In Bhagavad-gītā (2.65) it is said: prasāde sarva-duḥkhānāṁ hānir asyopajāyate. Unless one is self-satisfied, he cannot be free from the miserable conditions of material existence. Therefore it is essential to render service to the brāhmaṇas and Vaiṣṇavas to achieve the perfection of self-satisfaction. Śrīla Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura therefore says:
tāṅdera caraṇa sevi bhakta-sane vāsa
janame janame haya, ei abhilāṣa
"Birth after birth I desire to serve the lotus feet of the ācāryas and live in a society of devotees." A spiritual atmosphere can be maintained only by living in a society of devotees and by serving the orders of the ācāryas. The spiritual master is the best brāhmaṇa. At present, in the age of Kali, it is very difficult to render service to the brāhmaṇa-kula, or the brāhmaṇa class. The difficulty, according to the Varāha Purāṇa, is that demons, taking advantage of Kali-yuga, have taken birth in brāhmaṇa families. Rākṣasāḥ kalim āśritya jāyante brahma-yoniṣu (Varāha Purāṇa). In other words, in this age there are many so-called caste brāhmaṇas and caste Gosvāmīs who, taking advantage of the śāstra and of the innocence of people in general, claim to be brāhmaṇas and Vaiṣṇavas by hereditary right. One will not derive any benefit by rendering service to such false brāhmaṇa-kulas. One must therefore take shelter of a bona fide spiritual master and his associates and should also render service to them, for such activity will greatly help the neophyte in attaining full satisfaction. This has been very clearly explained by Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura in his explanation of the verse vyavasāyātmikā buddhir ekeha kuru-nandana (B.G.2:41). By actually following the regulative principles of bhakti-yoga as recommended by Śrīla Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura, one can very quickly come to the transcendental platform of liberation, as explained in this verse (atyanta-śamam).
(Srimad Bhagavatam-----4:21:40-----purport).

All the inhabitants of Vṛndāvana are Vaiṣṇavas. They are all-auspicious because somehow or other they always chant the holy name of Kṛṣṇa. Even though some of them do not strictly follow the rules and regulations of devotional service, on the whole they are devotees of Kṛṣṇa and chant His name directly or indirectly. Purposely or without purpose, even when they pass on the street they are fortunate enough to exchange greetings by saying the name of Rādhā or Kṛṣṇa. Thus directly or indirectly they are auspicious.
The present city of Vṛndāvana has been established by the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas since the Six Gosvāmīs went there and directed the construction of their different temples. Of all the temples in Vṛndāvana, ninety percent belong to the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava sect, the followers of the teachings of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu and Nityānanda, and seven temples are very famous. The inhabitants of Vṛndāvana do not know anything but the worship of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. In recent years some unscrupulous so-called priests known as caste gosvāmīs have introduced the worship of demigods privately, but no genuine and rigid Vaiṣṇavas participate in this. Those who are serious about the Vaiṣṇava method of devotional activities do not take part in such worship of demigods.
The Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas never differentiate between Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa and Lord Caitanya. They say that since Lord Caitanya is the combined form of Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa, He is not different from Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. But some misled people try to prove that they are greatly elevated by saying that they like to chant the holy name of Lord Gaura instead of the names of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. Thus they purposely differentiate between Lord Caitanya and Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa. According to them, the system of nadīyā-nāgarī, which they have recently invented in their fertile brains, is the worship of Gaura, Lord Caitanya, but they do not like to worship Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. They put forward the argument that since Lord Caitanya Himself appeared as Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa combined, there is no necessity of worshiping Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. Such differentiation by so-called devotees of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu is considered disruptive by pure devotees. Anyone who differentiates between Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa and Gaurāṅga is to be considered a plaything in the hands of māyā.
(Sri Caitanya Caritamrta-----1:5:232-----purport).

