Mayavada (CC)

The tendency of the living entity is to come down from the heights, where everything can be seen in perspective. God, however, does not have this tendency. The Supreme Lord is not subject to fall down into illusion (māyā) any more than the sun is subject to fall beneath the clouds. Impersonalist philosophers (Māyāvādīs) maintain that both the living entity and God Himself are under the control of māyā when they come into this material world. This is the fallacy of their philosophy.

The Caitanya-caritāmṛta teaches that the spirit soul is immortal and that our activities in the spiritual world are also immortal. The Māyāvādīs, who hold the view that the Absolute is impersonal and formless, contend that a realized soul has no need to talk. But the Vaiṣṇavas, devotees of Kṛṣṇa, contend that when one reaches the stage of realization, he really begins to talk. "Previously we only talked of nonsense," the Vaiṣṇava says. "Now let us begin our real talks, talks of Kṛṣṇa."

In support of their view that the self-realized remain silent, the Māyāvādīs are fond of using the example of the water pot, maintaining that when a pot is not filled with water it makes a sound, but that when it is filled it makes no sound. But are we waterpots? How can we be compared to them? A good analogy utilizes as many similarities between two objects as possible. A waterpot is not an active living force, but we are.

In the Bhagavad-gītā Kṛṣṇa begins His teachings by distinguishing the soul from matter, and in the Eighteenth Chapter He concludes at the point where the soul surrenders to Him in devotion. The Māyāvādīs would have all talk cease there, but at that point the real discussion only begins. As the Vedānta-sūtra says at the very beginning, athāto brahma jijñāsā: "Now let us begin to inquire about the Supreme Absolute Truth."

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 1.19, Purport:

The four Vaiṣṇava ācāryas who are the great authorities of the four Vaiṣṇava disciplic successions, as well as Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya of the Māyāvāda school, appeared in the Pañca-draviḍa provinces. Among the four Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, who are all accepted by the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas, Śrī Rāmānuja Ācārya appeared in the southern part of Andhra Pradesh at Mahābhūtapurī, Śrī Madhva Ācārya appeared at Pājakam (near Vimānagiri) in the district of Mangalore, Śrī Viṣṇu Svāmī appeared at Pāṇḍya, and Śrī Nimbārka appeared at Muṅgera-patana, in the extreme south.

CC Adi 1.53, Purport:

The Māyāvādīs are very proud of their grammatical knowledge, but any person who has actual knowledge of grammar can understand that aham means "I" and that "I" refers to a personality. Therefore the Personality of Godhead, speaking to Brahmā, uses aham while describing His own transcendental form. Aham has a specific meaning; it is not a vague term that can be whimsically interpreted. Aham, when spoken by Kṛṣṇa, refers to the Supreme Personality of Godhead and nothing else.

CC Adi 3.87, Purport:

Even according to historical references, Kṛṣṇa's activities are most uncommon. Kṛṣṇa has affirmed, "I am God," and He has acted accordingly. Māyāvādīs think that everyone can claim to be God, but that is their illusion, for no one else can perform such extraordinary activities as Kṛṣṇa. When He was a child on the lap of His mother, He killed the demon Pūtanā. Then He killed the demons Tṛṇāvarta, Vatsāsura and Baka. When He was a little more grown up, He killed the demons Aghāsura and Ṛṣabhāsura. Therefore God is God from the very beginning. The idea that someone can become God by meditation is ridiculous. By hard endeavor one may realize his godly nature, but he will never become God. The asuras, or demons, who think that anyone can become God, are condemned.

CC Adi 3.102, Purport:

Advaita Prabhu is nondifferent from the Lord, yet in His relationship with the Lord He does not merge with Him but eternally renders service unto Him as a plenary portion. This is inconceivable for Māyāvādīs because they think in terms of mundane sense perception and therefore think that nondualism necessitates losing one's separate identity. It is clear from this verse, however, that Advaita Prabhu, although retaining His separate identity, is nondifferent from the Lord.

CC Adi 3.111, Purport:

Māyāvādīs think that the devotees have imagined the form of Kṛṣṇa, but the authentic Vedic scriptures have actually described Kṛṣṇa and His various transcendental forms.

CC Adi 4.105, Purport:

Prior to the Lord's acceptance of the renounced order, Puruṣottama Bhaṭṭācārya, a resident of Navadvīpa, desired to enter the renounced order of life. Therefore he left home and went to Benares, where he accepted the position of brahmacarya from a Māyāvādī sannyāsī.

Great souls assert that Nārāyaṇa, who is known as the Paramātmā, or Supersoul, is beyond material nature, and this is in accordance with the statements of the Vedic literature. Māyāvādīs also agree that Nārāyaṇa can expand Himself in various forms.

Malicious editors and scholars who attempt to misrepresent the Pañcarātra-śāstras to refute their regulations are most abominable. In the modern age, such malicious scholars have even commented misleadingly upon the Bhagavad-gītā, which was spoken by Kṛṣṇa, to prove that there is no Kṛṣṇa. How the Māyāvādīs have misrepresented the pāñcarātrika-vidhi will be shown below.

Even Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya, in his commentary on the forty-second aphorism, has accepted that the Personality of Godhead can automatically expand Himself variously. Therefore his commentary on the forty-second aphorism and his commentary on the forty-fourth aphorism are contradictory. It is a defect of Māyāvāda commentaries that they make one statement in one place and a contradictory statement in another place as a tactic to refute the Bhāgavata school.

CC Adi 7.31-32, Translation:

The cosmic manifestation of the illusory energy is material nature, and everything within material nature is made of matter. Therefore, one should not try to compare the expansions of material nature to the catur-vyūha, the quadruple expansions of the Personality of Godhead, but unfortunately the Māyāvādī school unreasonably attempts to do this.

CC Adi 5.66, Purport:

The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the Absolute Whole, and the living entities are parts of the Absolute Whole. This relationship of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the living entities is eternal. One should never mistakenly think that the spiritual whole can be divided into small parts by the small material energy. The Bhagavad-gītā does not support this Māyāvāda theory. Rather, it clearly states that the living entities are eternally small fragments of the supreme spiritual whole.

CC Adi 5.226, Purport:

Māyāvādīs admit that worship of the Lord's form is required in the beginning, but they think that in the end everything is impersonal. Therefore, since they are ultimately against worship of the Lord's form, Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has described them as offenders.

CC Adi 6.97, Purport:

Misunderstanding the Lord, many fools consider themselves incarnations of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but the result is that after leaving the material body they enter the species of jackals. Persons who cannot understand the real significance of an incarnation must attain such lower species of life as punishment. Conditioned souls who are puffed up by false egoism and who try to become one with the Supreme Lord become Māyāvādīs.

CC Adi 7.8, Purport:

The rāsa dance can be enjoyed only by Śrī Kṛṣṇa because He is the supreme leader and chief of the damsels of Vṛndāvana. All others are His devotees and associates. Although no one can compare with Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, there are many unscrupulous rascals who imitate the rāsa dance of Śrī Kṛṣṇa. They are Māyāvādīs, and people should be wary of them. The rāsa dance can be performed only by Śrī Kṛṣṇa and no one else.

Seeing that the Māyāvādīs and others were fleeing, Lord Caitanya thought, "I wanted everyone to be immersed in this inundation of love of Godhead, but some of them have escaped. Therefore I shall devise a trick to drown them also."

CC Adi 7.31-32, Purport:

Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu wanted to invent a way to capture the Māyāvādīs and others who did not take interest in the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. This is the symptom of an ācārya.

CC Adi 7.33, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura has explained the term "Māyāvādī" as follows: "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is transcendental to the material conception of life. A Māyāvādī is one who considers the body of the Supreme Personality of Godhead Kṛṣṇa to be made of māyā and who also considers the abode of the Lord and the process of approaching Him, devotional service, to be māyā. The Māyāvādī considers all the paraphernalia of devotional service to be māyā."

CC Adi 7.33, Purport:

Māyā refers to material existence, which is characterized by the reactions of fruitive activities. Māyāvādīs consider devotional service to be among such fruitive activities. According to them, when bhāgavatas (devotees) are purified by philosophical speculation, they will come to the real point of liberation.

In describing the Kāśīra Māyāvādīs, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura has explained that persons who are bewildered by empiric knowledge or direct sensual perception, and who thus consider that even this limited material world can be gauged by their material estimations, conclude that anything that one can discern by direct sense perception is but māyā, or illusion. They maintain that although the Absolute Truth is beyond the range of sense perception, it includes no spiritual variety or enjoyment.

According to the Kāśīra Māyāvādīs, the spiritual world is simply void. They do not believe in the Personality of the Absolute Truth or in His varieties of activities in the spiritual world. Although they have their own arguments, which are not very strong, they have no conception of the variegated activities of the Absolute Truth. These impersonalists, who are followers of Śaṅkarācārya, are generally known as Kāśīra Māyāvādīs (impersonalists residing in Vārāṇasī).

Near Vārāṇasī there is another group of impersonalists, who are known as Saranātha Māyāvādīs. Outside the city of Vārāṇasī is a place known as Saranātha, where there is a big Buddhist stūpa.

Many followers of Buddhist philosophy live there, and they are known as Saranātha Māyāvādīs. The impersonalists of Saranātha differ from those of Vārāṇasī, for the Vārāṇasī impersonalists propagate the idea that the impersonal Brahman is truth whereas material varieties are false, but the Saranātha impersonalists do not even believe that the Absolute Truth, or Brahman, can be understood as the opposite of māyā, or illusion. According to their vision, materialism is the only manifestation of the Absolute Truth.

Factually both the Kāśīra and the Saranātha Māyāvādīs, as well as any other philosophers who have no knowledge of the spirit soul, are advocates of utter materialism. None of them have clear knowledge regarding the Absolute or the spiritual world.

Philosophers like the Saranātha Māyāvādīs who do not believe in the spiritual existence of the Absolute Truth but consider material varieties to be everything do not believe that there are two kinds of nature, inferior (material) and superior (spiritual), as described in the Bhagavad-gītā. Actually, neither the Vārāṇasī nor Saranātha Māyāvādīs accept the principles of the Bhagavad-gītā, due to a poor fund of knowledge.

Theorizing as if devotional service were subject to their mental speculation, both kinds of Māyāvādī impersonalists conclude that the subject matter of bhakti-yoga is a creation of māyā and that Kṛṣṇa, devotional service and the devotee are also māyā. Therefore, as stated by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, māyāvādī kṛṣṇe aparādhī: "All the Māyāvādīs are offenders to Lord Kṛṣṇa." (CC Madhya 17.129) It is not possible for them to understand the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement; therefore we do not value their philosophical conclusions.

However expert such quarrelsome impersonalists are in putting forward their so-called logic, we defeat them in every respect and go forward with our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Their imaginative mental speculation cannot deter the progress of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, which is completely spiritual and is never under the control of such Māyāvādīs.

CC Adi 7.40, Translation:

While Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu was passing through Vārāṇasī on His way to Vṛndāvana, the Māyāvādī sannyāsī philosophers blasphemed against Him in many ways.

Fortunately or unfortunately, we also meet such Māyāvādīs who criticize our method of chanting and accuse us of not being interested in study. They do not know that we have translated volumes and volumes of books into English and that the students in our temples regularly study them in the morning, afternoon and evening.

We are writing and printing books, and our students study them and distribute them all over the world. No Māyāvādī school can present as many books as we have; nevertheless, they accuse us of not being fond of study. Such accusations are completely false. But although we study, we do not study the nonsense of the Māyāvādīs.

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs neither chant nor dance. Their technical objection is that this method of chanting and dancing is called tauryatrika, which indicates that a sannyāsī should completely avoid such activities and engage his time in the study of Vedānta. Actually, such men do not understand what is meant by Vedānta.

In the Bhagavad-gītā (15.15) Kṛṣṇa says, vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyo vedānta-kṛd veda-vid eva cāham: "By all the Vedas I am to be known; indeed I am the compiler of Vedānta, and I am the knower of the Vedas." Lord Kṛṣṇa is the actual compiler of Vedānta, and whatever He speaks is Vedānta philosophy. Although they are lacking the knowledge of Vedānta presented by the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the transcendental form of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the Māyāvādīs are very proud of their study.

The Māyāvādīs are very proud of having monopolized the Vedānta philosophy, but devotees have their own commentaries on Vedānta such as Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and others written by the ācāryas. The commentary of the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas is the Govinda-bhāṣya.

The Māyāvādīs' accusation that devotees do not study Vedānta is false. The Māyāvādīs do not know that chanting, dancing and preaching the principles of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, called bhāgavata-dharma, are the same as studying Vedānta.

The Māyāvādīs in Vārāṇasī blasphemed Lord Caitanya because His behavior did not follow these principles. Lord Caitanya, however, bestowed His mercy upon these Māyāvādī sannyāsīs and delivered them by means of His Vedānta discourses with Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī and Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya.

CC Adi 7.42, Purport:

Foolish Māyāvādīs, not knowing that the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is based on a solid philosophy of transcendental science, superficially conclude that those who dance and chant do not have philosophical knowledge. Those who are Kṛṣṇa conscious actually have full knowledge of the essence of Vedānta philosophy, for they study the real commentary on the Vedānta philosophy, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and follow the actual words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead as found in Bhagavad-gītā As It Is.

