Nimbarka - the complete philosophy

gokulkr · August 14, 2006

Nimbarka ie., Dvaitadvaitha is the complete philosophy.

It contains essence of both dvaita & advaitha. It accepts both doctines in one way or other. So it is complete philosophy.

Moreover, Nimbarka is only philosophy comingly direct chain from God(Krsna). Krsna taught the philosophy to his "Hamsa" avatar. Hamsa taught it to "Sanath kumaras". Sanath kumaras directly appeared in person to Sri Nimbarkacharya and taught the philosophy.

Sri Nimbarkacharya got darshan of "Sri RadhaKrishna" (whereas other acharyas such as Sankara, Ramanuja & Madhva didnt got).

Jai Radhekrishna

August 14, 2006

I have tried to learn more about Nimbarka, as his Vaishnava sect is very interesing to me, but can not find much online. Do you know of any good links?

Puru_Das · August 14, 2006

Sree Nimbaditya

Sree Nimbaditya is the propounder of bifurcial monism (dvaitadvaitaada ).

Sree Nimbarkaditya appeared in the town of Baidurya-pattan (mod. ‘Munger-pattan’ or ‘Mungi-pattan’) in the Telugu country. He is known variously as ‘Nimbaditya,’ ‘Nimbarka,’ or ‘Nimbabibhavasu’ and sometimes also as ‘Aruneya,’ ‘Niyamanada,’ and ‘Haripriyacharya,’. His followers are known as Nimayets and are different from the ‘Nimanandis’ who profess to be followers of Sree Chaitanyadeva under His appellation of Nimananda,. Sree Nimbaditya wasan ascetic of the triple staff (tridandi sannyasin ); the line of his preceptorial succession being ( 1 ) Sree Narayana, (2) Hamsa, (3) the Chatuhsanas, viz., Sanaka, etc. and (4) Nimbadityacharya. Sree Nimbaditya's commentary of the Vedanta Bhasya known as the ‘Vedanta parijata-saurabha’ and there are also several other works written by him.

The system of Nimbarka holds the ‘heard transcendental sound’ (sruti) as the highest natural evidence of the Truth, and also accepts the testimony of other Shastras when they follow heard sound (sruti). The source of Nimbaditya’s teaching is the instruction imparted by the four Sanas to Sree Narada Goswami in the seventh prapathaka of the Chhandogyopanishad, which may be summed up as follows, viz., ‘that the Puranas are the fifth Veda; Vishnu is the Lord of all, devotion to Godhead in the forms of firm faith (sraddha) and close addiction (nishtha) is glorified; there is nothing equal or superior to the love for Godhead; the eternal Abode of Godhead is praised; Godhead is independent of any other thing; the perfectly emancipated are the eternal servitors of Godhead and are engaged in eternal pastimes in the region of self-conscious activities in the company of Godhead; Godhead has power of appearance to and disappearance from our view; the Vaishnavas are eternal and transcendental; the grace of Godhead is glorified, etc., etc.’

According to Sree Nimbaditya the individual (jiva) soul and the Supreme Soul are related to each other as integral part and Whole. The soul (jiva) is different from Godhead, but not separate. The soul (jiva) is both knowledge and knower, like the Sun which is self-luminous and also makes visible other objects. As an infinitesimal particle of consciousness the soul (jiva) is subordinate to Godhead Who is plenary consciousness. The souls (jivas) are infinite in number. By reason of his smallness he is liable to association with and dissociation from bodies made by the deluding energy of Godhead (maya). In the bound state the soul (jiva) is imprisoned in the gross and subtle physical bodies; in the free state he is dissociated from them. Souls (jivas) are of three distinct kinds, viz., those that are (1) free, (2) bound yet free, and (3) bound. There are various gradations of each one of these. The soul (jiva) is freed from the bondage of the deluding energy (maya) by the grace of Godhead, there being no other way. The inanimate objects are two, viz., (1) time, and (2) deluding energy (maya). Time is either transcendental or material. The former is self-conscious and eternal, i.e., undivided into past, present and future. The deluding energy (maya) is the perversion of the self-conscious (chit), or the shadow of the latter, and possesses the qualities of the shadow. Divinity is free from defect. The real nature of Godhead is full of infinite beneficience. Godhead as Krishna is the highest Brahman. Krishna is the source of all beauty and sweetness. Attended by His Own Power, the Daughter of Brishabhanu, constantly served by thousands of intimate female friends (sakhis) who are the extended self of the Daughter of Brishabhanu, Krishna is the Object of the eternal worship of the individual soul (jiva). He has an eternal and transcendental bodily Form. He is formless to the material vision but possessed of form to the spiritual eye. He is independent, all-powerful, Lord of all, possessed of inconceivable power and eternally worshipped by the gods such as Brahma, Siva, etc. Worship is of two kinds, viz., (1) tentative devotion during novitiate, and (2) the highest devotion characterized by love. The latter is aroused by the practice of nine kinds of devotion as means, consisting of hearing, chanting, etc.

The Nimbarka community is not mentioned in his works by Sree Jiva Goswami. He is also unnoticed in the Sarbadarsanasamgraha of Sayana Madhava. From which it is supposed that the current views of the present Nimbarka community were not extensively known till after the time of the author of Sarbadarsansamgraha, or even of the six Goswamins. There is, however, no doubt whatever that Sree Nimbaditya is a very ancient Acharya and the founder of the satvata dvaitadvaita sampradaya.

excerpted from:

http://bvml.org/contemporary/TCATOTSLSKC/00intro7.html

The Career and Teachings of the Supreme Lord Sree Krishna-Chaitanya

by Sri Narayan Das Bhakti Sadhukar

VII THE FOUNDER-ACHARYAS

August 14, 2006

Thanks for the info! They seem like a nice Vaishnava sect. I wish them well, as fellow devotees of Sri Krsna.

krishnadasa · August 15, 2006

i dont think u shud compare the acharyas like that in degrading sense!!!

All acharyas are equal and they had a definite objective

hari hari bol

Nimbarka ie., Dvaitadvaitha is the complete philosophy.
It contains essence of both dvaita & advaitha. It accepts both doctines in one way or other. So it is complete philosophy.

Moreover, Nimbarka is only philosophy comingly direct chain from God(Krsna). Krsna taught the philosophy to his "Hamsa" avatar. Hamsa taught it to "Sanath kumaras". Sanath kumaras directly appeared in person to Sri Nimbarkacharya and taught the philosophy.

Sri Nimbarkacharya got darshan of "Sri RadhaKrishna" (whereas other acharyas such as Sankara, Ramanuja & Madhva didnt got).

Jai Radhekrishna

gokulkr · August 16, 2006

I havent degraded any acharya. I just told only "Sri Nimbarkacharya" got darshan of "Sri Radhakrishna". It is the historical truth.

Moreover, some pseudo-"vaishnavas" degrade "Sri Sankaracharya" as calling him as incarnation of a demon and his followers as mayavadis. But i havent done any such thing like that. I respect "Sri Sankaracharya" & his philosophy "Advaita".

Also one particular vaishnava sect always degrade followers of "Sri Swaminarayan sect" as calling them fake philosophy or unauthorised teaching etc...

I strongly condemn acts of such pseudo-vaishnavas.

Jai Radhekrishna

August 16, 2006

How do you know what acharya got darshana of Krsna and what acharya didn't? I think such a statement is very presumptuous. Also, who has said that Shankaracharya is the incarnation of a demon?

At any rate - all glories to Sri Nimbarkacharya. All vaishnava acharyas are glorious.

By the way, all vaishnava lineages take issue with the Adwaita philosophy and Shankaracharya's bhasya on Vedanta sutra.

Puru_Das · August 17, 2006

How do you know what acharya got darshana of Krsna and what acharya didn't? I think such a statement is very presumptuous. Also, who has said that Shankaracharya is the incarnation of a demon?

At any rate - all glories to Sri Nimbarkacharya. All vaishnava acharyas are glorious.

By the way, all vaishnava lineages take issue with the Adwaita philosophy and Shankaracharya's bhasya on Vedanta sutra.

According to Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura all four sampradaya acaryas received the darshan of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu in Nabadwipa, prior to His appearance. SCM extracted essential elements from all of their teachings. This chapter explains how Nimbaditya received darshan of the four Kumaras, Radha Krsna and then SCM.

<CENTER>Chapter Sixteen

</CENTER><CENTER>Bilvapaksa and Bharadvaja-tila

</CENTER><CENTER>All glories to Sri Gauracandra, the wanderer of Nadia's groves! All glories to Sri Nityananda, the master of Ekacakra! All glories to Advaita Isvara, the master of Santipura! All glories to Gadadhara of Ramacandrapura! And all glories to Gaura-bhumi, the essence of cintamani, where Krsna wandered in Kali-yuga.</CENTER>

The son of Padma, Sri Nityananda, after crossing the Ganges and going some distance, said to the devotees, "See this attractive place named Bilvapaksa. Generally people call it Bela Pukhariya. The place known in the scriptures as Bilvavana in Vraja is situated here in Navadvipa.

"One time some brahmana devotees of Siva worshipped him by offering the leaves of his favorite tree, the bilva. or bael, tree for a fortnight's duration. Siva was pleased with the brahmanas and gave them krsna-bhakti. Amongst those worshipers was Nimbaditya, who had been very attentive in the worship. Siva spoke to him, 'At the edge of this village is a sacred bilva forest. Within that forest, the four Kumaras are sitting in meditation. By their mercy, you will receive transcendental knowledge. They are your gurus. By serving them, you will receive all that is of value. Saying this, Lord Siva disappeared.

"Nimbaditya searched and found that place. On an attractive platform in the forest near Siva, he saw the four brothers-Sanaka, Sanandana, Sanatana, and Sanat-kumara sitting unseen by others. They were young, naked, and noble in character. Nimbarka cried out in excitement, 'Hare Krsna! Hare Krsna!'

"On hearing the holy name, the Kumaras' meditation broke. 'They opened their eyes and saw before them an ideal Vaisnava. Satisfied by this sight, one after another they embraced Nimbaditya. 'Who are you:'' they asked. 'Why have you come here? We will certainly fulfill your prayers.

"Nimbarka offered his obeisances and humbly introduced himself. Sanat-kumara smiled and said, 'The all-merciful Supreme Lord, knowing that Kali-yuga would be very troublesome, decided to propagate devotional service. He empowered four men with devotional service and sent them into the world to preach. Ramanuja, Madhva, and Visnusvami are three of these men. You are the fourth of these great devotees. Sri, Laksmi, accepted Ramanuja, Brahma accepted Madhvacarya, Rudra accepted Visnusvami, and we, meeting you today, have the good fortune to teach you. This is our intention. Previously we were engaged in meditating on the Brahman, but by the Lord's mercy that sinful act has gone away. Now that I know the sweet taste of pure devotional service, I have written one book named Sanat-kumara Samhita. You should receive initiation into its teachings.

"Seeing his guru's mercy, the wise Nimbarka quickly took his bath in the Ganges and returned. He offered obeisances and humbly said, 'O deliverer of the fallen, please deliver this low rascal.

"The four brothers gave him the Radha-Krsna mantra and instructed him how to worship Radha and Krsna filled with sentiments of great love, called bhava-marga. Having obtained that mantra, Nimbaditya resided at this sacred place and worshipped according to the injunctions of that samhita.

"Radha and Krsna bestowed Their mercy by appearing before Nimbarka. Lighting up all directions and gently smiling, They said, 'You are very fortunate. You have performed sadhana in Navadvipa, Our dear abode. Here We take on one form, as the son of Sacidevi.

"While saying this, They combined in one form as Gauranga. Nimbarka was astounded on seeing that form and exclaimed, 'Never have I seen or heard of such a remarkable form anywhere!'

