ON ~AlqKARA'S AUTHORSHIP OF THE KENOPANIS. ADBHAS.

YA*
by SENGAKU MAYEDA University of Pennsylvania

ABBREVIATIONS
S's Brahmas~trabhasya (Bombay, Nir.naya-S~gar Press, 1934). P. Hacker, 'Eigenttimlichkciten der Lehre und Terminologie Safikaras: Avidyfi, N~marfipa, M~yfi, igvara', Zeitsehrift der Deutschen Morgenliindischen Gesellschaft, 100 (1950), pp. 246-286. GBh S's Bhagavadgitabh&sya (Bombay, Nir.naya-Sftgar Press, 1936). KU = Kena Upan#ad. PBh Padabha.sya (The Kena Upanishad with Sri Shankara' s Commentaries, edited by Sri Swami Saccidanandendra Sarasvati. Holenarasipur, Adhyatma Prakasha Karyalaya, 1959). ~afikara. Upad = S's UpadeAasOhasri. VBh = V~kyabhO.sya (The Kena Upanishad with Sri Shankara's Commentaries, edited by Sri Swami Saccidanandendra Sarasvati. Holenarasipur, Adhyatma Prakasha Karyalaya, 1959). BSBh Eigen

i t is an interesting fact t h a t there are two c o m m e n t a r i e s on the Kenopanis.ad which are a s c r i b e d to one a n d the same a u t h o r , Safikara; one is entitled Padabhds.ya a n d the o t h e r Vdkyabhd.sya. Several scholars such as Belvalkar, B h a t t a c h a r y a a n d S a c c i d a n a n d e n d r a Sarasvati a have asserted t h a t only the P B h is S's authentic w o r k while the VBh is spurious. H e r e * The substance of this paper was read at the 175th meeting of the American Oriental Society which was held at the University of Chicago, Chicago, on April 13, 1965. My sincerest gratitude is due to Professor Paul Hacker, University of MOnster, under whom I started preparing this paper and to Professor W. Norman Brown, University of Pennsylvania, who has greatly encouraged me in many ways and kindly taken the trouble to correct and improve my English. I am also grateful to the Alexander yon Humbold-Stiftung, West Germany, and the University of Pennsylvania, which generously granted me financial aids. 1 S.K. Belvalkar, Shree Gopal Basu Mallik Lectures on Vedanta Philosophy, Part 1 (Poona, 1929), p. 218; V. Bhattacharya, 'Safikara's Commentaries on the Upanisads', Sir Asutosh Mookerjee Silver Jubilee Volumes, vol. III (1925), pp. 101ft.; Sridhara ~fistri P~t.hak (ed.), Kenopani.sad(Poona, 1919), pp. 8-12; Saccidanandendra Sarasvati, op. cit., pp. 6-11.

34

SENGAKU MAYEDA

I would like to take up these two commentaries and discuss their authenticity. The main evidence on which the authenticity of the VBh has been denied is the fact that the VBh differs from the PBh in various points of interpretation of the KU. it is true that when the VBh is compared with the PBh, its difference in interpretation from the PBh is clearly seen. 2 However, as far as I have examined the two commentaries, their difference is only exegetical and not doctrinal or philosophical; the two commentaries are doctrinally or philosophically in accordance with each other. The following points are also ascertained from a comparison of the two commentaries: 1) The PBh 3 is primarily concerned with interpretation of words in the KU; the author of the PBh decides meanings of words with great care and lengthy arguments, a On the other hand, the VBh is mainly devoted to explanation of the meaning of sentences in the KU; generally it first states the meaning of a sentence and then comments on words in the sentence, 5 but on fewer words than the PBh. 2) The meanings of words, which are decided after a long discussion in the PBh, are adopted without any explanation in the VBh. ~
2 Compare the PBh with the VBh on: (1) naha.m manye, KUII,2, (2) no na vedeti veda ca, KU II,2, (3) atmand, vindate vfrya .m vidyaya vindate am.rtam, KU II,4, (4) in&a, KU III, I1, (5) adega, KUIV,4, (6) itft, K U IV,4, (8) tadvana, K U IV,6, and so forth. 8 It is not k n o w n whether or not the titles, Pada- and Vakyabhds.ya, are original. The title, Padabha.sya, appears in the last colophon to the PBh (samaptam ida.m grimaccha.mkaracaryaviracita.m talavak6ropanis.at-Padabhas.yarn) as well as to ,~nandajfi~na's c o m m e n t a r y (~rimaccha.mkaratalavakaropani.sadaparaparydyakenopani.sat-Padabhas.yat.ippa.na.m sa.mp~rn, am). But the title, Vakyabha.sya, is not seen in the colophon to the VBh but it is styled ks.udraga.navakyavivara.na. The colophon to ~mandajfiana's commentary on the VBh reads: samavedayitalavakara~akhopanis.atk.sudraga.ne vakyavivara.ne bha.sye...vyakhya samapta (~nandagrama Sanskrit Series, No. 6, 1934). 4 F o r example, commentaries on: kene.sitam, KU 1,1 ; pre.sita, KU I, 1 ; prar.ta, KU 1,2; vt~c, KU 1,5; manas, KU 1,6; brahma.no r~pam, KU II,1; pratibodhavidita, KU II,4. 5 For example, VBh 1,2; 1,3; 1,5; II,1 ; II,2 (yo nas tad veda tad veda); II,3; II,4; II,5; III,1; III,2. Saecidanandendra Sarasvati points out in his introduction to the edition of the KU, p. I0 that avatara.nikdtvakyas such as "grotrasya .~rotram" ityadiprativacana.m nirvi~e.sasya nirnittatvartham (VBh 1,2,8, p. 66), "yadi manyase suveda" iti gis.yavicMana g.rhftasthiratdzyai (VBh II, l,21, p. 77) and "iha ced avedi" ity ava~yakartavyokti.h, viparyase vina~a~ruta.h(VBh II,5,34, p. 84) are written in a m a n n e r which is hardly seen in S's Bhd~.syas on the Prasthdmatraya. In my understanding these are n o t avatara.nikavakyas but statements of the meanings of the sentences followed by interpretations of words which constitute these sentences quoted as "grotrasya grotram", '~ manyase suveda", and "iha cedavedi". It seems that acceptance of the avataranikdlvdtkyas as given in the PBh is implied in the above cases by the a u t h o r of the VBh. 6 F o r example, kenes.itam, KU 1,1 ; pre.sita, KU 1,1 ; vac, KU 1,5 ; manas, KU 1,6; brahma.no r~pam, KU II,1 ; pratibodha-, KU II,4; when the author of the PBh supplies

