Gita Bhusana: Commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita

"With care, Vidyabhusana has attended upon this commentary called Srimad Gita Bhusana. O devotees who are greedy for the sweetness of prema of Sri Govinda and who are filled with mercy, please purify this work." Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana.

"In Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana's commentary, we will find the influence of both Ramanujacarya in particular verses and Madhvacarya in the general philosophy. In his refutation of impersonal interpretations of the Gita, he takes some of the arguments from Sri Ramanuj acarya's commentary on the Gita. He takes the concept of visesa, the power by which particulars inhere in an object, from Madhvacarya, in order to explain the non-difference of God from His qualities." Srila Prabhupada Lecture-Seattle, October 18, 1968

Foreword:

One can ask why did Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana consider it necessary to write a commentary on the Bhagavad-gita, when shortly before that his siksa guru; Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, had written an excellent and original commentary perfectly in harmony with Gaudiya philosophy. His personal answer to that question we will never know.

However, by examining his commentary, Gita Bhusana, the reader will be able to appreciate that he has indeed made a significant contribution to the study of the Gita in writing it. Like Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti's, his explanations are unique and consistent with the whole of the Gita, and yet his commentary is quite different from Visvanatha's. At the same time, the explanations are in harmony with the Gaudiya philosophy. Thus, we have two equally brilliant commentaries on the same text. Both conclude the supremacy of Krsna and pure bhakti, but with different explanations of the verses leading to that conclusion. Within one sampradaya, we have two differing explanations of a work, both of which we accept as correct. Inconceivably, the two commentaries are different but harmonious.

In Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana's commentary, we will find the influence of both Ramanujacarya in particular verses and Madhvacarya in the general philosophy. In his refutation of impersonal interpretations of the Gita, he takes some of the arguments from Sri Ramanuj acarya's commentary on the Gita. He takes the concept of visesa, the power by which particulars inhere in an object, from Madhvacarya, in order to explain the non-difference of God from His qualities

However, we will also find original ideas in his commentary. He presents the concept of three types of devotees: the sanishta, parinisthita and nirapeksa in order to bring unity to the whole of the Gita. The sanistha bhakta follows the gradual process: niskama karma yoga (varnasrama), followed by jnana yoga, astanga yoga, and finally bhakti yoga. Thus all the processes described in the first six chapters can be considered essential for the sanishta bhakta's development. The parinisthita bhakta directly engages in the devotional processes of hearing and chanting as his main sadhana. He also performs varnasrama rules, but without attachment, only to set an example for less advanced persons who do not have strong faith to practice bhakti as their main sadhana. The nirapeksa bhakta performs only bhakti and rejects the rules of varnasrama. He is usually a renounced person. The latter two types of devotees are called ananya bhaktas or pure devotees, though they are practicing sadhana. They are considered superior because of their direct practice of bhakti. These two types are described in the middle six chapters, and at the conclusion of the Gita. This explanation of the relationship of varnasrama to bhakti may be useful to readers for application in their own lives.

In producing commentaries, the authors often resort to explanations of the words of the verse in their grammatical context within the sentence, while at the same time explaining the words' implied meanings in the context of the subject at hand. This often gives rise to long, complex sentences which become difficult to follow in English, but are quite clear in sanskrt. Such sentences have been broken up for easier comprehension, though in the process, the explanation of the grammatical context may disappear. Please bear that in mind while reading. Comments or explanations of the commentary are usually in footnotes. Please forgive any mistakes in translation or interpretation.

I hope the reader will find the commentary stimulating to the intellect and nourishing to the soul, bringing about greater faith and devotion to Lord Krsna.

Bhanu Swami
Chennai, Tamil Nadu, South India
Gaura Purnima 2005.