Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
mmM
Mit$~mm
B, No. 9.
GAUDAPADA-KARIKA
Edited
with a complete translation into English,
Notes, Introduction and Appendices
By
Poona
Published By
Institute
POONA
1953
Copies can be
had
direct
from the
(
India)
rs
U^f^T
STTOimidftr:
3?g^lTTf "
J
W"
4k4W*lR*l
^_
gr%
?<h ^rar
?v*3 iwwi4
^rq^[^?R5T:
Dedicated to
The
Sacred
Memory
of
to
expound and
PREFACE
Prof. Vidhusekhara Bhattacharya published his edition of Gauda-
padakankas
that edition
or Agamasastra )
clearly
some
years ago.
close perusal of
showed
a
had allowed
himself
to
be carried
little
too far by
his
leanings towards
clearly to the
and forced.
I
M. A.
students,
had occasion to
I felt
Prof.
Bhattacharya's
interpretations,
and
that
it
would be
better to present
my views
balanced
in a book-form,
before a larger
view of Gaudapada's philosophy could be taken. The present edition has been brought forth with such a back-ground.
Fortunately as regards the text of the
difference of opinion.
Karikas,
there
a
is
no
Prof, ^Bhattacharya
has
collated
differ
large
his text
from that
I
than
fifty
years ago.
two Mss.
specially lent
by the
Prajiiapathasala,
Wai.
(0
mwwwfter
It
This
and
%fcT jfr^qr^isrcP
sq^srar^
(
No.
^
9
is
Hiffw^^ftwrorft^mr^
This also
only, and the
It
contains the
first
Prakarana
reads
commentary of Anandagiii.
The colophon
#^S^
called ?q^5r3Pq[
there is a Ms. which contains only the 3rd and the 2nd Prakarana None of these Mss. show any marked of the Gaudapadakarikas.
variations of readings.
It
is
may
more or
Preface
have in
effect stated
is
intended
to
show how
am aware
that
might be charged
I
In the Introduction,
show
that
Gaudapada was a
traditional
now and
then that
philosophy
for having
undertaken to publish
I
this
work
in their
Government
Oriental Series.
must
also
of the
M.
S. University
I
me
in various ways.
In the end,
of Indian
hope
this edition
philosophy,
who wish
Gaudapada's Ajativada.
n
, 28 August 1953
a
f'
\ )
R-
Karmarkar
CONTENTS
Introduction
I
Pages
:
Gaudapada
Works
etc.
i-x
II
The
contents of Gaudapada-Karika
a Buddhist
?
x-xxh
xxii-xxvii
several
xxvii-xaviii
III
Was Gaudapada
The
Title of the
IV
Prakaranas thereof
V
VI
VII
VIII
the twenty-nine
Prakarana
?
xxviii-xxxhi
xxxiii-xd
xLi-xLvii
The Sources
Philosophical
of Gaudapada-Karika
Thought
xLvii-Lii
snm
sreR<n*3;
\~%
fern? snsTO**
<I?fhr
\-\%
sr^orat
n-
-h*
57-70
71-88
^g zmvtm
Notes
Chapter
I
Chapter
II
Chapter
III
88-107
Chapter IV
108-146
Appendix
An
147-154
Appendix
iSS-157
The
The Bhasya
on
referred to as K.bhasya
or Safikara-bhasya.
INTRODUCTION
I
Gaudapada
the
His Date,
salutation
Life,
Works
etc.
In
traditional
followers of Sankaracarya,
(
Gaudapada stands
jti^ti^
;
grand preceptor
afier
%$?:,
paramaguru
of Sankaracarya,
comes
then
srrT^spftWr^
thus
*m*T<rr
I
one
(3)
(
*f&r
I
4
5 6
31#cT
I
<rwr
1
ssrT^r
i
(7)
(
S^
*ff^T3[ the
8
9
great
nm*%
)
10
5!f*
I
11-14
and ^Tm^^IT ( **
).
From Nariyana up to Suka, theie is the %-pr succession from Suka onwards there is the ?js~%wt succession. The traditional date of Suka would be about 3000 B. C., as he was the son 6f Vyasa who lived at the time of the Mahabharata war. Even if the latest date for the Mahabharata war, viz. 1000 B. C. is accepted, and if Gaudapada was a direct pupil of uka as tradition asserts, the date of Gaudapada would be not earlier than 1000 B, C, and then Sankaracarya who was the pupil of the pupil of Gaudapada, would have to be taken as having lived sometime between 2900 8* C. and
ii
Gaudapada-Karika
B. C. Tradition
life
1
900
ing a long
pada.
Gaudato
A more
way
would be
and not
all
preserved
by tradition
as
has recently
come
to light in respect
A work called of the relation between Gaudapada and Sankara. ' Sakta doctrines with by Vidyaranya the dealing &rl Vidyarnava
'
( circa
100 A. D.
*THWn
^rmKccr:
that
is,
names of Acaryas between Gaudapada and Sankara. says that Sankaracarya's direct pupils were fourteen
q^rraf
(
Of
these the
sTr^^
**3T,
^afm^
name
is
and
the
only q^nr^'s
given
in the sfrfrsrrohr
plausible enough,
but
writer
who
lived about
the
fourth
generation
not in con-
Anandagiri
in
his
bhasya
name
at
of Sankara
mentions that
Gaudapada
revealed to
penance
Badarikasrama,
ar^rr
$$%*&
*n3W[T3ri*h
k
is
is
true
^ at
h ere Gaudapada
in the
referred to
Vyasa himself
Brahmasutrabhasya.
The YogavEsistba
who enjoyed
(II.
2
1-43-44).
See tb article
A Survey
of the
Sakta School*
in
Marathi
by Prof,
ltihasa Sariisodhaka
Mandala Quarterly
Vol.
XXXIII
*W
on IV.
Introduction
Gaudapada
are
His Date,
Life,
Works
etc.
in
The
gods,
likewise,
often
mentioned
in the singular,
is
so the
its
not without
exceptions.
in his
^nrfoftufffcrpntcr*
as
one being
in
There
is
no reason
to
the strength of the above traditional account which could not have
possibly invented him.
The
well-known
writers,
both
Santiraksita and Bhavaviveka * quote some Karikas as coming from some Vedantasastra. As both the above Buddhist writers were concerned with the doctrines and not the name of the author, the non-mention of Gaudapada need not appear surprising. In fact, Sanskrit writers normally quote passages from other works, without specifying the names of the authors, &ankaracarya quotes
remark
bhasya
(
sraterT
his sutrabhasya (II. 1.9 ) with the and Karika III. 15 in the ^r^*hr3TOT%?%* re$ L IV. 14 ), with the remark cW ^ *rc^r*rc^r ^r*cr. ( The
}
:
is
obviously intended to
show
respect
and
refers to
many
),
11
and
q;=r
remark
quotes two G. Karikas from Upadesasahasri of Sankara, with the and one 15 ), f As ifti rfei'& $&?*mh s*m%r: strfti". here refers to
I
Sankara,
nil-:
must
refer
to
viz.
ifeqr^.
Dr. Walleser misunderstands *frt" : and %\^k- to mean ' representaThe commentator tives of the Gauda and Dravida tradition \
^renm
is
calls
^**n%f%,
*n-<rrafhw5Fr.
Vidyaranya
q^^fr
refers to
The
44, 45
4
5
( III.
) as
fnpprro;.
iv
Gaadapcida-Rari'ka
All this
shows
(
that Gaudapada's
known
to
authors and
terms of respect
^
to
nickname and not a proper name, and Gauda apparently refers being used to show respect the Gaudta territory where the Karikas were written and where
Gaudapada seems
their author
became famous.
(
Bhavaviveka
500 A. D.
),
in his
commentary
)
tT^^^TT^rr
own work
3?rrc^r
irer3$Vrerft$T> quotes
Santiraksita (
four passages
resemble G. Karikas.
700 A. D.
in his nwirera|prc-
views,
which are
called grqfjrcarsrT^r
in
all
by Kamalasila,
probability
cannot thus be
of Gaudapada show more than a similarity of and expression with the Mulamadhyamakarikas of Nagarjuna ( whose date is accepted as circa third century A. D. ) and with Catuhsataka of Aryadeva who was the disciple of Nagarjuna.
The
Karikas
thought
The
glta,
and if we believe in the genuine nature of the bhasya by Gaudapada on the Sankhyakarikas of Iivarakrsna (circa 2nd century), of Gaudapada must be somewhere between it is clear that the date
300
to
500 A. D.
Alberuni
says'...
(nth
century
A D.
the Hindus have books on theosophy, on ascetics, on the process of becoming god and seeking liberation from the world as, e. g. the book composed by Gauda the anchorite, which goes by his name ../ Further on, Alberuni refers to the book Sarhkhya, composed by Kapila, the book of Patanjali, the book Ny&yabhdfd, composed by Kapila, ... the book Mlmatftsa, composed by Jaimini, ... the book Lokdyata, the book Jgastyamata composed by Agastya, ... and the book Viwwreligion,
It is clear that
dharrna,
as representing
even
Agastya,
now anything about Nydyabhdsd of Kapila or Agastyamata by we think there is no reason to doubt the existence of some
Introduction
:
J Gaudapada
sufficiently
His Date,
Life,
Works
etc.
v
time.
as
well-known
mentioned
in
Alberuni's
can reasonably be identified with Gaudapada, the author of the Gaudapada-karika. The tradition of Gau4apada as being a great Yogin is
the
anchorite,
by
Alberuni,
One
Sadasivabrahmendra in
and
as
Gaudahaving
The commentator Atmabodhendra came into contact with Apalunya ( equated with Apollonius, the Pythagorean philosopher who lived in ioo A. D. ). Even if this tradition is held to be correct, it would only show that some Indian philosopher had met the Greek philosopher, not necebeen the preceptor of Apolonys.
says Gaudapada
ssarily
Gaudapada.
Again,
it is
now
held that
all
trustworthy.
Works
of
Gaudapada
known
traditionally
No definite evidence is available to have come from Gaudapada. be wrong generally to believe in not would it but on this point,
tradition unless there
(
i
is
of Isvarakrsna
Some
karikas
is
no flashes of deep been written have not by Gaudapada. could it hence and thought, have no enough, hesitation curiously in thinking These same critics, highly of the Matharavrtti ( bhasya by Mathara on the Sankhyakarikas, which is certainly not better in any way than Gaudaof a very poor quality and betrays
pada's bhasya
is
in
common
with
it )
which
supposed to have the honour of being translated into Chinese about the middle of the sixth century. According to some both
have
drawn
upon
common
source
is
a matter-of-fact tame
scope to
show
Perhaps
was
his first
work when
6 Could it be that Ma^bara and GaudapSda are identical and that the M5tharavrtti and Gaudap5dabh5sya are but two editions of the same work?
vi
Gaudapdda-Kctrika
we
he was attracted to the tenets of the Sankhya philosophy. Anyway At the are not prepared to regard this work as not genuine.
The bhasya
It
Karika
1 )
^n%*s ^*%%x
^ataszr
^mw-
where some
of Brahmadeva.
described as sons
q^r%^
is
( also
under Karika 22
).
We
works in the bhasya to give the reader a general idea about the work.
(
Kanka
1 )
^toti^
3>ora^;rr%:
fog ^ra^?mm*<T
3 )
li
This
<rar
(
^
is
)
K&rila 2
<** ^tcttr
v**m?k
q^?rf
srsmssR
11
Mahldhara quotes
).
this
in
his
bhasya on Yajurveda-Samhita
XXIV
^ g5f g^
ft
<T&T SJTcUmft
w$\
^raarc:
11
K&nka 4
3*?*n?r
Introduction
I Gaudapada
hts Date,
Life,
Works
etc.
vii
K&tika
n
is
?3r^r
fa^
*st:
This
usually taken to
K&rik& 23
sfft
1
toto;
(***
(
3>
32)
RArika 61 )
gift 5T?g^^r-s?Hfcw:
$rcT3 3Prr
:
(wraroilH. 30-88)
^r^y:
wfar
wft
^t^:
wSr
srna;
Thus
the bhasya
Bhagavadglta,
Purana, Yogasutras
preached that ^srefct was srR^fcr led Gaudapada to declare that there cannot be 3*rq-n*rT3r of the q&m, and the doctrine of the Purusa
being a mere looker on, coupled with the statement of the Bhagavadglta
that the qualities, ^r^, ^3T^ and 31%^ are responsible for the
(
Sarusara
was
utilised
by him to
enunciate
There is a strong probability that Gau4apada wrote a commentary on the Saukhyakarika and called his own independent
work
(
^Tft^r as well.
^tTCTTcTT
Gaudapada's
<
commentary
on
this
work
is
known from
the colophons as
commences with a^u? ^fe^Rf^JW^RSnfre^ ^?wm%?Ji^*i^&*feftra$' *s$> wis* 3r5RwTHr^ ^wc* i?*nwr w^f^sHTcH^T?r#^r mwtasrrasifcr to^ 31^ raw* wwn s^frt~> and
11
viii
Gaudap&da- K&riku
ends with
^T^mw^srt
^fof^mfafarf&P
<T
good edition of
still
a desideratum.
The VaniBombay
have published
this small
Strangely enough,
and other languages* We were unable to find even one after a search for the same all over India. The one English translation by Mr, Lahari, published by the Theosophical Society of Madras has
been long out of print and
consulted
eight
we were unable
work
at
to
see
it.
We
Mss. of this
the
Bhandarkar Oriental
a reliable
:
edition
of this
work should be
as early as possible
chapters
Ms, No. 162 gives a total of 241 verses distributed in six (I-39; II-30; III-42 IV-37; V-37 ; VI-56 ) and
;
%xk
sftRSTw tfiwRfa
a total
;
sfc^faamt
wr^i#
srgrfaqref
#$<*n#rasrr? etc
II- 5 6
IH-27
%rrs>r?
etc.
a total of
;
\6o
verses,
distributed
in three
I-65
II-59
XII 3
fcT
wswfraT^qrtfw^
awfrWrfar
is
etc.
called ifW<rr^R-
$*HWr or
grrT^fTcfToq-T^rr
w^rsraT$mr%crr
).
or *?f^<nfm5tnw.
The
text
is
the
number of
verses
varies
(as
no,
The name of
Uttaragita
is
commentator
however
is
the
same
viz*
Gau4apada throughout.
clearly
is
The unreliability of the colophons to shown from the fact that in no versions of
it is
the
the
Mahabharata
Introduction
I Gaudapada
His Date,
Life,
Worh
etc.
IX
raises the question whether the Uttaraglta was written by Gau4apada himself, along with the commentary. It is not unlikely that Gaudapada who seems to be. indebted to the Bhagavadglta for
This
many
ideas in his Karikas., may have thought of emphasising the Yoga, element in the Gita, by writing a supplement to it. The
Uttaraglta,
etc,
of Brahman,
Jivanmukti
QVRt^rcgTcif
Tlrs
is
work of
begins thus
It
refers
to
the
in
demns
H^?qrr
the
qsrar
two schools, ^mq- and spr5* of the Saktas and conno uncertain terms ( ?f?cr?#rer*f 3ra?STO3&ni%cr
*PT^qoT
^ nm
it
ftft^T^riffOT
expected,
%&>
^^
\\
wmOTCfwf
^^TaiOT^q' ftfi?$
t
etc.
is
similar
qH^g^rs^rcrer
s^rcsarcrarafcr-
arenw ^ ^kw wr. ^m%<nre ( Uttaraglta ). On small work reveals poetic talents of a high order.
It is argued by some that the author of this Tantric or akta work must be some other Gaudapada. We do not think that there
for such a supposition. As the author of had interested himself in the Sankhya and Bauddha philosophical works, he could have been equally interested in the Sakta school which attached so much importance to Yoga in its
is
the Karikas
practical aspect,
sftf^n^rcr^
is
on
( 5 )
DurgasaprasatI,
Anuglta
and on
( 7 ) Njrsimhottaratapaniyopanisad.
The Mandukyopanisad
has
much
in
common
Mandukya
as a
as the
x
It
Gaudapcida-K&rtkci
appears to us that Gaudapada's authorship
of the Sankhya-
Karikabhasya,
be reasonably
accepted to be correct.
Gaudapada appears to have been attracted by beginning, from which he learnt of the was Purusa being entirely different from the Prakrci which alone the by influenced was he Then lesponsible for the evolved world.
Mulamadhyamakarika
of Nagaijuna,
him
Upamsads, the oneness of Brahman, and he wrote his own Kankas to preach his Vedantic doctrine, and the especially to controvert the teachings of the Lankavatara where
upon
Buddha teaches a large number of doctrines, but fails to grasp saying the most important one which fact Gaudapada proclaims by
^1%*
II
wfacH* in IV-99.
The Contents
I
of
Gaudapada-Kaiika
is
Prakarana
:- There
who
is
all-
Thus
(1)
He
resides in the
body in the right eye, is known as Visva, ( by means of the sense- organs and the
mind
in the
waking
state.
(2)
He
is
known
as
Taijasa,
residing inside
in the
mind and
dream
state.
(3) He is known as Prajna, residing in the heart-Akasa, experiences bliss in the state of deep sleep.
and
is
known
as
the
source
miseries has
any scope.
down by
under the
by the cause
is
Ajfiana
and they
function accordingly
all-seeing
no experience of
Introduction
duality,
:
11 The Contents
of
Gaudapada-Kan'ka
xi
Ajnana which
Some
philosophers
who
believe
in
real
process of creation
Time
enjoyment or sport
But
all
known
to be
whose desires are fulfilled ), how could he be associated with creation in any capacity, without changing his own nature ?
Aptakama
is
is
but
so
reality.
When
the soul,
who
is,
to speak,
under the influence of ( Avidya or ) Maya is awakened and frees himself from the clutches of Avidya, Advaita, unoriginated, uncontaminated by the experiences in the waking,
dream or deep sleep, flashes forth. It the creation were real, it would ever remain teal, for none can ever change his nature. The various theories of creation have their use in gradually making the soul realise the Advaita which is extremely difficult to grasp,
especially
The
Corresponding to the three states ( snsr^, *ro and ggr% ) we have faagr, inTO and srr*T forms of Atman and these can be taken to resemble or as equated with sr, s and ^, the three msrrs of
grrjpr.
^rarcrerj
the symbol
srrec
is
very useful
as
it
Thus
( t )
Has
$-,
three msrTS-sf,
*%
ffstff
respectively con-
cerned with
gigftr states ).
(
m%^>
*sr$r atl ^
2 ) 3i
is
the
first
of the
( 2 ) f^rar
deals
alphabet, and
which
is first
thus resembles
xil
Gaudapflda-K&rikd
all-pervading
{k*3 can be equated
3?
;
3? is
with
as he also
experiences
all
out-side world.
So by meditating upon
with
fk^x,
3* as
resembling
fe*a"
or as
identical
all
the
^r^*
secures
pre-eminence and
his
desires ].
( 3 )
( 3 )
Similarly
as
a"3Tff
also
is
grHTO
links 3j with
he
is
3jt ?
and
state
of deep sleep.
By meditating upon
flSTfl-,
3-
as
the
^nr^
e
represents
'
measur-
down
the
ing
and
merging \
limits
of
For,
^
3*
represents the
and
the
after
55^
comes again
limit of 3*r^
and ^ merges
to give a
srTsra; state.
into
and
sr
complete idea of
[
3^.
as
By meditating upon ^ as resembling srr?T or sn^r, the ^rra secures omniscience and the
ing into the highest
].
equated with
raerg
idea about
The
which
is
as the
three quarters
to
the
highest
knowledge
or the
^im^ as without any quartefs. This known as one unit (-the '^r^rr?H^ sfa
The meditation on
from fear, for
nothing but the immutable Brahman which is the beginning, middle and end of all, all-pervading, and Allis
free
One who
other
has
known
sfoj;
in
way
is
alone
Muni par
excellence
Munis
are
called
gfts
by courtesy.
Introduction
IT The Contents
of
Gaudapada-K&riM
xih
Prakarana
It
is
II
admitted by
all
that
of the body and mountains and rivers and goes to distant lands, even though one's body is lying motionless on the
One
sees
of objects
dream
meal
is
vitiated in the
waking
state.
full
in
the
dream
state.
feels still
dream
So, there
no reason
to suppose that
they are
any way different from the objects in the dream. An object which is *r?q- must retain its state under all circumstances and can never change its nature. Again, the truth of the dictum whatever is not there before and is not there in the end,, must
in
(
'
is
self-evident.
Judged
the
the
light
of this
dictum,
states
objects
experienced
bcth in
are
false
and
Jiva or
can
be spoken
only
imagined.
himself by his
individual soul
who
is
in
turn creates
world of
his
own
for himself.
real
Nothing
to the
are
really originated.
;
The
objects in the
dream are
Objects in
only to the
real
dreamer
person
in the
who
waking
has
experienced
them.
the dream
),
Cittakala
( lasting as
objects
state
are
Dvayakala
which
imagined
but
Objects in the waking state require, both are equally false. in addition, the use of sense-organs for being perceived, but that
real.
one superimposes
the
upon the
upon
Paramatman
kinds of ideas, shapes and forms. There is naturally no limit to one's imagination ; different people ( as long as they have not secured the right knowledge ) indulge in the pastime of describing
the
(
1
Paramatman
)
)
in -various ways.
)
Thus
Gunas,
(
the
(
Atman
)
is
taken to be
( 5 )
(
Prana,
2 ) Elements, ( 3
( 7 )
Tattvas,
Pada,
Objects of sense,
)
Worlds,
(
8 ) Gods,
9 ) Vedas,
(
10
Sacrifices, ( 11 ) Enjoyer,
(1 J) Gross,
(
12 ) Object of enjoyment,
12
Subtle,
14
Possessed of form,
( 15 ) "Form-less, (
16 )
xiv
Gaudapdda- K&rtkft
1
Time, (16) Quarters, ( 8 ) Topics for discussion, (19) Universedivisions, ( 20 ) Mind, ( 21 ) Intellect, ( 22 ) Citta, ( 23 ) Merit Twenty-six principles, ( 25 ( 24 ) Twenty-five and demerit,
)
Infinite, (
28
People,
29
Asramas,
Creation,
29
(
Man and
)
Woman,
(
29
32 ) Stability, ( 33 ) All( In short, whatever one is pleased to imagine existing and so forth. about or to superimpose upon Atman, that becomes that Atman
30
)
31
Dissolution,
for
him.
in
the Vedanta
know
the soobjects
air, as false as
The Highest
for
truth can
birth,
thus be summarised as
: There
'
is
no annihilation, no
to Samsara,
of liberation,
liberation,
no
and
it is
distinct apart
from Atman.
fear
Vedic
Atman
is
as
distinction
One who
Vidhi or
his
has
realised
Atman
in
for prayers to
all
to
Pitrs
he
is
beyond
realised
Nisedha
rules,
on with
not
automaton.
the
Having
to
the Advaita
fall
down from
body conies
an end.
be
all
Prakarana III
origination
When
it is
any
talk
or
is
Paramatman himself, and it is scant courtesy shown to Jiva if we narrow his functions and powers by calling him inferior to
Param&man.
subtle
Really the Paramatman is like AkaSa, infinite and and Jivas are like Ghatakasa, Pataklsa etc. which are nothing but Akasa associated with the Upadhis, Ghata, Pata etc. When the
Paramatman.
So long
as
merged into Akasa, similarly gone, are merged into the the Upadhis are there, the Jivas retain
is
etc.
;;
Introduction
their individualities,
11 The Contents of
Gaudapada-KdriM
xv
misery.
similarly
Jivas.
Akasa
the
is
Gha^akasa
is
so
Jlva
likewise
Paramatman who
The
in the
in the
how Paramatman
;
is
similarly
Madhukanda we are told how the Atman is one like Akasa Adhyatma and Adhidaiva pairs. The oneness of Atman and
always acclaimed and their manifoldness decried by the
Jlva
Sruti.
is
Sometimes the Sruti describes creation as something arising from the Paramatman ( like sparks from fire, or jar fiom earth or a pair of scissors from iron ), but such passages must not be taken
at
their
face
value.
;
In
this
world,
intelligent
people
some
are
all
too dull-witted to
understand
the
at
once
it
is
speaks in a
undetstood by them.
Advaita
is
the
those
who
riot,
all
sorts of theories
( for,
who
it
themselves.
can possibly
then,
that
Paramatman, the
is
creation
that
it is
real creation
it
an impossinothing
bility.
When
a thing
is
was unproduced
'.
before, that
is, its
nature was
nature.
to be unproduced
Now
its
An unproduced
unproduced.
There
are
some
We
'
xvi
accept blindly
'
Gaudap&da-Karika
what
Sruti says.
'
There
'
is
here
nothing manifold
Maya powers
is
these
to
'
due
like
'.
Maya.
Some
passages
Who
Jiim
'
The production
if
it is
would
being
already produced
non-existent thing,
reality
it is
produced either in
or through
Maya
!
woman
it
to
produce
false
;
objects,
state
as well
the
is
mind
thus
its
This duality
the
when
mind
mind
ceases
duality
disappears.
When
the
ceases
to function,
is,
no perceivable, and pure, eternal, unoriginated consciousness, Brahman, flashes forth. This is how the mind free from
and under proper control,
acts.
vibration,
the
mind is still under the spell of ignorance, and has its mischiefmaking tendencies only lying dormant but the properly controlled mind enjoying the Samadhi is nothing but Brahman itself, all light,
;
and omniscient.
metaphorical one.
This
is
a true description
no
anxiety,
all is
no desire, There is
self-realisation, unoriginated
may
be called the
it.
Freer
Most of them are afraid that thereby there would be annihilation of the Atman, The greatest self-control, and perseverance are required before one can reach this goal ( some may find the task as difficult as to empty the ocean by means of taking out drops of water with a Kusa grass blade ). Desire and enjoyment" would lead the *rore away from his goal now and then; even the temporary pleasure in the Samadhi may delude him, but he, should strive with all his might against such temptations, set his face against Kama ( desire ) and Bhoga (enjoyment), concentrating his mind upon the unoriginated Brahman alone. He should awaken the deluded mind in the
Introduction
:
II The
Contents of
track
Gaudapctda-KariM
xvii
Samadhi, put
it
on the proper
the
The
tion
is
is
no
Prakarana IV
The
like
Akasa
this
is
known by Jnana which is also like Akasa and The Free-fro m-touch Yoga
'
'
knowledge
is
beneficial to all
all
dispute and
free
from opposition.
Some
produced
alone
another,
;
disputants
others
(
the Sankhyas ) declare that an existent is the Vaisesikas ) declare that a non-existent
(
can be produced.
Thus they carry on dispute with one and they controvert their opponents' position, with the
The
sjsttfksnf^g; is thankful to the *r^TS3nn3[3[s ( Sankhyas ) for showing how futile the arguments of the SMr-EisVrf^s ( ttrwss ) are, and to the latter for controverting the former. Both the wm* crates and STHrErshnf^s forget the basic principle that nothing can change one's own nature. If a thing is 3**r?r, it would ever remain and vice versa. It is the 3=r^g[> it can never be changed into
nature of
all
and
According to the
into
^r?q*!*hrr^>
the g?rw
that
itself
is
(wh)
transformed
is
WAV
(
smaj
)>
which means
;
what
being produced
(
the
is
%nim
sreur ) itself
if so,
how
is
which
is
snr
not
gsKUT
so,
an <*
!
to
like
the 3?pf
No
which can prove to us that an srer thing and there would be the fault of endlessness
srr?* 3?rr*
assumed
that a
xviii
Gaudapdda-Kdrtkd
of the grr^nferri^s that area:
The view
(
mm
etc. )
produces
mi
) is
An
^
(
3^
^
?
is
non-existing before
production,
eFroJSrmift
the potter,
wheel,
work upon
will
have to
*TT3"
Thus
is
they argue
^to
is
in
But
this
For, according to
both
or cer&t; the
whole
sr<r^ or
%m*
must
also have
To
set*?
produces the
the father
mm wre^*
Wrw
To
of
you ought
mi and
(
1
q?rcnp
mi
;
and
mm
cannot obviously
come
into
existence
simultaneously
otherwise,
we
will
between the
(
first
left
mi cannot
mm>
for the
mm
has to be there
to
produce the
mi*
The mete statement that mi and are interdependent (.3 ) and mutually produce each other would not do. You must tell us which of these is the must necessarily be ^# ) and ( which
mm
mm
which
to do.
is
the
mi
which must be
m*
).
But
this
you
are unable
Thus
comes
ously.
first,
mi
or
mm
qpp$
un proven. Nobody can say, which and without the ^xrw*, ^r^T^n^R and cannot be produced simultane-
mm
Taking
all
consideration,
is
the wise
philosophers have
doctrine
1
decreed that
non-origination
Introduction
'
II The
contents oj
Gaudapada- Rclrika
sprout
(
xix
The maxim
is
where mutual
first
cOT=Erc&W3"
seen
this illustration.
fact that
5 )
The very
or
sfr*ot,
you
which comes
:f
first, q?nf is
a thing
what
is
there piior
to
production.
the upshot of this
all is
is
So,
that
nothing
or from another.
Nothing
originated,
non-existent or existent-non-existent.
which
is
how do we
(
get
the
experience
?
of
knowledge
objects of
So, the
existence of external
knowledge
(
to be admitted
on the strength of
logical reasoning
so argue the
mp^-Tri^s
),
To
this
the
reply
) that
would be
is
( in
The
(
or g*fr{flOT
)>
for
without
Citta
(
The
or
of.
its
(
own
accord,
)
objects or appearances
Arrhabhasa
knows
no independent object
at
any time.
believe
in
some kind of
by Citta
is
Gaudapada
lays
down
his proposition
them
as
under
(
originated; those
who admit
(
their origina-
that
is,
they make an
),
To
to
Aja Citta
or
Cittadrsya
is is
believe in
the
change of one's
if
waking
state also
The
Citta sees in
the
lies
dream things by means of another body on the bed all the time ) going to
'
xx
different regions;
all
Gaudapada-Kdrikd
admit that this body of the dreamer
state,
is false.
the
Citta can be
waking
Citta
).
So,
we
a non-existent
come from
^.
In the
come from 3?^ come from ^rg; and sth^ waking state ( as in dream ), one
An 3?^
can not
can not
For those
who
have enunciated
are perceived
as a
temporary
phase,
the doctrine
of origination
on the ground that such objects practical use. But ultimately such
people
come
appearances
is
unoriginated,
without any
duality,
unmoving
and unruffled.
The
crooked
brand
compared
it
to a
fire-brand.
When
the
fire-brand
whirled about,
etc.
which
are
not seen
when
the fire-brand
is at rest;
come from
is at rest,
outside,
fire-
when
the brand
or go out.
No
^ribpRor^re can be
seen between the fire-brand and these forms which must be declared
to be unreal and inscrutable.
In
the
rise to
various objects or
Dharmas which
nor
So, these
Dharmas
by the
Citta,
is
the
Citta originated
by the Dharmas
some
kind of origination for the Dharmas ) and so the wise philosophers proclaim the doctrine of non-origination
'
So long
as the obsession
about the
tg<*r$5*rnr
continues,
there
^ould be no freedom from the results of the causal relation, and from the Samsara; when the obsession ceases, the Samsara also comes to naught. Everything is originated by Maya and that is consequently not permanent ; unoriginated can have no -end* The Dharmas that are spoken of as originated by some, are not
production
is
real existence.
Introduction
II The Contents oj
Gaudapada*Rdrikd
xxi
as
same
is
true of
Dharmas*
In the
non-eternal
are meaningless.
In dream
we
find
on
non-dual
in the
waking
all
state also*
In
kinds of
objects which are really not different from his Citta, and are perceithe same thing happens in the waking state. vable by him alone Both Citta and Citta-drsya are interdependent and are not different from each other. As the objects in dream or those created by magic or yogic power are born and perish, so also all these Dharmas The Highest truth can once are born and perish due to Maya. no origination is possible, originated, No Jlva is more be stated as
;
:
nothing
is
is
All the
vable
is
void of contact
unchangeable.
What
exists
on account of Maya
does not exist in reality ( other schools of philosophy may postulate A thing imagined as unoriginated by Maya can to the contrary ). not be really unoriginated. When the absence of duality is realised,
there
is
no cause
is
for
<
origination
'.
This
unorithis,
ginated,
having realised
one secures the highest place ( Brahman ) free from grief, desire and Once it is realised that there are no independent Drsya things, fear.
the Citta turns back from
state
its
wrong
of the
Citta,
unoriginated
and non-dual
all its
is
realised
by the
enlightened ones.
The
(
eternal glory
and
associated
is not,
is
Brahman or Atman ) is wrongly taken to be involving duality and ideas about < is, dharma with any
or
is
and
not,
is
not
is is
not,
who
realises
said to be all-knowing.
secured this
want after he has omniscience and the highest place aimed at by the
a person
middle or end
This
this is the
xxii
Gaudapada- K&riko,
wise have described
The
chis
what
is
duality
their
admitted.
would be
entitled to
have omniscience.
All
is
like
Akasa
there
nothing manifold about them in any way. All are enlightened from the very beginning ; all are likewise tranquil and pure from
the very beginning. Every thing is thus unoriginated and same. Those who believe in manifold nature of Jivas or Dharmas are narrow-minded and dull-witted only those of large intellect can
;
realise the
unoriginated eternal.
;
The
there
is
unoriginated
Dharmas have
hence Jnana
is
this
Jnana by nature
the person
All
it is
said to be contactless.
Even
the
slightest idea of
mani-
comes to grief, for his Jnana ceases to be dharmas are thus naturally pure, enlightened from the beginning, and liberated, so realise the wise ones.
foldness,
1
Asaiiga \
The The
free
is
natural
and cannot be
transferred.
Gautama Buddha
(
highest place
or
Moksa
difficult to
Was Gaudapada
in
)
a Buddhist ?
of
Dasgupta
pp.
his
History
Indian
Philosophy*
Vol.
I,
423-42^
there
pdda was a Buddhist, in great detail and his conclusion is " that is sufficient evidence in the Karikas for thinking that he was
possibly himself a Buddhist
and considered that the teachings of the with those of Buddha Gaudapada assimilated all the Buddhist Sftnyavada and Vijfianavada teachings and thought
Upanisads
tallied
good of the ultimate truth preached by the Upani?ads. Hindu or a Buddhist, so long as
hit? eduction
:
III
Was Gaudapada
a Buddhist
for
xxiii
we
Buddha and
for his
confines
himself to
all
few
salient
Prof.
Vidhusekhara goes
a Buddhist.
In our Notes,
we have shown
in detail
how
the inter-
pretations put
on the Karikas by Prof. Vidhusekhara, do not bring out the meaning he wants to extract from them. Here we would be discussing the pioblem in a more general manner.
must be made clear how the two Professors have chosen to ignore some basic facts in their enthusiasm for glorifying Buddhism
To
begin with,
it
( i
The
following verse
is
traditionally
regarded as giving
sft^gpreRfTOT^
q^r<Tff
^ SSTW^ ^ ftw
Here Gaudapada is mentioned as either the teacher's teacher ( or, any rate a predecessor ) of Safikaiacarya. It is simply unthinkable that, if Gaudapada were a Buddhist, he would have been so solemnly selected every day in the Sankaraplthas that undoubtedly Traditions are often, it is true, stand for the traditional Hinduism.
at
not be ignored.
(
imm ^r^ra^s^rcrefen^rsf
if
3RU%m*rar u$r
etc.
)\ He thus refers to Gaudapada, most respectfully as a great Acarya who knows the traditional Vedanta teachings. Such a reference
would be quite out of order,
7
Same
as
sfteq-fsr;
q-jf
the metre.
sxiv
Gandapctda-Karika
Karikas.
The state of Moksa is called srrr^ q^ ( IV. 85 ) in the Would a genuine Buddhist refer to Moksa in terms of
?
a rival philosophy
(
(
The
basis the
Mandukyopanisad
5 )
doctrines,
his
Gaudapada
at the
end of
his
work
Buddha (^a^ppr vmz*K IV, 99 ). It is true that attempts have been made to explain away this passage, so as not to be regardtaught by
Gaudapada
Bauddhas
fNt
5^[ftfcr
^ ?rfE?
f^rfsrr tprffetr
%m
Bauddhas,
the
shown
to be
wrong
in
their views.
it
appears
how
the
question of
We
(1)
question
shall
now
briefly
forth
by
f^qgfr
s^
in IV.
1.
refers to *fsgmg c.
We
have
shown
in
how
number
of
times and that fjq^f *** was never accepted as a peculiar epithet
of
Buddha,
There
is
a greater probability
10 Naraya$a or Suka.
(2)
used
in his
There are various terms current in Buddhistic philosophy, Karikas by Gaudapada, such as ^t4, ^rg, ^r^rrcv crrf^f,
\fati9 Nrrw
8
mfo
etc.
at the
See B. (X K.
I.
Annals Vol
XXXII
pp. 166-173
Dvipadam Varam by
R. p. Karmaikar,
Introduction
III
Was Gaudapada
a Buddhist
xxv
Gaudapada had studied Buddhistic philosophy very well, which no one denies. We have shown in the Notes, how Gaudapada uses some of the above terms ( vnJ, #f i% etc. ) in a more or less Vedantic sense. Gaudapada did accept the Buddhistic terminology; in order to
be in a better position to contradict the Buddhist tenets successfully.
( 3 )
WT^TWT
expression
referred
to
so respectfully
in
IV.
2,
is
The
which
% W%X to end
:
:
l
sn?q"3T*n*r is
literature.
Gaudapada owes
to
the Bhagavadgita
refers to
jramsJ
^
as
swrtft
wTsnsn&mg
wwt
is
sfrawg**the panacea
-.
14
V. 21
all
misery,
The
simile
of
the
fire-brand
s^TcT
is
peculiarly
Buddhistic.
Gaudapada need not have gone to the Buddhists for the simile. found used in Ramayana (Kiskindhakapda) 9 , Mahabh&rata (Kamaparvan) 10 and Yogavasistha". The idea of whirling the fire-brand could have been easily suggested by the expression wms**Hhi?T?f?r *rarre?rft mnm in the Gita ( XVIII-61 ).
