Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Commentaries (CC)

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta

CC Preface and Introduction

CC Foreword:

While writing, my hands tremble. I cannot remember anything, nor can I see or hear properly. Still I write, and this is a great wonder.” That he completed the greatest literary gem of medieval India under such debilitating conditions is surely one of the wonders of literary history.

As mentioned above, this English translation and commentary is the work of His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda, the world's most distinguished teacher of Indian religious and philosophical thought. Śrīla Prabhupāda's commentary is based upon two Bengali commentaries, one by his guru, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Gosvāmī, the eminent Vedic scholar, teacher, and saint who predicted, "The time will come when the people of the world will learn Bengali to read Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta," and the other by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī’s father, Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura, who pioneered the propagation of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's teachings in the modern era.

CC Foreword:

Śrīla Prabhupada is himself a disciplic descendant of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and is the first scholar to execute systematic English translations of the major works of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's followers. His consummate Bengali and Sanskrit scholarship and intimate familiarity with the precepts of Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya are a fitting combination that eminently qualifies him to present this important classic to the English-speaking world. The ease and clarity with which he expounds upon difficult philosophical concepts enable even a reader totally unfamiliar with the Indian religious tradition to understand and appreciate this profound and monumental work. The entire text, with commentary, presented by the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, represents a contribution of major importance to the intellectual, cultural, and spiritual life of contemporary man.

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 1 Summary:

Any deviation from that line will bewilder the reader's understanding of the mystery of Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, which is a transcendental literature meant for the postgraduate study of one who has realized all the Vedic literatures such as the Upaniṣads and Vedānta-sūtra and their natural commentaries such as Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and the Bhagavad-gītā.

This edition of Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta is presented for the study of sincere scholars who are really seeking the Absolute Truth. It is not the arrogant scholarship of a mental speculator but a sincere effort to serve the order of a superior authority whose service is the life and soul of this humble effort. It does not deviate even slightly from the revealed scriptures, and therefore anyone who follows in the disciplic line will be able to realize the essence of this book simply by the method of aural reception.

CC Adi 2.53, Purport:

Virāṭ (the phenomenal manifestation of the Supreme Whole), hiraṇyagarbha (the numinous soul of everything), and kāraṇa (the cause, or causal nature) are all but designations of the puruṣas, who are responsible for material creation. The transcendental position surpasses these designations and is therefore called the position of the fourth dimension. This is a quotation from Śrīdhara Svāmī’s commentary on the Eleventh Canto, Fifteenth Chapter, verse 16, of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

CC Adi 2.95, Purport:

This quotation comes from Śrīdhara Svāmī’s commentary on the first verse of the Tenth Canto, Chapter One, of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

CC Adi 3.40, Purport:

In this Age of Kali the practical system of religion for everyone is the chanting of the name of Godhead. This was introduced in this age by Lord Caitanya. Bhakti-yoga actually begins with the chanting of the holy name, as confirmed by Madhvācārya in his commentary on the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad. He quotes this verse from the Nārāyaṇa-saṁhitā:

dvāparīyair janair viṣṇuḥ
pañcarātrais tu kevalaiḥ
kalau tu nāma-mātreṇa
pūjyate bhagavān hariḥ

"In the Dvāpara-yuga people should worship Lord Viṣṇu only by the regulative principles of the Nārada-pañcarātra and other such authorized books. In the Age of Kali, however, people should simply chant the holy names of the Supreme Personality of Godhead."

CC Adi 3.49, Purport:

This is a verse from the Mahābhārata (Dāna-dharma, Viṣṇu-sahasra-nāma-stotra). In his commentary on the Viṣṇu-sahasra-nāma, called the Nāmārtha-sudhā, Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, commenting upon this verse, asserts that Lord Caitanya is the Supreme Personality of Godhead according to the evidence of the Upaniṣads. He explains that suvarṇa-varṇaḥ means a golden complexion. He also quotes the Vedic injunction yadā paśyaḥ paśyate rukma-varṇaṁ kartāram īśaṁ puruṣaṁ brahma-yonim (Muṇḍaka Up. 3.1.3). Rukma-varṇaṁ kartāram īśam refers to the Supreme Personality of Godhead as having a complexion the color of molten gold. Puruṣam means the Supreme Lord, and brahma-yonim indicates that He is also the Supreme Brahman. This evidence, too, proves that Lord Caitanya is the Supreme Personality of Godhead Kṛṣṇa. Another meaning of the description of the Lord as having a golden hue is that Lord Caitanya's personality is as fascinating as gold is attractive. Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa has explained that the word varāṅga means "exquisitely beautiful."

CC Adi 3.52, Purport:

This text is from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (11.5.32). Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has explained this verse in his commentary on the Bhāgavatam, known as the Krama-sandarbha, wherein he says that Lord Kṛṣṇa also appears with a golden complexion. That golden Lord Kṛṣṇa is Lord Caitanya, who is worshiped by intelligent men in this age. That is confirmed in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam by Garga Muni, who said that although the child Kṛṣṇa was blackish, He also appears in three other colors—red, white and yellow. He exhibited His white and red complexions in the Satya and Tretā ages respectively. He did not exhibit the remaining color, yellow-gold, until He appeared as Lord Caitanya, who is known as Gaura Hari.

CC Adi 3.81, Purport:

He has composed this text (81), which is, in effect, an explanation of the Bhāgavatam verse, as the second verse of the same work. The verse from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam was enunciated by Karabhājana, one of the nine great sages, and it is elaborately explained by the Sarva-saṁvādinī, Jīva Gosvāmī’s commentary on his own Ṣaṭ-sandarbha.

Antaḥ kṛṣṇa refers to one who is always thinking of Kṛṣṇa. This attitude is a predominant feature of Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī. Even though many devotees always think of Kṛṣṇa, none can surpass the gopīs, among whom Rādhārāṇī is the leader in thinking of Kṛṣṇa. Rādhārāṇī’s Kṛṣṇa consciousness surpasses that of all other devotees. Lord Caitanya accepted the position of Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī to understand Kṛṣṇa; therefore He was always thinking of Kṛṣṇa in the same way as Rādhārāṇī. By thinking of Lord Kṛṣṇa, He always overlapped Kṛṣṇa.

CC Adi 5.22, Purport:

According to Śukadeva Gosvāmī, the above description of the material and spiritual skies is neither imaginary nor utopian. The actual facts are recorded in the Vedic hymns, and Lord Vāsudeva disclosed them to Lord Brahmā when Brahmā satisfied Him. One can achieve the perfection of life only when he has a definite idea of Vaikuṇṭha and the Supreme Godhead. One should always think about and describe the Supreme Personality of Godhead, for this is recommended in both the Bhagavad-gītā and the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, which are two authorized commentaries upon the Vedas. Lord Caitanya has made all these subject matters easier for the fallen people of this age to accept, and Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta has therefore presented them for the easy understanding of all concerned.

CC Adi 5.27-28, Purport:

"Mahā-Lakṣmī, the supreme energy of the Lord, is experienced in different ways. She is divided into material and spiritual potencies, and in both features she acts as the willing energy, creative energy and the internal energy. The willing energy is again divided into three, namely śrī, bhū and nīlā."

Quoting from the revealed scriptures in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā (4.6), Madhvācārya has stated that mother material nature, which is conceived of as the illusory energy, Durgā, has three divisions, namely śrī, bhū and nīlā. She is the illusory energy for those who are weak in spiritual strength because such energies are created energies of Lord Viṣṇu. Although each energy has no direct relationship with the unlimited, they are subordinate to the Lord because the Lord is the master of all energies.

CC Adi 5.40, Purport:

To provide the intrinsic import of such aphorisms, however, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, the leader of the six Gosvāmīs of Vṛndāvana, has properly replied to the impersonalists in his Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta, which is a natural commentary on the aphorisms of the Vedānta-sūtra.

The Padma Purāṇa, as quoted by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī in his Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta, describes that in the spiritual sky there are four directions, corresponding to east, west, north and south, in which Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Aniruddha and Pradyumna are situated. The same forms are also situated in the material sky. The Padma Purāṇa also describes a place in the spiritual sky known as Vedavatī-pura, where Vāsudeva resides. In Viṣṇuloka, which is above Satyaloka, Saṅkarṣaṇa resides. Mahā-saṅkarṣaṇa is another name of Saṅkarṣaṇa. Pradyumna lives in Dvārakā-pura, and Aniruddha lies on the eternal bed of Śeṣa, generally known as ananta-śayyā, on the island called Śvetadvīpa, in the ocean of milk.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

This rascaldom is the profession of the conditioned soul, and it increases his bewilderment. One who cannot understand the distinctions between the spiritual world and the material world has no qualification to examine or know the situation of the transcendental quadruple forms. In his commentary on Vedānta-sūtra 2.2.42–45, His Holiness Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya has made a futile attempt to nullify the existence of these quadruple forms in the spiritual world.

Śaṅkarācārya says (sūtra 42) that devotees think the Supreme Personality of Godhead Vāsudeva, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, to be one, to be free from material qualities and to have a transcendental body full of bliss and eternal existence. He is the ultimate goal of the devotees, who believe that the Supreme Personality of Godhead expands Himself into four other eternal transcendental forms—Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

The living entities are also beyond the limitations of birth and death. This is the version of the Vedas, and it is accepted by those who follow scriptural injunctions and who have actually descended in the disciplic succession.

(2) In answer to Śaṅkarācārya's commentary on Vedānta-sūtra 2.2.43, it must be said that the original Viṣṇu of all the Viṣṇu categories, which are distributed in several ways, is Mūla-saṅkarṣaṇa. Mūla means "the original." Saṅkarṣaṇa is also Viṣṇu, but from Him all other Viṣṇus expand. This is confirmed in the Brahma-saṁhitā (5.46), wherein it is said that just as a flame transferred from another flame acts like the original, so the Viṣṇus who emanate from Mūlasaṅkarṣaṇa are as good as the original Viṣṇu. One should worship that Supreme Personality of Godhead, Govinda, who thus expands Himself.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

(3) In reply to the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya on the forty-fourth aphorism, it may be said that no pure devotees strictly following the principles of the Pañcarātra will ever accept the statement that all the expansions of Viṣṇu are different identities, for this idea is completely false. Even Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya, in his commentary on the forty-second aphorism, has accepted that the Personality of Godhead can automatically expand Himself variously. Therefore his commentary on the forty-second aphorism and his commentary on the forty-fourth aphorism are contradictory. It is a defect of Māyāvāda commentaries that they make one statement in one place and a contradictory statement in another place as a tactic to refute the Bhāgavata school. Thus Māyāvādī commentators do not even follow regulative principles. It should be noted that the Bhāgavata school accepts the quadruple forms of Nārāyaṇa, but that does not mean that it accepts many Gods. Devotees know perfectly well that the Absolute Truth, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is one without a second. They are never pantheists, worshipers of many Gods, for this is against the injunction of the Vedas.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

Therefore, one should not try to compare the expansions of material nature to the catur-vyūha, the quadruple expansions of the Personality of Godhead, but unfortunately the Māyāvādī school unreasonably attempts to do this.

(4) To answer Śaṅkarācārya's commentary on Vedānta-sūtra 2.2.45, the substance of the transcendental qualities and their spiritual nature is described in the Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta (Pūrva 5.208–214) as follows: “Some say that transcendence must be void of all qualities because qualities are manifested only in matter. According to them, all qualities are like temporary, flickering mirages. But this is not acceptable. Since the Supreme Personality of Godhead is absolute, His qualities are nondifferent from Him. His form, name, qualities and everything else pertaining to Him are as spiritual as He is. Every qualitative expansion of the absolute Personality of Godhead is identical with Him.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

In this connection we may recommend references to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Third Canto, Chapter Twenty-six, verses 21, 25, 27 and 28.

Śrīpāda Rāmānujācārya has also refuted the arguments of Śaṅkara in his own commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, which is known as the Śrī-bhāṣya: “Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya has tried to equate the Pañcarātras with the philosophy of the atheist Kapila, and thus he has tried to prove that the Pañcarātras contradict the Vedic injunctions. The Pañcarātras state that the personality of jīva called Saṅkarṣaṇa has emerged from Vāsudeva, the supreme cause of all causes, that Pradyumna, the mind, has come from Saṅkarṣaṇa, and that Aniruddha, the ego, has come from Pradyumna. But one cannot say that the living entity (jīva) takes birth or is created, for such a statement is against the injunction of the Vedas. As stated in the Kaṭha Upaniṣad (2.18), living entities, as individual spiritual souls, can have neither birth nor death.

CC Adi 5.41, Purport:

“Considering all these points, one should understand that Śaṅkarācārya's statement that Saṅkarṣaṇa is born as a jīva is completely against the Vedic statements. His assertions are completely refuted by the above arguments. In this connection the commentary of Śrīdhara Svāmī on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (3.1.34) is very helpful.”

For a detailed refutation of Śaṅkarācārya's arguments attempting to prove Saṅkarṣaṇa an ordinary living being, one may refer to Śrīmat Sudarśanācārya's commentary on the Śrī-bhāṣya, which is known as the Śruta-prakāśikā.

The original quadruple forms—Kṛṣṇa, Baladeva, Pradyumna and Aniruddha—expand into another quadruple, which is present in the Vaikuṇṭha planets of the spiritual sky. Therefore the quadruple forms in the spiritual sky are the second manifestation of the original quadruple in Dvārakā. As explained above, Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha are all changeless, transcendental plenary expansions of the Supreme Lord who have no relation to the material modes.

CC Adi 5.84, Purport:

This is a verse from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.3.1). The commentary of Madhva on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam mentions that the following sixteen spiritual energies are present in the spiritual world: (1) śrī, (2) bhū, (3) līlā, (4) kānti, (5) kīrti, (6) tuṣṭi, (7) gīr, (8) puṣṭi, (9) satyā (10) jñānājñānā, (11) jayā utkarṣiṇī, (12) vimalā, (13) yogamāyā, (14) prahvī, (15) īśānā and (16) anugrahā. In his commentary on the Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta, Śrī Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa has said that the above energies are also known by nine names: (1) vimalā, (2) utkarṣiṇī (3) jñānā, (4) kriyā, (5) yogā, (6) prahvī, (7) satyā, (8) īśānā and (9) anugrahā. In the Bhagavat-sandarbha of Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī (text 103) they are described as śrī, puṣṭi, gīr, kānti, kīrti, tuṣṭi, ilā, jaya; vidyāvidyā, māyā, samvit, sandhinī, hlādinī, bhakti, mūrti, vimalā, yogā, prahvī, īśānā, anugrahā, etc. All these energies act in different spheres of the Lord's supremacy.

CC Adi 5.132, Purport:

In the Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has explained Kṛṣṇa's being both Kṣīrodakaśāyī Viṣṇu and Nārāyaṇa in the spiritual sky and expanding in the quadruple forms known as Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha. He has refuted the idea that Kṛṣṇa is an incarnation of Nārāyaṇa. Some devotees think that Nārāyaṇa is the original Personality of Godhead and that Kṛṣṇa is an incarnation. Even Śaṅkarācārya, in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā, has accepted Nārāyaṇa as the transcendental Personality of Godhead who appeared as Kṛṣṇa, the son of Devakī and Vasudeva. Therefore this matter may be difficult to understand. But the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava-sampradāya, headed by Rūpa Gosvāmī, has established the principle of the Bhagavad-gītā that everything emanates from Kṛṣṇa, who says in the Bhagavad-gītā, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavaḥ: (BG 10.8) "I am the original source of everything." "Everything" includes Nārāyaṇa. Therefore Rūpa Gosvāmī, in his Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta, has established that Kṛṣṇa, not Nārāyaṇa, is the original Personality of Godhead.

CC Adi 5.203, Purport:

Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī Prabhu, the teacher of the science of devotional service, wrote several books, of which the Bṛhad-bhāgavatāmṛta is very famous; anyone who wants to know about the subject matter of devotees, devotional service and Kṛṣṇa must read this book. Sanātana Gosvāmī also wrote a special commentary on the Tenth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam known as the Daśama-ṭippanī, which is so excellent that by reading it one can understand very deeply the pastimes of Kṛṣṇa in His exchanges of loving activities. Another famous book by Sanātana Gosvāmī is the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa, which states the rules and regulations for all divisions of Vaiṣṇavas, namely, Vaiṣṇava householders, Vaiṣṇava brahmacārīs, Vaiṣṇava vānaprasthas and Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs. This book was especially written, however, for Vaiṣṇava householders. Śrīla Raghunātha dāsa Gosvāmī has described Sanātana Gosvāmī in his prayer Vilāpa-kusumāñjali, verse six, where he has expressed his obligation to Sanātana Gosvāmī in the following words:

CC Adi 6.14-15, Purport:

As long as materialistic scientists and philosophers do not come to the right conclusion, certainly they will hover above the material field, bereft of proper understanding of the Absolute Truth.

The great Vaiṣṇava philosopher Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa has very nicely explained the materialistic conclusion in his Govinda-bhāṣya, a commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. He writes as follows:

“The Sāṅkhya philosopher Kapila has connected the different elementary truths according to his own opinion. Material nature, according to him, consists of the equilibrium of the three material qualities—goodness, passion and ignorance. Material nature produces the material energy, known as mahat, and mahat produces the false ego. The ego produces the five objects of sense perception, which produce the ten senses (five for acquiring knowledge and five for working), the mind and the five gross elements.

CC Adi 6.14-15, Purport:

The Sāṅkhya system of philosophy identifies three kinds of procedures—namely, pariṇāmāt (transformation), samanvayāt (adjustment) and śaktitaḥ (performance of energies)—as the causes of the cosmic manifestation.”

Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, in his commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, has tried to nullify this conclusion because he thinks that discrediting these so-called causes of the cosmic manifestation will nullify the entire Sāṅkhya philosophy. Materialistic philosophers accept matter to be the material and efficient cause of creation; for them, matter is the cause of every type of manifestation. Generally they give the example of a waterpot and clay. Clay is the cause of the waterpot, but the clay can be found as both cause and effect. The waterpot is the effect and clay itself is the cause, but clay is visible everywhere. A tree is matter, but a tree produces fruit.

CC Adi 7.5, Purport:

In his Anubhāṣya commentary Śrī Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura describes the Pañca-tattva as follows: The supreme energetic, the Personality of Godhead, manifesting in order to enjoy five kinds of pastimes, appears as the members of the Pañca-tattva. Actually there is no difference between them because they are situated on the absolute platform, but they manifest different spiritual varieties as a challenge to the impersonalists to taste different kinds of spiritual humors (rasas). In the Vedas it is said, parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate: (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport) "The varieties of energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead are differently known." From this statement of the Vedas one can understand that there are eternal varieties of humors, or tastes, in the spiritual world. Śrī Gaurāṅga, Śrī Nityānanda, Śrī Advaita, Śrī Gadādhara and Śrīvāsa Ṭhākura are all on the same platform, but in spiritually distinguishing between them one should understand that Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the form of a devotee, Nityānanda Prabhu appears in the form of a devotee's spiritual master, Advaita Prabhu is the form of a bhakta (devotee) incarnation, Gadādhara Prabhu is the energy of a bhakta, and Śrīvāsa Ṭhākura is a pure devotee. Thus there are spiritual distinctions between them.