"Mahaprabhu said, 'Please keep this form secret now. Just preach krsna-bhakti and the pastimes of Radha and Krsna, for I am very happy in those pastimes. When I appear as Gauranga, I will enjoy educational pastimes. At that time, you will take birth in Kashmir and tour India as a champion scholar out to defeat all opponents. Your name will be Kesava Kasmiri, and you will be celebrated everywhere for your great learning. While wandering on tour, you will come to Mayapur. The learned scholars of Navadvipa will flee when they hear your name, but I will be intoxicated with learning and take pleasure in defeating you. By the mercy of Sarasvati, you will realize My identity, give up your pride, and take shelter of Me. Then I will give you the gift of bhakti and send you out to preach devotional service again. So you can satisfy Me now by preaching the philosophy of dvaitadvaita (monism and dualism), keeping My identity secret.

"'Later, when I begin the sankirtana movement, I Myself will preach the essence of the four Vaisnava philosophies. From Madhva I will receive two essential items: his complete defeat of the Mayavada philosophy, and his service to the Deity of Krsna, accepting the Deity as an eternal spiritual being. From Ramanuja I will accept two great teachings: the concept of bhakti unpolluted by karma and jnana, and service to the devotees. From Visnusvami's teachings I will accept two main elements: the sentiment of exclusive dependence on Krsna, and the path of raga-bhakti And from you I will receive two excellent principles: the necessity of taking shelter of Radha, and the high esteem for the gopis' love of Krsna.' "

"When Gauracandra disappeared, Nimbarka wept out of love. After worshipping the feet of his gurus, he left for preaching krishna-bhakti."

Nityananda then pointed out to Jiva in the distance, Ramatirtha, where Lord Balarama killed the Kolasura demon and then took bath with the Yadus. This place is now known as Rukmapura, and it is situated on one end of the Navadvipa parikrama. During the month of Kartika this place is especially glorious.

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura

SNM

Also His Divine Grace Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada has written:

TEXT 95

TEXT

vaisnava hana yeba sariraka-bhasya sune

sevya-sevaka-bhava chadi' apanare 'isvara' mane

SYNONYMS

vaisnava hana--being a Vaisnava; yeba--anyone who; sariraka-bhasya--the Mayavada commentary Sariraka-bhasya; sune--listens to; sevya-sevaka-bhava--the Krsna conscious attitude that the Lord is the master and the living entity is His servant; chadi'--giving up; apanare--himself; isvara--the Supreme Lord; mane--considers.

TRANSLATION

"When a Vaisnava listens to the Sariraka-bhasya, the Mayavada commentary upon Vedanta-sutra, he gives up the Krsna conscious attitude that the Lord is the master and the living entity is His servant. Instead, he considers himself the Supreme Lord.

PURPORT

The philosophers known as kevaladvaita-vadis generally occupy themselves with hearing the Sariraka-bhasya, a commentary by Sankaracarya advocating that one impersonally consider oneself the Supreme Lord. Such Mayavada philosophical commentaries upon Vedanta are simply imaginary, but there are other commentaries on Vedanta philosophy. The commentary by Srila Ramanujacarya, known as Sri-bhasya, establishes the visistadvaita-vada philosophy. Similarly, in the Brahma-sampradaya, Madhvacarya's Purnaprajna-bhasya establishes suddha-dvaita-vada. In the Kumara-sampradaya, or Nimbarka-sampradaya, Sri Nimbarka establishes the philosophy of dvaitadvaita-vada in the Parijata-saurabha-bhasya. And in the Visnusvami-sampradaya, or Rudra-sampradaya, which comes from Lord Siva, Visnusvami has written a commentary called Sarvajna-bhasya, which establishes suddhadvaita-vada.

A Vaisnava should study the commentaries on Vedanta-sutra written by the four sampradaya-acaryas, namely Sri Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya, Visnusvami and Nimbarka, for these commentaries are based upon the philosophy that the Lord is the master and that all living entities are His eternal servants. One interested in studying Vedanta philosophy properly must study these commentaries, especially if he is a Vaisnava. These commentaries are always adored by Vaisnavas. The commentary by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati is elaborately given in the Adi-lila, Chapter Seven, text 101. The Mayavada commentary Sariraka-bhasya is like poison for a Vaisnava. It should not be touched at all. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura remarks that even a maha-bhagavata, or highly elevated devotee who has surrendered himself unto the lotus feet of Krsna, sometimes falls down from pure devotional service if he hears the Mayavada philosophy of Sariraka-bhasya. This commentary should therefore be shunned by all Vaisnavas.

Cc. Antya lila Ch. 2,. Txt 95

Puru_Das · August 17, 2006

Sri Vaikunthapura, Rudradvipa, and Pulina (ch. 15 NM)

<CENTER>All glories to Gauranga and the Panca-tattva!

</CENTER><CENTER>All glories to Navadvipa, the abode of Sri Caitanya!

</CENTER>Coming to Vaikunthapura, Nityananda Prabhu spoke to Sri Jiva while mildly smiling, "On one side of the eight-petaled Navadvipa is this Vaikunthapura. Listen, without doubt. This is Vaikuntha, the abode of Narayana, situated in the spiritual sky beyond the Viraja River. Maya can never enter this place, where Lord Narayana is served by His energies, Sri, Bhu, and Nila. The effulgence radiating from this spiritual abode is the Brahman. With material vision, people see only the material world. But with his transcendental vision, Narada once saw Narayana manifest as Gaurasundara in this spiritual abode. After seeing this, the best of the munis stayed here for some time.

"There is one more confidential story. Ramanujacarya once came to Puri and pleased the Lord with many prayers. Jagannatha appeared before him and said, 'Go and see Navadvipa-dhama, for I will soon appear there in the house of Jagannatha Misra. The entire spiritual sky is situated within one corner of Navadvipa, My very dear abode. As My eternal servant and leading devotee, you should see Navadvipa. Let your students, who are absorbed in dasya-rasa, stay here while you go. Any living being who does not see Navadvipa has been born uselessly. Just one portion of Navadvipa contains Ranga-ksetra. Sri Venkata (Tirupati), and Yadava Acala. O son of Kesava go to Navadvipa and see the form of Gauranga. You have come to the earth to teach bhakti, so let your birth be successful with the mercy of Gaura. From Navadvipa, go to Kurma-sthana and join again with your disciples.'

"With folded hands, Ramanuja submitted to Jagannatha, 'In Your narration You have mentioned Gauracandra, but exactly who He is, I do not know.

"The Lord mercifully replied to Ramanuja, 'Everyone knows Krsna, the Lord of Goloka. That Krsna, whose vilasa-murti is Narayana, is the Supreme Truth, and He resides in Vrndavana. That Krsna is fully manifest in the form of Gaurahari, and that Vrndavana is fully manifest in the form of Navadvipa-dhama. I eternally reside as Lord Gauranga in Navadvipa, the topmost abode in the universe. By My mercy that dhama has come within Bhu-mandala, yet it remains without a scent of maya. This is the verdict of scripture. If you say that Navadvipa is part of the material world, then your devotion will dwindle day by day. I have placed this spiritual abode within the material world by My desire and inconceivable energy. Simply by reading scriptures one will not get the highest truth, for the highest truth surpasses all reasoning power. Only the devotees can understand by My mercy.

''Hearing this, the sober-minded Ramanuja was agitated with love for Gauranga. He said, 'Lord, Your pastimes are truly astounding. The scriptures cannot know Your opulences. Why isn't gauranga-lila clearly described in the scriptures? When I closely examine the sruti and Puranas, I find only some hint of the Gaura-tattva. After hearing your instructions, my doubts are gone and the sweet mellows of Gauranga's pastimes have arisen in my heart. If You order me, after going to Navadvipa, I will preach gaura-lila throughout the three worlds. I will give people evidence from the hidden scriptures and establish devotional service to Gauranga throughout the universe. Please instruct me.

"Seeing Ramanuja's eagerness, Jagannatha said, 'Ramanuja, do not broadcast like this. Keep the confidential pastimes of Gauranga secret. Only after Gauranga has finished His pastimes will the general public receive them. For now, preach dasya-rasa, while in your heart worship Gauranga constantly.

"Taking the Lord's advice, Ramanuja secretly cultured his attraction for Navadvipa. So that Gauranga's pastimes were not revealed prematurely, Lord Narayana then led Ramanuja here to Vaikunthapura and mercifully showed Ramanuja His transcendental form served by Sri, Bhu, anti Nila. Ramanuja considered himself fortunate to obtain darsana of his worshipable Lord, when suddenly he saw the Lord assume the enchanting form of Gaurasundara, the son of Jagannatha Misra. Ramanuja swooned at the brilliance of the form. Then Gauranga put His lotus feet on the head of Ramanuja, who was thus divinely inspired and recited prayers of praise. 'I must see Gaura's actual lila on earth. I can never leave Navadvipa!'

"Gauranga said, 'O son of Kesava, your desire will be fulfilled. When the Nadia pastimes will be revealed in the future, you will take birth here again.

"Gauranga disappeared and Ramanuja, contented, resumed his journey. After some days he arrived at Kurma-sthana and saw the place with his disciples. During his life he preached dasya-rasa throughout South India, while internally he was absorbed in gaura-lila. By Gauranga's mercy, he took birth in Navadvipa as the devotee Sri Ananta. He went to Vallabhacarya's' house and saw the marriage of Laksmipriya and Gauranga.

Puru_Das · August 17, 2006

Sri Vaikunthapura, Rudradvipa, and Pulina (ch. 15 NM)

". . . Madhva and his disciples also stayed here for some time. Gaurasundara mercifully appeared to him in a dream and while smiling said, 'Everyone knows that you are My eternal servant. When I appear in Navadvipa, I will accept your sampradaya. Now, go everywhere and carefully uproot all the false scriptures of the mayavadis. Reveal the glories of worshipping the Deity of the Lord. Later, I will broadcast your pure teachings.

"Saying this, Gauracandra disappeared, and Madhva awakened dumbfounded. 'Will I ever see that beautiful golden form again?' he cried.

"In reply, a voice from the sky said, 'Worship Me secretly, and you will come to Me.' With this instruction, Madhva went on with great resolution and defeated the mayavadi philosophers."

Puru_Das · August 17, 2006

<CENTER>Chapter Fifteen

</CENTER><CENTER></CENTER><CENTER>Sri Vaikunthapura, Rudradvipa, and Pulina

</CENTER>

"One time, Visnusvami came here during the course of his tour to defeat opposing philosophies. He stayed the night with his followers here in Rudradvipa. The disciples began dancing and singing, 'Hari bol' while Visnusvaml recited prayers from the Sruti. Pleased by the discussion of bhakti, Nila-lohita mercifully appeared there. Upon Siva`s arrival in the assembly, Visnusvami became startled. He folded his hands in prayer and recited appropriate praises. Siva spoke to him, 'All of you Vaisnavas are dear to me. Your discussion on devotional service has pleased me. Ask a boon, and I will grant it. There is nothing I will not give to the Vaisnavas.

"Visnusvami offered his dandavats and, filled with ecstatic love, he said, 'Give us this one gift; that henceforth we will perfect a sampradaya teaching devotional service.

"In great bliss, Rudra consented and named the sampradaya after himself. Thus Visnusvami's sampradaya is called the Rudra-sampradaya. With the mercy of Rudra, Visnusvami staved here and worshipped Gauracandra with a desire to attain love of God.

"Gauranga appeared to him in a dream and said, 'By Rudra's mercy you have become My devotee. You are fortunate to attain the treasure of bhakti in Navadvipa. Now go out and preach the philosophy of suddhadvaita (purified monism). The time of. My appearance on earth will soon come. At that time you will appear in the form of Sri Vallabha Bhatta. You will meet Me in Puri, and you will perfect your sampradaya when you go to Mahavana.'