3T$TrT is
( 5 )
which
There is a large number of passages in Gaudapadakarika seem to be the echoes of the Mulamadhyamakarikas of
Nagarjuna, such as
W( * arm* fiefi*^
?hr arraft
IV-4
)
).
nm m tot*
TO
*$f
*rrfa
* %r%$*g
smk
IV-22
3lc5|cWpsri^TI
1>^p35cJ?
3
II
Kiskindh5kan4a XLVl.
I
13.
10
11
SRSTcl^K*^
W* 31*^
**?&
I
arnaparvan,
86. 42.
WISPTeW^^Jf^PP
&$fa ^TOS
fkV^Jr^tt ^R^
II
V.
78. 1*
^!cm##i:
the
later
<fcs5gps*fam: H v.
si
22.
majoi? portion of the Yogavasistha can be assigned to the period than that of Gaudapada, but there are undoubtedly some strata in that work, which belong to the earlier period.
xxvi
Gaudapada- Kdrika
can be shown
with those
in
Gaudapada's
work.
(
The
expression
g^
in its various
forms
mentioned
in
IV-99.
in the Notes,
has been
shown
how
is
in
most
and
cases used
it is
much
in
it.
The ^rg^u%^ idea mentioned in (IV-83, 84) is borrowed ( 7 ) by Gaudapada from Samjaya Belattiputta, a pre-Buddhist heretic.
Even
if
Gaudapada
is
8 )
It
may
mean
the
Purvamlmansa \
scholars
to
It
Buddhist and
that,
he
preached
or that he incorporated
Buddhistic ideas in
There
is
no doubt
carefully
(
the various philosophical systems current in his the Sankhya, Buddhistic, Gita )
in addition to
own
the
time
such as
Upanisads and
evolved his famous doctrine of Ajativada, which is certainly far removed from the main tenets of Buddhist philosophers, viz. ( 1 ) Momentariness ( ksanikatva ) and ( 2 ) Dependent origination ( pratityasamutpada ) which all schools of Buddhistic philosophy
accept.
The
Sunyavada
of Nag&rjuna,
Buddhist in disguise,
%%
Gaudapada thus seems to have been neither a Buddhist nor a but one who had a profound respect for
See notes
p.
Ut
Introduction
IP The
xxvii
who
his time,
that they
test
of
logical reasoning.
He
hence
and conviction
was possible
for
Saftkaracarya
and other
IV
The
Title of the
Prakaranas thereof
fifteen
Karikas
^*Tfi*rerr%r, or *n^n^nr%r ( in the plural or the singular ) or srnm^n^r. Fortunately there is no discrepancy as regards the number of the Karikas, Similarly there are no material variants or different readings worth noting as regards the text itself. Prof. Vidhusekhara
Bhattacharya has collated a large number of Mss. but nothing very
striking has
also looked into several
been revealed in the matter of the text proper. more Manuscripts at the Bhandarkar
We
Insti-
tute and two more specially obtained from Wai, but have not found any new readings worth considering. One Ms. No. 171 at the B. O. R. I. which contains the third ( srlaT^q* ) and the second (tcrsqwr) Prakaranas calls the work grq^srir^. The Buddhist writer 3m%?r%cT who quotes a number of Karikas, quotes them as from ^Fct^r^r* One commentator on the Pancadasi seems to call Gaudapada's -work Hnrf^q^riTT-E 13 an <i Gaudapada as crrm^TT. Prof. Vidhusekhara apparently likes to call the work strwsm^r. There is no particular reason why one title should be regarded as
preferable to the other.
The
simpler
title
nr^qr^rf^r appears to us
As regards the
titles
there
is
no contro-
taw^ro,
srtftsr^&r aU(*
3*^^rfosrsRor.
13
The
title
RT^^ITO^ilH^K
is
also found in
some colophons.
xxviii
Gau$apfrda-K&riU
to
(
K-bhasya/4 the second Prakarana proves logically the tars* of |fr and hence the name h^t l3?ft ^wsrftTOFrnr fipiW nvw^ )
hm
%awsr$OT.
Perhaps the
real
reason
is
that the
first
Karika in the
second Prakarana begins with the word lem (it would be remembered that the %*hf*nT? is so called because it begins with the expression
fcSrftoi ).
The
third Prakarana
reality
is
it
like-
wise proves
the
of the srtcT
eroTtcrerTfqr
tcrewfffsrrfr
is
^rascTOCTdtaw
there
(
(jcfar sr^trra; ).
The
fourth Prakarana
obviously
called srarrcT^TTT^Tsri^^
Karikas 47-50
The
first
Prakarana
is
variously described
and
sft^rctarercT. In
is
favour of
the argument
usually advanced
The K-bhasya remarks While frsr cirofi^rcraotarq' srsm q $mmw*^*m?WcTTHr!Tr%q^r*^'* Manduthe based upon mainly it is true that the first Prakarana is
that
it is
based mainly on
arrow
or Sruti.
kyopanisad, there
differentiate
it
is
it
so as to
it
smrar.
Besides, the
word srrim
sectarian
qra*T*mm, Ireropr ) and not with the general UpaThis also wilt nisadic tenets which are referred to in the Karikas. show how the name srroffsnw does not seem to be appropriate for
doctrines
( cf.
the
Karikas
as
whole.
The concluding
is
sections
of the
first
(sftgw
would be
ftf^r
^* ^ gRHcm
1-2 9
as
).
The name
3*rfttroo?qr
it,
or 3tfgroqr*r?rr or better
far
still 3ft|prt
more appropriate
Prakarana
The Maridukyopanisad
and commentators on the
contains
first
14 We have described the bhasya on the Karikas, attributed to Sankara"c2rya as K, bhasya, as we are of opinion that the bhasya could not have been written-by the great Sankara, separate paper on this topic is going to be published by us in the near future. 15 Tha colophons in Mss. giving the titles of sections or chapters of a work vary so much that they can be regarded as but noting the individual lanoy of the copyist or the commentator. There are more than half a dozen titles found in Mss. for some of the AdhySyas in such a well-known work as the Bhagavadgits.
1 :
Introduction
The Mdydukyopanisad
the
etc.
xxix
the
as part of as follows,
Mandukya and
distribute
twenty-nine Karikas
with
the introductory
expression
CO
(2)
Mancjukya
1-6
followed by Karikis
1-9
33
7
8-1
>,
10-18
19-23
2 A~2>3
(3) (4)
9>
12
the
work
( sftftahnnfiTfirct
^1 flr^qBqrorw* ^WT$
1
*nroww?rfN sr^tir^3Hcr^tm?^^m^Rqr&
According to Madhvacarya
(
)-
13th century
and
his followers,
Varuna in the form of a frog ( the Karikas had been revealed earlier Madhva quotes passages in this connection from to Brahmadeva ). the Padma and Garuda Puranas and also the Harivarhsa, but these are not found in any of the editions of those works available so far; Kuranarayana, a follower of the Ramanuja school, says that the
Karikas corroborate the sense of the Mantras which, being ^stht&t,
need no corroboration.
This
(1)
raises the questions
Do
Mandukya, and
(2) if not,
what
is
how
do they come to be
Mandukyopanisad
first
The answer
to the
be an emphatic
No,
(r)
(
the prose portion ) are given and there is no indication in the Mss, formed part of the Maridukya, as is clear from
only
the
commentators
who seem to
The Upanisads
and
it
would be going
xxx
against
all
Gaudapada-K&riha
after all a
tradition to
human
being
(4)
The
rightly refers to
tradition (
Gaudapada merely
)
as
one
who knows
the
Vedanta
^WTOwft ^
admitted that sometimes the Karikas are regarded as &ruti by some writers, but that simply would prove that the word
(5)
It is
'
Sruti
'
is
It is
nothing can
as
known human
Mandukyopanisad proper.
the Karikas
srlrff
$3m W?a
mean
time
that
are regarded as
would
Gaudapada
the
when
to have his
as
it
lived at least some centuries earlier than the Mandukya was written, so as to be famous enough work quoted in it The Mandukya is generally regarded
!
one of the old Upanisads, while according to the above theory, would have "to be assigned to the 7th or the 8th century at the
!
earliest
are
made
to
show
that
lived in
the
first"
century B. C. or
absurdity
basic
of a
an Upanisad
The
expression
are distributed
3^" sgr^r *rarr% with which the Karikas among- the Mantras of the Mandukya, no doubt
Brahmanas)
c^cq-q-
suggests that the Karikas existed before the Upanisad; similar expressions occur in the other old Upanisads (and
in the Taittinyopanisad,
also.
Thus
we have
all
the expression
sgfo: used as
these cases, we have a prose passage and then comes the emphatic dignified cr^<? #$:, introducing verses corroborating what has been stated
as eight times.
many
In
stating a
particular topic
we have
sgtasr
or
similar context.
The Chandogya
place
and ushers as many as fifteen verses there, but there %0 doubt whether these are genuine or interpolations.
-
sgfar
wfo
is
in
one
reason
In later
Introduction
The Mdndukyopanisad
etc*
xxxi
Upanisads
we
or as
many
gi^sfo?**?^ etc).
Slokas are used by
briefly
superficial
sgrsps are
introduced,
shows
that the
way oi clinching the argument or coiroborating and emphatically the argument used before in longer prose
In fact, the expression rr^*T
passages.
tative ring
^f^r
^rfrf has
an authori-
about
it,
compared with the docile and timid expression with which Gaudapada's Karikas are introduced.
as
(ro)
pointed out
as
how Gaudathe
is
commentary on
matter
it.
the
so obvious
The
Karikas
refer
mentioned in the Upanisad, fail to explain important terms therein, enumerate several views about creation
matters not
which matter is not even hinted at in the Upanisad and so on. Thus the first group of Karikas fails to explain the important words ^HTSf and ^g^tore^rras^ i^ the prose portion of the Mantra, The Karikas
and gjftrwre
so on.
use the expression WffiT iti place of 1%^ ; shtototoRj *TOWT in the prose portion are not found in the Karikas and
Similarly the prose portion appears to explain
some terms
in
the Karikas.
There
about the
But all this criticism is based upon the g, fkw, sniff etc. wrong supposition that the Karikas are a commentary on the
r
w ords
Mantra prose portion or vice versa. The proper view is that the Karikas have the Mantra portion as their basis and Gaudapada emphasises only those points which are useful for his own purpose
which
use
is
to establish
the Ajativada.
in
Prof.
Vidhusekhara makes
of certain
Karikas
the
first
our opinion
detail in the
Om,
those
who
believe
^f^^ft^f^cTr
Visitadvaitins
refers to those
who
and not
to
the
Advaita
xxxii
Gaudapada-Rarika
Vedantins as
is
clear
<s\*k*.
Similarly Karika
1-8, |<n<r ^i *2$r does not contain Gaudapada's view, but has in mind the WTOTrffos, according to whom creation
is
mr^mTOOTsr
real
The
the Karikas
in
the
first
Prakarana
is
therefore as follows
(i)
:
Mandukyopanisad.
The
They
cT^(
sqfa^
)rasr*ore<T.
Gaudapada could not have written the Upanisad which could not have under any circumstances any human author.
(ii)
(iii)
they are
srr^rshnrffcr
as
The
but were
similar slokas
have
several
how
did they
come to be associated with it in such an intimate manner ? Bearing in mind that this intimate association is found mostly in the commentaries on the Karikas, the answer appears to be that the Karikas on account of their having the Mandukyopanisad as their basis, and their importance as a well-known work on Advaita, came as a rule
Sankaracarya quotes the KSrika
his bha"sya on $fifrf
16
1.
16
3=RTI%TIW
8,
ffft
9?T
^i
Sfftzffl in
Brahmasutra
ill
II.
1.
3W%$33P3h
are
^<TT*Wf
(
the bhSsya on
The Karikas
11 and 15
^P
cll
^ff qqi
Suresvara, Sankara's
( 1.
)
fcmpil,
in his Naiskarmyasiddhi
*tWR$
*J^cH ?Wt flljp Similarly in his etc. expressly mentioning that they are Gauda( pada )*s, BrhadvSrtika, Suresvara quotes some of the KarikSs. In the face of this evidence it is idle to deny that the Karikas in the first Prakarana were written by Gau<JapSda.
crrf^?t
fif^^
and
W*W\
S^RSTFTcr:
Introduction
:
VI Are
by
the four
Prakaranas inter-tela'ed
xxxiit
to be studied side
the
and
is
even
now
ssary to read
kept up in the Pathasalas. It is therefore unneceany deeper meaning in the expression 3*lrar sgi^r mfet
a
which innocent-looking expression has unnecessarily caused such furore amongst students of Advaita Vedanta.
VI
inter-related
Prof. Vidhusekhara argues out the case that the four Prakaranas
are not inter-related, but are independent treatises
He
criticises
and comes
the conclusion
that
succeeded in proving
its thesis.
The arguments
at the
first
its
comments
:
Prakararta
(
i
The
first
Prakarana
is
how
duality is
when
the
sublated.
is"
Dvaita
is false,
not so
this is logically
The fourth Prakarana discusses the rival doctrines ( 4 ) opposed to Advaita and points out how they are opposed to one
another,
K-bhasya, in
its
introductory
comments
at the
beginning of the
second Prakarana says that the existence of the one without a second was stated in the first Prakarana on the strength mostly
of the Sruti passages.
The second
5
cm
xxxiv
Gau$ap&da-K&rtka
third Prakarana
The
The
feeiBg
how own
the rival
false
1
theories
nature
?
and
toto to the
above exposition of
it.
His objections
:
(
i )
The
firsr
Prakarana
is
not snniwrsr,
it
contains
some
17
We
comments in full, which clearly K-bhasya had a good grasp of the Karikas as
^cWR^ 3|qql%ftft3
H^IOTR
sspMf
*mWH
firmer
gni
w&t
$mm m*j$
^wiHc%rc^HRwft
Introduction
VI
An
the
jom Piakaranas
inter -related ?
xxxv
critical, that
This objection simply shows that Prof. Vidhusekhara isrhyperall. Surely K-bhasya wants to say that the .first is
as
it
Prakarana dealing
xrg<TT3[
it
Brahman by
implication,
stand
upon
Sruti,
not that
2 )
I
The
'
If the
connection hetweetl
) to
Books
and
II is
is it
be, then
why
its
that the
say
so just at
easily
all
The answer
left for
would be
logical,
critics.
that
if
authors
there
commentators or
the
to
But the
that authors do
as
not, as
manner
as
one would
like
say that
it,
there
are
if
And
we
&e
"Simil&xiy,
how many
out
why
?
that
was
his
intention
But we have
The
criricrstft
\&3W
^RlfsrasfNT
Prakaranas
II
and
III at all.
For,
in
both
Prakaraoas*
non-duality
'
The answer
the emphasis
is
that
is
the
different.
deals
Thus
two Prakaranas
to the ultimate
problem
is
different.
4 ) Prof* Vidhusekhara would like to enunciate a general rule that a Prakarana is entitled to be called an independent work if the
xxxvi
contents in
it
Ga udapdda-Karikd
could be understood without any reference
to the
earlier Prakarana.
by any one.
In that
shown
to be comprising at least
It is
no use arguing
that
it
if
we have
be a connecting
link,
in
the case
of a
thereof and
it is
to point this
represent
the
spirit,
we may
as
Karikas
now
(
and then, makes use of four Karikas while describing the similarity
IV-49-52
idea
in self-same
words
he
as
could have easily said simply that Vijnana acts in the same
Alata, instead of repeating the
way
word
for
word
or writes three
IV-68-70
),
first
due importance
to both Sruti and Tarka, and discussing the general topic of Advaita,
though with
a different
one another.
The Fourth
though
in
his
Prakarapa,
unlike
the
first
three
Prakaranas, can
piece
distinct
of work,
three
Prakaranas.
Prof* Vidhusekhara,
of
K-bhasya's
comments
about
the
it.
fourth
by over-stating
This
is
Gaudapada
r%
1
says,
v?m*t
11
introduction
:
VI Are
xxxvii
Here obviously the Asatkaryavada of the Vaisesikas and the Satkaryavada of the Sankhyas are referred to and they are shown to destroy each other and thus to help in proclaiming the Ajativada. Later the whole concept of causality is attacked and the conclusion drawn cr# ft *nfor ferret: tffcfirfwr ( 19 ) when we remember that the Vaibhasika Bauddhas did accept the Satkaryavada, and the
Yogacara Bauddhas the Astkaryavada,
it
is
idle to
Karikas 25-27
t%tt
* ^5^??r5
snajit ft
l*
the arguments of the f^rtwift Bauddhas wrong and Kafika 28 Bauddhas *w?fttWrn3[
make use of
to prove
the
is
f^p^s themselves,
Similarly in
the Vijfianavada
is
refuted,
ft
and
in
mk n
18 We have discussed in detail the different interpretations of this KSrika*, in our paper * a ( IV. 1 ) as also the meaning of the expression f^f
Dvipadaih Varam
'
Annals, B. 0. R,
Vol.
XXXII,
Pp. 166-173,
xxxviii
Gaudapada-Kdrikd
directly says that his philosophical
Gaudapada
from
doctrine
is
different
that preached
by Gautama Buddha.
the
is
position
taken
by the K-bhasya
unassailable
None
who
It is
and others
that
exposition
of Buddhist
philoso-
have
these
tried
to
them in this light. In the Notes, we show what should be the proper interpretation of
Here we
shall
passages.
briefly
discuss
few
general
objections.
(
ri^a[t
i
Gaudapada
salutes
is
referred to as
Gaudapada seems
at the
to
Mangalasloka both
end in imitation of certain Buddhistic works. He presumably wanted to meet the Buddhists on their own
beginning and
at the
in their
calls
own
Buddha
him g^ff gr
and
calls his
Master
ft^arf snr (
the best of
human
beings
).
We
have already shown elsewhere that tI^t sr* cannot be regarded as a peculiarly Buddhist expression ; it is found in the Mahabharata,
and
it
who
is
traditionally
regarded as Gau4apada's
or to
forth.
whom
come
Similarly
literature
to
in
Buddhist
and Gaudapada
sINeto
gM
(
msHHsmg
22
)
y^fta* *&
*
II.
14 and
q-
f|
^T^T^r *ttt
......V.
ct
firar$|:srOTta etc#
VI 2?
some
of his Karikas
on those
etc,
The main
of
doctrines taught in
fourth
Prakarana are
the
unreality
the
world
and
Introduction
VI Are
the four
xxxix
Madhyaetc,
The
are
Buddhist writers.
The
use of a very
(
number of Buddhist
wcjrg,
srwac
time
),
aira^,
mwu
(hm<i,
t^\^^ ir%*r>
}
Sf \*> %&k>
this points
out
obsessed
by
Buddhistic ideas
We
ments involved
have discussed in the Notes at the proper places, the arguHere we shall deal with in the above contention.
It
may
from them.
But
this
does not
mean
that
attacks the
own
own
phraseolo gy,
wants to prove
how
their teachings are wrong. Ciaudapada perhaps feels sorry that the Buddhist philosophers, having come so near the truth of Ajati or
oneness of Atman, by preaching the Vijnanavada or Sunyavada were not bold or rationalists enough to understand the Vedantic Nirvana and hence missed their bus. Thus the Madhyamikas merely content themselves with following a middle path between eternality
and
Ajativada. Gaudapada and the Bhagavadglta to fall had ample material in the Upanisads back upon, in order to promulgate his Vedantic theories- The zmx simile and Mayahastin illustration need not be regarded as specially Buddhistic, as they had been well-known in pre-Buddhistic literaGaudapada clearly points out wherein he differs from ture as well.
annihilation,
Karika IV. 99, by his statement %n^ g%* *ttfacP3> ( Buddha has told many things, but this viz Ajativada, he -has not As we have pointed out in the Notes, ifoff%* *fot?P3; has told )'.
the Buddhists in
a direct reference to the passages
.... mfa*q\sf ere, put in the mouth of Buddha a score of times in the Lankavatara, Attempts are- made
by Prof. Vidhusekhara and others to explain away the expression wfacrsc so as to make it conform with Buddhistic notions, %cT?f
Thus we
it is
5R3[
meaning
that
XL
Gaudapdda-KdrikA
but intuitively by every one
that the
nature of existence
upon
not be understood
permanent
later
real
element as
its
resort or
(
They
Atman
cannot play
The Sunyavadins by their categorical statement that Sunya, made their Sunyavada itself Sunya. Their attempts to make the Sunyavada a Madhyama way between two extremes in
conformity with the supposed teachings of Buddha, satisfied no one. &ankaracarya attacked this weak spot in the armour of the Sunya*
vadins,
and showed
how
sound only
Both the Vijnanavada and Sunyavada can become philosophically if an unchangeable permanent reality is admitted,
and
Buddha
failed to
do
this
according to Gaudapada.
The
nent,
common
with
unchangeable
Principle
is the Highest truth or Reality and Advaita cannot have any quarrel with any philosophical theories preaching Dvaita, for all such theories have their ultimate basis in Advaita, being themselves mere products of imagination.
originated.
That alone
(3)
The
expression
^m (S#* *m**n%
T
IV. 90 ) refers to
Ri^mmara:
w$wm.
Gaudapada seems to refer to sstwt as well as to the here by the deliberately chosen expression m h W0u ld be easily conceded that and fo $*, are more pointedly referred to in the r$umim than in the
^ *wm. m
;
m^^
z&mim
Prakarana
^h
in
the
fourth
;
urm*
91
far*
OT from*, 72
...
mm & <n*
28. etc.
),
Introduction
oj
Gaudapada-Karika
xu
where
the
obviously to
show how
There
is
the
Buddhistic
ideas
to
thus no reason
first
single
and complete
treatise
VII
The Sources
of
Gaudapada-Karika
Gaudapada, according to the present state of our knowledge must have lived about the 6th century, and could be presumed to have been acquainted with the important philosophical works that were current in his own times. It is possible to point out to similarities of thought and expression in Gaudapada-Karika and It would other works that undoubtedly had been written earlier. not perhaps be a correct statement to make that Gaudapada was
drew his inspiration from, such works, but it can be said that he was influenced by such works and that he made The expression occasional use of them in writing his Karikas, sources is thus used by us in a broader sense.
indebted
to,
or
'
We
in the
(
give below a
list
a large portion of
Prakarana
obviously based on
are
the
not
Aitareya Brahmana
Karika
I.
25
II
asTOmarnvqwrr
Brhadaranyakopamsad
mi etc.
Karika
I.
26 3Ts^tt*wrWTrf
3
etc.
3m*&^nBr:
*r *ra
(IV, 4.13)
3.7)
II.
sraft%...( IV.
?TO^
IL
5
srffcrr
(IV.
<Rft*T
3.
14-18
*W3Tf<rfctw&
cf **T 3TC
$^<SW
[ iSf
WTO"
30,11
Gaudapada-Karikd
II.
36 5TOTgT^OT#ra;
(
HI. 5.1 )
( II. 5 )
III.
12
$grn#r
srfcT%rT^
1
<r*
&
ngforr or
?5f sri
g3TR^
1
III.
13 sftrnfiTsfh^^Twr^r
?r?*mT?m
( II.
1
4.6 )
II.
sr^?T
III.
fTHrsr
fawn
:
?rs
5rnm% r%^^
(IV, 4.19)
(
15
^fr5r>^fefi% sfarf
^r^rr ^ra*:
gw ft*srfe%-T
IIL
24
^
^
1.20 )tf
Rwrft^rRr
^^01.5.19)
sqTWrA
smicT srrssrr ^r%
sq*ifoiftftfit
^ffar
III.
26
(II. 3- 6 )
(III. 9.26;
III.
35
cr^ftwaw
III
3TW 1
Chandogya
Karika
II. II.
II.
20
21
srrnr
jfa smnfM^
<TR[T%d
ssr
<I(5r $fcT
^^
etc.
1 1
4-5)
6)
)
srgror:
(IV. 4-8)
i I. 3
22
iJtarftrflt
nikv
ere.
III.
7
13
15
^*i*w wrens^
^^jRtaRqc^
^irff^?^fr|:
VI, 1.4
III.
VI. 8.7
III.
(VI. 13.4-6)
III.
23
^toi&tft
*rft
etc.
III.
34 fosterer H?r^r
IV
Karika
! !
Gits
3
5
srrc^isFcrm sn?
...
1%
^W&rtt
to:
V. 22
...^l^RT^l%c?m
f&<3KT
*
I
sr <rrq?r ...
(V. j, 10)
I.
..^cJfsjfjsq':
inferior
sforeSfe
(
(
strict:
I.
19
mgr^q-rfcrrgrcr^nq-TiTTf%-
otrr: 3T^nrrrTT^m6%
*n
XV. 7
X. 33
XVII.
)
I.
23
3*$m
?ra% fn*ac*i
*r^:
*r ipr
*n
) ;
Introduction
VII
Th
Sources oj
Gaudapada-Kanka
*V
fs
xLiii
I.
25 go=fra
srsr
sr<j&
^:
^C
srcrr^TT
reform
ifcfk
ftsrra;
**:
...
(XVII. 23-24)
(
I.
28
sraii
hw
Vnmz
1
XVIII. 1
^TRim
II.
II.
^T5Tn5Ft...
(XIII. 17)
(IX. 25)
20
20
21
^rfTRTfrr
^
i
cTfij?:
II. II.
%crr q^rr
f fit
fir
22
^ afty ^ aft?
=sr
\mn
...
^ftrewrs^T
s?5 ft
IX. 25 (IV. 31
)
IV. 23-24
II.
22
tffc&fir
^jftrff
^Rrnrf
ST
*Jtaw
(
(
^ srg^r
)
)
^
II t
IX. 24
^T^TS^^F
23
XIII. 22
*$
^r% *tfflr
sjw
...
^frmflrarnr ... (
IV. 6 )
^rwfJr
g^ S*t (
1V
8 )
II.
24
cutcJ sfcr
^r^r%^r
(XL 32)
^Spff:
wfosw*
II.
29
STO^^TOT
...
...
*n
11
*n^: ^ *&
&
*
( X. 34 ) (XVII. 3)
( JI - 5 6 )
rrsiTf : ^rg^fir
ere;
II.
35
ra*RW5&F^
( IV -
I0
III.
III.
13 itaT?ffreRTc9q;
^^:^ftfir...(Vin..i9)
an*
^rt^rr rwftc m5-r%^5TOr:etc. (XIV. 18,
x6 3irn?rf%rr%^rr
$fatrt&ra^
m&
XVII. 2
III.
III.
21
?r
mffrgtt jt?5
21 75>^qr*rr*ft
<
TOwftsFT**
-
n -^7)
srefiRwl
few?
sflrcrwrcet
*Wt*rfti
III.
(XVIIL59)
(VI. 25)
^rr... (VI. 25)
34
firqf hnpr
^^mr
wfhwri
III.
III.
38 3UcWVT
cTf r ^Tflf
snwfrw iw
a*
39 smsrsfnfr
41 jR^t finrs^rara^-
T5TT*R&fa5 t3tor
III.
*r
firwNr tras^
ift^sftr&rnt-
#TOri
Hi.
(VLa*)
42
otr*
firesflf^Tfi[%^
W*
(VI. 35-36)
) )) )
XL1V
Gaudapada ~K&rika
44 g& ^r\im%Tr &%*?
III.
jfrqrr^rHsiTH*
* ^afta;
w
**
*wz:
w^feroriT i%V
24-28)
III.
46
^T
(VI. 19)
III.
47
OTi[CT^0WW
OTSOT3C
etc.
*
1
sr
*fr*fr
srsrWror
srsr-
STOROTfte^Wrs^lr
q-
^Tfqr
st
wwt*
... (
...
VIII. 6
IV.
80 finwrarfcflw
ft cc^r ft^fits
1
ft*ro*T
Hsr^T
etc.
(II. 53 also
II.
IV.
81 sFOTftsrociT Jf*na
*
*r
asrrcro^
%m
...
XV.
6 )
IV.
85 sn^r
mwi <$i
*
etc.
IV-
86 farat faft
SW*
tV.
88 37*
89
IV.
Iw
T
sr
t%^
**r Wcfe
( XIII.
7-17
j
ft
fttnWtaft
(XV.
5
9 )
IV.
94
^R*ns
fcarika
#s**n? r:
^retj^HtoSr^sW*
II.
7}
V
HI.
25
Isa
^^Trottm
frs*ra
i
sw
srffr-
^ot^
VI
Karika
1.
Katha
26 28
srorsft
im 5r?r srmgrs^
^?^
f^ara; *nfer
t
I.
srot^
I'ft
&sra **
rififa
?f
III.
24 ^f
38
*%i*mm%
5RRT g# f^m:
$$ HIHtfa f%^*
*?r
(II.
I.I2)
)
( II. X. 1 1
HI.
*$
aw 8fM
^Twras^
( II.
1.
10
Introduction
of
Gaudap&da-Rarika
XLV
VII
Karika
I.
Kausitaki
6
is
^i
3T^TfrT shut:
^r^r
$ srrar
^ sqrr?m
f^fefr
etc.
(III.
III.
^rsRW&f^
VIII
Karika
TOisrssfeat
3)
Kena
III.
ak
( I.
IX
Karika
I.
Lankavatara
7 *^wr*TRns>fri etc.
mwmr- *$wrI%5E5W9[
etc.
(13)
(n)
(16) (66)
mmn *ron% ^
^srftwiwnTT^T
II.
32 JTiTO^r ^^erfamr:
S^(79)
III.
46
?<$\
fafa
f^w.-.^rf^sroa;
1
94
^i^t%
*araftfir
-
$$
etc.
( III.
20, 21 ) also
m* mv$*v
#nprtm
IV.
5n3T...( p.
157)
96 3&t*HW12^f?t..
(pages 157-iS 8
X
Karika
I.
Mantismrti
25 gssfra
srsnr.
srw*
1
^^r?r^%
*%
)
^r
IL 74, 76-78
) ) )
XLvi
Gaudaptida-R&rik&
XI
Karika
I.
Mundaka
*rar
awrftr
srrtTf^m^-
s^ara; <m*GV3i
(II. i.i)
II.
27 ...wTWanft
13
flro*
bhst^f
R#i
III.
^srite^'?
XII
Karika
H- 2.8
( II. 2.1 1 )
Prasna
I.
26 ^s<fe*5w$3Tprtfm:
sr&r*fr>s"-q-*T:
1
^ar|
w^m vk ^m
(
(
^r irr
sr^r?...
qfr|
...
V. 2
II.
27 ^mtfsnrc
24
?rs
www*
V.
III.
^ht%
sTTwrwrat
1.7)
XIII
Karika
I.
Svetasvatara
8 ^i^T?sr^r%
ww
*??$(
ssrar:
mmvi
facrferos^r
( I.
2 )
XIV
Karika
II.
Taittiriya
22
^t * r% %far
^5TT:
etc.
srrorr
%^ 23 vmta?rat
*rm
gfcr:
1
w^
etc.
Adhyaya
arcrp
II.
(
S^thm
...
nmr
arcfl^
II. 7.
IV. 43 3T3Tr^^rff
ffaf
...
a^FRK"
^^
3TT fT^T
OT
)
wfiu
(II. 7. 13
XV
Karika
I.
Yogavasistha
18
w^t^v
ff
ernft
^rrrr
|rf
faft
( III.
84.25
T^ff
II.
( III.
!ar*r
84.27
I sTm ^5r
ang:
srf*rsr
sr*r?q- etc.
( III. 19.
& 32
III.
...
* sr# h
sft#:
ssgercs
* softer *
*T$frtT%
31
imr
?m?ffrr& $?r$*)-
sfsfwrre^etc.
Introduction
etc.
xLvii
see from the above, that of the Vedic works proper, Gaudamakes most use of the Mandukya, Brhadaranyaka and pada Chandogya Upanisads, and in a lesser measure of Isa, Kajha, Mun4aka, Prasnaandthe Svetasvatara. Of the Smrti^works, Bhagavadgiving him the idea of gita has influenced Gaudapada most, Asparsayoga, Maya and so forth. It would be possible to point out scores of similarities in the Yogavasistha, but as that work ( at any
rate a very large portion of
it ) is
We
generally taken to be
it.
later
than
same can be
Mulamadhyamakarikas have the Lankavatara and the undoubtedly influenced Gaudapada a good deal. He seems to have thoroughly mastered the Mahayana Buddhist philosophy, but mainly for the purpose of showing where his doctrine of nonorigination differed from that of the Buddhists.
current philosoearlier
was willing
to
borrow from
his- Ajativada
against rival
VIII
Gaudapada's Contribution
Philosophical TTiougHt
to
Indian
Gaudapada can claim to be the first systematic exponent of the Advaita doctrine, and especially of Ajativada. Sankaracarya describes him as one who knew well the traditional Ved^nta doctrines. Gaudapada's teachings provided the firm foundation on which
Saiikaracarya and
edifice
his
built
their
theory.
Abhyankar ( in the introduction to his edition of Siddhantabindu ) makes the following observations in this connection, which clearly bring out the significance and importance of "the contribution of "both Gaudapada
The
late
Mahamahopadhyaya Wsudeva
ShaStri
and Sankaraclrya.
fNrenpsrt3f
srfeterrfta^
<
XL v jii
Gaudap&da-K&riha
propounded,
Sankaracarya
proved by
Whatever G. proved,
. established firmly.
Whatever G.
condemned
outright.
Whatever G. brushed
aside, .
and
not only propounded the Mayavada adumbrated by his 'paramaguru' Gaudapada, but expounded, promulgated, framed and established
the same by his acute intellectual powers,
skill,
unparalleled
expository
and
relentless logical
reasoning
".
calls
Uttama Satya
is
based
upon
the
he
is
(i)
its
nature; for,
ever change st qwgfag fi wfa * ( Nothing can changed its natural characteristic even in the
to be the original entity ).
slightest
manner,
if
would cease
Introduction
etc.
xlh
While writing
his
Gaudapada must have been struck by the discrepancy between the Saftkhya tenets ggjsretffaftsfir* and f^fsrr: 5r^r%T%^rr?T *r?r. How can the sr>fcr which has no fo^r% by nature, give rise to fk$V($ ? the course of his bhasya on the Sankhyakarikas, he quotes um S&5 STt^a ( from the Bhagavadgita ) twice, which points a way out of the difficulty, by declaring that the fem concerns only the gcrrs.
:
&
and unoriginated. From the 33&rv5n All is Upanisadic passages, Gau<kpada concluded that every thing that exists is Brahman and as Brahman could not ever change its nature,
(2)
*ri
It
must be regarded
(3) All
as being vt
m**
ftrs&mw*
wfercorwr cannot
be proved to exist.
subtlest form.
complex and gross can be reduced to its simplest and The big Nyagrodha tree can be seen to have its rise
seed.
So,
this vast
really exists,
produced by 3re$rrr% with respect to number i. 2, 3 This being so, the ultimate cause can be described in the Upanisadic language as ir^RrnWfoi*. How did the Universe come to be
are
produced from
as
this q<s
and
aifipfor
cause which
creation
is
variously described
Brahman, Atraau
because the
etc. ?
The
real,
relation
Thus WTOrcwOT
(2) that
mm
(
<rcr
must have
it is
m%
is,
are different,
been
^m. before
and
curcar
mi
If eFT
anything
it
if
mi
its
aero before,
A mi
must have
nature similar
to that of the
mtw*
Therefore (1)
(2)
A *ra: can
An
3T*ra;
not produce an
3^
0)
(4)
can not produce a to, produce another ^, for there would not can <*RC be refferr in its nature during the process.
Gaudapctda-KanU
resoiting to the maxim OTfc&Tinwr* can not be proved by wherein there is mutual interof 'the seed and the sprout' of the fact that the series is establishment the to dependence leading
(4)
srarf^
<> r
begbiningless.
first,
we ought
effect
to be
able to
know whatcomes
tbis
could be postulated,
Thus
there can be
no origination.
effect,
and no change or
being admissible,
we have
one
tcr fall
"entity in
which "must be unborn", immutable and all-pervading, only an appearance due to Maya which ^gftiri
reality.
Whatever
is
iir accordance
alone be -accepted.
The
is
but
of reasoning.
Once
accepted,
there
no
difficulty,
passagesjn
the Upanisads.
a part of
so
festly
imagined
'
unoriginated.
on
a firm foundation
by boldly
if
1
by reasoning
?.
stand
when he
declares
fire is
hundreds of Sruti texts could not hot, or that simply because your ancestor
that even
was a
not
mean
that
you shcmld
also
act as a fool 20 of
the the
into details as
to
how
19
'%%=}
5%5^ ^
T*r#rt^
%n^
III.
23
II".
Bh^sya on
1.
11
Brahmasmra
Introduction
etc.
tv
origination
is
illusion or
was
left for
Sankaracarya
gives
to
make
this
more
explicit,
Saiikara,
on
his
part^
more
In
sides
may
same
and Mayavada
are but
two
o-the
#$njTr
^-Sa&kara declared
Avidya
to be^r^rr%their-
and heace
67
resorting to-oneetc.
Gaudapada was
in the Bjrhadaranyaka
the
first
to
make
the
fullest-
use of the
doctrine of the three states, waking, dream and deep sleep, described
esta-
blishing Advaita.
riences in the
There
surely
no
valid reason
why
the expe-
waking
state
states,
why
sense-organs
in the
the soul perceives only the inside subtle, with the mind; in the deepsleep state, both the
soul perceives
mind and the sense-organs are nothing. Thus the soul can be said
and the
to be really free
from any encumbrances only in the Susupti state,, while in the other two states, he is dependent upon other means. The experiences in the waking state are contradicted in the dream-state and vice versa, which shows that there can not be any vital difference between the two states ; the same is the case with the experience in the deep I did not perceive any sleep, the perception there in the form of thing being due to the cessation of the effort by the mind and the sense-organs and the absence of any objects of perception. Now that alone can be the highest truth which is the same everywhere,
c '
irrespective of different
environments.
we
must take into account the totality of our experience. This leads Gaudapada to declare that the highest reality can only be the ' Fourth or Turya, beyond the three states, unoriginated, same and
'
uncontaminated.