CC Adi 7.41, Purport:

Although they are lacking the knowledge of Vedānta presented by the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the transcendental form of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the Māyāvādīs are very proud of their study. Foreseeing the bad effects of their presenting Vedānta philosophy in a perverted way, Śrīla Vyāsadeva compiled Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as a commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is bhāṣyo ’yaṁ brahma-sūtrāṇām; in other words, all the Vedānta philosophy in the aphorisms of the Brahma-sūtra is thoroughly described in the pages of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Thus the factual propounder of Vedānta philosophy is a Kṛṣṇa conscious person who always engages in reading and understanding the Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and teaching the purport of these books to the entire world. The Māyāvādīs are very proud of having monopolized the Vedānta philosophy, but devotees have their own commentaries on Vedānta such as Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and others written by the ācāryas. The commentary of the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas is the Govinda-bhāṣya.

CC Adi 7.42, Purport:

Foolish Māyāvādīs, not knowing that the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is based on a solid philosophy of transcendental science, superficially conclude that those who dance and chant do not have philosophical knowledge. Those who are Kṛṣṇa conscious actually have full knowledge of the essence of Vedānta philosophy, for they study the real commentary on the Vedānta philosophy, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and follow the actual words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead as found in Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. After understanding the Bhāgavata philosophy, or bhāgavata-dharma, they become fully spiritually conscious or Kṛṣṇa conscious, and therefore their chanting and dancing is not material but is on the spiritual platform. Although everyone admires the ecstatic chanting and dancing of the devotees, who are therefore popularly known as "the Hare Kṛṣṇa people," Māyāvādīs cannot appreciate these activities because of their poor fund of knowledge.

CC Adi 7.72, Purport:

This is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (15.15). Vedānta means "the end of knowledge." The ultimate end of knowledge is knowledge of Kṛṣṇa, who is identical with His holy name. Cheap Vaiṣṇavas (sahajiyās) do not care to study the Vedānta philosophy as commented upon by the four ācāryas. In the Gauḍīya-sampradāya there is a Vedānta commentary called the Govinda-bhāṣya, but the sahajiyās consider such commentaries to be untouchable philosophical speculation, and they consider the ācāryas to be mixed devotees. Thus they clear their way to hell.

CC Adi 7.101, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura comments in this connection, "Māyāvādī sannyāsīs accept that the commentary by Śrī Śaṅkarācārya known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya gives the real meaning of the Vedanta-sūtra. In other words, Māyāvādī sannyāsīs accept the meanings expressed in the explanations of the Vedānta-sūtra by Śaṅkarācārya, which are based on monism. Thus they explain the Vedānta-sūtra, the Upaniṣads and all such Vedic literatures in their own impersonal way." The great Māyāvādī sannyāsī Sadānanda Yogīndra has written a book known as Vedānta-sāra, in which he writes, vedānto nāma upaniṣat-pramāṇam. tad-upakārīṇi śārīraka-sūtrādīni ca. According to Sadānanda Yogīndra, the Vedānta-sūtra and Upaniṣads, as presented by Śrī Śaṅkarācārya in his Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary, are the only sources of Vedic evidence. Actually, however, Vedānta refers to the essence of Vedic knowledge, and it is not a fact that there is nothing more than Śaṅkarācārya's Śārīraka-bhāṣya. There are other Vedānta commentaries, written by Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, none of whom follow Śrī Śaṅkarācārya or accept the imaginative commentary of his school.

CC Adi 7.101, Purport:

Their commentaries are based on the philosophy of duality. Monist philosophers like Śaṅkarācārya 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 Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, which are known as śuddhādvaita (purified monism), śuddha-dvaita (purified dualism), viśiṣṭādvaita (specific monism), dvaitādvaita (monism and dualism) and acintya-bhedābheda (inconceivable oneness and difference). Māyāvādīs do not discuss these philosophies, for they are firmly convinced of their own philosophy of kevalādvaita, exclusive monism. Accepting this system of philosophy as the pure understanding of the Vedānta-sūtra, they believe that Kṛṣṇa has a body made of material elements and that the activities of loving service to Kṛṣṇa are sentimentality. They are known as Māyāvādīs because according to their opinion Kṛṣṇa has a body made of māyā and the loving service of the Lord executed by devotees is also māyā. They consider such devotional service to be an aspect of fruitive activities (karma-kāṇḍa). According to their view, bhakti consists of mental speculation or sometimes meditation. This is the difference between the Māyāvādī and Vaiṣṇava philosophies.

CC Adi 7.102, Purport:

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

The Vaiṣṇavas are by far the greatest philosophers in the world, and the greatest among them was Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī Prabhu, whose philosophy was again presented less than four hundred years later by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura Mahārāja. Therefore one must know very well that Vaiṣṇava philosophers are not sentimentalists or cheap devotees like the sahajiyās.

CC Adi 7.106, Purport:

This ultimate goal of life is to go back home, back to Godhead. The words anāvṛttiḥ śabdāt in the Vedānta-sūtra indicate this ultimate goal.

Śrīla Vyāsadeva, a powerful incarnation of Nārāyaṇa, compiled the Vedānta-sūtra, and in order to protect it from unauthorized commentaries, he personally composed Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam on the instruction of his spiritual master, Nārada Muni, as the original commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. Besides Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, there are commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra composed by all the major Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, and in each of them devotional service to the Lord is described very explicitly. Only those who follow Śaṅkara's commentary have described the Vedānta-sūtra in an impersonal way, without reference to viṣṇu-bhakti, or devotional service to the Lord, Viṣṇu.

CC Adi 7.106, Purport:

Generally people very much appreciate this Śārīraka-bhāṣya, or impersonal description of the Vedānta-sūtra, but all commentaries that are devoid of devotional service to Lord Viṣṇu must be considered to differ in purport from the original Vedānta-sūtra. In other words, Lord Caitanya definitely confirmed that the commentaries, or bhāṣyas, written by the Vaiṣṇava ācāryas on the basis of devotional service to Lord Viṣṇu, and not the Śārīraka-bhāṣya of Śaṅkarācārya, give the actual explanation of the Vedānta-sūtra.

CC Adi 7.110, Purport:

That is the difference between direct and indirect explanations of the Vedic literature. Therefore Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, mukhya-vṛttye sei artha parama mahattva: "To teach the Vedic literature according to its direct meaning, without false commentary, is glorious." Unfortunately, Śrī Śaṅkarācārya, by the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, compromised between atheism and theism in order to cheat the atheists and bring them to theism, and to do so he gave up the direct method of Vedic knowledge and tried to present a meaning which is indirect. It is with this purpose that he wrote his Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra.

CC Adi 7.110, Purport:

I meditate upon Him, the transcendent reality, who is the primeval cause of all causes, from whom all manifested universes arise, in whom they dwell and by whom they are destroyed. I meditate upon that eternally effulgent Lord, who is directly and indirectly conscious of all manifestations and yet is fully independent.” (SB 1.1.1) Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the real commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. Unfortunately, if one is attracted to Śrī Śaṅkarācārya's commentary, Śārīraka-bhāṣya, his spiritual life is doomed.

One may argue that since Śaṅkarācārya is an incarnation of Lord Śiva, how is it that he cheated people in this way? The answer is that he did so on the order of his master, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

CC Adi 7.128, Purport:

In this way, the so-called followers of Śaṅkara, the impersonalist Māyāvādīs, are sinking lower and lower. How can these degraded men explain the Vedānta-sūtra, which is the essence of all Vedic literature?

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

CC Adi 7.144, Purport:

Māyāvādī philosophers are jealous of the existence of the Personality of Godhead. Therefore the Vedānta-sūtra is not actually meant for them. They unnecessarily poke their noses into the Vedanta-sūtra, but they have no ability to understand it because, as the author of the Vedānta-sūtra writes in his commentary, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, it is meant for those who are pure in heart (paramo nirmatsarāṇām (SB 1.1.2)). If one is envious of Kṛṣṇa, how can he understand the Vedānta-sūtra or Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam? The Māyāvādīs' primary occupation is to offend the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. For example, although Kṛṣṇa demands our surrender in the Bhagavad-gītā, the greatest scholar and so-called philosopher in modern India has protested that it is "not to Kṛṣṇa" that we have to surrender. Therefore, he is envious. Since Māyāvādīs of all different descriptions are envious of Kṛṣṇa, they have no scope for understanding the meaning of the Vedānta-sūtra.

CC Adi 8.36, Purport:

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the authoritative reference book from which to understand devotional service, but because it is very elaborate, few men can understand its purport. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the original commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, which is called nyāya-prasthāna. It was written to enable one to understand the Absolute Truth through infallible logic and argument, and therefore its natural commentary, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, is extremely elaborate. Professional reciters have created the impression that Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam deals only with Kṛṣṇa's rāsa-līlā, although Kṛṣṇa's rāsa-līlā is described only in chapters 29 through 33 of the Tenth Canto. They have in this way presented Kṛṣṇa to the Western world as a great woman-hunter, and therefore we sometimes have to deal with such misconceptions in preaching. Another difficulty in understanding Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is that the professional reciters have introduced bhāgavata-saptāha, or seven-day readings of the Bhāgavatam.

