Srila Prabhupada explains how Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana wrote the Gaudiya-Bhasya on the Vedanta-sutras.
Lectures : Bhagavad-gita Lectures : Bg 13: Lectures : Bhagavad-gita 13.8-12 -- Bombay, September 30, 1973 : 730930BG.BOM :
But sometimes back, in Jaipur, there was a challenge that "The Gauḍīya Sampradāya has no commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra."
So at that time Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura was requested... Because
he was grand scholar, grand old man scholar, at that time living in
Vṛndāvana... So he was very old at that time; so he authorized Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana, that "You do it." There was no need, but people are demanding, "Where is your commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra?" So Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana, with the order of Govindaji at Jaipur, he wrote the commentary on Brahma-sūtra. That name is Govinda-bhāṣya. So the Gauḍīya-Brahmā Sampradāya, they have got also commentary on Brahma-sūtra. That is required.
Conversations : 1976 Conversations : June, 1976 : Interview with
Professors O'Connell, Motilal and Shivaram -- June 18, 1976, Toronto :
760618iv.tor :
Prabhupāda: So, it is actually
bhāṣyāyāṁ brahma-sūtrāṇām. It is stated. This is the real commentary on
Brahma-sūtra by Vyāsadeva himself, author. Vyāsadeva is the author of
Brahma-sūtra, and he has written personally, under the instruction of his guru, Nārada Muni, this
Brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya. And it begins with the
Brahma-sūtra aphorism:
janmādy asya yataḥ [SB 1.1.1]. The
Brahma-sūtra begins with these words:
janmādya, athāto brahma jijñāsā. Janmādy asya yataḥ. So these
things are explained elaborately. Therefore
Brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya, bhāṣyāyāṁ brahma-sūtra. Vedārtha
paribṛṁhita. So therefore in our Gauḍīya, Caitanya Mahāprabhu did not write any
bhāṣya of the
Brahma-sūtra, neither the
gosvāmīs, because they took it that
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the real
bhāṣya of
Brahma-sūtra.
But when.... Sometimes the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas are challenged that "You
cannot be accepted as bona fide community, spiritual community, because
you have no
bhāṣya on
Brahma-sūtra." Then Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa wrote govinda-bhāṣya. But Caitanya Mahāprabhu did not like or ask His disciples to write, because He thought, "This is the Gauḍīya,
Brahma-sūtra-bhāṣya." Not Gauḍīya—for every Vaiṣṇava.
Bhāṣyāyāṁ brahma-sūtrāṇām. S
o we have got now Gauḍīya Vedānta-bhāṣya. Rāmānuja Vedānta-bhāṣya is there.
Madhvācārya Vedānta-bhāṣya is there, all. And Gauḍīya had not.
But since this challenge was made in Jaipur, then Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, he took: "Yes," and he finished, Gauḍīya bhāṣya, and it is called Govinda-bhāṣya. Actually, in India, unless one follows the
ācāryas
and has given commentary on the
Brahma-sūtra, he's not a bona fide.
Nyāya-prasthāna. Brahma-sūtra is called
nyāya-prasthāna. Śruti-prasthāna,
smṛti-prasthāna, nyāya-prasthāna. So any bona fide
ācārya must give his understanding about these three
prasthānas..
Lectures : Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures : Canto 1: Lectures : SB 1.2:
Lectures : Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.2.25 -- Vrndavana, November 5, 1972 :
721105SB.VRN :
Now, the Vedānta, in the beginning it is, the first
sūtra is:
athāto brahma jijñāsā. So to inquire about Brahman, the Absolute. Now, the next answer is
janmādy asya yataḥ [SB
1.1.1]
. Brahman, the Absolute Truth, is that from whom everything emanates.
Janmādy asya yataḥ [SB
1.1.1]
. Now, this
janmādy asya yataḥ is explained in the
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Therefore
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is explained by Vyāsadeva himself. Vyāsadeva is explaining
Vedānta-sūtra in his book,
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Bhāṣyaṁ brahma-sūtrāṇām **. Śrī Vyāsadeva says, "This is the real
comment, or
bhāṣya, of
Vedānta-sūtra, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam."
Therefore Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas, Gosvāmīs, they did not write any comment on the Vedānta-sūtra because they accept Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the natural commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra.
So why they should write again? But still, when there was such question
raised in Jaipur that the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava has no commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra, at that time, Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, he wrote Govinda-bhāṣya on Vedānta-sūtra. But still,
Vedānta-sūtra does not mean to understand impersonalism. No. That's not the fact
Guest (1) (Indian man):
...cultural affairs, Orissa government. Here there is a large stack of
palm leaf manuscripts. Palm leaf manuscripts. We are editing the
Sanskrit manuscripts, correcting them and publishing them.
