Why Śrīdhara Svāmī? The Makings of a Successful Sanskrit Commentary

Ravi M Gupta

doi:10.3390/rel11090436

Abstract

Śrīdhara Svāmī’s commentary on the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, called Bhāvārtha-dīpikā and composed sometime between the mid-fourteenth to the mid-fifteenth centuries, has exerted extraordinary influence on later Bhāgavata commentaries, and indeed, on Vaiṣṇava traditions more generally. This article raises a straightforward question: “Why Śrīdhara?” Focusing on the Caitanya Vaiṣṇava tradition, particularly Jīva Gosvāmī, for whom Śrīdhara is foundational, we ask, “What is it about Śrīdhara Svāmī’s commentary—both stylistically and theologically—that made it so useful to Caitanya Vaiṣṇavas and other Bhāgavata commentators?” This question, to the extent that it can be answered, has implications for our understanding of Śrīdhara’s theology as well as the development of the early Caitanya Vaiṣṇava tradition, but it can also lend insight into the reasons for Śridhara’s influence more generally in early modern India.

Highlights

Śrıdhara Svāmı’s commentary on the Bhāgavata Purān.a, called Bhāvārtha-dıpikā and composed sometime between the mid-fourteenth to the mid-fifteenth centuries, has exerted extraordinary influence on later Bhāgavata commentaries, and on Vais.n.ava traditions more generally
Śrıdhara’s commitment to Vais.n.ava-bhakti, Caitanya’s commitment to Śrıdhara, and Jıva’s skillful ease in harmonizing Śrıdhara’s Advaita with Caitanya Vais.n.ava theology—all become less of a surprise and less of a problem
For example, the second verse of the Bhāgavata Purān.a that we examined above

Summary

Introduction

Śrıdhara Svāmı’s commentary on the Bhāgavata Purān.a, called Bhāvārtha-dıpikā and composed sometime between the mid-fourteenth to the mid-fifteenth centuries, has exerted extraordinary influence on later Bhāgavata commentaries, and on Vais.n.ava traditions more generally. Subsequent commentators on the Bhāgavata Purān.a are consistently aware of, and often deeply engaged with, the Bhāvārtha-dıpikā. This is true of the Caitanya Vais.n.ava commentaries by Sanātana. Sheridan calls for further study of Śrıdhara Svāmıand his commentary, which, he says, would lead to “understanding of the reason for the great authority of Śrıdhara’s ostensibly Advaitin commentary within the later Vais.n.ava schools” This article raises a straightforward question: “Why Śrıdhara?” Focusing on the Caitanya Vais.n.ava tradition, Jıva Gosvāmı, for whom Śrıdhara is foundational, we shall ask, “What is it about Śrıdhara’s commentary—both stylistically and theologically—that made it so useful to Caitanya has implications for our understanding of Śrıdhara’s theology as well as the development of the early

Why Choose an Advaitin?

When Not to Choose Śrıdhara

Conclusions