Siddhanta-darpana Release

To order a copy, please click HERE

A searchable docx file with the Sanskrit text can be downloaded HERE.

           I am glad to announce the release of the second publication of the Baladeva Vidyäbhüñaëa Project: an English translation of the Siddhänta-darpaëa based in more than ten manuscripts from all over India. This critical edition includes the original Sanskrit text and the commentary of Nanda Miçra, who was the author’s direct disciple.  The main topic of the book is the authenticity of the Srémad-Bhägavatam.

            Just as the supremacy of Lord Kåñëa is an object of timeless controversy, so is the authority of the scripture that depicts Him: the Çrémad-Bhägavatam. No other Vedic personality and no other Puräëa has been so much attacked by opposing groups – a fact which itself evinces the superiority of both, for the scriptures often describe the particular envy the demons feel towards Lord Kåñëa. Such envy would be baseless if He were a common being and the Çrémad-Bhägavatam a common book. Therefore çästra, history, logic, and Lord Kåñëa’s exalted devotees stand by Him to dismantle all bogus texts, false evidences, fallacies, and atheistic arguments. With this in mind, Çréla Baladeva Vidyäbhüñaëa, known as the Gauòéya Vedänta Äcärya, compiled the Siddhänta-darpaëa, an original treatise that presents the Çrémad-Bhägavatam as the sound incarnation of the Lord and defeats several objections against its authenticity. 
          By its very characteristics, Çrémad-Bhägavatam far surpasses all other Puräëas.  There are five basic topics that must be included in a Puräëa according to the following definition: [1

sargaç ca pratisargaç ca vaàço manvantaräëi ca 

vaàçänucaritaà ceti puräëaà païca-lakñaëam

           “Primary creation, secondary creation, the dynasties, the ages of the several Manus, and the activities of the various dynasties – these are the five characteristics of a Puräëa.”

           Another definition states that a Puräëa, or more specifically, a Mahä-puräëa, must have an additional five topics:

sargo 'syätha visargaç ca våtti-rakñäntaräëi ca  

vaàço vaàçänucaritaà saàsthä hetur apäçrayaù

                   “O brähmaëa, a Puräëa is said to contain ten characteristic topics: the primary creation, the subsequent creation, the universal maintenance, the protection of all beings, the ages of the various Manus, the dynasties of kings and their activities, annihilation, motivation, and the supreme shelter. Some state that the Mahä-puräëas have these ten topics, while lesser Puräëas have only five.” (Çrémad-Bhägavatam, 12.7.9-10)

           All the subject matters can be distinctly found in one or more books of the Çrémad-Bhägavatam. As it contains these ten main characteristics, it is therefore correctly defined as being a Mahä-puräëa:

 çré-çuka uväca                             

 atra sargo visargaç ca sthänaà poñaëam ütayaù  

 manvantareçänukathä nirodho muktir äçrayaù

          “Çré Çukadeva Gosvämé said: In the Çrémad-Bhägavatam there are ten divisions of statements regarding the following: the creation of the universe, sub-creation, planetary systems, protection by the Lord, the creative impetus, the change of Manus, the science of God, annihilation, liberation, and the supreme shelter.” (Çrémad-Bhägavatam, 2.10.2)

           The Puräëas are also classified as belonging to the mode of goodness (sättvika), passion (räjasika) or ignorance (tämasika). The Kürma Puräëa (2.43.49) and the Matsya Puräëa (53.68-69) state:

 sättvikeñu puräëeñu mähätmyam adhikaà hareù                      

 räjaseñu ca mähätmyam adhikaà brahmaëo viduù                   

 tadvad agneś ca mähätmyaà tämaseñu çivasya ca

           “In the Puräëas in the mode of goodness, the focus is the glories of Lord Hari; in those in the mode of passion, the focus is the glories of Lord Brahmä; similarly, in those in the mode of ignorance, the focus is the glories of Lord Çiva and Agni.”

           The Garuòa Puräëa (3.1.52) confirms:

viñëoù puräëaà bhägavataà puräëaà sattvottamaà gäruòaà cähur äryäù

           “The Aryans declare that Viñëu Puräëa, Bhägavata Puräëa and Garuòa Puräëa are the best of the Puräëas in the mode of goodness.”

Wherever this topic is dealt with, the Çrémad-Bhägavatam is described as a sättvika Puräëa.[2] This is quite obvious, as Lord Viñëu, the subject of the Çrémad-Bhägavatam, is also described as the controller of the mode of goodness. The superiority of sattva-guëa (goodness) over rajo-guëa (passion) and tamo-guëa (ignorance) is self-evident and it is superfluous to mention how it is praised by so many scriptures. Once this is understood, it is untenable to think that the Çrémad-Bhägavatam counted among the Mahä-puräëas could be any other text than the one in goodness and praising Lord Viñëu. No Puräëa named ‘Bhägavatam’ could possibly belong to the mode of goodness if it emphasizes the worship of any other deity than Viñëu, for this would contradict His direct instruction:

 ye 'py anya-devatä-bhaktä yajante çraddhayänvitäù    

  te 'pi mäm eva kaunteya yajanty avidhi-pürvakam

  (Bhagavad-gétä 9.23)

           “Those who are devotees of other gods and who worship them with faith actually worship only Me, O son of Kunté, but they do so in a wrong way.”

