Lord's name is an offender. The Supreme Lord and the demigods should never be considered on the same level.
The most astonishing fact is that Lord Caitanya, although the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, never displayed Himself as Kṛṣṇa. Rather, whenever intelligent devotees detected that He was Lord Kṛṣṇa and addressed Him as Lord Kṛṣṇa, He denied it. Indeed, He sometimes placed His hands over His ears, protesting that a human being should not be addressed as the Supreme Lord. Indirectly, He was teaching the Māyāvādī philosophers that one should never falsely pose himself as the Supreme Lord and thereby misguide his followers. Nor should the followers be foolish enough to accept anyone and everyone as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. One should test by consulting scriptures and by seeing the activities of the person in question. One should not, however, mistake Lord Caitanya and His five diverse manifestations for ordinary human beings. Lord Caitanya is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa Himself. The beauty of Lord Caitanya is that although He is the Supreme Lord, He came as a great devotee to teach all conditioned souls how devotional service should be rendered. Conditioned souls who are interested in devotional service should follow in the exemplary footsteps of Lord Caitanya to learn how Kṛṣṇa can be attained by devotional service. Thus the Supreme Lord Himself teaches the conditioned soul how He should be approached by devotional service.
The Supreme Personality of Godhead is transcendental to the material modes of nature, but He is fully qualified with transcendental attributes. To accept the Supreme as impersonal is to deny the full manifestation of His spiritual energies. Since the Supreme Brahman, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is full with all varieties of spiritual energy, one who simply accepts the impersonal exhibition of spiritual energy does not accept the Absolute Truth in full. To accept the Supreme in full is to accept spiritual variegatedness, which is transcendental to the material modes of nature. By failing to accept the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the impersonalists are left with an incomplete conception of Brahman.
“The impersonalist tries to explain that the Supreme Lord's impersonal effulgence (the brahmajyoti) is beyond the material modes of nature, but at the same time he tries to establish that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is contaminated by the modes of material nature. In truth, the Vedānta-sūtra establishes not only that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is transcendental to the material modes of nature but also that He has innumerable transcendental qualities and energies. All these various speculative philosophers are one in denying the existence of the Supreme Lord Viṣṇu, and they are very much enthused to put forward their own theories and be recognized by the people. Unfortunate persons become enamored of these atheistic philosophers and thus can never understand the real nature of the Absolute Truth.
Whenever we speak of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, we add the word śrī, indicating that He is full with six opulences. This means that He is eternally a person; if He were not a person, the six opulences could not be present in fullness. Therefore, whenever it is said that the Supreme Absolute Truth is impersonal, what is meant is that His personality is not material. To distinguish His transcendental body from material bodies, some philosophers have explained Him as having no material personality. In other words, His material personality is denied and His spiritual personality is established. In the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (3.19) this is clearly explained: "The Absolute Truth has no material legs and hands, but He has spiritual hands by which He accepts everything offered to Him. He has no material eyes, but He has spiritual eyes by which He can see everything and anything. He has no material ears, but He can hear everything and anything with His spiritual ears. Having perfect senses, He knows past, future and present. Indeed, He knows everything, but no one can understand Him, for by material senses He cannot be understood. Being the origin of all emanations, He is the supreme, the greatest, the Personality of Godhead."
The impersonalists' conception of the Lord's form, however, is just the opposite, for they say that it is a transformation of the material modes of nature. Actually, the form of the Supreme Lord is beyond the modes of material nature and thus is not like the forms of this material world. His form is fully spiritual and cannot be compared with any material form. Anyone who does not accept the spiritual form of the Supreme Lord is counted among the atheists. Because Lord Buddha did not accept these Vedic principles, the Vedic teachers consider him an atheist. Although Māyāvādī philosophers pretend to accept the Vedic principles, because they do not accept the Supreme Personality of Godhead they indirectly preach Buddhist philosophy, or atheistic philosophy. Māyāvādī philosophy is inferior to Buddhist philosophy, which directly denies Vedic authority. Because Māyāvāda philosophy is disguised as Vedānta philosophy, it is more dangerous than Buddhism or atheism.
