timmmwk

mmM

Mit$~mm

B, No. 9.

GAUDAPADA-KARIKA

Edited
with a complete translation into English,
Notes, Introduction and Appendices

By

Raghunath Damodar Karmarkar

Director,,

Post-Graduate and Research Department,

Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute

(

Efc-Principal, Sp||rajkurambhau College,

Poona

Published By

Bhandarkar Oriental Research

POONA
1953

Institute

Copies can be

had

direct

from the

Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona 4

Price:

rs

India)

5 per copy, exclusive of postage

Printed and
published by Dr. R. N. Dandekar,

M.A Ph.D., at the

Bhandarkar Institute Press, Bhandarkar Oriental
Research Institute, Poona No. 4.

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

The Late Mahamahopadhyaya

VASUDEVA SHASTRI ABHYANKAR

[1862-1942]
who

did his utmost throughout his

life

to

expound and

popularise the Philosophy of ankaracarya

PREFACE
Prof. Vidhusekhara Bhattacharya published his edition of Gauda-

padakankas

that edition

himself

showed

be carried

to

M. A.

and forced.

students,

interpretations,

and

in a book-form,

too far by

his

had allowed

leanings towards
clearly

While teaching Gaudapadakanka

to the

that

I felt

close perusal of

of his interpretations appeared

had occasion to

years ago.

that Prof. Bhattacharya

little

Buddhism, and hence some

to be biassed

some

or Agamasastra )
clearly

it

criticise

would be

before a larger

Prof.

Bhattacharya's

better to present

my views

circle of readers so that a

balanced

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

number of Mss, but

his text

(0

two Mss.

Ms. No. ^f44

This

is

than

specially lent

by the

mwwwfter

not a very old Ms,

It

No.

sq^srar^

differ

fifty

is

from that

^7??^ ^gi v&vw,

Hiffw^^ftwrorft^mr^

Wai.

contains four Prakaranas,

is

no

large

years ago.

Prajiiapathasala,

the colophon at the end of the fourth Prakarana

Sscfr arnrararsfc

there

collated

does not materially

published in the Anandasrama series more

also looked into

Karikas,

has

Prof, ^Bhattacharya

difference of opinion.

and

%fcT jfr^qr^isrcP

This also
only, and the

is

not a very old Ms.

It

contains the

commentary of Anandagiii.

irrn^jpftaftTOr** srsm srero

#^S^

first

The colophon

Prakarana
reads

there is a Ms.
which contains only the 3rd and the 2nd Prakarana
None of these Mss. show any marked
of the Gaudapadakarikas.

In the Bhandarkar Oriental Institute Collection,

called ?q^5r3Pq[

variations of readings.

the text of the Karikas

It
is

may

more or

therefore be taken for granted that

less fixed.

Preface

have in

to

show how

effect stated

above that the present edition

is

intended

Prof. Bhattacharya's Buddhistic interpretations of the

Karikas are not acceptable.

am aware

with having taken a partisan view myself.

that

might be charged

In the Introduction,

have discussed several important topics in this connection, and have

tried to

show

that

Gaudapada was a

he took particular care to show

differed

traditional

now and

Vedantist and that

then that

his

philosophy

from that of the Buddhists.

have to thank the authorities of the Bhandarkar O. R. Institute

undertaken to publish

for having

Oriental Series.

of the

M.

must

also

S. University

In the end,

hope

philosophy,

of Indian

this

work

in their

Government

thank Prof. Dr. Miss Sulochana Nachane,

of Baroda. for helping

this edition

me

in various ways.

would meet the needs of students

who wish

to

understand and appreciate

Gaudapada's Ajativada.

n
q

f'

,
28 August 1953
a

\
)

R-

Karmarkar

CONTENTS
Pages

Introduction

Gaudapada

The

II

His Date, Life,

Works

i-x

etc.

x-xxh

contents of Gaudapada-Karika

III

Was Gaudapada

a Buddhist

IV

The

whole work and the

Title of the

xxii-xxvii

several
xxvii-xaviii

Prakaranas thereof

The Maiidukyopanisad and

Karikas in the

VI

first

the twenty-nine

Are the four Prakararias inter-related

The Sources

VII

xxviii-xxxhi

Prakarana

xxxiii-xd

xLi-xLvii

of Gaudapada-Karika

Gaudapada's contribution to Indian

VIII

Philosophical

Thought

xLvii-Lii

Text and Translation

snm

\~%

sreR<n*3;

\-\%

fern? snsTO**
<I?fhr

n-

sr^orat

-h*

^g zmvtm
Notes
Chapter

57-70

Chapter

II

71-88

Chapter

III

88-107

Chapter IV

108-146

Appendix

An

147-154

Alphabetical Index to the Karikas

Appendix

II

Index to Important Words in the Notes

[

on

The

iSS-157

usual Abbreviations are used in this edition*

the Karikas, attributed to Saftkaracarya

or Safikara-bhasya.

is

The Bhasya

referred to as K.bhasya

INTRODUCTION
I

In

Gaudapada
the

His Date,

traditional

salutation

paramaguru

of Sankaracarya,

etc.

formula repeated daily by the

Gaudapada stands

followers of Sankaracarya,

srrT^spftWr^

Works

Life,

jti^ti^

whose pupil Sankara was

as the

comes

grand preceptor
afier

%$?:,

then

thus

*m*T<rr

srsf^r, the lotus- born

one

(3)

*f&r

31#cT

<rwr

ssrT^r

S^

(7)
(

10

*ff^T3[ the

great

nm*%
)

5!f*
I

11-14

q3r<n^ s*arair, shot,

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

Gaudapada-Karika

ii

900

ing a long

of thousands of years to Suka, as well as

life

A more

pada.

again tries to avoid such a conclusion by assign-

B. C. Tradition

way

rational

to explain the position

believe that only the chief names,

by tradition

preserved

and not

all

Gauda-

to

would be

to

the names, have been

lying between &uka and Sankaracarya.

as

Luckily some fresh evidence

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.

there are five

says ^rarf^rjf trerw

*THWn

^rmKccr:

that

is,

names of Acaryas between Gaudapada and Sankara.

says that Sankaracarya's direct pupils were fourteen

The same work

Of

names of the four pupils

have become more well-known

these the

sTr^^

in the sfrfrsrrohr

the

The account seems

who

lived about

fourth

generation

writer

q^rraf

^afm^

**3T,

name

only q^nr^'s

plausible enough,

is

and

given

but

the

1100 A. D. speaks of himself as living in

from Sankaracarya, which

not in con-

is

formity with the generally accepted date 788 A. D. for Sankara.

Anandagiri

bhasya

his

in

commentary on the Gaudapada-Karika-

that goes under

Gaudapada
revealed to

the

name

penance

at

Sankara in his bhasya on the

$$%*&

*n3W[T3ri*h

in the singular, but so

The YogavEsistba

of Sankara

is

is

true

Svetasvataropanisad

^ at

h ere Gaudapada

Vyasa himself

in the

BLB. Bhide, jn Bharata

H01.1&2, 1953,

*W

on IV.

A Survey

of the

who enjoyed

Sakta School*

ltihasa Sariisodhaka

ar^rr

referred to

Brahmasutrabhasya.

(II.

See tb article

says
is

describes Suka as the greatest of Vogins

the SamSdhi state for more than ten thousand years

mentions that

Badarikasrama,

and Narayana
him the Karikas on the Mandukyopanisad.
practised

in

1-43-44).

Marathi

Mandala Quarterly

Vol.

by Prof,

XXXIII

Introduction

The

gods,

Gaudapada

likewise,

often

are

His Date,

mentioned

Works

etc.

in

in the singular,

so the

Life,

rule about the plural being used honorifically

not without

is

its

exceptions.

Balakrsnananda (circa 17th century

in his

^nrfoftufffcrpntcr*

Gaudapada as jff^snrasrs" and

Samadhi right up from the Dvapara yuga.
describes

grnfo?,

There

is

no reason

as

one being

in

doubt the historicity of Gaudapada, on

to

the strength of the above traditional account which could not have
possibly invented him.

The

Karikas have been quoted by

Vedantists and Buddhists

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
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

the Karika sracr^JTPUTT... in

remark
bhasya

sraterT
(

plural used in both the cases

and

refers to

is

obviously intended to

many

only one Acarya and not to

show

respect

),

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

Suresvara in his Naiskarmyasiddhi, 5

(

I.

11

remark

and
q;=r

Sankara,

nil-:

must

refer

to

only one individual

viz.

ifeqr^.

Dr. Walleser misunderstands *frt" : and %\^k- to mean ' representaThe commentator
tives of the Gauda and Dravida tradition \

^renm

calls

the G. Karikas quoted in the

Vidyaranya
is

in his

q^^fr

refers to

^**n%f%,

*n-<rrafhw5Fr.

Gaudapada's teaching which

characterised as 3*raT<romcf by his commentator.

The
44, 45

Yedantasara of Sadananda quotes two G. Karikas

) as

being too well-known, with the remark

About the 5th and 8th centuries A, D,

IV.

41, 42.

fnpprro;.

( III.

Gaadapcida-Rari'ka

iv

authors and

to

terms of respect

though not by name

).

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

^
to

work at any rate was fairly

commentators and he was referred to in

that Gaudapada's

shows

All this

known

Gaudapada seems

to be a

their author

became famous.

Bhavaviveka

own work

500 A. D.

),

resemble G. Karikas.

commentary

in his

Santiraksita (

700 A. D.

on his
which closely

tT^^^TT^rr

four passages

irer3$Vrerft$T> quotes

in his nwirera|prc-

quotes about ten G. Karikas in connection with

3?rrc^r

views,

which are

by Kamalasila,

called grqfjrcarsrT^r

Gaudapada
D.
than 500 A.
Santiraksita.

in

all

probability

the srnTWT^
disciple of

cannot thus be

later

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

Karikas of Gaudapada are indebted a lot to the Bhagavad-

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

glta,

300

to

500 A. D.

Alberuni

(nth

century

A D.

pp. 131-2, Alberuni's India )

about the jurisprudence of their
) (

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 Viww-

says-

'...

religion,

dharrna,

It is clear that

as representing

Alberuni mentions Gauda the anchorite

the Vedantic doctrine

first,

philosophy was held in high estimation.

even

because the Vedantic

Though we do not know

now anything about Nydyabhdsd of Kapila or Agastyamata by

we think there is no reason to doubt the existence of some

Agastya,


Introduction

work by Gauda
Anyway Gau4a

J Gaudapada

as

His Date,

Life,

well-known

sufficiently

the

anchorite,

Works

in

mentioned

etc.

Alberuni's

by

time.

Alberuni,

can
reasonably be identified with Gaudapada, the author of the Gaudapada-karika.
The tradition of Gau4apada as being a great Yogin is

also corroborated by Alberuni.

One

Sadasivabrahmendra in

his 5TO|pftr*mrdT?cT3'j refers to

pada as having expounded the bhasya of

Pataiijali,

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

in this connection are not at

Works

of

all

now

held that

the Greek accounts

trustworthy.

Gaudapada

Besides the Karikas, the following works are

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
(

Some

is

evidence to the contrary

Bhasya on the Sankhyakarika

of Isvarakrsna

bhasya on the Sankhya-

scholars are of opinion that the

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 Gauda-

karikas

is

of a very poor quality and betrays

pada's bhasya

and has so many passages

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
is

Mathara and Gaudapada

which was known

The bhasya
really not much

is

have

drawn

upon

common

source

6
to the Chinese in translation .

a matter-of-fact tame

scope to

show

to follow the Sankhya-karikas.

work, but Gaudapada had

he was required

his brilliance here, as

Perhaps

it

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?

Gaudapdda-Kctrika

vi

he was attracted to the tenets of the Sankhya philosophy. Anyway

At the
are not prepared to regard this work as not genuine.

we

end of the 69th Karika-bhasya, we read

The bhasya

designates the Karikas of Isvarakrsna as srrers.

It

contains the following quotation,

(

Karika

^n%*s ^*%%x

1 )

where some

^ataszr

^mw-

of the Saftkhya philosophers are

described as sons

of Brahmadeva.

q^r%^

This quotation from

under Karika 22

).

We

is

given twice in the bhasya

( also

give below the passages quoted from other

works in the bhasya to give the reader a general idea about

the work.
(

Kanka

zwm *Ummn\ ^^mir?H wrratf^m \m^

1 )

r%
(

3>ora^;rr%:

fog ^ra^?mm*<T

This

<rar

^toti^

K&rila 2

is

from aram^s;, Rgveda VIII. 48.

<** ^tcttr

v**m?k

q^?rf

Mahldhara quotes

in

this

his

srsmssR

<T&T SJTcUmft

K&nka 4

3*?*n?r

w$\

11

bhasya on Yajurveda-Samhita

).

*rg jfty^sm'Sr \nx*\

li

3 )

^sgfa^q- trereTgfnft qgftfirra:

XXIV

^ g5f g^
ft

^raarc:

^T(W gRfrm ^r?^r^r%^:

:

11

Introduction

K&tika

This

is

I Gaudapada

?3r^r

fa^

hts Date,

^t* ^tt^t msj*

*st:

mx *nft|
( Gfta III. 28 )
rre *mw famreer TOnsrasfaftar

K&rik& 23

RArika 61 )

sfft

*Trfrar

toto;

$rcT3 3Prr
:

(***
gift 5T?g^^r-s?Hfcw:

vii

etc.

come from f^wrgrcT

usually taken to

Works

Life,

3>

32)

(wraroilH. 30-88)

^r^y:

Thus

the bhasya

Purana, Yogasutras

wfar

wft

^t^:

wSr

srna;

quotes from the Mahabharata,

etc.

Bhagavadglta,

study of the Sankhya philosophy which

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 Bhagavadthat the qualities, ^r^, ^3T^ and 31%^ are responsible for the

glta

Sarusara

son wh% nfcn

was

by him to

utilised

enunciate

ultimately his doctrine of Ajativada in course of time.

There is a strong probability that Gau4apada wrote a commentary on the Saukhyakarika and called his own independent

work
(

^Tft^r as well.

^tTCTTcTT

known from

Gaudapada's

commentary

on

this

work

is

^r^qrsfrosmw on the ^T^nmr, and

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
I

11

<

Gaudap&da- K&riku

viii

^T^mw^srt

ends with

^fof^mfafarf&P

this work is
Rangam and the

good edition of

vilas Press at Sri

have published

this small

been properly edited*

still

<T

ep% TO*R*5 5T^H*pr-

The VaniBombay

a desideratum.

Gujarati Printing Press,

work, but the text cannot be said to have

Strangely enough,

that several translations of this

the Vanivilas editor says

work have been published

in English

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

we were unable

consulted

work

Mss. of this

eight

at

to

see

We

it.

Bhandarkar Oriental

the

Research Institute, Poona, and the following observations about

them would show why

undertaken

a reliable

as early as possible

edition

work should be

of this

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

chapters

the colophon reads

%xk

sftRSTw tfiwRfa

wr^i#

sfc^faamt

srgrfaqref

#$<*n#rasrr? etc

Ms. No. 16) gives

three chapters ( I-54

%rrs>r?

of 137 verses only, distributed in

a total

II- 5 6

IH-27

and the colophon reads

etc.

Ms. No* 164 gives

chapters

I-65

II-59

fcT

a total of
;

XII 3

\6o

distributed

verses,

wswfraT^qrtfw^

awfrWrfar

Mss, 165-1S9 contain the commentary which

$*HWr or

The

text

varies

grrT^fTcfToq-T^rr

is

(as

w^rsraT$mr%crr

distributed in three chapters, but

no,

116, 112, 123

The name of

the

in three

and the colophon reads

the

is

etc.

called ifW<rr^R-

or *?f^<nfm5tnw.

number of

verses

).

commentator

however

is

the

same

viz*

Gau4apada throughout.

the

Uttaragita

the

is

Mahabharata

clearly
is

The unreliability of the colophons to

shown from the fact that in no versions of

the Uttaragita found either in the Bhlsmaparvan or

the Asvamedhika parvan. Similarly

it is

not found in the Bhagavata.

Introduction

I Gaudapada

His Date,

Worh

Life,

IX

etc.

This

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

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,

besides, describing jthe nature

3 )

QVRt^rcgTcif

Tlrs

is

Jivanmukti

refers

demns

to

the

the

qsrar

in

^ nm

expected,

it

wmOTCfwf

It

ftft^T^riffOT

refers to the Nadis, fafsjr,

the whole, this

R; ... g^t anurr g*rr "min

mn^fe^fsfa^^rccr 143). As can be

^^TaiOT^q' ftfi?$

s^rcsarcrarafcr-

begins thus

two schools, ^mq- and spr5* of the Saktas and conno uncertain terms ( ?f?cr?#rer*f 3ra?STO3&ni%cr

srmms Rcmf* *ftrF*irgw*

H^?qrr

*PT^qoT

work of

a srn all Tantric or Sakta

the Stotra tjpe, containing 52 verses.

It

of Brahman,

gives a detailed description of the Nadis, KundalinI etc.

etc.

is

%&>

^^

similar

fe? etc. Verse 31

qH^g^rs^rcrer

to

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

any reasonable ground

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

another Tantric work attributed to Gau$a-

pada, as also commentaries

and on

on

( 5 )

DurgasaprasatI,

The Mandukyopanisad

has

much

in

common

Anuglta

with the Nrsimhot-

taratapaniyopanisad, and as Gaudapada had used the

basis for his Karikas, tradition

Mandukya

seems to have regarded him

author of the commentary on the Nrsimha

?

( 7 ) Njrsimhottaratapaniyopanisad.

as well,

as a

as the


Gaudapcida-K&rtkci

of the Sankhya-

appears to us that Gaudapada's authorship

It

Uttaragita and Subhagodayastuti can

Karikabhasya,

be reasonably

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.

accepted to be correct.

the Sankhyakarikas in the

Mulamadhyamakarika

of Nagaijuna,

which advocated the unreality

him

to advocate his Ajativada based

of the world, and this enabled

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

the cardinal doctrine of the

Buddha teaches a large number of doctrines, but fails to grasp

saying
the most important one which fact Gaudapada proclaims by

^1%*

wfacH* in IV-99.

The Contents

II

Prakarana

:- There

Gaudapada-Kaiika

of

is

who

only one Paiamatman

is

all-

pervading, but he, in association with the various Upadhis or limit-

ing adjuncts, functions in different ways in different states.

Thus
(1)

He

resides in the

experiences the gross world

mind

(2)

in the

He

is

waking

body in the right eye, is known as Visva,

( by means of the sense- organs and the

state.

known

as

Taijasa,

residing inside

experiences tbe subtle or non-grass in the

dream

in the

mind and

state.

(3) He is known as Prajna, residing in the heart-Akasa,

experiences bliss in the state of deep sleep.

This all-pervading Paramatman

is

known

as

Turya, the Fourth,

being immutable, non-dual, where no duality which

of

all

miseries has

is

the

source

any scope.

down by

Visva and Taijasa are bound

effect, perceiver

and

the relation of cause and

and perceived, subject and object

influence of duality, Prajna only

function accordingly

by the cause

while the Fourth

consciousness or Jnana, and

is

is

all-seeing

etc.,

Ajfiana

under the

and they

beyond all this and is but

and beyond all duality.

In the case of both Prajna and Turya, there

is

no experience of


Introduction

11 The Contents

of

Gaudapada-Kan'ka

xi

but the Prajna remains influenced by the basic Avidya or

duality,

Ajnana which

Some

is

absent in the case of the Turya.

philosophers

who

believe

in

real

process of creation

regard the creation as the manifestation of the Lord, or as resembling

the dream or magic phenomena, or as due to

or as coming from Kala

enjoyment or sport
But

Time

for the Lord, or as being the nature of the Lord,

these theories are wrong,

all

the will of the Lord,

or as serving the purpose of

known

If the highest is

to be

whose desires are fulfilled ), how could he be associated

with creation in any capacity, without changing his own nature ?

Aptakama

So, the correct position in this matter

and Advaita the only

illusion

that all duality

is

When

reality.

who

the soul,

but

is

is,

so

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,

to speak,

asleep

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,
by people of ordinary intelligence.

especially

The

realisation of Advaita can be achieved

meditation on the sacred

by the worship of of

*3?rgpi^

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

For the purposes of

grrjpr.

as

it

the symbol

^rarcrerj

srrec

is

very useful

enables the ^rre^ to get a proper idea of the Paramatman easily.

Thus

( t )

Has
$-,

three msrTS-sf,

Has three wfs-fos?,

and

*%

srr^r (

ffstff

respectively con-

cerned with

m%^>

*sr$r atl ^

gigftr states ).
(

2 ) 3i

is

the

first

of the

alphabet, and

( 2 ) f^rar

deals

which

with the gross

is first

perceived and

thus resembles

3T.

Gaudapflda-K&rikd

xil

3?

as he also

So by meditating upon
with

fk^x,

3* as

^r^*

the

experiences

out-side world.

all

with

{k*3 can be equated

all-pervading

3? is

resembling

or as

fe*a"

identical

pre-eminence and

secures

his

all

desires ].

( 3 )

represents 3>"#OTf and

links 3j with

( 3 )

Similarly
as

33;

he

a"3Tff

and

3jt ?

also

is

also the link

is

between the waking

and the
[

By meditating upon
flSTfl-,

the

ing

and

'

For,

into

3*

measur-

sr

limits

and
the

The meditation on

comes again

srTsra; state.

as

equated with

idea about

raerg

lead

to

as the

the

three quarters

highest

knowledge

^im^ as without any quartefs. This

known
as one unit (-the '^r^rr?H^
sfa

or the

would correspond. to the

from fear, for

55^

].

meditation on the three snsrrs of

to realise

the

3^.

&f the qrtmwj however does not

is

down

to give a

ing into the highest

which

].

r%^ and ?bm,

of

after

By meditating upon ^ as resembling srr?T or

sn^r, the ^rra secures omniscience and the

The

of deep sleep.

) srr^f similarly lays

and ^ merges

complete idea of
[

represents the

and

state

resembling ^3T^ or as equated with

merging \

limit of 3*r^

state

secures excess and equanimity

^nr^

represents

as

3-

grHTO

able to perceive the

is

the MafH-less 3n*C

makes the w%<$

free

nothing but the immutable Brahman which is

the beginning, middle and end of all, all-pervading, and Allis

Controller, auspicious and non-dual.

this

way

is

alone

by courtesy.

Muni par

excellence

One who
other

has

Munis

known

are

sfoj;

called

in

gfts

Introduction

Prakarana
It

IT The Contents

xih

II

admitted by

is

Gaudapada-K&riM

of

the objects seen in dream are false,

that

all

because they are seen within the limited space

of the body and

mountains and rivers and goes
to distant lands, even though one's body is lying motionless on the

One

within a very short time.

bed. Again, the ^rsprteram

in the

dream

is

meal

in

full

the ability to serve a purpose

vitiated in the

dream

the

sees

waking

feels still

Objects seen in the waking state ha\e

dream

vitiated in the

state.

of objects

One who has enjoyed

hungry when he wakes up*

state.

So, there

similarly

their

no reason

is

srsrqtsrsrar

to suppose that

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

they are

in

not be existing in the present as well

the

in

dictum,

of this

light

waking and the dream

himself by his

who
is

The

really originated.

dreamer

his

Jiva or

as

own

individual soul

waking

them.

only to the

real

Dvayakala

also related to the external objects

to the

real

the dream

Objects in

long as the mind imagines them

are

state

Nothing

for himself.

dream are

objects in the

experienced

( lasting as

Cittakala
in the

has

the

be spoken

can

the objects in the waking state are likewise

who

person

world of

and

false

Maya imagines himself

turn creates

in

bcth in

This means that the Paramatman

imagined.

only

of as being

are

states

Judged

self-evident.

is

'

experienced

objects

are

objects

),

imagined by the mind and

which

also

are

imagined

but

Objects in the waking state require,

both are equally false.
in addition, the use of sense-organs for being perceived, but that

does not make them

the snake

upon the

Just as, in darkness,

real.

one superimposes

upon

rope, people superimpose

the

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

ail

the

Paramatman

in -various ways.

2 ) Elements, ( 3

Prana,

Objects of sense,

10

( 7 )

Subtle,

14

the

Gunas,

Worlds,

Sacrifices, ( 11 ) Enjoyer,
(1 J) Gross,

Thus

(
(

Atman
)

taken to be

is

Tattvas,

8 ) Gods,

( 5 )
(

12 ) Object of enjoyment,

Possessed of form,

Pada,

9 ) Vedas,
(

( 15 ) "Form-less, (

12

16 )

Gaudapdda- K&rtkft

xiv

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,
1

principles, ( 26 ) Thirty-one principles, ( 27

(

29

Asramas,

29

Woman,

Man and

Infinite, (

29

28

People,

High and Low,

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

for

Creation,

31

Dissolution,

But people well-versed

him.

thus be summarised as

no one bound down

one desirous
exists

and

'

no one trying
no one liberated \

unoriginated, and there

lore, realise the

distinction

has

Atman

and where there

the

realised

Atman

is

in

deities or sacrificial offerings

Nisedha

rules,

for

nothing distinct or non-

is

and anger, well-versed in the

fear

as

non-dual, auspicious, free from

One who

the sublation of Sarhsara.

way has no use

this

to

Pitrs

he

is

beyond

automaton.

Having

realised

for prayers to
all

Vidhi or

on with

his

the Advaita
fall

proved that there cannot

be

any

change associated with the Paramatman,

all

talk

that state,

or

all

not

Prakarana III
origination

no

For, only Advaita

way, the sage should take care to see that he does

down from

birth,

liberation,

he stays or wanders at will and goes

daily avocations like an

in this

truth can

from Atman.

Sages free from passion,

Vedic

objects

no annihilation, no

is

to Samsara,

of liberation,

it is

distinct apart

: There

the so-

The Highest

dream or as the creation by magic.

in the

know

air, as false as

the Vedanta

in

called creation as nothing but a castle in the

till

the

When

body conies

it is

to

an end.

about the individual soul or Jiva

having recourse to the Uplsana

or meditation on the Paramatman

really

is

meaningless.

For,

the

Paramatman himself, and it is scant courtesy shown to Jiva

if we narrow his functions and powers by calling him inferior to
Jiva

is

Param&man.

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

subtle

Up&dhis vanish away> Ghatafc&sa

merged into Akasa, similarly

gone, are merged into the
the Upadhis are there, the Jivas retain
is

the Jivas, with the Upadhis, body

Paramatman.

So long

as

etc.

;;

Introduction

Akasa

similarly

the

likewise

etc.

Paramatman undergoes no change on account of the

not a part or transformation of Akasa,

is

so

Jlva

Paramatman who

not a part or transformation of the

is

xv

not changed or divided by Ghafakasa

is

Gha^akasa

Jivas.

Gaudapada-KdriM

names and forms and experience happiness or

their individualities,

misery.

11 The Contents of

has these Upadhis superimposed upon him by the ignorant.

The

Taittirlyopanisad clearly points out

how Paramatman

the inmost, unchangeable in the five sheaths of the jlva

in the
in the

Jlva

is

similarly

Madhukanda we are told how the Atman is one like Akasa

Adhyatma and Adhidaiva pairs. The oneness of Atman and

is

always acclaimed and their manifoldness decried by the

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
Sruti.

at

In

value.

face

their

people

intelligent

all

once

understand

the

is

for their sake that the

speaks in a

manner which can be

at

out of pity for them,

undetstood by them.

there are different grades of

too dull-witted to

are

highest truth of Advaita

Sruti,

world,

this

some

it

Passages speaking of duality are to be under-

stood metaphorically only.

Advaita

the

is

highest reality which can be only one

those

who

believe in Dvaita have ample scope for their imagination to run

riot,

with the result that they put forth

who

can curb their imagination

all

sorts of theories

( for,

and are always quarreling among

Advaita looks on amusedly, pitying these Dvaitins

themselves.
it

have no quarrel with them.

can possibly

There cannot be any

dispute about imagined things.

If

there exists only the unoriginated

then,

creation

that

that

due to Maya and not

it is

bility.

is

When

before, that

a thing

is, its

can ever change

Paramatman, the

experienced can be explained only on the theory

its

is

real.

real creation

produced, that means

nature was
nature.

'

it

to be unproduced

An unproduced

is

an impossi-

was unproduced
'.

Now

nothing

thing must ever remain

unproduced.

There

are

some

others from st^ct.

Sruti passages that speak of creation from ^er,

We

shall

passages are authoritative by

have to decide the question as to which

strict logical

reasoning, and should not

'

Gaudap&da-Karika

xvi
accept blindly
'

what

Indra acts v,ith his

There

'

Sruti says.

Maya powers

out that production or creation

is

directly

condemn production, others

Jiim

deny the

'

-existence of

The production

cause

'

due

if

the production were to be real,

non-existent thing,

produced either in

woman

already produced

reality

Maya

or through

cannot be there even through Maya

acts in the

mind vibrates in dream

same manner in the waking

brought about by the mind-vibration

there
that

is

is,

duality

disappears.

When

it

would

is

being

the

the son of a barren

to

produce

objects,

false

as well

state

the

This duality

remains the same non-dual throughout.

pranks,

passages

obvious enough, cannot be

it is

So, just as the

it

Some

could possibly create

or birth of an existent thing can only be due to

Maya, never ia reality

Who

'.

be tantamount to saying that a thing

produced

'

passages clearly point

Maya.

to

like

nothing manifold

here

is

these

when

the

mind

ceases

mind

is

mind
thus

ceases

its

to function,

no perceivable, and pure, eternal, unoriginated consciousness,

Brahman, flashes forth. This is how the mind free from

vibration,

and under proper control,

acts.

In the state of deep sleep,

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,

the

and omniscient.

This

metaphorical one.

no

anxiety,

all is

is

a true description

of such a mind, not a

In such a state of Samadhi,

there

is

peace and quiet, light and fearlessness.

self-realisation, unoriginated

no desire,
There is

aud unchangeable consciousness.

This state can be achieved by what

may

be called the

from-touch yoga \ Ordinary yogins cannot reach

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
it.


Introduction

Samadhi, put

it

II The

on the proper

Contents of
track

xvii

when distracted, and see that it

when he is able to do this, he

does not swerve from the stable path

has reached his goal,

Gaudapctda-KariM

mind has become Brahman, calm and

the

eternal bliss.

The
tion

is

highest truth, therefore,

is

The doctrine of non-origina-

no individual soul is born,

Nothing is originated,

the only true one,

there

no

is

cause that can produce him.

Prakarana IV

The

individual souls are not different

from the Paramatman,

being all-pervading, subtle and incapable of being contaminated

Akasa

like

this

known by Jnana which is also like Akasa and

The Free-fro m-touch Yoga

is

not different from the Paramatman.

which enables one

'

'

to secure the right

knowledge

beneficial to all

is

conducive to their happiness, beyond

creatures,,

all

dispute and

from opposition.

free

Some
produced

disputants
;

others

the Sankhyas ) declare that an existent is

the Vaisesikas ) declare that a non-existent
(

Thus they carry on dispute with one

and they controvert their opponents' position, with the

can be produced.

alone

another,

result that they both help in establishing the non-origination theory.

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

imagine themselves to be subject to these

According to the
into

WAV

%nim

smaj

)>

^r?q*!*hrr^>

which means

sreur ) itself

if so,

capable of being changed )

from zsvm if
would be subject

different

gsKUT

and death, but they

souls to be free from old age

so,

to

how
is

the g?rw
that

ills

and

itself

what

is

suffer accordingly.

(wh)

is

transformed

being produced

can they assert that srqnR

snr

Further, they say jot?

if it is

assumed

that a

is

then sept would be

sr?r like g&r*trr,

change and decay

like

the 3?pf

the
is

not

an <*
!

No

which can prove to us that an srer thing

and there would be the fault of endlessness

illustration can be given

can produce any wa$

is

which

-mm l^rror produces further

srr?* 3?rr*

Gaudapdda-Kdrtkd

xviii

of the grr^nferri^s that area:

The view
(

mi

If the

area, never a 55.

where can the

eFroJSrmift

is

in general

they argue

^to

production,

work upon

For, according to

WfW and ^Tr^hrra" are mi, and as such

3Wf

or cer&t; the

Thus

srorf^cq-*

But

turn the cause of vjr?*to and this series has no beginning.

argument cannot stand.

whole

sr<r^ or

%m*

is

in

this

these CTrrf^rf^s, both

both

must

say that ^firer

the cause of ^rf^far?r, and ^sn^^fara

is

produces

world and ^Tsfo^oT-

on the strength of the argument of

its

etc. )

have to

will

try to account for the creation of the

Some
*TT3"

wheel,

the potter,

is

could produce only

non-existing before

%fam worked upon, then we

being produced and not ^gr

If the
is

3^

An

untenable on the face of it.

) is

mm

must have another

also have

an sm^"

in that

case.

To

say that the

produces the

set*?

mm wre^*

Wrw

55 n%^nrrrr ( which is the mi of

)
is as absurd as to say that a son produces

the father

To

you ought
of

mi and
1

to be able to indicate clearly

q?rcnp

mi

simultaneously

between the
(
first

to

between two objects,

what the order is in respect

prove that there exists a CTt&FrcoRur

and
;

left

mm

we

will

produce the

produce

mm>

come

into

existence

have to admit cfcufercoTm^

and right horns of a cow

mi cannot

cannot obviously

otherwise,

for the

mm

has to be there

mi*

mm

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

which

the

is

mi

which must be

m*

).

But

this

you

are unable

to do.

Thus
comes

mi

or

mm

cannot be proved, for

ously.

Taking

all

philosophers have
doctrine

un proven. Nobody can say, which

and without the ^xrw*, ^r^T^n^R
and
cannot be produced simultane-

the sr^fenrrow stands

first,

qpp$

mm

these difficulties into

decreed that

consideration,

non-origination

is

the wise

the only true

Introduction

II The

'

The maxim

cOT=Erc&W3"

seen

is

of the seed and the

prove the cffT^rf&nTrsr between

or

is

to

you

fact that

which comes

are not able to say,

proves the non-origination theory; for,

sfr*ot,

first

and 3?^f independently, you

sfrs?

being produced, you ought to

its

where mutual

this illustration.

The very

5 )

first, q?nf

sprout

xix

cannot help the sma^if^* for unless you

cannot make use of

Gaudapada- Rclrika

contents oj

be able to say

what

is

:f

a thing

there piior

production.
the upshot of this

So,

originated,

is

is produced of itself
whether it is existent,

nothing

that

all is

Nothing

or from another.

Whatevet has no beginning

non-existent or existent-non-existent.

can have no origination.

If

then only Brahman

how do we

exists,

knowledge
objects of

( in

sr^n?^, massed consciousness)

is

experience

so argue the

of the

So, the

existence of external

on the strength of

mp^-Tri^s

To

the

reply

accordance with the views of the fsr^rr^rff^s

) that

The

facts.

not necessary to produce Prajnpti

),

Vijfiana

of.

its

objects or appearances

own

accord,

Arrhabhasa

this

existence of external objects

or g*fr{flOT

them, we get that kind of knowledge in dreams.

mind,

no independent object

at

The

as

under
(

Gaudapada

Cittadrsya

nature; to say that Sarhsara

never end and Liberation,

eternal
are false.
(

the

To

),

to

is
is

knows

believe

lays

some kind of

in

down

his proposition

Citta sees in

body of the dreamer

who admit
(

that

is,

by Citta

is

their origina-

they make an

believe in the origination of the

believe in

the

change of one's

beginningless means that SariisSra can

if

it

Like objects in dream,

The

Citta

Neither Citta, nor perceivable

like the Vijnar>avadin$

absolutely impossible claim

or

or

without contacting external

tion see the foot-prints of birds in the sky

Aja Citta

can produce that knowledge.

The Vijuanav&di Bauddhas however

them

Citta

any time.

transformation of the Citta.

originated; those

without

for

)>

Arthabhasa and Artha both are really non-existent.

against

of

particularity

to be admitted

will have

reasoning must give way to

is

which

the

of Ghata, Pata etc. )

knowledge

logical reasoning

would be

get

has a beginning, would never be

objects in the

waking

state also

dream things by means of another body

on the bed all the time ) going to

lies

'

Gaudapada-Kdrikd

xx
different regions;

admit that this body of the dreamer

all

Applying the same argument to the waking

proved to perceive

false objects in the

the

state,

waking

Citta

come from

cannot come from

^.

we

come from 3?^

come from ^rg; and sth^
waking state ( as in dream ), one

An 3?^

*r<x

cannot come from 3^3,

So,

).

a non-existent

can be really originated;

have to admit that nothing

Citta can be

state as well ( Besides,

these objects are perceivable only to the particular

thing can never

is false.

can not

can not

In the

perceives things imagined by the Citta.

who

For those

have enunciated

cannot grasp this philosophical truth, the wise

as a

temporary

the doctrine

phase,

of origination

and can be put to

on the ground that such objects

practical use.
But ultimately such

to realise that the

external objects are like the magic-

and the existence of external objects

are perceived

people

come

elephant unreal, and that Vijnana which creates these objects or

appearances

is

without any

unoriginated,

duality,

unmoving

and unruffled.

The
crooked

whirled about,

is

which

etc.

these forms do not

brand

compared

Citta can be aptly

fire-brand

when

not seen

are

come from

the brand

to a

when

When

the fire-brand

the

is at rest;

nor do they enter the

outside,

is at rest,

fire-brand.

produces various forms, straight,

it

or go out.

No

fire-

^ribpRor^re can be

seen between the fire-brand and these forms which must be declared
to be unreal and inscrutable.

of the Citta appears to give

In

the

rise to

same manner, the vibration

various objects or

Dharmas which

are unreal and inscrutable.

So, these

Dharmas

Citta originated

are not originated

by the Dharmas

by the

Citta,

nor

the Bauddhas do believe in

is

the

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

really so; their

production

is

due to Maya which has no

real existence.

Introduction

II The Contents oj

magic sprout produced by

same

is

true of

Dharmas*

the expressions eternal or

things,

xxi

magic seed, can not be described

either eternal or non-eternal; the

case of originated

Gaudapada*Rdrikd

as

In the

non-eternal

are meaningless.

we

In dream

on

the Citta active and producing duality

find

account of Maya, though

it is

In

the Citta acts likewise.

non-dual

in the

waking

dream, the dreamer sees

all

state also*

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

originated- this alone

All the

vable

is

the true doctrine.

is

of perceiver and percei-

duality involving the relation

but the vibration of the Citta which

with objects and

is

What

unchangeable.

is itself

exists

void of contact

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

ginated,

no cause
is

for

<

origination

This

'.

state of the Citta,

always same and free from duality

unori-

having realised

this,

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

of the

The

obsession and the calm natural

wrong

unoriginated

Citta,

enlightened ones.

its

and non-dual

Citta flashes forth in

all its

is

by the

realised

eternal glory

and

associated

Brahman or Atman ) is wrongly taken to be

involving duality and ideas about < is,
dharma
with any

is not,

and

light. But the Citta

who

is

realises

is

or

not,

not

that the Citta

is
is

by the ignorant and only he

unconnected with duality, can be

not,

'

want after he has

omniscience and the highest place aimed at by the

said to be all-knowing.

secured this

is

What more can

a person

Brahma^as, non-dual, without beginning,

realisation

is

middle or end

the goal of the training of the Brahmanas;

natural self-control and calm.

This

this is the

Gaudapada- K&riko,

xxii

The

what

wise have described

is

Jnaru, Jneya and Vijneya

should be properly grasped.

chis

In Laukika Jnana, there

is

duality

where the external objects are

believed to exist, along with their perception.

no external objects but

In Pure Laukika Jnana, there are

perception

is

their

admitted.

In Lokottara Jnana, there are neither external objects, nor their

perception and in course of time, the wise one

would be

entitled to

have omniscience.
All

dharmas are by nature without beginning,

like

Akasa

there

nothing manifold about them in any way. All are enlightened

from the very beginning ; all are likewise tranquil and pure from
is

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
;

this

The

unoriginated eternal.

realise the

Jnana by nature

Even

said to be contactless.

Dharmas have

unoriginated

not transferred to them,

it is

there

if

is

the

hence Jnana

slightest idea of

is

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.
the person

foldness,

Asaiiga \

The

All

highest Jnana as described above

transferred.

The
free

Gautama Buddha

highest place

Ill

Vol.

I,

pp.

or

Moksa

) is

difficult to

423-42^

in
)

his

natural

and cannot be

thus unoriginated, same, puie,

grasp and to realise.

Was Gaudapada

Dasgupta

Prof.
(

from duality, very

is

did not preach this.

a Buddhist ?

History

of

Indian

Philosophy*

has discussed the question whether Gau4a-

pdda was a Buddhist, in great detail and his conclusion is "

that
is sufficient evidence in the Karikas
for thinking that he was

there

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

that these hold

It is

good of the ultimate truth preached by the Upani?ads.