The
nature
of this Turya,
as
the
Saksin or
Witness of
all
works and
external
and the Vijfiana alone matters for producing our experiences, but According to the Bauddhas there he parts company with them.
the $unyavadins included ) everything is momentary, while Gau4ap&da declares that the highest is eternal and unoriginal. The Siftyavadins by i^hrmg that the highest is Sunya, tend them(
selves
open
to explain
hpw
the illusory
Adhisthana or other.
fol
sS^ilcrpapraiBii
to stswRi ^fraji R
II
sr*w qi^i
IU
ll
II
^JT^rFTS'cT;af:
ftcfta
%^
$w-
m$i
II
Q%mwt ^p^a
S<fa:
snarcspr
^h-^
stff^^ss:
q^: ll^ll
<^r
#sr* ^r s$t
<$ts^% #h g&q
$rw*rct ft
^cTFTRll *ll]
5T^
SOT^
TOfOTT
( ?
)
3FTC:
5TT^T
^
)
$Nl Wit
:
II
\\
<^>:
^ fig:
fl% Sri
^JTf
ft
for:, apcnsrf:
5TH:,
cW
TOTf:
srif : (
frwr *S?
Gaudapada-Karika
FiRST CHAPTER
( 1 )
One and
]
is
traditionally
known
[ lit.
being ] three-fold ( l ) Visva, cogniserof cogniser of inside,, [ and ] ( 3 ) Prajna, again, Taijasa 2 Outside, ( ) likewise, cognition massed*
remembered
arrcrclr
ift
jiw^t
^ wpri^rat
N *
11
tr%
apra:i%cq
for:
f|
^j5g$
%3re:
sftfaBg^;,
str^st ^^t
m dm
oft
M*re
ii
a a
%p"<fr
^3 a
wrct
?r
ffcis n h
ii
2 )
fold in the
One and
is
well set
up threein
inside in the
heart.
Prajfia in
the
For ( hi ), always, Visva [ is ] the enjoyer of the gross, ( 3 ) Taijasa [ is ] the enjoyer of the rarified, Prajna likewise [ is ] the
enjoyer of bliss know the enjoyment
[
thus to be
three-fold.
(4)
( 5 )
The
bliss likewise,
Prajna
know
and
What
enjoyable
is
proclaimed
in
the
three abodes,
]
proclaimed
[ in the three
]
abodes
he again,
who knows
this dual, [
although
enjoying,
is
not contaminated,
shft* *rforarai
m\fcfa
frftw
si
sr;p?fo
JTM^ff^g^:
s^
II
ii
apw:
3j^ sj&^rprt:
sre^
ft^
*ffcj;
IU
II
gl
I
f^rta: F^ *F^%
);
^M^RSt:
^Iprf *REH^
q?q%
^T^fa
CTnfMWtyhWW
'FT
^|T
II
II
*fir
*scr ( * r% ^rcra;
( 6 ) [ There must be some ] origin of all entities that exist Prana creates all, Purusa this [ is ] the well-considered conclusion. [creates] the rays of the mind [ that is, the individual souls J,
from one another ]. Other creation-theorists, on the other hand ( tu ), consider ( 7 ) creation [ to be ] the manifestation [ of Purusa ]; creation is imagined by others as having the same nature as dream and illusion ( maya ). so Creation f is due to ] just the will of the Lord ( 8 )
separate [
think others who are ] quite convinced about [ there being a ] the Time-theorists consider the creation of beings as creation;
( 9 ) [
from Time.
Creation [ is ] for the sake of enjoyment [ of the Lord ] so [ say ] still others. say ] others; for the sake of sport very ] nature of God r the shining one ]- This again [ is ] the ' What [ possible ] desire [ can there be in ( so say others, arguing ] ' the case ] of [ the Lord ] whose cravings are [ already ] fulfilled ?
so
srfej
(
II
11
S$WFfl<lt&:
^:
1%: 3$:
1%1%:
I
$BH:,
Jig:,
af*W,
5tw$
$HTO^ It ft 5^ * fra* U
II
II
SWPRB
?*&
);
3t ft tf&
5r
f^lci:
^rc
(
mm * m
*n*:,
snfr
^i^
^
U
)
pph
nwR
sf,
<to^
*r,
gw
r,
( [
io
The
]
All-pervading
is
traditionally
known
all
as
Turya
the Fourth
capable
[
miseries,
among
all entities,
refulgent.
Those two
is J
desired ]
(
to be conditioned
other hand,
-
] Visva and Taijasa are taken by cause and effect Prajfia, on the conditioned by cause [ alone 1 ; those two [ the
;
well-known
no locus
Self,
Turya.
12
'that
nor others again, for the matter of neither truth, nor again the untruth nothing whatever does
)
Neither the
Pfajria
comprehend.
[ is ]
always all-seeing.
mi:
sfafangci:;
^^r
3ittf
(
=*r
fa&
?a
3pqq:
i^isfBi
srafasi^; m?: 9
sfw w<n
ftT^
(
^si t%t
apqrr
g?TO^PRr:
ll
<rct:
#r 3^ f^fr^
^s:
(
SH
11
{*\ )
apw:
(
a^ra,
3^^
wr:,
eaft^r
atf^ arsrRcT:
(
3?wi
) f?fcr;
1
aqt:
( sffd^ptfr: )
M%
eft
iw.
$ti <ts^ R#
aMiftflwn
1$
*KT
#H JTf &
3?t
11
wi%TO?rettf i*&
11
(13)
Prajfia
The
norv-perception
Prajfia
[ is
J
of duality
stuck
is ]
common
to both
sleep,
and Turya.
it
up with the
causal
while
(
14
The
first
two
[ that
is,
stuck
up
sleep, Prajfia,
[
do see
in
Turya neither
otherwise
the
nor again dream for the matter of that. (15) Dream [ is ] for one comprehending
for
reality.
reality
one who does not know apprehension in those two becomes Fourth stage.
sleep
(
When
one
wrong
to
extinct,
attains
the
16
When
Maya
the
is
individual
Soul,
asleep,
owing
the
to the
beginning-less
awakened, he
then
realises
unborn,
*nqwprfr$ Ismta
(
mmfon
f^TcT
ii
?*s
ii
?va ) apapj:
qfc
JPW:
(aft a:)
fqsrer)
I
fofo, *
<H*irfcr:
ait?raU^
st^t^ to
(
t<r
* faft
II
?<i
II
<L
) 3frqq:
qfe
mfat, I%5T:
^qcf'.
ml
st
W\h Iff
?T fqsTcf
s&fiwwift*
*rqicr
q ^q %s
II
^,
ii
Kfww#3r?r
fiHSFaft *rhj
rsRT^r fteftqr
Hi^rtfrpq^isr
*rqra
srfa
11
5 q
*rafci
iirmjro^g^
^^
I
55frwFr: mirt
f*rctf%
qr
^sfoftfN
(
*rqf%
^ $m
If
^^ u
11
11
*rqpcr
(17)
existing,
just
it
the
projected
creation
be,
would continue to
[ illusion,
no doubt.
[
But
only
J this
duality
is
Maya
( 18 )
appearance
];
there
non-duality
in reality.
If
[
some
]
illusion is
it
is
liable to
or could
)
be turned away.
[
This statement
involving
Vikalpa,
[
is
the Highest
instruction;
when
\%
3i*w:
trow
aR^^ffrara^
srri^RF^
3^
^^
^afifrraf
5ww
?t*tiM **iraj
the desire to state that Visva has A-ness, being the first [would be] prominent; and f for the equating of [ Visva ] with the [ syllabic ] portion [ A in Aum ], the common quality of pervading, itself [ wotild be prominent ]. As regards the knowledge of Taijasa being possessed ( 20 )
( 19 )
When
there
is
]
the
common
quality
viz.
of U-ness
distinctly
or posteriority ] is [ the common quality ] superiority [ seen ; for the equating of [ Taijasa with ] the [ syllabic ] the nature of being in Aum ) [ the-common quality portion [ both, could be of the same type [ that is, is distinctly seen .
As regards Prajna possessing the state of M, the the measure [ by which the remaining two are for the equating of [ Prajna with ] the measured is ] prominent the common Aum M in portion ] on the other hand, [ [ syllabic ] quality, merging, itself [ is prominent ]. When one [ or, he who has become ] firm [ in his ( 22 )
(
21
common
quality,
three realisation of the truth ] knows the equal common quality in the by adorable worship, and of worthy is sage, ] abodes, he, the great [
all
beings.
R3
3Piq:
3T^R:
i^^
^,
3SRR:
3ffq
%5ra
Bfirac^PHsiM i <p
^ H
II
il
(aft!* #fil*raFcT)
3fc&R
( R5? )
TT# f^F
TR3R
* f%f%?fa (^RT^
q^r: q^[:
II
R
[
It
8F?w:
#&,
3R] ^ m*V',
#RR
l%f%^3?fq T
W^l
i
pfta
nifl
(
3r f^r^r^
ft^gTO* *
font
i^
V\ H
^Tj
R*\ )
PW:
R^: H&r
soft
23 )
The
syllable
leads
on
to Visva
and the
Prajna.
syllable
U as'
no
well, to Taijasa,
and the
syllable
M again
]
to
There
is
portions.
One should know the letter [ or, sound ] Om, quarter ( 24 ) by quarter; the quarters [ are ] the [ syllabic ] portions, no doubt. Having known the Omkara, quarter by quarter, one should meditate
upon nothing
( 25 )
[ else ]
whatever.
fix the mind upon Pranava [ the syllable Brahman void of fear ; for him ever fixed upon
One
is
should
is ]
Om ]; Pranava [
Pranava, there
no
fear
anywhere,
m^t to
(
sir sptp?
<rct
ssst
R^
) aiwjq:
jto: If ant
sWT,
I
5PW *
"ft:
<E?ei:;
Erqf :
3f<$3:
9Frcw
ajarWR 3FPTC:
apw:
^
(
<tf
ft 5RT#
^vs
) 3f?sfq:
fRST
ft
^ft ?RJF^
gefoqr snfe: **?
II
RV9
II
jropr:
em ^
|
P?T:j
ft
TO
flHT
SFFR
TO
] sq^cf
\C
(\%)
8PW:
STOW,
3R-cT^f5f:
(
^, tfl^q
)
t
3<rerc:,
S:
&, ^: sw *
3^
wise
Pranava indeed [ isJ the lower Brahman, Pranava likeBeginningless, undifferenthe Higher [ Atman ]. without outside, unique [ and ] tiated, [ or, without inside ], immutable [ is ] Pranava.
(
26
( ca
) [ is ]
Pranava indeed [ is ] the beginning, middle and like( 27 ) wise the end itself of everything. Having indeed known Pranava thus, one attains to it [ Brahman ] immediately [or, attains to Pranava
afterwards
(
].
28 )
One
should indeed
know Pranava
as the
Lord well
set
up in the heart of all. Having thought of the all-pervading Omkara, the wise one does not grieve. He, by whom has been known the Omkara, portion( 29 )
less,
cause of
cessation
of duality,
and
] auspicious, [ is ]
HtfH
STORM
q^f%;
?fl:
sf?Tp[: *r
fff%^^r T &*&
3pqq:
Wl^n^ 8RW: T
(
*RqjN&
*PlSr,
In %
snff
TO<fc:
w
3i3&r
( i )
verily,
g3T
wr
^ ^5$? ft^
faft
all
ii
"
( ^jt: arpifera; )
SECOND CHAPTER
The wise
speak of the unreality of
entities
entities
in
dream,
on account of the
owing to
(
[ their ] being enclosed. 2 ) And on account of the time being not long, [ a person ] does not see [ things in a dream ], having [ actually ] gene over to [ different ] regions, and further, [ when ] awakened, every one is not in that region [ which he had travelled over to in the dream ]. The negation of chariots and others [ seen in dream ] is ( 3 )
shown
in the ^poti along with [ the soul's ] entering and going out of ( ny&ya )[ the different states ]; they speak of the unreality as indeed proved by that [ statement ], as being evident in dream. Therefore, again, [the unreality of entities ] in the ( 4 ) waking state is traditionally known, from the location within of the entities. As it [ that is, the location within of entities ] there [ in the waking state ], so in dream. [ But waking state and dream are not the same; dream ] differs [ from the waking state owing to its being characterised ] by the state of being enclosed.
Jfeft4
wsmn,
? $
S^raf ft
(
3T^q:
it
ii
<^ tern
^Rt
f|
for%t
%mv
SRftsf^rar
^ sf^rn
11
5 n
( vs )
3F^q:
?fof
( Sftprf )
gjrqjWiTcIT
*3&
MfaSRf,
am
(
<s
ii
) 3re*rj
qrr
^nf^rf^rf
a*n
wift*&-(
^)
( 5 )
The
verily,
states
(
the two
What
is
[ is ] so
though
"
] similar to illusions
are noted as
( 7 )
ties [ in the
though
real.
waking
state ] is contradicted
in
they indeed are traditionally known as unreal and nothing on account of [ their ] having a beginning and an end.
(
[ in
[ It is all J
is ]
wonderful
agent
dream,
heaven. As indeed
]
a well-trained person here, [ so ] this [ person dreaming [ various objects or regions ], having gone [ there ].
sees those
si: %<fa$i *;
^ ^w
^;
8^
W^,
sfc %3tlCra
<^t%
%cW
g^l
f^RSTSt
II
$
sr:
USTrf^ffi
%?F# % %ff
ifaf
II
^^
ifer^:
( 9 )
Even
in the dream-state,
mind within [ is ] verily ( to ) by the mind outside [ is ] existing in reality ] the unreality of these two
enced
(
].
so
people
differentiate,
but
[ is
10 )
Even
[ is ]
in the
waking
state, again,
the
verily ( tu ) non-existing;
[ is ]
existing
what is imagined by the what is apprehended by the unreality of these two [ ought
even both the
again ( vai
),
who
12 )
then
cognises
these entities ?
Who,
their imaginer ?
Atman imagines himself by himself, through he alone ] [ that ] cognises the entities this [ is ] the conclusion of the Vedanta [ Upaniads ].
(
The
shining
his
Maya;
[ it is
\\
epro
( strut )
srlfcfirer:
gq;
9p?rf^%
s*re-
SRM3T
(
33%
*r
# faNt *F*%B*
ft
II
?
2r
II
{v
3i*?q:
sr?cT;
fawsrej:,
sf|i
5lf|j
3ira: ^
3Fcr: 3j3zrgjr:
^r,
=* srf|:
?grjft
(^)3p5Pi:
(sfrrQl
(J^:)
],
<$
sftf
^9%,
clef:
SIOT^
ties,
( 13 )
[
The Atmau
outward-minded,
up, as also
[
those
] differently set
those
fixed
up within
Those thought-timers
[ lasting as
amenable to the
grahya-grabaka formula ] outside all those [ are ] of imagination [ lit. imagined ]; the differentiation
two
is ]
Those again [ that are ] just unmanifest within, and those [ that are ] just manifest without all those [ are ] mere products of imagination [ lit. imagined ]; the differentiation again [ lies ] in [ being associated with ] different organs of sense.
(15)
[ The Lord ] first imagjnes the jiva [ the individual ( 16 ) objective ] ], then, verily, th entities of various sorts, external [ and internal [ subjective 3; as one cogaises so one remembers.
soul
>fteq[5ftqSR#Rr
3T^%T TO ^^SRflft
(
fafifaWrl
\v
spot:
w ap^R sfftta
t%ki?<tct:
i
*sf
gfaltf^ft:
^nan
M^^T^f
to
ra*t
te<ft f^nr#%
*31$Rr ^nts
<T33R*?ftftsro: n *<s u
to
frfHter:
sro^
>i
?*,
11
f^#r?r.';
ctw ^rc?
*htt *rat
*#
filter;
S"it
(
$r
^o
3i^q:
9^%^r^ ^ ^fe:
(
arrcfrr
11
^o
>pft
(
jft
17 )
^
is
#^
fter% ),
1
erffe:
rope, [ with its nature ] not definitely ascertained imagined to be [ possessed of the nature of ] entities like the serpent, [ water- ] line e:c; so likewise [ is ] Atman imagined [ to be all sons of things ].
in the dark,
As the
(18 ) When the rope is definitely ascertained [ as the rope ], the imagined attribute turns away, and the non-duality [ emerges ] in the form ( iti ) < [ This is ] the rope itself So
'
likewise,
takes
place
the ascertaiment of
[
Atman.
[ life ] etc.
( 19 )
Atman
] is
imagined to be Prana
[ is ]
innumerable
[
entities.
This
the
Maya of
that shining
] by which [ he ] himself has been deluded. 20 ) As Prana, the Prana-knowers [ imagine Atman ] ; and as Bhutas [ elements ], Knowers of them [ the Bhutas as Gunas, the
Atman
(
];
the Tattvas
It
R?
it
tfl^ft
(
=?f
II
RR
II
RR
9FW:
# %d^S,
?ra
ifr:
*& ^
afifc:,
*taf
*jS
$r ^#r^ts^
^ af^
R3
li
R
-q
ii
R2
3pgq:
<R|9:
$fa
^isfa:,
for: fi%
at?:,
( 2i )
Knowers
oi
them [ objects ]; as the Lokas, the Loka-knowers; and Knowers of them [ gods ];
(
as
Gods, the
the
22
as
Vedas,
the Veda-knowers;
and as
it [
Sacrifices,
Knowers of them
( 23 )
[ sacrifices
the Bhojya
];
Subtle, the
the
the
Knowers of
Sthula
]; as the
Murta
[ possessed of form
],
Murta-knowers; and as the Form-less, the Knowers of it [ Amurta ]; as Kala [ time ], the Kala-knowers; and as the Quarters, ( 24 )
the
Knowers of them
as
Disah
];
as
Vadas
Vada-kno%ers;
Bhuvanas
];
ftmWi f^rild
nM
*r
ate
ii
\\i\
^13% If
r:
TOTOWrft
II
II
%i |
^t H
(n?nft
\c
it
fW?h
# faftfc:-^f *
as
(3fe&: )
3 ski ?
$5F%)
Knowers of
Mind-knowers; and as Intellect, the Thought, the Thought-knowers; and Merit and Demerit, the Knowers of them [ Dharma and Adharma ]; Some speak [ of Atmfn ] as constituted of twenty-five; ( 26 ) and as constituted of twenty-six, others; [ some ] as constituted of thirty-one; and as unending, others. of [ Atman ] ( 27 ) The Loka-knowers speak as People
the
it [
( a$ )
Mind,
Buddhi
]; as
[ Lokas ]; as Asnunas, the Knowers of them [ Asramas, modes of life ]; the Laingas [ grammarians, or knowers of sex ], as Male, Female and Neuter; and others, as higher and lower
(
28
as Creation, the
as Dissolution,
Laya
Knowers of
here
subsistence,
and
].
all
[ in respect
of
Atman
a
(
^r%
3F*q:
a ^r#r
q??T
^: s#ft ^c ^ ^q^ g
3:
cT
*%
q\i q?qft;
(\o)
3T?qq:
crq:
( STRUT )
ffcT
^t wrfo?
(
^ ^pg| f^^j
qtff
ii
3?
(
ii
^ l)
3F?q:
F?faTt
58
), fTCl
^r%5
fowa&r:
^ far sb^i
sw ?^?t iwfe
T*m%T
]
II
* !Sl$ I
^5 5T- T,
(
II
^ f
I fa
"^T
29 )
[ [
one
entity
him; strong attachment to that [ entity ] encompasses him. This [ Atman ] is noticed as indeed separate, owing to ( 30 ) these entities [ though really ] non-separate. One who knows thus as
may imagine
Atman
[
to be
any thing
as
[ is
with-
out hesitation.
(31)
As
are seen
[
illusion ],
is
seen
the Gandharva-city
so
seen
this
universe by
32
nor again aspirant [ or, one [ to this samsara ], working ] for salvation; neither one desirous of salvation, nor again one emancipated thus [ is ] this highest truth,
3
bound down
sfsr:
anarch
5tht
*,
?CT^pr
#r
srft
spw:
cfWI^
^ ^
(ca)
is
f^csri
v
^q;
3f|^
%r^
a&3 SRispq
This
[
sresrg;
sto^ air*H
( 33 )
Atman
further
imagined to be nonentities
also
are
imagined
bv the This
non-dual
universe
therefore
non
- duality
[ is ]
auspicious.
(
34
is ]
manifold
to
its
neither
owing
nature
]
to
the
somehow owing
separate or
own
even;
nothing whatever
of reality know.
(
[ is ]
35 )
By
seen this
cessation
fear and anger, who gone to the other shore of ] the of Prapafica, free from imagined
attributes
( 36
[and
)
non-dual.
Therefore, having known this [Atman] thus, one should fix [ one's ] memory on non-duality; having secured [ or, realised ] non-duality, one should carry on the worldly activities like an insensate one.
VO %*&
!%:*!%:
ftifa^R: ft:srew>FB
^%
aroisqifoNi SfT
S^w^^s# ^
sit
5 mHLi
II
II
sfw:
swl&r
(
5?q%: m^,
QF&d &r
^rfe
)
gqi^ifSrer:
vh ^%
3I
w:
^sr:
37
disassociated
with salutation
and quite disassociated with the utterance of Svadha [ that is, performance of Sraddha rites in honour of Pitrs ], and having no fixed residence whatever, one should become an ascetic acting according
to [ his ] will [ or , chance ].
Having realised the truth relating to within the body, ( 38 ) having realised as well the truth from outside [ that is, relating to objects outside ], having become the Reality, delighting in it, one
should not be slipping away from the
Here ends the Second Chapter
reality.
in the
Gau4apada~k2nk3
THIRD CHAPTER
( 1 )
Dharma
is
Jiva
associated
with devotion
]
arises
when
ali
Brahman
[ is ]
born.
is ]
Priot to
birth,
unborn; therefore he
Dharma,
Jiva
traditionally
known
as
pitiable.
grit
*Fci?r:
^pwft 1%%^
*n*&
$Tf^! ^sfcnSfofarc&i^
u 3
II
3TT^ TOfcp%
33ffaT
|fR#T
II
I!
?r
it
ii
( SOTKItt )
* IQ3F%
( 2
I shall therefore
without
[
birth,
]
supposed as
( 3 )
speak of the non-pitiableness [which is] maintaining sameness throughout, so that anything being born all around is not [ really ] born.
like the
Atman
[
Akasa
rises
up indeed
in [ the
form of ] by earthen
and in
This
].
jar etc.
[ is ]
illustration
origination
As the earthen jar etc. being dissolved, Gharakasa etc. ( 4 ) are dissolved in the Akasa, so [ are dissolved ] the individual souls
here in Atman.
( 5 )
etc
,
is
smoke
[
not
all [
are associated
with them
],
so
are ]
an%Riw
^1
ifwi
era
gst
*?ren$rainw:
I
fwtf;
^cT; ass.
sffts fifim
( v )
apw:
t,
?w
<tot
*RR*?i5RnTR*nft
II
%it
*&{%
( 6 )
mhsffig
m^mmm^
I
11
ft
srmtre
r^waffui: ( an?*n )
[ lit.
indeed, foim,
function and
name
do
] differ, [ [
but
there
]
is
no
splitting
up of
respect of
[is]
As the Ghatakasa
no transformation or portion of
As the sky becomes to [ that is, in the opinion of j the children, soiled owing to impurities, similarly Atman also becomes to [ that is, in the opinion of 1 the non-wise, soiled owing
( 8 )
to impuritfes.
(
9 )
in remaining in position, in
bodies,
Atman
is ]
not
dissimilar
to the Akasa,
\\
ares:
*r
ft
mw.
#?n: %%*fa%
sqr^icrr:
trt^
iipiM
*r
te& *m g^t
ft
ft
snir^li
&
11
f3N&,
)
^r
wmon.
io
like
dream.
la
respect of
their ]
superiority
[
every-
where, there does not exist any proper ground us to prove that the samghatas are real ].
(
ii )
The
[
the Taittirlyaka
upanisad
like
expounded in
is
clearly
shown up
(
as
)
Atman,
Akasa.
that
is,
12
In the Madhu-jnana
],
Madhuvidya chapter
[
in
the Brhadaranyakopanisad
[ described as
in the various
] is
Brahman,
(
as
)
13
difference,
is
and in the belly itself. That the identity of Jiva and Atman without any is praised and variety [ or, multiplicity ] is censured that
[
Akasa
shown up
in the earth
is
the creation
of Mayft
33fW
aw*.
\\
3FW:
35q%:
JTT^
q^
sfaiawt:
<j*fw
s^ra
stsrarcpi
^^ ^? ^^
J
II
?H
II
srrcRfaf^f
(
^n^fap^w
ll
\%
?0
aFW:
$sTORpfcfiOT:
ftfasr:
atfwn:;
?q^
tfcfa: )
3TR^^^TW:
r%*qli
What separateness of Jiva and Atman prior to creation, ( 14 ) has been declared, that [ is ] figurative, referring [ as it does ] to the
state to
[
come;
]
to
regard
it
as
having
primary
sense
fit
in.
( 15
The
[
creation
otherwise by
that
[ is ]
no difference what-
soever
between Jiva and Atman 1 exists. (16) [ There are ] three-fold stages of life, having low, middle and excellent vision; this [ mode of ] worship is prescribed
[
for
by the
sruti ].
[
17
The
their
this
[
laying out of
]
one another;
Ajativada
does
^8
jfteqtafhraff^Kf
afta 'R^rrqf ft
<r?Tprc*rT 1ft
(
( ?
M g%? 3*fr
ft
*t
fore * ft$*Kr
\c
if
aR*j:
alter
?taf
fcfonn.
3W?r
fo&
3*wt ftfW*
(
ft
*E$ITOS3
arrn(qil3)
3^
I
II
?<UI
\%
5T;
3fw: <^ft
IWJff
5fi^
?Wci: f|
3ffcT JJc&tf
3%^
apw:
*lfsfr:
3Rra^
^ *?l^
3flfH |^r%;
18
Non-duality
its
[ is ]
is
spoken of as
dvaita
outcome
in
the
that
advaita
( 19 )
different ]
indeed
it
advaita ] indeed becomes modified [ or, not otherwise under any circumstances. If were to be modified in reality, the immortal would go the
This unborn
through Maya,
way of
(
mortality
)
20
The
disputants
dvaitins
is]
wish
to
prove
the
verily unoriginated.
How
indeed
can an unborn [and therefore] immortal entity, pass on to mortality ? The immortal does not become mortal, nor likewise the ( 21 )
mortal immortal. There would not be under any circumstances, a change otherwise of [ one's ] nature.
<ft4
JI^K
^
II
3%^rerer
m ^^fT^% ta$:
^xr^TT%
%<rcg[
li
RR
II
ftftw
(
iT%i# ^
^ #ag#
RO
3fw:
i%i%ct
R\
ll
^cfcf: ff aPSJRl:
sift
(
*FW%
)
I
a^:
*WT;
erg^
^r% f ct^
*t
mm
3
aranronft
srfsri
*nw <5rr^%
ffet
3:
11
Rtf
11
errarWRU
t
(
^R
^H
or*?:
g^
SR^ftfit
:
WTO
5|firftwj%
=sr
II
arq^ra^
mm
^H m\k^%,
II
sk
( 22 ) [ He ] for whom [ that is, in whose opinion ] an entity immortal in [ its ] own nature, goes to mortality, how will the immortal of his [ that is, admitted by him ] artificially made [ subject to artificial effort ], remain changeless [ or, unmoving ] ?
23
In
the matter of
[ already ] existent, or from the non-existent also, the Sruti [ is ] equal [ that is, supporting both the views ]. What is associated [ or, fortified ] with logical reasoning and ascertained, holds, not the other.
( 24 ) Sruti text ]
Sruti text J
(
And from
e
'
'
No
multiple here,
'
Indra by means of
Maya powers
is
as well,
He
'
being unborn
however born
in
[
[
through Maya
nisad ], origination
(
is
25 ) and from the denial of origination [ in the Isavasyopais barred out. By [ the Sruti ] c Who possibly
this [
nu
4
would produce
Atman
] ?
'
the cause
of origination ]
barred out.
II
R%
II
13^
^ frf^,
era sraKRt
*rai ft
5
ff
g^ra:
a^Rft 3TTC%
(
^sj
Rva
apro:
Sfffi cf^I
3TR%
II
^RV3
}|
*TcT:
spq
JTPFir
ft goft,
sr
ctr^cl:;
*nfa srra%
*r*r
11
r<s
ii
3T^q:
aRTcf:
*nW, WHS:
?r <^r
gsq^;
smip^mra
w& wm to
n r$ji
26
As the explanation
[ or, conceals ] all
],
not
'
denies
bility [ of
(
Atman 27 ) The
the unborn
Atman Jshines
[
forth.
indeed reasonable
is,
through
in reality.
For
whom
that
in
him
[ that is,
!
admit
(
[
[ either ]
or
] in reality
is
assuredly
not reasonable;
the
woman
(
Maya
As through Maya the mind in dream vibrates into the appearance of two so through Maya the [ grahya and 'grahaka ], mind in the waking state vibrates into the appearance of two T grahva J and grahaka ].
29
ms ^ %mm m mm mm
(
^o
sf^m
mv ^ to
g^rw, *
3 n
sr
*pt:
i
ctwtct,
*rew;
cttt
srw^ ^
antf
( ;?;*: )
mm
Iff
*f%W;
mm
SWfouft
ft Iff
\\)
ap*ra: -
mn anwgsngtt^
m:
sr
te<r&
In dream again, the non-dual mind [ is ] appearno doubt [ about it ] and similarly in the waking state, the non-dual mind [ is ] appearing as dual, no doubt.
(
30
ing as dual,
and
31 ) [ A.11 ] this duality whatsoever, comprising the movable the immovable, [ is ] perceivable by the mind; when the mind
is
32 ) When [ the mind ] does not imagine owing to the comprehension of the truth about [ or, namely ] Atman, [ it ] goes
to the state of
non-mind;
assert
]
it [ is ]
of the cognisable.
( 33 )
They
unborn
as [ being
the jfiana free from imagination [ and not different from the knowable. Brahman [ is
[
Thus
] is
made known
the
jr=^
fl^;
q|
I&
a%gti *
3fcft
9FTO: -
to
3T^, 9|fa^,
aRSR!^,
9RW^,
SfSS'Ttft:
3T^; apws
tf*m%:
(
[
34
and
] free
[ or,
of the
discerning person
the
has to be
known
].
properly
the procedure
that
[
of
mind
1 in
deep sleep
[ is ]
different,
not
like
of the
(35)
In
it
the
mind
That
is
laid
[ is ]
low;
the
completely controlled
not
laid
low.
itself
with the illumination of jfiana all around, unborn, without sleep, without dream, without name, ( 36 ) without form, flashing up once for all, [ and ] omniscient. [ There
fear,
is
Brahman void of
in this
description of
Brahman
no
figurative
use in
any way
all
whatever.
( 37 ) statement in t
That
is ]
words,
risen
all,
above
all
[
thought,
] free
unmoving
and
from
<cfiq
mm.
R^
cf^T arr?iraw
fw
ararfa garaf
i?pu
II
<>
ii
craft.
QTCf^cT:
38
)
[
Where
that
is,
exist
thought,
[
there
either
], ],
[ is ]
no
taking up
apprehension
set
no
giving up
in the
[ lit.
At that
in
itself
[ or,
Atman
[ is ]
non].
and
going to sameness
39
[This
of
it,
40
For
all
[ are ]
absence of
fear, destruction
itself.
41
As
[ there
would be
the
sea
by
out
] one drop [ of ] Kusa grass, so would be the control of the mind without
of water at a time
[ a blade
all
toiling.
m 3% % W ^T# 5PTOWT
5* ringer ^wfrnftn^
3R
II
ttt
II
II
S3
II
otto tefhrairaTH *
(
88
eFW
3&
^i^
I)
w
(
ii
r%^
S%^,
%%ff
f%r
g*r:
r^j f^ift^^fqfepR^r:
(
8H
fw:
sh
ii
<re
gs
?r
sttctrH,
sirar r%:e*r:
^,
42
By
low
the prescribed
mind
] means, one should control [ the and enjoyment and also quite at ease
in the lying
low
anu ) remembered all [ to be ] mind from ] desires and enjoyments; having continually remembered all [ to be ] unborn, one
43
)
(
Having continually
[
the
assuredly does not see the born for the matter of that
tu
).
44 ) lying low [
(
One
when
]
in
the
state ],
again
when
tossed about;
[
should know [ it ] particularly [ to be ] with passion, not shake [ it ] up [ when ] attained to equilibrium.
and
should
One should not relish pleasure there [ in Samadhi ]; ( 45 ) one should be free from attachment through discernment; one should unify, by effort, the steadied mind [ if it be ] moving out [ towards objects of enjoyment ],
8^
apw:
^i
r%tr
sr
m^,
3*:
=3f
si
!%% c
cfST
srspfrfo t*fcr
eft ffHj%
h tf
11
irarfirfrr
sp^sr
^ H?^ ^
11
11
When the mind does not lie lowf and is not again ( 46 ) tossed about, then that [ being ] without movement, and not presenting any appearance, culminates into Brahman.
Resting in itself, calm, with Nirvana, indescribable, ( 47 ) highest happiness, unborn [ and one ] with the unborn knowable, omniscient [ thus of it ] they say.
No
is
ing whatever
born.
FOURTH CHAPTER
( 1 ) I [
[
bipeds,
who by
jfiana
almost
like the
sky
and
the entities
^FT ^T^FS^T
(
^Tf^TJ
%f%^r
ft
8R*r.
^1%^
^ wt^t: ft ^w
),
srti^ ^ftr,
(
3fq>
ffti:
anjas?
( *rrfcr^
^gr%
T^rt
fa^:
<^ ^
%^ft
ssr fcnrsrrft
^mfcr I
n a n
f^rat * %: sT&r%T<?
Wto
II
II
( 2 )
bow down
beings, beneficial,
(
by whom ] was preached the which is for ] the pleasure of without any dispute and unopposed.
to
him
called,
Some
]
disputants indeed
thus
No
originated;
[
a
]
non-existent
is
disputants
indeed disput-
We
proclaimed by them;
is ]
we
Know
how
the ajativada
free
from
dispute.
^3$
JTWPU
\\
g:
inform <^r%
( V3 )
3p*q:
3F|cT
Jj?q
*T
Jf
itffa f
I
^tf[
j}^ 3pjcT
ff
swfa^
*[^qfcf
<
) 3Fsr*r:
re?
*hp#;t
3ffcr:
vh
mtmi
to(?i
cT*q
apw:
affair
%
]
q?
( 6 )
The
[
disputants
[
dvahins
is ]
wish
to
prove
the
which
]
verily unoriginated.
How indeed
?
can an unborn
(
and therefore
7 )
The immortal
mortal immortal. There would not be under any circumstances, a change otherwise of [ one's ] nature.
( 8 )
[
He
for
whom
is,
that
immortal in immortal of
[ its ]
own
that
nature,
his
admitted by him
]
[
artificially
],
remain changeless
or,
made unmoving ]
[ or,
?
That should be well known as nature whieh [ is ] fully and not made [ artificially ], [and] which does not abandon [ its ] own nature.
9
)
3rc!TOft#KT $f
:
We wmm
wiK raFcn
&
crfA wr
^w%
W^^
tl
II
sr^,
( ?rf$ ) cT
^rpwpn^l
sRpfig; ft
epr^
^t
11
w gvU
i
srsrft srrcs
to
otrtcto *n%r %
^*?tot m&ti
srrar^ stpptito
death.
All entities [ are ] by nature freed from old age and ) Wishing for old age and death, they deviate [ from their nature ] by the thought of them. For whom indeed [that is, who holds that] the ( ii ) cause [ is ] the effect, for him [ that is, he would have to admit
(
io
that ] the
how
[
[
]
can
cause is originated; [ if the cause is ] being originated, modified it be ] unborn and how again [ can ] that [ if ]
?
be
eternal
If [ it is argued by you that there is ] non-difference 12 ) [ of the effect ] from the cause, and therefore if the effect [ is regarded as ] unoriginated, how [ can ] your .cause indeed [ which is
(
non-different
as ]
effect
being originated
be spoken of by
you
For whom [ that is, in whose opinion ] [ the effect ] is ( 13 ) originated from the unoriginated [ cause ], for him there is assuredly
no
theory ] ; and [ in the case ] of being originated from the originated, there would be the undesirable contingency of the regressus ad infinitum.
illustration [ to corroborate his
[ the effect ]
^t
II
?MI
prt^
fiu:
5r?
crrr
awf ^*r
14 ) For whom [ that is, In whose opinion ] the effect the producer [ or, beginning ] of the cause and the cause [ is
[ is ]
] the
]
producer
[ or,
beginning
of the effect
how can be
nonchalantly
of the
(15)
the producer
For
[ or,
whom
[ that is, is
]
whose opinion
the
for
the effect
[ is ]
[ is
beginning
]
cause
the
producer
[ or,
beginning
of the
manner
[ if
In the [ case of ] origination of the cause and effect admitted ], the order [ in which this takes place ] has got to be
much
as ( yastn&t )
effect ],
in
[
the
[ case
of
] ]
simultaneous origination
the absence
of
[
]
of cause and
connection,
there
[ left
mutual
like
the
horns
of a bull
(
(
U
^1
?< 11 9rc^ftri t*t ^riW^n ) FW: ifc "5313^: fefe", to* ^ ^1%(%:,
efajRT
fflTT%:
aft
( CIS" )
53^ #^51^
^
(
ft
s*n
3T*?q:
^%^^Tf^r:
5
iWtaT
li
3rgr%:
aRfaFP*, aw
I
m 3^ W\^:;
I
fl
||:
g&n
3T5rn%: qRCrffciT
^TpT^TT
*
(\o
)
ft arranft igt
3FTC:
11
^o
11
g: sfalflRPi: SBFti:
WW--,
effect,
( 17 )
the
how
will
effect ?
If [ there is ] the substantiation
effect
[ [
of the two
produced
] ?
first,
of the cause from the from the cause, which one whose substantiation [ is ] dependent
effect
[of the hetu to prove the sadhya ], the absence of full knowledge [ about what is prior and what is posterior ], the violation again of [ the reasonable ] order in view of this [ or, thus ] indeed, non-origination in every way has been
(19)
Incapability
20
That
[ is
srpwirrat
^H $ f lira?
)
RR
apw:
g^
3j^,
g^
i%f%g;
^3
arpra;
qr arft
r%fH q* t
JOT gftft^PFW
(
5*TCTCRri
^8
apW
=g
STfff:
^RxRq^;
I
3j;q*tf
sqSTRRl:
SfNra
gqeswfc
q*?F3nferai n?n
full
]
(21) The
posteriority [
absence of
priority
and
non]
origination.
