See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/338176202

Saguna and Nirguna-Bhakti, Advaita Vedanta and

Madhusudana Sarasvati

Article · December 2019

CITATION READS
1 2,104

1 author:

Niranjan Saha
Indian Institute of Technology (ISM) Dhanbad
8 PUBLICATIONS 5 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Niranjan Saha on 26 December 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Vaishnava Studies

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Steven J. Rosen

SENIOR EDITORS
Graham M. Schweig
Graduate Theological Union
Christopher Newport University
Rita D. Sherma
Graduate Theological Union

CONSULTING
EDITORIAL BOARD
Guy L. Beck
Tulane University
Edwin F. Bryant
Rutgers University
Gerald T. Carney
Hampden-Sydney College
Ravi M. Gupta
Utah State University
Barbara A. Holdrege
University of California, Santa Barbara
E. H. Rick Jarow
Vassar College
June McDaniel
College of Charleston
Vasudha Narayanan
University of Florida
The Journal of Vaishnava Studies (JVS) is subsidized by The Mira & Ajay Shingal
Center for Dharma Studies of the Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, California.
JVS is a biannual, interdisciplinary refereed publication dedicated to the in-depth
study of the Vaishnava traditions of India, from ancient times to the present. The
Journal presents the research of scholars on Vaishnavism and also Vaishnava
scholars, thus representing and drawing from both academic and practitioner per-
spectives and resources.

Subscriber Information: The Journal of Vaishnava Studies is published two times a

year, Fall and Spring. In the United States, a one-year subscription for individuals is
US$40.00; in Canada it is US$65.00 and overseas it is US$80.00. We encourage read-
ers to subscribe two years at a time. Back issues are US$50.00 each. All subscrip-
tions are to be made payable to “JVS/FOLK Books” and sent to JVS/FOLK Books,
P. O. Box 108, Nyack, NY 10960, USA.

Submission Information: All manu­script submissions should be sent in electronic

format, both in Microsoft Word and as a pdf file. Authors should also send a one-
paragraph bio blurb to accompany the article. Direct all cor­res­pon­dence to the
Editor-in-Chief, JVS, P.O. Box 108, Nyack, NY 10960 USA, or email satchmo868@aol.
com.
Manuscript submissions should be in English. If the original is in San­skrit, Tamil,
Hindi, Bengali, or other languages, the au­thor will be responsible for the English
trans­lation. Special characters, such as dia­critic marks and/or transliteration tech­
niques, are determined by individual authors. In terms of foreign language, then,
JVS editors will not attempt to achieve consistency from one article to the next.
Words such as Krishna (or Kṛṣṇa) and Braj (or Vraja) will thus be rendered vari-
ously. In addition, please note that JVS uses endnotes as opposed to footnotes.
Authors are responsible for all statements made in their work, and for obtain-
ing permission from copyright owners to reprint or adapt a table or figure, or to
reprint a segment of an article consisting of 500 words or more. To legitimately
obtain such usage, authors should write to the original author(s) and to the pub-
lisher or managing editor of the quoted work.
JVS is a refereed publication. All entries are re­viewed by at least two (anonymous)
qualified scholars in the field prior to publication. For accepted contributions, final
editorial decisions, in terms of content and style, rest with JVS editors alone. Opin­
ions ex­pressed in authored articles do not necessarily represent the views of the
ed­i­tors or publisher.

Copyright©2019 FOLK Books. The copyright of all printed material in JVS

rests with the Journal itself, and with the authors of individual articles. No part
of this publication may be used, in any form or by any means, without permis-
sion of the Editor-in-Chief, and the author. The author agrees to not hold JVS
responsible for any unauthorized use of the article after it is published in JVS
either electronically or otherwise. Printed in the United States of America. (ISSN
1062-1237)
 JOURNAL OF VAISHNAVA STUDIES
Volume 28 No. 1 Fall 2019

