About bhAShyas on the bhAgavatam

[S Saha]

Does anyone have any idea about the theological leanings of the following
authors of commentaries on the Bhagavata Purana?

I know that Sridhara was a famous Advaitin,Vijayadhvaja Tirtha a
Dvaitin,Viraraghava a Vishishtadvaitin and Vallabha a Suddhadvaitin
and Jiva Goswami and Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur Gaudiyas.

I am asking about the following commentators

(1) Vamshidhara(authored the Bhavartha-Dipika-Prakasha)
(2) Radha-Ramana Goswami(is he Gaudiya?)(authored the Dipini)
(3) Sukadeva/Shukadeva Acarya(authored the Siddhanta-Pradipa)
(4) Purushottamcharan Goswami(authored the Subodhini-Prakash,so in
Vallabha's line?)
(5) GiridharLal Goswami(authored the Balaprabodhini)

Thanking everyone in advance,

Saha.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear friends,

With all regards to all the great commentators of the Bhagavata Purana, one should not lose sight of what Vedavyasa himself said about how easy or how difficut for  the women and  other lay persons (who did not have the chance to go to Gurukula education) to understand the Bhagavata Purana. According to Vedavyasa, he first composed the Mahabharata for all the lay persons (which included the women), but after the epic was completed he was unhappy as it turned out to be difficult for the lay persons to understand it. That is why, on the advice of Narada, he composed the Bhagavata purana,to make it  surely easy for one and all to understand. Those who believe that Vedavyasa, one of the 24 avataras of Lord Vishnu, succeeded in his second attempt, read the main text, usually translated to vernacular language. I also recited the Bhagavata purana (the translation of that)  in my childhood before my grandmother, who was fond of the Bhagavata purana, but her eyesight became weak for reading it herself.  There is also the custom of observing the Bhagavata Saptha where the original Bhagavata Purana is supposed to be read.

What I understand is that the great Madhvacharya seemed to have felt that the Bhagavata Purana is a difficult text for people to understand, without his commentary, which was from the Dvaita standpoint. The guru of Sridhara  Swami  thought that the Bhagavata Purana was an advaitic text and that is why he advised Sridhara Swami to write another commentary. That is how probably the race for writing the commentaries began.

Now coming to the other great Acharyas, to my knowledge Adi Shankaracharya seems to have not expressed any view of the Bhagavata purana. Did Ramanujacharya or Chaitanya Mahaprabhu or Nimbarka Bhagavan or Jagadvijayi Keshav Kashmiri Bhattacharya (the guru of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu) express any opinion on the need for commentary on the Bhagavata purana ?

Regards,

Sunil KBDear friends,

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. www.avast.com

[V Subrahmanian]

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:46 PM, S Saha <sreeka...@gmail.com> wrote:

Does anyone have any idea about the theological leanings of the following
authors of commentaries on the Bhagavata Purana?

I know that Sridhara was a famous Advaitin,Vijayadhvaja Tirtha a
Dvaitin,Viraraghava a Vishishtadvaitin and Vallabha a Suddhadvaitin
and Jiva Goswami and Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur Gaudiyas.

I am asking about the following commentators

(1) Vamshidhara(authored the Bhavartha-Dipika-Prakasha)

From my reading of selected portions from his commentary, I get the feeling that Vamshidhara was an Advaitin. He has closely followed Sridhara Swamin and has elaborated the Advaitic ideas..

regards

subrahmanian.v 

(2) Radha-Ramana Goswami(is he Gaudiya?)(authored the Dipini)
(3) Sukadeva/Shukadeva Acarya(authored the Siddhanta-Pradipa)
(4) Purushottamcharan Goswami(authored the Subodhini-Prakash,so in
Vallabha's line?)
(5) GiridharLal Goswami(authored the Balaprabodhini)

Thanking everyone in advance,

Saha.

--

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Sunilji,

Srimadbhagavatam is normally dated to 11th century.

Shankara would not know of its existence!

Sri Ramanuja's Visistadvaita group buys into its every letter as I see in the temples.

BM

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

Because of the difficult language some people believe Vopadeva the grammarian is the author of Bhagavata. But others have rejected this. Others say it is written by some South Indian saints like Alvars. There is a belief it is a commentary on Gayatri Mantra because the first Sloka ends with Dhimahi.