The only reason Vyāsadeva compiled the Vedānta-sūtra was so that all living entities could benefit from it by understanding the philosophy of bhakti-yoga. Unfortunately, the Māyāvādī commentary, the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, has practically defeated the purpose of the 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 the Vedānta-sūtra is always dangerous. The danger is that through these commentaries one may come to falsely equate the living entity with the Supreme Lord. In this way a conditioned living entity can be falsely directed, and then he can never come to his actual position of eternal activity in bhakti-yoga. In other words, the Māyāvādī philosophers have rendered the greatest disservice to humanity by promoting the impersonal view of the Supreme Lord and thus depriving human society of the real message of the Vedānta-sūtra.
The sages known as the śrutis, the personified Upaniṣads, also desired the post of the gopīs, and they also followed in the footsteps of the gopīs in order to attain that highest goal of life. This is confirmed in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.87.23), where it is said that in general sages control their mind and senses by practicing prāṇāyāma (control of the breathing process) and mystic yoga. Thus they try to merge into the Supreme Brahman. But this same goal is attained by atheists, who deny the existence of God, if they are killed by an incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. They also merge into the Brahman existence of the Supreme Lord. But the damsels of Vṛndāvana worship Śrī Kṛṣṇa, having been bitten by Him just as a person is bitten by a snake, for Kṛṣṇa's body is compared with the body of a snake. A snake's body is never straight; it is always curved. Similarly, Kṛṣṇa often stands in a three-curved posture, and He has bitten the gopīs with transcendental love.
Nectar of Devotion
The Buddhists or other religionists who do not care for revealed scriptures sometimes say that there are many devotees of Lord Buddha who show devotional service to Lord Buddha, and who therefore should be considered devotees. In answer to this argument, Rūpa Gosvāmī says that the followers of Buddha cannot be accepted as devotees. Although Lord Buddha is accepted as an incarnation of Kṛṣṇa, the followers of such incarnations are not very advanced in their knowledge of the Vedas. To study the Vedas means to come to the conclusion of the supremacy of the Personality of Godhead. Therefore any religious principle which denies the supremacy of the Personality of Godhead is not accepted and is called atheism. Atheism means defying the authority of the Vedas and decrying the great ācāryas who teach Vedic scriptures for the benefit of the people in general.
Easy Journey to Other Planets
There are, of course, the mental speculators who comment upon the anti-material principle. These fall into two main groups, and they arrive at two different erroneous conclusions. One group (the gross materialists) either denies the anti-material principle or admits only the disintegration of material combination at a certain stage (death). The other group accepts the anti-material principle as being in direct opposition to the material principle with its twenty-four categories. This group is known as the Sāṅkhyaites, and they investigate the material principles and analyze them minutely. At the end of their investigation, the Sāṅkhyaites finally accept only a transcendental (anti-material) nonactive principle. However, difficulties arise for all these mental speculators because they speculate with the help of inferior energy. They do not accept information from the superior. In order to realize the real position of the anti-material principle, one must rise to the transcendental plane of superior energy. Bhakti-yoga is the very activity of superior energy.
Krsna, The Supreme Personality of Godhead
They have dedicated their lives to the welfare of others. Individually they are tolerating all kinds of natural disturbances, such as hurricanes, torrents of rain, scorching heat and piercing cold, but they are very careful to relieve our fatigue and give us shelter. My dear friends, I think they are glorified in this birth as trees. They are so careful to give shelter to others that they are like noble, highly elevated charitable men who never deny charity to one who approaches them. No one is denied shelter by these trees. They supply various kinds of facilities to human society, such as leaves, flowers, fruit, shade, roots, bark, flavor extracts and fuel. They are the perfect example of noble life. They are like a noble person who has sacrificed everything possible—his body, mind, activities, intelligence and words—for the welfare of all living entities.”
If someone denies Kṛṣṇa's self-sufficiency on hearing that He was tending the cows for His livelihood, or if someone doubts His not being in need of the food, thinking that He was actually hungry, then such a person should understand that the goddess of fortune is always engaged in His service. In this way the goddess can break her faulty habit of restlessness. In Vedic literatures like the Brahma-saṁhitā it is stated that Kṛṣṇa is served in His abode with great respect by not only one goddess of fortune but many thousands. Therefore it is simply illusion for one to think that Kṛṣṇa begged food from the brāhmaṇas. It was actually a trick to show them mercy by teaching them that they should accept Him in pure devotional service instead of engaging in ritualistic ceremonies. The Vedic ceremonial paraphernalia, the suitable place, the suitable time, the different grades of articles for performing the ritualistic ceremonies, the Vedic hymns, the process of sacrifice, the priest who is able to perform the sacrifice, the fire, the demigods, the performer of the sacrifice and the religious principles are all meant for understanding Kṛṣṇa, for Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He is the Supreme Lord Viṣṇu and the Lord of all mystic yogīs.
