sannyÄsÄ« ha-iyÄ kare gÄyana, nÄcana
nÄ kare vedÄnta-pÄá¹ha, kare saá¹…kÄ«rtana
1 times this text was mentioned in purports to other texts: LCC(1)
sannyÄsÄ« - a person in the renounced order of life; ha-iyÄ - accepting such a position; kare - does; gÄyana - singing; nÄcana - dancing; nÄ kare - does not practice; vedÄnta-pÄá¹ha - study of the VedÄnta philosophy; kare saá¹…kÄ«rtana - but simply engages in saá¹…kÄ«rtana.
The blasphemers said, “Although a sannyÄsÄ«, He does not take interest in the study of VedÄnta but instead always engages in chanting and dancing in saá¹…kÄ«rtana.
Fortunately or unfortunately, we also meet such MÄyÄvÄdÄ«s who criticize our method of chanting and accuse us of not being interested in study. They do not know that we have translated volumes and volumes of books into English and that the students in our temples regularly study them in the morning, afternoon and evening. We are writing and printing books, and our students study them and distribute them all over the world. No MÄyÄvÄdÄ« school can present as many books as we have; nevertheless, they accuse us of not being fond of study. Such accusations are completely false. But although we study, we do not study the nonsense of the MÄyÄvÄdÄ«s.
MÄyÄvÄdÄ« sannyÄsÄ«s neither chant nor dance. Their technical objection is that this method of chanting and dancing is called tauryatrika, which indicates that a sannyÄsÄ« should completely avoid such activities and engage his time in the study of VedÄnta. Actually, such men do not understand what is meant by VedÄnta. In the Bhagavad-gÄ«tÄ (15.15) Kṛṣṇa says, vedaiÅ› ca sarvair aham eva vedyo vedÄnta-ká¹›d veda-vid eva cÄham: “By all the Vedas I am to be known; indeed I am the compiler of VedÄnta, and I am the knower of the Vedas.†Lord Kṛṣṇa is the actual compiler of VedÄnta, and whatever He speaks is VedÄnta philosophy. Although they are lacking the knowledge of VedÄnta presented by the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the transcendental form of ÅšrÄ«mad-BhÄgavatam, the MÄyÄvÄdÄ«s are very proud of their study. Foreseeing the bad effects of their presenting VedÄnta philosophy in a perverted way, ÅšrÄ«la VyÄsadeva compiled ÅšrÄ«mad-BhÄgavatam as a commentary on the VedÄnta-sÅ«tra. ÅšrÄ«mad-BhÄgavatam is bhÄá¹£yo ’yaá¹ brahma-sÅ«trÄṇÄm; in other words, all the VedÄnta philosophy in the aphorisms of the Brahma-sÅ«tra is thoroughly described in the pages of ÅšrÄ«mad-BhÄgavatam. Thus the factual propounder of VedÄnta philosophy is a Kṛṣṇa conscious person who always engages in reading and understanding the Bhagavad-gÄ«tÄ and ÅšrÄ«mad-BhÄgavatam and teaching the purport of these books to the entire world. The MÄyÄvÄdÄ«s are very proud of having monopolized the VedÄnta philosophy, but devotees have their own commentaries on VedÄnta such as ÅšrÄ«mad-BhÄgavatam and others written by the ÄcÄryas. The commentary of the Gauá¸Ä«ya Vaiṣṇavas is the Govinda-bhÄá¹£ya.
The MÄyÄvÄdÄ«s’ accusation that devotees do not study VedÄnta is false. The MÄyÄvÄdÄ«s do not know that chanting, dancing and preaching the principles of ÅšrÄ«mad-BhÄgavatam, called bhÄgavata-dharma, are the same as studying VedÄnta. Since they think that reading VedÄnta philosophy is the only function of a sannyÄsÄ« and they did not find Caitanya MahÄprabhu engaged in such direct study, they criticized the Lord. ÅšrÄ«pÄda Åšaá¹…karÄcÄrya has given special stress to the study of VedÄnta philosophy: vedÄnta-vÄkyeá¹£u sadÄ ramantaḥ kaupÄ«navantaḥ khalu bhÄgyavantaḥ. “A sannyÄsÄ«, accepting the renounced order very strictly and wearing nothing more than a loincloth, should always enjoy the philosophical statements in the VedÄnta-sÅ«tra. Such a person in the renounced order is to be considered very fortunate.†The MÄyÄvÄdÄ«s in VÄrÄṇasÄ« blasphemed Lord Caitanya because His behavior did not follow these principles. Lord Caitanya, however, bestowed His mercy upon these MÄyÄvÄdÄ« sannyÄsÄ«s and delivered them by means of His VedÄnta discourses with PrakÄÅ›Änanda SarasvatÄ« and SÄrvabhauma Bhaá¹á¹ÄcÄrya.
