1. Advaita Vedanta, A Student's Note Shashikant Padalkar .epub

ADVAITA VEDANTA

A Student's Note

Shashikant Padalkar

Advaita Vedanta

A Student's Note

Shashikant Padalkar

Copyright C 2010 Shashikant Padalkar All rights reserved.

DEDICATION

To The Students of Advaita Vedanta

न हि ज्ञानेन सदृशं पवित्रमिह विद्यते Nothing exists here as purifying as Knowledge.

BG 4.38

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Thanks

To Madhuri for her withness, To Ananta for his witness.

Without them this note could not have seen the light of day.

PREFACE

My interest in Advaita-Vedanta was kindled by the excellent Marathi text-book of philosophy, "भारतीय तत्त्वज्ञान" byश्रीनिवास हरि दीक्षित, which I came across in 1991. I found the foundational status ascribed to consciousness aka awareness (संविद्, चित) to be an interesting speculation though it did not induce me to study Advaita seriously at that time. Monism for me, then, was only an energetic principle -- a 'matter-energy equivalence'; while, I considered consciousness to be an emergent property of particular types of biological processes. My interest in the awareness and Advaita was rekindled after a decade when I had read more about 'quantum measurement paradox' and the role of 'conscious observer' in the measurement process. This was supplemented by my own understanding of the "hard problem of consciousness" and various consciousness theories of the contemporary philosophy of mind. Awareness, I thought, could be that irreducible and fundamental entity after all, as claimed by Advaita! In my reintroduction with Advaita, its Vedic legacy and its long unbroken tradition raised number of questions: (1) what is the antiquity and fidelity of the oral Vedic tradition; (2) whether Shankara, the main protagonist has interpreted the central doctrines of Advaita in line with the old scriptural teachings; (3) how to account for the internal stress between Upanishads and Vedic liturgical sections; (4) how to reconcile the diversity of opinions within Upanishads themselves; and (5) what role the post-Shankara Vedantins played - whether they were mere carriers of Shankara's view or whether they contributed to the tradition by way of new interpretation. This note attempts to find answers to these questions. In Upanishads, there are descriptions of Brahman 'without qualities' (Nirguna) and also 'with qualities' (Saguna). Shankara has used various arguments to filter out all properties of Brahman from his scheme to advocate Nirguna Brahman over Saguna Brahman. The later is useful for meditation, only as an aid in realizing the Self. The filters that Shankara used are not part, at least explicitly, of the primary source'; but without them the contradictory description cannot be reconciled to offer a unified view. Ch 1-4 presents construction of such a unified view which is then summarized in the concluding Ch 7 following an overview of Advaita traditions. To trace the origins and continuity of Vedanta tradition and to understand its cultural impact, one has to browse through the Vedic as well as post-Vedic history of the Indic regions. While looking into Rigveda; it is quite natural to peep into the pre-historic times of

Sindhu (Hindu) civilization. In its grounds are hidden many a seeds of present day Hinduism (Ch 5.1). I included Shaiva (Trika), Shakta (Tripura), and Shakya (Maha-yana) traditions along with Vaishnava and Vedanta traditions; All of them have prominent monist themes and all of them are integral part of Indic culture. Sufism is also included in this panorama though it originated outside Indic region; it has many strands shared with Vedanta-Yoga. Vedanta history with all such excurrent themes is posited in Ch 5.2. Advaita Vedanta's contemporary avatar New Vedanta (NV) is discussed in Ch 6. There is very little to differentiate NV from analytical metaphysics except that the aspirant who wants to know the laws of this metaphysics has to operate within the framework of austerity and equanimity. In old days he had to depend on direct communication with his Guru; in this age of multimedia communication, he has many ways to reach his Guru as also to the source material of Vedanta. Anybody with access to Internet can have access to the source literature in both Sanskrit and in English. This has practically made irrelevant the exclusivity and secrecy that was once associated with Vedanta in the Indic traditions. Ironically, Vedanta has become the most famous and open ended part of Veda. This note, for example, has been prepared by making numerous reference to on- line resources in addition to published Vedanta texts (see Ch 8 and foot-notes). Apart from mainstream Vedanta, there are other Vedanta sub-schools, which are not only important in themselves, but have indirectly contributed to the evolution and confirmation of Vedanta tradition through polemic. Advaita-Vedanta competed against these Vedanta schools and other Indic schools to confirm itself. Many post-Shankara Advaitins defended Advaita in the polemical discussions. It is not possible to do justice to the contribution of these post-Shankara Advaitins in this type of introductory note, though their major works are referred to, mainly in Ch 5.2, and then in the list of Ch 8.4. This note does not cover Vedanta's exposition in the regional Indic languages like Hindi, Tamil, Bengali, Kannada etc though literature in Marathi is briefly discussed. The note also does not analyze the role of Sanskrit in establishing Vedanta. There is repetition due to the overlapping scope of chapters, which is retained to ensure integrity. Advaita can be studied in more than one ways: (1) exegetical approach of interpreting the scriptures around key dogmatic assertions; (2) rational approach of philosophical analysis and synthesis consistent with human experience and reason; and (3) axiological approach of yoga-meditation and Self-realization. Vedanta tradition blends all the three approaches. This study-note is inclined

towards the second approach. Awareness is fundamental in Advaita. Its absence can never be experienced, it being the basis of experience. Advaita then postulates Awareness to be eternal, impartite, and hence non-phenomenal. It is here that the Advaita doctrine becomes interesting; Awareness of 'intelligent being' IB1 cannot be differentiated from that of IB2. The world process cannot be experienced without this undifferentiated, noumenal Awareness. It becomes the common basis of all the variegated experience in which the aggregate of world objects are held. Vedanta superposes the concepts of karma, transmigration, rebirth, and liberation on this Awareness and offers the system of unified ontology, epistemology, and axiology. The main doctrine of Consciousness seems to be under con-templation of Vedic seers since c.1500BC-1400BC. This is the period of the last book of acin which Nasadiya and many other monist hymns appear. The axiological concepts of karma and transmigration might had tribal animist origins of anterior dates in the Gangetic plane where Upanishads took roots. If that is so, Vedanta tradition has transformed the ubiquitous primitive animism into the philosophy of absolute divinity. It is a fascinating story unfolded over more than three millenniums. In its more general scope, it is the spiritual history of Indian subcontinent. This Student's Note intends to capture the main elements of this history and introduce Advaita Vedanta to the like- minded curious students.

April 2010 Shashikant Padalkar

N.B.

1. ITRANS is used for Devanagari script and for romanized IA (mainly Sanskrit) words; the later ones are typed in italics. 2. Isolated genitive cases of romanized Sanskrit nouns and their plural forms are 'naively' derived by respectively postfixing 'apostrophe-s' and '-s' to their respective singular forms. 3. Applicability and validity of URLs given for online (Internet) resources is not guranteed (as usual). 4. (a) Dates 'Before Common-Era' are postfixed with BC; (b) Ordinal post-fixing by C denotes "Century in Common-Era" and ordinal postfixing by CBC denotes "Century Before Common-Era" (e.g. 8thC, 5thCBC etc.); (c) Common-Era dates are not postfixed; (d) Dates are prefixed with c. [circa]; d. [died], b. [borne], r. [ruled], a. [accessed] as the case may be.

5. Square brackets are used for definitive words or abbreviations; paren-thesis are used for supplementary or substitutive information; angular brackets are used for meta-information and instructions. 6. Vedanta is male-centric in culture but gender independent 'in principle'. Hence, gender dependent references 'in principle' are applicable to all genders unless context rules otherwise. 7. 'Ishvara', 'God', 'Saguna Brahman', and 'Lord' denote monotheist ideal; 'deity', and 'god' denote polytheist notion; and brahman (w/o adjective) denotes the neutral monistic principle.

Devanagari Transliteration (ITRANS) Scheme.

अ आ इ उ ऊ एऐ ओ औ अं अ: 北 ल लृ

a A i I u U e ai au aM aH RRi RRI LLi LLI

aa ii uu R^i R^I L^i L^I

क ख ग घ ङ

ka kha ga gha N^a

च छ ज झ 외

cha Cha ja jha JNa

ड ढ ण 어

Ta 2

Tha Da Dha Na

त थ द ध न

ta tha da dha na

प फ ब भ म

pa pha ba bha ma

य र ल व श ष स ह क्ष ज्ञ

ya ra la va sha Sha sa ha La xa GYa

श्र त्र ह्र र्ग 6 o: ए S ॐ - 0.

shra tra hra rga .n M .N H .C o.c .a OM .. .

0 १ २३ ४ ५ ६ 9

0123 4 5 678 9

http://www.aczoom.com/itrans

LEGEND

AU aitareya upaniShad [ऐतरेय उपनिषद्] AV atharva Veda [अथर्व वेद] Bh (shA.nkara) bhAShya [(शांकर) भाष्य] (postfix) BG bhagavadgItA [भगवद्गीता] BU bRRihadAraNyaka upaniShad [बृहदारण्यक उपनिषद्] BS brahmasUtra [ब्रह्मसूत्र] CU उपनिषद्] ChAndogya upaniShad [छान्दोग्य

GK कारिका] gauDapAdlya kArikA [गौड़पादीय

IU Isha upaniShad [ईश उपनिषद्] KU kaTha upaniShad [कठ उपनिषद्]

उपनिषद्] Kau kauShItakI upaniShad [कौषीतकी

KEU kena upaniShad [केन उपनिषद्] Mai maitrI upaniShad [मैत्री उपनिषद्] MAU mANDUkya upaniShad [माण्डूक्य उपनिषद्] MB mahAbhArata [महाभारत] MU उपनिषद्] muNDaka upaniShad [मुण्डक

NS naiShkarmyasiddhi [नैष्कर्म्यसिद्धि] Pai उपनिषद्] pai.ngala upaniShad [पैंगल

PP pa.nchapAdikA [पंचपादिका] PU prashna upaniShad [प्रश्न उपनिषद्] PY योगसूत्र] pAta.njala yogasUtra [पातंजल

RV RRigveda [ऋग्वेद] SB shrlmad bhAgavatam [श्रीमद् भागवतम्] SU shvetAshvatara upaniShad [श्वेताश्वतर उपनिषद्] SV sAma Veda [साम वेद] -SV saMbandha-vArtika [संबंध वार्तिक] (postfix) TU उपनिषद्] taittirlya upaniShad [तैत्तिरीय

US upadesha sAhasrI [उपदेश साहस्री] V vArtika [वार्तिक] (postfix) YOV yoga vAsishTha [योग वासिष्ठ]

YS स्मृति] yAGYavalkya smRRiti [याज्ञवल्क्य

YV yajurveda [यजुर्वेद]

CONTENT

PREFACE V

ITRANS ix

LEGEND X137 0 Introduction 0.1 Veda 0.2 Vedanga

1 Means of Knowledge 10 1.1 Primary Source 14 1.2 Secondary Source 21 1.3 Tertiary Source 25

2 Method of Knowledge 30 2.1 Criteria of Knowledge 32 2.2 Selection of Text 33 2.3 Metaphysical Criteria 59 2.4 Superimposition 69 2.5 Attribution-Retraction 74 2.6 Continuity-Discontinuity 76 2.7 Method of Indication 77 2.8 Illustrations 78

3 Ignorance and Illusion 88 3.1 Ignorance and Illusion 89 3.2 Illusion and Creation 91 3.3 Illusion and Self 95 3.4 vArtika Tradition 98 3.5 bhAmatI Tradition 100 3.6 vivaraNa Tradition 104

Content (contd.)

4 Liberation 111 112 4.1 Realization 114 4.2 Theory of karma 119 4.3 Path of Realization

5 Historical Overview 125 5.1 History of RRigveda 125 5.1.1 RV Communities 129 5.1.2 RVC and SSC 132 5.1.3 RV Culture 143 5.1.4 RV Time Frame 145 5.2 History of Vedanta 156 5.2.1 Scriptures 156 appx-A: Gautama Buddha 160 appx-B: pratItya-samutpAda 164 5.2.2 Collation 166 appx-A: tathatA 168 appx-B: mAdhyamaka 177 5.2.3 Recovery 180 appx-A: yogAchAra 184 appx-B: yogavAsiShTha 188 appx-C: Advaita Literature 190 appx-D: HVC Outside India 192 5.2.4 Establishment 193 appx-A: Kashmir Shaivism 197 appx-B: Trika and Vedanta 202 appx-C: Tripura Tantra 204 appx-D: Vedanta Monasteries 211 appx-E: bhakti Movement 213 appx-F: Advent of Sufism 215 5.2.5 Dialectic 219 appx-A: Sufism in India 227 appx-B: Sufi Theosophy 230

Content (contd.)

5.2.6 Syncretism 234 appx-A: shuddhAdvaita 241 appx-B: Kabir 244 appx-C: Sufi Literature 244 appx-D: Sikhism 246 appx-E: Samarth Ramdas 248 appx-F: Naqshbandi 250

6 New Vedanta 252 6.1 Advaita and Science 257 7 Conclusion 274 7.1 Vedanta Summary 284

Bibliography 291 8.1 Source Books 291 8.2 Students' Texts 293 8.3 Other References 295 8.4 Classical Literature 314

Index 321 Tables 1. Vedic Branches 5 2. Vedanga Literature 8 3. Primary Source 18 4. Distribution of RV Hymns 129 5. Types of Consciousness 287 Maps 1. Sapta Sindhava Civilization-I 150 2. Sapta Sindhava Civilization-II 151 3. Geography of RV-10 & SSC 152 4. River System of RV-10 153 5. Epic India (Uttarapath) 154 6. Epic India (Dakshinapath) 155

0. INTRoduction

Advaita Vedanta[1][अद्वैतवेदान्त] is an orthodox non-dualist system expo-unded by gauDapAda (c.500) and later more exhaustively by sha.nkara (c.700). It is based on: upaniShad-s [UP], the concluding parts of Veda[21 bhagavadgItA [BG], the axiological dialog in the epic mahAbhArata brahmasUtra [BS], the aphorisms that present the standard view of UP Triad of UP, BG, BS is known as 'source-triad' [prasthAna-traya].[3] It is the three-fold foundation of Vedanta philosophy. The terms Knowledge and Ignorance have special meanings in Advaita. Knowledge has the everyday meaning, that of 'knowledge' of the world; it has another metaphysical meaning, that of 'Knowledge of brahman' [brahmaGYAna] or 'ultimate Knowledge' [paramArtha]. The main purport of this later Knowledge is the 'realization' that there is only one, non-dual, limit-less, eternal, and attributeless reality called brahman, which is of the nature of undifferentiated[4] Consciousness, and which constitutes the essential core or the Self called Atman of all beings. This purport is expressed by the identity Atman=brahman [आत्मन्= ब्रह्मनO]. Sometimes it is stated by the traditional aphorism "ब्रह्म सत्यं, जगन्मिथ्या, जीवो ब्रह्मैव नापरo:" -- brahman is real; the jagat or Universe is 'other than real', and (Self or Atman of) the soul or Iva is nothing but brahman.[5] To realize the ultimate reality of brahman is to realize the Self. This Self-realization is the final goal for Advaitin. In Advaita; ignorance too has everyday meaning, that of 'lack of worldly knowledge' [aGYAna] and metaphysical meaning, that of 'absence of metaphysical Knowledge' [avidyA]. The two metaphysical entities viz Know-ledge and Ignorance[6] distinguish respectively two levels of reality - the absolute [pAramArthika] and relative [vyAvahArika].[7] At the relative level, knowledge involves the knowing subject and the known object. This level is said to be manifestation of Ignorance. At the absolute level the subject-object dichotomy is permanently dissolved and what remains is the Knowledge absolute, a substratum of undifferentiated, limitless Conscious-ness. There are states of empirical knowledge, which are conducive to the progress of individual soul [jIva] towards Self realization. The aspirant tries to capture and firm-up these states. In Advaita, this process assumes an axiological purport as we shall see later on. For the jIva who is operating at the relative level, the world is real. For the 'Seeker of Knowledge' [sAdhaka][8] or for

the student of Advaita [mumuxu] who is 'naively' aware of the reality of brahman, the world [jagat] is neither real nor unreal. It is not real because only non-dual brahman is the absolute or ultimate reality; but it is not unreal because jIva cognizes it. The relative reality experienced by jlva is known as mithyA. This reality is the inferential-logical [yauktika] position at the vyAvahArika level though it does not stand at the absolute level where there is no plurality - there is only brahman. In dvaita-Vedanta, only brahman is absolutely real; every thing else is relatively real or mithyA. 0.1 Veda: Vedanta being the 'concluding' part of Veda, it is worthwhile to look into Veda and their six auxiliary disciplines [vedA.nga] [Vedanga] for the sake of completeness as also to trace the evolution of Vedanta philosophy. The word Veda [aa] is derived from the Sanskrit root vid (to know). The knowledge in Veda however, is not necessarily about day-to-day secular affairs. Veda were compiled mainly to conduct sacrifices to gods.[9] RRik saMhitA or RRigveda [RV] was compiled for the hotRRi priests to invoke gods to preside over, sAma saMhitA or sAmaveda [SV] was compiled for the udgAtA priests to sing hymns to entertain the gods, yaju saMhitA or yajurveda [YV] was compiled for adhvaryu priests to perform the sacrificial act, and atharva saMhitA or atharva- veda [AV] was associated with brahma priests, the supervisors of the sacrifice.[10] The saMhitA-s grew into brAhmaNa[111 parts, which expound saMhitA-s and formulate the sacrificial act. Over the period ritualistic codification and its exegesis became more complex giving way to meditative speculations of AraNyaka-s[12] and philosophical conclusions of UP. The oldest UP embedded in AraNyaka-s are the basis of Vedanta. RV, SV, and AV demarcate their respective saMhitA (mantra) and brAhmaNa portions while YV is of two types: shukla yajurveda [SYV] in which saMhitA and brAhmaNa portions are separated, and kRRiShNa yajurveda [KYV] in which they are intermixed. UP were mostly compiled as the last division of respective Veda. In many ways, RV constitutes the basis of other saMhitA-s. It is not only the most ancient Vedic text, it also contributes hundreds of verses to the other saMhitA- S. We may use the terms like 'literature', 'scripture', 'texts', and 'books' while describing Veda; however, Veda have been essentially transmitted by oral traditions from generation to generation. Each Veda over a course of time had many versions (recensions, branches or shAkhA-s) with their own rendering of a particular Veda or its section. Meanwhile special techniques were developed to preserve the texts with utmost fidelity. This was to preserve the sacred status of

texts indicated by the word shruti, which means "revealed through the hearing".[13] As part of canonization of rites and rituals, kalpasUtra[14] were composed (see 0.2; Table-2). A particular performing branch in its entirety (mantra + brAhmaNa + AraNyaka + kalpasUtra) constitutes a 'charaNa'. Thus, shAkhA suggests a tradition defined by first three divisions (i.e. mantra, brahmaNa, and AraNyaka with their embedded upaniShad-s); while, charaNa extends that tradition to sUtra. Two different branches might share one or more texts; while two different versions of the same text may result in two different branches. There were many branches (and subbranches) of the yore. Over the time only few branches or their fragments remained. Table-1 lists some extant Vedic Branches (shAkhA-s) evolved from their respective mantra recensions. Some of them are only fragments due to missing information. - 'X' indicates 'no information'; '?' denotes ambiguity; ' ?? ' denotes 'possibly lost for ever', 'P' denotes 'partial existence'.[15] Table-1 and Table-2 need to be seen together to trace the charaNa-s.

Table-1: Vedic Branches

no shAkhA mantra brAhmaNa AraNy- upaniShad 161 [B] aka [A] 1 shAkala [17] RV

aitareyaitareya aitareya (A2.4-6) 2 AshvalAyana RV (aitareya) (aitareya) (aitareya)

3 kauShItakii RV(X) kauShItakii Kau. kauShItakii (A3-6.1-4)

4 bAShkala[18] RV (kauShItakii) (Kau.) (kauShItakii)

5 sha.nkh-Ayana RV sha.nkh- sha.kh- sha.nkhAyana Ayana Ayana (A7-8,13-14)[191

6 pai.ngii RV(X) pai.ngii (?) rahasya X ( ?? )

7 mAdhyandina SYV shatapatha in [B] bRRihadAraNyaka (B14.1-8) (B14.3-8)

8 kANva[201 SYV shatapatha in [B] bRRihadAraNyaka (B17) (B17)

9 kAtyAyana SYV(?) kAtyAyana X X (P)

10 taittiriiya[211 KYV taittiriiya in [A] taittiriiya, yAGYikii (A7-9, A10) 11 maitrAyaNii KYV maitrAyaNii maitrii shvetAshvatara, ( ?? ) maitrAyaNii = maitri 12 kAThaka KYV kAThaka (P) kAThaka kAThaka = kaTha

13 kapisthala KYV kapisthala X X (P) (P) 14 kauthuma SV eight[22] Incl. in ChAndogya[231 brAhamaNa- mantra S

15 rANAyaniiya SV (~kauthuma) As in [B] (kauthuma)

16 talavakAra SV(P) jaiminiiya, talava- kena (talavakAra ArSheya kAra =jaiminiiya) 17 shAtyAyana SV(X) shAtyAyana X X (?) 18 paippalAda AV ?? X prashna

19 shaunakiiya[24]AV gopatha (P) X muNDaka

Antiquity is not a criterion of authority within the Vedanta tradition, however, UP with unbroken oral tradition of saMhitA and brahmaNa- AraNyaka have a special value of authenticity. As can be seen from Table-1; bRRihadAraNyaka, ChAndogya, taittirlya, aitareya, and kauShItakI have such a continuous tradition. The first three of them along with muNDaka and kaTha have been most frequently quoted by sha.nkara.

0.2 Vedanga: There are six auxiliary disciplines of Veda: (1) shixA [f1&oT]: Phonetics (2) Chandas [छंदस]:Prosody (3) vyAkaraNa [व्याकरण]: Grammar (4) nirukta [निरुकृत] : Etymology (5) jyotiSha [ज्योतिष]: Astronomy (6) kalpa [कल्प]: Rituals First two disciplines (shixA and Chandas) are for ensuring uncorrupted oral transmission of Veda; the later two disciplines (vyAkaraNa and nirukta) are for understanding Veda and for standardizing their language; and the last two disciplines (jyotiSha and kalpa) are for stipulating the ritualistic guidelines based on Veda, within a calendrical framework. kalpa was compiled into four streams: (a) shrauta about shruti based great sacrifices, (b) gRRihya - about domestic rites, (c) dharma - about customs and social duties, and (d) shulba - about geometry for altar constructions. Table-2 gives names of the Vedanga Texts. kalpa sUtra-s are compiled for each Veda, while other texts are generally appli-cable to all the Veda though their applicability may not be uniform across the divisions.

Table-2: Vedanga Texts[25]

n a.nga RV SV KYV SYV AV

1a shrauta AshvalAyana lATyAyaNa, baudhAyana kAtyAyana vaitAna (kalpa) sha.nkhAyanddrAhyAyaNavAdhUla jaiminiiya mAnava bhAradvAja ApastaMba hiraNyakeshi vArAha vaikhAnasa[261

1b gRRihya AshvalAyana gobhila baudhAyana kAtyAyanakaushika (kalpa) kauShItakii. khAdira hiraNyakeshipAraskara sha.nkhAyandjaiminiiya mAnava kauthuma bhAradvAja ApastaMba agniveshya vaikhAnasa kAThaka vArAha vAdhUla kapisthala

1c dharma vAsiShTha gautama baudhAyana (kalpa) ApastaMba vaikhAnasa

1d shulva baudhAyana kAtyAtana (kalpa) mAnava ApastaMba

2 shixA (A) shiva-sUtra: fourteen verses that organize the Sanskrit phonemes; (B) Oral pATha-s: three prkRRiti-s (vAkya, pada, krama) and eight vikRRiti-s (jaTA, mAlA, shikhA, rekhA, dhvaja, daNDa, ratha, ghana); the reference to pATha tradition is found in aitareya-AraNyaka-3 and is attributed to shAkalya; (C) five prAtisAkhya-s, one for each saMhitA. [27]

3 Chandas Chandas-sUtra by pi.ngala on Vedic meters of versification. [28]

4 jyotiSha vedA.nga jyotiSha (Vedic astronomy) by lagadha. [291

5 vyA- aShTAdhyAyi of pANini. This work refers to 12 karaNa protagonists or their schools: ai.ndra, shakaTAyana, Apishali, shAkaiiya, kAshakRRiShNa, gArgya, gAlava, kAshyapa, senaka, sphoTAyana, chandravarmaNa, and kuNaravADava.

6 nirukta (A) nighaNTu - list of archaic Sanskrit words used in Veda, grouped thematically and often with annotations, (B) nirukta - the famous commentary by yAska on nighaNTu. Traditionally, nirukta means etymological glossaries of nighaNTu words.

1. means of knowledge

An empirical knowledge process[301 involves subject [pramAtA], object [prameya], instrument of knowledge [pramANa], knowledge [pramA], cognition [pramiti], and validation [prAmANya]. In Advaita, cognition or experience is equated with knowledge, and pramA is distinguished from pramiti as the 'validated knowledge' or 'non- contradicted cognition'. Usually, the subject (pramAtA) is identified with the body-mind complex due to Ignorance; in reality the so called subject is the transcendental 'Witness-Consciousness' as will be seen later on. There are six 'means of acquiring and validating knowledge' [pramANa-s]: (1) perception [pratyaxa / aparoxa pramANa], (2) verbal testimony [shabda or Agama], (3) inference [anumAna], (4) comparison [upamAna], (5) postulation [arthApatti], and (6) non- apprehension [anupalabdhi]. Perception overrides all other means of knowledge. It is the intrinsically valid and self-evident (svataH pramANa) criterion. In its general form as experience (pramiti); it is the basis of all other means of knowledge. Verbal testimony is not only the most important means of transmission of knowledge; it is also the traditional means of validation of knowledge (shabda prAmANya). Both shruti and smRRiti[31] are accepted as verbal testimony, however; shruti is given the highest authority in the spiritual domain similar to that of cognition-perception in the empirical-physical world.[32] In the Vedanta tradition, shrauta-shabda (words of shruti such as salient UP sentences) are said to be capable of producing the immediate Knowledge.[331 Inference, comparison, and postulation are the instruments of mediate or derived knowledge of the empirical world. Postulate is an assumption or hypothesis to explain the known fact(s) in conjunction with other means. Vedanta postulates that the absence of an object or its attri-bute from a locus is known by the sixth means of knowledge called anupalabdhi (non-apprehension). An object is said to be absent from its spatial- temporal locus (1) before its production (prAgabhAva), (2) after its destruction (pradhvaMsa abhAva), (3) as a difference from some other object (anyonya abhAva), or (4) as an eternal absolute absence, like a son of a barren woman etc. (atyanta abhAva). All such absences are said to be directly cognizable by non-apprehension. There is no 'absolute non-existence' in Advaita. Non-existence in the

name of 'absence' (abhAva) is acknowledged only at the relative level. Even the 'absolute absence' (atyantAbhAva) exists as a vacuous name or as a contradiction while other types of absence have contextual and semantic content that can be cognized by pramAtA through non- apprehension. Thus, absence itself can be an 'object of knowledge' (prameya). The knowledge of absence through non-apprehension is said to be immediate [aparoxa]. The total absence of plurality is said to be known directly by non-apprehension in the transcendental experience, which is said to be the immediate apprehension of non- dual brahman. [34] Eternal and total absence of the empirical duality is known as brahman - the pure Existence.[35] It is assumed to be the unnegated Self after negating the plurality of the phenomenal universe. Absolute absence of "Existence, Awareness, and Infinity" can never be cognized or experienced. As such, brahman is referenced by the triad of Existence- Awareness-Infinity [sat-chit-ananta] or [satyam-GYAnam-anantam] and is axiomatically equated with Self [Atman].[36] Self is not realized by mere reasoning. In the ultimate pan-experiential framework of Advaita; Self is supposed to be an Experience (Knowledge) though not of the ordinary sensual or empirical kind. Knowledge being super sensual and transempirical; mumuxu has to look into shruti which contains the testimony of the 'direct teaching' [aparoxa upadesha] about Knowledge. In shruti, topics related to brahman are compiled separately as Knowledge-Text [KT] [GYAna- kANDa], while remaining action oriented work which is related to rituals and rites is separated as Action-Text [AT] [karma-kANDa]. KT acts as pratyaxa pramANa for those whose minds are pure and who possess sAdhana-chatuShTaya.[37] Advaita-Vedanta tradition suggests a long drawn process to acquire this eligibility and realize the Knowledge.[381 The 'guiding authorities' [AchArya-s] such as sha.nkara and sureshvara[39] take the stand that AT is to be followed for secular goals and authority of its injunctions is applicable only for such purpose. Self-realization, according to them, is out side any injunctions. Further, they claim that KT does not embody any injunctions and does not suffer any loss of authority due to absence of injunctions.[401 sha.nkara saw the nexus of avidyA-kAma-karman (Nescience-desire- action); all the three feed on each other. Self-realization can be achieved by breaking this nexus. To do so, sha.nkara advocated renunciation of all actions [sarvakarma-saMnyAsa]. According to him, sAdhaka [the seeker of moxa][41] needs to renounce all actions, detach himself[42] from worldly affairs, and involve in 'sustained meditation' in the pursuit of Knowledge. In Vedanta tradition;

meditation means shravaNa (study of UP under the Guru), manana (reflection to secure conviction in UP principles) and nididhyAsana (perseverance till Realization). sha.nkara rejected any 'combination of Knowledge and actions together' [GYAnakarma-samuchchaya] for Realization. It allowed Vedanta to deliberate its own method of Knowledge. Though sha.nkara demarcated GYAna from karma for the reason of their incompatibility with each other; Vedanta tradition could interpret renunciation to include "self-less work" [niShkAma karma] in the path of Liberation.[43] 1.1 Primary Source: upaniShad-s[441 [UP] are the primary source of Knowledge. The muktika Up. lists 108 UP; however, Vedanta tradition has canonized following UP: (1) bRRihadAraNyaka[BU] [बृहदारण्यक] of SYV (2) ChAndogya[CU] [छान्दोग्य] of SV (3) taittirlya[TU] [तैत्तिरीय] of KYV (4) aitareya[AU] [ऐतरेय] of RV (5) kaTha[KU] [कठ] of KYV (6) muNDaka[MU] [मुण्डक] of AV (7) prashna[PU] [प्रशन] of AV (8) Isha[IU] [ईश] of SYV (9) kena[KEU] [केन] of SV (10) mANDUkya[MAU] [माण्डूक्य] of AV (11) shvetAshvatara[SU] [श्वेताश्वतर] of KYV (12) kauShItakI[Kau] [कौषीतक] of RV (13) maitrAyaNI[Mai] [मैत्रायण] of KYV

These prime thirteen UP have authority of shruti. sha.nkara has quoted all of them (except MAU and Mai), and also few others, in his 'commentary on brahma-sUtra' [BSBh].[45] Though MAU is the smallest of prime UP and though it is not quoted by sha.nkara directly in his BSBh, it has exalted status due to 'gauDapAda's path breaking treatise known as gauDapAdlya kArikA [GK] aka mANDUkya kArikA [MK] thereon. sha.nkara wrote commentaries on first nine of the prime UP and on MAU+GK.[46] All these 'Ten-UP' [daShopaniShad] are accepted as the most authoritative basis of Advaita Vedanta. Amongst the prime UP; (BU, CU), (AU, Kau, TU), and (KEU, IU) originated in pre-Buddhist era (before 500BC), while KU, MU, PU, and SU are contemporaneous to, if not prior to the advent of Buddhism. Trans-mission and compilation of bigger UP like CU, BU, KU, Mai might have happened in phases. Knowledge Text [KT] definitively includes primary UP. It can also include some verses from extant saMhitA and brAhmaNa portions.

These sections, particularly brAhmaNa-s however, do not contribute much to the KT, their main purpose is to secure well-being in present and future lives by prescribed 'regular' [nitya], 'occasional' [naimittika], and 'wishful' [kAmya] Actions. In saMhitA too it may not always be Knowledge qua Knowledge but eulogy of a particular god transcending into higher principle. Still, the negation of plurality and deperson-alization of deities is evident. Traces of Knowledge as an all pervasive monistic principle are visible from the ancient times of RRigveda [RV]. In the first Book of RV, the monistic principle is named as aditi (1.89.10), and sat (1.164.46). In the later case it is famously stated as "एकं सत् विप्रा बहुधा वदन्ति ... " [Of the One Being, sages speak in diverse ways ... ]. In the third Book this principle takes monotheist form: "The Infinite One is the Lord of the unmoving and the moving" (3.54.8); and "The worship-ful divinity of the gods is One (3.55). In the fourth Book It comes as haMsa referring Aditya (4.40.5). Later in the tenth Book the monism crystallizes under various names such as brAhmaNaspati (10.72), vishvakarmA (10.81-82), puruSha (10.90), suparNa (10.114.4-5) - where the seminal ekam sat viprA ... returns with a different wording, then hiraNyagarbha (10.121), vAk (10.125), and finally tadekam (10.129). These hymns stand out for their monistic or panentheistic views. Particularly, nAsadlya sUkta (10.129) is rich in speculation and contains the seed of both non-dualistic monism and empirical indeterminism which one can link to the later development of Advaita and to the concepts of mAyA / avidyA. The metaphor of 'twin bosom birds perched on the same tree' representing 'transient empirical soul and unchanging transcendental Self appears in RV 1.164.20 and in atharva Veda [AV] (9.9.20). It reappears in MU (3.1.1-2) and SU (4.6-7). Like RV, the idea of Supreme Being is present in the AV under various names and words: varuNa (4.16.1-5), aditi (7.6.1), "(Indeed) The Supreme Being is the inner animating Soul of all this" in brahma-sUkta or saMhitA Up. (paippalAda saMhitA, AV 8.9.1-12); virAja (9.10.24), Him, That (9.10.28), skaMbha (10.7.17, 10.8.2), yaxa (10.7.38), brahma (10.8.1), One Only (10.8.11), prajApati (10.8.13), AtmA (10.8.44), One Supreme Power (11.7), "He is the One, the One alone" (13.4.20-21), and puruSha (19.6). Principle of Unity in the name of prajApati and puruSha is also seen in SYV (vAjasaneyI saMhitA) and KYV (taittirlya brAhmaNa). Hymn 32.1 of SYV (tadeva sUkta) catalogs every-thing as That. In shatapatha brAhmaNa of SYV it is said that "this Self is everything" (4.2.2.1); and "AtmA of all beings is yaGYa" (14.3.2.1). In taittirIya AraNyaka (1.23) it is said that prajApati, having created his self (as the world) with his

own self, entered into it. The foregoing examples show that some of the passages in the saMhitA and brAhamaNa parts of Veda propagate the aupaniShad Knowledge. We can include in KT: Such passages culled out from respective Veda UP that are quoted by sha.nkara and other Vedanta teachers UP representing cult traditions or giving specific knowledge Some of the UP in the recently discovered old manuscripts[47] This will have the advantage of: Authenticity of antiquity Continuity and better representation of the traditions Clear demarcation between AT and KT

We then can consolidate Table-3 of KT as the primary source though this need not be the exclusive list of KT.[48]

Table-3: Primary Source[491

n Branch Knowledge Text [KT]: Primary Source [shAkhA] [upaniShad-s]

1 RV (1) aitareya Up. [ऐतरेय उप.] <8.1:1> (shAkala) (2) asyavAmlya sUkta [अस्यवामीय सूक्त] (1.164.1-64) (3) puruSha sUkta[पुरुष सूकृत] (10.90) (4) hiraNyagarbha sUkta[हिरण्यगर्भ सूक्त] (1.121.1-10) (5) vAk-sUkta[वाक् सूकृत] (10.125) (6) nAsadlya sUkta[नासदीय सूकृत] (10.129) (7) mudgalaUp. [मुद्गल उप.] <8.1.17c>

2 RV (8) bAShkalaUp. [बाष्कल उप.] <8.1:16> (bAShkala)

3 RV (9) bahvRRicha Up. [बहच उप.] <8.1.17c> (mANDukeya)

4 RV (10) kauShItakI Up. [कौषीतकीउप.] <8.1:4> (sha.nkhAyana) (11) sha.nkhAyanaUp. [शंखायन उप.] (A7-8, A13-14)

5 KYV (12) taittirlya Up. [तैत्तिरीय उप.] <8.1:1> (taittirlya) (13) yAGYikI Up. [याज्ञिकी उप.] <8.1.17c> (14) shrii rudram [श्री रुद्रम] (4.5, 4.7)

6 KYV (15) kaTha Up. [कठ उप.] <8.1:1> (kAThaka) (16) kaThashruti Up. [कठश्रुति उप.] <8.3:2a> (17) kaNThashruti Up. [कण्ठश्रुति उप.] <8.1:16>

7 KYV (18) maitrAyaNI Up. [मैत्रायणी उप.] <8.1:4> (maitrAyaNI) (19) ChAgaleyaUp. [छागलेय उप.] <8.1:16> (20) shvetAshvatara Up. [श्वेताश्वतर उप.] <8.1:5>

8 SYV (21) Isha Up.[ईश उप.] <8.1:1> (vAjasaneya) (22) bRRihadAraNyaka Up.[बृहदारण्यक उप.] <8.1:2> (23) shivasa.nkalpa Up. [शिवसङ्कल्प उप.] (34.1-6) (24) agnirahasya[अग्निरहस्य] (B10) (25) jAbAla Up. [जाबाल उप.] <8.1:4> (26) subALA Up. [सुबाला उप.] <8.1:4> (27) maNDala brAhamaNa [मण्डल ब्राह्मण] <8.1.17c> (28) tadeva sUkta[तदेव सूकृत] <8.1:16>

9 SV (29) jaiminlya or talavakAra upaniShad (jaiminlya) brAhmaNa [जैमिनीय / तलवकार उपनिषद् (talavakAra) ब्राह्मण] <8.3:23> (30) kena Up.[केन, तलवकार उप.] <8.1:1>/ <8.3:23> (31) prANagnihotra [प्राणाग्निहोत्र उप.] Up. <8.1:16>

10 SV (32) ChAndogya Up.[छांदोग्य उप.] <8.1:3> (kauthum)

11 AV (33) muNDaka Up. [मुण्डक उप.] <8.1:1> (shaunaka) (34) praNavaUp. [प्रणव उप.] <8.1:16> (35) skaMbha sUkta [स्कंभ सूकृत] (10.7.1-44) (36) uchChishTa sUkta [उच्छिष्ट सूकृत] (11.7) (37) prANa sUkta [प्राण सूकृत] (11.4) (38) gAyatrIUp. [गायत्री उप.] (B31-38) (39) kAla sUkta[काल सूकृत] (19.53-54)

12 AV (40) prashna Up. [प्रश्न उप.] <8.1:1> (pippalAda) (41) brahma Up. [ब्रह्म उप.] <8.3:2a> (42) garbha Up. [गर्भ उप.] <8.1:16> (43) brahmasUkta, saMhitA Up. [ब्रह्म सूक्त, संहिता उप.] (8.9.1-12)

13 AV (44) chulikA (mantrikA) Up. [चुलिका उप.] (w/o shAkhA) <8-1:15> (45) mANDUkya Up. [माण्डूक्य उप.] <8.1:1> (46) brahmabindu Up. [ब्रह्मबिन्दु उप.] <8.1.17c> (47) nAdabindu Up. [नादबिन्दु उप.] <8.1.17c> (48) dhyAnabindu Up. [ध्यानबिन्दु उप.] <8.1.17c> (49) amRRitabindu Up. [अमृतबिन्दु उप.] <8.1.17c> (50) tejobindu Up. [तेजोबिन्दु उप.] <8.1:15b> (51) atharvashIrSha Up. [अथर्वशीर्ष उप.] <8.1.17c> (52) kaivalya Up. [कैवल्य उप.] <8.1:4> (53) shaunaka Up. [शौनक उप.] <8.1:16> (54) ArSheya Up. [आर्षेय उप.] <8.1:16> (55) AtmAUp. [आत्मा उप.] <8.1.17c>

14 Addendum[501 (56) pai.ngala Up.[पैंगल उप.] (SYV)<8.1:4> (57) maho.apaniShad [महोऽपनिषद] (SV) <8.1.17c> (58) vajrasUchi Up. [वज्रसूचि उप.] (SV) <8.1:4> (59) AruNi Up. [आरुणि उप.] (SV) <8.3:2a> (60) sarasvatIrahasya Up. [सरस्वतीरहस्य उप.] <8.1.17c>

1.2 Secondary Source: Secondary source is derived from or based on the primary source. KA refers to bhagavadgItA[BG] [9dsldoT] as its main 'secondary source' [smRRiti] among very many other secondary sources known by the names of Vedic seers. BG tries to accommodate various theological-philosophical strands to address largest possible audience. It gives prominence to 'way of Action [karmayoga] and 'way of Devotion' [bhaktiyoga], the two streams auxiliary to the 'way of Knowledge' [GYAnayoga],[51] but more popular in Indic traditions than the later. If the dominant theme of UP is the inactive ideal of karma-saMnyAsa (nivRRitti-mArga); BG prominently represents the active principle of karma-yoga (pravRRitti- mArga); both these principles existed in Indic cultures since ancient times. UP are more concerned with metaphysical issues, while BG's concerns are mainly social and axiological. Commentators like sha.nkara sought support from BG for its established position, its accessibility,[52] and its exposition of Knowledge along side the Action and Devotion. BG is divided into 18 chapters [adhyAya-s] each having number of verses [shloka-s] totaling about 700 verses. It is placed in the epic mahAbhArata [MB][53]. sha.nkara's commentary on BG is the oldest available one though most of the verses of BG must be quite ancient.[54] Following chapters of BG are significant from the Knowledge perspective (ref 8.1(6)): Chapter-2: BG 2.12-30 propound 'Way of Knowledge' [सांख्य योग];BG 2.39-48 advise 'Way of Action' [कर्म योग], and BG 2.49-71 describe 'Steady Wisdom' [स्थित प्रज्ञOा]. Here the word sA.nkhyayoga[सांख्ययोग] does not imply the classical sA.nkhya philosophy nor is it applied to Atman as an adjective. It implies 'steadfastness in (the path of) Knowledge' [GYAna-yoga, irT]. sha.nkara identifies sA.nkhyawith Vedanta in 18.13 (अतः तस्मिन् आत्मज्ञानार्थे सांख्ये कृतान्ते वेदान्ते प्रोक्तानि कथितानि सिद्धये निष्पत्यर्थं सर्वकर्मणाम - Thus 'in sA.nkhya theory of Vedanta' (सांख्ये कृतान्ते वेदान्त) are stated the causes which promote the accomp- lishment of all actions). Similarly, yoga does not necessarily imply the yoga school; it usually means - concentration and steadfastness in the application. BG 2.16 states the law of conservationof Being:नासतो विद्यते भावो नाभावो विद्यते सत०: (Being never ceases to exist; Non-Being never comes into existence). Ch-2 gives summary of entire Vedanta philosophy of BG in the name of sA.nkhya yoga. Chapter-4: BG 4.33-42 teach 'Renunciation of Action and Importance of Knowledge' [ज्ञानकर्मसंन्यासयोग]. BG 4.33 (सर्वं कर्माखिलं पार्थ ज्ञाने परिसमाप्यत -- all karmaattains its consummation in Know-ledge); BG

4.37 (ज्ञानाग्निः सर्वकर्माणि भस्मसात् कुरुते - fire of Know-ledge reduces all karma to ashes), BG 4.38 (न हि ज्ञानेन सदृशं पवित्रमिह विद्यत- verily, nothing exists here as purifying as Know-ledge) emphasizes importance of Knowledge and supports sha.nkara's preference of Knowledge over Action. Chapter-5: BG 5.13-26 propounds 'Way of Renunciation' [संन्यास योग]. BG 5.14 and 5.15 projects God's 'acausal' nature. God is not concerned with worldly affairs neither is He concerned with merits or demerits of individuals; it is the Ignorance that envelops Knowledge due to which beings are deluded. BG 5.16 & 17 suggest the remedy - Knowledge reveals the Supreme (brahman) and Knowledge leads to the moxa; (hence realize the Knowledge). Chapter-7: BG 7.1-15 teach Knowledge with Realization [ज्ञान-विज्ञान योग]; BG 7.16-19 praise 'wise devotee' [ज्ञान(ी]. BG 7.7 says, beyond Me there is naught, and 'all this' is strung in me; BG 7.17-18 mention Lord's preference for Knowledgeable devotees; and in BG 7.19: the wise Knows that "all this is vAsudeva (brahman) (वासुदेव सर्वमिति)" Chapter-8: BG 8.16-19 propounds cyclic theory of Creation- Dissolution. In a brahmA's cycle of "day (Creation) and night (Dissolution)";[55] all beings are created from and dissolved into Unmanifest (avyakta). BG 8.20-22 state that beyond afore-mentioned avykta, there is another eternal and imperishable avyakta - a supreme goal attaining which none returns. It is the 'supreme Spirit' (y59: To:) in whom all beings dwell and by whom all this is pervaded (यस्तान्तःस्थानि भूतानि येन सर्वमिदं ततम). Chapter-9 imparts 'Kingly Knowledge' [राजविद्या-राजगुह्ययोग]. BG 9.4-6: All this word is pervaded by Me, all beings exist in Me but I am not contained in them (panentheism), in BG 9.7-10, God gradually states his position that He does nothing; in His observance prakRRiti[4afo] produces everything (मयाऽध्यक्षेण प्रकृतिः सूयते सचराचरम); and in BG 9.19 He states ultimate panentheistic position - I am immortality and death; being and non-being am I" (अमृतं चैव मृत्युश्च सदसच्चाहमर्जुन).[56] Chapter-13deals with 'Field and Field-Knower' [क्षेत्र-क्षेत्रज्ञ योग]. In this philosophical chapter Knower, Known, and Knowledge are explained. In BG 13.11 Lord defines 'steadfastness in spiritual knowledge' (3e2cH- ज्ञाननित्यत्वं) and 'deep understanding of the philosophical knowledge' (तत्त्वज्ञानार्थदर्शनम) to be the true Knowledge and whatever opposed is Ignorance. BG 13.7-10 specify the indicators (laxaNA-s) of this Knowledge comparable to sAdhana-chatuShTaya. In BG 13.12 He says that the supreme brahman is beginningless, neither being nor non- being (अनादिमत्परं ब्रह्म न सत्तन्नासदुच्यत)[57]; it is that by knowing which one attains immortality (यज्ज्ञात्वाऽमृतमश्नुत). BG 13.13 attributes perceptual qualities to That (brahman). In BGBh, sha.nkara explains

this as a deliberate 'false attri-bution' to be later retracted to intuit the true nature of brahman. This method is known as 'attribution- retraction' [adhyAropa-apavAda,अध्यारोप-अपवाद], and according to some modern scholars, is the only traditional method of Advaita-Vedanta. So, BG 13.14 and BG 13.15 negates all perceptual attributes and call the reality as sarvendriyavivarjitaM [सर्वेन्द्रियविवर्जित] and nirguNa [निर्गुण], devoid of all properties and qualities. In BGBh 13.26; sha.kara sees everything as the union of Subject (xetraGYa, I) & Object (xetra, क्षेत्र) formed by mutual superposition (adhyAsa, अध्यास), which is of the nature Nescience (मिथ्याज्ञान) (स अयं अध्यासस्वरुपः क्षेत्रक्षेत्रज्ञयोः संयोगः मिथ्या- ज्ञानलक्षण0:). Chapter-15 propounds yogaof the supreme spirit [पुरुषोत्तम योग]. BG 15.1-7: shows the way to Liberation. The limitless fugitive 'inverted tree' of saMsAra caused by Ignorance needs to be cut by the weapon of detachment and Knowledge to attain Liberation. In BG 15.12-20, starting from the pantheistic form of the God, the concept of Supreme God - uttama puruSha or purushottama[y7H] is reached over and above the perishable (manifest) principle & the imperishable (unmanifest) principle. The uttama puruSha is the panentheist principle that pervades everything (manifest and unmanifest) and still remains inexhaustible. Chapter-18 summarizes the axiology of BG. BG (18.2, 46, 49) propound Action and Devotion, BG 18.50-57 teach Knowledge and Devotion, and BG 18.65-66 suggest dedicated devotion and total surrender (renunciation) for Liberation(सर्व धर्मान् परित्यज्य मामेकं शरणं व्रज, अहं त्वा सर्वपापेभ्यो मोक्षयिष्यामि मा शुचः ॥१८.६६॥). According to sha.nkara, BG 18.66 teaches steadfastness in Knowledge alone by total renunciation of all worldly activities. According to 16thC Advaitin madhusUdana sarasvati devotion is common to both Action (as in BG 18.46) and to Knowledge (BG 18.55); hence BG 18.66 teaches devotion. In post-sha.nkara tradition, devotion is either an instrument of mind-purification; or in its higher form, it is the intense longing for the Knowledge -- in either way; it is a way of Knowledge.

1.3 Tertiary Source: The brahma-sUtra [BS][58] is a collection of aphorisms [sUtra-s] about brahman. It is also known as shArIraka-sUtra[शारीरक सूतर] (about : embodied Self), Vedanta- sUtra[वेदान्त सूतूर] (about Vedanta), bhixu-sUtra[भिक्षु सूतर] (for the bhixu-s or renunciates) & uttara-mlmAMsA-sUtra[उत्तर-मीमांसा सूत्र] (about posterior exegesis). The commentaries [bhAShya-s] & sub- commentaries [vArtika-s] written on the source-triad are treated as tertiary literature. sha.nkara's commentaries on BS, on pramANa UP, and on bhagavadgItA have de facto foundational status in Advaita- Vedanta. In general, shruti and smRRiti together with epics mahAbhArata, rAmAyaNa, and purANa-s are known as main shAstra-s. [59] Added to it are sectarian literature including theological and philosophical treatises. BS is known as nyAya-prasthAna[601-r4- 4R2-], as it aims to set forth Vedanta teaching in a logical order. The word sUtra means aphorism; it has also another meaning - that of 'connecting thread' implying a system made of multiple parts. It is divided into four books (adhyAya-s), each book consists of four quarters (pAda-s), each quarter has number of topics (adhikaraNa-s), and each topic has one or more aphorisms. According to sha.nkara there are about 192 topics including the one discussed by him in the preamble known as adhyAsa bhAShya - [essay on the "superim- position"]. He has commented on 555 aphorisms. Brevity of sUtra allowed multiple interpretations. Many teachers wrote commentaries to support their own view. sha.nkara's BS commentary [BSBh] is the earliest extant commentary which stands out for its consistency & completeness. It is supported by his parallel commentaries on UP and BG forming a de facto foundation of Vedanta exegesis and philosophy. The first book of BS is called harmony [samanvaya][4-qy]. The first quarter of the first book has first four important aphorisms. sha.nkarauses the first one (अथातो ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा - Henceforth an 'inquiry into brahman') (1.1.1) to distinguish the 'inquiry into brahman' from the ritualistic portion of Veda there by separating Knowledge Text from the Action Text and then discusses brahman while commenting next three aphorisms:[61] जन्माद्यस्य यत०: - That from which the birthetc. of this (universe) (1.1.2); शास्त्र योनित्वात- (brahman is omniscient) because of (Its) being the source of the scriptures (1.1.3); anddy H4-quldQ- But that brahman(is known from the UP), (It) being object of their full import (1.1.4). The fifth one isईक्षतेर्नाशब्दम - It is seen that (sA.nkhya pradhAna is not the cause because it is) not mentioned (in UP) (1.1.5). Thereafter, till end of 3rd quarter of the first book, sha.nkara argues that BS teaches brahman of UP by discussing various terms and expressions therein.

From the 4th quarter onwards till the end of the second book (called non-conflict or avirodha, अविरोध) sha.nkara engages himself in polemics and refutes the rival views. Mean-while he also establishes the provisional view of causality - the brahman to be both efficient and material cause of the World and that the World has no separate existence other than brahman. World being an effect of brahman is non-different from brahman- it is only an appearance; the cause alone is real (तदनन्यत्वमारंभणशब्दादिभ्य:) (2.1.14). He says that soul [jIva] is to brahman what reflectionis to prototype - like the reflection (semblence) of the sun in water (आभास एव च) (2.3.50). In the third book (called 'means to release' or sAdhana, Te-), sha.nkara discusses transmigration& establishes the essential nature of soul via the aphorismsएक आत्मन: शरीरे भावात (3.3.53), andव्यतिरेकस्तद्भावाभावित्वन्न तूपलब्धिवत (3.3.54). He also argues that brahmanwhich is devoid of attributes and form (अरूपवदेव हि तत्प्रधानत्वात) (3.2.14)), appears to be endowed with attributes and form on account of the limiting adjuncts (प्रकाशवच्चावैयर्थ्यात) (3.2.15). In (3.2.16); sha.nkara asserts that brahman is pure undifferentiated Consciousness, while in (3.2.17); he highlights Its supra-conceptual nature by narrating the story of bAdhva and bAShkali wherein bAdhva equates brahman with silence. Although essentially of the nature of pure consciousness, brahmanappears as many, as the sun gets reflected in many vessels containing water (अत एव चोपमा सूर्यकादिवत) (3.1.18). The Advaita tradition adopts the method of negation to indicate the Absolute.It finds support in following aphorisms: (प्रकृतैतावत्त्वं हि प्रतिषेधति ततो ब्रवीति च् भूय०: - (UP) certainly deny the limitation and thereafter say something more) (3.2.22); andतदव्यक्तमाह हि - That (brahman) is unmanifest (because UP) say (so) (3.2.23). Liberationis not a postmortem state; it is the essential and eternal nature of the Self, which is realized when the veil of Ignorance is lifted; Knowledge is possible even in 'this' life (ऐहिकमप्यप्रस्तुतप्रतिबन्धे तद्दर्शनात0) (3.4.51). The last book (called 'fruit' or phala [cf]) discusses modes of departure and some details of the 'release'. The book claims that one being able to realize brahmaneven in this very life, his subtle body does not depart (प्रतिषेधादिति चेन्न शारीरात) (4.2.12), implying that he gets immediate and is उत्तरपूर्वाघयोरश्लेषविनाशौ तद्व्यपदेशात) (4.1.13). Knower realizes the absolute release freed from all sins (तदधिगम

non-difference with brahman(अविभागो वचनात) (4.2.16). There is no transmigratory cycle for him after his worldly death. The one who is 'free of bonds of this world' [jIvanmukta] is also 'free from the bonds of the body and transmigration' [videhamukta] after his death. Following two examples will give us a flavor as to how sha.nkara reconciles the seemingly contradictory positions and puts the things in

order:[62] (1) अंशो नानाव्यपदेशात्, अन्यथा चापछि - (The soul is) part (of brahman) on account of difference (between the two) being declared (here) and otherwise also (i.e. on account of being non-different from brahman as declared elsewhere) (BS part-2.3.43): Here shan.kara assumes two view points; one valid at the ordinary empirical level which is the secondary or relative reality, while the other valid at the absolute level which is the ultimate reality. He says, brahman, being non- differentiated and limitless, cannot have any parts; the soul is a part of brahman only as it were - an imagined part from empirical standpoint; from the absolute standpoint both brahman and the soul (Atman) are identical; (2)न स्थानतोऽपि परस्यभयलिङ्ग, सर्वत्र हछि - Even from (difference of) place (adjunct), a two-fold characteristic cannot (be predicted of brahman), because throughout (scriptures teach It to be otherwise) (BS 3.2.11): In the scriptures we find two kinds of descriptions for brahman; one qualified as in "That which is all actions, desires .. etc" (CU 3.14.2); and another unqualified, as in "That which is neither gross nor minute, neither short nor long .. etc" (BU 3.8.8). Do we justify this two fold nature on account of the association of adjuncts? sha.nkara refutes this by saying: Even by association with the limiting adjuncts a substance that is different in kind cannot change its nature into another; for a transparent crystal cannot become opaque even when in contact with red lac; the idea of opaqueness is a mere error. The adjuncts are also conjured by Ignorance. Hence, only attributeless, changeless brahman, such as in BU 3.3.8 or KU 1.3.15 is the ultimate reality. The other brahman is for upAsanA (meditation).[631 sha.nkara's commentary of BS is the most famous exegesis of Vedanta. His view of non-duality however, is not the original one and existed from much earlier times. The idea of 'non-dualistic monism' germinated in the antiquity of RV, particularly, in the Rk passages like aditi अदिति and nAsadlyasUkta[नासदीयसूकृत] (10.129). Its further basis is clearly available in the old UP like BU and CU. BG gives it a theist basis. GK, which has all the essential features of Advaita, offers the earliest extant systemic reference. BS, with its anterior and posterior commentators, indicates an ancient and unbroken Vedanta tradition from the period of earliest UP to that of sha.nkara and then all the way to the 20thC.

2. METHOD OF KNOWLEDGE

The Knowledge-Text [KT] though separated from Action-Text [AT], is open to more than one interpretations and at places appears to be obscure or contradictory. Following methods and distinctions are used to explain the diversity in KT and to put the things in order:

1. Doctrine of reality levels (sattA siddhAnta): Knowledge is categorized as: (a) pAramArthika (absolute, transempirical, acosmic, noumenal); (b) vyAvahArika (relative empirical, cosmic, phenomenal).[641 2. Seeker's capability (adhikArIbheda): Knowledge is given in steps to suit the capability of individual Seeker. (ref: (a) CUBh 8.7-12, (b) 8.1(9): intro: p.liv, (c) 8.3(10): p.12-13) 3. Coarse and fine graining (arundhatI-nyAya): Gross (coarse) things are taught to the Seeker first, followed by more subtle concepts. (ref: same as above) 4. Doctrine of mAyA (mAyA vAda): Fallacies due to mutual dependen-cies, infinite regress etc are resolved by (magic of) mAyA. The ontology of mAyA is indeterminate. This inexplicable and undefinable (anirvach-anlya) mAyA is a distinctive feature of Advaita. (see 2.8(3), 3.x, and 6.x) 5. Attributed and attributeless brahman (saguNa and nirguNa brahman): guNa represents basic and substantive qualities of Universe. The 'brahman with guNa'[सगुण ब्रह्मन] is for meditation - as an object for concentration and instrument of purification; while 'brahman without guNa'[निर्गुण ब्रह्मन] is the ultimate reality. (ref: BSBh 1.1.11) 6. Attribution-Retraction (adhyAropa-apavAda): Attribution is to cancel the opposites so that its retraction can reach the ultimate substratum. In an equivalent via-negativa (neti neti - not this, not thus), whatever is conceived is negated to reach the ultimate non- negatable Self. (see 2.5) 7. Continuity-discontinuity or agreement-contrariety (anvaya- vyatireka): The presence (absence) of a thing is juxtaposed with the presence (abse-nce) of another thing to show the dependencey between the two. (see 2.6) 8. Method of indication (jahat-ajahat laxaNA)[651: This is an exegetical method that excludes mutually opposing or mutually incompatible elements of primary and secondary sentential meanings. (see 2.7)

9. Method of common substratum (sAmAnyAdhikaraNa): Two things are brought on common platform. (see 2.7, 2.8(8)) 10. Discrimination schema (viveka-prakriyA): separates the Real (supra-cognitive, constant, acausal, independent), from the relative (cognitive, transient, causal, dependent) using metaphysical criteria. (see 2.1, 2.3, 2.8)

2.1 Criteria of Knowledge: Following metaphysical and exegetical criteria are applied while interpreting KT:

(a) Metaphysical Criteria[661 1. Cognition (अनुभव): subject-object discrimination:प्रमातृ-प्रमेय विवेक 2. Constancy (नित्यत्व): permanent-transient discrimination:नित्य- अनित्य विवेक 3. Causality (कारणत्व): cause-effect discrimination:कारण-कार्य विवेक 4. Completeness: Independence (परिपूर्णत्व: स्वातंत्र्य):जीवन्मुक्ति विवेक

(b) Exegetical Criteria[67]

1. Unity in the opening & closing paragraph:उपक्रम-उपसंहार ऐक्य 2. Emphasis implied by repetition:अभ्यास 3. Theme's originality:अपूर्वत्व [68] 4. Theme's significance by way of result or utility: 4[69] 5. Specific mention, eulogy or highlighting of a point: 312qTG 6. Logical consistency in the thematic interpretation:344fa 2.2 Selection of Text: If we apply the exegetical criteria to UP and look for the answers of metaphysical queries[701; following passages stand out:

a) BU 1.4: Creation of multiplicity b) BU 2.4-5: Dialog between yAGYavalkya and maitreyI c) BU 3.4: Dialog between yAGYavalkya and ushasta d) BU 3.7: Debate between uddAlaka and yAGYavalkya e) BU 3.8: Dialog between yAGYavalkya and gArgl f) BU 4.2-4: Dialog between yAGYavalkya and janaka: "Not this, Not This".

g BU 5.1: "That (brahman) is infinite and this (cosmos) is infinite ... " h) CU 3.14.1: "All this is verily brahman". i) CU 6: Dialog between shvetaketu and his father uddAlaka AruNi "Thou Art That" j) CU 7.23.1-26.2: Dialog between nArada and sanatkumAra k) CU 8.7.1-15.1: Dialog between prajApati and devAsura 1) TU 2.1-8: Teachings of the five sheaths m) AU 3.1: "Consciousness is brahman". n) KU 1.2: yama's teachings to nachiketA 0) KU 2.2.15: "He shining all these shine". p) KU 3.3.12-15: "Mortal becomes Immortal". q) MU 1.1: Higher and Lower Knowledge.

r) MU 2 & 3.2: Higher Knowledge of puruSha and brahman s) MU 3.1: "A Tree and Two Birds" t) MAU: Three empirical states (waking, dreaming, sleeping) and the Fourth transcendental one. u) PU: Questions 1-3 & 5: exegesis of rites and meditation v) PU: Questions 4, 6: elucidation of MU 2.1-3; principle of puruSha w) IU: Renunciation, meditation, and Knowledge of 'manifest' and 'unmanifest'. x) KEU 1-2: Supersensuous, acosmic, uncomprehending brahman. In a like manner, exegetical and metaphysical criteria can be applied to BG to select salient verses and to discern the BG's teachings.[71] Traditionally, exegetical criteria are primarily applied to shruti texts - exegetes apply them to Veda in its entirety while Vedantins confine themselves to KT/UP with a different approach (anubandha-s) (ibid.) Salient sentences and stanzas: Vedanta tradition uses select sentences from UP for teaching and meditation. Five of them - one each related to the five saMhitA-s, are considered to be of special significance viz. (1)तत्त्वमसि[Thou art That](CU 6.8-16/SV) (2)अहम् ब्रह्मास्मधि [I am brahman] (BU 1.4.10/SYV) (3)अयमात्मा ब्रहम [This Self is brahman] (MAU 2 / AV) (4) प्रज्ञानम् ब्रहम [Consciousness is brahman] (AU 2.1.1 /RV) (5)सत्यं ज्ञानं अनन्तं ब्रहम [Truth, Knowledge, Infinity is brahman] (TU 3.1.3 / KYV) One can however, find other equally meaningful sentences depending on one's approach, such as: (6)सर्वम् खल्विदम् ब्रहम [All This is Verily brahman] (CU 3.14.1) (7)तस्य भासा सर्वमिदम् विभातधि [In Its luster shines all this](KU 2.2.15; MU 2.2.10) (8)नेति नेति [(brahman is) Not this; Not thus] (BU 2.3.6, 4.2.4) All these 'salient sentences' (mahAvAkya-s) stand out on the exegetical and metaphysical criteria. According to sha.nkara, they encapsulate the highest teaching (Atman=brahman) of not only KT, but of whole of Veda. The entire Vedic corpus -- their words and actions are for attainment of this teaching.[721 Along with salient sentences there are aupaniShadstanzas which are frequently used for illustrations and exegesis. They may include few apparently contradictory stanzas such as "सर्वकर्मा सर्वकाम :... " (CU 3.14.2), which are interpreted semantically (as in the 2.2:(28) or

thematically (as in the illustration 2.8(7). The famous mantra"yufyą: पूर्णमिदं ... " (BU 5.1) can be interpreted in terms of mathematical infinities (see Ch-6.1); it is used for the peace invocations in BU and IU. Following is the list of salient quotes from 'Ten-UP' [दशोपनिषद], preceded by the nAsadlya-sUkta [नासदीय सूक्त], the earliest and the most celebrated expression of Vedic monism. It is then followed by quotes from SU [श्वेताश्वतर उप.], the store-house of ideas and origin of theist Vedanta. (ref 8.1(1-5))

[0] नासदीय सूक्त (ऋग्वेद १०.१२९)[73] [nAsadIya sUkta] (RRigveda 10.129)

नासदासीन्नो सदासीत्तदानीम् नासीद्रजो नो व्योमा परो यत् किमावरीव: कुह कस्य शर्मन्नंभः किमासीद्रहनं गभीरम् ॥१।। नमृत्युरासीदमृतं न तर्हि न रात्र्या अह्व आसीत् प्रकेत: आनीदवातं स्वधया तदेकं तस्माध्दान्यन्न परः किं चनास ।।२|। तम आसीत् तमसा गुळ्हमग्रेऽप्रकेतं सलिलं सर्वमा इदम् तुच्छ्येनाभ्वपिहितं यदासीत् तपसस्तन्महिनाजायतैकम् ।।३।। कामस्तदग्रे समवर्तताधि मनसो रेतः प्रथमं यदासीत् सतो बन्धुमसति निरविन्दन् ह्रदि प्रतीष्या कवयो मनीषा ॥।४।। तिरश्चिनो विततो रश्मिरेषा मधः स्विदासी३दुपरि स्विदासी३त् रेतोधा आसन् महिमान आसन् त्स्वधा अवस्तात् प्रयतिः परस्तात् ।।५।। को अद्धा वेद क इह प्र वोचत् कुत आजाता कुत इयं विसृष्टि: अर्वाग्देवा अस्य विसर्जनेनाऽथा को वेद यत आबभूव ॥६।। इयं विसृष्टिर्यत आबभूव यदि वा दधे यदि वा न यो अस्याध्यक्षः परमे व्योमन् त्सो अङ्ग वेद यदि वा न वेद ॥७॥

[0] nAsadIya sUkta (RRigveda 10.129)[74]

Then there was neither Aught nor Nought, no air nor sky beyond || What covered all? Where rested all? In watery gulf profound? ||1|| Nor death was then, nor deathlessness, nor change of night and day || That One breathed calmly, self sustained; nought else beyond its lay. ||2|| 'Gloom hid in gloom' existed first -- one sea, eluding view || That One, a void in chaos wrapt, by inward fervour grew. ||3|| Within it first arose desire, the primal germ of mind ||Which nothing with existence links, as sages searching find. ||4|| The kindling ray that shot across the dark and drear abyss -- Was it beneath? or high aloft? What bard can answer this? There fecundating powers were found, and mighty forces strove -- A self supporting mass beneath, and energy above. ||5| Who knows, whoever told, from whence this vast creation rose? || No Gods had then been born -- who then can e'er the truth disclose? ||6|| Whence sprang this world, and whether framed by hand divine or no -- || Its Lord in heaven alone can tell, if even he can show. ||7||

[1]बृहदारण्यक उपनिषद [bRRihadAraNyaka Up.] [BU]:[75]

(1) ब्रह्मविद्यया सर्वं भविष्यन्त: (१.४.९) Through the Knowledge of brahman we shall attain identity with the Universe (BU 1.4.9) (2)अहं ब्रह्मास्मि (१.४.१०) (It knew itself only as) I am brahman (BU 1.4.10) (3)अथात आदेश: -- नेति नेतछि (२.३.६) [76] Henceforth the declaration "Not this, Not this" (BU 2.3.6) (4) आत्मा वा अरे द्रष्टव्यः श्रोतव्यो मन्तव्यो निदिधासितव्यो मैत्रेयि, आत्मनो वा अरे दर्शनेन श्रवणेन मत्या विज्ञानेनेदं सर्वं विदितं (२.४.५) The Self, O maitreyI, should be realized should be heard of, should be reflected on, should be meditated upon; By realization of this (Self) all this is Known (BU 2.4.5) (5)इदं सर्वं यदयमात्मा (२.४.६) This all is this Self (BU 2.4.6) (6)यत्र हि द्वैतमिव भवति तदितर इतरं जिघ्रति, तदितर इतरं पश्यति, तदितर इतरं शृणोति, तदितर इतरं अभिवदति, तदितर इतरं मनुते, तदितर इतरं विजानाति; यत्र वा अस्य सर्वमात्मैवाभूत्तत्केन कं पश्येत्, तत्केन कं श्रुणुयात्, तत्केन कं अभिवदेत्, तत्केन कं मन्वीत्, तत्केन कं विजानियात्? येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति तं केन विजानियात्? विज्ञातारमरे केन विजानियादिति (२.४.१४) For when there is duality, as it were, then one smells another, one sees another, one hears another, one speaks another, one thinks another, one knows another. When (however) all has become the very Self of Knower of brahman then what should one smell and through what? What should one see and through what? What should one hear and through what? What should one speak and through what? What should one think and through what? What should one know and through what? "Through what should one know that owing to which all this is known?" Through what, O dear, should one know the Knower? (BU 2.4.14) (7) इदं अमृतं इदं ब्रह्म इदं सर्वं (२.५.१-१४) This (Self) is immortal, This (Self) is brahman, This (Self) is all (BU 2.5.1-14) (8)रूपं रूपं प्रतिरूपो बभूव तदस्य रूपं प्रतिचक्षणाय । इन्द्रो मायाभि पुरुरूप ईयते युक्ता ह्यस्य हरय: शता दश ॥ (२.५.१९) (He) transforms Himself in accordance with each form. That form of His is for His revelation. The Lord, due to mAyA, is perceived as manifold, for to Him are yoked tens of hundreds of organs. (BU 2.5.19)

(9)एष त आत्मा सर्वान्तर: (३.४.१-२, ३.५.१) (Tell me precisely about brahman That is immediate and direct - the Self That is within all). This is your Self that is within all (BU 3.4.1-2, 3.5.1) (10)एष त आत्मा अन्तर्याम्यमृतः (३.७.३-२३) This is the Internal Ruler, your own immortal Self (BU 3.7.3-23) (11)स होवाच, एतद्वै तदक्षरं गार्गि ब्राह्मणा अभिवदन्ति, अस्थुलं अनणु अल्हस्वं अदीर्घम्लोहितं अस्नेहं अच्छायं अतमः अवायुः अनाकाशं असंगं अरसं अगंधं अचक्षुःकं अश्रोत्रं अवाक् अमन: अतेजस्कं अप्राणं अमुखं अमात्रं अनंतरं अबाह्यं, न तदश्नाति किंचन न तदश्नाति कश्चन (३.८.८) He said, 'O gArgI, the knowers of brahman describe It verily as immutable. It is neither gross nor minute, neither short nor long, neither red color nor oiliness, neither shadow nor darkness, neither air nor space, unattached, neither savor nor odor, without eyes or ears, without vocal organ or mind, without the vital force or mouth, not a measure, and without interior or exterior. It does not eat any thing, nor is it eaten by any body (BU 3.8.8) (12)एतस्य वा अक्षरस्य प्रशासने, गार्गि, सुर्याचन्द्रमसौ विधृतौ तिष्ठतः एतस्य वा अक्षरस्य प्रशासने, गार्गि, द्यावापृथिव्यौ विधृते तिष्ठतः एतस्य वा अक्षरस्य प्रशासने, गार्गि, निमिषे मुहूर्ता अहोरात्राण्यर्धमासा मासा ऋतवः संवत्सरा इति विधृतास्तिष्ठन्ति; एतस्य वा अक्षरस्य प्रशासने, गार्गि, प्राच्योऽन्या नद्य: स्यन्दन्ते श्वेतेभ्यः पर्वतेभ्यः प्रतीच्योऽन्याः, यां यां च दिशमनु; एतस्य वा अक्षरस्य प्रशासने, गार्गि, ददतो मनुष्याः प्रशंसंति, यजमानं देवाः, दर्विम् पितरोऽन्वायत्ता: (३.८.९) Under the mighty rule of this Immutable, O gArgI, the sun and moon are held in their positions; under the mighty rule of this Immutable O gArgI, heaven and earth maintain their positions; under the mighty rule of this Immutable, O gArgl, moments, Muhurtas, days & nights, fortnights, months, seasons and years are held in their respective places; under the mighty rule of this Immut-able, O gArgI, some rivers flow eastwards from the White Mountains, other flowing westward continue in that direction, and still others keep their respective courses; under the mighty rule of this Immutable, O gArgl, men praise those that give, gods depend on the sacrificer, and the manes on the independent offerings (darvIhoma) (BU 3.8.9) (13)तद्वा एतदक्षरं गार्ग्यदृष्टम् द्रष्टा, अश्रुतं श्रोता, अमतं मंत्रा, अविज्ञातं विज्ञाता; नान्यददोऽस्ति द्रष्टा, नान्यददोऽस्ति श्रोता, नान्यददोऽस्ति मंत्रा, नान्यददोऽस्ति विज्ञाता, इतस्मिन्नु खल्वक्षरे गार्ग्याकाश ओतश्च प्रोतश्च इति (३.८.११) This immutable, O gArgI, which is the unseen Seer, unheard Hearer; unthought Thinker; unknown Knower. There is no other witness, no other hearer, no other thinker, no other knower. This very Absolute, O gArgl, pervades the unmanifested space (BU 3.8.11)

(14) विज्ञानमानन्दं ब्रह्म (३.९.२८:७) It is brahman which is absolute Consciousness and Bliss. (BU 3.9.28:7) (15)अस्तमित याज्ञवल्क्य, चन्द्रमस्यस्तमिते, शान्तेऽग्नौ, शान्तायां वाचि किंज्योतिरेवायं पुरुष इति; आत्मैवास्य ज्योतिर्भवतीति, आत्मनैवायं ज्योतिषास्ते पल्ययते कर्म कुरुते विपल्येतीति (४.३.६) 'After the sun and the moon have both set, the fire has gone out, and the sound is hushed, yAGYavalkya, what serves as a light for a man?' 'The Self indeed serves as his light. It is through the light of the Self that he sits, moves, works and comes back." (BU 4.3.6) (16)स वा अयमात्मा ब्रह्म (४.४.५) This same Self is verily brahman (BU 4.4.5) (17)यथाकारी यथाचारी तथा भवति -- साधुकारी साधुर्भवति, पापकारी पापो भवति; पुण्यः पुण्येन कर्मणा भवति, पापः पापेन | अथो खल्वाहुः काममय एवायं पुरुष इति; स यथाकामो भवति तत्क्रतुर्भवति यत्क्रतुर्भवति तत्कर्म कुरुते, यत्कर्म कुरुते तदभिसंपद्यते । (४.४.५) Thus it is associated with what is perceived and what is inferred. As it does and as it acts, so it becomes: The doer of good becomes good, and the doer of evil becomes evil; it becomes virtuous through virtuous act and vicious through a vicious act. Others, however say that the self is identified with desire alone. It resolves as it desires; it does the work that it resolves; and it attains the result of the work it does. (BU 4.4.5) (18)विद्वान्ब्रह्मामृतोऽमृतं (४.४.१७) Knowing brahman I am immortal (BU 4.4.17) (19)नेह नानास्ति किंचन, मृत्योः स मृत्युमाप्नोति य इह नानेव पश्यति (४.४.१९) There is no multiplicity (nAnA) whatsoever here. He who sees diversity here, as it were, goes from death to death (BU 4.4.19) (20)एकधैवानुद्रष्टव्यमेतदप्रमेयम् ध्रुवं | विरज: पर आकाशादज आत्मा महान्धृवः (४.४.२०) It is to be realized as the homogeneous (ekadhA), unknowable, unflappable, and pure. Self is taintless, beyond the sky, birthless, great (infinite) and unchanging (dhruva) (BU 4.4.20) (21)स वा एष महानज आत्माजरोऽमरोऽमृतोऽभयो ब्रह्म; अभयं वै ब्रह्म; अभयं हि वै ब्रह्म भवति य एवं वेद (४.४.२५) That great birthless Self is undecaying, immortal, undying, fearless brahman. brahman is indeed fearless. He who Knows It as such certainly becomes the fearless brahman. (BU 4.4.25) (22)स एष नेति नेत्यात्मा (४.२.४, ४.४.२२, ४.५.१५, ३.९.२६) This is that "Not this, Not this" Self (BU 4.2.4, 4.4.22, 4.5.15, 3.9.26) (23)तदेतत्त्रयम् शिक्षेत् -- दमं दानं दयामिति (५.२.३)

Therefore one should learn these three - self-control, charity, and mercy. (BU 5.2.3) (24)सत्यं हि एवं ब्रह्म (५.४.१) Truth indeed is the brahman (BU 5.4.1) (25)असतो मा सद्गमय, तमसो मा ज्योतिर्गमय, मृत्योर्मा अमृतं गमय (१.३.२७) From untruth lead me to truth, from darkness lead me to light, from death lead me to immortality (BU 1.3.27) (26)पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पूर्णमुदच्यते | पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥ (५.१) That (brahman) is infinite, this (universe) too is infinite. Infinite (universe) emanates from the infinite (brahman). Assimilating the infinitude of infinite (universe), the infinite (brahman) alone is left (BU 5.1)

[2] छान्दोग्य उपनिषद[ChAndogya upaniShad] [CU]:[77] (27)सर्वं खल्विदं ब्रह्म तज्जलानिति शांत उपासीत । अथ खलु क्रतुमयः पुरुषो यथाक्रतुरस्मिन्ल्लोके पुरुषो भवति तथेतः प्रेत्य भवति स क्रतुं कुर्वीत ॥। (३.१४.१) "Verily, all this is brahman." From Him do all things originate, into Him do they dissolve and by Him are they sustained. On Him should one mediate in peace. For as his one's conviction such indeed one is; and as is one's conviction in this world, such one becomes on departing hence. Let one therefore cultivate conviction (CU 3.14.1) (28)सर्वकर्मा सर्वकाम: सर्वगन्धः सर्वरसः सर्वामिदमभ्यात्तोऽवाक्यनादर एष मे आत्मान्तर्ह्रदय एतदूब्रह्मैतमितः प्रेत्याभिसम्भावितस्मीति यस्य स्यादद्धा न विचिकित्सा-स्तीति ह स्माह शाण्डिल्य: शाण्डिल्य: (३.१४.२, ४) That which is (the origin of) all actions, all desires, all odors, all tastes; which pervades all this; which is with-out speech (and other senses), and which is free from hankering (That is my Self) (3.14.2) residing in (the lotus of) heart; He is brahman. On departing hence I shall attain to His being. One who possesses this true faith, has no further doubt. Thus declared shANDilya, yes, shANDilya. (CU 3.14.2, 4) (29)एष म आत्मान्तर्हदयेऽणीयान्व्रीहेर्वा यवाद्वा सर्षपाद्वा श्यामाकाद्वा श्यामाक-तण्डुलाद्वैष म आत्मान्तर्ह्रदये ज्यायान्प्रुथ्विव्या ज्यायानन्तरिक्षाज्ज्यायान्दिवो ज्यायान् एभ्यो लोकेभ्यः (३.१४.३) This Self of mine within the heart, is smaller than the paddy or barley or mustard or millet seed or a kernel of millet seed. This Self of mine within the heart, is greater than the earth, greater than intermediate space, greater than heaven, greater than all these worlds (CU 3.14.3) (30)यथा सोम्यैकेन मृत्पिंडेन सर्वं मृन्मयं विज्ञातं स्याद्वाचारम्भणं विकारो नामधेयं मृत्तिकेत्येव सत्यं (६.१.४) Just as through a single clod of clay all that is made of clay would be known, all modification is but name based upon words and the clay alone is the truth (CU 6.1.4) (31)सदेव सोम्येदमग्र आसीदेकमेवाद्वीतीयं (६.२.१-२) In the beginning, O dear, This was the only Being, one only without a second' (CU 6.2.1-2) (32)तदैक्षत बहु स्यां प्रजायेयेति तत्तेजोऽसृजत तत्तेज ऐक्षत बहु स्यां प्रजायेयेति तदपोऽसृजत ता आप ऐक्षन्त बह्यः स्याम प्रजायेमहीति ता अन्नम् सृजन्त (६.२.३-४) That Being willed, May I become many (and) grow forth. It created fire. That fire willed, May I become many (and) grow forth. It created water. That water willed, May I become many (and) grow forth. It created food (6.2.3-4)

(33)वाचारम्भणं विकारो नामधेयं त्रीणि रूपाणीत्येव सत्यं (६.४.१-४) All modification is but name based on words, only the three forms are real (CU 6.4.1-4) (34)सोम्येमाः सर्वाः प्रजाः सदायतना: सत्प्रतिष्ठाः (६.८.४, ६) All these creatures, dear boy, have Being as their root, have Being as their abode, and have Being as their support (CU 6.8.4, 6) (35)स य एषोऽणिमैतदात्म्यमिदं सर्वं तत्सत्यं स आत्मा तत्त्वमसि श्वेतकेतो (६.८-१६) That which is this subtle essence, all this (cosmos) has got That as the Self. That is Truth. That is Self. "Thou art That," O Svetaketu (CU 6.8.7, 6.9.4, 6.10.3, 6.11.2, 6.12.3, 6.13.2, 6.14.2, 6.15.2, 6.16.3) (36)यत्र नान्यत्पश्यति नान्यच्छुणोति नान्यद्विजानाति स भूमाथ, यो वै भूमा तदमृतमथ यदल्पं तन्मर्त्यम् (७.२४.१) In which one sees nothing else, hears nothing else, understands nothing else, that is the infinite. That (brahman, bhUmA) which is infinite is alone immortal, and that which is finite is mortal. (CU 7.24.1) (37)आत्मैवेदं सर्वमिति (७.२५.२) The Self indeed is all this (CU 7.25.2) (38)तस्य ह वा एतस्यैवं पश्यत एवं मन्वानस्यैवम् विजानत आत्मतः प्राण आत्मत आशात्मतः स्मर आत्मत आकाश आत्मतस्तेज आत्मत आप आत्मत आविर्भाव- तिरोभावावात्मतोऽन्नमात्मतो बलमात्मतो विज्ञानमात्मतो ध्यानमात्मतश्चित्तं आत्मतः संकल्प आत्मतो मन आत्मतो कर्माण्यात्मत एवेदं सर्वमिति (७.२६.१) Verily from him alone who sees thus, reflects thus and understands thus, prANa spring from Atman, AkAsha from Atman, fire from Atman, water from Atman, appear-ance and disappearance from Atman, food from Atman, strength from Atman, understanding from Atman, contem-plation from Atman, intelligence from Atman, will from Atman, mind from Atman, speech from Atman, name from Atman, hymns from Atman, rites from Atman; all this (springs) from Atman alone (CU 7.26.1) (39)एष आत्मेति होवाचैतदमृतमभयमेतद्ब्रह्मेति तस्य ह वा एतस्य ब्रह्मणोनाम सत्यमिति (८.३.४) This is the Self. This is immortal. This is beyond all fear. This is brahman. Verily, the name of this brahman is truth (CU 8.3.4) (40)य आत्मापहतपाप्मा विजरो विमृत्युर्विशोको विजिघत्सोऽपिपासः सत्यकामः सत्य- संकल्प: सोऽन्वेष्टव्यः स विजिज्ञासितव्यः स सर्वांश्च लोकानाप्नोति सर्वांश्च कामान्य- स्तमात्मानमनुविद्य विजानातीति ह प्रजापतिरुवाच (८.७.१) The Atman which is free from evil, old age, death; free from sorrow, free from hunger and thirst; whose desire is of the truth; whose resolve is of the truth; he should be sought; him one should

desire to understand (8.7.1)

[3] तैत्तिरीय उपनिषद [taittirlya upaniShad] [TU]:[78] (41)ओमिति ब्रह्म | ओमितीदं सर्वं | (१.८.१) OM is brahman. OM is all this (TU 1.8.1) (42)सत्यं वद | धर्मं चर | स्वाध्यान्मा प्रमद: | (१.११.१) Speak the truth. Practice rightness. Don't miss your study (TU 1.11.1) (43) ब्रह्मविदाप्नोति परं । (२.१.१) The Knower of brahman attains the param [brahman] (TU 2.1.1) (44)सत्यं ज्ञानं अनंतं ब्रह्म | (२.१.१) brahman is Truth, Knowledge, and Infinity (TU 2.1.1) (45)तस्माद्वा एतस्मादात्मन आकाश: संभूतः | आकाशाद्वायुः | वायोरग्नि: | अग्नेराप: अद्भ्यः पृथिवी | पृथिव्या ओषधयः | ओषधीभ्योऽन्नं | अन्नात्पुरुष: | (२.१.१) From that brahman indeed, which is this Self, was produced space. From space emerged air. From air was born fire. From fire was created water. From water sprang earth. From earth were born the herbs. From the herbs was produced food. From food was born man. (TU 2.1.1) (46)यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते। अप्राप्य मनसा सह | आनंदं ब्रह्मणो विद्वान् । न बिभेति कदाचनेति | (२.४.१, २.९.१) One is not subjected to fear at any time, if one Knows the bliss that is brahma, failing to reach which words along with the mind turn back (TU 2.4.1, 2.9.1) (47)सोऽकामयत । बहुस्यां प्रजायेयेति | स तपोऽतप्यत | स तपस्तप्त्वा | इदं सर्वमसृजत यदिदं किंच | तत्सृष्ट्वा | तदेवानुप्राविशत | तदनुप्रविश्य | सच्च त्यच्चाभवत् | निरुक्तं चानिरुक्तं च | निलयनं चानिलयनं च | विज्ञानं चाविज्ञानं च | सत्यं चानृतं च सत्यमभवत्। यदिदं किंच | तद् सत्यमिति आचक्षते | (२.६.१) He (the Self) wished, 'Let me be many, let me be born.' He undertook the deliberation. Having deliberated, He created all this. That (brahman) having created (that), entered into that very thing. And having entered there, It became the formed and the formless, the defined and the undefined, the sustaining and the non- sustaining, the sentient and the insentient, the true and the untrue. Truth became all this that there is. They call That as Truth (TU 2.6.1) (48)असद्वा इदमग्र आसीत । ततो वै सदजायत । तदात्मानं स्वयमकुरुत तस्मात्तत्सुकृतमुच्यत इति | (२.७.१) In the beginning all this was but the unmanifested. From that emerged the manifested. That brahman created Itself by Itself. Therefore It is called the self-creator (TU 2.7.1).

(49) विज्ञानं ब्रह्मेति व्यजानात् । (३.५.१) (He) knew Knowledge as brahman (TU 3.5.1) (50)आनन्दो ब्रह्मेति व्यजानात् । (३.६.१) (He) knew Bliss as brahman (TU 3.6.1)

[4] कठ उपनिषद् [kaTha upaniShad] [KU]:[79] (51)दूरमेते विपरीते विषूची अविद्या या च विद्येति ज्ञाता | (१.२.४) That which is known as Knowledge and that which is known as Ignorance are widely contradictory and they follow divergent courses (KU 1.2.4) (52)नैषा तर्केण मतिरापनेया | (१.२.९) This (Knowledge) is not accessible to mind by logic (KU 1.2.9) (53)न जायते म्रियते वा विपश्चिन्नायं कुतश्चिन्न बभूव कश्चित् । अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे (१.२.१८) The Self is neither born nor does it die. It did not originate from anything nor did anything originate from it. It is birthless, eternal, undecaying, and ancient. It is not injured even when the body is killed (KU 1.2.18) (54)अणोरणीयान्महतो महीयानात्मा ॥(१.२.२०) The Self is subtler than the subtle and greater than the great (KU 1.2.20) (55)नायमात्मा प्रवचनेन लभ्यो न मेधया न बहुना श्रुतेन | यमेवैष वृणुते तेन लभ्यस्तैष आत्मा विवृणुते तनूं स्वां ।। (१.२.२३) This Self cannot be known through study, nor through the intellect, nor trough much hearing. It can be known through the Self alone that the aspirant prays so; this Self of that seeker reveals Its true nature (KU 1.2.23). (56)नाविरतो दुश्चरितान्नाशान्तो नासमाहितः | नाशान्तमानसो वाऽपि प्रज्ञानेन नमाप्नुयात् ॥ (१.२.२४) One who has not desisted from bad conduct, whose senses are not under control, whose mind is not concentrated, whose mind is not tranquil, cannot attain this Self through knowledge. (KU 1.2.24) (57)अशब्दमस्पर्शमरूपमव्ययं तथाऽरसं नित्यमगंधवच्च यत् । अनाद्यनन्तं महतः परं ध्रुवम् निचाय्य तन्मृत्युमुखात् प्रमुच्यते ॥ (१.३.१५) One becomes free from the jaws of death by Knowing That which is soundless, touchless, colorless, undiminishing, and also tasteless, eternal, odorless, beginningless, endless, distinct from mahat & ever constant (KU 1.3.15)

तत्।। (२.१.३) (58) एन रूपं रसं गंधं शब्दान् स्पर्शांश्च मैथुनान् । एतेनैव विजानाति किमत्र परिशिष्यते । एतद्वै

What remains here (unknowable to this Self) through which very Self people perceive color, taste, smell, sound, touch, and sexual pleasure? This indeed is That (Self) (KU 2.1.3) (59)यदेवेह तदमुत्र यदमुत्र तदन्विह । (२.१.१०) मनसैवेदमाप्तव्यं नेह नाना अस्ति किंचन ।

मृत्यो: स मृत्युं गच्छति य इह नानेव पश्यन्ति । (२.१.११) What indeed is here, is there; what is there is here likewise (2.1.10). This is to be attained through the mind indeed (2.1.11). There is no diversity here whatsoever. He who sees as though there is difference here, goes from death to death (KU 2.1.10-11) (60)एकस्तथा सर्वभूतान्तरात्मा । रूपं रूपं प्रतिरूपो बभूव | (२.२.९-१०) The Self inside all beings, though one, assume a form in respect of each shape; and (yet) It is outside (KU 2.2.9-10) (61)न तत्र सूर्यो भाति न चन्द्र तारकं | नेमा विद्युतो भान्ति कुतोऽयमग्निः । तमेव भान्तमनुभाति सर्वं। तस्य भासा सर्वमिदं विभाति ।। (२.२.१५) There the sun does not shine, nor the moon or the stars; nor do these flashes of lightning shine there. How can this fire do so? "He shining all these shine; through his luster all these are illumined" (KU 2.2.15) (62)यम ज्ञात्वा मुच्यते जान्तुरामृततत्त्वं च गच्छति । (२.३.८) Knowing That a man becomes free & attains immortality (KU 2.3.8) (63)यदा सर्वे प्रमुच्यन्ते कामा येऽस्य हृदि श्रिताः | अथ मर्त्योऽमृतो भवत्यत्र ब्रह्म समश्नुते ।।(२.३.१४) When all desires clinging to one's heart fall off, then a mortal becomes immortal (and he) attains brahman here. (KU 2.3.14) [5]मुण्डक उपनिषद् [muNDaka upaniShad] [MU]:[80] (64)स ब्रह्मविद्यां सर्वविद्याप्रतिष्ठां | (१.१.१) That Knowledge of brahman is the basis of all know-ledge (MU 1.1.1) (65)द्वे विद्ये वेदितव्ये इति ह स्म यद्ब्रह्मविदो वदन्ति परा चैवापरा च ॥ (१.१.४) There are two kinds of knowledge to be known as told by the wise - the higher and the lower (MU 1.1.4). (66) तत्रापरा ऋग्वेदो यजुर्वेद: सामवेदोऽथर्ववेद: शिक्षा कल्पो व्याकरणं निरुक्तं छन्दो ज्योतिषमिति | अथ परा यया तदक्षरमधिगम्यते ॥ (१.१.५) Of these the lower comprises the RRigveda, yajurveda, sAmaveda, atharvaveda, grammar, etymology, meter, astrology etc. Then there is the higher (Knowledge) by which attained that Imperishable (brahman) (MU 1.1.5) (67)प्लवा ह्येते अदृढा यज्ञरूपा अष्टादशोक्तमवरं येषु कर्म | एतच्छ्रेयो येभिनन्दन्ति मूढा जरामृत्युं ते पुनरेवापि यन्ति || (१.२.७) Since the sacrifice of 18 constituents (16 priests and the sacrificer couple) on whom the the inferior karma has been said to rest is like a fragile raft, therefore those ignorant people who get elated with the idea 'This is (the cause of) Bliss, undergo old age and death over again (MU 1.2.7)

(68)दिव्यो ह्यमूर्त पुरुषः सबाह्याभ्यन्तरो ह्यजः | अप्राणो ह्यमनाः शुभ्रो हि अक्षरापरतः परः ।। (२.१.२) The puruShais transcendental since He is formless. And since he is coextensive with all that is external andprAGYa internal and since he is birthless, he is without vital force and mind; He is pure and superior to (other) superior imperishable (mAyA) (MU 2.1.2) (69)पुरुष एवेदं विश्वं कर्म तपो ब्रह्म परामृतं । एतद्यो वेद निहितं गुहायां सोऽविद्याग्रंथिं विकिरतीह सोम्य | (२.१.१०) The puruSha alone is all this karma and Knowledge. He who Knows this supreme, immortal brahman, existing in the heart, destroys here the knot of Ignorance (MU 2.1.10) (70)भिद्यते ह्ृदयग्रन्थिश्छिद्यन्ते सर्वसंशयाः | क्षीयन्ते चास्य कर्माणि तस्मिन् दृष्टे परावरे । (२.२.८) When that Self, which is both high and the low, is realized, the knot of the heart gets untied, all doubts are dissolved and all one's actions become dissipated (MU 2.2.8) (71)तमेव भान्तमनुभाति सर्वं | तस्य भासा सर्वमिदं विभाति ॥। (२.२.१०) He shining all these shine; through his luster all these are illumined (MU 2.2.10) (72) ब्रह्मैवेदममृतं पुरस्ताद्ब्रह्म पश्चाद्ब्रह्मदक्षिणतश्चोत्तरेण । अथश्चोर्ध्वम् च प्रसुतं ब्रह्ौवेदं विश्वमिदं वरिष्ठं। (२.२.११) All this that is in front is but brahman, the immortal. brahman is at the back, as also on the right and the left. It is extended above and below, too. This world is nothing but brahman, the highest (MU 2.2.11) (73)द्वा सुपर्णा सयुजा सखाया समानं वृक्षं परिषस्वजाते । तयोरन्यः पिप्पलं स्वाद्वत्त्यनश्नन्नन्यो अभिचाकशीति । (३.१.१) Two birds that are bosom friends, cling to the same tree. Of these, one eats the sweet fruit, and the other looks on without eating (MU 3.1.1) (74)सत्यमेव जयते नानृतं | (३.१.५) Truth alone wins and not untruth. (MU 3.1.5) (75)स यो ह वै तत्परमं ब्रह्म वेद ब्रहौव भवति। (३.२.९) Any one who Knows brahman becomes brahman indeed. (MU 3.2.9)

[6] ऐतरेय उपनिषद् [aitareya upaniShad] [AU]:[81] (76)आत्मा वा इदमेक एवाग्र आसीत | नान्यत किंचन मिषत् । स ईक्षत लोकान्नु सृजा इति ।। (१.१.१) In the beginning this was but the absolute Self alone. There was nothing else what so ever that winked. It thought 'let me create the worlds'. (AU 1.1.1) (77)सर्वं तत्प्रज्ञानेत्रं प्रज्ञाने प्रतिष्ठितं प्रज्ञानेत्रो लोक: प्रज्ञा प्रतिष्ठा "प्रज्ञानं ब्रह्म" All these are impelled by Awareness. Awareness is substratum. Universe has Awareness as its eye, and Awareness as its end. Awareness [praGYAna] is the 'ultimate Reality' [brahman] (AU 3.1.3)

[7] मांडूक्य उपनिषद् [mANDUkya upaniShad] [MAU]:[82] (78)सर्वं ह्येतद् ब्रह्म "अयमात्मा ब्रह्म" । (२) All this is verily brahman. This Self is brahman (MAU 2) (79) नान्तःप्रज्ञं न बहिष्प्रज्ञं नोभयतःप्रज्ञं न प्रज्ञानघनं न प्रज्ञं नाप्रज्ञं अव्यवहार्यमग्राह्यमलक्षणं अचिन्त्यं अव्यपदेश्यं एकात्मप्रत्ययसारं प्रपंचोशमं शान्तं शिवामाद्वैतं अदृष्टम्

चतुर्थं मन्यन्ते स आत्मा स विज्ञेय । (७) They consider the Fourth to be that which is not conscious of the internal world, nor conscious of the external world, nor conscious of both the worlds, nor a mass of consciousness, nor conscious, nor unconscious; which is unseen, beyond empirical dealings, beyond grasp, uninferable, unthinkable, indescribable; whose valid proof consists in the single belief in the Self; in which all phenomenon cease; and which is unchanging, auspicious, and non dual. That is the Self, that is to be Known (MAU 7)

[8] केन उपनिषद् [kena upaniShad] [KEU]:[83] (80)यद्वाचाऽनाभ्युदितं येन वागभ्युद्यते। यन्मनसा न मनुते येनाहुर्मनो मतं । यच्चक्षुषा न पश्यति येन चक्षूम्षि पश्यति। यच्छ्रोत्रेण न श्रुणोति येन श्रोत्रमिदं श्रुतं । यत्प्राणेन न प्राणिति येन प्राणः प्रणीयते । तदेव ब्रह्म त्वं विद्धि नेदं यदिदमुपासते ॥ (१.५-९) That which is not uttered by speech, (but) by which speech is revealed; That which is not comprehended by mind, (but) by which mind is encompassed; That which is not seen by the eye, (but) by which eye is able to see; That which is not heard by the ear, (but) by which hearing is effected; That which is not vitalized by the vital forces, (but) by which forces are vitalized - Know That to be brahman (KEU 1.5-9) (81)यस्यामतं तस्य मतं मतं यस्य न वेद सः | अविज्ञातं विजानतां विज्ञातं अविजानतां I (२.३) It is Known to him to whom It is unknown; he doesn't know to whom it is Known. It is unknown to those who know and Known to those who do not know. (KEU 2.3) (82)प्रतिबोधविदितं मतममृतत्वं हि विदंते | आत्मना विदंते वीर्यं विद्यया विदंते अमृतं । (२.४) It is really Known in each state of consciousness. It is one's own self by which one gets ability to attain immo-rtality through Knowledge (KEU 2.4)

[9] प्रश्न उपनिषद [prashna upaniShad] [PU]:[84] (83)एतद्वै सत्यकाम परं चापरं च ब्रह्म यदोकारः | तस्माद्विद्वान् एतेनैव आयतनेनै-कतरमन्वेति || (4.2) O Satyakama, this brahman, (known as) the inferior and the superior, is but this OM. Therefore the wise soul attains either of the two through this one means alone (PU 5.2). (84)स यथेमा नद्यः स्यन्दमाना: समुद्रायणाः समुद्रं प्राप्यास्तं गच्छन्ति भिद्येते तासां नामरूपे समुद्र इत्येवं प्रोच्यते । एवमेवास्य परिद्रष्टुरिमा: षोडश कला: पुरुषायणा: पुरुषं प्राप्यास्तं गच्छन्ति भिद्येते चासां नामरूपे पुरुष इत्येवं प्रोच्यते स एषोऽकलोऽमृतो भवति ॥ (६.५) Just as these flowing rivers that has sea as the goal, get absorbed after reaching the sea; their name-forms are destroyed, and they are called merely the sea, so also these sixteen parts of the all seeing puruSha, that have puruSha as their goal, disappear on reaching the puruSha, when their name-forms are destroyed as they are simply called as puruSha. Such a realized person becomes free of parts and immortal (PU 6.5). (85)अरा इव रथनाभौ कला यस्मिन्प्रतिष्ठिताः| तं वेद्यं पुरुषं वेद यथा मा वो मृत्युः परिव्यथा इति ॥ (६.६) You should Know that puruSha who is worthy to be known; in him are transfixed the parts like spokes in nave of a chariot wheel, so that death should not afflict you. (PU 6.6).

[10] ईशउपनिषद[Isha upaniShad] [IU]:[85] (86)ईशा वास्यमिदं सर्वं यत्किंच जगत्यां जगत्। All this whatever lives in the World should be covered by the God (IU 1) (87)तदेजति तन्नैजति तद्दूरे तद्वन्तिके। तदन्तरस्य सर्वस्य तदु सर्वस्यास्य बाह्यतः ॥ That moves, That does not move; That is far off, That is very near; That is inside all this, and That is also outside all this. (IU 5) (88)यस्तु सर्वाणि भूतान्यात्मन्येवानुपश्यति । सर्वभूतेषु चात्मानं ततो न विजुगुप्सते । He who sees all beings in the Self itself, and Self in all beings, feels no hatred due to that (realization). (IU 6) (89)अविद्यया मृत्युं तीर्त्वा विद्ययाऽमृतमश्नुते ॥ (One) attains immortality through vidyA by crossing over death through avidyA (IU 11)

[11]श्वेताश्वतर उपनिषद् [shvetAshvatara Up.] [SU][86] (90)पञ्चस्रोतोऽम्बुं पञ्चयोन्युग्रवक्रां पञ्चप्राणोर्मि पञ्चबुद्ध्यादिमूलाम् । पञ्चावर्तां पञ्चदुःखौघवेगां पञ्चाशद्धेदां पञ्चपर्वामधीम ॥ (१.५) We know (the river) that has five currents of water, made turbulent and winding by the five elements, whose waves are the five organs of action, whose origin (mind) is the root of five perceptions, which has five whirlpools and whose rapids are the five fold misery; (Further) it has five pain bearing obstructions and (totals) fifty variations. (SU 1.5) (91)सर्वाजीवे सर्वसंस्थे बृहन्ते अस्मिन्हंसो भ्राम्यते ब्रह्मचक्रे। पृथगात्मानं प्रेरितारं च मत्वा जुष्टस्ततस्तेनामृतत्वमेति ॥ (१.६) In this great wheel of brahman all life exists, and in that it finally dissolves, in it the soul rotates deluding itself as separate from the Impeller (brahman). When however, it identifies (with brahman), it becomes immortal. (SU 1.6) (92)सहस्रशीर्षा पुरुषः सहस्राक्ष: सहस्रपात् | स भूमिं विश्वतो वृत्वा अत्यतिष्ठद्दशा-ङ्गुलम् ॥ (३.१४) The puruSha has thousand heads, thousand eyes, and thousand feet. Pervading the universe totally He remains transcendent over it by ten fingers breadth. (SU 3.14) (93)त्वं स्त्री त्वं पुमानसि त्वं कुमार उत वा कुमारी | त्वं जीर्णो दण्डेन वञ्चसि त्वं जातो भवसि विश्वतोमुखः ॥ (४.३) Thou art the woman, Thou art the man, and Thou art the boy and the girl too. Thou art the old man tottering on a staff. Thou art born with faces everywhere (SU 4.3). (94)मायां तु प्रकृतिं विद्यान्मायिनं तु महेश्वरम् । तस्यवयवभूतैस्तु व्याप्तं सर्वमिदं जगत् । (४.१०) Know nature to be mAyA, and the Lord to be the reality (wielder) of mAyA. Indeed by objects which are of His own effect, this entire universe is pervaded. (SU 4.10) (95)यदातमस्तन्न दिवा न रात्रिर्न सन्न चासञ्छिव एव केवल: | (४.१८) When Ignorance is gone, then there remains neither day nor night, no existence or non-existence, but Shiva alone the absolute and imperishable. (SU 4.18) (96)अनाद्यनन्तं कलिलस्य मध्ये विश्वस्य स्ष्टारमनेकरूपम् । विश्वस्यैकं परिवेष्टितारं ज्ञात्वा देवं मुच्यते सर्वपाशे ॥ (५.१३) The beginningless and infinite exists in the middle of chaos (the world) and is the projector of the universe of various forms. Realizing Him, the One who pervades the universe, one is free from all fetters. (SU 5.13) (97)देवास्यैष महिमा तु लोके येनेदं भ्राम्यते ब्रह्मचक्रम् ॥ (६.१)

It is because of the glory of the God only, the wheel of brahma appears to be rotating in the (form of the ever changing) world. (SU 6.1) (98)येनावृतं नित्यमिदं हि सर्वं ज्ञः कालकारो गुणी सर्वविद्यः । तेनेशितं कर्म विवर्तते ह पृथ्व्यप्तेजोऽनिलखानि चिन्त्यम् ॥ (६.२) By whom all this is pervaded constantly, who is omni-scient, the creator of time, (the source of) all qualities, omnipresent; on whose basis the action of creation appears (by transfiguration) as Earth, Water, Fire, Air, and Space; Meditate on Him. (SU 6.2) (99)तत्कर्म कृत्वा विनिवर्त्य भूयस्तत्त्वस्य तत्त्वेन समेत्य योगम् । एकेन द्वाभ्यां त्रिभिरष्टभिर्वा कालेन चैवात्मगुणैश्च सूक्ष्मैः ॥ (६.३) After producing that work w/o any change in Him (by mere Witnessing), (He) again brings about union (of Self) with one (avyakta), two (puruSha, and prakRRiti), three (sattva, rajas, tamas), or eight (five mahAbhUta-s and manas, buddhi, aham) principles of nature with time and other subtle parts (of jlva-s) (SU 6.3) (100)एको देवः सर्वभूतेषु गूढः सर्वव्यापी सर्वभूतान्तरात्मा | कर्माध्यक्ष: सर्वभूता-धिवासः साक्षि चेता केवलो निर्गुणश्च ॥ (६.११) The one divinity is hidden in all beings and is all pervasive and the inmost Self of the all, supervisor of all actions, resides in all beings, the Witness Conscious-ness, the absolute devoid of all qualities. (SU 6.11) (101)निष्कलं निष्क्रियं शान्तं निरवद्यं निरञ्जनम् । अमृतस्य परं सेतुं दग्ध इन्धनमिवानलम् ।। (६.१९) (In That) partless, actionless, tranquil, faultless, taintless, the supreme bridge to immortality, and (who is) like the fire of the blazing log (I take refuge) (SU 6.19).

2.3 Metaphysical Criteria: Cognition (~experience) is the most basic and natural criteria of empirical reality for all sentient beings. What is subjectively cognized is only relatively real. In KA, 'cognition is knowledge' and at the relative level; it includes sensory perceptions, thinking, intellect, and even emotions and every thing which we experience through our 'psychic apparatus' (mind, antaH-karaNa). It is customary to assume that mind operates in four interconnected modes, namely manas (experiential), buddhi (intellectual), ahaMkAra (subjective), and chitta (memorative) with their respective faculties viz. experience, intellect, subject-ivity, and memory. Subject-object dual appears naturally in the cognition. Existence of Self as 'experiencing subject' is beyond doubt; the argument of denial itself is Subject. It is the unseen Seer, the unthought Thinker, the unknown Knower - the incognizant Cognizer (BU 3.8.11). It cannot be the object of cognition; It is the basis of cognition.[87] It can only be self-evidentor self- Knowable(idu)(US 18.203). It is the eternal, homogeneous Conscious-ness[88]. In any state of experience, It appears as the Witness-Consciousness [sAxi-chaitanya]. (See 2.8(4)). Mind in itself is unconscious; it becomes conscious when pervaded by the Self which, in its individuated form is known as sAxin [f&], the passive observer. Just as the 'space limited in a pot' (ghaTAkAsha) is the same as 'limitless space' (mahAkAsha); this sAxin as individuated in a body is nothing but Self (Atman). The complex of sAxin and mind is the provisional experiencer, and in that form it is known as jlva or empirical self. This complex endures in one form or other throughout jIva's 'living experience' till the final release after which sAxin remains as Self (brahman) and mind returns to its source - prakRRiti or mAyA. In empirical experience; sAxin is the pure subject without any attributes. It is the transempirical Self, which appears to be limited. In absolute sense there is no subject (pure or otherwise), there being no duality. Mind is always 'mobile' and changes from state to state except in deep sleep when it is latent. Each mind-state is a 'cognitive state' (vRRitti) and hence a state of 'empirical knowledge' (vRRitti-GYAna). This ever changing vRRitti-GYAna which arises from the interaction of subject and object is differentiated from the changeless sAxi-GYAna (absolute Know-ledge); the later is both the qualitative and integrative basis of the former. At the empirical level, seeker aspires to have this sAxi- GYAna by 'quietening the vRRitti-s' (chitta-vRRitti-nirodha) or by 'dissolution of the mind' (manonAsha). In immediate perception of external object, mind is assumed to go out

through sense organs and pervade the object - transform itself into a 'particular state' (vRRitti) according to the form of the object of perception. Since vRRitti is 'mode of the mind' this pervasion of the object by the mind is really the 'coincidence' of the cognizer (subject) and the cognized (object), both occupying the same locus. It is this co- incidental identification of the subject and the object in 'time and space' which gives immediacy to the experience. The object of the immediate perception need not always be 'external'; for example, it could be the ego associated with experiential attributes like pain and pleasure. Immediacy can be expe-rienced by the cognizer[89] insofar as the proper coincidence of space, time, and vRRitti takes place. Generally, in inferential or memorative experience this coincidence and hence the immediacy is missing; such an experience is said to be the 'mediate' experience. Do perceived objects have existence independent of individual perceptions? According to one view, "world exists independent of its being perceived" [sRRiShTi - dRRiShTi vAda] [SDV], that is to say, there are 'material objects' [bhoutika padArtha] constituting the material Universe independent of their being perceived.[901 In post- sha.nkara Advaita tradition such objects are explained by postulating 'primal Ignorance' [mUlAvidyA] which is the material cause of the Universe and which brings forth the manifest 'names and forms' [nAmarUpa-s]. The primal Ignorance is one (or manifold) but its manifestation in individual souls in the form of 'derived ignorances' [tUlAvidyA-s] are many and they cause subjective illusions. The reality grade of both these types is said to be indeterminate to sustain causality as well as non-duality.[911 Finally, in the pan-experiential framework of KA, subjective and objective worlds stand on the same platform - that of Awareness. There is also another view; that is, "world exists only if it is perceived" [dRRiShTi-sRRiShTi vAda] [DSV].[92] This view leads to the "dRRiShTi-sRRiShTi-ekajIvavAda]" [DSEV] which avoids conceptualization of multiple creators and fragmented reality. Here ekajlva [Single Soul] perceives and holds the totality of Universe including the aggregate of all waking, dreaming, and sleeping states of all the 'limited' jIva-s. The manifold world and the subjective cognitions are His mind states (vRRitti-s). He is thus omnipresent and omniscient. There is an opinion that DSEV is more compatible with the monistic position of older UP. DSEV however, faces issues of intuition & axiology once the 'limited' experinces of the multi-souls are sought to be reconciled with the totality of ekajlva's experience.[931 Similar issues are faced by the "sRRiShTi-dRRiShTi-ekajIvavAda" [SDEV] which receives lesser support from the UP sentenses such as "tat sRRiShTvA tadevAnuprAvishat" (TU 2.6.1).

Nature of knowledge: Empirical level is an interplay of name, form and action (BU 1.6.1) suggesting world-process to be an ever changing 'flux in motion'. Cognitive processes of individual psychic apparatus are part of the world-process. They are of two types: sensory (indriyajanya) and non-sensory (indriyAjanya). The later type is related to ego (pleasure, agony, pride, desire etc), to intellect (inference, abstraction etc.) and to memory (storage, retrieval) which acts as a glue connecting various cognitive states. Since manas is the main organ or locus of experience;[94] ego, intellect, and memory are sometimes considered to be modes or parts of manas. When Self (Atman) is reflected in intellect (buddhi) - that is when Self is superimposed on intellect, it appears to be 'conscious' and is called as knower (GYa, TI) (US 18.65-68). Thisuo gives the basic notion of ego or aham (subjectivity or self) to the individual soul. Ego is reinforced over the time by innumerable superimpositions on the basic superimposition of Self and not-Self. Seeker tries to reverse this process to dissolve the ego and realize the Self. Advaita tradition sets Self-realization as its goal with the assumption that there exists cognitive states (vRRitti-s) which: (a) do not consolidate the ego; and (b) are conducive to the dissolution of ego and realize the Self.[95] Unlike some other Indic schools, Advaita does not consider knowledge to be an action (activity). It is also not the cause of action and its bondage, if ego-building states are removed from its ambit. Such ego-less knowledge, though it is in the form of vRRitti-GYana, is capable of transcending itself to sAxi-GYAna.[961 GYAna then becomes an epistemic-axiological concept and "sat-chit- Ananda" becomes "ontologic-epistemic-ethic" unity. In Advaita, intellect is a mode of mind which 'reflects' Self and creates the notions of ego (aham) -- GYa (knower), kartRRi (doer), and bhoktRRi (enjoyer). This ego is said to be the cause of bondage and as such the GYa itself operates in the realm of Ignorance. Although all empirical knowledge is relative and hence technically is a mode of metaphysical Ignorance, its moral content and its ability to transcend itself to absolute Knowledge can be gauged on the scale of its subjectivity. Dissolution of ego becomes a goal as well as an ordinal measure of axiological advancement. Selfless work (niShkAma-karma), four-fold means (sAdhana-chatuShTaya), purified mind (chitta- shuddhi), equanimity (samatva), liberation-in-life (jIvanmukti), steady- wisdom (sthitapraGYA) etc are all axiological concepts that represent the state of dissolution of ego to various degrees (see 4.2, 4.3). The jIvan-muktaretains the minimal level of subjectivity(₹) to maintain essential 'empirical procedures' (loka vyavahAra).

Constancy suggests that Reality be eternal; it should never change. [97] This implies that both intrinsic (subjective, internal, immeasurable) and extrinsic (objective, external, measurable) properties of the Real entity should never change. In Advaita, perception is a 'state of mind' [vRRitti] corresponding to the object being perceived. It changes from time to time. Similarly, we are reasonably sure that extrinsic properties too change in space and time. We can objectively measure and subjectively cognize the extrinsic properties and their changes. This all- pervasive empirical changeability suggests that both intrinsic and extrinsic properties are mithyA.[981 From Advaita's point of view, all properties are objective since they can be empirically cognized or conceived. That which is objective is mithyA; it is limited by space-time-causality. Limitedness oppose constancy because limits and boundaries are indicative of change and diference. Criterion of constancy thus demands limitlessness or infinitude. It points towards an attributeless description of Reality.[991 Identity of the perceiving subject (Self) conforms to this reality; Its existence cannot be denied and It cannot be quantified or qualified (see 2.8(3)). It is attribute-less, though It appears to be attributed by 'Nescience' (see 2.4). Constancy thus leads us to the absolute Being which however, cannot be distinguished from the non-Being both being attributeless. We then have to turn to another criterion, that of causality. Causality criteria of Advaita distinguishes Being from non-Being by figuratively attributing efficient and material cause of the phenomenal world to pure Being. The 'becoming' world then is neither real nor unreal. It is not real because it changes; it is not unreal because it is experienced. However, terms like Being, Existence etc. are only labels; brahman is beyond words, sense perception and mental conception. Causality theory of Advaita is similar to satkAryavAda of sA.nkhyal[1001 where effect preexists in the cause as a potentiality. Effect is non-different than the cause in a cause-effect relationship; it is just a label and appearance [nAma-rUpa]; it is mithyA - of a secondary reality. The 'provisional' first cause of creation is brahman (BSBh 1.1.2, TU 2.7.1). The Creation (cosmos), being an effect, is only an 'illusory appearance' [vivarta]. Sometimes from the relative view- point, Advaita's creation is known as vivarta. Since effect is mithyA, creation is mithyA too. At the absolute level vivarta does not exist. There is no creation and no creator; only brahman exists. In GK this is declared in a telling manner: Like a dream and a magic are seen, and just as mirage city is seen in the sky, so is this universe seen by those who are well versed in UP. (GK 2.31)

There is no cessation, there is no origination, no one is bound and no one strives (to be free), no one desires liberation. This is the ultimate truth. (GK 2.32) [101] sha.nkara's commentary on CU 6.2.1-2 explains his stand on Creation as also his critique of the positions of naiyyAyika-s (Logicians) and mAdhyamaka-s (Buddhists). According to Logician an effect does not remain inherent in its cause, it is altogether a new creation. The cause loses its former identity and becomes non-existent 'as it were', and from that non-existence the product emerges as a new creation.[102] Logicians believe in both existence and non-existence. According to mAdhyamaka Buddhists nothing exists before its production. There is neither pure being (Existence) nor non-being (Non-Existence). There is only incessant change (Becom-ing) without any permanent identity. This change is governed by the law of 'Dependent Origination'.[1031 All these positions are axiomatic from their respective stand-points: Vedantin assigns reality only to 'being' (brahman) and follows vivarta vAda (apparent origination in Existence); while Logician assigns reality to both 'being' and 'non-being' and follows asatkAryavAda (origination in Non-Existence). Buddhist assigns reality to only 'becoming' and follows pratItyasamutpAda (interdependent origination).

Completeness criterion merges ontology, epistemology and axiology. The Knower becomes brahman; there is no duality and there is nothing more to be known or gained.[104] The brahman (Self) is the substratum of the superposition of Universe, non-dual, pure, independent and complete in itself.[105] "Completeness" includes all other criteria; it is the basis of 'realizing' Atman= brahman as the sole purpose of Vedanta.[106] At the empirical level this criterion is realized by jIvanmukta, the Knower. The sat (being) and chit (awareness) always exist in our ordinary experience. It is Ananda - the bliss of ethical sovereignty that makes jIvanmukti (Knowledge, liberation) sui generis. Ethics or righteousness (dharma) then becomes an autonomous principle and jIvanmukta becomes its embodiment. This dharma is not necessarily the Vedic dharma but the one that comes naturally to jIvanmukta.

2.4 Superimposition: sha.nkara describes Self as self- luminous [svayaM-jyoti]. It reveals Itself after removal of the Ignorance which is the root cause of duality. He advises to eliminate the difference between the known (object) and the knower (subject) by removing the superimposition of erroneous empirical knowledge. Concept of superimposition [adhyAsa] is one of the key concepts of shA.nkara Advaita; it is explained in the preamble to BSBh known as adhyAsa-bhAShya. Here, sha.nkara states the learned view that considers superim-position of non-Self (object) on the inmost Self (subject) is Ignorance [avidyA]; and the ascertainment of the nature of real entity by separating the superimposed thing from it is called Knowledge (vidyA). Since all the empirical transactions are based on subject-object relationship based on 'super- position' and since this superposition is nothing but Nescience; ontology of superimposition assumes an epistemic purport. The otherwise fragmentary concept of Ignorance becomes a vehicle for the unification of ontology and epistemology of Advaita. The entire adhyAsa-bhAShya is produced here: [107] adhyAsa-bhAShya: It is a matter not requiring any proof that the object and the subject[108] whose respective spheres are the notion of the 'Thou' (the Non-Ego) and the 'Ego,' and which are opposed to each other as much as darkness and light are, cannot be identified. All the less can their respective attributes[109] be identified. Hence it follows that it is wrong to superimpose upon the subject - whose Self is intelligence,[110] & which has for its sphere the notion of the Ego - the object and its attributes whose sphere is the notion of the Non- Ego; and vice versa to superimpose the subject and its attributes on the object. In spite of this it is on the part of man a natural procedure - which has its cause in wrong knowledge - not to distinguish the two entities (object and subject) and their respective attributes, although they are absolutely distinct, but to superimpose upon each the characteristic nature and the attributes of the other, and thus, coupling the Real and the Unreal, to make use of expressions such as: That am I, That is mine. -- But what have we to understand by the term 'superimposition?' -- The apparent presentation, in the form of a remembrance, to the consciousness of something previously observed, in some other thing. Some indeed define the term 'superimposition' as the super-imposition of the attributes of one thing on another thing.[111] Others, again, define superimposition as the error founded on the non-apprehension of the difference of that which is super-imposed from that on which it is superimposed.[1121 Others, again, define it as the fictitious

assumption of attributes contrary to the nature of that thing on which something else is superimposed.[113] But all these definitions agree insofar as they represent superimposition as the apparent presentation of the attributes of one thing in another thing.[114] And therewith agrees also the popular view which is exemplified by expressions such as the following: 'Mother-of-pearl appears like silver,' 'The moon although one only appears as if she were double.' But how is it possible that on the interior Self which itself is not an object there should be superimposed objects and their attributes? For every one superimposes an object only on such other objects as are placed before him (i.e. in contact with his sense-organs), and you have said before that the interior Self which is entirely disconnected from the idea of the Thou (the Non-Ego) is never an object. It is not, we reply, non- object in the absolute sense.[115] For it is the object of the notion of the Ego, and the interior Self is well known to exist on account of its immediate (intuitive) presentation. Nor is it an exceptionless rule that objects can be superimposed only on such other objects as are before us, i.e. in contact with our sense-organs; for non-discerning men superimpose on the ether, which is not the object of sensuous perception, dark-blue color. Hence it follows that the assumption of the Non-Self being superimposed on the interior Self is not unreasonable. This superimposition thus defined, learned men consider to be Nescience [avidyA],[116] and the ascertainment of the true nature of that which is (the Self) by means of the discrimination of that (which is superimposed on the Self), they call Knowledge [vidyA]. There being such knowledge (neither the Self nor the Non- Self) are affected in the least by any blemish or (good) quality produced by their mutual superimposition. The mutual superimposition of the Self and the Non-Self, which is termed Nescience, is the pre-supposition on which there base all the practical distinctions -- those made in ordinary life as well as those laid down by the Veda -- between means of knowledge, objects of knowledge (and knowing persons), and all scriptural texts, whether they are concerned with injunctions and prohibitions (of meritorious and non-meritorious actions), or with final release. -- But how can the means of right knowledge such as perception, inference, &c., and scriptural texts have for their object that which is dependent on Nescience? -- Because, we reply, the means of right knowledge cannot operate unless there be a knowing personality, and because the existence of the latter depends on the erroneous notion that the body, the senses, and so on, are identical with, or belong to, the Self of the knowing person. For without the employment of the senses, perception and the other means of right knowledge cannot operate. And without a basis (i.e. the body) the senses cannot act. Nor does anybody act by means

of a body on which the nature of the Self is not superimposed. Nor can, in the absence of all that, the Self which, in its own nature is free from all contact, become a knowing agent. And if there is no knowing agent, the means of right knowledge cannot operate (as said above). Hence perception and the other means of right knowledge, and the Vedic texts have for their object that which is dependent on Nescience. (That human cognitional activity has for its presupposition the superimposition described above), follows also from the non- difference in that respect of men from animals. Animals, when sounds or other sensible qualities affect their sense of hearing or other senses, recede or advance according as the idea derived from the sensation is a comforting or disquieting one. A cow, for instance, when she sees a man approaching with a raised stick in his hand, thinks that he wants to beat her, and therefore moves away; while she walks up to a man who advances with some fresh grass in his hand. Thus men also - who possess a higher intelligence - run away when they see strong fierce- looking fellows drawing near with shouts and brandishing swords; while they confidently approach persons of contrary appear-ance and behavior. We thus see that men and animals follow the same pattern with reference to the means and objects of knowledge. Now it is well known that the procedure of animals bases on the non-distinction (of Self and Non-Self); we therefore conclude that, as they present the same appear-ances, men also, though distinguished by superior intelligence, proceed with regard to perception and so on, in the same way as animals do; as long, that is to say, as the mutual superimposition of Self and Non-Self lasts. With reference again to that kind of activity which is founded on the Veda (sacrifices and the like), it is true indeed that the reflecting man who is qualified to enter on it, does so not without knowing that the Self has a relation to another world; yet that qualification does not depend on the knowledge, derivable from the Vedanta-texts, of the true nature of the Self as free from all wants, raised above the distinctions of the Brahmana and Kshatriya-classes and so on, transcending transmigratory existence. For such knowledge is useless and even contradictory to the claim (on the part of sacrificers, &c. to perform certain actions and enjoy their fruits). And before such knowledge of the Self has arisen, the Vedic texts continue in their operation, to have for their object that which is dependent on Nescience. For such texts as the following, 'A Brahmana is to sacrifice,' are operative only on the supposition that on the Self are superimposed particular conditions such as caste, stage of life, age, outward circum-stances, and so on. That by superimposition we have to understand the notion of something in some other thing we have already explained. Extra-personal attributes are super-imposed on the

Self, if a man considers himself sound and entire, or the contrary, as long as his wife, children, and so on are sound and entire or not. Attributes of body are super-imposed on the Self, if a man thinks of himself (his Self) as stout, lean, fair, as standing, walking, or jumping. Attributes of the sense-organs, if he thinks 'I am mute, or deaf, or one- eyed, or blind.' Attributes of the internal organ when he considers himself subject to desire, intention, doubt, determin-ation, and so on. Thus the producer of the notion of the Ego (i.e. the internal organ) is superimposed on the interior Self, which, in reality, is the witness of all the modifications of the internal organ, and vice versa the interior Self, which is the witness of everything, is superimposed on the internal organ, the senses, and so on. In this way there goes on this natural beginningless and endless superimposition, which appears in the form of wrong conception, is the cause of individual souls appearing as agents and enjoyers (of results of their actions), and is observed by every one. With a view to freeing one's self from that wrong notion which is the cause of all evil and attaining thereby the know-ledge of the absolute unity of the Self, the study of Vedanta-texts is begun. That all the Vedanta-texts have the mentioned purport we shall show in this so- called shArIraka-mImAMsA < < adhyAsa-bhAShya ends here> >

2.5 Attribution-Retraction:[117] sha.nkara does not accept injunctions for KT, and mentions a traditional method followed by his illustrious predecessors, that of 'Attribution-Retraction' [adhyAropa- apavAda]. This method or its variations have been discussed by modern scholars like Sw. satchidAnandendra (ref 8.3(10)), Richard De Smet, Anantanand Rambachan, Michael of Comans (ref 8.3(11)) et al. The ultimate reality according to Vedanta, is super sensuous and beyond words, beyond the comprehension of mind (TU 2.4.1, 2.9.1). The normal language of nouns, adjectives, verbs and adverbs can describe only the sense objects or a 'state of mind' [vRRitti] through subject-object relationship. Since brahman is neither of these, KT/UP uses the language of negation coupled with indication [laxaNA]. The description that is closest to the nature of brahman is "Existence- Awareness-Bliss" [sat-chit-Ananda][1181 or "Truth-Knowledge- Infinity" [satyam -GYAnam-anantam] (TU 2.1.1). Here these nouns are not properties of the brahman but they indicate the essential nature of brahman co-referentially. These terms individually are negated by saying 'Not this, Not this' because there is no other more appropriate description than this: 'Not this' (BU 2.3.6). Even Consciousness is negated (MAU 7), Existence is denied, and Reality is transcended beyond Being and non-Being by denying the both (BG 13.12). One may then wonder if this perpetual negation ultimately will result in 'absolute non-existence' [shUnya] - denial of substratum reality leading to mAdhyamaka position. sha.nkara asserts that this need not be the case; there has to be an unnegated substratum otherwise what is being negated would assume reality.[1191 He says: as (the Self) cannot be negated, it is left as the remainder (by way of) 'Not this, Not this' so that it (Self) becomes known,[120] and further: 'Not this, Not this' negates all that is super-imposed on Self, along with the mind itself (US 18.25). This attribution-negation process has to happen in a proper, guided manner. Various indicators are used to guide the negation. These indicators through their indicative (implied, secondary) meaning provide the context in which the search for brahman takes place. The method of guided superimposition-negation runs through most of other schemas or stratagems. sha.nkara uses such method in TUBh while discussing the nature (notion) of brahman which is indicated (superimposed) by the words Truth [satyam], Knowledge [GYAnam], and Infinity [anantam]: The word satya by definition negates all things that change. The word GYAna indicates brahman to be sentient and at the same time non- agent. It is non agent when used co-referentially with GYAna and ananta because anantatva [infinitude] rules out knowledge as agent, as

agent has to be separate from both knowledge and instrument of knowledge and infinity does not brook separateness. When all three words are used co-referentially then brahman is indicated by unchanging intelligence or undifferentiated Aware-ness. This then is supposed to become identical with pure Being without change and boundaries. The person who goes through the guideposts of laxaNA-s thus comes closer to the intuition when he uses their secondary meanings along with other superimposed attributes and their implied negation. sha.nkara argues that here the 'primary meaning' [vAchyArtha] of the words 'truth' (factuality) and 'knowledge' (understanding) is not used 'primarily' while describing the brahman. Still the nature of brahman can be intuited because the words satya etc. on account of their being co-referential, are mutually restricted (adjusted) and thereby distinguish brahman from the literal meaning of the word satya etc. and direct the mind towards brahman. Though the terms such as 'undifferentiated Awareness' may come close to the identity of brahman, sha.nkara still insists that this is not the exact definition of brahman. Any term either alone or used in conjunction with other terms like Being, Infinity etc. will only be approximate description of brahman. These words are in reality limiting adjuncts of mind and body (KeUBh 2.1) and they are used as indicators in contextual manner. (Also, see 2.7). It is believed that UP not only teach the existence of Atman = brahman, but also teach how to realize the Self. The method of adhyAropa-apavAda is considered by many to be the main pedagogical method of Advaita.[121] Operationally this method is used for mind- purification. The core of such method is to use guided superimpositions (saMskAra-s) to negate obstructive impressions, tendencies and habits (see 2.8(10)).

2.6 Continuity-Discontinuity: An exegetical scheme in the form of agreement [anvaya] and contrariety [vyatireka] has been discussed by sha.nkara (US 18.96-97, 18.191) and more prominently by sureshvara. In its modified general form, this scheme can be seen as a logical method to find out the dependency relation between two entities by juxtaposing their continuity and discontinuity. While doing so it can apply the criteria of cognition, causality, and constancy to the entity under consideration. As a result four generic types of anvaya-vyatireka reasoning are identified based on: (1) subject [seer or dRRik] and object [seen or dRRishya], (2) cause [kAraNa] and effect [kArya], (3) universals and particulars, (4) common substratum and perishable adjuncts. As illustrated later in dRRik-dRRishya analysis (2.8:4) the pure subject is approached by successively discarding whatever that can be objectified, for what can be objectified cannot be pure subject. Here, Awareness in the role of pure subject persists in the wake of changing states of body-mind complex and in the sublatable states of relative experience (see 2.8:5&6). The second reasoning is illustrated in (2.8:2) where brahman is the only permanently independent entity and everything else is dependent on It as Its effect and hence transitory in nature. The third reasoning observes that the individual changing perceptions cannot exist without the ever present perceptional universals which themselves are superimpositions and need to be negated to reveal the substratum of brahman (2.8:7). The fourth reasoning shows by using the metaphor of pots and temples that the common material cause (earth or clay) and universal base (AkAsha or space) persist through the particu-larized names and forms and their changing states (2.8:8). As seen earlier, exegetical application of adhyAropa-apavAda and anvaya-vyatireka themes is available in the literature of sha.nkara and sureshvara. sureshvara strengthened it by the 'normalization' (NS 3.3) (Also, see 2.7). In general, however, post-sha.nkara development of Advaita was guided more by the defense of Advaita doctrines against the arguments of rival competing schools. In the process; traditional methods took back seat and dialectical polemic came to the fore.[122]

2.7 Method of Indications: According to Advaita-Vedanta the sentential meaning is of three types: (1) primary meaning [vAchyArtha], (2) secondary meaning or indication [lAxyArtha], and (3) suggested tertiary meaning or hint [vya.ngyArtha]. The lAxyArtha, also known as laxaNA is divisible into three groups: (a) 'exclusive indication' [jahat-laxaNA] such as in "There is a village on the Ganga" where the primary meaning Ganga is abandoned to give way to the implied meaning of its bank, (b) 'inclusive indication' [ajahat-laxaNA] such as in "Lamps entered through the door" where the word lamp also includes person or servant carrying the lamp. Thus in ajahat- laxaNA the whole of the vAcyArtha is retained and something more is included into it, and (c) 'exclusive-inclusive indication' [jahat-ajahat laxaNA] where qualified portion of the vAcyArtha is left out, and a portion of it is taken such as in the example of 'That is This Devadatta'. Here 'That' refers to a thing qualified by the past time and (another) place, and 'This' is qualified by the present time and place. Hence two adjectival pronouns referring to the past and the present apply contradictions. Therefore, by abandoning the incompatible indications of 'That' and 'This' the apparent inconsistency is removed, and both of them refer to the same identity of substantiative Devadatta. Rejecting the first two laxaNA-s, later Vedantins accept the third laxaNA and apply it to the prime-sentence [mahAvAkya] "tat tvam asi" [Thou Art That] as an exegetical method. Here That is qualified by omniscience [sarvaGYatva] and Thou is qualified by 'inner organ' [antaHkaraNa]. The sentence how-ever, indicates the identity of That and Thou in their essence, excluding the mutually incompatible components. Since their essential characteristics viz. the 'cosmic awareness' (That) and 'individual awareness' (Thou) cannot be adjectively identical; the incompatible qualifiers the 'cosmic' and the 'individual' are abandoned to maintain the identity. This exegetical scheme can be seen as a part of normalization [sAmAnyAdhikaraNa] process where two things are equated by excluding incompa-tible attributes and retaining their common-compatible attributes to reach their common substratum; e.g. Atman=brahman is the common substratum in Thou and That.[123]

2.8 Illustrations: Following schemes and metaphors discriminate between what is Real and what is relative to illustrate metaphysical principles:

1. Microcosm-Macrocosm Transference [nara- vaishvAnara adhyAropa] [नर-वैश्वानर अध्यारोप] [124] Microcosm - macrocosm theme has been propounded since Vedic times under various names of microcosm (nara, jlva, vyaShTi) and macrocosm (vaishvAnara, nArAyaNa, virATa, samaShTi, puruSha, shiva, Ishvara). The scheme transfers structure and properties of the microcosm onto the cosmic macrocosm - an equivalent of the cosmic Being as the all pervasive single deity. This pantheistic form is negated to 'see' the Absolute as the ultimate substratum.[125] In RV 10.90 and BU 1.1.1 the analogy between soul (micro -cosm) and Cosmic 'puruSha' (macrocosm) is sought to be established by transferring the microcosm properties onto macrocosm. In BU 1.2.1-7 the superimposition is described as the process of Creation whereby microcosm (sacrificial horse) is related to cosmos. In MU 2.1.4 similar transfer-ence is seen. Microcosm-Macrocosm transference is the oldest monist theme of the Veda.

2. Effect-Cause Discrimination [kArya-kAraNa viveka] [कार्य-कारण विवेक] [126]

As stated earlier in 2.3, effect pre-exists in the cause as a potentiality. All 'names & forms' [nAmarUpa] are essentially effects and are no more than 'appearance' of the 'first cause' (brahman) similar to a rope appearing to be a snake in the darkness. This appearance is called vivarta; it is neither different from nor identical with brahman and as such is inexplicable. When the vivarta is negated by the cessation of Ignorance what remains is brahman. Causality can be seen as dependency relation through anvaya- vyatireka. For example, the observation "A exists, B occurs (anvaya) and A does not exist, B does not occur (vyatireka)" is indicative of cause-effect behavior. Though such behavioral indicators for the material cause [upAdAna kAraNa], instrument cause [sahakArI- kAraNa], efficient cause [nimitta-kAraNa], and functional cause [samavAya or vyApAra-kAraNa] etc. can be formulated, dependencies in general are more complex as they involve multiple entities and their interdependence as well as 'external' dependence. Given any set of interdependent entities it is possible to establish

dependence on external entities and then include them in existing set to form a new expanded set. In principle, the limiting position of such an infinite expansion should map the totality of the Universe in space and time. Space and time themselves are not independent entities as they are dependent on empirical cognition; they are effect of Ignorance (superimposition)[127]. Only One (non-dual), totally independent entity (brahman) is postulated which is beyond the world processes and hence acosmic.[128] The process of forming & expanding the entity set by tracing dependency[1291 should trace the material cause of Universe. sha.nkara conceives the unmanifested [avyakta] to be the seed [bIja] of the Universe. It is the essence of unmanifest (unevolved) name-and-forms[1301 and the combination of all the powers of causes & effects (BUBh 4.1.2, 4.4.17). Elsewhere he says: the seed- potency [blja-shakti] is of the 'nature of Ignorance' [avidyAtmikA] and is scorched (negated) by the Knowledge (BSBh 1.4.3).

3. "Creation-Sustenance-Dissolution" Discrimination [utpatti-

विवेक] [131] sthiti-vilaya viveka] ["उत्पत्ति-स्थिति-विलय"

The whole world is said to proceed from the brahman, is maintained, and then dissolved in It. Figuratively, It is said to be the material as well as efficient cause of the world. The world in its original (unevolved or dissolved) state is seen as a seed [bIja] of nAmarUpa which is unmanifest [avyakta]. This blja is seen as the material and efficient cause in notional association with Ishvara [$]. This seed itself, on the criteria of 'constancy' & 'causality', is a super-imposition of Ignorance. It is negated along with all the relative reality to reach the absolute substratum, 'the one only without dual' [ekamevAdvitlya] brahman. In reality there is nothing except brahman, and 'creation, sustenance and dissolution' is mithyA. There are three main ways of understanding creation in the Advaita tradition viz. ajAti vAda[132](no creation)[अजाति वाद], sRRiShTi-dRRiShTi vAda(what has already been created is perceived)[सृष्टि-दृष्टि वाद], and dRRiShTi-sRRiShTi vAda[133](what is being created is perceived)[दृष्टि-सृष्टि वाद]. The first one is the absolute view while other two are relative views. (Also, see 2.3 and 3.6.2). Creation (of cosmos and souls) is a 'matter of fact' at the relative level and human mind seeks the cause of this fact. The brahman being acausal, another notional entity called mAyA [HRI][134] is conceived as the cause of the creation. mAyA however, cannot belong to brahman because brahman is attributeless; mAyA cannot

exist because only brahman exists. Still, mAyA's existence cannot be denied because its manifestation is experienced. So, mAyA is said to be inexplicable (anirvachanlya). The vivaraNa tradition identifies metaphysical Ignorance (avidyA) with mAyA which is said to have two powers: (1) projecting power (vixepa shakti) which projects (creates) the subtle bodies and cosmos, (2) veiling power (AvaraNa shakti) which conceals the reality of brahman from the souls which operate at the relative level. mAyA thus acts both as the bridge and the insulator between relative level and absolute level adding to its inexplicable character.

1. Subject-Object Discrimination [dRRik-dRRishya viveka] [ą- दृश्य विवेक] [135] Empirical knowledge is seen as a process involving subject-object duality. In the 'sentient being' [jIva] the "apparent mixing of the subject and the object" [adhyAsa] is (due to) Ignorance. Knowledge of Self is the process of 'removing innumerable superpositions' of the ego notion that will lead to the ultimate subject. Ultimate subject (Witness, sAxin) is the Consciousness or Self, which does not have empirical or phenomenal properties; otherwise it will be an object of cognition and knowledge.[136] sha.nkara argues that sAxin perceives the entire movement of the mind as an object and hence It is transcendentally changeless. The changing cognitive mind-states require an unchanging homogeneous substratum to capture the entirety of the experience. At that plane there is no difference between perceiver and perception; both are figurative. In reality there is only eternal Awareness or Atman.[137] The sAxin is without any 'agentship' or 'attachment'. It is the basis of all experience. It is immutable [axara] like a 'space within pot' [ghatAkAsha] is immutable even after destruction of the pot. Here, sAxin is only an 'appearance' of that limitless undifferentiated Consciousness which is the common substratum of sentient beings as well as 'non-sentient beings' [padArtha or vastu]. In this sense It is the inmost Self of all perceiving souls and perceived objects and is the only unchanging and independent entity which persists amongst the transience of the world. This subject-object relationship is sometimes expressed in another way.[138] Any entity has five attributes: "existence, cognition, attraction, name, and form" [asti, bhAti, priya, nAma, rUpa]. Of these the first three are the co-referencing indicators of brahman corresponding to Truth [sat], Aware-ness [chit], and Bliss [Ananda] while the last two are the manifestation of mAyA. The brahman

[Self] is the sub-stratum of all entities while the nAmarUpa-s are the differentiators of objects. In sentient beings Self appears as sAxin, the pure subject while names and forms represent body- mind adjuncts. When these adjuncts are negated, that is when sAxin is decoupled from the names and forms; sAxin remains 'as it is' as Self - like a space is unaffected after destructions of pots etc.

5. Five Sheaths' Discrimination: [pa.nchakosha viveka] [44T8T विवेक] [139] The sentient being (soul) is made of five sheaths (1-outer body, 2- vital force, 3-mind, 4-intellect, 5-bliss) arranged with increasing interiority and subtleness. Each of these sheaths can be known as an object and hence can be negated to Know the inmost Self, the unknown Knower. This Knower is called sAxin (pure Awareness as the Witness). It persists unchanged through all the body processes and changing conditions of the outer sheaths. The sAxin is appearance of Atman (Self) which is nothing but brahman, the acosmic substratum of cosmos.

6. Three States' Discrimination: [avasthAtraya viveka] [अवस्थात्रय विवेक] [140] At the relative level deep sleep, dream, and waking states are experienced. Each one of them is sublated by the other and there persists in each of them Ignorance as well as sAxi-chetA or sAxin(Witness-Consciousness)[f&]. In deep sleep (sushuptl), the sAxin is said to experience (witnesses) only mUlAvidyA of essential body functions and not tUlAvidyA, the derived Ignorance of souls in the form of subsequent superpositions. Whatsoever that may be; there is no perception in the deep-sleep because internal psychic organs are inactive.[141] The Self in this state is a mass of mere awareness (praGYAna-ghana (MAU 5), ghan-apraGYA (GK 1.1)). The soul does not perceive the external objects, not because Consciousness ceases to be. It is because of Consciousness (sAxin) that one denies the existence of external sense-objects (US prose 2.90-93). Deep sleep is said to be the seed (bIja) of the other two empirical states (US 16.18). Appearance of Self in this state is called prAGYa. It is also called avyAkRRita or unmanifested (US 17.65). Interestingly & significantly, elsewhere in US (1.18) sha.nkara uses the term avyAkRRita nAmarUpa (unmanifest name & form) to denote the 'seed of the Universe' (jagad-bIjabhUtayoH). He calls it 'indefinable as identical with or different from' (tattvAnyatvAbhyAmanirvachanlyayoH) the Self and 'cognizable by Self (alone)' (svayaMvedya). What is called as deep-sleep (suShupti), Ignorance (aGYAnam), or Darkness (tamas) is the seed of waking

and dream states. It is burnt by the fire of Self (Knowledge) and no more produces any effect like a burnt seed that does not germi-nate (US 17.26). This seed time and again evolves into the three states one after another where Self in the garb of mAyA (mAyAvyAtmA) appears to be many like a reflection of sun in waters (US 17.27-28). [142] The fourth state, called turlya is the changeless state which cannot be sublated by any other state and which is beyond time, space and causation. It is the direct experience of acosmic brahman, the state of Liberation. In other three states, sAxi-chaitanya exists as individuated jIva-sAxin which is essentially cosmic Awareness (sarva-sAxi, sarva-dRRik or Ishvara-sAxin). The turlya state is distinguished axiologically from the ordinary 'death'. Prior to death; the jIva-sAxin is associated with karma-phala due to the Ignorance of jlva. This results in transmigration. In turlya, the individuated jIva -sAxin assumes the original sarva-sAxatva.

7. Universal-Particular Discrimination [samanta-vishiShTha viveka] [समंत-विशिष्ठ विवेक] [143] One can only hear a particular sound when the drum is beaten or a conch is blown or when a lute is played. This is 'the sounds of that particular instrument'. However, when we perceive such a class of sounds we know that we are 'hearing a sound'. This 'hearing of sound' is general and universal. The particularized sound has no separate exist-ence other than the principle of hearing, the universal sound. In the same way, the particulars of touch, color, test, and odor do not exist apart from the universals to which they respectively belong. We can say by analogy that none of the particulars found in the world during its period of manifestation exists independently of the greatest and all inclusive universal, the saguNa (qualitative) brahmanwhich is all actions, all desires, all smells, all essences etc.(सर्वकर्मा सर्वकामा सर्वगंध: सर्वरस :.... ) as described in CU 3.14.2&4. The same universal is figuratively described in BG 13.13 as "on all sides It has hands and feet; on all sides eyes, heads &mouths etc.(सर्वतः पाणिपादं सर्वतोऽक्षिशिरोमुखं ... ). This perceptional universal is superimposed to reject insentient and finite qualities in the saguNa brahman. The Absolute (nirguNa brahman) is beyond the universals and particulars. It is the negation of both perceptual and conative qualities of the saguNa brahman; it is attributeless and acosmic as indicated in BU 3.8.8, KU 1.3.15, MAU 7. It is the undifferentiated, limitless, unchanging, and acausal Conscious-ness which is the Self of All.

8. Principle of Common Substratum [sAmAnyAdhikaraNa nyAya] [सामान्याधिकरण न्याय]: The pot [ghaTa] and the temple [maTha] have common substratum (space) and common material base (earth). By negating the limiting adjuncts and particularized forms of pot and temple, we find the undifferentiated space and the material earth. Similarly brahman and indeterminate mAyA are common substratum and material base respectively of all appearances of names and forms. Similar 'ghaTa and ghaTAkAsha' metaphor is used in GK 3.3-3.7 to draw a number of conclusions: pot-spaces merge in space after destruction of pots, likewise individual souls merge in Self (GK 3.4); single pot- space is associated with smoke etc likewise individual soul has his own mind-states (GK 3.5); individual name-form-functions differ, but space does not differ; same applies to soul (GK 3.6); pot-space is neither a modification or part of space, likewise individual soul is neither a modification or a part of Self (GK 3.7). Pot-space analogy illustrates the concepts which are unique to KA[144] in comparison to other Vedanta schools: (1) The pot is a limiting adjunct of space; similarly Body-Mind- Intellect (BMI) is a limiting adjunct of the Self. (2) The space limited within pot is an illusion. In reality the space is not limited; it only appears to be limited. Both the pot-space and outside space are one and the same. Similarly Self (Atman) that falsely appears to be bound to BMI is nothing but brahman in the absolute sense. (3) The space is not affected in any way due the limiting adjuncts; similarly Self remains untainted by the BMI. <The terms like "illusion (AbhAsa)" and "adjuncts (upAdhi)" have contextual meaning and nuances that differ in some of the sub- schools of Advaita (ibid.)> 9. Ocean-Waves Simile [samudra-tara.nga nyAya] [समुद्र-तरंग न्याय]: Each wave of the ocean is perceived separately and can be distinguished from other waves. But all waves are water only, and are not separate from the ocean. The difference between them is only apparent. Similarly all the innumer-able jIva-s that appear in this universe, though apparently they are perceived to be separate from one another, are in reality one with the brahman. There is no difference or diversity. The sea-wave-foam simile is used by sha.nkara in BSBh 2.1.13, while the 'water-foam' simile is used by him in US 1.1.19 to illustrate the mithyatva of world process.

10. Two Thorns' Simile [kaNTakadvaya nyAya] [कंटकद्वय न्याय] [145]: A thorn stuck in the leg is removed by another one and then both are thrown away. Similarly, impurity is removed with the help of prescribed purificatory karma; and after realizing the Self, karma is abandoned. Prescribed karma superimposes (inculcates) virtuous habits and values to cancel vices and impurities. Purified mind free of impurities is the ready receptor of Knowledge. After realization of Self, karma and associated habits become redundant; they are abandoned figuratively. After the attainment of Know-ledge, instruments of knowledge such as Veda and shAstra too become redundant and are figuratively abandoned. The "inculcation of karma and its (figurative) abandonment once the purpose is achieved" may be interpreted as a kind of adhyAropa-apavAda. [146]

3. ignorance and illusion

Knowledge (GYAna) is the realization of Self that is attribute-less, independent, unsublatable, and acausal; while Ignorance (avidyA) [147] is attributed, dependent, sublatable and causal. In Advaita Vedanta, there is unanimity about brahman; but the same cannot be said about Ignorance; particularly, about its locus [Ashraya] and its substantiality [bhAvarUpatva]. Ignorance is said to have following features: (1) It is without beginning [anAdi],[148] (2) It 'can be subjectively terminated by Knowledge' [GYAnanivRRitya] leading to Liberation [moxa],[1491 (3) It is 'pos-itive (causal)' [bhAvarUpa], (4) It is 'qualitatively three-fold' [tri-guNAtmaka],[1501 (5) It is inexplicable [anirvachanIya],[1511 (6) It is indeterminate (mithyA), [152] (7) It has two powers: (a) power of concealment [AvaraNa] and (b) power of projection [vixepa], (8) Its locus [Ashraya] is either jlva or brahman. In the preamble of his BSBh, sha.nkara equates Ignorance [Nescience] with Superimposition [adhyAsa] which is said to be the basis of all our empirical activities. At times however, sha.nkara seems to suggest Ignorance to be the root cause of the world. At other times this causality is only figurative, of the type of rope-snake metaphor where rope is seen as a snake due to ignorance (darkness); and when the knowledge of reality occurs snake vanishes. The metamorphosis of Ignorance as a positive causal power projecting the world phenomenon mainly happened in post-sha.nkara period while defending Advaita principles against rival schools. In that role Ignorance is known as mUlAvidyA, is synonymous with mAyA, and is of indeterminate reality grade.

