Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Mayavadi philosophers (Lectures, SB)

Expressions researched:
"Mayavada philosopher" |"Mayavada philosophers" |"Mayavadi philosopher" |"Mayavadi philosophers" |"Mayavadi sannyasi philosophers" |"Mayavadis and other atheistic philosophers" |"Mayavadis sannyasis and philosophers" |"Philosophers like the Saranatha Mayavadis" |"philosopher, Mayavadi" |"philosophers (Mayavadis" |"philosophers of the Mayavada school" |"philosophers, even they are Mayavadis" |"philosophers, like the Mayavadis" |"philosophers, they are called Mayavadi" |"philosophers. The Mayavadis"

Notes from the compiler: use VedaBase query: "mayavad* philosopher*"@5

Lectures

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that the Purāṇas are not Veda. That is not the fact.
Lecture on SB 1.1.5-6 -- London, August 23, 1971:

Because Vedic language is so difficult... It is sometimes very difficult to understand. So Purāṇa, another meaning of Purāṇa means supplement. So they are explanation of the Vedic knowledge in a supplementary way by taking references from the history, from the life of great saints and sages. So they are addition, addendum. Go on. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that the Purāṇas are not Veda. That is not the fact. Here in the Bhāgavata says the Purāṇa is part of the Vedas. As Upaniṣad is part of Vedas... It is written in simplified language so that those who are less educated, less having brain substance...

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think the Absolute Truth is impersonal.
Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Delhi, November 11, 1973:

He has got His form. God has got His form. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think the Absolute Truth is impersonal. Śūnyavādi. No. Absolute cannot be zero or impersonal because controller, controller must have brain. Without brain, how he can control? And as soon as you have got brain, you have got other limbs of the body to carry out the order of the brain. So as soon as you have got senses, as soon as you have got sense organs, as soon as you have got brain, as soon as you have got activities, you are a person. This is the conclusion of the śāstra. Therefore the absolute controller cannot be impersonal.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they take advantage of this word, and they say that "Kṛṣṇa or anyone," I mean to say, "incarnation of God, that is created." That means they understand that as so many material things are created...
Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- Montreal, August 3, 1968:

Now, this sṛjāmi, this word, is used in Sanskrit: "something manufactured." Something manufactured. Just like I make this spectacle case. Or you make. This is called sṛjāmi. But actually we understand like that, but here sṛjāmi, this word, as explained by Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, a learned scholar who said that sṛjāmi means prakaṭāmi(?), "I appear." Now, if you say this word means manufactured... The Māyāvādī philosophers, they take advantage of this word, and they say that "Kṛṣṇa or anyone," I mean to say, "incarnation of God, that is created." That means they understand that as so many material things are created... Anything which we find here in this room, that is created. This dictaphone, this microphone or anything, that is created. But here, if you say this word in that sense, that "Kṛṣṇa is created. Anything created, that is material. Therefore Kṛṣṇa is also material," then you will be in misunderstanding.

The Māyāvāda philosophers, the impersonalists, they think mokṣa means to merge into the effulgence of Kṛṣṇa, brahmajyoti. That is also accepted, merging. But that kind of mokṣa is not accepted by the Vaiṣṇava.
Lecture on SB 1.2.6 -- London, August 27, 1971:

The Māyāvāda philosophers, the impersonalists, they think mokṣa means to merge into the effulgence of Kṛṣṇa, brahmajyoti. That is also accepted, merging. But that kind of mokṣa is not accepted by the Vaiṣṇava, because to merge into the effulgence of the Supreme Personality of Godhead may be liberation from this material world, but that does not mean that is actual liberation. Just like if you, from darkness of night, if you come to the sunlight, it is light of course, but sunshine or sunlight, if you go up with your airplane, "Now I shall live in the sunshine or sunlight and travel for millions of years...," you cannot travel millions of years. One day or three days or four days, then you come back again to this... If you can approach the sun planet, then there is stay. Otherwise you have to come back. Similarly, those who are taking shelter of the effulgence, which is the bodily rays of Kṛṣṇa, they will have to come back.

The purpose of studying Veda means to understand Kṛṣṇa. And vedānta-vit. Because people are very much proud, especially Māyāvādī philosophers, they're very much proud of becoming vedāntī. So the Vaiṣṇava philosophers...
Lecture on SB 1.2.10 -- Bombay, December 28, 1972:

Therefore Bhāgavata says, Sūta Goswami says, that this life, human life, or the purpose of the Vedic civilization, they are not meant for kāmasya nendriya-prītir (SB 1.2.10). Kāma, that should be utilized for better purpose, not for sense gratification. The real business is jīvasya tattva-jijñāsā. Life should be engaged simply for tattva-jijñāsā, to understand the Absolute Truth. The whole Vedic literature, Vedic knowledge is meant for understanding the Absolute Truth. Kṛṣṇa says, vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyam (BG 15.15). The purpose of studying Veda means to understand Kṛṣṇa. And vedānta-vit. Because people are very much proud, especially Māyāvādī philosophers, they're very much proud of becoming vedāntī. So the Vaiṣṇava philosophers... (aside:) Stop that. ...Everyone is vedāntī. Śrī Rāmānujācārya, he is also vedāntī. Madhvācārya, he is also vedāntī. Nimbārka, he is also vedāntī. Without understanding Vedānta, where is the question of spiritual advancement? So Vedānta does not mean it is the monopoly of a certain class of philosopher. No. Actually Vedānta, this vedānta-bhāṣya understanding of Vedānta, it is Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Bhāṣya brahma-sutrani. And this bhāṣya, this commentary, is given by the author Himself.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, "If everything is Kṛṣṇa, so whatever I worship, I am worshiping Kṛṣṇa." No. That is wrong.
Lecture on SB 1.2.17 -- Los Angeles, August 20, 1972:

So Kṛṣṇa is very selfish. He says... Here it is said: sva-kathāḥ kṛṣṇaḥ. Anyone who is engaged in hearing Kṛṣṇa's kathā. Kathā means words, messages. So, in the Bhagavad-gītā also, Kṛṣṇa says, mām ekam: "Only unto Me." Ekam. This is required. Although everything is Kṛṣṇa, but according to the pantheist theory we cannot worship everything. Everything is Kṛṣṇa, that's a fact, but that does not mean we have to worship everything; we have to worship Kṛṣṇa. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, "If everything is Kṛṣṇa, so whatever I worship, I am worshiping Kṛṣṇa." No. That is wrong.

That activity is different from material activity. Janma karma me divyam (BG 4.9). Therefore it is called divyam. They are not ordinary activities. They are all transcendental, spiritual activities. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand.
Lecture on SB 1.2.18 -- Calcutta, September 26, 1974:

Bhagavad-gītā, you hear. It's so many activities of Kṛṣṇa. So we have to hear about these. And unless there are activities, what you will hear? Simply "Brahman, Brahman, Brahman... nirākāra." How long you will hear? And how long you will enjoy? That is... There is no enjoyment. Therefore they, these Brahmavādīs, these Nirākāravādī, although by austerities and penances they may rise up to the Brahman effulgence, still, they will fall down. Because we are living entities, we want varieties of enjoyment. We are not satisfied in void, in zero. That is not possible. Therefore śṛṇvatāṁ sva-kathāḥ kṛṣṇaḥ (SB 1.2.17). One has to hear about Kṛṣṇa, varieties of activities. Varieties of activities. Not nirākāra, without any activities. No. That activity is different from material activity. Janma karma me divyam (BG 4.9). Therefore it is called divyam. They are not ordinary activities. They are all transcendental, spiritual activities. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand.

Now the original person is Kṛṣṇa. Now, to maintain this creation, He expands Himself into three: hari, viriñci, hara. Hari means Viṣṇu, viriñci means Brahmā, and hara means Lord Śiva. Hari-viriñci-hareti saṁjñāḥ. But, just like the Māyāvādī philosopher says that "Then, if Kṛṣṇa has become Hari, Viriñci and Hara, three, so I can worship anyone." No. That is hinted here: śreyāṁsi tatra khalu sattva-tanor nṛṇāṁ syuḥ.
Lecture on SB 1.2.23 -- Los Angeles, August 26, 1972:

Now the original person is Kṛṣṇa. Now, to maintain this creation, He expands Himself into three: hari, viriñci, hara. Hari means Viṣṇu, viriñci means Brahmā, and hara means Lord Śiva. Hari-viriñci-hareti saṁjñāḥ. But, just like the Māyāvādī philosopher says that "Then, if Kṛṣṇa has become Hari, Viriñci and Hara, three, so I can worship anyone." No. That is hinted here: śreyāṁsi tatra khalu sattva-tanor nṛṇāṁ syuḥ. But if you want your ultimate goal, then you take shelter of Viṣṇu—sattva-tanoḥ—not Śiva, not Brahmā. Here, clearly says. If you want... Because your conditioned life is due to your disobedience to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So unless you surrender unto Him, you again become obedient, there is no question of your goodness or your good or fortune. That is not possible. That is explained here. Śreyāṁsi, if you want... Śreyāṁsi means if you want really ultimate benefit of your life, then sattva-tanoḥ. Sattva-tanoḥ means Viṣṇu. You have to take shelter of the form of the Lord who is representing sattva-guṇa, goodness. Not the rajo-guṇa not the tamo-guṇa.

So who will know Vedānta better than Kṛṣṇa? The so-called Vedantists, they are very much proud of their knowledge of Vedānta, but the, the real compiler of the Vedānta philosophy is Vyāsadeva. He's incarnation of Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, vedānta-kṛd vedānta-vit. He is the compiler of the Vedānta-sūtra and He knows what is Vedānta-sūtra, not the so-called Māyāvādī philosophers.
Lecture on SB 1.2.25 -- Vrndavana, November 5, 1972:

So ultimate Absolute Truth is Kṛṣṇa. That is the verdict of all Vedic literature, Vedānta, and Kṛṣṇa says that vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ (BG 15.15). Anyone who has not understood Kṛṣṇa, he has not studied the Vedic literature very perfectly. Vedānta-vid vedānta-kṛd ca aham. Kṛṣṇa says He's the compiler of Vedānta. So who will know Vedānta better than Kṛṣṇa? The so-called Vedantists, they are very much proud of their knowledge of Vedānta, but the, the real compiler of the Vedānta philosophy is Vyāsadeva. He's incarnation of Kṛṣṇa. Therefore Kṛṣṇa says, vedānta-kṛd vedānta-vit. He is the compiler of the Vedānta-sūtra and He knows what is Vedānta-sūtra, not the so-called Māyāvādī philosophers.

So Nārāyaṇa, or Kṛṣṇa, is not one of the products of this material creation; therefore it is to be understood that Kṛṣṇa's body is not material. But the Māyāvādī philosophers, they think like that, that Kṛṣṇa is God, but He has accepted a material body.
Lecture on SB 1.2.30 -- Vrndavana, November 9, 1972:

Therefore Kṛṣṇa, or God, is not one of these created, material created things. That is admitted even by the staunchest impersonalist, Śaṅkarācārya: nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ avyaktāt. Vyakta avyakta, this mahat-tattva, from which this material cosmic manifestation is there, but nārāyaṇa-para, Nārāyaṇa is above. That means above this creation. Nārāyaṇa, or Kṛṣṇa, is not one of the product of this creation. Just like our existence: we are one of the products of this creation. So Nārāyaṇa, or Kṛṣṇa, is not one of the products of this material creation; therefore it is to be understood that Kṛṣṇa's body is not material. But the Māyāvādī philosophers, they think like that, that Kṛṣṇa is God, but He has accepted a material body. This is Māyāvādī philosophy. But how Kṛṣṇa can accept a material body, because He existed before the material creation? Another consideration is that even if He accepts a material body, that is not material for Him. That is also spiritual. It appears to us as material, but that is spiritual. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). He has got multi-energies, and because He is spirit, complete spirit, therefore His energies are also spiritual. Sakti-śaktimator abhedaḥ. There cannot be any distinction between the powerful and the power.

The Māyāvādī philosophers who think that Kṛṣṇa has accepted a material body, they are described as mūḍhas. They have no sufficient knowledge. Paraṁ bhāvam ajānantaḥ.
Lecture on SB 1.2.30 -- Vrndavana, November 9, 1972:

In the Bhagavad-gītā there is another instance. When Arjuna asked Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa said, imaṁ vivasvate yogaṁ proktavān aham avyayam (BG 4.1). Kṛṣṇa said that, "First of all, I narrated this yoga system of Bhagavad-gītā to the sun-god." So, in order to clear this matter, Arjuna inquired from Him: "My dear Kṛṣṇa, we are born very recently. How is that You narrated this yoga system to the sun-god?" Arjuna, of course, knew everything, but in order to clear our doubts, he raised this question. And Kṛṣṇa answered that "You were also present at that time, but you have forgotten. I have not forgotten." So this is another proof that Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa's body does not change. Kṛṣṇa, when He comes, when He appears, He comes in His original spiritual body. Therefore Kṛṣṇa has warned that avajānanti māṁ mūḍhāḥ (BG 9.11). The Māyāvādī philosophers who think that Kṛṣṇa has accepted a material body, they are described as mūḍhas. They have no sufficient knowledge. Paraṁ bhāvam ajānantaḥ. They do not know what is the power behind Kṛṣṇa. So Kṛṣṇa creates. Before creation, aham ādir hi devānām (Bg 10.2). In the Bhagavad-gītā it is said, devānām. First of all, Brahmā was created. Then other great sages were created.

Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they mistake that the soul and the Supersoul, there is no such difference: only the soul is the Supersoul, or the Supersoul is the soul; ātmā, Paramātmā, they are both one. But not they are not both one.
Lecture on SB 1.2.31 -- Vrndavana, November 10, 1972:

Tayā vilasiteṣu guṇeṣu guṇavān iva. Now, the living entity wanted to enjoy this material world. We get different types of bodies on account of our desire to have such body. We want to enjoy the material, the matter, in a certain way, and Kṛṣṇa gives us the opportunity to enjoy as we liked Prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni guṇaiḥ karmāṇi sarvaśaḥ (BG 3.27). Everything is under control of Kṛṣṇa. Although the body's obtained by material arrangement, still, behind the matter, there is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is... As the living entity enters this material world, Kṛṣṇa is also there along with him. Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they mistake that the soul and the Supersoul, there is no such difference: only the soul is the Supersoul, or the Supersoul is the soul; ātmā, Paramātmā, they are both one. But not they are not both one. They are two. That is stated in the Upaniṣads, that they are sitting in one tree like two birds, friendly birds. One is enjoying the fruit of the tree; other is only witnessing. So the witnessing bird is Paramātmā, and the fruit-eating bird is ātmā. These are the Vedic statements.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand the spiritual varieties. As soon as they think of varieties they think of material things.
Lecture on SB 1.5.2 -- Los Angeles, January 10, 1968:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand the spiritual varieties. As soon as they think of varieties they think of material things. But actually, that is not. There is variety in the spiritual... Unless there is variety... Because Vedānta-sūtra says, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Unless there are varieties, how in the shadow the varieties are there? Just like in a cinematographic picture, unless in the original photograph or the subject matter from which photograph is taken, unless there were varieties, how the picture can be variety? So in the material world the varieties are reflection of the spiritual world. Here is also father, but this is imitation father. But there is also father, but that is not father, that is real father. It is imitation father. A friend is imitation friend. Real friend is Kṛṣṇa. Real father is Kṛṣṇa. Here husband, imitation husband. Real husband is Kṛṣṇa. Master, imitation master. Real master is Kṛṣṇa. So in this way, if we establish our relationship with Kṛṣṇa as..., either as husband or lover or master or friend or son or father, it is perfect. It is perfect. We have to go to that stage.

So many so-called Vedānta philosophers. The Māyāvādīs, they are called Vedantists. The Ramakrishna Mission here, they are also preaching Vedānta philosophy. They are called... Vedānta Church there is in Los Angeles. And in New York there is a Vedānta... What is that?
Lecture on SB 1.5.11 -- New Vrindaban, June 10, 1969:

Now you try to understand how Nārada Muni is chastising his disciple like Vyāsadeva, that "You have created some literature which will be enjoyed by the crow class men." You see. Just see. He compiled Vedānta-sūtra. Still, Nārada Muni chastised him that "Your composition will be liked by the crow class men, not the swan class men." You see. Yes. Actually, you will find... So many so-called Vedānta philosophers. The Māyāvādīs, they are called Vedantists. The Ramakrishna Mission here, they are also preaching Vedānta philosophy. They are called... Vedānta Church there is in Los Angeles. And in New York there is a Vedānta... What is that?

The Māyāvāda philosopher says that God has become man, being, I mean to say, complicated in māyā, being illusioned. But God is acyuta. God never falls down.
Lecture on SB 1.5.12-13 -- New Vrindaban, June 11, 1969:

Then he says, naiṣkarmyam apy acyuta-bhāva-varjitam. Acyuta. Acyuta means Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa's name is Acyuta. You'll find in the Bhagavad-gītā. Arjuna says to Kṛṣṇa, senayor ubhayor madhye rathaṁ sthāpaya me acyuta (BG 1.21). He's addressing Kṛṣṇa as Acyuta. Acyuta means "not," and cyuta means "falldown." So God never falls down. Therefore God's name is Acyuta. The Māyāvāda philosopher says that God has become man, being, I mean to say, complicated in māyā, being illusioned. But God is acyuta. God never falls down. Then what is the meaning of this acyuta? If God falls down, becomes under the clutches of māyā, then māyā is greater than God. Then how God is great? That is the fallacy of their argument. They say that "I am God, but now I am under the clutches of māyā. As soon as māyā will be cleared, then I am again God." But they cannot answer the question that "Why? You are God. Why you are under the clutches of māyā? How you fall down?" That answer, there is none.

We must have engagement. But if the same child was not engaged in this way, he would be naughty. He would be doing something mischief, this way and that way. We must have engagement. Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not understand it.
Lecture on SB 1.5.13 -- New Vrindaban, June 16, 1969:

Just like this child. He wants some activities. He's fortunate by the association. He is engaged with Jagannātha, with Hare Kṛṣṇa, with Kṛṣṇa's picture, with Prabhupāda's picture. He's engaged. And chanting in his way, Hare Kṛṣṇa. We must have engagement. But if the same child was not engaged in this way, he would be naughty. He would be doing something mischief, this way and that way. We must have engagement. Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not understand it. They want to make stop. Of course, that stop, for the time being, may be. Just like if this child is very naughty, I can stop him: "Don't do this. Sit down here, silent." But how long he'll sit silently? He wants some engagement. Similarly, this meditation process is like that. They... In order to stop him for doing some nonsense activities, better let him sit down, like this. But how long he'll sit down like this? As soon as he is free from that so-called meditation, he will immediately engage himself in all nonsense activities.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that when Kṛṣṇa comes, He reduces His energy; therefore He also becomes covered by māyā.
Lecture on SB 1.7.6 -- Geneva, May 31, 1974:

Within the sun globe, within the orbit of the sun, any amount of... Because the sun globe is so big and the orbit is so big that the whole universal darkness you bring there, there will be no darkness. Just imagine. It is not imagine; it is fact. The universal darkness, all the darkness of the universe, you bring before the sun, it will not effect. It cannot effect. Because the sun is full light. It is not that imitation light. Here we have got this imitation light. The big amount of cloud is there. Immediately it will be dark. But sunlight is full light. Similarly, Kṛṣṇa is pūrṇa-puruṣam. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that when Kṛṣṇa comes, He reduces His energy; therefore He also becomes covered by māyā. This is called Māyāvāda. Māyāvāda means the māyā has covered everything; so māyā has covered Kṛṣṇa also. This is Māyāvāda philosophy. "Because māyā has covered me, you and everyone, therefore māyā has covered Kṛṣṇa. Unless Kṛṣṇa or the Absolute Truth, Brahman, becomes covered by māyā, he cannot take a form."

But that is not the fact. Kṛṣṇa said, sambhavāmy ātma-māyayā: (BG 4.6) "I am not external energy. I come in My own energy." And the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not understand. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhāḥ. Therefore they have been described as mūḍhāḥ, asses, fools, rascals.
Lecture on SB 1.7.6 -- Geneva, May 31, 1974:

But that is not the fact. Kṛṣṇa said, sambhavāmy ātma-māyayā: (BG 4.6) "I am not external energy. I come in My own energy." And the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not understand. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhāḥ. Therefore they have been described as mūḍhāḥ, asses, fools, rascals. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam: (BG 9.11) "Because I have come here in the form of a human being, they take it for acceptance that 'Kṛṣṇa is another human being.' " But that is not fact. Here, if one sees Kṛṣṇa through bhakti-yoga as Vyāsadeva saw, bhakti-yogena manasi... (SB 1.7.4). Mind must be saturated with bhakti-yoga.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they foolishly say that when God becomes entangled by māyā, He becomes a living entity-jīva-bhūta. Jīva means when He forgets that He is God, then he becomes a jīva, living entity. This is Māyāvādī philosophy.
Lecture on SB 1.7.16 -- Vrndavana, September 14, 1976:

So "Arjuna, who is guided by the infallible Lord as friend and driver." Kṛṣṇa's name is Acyuta. Cyuta means fallen, and acyuta means never fallen. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they foolishly say that when God becomes entangled by māyā, He becomes a living entity-jīva-bhūta. Jīva means when He forgets that He is God, then he becomes a jīva, living entity. This is Māyāvādī philosophy. But how God can degrade to become a man or an animal? He is Acyuta; He never falls. Otherwise how He is God? If God also falls... Just like we fall down... Aśvatthāmā, he is son of a brāhmaṇa, but he is fallen to become a butcher because he's a living being, he's different from God. In another place we find Kṛṣṇa says to Arjuna that both Arjuna and Kṛṣṇa was present when the Bhagavad-gītā instruction was given to sun-god millions of years ago. Kṛṣṇa said that "You have forgotten. I did not." So this is Acyuta. He never falls down from any standard. He is always perfect, complete.

We sometimes differ with the Māyāvādī philosophers. But they are jñānīs. They are better than the karmīs. There is no doubt. Koṭi-karma-niṣṭha-madhye eka jñānī śreṣṭha.
Lecture on SB 1.7.40 -- Vrndavana, October 1, 1976:

Simply jñāna, theoretical knowledge, is not good. It must be practical. Jñāna, the result of jñāna is to become liberated, mukti. Simply I am very jñānī and I am doing all nonsense, this is not jñāna. He must be liberated from material attachment. Brahma-bhūtaḥ prasannātmā (BG 18.54). This is the stage of perfection of jñāna. Na śocati na kāṅkṣati. He has nothing to do with the material world. That is jñānī. Therefore the karmīs, they are very much attached to the material activities, and jñānī is not attached—not attached neither interested. That is real jñānī. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu said koṭi-karma-niṣṭha-madhye eka jñānī śreṣṭha. Out of millions of karmīs, one jñānī is śreṣṭha. We sometimes differ with the Māyāvādī philosophers. But they are jñānīs. They are better than the karmīs. There is no doubt. Koṭi-karma-niṣṭha-madhye eka jñānī śreṣṭha.

Māyāvādī philosophers, they abuse that Viṣṇu's body is. Viṣṇu comes, appears, He accepts a material body. That is condemned, condemned by Bhagavān in Bhagavad-gītā. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). He does not accept any material body.
Lecture on SB 1.7.51-52 -- Vrndavana, October 8, 1976:

Māyāvādī philosophers, they abuse that Viṣṇu's body is. Viṣṇu comes, appears, He accepts a material body. That is condemned, condemned by Bhagavān in Bhagavad-gītā. Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). He does not accept any material body. Tadātmānaṁ sṛjāmy aham. Ātma-māyayā. Sambhavāmy ātma-māyayā (BG 4.6). Not with material help. Ātma-māyayā, cit-śakti. So Kṛṣṇa, there is no difference between Kṛṣṇa's soul and Kṛṣṇa's body. Just like we have got. We are different from this body. And Kṛṣṇa is not different from the body. He does not change His body. Although He assumes several avatāra, but he does not change His body. Advaitam acyutam... Acyuta, not different from the original personification, identification. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam (Bs. 5.33). Although He assumes so many varieties of viṣṇu-tattva, still, advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam ādyaṁ purāṇa-puruṣaṁ nava-yauvanaṁ ca (Bs. 5.33). Therefore viṣṇu-tattva is, never looks like old man. Nava-yauvanam. Always young. Kṛṣṇa always young.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they simply remain silent, "Oh, God is very great," and they cannot imagine how great He is. But a devotee can understand how great He is. He can see that innumerable universes are within the mouth of God. This is the position of devotee. This is not sufficient knowledge: "God is great."
Lecture on SB 1.8.18 -- New York, April 10, 1973:

his is the relationship of the Supreme Personality of Godhead with His devotees. This is wanted. Simply to understand "God is very great," that is not sufficient knowledge. When you deal with the great, exchange your relationship with the great, that is perfect. That is perfect. Suppose your president is very great. That's all right. Everyone knows, "President is very great." But what shall I derive out of that? When I actually deal with him, I become his friend, I become his servant, I become his secretary, I become... Some way or other, if I am related with that great personality, that is my benefit. Otherwise what is the use knowing, "Oh, President Nixon is very great"? There are so many... What I am deriving from that great? This is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they simply remain silent, "Oh, God is very great," and they cannot imagine how great He is. But a devotee can understand how great He is. He can see that innumerable universes are within the mouth of God. This is the position of devotee. This is not sufficient knowledge: "God is great."

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they simply say, jñāna, jñānavān. But jñāna is not stereotyped. There is varieties of jñāna. Just like in Vṛndāvana, there is jñāna, but there is varieties. Somebody wants to love Kṛṣṇa as servant. Somebody wants to love Kṛṣṇa as friend.
Lecture on SB 1.8.25 -- Vrndavana, October 5, 1974:

So one who is inquisitive... The uttama... Udgata-tama yasmāt. Udgata-tama. Tama means ignorance. So in the spiritual world, there is no ignorance. Jñāna. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they simply say, jñāna, jñānavān. But jñāna is not stereotyped. There is varieties of jñāna. Just like in Vṛndāvana, there is jñāna, but there is varieties. Somebody wants to love Kṛṣṇa as servant. Somebody wants to love Kṛṣṇa as friend. Somebody wants to appreciate Kṛṣṇa's opulence. Somebody wants to love Kṛṣṇa as father and mother. Somebody wants to love Kṛṣṇa as conjugal lover, as paramour—never mind. So somebody wants to love Kṛṣṇa as enemy, just like Kaṁsa. That is also vṛndāvana-līlā. He is always thinking of Kṛṣṇa in a different way, how to kill Kṛṣṇa. Pūtanā, she also apparently came as lover of Kṛṣṇa, to offer her breast for sucking; but the internal desire was how to kill Kṛṣṇa. But that is also taken indirect love, indirect love. Anvayāt.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they, monists, they want to become one with the Supreme. As Supreme is self-satisfied, they also want to be self-satisfied by becoming one with the Supreme. Our philosophy is also the same, kaivalya. But we depend on Kṛṣṇa.
Lecture on SB 1.8.27 -- Los Angeles, April 19, 1973:

Because Kṛṣṇa has no difference between body and self. He's simply self, spirit soul. So we have got now this body and self. I am self, but I possess this body. Then when actually we become dependent on Kṛṣṇa, as Kṛṣṇa is self-satisfied, similarly we can be also self-satisfied with Kṛṣṇa. Kaivalya, kaivalya-pataye namaḥ. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they, monists, they want to become one with the Supreme. As Supreme is self-satisfied, they also want to be self-satisfied by becoming one with the Supreme. Our philosophy is also the same, kaivalya. But we depend on Kṛṣṇa. We do not become one with, one with Kṛṣṇa. That is oneness. If we simply agree to abide by the order of Kṛṣṇa, there is no disagreement, that is oneness.

These Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that: "Why shall I keep my individual, separate existence? I shall become merged into..." That is not possible. Because we are created, not created, from the very beginning... We are separated part and parcel. We are separated parts and parcels.
Lecture on SB 1.8.27 -- Los Angeles, April 19, 1973:

These Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that: "Why shall I keep my individual, separate existence? I shall become merged into..." That is not possible. Because we are created, not created, from the very beginning... We are separated part and parcel. We are separated parts and parcels. therefore Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā: "My dear Arjuna, you, Me, and all these persons who have assembled in this battlefield, we were in the past individuals. We are, at present, individuals, and in the future, we shall continue to remain as individuals. We are all individual." Nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13). He's the Supreme nitya, Supreme Living Force amongst many, innumerable living forces. We are jīva, innumerable, ananta. There is no counting how many we are. Sa anantyāya kalpate. So this ananta, innumerable living entities, and Kṛṣṇa is also a living entity, but He's the chief. That is the difference. Nityo nityānā...

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not accept the energy. Simply they accept the energetic impersonal. No. We must accept the energy and the energetic, both. Śakti-pariṇāma. Śakti, śakti means energy. By the energy everything is going on. The energetic is aloof. Just like the sun, we can very easily understand.
Lecture on SB 1.8.38 -- Los Angeles, April 30, 1973:

So we should understand this. That after the disappearance of the body, soul, this so-called big name, big fame, important body, has no value. And what is that soul? That soul is part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa. Therefore we are energy of Kṛṣṇa. So when the energy is withdrawn or Kṛṣṇa is not there, the energy... Kṛṣṇa's energy and Kṛṣṇa is no difference. Śakti-śaktimator abhedaḥ. Just like the sun. The sun is the śaktimān, energetic, and the sunshine is the energy. So, so long the sunshine is there, the sun is there. There is no difficulty. When the sun is not there, the sun's energy's also not there. Similarly Kṛṣṇa, so long Kṛṣṇa is within us, within this body... Kṛṣṇa's energy... There are... Two things are always. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not accept the energy. Simply they accept the energetic impersonal. No. We must accept the energy and the energetic, both. Śakti-pariṇāma. Śakti, śakti means energy. By the energy everything is going on. The energetic is aloof. Just like the sun, we can very easily understand. The example is just before us.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā: "This world is false and Brahman is truth." We also say the same thing.
Lecture on SB 1.8.42 -- Los Angeles, May 4, 1973:

In the previous verse, Kuntī prayed that sneha-pāśam imaṁ chindhi dṛḍhaṁ pāṇḍuṣu vṛṣṇiṣu. She prayed, "My dear Lord, kindly cut off my attraction for the Pāṇḍu, Pāṇḍava family and Vṛṣṇi family." So by cutting off or giving up the attraction for material things, that is not sufficient. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā: "This world is false and Brahman is truth." We also say the same thing. But what is the difference? The difference is that you are living entity. You want enjoyment. Enjoyment means varieties. Without varieties you cannot enjoy. Just like here is a flower vase. There are so many flowers. Why has God created so many colors, so many forms? They create enjoyment, variety. Variety is the mother of enjoyment. That's a common saying. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they spoil the varieties, impersonalists. So what the result is? The result is āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). Bhāgavata says. They labor hard. They undergo severe penances. Just like our sannyāsīs, they can sit down here although there are many women. So Māyāvādī sannyāsī will not sit down.

So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot see the personal activities or the planets where Kṛṣṇa is personally active. That they cannot see.
Lecture on SB 1.8.42 -- Los Angeles, May 4, 1973:

So the Māyāvādīs, they simply see the effulgence, something impersonal, effulgence. They cannot see anything more. Just like the sunshine. In the sunshine, there are so many things. Suppose in bright sunshine, you saw one airplane is gone up, but after some time you cannot see. You cannot see. You cannot see because due to the dazzling sunshine, although the airplane is there you cannot see. Similarly, simply if we try to see the effulgence, brahmajyoti, we are unable to see inside. The Īśopaniṣad, there is this statement that a devotee is praying to the Lord that "You wind up Your, this effulgence so that I can see You properly." So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot see the personal activities or the planets where Kṛṣṇa is personally active. That they cannot see. Therefore Bhāgavata says anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ. Because they neglected to see the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, therefore, despite their severe penances and austerities, on account of not seeing the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, they come back again to this material world. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ (SB 10.2.32).

So the Māyāvādī philosopher, they simply want to destroy. Negative side. They have no information of the positive side, that after destruction... Suppose you are not satisfied with some business or some service. So you want to: "Oh, I want to leave this business. I want..."
Lecture on SB 1.8.42 -- Mayapura, October 22, 1974:

So the Māyāvādī philosopher, they simply want to destroy. Negative side. They have no information of the positive side, that after destruction... Suppose you are not satisfied with some business or some service. So you want to: "Oh, I want to leave this business. I want..." But you leave... Suppose you are getting, say, five hundred rupees. Then, if you leave, then you'll be zero, no income. If you get another service which will fetch you six hundred rupees, then you are profited. But if you simply give it up, this service, and become zero, then you become unemployed, the miseries will increase. The Māyāvādī, being disgusted with this material world... Brahma..., jagan mithyā. Jagan mithyā. That's, that's all right. Then Brahma satyam. That is theoretical. If you do not engage yourself as Brahman, then again you'll fall down. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adhaḥ anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ (SB 10.2.32).

So similarly, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not accept Kṛṣṇa or Kṛṣṇa's līlā. They think it is māyā. They do not accept it. So there is no ānanda.
Lecture on SB 1.8.42 -- Mayapura, October 22, 1974:

Then, if I don't get better engagement, then where is my ānanda? There is no ānanda. So as we do not get ānanda, so then I come back again. There is a Bengali hearsay, napad jimane na, na jamai batta.(?) When a widow, old woman, her husband is dead... We have got experience. And she talks very loosely with the grandson-in-law. I have got experience. When we were young, young married, so my grandmother-in-law, my father-in-law's mother, she was talking very loosely, just like husband and wife. So that's a practical... Because she... She is hopeless of getting another husband because she is old enough. So where is the husband? She accepts or talks like husband to the grandson-in-law. So similarly, the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not accept Kṛṣṇa or Kṛṣṇa's līlā. They think it is māyā. They do not accept it. So there is no ānanda. Therefore they come down again.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are impersonalists. They think, "Kṛṣṇa is person. Kṛṣṇa's activities are all personal. So this is also māyā."
Lecture on SB 1.8.43 -- Mayapura, October 23, 1974:

So here Kuntīdevī says that "Please help me in cutting my affection with my family." Sneha-pāśam imaṁ chindhi: "Please cut off. Please help me cutting this family connection." Then Kuntī says that tvayi me ananya-viṣayā matir madhu-pate asakṛt. So this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement means to cut off family connection and enter into Kṛṣṇa's family, not void. We are not impersonalists or voidists. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are impersonalists. They think, "Kṛṣṇa is person. Kṛṣṇa's activities are all personal. So this is also māyā." Because they are Nirviśeṣavādī, their ultimate goal is nirviśeṣa-brahman. So anything personal, they cannot accept it. And the Buddhist philosophy is to zero, śūnyavādi. Nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi. The whole world is now corrupted with these two kinds of philosophies: nirviśeṣa-śūnyavāda, impersonalism and voidism. But Vaiṣṇava philosophy is not voidism, not impersonalism. Vaiṣṇava philosophy means to know the Absolute Truth as person. Impersonal realization of the Absolute Truth is partial knowledge. It is not complete, because the Absolute Truth is sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha (Bs. 5.1). Vigraha means form. Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate.

The Māyāvādī philosopher says that when Kṛṣṇa comes, He accepts a material body. But these foolish people, they do not know that Kṛṣṇa has no material body.
Lecture on SB 1.8.44 -- Los Angeles, May 6, 1973:

So this caste distinction... Kṛṣṇa says, cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭaṁ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ (BG 4.13). Just like we have got division of my body. Guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ. The head is working nicely because without brain, there is no work. So the working of the head certainly is very important. Similarly, the walking of the leg is also important. So Kṛṣṇa's thinking, taxing the brain or walking there is no such difference. In our body also there is no such difference. But because we are in the materialistic world, dual world, we make distinction: this is superior, inferior. But for Kṛṣṇa there is no such thing, "superior," "inferior." Everything is Kṛṣṇa. The Māyāvādī philosopher says that when Kṛṣṇa comes, He accepts a material body. But these foolish people, they do not know that Kṛṣṇa has no material body. For Kṛṣṇa, everything is spiritual. Kṛṣṇa has no material body. It is for us to distinguish between matter and spirit. But Kṛṣṇa, being the original source of everything, He is absolutely spirit. That's all. The Supreme Spirit. He has no such distinction.

The Māyāvādī philosophers... Mukti means to merge into the existence of Brahman. Kṛṣṇa will give you very easily. But He is very strict to give you bhakti.
Lecture on SB 1.8.48 -- Los Angeles, May 10, 1973:

So, so long we are nonsense, we have to go, struggle for existence. Struggle for existence in this life. Suppose I am struggling, I am thinking, "If I could have possessed the strength of an elephant or a tiger, I would have been successful." Then next life he gets the body of lion, tiger, or elephant. Nature will give. Ye yathā māṁ prapadyante tāṁs tathaiva bhajāmy aham (BG 4.11). Kṛṣṇa is very kind. Whatever you want, He will give you, up to mukti. The Māyāvādī philosophers... Mukti means to merge into the existence of Brahman. Kṛṣṇa will give you very easily. But He is very strict to give you bhakti. That is His special... Because to the bhaktas, Kṛṣṇa, although the Supreme, He becomes within the grip of the bhaktas. Vedeṣu durlabham adurlabham ātma-bhaktau (Bs. 5.33). Adurlabha. For bhakta He becomes, He becomes controlled by the bhakta. The topmost bhakta is Rādhārāṇī. So although Kṛṣṇa is the īśvaraḥ paramaḥ, the supreme controller, He is controlled by Rādhārāṇī, because She is bhakta. Nobody can excel Her devotion, Her service.