CC Adi 7.42, Purport:

After understanding the Bhāgavata philosophy, or bhāgavata-dharma, they become fully spiritually conscious or Kṛṣṇa conscious, and therefore their chanting and dancing is not material but is on the spiritual platform. Although everyone admires the ecstatic chanting and dancing of the devotees, who are therefore popularly known as "the Hare Kṛṣṇa people," Māyāvādīs cannot appreciate these activities because of their poor fund of knowledge.

CC Adi 7.43, Translation:

Hearing all this blasphemy, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu merely smiled to Himself, rejected all these accusations and did not talk with the Māyāvādīs.

CC Adi 7.44, Translation:

Thus neglecting the blasphemy of the Vārāṇasī Māyāvādīs, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu proceeded to Mathurā, and after visiting Mathurā He returned to meet the situation.

CC Adi 7.46, Purport:

This exemplary behavior of Lord Caitanya definitely proves that a Vaiṣṇava sannyāsī cannot accept invitations from Māyāvādī sannyāsīs or intimately mix with them.

CC Adi 7.50, Purport:

If someone blasphemes a Vaiṣṇava, one should stop him with arguments and higher reason. If one is not expert enough to do this he should give up his life on the spot, and if he cannot do this, he must go away. While Caitanya Mahāprabhu was in Benares or Kāśī, the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs blasphemed Him in many ways because although He was a sannyāsī He was indulging in chanting and dancing. Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara heard this criticism, and it was intolerable for them because they were great devotees of Lord Caitanya. They could not stop it, however, and therefore they appealed to Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu because this blasphemy was so intolerable that they had decided to give up their lives.

CC Adi 7.51, Translation:

"The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are all criticizing Your Holiness. We cannot tolerate hearing such criticism, for this blasphemy breaks our hearts."

CC Adi 7.54, Purport:

This brāhmaṇa knew that Caitanya Mahāprabhu was the only Vaiṣṇava sannyāsī in Benares at that time and all the others were Māyāvādīs.

CC Adi 7.54, Purport:

It is the duty of a gṛhastha to sometimes invite sannyāsīs to take food at his home. This gṛhastha-brāhmaṇa wanted to invite all the sannyāsīs to his house, but he also knew that it would be very difficult to induce Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu to accept such an invitation because the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs would be present. Therefore he fell down at His feet and fervently appealed to the Lord to be compassionate and grant his request. Thus he humbly submitted his desire.

CC Adi 7.55, Purport:

An ācārya, or great personality of the Vaiṣṇava school, is very strict in his principles, but although he is as hard as a thunderbolt, sometimes he is as soft as a rose. Thus actually he is independent. He follows all the rules and regulations strictly, but sometimes he slackens this policy. It was known that Lord Caitanya never mixed with the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, yet He conceded to the request of the brāhmaṇa, as stated in the next verse.

CC Adi 7.56, Translation:

Lord Caitanya smiled and accepted the invitation of the brāhmaṇa. He made this gesture to show His mercy to the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs.

CC Adi 7.59, Purport:

By offering His obeisances to the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu very clearly exhibited His humbleness to everyone. Vaiṣṇavas must not be disrespectful to anyone, to say nothing of a sannyāsī. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu teaches, amāninā māna-dena: one should always be respectful to others but should not demand respect for himself.

CC Adi 7.62, Translation:

The leader of all the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs present was named Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, and after standing up he addressed Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu as follows with great respect.

CC Adi 7.62, Purport:

As Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu showed respect to all the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, similarly the leader of the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, Prakāśānanda, also showed his respects to the Lord.

CC Adi 7.63, Purport:

Here is the distinction between Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu and Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī. In the material world everyone wants to introduce himself as very important and great, but Caitanya Mahāprabhu introduced Himself very humbly and meekly. The Māyāvādīs were sitting in an exalted position, and Caitanya Mahāprabhu sat in a place that was not even clean. Therefore the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs thought that He must have been aggrieved for some reason, and Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī inquired about the cause for His lamentation.

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are always very puffed up because of their knowledge of Sanskrit and because they belong to the Śaṅkara-sampradāya. They are always under the impression that unless one is a brāhmaṇa and a very good Sanskrit scholar, especially in grammar, one cannot accept the renounced order of life or become a preacher.

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs always misinterpret all the śāstras with their word jugglery and grammatical compositions, yet Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya himself condemned such jugglery of words in the verse prāpte sannihite kāle na hi na hi rakṣati ḍukṛñ karaṇe. Ḍukṛñ refers to suffixes and prefixes in Sanskrit grammar.

Śaṅkarācārya warned his disciples that if they concerned themselves only with the principles of grammar, not worshiping Govinda, they were fools who would never be saved. Yet in spite of Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya's instructions, foolish Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are always busy juggling words on the basis of strict Sanskrit grammar.

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are very puffed up if they hold the elevated sannyāsa title Tīrtha, Āśrama or Sarasvatī. Even among Māyāvādīs, those who belong to other sampradāyas and hold other titles, such as Vana, Araṇya or Bhāratī, are considered to be lower-grade sannyāsīs.

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu accepted sannyāsa from the Bhāratī-sampradāya, and thus He considered Himself a lower sannyāsī than Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī. To remain distinct from Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs, the sannyāsīs of the Māyāvādi-sampradāya always think themselves to be situated in a very much elevated spiritual order, but Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, in order to teach them how to become humble and meek, accepted Himself as belonging to a lower sampradāya of sannyāsīs.

The Māyāvādi-sampradāya sannyāsīs are generally known as Vedāntīs, as if Vedānta were their monopoly. Actually, however, Vedāntī refers to a person who perfectly knows Kṛṣṇa. As confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (15.15), vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ: By all the Vedas it is Kṛṣṇa who is to be known.

The so-called Māyāvādī Vedāntīs do not know who Kṛṣṇa is; therefore their title of Vedāntī, or "knower of Vedānta philosophy," is simply a pretension.

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs always think of themselves as real sannyāsīs and consider sannyāsīs of the Vaiṣṇava order to be brahmacārīs.

A brahmacārī is supposed to engage in the service of a sannyāsī and accept him as his guru. Māyāvādī sannyāsīs therefore declare themselves to be not only gurus but jagad-gurus, or the spiritual masters of the entire world, although, of course, they cannot see the entire world. Sometimes they dress gorgeously and travel on the backs of elephants in processions, and thus they are always puffed up, accepting themselves as jagad-gurus. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, however, has explained that jagad-guru properly refers to one who is the controller of his tongue, mind, words, belly, genitals and anger. Pṛthivīṁ sa śiṣyāt: such a jagad-guru is completely fit to make disciples all over the world.

Due to false prestige, Māyāvādī sannyāsīs who do not have these qualifications sometimes harass and blaspheme a Vaiṣṇava sannyāsī who humbly engages in the service of the Lord.

CC Adi 7.67, Purport:

Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself exemplified such behavior, and this is why Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī inquired why He did not associate or even talk with them. Caitanya Mahāprabhu confirmed by example that a preacher of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement generally should not waste his time talking with Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, but when there are arguments on the basis of śāstra, a Vaiṣṇava must come forward to talk and defeat them in philosophy.

CC Adi 7.67, Purport:

According to Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, only one who takes sannyāsa in the disciplic succession from Śaṅkarācārya is a Vedic sannyāsī. Sometimes it is challenged that the sannyāsīs who are preaching in the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement are not genuine because they do not belong to brāhmaṇa families, for Māyāvādīs do not offer sannyāsa to one who does not belong to a brāhmaṇa family by birth.

CC Adi 7.69, Purport:

As explained in regard to verse 41, Māyāvādī sannyāsīs do not approve of chanting and dancing. Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, like Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, misunderstood Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu to be a misled young sannyāsī, and therefore he asked Him why He indulged in the association of fanatics instead of executing the duty of a sannyāsī.

CC Adi 7.70, Purport:

Due to renunciation, Vedānta study, meditation and the strict regulative principles of their daily routine, Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are certainly in a position to execute pious activities. Thus Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, on account of his piety, could understand that Caitanya Mahāprabhu was not an ordinary person but the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Sākṣāt nārāyaṇa: he considered Him to be Nārāyaṇa Himself.

CC Adi 7.70, Purport:

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs address one another as Nārāyaṇa because they think that they are all going to be Nārāyaṇa or merge with Nārāyaṇa in the next life. Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī appreciated that Caitanya Mahāprabhu had already directly become Nārāyaṇa and did not need to wait until His next life.

CC Adi 7.70, Purport:

One difference between the Vaiṣṇava and Māyāvādī philosophies is that Māyāvādī philosophers think that after giving up their bodies they are going to become Nārāyaṇa by merging with His body, whereas Vaiṣṇava philosophers understand that after the body dies they are going to have a transcendental, spiritual body in which to associate with Nārāyaṇa.

CC Adi 7.72, Purport:

Taking advantage of these verses, there are some sahajiyās who, taking everything very cheaply, consider themselves elevated Vaiṣṇavas but do not care even to touch the Vedānta-sūtra or Vedānta philosophy. A real Vaiṣṇava should, however, study Vedānta philosophy, but if after studying Vedānta one does not adopt the chanting of the holy name of the Lord, he is no better than a Māyāvādī. Therefore, one should not be a Māyāvādī, yet one should not be unaware of the subject matter of Vedānta philosophy. Indeed, Caitanya Mahāprabhu exhibited His knowledge of Vedānta in His discourses with Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī.

CC Adi 7.73, Purport:

A person who is addicted to the chanting of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra very easily gets the opportunity to serve the Supreme Personality of Godhead directly. There is no need for such a person to understand the grammatical jugglery in which Māyāvādī sannyāsīs generally indulge. Śrī Śaṅkarācārya also stressed this point: na hi na hi rakṣati ḍukṛñ karaṇe. "Simply by juggling grammatical suffixes and prefixes one cannot save himself from the clutches of death." The grammatical word jugglers cannot bewilder a devotee who engages in chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra.

CC Adi 7.74, Purport:

A name that represents an object of this material world may be subjected to arguments and experimental knowledge, but in the absolute world a name and its owner, the fame and the famous, are identical, and similarly the qualities, pastimes and everything else pertaining to the Absolute are also absolute. Although Māyāvādīs profess monism, they differentiate between the holy name of the Supreme Lord and the Lord Himself.

CC Adi 7.95-96, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu presented himself in this way: “I am a great fool and do not have knowledge of right and wrong. In order to understand the real meaning of the Vedānta-sūtra, I never followed the explanation of the Śaṅkara-sampradāya or Māyāvādī sannyāsīs. I’m very much afraid of the illogical arguments of the Māyāvādī philosophers. Therefore I think I have no authority regarding their explanations of the Vedānta-sūtra. I firmly believe that simply chanting the holy name of the Lord can remove all misconceptions of the material world.

CC Adi 7.95-96, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu continued, "I never chanted and danced to make an artificial show. I dance and chant because I firmly believe in the words of My spiritual master. Although the Māyāvādī philosophers do not like this chanting and dancing, I nevertheless perform it on the strength of his words. Therefore it is to be concluded that I deserve very little credit for these activities of chanting and dancing, for they are being done automatically by the grace of the Supreme Personality of Godhead."

CC Adi 7.99, Translation:

After hearing Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, all the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs were moved. Their minds changed, and thus they spoke with pleasing words.

The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs met Caitanya Mahāprabhu at Vārāṇasī to criticize the Lord regarding His participation in the saṅkīrtana movement, which they did not like. This demonic nature of opposition to the saṅkīrtana movement perpetually exists. As it existed in the time of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, similarly it existed long before that, even in the time of Prahlāda Mahārāja.

The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are āsuraṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ, which means that they have taken the path of the asuras (demons), who do not believe in the existence of the form of the Lord. The Māyāvādīs say that the ultimate source of everything is impersonal, and in this way they deny the existence of God. Saying that there is no God is direct denial of God, and saying that God exists but has no head, legs or hands and cannot speak, hear or eat is a negative way of denying His existence.

A person who cannot see is called blind, one who cannot walk is called lame, one who has no hands is called helpless, one who cannot speak is called dumb, and one who cannot hear is called deaf. The Māyāvādīs' proposition that God has no legs, no eyes, no ears and no hands is an indirect way of insulting Him by defining Him as blind, deaf, dumb, lame, helpless, etc.

Impersonalist Māyāvādīs always try to defy Vaiṣṇavas because Vaiṣṇavas accept the Supreme Personality as the supreme cause and want to serve Him, talk with Him and see Him, just as the Lord is also eager to see His devotees and talk, eat and dance with them. These personal exchanges of love do not appeal to the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs. Therefore the original purpose of the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs of Benares in meeting Caitanya Mahāprabhu was to defeat His personal conception of God. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, however, as a preacher, turned the minds of the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs.

CC Adi 7.100, Purport:

One whose love of Godhead (kṛṣṇa-prema) is awakened and who thus becomes a devotee of the inconceivable Supreme Personality of Godhead is to be considered extremely fortunate. The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs admitted this fact to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. It is not easy for one to become a Kṛṣṇa conscious person, but by the mercy of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu it can be possible, as will be proven in the course of this narration.

