SB 3.4.20

sa evam ārādhita-pāda-tīrthād
 adhīta-tattvātma-vibodha-mārgaḥ
praṇamya pādau parivṛtya devam
 ihāgato ’haṁ virahāturātmā
Word for word: 
saḥ — so myself; evam — thus; ārādhita — worshiped; pāda-tīrthāt — from the Personality of Godhead; adhīta — studied; tattva-ātma — self-knowledge; vibodha — understanding; mārgaḥ — path; praṇamya — after saluting; pādau — at His lotus feet; parivṛtya — after circumambulating; devam — the Lord; iha — at this place; āgataḥ — reached; aham — I; viraha — separation; ātura-ātmā — aggrieved in self.
Translation: 
I have studied the path of understanding self-knowledge from my spiritual master, the Personality of Godhead, and thus after circumambulating Him I have come to this place, very much aggrieved due to separation.
Purport: 

Śrī Uddhava’s actual life is the direct symbol of the catuḥ-ślokī Bhāgavatam enunciated first to Brahmājī by the Personality of Godhead. These four very great and important verses from Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam are particularly taken out by the Māyāvādī speculators, who construe a different purport to suit their impersonal view of monism. Here is the proper answer to such unauthorized speculators. The verses of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam are purely theistic science understandable by the postgraduate students of Bhagavad-gītā. The unauthorized dry speculators are offenders at the lotus feet of the Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa because they distort the purports of Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam to mislead the public and prepare a direct path to the hell known as Andha-tāmisra. As confirmed in Bhagavad-gītā (16.20) such envious speculators are without knowledge and are surely condemned life after life. They unnecessarily take shelter of Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya, but he was not so drastic as to commit an offense at the lotus feet of Lord Kṛṣṇa. According to Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya preached the Māyāvāda philosophy for a particular purpose. Such a philosophy was necessary to defeat the Buddhist philosophy of the nonexistence of the spirit soul, but it was never meant for perpetual acceptance. It was an emergency. Thus Lord Kṛṣṇa was accepted by Śaṅkarācārya as the Supreme Personality of Godhead in his commentation on Bhagavad-gītā. Since he was a great devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa, he did not dare write any commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam because that would have been a direct offense at the lotus feet of the Lord. But later speculators, in the name of Māyāvāda philosophy, unnecessarily make their commentary on the catuḥ-ślokī Bhāgavatam without any bona fide intent.

The monistic dry speculators have no business in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam because this particular Vedic literature is forbidden for them by the great author himself. Śrīla Vyāsadeva has definitely forbidden persons engaged in religiosity, economic development, sense gratification and, finally, salvation, from trying to understand Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, which is not meant for them (Bhāg. 1.1.2). Śrīpāda Śrīdhara Svāmī, the great commentator on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, has definitely forbidden the salvationists or monists to deal in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. It is not for them. Yet such unauthorized persons perversely try to understand Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, and thus they commit offenses at the feet of the Lord, which even Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya dared not do. Thus they prepare for their continuation of miserable life. It should be particularly noted herein that Uddhava studied the catuḥ-ślokī Bhāgavatam directly from the Lord, who spoke them first to Brahmājī, and this time the Lord explained more confidentially the self-knowledge mentioned as the paramāṁ sthitim. Upon learning such self-knowledge of love, Uddhava felt very much aggrieved by feelings of separation from the Lord. Unless one is awakened to the stage of Uddhava — everlastingly feeling the separation of the Lord in transcendental love, as exhibited by Lord Caitanya also — one cannot understand the real import of the four essential verses of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. One should not indulge in the unauthorized act of twisting the meaning and thereby putting himself on the dangerous path of offense.