CC Adi 10.62, Purport:

Caitanya dāsa, the eldest son of Śivānanda Sena, wrote a commentary on Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta that was later translated by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura in his paper Sajjana-toṣaṇī. According to expert opinion, Caitanya dāsa was the author of the book Caitanya-carita (also known as Caitanya-caritāmṛta), which was written in Sanskrit. The author was not Kavi-karṇapūra, as is generally supposed. This is the opinion of Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura. Śrī Rāmadāsa was the second son of Śivānanda Sena. It is stated in the Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā (145) that the two famous parrots named Dakṣa and Vicakṣaṇa in kṛṣṇa-līlā became the elder brothers of Kavi-karṇapūra, namely Caitanya dāsa and Rāmadāsa. Karṇapūra, the third son, who was also known as Paramānanda dāsa or Purī dāsa, was initiated by Śrīnātha Paṇḍita, who was a disciple of Śrī Advaita Prabhu. Karṇapūra wrote many books that are important in Vaiṣṇava literature, such as the Ānanda-vṛndāvana-campū, Alaṅkāra-kaustubha, Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā and the great epic Caitanya-candrodaya-nāṭaka. He was born in the year 1448 Śakābda (A.D. 1526). He continually wrote books for ten years, from 1488 until 1498.

CC Adi 10.84, Purport:

He actually belonged to a respectable brāhmaṇa family, but because he considered his behavior to be abominable, he did not try to place himself among the brāhmaṇas but always remained among people of the lower castes. He wrote the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa and Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī, which is a commentary on the Tenth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. In the year 1476 Śakābda (A.D. 1554) he completed the Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. In the year 1504 Śakābda (A.D. 1582) Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī published an edited version of the Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī named Laghu-toṣaṇī.

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu taught His principles through four chief followers. Among them, Rāmānanda Rāya is exceptional, for through him the Lord taught how a devotee can completely vanquish the power of Cupid. By Cupid's power, as soon as one sees a beautiful woman he is conquered by her beauty.

CC Adi 10.85, Purport:

They are all very much celebrated, and they are listed as follows: (1) Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa, (2) Sūtra-mālikā, (3) Dhātu-saṅgraha, (4) Kṛṣṇārcā-dīpikā, (5) Gopāla-virudāvalī, (6) Rasāmṛta-śeṣa, (7) Śrī Mādhava-mahotsava, (8) Śrī Saṅkalpa-kalpavṛkṣa, (9) Bhāvārtha-sūcaka-campū, (10) Gopāla-tāpanī-ṭīkā, (11) a commentary on the Brahma-saṁhitā, (12) a commentary on the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, (13) a commentary on the Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi, (14) a commentary on the Yogasāra-stava, (15) a commentary on the Gāyatrī-mantra, as described in the Agni Purāṇa, (16) a description of the Lord's lotus feet derived from the Padma Purāṇa, (17) a description of the lotus feet of Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī, (18) Gopāla-campū (in two parts) and (19–25) seven sandarbhas: the Krama-, Tattva-, Bhagavat-, Paramātma-, Kṛṣṇa-, Bhakti- and Prīti-sandarbha. After the disappearance of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī and Sanātana Gosvāmī in Vṛndāvana, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī became the ācārya of all the Vaiṣṇavas in Bengal, Orissa and the rest of the world, and it is he who used to guide them in their devotional service. In Vṛndāvana he established the Rādhā-Dāmodara temple, where, after retirement, we had the opportunity to live from 1962 until 1965, when we decided to come to the United States of America.

CC Adi 10.105, Purport:

Therefore I, a tiny living entity known as jīva, am trying to assort the events of the book chronologically, consulting the direction of great personalities like Madhvācārya, Śrīdhara Svāmī, Rāmānujācārya and other senior Vaiṣṇavas in the disciplic succession.” In the beginning of the Bhagavat-sandarbha there are similar statements by Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī. Śrīla Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī compiled a book called Sat-kriyā-sāra-dīpikā, edited the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa, wrote a foreword to the Ṣaṭ-sandarbha and a commentary on the Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta, and installed the Rādhāramaṇa Deity in Vṛndāvana. In the Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā (184) it is mentioned that his previous name in the pastimes of Lord Kṛṣṇa was Anaṅga-mañjarī. Sometimes he is also said to have been an incarnation of Guṇa-mañjarī. Śrīnivāsa Ācārya and Gopīnātha Pūjārī were two of his disciples.

CC Adi 11.55, Purport:

Śrīla Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura was an incarnation of Vedavyāsa and also a friendly cowherd boy named Kusumāpīḍa in kṛṣṇa-līlā. In other words, the author of Śrī Caitanya-bhāgavata, Śrīla Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura, the son of Śrīvāsa Ṭhākura's niece Nārāyaṇī, was a combined incarnation of Vedavyāsa and the cowherd boy Kusumāpīḍa. There is a descriptive statement by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura in his commentary on Śrī Caitanya-bhāgavata giving the biographical details of the life of Vṛndāvana dāsa Ṭhākura.

CC Adi 12.8, Purport:

Therefore, we do not belong to any faction. But because the two parties, busy dividing the material assets of the Gauḍīya Maṭha institution, stopped the preaching work, we took up the mission of Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura and Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura to preach the cult of Caitanya Mahāprabhu all over the world, under the protection of all the predecessor ācāryas, and we find that our humble attempt has been successful. We followed the principles especially explained by Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā verse beginning vyavasāyātmikā buddhir ekeha kuru-nandana (BG 2.41). According to this instruction of Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura, it is the duty of a disciple to follow strictly the orders of his spiritual master. The secret of success in advancement in spiritual life is the firm faith of the disciple in the orders of his spiritual master. The Vedas confirm this:

CC Adi 12.27, Purport:

Although all the sannyāsīs we have initiated in ISKCON are young, we have awarded them the titles of the renounced order of life, svāmī and gosvāmī, because they have completely dedicated their lives to preach the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura mentions that not only do the householder caste gosvāmīs disrespect the title gosvāmī, but also, following the principles of the smārta Raghunandana, they exhibit great foolishness by burning a straw image of Advaita Ācārya in a śrāddha ceremony, thus acting like Rākṣasas and disrespecting the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa, which is the guide for Vaiṣṇavas. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura says that sometimes these smārta caste gosvāmīs write books on Vaiṣṇava philosophy or commentaries on the original scriptures, but a pure devotee should cautiously avoid reading them.

CC Adi 13.42, Purport:

He passed the last days of his life in Jagannātha Purī. One of his famous books is Gīta-govinda, which is full of transcendental mellow feelings of separation from Kṛṣṇa. The gopīs felt separation from Kṛṣṇa before the rāsa dance, as mentioned in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and the Gīta-govinda expresses such feelings. There are many commentaries on the Gīta-govinda by many Vaiṣṇavas.

Caṇḍīdāsa was born in the village of Nānnura, which is also in the Birbhum district of Bengal. He was born of a brāhmaṇa family, and it is said that he also took birth in the beginning of the fourteenth century, Śakābda Era. It has been suggested that Caṇḍīdāsa and Vidyāpati were great friends because the writings of both express the transcendental feelings of separation profusely. The feelings of ecstasy described by Caṇḍīdāsa and Vidyāpati were actually exhibited by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

CC Adi 15.6, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura says there was a commentary on grammar named Pañjī-ṭīkā that was later explained very lucidly by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

CC Adi 16.11, Translation:

If one becomes a bookworm, reading many books and scriptures and hearing many commentaries and the instructions of many men, this will produce doubt within his heart. One cannot in this way ascertain the real goal of life.

CC Adi 16.25, Purport:

Unfortunately he could not conquer the learned scholars in Navadvīpa, for he was defeated by the boy scholar Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Later he understood that Caitanya Mahāprabhu is none other than the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Thus he surrendered unto Him and later became a pure Vaiṣṇava in the sampradāya of Nimbārka. He wrote Kaustubha-prabhā, a commentary on the Vedānta commentary of the Nimbārka-sampradāya, which is known as the Pārijāta-bhāṣya.

The Bhakti-ratnākara mentions Keśava Kāśmīrī and lists his predecessors in the disciplic succession of the Nimbārka-sampradāya: (1) Śrīnivāsa Ācārya, (2) Viśva Ācārya, (3) Puruṣottama, (4) Vilāsa, (5) Svarūpa, (6) Mādhava, (7) Balabhadra, (8) Padma, (9) Śyāma, (10) Gopāla, (11) Kṛpā, (12) Deva Ācārya, (13) Sundara Bhaṭṭa, (14) Padmanābha, (15) Upendra, (16) Rāmacandra, (17) Vāmana, (18) Kṛṣṇa, (19) Padmākara, (20) Śravaṇa, (21) Bhūri, (22) Mādhava, (23) Śyāma, (24) Gopāla, (25) Balabhadra, (26) Gopīnātha, (27) Keśava, (28) Gokula and (29) Keśava Kāśmīrī. It is stated in the Bhakti-ratnākara that Keśava Kāśmīrī was a favorite devotee of mother Sarasvatī, the goddess of learning.