Srila Prabhupāda: Sanskrit?
Guest (1): Sanskrit.
Prabhupāda: It is published in Sanskrit?
Guest (1): Yes.
Prabhupāda: Palm beach?
Guest (2) (Indian man): Palm leaves.
Prabhupāda: Oh, palm leaf.
Hari-śauri: They're translating and publishing. So he is the editor in charge of all that for the government.
Guest (1): What is the...?
Srila Prabhupāda: What is the
śāstra?
Srila Prabhupāda: Oh, yes, yes.
Srila Prabhupāda: Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana?
Guest (1): Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana who commented on, wrote Śrī Bhāṣyam..
Gurukṛpa: That's the same one you just quoted? By who?
Gurukṛpa: The one you just sang.
Guest (1): No. This is Kavisurya
Baladeva.
Srila Prabhupāda: Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana, different.
Guest (1): Different.
Srila Prabhupāda: Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana belonged to Orissa or Bengal?
Guest (1): Yes, Orissa. And he has clearly mentioned that near Tilika, Tilika Lake he was born. It is clear mentioned.
Srila Prabhupāda: But he used to live in Balasore.
Guest (1): Yes. He used to live in Balasore, and then went to Bhastrana,(?) where he wrote
Bhāṣya on
Vedānta-sūtra and
Gītā.
Guest (1): Jaipur. Yes, last time, Jaipur.
Srila Prabhupāda: I have dedicated my
Bhagavad-gītā to
Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana.
Hari-śauri: He dedicated it. Yes, this is... Śrīla
Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana.
Conversations : 1977 Conversations : January, 1977 : Room Conversation -- January 24, 1977, Bhuvanesvara
Conversations : 1976 Conversations : July,
1976 : Conversation with Prof. Saligram and Dr. Sukla -- July 5, 1976,
Washington, D.C. : 760705rc.wdc :
Prabhupāda: Brahma-sūtra-padaiś caiva hetumādbhir viniścitaiḥ [Bg.
13.5]
. Very....
Nyāya-praṣṭhāna. But
Vedānta-sūtra is explained in
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Therefore our Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas, they did not write any comment on the
Vedānta-sūtra. They accept
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the real
bhāṣya. But when the
Gauḍīya-Vaiṣṇavas are challenged that "You have no
Vedānta-sūtra-bhāṣya, therefore you
cannot be accepted as transcendental party,"
so Baladeva
Vidyābhūṣana immediately gave Govinda-bhāṣya on Vedānta. Our Gosvāmīs, they did not write because they knew Brahma-sūtra bhāṣya, Śrīmad-BhāgavatamLectures : Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures
: Madhya-lila: Lectures : Madhya 20: Lectures : Sri
Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 20.100-108 -- New York, November 22,
1966 : 661122C2.NY :
So Sanātana Gosvāmī, he's
ācārya in this
disciplic succession from Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Lord Caitanya. He is the
first disciple of Lord Caitanya, and from him, Sanātana Gosvāmī, six
Gosvāmīs.
There were six among the first followers of Lord Caitanya. And then,
from next step comes Raghunātha Gosvāmī and then this author of this
book, Kṛṣṇa dāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī, and from him, Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura,
and then from him, Viśvanātha Cakravartī,
Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa. In
this way this disciplic succession is coming from Lord Caitanya. So as
ācārya... Ācārya
means one who knows the principles of scripture, properly being
initiated by authority who knows things as they are, and they apply
those things in their own life. They are called ācārya. Acinoti śāstrāṇi:
he must know all the principles from authorities, and he should apply
in his life those principles. Not that he knows but does not apply. He
cannot be
ācārya. Āpani ācari prabhu jīva disa (?). Lord
Caitanya, He, although He is accepted as the, I mean to say, the
personal, He's Kṛṣṇa Himself, still, He behaved in such a way that
others can follow. He also accepted Īśvara Purī. Īśvara, Īśvara Purī was
His spiritual master, Lord Caitanya's. This is the disciplic succession.
Conversations : 1971 Conversations : July, 1970 : Room Conversation -- July 18, 1971, Detroit : 710718RC.DET :
Prabhupāda: Then,
from Kṛṣṇa, Nārada. From Nārada, Vyāsadeva. From Vyāsadeva to
Madhvācārya, from Madhvācārya to Īsvara Puri, Mādhavendra Puri, then
Caitanya Mahāprabhu, then His disciples, the six Goswāmīs, then Kṛṣṇa
dāsa Kavirāja,
then Baladeva
Vidyābhūṣaṇa. So we are taking account very rigidly from Caitanya
Mahāprabhu, and I am the tenth generation from Caitanya Mahāprabhu.
Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana explains the suvarna-varna hemango citation to establish Lord Caitanya as the yuga-avatara.
suvarṇa-varṇo hemāṅgo
sannyāsa-kṛc chamaḥ śānto
SYNONYMS
"In His early pastimes He appears as a
householder with a golden complexion. His limbs are beautiful, and His
body, smeared with the pulp of sandalwood, seems like molten gold. In
His later pastimes He accepts the sannyāsa
order, and He is equipoised and peaceful. He is the highest abode of
peace and devotion, for He silences the impersonalist nondevotees."
This is a verse from the
Mahābhārata (
Dāna-dharma, Viṣṇu-sahasra-nāma-stotra). In his commentary on the
Viṣṇu-sahasra-nāma called the
Nāmārtha-sudhā, Śrīla
Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, commenting upon this verse, asserts that Lord
Caitanya is the Supreme Personality of Godhead according to the evidence of the
Upaniṣads. He explains that
suvarṇa-varṇaḥ means a golden complexion.
He also quotes the Vedic injunction yadā paśyaḥ paśyate rukma-varṇaṁ kartāram īśaṁ puruṣaṁ brahma-yonim (Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 3.1.3).
Rukma-varṇaṁ kartāram īśam refers to the Supreme Personality of Godhead as having a complexion the color
of molten gold.
Puruṣam means the Supreme Lord, and
brahma-yonim indicates that He is also the Supreme
Brahman. This evidence, too, proves that Lord
Caitanya is the Supreme Personality of Godhead
Kṛṣṇa.
Another meaning of the description of the Lord as having a golden hue
is that Lord Caitanya's personality is as fascinating as gold is
attractive.
Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa has explained that the word varāṅga means "exquisitely beautiful."
Lord
Caitanya accepted
sannyāsa,
leaving aside His householder life, to preach His mission. He has
equanimity in different senses. First, He describes the confidential
truth of the Personality of Godhead, and second, He satisfies everyone
by knowledge and attachment to
Kṛṣṇa. He is peaceful because He renounces all topics not related to the service of
Kṛṣṇa.
Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa has explained that the word niṣṭhā indicates His being rigidly fixed in chanting the holy name of Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Lord
Caitanya
subdued all disturbing opponents of devotional service, especially the
monists, who are actually averse to the personal feature of the Supreme
Lord.
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta - 1975 Edition : Cc. Adi-lila
The External Reasons for Lord Caitanya's Appearance : Adi 3.49 .
Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa, in his commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra,
has tried to nullify this conclusion because he thinks that
discrediting these so-called causes of the cosmic manifestation will
nullify the entire
Sāṅkhya
philosophy. Materialistic philosophers accept matter to be the material
and efficient cause of creation; for them, matter is the cause of every
type of manifestation. Generally they give the example of a waterpot
and clay. Clay is the cause of the waterpot, but the clay can be found
as both cause and effect. The waterpot is the effect and clay itself is
the cause, but clay is visible everywhere. A tree is matter, but a tree
produces fruit. Water is matter, but water flows. In this way, say the
Sāṅkhyites, matter is the cause of movements and production. As such,
matter can be considered the material and efficient cause of everything
in the cosmic manifestation.
Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana has therefore enunciated the nature of pradhāna as follows:
"Material nature is inert, and as such it
cannot be the cause of matter, neither as the material nor as the
efficient cause. Seeing the wonderful arrangement and management of the
cosmic manifestation generally suggests that a living brain is behind
this arrangement, for without a living brain such an arrangement could
not exist. One should not imagine that such an arrangement can exist
without conscious direction. In our practical experience we never see
that inert bricks can themselves construct a big building.
"The example of the waterpot cannot be
accepted because a waterpot has no perception of pleasure and distress.
Such perception is within. Therefore the covering body, or the waterpot,
cannot be synchronized with it.
"Sometimes the material scientist suggests
that trees grow from the earth automatically, without assistance from a
gardener, because that is a tendency of matter. They also consider the
intuition of living creatures from birth to be material. But such
material tendencies as bodily intuition cannot be accepted as
independent, for they suggest the existence of a spirit soul within the
body. Actually, the tree or the body of a living creature has no
tendency or intuition; the tendency and intuition exist because the soul
is present within the body. In this connection, the example of a car
and driver may be given very profitably. The car has a tendency to turn
right and left, but one cannot say that the car itself, as matter, turns
right and left without the direction of a driver. A material car has
neither tendencies nor intuitions independent of the intentions of the
driver within the car. The same principle applies for the automatic
growth of trees in the forest. The growth takes place because of the
soul's presence within the tree.
