Mayavadis (Lectures, Other)

Expressions researched:
"Mayavadi" |"Mayavadi's" |"Mayavadin" |"Mayavadins" |"Mayavadis"

Notes from the compiler: VedaBase query: "Mayavadi" or "Mayavadis" or "Mayavadi's" or "Mayavadin" or "Mayavadins" not "Mayavad* philosopher*"@5 not "mayavadi sannyasi" not "mayavadi sannyasis" not "mayavadi sannyasa"

Nectar of Devotion Lectures

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

"These are eight kinds of separated energy of Me, Kṛṣṇa." So Kṛṣṇa's energy... Kṛṣṇa is truth. So Kṛṣṇa's energy is also truth. Because form truth, false cannot come. If Kṛṣṇa is truth, this energy is also truth. But it is not false. Therefore we do not accept this Māyāvādī theory that the world is false, jagan mithyā. We say that Brahman is satya, and this world is also satya.

The difference is that a devotee relishes a particular type of mellow, rasa, in this material world. But the, those who are not devotees, they do not feel any relish from this material world. They feel for some time, but when it becomes stale in their taste, they say, "It is false." Just like the same example: The jackal first of all tried to get the grapes, jumping, jumping, and when it was a failure, he said, "Oh, the grapes are sour. I don't require." So except devotee... The nondevotees, the karmīs, jñānīs, yogis, they actually do not relish the sweetness of the creation of Kṛṣṇa.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, January 8, 1973:

All others, they're incarnation or kalāḥ, but Kṛṣṇa is the avatārī, the source of all incarnations. So, bhakta-sane vāsa, satāṁ prasaṅgān mama vīrya-saṁvido (SB 3.25.25). The kṛṣṇa-kathāḥ, or the discussion about the Supreme Personality of Godhead becomes very pleasing, satām, when they're discussed among the devotees. nondevotee, he may go on speaking, but it is dry. It does not give any relish. Therefore it is advised, satāṁ prasaṅgān, one should discuss Kṛṣṇa consciousness amongst the devotees. So just contrary to this, Sanātana Gosvāmī says that,

avaiṣṇava-mukhodgīrṇaṁ

pūtaṁ hari-kathāmṛtam

śravaṇaṁ naiva kartavyam...

Avaiṣṇava, who is not a Vaiṣṇava, Māyāvādī... Māyāvādī philosophy is very dangerous. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has personally said, māyāvādī haya kṛṣṇe aparādhī. They're offenders to Kṛṣṇa. Just like the literatures, what is that literature, Kṛṣṇa is black something?

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, January 8, 1973:

Never mind he's a rascal, what is the fault of kṛṣṇa-kathāḥ?" He's giving this example: śravaṇaṁ na kartavyaṁ sarpocchiṣṭaṁ payaḥ yathā, milk is very good, everyone knows, but when it is touched by the lip of a serpent, immediately it becomes poison. If you take that milk, then you'll die. So kṛṣṇa-kathāḥ is very good, but when it is touched by the lip of the Māyāvādī, nondevotee, it becomes poisonous. It becomes poisonous. Poisonous in this sense. It will push you far away from kṛṣṇa-bhakti. That is the loss, greatest loss of life.

This life is meant for developing Kṛṣṇa consciousness, to become devotee of Kṛṣṇa. Bhagavad-gītā is left by Kṛṣṇa to make all people after Him, to become devotees. Man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65). The instruction is there, but these rascals will spoil. They will never allow you to become a devotee. These rascals are so dangerous. They are going against the will of Kṛṣṇa.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, January 8, 1973:

So phala visandi. As Śrīdhara Swami says, that in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, phala visandi paryantaṁ nirasta. Phala is mukti. Mukti is also phala visandi. So up to mukti, then above mukti, there is bhakti. It is a mistaken idea that one has to attain mukti by bhakti. Sometimes they say that, these pañcopāsanā Māyāvādī, they say that "Ultimately, the absolute truth is nirākāra. There is no form. But because you cannot worship or meditate upon the nirākāra, so just imagine some form. Either of Viṣṇu, or Lord Śiva or Sūrya or Devī." Pañcopāsanā, it is called pañcopāsanā. Sādhakānāṁ hitārthāya brahmaṇo rūpa-kalpanaḥ. This is kalpana, he imagines. "Ultimately the Brahman has no form, but because you are accustomed to meditate on the forms, and it is very difficult for you to meditate upon the formless, so you imagine some form. This is imagine, not fact." That is their theory. And Bhagavān says in the Bhagavad-gītā, kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām (BG 12.5). So that is simply troublesome.

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

Ḍukṛn, du-prata, kṛñ-prata, these are grammatical jugglery. So these Māyāvādīs, they coin words by grammatical jugglery. This word may be meant, may be meaning like this. They're all grammatical jugglery. Then nyāya jugglery. So they take advantage of this jugglery. Kṛṣṇa is not subjected to this jugglery of words. Kṛṣṇa keeps always His independence, and if you fulfill the condition, if you surrender unto Him, then He will be revealed unto you. Not by your jugglery of words. That is not possible.

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

Yes. Sometimes they create havoc. Because these Māyāvādīs, Kṛṣṇa gives them intelligence. Because he wants to, he puts forward his logic to kill Kṛṣṇa, or to forget Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa also gives his intelligence, "Yes, you talk like this so that you will forget forever." Yes. (laughter). "You talk like this." Mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca, Kṛṣṇa says. Sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭo mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca (BG 15.15). Kṛṣṇa can give you. If you actually want Kṛṣṇa, He'll give you intelligence. Dadāmi buddhi-yogaṁ taṁ yena mām upayānti te. Kṛṣṇa is very cunning also. This man is trying to forget Me, to mislead others. He is misleading himself, others cannot be mislead, for the time being, but he is misled for good. Tān ahaṁ dviṣataḥ krūrān kṣipāmy ajasram eva yoniṣu (BG 16.19). These asuras, on account of their enviousness upon Kṛṣṇa, to prove that there is no Kṛṣṇa, there is no God, so these people are put into andhā yoni. Andhā yoni means in such, just like animals.

The Nectar of Devotion -- Bombay, January 10, 1973:

So sometimes He is disappointed that nobody wants Me to show his stick. Therefore He finds out such a devotee who can show Him stick. (laughter) Kṛṣṇa is so kind. Kṛṣṇa is so kind. So you can become mother of Kṛṣṇa, or you can become father of Kṛṣṇa. What is to become one with Kṛṣṇa? You become father of Kṛṣṇa. The Māyāvādīs they want to merge into the Supreme, but we want to become father of Kṛṣṇa. Why merge? More than Kṛṣṇa. The devotee can beget Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa accepts that. Yes, I shall become your child. I shall be controlled by your stick.

So they are not ordinary. We should not think like that. The ānanda-cinmaya-rasa-pratibhāva. That is Kṛṣṇa's expansion of pleasure potency. Kṛṣṇa wants to be controlled by Yaśodāmāyī. Kṛṣṇa wants to be defeated by His friends. Kṛṣṇa wants to be refused Rādhārāṇī's darśana. Yes. Rādhārāṇī is angry, she has refused, she has ordered the sakhis, "Don't allow Kṛṣṇa to come here!"

The Nectar of Devotion -- Vrndavana, October 29, 1972:

We cannot disobey. Yasyaprasādād na gatiḥ kuto 'pi. This is the process. In Caitanya-caritāmṛta it has been very extensively explained what is the position of the spiritual master. But at the same time, the spiritual master does not accept himself as he's God or Kṛṣṇa like the Māyāvādīs. No. the bona fide spiritual master always thinks of himself as the servant of the servant of the servant of Kṛṣṇa. Gopī-bhartuḥ pada-kamalayoḥ dāsa-dāsānudāsaḥ (CC Madhya 13.80). Not that "Because my disciples accept me as good as Kṛṣṇa, and because my disciples offer me respect exactly he offers respect to Kṛṣṇa..." That does not mean I am Kṛṣṇa. I am servant of the servant of the servant of Kṛṣṇa. This is the position. Go on.

Pradyumna: "The connection with the spiritual master is called initiation. From the date of initiation by the spiritual master, the connection between Kṛṣṇa and a person cultivating Kṛṣṇa consciousness is established.

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

Simply mental speculation. This is going on. We should be very careful. What is that? Go on. The impersonalists... The impersonalists, they do not know that Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's body, not different. They take it for acceptance that when God, Brahman comes, He accepts a material body. That is Māyāvādī philosophy. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhāḥ mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritāḥ (BG 9.11). He comes... Sambhavāmy ātma-māyayā (BG 4.6). He comes as He is. Otherwise how He can act so wonderfully? When He was on the lap of His mother, three months old, how He could kill the gigantic demon, Pūtanā? He's not different from His body. He simply appears according to the necessity. Kṛṣṇa has no such difference, body and soul. He's full, complete, spiritual. We have got, in this conditional state, soul and body difference. Dehi and deha. Dehino 'smin yathā dehe kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā (BG 2.13). So dehāntaraṁ prāptiḥ. Kṛṣṇa hasn't got to accept another body.