There is also another famous Bhagavata known as Devi Bhagavata.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear Mishraji,

The Puranas have to meet five criteria called 'Panchalakshana'. Out of these one criterion requires the Royal genealogies to be keep uptodate. Several puranas have updated the genealogies upto the Gupta period. That to me, means that Puranas were written before the Gupta period. The Bhagavata purana was recited to the dying king Parikshit and the  Bhagavata Purana claims itself to have been composed immediately sfter Parikshita was coronated. That means this purana was composed about 5,000 years ago.

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Bijoy Misra <misra...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Sunilji,

Srimadbhagavatam is normally dated to 11th century.

Shankara would not know of its existence!

Sri Ramanuja's Visistadvaita group buys into its every letter as I see in the temples.

BM

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 11:55 AM, sunil bhattacharjya <skbhatt...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear friends,

With all regards to all the great commentators of the Bhagavata Purana, one should not lose sight of what Vedavyasa himself said about how easy or how difficut for  the women and  other lay persons (who did not have the chance to go to Gurukula education) to understand the Bhagavata Purana. According to Vedavyasa, he first composed the Mahabharata for all the lay persons (which included the women), but after the epic was completed he was unhappy as it turned out to be difficult for the lay persons to understand it. That is why, on the advice of Narada, he composed the Bhagavata purana,to make it  surely easy for one and all to understand. Those who believe that Vedavyasa, one of the 24 avataras of Lord Vishnu, succeeded in his second attempt, read the main text, usually translated to vernacular language. I also recited the Bhagavata purana (the translation of that)  in my childhood before my grandmother, who was fond of the Bhagavata purana, but her eyesight became weak for reading it herself.  There is also the custom of observing the Bhagavata Saptha where the original Bhagavata Purana is supposed to be read.

What I understand is that the great Madhvacharya seemed to have felt that the Bhagavata Purana is a difficult text for people to understand, without his commentary, which was from the Dvaita standpoint. The guru of Sridhara  Swami  thought that the Bhagavata Purana was an advaitic text and that is why he advised Sridhara Swami to write another commentary. That is how probably the race for writing the commentaries began.

Now coming to the other great Acharyas, to my knowledge Adi Shankaracharya seems to have not expressed any view of the Bhagavata purana. Did Ramanujacharya or Chaitanya Mahaprabhu or Nimbarka Bhagavan or Jagadvijayi Keshav Kashmiri Bhattacharya (the guru of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu) express any opinion on the need for commentary on the Bhagavata purana ?

Regards,

Sunil KB

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Namaste,

The Devi - Bhagavata is one of the 18 Mahapuranas, The Bhagavata Purana was written later, but before the death of Parikshitmaround 5,000 years ago.

Regards,.

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Venkatesh Murthy <vmur...@gmail.com> wrote:

Namaste

Because of the difficult language some people believe Vopadeva the grammarian is the author of Bhagavata. But others have rejected this. Others say it is written by some South Indian saints like Alvars. There is a belief it is a commentary on Gayatri Mantra because the first Sloka ends with Dhimahi.

There is also another famous Bhagavata known as Devi Bhagavata.

On Saturday, January 30, 2016 at 6:15:40 AM UTC+5:30, Bijoy wrote:

Dear Sunilji,

Srimadbhagavatam is normally dated to 11th century.

Shankara would not know of its existence!

Sri Ramanuja's Visistadvaita group buys into its every letter as I see in the temples.

BM

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 11:55 AM, sunil bhattacharjya <skbhatt...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear friends,

With all regards to all the great commentators of the Bhagavata Purana, one should not lose sight of what Vedavyasa himself said about how easy or how difficut for  the women and  other lay persons (who did not have the chance to go to Gurukula education) to understand the Bhagavata Purana. According to Vedavyasa, he first composed the Mahabharata for all the lay persons (which included the women), but after the epic was completed he was unhappy as it turned out to be difficult for the lay persons to understand it. That is why, on the advice of Narada, he composed the Bhagavata purana,to make it  surely easy for one and all to understand. Those who believe that Vedavyasa, one of the 24 avataras of Lord Vishnu, succeeded in his second attempt, read the main text, usually translated to vernacular language. I also recited the Bhagavata purana (the translation of that)  in my childhood before my grandmother, who was fond of the Bhagavata purana, but her eyesight became weak for reading it herself.  There is also the custom of observing the Bhagavata Saptha where the original Bhagavata Purana is supposed to be read.