Hindu or a Buddhist, so long as

immaterial whether he was a


hit? eduction

we

are sure that he

Was Gaudapada

III

had the highest respect

a Buddhist

xxiii

Buddha and

for

for his

teachings which he believed to be his \

Prof. Vidhusekhara Bhattacharya is another great champion of
Buddhism and has endeavoured in his edition of Gaudapadakarikas,
to prove that Gaudapada was merely reproducing Buddhist philosophical ideas in his work and no more. While Prof. Dasgupta does
not appear to have made a detailed study of the Karikas, and so

confines

himself to

Vidhusekhara goes

all

few

points in his criticism,

Prof.

out to uphold his thesis that Gaudapada was

In our Notes,

a Buddhist.

salient

we have shown

in detail

how

the inter-

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.

pretations put

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

the Guruparampara of Sankaracarya,

sr# g;? Hhre? 7 fairer mre^m*fr?TOrer ftnsq^

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 quite trustworthy,

but traditions involving daily practice can

not be ignored.
(

Sankaracarya in his Sutrabhasya, quotes Gaudapadakarika,

with the remark

imm ^r^ra^s^rcrefen^rsf

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
(I. 16

would be quite out of order,

7

Same

the metre.

as

sfteq-fsr;

if

Gaudapada had been a Buddhist.

the use of q* for

q-jf

is

perhaps due to the exigence of

Gandapctda-Karika

sxiv

The state of Moksa is called srrr^ q^ ( IV. 85 ) in the

Would a genuine Buddhist refer to Moksa in terms of

Karikas.

a rival philosophy

(
(

The

),

quote Taittiriyopanisad by name, and are

Chandogya, the Bhagavadgita, etc.

No Buddhist would

indebted to the Brhadaranyaka,

for

Mandukyopanisad

basis the

Karikas have as their

in the First Prakarana

doctrines. All these are Vedantic works.

its

have shown such reverence and preference for non-Buddhist works,

(

After having enunciated his

doctrines,

work

his

5 )

end of

his

categorically says that

Gaudapada

at the

philosophy has not been

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

ed as anti-Buddhistic, but these carry no conviction,

(

fNt

Gaudapada

5^[ftfcr

^ ?rfE?

in II-25, refers to the

he comes to the conclusion

showing
Similarly

that he

f far srtIn IV. 54,

* wbrob thus
( *r?r

cr#

?r

f^rfsrr tprffetr

%m

does not hold the Vij nana vada of the

Bahyarthavadins are also

the

Bauddhas

for the purpose of combating them.

shown

Bauddhas,

to be

wrong

in

their views.

In the face of the above positive pieces of evidence,

how

strange to us,

the

question of

it

appears

Gaudapada being a Buddhist

could have been ever taken up seriously.

We

now

shall

briefly

consider the arguments put

forth

by

in IV.

1.

Dasgupta and V, Bhattacharya.

(1)

It

is

contended that the expression

We

refers to *fsgmg c.

question

how

have

shown

in

f^qgfr

s^

our Notes on the Karika in

the Mahabharata uses the expression a

number

times and that fjq^f *** was never accepted as a peculiar epithet

Buddha,

There

is

a greater probability

of

of

of the expression referring

10 Naraya$a or Suka.
(2)

used

There are various terms current in Buddhistic philosophy,

Karikas by Gaudapada, such as ^t4, ^rg, ^r^rrcv crrf^f,

in his

\fati9 Nrrw
8

mfo

See B. (X K.

R. p. Karmaikar,

etc.

I.

This however might

Annals Vol

XXXII

at the

pp. 166-173

most prove that

Dvipadam Varam by

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.

WT^TWT

( 3 )

referred

so respectfully

to

IV.

in

2,

is

characteristic feature in Buddhistic philosophy.

The

expression

which
% W%X
to end
:

refers to
l

-.

all

sn?q"3T*n*r is

Gaudapada owes

literature.

14

jramsJ
V. 21

as

not actually found used in Buddhist

that expression

swrtft

the Bhagavadgita

to

wTsnsn&mg

wwt

and consequently 3W3T*n*T

is

sfrawg**the panacea

misery,

The

of

simile

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

There is a large number of passages in Gaudapadakarika

seem to be the echoes of the Mulamadhyamakarikas of

( 5 )

which

Nagarjuna, such as

W( * arm* fiefi*^

nm m tot*

3lc5|cWpsri^TI

TO

11

WISPTeW^^Jf^PP

^!cm##i:
the

II

W* 31*^

SRSTcl^K*^

&$fa ^TOS

* %r%$*g

1>^p35cJ?

10

*$f

*rrfa

?hr arraft

**?&

smk

IV-4

IV-22

Kiskindh5kan4a XLVl.
I

arnaparvan,

).

13.

86. 42.

fkV^Jr^tt ^R^

II

V.

78. 1*

<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.
later

Gaudapada- Kdrika

xxvi

There need be no hesitation in admitting that Gaudapada has

borrowed several ideas from his predecessors, both Buddhists and
Vedantins. Various passages in the Paramarthasara and Yogavasistha

can be shown

to bear striking similarity

with those

in

Gaudapada's

work.
6

The

expression

g^

in its various

forms

has been used to refer to the Buddhists and

mentioned

directly
It

most
and

IV-99.

in

shown

has been

cases used

in the Notes,

how

the expression g^[

is

in

by Gaudapada merely in the sense of 'the wise one'

unfair to read too

it is

etc. )
( ^:, f ^rt
Gautama Buddha 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

taken to have been a borrower as suggested

above, that does not prove anything.

(

Agrayana in Karika IV-90 means Mahay^na.

8 )

It

may

It

would thus be seen

very well

mean

the

that the attempt of certain

ptdve that Gau4apada was a

Buddhistic philosophy

There

is

Buddhist and

or that he incorporated

the Upanisadic philosophy,

least.

Purvamlmansa \

no doubt

that,

scholars

he

to

preached

Buddhistic ideas in

can not be said to be successful in the

that

Gaudapada studied very

carefully

the various philosophical systems current in his

own

time

the Sankhya, Buddhistic, Gita )

the

Upanisads and

in addition to

such as

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

teachings of Gau4apada can under no circumstances be

described as identical with or approximating to those of

Sunyavada

of Nag&rjuna,

Gaudapada thus seems to have been neither a Buddhist nor

a
but one who had a profound respect for

Buddhist in disguise,
%%

See notes

p.

Ut

Introduction

Vedantic tradition and

after

IP The

who

Title of the whole tvorkelc*

xxvii

evolved his doctrine of non- origination,

having studied the different systems of philosophy current in

his time,

and having found

He

logical reasoning.

and conviction

hence

that they

could not stand the

test

of

was, in short, a Vedantist, both by tradition

it

was possible

Saftkaracarya

for

and other

Vedantists to take his philosophy as their firm basis to build their

detailed theories upon,

IV

The

Title of the

whole work and the several

Prakaranas thereof

The two hundred and

fifteen

Karikas

comprising the four

Prakaranas, as a whole are described in the Manuscripts variously as

^*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

been revealed in the matter of the text proper.

more Manuscripts at the Bhandarkar

striking has

also looked into several

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

most likely to be the genuine one.

As regards the

titles

of the four Prakaranas,

versy about the names of Prakaranas

tively called

13

The

taw^ro,

title

II, III

srtftsr^&r aU(*

RT^^ITO^ilH^K

is

there

is

no contro-

and IV which are respec-

3*^^rfosrsRor.

also found in

According

some colophons.

Gau$apfrda-K&riU

xxviii

K-bhasya/4 the second Prakarana proves logically the tars* of |fr

and hence the name
h^t
l3?ft ^wsrftTOFrnr fipiW nvw^ )

to
(

hm

%awsr$OT.

Perhaps the

real

reason

that the

is

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

wise proves

third Prakarana

the

^rascTOCTdtaw

(jcfar sr^trra; ).

called srarrcT^TTT^Tsri^^

there

is

Karikas 47-50

called sriprsn^Gi, because

of the srtcT

reality

The

eroTtcrerTfqr

like-

it

tcrewfffsrrfr

fourth Prakarana

obviously

is

on account of the striking simile of the srara

The

).

first

Prakarana

in the Manuscripts as wrro, aftf KRofa

and

is

the argument

calling the Prakarana 3*r*msr**or,

variously described

sft^rctarercT. In
is

favour of

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

Besides, the

is

nothing specially characteristic about

it

from the other Prakaranas and to name

it

word srrim

usually associated with special

is

so as to
it

smrar.

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

the

( cf.

Karikas

as

The concluding

whole.

sections

of the

first

wind up
who knows the Omkara'

Prakarana describe the sacred syllable sfp^ in detail and

with the statement that 'he

(sftgw

ftf^r

^* ^ gRHcm

or 3tfgroqr*r?rr or better

would be

far

the real sage

is

3**:

1-2 9

still 3ft|prt

more appropriate

as

).

The name

3*rfttroo?qr

Anandagiri would have

it,

for the Prakarana. 1 *

The Mandukyopanisad and the twenty-nine

Karikas in the

The Maridukyopanisad
and commentators on the

first

Prakarana

contains

first

12 prose passages or Mantras

Prakarana of the Karikas apparently

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

regard the Karikas

as part of

twenty-nine Karikas

as follows,

Mancjukya

CO
(2)

(3)

33

8-1

(4)

9>

12

work

the

1-9

10-18

19-23

2 A~2>3

^1 flr^qBqrorw* ^WT$

*nroww?rfN sr^tir^3Hcr^tm?^^m^Rqr&
(

the

expression

Mandukyopanisad and the four

( sftftahnnfiTfirct

According to Madhvacarya

distribute

the introductory

>,

K-bhasya seems to regard

Prakaraiias as one

Mandukya and

with

followed by Karikis

1-6

the

xxix

etc.

13th century

)-

and

his followers,

both the Mantras and the Karikas were revealed by Narayana to

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

raises the questions

(1)

Do

what

is

the Karikas form part of the

the purpose of the Karikas and

associated with the

The answer

Mandukyopanisad

to the

first

how

(2) if not,

do they come to be

question can only

for the following convincing reasons:

(r)

Mandukya, and

be an emphatic

No,

In several Mss. of the Mandukyopanisad, only the Mantras

the prose portion ) are given and there is no indication in the Mss,
formed part of the Maridukya, as is clear from

that the Karikas ever

the Nirnayasagar edition of the Upanisads.

(2)

It

is

only

the

commentators

Upanisad and the Karikas together,

commenting upon the

regard the two as

who seem to

forming one complete whole.

(3)
(

The Upanisads

being Sruti are supposed to be apaurttfeya

not composed by anyjhuman agency

and

it

would be going

xxx

against

being

tradition to

all

Gaudapada-K&riha

make Gaudapada, who was

even though a great Yogin

The

(4)

Karikas are undoubtedly Gau4apada's and Sankaracarya

rightly refers to

Gaudapada merely

^WTOwft ^

tradition (

),

human

after all a

the author of a Sruti work.

as

who knows

one

Vedanta

the

admitted that sometimes the Karikas are regarded as

&ruti by some writers, but that simply would prove that the word
It is

(5)

'

Sruti

loosely used in a broad sense,

is

'

It is

known human

If

$3m W?a
mean

that

time

when

Gaudapada could not be regarded

as

Mandukyopanisad proper.

which are introduced with the words

the Karikas

are regarded as

forming part of the Upanisad,

srlrff

would

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

Gaudapada
the

to have his

it

nothing can

of the Upanisads being without any

author, and so

the author of the

as

for

unnecessary to pursue this topic further,

upset the traditional view

(6)

and nothing more.

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

show

In order to obviate this difficulty attempts

that

Gaudapada may have

the

lived in

even earlier but that would not solve the

human work being quoted

(7)

The

in

an Upanisad

first"

made

are

to

century B. C. or

basic

absurdity

of a

3^" sgr^r *rarr% with which the Karikas

among- the Mantras of the Mandukya, no doubt

expression

are distributed

suggests that the Karikas existed before the Upanisad; similar expressions occur in the other old Upanisads (and
in the Taittinyopanisad,

many

we have

Brahmanas)

the expression

c^cq-q-

also.

Thus

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.

stating a

In

all

particular topic

before or the sgfc has the sense of a

srs#5.
also,

we have

similar context.

sgtasr

or

In the Chandogya
sg r y wfir used seven times in a

The Chandogya

uses

sgfar

wfo

and ushers as many as fifteen verses there, but there

%0 doubt whether these are genuine or interpolations.

place

in

is

one

reason

In later

Introduction

Upanisads

we

The Mdndukyopanisad

xxxi

etc*

have a similar expression <%%& sgr^T *?*!%, ushering

about 10 verses in the

l^Tsruir,

Even a
the old Upanisads where the

gi^sfo?**?^ etc).

or as

many

as 75 verses in the
scrutiny of the passages in

superficial
sgrsps are

introduced,

shows

that the

way oi clinching the argument or coiroborating

and emphatically the argument used before in longer prose

Slokas are used by

briefly

In fact, the expression rr^*T

passages.
tative ring

about

3?%tf sgtesr STSTRcr

(ro)

an authori-

^rfrf has

as

Prof. Vidhusekhara has rightly

pada's Karikas can in

prose portion of the

as

^f^r

compared with the docile and timid expression

with which Gaudapada's Karikas are introduced.

it,

pointed out

no way be regarded
Mandukya. In fact,

as

the

how Gauda-

commentary on
matter

not to require any elaborate attempt to support

it.

is

the

so obvious

The

Karikas

mentioned in the Upanisad, fail to explain

important terms therein, enumerate several views about creation
matters not

to

refer

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
use the expression WffiT iti place of 1%^ ; shtototoRj *TOWT
in the prose portion are not found in the Karikas and

and gjftrwre
so on.

Similarly the prose portion appears to explain

There

the Karikas.

some terms

are also differences of interpretation

in

about the

w ords

But all this criticism is based upon the

g, fkw, sniff etc.
wrong supposition that the Karikas are a commentary on the
r

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

Karikas

of certain

Prof.

the Ajativada.
in

the

first

Vidhusekhara makes

Prakarana to prove that the

Karikas were earlier than the Mantra portion, but in

our opinion

they cannot possibly bear the interpretation he seeks to put on them.

( All these cases

have been discussed in

Notes ), The
and are mainly

detail in the

Karikas take the Maridukyopanisad as their basis

concerned with pointing out the importance of the Upasana of the

sacred syllable

those

who

Om,

believe

^f^^ft^f^cTr
Visitadvaitins

and incidentally refer to the different views of

creation to be real.

refers to those

who

Karika L7, ^smrorerwar

believe in a real creation ( the

and some Buddhists

and not

to

the

Advaita

Gaudapada-Rarika

xxxii

Vedantins as

is

from the expression

clear

<s\*k*.

Similarly Karika

mr^mTOOTsr

1-8, |<n<r
^i *2$r does not contain Gaudapada's
view, but has in mind the WTOTrffos, according to whom creation
is

and can be attributed to the Lord's nature alone.

real

The

as regards

position

therefore as follows

The

(i)

They

the Karikas

in

the

first

Prakarana

is

Karikas do not form part of the

are as Anandagiri puts

it,

cT^(

sqfa^

Mandukyopanisad.

)rasr*ore<T.

Gaudapada could not have written the Upanisad which

could not have under any circumstances any human author.
(ii)

Gaudapada wrote the Karikas

(iii)

Anandagiri expressly says.

The

(iv)

they are

srr^rshnrffcr

as

before the Upanisad,

Karikas did not exist

but were

written long after.

In the case of other Upanisads where

(v)

similar slokas

have

been introduced, they are invariably shown as part of the Upanisads

in the

Mss of those Upanisads, whereas

several

Mss, of the Mandu-

kyopanisad contain only the prose portion.

If the Karikas did not

form part of the Upanisad,

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

16

Sankaracarya quotes the KSrika

Sfftzffl in

his bha"sya on

3W%$33P3h
are

^P

fcmpil,

cll

^ff qqi

$fifrf

^<TT*Wf

1.

ill

16

II.

3=RTI%TIW

1.

8,

the bhSsya on

fif^^

V. 41-44

ffft

I. 4. 14.

^i

The Karikas

Suresvara, Sankara's

quotes two Karikas

W*W\

9?T

and the Karika III. 15

^ffira^qilcf according to Saiikara.

in his Naiskarmyasiddhi

*tWR$

Brahmasutra

( 1.

11 and 15

*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

etc.

and

S^RSTFTcr:


Introduction

VI Are

by

to be studied side

the four

Prakaranas inter-tela'ed

side with the Upanisad,

explaining the UpAnisad introduced

is

and the teacher while

Karikas to the pupil at

and the tradition was respected by the commentators

suitable stages

and

the

xxxiit

now

even

ssary to read

kept up in the Pathasalas. It is therefore unneceany deeper meaning in the expression 3*lrar sgi^r mfet

which innocent-looking expression has unnecessarily caused such

furore amongst students of Advaita Vedanta.
VI

Are the four Prakaranas

inter-related

Prof. Vidhusekhara argues out the case that the four Prakaranas

which were later

the arguments

are not inter-related, but are independent treatises

put together and called Agamasastra.

of the K-bhasya which
Prakaranas,

and comes

succeeded in proving

The arguments
at the

to

the conclusion

The

first

that

different

K-bhasya has not

its thesis.

of the K-bhasya are to be found in

takes stock of the

it

criticises

shows the inter-connection of

beginning of each Prakarana.

Prakararta

first

He

Prakarana

is

its

comments

At the very beginning of the

whole work as follows
:

mainly based upon the scripture

Omkara, and shows the means

Atman.

for the purpose of ascertaining the

for understanding the nature of
( 2 )
false,

The second Prakarana shows

how

logically

as the knowledge of Advaita can only be had

Samsara projected by duality

( 3 )

Dvaita

is false,

is

duality is

when

the

sublated.

but the Advaita

is"

not so

this is logically

proved in the third Prakarana.

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

Prakarana shows that the non-reality of duality

be proved by reasoning and by suitable analogies,

5

cm

Gau$ap&da-K&rtka

xxxiv

The

third Prakarana

shows how Advaita can be known, not

merely by Sruti but by reasoning

The

also.

fourth Prakarana describes in detail

opposed to one another, show their

feeiBg

how
own

the rival

thus Advaita becomes triumphant as a matter of course.

Prof. Vidhusekhara objects in

toto to the

and

above exposition of

the K-bhasya and finds nothing acceptable in

are

theories

nature

false

it.

His objections

:
The

i )

firsr

Prakarana

is

not snniwrsr,

it

contains

some

reasoning or fr# as well.

17

We

comments in full, which clearly

K-bhasya had a good grasp of the Karikas as

quote here the original Sanskrit

show how the author

of

a whole.

^cWR^ 3|qql%ftft3

firmer

gni

w&t

H^IOTR

$mm m*j$

sspMf

*mWH

^wiHc%rc^HRwft

Introduction

An

VI

the

jom Piakaranas

xxxv

inter -related ?

This objection simply shows that Prof. Vidhusekhara isrhyperall.

Surely K-bhasya wants to say that the .first
is

critical, that

Prakarana dealing

Brahman by

as

does with the 3TT|pw<?WTT and the

it

implication,

takes

upon

stand

its

Sruti,

xrg<TT3[

not that

it

excludes Tarka or reasoning entirely.

The

2 )

Books

and

so just at

really

II is

why

be, then

Professor further asks

its

is it

as

that the

The answer

to this

not, as

is

would be

commentators or

left for

shown by Sankatia ( K-bhasya

author of Book II himself does -not
it

that

the

fact

that authors do

is

as

one would

like

case of the author of the Bhagavadgit*

say that

to

over the world

all

manner

a rule, say things in a clear-cut

them to do. Take

It is no exaggeration

say

would have been no work

But the

critics.

easily

authors

if

there

logical,

) to

'

beginning though he could do so

had been so obliging and

connection hetweetl

If the

'

the Gita as there are writers on

there

are

And

it,

if

many views about

as

we

apply the above

te^t

put forward by Prof. Vidhusekhara to the Gita, as regards

tfye

inter-connection between the different Adhyayas, the author of

&e

Gita would be cutting a very sorry figure indeed

"Simil&xiy,

while studying the interpretations of the Brahmasutras by different

Bhasyakaras,
c

out

why

intention

how many

times in sheer annoyance has one to blurt

does not the Sutrakara say so directly,

'

But we have

in such cases ought to be in the spirit of

( 3 )

have

Prakaranas

II

been only one Prakarana.

reasoning has been resorted to in

'

\&3W

non-duality

'

is

For,

is

that

was

his

criricrstft

^RlfsrasfNT

III at all.

in

both

the

Prakaraoas*

order to prove the same topic

though the topic

different.

is

the

The second Prakarana

the illusoriness of the Prapanca

two Prakaranas

same ultimately*
mainly with

deals

the third Prakarana deals with the

non-origination so as to prove the non-duality.

in the

The

ultimately.

The answer
the emphasis

and

that

was no necessity of
There should

Prof. Vidhusekhara says that there

having two separate

if

to take things as they are.

to the ultimate

problem

is

Thus

the approach

different.

4 ) Prof* Vidhusekhara would like to enunciate a general rule

that a Prakarana is entitled to be called an independent work if the
(

Ga udapdda-Karikd

xxxvi
contents in

it

could be understood without any reference

to the

earlier Prakarana.

by any one.

This dictum cannot possibly be accepted

case, the Bhagavadglta can easily be

shown

half a dozen independent Adhyayas.

does not matter in the least

For, this

is

if

after all a defeatist attitude

be a connecting

link,

in

to point this

it

way. There is bound to

well-known work, which

in a

thereof and

knits the different sections

that

a dozen Gltas instead of one.

of a

the case

no use arguing

It is

we have

In that

to be comprising at least

the commentator's duty

it is

out in a sympathetic manner and

the

represent

to

intentions of the original author in a connected reasoned way.

can be taken in a hyper-critical

If objections

we may

spirit,

well object to the fact that Gaudapada repeats certain

Karikas

as

now

and then, makes use of four Karikas while describing the similarity

between Alata and Vijnana

IV-49-52

words

in self-same

could have easily said simply that Vijnana acts in the same
Alata, instead of repeating the

idea

word

Karikas in describing the Svapnamaya,

Jivas (

IV-68-70

),

Such

he
as

or writes three

Mayamaya and Nirmitaka

when he could have

one Karika and so on.

word

for

way

disposed

of the topic in

criticism is clearly unhelpful.

Broadly speaking therefore,

must be conceded that the

it

three Prakararias are written in the

same

style, giving

first

due importance

to both Sruti and Tarka, and discussing the general topic of Advaita,

though with

a different

emphasis and thus are closely related with

one another.

The Fourth

Prakarapa,

unlike

the

have some claim to being regarded as

though
in

related to the first

criticism

his

of

three

distinct

Prakaranas.

K-bhasya's

piece

of work,

Prof* Vidhusekhara,

comments

Prakararia, unnecessarily spoils his case

Prakaranas, can

three

first

about

by over-stating

the

fourth

it.

Prof. Vidhusekhara does not admit that the views of the

Dvaitins and the Vainasikas are discussed in the fourth Prakarana.

This

is

quite an untenable position.

Gaudapada

WW srrfcjra^faf mm; r%\*

^H*n<$

*?*T fir****! :

v?m*t

r%

11

says,


introduction

VI Are

the four Prakarai.ias inter-related ?

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

idle to

is

deny that the

fourth Prakarana does refer to the Vainasika Bauddhas.

Karikas 25-27

t%tt

* ^5^??r5

snajit ft

srofara- eras <s

tootSt *rofarcrwp &*%

l*

the arguments of the f^rtwift Bauddhas

wrong and Kafika 28
Bauddhas
*w?fttWrn3[

make use of

is

a hit against the

the Vijfianavada

is

f^p^s themselves,

refuted,

mk n

ft

and

to prove

the

Similarly in

in

f^w wri srws rnfs*:

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,

Gaudapada-Kdrikd

xxxviii

Gaudapada
from

that preached

position

the

It is clear therefore that

None

It is

different

who

are so bjind as those

by the K-bhasya

taken

and the arguments

unassailable

is

put forward by Prof. Vidhusekhara only

adage

is

by Gautama Buddha.

regarding the fourth Prakarana

'

doctrine

directly says that his philosophical

prove the truth of the

will not see

and others

further contended by Prof. Vidhusekhara

the fourth Prakarana contains an

'.

of Buddhist

exposition

that

philoso-

and abounds in Buddhist thought and ideas. Various

phical views

them in this light. In the Notes, we

show what should be the proper interpretation of

Karikas are interpreted by

have

tried

these

passages.

to

Here we

discuss

briefly

shall

few

general

objections.
i

Gaudapada

Gautama Buddha who

salutes

is

referred to as

3T at the beginning of the fourth Prakarana, and the 3TW3T*rt*r

ri^a[t

taught by Buddha, at the end.

Gaudapada seems

to

have deliberately put in

Mangalasloka both

end in imitation of certain Buddhistic

works. He presumably wanted to meet the Buddhists on their own
beginning and

at the

at the

ground and to pay them

his obeisance to
better

and

in their

Buddha

calls his

calls

Master

own

coin. Nagarjuna, while paying

him g^ff gr

ft^arf snr (

Gaudapada goes one

the best of

all

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

probably refers to Suka, son of Vyasa,

regarded as Gau4apada's

whom

the Vedantasastra has

Similarly
literature

gM

msHHsmg

......V.

swi^fsffar

and Gaudapada
sINeto

is
is

or to

teacher,

come

who

traditionally

Narayana himself from

forth.

not directly referred

to

in

Buddhist

undoubtedly indebted to the Bhagavad-

y^fta* *&

firar$|:srOTta etc#

ff

VI 2?

II.

14 and

q-

f|

^T^T^r *ttt

) for the term sns^Wtor.

22

ct

Gaudapada makes use of phraseology strongly reminiscent

of Buddhist schools, and has modelled

some

of Nagarjuna, Aryadeva, Asafiga

The main

the

is

fourth

Prakarana are

the

etc,

unreality

of his Karikas

of

on those

doctrines taught in

the

world

and

Introduction

VI Are

Pralaranas mkr-rel cited

the four

Sunyata respectively held by the Vijfianavadins and the

mikas.
all

The

three kinds of jnana, the

Buddhist ideas and were

Buddhist writers.

The

terms, such as 3*5*,

t^\^^ ir%*r>
}

this points

Sf \*> %&k>

out

time

Madhyaetc,

are

),

number of Buddhist

large

wcjrg,

aira^,

mwu

(hm<i,

the simile of the ar^rcT and Hrorsfas* &H

how Gaudapada was

which he, has taught

We

xxxix

borrowed by Gaudapada from the

use of a very

srwac

two kinds of Satya

obsessed

Buddhistic ideas

by

in the fourth Prakarana.

have discussed in the Notes at the proper places, the arguHere we shall deal with
in the above contention.

ments involved

their general implications.

It

may

be freely admitted that Gauda-

pada was well-versed in Buddhistic philosophy, had studied carefully

the important Buddhist writers, and had no hesitation in borrowing

from them.

But

this

does not

mean

teachings. Gaudapada, so to speak,

own

grouncT and using their

own

that

he had accepted their

attacks the

phraseolo gy,

Buddhists on the ir

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
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.

and

annihilation,

instead of accepting the

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

.... mfa*q\sf ere, put in

the mouth
of Buddha a score of times in the Lankavatara, Attempts are- made

a direct reference to the passages

by Prof. Vidhusekhara and others to explain away the expression

wfacrsc so as to make it conform with Buddhistic notions,
%cT?f

Thus we

are told that

it is

equal to sre ^*t

5R3[

meaning

that

Buddha's silence on the nature of the highest truth implies that

Gaudapdda-KdrikA

XL

can not be learnt through instruction,

for himself or

but intuitively by every one

does not depend

nature of existence

that the

the existence or otherwise of the Tatbagata.

upon

Both these explana-

tions are, to say the least, quite unconvincing.

The Vijf&navadi Bauddhas

rightly admitted the illusoriness of

the world, but failed to notice that illusion can

unless there

is

permanent

They

adhistfiana.

later

real

element as

its

not be understood

Buddhist nearest approach to

Atman

continuous series of fleeting ideas,

alambana or
which is the

resort or

admitted the Alayavijnana

which however, being but a

the role of an

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
Adhisthana.
all is

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

they are beneath contempt.

Both the Vijnanavada and Sunyavada can become philosophically

if an unchangeable permanent reality
is admitted,

sound only

Buddha

The

and

failed to

do

according to Gaudapada.

this

Ajativada of Gaudapada has thus nothing in

the Sunyavada of the Buddhists.

nent,

unchangeable

originated.

Principle

common

with

Gaudapada believes in a permawhich cannot be proved to be

That alone

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.

(3)

The

^m (S#* *m**n%

expression

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

z&mim

m^^

^ *wm.
m

There are several Upanisadic expressions

found
IV. 92
( $**,**
ft** * %

^h

Prakarana

OT from*, 72

...

mm & <n*

28. etc.

in

the

urm*

),

91

fourth
;

far*

Karikas from the 31,4

Introduction

Vll The Sources

and the 3rd Prakarana

aim of Gaudapada

are repeated in the fourth Prakarana

the

ideas

is

obviously to

first

three Prakaranas and

single

show how
There

short of the Vedantic 3tTjt mrj.

fall

doubt that the fourth Prakarana

to

and complete

VII

xu

Gaudapada-Karika

oj

treatise

is

is

where

Buddhistic

the

thus no reason

also inter-related with the

all the four Prakaranas constitute 3,

propounding the Upanisadic philosophy,

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

or

'

We

give below a

list

of similarities of thought and expression

Karikas and other works,

in the
(

to,

a large portion of

the First

both Vedantic and Buddhistic

Prakarana

is

obviously based on

Mandukyopanisad and so similarities between the two

below ).

are

the

not

specially pointed out

Aitareya Brahmana

Karika
I.

mi etc.

asTOmarnvqwrr

25
II

Brhadaranyakopamsad

Karika
I.

II.

26 3Ts^tt*wrWTrf

etc.

3m*&^nBr:
*r *ra

?TO^
5

3.7)

(IV.

srffcrr

IL

(IV, 4.13)

sraft%...( IV.

*W3Tf<rfctw&

cf **T 3TC

<Rft*T

$^<SW

3.

14-18

[ iSf

WTO"

( iv. 3.9 >

Gaudapada-Karikd

30,11

36 5TOTgT^OT#ra;

II.

HI. 5.1 )

$grn#r

&

III.

12

III.

13 sftrnfiTsfh^^Twr^r

srfcT%rT^

sr^?T
III.

?5f sri

fawn

fTHrsr

?rs

24

III.

26

( II. 5 )

( II.

5rnm% r%^^

4.6 )

(IV, 4.19)

gw ft*srfe%-T

1.20 )tf

II.

WspOT"- (IV. 5.11)

Rwrft^rRr

^^01.5.19)
sqTWrA

q^q- JffiT heftier

(II. 3- 6 )

smicT srrssrr ^r%

^ffar

sq*ifoiftftfit

(III. 9.26;

3TW 1

cr^ftwaw

35

?r?*mT?m

^r^rr ^ra*:

IIL

g3TR^

^fr5r>^fefi% sfarf

15

III.

<r*

ngforr or

IV. 2,4, 22 )
sr?n& srTmr% (IV. 2.4)

Chandogya

III

Karika
II.

20

srrnr

II.

21

<I(5r $fcT

II.

22

iJtarftrflt

jfa smnfM^

<tt<*t

1 1

4-5)

(IV. 4-8)

srgror:

i I. 3

^*i*w wrens^

3TO ~li *$* f^Tct^

^raR^OT fJlWRJ (

VI, 1.4

^^jRtaRqc^

q?RfTcwrfJrf

VI. 8.7

ssr

nikv

III.

III.

13
15

^irff^?^fr|:

III.

srro *r srfifffewc (1.

^^

<TR[T%d

ere.

6)

etc.

(VI. 13.4-6)

^toi&tft

III.

23

III.

34 fosterer H?r^r

^^ ^i^hit z*m?i (VI. 2.0

*rft
etc.

*ilcr?sw

IV

^fafrt ( VI. 8,1

Gits

Karika
!

srrc^isFcrm sn?

...^l^RT^l%c?m

I.

..^cJfsjfjsq':

...

1%

^W&rtt

f&<3KT

to:

inferior

sforeSfe

otrr:
3T^nrrrTT^m6%

I.

19

23

mgr^q-rfcrrgrcr^nq-TiTTf%-

3*$m

?ra% fn*ac*i

*n

*r^:

*r ipr

*n

V. 22

(V. j, 10)

sr <rrq?r ...

I.

strict:
(

XV. 7

X. 33

XVII.

);

Introduction

I.

25 go=fra

I.

28

srsr

sr<j&

Th

VII

^:

Sources oj

*V

**:

ifcfk

II.

20

^rfTRTfrr

II.

21

%crr

f fit

II.

22

q^rr

fir

XVIII. 1

(XIII. 17)

^T5Tn5Ft...

^mm *m% ^awp

cTfij?:

ssrr sfir saifir^a w^ftfct

=* rrfipr :

(XVII. 23-24)

...

^TRim
20

^C

hw

ftsrra;

Vnmz
II.

fs

xLiii

srcrr^TT

reform

sraii

Gaudapada-Kanka

(IX. 25)

(Adhyayas XVI, XVII)

^ afty
^ aft?

mfi=H

^arsr

\mn

^ftrewrs^T

IX. 25
(IV. 31

...

IV. 23-24
II.

22

tffc&fir

^jftrff

=sr

^Rrnrf

s?5 ft

^
23

*$

sjw

^r% *tfflr

...

II.

24

cutcJ sfcr

ST

XIII. 22

1V

g^ S*t (

IV. 6 )

^frmflrarnr ... (

^rwfJr

^ srg^r

IX. 24

^T^TS^^F
II t

*Jtaw

8 )

^r^r%^r

(XL 32)
^Spff:

II.

STO^^TOT

29

...

II.

35

...

rrsiTf : ^rg^fir

*n

ere;

wfosw*

*n^: ^ *&

&

( X. 34 )
(XVII. 3)

11

srcremw5Enr- ...
*RTTOTOHrT5 etc

ra*RW5&F^

( JI - 5 6 )
*

( IV -

I0

III.

13 itaT?ffreRTc9q;

^^:^ftfir...(Vin..i9)

III.

x6 3irn?rf%rr%^rr

an*

$fatrt&ra^

m&

^rt^rr
rwftc
m5-r%^5TOr:etc. (XIV. 18,

XVII. 2
III.

21

III.

21 75>^qr*rr*ft

?r

mffrgtt jt?5

TOwftsFT**
-

few?

sflrcrwrcet

*Wt*rfti

n -^7)
srefiRwl

(XVIIL59)

<

III.

34

^^mr

firqf hnpr

(VI. 25)

wfhwri
III.

38 3UcWVT

III.

39 smsrsfnfr

cTf r ^Tflf

snwfrw iw
a*

^rr... (VI. 25)

^T^r^ifWfa (VI. 23)

T5TT*R&fa5 t3tor
III.

41 jR^t finrs^rara^-

*r

firwNr tras^

#TOri
Hi.

42

otr*

(H-

ift^sftr&rnt-

(VLa*)

firesflf^Tfi[%^

W*

(VI. 35-36)

Gaudapada ~K&rika

XL1V

III.

)) ) )

44 g& ^r\im%Tr &%*?

*wz:

jfrqrr^rHsiTH*

III.

46

^T

* ^afta;

w^feroriT i%V

^ra^cra: M etc. (VI.

(VI. 19)

TOrri
III.

47

24-28)

vw Ctfr fStarcsSr %i& shram

oftq^ fotf ...

OTi[CT^0WW
OTSOT3C

**

etc.

sr

*fr*fr

srsrWror

srsr-

^nsfan^srftr etc. ( V, 24-26;

also VI. 27-28; II. 71-72 )
IV.

10

STOROTfte^Wrs^lr

q-

^Tfqr

wwt*

... (

VIII. 6

IX. 30
m$Mr mron
* ft ^irror^c^rsarg;...(VI. 40)
IV.

80 finwrarfcflw
ft cc^r ft^fits

IV.

ft*ro*T

Hsr^T

81 sFOTftsrociT Jf*na

85 sn^r

86 farat faft

SW*
88 37*
89

IV.

94

etc.

asrrcro^

(II. 53 also

%m

...

II.

XV.

6 )

wiwriW* **ra; (III. 17-18;

m*H&w tT**hr sra ( VI. 3
*r

etc.

tV.

IV.

mwi <$i

IV.

IV-

...

st

Iw
T

sr

t%^

ft

**r Wcfe

^R*ns

( XIII.

#s**n? r:

^retj^HtoSr^sW*

7-17

(XV.

fttnWtaft

II.

9 )

7}

Isa

fcarika

HI.

25

^^Trottm
frs*ra

sw

^ot^

3?^ to* srfr^mr

srffr-

gfnE&t (12)

VI

Katha

Karika
1.

26

srorsft

I.

28

srot^
I'ft

III.

HI.

24 ^f
38

*$

im 5r?r srmgrs^
^?^

&sra **
rififa
?f

f^ara; *nfer
t

*%i*mm%

aw 8fM

5RRT g# f^m:
$$ HIHtfa f%^*
*?r

^Twras^

(II.

I.I2)

( II. X. 1 1

( II.

1.

10

Introduction

VII The Sources

VII

of

XLV

Gaudap&da-Rarika

Kausitaki

Karika
I.

III.

^i

3T^TfrT shut:

^r^r

^rsRW&f^

is

^ sqrr?m

$ srrar

TOisrssfeat

f^fefr

etc.
(III.

3)

Kena

VIII
Karika
III.

ak

IX

( I.

Lankavatara

Karika
I.

mwmr- *$wr-

7 *^wr*TRns>fri etc.

etc.

(13)

I%5E5W9[

(n)

mmn *ron% ^

(16)

^srftwiwnTT^T

(66)

(also-144, 291, 561,582, 875)

II.

32 JTiTO^r ^^erfamr:

S^(79)
III.

46

?<$\

fafa

f^w.-.^rf^sroa;

IV. 83-84 stffo

etc.

^i^t%

94

*araftfir

^f^r^cT^r qarrea etc

$$

etc.

( III.

20, 21 ) also

(pages 96, 171, 188)

IV. 87-88

m* mv$*v

xr etc.

#nprtm
IV.

96 3&t*HW12^f?t..

5n3T...( p.

(pages 157-iS 8

157)

Mantismrti

Karika
I.

25 gssfra

srora %?*: etc.

srw*

srsnr.

^r

^^r?r^%

*%

IL 74, 76-78

)
))

Gaudaptida-R&rik&

XLvi

Mundaka

XI
Karika
6

I.

srrtTf^m^-

awrftr

*rar

s^ara; <m*GV3i

(II. i.i)

27 ...wTWanft

II.

^srite^'?

13

III.

R#i

flro*

bhst^f

XII

H- 2.8

( II. 2.1 1
)

Prasna

Karika
I.

26 ^s<fe*5w$3Tprtfm:
sr&r*fr>s"-q-*T:

II.

III.

27 ^mtfsnrc
24

?rs

^ht%

w^m vk ^m

^ar|

sr^r?...

qfr|

sTTwrwrat

www*

V. 2

V.

srsn^rftrsaRfit *rv...( III.

...

XIII

^r irr

1.7)

Svetasvatara

Karika

ww

8 ^i^T?sr^r%

I.

*??$(

mmvi

ssrar:

facrferos^r

( I.

XIV

2 )

Taittiriya

Karika
II.

22

^t * r% %far

%^
23 vmta?rat

HI. rr. y$v$$t

III.

*rm

gfcr:

IV. 43 3T3Tr^^rff

srrorr

^5TT:

w^

^r srsrc etc, ( III. 7.9 )

Adhyaya

etc.

S^thm

nmr

arcrp

II.

arcfl^

II. 7.

etc.
ffaf

...

...

a^FRK"

^^

wfiu

XV

3TT fT^T

OT

(II. 7. 13

Yogavasistha

Karika
I.

w^t^v

18

ff

ernft

^rrrr

|rf

sifesrtenr?* ^rfr ?tkt tef

faft

T^ff
II.

& 32
III.

!ar*r

...

31

I sTm ^5r

* sr# h

imr

sft#:

ang:

?m?ffrr& $?r$*)-

( III.

srf*rsr

ssgercs

( III.

sr*r?q- etc.

84.27

( III. 19.

* softer *

sfsfwrre^etc.

84.25

*T$frtT%

Introduction

Fill Gaudap&das Contribution

xLvii

etc.

We

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

generally taken to be

Gaudapada, we have not taken much note of

than

later

The
Of the non- Vedic

same can be

it.

said to be the case with Paramarthasara of Sesa.

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 non-

works,

origination differed from that of the Buddhists.

In short, Gaudapada, after liaving studied the

phical thoughts of his time,

was willing

to

current philoso-

borrow from

his- Ajativada

works whatever would strengthen

doctrines, whether Vedic or non-Vedic.

VIII

Gaudapada's Contribution

to

earlier

against rival

Indian

Philosophical TTiougHt

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

his

successors in the Advaita field,

built

edifice

their

theory.

of detailed, analytical exposition of' the Advaita

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

*m%r erwjf n^t?: far^wwr

srfeterrfta^

<

Gaudap&da-K&riha

XL v jii

Whatever Gaudapada intended

to say in his Karikas,

Sankaracarya has hinted in his Bhasya.

Whatever Gaudapada merely hinted, Sankaracarya propounded.

propounded,

Whatever Gaudapada

proved by

Sankaracarya

reasoning.

Whatever G. proved,

. established firmly.

Whatever G. hinted as worthless,

Whatever G.

. treated with contempt.

treated with contempt, S.

Whatever G. condemned outright,

S.

condemned

outright.

brushed aside unceremo-

niously.

Whatever G. brushed

aside, .

threw overboard mercilessly.