"Sometimes foolish people take for granted
that because scorpions are born from heaps of rice, the rice has
produced the scorpions. The real fact, however, is this: the mother
scorpion lays eggs within the rice, and by the proper fermentation of
the rice the eggs give birth to several baby scorpions, which in due
course come out. This does not mean that the rice gives birth to the
scorpions. Similarly, sometimes bugs are seen to come from dirty beds.
This does not mean, however, that the beds give birth to the bugs. It is
the living soul that comes forth, taking advantage of the dirty
condition of the bed. There are different kinds of living creatures.
Some of them come from embryos, some from eggs and some from the
fermentation of perspiration. Different living creatures have different
sources of appearance, but one should not conclude that matter produces
such living creatures.
"The example cited by materialists that trees
automatically come from the earth follows the same principle. Taking
advantage of a certain condition, a living entity comes from the earth.
According to the
Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad,
every living being is forced by divine superintendence to take a
certain type of body according to his past deeds. There are many
varieties of bodies, and because of a divine arrangement a living entity
takes bodies of different shapes.
When a person thinks 'I am doing this,' the 'I
am' does not refer to the body. It refers to something more than the
body, or within the body. As such, the body as it is has neither
tendencies nor intuition; the tendencies and intuition belong to the
soul within the body. Material scientists sometimes suggest that the
tendencies of male and female bodies cause their union and that this is
the cause of the birth of the child. But since the
puruṣa, according to
Sāṅkhya philosophy, is always unaffected, where does the tendency to give birth come from?
"Sometimes material scientists give the
example that milk turns into curd automatically and that distilled water
pouring from the clouds falls down to earth, produces different kinds
of trees, and enters different kinds of flowers and fruits with
different fragrances and tastes. Therefore, they say, matter produces
varieties of material things on its own. In reply to this argument, the
same proposition of the
Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad-that
different kinds of living creatures are put into different kinds of
bodies by the management of a superior power-is repeated. Under superior
superintendence, various souls, according to their past activities, are
given the chance to take a particular type of body, such as that of a
tree, animal, bird or beast, and thus their different tendencies develop
under these circumstances. The
Bhagavad-gītā (
13.22) also further affirms.
puruṣaḥ prakṛti-stho hi
bhuṅkte prakṛti-jān guṇān
kāraṇaṁ guṇa-saṅgo 'sya
sad-asad-yoni-janmasu
'The living
entity in material nature thus follows the ways of life, enjoying the
three modes of nature. This is due to his association with that material
nature. Thus he meets with good and evil among various species.' The
soul is given different types of bodies. For example, were souls not
given varieties of tree bodies, the different varieties of fruits and
flowers could not be produced. Each class of tree produces a particular
kind of fruit and flower; it is not that there is no distinction between
the different classes. An individual tree does not produce flowers of
different colors or fruits of different tastes. There are demarcated
classes, as we find them among humans, animals, birds and other species.
There are innumerable living entities, and their activities, performed
in the material world according to the different qualities of the
material modes of nature, give them the chance to have different kinds
of life.
"Thus one should understand that
pradhāna,
matter, cannot act unless impelled by a living creature. The
materialistic theory that matter independently acts cannot, therefore,
be accepted. Matter is called
prakṛti, which refers to female energy. A woman is
prakṛti, a female. A female cannot produce a child without the association of a
puruṣa, a man. The
puruṣa
causes the birth of a child because the man injects the soul, which is
sheltered in the semen, into the womb of the woman. The woman, as the
material cause, supplies the body of the soul, and as the efficient
cause she gives birth to the child. But although the woman appears to be
the material and efficient cause of the birth of a child, originally
the
puruṣa,
the male, is the cause of the child. Similarly, this material world
gives rise to varieties of manifestations due to the entrance of
Garbhodakaśāyī
Viṣṇu
within the universe. He is present not only within the universe but
within the bodies of all living creatures, as well as within the atom.