CC Adi 17.257, Purport:

"A person who directly applies these nine principles (hearing, chanting, remembering, etc.) in the service of the Lord is to be understood as a greatly learned man who has assimilated the Vedic literatures very well, for the goal of studying the Vedic literature is to understand the supremacy of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa." Śrīdhara Svāmī confirms in his commentary that first one must surrender to the spiritual master; then the process of devotional service will develop. It is not a fact that only one who diligently pursues an academic career can become a devotee. Even with no academic career, if one has full faith in the spiritual master and the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he develops in spiritual life and real knowledge of the Vedas. The example of Mahārāja Khaṭvāṅga confirms this. One who surrenders is understood to have learned the subject matter of the Vedas very nicely. One who adopts this Vedic process of surrender learns devotional service and is certainly successful.

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 1.35, Purport:

In the First Wave of the book known as the Bhakti-ratnākara, it is said that Sanātana Gosvāmī understood Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam by thorough study and explained it in his commentary known as Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī. All the knowledge that Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī and Rūpa Gosvāmī directly acquired from Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu was broadcast all over the world by their expert service. Sanātana Gosvāmī gave his Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī commentary to Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī for editing, and Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī edited this under the name of Laghu-toṣaṇī. Whatever he immediately put down in writing was finished in the year 1476 Śaka (A.D. 1554). Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī completed the Laghu-toṣaṇī in the year Śakābda 1504 (A.D. 1582).

CC Madhya 1.35, Purport:

He claims that the smārta-samāja, which is strictly followed by caste brāhmaṇas, has influenced portions that Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī collected from the original Hari-bhakti-vilāsa. It is therefore very difficult to find out Vaiṣṇava directions from the book of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī. It is better to consult the commentary made by Sanātana Gosvāmī himself for the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa under the name of Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā. Some say that the same commentary was compiled by Gopīnātha-pūjā Adhikārī, who was engaged in the service of Śrī Rādhā-ramaṇajī and who happened to be one of the disciples of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī.

Regarding the Bṛhad-bhāgavatāmṛta, there are two parts, both of which deal with the discharge of devotional service. The first part is an analytical study of devotional service, in which there is also a description of different planets, including the earth, the heavenly planets, Brahma-loka and Vaikuṇṭha-loka.

CC Madhya 1.35, Purport:

There are also descriptions of the devotees, including intimate devotees, most intimate devotees and complete devotees. The second part describes the glories of the spiritual world, known as Goloka-māhātmya-nirūpaṇa, as well as the process of renunciation of the material world. It also describes real knowledge, devotional service, the spiritual world, love of Godhead, attainment of life's destination, and the bliss of the world. In this way there are seven chapters in each part, fourteen chapters in all.

The Daśama-ṭippanī is a commentary on the Tenth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Another name for this commentary is Bṛhad-vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī-ṭīkā. In the Bhakti-ratnākara, it is said that the Daśama-ṭippanī was finished in 1476 Śakābda (A.D. 1554).

CC Madhya 1.120, Purport:

In the olden days there were no presses, and all the important scriptures were handwritten and kept in large temples. Caitanya Mahāprabhu found the Brahma-saṁhitā and Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta in handwritten texts, and knowing them to be very authoritative, He took them with Him to present to His devotees. Of course, He obtained the permission of the temple commander. Now both the Brahma-saṁhitā and Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta are available in print with commentaries by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura.

CC Madhya 1.263, Purport:

Vallabha Bhaṭṭa is the head of the Vaiṣṇava sampradāya known as the Vallabhācārya-sampradāya in western India. There is a long story about Vallabha Ācārya narrated in the Caitanya-caritāmṛta, specifically in the Seventh Chapter of the Antya-līlā and the Nineteenth Chapter of the Madhya-līlā. Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu visited the house of Vallabha Ācārya on the other side of Prayāga, in a place known as Āḍāila-grāma. Later, Vallabha Bhaṭṭa saw Caitanya Mahāprabhu at Jagannātha Purī to explain his commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. He was very proud of his writings, but Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu corrected him, telling him that a Vaiṣṇava should be humble and follow in the footsteps of his predecessors. The Lord told him that his pride in being superior to Śrīdhara Svāmī was not at all befitting a Vaiṣṇava.

CC Madhya 2.88, Translation:

In reply to those critics who say that Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta is full of Sanskrit verses, it can be said that Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is also full of Sanskrit verses, as are the commentaries on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Nonetheless, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam can be understood by everyone, as well as by advanced devotees who study the Sanskrit commentaries. Why, then, will people not understand the Caitanya-caritāmṛta? There are only a few Sanskrit verses, and these have been explained in the Bengali vernacular. What is the difficulty in understanding?

CC Madhya 4.62, Purport:

In his commentary on this occasion, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura quotes from the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa. Barley powder, wheat powder, vermilion powder, urad dhal powder and another powder preparation called āvāṭā (made by mixing banana powder and ground rice) are applied to the Deity's body with a brush made from the hair at the end of a cow's tail. This produces a nice finish. The oil smeared over the body of the Deity should be scented. To perform the mahā-snāna, at least two and a half mānas (about twenty-four gallons) of water are needed to pour over the body of the Deity.

CC Madhya 6.120, Purport:

The Vedānta- or Brahma-sūtra, written by Śrīla Vyāsadeva, is a book studied by all advanced spiritual students, especially by the sannyāsīs of all religious communities (sampradāyas). The sannyāsīs must read the Vedānta-sūtra to establish their final conclusions concerning Vedic knowledge. Here, of course, the Vedānta mentioned is the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya. Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya intended to convert Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who was a Vaiṣṇava sannyāsī, into a Māyāvādī sannyāsī. He therefore made this arrangement to instruct Him in the Vedānta-sūtra according to the Śārīraka commentary of Śaṅkarācārya. All the sannyāsīs of the Śaṅkara-sampradāya enjoy seriously studying the Vedānta-sūtra with the Śārīraka-bhāṣya commentary. It is said, vedānta-vākyeṣu sadā ramantaḥ: "One should always enjoy the studies of the Vedānta-sūtra."

CC Madhya 6.127, Purport:

He recited a verse from the Vedic literature to the effect that the order of sannyāsa is prohibited in this Age of Kali. Only those who are very serious and who follow the regulative principles and study Vedic literature should accept sannyāsa. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu approved of a sannyāsī’s reading the Vedānta-sūtra, or Brahma-sūtra, but He did not approve the Śārīraka commentary of Śaṅkarācārya. Indeed, He said elsewhere, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: (CC Madhya 6.169) "If one hears the Śārīraka-bhāṣya of Śaṅkarācārya, he is doomed." Thus a sannyāsī, a transcendentalist, must read the Vedānta-sūtra regularly, but he should not read the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. This is the conclusion of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. The real commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Artho ’yaṁ brahma-sūtrānām: Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the original commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, written by the author himself, Śrīla Vyāsadeva.

CC Madhya 6.132, Purport:

The real purpose of such foolish people is to impose the impersonalist conclusion on all Vedic literature. The Māyāvādī atheists also interpret the Bhagavad-gītā. In every verse of Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā it is clearly stated that Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In every verse Vyāsadeva says, śrī-bhagavān uvāca, "the Supreme Personality of Godhead said," or "the Blessed Lord said." It is clearly stated that the Blessed Lord is the Supreme Person, but Māyāvādī atheists still try to prove that the Absolute Truth is impersonal. In order to present their false, imaginary meanings, they must adopt so much word jugglery and grammatical interpretation that they finally become ludicrous. Therefore Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu remarked that no one should hear the Māyāvādī commentaries or purports to any Vedic literature.

CC Madhya 6.135, Purport:

Works that should be consulted are Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī’s Tattva-sandarbha (10–11), Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa's commentary on that, and the following verses of the Brahma-sūtra: śāstra-yonitvāt (Vs. 1.1.3), tarkāpratiṣṭhānāt (Vs. 2.1.11) and śrutes tu śabda-mūlatvāt (Vs. 2.1.27), as commented upon by Śrī Rāmānujācārya, Śrī Madhvācārya, Śrī Nimbārkācārya and Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa. In his book Sarva-saṁvādinī, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has noted that although there are ten kinds of evidence—direct perception, the Vedic version, historical reference, hypothesis and so on—and although they are all generally accepted as evidence, the person presenting a hypothesis, reading the Vedic version, perceiving or interpreting by his experience is certain to be imperfect in four ways. That is, he is subject to committing mistakes, to becoming illusioned, to cheating and to having imperfect senses. Although the evidence may be correct, the person himself is in danger of being misled due to his material defects.

CC Madhya 6.169, Translation and Purport:

“Śrīla Vyāsadeva presented the Vedānta philosophy for the deliverance of conditioned souls, but if one hears the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, everything is spoiled.

Factually, the devotional service of the Lord is described in the Vedānta-sūtra, but the Māyāvādī philosophers, the Śaṅkarites, prepared a commentary known as Śārīraka-bhāṣya, in which the transcendental form of the Lord is denied. The Māyāvādī philosophers think that the living entity is identical with the Supreme Soul, Brahman. Their commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra are completely opposed to the principle of devotional service. Caitanya Mahāprabhu therefore warns us to avoid these commentaries. If one indulges in hearing the Śaṅkarite Śārīraka-bhāṣya, he will certainly be bereft of all real knowledge.

CC Madhya 6.171, Purport:

According to the commentary of Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, the purpose of the janmādy asya verse in the Vedānta-sūtra is to establish that the cosmic manifestation is the result of the transformation of the potencies of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The Supreme Lord is the master of innumerable eternal energies, which are unlimited. Sometimes these energies are manifested, and sometimes they are not. In any case, all energies are under His control; therefore He is the original energetic, the abode of all energies. A common brain in the conditioned state cannot conceive of how these inconceivable energies abide in the Supreme Personality of Godhead, how He exists in His innumerable forms as the master of both spiritual and material energies, how He is the master of both manifest and potential powers, and how contradictory potencies can abide in Him. As long as the living entity is within this material world, in the condition of illusion, he cannot understand the activities of the inconceivable energies of the Lord. Thus the Lord's energies, though factual, are simply beyond the power of the common brain to understand.