What I understand is that the great Madhvacharya seemed to have felt that the Bhagavata Purana is a difficult text for people to understand, without his commentary, which was from the Dvaita standpoint. The guru of Sridhara  Swami  thought that the Bhagavata Purana was an advaitic text and that is why he advised Sridhara Swami to write another commentary. That is how probably the race for writing the commentaries began.

Now coming to the other great Acharyas, to my knowledge Adi Shankaracharya seems to have not expressed any view of the Bhagavata purana. Did Ramanujacharya or Chaitanya Mahaprabhu or Nimbarka Bhagavan or Jagadvijayi Keshav Kashmiri Bhattacharya (the guru of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu) express any opinion on the need for commentary on the Bhagavata purana ?

Regards,

Sunil KBDevi-

[S Saha]

Dear Gitarthi,


Sri Viraraghava,who was in Ramanuja's sampradaya,wrote the Sri Vaishanva commentary on the Bhagavatam. Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's sampradaya has produced many commentaries on the Bhagavatam,beginning from Jiva Goswami's(Mahaprabhu's immediate disciple) Krama-sandarbha,Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur's Saratha-Darsini,Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur's Gaudiya-Bhasya and what we have online of Srila Prabhupada's commentary. And Sriman Mahaprabhu is usually not counted as a disciple of Sri Keshava Kashmiri. Mahaprabhu's theology is acintya-bhedabheda,while Kesava Kashmiri was a Dvaitadvaita adherent of the Nimbarka Sampradaya.

Also,apparently Sri Vijyadhvaja Tirtha,the Madhva scholar who wrote the Pada-ratnavali commentary on the Bhagavatam,thought that Adi Shankara commented upon that text.

[S Saha]

Thank you for being helpful about Sri Vamshidhara! :) Any idea about the other commentators?

[Satyanarayana Dasa]

see my reply below.

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 8:16 AM, S Saha <sreeka...@gmail.com> wrote:

Does anyone have any idea about the theological leanings of the following
authors of commentaries on the Bhagavata Purana?

I know that Sridhara was a famous Advaitin,Vijayadhvaja Tirtha a
Dvaitin,Viraraghava a Vishishtadvaitin and Vallabha a Suddhadvaitin
and Jiva Goswami and Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur Gaudiyas.

I am asking about the following commentators

(1) Vamshidhara(authored the Bhavartha-Dipika-Prakasha)

He was a vaisnava, from Kruksetra, Haryana. Pandit Madhvacarya Shastratha Maharathi, Madhava Vidhya Bhavan, Delhi, author of books such as Kyon, Veda Digdarshana, Purana Digdarshana was his descendent. Srikantha Shastri, son of Sri Nadhvacarya is still alive.

 

(2) Radha-Ramana Goswami(is he Gaudiya?)(authored the Dipini)

Yes he was a Gaudia vaisnava, Gosvami of Radha Raman Temple, Vrindavan

 

(3) Sukadeva/Shukadeva Acarya(authored the Siddhanta-Pradipa)

He belonged to Nimbark Sampradaya and lived in Mathura.

 

(4) Purushottamcharan Goswami(authored the Subodhini-Prakash,so in 

Vallabha's line?)

A great Acarya and scholar in Vallabha Sampradaya, compared to Vedanta Desika of Sri or Jaya Tirtha of Madhva Sampradaya.

 

(5) GiridharLal Goswami(authored the Balaprabodhini)

Also an acarya in Vallabha Sampradaya. 

For more details you may consult "Bhagavata Ke Tikakara" By Dr. Vasudeva Krishna Caturvedi, Mathura.

 

Thanking everyone in advance,

Saha.

--

निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Satyanarayana Dasa

Jiva Institute of Vaishnava Studies

380 Sheetal Chaya

Raman Reti, Vrindavan

UP 281121, India

Phone: *91-9756605055

www.jiva.org

[Bijoy Misra]

Sunilji,

While such statement is "revolutionary", it needs strong evidence to be

accepted as a "fact".  What are the dates for the Vedas in this chronology?

And that of Panini?  What evidence?

Sounds arbitrary to me, needs moderation.

BM

[Ajit Gargeshwari]

 As always Suniji is know for his different concept of history which no one else is aware. This is good topic. Please continue posting leaving oot any issue that might distract the intended purpose of the thread

Regards
Ajit Gargeshwari
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः।
अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे।।2.20।।

[S Saha]

Thank you as well Satyanarayana Prabhuji for your information!