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

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

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

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

Prabhupāda: The material variety is the perverted reflection of the spiritual variety. As it is described in the Bhagavad-gītā, Fifteenth Chapter: ūrdhva-mūlam adhah-śākha. This tree, this material world (is) compared with a aśvattha vṛkṣa. The root is up, upstairs, upwards, and the branches and leaves are down, downwards. Why? Because it is reflection, chaya, or māyā. The real tree is in the Vaikuṇṭha planet or in the spiritual world. It is only simply reflection. Just like a tree standing on the bank of reservoir of water, on the bank of a lake or a river, you'll see the tree is reflected downwards.

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

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

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

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

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

Prabhupāda: Śukadeva Gosvāmī recommended,

tasmād bhārata sarvātmā

bhagavān harir īśvaraḥ

śrotavyaḥ kīrtitavyaś ca

smārtavyaś ca nityaśaḥ

(SB 2.1.5)

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

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

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

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Pradyumna: "...only."

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

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

This is a quotation from Caitanya-caritāmṛta, from Śāśvata Purāṇa. So we should not compare the Supreme Personality of Godhead Nārāyaṇa equal to any other demigod. That is offense. That is also nāma-aparādha. But the Māyāvādīs, they do that. Therefore, they do not derive any benefit. The Māyāvādīs also chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, but—just to attract people—but actually they think that the name of any other demigod and the name of Nārāyaṇa, Kṛṣṇa, all the same. That is nāma-aparādha. Go on.

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

The people do not know that, what is Vṛndāvana life. So devotees are so exalted. Rādhārāṇī orders, "Don't allow Kṛṣṇa to come here." Kṛṣṇa cannot come in. He flatters the other gopīs: "Please allow Me to go there." "No, no. There is no order. You cannot go." So Kṛṣṇa likes that. But the Māyāvādīs, they cannot understand that the Supreme Absolute Truth can be controlled by the devotee. They want to become one. But here the Vaiṣṇava, pure Vaiṣṇava, they become so exalted that there is no question of becoming one. Daivena phalati divya-kiśora-mūrtiḥ, bhaktis tvayi sthiratarā yadi bhagavān syād, Bilvamaṅgala Ṭhākura says. Daivena phalati divya-kiśora-mūrtiḥ muktiḥ mukulitāñjali sevate asmān. "Mukti, oh, she's standing with folded hands, 'What can I do for you, sir?' " Dharmārtha-kāma mokṣa samaya pratīkṣāḥ. They're just like attendants, servants. Dharma-artha-kāma-mokṣa (SB 4.8.41, Cc. Ādi 1.90). So for a devotee, the position is so exalted. They don't care for all this dharma, artha, kāma, mokṣa. They simply absorbed in thoughts of Kṛṣṇa. Always thinking, satato, smārtavyaḥ satato viṣṇu. Kīrtanīyaḥ sadā hariḥ (CC Adi 17.31).

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

Śrīmad-Bhāgavata it is said, niṣkiñcanasya gocarāḥ: "You, Kṛṣṇa, You are understood by persons who have become niṣkiñcana." Niṣkiñcana. So niṣkiñcanasya bhagavad-bhajanonmukhasya. The qualification of devotion is to become a niṣkiñcana. Means one should not try to possess anything material. He should simply try to possess Kṛṣṇa. There must be some possession. The Māyāvādī philosophy, to dispossess material things, will not help him. He must possess something positive. Otherwise he'll fall down. That is our... Because we want something. Paraṁ dṛṣṭvā nivartate (BG 9.59). So we simply, we try, that "Let me become sannyāsī, niṣkiñcana." That is not possible. You must take to the service of Kṛṣṇa. Then when you are fully satisfied that "I possess Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is within my heart," then you can give up all this nonsense, kick out: "I don't want." Otherwise not possible. So the two things: Niṣkiñcanasya bhagavad-bhajano..., param paro jīveṣa (?). Those who have become ni..., what is this liberation for them? Nothing.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 1.5 -- Mayapur, March 29, 1975:

How He can take? Because for understand brahma-sukha we are giving up everything—I mean from the Māyāvādī point of view—and again, Kṛṣṇa being Paraṁ Brahman, how He can indulge in material happiness? This is the argument. Brahma-sukha, to understand brahma-sukha, to release brahma-sukha, if one is giving up everything material... There are three kinds of sukha: material sukha, brahma-sukha, and spiritual sukha. Brahma-sukha is on the margin. Sukha means happiness. Therefore, from logical point of view, we should conclude it that "Kṛṣṇa, being Parabrahman, how He can indulge in material happiness?" This is very important point. If for understanding little bit of brahma-sukha we are giving up all material enjoyment, how Kṛṣṇa can enjoy materially? He is Paraṁ Brahman. Therefore those sahajiyās, those who are taking that Kṛṣṇa is enjoying with ordinary girls, they are very, very, much misled. That is not the fact. Therefore it is said, hlādinī śakti. This is different. This is in the spiritual world the topmost mellow, hlādinī śakti.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.1 -- Mayapur, March 1, 1974:

They will take interpretation of a rascal of Bhagavad-gītā. Sumanda-matayo. Even they read Bhagavad-gītā, they will read some rascaldom. Sumanda-matayo. The Māyāvādī philosophy, they will take it, not Kṛṣṇa's philosophy. They are reading Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa's book, but interpreting in the Māyāvādīc way. Therefore sumanda-matayo. Their intelligence is very bad. Mandāḥ sumanda-matayo manda-bhāgyā. And the unfortunate. In India there are so many Vedic literatures, full of treasure house of transcendental knowledge. But manda-bhāgyās they will read Lenin's literature. Just see how much unfortunate they have become. As if Lenin can speak more than Kṛṣṇa. This is going on. Manda... Not only here, everywhere, all the parts of the world, they are manda-bhāgyā. Mandāḥ sumanda-matayo manda-bhāgyā hy upadrutāḥ (SB 1.1.10). At the same time, they are disturbed by so many conditions. Just like at the present moment there is no rice, no wheat, no food. The agitation is... Manda-bhāgyā hy upadrutāḥ. Upadrutāḥ. They must be disturbed because they have not taken the right path.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.2 -- Mayapur, March 2, 1974:

Never said. Rather, when He was (in) Vṛndāvana, some of the devotees eulogized Him that "You are Kṛṣṇa," He immediately blocked His ear: "No, no. Don't say like that." That is the indication that to claim to become God or Kṛṣṇa is the highest type of rascaldom. That is rascaldom. Those who are these Māyāvādīs who are claiming that "Everyone is God. I am God, you are God," they are all rascals. Therefore I have said in connection, with reference to that boy-god..., you know, I do not wish to repeat. We do not accept such cheap God. No. We accept Kṛṣṇa. And we accept Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu as God because śāstra says, the ācārya says; therefore we follow the footsteps of the ācāryas. Rūpa Gosvāmī says, kṛṣṇāya kṛṣṇa-caitanya-nāmne: "Sir, You have now come... You are Kṛṣṇa. You have come under the name of Kṛṣṇa Caitanya. You are so magnanimous that You are distributing..." Be... Without becoming Kṛṣṇa, how one can distribute Kṛṣṇa? Without one becoming millionaires, how he can distribute millions of dollars?

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

Therefore they fall down. It is not our version, but it is stated in the Vedic literature, āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adho 'nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ: (SB 10.2.32) "By severe penance and austerities, these Māyāvādīs, they go up to the Brahman effulgence, but from there they fall down, fall down." Because for want of varieties. You cannot live without varieties. Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt: "The Absolute Truth is ānandamayo by nature," abhyāsāt. There are the interpretation of the Māyāvādīs of this Vedānta-sūtra, ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). But we see that the Supreme Absolute Person is ānandamāyā. Kṛṣṇa, you'll never see without ānanda. He is, I mean to say, taking care of the cows, He's dancing with the gopīs, He's playing with His cowherd boys. Ānandamāyā. These are ānanda māyā. These are the varieties.

