Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana Tirobhava Tithi [disappearance day] Monday, June 1, 2020 [Mayapura Time]

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.

“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.

“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.

“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.


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


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 :