Chaitanya Bhagavata

by Bhumipati Dāsa | 2008 | 1,349,850 words

The Chaitanya Bhagavata 2.10.139, English translation, including a commentary (Gaudiya-bhasya). This text is similair to the Caitanya-caritamrita and narrates the pastimes of Lord Caitanya, proclaimed to be the direct incarnation of Krishna (as Bhagavan) This is verse 139 of Madhya-khanda chapter 10—“Conclusion of the Lord’s Maha-prakasha Pastimes”.

Bengali text, Devanagari and Unicode transliteration of verse 2.10.139:

বেদে যেন নানা-মত করযে কথন এই-মত আচার্যের দুর্জ্ঞেয বচন ॥ ১৩৯ ॥

वेदे येन नाना-मत करये कथन एइ-मत आचार्येर दुर्ज्ञेय वचन ॥ १३९ ॥

vede yena nānā-mata karaye kathana ei-mata ācāryera durjñeya vacana || 139 ||

vede yena nana-mata karaye kathana ei-mata acaryera durjneya vacana (139)

English translation:

(139) As the Vedas have various opinions, the statements of Advaita Ācārya are very difficult to understand.

Commentary: Gauḍīya-bhāṣya by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura:

Since the so-called descendants of Advaita Ācārya who could not understand His explanations taught the people of this world that considerations unfavorable to devotional service should be accepted by devotees, pañcopāsanā (worship of five gods) has gained more respect in various parts of Bengal and Assam. Ṭhākura Vṛndāvana dāsa has stated that as various injunctions of the Vedic literatures appear contradictory from the external point of view and as a result various philosophies like kevalādvaita, śuddhādvaita, and dvaitādvaita have arisen, people who are unable to understand Advaita Ācārya’s words and behavior support various philosophies that they claim Advaita taught, while actually Śrī Advaita Prabhu has taught the world on the basis of Śrī Caitanyadeva’s teachings. Although His explanations appeared contradictory, they were approved by and in agreement with those of Śrī Caitanya. Although the explanations presented by Śrī Caitanya support the philosophy of inconceivable oneness, they nevertheless simultaneously support the philosophy of difference. Therefore they are not the subject matter of material thought.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: