Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Impersonalist (Lectures, Other)

Lectures

Nectar of Devotion Lectures

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, December 26, 1972:

They did not know. (aside:) All right, you can close. Close this door. So we should, we should be prepared to sacrifice everything, without any consideration of jñāna, karma, yoga. No. We have to see whether Kṛṣṇa is satisfied. Svanuṣṭhitasya dharmasya saṁsiddhir hari-toṣaṇam (SB 1.2.13). That is perfection. Saṁsiddhir hari-toṣaṇam: whether Kṛṣṇa is satisfied. So people have no information what is Kṛṣṇa, and what to speak of satisfying Him. That... Who was speaking? That Girirāja. He was talking to Mr. Motta, every so-called learned scholars, they have no, I mean to say, idea what is God, what is Kṛṣṇa, and where to speak of satisfying Him? But the bhakti means that he, a bhakta, is always ready to sacrifice everything to satisfy Kṛṣṇa. But if one has no idea what is Kṛṣṇa, then where is bhakti? For the impersonalist, there cannot be any bhakti because they have no information of Kṛṣṇa. They do not know what is Kṛṣṇa. And bhakti means satisfaction of Kṛṣṇa. If I know the person, if I know what is his nature, then I can know also how to satisfy him. If you have no information of any person, then where is the question of satisfaction? Go on reading.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 17, 1972:

It is not a question of any personal religion or personal ambition or something manufactured by some imperfect sense enjoyer. It is authorized because Bhagavad-gītā is authorized. Bhagavad-gītā is accepted... First of all, He was, it was accepted by Arjuna in toto. Sarvam etad ṛtaṁ manye yad vadasi keśava (BG 10.14). "My dear Kṛṣṇa, whatever You are saying, I accept it in toto, without any interpretation, without any rejection." Somebody says, somebody may say, "Arjuna was Kṛṣṇa's friend. To praise Him, he might have said like that." No. Arjuna immediately gives evidence that "It is not that I am accepting but you are accepted as, as such by such great personalities as, like Vyāsadeva, Nārada, Asita." He gives authority. So that was five thousand years ago. Later on, all the ācāryas, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī, Nimbārka, even Śaṅkarācārya. We Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, they differ little with Śaṅkarācārya. Impersonalist and personalist. But Śaṅkarācārya even, even though he was impersonalist, he accepted Kṛṣṇa in his commentary on Bhagavad-gītā. Sai bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇa. So Kṛṣṇa is accepted as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There is no doubt about it. By all authorities. And Kṛṣṇa Himself says in the Bhagavad-gītā, mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat (BG 7.7). "There is no more superior authority than Me."

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 17, 1972:

But the impersonalists will say, "The Supreme Controller is not a person." He's a person. But Brahmā says, "No, He's a person." Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha. Vigraha means person. Mūrti. But He's not ordinary person. Sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Sat cit ānanda. His form is made of eternity, bliss, and knowledge. Our form, this form, is not eternity. It will die. It will be finished. Why my form? Even Brahmā's form. Although he will live for many millions of years. Just like one day, twelve hours, is described in the Bhagavad-gītā: sahasra-yuga-paryantam ahar yad brahmaṇo viduḥ (BG 8.17). Brahmā's one day, twelve hours, he... These four yugas, forty-three hundred thousands of years multiplied by one thousand. That is Brahmā's twelve days, uh, twelve hours. Now we can calculate his life. He'll live for one hundred years. So his twelve hours is millions of years. So still, he will die. Anything in this material world, it will not stay. Bhūtvā bhūtvā pralīyate (BG 8.19). Everything will be finished. Therefore even Brahmā's body is not eternal. What to speak of my body, your body, ant's body, his body... Sat. Sat means "that exists". Oṁ tat sat.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 19, 1972:

But especially those who are impersonalists, they can see God in that way. Śabdaḥ khe pauruṣaṁ nṛṣu. There are descriptions in the Seventh Chapter, how you can see God in your common dealings. Still, if you do not see God, then you can see, you must see one day God at the time of your death. Mṛtyuḥ sarva-haraś cāham (BG 10.34). Death is God. So the atheist class men, just like Hiraṇyakaśipu, who always challenges God, in spite of so many things wherein we can see God, they deny to see God; therefore God comes before them as death. So everyone has to meet death. So God is there. And you are seeing. But because we are atheist class of men, we are denying, "There is not God." So Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu says that, "After all, you have to meet with God at the time of death. So before death, why don't you see God in so many ways?" That is Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu. The science of devotional service which is giving you indication how to see God always and everywhere. Go on reading.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 20, 1972:

Rocket, rocket. You have not very nice rocket running at the speed of eighteen thousand miles or twenty-five thousand miles per hour. But you may go. If you don't take, if you don't get shelter in some planet... Just as they're going in the moon planet, but do not get shelter and come back, similarly, supposing they are getting shelter, but that shelter is not very secure. They again come back. So without shelter, how long you can fly in the sky? The sky is unlimited. You can fly on your sputnik or capsules, but if you don't get the shelter in some planet, then again you come back to your place. So this is... The same example is given in the Bhāgavata: āruhya kṛcchreṇa, with great scientific method you can go up. But if you don't get a shelter, then you come back again on this planet. Similarly, the nondevotees, the impersonalists, they undergo severe penances and austerities undoubtedly, and they rise up to the brahma-jyotir... Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ (SB 10.2.32). From there, he again falls down. Same example. Why? Anādhṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. Because they did not care for the shelter under the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, therefore they have to come back again to this material world.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, January 2, 1973:

Because they could not search out the shelter of the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, they have to come down again to this material existence, which they left as mithyā. But their..., because there is no shelter on the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, this brahma-bhūtaḥ stage also not secure. One has to fall down. We have seen many big, big sannyāsīs, very learned scholars, sannyāsīs, they take part in politics, sociology. Because they could not catch up real Brahman, therefore they come again to his material existence. So Śrīdhara Swami, the great commentator on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, he says, in connection with the second verse, First Chapter, First Canto: dharmaḥ projjhita-kaitavo atra paramo nirmatsarāṇāṁ satāṁ vāstava vastu vedyam atra (SB 1.1.2). So Śrīdhara Swami says, atra mokṣavisandi api nirastam. To desire for mokṣa is also not ultimate goal of life. Ultimate goal of life is to accept the shelter of the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. Bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate (BG 7.19). Actually who is jñānavān, he'll take shelter of Kṛṣṇa. If not is this life, he'll have to come to this status. Therefore nirviśeṣa vadi, impersonalists... Kṛṣṇa says, kleṣaḥ adhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta cetasām. Avyakta. Kṛṣṇa is vyakta. But one who is not after this vyakta, he's after impersonal Brahman, their labor is still more hard than the bhaktas.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, January 2, 1973:

So the bhakti-mārga means we want real life, eternal life, and varieties also. Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). Ānanda cannot... Variety is the mother of enjoyment. Without variety, you cannot feel enjoyment. That is not possible. Suppose if I simply give you a lump of flour. Will you enjoy? But the same flour, you make kacoris, luci, puri, and this and... Oh, you'll enjoy. The ingredient is the same, but when it variety, it is enjoyable. Similarly, spiritual varieties... The impersonalists, they being fed up with this material varieties, they want to make it zero. But that will not help us. In zero we cannot be happy, because we are by nature, we want to enjoy. Enjoy means there must be varieties. The same flour, but you pick up some different varieties of flour and keep it, oh, you'll enjoy. "Oh, it is very nice." Therefore Kṛṣṇa has given so many varieties.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 27, 1972:

Pradyumna: "Let us offer our respectful obeisances to all the great devotees and ācāryas or holy teachers, who are compared with sharks in the great ocean of nectar and who do not care for the various rivers of liberation. Impersonalists are very fond of merging into the supreme, like rivers that come down and merge into the ocean. The ocean can be compared with liberation and the rivers with all the different paths of liberation. The impersonalists are dwelling in the river water, which eventually comes to mix with the ocean. They have no information, however, that within the ocean, as within the rivers, there are innumerable aquatic living entities. The sharks who dwell in the ocean do not care for the rivers which are gliding down into it."

Prabhupāda: Yes. The shark, big fish, shark, big body, they have no place to come into the river, come back. There is no place. Big crocodile, big sharks, they do not come to the river. They constantly remain in the ocean. Go on. Yes.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, January 9, 1973:

Pradyumna: (reading) "Impersonalists are very fond of merging into the Supreme, like rivers that come down and merge into the ocean. The ocean can be compared with liberation, and the rivers with all the different paths of liberation. The impersonalists are dwelling in the river water, which eventually comes to mix with the ocean. They have no information, however, that within the ocean, as within the river, there are innumerable aquatic living entities. The sharks who dwell in the ocean do not care for the rivers which are gliding down into it. The devotees eternally live in the ocean of devotional service, and they do not care for the rivers."

Prabhupāda: This comparison that the rivers, it does matter from which way it is coming down to the sea, when they mix together, they become one. But if this comparison is taken, that the rivers merging into the sea, and when it mixes there is no separate existence of the river, but they do not see analogy. Analogy, according to law of analogy, the points of similarities must be one. Analogy is perfect when the points of similarities are there. Just like we say, "Your face is as beautiful as moon." That means the face, beauty of the face is as attractive as the moon is attractive. The points of similarity is there. We cannot say an ugly face, your face is like moon. That cannot be. That is not analogy because there is no points of similarity. That is the law of analogy. So similarly, if you make analogy that as the different rivers are, the water is coming down and mixing with the sea, then it becomes one, but there are other points. This is superficial vision. There is other points. The same water again becomes evaporated, and again thrown on the ground, and they again glide down as rivers. That is, this is a fact. But if you go deep into the water, just like the shark fish—the comparison is given there—the shark fish is never evaporated. The shark fish is within the water of the sea, and there is no question of evaporation.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 28, 1972:

The nirviśeṣa, impersonalists, they want to stop activity, but actually Bhagavān, Kṛṣṇa, says that real activity begins when one is self-realized, one is situated in Brahman realization. Brahman realization does not mean to stop. Brahman realization means to act for Kṛṣṇa, not for sense gratification. That is Brahman realization. Mad-bhaktiṁ labhate parām (BG 18.54). And in that bhakti stage, bhaktyā māṁ abhijānāti yāvān yaś cāsmi tattvataḥ (BG 18.55). Actually, simply by executing devotional service, being freed from all material contamination, when one is engaged in devotional service, bhakti, that process, bhakti process can help one to understand what is God. Bhaktyā mām abhijānāti. It is not said that by karma, "karmaṇā mām abhijānāti." No. "Jñānena mām abhijānāti." Abhijānāti, tattvataḥ, if one wants to know God in truth, then he must take to devotional service. And this devotional service, actual devotional service begins when one is Brahman realized.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 30, 1972:

Pradyumna: "The impersonalists sometimes misunderstand devotional service in such a way that they divide Kṛṣṇa from His paraphernalia and pastimes. For example, the Bhagavad-gītā is spoken on the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra, and the impersonalists say that although Kṛṣṇa is of interest, the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra isn't. The devotees, however, also know that the Battlefield of Kurukṣetra by itself has nothing to do with their business, but in addition they know that 'Kṛṣṇa' does not mean just Kṛṣṇa alone. He is always with His associates and paraphernalia."

Prabhupāda: There are so-called pseudo devotees. They say, "What we have to do with Bhagavad-gītā?" They think that they are so advanced that they will jump over immediately to the Kṛṣṇa's rasa-līlā. That means Kṛṣṇa's līlā in the Kurukṣetra is not very much important for them. But no. Kṛṣṇa's līlā, either in the Kurukṣetra or in Vṛndāvana, the same thing. We should know. Abhinnatvād nāma-nāminoḥ. So better, first of all, read Bhagavad-gītā, the preliminary study of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Try to read, or try to learn. Of course, in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam there is everything. But for ordinary persons, because Bhagavad-gītā is the ABCD of spiritual knowledge... People even commit mistakes in studying the ABCD of spiritual knowledge. People have become so much degraded that they cannot understand even ABCD of spiritual knowledge. They'll make their own interpretation. Such is the horrible condition. They'll try to make minus Kṛṣṇa Bhagavad-gītā, go on reading Bhagavad-gītā for millions of years, setting aside Kṛṣṇa. That is scholarly. This is going on. Scholar means they say, openly... I have seen Dr. Radhakrishnan. When he's explaining man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65), he's saying openly, "It is not to the person Kṛṣṇa." He's saying. Just see the attempt. He's writing comments on Bhagavad-gītā and he's trying to make Kṛṣṇa away, minus Kṛṣṇa. Simply mental speculation. This is going on. We should be very careful. What is that? Go on. The impersonalists... The impersonalists, they do not know that Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's body, not different. They take it for acceptance that when God, Brahman comes, He accepts a material body. That is Māyāvādī philosophy. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhāḥ mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritāḥ (BG 9.11). He comes... Sambhavāmy ātma-māyayā (BG 4.6). He comes as He is.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 31, 1972:

Sometimes, individually we fight. Just like in the legislative assembly, our representative, M.P.'s, they go and fight. There is a deliberation. But that purpose is to serve the country. Therefore, instead of the difference of opinions, they agree to work in this way. That is legislative assembly. Similarly, individuality there must be always, but when we find out a one means to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, that is oneness. Ekatvam anupaśyataḥ (ISO 7). Eka. That is ekatvam. Why a... In other words, ekatvam... This is the version of the Īśopaniṣad, ekatvam anupaśyataḥ. Ekatvam anupaśyataḥ. Ekatvam, at the same time, anupaśyataḥ. That means we are all spirit soul. We are part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa. That is anupaśyataḥ. And on this basis, when we find ekatvam, oneness, that is the platform of peace, that "We are all servants of Kṛṣṇa." Caitanya Mahāprabhu advised this, jīvera svarūpa haya nitya kṛṣṇa dāsa (Cc. Madhya 20.108-109). When we feel that "Eternally I am servant of Kṛṣṇa, you are servant of Kṛṣṇa," that is ekatvam. Not that we become a lump of thing. No. Impersonality cannot be... Personality cannot be changed. Jīva-loke. Mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ jīva-loke sanātanaḥ (BG 15.7). This individuality is sanātana, eternal. But when we disagree to serve Kṛṣṇa, that is asanātana, not sanātana. That is artificial.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 8, 1972:

Acyutānanda: " 'Happiness In Kṛṣṇa Consciousness.' Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has analyzed the different sources of happiness. He has divided happiness into three categories, which are (1) happiness derived from material enjoyment, (2) happiness derived by identifying oneself with the Supreme Brahman, and (3) happiness derived from Kṛṣṇa consciousness. In the Tantra-śāstra, Lord Śiva speaks to his wife, Satī, in this way: 'My dear wife, a person who has surrendered himself at the lotus feet of Govinda and who has thus developed pure Kṛṣṇa consciousness can be very easily awarded all the perfections desired by the impersonalists; and beyond this, he can enjoy the happiness achieved by the pure devotees.' "

Prabhupāda: Go on.

Acyutānanda: "Happiness derived from pure devotional service is the highest because it is eternal, but the happiness derived from material perfection or understanding oneself to be Brahman is inferior because it is only temporary. There is no preventing one's falling down from material happiness, and there is even every chance of falling down from the spiritual happiness derived from identifying oneself with the impersonal Brahman."

Prabhupāda: Yes. Happiness, it is our experience that happiness derived from material enjoyment, that is not permanent. That we can understand. But happiness of identifying oneself with Brahman, ahaṁ brahmāsmi, nirbheda-brahmānusandhana, that happiness is also not permanent. That is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ anādṛta yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). Āruhya kṛcchreṇ... By great austerity, auspici..., and penance, one may rise up to the platform of Brahman realization, paraṁ padam. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ patanty adhaḥ (SB 10.2.32). Again he falls down. We have seen many big, big sannyāsī. they give up this world as brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā, false. But after some time, when they cannot actually realize Brahman, they again come to this jagat for humanitarian work, for welfare activities. If jagat is mithyā, then why do they come again to this welfare activity? So jagat is not mithyā, but it is temporary. We do not say mithyā. Vaiṣṇava philosophers, they do not accept the jagat as mithyā.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 8, 1972:

Therefore those who are impersonalists, they think that they have become liberated. Actually, they are not liberated. The Bhāgavata says, vimukta-māninaḥ. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa, ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ. They are thinking like that. Actually, their intelligence is not yet completely purified. Aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ (SB 10.2.32). So even Brahma-sukha, the happiness derived from realization of Brahman, is not perfect. That is also stated in the Bhagavad-gītā:

brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā
na śocati na kāṅkṣati
samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu
mad-bhaktiṁ labhate parām
(BG 18.54)

That brahma-bhūtaḥ state is a preliminary qualification to enter into devotional service. But if one does not enter into devotional service, anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ, neglects the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, then patanty adhaḥ. These are the statements, authoritative statements.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 9, 1972:

Pradyumna: " 'Happiness In Kṛṣṇa Consciousness.' Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has analyzed the different sources of happiness. He has divided happiness into three categories, which are (1) happiness derived from material enjoyment, (2) happiness derived by identifying oneself with the Supreme Brahman, and (3) happiness derived (through) from Kṛṣṇa consciousness. In the tantra-śāstra, Lord Śiva speaks to his wife, Satī, in this way: 'My dear wife, a person who has surrendered himself to the lotus feet of Govinda and who has thus developed pure Kṛṣṇa consciousness can be very easily awarded all the perfections desired by the impersonalists; and beyond this, he can enjoy the happiness achieved by the pure devotees.' Happiness derived from pure devotional service is the highest because it is eternal. But the happiness derived from material perfection or understanding oneself to be Brahman is inferior because it is temporary. There is no preventing one's falling down from material happiness, and there is even every chance of falling down from the spiritual happiness derived out of identifying oneself with the impersonal Brahman."

Prabhupāda: This we have explained last night, how the, a person enjoying happiness as Brahman realization... There are many examples, both in the East and the West, that... In our Eastern countries, the Māyāvādī philosophy is very prominent, and their basic principle is: brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. "The world is false, and Brahman, that is truth." But we have practically seen many sannyāsīs, they renounce this world as mithyā and take to Brahman realization path, but after some days, they come down to politics, sociology, philanthropy. Why? If Brahman is satya, jagat is mithyā, false, then why they, from the platform of satya, they fall down again in the mithyā? This is our question. To open hospital or to open a school or similar philanthropic activities are generally being done by persons who are embarrassed with this mithyā world. Why the sannyāsīs, who left this world as mithyā and went to the platform of Brahman realization, and why they come to this platform again for opening school, hospitals? What is the answer? Is there any answer?