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

"Here is American Vaiṣṇava and here is a brāhmaṇa vaiṣṇava." No, Vaiṣṇava is Vaiṣṇava. This is absolute. Guruṣu nara-matiḥ. Guru, although he is appearing like human being, he should not be considered. Ācāryaṁ māṁ vijānīyān nāvamanyeta karhicit (SB 11.17.27). These are the injunction of the śāstras. Suppose we are worshiping here. The Māyāvādī will say, "They are worshiping a brass, metal Deity." So are we so fools that we are spending so much money for worshiping a lump of metal? That they do not know. This is acintya-bhedābheda. And fact is that. Kṛṣṇa is omnipotent. He can accept your service in any way, as He likes. This is called arcā-vigraha. As Kṛṣṇa's avatāra is there, here is also another avatāra, arcā-vigraha. He is so kind. You cannot see Kṛṣṇa, you cannot touch Kṛṣṇa at the present moment, but Kṛṣṇa is so kind that He appears before you as you can touch, you can dress, you can offer your respect, you can see. That is Kṛṣṇa's mercy. But don't think that Kṛṣṇa has become metal. No.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.8 -- Vrndavana, March 15, 1974:

So Kṛṣṇa is Paraṁ Brahman. Paraṁ Brahman. He is accepted as Paraṁ Brahman in the Bhagavad-gītā by Arjuna: paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān (BG 10.12). He's Paraṁ Brahman, Supreme Brahman. The Māyāvādīs, they cannot understand the Supreme Brahman, or the Supreme Ātmā, Paramātmā. These words are there, ātmā, paramātmā; brahma, paraṁ brahma; īśvara, parameśvara. These words are there. But they, on account of their poor fund of knowledge, they think ātmā and Paramātmā the same, or īśvara or Parameśvara is the same, or Brahman or Paraṁ Brahman is the same. That is poor fund of knowledge. There cannot be any competition of the Parameśvara or Paraṁ Brahman or Paramātmā. Therefore in this verse it is said, svayaṁ bhagavān kṛṣṇa ekale īśvara. Īśvara, or the Supreme Absolute Truth, cannot have any competitor. Asamaurdhva.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.8 -- Vrndavana, March 15, 1974:

Therefore in this verse it is said, svayaṁ bhagavān kṛṣṇa ekale īśvara. Īśvara, or the Supreme Absolute Truth, cannot have any competitor. Asamaurdhva. These words are there. Asama. Asama means there is no equal. And aurdhva, and nobody is greater. Asamaurdhva. Nobody is greater than Kṛṣṇa, and nobody is equal to Kṛṣṇa. The Māyāvādī philosophy that everyone is God, everyone is Kṛṣṇa, that is not substantiated by the Vedic literature. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Therefore Kṛṣṇa's name is used there. The Parameśvara, Paraṁ Brahman, Paramātmā, that is Kṛṣṇa. Not we are. We are very fragmental portion of Kṛṣṇa. Very, very small, spiritual spark. So as the sparks from the fire falls down, it loses its original sparking capacity or fire elements. We have seen it. When the spark falls down from the big fire, then it is extinguished. No more fire. It is carbon. Similarly, when we are detached from Kṛṣṇa, we are jīva-bhūta. Then, gradually, if by good association, by the mercy of Kṛṣṇa and spiritual master, we gradually come to the spiritual position, then we become brahma-bhūta (SB 4.30.20).

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.8 -- Vrndavana, March 15, 1974:

This is the sum and substance of Vṛndāvana līlā. Kṛṣṇa comes, He exhibits His līlā in Vṛndāvana to attract the conditioned souls, who are engaged in false līlā, temporary līlā, or hellish līlā. Kṛṣṇa wants to save us. The propensity is there. Kṛṣṇa says, "Not here. Not in this material world. This is perverted. You come to Me." But the Māyāvādīs, because they have poor fund of knowledge, they think that "If again there is līlā, there is sporting, there is dancing, so that is here. Then it is māyā." In their poor fund of knowledge, brain cannot accommodate that Kṛṣṇa's līlā and this līlā are not the same. Not the same. They think when there is līlā, then it must be māyā; therefore they are called Māyāvādī. Their idea is that liberation means minus this līlā, no more līlā, simply stop everything. Or voidism.

Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.8 -- Vrndavana, March 15, 1974:

That is a disgusted negation only. And as soon as I am disgusted with something, I want to make it "No." Just like sometimes a man commits suicide. He thinks that "This life is simply disgusting. So finish this life." So Māyāvādī philosophy is like that. They want to finish this. But finishing, then what you are accepting? That they do not know. Therefore they are Śūnyavādī, Nirviśeṣavādī. If there is life... Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). Simply by committing suicide, how you'll be happy? Because tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ (BG 2.13). You'll have to accept another body. Either you commit suicide or die naturally, you have to accept. But if you accept natural death and natural body, then your karma kṣaya, you annihilate your karma, but if you commit suicide, then you become ghost. Because nature's punishment. You got a body and you neglected it, so you now you become, remain without body. That is ghost. Ghost means who does not possess this material body, but he has got the subtle body. That is ghost.

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

That means it was easier for Him to deliver the mlecchas, but it was difficult for Him to deliver the Māyāvādīs. In other words, the author is trying to place the position of the Māyāvādī sannyāsī less than the mlecchas. Less than the mlecchas.

So, sabe eḍāila mātra kāśīra māyāvādī. Māyāvādī means materialist. Māyā means this matter, and vādī means those who stick to this principle of material... There are different kinds of materialists. Because we should always know that up to the point of intelligence, it is matter. First point is the senses, the gross. The grossest type of materialist is that they are addicted to sense gratification. So this is materialist. And above this, there are mental speculators. They are also materialists because mind is matter. So the sense gratifiers and the mental speculationists, and those who are trying to reach spiritual perfection by bodily exercise... Because body is not at all spirit; it is matter. But by intellectually, by making proper adjustment...

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

Māyāvādī... The followers of Śaṅkara's school, they are generally called Māyāvādī. And another Māyāvādī are called the Buddhists. So in the Kāśī, in Benares, there were two kinds of Māyāvādīs. One kind of Māyāvādī, the Buddhists, they have got still Sarnath. Buddhists temples there are because Lord Buddha, he started his meditation near Gayā at about hundred miles off from Benares. Then his disciples established monasteries near Kāśī because Benares is well-known sacred place since a very long time, so they also established there. Formerly there was no such animosities between the Hindus and the Buddhists. They were practically on the same platform, but philosophically they were different. Just like the Māyāvādīs, the followers of Śaṅkarite, they are still Hindus. They are not out of it. Similarly, Buddhists also were considered as Hindu. But when Buddha religion was completely driven away from India's boundary, then now it is considered another sect. So the Kāśī Māyāvādī means both the Buddhists and the followers of Śaṅkarites.

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

So while Lord Caitanya was residing at Benares, that Tapana Miśra and Candraśekhara submitted with great regret that "Sir, the other party, the Māyāvādī sannyāsīns, they are criticizing Your activities. Because You are chanting and You do not give much attention to the reading of Vedānta philosophy, they are criticizing that 'What kind of sannyāsī is He? He does not take part in the matter of studying Vedānta philosophy, and on sentiment He is chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare, and some innocent people are following Him.' So in this way they are criticizing."

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 6.149-50 -- Gorakhpur, February 13, 1971:

So dehi. Dehi means possessor of this body, the owner of this body. So owner of this body is different from this body. But in case of Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu-tattva, there is no such difference, the self and the body, no difference. That is confirmed in the Kūrma Purāṇa. Unfortunately the Māyāvādīs, they, either due to their poor fund of knowledge of the śāstras or by their whims, they say that "Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu, when comes, or the Absolute Truth when He descends, He assumes, He accepts, a material body." That is not the fact. Kṛṣṇa says, sambhavāmy ātma-māyayā (BG 4.6). It is not that Kṛṣṇa accepts a material body. No. Kṛṣṇa has no such distinction, material world. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam: (BG 9.11) "Because I present myself, descend Myself as a human being, the mūḍhas, or the rascals, they think of Me or deride at Me." The Māyāvādīs, they will never worship the transcendental form of the Lord. They'll not worship. They will worship the imperson. And Kṛṣṇa has said, kleśo adhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām. Of course, impersonal, personal, is the same Absolute Truth.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.98-99 -- Washington, D.C., July 4, 1976:

Kṛṣṇa's symbolic representation is He is always playing on flute. And barhāvataṁsa: with a peacock feather. These are described in the Vedic literature. It is not that we worship Kṛṣṇa as imaginary form of God. No. As the Māyāvādīs, they say that you can imagine any form of God, no, that is not the fact. God has His original form, real form sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). Anādir ādir govindaḥ sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam (Bs. 5.1).

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

Actually, we are servants of God. That is our real position. But we sometimes become envious, that "Why shall I become servant of God? This is slave mentality." Sometimes we are accused, the Vaiṣṇavas are, of slave mentality because they want to serve God. And the Māyāvādīs, they think that "We are so exalted that I am as good as God. I am God." That is their position. But actually, nobody is God here. Everyone is servant. He's simply falsely thinking that he's God, he's master, he's this or that. You have got very nice example in the life of Mr. Nixon. He was thinking that he's everything: "I am the President." But now what is his position, you can understand.

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

Indian man: Prabhupāda, the basic confusion is that the Māyāvādīs take Bhagavad-gītā, they can recite the same Sanskrit words and interpret it in their way and convince someone that the ultimate Brahman is impersonal and the (indistinct) Brahman, Kṛṣṇa is only a technique.

