Books

Siddhanta Darpana of Baladeva Vidyabhushana (Nanda Mishra Commentary)

"Baladeva was Vaiśya by caste and born in a village near Remuna in the Balesvar subdivision of Orissa; he was a pupil of vairāgī Pītāmvara Dāsa, and was generally known as Govinda Dāga. He was the disciple of a Kanouj Brahmin, Rādhā Dāmodara Dāsa, the author of Vedānta-Syamantaka. Rādhā Dāmodara was a disciple of Nayanānanda, the son of Rādhānanda, and a pupil of his grandfather, Rasikānanda Murāri, who was a disciple of Śyāmānanda, a junior contemporary of Jīva Gosvāmī. Śyāmānanda was a disciple of Hṛdaya Caitanya, who in his turn was a disciple of Gaurīdāsa Paṇḍita, a disciple of Nityānanda. Baladeva himself had two well known disciples, Nanda Miśra and Uddhava Dāsa; he wrote his commentary on Rūpa Gosvāmī’ś Stava-mālā in the Śaka era 1686 (or CE. 1764)".

advtanmoy 02/06/2023 4 minutes read

Siddhanta Darpana

Commentary of Nanda Misra
Baladeva Vidyabhushana (c. 1700 – 1793 CE) and his works

“God is regarded as being both the material cause of the world and as the supreme agent. He has three fundamental powers: the supreme power, viṣṇu-śakti, the power as kṣetrajña, the power as avidyā. In His first power Brahman remains in Himself as the unchangeable; His other two powers are transformed into the jīvas and the world. The Sāṃkhyist argues that, as the world is of a different nature from Brahman, Brahman cannot be regarded as its material cause. Even if it is urged that there are two subtle powers which may be regarded as the material cause of the world and the jīvas, their objection still holds good; for the development of the gross, which is different from the subtle, is not explained. To this the reply is that the effect need not necessarily be the same as or similar to the material cause. Brahman transforms Himself into the world, which is entirely different from Him. If there were absolute oneness between the material cause and the effect, then one could not be called the cause and the other the effect; the lumpy character of the mud is not seen in the jug, which is its effect; in all cases that may be reviewed the effect must necessarily be different from the material cause. Such a modification does not in any way change the nature of Brahman. The changes are effected in His powers, while He remains unchanged by the modification of His powers. To turn to an ordinary example as an illustration, it may be pointed out that “a man with the stick” refers to none other than the man himself, though there is a difference between the man and the stick; so though the power of the Brahman is identical with Brahman in association with His powers, yet the existence of a difference between Brahman and His powers is not denied. Moreover, there is always a difference between the material cause and the effect. The jug is different from the lump of clay, and the ornaments from the gold out of which they are made; also they serve different purposes and exist in different times. If the effect existed before the causal operation began, the application of the causal operation would be unnecessary; also the effect would be eternal. If it is held that the effect is a manifestation of that which was already existent, then a further question arises, whether this manifestation, itself an effect, requires a further manifestation, and so on; thus a chain of manifestations would be necessary, and the result would be a vicious infinite”. [Surendranath Dasgupta-
A History of Indian Philosophy Volume 4]

(1) A commentary on the Brahma Sutras, Govinda-Bhashya;
(2) Siddhanta-ratnam,
(3) Vedanta-syamantaka,
(4) Prameya-ratnavali,
(5) Siddhanta-darpana,
(6) Sahitya-kaumudi,
(7) Kavya-kaustubha,
(8) Vyakarana-kaumudi (which appears to have been lost);
(9) Pada-kaustubha,
(10) Vaishnava-nandini, a commentary on the Tenth Canto,
(11) A commentary on Gopal-tapani Upanishad;
(12) Commentaries on the Isha and nine other upanishads;
(13) Gitabhushana-bhashya, a commentary on Bhagavad-gita;
(14) Namarthasudha, a commentary on the Vishnusahasranama;
(15) Saranga-rangada, a commentary on the Laghubhagavatamrita;
(16) Stavamala-vibhushana, a commentary on Stavamala;
(17) a commentary on Rupa Goswami´s Natika-candrika;
(18) Chandah-kaustubha-bhashya;
(20) A commentary on Rasikanandas Shyamananda-shataka;
(21) A commentary on Candraloka (which appears to have been lost);
(22) Krishnanandini, a commentary on Sahitya-kaumudi;
(23) Govindabhashya-tika, a commentary on his own Govinda-bhashya;
(24) Sukshma, a further clarification of his own Siddhanta-ratnam;

GURU PARAMPARA BY BALADEVA

Śrīkṛṣṇa,
Brahmā,
Devarṣi-Bādarāyaṇa,
Madhva,
Padmanābha,
Nṛhari,
Mādhava,
Akṣobhya,
Jaya-tīrtha,
Jñana-sindhu,
Vidyānidhi,
Rājendra,
Jayadharma,
Puruṣottama,
Brāhmaṇya,
Vyāsa-tīrtha,
Lakṣmīpati,
Mādhavendra,
Īśvara,
Advaita,
Nityānanda
and also Śrī Caitanya[