The vedic conclusion is given in Srimad Bhagawatam as "Krishnas tu bhagawan syawam" And it

is also indicated in the Bhagawad Gita "vedaiśh cha sarvair aham eva vedyo" In 15.15 that by all
the Vedas I am to be Known. If we compare these two important scriptures, Bhagawad Gita and
Srimad Bhagawatam, the Vedic conclusion is quite clear. At the same time, if we look at the
historic Unfoldment of Revelation. That Unfoldment has been progressive. Just as within the
vedic literature there is a progressive development of the revelation of the absolute truth. In the
Karma Kand of Vedic literature there is only talking about the Vedic Rituals by which one can get
material sense gratification then a seeker keeps practicing more and more, then that person
starts realizing that, actually these rituals don't satisfy me much, there that person comes to
gyana Kand and that person becomes detached from material things and focuses on the eternal
aspect of the absolute truth that is the Brahman aspect. That's how the person comes to the
impersonal conception, And beyond that, the person may realize now i have detached from
material things and i am peaceful. But peaceful necessarily doesn't mean Joyfulnes and then
his longing for love within the heart will gradually inspire him for the bhakti revelation, and within
the bhakti revelation also there can be various rasas, common rasa is dasya ras, and higher
rasas are also there. That is actually progressive revelation is indicated in brihat
bhagawatamrita's story told by sanatan goswami about the gopa kumar, so we know this is the
gradual progressive plan of the vedic literature. Now in Kali Yuga, this gradual progressive plan
has also actually been implemented or revealed progressively. If we look back at the history of
India 2500 or 3000 years ago not at the time of kali yuga but after kali yuga started and took off,
as it spread more and more, the religion that existed in india was mostly karma kandi and that
centered mostly on animal sacrifice because of which they started abusing those injunctions
that's why Lord Buddha Came and said Stop all this. Buddhism and jainism which were the two
schools of thought that evolved around 2500 years ago, they focused more on rejection of
karma kanda and rejection of world itself. So when they rejected the world, they indirectly
focused on making people detached from material things and progressively then Shankaracarya
came after 6th century and he said Ok, you want to talk about rejection and world renunciation
but this is there in the Vedic literature also, and then he introduced the people of India to the
Gyana Kanda section of the vedic literature and he showed that was was actually being
promised by Buddhism and Jainism was provided within the Vedic fold itself through the
literature of the Gyana kanda section of the vedas. And then after that Shankaracarya was very
successful in bringing various parts of the India back into the Vedic fold, and then after that
when the vaishnav acaryas came as a response to the intellectualized presentation of
impersonal teachings of the vedas, The Acaryas were forced to present intellectualized versions
of the devotional conclusions of the Vedas, so if we look at the teachings of Ramanujacarya, his
commentary on Athato Brahma Jijnasa, at a particular font size in a particular printed style can
draw it to almost 100 pages of his sri bhashya commentary and he is commenting on the
Upanishads, he is commenting on the vedanta sutra and Using very high level, intellectual
arguments to show how even if one is attracted to intellectual aspects of philosophy one should
not think that the bhakti aspect is lesser, personal conclusion is based on sound intellectual
philosophy. Similarly when Madhvacarya came, at that time he also gave heavily intellectual
presentations of the vedic literature. In fact, Madhvacarya's teachings were such that those who
met and debated with him used to get converted because they found him to be an incredible
philosopher, but those who heard his arguments from a distance or heard about him, found his
teachings incomprehensible. And sometimes even almost absurd. There's only when
successors like jaya teertha and vyasa teertha who wrote commentaries elaborating
Madhvacarya's writings then the depth and profundity of Madhvacarya's teachings became
accessible to the intellectual people of India. So the point which I'm making here is, that
progressively from the 10th century when Ramanujacarya appeared, to 12-13th century when
Madhvacarya appeared, when the impersonal notions were countered at that time it was
important to present intellectualized aspects of Bhakti. So the Madhuryarasa and especially the
love of the gopis for Krishna, in fact the whole conception of Krishna Himself seems too playful,
romantic, mundane and at times even immoral to actually appeal to an Audience that is
primarily not exclusively intellectual. So, after the intellectual credentials of the Bhakti path were
established after that the Lord arranged to himself decend as Lord Chaitanya and he created a
widespread awakening of Krishna Bhakti. Before that there were poets like Jayadev Goswami
and there are songs of Krishna bhakti even in the alwars but at that time the social cultural and
social intellectual situation was not receptive for the widespread dissemination of the
understanding that actually this bluish black cowherd boy who plays a flute and he has a
peacock feather and dances in a full moon night with young cowherd damsels, eats mud and
crawls like a baby sometimes, is the absolute truth. He is that same absolute truth that the
vedanta sutra is talking about in highly intellectualized ways. Even Lord Brahma the creator of
this universe was bewildered of seeing Krishna, that is famous and known as Brahma vimohan
leela in the Bhagawatam. Vishnu Swami and Nimbarkacarya are of course successors in terms
of Vallabhacarya and others, they do talk of Radha Krishna Bhakti only, but if we look at the
other prominent sampradays like the Dwaita and Vishishtaadvaita their prominent Acarya are
systematizers. Ramanujacarya and Madhvacarya they appeared in a historical situation that
was not conducive for the understanding of the lost vision of the beautiful form of Lord Krishna.
That's why the Vision of God as protector, the Vision of God as the imposing majestic Vishnu,
who is served in a Aishwarya rasa, that was the most sober conception for countering the
intellectual potentials of the Mayawad and therefore that was the presentation that they
emphasized. Now they did not minimize or reject Krishna worship in any way, but they did not
highlight or emphasize it. Because that was what required at that particular situation and that's
why when Lord Chaitanya Comes he gives highest conclusion of the Vedic literature which is
not brought forth till now and certainly not propagated till now, that's why it is the Gaudiya
Vaishnav Sampraday which builds on the spiritual restoration that was started by Buddha and
continued by Shankara and further continued by Ramanuja and Madhva and culminated in the
teachings of Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and his mission. That revelation, Krishna is the
ultimate conclusion of the Vedic Literature that was revealed and established and propagated.

The age of Kali is said to be a time filled with confusion & frustration. In this era, the Truth hides,
just like the village road gets covered with bushes after the rain. However, a sincere seeker
nevertheless should search the real path of Truth which can liberate him/her. in this book, I will
present many doctrines which are present in the present age. I will also tell the origin as well as
effects of following different doctrines. Finally, I will try to give conclusion that which doctrines
are genuine & which are distortions of real Truth. One may doubt, why does God wants us to be
deluded by false philosophies?Even in chapter 71 of Varaha Purana where we find Lord shiva
being questioned by the sages for the reason of spreading delusional doctrines and Lord Shiva
answers them. One can check Varaha Purana 71.9-62 personally. Because in this book I'm not
quoting Varaha Purana 71.9-62.

In reply, demonic people trouble the theists if they are not given some religion or work so that
they don't disturb the sober people much. Because they lack intelligence to grasp higher level of
truth, they are given a simpler task suitable to the society and them. inorder to separate
demoniac people from his pure devotees he deludes them away to protect his devotees from
bad association. Let that be adi shankaracarya, imaginative Shaiva-Shakta agamas or buddhism
& jainism are all for deluding with variations. People are of various types. Some like scary forms,
they are inclined towards such forms like that of Ma Kali, or lord Shiva due to they themselves
dwelling into tamas. Some have undeveloped consciousness to understand Krishna. They are
unintelligent to grasp the personality of God and frame him as impersonal. Bhagwatam says
realization is of three levels. Brahman (the formless) Paramatma ( the localized) & Bhagawan.
Just like a person from a distance when observes a mountain, is not as clear as he moves
closer to the mountain. He will slowly notice trees, then few people and so on. For such people,
Vyasdev compiled suitable shastras for them to uplift their consciousness slowly. Shastras
even provide Karma khanda of the vedas to uplift and attract materialistic people into spirituality.
Baladeva vidyabhushana explains this very well in his vedanta sutra bhashya. Better than being
atheists or have no rules and regulations for eating meat like that of Mlechas and Yavanas, its
better to attract such people by suitable shastras to their level.
SB 1.3.24-

"Then, in the beginning of Kali-yuga, the Lord will appear as Lord Buddha, the son of Añjanā, in
the province of Gayā, just for the purpose of deluding those who are envious of the faithful
theist"

Yamunacharya says in agama pramana, 116:

"those of frail minds, who are not strong enough to plunge into the deep ocean of rules of
interpretation, must not be disrespectful to the Veda"

Padma Purana 235.17-21:

"In the age of Svayambhuva (Manu) in olden times there were great demons like Namuci, who
were very powerful, very valorous, very strong and great heroes. All of them were devoted to
Vishnu, were pure, and free from all sins. They followed the practices (laid down) in the triad of
the Vedas. All gods, being frustrated, led by lndra, and overcome by fear, approached Vishnu
and sought his shelter."

Padma Purana, Uttara Khanda 235.25:

Lord vishnu says to lord shiva: "'Taking to these doctrines, all of these demons will become
averse to Me in a moment.There is no doubt it. O powerful Rudra, in every age in My different
incarnations I too shall worship you to delude the demons. Following these doctrines,they will
undoubtedly fall down.'"

lord buddha had come for another (additional) reason. The mission of Lord Buddha was to save
people from the abominable activity of animal killing and to save the poor animals from being
unnecessarily killed under the umbrella of vedas. When pāṣaṇḍīs were cheating by killing
animals on the plea of sacrificing them in Vedic yajñas, the Lord said, "If the Vedic injunctions
allow animal killing, I do not accept the Vedic principles." Thus he actually saved people who
acted according to Vedic principles. One should therefore surrender to Lord Buddha so that he
can help one avoid misusing the injunctions of the Vedas. Hence today, one can observe the
diet of Chinese and Buddhist belonging people. Their diet is not different than that of a amimal.
Why did this happen when buddha came to spread non violence? Because Buddhism was
afterall atheism, hence it was sure to happen. Atheistic philosophy is what attracted the
demoniac people. Indeed, Lords plan are not easy to understand by conditioned souls like us.
Afterall these deluding doctrines had another (3rd) reason to be spreaded that was to make kali
yuga appropriate to its main business. Kali yuga is the age of atheists and prepares sense
gratification opportunities more than any other yuga.

ŚB 10.87.2:

Śukadeva Gosvamī said: The Supreme Lord manifested the material intelligence, senses, mind
and vital air of the living entities so that they could indulge their desires for sense gratification,
take repeated births to engage in fruitive activities, become elevated in future lives and
ultimately attain liberation.

Adi Shankaracarya came to revive vedic culture and presented Buddhist philosophy with minute
changes under the umbrella of vedic culture. That is, to present the same in different glass. Adi
Shankaracarya thus saved vedic culture from becoming extinct and kicked Buddhism very hard.
Then came vaishnav saints to revive the truth and drive away mayawad philosophy of Adi
Shankaracarya. Vaishnav doctrines are the most perfect and genuine doctrines because they
are authorized by the supreme personality of Godhead himself.

(INTRODUCTION ENDS)
If one has gone through the introduction of the book, only then one must proceed further.
Otherwise not. It is said in the scriptures that Adi Shankaracarya was a incarnation of Lord Shiva,
he came to delude people with bogus doctrine which is nothing but Buddhist doctrine in a
different glass and atheistic in the sense his philosophy was against the real import of vedas.