“Dear Kṛṣṇa, dear friend, we know very well that You are not actually the son of Mother Yaśodā or the cowherd man Nanda Mahārāja. You are the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the Supersoul of all living entities. You have, out of Your own causeless mercy, appeared in this world, requested by Lord Brahmā for the protection of the world. It is by Your kindness only that You have appeared in the dynasty of Yadu. O best in the dynasty of Yadu, if anyone afraid of this materialistic way of life takes shelter at Your lotus feet, You never deny him protection. Your movements are sweet, and You are independent, touching the goddess of fortune with one hand and in the other bearing a lotus flower. That is Your extraordinary feature. Please, therefore, come before us and bless us with the lotus flower in Your hand.
On the plea of her sense gratification, however, He decided to go to her house, not actually for sense gratification but to turn her into a pure devotee. Kṛṣṇa is always served by many thousands of goddesses of fortune; therefore He has no need to satisfy His senses by going to a society girl. But because He is kind to everyone, He decided to go there. It is said that the moon does not withhold its shining from the courtyard of a crooked person. Similarly, Kṛṣṇa's transcendental mercy is never denied to anyone who has rendered service unto Him, whether through lust, anger, fear or pure love. In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta it is stated that if one wants to serve Kṛṣṇa and at the same time wants to satisfy his own lusty desires, Kṛṣṇa will handle the situation so that the devotee forgets his lusty desires and becomes fully purified and constantly engaged in the service of the Lord.
Kṛṣṇa continued: “This jewel is so powerful that no ordinary man is able to keep it. I know that you are very pious in activities, so there is no objection to the jewel's being kept with you. There is one difficulty, and that is that My elder brother, Śrī Balarāma, does not believe My version that the jewel is with you. I therefore request you, O large-hearted one, to show Me the jewel just once before My other relatives so that they may be pacified and reject various kinds of rumors. You cannot deny that the jewel is with you because we can understand that you have enhanced your opulence and are performing sacrifices on an altar made of solid gold.” The properties of the jewel were known: wherever the jewel remained, it would produce for the keeper more than two mounds of pure gold daily. Akrūra was getting gold in that proportion and distributing it profusely at sacrificial performances. Lord Kṛṣṇa cited Akrūra's lavishly spending gold as positive evidence of his possessing the Syamantaka jewel.
The girl continued: "My dear sir, I know that you are the hero Arjuna; so I may further say that I shall not accept anyone as my husband besides Lord Viṣṇu, because He is the only protector of all living entities and the bestower of liberation for all conditioned souls. I shall be thankful unto you if you pray to Lord Viṣṇu to be pleased with me." The girl Yamunā knew it well that Arjuna was a great devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa and that if he would pray, Kṛṣṇa would never deny his request. To approach Kṛṣṇa directly may sometimes be futile, but to approach Kṛṣṇa through His devotee is sure to be successful. She further told Arjuna, "My name is Kālindī, and I live within the waters of the Yamunā. My father was kind enough to construct a special house for me within the waters of the Yamunā, and I have vowed to remain in the water as long as I cannot find Lord Kṛṣṇa." Arjuna duly carried the message of the girl Kālindī to Kṛṣṇa, although Kṛṣṇa, as the Supersoul in everyone's heart, knew everything. Without further discussion, Kṛṣṇa immediately accepted Kālindī and asked her to sit down on the chariot. Then all of them approached King Yudhiṣṭhira.
Lord Kṛṣṇa's dealings with Rukmiṇī as a perfect husband are a perfect manifestation of the supreme perfection of the Personality of Godhead. There are many philosophers who propound a concept of the Absolute Truth in which God cannot do this or that. They deny the incarnation of God, or the Supreme Absolute Truth in human form. But actually the fact is different: God cannot be subject to our imperfect sensual activities. He is the all-powerful, omnipresent Personality of Godhead, and by His supreme will He can not only create, maintain and annihilate the whole cosmic manifestation but also descend as an ordinary human being to execute the highest mission. As stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, whenever there are discrepancies in the discharge of human occupational duties, He descends. He is not forced to appear by any external agency, but He descends by His own internal potency in order to reestablish the standard functions of human activities and simultaneously annihilate the disturbing elements in the progressive march of human civilization. In accordance with this principle of the transcendental pastimes of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He descended in His eternal form as Śrī Kṛṣṇa in the dynasty of the Yadus.