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 9, 1972:

So the answer is given in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that their such kind of Brahman realization is not fact. That Brahman realization is answered in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as vimukta-māninaḥ. They simply think that they have become liberated. Actually, they are not liberated. Otherwise, how they come down again to the platform of bondage? This is the answer. Ye 'nye ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ. Vimukta-māninaḥ. These impersonalists, they are thinking falsely that they have become Nārāyaṇa, or liberated. Actually, it is not so? Why? Aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ, their intelligence is not yet purified. Because there is material attachment, that means the intelligence is still materially affected. Otherwise, how they should be materially inclined and come to the material platform? The answer is aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ. The intelligence is not yet purified. Why it is not purified? That is also explained: āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padam (SB 10.2.32). By severe austerities, penances, they follow very strictly the rules and regulation of renouncement. That is called kṛccha sādhana, difficult procedure for self-realization. But despite all these endeavors, because their intelligence is not purified, they fall down. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padam (SB 10.2.32). They realize, actually, the impersonal Brahman, nirbheda-brahmānusandhana. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ patanty adhaḥ. Again they fall down from that platform. Why? Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. Because they could not adore the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 9, 1972:

When one understands Kṛṣṇa in truth, then he's allowed to enter; otherwise, he cannot enter. He remains outside. Just like if we have got capacity to enter into the sun planet then we can enter. Otherwise we remain in the sunshine. To remain in the sunshine and to enter into the sun planet is not the same thing. Although the sun and the sunshine are light, illumination, still there is difference between the sun and the sunshine. Similarly, impersonal Brahman effulgence and Vaikuṇṭha planets, both of them, absolute, but still Brahman effulgence and entering into the Vaikuṇṭha planets or Goloka Vṛndāvana planets are not the same. Or, in other words, those are not, those who are not devotees, but impersonalists, they can stay outside the Vaikuṇṭha planets in the Brahman effulgence, but they cannot enter into the Vaikuṇṭha planets. Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. Because they have not adored or glorified the lotus feet of the Lord, they are not allowed into the Goloka Vṛndāvana or Vaikuṇṭha planet. And they cannot remain perpetually in the impersonal Brahman effulgence. They come down again to these material varieties. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ (SB 10.2.32). They cannot go upwards. They come, come down. That we have practically seen. All big, big swamis, all Vedantists, but they could not find. Even big, big swamis, they are now taking to Bhāgavata and other Vaiṣṇava literature at the present moment. Because their own literature is finished. How long they'll simply call for Brahman? Unless they come to Kṛṣṇa, there is no varieties of enjoyment. Therefore here it is said that "There is no..." Go on. What is it?

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 9, 1972:

Pradyumna: "It has been seen that great Māyāvādī or impersonalist sannyāsīs—very highly educated and almost realized souls—may sometimes take to political activities or to social welfare activities. The reason is that they actually do not derive any ultimate transcendental happiness in the impersonal understanding and therefore must come down to the material platform and take to such mundane affairs."

Prabhupāda: The material variety is the perverted reflection of the spiritual variety. As it is described in the Bhagavad-gītā, Fifteenth Chapter: ūrdhva-mūlam adhah-śākha. This tree, this material world (is) compared with a aśvattha vṛkṣa. The root is up, upstairs, upwards, and the branches and leaves are down, downwards. Why? Because it is reflection, chaya, or māyā. The real tree is in the Vaikuṇṭha planet or in the spiritual world. It is only simply reflection. Just like a tree standing on the bank of reservoir of water, on the bank of a lake or a river, you'll see the tree is reflected downwards. So this description in the Fifteenth Chapter of this material world, downwards... Ūrdhva-mūlam adhah-śākha means this is only a perverted reflection of the spiritual world. The real tree is in the spiritual world. The other day, who was asking about this question? Some of our...? Ūrdhva-mūlam adhah-śākha? Who was asking me? Eh? Oh. Gopāla. He's not here. All right.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 25, 1973:

Devotee: "In the statements of Śukadeva Gosvāmī it is said that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Śukadeva recommends that one should always hear about Kṛṣṇa. He does not recommend that one hear and chant about the demigods. The Māyāvādīs (impersonalists) say that you can chant any name, either that of Kṛṣṇa or those of the demigods, and the result will be the same. But actually this is not a fact. According to the authorized version of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, one has to hear and chant about Lord Viṣṇu (Kṛṣṇa) only."

Prabhupāda: Śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ, it is specially mentioned. Not that as the Māyāvādīs say, that you can chant any name. No. Śāstra says, śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ.

śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ
smaraṇaṁ pāda-sevanam
arcanaṁ vandanaṁ dāsyaṁ
sakhyam ātma-nivedanam
(SB 7.5.23)

So, as it is recommended by the śāstras, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare, we should chant this. Why other demigods' names? The Māyāvādī philosophers, they misguide us. Śāstra says, harer nāma, harer nāma, harer nāma. Three times. Only the name of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, Hari.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 14, 1972:

Pradyumna: "In the statements of Śukadeva Gosvāmī it is said that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Śukadeva recommends that one should always hear about Kṛṣṇa. He does not recommend that one hear and chant about the demigods. The Māyāvādīs, or impersonalists, say that you can chant any name, either that of Kṛṣṇa or those of the demigods, and the result will be the same."

Prabhupāda: Śukadeva Gosvāmī recommended,

tasmād bhārata sarvātmā
bhagavān harir īśvaraḥ
śrotavyaḥ kīrtitavyaś ca
smārtavyaś ca nityaśaḥ
(SB 2.1.5)

He recommended this, that tasmād bhārata sarvātmā bhagavān harir īśvaraḥ. Sarvātmā. The Kṛṣṇa is situated in everyone's heart; therefore He's known as sarvātmā. So sarvātmā is Bhagavān, the Personality, Supreme Personality of Godhead, Hari, who takes away all our miserable conditions. Hari. And Īśvara, controller. Tasmād bhārata sarvātmā bhagavān harir īśvaraḥ. So He's to be always remembered. Satato smārtavyo viṣṇuḥ. Always we have to remember Viṣṇu. Nityada, always. Kīrtanīyaḥ sadā hariḥ (CC Adi 17.31).

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, November 14, 1972:

Pradyumna: "The Māyāvādīs, or impersonalists, say that you can chant any name, either that of Kṛṣṇa or those of the demigods, and the result will be the same. But actually this is not a fact. According to the authorized version of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, one has to hear and chant about Lord Viṣṇu, Kṛṣṇa..."

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Pradyumna: "...only."

Prabhupāda: Śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ (SB 7.5.23). There are other demigods. It is not recommended śravaṇaṁ kīrtanam of the name of other demigods. And to compare or to equalize the Supreme Personality of Godhead with other demigods, that is pāṣaṇḍī-matam, means atheistic opinion.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 29, 1973:

Bhavānanda: "Because the impersonalists cannot appreciate the spiritual happiness of association and the exchange of loving affairs with the Supreme Personality of Godhead..."

Prabhupāda: Because they have no conception of Godhead. Nirākāra. So nirākāra, where is the loving affairs with nirākāra? I cannot love the air. If I want to love, if somebody says, "You love this air, nirākāra," oh, where is my love? Love must be there. Just like here we have got Kṛṣṇa. We can love. We cannot love this sky. So they have no conception of God; therefore their love of God is all fictitious. Just like Rabindranath Tagore, he has written Gītāñjali, "Tumi." Who is that tumi, he does not know. All the poetry's "tumi, tomāra," and who is that rascal, tumi or tomāra? But that he does not know. This is going on. Now if I say, "My husband, tumi," I know, he's my husband. Or his form is like that. Then I can say. But he does not know who is that tumi. Everyone... The impersonalists will pray, tam eva mātā tam eva pitā. But who is that mātā, who is that pitā? That he does not know. We say, "Here is your mātā, pitā, Kṛṣṇa. Here is Kṛṣṇa." That is tangible. Fact. Not fictitious.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 30, 1973:

Bhavānanda: "This evidence from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam gives assurance to the pure devotee of being elevated to association with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī remarks in this connection that one who is actually attracted by the beauty of the lotus feet of Śrī Kṛṣṇa or His service and whose heart, by such attraction, is always full with transcendental bliss will naturally never aspire after the liberation which is so valuable to the impersonalists."

Prabhupāda: Yes. Liberation, a devotee never... Why liberation? Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, he says... Liberation means kaivalya. Kaivalyaṁ narakāyate. What is this liberation? It is as good as the hell. Kaivalyaṁ narakāyate. Tri-daṣa-pūr ākāśa-puṣpāyate (Caitanya-candrāmṛta 5). The persons, they are hankering after being elevated to the heavenly planet. So for a devotee, this is will o' the wisp, phantasmagoria, it has no value. Kaivalyaṁ narakāyate tri-daśa-pūr ākāśa-puṣpayate indriya-kāla-sarpa-paṭalī protkhāta-daṁṣṭrāyate. And the yogis... Karmīs, jñānīs, yogis. Karmīs are after heavenly planet; jñānīs are after kaivalya, liberation; yogis are after controlling the senses. So senses are very dangerous. Everyone knows. Our senses are very strong. Therefore the yoga system is recommended for them who are very much in bodily concept of life. Therefore they are advised to exercise the body to come to the point of spiritual platform. But those who are above bodily concept of life, those senses have been purified.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 30, 1973:

Bhavānanda: "In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Fourth Canto, 9th Chapter, 10th verse, King Dhruva says, My dear Lord, the transcendental pleasure derived by meditation upon Your lotus feet, which is enjoyed by the pure devotees, cannot be approached by the transcendental pleasure derived by the impersonalists through self-realization. So how can the fruitive workers who at most can desire to promotion to the higher, heavenly planets understand You, and how can they be described as enjoying a happiness similar to the devotees' happiness.' "

Prabhupāda: So there are three kinds of happinesses described, material happiness, spiritual happiness and devotional happiness. Three kinds of happinesses are very nicely described in this chapter.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Calcutta, January 31, 1973:

Mādhavānanda: "The impersonalists desire to merge into the existence of the Supreme, but without keeping their individuality, they have no chance of hearing and chanting the glories of the Supreme Lord. Because they have no idea of the transcendental form of the Supreme Lord, there is no chance of their chanting and hearing of His transcendental activities."

Prabhupāda: The impersonalists take it, this chanting, as means to attain liberation. They do not know that the chanting is the, real chanting begins after liberation. Not that by chanting one reaches liberation. No. That's not a fact. Satataṁ kīrtayanto māṁ yatantaś ca dṛḍha-vratāḥ (BG 9.14). Satatam. Satatam means after liberation also. This chanting will continue after liberation also. Not that after liberation chanting will finish. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, satatam. Satatam means after liberation also. Before liberation and after liberation. Therefore it is nitya. Nitya means it does not stop, never stops. Satataṁ kīrtayananto māṁ yatantaś ca, tuṣyanti ca ramanti ca. Dṛḍha-vratāḥ. So the, when you actually go to Goloka Vṛndāvana, the same chanting will go on before Kṛṣṇa. Chanting will never stop.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 1.3 -- Mayapur, March 27, 1975:

We are after truth, so here the author of Caitanya-caritāmṛta, he is asserting that "Here is the Supreme Truth, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu." Na caitanyāt kṛṣṇāt. Kṛṣṇāt, because Kṛṣṇa has appeared as Kṛṣṇa Caitanya. We have explained this truth yesterday according to Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya's declaration, vairāgya-vidyā-nija-bhakti-yogaṁ-śikṣārtham ekaḥ puruṣaḥ purāṇaḥ (CC Madhya 6.254). Puruṣaḥ purāṇaḥ. Puruṣaḥ purāṇaḥ is Kṛṣṇa. Puruṣaḥ, He is puruṣaḥ, and purāṇaḥ, ādyam, the original person. Govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi **. In many Vedic literature Kṛṣṇa is described as the purāṇaḥ puruṣaḥ, the oldest. Purāṇaḥ puruṣaḥ nava-yauvanaṁ ca (Bs. 5.33). Although He is the oldest of all, still, He is always like fresh youth, nava-yauvanaṁ ca. So how it is possible? They are trying to understand God. Sometimes they paint the picture of God as very old man. Because He is the original person, so by this time He must have become very old. This is imagination. This is not actually the form of the Lord. The form of the Lord is there in the Brahma-saṁhitā and other Vedic literatures. Even Śaṅkarācārya, who is a impersonalist, he has accepted Lord Kṛṣṇa as the supreme Nārāyaṇa. In his comment on Bhagavad-gītā he says, nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt: "Nārāyaṇa is beyond this material creation." And while describing Nārāyaṇa, he has affirmed, sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ: "That Nārāyaṇa is Kṛṣṇa." And he has clearly mentioned, "Now He has appeared as the son of Devakī and Vāsudeva," to confirm just like identification is confirmed when the father's name is there.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 1.15 -- Dallas, March 4, 1975:

Huh? Republican. Although they are party, their aim is how to develop the country. Similarly, these Vaiṣṇava sampradāya, although they appear to be a separate party, but their aim is how to serve Kṛṣṇa. So don't think the party means some opposite party. No. Everyone has got for the advanced devotee to serve the Lord in a particular way so that the Lord may be more satisfied. That is their intention. Sometimes we also have some parties in the temple: someone wants to dress the Deity in a way, another wants to... Of course, they are not transgressing the rules and regulation, but still, everyone wants that "I shall serve the Lord in this particular way." We cannot change the original rules and regulation, but there is variety. We are not impersonalist. Every person has got to serve the Lord in a particular way, and that is allowed. The central point is Kṛṣṇa. So although there are parties, if the central point is Kṛṣṇa, so there is no dissension. It is a competition, that "My Godbrother, my Godsister, is serving such a way. She is so well versed in this art. Why not try myself to do something?" This is variety. That is not this ordinary party strife if we make Kṛṣṇa the center.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.5 -- Mayapur, March 7, 1974:

So we may read herewith one commentary by my Guru Mahārāja Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura. "In his Anubhāṣya commentary Śrī Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura describes the Pañca-tattva as follows: The supreme energetic, the Personality of Godhead, manifesting in five kinds of pastimes, appears as the Pañca-tattva. Actually there is no difference between them because they are situated on the absolute platform, but they manifest different spiritual varieties as a challenge to impersonalists to taste different kinds of spiritual humors, rāsas..." Because they do not accept the different tastes. The Māyāvāda philosophy and Vaiṣṇava philosophy, the only difference is... Although the aim is one, Absolute Truth, but the difference is that they do not accept varieties, varieties of taste. Therefore they fall down. It is not our version, but it is stated in the Vedic literature, āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adho 'nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ: (SB 10.2.32) "By severe penance and austerities, these Māyāvādīs, they go up to the Brahman effulgence, but from there they fall down, fall down." Because for want of varieties. You cannot live without varieties. Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt: "The Absolute Truth is ānandamayo by nature," abhyāsāt. There are the interpretation of the Māyāvādīs of this Vedānta-sūtra, ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). But we see that the Supreme Absolute Person is ānandamāyā. Kṛṣṇa, you'll never see without ānanda. He is, I mean to say, taking care of the cows, He's dancing with the gopīs, He's playing with His cowherd boys. Ānandamāyā. These are ānanda māyā. These are the varieties.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.39-47 -- San Francisco, February 1, 1967:

Just like in Christian religion, those who do not follow the Bible, they are called heathens. Similarly, in Muslim, those who do not follow the Koran, they are called kafirs. Similarly, those who do not follow the Vedic principles, they are called nāstika or mlecchas. Nāstika means those who do not believe in the Vedic principles, they are called nāstika, atheist. And those whose behavior is not very clean, they are called mlecchas. So in comparison to Hindu mode of living and others in the world, there is very great difference, social sanctity and personal sanctity. So therefore, formerly the mlecchas means the Muhammadans, because they are meat-eaters, they do not take bath daily and there are so many things. So even those persons who were delivered by Lord Caitanya, but the author says that He could not deliver the Māyāvādīs, the impersonalist sannyāsīs. That means it was easier for Him to deliver the mlecchas, but it was difficult for Him to deliver the Māyāvādīs. In other words, the author is trying to place the position of the Māyāvādī sannyāsī less than the mlecchas. Less than the mlecchas.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.49-65 -- San Francisco, February 3, 1967:

Caitanya Mahāprabhu, although He was in the renounced order of life, sannyāsī, still, He was avoiding the company of the Māyāvādīs, who are impersonalists. Caitanya Mahāprabhu is personalist. So generally, that is the system still. The impersonalists, as soon as they see some personalist, they begin to attack by argument. So those who are not very highly developed, they avoid. But those who are conversant, they argue, so on. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu, while He was staying at Benares, He was not very enthusiastic to mix with this Māyāvādī class of sannyāsīs. Therefore this man who invited all the sannyāsīs for a dinner, he also came to Caitanya Mahāprabhu and asked Him that "I know that You do not associate Yourself with the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs. Still, I have come to invite You. Please accept my request."

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.109-114 -- San Francisco, February 20, 1967:

Guest (1): (static) ...your description of the impersonalist philosophers does not correspond..., it's happening, say, by themselves they make a distinction how those things make... (static) ...a part of that philosophy that seems crucial to extending it, and that is sometimes called the "little self" and the "big self," the "big self" being the person who we are—personality, ego—and the other type of ego is the actual ego. And when one's ego is dissolved, he will wake up, as it were. As, like you wake up out of a dream and you find that you thought you were one of the characters in the dream while you were dreaming, when you wake up you realize that you didn't have this limited identity. You had a greater identity which encompassed all the characters in the dream.

Prabhupāda: Where you lose your personality? Either in dream or in awakened, you are person. When do you lose your personality? When you become imperson?

Guest (1): When do you lose it? When you wake up from the dream of this material world.