We understand from the
Brahma-saṁhitā
that the Supersoul is present within the universe, within the atom and
within the heart of every living creature. Therefore the theory that
matter is the cause of the entire cosmic manifestation cannot be
accepted by any man with sufficient knowledge of matter and spirit.Sri
Caitanya-caritamrta - 1975 Edition : Cc. Adi-lila : Adi 6: The Glories
of Sri Advaita Acarya : Adi 6.14-15
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures :
Madhya-lila: Lectures : Madhya 20: Lectures : Sri Caitanya-caritamrta,
Madhya-lila 20.100-108 -- New York, November 22, 1966 : 661122C2.NY :
So Sanātana Gosvāmī, he's ācārya in this
disciplic succession from Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Lord Caitanya. He is the
first disciple of Lord Caitanya, and from him, Sanātana Gosvāmī, six Gosvāmīs.
There were six among the first followers of Lord Caitanya. And then,
from next step comes Raghunātha Gosvāmī and then this author of this
book, Kṛṣṇa dāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī, and from him, Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura,
and then from him, Viśvanātha Cakravartī, Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa. In
this way this disciplic succession is coming from Lord Caitanya. So as ācārya... Ācārya
means one who knows the principles of scripture, properly being
initiated by authority who knows things as they are, and they apply
those things in their own life. They are called ācārya. Acinoti śāstrāṇi:
he must know all the principles from authorities, and he should apply
in his life those principles. Not that he knows but does not apply. He
cannot be ācārya. Āpani ācari prabhu jīva disa (?). Lord
Caitanya, He, although He is accepted as the, I mean to say, the
personal, He's Kṛṣṇa Himself, still, He behaved in such a way that
others can follow. He also accepted Īśvara Purī. Īśvara, Īśvara Purī was
His spiritual master, Lord Caitanya's. This is the disciplic succession.
______________________________________________
Born in a Khandite (arguibly,
vaisya)family at the end of the 17th century in a village nearby Remuna in the
district of Balasore, Orissa, a boy of extreme sharp intellect and an
exceptional talent for logical reasoning would later on by the blessings of our
most beloved deity, Sri Govinda deva, become known as Srila Baladeva
Vidyabhusana, the author of ‘Sri Govinda bhasya’, the treatise that established
gaudiya vaisnavism as a bona fide school of vedanta . In his childhood, he
studied grammar, nyaya, alankara, etc. in a traditional pathasala on the bank
of the Chilka lake. Having quickly mastered all the different subjects, he left
for pilgrimage, in search of a guru who could impart to him the real import of
the Vedic knowledge. In Mysore he eventually came in contact with a sannyasi
from the Madhva sampradaya who strongly preached to him the tattvavada,
convincing him not only to accept Madhvacarya’s siddhanta, but also to renounce
the world and preach it. Concluding his studies of the Vedas, Vedanta and the
Sarva-mula of Madhvacarya, the young sadhu left for Jagannatha Puri, where he
challenged and defeated all the opponent scholars present there in very intense
debates on sastra. By the divine providence, one day he attended a lecture
given by a foremost disciple of the gaudiya vaisnava acarya, Srila Rasikananda,
called Sri Radha-damodara. The lecture was on the famous treatise written by
Srila Jiva Gosvami- the Six Sandarbhas. After several days hearing the sweet
topics about Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s acintya-bhedabheda-tattva in such
impressive and logical exposition, Baladeva surrendered himself unto Srila
Radha-damodara requesting him to be accepted as a disciple and fully taught the
gaudiya philosophy. Taking up the simple dress of a gaudiya vaisnava mendicant,
he was given the name ‘Ekanti Govinda dasa’ . Being surcharged by the taste of
the philosophy expounded by the six Gosvamis of Vrndavana- Rupa, Sanatana,
Gopala, Jiva, Raghunatha dasa and Raghunatha Bhatta- he left for Vrndavana to
dedicate his life to Lord Caitanya’s mission. At that time, the leader of the
gaudiya vaisnava community was Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti, who being pleased
with Ekanti Govinda dasa, taught him Srimad Bhagavatam and other vaisnava scriptures.
The Jaipur episode
Meanwhile, a series of historical incidents that were to take place would give
Ekanti the opportunity to serve His beloved Lord to his best capacity, changing
the very history of the gaudiya vaisnavism. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu had given
three main orders to the six Gosvamis of Vrndavana- to write books on
philosophy extensively quoting from the sruti and smrti to corroborate the
acintya-bhedabheda siddhanta; to excavate Vrndavana in order to recover the
lost sites of the pastimes of Bhagavan Sri Krsna and to establish temples for
His worship. It is said that the great grand-son of Lord Krsna, Vajranabha, had
carved three deities in an attempt to depict the Lord. They were called
Govinda, Madana-mohana and Gopinatha. Govindaji was found by Srila Rupa
Gosvami, who in 1590 installed Him in the most gorgeous temple ever built in
north India, sponsored by Man Singh from Rajasthan. Madana-mohana was found by
Srila Sanatana Gosvami and in 1580 installed in a temple built by a rich merchant
on the Aditya Tila hill, by the bank of the Yamuna. Gopinatha was found by a
disciple of Gadadhara Pandita called Paramananda Bhattacarya, who entrusted Him
to his disciple Madhu Pandita. Unfortunately, the time came when the Moghul
ruler, Aurangzeb, took the power and started his persecutions against Hinduism.