 Scriptural References:

Padma Purana 6.236.7-11:

"Mayavada or Advaita philosophy is an impious, wicked belief and against all the conclusions of
the Vedas. It is only covered Buddhism. My dear Parvati, in Kali-Yuga I assume the form of a
brahmana (Adi Shankara) and teach this imagined philosophy. This mayavada advaita
philosophy preached by me (in form of Adi Shankara) deprives the words of the holy texts of
their acutal meaning and thus it is condemned in the world. It only recommends the
renunciation of one's own duties, since those who have fallen from their duties say that the
giving up of duties is religiosity. In this way, I have also falsely propounded the identity of the
Supreme Lord and the individual soul. In order to bewilder the atheists, in Kali-yuga, I describe
the Supreme Personality of Godhead Lord Krishna to be without any form and without qualities.
Similarly, in explaining Vedanta scripture, I described the same non-scriptural and inauspicious
mayavada philosophy in order to mislead the entire population toward atheism by denying the
personal form of my beloved Lord. This powerful doctrine of Mayavada resembles the Vedas,
but is by nature non-Vedic. O goddess, I propagate this philosophy in order to destroy the world.

Srimad Bhagawatam 4.2.28:

"One who takes a vow to satisfy Lord Śiva or who follows such principles will certainly become
an atheist and be diverted from transcendental scriptural injunctions"

Srimad Bhagwatam 4.2.32:

"By blaspheming the principles of the Vedas, which are the pure and supreme path of the saintly
persons, certainly you followers of Bhūtapati, Lord Śiva, will descend to the standard of atheism
without a doubt"

The Garuda Purana, Brahma Khanda, 16th Adyaya states:

shaN^karAkhyo bhaviShyati |sarveShAM saN^karaM yastu kariShyati na saMshayaH || tena

shaN^karanAmA.asau bhaviShyati khageshvara | dharmAn.h bhAgavatAn.h sarvAn.h vinashyati
sarvathA ||

A demon by name maniman will come into being as Shankara, who will, no doubt, pollute
everything. This is why, O King of birds (Garuda), his name will be Shankara; he will pollute and
destroy all Bhagavata Dharmas.

Kurma Purana 30.32-34 Says:

In Kali Age, Rudra, Mahadeva is the greatest Lord of the worlds, he is the deity of deities, and he
shall achieve the welfare of all men. Shankara, Nilalohita, will take up incarnations for the
purpose of establishing the srauta (Vedic) and smarta (Belonging to the smriti) rites, with a
desire for the welfare of his devotees. He will teach his disciples the knowledge pertaining to
the brahman"

Yamunacarya (Guru of Ramanujacarya) in his work Agama Pramana, 86, Quoted this verse from
Varaha Purana 70:36-40 which says:

"For Thou, strong armed Rudra, must cause deluding doctrines to be expounded, the deceptions
of jugglers and the like as well as conflicting practices. Having shown that the fruit can be won
with little effort, you must delude all these people quickly. "

Later Rudra Says in the same Purana:

I have propounded this shastra as though it were correct doctrine in order to deceive those who
have deserted the Way of the Veda. From that time onward, O excellent Ones, the people who
believe in the scriptures promulgated by myself do not respect the Vedas.

The same verse that Yamunacarya quoted from Varaha Purana is quoted by Bhaktivinoda
Thakura also in his work Jaiva Dharma chapter 18, Page number 414.
Satvata Tantra 9.2, 6 & 9 Says:

Sri Siva Said: In the beginning of Satya-yuga, all human beings were devotees of Lord Vishnu,
they did not worship the demigods, they only worshiped Lord Vishnu. Then the supreme
personality of Godhead, the husband of the goddess of fortune, singled me (Siva) out and said:
"O siva, you should again and again conceal me with many scriptures you write from your own
imagination. Their intelligence made feeble with these scriptures, the people stopped
worshipping Lord Krishna.

Narada Pancaratra 4.2.29-30 Says:

tvdm drddhya yadd sambho

grahisydmi varam tava

dvdparddau yuge bhutvd

kalayd mdnusddisu

dgamaih kalpitais tvam hi

jandn mad-vimukhdn kuru

mdrh ca gopayame na

sydt srstir evottarottard

tatas tarn pranipatydham

uvdca paramesvaram

The Supreme Lord continued: O Sambhu, I will obtain a benediction from You by worshiping You.
Then, in the Dvapara-yuga, I will incarnate in a human-like form. Thereafter, you will misguide
people by preaching the philosophy of impersonalism, thus keeping Me hidden. This will help
serve the purpose of maintaining the creation.

 Purv Acaryas:

Yamunacarya again Says, In Agama Pramana before the quotation of Varaha Purana's verse
(Already quoted above) in Agama Pramana 86:

"Rudra is well known for spreading deluding doctrines"

Bhaskara (9th Century CE), the propounder of bhedabheda-siddhanta was one of the earliest Indian
philosophers to attack Mayavada. In his commentary on Vedanta-sutra, Bhaskara does not mention
Sankara by name, nor does he mention the name of his philosophy. However by reviewing his arguments
against the monistic doctrine of maya and the Advaitic concept of anirvacaniya, it is obvious who and
what he is alluding to. Bhaskara is positively vitriolic when writing about the Advaitin’s concept of maya,
referring to it’s adherents as bauddha-matavalambin (those that cling to Buddhist ideology) and goes on
to say that their philosophy reeks of Buddhism (bauddha-gandhin). Bhaskara concludes that, “No one but
a drunkard could hold such theories” and that Mayavada is subversive of all sastrika knowledge:

Bhaskara’s Brahma-sutra-bhasya 1.4.25:

vigitam vicchinna-mulam mahayanika-bauddhagathitam mayavadam vyavarnayanto lokan vyamohayanti

Expanding on the contradictory and baseless philosophy of maya propagated by the Mahayanika
Buddhists, the Mayavadis have misled the whole world.

In his Siddha-traya, the Vaisnava philosopher Yamunacarya (917–1042 CE) stated that Buddhism and
Mayavada was essentially the same thing. The only difference he could see was that while one was
openly Buddhist (prakata-saugata), the other was simply covered (pracchana-saugata).

Following on from Yamunacarya, his disciple Sri Ramanuja (1017-1137 CE) also concurred that Mayavada
was another form of Buddhism. In his Sri Bhashya commentary on the Vedanta-sutras, Ramanuja says
that to claim that non-differentiated consciousness is real and all else is false is the same as the
Buddhist concept of universal void. Furthermore, Ramanuja states that the concepts of such crypto-
Buddhists make a mockery of the teachings of the Vedas (veda-vadacchadma pracchana-bauddha).

Another acarya in the line of Ramanuja, Vedanta Desika (1269–1370) wrote his famous Sata-dusini, a text
expounding one hundred flaws found in Mayavada. In that work he refers to Sankara as a rahu-
mimamsaka (one who obscures the true meaning of Vedanta), a bhrama-bhiksu (a confused beggar), a
cadmavesa-dhari – one who is disguised in false garb, and goes on to assert that, “By memorizing the
arguments of the Sata-dusini like a parrot, one would be victorious over the crypto-Buddhists.”

In another work, Paramata-bhangam, Vedanta Desika refers to Sankara as, “One who studied the Vedas in
the shop of a Madhyamika Buddhist” (referring to Sankara’s param-guru Gaudapada)

Throughout history, Mayavadis themselves recognized certain similarities between Buddhism and
Advaitavada and have even complimented Buddhist ideology. The Advaitin scholar, Vimuktatman (9th
Century CE) agrees with Sankara that Sunyavada Buddhism is nihilism, but admits in his famous work
Ista-siddhi that if the Buddhists mean maya when they use the term asat, then their position is similar to
that of the Vedantin. Similarly, Sadananda Yogindra states that if the Buddhists define sunya as, ‘That
which is beyond the intellect,’ then the Buddhist is actually a Vedantist. Although the Advaitin Sriharsa
accepts some differences between Advaita and Buddhism, he considers both schools of thought to be
similar. Later, Sriharsa’s commentator Citsukha even comes to the rescue of the Sunyavada Buddhists by
fending off the Vedic Mimamsakas when they attack the Buddhist concept of ignorance (samvrtti).

The Advaitin scholar Vacaspati Misra (900-980 CE) shows appreciation for the Buddhists when he states
in his Bhamati commentary that the Buddhists of the Sunyavada school were advanced in thought
(prakrstamati).

If ‘imitation is the highest form of flattery.’ then it certainly must have been true when Sankara plagiarized
the famous Buddhist scholar Dharmakirti by directly lifting verses from Dharmakirti’s Pramana-viniscaya
and using them in his Upadesa-sahasri. One example is the following:

abhinno’pi hi buddhyatma viparyasitadarsanaih

grahya-grahaka-samittir bhedavan iva laksyate

The intellect itself, though indivisible, is looked upon by deluded people as consisting of the divisions of
the knower, knowing and the known. (Upadesa-sahasri.18.142)

Sankara’s doctrine of maya has been one of the principle reasons that he has been accused of being a
closet Buddhist. Yet it was actually Sankara’s parama-guru, Gaudapada who posited the idea of maya or
ajativada in his famous Mandukya-karika.

Ajativada refers to the theory of non-creation. In his karika Gaudapada claims that the world of
appearances is actually maya and does not factually exist. So this theory of maya/ajativada does not
originate with Sankara. However, it does not originate with Gaudapada either… Prior to Gaudapada, it was
Nagarjuna that first postulated the concept of ajativada in his Madhyamika-karikas. In his Mandukya-
karika, Gaudapada writes:

khyapyamanamajatim tairanumodamahe vayam

vivadamo na taih sardhamavivadam nibodhata

We approve of the ajati declared them (the Buddhists). We do no quarrel with them. (Mandukya-karika 4.5)

It is even affirmed by Sankara himself that Gaudapada accepted the arguments of the Buddhists
regarding ajativada:

vijnanavadino bauddhasya vacanam bahyarthavadi-paksha-pratishedha-param acaryena anumoditam

The acarya (Gaudapada) has accepted the words of the Vijnanavada Buddhist (Nagarjuna) to prove the
unreality of external things. (Sankara’s commentary on Gaudapada’s Karika 4.27)

Gaudapada’s affiliation with Buddhism does not stop there. Gaudapada also gives arguments that are
akin to those of the Buddhist scholar Vasubandhu in order to prove that the phenomenal world is unreal
by equating the dream state with the waking state. Furthermore, the two illustrations of the city of the
Gandharvas (gandharva-nagara) and the magic elephant (maya-hasti) that Gaudapada uses in his karika
to prove the illusory nature of the world are both found in Mahayana Buddhist literature.
In the fourth chapter of Mandukya-karika a case of similar terminology is found between Gaudapada and
Nagarjuna. Gaudapada writes in his karika (4.7):

prakrter anyathabhavo na katham cid bhavisyati

And we find a similar verse in Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka-karika (15.8):

prakrter anyathabhavo na hi jatupapadyate

The title of the fourth chapter of his karika is Alatasanti (circle of fire) which is a word commonly found in
Buddhist texts. But probably the biggest give-away is in the fourth chapter of the karika:

nivrttasyapravittasya nishcala hi tada sthitih

visayah sa hi buddhanam tatsamyamajamadvayam

Thus, the mind freed from attachment and undistracted attains a state of immutability. Being realized by
the wise, it is undifferentiated, birthless and non-dual. (Mandukya-karika 4.80)

upalambhatsamacaradastivastutvavadinam

jatistu desita buddhaih ajatestrasata sada

For those who, from their own experience and right conduct, believe in the existence of substantiality, and
who are ever afraid of the birthless, instruction regarding birth has been imparted by the wise. (Mandukya-
karika 4.42)

The Sanskrit word Gaudapada has chosen to refer to the wise is ‘buddha’!