Introduction 1
Edwin F. Bryant/ Vedāntic Backdrop of Patañjali’s Yoga Sūtras 5
Supratik Sen/ Yoga and Bhakti: Perspectives from Bhaktivinoda’s Prema 33
Pradīpa 17
Guy L. Beck/ “All Roads Lead to OM”: From Ancient Vedic Roots to Hindu, 51
Buddhist, Jain, and Sikh Dharma
Jeffery D. Long/A Jain Avatar? The Purposes and Possibilities of 69
Non-Vaiṣṇava Figures as Avatars of Viṣṇu
Sat Hari Singh/Sikh Dharma and Gaudiya Vaishnavism 81
June McDaniel/ “Vaishnavas are the True Śaktas”: Vaishnava and Śakta 95
Bhakti in West Bengal
Deepak Sarma/ Mādhva Vedānta: Defending Vaiṣṇavism Against 107
Antithetical Advaita Vedānta
Vasudha Narayanan and Jodi L. Shaw/ Vaiṣṇava and Śaiva Poets in 119
Common Landscapes and Parallel Universes
Daniel P. Scheid/ Tamil Shaivism, Srivaishnavism, and Eco-Theology 137
Patton E. Burchett/ On the Virtues of Love’s Savor: Humble Sufis, Arrogant 145
Tantrikas, and Vaiṣṇava Bhakti Ethics
Dalpat S. Rajpurohit/ Vaiṣṇava Models for Nirguṇa Devotion 157
Niranjan Saha/ Saguṇa and Nirguṇa-Bhakti, Advaita Vedānta, and 173
Madhusūdana Sarasvatī
Vasudha Narayanan/ A Note on the Buddha and Buddhism from 183
a Vaiṣṇava Perspective
Aleksandar Uskokov/ A Mīmāṁsaka Reading Kṛṣṇa’s Song: Pārthasārathi 197
Miśra and the Bhagavad-gītā
Book Reviews 213
About the Contributors 225
 Saguṇa and Nirguṇa-Bhakti, Advaita Vedānta,
and Madhusūdana Sarasvatī1

Niranjan Saha

T his essay attempts to highlight the devotional dimension in the Advaitic

fold of Madhusūdana Sarasvatī (ca. 1540-1647 CE), one of the greatest
Advaitins of the post-Śaṅkara era in Bengal. Advaita or non-dualism as pro-
pounded by Śaṅkarācārya recognized only knowledge (jñāna) as the key means
to liberation (mokṣa), even though Hindu thought in general teaches that lib-
eration is attained through a combination of devotion to a personal God (bhakti),
knowledge (jñāna), ritual or action (karma) and meditation (yoga). Accordingly,
in a major departure from Śaṅkarā, Madhusūdana interpreted the Bhagavadgītā,
among other texts, as including the importance of bhakti in liberation, at the
same time maintaining that Kṛṣṇa, his preferred deity, was nirguṇa-brahman or
the highest essence, as per Saṅkara’s teachings. The same notion is echoed in
Madhusūdana’s other works, such as the Bhaktirasāyana, etc.
With regard to the contribution of Madhusūdana to Advaita philosophy, the
first and foremost question might arise as to how an ardent follower of Advaita,
where it is believed that there is only one reality, i.e., brahman, which is devoid of
any attributes (nirguṇa), can be an avid follower of Lord Kṛṣṇa. To Madhusūdana,
this was neither self-contradictory nor surprising. He shows by critically examin-
ing the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, arguably foremost among the eighteen Purāṇa-s, that
the metaphysics of the Advaita system and the ethics of the theistic Vedāntins
give rise to a new horizon in this regard, with Kṛṣṇa as supreme object of devo-