~AtqKARA'S AUTHORSHIP OF THE Kenopani.sadbhd.sya

35

3) There are a few places in the VBh which are difficult to u n d e r s t a n d , w i t h o u t k n o w i n g the P B h , o r at least they are easier to u n d e r s t a n d , if we c o m p a r e t h e m with the P B h . ~ 4) The a u t h o r o f the VBh seems to try to a v o i d repeating w h a t is stated in the P B h ; when he repeats, he seems to t r y to express the same thing differently, sometimes a d d i n g s o m e t h i n g new. 8 5) W h e n the VBh presents i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s different f r o m those o f the P B h , the VBh does n o t refer to them, n o r deny them, a n d vice versa. It s i m p l y presents different i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s w i t h o u t a n y reference to those in the P B h , a n d vice versa. 9 However, the a u t h o r o f the VBh once denies a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n which is m e n t i o n e d , a p p a r e n t l y with a p p r o v a l , in the P B h , a l t h o u g h it is n o t specifically stated in the VBh to be the view o f the PBh2 ~ F r o m the a b o v e p o i n t s we m a y arrive at the following c o n c l u s i o n : a) It is very plausible t h a t the V B h was c o m p o s e d by an a u t h o r w h o k n e w the P B h a n d who h a d the same p h i l o s o p h i c a l s t a n d p o i n t as the a u t h o r o f the PBh. b) It is quite p r o b a b l e t h a t the exegetically different views expressed in the P B h are valid for the a u t h o r o f the VBh; if he h a d considered a n y one o f those different views invalid, he w o u l d have denied it in one w a y o r
j~dtvd in KU 1,2, he gives the reason, whereas the author of the VBh supplies bttddhvd without any explanation; VBh does not give any comments on KUI,7 and 8; VBh says almost nothing about KU III,3-10. For example, vaco ha vdcam, VBh I,2,9, p. 67; VBh I,7-8,20, p. 76; VBh II,4,30-33, pp. 82-84; VBh III, 3-10,47, pp. 75-76; VBh III,12,47 (esp. haimavativa), p. 96. 8 For example, the whole introductory part and commentaries on pre.sita, KU 1,1 (VBh does not comment on the meaning of the word but by adding iva it treats the word as having an illusionistic connotation. Such a kind of interpretation is commonly seen in g's genuine works.) grotra, KU 1,2; vidita, avidita, KU 1,4 (PBh - vyak.rta, avydk.rta ; VBh - vyakta, avyakta) ; manaso matam, KU 1,6; KU II,1 (PBh - ~i.syabuddhiviedlandrtham ; VBh - gi.syabuddhiviedland g.rhitasthiratdyai) ; KU II,3 ;pratibodhaviditam matam, KUII,4 (addition of the concept of a vabhdsa, etc.); KU III,1 (lengthy discussion on igvara); KUIII,3-10; KUIII,12 (urea); KUIV,1 (urea). 9 For example, PBh presents five different possible interpretations on KU III,1, and VBh, three interpretations; neither group of interpretations has any reference to the other. 10 In commenting on the word abr&na in KU IV,7, the author of the PBh takes it in the sense of a past tense, while the author of the VBh takes it in the sense of future (vak.sydma.h). Moreover, the author of the VBh clearly says, "Therefore, this word abrama is not in the sense of a past tense" (tasmdn na bhfttdbhipraya.h "abrgtma" ity aya.m gabda.h). It seems that by doing so, the author of the VBh tried to remove the difficulty that in spite of the statement, "We have recited to you the Upanisad", the KU continues to introduce a new topic on tapas, dama, karman, etc. right in the next section (KUIV,8). There does not, however, arise any serious doctrinal disagreement between the PBh and the VBh here.

36

SENGAKUMAYEDA

another just as he did in the case cited above, u I f the different views in the PBh are valid for the author of the VBh, then there remains hardly any exegetical disagreement between the PBh and the VBh. c) It would have been the author's intention to write the VBh as a supplement to the PBh, and not to refute it. F r o m the above observations, it is possible to suppose, as some scholars have done, that the VBh was written by an author different from the author of the PBh; in that case the author of the VBh would have had the same philosophical view as the author of the PBh. However, it is also possible to think that the VBh was composed by the same author who wrote the PBh. No further information about the problem of authorship of the two commentaries can be obtained from comparing them with each other. Another method, then, is necessary to get an answer to this problem. F r o m my experience 12 with S's Upade~asdhasri and Bhagavadgftdbhds.ya, I believe that the most reliable method for solving the authorship problem of any certain work ascribed to S is to compare it with S's Brahmasfttrabha.sya. As Prof. Paul Hacker has pointed out, lz S shows his doctrinal peculiarities in some technical terms such as avidygt, may& namarftpa and ~dvara in his BSBh to such an extent that we can tell g's genuine works from even those of his direct disciples with considerable certainty, in the following pages I would like to compare the PBh and the VBh with the BSBh with regard to these technical terms, taking into consideration the Upad and the GBh which are no doubt authentic? 4

A. AVID Y,,(
The PBh and the VBh use the terms avidy6 (or ajgdna) and mithygtffigma in the following passages:

I. Passages in the PBh

1. (Introductory part, 4, p. 4.) etasrndc ca pratyagdtmabrahmavijg~nat 11 See note 10. 12 Cf. The present writer, The UpadegasahasHof ~atikaracarya, CriticallyEdited with Introduction (University of Pennsylvania dissertation) (Ann Arbor, 1961), pp. 148; 'The Anthenticity of the Upadegasahasrfascribed to gaf~kara', Journal of American OrientalSociety, vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 178-196; 'The Authenticity of the Bhagavadgitgtbh&sya ascribed to ~afikara', WienerZeitschriftf~r die Kunde Siid- und Ost-asiens und Archivfiir indischePhilosophie, IX (1965), pp. 155-197. is P. Hacker, 'Eigentiimlicbkeiten der Lehre und Terminologie ~afikaras: Avidya, Namarftpa, Maya, i~vara', op.cit. 14 See note 12.

SAI~KARA'S AUTHORSHIP OF THE Kenopani.sadbhd.sya

37

sat.nsdrab~jam affidna.m kdmakarmaprav.rttikdra.nam a~e.sato nivartate.

And through this knowledge of the inner dtman being Brahman, ajg(ma, which is the seed of transmigration and the cause of rise of desire and action, ceases entirely. 2. (IV,9,67, p. 60.) "apahatya pdpmdnam" avidydkdmakarmalak.sat:am.

sa.msdrab~jam vidhftya . . . .
"Shaking off sin", i.e. removing the seed of transmigration characterized by

avidya, desire and action.

3. (I,4,23, p. 19.) aviditdd viditaviparitdd avydk.rtdd avidydlaksan, dd vyd-

k.rtab~jdt. [Brahman is different] from the unseen which is contrary to the seen, i.e. the unmanifested which is characterized by avidya and which is the seed of the manifested.

(11,5,45, p. 41.) dhimanta.h "pretya" vydv.rtya mamdham, bhdvalak.saedd avidydrftpdd "asmdl lokdd" uparamya ... "am.rtd bhavanti" brahmaiva bhavanti . . . .
4. The wise, "departing", i.e. turning away from "this world" which is characterized by the notions of My and I and which is of the nature of avidya, i.e. renouncing [this world], "become immortal" i.e. become Brahman. 5. (II,4,44, p. 39.) evam. martyatvam dtmano yad avidyaydndtmatvaprati-

pattiO.
Thus atman perishes if it is understood as non-6tman through avidya. 6. (II,5,45, p. 40.) ka.st.d khalu suranaratiryakpretddi.su sa.msdradu.hkhabahule.su prd.ninikdye.su janmajaramaran, aro~disampr6ptir ajgdndt. Miserable indeed is the experience of birth, old age, death, sickness, etc. through

ajgdna in the classes of the living beings such as gods, human beings, animals
and ghosts who must endure manifold sufferings in the course of transmigration. 7. (Introductory part, 5, p. 5.) asmdkam, svdbhdviko'jo~iaro'm.rto'bhayo ... nityaA ca loka i.st.a.h,sa ca nityatvdn ndvidydniv.rttivyatireken, dnyasddhanani.spddya.h We wish for the eternal world which is natural, unborn, undecaying, immortal, fearless .... And because of its eternal character it cannot be attained by any other means than the cessation of avidya.

38

SENGAKU MAYEDA

8. (III,2,48, pp. 44-45.) evam. mithyfibhimdneks.an,avatfim. ... mithyek. .san.am..., vij~dtavad brahma . . . . devfindm, ca mithydj~dnam upalabhya, maiva asuravad devd mithydbhimdndt pardbhaveyur iti tadanukampayd devdn mithydbhimfin@anodanen~nug.rh.nfydm iti.., devebhyo arthfiya ... prddurbhfitavat. Thus Brahman knew the false thought of those whose thought was based upon mithydbhimdna.... having recognized the mithydjgdna of the gods, He [thought], "The gods should not perish on account of the mithydbhimdna as the demons did and with compassion toward them I should save the gods through removing the mithydbhimfma." Thus he appeared.., for the gods' sake. In the first two instances (1. and 2.) avidyd (or aj~dna) appears as the first and most dangerous member of a series of powers similar to avidyd such as kdma and karman. Such usage of the term, commonly seen in ~'s genuine works, is peculiar to ~15 and is strong evidence of S's authorship of the PBh. This avidyd is of the same nature as that which appears as the first member among the five kle~as (psychic affection) in the Yogasfttra Ii,3. Passages 1 and 3-6 reveal the effects of avidyd and relationship between avidyd and its effects. The following table can be made from the above instances: Effects of avidyd Relationship between avidyd and its effects

Transmigration (sam. sdra) ... has aj~dna as b~ja (passage 1.) ... is avidyd-laks.a~a (.passage 3.) The Unmanifested (avydkrta) This world (asmdl lokdt) ... is avidyd-rapa (passage 4.) Understanding of dtman as non... is avidyayd (passage 5.) dtman (andtmatvapratipatti) Attainment of birth, old age, death, sickness, etc. (janmajardmara~arogddisam, prdpti) ... results aj~dndt (passage 6.) It should be emphasized that no use of the term updddna, updddnakdra.na or prakrti is made in the above instances to denote the relationship between avidyd (or aj~dna) and its effects, 16 although even Suregvara, who is S's direct disciple and is closest to ~ in his concept of avidyd, uses the 15 Eigen, p. 249; Section "Powers similar to avidyd" in my articles, op. cit. 16 Eigen, pp. 250-254; Section "Function of avidya" in my articles, op. cit.