Whatever G. threw overboard,

destroyed, lock, stock

and

barrel.

In short, Sa6karacarya, the spiritual successor of Gaudapada,,

not only propounded the Mayavada adumbrated by his 'paramaguru'

Gaudapada, but expounded, promulgated, framed and established
the same by his acute intellectual powers,
skill,

and

relentless logical

reasoning

".

unparalleled

expository

Gaudapada's philosophical doctrine of Ajativada which he

the

Uttama Satya

is

based

upon

the

calls

following basic ideas which

never tired of emphasising in the K&rikas.

he

is

its

nature; for,

(i)

slightest

ever change
st qwgfag fi wfa * ( Nothing can
changed its natural characteristic even in the

srect^sjWTsft
if it

manner,

if

would cease

to be the original entity ).

Introduction

While writing

Vlll Gctutfap&da's Contribution

xlh

etc.

bhasya upon Isvarakrsna's Sankhyakarikas,

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.
:

&

This would naturally lead to the acceptance of the theory of an

unreal or illusory production,

*ri

must be regarded

as being vt

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)

It

wfercorwr cannot

(3)
All

m**

ftrs&mw*

be proved to exist.

complex and gross can be reduced to its simplest and

The big Nyagrodha tree can be seen to have its rise

subtlest form.

from the subtle

So,

seed.

this vast

universe can be taken to have

one entity in the ultimate

for its cause only

Naiyayikas admit that only number

Even the
other numbers

analysis.

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

etc,

produced from
as

this q<s

Brahman, Atraau

Thus WTOrcwOT
(2) that

been

mm

and

anything
it

curcar
<rcr

etc. ?

cause which

variously described

is

can not be described as

creation

of cause and effect can not be

implies that (1) otto and

existed before mx$, that

m%

it is

is,

are different, anything can be

can be produced from ^r%^r

mi

3**ra;.

A mi

);

if

produced out of

mi

must have

its

is

aero before,

nature similar

mtw*

Therefore (1)

A *ra: can
An

not produce an

3^

0)

can not produce a to,

produce another ^, for there would
not
can
<*RC
be refferr in its nature during the process.

(4)

(2)

3T*ra;

non-existent thing can obviously not be pro-

duced from a non-existent thing.

7

proved..

are different,

must have
produced. Both these suppositions are wrong.

would always remain

to that of the

The

must have

^m. before

If eFT

aifipfor

relation

because the

real,

and

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)

begbiningless.

<> r

srarf^

know whatcomes
tbis

first,

we ought

For, here also

knowledge, no relation of cause and

Thus

($)

there can be

could be postulated,

effect

no origination.

There being no relation of cause and

and no change or

effect,

being admissible,

of one's nature

transformation

we have

back" upon the only possible idea 'that there is only

this world,

able to

to be

the^seed or the sprout,., and in the absence of

one

tcr fall

"entity in

which "must be unborn", immutable and all-pervading,

only an appearance due to Maya which ^gftiri

All duality can be

can have no existence, in

Whatever

(6)

is

reality.

iir accordance

with correct reasoning must

alone be -accepted.

The

Sruti texts are entitled to respect,

Once

of reasoning.
is

no

the idea of non-origination

Advaita

is

the highest reality;

and based on.. Ad vaita,

can have no antagonism for

a part of

festly

accepted,

is

about the interpretation of conflicting

difficulty,

the Upanisads.

so

not at the expense

but

imagined

'

for

a,s

Dvaita can be just

Advaita encompasses alLaad

the Dvaita ideas which are, mani-

and are useful for a time

the Highest Reality

there

passagesjn

the realisation .of

till

unoriginated.

Gaudapada can legitimately claim to have placed the Advaita

doctrine

on

a firm foundation

by boldly

passages are to be accepted only

clusions supported

stand

when he

not prove that

was a

by reasoning

fire is

?.

Sankara also takes the same

hundreds of Sruti texts could

not hot, or that simply because your ancestor

declares

fool, that does

proclaiming that the Sruti

they do not go against the con-

if

not

that even

mean

that

you shcmld

also

act as a fool 20

Gaudapada, being more interested in the establishment

doctrine of

19

non -origination does not go

'%%=}

5%5^ ^

T*r#rt^

%n^

III.

into details as

to

of

how

the
the

23

Bh^sya on

II".

1.

11

Brahmasmra

Introduction

origination

to

make

Fill Gaudapada s Contribution

illusion or

is

this

more

it

was

Saiikara,

on

appearance,

explicit,

Sankaracarya

left for

his

tv

etc.

gives

part^

more

thought to the establishment of the Avidya or Maya doctrine.

fact, it

may

o-the

same

#$njTr

be said that Ajativada

shield Advaita,

and heace

and Mayavada

^-Sa&kara declared

are but

Avidya

ingenuity to explain the real

67

nature of " Avidya,

first

to

make

the

their-

resorting to-one-

6x other of the theories of Avacched^ Pratibimba; Abhasa

the

In
sides

to be^r^rr%-

and -Sankara's successors used .all

srftsN'frfor

Gaudapada was

two

fullest-

etc.

use of the

doctrine of the three states, waking, dream and deep sleep, described

and the Ch&ndogya, for the purpose of

in the Bjrhadaranyaka

blishing Advaita.
riences in the

There

waking

than those in the other

is

state

surely

no

or

why

they should be taken as the

In the waking

the soul perceives the gross with the help of the

sense-organs

in the

esta-

the expe-

alone should be given greater attention

states,

standard by which are to be judged the other two.

state,

why

valid reason

mind and the

dream, the sense-organs do not function and

the soul perceives only the inside subtle, with the mind; in the deep-

mind and the sense-organs are

nothing. Thus the soul can be said

and the

sleep state, both the

inactive

soul perceives

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.

In order to realise this

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.

Witness of

all

The

nature

of this Turya,

experiences in the three states,

upon by Sankaracarya and

his successors.

as

the

Saksin or

was further dilated

Ga^4&pada bad studied

the Buddhist philosophical

he agrees with the Vjjfianavadins

that

external

works and

objects are illusory

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

to the charge of contradicting themselves

hpw

the illusory

and are unable

nature or Sanyatva of objects can be

understood without any relation to some unchanging, immutable'

Adhisthana or other.

fol

sS^ilcrpapraiBii

IU

sr*w qi^i

to stswRi ^fraji R

II

serf <^;ri1wpr: srff^gjg^

^JT^rFTS'cT;af:
ftcfta

m$i

ll

%^

II

Q%mwt ^p^a
S<fa:

II

snarcspr

^h-^

stff^^ss:

$w-

q^: ll^ll
<^r

<$ts^% #h g&q

#sr* ^r s$t

$rw*rct ft

^cTFTRll *ll]

5T^

TOfOTT
(

5TH:,

cW

3FTC:

TOTf:

5TT^T

<^>:

srif : (

SOT^

^ fig:
fl%

$Nl Wit

^JTf

frwr *S?

ft

II

\\

for:, apcnsrf:

Sri

Gaudapada-Karika
FiRST CHAPTER
( 1 )

One and

the same All-pervading

is

traditionally

known

being ] three-fold ( l ) Visva, cogniserof

cogniser of inside,, [ and ] ( 3 ) Prajna,
again,
Taijasa
2
Outside, (
)
likewise, cognition massed*

[ lit.

remembered

[ as

arrcrclr

tr%

N *

11

sfci:, art: *r If?: srr^rlr ( |(a ) $fe ftsr arafoicr:

apra:i%cq

for:

str^st ^^t

m dm

^3 a

%p"<fr

^ wpri^rat

jiw^t

ift

2 )

fold in the

One and

wrct

?r

M*re

mind, and

a a

ii

ffcis n h

the same All-pervading

body Visva in the

inside in the

oft

sftfaBg^;,

%3re:

^j5g$

f|

is

ii

well set

up three-

front of the right eye, Taijasa again,

Prajfia in

the Akasa [void, sky]

in

the

heart.

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

(4)

The

bliss likewise,

( 5 )

Prajna

What

and what enjoyer

who knows

thus to be

three-fold.

gross gratifies Visva; the rarified again, Taijasa;

know

enjoyable
is

[ is

proclaimed

this dual, [

and

gratification [ thus to be ] three-fold.

although

proclaimed

[ in the three
]

enjoying,

is

in

the

abodes

three abodes,
]

he again,

not contaminated,

shft* *rforarai

si

sr;p?fo

apw:

m\fcfa

frftw

JTM^ff^g^:

3j^ sj&^rprt:

s^

II

sre^

ii

ft^

^RHtXra^ ^TRT *F*P% *KTSf%?3$T*

( or, ?1%
srcjjsi

gl

q?q%

f^rta: F^ *F^%

^M^RSt:

IU

II

^Iprf *REH^

^T^fa

*fir

);

*ffcj;

*scr ( * r% ^rcra;

CTnfMWtyhWW

'FT

^|T

II

II

( 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;

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 ?
( 9 )

so

&fo #rt 5n#r

sfonrrct^rcpi fa& *%&

srfej
(

?o) ajare: ^tswt

S$WFfl<lt&:

^:

?*&

(
[

io

U
)

the Fourth

);

3t ft tf&

pph

The
]

1 1

*n*:,

other hand,

Pfajria

snfr

sf,

^i^

<to^

is J

known

traditionally

of controlling the cessation of

among

all entities,

gw

*r,

all

as

r,

Turya

miseries,

refulgent.

well-known

] Visva and Taijasa are taken

by cause and effect Prajfia, on the
conditioned by cause [ alone 1 ; those two [ the

'that

is

II

to be conditioned

cause and effect ] have

(

f^lci:

nwR

All-pervading

capable

Those two

desired ]

af*W,

mm * m

5r

powerful, immutable, non-dual

[ lit.

Jig:,

II

^rc
(

$BH:,

11

$HTO^ It ft 5^ * fra* U

5tw$

SWPRB

1%: 3$:

1%1%:

II

no locus

Neither the

standi in [ the case of ]

Turya.

nor others again, for the matter of

neither truth, nor again the untruth nothing whatever does

12

comprehend.

Self,

That Turya however

[ is ]

always all-seeing.

mi:

?a

iw.

^^r

3ittf

=*r

i^isfBi

while

ftT^

#r 3^ f^fr^

apw:

<rct:

3?wi

^s:

apqrr

a^ra,

aqt:

) f?fcr;

$ti <ts^ R#

The

1$

SH

ll

11

3^^

wr:,

M%

( sffd^ptfr: )

eaft^r

*KT

#H JTf &

[ is

3?t

of duality
J

stuck

11

is ]

11

common

up with the

to both

causal

sleep,

does not exist in Turya.

14

The

with dream and

sleep.

Prajfia

norv-perception

and Turya.
it

srafasi^; m?: 9

g?TO^PRr:

wi%TO?rettf i*&

(13)

^si t%t

aMiftflwn

Prajfia

fa&

sfw w<n
atf^ arsrRcT:
eft

3pqq:

{*\ )

sfafangci:;

first

two

[ that

sleep, Prajfia,

The convinced ones

is,

Visva and Taijasa are

stuck

up

on the other hand, with dreamless

about Advaita

do see

nor again dream for the matter of that.

(15) Dream [ is ] for one comprehending

Turya neither

in

sleep,

one who does not know

apprehension in those two becomes
Fourth stage.
sleep

for

16

When

beginning-less

Maya

the
is

individual

extinct,

Soul,

awakened, he

sleepless, dreamless non-duality.

reality.

reality

otherwise

When

the

one

asleep,

then

attains

owing

realises

the

wrong
to

the

to the

unborn,

mmfon

*nqwprfr$ Ismta

?va ) apapj:

JPW:

qfc

&iq:; I? Iff *rcwrwL;

W\h Iff

) 3frqq:

<L

?T fqsTcf

s&fiwwift*

q ^q %s

*rqicr

fiHSFaft *rhj

^ $m

(17)
existing,
just

If

Maya

* faft

II

fofo, *

?<i

II

ml

st

srfa

5 q

^qcf'.

ii

Hi^rtfrpq^isr
*rqra

^^ u

11

^^

*PRR3sfon *n*r fitMrcpft

11

f*rctf%

qr

11

*rqpcr

the

projected

creation

would continue to

it

^,

iirmjro^g^

*rafci

*rqf%

II

rsRT^r fteftqr

55frwFr: mirt

fqsrer)

mfat, I%5T:

qfe

ii

Kfww#3r?r

^sfoftfN

t<r

?*s

(aft a:)

ait?raU^

<H*irfcr:

st^t^ to

f^TcT

ii

[ illusion,

be,

appearance

(-prapanca) were [really J

no doubt.

];

there

[
is

But
only

J this

duality

is

non-duality

in reality.
( 18 )
liable to

Vikalpa,

is

If

some

or could
)

the Highest

illusion is

imagined by some one,

be turned away.

This statement

on account of its usefulness for ]

is ] known, duality does not exist.
[

it

is

involving

instruction;

when

\%

3i*w:

trow

%3r^R^rRfR 3^fr swlr

5ww

^afifrraf

srri^RF^

aR^^ffrara^

^^

3^

?t*tiM **iraj

RO 3f*r; sntw topp^ qpraww^ 3?^, hot-

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 )

When

( 19 )

the

common

there

quality

is

viz.

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 .

of U-ness
distinctly

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:

^ H

Bfirac^PHsiM i <p

^,

i^^

II

il

3SRR:

%5ra

3ffq

(aft!* #fil*raFcT)

TT# f^F

3fc&R
8F?w:

( R5? )

pfta
nifl
(

The

well, to Taijasa,

TR3R

WW

ft^gTO* *

font

JTOT% %ci: pfr?T;

syllable

and the

leads

syllable

on

course towards what has no [ syllabic

to

#&,

i^

R^: H&r

to Visva

M again

It

W^l

3r f^r^r^

*rc

II

q^r: q^[:

l%f%^3?fq T

Jrm^r %^r* sroft

PW:

R*\ )

23 )

aiNw TTO 1%^,

#RR

3R] ^ m*V',

* f%f%?fa (^RT^

and the
Prajna.

V\ H
^Tj

soft

syllable

There

U as'

is

no

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 ]

One

fix the mind upon Pranava [ the syllable

Brahman void of fear ; for him ever fixed upon

should

Om ]; Pranava [

is ]

Pranava, there

no

is

whatever.

fear

anywhere,


m^t to
(

Erqf :

R^

9Frcw

<tf

ft

^vs

TO

ajarWR 3FPTC:

ft 5RT#

) 3f?sfq:

flHT

fRST

jropr:

SFFR

ft

ssst

<rct

jto: If ant

) aiwjq:

3f<$3:

sir sptp?

sWT,

apw:

5PW *

"ft:

^ft ?RJF^
gefoqr snfe: **?

TO

cl^ [ or, cl^spcR

II

RV9

em ^

] sq^cf

\C

II

P?T:j

^nf^nft^R itcwt ^td * sNfa 3<s

to ft ^H 5& fecw.^rt INraj
) apw
it

li

<E?ei:;

(\%)

8PW:

ftr: afrfirc: fcfccr:

S:

STOW,

^, tfl^q

3R-cT^f5f:

&, ^: sw *

3^

3<rerc:,

Pranava indeed [ isJ the lower Brahman, Pranava likeBeginningless, undifferenthe Higher [ Atman ].
without outside, unique [ and ]
tiated,
[ or, without inside ],
immutable [ is ] Pranava.
(

wise

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
(

].

One

28 )

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,

possessed likewise of infinite portions, the

of duality,

and

] auspicious, [ is ]

cause of

the sage, not any other.

Here ends the First Chapter in th Gau<Jap3<3a-k5rik5

cessation

STORM

HtfH

q^f%;

?fl:

snff

sf?Tp[: *r

3pqq:

fff%^^r T &*&

Wl^n^ 8RW: T

%W S& JRnfcRP*. anf:

w
3i3&r

g3T

wr

( ^jt: arpifera; )

TO<fc:

*RqjN&

*PlSr,

In %

^ ^5$? ft^

ii

"

faft
~

SECOND CHAPTER
( i )
verily,

The wise

speak of the unreality of

on account of the

entities

all

entities

in

dream,

having [their] location within,

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 )
(

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.

shown

Jfeft4

3T^q:

( vs )

3F^q:

wftftw.

%mv

for%t

? $

m#r m%^ 4pt

S^raf ft
(

wsmn,

?fof

ft

( Sftprf )

ii

^Rt

<^ tern

$rj%ifr

SRftsf^rar

it

^ sf^rn

5 n

11

MfaSRf,

*3&

gjrqjWiTcIT

sr^ *npref ft
^tewiRn'm
fcp *R*n *^s #r%r* c

am
(

<s

) 3re*rj

( 5 )

The

ii

qrr

^nf^rf^rf

a*n

What

is

( 7 )
ties [ in the

though

though

[ in

dream,

state ] is contradicted

[ It is all J
is ]

the two

[ is ] so

] similar to illusions

"

in

the case of ] the entithe dream; therefore

they indeed are traditionally known as unreal and nothing

on account of [ their ] having a beginning and an end.
(

^)

real.

Being possessed of a purpose in

waking

[ in

not at the beginning and at the end,

also in the present; existing [ things ] [

are noted as

ii

wift*&-(

on account of the common nature of entities

] on the strength of well-established reasoning.
6

wise speak of the dream and waking states as one,

verily,
states

f|

wonderful

else (eua)

verily, the nature of the local

as [ in the case ] of the dwellers in

agent

heaven. As indeed

a well-trained person here, [ so ] this [ person dreaming

[ various objects or regions ], having gone [ there ].

sees those

^ ^w

si: %<fa$i *;

W^,

sfc %3tlCra

$
sr:

^;

USTrf^ffi

^^

yen^ ^1^ 5^,

Even

( 9 )

8^

<^t%

%cW

%?F# % %ff
ifer^:

ifaf

II

II

again,

f^RSTSt

what is imagined by the

non-existing; what is apprehended

in the dream-state,

mind within [ is ] verily ( to )

by the mind outside [ is ] existing
in reality ] the unreality of these two
enced

g^l

so

[ is

people

differentiate,

but

actually ] seen [ or, experi-

].

Even

10 )

mind within
mind outside

in the

[ is ]

the

waking

what is imagined by the

what is apprehended by
the unreality of these two [ ought

state, again,

verily ( tu ) non-existing;

[ is ]

existing

to be held to be likewise ] reasonable.

(
states,

If there [ is thus ] unreality of entities in

who

then

cognises

these entities ?

Who,

even both the

again ( vai

),

their imaginer ?

The

Atman imagines himself by himself, through

he
alone
]
[ that ] cognises the entities this [ is ]
the conclusion of the Vedanta [ Upaniads ].
(

his

12 )

Maya;

[ it is

shining

\\

epro

SRM3T
{v

( strut )

33%

3i*?q:

srlfcfirer:

gq;

9p?rf^%

# faNt *F*%B*
ft

*r

sr?cT;

II

fawsrej:,

3FPRT >^ %S?^3 *$r ^T ^ %

3ira: ^

(^)3p5Pi:

3Fcr: 3j3zrgjr:

(J^:)

<$

^r,

II

2r

5lf|j

sf|i

=* srf|:

^9%,

sftf

s*re-

clef:

?grjft

SIOT^

(sfrrQl
( 13 )

ties,

those

The Atmau

],

outward-minded,

] differently set

up, as also

diversifies other enti-

those

fixed

up within

the mind; thus does the Lord imagine.

( 14
lasts ]

Those thought-timers

[ lasting as

within likewise, and the duality-timers

long as the thought

[

amenable to the

grahya-grabaka formula ] outside all those [ are ]

of imagination [ lit. imagined ]; the differentiation

two

is ]

mere products
[ between the

not due to any other reason.

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
\v

^nan

t%ki?<tct:

to

M^^T^f

*31$Rr ^nts

ra*t

S"it
(

>pft

^o

jft

ctw ^rc?

$r

3i^q:

*sf

te<ft f^nr#%

sro^

frfHter:

*#

filter;

arrcfrr

11

) srm: ff^ $nTfac:

afe;, ggr; jft 301!^:, ?mrft

?*,

>i

11

9^%^r^ ^ ^fe:
(

gfaltf^ft:

to

*htt *rat

<T33R*?ftftsro: n *<s u

*n^?T <ra ^rcr

f^#r?r.';

fafifaWrl

w ap^R sfftta

spot:

Tit: fo#qcrr cf^

#^

^o

fter% ),

erffe:

As the

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 ].
(

17 )

in the dark,

is

(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,

'

place

the ascertaiment of

( 19 )

innumerable

Atman

entities.

] is

takes

Atman.

imagined to be Prana

This

[ is ]

the

[ life ] etc.

Maya of

and these
one

that shining

Atman

] 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

];

Guna-knowers; and as Tattvas, the Knowers of them

the Tattvas

It

$m # sfo#ft ^rr *fr ^ ^j

tfl^ft
(

RR

9FW:

*jS

=?f

*fMW i*t59ftfa ^ <TT^i

l^r:

# %d^S,

$r ^#r^ts^

?ra

*& ^

ifr:

^ af^

TO # ^n^t s^rctfifa 3te

(

R2

( 2i )

3pgq:

<R|9:

$fa

^isfa:,

22

as

the Veda-knowers;

Vedas,

[ sacrifices

( 23 )

Knowers of

it

Subtle, the

Sthula

ii

-q

at?:,

oi

Gods, the
the

Sacrifices,

];,as the Enjoyer, the Enjoyer-knowers;

and as the Object of enjoyment, the Knowers of

as the

*taf

Knowers

as

II

li

for: fi%

and as

RR

II

R3

them [ objects ]; as the Lokas, the Loka-knowers; and

Knowers of them [ gods ];

it

afifc:,

as Padas, the Pada-knowers; as Objects, the

Knowers of them

R?

it [

the Bhojya

];

Subtie-knowers; and as Gross,

]; as the

Murta

[ possessed of form

],

the
the

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

Vada-kno%ers;

as

Disah

];

as

Vadas

discussions, theories ], the

Worlds, the Knowers of them

Bhuvanas

];

ftmWi f^rild

^13% If

r:

nM

TOTOWrft

f^faftft forfeit snf

fW?h

# faftfc:-^f *

( a$ )

Mind,

*r

(3fe&: )

ate

II

%i |

3 ski ?

ii

\\i\

II

^t H
(n?nft

\c

it

$5F%)

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

Knowers of

as

it [

the

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

Knowers of creation; and

the Knowers of dissolution

Knowers of

all

here

subsistence,

[ in respect

of

and

Atman

].

Laya

as Dissolution,

as Subsistence [ Sthiti ], the

these [ are imagined ] again, always
]

^r%

3F*q:

(\o)

3T?qq:

^ l)

^r%5

crq:

3F?q:

fowa&r:

( STRUT )

cT

*%

q\i q?qft;

3?5qH*il: %*FF <?5

K

^ ^pg| f^^j
qtff

3?

ii

F?faTt

ii

58

ffcT

), fTCl

^ far sb^i

^ f

sw ?^?t iwfe

I fa

What entity
And that

29 )

3:

qqr WJT*nq ?t,

* !Sl$ I
^5 5T- T,

q??T

^t wrfo?
(

^: s#ft ^c
^ ^q^ g

a ^r#r

sees that entity.

T*m%T

one

entity

II

II

"^T

would present to one, he again

], having assumed his form, pro-

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

tects

the real state of things,

may imagine

Atman

to be

any thing

with-

out hesitation.

(31)

As

are seen

the Gandharva-city

dream and Maya

castle in the air ],

so

illusion ],
is

seen

as

this

[ is

seen

universe by

the well-versed in the Vedantas.

(

32

Neither destruction, nor again origination; neither one

bound down

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

%r^

sfsr:

anarch

spw:

a&3 SRispq

( 33 )

This

Atman

existing entities themselves

imagined

bv the

(ca)

is

itself;

#r

^q;

f^csri

srft

3f|^

imagined to be non-

by the non-dual; the

non-dual

?CT^pr

*,

sto^ air*H

further

5tht

^ ^

cfWI^

sresrg;

therefore

entities

non

also

- duality

are

[ is ]

auspicious.
(

34

This

universe

nature of Atman, nor

nothing whatever

is ]

manifold

somehow owing

[ is ]

separate or

to

its

neither

own

owing
nature

to
]

the

even;

non-separate this the knowers

of reality know.
(

35 )

By

"Vedas,

seen this

is

attributes

[and

fear and anger, who

gone to the other shore of ] the
of Prapafica,
free from imagined

the sages void of attachment,

have completely mastered

[ lit.

cessation

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.
( 36

VO %*&

aroisqifoNi SfT

sit

5 mHLi

S^w^^s# ^

37

QF&d &r

5?q%: m^,

sfw:

swl&r

gqi^ifSrer:

^rfe

w:

Disassociated with praise,

^%

ftifa^R: ft:srew>FB

!%:*!%:

^sr:

II

II

vh ^%

3I

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.

Gau4apada~k2nk3

in the

THIRD CHAPTER
( 1 )

Brahman
[ is ]

Dharma
is

Jiva

unborn; therefore he

pitiable.

associated

regarded as having been

[

Dharma,

with devotion
]

born.

Jiva

is ]

arises

Priot to

traditionally

when

birth,

known

ali

as

grit

wRT^^T'?RnT^ tot *et^

^pwft 1%%^

*Fci?r:

*n*&

$Tf^! ^sfcnSfofarc&i^

3TT^ TOfcp%

?r

( 2

without
[

33ffaT

u 3

|fR#T

II

II

^ w*^ gs^n prffcftt

% TOWJ%, ct5^ #*T. ^ifsfa:

( SOTKItt )

it

I!

* IQ3F%

birth,

speak of the non-pitiableness [which is]

maintaining sameness throughout, so that anything
being born all around is not [ really ] born.

Atman

( 3 )

like the

Akasa

up indeed

rises

and in
This

origination

the form of

[ is ]

the

form of ]
by earthen

in [ the

Jivas [ individual souls ] like Ghatakasas [ spaces enclosed

jar etc.

I shall therefore

supposed as

jars ],

ii

aggregates [ bodies etc. ] like earthen

in [ the matter of ] birth [ or,

illustration

].

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

not

As when one Ghakaa

all [

Ghatakasas

is

connected with dust,

are associated

the individual souls with happiness etc.

with them

],

so

smoke
[

are ]

an%Riw

ifwi

^1

( v )

^cT; ass.

( 6 )

srmtre

mhsffig

name

fwtf;

i#*t

do

[ lit.

] differ, [

the Akasa; so the upshot in

As the Ghatakasa

*r:

m^mmm^

r^waffui: ( an?*n )

in the various cases

function and

( 7 )

sffts fifim

*RR*?i5RnTR*nft

%it
*&{%

*?ren$rainw:

*W afl^IW* TOWST: fwm^

apw:

<tot

gst

era

ft

?w

II

there and there

but

respect of
[is]

11

II

t,

there
]

is

no

indeed, foim,

splitting

up of

the individual souls.

no transformation or portion of

the

Akasa, similarly [is] the individual soul always no transformation or

portion of At man.

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 death and verily in birth, in going and coming as well,

in remaining in position, in

to the Akasa,

alt

bodies,

Atman

is ]

not

dissimilar

\\

ares:

trt^
iipiM

io

ft

*r

mw.

te& *m g^t
^r

ft

wmon.

la

respect of

their ]

#?n: %%*fa%

ft

The

ii )

shown up
(

12

Atman,

as

like

superiority

[ described as

13

as
)

difference,
is

],

].

that

which would enable

is

expounded in
is

clearly

shown up

Madhuvidya chapter

is,

in the various

Adhidaiva and Adhyatma

Akasa

like

every-

Akasa.

] is

in

or, in each of the

] pairs

shown up the Highest

in the earth

and in the belly itself.

That the identity of Jiva and Atman without
any
is praised and variety
[ or, multiplicity ] is censured that

indeed rational only thus

of Mayft

or equality

of them, the supreme Jiva

In the Madhu-jnana

the Brhadaranyakopanisad

Brahman,

11

by the Maya of Atman,

sheaths, essence etc. that are indeed

upanisad

&

snir^li

where, there does not exist any proper ground

us to prove that the samghatas are real ].
the Taittirlyaka

sqr^icrr:

All aggregates are set forth

dream.

f3N&,

*r

by assuming that Jiva

is

the creation

33fW

3FW:

s^ra

35q%:

stsrarcpi

?0

aFW:

q^

JTT^

sfaiawt:

^^ ^? ^^
J

$sTORpfcfiOT:

q^q* foptt; %: 3R^(

tfcfa: )

\\

^n^fap^w

srrcRfaf^f
(

aw*.

ll

\%

II

<j*fw

?H

II

atfwn:;

ftfasr:

3TR^^^TW:

?q^

r%*qli

What separateness of Jiva and Atman prior to creation,

( 14 )
has been declared, that [ is ] figurative, referring [ as it does ] to the
come;

state to
[

sense

( 15

to

regard

indeed does not

)

otherwise by

The
[

it

fit

creation

as

having

the nature of the

in.

which has been authoritatively mentioned

illustrations of ] earth, iron,

device for the grasping

primary

of the true position

sparks etc
]

that

[ is ]

no difference what-

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

soever

for

them, out of compassion

(

17

The

by the

sruti ].

dualists are firmly fixed in

their conclusions; they contradict

not conflict with them.

one another;

their
this

laying out of

Ajativada

does

^8

jfteqtafhraff^Kf

M g%? 3*fr

afta 'R^rrqf ft
<r?Tprc*rT 1ft
?

(
(

fcfonn.

aR*j:

3W?r

fore * ft$*Kr

alter

\%

5fi^

5T;

3fw: <^ft
IWJff

?Wci: f|

18

apw:

Non-duality

spoken of as

] this [

different ]
it

way of
(

*E$ITOS3

3^

3%^

II

?<UI

*nw far, arw

arrn(qil3)

3Rra^

?taf

^ *?l^

3flfH |^r%;

For them
[
].
both ways; therefore [ or, with
or,

modification

is

the
that

does not conflict.

This unborn

through Maya,

mortality

20

if

advaita ] indeed becomes modified [ or,

not otherwise under any circumstances. If
were to be modified in reality, the immortal would go the

( 19 )

indeed

advaita

\c

indeed the highest reality; duality

[ is ]

in

fo&

3ffcT JJc&tf

*lfsfr:

outcome

its

dualists, exists ] duality

dvaita

*t

ft

q^i^:, ttf crt*: 3q>r;

ft

txra; eft atf

3*wt ftfW*
(

The

disputants

origination of the entity [which

dvaitins
is]

wish

to

verily unoriginated.

prove

How

the

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.

JI^K

<ft4

m ^^fT^% ta$:

3%^rerer

iT%i# ^

ftftw
(

RO

^ #ag#

3fw:

i%i%ct

^xr^TT%

^cfcf: ff aPSJRl:

erg^

aranronft

^r% f ct^

^H

^R

or*?:

ffet

WTO

SR^ftfit

g^

*t

%<rcg[

II

li

mm
3

RR

R\

*FW%

sift

*nw <5rr^%

srfsri

3Rl*RH: W. 3 SPWI 3pn 5TP&

II

ll

a^:

*WT;

3:

Rtf

11

11

errarWRU

5|firftwj%

arq^ra^

=sr

^H
m\k^%,
II

II

mm

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

being created, whether from the

[ 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

'

He

through Maya
(

the Sruti text

Indra by means of
being unborn

'

No

is

from the
from the
various ways

multiple here,

Maya powers

'

as well,

however born

in

'

[
[

'

25 ) and from the denial of origination [ in the Isavasyopais barred out.

By [ the Sruti ] c Who possibly

nisad ], origination
(
is

nu

would produce

barred out.
4

this [

Atman

] ?

'

the cause

of origination ]

sterfTOT^ IpTW siot%

^ frf^,

13^

amrerafcr

R%

II

II

era sraKRt

*rai ft

hfptt *r? 333% q

a^Rft 3TTC%
Rva

apro:

^sj

JTPFir

^s^pft 3 g%r *m*n

(

3T^q:

ff

Sfffi cf^I

spq

*TcT:

3TR%

26

not

denies

'

*r*r

[ or, conceals ] all

Atman
27 ) The

Maya, but not

born

(
[

or

],

the unborn

Atman Jshines

ii

gsq^;

n r$ji

in reality.

For

whom

him

] in reality

is

assuredly

forth.

indeed reasonable

that

is,

in

[ that is,

indeed the [ already ] born is born

28 ) The birth of the non-existent
is

ctr^cl:;

r<s

?r <^r

w& wm to

birth of the existent is

woman

}|

viz. ' This one, he [ is ] not, [ is

]
by the reason of the incomprehensi-

the existent ] in reality, for

admit

11

^RV3

As the explanation

bility [ of
(

smip^mra

sr

*nfa srra%

w ^k mum w& wim to

<rn

II

ft goft,

*nW, WHS:

aRTcf:

g^ra:

through

whose opinion ] is
he would have to

through Maya

[ either ]

not reasonable;

not born either in reality or through

the

son of a barren

Maya

even.

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

srw^ ^

antf

SWfouft

sf^m

mv ^ to

( ;?;*: )

g^rw, *

*pt:

mm

ctwtct,

\\)

T <P

37<JJT?r

ap*ra: -

sr

*rew;

cttt

O areq:~ r si%fag; s^rpr

ft Iff

3 n

Iff

*f%W;

mm

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,

31 ) [ A.11 ] this duality whatsoever, comprising the movable

the immovable, [ is ] perceivable by the mind; when the mind

and

has indeed become non-mind, duality

is

assuredly not experienced.

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;

it [ is ]

without cognition in the absence

of the cognisable.
( 33 )

unborn

They

as [ being

the jfiana free from imagination [ and

not different from the knowable. Brahman [ is

assert
]

the knowable, unborn [ and ] eternal.

unborn by the unborn

Thus

] is

made known

the

H^^F Tftil raffed #RTt

JW. 3

r%T:; gWff apii

SfSS'Ttft:

(
[

and

34

9FTO: -

3T^; apws

mind

to

tf*m%:

q|

3fcft

3T^, 9|fa^,

aRSR!^,

9RW^,

from imagination, endowed with discernment

discerning person
the

a%gti *

I&

fl^;

But that procedure of the mind completely controlled

] free

ft

jr=^

deep sleep

1 in

known

has to be

[ is ]

Nigrhita mind, described above

(35)

In

[ it ] is

not

different,

[ or,

of the

the procedure

that

like

of

of the

].

deep sleep indeed,

completely controlled

Brahman void of

properly

not

it

laid

the

low.

mind
That

is

itself

laid

low;

[ is ]

the

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
is

in this

fear,

description of

Brahman

no

figurative

use in

any way

whatever.
( 37 )
statement in

That

is ]

words,

illumination once for

the intense concentration, gone beyond

risen
all,

above

unmoving

all
[

thought,

and

] free

all

completely calm '

from

fear.

<cfiq

cf^T arr?iraw

fw

mm.

R^

i?pu

ararfa garaf

^wn srafas^wn snf^r ^

O apw: 155 S^itSt

*FW

QTCf^cT:
38

that

39

is,

and

there does not

apprehension

time the jnana well

originated

set

in

],

itself

ii

^ff'^JTr 3<r: 3$sr:

exist

no

[ or,

remaining the same

[This

is] verily,

craft.

thought,

giving up
in the
[ lit.

there
either

Atman

],

[ is ]

no

At that

],

[ is ]

going to sameness

non].

the 'non-touch- Yoga' by name, difficult

to be realised by all [ ordinary

of

<>

fal*: *ftgj

Where

taking up

II

Yogins; the Yogins are indeed afraid

seeing fear in something free from fear.

it,

40

For

all

absence of

[ are ]

Yogins, depending upon the control of the mind,

41

As

of misery,

fear, destruction

ing and eternal peace

and complete awaken-

itself.

[ there

would be

of water at a time

the draining out

of

sea

the

by means of the point of

]
one drop [
of ] Kusa grass, so would be the control of the mind without

toiling.

by

[ a blade
all

out

m 3% % W ^T# 5PTOWT
5* ringer ^wfrnftn^

otto tefhrairaTH *
88

eFW

3&

mind

8H

42

By

<re

low

?r

sttctrH,

ii

f%r

g*r:

ii

sirar r%:e*r:

^,

] means, one should control [ the

and enjoyment and also quite at ease

the prescribed

] tossed about in desire

in the lying

gs

sh

II

I)

%%ff

r^j f^ift^^fqfepR^r:
fw:

S3

II

^i^

S%^,

r%^

II

flf^^ 3IRT ^ 5 IWfit

3R

ttt

II

[ state ]

as desire, so the lying

equally undesirable and harmful

low

both states are

].

Having continually

anu ) remembered all [ to be

]
mind from ] desires and enjoyments; having continually remembered all [ to be ] unborn, one
(

43

misery, one should turn back

the

assuredly does not see the born for the matter of that

44 )
lying low [
(

One

should fully awaken the mind

state ],

should pacify

it ]

again

tu

).

when

when

should know [ it ] particularly [ to be ] with passion,

not shake [ it ] up [ when ] attained to equilibrium.

in

the

tossed about;

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

srspfrfo t*fcr

irarfirfrr

r%tr

sr

m^,

3*:

eft ffHj%

sp^sr

=3f

si

h tf

11

^ H?^ ^

11

!%% c

cfST

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

creature
( 48 )
exists [ or, takes place ].

ing whatever

is

whatever is born; no origination of it

This [ is ] that highest truth where noth-

born.

Here ends the Third Chapter in the GaudapSda-kSrikS.

FOURTH CHAPTER
( 1 )

like the

sky

the entities

[
[

salute that best of the

and

bipeds,

who by

jfiana

almost

not different from the knowable, fully realised

or, jivas, individual souls ]

comparable to the sky.

^FT ^T^FS^T
^

3fq>

ffti:

8R*r.

anjas?

^1%^

( *rrfcr^

%^ft

^Tf^TJ

^gr%

T^rt

),

ssr fcnrsrrft

bow down

beings, beneficial,
(

Some

No

^mfcr I

him

<^ ^

n a n

II

II

called,

disputants indeed

fancy the origination of the

existent; other intelligent [ disputants

], of the

they are seen

srti^ ^ftr,

fa^:

Wto

by whom ] was preached the

which is for ] the pleasure of
without any dispute and unopposed.
to

non-touch- Yoga verily so

all

ft

^ wt^t: ft ^w

f^rat * %: sT&r%T<?

( 2 )

%f%^r

non-existent;

thus

disputing with one another.

existent whatever

is

assuredly not originated; those dualists

originated;
[

disputants

non-existent
]

is

indeed disput-

ing thus proclaim non-origination.

( 5 )

we

We

endorse the non-origination

dispute not with them.

dispute.

Know

how

proclaimed by them;

the ajativada

is ]

free

from

JTWPU

^3$

3RfcT: If 3ffcr: vr:,

3p*q:

( V3 )

g:

) 3Fsr*r:

<

apw:

The

( 6 )

can an unborn
(

The immortal

7 )

*hp#;t

3ffcr:

affair

is ]

*[^qfcf

vh

^tf[

j}^ 3pjcT

ff

mtmi

to(?i

*sr*nfN& assrr srt^r

dvahins

which

and therefore

itffa f

*T

disputants

origination of the entity

Jf

swfa^

re?

inform <^r%

Jj?q

3F|cT

( **ri% ); 5T%%: 3{?qqrtTTf :

\\

wish

to

verily unoriginated.

cT*q

prove

q?

the

How indeed

immortal entity, pass on to mortality

does not become mortal,

nor likewise the

mortal immortal. There would not be under any circumstances, a

change otherwise of [ one's ] nature.
( 8 )

immortal in
immortal of

He

[ its ]

his

for

whom

own
that

is,

subject to artificial effort

],

is, in whose opinion ]

an entity
goes to mortality how will the

that

nature,

admitted by him

made
unmoving ]

artificially

remain changeless

or,

[ or,
?

That should be well known as nature whieh [ is ] fully

and not made [ artificially ], [and] which
does not abandon [ its ] own nature.
(

established, natural, inborn

3rc!TOft#KT $f
:

wiK raFcn

&

crfA wr

We wmm

^w%

STPRTC CTffi f*W fat*

sr^,

( ?rf$ ) cT

^rpwpn^l

srsrft srrcs

sRpfig; ft

to

W^^

epr^

tl

^t

otrtcto *n%r %

srrar^ stpptito

^*?tot m&ti

11

II

w gvU
i

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

death.

that ] the

how
[

be

[
]

can

cause is originated; [ if the cause is ] being originated,

modified
it be ] unborn and how again [ can ] that [ if ]

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
(

] from the
unchanging ?

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

prt^

sfr *&%<ff pre^r fag&rr

5r?

fiu:

crrr

awf ^*r

3wwft i%i^^ arg^r:

II

?MI

14 ) For whom [ that is, In whose opinion ] the effect

the producer [ or, beginning ] of the cause and the cause [ is
(

producer

[ or,

beginning

of the effect

described by them, the beginningless

how can be

[ is ]

] the

nonchalantly

cause as well as the

of the

effect ?

