THE GAUDIYA MARCH 2011
Pithy Precepts of Srila Prabhupâd
Sri JeevaGoswami has giventhe true spirit of theauthor of SrimadBhagavatam in his‘Krama Sandarbha’(explanations followingeach shloka) speciallyin his Shatsandarbha(Six treaties) andSarvasamvadini(Reconciliation of different discourses). Sowe need not misunderstand Sridhara tohave followed the ‘Kevaladvaitavada’School (undifferenced Monism).Sridhara’s Suddhadvaita (unalloyedmonotheism) interpretations are quitedifferent from Kevaladvaita views.Mayavadins, the advocates of Illusorytheory in explaining the non-manifestivephase of the Absolute, are really pitiableobjects in the estimation of the DevotionalSchool.It would be a tremendous task tosupply Bhagavata verses to serve ascommentaries of the Aphorisms in this shortnarration; so we give up the idea of thatundertaking to exhibit the eighteen thousandshlokas as commentaries of the Aphorismswhich are a quarter less six hundred only.
–TheSattwata Pancharatras are also acceptedas commentaries of the Aphorisms, thoughnone has attempted to arrange themaccordingly under each item of different
The Famous Commentators
:Theistic and Non-Theistic –– The other tencommentaries claim to explain the sutrasby citation of different hymns of Upanishadsin which the Sutrakara by following thedivisional method has arranged them intoparticular themes. There were several
2commentaries before the attempts of Kevaladwaita School through the pen of SriShankaracharya. Sri Ramanujacharya andothers have referred to the names of Bharuchi, Kapardi, Bodhayana, Audolomi,Tanka, Guha and some other oldercommentaries. We find half a dozenBhashyas and several dozen annotations of the same after Shankara had given out hisown interpretation. Among them, SriBhashyam of Sri Ramanuja, PurnaprajnaBhashyam of Sri Madhva and hisAnuvyakaranam are the most famous, andlater on we find that Vallabhacharya’sAnubhashyam and Nimbarka’s ParijataSaurabha (the origin of Keshava-Kashmiri’sthoughts of Kaustubha), Bhaskara’sinterpretation of the Dvaitadvaita view andShrikantha’s Shaiva VishistadvaitaBhashyam and lastly Sri BaladevaVidyabhushana’s Govinda Bhashyam hadadded multifarious interpretations of theAphorisms. Each Bhashyakara has gotseveral annotations to explain their methodsby way of elucidating their writings andchiefly to indicate the direction in which theirinterpretations differed from the opinion of a particular School, instead of participatingin a common view. Vijnana Bhikshu has alsogiven a Bhashyam of his own. One SarvajnaMuni’s ‘Samkshepa Sharirakam’ is also anattempt to explain the views of the Aphorismsaccording to the undifferentiated monisticschool, while Vrajanatha, Purushottama andothers have backed up the writer of Anubhashya.We are also at a later period accostedby the thundering muse of the writingstending to explain the Aphorisms by theShakta method and to proselytise theMasculine or Neuter aspect of theFountainhead to the Feminine store-houseof all energies.