“Lord Brahma is the guru of Narada Muni, who is the guru of Vyasadeva, and Vyasadeva is the guru of Madhvacarya. Thus the Gaudiya-Madhva-sampradaya is in the disciplic succession from Narada Muni. The members of this disciplic succession–in other words, the members of the Krsna consciousness movement–should follow in the footsteps of Narada Muni by chanting the transcendental vibration Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna, Krsna Krsna, Hare Hare. Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare. They should go everywhere to deliver the fallen souls by vibrating the Hare Krsna mantra and the instructions of Bhagavad-gita, Srimad-Bhagavatam and Caitanya-caritamrta.”
In the later age the Brahma Sampradaya was handed down though Madhva Acarya; in this Madhva Acarya disciplic succession came Isvara Puri. This Isvara Puri was accepted as Spiritual Master of Lord Caitanya. Therefore, we being in disciplic succession of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, we are known as the Madhva Sampradaya. And because Lord Caitanya appeared in Bengal, which country is called Gaudadesa, our Sampradaya party is known as Madhva Gaudiya Sampradaya. But all these Sampradayas are non-different from one another because they believe and worship the Supreme Lord. Any other Sampradaya who are Impersonalist or voidist or non-devotee, they are rejected by us.”
-Srila Prabhupada Letter to Upendra, 02-13-68
“So we belong to the Gaudiya-sampradaya. Gaudiya means, Gaudiya… Gauda-desa is called Bengal. There are panca-gauda. Punjab is also called Gauda-desa. There are five gauda and five dravida. In southern India, they are called dravida, and in the north India, they are called gauda-desa. So Gauda, Bengal is also Gauda, and the Vaisnavas belonging to Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s cult, they are called Gaudiya-Vaisnava, Bengali Vaisnava. So Caitanya Mahaprabhu happened to be a Bengali, but He belonged to the Madhva-sampradaya. His guru was Isvara Puri, and his guru, Isvara Puri’s guru, was Madhavendra Puri. And Madhavendra Puri belonged to Madhvacarya-sampradaya.”
-Srila Prabhupada Lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam, 12-22-74, Bombay
…. Gaudiya Vaisnava, means the followers of Caitanya Mahaprabhu… Especially in Bengal, there are many thousands followers, Bengal and Orissa. They are mainly followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, and you will find in Vrndavana, Navadvipa, many Bengali Vaisnavas, followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. They are living there very, I mean to say, austerity, following austerity, no very much careful about the bodily maintenance. But they are living. They have practically no income, but still, they do not go away from Vrndavana. Similarly, Kaviraja Gosvami also took shelter of Vrndavana under the lotus feet of Madana-mohana. Therefore he says, mat-sarvasva-padambhojau: “The lotus feet of Madana-mohana is my everything. I have taken shelter of Madana-mohanaji. That is my everything.” That is Vaisnava feeling. They think the lotus feet of Krsna as their only possession. But that is the greatest possession. What this material possession will do? One who has taken possession, at least one who is allowed to take possession of the lotus feet of Madana-mohana, is not very easy thing. If Krsna gives him the facility… Krsna is prepared. How? Simply by service, one can easily become in possession of the lotus feet of the Lord. Sevonmukhe hi jihvadau svayam eva sphuraty adah. We cannot bring in possession the lotus feet of the Supreme Being. That is not possible. But if we render service, He gives the allowance, “Yes, you can be under My shelter of feet.”
-Srila Prabhupada Lecture on Caitanya-caritamrta, 03-04-75, Dallas
“Beginning from Madhvacarya down to the spiritual master of Madhavendra Puri, the acarya named Laksmipati, there was no realization of devotional service in conjugal love. Sri Madhavendra Puri introduced the conception of conjugal love for the first time in the Madhvacarya-sampradaya, and this conclusion of the Madhvacarya-sampradaya was revealed by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu when He toured southern India and met the Tattvavadis, who supposedly belonged to the Madhvacarya-sampradaya.