Scholars have pointed out that Gaudapada’s method of dialectical analysis almost mirrors that of
Nagarjuna, thus it is obvious that Mahayana Buddhism heavily influenced Sankara’s parama-guru. Despite
glaring proof to the contrary, Gaudapada still tried to distance himself from Buddhism by writing at the
end of the fourth Chapter of his work, naitad buddhena bhasitam – “My views are not the views held by
Buddha.”

Indeed, Gaudapada’s karika is permeated so much with Madhyanika Buddhist thought that some scholars
have suggested that he may have previously been a follower of Nagarjuna.

We will now examine other examples where Buddhism has infiltrated Mayavada philosophy.

 Two Truths:

Sankara postulates that there are two ways of looking at the world. There is a conventional perspective
(vyavaharika-satya) where the world appears to be pluralistic, and there is the higher perspective
(paramarthika satya) where one realizes that all duality is simply illusory and everything is Brahman.
However, this concept of ‘two truths’ did not originate with Sankara but with the Buddhist scholar
Nagarjuna. Nagarjuna refers to these two truths as samvrtti-satta and paramartha-satta. Nagarjuna’s
theory was enthusiastically taken up by Sankara in order to explain higher and lower fields of knowledge.

 The Non-Existence of the Universe:

Buddhism states that the universe is unreal (asat). Since its origin is sunya and it ends in sunya, logically,
its interim must also be sunya. Thus they conclude that ultimately the element of time also does not exist.
This means that the sum-total of everything in the universe is sunya.

Sankara also posits the same idea when he states jagat-mithya – the universe is false. Sankara rejects all
three phases of time (past, present and future) when he writes in his Dasa-sloki:

na jagran na me svapnako va susuptir

I do not experience the waking state, the dream state nor the state of deep sleep. (Dasa-sloki 6)

If one dissolves all states of being that we experience (waking, dreaming and deep sleep), then naturally
this eliminates time itself and the only ‘property’ remaining is void, or sunya.

Sankara describes the ultimate cause of the universe as avidya (ignorance). It has no past, present and
future. However, conveniently, Sankara explains that this avidya cannot be fully explained philosophically
because of its immense propensity – thus he calls it anirvacaniya (inexplicable). Both the asat of the
Buddhist and the anirvacaniya of the Mayavadi accept the momentary ‘reality’ of the universe
(vyavaharika-satya), it’s ultimate falsity (paramarthika-satya) and its incomprehensible nature – thus asat
and anirvacaniya are one and the same thing.

Whereas Buddhists refer to the phenomenal universe as an impression (samskara), Sankara says that it
is like a dream (svapna). However, this is just a matter of semantics –both dreams and impressions are
in essence the same thing since they only occur on the mental platform.

 Ignorance:

Both the Mayavadi and the Buddhist agree that ignorance is the cause of suffering. The Mayavadi calls
this avidya and the Buddhist refers to this as samvrtti. The Mayavadis go to great lengths to make
differentiations between the two. However, the Buddhist scholar Candrakirti give the following
etymological meaning of samvrtti:

Samvrtti is not knowing, caused by the veil of avidya, common to all. (Prasannapada 24.8.492.10)

Thus we conclude that the two terms are actually non-different.

  Sadhana:

The Mayavadi claims that the method of achieving moksa is realization of the non-difference between the
atma and Brahman. The Buddhist says that realization that everything is ultimately sunya is the sadhana
to attain liberation. Sankara defines moksa thus:

brahma bhinnatva-vijnanam bhava-moksasya karanam

yen’advitiyam anandam brahma sampadyate budhaih

The realization of one's inseparable oneness with Brahman is the means of liberation from temporal
existence, by which the wise person achieves the non-dual, blissful nature of Brahman. (Viveka-cudamani
223)

This theory is identical with the Buddhist concept of prajna. In Buddhism, when the causes of bondage
are eliminated one attains realization of sunya which leads to liberation. This realization is known as
prajna.

 Moksa and Nirvana:

Advaita defines moksa as the removal of avidya. Buddhists say that by the removal of samvrtti, one
attains nirvana. Both conceptions of liberation are identical.

 Brahman and Sunya:

Once again, the Mayavadis go to great lengths to prove that their concept of Brahman and the Buddhist
concept of sunya are totally different. The Mayavadis argue that by attaining Brahman one achieves
ananda, but there is no ananda in sunya. However, the great Dvaita scholar Raghuttama Tirtha has shown
that there is no distinction between the two:

You Mayavadis desire to become Brahman or to become bliss. You do not say, ‘We want to experience
bliss.’ You say, ‘We want to become bliss’. When one becomes bliss, according to you, one has no
consciousness of bliss. One does not enjoy bliss because you don’t believe that there is any
consciousness of any enjoyment in that condition because you say the Self cannot become the object of
Self-consciousness. According to you, Brahman is merely bliss and light. This cannot be the highest end.
It is a state of inertness. It is thus like saying, ‘I do not want to taste sugar, or its sweetness – but I wish
to become sugar.’ What is the good of one’s becoming sugar, if one has no consciousness of its
sweetness? The lack of consciousness cannot be the highest end of man; in fact, there is no difference in
this unconscious brahma-bhava of the Mayavadi, and the sunya-bhava of the Buddhists. (Bhava-bodha
sub-commentary of the Brhad-bhasya)
According to Advaita, Brahman is nirguna (without any qualities). But logically speaking, something that is
without any attributes whatsoever is as good as nothing (sunya). If something has eternal existence (as
the Mayavadis claim Brahman has) then it must have attributes, otherwise it is nothing. Since the
Mayavadis Brahman and the Buddhists sunya have no attributes, they must be identical.

DOUBTS: What if the References you provided are interpolated one's?

ANSWER: First of all, Interpolating so many scriptures is not possible, only a rascal will think these so
many scriptures can be interpolated. Its stupidity of the Mayawadis to declare everything against their
likings to be interpolation without any proof. sankhya philosopher and egalitarian Vijnana Bhiksu who
lived in the 17-th century disagrees them to be interpolated.

In the preface of his book “Sankhya-pravacana bhasya” he has given quotes from Padma Purana that
have been given here too. (This appeared on pages 5 and 6 of the preface to Vijnana Biksu’s commentary
to “Sankhy darsanam”second edition, published by Sri Jivananda Didyasagara Bhattacarya in the Bengali
era, 12/16:

astu va papinam jnana pratibandhartham astika darsansv apy amsatah

sruti viruddha artha vyavaytahapanam tesu tesvmasesvapramanyam ca

sruti smrity aviruddhesutu mukyavisayesu pramanyam asti eva ata eva

Padma purane brahmayoga darsana atiriktanam darsananam ninda upapadyate

yatha tatra parvatim pratisvara vakyam

For the purpose of obstruction transmission of knowledge to sinful persons, theistic philosophy has
sometimes proffered interpretations that contradict the Vedic view. These sections are mostly
unsubstantiated. The major portions, which do not contravene the Vedas, are easy to prove. Thus in
Padma Purana, besides criticism of the knowledge of brahman, other philosophies have also been
censured. For example In Padma Purana, Mahadeva speaks to his consort Parvati:

sRNu devi pravaksyAmi taMasAni yathAkraman

yeSAm zravaNamAtreNa pAtityaM jJAninAm api

prathamamaM hi mayaiviktaM zaivaM pAzupatAdikam

macchaktyA vezitairvipraiH saMprktAni tataH param

kaNAdena tu saMpraktaM zAstraM vaizsSikaM mahat

gautamena tathAnyAyaM sANkyantu kapilena vai

dvijaManAjaimininA pUrvam veamayArhataH

nirIzvareNa vAdena kRtam zAstraM hahattaram

dhizaNena tathAproktaM cArvAkam atigarhitam

bauddha zastram asat proktaM nagna nIla paTadikam

mAyAvAdam asac chAstraM pracchannaM bauddham eva ca

mayA eva kthitaM devi kalau brAhmaNa rUpinA

apArthaM zrutivAkyAnAM darzayalloka garhitam

karma svArUpatyAjyatvam atra ca pratipAdyate

sarva karma paribharaMzAnnaiSkarmyaM tatra cocyate

parAtma jIvayor aikyam mayA atra pratipAdyate

brAhmaNo’sya paraM rUpaM nirguNaM darzitaM mayA

savasya jagato’pyasya nAzanArthaM kalau yuge

vedArtha van mahA zastraM mAyAvAdam avaidikam

mayaiva kathitam devi jagatAM nAzakAraNAt

"O Devi, I shall systematically explain “Tamasa Darshan”, philosophy in the mode of ignorance, hearing
which even knowledgeable persons will become confused and diverted. Kindly hear it. The very first
concept “pAzupat”, which is a part of the Shaiva-philosophy, is in the mode of ignorance. Brahmanas
empowered by me propagated these tamasika philosophies. The sage Kanada for example, postulated
the VaizeSika philosophy. Gautama compiled the NyAya writings and Kapila, the SAnkhya tradition.
Jaimini compiled the PUrva mImAMsA scripture, which promulgated a false, atheistic view. Similarly
CArvaka put out an equally misleading theory from his imagination. For the destruction of the demoniac
class of men, Lord ViSnu’s incarnation, Buddha, propagated a false teaching. The mAyAvAda philosophy
is a false doctrine disguised as Buddhism.

O Goddess, in the age of Kali, I will appear as a Brahmana and preach this false philosophy. This view is
contrary to the Vedic conclusion and is strongly denounced by the mass. In it I have perpetuated the
theory of non-action, which urges one to give up life’s activities altogether to attain freedom from
reactions. Furthermore, I have established the one-ness of “paramAtma”, Supresoul, with the jiva, as well
as the view that Brahman is devoid of attributes. Intending to bring about the absolution of the world in
Kali yuga, I habe given mAyAvAda philosophy the stamp of Vedic authority and recognition"

Sri Vijnana Bhiksu then writes:

itiadhikaM tu brahma mImAMsA-bhAzye prapaJcitam asmAbhir iti

More details regarding these points are available in my commentary to Brahma-mimamsa.

It is very important that we undertand this scholar’s background and motivation. Sri Vijnana Bhiksu was
intent on establishing a synthesis of all philosophical schools He did not nurture any ill feeling or envy
towards Sri Sankaracarya; rather he maintained an objective, unbiased stance and judiciously analysed
both his merits and demerits. One who is realized in the Absolute Truth unhesitatingly admits both what
is true and what is false, but never falls into the illusion of confusing the two.

Sri ShankarAcarya took Buddhist philosophy, which contradicts the Vedas, and giving it the stamp of
Vedic authority, extensively propagated in this world.

DOUBT: Why didn't Yamunacarya, Madhvacarya, Ramanujacarya, Nimbarkacarya, Vallabhacarya quote

these verses of padma purana? If we check the context of Yamunacarya's Quotation, The varaha purana's
verse doesn't refer to Adi Shankaracarya but Pasupata shaivism. Also, Yamunacarya himself didn't
mention Shankara, he meant it towards Shaivism.