CC Adi 7.101, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura comments in this connection, "Māyāvādī sannyāsīs accept that the commentary by Śrī Śaṅkarācārya known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya gives the real meaning of the Vedanta-sūtra. In other words, Māyāvādī sannyāsīs accept the meanings expressed in the explanations of the Vedānta-sūtra by Śaṅkarācārya, which are based on monism. Thus they explain the Vedānta-sūtra, the Upaniṣads and all such Vedic literatures in their own impersonal way." The great Māyāvādī sannyāsī Sadānanda Yogīndra has written a book known as Vedānta-sāra, in which he writes, vedānto nāma upaniṣat-pramāṇam. tad-upakārīṇi śārīraka-sūtrādīni ca.

CC Adi 7.101, Purport:

Māyāvādīs do not discuss these philosophies, for they are firmly convinced of their own philosophy of kevalādvaita, exclusive monism. Accepting this system of philosophy as the pure understanding of the Vedānta-sūtra, they believe that Kṛṣṇa has a body made of material elements and that the activities of loving service to Kṛṣṇa are sentimentality.

CC Adi 7.101, Purport:

They are known as Māyāvādīs because according to their opinion Kṛṣṇa has a body made of māyā and the loving service of the Lord executed by devotees is also māyā. They consider such devotional service to be an aspect of fruitive activities (karma-kāṇḍa). According to their view, bhakti consists of mental speculation or sometimes meditation. This is the difference between the Māyāvādī and Vaiṣṇava philosophies.

CC Adi 7.102, Translation:

After hearing the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs speak in that way, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu smiled slightly and said, “My dear sirs, if you don’t mind I can say something to you regarding Vedānta philosophy.”

CC Adi 7.102, Purport:

The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, appreciating Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, inquired from Him why He did not discuss Vedānta philosophy. Actually, however, the entire system of Vaiṣṇava activities is based on Vedānta philosophy. Vaiṣṇavas do not neglect Vedānta, but they do not care to understand Vedānta on the basis of the Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary. Therefore, to clarify the situation, Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, with the permission of the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, wanted to speak regarding Vedānta philosophy.

CC Adi 7.103, Translation:

Hearing this, the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs became somewhat humble and addressed Caitanya Mahāprabhu as Nārāyaṇa Himself, who they all agreed He was.

CC Adi 7.103, Purport:

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs address each other as Nārāyaṇa. Whenever they see another sannyāsī, they offer him respect by calling oṁ namo nārāyaṇāya ("I offer my respect unto you, Nārāyaṇa"), although they know perfectly well what kind of Nārāyaṇa he is.

CC Adi 7.103, Purport:

Since their philosophy declares that Nārāyaṇa and an ordinary human being are on the same level, they sometimes use the term daridra-nārāyaṇa ("poor Nārāyaṇa"), which was invented by a so-called svāmī who did not know anything about Vedānta philosophy. Therefore although all these Māyāvādī sannyāsīs who called themselves Nārāyaṇa were actually unaware of the position of Nārāyaṇa, due to their austerities Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu enabled them to understand Him to be Nārāyaṇa Himself. Lord Caitanya is certainly the Supreme Personality of Godhead Nārāyaṇa appearing as a devotee of Nārāyaṇa, and thus the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, understanding that He was directly Nārāyaṇa Himself whereas they were false, puffed-up Nārāyaṇas, spoke to Him as follows.

CC Adi 7.104, Purport:

"With one's materially contaminated senses one cannot understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead or His name, form, qualities or paraphernalia, but if one renders service unto Him, the Lord reveals Himself." (Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu 1.2.234) Here one can see the effect of the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs' service toward Nārāyaṇa. Because the Māyāvādīs offered a little respect to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and because they were pious and actually followed the austere rules and regulations of sannyāsa, they had some understanding of Vedānta philosophy, and by the grace of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu they could appreciate that He was none other than the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is endowed with all six opulences.

CC Adi 7.104, Purport:

One of these opulences is His beauty. By His extraordinarily beautiful bodily features, the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs recognized Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu as Nārāyaṇa Himself. He was not a farcical Nārāyaṇa like the daridra-nārāyaṇas invented by so-called sannyāsīs.

CC Adi 7.105, Purport:

These Māyāvādī sannyāsīs were fortunate enough to meet the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the form of a devotee, and certainly they were greatly influenced by the Lord. They knew that since a perfectly advanced spiritualist never says anything false, all his words are reasonable and agree with the Vedic version. A highly realized person never says anything that has no meaning. Māyāvādī philosophers claim to be the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and this has no meaning, but Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu never uttered such nonsense. The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs were convinced about His personality, and therefore they wanted to hear the purport of Vedānta philosophy from Him.

"The Māyāvāda philosophy," Lord Śiva informed his wife Pārvatī, "is impious (asac chāstra). It is covered Buddhism. My dear Pārvatī, in Kali-yuga I assume the form of a brāhmaṇa and teach this imagined Māyāvāda philosophy. In order to cheat the atheists, I describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead to be without form and without qualities. Similarly, in explaining Vedānta I describe the same Māyāvāda philosophy in order to mislead the entire population toward atheism by denying the personal form of the Lord."

Thus instead of being tattva-vāda, or in search of the Absolute Truth, they become Māyāvāda, or illusioned by the material energy. When Śrī Viṣṇu Svāmī, one of the four ācāryas of the Vaiṣṇava cult, presented his thesis on the subject matter of śuddhādvaita-vāda, immediately the Māyāvādīs took advantage of this philosophy and tried to establish their advaita-vāda or kevalādvaita-vāda. To defeat this kevalādvaita-vāda, Śrī Rāmānujācārya presented his philosophy as viśiṣṭādvaita-vāda, and Śrī Madhvācārya presented his philosophy of tattva-vāda, both of which are stumbling blocks to the Māyāvādīs because they defeat their philosophy in scrupulous detail.

Students of Vedic philosophy know very well how strongly Śrī Rāmānujācārya's viśiṣṭādvaita-vāda and Śrī Madhvācārya's tattva-vāda contest the impersonal Māyāvāda philosophy. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, however, accepted the direct meaning of the Vedānta philosophy and thus defeated the Māyāvāda philosophy immediately. He opined in this connection that anyone who follows the principles of the Śārīraka-bhāṣya is doomed.

"My dear wife, hear my explanations of how I have spread ignorance through Māyāvāda philosophy. Simply by hearing it, even an advanced scholar will fall down. In this philosophy, which is certainly very inauspicious for people in general, I have misrepresented the real meaning of the Vedas and recommended that one give up all activities in order to achieve freedom from karma. In this Māyāvāda philosophy I have described the jīvātmā and Paramātmā to be one and the same."

How the Māyāvāda philosophy was condemned by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and His followers is described in Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Antya-līlā, Second Chapter, verses 94 through 99, where Svarūpa-dāmodara Gosvāmī says that anyone who is eager to understand the Māyāvāda philosophy must be considered insane. This especially applies to a Vaiṣṇava who reads the Śārīraka-bhāṣya and considers himself to be one with God. The Māyāvādī philosophers have presented their arguments in such attractive, flowery language that hearing Māyāvāda philosophy may sometimes change the mind of even a mahā-bhāgavata, or very advanced devotee. An actual Vaiṣṇava cannot tolerate any philosophy that claims God and the living being to be one and the same.

CC Adi 7.112, Translation:

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

CC Adi 7.112, Purport:

Māyāvādī philosophers do not know how it is that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is formless. The Supreme Lord does not have a form like ours but has a spiritual form. Not knowing this, Māyāvādī philosophers simply advocate the onesided view that the Supreme Godhead, or Brahman, is formless (nirākāra). In this connection Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura offers many quotes from the Vedic literature.

CC Adi 7.112, Purport:

Māyāvādī philosophers materialistically think that if the Supreme Truth expands Himself in everything, He must lose His original form. Thus they think that there cannot be any form other than the expansive gigantic body of the Lord.

CC Adi 7.112, Purport:

From all these Vedic references one can understand that the Absolute Truth is a person and that no one can equal or excel Him. Although there are many foolish Māyāvādī philosophers who think that they are even greater than Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa is asamaurdhva: no one is equal to or above Him.

CC Adi 7.113, Translation:

“The Supreme Personality of Godhead is full of spiritual potencies. Therefore His body, name, fame and entourage are all spiritual. The Māyāvādī philosopher, due to ignorance, says that these are all merely transformations of the material mode of goodness.

The Māyāvādī philosophers cannot understand these two prakṛtis, or natures—material and spiritual—but one who is actually intelligent can understand them. Considering the many varieties and activities in material nature, why should the Māyāvādī philosophers deny the spiritual varieties of the spiritual world?

Due to unclean intelligence or a poor fund of knowledge, the Māyāvādī philosophers cannot understand the distinction between material and spiritual varieties; therefore they cannot even think of spiritual varieties because they take it for granted that all variety is material.

The material mode of goodness has nothing to do with spiritual varieties. Māyāvādī philosophers, however, cannot clearly understand spiritual varieties; therefore they imagine a negation of the material world to be the spiritual world. The material qualities of goodness, passion and ignorance cannot act in the spiritual world, which is therefore called nirguṇa, as clearly indicated in the Bhagavad-gītā (trai-guṇya-viṣayā vedā nistrai-guṇyo bhavārjuna).

The material world is a manifestation of the three modes of material nature, but one has to become free from these modes to come to the spiritual world, where their influence is completely absent. Now Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu will disassociate Lord Śiva from Māyāvāda philosophy in the following verse.

CC Adi 7.114, Translation:

“Śaṅkarācārya, who is an incarnation of Lord Śiva, is faultless because he is a servant carrying out the orders of the Lord. But those who follow his Māyāvādī philosophy are doomed. They will lose all their advancement in spiritual knowledge.

Māyāvādī philosophers are very proud of exhibiting their Vedānta knowledge through grammatical jugglery, but in the Bhagavad-gītā Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa certifies that they are māyayāpahṛta-jñāna, bereft of real knowledge due to māyā.

Why the daivī-māyā, or illusory energy of Kṛṣṇa, takes away the knowledge of the Māyāvādī philosophers is also explained in the Bhagavad-gīta by the use of the words āsuraṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ, which refer to a person who does not agree to the existence of the Lord. The Māyāvādīs, who are not in agreement with the existence of the Lord, can be classified in two groups, exemplified by the impersonalist Śaṅkarites of Vārāṇasī and the Buddhists of Saranātha. Both groups are Māyāvādīs, and Kṛṣṇa takes away their knowledge due to their atheistic philosophies.

The most prominent Māyāvādī scholar, Sadānanda Yogīndra, has written a book called Vedānta-sāra, in which he expounds the philosophy of Śaṅkarācārya, and all the followers of Śaṅkara's philosophy attribute great importance to his statements.

According to Māyāvādī philosophers, the Vaiṣṇava conception of the Lord as the Supreme Personality of Godhead and of the jīva, or individual soul, as His eternal servant is a manifestation of ignorance. If we accept the judgment of Lord Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad-gītā, however, the Māyāvādīs are to be considered māyayāpahṛta-jñāna, or bereft of all knowledge, because they do not recognize the existence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead or they claim that His existence is a product of the material conception (māyā).

Vyāsadeva composed the Vedānta-sūtra to deliver the conditioned souls from this material world, but Śaṅkarācārya, by presenting the Vedānta-sūtra in his own way, has clearly done a great disservice to human society, for one who follows his Māyāvāda philosophy is doomed. In the Vedanta-sūtra, devotional service is clearly indicated, but the Māyāvādī philosophers refuse to accept the spiritual body of the Supreme Absolute Person and refuse to accept that the living entity has an individual existence separate from that of the Supreme Lord.

The Māyāvādī philosophers' unrealizable ambition to become one with the Supreme through denying the existence of the Personality of Godhead results in a most calamitous misrepresentation of spiritual knowledge, and one who follows this philosophy is doomed to remain perpetually in this material world. Therefore the Māyāvādīs are called aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ, or unclean in knowledge. Because they are unclean in knowledge, all their austerities and penances end in frustration.

In actuality the Māyāvādī philosophers very strictly follow the austerities and penances of spiritual life and in this way are elevated to the impersonal Brahman platform, but due to their negligence of the lotus feet of the Lord they again fall down to material existence.

CC Adi 7.115, Purport:

Even these simple arguments, however, cannot be understood by the Māyāvādī philosophers, and therefore the term māyayāpahṛta-jñāna, which is applied to them in the Bhagavad-gītā, is extremely appropriate. Anyone who thinks that Lord Viṣṇu is a product of the material energy, as explained by Sadānanda Yogīndra, should immediately be understood to be insane, for his knowledge has been stolen by the illusory energy.

CC Adi 7.115, Purport:

Lord Viṣṇu cannot be placed within the category of the demigods. Those who are actually bewildered by the Māyāvāda philosophy and are still in the darkness of ignorance consider Lord Viṣṇu to be a demigod, in defiance of the Ṛg-vedic mantra oṁ tad viṣṇoḥ paramaṁ padam ("Viṣṇu is always in a superior position"). This mantra is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā: mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat (BG 7.7)—there is no truth superior to Lord Kṛṣṇa, or Viṣṇu.

CC Adi 7.115, Purport:

In this world there is a difference between the material body and the spiritual soul, but in the spiritual world everything is spiritual and there are no such differences. The greatest offense of the Māyāvādī philosophers is to consider Lord Viṣṇu and the living entities to be one and the same.