SANKARA'S AUTHORSHIP OF THE Kenopani.sadbhd.sya

39

t e r m updddna several times for this p u r p o s e in his Nai.skarmyasiddhi27 F u r t h e r m o r e all the expressions as used in the a b o v e table have parallels in g's genuine works, a8 t h o u g h there is no use above o f expressions p e c u l i a r to S such as -adhyasta, -adhydropita a n d -upasthdpita? 9 The a b o v e e x a m i n a t i o n , therefore, s u p p o r t s the authenticity o f the PBh. Passage 7 gives an instance o f the c o m p o u n d avidydniv.rtti-, parallels to which are available in the B S B h . ~~ Passage 8 is the o n l y case in the whole P B h where the t e r m mithydj~dna is used. O n a c c o u n t o f the c u r s o r y use o f the term, however, it is i m p o s sible to d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r the t e r m in the P B h is s y n o n y m o u s with avidyd as it is in the B S B h or i n s t e a d has avidyd as its cause. ~

U. Passages in the VBh 1. ( i n t r o d u c t o r y part, 3, p. 62.) yadi hy dtmaviffidnendtmdvidydvi.sayatvdt parititydjayi.sita.m k a r m a tata.h "prak.sdlandd dhi p a h k a s y a dftrdd aspardanam, varam", ~ ity andrambha eva karman, a.h dreydn . . . iti cet, satyam etat. avidydvi.saya.m k a r m a . . . . If [you say,] "If it is desired to abandon action completely through knowledge ar Cf. P. Hacker, Untersuchtmgen iiber Texte des friihen Advaitavdda, 1: Die Schiiler Sa~karas (Wiesbaden, 1950), pp. 1967-1972. is For example: (a) sarnsdrab[jam aj~dnarn - ni.h~esasarpsdrabijdvidyddyanarthanibarha.na, BSBh I,l,1, p. 41 ; avidyddisamsdrabija, GBh XVIII,12, p. 691 (cf. GBh XII,3, p. 503; XIII,27, p. 576) ; affidna .mtasya (= sam..sdrasya) mfdam, UpadI, l,5. (b) avidydlalcs.a.na - GBh VIII,20, p. 400; V,14, p. 261; IX,8, p. 417; IX,10, p. 419; XIII,21, p. 567; XIII,23, p. 571; XIII,34, p. 584. (e) avidydr~pa - GBh II,69, p. 128; XIII, 20, p. 566. (d)avidyayd-BSBh II,3,46, p. 556; GBh III,27, p. 164; UpadI, 10,8; UpadI,17,56. (e) aj~dndt - dtrnabuddh& avidyd, tatas ... rdgah, BSBh 1,3,2, p. 207; GBh II,11, p. 44; avidyata.h, Upad 1,9,8. i~ See note 16. 20 For example, avidydniv.rttiphalagrava.na, BSBh I, 1,4, p. 78; avidydniv.rttiphaladargana, BSBh II, l,14, p. 380; mithydjKdnaniv.rtti, BSBh IV,1,13, p. 847. Cf. GBh II,69, p. 127. Passage 7 occurs at the point where the PBh is expounding the meaning of a quotation from B.rhaddra.nyaka Up. IV,4,22; while commenting on it, S, the author of the B.rhaddra.nyakopanis.adbhds.ya, says: dtmalokaprdptir hy avidydniv.rttau svdtmany avasthdnam eva. 21 Eigen, pp. 248-249. In passage 8 mithyaj~dna may be taken as synonymous with mithydbhimdna. In PBh IV,1,55, p. 50 mithy4bhirndna is the wrong conception that "this victory is ours, this glory is ours." According to ~ such a wrong conception is also avidyd (see pp. 43-44). If so, mithydffidna is again synonymous with avidyd. 22 This nydya is also quoted in BSBh III,2,22, p. 655, though it occurs in a different context. It is again quoted in V~caspati's Bhdmaff, IV,l,16. Its source is not known to me, but there is a similar expression in the Mahdbhdrata, Vanaparvan, II,49: pralc.sMandd dhi pal~kasya dreyo na spardana.m n.rndm.

40

SENGAKU MAYEDA

of atman since action belongs to the sphere of avidya regarding 6tman, then because 'it is better not to touch mud from a distance than to bathe', the complete avoidance of action is preferable", [we reply,] "That is right. Action belongs to the sphere of avidya, ..." 2. (III,1,43, p. 93.) lokdvidyddhydropitam fgvare sam.sdritvam, The state of being a transmigrator is superimposed upon the Lord through the avidya of people. 3. (II,4,32, p. 83.) avidydjam, hi v~ryam, vin~i vidyaydvidydyd bddhyatvat, na tu vidydya bddhako'stiti vidyt~jarn "am.tram. viryam." Virility coming from avidy~ is indeed perishable since avidya is annulled by vidya, but as there is nothing to annul knowledge, "virility" coming from knowledge is "immortal". 4. (1,2,10, p. 68.) sati hy aj~dne karman, i dar~r~ntaram, pratisam, dadhate,

dtmdvabodhe tu sarvakarmarambhanimittdj~anaviparitavidy~gniviplu.s. t.atv~t karman. ~rn ity an~rambhe'm. .rtd eva bhavanti.
When there is ajgana, works indeed unite [people] with another body, but at the time of atman-realization works are burnt by knowledge-fire which is contrary to ajhana, the cause of the commencement of all works; thus when [works] are not commenced, they become immortal. 5. (II1,1,44, p. 94.) avidydvadupalabhyatvdc ca bhedasya tatk.saye anupapat-

tit iti siddham ekatvam, tasrndt, garfrendriyamanobuddhivi.sayavedandsa.mtdnasydhahkdrasam, bandhdd aj~dnab?jasya nityavijgdndnyanirnittasyatrnatattvaydthdtmyavij~dnad viniv.rttdv aj~anabfjasya viccheda ~tmano mok~asam, j ~ .
As difference is perceived by a possessor of avidya, difference is not possible at the time when avidya is destroyed. Therefore, on account of its connection with ahakara, the continuous flow of consciousness (vedana) concerning the body, the sense organs, the mind and the intellect has ajk6na as its seed and has as its cause something else than eternal knowledge; when it ceases through the knowledge of the real nature of ~tman-truth and when ajgana as seed is destroyed, atman is called final release. 6. (Introductory part, 1, p. 61.) sam.sarab~jam aj~anam uccicchitsatah pratyag6tmajij~dso.h .... ayam adhy~ya drabhyate, tena ca m.rtyupadam aj~dnam ucchettavyam, tattantro hi sam. s6ro yata.h. In behalf of him who wishes to cut off ajFtana,the seed of transmigration, ... this chapter is commenced. And by means of this chapter ajgana, the state of death, should be cut off, since transmigration depends upon it.