How
be
comprehended the
thing
?
Nothing whatever is originated either from ( 22 ) from something else also; nothing whatever, [ whether ]
non-existent or existent-nonexistent as well,
(
is
is
itself
or
existent,
originated.
23
By
[ its ]
own
and the
too.
for
it.
For which
no
no cause indeed
Cognition is [ or, has the state of being ] with [ that is, ( 24 ) due to some ] cause ; otherwise [ there would be no prajnpti and
no cognition of the dravya; so ] on account of the destruction of the dual and on account of the experience of afflictions, the existence
[ of external objects favoured [ by some
]
[ is
indicated as
].
sr^T
*TO
ft *rcraraf snsfiirrcraRri
s^ ^
II
&2?n%
);
ra:
stf: ft 3P3JT:,
awfare:
cTcT:
S^T
si
^frfw
cr^q arftfiro
^Tfet **r
Wf
*rfo<an%
ftqro
iM&
aw ^nft <rafo ^ % %
( 25 )
[
<rt
q^ri%
is [
is
that
is,
due
of being
[ that
is,
with
fancied
on seeing
on the
[
but
without a cause
the
actual
is
fancied
on
seeing
[ that is,
].
on the strength of
does not
the reality
(
26
The mind
and
similarly
[ is ]
And
is ]
it.
27
[ of time ], the
mind
its
how would
] ?
there
be
causeless false
28
Therefore,
the
mind
;
is
ceivable
is
not originated
[ either ]
those
who
perceive
its
origina!
\o
gpsq:
epn^:
ggpc^? antral
=T
%wfe,
eig- arar ( *r
Mv.
arton
^r
sta:
29
In asmuch as the
unoriginated
[ is ]
is
said to be ]
origi-
[ its ]
nature.
There would
[
one's
There would not again be resulting [or, be established] ( 30 ) coming to an end of the beginningless mundane creation; and there would not be the endlessness of salvation having a beginning. (31) What is not at the beginning and at the end [ is ] so
the
also in the present
;
existing
things
] [
though
similar to illusions,
of a
purpose in
as unreal
[ the
case of ]
the
waking
dream; therefore
else
known
and nothing
(eva)
on account of
[ their ]
i#
*r*tt
TO**nEpnn3*ft
tat: sn
3^
aRqr:
^Jf
apreq
wi^r
s*ra sshri^
All entities in dream are false on account of their percep( 33 ) tion within the body. Whence [can there be] the perception of exist-
On account of the non-fixation of time [ required ] for ( 34 ) the movement, the perception [ of things ] by [ actually ] going
[ there ] [ is ]
unwarranted
and further,
when
awakened every
over to in the
in that region [
which he had
travelled
(35) Having conversed together with [his] one [ when ] re-awakened does not attain [ to all
further whatever had been taken [by
friends
etc.,
;
that ]
and
one
in the
The body
in the
dream
[ is ]
again unsubstantial
owing
as
] distinct [
from
it ]
the
body, so
all
mind~perceivable
[ is ] unsubstantial.
8p^:
srrcfoT^
iTfDTig:
wr:
crt:
$&;
SR
( (
II
arfer ) f
( 37 )
^^
Owing
]
is,
era*?:
sjg^
3Rfi#j
?t erfier, ct^tt
atgsR
*r srffcf,
arera;
g^
is
[ is
^
? ]
II
aralta*
$er:
similar to
[
[
that in
the waking
state,
dream
to
waking waking
And owing
dream
having that
to
fancied
be real
for
him
(
[ that
the dreamer
38
all is laid
no origination
in
any
way
Having seen the unreal in the waking state, one being in the dream; and having it, sees [ the same ] seen the unreal in the dream also, one [ when ] reawakened sees
deeply absorbed in
[ it 3 not.
The unreal has not the unreal as [ its ] cause, likewise ( 40 ) the real the unreal as [ its ] cause. The real as well has not the real as [ its ] cause; whence [ can ] the unreal [ have ] the real as [ its ]
cause?
6
8^
#qrc^#RT
fWreran stopc^fwf
gn
(
^*#*
<re*n%
it
*# f^^feT^^
II
spare:
sruret
r%9?graL
r^w^
^^
^Wm^NRT3[^^l gsfN%
(
II
88
fto~
in the
[ or,
m
]
II
3*&,
mi
ww*\\mm^^?% &&
(
state, one through misinterpretation unthinkable [ objects ] as though real, similarly in dream, one perceives through misinterpretation, objects
41
As
waking
touch
42
By
the wise
{
[ lit.
the
awakened
origination ' for those who contend that things the doctrine of ] exist [ in reality J because of the perception [ of those things ] [ and ] of the prevailing etiquette, [ and who are ] ever frightened
of
Who, on account of the perception [of things, as though ( 43 ) they are real ] go astray, [ in the case ] of those frightened of [ the doctrine of ] non-origination, evils due to [ belief in ] origination would not be forthcoming ; [ there ] the evil again [ if at all ] would be negligible [ lit, small ] As an illusion-elephant is spoken of [ as real ] because ( 44 J of perception [ and ] of the prevailing etiquette, similarly ' things exist * is spoken of [ as depicting a real state of things ] because of perception [ and ] of the prevailing etiquette,
U^lill^^
(
$vj>
ptc:
fan^A a TO
I)
(I
icreqfc^5Eg*TOfoOTra
crrr
arw^wJwwwraiOTf to
45
way
vijnana, un]
and
without
any dual.
(
46
traditionally
are
the entities
[ the
unoriginated;
fall
those fully
knowing
]
do not
into error.
[ is
47 )
with
the appear[ is
so the
vibration of vijnana
with
48
As the
[ is ]
unoriginated, so [
no appearance no
appearance, unoriginated.
$2
^r^ff^rc
spot:
*<Knft
rRt
erraren
spi^rgs:
sr,
( *\\
II
H*
II
afRpn
simrerr:
3p*Rftgr:
*r,
49
do not
arise
appearances are ] the fire-brand. They do not get out from the fire-brand, owing to ( 50 ) with the absence of the nature of a substance connection their ] [ [ that is, owing to their not being a substance ]; they would be just like that [ in respect of ] the vijnana also, on account of the nondifference in appearance [ that is, appearances as such are the same by
nature
].
shaking up, the appearances non-shaking up, [ the not elsewhere other than there, nor do they enter
as a result of
When the vijnana is verily vibrating, the appearances do anything else ; as a result of non-vibration, they [ the not appearances are ] not elsewhere other than there, nor do they enter the vijnana, ( 52 ) They do not get out from the vijnana, owing to [their] connection with the absence of the nature of a substance [ that is, owing to their not being a substance ] ; because of the absence of the relation of cause and effect, they are ever and anon incom( 51 ) arise from
prehensible.
ig$ srjto
8H
*
s[sq^FT^Rt
wraj
m safari %T^
?r
II
II
*rW
saw*,
ajsranr: ^r
sqqsrci
^ ^$mk%
(
*ifa
\$m%at hh
ii
li
^
] ]
II
II
m&;
and
fcgiissfat* s$oi (
31%
) (
g^:
be
mii ^
the
]
s\qsfe
( S3 )
[
Substance
other
[
may
The
]
cause
of
substance;
]
a category
than substance
of
a category
other [ than
substance
[
assuredly.
[
not reasonable in the case of entities. not originated from the mind ; the ( 54 ) mind also for the matter of that [ is ] not originated from entities. Thus the wise enter into [ that is, have to fall back upon ] [ the doctrine of ] non-origination of cause and effect.
]
some
other
category
Thus,
entities [ are J
As long as [ there is ] the obsession of cause and eSect, ( 55 ) so long [ is ] the uprising of cause and effect ; when the obsession of cause and effect ceases to exist, there is no uprising of cause and
effect.
As long as [ there is ] the obsession of cause and effect, ( $6 ) so long the worldly existence [ is ] prolonged; when the obsession of cause and effect ceases to exist, one does not attain to worldly existence.
9^
3Tteq$wRwtf
si
ft
S3#r
3^>
^ ^ ^^
^
I
'
^Erf
spq
*n%R^,
SH *TRT
^T
f^T^
NO
snft f^ft
(
<^
3FW
W ^W^raC
=r
3jp: SfR%;
TO vft
(
%o
Everything is originated on account of empirical experi( 57 ) ence, therefore indeed [ what is so originated ] is not eternal [ or,
permanent
].
[ is ]
no
annihilation,
58 ) The entities which are spoken of ( tti ) as originated, they are not originated in reality. Their origination is comparable
to illusion; that illusion too does not exist.
As from a seed made up by illusion, is originated a ( 59 ) sprout constituted of it [ illusion ], that [ sprout ] is not eternal,
nor again
entities.
liable to annihilation;
60
[ significant ]
of eternal
[ are ]
unoriginated;
[
lit.
do not function
^?
) 3i?^i:
?r i%^r
*nw
jqmre ^fcr,
ct^t
^8
3Fr:
^STS^tTSW,
cRi:
1^
f^P%;
61
[ or, presenting
so in
the waking
and grahaka ], [ grahya having [ or, moves, maya through the mind
62
mind
no doubt [ about it ] ; similarly in the waking state, the non-dual mind again has the appearance of the dual, no doubt
of the dual,
[
about
it ].
born of perspiration, as well which the dream-beholder moving about in dream, always
( 63 )
or
beholds, [ as being
(
64
they are
capable
of being seen
only
by the
it it
mind of the dream-beholder; [ they ] do not exist apart from [ the mind ] ; so likewise, this capable of being seen only by [ the mind ] is fancied [ 10 be ] the mind of the dream-beholder.
<ra?
3<s^T#t
snjrefW^
ii
$$
11
( ^vs )
8PPT:
3ft ft
sn^RRJ^, cT^
fa?*, arffo ?
w
(
sffai spft
*$
?rcfor
#g ^ ^
II
65 )
or
born of perspiration as
always
in
( 66 )
they are
only
]
it
by the
[
mind of mind ]
;
the
waking one
they
do not
exist apart
from
it
the
[the
mind]
each
is
fancied [ to be
(
67
perceived by
is
other; then
( ucyate ).
what
is
it
that
is
real ] ?
Nothing
are
the answer
perceived
by their
so
thought
itself.
(6$)
As a dream-made
creature
is
dies,
and
# wtfai * w#gf
JIRHW: sfa:
STFTcr
*r
11
^
*C
^
*$
3FTC:
qsil
sr
sift
M^cf,
3**T arft
afar:
*^cT
**#<!
S$ *?#g * *l#3 ^
l%ffet *fa;
II
\3<>
II
\9o ) apjq:
3T&
afft
&=&,
69
As a maya-made creature
is
born and
also
dies,
so
likewise, all
and
( 70 ) As a creature created by supernatural power is born also dies, so likewise, all those creatures are and also are not. ( 71 )
No
place
creature whatever
].
is
born; no origination of
highest
truth
it
exists
[ or, takes
This
[ is ]
that
where nothing
the percepti-
whatever
(
is
)
born.
72
[ or,
involving
itself;
ble
and perceiver
the mind-vibration
is ]
the
mind
[
[ is ]
glorified as eternal
and
without attachment.
1
epra:
l:
^q<rafc*Tr
3jf^cl
arot
<rc*n$r
51
vs^
) ajsspT;
( 3?5r
apjsiftft^r:
sr
erfer,
I
&
*r
fo#;
53m 3^jaj ^
gj ftftffa:
^pfo
( 73 )
What
is
not in
not in
may
in
exists
)
reality.
even unoriginated on account of the imagined But that [ is ] not unoriginated in reality. ] originated by the phenomenal experience established in other schools [ of philosophy ] !
74
What
[is]
[Where]
is
philosophy
there
is
persistent
adherence
to the non-existent; ] there the dual exists not; having just understood
dual,
he
is
born
].
one does not get [ that is, become associated with ] causes, superior, inferior or middling, then the mind is not originated. In the absence of the cause, whence the effect ?
76
)
When
sr^^r
strict
( \9V9 ) 3f^3t:
5etI^
farr^q
j$
ft
cot
)
erftftgw j^srcq
srarcr (
f%w
qcT:
qT5^r: stott
ci^
(
II
\svs n
( era: )
)
fa^
f%gfq4
(
arcicisq
gfor
qi srgeqRr:
gr
gqr,
sftcTSlf*"
q^ ar^
ft
fr^WW ^
I
f^n%:
II
Co
II
prat raw:, a^
*n**rc.
3f3r^ ara?*^
ble,
In asmuch as that [ mind is ] verily the mind-percepti( 77 ) what non-origination, of the mind free from causal relation [or
],
there
is,
the
(
78
Having
finding out [another] separate cause, one secures the state [which
grief, free from desire [ and ] free from fear. 79 ) That [ mind ], owing to [ its ] persistent adherence K> the non-existent proceeds to a similar [ entity ] ; having verily realised the absence of a [ real ] object, he turns back, without any
void of
(
attachment.
(
80
Then
the state of
verily
and not
free
active,
[ is ]
unmoving.
same, unoriginated,
^ flltoa:
wr $^r ^
(
c\
apw:
?m
spfcr
^ ^q
<%
T%1r*Rr
s^t
wrrest
^nr
II
<s^
II
^fer
3{er
wti^ i%q
^#w*iT%Tinft^r sniw
II
<J3
II
mwfc
11
<:
li
81
Unoriginated,
]
free
itself.
[ the highest
blazes forth
once for
(
is
all
owing
to
[ its ]
fundamental nature.
82
By
the apprehension
[ or,
some
object
]
or
other again,
easily [and]
concealed
that
Lord
is
not,
is
not
[ [
is
not thus
again
encompass
[ notions of
him
as ]
and
free (
by apprehensions of which, the Lord again is always encompassed, he is omniscient by whom [ the Lord ] is seen as being uncontarninated by these.
^ri
e
s&m\
^
srcrosnfciwii*?^
<:h
sreq:
wrf
afoaf
^
sn#-
SA
) 8Fspr:
<*;
flrnqf r%rq;
f| JTT^cT: ?w:,
sr^g r?<wt
^ i^ ^rT%w*#
ll
<s H
gt:
^r r %4 R14 ^
(
sraiH&rct
Having attained to complete omniscience, the state Brahmana, non-dual, not amenable to any beginning, middle and end, what more than this does one yearn for ?
8s
)
beneficial to a
(86)
as
is
spoken of
[ itself ]
the
natural
owing
to the
nature
one should attain to calm. and with [ its ] perception, with the object The dual, ( 87 ) ' the dual ] without the practical or, looked upon as fancied is ] [ '; [ as 'pure practical'. upon looked is object and with [ its ] perception ( 88 ) [ The dual ] without the object and without [ its ] Knowledge, perception is traditionally known as ' super-practical \
being controlled.
thus,
Knowing
the object of knowledge and particularly the knowable [ these three ] are always proclaimed by the enlightened.
^8
4s<TT<toF;Ff^KT
m% ^
M^ 1^ ^jt
faflft
^^
II
II
t%t% * fc flfRT^
3<?f
su^
ffcrc
ii
^Hl
|qr:,
*>?) 3T^q:-~
*rtc i%erc
#
jt
w*ft:
ft
iftm
fa%
sjS?qRf
II
II
89
objects
of knowledge
its
being
known
or, in
order
],
omniscience, of
own
one of high intellect. What is fit to be abandoned, what is fit to be known, ( 90 ) what is fit to be secured, what is fit to be made perfect are to be known from the Agrayana. Of these, of the three excluding that fit to
all
on
sides to
be particularly known,
place
].
perception
is
traditionally
known
[ to take
91
All entities
should be
known
as naturally
beginningless
where
(
exists.
92 ) All entities by nature itself are well ascertained as Adibuddhas [ enlightened from the very beginning ] ; one who has self-sufficiency in this way, is capable of [ securing 3 immortality.
SRTJ SPTlfTO
3R
^q t%t^ M
II
II
%^T^f5TT:
(
^8
3FTO
WWT^TRFn^ OTK
gctf
fN<at 3
I
hm
TOT*
II
^8
II
^fifr;
fqair: ^jar:
%
it
^h
ii
ft
[%
^^
=r
Ifdt
SRTt
* 3RI
fFTCS'T
<re
fe^
II
<%$
11
icf:
iff
(
* ^cr
)
cfa srpi
iraa^
93
[ in nirvana ] [
the
The
unoriginated,
sameness andself-confident.
But there is indeed no self-confidence in the case ( 94 ) of those who move about in [ a world of ] difference. Those who hold the doctrine of separateness descend down to differences. Therefore they are traditionally known as nervous wrecks [ or,
pitiable ].
the other hand ( tu ) whosoever those would be ( 95 ) unoriginated sameness, they [ are ] indeed those of the well set up in
On
The world
in general ]
however
unoriginated knowledge is fancied [ or, regarded ] as not crossing over to the unoriginated [entities]; as the knowledge does not cross over, it is therefore proclaimed [ to be ] without
96
The
attachment.
warn ^t
smfor
f^ra^r^firi
<vm
sr<t
sre
(
ft
w*<rar
sfto:
infarct
ft snfc
II
^
5RT^,
st
l^k^mNI^
AFT
T%R^
If there is difference even of the measure of an atom, ( 97 ) being produced, for an unwise one, there is not always the state of
much more
therefore
]. [
there
is
no
away of the
)
veil [
[
98
All entities
who
have
never
secured
any covering, naturally unsullied; [ they are J enlightened as well as liberated from the beginning- so understand the Leaders [the wise]. The knowledge of the eternal enlightened one, does ( 99 ) not cross over into the entities; all entities likewise [ do not cross over into ] the knowledgethis has not been declared by Buddha. (100) Having realised the state, difficult to see, very profound, unoriginated, sameness, self-confident,
without multiplicity,
we
salute [
it
] to the best of
our power.
in the G-au4apa*da-k3rika\
NOTES
The
first
Prakarana
contains
usually
inserted
in
the
after
Mandukyopanisad
to be the
with
the
expression
3^3* sgr^T
srsrf^fr
paragraphs 1-6, 7, 8-10, and 11 respectively and the whole is taken text of the Mandukyopanisad by Kuranarayana of the
in manuscripts
name
(
).
the
see
Prakarana variously
as
srHTOsr^w,
m^Tfamq
all
etc.
these topics
Gaudapada has ob/iously planned his first Prakarana on the basis of the Mandukyopanisad. He only refers to such points therein
as
own
thesis,
make
his position
29 ) in the Prakarana that Gaudapada intends to advocate the Upasana of Omkara which he
last
from the
The
fkig
All-pervading
the
is
three
waking
),
dream ) and $f?% ( deep sleep ). fire is ^ftwrsr, because in the waking state, the *ft% perceives by means of the sense-organs which are turned outward ( qnfet wfa ssr^mg: m^fr^Fng; <m^ The outward universe is called fsr^, so Katha ). <*WFk 5UWTW3 he perceives the outward universe in as called 7%*$", also the soul is the srra^ state. The Mandukya calls the trf|"ssr^r> INtr*. Gaudapada
(
I
nr5
^
1
probably because
shg-rerc:
in
Brahmasutra
mean Brahman. %*373R is thus explained by Kurafk*i narayana, few *i**> sSyrea fi% ... v%& **g^r?r fts*r%ari#r *?: far ^fNrrr ^re w mx fire: 1 nmzm ti&tfm Sankara, on the other hand, explains the term as follows: fk^tvft
taken to
1
mm
1
honnxi
f*re
58 In the dream
is
Notes on Gautlap&da-R&rite
state,
the fag
is
own
light,
the sense-organs.
He
is 3T?cr:siqr,
itself (
ff^^T^qrr^rT^^^T^^rr^T^iFTrecrT
TOcftfcT
ehw
Sankara
)
is sresr^r (
same
as the
sr^nnR
narayana
just
),
ssw
He
is
called
srr?r,
because he
capable of
else
(
and nothing
as
wrar
rf
explains
arr^r
'
light
on
nix
or ^rrsr
things
'
srgsw
srr^ra^
e*ra:
).
is
explained by Kuranarayana
l
$m m%$qmimqw%<%
Mantras, and so brings in
( 2 )
^fffticqsr:
He
fsrssr,
regards the
as jr-t^St Karikas as
!
Brahman
is
The
location of the
three
few and
srr^r
in
the
body
is
the
perception,
^sorarersrsfff
is
located there
).
( cf.
^r^fe^^m?^ ^jg:
here
to
Tarkabhasa
Sankara
(
refers
the
II. 1.
p?r,
fI
to*
Brhadaranyakopanisad
17
).
means the
reflection
of a
is
name as ?* and $rsr apparently man in the eye of the person sitting
meant here. Other Upanisadic
opposite to him.
This
surely not
passages referring to the Purusa in the eye, likewise are irrelevant here.
Gaudapada
active in
is
is
The fera
to
in
resides in the
dream.
srr?r
resides in the
p^Wtst
or the
^m^r
so often
referred
the
Upanisads.
Sankara
remarks
ms^TE
sTcfr
TR^cRfj Irsr^rtSnr
f%9g
srsr
Sankara thus says that fenr is fes^r himself. This also does not appear to be the view of Gau4apada. It is one thing to say that rk**> lira and srqr are the three forms of r%, and another that
ferer
and
ftsg-
when they
are deliberately
described as different,
Chapter 1
59
in
( 3 )
As
a corollary to
what
the
is
stated
the
second
Kauka,
srr^r
three
{%*%,
asnj,
and
are
is
subtle
and str??.
the *u*r
because the f^q- being absent, only the grr^r divorced from the fg-q-srs is the wssr. In the %%i% state, 3*R?f is the iusq", because
is
there
(
^^mrsr; :^
Is
r%<?ar
and
both
srrcr*r
.^rw
q*
1
ft
B. G.
II.
22
few
or
%%f$,
the
srrff
enjoys
only
:^rpfrrer
fk^,
*T3ft*
and
srr~r
lot
in
being
is
able to enjoy
^^,
of three kinds.
srref^rS and 3TH?^ respectively, and so <jrlr Kuranarayana reads nrsrffisr ( for ftsnsrrr
also
and
remarks
fesrrcsr resrRfsr
f^w-Vcxm^
3*re ? ? mw^fr
f&f s^aror^.
1
The Mandukya mentions two more characteristics HFTlf and trEffiT?5rr%ES? for both jk^ ( l^-prr ) and asr?r> and x&ft-m and
str^W
for sr^.
Gaudapada ignores them, because they are unmain put pose which is ultimately to establish the
the following from the Bhasya by Sankata for the
*rr
R ea ^
anc*
terms
Wr?w
s^taf^rfag^r asrr tottipt*w ?r^r 5 ^hit stop s^t^rW mit *rf 5JF ^f^p^*ap$<T itV
tprenawir
*rcr:
^fecte
fantastic explanation,
?zmm
g*rrr [r
One who knows that 1%^ ftsw and srr^r are really just the ( 5 ) forms of one and the same flrg, and the three-fold miw is likewise concerned only with the three forms, knows that the is really
^5
m^-
the one
is
way by
*r
^w^t
tftsFffStewnr^
*
I
% *rer
*fr
fitar: ^r ?ta
WW
**fe*& ?*^r
crga;
( Safikara );
sra$ Kuranarayana
*% sftessr
^famr-
*&***
The same
Gita V. 7,
idea
is
contained in
webs f
icT
w**^
ibid
V. 8*10.
6d
6
)
Notes on Gaudapdda-KfiriM
mean
of sages \
the
This
srennr-
is
impossible,
when we remember
no doubt
that
that
stt^.
There
(
is
verses
describe
it
views of
Gaudapada's opponents.
that
All of
them
as
axiomatic truth
Whatever exists must have a source ', and base their various Karikas 6-10 seem to have for their basis in the theories on it, Mandukya the sixth paragraph, where the srr^r is described as The ^fl^T, *r%> sr^qrra^ ^sfcr vtfk, and ^ref srwn<anft. Gaudapada in by Karikas referred to 6-9, theories about creation
appear to us to be of the nature of fq^TRpir
pada's
srr^:,
to
*
quote Gau4a3rf3rnTar
sffa:
)
own words.
ftra&
1
Gau4apada's
*re
own view
t%t%^t
is
(
^rata* *
scrrrfrnr 5Etw
srra^r
III.
48
IV 7 1
-
Gau4apada points out how his opponents, not realising the highest truththe non-origination theory indulge in starting different theories about creation, seemingly supported by sruti texts which
they misinterpret to suit their
own
views.
viz.
their theories,
existent,
is
shaky
it
no wonder therefore
the super3?^rrfcr5rr^".
structure based
on
topples
down under
are
the onslaught of
As we
nine different
theories
of
creation referred to
[ 1 ]
by Gau4apada.
theory
is
The
*
first
is
that of
stromas
their
view
is
^k
swrfcr
is
VW;
This
thing without
srnsr
dead
with
life
*nnr, it is full
of
life.
So
sn<*T
can
be regarded as
q;sr
putting
into objects.
*r q;<r
Passages like
3Tr
TftOTtaw*RT>
vm ^ srarwH-d^mU^
theory
srior
(
wg srrur
sr^rr?^ $rft*
(Kausitaki Upanisad)
may
on
BrahmasQtra
[
28, shows
that
means Brahman
The s^^rf^cs
believe in a personal
as
God and
g^?
describe
5^T
self.
portions of himx$k%
They
upon
passages like
srarr
:
I
irar *rarct> ( Purusastikta, R. X. 90 ), jthsttstt mm tra sfkf$: qwm* wsfct ^ewtp ( Gita XV. 7 ), qvn q$rHT^r^:T%Sifef r 'sswsf aw^Titr%*rr. #T ssttw ?r=r ^rfq* *rftcr u ( Muiidaka II. 1 )
:
%^W" raYs or ^ ts ^
from which
for themselves.
The
to
s^<*
is
a store-house of #arar,
Vidhukkhara thinks
Chaptft
6*1
i%tTW^??T mentioned in IV. 72. This is very unlikely. Kuranarayana says ^cfer ^5?^g^i qroRrm *ri ^scUcgsFriErr *r mfeqrg^rr^XHrk
^smz&mfgvk war
sraraiet
!
gsr:
mwrft^r
to
He
and
5^
to refer
5ft.
apparently taking their stand upon ( 7 ) C 3 ] The the fspgjHS of the Lord described in the Gita and Puranas, explain the
process of creation, by attributing the
mwiT^s,
expansion or manifestation
*js%r%?cra One
him
perceivable
in
the
created
objects.
who
is
the
creation
proceeded.
;
The
is
gi%
their
(
worry
only about
others )
[
how it came to be there. The qrftorm^n^s may also come under this category.
The ^nrrqrcTJ^s
are
mm$ and
Mahayana
undoubtedly
srTiiner.
?r
the
Buddhists
in
who deny
( II.
the existence of
2. 29,
They
)
are referred to
where Sankara enough remarks This view is held by some of the Vedantists including our Could Gaudapada have referred to teacher ' ( that is, Gaudapada ). himself as stflr: 3f%f*hrfwr ? We think that Gaudapada has in
Brahmasutra
^gwifssr
^ffn%^
his
mind here
SWrfir
HWlW
^*zfefkfa*im
MM
^STR^fTOTTtW
5TfT
% &$?
to
in
ts^^flrast;
..-
^%l
^s^jrcmrw wr m^g^n:
*s?5r
hm<^ii
OTmwWWf W^r
^* W where mm and
one and the same passage. Those who believe 5% to be like ^ST or mm, do believe in the reality of the creation-process, while R&manuja goes to the extent of saying that the creation in dream is
real
enough.
$wm
*roragrr-
(8)
to
[ 5 ]
TOTST^ap;
^ ey
^lieve in a
real creation
by a
personal creator
create,
who
is
grqrr^ffisn^trr etc*
but
able
by
his will*
62
Notes on Gaudap&da'-Rtirikft
This view
srf
is
referred to in the
wf
srsriw.
Kuranarayana takes
( those who advocate the philosophy of the Upanisads ) and hence the Siddhanta view. According to Kuranarayana, the second half of the Karika again refers to sraj?cT?s. He seems to
3?r<n3*a[s
expression
fsrfaffercTP
It is
unnatural to expect
Kuralamely
difficulty,
but
...
tries
to
meet
I
it,
enough,
by
remarking
^rar%iwr:
STOgrorfcaa;
sgssrrfWfr-
penser.
that <ei^ or
refers
I
Time
is
the
great
dis-
to
w$
It is
( stst-
Ararat
ftrcrfilr-
sfe^nr fcTTH
ra^firac
I.i ).
wrong
to
call
them
astronomers.
( 9 )
in
real
creation
by a personal
creator, differ as to the cause or purpose of the creation all the same.
[
is
ment by
STOTffTR STOTPT
sp?rftranr
II
ssw
of
just
for the
sport
the Lord.
C 9 ]
the
possibly have
cfosr ( cf.
any
explanation
therefore, that
it is
the
*sr*rr*
Ktiranarayaria thinks
gfar:
^r^r
ww:
etc. is
^rfjM ^r*
*
^%m
Htww^Rftrfir im\ ) He seems also to combine into one snftsre. Sankara says $mw aftenSfafit *w$t
^n and
%&
mm
\
vm$t
awfc
According to Sankara, $nn* means here srfror. We have already stated above that the writaw has no scope for a creation even by means of 3ft%rr,
<r$r%rit
I
$*&* mnfrwfafo
Chapter I
6$
Having mentioned the various theories about creation, ( 10 ) Gaudapada now says that there is only non-duality, the Turya
(
'
the fourth
',
and Prajna
fk*$.
) that
is
real,
capable of ending
misery,
eternal
and
The
The
question
.
of
m^:
Kura-
narayana says,
H%wtf f^i%
g$
is
^ncnrficrar It 1?:
reading fts%:
would mean
that the
the negation of
all
misery.
In the STTsrs; and ^5T states, the in the form of ( ii ) firq^qfawsr, OTsnra*nrc*i ?n?|fr*rew, ^nfosFsranrar etc. persists. In the sg<|fsr state, there is no fsr<T<r, no m%X? n0 W* etc -> but the sngr s
*
^f%
;
still
the gq*
on the other
%&.
*$t%
...
hand
light,
free
irom
ail
sfra
mw& ftfirera;
;
Sankara)
I
^^R^r^w^iTrfTr?[^{^|;^i'5w?^
).
cT?3>rcmTlt
m^sp
^Ror^i^:
Kuranarayana
12
In the gjfo
as there
state-,
* (Mk^kik^H}
hand is no 5a exists,
1
is
no f^qis
on the other
according
all light
^ri
^ ag; ^^
the explanation of
^ra?
to Sankara
who
I
q%fir srir?TO?r
^*Sgf*TT*ro3*V
(15)
only vanish
rjT^refsr in
(
Both
and
poles asunder,
srf^r still
gq- do not cognise %$, but they are as remains wedded to the iggsrra re n which can
1
truth
is
realised,
ftsr is explained as
14
are always
)
;
jrftro; )
and
( awrsrfOTta:
encumbered with ^g* (sT^^mr with ironriNTO only, there g is completely unencumbered,
sn*r
srresrFrgsrr is
explained
be seen that
is
fa%x
is
common
to all the
B^
to
be identical for
all
made
fifcr^r*
clear in the
second Prakararia.
Both
srora;
and ^$r
states are
64
( 15 )
Notes on Gaudapada-KAriha
person in dream
and
sees
Hence
3PF?ra!5r3tn is the
in sleep a person
**
firwfar
is
3?3rr?re<T.
Whe
is
arwronrsoi
and
awgn*
vanish,
one
(16)
spTi^RWirr
both gn:
and srgsra ( **nrf^5$srr wwr( smr^lWr^rflmsPTr $wnrfenwr ) cannot be any 3^*rorarsr or there 1^ sricT ^cfSnOT^rsw ^i$rr ).
cix^rsrr^^^.
This Karika
is
bhasya
II. 1. 9.
17
An
all
objection
is
raised to the
is
statement
st|<y
srerar
cT^r
If 3*t?r
?
realised,
which we
experience
The answer
wm
to
is
just
mtrmrsr,
mere illusion which disappears immediately stI^ist is secured. question raised by the opponent could be taken seriously if
were
s*|cr
;
The
srq^f
real
srqsg
would have
go in the
face
of
but
some
effective
means
to get rid of
arise, as
sn^f
;
is
just illusion*
srqr=$
did exist,
stIth
we might take &%$ as the subject of fog&r then ^er would have to retire from the field,
Or,
snrer
if
for
both
not
and
arise, as sjtpr is
but
frnnsttsr
like
the
found in Brahmasutra III. 2-3, m*xmi# 5 gnr^^rarossr^^^rrft )* This, however, does Gaudapada perhaps uses fasSar in the not seem to be intended.
creation in ^g- ( the expression ottottst
sense
as
If
would
definitely
c
continue
to
exist
'
( ftsnTft
feast sraa
opposed to
fsrfaeraa
in
the
next
Karika
).
m?3
is real, it
any account.
For a
If various ideas about creation and srcr^ are put forth ( j8 ) by people through some reason or other, those would have necessarily to be given up ultimately. They are sometimes useful
to
beginners
who
*j
all
at
once.
it
*r
Kura-
narayaiia reads
and explains
as
OT^rit
idea
5
:
fesaasr
If the
ftra&r, the
sr^ were
to exist in reality,
Chapter I
65
its
would never
is
nature
it
as
merely
<i%<?3,
surely
must
disappear
is
for a
%&&\
is
unreal,
(
supply
3^. The
second line
w%9a?<Tsrrsfr
found in Yogavasistha
I
III
84. 27 )
III.
fesnf% SUTfsSEP
84. 25, as
OrspNer:
3-<T\snf?f
srrfr
etc.
and in
^f^JterapT
19 )
how
the three
states
are to be
g*r
equated
with
to the
Matra-less.
3*1*3;
% s and ^
first
or the
can
be
said to be
the
r%*3"
resides in the
first
of the states,
3* is
the
of the Matras
so
when we want
^<rar )
to
3* (
speech,
is like 3T,
3T^3r*gtfiFFsr
STOrefts^T^:
'
resulting in
or
;
ft*g-
the
BT^rrww is
when
3*
is
and the
fk^
is
to be identified
with
when
ht^ttow
more intimately connected than in 3"<rm ), the common ground is i%*g- pervades the whole outside crea3*rfsr ( pervading nature ),
tion
,
srerc
3T
is
shows
is
to be the
also all-pervading, as g^nTornFr^TTr^R ( Gita X. 32 ) This kind of identification rlnjfrT of the Lord.
in
frequently
is
met with
smftfer
),
Brahmana
literature.
The
<*r&
\
of this
(
q^?3fanj*T
? % snrW
^mRnV
srwsr
w% sim**
^ has
Sankara
on Mandukya 9
(
20
?m*T
n l ^ e second
like a
state )
is
like 3,
because
ftsrB"
is
more
exalted than
it
ftrgr,
sr
greater &?,$,
!
because
follows
sv^*? to
(
Or,
we
might take
follows
mean
as ^sr is because fern is midway between ( and so with be identified gr, connected with both ) ih?% and srr*r> and 3- is midway between The *$& of this q^ctr( and so connected with both ) a? and ^
'
R5^
coming after \ gr follows 3T, a^r^r dependent upon the sfr^ state ). ^s^r can
just
spert
is
&&mn
s I ^sraftrcr
).
ft^rrwm'S dkafar?*?*
1
tfwngvw
i
wfk swarfe^ $%
*rera
Sankara
on Matujukya 10
(
21 )
srqr
is
like n,
wm^
),
being
the
last,
and
syllable
of afof.
66
srr^r
Notes on
Gaudapada-Kanid
because
fr*cr
and
(
Isrg*
merge into
srr?r
in the
)
55 ftr
after
state,
and
st
and
being uttered.
ff f^nrsrer sntrc
ftfcOT
f^r^rfr
I
tot*
Sankara
The
).
of^this
c^rcwrr
^cfr?TO:
(
Sankara on
Mandukya
1 1
22
g??
*rmrrac> the
each of the
23
The sqOT$
secures
fw
that of ^3T^r
that of
Sri?" (
as identified
with
qsr
k^t )
*T
(
the
srr^r,
the doctrine,
m i*m^
He
srtfT
*r
Gita XVII.
has not to go
anywhere
to
his
Ihrtf
goal.
realises
himself as Brahman.
The
grqr^rcE
of
is
an d
the
secures
only the
inferior
to
sTr^s of the arm^. But Karika 22 calls him a Karika 29, one who knows the 3fi|FiT as arom etc.
This
is
strange.
Karika 22 appears to be a
24
as
swrsr aspect.
is
also
aftgpre is
To know
3Ti|frc as a
know
its
parts or Matras
There
is
no necessity of meditating
upon anything
( 25
)
else.
swsr or grtgHX
absolutely free
is
^grat
which
is
described in the
is
Upais
nisads
as
from
fear,
sr^cr
3^
lit.
which
first,
Vedic passage
is
expected
sfj^.
smrti,
*m
fq??r?w^
^ ^fr
srcwfi^fja
gwrra
,a a
rs
Iwet
II
II.
The Aitareyabrahmana
says flw$r%ffW*m?TT
Chapter I
mfcf
srofrahftrft
is
6y
prefer
i
wS
(
t%
wmwm msm
the
Trinity,
vfe*$r>
)
I
In
later
litera-
ture sfo*
said to refer to
Mahesa, ^^ifr
ttst:
I
R^ff^ s^mg
: *
i^ftafrstR *rm
says,
?$t
The
Gita
XVII. 23-24
also
&
sti
11
rT?^r%
ftfihft
3r^oTr%f^*: ^lfr
srrsrorccR
^rar ^rsr
rtw=
cr*mfrm?^if?s
( 26 ) doubt that
Vidhusekhara reads
qrc:
<tt
^s(
There
with
is
no
reading which
was emended so
along
as to refer to
sTgr.
which
is
generally spoken ot
VV
11
).
is
the
3m
:
srrfTrr
JT^cT:
^JTS^WfTS^TPTfJ^'?:
?V
III.
sw
g-gr-the
II
There
is
no point
describing
as qr
;
when
stor
is
to be
immediately shown
as srer. tpfcRr
srirRT.
fiwrer*mTO<i:
srffRr
Kuranarayana boldly explains 37^ .., and q*: as tmifRr srcrr^Y sft
:
WRTcT
<TC sr^r,
*TR:
be that
so that %xxm
thus
equatin
ing 5rR[ and snwj ^ the same time ? Prasna V. 2, we read <ra| sk^tr <rt <srw
On
=3*
the
other
hand,
TcTfR^^fcf
ranyaka IV,
(
l.