Yet there is a very old controversy in which the Çäktas claim that the Devé-Bhägavata Puräëa[3] is the bona fide Bhägavatam among the eighteen Mahä-puräëas. This issue has led to innumerable arguments between the disputants. Perhaps the earliest known reference to this controversy is that of Çrédhara Svämé (14^th century), who in the very beginning of his commentary on the Çrémad-Bhägavatam[4] states that one should not doubt it as the authentic Bhägavatam, hinting that this controversy was quite widespread even in his time. Narasiàha Väjapeyé (15^th century) in his Nityäcära-pradépa quotes the list of eighteen Mahä-puräëas and declares that one should not think that the name bhägavata comes from bhagavaté,[5] another name of Devé. In addition, Väjapeyé mentions the view of Lakñmédhara[6] that Puräëas such as the Kälikä Puräëa, which are not in the list, are later productions. He further remarks that if one doubts the Çrémad-Bhägavatam, which is so famous, then one may well doubt the other Puräëas too. In the 15^th century, Puruñottama Tértha, a sannyäsé in the line of Madhväcärya, wrote the Bhägavata-viñaya-svarüpa-çaìkä-niräsa-trayodaça, in which he presents thirteen arguments to prove the Vaiñëava Bhägavatam as the legitimate Mahä-puräëa. In the 16^th century, Jéva Gosvämé composed the Tattva-sandarbha, a pioneer work that presents the Çrémad-Bhägavatam not only as a bona fide Mahä-puräëa, but also the topmost scripture. Therein he refutes several objections against its authenticity. In the 17^th century some peculiar papers were composed: defending the Vaiñëava’s view, Rämäçrama, son of the famous Bhaööoji Dékñita, wrote the Durjana-mukha-capeöikä (A Slap on the Face of the Wicked); to refute it, Käçénätha Bhaööa compiled the Durjana-mukha-mahä-capeöikä (A Big Slap on the Face of the Wicked); and another response written by an anonymous author is called Durjana-mukha-padma-pädukä (A Lotus like Shoe on the Face of the Wicked). The discussion continues till the present day, and unfortunately for the Çäktas, on the basis of the large amount of evidence available, the great majority of scholars agree that the Vaiñëava Çrémad-Bhägavatam is the legitimate Mahä-puräëa. A few of these evidences are as follows.

           The famous Bhägavata-mähätmya in the Padma Puräëa (Uttara-khaëòa, 195.29) describes:

                 

 grantho'ñöädaça-sähasro dvädaça-skandha-saàyutaù   

 parékñic-chuka-saàvädaù çrémad-bhägavatäbhidhaù

           “The scripture named Çrémad-Bhägavatam has 18,000 verses in twelve books and is a conversation between Çukadeva and King Parékñit.”

As the Devé-Bhägavata has no conversation between Çukadeva and Parékñit, it is obvious that the Puräëa referred to here is the Vaiñëava Bhägavatam. The same is also true in the case of the Bhägavata-mähätmya in the Skanda Puräëa, which is part of the Vaiñëava-khaëòa and deals with Lord Kåñëa. The Agni Puräëa has a whole chapter (1.93) describing each book of the Bhägavatam which starts with the conversation between Çukadeva and Parékñit, and the main topics are accurately mentioned. The Padma Puräëa (Uttara-khaëòa, 193.3) corroborates:

puräëeñu tu sarveñu çrémad-bhägavataà param                        

yatra pratipadaà kåñëo géyate bahudharñibhiù

           “The Çrémad-Bhägavatam, in whose every word Lord Kåñëa is praised in many ways by the sages, is the topmost among all Puräëas.”

          As for the authorship of the Çrémad-Bhägavatam, it is clear from the narration in its first book that it was composed by Vyäsadeva through the instigation of Närada Muni. Its authorship was formerly falsely attributed to Vopadeva by unscrupulous persons in an attempt to taint its authority. Such imposition could impress only those who are indifferent to the tradition handed down through the disciplic succession and who lack a minimum knowledge of history. In his own books, Vopadeva gives sufficient information to let us understand that he lived in the 13^th century. Vopadeva states that his father was a physician named Keçava,[7] the author of a book on medicine called Siddha-mantra on which Vopadeva himself wrote a commentary called Siddha-mantra-prakäça. In this book, Keçava mentions that he was honored by King Siàharäja, also known as Singhana, who ruled from 1210 to 1247. Moreover, some of Vopadeva’s works were composed at the request of and to satisfy Hemädri,[8] a reputed scholar and author of Catur-varga-cintämaëi, who served as the prime minister of two kings in South India: King Mahädeva,[9]  who ruled from 1259 to 1271, and King Rämacandra Yädava of Devagiri,[10] who ruled from 1271 to 1309. Hemädri seems to have been a close friend of Vopadeva, and the existing commentary on Muktä-phalam entitled Kaivalya-dépikä is signed by him. This being so, he is quite competent to state how many books Vopadeva wrote: “Vopadeva has many excellent compositions, such as ten treatises on grammar, nine on medicine, one wonderful book on astronomy, three on literature, and three expressing the essence of the Çrémad-Bhägavatam.”[11] Had Vopadeva in fact authored the Çrémad-Bhägavatam, Hemädri would have certainly stated so.