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

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

Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja (BG 18.66). Person. Aham ādir hi devānām (Bg 10.2). Mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7). Mattaḥ. This, ahaṁ-śabdaḥ, is used. So they misinterpret just to mislead people; therefore whole India has become godless. This is the misfortune of India. On account of these impersonalists, Māyāvādīs, India is now godless. Very difficult position. So don't be misled by these rascals. Take real Bhagavad-gītā as it is. Then you'll be benefited. That's all. (end)

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.108-109 -- New York, July 15, 1976:

Somebody is going to distribute literature to make people understand the glories of Kṛṣṇa. So in this way Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement means everyone is engaged cent percent to become servant of Kṛṣṇa. So those who are sincerely engaged in the service of the Lord, they are all liberated. They are all liberated. The Māyāvādīs who are trying to become liberated in so many ways, mystic yoga practice and austere penances, and so on, so on, so on, so on... You can get that liberty immediately, simply by engaging yourself in some service of Kṛṣṇa. Immediately. Svalpam apy asya dharmasya trāyate mahato bhayāt. Even little service you give, it is your permanent asset. Even if you fall down from that service platform, still, whatever you have done, it will never go in vain. As soon as there is opportunity, again you shall begin from that point where you left. Therefore everyone... Tyaktvā sva-dharmaṁ caraṇāmbujaṁ hareḥ (SB 1.5.17).

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.108-109 -- New York, July 15, 1976:

Bhedābheda-prakāśa. Bheda means difference, and abheda means one. Two philosophies are going on. The Māyāvādīs, they say, "We are the same." So 'ham: "I am the same." Ahaṁ brahmāsmi: "I am the Supreme Brahman." But the Vedic literature says, ahaṁ brahmāsmi, but Kṛṣṇa, or God, is Param Brahman. In the Vedas there is no such thing as ahaṁ paraṁ brahmāsmi. No. They are misusing. The... Instead of understanding... Brahman, every one of us, we are Brahman. There is no doubt about it. But unfortunately, by mistake, by illusion, I am thinking, "I am this body." So spiritual education means first of all one has to understand that ahaṁ brahmāsmi: "I am Brahman. I am not this body." That is the beginning of spiritual education.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.108-109 -- New York, July 15, 1976:

So bhakti is not very ordinary thing. It begins after one is liberated. The Māyāvādī says that "By bhakti one can become one with God." No. That is not bhakti. That is Māyāvāda. That is mistake. Bhakti means to understand that "I am eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa." This conviction is possible when one is brahma-bhūtaḥ. Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā na śocati na kāṅkṣati. Brahma-bhūta means "I am part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa," as it is said, sūryāṁśa-kiraṇa, yaiche agni-jvālā-caya, svābhāvika kṛṣṇera... Oh... When one understands this, that "I am... My position is eternal servant," that is brahma-bhūta (SB 4.30.20). Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā (BG 18.54). Then undoubtedly he becomes immediately jubilant, that "Now I have got my real master to serve. I am serving so many, I mean, items, in the family, in the society, in the community, in the nation. But I could not be satisfied.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 20.110 -- New York, July 17, 1976:

So it is not possible. Therefore those who merge into the Brahman effulgence, they again fall down, because they have no engagement in Kṛṣṇa's business. They never cultivated such knowledge. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adho 'nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). Because the Māyāvādīs, they think, "What is this nonsense, serving Kṛṣṇa? Kṛṣṇa is māyā. We are not going to serve māyā. We are going to become one with God, with effulgence." That oneness, you can stay within sunshine and be burnt up, but you cannot stay there. After your whims are fulfilled or you become disgusted... But because you have no information of serving Kṛṣṇa, then come down again to this material world and serve māyā—so-called hospitals and other things, philanthropic work. Because they have no information to serve Kṛṣṇa, the result is āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padam (SB 10.2.32). The Brahman is also paraṁ padam. It is not material; it is spiritual world.

Lecture on CC Madhya-lila 25.19-31 -- San Francisco, January 20, 1967:

"So we belong to this Māyāvādī sect. Although we hear the Śārīraka-bhāṣya of Śaṅkarācārya and we say, 'Yes, yes,' but actually, it does not appeal to us."

There is the important point of Māyāvādī philosophers. Every one of them, they say that "I am God," but actually he thinks within himself that "What kind of God I am?" That is the position. But for argument's sake they will play so many things in support of their views, but actually, any sane man will think that "What kind of God I am? I cannot defend myself from the slightest attack of this material nature, and still I claim..." But they cannot admit frankly. They think like that.

Sri Isopanisad Lectures

Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 1 -- Los Angeles, April 29, 1970:

Why this nonsense? If you are controlled... Is God, does it mean that He is controlled? They are claiming that "I am God." Is there any meaning? If I am controlled, then how I can become God? This is commonsense affair. Therefore this Māyāvādī philosophy that "Everyone is God. I am God; you are God...," Just like the other, who was speaking, that Meher Baba's... Yes. That he was speaking, "I am God, you are God." So God is never controlled. If somebody is controlled, immediately he is not God. This is simple definition, that God is not controlled. If somebody claims that he is God, then first of all question "Whether you are controlled or not controlled?" Common sense. Nobody can say that he's not controlled. I have seen a rascal, he has got a society and he is preaching this, that "I am God." But one day I saw him, he had some toothache, and he was doing, "ohhh." (laughter) So I questioned him that "You claim that you are God, and now you are simply under the control of toothache. So what kind of God you are?" (laughter) You see. So these societies, those who are claiming that "I am God.

Sri Brahma-samhita Lectures

Lecture on Brahma-samhita, Verse 35 -- New York, July 31, 1971:

So this line is very nice. Every knowledge is perfect there from the disciplic succession. You take it and be advanced, that's all. We don't bother much.

Just like Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya. You know, Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya was a great scholar, and Māyāvādī scholar, but Caitanya Mahāprabhu made him surrender unto Him. He became Caitanya Mahāprabhu's admirer, follower after being defeated in Vedānta-sūtra, understanding. That story is there in the Teachings of Lord Caitanya. So Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya became convinced that Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is Kṛṣṇa. He wrote hundred verses about Caitanya Mahāprabhu, out of two verses are available in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta. He composed—he was a very learned scholar—he composed one hundred verses about Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and handed it over. But in all those verses he admitted that "You are Kṛṣṇa."

Festival Lectures

Janmastami Lord Sri Krsna's Appearance Day -- Bhagavad-gita 7.5 Lecture -- Vrndavana, August 11, 1974:

Educate, educated means wise man, educated man, jñānī. The actual jñānī means māṁ prapadyate. Bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate (BG 7.19). That is education. The education does not mean to become atheist, "There is no God. I am God, you are God, everyone is God." This is not education. This is ajñāna. The Māyāvādīs, they think that they have become one with God. That is not education. That is described in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ. They are thinking that they have become liberated, but actually, aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32), their intelligence is not purified. Therefore falsely claiming. If one is God, then how he has become dog? This much common sense there is not. God is God; dog is dog. This Dvaitavāda philosophy is perfect. Acintya-bhedābheda, simultaneously one and different. We have got... Because we are spiritual energy, therefore... Kṛṣṇa is Supreme Spirit.

Sri Vyasa-puja -- New Vrindaban, September 2, 1972:

Why? Sākṣād-dharitvena samasta-śāstraiḥ. They have already chanted this song. Samasta-śāstraiḥ, in all Vedic literatures. Samasta, all. Samasta means all. Śāstra means Vedic literature. The all the śāstras in Vedic literature, they have declared that spiritual master is as good as God. Not God, but as good as God. The Māyāvādī, they think that the spiritual master is also God. No. We Vaiṣṇava, we don't accept that theory. But actually how a man can become God? No. But because he is God's representative, he is honored as God, not that he has become God. Kintu prabhor yaḥ priya eva tasya. Just like you have got a dear son. If somebody pats your son, even pats your dog, you become pleased. So the spiritual master is very confidential servant, dog of God. Therefore if you can please him, yasya prasādād bhagavat-prasādaḥ **. If you can please the spiritual master, then God is pleased. Just like your small child.

Radhastami, Srimati Radharani's Appearance Day -- Montreal, August 30, 1968:

I may have this body this time, I may have another body, another species of life; therefore it is not śāśvatam. But the Lord's body is śāśvatam. As it is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā, śāśvataṁ puruṣam, and He is enjoyer. So the same word is used here. Śāntaṁ śāśvatam aprameyam. Aprameyam means that cannot be measured. The Māyāvādīs, they cannot conceive how immeasurable, unlimited. Therefore as soon as they take it that God is unlimited, immeasurable, they take it for impersonal. They cannot conceive that God can assume any extensive form without any difficulty. Just like He appeared as Hiraṇya..., I mean to say, Varāhadeva. The Varāhadeva, He appeared in such a gigantic body that He could lift this whole planet by His tusk. So just imagine how much great body He assumed. So aprameyam. Another, He can assume so small body. Just like Parīkṣit Mahārāja, when he was within the womb of his mother, attacked by the atomic energy, so Kṛṣṇa entered the womb of his mother and saved him.

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

Our Nārāyaṇa—that is real Nārāyaṇa, exalted—we cannot even compare with that supreme Nārāyaṇa with such demigods like Lord Brahmā, Lord Śiva, what to speak of these rascals. Yas tu nārāyaṇaṁ devaṁ brahma-rudrādi-daivataiḥ, samatvena vīkṣeta. Any person, rascal, if he thinks that Nārāyaṇa is equal to Lord Brahmā or Lord Śiva... There are Māyāvādīs. They say "Any demigod is as good as Viṣṇu. You can worship any demigod. It doesn't matter. You..." Because their ultimate understanding is that the Absolute Truth is impersonal, and you can imagine any form. It doesn't matter. You ultimately reach that impersonal, merge into the impersonal.