ANSWER: Tons of works of our purv acaryas are lost. If we talk only of those works which we got to know
that was ever written by XYD Acarya, there will be a big list of lost works, now imagine how many works
we don't even know got lost. hence we cannot say they surely didn't quote. We cannot say none of them
had quoted. nor we can say all of them had quoted. Hence the question or objection itself is wrong.
Yamunacarya did quote a verse directly & indirectly hitting Shankaracarya. He does not mention
Shankaracarya because the context of the quotation was to disprove the authenticity of Shaiva - Shakta
Agamas and etc texts. The book itself where Yamunacarya quoted is dedicated to defend the
authenticity of Vaishnav Agamas and disprove the authenticity of Non - Vaishnav Agamas. Hence naming
Shankara there was out of context & topic. Hence the saying that Yamunacarya didn't quote is not
acceptable to me. He did quote. Regarding Pasupata thing, Read the quotation properly, the Quotation is
referring not one but many doctrines holding pasupata as the prime according to the context.
DOUBT: The padma purana verse also said that

"In this (doctrine) only the giving up of one's own duties is expounded. And that is said to be religiousness
by those who have fallen from all duties"

However, Adi Shankara in his Gita BhASya teaches us not to leave our svadharma. This is reflected in his
commentary on verses 3.35, 4.13, 18.41 - 46,48 which talk about varna dharma.

Adi Shankara in his Gita BhASya says,

18.66 Sarva-dharman, all forms of rites and duties: Here the word dharma (righteousness) includes
adharma (unrighteousness) as well; for, what is intended is total renunciation of all actions, as is enjoined
in Vedic and Smrti texts like, 'One who has not desisted from bad actions' (Ka. 1.2.24), 'Give up religions
and irreligion' (Mbh. Sa. 329.40), etc.

In Taittiriya Bhasya, our acharya explains the importance of duties in Taittiriya Upanishad 1/11.

In simple words, TAi. Up. 1/11 Shankara BhaSya says, that Follow and practice Truth, follow dharma, do
your duties properly. Just by performing vedic rites once, do not consider that karma kand is over for you.
Keep doing karma kand and keep following smriti-s which are moral and ethical codes for harmonious
living. Practice non-violence, speak truth, speak without hypocrisy, do not have a motive to harm others.

Let us take a little excerpt form Tai. Up. 1//11 BhaSya by Adi Shankara and his disciple SureSavarAcArya.

Sloka begins with - ‘वेदमनू ाचाय ऽ तेवा सनमनुशा त’ – ‘Vedamanoochyãchãryo’ntevãsinamanushãsti’ – ‘The

teacher instructs the students who have completed their study of the Vedas’ (Taittireeya Upanishad:
1/11). He instructs them, ‘स यं वद। घम चर। वा यायान् मा मदः।’ ‘Satyam vada; dharmam chara; ...

Shankara Bhasya of Tai. Up. 1/11 with commentaries by Sureshvara and sayana (vidyaraNya) says Duties
briefly stated.

Adi Shankara in his sutra-bhAsya says, "PasvAdibhiscAviswsat' It means, "Human beings and animals
have the same urges. They eat and sleep and copulate and, besides, the feelings of fear are common to
both. What, then, is the difference between the two? it is adherence to dharma that distinguishes human
beings from animals. Without dharma to guide him man would be no better than an animal. Bhagavan in
Gita says the same thing. Adi Shankara revered veda-s as supreme authority. Paramacharya, Shri
Chandrashekharendra Saraswati of Kanchi Kamakoti peetham, says that , Acharya (Adi Shankara) has
commanded us to hold on to our old dharmic traditions and keep them alive.
ANSWER: Point number 1, your claim that Shankara didn't teach to give up Duties is wrong. Second, You
misunderstood the very verse.

To point number 1, Shankara was of the opinion that Duties, Karma are supposed to be done by those
who are not self realized. One who is in the stage of self realization, who have obtained refuge in the
unity of the Self and the Divine Being do not follow duties. he gives advice to follow duties, dharma to
those following karma kanda of the vedas, not to those who are following Gyan Kanda. He said to give up
duties to those who are not attached with the bodies.

Shankara in Bg 18.55 Says,

"Abandon dharma and a-dharma.,'

"Devotion of Knowledge {jnana·nishtha) should be practised by renouncing all action."Moreover,

(renunciation of works is necessary) because "Moksha consists in the realisation of the immutability of
one's own Inner Self.

In Bg 18.66 further he says:

that ignorant men are followerss of works....(fruits) does not accrue to those who have renounced all
worksworks" who have obtained refuge in the unity of the Self and the Divine Being. But it does accrue to
others who are ignorant, who follow the path of works, who are not sanyasins"

Read Taittiriya Upanishad Bhashya properly as quoted by you yourself in your simple words:

"that Follow and practice Truth, follow dharma, do your duties properly. Just by performing vedic rites
once, do not consider that karma kand is over for you. Keep doing karma kand and keep following smriti-s
which are moral and ethical codes for harmonious living. Practice non-violence, speak truth, speak
without hypocrisy, do not have a motive to harm others."

This is admitted by Shankara once again. Shankaraacharya in his Vivekacudamani says the following:

Verse 188. It always mistakes the duties, functions and attributes of the orders of life which belong to the
body, as its own. The knowledge sheath is exceedingly effulgent, owing to its close proximity to the
Supreme Self, which identifying Itself with it suffers transmigration through delusion. It is therefore a
superimposition on the Self.

Verse 340: How is the exclusion of the objective world possible for one who lives identified with the body,
whose mind is attached to the perception of external objects, and who performs various acts for that end ?
This exclusion should be carefully practised by sages who have renounced all kinds of duties and actions
and objects, who arepassionately devoted to the eternal Atman, and who wish to possess an undying
bliss.
Verse 436: He who lives unconcerned, devoid of all ideas of "I" and "mine" with regard to the body, organs,
etc., as well as to his duties, is known as a man liberated-in-life.

To point number 2, The verse says

"In this (doctrine) only the giving up of one's own duties is expounded. And that is said to be religiousness
by those who have fallen from all duties"

Note the word "Only". That is "Eva" in the sanskrit shloka.

As already proven, Shankara did teach to give up duties. We also teach the same. For example,

CC Madhya 9.263:

karma-nindā, karma-tyāga, sarva-śāstre kahe

karma haite prema-bhakti kṛṣṇe kabhu nahe

“In every revealed scripture there is condemnation of fruitive activities. It is advised everywhere to give up
engagement in fruitive activities, for no one can attain the highest goal of life, love of Godhead, by
executing them.

What differentiates us? Now the word "Only" Plays the role. We speak of abandoning inferior Karmas to
accept superior Bhakti towards Krishna. Mayavadis do not say that.

Srila Prabhupada said: Māyā is very strong. Therefore there are gradual process. Varṇāśrama-dharma,
karma-tyāga, this, that, so many things, pious activities, rituals. But this is the process, step by step, to
cross over māyā. But Kṛṣṇa said, mām eva ye prapadyante māyām etāṁ taranti te. Anyone who
surrenders to Kṛṣṇa sincerely, immediately he crosses over. As Kṛṣṇa says in another place, ahaṁ tvāṁ
sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣayiṣyāmi: (BG 18.66) "I'll do immediately." So māyā means pāpa. Unless one is
sinful, he cannot be in māyā. So if one surrenders, then he, means, immediately crosses over māyā.

So Padma purana is saying, "This doctrine (Mayawad) preaches to give up only duties and not to achieve
the goal of givir up duties, that is Krishna. And they preach this is religion. Which is not, it's partial
understanding"

Mayavadis think everything which is Lord's Lila or His divine play as per VS to be mere Maya and thus run
from it. Hence, they stubbornly exclude all duties and just speak of themselves to be Brahman and world
to be Maya. But when they are hungry, they eat, when they are tired, they sleep and thus, they take the
refuge of the same so-called Maya to which they offer their curses each minute. But Vaishnavas are true
to their principles. Their Virakti is not born of mere fear of this world. They naturally accept the fact that
this world is a manifestation of Lord's potencies and they find a way to stay in harmony with everything.
Hence they become a vessel of ultimate renunciation.
DOUBT: Why do Madhva sampraday say Shankaracarya was a demon. How do vaishnavas reconcile this
contradiction of his identity being a demon or shiva?

The verse you quoted from garuda purana is what they believe too. The Garuda Purana, Brahma Khanda,
16th Adyaya states: A demon by name maNimAn will come into being as Shankara, who will, no doubt,
pollute everything. This is why, O King of birds (Garuda), his name will be Shankara; he will pollute and
destroy all Bhagavata Dharmas.

ANSWER: Satvata Tantra 1.50 says:

"Siva's partial expansions are situated in the mode of ignorance. They are horrible and ugly, they destroy
the worlds".

DOUBT: Whats the authenticity of Satvata Tantra?

ANSWER: Its famous and old tantra. Quoted by Jiva goswami too. Satvata tantra is mentioned in Garuda
Purana 1.1.16. There can be many more references of satavata tantra's mention in other scriptures, which
i am unaware of.

DOUBT: But Madhvacarya's Authentic biography doesn't support the gaudiya perspective that he was a
partial expansion or incarnation of Lord Shiva.

It says:

"In Dwapara yuga, Manimantha, a demon who had been killed by Bhima at Gandhamadana mountain had
developed a great hatred and spirit of competition with Bhima. He performed rigorous penance to obtain
Maheshwara's boon that he should be endowed with great disputational abilities. Manimantha took birth
as Sankara in a Brahmin family called Kaladi. Many other main demons were also born on this earth at the
same time (with the same objective)"

ANSWER: Demon's identity on Shankara, Thats a partial understanding. In addition, this information may
have appearing faults. Mahaprabhu had said Madhvacarya that he will come and develop the concepts of
Madhvacarya.

Nawadwip Dham Mahatmya 15.84-85

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu Says to Madhvacarya:

ebe sarva-deśe tumi kariyā yatana

māyāvāda asach-chhāstra kara utpāṭana

śrī-mūrti-māhātmya tumi kara parakāśa

tava śuddha mata āmi kariba vikāśa’

'Now, carefully eradicate illusionism and false scriptures from all regions, and establish the glory of the
Lord’s Deity form. Later, I will develop your pure conception.’

DOUBT: What's the authenticity of Nawadip Dhama Mahatmya?

ANSWER: What's the Authenticity of Madhvacarya's Biography written by Narayana Panditacarya ? Well
its not what we say, its just a counter question. Nawadwip Dhama's Author Bhaktivinoda Thakura had
made many predictions which were fulfilled after few centuries. He was supernaturally empowered by
Krishna.

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura wrote in the Sajjana-tosani volume of 1885:

“Lord Caitanya did not advent Himself to liberate only a few men in India. Rather, His main objective was
to emancipate all living entities of all countries throughout the entire universe and preach the Eternal
Religion…. There is no doubt that this unquestionable order will come to pass…. Very soon the
unparalleled path of hari-nama-sankirtana will be propagated all over the world…. Oh, for that day when
the fortunate English, French, Russian, German, and American people will take up banners, mrdangas, and
karatalas and raise kirtana through their streets and towns! When will that day come? … That day will
witness the holy transcendental ecstasy of the Vaisnava dharma to be the only dharma, and all the sects
and religions will flow like rivers into the ocean of Vaisnava dharma. When will that day come?”

Which was a direct prediction of ISKCON and Srila Prabhupada.

DOUBT: I feel Advaita is Brahmawada not Mayawada.