The Māyāvādī philosopher, they simply wants to stop impious activities. But they do not engage themselves in pious activities.
Lecture on SB 1.15.30 -- Los Angeles, December 8, 1973:

Then after one is free from these sinful activities, then he comes to the understanding stage. So long one is sinful, he has no possibility of understanding. Yeṣāṁ tv anta-gataṁ pāpam. One who is completely free from all sinful activities, anta-gatam, finished, yeṣāṁ tv anta-gataṁ pāpaṁ janānāṁ puṇya-karmaṇām. And how you can become free from sinful activities unless you act piously? Because we must have some engagement. If you have no pious engagement, then you cannot become free from sinful activities. You must act. If you do not act piously, then you must act viciously. This is the way. The Māyāvādī philosopher, they simply wants to stop impious activities. But they do not engage themselves in pious activities. Therefore they fail. They fail. You must have side by side. Paraṁ dṛṣṭvā nivartate (BG 9.59). If you get something better, then you can give up inferior. But if you do not get better, you cannot give up the inferior. That is not possible.

That is Kṛṣṇa conscious movement, that we are trying to take the misled people from illusion to the reality. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they see that there is no more any pleasure in this dancing. "Make it zero. Forget it." No. We don't say that.
Lecture on SB 1.15.36 -- Los Angeles, December 14, 1973:

That is Kṛṣṇa conscious movement, that we are trying to take the misled people from illusion to the reality. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they see that there is no more any pleasure in this dancing. "Make it zero. Forget it." No. We don't say that. We say that this dancing is there in the original conception in the Absolute Truth. That is... The Vedānta-sūtra says, janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). Whatever you are experiencing, wherefrom it has come? It has come from the Absolute. That is the Absolute idea. But here, in the relative world, it is pervertedly reflected, and because it is not reality, therefore you are confused, baffled. So our proposition is come to the reality. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. The same dancing... Just like here is a picture, Kṛṣṇa is dancing with the gopīs.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to negate. Or the Buddhist philosopher. "Make it zero. Make it zero." Śūnyavādi. Śūnyavādi. Nirviśeṣavādi. Nirviśeṣavādi and śūnyavādi, almost the same. So they are after negation. But that is not possible.
Lecture on SB 1.16.6 -- Los Angeles, January 3, 1974:

So actual civilization means to deny material conveniences. That is actual civilization. That is perfection of civilization. Otherwise the cats and dogs, they are also after food, after sleeping, after sexual intercourse, after defense. Then what is the difference? The difference is the animals after it and the human beings should be not after it. Negation. That is perfection of life. So how we can negate? The Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to negate. Or the Buddhist philosopher. "Make it zero. Make it zero." Śūnyavādi. Śūnyavādi. Nirviśeṣavādi. Nirviśeṣavādi and śūnyavādi, almost the same. So they are after negation. But that is not possible.

Just like these Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, "Become desireless, no more desire." That is not possible. I am a living entity. How can I be desireless? It is not possible.
Lecture on SB 1.16.6 -- Los Angeles, January 3, 1974:

Therefore it is said here that kim anyair asad-ālāpaiḥ. If we stop hear Kṛṣṇa talking, then that is negation. If we stop artificially these mundane talks, that will be artificial. You cannot sit down. If I say that the so-called meditation... So meditation is artificially stopping mundane activities. That is meditation. But how long you will do that? He is becoming suffocated, "When I shall talk? When I shall talk? I am meditating, meditating, meditating." But how will it stop? That is not possible. Just like these Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, "Become desireless, no more desire." That is not possible. I am a living entity. How can I be desireless? It is not possible.

These Māyāvādī philosophers, they may go very high by knowledge, by speculation, but they will again fall down.
Lecture on SB 1.16.6 -- Los Angeles, January 3, 1974:

So this kind of artificial going up and making things negation will not help us. That is not possible. Therefore they are failure. Āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ (SB 10.2.32). These Māyāvādī philosophers, they may go very high by knowledge, by speculation, but they will again fall down. Why? Anādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ: "Because they could not get the shelter of Your lotus feet, therefore they will fall down." That is not secure. Because a man cannot remain without any activity, without any desire. That is not possible. A man, animal, any, even insect, he must be doing something. I have got practical experience. One of my sons in child..., when I was young man, he was very naughty. So sometimes we used to put him on the rack. He could not get down. So he was feeling so uncomfortable because his activities stopped on the rack. So you cannot stop activity. That is not possible. You must give better activity. Then you will stop. Paraṁ dṛṣṭvā nivartate (BG 9.59).

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think like that, something different. Because this is not Brahman. This is asat. Brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā.
Lecture on SB 1.16.8 -- Los Angeles, January 5, 1974:

So that is brahma-bhūtaḥ. It is very simple thing. Not that by becoming brahma-bhūtaḥ, one gets four legs and one dozen hands. No. The hand is there, the leg is there, the mouth is there, everything is there. When it is purified, that "These hands, legs, are meant for serving Kṛṣṇa," that is called brahma-bhūtaḥ. That is brahma-bhūtaḥ. Not that brahma-bhūtaḥ means I become nirākāra, no form. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think like that, something different. Because this is not Brahman. This is asat. Brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. "This world is false. Therefore Brahman realization means that something opposite must be there. In the māyā, everything is variety. So Brahman must be without variety." This is also material conception, because he is thinking like that.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are very much eager to become one with Kṛṣṇa, merge into the existence of Kṛṣṇa. That is their perfection. And Vaiṣṇava philosophy is: "What is there becoming one with Kṛṣṇa?
Lecture on SB 1.16.16 -- Los Angeles, January 11, 1974:

Kṛṣṇa says, "In all species of life, as many forms as there, I am the seed-giving father of all of them." So nobody can be Kṛṣṇa's father. Nobody can be controller of Kṛṣṇa. Nobody can be master of Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme. Mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat: (BG 7.7) "Nobody is superior than Me." But He accepts inferior position out of love. If you love Kṛṣṇa... The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are very much eager to become one with Kṛṣṇa, merge into the existence of Kṛṣṇa. That is their perfection. And Vaiṣṇava philosophy is: "What is there becoming one with Kṛṣṇa?

The Māyāvāda philosopher says that "We are in māyā, and as soon as the māyā is taken away, we are God." So we are not God, but we manifest our godly qualities when māyā is taken away.
Lecture on SB 1.16.26-30 -- Hawaii, January 23, 1974:

Another example: big fire and the spark. The spark is also fire, but it has got the potency to become extinguished. Suppose a spark falls down from the original fire, down. It is extinguished. But the big fire does not extinguish. Therefore the big fire, or Kṛṣṇa, is infallible. His name is Acyuta, infallible. The Māyāvāda philosopher says that "We are in māyā, and as soon as the māyā is taken away, we are God." So we are not God, but we manifest our godly qualities when māyā is taken away. So long we are covered by māyā, our godly qualities are not manifest, but we are not God. Or you are God, but not that God, that big God, but you are a particle of. You can say, "I am God," but you are not that original, chief God. That you are not. This is our philosophy.

There are Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that the Absolute Truth, the Supreme, has no name.
Lecture on SB 2.1.1 -- Vrndavana, March 16, 1974:

So if we take shelter of the supreme abhayam, Kṛṣṇa... Therefore one Vaiṣṇava kavi has sung, bhaja huṅ re mana śrī-nanda-nandana, abhaya-caraṇāravinda re. Abhaya-caraṇa. Kṛṣṇa's lotus feet is to become free from fearfulness. Bhaja huṅ re mana śrī-nanda-nandana. Particularly śrī-nanda-nandana. Nanda-nandana means that Kṛṣṇa has got many forms: Vāsudeva, Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna, Aniruddha, then Viṣṇu, Mahā-Viṣṇu. Ananta, advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam (Bs. 5.33). But His real form is in Vṛndāvana, the son of Nanda Mahārāja. Therefore he is advising, bhaja huṅ re mana śrī-nanda-nandana. Kṛṣṇa... There are Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that the Absolute Truth, the Supreme, has no name. Yes. For the persons with poor fund of knowledge, they may not find out Kṛṣṇa's name. But in the śāstra we have got thousands of name. Viṣṇu-sahasra-nāma. But what are those names?

There are Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that the Absolute Truth, the Supreme, has no name. Yes. For the persons with poor fund of knowledge, they may not find out Kṛṣṇa's name. But in the śāstra we have got thousands of name. Viṣṇu-sahasra-nāma.
Lecture on SB 2.1.1 -- Vrndavana, March 16, 1974:

There are Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that the Absolute Truth, the Supreme, has no name. Yes. For the persons with poor fund of knowledge, they may not find out Kṛṣṇa's name. But in the śāstra we have got thousands of name. Viṣṇu-sahasra-nāma. But what are those names? Name means His behavior with His devotees. Just like "Nanda-nandana." Kṛṣṇa is the father of everyone—ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā (BG 14.4)—everyone. So how He has got a father? Oh, that is His mercy. He accepts one devotee as His father. And when He's addressed in relationship with His devotee... Nanda Mahārāja wanted Kṛṣṇa as his son. Kṛṣṇa agreed, "Yes, I shall become your son." So everyone, if you want Kṛṣṇa as your son... Not to become God, but to become the father of God. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to become God. But we Vaiṣṇavas, we want to become the father of God. This is Vaiṣṇava philosophy.

So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do no know that "Suppose, even I get free, so where shall I go?" He thinks, "I shall be free in the sky."
Lecture on SB 2.1.3 -- Vrndavana, March 18, 1974:

ust like the bird is kept into the cage. He's unhappy. He's unhappy. It may be golden cage. It doesn't matter. Similarly, we cannot be happy with this encagement. We must be free from the encagement. Freedom. That is called liberty, mukti. That is required. So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do no know that "Suppose, even I get free, so where shall I go?" He thinks, "I shall be free in the sky." Just like impersonalism. Sky is impersonal. So if suppose a bird is given freedom, but he flies in the sky, will he be happy? No. That also he'll not be happy. Then he'll again think of that "It was better to remain in the cage. Now what is the value of my, this freedom? I'm not happy." And again go back to the cage. You will see in India. There is a bird, fiftil.(?) Fiftil. The man who keeps that bird in the cage, sometimes he takes it to the open field, and he opens the door, opens the door, and the bird walks, sometimes flies. He is given freedom. Then again the man: (makes coaxing sound:) ts-ts-ts-ts. He says like that, and the bird comes again within the cage.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they, another kind of fools, they think Kṛṣṇa like us. They consider that "If I am sitting here, how can I sit everywhere?"
Lecture on SB 2.1.4 -- Delhi, November 7, 1973:

Don't think that Kṛṣṇa is only in Goloka Vṛndāvana. No. Goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhutaḥ (Bs. 5.37). That is God. As you are sitting here, you are not sitting at home. That is finished. Means you are limited. But Kṛṣṇa, He is sitting everyone's heart; still, He is in Goloka. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they, another kind of fools, they think Kṛṣṇa like us. They consider that "If I am sitting here, how can I sit everywhere?" They think that "Kṛṣṇa is like me." Avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). These rascals, they think Kṛṣṇa like himself. Because he is sitting one place, he cannot be anywhere else, similarly, Kṛṣṇa also, if He is in India, He is not in Europe. That is their idea. Therefore Europe and America, they say sometimes that "Kṛṣṇa is Hindus' God." Why Hindus' God? He says, sarva-yoniṣu kaunteya sambhavanti mūrtayo yāḥ (BG 14.4), ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā: "I am the seed-giving father of all different forms of life." Kṛṣṇa claims that He is... Therefore, because He is the father of all living beings, therefore there is response from Europe and America. Otherwise what connection they have got? They have got their Jesus Christ or something else. But why they are attracted to Kṛṣṇa?

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are going to Himalayas or some secluded place for personal benefit. But a Vaiṣṇava, he has no desire for personal benefit.
Lecture on SB 2.3.11-12 -- Los Angeles, May 29, 1972:

Thoughts of becoming one with the Lord, or being merged in the brahmajyoti, can also be exhibitions of kāma spirit if they are desires for one's own satisfaction to be free from the material miseries. A pure devotee does not want liberation..."

Prabhupāda: Prahlāda Mahārāja said that "I don't want my liberation alone. Unless I deliver all these fools who are rotting in this material world, I do not want my personal liberation." This is Vaiṣṇava philosophy. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are going to Himalayas or some secluded place for personal benefit. But a Vaiṣṇava, he has no desire for personal benefit. The personal benefit is already there in Vaiṣṇava because he's in touch with the Supreme Lord by his service.

How it is pleasurable? So all the rasas ... The Māyāvāda philosopher, they have eaten sweet rice with grains, with sand grains.
Lecture on SB 2.3.20 -- Los Angeles, June 16, 1972:

How it is pleasurable? So all the rasas ... The Māyāvāda philosopher, they have eaten sweet rice with grains, with sand grains. Therefore when you offer him next sweet rice, "Oh, I have got taste. Don't supply it." Or, "I wish to live without eating-zero." This is Māyāvāda philosophy. Try to understand, impersonal, making everything zero, without any varieties. Nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi. Nirviśeṣa means without any varieties, and śūnyavādi means zero, voidist. The two kinds of Māyāvādīs, generally headed by Saṅkara philosophy and Buddha philosophy. But our position is transcendental, above. Karmīs ... Karmīs, they are on the material field. They are trying to enjoy on the material platform. Jñānīs, they are trying to make it varietyless, and the Buddhists, they are trying to make it zero. Our philosophy is substance. This is difference, substance, reality. Vāstava-vastu, real reality, not the false thing. So these people, the voidists and impersonalists, because they have no information of the Supreme Lord and His activities ...