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

This is the understanding. God is one, but He can expand Himself in millions and millions. There is no question of counting. Unlimited, but still, one. Advaita. Acyuta. The Māyāvādī philosophy is that because God has expanded Himself in so many, all-pervading, therefore he is finished. He is finished. Just like material conception. You take any big paper and make it into pieces and then throw it—the original paper is lost. There is no more existence. That is Māyāvādī philosophy. Māyāvādī philosophy means because God is all-pervading, therefore He has no form. He has finished His form. There cannot be any form. And this is material conception. This is not spiritual conception. Spiritual conception is pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam eva avaśiṣyate (Iso Invocation). If Kṛṣṇa is the complete, supreme, so even He expands Himself in millions and trillions of complete forms, still, He is complete.

Varaha-dvadasi, Lord Varaha's Appearance Day Lecture -- Bhuvanesvara, January 31, 1977:

Similarly, the incarnation of Kṛṣṇa is going on eternally, so many. If you take the opportunity of hearing-śravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ visnoḥ (SB 7.5.23)—about Viṣṇu's līlā activities... And if you simply stick to the nirakāra Brahman, what we shall hear? Therefore they fall down, these Māyāvādīs who simply take seriously the impersonal feature of Kṛṣṇa, because there is no līlā. "Brahman brahman ahaṁ brahman brahman," then how long it will go on? It will be hackneyed. But when we take to Kṛṣṇa's personal activities, then are newer, newer, newer, and multi and many... Then we get the opportunity of hearing Kṛṣṇa. Then you stick. Otherwise, if I simply become understood about the Brahman feature, it will be hackneyed, we want seek ānanda, pleasure. So in the impersonal feature there is no pleasure. Just like in the sky, even if you take a very nice airplane, and simply fly in the sky, you'll be very much displeased.

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

Last night, somebody was discussing with me saguṇa and nirguṇa. Saguṇa means, according to their version, or a standard version, saguṇa means the material quality. They worship saguṇa-rūpa. Saguṇa means forms of this material world. Sādhakānāṁ hitārthāya brāhmaṇa-rūpa-kalpanaḥ.(?) Kalpanaḥ. According to Māyāvādī school, the Absolute Truth is imperson. In the Bhagavad-gītā it is also said, kleśo 'dhikataras teṣām, adhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām (BG 12.5). Say, for meditation, it is very difficult to meditate on impersonal feature. Therefore, they artificially think like that: "I am the whole. I am moving the stars, I am moving the moon." Or some color display is taking place. Artificially. This meditation is artificial. Therefore, they do not get any result. Simply waste time, and they remain the number one debauch, as they are. So this kind of meditation... Because they will not put any form... "The Brahman is impersonal." So how they can think of any form? It is very difficult to adjust.

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

"This is external. If you know something more, better than this, you say." Why He said? There is the version, viṣṇur ārādhyate. Does it mean that He is rejecting Viṣṇu worship? No, He's not rejecting. Because generally, they, these impersonalists, Māyāvādīs, they also worship sometimes Viṣṇu, these five demigods and God. But their idea is that ultimately impersonal. The impersonal takes the form by the help of this material world. The formation takes place simply in the material. That is their opinion. Therefore they say, call, saguṇa. Saguṇa-upāsanā.

Just try to understand this. Saguṇa-upāsanā means when Brahman takes a form He takes a form from this material help. Just like we take a form, we spiritual entities. We also take a form, transmigration of the soul according to karma. I create a certain type of mentality, and that continues throughout my life. And at the time of death, because I have got a certain type of mentality, man-mentality or God-mentality or dog-mentality or fly-mentality, any kind of... There are so many. So I have to take a certain type of body.

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

A very nice factory is going on. That is also by nature. And nature is working by the order of Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, ultimate cause is Kṛṣṇa.

So this bodily development given by the nature is also adduced to the body of Kṛṣṇa. That is Māyāvādī philosophy. Māyāvādī philosophy means they accept Kṛṣṇa as God, but He has assumed a body which is given by this material nature, as it is given to us. That is their policy. They count Kṛṣṇa an ordinary man, on the same level. But that is not a fact. Therefore Kṛṣṇa condemns this philosophy, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). "Because I appear as a human being, therefore these rascals consider that I am ordinary man." The rascals, mūḍhāḥ. Mūḍhāḥ means rascals, gādhāḥ, asses. Their designation is given by Kṛṣṇa as asses, rascals. And Caitanya Mahāprabhu therefore said, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa (CC Madhya 6.169).

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

Because these commentaries, comments by the Māyāvādī school, is simply rascaldom. And if one hears such commentary by the Māyāvādīs, the result will be he'll be doomed. Doomed means forever... Forever, no. For very, very long time he'll not be able to understand actual his relationship with Kṛṣṇa. Therefore he's doomed. And because he is not able to understand his relationship with Kṛṣṇa, he is called rākṣasa or asura. Āsuraṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ.

That is also condemned in Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad-gītā. Na māṁ duṣkṛtino mūḍhāḥ prapadyante narādhamāḥ māyayāpahṛta-jñānāḥ (BG 7.15). You'll find amongst them very, very learned men, very, very good scholar. They can quote... Intelligent men. Because their Māyāvādī commentary, they can utilize, and Kṛṣṇa gives them intelligence also, that "You misuse this verse in this way because you want..." Tān ahaṁ dviṣataḥ krūrān (BG 16.19). Kṛṣṇa is sitting within the heart of everyone. So Māyāvādī philosopher wants to kill God, or Kṛṣṇa. Or nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi, they want to make Kṛṣṇa as zero or Kṛṣṇa as nirākāra. So Kṛṣṇa also gives them intelligence, "Yes, you just put forward this logic, that logic, that logic, and you prove."

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

"Yes, you just put forward this logic, that logic, that logic, and you prove." That is also confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā, sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭaḥ: "I am sitting in everyone's heart." Mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca (BG 15.15). Mattaḥ, "Through Me, from Me, all remembrance or memorization takes place."

So Māyāvādī wants to prove that the ultimate truth is nirākāra, or impersonal. So Kṛṣṇa gives you intelligence: "Yes, you put this forward. Put forward this logic, this logic, that logic." Similarly, Kṛṣṇa gives... There is a Bengali proverb that how God works, that one man, a householder is praying to God, "My dear Lord, there may not be any theft case, burglary, in my home this night. Please save me." So one man is praying prayer, praying like that. Another man is praying, the thief, "My dear Lord, this night I shall commit burglary in that house. Please help me to get something." Now, what is Kṛṣṇa's position? (laughter) Kṛṣṇa is everyone's heart.

Arrival Addresses and Talks

Arrival Address -- Los Angeles, February 9, 1975:

It is all stated there. So Kṛṣṇa can be understood only by devotional service, by no other. You cannot speculate, "Kṛṣṇa may be like this." Just like Māyāvādīs, they imagine. The imagination will not help you. You cannot imagine God. That is foolishness. God is not subjected to your imagination. Then He is not God. Why He should be subjected to your imagination? So these things are to be understood properly, and one can understand properly when he's pure devotee. Otherwise not. Nāhaṁ prakāśaḥ sarvasya yoga-māyā-samāvṛtāḥ: (BG 7.25) "I am not exposed to everyone." Why He should be exposed to everyone? When He's pleased, He will reveal Himself to you. Sevonmukhe hi jihvādau svayam eva sphuraty adaḥ (Brs. 1.2.234). You cannot ask the sun to appear immediately. When he is pleased, he will appear in the morning. Similarly, you have to please Kṛṣṇa so that He will appear before you and talk with you and bless you.

Arrival Lecture -- Dallas, March 3, 1975:

Not that if I give up this false family I will become zero. No. There is no such disappointment. The other philosophers, they simply... Just like Buddha philosophy. Their philosophy is "Finish this," nirvāṇa. But if people are not interested to finish all this, they want it, then what is the positive gain? So generally people are attached to these Buddhist and Māyāvādī philosophies; therefore they feel hopelessness. On account of future hopelessness, they become more attached to this false family. But our philosophy is not like that. Our philosophy is that you become detached to this false family and enter into the real family.

So these children... Kaumāra ācaret prājño dharmān bhāgavatān iha (SB 7.6.1). That is Prahlāda Mahārāja's instruction, that you produce children as much as you can train them to become eternally family members of Kṛṣṇa. That is spiritual contraceptive. Don't produce children like cats and dogs. This is our philosophy. If you can produce Kṛṣṇa conscious children, produce one hundred children.

