गोपाल-भट्टः

Gopāla Bhaṭṭa was born to the traditional shrI-vaiShNava pAncharAtrika archaka family of shrIrangam. One of 6 gosvAmI-s.

Supposed reincarnation of a gopI ( Anaṅga-mañjarī per Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā or Guṇa-mañjarī).

Meeting chaitanya 1510 CE

Caitanya Mahāprabhu met Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī, who had two brothers, Veṅkaṭa Bhaṭṭa and Tirumalaya Bhaṭṭa, who were Vaiṣṇavas of the Rāmānuja-sampradāya. Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī was the nephew of Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī. …. In his gṛhastha life, Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī was a resident of Śrī Raṅga-kṣetra, and he belonged to the Vaiṣṇava Rāmānuja-sampradāya. …

In the year 1433 Śakābda (A.D. 1511), when Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu was touring South India, He stayed for four months during the period of Cāturmāsya at the house of Veṅkaṭa Bhaṭṭa, who then got the opportunity to serve the Lord to his heart’s content. Gopāla Bhaṭṭa also got the opportunity to serve the Lord at this time. … - abhaya-charaNa-dAsaH bhaktivedAnta-svAmI

अयं चैतन्यः शाङ्कर-सन्न्यासात् परं श्रीरङ्गं प्राप्तः। कथम् अर्चकगृहे ऽवसत्? सचेलस्नाननिमित्तं तद्दर्शनं भवति खलु??

Gone to vRndAvana at over 30

This supposedly happened in mid 1530s, after chaitanya died.

Yet, others say that he was instructed (in 1510) by chaitanya to go to vRndAvana only after serving his parents till they died; and told him about rUpa and sanAtana being there many years before he even met them.

abhayacharaNa version

So, the below conflicts with that.

Both the father and the mother of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī were extremely fortunate, for they dedicated their entire lives to the service of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu. They allowed Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī to go to Vṛndāvana.
- abhaya-charaNa-dAsaH bhaktivedAnta-svAmI

When Lord Caitanya was later informed that Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī had gone to Vṛndāvana and met Śrī Rūpa and Sanātana Gosvāmī, He was very pleased, and He advised Śrī Rūpa and Sanātana to accept Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī as their younger brother and take care of him.
- abhaya-charaNa-dAsaH bhaktivedAnta-svAmI

Ritual input

Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī installed one of the seven principal Deities of Vṛndāvana, the Rādhāramaṇa Deity.

Mission

He was helping vaiShNava-s of north India, reeling under centuries of muslim devastation, rebuild their ritual and doctrinal knowledge as per chaitanya’s command (which did not conflict with rAmAnuja sampradAya at all).

Chaitanya can be deduced to have felt that rUpa and sanAtana themselves, being specialists deep into rasa-shAstra and bhakti extacy, were not up to the task, but would happily cooperate. Any exposure R and S might have had to vedAnta must’ve been mAdhva kind at best (C was dissatisfied with it).

Gopāla Bhaṭṭa was the designated smṛty-ācārya (and famous as such) and the link to the ancient Southern traditions.

हरि-भक्ति-विलासः was edited by him. Details at TW .

Sat-kriyāsāra-dīpikā

Composed and completed the compendious Sat-kriyāsāra-dīpikā (Source: TW) per orders of senior vaiShNava-s.

वक्ति गृहिद्विजादीनाम् अनन्यानां विशेषतः । पद्धतिं तां विवाहादेः सत्क्रियासारदीपिकाम् ॥२॥

श्रीमद्गोपालभट्टोऽयं साधूनामाज्ञया भृशम् । भगवद्धर्म्मरक्षार्थं भक्तानां वैदिकी तु या ॥३॥

विस्तारः (द्रष्टुं नोद्यम्)

ॐ श्रीरूपाय, ॐ सनातनाय ॐ भट्टरघुनाथाय ॐ श्रीजीवाय, ॐ गोपालभट्टाय ॐ दासरघुनाथाय

in vaiShNava homa are obviously later insertions - need not imply a later author for the rest of the material.

कृत्यन्तरम्

commentary on the Kṛṣṇa-karṇāmṛta,. (per abhaya-charaNa-dAsa) - TW

shrIvaiShNavatvam

As far as he was concerned, he never stopped being an SV - no major distinction existed (gauDIya philosophy, to the tiny extant it existed, did not conflict). He starts hari-bhakti-vilAsa, which he edited.

चैतन्य-देवं भगवन्तम् आश्रये
श्री-वैष्णवानां प्रमुदेऽञ्जसा लिखन् ।
…

जीयासुर् आत्यन्तिक-भक्ति-निष्ठाः
श्री-वैष्णवा माथुर-मण्डलेऽत्र ।

He took up tridaNDI sannyAsa, not ekadaNDI type like mAdhva-s or other gauDIya-s. Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura is said to have reintroduced tridaNDI sannyAsa.

Harmony with chaitanya

Why would an SV not be attracted by a neo-ALvAr? His parents were devoted to chaitanya - but never became gauDIya-s (the family line continues to serve shrIranga to date).

chaitanya trusted him so much as to make him formalize his doctrines; but rUpa and sanAtana ultimately didn’t.