173
174 Journal of Vaishnava Studies

tion. In works such as the Bhaktirasāyana and the Gūḍhārthadīpikā, a commentary

on the Bhagavadgītā, he clearly shows how nirguṇa-brahman can be an object of
bhakti. He avers that the propounders of theistic Vedānta have influenced the
jñāna-mārga of Śaṅkara’s non-dualistic Vedānta.
The reconciliation of jñāna and karma was already deeply considered in the
days of Kumārila Bhaṭṭa, a noted Mīmāṃsaka (who fl. roughly 700) and Śaṅkara
looked at it too; Madhusūdana and Vallabha, one of the propounders of the dual-
istic systems of Vedānta, also addressed it. The major problem was that of bhakti
and jñāna.2 Madhusūdana came many centuries after Vācaspati Miśra (9th century
CE), a commentator of the Brahmasūtra-bhāṣya of Śaṅkara, but who strode like
colossus before the advent of Madhusūdana. While Vācaspati, the propounder of
the Bhāmatī-prasthāna in post-Śaṅkara Advaita holds the view that the individual
self (jīva) is the substratum (āśraya) and brahman is the object (viṣaya) of nescience
(avidyā), Prakāśtma Yati (11th century CE), the propounder of the Vivaraṇa-
prasthāṇa accepts brahman as both the substratum and object of nescience.
Madhusūdana can be regarded as belonging to the latter. Though Madhusūdana
had reverence for Śaṅkara, he did not hesitate to take liberties in explaining scrip-
tural texts and to place his settled policies and conclusions to project Śaṅkara’s
Advaita-siddhānta in his own independent way.

Bhakti-Mārga and Nirguṇa-Brahman of Advaita

Observations on the path of devotion are found throughout the works of Madhu-
sūdana.3 It has already been stated that in his Bhaktirasāyana and Gūḍhārthadīpikā
this expression is found aptly. And in this regard, he maintained the authority
of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, which had already been commented upon several times
from the standpoint of Śaṅkara. In propagating his own theory of nirguṇa-prema-
bhakti, Madhusūdana regarded the Bhāgavata Purāṇa as the fourth prasthāna;
the Bhagavadgītā, Upaniṣad-s, and the Brahmasūtra being the three canonical lit-
eratures (prasthāna-traya) in Vedic tradition. In order to establish that bhakti is the
principal aim of human life, he says ‘‘the chief object of man is no other than bliss
with unmixed misery.’’4 Either as one of the puruṣārtha-s, i.e. dharma, artha, kāma
and mokṣa or as an independent object of human life, bhakti is the aim of man
which is also the highest bliss.

Bhakti, Jñāna and Nirguṇa-Brahman

Devotion to God must be distinguished from the knowledge of brahman. Though
both of them are described in the scriptures as necessarily preceded by the per-
 Saguṇa, Nirguṇa, and Madhusūdana Sarasvatī 175

formance of all religious acts such as study of the Vedas, performing sacrifices,
showing penances etc., they differ from each other in respect to their nature,
their means, their goals and the persons (adhikārin-s) entitled to both bhakti and
jñāna as the means to realize the supreme reality. Bhakti is of the nature of the
modifications of mind while brahma-jñāna is self-luminous, bereft of any kind
of modification of the ātman. Thus Madhusūdana says in his Bhaktirasāyana that
while the conceptual cognition of the Lord (savikalpaka-vṛtti) by the melted mind
wherein his form (bhagavadākāra) is reflected -- this is known as bhakti -- and the
modal change in the form of non-dual brahman bereft of attributes (nirvikalpaka-
vṛtti), when the mind is not melted, is called brahma-vidyā.5
The means of bhakti is the hearing of books which record the fruits of worship
while the means of brahma-jñāna is the realization of the Upaniṣadic dictum “That
thou art.” To Madhusudana, Kṛṣṇa is the incarnation of nirguṇa-brahman, who is
obtainable through bhakti. This has been clearly expressed in his Bhaktirasāyana,6
wherein he has established that bhakti-yoga is an independent goal of human life,
and that it is accepted by the śāstra-s. In the Gūḍhārthadīpikā, bhakti is said to be
the means of immediate liberation. According to Madhusūdana, bhakti is not only
a means to karma and jñāna, but also the true result of both of these. Bhakti-niṣṭhā
is said to be the means to mokṣa, i.e., the complete realization of nirguṇa-brahman
Some texts, like portions of the Upaniṣad-s and the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, assert the
fact that bhakti is superior to jñāna. But Madhusūdana holds the view that, though
mokṣa is achieved through bhakti or jñāna, when attained in its pure and ultimate
state, bhakti leads to the realization of truth more quickly than jñāna. He admits
the possibility of śuddha-prema-bhakti, the purest loving devotion, which is disin-
terested (niṣkāma) in mokṣa and even moves beyond it.7
Moreover, in order to show how a jīvanmukta is guided by the path of lib-
eration, Madhusūdana quotes a verse from the Bhāgavata Purāṇa both in his
Bhaktirasāyana8 and Gūḍhārthadīpikā, ‘‘Even sages who enjoy the bliss of ātman and
who are free from all bonds spontaneously dedicate themselves to Viṣṇu without
having any purpose in view such is the existence of Hari.’’9 Thus, bhakti is even
superior to liberation.

Incarnation of Nirguṇa-Brahman
In the invocatory verse (maṅgalācaraṇam) of his Saṃkṣepaśārīrakabhāṣya, Madhu-
sūdana states that ‘‘brahman the real, the knowledge, the infinite, the non-dual
bliss which, the best of sages who attained religious rapture (samādhi), came to
know after having approached a guru and which they directly comprehended in
order to attain liberation from the bondage of the worldly existence, that same
176 Journal of Vaishnava Studies

brahman was incarnate, for the joy of all, in Vṛndāvana, on account of the reli-
gious austerity of Nanda. I offer my homage to that brahman playing on the divine
flute, with his face beautiful like the moon and the eyes handsome like lotus.’’10 A
similar view has been expressed in another quotation from the same work where,
in commenting on, ‘‘This whole world is born of the son of Ānakadundubhi’’
(Saṃkṣepaśārīraka II. 265), Madhusūdana holds that the son of the Ānakadundubhi
is the incarnation of nirguṇa-brahman.11 A similar view is also expressed in his
Ānandamandākinī12 and Gūḍhārthadīpikā.13

Madhusūdana and Śaṅkara on Bhakti-mārga in the Bhagavadgītā:

Until the advent of Madhusūdana the followers of Śāṅkara’s school of Vedānta
stuck to their principal idea that salvation could be achieved by jñāna alone.
Though Śaṅkara did not emphasize the importance of bhakti as a means to mokṣa,
a critical examination of the term bhakti in the Bhagavadgītā, both by Śaṅkara and
Madhusūdana, shows the contribution of the latter to Advaita Vedānta.
The word bhakti occurs thirteen times in the Bhagavadgītā.14 In eight of these
places, Śaṅkara does not interpret the term, whereas Madhusūdana, being an
ardent follower of Lord Kṛṣṇa, finds it convenient to explain the term bhakti with
the sense of utmost devotion as “the most ardent love for God” (parameśvare paraḥ
prema). But in four other cases, Śaṅkara explains the term bhakti as jñāna. In two
of these cases, Madhusūdana does not accept these as such and interprets it in
the sense of love for God. In the remaining two cases, Madhusūdana had to accept
Śaṅkara’s interpretation. And in the thirteenth place, both of them took it in the
sense of service of God.15
In the course of his commentary on Bhagavadgītā 13.10, Madhusūdana explains
devotion to be love (prīti) for Lord Vāsudeva (Kṛṣṇa), the supreme lord, arising
from the knowledge that he is the most excellent among all (bhagavati vāsudeve
parameśvare bhaktiḥ sarvotkṛṣṭatva-jñāna-pūrvikā-prītiḥ). Madhusūdana holds that
such love is unwavering (avyabhicāriī), as it cannot be obstructed by any adverse
cause at all, and that it is the source of true knowledge. He substantiates this with
the support of a testimony: ‘‘As long as love for me, the Lord Vāsudeva, does not
arise (in oneself), the practitioner cannot be free from the association with the
body.’’16
In this connection, Śaṅkara holds that “devotion is worshipping the Lord”
(bhajanaṃ bhaktiḥ) with single-minded concentration (ananya-yoga) in an
unswerving conviction that there is nothing higher than Lord Vāsudeva, and
hence he alone is our refuge. He also maintains that “This devotion (being the
means to knowledge) is also (known as) knowledge” (sā ca jñānam).17 While
 Saguṇa, Nirguṇa, and Madhusūdana Sarasvatī 177

explaining Bhagavadgītā 8.10 too, Śaṅkara holds that “devotion” means worship-
ping the Lord. On the other hand, Śaṅkara sometimes defines bhakti as jñāna.
In his opinion, the word bhakti employed in Bhagavdgītā 8.22 means “devotion
characterized by the knowledge of the self” (jñāna-lakṣaṇā-ātmaviṣayā-bhaktiḥ), as
has been stated in Bhagavadgītā 7.17, while in Bhagavadgītā 12.20 it means “devo-
tion characterized by the knowledge of the highest reality” (paramārtha-jñāna-
lakṣaṇā-bhakti).18 In Bhagavadgītā 18.54 it means “devotion as worshipping the
Lord (bhajana), which is characterized by the highest knowledge” (uttamā-jñāna-
lakṣaṇā-bhakti), as has been stated in Bhagavadgītā 7.16; in Bhagavadgītā 18.55 it
means “devotion characterized by the steadfastness of knowledge” (jñānaniṣṭhā-
lakṣaṇā-bhakti). The view that devotion is characterized by knowledge is admitted
by Madhusūdana as well in his commentary on Bhagavadgītā 18.54-55 etc.19
In Bhagavadgītā 9.26, Śrī Kṛṣṇa says to Arjuna, ‘‘If one disciplined soul proffers
to me with love a leaf, a flower, fruit, or water, I accept this offering of love from
him.’’20 Śaṅkara has overlooked the import of this verse with regard to the devel-
opment of the conception of bhakti. Here the repetition of the term “love” implies
that the Lord is satisfied by devotion only and neither that birth as a Brahmin nor
the performance of severe penance causes him to accept his disciple in any way.
In the Gītā’s concluding chapter, where the Lord utters the famous verse,
‘‘Abandoning all rites and duties, take refuge in me only. I will liberate you from
all sins, do not grieve’’ (18.66),21 Madhusūdana comments with an appraisal of the
three niṣṭhā-s—karmaniṣṭhā, jñānaniṣṭhā and bhaktiniṣṭhā.
He holds the view that bhaktiniṣṭhā is the means as well as the completion
of the other two. This is diametrically opposed to Śaṅkara’s considered view of
two niṣṭhā-s, karma and jñāna. While Śaṃkara understands the word “abandon-
ment” in terms of the path of jñāna accompanied by the withdrawal of all actions,
Madhusūdana explains it not as the abandonment of actions as such, but as
self-surrender unto God with indifference to the fruit of works. It should also be
noted, however, that Madhusūdana is humble here when he expresses his differ-
ence with Śaṅkara. Indeed, he describes himself as a pitiable (varāka) person who
is unable to explain the actual intent of the Lord in this context.22
Again, though Madhusūdana was a great commentator on Śaṅkara, he dif-
fered widely from Śaṅkara and other Advaita Vedāntins in interpreting the
Bhagavadgītā. While according to Śaṅkara, there are only two paths promoted
in the Bhagavadgītā, i.e., knowledge and action, Madhusūdana talks about three
paths, i.e., knowledge, action and devotion, and considers the path of devotion
as important as that of jñāna-mārga. Thus, Madhusūdana explored a new path
in which the doctrine of Advaita must be reconciled with the theory of Vaish-
178 Journal of Vaishnava Studies

nava devotionalism. He acknowledges bhakti as a means to the removal of avidyā

which leads to ultimate realization. Bhakti for Madhusūdana, then, is as effective
as śravaṇa (hearing) and manana (meditation) are in the traditional view of the
Advaitins. As knowledge leads to liberation through self-realization, bhakti goes
beyond both even if it is the direct cause of liberation (mokṣa). The endeavor
of Advaitins ends in brahma-kaivalya, which Madhusūdana calls as parāmukti or
supreme liberation, but one can, he says, go further.23