Arrival Conversation -- Los Angeles, June 20, 1975:

When that love is reposed to Kṛṣṇa, that is perfect. The Māyāvādīs, they are frustrated; therefore they want to make this love into zero. They cannot understand Kṛṣṇa's love with gopīs. They think it is another edition of this material... Oh, how are you, Hayagrīva prabhu? How are you? You look better. You are looking better, brighter than when I saw you in New Vrindaban last. You have got so much talents for serving Kṛṣṇa. Everyone has got. That I am speaking. We have to utilize it. From the very beginning I met you, I instructed to edit. That was the starting of our Back to Godhead. He is good typist also. You know that? (laughter) I think he is the best of all of our men. He can type very swiftly and correctly. I think in our group Hayagrīva prabhu and Satsvarūpa Mahārāja are very good typist. And Jayādvaita I think you are also, no?

Initiation Lectures

Initiation of Lokanatha dasa -- New Vrindaban, May 21, 1969:

Why don't you understand this?

So Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, jñāne prayāsam. Jñānīs, the empiric philosophers, they simply speculate and try to prove that "I am God." That means āsuriṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ. The atheist says that "There is no God," and here the Māyāvādī philosophy says, "Yes, there is God, but God I am." That's all. It is the same philosophy, atheism. He is also denying that "There is no separate God. I am God." That atheistic philosophy, like Buddha philosophy, "There is no God..." But Buddha himself is God. That is... Another Bhāgavata interpretation is that he is cheating the atheist person. The atheists, they say, "There is no God," and Lord Buddha said, "Yes, there is no God, but you follow me." But He is God. Keśava dhṛta-buddha-śarīra jaya jagadīśa hare. So Bhāgavata therefore says, sammohāya sura-dviṣām (SB 1.3.24). It is something like that. A naughty boy does not want to go to school.

Initiations and Sannyasa -- New York, July 26, 1971:

Kīrtanānanda: "They have no inclination to render service unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Being very much disgusted with the materialistic way of life, they do not understand the purpose of the sannyāsa order. But those who are strictly followers of the Vaiṣṇava principles, they do not accept Māyāvādī way of sannyāsa. In the sect of Lord Caitanya..." (indistinct)

Prabhupāda: Bas. So you'll get a copy of this. So from this day your only business is to preach and collect alms for Kṛṣṇa. Give me that mango. So I give you first of all. Take this flower. And where is your...? Yes. Give him that flower garland.

Trivikrama: All glories to you, Śrīla Prabhupāda.

Prabhupāda: What is that?

Devotee: It's something for Your Divine Grace.

Initiation Lecture -- New York, July 28, 1971:

Avacintya means beyond our conception. Even though you are able to go in high speed, and for so many years, still Kṛṣṇa remains avacintya-tattva. Nobody can find out where is Kṛṣṇa's abode, Goloka Vṛndāvana. Therefore, the Māyāvādīs, in desperate frustration, they say that Kṛṣṇa is impersonal, because they want to approach Kṛṣṇa by mundane activities, by mental exercise, mental gymnastic. Kṛṣṇa is not available in that way. Kṛṣṇa is available only to His devotees. Kṛṣṇa is the property of His devotee.

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

Under the circumstances, persons who accept Lord Caitanya as ekadaṇḍī sannyāsī are mistaken. So following the footsteps of Lord Caitanya, still the tridaṇḍī sannyāsīs are in existence, keeping the sacred thread and śikhā intact, distinct from the Māyāvādī ekadaṇḍī sannyāsīs, who give up the sacred thread and śikhā. They have no inclination to render service unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Being very much disgusted by the materialistic way of life, they do not understand the purpose of the sannyāsa order. But those who are strictly followers of the Vaiṣṇava principles, they do not accept the Māyāvādī way of sannyāsa. In the sect of Lord Caitanya, the most venerable learned scholar known as Gadādhara Pandit Gosvāmī accepted this tridaṇḍī sannyāsa order, and he offered this facility to his disciple known as Śrī Mādhava Upadhyaya. This Mādhava Ācārya is the origin of the Vallabhācārya sect.

General Lectures

Lecture Excerpt -- San Francisco, September 14, 1968:

So we have to continue this chanting, either imperfectional stage or in the perfectional stage. Satatām kīrtayanto mām (BG 9.14). In the Bhagavad-gītā, you will see that this kīrtana is recommended continuously. Satatam. Satatam means always. Either in the imperfect stage or in the perfect stage, the process is one. It is not like the Māyāvādīs, that first of all you chant, and by chanting, when you become yourself God, then there is no chanting—stop. This is Māyāvāda philosophy. This is not real, the position. Chanting will continue even in your highest perfectional stage. But that chanting and at the present moment chanting, there is little difference. Yes.

Lecture to International Student Society -- Boston, December 28, 1969:

What is the basic? Sense gratification. That's all. This is one way. Another way is nivṛtti-mārga. When one has seen perfectly that "This process of sense gratification cannot give me actual happiness," then they began to give it up. Just like the Māyāvādī philosophy. They say brahma-satyaṁ jagan mithyā: "This world is false." Just like in your country, a section of youngsters, they're disgusted with this materialistic way of life. They have taken to the hippies' path. Why? It does not give satisfaction, but they do not know the right way. They have taken a wrong way, hippies. So this is called accepting and rejecting. So Kṛṣṇa says, "You have to give up all this nonsense accepting and rejecting. You have to take to Me, then you'll be happy." Sarva-dharmān. Sarva-dharmān means some religious occupation is for sense gratification and some religious occupation is rejection of this material world. So we have to give up both these, the acceptance and rejection.

Lecture -- Tokyo, May 1, 1972:

This material existence, which we are now passing through, is not our actual existence. There is a Bengali Vaiṣṇava poet. He said... Generally, the question is raised: "How the living entities became fallen in this material world?" The Māyāvādī philosophy, they say that we are the same with God, but we are now covered by māyā, and as soon as we are free from this māyā's covering, we become again one with the Supreme. This is Māyāvāda philosophy. Practically, the Vaiṣṇava philosophy, also the same, but only difference is that the jīvātmā, he is eternal servant of the Supreme Lord. Actually, if we scrutinizingly study, our constitutional position is to render service. Any one of us who are sitting here, everyone is servant. Nobody can say that "I am master." We are thinking like master, but actually we are all servants—anyone—either you are servant of your family or you are servant of your country or you are servant of your senses. Everyone, at the present moment, we are servant of the senses, servant of this body. And gradually our illusion expands. Ataḥ gṛha-kṣetra-sutāpta-vittair janasya moho 'yam ahaṁ mameti (SB 5.5.8). This material world, it is explained by Vaiṣṇava philosopher:

Lecture -- Vrndavana, March 14, 1974:

That is not possible. Nāyam ātmā pravacanena labhyo na bahunā śrutena. There are many Vedantists, many scholars in Vedic literature, but they do not know who is his prabhu. They will say, "prabhu," but I ask him, "Who is your prabhu?" That they cannot say. Or they will not utter the name of the prabhu. Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that māyāvādī haya kṛṣṇe aparādhī. They will charge, they will call, "Brahmā," "Caitanya," "Paramātmā," "Prabhu," but he will never utter the name of Kṛṣṇa. This is their disease. This is called Māyāvāda disease. Therefore, because people are so poor in knowledge, alpa-medhasaḥ, brain substance is very little, they cannot understand Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa Himself appeared as Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

Morning Lecture -- Allahabad, January 15, 1977:

Service is there. We cannot become master. That is not possible. Jīvera svarūpa haya nitya kṛṣṇa dāsa (Cc. Madhya 20.108-109). So there are two things: Kṛṣṇa and māyā, light and shadow. If you don't serve Kṛṣṇa, then you have to serve māyā. And those who are serving māyā in the name of Kṛṣṇa, they are called Māyāvādī. Actually, they are serving māyā, but they say that they have become liberated. Vimukta-māninaḥ. They are described as vimukta-māninaḥ. Māninaḥ means one who is not actually the thing, but falsely one is thinking that "I am liberated. I have become equal with Nārāyaṇa." They are called vimukta-māninaḥ. Actually that is not the fact. So we shall be very careful to avoid this kind of mahātmās who are thinking themselves as Nārāyaṇa, equal to Nārāyaṇa, or sometimes they claim greater than Nārāyaṇa. So we shall be very careful. This Melā, there are so many so-called mahātmās. But the symptom of mahātmā is described in the Bhagavad-gītā: bhajanty ananya-manaso.

Morning Lecture -- Allahabad, January 15, 1977:

We become more and more faithful to Kṛṣṇa by understanding the siddhānta.

So māyāvādī-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva... (CC Madhya 6.169). For kaniṣṭha-adhikārī, to avoid this Māyāvādī philosophy that "Everyone is God. I am God. You are God..." This is atheism. It is cheating atheism. One class of atheism is Śūnyavādī: "There is no God." That we can understand, that he is atheist. "There is no God." He publicly declares, "We don't believe in God." But the Māyāvādīs are dangerous because they say that there is God, but without any form—no head, no leg. If you make "no, no, no," then where is...? It becomes zero ultimately. Go on making "no, no"—"No head, no tail, no hand, no..." So what remains? So this is another trick for saying there is no God. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu has said that this class, who gives the negative definition of God—"Not this, not this, not this, not this"—the Māyāvādī, Māyā... They say, "Not this. This is māyā." So this Māyāvādī, they are greater atheist.