SAI~,IKARA'SAUTHORSHIPOF THE Kenopani.sadbhdsya

41

7. (H,3,27-29, pp. 80-81.) tena viditam, brahma yendvi.sayatvendtmatvena

pratibuddham .... sa samyagdardi yasya vij~dndnantaram eva brahmdtmabhdvasydvasitatvdt sarvata.h kdrydbhdva.h, viparyayen, a mithydj~dno bhavati. katham? "matam." viditam, ~dtam. mayd brahmeti "yasya" vij~dnam, sa mithyddardi vipar~tavij~dno viditdd anyatvdd brahma.na/.~. . . . tatad ca siddham avaidikasya vij~dnasya mithydtvam . . . . " aviffidta .m vijdnatd.m vij~dtam avijdnatdm" iti pftrvahet(tkti.h, anuvddasydnarthakydt . . . . viparyayamithydj~dnayor na.st.atvdd iti p~rvoktayo.h ... j~dndj~dnayor hetvarthatvenedam ucyate. "avij~dtam" aviditam dtmatvendvi.sayatayd brahma "v~idnatd.m'" yasmdt tasmdt tad eva j~dnam, yat te.sdm. "vij~dtam" viditam. vyaktam eva buddhyddivi.sayam brahma "av~dnatdm" ... tasmdd viditdviditawaktdwaktadharmddhydropen, a kdryakdran, abhdvena sa~ikalpam, ayathdrthavi.sayatvdt, duktikddau rajatddyadhydropan, affidnavan mithydj'~dna.m te.sdm. Brahman is known by him who has recognized [It] as non-object, as dtman...
He is right-visioned who has nothing to do since immediately after his knowledge, the understanding that Brahman is dtman becomes complete. In the opposite case is one who has false knowledge. How? He is one with false vision, with reverse knowledge, "who" has the knowledge that Brahman has been "thought" i.e. known, perceived by me, since Brahman is different from the known . . . . therefore, it is established that non-Vedic knowledge is false . . . . "It is not known to those who know. It is known to those who do not know" this is a statement of the reason for what has been mentioned before since repetition is meaningless, ... as reverse knowledge and false knowledge have been destroyed. This [second half of stanza KU II,3] is uttered for the purpose of stating the reason why [the first and the second line of the first half of the stanza are]ffidna and aj~dna respectively. That [first line] isffidna since Brahman is not known "to those who know It" as dtman i.e. as non-object. It is only the object of the intellect and the like that is "known" i.e. cognized, manifested, "to those who do not know" Brahman .... Therefore, they have false knowledge which is determinate and conceptually constructed perception through superimposition of attributes of the known, the unknown, the manifested and the unmanifested upon [dtman] and through the notion of cause and effect since it has the untrue as its object just like knowledge through superimposition of silver, etc. upon a mother-of-pearl, etc. Instance 1 makes use of the expression avidydvi.saya. In the BSBh does n o t use the expression in the sense o f "the object o f avidyd", partly because he in general refrains f r o m using purely theoretical concepts and partly because unlike other advaitins S treats avidyd as a kleda rather than as a cosmic power (dakti). W h e n he uses the expression, it means "the sphere o f avidyd" and is s y n o n y m o u s with avidydvasthd. 2~ In the 23 Eigen, p. 250 and pp. 255-256.

42

SENGAKU MAYEDA

above example avidydvi.saya no doubt means "the sphere of avidyd". Later advaitins and even S's own disciples such as Suregvara use this compound in the sense of "the object of avidyd". 24 Nowhere in the VBh is the problem of "the object of avidya'" taken up for discussion. This is a strong evidence of the authenticity of the VBh. F r o m passages 2-6 the following table can be made with regard to the effects of avidyd and the relationship between avidyd and its effects: Effects of avidyd Relationship between avidyd and its effects

The Lord as a transmigrator (sam. sdritva) .., is avidyd-adhydropita (passage 2.) Perishable virility (vfryam. vind~i) ... is avidy6-ja (passage 3.) Union with another body due to works ... sati hy aj~ane, karman, i ~arirdntaram. pratisam.dadhate (passage 4.) Commencement of all works ... has ajgdna as nimitta (passage 4.) (sarvakarmarambha) Continuous flow of consciousness concerning the body, the senses and the intellect (gar~rendriyamanobuddhivi.sayaveda... has aj~dna as bija (passage 5.) ndsam.tdna) Transmigration (sam. sara) ... has aj~dna as b~ja; tat-(=aj~dna) tantra (passage 6.) The above table shows that: a) -adhy6ropita is used once to denote the relationship between avidya and its effects. b) No use is made of updddna or updddna-kdran, a or prak.rti. c) Other expressions used above also have their parallels in S's genuine works. 25 These facts point to the authenticity of the VBh. 2~ Cf. Naiskarmyasiddhi III,1. 25 For example: (a) avidy6ja - affigmaja, GBh XIV,8, p. 593; XVIII,73, p. 770; Upad 1,18,6. Cf. avidyottha, Upad 1,1,16; avidyaprabhava, Upad 1,17,20. (b) sati hy ... pratisamdadhate is an example of coexistence of ajgana and its effect. This instance parallels: (1) ygzvat ... avidyg~.rnnivartayan ... atrnanam na pratipadyate t(~vajjivasya jivatvam, BSBh 1,3,19, p. 234, (2)y~vad... avidya na nivartate t6vad...jfvasya jfvatvam .. .

SAi<IKARA'SAUTHORSHIPOF THE Kenopani.sadbhd.sya

43

In passage 7 the term mithydjdna is used three times. The first instance of mithydjgdna occurs as a bahuvrihi compound in the sense of "possessor of mithydj~dna", and is opposed to samyagdar~in, being synonymous with mithyddar~in and viparitavij~dna. The samyagdargin has the knowledge that Brahman is dtman (brahmdtmabhdva) and this knowledge is called j~a-na. On the other hand, the mithydjgdna or mithyddarAin (or viparitavijgdna) has knowledge contrary to the above, which is called aj~dna. In other words the mithydj~dna or "possessor of mithydjgdna" has ajgdna. This instance would suggest that mithydjgdna is a synonym of aj~dna as in the BSBh. According to Sure~vara mithydj~dna, identical with adhydsa, arises from aj~dna 2~ and according to Padmap~da aj~dna is the material cause (updddna) of superimposition (adhydsa) or mithydj~dna. 27 The third instance of mithydj~dna attracts our special attention, for the term is used in close relationship with adhydropa or adhydropa.na. Mithydj~dna is determinate and conceptually constructed perception (savikalpa) due to superimposition of attributes of the known, the unknown, etc. upon dtman and due to the notion of cause and effect just like knowledge arising from superimposition of silver, etc. upon motherof-pearl, etc. (misconception that mother-of-pearl is silver). Here in this instance adhydropa appears to be a cause of mithydj~dna whereas in the BSBh mithydj~dna is a synonym of avidyd which is defined as adhydsa. 2s It m a y be necessary to re-examine avidyd and adhydsa in the BSBh and other authentic works by ~'. In his Upad ~ gives the following definition of avidyd: "Though you are the supreme Self and non-transmigrator, you understand in a contrary way, '[ am a transmigrator.' Though you are not a doer, not an experiencer and are [permanently] existing, [you understand in a contrary way, 'i am] a doer, an experiencer, and am not [permanently] existing' this is avidyd. ''~9 Soon after this statement it is said that avidyd is
-

na nivartate, BSBh 1,4,6, p. 304, and (3) satydm ... avidydyd.m ... gu.ne.su ... sa~ga.h, GBh XIII,21, p. 567. (c) aj~ana as nimitta or bija - BSBh 1,1,1, p. 41 ; GBh XVIII,66, p. 764; GBh XVIII,72, p. 769; Upad 11,2,48; II,2,110, etc. - No parallel to tantra associated with avidya (or aj~ana) has so far been found, though its compounds with other words appear in S's works, for example, vastutantra, BSBh 1,1,4, p. 83;purusatantra, BSBh 1,1,4, p. 83; kart.rtantra, Upad 1,18,132, etc. The expression avidydvatwhich is used in the beginning of passage 5 parallels Upad II, 1,42. ~6 P. Hacker, Untersuehungen iiber Texte der friihen Advaitavdda, op. eit., p. 1964. o~ Ibid., p. 1931. ~8 BSBh, Introduction, p. 19; UpadII,2,51. Cf. Eigen, pp. 248-249. ~9 tva.mparamdtmdna.m santam asamsdri.na.m sa.msdry aham asrn[ti vipar[ta.m pratipadyase, akartdra.m santa.m karteti, abhoktara.m santa~n bhokteti, vidyamdna.m edvidyamdnarn iti, iyam avidyd, Upad II,2,50.