ANSWER: Bhagavata Purana 1.2.11, known also as Srimad Bhagavatam, where the enlightenment or the
spiritual realization is described as being of three basic types:

Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this nondual substance Brahman,
Paramatma or Bhagavan.
It is quite amazing that the One Absolute Truth is not two, but three: Brahman, ParamAtmA and BhagavAn.
The meaning is that the Lord reveals Himself to everyone according one’s attained consciousness, in one
of these three forms, as bhagavan Sri Krishna states it in Bhagavad-gita 4.11:

"Ye yatha mam prapadyante tams tathaiva bhajamy aham ".

According one's way of worshiping Me, I reveal Myself.

Or in other words, everyone gets that what he/she deserves.

Brahman, ParamAtmA and BhagavAn are qualitatively one and the same, namely they are divyam –
spiritual, not material, and the most important characteristic of that which is spiritual, is that it is eternal.
That means that Bhagavan is eternal, The Absolute Truth,. not a temporary (material) manifestation, or
maya (illusory) as the maya-vada upholders pretend about the Supreme Personality - Bhagavan.

(CHAPTER 1 ENDS)
Foolish people accuse Puranas to be less important than the vedas. Or fantasy stories to provide
morals. We will refute such baseless claims by quoting Guru, Sadhu And Shastras.

First lets refute the claim, "Puranas are supposed to bee seen in iconography and are mythologies to
present morals and philosophy in a liquid state".

Such allegation can only be made by a mad man. Such allegations have no scriptural proofs but are mere
mental speculation. Such Logic is condemned in the scriptures which doesn't have any references in the
scriptures. Logic is dependent on shastras not the other way. Logic can only be applied when theres a
contradiction. For example, Krishna's eyes, Krishna's lotus eyes. Here its a contradiction and logic can be
applied to say, the lotus is symbolic. If everything in itihasas and puranas are just Iconographies, Why are
they recorded in a historical manner and Mahabharata - Ramayana are called as Itihasas? No Saint who is
predicted by the scriptures has ever said absurd like this. It has no scriptural proof, no sadhu proof. Its a
mere mental speculation. Even if we agree for few mins that they are iconographies by killing our
intelligence, why didn't they mention its fantasy? Does Harry potter writer said Harry Potter is real?
Instead shastras say Krishna decends on earth after certain time interval, they clearly declare themselves
to be true historic narrations. Kalpa Bheda of the Puranas clearly declare themselves to be true historic
narrations. In fact, Puranas come from the breathing of the Lord, how funny it sounds few harry potter
comics are coming out of the lord along with vedas. In fact, Tamasic Scriptures such as Shiva Purana,
Shaiva- Shakta Agamas are Fantasies says shastras themselves. Not Satvik Scriptures. Only tamasic
shastras are created out of the imagination of Siva.

Satvata Tantra 9.6 Says:

Lord Krishna singled me (Siva) out and said: O Siva, you should again and again conceal me with many
scriptures you write from your own imagination."

This will be discussed in detail in the very next Chapter. The Point is, behind such huge claim there must
be a scriptural proof. Ofcourse there's no scriptural references they have, maybe they'll provide after few
decades or century after Interpolating? Lets move on.

Vedanta Sutra 1.3 says:-

sastra yonitvat

(The speculations of the logicians are unable to teach us about Supreme Personality of Godhead)
because He may only be known by the revelation of the Vedic scriptures.
This is confirmed by the following statement of sruti sastra:

purvapara virod-hena ko 'rtho 'trabhimato bhavet ity adyam uhanam tarkah suska tarkam -vivarj ayet

"Logic is properly employed to resolve apparent contradictions in the texts of the Vedas. Dry logic,
without reference to scriptural revelation, should be abandoned. " (QUOTED BY BALADEV
VIDYABHUSHAN IN HIS COMMENTARY ON V.S 1.3)

ŚB 10.14.4:

ेय:सृ त भ मुद य ते वभो

ल य त ये केवलबोधल धये ।

तेषामसौ लेशल एव श यते

ना यद् यथा थूलतुषावघा तनाम्

"My dear Lord, devotional service unto You is the best path for self-realization. If someone gives up that
path and engages in the cultivation of speculative knowledge, he will simply undergo a troublesome
process and will not achieve his desired result. As a person who beats an empty husk of wheat cannot
get grain, one who simply speculates cannot achieve self-realization. His only gain is trouble"

ŚB 10.14.29:

अथा प ते दे व पदा बुज य-

सादलेशानुगह
ृ ीत एव ह ।

जाना त त वं भगवन् म ह नो

न चा य एकोऽ प चरं व च वन्

"My Lord, if one is favored by even a slight trace of the mercy of Your lotus feet, he can understand the
greatness of Your personality. But those who speculate to understand the Supreme Personality of
Godhead are unable to know You, even though they continue to study the Vedas for many years"

Baladeva Vidyabhushana in his Prameya Ratnavali, 9.2:

pratyaksam anumanam ca yat-sacivyena suddhimat maya-munkavalokadau pratyaksam vyabhicari yat

Direct perception and logic are actual sources of knowledge when they confirm the authoritative
statements found in Vedic revelation. Only foolish persons bewildered by the illusory material energy of
the Lord accept the misleading evidence of direct sensory perception.

Now, lets refute the allegation "Puranas are lesser than vedas or unimportant" Or "one can understand
scriptures and import of Vedas without Puranas".

Madhyandina-sruti, Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 2.4.10:

asya mahato bhutasya nihsvasitam etad yad rg-vedo yajur-vedah sama

vedo’tharvangirasa itihasah puranam ityadina

"O Maitreya, the Rg, Yajur, Sama and Atharva Vedas as well as the Itihasas and the Puranas all manifest
from the breathing of the Lord."

Gopatha Brahmana, purva 2.10:

evam ime sarva veda nirmitah sa-kalpah sa-rahasyah sa-brahmanah sopanisatkah setihasah
sanvakhyatah sa-puranan

"In this way, all the Vedas were manifested along with the Kalpas, Rahasyas, Brahmanas, Upanisads,
Itihasas, Anvakhyatas and the Puranas."

Chandogya Upanisad 7.1.4:

nama va rg-vedo yajur-vedah sama-veda atharvanas caturtha itihasa-puranah pancamo vedanam vedah

"Indeed, Rg, Yajur, Sama and Atharva are the names of the four Vedas. The Itihasas and Puranas are the
fifth Veda."

Srimad Bhagavatam 3.12.39:

itihāsa-purāṇāni pañcamaṁ vedam īśvaraḥ

“Itihasa and Puranas are Fifth Veda.”

Yamunacarya, quotes from mahabharata in his work Agama Pramana, 90.

"The assembled gods placed the four vedas on the one side of the balance (tula) and the Mahabharata on
the other, and found that the Mahabharata weighed more than the combined weight of the Vedas, it is
called Mahabharata since that time."

~ Mahabharata 1.265

Ramanujacarya in his Vedartha Sangraha 1.216

The Itihasas (Epics) and Puranas, works seeking to augment the Vedas, embody the same truth: Sri
Ramayana undertakes to augment the Vedas as evidenced by the opening, ‘The master, seeing those two
brilliant pupils, well established in the Vedas, took them up for purposes of reinforcing the Vedas
(Balakanda, 4: 6)

Madhvacarya quotes the following from Chhandogya upanishad in his Work called Vishnu Tattava
Nirnaya.

na caitEshAM vacanAnAmEva aprAmANyam | apourushEyatvAt vEdasya | itihAsapurANaha pancamO

vEdAnAm vEdaha' iti tad-griheetatvAt ca ||

The texts quoted (the Upanishads & Puranas) cannot be considered untrue, for the Veda is not an
authored composition and the other texts are admitted as authoritative by the Veda itself in the statement,
'Itihasa-purana is the fifth Veda as it forms the fifth in the series of Rk, Yajus, Saman and Atharvan'

Sripad Ramanujacarya in his Sri Bhashya says:

"The Veda should be amplified and supported by the Itihasas and the Puranas, because the Veda is afraid
of him who has little learning that he would do it wrong." [M.B. I. i. 264.]”

Sripad Ramanujacarya again, quotes the following from chandogya upanishad 7.1.4 in his Sri Bhashya:
At the beginning Narada says, 'I know the Rig−veda, the Yajur−veda, the Sama−veda, the Atharvana as the
fourth veda, the Itihasa− purana as the fifth veda,' and so on, enumerating all the various branches of
knowledge.

Vedanta Desika in his Dramidopanishad Tatparya Ratnavali, 4th verse Says:

"...The ltihasas and the 'Puranas

have but sought to clarify the import of the Vedas !..."

Atharva Veda 11.7.24:

rcah samani chandamsi puranam yajusa saha

ucchistaj-jajnire sarve divi deva divi-sritah

"The Rg, Sama, Yajur and Atharva became manifest from the Lord, along with the Puranas and all the
Devas residing in the heavens."

Atharva Veda 15.6.10–12:

a brhatim disam anu vyacalat tam itihasas ca puranam ca gathas ca itihasasya ca sa vai puranasya ca
gathanam ca narasamsinam ca priyam dhama bhavati ya evam veda

"He approached the brhati meter, and thus the Itihasas, Puranas, Gathas and Narasamsis became
favorable to him. One who knows this verily becomes the beloved abode of the Itihasas, Puranas, Gathas
and Narasamsis."

Mahabharata (Adi Parva 1.267) and Manu Samhita –

itihasa puranabhyam vedam samupabrmhayet

" One must complement one’s study of the Vedas with the Itihasas and the Puranas."

In the Prabhasa-khanda of the Skanda Purana (5.3.121-124) it is said –

veda-van niscalam manye puranartham dvijottamah

vedah pratisthitah sarve purane natra samsayah

bibhety-alpa-srutad vedo mam ayam calayisyati

itihasa-puranais tu niscalo’yam krtah purah

yan na drstam hi vedesu tad drstam smrtisu dvijah

ubhayor yan na drstam hi tat puranah pragiyate

yo veda caturo vedan sangopanisado dvijah

puranam naiva janati na ca sa syad vicaksana

" O best of the brahmanas, the meaning of the Puranas is unchanging just like that of the Vedas. The
Vedas are all sheltered within the Puranas without a doubt. The Veda has a fear that unqualified people
will read her and then distort her meaning. Thus, the significance of the Veda was fixed in the Puranas
and Itihasas. That which is not found in the Vedas is found in the Smrti. That which is not found in the
Smrti is to be found in the Puranas. Those who know even the Vedas and Upanisads are not learned if
they do not know the Puranas."

Thus, the allegation that Puranas are unimportant, lesser than vedas or Puranas are mythology in the
form of iconography has been refuted.

Summary: one cannot understand vedas without Puranas. Puranas are eternal, they all manifest along
with vedas. Puranas are the fifth veda along with Mahabharata. The reason they are called ‘Puranas’ is
because they make the Vedas complete (puranat puranam iti canyatra). This is not to suggest that the
Vedas are incomplete. It simply means that the Puranas are explanatory supplements which aid one to
understand the concise and ambiguous passages in the Vedas. If the Puranas complete the Vedas, it is
only logical that they must be Vedic in nature. That which is not found in the Vedas is found in the
Puranas. That which is not found in the Puranas is found in Vedas. Those who know even the Vedas and
Upanisads are not learned if they do not know the Puranas."
DOUBT: But Madhvacarya said in his Vishnu Tattva Nirnaya that Puranas are not eternal but vedas are, he
quoted from Rig Veda and paingi shruti.

" vA`cA vi'rUpa` nitya'yA" (Rigveda 8.75.6)

The Sruti says: ‘O sage, Virupa, praise him in eternal words.

