406
Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta
Therefore Śaṅkarācārya says that Śaṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha must be creations of that original cause.
Great souls assert that Nārāyaṇa, who is known as Paramātmā, the Supersoul, is beyond material nature, and this is in accordance with the statements of the Vedic literature. Māyāvādīs also agree that Nārāyaṇa can expand Himself in various forms. Śaṅkara says that he does not attempt to argue that portion of the devotees' understanding, but he must protest the idea that Śaṅkarṣaṇa is produced from Vāsudeva, Pradyumna is produced from Śaṅkarṣaṇa, and Aniruddha is produced from Pradyumna, for if Śaṅkarṣaṇa is understood to represent the living entities created from the body of Vāsudeva, the living entities would have to be noneternal. The living entities are supposed to be freed from material contamination by engaging in prolonged temple worship of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, reading Vedic literature and performing  yoga  and pious activities to attain the Supreme Lord. But if the living entities had been created from material nature at a certain point, they would be noneternal and would have no chance to be liberated and associate with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. When a cause is nullified, its results are nullified. In the Second Chapter of  Vedānta-sūtra , Ācārya Vedavyāsa has also refuted the conception that the living beings were ever born ( nātmā śruter nityatvāc ca tābhyaḥ ). Because there is no creation for the living entities, they must be eternal.
Śaṅkarācārya says (verse 43) that devotees think that Pradyumna, who is considered to represent the senses, has sprung from Śaṅkarṣaṇa, who is considered to represent the living entities. But we cannot actually experience that a person can produce senses. Devotees also say that from Pradyumna has sprung Aniruddha, who is considered to represent the ego. But Śaṅkarācārya says that unless the devotees can show how ego and the means of knowledge can generate from a person, such an explanation of the  Vedānta-sūtra  cannot be accepted, for no other philosophers accept the  sūtras  in that way.
Śaṅkarācārya also says (verse 44) that he cannot accept the devotees' idea that Śaṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha are equally as powerful as the absolute Personality of Godhead, full in the six opulences of knowledge, wealth, strength, fame, beauty and renunciation, and free from the flaw of generation at a certain point. Even if They are full expansions, the flaw of generation remains. Vāsudeva, Śaṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha, being distinct individual persons, cannot be one. Therefore if They are accepted as absolute, full and equal, there would have to be many Personalities of Godhead. But there is no need to accept that there are many Personalities of Godhead, because acceptance of one omnipotent God is sufficient for all purposes. The acceptance of more than one God is contradictory to the conclusion that Lord Vāsudeva, the absolute Personality of Godhead, is one without a second. Even if we agree to accept that the quadruple forms of Godhead are all identical, we cannot avoid the incongruous flaw of noneternity. Unless we accept that there are some differences among the personalities, there is no meaning to the idea that Śaṅkarṣaṇa is an expansion of Vāsudeva, Pradyumna is an expansion of Śaṅkarṣaṇa, and Aniruddha is an expansion of Pradyumna. There must be a distinction between cause and effect. For example, a pot is distinct from the earth from which it is made, and therefore we can ascertain that the earth is the cause and