(15)
the producer

producer

whom

For
[ or,

[ or,

[ that is, is

beginning

beginning

the birth in the same

of the

manner

whose opinion

of the cause and

effect,

for

the

the effect

cause

[ is ]

[ is

the

them, there would be

as the birth of the father

from the son

In the [ case of ] origination of the cause and effect

admitted ], the order [ in which this takes place ] has got to be
( t6 )

[ if

searched after by you, in as

simultaneous origination
the absence

horns

of

of a bull

[
]

mutual

much

as ( yastn&t )

of cause and

connection,

effect ],

like

the

in
[

the

there
[ left

[ case

of

would be
and right

]
]

qft^t: uaifarfti qasfafes ip:

?< 11
9rc^ftri t*t ^riW^n
) FW: ifc "5313^: fefe", to* ^ ^1%(%:,
11

aft

^1

efajRT

^
(

||:

fl

fflTT%:

ft

3T*?q:

g&n

s*n

(\o

( 17 )

^%^^Tf^r:

3rgr%:

( itf )

effect

m 3^ W\^:;

fl^ snto f^%

Your cause being brought

how

li

g: sfalflRPi: SBFti:

would not be substantiated;

produce the

^ST?g: H^CT ST^fllfr ft W*

ft arranft igt

3FTC:

iWtaT

aRfaFP*, aw

3T5rn%: qRCrffciT

^TpT^TT
*

53^ #^51^

( CIS" )

11

f| *TCT

into being from

will

^o

11

WW--,

the

effect,

the unsubstantiated cause

effect ?

of the cause from the

from the cause, which one
whose substantiation [ is ] dependent

If [ there is ] the substantiation

and the substantiation of the

of the two

upon the other

is ]

produced

first,

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

blazoned forth by the wise.

That

'
illustration
called
seed and
[ well-known ]
indeed always in the category of ( sama ) 'to be
proven '. Surely no reason in the category of ' to be proven ' is
employed for the establishment of a thing to be proved.

sprout

20

[ is

srpwirrat

RR

g^

^H $ f lira?

3j^,

apw:

g^

i%f%g;

qr arft

^3

*srt: qi q^ci: *n arft

r%fH q* t

JOT gftft^PFW
^8

SfNra

apW

gqeswfc

posteriority [

origination.

absence of

How

is

sqSTRRl:

3j;q*tf

[ is ]

indeed can not

prior to an entity that

5*TCTCRri

knowledge about the

full

of cause and effect

be

priority

and

the full illuminator of

non-

comprehended the

non-existent or existent-nonexistent as well,

23

By

[ its ]

beginningless,
beginning, there is

own

is

nature the cause

and the

the

thing

being originated for the matter of that

Nothing whatever is originated either from

( 22 )
from something else also; nothing whatever, [ whether ]
(

arpra;

^RxRq^;

STfff:

q*?F3nferai n?n

=g

(21) The

srracT

effect

no cause indeed

too.
for

is

itself

or

existent,

originated.

not originated from

For which

there

is

no

it.

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

].

in the philosophy of others

[ is

indicated as

sr^T
*TO

&2?n%

);

ra:

^frfw
cr^q arftfiro

ftqro

iM&

( 25 )
[

<rt

Wf

S^T

cTcT:

*rfo<an%

si

or, has the state

is [
is

fancied

on seeing

of being
[ that

without a cause

that the cause has the state of being

[ that is,

the reality
(

26

on the strength of

the

The mind

does not

Ever in the three paths

does not contact the cause;

impression [ or, modification
(

28

ceivable

is

actual

is

with

on the

is,

but

on

fancied

state of things [ or,

contact the object,

And

non-existent, the object-appearance [

27

].

indeed not the object-appearance.

strength of the presentation of the above ] logical reasoning;

seeing

q^ri%

That the cognition

to some ] cause,

due

is,

II

awfare:

stf: ft 3P3JT:,

^Tfet **r

aw ^nft <rafo ^ % %
that

s^ ^

ft *rcraraf snsfiirrcraRri

Therefore,

not originated

the

and

similarly

because the object again

is ]

not different from

[ of time ], the

how would

there

be

mind
its

[ is ]

it.

for all time

causeless false

] ?

mind

[ either ]

tion, they verily perceive the foot [

is
;

not originated, the mind-per-

those

who

perceive

its

origina-

prints of birds ] in the sky

\o

eig- arar ( *r

29

gpsq:

epn^:

3ffer ); fieri: sssrr: sfct. (

In asmuch as the

Mv.

unoriginated

nated, therefore non-origination

ggpc^? antral

[ is ]

[ its ]

is

=T

arton

^r

%wfe,

sta:

said to be ]

nature.

origi-

There would

not be under any circumstances, a change otherwise of

one's

nature.

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

are noted as though real.

(32) Being possessed
entities [ in the

waking

[ their ]

of a

] [

though

purpose in

similar to illusions,

[ the

state ] is contradicted in the

they indeed are traditionally

on account of

things

known

as unreal

case of ]

the

dream; therefore

and nothing

having a beginning and an end.

else

(eva)

wi *rt 3<n ^sr sprcrraftac&n^

i#

tat: sn

3^

aRqr:

*r*tt

TO**nEpnn3*ft

&*f*t %|^r 3 jr^%

^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-

ing things within this enclosed region

On account of the non-fixation of time [ required ] for

( 34 )
the movement, the perception [ of things ] by [ actually ] going
[ there ] [ is ]

one is not
dream ].

unwarranted

in that region [

and further,

when

awakened every

travelled

over to in the

which he had

(35) Having conversed together with [his]

one [ when ] re-awakened does not attain [ to all
further whatever had been taken [by

one

in the

friends

that ]

etc.,
;

and

dream], one [when]

re-awakened does not perceive.

( 36 )

The body

in the

dream

[ is ]

to the perception of another [ body as

body, so

all

mind~perceivable

again unsubstantial

] distinct [

[ is ] unsubstantial.

from

it ]

owing
as

the

8p^:

SR
s

(
(

stffc ^rf^T BJtpSRRftf

era*?:

sjg^

3Rfi#j

II

crt:

?t erfier, ct^tt

$&;

II

aralta*

atgsR

( 37 )

Owing

to the apprehension [of objects in dream, being]

him
(

that in

38

*r srffcf,

the waking

state ] as [ its ] cause.

state ] as

[ that

all is laid

way

wr:

iTfDTig:

^^

waking
waking

for

srrcfoT^

arfer )
f

similar to
[

is,

arera;

state,

g^

dream

And owing

the cause, the waking state

the dreamer

is

to

[
is

$er:

fancied to have that

dream

fancied

having that
to

be real

] alone*

Owing to the production not

down as unoriginated. And there
)

being quite established,

is

no origination

in

any

of the non-existent from the existent.

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
( 39 )

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

#qrc^#RT

8^

fWreran stopc^fwf
gn
(

^*#*

*# f^^feT^^

spare:

<re*n%

^Wm^NRT3[^^l gsfN%
(

mi

88

fto~

II

^^

r^w^

r%9?graL

sruret

it

II

II

3*&,

3q**ra[ srerercrg; flwresft

ww*\\mm^^?% &&

state, one through misinterpretation

unthinkable [ objects ] as though real,
similarly in dream, one perceives through misinterpretation, objects
(

41

As

may come upon

there
(

in the
[ or,

waking

touch

itself.

42

By

the wise

[ lit.

the

awakened

has been preached

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

the doctrine of ] non-origination.

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

45

(I

icreqfc^5Eg*TOfoOTra

arw^wJwwwraiOTf to

I)

crrr

Origination-appearance, moving-appearance, and thing-

appearance exactly in the same

originated and

way

are nothing but

unmoving, unsubstantiality, calm

vijnana, un-

and

without

any dual.
(

46

traditionally

Thus is not
known as

reality ] thus alone

(

47 )

As,

originated the mind; thus

unoriginated;

do not

fall

etc.,

knowing

[ the

into error.

the shaking of the fire-brand

ance of straight, crooked

the entities

are

those fully

so the

[ is

with

vibration of vijnana

the appear[ is

with

the appearance of perception and perceiver.

(

[ is ]

48

As the

fire-brand not shaking, presenting

unoriginated, so [

appearance, unoriginated.

is ]

no appearance
no

the vijnana not shaking, presenting

^r^ff^rc

$2

spot:

*<Knft

rRt

erraren

^*M I ^fRRTT STATIST:

* %$[$*& ffa&Q* %R ft#3 %
wz&Ft %$ %
%I%

( *\\

49

do not

arise

spi^rgs:

sr,

afRpn

simrerr:

II

H*

3p*Rftgr:

II

*r,

When the fire-brand is verily

shaking up, the appearances

non-shaking up, [ the
not elsewhere other than there, nor do they enter

from anything

else

as a result of

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

].

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

*rW

saw*,

ajsranr: ^r

^ ^$mk%
(

( S3 )

substance

some

sqqsrci

II

\$m%at hh

*ifa

ii

li

31%

Substance
]

other

assuredly.

other

g^:

) (

may

be

mii ^
the

than substance

The

category

II

II

a category

?r

II

lW tpE?M 3R 3 sp?3& K5.

qi^ t^&sr: cfl^ %m:
) s^q:

fcgiissfat* s$oi (

m safari %T^

s\qsfe

cause
]

of

of

m&;

substance;

a category

and

other [ than

nature of a substance or the nature of

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.
[

Thus,

is

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.

3Tteq$wRwtf

9^

si

^Erf

ft

*n%R^,

spq

^ ^ ^^

3^>

S3#r

SH *TRT

^T

f^T^

'

NO

snft f^ft
(

<^

3FW

%o

#%$ rafls 3m*r n H^

W ^W^raC

sftar^

cT^T^T:

3jp: SfR%;

I^rw 3^ $ n
a^pr: *$*$ ^5
^5 flprarawmforr

TO vft
(

=r

*8%

(I

Everything is originated on account of empirical experi( 57 )

ence, therefore indeed [ what is so originated ] is not eternal [ or,

permanent

Everything characterised by the nature of existent

].

unoriginated, and therefore there

is

no

[ is ]

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

liable to annihilation;

so likewise, the scheme in respect of

entities.

60

The designation
when all entities

[ significant ]

[ lit* alphabet, letters ]

is

not spoken of there

of eternal
[ are ]

do not function

[ that

is,

and non-eternal is not

where words

unoriginated;
[

lit.

exist ], discrimination

cannot be said to have any scope

].

^?

) 3i?^i:

^8

61

3Fr:

?r i%^r

*nw

^STS^tTSW,

jqmre ^fcr,

cRi:

1^

ct^t

f^P%;

As in dream, the mind through maya moves, having

[ or, presenting

the waking

so in

and grahaka ],
[ grahya
having [ or,
moves,
maya
through
the mind

the appearance of the dual

state,

presenting ] the appearance of the dual.

(

62

In dream, the non-dual

mind

again has the appearance

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 ].

The creatures oviparous

born of perspiration, as
well which the dream-beholder moving about in dream, always
( 63 )

beholds, [ as being
(

64

they are

or

located verily in the ten quarters

[ all ]

capable

of being seen

only

by the

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.

it
it

<ra?

( ^vs )

8PPT:

w
(

3<s^T#t

snjrefW^

3ft ft

sffai spft

*$

sn^RRJ^, cT^

well which the waking one moving

beholds,

[ as

( 66 )

mind of
mind ]

the

is

being

they are

?rcfor

The creatures oviparous

65 )

ii

or

in

$$

11

fa?*, arffo ?

#g ^ ^

II

born of perspiration as

the waking state,

always

located verily in the ten quarters

[ all ]

waking one

capable of being beheld

they

do not

exist apart

so likewise, this capable of being seen only by

] the mind of the waking one.
They both [ are ] capable of being

only

from
it

by the

it

[the

the

mind]

fancied [ to be
(

67

other; then
( ucyate ).

thought

what

is

it

that

is

real ] ?

Both, void of characteristics,

perceived by

Nothing
are

is

each

the answer

perceived

by their

itself.

(6$)

As a dream-made

likewise, all these creatures are

creature

and

is

born and also

also are not.

dies,

so

g*n sfkr awt

(

*$

3**T arft

3FTC:

afar:

*^cT

qsil
sr

69

likewise, all

and

*r

sift

STFTcr

11

M^cf,

*C

S$ *?#g * *l#3 ^

3T&

l%ffet *fa;

As a maya-made creature

afft

born and

is

\3<>

II

also

II

&=&,

dies,

so

those creatures are and also are not.

( 70 ) As a creature created by supernatural power is born

also dies, so likewise, all those creatures are and also are not.
( 71 )

[ or, takes

whatever
(

ble

\9o ) apjq:

JIRHW: sfa:

**#<!

3*IT sffaT 3f*ft

(

# wtfai * w#gf

72

is
)

No
place

creature whatever

This

].

[ is ]

is

highest

it

exists

where nothing

truth

born.

This dual, associated with

and perceiver

is ]

without attachment.

[ or,

involving

the mind-vibration

unrelated to the object; therefore [it

born; no origination of

that

is ]

itself;

the

the percepti-

mind

glorified as eternal

[ is ]

and

epra:

vs^

) ajsspT;

53m 3^jaj ^

fo#;

( 73 )

What

^q<rafc*Tr

( 3?5r

but

it ]

exists

not in

What

apjsiftft^r:

gj ftftffa:

reality.

It

phenomenal experience accepted

[

3jf^cl

sr

^pfo

arot

<rc*n$r

erfer,

&

51

*r

on account of the imagined phenomenal experi-

is

not in

ence, that exists

l:

may

in

exist in accordance with the

other schools [ of philosophy ],

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

[is]

phenomenal experience
[ same ] is [ held to be
( 75 )

[Where]

is

[ in the other schools of

persistent adherence to the unoriginated, [or,

philosophy

there

is

persistent

adherence

to the non-existent; ] there the dual exists not; having just understood

the absence of the

[ for being

born

dual,

he

is

not born, being without a cause

].

When

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

sr^^r

5etI^

strict

( \9V9 ) 3f^3t:

erftftgw j^srcq

sftcTSlf*"

3ir affiR^ 3HTC

f%w

cot

ft

qT5^r: stott
ci^

j$

qcT:

arcicisq

srarcr (

farr^q

gfor

fa^

f%gfq4

qi srgeqRr:

q^ ar^

prat raw:, a^

gqr,

ft

f^n%:

*n**rc.

3f3r^ ara?*^

II

Co

II

In asmuch as that [ mind is ] verily the mind-percepti( 77 )

what non-origination, of the mind free from causal relation [or

for the matter of that

it is

gr

fr^WW ^

ble,

( era:
)

f^TCTun^r f^sr
fcPK S ft p[Rf
w. ft

\svs n

II

the
(

78

],

of everything unoriginated as well,

there

is,

same, free from the dual.

)

Having

thus ] understood the true causelessness, not

finding out [another] separate cause, one secures the state [which

is]

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

and not

Then

active,

the state of

[ is ]

verily

him, or the mind ] turned away

That [ is ] indeed the

unmoving.

province ( vifsyah ) oi the Enlightened.

from the dual.

free

It [ is ]

same, unoriginated,

^?r%^# sum *rera *m\

^ flltoa:

ft srf: *iOTn*ET:

prendre faw 5:^

wr $^r ^
(

c\

apw:

T%1r*Rr

^
^q

spfcr

?m

<%

s^t

wrrest
^nr

^fer

81

Unoriginated,

once for
(

82

all

free

blazes forth

owing

By

to

[ its ]

itself.

II

<J3

II

11

<:

li

of

is

always uncovered with difficulty.

[ or,

Is, is not, is [ and ]

( 83 )
the untrained one ( balisa ) does

him

as ]

from both.
84 ) These

fundamental nature.

the apprehension

continuously covered over

and

wti^ i%q

from sleep, free from dream, it

This entity indeed is illuminated

is

[ notions of

II

^torei ^re atiferf tort:

wrrcri^ist *re ss: sr stfe^

[ the highest

<s^

II

3{er

^#w*iT%Tinft^r sniw

mwfc

some

concealed

is

not,

is

object
]

that

not

is

or

other again,

Lord

easily [and]

not thus

again

encompass

the Bhagavat ] with

moving, steady, both

moving and steady

free
(

are

the ] four points [ alternative theories

],

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

s&m\

sreq:

<:h

SA

) 8Fspr:

wrf

<*;

sr^g r?<wt

gt:

^r r %4 R14 ^

afoaf

flrnqf r%rq;

f| JTT^cT: ?w:,

^ i^ ^rT%w*#

sraiH&rct

srcrosnfciwii*?^

ll

sn#-

<s H

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

the

This discipline of the Brahmarias indeed

natural

calm and control

Knowing

owing

to the

is

nature

spoken of
[ itself ]

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,

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

Iwpt fi$TT$<Rpnri%i ^r:

t%t% * fc flfRT^

*>?) 3T^q:-~

*rtc i%erc

ft

iftm

jt

3<?f

su^

89

gradually

accord, accrues here

on

fa%

or, in

ii

II

^Hl

arrange tff^r 3^1^:

w*ft:

|qr:,

Knowledge and the three-fold

known

ffcrc

T^ ^Wra SJTfo: #rsj<RFT

being

II

order

],

sjS?qRf

objects

II

II

of knowledge

omniscience, of

its

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
be particularly known,
place

all

sides to

perception

is

traditionally

known

[ to take

].

91

like the sky.

where

All entities

should be

known

as naturally

In their case, no multiplicity indeed

beginningless

of any kind any-

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.
(

%^T^f5TT:
(

^8

3FTO

it

[%

ft

gctf

iff
(

ffSTI RT:, fai:

* ^cr

93

cfa srpi

Ifdt

=r

fFTCS'T

iraa^

hm

<re

II

^8

II

II

^fifr;

^h

<%$

11

ii

fe^

II

All entities indeed [ are

calm from the very beginning,

by nature itself, [ always

[ in nirvana ]

same and non-different.

fN<at 3

fqair: ^jar:

^^

* 3RI

unoriginated, quite happy

the

TOT*

H sf% qsrfRrc<rc #tt * tot

SRTt

icf:

II

WWT^TRFn^ OTK

g?Rl^: Sj^fon:, awra^%

^q t%t^ M

3R

SRTJ SPTlfTO

The

highest

is ]

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 ].

On

the other hand ( tu ) whosoever those would be

( 95 )
unoriginated sameness, they [ are ] indeed those of
the
well set up in

high knowledge in the world.

( ca ) does not delve into it.

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

attachment.

The

warn ^t

sr<t
sre

smfor

%m m& *$% atfto

ft

w*<rar

sfto:

f^ra^r^firi

ih %^ i^t

cttfcr:

l^k^mNI^

|S*q fpf

AFT

infarct
ft snfc

T%R^

<vm

II

^
5RT^,

st

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

being without attachment;

slipping
(

away of the

98

veil [

All entities

much more

therefore

covering the Highest

are ] those

who

there

is

no

].

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,

we

salute [

it

] to the best of

without multiplicity,

our power.

Here ends the Fourth Chapter

in the G-au4apa*da-k3rika\

NOTES
The

first

Prakarana

contains

twenty-nine Karikas or verses.

Verses 1-9, 10-18, 19-23, and 24-29

Mandukyopanisad

with

the

are

usually

inserted

3^3* sgr^T

expression

the

in

after

srsrf^fr

paragraphs 1-6, 7, 8-10, and 11 respectively and the whole is taken

text of the Mandukyopanisad by Kuranarayana of the

to be the

Ram&nuja school and Madhva. Colophons

Prakarana variously

first

m^Tfamq

srHTOsr^w,

as

name

in manuscripts

Introduction for a detailed consideration of

all

etc.

these topics

the

see

).

Gaudapada has ob/iously planned his first Prakarana on the

basis of the Mandukyopanisad. He only refers to such points therein
as

own

are pertinent to his

thesis,

the Mandukya, and introduces

from the

ignores several details given in

some new matter

make

to

his position

29 ) in the Prakarana that

Gaudapada intends to advocate the Upasana of Omkara which he

clear.

It is clear

identifies with the

( 1

The

last

verse

Turya or the Highest.

fkig

All-pervading

three forms corresponding to

the

here described as assuming

is

three

states

snara;

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

^cr$r

changed t^ra* into

nr5

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
I.2.24

is

taken to

honnxi

mm

Yaska derives as under: sgT*?: $w?f^f5r*T$rarr?r

f*re

Notes on Gautlap&da-R&rite

58
In the dream
is

the fag

state,

He

the sense-organs.

ehw

Sankara

without the intervention of

because he perceives everything

light,

is 3T?cr:siqr,

then within the body

TOcftfcT

called fersr, because the perception

is

own

there due to the soul's

ff^^T^qrr^rT^^^T^^rr^T^iFTrecrT

itself (

In the state of deep sleep, the soul

ssw

of the Mandukya; srtrratR

narayana

is sresr^r (

same

He

called

is

Wffa5q*3n$4 OTiW^rT^p^w^fit snsp

sr?ftw?ir*WCTvrTTO ^<ricrft m%* Sankara ). Kuranarayana
else

one not throwing

'

srr^ra^

e*ra:

^ar*

).

light

on

^fffticqsr:

Mantras, and so brings in

Brahman

The

body

is

location of the

perception,

the fir**

fI

is

to*

means the

This

is

few and

the

rf

as jr-t^St
Karikas as
!

in

srr^r

the

most important organ of

( cf.

^r^fe^^m?^ ^jg:

refers

here

the

to

Brhadaranyakopanisad

II. 1.

p?r,

17

).

name as ?* and $rsr apparently

man in the eye of the person sitting

of a

reflection

opposite to him.

srgsw

regards the

fsrssr,

Sankara

).

its* %\&w$%{?%%TBut that passage mentions the

5?r

'

to account for the ^R^trr

located there

Tarkabhasa

is

He

three

given here. As the eye

^sorarersrsfff

things

explained by Kuranarayana

is

$m m%$qmimqw%<%
( 2 )

or ^rrsr

nix

wrar

explains

as

srr?r,

knowing everything, being consciousness

capable of

is

and nothing

arr^r

sr^nnR

f t% firTTO^Rrmt iSfcr- Kurabecause there being no object of knowledge, the soul is

),

because he

as the

^raragrrc'

massed consciousness or purely self-conscious.

just

surely not

meant here. Other Upanisadic

passages referring to the Purusa in the eye, likewise are irrelevant here.

Gaudapada

is

only interested in giving a local habitation to each of

the three, feaq- etc.

active in
is

dream.

so often

ms^TE

The fera

srr?r

referred

to

in

mm vm& ?rar t^sr

\

resides in the

resides in the

the

sTcfr

p^Wtst

mind which alone is

which

or the

Upanisads.

^m^r

Sankara

TR^cRfj Irsr^rtSnr

remarks

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-

should be regarded as one,

described as different,

when they

are deliberately

Chapter 1

As

( 3 )

a corollary to

what

the objects of enjoyment for

respectively, gross,

subtle

stated

is

the

59

three

in

and str??.

Kauka,

second

the

and

asnj,

{%*%,

In the ^jr state,

are

srr^r

the *u*r

is

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

srferarfr,

there

^^mrsr; :^

is

fk^,

able to enjoy

*T3ft*

^^,

of three kinds.

remarks

caused by the contact with

Is

^bwj&ht iftnr
and err^r being absent

cf. q- f|

.^rw

and

q*

ft

the

%%f$,

srr~r

B. G.

II.

enjoys

srrff

and

r%<?ar

22

only

are satisfied with their

f^w-Vcxm^

3*re ? ? mw^fr

few

:^rpfrrer

lot

or

being

in

srref^rS and 3TH?^ respectively, and so <jrlr

Kuranarayana reads nrsrffisr ( for ftsnsrrr

fesrrcsr resrRfsr

srrcr*r

both

is

also

and

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

necessary for his

Gaudapada ignores them, because they are unmain put pose which is ultimately to establish the

R ea ^

the following from the Bhasya by Sankata for the

for sr^.

srsmlfenc.

terms

s^taf^rfag^r asrr tottipt*w ?r^r 5

^hit
stop s^t^rW mit *rf 5JF
^f^p^*ap$<T
itV
anc*

Wr?w

Kuranarayana gives the following

fantastic explanation,

*rr

tprenawir

^fecte

?zmm

*rcr:

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

the one

Atman and hence he

is

not contaminated in any

the empirical experience, if 3"tffw ifrswftq^a^TOW

* fawn *tfrm ^Mtero

I

tftsFffStewnr^

wwm
says, araror&5 ffTTcqr^rsrfcarr mw $m

sHH*

srr

*r

WW

The same
Gita V. 7,

webs f

icT

**fe*& ?*^r

idea

is

crga;

*fr

*% sftessr

m^-

*r

^w^t

sra$
Kuranarayana

fitar: ^r ?ta

( Safikara );

^famr-

*&***

^%m?*r^?n?m i^T* * t^tara

i%H <mt%3; f i%^Tafn^wr%

contained in

^r t%t%^ sRhftfa ittr

* ftr^ * * n^r

w**^

% *rer

way by

II

ibid

V. 8*10.

Notes on Gaudapdda-KfiriM

6d

is

impossible,

There

stt^.

when we remember
no doubt

is

Gaudapada's opponents.

6-9

them

All of

of sages \

Gaudapada holds the

that

verses

that

mean

Prof. Vidhusekhara takes ^af to

take

axiomatic truth

as

it

srennr-

views of

the

describe

This

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
(

that

appear to us to be of the nature of fq^TRpir

own words.

pada's

^rata* *

ftra&

t%t%^t

*re

scrrrfrnr 5Etw

is

srra^r

quote Gau4a-

to

srr^:,

own view

Gau4apada's

3rf3rnTar

48

III.

sffa:

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

on which they base

that

existent,

is

on

structure based

As we

it

The

[ 1 ]

VW-

swrfcr

dead

putting

with

BrahmasQtra

5^T
self.

theory
is

is

I, 1.

stromas

that of

of

So

life.

Passages like

wg srrur

vm ^ srarwH-d^mU^

28, shows

theory

The s^^rf^cs

that

srior

of

upon

is

be regarded as
q;sr

sr^rr?^ $rft*

Saftkara in his Bhasya

means Brahman

passages like

^k

srnsr

(Kausitaki Upanisad)

as

on

).

God and

believe in a personal

take their stand

view

thing without

can

sn<*T

3Tr

as creating sffcrs as different bits of %ffrsr,

They

3?^rrfcr5rr^".

theories

their

also the popular view.

*nnr, it is full

*r q;<r

nine different

are

the super-

that

the onslaught of

by Gau4apada.

be cited in support of this

viz.

down under

topples

into objects.

life

TftOTtaw*RT>

may

first

This

The very foundation

there must be a srw for all

views.

no wonder therefore

interpret Karikas 6-9, there

creation referred to

is

their theories,

shaky

is

own

describe

portions of him-

g^?

x$k%

srarr

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

sffas can be said

for themselves.

The
to

s^<*

is

a store-house of #arar,

have taken the necessary portion

Vidhukkhara thinks

that the %afsjj; refers to the

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

mwrft^r
to

sraraiet

He

spfa?g^?snff?rr gCTrorr sng^cWRr

gsr:

thus takes both qror

and

5^

to refer

5ft.

mwiT^s,

apparently taking their stand upon

( 7 )
C 3 ] The
the fspgjHS of the Lord described in the Gita and Puranas, explain the

expansion or manifestation

process of creation, by attributing the

of the universe to the supernatural power of the Lord which makes

him

perceivable

created

the

in

absorbed in reasoning out how

^r%r%5rr^s take

it

objects.

the

*js%r%?cra One

for granted that there is a

gi%

their

how it came to be there. The qrftorm^n^s

may also come under this category.

only about
others )
[

The ^nrrqrcTJ^s

who deny

Buddhists

undoubtedly

are

the existence of

srTiiner.

is

The

worry

is

mm$ and
Mahayana

the

They

^ffn%^

who

proceeded.

creation

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

in

Brahmasutra

2. 29,

( II.

^gwifssr

?r

Prof. Vidhusekhara strangely

refutes their view.

'

mind here

his

HWlW

to

SWrfir

passages from the Lankavatarasutra, like susrr^sfrgii

^*zfefkfa*im

ts^^flrast;

OTmwWWf W^r

..-

^%l

MM

^STR^fTOTTtW

5TfT

% &$?

^s^jrcmrw wr m^g^n:

^* W where mm and

*s?5r

hm<^ii

are used together

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
in

real

enough.

(8)

[ 5 ]

personal creator
to

create,

but

$wm

Kuranarayaija remarks, $r%f%nrer

TOTST^ap;

who
is

^ ey

^lieve in a

real creation

does not stand in need of any

able

*roragrr-

by a

grqrr^ffisn^trr etc*

to bring about creation merely

by

his will*

62

Notes on Gaudap&da'-Rtirikft

This view

wf

srf

Upanisadic passages like *u$csrwff

this as the opinion of the

referred to in the

is

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

have been misled by the

expression

which does not

fsrfaffercTP

the Siddhanta view.

necessarily refer to

unnatural to expect

It is

the Siddhanta view to be sandwiched between the

narayana sees the above

enough,

by

penser.

remarking

^rar%iwr:

qnOTF^s advocate
The s^rrpqrcrmfcPT^

sfe^nr fcTTH

mm: 3ct sf?r

but

difficulty,

ra^firac

Time

w$

to

I.i ).

Kura-

meet

lamely

STOgrorfcaa;

...

that <ei^ or
refers

HrTf^s.

to

tries

sgssrrfWfr-

the

is

it,

great

Ararat

( stst-

dis-

ftrcrfilr-

Atharvaveda and the Maha-

bharata also refer to these philosophers.

It is

wrong

to

call

them

astronomers.

Those who believe

( 9 )

in

by a personal

creation

real

creator, differ as to the cause or purpose of the creation all the same.
[

roram%3S say that the creation

ment by

the afar ( c f-

*f**
T%R^HH ST$ftp

STOTffTR STOTPT

is

II

fw&r *&??r
^IWETCW, 59 ).

gftewftRS say that the creation

intended for the enjoy-

sp?rftranr

is

*rar

just

sj?sng;

for the

ssw

sport

of

the Lord.
C 9 ]

^TOTWifiras argue that

possibly have
cfosr ( cf.

any

Lord being srrosrw cannot

which is just his

^rq^jr ctfsn&gw*, Brahmasutra

explanation

is,

therefore, that

Ktiranarayaria thinks
gfar:

the

desire or purpose in creation

^rfjM ^r*

^r^r

it is

ww:

the

The proper
33 ).
of the Lord to create.
the %^[T?rT view ( wraw?
II. x,

*sr*rr*

etc. is

tfhriSi3*hr sftgroftrw wsnfirflrw:

*

awfc

$*&* mnfrwfafo

^%m

^n and

Htww^Rftrfir im\ ) He seems also to combine

into one snftsre.
Sankara says $mw aftenSfafit *w$t

%&

mm

vm$t

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

Chapter I

6$

Having mentioned the various theories about creation,

( 10 )
Gaudapada now says that there is only non-duality, the Turya
(

'

the fourth

apart from Visva, Taijasa

',

capable of ending

misery,

all

m^:

creation does not therefore arise,

H%wtf f^i%

narayana says,

would mean

that the

g$

and Prajna

and

eternal

^ncnrficrar It 1?:

The

is

real,

question

goes with ^tpt:

the negation of

is

) that

The

fk*$.

of

Kura-

reading fts%:

misery.

all

^f%

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
*

still

in the clutches of srrasrr^RST and arfsrre

hand

sfra

is

pure consciousness and

mw& ftfirera;

cT?3>rcmTlt

12

m^sp

* (Mk^kik^H}
hand is
no 5a exists,

as there

q%fir srir?TO?r

(15)

rjT^refsr in
(

14

and

state-,

%&.

*$t%

...

).

the ~n?r of the qr^f takes the form of

no f^q-

is

ail

^^R^r^w^iTrfTr?[^{^|;^i'5w?^

Kuranarayana

to be cognised, gfpr

is

the explanation of

remarks s^crr ^rawrjpfc ^jm^W:

( ^1 ^T*?affr% Kuranarayana ).

Both

poles asunder,

only vanish

^ ag; ^^

^ri

who

irom

free

on the other

on the other

and consciousness, hence ^shr^ though there too

all light

jrftro; )

Sankara)

In the gjfo

to Sankara

^Ror^i^:

light,

the gq*

^*Sgf*TT*ro3*V

gq- do not cognise %$, but they are as

remains wedded to the iggsrra re n which can
1

when the highest

Kanka 1 5 below.

ff$T

according

and

sri^r

srf^r still

fyy% and

^ra?

asrtf"

truth

is

ftsr is explained as

realised,

encumbered with ^g* (sT^^mr

with ironriNTO only, there
g is completely unencumbered,

are always

( awrsrfOTta:

sn*r

being no 3i?*rm3"3r in 551%.

there being neither sre^urftrr nor awsicrsfhr.

srresrFrgsrr is

explained

by Sankara as ^^T^cT^srsrersr fk&rt, by Kuranarayana as 7%fr*raK

f^T^fl^f^nnra^HT*

It

will

be seen that

B^

and srr^r. srisra;

Gaudapada regards mvRt and *gsr

three, m*$,

practical purposes, as
srora;

and ^$r

is

is

states are

made
fifcr^r*

fa%x

is

common

to all the

not specifically mentioned, for

states

clear in the

to

be identical for

second Prakararia.

all

Both

Notes on Gaudapada-KAriha

64

( 15 )

person in dream

Hence

things as they are not.

S3ST ( as well as susrcf
is

firwfar

in snag; state, as well )

and

**

sees

sine qua non of

knows nothing, here the

3PF?ra!5r3tn is the

in sleep a person

Whe

3?3rr?re<T.

awgn*

and

arwronrsoi

one

vanish,

secures the ^rw of g# and becomes g$.

(16)

spTi^RWirr

taken by Kuranarayana with

is

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 ).

This Karika

cix^rsrr^^^.

bhasya

II. 1. 9.

17

An

objection

in the last Karika.

which we

all

quoted by Sankara in Brahmasutra-

is

with the remark wrararsr tRr^9rT^RW^^waRT?*RT-

is

If 3*t?r

experience

raised to the
is

realised,

The answer

statement

st|<y

srerar

is

wm

just

is

mtrmrsr,

The

mere illusion which disappears immediately stI^ist is secured.

question raised by the opponent could be taken seriously if
were
s*|cr

even in that case

real

but

we would have been

means

to get rid of

just illusion*

did exist,

srqr=$

both
not

stIth

and

would have

srqsg

go in the

to

required to search for

But the problem does not

it.

cT^r

what happens to the ip^r

some

srq^f

effective

arise, as

sn^f

we might take &%$ as the subject of fog&r

then ^er would have to retire from the field,
Or,

snrer

arise, as sjtpr is

is

if

for

But the question does

could not stay together.

the only reality and |pr

of

face

is

but

like

frnnsttsr

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

would

as

opposed to

If

m?3

fsrfaeraa

is real, it

continue

definitely

is

to

exist

would turn away

'

could not cease to exist on

thing cannot ever change

its

( ftsnTft

the

in

feast sraa

next

Karika

any account.

).

For a

nature.

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

narayaiia reads

who
*j

cannot grasp the ^|er

fSra&r ( for rafesraa

^tffaTS^snssnsr fasSmfir
would be as follows

idea

5
:

fesaasr

If the

),

all

at

once.

and explains

With the reading

sr^ were

Kura-

OT^r-

it

as

*r

ftra&r, the

to exist in reality,

it

Chapter I

would never
is

disappear, for a thing can never change

stated in III. 21 below. But

disappear
is

%&&\

for a

3-<T\snf?f

etc.

srrfr

84. 27 )

and in

with

the

III.

how

nature

its

surely

<i%<?3,

3^. The

supply

^rrar,

III

Verses 19-23 describe

19 )

equated

merely

if srqr^t is

unreal,

is

found in Yogavasistha

OrspNer:

65

second line

fesnf% SUTfsSEP
84. 25, as

w%9a?<T-

^f^JterapT

the three

srrsfr

are to be

states

Matras of Gmkara, and the

three

as

must

it

to the

g*r

Matra-less.
3*1*3;

?n3*

be

can

of the states,

first

% s and ^

has three portions,

or the

3* is

said to be

the

say f%*3" has the nature of

speech,

3T^3r*gtfiFFsr

is like 3T,

the

for purposes of ^qrsRT

( that

when

is,

strfsC.

of the Matras

first

resides in the

r%*3"

so

when we want

resulting in

>

or

^<rar )

the being at the head of the series'

'

to

This would be the fof ^far figure of

3* (

STOrefts^T^:

BT^rrww is

the totality of these portions

the

and the

the idea of ^rsp

like,
is

fk^

is

ft*g-

when

with

3*

ht^ttow

is

to be identified

involved, where the

more intimately connected than in 3"<rm ), the common ground is

i%*g- pervades the whole outside crea3*rfsr ( pervading nature ),
tion

is

also all-pervading, as g^nTornFr^TTr^R ( Gita X. 32 )

This kind of identification
rlnjfrT of the Lord.

is

srerc

shows

to be the

3T

frequently

q^?3fanj*T

is

met with

more

20

exalted than

because

it

follows

might take
follows

n l ^ e second

ftrgr,
sr

srwsr

of this

<*r&

w% sim**

state )

is

like 3,

being more subtle, and

like a

Sankara

because

^ has

ftsrB"

is

greater &?,$,

king coming after the servant

Or,

we

coming after \ gr follows 3T, a^r^r

dependent upon the sfr^ state ). ^s^r can

mean

sv^*? to

R5^

^mRnV

The

literature.

),

?m*T

? % snrW

smftfer

on Mandukya 9

Brahmana

in

just

'

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 ^
(

'

spert

is

&&mn

s I ^sraftrcr

fcsra^refc ^Tf q^rrcTTH^^r

on Matujukya 10
(

the

21 )

last,

and

srqr

is

ft^rrwm'S dkafar?*?*

wfk swarfe^ $%
1

*rera

tfwngvw
i

Sankara

).

like n,

because sny acts as a limit

also acts as a limit, being the

last

wm^

syllable

),

being

of afof.

Notes on

66

can be identified with

srr^r

in the

and

55 ftr

state,

after

being uttered.

f^r^rfr

ftfcOT

^cfr?TO:

st

tot*

g??

23

Sankara

*rmrrac> the

fw

his goal viz.

that of

Sri?" (

the doctrine,

*r

secure

his
Ihrtf

inferior

to

He

goal.

an d
the

c^rcwrr

of^this

the

each of the

But the wor-

3 ).

anywhere

has not to go

only the

secures

with s^T? ) tsrsr

in accordance with

srr^r,

The

himself as Brahman.

realises

secures

srtfT

ff f^nrsrer sntrc

).

Gita XVII.

shipper of Matraless portion of 3?r^i^

T%*3r 5

( as identified

k^t )
*T

qsr

srr?r

).

Sankara

with

as identified

m i*m^

1 1

merge into

like =ra?s in the *<?rte

The

).

Isrg*

common ground between

that of ^3T^r

and

of fe*<r ( as identified with srasnr )

The sqOT$

fr*cr

s merge into n
m^rmWrH" m*er

three pairs, nsrift: -sTgrfes: (

(

because

Mandukya

Sankara on

22

and

Gaudapada-Kanid

to

grqr^rcE

of

lower cr-^ and as such

is

sTr^s of the arm^. But Karika 22 calls him a

Karika 29, one who knows the 3fi|FiT as arom etc.

Wfrgm, while in
is called only a gr%.

This

Karika 22 appears to be a

strange.

is

suspicious one.

24

as

sfijjfr*

w^jk a s si*rre
known as

also

To know

( 25

There

smrti,

swsr or grtgHX

,a a

Iwet

and end with

^rmr:

aftgpre is

know

is

its

parts or Matras

no necessity of meditating

else.

is

^grat

from

praised ( srqpft f r% ) or uttered

to begin

One who know s

the real Muni,

is

whole, one must

absolutely free

as

swrsr aspect.

srenmrsr, tasqftasn*: etc.

3Ti|frc as a

upon anything

its

stot^*.

equated with the strfrt^s.

nisads

and the sqro^ of

Karikas 24-29 glorify the 3"<n*Rr

a whole^ and especially

*m

sfj^.

fq??r?w^

which

fear,

first,

described in the

is

sr^cr

is

3^

which

lit.

Vedic passage

Upa-

is

is

expected

Read the following from Manu-

^ ^fr

srcwfi^fja

gwrra

rs

II

II.

74, 76, 78.

The Aitareyabrahmana

says flw$r%ffW*m?TT

Chapter I
mfcf

The

VV

11

There

the

is

which

grgr

sw

).

srrfTrr

immediately shown
as srer. tpfcRr

fiwrer*mTO<i:

WRTcT

*TR:

is

^s(

ranyaka IV,

27 )
Sankara
(

ftrsik
(

28

niad

Sctft

),

( II.

( Sarikara

29

3R

)
:

>

be that

3m
:

stor

is

II

to be

sjjrr * ^ra^fa
the original reading was stot^t T%

h R^ft ^1

cTS;

<rferiTRm>

On

thus

3rr?Rr,

hand,

other

the

equat-

=3*

in

5rr

*W

q?T*nr

sftesjh

*PW

^ROTSr:

Kuranarayana

rrtjr?wra

),

apparently refers to Brahman in Karika 26.

for
),

the

first

swaraw

swswtw

217

).

%\Hi[*b

W 5RRT f^
r^m

^fsr,

|*^: ^^cTRT

line,

^r 3r

also

ff^

SRfos:

gf|t$g?t
Ri%crat

Kathopa-

swfogfaw

^TtoHircrft^

).

lawtasm i There
wmfttf*

Sankara

Sastras carlnot be called gfts,

Of

no

Kuranarayana boldly explains 37^

.., and q*: as tmifRr
srcrr^Y sft

^-SF5W*TR?cT?