Break with gauDIyas

Data

The sole guru

colophon of kRShNa-karNAmRta commentary - श्री-द्राविड-हरिवंश-भट्टैक-चरण-शरण-श्री-गोपाल-भट्ट clearly indicates whose sole disciple he claimed to be - and it is not sanAtana.

ShaT-sandarbha abandonment

ShaT-sandarbha abandonment, and take-over by jIva - see here.

HBV thrust

हरि-भक्ति-विलासः was published under his name by sanAtana. Details at TW .

sannyAsa

Unlike rUpa, sanAtana and jIva, and like chaitanya, gopAla-bhaTTa took sannyAsa. Even more particularly - tridaNDI sannyAsa, like other shrIvaiShNavas, and unlike even chaitanya.

Kṛṣṇadāsa

When Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī took permission from all the Vaiṣṇavas before writing Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī also gave him his blessings, but he requested him not to mention his name in the book. - abhaya-charaNa-dAsa

As a result, Gopal Bhatta is only briefly named in the Caitanya-caritamrta (with no detailed glorification or biographical information)

Kṛṣṇadāsa also is said to have composed Gopi Bhatt Goswami astakam.

Acnowledgements

He is acknowledged in 10th skandha’s Brihad Vaishnava Toshini commentary by Sanatana as suhRt, (and not?) sahAya (गोपाल-भट्टो रघुनाथ-दासः । स्याताम् उभौ यत्र सुहृत्-सहायौ) (after acknowledging a long list of perceptors like mAdhava-purI, shrIdhara-svAmI, sArvabhauma-bhaTTAchArya …).
So, the order order can be taken as GB is suhRt (friend) and RD is sahAya (helper).

This is copied in jIva’s commentary. So how heart-felt? :-P Doesn’t indicate any discipleship of sanAtana, which is anyway percluded quite explcitly by the use of एक in the colophon of kRShNa-karNAmRta commentary - श्री-द्राविड-हरिवंश-भट्टैक-चरण-शरण-श्री-गोपाल-भट्ट .

jIva acknowledges him among other gosvAmis in the manglacharana of Gopal Campu. This is similarly unimpressive. To their credit (and to the unfortunate - perhaps intended - confusion of readers), gauDIyas liberally acknowledge vRddha-vaiShNavas as “inspiring” their works.

Disciples

narottama-dAsa, shixA disciple of jIva, composed praises on gopAla-bhaTTa.
jIva is said to have asked shrInivAsa AchArya to take dIxA from gopAla-bhaTTa. He went on to compose Shad-gosvamy-ashtaka.
shrInivAsa AchArya and narottama became close friends.

puNDra-s

gopAla-bhaTTa-parivAra bears the very ungauDIya and SV-like puNDra. Further placement of the puNDra-s on the body (atleast the front portion) are identical to SV layout, except that the neck tilakas have moved down.

Deduction

One can be said to “belong” to a tradition by ritual initiation or tutelage or by one’s explicit agreement with the said tradition. The tradition’s adoration of him is not good evidence (for that matter even shrIdhara-svAmI is glorified by gosvAmins).

One must consider -

Why did gopAla bhaTTa not finish what he started off with?
Though he lived long after jIva completed the project (and after rUpa and sanAtana died), why is he not acknowledged for anything more than the initial “disordered” notes?
Why did he ask the author of charitAmRta to not mention him ( as abhayacharaNa dasa states)?
Why does Sat-kriyāsāra-dīpikā differ so much from hari-bhakti-vilAsa which sanAtana published under his name?
etc..

sanAtana and rUpa came from a tough political background - would likely have been quite cunning. So sanAtana’s deed in trying to coopt gopAla bhaTTa into his view by publishing HBV under his name isn’t surprising.
GB would’ve wisened up fast though;
stayed aloof thence, abandoning ShaT-sandarbha.

The continued respectful mentions of gopAla-bhaTTa by sanAtana and jIva amount to a case of gentlemanly disagreement; perhaps even accompanied consideration by gopAla in not writing a refutation.

संस्कृत-प्रस्तुतिः

एक एव गोपालभट्टः श्रीरङ्गोद्भवोऽवर्तत प्रसिद्ध इति मन्ये - न च स तावान् प्राचीनः।
उपत्रिंशत्तमे वर्षे वृन्दावनं प्राप।
स रामानुजीयैर् लालितः पालितः पाठित इति सर्वैर् अपि प्राचीनैर् अङ्गीकृतम्।
अतः स जन्मना रामानुजीयसम्बन्धम् आप्तवान् इति स्फुटम्।
(यद्यपि तत्-परिवारोऽधुना पूर्णतया जीवसनतनादिमार्गे पतिताः, तथापि १२ पुण्ड्रधरणपद्धतिर् इतरगौडीयपरिवारेभ्योऽत्यन्तविलक्षणा रक्षितेति रुचिरम्। )