CC Adi 7.117, Purport:

Unfortunately, Māyāvādī philosophers do not accept the smṛti-prasthāna. Smṛti refers to the conclusions drawn from the Vedic evidence. Sometimes Māyāvādī philosophers do not accept the authority of the Bhagavad-gītā and the Purāṇas, and this is called ardha-kukkuṭī-nyāya, "the logic of half a hen" (See Ādi-līlā 5.176).

CC Adi 7.117, Purport:

If one believes in the Vedic literatures, one must accept all the Vedic literatures recognized by the great ācāryas, but the Māyāvādī philosophers accept only the nyāya-prasthāna and śruti-prasthāna, rejecting the smṛti-prasthāna. Here, however, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu cites evidence from the Gītā, Viṣṇu Purāṇa, etc., which are smṛti-prasthāna.

CC Adi 7.118, Purport:

Transcendental loving devotional service is the spiritual activity of the spirit soul. Māyāvādī philosophers confuse such spiritual activity with material activity, but the Bhagavad-gītā (14.26) confirms:

māṁ ca yo ’vyabhicāreṇa bhakti-yogena sevate

sa guṇān samatītyaitān brahma-bhūyāya kalpate

One who engages in the spiritual activities of unalloyed devotional service (avyabhicāriṇī-bhakti) is immediately elevated to the transcendental platform, and he is to be considered brahma-bhūta (SB 4.30.20), which indicates that he is no longer in the material world but is in the spiritual world.

CC Adi 7.118, Purport:

Such an advanced mahātmā, or great soul, is very rarely to be seen.” Thus although the Māyāvādī philosophers appear to be very much advanced in knowledge, they are not yet perfect. To come to the point of perfection they must voluntarily surrender to Kṛṣṇa.

CC Adi 7.120, Translation:

“The Māyāvāda philosophy is so degraded that it has taken the insignificant living entities to be the Lord, the Supreme Truth, thus covering the glory and supremacy of the Absolute Truth with monism.

CC Adi 7.120, Purport:

The mission of human life, as described in the Bhagavad-gītā, is to surrender unto the Supreme Lord and become His devotee, but the Māyāvāda philosophy misleads one to defy the existence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and pose oneself as the Supreme Lord. Thus it has misguided hundreds of thousands of innocent men.

CC Adi 7.120, Purport:

Unfortunately, the Māyāvāda philosophy, misguiding people by claiming the living entity to be the Lord, has created havoc throughout the entire world and led almost everyone to godlessness. By thus covering the glories of the Supreme Lord, the Māyāvādī philosophers have done the greatest disservice to human society. It is to counteract these most abominable activities of the Māyāvādī philosophers that Lord Caitanya has introduced the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra.

CC Adi 7.120, Purport:

There is no other way.” People should simply engage in the chanting of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra, for thus they will gradually come to understand that they are not the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as they have been taught by the Māyāvādī philosophers, but are eternal servants of the Lord. As soon as one engages himself in the transcendental service of the Lord, he becomes free.

Śaṅkarācārya, however, not accepting the energy of the Lord, thinks that it is the Lord who is transformed. He has taken many clear statements from the Vedic literature and twisted them to try to prove that if the Lord, or the Absolute Truth, were transformed, His oneness would be disturbed. Thus he has accused Śrīla Vyāsadeva of being mistaken. In developing his philosophy of monism, therefore, he has established vivarta-vāda, or the Māyāvāda theory of illusion.”

A person can create many things by the transformation of his energy. For example, a businessman transforms his energy by establishing many big factories or business organizations, yet he remains a person although his energy has been transformed into these many factories or business concerns. The Māyāvādī philosophers do not understand this simple fact.

Śaṅkarācārya does not believe in the transformation of the energy of the Absolute Truth, for he claims that everything is one and that the living entity is therefore also one with the Supreme. This is the Māyāvāda theory.

With this jugglery of understanding, Māyāvādī philosophers have propagated the slogan brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā, which declares that the Absolute Truth is fact but the cosmic manifestation and the living entities are simply illusions, or that all of them are in fact the Absolute Truth and that the material world and living entities do not separately exist.

CC Adi 7.127, Purport:

They lead one to assume that since Lord Kṛṣṇa could not personally sense the meaning of what He was speaking and Vyāsadeva did not know the meaning of what he was writing, Lord Kṛṣṇa left His book to be explained later by the Māyāvādīs. Such interpretations merely prove, however, that their proponents have very little philosophical sense.

CC Adi 7.127, Purport:

The Lord therefore says in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.26) that He knows everything, past, present and future, but that no one but a devotee knows Him as He is. Therefore, the Absolute Truth, the Personality of Godhead, is at least partially understood by devotees of the Lord, but the Māyāvādī philosophers, who unnecessarily speculate to understand the Absolute Truth, simply waste their time.

Māyāvādī philosophers cannot understand these simple facts explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, and yet they are very proud of being Vedāntīs. Sometimes, therefore, we refer to the Vedāntī philosophers as Vidantīs, those who have no teeth (vi means "without," and dantī means "possessing teeth"). The statements of the Śaṅkara philosophy, which are the teeth of the Māyāvādī philosopher, are always broken by the strong arguments of Vaiṣṇava philosophers such as the great ācāryas, especially Rāmānujācārya. Śrīpāda Rāmānujācārya and Madhvācārya break the teeth of the Māyāvādī philosophers, who can therefore be called Vidantīs, "toothless."

The Māyāvādī philosophers consider many Vedic mantras to be the mahā-vākya, or principal Vedic mantra, such as tat tvam asi (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.8.7), idaṁ sarvaṁ yad ayam ātmā and brahmedaṁ sarvam (Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 2.5.1), ātmaivedaṁ sarvam (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 7.25.2) and neha nānāsti kiñcana (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.1.11). That is a great mistake. Only oṁkāra is the mahā-vākya. All these other mantras that the Māyāvādīs accept as the mahā-vākya are only incidental. They cannot be taken as the mahā-vākya, or mahā-mantra.

At present, however, the Vedānta-sūtra is misrepresented not only by the so-called Vedāntīs but also by other unscrupulous persons who are so degraded that they even recommend that sannyāsīs eat meat, fish and eggs. In this way, the so-called followers of Śaṅkara, the impersonalist Māyāvādīs, are sinking lower and lower.

Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has declared, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: (CC Madhya 6.169) "Anyone who hears commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra from the Māyāvāda school is completely doomed." As explained in the Bhagavad-gītā (15.15), vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ: all Vedic literature aims at understanding Kṛṣṇa. Māyāvāda philosophy, however, has deviated everyone from Kṛṣṇa. Therefore there is a great need for the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement all over the world to save the world from degradation. Every intelligent and sane man must abandon the philosophical explanation of the Māyāvādīs and accept the explanation of Vaiṣṇava ācāryas. One should read Bhagavad-gītā As It Is to try to understand the real purport of the Vedas.

CC Adi 7.130, Purport:

The Māyāvādī philosophers stress the statements tat tvam asi, so ’ham, etc., but they do not stress the real mahā-mantra, praṇava (oṁkāra). Therefore, because they misrepresent Vedic knowledge, they are the greatest offenders to the lotus feet of the Lord. Caitanya Mahāprabhu says clearly, māyāvādī kṛṣṇe aparādhī: "Māyāvādī philosophers are the greatest offenders to Lord Kṛṣṇa." Lord Kṛṣṇa declares:

tān ahaṁ dviṣataḥ krūrān saṁsāreṣu narādhamān

kṣipāmy ajasram aśubhān āsurīṣv eva yoniṣu

"Those who are envious and mischievous, who are the lowest among mankind, I perpetually cast into the ocean of material existence, into various demoniac species of life." (BG 16.19) Life in demoniac species awaits the Māyāvādī philosophers after death because they are envious of Kṛṣṇa.

CC Adi 7.133, Translation:

"To prove their philosophy, the members of the Māyāvāda school have given up the real, easily understood meaning of the Vedic literature and introduced indirect meanings based on their imaginative powers."

CC Adi 7.134, Translation:

When Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu thus showed for each and every sūtra the defects in Śaṅkarācārya's explanations, all the assembled Māyāvādī sannyāsīs were struck with wonder.

CC Adi 7.135, Translation:

All the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs said, “Your Holiness, kindly know from us that we actually have no quarrel with Your refutation of these meanings, for You have given a clear understanding of the sūtras.

CC Adi 7.137, Translation:

"Now let us see," the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs continued, "how well You can describe the sūtras in terms of their direct meaning." Hearing this, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu began His direct explanation of the Vedānta-sūtra.

CC Adi 7.140, Purport:

In the Bhagavad-gītā the Lord is also addressed as Parabrahman. Māyāvādīs and others sometimes misunderstand Brahman because every living entity is also Brahman. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is referred to as Parabrahman (the Supreme Brahman). In the Vedic literature, whenever the words "Brahman" or "Parabrahman" are used, they are to be understood to refer to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa.

CC Adi 7.140, Purport:

Thus to understand that Brahman, the Supreme, is conscious is not sufficient. One must know how He consciously acts through His different energies. Māyāvāda philosophy simply informs us of the consciousness of the Absolute Truth but does not give us information of how He acts with His consciousness. That is the defect of that philosophy.

CC Adi 7.141, Purport:

Māyāvādī philosophers are satisfied simply to understand Brahman to be the sum total of knowledge, but Vaiṣṇava philosophers not only know in detail about the Supreme Personality of Godhead but also know how to approach Him directly.

CC Adi 7.142, Purport:

The Māyāvādī philosophers miss even the first stage in self-realization because they have no conception of God's being personal. He is the master of all, and He is the only person who can accept the service of all living entities, but since this knowledge is lacking in Māyāvāda philosophy, Māyāvādīs do not have knowledge even of their relationship with God.

CC Adi 7.142, Purport:

They wrongly think that everyone is God or that everyone is equal to God. Therefore, since the real position of the living entity is not clear to them, how can they advance further? Although they are very much puffed up at being liberated, Māyāvādī philosophers very shortly fall down again to material activities due to their neglecting the lotus feet of the Lord.

CC Adi 7.143, Purport:

Although Māyāvādī philosophers are supposed to be very much advanced on the path of liberation, we see that after some time they descend to politics and philanthropic activities. Many big sannyāsīs who were supposedly liberated and very advanced have come down again to materialistic activities, although they left this world as mithyā (false).

CC Adi 7.143, Purport:

He is simply inspired to serve the Lord, and he engages his entire life in such service. This is the difference between Vaiṣṇava and Māyāvādī philosophers. Devotional service, therefore, is practical, whereas Māyāvāda philosophy is merely mental speculation.

The Māyāvādī philosophers consider the highest goal of perfection to be liberation (mukti), which is the fourth perfectional platform. Generally people are aware of four principal goals of life—religiosity (dharma), economic development (artha), sense gratification (kāma) and ultimately liberation (mokṣa)—but devotional service is situated on the platform above liberation. In other words, when one is actually liberated (mukta) he can understand the meaning of love of Godhead (kṛṣṇa-prema).

The most elevated Māyāvādī philosopher can rise to the platform of liberation, but kṛṣṇa-bhakti, devotional service to Kṛṣṇa, is transcendental to such liberation.

Māyāvādī philosophers are jealous of the existence of the Personality of Godhead. Therefore the Vedānta-sūtra is not actually meant for them. They unnecessarily poke their noses into the Vedanta-sūtra, but they have no ability to understand it because, as the author of the Vedānta-sūtra writes in his commentary, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, it is meant for those who are pure in heart (paramo nirmatsarāṇām (SB 1.1.2)).

The Māyāvādīs' primary occupation is to offend the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. For example, although Kṛṣṇa demands our surrender in the Bhagavad-gītā, the greatest scholar and so-called philosopher in modern India has protested that it is "not to Kṛṣṇa" that we have to surrender. Therefore, he is envious. Since Māyāvādīs of all different descriptions are envious of Kṛṣṇa, they have no scope for understanding the meaning of the Vedānta-sūtra.

CC Adi 7.145, Purport:

Speaking from his actual experience, Śrīla Bilvamaṅgala Ṭhākura says that if one develops love of Godhead, mukti (liberation) becomes subservient and unimportant to him. Mukti stands before the devotee and is prepared to render all kinds of services. The Māyāvādī philosophers' standard of mukti is very insignificant for a devotee, for by devotional service even the Supreme Personality of Godhead becomes subordinate to him.

CC Adi 7.146, Purport:

Māyāvādī philosophers, who do not understand the relationship between themselves, the cosmic manifestation and the Supreme Personality of Godhead, are simply wasting their time, and their philosophical speculation has no value.

CC Adi 7.147, Translation:

When all the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs thus heard the explanation of Caitanya Mahāprabhu on the basis of sambandha, abhidheya and prayojana, they spoke very humbly.

CC Adi 7.148, Purport:

The complete path of bhakti-yoga is based upon the process of becoming humble and submissive. By the grace of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, all the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs were very humble and submissive after hearing His explanation of the Vedānta-sūtra, and they begged to be pardoned for the offenses they had committed by criticizing the Lord for simply chanting and dancing and not taking part in the study of the Vedānta-sūtra.

CC Adi 7.149, Translation:

From that moment when the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs heard the explanation of the Vedānta-sūtra from the Lord, their minds changed, and on the instruction of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, they too chanted "Kṛṣṇa! Kṛṣṇa!" always.

