So far we are concerned, Madhva-Gauḍīya sampradāya, our ācāryas, they took it, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, as the right commentary on Brahma-sūtra. Bhāṣyaṁ brahma-sūtrānāṁ vedārtha-paribṛṁhitam. This Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is the real bhāṣya of Brahma-sūtra. So the Gauḍīya sampradāya did not make any commentary on the Brahma-sūtra because they took it, Caitanya Mahāprabhu took it, as Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, as a natural commentary, because Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is also made by Vyāsadeva, and Vyāsadeva is the original author of Brahma-sūtra. So author made his own commentary, so there was no need of another commentary. This is the Gauḍīya-siddhānta, Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇava-siddhānta.
But sometimes back, in Jaipur, there was a challenge that, "The Gauḍīya sampradāya has no commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra." So at that time Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura was requested . . . because he was grand scholar, grand old man scholar, at that time living at Vṛndāvana. So he was very old at that time; so he authorized Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana that, "You do it." There was no need, but people are demanding, "Where is your commentary on the Vedānta-sūtra?" So Baladeva Vidyābhūṣana, with the order of Govindajī at Jaipur, he wrote the commentary on Brahma-sūtra. That name is Govinda-bhāṣya. So the Gauḍīya-Brahmā sampradāya, they have got also commentary on Brahma-sūtra. That is required.