5. 12. gfgjh
).
h R^ft ^1
q?T*nr
*W
sftesjh
*PW
^ROTSr:
Kuranaiayana
27 ) Sankara
(
(
^w
).
cTS;
^-SF5W*TR?cT?
Kuranarayana
),
rrtjr?wra
28
I
Compare
),
the
also
first
line,
|*^: ^^cTRT
%\Hi[*b
ftrsik
(
Gita XVIII. 61
^r 3r
r^m
XIII. 17
swaraw
217
).
swswtw
*
W 5RRT f^
ff^
^
l
gf|t$g?t
Ri%crat
I
SRfos:
Kathopa-
niad
( II.
).
^fsr,
^TtoHircrft^
swfogfaw
duality ceases*
( Sarikara
29
)
:
lawtasm i There
wmfttf*
(
being only
).
3t|ar,
all
Sctft
3R
Of
>
Sankara
if
they do not
know
the
Omkara.
Munckka,
Chandogya
atid
Mauri
refer
to
Omkara
$?ra$ava, describe
g
uses for
Notes on Gaudapdda-Kdrika
meditation
and
fruit
of
gffwfrqrosrr.
The following
Kathopanisad
3frw?^l!l.2i5
trer^r^ ssr
tra w?rc <rc*
srfar^rar
l
t?rr%w* 5t^t *n
cr^E^ era:
II
1.
12.16
qasrcwr
Prasnopanisad
qffrsrr
5TiT$r%
hst^
11
1.
12. 17
tnWr
11
V. 2
wsr5t?p
h wwisftTOt^mm
%$m wnfl?w
11
a^at
##t ^a:
II
V.5
<s*<m ^-
V,6
!%5f ? ^^ryaJT3T*R*jamr?r
<r*
%ra
it
V.7
srfr
^3:
gmm
srr
auwg5qfr
*!><*
II
3T5TI=r%Fr
Taituriya
W^Sq ^tFOTT :
II.2.4
w*ri*s
^r^rtwm wffnr
11
qrtsrfcr
srfrV
^tm% mpr*
**wm *#TOW*fiflt
srltftnfrfa
1,8
Chapter I
69
Chandogya
^rfk&TOWSstaswd^tmSr
srsraict
^mvwmwoi
...
I.1.1
m* ^
^^%^\m^m^^ ^^sra
1
I.1.5.6
iftq- srtfr
7r%?lm%^r to*
1.8
^r
srsr
*r
qt^^r^c^rmrasrfm^^^^jrf^
sricrr
w? aarftrvr %qr
q^r
st^to
1.
4.
*r
sfor-
*r sr^i^r q; srors: *t
1
sfm f??ror
err
smq
sftffrft
ir?
w&nir
1.5.
ct$n*rr
wr^^noT ^t^?ct
*rer srrf
^s^Rsrftfcf
II.
13.2
1
m^s^vq^facwpq ^rr^Smrn^sm^HW
^f a<mf
rc:
grsnsrerHrsn
$t^tt *reffa
Wfit
H- x 33
^y^rsmrgprc
qfo^^
w VI.2
Maitri
HTT^r sTfroiT
^
*r
nS
-grriS
*t
^ra
9?^
a?^"*
'flPsS
cr?*r?*f
rT^u
as^rfaasssrfcr:
faft ?%sfr srrer
am^sr-
qr
c^ ^mcqcr^rfm*r3r?*r
sfrcf
ir<*rmPT sq^rfr-
wrfip
^ftr?riJ?f
4hrrof&$*r
mt*%j
wris** sftfow
sqrocwwn %m\h%
VL3
trcf sroi^r
Bq-^TC
i?W srtijfrsr srmqrw mT?rrc *tc<t fNnf^ fir^rt firvj fiw? 5*: ^Wrltf faffrT Sfrmfa?q# SW ^fa&TO$W ^rfcl cr^T^t*
m w\wi\m\%w
srar srsr Ssfr
iter
*ms&*r
fa^KTH
TO11^?k
^0
Notes on Gaudapada-Kdrikd
3Tr
**i?T srsq-
^T%sgr%?%
^r$j^Tr
sro
srrofrsfsp
%$
f r%
sramafar
??^
<tt
^m
^r srgr
^TmcTO^^wr%
:
VI. 5
5gswr
*3?rf
mfc; $r^*r
...
sr^st
q?ra
11
VI. 14
VI. 22
r^t^
VI. 24
$mm*&
ik^i iWri
^tstrt
I
^ ^Ufqr
srorarw: vfar
*re<n iWrestr
ftras^taft
his
VI.25
that Hari
in the
tCuninarayana
tries
best
to
show
It is
forms
is
the object
of Upasana
described
first
Madhva
same
line.
interpretations of tCuranarayana
and
Madhva
In
the
eyes of both
of
thferti,
Gau4apadfyakarikas in the
Prakarapa
Mandukyopamsad. They do not seem to be aware of the other three Prakaranas of the Gaudapadfyakarikas. The colophons in the Manuscripts at the end of 'this Prakarana vary considerably, such as ft v mvftftafat smar, snm ( without any specific name ) ...
form
a part of the
R ft<fc:
*m
****, vftmim
I here does not appear to be Any good authority for calling this jtWW, anw, as is done by Prof. Vidhusekhara. perhaps is the most fitting title for this Prakarana, if any is to be given
*f j^^
CHAPTER
presumably because the
rana
is
II
is
usually called
|^w,
is
word of the
tries
first
^cr$q\
Gaudapada
srrsrci;
to
no
is
and ^wstarr consists in neither fo?hr nor s?qn%, neither srtgr nor
and ^sr
m^$
(
etc.
1
Things seen
in a
to be false, because
Mountains,
dream cannot possibly be accommodated in the small limited space occupied by the body of the dreamer. So they must be false or imaginary.
(
2 )
The
The mountains
etc. are
the dreamer
may
It is
be actually travell-
may
To
this
we answer
dreamer to actually travel to the regions within the short period of the dream hardly lasts, say an hour or so; is dreaming; how could he be travelling thousands of miles during that
time he
period
?
Secondly,
many
when awake,
in
the
regions
which
he had visited in his dream. All this shows that the objects seen in a dream are within the body itself; the dreamer does not go out
to see
them.
)
( 3
The
how
the objects in a dream are created by the soul out of the material of
this all-containing world, but
exist.
*re smfafcr
stot: 3T3re
?T
rT5T
5P5TfWr% serf
SW^
(IV.
'
11
W&& *nr?c*TO
The
as
?W*m*l
SWftnft:
is
$r*nu:
$srff
*r
$.
10).
expression wnqrs^lH*
Sankara
).
But there
are undoubtedly
what
Gaudapada
is
referring to here,
:
trasq- ?*tt
j
*w wwrftprft'nP"
:
<3W
spffirttamf ^r%?
says
Sankara
but ^g?sffra
would simply
j2
Notes on Gaudap&da-K&rihi
help of other
means
*
unreal.
Their unreality or
qr
srenr
is
just
?srr
w-
9>n
III.
etc.
Some
sort of reasoning
crl
is
to be
1
found in Yogavasistha
?r
19,
mg*ra smsrq
w%t%
ffc^on?!;
|^T^rc5^!^ ^
h^w
ti
tt
i^r*
<r*
Nki
11
*|rr
^ro
^itot^
r^
...
^Nta*
srfg^ft
^ ^
RM
11
11
**fr
11
11
however think that wTwphs^ does not refer to logical reasoning at all. It might be argued that the soul in the dream
might be
is
We
different
*grsr
in the
gH
ffrf
IV. 3. 14
absence of
^*rg^kftcT^5T <^nm s?k uttr- ire sTrorsn^fo arrf^r the mere statement about the ) and therefore etc. in dream, without the corresponding statement
is
futile.
The
Brhadaranyaka to meet
this
argument says in
the same way the same means way by which one had gone, the trsn^rra' ;?fnr entering and it is this rqrq- in ^^rri^r^ used in the way of going, )
soul enters from one state into another and returns
is
refened to by Gaudapada:
*r
zht sto
=cr
<*r<r
g*
sjfcjrqig
sfoqfanwfir wrista"
IV. 3.14,
^r ?rr
*msr f3n%?^?*Hrrrarc&T
wtr^rftot 5^? 5%
itffrat^rosrfec
s^aHhr
scrrwi^r-fr r&i
*rsra?*q-
stfei'ftTTO srfcritorr
s*
f^T?cT
g&sgtf^rfcr sH IV. 3. 1 8.
II
^m *hmw
c
) *rf
and
qrrsr
are
synonymous
because
terms,
meaning
objects
thing
object ^
There
is
%mn
in hst,
the
experienced
also, because
is IcTsst
in
srrirat
the so-called
sn^
is
the perceiver's
f Rj
which
f^THmf^s rherefore
perception only the
argue that
becomes ffWrre^rer*r ( The srrp^g does not exist all, because for
).
3^3:^51%
helps
Chapter II
?j
tfie
must not lead us to conclude that there is only one state and not two. There is some difference; smr^ state is different from ^$r on the score of HrT?3r ( being enclosed ) which is a characteristic of ^sr only where
smnt state,
obtains in the
^=rsr
as well.
But
this
all
is
body of the dreamer. But this Devadatta sitting in the open cannot
from Devadatta
sitting
in a closed
Prof. Vidhusekhara unnecessarily wants to room on a rainy day emend ^ffr?^?r nr^m into %&& ?r fasm which he explains to mean
that the state of being enclosed does not differ in
There
as
is
we have shown
is
reading ^cT?^r
as
firafr
satisfactory
meaning.
To
%3rrr
H
a
3rr$? )
msra
equally
unnecessary.
Sankara
tries
to
evolve
regular
( stcNtt )
?w?*ra
fc^
All this
( 5 )
is
are thereand *tm<ft both because fore understood by the wise to be one and the same, are fa-pro and ( <W ir wr is also called ^*w <Jffto
For
purposes,
*=r$r
WW
sw^R.
WH
Brha. IV. 39
(
).
tgm *m?3R
( Safikara ).
6 )
This Karika
and strkcT states are fsfcrsr also on the general principle that whatever is not there from the very beginning ( that is, whatever is produced or born ) and is going to have an end ( that same characteristic, viz. is, can be destroyed ) must also have the
Things
in ssff
The mirage
after,
^n^wm
is
is
not
it
so
it
unreal
when
Things in
?ssr
and
)
srwrfta
are
really
possessed
entities,
of the
same
characteristics ( ^rg^rr
as
those of t%<re
but they
by the ignorant*
grabt the
7 )
One
rtiay readily
74
Notes on Gaudapdda-K&rika
Why
do we regard the
of
state.
dream
serving
some purpose
is
contradicted in
another
real
its
characteristics or sr^ft.
is
The
hearty meal
of no avail in the
smni
the
state
where he
Now
snsr^
exactly the
state.
same
is
the
situation
in
The
^rsnfisnrrrr
(
contradicted in
as
on eating
srrgr^
in a
dream
So,
though he
contradict-
state ).
mm^ objects
is
ed in the other
state.
So smrs; objects
objects.
being of a changeful
must
*
*=r$r
and
some purpose
*?jt
also in
dream
is
known
We
what the
wrtfrcrmT of objects
in question. are
in
fawr and he gives the reason that their ^ wnwar is contradicted dreams. Whether objects in a dream have a snmrar or not is beside
the point.
Vidhusekhara wants to emend wrfW: into 9WV- wmwr:, and confesses that the Karika is not quite clear to him. There is no doubt that is the genuine reading,
(
Prof.
3^
^| wriM
if
one
likely to
is
change
3^
merely on account of the fact that no mrfcraf: into qtf *wfcn:. Gauda-
we have to fill in gaps'to but that hardly justifies us in changing his words at will. Prof Vidhusekhara is unable to Understand the Karika presumably because he has failed to grasp the meaning of the & last Karika.
make
the
pada's style
meaning
The
is
as
follows:
granted
that the
The
objector
sajrs
that
it
may be
tnrtataff oi
( referred to as
to
many
dream-state if the same a time the dreamer sees in a dream quite abnormal,
vm*
Chapter II
75
state.
therefore has
that
no scope here.
is
Are
that
we
not therefore
state
in saying
the dream
an entirely
unique
state,
and
the dreamer
things in
also a different
soul
who
creates
those
abnormal
such an easy manner ? No conclusion can therefore be drawn about the las? of objects in the waking state from what we
see in the dream.
The
is
Siddhlntin's answer
an 3*$! thing.
soul;
it
is as follows: We agree that *$$*P But that does not mean that the dreamer is a
different
is
just a case of
wrmsw.
Is
The 3^?*
is
but a
An
ordinary
person
when
Similarly
the
dream
is
a privileged
one could
of
fly in
300
miles an hour,
but a trained
that
with
the
ease. So whether the things aie normal or abnormal, but upon whether they The sr^lr in the dream are capable of being belied in another state.
greatest
the las?
of things does
is
is all.
q-^r
wrfroafatf
I
TS^^^fcareT(
Ankara
).
9 and 10 )
Things,
both in the
5^3 and
^jr
states, are
%&:
3TT9Tc|
state
is
tsjr state
Whatever
is
imagined
Even
in
the ^j(,
the
by the mind
ed as 3|HtI
( 2 )
popularly regard-
Whatever
is
cognised
is
Even
in
^r
^5
on par with
the
sn^ state
is
therefore
&#
(,
Notes on Gaucjapada-Rftrika
^Ute, .andisftiw
like
the
w%
1 1
)
is
What
both the smra; and rejr objects are f^m and %?P*ffcra, 5 these questions require real ? Who imagines these
If
^s
Sankara
).
Karika.
all
Atman Atman
'
is
the answer
light (
to the questions
),
raised in the
is all
sm,
srtcT
etc,
hence he ima-
gines
ent
(
Maya ( which also is not differfrom him). Here Gaudapada parts company with the Bauddhas
this
Vijnanavadins
).
^ ikmvk
<** STtsf^stfr
is
$*rr%Hnfa&sfasrw
'
According to the
Bauddhas fasTR
also
%mm \
-
It
cannot be
w&m
He
first
for
any thing.
the
13
how
powerful
srg: )
Atman
mind and then becomes out-ward-minded and fixes them up outside, just as a speaker first thinks about what he is going to Prof. Vidhusekhara wants to read speak and then speaks out. srarefromij for swi^Erarat, because the objects in a dream are not
his
fixed,
and ftum 5* i n the second line is intended to be contrasted He also wants to read srif so as to correspond
to
),
We
differ
Gaudapada
as
Karika
f&ra.
good
first
as HtfcT.
are
purposes.
mean/
That
outside in the
is
why
r%r^fr:
expression grfffsg% would mind* which is a contradiction in terms. minded out-ward seems to have been
'
The
'
preferred by
Gaudapada.
(14,) Objects within are v=m%\^ ( staying as long as the thought lasts ), objects without are r%TTF.Toy and ^^r^F^. T%TT^r^s
are cognised by the mind;
referred to
gpj
in addition by %\?3&s, as they are by Gau4apada himself in IV. 72 as in g^rs* here does not mean snpsrr^cTtsr,
%?m$,
belongs surely to
fe^ns*
as
well
for ?%tT
would be the
and the things imagined would be grgr ) Read the following from Ankara's Bhyasya, t%^t<3P ... ... fararaft*d*rr:
srrp?
i
Chapter II
77
^^51^ ^wAfM^cs
and
also
mz%i
HTifrr^t 3[rei
srtmr *m?sr <frfH rronrrar %fa ) <mmftar 5prei3H sri^r objects thus are t%tT^^
:
I
existence.
Hence they are [*Tssr^. Whatever that be, all objects, whether within or without, are but imagined objects. The rer<? pointed out, viz. some are r%Trsro and others are gq-^T^, is due, not to any other cause, but ^qRW itself.
( 15 )
It is
^r,
but this
distinction
in
between the
for
their
two
is
caused merely
It is
by the difference
the
means
cognition.
are
^to
while those
without are
leal.
addition
srrrFTT
the
help
of
tr*
their
cognition;
R**rr Hgs*re
SWT
of the Naiyayikas,
there
is
%*r
(
in
between
due
jt^
to
and
objects.
ff?qrTnr*
is
may mean
)
other itHtss
m as opposed
to *?*$;
which
an
3^1%^
or the
difference or distance
the
intervention
of ?faws
between
srrsqrfrErsF
come
into existence.
)
The
that
Advaita
Atman
first
imagines
by his Maya
the individual
It
^qrcsic?.
appears
the
individual
souls
dilate
upon
any further,
as
he
is
mainly interested
the
^srrf?teT^.
The
logical
conclusion and
by
imagination by the individual souls. tional enough. But whence does the
qrsrrfir^
first firsn
is
unexcep?
come
Why
should there be the difference in the powers of imagination of indito this and similar queries, Gaudavidual souls to start with ?
all
unreal
*=?<f
Atman
is
the qrmrcftrr
Sankara says,
w$w
^t%^t
sfHr-
*r!^W-
wi
^TiTRrwrt?^^m^f^r%r%fTm^r%^^[^?rR^wT $*<w<f
-g
Notes on Gaadapada-Kfrrikd
17)
*formi%ft
The
r0 P e in
dartness
is
mistaken for a
Similarly stick etc. stream of water ( s^otto ), serpent ( *r* ), people different accordby things of sorts all for Atman is mistaken inngination. ing to their powers of
(
18
When
the
the
fkw^s
realised as
3Tr?r,
the different
19
etc, are
due to the Maya of Atman that so many fifths, srror It is strange, but true that Atman superimposed on him.
)
It is
Maya
of
his
and gives
rise to
such
I
ftr^s
(
w*r!q-
tfrfefr
f sr mff cfl"
(
WcT
20
Verses 20-28
3 5
of them
They
men.
It is
possible to
point out
some
ima
facie
is
fcp^q-s in the
[ 1 ] stiut
Atman
imagined to be
their
)
who
1.
take
.4-5
stand
upon
passages like
iA
xmwm ( Chandogya
1 1
and others
f *im*rkrr
snsrwr$r?sTsar $F<rorfer ).
by
^Frfir^s
(
who
take
their stand
)
upon passages
the three
igyrs,
that
support the
fir^TO
or the
are
q^wn process
or or
ffsiw;
srrersr
added to the
is
list.
The popular
also
qnsr*uf?re
is
well-known.
The
^rsw
(IX. 25
are
sfassg^mq-cr^frft
meant here
[3]
).
mK
HW$ by some of the Sankhyas who postulate *m, ?3T*c and the three constituents out of which every thing is The Gita ( XVI and XVII Adhyayas ) elaborates this constituted.
as
).
**?TTOwri%
mx *zwx).
w*wrsrfw?rc
*r*rar
^rcwfm%
top ( Anandagiri
Chapter II
y$
that STrm^t,
fiT^R by the Saivas ( according to Anandagiri ) who say 3*!W and fsre are the three ftt^s which create the world. One would naturally expect the si^rTTsrs to follow the ^f^q-^ors in
[
reasonable.
upon Chandogya
5^*
and
in the <tt?s
by some Vedantins who take their stand 5-8 ) where srr^nr is instructed by the ( of Brahman, called sn&n?nrT5, awwiqt, ^mmq[
qr^s
III. 5
srrfNft
ft&Gi
v$wi
fe&sn^^ft
&&5$n % m**
s^r g?f ^traRwrjr
^&%&
m%x srgm:
^jts^oj: <nr
^srafTw^wTirfiT
:
... srfir:
cPojt
...
*%<?
^iwi
srr^ ^5TT
ii?r ^itTOTt
Anandagiri
fe*3", H3T*r> sny and g?r ( the Mandukya ^CTmfflrr^aws ) This is not ^ely as Gau4apada himself has dilated upon them in Prakarana I ( though with the ultimate object of establishing $r|ar ) and would not of his
own
among
the c^Rr^s.
ftws by
the
sensualists
like
3TWPR
the
:
author of Kamasutra (
wwqwsrfRi
^moirsfa
11
sp^rt qr^frr^s^sfr
mwr
otStS (sr
Anandagiri
[
fffer
)
ftwn:
? fa
is
fawTsFrenw (Hft^fWR;
qressftr stf
sftSrat
I
...
and
^rnrfes
whose motto
igjfas
snrorfrora
stfi
etc.
by the ^reft^s who think highly of ^ra, Wfr^t*, and aspire to secure residence in them; ^g*r: $rftfcT
:
shot **gpe*r s^cftfSt welfare ( Anandagiri ). It is better to understand by &fcs, the various abodes on the %rr path, rather than ^, gsp and *r: as stated by Anandagiri. Very few would
by ^rii^s or ^grg-rrs who are enamoured of the hier* archy of the gods and worship their favourite gods to secure their
[ 8 ]
i^rs
\*m
(
8
Gita IX. 25
).
snfbsrepft
^raiww*
%mix ^WRrSftr ^nrrOTrtftar ( worshippers of the ^srts mentioned in the IwrenH' in Yaska's Nirukta )> says Anandagiri*
Notes on
Gaudapada-K&riU
22
?%$ by *%{%%$
who
swear by the
^T%
Anandagiri
).
ro
q-frs
who
^ffr
upon
I
passages
(
from
13
),
E^^
(
swreiWI:
),
Gita
III.
*5rf^?nj5fl- *rfar
(
^s^raTO
ffosfWr
IV.31
^3rrarrTOf=
j
m$
*msr srfasfW*
IV. 23
(
),
^rw
).
sr^r
srgroi
5^
*&*
*r?cT=i
sr^jfowftRi
IV. 24
11
Trf5
1
by the tfts^ft^s
1%
who
the
wg;
),
( 3T5
sA^ref
spSfir
*far
srgte
^
),
Gita
IX, 24,
XIII. 22
tf&wm
mwrr.
Anandagiri
[12] wwn,
like
srrotr err
by the ^r^fl^s
who
11
on passages
1
sras
11
swwsrr^
11
'"
*&
ran
stfrc
sftaapBira srfarfera*
fccrs;
1
...
*rt
11
err
^ftfgrrgpac
wg s*w%:
sfarsft
srrlr11
wtfelpErTq:
11
srrarfisrfTr:
a^asRrwir
srrcriVa:: H
srr%%^
aws&Tft
11
st
wm*f,
li
3?rq>rw.s*rr^
^Riwrar^r^r:
sto
srfaten
rr%cr*
cp5m%
st^rrl
srRrRrcfH M
(Taittirlya
)
III.7-9
srstPSRTW&C H.1.2
a^r $gf
^^ humour
rare
H.i
co ks )
We
is
do not
think Gaudapada wishes to include cooks in the category of philosophers, in spite of the fact that the
problem of food
universally
one and the validity of the an army marches on its stomach, is self-
*3
9RW ky
srgjs as
'
the ggflfajs.
They
*
ikas
who
regard
&nm sjpfoig*
*ftmP vuf^H
Vidhusekhara says they would refer to all the Vaisijava teachers, such as Ramftnuja, Nimbarka, Madhva and Vallabha \ This is quite improbable, for these Vaisnava teachers
fcfirat
regard the individual as atomic, not the qrmrw*. Here the question is about the ideas about the Highest or the *t*i?$tot and not about
'
Chapter II
81
4
as
*W
ky
^e
is
^^flr^s
whom
Atman
C
T
who
regard
the
5 ]
^ by
jt|
Paficaratra or Saiva
swms.
They believe that God descends down They take their stand upon passages
...
^w^rmwnn
^mrr^r
l*i
).
^r?r%^*rfewrT
giri
).
q$- is
Ananda*s$
...
W$ra
^rap^fsrrorw
[
^aOTR^TeSWrerSP
sp^cT
The Brh. passage quoted above sjijjff^?s. aro^S ^ri^rrcrf^ ^ ... sriom tr^rqTC?cmm*3rr$T$r. etc, 3^: ^^WR^fT fo:*wnn wm$ $ra 3F?srrf?* ( Anandagiri ). It is more likely that the sr^raf s are some theorists who deny the existence of a personal god in a concrete form. 3?^ cannot mean
16
]
explains sr^c? as
24
) [
17
$ra by the
g?r$yf^s
these
upon
passages like
( (
^rsfow ^lrajrTO^ swr ( ), *jf$: ^tIswtsh; X. 34 ) and Atharvaveda XIX. 53, 54, etc. <$\&: q^sro $T%s^TrU%: astronomers ) says Anandagiri. The t^r^^s also regard wa as
Gita
XL 3 2
18
i%^t:
by the f^fJ^s
eternal;
who
regard
so space
ffqrg:.
space
is
as
everything
exists in space;
the
*^<rorr.
The expression mi^sr^: is usually explained as know how to foretell events by reading the voices of
it
'
those
who
etc.
birds
Perhaps
spheres.
[
means
Yogins
who
can
hear
the
music of the
19
srrgfr:
by the
according to Anandagiri,
etc.
those
(
who
^rgsxtr i^^r^siTfsr srr^r arcgpsjrrr WFeftief %r%<r ). m$hss who believe in the dictum ^\\ m\ m*m m^$W here. They think that right knowledge could be had by
srr^ is
Perhaps the
are
meant
discussion
I
and argumentation,
[
defined as cmis?Ht: n\
;
WV
20
gsRTR by
the gssrf^s
who
claim to
^srs (seven
82
higher, *:, g*:, *sp,
facr?r, gcfsr,
Notes on Gaudapdda-Kdrika
m'>
* T and ^WI, and seven lower> wfi^ and qmrsr ). sprtPt srsfoTOpfoft
:
<
^^
on
).
( 25 )
21
bt?Tt
tffrs;
their stand
passages like
<prr&fit
srjfcswftr,
(
v&
).
wgrr<rri $T*ai
^wr$PTf:
sr
^werer]
Anandagin
22
gfsg[:
by theff%r%fs
).
Bauddhas
23
t%tT3;-
by the t%tT&?s
vadins, Bauddhas (
fan&& sfr^rc^
ikw**K
fr%^rrc?^q>
Ananda-
gin )
The Bauddhas
use
as
that
Gaucjapada,
who condemns
It is
these
significant
no remarks
5
to offer
on
this point.
24
Wiwf
by the
WWi%^s
these are
qrrf
the
Mini*insakas;
<ttt
fsg-f,
and
a*w (
and
guq- )
snimw
).
otW?
fefofrVj^r^rwr
TOrrahlrft
Anandagiri
(
26
[ 25 ]
)
T2R$T9s
or elements
*rw
l
by the Saiikhyas
r
^sr&rVfa^fo: flworr:
sr$faf*$?wr:
fte3?rw fem'-
sr$r%<i
r%2>fen
sw
Thus
sr^mr%3f?Tqr.
jrr ffij st^tt, t^ ?r?mgrTT% t^t%t%^k* T^f f ^wrftr ( m<ir t*r, ?*^ and t*m
4
),
7
)
rg:,
ere jTSPiaifa
jwsro^Tgu^f^r:
16
1
5^5
26 ]
25
of twenty-six principles ) by the Patanjalas followers of the system of Yoga propounded by Patanjali, ?
[
*3&5t
( constituted
Chapter 11
83
They
and add
f*^
hence,
mms
[
).
27
<T$T%$T^
constituted
of thirty-one
principles )
(
by
worshippers
They accept the twenty-five nx^s of the ^fess, ). more, (1) (2) srflrqT (3) favm- (4) (5) seer and (6) m*n. Others add to this list five more, fsre:, ^rFrf: ^5[rr%^, i*?l. and fosjr, making the total 36. Prof. Vidhusekhara says that
and add
six
m&
im-., srfsrsrr,
f?rarf?r : ,
mw>, and
tjr^r
are regarded
can
be reduced to thirty-one.
that
(
We
is
think that
all
wrong and
the
Gaudapada
XIII. 5-6
)
passage in
Glta
The
total 3
is
thus
made up,
3^T?,
fftj
( 5
and 3*settB
5
pr^s
I ^t,
5w%[ss,
^THF^s and
I f^sror^s (
|r,
*m
and
^ )
^m
it^hl )
* *
l^">
l ^>
:
*farcr,
=^?rt and
3m*n by some who hold that- it is futile to limit the a^s. They^presumably take their stand upon passages ... *rw sfurflike rn?cu,st%T festrRT fr^effaf ^nq* f^cw* *rr a^a^rr**^ 4 *m ifcfhsrarwii*; ( Glta X. 40-41 ).
[
28
number
of
^i|w
ti
5i^p by the ^rqef^s these are the democrats [ 29 ] 27 ) from a practical point of view, and are not world the who look at The greatest good of the greatest interested in metaphysics.
(
; '
number
different
'
is
their motto,
and
from the
]
$&&$?
:
in II. 21 above.
these want to follow the by the ^isrm%f s the different modes of about works Smrti directions given the proper obseivance of life ( srgpsr^, *OTW, srrcsrw and %r^m ) the Smrti rules in this behalf conduces to the well-being of society
[
30
$rmm
in the
84
Noteslon Gattdapada-K&rtka
as
(
whole, and
:
ensures salvation
<TC*rar?
for
I
the
individual
^^r
as
well
first
w*WWWW
sfo Sff&nfr
Anandagiri.
was the
16
in society accordin
III.
).
The
3*rwrs
mentioned
below
31
#5^^ by
the
%^s
these
ate
the
grammarians,
world can
according to Anandagiri,
be classified into one
(
who
male,
),
mm*z
of
f^fr.
modern
as
Fieudists
aie
meant here
who
take
stand
upon
tg$3
II
[32]
(
q*T<W[
).
Anandagiri
Perhaps,
^m %%
^T%?i;
and
the
I
fwr
II
^TW
^rftrr
fff^?^
tot>
Mundaka
2,
are
...
^\ ww^W w *$Ffi
^r
3TST
( 2% ) [ 33 3 ?H%' by the $i%r%rs in whose eyes the problem of creation looms large ; these are presumably the worshippers of
34
Wftn%
by the $qrr%^s,
the
worshippers
of
ir|$r,
the
35
who
f i%*r
These
%$t
Anandagiri
).
thirty-five m$S<*s
Gaudapada here points out that in accordance with the ( 29 ) dictum *tt qsf^: ^r ( Gita XVI. 3 ) } persons entertaining any about the fossH Atman, secure that as their goal, and fail to
^w
fa^
regchthe highest
reality.
The Kirika
( especially the
second half
Chapter II
is
85
use
of
^r, fr,
sw
etc.
making
very
idea
difficult to
is
understand
its
import.
The
a
as
follows:- Let
us
is
simple-minded seeker
whom
to
he has implicit
faith, is a
votary of Visnu
reality.
Highest
Devadatta
whole-heanedly
and jealously
Visnu at all costs, and this obsession for Visnu, having taken root, ultimately becomes united with Visnu
sticks to
T>*g^;<t
) )
)
*r (
(
*rr# (
I
^?fP
fT
5$is
I^W
^?pr
:
(
)
^r^w
^
5rf
(
:
f^o^ *w S"
)
5 qwfit
ft*?FT
*W
3*91%
( (
awr*
arforat
feqs^> *rm
w
*r
%sr^r:
),
STOT
*r. )
Sankaia explains differently, a =sr ( *n*0 stst rwr (wftr) ^snawT *wp r%wi% (that is, the Atman, assuming the form of the jw^q*, protects the )
fspsqj^q).
:
I
vm^
afora 2Tpags*?^f*rf?re3T
wfcr
awftc%
ct
snftwg$r% awa**!*
is
( that
).
is,
the srfmg;,
Thus( according to
*nr
first
<r
means
s^k
snarr
( according to
our
Saiikaia
),
interpretation )
)
*n
s*#r
,5
>,
*tw:
same
as
?8rot*T*:
>}
) (
^: in the
first
half)
(
( (
"
bfpto :
)
) )
ff
ff?2rs
>
ffcOT*
compound
(
(
*nm
*tpt
<r
>*
second
<r
means jrCraT^
to the
Looking
wording
in the Karika
*n*
<TC?n%
^n^T%
^: 3 where the use of ^ shows that the subject of 3rer% and q^ftr refer to the mqm, and as a is the same, we think that *r: should to Ankara the Atman According to refer should *n*. corollary, <r
protects the
takes possession
of him;
according to
^^
guards the
is
just a
Mahomed going to the mountain or the mountain going to Mahomed ), but our way of construing the Karika is more in con-
6
30
Notes on Gaudapclda-K&rikfi
about Atman,
not different
that
regard
Atman
actually
to
are
that they
know
Atman.
is
On
who
have realised
at
Atman
other-
their
face value
and
might
ha\e
l
graOTrtffri^TSPSTrg ^rgjrfrr
?ma:
be
* sresm?R-
% *mi tz**
are
m (
Anandagin
to
).
(31)
universe
is
^sr, mqr,
IW^T etc.
known
aref^;
the
likewise shispt.
arrfH^OT amfia,
(
*sr arc*
32
how the
enunciates his
^,
only
spg,
mw,
E5g:>
?^
view about qTmsrkr rtto, these terms can have any meaning
afrrawt is
if
there
is |<j.
Only ^ar
the
reality.
An
H
^|cT
can
etc.
st
It is futile
also to
...
talk of
rVm
in connection with
imagined things
Yogavasistha
III.
),
Cf.
).
sr*prcg
sr?^r6RfT
srvrft
tfi3Trt?% Hsraft
=5r
H (
10 x
nre
^fk^iFra
?r
gw
(
Lankavatarasutra 79
33 )
The
3Hpr
srir^g: is
be
all
Atman
^or
is
always the
srivrarnr
).
a^
^*n s
ft fw*<T?T
3*[?t
nfti55^A
is
Anandagiri
the
alone
$r*.
(
34
The
the
*m
is
just
f%^q
foisted
that *ftv^
is
rfRT
from the point of view of Stfcmn^r ? The answer is no. Can one say that the imagined serpent is ttiht irom the point of view The imagined serpent simply does not exist; no of w%[}
question
of
m^m
Prof.
as to
can
therefore
arise.
In
the
for
cannot be any
3^3;.
thing.
^-*rr*,
s*w*
or
sr^^er
wants
to
Vidhusekhara
read
7tr*W^t
s^-sn^r;
for
HTeOTR* so
atrq-nnsr
and
he
mean one and the same thing. We sneiw* means not the nature of 3*1^ ,
'
the nature of
sm% as
Again,
Chapter II
%y
nature
of another
it is
(
except in Alamkarasastra
for sTRFnTT^,
The
all
be read
against
merit consideration.
( 35
)
The
(
expression
).
^rcFrT^afNr
sprefigrsn?:
).
is
used
twice
in
the
Bhagavadgita
11.56, IV. 10
snrefr t?rfc?fr*mTOf**ft*
trsmwrsr
*tt<*fh
3Ti?m
Sankara
fifth
ftff$c*T^
Void of s^ms.
fosr?or$n^
The Yogavasistha
has the
and
is
36 ) 3Tg'^--3Tsr?5Trqrq 5rT?3RrRiT5w^T%^r i?3!%wt: (SaAkara). It only bogus gfts who advertise themsehes and their so-called mira,
culous powers,
III. 5.1
).
^m^sfigror: mvrgri
rrst
?T
w&z
III.
4.50
says
flSrr
^W ^frf^K:,
*T ff
H?cT
^WnT
5?rgcT
STilJcrat
37
The ^R^>^rqri%^
the
is
beyond
all
all
obligations.
He
has
no use
for deities;
Sraddha
Pars
( ^qrr,
oblations
the pitrs
are
offered with fr% ( ikqpv ) ^rrr ) knowledge, theiejs no possibility irreligious acts as such, e\en though he may be technically above
fsrfas
or f?ms.
wr^ Constantly
he should
be
lest
changing.
A m%
to
<j5jrr,
1
should have
his
no fked abode,
of
5p
residence,
constantly
a
*r
changing
place
etc.
).
he might
?r
fall
prey
sn*r
^rr^ ^
*srara&
ftcrt *rwrra--
^ ^ri
mrfk
sr^a;
Anandagiri
I
srrlr^rnriT^^r^i^rg;
srt^-
wkht pr%cTWwrm?*ri^S R*<wfm% wsrer v?r n?i *%w %sr f*%<rr *W ^tot&st ^r^R^JTT fa^ s^Vfrwrsro-* All this is unsatisI
xf^[^
as
absolutely
i
not fixed \
(
Sankara
).
irr^f^r^: ^^rrsTTff^sTr^r^sTsrnrm^f wmfoirsf: Yati must make use of only what comes to him
unsolicited; he
after
anything.
minimum
by him.
38
38 )
snr<*:-~
Notes on Gaudaptida-Kdrika
Referring
to
the
external world,
the
five
is,
the body.
The fr^
Ankara
).
q%
CHAPTER
III
This Prakarapa usually called ^t?Tsm&T contains 48 Karikas. The firsc Prakarana mainly dealt with aftqjrciqmsrr and the second with the
tow
of the
jw.
The problem
If there
of the
individual
WffiFfo
soul
exits
only ^f?r
what
we
to
37<n% of Jlvas and the world ? How does the sq^w'mnEWsr come into existence ? What is exactly meant by birth or sniff ? All such
topics are discussed here,
and the
last
Kanka
This
is
gives
the
sfhr:
considered
snjgr s*sr
^fkmr^
the
first
qenrsTO *ra
rsr
r%r%gr
mm
famous
ararfeteT?
or non-origination doctrine
which was
systematically
pro-
pounded by Gautjap&da.
( 1 )
Prakarana r^wfavnQ
^i
to
W>sr:
c
( 5rfN: )f
Safikara.
last
Prof.
( III.
Vidhusekhara takes 48
)
^jf:
mean
3^|rr;
duty
'.
As the
Karika
uses the
expression
sfte, the
and
meaning given by Sankara is a better one. Brahman is 3*$r the existence of sfNr and the OTi^fartf^re are possible only when 5a is produced. So first, Brahman has to be born ( what
exactly
itself later
sftr
meant by the snra of Brahman is made clear in the text The existence of ), and then Jlv/s s^rtre?? can function. thus depends upon something else, after is therefore called a
is
,<*% one
The
sffo
who is unable to stand on one's own legs, a parasite. who believes in sq^R? as a means of reaching Brahman
is
(even though he
really
Chapter III
89
to be pitied.
in a
He
is
a g5r$rr%a; as
Sankara says.