In 1669 he gave an open order to his army to destroy all the main Hindu temples
and deities within his domain. Under this threat, the vaisnava leaders in
Vrndavana decided to appeal to the Rajputs of Rajasthan. With mutual
cooperation, it was decided that the deities should be moved to Rajasthan. In
1670, the troops of Aurangzeb mercilessly desecrated the main temples in
Vrndavana, but could not find anyone inside them. After moving from one place to
another, Govindaji finally settled under the care of Maharaja Jai Singh, nearby
the present Jaipur city. It happened that at that time the Ramanandi
sampradaya, a branch of the Sri Ramanuja sampradaya founded by Sri Ramananda in
north India, was in charge of the worship there, enjoying the favor of the
king. The arrival of Govindaji and His gaudiya priests was a threat to the
status of the Ramanandis. In an attempt to keep their prestige and royal favor,
they plotted against them by raising doubts about the credibility of the
gaudiya sampradaya on the following grounds:
1) They did not seem to be connected to a bona fide parampara in terms of
philosophical affiliation, since they lacked a commentary on the Vedanta Sutra.
2) According to the standard of the Sri vaisnavas, Lord Narayana is the
original form of God and the source of all incarnations, and therefore He
should be worshiped first. The gaudiyas, however, were worshipping Govinda
before Narayana.
3) The ramanandis considered the worship of Srimati Radharani as unprecendented
and irregular, and therefore they objected and even removed Her from the altar,
thus separating Her from Govindaji.
Upon being requested, the mahanta of Sri Gopinatha temple, Shyam Charan Sharma,
wrote a letter in reply to their challenges quoting from several scriptures to
substantiate Lord Caitanya’s position as the Supreme Lord Krsna Himself and
founder of the gaudiya vaisnava sampradaya. However, the ramanandis remained
adamant. They quoted a verse said to belong to the Padma Purana:
sri-brahma-rudra-sanaka vaisnavah ksiti-pavanah
catvaras te kalau bhavya hy utkale purusottamat
“In kali-yuga, four vaisnava disciplic successions will emerge from Jagannatha
Puri and purify the whole world: Sri-sampradaya, Brahma-sampradaya,
Rudra-sampradaya and Kumara-sampradaya.”
With basis on this verse they were not ready to accept any sampradaya not
proceeding from these four- Sri, Brahma, Rudra and the Kumaras- represented by
their respective acaryas – Ramanuja, Madhva, Visnu Svami and Nimbarka. The
gaudiyas had to go to Vrndavana to appeal to the senior most learned scholar at
that time- Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti . Upon hearing that Radha and Govinda
were split he started laughing and commented that this must be an amorous quarrel.
Our acarya was in advanced age and would not be able to personally go to Jaipur
to face the opponents, but he was convinced that Ekanti Govinda dasa was the
right person to solve the case. Once in Jaipur, Ekanti presented himself to the
king and the ramanandis for a debate. Upon seeing the boy in his early twenties
and dressed like a vaisnava mendicant, they looked at him in disbelief. Without
hesitation, he started substantiating the authenticity of the gaudiya
sampradaya as a bona fide branch of the Madhva sampradaya, although remarkable
philosophical divergences made each of them unique. But then which commentary
on the Brahma-sutra do the gaudiyas follow? In reply to this, Ekanti explained
that Sri Caitanya preached the study of Srimad Bhagavatam, this being the
natural commentary on Vedanta written by the author himself, Sri Vyasadeva, as
corroborated by the Garuda Purana:
artho ‘yam brahma-sutranam bharatartha-vinirnayah
gayatri-bhasya-rupo ‘sau vedartha-paribrmhitah
“Srimad-Bhagavatam is the meaning of the Vedanta-sutra and the purport of the
Maha-bharata. It is the commentary on the Brahma-gayatri and it is fully
expanded with all Vedic knowledge.”