44

SENGAKU MAYEDA

the superimposition of the qualities of one upon another, s~ Such an understanding as "I am a doer" is made through the following process: "Having superimposed action based on the body and the like upon dtman, people understand, 'I am a doer.'"sl In other words, the process of superimposition of action upon dtman results in the erroneous knowledge, "I am a doer." The following passage from the BSBh supports this interpretation: "This superimposition, in the form of false representation (mithydpratyaya), gives rise to the notion of being a doer and an experiencer and is perceived by all people. ''s~ According to g's definition of avidyd in the Upad mentioned above, this erroneous knowledge as the result of superimposition is also called avidyd. It is ascertained from the statement in the BSBh: "The conception that the body and other non-dtmans are my dtman is avidy6. ''ss The GBh also shows an example of this kind: " ' M y action,' 'I am a doer,' 'For the sake of this fruit I shall do this action' - this is avidyd which has been working from eternity. ''s4 Mithydjgdna in the above instance can be taken as a result of the process of superimposing qualities of the known, the unknown, etc. upon dtman. In this sense it can be called avidyd; rnithydj~dna is synonymous with avidyd here. Adhydropa is not a cause of mithydj~dna but it is the process or function of mithydj~dna, s5 The VBh agrees with the BSBh in the respect of the term mithydj~dna.

ao avidya n(tm(myasminn anyadharmadhy(tropa.nFt, Upad I1,2,51. 31 dehadygtdraya~ karm(ttmany adhyaropyaha.m karta ... iti ca, GBh IV,18, p. 203. 32 evam ayam ... adhyaso mithyapratyayarFtpaO kart.rtvabhokt.rtvapravartakah. sarvalokapratyak.sa.h, BSBh, Introduction, p. 25. 33 dehadi.sv angttmasv aham asmfty atmabuddhir avidya, BSBh 1,3,2, p. 207. 84 mama karmFtha.m kartamu.smai phalayeda.m karma kari,yyamitiyam avidyanadik6laprav.rttFt, GBh XVIII,67,p. 756. 85 According to S's definition, the term avidygt is identical with adhyasa, but to judge
from his actual usage of the term, it seems that the term comprises (1) the cause which gives rise to the process of adhy6sa or function of avidy6, (2) the process of adhyasa or the function of avidya, and (3) the erroneous knowledge which results from (2). Avidya as (1) is found in such expressions as avidyadhyasta, avidyadhyaropita and avidyadhyasa. Avidygt as (2) is that which is seen in g's definition of avidya. Avidya as (3) is, as stated above, indicated by such examples as dehadi.sv anatmasv aham asmfty atmabuddhir avidya, BSBh 1,3,2, p. 207; mamaha~n cety ato'vidya gariradi.sv anatmasu, Upad 1,17,46; anyad.r.st.is tv avidyEt syat tanngt~o mok~a ucyate, Upad 1,17,7. Such a loose usage of technical terms may be one of S's characteristics and may have been a cause of controversy among later advaitins.

SAIr

AUTHORSHIP OF THE

Kenopani.sadbhd.sya

45

B. N~MAROPA
Only one example of ndmar@a is available in the PBh. It is as follows:

(PBh II,1,36, p. 29.) anekdni hi ndmargtpopddhik.rtdni brahman, o rftpdn, i na svata.h.

...because there are many forms of Brahman, but they are made by the limiting adjunct of name and form and not by nature. The expression ndmar@opddhi, which is characteristic of ~'s usage of ndrnarftpa, 36 evidently points to the authenticity of the PBh. On the other hand, no use of the term ndmarftpa is made in the VBh. Such mere absence of its use, however, cannot be strong negative evidence on which to doubt the authenticity of the VBh. Furthermore, the absence of the term in the sense of "primary material of the world" in both the PBh and the VBh, which is peculiar to ~,37 is quite reasonable, since in the whole KU there is no place where cosmology is taken up as a topic.

C. M.~Yzr

The term mdyd and its derivatives are quite infrequently used in the PBh and the VBh.

I. Passage in the VBh 1. (PBh IV,8,66, p. 59.) "satyam" ity amdyitdkaut.ilyam, vdhmana.hkdydndm. te.su hy dJrayati vidyd ye'mdydvina.h s6dhava.h, ndsuraprak.rti.su mdydvi.su, "na ye.su jihmam an.rta.m na mdyd ca" iti ~rute.h
"Truth" means absence of deceit, absence of fraud in speech, mind, and body. Indeed knowledge (vidya) depends upon those who are devoid of fraud and are good, and not upon those who are of demoniac nature and fraudulent, for the ~ruti (Pragna Up. 1,16) reads: "[To those] in whom there is no crookedness, falsehood or fraud". The terms mdyd and its derivatives in the above instance are definitely used in the sense of "fraud". Such usage of the terms is commonly seen in the BSBh and other genuine works of ~.8s
3n Eigen, pp. 265-266.

37 Eigen, pp. 258-259. 38 BSBh II,6, p. 507; GBh XV,16, p. 628; XVI, I, p. 634; XVI,3, p. 636; UpadII,1,6. Cf. Eigen, p. 269.

46 iI. Passages in the VBh

SENGAKU MAYEDA

1. (VBh II,4,32, p. 83.) an6tmddhyaropamdydsvantadhvdntdnabhibhavyalak.san, am. balam, vidyayd ~indate.

By means of knowledge one gains the strength which is characteristic of not being overpowered with the superimposition of non-atman, maya, and darkness of the mind.

2. (VBh IIi,2, p. 95.) mahegvaragaktimdyopdttendtyantddbhfttena prddurbhfttam, kila kenacid r@aviAe.sen,a.

It is said that [Brahman] appeared in some special supernatural form which was obtained by means of maya, power of Mahegvara. The term mdyd in the above two instances can be taken as "the miraculous power of god", though mdyd in the first instance 8~ is not so clear as that in the second. Such usage of the term often occurs in S's genuine works. 4o

D. I,~VARA
Although the term f~vara does not occur in the KU itself, it is used 11 times in the PBh and 39 times in the VBh. The only difference of g from his pupils with regard to igvara is that he uses the term very frequently while they use it very rarely. 41 If the size of the PBh and the VBh is taken into account and if the frequency of the term is compared with that of the terms which have been dealt with, it may be said that the term occurs rather frequently in both of the two commentaries, especially in the VBh; the PBh and the VBh are of almost the same size but the term is used over three times more frequently in the latter than in the former. For this reason the VBh may be more akin to the BSBh than the PBh. The concept of the term ~vara in the two commentaries should be examined. The KU has four khan..das. The first two khan..das, in verse, deal with knowledge of Brahman 42 while the second two khan.d.as, in prose, narrate a story of a yaks.a and the gods; this story is told to ward off the wrong 39 Anandajfifmainterprets this may~ as p~rame~varigaktiO. 4o Eigen,p. 271. Cf. GBh, Introduction, pp. 4-5; UpadI,19,17, and so forth. 41 Eigen, pp. 276-286. But in the Upad the term is used only 8 times. Therefore frequency may not be considered critical. r Cf. sam~pt~brahmavidygtyadadhina.hpuru.s~rtha.h, VBh III,1,36, p. 85.

SAI~KARA'SAUTHORSHIPOF THE Kenopani.sadbhd.sya

47

notion of dull-witted persons that Brahman is non-existent, 48 or to encourage meditation upon the qualified Brahman. 44 It is interesting to see that in the two commentaries the term fdvara occurs only when they deal with the second two khan.d,as except in the case in the PBh on the stanza K U 1,5 which ends with a refrain: "nedam. y a d idam updste"; though this refrain appears also in the stanzas K U 1,6-9, the term idvara is used only in the PBh on K U 1,5 and not in the VBh. Such being the case, fdvara seems to be differentiated from Brahman and dtman, though there is no mention of their difference. It is, however, impossible to distinguish idvara from Brahman and dtman in the following passages:

I. Passages in the PBh

1. (III, 1,47, pp. 43-44) "brahma" yathoktalak.san, am. param. ... "'devebhyo " ... jaya.m labdhavat . . . . "tasya ... brahman, o vijaye devd" ... mahimdnam prdptavanta.h, dtmasam, sthasya pratyagdtmana fdvarasya sarvajgasya ... aya.m vijayo mahimd cety ajdnanta.h . . . . devd.h ... ik.sitavanta.h ... n6smatpratyagdtmabhfttedvarak.rta iti. The highest "Brahman" the characteristic of which have been mentioned above ... won a victory "in behalf of the gods." ... "in the victory of this Brahman the gods" ... attained glory. Then without knowing that this victory and glory belonged to the omniscient iAvara who is pratyagdtman, abiding in dtman . . . . the deities.., thought that... [the glory] has not been achieved by iAvara who is our pratyagdtman. 2. (III,1,46, p. 42) tad eva hi b r a h m a . . , devdndm api paro deva.h, idvardn, dm api paramedvara.h. Indeed, this very Brahman ... is the supreme Deity of even the deities, the supreme Lord of even the lords. In passage 1 the word Brahman in K U III, 1 is interpreted as para.m brahma and it is again called idvara which stands in apposition to pratyagdtman. I f expressions in the PBh such as pratyagdtmabrahmavij~dna (PBh, Introductory part, 4, p. 4; 5, p. 5; -p~rvaka, 5, p. 5) and pratyagdtma4a tathedarn brahmtivij~dtatvdd asad eveti mandabuddhin~.rn vy~moho ma bhl~d iti tadartheyam dkhydyikdrabhyate, PBh III,1,46, p. 42. The PBh suggests four more

possible interpretations of this story. 44 sagunopdsanartho vd, VBh III,1,36, p. 85. The VBh suggests two more explanations of this story.