           Further evidence of the existence of the Çrémad-Bhägavatam prior to Vopadeva appears from Al-Biruni (973-1048), a Muslim scholar who spent years doing research in India and wrote an elaborate book on Indology[12] in which he clearly mentions Väsudeva’s Bhägavata Puräëa among a list of eighteen Mahä-puräëas.

          Similarly, King Valläla Sena, who ruled from 1160 to 1178, wrote the Däna-sägara in 1169,[13] wherein he states that he will not quote the Bhägavata Puräëa because it does not contain any chapter dealing particularly with charity, the main topic of his book.[14] By saying so, he obviously was not referring to the Devé-Bhägavata Puräëa, which has a whole chapter about charity in the ninth book (chapter 30).

           We also know from Vopadeva’s writings and from history that he was a very learned brähmaëa and a great devotee of Lord Kåñëa, therefore it is illogical to assume that he would do such a dishonest act as faking a Puräëa. His veneration for the Çrémad-Bhägavatam is expressed in the following words:

 vedaù puräëaà kävyaà ca prabhur mitraà priyeva ca            

 bodhayantéti hi prähus trivad bhägavataà punaù

           “The learned say that a Veda instructs like a master, a Puräëa instructs like a friend, and poetry instructs like a lover, but the Çrémad-Bhägavatam instructs like all three of them.”

         Even greater evidence showing the anachronism pointed above is Madhväcärya’s (1238-1317) commentary on the Çrémad-Bhägavatam, named Bhägavata-tätparya-nirëaya. Even if somehow someone could prove that Vopadeva lived a century before Madhva, it would still not substantiate the claimed authorship. The Çrémad-Bhägavatam was the only Puräëa commented by Madhva, who commented only on standard scriptures such as the Vedänta-sütras, Upaniñads and Bhagavad-gétä. In those days, even in a hundred years a newly composed text would not possibly be so widely accepted that Madhva would prefer to comment on it instead of the Viñëu and Padma Puräëas, which were largely quoted by Çaìkara and Rämänuja. In other words, the very fact that Madhva wrote a commentary proves that at his time Çrémad-Bhägavatam was a well-known scripture accepted by most scholars.

           As for the speculations regarding Rämänujäcärya’s (1017-1137) silence about the Çrémad-Bhägavatam, they are baseless. There are innumerable scriptures which were not quoted by him, and this does not even slightly affect their credibility. Rämänuja’s exegetics aimed at defeating Çaìkara’s arguments and relied on the same passages of the çruti and småti quoted by him. Since Çaìkara did not refer to the Bhägavatam to support his philosophy, Rämänuja also did not. It was the custom in orthodox philosophical circles to refer to the çruti as primary evidence and to the småti secondarily. In the case of the småti, the texts most quoted were those more widely accepted in the society. The fact that the Bhägavatam might not have been a popular scripture at Çaìkara’s time (8^th century) does not undermine its authority. In his Tattva-sandarbha, Jéva Gosvämé mentions that many portions of the Vedas are lost. If eventually some of those original texts could be recovered, their credibility would be naturally contested for some time by scholars who never heard of them. Although it was previously known and commented on, it was between Madhväcärya (1238-1317) and Lord Caitanya Mahäprabhu (1486-1534) that the Çrémad-Bhägavatam became largely popular all over India, being commented on by scholars from all corners. It then became a standard scripture quoted as authority on innumerable topics. It is remarkable that some scholars like B.N.K.Sharma[15] believe that Rämänuja, Abhinava Gupta (10^th century) and Gauòapäda (7^th century) actually quoted the Bhägavatam in their works, but their authenticity has been questioned by other scholars.

          Apart from a good number of commentaries, Çréla Baladeva Vidyäbhüñaëa wrote only a few philosophical books: Siddhänta-ratna and Prameya-ratnävalé (both introductions to Govinda-bhäñya), Siddhänta-darpaëa, Vedänta-syamantaka (also attributed to Rädhä-Dämodara Gosvämé) and Tattva-dépikä. Siddhänta-darpaëa is a prakaraëa-grantha, a treatise briefly dealing with a specific philosophical topic. Comprising a total of 56 verses, the work aims at proving that the Çrémad-Bhägavatam is a bona fide Mahä-puräëa, and that being non-different from the Supreme Lord, it is eternal and faultless. The only commentary available was written by Nanda Miçra, who, according to the Gauòéya Vaiñëava Abhidhäna, was Baladeva Vidyäbhüñaëa’s disciple. There is hardly any available information about him, but from his commentary on verse 5.4 we may assume that he was either originally from Väräëasé or lived there for several years. In any case, it is evident that he was formally trained in the different branches of orthodox philosophical schools and was directly appointed to write this commentary.