CC Adi 7.149, Purport:

Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī was a great Vaiṣṇava devotee of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, but Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, the head of the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs in Benares, was a different person. Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī belonged to the Rāmānuja-sampradāya, whereas Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī belonged to the Śaṅkarācārya-sampradāya.

CC Adi 7.150, Translation:

Thus Lord Caitanya excused all the offenses of the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs and very mercifully blessed them with kṛṣṇa-nāma.

CC Adi 7.150, Purport:

Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī also says, karuṇayāvatīrṇaḥ kalau: it is only by His mercy that He has descended in this Age of Kali. Here this is exemplified. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu did not like to see Māyāvādī sannyāsīs because He thought of them as offenders to the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, but here He excuses them (tāṅ-sabāra kṣami' aparādha). This is an example in preaching. Āpani ācari' bhakti śikhāimu sabāre.

CC Adi 7.151, Purport:

Previously Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu had neither mixed nor talked with the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, but now He took lunch with them. It is to be concluded that when Lord Caitanya induced them to chant Hare Kṛṣṇa and excused them for their offenses, they were purified, and therefore there was no objection to taking lunch, or bhagavat-prasādam, with them, although Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu knew that the food had not been offered to the Deity.

CC Adi 7.151, Purport:

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs do not worship the Deity, or if they do so they generally worship the deity of Lord Śiva or the pañcopāsanā (Lord Viṣṇu, Lord Śiva, Durgā-devī, Gaṇeśa and Sūrya). Here we do not find any mention of the demigods or Viṣṇu, and yet Caitanya Mahāprabhu accepted food in the midst of the sannyāsīs on the basis that they had chanted the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra and that He had excused their offenses.

CC Adi 7.152, Translation:

After taking lunch among the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who is known as Gaurasundara, returned to His residence. Thus the Lord performs His wonderful pastimes.

CC Adi 7.154, Translation:

Many Māyāvādī sannyāsīs of Vārāṇasī came to see the Lord after this incident, and the entire city praised Him.

CC Adi 7.157, Purport:

Vaiṣṇavas generally do not visit a demigod's temple, but here we see that Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu regularly visited the temple of Viśveśvara, who was the predominating deity of Vārāṇasī. Generally Māyāvādī sannyāsīs and worshipers of Lord Śiva live in Vārāṇasī, but how is it that Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who took the part of a Vaiṣṇava sannyāsī, also visited the Viśveśvara temple? The answer is that a Vaiṣṇava does not behave impudently toward the demigods.

CC Adi 7.157, Purport:

He propagated the Māyāvāda philosophy under the order of the Supreme Lord. We have already discussed this point in text 114 of this chapter: tāṅra doṣa nāhi, teṅho ājñā-kārī dāsa. "Śaṅkarācārya is not at fault, for he has thus covered the real purport of the Vedas under the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead." Although Lord Śiva, in the form of a brāhmaṇa (Śaṅkarācārya), preached the false philosophy of Māyāvāda, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu nevertheless said that since he did it on the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, there was no fault on his part (tāṅra doṣa nāhi).

CC Adi 7.157, Purport:

We are surely eternal servants of the Lord. The Māyāvāda philosophy maintains that the demigods, the living entities and the Supreme Personality of Godhead are all equal. It is therefore a most foolish misrepresentation of Vedic knowledge.

CC Adi 8.19, Purport:

Māyāvādī philosophers desire to merge into the existence of the Brahman effulgence, although this aspect of liberation is always neglected by devotees. Śrīla Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, describing this kind of mukti, which is called kaivalya, or becoming one with the Supreme, has said, kaivalyaṁ narakāyate: "Becoming one with the Supreme is as good as going to hell." Therefore the ideal of Māyāvāda philosophy, becoming one with the Supreme, is hellish for a devotee; he never accepts it. Māyāvādī philosophers do not know that even if they merge into the effulgence of the Supreme, this will not give them ultimate rest.

CC Adi 8.19, Purport:

However, since he is not aware of his relationship with the Supreme Personality of Godhead and therefore has no spiritual activity, he must come down for further activities in this material world. This is confirmed in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.2.32):

āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ

patanty adho ’nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ

Because Māyāvādī philosophers have no information regarding the transcendental service of the Lord, even after attaining liberation from material activities and merging into the Brahman effulgence, they must come down again to this material world to open hospitals or schools or perform similar philanthropic activities.

CC Adi 9.13-15, Purport:

We may note in this connection that the name Brahmānanda is accepted not only by Māyāvādī sannyāsīs but by Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs also. One of our foolish Godbrothers criticized our sannyāsī Brahmānanda Svāmī, saying that this was a Māyāvādī name. The foolish man did not know that Brahmānanda does not always refer to the impersonal Brahman. Parabrahman, the Supreme Brahman, is Kṛṣṇa.

CC Adi 9.53, Purport:

When Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu started the saṅkīrtana movement, even He was unnecessarily criticized by Māyāvādīs, atheists and fools. Naturally we are also criticized by such men. They will always remain and will always criticize anything that is actually good for human society. But the preachers of the saṅkīrtana movement should not be deterred by such criticism.

CC Adi 10.11, Purport:

Śrīla Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura has said, anya-devāśraya nāi, tomāre kahinu bhāi, ei bhakti parama-kāraṇa: if one wants to become a pure, staunch devotee, one should not take shelter of any of the demigods or -goddesses. Foolish Māyāvādīs say that worshiping demigods is as good as worshiping the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but that is not a fact.

CC Adi 10.77, Purport:

In the present town of Navadvīpa, which was formerly known as Kuliyā, Lord Caitanya showed such mercy to him that he gave up the Māyāvādī interpretation of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and learned how to explain Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam in terms of bhakti. Formerly, when Devānanda was expounding the Māyāvādī interpretation, Śrīvāsa Ṭhākura was once present in his meeting, and when he began to cry, Devānanda's students drove him away.

CC Adi 10.77, Purport:

Some days later, Caitanya Mahāprabhu passed that way, and when He met Devānanda He chastised him severely because of his Māyāvāda interpretation of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. At that time Devānanda had little faith in Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu as an incarnation of Lord Kṛṣṇa, but one night some time later Vakreśvara Paṇḍita was a guest in his house, and when he explained the science of Kṛṣṇa, Devānanda was convinced about the identity of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

CC Adi 10.135-136, Purport:

His father, Śatānanda Khān, was completely materialistic, and his younger brother, Gopāla Bhaṭṭācārya, was a staunch Māyāvādī philosopher who had studied very elaborately. When his brother came to Jagannātha Purī, Bhagavān Ācārya wanted to hear from him about Māyāvāda philosophy, but Svarūpa Dāmodara forbade him to do so, and there the matter stopped.

CC Adi 12.27, Purport:

Balarāma, Svarūpa and Jagadīśa, being smārtas, or Māyāvādīs, were rejected by Vaiṣṇava society. Sometimes Māyāvādīs pose themselves as Vaiṣṇavas, or worshipers of Lord Viṣṇu, but actually they do not believe in Lord Viṣṇu as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, for they consider demigods like Lord Śiva, Durgā, the sun-god and Gaṇeśa equal to Him. They are generally known as pañcopāsaka-smārtas, and one should not count them among the Vaiṣṇavas.

CC Adi 12.27, Purport:

The youngest son of his first wife was known as Madhusūdana Gosvāmī. He took the title Bhaṭṭācārya and accepted the path of the smārta or Māyāvāda philosophy. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura notes that the son of Gosvāmī Bhaṭṭācārya, Śrī Rādhāramaṇa Gosvāmī Bhaṭṭācārya, refused the title gosvāmī because it is generally meant for sannyāsīs, those who have taken the renounced order of life.

CC Adi 12.35, Purport:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, engaged in the missionary work of spoiling the Vedic culture by preaching that everyone is God, describe a poverty-stricken man as daridra-nārāyaṇa, or "poor Nārāyaṇa." Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu never accepted such foolish and unauthorized ideas. He strictly warned, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: (CC Madhya 6.169) "Anyone who follows the principles of Māyāvāda philosophy is certainly doomed." Such a fool needs to be reformed by punishment.

CC Adi 12.40, Purport:

There is a book of the name Yoga-vāśiṣṭha that Māyāvādīs greatly favor because it is full of impersonal misunderstandings regarding the Supreme Personality of Godhead, with no touch of Vaiṣṇavism. Factually, all Vaiṣṇavas should avoid such a book, but Advaita Ācārya Prabhu, wanting punishment from the Lord, began to support the impersonal statements of the Yoga-vāśiṣṭha.

CC Adi 12.73, Purport:

This analysis by Śrī Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura, supporting the statements of Śrī Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī, depicts the position of the present so-called Hindu religion, which, being predominantly conducted by the Māyāvāda philosophy, has become a hodgepodge institution of various concocted ideas. Māyāvādīs greatly fear the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement and accuse it of spoiling the Hindu religion because it accepts people from all parts of the world and all religious sects and scientifically engages them in the daiva-varṇāśrama-dharma.

This is an explanation of the Māyāvāda philosophy, which takes everything to be one. The necessities of the body, namely eating, sleeping, mating and defending, are all unnecessary in spiritual life. When one is elevated to the spiritual platform, there are no more bodily necessities, and in activities pertaining to the bodily necessities there are no spiritual considerations.

In other words, the more we eat, sleep, have sex and try to defend ourselves, the more we engage in material activities. Unfortunately, Māyāvādī philosophers consider devotional activities to be bodily activities.

Although Māyāvādī philosophers are very eager to merge into the Brahman effulgence, they have no Brahman activities. To a certain extent they recommend Brahman activities, which for them means engagement in studying the Vedānta and Sāṅkhya philosophies, but their interpretations are but dry speculation.

Since Māyāvādī philosophers cannot understand this, they take it for granted that a devotee's activities (śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ smaraṇaṁ pāda-sevanam, etc. (SB 7.5.23)) are all material and are therefore māyā. They also consider Kṛṣṇa's advent in this universe and His activities to be māyā. Therefore, because they consider everything māyā, they are known as Māyāvādīs.

Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, as the supreme spiritual master, instructed His mother about the Māyāvāda philosophy. By saying that the body is dirt and eatables are also dirt, He implied that everything is māyā. This is Māyāvāda philosophy. The philosophy of the Māyāvādīs is defective because it maintains that everything is māyā but the nonsense they speak.

While saying that everything is māyā, the Māyāvādī philosopher loses the opportunity of devotional service, and therefore his life is doomed. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu therefore advised, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169). If one accepts the Māyāvāda philosophy, his advancement is doomed forever.

CC Adi 14.30, Translation:

Astonished that the child was speaking Māyāvāda philosophy, mother Śacī replied, "Who has taught You this philosophical speculation that justifies eating dirt?"

CC Adi 14.31, Translation:

Replying to the Māyāvāda idea of the child philosopher, mother Śacī said, “My dear boy, if we eat earth transformed into grain, our body is nourished, and it becomes strong. But if we eat dirt in its crude state, the body becomes diseased instead of nourished, and thus it is destroyed.

CC Adi 14.32, Purport:

This simple philosophy propounded by Śacīmātā, even though she is a woman, can defeat the Māyāvādī philosophers who speculate on oneness. The defect of Māyāvāda philosophy is that it does not accept the variety that is useful for practical purposes.

CC Adi 15.14, Purport:

It is recommended that one accept sannyāsa to dedicate his life for the service of the Lord, and everyone must take that kind of sannyāsa, for by accepting such sannyāsa one renders the best service to both his paternal and maternal families. But one should not accept the sannyāsa order of the Māyāvāda school, which has practically no meaning. We find many Māyāvādī sannyāsīs simply loitering in the street thinking themselves Brahman or Nārāyaṇa and spending all day and night begging so they can fill their hungry bellies.

CC Adi 15.14, Purport:

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs have become so degraded that there is a section of them who eat everything, just like hogs and dogs. It is such degraded sannyāsa that is prohibited in this age. Actually, Śrīla Śaṅkarācārya's principles for the acceptance of sannyāsa were very strict, but later the so-called Māyāvādī sannyāsīs became degraded because of their false philosophy, which propounds that by accepting sannyāsa one becomes Nārāyaṇa.

CC Adi 17.52, Purport:

Māyāvādīs certainly realize Brahman in certain aspects, but realization of Brahman in the aspects of wine, women and meat is not the same realization of Brahman that devotees achieve by chanting, dancing and eating prasādam. Māyāvādī philosophers, being educated in paltry knowledge, think all sorts of Brahman realization one and the same and do not consider varieties.

CC Adi 17.53, Purport:

He specifically mentioned that the Māyāvādī philosophers are the greatest demons. Therefore He warned all others not to hear the Māyāvāda philosophy: māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. Simply by hearing the Māyāvāda interpretation of the śāstras, one is doomed (CC Madhya 6.169).

CC Adi 17.65, Purport:

Mukunda Datta was once forbidden to enter the association of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu because of his mixing with the Māyāvādī impersonalists. When Lord Caitanya manifested His mahā-prakāśa, He called all the devotees one after another and blessed them, while Mukunda Datta stood outside the door.

CC Adi 17.65, Purport:

The devotees informed the Lord that Mukunda Datta was waiting outside, but the Lord replied, "I shall not soon be pleased with Mukunda Datta, for though he explains devotional service among devotees, he then goes to Māyāvādīs to hear from them the Yoga-vāśiṣṭha-rāmāyaṇa, which is full of Māyāvāda philosophy. For this I am greatly displeased with him."