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 1:17 PM, S Saha <sreeka...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Gitarthi,

Also,apparently Sri Vijyadhvaja Tirtha,the Madhva scholar who wrote the Pada-ratnavali commentary on the Bhagavatam,thought that Adi Shankara commented upon that text.

Sir, what made you conclude as above? Would you kindly elaborate with textual references?

Thanks and warm regards

subrahmanian.v  

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Satyanarayana Dasa <da...@jiva.org> wrote:

see my reply below.

I am asking about the following commentators

(1) Vamshidhara(authored the Bhavartha-Dipika-Prakasha)

He was a vaisnava, from Kruksetra, Haryana.

Swami, here are my doubts regarding your above statement:

In that commentary Vamshidhara has given long arguments with citations from various sources to prove Hari-Hara abheda, trimurti aikya, ideas such as: whenever Vishnu slays asuras, he resorts to the 'tamas' of Rudra, etc.  He has also cited the Padma Purana Bhagavata 12th Canto māhātmya which says, among other things: He alone is a great / true vaishnava who holds Hari, Hara and Durga to be non-different and all of them to be Brahman.

I mentioned the above as I do not know the type of vaishnavism that is prevalent in Haryana. 

pranams

subrahmanian.v

[L Srinivas]

Dr Misra,

I wouldn't know about dating and such.

> Sri Ramanuja's Visistadvaita group buys into its every letter as I see in the temples.

I'm somewhat confused by this statement. What do you really wish to say here - what have you seen in the temples?

In passing I may mention that there's a big body of commentarial literature on the Divya Prabandham (also called the Dravida Veda). The commentaries use the Ramayana, several purana texts like the Vishnu purana and the Vayu purana and of course, the Veda and Sastras as proof texts . One will have to struggle really really hard to find  a reference to the Bhagavatham in these commentaries. In fact as far as these commentaries are concerned, it is as though the Bhagavatham did not exist.

Based on my own experience, the Bhagavatam has hardly had any influence on the Ramanuja sampradaya. If you were to believe some western writers, it's quite the other way around.

Thanks,

Srini

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear Mr. Saha,

People from Ramanujacharya's school did write commentary but Ramanujacharya himself have not said anything about such need. Adherents of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's Achintyabhedabheda school, did write commentaries but Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has not spoken of such need.

As regards Keshav Kashmiri Bhattacharya being the guru of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, I understand that he gave Shodshakshari mahamantra to Chaitanya mahaprabhu. Initially Chaitanya Mahaprabhu did challenge Keshav Kashmiri Bhattacharya for a bebate in Sanskrit grammar but that never took place  and many believe that it did not take place due to intervention of Mother Saraswati herself.Some people do  claim that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was a disciple of the Madhva school. But to me it appears that there is less of  difference between the Bhedabheda school and the Dvaitadvaita school than between vedabheda school and the Dvaita school.

If you heve information as to who was chaitanya Mahaprabhu's guru, why don't you share that wirth us.

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Dr Srinivasa,

The thread started with the dates.

On temples, I only cited what I observe. 
I have studied Srimadbhagavatam, but no commentaries or articles yet.

BM

[Satyanarayana Dasa]

Sir 

I have no need to defend Vamsidhara's vashnavism., or elaborate on the type of vaishnavism he followed.  I just answered the question asked about him.

I only know that his descendants at present subscribe to Shri Vaisnavism.

[S Saha]

I did say 'apparently'. It is from this link, quoting from here:

Sankaracarya, according to Vijayadhvaja-tirtha, wrote a commentary on the Bhagavatam.

In the section 'Lost SB commentaries'.

[S Saha]

Dear Gitarthi,

Some people do  claim that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was a disciple of the Madhva school.

These 'some people' include literally all descendants of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's parampara. All of them claim to be descendant of Madhva.

As regards Keshav Kashmiri Bhattacharya being the guru of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, I understand that he gave Shodshakshari mahamantra to Chaitanya mahaprabhu. Initially Chaitanya Mahaprabhu did challenge Keshav Kashmiri Bhattacharya for a bebate in Sanskrit grammar but that never took place  and many believe that it did not take place due to intervention of Mother Saraswati herself.

This is a Nimbarka/Advaita side claim mostly. It was Isvara Puri who gave mantra to Chaitanya.