Lord Caitanya stayed at the house of Candraśekhara, a clerk, although a sannyāsī is not supposed to reside in a śūdra's house. Five hundred years ago, especially in Bengal, it was the system that persons who were born in the families of brāhmaṇas were accepted as brāhmaṇas, and all those who took birth in other families—even the higher castes, namely, the kṣatriyas and vaiśyas—were considered śūdras, non-brāhmaṇas. Therefore although Śrī Candraśekhara was a clerk from a kāyastha family in upper India, he was considered a śūdra. Similarly, vaiśyas, especially those of the suvarṇa-vaṇik community, were accepted as śūdras in Bengal, and even the vaidyas, who were generally physicians, were also considered śūdras. Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, however, did not accept this artificial principle, which was introduced in society by self-interested men, and later the kāyasthas, vaidyas and vaṇiks all began to accept the sacred thread, despite objections from the so-called brāhmaṇas.
Before the time of Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the suvarṇa-vaṇik class was condemned by Ballāl Sena, who was then the King of Bengal, due to a personal grudge. In Bengal the suvarṇa-vaṇik class are always very rich, for they are bankers and dealers in gold and silver. Therefore, Ballāl Sena used to borrow money from a suvarṇa-vaṇik banker. Ballāl Sena's bankruptcy later obliged the suvarṇa-vaṇik banker to stop advancing money to him, and thus Ballāl Sena became angry and condemned the entire suvarṇa-vaṇik society as belonging to the śūdra community. He tried to induce the brāhmaṇas not to accept the suvarṇa-vaṇiks as followers of the instructions of the Vedas under the brahminical directions, but although some brāhmaṇas approved of Ballāl Sena's actions, others did not. Thus the brāhmaṇas also became divided amongst themselves, and those who supported the suvarṇa-vaṇik class were rejected from the brāhmaṇa community. At the present day the same biases are still being followed.
There are many Vaiṣṇava families in Bengal whose members, although not actually born brāhmaṇas, act as ācāryas by initiating disciples and offering the sacred thread as enjoined in the Vaiṣṇava tantras. For example, in the families of Ṭhākura Raghunandana Ācārya, Ṭhākura Kṛṣṇadāsa, Navanī Hoḍa and Rasikānanda-deva (a disciple of Śyāmānanda Prabhu), the sacred thread ceremony is performed, as it is for the caste Gosvāmīs, and this system has continued for the past three to four hundred years. Accepting disciples born in brāhmaṇa families, they are bona fide spiritual masters who have the facility to worship the śālagrāma-śilā, which is worshiped with the Deity. As of this writing, śālagrāma-śilā worship has not yet been introduced in our Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, but soon it will be introduced in all our temples as an essential function of arcana-mārga (Deity worship).
(Sri Caitanya Caritamrta-----1:7:45-----purport).

The Sanskrit book Advaita-carita states that Balarāma, Svarūpa and Jagadīśa were the fourth, fifth and sixth sons of Advaita Ācārya. Therefore Śrī Advaita Ācārya had six sons. Balarāma, Svarūpa and Jagadīśa, being smārtas, or Māyāvādīs, were rejected by Vaiṣṇava society. Sometimes Māyāvādīs pose themselves as Vaiṣṇavas, or worshipers of Lord Viṣṇu, but actually they do not believe in Lord Viṣṇu as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, for they consider demigods like Lord Śiva, Durgā, the sun-god and Gaṇeśa equal to Him. They are generally known as pañcopāsaka-smārtas, and one should not count them among the Vaiṣṇavas.