48

SENGAKU MAYEDA

brahmavi.saya (ibid., 5, p. 6) are taken into consideration, it is certain that idvara is interchangeable with param, brahma and pratyagatman. I n example 2 the same Brahman is said to be paro deva.h and paramedvara.

II. Passages in the VBh

1. (III,1,37-40, pp. 86-89.) "brahma" iti parah. . . . . na hy anyatra pardd ~dvaran nityasarvaj~dt ... t.rn.am. vajr?kartum, s6marthyam asti . . . . brahmadabdavdeya ?gvara ity avas~yate .... grutism.rtiprasiddhibhir nityasarvavij~dna ~dvare sarvdtmani sarva~aktau siddhe'pi ~dstrdrthanigcaydrtham ueyate. tasye~varasya sadbhdvasiddhi.h kuto bhavaffti?.., sa cdtmabhftta.h sarvasya sarvakriydphalapratyayas6k.si nityavij~dnasvabhdva.h sam.sdradharmair aspLst.a.h. ~ruted ca . . . . asam. sdrin, a ekasydtmano nityamuktasya siddhau drutaya.h.

"Brahman" means the highest one . . . . because the capability of turning a straw into the thunderbolt does not belong to ... anybody else than the highest everomniscient ikvara. . . . it is ascertained that igvara is expressed by the word "Brahman".... although [the existence of] fgvara who is permanent, omniscient, gttman of all, and all-mighty is established on the evidence of the ~rutis and the Sm.rtis, reference [to Him] is made for the purpose of determining the purport of the Sastras. How is the existence of igvara established? ... He is dtman of all, witness of all actions, their fruits and representations, has the nature of permanent knowledge, and is not touched by the qualities of transmigration. Because there are passages from the ~rutis such as... These passages from the Srutis are concerned with the establishment of the only dtman who is non-transmigrator and ever-free.
2. (iII,1,41, p. 90.)tasmdt siddhah, sarvaj~a ~dvara.h sarvajantubuddhikarmaphalavibhdgasdk.sf "sarvabhfadntardtmd" (Svetd~vatara Up. VI,11).

"yat sdks.dd aparok.sdd brahma ya dtmd sarv6ntara.h" (B.rhaddran.yaka Up,

III,4,1) iti drute.h, sa eva eatrdtmdjantgmdm . . . . "tat tram asi" (Ch6ndogya Up. III,8,7) iti cdtmatvopade~dt. Therefore it has been established that the omniscient fgvara is the witness of the intellect, action, its fruits and the assignment of them to all creatures on the ground of the following passages from the Srutis: "[The one God is] the inner dtman of all beings" and "[Please explain to me] the Brahman that is immediately present and directly perceived, that is the atman in all beings." He is the atman of the creatures here . . . . and since saying, "That art Thou", [the Sruti] teaches that [igvara] is atman. 3. (III, 1,42, pp. 91-92.) updsya fdvaro gururdjavat; upasakad eetara.h di.sya-

SAI~KARA'S AUTHORSHIP OF THE Kenopani.sadbhd.sya

49

bh.rtyavat . . . . eka evegvarag cdtmd sarvabhfttdndm, nityamukto'bhyupagamyate . . . . anityavij~dna fgvaralak.sa.naviparTto'bhyupagamyate, yasydvicchede sam.sdravyavahdra.h, vicchede ca mok.savyavahdra.h . . . . na punag caturtho bhinnalak.san, a f2vardd abhyupagamyate .... fSvardd anyasydtmano 'sattvdt. i~vara is to be worshipped like a teacher and a king; anything other is a worshipper, like a pupil and a subject . . . . and it is recognized that there is only igvara who is the dtman of all beings and ever-free. . . . it is admitted that transient knowledge is contrary to igvara's characteristics. When it is not destroyed, the life of sa.msdra exists and when it is destroyed, there is the life of moks.a.... again it is not admitted that the Fourth is other than i~vara different in its characteristics from igvara. . . . because there does not exist dtman other than f~vara.

4. (Iii,1,46, p. 95) sarvdtmdnam dtmastham. ... f~varam evdtmatvendbuddhvd yam. mithydpratyayam, cakru.h, tasya ... mithydpratyayatvdt sarvdtme~varaydthdtmydvabodhena hdtavyatdkhydpandrtha.h " tad dhai.sdm" ityddydkhydyikdmndya.h Without realizing that i~vara, which is dtman of all, abiding in dtman, is dtman, they conceived the false representation . . . . As it is a false representation, the traditional doctrine in the form of narrative beginning with "tad dhais.dm" has the purpose of making known that it should be destroyed by realizing the real nature of igvara, dtman of all. In passage 1 the word Brahman, which is dealt with as param, brahma (neuter) in the PBh, is interpreted as para idvara.h or f~vara. Then the commentator of the VBh tries to prove the existence of fgvara. In conclusion he declares that f~vara is dtman of all, witness of all actions, their fruits, and representations, of the nature of permanent knowledge, and not touched by the qualities of transmigration. In order to prove the existence of igvara he quotes several passages from the Srutis. Nevertheless, he maintains in the end that these scriptural passages are concerned with the establishment of dtman. It is unquestionable that in his consciousness f~vara is interchangeable here with dtman. Passage 2 occurs in the sequel to the discussion which was begun in passage 1. In order to support his view that fdvara is dtman of the creatures, the commentator quotes the mahdvdkya: "tat tram asi'" and explains that this sentence teaches the identity of ?~vara and dtman. This parallels BSBh IV, I,3, p. 832: grdhayanti cdtmatvenaivegvaram, veddntavdkydni ... "tat satya.m sa dtmd tat tvam asi" (Chdndogya Up. Vi,8,7) ityevamddini. (Moreover certain Veddnta passages make us comprehend

50

SENGAKU MAYEDA

that ~gvara is dtman . . . . "That is the true, that is dtman, thou art that. ''45) When in passage 1 the commentator interprets the word Brahman in KU III,1 as para ~vara.h or fgvara, ~vara appears to be more or less differentiated from Brahman. In passage 2, however, ~Avara is quite interchangeable with Brahman. In passage 3 there are two kinds of life, sam.sdravyavaMra and mok.savyavahdra, distinguished accordingto the presence and absence of transitory knowledge (anityavij~dna) which is contradictory to ~gvara'scharacteristics. Though it is not clearly stated, it appears to be in the sam.sdravyavahdra that fgvara is the object to be worshipped (updsya), while anything other is the worshipper (updsaka). This very ~dvara is said to be identical with the Fourth (eaturtha) which is atman in the moks.avyamhdra. The Fourth should be considered as originally identified with (param.) brahma(n), though the term is not explained in the VBh. The usage of i~vara as identical with the Fourth in the VBh parallels that in the Upad where the Fourth (turiya) is identified with both parama (brahman) and ~gvara.4~ It may be said that fgvara in passage 3 is interchangeable with brahman, though this fgvara is the object to be worshipped. Passage 4 shows the interchangeability of ~gvarawith (param.)brahma(n), since atman is identified with ~gvara instead of (param.) brahma(n). ~7 In short, the PBh shows examples of interchangeability of param. brahma and pratyagdtman with fgvara. In the VBh also dtman (passage 1) and (param.) brahma(n) (passages 2-4) are interchangeable with igvara. In this respect both the PBh and the VBh agree with the BSBh and differ from later advaifins' works such as the Pa~cada~ and the Ved~ntasdra in which fgvara is defined as brahman associated with avidya or maya. ~s
E. .4NANDA