So being, what need there should be of another commentary? This argument was
not at all appealing to the panditas in the royal court, who demanded a
Brahma-sutra commentary to accept the credibility of the gaudiya sampradaya,
otherwise they should get ready to give up the worship of Govindaji and leave
Jaipur. Being a staunch devotee of the Lord and fully relying on His mercy,
Ekanti boldly affirmed that all he needed were some days to write down a full
fledge commentary on the Vedanta-sutra. Before the assembly, the king accepted
the proposal and requested him to present as soon as possible commentaries on
Brahma-sutra, ten Upanisads and Bhagavad-gita. Ekanti went to see His beloved
Govindaji and explained the whole situation for Him. In a dream, He appeared to
him and assured him that there was no need to worry about anything, for He
Himself would be dictating the whole commentary in his dreams. And it so
happened, after which the commentary is called ‘Govinda-bhasya’. This was
described by Baladeva himself at the end of the book:
vidya-rupam bhusanam me pradaya
khyatim ninye tena yo mam udarah
sri-govindah svapna-nirdista-bhasyo
radha-bandhur bandhurangah sa jiyat
“All glories to the graceful and handsome Lord Govinda, who is
the dear friend of Sri Radha, who kindly gave me the name
Vidyabhusana, and Who spoke this commentary to me in dreams”.
There is divergence regarding how long it took him to write it down; some say
seven days, some say one month. In any case, after a short period of time,
Baladeva presented his commentary before the assembly of scholars in the court
and defeated all possible objections raised by them, thus establishing the
gaudiya vaisnava philosophy as bona fide as that of the other vaisnava
sampradayas. He also substantiated that Lord Govinda is the original form of
Lord Narayana and that Srimati Radharani is His eternal consort. Being fully
satisfied with his presentation, Jai Singh Maharaja awarded him the title
‘vidyabhusana’ (adorned with knowledge). The ramanandis requested him to
initiate them in the gaudiya sampradaya, but Ekanti refused explaining that
they were already initiated in a bona fide vaisnava sampradaya and it would be
an insult to Sri Ramanujacarya to reinitiate them. Back to Vrndavana, Baladeva
became the leader of the vaisnava community and kept on writing. The following
is a partial list of the works attributed to him:
Complete works attributed to Baladeva Vidyabhusana:
1. Isopanisad; (Krishnadas Baba), (Sarasvata Gaudiya Mission), (Shyam Lal,3
comm.), (Bhaktivinoda)
2. Aisvarya-kadambini; (Haridas Shastri), (Haridas das)
3. Kavya-kaustubha; (Haridas das), (Haridas Shastri)
4. Gopala-tapany-upanisad-bhasya; (Haridas das)
5. Candraloka-tika, (supposedly lost)
6. Chandah-kaustubha-tika; (Haridas das), (Haridas Shastri), (Vrindavan
Research Inst.)
7. Tattva-dipika (manuscript)
8. Tattva-sandarbha-tika; (Harinam Press), (Haridas Shastri), (Nityasvarupa),
(Jadavpur), (Acyuta-grantha-mala), (Krishnachandra Bhagavataratna), (Shyam Lal)
Commentary on five other Sandarbhas; (supposedly lost)
9. Nataka-candrika-tika; (supposedly lost)
10. Pada-kaustubha, (unpublished manuscript)
11. Prameya-ratnavali; (Haridas Shastri), (Gokul Chandra Goswami), (Sanskrit
Parisad), (Kanai Lal), (Gaudiya Math), (Gour Krishna Goswami)
12. Brahma-sutra-karika-bhasya, (manuscript)
13. Bhagavad-gita (gita-bhusana); (Krishnadas Baba), (Gaudiya Mission),
(Vidyananda), (Kasinatha S. Agase and Baba S. Phadake)
14. Laghu-bhagavatamrta-tika (saranga-rangada); (Haribhakta das), (Ramanarayana
Vidyaratna), (Venkatesh Press), (Atul Krishna Gosvami), (Gaurasundar Bhagavata)
15. Visnu-sahasra-nama-tika (nama-sudhartha); (Krishnadas Baba)
16. Vedanta-sutra-Govinda-bhasya; (Sarasvata-Gaudiya Mission), (Harinam Press),
(Krishnadas Baba), (Shyam Lal Goswami), (Krishnagopal Bhakta)
17. Vedanta-sutra-suksma-tika; (Sarasvata-Gaudiya Mission), (Shyam Lal Goswami)
18. Vedanta-syamantaka; (Haridas Shastri), (Umesh Chandra Bhattacharya,
Lahore), (Kalidasnath), (Nalinikant Gosvami), (Pancavati, Nasik), (Shyam Lal
Goswami), (Sri Vrindavan/Gourkrishna?)