Balarāma had three wives and nine sons. The youngest son of his first wife was known as Madhusūdana Gosvāmī. He took the title Bhaṭṭācārya and accepted the path of the smārta or Māyāvāda philosophy. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura notes that the son of Gosvāmī Bhaṭṭācārya, Śrī Rādhāramaṇa Gosvāmī Bhaṭṭācārya, refused the title gosvāmī because it is generally meant for sannyāsīs, those who have taken the renounced order of life. One who is still in family life should not misuse the title gosvāmī. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura did not recognize the caste gosvāmīs because they were not in the line of the Six gosvāmīs in the renounced order who were direct disciples of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu—namely Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī, Śrīla Bhaṭṭa Raghunātha Gosvāmī, Śrī Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī, Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī and Śrīla Raghunātha dāsa Gosvāmī. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura said that the gṛhastha āśrama, or the status of family life, is a sort of concession for sense gratification. Therefore a gṛhastha should not falsely adopt the title gosvāmī. The ISKCON movement has never conferred the title gosvāmī upon a householder. Although all the sannyāsīs we have initiated in ISKCON are young, we have awarded them the titles of the renounced order of life, svāmī and gosvāmī, because they have completely dedicated their lives to preach the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura mentions that not only do the householder caste gosvāmīs disrespect the title gosvāmī, but also, following the principles of the smārta Raghunandana, they exhibit great foolishness by burning a straw image of Advaita Ācārya in a śrāddha ceremony, thus acting like Rākṣasas and disrespecting the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa, which is the guide for Vaiṣṇavas. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura says that sometimes these smārta caste gosvāmīs write books on Vaiṣṇava philosophy or commentaries on the original scriptures, but a pure devotee should cautiously avoid reading them.
(Sri Caitanya Caritamrta-----1:12:27-----purport).

“It is true that whatever relationship a particular devotee has with the Lord is the best for him; still, when we study all the different methods from a neutral position, we can understand that there are higher and lower degrees of love.
In this regard, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura explains that this verse does not advocate the whimsical invention of some methods of love of Godhead. Such inventions cannot be accepted as topmost. Indeed, such concoctions are not recommended in these verses. Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī has said in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu (1.2.101):
śruti-smṛti-purāṇādi-pañcarātra-vidhiṁ vinā
aikāntikī harer bhaktir utpātāyaiva kalpate
He clearly mentions in this verse that one must refer to the Vedic literatures and other, supplementary literatures and follow the conclusion of the Vedas. An invented devotional attitude simply creates disturbances in the transcendental realm. If a person overly addicted to family life takes to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam or Kṛṣṇa consciousness to earn a livelihood, his activity is certainly offensive. One should not become a caste guru and sell mantras for the benefit of mundane customers, nor should one make disciples for a livelihood. All these activities are offensive. One should not make a livelihood by forming a professional band to carry out congregational chanting, nor should one perform devotional service when one is attached to mundane society, friendship and love. Nor should one be dependent on so-called social etiquette. All of this is mental speculation. None of these things can be compared to unalloyed devotional service. No one can compare unalloyed devotional service, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, to mundane activities. There are many unauthorized parties pretending to belong to the Śrī Caitanya cult, and some are known as āula, bāula, kartābhajā, neḍā, daraveśa, sāṅi, sahajiyā, sakhībhekī, smārta, jāta-gosāñi, ativāḍī, cūḍādhārī and gaurāṅga-nāgarī.
Moreover, there are those who take the caste gosvāmīs' opinions of such parties as bona fide, comparing these opinions to those of the Six Gosvāmīs, headed by Śrī Rūpa and Śrī Sanātana. This is simply another cheating process. There are also nondevotees who compose unauthorized songs, who establish different temples for money, who worship the Deity as priests for salaries, who accept caste brahmanism as all in all, and who do not know the value of a pure Vaiṣṇava. Actually the caste brāhmaṇas of the smārta community are opposed to the principles of the Sātvata-pañcarātra. Furthermore, there are many Māyāvādīs and those overly addicted to material sense enjoyment. None of these can be compared to a person who is purely engaged in preaching Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Every Kṛṣṇa conscious person is constantly endeavoring to utilize different transcendental devices in the service of the Lord. Such a devotee renounces all material enjoyment and completely dedicates himself to the service of his spiritual master and Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. He may be a perfect celibate, a restrained householder, a regulated vānaprastha or a tridaṇḍi-sannyāsī in the renounced order. It doesn’t matter. The pseudo transcendentalists and the pure devotees cannot be compared, nor can one argue that a person can invent his own way of worship.
(Sri Caitanya Caritamrta-----2:8:83-----translation and purport).