Questions And Answers: Anarthās / Māyāvāda / Impersonalism

In the purport it was written that accepting of untruth as truth is Vivarta-vāda. Is there a reason that Māyāvāda philosophy is given more emphasis as Vivarta-vāda than the acceptance of the body as the self?
Questioner: Devotee
Date: 2023-10-29
Jayapatākā Swami: I don’t understand. Kṛṣṇa’s body is not different from Kṛṣṇa.
Our body is different from our self.
But Kṛṣṇa is not like that.
He is transcendental.
His body, His self are the same.
So the Māyāvādīs they think that Kṛṣṇa’s body and Kṛṣṇa is different.
But that is offensive.
Kṛṣṇa doesn’t change.
He can create, maintain and destroy
but He remains the same.
Category: [Anarthās / Māyāvāda / Impersonalism]
Is impersonalism a deviation from Kṛṣṇa's service ?
Questioner: Devotee
Date: 2022-08-26
Jayapatākā Swami: Well, those who want the kingdom of God without God are better than impersonalists,
because, you see, the impersonalists, they don’t even want the kingdom of God without God.
The people who want the kingdom of God without God are the materialists.
They want the material world, and they want to enjoy it, but they don’t want God, you see.
Even the demigods, I mean, they respect Kṛṣṇa, you see.
But this like two sides of the coin; in one hand you have the materialists who want to
have the material world and enjoy it without God. They want to usurp in a way.
They want to be able to enjoy as the controller.
So those are coming, some as demigods who are still favorable to God,
and some are demons who are completely offensive to God.
But the Māyāvādīs, the impersonalists, they are completely offensive.
And in a way, they want to themselves by...they think that they are God, you see.
To say even without God indicates more of the demigods, because they...
By saying without God, we are indicating that there is God.
But the impersonalists, they don’t actually accept that there is any Supreme God; they’re saying that
everything is impersonal. That being impersonal, therefore, the concept of a Supreme
Person doesn’t come in at all. That every individual soul is a supreme as any other soul.
And that any form is illusion, so including the form of God.
So therefore, they are great offenders, Lord Caitanya said māyāvādī kṛṣṇe aparādhī (Cc Madhya 17.129).
They are offenders of Kṛṣṇa.
The demons that Kṛṣṇa kills, they get that. Some get even more than that.
But at least they get merging. So being killed by Kṛṣṇa, if you get to merge
and get impersonal realization, then what is so great about that,
you see. Even the demons get it. That means that these impersonalists are on the same level as demons.
So therefore, Lord Caitanya, He warned us, “Don’t listen to them.”
Because if you understand their viewpoint,
then that can destroy your actual appreciation of Kṛṣṇa because they are offensive.
And if we hear offenses against Kṛṣṇa, then that takes away our devotional assets.
So therefore, we should always avoid hearing the offenses of Kṛṣṇa, and their preaching is offensive.
Their way of preaching is to offend Kṛṣṇa.
Sahajiyāism is more dangerous than impersonalism for devotees.
It’s harder to recognize the difference between sahajiyāism and real devotion.
Impersonalism is pretty cut and dry, I mean, they just, you know, they don’t believe it. All
quality and personality is very cut and dry, the line is very sharp.
But in sahajiyāism where they seem to have a quality of a devotee,
but actually, there are some subtle offenses to real devotees;
they think that they are already an associate of God even though they haven’t achieved that position.
And thus, they are speaking as an associate or as an authority,
when actually, they are, because they are offenders of real devotees
and they are not presenting the thing as it is. Therefore, they miss the whole,
they are not able to actually go back to Godhead from that platform,
and they are guilty of other type of offenses; do rasābhasa and vaiṣṇava-aparādhas.
It’s actually what it is. Sahajiyāism is that you try to enjoy Kṛṣṇa.
Bhakti means that you surrender to Kṛṣṇa, and He enjoys you; He enjoys your service.
You offer the service, and that service
is enjoyed by Kṛṣṇa, and you feel the transcendental bliss from within.
But sahajiyā means that, that person wants to enjoy Kṛṣṇa’s.
He wants to enjoy the ecstasy with Kṛṣṇa. He wants to… So, because it is not a service mood,
it’s an enjoyment.
Category: [Anarthās], [Anarthās / Māyāvāda / Impersonalism]
Is vivarta-vāda, nirviśeṣa-vāda and māyāvāda the same?
Questioner: Devotee
Date: 2023-10-29
Jayapatākā Swami: Māyāvāda is like general.
Vivarta-vāda, is the way that Śaṅkarācārya explains it,
and part of the Māyāvāda.
Lord Caitanya showed how that was defective.
Category: [Anarthās / Māyāvāda / Impersonalism]
What is the difference between the Māyāvādīs and Brahmavādis?
Questioner: Devotee
Date: 2022-09-20
Jayapatākā Swami: Well,
the four Kumāras had already realized the Brahman.
The Māyāvādīs may… may have not realized the Brahman, but they’re speculating on what Brahman is, what māyā is.
They want to become brahmavādis.
But in doing so, they make so many misconceptions.
The four Kumāras, they had no preconceived conceptions.
Even like Buddha, he never said, “Well, there is no God.”
He said, “Why you bring up this thing?
I know what I know and,
so that’s enough.
You don’t need to ask about more.”
Just avoided the whole subject.
The four Kumāras, they’re not offensive.
You see, Māyāvādīs,
they not only want to realize brahman, but they’re actually against Kṛṣṇa.
The four Kumāras are not against Kṛṣṇa.
They were just not at all… it wasn’t something that they were really concerned with.
They didn’t understand Kṛṣṇa.
Then there wasn’t something that was …
how do you say…
a preoccupation with them.
They weren’t at all preoccupied.
They were preoccupied with Brahman.
Just like, there are many people in the material world who are preoccupied with, material life.
They’re not against Kṛṣṇa.
They’re just preoccupied with material life.
Category: [Anarthās / Māyāvāda / Impersonalism], [Other philosophies], [Sādhanā / Philosophical questions]
Categories