"O Jiva! Sri Vallabha is now in Gokula. When you go there, you will be able to see him." Saying this, Nityananda happily went south to Paradanga in Sri Pulina. Here he showed the place where Sri Rasa-mandala and Dhira-samira of Vraja were located. He said, "O Jiva,' this is Vrndavana. One can see the Vrndavana pastimes here." Upon hearing the word 'Vrndavana,' Jiva began trembling and tears flowed from his eyes.

The Lord continued, "Gauranga brought His devotees here, and they performed kirtana describing the rasa-lila. The place of the rasa-lila in Vrndavana is situated here on the bank of the Ganges. The rasa-lila pastimes, with the gopis, which are eternally enacted here, are sometimes seen by fortunate persons

"'Listen sober-minded one, west of here, see Sri Dhira-samira, a nice place for worship of the Lord. In Vrndavana, Dhira-samira is situated on the bank of the Yamuna, and here it lies on the bank of the Ganges. Actually what you see, however, is not the bank of the Ganges, but that of the Yamuna, which flows on the western side of the Ganges. As this beautiful Pulina lies on the bank of the Yamuna, Visvambhara therefore calls this place Vrndavana. You should know that all the pastime places of Vrndavana are situated within this place. Make no distinction between Vrndavana and Navadvipa nor between Gauranga and Krsna.''

In this way, overwhelmed with ecstatic love, Nityananda Raya took Jiva and showed him around Vrndavana. Then, heading some distance to the north, they spent the night in Rudradvipa.

With the lotus feet of Nitai and Jahnava as my only wealth, Bhaktivinoda sings this glorification of Nadia.

Puru_Das · August 17, 2006

<CENTER>Chapter Fifteen

</CENTER><CENTER></CENTER><CENTER>Sri Vaikunthapura, Rudradvipa, and Pulina

</CENTER>

"Rudradvipa has been cut in two pieces by the Ganges. See how this western island has now moved to the east bank. By the Lord's desire, no one lives on this side now. From here see Sri Sankarapura. Even from a distance, see how it beautifies the bank of the Ganges. When Sankaracarya went out to defeat all opponents, on his way to Navadvipa, he first arrived there. Within his heart, he was the topmost Vaisnava but externally he played the role of a mayavadi, a servant of Maya. Actually, he was an incarnation of Siva, and by the Lord's order he expertly preached a covered form of Buddhism. While engaged in this way, he came to Nadia.

"When Sankaracarya came to this place, Gauracandra appeared to him in a dream and mercifully spoke to him in sweet words, 'You are My servant. Following My orders, you are preaching effectively the Mayavada doctrine. But as Navadvipa-dhama is very dear to Me, the Mayavada philosophy has no place here. On My behalf, Vrddha Siva and Praudha Maya spread the imaginary impersonal interpretations of scriptures, but only to those people who envy the devotees of the Lord. In this way I cheat them. Since this Navadvipa-dhama is generally a place for My devotees, not for the envious, you should go somewhere else. Do not contaminate the inhabitants of Navadvipa.'

"Realizing the truth about Navadvipa in his dream and with devotion instilled in his heart, he went elsewhere.

"In this Rudradvipa, the eleven Rudras reside. Headed by Nila-lohita Siva, the Rudras chant Gauranga's glories and constantly dance in bliss. As the demigods watch their dancing, they become happy and shower flowers from the sky.

Nabadwipa Mahatmya is on line in several places. You can find it on my website here:

http://bvml.org/SBTP/SNM/index.html

Puru_Das · August 18, 2006

I havent degraded any acharya. I just told only "Sri Nimbarkacharya" got darshan of "Sri Radhakrishna". It is the historical truth.

Moreover, some pseudo-"vaishnavas" degrade "Sri Sankaracharya" as calling him as incarnation of a demon and his followers as mayavadis. But i havent done any such thing like that. I respect "Sri Sankaracharya" & his philosophy "Advaita".

Also one particular vaishnava sect always degrade followers of "Sri Swaminarayan sect" as calling them fake philosophy or unauthorised teaching etc...

I strongly condemn acts of such pseudo-vaishnavas.

Jai Radhekrishna

TEXT 101

TEXT

krsne bhakti kara----ihaya sabara santosa

vedanta na suna kene, tara kiba dosa

SYNONYMS

krsne--unto Krsna; bhakti--devotional service; kara--do; ihaya--in this matter; sabara--of everyone; santosa--there is satisfaction; vedanta--the philosophy of the Vedanta-sutra; na--do not; suna--hear; kene--why; tara--of the philosophy; kiba--what is; dosa--fault.

TRANSLATION

"Dear sir, there is no objection to Your being a great devotee of Lord Krsna. Everyone is satisfied with this. But why do You avoid discussion on the Vedanta-sutra? What is the fault in it?"

PURPORT

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura comments in this connection, "Mayavadi sannyasis accept that the commentary by Sri Sankaracarya known as Sariraka-bhasya gives the real meaning of the Vedanta-sutra. In other words, Mayavadi sannyasis accept the meanings expressed in the explanations of the Vedanta-sutra by Sankaracarya, which are based on monism. Thus they explain the Vedanta-sutra, the Upanisads and all such Vedic literature in their own impersonal way." The great Mayavadi sannyasi Sadananda Yogindra has written a book known as Vedanta-sara, in which he writes, vedanto nama upanisat-pramanam. tad-upakarini sariraka-sutradini ca. According to Sadananda Yogindra, the Vedanta-sutra and Upanisads, as presented by Sri Sankaracarya in his Sariraka-bhasya commentary, are the only sources of Vedic evidence. Actually, however, Vedanta refers to the essence of Vedic knowledge, and it is not a fact that there is nothing more than Sankaracarya's Sariraka-bhasya. There are other Vedanta commentaries, written by Vaisnava acaryas, none of whom follow Sri Sankaracarya or accept the imaginative commentary of his school. Their commentaries are based on the philosophy of duality. Monist philosophers like Sankaracarya and his followers want to establish that God and the living entity are one, and instead of worshiping the Supreme Personality of Godhead they present themselves as God. They want to be worshiped as God by others. Such persons do not accept the philosophies of the Vaisnava acaryas, which are known as suddhadvaita (purified monism), suddha-dvaita (purified dualism), visistadvaita (specific monism), dvaitadvaita (monism and dualism) and acintya-bhedabheda (inconceivable oneness and difference). Mayavadis do not discuss these philosophies, for they are firmly convinced of their own philosophy of kevaladvaita, exclusive monism. Accepting this system of philosophy as the pure understanding of the Vedanta-sutra, they believe that Krsna has a body made of material elements and that the activities of loving service to Krsna are sentimentality. They are known as Mayavadis because according to their opinion Krsna has a body made of maya, and the loving service of the Lord executed by devotees is also maya. They consider such devotional service to be an aspect of fruitive activities (karma-kanda). According to their view, bhakti consists of mental speculation or sometimes meditation. This is the difference between the Mayavadi and Vaisnava philosophies.

Cc. Adi lila Ch. 7 Txt 101

HSDGACBSP

renuka · August 19, 2006

Interesting!

gokulkr · August 21, 2006

TEXT 101

TEXT

krsne bhakti kara----ihaya sabara santosa

vedanta na suna kene, tara kiba dosa

SYNONYMS

krsne--unto Krsna; bhakti--devotional service; kara--do; ihaya--in this matter; sabara--of everyone; santosa--there is satisfaction; vedanta--the philosophy of the Vedanta-sutra; na--do not; suna--hear; kene--why; tara--of the philosophy; kiba--what is; dosa--fault.

TRANSLATION

"Dear sir, there is no objection to Your being a great devotee of Lord Krsna. Everyone is satisfied with this. But why do You avoid discussion on the Vedanta-sutra? What is the fault in it?"

PURPORT

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura comments in this connection, "Mayavadi sannyasis accept that the commentary by Sri Sankaracarya known as Sariraka-bhasya gives the real meaning of the Vedanta-sutra. In other words, Mayavadi sannyasis accept the meanings expressed in the explanations of the Vedanta-sutra by Sankaracarya, which are based on monism. Thus they explain the Vedanta-sutra, the Upanisads and all such Vedic literature in their own impersonal way." The great Mayavadi sannyasi Sadananda Yogindra has written a book known as Vedanta-sara, in which he writes, vedanto nama upanisat-pramanam. tad-upakarini sariraka-sutradini ca. According to Sadananda Yogindra, the Vedanta-sutra and Upanisads, as presented by Sri Sankaracarya in his Sariraka-bhasya commentary, are the only sources of Vedic evidence. Actually, however, Vedanta refers to the essence of Vedic knowledge, and it is not a fact that there is nothing more than Sankaracarya's Sariraka-bhasya. There are other Vedanta commentaries, written by Vaisnava acaryas, none of whom follow Sri Sankaracarya or accept the imaginative commentary of his school. Their commentaries are based on the philosophy of duality. Monist philosophers like Sankaracarya and his followers want to establish that God and the living entity are one, and instead of worshiping the Supreme Personality of Godhead they present themselves as God. They want to be worshiped as God by others. Such persons do not accept the philosophies of the Vaisnava acaryas, which are known as suddhadvaita (purified monism), suddha-dvaita (purified dualism), visistadvaita (specific monism), dvaitadvaita (monism and dualism) and acintya-bhedabheda (inconceivable oneness and difference). Mayavadis do not discuss these philosophies, for they are firmly convinced of their own philosophy of kevaladvaita, exclusive monism. Accepting this system of philosophy as the pure understanding of the Vedanta-sutra, they believe that Krsna has a body made of material elements and that the activities of loving service to Krsna are sentimentality. They are known as Mayavadis because according to their opinion Krsna has a body made of maya, and the loving service of the Lord executed by devotees is also maya. They consider such devotional service to be an aspect of fruitive activities (karma-kanda). According to their view, bhakti consists of mental speculation or sometimes meditation. This is the difference between the Mayavadi and Vaisnava philosophies.

Cc. Adi lila Ch. 7 Txt 101

HSDGACBSP

Theres no word such as Sankara / advaitha occuring in original text :-

krsne bhakti kara----ihaya sabara santosa

vedanta na suna kene, tara kiba dosa

Moreover "purport" is just personal interpretration of a guru who doesnt accept advaitha or shankara's philosophy.

So it cant be accepted as statement againt Shankaracharya.

May all glories go to "Sri Shankaracharya" & "Sri Nimbarkacharya".

Jai RadheKrishna

August 21, 2006

Just because a person saw Radha or other mythological figures, it doesn't mean he knows the truth, or that he's 'more enligtened' than the rest of the acharyas. It is an assumption to think so. Philosophy is important, not personality. So stop "personality worship" cult.

gokulkr · August 22, 2006

Just because a person saw Radha or other mythological figures, it doesn't mean he knows the truth, or that he's 'more enligtened' than the rest of the acharyas. It is an assumption to think so. Philosophy is important, not personality. So stop "personality worship" cult.

Yes, philosophy is important. Also the acharya propogating the philosophy should be highly respected & worshipped. Otherwise it is equal to following the teaching without respecting its guru. Philosophy of Sri Nimbarkacharya contains essence of philosophies of all acharyas. Spiritually & Historically theres evidence of Sri Nimbarka having darshan of "Sri Radhekrishna".

Anyway, Mr TackleBerry , by telling "Radhakrishna" as mythological figure yuo have exposed yourself how degraded you are. Also you have degraded yourself by saying worshipping acharyas as "personality worship". Degraded persons like you should be in Taliban army rather than wasting time here.

Jai RadheKrishna

Puru_Das · August 22, 2006

Theres no word such as Sankara / advaitha occuring in original text :-
krsne bhakti kara----ihaya sabara santosa

vedanta na suna kene, tara kiba dosa

Moreover "purport" is just personal interpretration of a guru who doesnt accept advaitha or shankara's philosophy.