3.1 Ignorance and Illusion: Advaita acknowledges more than one reality domains: (1) Absolute [pAramArthika] state of the Liberated soul; (2) Empirical [vyAvahArika] states of soul's wakeful experience; as also soul's other recurring or incidental mental [mAnasika] states such as: (2a) dreams, (2b) sleep [sushuptI], (2c) other unconscious states. (see BSBh 3.2.10); (3) Illusory [prAti-bhAsika] states where there is erroneous wakeful experience which is negated by more valid experience, such as rope mistaken for snake is revealed on proper scrutiny. Sometimes, domain (2a) is clubbed with domain (3) and the combined one is known as prAtibhAsika in the sense of subjective reality that is contradicted by more valid & wakeful reality. Ultimately, there is subjectivity even in the wakeful experience, however, this wakeful subjectivity can be shared (communicated) and

validated on a 'moment to moment basis' with other sentient beings. Its 'quality of experience' (qualia) is different than that of other states. As seen in 2.4, illusory experience is a 'perceptual error' - 'obfuscation of the substratum reality' [AvaraNa] or 'projection of a different reality' [vixepa]. It is due to defects or limitation of cognizing apparatus or due to inherent nature of cognitive process. This illusion is said to be of two kinds:

1. 'Objective Superimposition' [arthAdhyAsa]: It confuses one object of cognition with another, such as perceiving the rope as a snake, post as a man, nacre as a silver etc. This is mainly an epistemic, non-sensory (indrlyAjanya) confusion, though it has sensory element.

2. Attributive Superimposition [GYAnAdhyAsa]: It confuses attributes of one cognition with another, such as colors in the clear crystal, shadows on the wall, blurred images, smallness of distant objects, sky color, apparent stillness of rotating wheel etc. This confusion is mainly indrlyajanya (sensory) though it may have non-sensory element. Illusions have always some extra-mental substratum and differ from pure memory, dreams, and hallucinations which are mental [mAnasika] phenomena inasmuch as there is no direct contact with extra-mental object. All illusions have hierarchy of supports. In a particular context, the lowest (ultimate or most real) support is known as substratum [adhiShThana] different-iated from the support(s) [AdhAra-s] of superimposed object(s) of lower reality. So, in nacre- silver illusion nacre is the sub-stratum while silver is the support. [153] Even in so called pure mental phenomenon there is some support for mental objects. Various Indic schools formulated their own illusion theories, termed as khyAti (ibid.). The Advaita's theory of illusion is known as anirvachanlya khyAti; it holds that the illusory object is an instantaneous apparent creation of ignorance [aGYAna] associated with substratum which is but vaguely perceived. This ignorance is of indeterminate reality. Empirical experience itself is a jumble of superpositions; the fundamental one is that of body-mind complex on Self. It persists throughout life-time of jlva as ego (aham pratyaya) Superpositions of sensory perceptions are like a fresco drawn on the Self (see PD 6.1-10). Some of the superpositions take forms of impressions [saMskAra-s]; some others becomes propensities [vAsanA-s] or memories [smaraNa-s]. The natural occurence of superposition manifesting as natural tendencies may be termed as sahaja-svabhAva, dharma or naisargika-vyavahAra. Self is the 'ultimate substratum'

[adhiShThAna] of all experiences. At the cosmic level it is indeterminate mAyA which hides brahman and projects multiplicity of names and forms. The soul due to Ignorance is not able to apprehend the ultimate substratum that is brahman. Though traditionally illusion is understood to be an error in empirical cognition that can be corrected by valid means of knowledge, after critical analysis we find that our so called validated cognition itself is erroneous due to limitations of superimposed body-mind complex. The basic cognitive error (that is, primary Illusion,[154] fundamental Ignorance or Nescience) cannot be corrected by mere routine applications of relative means of knowledge but requires something more (see Ch-4).

3.2 Illusion and Creation: In the first Chapter of BSBh sha.nkara clarifies that brahman is known to have two aspects - one as qualified by the adjuncts in the form of the varieties of modification of name and form and the other free of all adjuncts (BSBh 1.1.12). In the second Chapter, he points out that brahman cannot undergo change, and explains (BSBh 2.1.14) that the one becoming many as nAmarUpa is only an 'appearance' conjured up by Ignorance; and Ishvara is relevant only in the relative plane. In the absolute plane, there are no empirical transactions. Elsewhere (BUBh 3.8.12, AUBh 3.1.3) he says that the brahman, devoid of all attributes and actions, by the association of the adjuncts of unlimited know-ledge (mAyA or prakRRiti), becomes the omniscient Ishvara and is known as antaryAmi by virtue of his being activator and controller of the activity of the unmanifested seed of the universe. When it has the adjunct of the individual body-mind, characterized by ignorance, desire and action, it is called the 'transmigrating soul' [saMsArl jIva]. At the absolute level there is no transmigration, law of action, worldly affairs, and liberation - the very basis of the Advaita theology. Only brahman exists. This brahman is different than mAdhyamaka's shUnya in one important respect. It is the substratum of the Universe including sentient beings. The mAdhyamaka seeks to explain the world phenomenon 'from within', while Advaita seeks to explain it taking recourse to acosmic Noumenon relegating the world to the ontological level of neither real nor unreal, a manifestation of meta-physical Ignorance. This Ignorance gave rise to three world views in post sha.nkara period: (1) Illusion Theory [AbhAsa vAda], (2) Delimitation Theory [avachCheda vAda], and (3) Reflection Theory [pratibiMba vAda]. These were developed as a part of what we now know respectively as vArtika, bhAmatI, and vivaraNa traditions[155]. In AbhAsa vAda[आभास वाद], the Creator is God [Ishvara], constituted by the 'semblance of brahman [chidAbhAsa] in the 'cosmic adjunct' mAyA. Similarly, the soul [jIva] is constituted by the chidAbhAsa in the 'individual adjunct' (buddhi). In avachCheda vAda[अवच्छेद वाद], the Creator is God which is brahman delimited by the cosmic adjunct mAyA. Similarly soul is brahman delimited by the 'individual adjunct' (buddhi). In pratibiMba vAda[प्रतिबिंब वाद], brahman adventitiously acquires the status of prototype[1561 [biMba] called God. Its reflection in the 'individual adjunct' (buddhi) is soul. What appears as a 'reflection' is brahman itself. In AbhAsa vAda, God and soul are semblance of conscious-ness respectively in mAyA and individual mind, while in other two schools; God's consciousness and soul's consciousness are non-different from

brahman. That is to say, in reflection and delimitation theories; there is no secondary consciousness of a lower order. Even so God is said to be omniscient and omnipotent due to His command over mAyA while the soul is said to be limited in knowledge and potency because it is deluded by mAyA. Souls, on account of superimposition which is (caused by) Ignorance, regard the very brahman to be the differentiated knower-consciousnesses of self and to be the omniscient consciousness of Ishvara. This difference between "illusion as effect of superimposition" and "illusion as super-imposition" may appear as mere play of words, but this subtlety differentiates the 'illusion' of vivaraNa and bhAmatl traditions from that of AbhAsa. The basic metaphorized processes viz of semblance (AbhAsa), delimitation (avachCheda) and reflection (biMba-pratibiMba) are inexplicable in terms of their agency (kartRRitva), but all of them impart notionally or otherwise, omniscience and omni-potence to God. Again, in all these processes mAyA is the common cosmic adjunct (upAdhi). Her ontological status as well as her relationship with brahman is undefinable, but it is natural to see omnipotent and omniscience God in control of mAyA to be the Creator. sha.nkara provides the guideposts of 'origination-creation' in his commentaries. In adhyAsa bhAShya, he equates Ignorance with super- imposition. However, at places he equates Ignorance with seed potency of nAmarUpa in the names of 'Unmanifest' [avyakta], mAyA, seed-state [bIjAvasthA] etc. and reiterates brahman's agent-less Lordship over avyakta or mAyA.[157] Some times he uses the term nAmarUpa itself to denote seed of the cosmos (nAmarUpayoH jagadbIjabhUtayoH) (CUBh 8.14.1) as the unmanifested primary state of cosmos. In US (prose 1.18-20) sha.nkara says that cosmos - space, air, fire, water, earth etc and then flora-fauna, food, embryo, sentient beings etc. all evolved from 'unmanifested, unevolved name and form' [UNF] [avyAkRRita nAmarUpa] in a gradual, cascading and collaborative manner.[158] sha.nkara anticipates the difficulty of accepting a cause other than brahman - it leads to dualism. Hence he describes the UNF as anirvachanlya [indescribable]. He is also careful not to define UNF as an independent material cause of the universe by characterizing it as abiding in the Self (brahman). On one hand he stresses UNF's difference from brahman and on the other hand he asserts that brahman's inscrutable power is the cause of nAmarUpa. He uses the simile of 'clear water' and 'dirty foam' that arises from clear water. In ref 8.3(16) Mayeda speculates that the word dirt, by its analogy with Ignorance, might have prompted sha.nkara's disciple padmapAda to take Ignorance as the material cause of the universe. In the context of creation, sha.nkara also quotes the aupaniShad position that brahman, after producing the body, entered in the name and form

of the body as Atman.[159] Therefore brahman is Atman; this is one way of approaching the identity Atman= brahman. In post-sha.nkara Advaita, mAyA plays a more prominent role. She brings forth the universe with movable and immovable (objects); acts as 'projecting power' [vixepa shakti] and the veiling power [AvaraNa shakti]. The projecting power produces everything from subtle body to the gross universe. The veiling power conceals the distinction between real perceiver (Witness or sAxin) and the perceived objects which are cognized within one's own body (everything from ego to the gross body). It also conceals the distinction between brahman and the phenomenal world which is perceived outside one's own body. Thus, mAyA makes the non-dual Atman= brahman appear as the phenomenal Universe (ref. DDV 13-15). From the absolute level, the attributeless brahman is neither the 'intelligent cause' [nimitta kAraNa] nor the 'material cause' [upAdAna kAraNa] of the universe.[1601 There is no creation at all. From the relative level the intelligent cause of creation is the qualified [saguNa] brahman with mAyA as its upAdhi. mAyA is the material cause of creation, in the sense of seed of nAma-rUpa evolving into manifested nAmarUpa and being superimposed [adhyAsita] on nirguNa brahman. sha.nkara's description of the soul seems to be the fore- runner of all the three Creation views. He talks of the soul as being lodged in the cavity of intellect - as perceived in the cavity of intellect and possessing such distinctions as being a seer, a thinker, a knower etc. (TUBh 2.6.1). He then talks of brahman conforming to upAdhi-s like the space conforming to pots, jars, etc. (BSBh 1.2.14). The example of space in pot, jar, cave etc. is also given for the conditioning of the consc-iousness by the intellect whereas at other places he talks of the intellect as being pervaded by the 'semblance of witness-consciousness' [draShTrAbhAsa] (US 12.1), or the modification of the intellect being pervaded by the 'reflection of conscious-ness' [chaitanya-pratibiMba] (US 5.4). In BUBh 1.4.7, he says that Atman is perceived in the mind as a reflection of sun etc. in water and the like. 3.3 Illusion and Self: Even though the origins of these metaphors and associated prakriyA-s of illusion, reflection, and delimitation can be traced in sha.nkara's commentaries; his preference seems to be in favor of the 'semblance or false appearance of the Self [chidAbhAsa]. In fact in all probability, it was sha.nkara who introduced the concept of AbhAsa while explaining the relationship between the Self [Atman] and the 'inner organ' [antaHkaraNa] in the act of perception.[161] He uses the term both as reflection and as false appearance. When AbhAsa means only reflection, he uses the terms pratibiMba, pratichChAyA, and ChAyA.[162] He says, when the

'reflection of Consciousness' [chaitanya-pratibiMba] pervades the buddhi which is by nature unconscious; it appears to be endowed with action, and appears as perceiver (US 5.4), just as torches etc. appear to be possessed of power of burning (on account of there being light in them) (US 18.71). The soul is not the Atman (at the relative level). On account of the constant proximity of the Atman (pure awareness) the ego becomes its semblance (US 18.26-27). After pervading and taking the forms of external objects, the intellect becomes, as it were, an illuminator due to Atman's reflection in it and thus perceives external objects (US 18.155-157). Just as the face is different than its reflection in mirror, Atman is different from Its reflection in intellect (US 18.32-33), and the reflection is by nature unreal (US 18.40-46). Atman's perceiver-ship means not that Atman is the agent of action of perceiving, but that reflection of the Atman is the enabler of perception by simply being in vRRitti (state of mind-intellect). Atman does not do anything; It simply exists. Following are the examples from sha.nkara's commentaries: 1. "That (brahman),having created (that) entered into that very thing -'तत्सृष्ट्वा तदेवानुप्राविशत्' is discussed (TUBh 2.6.1). One of the suggestions discussed is,"the entry may be like that of reflections of the sun etc in water". sha.nkara comments that the entry is not actual entry; it has entered, as it were; that is, it is perceived within the cavity of intellect, to be in possession of such distinctions as being a seer, a hearer, a thinker, a knower etc. The idea of an entry is 'imagined' inasmuch as brahman has no attributes, It cannot be realized elsewhere; brahman is recognized only through Its association with the mind, since the mind has proximity to the Self and has the nature of illumination like the Self. (Just as the mind is mithyA, the reflection of brahman in the mind (intellect) is also mithyA, i.e. the consciousness of the mind is of a lower order of reality than the brahman-consciousness; it is an illusion [AbhAsa] of brahma-chaitanya). 2. To the query "Is it not incongruous for the omniscient Deity, not being a saMsArl, to deliberately wish and enter into the body and subject Itself to sorrow?" sha.nkara answers: As the Up. states expressly, the 'entry' is in the form of several souls. A soul is merely a semblance of the Deity. It is like the reflection of a person that appears to have entered into a mirror and like the sun in water etc. The contact of the Deity with the intellect results in a 'semblance of consciousness' [chaitanya AbhAsa]. The Deity does not Itself become connected with the human happiness, sorrow etc. (CUBh 6.3.2). 3. The Self is viewer of two kinds of vision - ordinary and real. Ordinary vision is a mode of the mind; it arises as a reflection of

the Self. It has a beginning and an end (BUBh 3.4.2). (As such ordinary vision is unreal; only a semblance of vision - an illusion). 4. In the dialog between maitreyI and yAGYavalkya (BUBh 2.4.12-13), there is this discussion about Self. The seer yAGYavalkya tells maitreyI,"In the one who is freed of the body- mind complex, there is no more consciousness". In response maitreyI says, "Here you have confused me, sir, by saying that after death there is no more consciousness (contrary to what you have described earlier - Self as undifferentiated Consciousness, is endless and infinite)". sha.nkara explains in the name of yAGYavalkya: "I did not attribute them (endlessness, infinitude) to the same entity. You have mistaken the same entity to have opposite attributes. What I said was this: When the individual ego which is superimposed by Ignorance and is connected with the body-mind is destroyed by Knowledge, the particular awareness connected with the body-mind and consisting of false notion is destroyed on the destruction of the limiting adjuncts (body-mind), just as reflection of moon and the reflected light etc is destroyed when their support, water etc. are destroyed. There is however, no destruction of the acosmic Self, the endless Awareness, just as there is no destruction of the real moon etc." (The empirical aware-ness is only an appearance which is different than the Self or pure undifferentiated Awareness; this appearance of particularized awareness is destroyed after death; not the pure Awareness or Self)". 5. It is to be understood that this soul is only a semblance of paramAtmA like the sun in water (BSBh 2.30.50). 6. A clear crystal appears colored because of the external adjunct or other conditioning factors. Its true nature can be known by valid means of knowledge. Similarly individual soul mixed up with adjuncts of body, mind and intellect appears to acquire adventitious properties. When the soul acquires 'four-fold means' [sAdhana-chatuShTaya], purified mind; and alongside applies right methods of hearing, pondering, and intense meditation; there may spring the Knowledge of Self (BSBh 1.3.18).

3.4 vArtikaTradition [वार्तिक संप्रदाय]: According to its protagonist sureshvara; brahman is non-dual, eternal, changeless and is neither cause nor effect. It has no parts. There is no material external to brahman working on which brahman can create anything. brahman has no organs of perception and is devoid of intellect, desire and will. To talk of creation of the universe by brahman of such a nature is illogical.[163] For sureshvara, Ignorance is the absence of Knowledge and effect thereof. Ignorance is established due to lack of contemplation. Its seat is the Self and it manifests itself as immediate experience. When Ignorance is destroyed the whole world is destroyed and is turned into pure consciousness (BUBhV 1.4.1329). The sole cause of superimposition is Ignorance, which means 'I do not know'. It is established only through one's own experience of it like the owl's experience of night by day (TUBhV 2.176). One who wishes to see Ignorance by means of Knowledge is like one hoping to see the darkness in the depths of a cave with a lamp (meaning Ignorance is destroyed by Knowledge like darkness is destroyed by lamp). Whatever appears in this world as non-Self is a result of Ignorance. Knowledge has only one form, that of the Self. Ignorance has no other nature but failure to apprehend the Self. Ignorance is non-Knowledge in the sense of opposite of Knowledge (TUBhV 2.177-179). sureshvara does not distinguish lack of knowledge, wrong knowledge, and doubt as separate metaphysical entities; he postulates them together as one metaphysical entity - absence of Knowledge or Ignorance (TUBhV 1.4.440). The whole world of duality is per se endless, in that it rests on bare Ignorance of the non-dual Self as the "silver rests on the ignorance of the nacre". Hence it is Ignorance of the Self which is the cause of all evil (NS 1 intro.). Ignorance of Self is precondition for this magic show of duality and brahman is the cause 'mediately' through that (BUBhV 1.4.371). The world which is composed of names and forms has no existence of its own. Absolute (brahman) is the only pure existence. The relative existence of all phenomenal things proceed from the eternal Ishvara. Everything has its being in the being of Self. The names and forms - ahaMkAra (ego) and other objects - are superimposed on the transcendental Absolute. The 'reality of the gross and the subtle pheno-menon' [vyAvahArika satya] and illusions like mirage [prAti- bhAsika satya] have sprung from Ignorance.[164] The objects cannot exist outside Awareness nor are they identical to Awareness. Thus duality is difficult to understand (durbodha). It is neither real nor unreal (mithyAsiddha). It is only an appearance - product of delusion (mohamUlam). (NS 2.44-45).

According to sureshvara, the cause of the universe is not nirguNa brahman but Isvara, constituted by the semblance of brahma- chaitanyam in mAyA, which is mithyA. The reality is brahman as Existence. The names and forms displayed by mAyA are mithyA - superimposed on brahman. Ishvara who is omniscient and omnipotent is the intelligent cause of creation. mAyA defies understanding. It cannot be said to be non-existent because it appears. It cannot be said to be existent because it is sublated. We cannot say that it is different from brahman because brahman being non-dual, there is no second entity. Nor can we say that it is non-different from brahman, because brahman is its locus. It is mithyA. It is beginningless (in the sense that its cause and beginning is not in space and time) (ref BUBh-sv[165]). Ignorance - its content and locus: For sureshvara, it is the Self alone which is both the seat and the object of Ignorance. In NS 3.1 (intro) he argues that Self obviously is not identical with Ignorance which obscures the Knowledge and veils the Self. Nor is Self the effect of Ignorance since Self is eternal and unchanging. Self has self-sustaining independent existence. This implies that Self can be the seat of Ignorance and it is not the other way round. At the relative level Self appears to be differentiated in knower, knowledge, and known due to mere Ignorance just as it is mere Ignorance due to which 'rope appears as a snake' - the rope and Self in reality are quite unaffected. At another place[1661 he opines that at the absolute level, Ignorance simply does not exist and the notion that Ignorance has its seat in Knowledge is only imagined in Ignorance. The following extracts show that sureshvara is an advocate of AbhAsa vada:

1. Soul is a "semblance of brahma-chaitanyam" [chit-AbhAsa] in the intellect. AbhAsa is different from the original though it resembles the original (BUBhV). 2. The non-dual Seer (Self) appears to be many in several bodies, because of the presence of the internal organ, just as the sun appears to be many in different water vessels (NS 2.47). 3. Just as in the case of fire and wood, the object and the burning agent exist together in the same place, the mind and Atman exist together. The mind which is a product of Ignorance, undergoes modification due to its relation with external objects and there arises the 'I-notion' in it for delimiting the modification as such and such. The mind, being delimited by the I-notion becomes an object directly to the 'reflected consciousness' [chidAbhAsa] of which the 'immutable' Atman is the (figurative) cause (NS 3.60).[167]

4. The body, the senses, the mind and determinative modes of the intellect are negated as not-Self, because they are perceived and are subject to origination and cessation. The internal organ which has the I-notion can be objecti-fied and appears-disappears; it is also, therefore, not-Self [anAtmA] (NS 3.82). 5. The intellect which contains the semblance of Atman is the agent [kartA]; Self is not agent, because it is immutable (NS 2.63). I-notion is sublatable; it is there in waking and dream state but not in the deep sleep. It cannot be brahman as it is, but Its appearance.

Reflection is taken here as an illusion in a primary sense (as AbhAsa). In schools of vivaraNa and bhAmatl this reflection is real in primary sense and is illusion in a secondary sense as an effect of superimposition. Finally, the liberal pedagogical approach of sureshvara can be seen from his statement: "whichever way men come to realize the Self would be a good way" (BUBhV 1.4.402)

3.5 bhAmatITradition [भामती संप्रदाय]: sha.nkara's elder contemporary maNDana mishra articulated some of the Advaita opinions prevalent at his times in brahmasiddhi, an influential treatise on Advaita Vedanta. Another well known commentator vAchaspati mishra[1681 synthesized some of the opinions of maNDana in his own commentary on BSBh. This commentary of vAchaspati is titled bhAmatI [BH].[169] It posits an influential view within Advaita tradition in the name of bhAmatI school. It assumes soul as the locus of Ignorance and incorporates 'delimitation theory' vAchaspati defines truth & reality as 'immediate self-revelation' [sva- prakAshatA] which is never contradicted [abAdhita]. Only inmost Self qualifies for such reality. BH 1.3.30 says that at the time of 'great dissolution' [mahA-pralaya] all products of Ignorance cease to function and merge into their root cause - Ignorance, 'as subtle potentialities [sUxmeNa shakti-rUpeNa]. After great dissolution they come out like limbs of the tortoise and assume their names and forms. He does not consider nirguNa brahman to be the material cause of the universe, ruling out Its actual transformation into the universe. He says that if the universe was an actual transformation of brahman, (brahman being consciousness) all objects of the universe, not merely souls, would be sentient. So, brahman is only an 'apparent material cause' [vivarta upAdAna kAraNa]. He makes a distinction between 'unconditioned brahman' [nirupAdhika brahman] and conditioned brahman [sopAdhika brahman]. Owing to the adjunct of Ignorance (mAyA), brahman acquires the attributes of omniscience and omnipotence (BH 1.1.1).

This sopAdhika brahman called Ishvara is the material and intelligent cause of the universe. The mAyA is the adjunct of Ishvara and the individual intellects which are manifestation of mAyA are the adjuncts of souls. vAchaspati speaks of the 'indeterminable nature' of Universe [anirvachanIyatvam] giving the analogy of mirage. Is cognition of the water appearing in the sun-rays reflected from desert sand real or not? If it was real it would not be negated, but we do negate it when we reach the spot where we perceived it and find that there is no water. At the same time we cannot absolutely deny the existence of the water, because water was cognized. The experience of the perception of water, qua experience, cannot be negated. Thus, the mirage is neither existent nor non-existent nor existent-cum-non-existent. Similarly, the universe of objects, bodies and organs are also, indescribable as existent or non-existent. brahman's absoluteness [pAramArthika satyam] is proved by scriptures and reasoning. The aggregate objects, bodies, sense organs and intellects (minds) of the universe are superimposed on brahman owing to Ignorance. The substratum of this super-imposed (mithyA) world is brahman, just as the rope is the substratum of the erroneously perceived snake. Ignorance in the form of superimposition is indeterminable. vAchaspati (BH 2.2), says that the objects are themselves undefinable in their nature. They are not mere mental ideas as they exists inde-pendent of perceiver. Their nature and raison d'etre however, is undefinable (anirvAchya). Soul is not different from Atman [brahman] nor is soul a modification of brahman. Soul is brahma-chaitanyam itself appearing to be limited owing to the influence of Ignorance (BH 1.4.22). Ignorance operates at the relative plane, through it's dual power of concealment [AvaraNa] and of projection [vixepa]. Souls are at the mercy of the concealing and projecting powers of Ignorance. Ishvara, being its Lord is not affected by it. The concealing power gives rise to the non- apprehension of the identity of souls with brahman. The consciousness in the body-mind complex is then erroneously apprehended as finite just as space enclosed in pots etc is apprehended as the limited space. brahman is homogeneous Conscious-ness, but owing to the attributes superimposed by Ignorance, It appears as differentiated, objectified intellects and as numerous limited individuals. vAchaspati uses the metaphor of reflection. Just as reflections of prototype, though non- different from prototype, appear variegated due to the reflect-ing media; in like way jIva-s too, though non-different from brahman, appear differentiated due to intervening adjuncts. Ignorance - its content and locus: Like other Advaita philosophers,

vAchaspati says that the content of Ignorance is brahman. It is due to the influence of Ignorance that souls, forgetting the identity of brahma-chaitanyam and pratyagAtma (inmost Self and Witness- Consciousness) regard the enclosed pratyagAtmA to be a limited individual knower-consciousness and themselves to be limited individuals. The bhAmatI tradition speaks about two fold power of indeter-minable Ignorance, one fold related with dissolution (laya) or non-cognition and another with projection (vixepa) or wrong cognition. vAchaspati says, causal Ignorance is of the nature of dissolution, associated with impressions of world-projections in the previous world-periods. Name and forms so conceived are called mAyA (BH 2.2.2). This two-fold causal power was later termed as root-Ignorance [mUlAvidyA]. According to vAchaspati; soul is the locus of Ignorance. His argument is: It is only the soul who is the agent [kartA], the enjoyer [bhoktA], the one who has the notion of "I" [ahaM], the transmigrator [saMsArl] and the victim of all suffering. Therefore soul alone can be the locus of the Ignorance which is the root cause of multiplicity. On the other hand, brahman is pure [shuddha], defectless [nira.njana] and is of the nature of Knowledge [vidyAtma]. Therefore, it is illogical to speak of brahman as the locus of Ignorance. It is the soul, and not brahman, who requires the Knowledge for removing Ignorance. Logically, the destroyer vidyA, and the destroyed avidyA, must have the same locus. According to vAchaspati, Ignorance is not one; there are as many Ignorances as there are souls, soul being the seat of Ignorance. If Ignorance was a single entity, then when one soul attains the knowledge 'I am brahman' [aham brahmAsmi], the single Ignorance will be removed and, there being no Ignorance to delude other souls, all souls will be simultane-ously liberated, without any efforts on their part.[170] He explains the use of "mAyA" in the singular (SU 4.10) by interpreting it as the state of being deluded by Ignorance. The objection raised against this is, "soul being a product of Ignorance cannot be its locus" [anyonya Ashraya]. vAchaspati mishra's answer is, "there is a succession of births; my present birth is due to the Ignorance located in me in my previous birth and the Ignorance located in me in the present birth will produce my next birth; thus, there are two beginningless series, one of birth and the other of Ignorance. So there is no defect of anyonya Asraya." In a similar vein vAchaspati waives the objection against reciprocal dependence between superimposition and Self-objectification. He says; "Self- object-ification and superimposition is a beginningless process like a 'seed and sprout' so that every subsequent superimposition has for its object that which was the effect of each earlier superimposition."

bhAmatI (vAchaspati), kalpataru (amalAnanda), and parimala (appaya dIxita) is a representative line of this school.

Distinguished Features of bhAmati: 1. Performance of 'obligatory' duties leads to the 'desire of Knowledge'. 2. Mind is a sense-organ and also an instrument of Self-realization. It can make the mediate Knowledge immediate. 1. Text (shruti) cannot produce immediate perception. It is the mind (antaHkaraNa or buddhi) that produces perception; and mind after sustained meditation produces Knowledge. Text is a helpful auxiliary for that purpose.

2. 'Sustained Meditation' [nididhyAsa] is the principal factor while hearing or study [shravaNa] and reflection [manana] are its attributes.

3. Soul is 'Consciousness limited by Ignorance', while Ishvara is 'Consciousness transcending the limiting adjunct'.

4. Soul is the locus of Ignorance, while Self is the content of Ignorance inasmuch as it is the vRRitti that conditions the Consciousness, like the pot conditions the space. 1. Ignorance is of two types: (a) Root Ignorance (mUlAvidyA or kAraNAvidyA) that projects and dissolves the Unverse; (b) Derivative Igorances (tUlAvidyA or kAryAvidyA) that are individuated Ignorances derived from the 'root'. Both these types are mithyA though 'root' is sublated only after the videhamukti terminating all derived Ignorances therefrom.

5. The Triplication [trivRRitkaraNa] is the preferred theory of Creation (by vAchaspati and amalAnanda).

6. The "discrimination" [viveka] is foremost in the "four-fold means" [sAdhana-chatuShTaya].

7. The omniscience of brahman is derived from the essential nature of brahman.

8. "Delimitation Theory" [avachCheda-vAda] is the preferred theory to explicate the relation between jIva and brahman.

3.6 vivaraNa Tradition [विवरण संप्रदाय] : The vivaraNa view stems from pa.nchapAdikA [PP], a commentary by sha.nkara's disciple padmapAda on BSBh on first four sUtra-s and a commentary on padmapAda's work written by prakAshAtman[1711 called pa.nchapAdikAvivaraNa [PPV]. The name 'vivaraNa' was taken

from the later work; it means elucidation. pa.nchapAdikA: PP's position on superimposition is based on a particular interpretation of sha.nkara's adhyAsa-bhAShya. PP contextually interprets the word mithyA as (a) 'denial' [apanhava] as in case of mithyA iti bhavitam uktam; and (b) as 'indeterminable' [anirvachanlya] as in case of mithyA-GYAnanimitta. In the first case (a) superimposition is taken as logical impossibility rather than as indeterminable but natural phenomenon. In the second case (b), this impossibility is 'apparently' made possible by way of coupling the Real and the Unreal caused by Ignorance or Nescience. Here Ignorance is interpreted as an ontological (causal) entity rather than as an epistemological one. PP does so by suitably interpreting the word mithyAGYAnanimitta. It ascribes the mithyA-aGYAna [indeterminable Ignorance] and not mithyA-GYAna [false know-ledge] to be the cause of superimposition.[1721 It suggests that all empirical transactions [vyavahAra] have Ignorance as their material cause. Ignorance is not mere 'lack of knowledge' [a-GYAna] but it is the causal power [avidyA shakti], is insentient [jaDAtmikA] and is opposed to Knowledge. It is neither real nor unreal; it is inexpressible or undefinable. According to padmapAda, this position is accepted as a postulate [arthA-patti] because objective world, though not real, is experienced as a matter of fact. This interpretation of Ignorance causing the 'superimposition' and hence being the root cause of 'phenomenal world' [saMsAra] has been now established in the Advaita tradition, though not without counter arguments. [173] In his comments on adhyAsa bhAShya, padmapAda discusses cognition- perception along with nature of consciousness. He divides the 'I- cognition or ego' [asmat-pratyaya] in 'this-part' [idamaMsha] which can be objectified and 'not-this-part' [unidamaMsha] which cannot be objectified. These two parts are intermingled and this seeming intermingling, according to padmapAda, is what is meant by superposition. In this super-position the "not-this-part" is pure Awareness and "this-part" is called (for the sake of convenience) mind. The mind is able to manifest this Awareness like a mirror is able to manifest the reflection. The reflection is available for ego's empirical dealings and to that extent (and only figuratively) is spoken of as object of 'I-ness' [aham-pratyaya]. Just as a mirror is revealed by light and also reveals light, the "I" or "this-part" is revealed (animated) by Awareness and also manifest Awareness as a reflection. This reflection identifies only Self [brahman] and nothing else; as such it is identical with brahman. The reflection is not an illusion like silver seen in a nacre or a snake seen as rope from a distance; it is not sublated till the relative I-cognition exists (that is till the physical apparatus supports this reflection) and even after the apparatus

perishes the original Awareness, unlimited and untainted, remains as ever as a substratum. In perception, according to PP, the mind, which is a subtle form of matter (nAmarUpa), is animated (blended, combined) with Awareness and under-goes certain changes. The changes are essentially effected in the mind and oriented towards the object being cognized in such a way as to: (1) establish connection between cognizer (combination of Awareness and mind) and the object; (2) condition the cognizer for cognition; that is, to envelop or pervade the object by the cognitive mind to perceive it. Since the object itself is the 'apparent transformation' [vivarta] of Awareness which is the substratum of mind too, there is certain immediacy to the process of perception. Here the mind is not necessarily confined to the physical body but depending the locus of object, apparently goes out to envelop the object to perceive it. The arguments in PP about the causal nature of Ignorance and its implicit capacity to conceal and project the objective world is further elaborated by prakAshAtman in his vivaraNa. He consolidates and expands the position of padmapAda by surveying the positions of other commentators. [1741 pa.nchapAdikA vivaraNa: prakAshAtman refers TU 2.7.1 and CU 6.2.3 where brahman is mentioned as the material cause as well as the intelligent cause of the universe and points out the difficulties in attributing such a causality to the nirupAdhika brahman. According to him; brahman can be the material cause only if It undergoes modification into the form of the world, leaving its earlier form. But we have in KT (BU 4.4.20), "The AtmA (brahman) is birthless, all pervasive and immutable". Immutability and modification cannot be the nature of the same entity. It follows that nirupAdhika brahman cannot be the material cause of the universe. As regards brahman being the intelligent cause, only an entity with an intellect which can visualize and design the universe can be the intelligent cause. But this process is not possible in the case of brahman which shAstra says is of the nature of Consciousness devoid of instruments of visualization and action. Therefore nirupAdhika brahman cannot be the intelli-gent cause of the universe, either. Hence, prakAshAtman says that shruti and smRRiti texts introduce the principle of mAyA. He cites in SU 4.10: "Know that prakRRiti is mAyA and the wielder of mAyA is the great Lord" and says that brahman, the pure consciousness, associated with mAyA, should be regarded as the material cause of the universe. brahman adventitiously acquires the status of prototype [biMba] called Ishvara. Its reflection in the 'individual adjunct' (buddhi) is soul. What appears as a 'reflection' is brahman only. mAyA functions at the behest

of Ishvara who, as the biMba chaitanyam, is omniscient. Thus Ishvara and mAyA taken together, is the material and intelligent cause of the universe. Here, mAyA is the "transformative material cause" [pariNAmI upAdAna kAraNa], but brahman as existence and being the substratum of mAyA, is said to be the "figurative (apparent) material cause" [vivarta upAdAna kAraNa]. mAyA is Ishvara's mind; thus pure consciousness associated with mAyA gets the adventitious status of the omniscient Ishvara with the knowledge and desire to Produce. While the material world is manifestation of mAyA; Ishvara visualizes and designs the universe and guides mAyA. The appearance of the cosmos on brahman is mithyA. prakAshAtman defines mithyA as "the state of being the 'counter positive' [pratiyogin] of the absence of an entity at all times - in past, present and future and in the substratum where it is perceived". The avidyA [mAyA] is one - "Know mAyA to be prakRRiti (the material cause of the universe) and the Lord [mAyI] to be its controller" (SU 4.10), where the word mAyA is used in singular. The avidyA is a single entity, but the reflection of Consciousness in Ignorance results in plurality of souls. The main feature of soul is the intellect; since the intellects projected by Ignorance are many, souls with intellects carrying the apparent reflection of Consciousness are many [anekajIva vAda]. Further, if Ignorance is said to be one, it has to meet the objection that when any one soul overcomes the AvaraNa shakti of Ignorance by gaining the knowledge 'I am brahman' and gets Liberation, Ignorance is destroyed altogether and all other souls will get liberated simultaneously without any effort on their part. In the siddhAnta-lesha-sa.ngraha [SLS],[175] it is explained that mAyA is an inexplicable entity. A single inexpli-cable entity can have inexplicable parts. It is one such part of avidyA alone that gets removed by one soul attaining the Knowledge. This position is not much different than bhAmatl's manifold Ignorances. In both schools, there is a separation between ontological component of Ignorance (root Ignorance) and epistemic component of Ignorance (auxiliary Ignorance). The singularity of mAyA otherwise, can lead to ekajIva-vAda wherein there is only 'one soul' [ekajlva] at the relative level there being only one Ignorance to serve as the medium of reflection of brahma- chaitanyam. All other souls and their perceptions are 'dreamlike tertiary reality' [pratibhAsa][176] and their existence is confined to the time when the ekajlva has the vRRitti and perception thereof. This view is generally allied with dRRiShTi-sRRiShTi vAda (see 2.3) when relative reality is limited to the perception of the ekajlva. According to prakAshAtman, the pratibiMba chaitanyam is identical with brahma-chaitanyam. If that were not so, the mahAvAkya-s

revealing identity of jIvAtmA and paramAtmA like "Thou art That", will become meaningless. Though that is a fact, owing to the veiling power of mAyA souls mistake the consciousness to be different from brahma-chaitanyam and consequently regard themselves as limited individuals and undergo saMsAra. The vivaraNa contends that the reflection is identical with the original. It argues that the process of seeing the reflection and seeing its original is essentially the same for any observer except for the presence of reflecting medium. The empirical differences pointed out by the opponent (such as presence of the reflected face inside the mirror, reflection facing the original, and the difference between the original and the reflection) are said to be superimposed due to the reflecting medium. That is to say, 'the appearance of the one face being an original and the other being a reflection' (biMbatva and pratibiMbatva) is a 'false notion' [adhyAsa]. Thus, when a person thinks that he is seeing a reflection of his face in the mirror, what he is actually perceiving is the face on his neck. The perception of the face as being inside the mirror is an optical illusion.[177] In the same way, chaitanya pratibiMbatva and chaitanya biMbatva are superimposed on brahma-chaitanya due to Ignorance. These two features are indeterminable as they are caused by Ignorance. But brahman per se, whether it appears as the consciousness of Ishvara or the consciousness of souls, is real and the same. The super-imposition of biMbatva leads to the false notion [adhyAsa] of souls that they are limited individuals is caused by Ignorance, which is removed by the Knowledge of Atman= brahman. Ignorance - its content and locus: Like the majority of Advaita teachers, prakAshAtman holds that brahman is the content [viShaya] of Ignorance. According to him, brahman is also the locus of Ignorance. Soul cannot be said to be the locus of Ignorance. Soul is dormant in the 'causal state' [kAraNa avasthA]. There is no soul to say "I do not know anything." Only Consciousness and Ignorance are there. It is true that soul recollects, on waking, "I slept happily; I did not know anything" but he also says "I was absent in suShupti". What he recollects is the bliss of pure Consciousness and the ignorance of Ignorance. Soul's intellect is a reflecting medium. A reflecting medium appropriates the property of the original as its own, just as the mirror appropriates the face. Is Ignorance also the cause of the prAtibhAsika adhyAsa, like nacre- silver? If so, the adhyAsa will be removed only by the Knowledge of brahman. Commentator prakAshAtman, as one of the alternatives, says that as derivatives of the 'root Ignorance' [mUla avidyA], there are modal ignorances [tUla avidyA-s] or [avasthA aGYAna-s]. While the

content of mUla avidyA is brahman, the content of a tUla avidyA is awareness conditioned by an object. Thus, perception of silver on nacre is one of the tUla avidyA-s concealing awareness conditioned by the nacre. When this tUla avidyA is removed, perception of silver ceases.

Distinguishing features of vivaraNa: [1781

1. karma is a useful accessory for Self-realization. 2. There exists 'primal Ignorance' [mUlAvidyA], which is w/o beginning [anAdi], of 'positive nature' [bhAvarUpa], and of 'indeterminate reality' [mithyA]. This primal Igorance is the cause of superimposition [adhyAsa] of Self and non-Self and all the empirical transactions [saMsAra]. This root (primal) Ignorance was formulated in PP and was adopted in BH. Thus, primal Nescience is acceptable to vivaraNa as well as to bhAmatl schools. 3. Ignorance has Self [Atman] as the locus and it conceals the essential nature of the Self. 4. Causal Ignorance remains in the deep sleep in the form of an impression [saMskAra] of the ego and then is projected again in the waking state. 5. Metaphor of 'reflection' [ptatibiMba] is preferred over the 'delimitation' [avachCheda] doctrine of bhAmatl. 6. 'avidyA' & 'mAyA' are basically the same principles though generally mAyA is associated with Ishvara as His upAdhi or power, while avidyA is associated with jIva. 7. The 'quintuplication' [pa.nchIkaraNa] is the preferred theory of creation of subtle elements and gross material objects. 8. Mind (manas) is neither a sense-organ nor an instrument of Self- realization. The direct Knowledge arises by itself in the purified mind. Verbal testimony of the 'shrauta-shabda' can produce immediate Know-ledge. 9. The vivaraNa acknowledges the 'seed-less absorption' [nirvikalpa or asaMprajnAt samAdhi] for the non-dual vision and thus concurs with the bhAmatI view in this respect. 10. The vivaraNa accepts the bhAmatl view of 'impressions of Ignorance' [avidyAsaMskAra] continuing in the Liberated person. It also supports the IShTasiddhi's doctrine of the remnant Ignorance [avidyAlesha] in the Liberated person.[179] 11. 'Discrimination' [viveka] is foremost in the 4-fold aid, while 'the study of Vedanta' (shravaNa) is foremost in the path of Self realization. Post-sha.nkara sub-schools reoriented some of the sha.kara's positions and preferences: (a) sureshvara clarified that all dwija-s including xatriya-s and vaishya-s can take saMnyAsa. (b) Role of karma as an

important accessory for the Self realization was acknowledged. (c) UP was adapted to be the repository of mediate Knowledge. (d) mUlAvidyA subsumed the role of avyakta as the seed of universe. It acquired causality, and became entity of positive kind (bhAvarUpa). (e) Difficulty in equating cessation of the individul Ignorance with brahman was addressed (Ch-4). (f) samAdhAna (concentration) was adapted as samAdhi (stilling of the mind) and was used as an accessory in the way to Self-realization (Ch-4). Generally, these orientations came by way of elaborations or clarifications while claiming respectful allegiance to sha.nkara. The general post-1500 trend in Vedanta takes unified view of all the three KA sub-schools - vArtika, vivaraNa and bhAmatI. They are seen as emphasizing different aspects of the same reality. (See 5.2.6).

4. liberation

"The Knower of brahman becomes (attains) brahman" (MU 3.2.9, TU 2.1.1) is the theme of Liberation (mukti, moxa). Liberation is associated with "cessation of Ignorance" (avidyA nivRRitti) which is ontologically defined as: (1) avidyA nivRRitti is identical with brahman (sha.nkara); (2) it is reality of the Fifth Kind[180] (vimuktAtman); (3) It is the particular mental state (sarvaGYAtman); (4) it is the direct experience of brahman=Atman (nRRisihMAshrama); (5) It is the relation superimposed on brahman=Atman; it is inderminable (madhusUdana).[181] In reality, soul essentially is always brahman; Liberation is only figurative. It has axiological and metaphysical aspects. The axiological aspects are associated with the law of karma which assigns merit [puNya] or demerit [pApa] to each action according to its moral content. The "results of one's actions" [karmaphala] need to be exhausted by experiencing them. This is said to create 'bond' by which soul is entangled in the transmigratory cycle. The axiology of Advaita looks down upon this bond even if it arises due to merit. The cessation of transmigratory cycle through Liberation is the 'ultimate aim' (moxa). However, karma is the essential part of one's life and bondage seems unavoidable. BG suggests a way out to minimize bondage - one should perform 'karma without desire' [niShkAma-karma][182] as a part of one's duty so that karma-phala and its bondage is minimized. [183] At the metaphysical level Advaita combines metaphysics and axiology by saying that Knower [jIvanmukta] is free from the 'bondage of action' and attains moxa after his previously accumulated karmaphala is exhausted. Thereafter on his death he becomes videhamukta or Knowledge absolute. The concept of jIvanmukta is metaphysically problematic[184] and at the same time is crucial from axiological point of view. One view is that even GYAni (jIvanmukta) is bound by the prArabdha (the 'karmaphala in fruition), and thus experiences the same phen-omenal world and limitations of the body and mind as before his Self-realization. The difference is that he retains only the minimum essential subjectivity to retain his worldly existence, over and above which, he does not have any ego (doer-ship and consumer- ship). sha.nkara has discussed this issue in his commentaries[185] where he supports the view that GYAni is bound by the prArabdha. Few other texts[186] that are attributed to him however, take the opposite view; they say that GYAni is not bound by the prArabdha- karma.

4.1 Realization: Is Knowledge available to soul 'here and now' when it is experiencing the relative level? How does a Seeker [sAdhaka] realize the Knowledge to transcend to absolute level? What happens to him after realization? sha.nkara is emphatic that Knowledge can be realized here and now (BSBh 3.4.51). Advaita tradition assumes that shruti gives direct and immediate [aparoxa] knowledge and not the mediate or indirect [paroxa] one, though the tradition is not monolithic in this respect. Two important contributors to the tradition, maNDana mishra and vAchaspati mishra were of the opinion that UP do not give direct experience. sha.nkara how-ever, believed that those whose minds are acute, and for whom the meaning of words is not obstructed by ignorance, doubt, or misunderstanding, are able to experience the mean-ing of tat tvam asi [Thou art That] even when it is uttered once.[187] He further believed that jIvanmukta cannot relapse into state of Ignorance except for any momentary confusion which might happen due to past impressions.[188] If the Knowledge is super sensuous and unaccessible to mind how can it be Known? sha.nkara suggests that brahman is not accessible to the senses and the mind because it is not immediate to them; but UP can make brahman direct and immediate like an experience triggered by the sentence 'you are the tenth'.[189] It is realization (experience) of Self as the undifferentiated Awarene. It is the very basis of experience. According to sha.nkara, the Liberated person is able to see everything as his limiting adjunct, implying that he sees him-self as pure Awareness (BUBh 2.5.15). He Knows that Self is beyond phenomenal conditions and sinless.[190] He Knows that Self is the undifferentiated Seeing, without any agent-ship, and has given up the idea of his being Knower of the brahman.[191] A Knower does not have self-referring cognition (US 14.29). A Liberated person is in a space-like state by removing the ideas of "I" and "mine" and becoming free from body (US 15.54). When a person negates the cognition that body is the Self and remains as firm in it as his previous cognition that body is the Self is Liberated (US 4.5). When the identification with all 'other' things are gone the Self is Known (BUBh 4.4.20). There is nothing more to be done apart from remain-ing in the Knowledge of the Self.[192] The Liberated person (i.e. jIvanmukta) suffers the same fate, the old age, sickness and all that, as the bodies of other people (BUBh 1.4.7); except that he knows Self and hence does not identify himself with the body-mind. He is the Knowledge personified without any attachment to body or worldly affairs. Possibly for this reason sha.nkara speaks of the Knower as bodiless person. Knower metaphorically merges with the brahman after the death, but in reality nothing happens. His body perishes, though Self remains as it is, eternally without any change,

since it is nothing but brahman (BUBh 4.4.6). [193] 4.2 Theory of karma: BU 1.6.1 underlines the importance of karma[cHf]: "This Universe is formed of three entities: name (nAma), form (rUpa), and action (karma)." In Vedanta, it is customary to see the first indication 194] of the karma doctrine in BU 3.2.12-13 where sage yAGYavalkya has a discussion about life after death with the learned Brahmana ArthbhAga: "Having gone aside, they engaged in a consultation. That which they spoke about was karma (action) and that which they praised was karma, one indeed becomes good by good action, and bad by bad action".[195] The doctrine can be described as "kArmika law of causation or kArmika law of action and reaction" shaping the future of the soul. The theme is taken again in BU 4.4.5 bringing in the element of 'desire' which propels the course of individual action.[196] PY 2.14 says that the experience of pleasure and of pain are the results of merit and of demerit respectively. Good karma attracts merit and bad karma attracts demerit.[197] At the relative level, Vedanta is emphatic about rebirth (BU 4.4.3): "Just as a leech goes to the end of a blade of grass, catches another support and withdraws itself, so does this self set aside the present body - giving up identification with it - and withdraws itself to take a new body".In BG 4.5, Krishna remembers his previous births though Arjuna does not. BG 2.22 clearly asserts the doctrine of rebirth(anif जीर्णानि यथा विहाय ... ). The exit of the soul from the body is described in CU 8.4.1-3 and again in 8.6.1-2, 5-6. KU 2.3.16 follows the same line. BU 6.2.9-16 offers to explain the 'wisdom of five fires' [pa.nchAgni vidyA][198] and soul's 'journey' after the death. The same vidyA is propounded in CU 5.4-10. A more detailed and fanciful description of soul's post death journey is given in Kau 1.2-7. During the intervening period between a birth and rebirth, Soul experiences ideation of pain and pleasure corres-ponding to its merit and demerit of previous birth(s). The 'womb for next birth' is decided by 'residual karma' [sa.nchita-karma] that the soul may carry to the next birth. The cycle of birth and rebirth is stated in SU 1.6 by using allegory of the "wheel of brahma" (brahma-chakra). This cyclic rebirth is illustrated in KU 1.1.6 by using simile of 'corn': "Consider how it was with the forefathers; behold how it is with the later (men); a mortal ripens like corn, and like corn is born again". Whatever may be the balance of his sa.nchita-karma, Soul's final release (videha-mukti or moxa) from the transmigratory cycle of saMsAra is possible only when it realizes the Self. In Advaita, Knowledge is the only key to Liberation. In BSBh 3.1.1-27, sha.nkara discusses transmigration. In BSBh 3.1.8, he observes that the scriptures do not proclaim any competence for

acquiring fresh karma in heaven or hell or among lower creatures. This limits the scope of action 'here and now' and confines it to the higher (evolved) sentient forms, excluding insects etc. The karma theory formulates various types of karma and their results (karma-phala or karma-vipAka)[199] viz: (1) nitya-karma: 'prescribed' karma[2001 which is performed regularly and which accumulates demerit if not performed, (2) naimittika-karma: 'prescribed' karma which is performed 'on occasion' and which accumulates merit if performed, (3) niShiddha-karma: prohibited karma which attracts kArmika penalty, (4) sa.nchita-karma: accumulated karma which has not started fruition, (5) prAra-bdha-karma: predestined karma which has started fruition and which needs to be exhausted in 'this-world', (6) kriyAmAna-karma: Day-to-day actions arising out of individual free will that accumulate merit or demerit depending on their nature, (7) AgAmI-karma: future karma that is result of the present karma in hand. [201] This karma categories and their results are of much concern to school of mImAMsA (school of exegesis) which sees the whole Veda as 'injunctions-prohibitions' [vidhi-niShedha] and discussions [arthApatti] about the performance of the karma. On the contrary, Vedanta downplays karma and advocates its renouncement for Liberation. Still, there are clear indications that some of the kArmika concerns of oldest UP like BU, CU, and AU are outgrowths of their respective brAhmaNa- s.[202] Which kArmika residues work themselves out sooner? Which ones constitute the prArabdha-karma for a given lifetime as opposed to others, particularly, which are sa.nchita-karma stored up for later fruition? This is the Problem of Priorities. sha.nkara seems to think that in general the more intense and proximate residues, whether sinful or meritorious, tend to mature first. But the general rule here is subject to many exceptions because there are incompatibilities among several residues which have equal claim but only one of which can mature at a time (Karl Potter in KRCIT[203]). Who keeps the account of karma and prepares the balance-sheet of puNya (merit) and pApa (demerit) individually as well as collectively? The 'book-keeping' of karma will be quite complex if we decide to design a consistent model of karma and its fruition. This is the problem of complexity. The previous 'problem of priority' is part of the complexity problem. [204] Vedanta (BSBh 3.2.38, 41) attributes the workability of karma to the omniscience and omnipotence of Ishvara - karma by itself cannot bring about the proper results at some future time; neither can super- sensuous, non-intelligent qualities like adRRiShTa[205] by themselves mediate the appropriate, justly deserved pleasure and pain. The fruits

of actions, according to sha.nkara, must be apportioned by a conscious, all-knowing agent, namely, Ishvara. In addition to its complexity and metaphysical workability, the karma theory[206] has to answer certain other issues such as: Problem of Free Will: In a mechanistic action-reaction type of karma theory, there is no scope for the free-will. << answer: Apart from 'book-keeping of merit and demerit', karma theory is not mechanistic. The situation of the soul's birth and the karmaphala which the soul has to experience in 'this life' are decided by its past karma; however, the soul can modify its dispositions and exercise its will in the performance of karma. Soul has to experience and exhaust its prArabdha, but its will which decides its consequent action is based on both kArmika tendencies (vAsanA) and non-kArmika dispositions (svabhAva). This later part has probabilistic elements, which could figura-tively be attributed to mAyA. Even if we discount this non- kArmika part of the soul, the kArmika tendencies themselves have scope for modifications due to builtin mechanism of retribution and compensation. Though kArmika modifications are deterministic inasmuch as they take place in the broad framework decided by the soul's kArmika past, they offer free-dom to the soul to take its own microlevel actions. Thus, the kArmika universe appears to be deterministic at the macro-level; but is probabilistic or free-willed at the micro-level> >[207] Problem of Identity: If the Self is attributeless, how can it be identified in the new body-mind complex? << answer: When the individual soul leaves the previous body and attains another, it is helped by the chief prANa, it is accompanied by the senses and the mind, and it has ignorance, results of past actions, and the tendencies acquired in the previous birth as its prop. (BSBh 3.1 (intro)). This prop is carried to its next birth. Though the soul itself may not identify its old self of the previous birth, it is identifiable to the kArmika law (to Ishvara or to the principle of apUrva) which allocates sa.nchita-karma to the transmigrating soul. > > Problem of Memory: If the soul doesn't have any memory of previous births then its present experience of karma is 'not justified'. This problem can also be seen as an identity problem, since memory is the basis of personal identity in the background of changing mental states. < < answer: Universal kArmika justice and its juriprudence is different than the secular justice and its juriprudence. Secular justice is confined to a single birth, while; the kArmika justice encompasses multiple births of causal bodies. > > Problem of Verifiability: The previous birth of the soul is not verifiable. This problem is again corollary to the 'Problem of Identity'.

< <answer: Soul, due to its 'primal Ignorance', forgets its 'notional' birth(s) of the past and also the fact that it is essentially birth-less. Establishing soul's identity of the past births is not possible by scientific means; karma theory is soterial and not scientific. > > Problem of Infinite Regress: If the residual karma is acq-uired from the previous birth, it will lead to the problem of infinite regress as applicable to the origin of kArmika process < <answer: The kArmika cycle is beginning-less - without origin in space-time. The soul's Liberation does not occur in space-time. > > Problem of Sufferings: Ishvara is omnipotent and omni-scient and still there is evil and suffering in the world. This problem will also lead to Problem of Purpose - What is the purpose of creation if there are sufferings and evil tendencies. << answer: Looking from the relative standpoint, this world is an "undefinable play of mAyA". From the absolute standpoint however, the concepts of Ishvara, mAyA, karma-vipAka, good and evil, and rebirth do not stand. At that level there is only brahman and nothing else. This really is the answer to all other questions as well. > > In Vedanta, it is not sufficient to reduce the merit and demerit balance to zero - one is not Liberated by mere experiencing and exhausting the karmaphala. Liberation is achieved only by Knowledge, by Self realization. [208] 4.3 Path of Realization: Ignorance is said to be (the cause of) superimposition - the fundamental error in our perception due to which plurality of names and forms appears. sha.nkara does not seem to advocate any supernatural method by way of 'mystic experience' (samAdhi) to realize Knowledge. Hearing (shravaNa), contemplation (manana), and 'sustained meditation' (nididhyAsa) is said to be the traditional path of Realization (BU 2.4.5).[209] Knowledge is like an insight - an understanding of the fact that brahman is nothing but the inmost Self. It arises like a discovery - a direct experience of the luminous Self from such texts as 'Thou art That' just as it did from 'Thou art the tenth' (US 18.190-192). At some places UP add another dimension by saying that the Self becomes known of its own accord; It reveals Its true nature on Its own and not through traditional means like discourse, hearing or intellect (KU 1.2.23, MU 3.2.3). In US, sha.nkara says that Knowledge alone is the cause of immort-ality; there is nothing else to cooperate with (in producing Liberation) (US 11.2). The Self does not depend on any thing else in order to be acquired (US 17.6). When mind is purified like a mirror, Knowledge is revealed in it. Here[210] sha.nkara advises to purify the mind by yama-niyama of pata.njalii yoga[2111 [PY]. He however, does not use the term samAdhi; in US 17-23-24, he mentions

samAdhAna and ekAgryam [one-pointedness] and declares the latter to be the best of austerities. This may suggest that sha.nkara adopted classical yoga more as ethical means of chitta-shuddhi rather than as a manual of mind-control. His advocacy of karma in US 17.22 too can be seen as addressing the ethical concerns similar to those of pa.ncha- yaGYa,[212] rather than strict conformance to Vedic commands. The clear separation between KT and AT, and absence of injunctions in KT allow Advaita-Vedanta to decide its own method(s) of Self realization.[213] This has resulted in multiplicity of soterial methods including classical yoga, Ishvara-bhakti and niShkAma-karma of BG. "Mind purification" [chitta-shuddhi] and its indicative "four-fold means" [sAdhana chatuShTaya] are the prerequisites for realization. KA tradition assumes that certain rites and rituals are useful for chittashuddhi, but thereafter lose their relevance. The basic doctrine of Advaita is Self= brahman, where all ontological, epistemic, and axiological concepts converge and merge. At the absolute level multipli-city is dissolved into unity and souls are freed from the bonds of karma. At the relative level unity appears in the form of equanimity (samatva) and the freedom is achieved by 'selfless work' [niShkAma- karma]. The concepts of 'mind-purification', 'equanimity', and 'selfless work' are essentially moral concepts that go beyond the 'injunctions of Veda' (karma kANDa) and lead to the Liberation. BG acknowledges 'loving devotion to the God' [bhakti] as a soterial path along side the 'path of Action' [karma-yoga] and path of Knowledge [GYAna-yoga]. In it, samatva is established in yogi.[214] The word yoga with its entire purport plays an important role in BG and in Vedanta. KU (1.2.12) calls Self-realization as the adhyAtma- yoga. 'yAGYavalkya smRRiti' [YS] significantly, terms Self-realization through yoga as the highest of all dharma-s.[215] Liberation in yoga is different than that of Advaita. PY treats samAdhi as Liberation while Advaita treats it as purification of mind; some KA traditions however, define samAdhi itself as 'identification with brahman' and adopt accessories of yoga[216] to achieve it. In general, post-sha.nkara Advaita traditions accept 'knowledge of Truth' [tattva-GYAna], 'annihilation of mind' [manonAsha] and 'effacement of the latent impressions of desires' [vAsanA-xaya] as means of jIvanmukti (तत्त्वज्ञानमनोनाशवासनाक्षयास्तत्साधनम्). These are to be practised together and not severally.[217] As an example, a path of realization, based on an invocation by the 16thC Vedantin madhusUdana saraswatii, and which includes classical yoga is described in the following steps: [218] 1. First step is the 'selfless work, devotion' [niShkAma-karma, bhakti]. It is the beginning of renunciation [saMnyAsa].[219]

2. niShkAma-karma firms up 'discriminating ability' [viveka] of the Seeker.

3. Discrimination firms up detachment [vairAgya] and the six- treasures [ShatsaMpatti]. Here the Seeker should be fully established in renunciation.

4. 'Longing for Liberation' [mumuxutva] springs from renun- ciation. This then completes and consolidates 'four means of Liberation' [sAdhana-chatuShTaya]. 5. Seeker goes to the Guru for 'initiation & guidance' [dIxA]. Then follows 'hearing and study of the Vedanta scriptures' [shravaNa] and contemplation [manana] on it. 6. Next step is the 'sustained meditation' [nididhyAsa]. Whole of yoga scriptures gets its purpose fulfilled when Seeker purifies his mind with the practice of yoga and develops equanimity [samatva]. 7. Equanimity leads to the "Knowledge of reality" [tattva- GYAna]. This happens when purified mind 'listens' and 'understands' the purport of mahAvAkya-s like "tat tvam asi" [That Thou Art] and when Nescience is eradicated on the rise of Knowledge. 8. The tattva-GYAna burns up the results of all actions that have not started bearing fruits and that belong to past births [sa.nchita-karma] as well as to the present birth for future fruition [AgAmIni-karma]. 9. The 'results of past actions that have caused the present birth and that have started bearing fruits' [prArabdha karma] and the 'past impressions' [vAsanA-s] however, remain. These are quelled or eliminated by practicing the triad of concentration [dhAraNA], meditation [dhyAna], and absorption [samAdhi] known as saMyama. 10. The yama commands (truth, non-injury etc.) are conducive to saMyama. However, samAdhi is quickly achieved by 'devotional work (bhakti) dedicated to Ishvara. 11. The practice of samAdhi leads to 'steady wisdom' [sthita- praGYA] and removes the obstructive past impressions [vAsanA- s] 12. The 'Knowledge of brahman' [tattva-GYAna], 'steady mind' [sthitapraGYA], and "dissipation of the past impressions" [vAsanAxaya] lead to the "state of Liberation while still alive" [jIvanmukti]. This state is also known as "renun-ciation of the wise" [vidvatsaMnyAsa].

13. The state of jIvanmukti is sustained by constant practice of samAdhi: first by savikalpa samAdhi in which mind fluctuations are eliminated but multiplicity persists; and then by nirvikalpa samAdhi when multiplicity is removed. Devotional absorption serves the same purpose. [2201 14. The Seeker who sees no multiplicity, has perfect equa- nimity, and keeps himself absorbed in devotion is known as sthitapraGYa or paramabhakta. During this state the Seeker acquires 'supreme detachment' [parA-vairAgya] of worldly phenomena. Both in Vedanta and in classical yoga, viveka [faach] -- the "ability to discriminate" is needed. In Advaita it is the part of "four-fold means"; it discriminates between the eternal and the non-eternal. In yoga it discriminates between the pure and the impure and between the good and the evil (PY 2.5). This viveka needs to be exercised continuously to attain Liberation. It reveals itself in the light of Knowledge when impurity is removed (PY 2.26, 2.28). In its general form it becomes sadasatviveka (सदसत्विवेक), which is the ability to discriminate between the sat and the asat; where 'sat' (Truth, Awareness, Right-eousness) and 'asat'(falsehood, ignorance, unrighteousness) have ontological, epistemic and ethical purport. It ensures one's movement towards Liberation in a manner suggested by BG (6.5-6): "elevate the self by the self ... " (उद्धरेदात्मनात्मानम् ... ).[221]

5. historical overview

We can cursorily map the philosophical and social aspects of Advaita within the broad historical framework: (1) civilization of Veda (before c.500BC) to which scriptures are assigned, (2) classical civilization of Indian empires (c.500BC-500) in which Vedanta evolved in sUtra-s, (3) early middle ages of regional kingdoms (c.500-1000) in which Advaita was established and flourished, and (4) middle to late middle ages of Turko-Mongol-Islamic conquests and Mughal empire (c.1000-1700) in which Advaita defended itself against the competing schools.

5.1 History of RRigveda [ऋग्वेद] It is possible to trace the Vedanta monism in RRigveda [RV] (see 1.1). RV is the oldest amongst Veda[222] and arguably the oldest scripture known to mankind. It can give valuable insight into Vedic culture, the pinnacle of which is the Vedanta philosophy. The major RV branch (recension) that has survived is shAkala. Another one reportedly surviving is bAShkala, almost identical to shAkala. The shAkala recension has 1017 regular hymns, and an appendix of 11 vAlakhilya hymns which are now customarily included in the Book-8 (as 8.49-8.59), for a total of 1028 hymns comprising of 10552 mantra-s, distributed into ten Books (maNDala-s). The bAShkala recension includes 8 of these vAlakhilya hymns among its regular hymns, making a total of 1025 regular hymns for this shAkhA. In addition, the bAShkala recension has its own appendix of 98 hymns, known as khilAni. Most of the hymns are to be sung to various deities[223] as manifestations of the One Divinity. RV and AV mention 33 main deities. These are classified as 11-celestial deities (dyaus, ashvin twins, pUshANa, viShNu, six Aditya-s - sUrya, savitA or bhaga, mitra, Aryaman, daxa, aMsha); 11-atmo-spheric deities (indra, varuNa, rudra, maruta, uShas, vAyu, parjanya, vivasvat, yama, prajApati, aditi); and 11- terrestrial deities (agni, soma, bRRihaspati, apAM napAt, mAtArishvan, tvaShtrA, and goddesses pRRithvI, ApaH, sarasvatl, iDA, bhAratI).[224] The heroic and kingly god - indra, the god of fire - agni, and the god of sky - varuNa are addressed more frequently than the later day more popular viShNu and rudra (shiva). shiva is not the name of any God in RV; it is an adjective meaning propitious, auspicious, or favorable. In RV it is mostly applied to rudra to placate him, he being the most fearful God for the Aryans. Over the period shiva became synonymous with rudra. Sometimes, to the classification of celestial, atmospheric, and terrestrial deities few additional classes such as abstract deities,

secondary deities, demon deities, and ancestral spirits are added. It is customary to view the multiplicity of deities as a kind of nature worship which subsequently evolved to absolute monism or panenthe- ism through intermediate stages of polytheism, henotheism, monotheism and pantheism. Whatever view one may adopt, the ultimate Reality of RV is only One - "ekam sat" (एकम् सत्) or "tad ekam" (तद् एकम्). Bk-1 is one of the largest Books along with Bk-10. It can be seen as a collection of family booklets. Bk-2 to Bk-7 are family books; they are said to be the oldest. Bk-3 (3.62.10) has important gAyatrI mantra. Book-9 is a collection of hymns related to soma pavamAna[225] ascribed to sages belonging to the ten principal families of composers- compilers. The sequ-ence of Bk-8, Bk-9, and Bk-10 can be seen to represent their respective chronological order.[226] Bk-10 has hymns related to cosmogony and miscellaneous topics not covered in other Books. It contains the nadistuti sUkta (10.75) which is in praise of rivers and is important for our understanding of the geography of the Vedic civilization.[227] It has puruSha-sUkta [y54 dd] (10.90) which mentions 4-fold classification (varNa system) and is considered to be important for the social development of later Hinduism. It also contains the nAsadlya sUkta [नासदीय सूक्त] (10.129), probably the most celebrated hymn, which deals with the Creation. The marriage hymn (10.85) and the death hymns (10.10-18)[228] are important in the performance of the domestic [gRRihya] rituals. The language and ideas of Bk-10 are quite different than that of other Books, suggesting its comparitively recent origin. Associated with RV are the anukramaNi-s (indexes) and the parishiShTha-s (appendixes). The former give information of composers, deities, and meters of each hymn. The hymns are altogether attributed to 407 Sages, of which 21 are women Sages. Ten principal families emerge after the genealogical tracing which include traditional seven primary families (sapta-RRiShi)[2291 -- a.ngirasa, bhRRigu, vAsiShTha, agastya, vishvA-mitra, kashyapa, atri; the two secondary families - kaNva (of a.ngirasa), gRRitsamada (of bhRRigu); and one bharata family. Bk-6 and Bk-4 are exclusively assigned to a.ngirasa family; of them bhAradvAja-s are exclusive authors of Bk-6, and vAma-deva-s are exclusive authors of Bk-4 except its hymns 43-44. A special hymn known as Apri sUkta is associated with each of the ten families: for example a.ngirasa (RV 1.142), kaNva (RV 1.13), vasiShTha (RV 7.2), vishvAmitra (RV 3.4), atri (RV 5.5), bhRRigu (RV 10.110), kashyapa (RV 9.5), gRRitsamada (RV 2.3), agastya (RV 1.118), bharata (RV 10.17). Table-4 is the 'extrapolated' Book-wise and family-wise distrib-ution of

RV hymns and their verses based on RV indexes & appendixes.[2301

Table-4: Distribution of RV Hymns and Verses

n Family Bk Bk Bk Bk Bk Bk Bk Bk Bk Bk Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 a.ngirasa 96 58 3 75 25 30 58 [अंगिरस] 1047 589 19 765 460 217 485

2 kaNva 27 55 8 1 [कण्व] 321 933 50 9

3 vasiShTha 9 1 102 1 26 [वसिष्ठ] 91 15 832 6 276

4 vishvAmitra 18 60 2 5 12 [विश्वामित्र] 207 588 19 44 91

5 atri 79 7 2 8 [अत्रि] 655 88 16 112

6 bhRRigu 4 4 14 24 [भृगु] 31 46 136 255

7 kashyapa 1 6 36 3 [कश्यप] 1 74 300 24

8 gRRitsamada 39 [गृत्समद] 398

9 agastya 27 1 1 2 4 [अगस्त्य] 239 4 21 12 40

10 bharata 13 2 4 [भरत] 100 27 42

11 Jointly by 2 1 2 4 6 7 2+ families 29 15 9 76 196 49

12 Unknown 1 8 44 18 104 371

13 Total 191 43 62 58 87 75 104 103 114 191 1028= 2006 429 617 589 727 765 841 1716 1108 1754

10552=

5.1.1 RV Communities: RV mentions about 30 tribes and clans; among them six tribal groupings viz (1) pUru, (2) yadu, (3) turvasha, (4) druhyu, (5) anu are mentioned together in RV 1.108.8; and (6) tRRixi (with pUru) is mentioned in RV 6.46.8. They inhabited the regions of ga.ngA-yamunA [G-Y], and sindhu-sarasvatI [S-S]. The tRRixi belonged to the 'solar race' of IxvAku while others belonged to 'lunar race' of aiLa. Amongst them, the pUru-s, and particularly bharata-s,

had the central role; RV in a way, is the Book of the bharata family of pUru tribe.[231] Amongst bharata kings, divodAsa (prominent in Bk-6) and sudAsa (prominent in Bk-3&7) together, are referred to in all books except Bk-10. Though tRRixi-s[232] are rarely mentioned in RV, they helped pUru-s in adversity and had a unique place of their own. In RV, the term Arya is synonymous with 'honorable men'. It is generally but not exclusively applied to pUru-s, particularly for bharata-s. It had no racial connotation; it being either an honorific title or suggestive of certain linguistic groups. From paurANika refer- ences, yadu-turvasha inhabited part of Western and Central India, while pUru-IxvAku, and anu-druhyu occupied Northern Indic regions. Within them IxvAku inhabited eastern part, while pUru occupied central and anu-druhyu occupied north-western areas. Possibly, this was the demography during the late and final stages of SSC. In some RV hymns, mainly related to dAsarAGYa, vArShAgirA, and hariyUplya battles which were fought on S-S soil in early and middle RV period, we come across several Iranian, west Asian, and central Asian ethnonyms such as (1) pRRithu or pArthava (RV 7.83.1): Parthians; (2) parshu (RV 7.83.1): Persians; (3) paktha (RV 7.18.7): Pakhtuns; (4) bhalAna (RV 7.18.7): Baluchis; (5) shiva (RV 7.18.7): Khivas; (6) viShANina (RV 7.18.7): Pishachas (Dards); (7) shimyu (RV 7.18.5): Sarmatians (Sairimas of Avesta) (Illyrians(?), Albanians(?)); (8) alina (RV 7.18.7): Alans or Hellenes (Greeks); (9) bhRRigu (RV 7.18.6): Thraco-Phrygians (Armenian). Along with, there are personal proto-Iranian names like kavasha (RV 7.18.12), kavi chAyamAna (RV 7.18.8), vishtAspa (RV 1.100) etc. One may arguably guess the structure of anu-druhu groupings from RV and paurANika references after searching the adstratum words in other IE languages[233] (ref: Talgeri 2000, 2008): anu: ethonyms of Iranian, Thraco-Phrygian, Hellenic. druhyu: ethonyms of Baltic and Slavonic, Italic and Celtic, Germanic. These ethnonyms do not suggest chronology of movements of ethnic communities; however, they indicate that in RV times, Indic regions, particularly S-S/G-Y region had mixed & diverse ethnic composition. [234]

5.1.2 RVC and SSC: To trace the RV antiquity we will have to explore the relationship among (a) hypothetical "RRig-veda civilization" [RVC] of RV Books 1-10, (b) archaeological "sapta sindhava or sindhu-sarasvatI civilization" [SSC] of N-W Indic region, [235] and (c) historical post-800BC "Hindu[236]-Vedic-Culture" [HVC] of Indic regions. We may consider the stages of SSC to explore its connection with RVC and HVC typified by the names of the archaeological sites: 1. Formative stage: Mehrgarh-4,5 (c.4000BC-3500BC) 2. Early stage: Kalibangan-1 (c.3500BC-2800BC) 3. Period of transition e.g. Dholavira-3 (c.2800-2600BC) 4. Mature era: Harappa-3, Kalibangan-2 (c.2600BC-1900BC) 5. Late stage: Cemetery H, Harappa-4 (c.1900BC-1500BC) 6. Final Stage: Harappa-5, Dholavira-4 (c.1500BC-1300BC) Spatial-temporal and cultural relationship between RVC and SSC can be explored within these time-frames. (See Maps-1, 2, 3, 4). RVC and SSC have a large spatial overlap between them as evidenced from the archaeological findings and geographical references within RV. The core area of both of them is the rivers' region of sindhu- sarasvatI or sapta-sindhava [S-S]. RV identifies sarasvatl between shatudrI [Satalej] and yamunA (RV 10.75.5) with tributaries dRRishadvatI (Chautang) and Apaya (RV 3.23.4). This positional description uniquely identifies the desiccated Ghaggar-Hakra-Nara river bed of today. Ghaggar's large basin, 8-10 km wide at places, and numerous SSC sites found across its banks match the description of 'mighty' sarasvatI of RV[237]. Multidisciplinary data suggest that sarasvatI was in 'full flow' in the days of formative and early SSC and dried to its present form[238] towards the end of mature SSC. This suggests that RVC of 'old books' might be anterior to or overlap the period of mature SSC and prima facie establishes a compositae of SSC+RVC=HVC. According to one possible scenario, the natural and/or cata-strophic events during c.2000BC-1700BC forced a population shift from the basins of sarasvatI-sindhu to more hospitable regions - to north-west (of sindhu), to east (G-Y doab), and to south (Gujarat, and Narmada, Godavari river basins).[239] This shift resulted in 'deurbanization' which meant gradual disapp-earance of Indus script, and discontinuation of standard seals. It brought forth local strata and sacrificial theology. It also loosely established at a later date the social-familial framework of varNa (class) and Ashrama (life-stage). The varNa system post-800BC was a loose four-fold classification of brAhamaNa (priest-teacher), xatriya (warrior-administrator), vaishya

(trader-professional), and shUdra (servant-laborer). Its first reference comes in the late RV hymn 10.90.[2401 The Ashrama prescribed life- stages and concomitant ritualistic duties for an individual and his family. The varNa system was superimposed on the stratification of jAti, which was more of a nature of clan rather than rigid caste based profession.[241] RV mentions administr-ative units like sabhA, samiti, and vidatha that evolved into later day janapada, an autonomous geopolitical entity. These localized prototype patterns appeared from the farthest S-S region (gAndhAra) in the north-west to farthest of G-Y plain (kIkaTa, magadha) in the East. By 1300BC, the spread of this HVC prototype had possibly crossed vindhya range in the South [242] and flanged into the peninsular coastal areas in a checkered way. Its northern limit was Kashmir and janapada-s in the Himalayan subranges. There was no significant urbaniz-ation till this time indicating a localized self-governance. Urban centers started appearing again, almost a millennium after the period of mature SSC by which time HVC had penetrated into the peninsular Indic regions and coastal areas.[243] The deurbanization in the final phases of SSC can be viewed as the cultural synthesis of S-S, G-Y, and parts of middle and peninsular Indic regions which had common cultural substrata. The resultant civilization was indigenous because it was mainly caused by gradual dislocation and the subsequent syn-thesis which in turn was caused by 'natural causes' and not by invading or intrusive influx of migrants from outside the S-S/G-Y regions.[244] It was indigenous also because it evolved over a long period of time (1900BC-1300BC) by natural fusion - a kind of cultural osmosis. This civilization was a continuum inasmuch as it retained and transmitted non-urbanized cultural strands of SSC+RVC into the post 1300BC HVC as supported by the archaeological finds.[2451 The identity (SSC+RVC) =HVC can be interpreted to mean that HVC included substrata of popular Hindu customs and traditions of SSC and of Vedic sacrificial theology of RVC. Both substrata were intermeshed and many of their layers, particularly of popular Hinduism were common to S-S, G-Y and peninsular Indic regions in a localized, stratified manner. Vedic priests were instrumental in spreading the sacrificial theology of HVC in which they had both ideological commitment and material stakes; Vedic ritualism was traditional means of their livelihood. HVC had prototypes of important post 800BC cultural traits such as: (1) brAhmaNa and shramaNa[246] traditions; (2) dravida and Munda (tribal) subcultures; (3) stratification based on caste (jAti) and class (varNa), though in RVC this stratificatiion was not rigid. This HVC continuum had a Greek historical reference. [247] The model of indigenous HVC is disputed mainly by philo-logists and

linguists. They argue that Indo-European languages [IE] including Sanskrit, Latin, Greek etc have many common features[248] and are spread over disparate regions of Eurasia. IE must have evolved from a common Proto-Indo-European [PIE] language which had 'original homeland' [Urheimat]. PIE spread outside Urheimat, in other regions, as super-stratum on the respective anterior local language by: (1) Invasion and force, (2) migration and elite domination, (3) acculturation and exchange. The first natural choice of Urheimat was the S-S region where the ancient IE text (RV) was composed in the archaic Sanskrit. This was rejected for following reasons: Aryan Migration Theory [AMT]: It was assumed that the Aryans were 'outsiders'; their entry in the S-S regions was the cause of destruction or decline of SSC. < <This hypothesis and its original AIT premise - invasion by the "chariot driving or horse riding" hordes of Aryans - has been contested and countered by many Indologists and archaeologists > > .[249] Dravidian or Munda Substratum of Sanskrit exists in the S-S region << This has been countered by Thieme, Das, Hock and others by observing that, majority of the so called substrate words have no Dravidian origins; the remaining cases are suggestive of ad-stratum and not substratum> >. The Linguistic Center of Gravity: Language family's most likely point of origin is in the area of its greatest diversity; S-S/G-Y is not such an area. << This argument has been set aside by Dhar and others by saying that 'linguistic center of gravity principle' is culture specific; the point of origin is the area of 'least linguistic change' and not of 'greatest diversity' for 'conservative' languages and their cultures>>. Law of Palatals[250] and the discovery of the laryngeals[251] in Hittite, disprove the claim of Sanskrit being PIE. << Against this, Kazanas (2004) argues that Sanskrit need not be PIE, but it is the oldest and the closest language to PIE. It might had innovated (or lost) some features due to palatalization or otherwise but, it still retained most of its archaic IE features. This suggests that Indo-Aryans were sedentary and remained in the Urheimat while other groups left. Burrow (1974) says - "Vedic Sanskrit is a language which in most respects is more archaic and less altered from original IE than other members of the family". Elst (1996, 1999) does not think that the laws of palatals and laryngeals warrant exclusion of Indic Urheimat. According to him, it is perfectly possible that a Kentum language which we now label as PIE was spoken in India, that some of its speakers emigrated and developed Kentum languages like Germanic & Tokharic, and that subsequently PIE language in its Indic homeland

developed and satemized into Sanskrit. Similarly, as the first emigrant dialect, Hittite could have taken from India some linguistic features (genus commune, laryngeals) which were about to disappear in the dialects emigrating only later or staying behind. > > [252] Language Continuity: There is no archaeological record as yet that attests the use of Vedic Sanskrit or any other IE in SSC. < <Against this, it is argued that RV was preserved through the oral tradition. SSC could be a multilingual society, Vedic Sanskrit being one of its languages, mainly of priests and bards. It was used for sacral duties and not for 'trade and services' so as to leave archaeological trace > > [253] According to mainstream linguistics, Sanskrit is a derivative IE language of the Indo-Aryan group [IA] with IE superstratum and with some local substrate. As a corollary of this thesis, Sanskrit was linked to migration of Aryans into Indic regions who supposedly brought along with them an IE/IA dialect, a forerunner to RV Sanskrit. This disqualified the Indic Urheimat. Various other regions have been identified as the possible Urheimat candidates, first spanning most of Europe, and then Asia: (1) Anatolia in West Asia, (2) Caucasus region between Black and Caspian Seas, (3) Kurgan region in the steppes of South Russia, (4) Bactria & Margiana Archaeological Complex [BMAC][254] which is close to the S-S region. The vast Indic (Sanskrit) literature has no memory of any homeland outside S-S/G-Y regions. Though there must have been occasional inward trickle of migrants, there is no record of any migrants' influx during 4500BC-800BC; on the contrary, as argued by some Indologists; there are pointers to the possible outwards movements during the same period[255]: Pointer-1: Based on genealogy of kings & priests mentioned in RV, 'relative chronology' of RV books is found to be: (a) Early: Bk [6, 3, 7, 1]; (b) Middle: Bk [4, 2, 1]; (c) Late: Bk [(5, 8, 1), (9)]; (4) Final: Bk [10]. If this chronology is mapped on various geographical references in RV, a movement of Aryans away from G-Y doab to the west (sindhu and beyond) is discerned. This indicates an out of S-S movement rather than the inward flux of population into S-S/G-Y regions. It also suggests G-Y region to be the homeland of RV-IAs,[256] though the core area of RVC was the S-S region. Pointer-2: purANa-s allude to migration of druhyu-s in early (proto Vedic) period out of S-S. The druhyu-s were resident in Punjab, but tried to expand into interior Indic regions. Other tribes battled and contained them in the north-western part of the Punjab. The druhyu king a.ngAra was killed. Their settle-ments in Punjab came to be

known as gAndhAra after the name of one of a.ngAra's successors. After a time, being over-populated, druhyu-s crossed the northern contours of S-S regions and founded many principalities in the alien territories of the north. Thus, according to purANa-s (matsya 48.9, vAyu 99.11-12, brahmANDa 3.74.11-12, viShNu 4.17.5, bhAgavata 9.23.15-16), prachetas' descendants spread out into alien (mlechCha) lands to the north and founded kingdoms there. Pointer-3: The second historical outward migration recorded is that of the anu-s and the residual druhyu-s, which took place after the dAsharAGYa battle in the early RVC. This is "the battle of 10-kings" (RV 7.18-19, 33, 83) between the bharata king sudAsa and a confederacy of ten tribes of anu-druhyu group in whose names we can recognize the IE ethnonyms.[257] The hymns show that in this period all the major IE groups were settled in the Punjab, including all those found, in later times, in the geographically furthest areas from the Punjab: the Phrygians (later in Turkey), the Alans (later in the northern Caucasus), and the Khivas (later in Chorasmia), not to mention the major peoples of latter day Afghanistan (Pakhtoons) and Iran (Persians, Parthians, Medes). The hymns clearly record that this battle saw the defeat of the anu-s, the conquest of their territories by sudAsa (RV 7.18.13), and the commencement of their migration westwards. These post-dAsharAGYa migrations included the ancestors of Iranian, Thraco-Phrygian (Armenian), Illyrian (Albanian), and Hellenic (Greek), which are mentioned in the dAsharAGYa hymns. From the point of view of Indic Urheimat Theory [IUT]: Seven ancestral branches of IEs, not mentioned in the dAsharAGYa hymns, viz Hittite, Tocharian, Italic, Celtic, Germanic, Baltic, and Slavonic migrated northwards from gAndhAra into Central Asia during the pre- RV times. Five of these IEs later migrated westwards into Europe, while the other two, Hittite and Tocharian, remained behind in parts of Central Asia. Hittites, at a much later date, migrated into Anatolia. [258] These two branches, which remained behind in Central Asia, retained contact with the Indo-Aryans further south. It is quite possible that these contacts were revived through new migrants from S-S regions post-1900BC in the late SSC. Pointer-4: The vArShAgirA battle (RV 1.100) took place in gAndhAra in the middle RV period between paurava-s led by RRijrAshva against proto-Iranians lead by vishtAspa and supported by paurava-s like arNa & chitraratha (RV 4.30.18). After the battle, Iranians were pushed out of gAndhAra. This battle has been attested in the middle and late parts of RV and by the early parts of Avesta,[259] and suggests an outward movement of Indo-Aryans into Persia and central Asia. Pointer-5: There is no internal reference in RV that indicates

desiccation of river sarasvatI and the population shift caused thereof. [260] Archaeological findings however, show this shift during the late SSC period, particularly in settlements located on banks of sarasvatI (across Ghaggar as well as Hakra sections) and sindhu and its tributaries. The shift was due to natural causes or calamities. It affected large areas and involved population movements towards east (Cemetery H and G-Y), to south (Gujarat and west coast) and to the north-west beyond sindhu (BMAC). This must be the epoch making shift of its times that gradually altered the demographic setup of S-S/ G-Y regions and reverberated in the far remote regions across western and central Asia. The comparative study of RV and Avesta gives some more clues to the early population movements. The ancient lands of Fargard-1 of Vendidad have been identified by scholars, but without unanimity. Gnoli is of the opinion that none of them is to the west of Iran; all of them are in the present day Central Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Punjab; the last being the easternmost boundary of the Iranian ancient homelands. If one reads the pointers 1-5 with Fargard list of homelands,[261] then the movement from S-S or gAndhAra to Iran looks more probable than the singular east-ward movement from Iran to S-S during the time frames of Vendidad and RV.[262] Ahurs (Asurs) and Daeva (Devas) had interchanged roles in Avesta and RV. They had the background of pUru and proto-Iranian (anu- druhyu) conflict in RV which later might have manifested as mythical conflict between Ahur Mazda of Ahurs and Angra Mainyu of Daevas in Avesta. In RV times this relationship is not of uniform rivalry. In hariyUplya battle (RV 6.27.5) for example; the pUru king sRRi.njaya and the anu (pArthava) king abhyAvartin chAyamAna (RV 6.27.8) united against their then common adversary (turvasha) from south (of Vindhya), suggesting friendly relations between anu-s (proto-Iranians) and pUru-s before dAsharAGYa war. In vArShAgirA battle too it was not a uniform rivalry between pUru-s and proto-Iranian tribes. After the comparative study of RV and Avesta, one fact clearly emerges - Avestians had a shared past with Vedic people confirming S-S region as one of their homelands or both of them came from a common homeland. Some Indologists, based on these speculative "out of S-S movements", suggest S-S region to be the PIE Urheimat and to be the cradle of most of the Eurasian civilizations. Some others feel that concepts like Urheimat and PIE should not be applied to the civilizational issues in a dogmatic manner. According to them, linguistic principles are not necessarily or adequately applicable to communication of ideas and their spread which form the basis of civilization. Civilizations are

formed and spread by 'stimulus diffusion' - not by specific techniques or institutions but by the adaptation of stimuli of underlying ideas and principles suited to their respective cultural ecology and temperament. A language can help this spread but it cannot be the benchmark for deciding the origins or chronology of such stimuli. According to some historians, civilizations in Nile and S-S region got underway from stimulus diffusion from Mesopotamia while some believe that Minoan- Mycenaean civilization of pre-historic Greece is autochthonous (Ref. Stavrianos, 1983) implying that stimulus can be 'external' or can originate autochthonously. What really matters is the receptivity of the cultural ecology that s sustains the stimulus rather than autochthony of stimulus. If RV was composed in the final stage of SSC, then SSC+ RVC language continuity may or may not hold; however, if the bulk of RV was composed during or before the stage of mature SSC, then SSC+RVC cultural continuum includes the continuity of language. According to some Indologists, this continuum is more credible than the scenario in which newly migrant nomadic Aryans settle across the banks of desiccated sarasvatI c.1400BC[2631, extol its grandeur, and establish vast Vedic literature including lagadha's jyotiSha (c.1200BC), which must be the result of astronomical data accumulated over many centuries; and liturgical brAhamaNa texts which were the result of codification efforts of centuries culminating in shulba geometry[2641. Many Indologists hold that evolution of HVC was an osmotic process of cultural synthesis which occurred over a long period of time spanning over late and final phases of SSC. Some evidence of this synthesis is discernible in epics, though their compilation happened mostly in post-Vedic period. See Maps-5&6 for ethnonyms and place- names in epics and purANa-s that can be identified all across the subcontinent. 5.1.3 RV Culture: Some Indologists such as K. D. Sethana (Amal Kiran) and N. Kazanas who oppose AIT/AMT within the time frame of 4500BC-800BC argue that RVC was pastoral-agricultural in nature and hence anterior to mature SSC and contemporaneous with formative and early stages of SSC. In support of their argument, they point out the absence of following things in RVC: (1) brick [IShTakA]; (2) fixed altars or hearths (made of bricks); (3) urbanization - bricked buildings, sewerage system, granary, public bath, iconography, language script etc; (4) cultivation of cotton [karpAsa]; (5) Silver metal (rajat); and (6) rice grain (vRRihi). They acknowledge that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, however, the absence of so many crucial things in RV, according to them, is indicative of RVC's pastoral and semi-nomadic nature.

RV 4.57 (hymns of xetrapati or Lord of the Field), reference in RV 8.91.5 of urvarA or 'fertile field', and other references to farming tools and tackles such as khanitra (shovel), lA.ngala (plough), sRRiNi (sickle) etc. give RVC a 'pastoral-agricultural-rural' [PAR] base. That this PAR culture was capable of evolving towards firm semi-urbanized settlements is clear from the references to weaving with loom, shuttle, warp, and woof; and metal-work with some kind of smithy. Proponents as well opponents of AMT, are in general agree-ment with PAR nature of RVC for their own reasons. On the basis of stratification however, urbanization of mature SSC and rural tradition of RVC could exist together as two aspects of the same civilization. We can discern four distinct streams of RVC, which fused into later day HVC: Nature worship of popular Hinduism: Perhaps, this is the earliest practice of RVC that has continuity till the present day. This practice manifested not only as worship of gods representing 'natural elements' but as worship of nature itself - rivers, mountains, trees and then of animals - cows, monkeys, snakes and many others. The deification and personification of nature - its phenomena, its flora- fauna - is an ancient legacy of Hinduism.[265] Righteous tradition of varuNa & RRita: varuNa is the God of sky and the upholder of the 'order, both physical as well as moral' (RRita). mitra, the friend, is usually associated with varuNa and both rule the day and the night, the heaven and the earth, guard the good and punish the perverse. varuNa has the moral character higher than that of any other deity. While many of the hymns of other deities are replete with demands for long life, wealth, and power; the worshiper of varuNa seeks from him systemic order, purity, freedom from evil, and forgiveness. The hymns to varuNa, as far as they refer RRita [Fd]- the principle of harmony, order and righteousness; show an ethical perception. This ethical right-eousness continued in gItA, and bauddha canon though in the later case it showed no explicit connection with RV. The moral order of RRita metamorphosed into the "law of karma" which is the axiological basis of all Indic schools. Ritualistic tradition of brAhamaNa-s: The origin of this tradition is shrouded in the antiquity of RV and SSC. In this tradition, the worshiper expects attention from his deity. "dehi me; dadAmi te" [give thou to me; I give to thee] seems to be one of the dominant underlying themes. The God receives strength from the offerings[2661 of the worshiper, and he obliges in return. "All rivers swell thy ocean; so, God our prayers increase thy might" (RV 8.87.8). In return God is expected to fulfill the aspirations of the worshiper. The worshiper reminds the God: "Son of Strength, agni, if thou wert the mortal,

bright as mitra, I worshiped with our gifts! And (if) I were the Immortal God, I would not give thee up to calumny or misery, O Bounteous One. My worshiper should feel no hunger or distress nor should he live in sin. (RV 8.19.25-26)". This spirit of 'give and take' between the god and the man later turned into the 'spiritual contract' to be honored by the god if the sacrifice is rightly performed. Some of the sacrifices involved killing of anmals[267] drawing criticism from Jain and Bauddha monks and introspection within. In post RV period; yaGYa[yo] (offerings through sacrificial fire) was made part of house-holders' daily routine. Vedic-Brahmanic culture tried to build its social system around the concept of yaGYa. In AraNyaka and upaniShad-s, the ritualism was spiritualized and the yaGYa was seen as metaphor of the cosmic process. Here, ritualism of brahAhmaNa connected with RV's pantheist world-view and with UP's kArmika theology. The conceptualization of pa.ncha-agni and pa.ncha-yaGYa represents evolution towards kArmika and ethical universalism. aupaniShad philosophy of monism: The late hymns, particularly those in Bk-10 and Bk-1, show monistic trends. The lists of teachers in BU suggest that this tradition must have originated sometime during late or final stages of SSC (1700BC-1300BC) contemporaneous with Book-10 of RV. The seeds of mAyAvAda of Advaita and spanda-vAda of Kashmir Shaivism are discernible in RV 10.129-130, though their manifestation and compilation occured quite late in the oldest UP and still later in the writings of their 8thC-9thC protagonists. The meditative and renunciatory strands of later Vedanta tradition can be traced to SSC as well as to the Gangetic regions. Finally in UP they were integrated with RV's monism and prevalent kArmika axiology, while BG added the theistic and proactive strands to offer a syncretic philosophy. 5.1.4 The time frame of RVC: Indologists have interpreted astronomical and genealogical clues in Vedic and paurANika texts to trace the footprints of RV. This evidence seems to be uncertain but indicative. [268] Archaeological evidence indirectly supports historicity projected by the old family books to be anterior to or convergent with the mature SSC[269]. Internal RV references and geological research of sarasvatI give further credence to pre-1900BC antiquity of RVC/proto-RVC which it might had shared with BMAC. The speculation of the inward-outward migratory movements depends on a particular model within AMT or IUT framework that one may subscribe to. The comparative study of RVC and Mesopotamian civilization suggests synchronism between these two ancient civilizations. As an example, it is argued that the religion of RVC parallels Mesopotamian religion

of the 3rd millennium BC. Even specific epithets and literary allusions can be found to apply to certain deities that are comparable in the respective traditions. RV is seen to end at the time of the first period of doubt in Mesopotamia around 1500BC, which coincides with the end of late SSC. This is also the time of the development of monotheism in the Ancient Near East, and this development can be seen in RV. In general, it is argued that it is not conceivable that there should be a lapse of 1500-1800 years between two comparable civilizations with comparable develop-ments in areas which had trade with one another. We can date the early Indic tradition on the basis of comparable points in ancient Mesopotamia. By this, RV would date back to the beginning of the third millennium BC, with some of the earliest hymns perhaps dating back to (or looking back into) the end of fourth millennium BC".[2701 Finally, the spread of Indic (Vedic) culture in the first mille-nnium AD in Southeast Asia may provide a clue to its spread in the second millennium BC in West Asia. A good example of the former case is Sanskrit inscription c.400 in Borneo. From this and several other inscriptions it is known that an Indonesian clan was founded by a son (Ashvavarman) of a chieftain (Kundunga without a trace of Sanskrit) independently of the Brahmanas, who on their arrival consecrated the ruler (Mulavarman) of the third generation. The inscription says that Mulavarman celebrated great sacrifices by giving valuable presents to the Brahmanas; and that "they (Brahmanas) had come here" - most likely from India. This was a case when an indigenous chieftain invited Brahmanas to legitimize his rule and sought covenanted kingship by offering sacrifices. In such cases invited Brahmanas were isolated from local people and kept in touch only with their patrons for counselling etc. It is quite possible that Mitanni and Hittite kings might had sought similar legitimation from proto-Brahmanas who had earlier left the S- S/BMAC region during late SSC. The Boghaz Kuei inscription invoking Vedic Gods could be a relic of this pre-historic cultural transmission that might have happened, to start with, for a limited period for a limited purpose. In fact, according to modern Hurrian scholarship, Hurrians venerated the same Syrian-Mesopotamian gods and followed the same religious practices as did the other contemporary peoples in that region. Similarly, in Hurrian language, barring the kings' names and few other terms, IA names and words are non-existent.[271] The IA names in the inscription as well as few IA loan words in the old Hurrian language of the Mitanni realm must be the localized form of the corresponding Sanskrit words; their presence merely attests the transmission of the politico-cultural idea of divine sanction through Vedic sacrifices at some point of time in the past. The transmission of

idea need not be necessarily from S-S/G-Y region to West Asia; it could be in reverse direction or from a 'third place'; however, its earliest known literal and cultural manifestation was the RVC in the S- S/G-Y region. RV Autochthony:[2721 All this argumentation however, does not mean that RV authors were autochthonous in the absolute anthropogenic sense. There are ample indications to believe that RVC was a container of societies, tribes and clans with pastoral and semi- nomadic as well as agricultural and semi-urbanite strata. RV autochthony means that the geography, peoples, events, and ideas which RV talked about were closely related and affiliated to S-S/G-Y region. RV composers eulogized and worshiped the S-S rivers across which they had settled. RV itself was composed by many families over many generations as a part of their oral tradition. This suggests that RV authors were domiciled in S-S region for a long time and had a sedentary culture. Integration of RVC (Vedic) and SSC (proto- Hinduism) substrata into HVC, and its spread in S-S/G-Y and adjacent Indic regions happened not by invasion and force but by cultural osmosis[2731 impelled by natural events. This should make the autochthony issue superfluous. RV composers being domiciled in S-Sregion is secondary to their internalizing the principle"एकं सत् विप्रा बहुधा वदन्ति ... " [to "The One", the sages give many names].[274]This is the concluding principle of RV. At some other place in RV, it is known as"d4cH" [That One]. Vedantaadapts and expresses it as"drqHR" [Thou Art That] or"316 "El" [I am brahman]". This principle is not dependent on the antiquity or autochthony of RV. Its purport is universal and timeless. Those who internalize it are all autocthonous in the spirit of 'universal brother-hood'[वसुधैव कुटुंबकम्]. The test of internalization ofएकं सत् ... , is to include principled atheism and agnosticism in its fold. It is the principle of harmony - coexistence with minimum friction and maximum bliss.

Zarif karura kahu

Ssri Khola

Pahnian Chen4 Lahore

Fupar Patano Ghndal

4 Rana gun da Dudheri Boochiste

Mahrgerh oDelhil Nausharo

TArkhanawals-dAm

Mohanto- cann

Min Knlat Nindowarl Thas Desan

; Makur

Kanchi-

7 A-Sites belongs early farming oultures =Stes belongs Indus Ov. -Ahmadabad Stes belongs Post Indus cuhtures Runn of Kutch -modem eiry Rangpur

=alluvid plin Saurashtra -hlk 0 200km

Arabian Sea

http://bosei.cc.u-tokai.ac.jp/~indus/english/map.html (a.1.8.2008)

Map-1: Sapta Sindhava (Harappa) Civilization-I

(1) Formative stage e.g. Mehrgarh-4,5 (c.4000BC-3500BC); (2) Early stage e.g. Kalibangan-1 (c.3500BC-2800BC); (3) Period of transition e.g. Dholavira-3 (c.2800BC-2600BC) (4) Mature era e.g. Harappa-3, Kalibangan-2 (c.2600BC-1900BC) (5) Late stage e.g. Cemetery H, Harappa-4 (1900BC-1500BC); (6) Final Stage e.g. Harappa-5, Dholavira-4 (1500BC-1300BC)

lammu &

0 200 m 400 km . Mandas

Mundigak

AFGHANISTAN Rehman Dheri -* LAHOREYAMRITSARO TAPUT Ropar Harappa +OUETTA AMDALA

-Dabarkot Bhagwanpura

Mehrgarh .. Kuna

Nausharo Pirak Banawal .

Kalıbangan Siswal ... Harvana . Jhukar Rakhigarhi DELHI

PAKISTAN Ganwerlwala BKANER

Mohenjo-daro Rajasthan MATHURAT Kot Dij DIASALMER

Amri @Chanhu Daro JOOHPUR

INDIA Balakot "

KARACHI RANNOF

Arabian Sea Dholavira

Surkotada

Ber Dwarka Lothal Guiarat -Nagoshwar Rangpur OBARODA Punjab Indian State OWARKA

BARODA :present-day city 'Rojdï Cy/Bhagatrav

• Ropar : Harappan site Maharashtra Lothal :major sile SOUNATH

intemational border NASK dry bed of Dalmabad

the Sarasvab http://micheldanino.voiceofdharma.com/images/map.jpg (a.1.8.2008)

Map-2: Sapta Sindhava (Harappa) Civilization-II

Note the Major sites such as Gunweriwala, Kalibangan, and Banawli; and numerous smaller SSC settlements across the river Sarasvati (the present day desiccated Ghaggar-Hakra river bed). According to geologist, this was a perennial river flowing from source (Himalaya) to Sea before 3000BC.

Kubha Trst Suvastu. Sarasval?

Kurrum Sushoma

Gomat Vitasta Asikni Parusni Vipas Sutudri Harappa

Sarasinzı Yamuna Cemetary H Ganga

Source: Wikipedia (a.1.7.2010) Map-3: Geography of RV-10 Synchronization Pointers: 1. RV-10 alludes to Cemetary H practices (c.1900BC-1500BC) 2. Sarasvati flow drastically reduced; Kalibangan abandoned c.1900BC 3. Hymn RV-10.98 (devApi) synchronizes RV-10 with early MB era. 4. Submerging of Bet Dwaraka of MB in c.1500BC-1400BC 5. Marine excavation suggests Dwaraka to be late SSC settlement. 6. Puranic references place MB era somewhere in c.1900BC-1400BC 7. BU teachers' list philosophically and temporally connects with RV-10

Sarasvati flowed from Hardikun glacier, W. Harhwal Bandarpunch - Channels in Vedic Lime massif, Himalayas: Shatdru Present (Sutlej) joined at Shatrana: Channel Yamuna pirated Sarasvati at o (Jhelam)

PaontaSaheb, after Valdiya vitast 1996; Balarama's Asikni (Chend&)

pilgrimage from Dwaraka to Mathura in Airo vati (Ravi) Shotodru Pomundri Kollas Sindhu on Sarasvati.

PShatrana

Drishadwati Ghaggar Saroswati Delhi KGanga Pirate lamuna HOKTO .Joisalmer Mathurd Shdradb

Degänd Sömthar Umarkot Bärmer TLuni) Lovanavati Chombal Allőhäbdd

KachchR 150 km

www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/sarasvati/civilizationmapsimages/ vedicsaras1.jpg (a.1.7.2010) Map-4: River System of SSC and RV-10.75.5

इमं मे गङ्गे यमुने सरस्वति शुतुद्रि स्तोमं सचता परुष्ण्या | असिक्न्या मरुद्वुधे वितस्तयाऽऽर्जीकीये शृणुह्या सुषोमया ।।५। O ga.ngA, yamunA, sarasvati, shutudri (Sutlej) and paruShNii (Ravi), O maru-dvRRidhA with asiknii (Chenab), O ArjikiiyA with vitastA (Jhelum) and suShomA (Sohan), please listen to and accept this hymn of mine. ||5|| (N.B. Verse-6 of RV 10.75 adds another nine north-western tributaries of Sindhu flowing through Afghanistan and N-W Pakistan indicating the total spread of RVC at the time of RV-10).

The locations are approximate

and are based in their

references in the Epics

(Mahabharatu, Ramayana), Puranas

& Bauddha literature. They

inetoda king-doms, Tbrests and

Fivers, The Lindoms were

Huna This map shons the names ef the tingdorre mertoned Focue is on Menabharine, Phces H Pan ayada aleo as Yellow Kingdoms Tolkictan Creen : Fureels Puple Motrtens Prtishika Riers (Banth) Asu ika Cranye Purelyforiean kngcerhe thigply unceita n locm

Kambolu Kingdurin cf eaulic-ribes, tic ugh each of lhem to many other p laces

Gandhard

Trigait

Amuasthe

Curu Panchala sindhu Fur Nepa Kirata Sondald

Panchald Vidcha

Halla Prayiyuticha

Dosamno uhma

Riksha

Dw crøkn Anaito armeda

Sourashtra

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_India (a.14.09.2008)

Map-5: Epic India (c.1300BC-600BC)

Uttarapath (Northway)

(North of Vindhya)

According to MB, Saraswati River had already dried in desert at Vinashana

The locations are approximate an

are based on their references in

the Epics (Mahabharata, Ramavana)

Puranas and Bauddha literature.

They include Lingdoms, forests

and rivers. Tha Lingdams ware

Saurashtra Heyaya ntin apa

Anupa Yidarbha Tabat

Asmaka Habendra

Dandaka

telings

Krshne

Kishkindha Gomanta

Karanataka Drauiila

Mahishaka Malyavat Kanchi Mushika Tkaver Chola

Kerala ralava Pandya

Sinhala

Lanka

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_India (a.14.09.2008)

Map-6: Epic India (c.1300BC-600BC)

Dakshinapath (Southway)

(South of Vindhya)

5.2 History of Vedanta:[2751

Though it is possible to trace origin of Vedanta principles in the saMhitA part of Veda (before 1000BC), it is customary to view Vedanta tradition to emanate from the UP. If we fix the anterior boundary of this tradition to c.800BC, close to which the oldest UP are assigned; we can divide the subsequent chronology as follows: 1. Period of Scriptures (c.800BC-300BC) 2. Period of Collation (c.300BC-200) 3. Period of Recovery (c.200-700) 4. Period of Establishment (c.700-1000) 5. Period of Dialectic (c.1000-1400) 6. Period of Syncretism (c.1500-1700 and thereafter) 5.2.1 Period of Scriptures (c.800BC-300BC): This is the period of prasthAnatraya works. MU 3.2.6 and SU 6.22 refer the term Vedanta as a Knowledge discipline to signal the end of Vedic period some time around 500BC. MU demarcates clear boundary between Vedic ritualism and Vedanta. Some of the aupaniShad sages such as yAGYavalkya, uddAlaka AruNi, aitareya, shANDilya, satyakAma jAbAla, bhAradvAja, pippalAda and kings such as kaikeya, jaivali, ajAtashatru, janaka could be anterior to it having acquired mythical status at that time. Considering the list of teachers in BU (2.6, 4.6, 6.5); the central aupaniShad doctrine must have been known to the sages much before the BU compilation. [276] This is also known as the Vedanga period in which kalpa[277] sUtra-s and other important texts in the domain of "auxiliary Vedic studies" [Vedanga] came up. Most of these texts must have been composed in S-S region itself though their redaction in extended G-Y or other regions is possible:

1. vedA.nga jyotiSha [VJ] by lagadha (c.1200BC)[278] on astrology. 2. kalpasUtra-s by AshvalAyana, and sha.nkhAyana (of RV); by ApastaMba, vAdhUlA, and baudhAyana (of KYV); and by kAtyAyana (of SYV) etc. (c.800BC-500BC) on rituals 3. nirukta by yAska (c.700BC) on etymology 4. padapATha-s are attributed to shAkalya (before 500BC) in whose name one RV recension is known; and prAti-sAkhya-s are attributed to shaunaka (c.500BC) in whose name one AV recension is known

2. aShTAdhyAyI (on Sanskrit Grammar) by pANini (c.550BC-350BC)

6. Chandasa-sUtra (on Vedic meter) by pi.ngala (c.350BC-200BC) Asterismal data and calendrical studies of jyotiSha; shulba geometry and mensuration of kalpasUtra; root-morphemes of nirukta; fidelity phonetics of prAtisAkhya; BNF like notation and morphology similar to 'finite state automata' of aShTAdhyAyI; combinatorics including binomial and binary symbol system of Chandas are some of the high points of Vedanga. The earliest draft of arthashAstra (on Political Management) by kautilya came up by end of this period (c.300BC). The artha-shAstra acknowledges four sciences - philosophy, theology, economics, and jurisprudence. It places lokAyata, sA.nkhya & yoga in philosophy while assigns mImAMsA and Vedanta to theology. This influential text provided the administrative frame-work for many a future kingdoms. As most of the pramANa UP were compiled before 500BC,[279] formulation of BS aphorisms might have started circa 500BC-300BC after their compilation. Some of the initial contributors among kArShNAjini, kAshakRRiShNa, Atreya, jaimini, bAdari, auDulomi, Ashmarathya and bAdarAyaNa which have been named in BS itself could belong to this period. Interestingly, in BU and CU, some of the important doctrines are taught by the kings (warrior's class) to the Brahmanas (priests or teaching class). For example, king ajAtashatru of kAshI instructs Brahmana gArgya bAlAki about identification of Atman with brahman (BU 2.1); king ashvapati kaikeya instructs the Brahmana seekers about Atman vaishvAnara (CU 5.11-14); king pravAhaNa jaivali instructs two Brahamanas about AkAsha as the ultimate substratum of all things (CU 1.8-9), and again instructs uddAlaka AruNI about doctrine of soul's transmigration (CU 5.3-10 and BU 5.2). Probably, the doctrine of indestructibility of soul was cultivated (if not originated) and transmitted more actively and exclusively within the warrior class of that time. The doctrine must be more attractive to those who faced prospects of untimely death during the wars etc.[280] The anterior period was after all the period of warfares when small kingdoms (janapada-s) fought with each other to defend themselves or to become bigger kingdom (mahA-janapada). Existence of some eighteen mahAjanapada-s by c.600BC is recorded in epic and bauddha literature. [281] In the initial phase of this period, sacrificial dogma was dominant. Development of the UP (before 500BC), and then advent of Buddhism and Jainism (c.500BC-300BC)[282] may be viewed on the back- ground of this dogma. The framework of these new developments is described by Frits Staal: [2831 The conviction that sacrifice (yaGYa) was the basis of the entire

universe, including even the Gods, shows that it was itself the basis of the entire Vedic civilization and the main inspiration of the vast Vedic literature. But as soon as the reality, which was accessible to it, was discovered and the sacrificial act had lost its creative efficacy, the central place accorded to the sacrifice led to over-emphasis and codi- fication, which became increasingly rigid. This led to several new interconnected developments:

1. The ritual acts were maintained, but were interpreted symbolically (as for instance in the AraNyaka-s and in the opening sections of BU, where the horse-sacrifice (ashva-medha) is interpreted allegorically) 2. The ritual acts were 'interiorized' or spiritualized (leading to meditation, and hence to the GYAna or vidyA)

2. The ritual acts were regarded as ineffective in the spiritual realm[2841 (leading to one of the main theses of Advaita- Vedanta: the inferiority of karma) 4. The ritual acts were abolished altogether (leading to the rejection of the authority of the Veda and to the avaidika doctrines of Buddhists as well as of Jains and others[285]). Only mImAMsA maintained the Vedic tradition of sacrifices and karma, though even here further developments took place. The second and third developments lead to the heart of Advaita. The last development, particularly the Buddhism [bauddha mata] was equally important for Advaita from epistemic and axiological point of view.