Gita XVIII. 61

XIII. 17

is

with

along

when

sr<JR as 3rq"T 5rT>

described as qR srif and q*:

Compare

).

There

was emended so

).

^w

for qv. ^r<r:

^r^R*arwr%5RW?rsrr3R?cros^rr^ This expression is found in Brhada-

l.

ftfihft

cr*mfrm?^if?s

11

srirRT.

it

5. 12. gfgjh

Kuranaiayana

sti

ing 5rR[ and snwj ^ the same time ?

Prasna V. 2, we read <ra| sk^tr <rt <srw

TcTfR^^fcf

rtw=

?$t

snrnnFg

rT?^r%

describing

is

litera-

Wl *TR
S^r*T 1* T%RT?tfr m\
lower Brahman associated with ^qrfas*

?V

as qr

Could

&

says,

generally spoken ot

^^T^WcnTr?m
fft: ... wfwft

later

i^ftafrstR *rm

reading which

srffRr

so that %xxm

<TC sr^r,

<tt

In

or q^: s^sp referred to in the Kathopanisad

g-gr-the

no point

is

also

^rar ^rsr

^rer: is the original

^JTS^WfTS^TPTfJ^'?:

JT^cT:

III.

srrsrorccR

vfe*$r>

XVII. 23-24

prefer

Brahmadeva, Vjsnu and

Trinity,

Vidhusekhara reads
qrc:

as to refer to
sTgr.

the

R^ff^ s^mg

Gita

3r^oTr%f^*: ^lfr

( 26 )
doubt that

wmwm msm

t%

said to refer to

is

Mahesa, ^^ifr
ttst:

wS

srofrahftrft

ture sfo*

6y

if

being only
).

3t|ar,

all

duality ceases*

People well-versed only in the

they do not

know

the

Omkara.

the older Upanisads, besides the Ma^dukya, Katha, Praiha*

Munckka,

Taittirlya,

$?ra$ava, describe

its

Chandogya

atid

Mauri

refer

to

Omkara

identification with Brahman, glorify the various


Notes on Gaudapdda-Kdrika

g
uses for

meditation

and

fruit

of

The following

gffwfrqrosrr.

extracts will be found interesting in this connection.

Kathopanisad

3frw?^l!l.2i5
trer^r^ ssr

tra w?rc <rc*

t?rr%w* 5t^t *n

qasrcwr
Prasnopanisad

tnWr

11

wsr5t?p

qffrsrr

srfar^rar

5TiT$r%

cr^E^ era:

hst^

11

1.

II

12.16

1.

12. 17

V. 2

h wwisftTOt^mm

%$m wnfl?w

11

fewm ^rirrvsrer^wmg ^v^^r^t^f^ ^

awg^swerfor^fer
Mundaka
srarar

w*ri*s

<s*<m ^-

II

<r*

V.5

V,6

%ra

it

V.7

^3:

srfr

gmm

srr

auwg5qfr

W^Sq ^tFOTT
:

^rfar% tfrmft *n*fec

^tm% mpr*

##t ^a:

!%5f ? ^^ryaJT3T*R*jamr?r

3T5TI=r%Fr

Taituriya

a^at

*!><*

II

II.2.4

^r^rtwm wffnr

**wm *#TOW*fiflt

11

srltftnfrfa

qrtsrfcr

1,8

srfrV

Chapter I

Chandogya

^rfk&TOWSstaswd^tmSr

m* ^

^r

*r

*r

sricrr

sfor-

ir?

sftffrft

st^to

1.

I.1.5.6

*r sr^i^r q; srors: *t

w&nir

3 ^rt *|TO*rofa wr*

sfm f??ror

err

sim^RT ssfro <pr

1.5.

wr^^noT ^t^?ct

^Smrn^sm^HW

q^r

4.

^s^Rsrftfcf

m^s^vq^facwpq ^rr-

I.1.1

1.8

1.

qt^^r^c^rmrasrfm^^^^jrf^

w? aarftrvr %qr
srsr

...

f^i sm sfrftwwTwgrfofa' ^^?q>facgrqr^q*rrcw""

7r%?lm%^r to*

ct$n*rr

^mvwmwoi

srsraict

^^%^\m^m^^ ^^sra

iftq- srtfr

smq

69

*rer srrf

^f a<mf

-grriS

II.

13.2

grsnsrerHrsn
rc:

$t^tt *reffa

^y^rsmrgprc

qfo^^

Wfit
H- x 33

w VI.2

Maitri

HTT^r sTfroiT

as^rfaasssrfcr:
faft ?%sfr srrer

*r

nS

am^sr-

wrfip

sqrocwwn %m\h%

*t

^ra

qr

9?^

^ftr?riJ?f

sfrcf

4hrrof&$*r

'flPsS

cr?*r?*f

rT^u

ir<*rmPT sq^rfr-

mt*%j

wris** sftfow

VL3

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-

trcf sroi^r

Bq-^TC

a?^"*

c^ ^mcqcr^rfm*r3r?*r

m w\wi\m\%w
srar srsr Ssfr

iter

fa^KTH

*ms&*r

TO11^?k

Notes on Gaudapada-Kdrikd

^0

??^

^m

3Tr

**i?T srsq-

sro

srrofrsfsp

%$

f r%

^TmcTO^^wr%

sra *n are* s*fo *m?r

q?ra

5gswr

mfc; $r^*r

*3?rf

11

...

sr^st

VI. 14

VI. 22

%wm *u^<t xkmfaz fern

*re<n iWrestr

ffcrit

tCuninarayana
is

Madhva

the object

ftras^taft

tries

his

same

of

thferti,

srorarw: vfar

that Hari

with his four

VI.25

show

to

described

line.

interpretations of tCuranarayana

^ ^Ufqr

ik^i iWri
^tstrt

best

of Upasana

also follows the

eyes of both

form

<tt

VI. 24

$mm*&

forms

3rr%r v^tfr^i inter! *r?*rem

VI. 5

^m for^for $rr ^ra^rafmsa;

tfrfots^BBEW w*pot &*$(

sramafar

^rfir?g%^cfr: s^gar arfirar

^r srgr

r^t^

^r$j^Tr

^T%sgr%?%

It is

and

in the

first

Prakarana.

unnecessary to take the

Madhva

seriously.

Gau4apadfyakarikas in the

first

In

the

Prakarapa

a part of the

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 ) ...

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

II

This Prakararia contains 38 Karikas and

presumably because the

rana

is

Gaudapada

^cr$q\

difference between the

the belief that there

m^$

and ^sr

is

first

usually called

|^w,

Karika in this Praka-

prove here that there

to

tries

is

no

and ^wstarr consists in

neither fo?hr nor s?qn%, neither srtgr nor

srrsrci;

is

word of the

first

states,

etc.
1

Things seen

dream are admitted

in a

to be false, because

they are seen within the body in a very limited space.

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.
chariots etc. seen in a

2 )

etc. are

The

objector might argue as follows

not within the body

the dreamer

may

The mountains

be actually travell-

ing to those regions, in which case the things seen in a dream

be regarded as real.

To

we answer

this

may

impossible for the

It is

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

time the dreamer awakes suddenly,

when awake,

but he does not find himself,

the

in

which

regions

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

following passage from the Brhadaranyaka shows

how

the objects in a dream are created by the soul out of the material of

they really do not

this all-containing world, but

stot: 3T3re

$r*nu:

?T

$srff

5P5TfW-

rT5T

*r

r% serf

SW^
(IV.

usually understood to mean,

11

$.

'

W&& *nr?c*TO

10).

The

Sankara

Gaudapada

<3W

is

But there

).

referring to here,

spffirttamf ^r%?

says

*re smfafcr

?W*m*l

SWftnft:

expression wnqrs^lH*

is

with the logical reasoning therefore

no gfer
passages from the Brhadaranyaka, which

fiRRT-

exist.

is

trasq- ?*tt

Sankara

as

such in the above

are undoubtedly

what

*w wwrftprft'nP"

but ^g?sffra

would simply

Notes on Gaudap&da-K&rihi

j2

to perceive things, not that they

srenr

9>n

*|rr

<r*

sort of reasoning

mg*ra smsrq

19,

i^r*

tt

Some

etc.

III.

dogmatically asserted in the above passage,

just

is

Their unreality or

unreal.

are

Nki

ffc^on?!;

' l

fop* *ra*&? a* ^r smfomfWr

w-

h^w

r^

^Nta*

...

ti

srfg^ft

^m?^r ^rsfr srnw^w:

**fr

?srr

|^T^rc5^!^ ^

?r

^itot^

^ cr?er5r5RT$*
wr#$TO*nra; srfirwifir

11

^ro

w%t%

crl

qr

found in Yogavasistha

to be

is

means

help of other

emphasise that the soul does not require the

^
^

11

RM

11

11

11

We

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

different

from the soul in

Hsr^fl? or *rc?r5 state or that

what one had seen

but srrJTKfft^ as in dream one sees just

*grsr

in the

^*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

3rrea[ state ( sror

gH

ffrf

IV. 3. 14

absence of

about the same soul persisting in the three states

Brhadaranyaka to meet

this

argument says in

futile.

is

The

IV. 3. 15-17, that the

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

following passages, that

*r

is

sr c^r wffcrossrr^ r<w ^ftest

sfoqfanwfir wrista"
IV. 3.14,

^r ?rr

sr

^r srr q*r

otrt ^wrsmthr IV.3.17, asror

) *rf

object ^

and

There

*rsra?*q-

qrrsr

is

are

%mn

s*

f^T?cT

f Rj

which

sn^
is

because

f^THmf^s rherefore
perception only the

argue that

3^3:^51%

g*

itffrat^rosrfec

sjfcjrqig

s^aHhr

stfei'ftTTO srfcritorr

^m *hmw

II

meaning

terms,

the

is IcTsst

objects
in

srrirat

objects cannot be perceived unless

within the body

g&sgtf^rfcr sH
IV. 3. 1 8.

synonymous

in hst,

<*r<r

wtr^rftot 5^? 5%

scrrwi^r-fr r&i

there, are seen within the body; there

the so-called

=cr

*msr f3n%?^?*Hrrrarc&T

5^T <rmi*TT^cTT^^IrT ^5TPcT

zht sto

q^t%irafr *w... sjfcifrm^r

*r- sot sr% IV.3.15,

refened to by Gaudapada:

thing

experienced
also, because

the perceiver's

becomes ffWrre^rer*r ( The

srrp^g does not exist all, because for
)

helps

).

So that what obtains in

Chapter II

?j

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

tfie

all

smnt state,

obtains in the

as well.

But

this

body of the dreamer. But this

Devadatta sitting in the open cannot

objects are enclosed within the

not a material difference.

is

^=rsr

surely be regarded as different

from Devadatta

in a closed

sitting

Prof. Vidhusekhara unnecessarily wants to

room on a rainy day
emend ^ffr?^?r nr^m into %&& ?r fasm which he explains to mean
!

waking and dream.

that the state of being enclosed does not differ in

There
as

is

we have shown

the

To

reading ^cT?^r

firafr

take ^?r?%?T f*TOff

as

Sankara

to

unnecessary.

equally

is

above,

meaning.

satisfactory

msra

Again,

no manuscript authority for such an emendation.

tries

does give a

%3rrr

evolve

3rr$? )

regular

syllogism out of this Karika,

snjr^swfrf Hrarct tastf**

?w?*ra

All this

( stcNtt )

fc^

cumbrous and confusing.

is

WW

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
( 5 )

For

all practical

purposes,

*=r$r

WH

sw^R.

Brha. IV. 39
(

6 )

).

srr%3?^ h?rt snsnrwFf^r

This Karika

is

tgm *m?3R

( Safikara ).

repeated in the fourth Prakaraiia (IV. 31).

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

being unreal, even in the present.

there before, is not going to be
appears.

same

Things in

?ssr

characteristics ( ^rg^rr

are taken to be stnrasr

(

7 )

One

after,

srwrfta

as

are

so

it

^n^wm

is

really

those of t%<re

unreal

not

when

possessed
entities,

is

it

of the

but they

by the ignorant*

rtiay readily

som may not be

10

and

The mirage

feiW* of objects ill dream* but

sfmftfWTsr keittg faWN Gatuja-

grabt the

so sure about the

Notes on Gaudapdda-K&rika

74

Why

pada therefore explains the point further.

dream

objects in

as ftarsr ? Because, their HsrmsrJTrrf ( the capacity

some purpose

serving

object can never change

where he

contradicted in

its

characteristics or sr^ft.

has to satisfy his

same

The

state.

is

the

^rsnfisnrrrr

the **sr state

is

The

about the

situation

objects

of a meal in the srnni state

on eating

in a

dream

stand on the same level as the

objects in that each

ssrjr

So smrs; objects

state.

smni

also,

the

in

So,

be regarded as fa7r like the

*=r$r

<*#$<* sricT^ for ?5jr fesr ?TT^dr,

some purpose

mm^ objects
contradict-

is

being of a changeful

what the

to see

in question.

*?jt

and

must

Prof. Vidhusekhara reads

objects.

translates the first line as

also in

snsr^

though he

as

nature, with their sre>r% securing 3^srr*r=r in a different state,

the things have

state

Now

contradicted in

srrgr^

state ).

of

real

hearty meal

of no avail in the

had never tasted any meal in the

ed in the other

state.

hunger by having another meal.

the dreamer goes

another

is

that a person takes in the dream,

exactly the

do we regard the

dream

wrtfrcrmT of objects

is

known

We

that
fail

has to do with the matter

Gaudapada wants to prove that objects

in the srnra; state

fawr and he gives the reason that their ^ wnwar is contradicted

dreams. Whether objects in a dream have a
snmrar or not is beside

are
in

the point.

3^

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.

^| wriM

if

not for any other reason,

one

is

likely to

pada's style

change

3^

merely on account of the fact that no

mrfcraf: into qtf *wfcn:.
Gauda-

sometimes very terse and

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

is

meaning

clear,

The

idea in the Karika

The

objector

sajrs

that

ObjMttlift the srm* state

contradicted in the

many

is

it

as

follows:

may be

granted

( referred to as

to

that the

tnrtataff oi

in the last Karika ) is

are seen there.
But

dream-state if the same

a time the dreamer sees in a
dream quite abnormal,

fantastic

and unprecedented objects which he

has never seen in the

vm*

Chapter II

The ^srenwrr argument

state.

we

not therefore

unique

justified

75

therefore has

in saying

no scope here.

the dream

that

having no correspondence to the gnsni

state

the dreamer

is

also a different

who

soul

and

state,

those

creates

Are

an entirely

is

that

abnormal

such an easy manner ? No conclusion can therefore be

drawn about the las? of objects in the waking state from what we
things in

see in the dream.

The
is

is as follows:
We agree that *$$*P
But that does not mean that the dreamer is a

Siddhlntin's answer

an 3*$! thing.

different

soul;

it

is

just a case of

characteristic of the dream-state.

all

wrmsw.

The 3^?*

is

but a

not the ^rrsu associated with

Is

An

kinds of unbelievable objects?

ordinary

person

when

anointed as king, does become possessed of extraordinary powers.

place.
To us in the waking
dream
may
appear impossible or
state the things seen or done in a
abnormal, but the dreamer considers them as just ordinary
Even in the waking
routine and they are real to the dreamer only.
state an untrained man would think it abnormal or impossible that

dream

Similarly

the

one could

fly in

of

300

is

a privileged

Constellation aeroplane at the rate

the air in a big

but a trained

miles an hour,

the las?

air-pilot does

that

with

the

not depend upon

of things does

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

is

the uj} of the dreamer, that

is all.

q-^r

wrfroafatf

cfnra^ <rar ^HSsmm^Wf wn%w*i^mwi

(

9 and 10 )

3TT9Tc|

Things,

is

is

imagined

popularly regard-

Whatever

is

cognised

by the sense-organs outside,

regarded as

TS^^^fcareTAnkara

^jr

).

states, are

%&:

tsjr state

ed as 3|HtI
( 2 )

5^3 and

state

Whatever

by the mind

both in the

^r

in

the ^j(,

the

as 3WcT
( 2 )

is

Even

in

the ^jr, the

dreamer considers things cognised

outside as

This shows that the so-called B^fiprnr

in the **jf state as well,

Even

dreamer imagines certain things

in the mind and considers them

sn^ state

is

^5

in the 5T?*t$ state obtains

therefore

on par with

the

&#

Notes on Gaucjapada-Rftrika

(,

the

like

^Ute, .andisftiw

w%

on account of the arwssiws of

things as has been explained below.

(

1 1

What

)
is

both the smra; and rejr objects are f^m and %?P*ffcra,
5
these questions require
real ? Who imagines these
If

^s

10 be answered. ^fagrrc^ *- 3Tra*wtowfasrr*:

last

Karika.

'

all

is all

Vijnanavadins

%mm \
-

light (

to the questions

sm,

),

etc,

srtcT

).

raised in the

hence he ima-

within himself by his

this

Sankara aptly remarks, *

).

$*rr%Hnfa&sfasrw
'

the answer

is

Sankara

Maya ( which also is not differfrom him). Here Gaudapada parts company with the Bauddhas

gines

ent

Atman
Atman

( 12 )

13

It

w&m

cannot be

for

He

first

<** STtsf^stfr
is

also

any thing.

how

This Karika shows

effects the creation.

^ ikmvk

Bauddhas fasTR

According to the

the

powerful

srg: )

Atman

thinks of the objects to be created in

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

with ^scrwirscn 5*.

with 3*rcH%a%.

We

differ

from Prof. Vidhusekhara. Things within

Gaudapada

are srsqrap according to

As dreams go, they are

f&ra.

to emphasise here that objects

for

mean/

outside in the

is

practical

why

preferred by

r%r^fr:

Karika

good

are

first

),

as HtfcT.

srew is not 3Tsq-?rThe author seems

thought out and then pro-

The

expression grfffsg% would

mind* which is a contradiction in terms.
minded out-ward seems to have been

purposes.

jected

That

as

'

'

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;

*W5Wwrro 3*
m^rs^g;; but the
is

gpj

for that characteristic

would be the

%?m$,

in addition by %\?3&s, as they are

by Gau4apada himself in IV. 72 as
in g^rs* here does not mean snpsrr^cTtsr,

referred to

belongs surely to

fe^ns*

as

well

for ?%tT

and the things imagined would be grgr ) Read

the following from Ankara's Bhyasya, t%^t<3P ...
...
fararaft*d*rr:
srrp?

Chapter II

^^51^
^wAfM^cs

mz%i

HTifrr^t 3[rei

and

77

srtmr *m?sr <frfH rronrrar %fa ) <mmftar 5prei3H

sri^r objects thus are t%tT^^
:

dependent upon or correlated to other objects for their

also

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.

existence.

true that objects within are not distinctly experienc-

It is

( 15 )

ed while those without are

two

is

caused merely

cognition.

It is

without are

leal.

^r,

but this

by the difference

not that objects within

the mind, while objects without require

there

is

%*r

other itHtss

SWT

in

means

the

^to

are

for

their

while those

All are tsfcyn, but objects within are cognised by

fr%qrs or sense-organs for

3f?3C*m, ?foprar

between the

distinction
in

jt^

m as opposed
due

and

to *?*$;

the

to

objects.

which

may mean

3^1%^

an

intervention

of
tr*

of the Naiyayikas,

ff?qrTnr*
is

help

the

R**rr Hgs*re

srrrFTT

according to this theory

between

difference or distance

addition

in

cognition;

their

of ?faws

or the

between

*mq^ and the objects of perception.

( 16

This Karika indicates the process by which snp and

srrsqrfrErsF

imagines

objects
(

come

objects f%TT9sr& and

The

into existence.

by his Maya

the individual

appears

It

^qrcsic?.

Atman

Advaita

first

soul and then the different

that

the

individual

souls

thus imagined, imagine for themselves different objects according to

their experiences also imagined.
this topic

The

any further,

as

he

is

Gaudapada does not

mainly interested

Yogavasistha carries this theory to

speaks of countless myriads

of worlds

imagination by the individual souls.

tional enough. But whence does the

its

logical

dilate

the

in

upon

^srrf?teT^.

conclusion and

within worlds created

qrsrrfir^
first firsn

eror^fcP
or

is

unexcep-

come

f^r^rrsr

by

Why

should there be the difference in the powers of imagination of indito this and similar queries, Gaudavidual souls to start with ?

pada has only one answer, they are

Atman

wi

is

the qrmrcftrr

all

Sankara says,

unreal

w$w

*=?<f

and only the Advaita

^t%^t

^TiTRrwrt?^^m^f^r%r%fTm^r%^^[^?rR^wT $*<w<f

sfHr-

*r!^W-

Notes on Gaadapada-Kfrrikd

-g

*formi%ft

17)

The

dartness

r0 P e in

mistaken for a

is

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

vanish away; similarly

teg is realised
when ^rag; is

the

in its true nature,

realised as

fkw^s

the different

3Tr?r,

ft$*qrs about 3KOT9C disappear,

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

himself stands deluded by this

ftr^s
(

w*r!q-

Saftkara hastens to explain,

20

Verses 20-28

It is

ima

passages like

crrot

iA

facie

Atman

who

by some snoRT^s, Vedantins

[ 1 ] stiut

3 5

of them

by philosopheis and lay

pi

Upanisads and older works.

fcp^q-s in the

upon

some

point out

possible to

WcT

represent the ideas about the Highest

or the goal to be achieved, entertained

men.

such

rise to

f sr mff cfl"

tfrfefr

describe the various firebars

They

fathered upon Atman

and gives

his

of

xmwm ( Chandogya

1.

is

bases for these

imagined to be

take

1 1

stand

their

.4-5

and others

quoted in notes on 1.6 above. Anandagiri says that Vaisesikas and

worshippers of Hiranyagarbha are meant ( srran ]%*usn>foa<rw*grcT
*r

f *im*rkrr

erort sgftfct snoiftv

2 ] ^rfrffr

support the

by

^Frfir^s

fir^TO

who

snsrwr$r?sTsar $F<rorfer ).

take

their stand

Chandogya VI. 2. 3-4

for the creation of the world, js^fr, arra

with grg and

five,

srrersr

The

Gita also refers to these

).

is

meant here

ffsiw;

are
list.

qnsr*uf?re

is

that

q^wn process

the three

igyrs,

The popular
also

or
or

well-known.

philosophers in ^?itt% mfcer

sfassg^mq-cr^frft

^rsw

^ ^csnft wtfa smwrmttftfa

to whom only four elements

crrffr

srETsra^T: ( Anandagiri, according

are

upon passages

or the

added to the

the Carvaka view that the body

(IX. 25

srr

).

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.
[3]

mK

as

aspect in various detail

'

^rcwfm%

).

**?TTOwri%

mx *zwx-

top ( Anandagiri

).

w*wrsrfw?rc

*r*rar

Chapter II

y$

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
4

that STrm^t,

but as the ^f^ariTTS are obviously referred to in

the last Karika,

Karika 26 below, Anandagiri's interpretation

( 2r )

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

[ 5 ]

upon Chandogya

5^*
and

srrarrRsrr^ constituted of four

ft&Gi

^jts^oj: <nr

*%<?

III. 5

in the <tt?s

srrfNft

v$wi

fe&sn^^ft

^srafTw^wTirfiT

^iwi

^a^
ir* ^%^r $

srr^ ^5TT

reasonable.

is

^&%&

s^r g?f
^traRwrjr

wor: c&^r ^j:

... srfir:

ii?r ^itTOTt

q^rs each, as follows sn^pr f^oJr

&&5$n % m**

cPojt

...

m%x srgm:

^rar *^r fe^a;

mw **&$&'* qrr ww m^z^m*

^jr

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

thinks that the four qr^s are

says *ri Im^anjrwiTTfm

own

sr^r

accord include himself

ftws by

[ 6 ]

among

the c^Rr^s.

fqwrf^s who consider enjoyment of the

the

objects of sense as the

highest

author of Kamasutra (

wwqwsrfRi

otStS (sr

snrorfrora

ftwn:

fffer

Anandagiri

and

igjfas

etc.

goal,

^moirsfa

^rnrfes

11

sensualists

3TWPR

is

qressftr stf

sftSrat

the

mwr

fawTsFrenw (Hft^fWR;

? fa

whose motto

like

sp^rt qr^frr^s^sfr

...

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
:

stfi

choose ^: and 3*: for their goal.

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

worlds; *m*<r %*3crr

\*m

Gita IX. 25

).

snfbsrepft

^raiww*

%mix ^WRrSftr ^nrrOTrtftar ( worshippers of the ^srts mentioned

in the IwrenH' in Yaska's Nirukta )> says Anandagiri*
8

Notes on

22

Gaudapada-K&riU

who

?%$ by *%{%%$

gr?s which they

of the Highword
tevealed

swear by the

regard as awfcta and f?r:^rr%ff or diiectly

ro

Gita

m$

by the ssrfHs or *tt%$s

q-frs

III.

13

*5rf^?nj5fl- *rfar

),

*msr srfasfW*

sr^jfowftRi

*r?cT=i

11

XIII. 22

tf&wm

sras

srrotr err

11

sftaapBira srfarfera*
fccrs;

wtfelpErTq:

3?rq>rw.s*rr^

cp5m%
st^rrl

by the ^r^fl^s

swwsrr^
11

...

*rt

srrarfisrfTr:

ry in saying syrem:

who

*&

srgte

Anandagiri

),

*&*

^ftfgrrgpac

11

III.7-9

srr%%^
aws&Tft

Gita

11

on passages

^rr> srro: $rftn%cr:

wg s*w%:

sfarsft

sto

st

srfaten

srj gr^ft anrraTg;

^^
humour
rare

IX, 24,

),

srfcrfarerac

a^r $gf

co ks )

^3rrarrTOf=

5^

take their stand

stfrc

srrcriVa:: H

Anandagiri displays a sense of

swreiWI:

IV.31

srgroi

upon

believe in the Highest being

a^asRrwir

(Taittirlya

srRrRrcfH M

srstPSRTW&C H.1.2

E^^
(

ffosfWr

who

ran

err

11

^Riwrar^r^r:

11

'"

take their stand

^s^raTO

sr^r

*far

mwrr.

spSfir

who

).

Anandagiri remarks, smfroimspft

).

sA^ref

1%

( 3T5

[12] wwn,
like

),

IV. 24

),

^rw

by the tfts^ft^s

Trf5

wg;

the

IV. 23

Anandagiri

^ffr

Gita, q-^rf^srr^T^"

the

from

passages
(

^T%

sp^T^rr Hrwwr^rT^^rft wrar

est.

srrlr-

wm*f,
li

11

rr%cr*

H.i

( Chandogya I. 3. 6 ).
in a Sanskrit commenta-

We

*rt*q srr%wfrT srffraiw.

do not

think Gaudapada wishes to include cooks in the category of philosophers, in spite of the fact that the

problem of food

is

universally

one and the validity of the

an army marches on its stomach, is self-

admitted to be the most important

Napoleanie dictum that

evident.
( 23 )

ikas

who

*3

regard

9RW ky
srgjs as

the ggflfajs.

They

are the atomists, Vaise

the srimTTO* Anandagiri says,

&nm sjpfoig*

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

*ftmP vuf^H

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

the individual soul*

'

Chapter II

*W

^e

ky

whom

the gross body

Atman

as

is

^^flr^s

81

they are the urates according to

the Highest, 01 the Jainas

who

regard

the

^(taftarm. *y$t ^frscaranfTr&fit steiTcro?: (Anandagiri).

^ by

5 ]

the igfif^s; they are the annfir^s, followers of the

Paficaratra or Saiva

They believe that God descends down

They take their stand upon passages

swms.

to the earth in various forms.

like sre>f wsrfaorra

giri

q$- is

).

^rap^fsrrorw

^w^rmwnn

...

^mrr^r

l*i

Gita IV. 6,8

^wanf^mft *rr qwraf weftarrofitep

explained as ifa&$ cRpasr^rsRTRTi^prw

^r?r%^*rfewrT

jt|

^aOTR^TeSWrerSP

...

).

Ananda-

W$ra

*s$

in Brhadaranyaka II. 3. 2-3.

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

sp^cT

by the

explains sr^c? as

24

17

) [

$ra by the

g?r$yf^s

(
(

these

take their stand

upon

XL 3 2

^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

passages like

18

regard

i%^t:

space

so space

is

the

by the f^fJ^s
eternal;

as

these are probably the th^fiNss

everything

Anandagiri says ^fr^trftwi ikw* TOrro?

*^<rorr.

The expression mi^sr^: is usually explained as

know how to foretell events by reading the voices of

ffqrg:.

Perhaps
spheres.
[

those

19

it

means

Yogins

who

can

hear

the

who

srrgfr:

by the

erT^f%s; these are,

are conversant with

according to Anandagiri,

alchemy, mantras or charms

and argumentation,
]

srr^ is

gsRTR by

defined as cmis?Ht: n\

the gssrf^s

know the whole

etc.

Perhaps the

claim to

who
etc.

music of the

^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

20

those

birds

'

who

exists in space;

that exists

WV

are

meant

discussion
I

these are the geographers

universe consisting of fouiteen

who

^srs (seven

Notes on Gaudapdda-Kdrika

82
higher, *:, g*:, *sp,

m'>

wrra, <raraar>
*pr*r$rr%s
( Anandagin
facr?r, gcfsr,

( 25 )

passages like
<prr&fit

<

).

Anandagin

23

t%tT3;-

wgrr<rri $T*ai

^wr$PTf:

on

sr

Bauddhas

these aie evidently the

).

by the t%tT&?s

these are evidently the Vijhana-

fan&& sfr^rc^

vadins, Bauddhas (

their stand

).

by theff%r%fs

ff^CT&ftr #I3CP; Anandagiri

[

v&

srjfcswftr,

bt?Tt

gfsg[:

by the jwfir^s; these take

tffrs;

^werer-

22

21

^^

* T and ^WI, and seven lower>

wfi^ and qmrsr ). sprtPt srsfoTOpfoft
:

ikw**K

fr%^rrc?^q>

Ananda-

gin )

The Bauddhas

use

tw^ f?^ and few

theorists, could not

24

Wiwf

by the

they do not admit any

snimw

the

26

or elements
*rw

but say that

these are
qrrf

and

fefofrVj^r^rwr

It is

on

to offer

these

all

significant

this point.

the

a*w (

determine his future and

otW?

Mini*insakas;
<ttt

and

guq- )

hence they are

TOrrahlrft

jfisrw^r-'

).

T2R$T9s

[ 25 ]
)

constituted of twenty-five principles

by the Saiikhyas

fte3?rw fem'-

no remarks

WWi%^s

fsg-f,

of the individual soul

Anandagiri

synonymous terms very

who condemns

Gaucjapada,

have been himself a Buddhist.

that Prof. Vidhusekhara has

[

as

that

often. It is quite clear

sr$r%<i

^sr&rVfa^fo: flworr:

r%2>fen

sw

sr$faf*$?wr:

Thus

jrr ffij st^tt, t^ ?r?mgrTT%

t^t%t%^k* T^f f ^wrftr ( m<ir t*r,
?*^ and t*m
4

sr^mr%3f?Tqr.

),

ere jTSPiaifa

5^5

rg:,

jwsro^Tgu^f^r:

7
)

16
1

25
26 ]

*3&5t

( constituted

of twenty-six principles ) by the

Patanjalas followers of the system of Yoga
propounded by Patanjali,
?
[


Chapter 11

They

accept the twenty-five ?tt^s of the Sankhya system,

only one more

mms
[

83

a^sr, viz.

f*^

and add

they are also called %<r*

hence,

).

27

<T$T%$T^

constituted

of thirty-one

principles )

some, They,^ according to Anandagiri, are Pasupatas

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

of Pasupati, Siva

and add

six

m&

out of these thiity-six,

im-., srfsrsrr,

as STrsTf^frrs, so the thirty -six cR*s

We
is

think that

all

The

total 3

3^T?,

pr^s

is

fftj
( 5

thus

|r,

wrong and

passage in

the

that

Glta

5w%[ss,

Gaudapada
XIII. 5-6

^THF^s and

*m

^<r, *tf, *t?*>

l^">

are regarded

made up,

and 3*settB

I f^sror^s (

I ^t,

tjr^r

be reduced to thirty-one.

can

the above views are

here merely referring to the

mw>, and

f?rarf?r : ,

l ^>
:

and

* *

^ )

=^?rt and

*farcr,

it^hl )

^m

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,

from the

and

$&&$?

<Jfas*rarj their forte.

These sJtefa^s are

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

Noteslon Gattdapada-K&rtka

84

as
(

w*WWWW

<TC*rar?

sfo Sff&nfr

individual

the

for

ensures salvation

whole, and

Anandagiri.

31

The

#5^^ by

according to Anandagiri,
be classified into one
(

mentioned

3*rwrs

the

who

%^s

these

cresrr&fcr

those

who

ft

q*T<W[

Anandagiri

^TW

are

3TST

...

world can

as

take

Fieudists

aie

nothing but sextheir

stand

upon

^rqrmtfw fc**Tf$HTsm^f^sfterw
same to suit their own views.
!

).

^m %%

by some; | w^ofr 3%sq- <K

we should read qrPW( here,

Perhaps,

fwr

reference might be to the passage,

srgT

grammarians,

Gita XVI.8, by interpreting the

[32]

$fro??T

below

followers of <*tiotr~

),

modern

of

regard the highest $xw

passages like swamsT/ft*

16

female and neuter

male,

urge which animates the world. These can

II

III.

the

ate

mm*z

Perhaps the remote ancestors

meant here

tg$3

in

say that everything in this

of the three classes,

We*im*g ffhprs^P $rs^m

f^fr.

first

be confused with the stows lefeued to here.

are not to
[

).

well

was the

in society accord-

great patriarch to introduce the system of 3ttwts

ing to some Puranas

^^r

as

^rftrr

fff^?^

tot>

II

^T%?i;

and

the

jsprsriSqrf^^ ^Pmsnu^
II. 2-8.
q* and &qi
I

Mundaka

mentioned in the Prasnopanisad V.

2,

^\ ww^W w *$Ffi

^r

( 2% )
[ 33 3
?H%' by the $i%r%rs in whose eyes the problem
of creation looms large ; these are presumably the worshippers of

Brahmadeva, the creator.

[

34

W-

by the $qrr%^s,

the

worshippers

of

ir|$r,

the

destroyer of the world.

[

35

ftn%

by the ftafrft^s* the worshippers of Virm

who

looks to the maintenance of the world.

f i%*r
These

%$t

m f*mW mzmh mm*v

thirty-five m$S<*s

Anandagiri

).

and similar others are always being

by ignorant and semi-

continuously associated with the Highest

ignorant thinkers,

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

very con! using, with the promiscuous

making

it

The
a

85

very
idea

as

is

follows:- Let

simple-minded seeker

he has implicit

use

of

^r, fr,

sw

suppose that Devadatta

us

votary of Visnu

Highest

etc.

import.

its

and advises Devadatta

to

whole-heanedly

Devadatta

reality.

is

whom

after truth. Yajnadatta, his friend in

faith, is a

regard Visnu as the

and jealously

understand

difficult to

Visnu at all costs, and this obsession for

Visnu, having taken root, ultimately becomes united with Visnu

*r (

T>*g^;<t

sticks to

I^W

5 qwfit

^?pr

awr*

^?fP

*rr# (

vm^

fT

5$is

*W

ft*?FT

^r^w

feqs^> *rm

arforat

5rf

f^o^ *w S"
)

3*91%

*r. )

%sr^r:

STOT

),

q&n *rgq7% ct
$3^ ) ^ ( w. )

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-

).

awftr (qr s/srar

afora 2Tpags*?^f*rf?re3T
( that

frR^cftero
takes hold of him
1

first

means

<r

).

:
I

wfcr

awftc%

,5

s^k
snarr

?8rot*T*:

s*#r

snftwg$r% awa**!*

ct

is

the srfmg;,

Thus( according to

Saiikaia

*n

*r

the obsession, viz. that r%$S*T

is,

>,

>}

( according to

*nr

our

interpretation )

),

*tw:

) (

same

bfpto :

*nm

>*

as

^: in the
first

ff?2rs

second

>

<r

ffcOT*

compound

means jrCraT^

Looking

to the

wording

half)

*tpt

in the Karika

<r

*n*

"

<TC?n%

ff

^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

^rw, and aff

^^

takes possession

guards the

our interpretation the

by it reaches it. The meaning

is

of him;

according to

adopted to, and obsessed

ultimately the same (

it 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-

case of

formity with the grammatical requirements.

Notes on Gaudapclda-K&rikfi

6
30

regard

Those who indulge

in the various fifaj^s

about Atman,

as different, these

are

not different

Atman

irom Atman. No wonder

On

Atman.

?r

^sr, mqr,

(31)

32

IW^T etc.

likewise shispt.

arrfH^OT amfia,
(

*sr arc*

only

spg,

if

mw,

there

not have any

gw

=5r

be

H (

The

afrrawt is

imagined things
Yogavasistha

Lankavatarasutra 79

33 )

how the

far

3Hpr

aref^;

the

srir^g: is

Cf.

10 x

III.

talk of

...

sr*prcg

can
etc.

sr?^r6RfT

^fk^iFra

nre

).

^|cT

rVm

st

srvrft

?r

responsible for imagining himself to

Atman

changeable and serves as the

srivrarnr

nfti55^A

).

Anandagiri

An

reality.

also to

),

the imagined things themselves.

is

be

to

soits of things that are really non-existent,

all

).

views of other thinkers

the

It is futile

ScTTtT, SOT" etc*

tfi3Trt?% Hsraft

known

other-

* sresm?R-

view about qTmsrkr rtto,

these terms can have any meaning

Only ^ar

in connection with

?ma:

Anandagin

m (

are

ha\e

enunciates his

?^

E5g:>

is |<j.

might

face value

^r?H!| ?rs HrremcT ?%xT?t, ^=?r mqrrw,

^Tflfforsa f?*n%5 ( Anandagin ).

Having shown thus

cannot stand, Gaudapada

^,

% *mi tz**

Atman

that

their

at

graOTrtffri^TSPSTrg ^rgjrfrr

i%^ftra[ fiFTiqr5ri<rWff f f?r

is

the leal tiuth about

have realised

do not take these fgre^s

wise accrued to them.

universe

who

know

contaminated by the 5F&F5* which

are not

and

to

fail

the other hand, those

the only reality,

is

actually

fsj$?qs

that they

^or

and likewise for

same, un-

always the

is

a^

^*n s

All qpwtfs are 3*r%cr

(
;

the

ft fw*<T?T
3*[?t

alone

$r*.
(

f%^q

34

The

foisted

objector says that he admits that

on the Atman; would not that mean

the

*m

that *ftv^

is

is

just

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

m^m

of

cannot be any
3^3;.

thing.

HTeOTR* so

can

^-*rr*,

Prof.

as to

therefore

s*w*

or

Vidhusekhara

In

the

sr^^er

for

arise.

wants

have a contrast between

to

same way there

an imagined or

read

atrq-nnsr

7tr*W^t

and

s^-sn^r;

for

he

mean one and the same thing. We

sneiw* means not the nature of 3*1^ ,

thinks that sriesmtsr and ^*rr*r

have shown above that

but

'

the nature of

sm% as

'

conceived as a ft$$q on sroro'.

Again,

Chapter II

absurd to talk about a thing having the

it is

except in Alamkarasastra

%y

be read

for sTRFnTT^,

The

).

against

of another

nature

suggestion that prr^m^T should

manuscript authority does not

all

merit consideration.
( 35

The

Bhagavadgita

trsmwrsr

expression

11.56, IV. 10

3Ti?m

*tt<*fh

The Yogavasistha

has the

^rcFrT^afNr
).

sprefigrsn?:

Sankara
fifth

).

used

is

twice

the

in

snrefr t?rfc?fr*mTOf**ft*

ftff$c*T^

Void of s^ms.

Prakarana called ^crsm of which the

author apparently thinks veiy highly as he

calls it

and

fosr?or$n^

36 ) 3Tg'^--3Tsr?5Trqrq 5rT?3RrRiT5w^T%^r i?3!%wt: (SaAkara). It

only bogus gfts who advertise themsehes and their so-called mira,

is

culous powers,
III. 5.1

III.

37

no use

ftsT^s ( Brha,
Sankara in his Bhasva on 3T?Tn%<s5r?=r*TRT ( Brahmasutra

).

4.50

says

flSrr

^W ^frf^K:,

The ^R^>^rqri%^

for praise or salutation

Sraddha

w&z

rrst

^m^sfigror: mvrgri

cf.

rites for

the

Pars

is

H?cT

*T ff

beyond

for deities;

( ^qrr,

all

^WnT

?T

all

5?rgcT

STilJcrat

He

obligations.

has

he need not perform the

oblations

the pitrs

to

are

As he has secured the right

of his doing any unmoral or

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

no fked abode,
of

residence,

5p

^rr^ ^

he should

lest

*srara&

be

he might
?r

ftcrt *rwrra--

Sankara curiously enough says,

a
*r

prey

mrfk

^ ^ri

to

<j5jrr,

sr^a;

all

should have

changing

constantly

fall

A m%

changing.

place

his

sn*r

etc.