So it cant be accepted as statement againt Shankaracharya.

May all glories go to "Sri Shankaracharya" & "Sri Nimbarkacharya".

Jai RadheKrishna

Purport means to bring out the meaning. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura has written:

"What are the Scriptures? They are nothing but the record by the pure devotees of the Divine Message appearing on the lips of the pure devotees. The Message conveyed by the devotees is the same in all ages. The words of the devotees are ever identical with the Scriptures. Any meaning of the Scriptures that belittles the function of the devotee who is the original communicant of the Divine Message contradicts its own claim to be heard."

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura,

The Harmonist, December 1931, vol. XXIX No.6

We cannot share your minmization of the written words of His Divine Grace Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada as "personal interpretation." Moreover there are many other statements about Sankaracarya by other Gaudiya acaryas that agree with his estimations . Many concuring statements about Sankaracarya's monist philosophy are there from Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu Himself and his direct associates . A detailed study of mayavada was written by Srila Bhakti Prajnan Kesava Maharaja in a book called Vaisnava Vijaya. This VNN article

http://www.vnn.org/world/WD0003/WD31-5779.html

gives the introduction and preface to that book. Anyone who wants to understand the Gaudiya Vaisnava point of view with regard to monism is encouraged to examine them carefully .

In the introduction written by

His Divine Grace Srila Bhakti Vedanta Vaman Maharaja he writes:

". . . For those living entities that choose to negate, disregard or ignore the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Krsna, He especially sent His dearmost Mahadeva Siva to incarnate as Sankaracarya to spread the doctrine of mayavadism and thus by bewildering the demonic, misguide them further by misinterpreting the supreme knowledge of the Vedas by interpolating the principles and misrepresenting the fundamental concept of Vedanta. In this way the idea of illusory ideas in an illusory world was fabricated. Sankaracarya performed his service relentlessly, completely twisting and deforming the pristine absolute truth of the Supreme Lord, into a non-distinct impotent facsimile of a formless and qualitiless Brahman, implicitly following the ultimate order of the Supreme Lord Krsna. . . ."

and the author of the book, His Divine Grace Srila Bhakti Prajnan Kesava Gosvami Maharaja has written in his Preface:

". . . The fundamental axioms of Vedanta-sutra have been so deviated by Sankaracarya in his commentary Sariraka-bhasya that it is totally opposed to the principles of Vedanta philosophy. In this work Sankaracarya states that Brahman is formless, impersonal and unqualitative. That is why Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu Himself stated: mayavadi bhasya sunile haya sarva-nasa: "If one hears this illusory commentary then one is doomed." No where in any of the five hundred and fifty-five sutras of "Vedanta sutra" is it mentioned that Brahman possesses these three attributes. Brahman cannot be formless, impersonal and unqualitative. If Brahman is no also in possession of form why is that so many saintly souls have written praises to the dust of his lotus feet. So these statements by Sankaracarya about Brahman being formless, impersonal and unqualitative are utterly false and deceptive; hence atheistic and demonic. No where in his Vedanta-sutra does Srila Veda Vyasadeva ever mention these three abominably atheistic words of formless, impersonal and unqualitative.

Sankaracarya cleverly interpolated these three gnostic and antitheistic trends of thought borrowing them from Buddhism and then very craftily and expertly superimposed them in his commentary on Vedanta-sutram. So the Brahman of mayavadi philosophy alluded to by Sankaracarya is not true Brahman. It is an illusory, distorted and false imitation of Brahman and should not in any way, shape or form be ever mistaken for the real Brahman. Those souls who are eager to learn and understand the life history of mayavadism can now understand the root of its beginnings already here in the forward.

The word Brahman itself confirms the transcendental sound vibration. This is the transcendental Name Brahman "Hare Krsna" preached by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Those who have no affinity for this transcendental name and who have not the esoteric understanding of the word Brahman the results of their chanting of the Hare Krsna mahamantra becomes totally futile. The broadcasting of the Hare Krsna Mahamantra was the main purpose for establishing the Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti in . . .

It is the Divine Will to intensify the forces of kali yuga. Norms of human behavior, ethics, morals and judgement have reached such low levels that it will be difficult for posterity in future generation to surpass them; but somehow or other they will. The Supreme Lord deputed his servitor, Mahadeva Siva to descend to earth and taking birth in a Brahman family develop a philosophy that would be logically acceptable to those opposed to bhakti to the point where they would accept the Lord as impersonal possessing no form , no personality and no qualities. Here is a vivid description of this as Siva describes to Parvati:

(*Note Devanagari and word for word translations are omitted in this cyber version, but are found in the printed version from Gaudiya Vaisnava Press)

mayavadam asacchastram pracchannam bauddhamuchyate

</CENTER><CENTER>maya iva vihitam devi kalau brahmana murttina

</CENTER><CENTER>

Translation

</CENTER>

The theory of impersonalism is a false scripture and is know as disguised Buddhism. It is me O’Goddess, in the form of a brahmana who perpetrate this in the age of kali.

Now we will see in this next example that the Lord Himself confidentially instructs Siva thusly:

svagamaih kalpitais tvam ca janan kuru madvimukhan

mancha gopaya yena syat srsti resottarottara

Translation

</CENTER>

With your own concocted scriptures, make the people adverse to me and hide me so that the population may grow perpetually.

Now Siva reveals to Parvati the method in which he created his theory

vedarthavan mahasastram mayavadam avaidikam maya eva

kathitam devi jagatam nasakaranat

Translation

</CENTER>

The great scriptural theory of impersonalism is non-vedic though taking its meaning from the Vedas, O’Goddess. It is me who has told this because it is the root of destruction of the worlds.

Mayavadism is factually covered Buddhism and it has been authorized for Siva to incarnate and spread this theory by Lord Visnu. Atheistic people can only turn against their natural, constitutional position by accepting demonic ideas. To accomplish this task Siva took birth as Sankaracarya and misrepresented the Vedic scriptures by speculative logic and deceptive interpolation. It can be understood from Vedanta that Siva is the Lord of chaos, Brahma is the lord of creation and Visnu is the lord of preservation. To expedite the forces of Kali, Sankaracarya powerfully declared, "This world is an illusion! This world is false! This existence is not real!" This demonic teaching with a covert purpose gives false wisdom to spiritual unactivated humans. In kali yuga the gloom and darkness is deepening rapidly and the degeneration of the whole creation is pathetically regressing to idleness and apathy. Humanity unable to save itself is helpless, beguiled by its own tune and charmed by its own dance into the deepest darkness of ignorance.

Definitions and explanations, hypothesis and theories nowhere to be found in Vedanta philosophy or in Vedanta-sutra were ruthlessly presented by Sankaracarya without compunction. Even if we were to accept his philosophy as a doctrine of knowledge; still because of the fallacy of his basic fundamental ontology it would have to be rejected and totally excluded from the Vedic pantheon. Sankaracarya’s mayavad theory can never in any shape, way or form be accepted as a doctrine of knowledge. This opinion is not only held by me; but it is also fully in line with the previous Vaisnava acaryas going back to antiquity. In the Sandilya Sutra, chapter two called the Bhakti Khanda, verse 26 we find:

brahma-kandam tu bhaktau tasya anujnanaya samanyata

</CENTER><CENTER>

Translation

</CENTER>

The portion of knowledge of Brahman commonly accepted is for devotion.

The knowledge of Brahman is made for devotion whereas knowledge without devotion is meaningless unless it is utilized in the service of the Supreme Lord. Acarya Svapneswar in his commentary on Sadilya’s Sutra clarifies it even further. We cite the relevant part of this commentary below:

<CENTER>jnana pradhanye jnana kandam uttara kanda

prasiddhir na syad iti manvana pratyucate

Translation

</CENTER>

When we say that the later portion which is famous as the Vedas is the knowledge of Brahman it may not be believed so we reply:

bhaktartham brahma kandam sruyate na jnanartham

tasmaj jnana kandam iti brumah

Translation

</CENTER>

This portion of knowledge of Brahman, the Vedas is not for the sake of knowledge only but for the sake of devotion therefore we call it the portion of the knowledge of Brahman.

Acarya Svapnesvar was not a modern commentator. He was born in the 1400’s in Bengal in a Vaisnava ksatriya family, as the son of a royal, commander he was knowledgeable enough about sastra to understand the importance of the writings of Sandilya. All saints and seers and scriptural luminaries of antiquity were well aware of Sandilya, that great writer of scriptures. Srila Veda Vyasadeva gives relevant details regarding Sandilya in the Skanda Purana. In the chapter called Visnu Khanda in the first canto, verses 16 and 17, Sandilya is mentioned while eulogizing the glories of the Srimad Bhagavatam.

ityukto visnuratas tu nandadinam purohitam

sandilyam ajuhava asu vajra-sandeha-nuttaye

Translation

</CENTER>

When Visnurata was thus told he immediately called for Sandilya, the priest of the Nandas and others in order to remove the doubts of Vajra.

<CENTER>atha utajam vihaya asu sandilya samupagatah

pujito vajranabha nisada asanottame

Translation

</CENTER>

Then Sandilya leaving his hermitage immediately went there and sitting on a suitable seat was honored by Vajranabha.

Another example to show the caliber of Sandilya’s qualifications is given by Narada Muni, who also held Sandilya in great esteem. We found an 82 year old edition of the Narada Bhakti sutras in the original sanskrit printed in Varanasi 1808 Sakabda era. In the 83 chapter of this text Sandilya is mentioned.

om evam vadanti jana-jalpa-nirbhaya ekamatah

kumara vyasa sukadeva sandilya garga

visnusvami kaundinya sesa uddhava aruni

bali hanuman vibhisana dayo bhaktyacaryah

Translation

</CENTER>

Those masters on the path of devotion who speak of the Supreme Lord like the four Cameras, Vedavaysa, Sukadeva Gosvami, Sandilya Rsi, Gargacarya, Visnusvami, Kaundilya, Sesa, Uddhava, Aruni, Bali, Hanuman,Vibhisana and others all are of the same opinion and are unafraid of the prattle of ordinary people.

Acaryas of devotional piety give directions by instructions for the best ways and means of devotion. Theses are very great and saintly souls and I pray that they not belittle this humble offering which follows in their footsteps. Narada Muni describes Srila Veda Vyasa the compiler of Vedanta-sutra and includes Sandilya along with him as writers of devotional scriptures of the highest order and Sandilya the rishi also glorifies Vedanta-sutra as the root scripture of his writings and the foundation of the devotion of bhakti.

The preceding slokas reveals that Sankaracarya’s ordeal of attempting to establish impersonalism, denying the Supreme Lord His form, His individuality, His opulences, His potencies, His paraphernalia and His beloved associates and devotees, making the Supreme Lord an enigma and giving Him only the nomenclature Brahman is devoid of all rationality and is complete concoction.

My last humble but earnest request to all sane and intelligent persons desiring freedom from the clutches of kali, is that they should declare total prohibition on Sankaracarya’s mayavadi hypothesis, never listen to the senseless prattle of indistinct formlessness and never utter a single word of impersonalism to anyone. Total prohibition on mayavadism is based on the injunction declared by Srila Krsnadas Kaviraj Gosvami in Sri Caitanya Caritamrta, Madhya-lila, chapter six, verse 169 below:

jivera nistara lagi' sutra kaila vyasa

mayavadi-bhasya sunile haya sarva-nasa

</CENTER>

jivera--of the living entities; nistara--deliverance; lagi'--for the matter of; sutra--the Vedanta-sutra; kaila--made; vyasa--Srila Vyasadeva; mayavadi--of the impersonalists; bhasya--commentary; sunile--if hearing; haya--becomes; sarva-nasa--all destruction.

Translation

</CENTER>

Srila Vyasadeva presented Vedanta-sutra for the benefit of all living entities, but if one hears the impersonalist commentary of Sankaracarya they are doomed.