The book is divided in seven prabhäs or rays, as follows:

The First Ray refutes various Nästika arguments, as well as arguments put forward by the Mémäàsakas and Vaiñeçikas, and proves that the Supreme Lord is the creator of the universe and that the çruti and småti are his sound incarnation.

The Second Ray refutes the idea that the çästras are human compositions and that if the çruti and the småti are non-different, then the çüdras should be prohibited to read the småti.
The Third Ray proves that the Çrémad-Bhägavatam is one of the eighteen Mahä-puräëas by its characteristics and number of verses.

The Fourth Ray proves that the Çrémad-Bhägavatam is different from the Devé Puräëa and the Kälikä Puräëa.

The Fifth Ray refutes the doubts raised about the authenticity of the Çrémad-Bhägavatam.

The Sixth Ray refutes the idea that Vopadeva is the author of the Çrémad-Bhägavatam.

The Seventh Ray refutes the idea that the Çrémad-Bhägavatam has only 332 chapters.

For more information on the Baladeva Vidyäbhüñaëa Project, please visit the following Blog:

 http://vidyabhusanaproject.blogspot.in/

For purchasing a copy, as well as for enquiries and donations, please click on the CONTACT link above.

---

[1] This same verse appears in the Brahmäëòa Puräëa 1.1.37, Çiva Puräëa 7.1.1.41, Väyu Puräëa 1.31, Matsya Puräëa 53.65, Kürma Puräëa 1.1.12, and Garuòa Puräëa 1.2.28. A similar verse appears in other scriptures.

[2]  For example, in the Padma Puräëa, Uttara-khaëòa, 236.19, and Garuòa Puräëa 3.1.52.

[3] Chapter four deals with another book, called Devé Puräëa, which is also considered the original Bhägavatam by some Çäktas.

[4]  ata eva bhägavataà nämänyad ity api na çaìkanéyam. (Bhävärtha-dépikä, 1.1.1)

[5] vinirgataà samudbhütam | yathä kälikä-puräëädénéti lakñmédharaù | evaà ca sati bhagavatyä idaà bhägavataà kälikä-puräëaà bhägavata-padenoktam iti ye vadanti te nirastäù. (Nityäcära-pradépa, pramäëa-nirüpaëam)

[6]  The author of Bhagavan-näma-kaumudé.

[7]  vidvad-dhaneça-çiñyeëa bhiñak-keçava-sünunä. (Muktä-phalam, 19.54)

[8] çrémad-bhägavata-skandhädhyäyärthädi nirüpyate | viduñä vopadevena mantri-hemädri-tuñtaye (Hari-lélämåta, verse 1); hemädrir vopadevena muktäpham acékarat (Muktäphalam, 19.54).

[9] asti çasta-guëa-stomaù soma-vaàça-vibhüñaëam | mahädeva iti khyäto räja-räjeva bhütale (Catur-varga-cintämaëi, introduction). iti çré-mahäräjädhiräja-çré-mahädeva- samasta-karaëädhéçvara-sakala-vidyä-viçärada-çré-hemädri-viracitaç caturvargacintämaëiù (Ibid., end of the text).

[10] iha ca svakartåkatve’pi yadu-räja-mantriëä hemädriëäbhyarthitas tat-kartåkatvaà khyäpitavän (Muktäphalam, commentary on verse 1). iti çrémat-prauòha-pratäpa-cakravarti-mahäräjädhiräja-soma-yadu-vaàçodbhava-räma-räja-mantri-varya-hemädri-viracitä muktäphala-öékä samäptä  (Ibid., end of the commentary).

[11] yasya vyäkaraëe vareëya-ghaöanä-sphétäù prabandhä daça, prakhyätä nava vaidyake’tha tithi-nirdhärärtham eko’dbhutaù sähitye traya eva bhägavata-tattvoktau trayas tathä. This is found at the end of both Hari-lélämåtam and Muktäphalam, the third work being a commentary called Paramahaàsa-priyä.

[12] Alberuni’s India, chapter 12.

[13] nikhila-bhüpa-cakra-tilaka-çrémad-vallälasena-devena pürëe çaçi-nava-daça-mita-çaka-varñe däna-sägaro racitaù. (Däna-sägara, section 70) [1091 çaka = 1169 A.D.]

[14] bhägavataà ca puräëaà brahmäëòam caiva näradéyaà ca | däna-vidhi-çünyam eta trayam iha na nibaddham avadhärya.(Däna-sägara, 1.57)

[15] “The Date of the Bhägavata Puräëa,” B.N.K. Sharma, Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1932-33, Vol. XIV, Part III, pgs. 182-218.