Anandagiri

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

factory. Prof. Vidhusekhara rightly explains

not fixed \
(

Sankara

).

by him.

as

absolutely

irr^f^r^: ^^rrsTTff^sTr^r^sTsrnrm^f wmfoirsf:

Yati must make use of only what comes to him
i

unsolicited; he

minimum

xf^[^

must not hanker

after

anything.

Only the bare

required to keep body and soul together, should be taken

Notes on Gaudaptida-Kdrika

38
38 )

snr<*:-~

Referring

external world,

the

to

Mahabhutas, srreTfftre-- Connected with

*$<& 1>8<W ftsn ftfasw

Ankara

the

five

The fr^

the body.

is,

Having known this n*&, the

from it.

).

should ever be on his guard not to deviate

q%

CHAPTER

III

This Prakarapa usually called ^t?Tsm&T contains 48 Karikas.

The firsc Prakarana mainly dealt with aftqjrciqmsrr and the second

tow

with the

of the

jw.

however was not discussed,

we

are

The problem

of the

If there

only ^f?r

exits

individual
WffiFfo

soul

what

understand by the various Stuti passages dealing with the

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

and the

topics are discussed here,

last

Kanka

opinion of the author as follows:;*

firaft

qenrsTO *ra

rsr

r%r%gr

or non-origination doctrine

mm

gives

^fkmr^

This

which was

is

the

first

the

considered

sfhr:

famous

snjgr s*sr

ararfeteT?

systematically

pro-

pounded by Gautjap&da.
Saiikara thus introduces the third

( 1 )

^i
to

W>sr:

mean

duty

'.

Safikara.

( 5rfN: )f

As the

last

Karika

Prof.
( III.

Prakarana r^wfavnQ

Vidhusekhara takes
48

uses the

^jf:

expression

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

sfte, the

and

3^|rr;

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

exactly

is

itself later
sftr

,<*% 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

(even though he

is

really

Brahman) has surely an intelligence only

Chapter III

He

to be pitied.

memorable passage

in a

%? ^f^^g^F^

ikv%

hankering

repeats

(I- 3~8

times the refrain a^st

five

),

The Kenopanisad

Sankara says.

a g5r$rr%a; as

is

89

which shows

how

clearly

srgr

?#

the srfa

after g-qr^rrr is rightly called ^q-or.

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^oflr-

( 2 )

Jiva

answered in

is

is

this Karika.

srgr (

Sankara

^mcU *r?R

).

'

same

as

mvk

100

in IV. 80, 93,

etc*

),

being ever the same, unchangeable. Only a thing with parts can be

few. srrTOR which

all

is

around; *rem ^Tct:

popularly regarded as being produced. ^m?cra:

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
( 3 )

that of srr^r^r with wsr^Tsr etc,

[

Q$fl,
[

Both

xh^im

sncflrg;

or

and

*rc etc.

Brahman

and sw^nsT

sremsT, rerarsr

Similarly 3ti?r^
[ 3

w,

are

really

srar,

etc.

arr^r^r seems to give rise to

2 ]

Thus

etc.

sfnrs

<rc, etc.

seem

to

give rise to ^srarrsr, rerersT etc.

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>

Saftkara understands sf^r: to

^afH^rrar 3n3<nffcHnw
( 4 )
of stot^T

3>"cn%
is

and

q^r etc. );

mean

( 1 )

s^: or

^r%r^^^t^t ^?3^rWI[^!mT
sr^sr affect

sn^

zuwr

The so-called 3^%

when ttc, <rc, etc. dis-

the OTffas only.

really the g-tfri% of src,

w,

etc.;

appear, trsr^T^F; TCWrsr etc. disappear. ^rsforfa similarly

sv-q^: (

is

due to the

Notes on GaudapcLda-K&riU

90
s?qr% of

^Nrnr; when thefo^mr

disappears,

gfrsr

disappears,

also

being merged in the Atman.

objector says: If there

The

( 5 )

only one Atman,

is

Yajfiadatta do not suffer alike

it that Devadatta and
the same time
dies, Yajfiadatta also ought to die at

many

be therefore

Siddhantin's answer is:

we do

not find

all

different

all

Jivas,

When

there

is

If

how

is

Devadatta

There must

from one another. The

one ^t^tST full of smoke,
with smoke ( because

tos or srer$T$TS covered

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

name

tft

Even though

( 6 )

SWTOW

nm%> imx
The

etc.

^<r

Ankara

form

),

we

sfh?

of the sir^rsr as covered by

due to the scmfaihj.

).

srrarsT is one,

no doubt, but these do not

is

wnwn

q^sp etc.

trer, <yar,

affect the

3WET3T at

the

Similarly

of ^arorsr, qsrsprsn
purpose served ),
talk

^^r,

different

The sttoto^?

all.

g:^

are

of the

etc.

sfhrs

become different on account of the ^ftarfas.

(
is

The ^s,

7 )

either a ft^r*

TO is a fon*
awnr ( $<Tr$

an

&m%

y^

of to, a

etc.

etc,

cannot be

are

^resrr is

any way the

VI. 3*5

$?5$RcT:

tootst

an

fircpr*

^srq-gr

is

real.

fforc

).

Vedantasara

srr^r^r.
is

real ^r?

a firCTC of gold;

of water ) or an
of a tree ).
But

have no independent existence as apart from

affect in

Chandogya

T%R

^r2T$T^rj>

or w^orm* the $*%% ornament

of sfoer; qw,
is

TOresrsr, qrarr^rsr

and do not

ajr^Tsr,

'srr^fW&T ik^K'> says the

explained

as

*rcTT*ctt,$?*mi

sror

).

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

as they

do not believe in stfr^- The crr%*T?3r etc. is really

qx\*t by the ignorant who do not realise its

superimposed on the
real

nature;

similarly

all

xk^Ks associated with Atman by the

no real existence, ^ffarrfWfar-

ignorant are merely 3mt%cT and have

frisrar

HT?Wf ^roifow^*m%#r

wfr?^*

Saftkara

Chapter 111

The

9 )

Atman owing

9*

various fk$ws usually spoken of in connection with

to his association with bodies, such as

birth,

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

f^n%
(

is

Prof.

fcsrar,

read frsm:. T%rffr however

fulfils

Vidhusekhara would

the srr^f^r raised by

usually found mentioned along with

10

wqtsv

%frf^:,

these are just

and

irfcT

like

like

to

ncqrwr,

as

STPrfk-

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

3*^^mT%atfjror. In this Karika and

from the Taittirlyaka

by name

corroborate his statement. In

^STR^gfr)
is

spoken of

the

the

next

and the

he

that

3?rW3[

Brhadaranyaka which
( Adhyaya II,
Brahman ^<q sTRSR^

Taittinyopanisad

the five sheaths are described, and

was

refers to passages

as the ultimate srfcfBT-

mm: w

#M^H^:W

Notes on Gaudapcida-KdriM

91

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;

str^W cannot

interpretation that
151,

mere

),

sfbr ( s$qt tfTwftfarr?STsfta

cjTt^is

u<%\ ( for

The

there.'

four.

first

^Ff^r:

are ^TrTOTSTra^Ernra* Prof.

qrrr

) ^sr^Tr%cf :

expression

^ ^r

^r

sjrpq*

in a similar case,

is

Prof.

Gau

According to

3*5TW,
dapada,

Vidhusekhara wants to lead

as 'as

it is

used in passages like

^ vw

3w

stands for

terror

...

made

clear

g-

*rar ^*f rBrhadaranyaka IV. 5 )

always followed by a specific i>cT. Here there

no such g^Rf; besides

Karika.

of all the r$rs

which he explains

^'^\ as

... ,

( ?^r

*3tiw, faSTROT and srra^JW.

snopflWa

is

just a

is

^f

<??:

not merely of the

itr^t

Brahman, but

is

said to be

these

be

which seems to be Gaudapada's view. For here, s^gr? or arrm^

^ *T$rr

Vidhusekhara's

corresponds to

preference

for

*ref5nsr: in

q-^rr

is

the next

hardly

reasonable.
(

12

tains the

This Karika refers to Brhadaranyaka II.

famous trgfon

(O

sfafr

CO

3tf<r:

*mf

( or jrgsjTR
,'

>UTHf JTf

*>

(3)
(4)

3T%:

>

3>

?\W-

>'>

(5)

3ITf?HT:

CO

fop

>)

(7)
(8)

^5=5=

37

1^1^

>'

(9)

*5rcfoa:

(10)

^rq?I5t:

(11)
(12)

^T

(13)

mg<*

(<4)

STfcJU

'?

>

>

gf^rsq'

35

zm 3#

sr^.wmr:

33

3TW 3TrT%?*W

?'

srof

J*

3)

>;

3>

swr ^^q-

<}

3^1 ftf a:

f?^rf

^W wrfitart:

5 5

>

?J

35

>>

s*w srr^T^^r

>'

*3

>r

s*wsr*for

)>

)>

>

s?w ^r^sr

<>

>>

>)

>

>

Wro

3*T*rra<rf

which con-

).

J>

3*W HTg^q*

stw

WfUT 3

>

>1

33

h
33

srrcHflr:

In the case of each of the above

fourteen pairs, occurs the
following passage mutatis mutandis
(wprf ifoarf) toforfte**-

vlwm

Chapiir 111

g^r wnmtsqTfK

srsp

wm^^m%
W

(<3va-fr,

and

etc.

?:

^wim ^em%

as the ultimate
q?r$Ti>

sntfa:

The

and the

to be the identity

the

etc..

every thing as

and inside

wg

of

?d"*r,

there

and

the

is

srm^

The

( 13 )

sr^

identity of

any

and

3?i?fr3[ is

Saiikaia

),

mac^r-

sr^riVcn

and emphasis-

praised

between the two

of difference

idea

on

describing

Jra^are^cN
(

ed by the Sruti and

both

outside

section

called JT^snsror ( srgrfic^r^

is

tg^rfl^wff ^r%?i%?H ngfrnr w&<%iw a%T&r?<rch

3*3m^T c5W ( Sankara ).

the

so here also

everywhere

The

Just

describing

qrs'gni,
is

same

in the belly etc.

<gBq=fr

to understand.

passage

sfisr

*ftw-

*r

are the arfcft^

gpft:

mw etc.) and not

Brahman

refiain.

outside and inside, just a?

the earth

by

Vidhusekhara seems

purpose of the Taittirlyaka

declared in

g^OTfcgr

asTTTOtojcrsrcr.

pairs referred to

arcur?* fanrfar,

Prof.

as

was shown

5rrr?flHFl is

*r&[

srfrar

93

is

Thus both positively and negatively grn?sthF*T

brought home to the ^n^. The identity passages are ( as

deprecated strongly.
is

rightly

quoted by Sankara

m si
(

VII. 25-2

IV. 4-19

passages

*r

II.

Chandogya VI. 8-7

w hhw q^ftr

Sankara

%xw$wsim%
14

^k q^warr ( Brha II. 4-6

sr^^ ^^ ( Mundaka II. 2-1 r

),

1-14
),

cr^R^r-

<mwM ^i^

*$ *mrr% t%^=r
and the censure
)

are

?r

( Sankara ). srsm^Mcpfi- 5rr&r

Anandagiri quotes in this connection,
1

Gita

jft:

^fm?

objector says:

You

tell

>

t%

3t*tht
arc

us that there

cT^;-

^%sp

srrwrcra:

?r

is

wmr-

vtfkqvRtffcmnw s^ft ft$r?T%3:

The

).

83*w

^ffricr^ *r$r<w

Bhasya on Brahmasutra

a^m%

quoted in the Bhasya on Gaudapadakarika

( as

^Spriiftfir

f^fim

),

in his

3TRRT

cTferrf' *r

<n<r

Brahman

sffas and ^ffirs a ^ e just created

goes against some Sruti passages which say that

only, one without a second, and the

by Maya. But

this

before creation, sfhr

the presence of

was there along with Atman

are such passages to be explained

The
is

Siddhantin's reply

%*r 3&3Rr

aqrowioftft

VL

3-2-3),

...

is

s^rsmmfWr
s^rsf

as

we

being due to

after creation, as

can understand

Maya

).

How

follows: The passage

^rcm

srerc

relied

upon

^FfTcWrasn^ *ws>
sgw^t (Chandogya

^rtWIS^ ^^

which shows

that the

sftsr

sn^W was already

ia existence

Notes on Gaudapada-Kari'k&

94
along with the

Brahman

^srar (

Bhasya on Brahmasutra

before creation

srsR*i

*crarwrr%

interpreted literally,

mopmwfafa^*Tf^TO*Tf^ *mx

tion

is

STpTifrs'TOTRt

we have

for

The

seen

that

passage must not be

its

impossible in the face of srrciW?^. So here

future state of things obtaining

into existence,

The popular

the gfcp3" of sfre

cooked

Wrgfarg;

marriage
of

^r^

which

rice

the lady

^rrvww

T^fcT
is

erwfSra^ Kavyaprakasa).

one

really

really the

entitled to be called a vrrqr

is

refer to the *rfcc<sqrsr% or future state, the

no doubt that the above

is

the
the

is

entirely in

1-36 says

Vm sfWf

ftro^w:

sfr$;?r ),

only

primary

after

sense

mmr*- sfo to mean ^ah?^, refers to srrsmo?,

RV. X. 121-r, sees here ftffa between qs&snis

qrnac,

m^ro* wten*

^rewgwfr
n^nR!% to

'TTtrt

*r ?mf?r

qWwrc:

^mfk STO^ar ... smgsraror*qmrik ft erS

ir&Hit hst

q-^wpr

^eRftfit

mm

353

*ftnE?wT

...

This means that the Karikabhasya takes

be ultimately established. An

refer to the 3ro*h*?5r to

alternative interpretation

wmft

q-^r

correct interpretation

takes

wwTOCT&nft^g:

SFP<r

rice-

sfre?rTcsrcT etc.

and ^rasr**, and remarks sat

*mm

the

first half,
being the
But the Sankarabhasya on the Karika
opposition to what the Sankarabhasya on Brahmasuna

Chandogya arfo

*r

cooks

meaning of

and *wr not being appropriate.

There

to

by Maya comes

the creation

of the Karika, the passage referred to in

II.

referring

an illustration of the use of the Bhavika figure

s^rar w&*ft

expressions sft^r

grain, not the

*r$ff

It is

(srargrr W*r

when

interpreta-

literal

and 3*rW3; should be understood figuratively as

of speech

his

in

-36 remarks gflt rrr^ s&st sf&sTTfWT

II,

*fa ^r*fag% srtfrcmfmsT struts?*

fffrcT-

( Sankara

vM

is

nftwnftft

^T%sn$- *n*nTR

the subject of sraftflfa;

is

offered

TOk^

not

3^

by the same,

sw

ifeqm,

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

3*ra*sr is to

is

clear that

taking

account the Chandogya passage which is most

pertinent here.
view of the fact that Sankara rightly refers to it
in

his

into
In

Vedaata-

Chapter III

sutrabhasya

1-36

( II.

95

possible to argue that

), it is

Bhasya on

the

the Karikas attributed to Sankara, could not have been a

work of

Adisankara.
It

would be seen

g^g/ars and

Gaudapada boldly distinguishes between

and Sankara does not lag behind him in this

that

nT<irjf?fs,

respect.

The

expression srF?<m: occurs in Karika

where the Kankabhasya understands

meaning

cE&ffnii'

given here

is

The

The objector says:

may be admitted as

(15)

and Sruti passages

How

we

are

The

to

account for

Prakarana,

this

The

sense.

%<%*&%

but

after

and

of sfh*
creation

BrrrSFS;

g^q",

it is

$rT?fhj?g"

this state of things,

is

face

in

of

given in this

Karika.

views about creation in the Sruti are not to be taken

They

literally*

in

natural

as the highest reality

are intended to enable especially the

to grasp the profound truth viz.

The

insr,

Siddhantin's answer to the above

different

its

also are found, describing the creation in various

your insistence upon

The

in

not therefore acceptable.

before creation

ways.

it

3rr?*T<Pc3*j

in

g??Rm

W^s

accordance with

and $Tf gsrers are found in Chandogya

VI. 3.4-5,

the

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

gsr

Wr&r

ftr^srfeipr

S^cT

is

found

Brhadaranyaka

in

sg^rc^&rRHT^T?**'- ^3 stmt: *re

^?nft ssa?T%

II.

20, sn&T

1.

$w-

also in Kausitaki III. 3, *rat sroscfear

*rW

\?v

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

WW

r%

^T%mft

( Brha. IV. 5.

and

to srafoift in II. 1.

20

etc.

coming down; reaching the level of the dull-witted.

sn^mcSN^si^isqww ( K. bhasya ). Read also the following
3Tr?nT

lit.

from K. bhasya, ^^^Wf^i^g^rgcqrr%gcrT?rf

^ srfcT^n^rcrsrrrsr-

Notes on

^g

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

6 )

'

to be jirnPsr here.

We

Anandagiri remarks,

think that the reference here

is

srrsrfooiT

to 37;$ *r^f?cr

st^ot^ttot srat *T^for are^T-'

wi% ^r %ffsif srr ssrmsn srrwifr ^r^rer

TT5RTCJ

(i

alluded

^rafta
refers

^^^,

so that

Sankara in

to.

Sankara also refers to

fwrRT

?tot
wsra?* cffgd^r wHhrf?sn%*fa wi%ar
Sutrabhasya
II.
2-2S
cr^rfir^rTfasttN^^r?
I

f%

used in the
17

at

sri|r

^regwrftf^sr-

^Trnwrnr
),

anothei

his preaching to

fw

and enunciating

toiw

one.

|i?rats Followers

being one,

st^ii

H. 1-34)

11.2-32), This Karika explains the expression

last

fsrrsrcrr

),

5r!^TWR^^r^qriTO>aTr^^^^f|^r^r

different doctrines (

kw smT f

does

of

admit of

not

Thus

capable of infinite vaiieties.

own

4%

q^T^rq^nipsWH: $*fr%

Buddha adjusting

suit the intellect of his pupils ( %<*tt%t%q?

*tct feisfca

qdi^f^ag^Tsn qsgrr^^qah^Rww^Rmsfr irj^rfr^

to ^r, sgsq- and q^ to represent three-fold creation in

context.

three

srawr

XIV. 18

*rsm and aiTO types of people are

Sutra bhasya

his

Gita

Ihr crm*ft

Gita XVII. 2

sfSrw epw^qTH^T

fancied view, are

mmm

^r,

%?rfw,

any

differences;

the Dvaitins, each

etc. ^|cr,

while

|cf

is

sticking to his

always quarreling amongst themselves; the

Advaitin, like a star, standing apart,

malice.

He

phantoms

has

looks on amusedly, without

no quarrel with Dvaitins who are concerned with

q-^r

^w^m%Vi^rfr ^n^rwsfa |<?r *

^*rww^5wwn%flrab

srrarar

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?
I

How

( 18

The only q*R T $t

be a variety or effect of

made

clear in the next

it

or reality

what

Karika

),

is

the

is

3%;

exact

Dvaita can
cause

at best,

of this *c^

hence there cannot be any

is

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

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.

says to another

Similarly the Advaitin refuses to quairel with a Dvaitin

(

19

through

An

rrfin. If

and become

wm

the
!

srsresr

qTOWT^refr rnwr \M^k

K. bhasya
(

20

the

real,

^f is
w^ and

have 5^ associated with

can

sen object

3rer

object

will

lose

only

nature

itnzi

..

?r

ftwr*w?T?*R:

crcmsfa:

).

Some ^tt^s

born as well

born, must

be

unproduced

are very illogical in their statements.

Now

or unborn

mx

srmssr ff

object can

to K. bhasya

according

They

say that he

every one must admit that a thing that

mortal

^?g: Gita

are

II.

be immortal.

can an object having an immortal nature

srrfifts,

it

its

are incompatible with each other.

regard their Highest as immortal and at the same time

is

).

27

How

become mortal

^F%*R^?j>9rwm?r

is

only an
possibly

These

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
;

believing in his real birth.

etc.,

who

written by Sankara

21)

so; if

it is

If a

thing

mortal,

change his nature.

s*T3rmsn& sreftrcw
(

ing*

22

They

These
say

it

It is

hardly ever

doubtful
refers

if

the K. bhasya was

to

commentators on

is immortal by nature, it must always remain

must always be mortal. No one can ever

leopard can

fawn%
jftsjs

Gita

never change his spots. Cf.

XVIIL

59

ftH

).

do not see the absurdity

in

their

reason*

Notes on GctufapAcla-K&rihl

58

that their Highest

that he

[ 2 ]

It is

wrong

wf

jt?$;

in this way,

he

can be

still

made

and fas^.

snjcT

( for

naturally a^er,

born and so becomes

is

though become

is

to say that a naturally

no one can change one's nature

snpr thing can

);

assuming that

become

^r?f

does

be-

it

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
t

Sankara,

w$ <jw

wsrsnfo-

QWT^TRsr *r

23

^rm*

err

^ros^r* f ft t^

swnFr *V ^ s*rqrrw^?r mww r% ^nr mxmv

w^toww
are garret wi%, ^wrrffrsrosrgrI

*rr

Sutiabhasya
(

srn%5B

*rfa

afewmot *rcsw

wr=^r,

urb"

tfrsttrwr

w
1-4

I.

?r

^r% 3sr

%sT$w3t3qra?RTcFR:

),

There are Sruti passages which speak of

^msrr ?m-

q?*rorrfir

& ^msfe

Sak. I

real

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

mentioned in the next Karika speak of

bring about a

***** of these two types of

passages,

mw$i%. To
we have no

alternative but to regard the

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

'

non-existent

and remarks

*PW.

But

'

<

mv %$m s^fo rat * **3TWcr Taittinya

according to
in

IV.

Sankara

he explains

the

is

II.

7-1

),

<wrmV. and *
same words saying
:

Chapter III

fsrwrw,

*rw

stok*

3?R3ror??^r.

Vidhusekhaia has not understood the

Kanka. Gaudapada

is

nature of the process

IV,

seems

It

'

purport

real

Prof.

that

of the

present

concerned here with pointing out the

and not the

of creation,

the expression used

3,

99

from ^fr: $vx*mR here.

in interpreting ^cRsr as

creation of

^m^

which
The Kankabhasya is
is *gcR*r

rstptiw

is

real

any thing.

In

entirely different
justified

perfectly

in the particular context in IV. 3.

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^

to mm. HrmfaK. bhasya. Even if srrq-T

creation being due

in

ffesn^ww:

is

is

explained

taken to

fi^qs^nfV

as

mean

wonderful

'

meaning of the passage is not affected, c Indra by his

wonderful powers assumes different forms which are illusory or

power,

the

'

K. bhasya apparently takes the second

unreal.'

probably

passage,
fq-srrsRf

cw

yaranyaka,

referring

to

snsTrqftsitfrr

line

3-

as a ji%

T^arwsnwwr

rg^T

^frmafwg % c!^s^Tr% ft^T

( TaittiriAs there are only two $fas in the Kanka,

$\\h ?re^r?ar

III.

also

11

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

born in various ways due to Maya, although really not

is

being born/
(

25

to the
3"

Gaudapada further

passage,

*Pif *ar

U (

contention by referring

fortifies his

3^ cw sn^ra ^OT^fcrgqrsnfr
Isopanisad 12

creation,

the doctrine of a real

Those who

).

enter into

aat ^sr

s*r

?r

am

belive in the ^*racTT3",

deep pitchy darkness.

This shows that the Isopanisad condemns the creation as futile or

unreal. Anandagiri says ^st^W*? qrwr: *rr ^fcf|^?Tr fesoqwrrJPW
I

areitsar

^rf^

ftfttarer

rr^rr

r^T^^rcH^-

SisrraT Orf^rTcsrra:

srfarftrsiet

^TrWr^Hq %*njm^
far-fetched.
just

^Rsgi^fGrsqw* ^w^nSpr WAwk*

a^wg^fofW

r%^
:

...

K. bhasya also says

%*T- srrafaWd

All

this

in the sense of 'creation', 'origination*.

3^ qsr

tott^*

seems to be quite

Gaudapada apparently understands %wfa and

synonyms

^tnw-

^^crersrcH^rqr%q&r^ s^wfcr

cr

%"*{% to

k$

be

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

Notes en Gaudapdda-Kdrihd

I00
its activities

^pbtto
no

%m for the time

also exists.

There

only

is

The second

being.

grrarat

line says that

and nothing

no

else,

no

%w,

^*nr$n:oT either.
(

$fa
22

of

26

make

etc. )

it

W^

powered by the
not in

is

mam

whatever other Upamsadie passages

that

clear

about creation,

state

Brhadaranyaka grata 3tt%^tt ^t%

wrfmssft * 1% spa: ( III. 9-26, IV. 2-4,

passages from the

3- 6 )>

( II.

The

be

to

secondary and over-

regarded as

statement about

which

3?r?Hc?gr,

is

necessarily

any way concerned with snpar^Wr. And on account of

very reason the reality can only be snr or unorigi&ated;

this

the originated |a can be smr and have

only

a snw.

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

can alone be frcT

cannot have any

its ^pror,

would change

3TrEr

any circumstances

nature

its
), it

).

srtq-

thing which

^,

is

or origination

in

no one can change

and has ^wr

reality

his nature

can only be illusory or due to Maya.

for

for this

under

To

say

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

can

%;[ thing be regarded as ^\^x

3*?FTr%srr is

How

completed

through mqr.

^ct

Wrt wr

A
<*rar

would
(

28

thing can

m\ft

come

).

^h*

...

^nSt

wot ^^t gsser

Once you admit that

would be no

is

may

finality for this

that

the

in process.

be taken as

into existence from the

sroniw nwrr 3t?h^t^

K. bhasya

implies

implies that the 3r?m%*n

^tcgrt ^g^r&sro^Nr

originated, there
qrfa

srpnfr

reality

can one be compatible with the other

abl. sing, also,

^nft

in

only

firaranrararcm-

awr q^rswrsrm thing can be

process and STr^wr

tg

be the result.

The

last

Karika had in

ready to admit that the highest

mind opponents who were

^,

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
is

rely

^n

reference to a non-existent thing.

What

is

the

use

of inquiring

tot

Chapter III

whether the 5?-^rnp was married

under the Civil Maitiages Act ?
29

It

accordance with Vedic

has been proved so far

Maya. This Kanka tells us how

his favourite view that the TffSTci;

or

rites

only be due
Gaudapada turns

that ^?ft can

that happens.

to

to

and ^?r
woiking. In dream, the mind creates different objects with

in their

the

in

state

are

state

snfnTff^T^ the same thing happens in the

srrrg; is FRTg %$ m the sfrsrg; state as in the ^r$r
;

state also.

srrjnj

The

identical

state.

( 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

that are perceived

same

state

All

3 1

which

jngr

53

srrjrrl

just the creation

is

fiom the fe^m or src^; the

are not apart

of things obtains in the

state as well.

of the

When

mind.

the real culprit in staging this huge illusory show,

is

jr?t^

ceases

pranks, being curbed by f^qj and l^rq*, |cT vanishes, as

the cause which produces it has disappeared. When a person enjoys

to play

its

deep or dreamless sleep, he experiences the absence of lar, but g^ig"

is

not the same

(

}2

Atman

as 3*irJT?rH ( see Katikas, 34, 35

When

the smrfmre

the only reality,

is

is

to

).

by the knowledge

caused

v*^ ceases

below

have any

fe^s.

that

There

being no ingr, srh; has no work to do. The srFRrmsr referred

here is named sMrJUt* in Yogavasistha, tr^jwisngrsr

to

3WT&

wrrc^cfi^T^r^TT^T
(

33

rh^?^

which

mean

clumsy,

what

&m

has

all |a, ) is

).

ceased to

be ers;

thus merely

gn^f,

(and

so has

unoriginated and

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

The
this %??.

r?t^.
Brahman.

srsr,

is

is

HI. 4.53-5 6

all

is

itself as

to

11

The jr^ which

caused the absence of

void of

first
?

*s**J

cif%i

line says

^rm

This sratip

redraw*??

<$%mm^

is

srr>

This

5rr|ra3C.
is

^mw,

satisfied

is

unnecessarily

naturally the 3^RT|fr

is

by the statement ^q*

is

^ ?to^

^029X83

srgr etc,

show

that

%m

Notes on Gcmdapada-Kfirtkd

102

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

The Chandogya

sleep.

passage

sw wra

VI. S-i

^Hwr

^r^q-

says,

^frfa

ewi^

^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
ar^r

^m

that

it

sleep

had been merged into the ^. The result is that when the deep
ovei, the mind goes on its travels again, and is again envelop-

is

ed by the illusory

mq

mh

rawrs
* fty

smr: ^ ft
arrT^ras f fir a if ansft
<rr

*reirr

H^r ^r q^sr^rr

crarr

says the

srra

Chandogya

#rows

*n ftsr

^far

... crsrosr

^g

^fPjn:

* 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
sfrf

...

3rrrar

srer

srr

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

realised

its

In short, the swfwicr in

true nature.

ujfa

is

pseudo-

stiththr and should be carefully distinguished from that caused by

3nrn*ta which makes the mind free from fevers, steady and properly regulated,
tftaa:, re^EW ( K. bhasya ), of the wise man
(

is

Prof. Vidhusekhara

The context seems

).

an adjectival expression going with mind,

ffcf^frcf^T

srarc:

srm *

it

GitaVI. 25.

ffc^Fr:

K. bhasya

tlie

beaming

w;

It is, in fact,

ftrsrar

OTWErshfo
(

36

is

rfhrilrtsfT^ar

As tm*i thus

terms associated with

it,

|fr

benumbed;
Brahman,

*rem?3$fcs*T:

on the other
away from all *nr>

ftraf?r

Brahman,
^fas^,

with the light of

fearless,

around,

cmq^m?^^:
is

^frr^:

in 3?r?*rsfte

swr cf.

^ra?r.

and 3 does not

3^,

that

^rlr^q^f ^-gr

).

in all its splendour all

srr^i%(Brha. IV. 2-4 )

because all to arises from

^:

v^xr movements, working.

being thoroughly controlled and kept

is T%^TTR^r^r itself.
jTrr

In Slftr*

35 )

hand,

show

to

cf.

3t*?t

Brahman
exist

in

sr*s

zwq,
Brahman.
is

K. bhasya

it

can be rightly spoken of in

^srsra;, etc.

)t

There being no

Chapter III

ar^r
etc.

or

mw influencing such

has no

It

the Sruti.

name and

fR*r,

103

it is

without

^ngn%*ncr shining all the time, or once for

It is

upon

things shine occasionally, because they depend

something

birth, sleep,

else.

Here, the light

splendour for ever.

ing

its

that

in describing ^f^t with

he

is

not using figurative

in

with the

is

Othei

all.

the

light

of

always there inherently, retaingrafxR

sfpT^JT:

the

dteam

qm m^r fa^ff says

form, being intangible,

snFpftsrisr,

The

language.

Gaudapada

as srar^,

^rf?r^

expressions

says
etc.

sryra; etc. fit

meaning. Prof. Vidhusekhara takes

jt^tt, in their literal

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

doubtful whether Gaudapada has this meaning in

the expression

sr^r*.

WRrgqRTR;

qs^scr:

Anandagiii also

).

The srw; with the

( 37 )
thing to be achieved by ^"jrrfa.

3T^

is

It is

3"tF3"rc

is

gTFrtffarra

Samadhi

particular

honey.

mind, in using

to mean s'q-^oi^
q^T^reirRS^qsTra^or *rarremarks ot^R? WTWfSf:
ftwfV^

K. bhasya takes

g-q^orgq^R:

( ?rs sf^trgg-f^r

of

^mmr

itself,

not some-

Prof. Vidhusekhara points out that

in

Buddhism,

which

is

hardly

intended by Gaudapada. ^irnftp ^JTii^ftm^srqrTgrnwTfsria; i^rwvft'Er&^^TThe Yogasutras call this the fafl^T
( K. bhasya ).

%irT 3T ^rm%:

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

^%

f^ira;

II

Gita VI. 25, q%\ q^srfera^ar srrmfJt tfTOr

if^sr h vt^vm crmif <ttot

Katha I. 6-10-11.

vrrwr^
(
is

r%i%5.fq

?t

'

39

ifcP* k

erf

^mmfit

spw ft^Tftri^r-

known

The *rmr%
as 3rc<T5?in*T

in

Karika 37 or the mind with the swiftm*

is no contact with

concentration where there

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

minor successes which

are

secured

by following

a less

rigorous

Notes on Gaudstpfida- Kdriha

104

They

course of Yogic exercises.

they see fear where there

c

general \

absence

really total

is

in the sense of

seems to be used not

ordinary types of Yogin.

Yogins

all

of

fear.

but

',

Yogins

'

in

only the select few that

It is

'

wrong for
^snm*R

quite

are, to be sure,

^WTSTn". It appears that the

same ^^t?tht as merely ?fpT, n fw^f:^which is necessarily void of jctstiwsts that are

are able to reach the highest level of

Gita

VI. 6-23

calls this

Hmnrsr*ff*T *fr*r*f%a*J[

the

obstacle to the realisation of the highest bliss

main

PfusrRT^TRg

to be indebted to the Gita for the detailed descrip-

Gaudapada appears

tion of the 3T^Tsn*T given in Karikas, 40-47.

40

('

the

3*w, i'W*r>

sr^

mind.

of the

i?rsrf

K.

realised the real nature of itjt^

3tw

naturally,

etc.

$nf?cr,

( viz. that

it is

w #q-rf? ^ *

c^rera

^r

mm&$ *fn%n mnm

depend upon
who have

those

^Tcf

effoit

<nirrafcir

wmm *fr$riw ^igrcrr snfw ^m^n <^ r%^T

all

that

says

without auy further

*3gs<f*a; ^fkawr

arfct^fcur

and eternal
bhasya

),

secure this

( *jqf

(Wei

s^sfe^^stsrspctt-

etoi

srr^roTTT Harare 5

sNNft-

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?.

requires

It

not at

It is

all

long-standing

persistent

an easy job

( it

ocean by taking out a drop of water

grass ) for a pjrson
tracting experiences.

iksm*

%?rcr, ff

This Karika

comment

srmfr awwFcft

wm

'

allows his

zm%

^rr

to be associated

quoted in

is

Gita

secure

to

empty the
end of the small Kusa

with

PancadasL

dis-

Cf.

VI.

%?w% r% &$&& ^5^1

...

qft&frr:

i%f|*?i<n^R in the Hitopadesa to

WOTrftr^nflrr^r^

by the

mind

effort

like trying to

Madhusudana
23 ).
on the above Gita passage says w%rqWr-

*ft*ft$f*rf5tfin%?rsn

*r?7E5trr

Saiasvati, in his

qrr3[r

who

is

zsmfenTsv

'

trefcmh

Madhusudana then

illustrate his

w%(^w&fk

point, sra

eftararrfSr

ff^iftfo

*\n%fe

refers to

wapm^
swsto-

105

Chapter III

srt

eras*

tsrrg^ra;

3><rrg*rcft

T5#

trfsm&Twrnr

w.

^www ^E5^^?rr%-

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)

^gTTrr

compares
(
( cf.

42

fnftftirc to errg frsrs,

Gaudapada says

^3f$* ff

SfSR**;

#rto

11

rr?r:

^<$&r

flfhpmjsrsr

sbemror

=g-

35^

^r^?^^

mind

The

VL

qspR"

Gita

is

),

ft

^^
war-

wmft*

srwriN g

*w?tot 3

but there are sqrss, a

to achieve his
First,

faars

^Sirs
sra

no doubt

difficult

nwri

^srrq-

34-56

^^

Karikas 42-45.

constant vigil against

the

Gita

very

is

T^rrfr srsft

3THtffTr?HRr sfwr

II

ll

described in

that R^rRJTf

swot

warr ^Rr^tcggqnra:
resort to which enables the
are

both are %%&&.

srmfa
I

the

These

goal.

w^

scrnrs

should be on

and ^ir which are continually distracting

particularly

harsh' against

sent,

%?r

stst

?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

11

m^ ^m^t

11

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

pleasurable

friend.

can

Such

is

not the case.

can do as

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

ment of

*n*r?%

sqw* *$wnita

Madhusttdana Sarasvati on

Gaudapada Karikas

are

also

sruwnwriNr, return srmtiri%q^rfN5^r-

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

wr

or Brahman, one

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

Notes on

bad

all |ff

fr^rca;
gr

idea

JT?r^r:

a^r^nf??**?:

44

),

%mvx $\*m

"

g.'^tflr-srgscq-

qr

^m

epra*fin

rwr?*Rr ft*#rT%ft

^rumma; ablative
t^w^r^r when there is

accusative plural or

^ro^wrg

There should be thus

singular.

first

tremor.

should be followed by

ifTflfwr; this

icOT^rft^r^rm?<T

Madhusudana

Gaudap&da-RariH

There are four impediments in the way of

*r*Tsrnw

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

mind

to put the

and not allow

this daily oblivion,

He should

state of

awakening.

mind

where there

So the

not enlightened silence.

the silence of the grave,

is

^nra should hasten

it

in the state of

be

to

awakening from

distracted

also realise that

while

in the

the sasqffang' of the

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
(

to see that

it is

K. bhasya

%\m

),

h *cft

27-28

wm*

the Vedantasara,

He

ftwcfcir

VI.

JTW^Rfasn*
wbiw

24-26).

mwftq& *TW* *v^\ft&*$*mim*t

( Madhusudana ),
$*rnr is the same
(

the

^s

^rwriTO K. bhasya

( *r*r,
),

^r

|<?

and

srgr (

mwm finrw-

^[t trsmjfff

^WW^*
as the
tfrs

jewy
of the

Madhusudana

^m\i for *msrr<^. This Karika is quoted

).

in

On q ^tw&g;, Madhusudana comments as follows,

appears to take

hut to

or

Prof. Vidhusekhara reads

Sift,

vnt

(Gita

Cf. ^sqrsrtnri^

StE^

in the Gita ( VI.

Yogasutras.

by the fwrs.

not again attracted

iscwr ^fc^irasr ...

arfi>s?ra *$ wg[ii

JCTnhir

is

?w

to refer not to

pseudo-sleep

caused

the state of deep sleep or

by indigestion, over-eating,

fatigue etc.

45

The *nre should beware of the pleasurable

sensation
9*7$ as well, for that smacks of rofor which

the practice of

has no place in zmqtito.

sudana in two

ways:-

srwr

R^f

r*r

is

explained by

t^*** ,*

f5
WTOwrft^rR^: ^^s^i

Madhu-

ft^rfJ^wft^ftqir

(ii)awr sr*T&*?r.

Chapter til

ftwr^ra^mTsr^iqf^i^?}:
fTq-c^ ( Madhusudana ).
46

In the

K. bhasya

half of the

first

107

srgnithprrf

and

r%T<T

r>*T9snic?r;T

),

only

Karika,

$y*r

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

sudana
<ftf*rer

fl

to.

3T=g[^ (

*raf%tT<w

* ^r%3>r?<ra?r

srarow
also

is

sqrcrr

f^rosnEfajsqi^

);

^tttcT

sr%

K. bhasya

Laftkavatara X. 94.

The

Madhusudana

^r

Cf.

).

expression ftrnmr

gfTx?r?^ ( Anandagiri). Cf. m^a-^^fSr^r^TR^^rrPrT^^TrfrV T*5rf*nrftir

sur^if^rw^Rf

sr^Rsnri *$k

feirrown

II

48

<*ro

( II.

Sht

71 -72

).

11

jtiwt

Gita V. 24-26

*wpt

|cr is

the

that

*mfr
i%*r-

srsnnTFrc^ gfa

VI, 27-28

),

fagw

is

not different from

is

firasq-

nothing but
of the mind.

the

jt?p
It

^%
with

follows

no ?ewt in reality. The best

nothing can ever be born, and that srarfeteTsr is the only

therefore that the stjT srr?Hq; can have

^r?q- is

also

),

f^wwrassreitrsfir anrftwr-

i%bst(ct h

the highest bliss

The whole

sw<t gsrforfuFiw: ^fm^Rqr:

The 3OT5^B^

Brahman or

the srarfhwr*

...

^^^^TR^r? cT

e^T

ftfenwri?

n^fn-

arrsft

),

?ftnr

Erafor %sw; 3T^*r> * siwr wifirjpr s^cTmrercoTK. bhasya )

qffasOT^mg^KtaRJhr OTS^wrarfitowTfST?-

firwarra;

^^r%

Madhu-

Hf% sr<ror ssar

Gita VI. 19. srcnsrra h ^f^flcwT-

^rc$^wr$^wr?ff*fe ^t^ q:w

ftrar*Tt5W*c!*Rr

<w

used to express the same thing by the Lankavatara.

47

rrsffcT

cf. ^r^rr ^rqr Rsrrar*fr

gwft sinm?**:

?ra^

spftnrrora?r

arfSnpr ?$** *$&$

K. bhasya

true doctrine.

CHAPTER

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
This

is

called

It

Gau4apada's teachings.
salutation to fij^i **

contains a

also

which expression

containing a

Hf*ra*crr

generally taken to refer

is

to Narayana by some, and to Gautama Buddha by others ), many a

Buddhistic philosophic term and a reasoned exposition of Ajativada
(

see Introduction for a detailed exposition of these topics ).

K. bhasya thus introduces

^QjrcT^rn%TR^
existence

ing

is

smfo-3rr?fR: ( K. bhasya,

Prof. Vidhusekhara

w>

assigned to

Prakarana:- sftjpRfttiftrjrWTOfT

this

for sp?

