Shankaracharya's Philosophy Made India Weak and Poor

 https://blog.shabda.co/2021/07/17/how-shankaracharyas-philosophy-made-india-weak-and-poor/?

Prabhupāda : [...] Bhagavān says, "I am everything." So where is imperson? How they can bring in impersonal at all? It is simply dragging (?) the matter. This impersonal has killed India's Vedic culture.

Guest: Well, the example is that Śaṅkarācārya, who was of course . . .

Prabhupāda: Śaṅkarācārya, he advised bhaja govindam, bhaja govindam, "Hey you rascal, whatever I have said, you just . . ."

Guest: On the one hand he reached the height of that intellectual exercise, at the same time he realized that bhaja govindam.

Prabhupāda: No. He is correct in the study. Because his mission was to stop atheism. At that time India was full of Buddhistic philosophy. Atheism. So his preaching was to stop Buddhism. Therefore, the Buddhists are śūnyavādis. So he said, "No, it is not śūnya. That is Brahman. This material world is false, . . . (indistinct) . . ." Lord Buddha said everything is false. He said: "No, the material world is false, Brahman is false, brahma satyaṁ jagan mithyā. But he did not give any further information of Brahman. But at last he said brahma me govindaṁ brahmate bhaja govindam.

Guest: There's a very nice story about this illusion. That once he was walking and someone who knew that Śaṅkarācārya preached this illusion business, was riding on an elephant, so he asked his driver, "Chase Śaṅkarācārya." And of course he did and Śaṅkarācārya started running. So this man said: "Why are you running, since this is illusion?" And he said: "So is my running." (laughter) He said: "So is my running, that's also an illusion."

Rūpānuga: But sometimes the impersonalists, they say, Prabhupāda, that this Kṛṣṇa consciousness is just the beginning platform, that after Kṛṣṇa consciousness then one can come to impersonal realization. They say that in the scriptures only Bhagavad-gītā and a few scriptures teach about Kṛṣṇa but the rest of the Vedas don't even talk about Kṛṣṇa's name. So, therefore, this impersonalism is higher realization, but one comes to it, after bhakti.

Prabhupāda: No. There are Vedas, there are so many names described. Kṛṣṇa says, vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyam (BG 15.15). If one has not understood Kṛṣṇa by studying Vedas, then he has not studied Vedas. It is very confidential. Otherwise, why Kṛṣṇa says vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyam? 

If one has studied Veda, but has not understood Kṛṣṇa, then his labor is useless. Bahūnāṁ janmanām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate (BG 7.19). If one is actually jñānavān, then he . . . (indistinct) . . . Śaṅkarācārya said bhaja govindam, bhaja govindam. That is real knowledge. But if one says that in the Vedas, you don't find Kṛṣṇa's name, then he has not studied Veda. Because Kṛṣṇa says, vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyam (BG 15.15). The actual purpose of studying Vedas means to understand Kṛṣṇa. If one has not understood Kṛṣṇa, then śrama eva hi kevalam (SB 1.2. They have simply labored for nothing.
[ 760705 - Conversation A - Washington D.C. ]