CC Madhya 8.5, Purport:

The goddess of fortune is always embraced by Lord Nṛsiṁhadeva. This is mentioned in the commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam written by the great commentator Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī. The following verse was composed by Śrīdhara Svāmī in his commentary on the Tenth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.87.1):

vāg-īśā yasya vadane lakṣmīr yasya ca vakṣasi
yasyāste hṛdaye samvit taṁ nṛsiṁham ahaṁ bhaje

"Lord Nṛsiṁhadeva is always assisted by Sarasvatī, the goddess of learning, and He is always embracing the goddess of fortune to His chest. The Lord is always complete in knowledge within Himself. Let us offer obeisances unto Nṛsiṁhadeva."

Similarly, in his commentary on the First Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.1.1), Śrīdhara Svāmī describes Lord Nṛsiṁhadeva in this way:

CC Madhya 8.6, Purport:

This verse was composed by Śrīdhara Svāmī in his commentary on the Seventh Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (7.9.1).

CC Madhya 8.66, Purport:

In his Anubhāṣya commentary, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura says that this stage—devotional service mixed with speculative knowledge—is also external and not within the jurisdiction of pure devotional service as practiced in Vaikuṇṭhaloka. As soon as there is some conception of materialistic thought—be it positive or negative—the service is not spiritual. It may be free from material contamination, but because there is mental speculation the devotional service is not pure and freed from the contamination of material life. A living entity who wants to be completely pure must be above this material conception. The negation of material existence does not necessarily mean spiritual existence. After material existence is negated, spiritual existence—namely sac-cid-ānanda—still may not be manifested. Until one comes to the stage of actually understanding one's eternal relationship with the Supreme Lord, he cannot enter into spiritual life. Spiritual life means becoming detached from material life and engaging in the loving service of the Lord.

CC Madhya 9.102, Purport:

"Only unto those great souls who have implicit faith in both the Lord and the spiritual master are all the imports of Vedic knowledge automatically revealed."

All Vedic literatures are to be understood with faith and devotion, not by mundane scholarship. We have therefore presented Bhagavad-gītā As It Is. There are many so-called scholars and philosophers who read the Bhagavad-gītā in a scholarly way. They simply waste their time and mislead those who read their commentaries.

CC Madhya 9.244, Purport:

After accepting sannyāsa, Śaṅkarācārya stayed with his spiritual master for some days. He then took his permission to go to Vārāṇasī, and from there he went to Badarikāśrama, where he stayed until his twelfth year. While there, he wrote a commentary on the Brahma-sūtra, as well as on ten Upaniṣads and the Bhagavad-gītā. He also wrote Sanat-sujātīya and a commentary on the Nṛsiṁha-tāpanī. Among his many disciples, his four chief disciples are Padmapāda, Sureśvara, Hastāmalaka and Troṭaka. After departing from Vārāṇasī, Śaṅkarācārya went to Prayāga, where he met a great learned scholar called Kumārila Bhaṭṭa. Śaṅkarācārya wanted to discuss the authority of the scriptures, but Kumārila Bhaṭṭa, being on his deathbed, sent him to his disciple Maṇḍana, in the city of Māhiṣmatī. It was there that Śaṅkarācārya defeated Maṇḍana Miśra in a discussion of the śāstras. Maṇḍana had a wife named Sarasvatī, or Ubhaya-bhāratī, who served as mediator between Śaṅkarācārya and her husband. It is said that she wanted to discuss erotic principles and amorous love with Śaṅkarācārya, but Śaṅkarācārya had been a brahmacārī since birth and therefore had no experience in amorous love.

CC Madhya 9.245, Purport:

After traveling all over India, he finally discussed scriptures with Vidyāśaṅkara, the exalted leader of Śṛṅgeri-maṭha. Vidyāśaṅkara was actually diminished in the presence of Madhvācārya. Accompanied by Satya Tīrtha, Madhvācārya went to Badarikāśrama. It was there that he met Vyāsadeva and explained his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā before him. Thus he became a great scholar by studying before Vyāsadeva.

By the time he came to the Ānanda-maṭha from Badarikāśrama, Madhvācārya had finished his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā. His companion Satya Tīrtha wrote down the entire commentary. When Madhvācārya returned from Badarikāśrama, he went to Gañjāma, which is on the bank of the river Godāvarī. There he met with two learned scholars named Śobhana Bhaṭṭa and Svāmī Śāstrī. Later these scholars became known in the disciplic succession of Madhvācārya as Padmanābha Tīrtha and Narahari Tīrtha.

CC Madhya 9.245, Purport:

There was a person named Kaḍañjari who was famed for possessing the strength of thirty men. Madhvācārya placed the big toe of his foot upon the ground and asked the man to separate it from the ground, but the great strong man could not do so even after great effort. Śrīla Madhvācārya passed from this material world at the age of eighty while writing a commentary on the Aitareya Upaniṣad. For further information about Madhvācārya, one should read Madhva-vijaya, by Nārāyaṇācārya.

The ācāryas of the Madhva-sampradāya established Uḍupī as the chief center, and the monastery there was known as Uttararāḍhī-maṭha.

CC Madhya 9.305, Purport:

This book was composed by Bilvamaṅgala Ṭhākura in 112 verses. There are two or three other books bearing the same name, and there are also two commentaries on Bilvamaṅgala's book. One commentary was written by Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī and the other by Caitanya dāsa Gosvāmī.

CC Madhya 15.163, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura gives the following commentary on this verse. In the Western countries, Christians believe that Lord Jesus Christ, their spiritual master, appeared in order to eradicate all the sins of his disciples. To this end, Lord Jesus Christ appeared and disappeared. Here, however, we find Śrī Vāsudeva Datta Ṭhākura and Śrīla Haridāsa Ṭhākura to be many millions of times more advanced even when compared with Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ relieved only his followers from all sinful reactions, but Vāsudeva Datta is here prepared to accept the sins of everyone in the universe. So the comparative position of Vāsudeva Datta is millions of times better than that of Lord Jesus Christ. A Vaiṣṇava is so liberal that he is prepared to risk everything to rescue the conditioned souls from material existence. Śrīla Vāsudeva Datta Ṭhākura is universal love itself, for he was willing to sacrifice everything and fully engage in the service of the Supreme Lord.

CC Madhya 16.186, Purport:

This is the proof. Śvādo ’pi sadyaḥ savanāya kalpate. One may be born in a family of dog-eaters, but he can perform sacrifices simply by chanting the mahā-mantra.

Those who find fault in the Western Vaiṣṇavas should consider this statement from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and the commentary on this verse by Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī. In this regard, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī has stated that to become a brāhmaṇa one has to wait for purification and undergo the sacred thread ceremony, but a chanter of the holy name does not have to wait for the sacred thread ceremony. We do not allow devotees to perform sacrifices until they are properly initiated in the sacred thread ceremony. Yet according to this verse, an offenseless chanter of the holy name is already fit to perform a fire ceremony, even though he is not doubly initiated by the sacred thread ceremony. This is the verdict given by Devahūti, the mother of Lord Kapiladeva, when He was instructing her in pure Sāṅkhya philosophy.

CC Madhya 16.207, Purport:

"Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu walked through Rāḍha-deśa and gradually arrived at the Ganges. After bathing in the river, he crossed it and went to Kuliyā. Because He had promised His mother He would return to Navadvīpa, He went to Vārakoṇā-ghāṭa, a village near His house."

In the commentary of Premadāsa it is said:

nadīyāra mājhakhāne, sakala lokete
jāne, "kuliyā-pāhāḍapura" nāme sthāna

"Everyone knows that in the middle of Nadia is a village named Kuliyā-pāhāḍapura."

Śrī Narahari Cakravartī, or Ghanaśyāma dāsa, has written in his Bhakti-ratnākara:

CC Madhya 17.80, Purport:

This is a quotation from the Bhāvārtha-dīpikā commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.1.1).

CC Madhya 17.185, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura gives the following commentary on this passage. A sādhu, or honest man, is called a mahājana or a mahātmā. The mahātmā is described thus by Lord Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad-gītā (9.13):

mahātmānas tu māṁ pārtha daivīṁ prakṛtim āśritāḥ
bhajanty ananya-manaso jñātvā bhūtādim avyayam

"O son of Pṛthā, those who are not deluded, the great souls, are under the protection of the divine nature. They are fully engaged in devotional service because they know Me as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, original and inexhaustible."

CC Madhya 18.47, Purport:

Śrī Vallabha Bhaṭṭa had two sons. The elder, Gopīnātha, was born in 1432 Śakābda Era (A.D. 1510), and the younger, Viṭhṭhaleśvara, was born in 1437 (A.D. 1515) and died in 1507 (A.D. 1585). Viṭhṭhaleśvara had seven sons: Giridhara, Govinda, Bālakṛṣṇa, Gokuleśa, Raghunātha, Yadunātha and Ghanaśyāma. Viṭhṭhaleśvara completed many of his father's unfinished books, including his commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, the Subodhinī commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Vidvan-maṇḍana, Śṛṅgāra-rasa-maṇḍana and Nyāsādeśa-vivaraṇa. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu went to Vṛndāvana before the birth of Viṭhṭhaleśvara. As previously mentioned, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī was very old at the time Gopāla stayed at the house of Viṭhṭhaleśvara.