Chandah-kaustubha translation released

 

It is a great satisfaction to announce that the first book of the “Baladeva Vidyabhusana Project” has been released by the Chowkhamba Sanskrit Samsthan, the largest publisher of traditional Sanskrit books in India. This is a humble attempt to get the blessings of Srila Vidyabhusana by first honoring his commentary on a work written by his Guru Maharaja, Srila Radha-Damodara Gosvami. We endeavored to present a lucid English translation and a critical edition of the Sanskrit text based on whatever books and manuscripts we could collect. The book deals with chandah (Sanskrit prosody) and is ideal for those who want to learn the different kinds of Sanskrit metres, their formation, number of syllables and other characteristics. There are innumerable texts on chandah, among which Chandah-kaustubha is a distinct work from many perspectives. Just as Jiva Gosvami’s Hari-namamrta-vyakarana is an ingenious treatise in the field of Sanskrit grammar  –  a pioneer in the Gaudiya line – so is Srila Radha-Damodara’s Chandah-kaustubha in the field of prosody. In the same spirit, both the author and the commentator bring the Gaudiya mood of worship of Sri Sri Radha and Krsna while teaching the technical details about the formation of poetic metres. One of the remarkable features here is that the aphorisms laying the rules for each metrical pattern are themselves written in those respective metres, without the need of further examples. In a few instances, Vidyabhusana supplied examples where the author himself did not for the sake of concision. Despite the omission of the Vedic metres, herein a total of 264 laukika (common) metres are defined and exemplified, after which follow two chapters describing the pratyaya (analysis) of syllabic and moraic metres with their respective charts. These charts serve as a useful tool to quickly identify any metre and its diverse characteristics based on very precise calculations. All these features combined make the Chandah-kaustubha one of the most comprehensive and lucid treatises on classical Sanskrit prosody ever composed.

The book is available at: http://www.chowkhambasanskritseries.com/

A searchable docx file with the Sanskrit text can be downloaded HERE.

Further details about the Baladeva Vidyabhusana Project can be found here:

www.vidyabhusanaproject.blogspot.com

Contents

Introduction

First Ray – Definitions

Second Ray – Even Metres (sama-vrtta)

uktha (1 syllable):
sri
atyuktha (2 syllables):
stri
madhya (3 syllables):
nari
mrgi
pratistha (4 syllables):
kanya
sati
supratistha (5 syllables):
pankti
priya
gayatri (6 syllables):
tanumadhya
sasivadana
somaraji
vasumati
usnik (7 syllables):
madhumati
kumaralalita
madalekha
cudamani
hamsamala
anustup (8 syllables):
citrapada
vidyunmala
manavaka
hamsaruta
samanika
pramanika
vitana
naracaka
padmamala
sucandrabha
suvilasa
brhati (9 syllables):
halamukhi
bhujagasisusrta
manimadhya
bhujangasangata
pankti (10 syllables):
rukmavati (rupavati, campakamala)
matta
suddhavirat
panava
mayurasarini
tvaritagati
manorama
tristup (11 syllables):
indravajra
upendravajra
upajati
upasthita
sumukhi
salini
dodhaka
vatormi
bhramaravilasita
rathoddhata
svagata
vrtta
bhadrika
syeni
upasthita
sri
sikhandita
anukula
motanaka
sandrapada
jagati (12 syllables):
candravartma
vamsasthavila
indravamsa
jaloddhatagati
totaka
drutavilambita
puta
mauktikadama
sragvini
vaisvadevi
pramitaksara
mandakini
kusumavicitra
tamarasa
malati
bhujangaprayata
priyamvada
manimala
puspavicitra
vibhavari
lalita
ujjvala
jaladharamala
navamalini
prabha
atijagati (13 syllables):
praharsini
ksama
rucira
candi
mattamayura
gauri
kutilagati
upasthita
manjubhasini
sandhivarsini
candrika
nandini
mrgendramukha
sakvari (14 syllables):
asambadha
aparajita
vasantatilaka (uddharsini, sihoddhata, madhumadhavi)
praharanakalika
vasanti
lola
induvadana
nandimukhi
vasudha
kutila
atisakvari (15 syllables):
sasikala
srak
gunamaninikara
malini
prabhadraka
rela
lilakhela
vipinatilaka
candralekha
tunaka
citra
mrdangaka
candrakanta
vrsabha
asti (16 syllables):
citrasanga
pancacamara
rsabhagajavilasita
cakita
madanalalita
manikalpalata
pravaralalita
vanini
acaladhrti
yati
garudaruta
atyasti (17 syllables):
sikharini
vamsapatrapatita
nardataka
kokilaka
prthvi
mandakranta
bharakranta
harini
harini
samavilasini
druta
dhrti (18 syllables):
kusumitalatavellita
nandana
naraca
lata
taraka
sardulalalita
citralekha
harakrntana
atidhrti (19 syllables):
meghavisphurjita
chaya
sardulavikridita
surasa
phulladama
vallaki
krti (20 syllables):
suvadana
gitika
vrtta
sobha
prakrti (21 syllables):
sragdhara
sarasi
akrti (22 syllables):
hamsi
bhadraka
madira
mahasragdhara
lalitya
vikrti (23 syllables): adritanaya
asvalalita
mattakrida
samskrti (24 syllables):
tanvi
abhikrti (25 syllables):
krauncapada
bhujangavijrmbhita
apavaha
dandaka (26 syllables):
dandaka
candavrstiprapata
arna
arnava
vyala
jimuta
lilakara
uddama
sankha
pracitaka
asokapuspamanjari
kusumastavaka
mattamatangalilakara
anangasekhara