This injunction must be followed by all devotees, friends and well wishers of Vaisnavism. Moreover we must augment it by the sublime teachings of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura who wrote thus:

visaya vimudhah aar mayavadijan

bahkti sunya duhe prana dhare akarana

Translation

</CENTER>

The lives of ignorant materialists and impersonalists are useless as both are devoid of devotion.

seyi duyer madhye sivaya tabu bhalo

mayavadi sanga nahi magi kona kala

Translation

</CENTER>Among the two the gross materialist is better for one should never ever associate with an impersonalist.

mayavada dosa yar hrdaye pasila

kutarka hrdaye tar vajra sama

Translation

</CENTER>

Whose heart the poisonous noise of impersonalism has entered is the same as having his heart struck by a thunderbolt.

bhaktira svarupa aar vasaya asraya

mayavada ‘anitya bolia sava kaya

Translation

</CENTER>

The essence of devotion is to the Supreme Lord and sadguru; but impersonalists consider these ephemeral manifestations.

<CENTER>dhik tar krsna seva sravana kirtana

Krsna ange vajra haane tahar stavana

Translation

</CENTER>The prayers from those inimical to the Supreme Lord Krsna’s service of the hearing and chanting of His holy names is like a thunderbolt in Lord Krsna’s body.

<CENTER>mayavad sama bhakti pratikul nahi

ateva mayavadi sanga nahi chai

Translation

</CENTER>

There is nothing more against devotional service to the Supreme Lord Krsna than the denial that He has a personality; thus one should never have the association of an impersonalist.

Thus with all these instructions in mind we should always adhere to the pure and pristine teachings of the great Vaisanava acaryas, making them our only shelter and refuge in transcendental life. Srila Vyasadeva projected the highest welfare for all human beings when he compiled the Vedanta-sutra. . The Vedanta-sutra and the Bhakti-sutra are synonomous. They have both originated from the same source with the same goals and same objectives. This have been made apparent in the previous pages while deliberating on the subtance of Vedanta-sutra and the Vedanta philosophy. The only deliberation remaning is the efficacy of nama-bhajan-siksa.

The chanting of the holy names of the Supreme Personality of Godhead Lord Krsna is the highest scriptural truth. In kali yuga without the devotional chanting of the Lord’s holy names; all other activities cannot be approved. The great acaryas, sages, rsi’s and munis of India prescribed this path as the only way to attain imperishable transcendental knowledge as well as bliss. All other paths whether they be by jnana, by yoga, by tapasya, by meditation or any other austerities or methodology are fruitless unless they are accompanied by the chanting of the holy names of the Supreme Lord Krsna and His incarnations. Any concocted deviation or speculative assumptions that doesn’t include the chanting of the holy names of the Supreme Lord Krna and His incarnations should be understood to be valueless.

The mayavadi theory of impersonalism is full of innuendo oposed to bhakti and the factual existence of the Supreme Lord Krsna. Moreover it is also full with the fault of being bias toward humans beings who are all part and parcel of the unqualified Brahman.

Why is a mayavadi required to continue austere penance after attaining the status of Brahman And if he considers himself to be Brahman and declares ‘aham brahmasmi’ then what is the need for any further self-mortification This methodology is written in the book ‘Siddha-Sadhana-Dosajukta’ much relished by mayvadis. It is commonly practiced by them; but if one is already in possession of something why should one continue to waste additional efforts for it This hypothesis I carefully analyzed from the original version of this book. Also on page 153 the delineation of nirvana rupa fal nirodh should be well noted.

Since January lf 1968 Sriman Nava Yogendra Brahmancari has made an earnest attempt to publish this "The Life History of Mayavadism" in book form. I am indebted to him. Sri bhakti Vedanta Vaman Maharaj took immense pains for its publication in the "Sri Gaudiya Patrika" amking literal changes and improvements. Although myself being ill, I tried t odo my level best for it, especially by adding the term "Vaisnava Vijaya" to the title, as withou it the transcendental truth would not be made apparent. The truth must prevail! The trust must always prevail!.

I humbly request the readers of this book to study the contents of this book very carefully. By doing this one will insure that they will never be captivated or ensnared by the illusion of mayvadism and also by doing so they will be able to easily lead others away from mayavadism.

Bhakti Prajnan Kesava

Aksaya Tritiya

Tuesady March 20, 1968

17, Madhusudan, 482 Gour Era

17, Vaisak, 1375 Bengali Era

<DL><DD><DD><DD>Published by: <DD>Shri Satyananda Das Brahmacari, Vidyaratna <DD>From SHRI GOUDIYA VEDANTA SAMITI (Regd.) <DD>Shri Binode Behari Goudiya Math <DD>28, Halder Bagan Lane (Calcutta-4). W.B., India <DD>First Edition 1993 <DD>Printed by: Shri Nepal Cahndra Pan <DD>Sonali Press <DD>2/A Bholanath Paul Lane <DD>Calcutta-6 <DD><DD><DD>Also later published by <DD>Jagannath Das <DD>Gaudiya Vaisnava Press <DD>P.O. Box 450812 <DD>Atlanta, Georgia 31145 <DD>United States of America <DD><DD>For <DD>Sri Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti <DD>Sri Devananda Gaudiya Math <DD>P.O. Navadvipa, West Bengal, India <DD>Printed at Redkha Printers Pvt. Ltd. <DD>New Dehl-110 020 <DD>Library of Congress Catologue Card Number: 95-081461 <DD>ISBN: 0-9623662-2-6 <DD>Copyright Jagannatha Das 1996 U.S.A. </DD></DL>

sumedh · August 26, 2006

Gokulrji wrote:

Theres no word such as Sankara / advaitha occuring in original text :-
krsne bhakti kara----ihaya sabara santosa

vedanta na suna kene, tara kiba dosa

Moreover "purport" is just personal interpretration of a guru who doesnt accept advaitha or shankara's philosophy.

So it cant be accepted as statement againt Shankaracharya.

May all glories go to "Sri Shankaracharya" & "Sri Nimbarkacharya".

Jai RadheKrishna

Anyone who has read Chaitanya Charitamrta even a little would know that it clearly denounces Shankaracharyas kevala-advaita in multiple places. For instance (Madhaya-Lila 6.166-183):

The transcendental form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is complete in eternity, cognizance and bliss. However, you describe this transcendental form as a product of material goodness.

One who does not accept the transcendental form of the Lord is certainly an agnostic. Such a person should be neither seen nor touched. Indeed, he is subject to be punished by Yamaraja.

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 Mayavada philosophy are certainly more dangerous than the Buddhists.

Srila Vyasadeva presented the Vedanta philosophy for the deliverance of conditioned souls, but if one hears the commentary of Sankaracarya, everything is spoiled.

The Vedanta-sutra aims at establishing that the cosmic manifestation has come into being by the transformation of the inconceivable potency of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

The touchstone, after touching iron, produces volumes of gold without being changed. Similarly, the Supreme Personality of Godhead manifests Himself as the cosmic manifestation by His inconceivable potency, yet He remains unchanged in His eternal, transcendental form.

Sankaracarya's theory states that the Absolute Truth is transformed. By accepting this theory, the Mayavadi philosophers denigrate Srila Vyasadeva by accusing him of error. They thus find fault in the Vedanta-sutra and interpret it to try to establish the theory of illusion.

The theory of illusion can be applied only when the living entity identifies himself with the body. As far as the cosmic manifestation is concerned, it cannot be called false, although it is certainly temporary.

The transcendental vibration omkara is the sound form of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. All Vedic knowledge and this cosmic manifestation are produced from this sound representation of the Supreme Lord.

The subsidiary vibration tat tvam asi ["you are the same"] is meant for the understanding of the living entity, but the principal vibration is omkara. Not caring for omkara, Sankaracarya has stressed the vibration tat tvam asi.

Thus Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu criticized Sankaracarya's Sariraka-bhashya as imaginary, and He pointed out hundreds of faults in it. To defend Sankaracarya, however, Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya presented unlimited opposition.

The Bhattacarya presented various types of false arguments with pseudo logic and tried to defeat his opponent in many ways. However, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu refuted all these arguments and established His own conviction.

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu continued, "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the central point of all relationships, acting in devotional service to Him is one's real occupation, and the attainment of love of Godhead is the ultimate goal of life. These three subject matters are described in the Vedic literature.

If one tries to explain the Vedic literature in a different way, he is indulging in imagination. Any interpretation of the self-evident Vedic version is simply imaginary.

Actually there is no fault on the part of Sankaracarya. He simply carried out the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. He had to imagine some kind of interpretation, and therefore he presented a kind of Vedic literature that is full of atheism.

"[Addressing Lord Siva, the Supreme Personality of Godhead said:] 'Please make the general populace averse to Me by imagining your own interpretation of the Vedas. Also, cover Me in such a way that people will take more interest in advancing material civilization just to propagate a population bereft of spiritual knowledge.'"

"[Lord Siva informed goddess Durga, the superintendent of the material world:] 'In the Age of Kali I take the form of a brahmana and explain the Vedas through false scriptures in an atheistic way, similar to Buddhist philosophy.'"

Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya became very much astonished upon hearing this. He became stunned and said nothing.

The purport of Adi-Lila 7.101 quoted by Puru dasji derives directly from Chaitanya Charitamrta itself and calling it a "personal interpretation" is insincere unless one shows that Chaitanya Charitamrta states otherwise. As mentioned later by Puru dasji, mayavada is condemned by Lord Shiva himself in multiple places in Padma purana and Shiva purana, so there is direct scriptural evidence for such statements.

Hare Krishna

August 27, 2006

Puru Das, you are squeezing out the space with an excess of words. Listen, first if you want to have a decent conversation, stop with the puranic interludes of how Vishnu sent Shiva to do this deed and all that. Those who cannot throw all that aside as stories are unfit to argue with Shankara's philosophy, for yours then is a religion of imagination and your philosophy no matter how logical it seems against Shankara is really meant to safeguard your fairytale religion.

Yes you may call people like me atheists and feel secure by not talking with us. But we call spades spades. And all your concoction of Krishna, Shiva, and so forth, their forms being this or that, them incarnating in as a particular person, and having this particular essential feature or that, are but your imaginations. Shankara says that these are our indicators, our supports/channels, but the Indicated is the One Reality. He does not mess with trying to make the Indicated fit our little notions but says that we can access That through any of these indicators, etc. It is the all-pervading Reality comprehended in the mind through names and forms. The names and forms are our business, and we should see them as indicators of the substratum which is Him/That. (Note that name and form are not negated in themselves but rather affirmed in the substratum Brahman).

Actually Shankara and his followers do not have too much argument with you people, since they know that your affirmed devotion is not very different from theirs. It is you who keep crying like spoilt children.

August 27, 2006

Listen, first if you want to have a decent conversation, stop with the puranic interludes of how Vishnu sent Shiva to do this deed and all that. Those who cannot throw all that aside as stories are unfit to argue with Shankara's philosophy.

You're making up your own rules of debate as you go along. If one isn't allowed to discuss with Sastra at the center, then what's the point? Then it just becomes your opinion vs his based upon mental speculation and word jugglery.

Ironically, apart from that, how can any Vaishnava carry on what you describe as a "decent conversation" with you when you say things like: "yours then is a religion of imagination" "your fairytale religion" "And all your concoction of Krishna, Shiva, and so forth...are but your imaginations."

Based on what you've just stated, any further discussion with you seems more than futile and little more than a hopeless exercise in mud-slinging.

Puru_Das · August 27, 2006

Us people (Gaudiya Vaisnava sadhakas) will not accept that Lord Brahma's descriptions of Bhagavan Sri Krsna's form in Sri Brahma-samhita are "fairy tale".