Madhusūdana’s Contribution to Advaita

The path of knowledge or jñāna-mārga has been accepted as the only direct path
to salvation by the sage Bādarāyaṇa, at least according to the Advaita school
beginning with Śaṅkarācārya. This view proffers the identity of the individual
self (jīva) with the supreme self (brahman/ātman) and that ultimate reality is
nirguṇa or without qualities or attributes. Madhusūdana takes them one step
further, considering Śrī Kṛṣṇa as the ultimate reality or the incarnation of
nirguṇa-brahman. His dedication and mastery in the field of Advaita is proven by
his most popular works like the Siddhāntabindu, Vedāntakalpalatikā, Advaitasiddhi,
Advaitaratnarakṣaṇa, etc., and yet he is an ardent follower of the bhakti-mārga,
showing that bhakti reigns supreme.
According to Madhusūdana, there is no inconsistency between the attribute-
less non-dualistic conception of Śaṅkara and the ardent devotion to Śrī Kṛṣṇa,
who is none other than the supreme being Himself. Thus, Madhusūdana wanted
to synthesize the bhakti school of Vedānta with the jñāna-mārga, giving a new
perspective to the field of Advaita philosophy. The previous notion in Advaita
was that meditation on the supreme being with attributes (saguṇa-brahmopāsanā)
was a preliminary step in the realization of one’s own self, which was considered
the essence of God-realization. Madhusūdana, though viewing the supreme being
as nirguṇa, as Śaṅkara did, would bring followers to the next level. Śaṅkara, for
his part, had composed a number of devotional stotra-s (poems), but in the post-
Śaṅkarite period, his followers established a number of muṭṭ-s where the object
of their meditation (upāsanā) was anything but saguṇā-brahman. Madhusūdana, in
this sense, was coming full circle.
Madhusūdana’s ardent devotion for Lord Kṛṣṇa was in no way affected by the
fact that brahman, or the Lord, who himself assumed incarnations, did so by way
of producing “illusory forms” (māyā): the incarnations were in essence nirguṇa-
brahman itself. According to typical Advaitin understanding, they were unreal.
Madhusūdana severely criticized all those who held that brahman is eternal
and yet assumes real avatāra-s. He fully accepted Śaṃkara’s conception of jagat,
 Saguṇa, Nirguṇa, and Madhusūdana Sarasvatī 179