Third Ray – Half Even Metres (ardha-sama-vrtta)
upacitra
vegavati
harinapluta
malabharini
drutamadhya
bhadravirat
ketumati
akhyanaki
viparitakhyanaki
aparavaktra
puspitagra
sundari
yavamati

Fourth Ray – Uneven Metres (visama-vrtta)
udgata
saurabhaka
lalita
padacatururdhva
apida
kalika
lavali
amrtadhara
upasthitapracupita
vardhamana
suddhaviradarsabha
gatha

Fifth Ray – The Vaktra and Vipula Metres
vaktra
pathya-vaktra
viparita-pathya-vaktra
capala-vaktra
yugma-vipula
vipula
bhavipula
ravipula
navipula
tavipula, etc.
Sixth Ray – Moraic Metres (matra-chandah)
arya
pathyarya
vipularya
mukha-capala
jaghana-capala
giti
upagiti
udgiti
arya-giti
vaitaliya
aupacchandasika
apatalika
daksinantika
udicyavrtti
pracyavrtti
pravrttaka
aparantika
caruhasini

Seventh Ray – Moraic Even Metres (matra-samaka)
pajjhatika
matra-samaka
visloka
vanavasika
citra
upacitra
padakula
rola
dvipatha
sorattha
catuspada
satpada
kundalika
sikha
anangakrida
khanja
rucira
pravangama
akhila
culiyala
tribhangi
durmila

Eighth Ray – Analysis of the Syllabic Metres
prastara
uddista
nasta
meru
pataka
markati

Ninth Ray – Analysis of the Moraic Metres
prastara
uddista
nasta
meru
pataka
markati
Concluding words



Introduction

Prosody is at least as old as the first texts that appeared in written form, the Vedas, in which we see a diversity of metrical forms. In traditional Vedic learning, prosody is called chandah and is counted as one of the six Vedangas, or limbs of the Vedas, which include vyakarana (grammar), nirukta (etymology), siksa (phonetics), jyotisa (astronomy) and kalpa (sacrificial rules). The Paniniya-siksa (41-42) describes the importance of the Vedangas as follows:

chandah padau tu vedasya hastau kalpo’tha pathyate |
jyotisam anayam caksur niruktam srotram ucyate ||
siksa ghranam tu vedasya mukham vyakaranam smrtam |
tasmat sangam adhityaiva brahma-loke mahiyate ||

“Chandah is the feet of the Vedas, kalpa is the hands, jyotisa is the eyes, nirukta is the ears, siksa is the nose, and vyakarana is the mouth. Therefore one who has studied the Vedas with all its limbs becomes exalted in Brahma-loka.”

Such is the importance of chandah that it is given the position of support of the Vedas. Knowledge of chandah plays an essential role in the accurate recitation of the Vedas and in the composition of treatises in Sanskrit. It is a very ancient custom to write whole books in one or more metres, the purpose being twofold: to facilitate the memorization of the text and to make it suitable for melodic and rhythmic recitation. Another aspect common in Sanskrit literature is the poets’ use of chandah to fully display the dimension of their scholarship, culminating in compositions like the citra-kavitva, poems in the forms of pictures. Accordingly, the vast majority of Sanskrit texts were composed in verse (padya) rather than prose (gadya). Those who are not conversant with chandah are rebuked in the Brhaddevata (8.136):

aviditva rsim chando devatam yogam eva ca |
yo’dhyapayej japed vapi papiyan jayate tu sah ||

“One who teaches or recites the Vedas without knowing the rsi, the metre, the deity and the application is born as the most sinful.”

In a similar way, in the Chandah-kaustubha (1.4) we find the following verse:

chando-laksana-hinam sabhasu kavyam pathanti ye manujah |
kurvanto’pi svena sva-siras-chedam na te vidyuh |

“Without knowing the characteristics of the different metres, those who read poetry in assembly halls act as if cutting their own heads without realizing it.”

The word chandah is used primarily in the sense of prosody and can also refer to the Vedas themselves. Its etymological formation is given in the Unadi-sutras (4.224): cander ades chah, that means, it comes from the verbal root cand, which is then changed to chand. In his commentary on this verse, Svetavanavasi explains the word chandah: candati ahladayati vaidikan iti cchandah vedah – “That which gladdens the Vedic followers is called chandah or Veda itself.” In the Nirukta (7.12), Yaska defines it in the following way: chandamsi chadanat – “Poetic metres or the Vedas are called chandah because of covering.” This refers to a passage of the Chandogya Upanisad (1.4.2): deva vai mrtyor bibhyatas trayim pravisams te chandobhir acchadayan yad ebhir acchadayams tac chandasam chandas tvam – “Being afraid of death, the demigods entered in the three Vedas and covered (acchadayan) themselves with the Vedic hymns. By this reason they are called chandah.”