We similarly do not reject the Puranas and Upanisads as valid pramana(evidence). In his Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu (1.2.10) Srila Rupa Gosvami, quoting the Skanda purana, states:

sruti-smrti-puranadi-

pancaratra-vidhim vina

aikantiki harer bhaktir

utpatayaiva kalpate

"Devotional service performed without reference to the Vedas, Puranas, Pancaratras, etc., must be considered sentimentalism, and it causes nothing but disturbance to society."

We will also not accept that the Srimad Bhagavatam, which was written by the author of the vedanta-sutra, Srila Vyasadeva, is not its ultimate and most authoritative commentary.

In the 18th Chapter of Jaiva Dharma, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura discusses how mayavada doctrine misunderstands Prameya: Bhedabheda-Tattva

Babaji: Baba, you should hear the eighth sloka of Dasa-mula:

hareh sakteh sarvam cid-acid akhilam syat parinatih

vivartam no satyam srutim iti viruddham kali-malam

harer bhedabhedau sruti-vihita-tattvam suvimalam

tatah premnah siddhir bhavati nitaram nitya-visaye

The entire spiritual and material creation is a transformation of Sri Krsna’s sakti. The impersonal philosophy of illusion (vivarta-vada) is not true. It is an impurity that has been produced by Kali-yuga, and is contrary to the teachings of the Vedas. The Vedas support acintya-bhedabheda-tattva (inconceivable oneness and difference) as the pure and absolute doctrine, and one can attain perfect love for the Eternal Absolute when he accepts this principle.

The conclusive teachings of the Upanisads are known as Vedanta, and in order to bring their precise meaning to light, Vyasadeva compiled a book of four chapters, called Brahma-sutra or Vedanta-sutra. The Vedanta commands great respect amongst the intellectual class. In principle, Vedanta-sutra is widely accepted as the proper exposition of the truths taught in the Vedas. From this Vedanta-sutra, the different acaryas extract different conclusions, which are just suitable to support their own philosophies.

Sri Sankaracarya has used Vedanta-sutra to support his impersonal theory of illusion, which is called vivarta-vada. He said that one compromises the very essence of brahma if one accepts any transformation in brahma, that the doctrine of transformation (parinama-vada) is therefore completely faulty, and that vivartavada is the only reasonable philosophy. According to his own needs, Sri Sankaracarya collected some Vedic mantras to support His vivarta-vada, which is also known as Mayavada. We can understand from this that parinama-vada has been popular from early times, and that Sri Sankara checked its acceptance by establishing vivarta-vada, which is a sectarian doctrine. Sriman Madhvacarya was dissatisfied with vivarta-vada, so he propounded the doctrine of dualism (dvaita-vada), which he also supported with statements from the Vedas to suit his own purpose. Similarly, Ramanujacarya taught specialized non-dualism (visistadvaita-vada), Sri Nimbadityacarya taught dualism-withmonism (dvaitadvaita-vada) and Sri Visnusvami taught purefied non-dualism (suddhadvaita-vada). Sri Sankaracarya’s Mayavada philosophy is opposed to the basic principles of bhakti. Each of the Vaisnava acaryas has claimed that his principles are based on bhakti, although there are differences between the various philosophies that they taught.

Sriman Mahaprabhu accepted all the Vedic conclusions with due respect, and gave their essence in His own instructions. Mahaprabhu taught the doctrine of acintya-bhedaabheda-tattva (inconceivable difference and oneness). He remained within the sampradaya of Sriman Madhvacarya, but still Sriman Mahaprabhu only accepted the essence of Madhvacarya’s doctrine.

Vrajanatha: What is the doctrine of parinama-vada (transformation)?

Babaji: There are two kinds of parinama-vada: brahma-parinamavada (the doctrine of transformation of brahma), and tat-saktiparinama-vada (the teaching of the transformation of energy). Those who believe in brahma-parinama-vada (the transformation of brahma) say that the acintya (inconceivable) and nirvisesa(formless) brahma transforms itself into both living beings and the inert material world. To support this belief, they quote from the Chandogya Upanisad (6.2.1), ekam evadvitiyam, “Before the manifestation of this universe there existed only the Absolute Truth, a non-dual tattva that exists in truth.”

According to this Vedic mantra, brahma is the one and only vastu which we should accept. This theory is also known as non-dualism, or advaita-vada. Look, in this theory, the word parinama (progressive transformation) is used, but the actual process that it describes is in fact vikara (destruction or deformation). Those who teach transformation of energy (sakti-parinamavada) do not accept any sort of transformation in brahma. Rather, they say that the inconceivable sakti, or potency of brahma, is transformed. The jiva-sakti portion of the potency of brahma transforms into the individual spirit jivas, and the maya-sakti portion transforms into the material world. According to this theory, there is parinama (transformation), but not of brahma.

sa-tattvato ‘nyatha-buddhir vikara ity udahrtah

Sadananda’s Vedanta-sara (59)

The word vikara (modification) means that something appears to be what it is factually not.

Brahma is accepted as a vastu (basic substance), from which two separate products appear, namely the individual souls and this material world. The appearance of substances that are different in nature from the original substance is known as vikara, (modification).

What is a vikara? It is just something appearing to be what it is actually not. For example, milk is transformed into yogurt. Although yogurt is milk, it is called yogurt, and this yogurt is the vikara or modification of the original substance, in this case, milk.According to brahma parinama-vada, the material world and the jivas are the vikara of brahma. Without any doubt, this idea is absolutely impure for the following reasons: Those who put forward this theory accept the existence of only one substance, namely the nirvisesa-brahma. But how can this brahma be modified into a second substance, if nothing else exists apart from it? The theory itself does not allow for modification of brahma.

Accepting modification of brahma defies logic, which is why brahma-parinama-vada is not reasonable under any circumstances. However, there is no such fault in sakti-parinama-vada, because according to this philosophy, brahma remains unaltered at all times. Bhagavan’s inconceivable sakti that makes the impossible possible (aghatana-ghatana-patiyasi-sakti) has an atomic particle, which is transformed at some places as the individual souls, and it also has a shadow portion, which is transformed in other places into material universes. When brahma desired, “Let there be living entities,” the jiva-sakti part of the superior potency (para-sakti) immediately produced innumerable souls. Similarly, when brahma desired the existence of the material world, the maya potency, the shadow form of para-sakti, at once manifested the unfathomable, inanimate material world. Brahma accepts these changes while remaining free from change itself.

One may argue: “Desiring is itself a transformation, so how can this transformation occur in the desireless brahma?” The answer to this is, “You are comparing the desire of brahma to the desire of the jiva, and calling it a vikara (modification). Now, the jiva is an insignificant sakti, and whenever he desires, that desire comes from contact with another sakti. For this reason, the desire of the jiva is called vikara. However, the desire of brahma is not in this category. The independent desire of brahma is part of its intrinsic nature. It is one with the sakti of brahma, and at the same time different from it. Therefore, the desire of brahma is the svarupa of brahma, and there is no place for vikara. When brahma desires, sakti becomes active, and only sakti is transformed. This subtle point is beyond the discriminating power of the jivas’minute intelligence, and can only be understood through the testimony of the Vedas.

Now we must consider the parinama (transformation) of sakti. The analogy of milk changing into yogurt may not be the best example to explain sakti-parinama-vada. Material examples do not give a complete understanding of spiritual principles, but they can still enlighten us regarding certain specific aspects. The cintamani gem is a material object that can produce many varieties of jewels, but it is not transformed or deformed itself in any way. Sri Bhagavan’s creation of this material world should be understood as being something similar to this. As soon as Bhagavan desires, His acintya-sakti (inconceivable potency) creates innumerable universes of fourteen planetary systems and worlds where the jivas can live, but He Himself remains absolutely unchanged.

It should not be understood that this “untransformed” Supreme is nirvisesa (formless) and impersonal. On the contrary, this Supreme is the great and all-encompassing substance, brahma (brhad-vastu-brahma). He is eternally Bhagavan, the master of the six opulences. If one accepts Him as merely nirvisesa, one cannot explain His spiritual sakti. By His acintya-sakti, He exists simultaneously in both personal and impersonal forms. To suppose that He is only nirvisesa is to accept only half the truth, without full understanding. His relationship with the material world is described in the Vedas using the instrumental (karana) case to signify ‘by which...’; the ablative (apadana) case to signify ‘from which...’; and the locative (adhikarana) case to signify ‘in which...’. It is stated in the Taittiriya Upanisad (3.1.1):

yato va imani bhutani jayante

yena jatani jivanti

yat prayanty abhisamvisanti

tad vijijnasasva tad brahma

One should know that brahma is He from whom all living beings are born, by whose power they remain alive, and into whom they enter at the end. He is the one about whom you should inquire, He is brahma.1

1 “The one about whom you are asking–that is brahma.”

In this sloka, ‘yato va imani’, the ablative (apadana) case for Isvara is used when it is said that the living beings are manifested from Him; ‘yena’, which is the instrumental (karana) case, is used when it is said that all sentient creatures live by His power; and ‘yat’, which indicates the locative (adhikarana) case, is used when it is said that all living beings enter into Him in the end. These three symptoms show that the Absolute Truth is Supreme; this is His unique feature. That is why Bhagavan is always savisesa (possessing form, qualities, and pastimes). Srila Jiva Gosvami describes the Supreme Person in these words:

ekam eva parama-tattvam svabhavikacintya-saktya

sarvadaiva svarupa-tad-rupa-vaibhava-jiva-pradhana-rupena

caturdhavatisthate suryantar-mandala-stha-teja iva

mandala tad-bahirgata-tad-rasmi-tat-praticchavi-rupena

The Absolute Truth is one. His unique characteristic is that He is endowed with inconceivable potency, through which He is always manifested in four ways: 1) svarupa (as His original form), 2) tad-rupa-vaibhava (as His personal splendor, including His abode, and His eternal associates, expansions and avataras), 3) jivas (as the individual spirit souls), and 4) pradhana (as the material energy). These four features are likened to the interior of the sun planet, the surface of the sun, the sun-rays emanating from this surface, and a remotely situated reflection, respectively.

These examples only partially explain the Absolute Truth. His original form is sat-cid-ananda (full of eternity, knowledge and bliss) and His spiritual name, abode, associates and the entire paraphernalia in His direct service are opulences that are nondifferent from Himself (svarupa-vaibhava). The countless nityamukta and nitya-baddha jivas are dependent, conscious atoms (anucit). Pradhana includes maya-pradhana, and its products are the entire gross and subtle material worlds. These four features exist eternally, and similarly, the oneness of the Supreme Absolute is also eternal. How can these two eternal contradictions exist together? The answer is that it seems impossible to the limited intelligence of the jiva, and it is only possible through Bhagavan’s inconceivable energy.

Vrajanatha: What is vivarta-vada?

Babaji: There is some reference to vivarta in the Vedas, but that is not vivarta-vada. Sri Sankaracarya has interpreted the word vivarta in such a way that vivarta-vada has come to mean the same as Mayavada. The scientific meaning of the word vivarta is:

atattvato’ nyatha buddhir vivarttam ity udahrtah

Sadananda’s Vedanta-sara (49)

Vivarta is the illusion of mistaking one thing for another.

The jiva is an atomic, spiritual substance, but when he is bewildered, he imagines that the subtle and gross bodies in which he is encaged are his self. This bewilderment is ignorance born of lack of knowledge, and it is the only example of vivarta found in the Vedas. Someone may think, “I am brahmana Ramanatha Pandey, the son of the brahmana Sanatana Pandey,” and another may think, “I am the sweeper Madhua, son of the sweeper Harkhua,” but really, such thoughts are completely illusory. The jiva is an atomic spiritual spark and is neither Ramanatha Pandey nor the sweeper Madhua; it only seems to be so because he identifies with the body. The illusions of mistaking a rope for a snake, and seeing silver in the reflection on a conch shell are similar examples.