….Worship in separation is considered by the Gaudiya-Madhva-sampradaya to be the topmost level of devotional service. According to this conception, the devotee thinks of himself as very poor and neglected by the Lord. Thus he addresses the Lord as dina-dayardra natha, as did Madhavendra Puri. Such an ecstatic feeling is the highest form of devotional service. Because Krsna had gone to Mathura, Srimati Radharani was very much affected, and She expressed Herself thus: “My dear Lord, because of Your separation My mind has become overly agitated. Now tell Me, what can I do? I am very poor and You are very merciful, so kindly have compassion upon Me and let Me know when I shall see You.” Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu was always expressing the ecstatic emotions of Srimati Radharani that She exhibited when She saw Uddhava at Vrndavana. Similar feelings, experienced by Madhavendra Puri, are expressed in this verse. Therefore, Vaisnavas in the Gaudiya-Madhva-sampradaya say that the ecstatic feelings experienced by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu during His appearance came from Sri Madhavendra Puri through Isvara Puri. All the devotees in the line of the Gaudiya-Madhva-sampradaya accept these principles of devotional service.”
-Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya lila 4:197
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura remarks that only Lord Krsna was worshiped in the disciplic succession of Madhvacarya up to the advent of His Holiness Sripada Laksmipati Tirtha. After Srila Madhavendra Puri, worship of both Radha and Krsna was established. For this reason Sri Madhavendra Puri is accepted as the root of worship in ecstatic love. Unless one is connected to the disciplic succession of Madhavendra Puri, there is no possibility of awakening the symptoms of ecstatic love. The word gosani is significant in this connection. The spiritual master who is fully surrendered unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead and has no business other than the Lord’s service is called the best of the paramahamsas. A paramahamsa has no program for sense gratification; he is interested only in satisfying the senses of the Lord. One who has control of the senses in this way is called a gosani or a gosvami, master of the senses. The senses cannot be controlled unless one is engaged in the service of the Lord; therefore the bona fide spiritual master, who has full control over his senses, engages twenty-four hours a day in the Lord’s service. He can therefore be addressed as gosani or gosvami. The title gosvami cannot be inherited but can be given only to a bona fide spiritual master.”
-Caitanya-caritamrta, Madyam lila 9:289
“…. Bhagavatam is accepted as the real commentary on the Vedanta-sutra. Real commentary. Bhasyam brahma-sutranam. Vedartha paribrmhitam. These are the statements. This is accepted by the acaryas. In the Gaudiya-sampradaya, therefore, the Gosvamis, they did not write any comment on the Vedanta-sutra although other acaryas like Ramanujacarya, Madhavacarya, they wrote commentaries on the Bhagavad, uh, Vedanta-sutra. But our Gosvamis, they did not write purposefully, because they accept that there is already natural perfect commentary written by the same author, Vyasadeva, the Srimad-Bhagavatam. Bhasyam brahma-sutranam.”
-Srila Prabhupada Lecture on Nectar of Devotion, 01-01-73, Bombay
“The sampradaya must have understanding of the Brahma-sutra, Vedanta-sutra. So all the sampradayas, they have got their commentary on the Vedanta-sutra and… Even Sankaracarya. But his commentary is not accepted by the Vaisnava acaryas because he has tried to derive some meaning, interpretation. But there is no question of interpretation. When the things are clear, in the Brahma-sutra, all the sutras are very clear. So you don’t require any interpretation. You can expand, explain very elaborately. That is another thing. But you cannot go beyond the sutra.
….So far we are concerned, Madhva-Gaudiya Sampradaya, our acaryas, they took it, Srimad-Bhagavatam, as the right commentary on Brahma-sutra. Bhasyam brahma-sutranam vedartha-paribrmhitam. This Srimad-Bhagavatam is the real bhasya of Brahma-sutra. So the Gaudiya Sampradaya did not make any commentary on the Brahma-sutra because they took it, Caitanya Mahaprabhu took it as, Srimad-Bhagavatam, as a natural commentary, because Srimad-Bhagavatam is also made by Vyasadeva and Vyasadeva is the original author of Brahma-sutra. So author made his own commentary; so there was no need of another commentary. This is the Gaudiya-siddhanta, Gaudiya-vaisnava-siddhanta.
But sometimes back, in Jaipur, there was a challenge that “The Gaudiya Sampradaya has no commentary on the Vedanta-sutra.” So at that time Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura was requested… Because he was grand scholar, grand old man scholar, at that time living in Vrndavana… So he was very old at that time; so he authorized Baladeva Vidyabhusana, that “You do it.” There was no need, but people are demanding, “Where is your commentary on the Vedanta-sutra?” So Baladeva Vidyabhusana, with the order of Govindaji at Jaipur, he wrote the commentary on Brahma-sutra. That name is Govinda-bhasya. So the Gaudiya-Brahma Sampradaya, they have got also commentary on Brahma-sutra. That is required.”
-Srila Prabhupada Lecture on Bhagavad-gita, 09-30-73, Bombay