Prabhupāda: You are not imperson at that time. You are person. You are thinking, "I was dreaming." So your ego is there.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.113-17 -- San Francisco, February 22, 1967:

So His vision, His presence, His activities, they are all spiritual. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, janma karma me divyaṁ yo jānāti tattvataḥ: "Anyone who understands the absolute nature of My birth, of My appearance, disappearance and activities," tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9), "he becomes immediately liberated." Sa aikṣata. Sa imāḻ lokān asṛjata. This is Aitareya Upaniṣad. What is that? Sa aikṣata. The same thing: "He saw. He put His glance." Sa aikṣata. Sa imāḻ lokān asṛjata: "He has created all this material manifestation, cosmic manifestation." So tad vā īśan vijato tebhya ha prabhur babhūva. In this way, there are so many instances, so many quotations. Apāṇi-pādaḥ. In the Śvetāśvatara, apāṇi-pādaḥ. He has no, I mean to say, hands and legs. If He has no hands and legs, then how can He see? Is there any instance in your experience that something which has no hands and legs, he can see? No. He has no... Whenever... This is impersonal... The impersonalists quotes these authorities, that "He has no hands and... Therefore He's impersonal." No, it is not... If He sees, sa aikṣata, if He sees, if He hears, if He creates, then there is hand, there is eyes. But another place, if it is said, apāṇi-pādaḥ: "He has no hands and legs." That means He has no hands and legs like us. Because we have got material hands and legs, but the... "He saw; therefore there was creation." Therefore His seeing power existed before this material creation. So it is natural that He has no material hands and legs. So when it is denied that "He has no hands and legs," it is to be understood that He has no material limited hands and legs, but He has spiritual.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.113-17 -- San Francisco, February 22, 1967:

So again He supports Śaṅkarācārya, that "It is not his fault. He had to do it under the superior order to explain the Vedic literature in an impersonalist way. But those who are not expert, if they hear the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, Śārīraka-bhāṣya, then he is doomed." In other words, those who are actually aspiring for being elevated in spiritual science, they should avoid to hear any commentary which is impersonal. Any commentary. Then he is doomed. If we follow Caitanya Mahāprabhu's instruction, then any impersonal commentary means, if we hear... Because we are not expert. We are not expert. Kaniṣṭha-adhikārī. Kaniṣṭha-adhikārī means neophytes, neophytes who are not conversant with the conclusion of the Vedas. They have got some, I mean to say, faith. That's all. But faith can be changed. Any... If a person, strong in arguments and strong in presenting things in jugglery of words, oh, the neophyte, his idea can be changed. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu warns, therefore, in the Vaiṣṇava philosophy that "You should not worship any other demigods." It does not mean that you should show disrespect to demigods.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.119 -- Gorakhpur, February 17, 1971:

So we are discussing three kinds of energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Yesterday the question was, some gentleman, that whether the ultimate truth, Absolute Truth, is a person or imperson. There are many impersonalists, and there are many personalists also. The personalists, impersonalists, and the localized Paramātmā worshipers, they are worshiping the same Absolute Truth in different features. Impersonal Brahman and localized Paramātmā and Personality of Godhead, They're one and the same. It is the process of realization only, that somebody is realizing the Absolute Truth as imperson and somebody is realizing the Absolute Truth as all-pervading Paramātmā, Antaryami, and some persons are realizing the Absolute Truth as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. But they are advaya-jñāna, identical, the same thing. It is our power of perception only that makes the difference. The object is the same.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.119 -- Gorakhpur, February 17, 1971:

So there is no quarrel between the impersonalists or personalists or the Paramātmā-ists. There is no question of quarreling. The example is present daily in our daily experience. Just like the sunlight, sun, sun globe, and the sun-god. Within the sun globe, there is sun-god. So which one is the chief? That we have to consider. The sun-god or the sun globe or the sunshine? Everything is light. Sunshine is also light, sun globe also light, and the original source of this light, the sun-god, is also light. So sunshine is impersonal, sun globe is localized, and the sun-god is personal. If you be satisfied that "I am in the sunshine," be satisfied. That is called sāyujya-mukti. The sunshine means combination of different molecular shining parts. Any scientist knows it that what is the sunshine. The sunshine appears to be a homogeneous thing, but actually, in minute analysis it will be found that there are innumerable shining sparks, molecular sparks only—their combination. (baby making noise) (aside:) They're disturbing.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.149-171 -- San Francisco, March 18, 1967:

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs of Benares. There are two kinds of Māyāvādīs. The word Māyāvādī is very significant. I saw yesterday in your iṣṭagoṣṭhī you have tried to understand what is this Māyāvādī. Māyāvādī means materialist. Māyā, this matter, the external energy, the inferior energy, and those who want to stick to this inferior energy, never mind what class of philosopher, what section of philosophers they belong, if their idea is only within the boundary of this material energy, they are called Māyāvādī. They have no information of the spiritual energy. They are called Māyāvādī. So chiefly the impersonalists and the void philosophers, they are called Māyāvādī, because they have no other information. They want to simply negate, nullify, but they have no positive information, so they are called Māyāvādī. So the Śaṅkarites... Śaṅkarites, of course, they give positive information. Brahma satya jagan mithyā. They say that this world is false and Brahman is reality. But because we want reality in variety, therefore impersonal philosophy, although we take it as a matter of sectarian philosophy, it does not appeal to the heart because by nature we want enjoyment. And whenever there is question of enjoyment, there must be variety. Variety is the mother of enjoyment.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.149-171 -- San Francisco, March 18, 1967:

So because Benares is a city of pilgrimage, it is not ordinary city, mostly the person who reside in Benares, they are retired life for cultivating spiritual consciousness, but they are almost cent percent impersonalists. Prabhura praśaṁsā kare saba vārāṇasī

vārāṇaṣi-purī āilā śrī-kṛṣṇa-caitanya
purī-saha sarva-loka haila mahā-dhanya

So Caitanya Mahāprabhu visited this city of Māyāvādī sannyāsīs. By His mercy all of them became glorified.

lakṣa lakṣa loka āise prabhuke dekhite

mahā-bhiḍa haila dvāre, nāre praveśite

So many thousands of people gathered before His house, and they wanted to see Him, but due to the crowd, some of them could not enter into the house.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 6.151-154 -- Gorakhpur, February 14, 1971:

Unless one is person, there is no question of enjoying ānanda. So that is His challenge, that if the Supreme Personality of Godhead is full of ānanda, as it is stated in all the Vedic scriptures, especially in Vedānta-sūtra, ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt, then how He can be imperson? There is no possibility. And He gives other Vedic evidences also. Apāṇi-pādo javano grahītā, that He has no hand; still, He accepts whatever is given to Him. So there is no possibility of the Absolute Truth's being imperson. He is person. Hena bhagavāne tumi kaha nirākāra.

svābhāvika tina śakti yei brahma haya
niḥśaktika kari' tāṅre karaha niścaya

The impersonalists say that the Brahman has no enemy. The difference between Vaiṣṇava philosophy... (aside:) What they are talking? They are not coming here?

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 6.254 -- Los Angeles, January 8, 1968:

So Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, he was a great logician. He was unfaithful. Not... He was moralist, but he had no faith in God, or impersonalist. There are many persons who have faith in something superior or absolute, but they do not believe in the personal nature of God. But here, from the Bhagavad-gītā, we can clearly understand, from Bhāgavata we can clearly understand, from Vedānta philosophy we clearly understand that God is person, a person like you and me. Take, for example, in the Vedānta-sūtra, the first aphorism is janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). The first sūtra is athāto brahma jijñāsā: "Now you have to understand what is Brahman, or what is the Absolute Truth." The next aphorism is, immediately, that "The Absolute Truth is that from whom everything emanates, the original source of all emanation." Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Janma, janma means birth. Ādi means et cetera. But janma, where there is birth, there is death and there is existence. Whenever there is birth, you must know there is death also.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.100 -- Washington, D.C., July 5, 1976:

That means they misinterpret and they misguide. So people should be intelligent enough that they are impersonalists but Bhagavad-gītā means Kṛṣṇa, the person, He is teaching. Where is the impersonalist? But nobody has any common sense even that Kṛṣṇa says aham ādir hi bhūtānām. Ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo (BG 10.8). This aham is person, so how He can be imperson? And He's talking personally with Arjuna. So how He is imperson? Can the air talk with you? Air is imperson. Sky is imperson. Can he talk with you? What do you think? No, sometimes talks. (laughter) So we should have common sense, that where is the question of... And Kṛṣṇa says in the Second Chapter that "My dear Arjuna, both you, Me and all these soldiers and kings who are assembled here, we existed in the past, we are now existing, and we shall continue to exist in the future." So three things: first person, second person and third person. I am first person, you are second person and all others third person.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.100 -- Washington, D.C., July 5, 1976:

Confusion... How you should be confused? Where is Kṛṣṇa says? The basic (indistinct) is in person? Kṛṣṇa's teaching personally. Where is the imperson? Why you should be misled unless you are also one of them. Kṛṣṇa is always person. He's always speaking aham. Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). Person. Aham ādir hi devānām (Bg 10.2). Mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7). Mattaḥ. This, ahaṁ-śabdaḥ, is used. So they misinterpret just to mislead people; therefore whole India has become godless. This is the misfortune of India. On account of these impersonalists, Māyāvādīs, India is now godless. Very difficult position. So don't be misled by these rascals. Take real Bhagavad-gītā as it is. Then you'll be benefited. That's all. (end)

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.142 -- New York, November 30, 1966:

Therefore a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, pure devotee of Kṛṣṇa, they are not hankering after Kṛṣṇa..., mukti. They say, muktiḥ mukulitāñjali sevate asmān: "Oh, the mukti lady is standing with folded hands, 'My dear sir, what can I do for you?' " And devotee doesn't care. "Oh, what can I (you) do for me? I don't want your help." There is a nice verse of Bilvamaṅgala Ṭhākura. He lived for seven hundred years in Vṛndāvana, and he was, became a great devotee of Kṛṣṇa. In the beginning he was an impersonalist. His life is very nice. It is better to cite his life. He was a South Indian brāhmaṇa, a very rich man and very much sensuous. He kept one prostitute, prostitute. So he was so much, I mean to say, devoted to the prostitute that he was performing his father's death ceremony and he was asking the priest, "Please, haste. Please make haste. I have to go. I have to go." Means prostitute's house. So he was very rich man.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.146-151 -- New York, December 3, 1966:

Now, these universes and the brahmāṇḍas, or the Vaikuṇṭhas, they are manifestation of the energy of the Supreme Lord. God is all-pervading. "God is all-pervading" does not mean God has lost His identification. This is the mistake of the impersonalists. "Because God is everywhere, God is all-pervading; therefore there should not be any particular existence of God." This is impersonalism. But this is material thought. They do not study Vedic literature properly. In the Vedic literature it is said, pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate (Īśo Invocation). Just like I have several times explained before you that in the spiritual absolute identity, one minus one equal to one and one plus one equal to one. So although innumerable energies are coming out of the supreme body of the Supreme Lord, still He is full. There is no loss of energy. Just like we can have some material example: the sun.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.156-163 -- New York, December 11, 1966:

The, the body of Kṛṣṇa is sac-cid-ānanda vigraha (Bs. 5.1). Sac, cid, ānanda—three, three spiritual divisions. Not division actually. They are one. But for our understanding we analyze in that way, sac, cid, ānanda. Sat. Sat means eternity. So Brahman realization, impersonal Brahman realization, is realization of eternity; Paramātmā realization means eternity and knowledge; and Bhagavān realization means full realization: eternity, knowledge and bliss. Simple eternal realization is without factual knowledge and without bliss—impersonal. The impersonalists, they cannot enjoy the transcendental bliss. They simply stay as eternal. That's all. Śānta-rasa. It is called śānta-rasa, peaceful śānta-rasa. There is no exchange. And further development is dāsya-rasa. And further development is sākhya-rasa. And further development is vātsalya-rasa. And further, ultimate development is mādhurya-rasa. So in the spiritual atmosphere there are different degrees of realization. So this Brahman realization is the first step, and the Paramātmā realization is the second step, and Bhagavān realization, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, that is the ultimate stage.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.245-255 -- New York, December 16, 1966:

Anyone who understands about the appearance and disappearance of God or His incarnation, simply by understanding this, one is liberated. And that person who understands, after quitting this material body, no more he comes here, but he goes back to Godhead to become one of His associates. Such persons who knows about the incarnations, they are not impersonalists. Therefore they do not merge in the impersonal Brahman feature, but they go to the different spiritual planets.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.298 -- New York, December 20, 1966:

Now, Hari, Viṣṇu is beyond this material world. That is accepted by Śaṅkarācārya. Nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt. Nārāyaṇa, Hari... Although Śaṅkarācārya is impersonalist, but he has accepted Nārāyaṇa, Hari, the Supreme Lord, as beyond this material infection. Nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt. And he has also agreed to accept Kṛṣṇa. Sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ. That Supreme Personality of Godhead is Kṛṣṇa. It is accepted by Śaṅkarācārya. Those who are reading the commentary by Śaṅkarācārya on the Bhagavad-gītā, he will find in the beginning of that nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ. So it is also confirmed in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that harir hi nirguṇaḥ sākṣāt: "Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He is beyond the touch of this material qualities." Therefore His body is sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). His body is not made of this tri-guṇa. Our, this material body is made of these three guṇas: sattva-guṇa, rajo-guṇa, tamo-guṇa. Those who have got this body from the modes of goodness, they are called brāhmaṇas, or the most intelligent persons. And those who have got their body from the modes of passion, they are called kṣatriyas. They have got creative initiation. And those who are mixed, they are called vaiśyas, or the mercantile community. And those who have got purely body from modes of ignorance, they are called śūdras. So harir hi... But Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is beyond this. He is transcendental. Harir hi nirguṇaḥ sākṣāt puruṣaḥ prakṛteḥ paraḥ.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.353-354 -- New York, December 26, 1966:

So accept or no accept, His work, His activities, His characterize, characteristics will be known because God will be known. Just like Lord Buddha. Lord Buddha is accepted as incarnation in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. And during the time of Emperor Aśoka, he was patronized, Lord Buddha was patronized, not Buddha, or Buddhism was patronized by Aśoka. So practically the whole of Far East, including India, all over, the Buddhism was broadcast and everyone become Buddhist. Whole of India, practically, became Buddhist during his time. But later on, after Śaṅkarācārya's drive against Buddhism, Buddha-ism... Śaṅkarācārya wanted to establish the difference of Buddhism and Hinduism is that Buddhism, Lord Buddha did not accept Vedic authority. He did not accept Vedic authority. But according to Hindu culture, if somebody does not accept the Vedic authority, then he's not a authority. Vedānta philosophy, there are different parties in India. The Māyā... Generally, two parties: the Māyāvāda philosophers and the Vaiṣṇava philosophers, or the impersonalists and the personalists. Otherwise, there is no difference. Ultimately, the Māyāvādī philosophers they say that God, the Supreme Absolute Truth, is impersonal, and the Vaiṣṇava philosophers, they say in the ultimate end, the Absolute Truth is Person and He is, He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28).

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.353-354 -- New York, December 26, 1966:

So very recently... The impersonalists, they also accept avatāra. They accept Kṛṣṇa. Śaṅkarācārya accepted Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam. Sa bhagavān svayam kṛṣṇa. Specifically... People may misunderstand that Kṛṣṇa may be some other Kṛṣṇa because, as the present followers of Śaṅkarācārya, they are interpreting in that way. But Śaṅkarācārya, just to specify Kṛṣṇa, devakī vāsudeva jātaḥ. This means Kṛṣṇa who appeared Himself as the son of Devakī and Vasudeva, that Kṛṣṇa. That Kṛṣṇa. Just like Śaṅkarācārya has a nice prayer of Kṛṣṇa, the present followers of Śaṅkarācārya, they say... They cannot say that this is not composed by Śaṅkarācārya. It is very famous.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.358-359 -- New York, December 29, 1966:

Therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā you'll find, mahātmānas tu mām, daivī prakṛtim āśritāḥ. Daivī prakṛti means the superior energy, divine energy. This is also divine energy, but that is directly. This is indirectly. This is temporary. Nothing, without, nothing can exist without being divine because everything is coming out from the Lord. Sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. Therefore the impersonalists, they have taken everything as Brahman. That is their... That is also true. Everything is Brahman. That's right. That's all right. Just like in this store. This whole thing is store. That's all right. But we have to take advantage of the store, not sitting in this, I mean to say, lighted(?)... You have to sit here. If you say, "That is also sitting place. Why not go there? And deliver the lecture from there?" No. We have to utilize here. So you have to take advantage of the best. Everything is energy of Kṛṣṇa. That's all right. But we have to take the advantage of the better energy, superior energy. So na te viduḥ, they do not know how to take advantage of that superior energy. So there are two energies, the superior and inferior, or the spiritual and material. The material energy... This is the definition and the sum and substance of the definition and activities of the supreme summum bonum, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), the Supreme Source of everything.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.391-405 -- New York, January 2, 1967:

Still, simply by going there, he'll at once change his mind that "Here is God." He'll accept it. Still. If you like, you can go to India and you can see, make an experiment. So, although Vṛndāvana is a, is a place for the personalists, now all the impersonalists school of India, they're making their āśrama at Vṛndāvana because they have failed to achieve the sense of God anywhere, they are coming to Vṛndāvana. It is such a nice place. Here Lord Caitanya says that goloka, gokula-dhāma-'vibhu' kṛṣṇa-sama. Just like Kṛṣṇa is unlimited, similarly, His place is also unlimited. It is not limited by the material laws. Similarly, His name is unlimited. When you chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, the Hare Kṛṣṇa, this name, the holy name, has got unlimited potency. Simply you have to realize it. Even God is present before us, we cannot realize it. When Kṛṣṇa was present before us on this earth, not that all people of the world or all people of India could recognize. Only few people—the Pāṇḍavas and the inhabitants of Vṛndāvana, inhabitants of Dvārakā, some of them could understand. So it requires training only. Otherwise, the unlimited God can be seen even within this limited sphere of material existence.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 21.1-10 -- New York, January 3, 1967:

So Kṛṣṇa, about Kṛṣṇa he has described shortly, that He is personally like this, His incarnations are like this, and there are so many incarnations, and He is existing in this way, He manifests Himself in this material world in this way. As far as possible he has given description about Kṛṣṇa. Now, about Kṛṣṇa's abode... Kṛṣṇa means not only Kṛṣṇa. Nāma dhāma guṇa līlā parikara vaisiṣṭha. Kṛṣṇa means Kṛṣṇa Himself, His name, His place, nāma dhāma, His quality, then His entourage, then His pastime. All these things Kṛṣṇa means. Because we are not impersonalists, simply understanding Brahman we are satisfied... The impersonalists are satisfied simply understanding that He is Brahman. But the Vaiṣṇava, they are not satisfied simply by knowing Brahman. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, brahma-bhūtaḥ. Brahma-bhūtaḥ means he's already Brahman, but he forgot himself. He thought himself that "I am matter." That is illusion. So every living entity, by constitutional position he is Brahman, but his forgetfulness—he thinks that "I am something of this matter." So brahma-bhūtaḥ, when one becomes spiritually realized that he is not anything of this material world, he is spirit soul, brahma-bhūtaḥ, this is called brahma-bhūtaḥ.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 21.1-10 -- New York, January 3, 1967:

There is no question of voidness or impersonalist. He says that all those Vaikuṇṭha planets are so big that some of them, hundreds, some, millions and millions of miles, I mean to say, area. What is called? Round. Eka vaikuṇṭhera vistāra varṇana. Vistāra means very much expanded.

saba vaikuṇṭha-vyāpaka, ānanda-cinmaya

pāriṣada-ṣaḍaiśvarya-pūrṇa saba haya

And each and every Vaikuṇṭha planet, there are living entities, not that they are vacant. But all of them are ānanda. They are all made of sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1), eternity and bliss and full of knowledge. The land is also eternal, blissful and full of knowledge; the inhabitants are also eternal, blissful and full of knowledge; and the presiding Deity expansion of Kṛṣṇa, Nārāyaṇa, He is also eternal, blissful and full of knowledge. This is called absolute. Here in the material world we have got difference. I am spirit soul, but there is difference between me and my body; there is difference between me and this material world. But there, everything is spiritual. Therefore there is no difference. The impersonalists, they cannot understand. Because everything is spiritual, they think that there is no variegatedness. But from this description of Caitanya-caritāmṛta and other scriptures like Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Bhagavad-gītā, we can understand that the spiritual sky is exactly like this, but that is spiritual and this is material.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 21.13-49 -- New York, January 4, 1967:

So these boys who are playing with this Kṛṣṇa, He is the reservoir of that Brahman realization. Itthaṁ satāṁ brahma-sukhānubhūtyā dāsyaṁ gatānāṁ para-daivatena. Dāsyaṁ gatānām, those who have accepted the Supreme Lord as master, that means devotees, for them this Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord. For the impersonalists He is Supreme Brahman, and for the personalists He is Supreme Lord. And māyāśritānāṁ nara-dārakeṇa. And those who are under the spell of materialism, for them He is ordinary boy. Māyāśritānāṁ nara-dārakeṇa sākaṁ vijahruḥ kṛta-puṇya-puñjāḥ (SB 10.12.11). With Him these boys, who had accumulated millions and millions births of pious activities, now they have got the opportunity of playing with Kṛṣṇa face to face just like ordinary boys play. So similarly, Kṛṣṇa is very much fond of playing with His young boyfriends. That is mentioned in the Brahma-saṁhitā. Surabhīr abhipālayantam, lakṣmī-sahasra-śata-sambhrama-sevyamānam (Bs. 5.29). So these things are explained here also.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 21.13-49 -- New York, January 4, 1967:

Now these cowherds boys, they have got a cane in the hand, vetra. And each of them has got a flute also. Vetra veṇu dala. And a lotus flower, and a śṛṅgara, a horn. Śṛṅgara vastra, and very nicely dressed. And full of ornaments. Just like Kṛṣṇa is dressed, similarly, His friends, cowherd boys, they are also dressed. In the spiritual world, when you go, you'll not be able to understand who is Kṛṣṇa and who is not Kṛṣṇa. Everyone is like Kṛṣṇa. Similarly, in the Vaikuṇṭha planets everyone is like Viṣṇu. That is called sayujya-mukti. The living entities, when they enter into the spiritual planets, they become as good as Kṛṣṇa and Viṣṇu—there is no difference—because it is absolute world. Here the difference is there. The impersonalists, they cannot understand that even in individuality there is no difference. As soon as they think of individuality, oh, they think that there is a difference. Then what is liberation? Yes. And actually there is no difference. The difference is only that Kṛṣṇa's personality and others' personalities, they are conscious that "Kṛṣṇa is our object of love." That's it. The center is Kṛṣṇa. In this way the individual boys and girls and Kṛṣṇa, everyone is enjoying spiritual bliss.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 21.49-61 -- New York, January 5, 1967:

So we also coming from the same disciplic succession, to worship Kṛṣṇa, Brahmā. Then from Brahmā, Nārada learned how to worship Kṛṣṇa. From Nārada learned Vyāsadeva how to worship Kṛṣṇa. From Vyāsadeva learned Madhvācārya how to worship Kṛṣṇa. Then from Madhvācārya learned Mādhavendra Purī. Similarly, the disciplic succession is coming, Caitanya Mahāprabhu, then His disciplic succession—Svarūpa Dāmodara, Ṣaḍ-gosvāmī, Sanātana Gosvāmī, Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana, Viśvanātha Cakravartī. In this way there is a disciplic succession beginning from Lord Brahmā. But that Brahmā instructed, govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi **: "I worship the Supreme Original Personality of Godhead, Govindam." The Govinda-bhajan is the prime factor for all worshiping endeavors. Even Śaṅkarācārya, who was impersonalist, at the last stage of his life he advised everyone,

bhaja govindaṁ bhaja govindaṁ bhaja govindaṁ mūḍha-mate
prāpte sannihite kāle na hi na hi rakṣati ḍukṛñ-karaṇe

He advised, "You fools, you are talking about philosophical speculation, grammatical meaning, and eschewing. Oh, these are all nonsense. You cannot save yourself by doing this. When there will be death, Govinda can save you. The Govinda can save you from falling down.

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

They keep their separate identity, and they enjoy in the ocean. The foolish persons, they are satisfied that "I am in the ocean now." That is the less intelligence. Go deep into the ocean and see what is going there. Similarly, those who are satisfied simply by merging into the spiritual existence, impersonalists, they are less intelligent. They have no intelligence to see that within the ocean there is individual expansion, individual life, and they are enjoying. Similarly, in the spiritual sky there is individuality. That individuality is there. And that individuality is reciprocated between Kṛṣṇa and the individual souls. They are called nitya-mukta, eternally liberated. And the other class, who are just like in the river fishes, they are called nitya-baddha. Their, I mean to say, limited sphere in the river or in the pond or in the well... The frog philosophy. They are expanding themselves, frogs: "How much great is Atlantic Ocean?" So they are called conditioned soul. Those who are in this material world, although they are part and parcel of the Supreme Lord energy, but because they are conditioned in this material contamination, they are called, I mean to say, conditioned, conditioned by the laws of nature.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 22.21-28 -- New York, January 11, 1967:

The impersonalists think that simply by cultivating knowledge that "I am not matter; I am spirit," or "I am one with the Supreme Spirit; I am now... Out of ignorance, I am thinking different, but when I am fully elevated to the platform of knowledge, then I become liberated." But the..., there is no answer that "Why you have become conditioned?" The impersonalists think that "I am one with the Supreme. Now, due to my ignorance, I have forgotten that I am the Supreme." Because they do not recognize the Supreme Personality of Godhead, so they think that impersonal conception of the spirit soul: "I am now... Out of ignorance, I am thinking matter, but as soon as my ignorance is over, I shall become one with the Supreme." So this is the theory of the impersonalists. But they... They cannot give any answer that "Why you have become under the influence of ignorance? If you are the Supreme, then what is the cause that you have become conditioned? Then the Supreme will become conditioned under the material nature. Then how one can become the Supreme? Supreme cannot be conditioned." So there is no answer for this question from the impersonalists' school. But real fact is that the Supreme never falls down. The part and parcel of the Supreme, they fall down—some of them; not all. So therefore the living entities, they are different from the Supreme. They are one in quality with the Supreme, but not in quantity.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 22.21-28 -- New York, January 11, 1967:

So these impersonalists, due to their, I mean to say, less intelligence, or misfortune, they cannot see Kṛṣṇa. So therefore, for them this remark is here that śreyaḥ-sṛtim, that "Actually what is auspicious, devotional service, if somebody gives that path away and takes to simply dry speculation, simply to understand..." Because jñāna means to understand what is the difference between matter and spirit. So they, of course, indulge in that process of knowledge. But simply by that speculation the result is that teṣām asau kleśala eva śiṣyate. The trouble which they accept for discriminating matter from spirit... There is trouble. You have to see so many Vedic literatures, and you have to understand the instruction of Upaniṣads and logic, and so many things there are to, I mean to say, back your understanding. So teṣām kleśala eva... Their, their profit is that the trouble which they accept for studying so many Vedic literatures to prove that the Absolute Truth is not person, that trouble is their profit and nothing more. Kleśala eva, teṣām asau kleśala eva śiṣyate: "They do not get any other profit except that troublesome business." That's all.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 22.31-33 -- New York, January 16, 1967:

As the sunshine is coming out, emanating incessantly from the sun disc, similarly the real sunshine, brahma-jyotir, is coming out of the spiritual planet Goloka Vṛndāvana incessantly. That is called brahma-jyotir. Yasya prabhā prabhavato (Bs. 5.40). And due to that incessant shining, all the shining which you are experiencing, even this lamp, even this electricity, fire, moonshine, sunshine, any shining, that is due to that brahma-jyotir. So yasya prabhā prabhavato jagad-aṇḍa-koṭi (Bs. 5.40). In that shining, this material world, the spiritual world, they are resting. So impersonalists, they are concerned with the shining, that's all. The difference between the personalists and impersonalists is that impersonalists, they take that shining as final. But the personalists, they take, "No. Kṛṣṇa is final." That is their difference of opinion. Otherwise, both of them in the spiritual realm. And so far Kṛṣṇa is the cause of brahma-jyotir, there are many evidences from Vedic literature. In Īśopaniṣad and other Upaniṣads, in Bhagavad-gītā also, the Lord says, brahmaṇaḥ ahaṁ pratiṣṭhā: "I am the source of brahma-jyotir." You'll find in the Fourteenth Chapter, last verse, brahmaṇaḥ ahaṁ jyoti. Is there any Bhagavad-gītā? You find out Fourteenth Chapter, last verse.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 22.31-33 -- New York, January 16, 1967:

So he saw. Vilajjamānayā yasya sthātum īkṣā-pathe amuyā. The māyā is ashamed to come before Kṛṣṇa because she is entrusted with very thankless task. Māyā is entrusted by Kṛṣṇa to take the conditioned souls and take charge of them. And māyā has taken charge of all us conditioned souls, and her task is to punish, simply beating. So that is a very thankless task. She is discharging the duty entrusted to her by Kṛṣṇa, but everyone, especially the transcendentalists, oh, they are hating, "Oh, māyā, māyā, māyā." Nobody will like, transcendentalists, māyā. Either personalist or impersonalist. But she's engaged. Just like police. Police is engaged by the state, but nobody likes police. Everyone will criticize police. Thankless task. Because they, unless they become strict, unless they become red-hot iron (?) they cannot execute their duty. That is their way of punishing. But people do not like them. Nobody likes police. You see. Even a police comes all of a sudden here to sit down here to hear us, we'll suspect, "Oh, he has come with some purpose." (laughs) It is such a thankless task. Similarly, māyā is entrusted with thankless task. She cannot approach Kṛṣṇa, neither she is liked by the conditioned souls.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 25.29 -- San Francisco, January 21, 1967:

So God means the greatest. Caitanya Mahāprabhu explains on that line. Brahman means the greatest, the Supreme. And how we can estimate one's greatness? These are the symptoms of greatness. So how He can be impersonal? If the Brahman is the richest, if the Brahman is the most beautiful, if Brahman is the most learned, then where is the question of impersonality? Can any impersonal thing become learned? Can any impersonal thing can become richest? That is... Who can challenge this explanation? If you say "God is great," then how we estimate God is great? These are the symptoms. He must be great in richness. He must be great in strength. He must be great in beauty. He must be great in knowledge. He must be great in renunciation. These are the symptoms of greatness. How you can deny it? Where is the... Now, if you say, "Our idea of great means the sky," oh, then God creates the sky; therefore sky is not great. God is great. Just like you see the sunlight distributed all over the universe. If you say, "This is greatest," oh, the sun planet is creating the sunlight; therefore sun planet is greatest, not the sunshine.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 25.31-38 -- San Francisco, January 22, 1967:

And Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that... Not Caitanya Mahāprabhu, I'm sorry. That disciple, the chief disciple of Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, he's repeating what Caitanya Mahāprabhu explained about the Vedānta-sūtra. He also accepts. Yes. Brahman, the great, means He is great in all respect. He is great in richness, He is great in strength, He is great in power, He is great in knowledge, He is great in renouncement. Then He is great. So if a man is the greatest man in richness, greatest man in power, greatest man in fame, greatest man in knowledge, greatest man in beauty, then where is the impersonality? These are all personal qualifications. So Brahman, or the Supreme, or the Absolute Truth, cannot be imperson. Imperson may be a feature, but ultimately He is person.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 25.31-38 -- San Francisco, January 22, 1967:

So ultimately, a person, Bhagavān, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, ultimately. That is the evidence from all Vedic scriptures. Tāhā nāhi māni, paṇḍita kare upahāsa. And these impersonalists, they do not accept this personal aspect of the Absolute Truth, and they laugh at the devotees, "Oh, what they are doing? They are less..." They are thinking that the devotees are less intelligent. And the devotees, they are also thinking that less intelligent. But you have to decide who is less intelligent. If you, from the Vedic literature, if you do not accept the decision... And the essence of Vedic literature is Bhagavad, Bhagavad-gītā, and it is clearly stated there. When understood..., Arjuna understood Bhagavad-gītā, he clearly accepted Him that paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān (BG 10.12), "You are the Supreme Lord, and nobody knows Your personality." So personality is accepted. Caitanya Mahāprabhu also says that the verdict of all Vedic literatures is to accept the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 25.31-38 -- San Francisco, January 22, 1967:

"You have no eyes" means you are blind man. "You have no hand" means... That means I am calling you by all ill names. "You are blind. You are lame. You are nonsense. You are rascal." So are they not offenses against the friend? If I say, "You have no eyes," it is gentlemanly speaking that "You are blind." If I directly say, "You are blind," oh, will you be very happy upon me? No. If I say, if "You have no leg..." Suppose if I say if "You have no brain," that means "You are rascal. You are fool." So these impersonalists, they are always, I mean to..., trying to understand how God is eyeless, handless, legless, all less. Simply he has got eyes to see beautiful things. He has got his hands to touch nice things. No. These are offenses. According to Caitanya Mahāprabhu these are great offense against God. So therefore they are, life after life, they are studying this impersonalism, but there is no perfection.

Sri Isopanisad Lectures

Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 7 -- Los Angeles, May 9, 1970:

"One who always sees all living entities as spiritual sparks, in quality one with the Lord, becomes a true knower of things. What is there as illusion or anxiety for him?" This realization is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. There are different kinds of realization, but ekatvam, a qualitatively oneness, is always there. The brahmavādi, impersonalist, they think that we are cent percent one with the Lord or the Supreme Absolute Truth, but that is not a fact. If one is cent percent one with the Supreme Lord, then how he has come under the control of māyā? This question, they cannot answer.

Sri Brahma-samhita Lectures

Lecture on Brahma-samhita, Lecture -- Bombay, January 3, 1973:

Ādyam: the original person. Just like in our genealogical table, in each family, there is a person who is the origin of the family—then his son, his son, his grandsons, great-grandson. In this way, family expands. Similarly, this creation is from Kṛṣṇa. In the Catuh-ślokī Bhāgavata also, aham eva āsam agre: (SB 2.9.33/34/35/36) "I was present before the creation." Even Śaṅkarācārya, who is impersonalist, he also says, nārāyaṇaḥ paro avyaktād: "The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Nārāyaṇa, He is beyond this material creation." Nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktād. Avyaktād aṇḍa-sambhavaḥ. From the avyakta, nonmanifested material mahat-tattva, this material creation has been, become possible. Before the material creation, beyond the material creation, there is Kṛṣṇa. Therefore in the Brahma-saṁhitā, Lord Brahmā is describing Kṛṣṇa in each verse: govindam ādi-puruṣam tam ahaṁ bhajāmi **. Govindam ādi-puruṣam. He's the original person.

Festival Lectures

Ratha-yatra Lecture at The Family Dog Auditorium -- San Francisco, July 27, 1969:

Therefore those who are impersonalists, their knowledge is not yet perfect. They do not know actually what is the situation of their father. The supreme father is a person. It is confirmed in the Vedas, nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām: (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13) "He is the supreme eternal of all eternals." We are all eternal. Each living entity, they are all eternal. Death means the end of this body. We are dying at every moment as our bodies change. So this death means death of this body, not of the spirit soul. Spirit soul is eternal. God is eternal, and I am His son, you are His son. You are also eternal. But just like particle of gold is still gold, similarly, the part and parcel of the Supreme Lord, he is also God. It is said that we are partly God, and He is the Supreme God.

Radhastami, Srimati Radharani's Appearance Day -- Bhagavad-gita 18.5 -- London, September 5, 1973:

Now, the material activities are that we are trying to avoid inconveniences. Material life is. But spiritual life means to execute tapasya, austerity, penance, even at the risk of all inconvenience. This is called tapasya. So Kṛṣṇa says, yajña-dāna-tapaḥ, kāryaṁ na tyājyam. You can give up your family life, but you cannot give up this yajña-dāna-tapaḥ. That you cannot, at any circumstances. These things must be continued. Yajña-dāna-tapaḥ na tyājyaṁ kāryam eva tat. Kāryam means "must," "you must perform." The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, karma-tyāgī, they do not work. Their principle is always study Vedānta philosophy, and whatever they require, a little, they will beg, taking alms from gṛhasthas, and live and follow the strictly the principles of austerity. They are very strict. Those who are really Māyāvādī sannyāsī, not false, they follow strictly three times taking bathing. Even in severest cold they must. They lie down on the floor and always read Vedānta and Sāṅkhya philosophy. But in spite of all these austerities, they do not approve the worship of Deity, the transcendental form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Because they are impersonalist, they do not worship.

His Divine Grace Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Prabhupada's Disappearance Day, Lecture -- Bombay, December 22, 1975:

Similarly, there are varieties of service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and if we serve Kṛṣṇa with our varieties, sa karmaṇā manasā vācā, then it is everything peaceful. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. We do not want to stop the varieties. Varieties must be there. We are not nirveśeṣa-vādī, impersonalist. No. We are completely personalist. Kṛṣṇa is person, Rādhārāṇī is person, the devotees are person, the demigods are person, the cats person, the dogs person, the cows person, the calves person. But what is the meaning of Vṛndāvana? Vṛndāvana means everyone—the father and mother of Kṛṣṇa, Nanda Mahārāja, Yaśodāmāyī, the gopīs, the girlfriends of Kṛṣṇa, Rādhārāṇī and others, and the cowherd boys, and the cows, the calfs, the trees, the flowers, the fruits, the water. Everyone is for serving Kṛṣṇa. This is Vṛndāvana. Vṛndāvana means there is variety, and varieties of service and everything for Kṛṣṇa. That is Vṛndāvana.

His Divine Grace Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Prabhupada's Appearance Day, SB 6.3.24 -- Gorakhpur, February 15, 1971:

Otherwise, it is not civilized life; it is crude, uncivilized life, where there is no varṇāśrama, where there (is) no division of society according to work and quality and āśrama, spiritual life division. So Rāmānanda Rāya recommended this verse, that this is the process to satisfy the Supreme Lord Viṣṇu. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that eho bāhya āge kaha āra, "This is external. If you know something more, better than this, you say." Why He said? There is the version, viṣṇur ārādhyate. Does it mean that He is rejecting Viṣṇu worship? No, He's not rejecting. Because generally, they, these impersonalists, Māyāvādīs, they also worship sometimes Viṣṇu, these five demigods and God. But their idea is that ultimately impersonal. The impersonal takes the form by the help of this material world. The formation takes place simply in the material. That is their opinion. Therefore they say, call, saguṇa. Saguṇa-upāsanā.

Initiation Lectures

Talk, Initiation Lecture, and Ten Offenses Lecture -- Los Angeles, December 1, 1968:

We have rebelled against the supremacy of the Personality of Godhead. That is conditioned life. There are so many theses to support this rebellious condition. Somebody is thinking that "I am one with God"; somebody is thinking, "God is dead"; somebody is thinking, "There is no God"; somebody is thinking, "Why you are searching God? There are so many Gods loitering in the street." So in this way many theses are there. All of them are different symptoms of rebellious condition. The sum and substance... Just like atheists, they are boldly saying, "There is no God." Now..., but the impersonalists saying, "There may be God, but He has no head, He has no tail. That's all." So in this way our condition is rebellious condition. Therefore Bhagavad-gītā instructs that "You surrender." Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). So without surrender, there is no question of making any spiritual progress. Just like a person who has rebelled against the government—the first condition is to surrender; otherwise there is no question of mercy from the government. Similarly anyone, the living entity, any one of us who has rebelled against the supremacy of the Lord, the beginning of spiritual life is surrender.

Talk, Initiation Lecture, and Ten Offenses Lecture -- Los Angeles, December 1, 1968:

This is the basic principle, Kṛṣṇa consciousness. We should always remember Kṛṣṇa and we shall never forget. And the very simple method, that we chant Hare Kṛṣṇa. So Kṛṣṇa has given us tongue, so we can utilize it, and this is the beginning of spiritual life. This is the beginning of understanding God, or Kṛṣṇa. Otherwise we cannot understand what is God. Ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi na bhaved grāhyam indriyaiḥ (CC Madhya 17.136). Nāmādi, God has name. People say, "Why there should be name of God? He has no name." The impersonalist says "Nameless." Why? The Vedānta-sūtra says, janmādy asya yataḥ: (SB 1.1.1) "Everything is generated from Him." So if there is name, you have got name, I have got name, anything... This tape recorder has got name, this plate has got name, the place has got name, the carpet has got name, and simply God has no name? Why? (laughs) Just see the fallacy. The fountainhead of all names is God, and He has no name. You see? He is zero. These are the arguments. But we don't accept. The thing is they do not know the name because their senses are not purified. You cannot understand God by imperfect senses. Therefore Bhāgavata says, ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi. Nāmādi. Nāma means name; ādi, because name is the beginning of everything. Just like if I want to make friendship with you, I ask you, "What is your name?" That is the beginning. If you go to the court, before beginning the judgment, "What is your name? What is your father's name?" You submit any application, "What is your name?" So nāmādi.

Sannyasa Initiation -- Los Angeles, February 20, 1970:

Dayānanda: Translation: "I shall cross over the insurmountable ocean of darkness of ignorance simply by taking shelter of the lotus feet of Lord Mukunda who gives all kinds of liberations and who is worshiped by many great previous ācāryas." Purport: "There are sixty-four kinds of rendering service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, out of which to accept the uniform dress of a tridaṇḍi sannyāsī is also an important item. One who accepts this order of life, surely by rendering service unto the Supreme Lord becomes eligible to cross over the insurmountable ocean of ignorance. All previous sages used to accept such order of life, and later ācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī, adopted this order of life and specifically stressed on this procedure in order to achieve firm conviction in the matter of devotional service. Those who are unalloyed devotees, they add one more staff along with the original three. This extra one is representation of the living entity. There is another sect who are known as ekaṇḍa sect. They misunderstand the purpose of tridaṇḍa and by such deviation, Śivaswami sannyāsīs, who claim to belong to the Viṣṇu Svāmī sect, turn to be impersonalists and follow the footsteps of Śaṅkarācārya, accepting only the ekaṇḍa. Instead of naming themselves out of the 108 names of Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs, this Śivaswami sect accepts ten names of the sannyāsī, following Śaṅkarācārya. Lord Caitanya, although in terms of the then practice accepted ekaṇḍi (sic) sannyāsa order, but His acceptance of tridaṇḍi sannyāsa is understood. This mantra was first chanted by a learned brāhmaṇa of Avantīpura after being very much disgusted in this materialistic way of life. This happened long, long years ago because it is mentioned in the Bhāgavatam which was composed by Vyāsadeva at least five thousand years ago. So it is to be concluded therefore that this tridaṇḍi sannyāsī order is coming down since a long time. Since a time long, long years ago. And within five hundred years of time, Lord Caitanya adopted this order of life. In the latest years, His Divine Grace Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura Prabhupāda adopted it personally and made many of his disciples tridaṇḍi sannyāsīs. We are also following his footsteps. In the purport of this mantra is that the ekaṇḍi sannyāsī is devoid of parātma niṣṭha, which is explained above. In other words, impersonalists..." On the first page it says, an explanation of parātma is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is given in the English synonyms. So it says, "We are also following his footsteps. And the purport of this mantra is that the ekaṇḍi sannyāsī is devoid of parātma niṣṭha, which is explained above." So that is right, Prabhupāda, that the impersonalist is devoid of the Supreme Personality of Godhead?

Prabhupāda: They have no idea. They say that we can imagine an idea. According to impersonalists, they say sādhakānām hitārthaya brahmaṇo rūpa kalpanaḥ. Because we cannot concentrate our mind in impersonal therefore they say, "Imagine some form." They think that Kṛṣṇa is imagination. Yes. (laughter) That is their Māyāvāda. Kṛṣṇa was personally present and He killed all the demons. Still, these demons says imagination. That is demonic. Therefore we do not agree with them.

Sannyasa Initiation -- Los Angeles, February 20, 1970:

Dayānanda: "In other words, impersonalists cannot have any faith in the Supreme Personality of Godhead and they prefer to merge into the impersonal Brahman effulgence. In the Śrīmad-Bhagavatam we do not find any mention of ekaṇḍa sannyāsa. This tridaṇḍa sannyāsa is accepted therefore as standard. Lord Caitanya accepts Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as the supreme authority. Under these circumstances, persons who accept Lord Caitanya as ekaṇḍi sannyāsī are mistaken. So following the footsteps of Lord Caitanya still the tridaṇḍi sannyāsīs are in existence. Keeping the sacred thread and śikhā intact, distinct from the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, Māyāvādī ekaṇḍi sannyāsīs, who give up the sacred thread and śikhā. They have no inclination to render service unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Being very much disgusted by the materialistic way of life, they do not understand the purpose of the sannyāsa order. But those who are strictly followers of the Vaiṣṇava principles, they do not accept the Māyāvādī way of sannyāsa. In the sect of Lord Caitanya, the most venerable learned scholar known as Gadādhara Paṇḍita Gosvāmī accepted this tridaṇḍi sannyāsa order and he offered this facility to his disciple known as Śrī Madhva-upādhyāya. This Madhvācārya is the origin of the Vallabhācārya sect. One of the Six Gosvāmīs, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī, who is the authority of Vaiṣṇava regulations, was initiated by another tridaṇḍi sannyāsī known as Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī. Therefore this sannyāsī order is completely in pursuance of Vaiṣṇava authority."

Prabhupāda: So that daṇḍa you can take. Your daṇḍa take. You can take, come on. His name is there? No.

Devotee: No.

Viṣṇujana: You know which one is which?

Prabhupāda: No. According to the size we have made. So which size he is I do not know. I... That's your?

Viṣṇujana: Yes.

Prabhupāda: That's your. Hare Kṛṣṇa Hare Kṛṣṇa... Hare Kṛṣṇa Hare Kṛṣṇa. Now chant Hare Kṛṣṇa. Dance. (break—prema-dhvani) So, this is now formal accepting of sannyāsa, but real sannyāsa purpose will be fulfilled when you'll be able to induce the people of the world dancing like you. That is real sannyāsa. This formal dress is not sannyāsa. Real sannyāsa is when you can induce other people to become Kṛṣṇa conscious and they dance in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Initiation of Mrga-netri Dasi -- Los Angeles, June 22, 1970:

Prabhupāda: So your spiritual name, Lakṣmī-priyā. Lakṣmī-priyā, Lord Chaitanya's first wifes name was Lakṣmī-priyā. Yes, so always think of Lord Chaitanya and chant Hare Kṛṣṇa. Come on next...

Prabhupāda: Chanting japa...

Your name is Mṛga-netrī. Mṛga-netrī. Mṛga-netrī means staring eyes like she-deer. When Kṛṣṇa and Rādhārāṇī used to pass through the forest of Vṛndāvana, these deers and stags, they were looking with staring eyes—"When Kṛṣṇa will pass this way?" These animals were also attracted to Kṛṣṇa. The birds, everyone, the flowers, the fruits, everyone engage... Vṛndāvana means everything engaged in Kṛṣṇa. So if all of you similarly engage yourself always in Kṛṣṇa's service, this is Vṛndāvana. Vṛndāvana is not that... As Kṛṣṇa is not located... He is located, but by His inconceivable potency He can simultaneously become located and distributed. Akhilātma-bhūtaḥ. Goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūtaḥ (Bs. 5.37). He is always in Goloka Vṛndāvana, but still, He is everywhere. That is God's omnipotency. We say that God is omnipotent, but we do not know what does it mean. The omnipotency means simultaneously to do or to act or to remain everywhere. That is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa... You may not think that "Kṛṣṇa is (in) Goloka Vṛndāvana. Here is an idol of Kṛṣṇa." No. He is Kṛṣṇa. Just like the electricity is distributed, but in the plug there is also electricity, similarly, Kṛṣṇa... That is Kṛṣṇa's inconceivable potency. He can remain in everyone's heart, He can remain everywhere. Just imagine. Everywhere He is. Goloka eva. But His location is Goloka Vṛndāvana, but still, He is everywhere.

So try to see Kṛṣṇa with that staring eyes—"Where is Kṛṣṇa?" Here is... Kṛṣṇa is within your heart. Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānām (BG 18.61). He is within the atom. He is everywhere. So by service, we can realize. Ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi na bhaved grāhyam indriyaiḥ (CC Madhya 17.136). If we want to see Kṛṣṇa, touch Kṛṣṇa, with our, these material senses, it is not possible. The senses are to be purified. How it is purified? Sevonmukhe hi jihvādau. The service. And wherefrom the service begins? The service begins jihvādau, from the tongue. The service begins from the tongue. You chant. Therefore we are giving you the beads to chant. That is the beginning of service, chanting. If you chant, then svayam eva sphuraty adaḥ. By hearing Kṛṣṇa's name, you will understand Kṛṣṇa's form, you will understand Kṛṣṇa's quality, you will understand Kṛṣṇa's pastimes, His omnipotency. Everything will be revealed. Svayam eva sphuraty adaḥ. Svayam means the Kṛṣṇa science becomes revealed. You cannot make research to understand Kṛṣṇa science with these material senses. You have to purify your senses, sevonmukhe, by service. Tat-paratvena nirmalam (CC Madhya 19.170). When you engage your senses in Kṛṣṇa's service, then it becomes purified. Hṛṣīkeṇa. That purified, your senses is not to be abolished like the impersonalists: "No more sense, finished." No. We... Our senses are... Because we are eternal, our senses are eternal. But at the present moment our senses are being used, contaminated; therefore you are not satisfied. The senses are not to be cut off.

Initiation Sri Ranga, Romaharsana, Sridhara Dasas -- Los Angeles, July 3, 1970:

Those who are impersonalists, they think that "After all, the Absolute Truth is void or impersonal. So we can imagine any form." The Māyāvādī philosopher says, sādhakānām hitarthaya brahmaṇo rūpaḥ kalpanaḥ. "Brahman, the Supreme Absolute Truth, He is formless, but because we cannot concentrate our mind in the formless, therefore let us imagine any form we like, and that will make me advance." This is not the philosophy. The Absolute Truth, Supreme Personality of Godhead, He has His form and He is not equal, nobody is equal to Him. So according to Vedic literature, you cannot put Viṣṇu-tattva even on the equal footing with Brahmā and Śiva. His position, Viṣṇu-tattva, is mahato mahīyān. He's the greatest of the greatest. So this is offense. There are many Māyāvādī philosophers, they say "You can chant any name, either Kṛṣṇa or Kali or Durgā or..." And another mission says, "Any nonsense name you can chant. That doesn't matter." But our Vedic śāstra, scripture, does not say that. It is said, harer nāma. Not any other name. Harer nāma. only the name of Hari. Śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ (SB 7.5.23). To hear and chant about whom? Viṣṇu. It is clearly stated there. So we have to chant Viṣṇu name, we have to chant Harer name, Hari and Viṣṇu, Kṛṣṇa. They're the same. So this is my... You should not misguide yourself by thinking that "Any name will do."

Initiations and Lecture Sannyasa Initiation of Sudama dasa -- Tokyo, April 30, 1972:

They misunderstand the purpose of tridaṇḍa, and by such deviation, Śrīvāsa Swami sannyāsa, who proclaimed to belong to the Viṣṇu Svāmī sect, turned to be impersonalists and follow the footsteps of Śaṅkarācārya, accepting only the ekadaṇḍa. Instead of naming themselves out of the 108 names of Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs, this Śrīvāsa Swami sect accepts ten names of the sannyāsī, following Śaṅkarācārya. Lord Caitanya, although in terms of the then practice, accepted ekadaṇḍī sannyāsa order, by His acceptance of tridaṇḍi sannyāsa is understood. This mantra was first chanted by a learned brāhmaṇa of Avantipur after being very much disgusted in this materialistic way of life. This happened long, long years ago because it is mentioned in the Bhāgavatam, which was composed by Vyāsadeva at least five thousand years ago. So it is to be concluded, therefore, that this tridaṇḍī sannyāsīn order is coming down since a time long, long years ago. And within five hundred years of time Lord Caitanya adopted this order of life. And in the latest years His Divine Grace Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Thakur Prabhupāda adopted it personally and made many of his disciples tridaṇḍī sannyāsīs. We are also following his footsteps, and the purport of this mantra is that the ekadaṇḍī sannyāsī is devoid of paramaṁ niṣṭha, which is explained above. In other words, impersonalists cannot have any faith in the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and they prefer to merge into the impersonal Brahman effulgence. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam we do not find any mention of ekadaṇḍa sannyāsa. This tridaṇḍa sannyāsa is accepted, therefore, as standard. Lord Caitanya accepts Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as the supreme authority. Under the circumstances, persons who accept Lord Caitanya as ekadaṇḍī sannyāsī are mistaken.

Initiations -- Los Angeles, June 21, 1972:

Prabhupāda: So you're Satyadevī dāsī. Satyabhāmā was one of the wives of Kṛṣṇa. Hare Kṛṣṇa. Then?

Śyāmasundara: Pravīnacandra?

Prabhupāda: Are you still impersonalist? (japa) What is this?

Pravīnacandra: Uh, this is an (indistinct). I brought it for you.

Prabhupāda: You are still impersonalist or personalist?

Pravīnacandra: Not still impersonalist ... For the learning, I am learning still. I am not yet... I want to learn more.(?)

Prabhupāda: All right. So, you know the rules and regulations?

Pravīnacandra: Chanting sixteen rounds, no meat eating, no illicit sex life, no gambling and no drinking wine.

Prabhupāda: What is?

Śyāmasundara: Pratibhānu dāsa.

Prabhupāda: Pratibhānu dāsa. Hare Kṛṣṇa.

Initiation Ceremony -- Los Angeles, May 15, 1973:

Come on. (pause) What are the rules? (devotee answers) So your name is Hāsyapriya, friend of Kṛṣṇa. (pause) You want? You want? Oh, they were not distributed prasādam? All right, wait. (laughter)

So what are the rules and regulations? (devotee answers) Actually or theoretically? Thank you. What is the name? Ah, your name is Brahma-rūpa. The impersonalists, they say Brahman has no rūpa. We say, "No, there is rūpa. That is Kṛṣṇa." Brahma-rūpa. Brahma-rūpa dāsa. (pause)

So you know the rules and regulations? (devotee answers) So you name is Nirakula dāsī. Nirakula. Akula means one who becomes confused, and nira means not. One who does not become confused, fixed up. Hare Kṛṣṇa.

Wedding Ceremonies

Paramananda & Satyabhama's Wedding -- Montreal, July 22, 1968:

This world is called relative world. It is not Absolute. Relative. Difference, two, duality. We cannot understand a man without knowing a woman. We cannot understand father without understanding a son or a mother. Relativity. But in Absolute world, everything is one. So this love between male and female, conjugal love, we Vaiṣṇava philosophers... Because everyone, according to Vedic system, everyone has to follow the Vedānta-sūtra. There are two section of philosophers in India, approved; not, I mean to say, manufactured philosopher, mental speculators, but actually those who are counted valuable. There are two classes of philosophers, namely the impersonalist and personalist. The Vaiṣṇava, they accept that the Absolute Truth is person, and the Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that Absolute Truth is impersonal. That is the difference. Otherwise their process of other paraphernalia, execution of understanding, is almost the same. Now our Vaiṣṇava philosopher's argument is that how the Absolute Truth can be impersonal? Because here, in this world, in our experience, we see everything personal. So unless the personality, the individuality, or the individual attraction is there in the Absolute Truth, how they can be represented here in the relative truth?

General Lectures

Lecture -- Los Angeles, February 2, 1968:

Prabhupāda: Who was he? Who was Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya?

Nandarāṇī: He was a great impersonalist who was converted by Lord Caitanya to Vaiṣṇavism.

Prabhupāda: Yes. And Nandarāṇī knows better than you. (laughter) So girls are intelligent. Yes. Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya was a great impersonalist and a great logician. The impersonalist school, amongst them, there are very, very learned scholars. Śaṅkarācārya himself, he was unique scholar. At the age of eight years only, he studied all the Vedas. And not only he studied, he became a critical student, Śaṅkarācārya. He was incarnation of Lord Śiva; therefore nobody can be compared with him.

So amongst the impersonalist school, there are many great logicians and high class scholars. But according to Vedic principles, God realization does not depend on material intelligence or scholarship. It is stated in the Vedas, nāyam ātmā pravacanena labhyaḥ: "You cannot realize the self simply by arguments or very scholarly speeches." No. Nāyam ātmā pravacanena labhyo na bahunā śrutena: "Neither by studying many, many different types of Vedic literatures." Nāyam ātmā pravacanena labhyo na bahunā śrutena na medhayā: "Neither by sharp brain or memory." These are good qualifications—to be scholarly, to be a very good speaker, and to have very good memorizing power.

Lecture Excerpt -- Montreal, July 18, 1968:

The same example can be given. Suppose you are taking a jet plane to go to the sun planet or moon planet, but you are in the sunshine. You are more higher above the cloud region. Cloud is after, say, a few miles up, if you go, there is no more cloud. Finished. If you go above seven miles up, there is no more clouds. There is no question of māyā. That's all right. But if you go continually, if you do not get shelter in any other planet, then the next stage will be you have to come back. You cannot remain in that impersonal sunshine. You have to take shelter. If you don't get shelter, then you come back. Similarly, the impersonalist, for the time being they may think that they have Brahman realization, but because by nature he wants association, without getting association of the Supreme Lord he has to come back to make association with this nonsense. And this is practically we have seen. Many sannyāsīs, brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā, "Brahman is truth and the world is false." They take sannyāsa, and after some time they come to the hospital opening business.

Lecture Excerpt -- Montreal, July 20, 1968:

It is simply troublesome, kleśa. Kleśa means troublesome. Because they cannot concentrate. Avyaktā hi gatir duḥkhaṁ dehavadbhir avāpyate. Those who have accepted this body, for them, to think of something impersonal is simply artificial, is simply artificial. Therefore the impersonalists or the void philosophers, their process of so-called yoga is simply troublesome, and maybe some profit there, but the ultimate profit, they cannot have. It is not possible. Therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā it is clearly said that yoginām api sarveṣāṁ: (BG 6.47) "Of all the yogis, the one who is thinking of Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu..." Because that is the ultimate goal. One has to come to the point. That point, of course, one has to come ultimately, as it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, bahūnāṁ janmanām ante (BG 7.19), after many, many births. It is simply obstinacy. One who does not take to the meditation of God, or they want to meditate in something other, void or impersonal—that is not possible; that is simply troublesome—so simply they are wasting time because ultimately they have come to this point of personal conception of the Supreme Lord. Bahūnāṁ janmanām, after many, many births, if they are fortunate enough to meet some real devotee, then he becomes enlightened. And vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti (BG 7.19). He then accepts Vasudeva, Kṛṣṇa, as everything. Sa mahātmā su-durlabhaḥ: "Such kind of great soul is very rare."

Lecture on Teachings of Lord Caitanya -- Seattle, September 25, 1968:

Yes. Here is one point. He says that "You have liberated me. Now let me know what is my duty." This is very important point. The Māyāvādī philosopher, they think that liberation is the ultimate goal. Just like in Buddha philosophy, the nirvāṇa. Nirvāṇa means annihilation of material existence. Nirvāṇa. They think that as soon as there is annihilation of this material existence, that is the final goal. The Māyāvādī philosopher or the impersonalist, they think that not only to get freedom from this material existence, but to remain in spiritual status, jñānam, simply in the knowledge that "I am spirit soul. I am merged into the spirit soul," that is their goal. But here, the Sanātana Gosvāmī, he belongs to the Vaiṣṇava philosophy. He says, "Now what is my duty?" That means after liberation it is not that everything is void or activity is stopped. No. Actually activity begins after liberation. At the present moment our activities are not liberated activities. At the present moment all our activities are conditional, but actually I am not... Because I am spirit soul, therefore I'm not under material condition.

Lecture on Teachings of Lord Caitanya -- Seattle, September 25, 1968:

Yes, there is. But you have to accept the standard platform by your advancement. Just like somebody accepts somebody as master, that is according to his own mentality. And somebody accepts somebody else as master, that is his mentality. But the highest, according to Vedic literature, Kṛṣṇa is the supreme master. Because all the ācāryas, all the spiritual masters of Vedic perfection, just like in the recent years Śaṅkarācārya, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, and Viṣṇu Svāmī, Lord Caitanya, all of them, they have accepted Kṛṣṇa as the supreme spiritual master. All of them. Even Śaṅkarācārya, he's impersonalist, still he has accepted Kṛṣṇa. Sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇa. He says that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is Kṛṣṇa. That is mentioned in his commentary of Bhagavad-gītā. And what to speak of Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, they accept. And Caitanya Mahāprabhu, he says, yāre dekha tāre kaha kṛṣṇa-upadeśa (CC Madhya 7.128). If you want to become a spiritual master, then try to disseminate the teachings of Lord Kṛṣṇa. So that is our, so far we are concerned, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, our ideal spiritual master is Kṛṣṇa. Yes?

Lecture -- Seattle, October 7, 1968:

Jaya-gopāla: Prabhupāda? How do we explain to impersonalists inductively the existence of the Personality of Godhead?

Prabhupāda: This example I have given you several times. Just like you try to understand the sun. This is daily affair. Now when you try to understand what is this sun, you first of all come to the sunshine light. If you are covered with cloud and if you have not known what is sun, that is a different thing. Or even if it is covered, you can go up to the over the cloud and see the sunshine and sun. So the cloud is compared with māyā. So sun is compared with the kingdom of God, and the president of the sun planet is God. This is example. God is far away and He's the greatest. He has created so many millions of suns. But I am giving that example. Now to study the sun, first of all you come to the sunshine. The sunshine is distributed all over the universe, and the sun planet is situated in a localized place. And within the sun planet, there is the predominating deity who is called sun-god. But if you want to study all these things, first of all you come to the sunshine. The sunshine is impersonal.

Lecture -- Seattle, October 7, 1968:

This example I have given you several times. Just like you try to understand the sun. This is daily affair. Now when you try to understand what is this sun, you first of all come to the sunshine light. If you are covered with cloud and if you have not known what is sun, that is a different thing. Or even if it is covered, you can go up to the over the cloud and see the sunshine and sun. So the cloud is compared with māyā. So sun is compared with the kingdom of God, and the president of the sun planet is God. This is example. God is far away and He's the greatest. He has created so many millions of suns. But I am giving that example. Now to study the sun, first of all you come to the sunshine. The sunshine is distributed all over the universe, and the sun planet is situated in a localized place. And within the sun planet, there is the predominating deity who is called sun-god. But if you want to study all these things, first of all you come to the sunshine. The sunshine is impersonal. Similarly, there is a transcendental rays from the planet where Kṛṣṇa, or God, is there. Just a few minutes before I recited one verse from Bhagavad-gītā that na tad bhāsayate sūryo (BG 15.6). That means it is illuminating. There is no need of sunshine. Just like this planet is not illuminating; therefore we want light from the sun, from the moon, from electricity. But Bhagavad-gītā says that the planet of the Lord, there is no... Why planet? The sky. There is no need of sunshine. Every planet in the spiritual world is illuminating. So because every planet is illuminating, the whole spiritual sky is dazzling illumination. So one who approaches that dazzling illumination called brahma-jyotir, they are called impersonalists. Is it clear?

Lecture -- Seattle, October 7, 1968:

Jaya-gopāla: But how does one show such an impersonalist with absolute proof logically? I was told Śrīla Bhaktivinoda has such a proof.

Prabhupāda: Apart from Bhaktivinoda, try to understand in your common sense.

Jaya-gopāla: Yes, I can see this.

Prabhupāda: Just like sun planet, there is sunshine. The sunshine is impersonal, but if you have got power to enter into the sun globe, then you will find there, there are so many persons, they have got fiery body. It is not a fact in other planets there is no life. That is a nonsense. Every planet there is life, but they have got different situation, different atmosphere. The moon planet is very cold. Even the modern scientists, they agree that the temperature in the moon planet is below two hundred degree zero. So it is very cold. Similarly, sun planet is very hot. Similarly, there are other planets which is made of air, some planets made of water. These five elements, earth, water, air, ether, this is the, these are the ingredients of material world. So some planet is made of something, some planet is made of something. But this earth is made of earth only, and water. So in the sunshine you see, you go by airplane, go in the "friendly sky" above the... You see everything impersonal. Simply glaring sunshine, that's all. But that does not mean it is impersonal. There are many planets within the sunshine, millions of planets, but you cannot see. Similarly, persons who cannot see beyond the brahma-jyotir, the transcendental rays of the spiritual sky, they are impersonalists. They are impersonalists. But one who goes to the transcendental planets, Vaikuṇṭhas, Goloka Vṛndāvana, they see God is there person. As you are person, I am person, you'll find person.

Lecture Excerpt -- New York, April 11, 1969:

So Kṛṣṇa is accepted by all Vedic scholars. Not only in the bygone ages, just like Nārada, Vyāsa, but in the recent ages, within, say, one thousand years. Within one thousand years, there happened to be many great scholars, just like Madhvācārya, Rāmānujācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī, Lord Caitanya. They were very, very learned scholars. They have accepted Kṛṣṇa the Supreme Person... Even Śaṅkarācārya. Śaṅkarācārya is more than one thousand years ago. Śaṅkarācārya's time is just after Buddha's age. Buddha, 2,500. Śaṅkarācārya, about 1,500 years ago. He also accepted. Although he was impersonalist, he accepted, sa bhagavān svayam kṛṣṇa. "Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, has come, has descended as the son of Vasudeva and Devakī." He has clearly mentioned. Because one may not misunderstand, "This Kṛṣṇa may be different." But he has specif... Just like identification. If you go to the court, you give your identification by your father's name. So Śaṅkarācārya has given identification of Kṛṣṇa by His father's name, by His mother's name. Devakī vasudevāsya. We also say Devakī-nandana, Vasudeva. So ātmavit-sammataḥ. It must be approved by great ācāryas. We are pushing on this Kṛṣṇa consciousness not by whims. It is approved by great ācāryas. We are following their footsteps. That's all. That is our business. Ātmavit tattva, ātmavit-sammataḥ. And then puṁsām, for the people in general, śrotavyādiṣu yaḥ paraḥ. They have got many subject matter for hearing, ordinary people. But this subject matter, hearing of this Kṛṣṇa consciousness, is the, śrotavyādi... Whatever subject matter you have got for hearing, this is the topmost. This is the topmost. Śrotavyādiṣu yaḥ paraḥ.

Lecture Excerpt -- New York, April 12, 1969:

So I asked him, "What do you mean by incarnation?" So he replied that because Kṛṣṇa or God is everyone's heart, therefore everyone is incarnation. Then he... I said, "Then what is difficulty? Then we are all incarnation. What is the specific quality of Meher Baba?" Because īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe 'rjuna tiṣṭhati (BG 18.61). The Lord is situated in everyone's heart. The Lord is situated in the heart of cats and dogs also. Sarva-bhūtānām. Sarva-bhūtānām means all living entities. It is not that God is not situated in the cat's heart or dog's heart. He is there. Therefore he is also incarnation. If that is the formula... These impersonalists... Because... Just like in Ramakrishna mission, they say, "Because Nārāyaṇa is in everyone's heart, therefore everyone is Nārāyaṇa." This is not very good logic. Even Nārāyaṇa or God, He is omnipotent, omnipresent, He can be present everywhere, that does not mean everyone is God. This is not very good logic. Anyway, then when I asked him that "If everyone is incarnation, then what is the speciality of Meher Baba?" Then, "He knows more than others." Then next reply is that somebody may be more than Meher Baba. So if you go on searching like that, you will find Kṛṣṇa. Nobody is greater than Kṛṣṇa. Therefore He is the Supreme. By logic. You go on by logic. If everyone is incarnation and if everyone, out of many, one who is still more advanced, he is accepted as God, then you have to search more—if there is any other person who is greater than that person.

Lecture Engagement and Prasada Distribution -- Boston, April 26, 1969:

So there is a definition of God also in the Vedic literature. A great sage, the father of Vyāsadeva, Parāśara Muni, he has very nicely defined what is meant by God, and all the symptoms were visible in the person of Lord Kṛṣṇa. And according to our Indian, Vedic culture, all the great ācāryas, just like Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī, Nimbārka, even Śaṅkarācārya... Śaṅkarācārya is considered to be impersonalist, that He believes in impersonal Brahman. So impersonal Brahman is mentioned in all Vedic literature. We also know that. But beyond impersonal Brahman there is Supersoul realization, and beyond Supersoul realization there is the personal realization, the Supreme Personality of God. Bhāgavata says that vadanti tat tattva-vidas tattvam: (SB 1.2.11) "The Absolute knowledge, the Absolute Truth, is nondual." How it is nondual? Now, brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate. Either you realize the Absolute Truth as impersonal Brahman or localized Paramātmā, Supersoul, or as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu, they are one and the same. How one and the same? That is also explained. So God realization, it is said in the Vedic literatures, that avāṅ-manasā-gocaraḥ. It is very difficult to realize God.

Lecture Engagement and Prasada Distribution -- Boston, April 26, 1969:

So Lord Kṛṣṇa is accepted as the Supreme Personality of Godhead at least by the great ācāryas of India. Even, as I was speaking of Śaṅkarācārya, he was impersonalist, but he has admitted in his commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that sa kṛṣṇa bhagavān svayam. He has accepted. In the beginning of his commentary he said, nārāyaṇaḥ para avyaktāt: "Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is beyond this material creation." And in next page he has admitted, "That Supreme Personality of Godhead Nārāyaṇa is Kṛṣṇa, who is born as the son of Devakī and Vasudeva." So, so far Indian scholars... I don't speak of modern scholars. Those who are authorized scholars of bygone ages, admitted by the Vedic society—Śaṅkarācārya, Rāmānujācārya, and Viṣṇu Svāmī, Nimbārka—and they are stalwarts. And there are many hundreds and thousands of temples of Kṛṣṇa, Viṣṇu, in India. If you have ever gone, you might have seen. In Vṛndāvana, only a small city of people, there are five thousand Kṛṣṇa temples. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is very strong and very old in India. And if you also accept this, without any loss on your part, you will be happy. You will be happy. That is the process of peace.

Address to Indian Association -- Columbus, May 11, 1969:

So he remarked that "He's a pseudo sannyāsī. He is not actually sannyāsa." Then one of the devotees, he did not like the idea, remark of Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī. He came back and informed Lord Caitanya that "These people are blackmailing You. I cannot tolerate this. So if something can be done to stop this blackmailing?" So that's a long history. So one devotee, he arranged the meeting of all the sannyāsīns, and Caitanya Mahāprabhu was also invited, and there was Vedānta philosophical discussion between Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī and Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. This description and philosophical discussions are given in our Teachings of Lord Caitanya, and it is very nice that Prakāśānanda himself with his, all his disciples, they became Vaiṣṇavas. The idea is... Similarly, Caitanya Mahāprabhu had a great discussion with Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, the greatest logician of that time. He was also Māyāvādī, impersonalist.

Lecture -- London, September 14, 1969:

We become very much obstinate, that "I must have this," and we work very hard. Just like in Europe, that Hitler, he wanted supremacy over Europe, and he fought very valiantly. But at the end he became vanquished. Similarly, in the material world we have got so many desires and we want to fulfill it—and for which we work very hard. But at the end it becomes frustrated. That is the nature of the material world. You cannot have anything here permanent, however hard you work... You may achieve that. Not only in this material world. Even you achieve the liberation, perfectional stage, as the impersonal philosophers want. They want nirvāṇa. Just like Buddhists, they want nirvāṇa, extinction of this material conditional life. That is called nirvāṇa. And the Māyāvādī philosophers, impersonalists, they want not only extinction of these material pangs but they want to be situated in spiritual consciousness only. But our Vaiṣṇava philosophy is that you cannot keep yourself in spiritual consciousness unless you are fully engaged in spiritual activities. That is the perfect philosophy.

Pandal Lecture -- Bombay, March 31, 1971:

In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam also it is confirmed, ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). Even Śaṅkarācārya, whom we call impersonalist, he has accepted in his comment on Bhagavad-gītā that "Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead appearing as the son of Devakī and Vasudeva." Similarly, all other ācāryas-Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī, Nimbārka, and lately, Caitanya Mahāprabhu... Of course, Caitanya Mahāprabhu is both ācārya and Kṛṣṇa Himself. Apart from His being Kṛṣṇa, if we take the part which He played as ācārya, that is, He also accepts Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Ārādhyo bhagavān vrajeṣa-tanayas tad-dhāma vṛndāvanam. So we are to follow the ācāryas, not these casual interpretations, interpreters, to understand Bhagavad-gītā. Then we will be misled. We cannot understand. Because Kṛṣṇa says that "The mystery of Bhagavad-gītā will be understood by you because you are My very dear friend." So... "Because you are My devotee." So unless one is devotee, how one can understand Bhagavad-gītā and Kṛṣṇa? That is not possible.

Pandal Lecture -- Delhi, November 20, 1971:

Now, there are Vedas, four Vedas—Sāma Veda, Atharva Veda, Yajus Veda, Ṛk Veda. And there are Upaniṣads, the Vedānta-sūtra, the Purāṇas, Rāmāyaṇa, Mahābhārata—there are so many things. That is in India. And outside India or outside Vedic culture, there are many scriptures. Therefore it is said, śrutayo vibhinnā. There are innumerable Vedic scriptures. So we cannot come to the conclusion what is right or wrong, because sometimes you will find contradiction from one... Of course, there is no contradiction, but because we are not advanced in knowledge, sometimes we will find contradiction. Just like in India there are two classes of transcendentalists: the impersonalist and the personalist. That is not contradiction. The Absolute Truth is both impersonal and personal, but somebody is stressing on the impersonal point of view and somebody is stressing on the personal point of view. But we Vaiṣṇava, we know what is the meaning of impersonalism and what is the meaning of personalism. We take it for understanding, as it is stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate (SB 1.2.11). The Absolute Truth is simultaneously Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān. It is simply different stages of understanding. In the first stage, it is Brahman realization. In the second stage, it is Paramātmā realization. And at the last stage, it is Bhagavān realization.

Town Hall Lecture -- Auckland, April 14, 1972:

Another paramparā system is coming from Lord Śiva. Another paramparā system is coming from the Kumāras—they were unmarried, brahmacārīs, sons of Brahmā. So those paramparā system, line of disciplic succession, are still existing in India. Practically, India's spiritual life is still being controlling by these lines of disciplic succession. So all these ācāryas, according to the Vaiṣṇava ācārya... Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, there are four ācāryas. Śrī Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Nimbārka, and Viṣṇu Svāmī. And those who are not Vaiṣṇavas, impersonalists, they are represented by Śaṅkarācārya. Even Śaṅkarācārya, from whom we differ in philosophical discussion... Not very much different—so far the procedure is concerned, the regulative principles are concerned, they are all the same. The only difference is that Śaṅkarācārya's sampradāya, they take the ultimate Absolute Truth as impersonal, and we Vaiṣṇavas, we take the Absolute Truth as person. But Śaṅkarācārya, in his later stage, he also admitted in a different way.

Lecture -- Bombay, September 25, 1973:

Śaṅkarācārya said, na hi na hi rakṣati ḍu-kṛñ-karaṇe. "By your grammatical jugglery of words nonsense, you cannot be saved." Bhaja govindaṁ bhaja govindaṁ bhaja govindaṁ mūḍha-mate: "You rascal, just engage yourself in the loving service of Govinda." This is Śaṅkarācārya's advice, although he was impersonalist. Kṛṣṇa says that "Who does not worship Me?" Naradhāma, māyayāpahṛta-jñānā, they have no knowledge. Because if he remains in the real point a rascal, then what is the value of his knowledge? There is no knowledge. Therefore bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate (BG 7.19). After many, many births of struggling for existence like this, if one becomes actually wise, jñānavān māṁ prapadyate, he surrenders to Kṛṣṇa. This is intelligence. This is intelligence. "Kṛṣṇa, from this day, I surrender. So long I was forgotten. I did not know that my only business is to surrender to You." So any moment you surrender, immediately you are protected.

Subha Vilasa Home Engagement -- Toronto, June 19, 1976:

Prabhupāda: There cannot be any section. There are two section: demons and the demigods. That is the statement in the śāstra. Dvau bhūta-sargau loke 'smin daiva āsura eva ca (BG 16.6). There are two kinds of men: daiva and āsura. Viṣṇu-bhaktaḥ bhaved daiva āsuras tad-viparyayaḥ. So if they want to remain demons, that is their choice, but that will not help them.

Indian man (1): Most fortunate men try to follow Kṛṣṇa. The unfortunate...

Prabhupāda: So anyway, now it is Śubha Vilāsa Prabhu's duty to bring these imitation Kṛṣṇas.

Devotees: Jaya.

Prabhupāda: Hare Kṛṣṇa.

Guest: Many, many good bhaktas are being spoiled by impersonalists nowadays...

Prabhupāda: Yes. You are personalist or impersonalist? He is personalist. (laughter) Hari-nāma karo (Hindi). So, another kīrtana? (end)

General Lecture -- (location & date unknown):

So naturally we accept Kṛṣṇa on the basis of Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is natural. But, everyone, of course, has to accept Bhagavad-gītā and Vedānta-sūtra if he, I mean to say, presents himself as Vedic or Hindu. Hindu is the name, the modern name. Actually the Vedic name is the original name, or varṇāśrama-dharma. That is the original name. So, apart from Vaiṣṇavas, even Śaṅkarācārya, who is impersonalist, who is Brahmavadi, he also accepts Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Those who have read Śaṅkarācārya's commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā, they must have seen it in the very beginning: sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ. He begins his commentary, nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktat: "Nārāyaṇa is beyond this material creation." And then he says, "That Nārāyaṇa is svayaṁ bhagavān, Kṛṣṇa." Kṛṣṇa. Sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ. And he has specifically mentioned that "He has appeared as the son of Devaki and Vasudeva." Beside that, he has written many songs and prayers about Kṛṣṇa.

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz:

Śyāmasundara: Because it is impossible to conceive of not God. In other words, God is absolutely necessary because to conceive not-God is impossible.

Prabhupāda: That is artificial. The atheists say there is no God, so God is there, but he refuses to accept. Otherwise why does he say there is no God? The idea of God is there, but he refuses to accept. And unless God is there, wherefrom the idea is coming? The atheist... God is there, but he is refusing to accept. Just like the impersonalist: unless you have got personal understanding, how will you try to make it impersonal? The first is personal. You try to make it impersonal.

Śyāmasundara: Otherwise where does the impersonal idea come from?

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is out of frustration. We see so many things, personal, varieties, but they are not giving us satisfaction; therefore we are thinking in a negative way, impersonal. But the person is first.

Śyāmasundara: He says that men, because they are...

Prabhupāda: The atheist demons are like that. If he exists to accept God, then he cannot work irresponsibly. To facilitate his sinful activities he is denying that there is a God.

Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:

Prabhupāda: That is misleading. Nobody can ascertain in that way. That is not possible. In the śāstras it is said that panthās tu koṭi-śata-vatsara-sampragamya. He is thinking he is a man living for fifty or sixty or a hundred years. But if somebody is there, just like modern, these sputnik scientists, they say that if one can go forty thousands of years at the speed of light, he can approach the topmost planet. So śāstra says even one goes forty thousands of years, still you won't find where is Kṛṣṇa, where is Kṛṣṇa's abode. Not only at the speed of light, but he says the speed of mind and air. Panthās tu koṭi-śata-vatsara-sampragamyo vāyor athāpi manaso muni-puṅgavānām: (Bs. 5.34) still, the subject matter which is beyond my senses will remain the same, beyond my senses. This material attempt will not help. Never. There is another verse that adhane gopī chindan vidhena ataḥ pudedevo padamjadayan (?): "Dear Lord, a devotee who has got a little grace from your lotus feet, padamjadaya (?), he can understand You. Others, they may speculate for millions of years. Still it is not possible." Just like Kṛṣṇa says that manuṣyāṇāṁ sahasreṣu: (BG 7.3) "Out of many millions of people, one is interested to make his life successful, and out of millions of successful..." Successful means one who understands that I am not this body. You ask, you take census, in this Nairobi city, you will find that 99.9%, or more than that, people do not know what he is. Everyone knows that "I am this body." So perfection of life means one who understands that "I am not this body..." They become impersonalists, something like that, or voidists. Out of them—those who have understood perfection, that "I am not this body"—one can understand Kṛṣṇa. Out of many thousands of people who have attained actual perfect. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness is actually not so easy, but these devotees are actually realizing Kṛṣṇa. Why? By the grace of Kṛṣṇa. Because the devotees are engaged in His service, He is revealing Himself. That is the process. Not by this, Kant's speculation. It is not possible.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Prabhupāda: That is also true. Just like a child does not know that by touching the fire, his hand will be burnt. His father says, "No, no, no. Don't touch this." He has got experience; the child hasn't got experience. That's all.

Devotee: Suppose if there are two people, and if you try to teach them mathematics, one person learns very quickly and one person doesn't learn it.

Prabhupāda: That varieties are always there. Impersonalists, they do not want to see the variety, but we know in everything there is variety. One man is learning (indistinct) and another man is learning very quickly—these are the varieties. But the process is the same.

Devotee: (indistinct)

Prabhupāda: Yes. Whatever it may be, but there must be some cause. (indistinct) the variety, these varieties are existing everywhere.

Śyāmasundara: He says that the life impulse moves through the universe, creates ever newer forms or varieties, just like an artist creates different paintings. But he says that that painting the artist creates becomes better than the previous one.

Prabhupāda: Yes, that you can say, evolution. That is evolution. Similarly, this living force is also coming through 8,400,000 species of life, so the next one is better than the last one. In this way they come to the human form, and from this human form they can become demigods or they can become as good as God. Just like Brahma, Brahmā is also a living entity. He is not in the Viṣṇu category, but still, Brahma's power, he can create this universe. God can create many universes, but he can create at least one universe. So it is not less powerful.

Philosophy Discussion on William James:

Hayagrīva: James writes about religion and total surrender and involvement. He says, "In the religious life surrender and sacrifice are positively espoused. Even unnecessary givings-up are added in order that the happiness may increase. Religion thus makes easy and felicitous what in any case is necessary. It becomes an essential organ of our life, performing a function which no other portion of our life can so successfully fulfill."

Prabhupāda: Yes. Without religion the human society is animal society. So religion must be there, and religion means to understand God, to learn how to love God, how to obey His orders, and actually real religion means to accept the order of the Supreme Lord, God. Therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā this fact is taught. God is personally teaching that "You become My devotee, always think of Me," man-manā bhava mad-bhakto, "worship Me," mad-yājī, "and if you cannot do anything more, you simply offer your obeisances unto Me." Man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65). Without any big, I mean to say, attempt for religious system, if one has got the idea that there is God, and even without seeing Him if he follows His instruction, always think of Him... Either you think of Him as personal God or as localized or all-pervading, but God has got form. One has to think of the form of the God. That is easier. And if God is accepted as impersonal, that is very troublesome. That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, kleśaḥ adhikataras teṣām avyakta āsakta cetasām. Those who are impersonalist, for them to think of God becomes very difficult job. Who is God and what to think of, so the so-called meditation is very difficult. But if you have got really conception of a God, just like we have got Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead... Although He has got different incarnations, forms, He is the Supreme, so we think of Him. That is our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement.

Philosophy Discussion on William James:

Hayagrīva: Typical of the latter part of the nineteenth century, James' only acquaintance with Hinduism was through the impersonalists, and he spoke of samādhi and the mystical experience in this way. He says, "The Vedantists say that one may stumble into superconsciousness sporadically without the previous discipline, but it is then impure. The test of its purity, like our test of religious value, is empirical. Its fruits must be good for life. When a man comes out of samādhi they assure us that he remains enlightened—a sage, a prophet, a saint, his whole character changed, his life changed, illumined." What is this samādhi or...

Prabhupāda: Samādhi means ecstasy, always in God consciousness. That is samādhi. That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, yoginām api sarveṣāṁ mad-gata āntarātmanā (BG 6.47). The yogis means they are always remaining in meditation of the Supreme Lord. Dhyānāvasthita-tad-gatena manasā. Mind is always absorbed in God. That is samādhi. He has no other thought than God. So if we can continue in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that is samādhi.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Śyāmasundara: They said that both of these types of persons become bored with themselves and they get a feeling of emptiness or meaninglessness or despair. He calls it despair, hopelessness, nothingness. So that this pleasure...

Prabhupāda: That we condemn, śūnyavādi. Śūnyavādi, or nirviśeṣa śūnyavādi, impersonalists and voidists. They must be overcome by despair. They have no aim. They do not know what is the aim of life. Being disgusted in the present form of life, they, when they have no conclusion, no high aim, they become disappointed. That is the cause of these hippies.

Śyāmasundara: Yes. He says that then they indulge in pleasure and mental speculation as a diversionary tactic. To try to cover up this despair, they become more indulged in sense pleasure and more speculating.

Prabhupāda: Just like people in the material world, when a businessman failure, he takes to drinking. Sometimes great shock, in order to forget, one takes to drinking. Yes. Intoxication.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Prabhupāda: Purport.

Hari-śauri: The group of transcendentalists who follow the path of the inconceivable, unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme Lord are called jñāna-yogīs, and persons who are in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness, engaged in devotional service to the Lord, are called bhakti-yogīs. Now, here the difference between jñāna-yoga and bhakti-yoga is definitely expressed. The process of jñāna-yoga, although ultimately bringing one to the same goal, is very troublesome, whereas the path of bhakti-yoga, the process of being in direct service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is easier and is natural for the embodied soul. The individual soul is embodied since time immemorial. It is very difficult for him to simply theoretically understand that he is not the body. Therefore, the bhakti-yogī accepts the Deity of Kṛṣṇa as worshipable because there is some bodily conception fixed in the mind, which can thus be applied. Of course, worship of the Supreme Personality of Godhead in His form within the temple is not idol worship. There is evidence in the Vedic literature that worship may be saguṇa and nirguṇa—of the Supreme possessing or not possessing attributes. Worship of the Deity in the temple is saguṇa worship, for the Lord is represented by material qualities. But the form of the Lord, though represented by material qualities such as stone, wood, or oil paint, is not actually material. That is the absolute nature of the Supreme Lord.

A crude example may be given here. We may find some mailboxes on the street, and if we post our letters in those boxes, they will naturally go to their destination without difficulty. But any old box, or an imitation, which we may find somewhere, which is not authorized by the post office, will not do the work. Similarly, God has an authorized representation in the Deity form, which is called arca-vigraha. This arca-vigraha is an incarnation of the Supreme Lord. God will accept service through that form. The Lord is omnipotent and all-powerful; therefore, by His incarnation as arca-vigraha, He can accept the services of the devotee, just to make it convenient for the man in conditioned life.

So, for a devotee, there is no difficulty in approaching the Supreme immediately and directly, but for those who are following the impersonal way to spiritual realization, the path is difficult. They have to understand the unmanifested representation of the Supreme through such Vedic literatures as the Upaniṣads, and they have to learn the language, understand the nonperceptual feelings, and they have to realize all these processes. This is not very easy for a common man. A person in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, engaged in devotional service, simply by the guidance of the bona fide spiritual master, simply by offering regulative obeisances unto the Deity, simply by hearing the glories of the Lord, and simply by eating the remnants of foodstuffs offered to the Lord, realizes the Supreme Personality of Godhead very easily. There is no doubt that the impersonalists are unnecessarily taking a troublesome path with the risk of not realizing the Absolute Truth at the ultimate end. But the personalist, without any risk, trouble, or difficulty, approaches the Supreme Personality directly. A similar passage appears in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. It is stated there that if one has to ultimately surrender unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead (This surrendering process is called bhakti.), but instead takes the trouble to understand what is Brahman and what is not Brahman and spends his whole life in that way, the result is simply troublesome. Therefore it is advised here that one should not take up this troublesome path of self-realization because there is uncertainty in the ultimate result.

A living entity is eternally an individual soul, and if he wants to merge into the spiritual whole, he may accomplish the realization of the eternal and knowledgeable aspects of his original nature, but the blissful portion is not realized. By the grace of some devotee, such a transcendentalist, highly learned in the process of jñāna-yoga, may come to the point of bhakti-yoga, or devotional service. At that time, long practice in impersonalism also becomes a source of trouble, because he cannot give up the idea. Therefore an embodied soul is always in difficulty with the unmanifest, both at the time of practice and at the time of realization. Every living soul is partially independant, and one should know for certain that this unmanifested realization is against the nature of his spiritual blissful self. One should not take up this process. For every individual living entity the process of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, which entails full engagement in devotional service, is the best way. If one wants to ignore this devotional service, there is the danger of turning to atheism. Thus this process of centering attention on the unmanifested, the inconceivable, which is beyond the approach of the senses, as already expressed in this verse, should never be encouraged at any time, especially in this age. It is not advised by Lord Kṛṣṇa.

Hayagrīva: He says, "If you throw away His grace, He punishes you by behaving objectively toward you, and in that sense one may say that the world has not got a personal God in spite of all the proofs. But while dons and parsons," that is priests, "drivel on," talk on, "about the millions of truths about God's personality, the truth is that there are no longer the men living who could bear the pressure and weight of having a personal God." Because he feels that a personal God would make demands on man, and so therefore men reject the idea of a personal God.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Personal God means He is demanding, as Kṛṣṇa is demanding, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru: (BG 18.65) "Always think of Me, or offer Me worship, offer Me obeisances, and become My devotee. And give up all other engagement. Simply be engaged in My service." This is the demand of God, and if we carry out His demand, then we are perfect. Tyaktvā dehaṁ punar janma naiti (BG 4.9). If you simply carry out the orders of God then you become qualified, fit for going back to home, back to Godhead. This is clearly stated. Tyaktvā deham. We have to give up this body, but a devotee, a pure devotee, after giving up this body, he doesn't accept another material body, but in his original, spiritual body he goes back to home, back to Godhead.

Hayagrīva: That's the end of Kierkegaard. (end)

Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:

Devotee: The impersonalist in the brahma-jyotir, is his will in a dormant state also?

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is willingness in a negative way: "I shall not will. I shall not will. Because I have got experience that by willing I have suffered so much, so I shall not will." But that stage you cannot stay for a long time. Then you have to again will in the same way.

Śyāmasundara: What about these men who perform great austerities, lash their bodies, starve, and...