Renunciation Through Wisdom
It is impossible to be exempted from the adversities caused by mentally concocted beliefs. According to man-made laws, if one person murders another he is condemned to the gallows, but no action is taken against a man for killing animals. Such is not the law of providence. The law of God is such that it punishes the killers of both man and animals; both acts of murder are penalized. The atheists deny the existence of God because in this way they think they can commit sins unhindered. But all the revealed, authorized scriptures say that by killing innocent creatures, the householders commit many sins willingly or unwillingly while performing their normal daily activities. To get release from these sins, the householders are enjoined to perform certain sacrifices. Foremost of these is to eat and honor the remnants of food offered to Lord Viṣṇu. As for those selfish householders who cook food only for their own sensual pleasure and not for the service of Lord Viṣṇu, they have to suffer all the sinful reactions incurred while cooking and eating. This is the law of providence. Therefore, to get rid of these sins, the followers of the Vedic religion dedicate their household activities to Lord Viṣṇu's service.
Puny human beings can manufacture only insignificant items like pots, pans, and factories. Therefore, when a personality who was born not so long ago in Mathurā and who looks like a human being is introduced as the Supreme Controller of the entire cosmic manifestation, the Lord of all lords and possessor of all absolute qualities, then, no matter how clearly one explains these truths, ordinary people cannot absorb them, due to their tiny dog's-bent-tail intelligence. Thus they embrace monistic, impersonal philosophy. Denying that Lord Kṛṣṇa alone is God, they insist that they are also "Gods." In this manner they embrace grossly foolish ideas about themselves and God and try to compete with Him, completely disregarding all etiquette and sound philosophical conclusions.
In their philosophical discussions the Māyāvādīs deny the existence of the Supreme Lord's multifarious energies. Such sub-standard debates are indeed on the kindergarten level. According to Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, the Māyāvādīs have a poor fund of knowledge and are thus prevented from understanding that the Supreme Brahman is full with six opulences. To save these poor Māyāvādī impersonalists from philosophical impoverishment, Lord Kṛṣṇa has mercifully instructed them in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.19),
- bahūnāṁ janmanām ante
- jñānavān māṁ prapadyate
- vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti
- sa mahātmā su-durlabhaḥ
After many births and deaths, he who is actually in knowledge surrenders unto Me, knowing Me to be the cause of all causes and all that is. Such a great soul is very rare.
When Śrī Aurobindo wrote of "the Divine Mother," he was likely referring to this internal, spiritual energy, the predominating Deity of eternal transcendental bliss. He also pointed out that the activities of the inferior, material energy should not be mistaken for those of this spiritual potency. Once the famous impersonalist and monist sannyāsī Ramana Maharshi of Madras was asked by a foreign disciple, "What is the difference between God and man?" His cryptic reply was "God plus desire equals man, and man minus desire equals God." We say that man can never be free of desire. In his eternal conditioned existence the jīva is full of the desire to enjoy matter, while in his eternal liberated state he is full of the desire to render devotional service to the Lord. Thus the jīva can never become God. It is sheer insanity to equate man with God, or vice versa. The Māyāvādī's unnatural desire to deny the inherent characteristics of his conscious self is the very same desire that keeps him from attaining liberation. Hence the Māyāvādīs' false and arrogant claim of liberation is merely a demonstration of their perverted intelligence.
The Māyāvādīs are hard pressed to understand that there is a wide gulf of difference between their individual efforts to nullify nescience and the Supreme Lord's mercifully enlightening His devotees. The Māyāvādīs are always eager to deny the Supreme Energetic His potencies. They are no better than demons like Rāvaṇa, who tried to usurp the Lord's potency, and Kaṁsa, who tried to kill Him outright. This sort of behavior is expected of demons. Aspiring for evil powers, they abandon devotional service to the Lord and take to sinful activities. In this way they forfeit all knowledge. Lord Kṛṣṇa aptly describes them in the Gītā (7.15) as māyayāpahṛta-jñānā, "those whose knowledge is stolen by illusion." Many, many philosophers, scholars, and so-called invincible heroes have tried to make the Supreme Lord impotent, formless, and impersonal, but in the end they always suffered terribly.
Where can one see qualities such as intelligence, knowledge, freedom from doubt, joy, sorrow, fear, fearlessness, nonviolence, equanimity, contentment, austerity, charity, fame, and infamy? These qualities are indicative of consciousness, so they are present wherever consciousness is present. The Supreme Lord has declared that these qualities are His, that they have sprung from Him. And the Kaṭha Upaniṣad states, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām eko bahūnāṁ yo vidadhāti kāmān: "Among all the eternal, conscious living entities, there is one supreme conscious being who supplies all others with their necessities." Therefore, to deny that these qualities are inherent in all conscious beings, and in this way to equate both the minute living entities and the Supreme Soul with dead matter, results in complete confusion and certainly demonstrates a severe lack of insight. The Māyāvādīs are confused as to whether refuting the existence of consciousness or accepting it will give them contentment.
Śrī Aurobindo has accomplished something commendable by presenting today's learned circles with a "new" concept: instead of trying to deny the inherent qualities of consciousness, one should transform one's mundane consciousness into supramental consciousness by engaging in service of the Supreme Lord under the direction of His divine potency. Of course, those who prefer to emulate the modern philosophers rather than the realized souls of bygone ages will find Śrī Aurobindo's presentation novel. But those who follow in the footsteps of pure, loving devotees of the Lord linked to an authorized disciplic succession know that Śrī Aurobindo's words echo the annals of age—old wisdom. Indeed, they sound close to the essence of the Vedas.
Upon seeing the devotion of the South Indian brāhmaṇa as he read the Gītā, Lord Caitanya embraced him and then told him that he had perfected the reading of the Gītā. What fool would deny that Lord Caitanya's approval is far superior to millions of university doctorates? This accolade from the Lord proves that the Bhagavad-gītā cannot be studied with material intelligence. The knowledge of the Gītā must be received through the chain of ācāryas, or spiritual masters, coming down in disciplic succession. That is the only method; otherwise studying the Gītā is an exercise in futility. The scriptural conclusion is that since the Supreme Lord is transcendental, His words are also transcendental, and hence the esoteric subject matter of the Bhagavad-gītā can be received only through a disciplic succession that is equally transcendental.
The Māyāvādīs try to imitate Śrīpād Śaṅkarācārya. Pretending to be orthodox, they reject the truth that the jīva is part and parcel of Para-brahman, the Supreme Lord. They also deny the fact that it is only the part and parcel aspect of Para-brahman (the jīva) and not Para-brahman Himself who falls under the spell of māyā. And worst of all, they deny that Para-brahman is none other than the Supreme Personality of Godhead. According to their lop-sided argument, when the jīva attains mukti (liberation) he merges into the impersonal Brahman and loses his individual identity. By this logic, when the Supreme Lord, the Para-brahman, incarnates in this material world or appears in the Deity form, He becomes an ordinary jīva. Thus the foolish Māyāvādīs draw a distinction between the Lord and His form, and in this way they commit great offences against Him.
15) Just as the most sinful wretch lives in a ghostly body after death and moves about in the ether, having been denied a gross body, so the impersonalist, although rising to the point of liberation in the transcendental position, falls back down to the material world because of not having developed the mood of loving service to the Supreme Lord. Therefore the severe austerities and penances the impersonalist performs are not equivalent to the eternal religion of devotional service.
Message of Godhead
The philosophers and the logicians have tried to understand the intrinsic relationship of living entities with God by various conceptions and methods, on the strength of their mundane education and scholastic research. But the Absolute Truth remains above the philosophers and their acquired knowledge. The conception of the Absolute is never perfectly attained by such an ascending process, because of its being born of imperfect, material senses. These empiric philosophers and logicians cannot realize their imperfection by the vanity of material knowledge, and the ultimate conclusion of such materialistic philosophers is atheism. They deny the existence of God, who is the Supreme Person, different from all other persons. Under such a vague assumption, we remain in the same darkness as before. We are content with a conception of Godhead according to our own individual idea, without knowing the real relationship of Godhead and ourselves.