The compiler of the original treatise on prosody named “Chandah-sastra” was the sage Pingala, often revered here by Radha-Damodara and Vidyabhusana as an incarnation of Ananta Sesa. There are several narrations that describe Ananta Sesa displaying His transcendental proficiency in chandah. In Laksminatha Bhatta’s commentary on the first verse of the Prakrta-paingala, the following account is given: Desiring to know the extension of the earth planet situated on one of His hoods, once Sesa-naga appeared in Bharata-varsa assuming the form of a brahmana called Pingala. Knowing this, His old enemy, Garuda , chased Him. Promptly thinking of a way to escape, Pingala told him: “Hold on! Don’t you know that I am a great poet? Just look how I can write an unlimited amount of metrical combinations. If you see me repeat any of them, you can eat me up immediately.” As Garuda agreed, Pingala started to draw all the different prastaras (expansions) of metres containing from one to twenty six syllables on the ground. Gradually proceeding towards the coast, and far before finishing all the possible combinations of metres , Ananta Sesa reached the seashore and jumped in the water, leaving Garuda perplexed. In the beginning of Bhikharidasa’s Chando’rnava we find the allusion to another episode: Once Sesa came out from the water and was enjoying the sunshine while laying on a rock. Seeing Him in such a relaxed state, Garuda took the opportunity and grabbed Him right away. Sesa then pleaded, “No one besides Me knows the science of chandah. If you eat Me, this knowledge will be lost. Let me transmit it to you so that at least there will be someone to teach this science to the future generations. After hearing it from Me, you can satisfy your hunger as you wish.” After thinking for a moment, Garuda agreed under the condition that Sesa would not try to run away. As both of them complied with each other’s condition, Sesa narrated the chandah-sastra in such a fascinating way that Garuda became totally mesmerized. Seeing the chance to escape, Sesa then described the metre called “bhujangaprayata”, and pronouced its name four times. Garuda did not say anything, and Sesa quickly disappeared in the water. Coming to his senses, Garuda protested, “You cheated me!”, to which Sesa replied from a good distance, “I informed you that I was going away by saying “bhujangaprayata” several times, and since you did not say a word, I took this as a permission. Farewell!”

There are innumerable texts on chandah, among which Chandah-kaustubha is a distinct work from many perspectives. Just as Jiva Gosvami’s Hari-namamrta-vyakarana is an ingenious treatise in the field of Sanskrit grammar – a pioneer in the Gaudiya line – so is Radha-Damodara’s Chandah-kaustubha in the field of prosody. In the same spirit, both the author and the commentator, Baladeva Vidyabhusana, bring the Gaudiya mood of worship of Sri Sri Radha and Krsna while teaching the technical details about the formation of poetic metres. One of the remarkable features here is that the aphorisms laying the rules for each metrical pattern are themselves written in those respective metres, without the need of further examples. In a few instances, Vidyabhusana supplied examples where the author himself did not for the sake of concision. Despite the omission of the Vedic metres, herein a total of 264 laukika (common) metres are defined and exemplified, after which follow two chapters describing the pratyaya (analysis) of syllabic and moraic metres with their respective charts. These charts serve as a useful tool to quickly identify any metre and its diverse characteristics based on very precise calculations. All these features combined make the Chandah-kaustubha one of the most comprehensive and lucid treatises on classical Sanskrit prosody ever composed.

The Author

Sri Radha-Damodara Gosvami belonged to the seventh generation in the Gaudiya disciplic succession:
1. Lord Caitanya and Nityananda Prabhu
2. Gauridasa Pandita
3. Hrdaya-caitanya Thakura
4. Syamananda Pandita
5. Rasikananda Murari
6. Nayanananda Gosvami
7. Radha-Damodara Gosvami

There is hardly any available information about his life and contributions, but we can infer that he was born around the middle of the 17th century. From Vidyabhusana’s invocation it is clear that Radha-Damodara Gosvami was his guru:

arcita-nayananando radha-damodaro gurur jiyat |
vivrnomi yasya krpaya chandah-kaustubham aham mita-vak ||

“All glories to my guru, Srila Radha-Damodara Gosvami, who worshipped Srila Nayanananda Gosvami as his spiritual master. By his mercy I am writing this commentary on the Chandah-kaustubha in a few words.”

In the same purport, Vidyabhusana further clarifies that he was born in a brahmana family in Kanyakubja (Kanpur) and was a great scholar and disciple of Nayanananda Gosvami. His great scholarship is self-evident in the text of Chandah-kaustubha and also by the fact that he converted such a genius as Vidyabhusana into Gaudiya Vaisnavism, which in due course of time proved to be his greatest preaching achievement. He spent the last portion of his life in Puri, Orissa, where he was appointed as the head of the Kunja-matha, one of the temples belonging to the Syamananda line, and dedicated his life to worshipping the deity and spreading the philosophy of Lord Caitanya. His samadhi is located next to the temple. Being renowned for his profound discourses on Jiva Gosvami’s six Sandarbhas, he probably wrote a good number of treatises on different topics, but at present, Chandah-kaustubha is the only one whose authorship is beyond doubt. Another book attributed to him is the Vedanta-syamantaka, but some scholars also attribute it to Vidyabhusana.