jīvātmā, and paramātmā and also jñāna-mārga as directly leading to mokṣa, and in
many others ways, too, he adhered to the standard Advaitin view. Thus, even with
his predilection toward bhakti-mārga, he could be counted among the Advaitins.
In the end, nirguṇa-bhakti-mārga cannot be regarded as a new concept attrib-
uted to Madhusūdana. Along these lines, it is to be reiterated that Madhusūdana
was a prolific writer both on bhakti-mārga and on Advaita Vedānta. His works
include the Ānandamandākinī, Bhaktirasāyana, Āśvarapratipattiprakāśa, Mahim-
nastotravyākhyā, Harilīlāvyākhyā, Bhāgavataprathamaślokāṭīkā, Vedāntakalpalatikā,
Siddhāntabindu, Saṃkṣepaśārīrakabhāṣya, Gūḍhārthadīpikā, Advaitasiddhi, Advaita-
ratnarakṣaṇa etc. Ānandamandākinī is an original poem of 102 stanzas in praise
of Lord Kṛṣṇa, with a full morphological description. It is an expression of the
author’s fervent devotion to Lord Kṛṣṇa.
His Vedāntalatikā is a small treatise on Advaita Vedānta. It deals with the
nature of the absolute, the refutation of the conception of the absolute accord-
ing to other schools, the explanation of how avidyā ceases by the direct appre-
hension of brahman arising out of hearing the mahāvākya-s and the concept
of mokṣa achieved through it. The Siddhāntabindu is a commentary on the
Daśaślokī of Śaṅkara wherein the views of the opponents have been refuted
in precise manner and the basic teaching of Advaita finds a firm hold. The
Saṃkṣepaśārīrakasārasaṃgraha is a commentary on Śaṅkara’s Vedāntasūtra-bhāṣya
by Sarvajñātmamuni. Madhusūdana’s fervent devotion to Lord Kṛṣṇa, an incarna-
tion of nirguṇa-brahman is expressed here. The Bhaktirasāyana is a great treatise
on bhakti. The Mahimnastotra and Harilīlāvyākhyā also convey the same ideas in
greater detail. The Gūḍhārthadīpikā (a commentary on the Bhagavadgītā), although
deviating from Śaṅkara’s interpretation, as already discussed, conveys bhakti and
jñāna-mārga as the means to mokṣa. In the Advaitaratnarakṣaṇa, Madhusūdana has
answered the unjust attack of the Naiyāyikas and of the dualistic schools with
great logic and philosophical prowess.
From the above discussion, it becomes clear that though Madhusūdana had
the utmost reverence for Śaṅkarācārya, he never hesitated to make bold depar-
tures from him in the need of establishing his own view. An apparent dichotomy
ensues when one looks at the dichotomy in his emotional and intellectual under-
standing. Emotionally, he shows much reverence for Śaṅkara, but it did not
allow him to compromise his intellectual independence as a philosopher in the
Vedānta tradition. An instance of such apparent conflict can be found in his
masterpiece, the Advaitasiddhi. This work was mainly written to refute the allega-
tions raised against Advaita by Vyāsatīrtha, a staunch Dvaitin and the author of
the Nyāyāmṛta. While expounding his intellectual conviction in nirguṇa-brahman,
180 Journal of Vaishnava Studies

the great master of Advaita, Madhusūdana, had no reservations in showing his

insatiable devotion for saguṇa-brahman, i.e., Lord Kṛṣṇa, quoting the famous verse
in glorifying Kṛṣṇa that he personally knew no truth greater than Kṛṣṇa as the
supreme truth (. . . kṛṣṇātparam kimapitattvamahaṃnajāne).24 In fact, the saying
bhaktyārthaṃ kalpitaṃ dvaita, advaitāpi sundram (“for the sake of devotion, embrac-
ing duality is fairer than that of non-duality’) can easily and enthusiastically be
attributed to Madhusūdana.
Let us conclude the paper by quoting the view of one of the commentators
on the Siddhāntabindu and Advaitasiddhi, respectively: Brahmānanda Sarasvatī’s
eulogy of Madhusūdana stating that his range of scholarship was known only
to Sarasvatī, the goddess of learning, as much as the boundary of knowledge of
Sarasvatī was known to Madhusūdana—

madhusūdanasarasvatyāḥ pāraṃvetti sarasvatī

pāraṃvetti sarasvatyāh madhusūdanasarasvatī.

