Gaudiya siddhanta - ebooks - ISKCON desire tree

Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana was challenged by the Ramanandi sect
in Galta as to why the Gaudiyas claimed to be affiliated to the
Madhva sampradaya when they differed in philosophy to them.
Again, this was a point of rasa-vicara because the Gaudiyas
worshiped the Deity of Govindadeva, regarding Him as superior to
the form of Narayana. This is a point which will be discussed in a
later chapter.
In order to prove the validity of the Gaudiya sampradaya, Baladeva
was told by the Ramanandis that it would be necessary for him to
produce a commentary on the Vedanta-sutras supporting the
Gaudiya philosophy of Acintyabheda-bheda tattva. Baladeva did
this in seven days and called his commentary the ‘Govinda Bhasya.’
His bhasya was so profound and complete that the opposition was
silenced. Considering the fact that the Madhva sect had scant
knowledge in the matters of rasa-tattva, it would have been futile
for the Gaudiyas to refer to Madhvacarya’s commentary as their own.
Our Tattvavadi friends have referred to Madhva’s commentary on the Vedanta-sutras as ‘exhaustive’,
inferring that there is nothing else to be said on the subject. We therefore raise the question, why did
Jaya Tirtha write his Tattva Prakasika commentary to Madhva’s Vedanta-sutra-bhasya? Why did
Raghavendra Tirtha write his Tattva Manjari commentary on the Anu-bhasya of Madhva? Why did
Trivikrama need to write his Tattvapradipa commentary? In fact, all of the works of Madhvacarya have
been commented upon by many acaryas following in the Dvaita line.
OBJECTION: You have explained that Baladeva Vidyabhusana accepted
nine basic tenets of Sri Madhvacarya, yet Sri Caitanya Himself only
accepted one point and rejected the philosophy of Madhva. This seems
to be a contradiction.
REFUTATION: In the Caitanya Caritamrta (Madhya 9.277) Sri Caitanya
Mahaprabhu addressed the acarya of the Tattvavadis thus -
sabe, eka guna dekhi tomara sampradaye
satya-vigraha kari’ isvare karaha niscaye
"The only qualification that I see in your sampradaya is that you accept the form
of the Lord as truth."
Baladeva Vidyabhusana
It is not that Sri Caitanya rejected Madhva’s philosophy (2), rather, he rejected
the erroneous, distorted dogma which had entered the sampradaya of
Madhvacarya at that time. (3) This is the reason why Mahaprabhu used the
phrase ‘tomara sampradaya’ (your sampradaya) rather than ’our sampradaya’ —
in order to establish that He did not subscribe to the philosophy that was being propounded in the name
of Madhva. Later, in the 16 th Century, these inconsistencies were corrected to some extent by the great
reformer Sri Vadiraja Tirtha. (4)
The major principle established by Sri Madhvacarya was that the Lord and His creation are real and that
the jiva is eternally subservient to Isvara - the nine prameyas enhance these points. In this way the
Gaudiyas strictly follow in the footsteps of Madhvacarya.