किञ्च गौडीयसम्बन्धं तिरश्चकारेत्यत्र सूचना वर्तन्ते -

षट्सन्दर्भग्रथनं प्रारम्भे हि त्यक्तवान्।
जीवः केवलं विप्रकीर्णपत्राणि प्राप।
अग्रे न तस्मात् साहाय्यं किञ्चित् प्राप,
येन ततोऽधिकं न किञ्चित् कृतज्ञाता सूचिता,
प्रत्युत “रूप-सनातनौ विलेखयतः” इति जगाद।
किञ्च जीवेन षट्सन्दर्भपूरणात् परम् अपि २०+वर्षाणि भुव्य् अराजत।
कुत एवं षट्सन्दर्भरचनां तत्याज, कुतो जीवस्य साहाय्यं नाकरोद् इति च विचारणीयम्।

एवं च षट्सन्दर्भे - अप्रसिद्धस्य वादिकेसरिसौम्यजामातृमुने रामानुजीयस्य चोल्लेखोऽपि बहुमानेन क्वचित् तदुपज्ञम् एव भाति।
अथापि, आदिमाध्याय-ग-प्राया एव रामानुजीय-भाष्योल्लेखा दृश्यन्ते।
कथं चेदं वैरल्यम् इत्यपि विचारणीयम्।

पुनः, यत्र यत्र जीवादिभिस् स्वप्रशंसा, स्तुतिर् वा (यथा वैष्णवतोषण्योः, ) -
तत्र तत्र सुहृत्त्वम् अतिरिच्य
न किञ्चित् ततो लब्धम् उच्यते।
न च शिष्यस्य सुहृत्त्वमात्रेणाभिधानम् उपपन्नम् - अतो न सनातन-शिष्यः।

तथा ऽस्य कृष्णकर्णामृतटीकायां स्पष्टम् उच्यते -
“श्री-द्राविड-हरिवंश-भट्टैक-चरण-शरण-श्री-गोपाल-भट्ट” इति,
येन +एक-शब्दप्रयोगेण स द्राविड-हरिवंश-भट्टम् अन्तरा सनातनादीन् स्वगुरून् नैवामन्यतेति
स्पष्टम् एव भवति।

अयम् एव प्रबोधानन्दसरस्वतीनामा तस्मै त्रिदण्डिसन्न्यासं ददाव् इत्य् अपि अभयचरणदासप्रभृतयः।
स च सन्न्यासक्रमो रामानुजीयेष्व् एव प्रसिद्धः,
न प्राचीन-गौडीयादिषु।
(प्रबोधानन्दसरस्वतीति वस्तुतो रामानुजीययतिनाम नैव भवितुम् अर्हति -
अत्र गौडीयभ्रम एव मे भाति।)
अनेन रूपसनातनाभ्यां वर्णाश्रमधर्मपरित्यागोऽप्य् अनिष्टो मतस् तेनेति सूह्यः।

तथा, कृष्णदासकविराजं चैतन्यचरितामृते स्वोल्लेखे निषिद्धवान् इति प्रतीतिः ।
कुतस् तथेति चिन्त्यम्।

यद्यपि राजकीयाधिकारप्राप्त-नेतृत्व-कौटिल्यवता सनातनेन
हठात् तन्नाम्नि हरिभक्तिविलासः प्रकाशितः,
तथापि,

“इतः परम् मन्नाम्ना ऽपसिद्धान्तप्रचारो मा भूत्।
वर्धतां तदीयवैष्णवतेति तद्-विरोधं नाचरामि,
किञ्च सत्सिद्धान्तविकारे ऽपि न सहकरोमि”

इति निरचिनोद् इति ममोहः ।
(हरिभक्तिविलासे श्रीवैष्णवमत-विरुद्धांशा वर्तन्तेतराम् इत्य् अवधेयम्।
तद्-अपेक्षया सत्-क्रिया-सार-दीपिका ऽनुकूलतरेति श्रूयते?)

आधुनिक-बान्धवाः

अर्वाचीन-बान्धवा अपि दीक्षा-करमदिषु बोधयन्ति गौडीयान् - 2019 1 TW।

Disciples

Śrīnivāsa Ācārya and Gopīnātha Pūjārī were two of his disciples. (per abhaya-charaNa-dAsa)

tridaNDitva

He later accepted the tridaṇḍa-sannyāsa order from his uncle Tridaṇḍipāda Prabodhānanda Sarasvatī (supposed author of Caitanya-candrāmṛta), per abhaya-charaNa-dAsa.

विश्वास-टिप्पनी

@vedant_vagish says there’s no evidence for this sannyAsa.

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu traveled in South India in the year 1433 Śakābda (A.D. 1511) during the Cāturmāsya period, and it was at that time that He met Prabodhānanda, who belonged to the Rāmānuja-sampradāya. How then could the same person meet Him as a member of the Śaṅkara-sampradāya in 1435 Śakābda, two years later? - abhaya-charaNa-dAsaH bhaktivedAnta-svAmI

This was accepted by rUpa (and presumably sanAtana).

tridaṇḍa-sannyāsa is not distinctly mentioned in the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava literature … the first verse of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī’s Upadeśāmṛta advocates that one should accept the tridaṇḍa-sannyāsa order by controlling the six forces
- abhaya-charaNa-dAsaH bhaktivedAnta-svAmI