The Māyāvādī philosophers, due to their poor fund of knowledge, they think that "The Absolute Truth is formless, but because we cannot meditate upon formless, something formless, let us imagine some form." Imagine.
Lecture on SB 2.3.22 -- Los Angeles, June 19, 1972:

So, the peacock plumes, they look like eyes, painted. But it has no power to see. Similarly, if we do not see the forms of the Lord, just like in this temple we are seeing, then these eyes are to be considered as painted eyes. Not real eyes. Simply just appearing like eyes. It has no use. The human form of life, the eyes are there, particular eyes, to see the forms of the Lord eye to eye. And because our present position is that with these material eyes we cannot see the Lord in His spiritual form, therefore the Lord has kindly appeared before us in a manner in which we can see Him. The forms of the Lord is not imagination. They say that they imagine some form. Sādhakānāṁ hitvārthāya brahmaṇo rūpa-kalpanaḥ. The Māyāvādī philosophers, due to their poor fund of knowledge, they think that "The Absolute Truth is formless, but because we cannot meditate upon formless, something formless, let us imagine some form." Imagine.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, "You can imagine your God." This is rascaldom. How you can imagine your God? God is God. God means the supreme controller, the Supreme Being. In the dictionary you'll find this word: "God means the Supreme Being." He is also a being like us, individual.
Lecture on SB 2.8.7 -- Los Angeles, February 10, 1975:

So the science of Kṛṣṇa is not speculation. It is exactly science. Tad-vijñānam. Tad-vijñānam. Tad-vijñānārtham. Vijñāna means science, not speculation. So one should understand God scientifically. That is required, not imagination. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they say, "You can imagine your God." This is rascaldom. How you can imagine your God? God is God. God means the supreme controller, the Supreme Being. In the dictionary you'll find this word: "God means the Supreme Being." He is also a being like us, individual. Just like we are here face to face. You are one individual; I am one individual. We are talking or hearing. Similarly, God is also individual.

The Māyāvadi philosophers, they say "It is ivābhāti. There is no form. Therefore make it formless." But our is that ivābhāti means there is form, but this is simply imitation.
Lecture on SB 2.9.2 -- Melbourne, April 4, 1972:

So therefore this very word is used, ivābhāti. Actually it is all matter. But they have been changed into different forms. The Māyāvadi philosophers, they say "It is ivābhāti. There is no form. Therefore make it formless." But our is that ivābhāti means there is form, but this is simply imitation. That is the difference between Māyāvada and They say "Because it is false therefore reality must be zero. It is formless. It must be zero." Śūnyavādi. Nirviśeṣa śūnyavādi. There are no varieties. They will say "No varieties," and somebody will say, "No. It is zero." We say, "No. There is variety."

So Māyāvādī philosophers, when they come to know that this is māyā's place, so therefore they want to make it varietyless, formless.
Lecture on SB 2.9.3 -- Melbourne, April 5, 1972:

So Māyāvādī philosophers, when they come to know that this is māyā's place, so therefore they want to make it varietyless, formless. This is their theory. So, but that is not the solution. This is māyā. This form or no form, this is māyā. When we develop our real spiritual form and enjoy in company and association of the Supreme Lord varieties, just like Vṛndāvana, variety... In Vṛndāvana the cows, the trees, the water, they are also spiritual. Some devotee wants to serve Kṛṣṇa becoming a cow. Some devotee wants to serve Kṛṣṇa becoming a bird, becoming a monkey. And somebody is serving as gopī or as cowherd boy, as father, as mother. But they are all spiritual. Ānanda-cinmaya-rasa-pratibhāvitābhiḥ. They are all expansion. Just like when Brahmā took away all the friends and cows of Kṛṣṇa, immediately expanded Himself in the same way. So all the cows and all the cowherd boys, in every case, they were all expansion of Kṛṣṇa, pleasure potency.

So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they have no information of the spiritual world. Therefore they are thinking that spirit means something void of all these varieties. They cannot conceive that in the variety there can be enjoyment.
Lecture on SB 2.9.13 -- Melbourne, April 12, 1972:

Bahu-rūpa ivābhāti māyayā bahu-rūpayā. Actually this is māyā, but bahu-rūpayā, by the interaction of the three modes of material nature there are varieties. Similarly in the spiritual world, although the spirit is one, there are also varieties, saṁvit... There are... These three qualities, there it is known... What is that called? Now, just now I forget. Saṁvit sandinī. Sandinī saṁvit. That is described in Caitanya-caritāmṛta, there also, varieties. So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they have no information of the spiritual world. Therefore they are thinking that spirit means something void of all these varieties. They cannot conceive that in the variety there can be enjoyment.

So in the spiritual world there is no need of artificial, mechanical arrangement. Everything is living force. That is the difference. And the Māyāvādī philosophers...
Lecture on SB 2.9.13 -- Melbourne, April 12, 1972:

This tape recorder, so long the superior energy is handling, it is giving the desired result. But if you don't handle, if some superior energy, some human being, does not tackle it, it has no value; it is matter only. It is matter. Out of its own accord it cannot act. But if it was made of spirit, then out of his own accord it can play. There is no need of handling. Just like if I ask you, "Bring me a glass of water," so immediately the glass of water is here. But if I ask this, "Give me a glass of water," it cannot. That is difference between matter and spirit. So in the spiritual world there is no need of artificial, mechanical arrangement. Everything is living force. That is the difference. And the Māyāvādī philosophers... Therefore they are called Māyāvādī. They are so fool that even in Kṛṣṇa they find difference, that Kṛṣṇa has got a soul. Just like Dr. Radhakrishnan states, "It is not to Kṛṣṇa the person, but within." He is such a fool that he does not know that there is no within and without Kṛṣṇa. And he is trying to comment on Bhagavad-gītā. He does not know what is Kṛṣṇa. He's distinction, making distinction.

The Māyāvādī philosopher says that brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. We Vaiṣṇavas, we do not say mithyā, because God, or the Supreme Brahman, is truth, so there can be anything untruth from the truth.
Lecture on SB 3.25.3 -- Bombay, November 3, 1974:

So in the material world nothing will exist. It exists for some time, temporary. The Māyāvādī philosopher says that brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. We Vaiṣṇavas, we do not say mithyā, because God, or the Supreme Brahman, is truth, so there can be anything untruth from the truth. That is not possible. Just like if you prepare something from gold, an earring, that earring is also gold. You cannot say it is something else.

Therefore we Vaiṣṇava philosophers, we do not accept this jagat as the Māyāvādī philosopher says, jagan mithyā. No, we don't say mithyā. We say jagat is also satyam.
Lecture on SB 3.25.3 -- Bombay, November 3, 1974:

The Māyāvādī philosopher says that brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. We Vaiṣṇavas, we do not say mithyā, because God, or the Supreme Brahman, is truth, so there can be anything untruth from the truth. That is not possible. Just like if you prepare something from gold, an earring, that earring is also gold. You cannot say it is something else. So yato vā imāni bhūtāni jāyante. That is the Vedic instruction. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1). So Supreme Absolute Truth is that from whom, or from which, everything has emanated. So if everything has emanated from the Absolute Truth, it cannot be untruth. How it can be untruth? It may be temporary. Therefore we Vaiṣṇava philosophers, we do not accept this jagat as the Māyāvādī philosopher says, jagan mithyā. No, we don't say mithyā. We say jagat is also satyam. Because the jagat has emanated from the Supreme, therefore it is not mithyā, but it is temporary. That is also explained in the Bhagavad-gītā. The material nature is temporary. Bhūtvā bhūtvā pralīyate (BG 8.19). It comes into existence and stays for some time.

These Māyāvādī philosophers, impersonalists, he also accepts Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
Lecture on SB 3.25.5-6 -- Bombay, November 5, 1974:

In the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, the Gosvāmīs, they have analyzed the characteristics of Bhagavān. The first Bhagavān is Lord Brahmā. Lord... Not first... First Bhagavān is Kṛṣṇa, but the Bhagavān realization, the opulences realization, begins from Lord Brahmā. He is jīva-tattva. Jīva-tattva means he's ordinary living being like us. If you become powerful in spiritual strength, then you can also have the post of Lord Brahmā. And better than Lord Brahmā is Lord Śiva. And better than Lord Śiva is Viṣṇu, or Lord Nārāyaṇa. And the best of all of them is Kṛṣṇa, kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam (SB 1.3.28). That is the analysis of the Vedic śāstra. So all śāstras accept... the Brahma-saṁhitā and, I mean to say, other, all śāstras... Kṛṣṇas tu... Even Śaṅkarācārya accepts. Sa bhagavān svayaṁ kṛṣṇaḥ. Śaṅkarācārya. He... These Māyāvādī philosophers, impersonalists, he also accepts Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

So this material world is not false, as the Māyāvādī philosopher says. Brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. Jagat is not mithyā.
Lecture on SB 3.25.10 -- Bombay, November 10, 1974:

So this material world is not false, as the Māyāvādī philosopher says. Brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. Jagat is not mithyā. It is fact, but we are using it in the way for our sense gratification. That is false. But the material world is not false. Our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is just to teach people how to use it properly. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Just like we are using this microphone. It is not false, but we are utilizing it for spreading Kṛṣṇa consciousness. And if you use it for something else, for some political propaganda or some other propaganda, then it is false. But if you use it for propagating Kṛṣṇa consciousness, it is not false. Therefore the conclusion is the microphone is not false. Its use is false. So if you properly use, that is wanted. Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is for that purpose. Īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvam (ISO 1). Everything Kṛṣṇa's. Everything of the Supreme Personality, belonging to Him. Actually, that is the fact. So if we misuse it for our purpose or for our sense gratification, that is false.

Some Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that "I am the same, so 'ham." So 'ham does not mean that I am equal to God. Nobody can be equal to God or greater than God. That is not God. Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad..., mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7).
Lecture on SB 3.25.17 -- Bombay, November 17, 1974:

Just like small particle of this sea water. The chemically composition is the same; you'll find the same taste. And if you analyze, you'll find all the same ingredients, chemicals, within the small particle. But the small particle is never equal to the sea, small particle of the water. This is said... If I think, "Because I am qualitatively one with God, therefore I have become God," that is mistake. That is aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). They have been described in the śāstras as aviśuddha, unclean intelligence. Unclean intelligence. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninaḥ. The, some Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that "I am the same, so 'ham." So 'ham does not mean that I am equal to God. Nobody can be equal to God or greater than God. That is not God. Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad..., mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya (BG 7.7).

Bhakti means spiritual activities. There is activity... It is not... The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that "Stop material activities."
Lecture on SB 3.25.19 -- Bombay, November 19, 1974:

Bhakti means spiritual activities. There is activity... It is not... The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that "Stop material activities." Brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. "Why you are engaged..." The Buddhist philosophy also, they say nirvāṇa, "Stop this material life." The Buddhist philosophers, they do not give more information. "We are suffering on account of this material combination." That is their philosophy. Because this body is nothing but combination of earth, water, fire, air, mind, intelligence and ego, so if you separate it, let the earth go to the earth, let water go to the water, let fire go to the fire, then you become zero. If you dismantle just like we dismantle some house, so there are so many things coming out. So let the doors be taken, somebody windows, somebody the bricks, somebody and..., rubbish somebody. Then there is no house, zero. This is called nirvāṇa theory. No more existence.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that "Because everything is God, everything is Kṛṣṇa, then where is Kṛṣṇa? Kṛṣṇa is finished."
Lecture on SB 3.25.26 -- Bombay, November 26, 1974:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that "Because everything is God, everything is Kṛṣṇa, then where is Kṛṣṇa? Kṛṣṇa is finished." But actually that is not. Kṛṣṇa is Kṛṣṇa; at the same time, He is everything. That is Kṛṣṇa. That we can understand by bhakti. Therefore it is said, bhaktyā. Bhaktyā. In Bhagavad-gītā also, Kṛṣṇa said, bhaktyā mām abhijānāti (BG 18.55). These things can be understood not by ordinary person without any devotion. One who is bhakta, he can understand that Kṛṣṇa is everything and everything is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa is everything—that is dṛṣṭa. When a bhakta sees a tree, he sees Kṛṣṇa. That is bhakta's vision.