CC Adi 17.65, Purport:

Hearing the Lord speak in that way, Mukunda Datta, standing outside, was exceedingly glad that the Lord would at some time be pleased with him, although He was not pleased at that moment. But when the Lord understood that Mukunda Datta was going to give up the association of the Māyāvādīs for good, He was pleased, and He at once called to see Mukunda. Thus He delivered him from the association of the Māyāvādīs and gave him the association of pure devotees.

CC Adi 17.68, Purport:

He began to explain the path of philosophical speculation in the midst of some unfortunate Māyāvādīs, and when Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu heard about this, He immediately went there and in a very angry mood began to beat Advaita Ācārya.

CC Adi 17.68, Purport:

This is My reward. His affection for Me is so great that He wanted to save Me from the hands of the Māyāvādīs.” Hearing this statement, Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu was somewhat ashamed, but He was very pleased with Advaita Ācārya.

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 1.34, Purport:

The impersonalists have no idea of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The position of the sahajiyās is far better than that of the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs. Although the sahajiyās do not think much of Vedic knowledge, they nonetheless have accepted Lord Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Lord. Unfortunately, they mislead others from authentic devotional service.

CC Madhya 1.91, Purport:

His acceptance of this renounced order is not at all comparable to the acceptance of sannyāsa by Māyāvādīs. After accepting sannyāsa, Caitanya Mahāprabhu wanted to reach Vṛndāvana. He was unlike the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, who desire to merge into the existence of the Absolute. For a Vaiṣṇava, acceptance of sannyāsa means getting relief from all material activities and completely devoting oneself to the transcendental loving service of the Lord.

CC Madhya 1.91, Purport:

The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, however, do not know how to engage everything in the service of the Lord. Because they have no devotional training, they think material objects to be untouchable. Brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā: The Māyāvādīs think that the world is false, but the Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs do not think like this. Vaiṣṇavas say, "Why should the world be false? It is reality, and it is meant for the service of the Supreme Personality of Godhead."

CC Madhya 1.245, Purport:

After fully instructing Sanātana Gosvāmī, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu sent him to Mathurā with empowered devotional service. In Benares He also bestowed His mercy upon the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs. He then returned to Nīlācala (Jagannātha Purī).

The Māyāvādī sannyāsī accepts only one daṇḍa, not understanding the meaning of tri-daṇḍa. Later, many persons in the community of Śiva Svāmī gave up the ātma-niṣṭhā (devotional service) of the Lord and followed the path of Śaṅkarācārya.

These four daṇḍas, bound together as one, are symbolic of unalloyed devotional service to the Lord. Because the ekadaṇḍi-sannyāsīs of the Māyāvāda school are not devoted to the service of Kṛṣṇa, they try to merge into the Brahman effulgence, which is a marginal position between material and spiritual existence. They accept this impersonal position as liberation. Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, not knowing that Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was a tridaṇḍī, think of Caitanya Mahāprabhu as an ekadaṇḍi-sannyāsī.

The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, who are enamored of the external energy of the Lord, cannot understand the mind of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

The ekadaṇḍi-sannyāsīs of the Māyāvādī school give up the sacred thread and do not keep any tuft of hair. Therefore they are unable to understand the purport of tridaṇḍa-sannyāsa, and as such they are not inclined to dedicate their lives to the service of Mukunda.

CC Madhya 5.142-143, Purport:

The followers of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu never accepted the Māyāvāda order of sannyāsa, and for this they cannot be blamed. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu accepted Śrīdhara Svāmī, who was a tridaṇḍi-sannyāsī, but the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, not understanding Śrīdhara Svāmī, sometimes think that Śrīdhara Svāmī belonged to the Māyāvāda ekadaṇḍa-sannyāsa community. Actually this was not the case.

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu accepted the order of sannyāsa from a Māyāvādī sannyāsī. The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs generally carry one staff, or daṇḍa. Taking advantage of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's absence, Śrīla Nityānanda Prabhu broke the staff into three parts and threw it into the river later known as the Daṇḍa-bhāṅgā-nadī.

CC Madhya 6 Summary:

The Bhaṭṭācārya was an impersonalist, but Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu proved that the Absolute Truth is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He proved that the conceptions of the Māyāvādī philosophers concerning the impersonal Absolute Truth are incorrect.

CC Madhya 6 Summary:

The Absolute Truth is neither impersonal nor without power. The greatest mistake made by the Māyāvādī philosophers is in conceiving the Absolute Truth to be impersonal and without energy. In all the Vedas, the unlimited energies of the Absolute Truth have been accepted.

CC Madhya 6 Summary:

The real philosophy of the Absolute Truth states that the Lord and His creation are inconceivably and simultaneously one and different. The conclusion is that the Māyāvādī philosophers are actually atheists. There was much discussion on this issue between Sārvabhauma and Caitanya Mahāprabhu, but despite all his endeavors, the Bhaṭṭācārya was defeated in the end.

CC Madhya 6.48, Purport:

This greeting is used especially by Māyāvādī sannyāsīs. According to the smṛti scriptures, a sannyāsī should not expect anything from anyone, nor should he consider himself identical with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs never think of themselves as being one with the Lord; they always consider themselves eternal servants of Kṛṣṇa, and they want to see everyone in the world become Kṛṣṇa conscious.

CC Madhya 6.58, Purport:

Because the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs teach Vedānta philosophy to their students or disciples, they are customarily called jagad-guru. This indicates that they are the benefactors of all people. Although Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya was not a sannyāsī but a householder, he used to invite all the sannyāsīs to his home and offer them prasādam. Thus he was accepted as the best well-wisher and friend of all the sannyāsīs.

The Māyāvādī philosophers in particular make certain hypotheses about the Absolute Truth. They reason that in the material world we experience that everything is created. If we trace the history of anything, we find a creator.

The Māyāvādīs do not accept this great power to be a person. Their brains cannot accommodate the fact that the huge cosmic manifestation can be created by a person. They doubt this because as soon as they think of a person, they think of a person within the material world with limited potency. Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers will accept Lord Kṛṣṇa or Lord Rāma as Bhagavān, but they think of the Lord as a person having a material body. The Māyāvādīs do not understand that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, has a spiritual body.

They think of Kṛṣṇa as a great personality, a human being, within whom there is the supreme impersonal power, Brahman. Therefore they finally conclude that the impersonal Brahman is the Supreme, not the personality Kṛṣṇa. This is the basis of Māyāvādī philosophy.

Māyāvādī philosophers study the Vedic literature, but they do not understand that in the last stage of realization the Absolute Truth is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. They do accept the fact that there is a creator of this cosmic manifestation, but that is anumāna (hypothesis). The Māyāvādī philosophers' logic is something like seeing smoke on a hill and concluding that there is a fire. When there is a forest fire on a high hill, smoke is first of all visible.

CC Madhya 6.104, Translation:

Since it is known that smoke is created when there is fire, from seeing the smoke on the hill one can conclude that a fire is burning there. Similarly, from seeing this cosmic manifestation the Māyāvādī philosophers conclude that there must be a creator.

""The Lord (in the incarnation of Gaurasundara) has a golden complexion. Indeed, His entire body, which is very nicely constituted, is like molten gold. Sandalwood pulp is smeared all over His body. He will take the fourth order of spiritual life (sannyāsa) and will be very much self-controlled. He will be distinguished from Māyāvādī sannyāsīs in that He will be fixed in devotional service and will spread the saṅkīrtana movement.""

CC Madhya 6.107, Translation:

“The false arguments and philosophical word jugglery of your disciples are not faults of theirs. They have simply received the benediction of Māyāvāda philosophy.

CC Madhya 6.120, Purport:

Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya intended to convert Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who was a Vaiṣṇava sannyāsī, into a Māyāvādī sannyāsī. He therefore made this arrangement to instruct Him in the Vedānta-sūtra according to the Śārīraka commentary of Śaṅkarācārya. All the sannyāsīs of the Śaṅkara-sampradāya enjoy seriously studying the Vedānta-sūtra with the Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary.

CC Madhya 6.127, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu presented Himself as if He were a sannyāsī in name only or, in other words, a number-one fool. Māyāvādī sannyāsīs in India are very much accustomed to declaring themselves jagad-gurus, teachers of the world, although they have no information of the outside world and are limited in their experience to a small town or village, or perhaps to the country of India. Nor do such sannyāsīs have sufficient education.

CC Madhya 6.127, Purport:

Indeed, He said elsewhere, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: (CC Madhya 6.169) "If one hears the Śārīraka-bhāṣya of Śaṅkarācārya, he is doomed." Thus a sannyāsī, a transcendentalist, must read the Vedānta-sūtra regularly, but he should not read the Śārīraka-bhāṣya.

CC Madhya 6.130, Purport:

The factual meaning of the aphorisms of the Vedānta-sūtra is as clear as sunshine. The Māyāvādī philosophers simply try to cover the sunshine with the clouds of interpretations imagined by Śaṅkarācārya and his followers.

CC Madhya 6.132, Purport:

This is typical of all Māyāvādīs or atheists who interpret the meaning of Vedic literature in their own imaginative way. The real purpose of such foolish people is to impose the impersonalist conclusion on all Vedic literature. The Māyāvādī atheists also interpret the Bhagavad-gītā. In every verse of Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā it is clearly stated that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

CC Madhya 6.132, Purport:

It is clearly stated that the Blessed Lord is the Supreme Person, but Māyāvādī atheists still try to prove that the Absolute Truth is impersonal. In order to present their false, imaginary meanings, they must adopt so much word jugglery and grammatical interpretation that they finally become ludicrous. Therefore Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu remarked that no one should hear the Māyāvādī commentaries or purports to any Vedic literature.

CC Madhya 6.151, Translation:

“All these mantras confirm that the Absolute Truth is personal, but the Māyāvādīs, throwing away the direct meaning, interpret the Absolute Truth as impersonal.

CC Madhya 6.152, Purport:

Rejecting the direct meaning of the Vedic mantras, the Māyāvādī philosophers interpret them and try to establish the Absolute Truth as formless. Actually, the Supreme Lord has an eternal personal form full of all opulence. The Māyāvādī philosophers try to interpret the Absolute Truth as being without potency.

CC Madhya 6.167, Purport:

The first-class materialists (the Māyāvādīs) imagine five specific forms of the Lord, but when they try to equate the worship of such imaginary forms with bhakti, they are immediately condemned. Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa confirms this in the Bhagavad-gītā (7.15), where He says, na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ. Bereft of real knowledge due to agnosticism, the Māyāvādī philosophers should not even be seen by the devotees of the Lord, nor touched, because those philosophers are liable to be punished by Yamarāja, the superintendent demigod who judges the activities of sinful men.

CC Madhya 6.167, Purport:

The Māyāvādī agnostics wander within this universe in different species of life due to their nondevotional activities. Such living entities are subjected to the punishments of Yamarāja. Only the devotees, who are always engaged in the service of the Lord, are exempt from the jurisdiction of Yamarāja.

CC Madhya 6.168, Translation:

“The Buddhists do not recognize the authority of the Vedas; therefore they are considered agnostics. However, those who have taken shelter of the Vedic scriptures yet preach agnosticism in accordance with the Māyāvāda philosophy are certainly more dangerous than the Buddhists.

Although the Buddhists are directly opposed to Vaiṣṇava philosophy, it can easily be understood that the Śaṅkarites are more dangerous because they accept the authority of the Vedas yet act contrary to Vedic instruction. Vedāśraya nāstikya-vāda means "agnosticism under the shelter of Vedic culture" and refers to the monistic philosophy of the Māyāvādīs.

The Māyāvādī philosophers offer lip service to Vedic authority but try to escape the Vedic ritualistic ceremonies. They concoct some idea of a transcendental position and call themselves Nārāyaṇa, or God. However, God's position is completely different from their concoction. Such Māyāvādī philosophers consider themselves above the influence of karma-kāṇḍa (fruitive activities and their reactions).

There is very little difference between impersonalism and voidism. Voidism can be directly understood, but the impersonalism enunciated by Māyāvādī philosophers is not very easily understandable. Of course, Māyāvādī philosophers accept a spiritual existence, but they do not know about the spiritual world and spiritual beings.

The intelligence of the Māyāvādīs is not purified; therefore even though they practice austerities for self-realization, they cannot remain within the impersonal brahmajyoti. Consequently, they fall down again into this material world.

The Māyāvādīs' conception of spiritual existence is almost identical to the negation of material existence. The Māyāvādīs believe that there is nothing positive in spiritual life. As a result, they cannot understand devotional service or the worship of the Supreme Person, sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1). The Māyāvādī philosophers consider Deity worship in devotional service to be pratibimba-vāda, or the worship of a form that is the reflection of a false material form.

Thus the Lord's transcendental form, which is eternally blissful and full of knowledge, is unknown to Māyāvādī philosophers. Although the term "Bhagavān" is explicitly described in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, they cannot understand it. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate: "The Absolute Truth is called Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān." (SB 1.2.11) The Māyāvādīs try to understand Brahman only, or, at the most, Paramātmā. However, they are unable to understand Bhagavān.