The Vedas use various examples to try to convince the jivas to become free from this vivarta, the illusion of identifying one’s self with this mayika body. Mayavadis reject the true conclusions of the Vedas and establish a rather comical theory of vivarta-vada. They say that the idea “I am brahma” is essential understanding, and the idea “I am a jiva” is vivarta (erroneous understanding). The Vedic examples of vivarta do not contradict sakti-parinama-vada at all, but the theory of vivarta-vada that the Mayavadis put forward is simply foolish.

The Mayavadis propose various types of vivarta-vada, of which three are most common:

1. The soul is really brahma, but he became bewildered into thinking himself to be an individual soul.

2. The jivas are reflections of brahma.

3. The jivas and the material world are just the dream of brahma.

All these varieties of vivarta-vada are false and contrary to Vedic evidence.

Vrajanatha: What is this philosophy called Mayavada? I am unable to understand it.

Babaji: Listen carefully. Maya-sakti is just a perverted reflection of the spiritual kingdom, and it is also the controller of the material world which the jiva enters when he is overpowered by ignorance and illusion. Spiritual things have an independent existence, and are independently energetic, but Mayavada does not accept this. Instead, the Mayavada theory declares that the individual soul is itself brahma, and only appears to be different from brahma because of the influence of maya. This theory states that the jiva only thinks himself to be an individual entity, and that the moment the influence of maya is removed, he understands that he is brahma. According to this conception, while under the influence of maya, the atomic spiritual spark has no independent identity separate from maya, and therefore the way of liberation for the jiva is nirvana, or merging in brahma. Mayavadis do not accept the separate existence of the pure individual soul. Furthermore, they state that Bhagavan is subordinate to maya, and has to take shelter of maya when He needs to come to this material world. They say, “This is because brahma is impersonal and does not have any form, which means that He has to assume a material (mayika) form in order to manifest Himself in this world. His Isvara aspect has a material body. The avataras accept material bodies and perform wonderful feats in this material world. In the end, They leave Their material body in this world, and return to Their abode.”

Mayavadis show a little kindness towards Bhagavan, for they accept some differences between the jiva and the avataras of Isvara. The distinction they make is that the jiva has to accept a gross body because of his past karma. This karma carries him away, even against his wishes, and he is forced to accept birth, old age and death. The Mayavadis say that Isvara’s body, designation, name and qualities are also material, but that He accepts them of His own accord, and that whenever He desires, He can reject everything and regain His pure spirituality. He is not forced to accept the reactions resulting from the activities that He performs. These are all misconceptions of the Mayavadis.

Vrajanatha: Is this Mayavada philosophy found anywhere in the

Vedas?

Babaji: No! Mayavada cannot be found anywhere in the Vedas. Mayavada is Buddhism, We read in Padma Purana:

mayavadam asac-chastram

pracchannam bauddham ucyate

mayaiva vihitam devi

kalau brahmana-murtina

Uttara-khanda (43.6)

In answer to a question by Umadevi (Parvati), Mahadeva explains “O Devi! Mayavada is an impure sastra. Although actually covered Buddhism, it has gained entry into thereligion of the Aryans, disguised as Vedic conclusions. In Kali-yuga, I shall appear in the guise of a brahmana and preach this Mayavada philosophy.”

Vrajanatha: Prabhu, why did Mahadeva perform such an ugly task, when he is the leader of the devatas and the foremost among Vaisnavas?

Babaji: Sri Mahadeva is Bhagavan’s guna-avatara. The supremely merciful Lord saw the asuras taking to the path of bhakti and worshiping Him to get fruitive results and to fulfill their wicked desires. He then thought, “The asuras are troubling the devotees by polluting the path of devotional service, but the path of bhakti should be freed from this pollution.” Thinking thus, He called for Sivaji and said, “O Sambhu! It is not auspicious for this material world if My pure bhakti is taught amongst those who are in the mode of ignorance and whose character is asurika. You should preach from sastra and spread Mayavada philosophy in such a way that the asuras become enamored and I remain concealed from them. Those whose character is asurika will leave the path of devotional service and take shelter of Mayavada, and this will give My gentle bhaktas the chance to taste pure devotional service unhindered.”

Sri Mahadeva, who is the supreme Vaisnava, was at first somewhat reluctant to accept such an arduous task with which Bhagavan had entrusted him. However, considering this to be His order, he therefore preached the Mayavada philosophy. Where is the fault of Sriman Mahadeva, the supreme guru, in this? The entire universe functions smoothly like a well-oiled machine under the guidance of Bhagavan, who expertly wields in His hand the splendid Sudarsana Cakra for the well-being of all creatures. Only He knows what auspiciousness is hidden in His order, and the duty of the humble servants is simply to obey His order. Knowing this, the pure Vaisnavas never find any fault in Sankaracarya, Siva’sincarnation who preached Mayavada. Listen to the evidence from sastra for this:

tvam aradhya tatha sambho grahisyami varam sada

dvaparadau yuge bhutva kalaya manusadisu

svagamaih kalpitaistvanca janan madvimukhan krru

manca gopaya yena syat srstiresontarontara

Padma Purana, Uttara khanda (42.109-110)

and Narada-pancaratra (4.2.29-30):

Visnu said, “O Sambhu, although I am Bhagavan, still I have worshiped different devatas and devis to bewilder the asuras. In the same way, I shall worship you as well, and receive a benediction. In Kali-yuga you should incarnate amongst human beings through your partial expansion. You should preach from sastras like Agama, and fabricate a philosophy that will distract the general mass of people away from Me, and keep Me covered. In this way, more and more people will be diverted away from Me, and My pastimes will become all the more valuable.”

In Varaha Purana, Bhagavan tells Siva:

esa moham srjamy asu ye janan mohayisyati

tvanca rudra mahasaho mohasastrani karaya

atathyani vitathyani darsayasva mahabhuja

prakasam kuru catmanamprakasanca mam kuru

“I am creating the kind of illusion (moha) that will delude the mass of people. O strong-armed Rudra, you also create such a deluding sastra. O mighty-armed one, present fact as falsehood, and falsehood as fact. Give prominence to your destructive Rudra form and conceal My eternal original form as Bhagavan.”

Vrajanatha: Is there any Vedic evidence against the Mayavada philosophy?

Babaji: All the testimony of the Vedas refutes Mayavada philosophy. The Mayavadis have searched all the Vedas and isolated four sentences in their support. They call these four sentences mahavakya, ‘the illustrious statements.’ These four statements are:

1) sarvam khalv idam brahma, “All the universe is brahma.”

Chandogya Upanisad 3.14.1.

2) prajnanam brahma, “The supreme knowledge is brahma.”

Aitareya Upanisad 1.5.3.

3) tat tvam asi svetaketo, “O Svetaketu, you are that”

Chandogya Upanisad 6.8.7.

4) aham brahmasmi, “I am brahma.”

Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 1.4.10.

The first maha-vakya teaches that the whole universe, consisting of the living beings and non-living matter, is brahma; nothing exists that is not brahma. The identity of that brahma is explained elsewhere:

na tasya karyam karanam ca vidyate

na tat-samas cabhyadhikas ca drsyate

parasya saktir vividhaiva sruyate

svabhaviki jnana-bala-kriya ca

Svetasvatara Upanisad (6.8)

None of the activities of that para-brahma Paramatma is mundane, because none of His senses – such as His hands and legs – is material. Thus through the medium of His transcendental body, He performs His pastimes without any material senses, and He is present everywhere at the same time. Therefore, no one is even equal to Him, what to speak of being greater than Him. The one divine potency of Paramesvara has been described in sruti in many ways, among which the description of His jnana-sakti (knowledge), His bala-sakti (power), and His kriya-sakti (potency for activity) are most important. These are also called citsakti or samvit-sakti; sat-sakti or sandhini-sakti; and anandasakti or hladini-sakti respectively.

Brahma and His sakti are accepted as non-different from each other. In fact, this sakti is said to be an inherent part of brahma, which is manifested in different ways. From one point of view, it may be said that nothing is different from brahma, for the potency and the possessor of potency are non-different. However, when we look at the material world, we can see that in another sense brahma and His sakti are certainly different.

nityo nityanam cetanas cetananam

eko bahunam yo vidadhati kaman

Katha Upanisad (2.13) and

Svetasvatara Upanisad (6.10)

He is the one supreme eternal being among all eternal beings, and the one supreme conscious being among all conscious beings. He alone is fulfilling the desires of everyone.

This statement from the Vedas accepts variegatedness within the eternally existing substance (vastu), brahma. It separates the sakti (potency) from saktiman (the possessor of the potency), and then it considers His jnana (knowledge), bala (power) and kriya (activities).

Now let us consider the second maha-vakya, prajnanam brahma, “The supreme knowledge is brahma“ (Aitareya Upanisad 1.5.3). Here it is said that brahma and consciousness are identical. The word prajnanam, which in this sentence is said to be one with brahma, is also used in Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad (4.4.21), where it is used to mean prema-bhakti:

tam eva dhiro vijnaya prajnamam kurvita brahmanah

When a steady and sober person attains knowledge of

brahma, he worships Him with genuine loving feelings

(jnana-svarupa-prema-bhakti).

The third maha-vakya is tat tvam asi svetaketo, “O Svetaketu, you are that,” (Chandogya Upanisad 6.8.7). This sloka gives instructions on oneness with brahma, which is more elaborately described in Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad (3.8.10) as follows:

yo va etad aksaram gargy aviditvasmal lokat praiti sa krpanah

ya etad aksaram gargi viditvasmal lokat praiti sa brahmanah

O Gargi! Those who leave this material world without understanding the eternal Visnu are krpanah, extremely miserly or degraded, whereas those who leave this material world in knowledge of that Supreme Eternal are actually brahmanas, knowers of brahma.

The words tat tvam asi therefore mean, “He who gains true knowledge eventually attains devotional service to para-brahma, and he is to be known as a brahmana.”

The fourth maha-vakya is aham brahmasmi, “I am brahma” (Brhadaranyaka Upanisad 1.4.10). If the vidya that is established in this vakya does not become bhakti in the end, then it is thoroughly condemned in Sri Isopanisad (9), which says:

andham tamah pravisanti ye ’vidyam upasate

tato bhuya iva te tamo ya u vidyayam ratah

Those who are situated in ignorance enter deep darkness, and those who are in knowledge enter deeper darkness still.

This mantra means that those who embrace ignorance, and do not know the spiritual nature of the soul, enter the darkest regions of ignorance. However, the destination of those who reject ignorance, but who believe that the jiva is brahma, and not a spiritual atom, is far worse.

Baba! The Vedas have no shoreline and are unsurpassed. Their precise meaning can only be understood by studying each and every sloka of the Upanisads separately, and by deriving the meaning from all of them combined. If one singles out a particular sentence, hemay always be diverted by some misinterpretation. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu therefore investigated all the Vedas thoroughly, and then preached that the individual spirit souls and the material world are simultaneously and inconceivably one with Sri Hari and different from Him

Puru_Das · August 27, 2006

Sankaracarya 1<SUP>st</SUP> Canto SB

“. . . The living force is called Brahman, and one of the greatest acaryas (teachers), namely Sripada Sankaracarya, has preached that Brahman is substance whereas the cosmic world is category. The original source of all energies is the living force, and He is logically accepted as the Supreme Person. . .”

SB Introduction

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

"Pranava [om], or the omkara in the Vedas, is the primeval hymn. This transcendental sound is identical with the form of the Lord. All the Vedic hymns are based on this pranava omkara. Tat tvam asi is but a side word in the Vedic literatures, and therefore this word cannot be the primeval hymn of the Vedas. Sripada Sankaracarya has given more stress on the side word tat tvam asi than on the primeval principle omkara."

The Lord thus spoke on the Vedanta-sutra and defied all the propaganda of the Mayavada school. * The Bhattacarya tried to defend himself and his Mayavada school by jugglery of logic and grammar, but the Lord defeated him by His forceful arguments. He affirmed that we are all related with the Personality of Godhead eternally and that devotional service is our eternal function in exchanging the dealings of our relations. The result of such exchanges is to attain prema, or love of Godhead. When love of Godhead is attained, love for all other beings automatically follows because the Lord is the sum total of all living beings.

The Lord said that but for these three items--namely, eternal relation with God, exchange of dealings with Him and the attainment of love for Him--all that is instructed in the Vedas is superfluous and concocted.

The Lord further added that the Mayavada philosophy taught by Sripada Sankaracarya is an imaginary explanation of the Vedas, but it had to be taught by him (Sankaracarya) because he was ordered to teach it by the Personality of Godhead. In the Padma Purana it is stated that the Personality of Godhead ordered His Lordship Siva to deviate the human race from Him (the Personality of Godhead). The Personality of Godhead was to be so covered so that people would be encouraged to generate more and more population. His Lordship Siva said to Devi: "In the Kali-yuga, I shall preach the Mayavada philosophy, which is nothing but clouded Buddhism, in the garb of a brahmana."

“. . .Vedanta-sutra consists of transcendental words or sounds uttered by the transcendental Personality of Godhead. As such, in the Vedanta there cannot be any human deficiencies like mistake, illusion, cheating or inefficiency. The message of the Upanisads is expressed in the Vedanta-sutra, and what is said there directly is certainly glorified. Whatever interpretations have been given by Sankaracarya have no direct bearing on the sutra, and therefore such commentation spoils everything.

"The word Brahman indicates the greatest of all, which is full with transcendental opulences, superior to all. Brahman is ultimately the Personality of Godhead, and He is covered by indirect interpretations and established as impersonal. Everything that is in the spiritual world is full of transcendental bliss, including the form, body, place and paraphernalia of the Lord. All are eternally cognizant and blissful. It is not the fault of the Acarya Sankara that he has so interpreted Vedanta, but if someone accepts it, then certainly he is doomed. Anyone who accepts the transcendental body of the Personality of Godhead as something mundane certainly commits the greatest blasphemy."

The Lord thus spoke to the sannyasi almost in the same way that He spoke to the Bhattacarya of Puri, and by forceful arguments He nullified the Mayavada interpretations of the Vedanta-sutra. All the sannyasis there claimed that the Lord was the personified Vedas and the Personality of Godhead. All the sannyasis were converted to the cult of bhakti, all of them accepted the holy name of the Lord Sri Krsna, and they dined together with the Lord in the midst of them. After this conversion of the sannyasis, the popularity of the Lord increased at Varanasi, and thousands of people assembled to see the Lord in person. The Lord thus established the primary importance of Srimad-Bhagavata-dharma, and He defeated all other systems of spiritual realization. . . .”

SB Introduction

A short sketch of the life and teachings of Lord Caitanya, the Preacher of Srimad-Bhagavatam

“. . . Srimad-Bhagavatam is the one unrivaled commentary on Vedanta-sutra. Sripada Sankaracarya intentionally did not touch it because he knew that the natural commentary would be difficult for him to surpass. He wrote his Sariraka-bhasya, and his so-called followers deprecated the Bhagavatam as some "new" presentation. One should not be misled by such propaganda directed against the Bhagavatam by the Mayavada school. From this introductory sloka, the beginning student should know that Srimad-Bhagavatam is the only transcendental literature meant for those who are paramahamsas and completely freed from the material disease called malice. The Mayavadis are envious of the Personality of Godhead despite Sripada Sankaracarya's admission that Narayana, the Personality of Godhead, is above the material creation. The envious Mayavadi cannot have access to the Bhagavatam, but those who are really anxious to get out of this material existence may take shelter of this Bhagavatam because it is uttered by the liberated Srila Sukadeva Gosvami. It is the transcendental torchlight by which one can see perfectly the transcendental Absolute Truth realized as Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan.

SB 1.2.3 purport

“. . . Technically Lord Buddha's philosophy is called atheistic because there is no acceptance of the Supreme Lord and because that system of philosophy denied the authority of the Vedas. But that is an act of camouflage by the Lord. Lord Buddha is the incarnation of Godhead. As such, he is the original propounder of Vedic knowledge. He therefore cannot reject Vedic philosophy. But he rejected it outwardly because the sura-dvisa, or the demons who are always envious of the devotees of Godhead, try to support cow-killing or animal-killing from the pages of the Vedas, and this is now being done by the modernized sannyasis. Lord Buddha had to reject the authority of the Vedas altogether. This is simply technical, and had it not been so he would not have been so accepted as the incarnation of Godhead. Nor would he have been worshiped in the transcendental songs of the poet Jayadeva, who is a Vaisnava acarya. Lord Buddha preached the preliminary principles of the Vedas in a manner suitable for the time being (and so also did Sankaracarya) to establish the authority of the Vedas. Therefore both Lord Buddha and Acarya Sankara paved the path of theism, and Vaisnava acaryas, specifically Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, led the people on the path towards a realization of going back to Godhead.

SB 1.3.25

“. . . Sripada Sankaracarya, who preached Mayavada philosophy and stressed the impersonal feature of the Absolute, also recommended that one must take shelter at the lotus feet of Lord Sri Krsna, for there is no hope of gain from debating. Indirectly Sripada Sankaracarya admitted that what he had preached in the flowery grammatical interpretations of the Vedanta-sutra cannot help one at the time of death. At the critical hour of death one must recite the name of Govinda. This is the recommendation of all great transcendentalists. Sukadeva Gosvami had long ago stated the same truth, that at the end one must remember Narayana. That is the essence of all spiritual activities. In pursuance of this eternal truth, Srimad-Bhagavatam was heard by Emperor Pariksit, and it was recited by the able Sukadeva Gosvami. And both the speaker and the receiver of the messages of Bhagavatam were duly delivered by the same medium.

SB 1.3.42

Sankaracarya 2nd Canto SB

“. . . Before creation, there was neither Brahma nor Siva, and what to speak of others. Sripada Sankaracarya has definitely accepted this, that Narayana is beyond the material creation and that all others are within the material creation. The whole material creation, therefore, is one with and different from Narayana, simultaneously, and this supports the acintya-bhedabheda-tattva philosophy of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Being an emanation from the glancing potency of Narayana, the whole material creation is nondifferent from Him. But because it is the effect of His external energy (bahiranga maya) and is aloof from the internal potency (atma-maya), the whole material creation is different from Him at the same time.

SB 2.1.39

“. . . . The conclusion is that one must minimize the desires for material enjoyment, and for this one should worship the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is described here as param, or beyond anything material. Sripada Sankaracarya has also stated, narayanah paro 'vyaktat: the Supreme Lord is beyond the material encirclement.

SB2.3.9

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

SB 2.5.21

Foolish interpreters unnecessarily tackle the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam when they have no access to the subject matter. There is no use in nondevotees' meddling with the two topmost Vedic literatures, and therefore Sankaracarya did not touch Srimad-Bhagavatam for commentation. In his commentation on the Bhagavad-gita, Sripada Sankaracarya accepted Lord Krsna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but later on he commented from the impersonalist's view. But, being conscious of his position, he did not comment on the Srimad-Bhagavatam.

SB2.8.27

aham evasam evagre

nanyad yat sad-asat param

pascad aham yad etac ca

yo 'vasisyeta so 'smy aham

"Brahma, it is I, the Personality of Godhead, who was existing before the creation, when there was nothing but Myself. Nor was there the material nature, the cause of this creation. That which you see now is also I, the Personality of Godhead, and after annihilation what remains will also be I, the Personality of Godhead."

from the purport:

“. . . In another feature of this verse, no one can deny the personalities of both the Lord and Brahma. Therefore in the ultimate issue both the predominator and predominated are persons. This conclusion refutes the conclusion of the impersonalist that in the ultimate issue everything is impersonal. This impersonal feature stressed by the less intelligent impersonalist school is refuted by pointing out that the predominator "I" is the Absolute Truth and that He is a person. The predominated "I," Brahma, is also a person, but he is not the Absolute. For realization of one's self in spiritual psychology it may be convenient to assume oneself to be the same principle as the Absolute Truth, but there is always the difference of the predominated and the predominator, as clearly pointed out here in this verse, which is grossly misused by the impersonalists. Brahma is factually seeing face to face his predominator Lord, who exists in His transcendental eternal form, even after the annihilation of the material creation. The form of the Lord, as seen by Brahma, existed before the creation of Brahma, and the material manifestation with all the ingredients and agents of material creation are also energetic expansions of the Lord, and after the exhibition of the Lord's energy comes to a close, what remains is the same Personality of Godhead. Therefore the form of the Lord exists in all circumstances of creation, maintenance and annihilation. The Vedic hymns confirm this fact in the statement vasudevo va idam agra asin na brahma na ca sankara eko narayana asin na brahma nesana, etc. Before the creation there was none except Vasudeva. There was neither Brahma nor Sankara. Only Narayana was there and no one else, neither Brahma nor Isana. Sripada Sankaracarya also confirms in his comments on the Bhagavad-gita that Narayana, or the Personality of Godhead, is transcendental to all creation, but that the whole creation is the product of avyakta. Therefore the difference between the created and the creator is always there, although both the creator and created are of the same quality.. . . In various places in Srimad-Bhagavatam and in other revealed scriptures the existence of the Personality of Godhead is mentioned . “

SB 2.9 .33

Puru_Das · August 27, 2006

The dangerous Mayavada theory set forth by Sankaracarya--that God is impersonal--does not tally with the injunctions of the Vedas. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu therefore described the Mayavadi philosophers as the greatest offenders against the Personality of Godhead. According to the Vedic system, one who does not abide by the orders of the Vedas is called a nastika, or atheist. When Lord Buddha preached his theory of nonviolence, he was obliged to deny the authority of the Vedas, and for this reason he was considered by the followers of the Vedas to be a nastika. But although Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu very clearly enunciated that the followers of Lord Buddha's philosophy are nastikas, or atheists, because of their denial of the authority of the Vedas, He considered the Sankarites, who wanted to establish Vedic authority by trickery and who actually followed the Mayavada philosophy of Buddha's school, to be more dangerous than the Buddhists themselves. The Sankarite philosophers' theory that we have to imagine a shape of God is more dangerous than denial of the existence of God. . . "

SB 4.21.27 Purport

HDGACBSP

Puru_Das · August 27, 2006

In order to obey the Lord Siva came here as Shankara Acharya. But in the long run he could not totally conceal Him from people in his performances. In his birthplace Kerala, the Acharya set up the Deity of Ekal Krishna. He said afterwards, "Bhaja govindam, bhaja govindam, govindam bhaja mura mate (Fools, you go on worshiping Govinda). The followers of Shankara of Kantipuram do not admit it.

There is another example. When Siva was in Kasi, one day Shankara Acharya was passing by the side of the Muni Kanika Ghat. Durga Devi was lying on the way and She had Siva lying on Her lap. Shankara Acharya came there and said, "What are you doing? You are lying with the dead body. Leave the place. How shall I go if you would not do that?" The lady answered, "What is your inference? You said, "Jiva is brahman". "Sarva brahma idam jagat ("this world is full of brahman"). If that is the case how do you see a dead body? How does your inference stand?" Shankara was wondered. He thought, "A lady is telling me this". Uttering the words the lady disappeared with her husband. Siva and Durga appeared for bringing to light the philosophical knowledge. So, Nirvishes theory Advaitavad will not be enforced. There is no irrefutable argument in it. So, Advaitavad is not proved.

from:Sri Guru Tattva

A Lecture by

His Divine GraceSri Srila Bhakti Kumud Santa Maharaja

http://bvml.org/SBKSM/gurutattva.htm

Sign In

Nimbarka - the complete philosophy

Recommended Posts

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post