"These people are less intelligent, so they are in the... Because jñāna-yoga means vikarma or akarma, akarma. There is no resultant action." That is the view of the jñānīs, Māyāvādī philosophers. But because they see that the bhaktas they are working also just like ordinary man, therefore it is māyā, that is Māyāvāda.
Lecture on SB 3.25.29 -- Bombay, November 29, 1974:

So that is also explained in the Bhagavad-gītā, yajñārthe karmaṇaḥ anyatra karma-bandhanaḥ. If you work for Yajña, for Kṛṣṇa, then you are becoming relieved from the resultant action of karma. But if you work for your sense gratification, then you are becoming entangled with the resultant action of your karma. Therefore sometimes this bhakti-yoga is misunderstood as karma. Māyāvādīs, they cannot understand. They think that bhakti-yoga is also karma. "These people are less intelligent, so they are in the... Because jñāna-yoga means vikarma or akarma, akarma. There is no resultant action." That is the view of the jñānīs, Māyāvādī philosophers. But because they see that the bhaktas they are working also just like ordinary man, therefore it is māyā, that is Māyāvāda. They think bhakti activities as māyā. Therefore we call them Māyāvāda. But actually bhakti-yoga, if you act according to the shastric principles, if you act according to the order of your spiritual master in bhakti-yoga, that is not karma. That is bhakti-yoga, beyond this karma-yoga. But they cannot understand.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand it. But Kṛṣṇa says personally that this devotional service is in the transcendental platform, Brahman service.
Lecture on SB 3.25.32 -- Bombay, December 2, 1974:

That service is not ordinary service. The service to the Lord is not to be calculated as equal to this material service. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand it. But Kṛṣṇa says personally that this devotional service is in the transcendental platform, Brahman service. Therefore He says, māṁ ca yo 'vyabhicāreṇa bhakti-yogena sevate (BG 14.26). This bhakti-yoga, one who is actually employed, engaged in pure devotional ser..., animittā, without any motives, without any material purpose, that is real spiritual service.

The Māyāvādī philosophers say that "If Kṛṣṇa has become everything, then where is Kṛṣṇa? Kṛṣṇa is finished." This is Māyāvādī philosophy.
Lecture on SB 3.25.38 -- Bombay, December 7, 1974:

The Vasudeva and Devakī, in their previous life they underwent severe austerities. After their marriage, they immediately were not anxious to beget child. They went to the forest and began practicing austerity and penances, severe, some hundreds of years. Then Kṛṣṇa appeared that "What do you want? Why you are undergoing so much severe...?" "No, we want a son like You. Then we enter into the family life." So Kṛṣṇa said that "Where is another Kṛṣṇa?" Because God is one. "So if you want a son like Me, then I will have to become your son. There is no competitor." God has no competitor. God is one. Ekaṁ brahma dvitīyaṁ nāsti. This is the... Kṛṣṇa therefore says, mām ekam. Mām ekam. Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekam (BG 18.66). Kṛṣṇa is one, but Kṛṣṇa can expand. That is Kṛṣṇa. The Māyāvādī philosophers say that "If Kṛṣṇa has become everything, then where is Kṛṣṇa? Kṛṣṇa is finished." This is Māyāvādī philosophy.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are afraid of having such relationship again. Because they have got bitter experience of this material world, they want to make it zero—no more relationship, no more son, no more daughter, no more lover, no more master.
Lecture on SB 3.25.38 -- Bombay, December 7, 1974:

So if you accept Kṛṣṇa as your son, as your friend, as your lover, you will never be cheated. So try to accept Kṛṣṇa. Give up this false illusory servant or son or father or lover. You'll be cheated. You'll be cheated. If you love your son with your heart and soul, that very son will may be someday your most veritable enemy. Yes. This is the world. The wife you love so much, but the wife may be someday so great enemy that she can kill you for her own interest. There are so many instances. So if you want to have real... The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are afraid of having such relationship again. Because they have got bitter experience of this material world, they want to make it zero—no more relationship, no more son, no more daughter, no more lover, no more master.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think like that, that the Absolute Truth, (is) imperson; but when He comes in form He accepts a material body.
Lecture on SB 3.26.1 -- Bombay, December 13, 1974:

Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that "Any rascal who thinks that the body of Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu is prākṛta, material, this is the greatest offense." The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think like that, that the Absolute Truth, (is) imperson; but when He comes in form He accepts a material body. This is the greatest offense, aparādha nāhi yāra ihāra rūpa.(?) Therefore they cannot understand very well because they're aparādhī. Kṛṣṇa, Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, māyāvādī kṛṣṇe aparādhī.

Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they also take the living entities within this material world as līlā.
Lecture on SB 3.26.4 -- Bombay, December 16, 1974:

Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they also take the living entities within this material world as līlā. That is not līlā. Līlā refers to the pastimes of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Never... Nobody says that the living entity has come in this material world for līlā. At least, the Vaiṣṇava philosophers do not agree that. It is contradictory. Kṛṣṇa said that "When I come..."

So therefore, here it is said that vibhuḥ... Kṛṣṇa is vibhuḥ, and if He is covered by māyā... As the Māyāvādī philosopher thinks, that "When God comes within this material world, He is also covered by māyā..." He is not covered by māyā.
Lecture on SB 3.26.4 -- Bombay, December 16, 1974:

So therefore, here it is said that vibhuḥ... Kṛṣṇa is vibhuḥ, and if He is covered by māyā... As the Māyāvādī philosopher thinks, that "When God comes within this material world, He is also covered by māyā..." He is not covered by māyā. If māyā is greater than Kṛṣṇa, then māyā can cover Kṛṣṇa. But that is not the fact. Kṛṣṇa says, mama māyā. That means... Mām eva ye prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti te (BG 7.14). If one surrenders to Kṛṣṇa, then he becomes free from the clutches of māyā. So how Kṛṣṇa can be caught by māyā? This is contradictory. If anyone surrenders to Kṛṣṇa, he becomes free from the influence of māyā, simply by surrendering.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not admit the existence of Supersoul. They think there is one soul.
Lecture on SB 3.26.7 -- Bombay, December 19, 1974:

So we are conditioned soul, but the Supersoul... The Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not admit the existence of Supersoul. They think there is one soul. We are... They speak of our conditioned life as līlā. This is not very good philosophy. One has got the body of a hog, and he is eating stool, and the Māyāvādī philosopher says that it is līlā. God is eating stool; it is līlā. Just see the philosophy! Because we say kṛṣṇa-līlā... Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He is dancing with the gopīs or playing with the cowherds boy or becoming the child of mother Yaśodā. We say it is līlā. The Māyāvādī philosopher says... Because they do not two, make two. Their philosophy is one. So the pig or the hog eating the stool, they say it is also līlā. Kṛṣṇa is dancing with the gopīs, that is also līlā, and because they do not make two, therefore... We cannot say, of course. They say that God is also, has become pig and they, eating stool, that is also līlā.

Because these Māyāvādī philosophers, they have no knowledge of the Supreme Personality of... They cannot believe that the Absolute Truth can be a person. They cannot believe it.
Lecture on SB 3.26.9 -- Bombay, December 21, 1974:

This is the relation. This is the characteristic, two puruṣas: one living entity and the Supreme Soul, parama-puruṣa or puruṣottama. The puruṣottama is the controller, and we ordinary living entities, we are controlled. Then how the living entities can be on the equal level with the Supreme Lord? That is not possible. Anyone who thinks like that, they are imperfect knowledge. That is not perfect knowledge. Aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ. They have been described as aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ. Imperfect knowledge. Buddhi means intelligence. They have no intelligence. We cannot say no intelligence, but aviśuddha. Aviśuddha, means it is not purified. Anyone who is claiming to be on the equal level with the Supreme, their intelligence is not yet purified. Aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ. Ye 'nye 'ravindākṣa vimukta-māninas tvayy asta-bhāvād aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32). Because these Māyāvādī philosophers, they have no knowledge of the Supreme Personality of... They cannot believe that the Absolute Truth can be a person. They cannot believe it. Their knowledge is so poor, they cannot accommodate. Because as soon as they think of one person, they think that "That person is equal with me." Otherwise, they cannot think of person.

That is the difference between the Māyāvāda philosopher and Vaiṣṇava philosopher. Vaiṣṇava philosopher says the Bhagavān is staying in one place.
Lecture on SB 3.26.18 -- Bombay, December 27, 1974:

Similarly, Bhagavān does not move. He has got immense power. Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Cc. Madhya 13.65, purport). He moves by His energy. That is the difference between the Māyāvāda philosopher and Vaiṣṇava philosopher. Vaiṣṇava philosopher says the Bhagavān is staying in one place. Goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūtaḥ (Bs. 5.37). He is staying. In the śāstra we understand that Kṛṣṇa... Vṛndāvanaṁ parityajya na padam ekaṁ gacchati: "Kṛṣṇa does not leave even by a step Vṛndāvana." He always remains there. So in the Brahma-saṁhitā also, it is stated that goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūtaḥ. He is always living in Goloka Vṛndāvana. He does not require to move. That is His inconceivable potency.

So the Māyāvādī philosopher, they says, "When Bhagavān is everywhere—His action is visible in every step, every atom, everywhere—then the original..., where is the original form of Bhagavān? Everything is Bhagavān." That is called nirviśeṣavādi, nirākāravādi, "Bhagavān has no ākāra. He is finished.
Lecture on SB 3.26.18 -- Bombay, December 27, 1974:

So Kṛṣṇa orders only māyā that "Give this living entity a body like a demigod, or a dog, or a pig, or a tree." So there are 8,400,000 varieties of body. He has to manage all these. How He is managing? Is He managing personally? No. He is managing through His potency, ātma-māyayā. Here it is said, ātma-māyayā. Samanvety eṣa sattvānāṁ bhagavān ātma-māyayā. Māyā means energy, energy, tricks. This is called māyā. So everything is being done by His potency. So the Māyāvādī philosopher, they says, "When Bhagavān is everywhere—His action is visible in every step, every atom, everywhere—then the original..., where is the original form of Bhagavān? Everything is Bhagavān." That is called nirviśeṣavādi, nirākāravādi, "Bhagavān has no ākāra. He is finished.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to become one. "One" means you agree to the Supreme. That is oneness. Just like we are conducting this international society.
Lecture on SB 3.26.25 -- Bombay, January 2, 1975:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to become one. "One" means you agree to the Supreme. That is oneness. Just like we are conducting this international society. We have got many workers, many disciples, but we are one. "One" means they are carrying their spiritual master's order. Therefore they are one. "One" means one is agreement, not that they have become amalgamated, no more individuality. Individuality is there always, but they are one, Kṛṣṇa and Kṛṣṇa's devotees. The devotees are simply trying to satisfy Kṛṣṇa, and Kṛṣṇa is trying to maintain His devotees. This is oneness, not that we lose our individuality.

The Māyāvādī philosopher says that "We are accepting snake..., er, rope as a snake. But there is no snake." But we, Vaiṣṇava philosopher, we say, "No, there is snake, and there is rope. But when we accept the rope as snake, that is māyā." Similarly, there is spiritual world and there is material world.
Lecture on SB 3.26.30 -- Bombay, January 7, 1975:

This is the statement in Bhagavad-gītā. Jñānaṁ te 'haṁ sa-vijñānam idaṁ vakṣyāmy aśeṣataḥ (BG 7.2). Pravakṣyāmy aśeṣataḥ, yaj jñātvā mokṣyase aśubhāt. That aśubha, inauspicious, we do not understand. We have taken inauspicious thing as auspicious. This is called māyā. We accept something māyā, or illusion, or vivarta. We accept something for something. The example is given: there is a rope, and due to my ignorance or insufficient knowledge, I take it as a snake. This is my insufficient knowledge. The snake is fact, and the rope is fact. But when we take the rope as snake, that is ignorance, or the snake as rope, that is ignorance. The Māyāvādī philosopher says that "We are accepting snake..., er, rope as a snake. But there is no snake." But we, Vaiṣṇava philosopher, we say, "No, there is snake, and there is rope. But when we accept the rope as snake, that is māyā." Similarly, there is spiritual world and there is material world. But when we accept the material world as everything, that is māyā. That is illusion.

So Caitanya Mahāprabhu warns that māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. Anyone who listens to the commentary of the Māyāvādī philosopher, then his fate is doomed. He is finished. He will never be able to understand bhakti philosophy. It is so poisonous.
Lecture on SB 3.26.30 -- Bombay, January 7, 1975:

So Caitanya Mahāprabhu warns that māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa. Anyone who listens to the commentary of the Māyāvādī philosopher, then his fate is doomed. He is finished. He will never be able to understand bhakti philosophy. It is so poisonous. Therefore Sanātana Gosvāmī has warned not to hear from avaiṣṇava about Kṛṣṇa. There is a very famous Bhāgavata reader in Bombay. He is a pakka avaiṣṇava. But he is going on, and he is infusing poison—means those who are hearing him, they will never be able to understand what is Kṛṣṇa. They will never be able. It is so poisonous. Therefore Sanātana Gosvāmī says, avaiṣṇava-mukhodgīrṇaṁ pūtaṁ hari-kathāmṛtam, śravaṇaṁ na kartavyam: "Avaiṣṇava, who is not Vaiṣṇava, who is not devotee, if he speaks about Bhagavad-gītā, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, nonsense..." He will speak nonsense. So it is not good. Avaiṣṇava-mukhodgīrṇaṁ pūtaṁ hari-kathāmṛtam, śravaṇaṁ na kartavyam: "You should never hear."

So intelligence is to know the one as well as the varieties. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam ādyaṁ purāṇa-puruṣaṁ nava-yauvanaṁ ca (Bs. 5.33). The Māyāvādī philosophers, they simply take one side, oneness. Ekaṁ brahma dvitīyaṁ nāsti.
Lecture on SB 3.26.45 -- Bombay, January 20, 1975:

So intelligence is to know the one as well as the varieties. Advaitam acyutam anādim ananta-rūpam ādyaṁ purāṇa-puruṣaṁ nava-yauvanaṁ ca (Bs. 5.33). The Māyāvādī philosophers, they simply take one side, oneness. Ekaṁ brahma dvitīyaṁ nāsti. That is fact. Dvitī... There is no dvitīya. Dvitīyābhiniveśa means māyā. Everywhere, Kṛṣṇa is there. Aṇḍāntara-stha-paramāṇu-cayāntara-stham (Bs. 5.35). The materialistic scientists, they take the ultimate cause of this material world: the atom. Now this atomic theory, paramāṇu. Paramāṇu. You have seen the paramāṇu. In your room, if there is a hole and sunshine is coming through that hole, you will find in that sunshine, sun rays, there are millions of small particles. That is called paramāṇu. Aṇu, paramāṇu. So then there is aṇu also, smaller than that. Six aṇus combined together becomes a paramāṇu. So the paramāṇuvāda... I forget the ṛṣi's name who propounded the philosophy of paramāṇuvāda, that the material creation is combination of these atomic particles, paramāṇuvāda.

These Māyāvādī philosophers, they think, "Now I have become equal to Kṛṣṇa. I am also Kṛṣṇa." That is rascaldom. Kṛṣṇa, God, is never equal to anyone.
Lecture on SB 3.28.18 -- Nairobi, October 27, 1975:

So every devotee is subordinate. Nobody is equal to Kṛṣṇa. If we do that, then it is mistake. Devotee... A devotee never says. Dāsa. Dāsa means servant. Servant is always the subordinate. Therefore Vaiṣṇava says "dāsa." He never says "master." Vaiṣṇava, dāsa, subordinate, tad-adhīna, under the..., under Kṛṣṇa. Nobody can be superior to Kṛṣṇa or equal to Kṛṣṇa. That is mistake. These Māyāvādī philosophers, they think, "Now I have become equal to Kṛṣṇa. I am also Kṛṣṇa." That is rascaldom. Kṛṣṇa, God, is never equal to anyone. Asamaurdhva. Asama means "not equal," and urdha, "always the top." Asamaurdhva. That is described in the Bhagavad... So we should remain tad-adhīna, always under Kṛṣṇa. That is our perfection. If we remain just like in Western countries—they rebel. If a woman is advised to remain under the control of the husband, that is insult to them. They cannot tolerate it.

Generally the Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to merge into the existence of God. That also, one of the recommended process of liberation.
Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Boston, April 28, 1969:

Vimukteḥ means... Vimukti. Mukti means liberation, and, adding the word, vi... Vi means specifically liberation. There are five kinds of liberation. One liberation is to merge into the Supreme. Another liberation is to live with the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the same planet. Another liberation is to achieve the status quo of life as good as God. Sārūpya, sāyujya, sālokya, sāmīpya. You can associate yourself with God. That is another liberation. In this way, there are five kinds of liberation. Generally the Māyāvādī philosophers, they want to merge into the existence of God. That also, one of the recommended process of liberation. But so far we are concerned, we don't want even to merge into the existence of God, but we want to become associated with God in friendship, in love, in servitude, in so many ways. We want to keep our existence, individual existence, and associate with God. That is the Vaiṣṇava philosophy.

The Śaṅkarācārya is accepted as Māyāvādī because these Māyāvādī philosophers, they think everything is māyā; even Kṛṣṇa is māyā.
Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Hyderabad, April 11, 1975:

The Śaṅkarācārya is accepted as Māyāvādī because these Māyāvādī philosophers, they think everything is māyā; even Kṛṣṇa is māyā. So, our Caitanya Mahāprabhu... We belong to Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and Caitanya Mahāprabhu belongs to Madhvācārya-sampradāya. As I have already explained, there are mahājanas. So all mahājanas, they have got different sampradāyas. Just like Lord Brahmā, he has got his sampradāya; it is called Brahma-sampradāya. Similarly, Lord Śiva has his sampradāya; it is called Rudra-sampradāya. Lakṣmījī has got his (her) sampradāya; it is called Śrī-sampradāya. So śāstra says that śrutayo vibhinnaḥ.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are concerned with the brahman-kathā but, we (are) very interested not only (in) brahman-kathā but parabrahman-kathā, that is Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that is wanted.
Lecture on SB 5.5.14 -- Vrndavana, November 2, 1976:

Then mat-karmabhir mat-kathayā ca nityam. This is a very important word nityam, mat-kathayā. The Bhagavān says, "My words," so kṛṣṇa-kathā mat-kathā. Kṛṣṇa says, mat-kathā. We can say, kṛṣṇa-kathā. So kṛṣṇa-kathā, Kṛṣṇa is speaking personally Bhagavad-gītā, this is kṛṣṇa-kathā. Kṛṣṇa is speaking the words, that is kṛṣṇa-kathā. And Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam also kṛṣṇa-kathā, it is spoken about Kṛṣṇa. Janmādy asya yato 'nvayād itarataś cārtheṣv abhijñaḥ (SB 1.1.1). Paraṁ satyaṁ dhīmahi, that is paraṁ satyam, kṛṣṇa-kathā. Bhagavān is paraṁ satyam. Paraṁ Brahman. Not only Brahman, Paraṁ Brahman. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they are concerned with the brahman-kathā but, we (are) very interested not only (in) brahman-kathā but parabrahman-kathā, that is Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that is wanted.

Therefore Kṛṣṇa's name is nānā-yoga-caryācaraṇo bhagavān kaivalya-patiḥ. Kaivalya-patiḥ. Kevaladvaitavādī, Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that kaivalya, to become one, one...
Lecture on SB 5.5.35 -- Vrndavana, November 22, 1976:

This is Kṛṣṇa's activity. A devotee never takes the credit of any wonderful thing. But it is a fact. What wonderful thing we can play? Kṛṣṇa can do that. Therefore His name is nānā-yoga-caryācaraṇo bhagavān kaivalya-patiḥ. Kaivalya-patiḥ. Kevaladvaitavādī, Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that kaivalya, to become one, one... Just like if you fly in the sky, after going long distance we cannot see you. It appears that you are no longer existing, you have mixed up, you have become one with the sky. But actually it is not the fact. That is not one with God. I cannot see you. The example is given: just like a green bird enters into a green tree.

Because Māyāvādī philosophers, they are very much, I mean to say, careful, that "My salvation may..., may..., may not be interrupted. If I go to preach, and in association with others, if I fall down, then my business will be finished."
Lecture on SB 6.1.6-8 -- New York, July 21, 1971:

Prahlāda Mahārāja says, "My dear Lord, I'm not very much anxious for my deliverance." Because Māyāvādī philosophers, they are very much, I mean to say, careful, that "My salvation may..., may..., may not be interrupted. If I go to preach, and in association with others, if I fall down, then my business will be finished." So they do not come. Only Vaiṣṇava comes at the risk of their falldown. They do not fall down, but they go even to the hell to deliver. So Prahlāda, this is Prahlāda Mahārāja's admission.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot adjust. They think that if the same things are there in the spiritual world, then what is the difference between the spiritual and the material?
Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

Just like Mahārāja Nanda and Yaśodā were enjoying the childish pastimes of Lord Kṛṣṇa, the same thing is pervertedly reflected in this material world. Father's affection, child's activities. Because we are part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa, the same thing you'll find in the transcendental world. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot adjust. They think that if the same things are there in the spiritual world, then what is the difference between the spiritual and the material? That is the defect of Māyāvāda philosophy. But if they are seriously students of Vedānta-sūtra...

But these Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not know Him; therefore they are not liberated. Do you follow? Yes. They are not liberated. Kṛṣṇa says, "One who knows perfectly well about Me, he becomes liberated."
Lecture on SB 6.1.22 -- Indore, December 13, 1970:

Just like we are spiritual sparks, but we have taken this material form in this material world, so they take it also that God, when He comes, appears, He also accepts a material body. That is called Māyāvādī. But Kṛṣṇa says that janma karma me divyam: (BG 4.9) "When I come I do not accept a material body." Divyam, janma divyam. It is completely spiritual. And yo jānāti tattvataḥ: "Anyone who knows it, he becomes liberated." But these Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not know Him; therefore they are not liberated. Do you follow? Yes. They are not liberated. Kṛṣṇa says, "One who knows perfectly well about Me, he becomes liberated."

So the Māyāvādī philosophers, nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi... There are philosophers. They are trying to negate these varieties. They are disgusted with the varieties.
Lecture on SB 6.1.25 -- Chicago, July 9, 1975:

So the Māyāvādī philosophers, nirviśeṣa-śūnyavādi... There are philosophers. They are trying to negate these varieties. They are disgusted with the varieties. Everyone is disgusted. The same child, when he grows up, he becomes disobedient to the father and breaks. He goes away. The father is broken-hearted, "Oh, I loved this child and he became so unfaithful? He has done so much harm and he has gone away?" Broken-hearted. Broken-heart... That you will have to experience in the material world.

There are five kinds of devotees, liberation. Any one. There are varieties in the spiritual kingdom also, the five kinds of liberation, any one of them. Māyāvādī philosophers, they know only one kind of liberation, sāyujya-mukti, to merge into the existence of brahmajyoti.
Lecture on SB 6.1.27-34 -- Surat, December 17, 1970:

All right. Now have... (break) There are five kinds of devotees, liberation. Any one. There are varieties in the spiritual kingdom also, the five kinds of liberation, any one of them. Māyāvādī philosophers, they know only one kind of liberation, sāyujya-mukti, to merge into the existence of brahmajyoti. That much they know. Or they know... They prefer this kind of liberation, to become with the Supreme. That is taste. But devotees, they do not like. They want to keep their individuality.

So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they prefer sāyujya, to merge into the existence of impersonal existence.
Lecture on SB 6.1.34-39 -- Surat, December 19, 1970:

So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they prefer sāyujya, to merge into the existence of impersonal existence. A living entity can live, can remain in the Brahman effulgence as a particle of shining. Just like there are many molecular particles in the sunshine, similarly, the living entities also can cluster together and live as a small particle of spiritual shining, and that is called brahma-sāyujya-mukti. But that kind of existence is subjected to fall down again.

Then again, Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura says, kintu prabhor yaḥ priya eva tasya. Why the spiritual master should be accepted directly as Nārāyaṇa and God? The Māyāvāda philosophers, they say, "Yes, spiritual master is God and I am God, you are God—everyone is God."
Lecture on SB 6.1.40 -- Surat, December 22, 1970:

Then again, Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura says, kintu prabhor yaḥ priya eva tasya. Why the spiritual master should be accepted directly as Nārāyaṇa and God? The Māyāvāda philosophers, they say, "Yes, spiritual master is God and I am God, you are God—everyone is God." No. That is rectified. Everyone is not God. God is God, and living entities are living entities. In the Vedas it is..., nityo nityānāṁ cetanaś cetanānām: (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 2.2.13) "He is the prime entity of all entities." So there cannot be two Gods. One God. As such, if God is one, there cannot be two religion also, because religion means to understand God, to love God. That is religion. And religion means the words of God, just as it is said. So why there should be two religions? There cannot be two religions. There may be some difference according to climate, country, population. There may be some difference in the execution of religion.

So, the Māyāvādī philosopher, they say the Purāṇas are stories. No. The Bhāgavata is Purāṇa. It is full of stories.
Lecture on SB 6.1.42 -- Los Angeles, June 8, 1976:

Common man cannot understand. Janmādy asya yataḥ (SB 1.1.1), athāto brahma jijñāsā. This Veda mantra goes on. But ordinary persons, they cannot understand. Therefore the same Vedas explained with reference to the historical incidences, that is called Purāṇa. Purāṇa means "who is complete." Purāṇa, pūrayati iti purāṇa. So, the Māyāvādī philosopher, they say the Purāṇas are stories. No. The Bhāgavata is Purāṇa. It is full of stories. But what kind of stories? All Vedic instruction. Just like Ajāmila. Ajāmila began, itihāsa. The Bhāgavata Purāṇa is speaking itihāsa, in the beginning. It is said. So Śukadeva Gosvāmī is giving incidences of itihāsa, history, example from the history. So this is actual fact.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they stay that stop, nirvāṇa. Buddha philosophy: stop sense activity. That is not possible. That is impossible. Then how we can control the senses?
Lecture on SB 6.1.50 -- Detroit, June 16, 1976:

? You can engage your arms for decorating the Deity, for sewing the clothing, dress, garland. In this way you can engage your arms. Voice in speaking about Kṛṣṇa, eyes to see Kṛṣṇa, how nicely decorated, come to the temple. For coming to the temple your legs will be used. And after coming to the temple, your hands will be used, your eyes will be used, your ear will be used, your tongue will be used. Chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, take prasāda. In this way, if we engage all our senses in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then we are victorious. Otherwise, it is not possible. Sa vai manaḥ kṛṣṇa-padāravindayor vacāṁsi vaikuṇṭha-guṇānuvarṇane (SB 9.4.18). We have got our senses. Senses cannot be stopped working, that is not possible. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they stay that stop, nirvāṇa. Buddha philosophy: stop sense activity. That is not possible. That is impossible. Then how we can control the senses?