But to me it appears that there is less of  difference between the Bhedabheda school and the Dvaitadvaita school than between vedabheda school and the Dvaita school.

You are right. Achintya bhedabheda is basically Sridhara's Advaita,with all the parts that emphasize Advaita thrown out. Jiva Goswami himself in his sandarbhas effectively admits it as such and claims that Sridhara included 'mayavadin'(Advaita) ideas in his bhasya only to lead other Advaitins to Visnu-bhakti (which is a theological fiction in my opinion,but that's a separate matter).

[Mamata Dash]

Dear Bhagavatapreminah, 

The New Catalogus Catalogorum : An Encyclopedia of the Texts in Sanskrit Vol. XVI. has documented the text and the commentaries on the text. With out referring to the volume, one should come to end of the commentaries available on Bhagavata. 

The text has Coms. in Adaita, Visishtadvaita, Dvaita, Suddhadvaita, Acintyabhedabheda, Dvaitadvaita, Mimamsakadvaita and Ramanandiya school. Bhagavata tattvadipa of Vallabhacharya is understood as an exposition on the text, not a com.

Scholars are requested to go through the documentation, where more than 100 commentaries are noticed.

Mamata Mishra

[Nityanand Misra]

On Monday, 1 February 2016 16:35:17 UTC+5:30, Mamata Dash wrote:

Dear Bhagavatapreminah, 

The New Catalogus Catalogorum : An Encyclopedia of the Texts in Sanskrit Vol. XVI. has documented the text and the commentaries on the text. With out referring to the volume, one should come to end of the commentaries available on Bhagavata. 

The text has Coms. in Adaita, Visishtadvaita, Dvaita, Suddhadvaita, Acintyabhedabheda, Dvaitadvaita, Mimamsakadvaita and Ramanandiya school. Bhagavata tattvadipa of Vallabhacharya is understood as an exposition on the text, not a com.

Scholars are requested to go through the documentation, where more than 100 commentaries are noticed.

Mamata Mishra

Mamata Mishra Ji

Is it possible for you to share a PDF or image of the list of 100 commentaries?

Thanks, Nityanand 

 

[S Saha]

Dear Nityananda Mishra ji,

Dr. Demian Martins(PhD) published an edition of the Siddhanta-Darpana from the Jiva Institue of Vaishnava studies. The Jiva Institute hosts a small sample of that work online. In it,a list which is copied from a list of commentaries on the Bhagavata Purana from the edition of the Bhagavatam published by Mohendra Nath Chatterjee in 1895 exists. It is there in page 20 of the sample document(which is a fragment of the full one) that I am linking here.There are like 136 commentaries/works related to that scripture.

Link to the work in question(PDF).

[Mamata Dash]

Dear Scholars,

Please find the volume, if you get the catalogue some where. I will try to post the name of these Commentaries later, as it has to typed. 

Thank you, 
Mamata Mishra

--

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear Mr. Saha,

At the time of subscribing to the BVP list, I did  express my desire to continue the correspondence with the name as Gitarthi, but soon realized that it is better to continue the correspondence with my regular name Sunil Kumar Bhattacharjya (Sunil KB, in short). So, if you please, you can address me in my regular name.

1)
You have made the point:
 < These 'some people' include literally all descendants of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's parampara. All of them claim to be descendant of Madhva.>.

On this,  I have to disagree with  all those descendents of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu parampara, who claim Chaitanya Mahaprabhu  to be descendent of Madhacharya.  Adi Shankara wrote  "Bhaktyartha kalipitam dvaitam, advaitadapi sundaram", yet he led the aspiring  advaitins to the goal,  the   bliss of " Ekatva with Brahman". Chaitanya Mahaprabhu too, as I see him, enjoyed the  prem of Radha-Krisha, yet  knowing that Radha-Krishna and all of us are only one.

2)
As regards Lord Krishna's name, all Hindu's including Adi Shankaracharya (who wrote Bhaja Govindam) have reverence for His name.  If Ishvara Puri gave one mantra of the Lord to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, that does not alter the philosophy of Achintya Bhedabheda. . 

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[S Saha]

yet  knowing that Radha-Krishna and all of us are only one.

But he voiciferously condemns this as mayavada. He did say: 'Mayavadi Bhasya shunile hoibe shorbo-nash(sarva-nāsa)'(If one listens to Mayavada,all his spirituality is destroyed)

Anyway,this conversation is diverging from the original topic of the convo(which was about the bhasyakaras on the Bhagavata).