In the PBh the term ananda occurs 4 times but only in direct quotations
45 In the BSBh this mahavakya is quoted to show the identity of brahman and sa.msarin (BSBh 1,3,25, p. 246); ofparamegvara and atman (BSBh 1,2,13, p. 176); ofpara and jiva (BSBh III,4,8, p. 786). Cf. expressions such as fgvaro'smi (Upad 1,3,1) and aham igvarah. (Upad 1,10,8; BSBh IV, l,3, p. 833) instead of aharo brahmasml (Brhadaran. yaka

up. 1,4,10).
~6 Upad 1,10,1-8. ,7 Cf. atma ca brahma sarvantaratvad avis.aya.h, VBh 1,4,16, p. 74; svatmabrahmatvanigcayargtpa, VBh II,2,24, p. 78; tena vidita.m brahma yenavi.sayatvenatmatvena pratibuddham, VBh II,3,27, p. 80; brahmatmabhavasyavasitatvat, VBh II,3,27, p. 80; atmatvenavisayataya brahma vijanatam, VBh II,3,29, p. 81 ; ~tmabh~tatvac ca brahma.naO VBh IV,6,52, p. 98; nirdubkhatmani pare brahma.hi ... pratiti.st.hati, VBh IV,9,56, 100. 48 Cf. Pa~cadagfI,16; III,37; Vedantasara (VII) 43.

SAlqKARA'S AUTHORSHIP OF THE

Kenopani.sadbh~sya

51

f r o m the Upanis.ads) 9 I n the VBh there is no occurrence o f dnanda at all a n d even a single passage c o n t a i n i n g dnanda is n o t q u o t e d f r o m the Upani.sads. N o use o f the set c o m p o u n d sac-cid-dnanda as the positive c h a r a c t e r o f brahman-dtman is m a d e in either the PBh or the VBh. This fact points to the authenticity o f the P B h a n d the VBh3 ~

F. ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE The a g r e e m e n t o f the PBh a n d the VBh with the B S B h can also be seen f r o m the following p o i n t s : 1) The n a t u r e o f avidyd is n o t analysed either in the P B h or the VBh; the t e r m anirvacanfya is n o t used as an a t t r i b u t e o f avidyd in either o f them31 The t e r m anirvacanfya as such first a p p e a r s in the Brahmasiddhi o f Man..danami~ra, one o f S's c o n t e m p o r a r i e s . 52 The a s s o c i a t i o n o f the t e r m with avidyd occurs in the t h i n k i n g o f all advaitins except g, Suregvara, a n d To.taka. ~ 2) Avidyd in the two c o m m e n t a r i e s , as in the BSBh, lacks the following t r a d i t i o n a l a t t r i b u t e s : a. ja.da (since P a d m a p ~ d a ) , b. bhdvar@a (since Jfifinottama), c. dvara.na~akti a n d d. vik.sepa~akti. 54 3) The p r o b l e m o f avidya~raya (the locus o f avidyd) is n o t discussed; the t e r m is n o t used in either the PBh or the VBh. I n this respect t h e y agree with the B S B h 55 a n d differ f r o m w o r k s o f g's direct pupils such as Sure~vara who asserts t h a t avidyd~raya is dtman a n d Ma.n.danami~ra a c c o r d i n g to w h o m it isfiva. 56

49 "yad e.sa dkdga dnando na sydt" (Taittiriya Up. II,7), PBh 1,2,16, p. 14; ~ dnanda.m brahma" (B.rhaddra.nyaka Up. III,9,28), PBh 1,5,28, p. 23; PBh II,1,36, p. 30; PBh II,4,43, p. 36. 50 Eigen, p. 276; D. H. H. Ingalls, 'The Study of Sa~nkarficftrya', Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, vol. 33 (1952), p. 7; Section "~fnanda" in my articles, op. cit. 51 In the BSBh and the Upad, anirvaeaniya occurs only as an attribute of avyak.rte ndmarape. There is no occurrence of anirvaeaniya in the GBh, which lacks the term avydk.rte ndmarape. Likewise no use of anirvaeaniya is made in either the PBh or the VBh because of the absence of the term avydkrte ndmarf~pe. 52 Brahmasiddhi ( = Madras Government Oriental Manuscripts Series, No. 4) (1937), p. 9, line 14. Cf. Dasgupta, A History of Indian Philosophy, vol. II (Cambridge, 1952), p. 89; Eigen, p. 255, n. 1. 53 Eigen, pp. 254-256. Cf. D. H. H. Ingalls, '~afiakara on the Question: Whose is avidyft?', Philosophy East and West, vol. 3 (1953), no. 1, p. 69. ~4 Eigen, pp. 254-256. ~5 Eigen, pp. 254-256. Cf. D. H. H. Ingalls, '~arhkara on the Question: Whose is avidyg?', op. cit., pp. 69-72. 5~ Nai.skarmyasiddhi III,1 ; Brahmasiddhi, p. 10. Cf. Dasgupta, A History of Indian Philosophy, vol. II, pp. 89-90 and pp. 101-102.

52

SENGAKU MAYEDA

4) As I have menionted elsewhere, 57 the problem of avidydvis.aya (the object o f avidyd) is not discussed in the VBh, nor is it treated anywhere in the PBh. 5) The term vivarta does not occur at all in the two commentaries. does not use it in his B S B h and other works rightly ascribed to him, although it is an important term a m o n g later advaitins. 5s 6) In the two commentaries, as in the B S B h , the Upad and the GBh, the highest regard is paid to the B.rhaddran.yaka Up. which is quoted three times more often than the Chdndogya Up., t h o u g h the latter is of almost the same size as the former. Moreover, in the two commentaries the Bhagavadgftd is m o s t frequently quoted a m o n g the non-Vedic texts as it also is in the B S B h and the Upad. 59 Furthermore, the following additional points also support the authenticity o f the P B h and the VBh: a) Both the P B h and the VBh are attributed to Safikara-Bhagavatp~da or Safikara-Bhagavat in their colophons and not to Safikar~c~rya. ~~ 57 This article, p. 41-42. Cf. Eigen, pp. 254-256. 5s P. Hacker, Vivarta (Wiesbaden, 1953), pp. 24ff. Cf. H. Nakamura, Kotoba no Keijijdgaku (Tokyo, 1956), pp. 328-332 and p. 430. The verbal form vivartante and its participle vivartamdna are used in BSBh 1,3,39, p. 282, but they have no illusionistic connotation. There is no occurrence of the term in the GBh and the Upad. 5~ The sources of quotations made in the PBh and the VBh and their frequency are as follows:
Padabhds. ya B.rhaddran.yaka Up. Kena Up. Kat.ha Up. Chdndogya Up. Mu~d. aka Up. Pragna Up. Taittiriya Up. Aitareya A. Taittirfya B. Aitareya Up. ~vetOJvatara Up. l~a Up. Mahdndraya.na Up. Bhagavadgftd Mahdbhdrata
I

22 14 7 6 6 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 6 2 2

Vdkyabha.sya Brhadara.nyaka Up. Kena Up. Chdndogya Up. Mu.nd.aka Up. Kat.ha Up. ~vetagvatara Up. Kau.sftaki Up. Iga Up. Mahdndrdya.na Up. Satapatha B.