19. Vyakarana-kaumudi; (unpublished manuscript)
20. Srimad-bhagavata-bhasya (vaisnavanandini); prathama skandha, (Haridas das);
dasama skandha (Krishna-Shankar Shastri, incomplete), (Nityasvarupa/Manindra
Bahadur)
21. Syamananda-sataka-tika, (Haridas das), (Gopala-Govindananda Goswami)
22. Sahitya-kaumudi; (Haridas Shastri),(Rastriya Sanskrit
Samstham),(NirnayaSagar Press)
23. Siddhanta-darpana; (Haridas das), (Gaudiya Math), (Sajjana-tosani)
24. Siddhanta-ratna; (Krishnadas Baba), (Gopinath Kaviraj), (Shyam Lal
Goswami), (Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti), (Adimohana Goswami), (Gaurasundar
Bhagavata)
25. Stava-mala-tika; (Nirnaya Sagar Press), (Ramanarayana Vidyaratna)
Books wrongly attributed to BV:
Krsna-bhavanamrta-tika, (Krsnadeva Sarvabhauma)
Gupta-dhama-chatra, (Kanai Lal)
Gopala-campu-tika, (Viracandra Gosvami)
Padyavali-tika (rasika-rangada), (Viracandra Gosvami)
Bala-tosani, (Hare Krsna acarya)
Samsaya-satini, (Raghunandana Gosvami)
Sadananda-vidhayini-tika , (Vrndavana Cakravarti)
Stavavali-kasika, (Vangesvara Vidyabhusana)
posted by Demian Martins at 1:57 AM
_______________________________________
Sri Ganga mata Goswamini
śiṣya paḍichā-dvārā prabhu nila vahāñā
ghare āni' pavitra sthāne rākhila śoyāñā
SYNONYMS
At that time
Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya lived on the southern side of the
Jagannātha Temple. His home was practically on the beach and was known as
Mārkaṇḍeya-sarastaṭa.
At present it is used as the monastery of Gaṅgāmātā.Sri Caitanya-caritamrta - 1975 Edition : Cc. Madhya-lila : Madhya 6: The Liberation of Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya : Madhya 6.8
tāṅhāra ananta guṇa ke karu prakāśa
tāṅra priya śiṣya iṅha--paṇḍita haridāsa
SYNONYMS
TRANSLATION
Ananta Ācārya was a reservoir of all good qualities. No one can estimate how great he was. Paṇḍita Haridāsa was his beloved disciple.
Śrī
Ananta Ācārya is one of the eternal associates of Śrī
Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Previously, during the advent of Lord Śrī
Kṛṣṇa,
Ananta Ācārya was
Sudevī, one of the eight
gopīs. This is stated in the
Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā, verse 165, as follows:
anantācārya-gosvāmī yā sudevī purā vraje. "Ananta Ācārya Gosvāmī was formerly
Sudevī-
gopī in
Vraja [
Vṛndāvana]." In
Jagannātha Purī, or
Puruṣottama-
kṣetra, there is a monastery known as
Gaṅgā-
mātā Maṭha that was established by
Ananta Ācārya. In the disciplic succession of the
Gaṅgā-
mātā Maṭha, he is known as
Vinoda-
mañjarī. One of his disciples was
Haridāsa Paṇḍita Gosvāmī, who is also known as Śrī
Raghu Gopāla and as Śrī
Rāsa-
mañjarī.
His disciple Lakṣmīpriyā was the maternal aunt of Gaṅgā-mātā, a princess who was the daughter of the King of Puṭiyā. Gaṅgā-mātā brought a Deity of the name Śrī Rasika-rāya from Kṛṣṇa Miśra of Jaipur and installed Him in the house of Sārvabhauma in Jagannātha Purī. The disciple in the fifth generation after Śrī
Ananta Ācārya was Śrī
Vanamālī; in the sixth generation, Śrī
Bhagavān dāsa, who was a Bengali; in the seventh generation,
Madhusūdana dāsa, who was an Oriyā; in
the eighth generation,
Nīlāmbara dāsa; in the ninth generation, Śrī Narottama
dāsa; in the tenth generation,
Pītāmbara dāsa; and in the eleventh generation, Śrī
Mādhava dāsa. The disciple in the twelfth generation is
presently in charge of the
Gaṅgā-
mātā
monastery Sri Caitanya-caritamrta - 1975 Edition : Cc. Adi-lila : Adi
8: The Author Receives the Orders of Krsna and Guru : Adi 8.60 :