Given its short size and the didactic nature of its topic, there are many manuscripts of the Chandah-kaustubha preserved in libraries all over India. One of the oldest ones, kept at Vrindavan Research Institute, was dated by the scribe in the samvat year of 1827 (A.D. 1770). At that time Vidyabhusana was possibly still alive, so we can roughly estimate that the book was written some time between 1680 and 1730 and commented many years later.


The commentator

After Jiva Gosvami, Baladeva Vidyabhusana was the greatest philosopher who appeared in the Gaudiya line. His outstanding literary legacy remains unsurpassed to the present day. There are no historical records about his early life, however, those in his disciplic succession claim that he was born in a village nearby Remuna, in Orissa. Most scholars believe that he was born either at the end of the 17th century or at the beginning of the 18th century. From his own statement at the end of his Siddhanta-ratna we know that he was a staunch follower of Madhvacarya’s tattvavada. It is said that he strongly preached this philosophy all over India until he met Radha-Damodara in Jagannatha Puri and became deeply impressed by his exposition of the Sat-sandarbhas. Accepting him as his guru, he learnt the philosophy of Lord Caitanya and received the name “Ekanti-Govinda dasa”. Radha-Damodara eventually sent him to Vrndavana to learn Srimad-Bhagavatam from Visvanatha Cakravarti, who was then the leader of the Gaudiya community there and an exceptional scholar. In those days there was a dispute between the Ramanandis and the Gaudiyas regarding the method of worship of Govindadeva, the original deity of Rupa Gosvami. The deity of Govindadeva had been transferred from Vrndavana to the place which is now known as Jaipur to protect Him from the attacks of Aurangzeb. The Ramanandis allegedly complained to King Jai Singh that the Gaudiyas did not seem to be connected to a bona fide sampradaya, that they were worshipping Govinda before worshipping Narayana, and that the worship of Radharani was unprecedented and irregular. Upon hearing about the case, Visvanatha Cakravarti decided to send Ekanti-Govinda dasa to Jaipur to respond to the allegations. There he invited all the opponents to a debate in which he refuted their objections and established that the sampradaya of Lord Caitanya was coming from the sampradaya of Madhvacarya. Yet one objection remained: the Gaudiyas did not have a commentary on the Brahma-sutras. That being the case, Ekanti-Govinda dasa promised to present a full commentary very soon. Spending the day in intense prayer, at night Govindaji appeared in his dream and directed him to write the commentary, which was completed in a matter of days and became known as “Govinda-bhasya”. Having established the authority of the Gaudiya sampradaya and having received the title “Vidyabhusana” from the King, he went back to Vrndavana where he was appointed as the head of the Radha-Syamasundara temple, where he spent the rest of his life. At the end of the Aisvarya-kadambini we find the mention of the year saka 1701 (A.D. 1779). If the authorship of the book is correctly attributed to him, then Baladeva Vidyabhusana departed from this world by the end of the 18th century.

The following works are attributed to Baladeva Vidyabhusana: 1. Commentary on the Isopanisad (the commentaries on nine other Upanisads are supposedly lost); 2. Aisvarya-kadambini; 3. Kavya-kaustubha; 4. Gopala-tapany-upanisad-bhasya; 5. Candraloka-tika (supposedly lost); 6. Chandah-kaustubha-bhasya; 7. Tattva-dipika; 8. Commentary on the Tattva-sandarbha (the commentaries five other Sandarbhas are supposedly lost); 9. Nataka-candrika-tika (supposedly lost); 10. Pada-kaustubha (supposedly lost); 11. Prameya-ratnavali; 12. Brahma-sutra-karika-bhasya; 13. Bhagavad-gita-bhasya (Gita-bhusana); 14. Laghu-bhagavatamrta-tika (Saranga-rangada); 15. Visnu-sahasra-nama-bhasya (Namartha-sudha); 16. Vedanta-sutra-Govinda-bhasya; 17. Vedanta-sutra-suksma-tika; 18. Vedanta-syamantaka; 19. Vyakarana-kaumudi (supposedly lost); 20. Srimad-Bhagavata-bhasya (Vaisnavanandini) (Cantos 2-9 and 11-12 are supposedly lost); 21. Syamananda-sataka-tika; 22. Sahitya-kaumudi; 23. Siddhanta-darpana; 24. Siddhanta-ratna; 25. Stava-mala-tika.

Acknowledgements

To prepare this edition the following resources were consulted:

1.Chandah-kaustubhah Baladeva-Vidyabhusana-bhasyopetah, Haridas das, Navadvip, 1943. This edition was done based on a few manuscripts from Vrindavan.
2.Chandah-kaustubhah Baladeva-Vidyabhusana-bhasyopetah, Haridas Shastri, Vrindavan, 1990. This is mostly a reprint of the previous edition and includes an expansion of the commentary, but its authorship is not mentioned.
3.Chandah-kaustubhah Baladeva-Vidyabhusana-bhasya-sahita, Vrindavan Research Institute, 1993.

I would like to thank Dinanatha dasa from Australia for revising and editing the translation and also Sacisuta dasa from Hungary for sending me a digital copy of the Haridas Shastri edition.

Dr. Baladeva Dasa