CC Madhya 18.114, Purport:

This quotation of Viṣṇu Svāmī is cited in Śrīdhara Svāmī’s Bhāvārtha-dīpikā commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.7.6).

CC Madhya 19.17, Purport:

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura gives the following commentary on the words bhāgavata vicāra. As confirmed in the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad (1.1.4–5), there are two kinds of educational systems:

dve vidye veditavya iti, ha sma yad brahma-vido vadanti—parā caivāparā ca. tatrāparā ṛg-vedo yajur-vedaḥ sāma-vedo ‘tharva-vedaḥ śikṣā kalpo vyākaraṇaṁ niruktaṁ chando jyotiṣam iti. atha parā yayā tad akṣaram adhigamyate.

"There are two kinds of educational systems. One deals with transcendental knowledge (parā vidyā) and the other with material knowledge (aparā vidyā). All the Vedas—the Ṛg Veda, Yajur Veda, Sāma Veda and Atharva Veda, along with their corollaries, known as śikṣā, kalpa, vyākaraṇa, nirukta, chanda and jyotiṣa—belong to the inferior system of material knowledge (aparā vidyā). By parā vidyā one can understand the akṣara—Brahman or the Absolute Truth."

CC Madhya 19.61, Purport:

His sect is celebrated as the Vallabhācārya-sampradāya. This sampradāya has had great influence in Vṛndāvana near Gokula and in Bombay. Vallabha Bhaṭṭa wrote many books, including a commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam called Subodhinī-ṭīkā and notes on the Vedānta-sūtra in the form of an Anubhāṣya. He also wrote a combination of sixteen short works called Ṣoḍaśa-grantha. The village where he was staying—Āḍāila-grāma, or Adelī-grāma—was near the confluence of the rivers Ganges and Yamunā, on the other side of the Yamunā from Prayāga, about one mile from the river. A temple of Lord Viṣṇu there still belongs to the Vallabha-sampradāya.

Vallabha Bhaṭṭa was originally from a place in southern India called Trailaṅga. There is a railway station there called Niḍāḍābhalu. Sixteen miles from that station is a village called Kāṅkaḍabāḍa, or Kākuṅrapāḍhu.

CC Madhya 19.61, Purport:

Vallabhācārya had two sons, Gopīnātha and Viṭhṭhaleśvara, and in his old age he accepted the renounced order. In 1452 Śakābda Era (A.D. 1530), he passed away from the material world at Vārāṇasī. His book known as Ṣoḍaśa-grantha and his commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra (Anubhāṣya) and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (Subodhinī) are very famous. He wrote many other books besides.

CC Madhya 19.140, Purport:

This is quoted from the commentary on the portion of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam wherein the Vedas personified offer their obeisances unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Lord Kṛṣṇa confirms this statement in the Bhagavad-gītā (15.7): mamaivāṁśo jīva-loke jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ. "The living entities in this conditioned world are My eternal fragmental parts."

Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa personally identifies Himself with the minute living entities. Lord Kṛṣṇa is the supreme spirit, the Supersoul, and the living entities are His very minute parts and parcels. Of course, we cannot divide the tip of a hair into such fine particles, but spiritually such small particles can exist. Spiritual strength is so powerful that a mere atomic portion of spirit can be the biggest brain in the material world. The same spiritual spark is within an ant and within the body of Brahmā. According to his karma, material activities, the spiritual spark attains a certain type of body. Material activities are carried out in goodness, passion and ignorance or a combination of these.

CC Madhya 20.151, Purport:

This is a quotation from the Bhāvārtha-dīpikā, Śrīdhara Svāmī’s commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.1.1). In the Tenth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam there is a description of the āśraya-tattva, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. There are two tattvas—āśraya-tattva and āśrita-tattva. Āśraya-tattva is the objective, and āśrita-tattva is the subjective. Since the lotus feet of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa are the shelter of all devotees, Śrī Kṛṣṇa is called paraṁ dhāma. In the Bhagavad-gītā (10.12) it is stated, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān. Everything is resting under the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.14.58) it is stated:

CC Madhya 20.359, Purport:

This verse, quoted from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.1.1), links the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam with the Vedānta-sūtra with the words janmādy asya yataḥ. It is stated that the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Vāsudeva, is the Absolute Truth beyond the material creation. This has been accepted by all ācāryas. Even Śaṅkarācārya, the most elevated impersonalist, says in the beginning of his commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā: nārāyaṇaḥ paro ’vyaktāt. When this material creation is not yet manifested from the mahat-tattva, it is called avyakta, and when it is demonstrated from that total energy, it is called vyakta. Nārāyaṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is beyond this vyakta-avyakta, manifested and unmanifested material nature. This is the chief qualification of the Supreme Personality of Godhead when He assumes a particular incarnation. Kṛṣṇa tells Arjuna that although they both took birth many, many times before, Kṛṣṇa remembers everything about His previous appearances but Arjuna does not remember.

CC Madhya 23.117-118, Purport:

Thus Balarāma appeared from the first hair, and Kṛṣṇa appeared from the second hair. It was also foretold that all the asuras, who are enemies of the demigods, would be cut down by Lord Viṣṇu by His white and black plenary expansions and that the Supreme Personality of Godhead would appear and perform wonderful activities. In this connection, one should see the Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta, the chapter called Kṛṣṇāmṛta, verses 156–164. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has refuted this argument about the hair incarnation, and his refutation is supported by Śrī Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa's commentaries. This matter is further discussed in the Kṛṣṇa-sandarbha (29) and in the commentary known as Sarva-saṁvādinī, by Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī.

CC Madhya 24.78, Purport:

This is a quotation from the Bhāvārtha-dīpikā, Śrīdhara Svāmī’s commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

CC Madhya 24.112, Purport:

Highly elevated Māyāvādī sannyāsīs sometimes worship the Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa Deity and discuss the pastimes of the Lord, but their purpose is not elevation to Goloka Vṛndāvana. They want to merge into the Lord's effulgence. This statement is quoted from Śaṅkarācārya's commentary on the Upaniṣad known as Nṛsiṁha-tāpanī.

CC Madhya 24.144, Purport:

This is a quotation from Śaṅkarācārya's commentary on the Nṛsiṁha-tāpanī Upaniṣad.

CC Madhya 24.313, Translation:

"(Lord Śiva said:) "I may know; Śukadeva Gosvāmī, the son of Vyāsadeva, may know; and Vyāsadeva may know or may not know Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. On the whole, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the spotless Purāṇa, can be learned only through devotional service, not by material intelligence, speculative methods or imaginary commentaries.""

CC Madhya 24.313, Purport:

Devotional service includes nine processes, beginning with hearing, chanting and remembering the activities of Lord Viṣṇu. Only one who has taken to devotional service can understand Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, which is the spotless Purāṇa for a transcendentalist (paramahaṁsa). So-called commentaries are useless for this purpose. According to the Vedic injunction, yasya deve parā bhaktir yathā deve tathā gurau (ŚU 6.23). All Vedic literatures maintain that Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam has to be learned from the person bhāgavata, and to understand it one has to engage in pure devotional service. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam cannot be understood by so-called erudite scholars or grammarians. One who has developed pure Kṛṣṇa consciousness and has served the pure devotee, the spiritual master, can understand Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Others cannot.

CC Madhya 24.326, Purport:

The writing of Vaiṣṇava literatures is not a function for ordinary men. Vaiṣṇava literatures are not mental concoctions. They are all authorized literatures meant to guide those who are going to be Vaiṣṇavas. Under these circumstances, an ordinary man cannot give his own opinion. His opinion must always correspond with the conclusion of the Vedas. Unless one is fully qualified in Vaiṣṇava behavior and authorized by superior authority (the Supreme Personality of Godhead), one cannot write Vaiṣṇava literatures or purports and commentaries on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and the Bhagavad-gītā.

CC Madhya 25 Summary:

He asked Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu about devotional service in terms of the Vedānta-sūtra, and the Lord told him about devotional service that is approved by great personalities who know the Vedānta-sūtra. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu then pointed out that Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the proper commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra. He then explained the catuḥ-ślokī (SB 2.9.33/34/35/36) (four ślokas) of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the essence of that great scripture.

From that day on, all the sannyāsīs of Vārāṇasī became devotees of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Before returning to His headquarters at Jagannātha Purī, the Lord advised Sanātana Gosvāmī to go to Vṛndāvana. The Lord then departed for Jagannātha Purī. Kavirāja Gosvāmī then describes something about Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, Sanātana Gosvāmī and Subuddhi Rāya. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu returned to Jagannātha Purī through the great forest of Jhārikhaṇḍa in central India.

CC Madhya 25.91, Purport:

An ordinary living being cannot actually understand the meaning of the Vedānta-sūtra. One can understand the meaning if he hears it from the authority, Vyāsadeva himself. For this purpose, Vyāsadeva gave a commentary on the Brahma-sūtra in the form of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. He had been instructed to do this by his spiritual master, Nārada. Of course, Śaṅkarācārya distorted the meaning of the Brahma-sūtra because he had a motive to serve. He wanted to establish Vedic knowledge in place of the atheistic knowledge spread by Lord Buddha. All these necessities are there according to time and circumstances. Neither Lord Buddha nor Śaṅkarācārya is to be blamed. The time required such an explanation for the understanding of various types of atheists.

CC Madhya 25.97, Translation:

“Śrīla Vyāsadeva considered that whatever he had received from Nārada Muni as an explanation of oṁkāra he would elaborately explain in his book Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as a commentary on the Brahma-sūtra.