Morning Lecture -- Allahabad, January 15, 1977:

So it is very dangerous to associate with Māyāvādīs. Of course, those who are kaniṣṭha... Who are fixed up in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, they can mix with anyone. Nobody can influence. They are protected. If one has become pure devotee, for preaching work he can go anywhere. (break) (end)

Lecture -- Bhuvanesvara, January 29, 1977, (with Oriyan translator):

So the speculators, they are thinking that "God has no form. You can imagine any form of the Lord and try to worship Him." That is speculator. (break) ... Another type of atheism. The atheists, they say, Śūnyavādī, "There is no God." But these Māyāvādī, they say, "Yes there is God, but He has no head, no leg, no mouth, nothing." Means, indirectly, they are saying there is not God.

So Caitanya Mahāprabhu has therefore clearly said that this Māyāvādī, nirākāravādī, is more dangerous than the Śūnyavādī. Śūnyavādī, they publicly declare, "There is no God," just like modern population, that "There is no need of God." Asatyam aprathiṣṭhaṁ te jagad āhur anīśvaram (BG 16.8). That is also described in the Bhagavad-gītā. The atheist class, they say that "This world is asatya. There is no meaning." Asatyam jagad āhur anīśvaram (BG 16.8). "And there is no God." We can understand that they are atheist. (break)... Māyāvādī philosopher, they take the shelter of Vedic literature and indirectly, directly, they try to wipe out the existence of God. (break)

Departure Talks

Departure Lecture -- London, March 12, 1975:

You can make an experiment that you take a little red water and put it in the ocean. The ocean does not become red. So chemically also, the water, they are composition of molecules of water. But it is mixed with water. That is a fact, but there is another process which evaporates the water. Suppose you are mixed with the water. The Māyāvādī philosophy, that "We... Let us mix with the big water. Then I become big..." Because here in the material world he tried to become big in so many ways but he could not become big, therefore he wants to merge into the biggest, Brahman, so that he thinks that he will become... He is already Brahman. So the Brahman effulgence is combination of so many sparks of living entities.

So this philosophy, to merge into the big Brahman, Supreme Brahman, or effulgence, brahmajyoti, that is not very secure position. It is said in the śāstra that āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ: (SB 10.2.32) they fall down.

Departure Lecture -- London, March 12, 1975:

If we accept this principle, then we enter into the Bhāgavata-dharma. Otherwise there is no entrance in the Bhāgavata-dharma.

For the Māyāvādī who wants to become one with the Supreme... You can become one. One means the same thing, a small portion of the water. But our philosophy is not to mix up with the water superficially but enter into the water and live there like fish, big, big fish. That is our philosophy. What is the use of becoming one with the water? Go within the water and live there like a whale fish, perpetually. That is our philosophy. So that is secure philosophy, because as soon as actually you become a big fish within the water, there is no question of evaporation. But if you live, remain superficially on the water, then you will be evaporated again and again thrown outside, then again come as river. So your coming and going, repetition of birth and death, will not stop. But one should become a big fish, there is no evaporation. These things are explained in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu by Rūpa Gosvāmī.

Departure Lecture -- London, March 12, 1975:

Nobody is trying so hard to making suicide. Is anybody there in this material world who is working so hard for ultimately making suicide? No. Everyone is trying to become happy. Ānandamayo 'bhyāsāt (Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.12). Because he wants. That is his nature, sat-cit-ānanda: eternal life, full of knowledge and full of bliss. This is real life. So if we simply accept eternity like the Māyāvādīs, then what about the other two items? Or if we simply live in knowledge... Suppose theoretically I know so many things to prepare-rasagullā, sandeśa, halavā, kachorī—but if I do not practically taste what is halavā, what is kachorī, then what is the use of simply having knowledge? So the Māyāvādī philosophy like that, jñāna, simply knowledge. That knowledge is there in the Bhagavad-gītā in the beginning, the first lesson: dehino 'smin yathā dehe kaumāraṁ yauvanam (BG 2.13). "Within the body there is the soul. That soul is eternal." Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20).

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Kīrtanānanda: But that's what the Māyāvādīs, they say that all of these forms, all form is māyā.

Prabhupāda: Yes, we say temporary, they say māyā.

Kīrtanānanda: So we also say that there is spiritual world full of form, and that is not-

Prabhupāda: Yes. That they do not know. That is their ignorance. We say wherefrom this form came, who gave this idea? The Vedānta says janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), the origin, from the original source it comes.

Kīrtanānanda: So the question is that, these forms that are here, are they actually eternal forms?

Prabhupāda: No. There is eternal..., this is not eternal. This is imitation. Perverted reflection. Reflection is not eternal. As soon as the condition is gone, there is no reflection.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Prabhupāda: That means he is creating God. Is it not? God is an idea. So his philosophy is that you create by imagination something as God. Actually there is no God. Just like Māyāvādīs, they say, "God is imperson. God is dead." Like that. And you can create a God. Just like Vivekananda, that is their theory. Therefore they create Ramakrishna as God.

Śyāmasundara: He said that God is the idea behind all concrete objects. Whatever is concrete there is a superior idea.

Prabhupāda: (indistinct) Idea can be changed so God becomes a thing which is subjected to the whimsical change of rascals. That is his idea.

Śyāmasundara: He says that God is the sum total of all concrete phenomenon.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Śyāmasundara: "All kinds of weapons, swords, flames, rains, tornadoes, etc., are unable to kill the spirit soul. It appears that there were many kinds of weapons made of earth, water, air, ether, etc., in addition to the modern weapons of fire. Even the nuclear weapons of the modern age are classified as fire weapons, but formerly there were other weapons made of all different types of material elements. Firearms were counteracted by water weapons, which are now unknown to modern science. Nor do modern scientists have knowledge of tornado weapons. Nonetheless, the soul can never be cut into pieces nor annihilated by any number of weapons, regardless of scientific devices. Nor was it ever possible to cut the individual souls from the original Soul. The Māyāvādī, however, cannot describe how the individual soul evolved from ignorance and consequently became covered by illusory energy. Because they are atomic individual souls (sanātana) eternally, they are prone to be covered by the illusory energy, and thus they become separated from the association of the Supreme Lord..."

Prabhupāda: The vital source of the soul can be temporarily covered by physical elements, but it is not belonging to the group of physical elements. That is our system.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Śyāmasundara: Just like we might say surrender. The self wills...

Prabhupāda: There is no question of surrender. To become self, that is the Māyāvādī, that I become one with the Supreme Self.

Śyāmasundara: No. He means as a part and parcel of God, because he says, "Faith is the self willing to be itself, authenticity, and to stand transparently..."

Prabhupāda: Then it can be understood that I am part and parcel of the Supreme. So when I remain as part and parcel, that is called faith.

Śyāmasundara: Yes. When I surrender to the idea that I am part and parcel of God, then I am...

Prabhupāda: So that surrender to the idea means, the same example, that a part and parcel of my body, they are engaged in the service of the body. So as soon as you engage yourself in the service of the Lord, that is your self-realization. That is perfect self-realization. Because you remain in your position, your position as part and parcel of the Supreme is to serve Him, practically. So if you engage yourself always in the service of the Lord, that is self-realization. There is no other philosophy.

Philosophy Discussion on Soren Aabye Kierkegaard:

Śyāmasundara: He says that full self equals full will. That when we are fully ourself, then we are fully willed.

Prabhupāda: What you mean? That is Māyāvādī. Full self, what is that? Then what is the question of part and parcel?

Śyāmasundara: That means when we make decisions that they are...

Prabhupāda: You cannot make decision. If you are part and parcel, then you have to take decisions from the whole. You cannot make. The finger does not make decision. I say "Finger, stand up like this, please."

Śyāmasundara: So just like when there are decisions to be made, because a self-realized soul automatically...

Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:

Prabhupāda: What does he give..., what does he explain about the nirvāṇa? What?

Hayagrīva: The will to live is the irrational urge that brings about all suffering. And his is a philosophy of extinction. Now in his first book, The World Is Idea, he ascribes to the philosophy of māyā, like a Māyāvādī. He writes, "The Vedas and Purāṇas have no better simile than a dream for the whole knowledge of the actual world, which they call the web of māyā, and they use none more frequently." From this Schopenhauer concludes that life is a long dream. "What is this world of perception besides being my idea? Is that of which I am conscious only as idea exactly like my own body, of which I am doubly conscious, in one aspect as idea, in another aspect as will?" So from this he concludes that life is a projection of the will.

Prabhupāda: This material life?

Philosophy Discussion on Arthur Schopenhauer:

Hayagrīva: The... He speaks of the sannyāsī, who lives without a dwelling and entirely without property, who is advised not to lay down often under the same tree least he should acquire a preference or inclination for it above other trees. The Christian mystic and the teacher of the Vedānta philosophy agree in this respect also, that they both regard all outward works and religious exercises as superfluous for him who has attained to perfection. Isn't this the viewpoint of the Māyāvādī, and doesn't Kṛṣṇa recommend the lighting of the sacrificial fire even after one has attained perfection?