The kṣetrajña is the eternal spirit, whereas the kṣetra is matter, which is temporary and ephemeral. This eternal truth is summarized in the Vedas in the aphorism brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā: "Spirit is fact and the world is a false shadow." By "false shadow" one should understand that the world is temporary, existing only for the time being. But one should not make the mistake of thinking the world has no existence at all. I really possess my temporary material body and mind, and I must not make myself a laughing stock by denying the existence of my body and mind. At the same time, I must always remember that the body and mind are temporary arrangements. However, the spirit encaged by this body and mind is eternal truth and indestructible. No one can destroy the eternal spirit—that is what we need to understand at the present moment. The indestructible spirit is thus above the conception of violence and nonviolence.
Light of the Bhagavata
The Vedic knowledge comes in a tradition from the spiritual master through the chain of disciplic succession, and the knowledge must be acquired through this chain, without deviation. In the present age of quarrel the chain has been broken here and there, and thus the Veda is now interpreted by unauthorized men who have no realization. The so-called followers of the Vedas deny the existence of God, as in the darkness of a cloudy evening the glowworms deny the existence of the moon and stars. Saner people should not be waylaid by such unscrupulous men. Bhagavad-gītā is the summary of all Vedic knowledge because it is spoken by the same Personality of Godhead who imparted the Vedic knowledge into the heart of Brahmā, the first created being in the universe. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam was especially spoken for the guidance of the people of this age, which is darkened by the cloud of ignorance.
Sri Isopanisad
We are seeing the sun daily, and it appears to us just like a small disc, but it is actually far, far larger than many planets. Of what value is this seeing? Therefore we have to read books; then we can understand about the sun. So direct experience is not perfect. Then there is anumāna, inductive knowledge: "It may be like this"—hypothesis. For instance, Darwin's theory says it may be like this, it may be like that. But that is not science. That is a suggestion, and it is also not perfect. But if you receive the knowledge from the authoritative sources, that is perfect. If you receive a program guide from the radio station authorities, you accept it. You don't deny it; you don't have to make an experiment, because it is received from the authoritative sources.
There are many pseudo worshipers who become religionists only for the sake of name and fame. Such pseudo religionists do not wish to get out of this universe and reach the spiritual sky. They only want to maintain the status quo in the material world under the garb of worshiping the Lord. The atheists and impersonalists lead such foolish pseudo religionists into the darkest regions by preaching the cult of atheism. The atheist directly denies the existence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and the impersonalists support the atheists by stressing the impersonal aspect of the Supreme Lord. Thus far we have not come across any mantra in Śrī Īśopaniṣad in which the Supreme Personality of Godhead is denied. It is said that He can run faster than anyone. Those who are running after other planets are certainly persons, and if the Lord can run faster than all of them, how can He be impersonal? The impersonal conception of the Supreme Lord is another form of ignorance, arising from an imperfect conception of the Absolute Truth.
The facilities of devotional service are denied the impersonalists because they are attached to the brahma-jyotir feature of the Lord. As suggested in the previous mantras, they cannot penetrate the brahma-jyoti because they do not believe in the Personality of Godhead. Their business is mostly word jugglery and mental speculation. Consequently the impersonalists pursue a fruitless labor, as confirmed in the Twelfth Chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā (12.5).
Unless one is accustomed to devotional practice, what will he remember at the time of death, when the body is dislocated, and how can he pray to the almighty Lord to remember his sacrifices? Sacrifice means denying the interest of the senses. One has to learn this art by employing the senses in the service of the Lord during one's lifetime. One can utilize the results of such practice at the time of death.
Narada-bhakti-sutra (sutras 1 to 8 only)
In the Bhagavad-gītā Lord Kṛṣṇa stresses in many verses that He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. But despite Lord Kṛṣṇa's stressing this point, many so-called scholars and commentators still deny the personal conception of the Lord. One famous scholar wrote in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā that one does not have to surrender to Lord Kṛṣṇa or even accept Him as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but that one should rather surrender to "the Supreme within Kṛṣṇa." Such fools do not know what is within and what is without. They comment on the Bhagavad-gītā according to their own whims. Such persons cannot be elevated to the highest stage of love of Godhead. They may be scholarly, and they may be elevated in other departments of knowledge, but they are not even neophytes in the process of attaining the highest stage of perfection, love of Godhead. Niṣṭhā implies that one should accept the words of Bhagavad-gītā, the words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as they are, without any deviation or nonsensical commentary.
| Page Title: | Deny (CC and Other Books) |
| Compiler: | Visnu Murti, Mayapur |
| Created: | 23 of Feb, 2012 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=28, OB=36, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 64 |