The doctrine of by-products, pariṇāma-vāda, is asserted from the very beginning of Vedānta-sūtra, but Śaṅkarācārya has superficially tried to hide it and establish the doctrine of transformation, vivarta-vāda. He also has the audacity to say that Vyāsa is mistaken. All Vedic literatures, including the purāṇas, confirm that the Supreme Lord is the center of all spiritual energy and variegatedness. The Māyāvādī philosopher, puffed-up and incompetent, can not understand variegatedness in spiritual energy. He consequently falsely believes that spiritual variegatedness is no different from material variegatedness. Deluded by this false belief, the Māyāvādīs deride the pastimes of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Such foolish persons, unable to understand the spiritual activities of the Supreme Lord, consider Kṛṣṇa to be a product of this material nature. This is the greatest offense any human being can commit. Lord Caitanya therefore establishes that Kṛṣṇa is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1), the form of eternity, knowledge and bliss, and that He is always engaged in His transcendental pastimes in which there is all spiritual variegatedness.
The student of Prakāśānanda summarized the explanations of Lord Caitanya and concluded: "We have practically given up the path of spiritual realization. We simply engage in nonsensical talk. Māyāvādī philosophers who are serious about attaining benediction should engage in the devotional service of Kṛṣṇa, but instead they take pleasure in useless argument only. We hereby admit that the explanation of Śaṅkarācārya hides the actual import of Vedic literature. Only the explanation given by Caitanya is acceptable. All other interpretations are useless."
After thus explaining his position, the chief student of Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī began to chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. When Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī saw this, he also admitted the fault of Śaṅkarācārya and said, "Because Śaṅkarācārya wanted to establish the doctrine of monism, he had no alternative but to interpret the Vedānta-sūtra in a different way. Once one accepts the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the doctrine of monism cannot be established. Therefore by mundane scholarship Śaṅkarācārya has tried to obscure the actual meaning of the Vedānta-sūtra. Not only has Śaṅkarācārya done this, but all authors who attempt to give their own views of necessity misinterpret Vedānta-sūtra."
Thus Lord Caitanya gave the direct meaning of Vedānta-sūtra. No Vedic scripture should be used for indirect speculation. In addition to Śaṅkarācārya, other materialistic philosophers like Kapila, Gautama, Aṣṭāvakra and Patañjali have put forward philosophical speculation in various ways. Indeed, the philosopher Jaimini and his followers, who are all more or less logicians, have abandoned the real meaning of the Vedas (devotional service) and have tried to establish the Absolute Truth as subject to the material world. It is their opinion that if there is a God, He will be pleased with man and give man all desired results if man simply performs his material activities nicely. Similarly, the atheist Kapila tried to establish that there is no God who created the material world. Kapila has even tried to establish that a combination of material elements caused creation. Similarly, Gautama and Kaṇāda have given stress to this theory that the creation resulted from a fortunate combination of material elements, and they have tried to establish that atomic energy is the origin of creation. Similarly, impersonalists and monists like Aṣṭāvakra have tried to establish the impersonal effulgence (brahmajyoti) as the Supreme. And Patañjali, one of the greatest authorities on the yoga system, has tried to conceive an imaginary form of the Supreme Lord.