[Nityanand Misra]

Thank you for the reference. On page 20 in the sample PDF, all of these 136 works are called commentaries on the Bhagavata. This is most likely incorrect, and what you say (commentaries or works related to Bhagavata) appears to be correct. This ‘list of commentaries’ includes many works titled Anukramanika, Stotra, Sara, Campu, etc which are highly unlikely to be commentaries on the Bhagavata. In fact, number 98 on the list is the Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu of Rupa Gosvami which is certainly not a commentary on the Bhagavata. Either Mohendra Nath Chatterjee or Demian Martins has erred in calling all these 136 works as commentaries on the Bhagavata. Or perhaps Chatterjee relied on a source without cross-checking. 

It may be worthwhile checking with the list in the New Catalogus Catalogorum.

[shankara]

Namaste,

A list of 30 major commentaries and 93 minor commentaries on Bhagavata is given in pages 35-39 of 'Srimad Bhagavat Ke Tikakar' by Vasudeva Krishna Chaturvedi. This book is available at Digital Library of India.

http://dli.serc.iisc.ernet.in/handle/2015/402451

 

regards
shankara

---

From: Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com>
To: भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 2 February 2016 9:22 AM
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} About bhAShyas on the bhAgavatam

[Hnbhat B.R.]

89-92 are certainly campu-s, Bhagavata-campu-s by different writers. 99 and 100 also independent campu-s,based on bhagavata.  But it is strange that भागवतचम्पू of Anantha Bhatta has been left out.

112 seems to be सूचिका but not sure of its nature.

The commentary listed by Vamshidhara is on the first verse only. By the way, I found nos. 74, 75 and 76 by Vopadeva, to whom the authorship of Bhagavata is often ascribed. These three titles may or may not be commentaries.

[Ashok Aklujkar]

Perhaps it should also be borne in mind in the present context that the English word “commentary” can also cover 'works reacting to a particular text,’ ‘works inspired by a particular text,’ and so on. The Sanskrit words like bhāṣya, ṭīkā, etc. are, on the other hand, have narrower meanings based on remaining close to the words of a commentandum.

a.a.

[శ్రీకర సాహా]

Thank you Mishra ji for correcting my error/oversight. As far as I
know,Martins simply copy-pasted that list ad verbatim.

-Sreekar.

On 02/02/2016, Nityanand Misra <nmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, 1 February 2016 18:47:21 UTC+5:30, S Saha wrote:
>>
>> Dear Nityananda Mishra ji,
>>

>> Dr. Demian Martins(PhD) published an edition of the *Siddhanta-Darpana*

>> from the Jiva Institue of Vaishnava studies. The Jiva Institute hosts a
>> small sample of that work online. In it,a list which is copied from a list
>>
>> of commentaries on the Bhagavata Purana from the edition of the Bhagavatam
>>
>> published by Mohendra Nath Chatterjee in 1895 exists. It is there in page
>>
>> 20 of the sample document(which is a fragment of the full one) that I am
>> linking here.There are like 136 commentaries/works related to that
>> scripture.
>>
>> Link to the work in question(PDF).

>> <https://store.jiva.org/samples/books/siddhanta-darpana-en_sample.pdf>

>>
>
> Thank you for the reference. On page 20 in the sample PDF, all of these 136
>
> works are called commentaries on the Bhagavata. This is most likely

> incorrect, and what you say (*commentaries or works related to Bhagavata*)

> appears to be correct. This ‘list of commentaries’ includes many works
> titled Anukramanika, Stotra, Sara, Campu, etc which are highly unlikely to
> be commentaries on the Bhagavata. In fact, number 98 on the list is the
> Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu of Rupa Gosvami which is certainly not a commentary
> on the Bhagavata. Either Mohendra Nath Chatterjee or Demian Martins has
> erred in calling all these 136 works as commentaries on the Bhagavata. Or
> perhaps Chatterjee relied on a source without cross-checking.
>
> It may be worthwhile checking with the list in the New Catalogus
> Catalogorum.
>

> --
> निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
> ---

> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the

> Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/8PKxjWFZc6g/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to

> bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

--
Sreekar Saha

[S Saha]

Thank you Shankara as well for being able to provide the source for the book as well! :)

[sanket bhabha]

मान्याः

अपरमपि भागवतं प्राप्यते 'भागवतविद्यापीठ', सोला, अहमदाबाद(गुज.)तः प्रकाशितं यत्र 32 टीकानां संग्रहः दृश्यते ।

--

निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Dr. Pankaj K. Thaker

Assistant Prof. Sanskrit

K.S.K.V. Kachchh Uni.