18 11 6 4 3 3 1 1 1 1

Undetermined

Bhagavadgftd Manu Mahgtbhdrata Undetermined

5 2 1 1

Cf. The present writer, The Upadegasdhasrfof~at~kardcdrya, op. cit., pp. 47-51 ; Section "A Comparison of Quotations" in my articles, op. cit. 60 P. Hacker, 'Safikar~c~rya and Safikarabhagavatp~tda', New Indian Antiquary, vol. 9 (1947), pp. 176-178 and pp. 182-183. In the case of the PBh the colophons which

SAiqKARA'S AUTHORSHIPOF THE Kenopani.sadbhd.sya

53

~nandajfi~na, commentator on the PBh and the VBh, attributes both of them to Bhagav~n Bh~.syak~rah. which is a usual designation of g since Padmap~da. b) To judge from the existence of ,~nandajfi~na's commentaries on the PBh and the VBh, 6~ these two works m a y be ranked with respect to their authenticity just next to the B.rha&fran.yakopani.sadbhds.ya and other works which have Sure~vara's Vdrttika and may be considered equally genuine with the Upad and the GBh. c) Parisa.mkhy6na is mentioned as something which the commentator recommends in PBh 1,5,29, p. 24; he does not mention prasa.mkhydna. ~2 This point too would support S's authorship of the PBh. CONCLUSION in the previous pages a comparison of the PBh with the VBh has been made and then these two commentaries have been compared with the BSBh with regard to technical terms, avidyd, ndmarf~pa, ~vara and dnanda, which are used in these three works. F r o m the first comparison it has followed that the PBh and the VBh were either written by different authors who had the same philosophical view, or composed by one and the same author, and that the VBh was probably written as a supplement to the PBh. The second comparison has revealed the agreement of the PBh and the VBh with the BSBh and their disagreement with works of even g's direct disciples like Padmapgda and Suregvara. It seems that the result of the second comparison has made it impossible to assume that the PBh and the VBh were written by different authors; the agreement of the two commentaries with the BSBh would lead us to the conclusion that they were composed by S, author appear at the end of every kha.nd.a attribute it to ~afikarabhagavatp~da. Nevertheless, the last colophon to the PBh attributes it to ~afikarac~rya. The colophon to Pmandajfifma's commentary on the PBh ascribes it to Srimaccha.mkara, while that to his commentary on the VBh, to grimaccha .mkarabhagavat. This information is based only upon the edition of the Anaddgrama Sanskrit Series, vol. 6 (1934); no manuscripts have been accessible to me. ~1 E. Kanakura, 'Paficikara~aaK6', Journal of Philosophy, vol. 41 (Tokyo, 1926), no. 475. Cf. The present writer, The Upadedasdhasriof Satikardeglrya, op. eit., pp. 64-66. The authenticity of ~nandajfi~na's commentary is, however, doubted by M. Hiriyanna ("Note", Kenopanishad with the commentary of Sri Sankardedrya, Sriramgam, 1912) and Saccidanandendra Sarasvati (The Kena Upanishad, op. eit., pp. 7-9). ~ Parisa.mkhy~nais recommended by ~ and an illustration of its use appears in Upad II,3. However, prasa.mkhyana or prasa.meaksa is rejected as an opponent's view in Upad 1,18,9-18. Suregvara also rejects prasa.mkhy6na. Cf. P. Hacker, Untersuchungen iiber Texte des friihen Advaitav6da, op. cit., pp. 2005-2006.

54 of the BSBh.

SENGAKU MAYEDA A s f a r as I c a n see, t h e r e is n o s t r o n g e v i d e n c e o n w h i c h t o

d e n y t h e i r a u t h e n t i c i t y . 6z T a k i n g i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e r e s u l t o f m y ~* As far as I have investigated, the K U is quoted four times in the BSBh. It may be necessary to examine these quotations, since if parallels are found, they may furnish some support for the authenticity of the two commentaries. BSBh na ca vidikriyakarmatvena karyanupravedo brahma.nah, "anyad eva tad viditad atho aviditad adhi" iti vidikriyfikarmatvaprati.sedhat, ... - - 1,1,4, p. 78. KU 1,4 PBh or VBh "anyad" eva p.rthag eva tat. yat prak.rta.m "grotradfnfi.m grotradi" ity uktam avi.saya~ ca te~;am, tad viditad anyad eva hi. viditam nfima yad vidikriyaya atiSayena aptar.n vidikriyakarmabhfitam ... PBh 1,4,23, pp. 18-19. tabhyam anyad brahma wjnanasvarfipam sarvavi$es.apratyastamitam ity aya .msamudayfirtha.h. VBh 1,4,16, p. 74. " yad vacfinabhyudita .m" vakprak~animitta .m ceti brahma.no' vis.ayatvena vastvantarafighrk.sa.m nivartya svatmany evavasth6payaty amnayab "tad eva brahma tva.m viddhi" iti. yatnata uparamayati "nedam" iti. upd*syaprati.sedhac ca. VBh 1,5,19, p. 75. tena vidita.m brahma yenavi~ayatvenatmatvena pratibuddham ity artha.h, sa samyagdargf yasya vijfianfinantaram eva brahmatmabh~vasy~vasitatv~t sarvatab kgtryabhavab. - - VBh II,3,27, p. 80.
-

dar2ayati ca druti.h pararfipaprati~edhenaiva brahma nirvides.atvfit ..., "anyad eva tad viditad atho aviditfid adhi," ... - - I I I , 2 , 1 7 , p. 644. tathopastikriy~karmatvaprati.sedho'pi bhavati - "yad vacfinabhyudita.m yena vdtg abhyudyate" ity avi.sayatva.m brahma.na upanyasya "tad eva brahma tva .mviddhi nedam yad idam upasate" iti - - 1,1,4, p. 78. avi~ayatve brahma.nab gastrayonitvdmupapattir iti cet, na, avidyfikalpitabhedaniv.rttiparatvac chastrasya. na hi gfistram ida .mtaya vis.ayabhfita.m brahma pratipipadayis.atL ki.m tarhi pratyagatmatvenavis.ayatayfi pratipfidayad avidyakalpita.m vedyavedit.rvedanadibhedam apanayati. tatha ca gastram - "yasydtmat a ~ ... vtjfidtam avijfinatam" ... iti ...
- - 1,1,4, p. 79.

1,4

1,5

II,3

~'s remarks on the quotations from the K U are too brief in the BSBh for a satisfactory comparison but among the above instances the first one is most interesting, since the remarkable expression vidikriydkarma- is commonly used in the BSBh and in the PBh. This point suggests a close relationship between the two texts. The other instances, especially the last one, are not so relevant as the first, but it is certain that the VBh agrees well with the BSBh. In addition, it is also to be noted here that when S refers to "anyad eva tad viditad atho avid#rid adhi" (KU 1,4), he paraphrases it as "viditaviditabhyd.m tad anyad eva" in Upad II,15,49 and "viditdvidit~bhydtm anyatva~rateO" in GBh XIII,12, p. 553. A similar paraphrase of K U 1,4 appears both in the PBh (viditaviditabhyam anyat; viditdviditdbhydm anyatvam, I,4,25, p. 20)and in the VBh (viditaviditabhydm anyat, 1,4,12, pp. 69-70). The significance of this fact should not be exaggerated; a similar paraphrase appears in the Paficadagf (viditdviditabhya.m tat prthak, III,18). In any case, however, our examination has produced no negative evidence.

SAI~KARA'S AUTHORSHIP OF THE Kenopanis.adbhd.sya

55

c o m p a r i s o n o f the P B h w i t h t h e VBh, we m a y c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e P B h a n d t h e VBh are b o t h g e n u i n e w o r k s o f ~ a n d t h a t the VBh was c o m p o s e d l a t e r b y S to s u p p l e m e n t t h e PBh. ~4

~ In the opening of his commentary on the VBh ~rknandajfihna explains the reason why Bh~t.syakftra wrote the two commentaries on the same text: "kenes.itam" itya-

dikgt .msdmavedagfikhdbhedabrdhmanopanis, adam padago vydkhydydpi na tuto.sa bhagavan bhfi.syakara.h ddrfrakair nydyair anir.nftdrthatvdd iti nydyapradhdnaJrutyarthasa.mgrdhakair vdkyair vydcikhydsub pfirvakd.nd,ena sa.mbandham abhidhitsu.h pFtrvakd.nd.drtha.m sat.nks.epato dargayati. It is also worthy of note that N~r~ya.na's Dfpikd on the KU (.4nandagrama Sanskrit Series, No. 6, 1934) seems to be a compilation, or even plagiarism, of the PBh and the VBh. Gathering sentences or passages suitable for his purpose from the two commentaries, oftener from the PBh, Nar~tya9a combined them into one
work under his name, sometimes changing grammatical forms, sometimes omitting or adding words, sentences or quotations. For example, in Dfpika II,3, it is quite clear that the whole text comes from the PBh and the VBh except two quotations from P~ .nini and his additional comment: na tv atyantamfid.dndm iya.m bhranti.h; while combining sentences from the PBh and the VBh he paraphrases bodhayati in the PBh into avadharayati, avijfidtam amatam aviditam in the PBh into avijfidta~ vij~andd viditdd anyad, and samyagviditavatdm in the PBh into samyagdargindm. He does not refer to the above-mentioned fact anywhere but his Dfpikgt ends with a stanza in which he describes himself as "adherent to ~'s sayings" (gahkaroktyupajfvin).