Prabhupāda: Oh, that is also the same thing, not willing. They have no knowledge of good willing; therefore they simply want to kill bad willing. Because they are insufficient in knowledge that in this way willing cannot be reformed. Just like a child is accustomed to play. If you stop playing, then he will be dull, he'll be diseased. But you must give him good engagement. Just like DDD, he stopped playing. He was worshiping Jagannātha, and he said, "It is māyā." He stopped. Just like your daughter, when she is engaged in worshiping Deity, she is engladdened. So give good engagement, good willing, and he will automatically give up all this nonsense bad willing. But if you want to stop artificially willing, that will be not possible. That you can stop for the time, but it will again act.

Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:

Śyāmasundara: What about these men who perform great austerities, lash their bodies, starve, and...

Prabhupāda: Oh, that is also the same thing, not willing. They have no knowledge of good willing; therefore they simply want to kill bad willing. Because they are insufficient in knowledge that in this way willing cannot be reformed. Just like a child is accustomed to play. If you stop playing, then he will be dull, he'll be diseased. But you must give him good engagement. Just like DDD, he stopped playing. He was worshiping Jagannātha, and he said, "It is māyā." He stopped. Just like your daughter, when she is engaged in worshiping Deity, she is engladdened. So give good engagement, good willing, and he will automatically give up all this nonsense bad willing. But if you want to stop artificially willing, that will be not possible. That you can stop for the time, but it will again act.

Śyāmasundara: So you go through so much trouble...

Prabhupāda: Therefore the Māyāvādī philosophers, the impersonalists, because they are not willing to serve Kṛṣṇa, they stop willing. They again fall down. Vivekananda comes and opens hospitals. Just like your Christian missionaries. Yes. This is there. Willing, you cannot stop. You have to will badly or goodly, or godly. So better try to will godly, then badly will automatically... This is our process. You don't stop willing. Yes, we will—or Kṛṣṇa's service.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Prabhupāda: There are others...

Hayagrīva: Yes.

Prabhupāda: ...they say that meditation you become God. That meditation can make, manufacture God?

Hayagrīva: Well his, his impersonalist stand leads toward pantheism.

Prabhupāda: This is also kind of meditation, speculating that "God should be like this." What is that? But they cannot define what is that, this.

Hayagrīva: He says, "The concept of God as a separate substance is impossible and contradictory."

Prabhupāda: God is everything. There is no question of separation. That is defined in the Bhagavad-gītā, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam, "I am everything." So how He can be separate?

Hayagrīva: But he rejects God as a separate person.

Prabhupāda: He may reject, but God is everything. How he can reject God? The, the, these are the defects of speculators. They cannot give us tangible leading. That because they are defective themselves, so whatever interpretation they will give, all defective.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

Hayagrīva: Well in this sense Fichte is closer to Kṛṣṇa consciousness than most impersonalists, because most impersonalist advocate inaction and meditation on the void, but, uh...

Prabhupāda: No, impersonalist...

Hayagrīva: ...but how can you have action without action directed toward a person or toward...?

Prabhupāda: Yes. Just like here in India, impersonalist, they have got also action. Just like the Māyāvādīs, they have also the same principle. The Śaṅkarācārya is teaching vairāgya, "Sit down under the tree, take thrice bath," so many vairāgya instruction. Rather, their instruction are more difficult than Vaiṣṇava. So vaivāgya-vidyā's teaching. Ours is also, Caitanya Mahāprabhu taught by His personal example. There is no question of inaction, sitting idly and gossiping about God imagination. Even an impersonalist or personalist, they are fully engaged. Just like the impersonalist in India, they are reading Vedānta-sūtra, they are trying to understand. They are not idle.

Hayagrīva: He felt that faith is the basis of action, not knowledge. He felt that knowledge...

Prabhupāda: So faith is...

Hayagrīva: ...is not sufficient for action.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Faith is there. Just like a child, even animals, we have seen in the park the swan... What is called the children of the swan?

Philosophy Discussion on Socrates:

Hayagrīva: According to Socrates, the pursuit of man is the seeking of this absolute good. Basically Socrates is an impersonalist because he does not ultimately define this absolute good as a person, nor does he give the absolute good a personal name. He just calls it "the good."

Prabhupāda: That is preliminary stage of understanding the Absolute. Because the..., the beginning, Brahman realization, impersonal, and then further advanced Paramātmā realization, localized, God is everywhere. And God is everywhere, that's a fact. That is God. But He has got His place, abode. That is God, that goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhuto (Bs. 5.37), that God is Person, He has His own abode, He has his own associates and everything. Difference is that although He is in His abode, He is present everywhere, even within the atom. Aṇḍāntara-stha-paramāṇu-cayāntara-stham (Bs. 5.35). So Socrates or any other philosopher, they cannot understand the potency of God, how He can remain in His own place, simultaneously in every atom. That is the conception of God. So everywhere He is staying. Everything is His expansion, His energy, the bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ khaṁ mano buddhir eva ca (BG 7.4). The material world is bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ-land, water, earth, air. So these are different expansion of God's energy. So He can be present everywhere because His energy is expanded everywhere. So energy and the energetic, they are not different, but at the same time energy is not the energetic. This simultaneously one and different, acintya-bhedābheda-tattva, this is perfect philosophy.

Philosophy Discussion on Socrates:

Prabhupāda: Yes. That's a fact. That is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā: kāmais tais tair hṛta-jñānāḥ tyajante anya-devatāḥ (BG 7.20). They worship other demigods, being too much lusty. Because the demigod is worshiped for some material benefit. So they have been described as hṛta-jñānāḥ. Hṛta-jñānāḥ means one who has lost his intelligence. Actually it is so. Suppose by worshiping a demigod, Sarasvatī, the goddess of learning, so you get the opportunity of being a, becoming a very nice scholar. But how long you shall remain scholar? As soon as the body is finished, your whole scholarship is finished. Then you have to accept another body, and you have to act according to that body. So how you have..., this scholarship will help you? But if you worship God, as Kṛṣṇa says, that janma karma ca me divyaṁ yo jānāti tattvataḥ... (BG 4.9). To worship God means to know God, actually what is God, more perfect—how He is managing, how material nature is working under Him. People cannot even imagine that God can be person, but here is everything person. Mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ sūyate sa-carācaram: (BG 9.10) "Under My supervision the material nature is working." So these impersonalists or less intelligent persons, they cannot understand that how a person can dictate the wonderful activities of the material nature; therefore they remain impersonalist. But actually, person. That is the understanding of Bhagavad-gītā. God is person. Mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya: (BG 7.7) "There is no more superior authority than Me." So when He says mattaḥ, that means there is a person, person.

Philosophy Discussion on Socrates:

Prabhupāda: But actually that is the fact. Just like we are say so many times, Dr. Frog. A frog within the dark well, he is thinking, "Here is everything." And if he is informed, "Oh, there is big miles of water, Atlantic Ocean," so this Dr. Frog, from within the well he has never seen the Atlantic Ocean, and he cannot conceive that the water can be so expansive. So therefore those who are in the dark well, for them it is surprising that what is the light outside. But that's a fact. And one who has fallen, he is in the..., if he is crying that "I am fallen," so it is said that the man outside, he drops a rope, that "You catch this rope and I shall take it out." But he does not catch up. Just like we are presenting that you, everyone in the material world, you are suffering, you take, catch up this Kṛṣṇa consciousness. They are refusing, or they do not admit; that is going on. But if one is fortunate, he can catch up the rope, and the man wants to help him, he can get him out. But he has to catch up. It is Kṛṣṇa's advice also, that "You are crying, you are suffering, you are finding, trying to find out how your suffering will be ended." That materialist, they are doing their own way, and the impersonalists, they are doing in their own way; the yogis, they are doing in their own way. Everyone is trying to get out of the suffering. But when Kṛṣṇa says that these things will not help you, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66), he does not catch up. That is his misfortune. God Himself says that "You take." "You take Me" means by His instruction in the Bhagavad-gītā. "You take to Me, you will be saved." But they will not. That is their obstinacy. And the Vedas therefore says, tamasi mā jyotir gamaḥ: "Don't remain in the dark well. You come out to the light." But they will not come to the light. They want to remain in the dark well. And if you want to become perfect, that is their misfortune. Within this material world it is darkness, just like the, just now it is evening.

Philosophy Discussion on Plotinus:

Prabhupāda: The One is Vedic conception, ekaṁ brahma dvitīyaṁ nāsti, Supreme Truth, Absolute Truth, advaya-jñāna. So this is our philosophy, that these living entities, soul, they are of the same quality as the one Supreme, but they are fragmental parts, emanation from Him. He has got the same intelligence, same mind, but limited jurisdiction. God is... That One is omnipresent, but we are not omnipresent, but we are present. Omniscient; but we are not omniscient, but we are (sic:) sentient, not that dull matter. In this way, that One has got all spiritual qualities in fullness; we have got spiritual qualities in minute quantity. That is our constitutional position. But we are like sparks, and the Supreme One is like big fire. When we leave the association of the big fire, as sparks we become extinguished, means our illumination stops. That is called māyā, māyā andhakāra, darkness. That we can revive also, again be put with the One and revive our illuminating power, spiritual power, and live with the Supreme One peacefully, eternal life of bliss.

Hayagrīva: Plotinus is an impersonalist. He believed that attributing attributes to God limit God.

Prabhupāda: Hm?

Hayagrīva: He believes that attributing qualities to God necessarily limit God, so he's an impersonalist.

Prabhupāda: Limit?

Hayagrīva: Limit. Any attribute or quality is by necessary limiting. This is a typical impersonalist stand.

Prabhupāda: If he is...

Hayagrīva: That the One, the One is transcendental, but there's no multiplicity in Him. That means im..., impersonal. Although He is the cause of all multiplicities, He is the cause of all living entities, He Himself...

Prabhupāda: Yes, He is the cause of all living entities. That is Vedic conception. Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). He is the chief amongst the eternals, chief amongst the sentients, but unless He has got unlimited transcendental qualities, how He can be omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, all-powerful? That is not perfection.

Philosophy Discussion on Benedict Spinoza:

Prabhupāda: So, so far God is concerned, and undoubtedly He is unlimited and His qualities are unlimited. So His one of the most important quality is called Bhakta-vatsala. He is very much dear to His devotee, Bhakta-vatsala. So He has unlimited devotees and unlimited dealings with them; therefore He is unlimitedly expanded. That is pantheism. But it does not mean because He is unlimitedly expanded, His personality is lost. He is person always, even though He is unlimitedly expanded. That is the Vedic version: pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam eva avaśiṣyate (Iso Invocation). He is complete, and if another complete form expands from Him, still He remains complete. He is not lost. The material conception is if one unit, if something is taken from it, then it becomes less of that thing. But God is so complete that you can go on taking from Him unlimitedly, still He remains unlimited. That is pantheist. I think they are impersonalist.

Hayagrīva: Yes. Spinoza is impersonal. He asserts that God cannot be a remote cause of the creation. He says that the creation flows from God in the same way that conclusions flow from principles in mathematics. God is free to create, but He is the eminent cause. That is to say, the creation is an extension of Himself.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is, He creates by His energy. Just like in the Bhagavad-gītā it is stated,

bhūmir āpo 'nalo vāyuḥ
khaṁ mano buddhir eva ca
bhinnā me prakṛtiḥ aṣṭadhā
(BG 7.4)

These eight kinds of material elements—earth, water, air, fire, sky, mind, intelligence and ego—they are material energies, and this material world is made of these material elements. So because it is made of God's energy, therefore it is called created by God. But this is creation of His energy. Prakṛtiḥ pradhāna, upadhāna, pradhāna. The ingredients are coming from Him, and prakṛtiḥ, nature, creates. This is the idea of creation. So God is a remote cause and a eminent cause also, because these elements, they are God's energy. So the eminent cause is the energy. Therefore it is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā, mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam: "By Me, everything is expanding." So when He says "By Me," then He is the eminent cause. There are two causes: remote and eminent.

Philosophy Discussion on Benedict Spinoza:

Hayagrīva: Spinoza's God is clearly not a personal God. Spinoza is an impersonalist, and his love for God is more intellectual or philosophical than theistic or religious. Being an impersonalist, Spinoza believed in the identity of the individual soul with God. This is not to say that he believed that the individual soul is infinite, but that it is not distinct from God. He writes, "Thus that love of the soul is a part of the infinite love with which God loves Himself." He sees the soul's intellectual love of God and God's love for the individual soul, which is within man, to be one and the same love.

Prabhupāda: Love is five kinds of love: śānta, dāsya, sākhya, vatsalya, mādhurya. The beginning of love is awe and adoration: "Oh, God is so great. God is everything." When he understands God's potency, unlimitedness, the soul adores Him. That adoration is also love. When that adoration is further advanced, then he serves God as master and servant. When the service is more intimate, then friend to friend—as one friend renders service to other friend, the other friend renders to other friend, like that, reciprocal. Then further expanded, the love is turned into paternal love, and further expanded it is expanding into conjugal love. So there are different stages of love. So Spinoza is touching only the beginning of love, simply adoring, appreciating God's power, expansion, that much. But when this love of adoration expands, that is called dasya-rasa, sākhya-rasa, vatsalya-rasa, madhurya-rasa. So he is on the beginning state of loving God. He has not advanced farther.

Philosophy Discussion on Benedict Spinoza:

Hayagrīva: It, it seems that he believes in the Paramātmā present within all beings but does not believe in the jīva along with Paramātmā. Is this a typical impersonalist position?

Prabhupāda: That means he does not know what is love. If God loves the living entity, then He must be well-wisher, friend of the living entity. And because God expands Himself unlimitedly, therefore He lives with the living entity, and living entities are unlimited. That is said in the Bhagavad-gītā: īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe arjuna tiṣṭhati (BG 18.61). In Upaniṣads also it is confirmed that two birds are sitting on tree; one is eating the fruit and the other is simply witness. So this witnessing bird is God; therefore Paramātmā and jīvātmā live together. And there are many other places-sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭo (BG 15.15). He reminds the living entity that "Unless Paramātmā is there, I forget everything of my past life." But because I wanted to enjoy something in my past life, God gives him the opportunity and reminds him, "Now you wanted this. Here is the opportunity. You do it." So Paramātmā is always with the jīva.

Purports to Songs

Purport to Gaurangera Duti Pada -- Los Angeles, January 6, 1969:

Therefore Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura says, "Such devotee, it doesn't matter whether he's in the renounced order of life or whether he is a householder." Gṛha. Gṛha means householder. So Caitanya Mahāprabhu's movement does not say that one has to become a renounced order, sannyāsī. Just like Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, impersonalists, Śaṅkarācārya, they first, they put the first condition that "You take up the renounced order of life first, and then talk of spiritual advancement." So in Śaṅkara sampradāya nobody is accepted as bona fide impersonalist unless he has accepted the renounced order of life. But here, in Caitanya's movement, there is no such restriction. Advaita Prabhu, He was a householder. Nityānanda, He was householder. Gadādhara, He was also householder. And Śrīvāsa, he was also householder. And Caitanya Mahāprabhu also married twice. So it doesn't matter. Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura says that to become in renounced order of life, or to remain in householder life, that does not matter. If he is actually taking part in the movements of Caitanya's saṅkīrtana activities and actually understanding what it is, he is taking sport in the waves of such devotional ocean, then such person is always liberated. And Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura is aspiring his association ever increasingly. That is the sum and substance of this song. (end)

Purport to Gaura Pahu -- Los Angeles, January 10, 1969:

When we speak of Kṛṣṇa, "Kṛṣṇa" means Kṛṣṇa with His devotees. Kṛṣṇa is never alone. Kṛṣṇa is with Rādhārāṇī. Rādhārāṇī is with the gopīs. And Kṛṣṇa is with the cowherd boys. We are not impersonalists. We do not see Kṛṣṇa alone. Similarly, Kṛṣṇa means with Kṛṣṇa's devotees. So Kṛṣṇa consciousness means to keep association with the devotees of Kṛṣṇa. Viṣaya viṣama viṣa satata khāinu. And he says that "I have drunk always the most dangerous poison of sense gratification." Viṣaya viṣama viṣa. Viṣaya means sense gratification. Eating, sleeping, mating, and defending. These are called... These four principles are called viṣaya. And viṣama means dangerously. And viṣa means poison. If one is simply engaged with these four principles of life, just like animals. Then it is to be supposed that he's simply drinking poison. That's all. Viṣaya viṣama satata khāinu. "I know this (is) poison, but I am so much intoxicated that I am drinking this poison every moment."

Purport to Parama Koruna -- Los Angeles, January 16, 1969:

So in this age... Of course, the last incarnation, Kalki, will simply kill. Long, long after, He will come. But here Lord Caitanya, His mission is no killing, simply favoring. That is the specific characteristic of Lord Caitanya. Because in this age, of course, there is very much prominence of irreligiosity. But if Lord Caitanya wanted to kill them, then there was no question of their salvation. They would be... Of course, anyone who is killed by incarnation he also gets salvation. But not to the spiritual planets, but they merge into the Brahman effulgence as the impersonalists desire. In other words, the impersonalist's goal of salvation is as good as the goal of salvation of the enemies of God. That is not a very difficult job. So Lord Caitanya is very merciful because He is embracing everyone by bestowing love of Kṛṣṇa. Rūpa Gosvāmī has described Lord Caitanya as the most munificent of all the incarnations because He is giving Kṛṣṇa to everyone, without any qualification. So Locana dāsa Ṭhākura says that parama koruṇa, pahū dui jana, nitāi gauracandra, that They are essence of all incarnation. Kevala ānanda-kanda. And Their preaching process is very pleasing. Caitanya Mahāprabhu recommends "You chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, dance nicely, and when you feel tired, just take rest and eat Kṛṣṇa prasādam." So His formula is very pleasing. Kevala ānanda-kanda. While He was present in Jagannātha Purī, every day in the evening, dancing was, chanting and dancing continued. And after dancing is finished, He used to distribute sumptuously prasādam of Jagannātha. So many thousands of people used to assemble every night. So simply transcendentally pleasing, this movement. Kevala ānanda-kanda.

Page Title:Impersonalist (Lectures, Other)
Compiler:Visnu Murti, Mayapur
Created:25 of Mar, 2012
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=121, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:121