Prabhupāda: Yes. Kṛṣṇa says, yajña-dāna-tapaḥ-kriyā na tyājam. Because if he gives up this ritualistic ceremony, then there is chance of falling down. So even though he is liberated, to keep his position secure he should continue these three things: sacrifice, charity, and austerity.

Philosophy Discussion on Ludwig Wittgenstein:

Prabhupāda: Yes. Then that's all right. Then why he is bothering about something false? That is another foolishness.

Devānanda: I thought that that was a Māyāvādī theory, that everything is false.

Prabhupāda: Yes. He wants to accept false, again make botheration.

Śyāmasundara: No. He does not say false, he says that the sum of the...

Prabhupāda: Better thing is that as we say, it is not false, but it is temporary.

Śyāmasundara: He doesn't say true or false, he says that the sum of the angles...

Prabhupāda: Just now you said that it cannot be verified. That means false.

Śyāmasundara: It cannot be verified if it is true or false. But it can...

Prabhupāda: That means doubt. It is doubtful.

Philosophy Discussion on Jacques Maritain:

Prabhupāda: Yes. So for God there is no such distinction; therefore it is called kaivalya. For Him the material energy or the spiritual energy is the same. Therefore the Māyāvādīs, they cannot understand God. They think that Kṛṣṇa, when He comes, He accepts a material body. But even He accepts a material body, for Him there is no such distinction-spiritual body and material body. He is..., He being omnipotent, He can act even in His material body as spiritual. Just like when Kṛṣṇa was present, accepting that He has a material body, but at the age of seven years old He lifted the big hill. That is not possible by the material body. Therefore, as omnipotent He can turn the material energy into spiritual energy and the spiritual energy into material energy. That is omnipotency. But those who are with poor fund of knowledge, they think that Kṛṣṇa has got this material body. Actually He has no such distinction, either material or... Just like electrical engineer, he knows how to tackle electric energy. He can convert the heater into refrigerator, and he can convert the refrigerator into heater, because he knows how to do it.

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Prabhupāda: No. So you are, if you are regularly progressing, that then at the end it is not empty, it is completeness. To go back to home, back to Godhead, that is completeness; that is not empty. The Māyāvādī can not understand the posi..., positivity of God's kingdom, so they simply make empty. There is no positive concept, therefore...

Hayagrīva: No. He says... No. He says, "It is important that I do not stand at the end with empty hands."

Prabhupāda: Yes. That, that nobody has...

Hayagrīva: That, in others words, he has good deeds and...

Prabhupāda: No, not only good deeds, that is our aspiration. We don't want emptiness.

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Prabhupāda: That I said, the spiritual body. The spiritual body never changes. When one comes with the spiritual body there is no change. Material body changes, but God has no material body. The conception of..., Māyāvādī conception that Absolute Truth is impersonal, when He comes as a person He accepts a material body, that is not understood by those who are advanced in spiritual knowledge or take information from Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa says, avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritāḥ (BG 9.11). Because He appears as a human being, rascals think that He is a human being, but He is not. Paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto. He has no knowledge of the spiritual body.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Śyāmasundara: He says that in this unity of myself, the subject, that I desire objectivity, and he says this union of subject and object is called the "being in itself," or God; that man is desiring to be God or "being in himself."

Prabhupāda: This is the position more or less of Māyāvādī philosophy, that when I am completely in knowledge, I become God. It is like that.

Śyāmasundara: He says this is man's fundamental orientation, that he wants to become God.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That we confirm in this way, that because he is part and parcel of God, so he wants to be united with God. Because he is now detached from God, so therefore, just like a man who is for long, long years out of home, so he wants to go home again.

Philosophy Discussion on Jean-Paul Sartre:

Śyāmasundara: I think he looks at it that we are not God. We know we are not God, but we are trying to become God.

Prabhupāda: That is Māyāvādī philosophy.

Śyāmasundara: But he says it's impossible to become God.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That's nice. That is our philosophy.

Śyāmasundara: But because it is impossible to become God, that means everything else is useless.

Prabhupāda: No. That is another foolishness. You are not God; you are God's servant. Now you are posing to be God. So give up this idea and become servant. That is right idea. You are actually servant of God, but you are posing yourself as master. So you give up this wrong idea and become servant of God, then you are happy.

Philosophy Discussion on Johann Gottlieb Fichte:

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

Philosophy Discussion on Plato:

Prabhupāda: We say that the living entity is part and parcel of God, mamaivāṁśa. Under the circumstances he has got almost all the qualities of God, but partially, because God is great and we are minute. So even though we have got all the qualities of God—not all, certain percentage, say seventy-eight percent—in minute quantity. Just like God has creative power, we have got also creative power. We have created the 747 flying machine. All right, get credit for that, but you cannot create a flying ball like sun floating in the sky. That is difference between God and me. You can take credit that you are keeping suspension in the air a big machine, 747, but it is not in your power that you can float millions and millions of planets floating in the air. That is not possible. Therefore God is great; I am small. That is real Kṛṣṇa consciousness. And as soon as he says, "I am as good or as great as God," then He is a rascal. That is Māyāvādī. He is in māyā. Just like one man in India, he is showing some jugglery. He makes like this and creates some gold, a little gold, but foolish people are enamored. "Ah, he is God."

Philosophy Discussion on Plato:

Prabhupāda: That is from Vedic same. As soon as there is instruction there is form. As Kṛṣṇa is giving instruction, He is always saying "I," "you," like that, it is personal. He says Arjuna, "You," and He says Himself, "I." So Arjuna is also form and Kṛṣṇa is also form, and Kṛṣṇa also says that "Both you, Me, and all these living entities, kings and soldiers who are assembled here, they existed in the past, they are existing now, and they will continue to exist." So you can understand that "In the present I am in form, so I existed in the past in form and I shall continue to exist in the future as form. So where is formless?" From my present position I can understand my past and future. So Kṛṣṇa says that we existed in the past. So we existing now, now I mean to say, continuing. He never said that "In the past we were formless; now we have got form." This is not stated there. Rather, He condemns, that avyaktaṁ vyaktim āpannam manyante mām abuddhayaḥ (BG 7.24): "In the past I was formless, impersonal, and now I am a person," that is Māyāvādī thought, that when God takes the form, He takes the form of māyā. So they have been condemned as abuddhayaḥ, no intelligence. Avyaktaṁ vyaktiṁ āpannaṁ manyante mām abuddhayaḥ (BG 7.24). Those who have less intelligence, they think like that, that "God was formerly formless, now He is talking in form, that means He has accepted the body of māyā." This is called Māyāvāda philosophy.

Philosophy Discussion on Aristotle:

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: But there is no mention of God as a person, although he says He's pure form. Is this an imagined form like the Māyāvādīs may imagine a form?

Prabhupāda: Yes. He has got the tilt of Māyāvāda. That is his imperfect knowledge of God. Because he does not receive knowledge from God, he speculates; therefore his knowledge is imperfect.

Hayagrīva: Aristotle's belief in the soul changed. He has three conceptions of the soul. One is that the soul is a separate substance, another is that the body is the instrument of the soul, and the third is the soul is the form of the body.

Philosophy Discussion on Blaise Pascal:

Prabhupāda: This is the original sin. When he thought of not to serve God but to become God, that is the original. Just like the Māyāvādīs, they have knowledge, they have philosophy, everything, but still trying to become God, which is impossible. Then there is no meaning of God. If simply by meditation and by some material efforts one can become God, then where is the use of God? You cannot become God. But artificially you can try to become God, and that artificial way of becoming God is the beginning of sinful life.

Hayagrīva: He believed that it is impossible..., it is impossible for man to understand the universe or his position in the universe. In the material world we cannot look for certainty or stability because our reasoning powers, our reason, is always being deceived. Consequently, man must surrender to the dictates of his heart and to God.

Philosophy Discussion on Samuel Alexander:

Prabhupāda: Hm?

Hayagrīva: Nor does He meditate.

Prabhupāda: Meditate of Himself. The Māyāvādī has taken like that. But He has no more, anybody higher than Him, so He has to meditate upon Himself.

Hayagrīva: He does meditate upon Himself.

Prabhupāda: Just to teach us. In the, as a family man, He in the morning He was meditating.

Hayagrīva: Oh.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Gṛhastha. So He was meditating upon Himself.

Philosophy Discussion on Samuel Alexander:

Prabhupāda: Everything that you will see, they are all part and parcel of God. The other day I was saying that the wheel, the whole wheel is resting on the axle. So axle is there, the wheel is moving, so everything is part and parcel of God. Therefore the Māyāvādī's philosophy that everything is one, yes, but they do not accept the variety. The wheel is one, that's all right, but still the parts, sometimes it is called spokes, sometimes it is called the rim, sometimes it is called the hub, sometimes it is rolling, sometimes it is stopped, but everything the wheel, nothing but wheel.

Hayagrīva: He goes through a lot of, a lot of speculation to arrive at the final point. Concerning the existence of evil and suffering in the world, he writes, "God is not responsible for the miseries endured in working out his providence, but rather...