A Māyāvādī philosophers, they are so dangerous that they mislead their followers to the hell. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has therefore strongly warned, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: (CC Madhya 6.169).
Lecture on SB 6.2.9-10 -- Allahabad, January 15, 1971:

A Māyāvādī philosophers, they are so dangerous that they mislead their followers to the hell. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has therefore strongly warned, māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: (CC Madhya 6.169) "If you attempt to hear some Māyāvādī philosopher, then your life will be spoiled. Your path to devotional service will be blocked, so don't try to hear a Māyāvādī." This is the recommendation by Caitanya Mahāprabhu. So we should always remember, when there is question of chanting the holy name, that means Viṣṇu, not any other's name. Vyāharaṇaṁ viṣṇor yatas tad-viṣayā matiḥ.

Therefore Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that "This material association is simply a bewilderment.
Lecture on SB 6.3.25-26 -- Gorakhpur, February 18, 1971:

Therefore Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that "This material association is simply a bewilderment. Actually it does not exist. I am Brahman; I am the same." But actually, although I am the same, because I am associating with the different qualities, I mean to say, higher qualities or lower qualities of the material nature, then that association will give me a different position, although I am not mixed up with this material existence.

So aṁśa, particle, that is also sanātana. Not that, as the Māyāvādī philosophers say, that because we are now under the illusion, therefore we are thinking as different; otherwise, God and we are the same. This Vaiṣṇava philosophy, Caitanya Mahāprabhu's philosophy, acintya-bhedābheda-tattva.
Lecture on SB 7.5.1, Pandal Lecture -- Bombay, January 12, 1973:

So aṁśa, particle, that is also sanātana. Not that, as the Māyāvādī philosophers say, that because we are now under the illusion, therefore we are thinking as different; otherwise, God and we are the same. This Vaiṣṇava philosophy, Caitanya Mahāprabhu's philosophy, acintya-bhedābheda-tattva. There are other Vaiṣṇava philosophers also—viśuddha-dvaita, dvaitādvaita, advaita, like that. So many philosophies are there. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the latest ācārya who appeared five thousand years ago, er, five hundred years ago, I'm sorry, He preached this acintya-bhedābheda-tattva. Means that jīva, simultaneously one and different, one in quality and different in quantity. This is very reasonable. And it is confirmed in the Vedas, Upaniṣad.

Kṛṣṇa says that "I am also kṣetra-jña, knower of the body, but I know everyone's body." That is the difference between Kṛṣṇa, Paramātmā, the Supersoul, and the individual soul. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they make one.
Lecture on SB 7.7.19-20 -- Bombay, March 18, 1971:

As I am, I am spirit soul, I am the basic principle of development of this body, similarly Kṛṣṇa is the basic principle of development of this universe. That is the difference. I know where is the pains and pleasure, what are the defects and favorable condition in my body, but I do not know what is favorable for your body. Therefore I am not kṣetra-jña, conversant with your bodily activities, but Kṛṣṇa knows. kṣetra-jñaṁ cāpi māṁ viddhi sarva-kṣetreṣu bhārata (BG 13.3). Kṛṣṇa says that "I am also kṣetra-jña, knower of the body, but I know everyone's body." That is the difference between Kṛṣṇa, Paramātmā, the Supersoul, and the individual soul. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they make one.

The Māyāvādī philosophers who mistake that "I am unlimited consciousness," no. If you deliberate, if you think wisely, then you are not unlimited consciousness.
Lecture on SB 7.7.22-26 -- San Francisco, March 10, 1967:

The Māyāvādī philosophers who mistake that "I am unlimited consciousness," no. If you deliberate, if you think wisely, then you are not unlimited consciousness. Your consciousness cannot approach my perception. Therefore I am limited consciousness. But because I have got consciousness, you have got consciousness, we are living soul, therefore the Supreme Soul, He has got His consciousness, and that is unlimited consciousness.

So this is the creation. Sarvam idam. Therefore the Vedic injunction, sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. There is nothing except Brahman. But the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not accept the varieties.
Lecture on SB 7.9.10-11 -- Montreal, July 14, 1968:

So this is the creation. Sarvam idam. Therefore the Vedic injunction, sarvaṁ khalv idaṁ brahma. There is nothing except Brahman. But the Māyāvādī philosophers, they do not accept the varieties. They accept varieties as false. But we Vaiṣṇava philosophers, we don't accept varieties as false, but it is temporary. That is the difference. Actually it is so. Just like your body. Now if I say, "Your body is false. Let me kill you," will you agree? Then why should you call it is false? If it is false, then don't mind whether it is killed or it is left. No, it is not false. The theory of the Māyāvādī, brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā... Jagat, this material world, they say it is false. We don't say it is false. It is temporary. That is the real termination, or terminology, that it is not false.

So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand that the variety, vaicitra, is creation of Kṛṣṇa. Although they are one, the same, Kṛṣṇa, puṇyo gandhaḥ pṛthivyāṁ ca, but still, there are varieties. Everywhere you'll find varieties, visesata. And the Māyāvādī philosopher-nirviśeṣa.
Lecture on SB 7.9.12 -- Mayapur, February 19, 1976:

Everyone is not of the same intellect. You may be more intelligent than me, another may be more intelligent than you, but that varieties of intelligence does not mean missing the real point. The real point is the same. Just like Kṛṣṇa has got so many queens, or He, in Vṛndāvana, He was associated with so many gopī friends or cowherd boyfriends. So everyone was Kṛṣṇa's devotee, everyone loved Kṛṣṇa, but there were varieties, varieties, vaicitra. It is called vaicitra. Kṛṣṇa is not without variety. Just see in the flower. Kṛṣṇa says, puṇyo gandhaḥ pṛthivyāṁ ca. The flavor is Kṛṣṇa. We were studying in the morning. But there are still varieties of flavor. The rose flower has got a particular type of aroma; another flower, aroma. So the Māyāvādī philosophers, they cannot understand that the variety, vaicitra, is creation of Kṛṣṇa. Although they are one, the same, Kṛṣṇa, puṇyo gandhaḥ pṛthivyāṁ ca, but still, there are varieties. Everywhere you'll find varieties, visesata. And the Māyāvādī philosopher-nirviśeṣa.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that when God comes, incarnation, He also accepts the sattva-guṇa and therefore the form is there.
Lecture on SB 7.9.22 -- Mayapur, February 29, 1976:

So He is not subjected to this māyic influence. He's not subjected. Therefore it is said, tvam nitya-vijitātma-guṇaḥ. This material world is created by Him, composition of three material qualities—sattva-guṇa, rajo-guṇa, tamo-guṇa—but He does not belong to any one of them. The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that when God comes, incarnation, He also accepts the sattva-guṇa and therefore the form is there. Their conclusion is, "The Absolute Truth is formless, so when He accepts a form of this material world, He accepts this sattva-guṇa." But that is not the fact. He's above sattva-guṇa even.

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think we are also quantitatively the same. That is mistake. That is not possible.
Lecture on SB 7.9.32 -- Mayapur, March 10, 1976:

The Māyāvādī philosophers, they think we are also quantitatively the same. That is mistake. That is not possible. Otherwise why it is said, sthito na tu tamo na guṇāṁś ca yuṅkṣe? This... He is so big that He is above these qualities. Just like we become infected in a filthy place, but the sun does not become infected. It, rather, sterilizes that infected place. So we should not compare with God, that "I am equal to Him." No.

The Māyāvādī philosopher cannot understand this. They think that anyone who comes in this material world, he falls under the influence of māyā.
Lecture on SB 7.9.36 -- Mayapur, March 14, 1976:

The Māyāvādī philosopher cannot understand this. They think that anyone who comes in this material world, he falls under the influence of māyā. That is right for the small living entities, as we are. That is not correct for the Supreme. Therefore they misunderstand Kṛṣṇa in His activities, especially when He dances with the gopīs. Therefore a neophyte person should not try to understand Kṛṣṇa's dancing with the gopīs immediately, because they do not know Kṛṣṇa. So here if we do something against the moral principles, we are liable to be punished. But Kṛṣṇa, about Kṛṣṇa it is stated in the Īśopaniṣad, apāpa-viddham. You know this. Apāpa-viddham. (aside:) Who is that? He does not become affected by any pāpa, apāpa-viddham. That is His nature. Etad īśanam īśasya. Just like we go into the fire—we become burned into ashes. But there are some others, not... We cannot see, but if Kṛṣṇa enters...

These Māyāvādī philosophers, they think to stop activity is the highest perfection. No. Our philosophy is stop foolish activities and begin real activities.
Lecture on SB 7.9.52 -- Vrndavana, April 7, 1976:

So vāsudeve bhagavati... To full... Surrender to Kṛṣṇa means to become spiritually active. Sometimes the Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that when we become Brahman realized, we become one with the Supreme; then all our activities stop. No, that is (not) the fact. The fact is we are now materially active, and when we finish our material activities, then our spiritual activity begins. You cannot make the living entity as inactive. That is not possible, because we are living; we are not stone. How I can be inactive? That is not possible. Inactivity is for the stones and irons. But we are not stones and irons. Nityaḥ śāśvato 'yaṁ na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre (BG 2.20). These Māyāvādī philosophers, they think to stop activity is the highest perfection. No. Our philosophy is stop foolish activities and begin real activities.

But unfortunately Māyāvādī philosophers, they take it ahaṁ brahmāsmi means "I am the Supreme Brahman."
Lecture on SB 7th Canto -- Calcutta, March 7, 1972:

There is no beginning of spiritual life. Spiritual life begins when one understands that he is not this body. Brahma-bhūtaḥ, brahma-bhūtḥ. So long one identifies with the body, he is jīva-bhūtaḥ. Jīva-bhūtāṁ mahā-bāho yayedaṁ dhāryate jagat (BG 7.5). And when one realizes ahaṁ brahmāsmi, "I am Brahman..." But unfortunately Māyāvādī philosophers, they take it ahaṁ brahmāsmi means "I am the Supreme Brahman." No. Brahmāsmi means "I am spirit soul." Spirit soul is Brahman, and the Supreme Brahman is different. Supreme Brahman, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān (BG 10.12), that is Kṛṣṇa, Viṣṇu-tattva. So unfortunately these Māyāvādī philosophers, they accept brahmāsmi means "I am the Supreme." We are not the Supreme. We are subordinate.

The Lord is puruṣa, the male. The Lord, the Supreme Truth, absolute cannot be female. Just like so many others, Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that the Supreme Absolute Truth can be female. No. He can be female, but the real form is puṁsaḥ.
Lecture on SB 7th Canto -- Calcutta, March 7, 1972:

This is plural number, yogāḥ, all these kind including. Nārādhanāya hi bhavanti. They are not qualification for worshiping the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Na ārādhanāya hi bhavanti. Nārādhanāya hi bhavanti parasya puṁsaḥ. Parasya. Parasya puṁsaḥ. Puṁsaḥ means enjoyer. Puruṣa. The Lord is puruṣa, the male. The Lord, the Supreme Truth, absolute cannot be female. Just like so many others, Māyāvādī philosophers, they think that the Supreme Absolute Truth can be female. No. He can be female, but the real form is puṁsaḥ. Just like Arjuna accepts the Absolute, paraṁ brahma paraṁ dhāma pavitraṁ paramaṁ bhavān, puruṣaṁ śāśvataṁ (BG 10.12). The Lord is puruṣa, He is not female. Here also puṁsaḥ. Another meaning of puruṣa means "enjoyer." Just like we have got experience that the male is considered to be the enjoyer and the female is considered to be the enjoyed; although in this material world everyone is under illusion, everyone is thinking that he is the enjoyer or she is the enjoyer. So long we have got this false identification that "I am enjoyer," that is māyā.

Page Title:Mayavadi philosophers (Lectures, SB)
Compiler:Labangalatika, Partha-sarathi, Visnu Murti
Created:30 of Mar, 2010
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=102, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:102