"nityayA.anityayA staumi brahma tatparamaM padam.h" iti ||

And in words both eternal and non-eternal I praise that Brahman, who is the final goal’

"shrutirvAva nityA anityA vAva smR^itayo yAshchAnyA vAchaH" iti paiN^gishrutiH || 38 ||

The Paingi-sruti says: ‘The Srutis are eternal words and the smrtis and other speech constitute non-
eternal words’

ANSWER: the Puranas are supposed to explain the meaning of the Vedas and are only different by the
changes in words, chanda (metre), rsi, sequence etc. at the beginning of each creation. In this way they
are considered to be non-eternal, but their meaning will be the same as in the previous creation. For
example: Kalpa Bheda.

DOUBT: Vyas smriti 1.4 says whenever shruti and smriti contradict each other, shrutis have an upperhand.
Thus, does it mean Puranas should be rejected because puranas mention stories which are not present in
vedas.

ANSWER: Absence of something in vedas and presence of something in puranas is not a contradiction.

Prabhasa-khanda of the Skanda Purana says (Quoted this already) That which is not found in the shruti is
to be found in the Puranas. Those who know even the Vedas and Upanisads are not learned if they do not
know the Puranas. The very meaning of contradiction is misunderstood. First of all, the doubt or
objection itself is stupid because its a common sense that other scriptures will have different content or
else why will there be 18 Ditto copies of the vedas and be called shrutis? And most importantly, Satvik
Puranas never contradict Shrutis. Tamasic Puranas do. This will be explained in the coming chapter.

(CHAPTER 2 ENDS)
How can one understand which sect among Shaivism, Shaktism, Smartism, & Vaishnavism is the true one.
Its very clearly declared in the scriptures which is delusional and which is ultimate. All other sects are
basically based on Advaita mostly. Hence to understand it, one must first read the introduction of the
book.

People are of various types. Some like scary forms, they are inclined towards such forms like that of Ma
Kali, or lord Shiva due to they themselves dwelling into tamas. Some have undeveloped consciousness to
understand Krishna. They are unintelligent to grasp the personality of God and frame him as impersonal.
Bhagwatam says realization is of three levels. Brahman (the formless) Paramatma ( the localized) &
Bhagawan. Just like a person from a distance when observes a mountain, is not as clear as he moves
closer to the mountain. He will slowly notice trees, then few people and so on. For such people, Vyasdev
compiled suitable shastras for them to uplift their consciousness slowly. Shastras even provide Karma
khanda of the vedas to uplift and attract materialistic people into spirituality. Baladeva vidyabhushana
explains this very well in his vedanta sutra bhashya. Better than being atheists or have no rules and
regulations for eating meat like that of Mlechas and Yavanas, its better to attract such people by suitable
shastras to their level.

Lets start quotations from shastras as references.

 Any conclusion contradicting Vishnu's supremacy is delusional.

Padma Purana Uttara Khanda 235.17-21,25:

Lord Shiva says to mother Parvati:

O goddess, listen. I shall tell you that secret which is very wonderful. O goddess, you should not speak
what I have told you among people. O you of a good vow, I shall tell it to you since your body is not
separate from mine. In the age of Svayambhuva (Manu) in olden times there were great demons like
Namuci, who were very powerful, very valorous, very strong and great heroes. All of them were devoted to
Vishnu, were pure, and free from all sins. They followed the practices (laid down) in the triad of the Vedas.
All gods, being frustrated, led by lndra, and overcome by fear, approached Vishnu and sought his shelter.

Then Lord Vishnu says (in the narration of Lord Shiva):

'Taking to these doctrines, all of these demons will become averse to Me in a moment.There is no doubt
it. O powerful Rudra, in every age in My different incarnations I too shall worship you to delude the
demons. Following these doctrines,they will undoubtedly fall down.'

Padma purana, uttara khanda 6.71.114–116 states as follows:

paramo visnur eva ekas tat jnanam moksa sadhanam | shastranam nirnayastvesha tad anyan mohanaya
hi ||

“ Realization of supreme lord Vishnu alone leads to salvation. This is the settled view of all the scriptures.
What is contrary to this is only delusive.”

jnanam vina tu ya muktih samyam ca mama visnuna | tirtha adi matrato jnanam mama adhikyam ca
visnutah || abhedas ca asmad adinam muktanam harina tatha | ityadi sarvam mohaya kathyate putra na
anyatha||

“That salvation results without knowledge, my alleged equality with Lord Vishnu, that knowledge comes
simply by going to pilgrimage and my(Lord Shiva) superiority to Lord Vishnu. Equality of us or even of
liberated souls with Lord Vishnu—all this and more, Oh Son (karttikeya), are stated only for delusion and
not otherwise.”

Padma Purana 5.97.27

vyāmohāya carācarasya jagatas te te purāṇāgamās tāṃ tām eva hi devatāṃ paramikāṃ jalpantu
kalpāvadhi | siddhānte punar eka eva bhagavān viṣṇuḥ samastāgama- vyāpāreṣu vivecana-vyatikaraṃ
nīteṣu niścīyate//

“There are many types of Vedic literatures and supplementary Puranas. In each of them there are
particular demigods who are spoken of as the chief demigods. This is just to create an illusion for moving
and non moving living entities. Let them perpetually engage in such imaginations. However, when one
analytically studies all these Vedic literatures collectively, he comes to the conclusion that Lord Visnu is
the one and only Supreme Lord.”

Narsimha Purana 64.78–79 states as follows:

āloḍya sarvaśāstrāṇi vicārya ca punaḥ punaḥ idam ekaṃ suniṣpannaṃ dhyeyo nārāyaṇaḥ sadā

“ By scrutinizingly reviewing all the revealed scriptures and judging them again and again, it is now
concluded that Lord Narayana is the Supreme Absolute Truth, and thus He alone should be worshipped.

tyaktvā vyāmohakān sarvān tasmāc chāstrārthavistarān ananyacetā dhyāyasva nārāyaṇam atandritaḥ

“ Leave aside all the other process of expanding the meaning of the various scriptures ,which simply
bewilder the people. With one pointed devotion, always meditate on the Lord Narayana.”

Padma Purana 5.97.27:

(padme vaisakha-mahatmye yama-brahmana-samvade )

vyamohaya caracarasya jagatas te te puranagamas

tam tam eva hi devatam paramikam jalpantu kalpavadhi |

siddhante punar eka eva bhagavan viṣṇuḥ samastagama-

vyaparesu vivecana-vyatikaraṃ nitesu nisciyate

“ There are many types of Vedic literatures and supplementary Puranas. In each of them there are
particular demigods who are spoken of as the chief demigods. This is just to create an illusion for moving
and non-moving living entities. Let them perpetually engage in such imaginations. However, when one
analytically studies all these Vedic literatures collectively, he comes to the conclusion that Lord Visnu is
the one and only Supreme lord.”
  Guna Classifications of Scriptures:

Skanda Purana Says:

siva sastresu tad grahyam

bhagavat sastra yogi vat

“"The statements of the Saiva scriptures should be accepted only when they agree with the Vaisnava
scriptures.”

THE ABOVE VERSE IS QUOTED BY JIVA GOSWAMI IN HIS PARAMATMA SANDARBHA(TEXT 24).THIS
HAD ALSO BEEN QUOTED BY 13TH CENTURY SAINT MADHVACARYA IN MAHABHARATA TATPARYA
NIRNAYA 1.52.

Padma Purana ,Uttara khanda,chapter 236.18–20:

mātsyaṃ kaurmaṃ tathā laiṅgaṃ śaivaṃ skāndaṃ tathaiva ca

āgneyañ ca ṣaḍ etāni tāmasāni nibodha me

"Know from me that mastya, kurma, linga, siva, so also Skanda and Agni are tamasa(vicious)."

vaiṣṇavaḥ nāradīyañ ca tathā bhāgavataṃ śubhaṃ

gāruḍañ ca tathā pādmaṃ vārāhaṃ śubhadarśane

“The Vaisnava, Naradiya, Bhagavata, Garuda, Padma, Varaha should be known to be sattvika and should
be considered auspicious."

sāttvikāni purāṇāni vijñeyāni ca ṣaṭ pṛthak

brahmāṇḍaṃ brahmakaivartaṃ mārkaṇḍeyaṃ tathaiva ca

bhaviṣyad vāmanaṃ brāhmaṃ rājasāni ca ṣaḍvidhāḥ

" Know from me that, Brahmanda, Brahmavaivarta, Markendeya, Bhavishya,Vamana and Brahma are
rajasa (endowed with the quality of passion)."

The Kurma Purana 2.43.49 + Skanda Purana 7.1.2.87-88 + Matsya Purana (53.68-69) together states as
follows:

sāttvikeṣu purāṇeṣu māhātmyamadhikaṃ hareḥ

rājaseṣu ca māhātmyam adhikaṃ brahmaṇo viduḥ

tadvadagneśca māhātmyaṃ tāmaseṣu śivasya ca

"In the Puranas in the mode of goodness, the focus is the glories of Lord Hari. Those in the mode of
passion, the focus is on the glories of Lord Brahma. Similarly, those in the mode of ignorance, the focus is
on the glories of Lord Siva and Agni."

Now, Prakasa samhita (one of the pancharatra samhita) 1.4.32–34:

vārāhaṃ vaiṣṇavaṃ pādmaṃ vāyuproktaṃ ca gāruḍam

śrīmadbhāgavataṃ caiva sātvikānīti hi śrutiḥ

“ Varaha ,Vishnu, Padma, Vayu, Garudam and the Srimad bhagavata purana are sattvik puranas.”

brahmāṇḍaṃ brahmavaivartaṃ mārkaṇḍeyaṃ ca vāmanam bhaviṣyaṃ nārasiṃhaṃ ca rājasāni ṣaḍaiva

hi

“Brahmanda, Brahmavaivarta, Markendeya,Vamana,Bhavishya and Narsimha purana are always rajasic.”

mātsyaṃ kaurmyaṃ tathā laiṅgyaṃ śaivaṃ skāndaṃ tathaiva ca pāśupatasaṃjñikaṃ ceti tāmasāni vido
viduḥ

“Matysa, Kurma,Linga,Siva,Skanda and the Pasupata sastra are the tamasic in nature.”

The Garuda Purana (3.1.52) confirms:

visnoh puranam bhagavatam puranam

sattvottamam garudam cahur aryah

“The Aryans declare that Visnu Purana, Bhagavata Purana and Garuda Purana are the best of the Puranas
in the mode of goodness."

Skanda Purana: Book 2: Vaishnava Khanda, Section 7: Vaisakhamasa Mahatmya. Section (sub section) 9:
Vasudev Mahatmya, Chapter 6, Verse Number 17–19:

“In Your case, who are created out of sattvaguna, the true meaning of the vedas should be accepted,
otherwise, that kind of performance (involving violence) Is not at all proper. The nature of a person
conforms to one's own guna. One's attitude in the performance of a ritual conforms to one's own nature.
to you who are sattvikas the God is directly Vishnu, the consort of rama. For his gratification one is
authorized to perform a yajna which does not involve any violence. The performance of a sacrifice by
killing a beast, is contrary to dharma in your case, O excellent Suras”

Varaha Purana 70.24-26 says:

Siva says: In the krtayuga, Narayana is worshipped, in the tretayuga, he is worshipped in the form of
sacrifice and in the dvapara yuga according to pancaratras. In the kaliyuga he is worshipped in the
manner laid down by me in various Tamasic forms and with the motive animosity. There is no God above
him in the past, present and future.