).

and

objects, elements of

^mg

one and the same,

are

according to Advaita view. Both ^tr and *r& are

common
below

property being
(

), 3Tm%5rc^r

in IIL 6 above
f^rito is

)>

realised the

srifs

implied in III. 8 above

realised

^cfterr,

|rcr is

Karika

by

his

not different from

we

fl^i %X

best

to

below

).

|rort-

should

it

^q-,

that

who

'

Brah-

is,

Gaudapada
surq.
amongst men or bipeds )

^rrcFf^T-like

qrjfs

Whatever the exact reference to

who

is

usually associated with

but so are the epithets,

farrpra?,

m to refer to 1^

being

as

f|[<Tcff

3?>

it

meant, for Brahman could

not be said to have been realised by Buddha.

literature,

to

( referred

think that

from the

sn^TST-Hke %th, the

is

Karika

already declared to be

could not be Gautama Buddha

that this expression

sttw^

the

srrqsTQrj

in

used as a kind of adverbial clause,

the

srgp*.

),

like

to

( referred to in Karika 91

as being not different

In III. 33,

salutes in this

who

referred

usually taken as going with qrwr;

be taken as s^y^rat

man

STnm^HSTB?^

awr^r

what mean-

does not matter

It

4
.

%^T
Buddha

*nrr$r,

*r*

It

is

true

in Buddhistic

^rcraro,

etc

The

^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^ari-

MBh.

uses f|qa[T

wmm

IF

Chapter

JTOpftft

SW3[ <renw*

why

as to

the

is

Are

we

to

m*

question has been raised

at

the

beginning of the

conclude that

the

Fourth

Gaudapada has no

Fiist Prakarana.

alone

<wfccns*ft

I09

snfffsgte

work of Gaudapada

See Introduction

fire trawft srfHfqrqrr^fqr^ra- qfcw^rsrfrr^rsEf^or srfMrnr *rera (

Prakarana

...

3T*m%<r?r

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

the ninth or the last of the

dhyanas or meditations called

nine

3*35s?T%fTT or the successive states

of dhyana

which the Buddha

taught and are found frequently in Buddhist texts \ He also tries

to show that arwjfcsrtn is nothing but srgftTnr meaning thereby ' a

yoga which

ground
its

not one that can be attained with ease

is

All this

is

on the

9R^{^

is

sheer special pleading ( see Introduction

).

that s<T$rfasrc ( Pali qrrgftffre )

opposite

',

is

and

g^rr%jfit

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

towst and

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

the

above that

^rms

sfifcr.

srtcT is

|cT is

stf^g-not containing contradictory statements.

Prof. Vidhusekhara on the strength of the expression arfsrar? and

c
that
artShRT, comes to the amazing and unwarranted conclusion

the aspariayoga was not originally taught in the Brahmanic system

of yoga ...in

acceptance of the

among whom

the author himself

by the Vedantists,

aspariayoga

included, there cannot be raised

is

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

how
exist.

knows

3 )

( see

Introduction

).

In order to establish his

qn^tefTOTTV held by the

Those who

believe in

3rerrfrf37S">

tfmus,
real

Ir^rfaqjs

Gaudapada shows
ate.

origination

fitst

cannot possibly

have naturally td

Notes on Gaudapdda~Kdrifa

no

believe in the relation of cause

jw^,

srrfa

^cratoljrat

and

In Karika III. 23 above,

effect.

was whether

the point under discussion

the creation was real or unreal

t^W was

hence

there

taken

to

^?w means of the existent \ because here

mean <rcmw )>
(which is taken to be self-evident)
origination
the point is how the
'

here

comes into
( 1 )

effect.

^qr mmftc*fa

These are the

tos, ^enreTf^s

among

the Buddhists

Their view

qftoTm^TT%3S, t*nftrcs
the sept

is

in the

in the

new

something

is

^or

it%$t; when we

but a real transformation

s?W*T<T>

from the

produced

%vftm *rs^ur m<nRfr

however

( trc

^rw-sr,

ra

say

*TC,

the

m^T^^oT

not a

is

are the titles,

sr^OTsrn^s. Their view

between them

is

not

exists

produced, what happens

is

object produced from ^i%qn, but there

relation

Thus ^e
^ already

that

fettr-,

).

mmm^frcf These

the Buddhists)

).

prior to origination.

or

is

( as there

that

^reTS %*f?$

is

intimate

no flraqw between arg and

is

sm^^re does not come from

is

m^ii^^s (among
^sr is a new (3**ni)

cfrg

is

qpT^f

3wa; before

its

origination.

Thus

the gtTnferi^s deny production of an ar^j object, and

the src^Tihrrf^s

As there can be only two

sets of objects

$3 and

object.

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
that like

triumphantly.
(

If a thing

You

Originated.

3TO0 3Wa;

will

can change bis

|r%g;s >

is

it

cannot be originated, for

cannot surely die twice.

it is

already

Similarly if a thing

is

remain for ever, for instance the srrssrrgsr. No one

$nrrr under any circumstances. frsr??cfr Wtt The
it

si^s and l^r%^s

establishment of the

contradicting each

doctrine

other,

simply help the

of non-origination.

Prof. Vidhu-

sekhara says that in Karika 4, "the Acarya now proceeds to mention

the doctrine of the Buddhists who subscribe to neither of these two

views asserting absolute non-becoming

takes f^r^rffflSST as fSfe^tT:
( Buddhists

who do

3*5*n*

( ajati )

and explains

of things *\
3T3*t

as

He

also

snEtrarfipt

not subscribe to any extreme views, but

tyk;e a


IF

Chapter

The Buddha

middle path.

does he hold that

it

til

does not hold

the teachers alluded to in the

present

Karika are

nation

of the existent or of the

is

is

no

We

non-existent,

origination ( aj&tim khy&payanti

have stated

nor

but

from
origi-

that

assert

te ).

views

Vidhusekhara's

Prof.

different

as

pp. 102-104, in bis edition of Gaudapadakarikas in his

We

exists,

to whether the

those in Karika 3, as they do not discuss as

there

any thing

that

does not exist). According to Prof. Vidhusekhara,

given

own

on

words.

have no hesitation in saying that Prof. Vidhusekhara has com-

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

fesRprT: (

according to Prof. Vidhusekhara

as philosophers belonging to the

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

opposite school, whose views he does not share,

l^rfq^s in the

last

Karika.

putants thus actually

ft9^r<S3*n:

come

ma y

also

m ean

'

the dis-

to be srtfcRS supporting the 3T3TfrarT?

'-

Again, the

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

as holding

4
I

The
The
is

say that there

reply

^arer srrfe:*

is

^ one

* *fwn T%r%a:

necessarily an sp^cf

The
The

*rft?7S

|^tr%'3?s

thing to be produced

).

IhrrrNs say that there

is

BT^rT^ 5W%:>

^rfturs reply sr^cT hst swra

transformation of a *$$ thing ).

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 )

that

or origination

Gau4apada

is

at

all

Under these circumstances,

no ground for quarrel with his

possible.

declares that there

is

Notes on Gautfapdda-K&rika

112

who have made his work easier, and

expound how the sTrrrrNr? transcends all frsrr?.

proceeds to further

opponents

6-8

ing that

These three Karikas are the same as

srtfcq-

str? (in 6 and 6-8

and

20 and 20-22

*T!^r ( in

#^

).

III.

20-22 except-

are substituted

K. bhasya says

^r^r[rT%5Ti

for

*rrw and

^farh%

STOTT-

and Stsrofct ^reRnftsfasqw: wm\k~

^mm*w?m?hv%wwzmw%%%%$*w Gaudapada before subjecting

?5tW!F

Karika 6

the views of the ^rn^s and t^ffops to

these Karikas which contain

have been substituted for

Prakarana.

It

*nsr

snf

would be

even

felt

quotes

what origination
seems to
1,

used in Karika

occurring in the Karikas in the third

whether Gaudapada himself

some

responsible for this change or

hiatus

is

to say

difficult

is

criticism,

a general idea about

As the word

really connotes.

detailed

copyist did

Actually,

it.

is

no

these Karikas are dropped here.

if

As origination necessarily involves some change in the

concerned, Gaudapada first explains what is

nature of the object

meant by

sr^fa"

cteristics

( s<r*rrsr ).

or nature
sr^ra

).

stftrftpS' which

[ 1 ]

never gives up

sr$r%

has

become

object due to the acquisition of supernatural

presumably was

on

ftqifffr

K. bhasya

K. bhasya
[

Gaudapada

etc.

^^

q-s

'TWR^Hn'a^orsr^r^nt^TOT sift

K. bhasya

3F*rfo

K. bhasya

q-T

wfirroerr %srfcw

is

the

used in the sense

wm

qrantf

ftaforfc-

).

K. bhasya also adds ffanvfaftc

STr%%&

war

mpi^rorr

trust.

mw*zm wrrefi: ^

* ?>m*n*

chara-

powers and we have to take

*hr?
%: jfafc
tffaftnft

^srfoift sjarwnsci

own

part and parcel of the

pow er

possessed of Yogic

this variety of sr^PrT

its

of four kinds:

is

same

as

W&&

acquired, but

Afetaft *

ncfaiferer

according to sNhfos,

become second nature

'/

here

it is

IV

Chapter

10

Here perhaps smh should mean sass

bhasya says

K.

113

The

).

imagine

sffas

^^t^ct: K. bhasya ) that they are

death, and experience accordingly ( cf. *r

3^**3;

mkm

^t^t

l^Rrt

^3*c*

wmmik

or snwra: as the

and

wr?*^ arH??^

grrfa

Gita VIII. 6

*r?r cT^rsr*nr%rP n

***nxmn

subject to old age

).

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

creation of the world

means

that sp*R

Let us analyse this view of the

etc.

becomes tr^(

We

is

transformed into vt^,

that sp*t?t (

OTTO

) ltsQ

c^nr).

In other words,

and the same

^rf^q-s,

*^

originated

is

but fl$^ and

srqrr?r

are

one

).

ought to say that

said to be sra

originated

srsrr* is

but sh-tr

ls

^ so

).

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

%ra,

f^r

? ( srsrr*

f^rfrol

*$7%<TK$%$r*

&rfa4fara swfiraw:

trerflEsrftrRrv

m^

K. bhasya

r?*t ^>f^fcr^:

1%

).

'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
(

one,

1%

The

*n*str

grrtf is 3fr?7

your theory that the

3^wr from ^rot

egg bad in parts

K, bhasya

cj?T*ar

'

ff

Your

( i^sr^fcr ) is srsr ?

cannot be

3??^ only

$?$arr

q$^

in

parts,

qr^qrer

^m

q;^$T:

The proposed emendation g^w?*^

).

makes the construction simpler and

for

that

which

the

like

is

curate's

srsrsrrc

^?Tcr

for spsrc^irc^

very reason,

not

is

likely to be genuine.
( 13 )

ask

is

If

it is

argued that an

3*3*

thing can

produce a

there any g^rrf to corroborate this statement

Our

m$

we

experi-

ences in this world are concerned only with ^q-^r things producing

any <&$.
1

Notes on Gaudapdda~Kdrikd

114
If

it is

argued that

S?q5r thing produces

we might

a sppfj

accept the proposition that only an

then there would be the fault of endless-

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-

ness (

sqr^T==3WT*2ir

?r

down and

ing links break

14

shows

main proposition

the

falls to

the ground,,

The objector says: We can produce a ^r??r which

swf? can originate, and which also does not contain

that an

the srarcrcWTft* This #*rr*

Whk?

^Ror

admitted by

is

produces the

all

to be 3T?nf^, so also are

Now

qrrfw and |jn%^hrrer.

c^

or <$\$

$PT%^ra

wW
mm

Here the mm and m$ are interdependent and

tsrrtwcT

:>

and

3T*rfq>

So

this jTST'rT

The

should meet

Siddhantin's answer

speak of 3t?tt%?* and

mm

any

all

is:

15

CTW

is

K. bhasya

simply astounding

16 )

Again,

no use saying
It

simile in his Vedantasutrabhasya

And

Further, the

<# ( which

a non-existent

I3-

qfrar

or <s\i produces

the

in his senses argue that a

that qjnrnr andqsnf

cannot be argued that

the right horns of a cow, that spring

17 )

have

necessarily

mm

is jstsht ),

mm,

it is

mutually

be able to state the order in which

on

mm

for, in that case,

and <$m
left and

the

up simultaneously could be
them Satikara uses the firowi

regarded as having cjnsfcrww* between

its

is

fiww gjswnaufr

Can any one

both be produced simultaneously,

which

t%

( sr

qpT^sr

).

You must

the things are produced.

upon

can an 3t*tt\ thing

it is

produce each other.

may

^\m

terms to

a contradiction in

is

How

Again, your argument that

son begets the father

(

It

thing have any

associated with change in the

I

^gq^wnrt^.

How can an sraif^

^^TfJicrr siwrfir

your objections.

II.

2-17, smrf^sn^igmsrcg?*"-

which depends for

its production
cannot possibly be proved to exist
!

needless to add,

like

^rewr,

cat}

Chapter

produce any thing

tiot

115

^rfsnro^w^

icUft?ft$rf6^rr:

?r

stow

^rrm^i^r raP &fa?gz'. 9

IF

Swfirarr*:

K. bhasya

3?m-

).

we

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
( j

Further, even

8 )

if

gnsfosrctJWf can exist mutually

this

you cannot

do.

19 ) ^nFrc<n*mr can have the following alternative theories:-

[ 1 ]

The

cause produces the effect.

The

effect

This

denounced

Cause and

[ 3

is

produces the cause.

effect

as absurd in Karikas 15

and

17.

mutually produce each other.

This also can be ruled out on the ground that

what comes firsts the cause or the

the knowledge of cfhrh*? is essential and

to state

it

is

impossible

In a cFr&FRtrRnrj

effect.

implicit ( Karikas 16

and

t8);
[

Catase

obviously absurd,

which have
(

[ 5

and effect are produced simultaneously* This is

There cannot be ^r&PRonrre between things

a simultaneous origin.

There is no origination at all.

^r?f and mxm are one; <fjr is a mere ft*

( [ 6 ]

Gaudapada emphasises No.

establishing

the

siSTTrasrr?.

emphasises No. 6 and resorts

expound

his thesis.

It

and

mainly concerned with

on the other hand,
to the msrer^ and sn^grfo? *r?tr to
5

is

Sankaracarya,

would be seen

that

Numbers

and 6 are

but different aspects of one and the same proposition.

No*

of the above alternatives has not been discussed

Prof. Vidhusekhara says

first

proposition

is

now

'

it

lost

between Karikas 16 and

the second and third propositions are discussed

may

naturally expect to have the discussion also

position, but

it is

not to be found.

himself Has omitted

it ?

'

so

far.

appears that a Rarika dealing with the

For, as

17.

IV. 17-18
of the

Can we think

),

first

one
pro-

that the author

Prof. Vidhusekhara's fears are groundless,

Notes on Gaudaphda-K&rikd

t6

Gaudapada does not ignore proposition No.

being fully aware of

Those who

^rctara

first

and

^rw

gspf are

before ^\n

csrw and

importance, in the

believe that

wim

[ 1 ]

its

is

two

admit

tacitly

There

entirely different things.

ensures that

%w

only a particular
otherwise

),

^r*or has thus a particular ^rf%

q?r*f,

is

relation.

( 3fT%$T ) produces a particular

even q^ from fT%$r.

it,

however intimately connected with

mmm
This qmw relation

f 3 ]

produces the

but discusses

half of Karika 19.

produced.

<f>m are

each other by the

i,

first

to

sercjt

we might

produce the

ssn?

get

in

questioii.
If

[ 5 1

W<*

now

Gaudapada
1

and

Is this

$n%

Is this

51^

In either ease, the

;

the ^ffe

^fercnft

ijtfmzt

different
like

from

$roWr,

$prar

Or

of a non-existent nature

is

^fo would
existent

win sM* ^5?rot * sfiraror:, sftwnrr

*m*t mifavmni womHi nmmtit *t

produce the

**qfafir

****

arcrm-

mm

means { the absence of any power in the

particular^'. K. bhasya seems to connect

qj^R^w%t%^gr in

^mlr

w ^ to

wv$ (Static

Wfrfa: thus

with

not help the q^or to produce

and not different from ^pror, it is
(Read the following from Sankarabhasya on II. 1-18, 3%:

if

sfrrw itself

**

Htfros.

Gaudapada points out that the existence of $r% in the

produce a particular m$ cannot be proved.
Thus

%x$

fatfstar etc.

attacks these tenets of the srcre&ftfaTft

( a
[

would be

rcor to

the

sprf are arnwr, ^?qr%:

fc*ro*rfir-

the

so that

last

3^%

Karika,
is

to

**%:

saying ^cTST

taken to

mean

'

the

Chapter

answer the query.

inability to

sTSrfrE refers to

IV.

where two

lV

117

Prof. Vidhusekhara

'

classes of teachers

thinks

that

mentioned,

are

one holding satk&ryavada and the other asatkaryavdda.

[

Another objection

to the sraf^nrar^

is

there

that

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

^ ^la^retnarsbasartifraf

^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

*ttgq*Tnfspq;

#warai ...wrmTO

a^T^**wTaaaw?a>%waafraU~
aaa ... 3*aaWT <^a iRT^f
&3 aaaaa aafagwai*raaaiaT ^easftaaTa; sro awaaa a&r a$wr

aaar:

'ffTOta

a??a

q-WW^W^grq-^^^r

^^T*C

aarafosasronarc*
*T%aT"aa

m% ^ratframa*a?5>a

wra a % ?a?a:
1

saq?a$?a 3aTa?te?aaaf: wi

ara

5% ^a a

aw

^hswra; fipharft wreriJ

air aefrwaraTa

wJ aw

sa ara?q%*aa;

foaTfsjaa

...

ar<n%sa>sfa

qfinaw?ta

sr<fcfc

s&W^rmtfr ^rraafta: g>raoTrfW*ra

ja^rr =a ss^raa a #a s^aa ... aw
1

...

faiaaa: OTwsanant: wra* sraTaw ftaasrisaaTi:-

nOTOTaa*a>TO^*foT3aayi%a3; ... TOarfirOTvnfiraa:

wn^ra %a> a 3^rq*T%^or ^r^wrqft<arwraq^aa*rfta

srassararc:

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

?m

$w

asaa *nfcaa*mwa?a
II.

1-18

Sankarabhasya

is

explained by K. bhasya as arantfhat qttarah

sjrfaratfsnan in Karika 21 below,

ssion refers to

No.

of the alternatives

Vidhusekhara suggests that mftqrr*

which is described in wmlMtaT

madhyamakarika of Nagarjuna.

mmtoT No
neously,

on Brahmasutra

mtetm
mean

srftmftr

is

is

It

may

which case, the exprementioned above. Prof,

in

the

urfro&fe ^qr%Ta

Chapter XI

of the

Mula-

4 alternative, viz. $rf and $rwr arising simulta*

objected to, on the ground of the ' violation of the
order*.

! |

Notes on Gaudapada-Kdrikd

The accepted order between

and

mm

that

is

afterwards. Karika 16 above also refers to

w?

and

w$

Gaudapapa says
carefully

the points

all

involved in

comes

first

this.

having considered

philosophers

that the wise

^im

qsnfereowr*,

and the various

alternative theories adumbrated, have come to the

conclusion that

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

frivolous and beneath consideration.

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 ).

No. 4 goes against

thus No.

3Tg*rr.

which

says that there

is

srsrrm,

is

alone the correct

theory*

we should understand

Prof. Vidhusekhara says that by g^:,

Buddhists'.

( see

a^rriirV.

5^: and
*Tf?rfaaT

The

Introduction

in IV. 54,

f ^I

'the

expression seems to have been used in the sense of

).

In IV. 42,

*rfNn%

IgqrgrraifS

q*r

Gaudapada probably

refers

we have

snfiftg

3qrfTf^tn:

to

so

|T%m
by

that

wise philosophers

'

in general.

2Q

The

Gaudapada
producing

objector says that

it

was not

to brush aside his theory of

$tw

and

m^m

producing qn*r

how

a son can beget the father ( Karika 15 )

not

be

treated

in

that

light-hearted

correctly represents his position (

duces sfta

),

Why

sfrsr

sfirwnf

wr

the

part

manner.

produces

matter

the

The

3^ and

should mutual qn^JiTowrar

Every body accepts the

on

fair

of

mutual ot*?$TTO*W ( %w
) as frivolous by asking

be

should

sftsui^rsnT

s^r

pro-

objected

to

as authoritative.

in reply: We swifiwrffos can not accept the

have yet to prove to us how the grafasFrararc exists

Gaudapada says

You

soti.
between sfte and

sfisftf*

strictly,

speaking,

well. It

is

3^. The ^ra

it is

wrong

is

not r%=5,

to regard ifteTf*

generally held that

it is still *rr*q%

proving

Again,

gwf^r

as

IF

Chapter

^ip*

sftsr

sfrsr

3=rj^

(0

and so on- this

series

shows mutual

0)

but surely the

q^rcaHn*,

119

produced from

sfrsr 1

is

313^

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
!

may

not refer-

be taken here to enunciate a general proposition,

ring to the particular point under reference.

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

Gaudapada's reply would be:

thing

If a

able to

tell

is

really being produced,

which

the

is

its

5W$

srftasa**

that

fact that

relation with the qjnf,

viz. that there is

its

qsrsar

The

thing to be produced.

cErw and

If

srRrenranft:

(22)

shF^rrorarat

The upshot

of

not be produced from

q^:

srror

different thing, say

itself )

( *re

<nr) is

not be produced ^?rp and

we are using mere words

K. bhasya

this discussion

all

^w

srraeir is

cannot be

( STramsft r%

sr

).

that

is

view of

the

untenable

can-

that of the ( 3T*r?$rshrtr%gs ) l^rffes

produced from

equally untenable.
crct:.

prior to the

the cpnr can be apprehended,

must be capable of being apprehended too

the ( w$Ttfar$fts ) tf^trs that q^g

that r*g

already there )

is

you are not able to point out the

shows that your basic principle

unfounded.

srrrar, is

surely a child ought to be

When we

A thing

say

'a

an entirely

obviously can-

thing

is

sn^trarfaqij' sr*g TC5srrflr39raT

produced',

ST^mR*

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),

Hg;

fRRra; cannot likewise be

which adds ^ri sroftfo

produced

zmk

wfer

fa^^wi#*nrrci; K. bhasya

T%m^rc$qr%^?w*gw^T

$rfnre?^


Notes on Gaudapada-K&rtka

120

23 )

dw

src?f^

Those who speak of 3nr%, basing

and

arguments on the

their

|su%WcT mutually giving rise to 3T?m%

For,
^m\: <E$tta; IgH mmn

?tok, are

contradicting themselves.

the

if

and does produce something, there would be ceaseless

production, and an srari^rcor must produce sreif^ mm ( for $ntoT

is 3T?rrfsr

%m

and

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%

srerf^: for

wishes to read
clear )

and

snfcf: for

3m^

clear that

is

3W\\:

n%

( this

( this

is

would make the sense more

quite unnecessary

It is quite

).

used twice deliberately ( in two different senses

to give an enigmatical touch to the

line,

means

srrf^:

(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
Bauddhas.

the

tottst

means

'

another

philosophy ( qfai a?* q^srmctfrtrsrra K. bhasya;

q*?TrSrTT%^ *raff^r%3[Rcr: Nyayasutra L 1-29 ).

^[s

must be *wfr

for

ence of pain

etc.

TO,

it is

how

gT% must be taken

it )

Objective experience.

essential that one's

can the

gf% be tot^ttt

g \i% must
)

and

whom

^WTO^T**^

The

*rgrrafcrfc

that

3r?nsr

to exist (and therefore there

to account for the srrtfq^fasq"

sr^rrH"

cf.

The ^rimkrf^gs maintain

are referred to here.

turns to

another school of

srr^r,

apart from fc^rnr or

etc.

now

be TOrercr;

how

and the experi-

In order to perceive

no *r?,
? So sr^rftr
there would be

if

there

is

can TOsr^rnr arise

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.

existence
clear.

is

Vidhusekhara explains

regarded as dependent,

There

is

'

qrccTrsnrecrcrr

nar

as

( their )

which hardly makes things

no question here about existence being dependent

or independent, but about existence of the signs? itself. ^%$r:

%l*n* S flfawi- ( K. bhasya ). %fc^rs according to the Buddhists
:l

arise

from

&w*s

( ^r>
%Vth *W> wnt and ftsfH" )> smra*
$3faprs and mind, and their objects, in all 12 ), and vtj

6 organs

of sense, six

objects

and

six

kinds

pf consciousness

Chapter

(
srrrejft

25

state

but

),

lit

This Karika refutes the wrpTsferr%^s view. The

upon

takes his stand

Karika

IF

of things

gfrff (

inferior

gfrff is

as implied

inference,

srrprsr*

the last

in

and must give way to ^3?^*?r, the

( <rim*lsFNrftfSfcra:

^i\

i%

real

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

no ftfarrT, as no srrimr can exist. The f%tT

alone exists and appears as 37n$T* Thus f%*j has no
sr^rfa

or r%5TR

has

contact with sp$ ( because

w$> wrhro cannot

**jrwh|* K. bhasya

it

does nor exist

3?^: Not

exist ).

or srarvrrcr
existent.

without

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

^rsr

etc., there is

etc.

The answer

be in a position to say

nw

if

is

that

if

28

^^RfszrrW

Karika 27

fepar

qz were

the presentation by

*3pTOf*ir refinr

presenting a
to exist,

ferw

^rgrc%q q-r^r is

K. bhasya says: s^ra: ^ftftrrrr^CKarika

)

ft^Herrf^T

afteft*

wrong

we would

conforms to the
out of question
^3T|r a^smrsre** K. bhasya ).

or not* But with *re not in existence,

( swrfcr ft

the chance of

25)^1^^

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
l

vice versa, he uses

the

arguments advanced by the T%?rrararri%q;s

by the qrrgntferi^fts. In this

against the existence of srr^mr admitted

Karika he turns the tables on

the

ft^TFOTTJ^is.

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.
is

originated ( the origination of t%tT

means

its

association with snfs

).

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

one can mark the passage of birds in

Notes on Gaudctpada-K&rikd

i24
38

Actually

wrong

it is

produces **#.

that srnrfta

to say

the
( mm\n ).
There can not be *hwr of an 3T^cT ( wjt ) from
Theie
be
produced.
never
can
instance,
for
the ^r^fsrnor

An

s^fr,

Brahman

is
no sms, bence the Vedantas have proclaimed that
the second
and
take
mean
w*i
which is 3T3*. We may take anor to

all

is

half as corroborating srsf

(

in the

The dreamer

39

^r?W?^

waking

dream, he

fails

sees in

them

dream things which he has seen

having seen the unreal things in the

state as unreal;

to see

in the first line -

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

fcsr

war * T^fk

ssrftrftsu}:

awiasTPTfttf

equally unreal.

also
%r

sts^raw srmflfofir

W&3TO& * g

<rorflf sftflr

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

waking

this in the

40

From

TWn*

state.

the point of view of the highest reality

possible.

*s

[ x ]

sj^ &$gr

[ 2 ]

*5

[ 3 ]

^
(

TO

cannot have

3T*ra;

TO

cannot have

^5

for, in that case *c^

( for,

41

are unreal,

cannot have are^

3rcrs;

110

%d-

Thus

cannot have

would
for

its

ijr$tftrrnr

for its catise.

srtffawr

) for its cause.

TO

lose

<* ) for its

its sr^fcT,

cause.

Btst )

cause.

they are as two poles asunder

).

The objector says that if both smnrand 'TOT experiences

how can there be any qnWiWfrr* between them ? The
not our statement the ^rjnrifs are

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.

answer

is

that

it is

the 5rnn[3sb. J ust as in

t 'ie

In both
(

42

states, there is ftrofff, that is all.

If the

amTffor?

haveSastras taught

is

different

the highest philosophical truth,

kinds

of Upasanas,

Wqwrars

why
etc.

IF

Chapter

which presuppose that

answer is that the wise

creation

extremely

be grasped

to

difficult

nothing but gnararsr

preached for them the

t 'ie

sftrirT?!?, in

belief that

they would be in a position to understand the

ararfNT? ( this is what is meant by stt^

the

here

gq|:

who

see

on

But surely, the Buddha never preached the

have

wise

in course of

higher

wmmxm

Prof, Vidhusekhara understands by

is

taking compassion
people,

well-intentioned

The

srswcfcrrf

people

by ordinary
So,

exists

that

people realise

in the srenfrrarrs".

weak-kneed but

these

and duality

real

is

buddha

125

time
of

truth

in III. 15

).

also, the Buddhists.

3V"<rr%373[

or

arercffcrr?

either

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

injunctions based

upon

'

warns the ^T^ns against the danger of

people

not those

srrnfaT> because

who

follow

the

Sastric

they are terribly afraid

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

XL

Gita

44

the

in

srenftfrw

ft

^^OTi^fs^w ma

w*fa

40

Gaudapada says howsoever he might sympathise with

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.

instance,

perceived

knows
(

it

does not

that the elephant

45

Because an object

mean
the magic elephant shown up by
people see its movements and

can be put to practical use,

The only

is

that

is

perceived and

it

is

juggler

so on,

real.
is

For

actually

but every one

unreal.

real thing is

thus i%r?r ( also

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

is,

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#,

Notes on Gaudapada-K&rtk&

126
nor

Gaudapada

grarcg.

accepts

the arguments of the

46

fasrw or ?%tT or

being different

wr>

srgra: is

5^ are also

realised
When
nvtm xk^ri mm\v$m?m%$mmKT^

from

is

W% q^?TO5<TOra:

'

this truth

3757.

*rwnk

prrfir

m^

'
1

K. bhasya

speak of an Upanisadic passage as a ^rsr^or as

to

tos not

so-called

an(1 a!1

no #bt* trouble, ijsmsr

fir^^wajmftaiin: s?r qrawftwT^T^^uft:
there

fayrwf^

company with them.

against the mtnstaififts, but then he parts

ere

is

It

).

is

mr-

is

unusual

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

Do

are all

they arise out of i%^r?r

^^g; and srrwftsfe

When

(1)

the fire-brand

about,

whirled

ls

there

is

The answer

is

that sTTrmsTWTFs

VW*

When

is

the

appearance of straight and crook-

m$%

ed

is

lines.

the fir^TR vibrates, there

mw

appearance of

the

is

an ^

the vibration of the re^TR

of course due to 3ifNrr*

)
When the

it

is

not real
(2)

When

there

arises

there

is

the

$ffi\$ is at rest,

no
no change

appearance,
in the

stsjfct;

vibrate,it is
*Tf?

and

re$rm

not

does

without any srT^fJTT^^-

issrsr*

it is sjsr*

When the s^rft is whirled

(3)
about, the qt^srsErc% appearances

anpsrrpTOFsr

do not come in from

come

side

a place out*

When
in

the f^ra" vibrates, the

appearances do not

from a place outside

it.

it,

(4)

When

the

When

wfflft is at rest,

the appearances do

the

fe^H

is

at rest, the

not go out

appearances do not go out else-

elsewhere, nor do they enter the

where, nor do they enter the

(5)

The appearances can not

be going out, as they are not $$qs;

only a
&*ent*

g^

is

capable

of move-

The

appearances

mq&w&sm

as they are not 53*7$.

is

capable of

involving

cannot be going out

Only

movement.

a ^aq-

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

^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

language

(53)
firsrra

In the

which

Karika explains
be
is

two

gsq-s,

last

one,

is

Karika,

it is

so that one

one, immutable,

so.

is

and ^r? have

relation between the two

^wrsrs

( ctist

nothing
or

wfercoror* ). Though there

rf^gwr ( which are srssq", being

upon

so

else,

the

case

of

s&rs

is

srer

there

is

any

sreqrsrq-fo

and tc^k can have a

the CTtfercownr between

jjots ) it is

ra*TlT

cannot have

it

qnifercanrorj because
)

in

can be the cause of another gsq\

^sqr

there

was stated that

it

no g&nfanT&mra' was possible, This

^nrarcswre implies that there must

srer etc.,

why

obvious that

vrsm and

depends

+ 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

they different from

W&PffW
(

54

r%?rr?r, as

we have

already proved.

So no cRq^

possible.

is

we have to fall back upon

The ft?F?rarnfo[s seem

So,

unassailable doctrine.

srarffonr as the only

to hold that snfs are

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

t%tT3t

to the Buddhists,

from the

different

are

especially

really

ST^ff^s

srwgf^r smsr^pfr
( 55 )

ghosts or
there

is

because

the

fsr^TR

of Gaudapada

is

f^R of the
(

Buddhists, and the Buddhists who

could not have preached the srsnfcHTT?.

K. bhasya

).

with the seizure by

> usually used in connection
hence, strong attachment or adherence. As long as

sfTOjn

spirits

the superimposition of

exists the ^nf^renronr based

causality disappears, the

srifs

on |a\

upon the srrctfq; or r%*TR, there

But when the adherence to

|cf also disappears.

v^\

s^tf?^n>^if^

Notes on Gaudapada-Rarihft

28

Ig^^:

*T%

56

that of

|fr,

57

).

With the disappearance of Ig^r^r? and consequently

there can be no Sarhsam,,

^fa

K. bhasya

ftif^osrasr*:

explained by

is

K. bhasya

the Buddhists admit of

( ^T^rft^ ^m of Sankara ) and

Gaudapada uses the expression

empirical truth

us

to

WWt

that

the instrumental %%<qj does not

empirical truth

'

Prof.

).

fit

We

93FpNt*

Karika, argues that the ^nsn^

last

swff

attacked.

actually

is

of

sense

meaning

in well with the

of opinion

are

appears

It

the

in

this

He

Karika

also

likes

Gaudapada

that

who, being told that there

here answers the objector

the

^wm^.

Vidhusekhara thinks that in

the Sasvatavada and the Ucchedavada are

to read ssprr^r for

%mxsm ^fesnftw
^etr, ^r%W*r

as

two kinds of

is

no

^m*

in

experienced, and

we may

not be able to say whether the sfte comes

or the st^c comes first, but we must admit that the arWfC

that

it is

first

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

coming to an end is
and Brahman alone exists

talk of its

am

^.

it is

Every thing that exists

futile.

on account of the fact that

The reading ssun^ proposed by Vidhusekhara ( against

),

Mss authority ) appears simpler, but after

same as h^ht in the case of an sm object.
all

all

the $raro

the

is

"

58

The

ws

may

refer

to

the

admitted by the Sarvastivadi Bauddhas

(

ffo*rorcs +

ftrorcarcs

+ 14 fe^rsrgrBOTs
3*sTfa*rwR*hr
says

that

really

Maya which
(

59 )

viz. the

).

is

and

They

stR^th*

^tcscTOits

divisions of Reality

75

72
)

^cRifs

wsrsr,

sfa^m^thr

are popularly said to be born.

they aie not

born.

They can

Gaudapada
to

also really non-existent*

the qfe

is

m*tar.

A mm^t

Karika

last

coming from

mimm,

cannot be called ftar or T%mr, because it really does not

Similar is the case with the *4s, *
3 *wr*lm Wroi

sm

&3K?ST

and

compared

be

This Karika explains the statement in the

5to of

^cpjjfs,

1 1

t%ttw-i-46

l?^}: ( K. bhasya

).

exist!

srnit

st

IV

Chapter

60

(
(

The

Buddhists speak of 72 src$<raiSs and

on Karika 58 above
^TT^rT. Gaudapada says

see note

latter

129

that everything

),

that

the

in

3 3rcN?ren?5

^T^ff

the former being

and the

which holds

sFmicTC??

nomenclature ^n^ar and sisn^cT is

meaningless. The highest can not be described in words ( *t<tt srrer
is

the

^;?r,

fr^crer Taittiriyopanisad

describable

nature
(

All

'

ar$r&TS.

fir^j

in the

f%WT5^[5T caused by

same

as III. 29,

as

it

is

Maya

not possessed of any

ideas

like

this

is

has no scope in the case of

of this

srsr sths.

only in the illusory origination.

grrsra; state or the

appears to have that

srre,

'

has scope

fsr^gj

whether

),

consisting of

this is of that nature

61-62

srtfs,

4-5

II.

&$

due to the

are

state,

the f%fT though really void of uriTsng^in the two states. Karika 61 is the

[q*

with the difference that f%TT ^fer srnm is substitut*w; Karika 62 is also the same as III, 30, only

ed for *q?5?rf wrosr

substituting fe^T for

(

63-64

rre:.

Whatever the dreamer

the t%tT of the dreamer and

T%tT again

is

^q- only

dream,
the

is

g^q- to

f%tt;

this

Thus ^STW> ^5T*

one and the same,

are

there are four kinds of m\^s } arngsr and srf^3T

being the remaining two

3"ST

sees in the

not different from

dreamer himself-

to the

^^tT, and ^5n%TTS^r

zw^m and ^?3T

is

refer to all the four kinds of sfbr s.

the four main quarters,

fsfg

the four by-quarters, the upper and

the lower are the ten quarters.

(

65-66 ) The situation

dream state.

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

characteristic features peculiar to

thought of by the t%tT

^gr rTf^Tfrf^sr

rasrfcP

&%twx

is

r{

*%th

itself,

wmH wr^rnr yt q$

ff

1% H5r srar<nsra*n*f

used here in the

qm smrorac

K. bhasya

them. They are cognised only

srmorsjprg^ri' t%tT 4rr 5*r

51W& ^^ftrgm^msrm

sense
).

t%

of

$yroT

crarmrfcr

^i

srtfqr
:
1

srarrcsqTtr

K. bhasya

characteristic,

Hms Prof.

wr^
).

$^$&ftr

Vidhusekhara

reads f% cT^afrm srtwr but curiously enough translates the same as

!

'

but you do not say what remains there*.

17

The

objector asks:

If


Notes on Gaudap&da-K&rifal

130

what exists ?
Gaudapada holds the view

both f%TT and ^?q- have no independent existence, then

The answer

is

nothing dependent

which

that the f%fr

f^rTfrarn^ts as

sees the %?q-

exists.

not the

is

highest reality.

Gaudapada understands them, seem

endowing them with some

capable of producing the ferTHTOHS,

The

to regard r%rr as

sort

of reality.

68-70

How

The

objector remains

still

He

unconvinced.

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

and

g^q*

at

the

powers all

these are manifestly unreal as the

common man

under-

these not undergo the process of

and annihilation before our very eyes ? There is there-

stands the expression, but do

origination

fore nothing surprising

if

unreal t%tT?S*T comes into being and

the

ftj$cT$: ff?#w^u%wf^Ti%cT:, Gaudapada is a believer in

the yogic powers, perhaps being a great Yogin himself.
dies.

71

This Karika

is

the

same

Nothing

r%#

is

as held

Buddhists
73 below

ever produced or born

by the Buddhists.

who

sw

admit

'

3tW

to be of

Gaudapada repeats

as III. 48.

only true

his thesis that the 3nrrr%srr3[ is the

and not t%tHTP ^hj: and ^trst

^w^ This is a hit against the

two kinds

see notes

The %$ consisting of srr^r and

( 72 )
nothing but the vibration of the f%TT which

rightly called

sr^f ( 3T*r#r
SW* Sr%
ftflw^n%TOsnpiftf*sh ( K. bhasya ).
(

on Karika

).

sn^

is

enunciating

doctrine

K. bhasya says ^3 ftfihw&sr

73 )

#:

and subject,
and therefore

object

is ftffhrqr

#ro

T%

fw *w

^Rnprf ferwr * ft%f err

mm vm^wmi w f^*&&**n^nfrrcrsr firtrmwroi

51

so that accord-

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

the

it

tinction
reality.

is

due to Avidya and

firerew as TOgrwswiftoi
says by

is

intended only as a step to

know the
vwmi-

thing existing by TO&rfWTOTT (K. bhasya explains

way

does not really

exist'.

Prof. Vidhusekhara

of introduction to this Karika 'the author says that the

and the object is

and not in absolute ( paramartha )

existence of the duality consisting of the subject

only in empirical

sainvfti )

IF

Chapter
truth. For a thing

may

131

which is dependent ( paratantra

and not in absolute truth

) for its existence

J

exist in empirical

sekhara

here

also, as usual agaist

q^^rfa^qr

into TOrTsfrsftw^ror

requires
^r5?qr

it

and

it is

Prof. Vidhu-

Manuscript authority, emends

on

ground

the

supported by Buddhist works.

that

the

sense

He

says

^rnr-

the same as srnrAsqTqrr %$?rr which he explains as %%m

is the cause of existence or appearance of things. Not

is

which

satisfied

with

roF3ft t%

the

this,

all

^TW

Professor

Prof. Vidhusekhara points

kinds of

says

instead of qTcf^rsfvr^rqr

^m, w=$mm

first

that

we should

read

proposed by himself!).

out that the

Buddhists admit two

corresponding to ^rafntsTT of the Jainas,

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

11

II

grq-rq-

and q^rr^

is

the

thing, according to
(

e. g. *Ji*rf?nlr?r

g-qq-.

elephant

qrrr?^ is

one of the three

Buddhists,

the
)

qnccT?^

or

qrfor%<itT
as=f>

sr^rarrs

dependent

of a

imagined

or ^f^rar,

( 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

).