The Māyāvādīs try to understand Brahman only, or, at the most, Paramātmā. However, they are unable to understand Bhagavān. Therefore the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, says, māyayāpahṛta-jñānāḥ (BG 7.15). Because of the temperament of the Māyāvādī philosophers, real knowledge is taken from them. Because they cannot receive the mercy of the Lord, they will always be bewildered by His transcendental form. Impersonal philosophy destroys the three phases of knowledge—jñāna, jñeya and jñātā.

CC Madhya 6.172, Translation:

As soon as one speaks of knowledge, there must be a person who is the knower, the knowledge itself and the object of knowledge. Māyāvāda philosophy combines these three categories; therefore the Māyāvādīs cannot understand how the spiritual potencies of the Supreme Personality of Godhead act. Because of their poor fund of knowledge, they cannot understand the distinction in the spiritual world between knowledge, the knower and the object of knowledge. Because of this, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu considers the Māyāvādī philosophers more dangerous than the Buddhists.

CC Madhya 6.169, Purport:

Factually, the devotional service of the Lord is described in the Vedānta-sūtra, but the Māyāvādī philosophers, the Śaṅkarites, prepared a commentary known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya, in which the transcendental form of the Lord is denied. The Māyāvādī philosophers think that the living entity is identical with the Supreme Soul, Brahman.

CC Madhya 6.169, Purport:

The ambitious Māyāvādī philosophers desire to merge into the existence of the Lord, and this may be accepted as sāyujya-mukti. However, this form of mukti means denying one's individual existence. In other words, it is a kind of spiritual suicide. This is absolutely opposed to the philosophy of bhakti-yoga. Bhakti-yoga offers immortality to the individual conditioned soul. If one follows the Māyāvādī philosophy, he misses his opportunity to become immortal after giving up the material body. The immortality of the individual person is the highest perfectional stage a living entity can attain.

CC Madhya 6.171, Purport:

When the atheistic philosophers or the Māyāvādīs, being unable to understand the inconceivable energies of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, imagine an impersonal void, their imagination is only the counterpart of materialistic thinking.

CC Madhya 6.171, Purport:

By such imperfect knowledge, the Māyāvādī philosophers conclude that the cosmic manifestation is a transformation of the Supreme. Thus they must necessarily also accept the theory of the illusion of the Supreme (vivarta-vāda). However, if we accept the inconceivable potencies of the Lord, we can understand how the Supreme Personality of Godhead can appear within this material world without being touched or contaminated by the three modes of material nature.

“Śaṅkarācārya's theory states that the Absolute Truth is transformed. By accepting this theory, the Māyāvādī philosophers denigrate Śrīla Vyāsadeva by accusing him of error. They thus find fault in the Vedānta-sūtra and interpret it to try to establish the theory of illusion.

CC Madhya 6.173, Purport:

The material world is the inferior energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but it is not a fact that the Supreme Lord has been transformed into this material world. The Māyāvādī philosophers, devoid of true understanding, have confused the theory of illusion and the theory of the cosmic manifestation by word jugglery.

CC Madhya 6.179, Purport:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, however, consider the central point of relationship to be the impersonal Brahman, the function of the living entity to be the acquisition of knowledge of Brahman, resulting in detachment from material activity, and the ultimate goal of life to be liberation, or merging into the existence of the Supreme.

CC Madhya 6.182, Purport:

The word brāhmaṇa-mūrtinā in this verse refers to the founder of Māyāvāda philosophy, Śaṅkarācārya, who was born in the Mālabara district of southern India. Māyāvāda philosophy states that the Supreme Lord, the living entities and the cosmic manifestation are all transformations of illusory energy. To support this atheistic theory, the Māyāvādīs cite false scriptures, which make people bereft of transcendental knowledge and addicted to fruitive activities and mental speculation.

CC Madhya 6.235, Purport:

According to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.2.32), Māyāvādī sannyāsīs who falsely think of themselves as liberated from the clutches of māyā are called vimukta-māninaḥ. Actually, they are not liberated, but they think that they have become liberated and have become Nārāyaṇa Himself. Although they have apparently realized that they are not the material body but spirit soul, they nonetheless neglect the duty of the spirit soul, which is to render service to the Supreme Soul.

CC Madhya 6.235, Purport:

Māyāvādī sannyāsīs do not purify their intelligence, mind and ego, and consequently they cannot engage in the service of the Lord or expect the causeless mercy of the Lord. Although they rise to a very high position by executing severe austerities and penances, they still hover in the material world without the benediction of the lotus feet of the Lord. Sometimes they rise to the Brahman effulgence, but because their minds are not completely purified, they must return to material existence.

CC Madhya 6.244, Purport:

In the Bhagavad-gītā (2.40) it is therefore said, sv-alpam apy asya dharmasya trāyate mahato bhayāt: "Simply by performing a little devotional service, one can escape the greatest danger." Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya had been in the greatest danger because he had adhered to Māyāvāda philosophy. Somehow or other he came into contact with Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and became a perfect devotee. In this way he was saved from the great falldown of impersonalism.

CC Madhya 6.269, Purport:

According to the opinion of the Māyāvādī Vedāntists, the living entity's ultimate success is to merge into the impersonal Brahman. The impersonal Brahman, or bodily effulgence of the Supreme Lord, is known as Brahmaloka or Siddhaloka.

CC Madhya 6.278, Translation:

Indeed, that very person who had been accustomed to reading and teaching Māyāvāda philosophy was now even hating the word "mukti." This was possible only by the mercy of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

CC Madhya 8.45, Translation:

“Although I am a Māyāvādī sannyāsī, a nondevotee, I am also floating in the ocean of love of Kṛṣṇa simply by touching you. And what to speak of others?

CC Madhya 8.83, Purport:

Furthermore, there are many Māyāvādīs and those overly addicted to material sense enjoyment. None of these can be compared to a person who is purely engaged in preaching Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Every Kṛṣṇa conscious person is constantly endeavoring to utilize different transcendental devices in the service of the Lord.

CC Madhya 8.83, Purport:

These mellows cannot be compared to the feelings one derives from demigod worship. Kṛṣṇa is one, but the demigods are different. They are material. Love for Kṛṣṇa cannot be compared to material love for different demigods. Because Māyāvādīs are on the material platform, they recommend the worship of Śiva or Durgā and say that worship of Kālī and Kṛṣṇa are the same. However, on the spiritual platform there is no demigod worship.

CC Madhya 8.124, Translation:

Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, “I am a Māyāvādī in the renounced order of life, and I do not even know what transcendental loving service to the Lord is. I simply float in the ocean of Māyāvāda philosophy.

CC Madhya 8.138, Purport:

In reference to the words aprākṛta navīna madana, aprākṛta refers to that which is the very opposite of the material conception. The Māyāvādīs consider this to be zero or impersonal, but that is not the case. Everything in the material world is dull, but in the spiritual world everything is alive.

CC Madhya 8.139, Purport:

Sometimes Kṛṣṇa's activities and attractive features are misinterpreted by gross materialists who accuse Him of being immoral because He danced with the gopīs, but such an accusation results from not knowing that Kṛṣṇa is beyond this material world. His body is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1), completely spiritual. There is no material contamination in His body, and one should not consider His body a lump of flesh and bones. The Māyāvādī philosophers conceive of Kṛṣṇa's body as material, and this is an abominable, grossly materialistic conception.

CC Madhya 8.204-205, Purport:

One should not be misled by mental concoctions, supposing his material body to be perfect and deeming oneself a sakhī. This is something like ahaṅgrahopāsanā, that is, a Māyāvādī’s worship of his own body as the Supreme. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has cautioned mundaners to abstain from such conceptions. He also warns that thinking oneself one of the associates of the Supreme without following in the footsteps of the gopīs is as offensive as thinking oneself the Supreme.

CC Madhya 8.276, Purport:

The advanced devotee does not see anything as unconnected with Kṛṣṇa. Unlike the Māyāvādī philosophers, a devotee does not see the material world as false, because he knows that everything in the material world is connected to Kṛṣṇa.

CC Madhya 9.1, Translation:

Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu converted the inhabitants of South India. These people were as strong as elephants, but they were in the clutches of the crocodiles of various philosophies, such as the Buddhist, Jain and Māyāvāda philosophies. With His disc of mercy the Lord delivered them all by converting them into Vaiṣṇavas, devotees of the Lord.

CC Madhya 9.1, Purport:

When Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu visited southern India, almost all the residents were within the jaws of the crocodiles of Buddhist, Jain and Māyāvāda philosophy. Here Kavirāja Gosvāmī states that although these people were as strong as elephants, they were almost in the clutches of death because they were being attacked by the crocodiles of various philosophies.

CC Madhya 9.11, Purport:

To distinguish his disciplic succession from the Māyāvādī followers of Śaṅkarācārya, Śrīla Madhvācārya named his party the Tattvavādīs. Impersonal monists are always attacked by these Tattvavādīs, who attempt to defeat their philosophy of impersonalism. Generally, they establish the supremacy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

CC Madhya 9.11, Purport:

The word pāṣaṇḍī refers to those who are opposed to pure devotional service. In particular, these are the Māyāvādīs, the impersonalists. A definition of pāṣaṇḍī is given in the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa (1.73), wherein it is stated:

yas tu nārāyaṇaṁ devaṁ brahma-rudrādi-daivataiḥ

samatvenaiva vīkṣeta sa pāṣaṇḍī bhaved dhruvam

(CC Madhya 18.116)

A pāṣaṇḍī is one who thinks that the Supreme Lord Nārāyaṇa, the Personality of Godhead, is on the same level with the demigods, headed by Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva. A devotee never considers Lord Nārāyaṇa to be on the same platform with Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva.

CC Madhya 9.42, Translation:

There are many kinds of philosophers. Some are logicians who follow Gautama or Kaṇāda. Some follow the Mīmāṁsā philosophy of Jaimini. Some follow the Māyāvāda philosophy of Śaṅkarācārya, and others follow Kapila's Sāṅkhya philosophy or the mystic yoga system of Patañjali. Some follow the smṛti-śāstra composed of twenty religious scriptures, and others follow the Purāṇas and the tantra-śāstra. In this way there are many different types of philosophers.

CC Madhya 9.244, Purport:

Afterwards, Maṇḍana Miśra took the order of sannyāsa from Śaṅkarācārya and became known as Sureśvara. Śaṅkarācārya defeated many scholars throughout India and converted them to his Māyāvāda philosophy. He left his material body at the age of thirty-three.

CC Madhya 9.245, Purport:

There was even an attempt to prove that the disciplic succession of Madhvācārya was not in line with Vedic principles. A person named Puṇḍarīka Purī, a follower of the Māyāvāda philosophy of Śaṅkarācārya, came before Madhvācārya to discuss the śāstras. It is said that all of Madhvācārya's books were taken away, but later they were found with the help of King Jayasiṁha, ruler of Kumla.

CC Madhya 9.250, Translation:

When the Tattvavādī Vaiṣṇavas first saw Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, they considered Him a Māyāvādī sannyāsī. Therefore they did not talk to Him.

CC Madhya 9.277, Purport:

It is the Māyāvāda sampradāya that does not accept the transcendental form of the Lord. If a Vaiṣṇava sampradāya is also carried away by that impersonal attitude, that sampradāya has no position at all. It is a fact that there are many so-called Vaiṣṇavas whose ultimate aim is to merge into the existence of the Lord. For example, the sahajiyās' Vaiṣṇava philosophy is to become one with the Supreme.

CC Madhya 9.360, Purport:

The Māyāvādīs imagine themselves to be the Supreme. They imagine that the Supreme has no personal form and that all His forms are imaginary like the will-o’-the-wisp or a flower in the sky. Both Māyāvādīs and those who imagine forms of God are misguided. According to them, worship of the Deity or any other form of the Lord is a result of the conditioned soul's illusion. However, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu confirms the conclusion of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam on the strength of His philosophy of acintya-bhedābheda-tattva. That philosophy holds that the Supreme Lord is simultaneously one with and different from His creation.

CC Madhya 9.360, Purport:

To set the example, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu personally visited temples in various holy places. Wherever He visited, He immediately exhibited His ecstatic love for the Supreme Personality of Godhead. When a Vaiṣṇava visits the temple of a demigod, his vision of that demigod is different from the vision of the impersonalists and Māyāvādīs.

CC Madhya 9.360, Purport:

This imaginary deity worship has recently been transformed into Māyāvāda impersonalism. For want of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, people are victimized by the Māyāvāda philosophy, and consequently they sometimes become staunch atheists. However, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu established the process of self-realization by His own personal behavior.

CC Madhya 10.113, Purport:

These misconceptions practically parallel the Māyāvāda philosophy. If one indulges in Māyāvāda philosophy, he gradually falls down from the platform of devotional service. By overlapping mellows (rasābhāsa) one eventually becomes a prākṛta-sahajiyā and takes everything to be very easy. One may also become a member of the bāula community and gradually become attracted to material activities.

CC Madhya 11.187, Purport:

The Māyāvādī philosophers say that the living entity and the Supreme Lord are nondifferent, and therefore they equate the transformation of the living entity with the transformation of the Lord. In other words, Māyāvādīs say that if the living entity is pleased, the Lord is also pleased, and if the living entity is displeased, the Lord is also displeased. By juggling words in this way, Māyāvādīs try to prove that there is no difference between the living entity and the Lord.