 Purv Acaryas:

Sripad Ramanujacarya in his Vedartha Sangraha 1.131-132 says:

That even the followers of the Vedas, who take a wrong view of things, are to be judged on a footing of
equality with the non-Vedic thinkers has been laid down by Manu himself. He says, ‘The smritis that are
non-Vedic and the views that are perverse, are futile, being established in tamas (XII, 96)’. Only those who
have sattva uncontaminated by rajas and tamas as their innate propensity have a taste for the Vedas and
an understanding of the real contents of the Vedas. Matsya-Purana accords with this proposition: ‘There
are four categories — the mixed, the sattvik, the rajasik and the tamasik’. Some epochs of Brahma are
mixed, some are dominantly sattvika, some are dominantly rajasik and some dominantly tamas. After this
classification of epochs, it is stated that Brahma dominated by the predominant quality of each epoch,
proclaims the greatness of principles that correspond in quality to the epoch in question and to his own
dominant propensity in that epoch. ‘in the various Puranas produced in the past by Brahma, deities have
been praised corresponding to the dominant qualities of the epoch of production (Matsya)’. The principle
is more specifically laid down (in the following verses): ‘In the epochs of tamas the greatness of Agni and
Shiva is praised. In the epochs of rajas the greater greatness of Brahma is praised (Matsya. LIII, 68);’
‘Then in the epochs of sattva the still greater greatness of Hari is praised. Those who reach realization in
them attain the highest goal (Matsya. LIII, 67);’ ‘In the mixed epochs the greatness of Sarasvati and
manes is praised (Matsya. LIII, 69). The idea of the foregoing is this: Brahma is the first individual self (in
the realm of samsara). Therefore even in him, some days sattva, some days rajas, and some days tamas
preponderate. The Lord has said, ‘There is no creature either on earth or in heaven among the gods, which
is free from these material properties (Gita, 18:40)’. The Vedic text ‘He, who first creates Brahma and
imparts the Vedas to him (Sve. 6:35) ‘implies that Brahma is a creature, and is subordinated to the
commandments of the scriptures and therefore is an individual self in bondage. Further, it is to be
understood, that in case there is a conflict Sangraha between the Puranas that have been composed by
Brahma on the days in which sattvapreponderates and the Puranas that have been composed by him on
other days, the Puranas composed on the days of sattva are true and the others in conflict with them and
composed on other days are untrue. This principle of evaluation has been formulated by Brahma, himself,
when established in and devoted to sattva. The effects of the three qualities have been enumerated and
classified by the Lord himself: ‘Sattva originates knowledge, rajas originates covetousness and tamas
originates inadvertence, delusion and ignorance (Gita, 14:17);

“O Partha, do thou understand that buddhi is sattvika, which discerns action and non-action, what is to be
done and what is not to be done, what is to be feared and what is not to be feared, and bondage and
emancipation. That buddhi is rajas through which dharma and adharma, actions to be done and actions
not to be done are not cognised in the correct manner. That buddhi is tamasa, which being enveloped in
darkness takes adharma for dharma and in general takes everything, for its exact opposite (Gita, 18:30-
32)’. The author of each of the Puranas, first of all gathered from Brahma himself all the materials that
should go into the particular Purana and then transmitted that body of information through his
composition. Accordingly it has been stated, ‘I will tell you, as Brahma, told, in reply to the questions put to
him by the great sages like Daksa (Vi. Pu. 1:2:8)’. (This is the governing principle of evaluation in
connection with the Puranas). It may be asked, how we ought to proceed when we are confronted with
conflicting passages of the Vedas, which are not personal compositions. Our reply is that the conflict can
be eliminated by the determination of the total import of the texts, as already demonstrated.

Sripad Ramanujacarya again in his Vedartha sangraha 1.158 says:

All other Puranas with other aims must be interpreted consistently with this Purana (Vishnu Purana or
Satvik Puranas). That they have other aims is discerned in the manner of their commencement. Whatever
is found in them, altogether inconsistent with this Purana must be set aside as being of the nature of
tamas.

Yamunacarya in his Agama Pramana, 81 says:

Likewise in Matsya Purana:

" In those aeons where sattva prevails, the greatness of Vishnu is declared. In aeons predominated by
tamas the greatness of Fire and Siva is expounded."

Yamunacarya then, again in his agama pramana 86 says:

"Rudra is well known for spreading deluding doctrines"

And then he quotes

Varaha purana: "For Thou, strong armed Rudra, must cause deluding doctrines to be expounded, the
deceptions of jugglers and the like as well as conflicting practices. Having shown that the fruit can be
won with little effort, you must delude all these people quickly.

Linga Purana: "Those who consider the Supreme Person to be equal (to Siva) are to be regarded as
heretics who are expelled from the Way of the Veda."

Yamunacarya in his Strotra Ratna. 14 says:

Tvan sheelaroopa charithaih parama prakrishta

sattvena saatvikatayaa prabalaischa saastraih

prakhyaata daiva paramaart—ha vidaam mataischa

naivaasura prakritayah prabhavanti boddhum.

You are greater than the greatest. This is known to all, except those of a demoniac nature by i) Your
benevolent disposition, ii) by the loveliness of Your Fomi, iii) by your divine deeds, (iv) by Your exalted
Sattva nature. (v) by the accounts in the scriptures which are authoritative because they are Sattva in
tenor and (vi) by the precepts of the famous knowers of the supreme truth.
Madhvacarya in his Mahabharata Tatparna Nirnaya 1.35-36 says:

Since those granthas have been composed, under the orders of Vishnu, by Shiva and others, the themes
in those granthas that are not against the spirit of the Vedas and other pramanas are very much
acceptable.Eve Even if some of the riks in the Vedas appear to be going against the philosophy of the
Supremacy of Lord Vishnu, they have to be re-interpreted and understood to mean and indicate the
Supremacy of Lord Vishnu.

Madhvacarya again in his Mahabharata Tatparna Nirnaha 1.48-59:

"O Rudra, the one with great arms, I will compose illusionary shastras to put (tamasic) people into illusion.
You too get others to compose such shastras and you do the same as well. O One with great shoulders!
bring out points which does not exist anywhere, bring out contradictory messages. Mask my presence.
Make yourself shine. There exists such a statement (as above) in the Varaha Purana. The statements in
Brahmanda Purana also state the same. The attributes of the Lord, form, having a body that is pure
knowledge (contd) Absence of any defect, Hierarchy even in Moksha, anything that is against these
principles are for illusion of Asuras. That is the decision. A similar message exists in Skanda Purana as
well and has been told respectfully by Shiva to Shanmukha. Though Skanda Purana is a Shaiva Purana, it
is acceptable since it is in sync with the shastra of the Lord (Veda Vyasa). Lord Vishnu alone is Supreme.
His knowledge alone is the path to salvation. This is the purport of all shastras. All that is against these
principles have been composed to cause illusion. Moksha without knowledge, Equality between Vishnu
and me, direct knowledge due to pilgrimage and other such rituals, my superiority over Lord
Vishnu...Oneness of all of us and Oneness with Lord Hari after Mukti, all such statements, O dear son,
have been told only to cause illusion and not with any other purpose. In the Shaiva section of Padma
Purana itself, it has been told by Shiva himself. What Lord Hari had told him previously, he narrated the
same to Uma. O Shambhu! In the Kruta, Treta and Dwapara yugas, I will appear on earth in human form
and worship you and obtain boons from you. Using your created shastras, make people go away from me.
Because of this, those daityas who have taken the correct route will take the route of evil and destroy
themselves. In Vaishnava shastras or in the Vedas, there is no statement which ever attributes
supremacy to anyone apart from Lord Hari. Whereas in other shastras, there has sometimes been an
allusion to the supremacy of Lord Vishnu.

Madhvacarya in his Mahabharata Tatparna Nirnaya 1.56–58, 2.133— 134 says:

“In the Shaiva section of Padma Purana itself, it has been told by Shiva himself. What Lord Hari had told
him previously, he narrated the same to Uma. "O Shambhu! In the Kruta, Treta and Dwapara yugas, I will
appear on earth in human form and worship you and obtain boons from you” “Using your created
shastras, make people go away from me. Because of this, those daityas who have taken the correct route
will take the route of evil and destroy themselves. Lord Vishnu sometimes worships Shiva; Sometimes He
worships Rishis; Sometimes He worships Devatas; Sometimes He worships humans; He bows to them
and praises them; He asks boons from them; He establishes Lingas; He asks boons from Asuras; He, who
is eternally the Supreme Lord, independent, infinitely capable, infinitely knowledgeable and above all
beings, does so to cause illusion to (some) people”

DOUBT: Few Shaivaite and shaktas from pure agama background claim that puranas are unimportant to
them. In fact nigamas themselves, even vedas. Hence any quotation from them they don't care. How will
you reply to them? You quoted mostly from nigamas.

ANSWER: Wether they care or no is least our concern. They are free to close their eyes and believe what
they want but facts won't change. Saying that nigamas are unimportant to them is absurdity. Vaishnav
Agamas glorified Puranas many times Satvata tantra for example. Satvata tantra even declares Srimad
Bhagwatam as the essence of all Puranas. Let it be shaiva or shakta or vaishnav agamas, all discuss the
authenticity of Puranas and vedas, hence ignoring Nigamas is highest level of foolishness. Vaishnav
agamas reject the ideas of shaiva-shakta conclusions from their agamas, Shaivas and Shaktas struggle
hard to reconcile the contradictions of vaishnav agamas and puranas to theirs without Guna
Classification of Puranas or with their weird interpretations.

However, Shaiva-Shakta Agamas are nothing but imaginations. Not factual. Says agamas themselves.
Satvata Tantra 9.2,6,9 Says:

Sri Siva Said: In the beginning of Satya-yuga, all human beings were devotees of Lord Vishnu, they did not
worship the demigods, they only worshiped Lord Vishnu. Then the supreme personality of Godhead, the
husband of the goddess of fortune, singled me (Siva) out and said: "O siva, you should again and again
conceal me with many scriptures you write from your own imagination. Their intelligence made feeble
with these scriptures, the people stopped worshipping Lord Krishna.

Narada Pancaratra 4.2.29-30 Says:

The Supreme Lord continued: O Sambhu, I will obtain a benediction from You by worshiping You. Then, in
the Dvapara-yuga, I will incarnate in a human-like form. Thereafter, you will misguide people by preaching
the philosophy of impersonalism, thus keeping Me hidden. This will help serve the purpose of maintaining
the creation.

DOUBT: Padma Purana 236.20 says tamasa Puranas leads one to hell. If so, why did vyasa dev create it?

ANSWER: "hell" Here is not to be taken literally. For example, Bhagwatam 10.1.4 & 11.20.17 mentions if
we don't utilize our human body in the service of Krishna then we are killing our own soul. Here "killing our
soul" is not literally speaking, like BG 2.20 contradicts it. Sometimes shastras convey non-literal texts.
For example, Krishna's feet got hurt, Krishna's lotus like feet. Here " lotus" is not literal. Such logic can
only be applied at that time when we see two direct contradictions. Here "Hell" Indicates "Misleading".
Another explanation is, its referring " Hell" In a indirect method, by saying that because satvika puranas
directly provide ultimate liberation which tamas puranas don't, one still remains in the cycle of birth and
death, and is obviously prone to fall down into hellish life. If we check the context of Padma Purana
236.20, we see in Padma Purana Uttara Khanda 235.17-21,25:

Lord Shiva says to mother Parvati:

O goddess, listen. I shall tell you that secret which is very wonderful. O goddess, you should not speak
what I have told you among people. O you of a good vow, I shall tell it to you since your body is not
separate from mine. In the age of Svayambhuva (Manu) in olden times there were great demons like
Namuci, who were very powerful, very valorous, very strong and great heroes. All of them were devoted to
Vishnu, were pure, and free from all sins. They followed the practices (laid down) in the triad of the Vedas.
All gods, being frustrated, led by lndra, and overcome by fear, approached Vishnu and sought his shelter.