The qft^TcT corresponds

the sm%*m%9s

to

^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

^TPTT^ fa^Tf^, awfa* TO^mT%^m?pr

sqsrsRraTOT,

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

Karika 57, you also said ^r??qr

this ?

3rr*ra ^q*a(.

How

can

you

reconcile

Notes on Gaudaptlda-Kdrtkd

132

The answer is; Karika

58

makes

srnfrw, so gfra

is

taken to exist on account of the

reality

f?gx$?r

The
is

cpf?7?T stflnqr,

&ankarabhasya on Vedantasutra

The Buddhists
^% should be true,

II.

The answer is: The Buddhists have

and may endow

but in reality the

( cf.

Mammata

thing admitted

silencing an

1-14

exist

ir% grfe

in

WOT

).

own

their

terminology

^rr% cannot be

in

real.

who

objector

complains that v&;mq

while Mammata would class

qwnnrTfRf gnmsqwrci.

safcf,

prakasa II

not

does

spa

So whatever

with any characteristics they

regarded by the $tfa^s as gars,

as

mm*i

<*rrc*rrfa

'

Kavya-

).

mean

3rftw?i% seems to
fected

3%

their favourite

like,

them

exist.

admit %%fa as ^?t; so what

objector says*

accepted by

etc, are

not

the

that

quite clear

^m ^^frn^rm6^^TT%^qR^6T^mff

is

it

not born and rnqr does

is

srwsraT

or srfaftwraT ( evolved, per-

#??%.

K. bhasya's explanation of

crct^st

.-.as

Hf^iwareSKtfr

far-

is

fetched.

74

The

outright. If

objector says that

^m

ing simply because ^frf

The answer is:

Karika
be

We

).

'

stick to

associated

it is

says sfhn 3OT, are

Certainly

'

( this is

Again,

reality.

as being born. TOTHnat stfkRorfip

ii$*t f?frF

snw*

or

that

sttct

TO?srrfin%<smT
is,

even

m**l

is

as

he

sjsr,

we going

made

).

different

clear in

the

^w^%

next

cannot

%%fa which bears the

about it

thing or the idea

how we

*mr. ?wrr, that is,

K. bhasya says,

called
is

srer

sw really

this

take

q^T^%%nVr

we cannot

ftrff^ only with

validity to the Rr^TSTr^r etc. prior to snwrafar;

fetched

to discard that teach-

our proposition that the

with any

expression

condemn ^r%

fair to

is 3sfpTcT ?

Buddhist brand does admit even an

the

not

a
is

call

the

view to give
obviously

far-

Gaudapada says that ideas about ^r% differ according to

philosophers. But they involve ^Ttfercarcnr which has been

declared to be baseless. So, even

if

the %%fa blunders into the right,

Chppter

that cannot be accepted as

premises.

To

133

on wrong
pure eye-wash and self-

because

truth,

hold that ^r^^fer

IF

^m

is

is

it

based

is

deception.

75

there

The

is 3rfirr%5f$T

reason
for

an

why ^fcT cannot

spsa; ( 3*^ = not

us any truth,

tell

existing, unreal

is

that

viz, the

gsrWROTWS' which means belief in $3. Actually in the case of

cannot be any ^cT. When a person knows that there

reality there

cannot

any jrriTJnpnn^ the sr^crrnrf^sr caused by cotVrot-

exist

str has no scope. K. bhasya

FfRTRTTr

Rfwmm^Tmr"w^T:,

construction
subject of

and

?r

less

otstcT,

anything,
subject of

srnra

Karika 74, or
(

76

mentioned

it

^nsra* <pn^rr

supplies

q:

to

make

the

We

that srfsrre^ST cannot

be

said

to

cognise

jqrahr has the sense of a nominative absolute, and the

^
?r

so that

mean

to

^r:

might take 3T^rf*TRR??r: as the

but then grsnsnsr sqrcr would go with sjmm^r

involved.

might be objected

it

takes

srbr*

may
*

be different from

%>, or ^:

refers to

3m:

in

n Karika 71.

The SrOTWsnsrff tjs correspond to

sraR^RT?2^g* wwm- ).

in III, 16 (

the

w?

three

srrsros

^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

i%mTf(

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

the explanation given in the K. bhasya

%w ^

i^Hc?i^rTcT^rg?q^^q' i%w*s

^^E^ifcrsJ:

as unsatisfactory.

nothing corresponding to

m in

w^w^mw?cri%RWTr

^wsq^Wh

wrrsrnifor finrraT-

( 1 ) There
and the sentence

His objections are

the

first

line

no antecedent

is

is

in the second line.

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
incomplete, and (2) there

It

is

to

Notes on Gaudaptida-K&rikn

134
and 3TRT%tT,

state

its real

any change. K. bbasya

as
or we might take

The

Karika.

<*rs also is

The

expressions

is

^ffcr^fcp,

rather than f^Tf

the person (

jjrgr,

so

3?u;jpra(,

him

regarded by

as the

the

secures

the

is

that

it

of

subject

13 ff^ however agree better

who

exist.

of the t%tT

3TRfnTTrTT

Vidhusekhara reads

might agree with f%Tf which

3T^?f.

cannot really

fam&& and

as the an^/fal*. Prof.

same

the

as

this 3*g?<ri% state

rightly calls

without

perseveres

it

referring to q>^ in fr?snw q?# ^<T : in the last

H?^r^~ WTTre<TO. The

(78)

and

just 3Tgr<TT%

is

with

knowledge.

right

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

know what happens

to

that

is

satisfied

as the

persists, the f%=rT is tossed

But when

it is

who

of m$r,

state

that state,

realises

and

by the present Karika. ^:=3fter:.

As long

79 )

to a person

^mnrftlsr involving

the

cannot be any %q or

realised that there

belief in

3^ thing

about from one

%*%

to

another.

3r*g,

the r%rr

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

fVto^

the subject of

^r: is

the

first

half being regarded as a parenthetical cause.

(

80

When

the f%xT

is

thus fully ft^Tf

in that state, the person can be said to

which

same always, unborn and

the

is

Prof,

Buddhas.

II. 53,

rather refers to

It

...

*$

the

this

realise

11

II.

sr^rr

this.

expression

Rsmsr^rs of the

% *^smfa m? st^tt srftrfeanr

ffij: <w*fii8&

i^rowww

that

11

II.

11

68

II.

).

qjRr*3C

refers

Gita

to

the

gft-

( cf.

61, srarsr%?ra> srrgr

65, srorrow ^rsrrir foorffrrrfit snsfo:

srfirfaraT

Reality

from %q; naturally

free

only the enlightened ones are lucky to

Vidhusekhara thinks

and remains steady

have realised the

ffaqToflr-

finwr: *rtw, something to

be realised by.
(

81

^f:

asnanro*:,

^th^rtw:

Prof. Vidhusekhara wishes to

take

*%

sense, *r&Asre arrOTra^TR or 3n8raraw%t%.

wwros,

but wishes to

emend

it

into

srcassmnqra: (

the

in

He

wrrg

K. bhasya

special

also

sww

reads \**n
C

).

Buddhistic

^&ng

srrg:

me^n-

IF

Chapter

ing

the essence of reality.

The

135

reading as

gives a satisfactory

it is

however

likely that Gaudapada may have deliberately

used here the Buddhistic expression wfcrrg:* gsr^RW ^*T vrrcnn^

sense. It

...

qrrirr

is

fMfWSr
faf^m sprT?rn$taT%rrr sngwiftofr
^q- srvrrer wfir ( cf. ri
waft ^t! * srsnjfr * qrres

tftaer

Anandagiri

XV-6

Gita

others for

).

which

is

The

expression ^fg[>Tra

IfH

srr$te:.

its light.

VII, 4-2, ^T%*rreV

self-illuminating and does

upon
Chandogya

not depend

occurs in

5^

and :*jsr are used adverbially. Prof. Vidhusekhara

( 82 )
translates g^*3[ sw%?ra f?r??T and -^ firfavErSfc
as ' bliss is constantly

^t

covered and misery

be construed with

reason to

unfolded \ According to him w^THsn

fa*&m

fk^ik'

which

is

Gaudapada points out

( Sflcsrq: )

is

obscured by

different sms,
at reality.

[ 1 ]

the

same

the

four

3T%T

ignorant

as 3rir?fi*usr or sn&rac*

how

Karika

who

ssrfars

associate

modes

2 ]

3TC?qTr$T%

msft

sriffcr *mrfr^q*>

^r%srr1m?r

l*w%$?:

*W*renfs[r%

mfler

^rrf^cr

the

smarts*

him with
of looking

sptfes are:

K. bhasya

flrfT^r

K. bhasya

K. bhasya

fsRnwrfiror:

), ifcfrar

fip&wwi

mftcr TO^fqwapro^

Anandagiri

to

no

in better with srffarg.

fits

in this

by resorting to the four

The

is

see

K. bhasya rightly remarks

Prof. Vidhusekhara says that the expression

( 83 )

We

the next Karika.

3rr%r, rrf%^ etc, in

the Karika in this way.

split

glorifies the

is

Anandagiri

Anandagiri

K. bhasya

Anandagiri

Notes on &audapada~Rarik&

126

According to the K. bhasya and Anandagiri ?txm

rnr%

4
while No.
)

3 arffcr

admit the

refers

*rcpflrt

the

only to

it

No.

).

Jainas

not

is

actually

referred

to

philosophy by K. bhasya; Anandagiri refers

the

any
it

to

!fn%s.
no reference

Prof. Vidhusekhara sees here

and msqffn&s, but

is

prepared to reter No.

Atman

believe in the existence of

Katha VI. 12-13,

It

*n%

ftOTwfSfts and the sprerf^s respectively ;

*!W is taken by K. bhasya to refer to the |^h%$s

particular school of

the

and

refer to the

and Jainas, Anandagiri

Jainas

and

whom

that

the

unthinkable

is

( greftfcr

the

to

to the

firfrm^r^s
Vedantins who

sprawl

v&b

Gaudapada dubs here

^%^vx^
as

srn%3T

Vedantins could have been referred

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

mwv,

six vrrafirercs,

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
:

*m%*rrc- far*: ^rfrifawa: K. bhasya ). The

belief in the existence of the wrong type of Atman is referred to

^l^fff?Tr%^trT?^r^

here.

We think

Gaudapada

that

schools of philosophy here.

references like
a*

TO*^ftr?p

^fl^^a

II

mm:

srrsrWfa

n ar*r*r srroer

is

s<?i

$tm *r

Lankavatara

not thinking of any particular

He seems

i&

to

be indebted to Buddhistic

snmer

^g^ife^T grET *

ssr sr^irftrg;

vwh

^re<Wtfq- tror

20-21; gi^s^y^^T ... * wfav*twi

P. ryi ) t^gCTftMrgr cT^rTcTRt
qftrftriTwOff

^rg^rt%^r%^

III.

srotsRr ^^T*^wmgwr^m^rrr *rs?m%mwTrqnqm3t%%ET&r etc,

P. 9^> ^Tg*sh%$; ^ *$mn
qre ^rg^fe-wir ajp^nsr

$mw?m

stctsto

^ansproa;

84

When

P. 188.

the

Atman

^rgs^lfe^fff. One goes beyond

is

tealised as being

^Sc^tt

untouched by the

and becomes omniscient*

IF

Chapter

85

Being a *Hqr means securing the 5rrnJS7 <?3". srr^ws;

( one who knows Brahman ) who deserves the

Befitting a

137

Brahmana

highest q^ as mentioned in

That Gaudapada

calls

fa?*ft

q;*r

aiw 5rrrtfrsr

the highest end in

proof that he could not be

life as

Brha. IV. 4-23 )

i s convin-

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
cing

<r**fT$i*

Cf.

sqrqrsenr:

Gita

II

86

m$w m*

\kw$ a^roOTftFrarr^

qra^ *

III.

The

secured by those

the exact English equivalent for

SHEwP

*9T*w%

the right

firsTST,

bhasya

).

r%5?ci:

^saww

am****

who know Brahman

not something to be secured anew,

1S

natural state for them, iknw, education, from e

is

17-18,

srrsrffsr <r?

the true sn?***^*

'

^r^njH'Ef rt^

trearrmtfcrfc

...

preaching

A knower

sra and

of Brahman

^j?.

= out,

is

Cf. ifNrwffW

duco

r%=fHfqar and

nffiq-:,

but

rft

is

or

the

I lead,

to carry.

naturally possessed of

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

faraftw
87

shows

is

not the true firw.

Gaudapada

In the remaining portion of this Prakarana,

his acquaintance

ever improves

with Buddhistic thought and works; he how-

upon some of the

ideas

and points out where he

differs

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

where both the object and

perception are experienced.

This

is

Lanka vatara P. 157

^sr^rrfr,

where the object

but the perception

because

it is

According to
J8

).

exists.

It

is

is

absent,

called

^^,

from contact with the sr*g.

the Lankavatara this would be

free

Uotet on Gaudapada-Rarika

jo8

K.

cfasrm.

88 )

[ 3 ]

bhasya by

way

of introduction

q^Hr^q'^^^rc^^T^HmiR

remarks

here,

srrcw

Similarly, Anandagiri,

r$m*3r- This

is

the

55^,

qwaforaOT"

where there

is

neither

cRg nor ot^wt.

The ^grocm
I3[Rf

follows: ^f^rffT ?tr ^ar^rTOgrato*

^^rm^^trrq-mfrr^^TTwAf^ERr^, and mentions also 9fct*rcexplains

as

ar^rTO^m^rcf^rrwwfsr^c?^

P. 157

m&m,

The ^rffe^
and ^raJreroriT of the Lankavatara,
ponds, as Prof. Vidhusekhara points out, respectively to

B^t^feF and

^Hr*

Prof. Vidhusekhara

in the text.

when he

We

says that

corres-

&T%9?>
however do not agree with
'

the difference

is

only in

nomenclature and as such

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

(III. 48, IV. 71).

Generally only two categories

Wi^TO^s 4 +

&r&3

prW =

9 ^r^fTTf,

) are referred to in

three categories which

states anarar,

wr and

and

sftftw
all

and

mm

( jtpts 4

states

are

the other mental

Buddhist works.

The Lankavatara

gives

Gaudapada cleverly equates with the three

gpr

)-

what is regarded by the

comprehended to secure salvation.
proposed as follows:

In the second line Gau4apada refers to

wise philosophers to be

fit

to be

Different interpretations are

[ 1 ]

K. bhasya:

^r%^ gRR^fiw

cJri&RT

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

'

jMna and jneya.

IV.

Or

it

seen that there

may mean

by the terms jndna and jneya

is

is

no

between

difference

we may know

whatever

that

only the three things mentioned in

the Karika \
Prof. Vidhusekhara's interpretation

hardly convincing.

is

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

!pt ) can not refer to the object of the three-fold ^tt* just

srgj

The

described.

next Karika

tells

when ^q

us that

is

known, the
of know-

person becomes *r^r, so ^tq cannot mean a mere object

ledge in the ordinary sense of the term.

The

is

query about the second half of the Karika would be

first

How many

things are mentioned there

*n#, fNf and \k%q, these three, or

3TR fe^i and ffq r>^;

Though Gaudapada
appears that K. bhasya
there

is

also

are intended
is

has said

is

right

$q

that

before

111

is,

taking fa^g

is

to be

Btahman, it
gq-, and

the

no sm which would be necessary if only ^r* atid ^rq

already remarked,
( Gaudapada, however, as has been

careless in his constructions ).

The second query would

and

^fq- ?

Does ^tr

and #Era*

The

be

what

and

^q*

f^|fqr ),

the

is

ation in a

unless

we

is

given, the

way

well-known

g^srMN?

*r%m ff *dbr

Just as

triad

refers to

^jd

the
%tj

threefold
and fir^r is

for the benefit of the student. If the lattet interpretation

VII. 2\ amTfiR^f^rafiftnr strfarosfsrs;

"from*ftsr-

#rf%^>

next Karika refers only to ^fre

hold that

favoured, Gau<Japada possibly refers to the

etc.

meaning of frw

second line just intended to give some inform-

detached parenthetical

divisioh of ^r?T

mentioned

the exact

expression fsrnra %fa in the next Karika strongly

and not to r^to

or

is

refer to the three -fold division

favours this interpretation, but the

is

and fhf these two, that

srra

fqi^r to be taken as a predicative

11

?r^r% Wrowrc

q^

Gua
1

in this connection*

srwrohnePT

sNr *3W-

^ sf^flwmsmi^!^^1

^crefRmfcT JlNnRrrc qr^ateTOt n XIIL

sr^srrm *^?*?sa*ng&
3prrftproq* srgr * *r<r

a^r^pJwfrrcc

srrarftar?*

7-11;

%g

qg;?rg;

sr?%B sreftqs

11

3^

irq-

^fe^TfisPw^

all

*raVrTT %$9smi ?r *rq$r*cFisr:

*m q%n?q<?f srr^r^mi^ which

being
^5T

si?

^f^^ m
(

se&jt

90

is

f?r|^i3[^af?^T^T^r

as srosra:. Prof.

yana, There
factory.

is

II

no doubt

The

WHW^r

*ft

XV,

Gita

that

way

the

*8T

3rr?irsq^<Tfrq

^RF^rnroqr

idea of a
srwrffr

gfgrfa^

^tfWFrac

19.

of introduction,

#Tfeq>!sfraf

qwram m ^j^m^ and explains

wswm

Vidhusekhara takes

<re

as

as

referring

3?jr?rrmH-

to

Maha-

explanation

snmcr: is unsatisVidhusekhara, the first line means

should be understood from the M&hayana '. Even if

According to Prof.

tqtrq-jtjrqrspis
srcrf ror

otT[^t HT^cf

means amrflsac

r% <rcmsifqr

far-fetched.

cf.

K. bhasya says by

iMr*

common,

and %\*

rlrfsre

K. bhasya says,

... *r

quite

$rq

^ ftftf

One who knows Brahman,

).

pV for time.
x^m

automatically becomes

is

^r^ir, if

XIIL 12

as explained in the Gita (

%q tfFPpar

).

mean #rr%^nfr

to

only to

firfW" refers

|?nT

expression 37* thr

sttokt above

K. bhasya takes

(The

12-17

II

89

m&&fo

sqrfcromfa crewWctaatngn

XIIL
fff wlsr faftra*
seems to be an echo of

Gaudap&da-KdrtM

Notes on

l^o

means as rq-R, Gaudapada's reference to tsrlrqpqijTcpTs as

Gaudapada refers to f%q- as the highest

fotrarft ( In Karika 88,

truth, he could not possibly

further
in

its

admit more than

one

fq-^rq" ) shows
what the Mahayana says ( This is
corroborated by the second line which uses the word fq^fq-

that he does not approve

of

proper sense and brushes aside the fq%qs in the

moniously

).

The words

q^ictsqrffr

TOraraw*
Asanga

in the

(
(

first

line uncere-

Karika are variously interpreted:-

K. bhasya

)*

Prof. Vidhusekhara,

in

conformity with

IV

Chvpter

%q"^

^grr%rflr<T <T*srrsfcTT^i;

authority explained

as

|ra*

while the same

K. bhasya;

comment on Karika 88
W^rkrrervrre

t-41

5P,

^r%^r^r%

in

the

).

Vidhusekhara

).

K. bhasya).

^TT^RTfr l(

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

^mn

an

as

To

? ).

be matured, the act of maturing by

but also for one's

own

self (

discipline for

not only for others

the attainment of the absolute,

Vidhusekhara

).

&rf etc. ^tt tqrefrfrmHr* ft!rrwTOT*fcw fttra srlN *^faw,

sq3*s*g^*^rs^re^rm3r*i; ( K. bhaya so far seems
1

all the four |q-* |r^ stnar,

and calls the four srfererr^w, and makes
distinction between |rcr in the first line and felnr in

to take star as referring to

and
a

the

<ttcR>

Vncqqrepis f^csrfq- \^\ srgrftf^l

( here only the three |*r, sn^T
are said to be 3fH?*T> in contradiction of what

second line

TOrrstacScU sniTawOTsrsh

and

qrrF7

was

just said before

).

Prof. Vidhusekhara translates the second line as "

said that

among them

but not of that which

the idea as under:

there
is

is

known

to be

" only three,

i.

"

it is

parikalpita

'

imagined

only imagined owing to

its

perceived, just like mirage, as

Vidhusekhara thus,
to

fsr* 3?i:q-

same

We

differ

like

and

'

very
it

and explains

e. heya,

p&k)a can be perceived but not the jneya

For

It is

perception of the three,

dpya and

or vijneya.

a thing

which

nature cannot

has

no

is

be

existence.

"

K. bhasya, takes fy% to refet

|rcr
( in line i ) to be the

and qnpr; and

as ft^rq ( in line 2
1

).

from Prof. Vidhusekhara and K. bhasya in the

interpretation of this Karika,

We

are of opinion

that ^qf

refers to

Notes on Gaudapdda-Kdrikd

A2

3W^

w^

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

all the four, |qr,

their OTq&svt

the

real

connected with

is

They can

ftlra".

the

the

lit.

sjrtfrafflT

%w%q

etc.

I.

1-4

to

be

concerned

know Brahman,

or previous path,

ft

^wr^^gs-farcr^

mm$> ifenftwHTO ftr=

).

the faqsreicRs;
the r%fRfcFtrs (

tm seems

routine of the
srsrnmrsJfas etc,

us,
|qr,

tf?q^Tf^feqqwr?*ft-

Prefer,

Sankarabhasya on Vedanta-

$a is to be known from
what should be known, can be learnt from

According

which one knows what

sacrifices,

taken

be

qrra

first

( cf. ?r

crepcr^q frfo
sutra

and they are apart from Brahman,

best

which does not make us

means here according to
which concerns itself with pointing out what is

with the thiee-fold

srsrmnr,

|cr

at

sacrificial

to the ^iftfffarT*

used

to be

sacrifices

procedure

z%T%% ) from
performed and the

in the sense of

should be
etc.;

w\zq

the

is

goal,

^if^T^

which can be secured by the performance of various

and qrws are the various sacrifices. The gmsEiug' thus

is dependent upon |fr, while
in the case of the true

preaches what

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

^gOTS3W ^m^ff^rmcr

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.

{%*m

*t\3W

The

expression

does not

ffcrferofrrnHfa K. bhasya )

*itwpm

mean

ansFFnswftfa

that there

real

is

^r^TTOvrT^m^rfrtr-

Anandagiri.

wv

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

^s

Brahman ) are already g ^. 3rr%^n ftar$nra<n:.

Vidhu&khara takes f ^ to mean ^m or ctot*TcT. It appears

really

that

Gau4apada

is

Prof.
to

us

here objecting to the Buddhistic view that there

IF

Chapter

143

some who are arfr^f 35s ( or srrf^rTOs, who are born ^s ),

some who acquire f^hood ( grfasw ) etc. ^nfo: Persistent or

are

enduring

belief,

^^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
were

If jJi$t

it.

Anandagiri

made

to be ^<j$ ( artificially

^rorsar srfasrisa'

wrrnT*n

would be wfiw

it

),

always the same, without

hw

any change or variety. The highest is thus srer,

same ) and fasrur^ ( opposite of ^qar ). The qrils

Bfafan BfTOrcrorep
(

94

mean

t^msra;

feuftg.

K. bhasya

or grounded

always the

are

sn^cr.

all

in ftsjfbr.

the opposite;of ^rqtrqr^. K. bhasya takes

is

means

generally

nsrsnrf

'

proficient

'
'

to

it

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

^jt.

Prof. Vidhusekhara

four-fold, in respect of (
(

points out that in

Buddhism

the highest knowledge

the knowledge of destroying

the

all

human

way

leading to

that %^ri^r mainly points out

as

the

to

uses the expression

the

but the

sr^rros

bold

reference

and jsjt^s

belief

^mff^Tr<TcT*3r*rre.'

in
(

^|?T,
II.

7 )

who had become ^fg^iraT*. Gau4apada

with reference to Arjuna

is

knowledge of
( 4 )
may be
Gaudapada
salvation.

to the ^qtrjs ( as contrasted with ft^rn^s

shows

things,

the

referring to this Buddhistic idea in this Karika,

The Bhagavadglta

tr$rrcsi is

all

passions, ( 3

knowledge about destroying impediments,

the Tightness of the

of

indebted perhaps to the Gita for the expression

^q-or.

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.

think that Gaudapada hints in this

Lankavatara

is

really

no si^mm

qgna&BWX wz*stmw
fH^r^T^T nftr3<s?t<raw?t
(

$6

When

knowledge of the

*r
II

it

3Tr?r

Karika,

at

all

said

asf

the

&m

?r

R^rma of the
nwt n^ ...

it

sr^fftrrr-

that a wfT^rR

Brahman,

that

m*r gii???T<Tfw <rtr%tfp

( K. bhasya ).

t^rr srfa

f?*nff OTflnrac

is

is

one

should not be

who

has

the

understood that

Notes on Gaudap&da-K&ri'kd,

144
the 5rm

is

from Brahman. The

different

srsr

*TR

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
the

-%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^

irosnsraforarf:

crfipwfJrarwrrsnrrcTT

swot a^fa^Rswsrramfir

*r5T5iT5Twftrwr^r^^rFy an^fafir

fife

wwra

srar wmfssrcsrrafsrjsrr

^f^wi^a* ?wrfa fiwnwn%*

strw

i^ar ftfifw *r ffcr *grclr ^^r%^m?*rrf- *Rr *r

The Lankavatara also describes ^rr* to be srcrf and contrasts it with

ftnarf&r

ftsTF*,
filgrrar

rfcTsg*

^fq^rsr^ftr arsnr

jf^frrasnsffir firsTR*

smsrf^ft^s^^nnlj*

(Pp. 157-158).

^r,

The ^th

'

RfafrrRfmrqfeR

Rm^rHm^rfa^rrff^oT %\mi

issrcnp,

for

there

is

no

j%q*T,

...

as

Anandagiri says.
(

97

Anandagiri thus comments upon this

*rf?TO*RcT srcre&srrg

*l*<fterTS

%&riR

If

3TO*n^s<ftfir

once

even the slightest change,

*& would become

^m

atf^sssrr

we admit

that

%m

cease to be

would

and so

3rft?q\

Karika:-^^
q^qf^ftr

Brahman

It

srijhr

q^far

capable

is

of

srof and grraTffrhas been already stated

any sense, sotto is the concealqyrf"

ment of the true nature of Brahman, due to urcr, 3u%sn> msflrr-

that

m$T can never be a

state.

98

in

All sr4s are always

without any strto in their natural

we who wrongly superimpose upon them all sorts of

and forms. They are always g^ and grff. It is wrong to say

It is

qualities

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

fSrwrnfofq- ftwtft

Wftro^jw* tT^ sotscJ

^lis are always pg[, they are metaphorically

f ?^mt

said

to be

Though
'

the

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

mean

to

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
This

obviously

an unnatural interpretation.

proper way surely

is

to take ffcf

%mm:

and what they say

is

to be

3F$nTOT^T^.

wrer f w^

5r%

first

is

as Prof.

half of the Karika

is

found in the

out

how

so the ?r?ws say

it ).

Karika ( and not

think that the

We

not to be connected with the second

After having stated his thesis that

Gau4apada

'

rest of the

Vidhusekhara takes

The
5

mean

to

all sn?s

half.

and sr^rami^,
and the next one points

are stsssstt^gt

in the second half of this Karika

>

the Bauddha view differs from his. Buddhas

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

view of the Bauddhas

the

a great obstacle in

is

wrong. For

way

tf3>fm%ife> the distinction that

sr.f^rfcT

is

involves %q*$ which

this

of srreTO^jfcr.

some vms

When

are srn%g

all syj|s are

sw^g^

or

or

meaningless.

99 ) Gaudapada shows here

to have the knowledge of the qfis.
(

how

it is

In

order

not possible for a g^r

that

may

there

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

sr^rafro^ like
3tt*T is

also

%ri

the

3?r^T$r

^s, The

3^
^s too,

being

cannot relate themselves to ^r* either,

for

sn^rST^*; thus

w?

jt

sf>m, and

*re Wtb ^7* * 2E*n% ( one would have expected here ^h to keep
symmetry ) or *$ wrearar ^R ( crrft?n or tmw is explained in
;

ssrrsrefr
K. bhasya, as ^ffnrctt f^^g^r^^qwq-^-*
rTtf^^ is variously explained in Buddhist literature as
I

'instructed'

^f%s^rsTfrcT>
19

might be taken

* &*$*

W W*

to

mean

as the K.

zsfe&vvivtik

*T

err
f

ar^m*

bhasya does,
wufc*

*rr

permanent

In

'

^f W?:

any

case f

Notes on Gaudapada- Karika

1^6

wj

* 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

vrflj:

%&

rr

w^

Lankava&ra contains the expression wfti\$f

repeated

era

mouth of Buddha who

the

times and put in

made

is

many
to dis-

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,

course

fr^wr^

and admitted the

somehow or

he

but

not get out of the idea of causal relation and

extent Buddha's philosophy

meaning of

defective this

is

seems

sees in the expression ^ar?f %R" ^rfact^, a reference to

which

mean

taken to

is

that

attained through instruction

nob le.

for the

All this seems

Dvipadam Vara
Vol. XXXII, pp. 166-173
'

article

Karika

transcendental

the

from another, and

toms

^T?acf5r fMfrftrerefc

that

be the

sr^r g ;g3rcr<ra(
cannot be

truth
is

therefore silence

to be entirely far-fetched (see the

in

the

for

Annals

of the

All agree that the

B.

expression

O. R. L,

about

discussion

detailed

K. bhasya remarks on ^fTff%^ *rfaTO, f g

).

To

to

on the other hand

Prof. Vidhusekhara

this Karika.

other could

origination.

this

qrmsfaw w|er
refers

f%*

to

Gautama Buddha.
(

wt

100

Gaudapada had saluted

in Karika 2, he

saluting the

mean

ftrqffur

ftsrfar )

used often in

and

sr^rr

and 3k<k$-

state. Prof. Vidhusekhara takes

to
and thinks that the epithets ^sf ( in Pali
means

g^f

and SRiWtfh: support the meaning rWtrr.

remarks,

I,

concludes this Prakarana and the whole work by

^ or highest

sary to take crs to

fawS:

** in Karika

fipr^f

mean

philosophical

expression,

literature

5^

?$* *&m*Mlr

q-srrsera; Prof.

The

fawrr.

to

^r?ar smsftfar

sr^ in

Buddhism

unneces-

usually <rw <^,

is

mean m$T. K. bhasya

^s^rR^cTW^^^-

Vidhusekhara says sr^r,

which constitute

It is quite

are

gfaf t

meant

wm,

here.

*rwr%

APPENDIX
An

Alphabetical Index to the Karikas

Karika

Prakarana

mm

No. of Karika

Page

33

27

23

74

SO

3H3WplOTWP3(

36

28

assmfsisfjreiSP*

81

52

29

39

srsmrehr *nfer

33

sfstTcTtlsr *rnrer

20

24

77

Si

43

42

13

34

96

SS

95

55

97

>

arat ^arrT3JT$iWJ(

20

sr^Niwff gsisvr

10

^ S^mireu;

30

27

stse*^ gpmrrcra;

62

47

18

24

16

30

39

17

10

15

3TCS5<re?jr3T

wfr fk^m

st^i^t

3?fNfW3TlT

3I3T:

smxn

mv&

arsnar^

srema;

*&*

3<Mia%)'HcTf ftari
3t5TT[

5TWS

STCT

sT^^snroajTffnJc
sre*

*n$

g ^ #r%3;

sju^nr^ifcr

srft

a^er

^tw

rwwf

smiKMWrr sh:

SPTI^'H^t^

stfsrfsarerTTsn*^

SPrTIWRT^
sj^rar

^WW

^>fn

wjt:

Gaudapada-Kdrika

148
Karika

Prakaraija

No. of Karika

Page

W$ Wlft*nJf %

t:

wrawr

10

3rcwftrP^nmf%

79

5i

3T^mftfaWT>s%

75

50

smr^fOTrcr^rsr^

29

3T$3i*T3W: srl

98

56

mik *&&&%

49

44

wwgqsw

^r

88

53

fcwRg

15

13

wsrfi^qftgrnw

19

3*

sroarwft^ esjrr

39

4i

3RJ& WT7?

28

26

3T!%r fri^rf^r srofHc*

83

52

3raF^TO3rKWC

48

43

****** TO?

39

29

32

waTOsng^raH

32

27

snwr

srrensrasfft:

20

sn^ra^

^ snsrT^r

11

snsp*^

=gr

istma

31

39

3fri^f^T sr^sre'

92

54

wf^nsaT psfrar:

93

55

snwnfcrforr

??*..

16

23

$r%J

TORfhrwt

SJSTrEr qsr

8<W$?'fWl

3T?JT

TW

t^wts

snft:

3*mfsrorfo3[f*i<t

38

4i

3%^^^

4i

29

3i5fn^rorawa;

42

42

OTawwnRrroa;

44

42

Appendix 1
Karika

Prakarana

swrefa term's

sftjnr <TT3RTr flrtu

?r

No, of Karika

Page

42

19

II

12

67

48

47

43

30

17

54

4S

46

43

24

12

12

11

34

12

34

11

24

15

84

52

99

56

32

37

4i

38

29

20

6j

48

26

38

13

72

49

10

34

66

48

10

12

45

43

30

<

*++

irsr

149

era sfNrfj

Gaudap&da-K&riha

ISO

Prakarana

No, of Karika

16

13

23

13

22

89

54

$rr^?rra?T5T^*fr

3i

frowT^nftTO qjr

38

19

36

18

28

38

20

22

6ns *J*S *#5***

?%orr%^

43

30

100

56

53

4S

12

22

13

S8

4*

48

31

3rft^

7i

49

n%

32

17

So

44

52

44

21

24

Karika
sft# gSSTOfl* S?*3(
3fter?*Rr:

^<?

5ftaRtoW?
*rft

rT^TT^
rremsr

Wi

nrftre

f^T^N^
arnrir fofra;

^^^^fi^f^rH
firs ^rnr^

s^r^

fa*cP

# ^fTS^T

ss* ^o^nFT %gt

sqrra:

SttftSRf&^TT*
SfT-WlilPI

gW3[

^H? * f T%

5TnT5&

*r

?T

^f^vr^Nri
^feiVHIMd

?r fSrct^rt *r

*fNr-

t?t

f ftlim& ftVRlQ,

Pag

ff

mww wro;

33

WR 53W IWT

34

40

IflBNilW ^at^RT'

21

lists ffVwJ

to

Appendix 1
Karika

redraw

*R*r

Prakaraiia

frfsrarrm *ror *?vjf n*

qrarr

f far

qTarftsfr

*<rrf tftarc ftwra;

srT2fr

srror

m% ftrira

ffar

srrofafr

snlssr^r ftrgfifar
sfrsrr

tmfi

ssrw

ISI

No. of Karika

Page
18

34

12

40

4t

45

30

37

19

34

28

27

38

8o

Si

ro

18

24

25

26

16

21

13

21

37

91

54

24

37

2$

38

28

26

17

20

19

14

85

53

17

36

20

36

78

5i

-'

152

Gautfapada-Karika
Karika

Prakarana

No. of Karika

Page

33

18

32

23

25

}2

25

16

40

29

31

27

21

19

24

35

40

15

23

29

17

70

49

21

59

46

69

49

68

48

29

26

61

76

50

46

3i

18

36

55

45

56

JRrwrmraf fewr

q*

fircrer ^rarg;

W SsHNrcq

to tow stt^rt^
to mwwrgffena;
tot mcrrmt sfa:

TOrr

*s& gqnrmi;

to

**jr

Tr

?r

*?r *

swrmn

area- 553;
afford

*wbt fSnrjnmir

nmT

21

r%w^

25

47
20

45

Appendix 1
Karika

153

Prakararja

No. of Karika

Page

73

50

11

22

w.<mw*mimiva

21

&% ^trw^fe^w

44

30

.3

^fkar^TTtfr

fitsfan

%t

vm^ii

*\m-

% 55 r mi

af <&

35

28

5te!ghd%? srrf

27

16

r^fcqwnTrsrret

13

13

18

5i

44

4i

42

86

53

f^5<Tr i%r%^fr
flr^rr^

st^w* %

f^^wra^r

3rrars=i:

ftsrrmf fsrawt ?rr:

&&

19

S3

18

^?tNt

22

15

wlwrnrac

10

94

55

26

26

10

22

**& Ig^rft:

16

35

#g?rcqsnarra

25

25

^5r?rr arrafr *nfo;

57

46

fN:fifr srsra

ft***srr?srf^r$rrn'*
fa*c?r t%

^^ntora;

sfaronwrasl^:

%?r

ffrt

IcTot

1^n#

g * nrr%

*T <TT Stfa *cftr%

sawr

?rat

*smsr?*ra

% mitn 3j**i

^grsraWrirr etonac

srspffaTTaT?r<Tm

*nfor Jmft ?rrfe

^fiRJTT^Jia:
sgi

w?

f^S"

ssrcg $r"raref
20

27

26

11

32

39

27

57

28

33

40

87

53

Gaudapada-Rarika

*54
Karika

SOTffWff fawn

5cfwf?:

TO ^TTH

Prakaraoa

No. of Karika

82

23

28

22

64

63

14

3i

36

22

17

47

14

15

2?

APPENDIX

II

Index to important Words in the Notes

Word
awnfinn*;
3T3>rn
arararmr

ssRra

Page Noo
89
112
140, 142

103

Word
WRapwrar

Page Not

76

CTRmrairora^s

133

3?*nT

103

grf?n:

89
T03

3*3T

97

^WRT

3T*?cf

83

wwsra

83

swfsirratrr

64

3?rg*r?

66
65

107

3*l*3t

^faf^

107

$wr

srftftrrrctt

134

wr

88

3T5f<rirr

133

sr&

90

owimmt

117

swHton*

srft^sm

132

^Iq5

98

SFT^T

srewrerai;

3T^rcr:
^preter^r

101

10$

106

62,81
9^

sfiWEtT

117

3TO#

81

^TRcT

143

^^TcT

126

STS

103

srecrr*

95

ITOT

78

3^*"^

109

^FSToJ

87

^Rsr^r

58

3rr%ar$ro

9i

82, 129

stfsrtH

109

ftflT

S^TtS

116

fenrera

76

awR&Wtor

103, 109

3rrr%:

120

^rflf^f-

142

srrwrf&ra

srw
ari^r
sjrsrm;

88
141, 142

127

83,96

fefisw

129

%?Tt^

60

sr^rg:

87

stocj;

63

Srwt
rT^^r

%:

141

79,88
123

Gaudap&dci-K&riktl

I$6

Wrd

Page No.

M5

errft^

63

5*

53, 59/ 6?, 6s

^3T6"

flWWS
far-

121

%vm$

%M ^

Page Noc
90, 134

82

*fc

I%

118, 125

sngnrcrsc

wwrik

79

^a

'37
81

98

W3"$r*

121

76

W^

124

108

WT%

78

*fcF?

80

96

|m^:

I^T*!^

81

130

%?

Word

88 3 108 128, 134

wnsrm

82

ft*T

63

ftw
*S*rr?r

80
92, 93

r^

82

famrW

130

5Rsftfif!Tff

104, 105

fimfm

107

m^raT*

64

wrrcr*p^
T^ftsra

^
qfTci^
^cT?gfrfla*?rr

wrc

71,72
82

146

120, 131

srsNw

87

WT?q-:

92

120

79
60

SW

SW*

*?r
trorsraq;

141, 142

war

81

80

146

84

<n*rc

l.#

90

^qr
oJ^roTr

&T

srtrfcr

94
112

SflWIW

STR^lf^

I27

*t*n

129
84, io*, 107
79, 83

138

137
81

1?
sr^rm-.

120

fffc*

STf^rT

fj 7

fiWT!

STTgfqw:

94, 95

T%S

srinr

60, 78

ftqrrar

%m
%w
inim

106, 107
J

37
S7

125

58, 59. 63, 6$

ft*<r

63

90

fa**

57, 58, 59, 65

T%W

7?

Append** 11

Word
**

ttm
trsrrcsr

Ww
&%$tfe%

Page No.
80

71,72

M3

Page No.

i^r

106

srMan

M3

3$fa

63

S7

ss*

80

*37

sr%

84

5%f%5rrar

61

82

Wlftw
s^fa

Word

157

128, 131

r>

84

20

wifavri?

91

fajfir

74
84

**$$

99

*^s

81

^t*

128

^*rc

87

srsnfr3T?rar

74

fwjr

63

*rm*3*r

90

SSHTTST

62

s#sr

WcT

mfm^i

112

^Twfgr^r

H2

srrs*mH

119

t*m%

140

ERRATA
[

or

The

list is

top line is

not exhaustive. In counting the lines, the heading

ignored ]

For

Page

Read

11.22

59

V. 22

line 7 )

V. 8-10

V. 7-10

( last line )

61

*
( line

24

sr>srq5jrTr5nwrr

sfrsrersHrerwri

( line 1 ? )

X.32

6J

X.33
20

( line

67

II.

( line

73

29

IV. 3. 9

24

20

q^WTT
L

i?ne

VI.

rt

4 .6

<TO-

*rs

wrr

r%sr ?m

19)

113

wra^f
( line

( line

24

116

121

17

VI. 3. 4-5
( line

98

II. 3.

IV. 39
( line

95

217

tT5*rf$r*J<rr?
)

nor

not

line 14

line 31
)

131