The Kenopanisad
srgr
memorable passage
repeats
),
five
?#
ikv%
%? ^f^^g^F^
Jiva
(I- 3~8
which shows
how
the srfa
hankering
( 2 )
this natural query ^ot, who is srgrcar then ? Brahman is called snEnfw ( not sr^qror, because that expression implies the possibility of Brahman being possessed of some ). m^ qsTwnw?^ ^raT??ft^q ?^q ?^a^oflris
answered in
this Karika.
w
is
'
srgr (
Sankara
).
^mcU *r?R
same
as
mvk
100
etc*
),
being ever the same, unchangeable. Only a thing with parts can be
m$i
sr*gcr5#
Anandagin
).
Gaudapada shows by using the famous ^srr^rsr illustration what is the real meaning of tyrrfcT or origination. The relation between sr^R ( or snrST^ ) in respect of sfters and their bodies is like
that of srr^r^r with wsr^Tsr etc,
[
1
and
*rc etc.
)
Thus
are
really
srar,
Both
etc.
sncflrg;
or
Brahman
and sw^nsT
Q$fl,
[
xh^im
2 ]
sremsT, rerarsr
sfnrs
etc.
Similarly 3ti?r^
[ 3 (
w,
<rc, etc.
seem
to
similarly snvwj seems no case is there any But in to produce sffastfirs or ^ras. trace of real production. The so-called srrfcT is due to the sqrras.
or 3rr^r$r seems
to produce ^ar>
mean
( 1 )
s^: or
sv-q^: (
zuwr
^afH^rrar 3n3<nffcHnw
( 4 ) of stot^T
^r%r^^^t^t ^?3^rWI[^!mT
sr^sr affect
sn^
3>"cn%
is
and
w,
etc.;
due to the
90
s?qr% of
Notes on GaudapcLda-K&riU
disappears,
gfrsr
also
disappears,
is
how
is
Yajfiadatta do not suffer alike it that Devadatta and the same time dies, Yajfiadatta also ought to die at
If
Devadatta
There must
be therefore
many
all
Jivas,
all
different
When
there
is
we do
not find
the smoke is concerned with one particular snnfa )> similarly the affect other sfors. q-srr wrasnjrwrjpsr, 5:3- etc. of one. aft* do not
^<r*r ?5Nr
( 6 )
nm%> imx
Even though
tft
Ankara
).
srrarsT is one,
(
we
(
SWTOW
(
etc.
The
^<r
form
),
sfh?
wnwn
name
trer, <yar,
q^sp etc.
all.
are
different
3WET3T at
^^r,
The sttoto^?
of the
sfhrs
Similarly
the
g:^
etc.
7 )
The ^s,
(
^r2T$T^rj>
tootst
etc.
cannot be
is
real.
real ^r?
either a ft^r*
a firCTC of gold;
of sfoer; qw,
is
y^
is
etc,
are
fircpr*
an
&m%
of to, a
^resrr is
an
^srq-gr
TOresrsr, qrarr^rsr
affect in
(
srr^r^r.
Chandogya
VI. 3*5
I
fforc
).
explained
sror
T%R
$?5$RcT:
Vedantasara
rr^ Child, an ignorant person. Sankara in his Bhasya ( 8 ) on Brahmasutra 1. 1-1 says ^swifrsfa srrasrit ^r*cr#m%*crm*r*gf?rr, which appears to be an echo of the first half of this Karika. srg ^rt is equal to wr^HT^. f ^rai at any rate here, cannot refer to the
Bauddhas
real
as they
superimposed on the
nature;
do not believe in stfr^- The crr%*T?3r etc. is really qx\*t by the ignorant who do not realise its
all
similarly
frisrar
HT?Wf ^roifow^*m%#r
wfr?^*
Saftkara
Chapter 111
9*
9 )
The
Atman owing
deaths
going and coming, remaining steady etc*,, do not in the least affect Atman who is srft^ntfar (undergoing no change, remaining the same
always
) like srr^r^r.
For
fcsrar,
Prof.
Vidhusekhara would
like
to
as
fulfils
ncqrwr,
f^n%
(
is
and
STPrfk-
10
wqtsv
%frf^:,
like
objects in a dream.
People talk about the difference in the case of bodies of birds, men, gods etc; some philosophers might argue that the bodies being made of the same constituent elements, can be regarded in essence
^j. Both these views cannot be justified; it is futile to discuss details about a non-existent or illusory object. And the illusion can be satisfactorily explained only on the ground that it is Rpiras being
Tlr^rirrT.
to
mean
(
ZWJrlh reasonable explanation. Sarikara takes the expression %t&t. (and also adds ) ^rsrsrfNrsppIr $5:*
)
In Karika
II. 9,
Gaudapada declared
the
that
3?rW3[
was
next
he
refers to passages
by name
and the
Brhadaranyaka which
( Adhyaya II, Brahman ^<q sTRSR^
the
Taittinyopanisad
^STR^gfr)
is
spoken of
mm: w
#M^H^:W
91
Notes on Gaudapcida-KdriM
and srgr*, the ultiso like and s?tsr$t. Sankara mate srfksr, is by implication sr&^riVtf comments at length on the Taittiriya passage referred to in th e 3*T*??OTn%R0T ( Brahmasutra I. 1-6 ) and shows in the second
All these five rers are stated to be s^rf^r;
interpretation that
151,
str^W cannot
be
Brahman, but
:
is
just a
mere
is
said to be
^f
),
four.
^Ff^r:
( ?^r
stands for
3w
3*5TW,
dapada,
According to
Gau
these
cjTt^is
u<%\ ( for
#
j
) ^sr^Tr%cf :
^r
which he explains
made
clear
there.'
The
expression
sjrpq*
is
^'^\ as
itr^t
^ ^r
Prof.
... ,
^ vw
g-
in a similar case,
is
^ *T$rr
corresponds to
for
*ref5nsr: in
the next
Karika.
Vidhusekhara's
preference
q-^rr
is
hardly
reasonable.
(
12
which con-
tains the
famous trgfon
sfafr
3tf<r:
).
(O
*mf
?
>
>UTHf JTf
*>
gf^rsq'
Wro
35
)
WfUT 3
CO
(3) (4)
'?
3*T*rra<rf
3T%:
?\W3ITf?HT:
3>
>
zm 3#
sr^.wmr:
>'>
>
33
(5)
r
>)
J>
3)
3TW 3TrT%?*W
srof
f?^rf
?'
CO
(7) (8)
(9)
(10) (11)
(12)
(13) (<4)
fop
^5=5=
J*
37
>'
>;
3>
>
1^1^
*5rcfoa:
^rq?I5t:
*
<}
5 5
>
^W wrfitart:
s*w srr^T^^r
s*wsr*for
>1
?J
>'
35
>>
*3
>r
>
33
^T
mg<*
STfcJU
)>
)>
s?w ^r^sr
r
h
33
>
<>
3*W HTg^q*
>>
>)
>
stw
srrcHflr:
In the case of each of the above fourteen pairs, occurs the following passage mutatis mutandis (wprf ifoarf) toforfte**-
vlwm
Chapiir 111
93
srsp
g^r wnmtsqTfK
srfrar
)
(
I
sntfa:
asTTTOtojcrsrcr.
g^OTfcgr
gpft:
*r
*ftw-
(<3va-fr,
wm^^m% W
3
*r&[
The
pairs referred to
?d"*r,
by
?:
etc.
and the
Prof.
arcur?* fanrfar,
and
^wim ^em%
was shown
as
Vidhusekhara seems
of
Just
as the ultimate
q?r$Ti>
passage
describing
the
and
qrs'gni,
is
so here also
5rrr?flHFl is
declared in
the
refiain.
Brahman
the
everywhere
section
both
there
is
same
srm^
outside
on
and inside
The
(
describing
mac^r-
every thing as
wg
is
Jra^are^cN
Saiikaia
),
sr^riVcn
( 13 )
The
identity of
sr^
and
3?i?fr3[ is
praised
and emphasisis
any
idea
of difference
rightly
Thus both positively and negatively grn?sthF*T brought home to the ^n^. The identity passages are ( as
in his
quoted by Sankara
Bhasya on Brahmasutra
(
II.
1-14
),
cr^R^r-
m si
( (
cTferrf' *r
),
3TRRT
a^m%
<mwM ^i^
VII. 25-2
IV. 4-19
passages
( as
are
?r
cT^;-
^Spriiftfir
*r
w hhw q^ftr
).
f^fim
Sankara
wmr-
^%sp
^ffricr^ *r$r<w
83*w
Gita
jft:
^fm?
1
3t*tht
arc
?r
srrwrcra:
%xw$wsim%
(
>
t%
<n<r
14
The
objector says:
You
tell
us that there
is
Brahman
by Maya. But
this
sffas and ^ffirs a ^ e just created goes against some Sruti passages which say that
the presence of
we
can understand
being due to
Maya
).
How
upon
The
is
Siddhantin's reply
is
as
relied
%*r 3&3Rr
I
s^rsmmfWr
s^rsf
^rcm
aqrowioftft
...
^rtWIS^ ^^
that the
sftsr
VL
3-2-3),
which shows
94
along with the
^srar (
Notes on Gaudapada-Kari'k&
( Sankara
Brahman
II,
before creation
in
his
Bhasya on Brahmasutra
mopmwfafa^*Tf^TO*Tf^ *mx
fffrcT-
srsR*i
*crarwrr%
STpTifrs'TOTRt
The
that
interpreted literally,
tion
is
for
we have
seen
its
interpreta-
when
the creation
by Maya comes
(srargrr W*r
s^rar w&*ft
rice
^rrvww
(
is
erwfSra^ Kavyaprakasa).
really
The popular
*r$ff
expressions sft^r
T^fcT
one
cooks
the
rice-
cooked
(
which
is
really the
meaning of
sfr$;?r ),
Wrgfarg;
)
the lady
only
after
marriage
of
primary
sense
^r^
There
is
the
the
correct interpretation
Chandogya arfo
(
entirely in
first half, being the But the Sankarabhasya on the Karika opposition to what the Sankarabhasya on Brahmasuna
sfre?rTcsrcT etc.
II.
*r
1-36 says
takes
Vm sfWf
qrnac,
mmr*- sfo to mean ^ah?^, refers to srrsmo?, RV. X. 121-r, sees here ftffa between qs&snis
*r ?mf?r
ftro^w:
m^ro* wten*
1
ir&Hit hst
^eRftfit
wwTOCT&nft^g:
^rewgwfr n^nR!% to
'TTtrt
mm
1
q-^wpr
*ftnE?wT
353
...
qWwrc:
alternative interpretation
by the same,
sw
ifeqm,
*mm
SFP<r
wmft
vM
is
nftwnftft
q-^r
^T%sn$- *n*nTR
TOk^
not
3^
art rftatcrffemrtg? trcfrna*?}: This makes matters still worse; but i^ftj- understood and the
!
be referred to some unspecified passage. It the Karikabhasya has completely gone wrong in not
is
clear that
taking
into
In
account the Chandogya passage which is most pertinent here. view of the fact that Sankara rightly refers to it
in
his
Vedaata-
Chapter III
95
the
sutrabhasya
( II.
1-36
), it is
Bhasya on
work of
Adisankara.
It
would be seen
that
g^g/ars and
respect.
nT<irjf?fs,
Gaudapada boldly distinguishes between and Sankara does not lag behind him in this
The
meaning
in
this
Prakarana,
sense.
in
its
natural
The
given here
is
(15)
before creation
The
insr,
%<%*&%
of sfh*
creation
and
it is
BrrrSFS;
but
after
g^q",
How
we
account for
in
face
of
$rT?fhj?g"
The
given in this
Karika.
The
different
literally*
They
g??Rm
W^s
the
in
accordance with
The
VI. 3.4-5,
nm
( The world is the fsr^R of snOT^; in other words, the gfk can be taken to have preached that the world proceeds from sfffng; ).
The
&%'
f^grrarf
ftr^srfeipr
S^cT
1
is
found
in
Brhadaranyaka
II.
1.
20, sn&T
*rW
gsr
$w-
\?v
\
Wr&r
^?nft ssa?T%
r^iri^fr
fe*ra>^H%aws[rrFR: stow *wra;r T%srfcrar^ mStesr |?rr ^Wr $\v The 3*n% refers to passages like ^ s^f^ritawnftew
s^w
20
etc.
WW
r%
^T%mft
( Brha. IV. 5.
and
to srafoift in II. 1.
coming down; reaching the level of the dull-witted. sn^mcSN^si^isqww ( K. bhasya ). Read also the following
3Tr?nT
lit.
^ srfcT^n^rcrsrrrsr-
^g
Notes on
Gaudapada-K&rtM
c rs
rs
( K.bhasya ), srrsrw: 3Ufa<fa$fa$ap, *forw w*f*rr: ' used here in the sense of types of men ; the usual sense of the four draffs ( anjrc*? etc. ) would not do, as the stisths are said
(
1
6 )
'
to be jirnPsr here.
Anandagiri remarks,
srrsrfooiT
sfSrw epw^qTH^T
We
is
to 37;$ *r^f?cr
(i
srawr
*tct feisfca
),
fsrrsrcrr
TT5RTCJ
st^ot^ttot srat *T^for are^T-' wi% ^r %ffsif srr ssrmsn srrwifr ^r^rer
I
Gita
XIV. 18
Ihr crm*ft
4%
at
st^ii
Gita XVII. 2
to.
so that
^^^,
his
alluded
Sankara in
Sutra bhasya
q^T^rq^nipsWH: $*fr%
H. 1-34)
anothei
^rafta
refers
context.
Buddha adjusting
his preaching to
sri|r
fwrRT
),
^regwrftf^srl
^Trnwrnr
fw
and enunciating
three
different doctrines (
5r!^TWR^^r^qriTO>aTr^^^^f|^r^r
kw smT f
(
f%
toiw
used in the
17
)
last
one.
of
|i?rats Followers
^r,
any
%?rfw,
mmm
etc. ^|cr,
being one,
does
not
admit of
differences;
while
|cf
is
Thus
sticking to his
own
He
!
has
looks on amusedly, without no quarrel with Dvaitins who are concerned with
phantoms
q-^r
srrarar
^*rww^5wwn%flrab
says Anandagiri. Advaita is all pervading and so includes |a ( may be, due to srnir ) as well. can one quarrel with something belonging to or included in oneself?
How
( 18
or reality
is
3%;
Dvaita can
cause
at best,
is
be a variety or effect of
what
),
is
the
exact
of this *c^
made
Karika
fitffa
Chapter 1IL
97
between 3r|rr and far. The Advaitins admit |ct, but as merely having existence in appearance only; while the |m^s being regard |cT as real both <wxw& and smm&n* The 5rgrr%3; is the Ararat of the |r%^s, so he pities them for being sn*cT ( vw fm*Tsn^ s^tT
w^
I?W
says to another
A person gone mad standing on the ground mounted on a big elephant I am mounted on an elephant, lead on to me/ Knowing that the person talking like that is snra", the other man takes pity upon him and leaves him alone.
rf^cj;
K. bhasya.
).
it
19
An
sen object
the
!
can
real,
srsresr
only
through
rrfin. If
and become
wm
^f is w^ and
object
will
lose
its
nature
itnzi
?r
crcmsfa:
ftwr*w?T?*R:
K. bhasya
(
).
20
Some ^tt^s
!
They
is
say that he
born as well
Now
born, must
be
(
mortal
srmssr ff
mx
^?g: Gita
II.
27
only an
possibly
?
unproduced
or unborn
object can
be immortal.
How
become mortal
These
according
to K. bhasya
are
^F%*R^?j>9rwm?r
3Qjr^ri|^r
wr^nr:, Perhaps the Krsna-worshippers, Rama-worshippers etc, are referred to for these while regaiding Rama, Krsna etc. as the Highest, immortal etc., celebrate his birth -day with great pomp
;
etc.,
It is
doubtful
refers
if
written by Sankara
who
hardly ever
to
commentators on
21)
it is
If a
thing
it
so; if
mortal,
is immortal by nature, it must always remain must always be mortal. No one can ever
leopard can
1
ftH
fawn%
jftsjs
Gita
XVIIL
59
).
22
These
say
in
their
reason*
ing*
They
58
Notes on GctufapAcla-K&rihl
is
naturally a^er,
jt?$;
[ 2 ]
]
though become
snjcT
wf
in this way,
he
still
can be
made
and fas^.
to say that a naturally
);
It is ( for
wrong
become
it
^r?f
assuming that
does
be-
come vr<i why should it again change its nature ? If it again becomes snjrT, what guarantee is there that it would not change its nature again ? Who would care for a iftgr that is always changing and not permanent ? Read the following acute observations of
Sankara,
w$ <jw
tfrsttrwr
urb"
srn%5B
^rm*
err
^ros^r* f ft t^
wsrsnfo-
*rfa
QWT^TRsr *r
swnFr *V ^ s*rqrrw^?r mww r% ^nr mxmv w^toww are garret wi%, ^wrrffrsrosrgrI
*rr
?r
afewmot *rcsw
Sutiabhasya
(
I.
w
1-4
^r% 3sr
%sT$w3t3qra?RTcFR:
^msrr ?m-
),
23
wr=^r,
real
^^:
& ^msfe
Sak. I
creation; there
are others
which speak of the creation being unreal. The <gfcre# is claimed for both views. But we must not take Sruti passages at their face value; we must find out what the real purport of the Sruti is, and by logical
reasoning weed out certain passages as being ifr*. ?$*: Passages like cnfOTgr etc stow: speak
W**
hw
means trwufcc:.
of a real crea-
tion; passages
bring about a
passages,
mw$i%. To we have no
q^r^fe passages as ijfar; if they arc mmqfe passages would have no scope. Prof. Vidhusekhara takes ^r: to mean from the existent ( referring to s^r %\*Hm 3*mV~Chandogya VI. 2-1 and sr^: from the
regarded as g^q-, the
c
'
non-existent
<
and remarks
'
according to
in
*PW.
But
he explains
II.
7-1
is
the
),
Chapter III
99
It
*rw
fsrwrw,
stok*
is
3?R3ror??^r.
'
seems
that
Prof.
real
purport
of the
present
real
Kanka. Gaudapada
nature of the process
of creation,
creation of
is
any thing.
In
IV,
3,
^m^
entirely different
justified
perfectly
rstptiw
Gaudapada cays that the passage tticttt% t%^T (Brha. ( 24 ) IV. 4-99, also Katha IV. 11 ) indirectly and ?r snstnr. f^H" ( Rgveda VI. 47-18, and Brha. 11. 5-19 ) directly point out to the
55^
ffesn^ww:
power,
'
in
is
explained
as
fi^qs^nfV
'
is
taken to
mean
wonderful
meaning of the passage is not affected, c Indra by his wonderful powers assumes different forms which are illusory or
the
unreal.'
line
also
as a ji%
passage,
fq-srrsRf
1
T^arwsnwwr
11
rg^T
cw
$\\h ?re^r?ar
1
yaranyaka,
III.
3-
^frmafwg % c!^s^Tr% ft^T ( TaittiriAs there are only two $fas in the Kanka,
only two passages are intended; in that case, the second line may be 6 the Purusa explained as the conclusion drawn from the first line,
or
Atman
is
being born/
(
25
Gaudapada further
U (
fortifies his
contention by referring
1
to the
3"
passage,
:
3^ cw sn^ra ^OT^fcrgqrsnfr
Isopanisad 12
).
aat ^sr
s*r
?r
am
*Pif *ar
Those who
enter into
creation,
This shows that the Isopanisad condemns the creation as futile or unreal. Anandagiri says ^st^W*? qrwr: *rr ^fcf|^?Tr fesoqwrrJPW
I
areitsar
^rf^
I
SisrraT Orf^rTcsrra:
ftfttarer
rr^rr
r%^
:
a^wg^fofW
1
^tnw1
r^T^^rcH^far-fetched.
just
srfarftrsiet
...
^^crersrcH^rqr%q&r^ s^wfcr
I
tott^*
be
^TrWr^Hq %*njm^
synonyms
%*T- srrafaWd
seems to be quite
%"*{% to
k$
5TW5
^ snqr^r ^r *%* srscS**- ( HI. 28 ). In the first line, ^rst was condemned, but that leaves room for believing in the #nr<Rtfi lying in a dormant condition, and suspending
refers to the Brha. passage
3^ qsr
I00
its activities
Notes en Gaudapdda-Kdrihd
of
being.
The second
no
^pbtto
no
26
( II.
also exists.
only
grrarat
and nothing
no
%w,
^*nr$n:oT either.
(
)
The
3- 6 )>
it
$fa
22
W^
is
Brhadaranyaka grata 3tt%^tt ^t% wrfmssft * 1% spa: ( III. 9-26, IV. 2-4,
l
etc. )
make
clear
that
to
state
about creation,
regarded as
powered by the
not in
this
mam
statement about
3?r?Hc?gr,
which
is
necessarily
Having shown that the Sruti passages favour spjacP now turns to pointing out that Gaudapada also Q5tmFrt?> Karika it in was declared that what is 23, favours the same view (
27
)
5%
(
SfrffSTff
).
A
;
thing which
is
^,
in
for
its ^pror,
srtq-
or origination
reality
for this
3TrEr
would change
nature
his nature
under
say
a a
any circumstances
have 3^+T is as absurd as to say that that a thing which How can thing already originated or existent is being originated
is
To
in
reality
m\ft
implies
is
that
the
completed
srpnfr
in process.
How
^h*
may
be taken as
A
<*rar
thing can
come
only
through mqr.
^nSt
%
tg
firaranrararcm-
^nft
^ct
^tcgrt ^g^r&sro^Nr
I
Wrt wr
qrfa
K. bhasya
).
originated, there
would be no
would
(
be the result.
28
The
last
Karika had in
is
this one refers to those who on the Sruti passage ^rarefa tr%JT5T amsftaj and say that the *W<Z comes out of 3^. The ara$rf^s are really beneath contempt. There can be no question of any whether real or illusory with
^,
^n
What
is
the
use
of inquiring
Chapter III
tot
or
whether the 5?-^rnp was married under the Civil Maitiages Act ?
(
in
rites
29
It
Maya. This Kanka tells us how his favourite view that the TffSTci;
in their
that happens.
state
to
to
and ^?r woiking. In dream, the mind creates different objects with
are
identical
;
the
The
snfnTff^T^ the same thing happens in the srrrg; is FRTg %$ m the sfrsrg; state as in the ^r$r
srrjnj state.
state also.
( 30 ) The jpr^ is really 3?%q-, being ^icst^r, but appears as g?r. In the dream state, the ff^js that perceive ( sn^ ) and the objects
jngr
same
(
state
3 1
53
is
of the
mind.
When
jr?t^
which
to play
is
ceases
pranks, being curbed by f^qj and l^rq*, |cT vanishes, as the cause which produces it has disappeared. When a person enjoys
its
below
).
}2
is
When
the smrfmre
is
caused
to
by the knowledge
have any
that
Atman
v*^ ceases
fe^s.
There
to
being no ingr, srh; has no work to do. The srFRrmsr referred here is named sMrJUt* in Yogavasistha, tr^jwisngrsr
3WT&
wrrc^cfi^T^r^TT^T
(
rh^?^
11
).
33
has
be ers;
gn^f,
(and
so has
all |a, ) is
thus merely
unoriginated and
which
to
is
itself as
illusory contacts and so is not different from the %sr Brahman, The *r$ ( which is Brahman ) thus realises Brahman, unoiiginated and eternal. K. bhasya takes 5np*3hj
srgr
|r*r
mean
is
*s**J
cif%i
5rr|ra3C.
is
This
is
unnecessarily
is
clumsy,
The
this %??.
first
?
line says
^rm
is
^mw,
what
srsr,
This sratip
is
r?t^. Brahman.
&m
redraw*??
srr>
^ ?to^
satisfied
is
show
that
%m
<$%mm^
^029X83
102
Notes on Gcmdapada-Kfirtkd
Gaudapada in this and the following Karikas points out that the srajftarsr due to arirJWf* is entirely different from the which occurs when a man is in deep daily merging into the
(
34
sleep.
The Chandogya
ar^r
passage
VI. S-i
*reirr
says,
^r^q;
^frfa
^farnrST-^fr ?rrff ^TrTT si** meiely is merging temporary this in fact, the But ^rfmr sleep, in deep coma oi with of its mischiefqg mind is in a state making poweis intact, but lying dormant. The mind does not know
sw wra
^Hwr
ewi^
^m
that
it
sleep
is
had been merged into the ^. The result is that when the deep ovei, the mind goes on its travels again, and is again envelop-
ed by the illusory
rawrs
* fty
crarr
says the
Chandogya
sfrf
I
... crsrosr
^g
^fPjn:
mh
mq
srra
#rows
srr
I
*n ftsr
H^r ^r q^sr^rr
^far
mind ceases to act, g^fff the mind is still possessed of the srT^rtsfr^s, and hence this merging is temporary. In srrrRarna", on the other hand, the err^rctt^s are completely destroyed and the mind is srifRqc himself, having
^TrR^i^r> the
;
* m%: ^?r ?^> *rr sTiff ^r q&rr ^rr qaipir *rr ^5rr VI, 9-10-2 ). In both 35ft and and meiges into Atman but in
...
srer
3rrrar
realised
its
true nature.
ujfa
is
pseudo-
3nrn*ta which makes the mind free from fevers, steady and properly regulated, tftaa:, re^EW ( K. bhasya ), of the wise man
(
Prof. Vidhusekhara
).
to
show
that
^frr^:
is
cf.
^:
^rlr^q^f ^-gr
*rem?3$fcs*T:
ffcf^frcf^T
GitaVI. 25.
srarc:
(
srm *
ffc^Fr:
K. bhasya
).
35 )
it
In Slftr*
tlie
w;
is
benumbed;
Brahman,
in 3?r?*rsfte
hand,
is T%^TTR^r^r itself.
jTrr
fearless,
beaming
around,
swr cf.
exist
sr*s
ftrsrar
ftraf?r
^ra?r.
Brahman
in
|fr
zwq, Brahman.
is
rfhrilrtsfT^ar
cmq^m?^^:
is
(
it
K. bhasya
)t
36
As tm*i thus
it,
Brahman,
^fas^,
3^,
^srsra;, etc.
There being no
Chapter III
103
ar^r
etc.
or
mw influencing such
name and
It is
fR*r,
it is
without
birth, sleep,
dteam
Othei
of
It
has no
the Sruti.
upon
the
light
something
ing
that
its
else.
is
sfpT^JT:
Gaudapada
^rf?r^
says
etc.
the
snFpftsrisr,
as srar^,
he
in
is
language.
The
expressions
with the
sr^nc to mean 'access-concentration' (one of the two kinds or stages of Samadhi, sq^ir swrfa and swnr, mentioned in Buddhistic philosophy ). The mind in this Samadhi moves near the object just
like a bee sitting gently inside a
lotus
in
search
of
honey.
It is
mind, in using
sr^r*.
K. bhasya takes
qs^scr:
I
g-q^orgq^R:
WRrgqRTR;
).
Anandagiii also
gTFrtffarra
is
^mmr
itself,
not some-
3T^
is
particular
Samadhi
Buddhism,
which
is
hardly
%irT 3T ^rm%:
intended by Gaudapada. ^irnftp ^JTii^ftm^srqrTgrnwTfsria; i^rwvft'Er&^^TThe Yogasutras call this the fafl^T ( K. bhasya ).
I
there is only 5T5 and ^rH'f are out of question, when ( 38 ) one thing which is fawr* and srfeflCT; as the srypr ceases to funcThe ^n?r is thus resting 111 tion, there can be no f%??rr or fijwr. itself, unborn and remaining always the same. This is the sregrqoqwhich Gaudapada had promised to explain in Karika 2. Cf. ^icR^f^
**: ^srr
?t
r%i%5.fq
f^ira;
II
^%
vrrwr^
(
is
^mmfit
spw ft^Tftri^r-
39
The *rmr%
as 3rc<T5?in*T
in
known
another object. Yogins in general are loath to go in for this 3T*q$rVr*r, for they think that this is akin to 3Tr?H^r^r, and are content with
secured
by following
a less
rigorous
104
They
is
are, to be sure,
quite
really total
f
absence
of
',
fear.
in the sense of
'
all It is
Yogins
but
'
Gita
VI. 6-23
calls this
I
Hmnrsr*ff*T *fr*r*f%a*J[
^WTSTn". It appears that the same ^^t?tht as merely ?fpT, n fw^f:^which is necessarily void of jctstiwsts that are
(
the
main
PfusrRT^TRg
Gaudapada appears
40
3*w, i'W*r>
of the
sr^
K.
and eternal
bhasya
says
( viz. that
$nf?cr,
all
the
i?rsrf
mind.
that
those
),
it is
^Tcf
3tw
etc.
naturally,
effoit
( *jqf
arfct^fcur
*3gs<f*a; ^fkawr
w #q-rf? ^ *
s^sfe^^stsrspctt-
<nirrafcir
(Wei
etoi
srr^roTTT Harare 5
sNNft-
^r
srhstosctt wr^^TfR^mftrF^rm-
This does not appear to be warranted by the text. The however must not be down-hearted,, but must continue his efforts, may be for several lives till he achieves his goal.
).
*rnr$
(41)
wrfasr?.
It
requires
persistent
long-standing
( it
is
effort
to
secure
It is
not at
all
an easy job
allows his
like trying to
by the
who
mind
is
to be associated
This Karika
(
quoted in
VI.
PancadasL
Cf.
iksm*
*r?7E5trr
*ft*ft$f*rf5tfin%?rsn
Saiasvati, in his
comment
Gita
%?rcr, ff
qrr3[r
wm
srmfr awwFcft
'
zm%
t
^rr
*\n%fe
...
'
Madhusudana then
point, sra
ff^iftfo
refers to
illustrate his
wapm^
swsto-
zsmfenTsv
w%(^w&fk
eftararrfSr
Chapter III
105
srt
eras*
tsrrg^ra;
3><rrg*rcft
T5#
trfsm&Twrnr
^www ^E5^^?rr%-
^gTTrr
ctar^ar <Trr&r $sr frwrrwcT flrwtftfct wftr<[rr: in the text corresponds to srfti^ar^Nrcrr in the Gita passage. The Gita ( VI. 34)
I
w.
compares
(
( cf.
42
Gaudapada says
rr?r:
that R^rRJTf
very
difficult
^3f$* ff
11
^<$&r
I
srmfa
^r^?^^
nwri
^Sirs
sra
ft
faars
SfSR**;
flfhpmjsrsr
=g-
swot
Gita
T^rrfr srsft
^^
warI
^
l
no doubt
wmft*
srwriN g
#rto
sbemror
35^
II
3THtffTr?HRr sfwr
ll
^srrq),
*w?tot 3
scrnrs
VL
^^
34-56
to achieve his
First,
These
described in
Karikas 42-45.
qspR"
is
the
w^
11
should be on
%?r
1
mind
The
Gita
?i*m zmik? famrsra: sfrwsngsre wr tr? sra q*r ^ft^nr^g^r: frgr^Fft srsr^m restores %\\wk wstf TRdfN- *rrf?r*)r fSwrrftorT ^ wro>or Then he should always beware of the pseudo( III. 36, 38-39 ).
srgrFksq- ttt ^tfer
w?r-
arfsrsrafir
1
m^ ^m^t
11
pleasurable
sensations in 151%, and control his mind against harbouring them. q?m and s?r*T can easily be recognised as one's enemies, but syq- might be regarded by the unwary as an innocent
friend.
Such
is
can do as
1
much damage
as
qsnr
gn ^TRr>sw|g*cTsrr 8*rrOT s*ar: ottPctow *re#r Hirf^^n^fqK. bhasya ). Both are impediments in the attainTW^sqifTctrsf:
(
II
can
ment of
*n*r?%
sqw* *$wnita
Madhusttdana Sarasvati on
Gaudapada Karikas
are
also
Gita VI. 26, where the next four commented upon by him ).
To keep off sjnr?T and tfpr, one should never forget that ( 43 ) they would but lead to 5:^; by always remembering the teaching of
would get out of the clutches of |rT. ^ri W3( is the most important basic tenet of Buddhism. Gau4apada however adds that 3*3* ( srgr ) *r also must not -be lost sight of at the same time. The remembrance of srsf nips in the
Vedanta that
all is
wr
or Brahman, one
Notes on
Gaudap&da-RariH
g.'^tflr-srgscq-
bad
all |ff
idea
m
),
icOT^rft^r^rm?<T
"
qr
^m
fr^rca;
gr
I
JT?r^r:
a^r^nf??**?:
%mvx $\*m
first
epra*fin
rwr?*Rr ft*#rT%ft
Madhusudana
^ro^wrg
accusative plural or
singular.
ifTflfwr; this
tremor.
*r*Tsrnw
44
or
3OT is the daily oblivion experi*rwfa ( ot, f^r, $qnr and g^ ). state; there is silence but in that is no fir^T enced in sleep, there
that
is
So the
in the
mind
it
awakening from
while
to
be
distracted
awakening.
He should
is
no fl^r or sjq* ) is also not the 'goal to be reached, for the mind is still under the influence of sffars. Once the mind has become averse to r%T^s and steadied, care should be taken
(
mind
where there
to see that
it is
by the fwrs.
Cf. ^sqrsrtnri^
h *cft
vnt
ftwcfcir
(Gita
VI.
24-26).
JTW^Rfasn* wbiw
mwm finrw-
^[t trsmjfff
K. bhasya
),
JCTnhir
%\m
StE^
^WW^*
as the
tfrs
)
or
the
^s
jewy
of the
).
( *r*r,
),
|<?
and
Yogasutras.
wm*
^rwriTO K. bhasya
^r
srgr (
Madhusudana
in
the Vedantasara,
He
appears to take
Sift,
hut to
pseudo-sleep
caused
fatigue etc.
45
the practice of
The *nre should beware of the pleasurable sensation 9*7$ as well, for that smacks of rofor which
srwr
(
i
R^f
r*r
sudana in two
ways:-
f5 WTOwrft^rR^: ^^s^i
t^*** ,*
is
explained by
Madhu-
ft^rfJ^wft^ftqir
(ii)awr sr*T&*?r.
Chapter til
107
K. bhasya
),
r>*T9snic?r;T
^
and
srgnithprrf
46
In the
first
half of the
Karika,
only
$y*r
r%T<T
are
mentioned. Madhusudana says that ^q- includes ^assffar^ and fk$v 3 S^RSTS" as well; so that all the four fr<srs could be taken to have
been referred
to.
rrsffcT
f^rosnEfajsqi^
Madhu1
sudana
<ftf*rer
fl
3T=g[^ (
K. bhasya
);
*raf%tT<w
gwft sinm?**:
ftrar*Tt5W*c!*Rr
^tttcT
I
spftnrrora?r
?ra^
Madhusudana
Cf.
),
* ^r%3>r?<ra?r
K. bhasya
).
^r
?ftnr
srarow
also
is
sqrcrr
<w
Laftkavatara X. 94.
The
expression ftrnmr
47
firwarra;
*mfr
i%*r-
sur^if^rw^Rf
ftfenwri?
...
sr^Rsnri *$k
11
also
srsnnTFrc^ gfa
feirrown
arrsft
e^T
<*ro
^^^^TR^r? cT
Sht
).
*wpt
VI, 27-28
),
fagw
n^fnII
jtiwt
i%bst(ct h
is
^^r%
(
( II.
71 -72
The 3OT5^B^
^%
with
48
Brahman or
is
nothing but
of the mind.
jt?p
It
the srarfhwr*
The whole
the
firasq-
follows
that
no ?ewt in reality. The best nothing can ever be born, and that srarfeteTsr is the only
true doctrine.
CHAPTER
This
is
IV
srawrrfo, P resumabl y after the slmile of the the text ( 47-50 ). It contains one srara ( fire-brand ) used in said to give the quintessence of be may hundred Karikas, and
called
Gau4apada's teachings.
salutation to fij^i **
(
It
also
contains a
is
Hf*ra*crr
containing a
which expression
to Narayana by some, and to Gautama Buddha by others ), many a Buddhistic philosophic term and a reasoned exposition of Ajativada
(
this
Prakarana:- sftjpRfttiftrjrWTOfT
4 .
^QjrcT^rn%TR^
existence
(
smfo-3rr?fR: ( K. bhasya,
).
objects, elements of
Prof. Vidhusekhara
It
what meansrrqsTQrj
ing
is
assigned to
w>
for sp?
and
^mg
are
the
common
below
property being
(
STnm^HSTB?^
referred
),
to
in
Karika
to
to
), 3Tm%5rc^r
sttw^
( referred
).
in IIL 6 above
f^rito is
)>
awr^r
^cfterr,
( referred to in Karika 91
below
it
|rort-
we
think that
that
should
'
be taken as s^y^rat
realised the
srifs
who
Brah-
from the
best
^q-,
is,
man
In III. 33,
already declared to be
salutes in this
Karika
his
the
fl^i %X
who
realised
by
^rrcFf^T-like
as
being
3?>
it
srgp*.
f|[<Tcff
who
is
%^T
Buddha
*r*
It
is
true
in Buddhistic
etc
-
*nrr$r,
^rcraro,
The
MBh.
^snt? and frrcnrnr. %^f wt cm not claim exclusive association with g ^ in any case. Anandagiri says that *mm*t is meant here ( fl skt ^fasrsrir ^TSTTtr^ariuses f|qa[T
m to refer to 1^
wmm
Chapter
IF
I
I09
JTOpftft
as to
SW3[ <renw*
Are
<wfccns*ft
m*
(
A
at
why
is
Gaudapada has no
snfffsgte
beginning of the
Fiist Prakarana.
we
to
conclude that
?
the
Fourth
)
Prakarana
3T*m%<r?r
alone
the
work of Gaudapada
See Introduction
...