Then Lord Vishnu says (in the narration of Lord Shiva):

'Taking to these doctrines, all of these demons will become averse to Me in a moment.There is no doubt
O powerful Rudra, in every age in My different incarnations I too shall worship you to delude the demons.
Following these doctrines,they will undoubtedly fall down.' So here we understand, demons who are in
dress of saints are leaded by tamasic scriptures, towards hell. Not every Shaiva. That is, Tamasic Puranas
are prone to lead towards hell, not mandatory.

DOUBT: Why is BrahmaVaivarta Purana in the category of Rajasik Puranas, Satvika Puranas focus on Hari,
which BrahmaVaivarta Purana does.

ANSWER: In Rajasik Puranas, there are mixed portions dedicated to various deities. We should accept
those which are dedicated to Krishna and reject the remaining. Some may object saying, there are
negligible or no chapters/verses dedicated to other deities as supreme. In reply, There must be. If there
aren't, they must have been lost. Vaishnava parampara is very concerned about the preservation of
Shastra, therefore, the Vaishnava portion must have been passed on.

(CHAPTER 3 ENDS)
We tend to cross check what Srila Prabhupada had told through other translations of a text, other acaryas,
Purv acaryas etc. But Prabhupada's words are not deserving to be cross checked because he is declared
to be a Vedic Authority by Shastras themselves and also by Purv Acaryas. Specially Chaitanya
Mahaprabhu who is none other than Krishna sent Srila Prabhupada.

In the Bhagavata-mahatmya in the Uttara-khanda (194.57) of the Padma Purana, bhakti personified tells
Narada muni that after travelling through several places in India, she reached Vrndavana. Then she
declares her resolution of leaving from Vrndavana to go to foreign countries:

idam sthanam parityajya videsam gamyate maya

“Leaving this place, I will go abroad.”

It was srila Prabhupada who spreaded bhakti-yoga and hari nama to foreign countries. Thus he alone
fulfilled this prophecy.

By the end of the Brahma-vaivarta Purana (Krsna-janma-khanda, chap. 129, 49-51) we

find the narration of the departure of Lord Krsna from this world and how all the holy
rivers headed by the personified Ganges approached Him:

bhagirathy uvaca he natha ramana-srestha yasi golokam uttamam asmakam ka gatis catra bhavisyati
kalau yuge

Ganga Devi said: “O Lord, best of lovers, now that You are going to the supreme abode, Goloka, what will
be our situation here in this age of Kali?”

sri bhagavan uvaca kaleh panca sahasrani varsani tistha bhutale papani papino yanti tubhyam dasyanti
snanatah

The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: “Sinful people will come to you and upon bathing will give you
their sins. You must remain like this on earth for 5,000 years of the age of Kali.”

man-mantropasaka-sparsad bhasmi-bhutani tat-ksanat bhavisyanti darsanac ca snanad eva hi jahnavi

“O Ganga, then there will be many devotees worshipping Me by My mantra, and merely by their touch,
glance and bathing all those sins will be immediately burnt.”

Again, The person who boosted krishna bhakts world wide was srila Prabhupada.

In the Sri Caitanya-bhagavata (Antya, 4.126), Lord Caitanya declares:

prthivi paryanta yata ache desa grama sarvatra sancara haibeka mora nama

“In every town and village of the world, the chanting of My name will be heard.”

In the Caitanya Mangala (Sutra-khanda, song 12, texts 564-565) Lord Caitanya clearly mentions that He
will send His leading preacher abroad:

ebe nama sankirtana tiksna khadga lana antara asura jivera pheliba katiya yadi papi chadi dharma dura
dese yaya mora senapati-bhakta yaibe tathaya

“Taking the sharp sword of the congregational chanting of the Holy Name, I will root out and destroy the
demoniac mentality in the hearts of the conditioned souls.If some sinful people escape and giving up
religious principles go to far off countries, then My commander in chief (Senapati Bhakta) will appear to
chase them and distribute Krsna consciousness.”

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati also had predicted the propagation
of the sankirtana movement. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura wrote in the Sajjana-tosani volume of 1885:

“Lord Caitanya did not advent Himself to liberate only a few men in India. Rather, His main objective was
to emancipate all living entities of all countries throughout the entire universe and preach the Eternal
Religion…. There is no doubt that this unquestionable order will come to pass…. Very soon the
unparalleled path of hari-nama-sankirtana will be propagated all over the world…. Oh, for that day when
the fortunate English, French, Russian, German, and American people will take up banners, mrdangas, and
karatalas and raise kirtana through their streets and towns! When will that day come? … That day will
witness the holy transcendental ecstasy of the Vaisnava dharma to be the only dharma, and all the sects
and religions will flow like rivers into the ocean of Vaisnava dharma. When will that day come?”

Now Srila Prabhupada himself:

Prabhupada: And in my horoscope there was written there, "After seventieth year this man will go outside
India and establish so many temples.(…) I could not understand. "What is this, that I have to go outside
India? That is not…" And Guru Maharaja foretold. He told my Godbrothers, Sridhara Maharaja and others,
that "He'll do the needful when time comes. Nobody requires to help him." He told in 1935. And after all,
this was true(?). Guru Maharaja told. And in the beginning, first sight, he told, "You have to do this."

(Room Conversation, June 17, 1977, Vrndavana)

(CHAPTER 4 ENDS)
Swami Nischalananda shamelessly claimed Sikshashtakam of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu to convey Advaita
Vedanta. And he actually mean to say, Gauranga was a Advaitin. In Govardhan math YT Channel. Let's see
how true is this claim, he claims that he read the biography of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu minimum 50 times.
Well, There's nothing more remaining after hearing this, but to die out of laughter.

the first verse of Sikshashtakam is:

ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanaṁ bhava-mahā-dāvāgni-nirvāpaṇaṁ

śreyaḥ-kairava-candrikā-vitaraṇaṁ vidyā-vadhū-jīvanam

ānandāmbudhi-vardhanaṁ prati-padaṁ pūrṇāmṛtāsvādanaṁ

sarvātma-snapanaṁ paraṁ vijayate śrī-kṛṣṇa-saṅkīrtanam

"Let there be all victory for the chanting of the holy name of Lord Kṛṣṇa, which can cleanse the mirror of
the heart and stop the miseries of the blazing fire of material existence. That chanting is the waxing
moon that spreads the white lotus of good fortune for all living entities. It is the life and soul of all
education. The chanting of the holy name of Kṛṣṇa expands the blissful ocean of transcendental life. It
gives a cooling effect to everyone and enables one to taste full nectar at every step."

to which Swami Nischalananda said (In short):

If Krishna is Atmiya only, then what is the need of a mirror? For beholding one’s beloved, one’s own eyes
are sufficient, no need of mirror; but, to see one’s own face, one requires a mirror.

REPLY: Such Absurd allegations are not expected from a person in the position of "Shankaracarya". Truly
laughable claim. He cherry picked the first verse out of 8. Actually the cherry picked verse even though
taken as isolated, doesn't support the claim.
Skanda Purana: Book 1, Maheshwara khanda, Section 3: arunachal mahatmyapurvardha, Chapter 1, verse
number 7 states:

"Even by the single instruction, the entire range of knowledge reflects in the mirror of my mind which is
cleansed with the sacred ash of devotion to you”.

Here we see, the "Mirror" is compared to the mind for reflecting Knowledge. Because a dirty layer on a
mirror obstructs mirror to reflect properly. Similarly, Gauranga related Mirror to the heart for reflecting
Bhakti. How will Mayawadis interpret now? Do we see the self in mind? Soul resides in the mind or in the
heart? Nischalananda ji's interpretation if applied to Skanda Purana's verse, it will be a disaster. Even lets
forget Skanda Purana's reference, still its a common sense that Nischalananda ji's interpretation is
laughable because it contradicts the context top to bottom.

namnam akari bahudha nija-sarva-shaktis

tatrarpita niyamitah smarane na kalah

etadrishi tava kripa bhagavan mamapi

durdaivam idrisham ihajani nanuragaha

"O my Lord, Your holy name alone can render all benediction to living beings, and thus You have hundreds
and millions of names, like Krsna and Govinda. In these transcendental names You have invested all Your
transcendental energies. There are not even hard and fast rules for chanting these names. O my Lord, out
of kindness You enable us to easily approach You by Your holy names, but I am so unfortunate that I have
no attraction for them"

trinad api sunichena

taror api sahishnuna

amanina manadena

kirtaniyah sada harih

"One should chant the holy name of the Lord in a humble state of mind, thinking oneself lower than the
straw in the street; one should be more tolerant than a tree, devoid of all sense of false prestige, and
should be ready to offer all respect to others. In such a state of mind one can chant the holy name of the
Lord constantly"

na dhanam na janam na sundarim

kavitam va jagad-isha kamaye

mama janmani janmanishvare

bhavatad bhaktir ahaituki twayi

O almighty Lord, I have no desire to accumulate wealth, nor do I desire beautiful women nor do I want any
number of followers. I only want Your causeless devotional service, birth after birth.

ayi nanda-tanuja kinkaram

patitam mam vishame bhavambudhau

kripaya tava pada-pankaja-

sthita-dhuli-sadrisham vichintaya

O son of Maharaja Nanda (Krsna), I am Your eternal servitor, yet somehow or other I have fallen into the
ocean of birth and death. Please pick me up from this ocean of death and place me as one of the atoms
at Your lotus feet.

nayanam galad-ashru-dharaya

vadanam gadgada-ruddhaya gira

pulakair nichitam vapuh kada

tava nama-grahane bhavishyati

O my Lord, when will my eyes be decorated with tears of love flowing constantly when I chant Your holy
name? When will my voice choke up, and when will the hairs of my body stand on end at the recitation of
Your name?

yugayitam nimeshena

chakshusha pravrishayitam

shunyayitam jagat sarvam

govinda-virahena me
O Govinda! Feeling Your separations I am considering a moment to be like twelve years or more. Tears
are flowing from my eyes like torrents of rain, and I am feeling all vacant in the world in Your absence.

ashlishya va pada-ratam pinashtu mam

adarshanan marma-hatam karotu va

yatha tatha va vidadhatu lampato

mat-prana-nathas tu sa eva naparah

I know no one but Krsna as my Lord, and He shall remain so even if He handles me roughly by His
embrace or makes me brokenhearted by not being present before me. He is completely free to do
anything and everything, for He is always my worshipful Lord, unconditionally.

Statements made by Gauranga Mahaprabhu such as:

"O son of Maharaja Nanda (Krsna), I am Your eternal servitor", "He is always my worshipful Lord", "I only
want Your causeless devotional service, birth after birth" "You have hundreds and millions of names, like
Krsna and Govinda. In these transcendental names"

Who but a dull head will claim Shikshashtakam to promote Advaita. It Does not promote Mayawad
philosophy at any point. Instead, Sikshashtakam promotes hardcore Dwaita. If a mayawadi in the position
of Shankaracarya be like this, what must be the followers be like? Achintya.

(CHAPTER 5 ENDS)