CC Madhya 25.143-144, Translation:

“"The meaning of the Vedānta-sūtra is present in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The full purport of the Mahābhārata is also there. The commentary of the Brahma-gāyatrī is also there and fully expanded with all Vedic knowledge. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the supreme Purāṇa, and it was compiled by the Supreme Personality of Godhead in His incarnation as Vyāsadeva. There are twelve cantos, 335 chapters and eighteen thousand verses."

CC Madhya 25.156, Purport:

This is a quotation from Śaṅkarācārya's commentary on the Nṛsiṁha-tāpanī Upaniṣad.

CC Antya-lila

CC Antya 1.132, Purport:

This verse (Vidagdha-mādhava 1.2) also appears in the Ādi-līlā (1.4 and 3.4). In his commentary on the Vidagdha-mādhava, Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura remarks, mahā-prabhoḥ sphūrtiṁ vinā hari-līlā-rasāsvādanānupapatter iti bhāvaḥ: "Without the mercy of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, one cannot describe the pastimes of the Supreme Personality of Godhead." Therefore Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī said, vo yuṣmākaṁ hṛdaya-rūpa-guhāyāṁ śacī-nandano hariḥ pakṣe siṁhaḥ sphuratu: “May Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, who is exactly like a lion that kills all the elephants of desire, be awakened within everyone's heart, for by His merciful blessings one can understand the transcendental pastimes of Kṛṣṇa.”

CC Antya 2 Summary:

Thus he described the glories of Nṛsiṁhānanda and other devotees. A devotee named Bhagavān Ācārya was exceptionally faithful to the lotus feet of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Nevertheless, his brother, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Ācārya, discoursed upon the commentary of impersonalism (Māyāvāda). Śrīla Svarūpa Dāmodara Gosvāmī, the secretary of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, forbid Bhagavān Ācārya to indulge in hearing that commentary. Later, when Junior Haridāsa, following the order of Bhagavān Ācārya, went to collect alms from Mādhavīdevī, he committed an offense by talking intimately with a woman although he was in the renounced order. Because of this, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu rejected Junior Haridāsa, and despite all the requests of the Lord's stalwart devotees, the Lord did not accept him again. One year after this incident, Junior Haridāsa went to the confluence of the Ganges and Yamunā and committed suicide.

CC Antya 2.89, Purport:

During those days and also at the present, Vedānta philosophy is understood through the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, which is known as the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. Thus it appears that Gopāla Bhaṭṭācārya, the younger brother of Bhagavān Ācārya, had studied Vedānta according to the way of the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, which expounds the Māyāvāda philosophy of the impersonalists.

CC Antya 2.93, Translation:

Bhagavān Ācārya requested Svarūpa Dāmodara Gosvāmī to hear from Gopāla the commentary upon Vedānta. Svarūpa Dāmodara, however, somewhat angry because of love, spoke as follows.

CC Antya 2.95, Translation:

“When a Vaiṣṇava listens to the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, the Māyāvāda commentary upon the Vedānta-sūtra, he gives up the Kṛṣṇa conscious attitude that the Lord is the master and the living entity is His servant. Instead, he considers himself the Supreme Lord.

CC Antya 2.95, Purport:

The philosophers known as kevalādvaita-vādīs generally occupy themselves with hearing the Śārīraka-bhāṣya, a commentary by Śaṅkarācārya advocating that one impersonally consider oneself the Supreme Lord. Such Māyāvāda philosophical commentaries upon the Vedānta-sūtra are simply imaginary, but there are other commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra. The commentary by Śrīla Rāmānujācārya, known as Śrī-bhāṣya, establishes the viśiṣṭādvaita-vāda philosophy. Similarly, in the Brahma-sampradāya, Madhvācārya's Pūrṇaprajña-bhāṣya establishes śuddha-dvaita-vāda. In the Kumāra-sampradāya, or Nimbārka-sampradāya, Śrī Nimbārka establishes the philosophy of dvaitādvaita-vāda in the Pārijāta-saurabha-bhāṣya. And in the Viṣṇu-svāmi-sampradāya, or Rudra-sampradāya, which comes from Lord Śiva, Viṣṇu Svāmī has written a commentary called Sarvajña-bhāṣya, which establishes śuddhādvaita-vāda.

CC Antya 2.95, Purport:

A Vaiṣṇava should study the commentaries on the Vedānta-sūtra written by the four sampradāya-ācāryas, namely Śrī Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Viṣṇu Svāmī and Nimbārka, 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 Vedānta philosophy properly must study these commentaries, especially if he is a Vaiṣṇava. These commentaries are always adored by Vaiṣṇavas. The commentary by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī is elaborately given in the Ādi-līlā, Chapter Seven, text 101. The Māyāvāda commentary Śārīraka-bhāṣya is like poison for a Vaiṣṇava. It should not be touched at all. Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura remarks that even a mahā-bhāgavata, or highly elevated devotee who has surrendered himself unto the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, sometimes falls down from pure devotional service if he hears the Māyāvāda philosophy of the Śārīraka-bhāṣya. This commentary should therefore be shunned by all Vaiṣṇavas.

CC Antya 2.96, Translation:

"The Māyāvāda philosophy presents such a jugglery of words that even a highly elevated devotee who has accepted Kṛṣṇa as his life and soul changes his decision when he reads the Māyāvāda commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra."

CC Antya 2.99, Translation:

"The Māyāvādī philosopher tries to establish that the living entity is only imaginary and that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is under the influence of māyā. Hearing this kind of commentary breaks the heart and life of a devotee."

CC Antya 4.220, Translation:

Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī wrote a commentary on the Tenth Canto known as Daśama-ṭippanī, from which we can understand the transcendental pastimes and ecstatic love of Lord Kṛṣṇa.

CC Antya 4.222, Purport:

The Bhakti-ratnākara refers to the following books by Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī: (1) the Bṛhad-bhāgavatāmṛta, (2) the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa and his commentary known as Dig-darśinī, (3) the Līlā-stava and (4) the commentary on the Tenth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam known as Vaiṣṇava-toṣaṇī. Sanātana Gosvāmī compiled many, many books, all with the aim of describing how to serve the principal Deities of Vṛndāvana—Govinda and Madana-gopāla. Later, other Deities were gradually established, and the importance of Vṛndāvana increased.

CC Antya 7.81, Translation:

"I have written some commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam," he said. "Would Your Lordship kindly hear it?"

CC Antya 7.113, Translation:

"In my commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam," he said, “I have refuted the explanations of Śrīdhara Svāmī. I cannot accept his explanations.

CC Antya 7.132, Translation:

“You have dared criticize Śrīdhara Svāmī, and you have begun your own commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, not accepting his authority. That is your false pride.

CC Antya 7.134, Purport:

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam has many ṭīkās, or commentaries, following the paramparā system, but Śrīdhara Svāmī’s is first. The commentaries of all the other ācāryas follow his. The paramparā system does not allow one to deviate from the commentaries of the previous ācāryas. By depending upon the previous ācāryas, one can write beautiful commentaries. However, one cannot defy the previous ācāryas. The false pride that makes one think that he can write better than the previous ācāryas will make one's comments faulty. At the present moment it has become fashionable for everyone to write in his own way, but such writing is never accepted by serious devotees. Because of false pride, every scholar and philosopher wants to exhibit his learning by interpreting the śāstras, especially the Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, in his own way. This system of commenting in one's own way is fully condemned by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Therefore He says, "artha-vyasta" likhana sei. Commentaries written according to one's own philosophical way are never accepted; no one will appreciate such commentaries on the revealed scriptures.

CC Antya 8.26, Purport:

"Even though one is liberated in this life, if one offends the Supreme Personality of Godhead he falls down in the midst of material desires, of which dry speculation about spiritual realization is one."

In his Laghu-toṣaṇī commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.2.32), Jīva Gosvāmī says:

jīvan-muktā api punar bandhanaṁ yānti karmabhiḥ
yady acintya-mahā-śaktau bhagavaty aparādhinaḥ

"Even if one is liberated in this life, he becomes addicted to material desires because of offenses to the Supreme Personality of Godhead."

CC Antya 9.10, Purport:

Vyāsadeva was the son of the great sage Parāśara. Other names for him are Sātyavateya and Kṛṣṇa-dvaipāyana Bādarāyaṇa Muni. As one of the authorities on the Vedas, he divided the original Veda, for convenience, into four divisions—Sāma, Yajur, Ṛg and Atharva. He is the author of eighteen Purāṇas as well as the theosophical thesis Brahma-sūtra and its natural commentary, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. He belongs to the Brahma-sampradāya and is a direct disciple of Nārada Muni.

Śukadeva Gosvāmī is the son of Vyāsadeva. He was a brahmacārī fully conscious of Brahman realization, but later he became a great devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa. He narrated Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam to Mahārāja Parīkṣit.

CC Antya 10.149, Purport:

By the grace of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Caitanya dāsa understood the Lord's mind. Therefore he arranged for food that would counteract the heavy meal the Lord had eaten the previous day.

Later in life, Caitanya dāsa became a very learned Sanskrit scholar and wrote many books. Among these books, his commentary on Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta is very famous. There is another book called Caitanya-caritāmṛta, which is a work of Sanskrit poetry. It is said that this was also composed by him.

Page Title:Commentaries (CC)
Compiler:Visnu Murti, RupaManjari
Created:06 of Nov, 2012
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=113, OB=0, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:113