Endnotes
1. This is a revised version of an unpublished paper that I presented at the Interim
World Philosophy Congress and the 81st session of the Indian Philosophy Congress held
on 15-20 December 2006 at Delhi University. I acknowledge my gratitude to Professor
(Retired) Godabarisha Mishra, Department of Philosophy, University of Madras, with
whom I started reading Madhusūdana Sarasvatī first and to Dr. Gayathri Preetha Ganesan,
Department of Sanskrit, Dr. MGR Janaki College of Arts and Science for Women, Chennai,
who helped me in preparing the original version of this paper.
2. P. M. Modi, Siddhāntabindu (trans), Vohra Publishers and Distributors, Allahabad, 1985,
pp. 12-13.
3. Ibid, p. 13.
4. Ibid, p. 156.
5. Bhaktirasāyana 1.1.19.
6. Bhaktirasāyana 1.1.
7. P. M. Modi, op. cit., p.16.
8. End of commentary on Bhaktirasāyana 1.1.
9. ātmārāmasca munayo nirgranthā apyurukrame / kurvantyahaitukīṃ bhaktimithambhū-
taguṇo hariḥ // Bhāgavata Purāṇa 1.7.10 (Gūḍhārthadīpikā, introductory verse 38)
10. satyaṃ jñānamanantamadvayasukhaṃ yadbrahma gatvā guru matvā labdha samādhibhir-
munivarairmokṣāya sākṣātkṛtam / jātaṃ nandatapovanāttadakhilānandāya vṛndāvane veṇuṃ
vādayadindusundaramukhaṃ vande’ravindekṣaṇam // (Invocatory verse 1) [translation, P.
M.Modi, opcit, p. 14].
11. tasyaivāvatāritvaprakhyāpanāyānakadundubhinandanādityuktam (P. M. Modi, opcit, p.
14).
 Saguṇa, Nirguṇa, and Madhusūdana Sarasvatī 181

12. yo vāco manaso’pi naiva viṣayastvaṃ tvāṃ vidhāyātmajam . . . (Ānandamandākinī, verse

99).
13. Ample examples are there throughout the text such as beginning of the commen-
tary on chapter 13, end of chapter 14 of the Bhagavadgītā.
14. The term bhakti along with its other similar forms like bhakta, abhakta, ekabhakti,
bhaktimat and the root word bhaj arises nearly forty two times in the text (Bhagavadgītā 4.3;
6.31, 47; 7.16, 17, 21, 23, 28; 8.10, 22; 9.13, 14, 23, 26, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34; 10.8, 10; 11.54, 55; 12.1,
14, 16, 17, 19, 20; 13.10, 18; 14.26; 15.19; 18.54, 55, 65, 67, 68) [cf. T. G. Mainkar, A Comparative
Study of the Commentaries on the Bhagavadgīta, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1969, 2nd edition,
footnote 1, p. 12].
15. P. M. Modi, opcit, pp. 169-170.
16. Wāsudev Laxmaṇ Shāstrī Paṇsīkar, Śrīmadbhagavadgītā with the commentar-
ies Śrīmat-Śānkarabhāshya with Ānandagiri; Nīlakanṭhī; Bhāshyotkarshadīpikā of Dhanapati;
Śrīdharī; Gītārthasangraha of Abhinavaguptāchārya; and Gūḍhārthadīpikā of Madhusūdana with
Gūḍhārthatattvāloka of Śrīdharmadattaśarmā (Bachchāśarmā) (sic), (edited), Delhi: Chaukham-
ba Sanskrit Pratishthan, 1999, Madhusūdanīvyākhyā, p. 548.
17. Ibid, Śrīmacchaṃkarabhāṣyam, p. 548.
18. Ibid, Śrīmacchaṃkarabhāṣyam, pp. 389, 402 and 518.
19. Ibid, Śrīmacchaṃkarabhāṣyam, Madhusūdanīvyākhyā, pp. 741ff.
20. J. A. B. van Buitenen, The Bhagavadgītā in the Mahābhārata (translated and edited), The
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1981 (patraṃ puṣpaṃ phalaṃ toyaṃ yo me bhaktyā pray-
acchati/tad ahaṃ bhaktyupahṛtam aśnāmi prayatātmanaḥ).
21. sarvadharmānparityajya māmekaṃ śaraṇaṃ vraja/ ahaṃ tvā sarvapāpebhyo moksayiṣ-
yāmi mā śucaḥ //
22. Wāsudev Laxmaṇ Shāstrī Paṇsīkar, opcit, Madhusūdanīvyākhyā, pp. 752-755.
23. Advaitasiddhi, Nirṇaya Sāgar edition, p. 893 (also refer to P. M. Modi, opcit, pp. 169ff.
for fuller discussion).
24. Gūḍhārthadīpikā, 18th chapter, 1st of the last five verses.

View publication stats