Nimbarka, also known as Nimbarkacharya, Nimbaditya or Niyamananda, was a Hindu philosopher, theologian and the chief proponent of the theology of Dvaitādvaita (dvaita–advaita) or dualistic–non-dualistic sometimes known as Svābhāvika bhedābheda. He played a major role in spreading the worship of the divine couple Radha and Krishna, and founded the Nimbarka Sampradaya.
Nimbarka is believed to have lived around the 12th century, but this dating has been questioned, suggesting that he lived somewhat earlier than Adi Shankara, in the 6th or 7th century CE. Born in Southern India in a Telugu Brahmin family,
Etymology and epithets
The word 'Nimbārka' (निंबार्क) is derived from two
Sanskrit words nimba (निम्ब) and arka (अर्क). It is believed that Nimbarka was given the name 'Niyamananda' at his birth. According to a folk tale, Niyamananda achieve the name Nimbarka because he trapped some rays of sunlight (arka) in the leaves of
Neem (nimba). He was also referred as Nimbaditya by his followers. Sometimes Bhaskara is also considered his epithet because of the identification of Nimbarka with the philosopher Bhaskara. The tradition which he founded is named after him.
Datings
Nimbarka's traditional followers believe that he appeared in 3096 BCE, but this dating is controversial as historians believe that he lived between 7th and 11th century CE. According to Roma Bose, Nimbarka lived in the 13th century, on the presupposition that Nimbarkacharya was the author of the work
Madhvamukhamardana. Meanwhile, Vijay Ramnarace concluded that the work
Madhvamukhamardana has been wrongly attributed to Nimbarkacharya. This view is also supported by traditional scholars, who hold a similar perspective.
Bhandarkar places Nimbārka after Rāmānuja, suggesting 1162 CE as the approximate date of his demise, though he acknowledged that this estimation is highly speculative. S.N. Dasgupta, on the other hand, dates Nimbārka to the mid-14th century. Dasgupta bases this dating on the absence of Nimbārka's mention in the Sarvadarśanasaṅgraha, a doxography by 14th-century author
Vidyaranya. However, it is important to note that none of the Bhedābhedins—whether Bhartṛprapañca, Nimbārka, Bhāskara, or
Yadava Prakasa—are referenced in the
Sarvadarśanasaṅgraha. While S. A. A. Rizvi assigns a date of c.1130–1200 CE.
[Saiyed A A Rizvi- A history of Sufism in India, Vol.1 (Munshi Ram Manoharlal Publishing Private Limited: 1978), page 355]
According to Satyanand, Bose's dating of the 13th century is an erroneous attribution.[Satyanand, J. Nimbārka: A Pre-Śaṅkara Vedāntin and his philosophy, Varanasi, 1997] Malkovsky, following Satyanand, notes that in Bhandarkar's own work it is clearly stated that his dating of Nimbarka was an approximation based on an extremely flimsy calculation; yet most scholars chose to honour his suggested date, even until modern times. According to Malkovsky, Satyanand has convincingly demonstrated that Nimbarka and his immediate disciple Srinivasacharya flourished well before Ramanuja (1017–1137 CE), arguing that Srinivasacharya was a contemporary, or just after Sankaracarya (early 8th century). According to Ramnarace, summarising the available research, Nimbarka must be dated in the 7th century CE.
Biography
Little is known about Nimbarka's life. He is said to have been born into a
Telugu Brahmin family
on the 3rd bright half of the month
Vaisakha and his parents were Jagannath, a
Bhagavata saint, and his wife Sarasvati, who lived in Pratiṣṭḥāna, which is in present-day
Paithan,
Maharashtra. However, some other versions suggest that the name of his parents were Aruna Rishi and Jayanti Devi, who lived in a place near the river
Godavari, which may be in
Maharashtra. Nimbarka's followers believe him as the incarnation of Vishnu's weapon, Sudarshana Chakra.
It is believed that Nimbarka was given the name Niyamananda at his birth, but sometimes Bhaskara is considered as his birth name. During Nimbarka's early years, it is described that his family moved to Vrindavan, but there is no historical recorded account.