Bhuj. 370001

[శ్రీకర సాహా]

Dear Satyanarayana Prabhuji and everyone else,

I got access to that book (Srimadbhagavata ke tikakara )and in the
list of major commentaries,it is listing it like this

1. bhAvArtha dIpikA--shrIdhara svAmI

vishiShTAdvaita

1. shuka pakShIyA --- sudarshana sUrI
2. bhagavat chandrachandrikA --- vIrarAghava
3. bhakta rajanI --- bhagavatprasAda

dvaita

1. padaratnAvalI --- vijayadhvaja
2. mandanandinI --- vyAsa tattvaj~na
3. <unreadable>
4. tAtparya vivaraNa --- shrInivAsa tIrtha
5. bhAgavata tAtparya niryNaya prabodhinI --- <unidentifieable> nArayaNAchArya
6. sajjA hita(?) --- cheTTI <?>AchArya
7. manda bAdhinI --- sheShAchArya
8. duNghata bhAva dIpisha
9. bhAgavata tAtparya dIpikA
10. bhAgavata tAtparya TippaNI
11. Ti. virodhoddhAra --- pAdharI shrInivAsa
12. gUdArtha dIpikA --- dhanapati sUrI

dvaitAdvaita

(Note:Why has it been listed as (a) , (b) and (c) here?It looks arbitrary)

1. (a) siddhAnta pradIpikA --- shuka-sudhI
(b) bhAvArtha dIpikA prakAsha --- vamshIdhara (WHY?It looks like
Vamshidhara was a pukka advaitin)
(c) anitArtha prakAshikA --- gagAsahAya

shudhhAdvaita

1. subodhinI --- vallabha
2. TippaNI --- Goswami viTThalanAtha
3. subodhinI prakAsha -- Goswami puruShottama
4. bAla prabodhinI --- Goswami Giridharlal
5. vishuddha rasadIpikA --- kishorI prasAda

achintya bhedAbheda

1. bRRihadvaiShNavatoShiNI --- sanAtana gosvAmI
2. vAiShNavatoShiNI --- jIva gosvAmI
3. kramasandarbha -- "
4. bRRihatkramasandarbha --- "
5. sArarthadarshinI -- Srila vishvanAthachakravartI
6.vaiShNavAnandinI --- Srila baladevavidyAbhUShaNa
7. dIpikA dIpanI -- rAdharamaNa gosvAmI
8. bhAva bhAva vibhAvikA -- rAmanArayaNa mith

> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the

> Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/bvparishat/8PKxjWFZc6g/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to

> bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>


--

Sreekar Saha

[V Subrahmanian]

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 5:37 PM, శ్రీకర సాహా <sreeka...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Satyanarayana Prabhuji and everyone else,

I got access to that book (Srimadbhagavata ke tikakara )and in the
list of major commentaries,it is listing it like this

dvaita

1. padaratnAvalI --- vijayadhvaja
2. mandanandinI --- vyAsa tattvaj~na
3. <unreadable>
4. tAtparya vivaraNa --- shrInivAsa tIrtha
5. bhAgavata tAtparya niryNaya prabodhinI --- <unidentifieable> nArayaNAchArya
6. sajjA hita(?) --- cheTTI <?>AchArya
7. manda bAdhinI --- sheShAchArya
8. duNghata bhAva dIpisha
9. bhAgavata tAtparya dIpikA
10. bhAgavata tAtparya TippaNI
11. Ti. virodhoddhAra --- pAdharI shrInivAsa
12. gUdArtha dIpikA --- dhanapati sUrI

Sir, to my knowledge Dhanapati Suri is an Advaitin. He has written a work 'bhāṣyotkarṣa dīpikā' to bring out the nuances of the Shānkara Gitā Bhāṣyam. I do not know if he has written a commentary to the Srimadbhāgavatam and that too according to Dvaita tenets.  

Also, there is a work by name  gUdArtha dIpikA  by Sri Madhusudana Saraswati as his own commentary to the Bhagavadgita. 

regards

subrahmanian.v