K. bhasya
).
rTST^r^Wt^ or a?r ^ftmw^. Prof. Vidhusekhara in refers long note on s^qr^rm, says that the expression aron^frr
(2)
a
to
nine
taught and are found frequently in Buddhist texts \ He also tries to show that arwjfcsrtn is nothing but srgftTnr meaning thereby ' a
yoga which
is
',
on the
is
).
ground
its
g^rr%jfit
and
9R^{^
opposite
All this
is
Gaudapada need not have gone to any non-Vedic work for the arercfqfrr which is certainly not directly traceable to Buddhist literature, nor is there any definite statement about Buddha having taught any yoga as such. srfSfaTsj: It has been already stated in
term
an off-shoot (due to n*crO Hence there can be no f8r$ta between |<r and snScT* The thereof. a^firat certainly accepts |cf, but only as having an empirical reality. The "Im^s have every reason to quarrel with one another but not with
III. 18
above that
srtcT is
towst and
|cT is
the
^rms
sfifcr.
Prof. Vidhusekhara on the strength of the expression arfsrar? and c that artShRT, comes to the amazing and unwarranted conclusion
of yoga ...in
acceptance of the
the author himself
aspariayoga
is
by the Vedantists,
among whom
any dispute or opposition, for there is nothing to be opposed even How such a conclusion can be from their own point of view. drawn from the expressions 3rfonrc[ and srfir^g, only Prof. Vidhu*
'
sekhara
knows
( see
Introduction
).
3 )
3rerrfrf37S">
Gaudapada shows
ate.
fitst
how
exist.
tfmus,
real
Ir^rfaqjs
cannot possibly
Those who
believe in
origination
have naturally td
no
Notes on Gaudapdda~Kdrifa
and
effect.
jw^,
here
was whether
there
to
hence
'
t^W was
taken
^?w means of the existent \ because here mean <rcmw )> (which is taken to be self-evident) origination the point is how the
comes into
( 1 )
effect.
^qr mmftc*fa
among
is
tos, ^enreTf^s
).
or
qftoTm^TT%3S, t*nftrcs
the sept
Their view
is
that
in the
^or
prior to origination.
something
(
new
produced
from the
say
^rw-sr,
is
is
Thus ^e ^ already
is
not
exists
in the
it%$t; when we
( trc
).
ra
is
however
m^T^^oT
fettr-,
s?W*T<T>
mmm^frcf These
;
the Buddhists)
that
^reTS %*f?$
qpT^f
intimate
between them
-
( as there
is
the
is
3wa; before
its
origination.
Thus
sets of objects
object.
$3 and
s^rcT, it
follows
55 and eqg^, the sr?^nrerf|*J[s and the srac^pf mf^s destroy each other's ^rm^rf and enable the srarrrmrrsr to hold up its head
triumphantly.
(
If a thing
is
it
it is
already
is
Originated.
You
will
it
Similarly if a thing
3TO0 3Wa;
|r%g;s >
remain for ever, for instance the srrssrrgsr. No one $nrrr under any circumstances. frsr??cfr Wtt The
contradicting each
other,
establishment of the
doctrine
of non-origination.
sekhara says that in Karika 4, "the Acarya now proceeds to mention the doctrine of the Buddhists who subscribe to neither of these two
( ajati )
of things *\
3T3*t
He
also
and explains
as
snEtrarfipt
tyk;e a
who do
Chapter
IF
that
til
middle path.
The Buddha
it
any thing
exists,
nor
Karika are
different
from
origi-
to whether the
nation
there
is
non-existent,
te ).
but
assert
that
is
no
We
have stated
Vidhusekhara's
views
as
given
on
own
words.
We
fesRprT: (
gone astray in his exposition of Karika 4. The expression which is also found in Karika 3 ) clearly shows that Gaudapada regards srrr%?r:, sm ( in Karika 3 ) and ?gr. ( or 375m:
pletely
but whose arguments are useful to him in establishing the ^r^rrfcr^rr^* ftfsnpjfs means ' disputing \ Surely Prof, Vidhusekhara does not desire the The BTgq-s also disputing about something amongst themselves. correct reading is jgp and it undoubtedly refers to the ^fegs and
l^rfq^s in the
last
Karika.
ft9^r<S3*n:
ma y
also
m ean
'
the dis'-
come
as holding
sjgprs propounding the middle path cannot be regarded any definite view like the sKnfttrrco The first half of the Karika shows how the m^vs and tr|tr%$s turn the tables on each other and nullify each other's views. Thus
Again, the
4
I
The The
is
*rft?7S
is
|^tr%'3?s
necessarily an sp^cf
^ one
^arer srrfe:*
(
* *fwn T%r%a:
).
thing to be produced
The The
is
BT^rT^ 5W%:>
(
i
that
for,
origination
is
but a
Gaudapada displays his sense of humour by asserting he whole-heartedly backs up his opponents in their arguments against each other. It is not often that your opponents support you, but here the wwis and ttffa^s together help in proving that no *m%
( 5 )
or origination
is
at
all
possible.
is
Gau4apada
112
Notes on Gautfapdda-K&rika
who have made his work easier, and expound how the sTrrrrNr? transcends all frsrr?.
opponents
(
proceeds to further
6-8
III.
20-22 exceptfor
ing that
*T!^r ( in
srtfcq-
are substituted
^r^r[rT%5Ti
*rrw and
I
20 and 20-22
K. bhasya says
)
^farh%
STOTT-
?5tW!F
#^
Karika 6
detailed
criticism,
quotes
As the word
*nsr
is
used in Karika
difficult
to say
is
some
Actually,
no
would be
9
)
felt
even
if
As origination necessarily involves some change in the concerned, Gaudapada first explains what is
(
meant by
cteristics
sr^fa"
or nature
sr^ra
).
is
sr$r%
never gives up
its
own
chara-
( s<r*rrsr ).
of four kinds:
[ 1 ]
stftrftpS' which
has
become
pow er
T
etc.
Gaudapada
presumably was
possessed of Yogic
on
trust.
^^
ftqifffr
K. bhasya
^srfoift sjarwnsci
q-s
'TWR^Hn'a^orsr^r^nt^TOT sift
)
* ?>m*n*
mw*zm wrrefi: ^
)
K. bhasya
K. bhasya
[
]
I
war
(
3F*rfo
).
q-T
wfirroerr %srfcw
wm
qrantf
ftaforfc-
mpi^rorr
K. bhasya
Afetaft *
ncfaiferer
STr%%&
is
the
s
same
as
W&&
according to sNhfos,
'/
here
it is
acquired, but
Chapter
IV
(
113
or snwra: as the
10
K.
bhasya says
The
sffas
imagine
^3*c*
l^Rrt
***nxmn
and
wmmik
3^**3;
1
^^t^ct: K. bhasya ) that they are death, and experience accordingly ( cf. *r
wr?*^ arH??^
).
mkm
^t^t
*r?r cT^rsr*nr%rP n
Gita VIII. 6
Gau4apada now shows how the OTcfeTTOWftr admitted by the ^rf^rs and $$rftr$s cannot be valid. According to the m*$is who are ^mvmxk^s, sr^far ( or stor ) is the *$3>r?ar and is also 3*xr.
( 11 )
The
etc.
means
that sp*R
^rf^q-s,
is
that sp*t?t (
OTTO
) ltsQ
becomes tr^(
In other words,
*^
is
originated
srqrr?r
are
one
).
We
srsrr* is
originated
but sh-tr
ls
^ so
said to be sra
But how can an sra ( unoriginated and so immutable ) thing undergo origination or change ? If it undergoes a change, how can
it
be R?qr
? ( srsrr*
f^r
f^rfrol
*$7%<TK$%$r*
m^
r?*t ^>f^fcr^:
1%
%ra,
(
trerflEsrftrRrv
&rfa4fara swfiraw:
*n*str
K. bhasya
).
'We believe that spr*n and $ro are might say: from gnrai* So if <t*ar is srsr, then $t*i is also srer.' To this our answer would be ' But this is also frsrfkNRfr for your $nf is srrTOT* and therefore 3TR?qr; &\$ is 3R*r from gj^nr as y u sa y> so the 3rr%f^ $t should mean an 3rfrr?*r 3?ttor> then what becomes of
1%
)
The
one,
grrtf is 3fr?7
cj?T*ar
( i^sr^fcr ) is srsr ?
Your
q;^$T:
^m
which
is
)
'
!
cannot be
(
3??^ only
in
parts,
like
the
srsrsrrc
curate's
ff
$?$arr
q$^
qr^qrer
^?Tcr
is
K, bhasya
).
for spsrc^irc^
that
very reason,
not
argued that an
3*3*
thing can
produce a
?
m$
we
ask
is
Our
experi-
ences in this world are concerned only with ^q-^r things producing
any <&$.
1
114
If
it is
Notes on Gaudapdda~Kdrikd
argued that
we might
)
a sppfj
ness (
thus: B is produced by A ( which must itself be ar?<ra according to the above supposition ), A in turn owes a A 3 to A* and so on ad infiits origination to, say, A , A to A nitum, If the series comes to an end at some point, all the preced?r
sqr^T==3WT*2ir
down and
the
main proposition
falls to
the ground,,
14
shows
that an
The objector says: We can produce a ^r??r which swf? can originate, and which also does not contain
is
admitted by
all
Now c^
or <$\$
:>
Whk?
^Ror
(
produces the
)
$PT%^ra
)
and
tsrrtwcT
3T*rfq>
So
this jTST'rT
should meet
all
your objections.
It
is
The
any
Siddhantin's answer
is:
a contradiction in
terms to
^gq^wnrt^.
How
?
have
mm
(
which
is
necessarily
^\m
( sr
t%
fiww gjswnaufr
or <s\i produces
I3-
K. bhasya
).
15
is
qfrar
the
CTW
simply astounding
?
16 )
Again,
it is
no use saying
It
mutually
You must
mm
may
the
on
II.
2-17, smrf^sn^igmsrcg?*"-
17 )
its
Further, the
mm
it is
upon
<# ( which
is jstsht ),
And
a non-existent
mm,
like
^rewr,
cat}
Chapter
IF
115
tiot
?r
icUft?ft$rf6^rr:
Swfirarr*:
I
^rfsnro^w^
K. bhasya
).
3?m-
stow
if
admit, just to please you, that between |g and c^, and w$ and |g which comes first, and which it is incumbent upon you to say second that has to depend upon the establishment of the first. But
8 )
Further, even
we
this
you cannot
(
do.
[ 1 ] [
The
The
This
denounced
effect
and
17.
[ 3
Cause and
is
impossible
what comes firsts the cause or the the knowledge of cfhrh*? is essential and
t8);
[
effect.
In a cFr&FRtrRnrj
implicit ( Karikas 16
and
Catase
obviously absurd,
and effect are produced simultaneously* This is There cannot be ^r&PRonrre between things
which have
(
[ 5
a simultaneous origin.
( [ 6 ]
There is no origination at all. ^r?f and mxm are one; <fjr is a mere ft*
mainly concerned with on the other hand, to the msrer^ and sn^grfo? *r?tr to
5
is
and
the
siSTTrasrr?.
Sankaracarya,
expound
his thesis.
It
would be seen
that
Numbers
and 6 are
No*
first
so
far.
it
proposition
is
now
lost
17.
For, as
),
IV. 17-18
of the
one
pro-
may
first
position, but
not to be found.
it ?
'
Can we think
t6
Notes on Gaudaphda-K&rikd
i,
but discusses
it,
importance, in the
first
Those who
[ 1 ]
believe that
^rw
two
produces the
q?r*f,
admit
wim
and
gspf are
is
There
is
^rctara
[
first
before ^\n
produced.
csrw and
<f>m are
relation.
ensures that
only a particular
otherwise
%w
sercjt
),
we might
get
to
produce the
ssn?
in
questioii.
If
[ 5 1
W<*
and
would be
fatfstar etc.
Gaudapada
[
1
now
Htfros.
rcor to
( a
[
)
Gaudapada points out that the existence of $r% in the produce a particular m$ cannot be proved. Thus
Is this
$n%
different
like
from
$prar
Or
?
Is this
51^
is
$roWr,
of a non-existent nature
%x$
if
sfrrw itself
not help the q^or to produce and not different from ^pror, it is (Read the following from Sankarabhasya on II. 1-18, 3%:
the ^ffe
existent
^fo would
**
^fercnft
w ^ to
1
ijtfmzt
arcrm-
Wfrfa: thus
produce the
with
qj^R^w%t%^gr in
**qfafir
means { the absence of any power in the particular^'. K. bhasya seems to connect
the
last
mm
'
to
**%:
the
Karika,
is
^mlr
saying ^cTST
****
fc*ro*rfir-
so that
3^%
taken to
mean
Chapter
lV
thinks
117
that
inability to
'
sTSrfrE refers to
where two
classes of teachers
mentioned,
Another objection
to the sraf^nrar^
is
that
there
is
no
knowledge of the inter-relation between gsra and q^rwr; no intimate relation between two entirely different things can be proved. It can not be known how g>rc can reside in the *&\vst. There can be no relation between qsTTOT which already exists and ^pf which is going to come into existence later. A #r?a is possible only between two existing
^r^amf aa#?f^aarara; ar?r**a^ffara^qarcrofa^HaTawwarT^a: a^^<Ta*mra aw awrwrw: ^sr^ ^^firrTcq- awaawwsip sravgqawstra =a fk*%% ar?r?wsrar?ter ssasarFCTat wara^qarasfoaa; ot *a otIaaip wrfiw wtoiwwTOpdi aama afr fifc mrctawAg aaa sa srwaaan afe arsia *ra*a$ aa a^wawspraftas srcreJfrr WFrerraaasrfas&<fwrthings ( srfa
t
^ ^la^retnarsbasartifraf
:
*ttgq*Tnfspq;
aaar:
a^T^**wTaaaw?a>%waafraU~ aaa ... 3*aaWT <^a iRT^f &3 aaaaa aafagwai*raaaiaT ^easftaaTa; sro awaaa a&r a$wr
1
#warai ...wrmTO
^^T*C
'ffTOta
a??a
q-WW^W^grq-^^^r
wra a % ?a?a:
1 1
aarafosasronarc*
*T%aT"aa
i
m% ^ratframa*a?5>a
...
ar<n%sa>sfa
saq?a$?a 3aTa?te?aaaf: wi
air aefrwaraTa
...
foaTfsjaa
sr<fcfc
qfinaw?ta
ara
5% ^a a
aw
sa ara?q%*aa;
wJ aw
1
a*wa[
sfftrfiwa asarftr awn^araaTaraswarra eerafcaf ;$a?a ffa a $rwn?wa; aasraarfa fa&rga; arr *s^rc<afraT*"ara Ararat aa aa qnafeftir
$w
II.
?m
asaa *nfcaa*mwa?a
1-18
)
srftmftr
Sankarabhasya
on Brahmasutra
mtetm
mean
is
It
may
ssion refers to
No.
of the alternatives
is
urfro&fe ^qr%Ta
)
Chapter XI
of the
Mula-
mmtoT No
neously,
is
4 alternative, viz. $rf and $rwr arising simulta* objected to, on the ground of the ' violation of the order*.
! |
Notes on Gaudapada-Kdrikd
w$
and
mm
is
that
^im
this.
comes
first
w?
Gaudapapa says
carefully
all
philosophers
qsnfereowr*,
having considered
the points
involved in
on the ground of <$mw of the setw, and the arcKqTW of any sr?vr between <snf and spnpt.
No.
is
to be rejected
No.
is
No. 3 is to be rejected, because there is no ground to ascertain which comes first, of the two %\i and ^r^ur ( and no gvrrer to
corroborate
it ).
3Tg*rr.
thus No.
theory*
which
is
srsrrm,
is
we should understand
we have
3qrfTf^tn:
l
'the
The
a^rriirV.
( see
Introduction
q*r
).
In IV. 42,
snfiftg
I
|T%m
by
'
5^: and
*Tf?rfaaT
:
in IV. 54,
IgqrgrraifS
*rfNn%
refers
so
that
f ^I
Gaudapada probably
to
wise philosophers
in general.
2Q
The
it
was not
fair
on
the
part
of
Gaudapada
producing
$tw
and
in
m^m
that
producing qn*r
light-hearted
sfrsr
how
not
the
matter
should
be
treated
manner.
The
be
sftsui^rsnT
produces
3^ and
s^r
proto
?
duces sfta
),
Why
objected
wr
as authoritative.
Gaudapada says
sfisftf*
You
in reply: We swifiwrffos can not accept the have yet to prove to us how the grafasFrararc exists
is
not r%=5,
it is still *rr*q%
Again,
as
speaking,
is
wrong
to regard ifteTf*
proving
gwf^r
well. It
Chapter
IF
series
119
sftsr
^ip*
sfrsr
3=rj^
shows mutual
(0
q^rcaHn*,
but surely the
0)
sfrsr 1
produced from
313^
is
different
from afr^r; and 3^* 1 produced from sftsr 1, is different from wgt. Here are therefore different q?i*fer*iimr*s between different sets of same objects CTftTftff is a IfcrnwH mentioned by Gautama; it is the remarks, bhasya K. On |gftft as srffc^ of other mii^s. |g:, But Gaudapada SWatOTTfo^fi- m^i^ sr^fn 1% reran ^ sgftm
!
l
may
(
not refer-
The objector says: You are making too much of our mention which of the two mi and ^rot comes first. What does it matter if we do not know this particular ? The relationship between the two is clear to the meanest intelligence and that should suffice for our purpose.
21
)
inability to
thing
tell
is
able to
which
the
qsrsar
that
already there )
prior to the
thing to be produced.
The
fact that
cErw and
its
its
you are not able to point out the shows that your basic principle
If
unfounded.
5W$
srftasa**
shF^rrorarat
of
all
K. bhasya
is
).
(22)
The upshot
this discussion
that
the
(
view of
^w
srraeir is
untenable
can-
itself )
q^:
srror
( *re
cannot be
produced from
an entirely
produced',
<nr) is
equally untenable.
crct:.
(
A thing
'a
obviously canis
When we
say
thing
or 3*3-5 thing can srrarcwi** f fct gaf: K.bhasya). Similarly, a not be produced (otherwise there would be srrq-srwrsr of their sr$m),
fRRra; cannot likewise be
ST^mR*
produced
fa^^wi#*nrrci; K. bhasya
$rfnre?^
zmk
wfer
T%m^rc$qr%^?w*gw^T
120
Notes on Gaudapada-K&rtka
23 )
src?f^
dw
their
arguments on the
contradicting themselves.
is 3T?rrfsr
|su%WcT mutually giving rise to 3T?m% For, ^m\: <E$tta; IgH mmn
?tok, are
if
the
and does produce something, there would be ceaseless production, and an srari^rcor must produce sreif^ mm ( for $ntoT
and
%m
must be
like in nature
which
is
ridiculous
how
can an
^P? have a beginning ? ) Similarly t^ST cannot be produced from arc Tr^fg. Prof. Vidhusekhara against all manuscript authority
3T*TTT%
wishes to read
clear )
srerf^: for
3W\\:
( this
( this
is
and
snfcf: for
:
n%
quite unnecessary
It is quite
)
clear that
3m^
is
means
(1)
cause
A thing for which no cause can be found, cannot that is, cannot be produced ( ^rcar^ q* beginning, any have ^rfe^WW* srraftTOVff: K. bhasya ).
(2) beginning.
Having disposed of the sri^s, l^ft^s ( 24 ) Gaucjapada could have called a^R^hrr: )> Gaudapada
the
etc.
whom
now
turns to
Bauddhas.
*
tottst
means
'
another
srr^r,
another school of
cf.
^WTO^T**^
*rgrrafcrfc
3r?nsr
The
^[s
that
must be *wfr
ence of pain
for
etc.
it )
sr^rrH"
Objective experience.
g \i% must
)
In order to perceive
TO,
it is
be TOrercr;
how
can the
gf% be tot^ttt
and
how
must have a faf*re; in the absence of this ftfarr* no srfnn^sjnr ( [*r ); secondly, we actually experience pain etc., this cannot be denied. This %fe^nqrT^r also must be attributed to some cause. This cause could only be the srririsr which is subject
to snfa. Prof.
Vidhusekhara explains
'
qrccTrsnrecrcrr
nar
as
( their )
existence
clear.
is
regarded as dependent,
is
There
or independent, but about existence of the signs? itself. ^%$r: %l*n* S flfawi- ( K. bhasya ). %fc^rs according to the Buddhists
:l
arise
(
(
( ^r> %Vth *W> wnt and ftsfH" )> smra* $3faprs and mind, and their objects, in all 12 ), and vtj
from
&w*s
6 organs
of sense, six
objects
and
six
kinds
pf consciousness
Chapter
IF
lit
srrprsr*
(
srrrejft
25
upon
gfrff (
inference,
as implied
in
the last
real
Karika
state
but
gfrff is
inferior
of things
( <rim*lsFNrftfSfcra:
i%
^i\
qmwwgwfc *&
'TCTSwfoft' cT^n^cT *T& K. bhasya ). ^rT^?r tells us that nothing is ever produced, all so-called production is j^irrer*
(
(
26
)
)
or r%5TR
no ftfarrT, as no srrimr can exist. The f%tT alone exists and appears as 37n$T* Thus f%*j has no
sr^rfa
has
it
or srarvrrcr
existent.
(
without
exist ).
3?^: Not
srmfiitaftr
fs^ssrg In the three paths or periods of time, ^Tcfrfrrsrr-* ( 27 ) neroliTRTWB. T%fT never gets into contact with any external object. The objector points out that if the ferer can have ^STsrmr^crr in the
absence of
picture of
etc., there is
the chance of
is
fepar
presenting a
to exist,
wrong
^rsr
etc.
The answer
if
that
if
qz were
,
we would
be in a position to say
the presentation by
nw
( swrfcr ft ( (
^^RfszrrW
*3pTOf*ir refinr
28
25)^1^^
I
Karika 27
l
ft^Herrf^T
afteft*
w%* ?m$wf%^vTwwwTsxmmx%~
Just as tiifom ffa $3 w<&\ wnpmfiwi nffoswl ?RRii^ Cau4apada used the arguments of the t^rfa^s against the ^rnprs, and
vice versa, he uses
the
According to the
associated with ^rftrew, 5:^, qp w etc., that is, these ftrsrrOTT^ *%*rra says that neither t%tT nor t%tT^?t can be Gau4apada are ft^r*? ^vis.
means
its
).
The
fa3TR*T$fts holding the view that ftrw or ftrawr is originated, see the foot -prints ( of birds ) in the sky. It is as absurd to say
that ferer ssrro^ 4s to say that
16
i24
38
)
Notes on Gaudctpada-K&rikd
the ( mm\n ). There can not be *hwr of an 3T^cT ( wjt ) from Theie be produced. never can instance, for the ^r^fsrnor
Actually
it is
wrong
to say
that srnrfta
^
all
produces **#.
An
is
s^fr,
is no sms, bence the Vedantas have proclaimed that the second and take mean w*i which is 3T3*. We may take anor to
Brahman
^r?W?^
sees in
39
The dreamer
fails
in the
waking
state as unreal;
dream, he
to see
them
in the
waking
state.
So both
in
the
waking state and in the dream-state, one sees things seen in the other state as unreal, snifter is the cause of ^rjr only from the
point of view of arc? rc, but the srrorto is The propriety of is given by K. bhasya as
also
%r
equally unreal.
sts^raw srmflfofir
<rorflf sftflr
fcsr
war * T^fk
ssrftrftsu}:
awiasTPTfttf
W&3TO& * g
this $ot. The ^srr^r is unreal and has ^mfterf^ for its cause; unreal sees thus person A unreal. ke must that snirflarwr shows things both in the waking and dream states, but does not realise
this in the
waking
state.
40
)
*s
From
110
%d-
TWn*
[ x ]
possible.
Thus
cannot have are^
3T*ra;
(
sj^ &$gr
*5
(
(
ijr$tftrrnr
[ 2 ]
TO TO
)
)
srtffawr
}
[ 3 ]
^
(
^5
TO
cause.
would
for
its
lose
Btst )
3rcrs;
cannot have
cause.
).
( for,
41
are unreal,
The objector says that if both smnrand 'TOT experiences how can there be any qnWiWfrr* between them ? The
it is
answer
produced by waking state, a person can have false knowledge of a rope as though it were a real serpent, the same thing happens in the dream-state as well, ^rct As a fact, as real.
is
that
In both
(
42
If the
amTffor?
is
why
etc.
haveSastras taught
different
kinds
of Upasanas,
Wqwrars
Chapter
IF
real
125
creation
(
is
)
and duality
that
exists
The
is
buddha
people realise
srswcfcrrf
to
be grasped
by ordinary
So,
people,
people
who
see
in the srenfrrarrs".
taking compassion
the
on
weak-kneed but
well-intentioned
t 'ie
wise
have
sftrirT?!?, in
belief that
in course of
time
of
).
they would be in a position to understand the ararfNT? ( this is what is meant by stt^
Prof, Vidhusekhara understands by
gq|:
higher
truth
wmmxm
3V"<rr%373[
in III. 15
here
or
arercffcrr?
t%ST%~- jk^4 *n*er, Irf srfcrc^ar ian$: ( K. bhasya ). The objector says: The gra ( ... s^rnrari wft ^TO *W
( 43 )
w&
'
Taittiriyopanisad
believing in
Iter.
II.
7-1
Would
upon
not those
who
follow
the
Sastric
injunctions based
srrnfaT> because
of
smricter?, come to grief in the end ? Have they ever no hope for salvation f The answer is that these people are after all not bad, but just weak and certainly *jTW*f$ra ( m$& K JFtW: ^**I*arar%?tt ft Glia IX. 30 ). They are not ?m^ss like the Carvakas or *r: Buddhists, and with luck, they can ultimately see their way to
l
believing
in
the
srenftfrw
ft
^^OTi^fs^w ma
w*fa
Gita
(
XL
44
40
)
the ^T%^gr^rr%q;s referred to in Karikas 42, 43, he has to point out that their argument viz. there is sr*g*usr on account of 3"<r$**r
&nd
*r*$F3THi is
entirely
wrong.
it
Because an object
does not
that
is
it
perceived and
is
perceived
mean the magic elephant shown up by people see its movements and
is
real.
is
For
juggler
actually
so on,
knows
(
unreal.
45
The only
is,
real thing is
called
fertf,
5nrW *&** which U am ( but appears to be born ), WMt to have motion ), st^g ( but appears to be a but appears ?ft9 ( sftg ) and is completely unruffled ( having no {km ) atid not within
) that
the province of the 3* ( immr^CTRr ). This description of ftryftr by Gaudapada shows that he does not hold the ft^rrrorcf of the
Buddhists.
The
ft^fff of the
Buddhists
is
neither
srsr,
nor -sw#,
126 nor
Notes on Gaudapada-K&rtk&
grarcg.
Gaudapada
accepts
fayrwf^
tos not
is
46
fasrw or ?%tT or
srgra: is
wr>
an(1 a!1
being different
there
is
from
5^ are also
m^
'
1
ere
It
m
is
mr-
W% q^?TO5<TOra:
to
'
prrfir
*rwnk
K. bhasya
).
unusual
is
done here by
the K. bhasya.
Karikas 475 2 introduce the famous s^rrcT simile which the present Prakatana is named. If the fsr?rr* is one and 3T3T* how do we experience the various q$s ? Whence do they come and whither do they go ? What is their connection with
(47-52)
after
fa^TR
are all
Do
The answer
is
that sTTrmsTWTFs
VW*
(1)
When
the fire-brand
there
is
is
When
is
whirled
about,
the
the
(
appearance of
mw
an ^
m$%
is
ed
lines.
is
not real
(2)
When
arises
is
the
$ffi\$ is at rest,
) When the
and
issrsr*
re$rm
does
not
there
there
no no change
appearance,
in the
stsjfct;
vibrate,it is
*Tf?
it is sjsr*
When
come
in
anpsrrpTOFsr
appearances do not
it.
a place out*
When
the
wfflft is at rest,
When
fe^H
is
at rest, the
the appearances do
not go out
(5)
The
appearances
involving
mq&w&sm
is
only a
&*ent*
g^
is
capable
of move-
Only
a ^aq-
capable of
movement.
Chapter
IV
127
the srmrsrfsr it is the ^eram^ or sntnng 3mnr srTsrrcr, There is no qsrq same and their behaviour is exactly alike. 3sn:aT*rpgr between the srmrers and ar^ra or T%?rR. Hence they must be pronounced to be not capable of being considered or in plain
Whether
is
the
language
^t> srarcr?*^ rom&$ ^^^rr%f f%lsT5rmm^ asrnflc*N m*mK. bhasya which also ik% vkmimfe 5nwrf?fr%^%fir ^g^isrnq: hastens to add w$\n% srmJT *r$ ftrsrR'wr ^cfrgrsrar g firgnsrar r%$W
I l
(53)
firsrra
In the
is
last
Karika,
it
in
the
case
of
which
gsq-s,
one,
srer etc.,
it is
Karika explains
be
is
why
so.
^sqr
is
two
so that one
one, immutable,
( ctist
there
nothing
or
is
else,
so
it
cannot have
there
is
any
^wrsrs
qnifercanrorj because
)
sreqrsrq-fo
s&rs
srer
jjots ) it is
obvious that
vrsm and
depends
upon
+ cT?g ) here also, so that does not vitiate the general statement $$i %<&w &nvm or 3^3; z&uw ^reon* ( sprc&r and are not %$ns 9 nor are 3W must be two separate things ). The
a
scsqr (
<TC
r%?rr?r, as
we have
already proved.
So no cRq^
W&PffW
(
is
possible.
54
So,
unassailable doctrine.
t%tT3t
but this is not possible. ; f%rr is anmftsnsr^q- and *nfs are ftynw^^TPRTWmsr ; there cannot be igqrOTt* between them. Here Gau4apada uses the expression fnfifton It is more probable therefore, that the expression sn|: in IV. 19 and IV. 42 does not refer
.
to the Buddhists,
different
especially
because
the
fsr^TR
of Gaudapada
is
from the
f^R of the
(
are
really
ST^ff^s
Buddhists, and the Buddhists who could not have preached the srsnfcHTT?.
).
srwgf^r smsr^pfr
( 55 )
K. bhasya
sfTOjn
;
ghosts or
there
is
spirits
with the seizure by > usually used in connection hence, strong attachment or adherence. As long as
srifs
the superimposition of
on |a\
s^tf?^n>^if^
28
Notes on Gaudapada-Rarihft
*T%
(
Ig^^:
56
)
K. bhasya
).
that of
|fr,
57
^fa
;
is
explained by
K. bhasya
as
ftif^osrasr*:
two kinds of
in
empirical truth
to
us
(
that
^wm^.
the
appears
of
sense
WWt
fit
meaning
Karika
likes
empirical truth
).
Prof.
this
He
that
is
also
93FpNt*
We
are
of opinion
Gaudapada
no
^m*
in
last
actually
experienced, and
not be able to say whether the sfte comes or the st^c comes first, but we must admit that the arWfC
it is
swff
we may
is 3??mf ). In fact, the !TcfrHT*rg?qrr? of the Buddhists admits kind of causality. Gaudapada's answer is that the tot* is an illusion due to Maya, and when the #spr really does not exist,
series
this
any
is
talk of its
(
am
futile.
),
it is
^.
on account of the fact that The reading ssun^ proposed by Vidhusekhara ( against
all
Mss authority ) appears simpler, but after same as h^ht in the case of an sm object.
all
"
the $raro
is
the
58
The
ws
5
may
refer
to
the
(
75
divisions of Reality
72
)
^cRifs
1
1 1
^cpjjfs,
s
ffo*rorcs +
ftrorcarcs
)
stR^th*
(
t%ttw-i-46
+ 14 fe^rsrgrBOTs
3*sTfa*rwR*hr
says
that
).
and
^tcscTOits
wsrsr,
sfa^m^thr
be
and
They
Gaudapada
compared
to
really
is
born.
They can
Maya which
(
59 )
last
Karika
viz. the
5to of
m*tar.
A mm^t
coming from
mimm,
exist!
srnit
cannot be called ftar or T%mr, because it really does not Similar is the case with the *4s, * 3 *wr*lm Wroi
sm
st
&3K?ST
l?^}: ( K. bhasya
).
Chapter
IV
129
3 3rcN?ren?5
(
(
60
The
see note
latter
^T^ff
and the
that
the
sFmicTC??
which holds
nomenclature ^n^ar and sisn^cT is meaningless. The highest can not be described in words ( *t<tt srrer
^;?r,
that everything
the
fr^crer Taittiriyopanisad
II.
4-5
'
),
as
it
is
describable
ar$r&TS.
fir^j
consisting of
ideas
this
is
of this
nature
(
'
srsr sths.
61-62
has scope
All
srtfs,
whether
in the
&$
state,
are
due to the
f%WT5^[5T caused by
srre,
Maya
[q*
the f%fT though really void of uriTsng^in the two states. Karika 61 is the
same
with the difference that f%TT ^fer srnm is substitut*w; Karika 62 is also the same as III, 30, only
rre:.
63-64
is
sees in the
dream,
the
is
g^q- to
this
f%tt;
^q- only
to the
dreamer himself-
are
fsfg
in the
cTTsrg;
state
is
exactly the
same
as in the
(
67 ) t^tT and $m are thus g^q- only to each other, and depend upon each other for their existence, f^r^f^q- without the f%rT, and the f%<?r without the feptfcr^qr are unthinkable. Both have
no
as
itself,
^gr rTf^Tfrf^sr
^
(
wr^
srarrcsqTtr
).
*%th
ff
wmH wr^rnr yt q$
:
^i
rasrfcP
r{
1% H5r srar<nsra*n*f
51W& ^^ftrgm^msrm
of
$yroT
K. bhasya
&%twx
is
sense
).
characteristic,
$^$&ftr
qm smrorac
'
K. bhasya
!
t%
crarmrfcr
Hms Prof.
The
Vidhusekhara
objector asks:
If
130
Notes on Gaudap&da-K&rifal
The answer
that the f%fr
is
nothing dependent
sees the %?q-
exists.
is
which
not the
The
sort
f^rTfrarn^ts as
to regard r%rr as
of reality.
(
68-70
The
objector remains
still
unconvinced.
at
He
says:
same time ? The answer is: The object in the dream, the object created by the magician, the object created by a Yogin possessed of supernatural
can the ferfRnwr be unreal
How
and
g^q*
the
powers all
origination
common man
under-
these not undergo the process of and annihilation before our very eyes ? There is thereif
the
ftj$cT$: ff?#w^u%wf^Ti%cT:, Gaudapada is a believer in the yogic powers, perhaps being a great Yogin himself.
(
71
This Karika
is
the
same
'
as III. 48.
Gaudapada repeats
enunciating
only true
doctrine
Nothing
is
r%#
as held
by the Buddhists.
admit
3tW
and not t%tHTP ^hj: and ^trst ^w^ This is a hit against the
(
Buddhists
73 below
who
).
sw
to be of
two kinds
see notes
on Karika
is
The %$ consisting of srr^r and ( 72 ) nothing but the vibration of the f%TT which
c
sn^
1
object
rightly called
is ftffhrqr
#:
#ro
fw *w
73 )
the
meaning would be the distinction about the teacher, pupil etc. which is inevitable in studying the Vedantasastra itself would have no scope, if the ferT is ftr:*np. The answer is, the dising to
it
tinction
reality.
is
is
firerew as TOgrwswiftoi
says by
exist'.
Prof. Vidhusekhara
way
only in empirical
sainvfti )
Chapter
truth. For a thing
IF
131
) for its existence
J
may
exist in empirical
Prof. Vidhu-
sekhara
requires
^r5?qr
is
here
q^^rfa^qr
it
into TOrTsfrsftw^ror
it is
on
the
ground
that
the
says
sense
^rnr-
and
He
which
the same as srnrAsqTqrr %$?rr which he explains as %%m is the cause of existence or appearance of things. Not
satisfied
with
all
this,
the
Professor
says
first
that
we should
read
roF3ft t%
^TW
instead of qTcf^rsfvr^rqr
proposed by himself!).
Buddhists admit two
kinds of
^m, w=$mm
qSt^tk^ *r?*n??r of Sankara ) and qrorfcrar ( qwmw of the Jainas, qromSrc *r?q of Ankara ) ( | *r?q Fg<nfk?*r f 3[Rf otI^^t tfimmrmw ^ mi ^ ?w%& ShwR fg*rr5Tr*<T ikvm ^w|?fr: ft r^s Madhyamakarika IV. 8-9 ). %%fa is the 5T ft^TR^cT *nw* f ^srrerq"
and
the
l
11
II
grq-rq-
and q^rr^
is
the
g-qq-.
qrrr?^ is
sr^rarrs
of a
thing, according to
(
the
)
Buddhists,
qnccT?^
or ^f^rar,
imagined
e. g. *Ji*rf?nlr?r
elephant
or
dependent
( the
form of
the qfaRufflf elephant depending for its existence upon the cause sffir ) and qftfasqsr or ftisqgr, perfect ( the non-existence of the
elephant
).
to
the sm%*m%9s
^sr of the
Vedantins.
We differ from Prof. Vidhusekhara regarding the interpretation of this Karika. q^gr means here undoubtedly other schools of philosophy ', the Buddhistic school ( cf. ^pra'srreraj;: ^WrSTTf^g':
c
Nyayasutra I, 1-29 ). The Buddhists regard ^fct or ^r^^frT as ^?q ( which is really a contradiction in terms,, for ^r% means snwr ), while Gaudapada regards it as 3T*r?q\ It is wrong to say that Sankara admits any sgrerffffe' %w* In the beginning of the Vedantasutiabhasya, he defines his position quite
srfcTcTf^r%^[r?cr: (
clearly
...
ftwqrrcroftra:
^r^sq^rjFr:.
He
talks
of
but not of
wrjmw*
Like
Gaudapada, he understands mq to be one, indivisible and without any gradations. ^r% must therefore be always s^rar. Gau4a~ pada recognised only ^f^qer^rar. The objector says: You said in the last two Karik&s that t%tT was 3?^ and 5frq is not born. But in
3rr*ra ^q*a(.
How
can
you
reconcile
132
Notes on Gaudaptlda-Kdrtkd
58
makes
it
quite clear
that
the
spa
in
srnfrw, so gfra
is
not
exist.
So whatever
not
exist
cpf?7?T stflnqr,
does
reality
^m ^^frn^rm6^^TT%^qR^6T^mff
ir% grfe
WOT
f?gx$?r
&ankarabhasya on Vedantasutra
objector says*
II.
1-14
).
The
is
accepted by
their
own
terminology
3%
thing admitted
objector
^rr% cannot be
real.
( cf.