CC Madhya 11.189, Purport:

The Māyāvādī philosophers try to explain the equality of master and servant in terms of quantity, but they fail to explain why, if the master and servant are equal, the servant falls victim to māyā. They try to explain that when the servant, the living entity, is out of the clutches of māyā, he immediately becomes the so-called master again.

CC Madhya 11.189, Purport:

Such an explanation is never satisfactory. Being unlimited, the master cannot become a victim of māyā, for in such a case His unlimitedness would be crippled or limited. Thus the Māyāvāda explanation is not correct. The fact is that the master is always master and unlimited, and the servant, being limited, is sometimes curtailed by the influence of māyā. Māyā is also the master's energy and is also unlimited; therefore the limited servant or limited living entity is forced to remain under the master or the master's potency, māyā.

CC Madhya 12.61, Purport:

Māyāvādī philosophers make a great mistake by assuming that the sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1), the transcendental form of the Lord, is like a material body. However, there is no material contamination in transcendence, nor is there any possibility of imagining a spirituality in matter. One cannot accept matter as spirit. As indicated by the technical words bhauma ijya-dhīḥ (SB 10.84.13), materialistic Māyāvādīs imagine the form of God in matter, although according to their imagination, God is ultimately formless.

CC Madhya 12.135, Purport:

If one stops preaching and simply sits down in a solitary place, he is engaging in material activity. If one desires to make a compromise with the Māyāvādīs, he is also engaged in material activity. A devotee should never make compromises with nondevotees. By acting as a professional guru, mystic yogī or miracle man, one may cheat and bluff the general public and gain fame as a wonderful mystic, but all this is considered to be dust, straw and grains of sand within the heart.

CC Madhya 12.195, Purport:

One should carefully avoid eating food offered by nondevotees. Indeed, a devotee should be very strict in not accepting food from a nondevotee, especially food prepared in restaurants or hotels or on airplanes. Śrīla Nityānanda Prabhu's reference in this connection is meant to emphasize that one should avoid eating with Māyāvādīs and covert Māyāvādīs like the sahajiyā Vaiṣṇavas, who are materially affected.

CC Madhya 12.207, Purport:

The karaṅga is a kind of waterpot especially carried by Māyāvādī sannyāsīs and generally carried by all other sannyāsīs.

CC Madhya 15.111, Purport:

Whether a Vaiṣṇava is properly initiated or not is not a subject for consideration. One may be initiated and yet contaminated by the Māyāvāda philosophy, but a person who chants the holy name of the Lord offenselessly will not be so contaminated. A properly initiated Vaiṣṇava may be imperfect, but one who chants the holy name of the Lord offenselessly is all-perfect.

CC Madhya 15.163, Purport:

The Māyāvādīs and karmīs should therefore turn their attention to the magnanimous Vāsudeva Datta, who wanted to suffer for others in a hellish condition. No one should consider Vāsudeva Datta a mundane philanthropist or welfare worker. Nor was he interested in merging into the Brahman effulgence or in gaining material honor or reputation. He was far, far above philanthropists, philosophers and fruitive actors.

CC Madhya 15.277, Purport:

The impersonalist may consider himself a brāhmaṇa and may be situated in the mode of goodness, but nonetheless he is conditioned by one of the modes of material nature. This means that he is not yet liberated, for liberation cannot be attained unless one is completely free from the modes. In any case, the Māyāvāda philosophy keeps one conditioned. If one becomes a Vaiṣṇava through proper initiation, he automatically becomes a brāhmaṇa.

CC Madhya 16.65, Purport:

Similarly, Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī was a leader of many thousands of Māyāvādī sannyāsīs. It was Śrīla Nityānanda Prabhu, however, who delivered persons like Jagāi and Mādhāi. Therefore, Lord Caitanya says, āmāra "duṣkara" karma, tomā haite haye. Jagāi and Mādhāi were delivered solely by Nityānanda Prabhu's mercy. When they injured Nityānanda Prabhu, Lord Caitanya became angry and decided to kill them with His Sudarśana cakra, but Nityānanda Prabhu saved them from the Lord's wrath and delivered them.

CC Madhya 16.72, Purport:

The Māyāvādīs look on Viṣṇu and Vaiṣṇavas imperfectly due to their poor fund of knowledge, and this is condemned. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (11.2.46), the intermediate Vaiṣṇava is described as follows:

īśvare tad-adhīneṣu bāliśeṣu dviṣatsu ca

prema-maitrī-kṛpopekṣā yaḥ karoti sa madhyamaḥ

"The intermediate Vaiṣṇava has to love God, make friends with the devotees, instruct the innocent and reject jealous people. These are the four functions of the Vaiṣṇava in the intermediate stage."

CC Madhya 16.281, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura points out that we have no authorized documents stating that these exalted personalities visited Vṛndāvana. Nonetheless, we find many nondevotees, Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, prākṛta-sahajiyās, fruitive workers, mental speculators and many others with material motives going to Vṛndāvana to live. Many of these people go there to solve their economic problems by becoming beggars.

CC Madhya 17 Summary:

Seeing the behavior of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, a Maharashtriyan brāhmaṇa informed Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, the leader of the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs. Prakāśānanda made various accusations against the Lord. The Maharashtriyan brāhmaṇa was very sorry about this, and he brought the news to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, inquiring from Him why the Māyāvādī sannyāsīs did not utter the holy name of Kṛṣṇa. In reply, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that they were offenders and that one should not associate with them.

CC Madhya 17.60, Purport:

This indicates that one who is born in a non-brāhmaṇa family has accepted the brāhmaṇa status by initiation. Such devotees extended invitations to Balabhadra Bhaṭṭācārya. A Māyāvādī sannyāsī will accept an invitation only from a brāhmaṇa family, but a Vaiṣṇava does not accept an invitation from a brāhmaṇa if he does not belong to the Vaiṣṇava sect. However, a Vaiṣṇava will accept an invitation from a brāhmaṇa or śūdra-mahājana if that person is an initiated Vaiṣṇava.

CC Madhya 17.89, Purport:

Vallabhācārya was also known as Mahāprabhu among his disciples. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu probably lived at Yatana-vaṭa, but there is no sign of Candraśekhara's or Tapana Miśra's house, nor is there any sign of the Māyāvādī sannyāsī Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, with whom Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu discussed the Vedānta-sūtra. A little distance from Yatana-vaṭa is a temple of Gaura-Nityānanda established by Śaśibhūṣaṇa Niyogī Mahāśaya of Calcutta.

CC Madhya 17.96, Purport:

The Māyāvādīs call themselves Vedāntists but do not at all understand the purport of Vedānta philosophy. Not being properly educated, people in general think that Vedānta means the Śaṅkarite interpretation.

CC Madhya 17.103, Translation:

Every day Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu refused their invitations because He feared associating with Māyāvādī sannyāsīs.

CC Madhya 17.103, Purport:

A Vaiṣṇava sannyāsī never accepts an invitation from a party who considers Māyāvādī sannyāsīs and Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs to be one and the same. In other words, Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs do not at all like to associate with Māyāvādī sannyāsīs, to say nothing of eating with them. This principle must be followed by the sannyāsīs of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. That is the instruction of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, given by His personal behavior.

CC Madhya 17.104, Translation:

There was a great Māyāvādī sannyāsī named Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, who used to teach Vedānta philosophy to a great assembly of followers.

Śrīpāda Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī was a Māyāvādī sannyāsī, and his characteristics have been described in Caitanya-bhāgavata (Madhya-khaṇḍa, Chapter Three)

Thus by studying Vedānta philosophy one must come to know the Supreme Person. Whoever describes Vedic knowledge as impersonal is a demon. One becomes successful in life by worshiping the form of the Lord. The Māyāvādī sannyāsīs deny the form of the Lord, which delivers all fallen souls. Indeed, the Māyāvādī demons try to cut this form to pieces.

The Personality of Godhead is worshiped by exalted demigods like Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva. The original Māyāvādī sannyāsī, Śaṅkarācārya, also accepted the fact that the Lord's form is transcendental: nārāyaṇaḥ paro ’vyaktāt. "Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is beyond the avyakta, the unmanifested material energy."

However, Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are impersonalist philosophers, and they describe the form of the Lord as māyā, or false. How can one be purified by worshiping something false? Māyāvādī philosophers have no sufficient reason for being impersonalists. They blindly follow a principle that cannot be supported by reason or argument. This was the situation with Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, the chief Māyāvādī sannyāsī of Benares.

CC Madhya 17.123, Translation:

The Absolute Truth, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, always displays pastimes and activities, but Māyāvādī sannyāsīs claim that these activities are false.

CC Madhya 17.116, Purport:

Consequently he called Him a loka-pratāraka, a pretender. Māyāvādīs cannot understand the transcendental symptoms exhibited by a devotee; therefore when such symptoms are manifest, the Māyāvādīs equate them with temporary emotional feelings. However, Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī’s statement is offensive, and consequently he should be considered an atheist (pāṣaṇḍī). According to Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, since Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī was not engaged in the Lord's devotional service, his sannyāsa is to be considered phalgu-vairāgya.

The mind of the brāhmaṇa was already purified by his seeing the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. He therefore went to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and described what had taken place before the Māyāvādī sannyāsī Prakāśānanda.

CC Madhya 17.127, Purport:

Māyāvādī philosophers and the pañcopāsakas cannot in the least understand the existence of the spiritual world and the blissful variegatedness there. They cannot understand the Absolute Truth and its spiritual varieties—name, form, qualities and pastimes. Consequently they conclude that Kṛṣṇa's transcendental activities are māyā.

CC Madhya 17.127, Purport:

To avoid this misconception one has to directly cultivate knowledge about the holy name of the Lord. Māyāvādī philosophers do not know this fact, and therefore they commit great offenses. One should not hear anything about Kṛṣṇa or devotional service from the mouths of Māyāvādī impersonalists.

CC Madhya 17.129, Translation:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu replied, “The Māyāvādī impersonalists are great offenders unto Lord Kṛṣṇa; therefore they simply utter the words "Brahman," "ātmā" and "caitanya."

CC Madhya 17.132, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is herein pointing out to the brāhmaṇa that Māyāvādī philosophers cannot understand that the living entity is equal in quality with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Because they do not accept this, they think that the living entity has been falsely divided from the original Brahman due to being conditioned by māyā. Māyāvādīs believe that the Absolute Truth is ultimately impersonal. When an incarnation of God or God Himself comes, they think He is covered by māyā. In other words, Māyāvādī impersonalists think that the Lord's form is also a product of this material world.

CC Madhya 17.142, Purport:

In Vṛndāvana we have seen many Māyāvādī sannyāsīs who do not even come to the temple of Govindajī, Gopīnātha or Madana-mohana because they think that such temples are māyā. Therefore they are called Māyāvādīs. Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu therefore said that the Māyāvādīs are the greatest offenders.

CC Madhya 17.143, Translation:

“Because the Māyāvādīs are great offenders and atheistic philosophers, the holy name of Kṛṣṇa does not come from their mouths.

CC Madhya 17.143, Purport:

Because they are constantly blaspheming the Supreme Personality of Godhead by saying that He has no head, hands or legs, Māyāvādī philosophers remain offenders for many, many births, even though they have partially realized Brahman. However, if such impersonalists are not offenders at the lotus feet of the Lord, they immediately become devotees in the association of a devotee.

CC Madhya 17.143, Purport:

In other words, if an impersonalist is not an offender, he can become a devotee if he gets a chance to associate with other devotees. If he is an offender, he cannot be converted even by the association of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu was very much afraid of this Māyāvādī offender; therefore He spoke as follows.

CC Madhya 17.145, Purport:

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was selling the transcendental holy name of the Lord. But Kāśī was a city of Māyāvādīs (impersonalists), and such people will never chant the holy names of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra. Consequently Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was feeling disappointed. How could He teach the Māyāvādīs the importance of chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mahā-mantra? The attraction for chanting the holy name of the Lord belongs absolutely to pure devotees, and there was no possibility of finding pure devotees at Kāśī.

CC Madhya 17.145, Purport:

We are now very happy to see that this movement is advancing more and more in the Western countries. We therefore conclude that the so-called mlecchas and yavanas of the Western countries are more purified than offensive Māyāvādīs or atheistic impersonalists.

This is the viewpoint of Māyāvāda philosophy. Māyāvāda philosophy supports the impersonalist view that Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, has no form. One can imagine impersonal Brahman in any form—as Viṣṇu, Lord Śiva, Vivasvān, Gaṇeśa or Devī Durgā. According to the Māyāvāda philosophy, when one becomes a sannyāsī he is to be considered a moving Nārāyaṇa.

Māyāvāda philosophy holds that the real Nārāyaṇa does not move because, being impersonal, He has no legs. Thus according to Māyāvāda philosophy, whoever becomes a sannyāsī declares himself Nārāyaṇa. Foolish people accept such ordinary human beings as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is called vivarta-vāda.

In this regard, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura comments that jaṅgama-nārāyaṇa means that the impersonal Brahman takes a shape and moves here and there in the form of a Māyāvādī sannyāsī. The Māyāvāda philosophy confirms this. Daṇḍa-grahaṇa-mātreṇa naro nārāyaṇo bhavet: "Simply by accepting the daṇḍa of the order of sannyāsa, one is immediately transformed into Nārāyaṇa." Therefore Māyāvādī sannyāsīs address one another by saying oṁ namo nārāyaṇāya. In this way one Nārāyaṇa worships another Nārāyaṇa.