Works of Nimbarka
Vedanta Parijata Saurabha
The Vedānta Pārijāta Saurabha composed by Nimbārka is extremely concise and does not refute the views of others. This form of commentary undoubtedly indicates it's antiquity. The Vedānta Pārijāta Saurabha represents an earlier style of Brahmasūtra commentary in the manner of the authors that preceded Śaṅkara. It supports the bhedābheda school of Vedānta, which advocates the view of a relationship of simultaneous unity and diversity between Brahman, the individual soul (jīva) and the universe (jagat).
Vedānta Pārijāta Saurabha is further commented by Srinivasacharya in his Vedanta kaustubha
Vedanta kamadhenu dashashloki
The dashashloki is very simple, suited to a devotee who does not want to be bothered with abstract logical theories and hair-splitting wranglings, but wants to have the truth immediately in a nut-shell.
The Vedānta kāmadhenu Daśaślokī have been extensively commented upon by several scholars. Among them, the three primary commentaries are:
-
Vedāntaratnamañjūṣā of Śrī Puruṣottamāchārya
-
Vedānta Siddhāntaratnāñjali of Śrī Harivyāsa Devāchārya
-
Vedāntalaghumañjūṣā of Śrī Giridhara dāsa
Mantrarahasyaṣoḍaśī and Prapannakalpavallī
Mantrarahasyaṣoḍaśī is a work consisting of 18 verses, with the first 16 dedicated to exposition of the revered 18-syllable Gopāla Mantra, a central element of the Nimbārka tradition. Sundara bhaṭṭācharya has authored a commentary on this work titled
Mantrārtharahasya.
The Prapannakalpavallī explains the mukunda śaraṇāgati mantra. On this, Sundara bhaṭṭācharya has written an extensive commentary titled Prapannasuratarumañjarī.
Philosophy
Nimbarka's Dvaitadvaita philosophy emphasizes a dualistic non-dualism where the soul is both distinct and non-distinct from God. His teachings emphasize devotion to Krishna and Radha.
Brahman
According to Nimbarka, the ultimate reality or
Brahman is Krishna, recognized by various names such as Purushottama, Hari, and Bhagavan. He is accompanied by Radha. Brahman, as described by Nimbarka, is flawless, possessing auspicious qualities and transcending the influence of karma, and with attributes such as knowledge, power, and compassion; Brahman is also both the material and efficient cause of creation, likened to a sovereign emperor engaging in playful activities without specific outcomes in mind.
Jiva
Nimbarka considered the
jiva to possess inherent knowledge (j
nana), which distinguishes it from non-sentient elements such as the body, sense organs, and mind. This inherent knowledge permeates every state of the
jiva, including waking, dreaming, and deep sleep. Nimbarka explains that the
jiva is both knowledge and knower, likening their relationship to that of a gem and its radiance, where they are distinct yet inseparable, existing in a relationship of substrate and attribute.
Difference and Non-difference
Nimbarka's philosophy distinctively outlines the differences between
jiva and
Brahman by emphasizing their intrinsic relationship as cause and effect, part and whole.
Brahman is portrayed as the ultimate cause and the whole, whereas
jiva, the individual soul that experiences pleasure and pain, is seen as an effect or a transformation of Brahman. This relationship is analogous to clay transforming into pottery or a tree bearing leaves and fruits, showing differences between the source material and its derivatives. Using scriptural references, Nimbarka asserted that
jiva, as a part of the omnipotent Brahman, lacks independence and fullness of power.
Relation to other Vedanta schools
Like Nimbarka,
of other Vedanta schools also accept the concepts of difference and non-difference between Jiva and Brahman as real, but they explain and reconcile these ideas in various ways:
-
Nimbarka asserts that the relationship of both difference and non-difference between Jiva and Brahman is natural ( svabhavika) and fully compatible, meaning these aspects coexist without conflict.
-
Ramanuja and Srikantha explain the relationship using the analogy of the soul and body ( sariri-sarira), where non-difference is principal and difference is subordinate.
-
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu considers the concepts of difference and non-difference to be inconceivable ( acintya), implying that human understanding is limited in fully grasping how both can be true simultaneously.
Bibliography