Mammata
as
safcf,
).
silencing an
who
etc, are
them
qwnnrTfRf gnmsqwrci.
mm*i
'
Kavya-
prakasa II
3rftw?i% seems to
fected
)
mean
srwsraT
#??%.
crct^st
K. bhasya's explanation of
fetched.
(
.-.as
Hf^iwareSKtfr
is
far-
74
The
it is
not
fair to
outright. If
^m
condemn ^r%
we going
'
Certainly
'
( this is
made
clear in
the
next
We
stick to
^w^%
cannot
associated
with any
Again,
srer
the
expression
:
TO?srrfin%<smT
is,
how we
call
take
q^T^%%nVr
the
a
ii$*t f?frF
that
m**l
as
is
called
is
sw really
we cannot
is
snw*
or
sttct
even
sjsr,
he
view to give
obviously
far-
fetched
).
different
Gaudapada says that ideas about ^r% differ according to philosophers. But they involve ^Ttfercarcnr which has been
if
Chppter
IF
it is
133
truth,
is
because
premises.
deception.
(
To
^m
is
75
The
reason
for
there
is 3rfirr%5f$T
an
tell
us any truth,
)
is
that
existing, unreal
viz, the
reality there
gsrWROTWS' which means belief in $3. Actually in the case of cannot be any ^cT. When a person knows that there
exist
cannot
to
mean
m
q:
^nsra* <pn^rr
to
Rfwmm^Tmr"w^T:,
less
so that
supplies
make
the
construction
subject of
?r
involved.
otstcT,
might take 3T^rf*TRR??r: as the but then grsnsnsr sqrcr would go with sjmm^r
that srfsrre^ST cannot
We
and
it
might be objected
be
said
to
cognise
anything,
subject of
^
?r
may
*
be different from
%>, or ^:
refers to
3m:
in
Karika 74, or
(
n Karika 71.
the
76
mentioned
i%mTf(
in III, 16 (
three
srrsros
w?
^rrftsnftr-
srafrr^OT^rwrr: ( K. bhasya ), When the f^m does not concern itself with these fgs, it becomes r%HWTT and is
sre&WW
not originated.
77 ) When the t%tT has become ftf^/tar, the 3*5**1% state of remains the same immutable for ever. That ^g?qr% is the m$r itself. Prof,Vidhusekhara admits himself baffled over this Karika, leaves the second half of the Karika untranslated, and considers
(
the
feHtT
w^w^mw?cri%RWTr
1
%w ^
i^Hc?i^rTcT^rg?q^^q' i%w*s
^wsq^Wh
first
wrrsrnifor finrraT-
^^E^ifcrsJ:
as unsatisfactory.
nothing corresponding to
incomplete, and (2) there
m in
is
the
is
is
3% must be admitted that the construction is an involved one ( but this is not uncommon with Gaudapada ), but we can easily supply Because ^rr to correspond with gr, and take era; as referring to r%Tf. therefore as explained before, and but nothing is srerfcf j%m^ j%tT
to
It
no antecedent
134
and 3TRT%tT,
its real
Notes on Gaudaptida-K&rikn
state
is
just 3Tgr<TT%
and
it
perseveres
as
without
the
jjrgr,
rightly calls
Karika.
The
<*rs also is
fam&& and
cannot really
3TRfnTTrTT
exist.
(78)
same
of the t%tT
3?u;jpra(,
is
the
it
Vidhusekhara reads
regarded by
so
that
him
the
as the
subject
of
The
expressions
^ffcr^fcp,
with
the person (
who
secures
right
knowledge.
As Prof. Vidhusekhara has pointed out the change over from f^rr to a person is abrupt. On the other hand, it might be argued that
the snrsnifr of the reader, after being told about the
is
state
of m$r,
to
to a person
who
realises
that state,
and
that
satisfied
79 )
As long
^mnrftlsr involving
the
belief in
3^ thing
%*%
to
3r*g,
another.
the r%rr
But when
it is
cannot be any %q or
sraip and turns away from the ^q\ The subject of fsrfWtar may be era; ( i%tT ) in the first half, in which case ^ f5>%3" is a kind
becomes
of absolute construction, or
^r: is
the subject of
fVto^
the
first
80
When
the f%xT
is
which
Prof,
is
the
qjRr*3C
to
Vidhusekhara thinks
It
expression
refers
the
Buddhas.
rather refers to
the
Rsmsr^rs of the
Gita
( cf.
gft-
II. 53,
...
*$
11
II.
ffij: <w*fii8&
II.
ffaqToflr-
i^rowww
(
sr^rr
srfirfaraT
II.
68
).
be realised by.
81
)
^f:
asnanro*:,
^th^rtw:
take
*%
in
srcassmnqra: (
K. bhasya
).
the
special
Buddhistic
srrg:
He
:
also
reads \**n
C
wwros,
but wishes to
emend
it
into
wrrg
sww
^&ng
me^n-
Chapter
9
IF
it is
135
gives a satisfactory
ing
The
reading as
likely that Gaudapada may have deliberately used here the Buddhistic expression wfcrrg:* gsr^RW ^*T vrrcnn^
sense. It
however
qrrirr
...
tftaer
Anandagiri
).
fMfWSr faf^m sprT?rn$taT%rrr sngwiftofr ^q- srvrrer wfir ( cf. ri waft ^t! * srsnjfr * qrres
Gita
XV-6
which
is
not depend
others for
its light.
The
expression ^fg[>Tra
srr$te:.
occurs in
upon Chandogya
IfH
and :*jsr are used adverbially. Prof. Vidhusekhara ( 82 ) translates g^*3[ sw%?ra f?r??T and -^ firfavErSfc as ' bliss is constantly
5^
^t
is
is
to
We
see
no
reason to
split
glorifies the
fa*&m
fk^ik'
which
is
the
same
fits
as 3rir?fi*usr or sn&rac*
in this
Karika
how
)
the
smarts*
ignorant
who
(
associate
him with
of looking
different sms,
at reality.
ssrfars
modes
The
[ 1 ]
3T%T
3TC?qTr$T%
msft
^r%srr1m?r
K. bhasya
Anandagiri
2 ]
sriffcr *mrfr^q*>
l*w%$?:
K. bhasya
*W*renfs[r%
flrfT^r
fsRnwrfiror:
Anandagiri
K. bhasya
), ifcfrar
fip&wwi
1
Anandagiri
mfler
^rrf^cr
mftcr TO^fqwapro^
K. bhasya
Anandagiri
126
Notes on &audapada~Rarik&
and
*n%
rnr%
refer to the
3 arffcr
ftOTwfSfts and the sprerf^s respectively ; *!W is taken by K. bhasya to refer to the |^h%$s
refers
admit the
*rcpflrt
it
only to
the
is
Jainas
actually
to
the
).
No.
not
referred
any
it
particular school of
to
the
!fn%s.
Prof. Vidhusekhara sees here
no reference
1
to
the
is
to the
Atman
( greftfcr
sprawl
^%^vx^
as
and
that
whom
the
srn%3T
unthinkable
condemned. Prof. Vidhusekhara to suit his purpose, takes ^r$j, ftsiT, sw, and swre ( not as referring respectively to 3T%, ?w%, 3#?r ?nfar, and *tm$ hti%, but ) as referring to mm, 3*%, etc. ), that is, 371% refers to i%fc and *%& to rW%r. Gaudapada obviously understands by str%?, a phase involving
to here, for being specifically
production
one of the
six vrrafirercs,
mwv,
stftfr,
ftqRtrTsra-,
nvfc,
3WRrh&, rlR^fri }, so that those only who believe that Atman undergoes any change are condemned here as qrn%3T ( rrgrT??tTOTsrs3$5
:
^l^fff?Tr%^trT?^r^
*m%*rrc- far*: ^rfrifawa: K. bhasya ). The belief in the existence of the wrong type of Atman is referred to
I
here.
We think
references like
a*
that
Gaudapada
is
He seems
s<?i
be indebted to Buddhistic
I
mm:
srrsrWfa
i&
snmer
^g^ife^T grET *
1
TO*^ftr?p
II
n ar*r*r srroer
$tm *r
III.
1
ssr sr^irftrg;
vwh
^re<Wtfq- tror
^fl^^a
Lankavatara
^rg^rt%^r%^
srotsRr ^^T*^wmgwr^m^rrr *rs?m%mwTrqnqm3t%%ET&r etc, P. 9^> ^Tg*sh%$; ^ *$mn qre ^rg^fe-wir ajp^nsr
$mw?m
is
stctsto
^ansproa;
P. 188.
84
When
the
Atman
tealised as being
untouched by the
^Sc^tt
Chapter
IF
137
85
Befitting a
Brahmana
Being a *Hqr means securing the 5rrnJS7 <?3". srr^ws; ( one who knows Brahman ) who deserves the
q;*r
highest q^ as mentioned in
fa?*ft
aiw 5rrrtfrsr
life as
That Gaudapada
cing
calls
srrgrircr
Buddhism ( Prof. Vidhusekhara points out that in Buddhist literature a Brahmana is held in as much respect as a Sramana and a true Brahmana is someBut it would be all the same extretimes identified with a Buddha. mely unusual for a true Buddhist to speak of the highest reality as
preaching
qra^ *
<r**fT$i*
l
\kw$ a^roOTftFrarr^
Cf.
II
m$w m*
'
(
:
i
bhasya
).
r%5?ci:
...
trearrmtfcrfc
^r^njH'Ef rt^
am****
^saww
or
sqrqrsenr:
Gita
)
III.
17-18,
secured by those
86
The
srrsrffsr <r?
1S
the
= out,
duco
rft
I lead,
nffiq-:,
r%=fHfqar and
is
to carry.
SHEwP
(
*9T*w%
firsTST,
A knower
^j?.
of Brahman
naturally possessed of
the right
sra and
Cf. ifNrwffW
am sm:
Krg^
Gita VI. 3 ). It is possible that Gaudapada deliberately uses the expression {%*m here to hint that the faro in the Buddhistic work
is
faraftw
(
87
Gaudapada
differs
shows
his acquaintance
ever improves
from the Buddhists. In this Karika and the next, he describes the three kinds of ^ras ( which are dealt with in detail in the Lankavatara
[
).
sm%^
This
its
is srmftrrqrra",
<|2iwn*li *z
[
).
2 ]
u^#n%
5
This
is
^sr^rrfr,
is
absent,
It
is
called
^^,
free
According to
J8
jo8
Uotet on Gaudapada-Rarika
cfasrm.
K.
bhasya by
way
of introduction
remarks
here,
q^Hr^q'^^^rc^^T^HmiR
srrcw
Similarly, Anandagiri,
qwaforaOT"
88 )
[ 3 ]
r$m*3r- This
is
the
55^,
where there
is
neither
The ^grocm
I3[Rf
ar^rTO^m^rcf^rrwwfsr^c?^
P. 157
The ^rffe^ and ^raJreroriT of the Lankavatara, ponds, as Prof. Vidhusekhara points out, respectively to
m&m,
corres-
B^t^feF and
^Hr*
in the text.
We
Prof. Vidhusekhara
when he
says that
the difference
is
only in
is not important \ Gaudapada seems to scheme that the ^PBhrWRfsTR of the Bauddhas could not be the sto^tr which according to him is f%R*r ^rr^rar
show by
his
sftftw
all
and
mm
( jtpts 4
states
+
are
prW =
wr and
9 ^r^fTTf,
and
&r&3
) are referred to in
Buddhist works.
The Lankavatara
gives
gpr
wise philosophers to be
fit
to be
[ 1 ]
K. bhasya:
^r%^ gRR^fiw
3&W
*ta
5Tl^r
Chaptef
'
IF
139
the
Prof. Vidhusekhara: This is to be understood to be [ 2 ] knowledge and knowable, as is always declared by the Buddhas.
We
have already
IV.
is
no
difference
between
Or
it
may mean
is
whatever
we may know
is
hardly convincing.
We
need not understand that Buddhas are meant by the expression g%-*, again ^rq- ( which elsewhere is taken to be Brahman by Gaudapada
III.
33
srgj
!pt ) can not refer to the object of the three-fold ^tt* just
described.
The
next Karika
tells
us that
when ^q
is
person becomes *r^r, so ^tq cannot mean a mere object ledge in the ordinary sense of the term.
The
first
How many
[
1
3
]
[
is
srra
?
is,
Though Gaudapada
appears that K. bhasya
there
is
before
that
$q
is
is
taking fa^g
to be
the
also
are intended
is
no sm which would be necessary if only ^r* atid ^rq already remarked, ( Gaudapada, however, as has been
be
what
is
the exact
meaning of frw
Does ^tr
?
#rf%^>
g^srMN?
The
unless
we
*r%m ff *dbr
the
%tj
refers to
f^|fqr ),
the
ation in a
detached parenthetical
is
way
Just as
triad
divisioh of ^r?T
given, the
well-known
^jd
mentioned
is
Gua
1
in this connection*
etc.
srwrohnePT
sNr *3W-
"from*ftsr-
?r^r% Wrowrc
q^
^ sf^flwmsmi^!^^1
l^o
Notes on
Gaudap&da-KdrtM
srrarftar?*
a^r^pJwfrrcc
qg;?rg;
7-11;
%g
sr?%B sreftqs
11
sqrfcromfa crewWctaatngn
II
m&&fo
).
|?nT
%q tfFPpar
12-17
irq-
(The
^ ftftf
3^
sttokt above
to
K. bhasya takes
1
mean #rr%^nfr
^r^ir, if
rlrfsre
and %\*
<re
as
^fe^TfisPw^
firfW" refers
only to
$rq
means amrflsac
*8T
XIIL 12
all
).
automatically becomes
^RF^rnroqr
gfgrfa^
I
far-fetched.
*ft
The
idea of a
srwrffr
being
^5T
^f^^ m
(
si?
is
quite
common,
cf.
II
WHW^r
XV,
19.
^tfWFrac
otT[^t HT^cf
Gita
90
K. bhasya says by
f?r|^i3[^af?^T^T^r
way
of introduction,
#Tfeq>!sfraf
3?jr?rrmH-
se&jt
iMr*
as srosra:. Prof.
Vidhusekhara takes
wswm
as
referring
to
Maha-
yana, There
factory.
c
is
According to Prof.
tqtrq-jtjrqrspis
srcrf ror
snmcr: is unsatisVidhusekhara, the first line means should be understood from the M&hayana '. Even if
no doubt
that
the
explanation
means as rq-R, Gaudapada's reference to tsrlrqpqijTcpTs as Gaudapada refers to f%q- as the highest
fq-^rq" ) shows what the Mahayana says ( This is corroborated by the second line which uses the word fq^fq-
one
of
further
in
its
first
line uncere-
moniously
The words
in the
q^ictsqrffr
(
(
K. bhasya
)*
TOraraw*
Asanga
)
Prof. Vidhusekhara,
in
conformity with
Chvpter
IV
I
t-41
%q"^
^grr%rflr<T <T*srrsfcTT^i;
K. bhasya;
authority explained
|ra*
).
as
^r%^r^r%
).
5P,
in
the
comment on Karika 88
W^rkrrervrre
(
Vidhusekhara
^TT^RTfr l(
K. bhasya).
Attainable, sriforg
which
is <rrcr%GT5r
(Vidhusekhara).
( K. bhasya; OTT^ronFrrft xk^&xxh T^goTrTT^rf^?^: the could ^g<s$ft%9"flrcT Ttw^a^r be regarded but how
I
as
an
^mn
? ).
To
discipline for
own
self (
Vidhusekhara
1
&rf etc. ^tt tqrefrfrmHr* ft!rrwTOT*fcw fttra srlN *^faw, sq3*s*g^*^rs^re^rm3r*i; ( K. bhaya so far seems
to take star as referring to
and
a
all the four |q-* |r^ stnar, and calls the four srfererr^w, and makes distinction between |rcr in the first line and felnr in
<ttcR>
the
second line
TOrrstacScU sniTawOTsrsh
and
qrrF7
Vncqqrepis f^csrfq- \^\ srgrftf^l ( here only the three |*r, sn^T are said to be 3fH?*T> in contradiction of what
)
).
was
It is
among them
there
is
is
to be
known
i.
"
and explains
dpya and
or vijneya.
'
e. heya,
For
it is
parikalpita
imagined
its
'
and
it
a thing
which
is
very
nature cannot
be
"
has
no
existence.
Vidhusekhara thus,
to
fsr* 3?i:q-
like
same
as ft^rq ( in line 2
We
differ
We
are of opinion
that ^qf
refers to
A2
Notes on Gaudapdda-Kdrikd
and vm, and fe% to ^srfag? and %?, and crr^tr, which are ^reTra*. Gaudapada says that |q-, jjw, srTcqknown to be felfas from arsrortyr, are really not fit to be known, as
their OTq&svt
is
w^
3W^
connected with
|cr
the
real
ftlra".
They can
qrra
first
at
be
taken
to
be
concerned
us,
|qr,
the
the
sjrtfrafflT
which does not make us means here according to which concerns itself with pointing out what is
or previous path,
ft
know Brahman,
%w%q
etc.
( cf. ?r
^wr^^gs-farcr^
I
Prefer,
tf?q^Tf^feqqwr?*ft-
crepcr^q frfo
sutra
I.
Sankarabhasya on Vedanta-
1-4
).
According
tm seems
sacrificial
to be
used
in the sense of
sacrifices
should be
etc.;
procedure
w\zq
is
^if^T^
sacrifices,
preaches what
and qrws are the various sacrifices. The gmsEiug' thus is dependent upon |fr, while in the case of the true
fe%q ( Brahman ) there is no scope for |ct. The knowledge gained from qjWtafar is thus wrong knowledge and we should be on our guard against being influenced by that, snrtniir is undoubtedly a strange expression, but that it should refer to HSTSR is not likely.
(
91 )
Anandagiri
thus
introduces
I
the
Karika,
s^E
%**
erf^r*! ^ywfcT Gaudapada says that the popular view about the three-fold ^tr and the ^srofar view about %* etc. are wrong and |rr or mw& is to be attributed to sn-m^. All wrs are really unoriginated and incapable of being contaminated,
like ^r^r^r.
^gOTS3W ^m^ff^rmcr
The
expression
does not
mean
that there
is
real
{%*m
ffcrferofrrnHfa K. bhasya )
I
ansFFnswftfa
^r^TTOvrT^m^rfrtr-
*t\3W
*itwpm
Anandagiri.
The expression ( 92 ) lr*rn in the last Karika may be misunderstood by some to mean that the |prer of the is something to be acquired anew. Gaudapada says that all strs ( which are
wv
^s
really
Brahman ) are already g ^. 3rr%^n ftar$nra<n:. Vidhu&khara takes f ^ to mean ^m or ctot*TcT. It appears
that
Prof.
to
us
Gau4apada
is
Chapter
are
IF
143
some who are arfr^f 35s ( or srrf^rTOs, who are born ^s ), some who acquire f^hood ( grfasw ) etc. ^nfo: Persistent or
belief,
enduring
^^sqrmfoftqmT
K. bhasya
).
Gau4apada points out that ^nfScr, ik^m etc. which are ( 93 ) but different names for tff^r or salvation is not something to be acquired. All are g^ or ft|cf by nature, only they do not know
it.
If jJi$t
were
to be ^<j$ ( artificially
made
:
),
it
would be wfiw
Anandagiri
^rorsar srfasrisa'
wrrnT*n
any change or variety. The highest is thus srer, same ) and fasrur^ ( opposite of ^qar ). The qrils
hw
are
always the
all
sn^cr.
Bfafan BfTOrcrorep
(
K. bhasya
or grounded
in ftsjfbr.
it
94
t^msra;
is
to
mean
feuftg.
nsrsnrf
generally
means
'
proficient
'
'
clever \
;
According to Gaudapada, a ^trr is one who believes in duality a T%5TK? is one who has the right knowledge that the highest is sra
and
2
^jt.
Prof. Vidhusekhara
r
Buddhism
of
all
tr$rrcsi is
four-fold, in respect of (
(
things,
)
the
human
passions, ( 3
the
way
leading to
but the
reference
as
sr^rros
and jsjt^s
in
(
shows
to
the
bold
belief
^|?T,
II.
The Bhagavadglta
is
^mff^Tr<TcT*3r*rre.'
7 )
firmly grounded in ( 95 ) The %mns are qw; those who are In the Lankavatara, one 9$rin% stga alone can be called One is tempted 10 is described as propounding Buddhistic views.
h^hs.
Karika,
all
!
that
the
?r
Lankavatara
is
really
no si^mm
*r
II
at
asf
&m
qgna&BWX wz*stmw
fH^r^T^T nftr3<s?t<raw?t
(
t^rr srfa
f?*nff OTflnrac
said
sr^fftrrr-
$6
When
it
is
that a wfT^rR
it
is
one
who
has
the
knowledge of the
3Tr?r
Brahman,
should not be
understood that
144
the 5rm
is
Notes on Gaudap&da-K&ri'kd,
different
srsr
*TR
the
is
there in the
^^
very nature of, *4, as heat and light are in the sun. ^r is and not different from, the sra qpf. Only the fftip speak of 37* being related to the objects ( the Buddhists also in a sense regard
-%m to be related to the arrcRT ). 3TR is really ^w^ and_ 3*rar$re?q and ft*rftqrfcOT Read the following comment of Anandagiri,
^m mwrwcsrk srfo*:
sregqftx^
crfipwfJrarwrrsnrrcTT
swot a^fa^Rswsrramfir
l
*r5T5iT5Twftrwr^r^^rFy an^fafir
srar wmfssrcsrrafsrjsrr
irosnsraforarf:
ftnarf&r
l
fife
wwra
strw
i^ar ftfifw *r ffcr *grclr ^^r%^m?*rrf- *Rr *r The Lankavatara also describes ^rr* to be srcrf and contrasts it with
rfcTsg*
ftsTF*,
filgrrar
jf^frrasnsffir firsTR*
^fq^rsr^ftr arsnr
^r,
'
RfafrrRfmrqfeR
i
smsrf^ft^s^^nnlj*
Rm^rHm^rfa^rrff^oT %\mi
...
(Pp. 157-158).
Anandagiri says.
(
The ^th
issrcnp,
for
there
is
no
j%q*T,
as
97
Karika:-^^
q^qf^ftr
is
srijhr
*rf?TO*RcT srcre&srrg
3TO*n^s<ftfir
atf^sssrr
that
q^far
of
*l*<fterTS
%&riR
If
once
we admit
Brahman
capable
%m
in
would
cease to be
It
^m
and so
3rft?q\
any sense, sotto is the concealqyrf" ment of the true nature of Brahman, due to urcr, 3u%sn> msflrr-
98
state.
It is
qualities
we who wrongly superimpose upon them all sorts of and forms. They are always g^ and grff. It is wrong to say
they become ggj or grE after undergoing penance etc. K. bhasya takes *m%j: to mean wftR: *nrof ?*S5 ^^TtIWWWITm and adds *mr foTO^weftrsfq sn%ar srsFrsm ??|^ *ror *r firarthat
1
fSrwrnfofq- ftwtft
f ?^mt
Though
'
the
said
to be
knowers %
Chapter
IV
145
which expression implies knowing to be something different from the knower. We have to regard ffa to be misplaced according to this nterpretation. The natural way would be to take %m with wt^. Prof. Vidhusekhara rightly explains mvw.v to mean Buddhas. K.
bhasya seems to understand the Karika
to
mean
that
all
ws
are
s^raHifo, 3nft3[> ^Tf^grfc and r{m<$ and they are spoken of as g sjrar only metaphorically. After j% we have to supply apparently
3F$nTOT^T^.
This
is
is
obviously
to take ffcf
an unnatural interpretation.
The
5
%mm:
to
mean
it ).
'
is
to be
found in the
rest of the
wrer f w^
:
as Prof.
is
Vidhusekhara takes
We
first
are stsssstt^gt
Gau4apada
out
how
nw^v
say
3m%f^[s and the w%g?FS fyave knowledge of the^jfs ( and the ^fira'ws try to secure that knowledge. Some Bauddhas at any rate admit that some are &<% or gtF from the very beginning and some attain to Buddhahood by penance etc.). Gaudapada argues that
that the
this
is
is
wrong. For
this
a great obstacle in
way
of srreTO^jfcr.
When
some vms
are srn%g
or
sw^g^
or
sr.f^rfcT
(
is
meaningless.
how
In
it is
order
there
may
be
the ^qs, ^rr?r must relate itself to the objects; but according to Uj5j of cannot the 3THrr%err? there is no sw^r of the y$s themselves.
therefore be said to be going over to the
^s, The
3^ ^s too,
being
for
sr^rafro^ like
3tt*T is
3?r^T$r
also
sn^rST^*; thus
jt
%ri
w?
sf>m, and
the
*re Wtb ^7* * 2E*n% ( one would have expected here ^h to keep symmetry ) or *$ wrearar ^R ( crrft?n or tmw is explained in
;
I
err
f
ar^m*
*rr
permanent
any
'
'instructed'
might be taken
to
mean
as the K.
*T
bhasya does,
wufc*
^f W?:
case f
^f%s^rsTfrcT>
19
* &*$*
W W*
zsfe&vvivtik
In
1^6
vrflj:
* a?*KT are respectively used to mean s&fW* and ^re What Gauda( Karika 54, above ). ?t fem^rr OTfiJ and r%tT * pada means to say is that Gautama Buddha told many things ( The
%&
rr
w^
wj
era
repeated
is
many
to dis-
made
on various topics there ), but he could not grasp the proper solution of the problem Ajativada which is the only about Samsara. Buddha no doubt denied the existence of snfrm,
fr^wr^
but
he
somehow or
seems
other could
origination.
to
To
that
defective this
be the
meaning of
which
for the
article
this Karika.
Prof. Vidhusekhara
sr^r g ;g3rcr<ra(
cannot be
taken to
mean
that
the
transcendental
truth
is
therefore silence
nob le.
T
toms
in
for
the
a
Annals
of the
B.
O. R. L,
this
detailed
discussion
about
refers
Karika
).
qrmsfaw w|er
to
^T?acf5r fMfrftrerefc
expression
f%*
I,
Gautama Buddha.
(
100
fipr^f
** in Karika
and 3k<k$-
wt
in Karika 2, he
saluting the
^ or highest
mean
mean
ftrqffur
state. Prof. Vidhusekhara takes to and thinks that the epithets ^sf ( in Pali means
g^f
ftsrfar )
It is quite
unnecesis
The
I
expression,
to
used often in
remarks,
philosophical
literature
?$* *&m*Mlr
which constitute
5^
sr^ in
^r?ar smsftfar
^s^rR^cTW^^^gfaf t
fawS:
and
q-srrsera; Prof.
wm,
*rwr%
sr^rr
Buddhism
are
meant
here.
APPENDIX
An
Karika
3TCS5<re?jr3T
Prakarana
3
i
No. of Karika
33
Page
mm
27
8
st^i^t
3I3T:
wfr fk^m
23
3?fNfW3TlT
4
3
74
36
81
SO
3H3WplOTWP3(
assmfsisfjreiSP*
28
52
4 4 4
3
smxn
mv&
srema;
29
6
39
33
srsmrehr *nfer
sfstTcTtlsr *rnrer
20
77
43
13
24
Si
arsnar^
*&*
STCT
4 4
4
4
3<Mia%)'HcTf ftari
3t5TT[
42
34
SS
55
5TWS
sT^^snroajTffnJc
sre*
96
95
*n$
g ^ #r%3;
4 4
3
sju^nr^ifcr
^tw
97
2 2
>
arat ^arrT3JT$iWJ(
20
10
sr^Niwff gsisvr
srft
2
3
^ S^mireu;
rwwf
30
27
47 24
5
stse*^ gpmrrcra;
a^er
4
3
i
62
18
16
%
^
smiKMWrr sh:
SPTI^'H^t^
4 2 2
I
30
17
39
stfsrfsarerTTsn*^
M
10
5
SPrTIWRT^
sj^rar
^WW
wjt:
4
15
^>fn
148
Karika
Gaudapada-Kdrika
Prakaraija
No. of Karika
,
Page
t:
W$ Wlft*nJf %
wrawr
TORfhrwt
2 2
8
3
10
5i
3rcwftrP^nmf%
79
75
3T^mftfaWT>s%
smr^fOTrcr^rsr^
4
1
50
9
29
3T$3i*T3W: srl
98
56
mik *&&&%
4 4
2 4
49
88
15
44
53
13
wwgqsw
SJSTrEr qsr
^r
fcwRg
wsrfi^qftgrnw
19
3* 4i
sroarwft^ esjrr
4
3
39
3RJ& WT7?
3T?JT
28
83
26
52
3raF^TO3rKWC
4
3
48
39
2
43
****** TO?
8<W$?'fWl
29
32
TW
4
3 3
waTOsng^raH
snwr
srrensrasfft:
32
3
27
20
11
sn^ra^
snsp*^
^ snsrT^r
=gr
6
31
istma
4
4 4
3
1
39
3fri^f^T sr^sre'
:
92
93 16
8
54
55
wf^nsaT psfrar:
snwnfcrforr
??*..
23
3
t^wts
snft:
$r%J
3*mfsrorfo3[f*i<t
4
3
38
4i
4i
3%^^^
3i5fn^rorawa;
29
4
4
42 44
42 42
OTawwnRrroa;
Appendix 1
Karika
149
Prakarana
3
No, of Karika
42
i
Page
30
19
swrefa term's
II
12
4
4
67
48
43
17
47
30 54
4
4
sftjnr <TT3RTr flrtu
I
4S 43
8 12
46
24
12
11
4 4
i
34
34
12
11
4
15
24
84
99
5
4 4
*++
52
56
<
4
32
4i
4
irsr
?r
37
era sfNrfj
3
3
38
29
4
6j
20
4 4 2
48
38
13
26
M
72
10
4
4
49
34
4
2
66
10
48
12
45
43
ISO
Karika
sft# gSSTOfl* S?*3(
3fter?*Rr:
Gaudap&da-K&riha
Prakarana
2
No, of Karika
.
Pag
13
16
^<?
Wi
3
3
H
13
23 22 54
3i
5ftaRtoW?
*rft
nrftre
4 4
2
2
89
I
$rr^?rra?T5T^*fr
frowT^nftTO qjr
rT^TT^
rremsr
38
36
19 18
f^T^N^
arnrir fofra;
4
i
28
38
7
7
^^^^fi^f^rH
firs ^rnr^
20
22
S
s^r^
I I
2 2
?%orr%^
5
:
fa*cP
# ^fTS^T
sqrra:
43
30
56 4S
4
ss* ^o^nFT %gt
SttftSRf&^TT*
SfT-WlilPI
100
53
4
3 I
12
13
22
5
gW3[
5TnT5&
*fNr3rft^
^H? * f T%
*r
4
3
S8
4*
31
^f^vr^Nri
^feiVHIMd
:
48
7i
32
?T
4
2
4
49
17
?r fSrct^rt *r
t?t
n%
So 52
21 7
44
f ftlim& ftVRlQ,
4
3
44
24 33
ff
mww wro;
WR 53W IWT
4
3
34
40
21
IflBNilW ^at^RT'
7
to
lists ffVwJ
Appendix 1
Karika
Prakaraiia
2
i
ISI
No. of Karika
34
12
Page
18
4
4t
4
1
40
45
30
19
37
34
redraw
*R*r
28
38
Si
4
4
I
27
8o
ro
18
4
-'
2
3
24
25
2
qrarr
26
21
16
13
f far
qTarftsfr
4 4 4
21 91 24 2$
37
54
37 38
9
9
4
*<rrf tftarc ftwra;
i
28 26
17
6
srT2fr
m% ftrira
srrofafr
6
3
srror
ffar
20
19
M
14
53
4
4
snlssr^r ftrgfifar
sfrsrr
:
85
17
1
36
1
tmfi
ssrw
4 4
20
78
36
5i
152
Karika
Gautfapada-Karika
Prakarana
2
No. of Karika
33
A
Page
18
32 25
}2
4
3
23
4
1
21
25
7
16
*wbt fSnrjnmir
JRrwrmraf fewr
40
31
9
29
3 3
27
21
nmT
fircrer ^rarg;
19 35
15
24
4
3
q*
40
23
17
W SsHNrcq
29
70
8
59
49
21
3
4
46
49
48 26
69 68
29
61
5
4
TOrr
*s& gqnrmi;
**jr
to
Tr
swrmn
4
3
47 20
50
3i
?r
area- 553;
afford
4
3
76
46
18 55
*?r *
r%w^
36
45
45
4
1
56
25
Appendix 1
Karika
fitsfan
153
Prakararja
No. of Karika
73
11
Page
50
22
^fkar^TTtfr
4
3
vm^ii
%t
*\m-
w.<mw*mimiva
3 3
.3
21
&% ^trw^fe^w
af <&
44
35
30
% 55 r mi
:
28
16
13 6
5te!ghd%? srrf
2 2
I
27
13
r^fcqwnTrsrret
f^5<Tr i%r%^fr
flr^rr^
18
5i
st^w* %
3rrars=i:
4 4
4
1
44
f^^wra^r
4i 86
7 19
3
42
53
3
&&
ft***srr?srf^r$rrn'*
fa*c?r t%
I
l
7 2 18
15
^^ntora;
^?tNt
sfaronwrasl^:
2 2
2
S3
%?r
ffrt
22
1
IcTot
wlwrnrac
g * nrr%
10
55
1^n#
sawr
4
3
94 26
10 16 25
26
22
35
*smsr?*ra
**& Ig^rft:
#g?rcqsnarra
^5r?rr arrafr *nfo;
?rat
4
3
25
4
3
57 27
7
46
26
11
% mitn 3j**i
^grsraWrirr etonac
srspffaTTaT?r<Tm
4
:
32
39
9
27
57
33
^fiRJTT^Jia:
sgi
w?
28
f^S"
4 4
40
53
ssrcg $r"raref
20
87
*54
Karika
Gaudapada-Rarika
Prakaraoa
No. of Karika
9
SOTffWff fawn
4
2
82
23 28
2
I
4 22
5
4
2
4 4
i
64
63
14
3i
4
3
36
22
8
4
3
17
47
14
15
5cfwf?:
TO ^TTH
4 4 4
4
2?
APPENDIX
II
Word
awnfinn*;
3T3>rn
arararmr
Page Noo 89
112
140, 142
Word
WRapwrar
Page Not
76
133
103
CTRmrairora^s
3?*nT
grf?n:
ssRra
3*3T
103
89
T03
83
97
83
64
^WRT
3T*?cf
wwsra
3?rg*r?
3*l*3t
swfsirratrr
srewrerai;
66
65
107
107 134
133
^faf^
srftftrrrctt
3T5f<rirr
$wr
10$
wr
sr&
88
90
106
owimmt
srft^sm
3T^rcr:
^preter^r
117
132
98
101
swHton*
^Iq5
SFT^T
62,81
9^
117
143
sfiWEtT
3TO#
^^TcT
srecrr*
81
^TRcT
STS
ITOT
126
95
103
78 87
58
82, 129
3^*"^
3rr%ar$ro
109
9i
^FSToJ
^Rsr^r
ftflT
stfsrtH
109 116
103, 109
S^TtS
awR&Wtor
3rrr%:
fenrera
76
fefisw
129
120
142
%?Tt^
sr^rg:
stocj;
60
^rflf^f-
87
63
141
srrwrf&ra
88
141, 142
srw
ari^r
sjrsrm;
Srwt
rT^^r
127
79,88
123
83,96
%:
I$6
Gaudap&dci-K&riktl
Wrd
errft^
Page No.
Word
I^T*!^
Page Noc
90, 134
M5
63
53, 59/ 6?, 6s
5*
^3T6"
*fc
82
118, 125
I%
flWWS
far-
121
81
sngnrcrsc
'37
81
wwrik
79
^a
98
121
%?
130
W3"$r*
%vm$
76
108
W^
WT%
*fcF?
124
78
%M ^
|m^:
96
88 3 108 128, 134
80
80
92, 93
ftw
*S*rr?r
wnsrm
ft*T
82
63
r^
5Rsftfif!Tff
82
104, 105
famrW
fimfm
130 107
m^raT*
l.#
64
81
wrrcr*p^
T^ftsra
71,72
82
146
120, 131
*?r
trorsraq;
80
146
87
^
qfTci^
^cT?gfrfla*?rr
srsNw
WT?q-:
^qr
oJ^roTr
120
84
141, 142
92
wrc
<n*rc
90
129
84, io*, 107
79, 83
war
SW
79 60
^
SflWIW
*t*n
fffc*
&T
SW*
srtrfcr
94 112
138
137
81
106, 107
J
STR^lf^
sr^rm-.
I27
1?
120
fj 7
94, 95 60, 78
58, 59. 63, 6$
STf^rT
fiWT!
37
S7
STTgfqw:
srinr
T%S
ftqrrar
ft*<r
125
%m %w
inim
:
63
57, 58, 59, 65
90
8
fa**
T%W
7?
Append** 11
157
Word
**
Page No.
80
Word
i^r
Page No.
106
ttm
trsrrcsr
71,72
srMan
3$fa
M3
63
Ww
&%$tfe%
Wlftw
s^fa
M3
S7
ss*
sr%
5%f%5rrar
r>
80 84
61
*37
82
128, 131
3
84
wifavri?
fajfir
s#sr
20
91
WcT
**$$
74 84
81
99
*^s
^*rc
fwjr
SSHTTST
^t*
srsnfr3T?rar
128
87
63
74
*rm*3*r
90
112
62
mfm^i
srrs*mH
^Twfgr^r
H2
140
119
t*m%
ERRATA
[
The
list is
or
top line is
ignored ]
Page
For
Read
59
11.22
(
V. 22
line 7 )
V. 8-10
( last line )
V. 7-10
61
( line
*
24
)
sr>srq5jrTr5nwrr
sfrsrersHrerwri
( line 1 ? )
6J
X.32
( line
X.33
20
)
II. 3.
67
II.
217
29
)
17
( line
73
IV. 39
( line
IV. 3. 9
)
24
95
VI. 3. 4-5
( line
VI.
rt
4 .6
20
98
q^WTT
L
i?ne
<TO-
*rs
wrr
r%sr ?m
19)
113
( line
wra^f
4
)
tT5*rf$r*J<rr?
116
( line
24
121
nor
(
not
)
line 14
131
(
line 31 )