(A) Siddhartha Gautama [सिद्धार्थ गौतम]or Gautam Buddha [गौतम बुद्ध] (c.563BC-483BC)[286]: Buddha is probably the most influential historical figure in the spiritual, philosophical milieu of the Indic regions. He was borne as prince Siddhartha in a Gotama family of Shakya clan on the border of today's India and Nepal. According to hagiography; he left his kingly abode at the age of twenty-nine in search of panacea for sufferings of the human kind and after six years of intense austerities and experiencing their futility he found his 'middle path', neither of severe austerities nor of bodily pleasures, but a middle one of eight 'appropriate' (samyak) auxiliaries" [Arya- AshTA.nga-Marga]: (1) Knowledge (dRRiShTi) of four basic truths (Aryasatya);[287] (2) undertaking (sa.nkalpa) of noble intentions and aspirations without attachment to worldly pleasures; (3) speech (vAchA) excluding falsity, bad-mouthing, and prattling; (4) action (karma) with restraint and without causing violence; (5) vocation (AjIvikA) which does not lead directly or indirectly to disharmony and

injury[2881 (6) practice (vyAyAma) of positive and virtuous thinking; (7) awareness (smRRiti) of the sufferings of others, of keeping in mind the transience of material world, and of the fact that world objects are without any permanent unchanging essence; and (8) absorption (nirvANa) [fafur] which is the result of mental discipline and of adherence to the previous seven auxiliaries. It is the state of supreme peace and balance. This middle path is included in last of the four basic truths: (1) there are sufferings in the world; (2) ignorance is the basic cause of these sufferings; (3) this Ignorance needs to be removed to alleviate the sufferings; and (4) Ignorance can be removed by the 'noble eight-fold path' (Arya-aShTA.nga-mArga) which is the Buddha's 'middle path'. He preached these noble truths (Aryasatya) throughout his life after he became 'enlightened' (Buddha). Sometimes Buddha's aShTA.nga-mArga is summarized into three-fold path which recommends imbuing of the following principles: (a) praGYA or awareness that all world objects are transient, sorrowful, and interdependent and (hence) without any 'essence'. Man's ego is the root cause of his sufferings; (b) shiila or character that inculcates virati (avoidance) of prANAti-pAta (killing), adattAdAna (that which is not willingly given), kAma-mithyAchAra (unlawful sex), mRRiShAvAda (falsity), surA -maireya-pramAdasthAna (liquor or any other intoxicants that loosen the control over mind); and (c) samAdhi (absorption) which is the final stage of supreme peace which is attained by dhyAna (concentration of mind by detaching it from world objects). This stage is consolidated by practicing maitrl (friend-ship towards all), karuNA (compassion), muditA (sharing the happiness of others), and upexA (a certain indifference toward worldly affairs; a balance of mind). Buddha's teachings were mainly ethical and positivist; he was not interested in engaging himself in speculative metaphysics. This is the reason he kept quiet on following questions which are called avyAkRRita:[2891 (1) The Universe as a whole is permanent, (2) The Universe as whole is impermanent, (3) The Universe is finite, (4) The Universe is infinite, (5) Soul (jIva) and body (sharIra) are one and the same, (6) Soul and body are different from each other, (7) Tathagata (Buddha) exists after death, (8) Tathagata does not exist after death, (9) Tathagata exists and does not exist after death, (10) Tathagata does not "exist and not exist" after death. In spite of Buddha's reluctance to dwell on metaphysical topics he had to deal with metaphysical and axiological issues such as causality, karma, and birth-rebirth cycle etc. while discussing the causes of sufferings. His dvAdasha nidAna [DN] (twelve-fold doctrine) enlist a chain of twelve causes leading to human sufferings: (1) avidyA

(Ignorance) -> (2) saMskAra (dispositions) -> (3) viGYAna (ego or consciousness) -> (4) nAmarUpa (basic personality of body-mind complex) -> (5) ShaDAyatana (five sense organs plus connected mind component) -> (6) sparsha (connection of sense organs with their objects) -> (7) vedanA (pain and pleasure) -> (8) tRRishNA (longing for pain and pleasure) -> (9) upAdAna (binding or excess of tRRishNA) -> (10) bhava (actions leading to repetition of causes 6-10 -> (11) jAti (birth and rebirth) -> (12) jarA-maraNa (old age and death) as the natural consequence of birth. It is customary to divide this chain in three births: first two nodes, avidyA and saMskAra are assigned to previous birth, while node 3-10 (viGYAna to bhava) are assigned to the present birth, and last two nodes (jAti and jarA-maraNa are assigned to next birth. The transmigratory cycle of birth-death-rebirth arising due to impurities (Asava-s) and Ignorance (avidyA) is a cyclic continuum; it is known as bhavachakra. DN may look contrived, but bauddha tradition interprets it as the origin of pratItya-samutpAda [Dependent Origination], the most basic principle accepted by all bauddha schools. In addition, bauddha tradition traces the origins of following commonly accepted principles to the Buddha's discourses on Aryasatya: (1) sarvam xaNikam or sarvamanityam (everything is momentary or impermanent), (2) sarvam dukkham (every thing is sufferance), (3) sarvamanAtman (everything is essence -less), (4) sarvam svalaxaNam (everything is unique), (5) nirvANam shAntam (the ultimate state is peace). Both Buddhism and Vedanta rejected efficacy of Vedic rituals in their respective domains. Buddha took a strong moral view while UP's ethics were shrouded underneath metaphysical and soterial concerns. The aupaniShad traditions compensated for their lack of emphasize on ethics by adopting pAta.njala yoga, including its first two ethical accessories, in their soterial methods. Both aupaniShad (Vedanta) and bauddha streams however, were operating in the same cultural milieu and were using similar terminology.[290] The concepts of avidyA in KU and avijjA in DN are analogous. The bauddha bhava-chakra aka dharma-chakra is similar to brahma-chakra of SU. Karma (kamma) and rebirth are common to both. The attainment of nirvANa by removing Ignorance is quite similar to aupaniShad concept of realizing moxa through Knowledge of Self. Peace of nirvANa is not much different than bliss of moxa. Except for few soterial and metaphysical nuances these nodal concepts were present in both aupaniShad and bauddha traditions. The concepts of yoga, renunciation, karma, rebirth and liberation were shared by both non-Vedic (Shramana) and Vedic (Brahmana) traditions even before Buddha's times[2911.

Over the preiod, early Buddhism, represented by Abhidharma- Thervada [अभिधर्म-थेरवाद] and sarvAstivAda [सर्वास्तिवाद](together known as hInayAna[292] [हीनयान] or small vehicle) was followed by mahAyAna(great vehicle)[46T4] which later encompassed vajrayAna [a] or Tantric path. It is customary to say that each of these three paths dominated for 500 years each in the total 1500 years of Buddism's prominence in Indic regions starting c.500BC. Thervada spread over comparitively smaller region including Lanka, Cambodia, Laos, Burma, and Thailand while mahAyAna, and along with it vajrayAna spread over a greater region including India, China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Mongolia, Tibet, and Bhutan. Thervada maintained its distance from absolutist Vedanta; but Mahayana moved closer to Vedanta's absolutist position, as will be seen later on.

(B) pratItya-samutpAda [प्रतीत्य समुत्पाद] (Dependent Origination): This foundational principle[293] first appears in kachchAyanagotta sutta of the Pali canon (SN 12.15): || Everything-exists' -- this, kachchAyana, is the first extreme. `Everything does not exist' -- this, kachchAyana, is the second extreme. kachchAyana, without approaching either extreme, the tathAgata teaches you a doctrine by the middle. Dependent upon ignorance arise dispositions ... << This then is followed by the application of pratItya- samutpAda of the twelve links of dvAdashanidAna> > || Pali canon (SN 12.61, as one of the examples) gives general formula of pratItya-samutpAda [PS]: When this is, that is. (ImasmiM sati, idaM hoti) From the arising of this comes the arising of that (Imass' uppAdA, idaM uppajjati). When this isn't, that isn't (ImasmiM asati, idaM na hoti) From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that (Imassa nirodhA, idhaM nirujjhati) By interpreting PS in the context of DN, reality is seen as a complex web of conditioned cause-effect relations. It involves future as well as past and present times and (hence) close loops and cyclic continuum. Effect is neither contained in the cause nor generated due to the power of cause, but just happens when certain conditions are met. PS has three-fold causal interdependence: (a) everything is dependent on every-thing else, (b) holistic (syncronic) interdependence governed by whole-part relationship, and (c) conceptual imputation in which effect is cognized and conceptualized within the substrative framework of consciousness and space-time. PS in the form of DN is seen as the life- cycle of saMsAra (bhavachakra).

PS within the framework of DN is seen as one of the earliest statements of process philosophy. Since everything is inter-dependent, nothing has the permanent essence leading to the hypothesis of anAtmA. This means that the world objects are only "aggregates of elements" [skandha-s of dharma-s] with-out any static identity. PS views 'personality' [pudgala][294] as a group [sa.nghAta][295] of five skandha-s viz rUpa (material form), vedanA (feeling of pain and pleasure), sa.nGYA (perception), saMskAra (conative disposition), and viGYAna (consciousness). All five skandha-s of pudgala are interdependent and pudgala as a whole is dependent on its parts or invidual skandha-s making the pudgala selfless or essence-less.[296] PS is also related to the hypothesis of impermanence. All dharma-s being interdependent are impermanent because otherwise (that is, if they are constant or statically eternal) they will be indepen-dent in themselves. Each phenomenon is thus 'continuum of causally connected web of events and conditions' (process) which is essenceless or empty. The reality of world objects is then 'as it is' (svalaxaNam). It is the reality which is devoid of permanent phenomenal properties. It is an ever changing flux or continua of aggregate of processes. Bauddha tradition is generally careful to differentiate the concept of svalaXaNa from the unchanging substratum or essence. It is simply a unique processual (and hence imperm-anent) aggregate.[297] Momentariness and emptiness are the characteristics of all processes; they are the inherent aspects of PS reality. Humans are 'confused' (Ignorant) about this impermanence; they see permanence rather than impermance and self rather than selflessness. This confusion (Ignorance) is the cause of their suffering. It can be removed by aShTA.nga mArga to attain nirvANa (supreme state). PS thus leads to pa.ncha-siddhAnta (five doctrines) of Buddhism: सर्वं क्षणिकं: sarvam xaNikam (everything is momentary) सर्वं दुःखं: sarvam dukkham (everything is sufferance) सर्वमनात्मा: sarvamanAtmA (everything is essenceless) सर्वं स्वलक्षण: sarvam svalaxaNam (everything is unique) निर्वाणं शान्त: nirvANam shAntam (Liberation is peace) All bauddha schools believe in Aryasatya, dvAdasha nidAna, pratItyasamutpAda, pa.nchaskandha, and pa.nchasiddhAnta.[298] Their ethical concerns (pa.ncha-shiila: five virtues) were shared by yoga and Jain traditions in the form of pa.ncha-yama (five rules) and pa.ncha- vrata (five vows) respectively. 5.2.2 Period of Collation (c.300BC-200): Major part of BS was consolidated in this period. The compilers such as jaimini, and bAdarAyaNa may belong to its first half. Some scholars believe that BS work was compiled by more than one seers and was contributed by

many scholars over number of centuries (ref Nakamura, Mayeda 1983). The first known commentary (vRRitti) on BS by upavarsha which is referred by later Vedantins appeared by end of this period (c.150). Mai and MAU could have been compiled in the first and later half of the period respectively along with few other UP like mahA, pai.ngala, and vajrasUchi. (See 1.1) The influence of bauddha philosophies which themselves were influenced by aupaniShad thinking and were part of general philosophical ferment that was going on at that time, is discernible in these UP, though BS appears to be free from such influence. Unlike Buddhism which produced many texts in this period, not much of Vedanta is available by way of written texts. One reason could be the secrecy and exclusiveness associated with UP. They were taught and transmitted in closed circles. Abstruseness of BS may be part of this secrecy. Another reason could be the ascendancy of Buddhism. It had better state patronage and hence resources.[299] Buddhism itself was probably seen as a natural successor to aupaniShad reforms and ideas. Its positivism was attractive against the backdrop of Vedic dogma of excessive ritualism. Vedanta's textual activity in this period was seemingly confined to redaction-compilation of late UP and BS which had started in the period of scriptures. In spite of its apparent insularity and dogma, Vedanta tradition proved to be remarkably open in absorbing new ideas and methods as can be seen by the later developments. Further, though Buddhism was dominant in urban centers and academia, Vedic culture had penetrated into ordinary households in urban as well rural areas. MU and BG had created ground for subordinating the rites and simplifying the religion. The pessimistic-agnostic undertones of Buddhist philosophy and its rationality devoid of mysticism and devotion were bound to make it less popular over a period of time. Recovery of Vedic domination was thus a matter of time though it had to wait till the arrival of gauDapAda and sha.nkara for almost half a millennium; and when it happened it was not uniformly and absolutely Vedic in nature. In addition to vedAnta-sUtra; authoritative Hindu law-books (dharma- shAstra), foremost amongst them the Book of Manu (manusmRRiti), were compiled in this period which were sub-sequently edited in Gupta period and probably even thereafter.

(A) tathatA [TUdT]: Buddhism in this period was one of the two main streams in the Indic regions. The other main current that of aupaniShad thinking was busy systematizing itself in the form of BS. Both these streams converge in the following discourse of tathatA school of mahAyAna: [3001 < > There is only One Mind that includes in itself all states of the phenomenal and transcendental worlds. This Mind has two aspects. One is the aspect of the Absolute (tathatA: Suchness, Thatness), and the other is the aspect of phenomena (saMsAra; birth and death - transmigration). Each of these two aspects embraces all states of existence because they are mutually co-extensive. The Mind in terms of the Absolute is the one World of Reality (dharmadhatu) and the essence of all phases of existence in their totality. That which is called "the essential nature of the Mind" is unborn and is imperishable. It is only through illusions[301] that all things come to be differentiated. If one is freed from illusions, then to him there will be no appearances (laxaNa-s) of objects. All things from the beginning transcend all forms of verbalization, description, and conceptualization and are, in the final analysis, undifferentiated, free from alteration, and indestructible. They are only of the One Mind; hence the name Suchness (or Thatness). All explanations by words are provisional and without validity, for they are merely used in accordance with illusions and are incapable of denoting Suchness. The term Suchness likewise has no attributes which can be verbally specified. The term Suchness is, so to speak, the limit of verbalization wherein a word is used to put an end to words. But the essence of Suchness itself cannot be put to an end, for all things in their Absolute aspect are real; nor is there anything which needs to be pointed out as real, for all things are equally in the state of Suchness. << Upto this point there is no difference between Suchness and the Absolute (neti neti brahman) of KA. The author, then mentions two aspects of Suchness. > > Suchness has two aspects if predicated in words. One is that it is truly empty (shUnya), for this aspect, in the final sense, reveal what is real. The other is that it is truly nonempty (ashUnya), for its essence itself is endowed with undefiled and excellent qualities. [3021 The Mind as phenomena (saMsAra) is grounded on the tathAgatagarbha. What is called the 'Storehouse Conscious-ness' [Alaya viGYAna or chitta] has two aspects which embrace all states of existence and create all states of existence: They are: (a) the aspect of enlightenment, and (b) the aspect of non-enlightenment. << The author, after defining these aspects, clarifies their metaphysical

interrelationship. The similarity of the enlightenment with the jIvanmukti and inherent ontologic ambiguity is unmistakable>> <The author continues .. > Two relationships exist between the enlightened and non-enlightened states. They are: "identity" and "non- identity". Identity: Just as pieces of various kinds of pottery are of the same nature in that they are made of clay, so the various magic-like manifestations (mAyA) of both enlightenment (non-defilement) and non-enlightenment (Ignorance) are aspects of the same essence that is Suchness. For this reason, it is said in a sUtra that "all sentient beings intrinsically abide in eternity and are entered into nirvANa. The state of enlighten-ment is not something that is to be acquired by practice or to be created. In the end, it is unobtainable [for it is given from the beginningl." Also it has no corporeal aspect that can be perceived as such. Any corporeal aspects [such as the marks of the Buddha] that are visible are magic like products of Suchness manifested in accordance with the mentality of men in defilement. It is not, however, that these corporeal aspects which result from the supra- rational functions of wisdom are of the nature of non-emptiness (That is, they are not substantial); for wisdom has no aspects that can be perceived.[303] Non-identity: Just as various pieces of pottery differ from each other, so differences exist between the state of enlightenment and that of non-enlightenment, and between the magic like manifestations of Suchness manifested in accord-ance with the mentality of men in defilement, and those of men of ignorance who are defiled (i.e., blinded) as to the essential nature of Suchness. << What is the relationship between Suchness and Ignorance? The author answers thro' the novel concept of permeation : > > Permeation of Ignorance: On the ground of Suchness [original enlightenment],[304] there appears the Ignorance [non- enlightenment]. Ignorance, the primary cause of the defiled state, permeates into Suchness and results in deluded mind. Thenceforth deluded thoughts further permeate into ignorance and predicate erroneously conceived objects of the senses and the mind. These erroneously conceived sense-objects, the coordinating causes in bringing about the defiled state, perm-eate into deluded mind and cause the deluded mind to attach itself to its thoughts, to create various evil karma, and to undergo all kinds of physical and mental suffering. Permeation of Suchness: It may be said that there is the principle of Suchness that can permeate into ignorance and causes the deluded mind to loathe the suffering of saMsAra and to aspire for nirvANa.

Because this mind, though still deluded, is now possessed with loathing and aspiration, it permeates into Suchness in that it induces Suchness to manifest itself. Thus a man comes to believe in his essential nature, to know that what exists is the erroneous activity of the mind and that the world of objects in front of him is nonexistent, and to practice teachings to free himself from the erroneously conceived world of objects. Through the force of this permeation of Suchness over a long period of time, his ignorance ceases. Because of the cessation of ignorance, there will be no more rising of the deluded activities of mind. Because of the non-rising of the deluded activities of mind, the world of objects as previously conceived ceases to be; because of cessation of both the primary cause (ignorance) and the coordinating causes (objects), marks of the defiled mind will all be nullified. This is called "gaining nirvANa and acting spontaneously". If all sentient beings are endowed with Suchness and are permeated by it, why is it that there are infinite varieties of believers and nonbelievers? Though Suchness is originally one only, there are immeasurable and infinite shades of Ignorance. From the very beginning Ignorance is, because of its nature characterized by diversity and its degree of intensity, is not uniform. Defilements, more numerous than sands of Ganges, come into being because of differences in the intensity of ignorance, and exist in manifold ways. Defilements like the belief in the existence of Atman[305], and indulgence in passion develop because of ignorance and exist in different ways. All these defilements are brought about by ignorance, in an infinitely diversified manner in time. Nature of Suchness: The essence of Suchness does not change. It was not brought into existence in the beginning nor will it cease to be at the end of time; it is eternal through and through. From the beginning, Suchness in its nature is fully provided with all excellent qualities; namely, it is endowed with the light of great wisdom, the qualities of illuminating the entire universe, of true cognition and mind pure in its self-nature; of eternity, bliss, Self[306], and purity; of refreshing coolness, immutability, and freedom. It is endowed with these excellent qualities which outnumber the sands of the Ganges, which are not independent of, disjointed from, or different from the essence of Suchness, and which are supra-rational attributes of Buddhahood. Since it is endowed completely with all these, and is not lacking anything, it is called the tathA-gatagarbha [2T9f]when latent and also the dharmakAya of tathAgata. Influences of Permeation of Suchness: The Buddhas[307] while in the stages of Bodhisattvahood[308], exercised great compassion, practiced pAramitA-s[3091, and accepted as well as transformed

sentient beings. They took great vows, desiring to liberate all sentient beings through countless aeons until the end of future time, for they regarded all sentient beings as they regarded themselves. And yet, they never regarded them as separate sentient beings. Why? Because they truly knew that all sentient beings and they themselves were identical in Suchness and that there could be no distinction between them.[3101 Because they possessed such great wisdom which could be applied to expedient means in quest of enlighten-ment, they extinguished their Ignorance and perceived the original dharmakAya. Spontaneously performing incomprehen-sible activities and exercising manifold influences, they pervade everywhere in their identity with Suchness. Nevertheless, they reveal no marks of their influences that can be traced as such. Why? Because the Buddha-tathAgata-s are no other than the dharmakAya itself, and the embodiment of wisdom. They belong to the realm of the absolute truth that transcends the world where the relative truth operates. They are free from any conventional activities. And yet, because of the fact that sentient beings receive benefit through seeing or hearing about them, their influences can be spoken in relative terms. From saMsAra to nirvANa: Examining the 'five components' (pa.ncha- skandha), we find that they may be reduced to matter (object) and mind (subject). The objects of the five senses and of the mind are in the final analysis beyond what they are thought to be. And the mind itself is devoid of any form or mark and is, therefore, unobtainable as such, no matter where one may seek it. Just as a man, because he has lost his way, mistakes the east for the west, though the actual directions have not changed place, so people, because of their ignorance, assume Mind (Suchness) to be what they think it to be, though Mind in fact is unaffected even if it is falsely predicated. If a man is able to observe and understand that Mind is beyond what it is thought to be, then he will be able to conform to and enter the realm of Suchness. The Biased Views Held by Ordinary Men: There are five kinds of biased views held by ordinary men which may be discussed: Hearing that the dharmakAya of the tathAgata is, in the final analysis, quiescent, like empty space, ordinary men think that the nature of the tathAgata is, indeed, the same as empty space. How is this to be corrected? The way to correct is to understand clearly that "empty space" is a delusive concept, the substance of which is nonexistent and unreal. It is merely predicated in relation to its correlative corporeal objects. If it is taken as a being termed non-being, a negative being, then it should be discarded, because it causes the mind to remain in saMsAra. In fact there are no external corporeal objects, because all

objects are originally of the mind. And as long as there are no corporeal objects at all, "empty space" cannot be maintained. All objects are of the mind alone; but when illusions arise, objects appear. When the mind is free from its deluded activities, then all imagined objects vanish. What is real, the one and true Mind, pervades everywhere. This is the final meaning of the tathAgata's great and comprehensive wisdom. The dharmakAya is, indeed, unlike "empty space". Hearing that it is explained in the sUtra[311] that all things in the world, in the final analysis, are empty in their substance, and that nirvANa, the principle of Suchness is also absolutely empty from the beginning and devoid of any properties, they, not knowing that the purpose of the sUtra is to uproot their adherence, think that the essential nature of Suchness or nirvANa is simply empty. How is this to be corrected? The way is to make clear that Suchness or the dharmakAya is not empty, but is endowed with numerous excellent qualities. Hearing that it is explained in the sUtra that there is no increase or decrease in the tathAgatagarbha and that it is provided in its essence with all excellent qualities, they, not being able to understand this, think that in the tathAgata-garbha there is plurality of mind and matter. How is this to be corrected? They should be instructed that the statement in the sUtra that "there is no increase or decrease in the tathA-gatagarbha" is made only in accordance with the absolute aspect of Suchness, and the statement that "it is provided with all excellent qualities" is made in accordance with the pluralistic outlook held by the defiled minds in saMsAra.[3121 Hearing that it is explained in the sUtra that all defiled states of saMsAra in the world exist on the ground of the tathA-gatagarbha and that they are therefore not independent of Suchness, they think that the tathAgatagarbha literally contains in itself all the defiled states of saMsAra in the world. How is this to be corrected? To correct this error it should be understood that tathAgatagarbha, from the beginning, contains only pure excellent qualities which, outnumbering the sands of the Ganges, are not independent of, severed from, or different from Suchness; that the soiled states of defilement which, outnumbering the sands of the Ganges, are not independent of, severed from, or different from Suchness; that the soiled states of defilement which, outnumbering the sands of the Ganges, merely exist in illusion; are from the beginning, non-existent; and from the beginningless beginning have never been united with tathAgatagarbha. It has never happened that the tathAgatagarbha contained deluded states in its essence and that it induced itself to realize Suchness in

order to extinguish forever its deluded states. Hearing that it is explained in the sUtra that on the ground of the tathAgatagarbha there is saMsAra as well as the attain-ment of nirvANa, they, without understanding this, think that there is a beginning for sentient beings. Since they suppose a beginning, they suppose also that the nirvANa attained by the tathAgata has an end and that he will in turn become a sentient being. How is this to be corrected? The way to correct this error is to explain that the tathAgatagarbha has no beginning, and that therefore ignorance has no beginning. If anyone asserts that sentient beings came into existence outside this triple world, he holds the view given in the scriptures of the heretics. Again, the tathAgatagarbha does not have end; and the nirvANa attained by the Buddha-s, being one with it, likewise has no end. The Biased Views Held by the Hinayanists: Because of their inferior capacity, the tathAgata preached to Hinayanists only the doctrine of the non-existence of Atman and did not preach his doctrines in their entirety; as a result, Hinayanists came to believe that the five components, the constituents of saMsArika existence, are real; being terrified at the thought of being subject to birth and death, they erroneously attach themselves to nirvANa. How is this to be corrected? The way to correct this error is to make clear that the five components are unborn in their essential nature and therefore, are imperishable - that what is made of the five components is, from the beginning, in nirvANa. Finally, in order to be totally free from erroneous attachments, one should know that both the defiled and the pure states are relative and have no particular marks of their own-being that can be discussed. Thus, all things from the beginning are neither matter nor mind, neither wisdom nor consciousness, neither being nor non-being; they are ultimately inexplicable.[3131 And yet they are still spoken of. It should be understood that the tathAgata-s, applying their expedient means, make use of conventional speech in a provisional manner in order to guide people, so that they can be free from their delusion and can return to Suchness; for if anyone thinks of anything as real or absolute in itself, he causes his mind to be trapped in saMsAra, and consequently he cannot enter the state of enlightenment. On Five Practices: There are five practices which enable a man to perfect his faith. They are the practices of (1) charity, (2) observance of precepts, (3) patience, (4) zeal, and (5) cessation of illusions and clear observation. How should a man practice charity? If he sees anyone coming to him begging, he should give him the wealth and other things in his

possession insofar as he is able; thus, while freeing himself from greed and avarice, he causes the beggar to be joyful. Or, if he sees one who is in hardship, in fear, or in grave danger, he should, according to his ability and understanding, explain it by the use of expedient means. In doing so, however, he should not expect any fame, or material gain, but he should think only of benefiting himself and others alike and of extending the merit that he gains from the charity toward the attainment of enlightenment. How should he practice the observance of precepts? He is not to kill, to steal, to commit adultery, to be double-tongued, to slander, to lie, or to utter exaggerated speech. He has to be free from greed, jealousy, cheating, deceit, flattery, crook-edness, anger, hatred, and perverse views. If he happens to be a monk or nun who has renounced family life, he should also, in order to cut off and suppress defilements, keep himself away from the hustle and bustle of the world and, always residing in solitude, should learn to be content with the least desire and should practice vigorous asceticism. He should be frightened and filled with awe by any slight fault and should feel shame and repent. He should not take lightly any of the tathAgata's precepts. How should he practice patience? He should be patient with others' vexatious acts and should not harbor thoughts of vengeance; he should also be patient in matters of gain or loss, honor or dishonor, praise or blame, suffering or joy etc. How should he practice zeal? He should not be sluggish in doing good, he should be firm in his resolution, and he should purge himself of cowardice. He should remember that from the far distant past he has been tormented in vain by all of the great sufferings of body and mind. Because of this he should diligently practice meritorious acts, benefiting himself and others, and liberate himself quickly from suffering. Even if a man practices faith, due to his evil karma derived from the grave sins of previous lives, he may be troubled by the 'Evil Tempter' (Mara) and his demons, or entangled in all sorts of worldly affairs, or afflicted by the suffering of disease. There are a great many hindrances of this kind. He should, there-fore, be courageous and zealous, and at the six four-hour intervals of the day and night should pay homage to the Buddhas, repent with sincere heart, beseech Buddhas for their guidance, rejoice in the happiness of others, and direct all the merits to the attainment of enlightenment. How should he practice cessation and clear observation? What is called "cessation" means to stop to all characteristics (laxaNa) of the world of sense objects and of mind, because it means to follow the samatA (tranquility) method of medi-tation. What is called "clear observation" means to perceive clearly the characteristics of the

causally conditioned pheno-mena (saMsAra), because it means to follow the vipashyanA (discerning) method of meditation. How should he follow these? He should step by step practice these two aspects and not separate one from the other, for only then will both be perfected. < > Compared to other bauddha schools tathatA school tallies quite well with aupaniShad metaphysics and orthodox Vedanta. It could be a bauddha parallel of KA that shifted to adjacent Indic regions. In India, it was eclipsed by the other Mahayana schools such as mAdhyamaka and viGYAnavAda, which were parceived to be more faithful to the pa.ncha-siddhAnta. How-ever, its influence in the Buddhist circles outside Indic regions remained and even grew. The ratnagotra-vibhAga text [RGV] which expounded the absolutist Mahayana philosophy may be attributed to this school. [314]

(B) mAdhyamaka [HT&]Hc]: As the name suggests, it is the philosophy of the 'middle path' (madhyama pratipAda) -- that of Becoming rather than of Being or non-Being. Madhyama is the position between any opposing extremes. This philosophy is said to be the apex of Buddhism both in terms of its adherence to pa.ncha-siddhAnta and its depth and prestige among many bauddha schools[315] which came into being during c.300BC-200. It is customary to hold nAgArjuna (c.100-200) as its founder and most important protagonist, though its founding principles were already established in the Buddhist annals. The three aspects of the interdependence of PS - conditioned causality, whole- part relationship, and conceptual imputation - were known to lead to emptiness [shUnyatA]. Protagonist like nagArjuna provided dialectical arguments to affirm this know-ledge as a basic hypothesis. nAgArjuna's principal treatise mUlamAdhyamakakArikA [MMK] (Fundamental Discourse of the Middle Way) attracted many commentators like buddhapAlita (3rdC), bhAvavaviveka (5thC), chandrakIrti (6thC), and Tsongkhapa (14thC, in Tibet). MMK is the earliest extant philosophical treatises which attempts to give a scholastic exposition of the theory of 'emptiness' and 'non- substantiality'. In bauddha tradition, nAgArjuna is associated with the praGYA-pAramitA-sUtra [perfection of wisdom theme] - a mahAyAna scripture in which these hypotheses are extensively discussed. MMK and its commentaries are the basic literature of mAdhyamaka; as such the abbreviation MMK in this note denotes the summarized mAdhyamaka view. MMK propounds that to exist dependently is, importantly, to be empty of essence. In MMK, this emptiness of essence is the final mode of existence of any phenomenon, its ultimate truth. For to have an essence is to exist independently, to have one's identity and to exist not in virtue of extrinsic relations, but simply in virtue of intrinsic properties. Because all phenomena are interdependent, all are empty in this sense. Just as the conventional truth about phenomena is made up by their interdependence, their ultimate truth is their emptiness. In one place (MMK 5: 4a,b), as a general example of this interdependence; nAgArjuna argues that the spatial properties (and, by analogy, all properties) of an object cannot be essential. It would be absurd to suppose that the spatial location of an object could exist without the object itself - or, conversely, that there could be an object without location. Hence, location and object are interdependent. It follows immediately that the emptiness of all phenomena that MMK defends is not non-existence: to be empty of essence is not to be empty of existence. Instead, to exist is to be empty. The emptiness of any

phenomenon is dependent on the existence of that phenomenon. That is to say, Emptiness is itself dependent, and hence empty. This doctrine of (1) having a processual (empty) identity, and (2) absolute emptiness (shUnyatA) - the ultimate truth, is MMK's unique bipolar view. The two truths are different from one another in that the ultimate is the object of enlightened knowledge and is liberating, while the conventional is apprehended by ordinary people through mundane cognitive processes. Nonetheless, they are in a deeper sense identical. To be empty of essence is simply to exist only conventionally. The conditions of conventional existence are interdependence and impermanence which entail essencelessness. MMK hence strives to develop a middle path between a realism that takes real phenomena to be ultimately existent in virtue of being actual, and a nihilism that takes all phenomena to be nonexistent in virtue of being empty. Instead, MMK argues that reality and empti- ness are coextensive, and that the only nominally coherent mode of existence is conventional existence.[316] Central to MMK's view is the doctrine of the two realities: the 'conventional reality' [saMvRRiti satya or vyavahAra] and the 'ultimate reality' [nirvRRiti satya or paramArtha]. It is tempting to identify conventional reality with the phenomenal realm, and ultimate reality with the noumenal.[317] The emptiness of empti-ness however, means that ultimate reality is just as empty as conventional reality, and in a way, the two seemingly distinct realities are therefore 'essentially' the same. This non-dualism [advaya, Advaita] is taught in mahAyAna texts; for example: "To say this is conventional and this is ultimate is dualistic. To realize that there is no difference between the conventional and the ultimate is to enter the Dharma-door of non-duality," (vimalakIrtI-sUtra)[318] or, "Form is empty; emptiness is form; form is not different from emptiness; emptiness is not different from form" (praGYA-pAramitA- hradaya).[3191 MMK makes apparently contradictory statements such as: (1) space (and by implication other four tanmAtra-s) are neither an entity nor a non-entity (MMK 5:7); (2) objects are neither existent nor non-existent (MMK 5:8); (3) effect and cause are neither similar nor dissimilar (MMK 6:6) etc. These apparent contradictions are resolved if we reject the "law of excluded middle". MMK however, also makes 'assertions' that face the charge of contradiction from which it is difficult to wriggle out. For example, MMK's central theme (ultimate truth) is 'every-thing is empty' which itself becomes empty and devoid of final truth. This is a linguistic as well ontological paradox. That nAgArjuna is aware of this paradox is clear from MMK 22:11 where he says that

'emptiness' or 'non-emptiness' should not be taken as a positive assertion, but only as a 'nominal' truth - that is to say, the statement 'ultimately' can neither be true nor be false. Here, nAgArjuna knowingly loses the thrust of his main proposition. MMK's other ontological thesis - that of 'emptiness of emptiness' meets similar fate. Emptiness itself becomes a 'nominal' concept and not the 'ultimate' ontological truth. Thus, nAgArjuna's argument is both vindicated and nominalized. He is vindicated at the saMvRRiti level but cannot 'close' the argument at the paramArtha level. This is where the 'open' (absolutist) position is forced onto mAdhya-maka. This is not the failure of nAgArjuna. He explores the boundaries of conventional reality and boldly faces the paradoxes in his attempt to reach the ultimate truth. This difficulty is faced by all non-dualist schools including KA.[3201 The absolute pole of MMK's bipolar truth - shUnyatA without essence or attributes, makes mAdhyamaka position convergent with aupaniShad position of 'neti neti' brahman. Both shUnya and 'brahman' are absolute concepts which cannot be differentiated from each other - for differentiation needs attribution which is not possible for the Absolutes. This paradox of equi-valence between mAdhyamaka and KA is inherent in the logical-linguistic concepts of "identity" and "difference". Identity (essence, constancy, independence) and difference (process, motion, dependence) can be defined only in terms of each other. One can only emphasize one aspect over the other without being able to break the circularity. Vedanta emphasizes identity (Atman=brahman) and calls everything else as tuchCha (lower order) while mAdhyamaka emphasizes process (pratItya-samutpAda) and calls identity as empty. Both agree that jagat or saMsAra is mithyA (indeterminate). So both are isomorphic to each other and still different; they start from orthogonal positions and lead to the same destination. [321] After nAgArjuna; mAdhyamaka split into two sub-schools. The prAsa.ngika sub-school dialectically reduces to absurdity the opponent's position, but faces the same charge as was earlier faced by nAgArjuna - that of nominalizing the ultimate truth. The svAtantrika sub-school founded by logician bhAvaviveka applies formal syllogism to counter opponents' arguments, but faces the charge of absolutism.

5.2.3 Period of Recovery (c.200-700): BS finalization was the starting phase of this period. In BS, the identity Atman=brahman is open to various interpretations. [322] Up to the times of sha.nkara; many commentaries on prasthAnatraya along with few independent treatises were written by teachers such as: upavarsha, bodhAyana, ta.nka (brahmAnandin), dravida, bhartRRi-

prapa.ncha, shabarasvAmin, bhartRRimitra, shrIvatsA.nka, sundara- pANDya, brahmadatta, bhartRRihari, gauDapAda, govinda, & maNDana. Among these teachers upavarsha is said to have written the earliest BS- commentary sArIraka-mImAMsA-vRRitti, on which sundarapANDya wrote a vArtika. Another teacher brahmAnandin wrote ChAndogya- vAkya which was commented by dravida. The vAkyapadlya [VKY] of bhartRRihari, though not directly related to prasthAnatraya, expounds concepts very similar to those of sha.nkara's line of Advaita through his philosophy of language. Most of these works are not available today, their references however, are available in the extant literature. Most of the positions established by sha.nkara later, were discussed during this period or earlier not only by gauDapAda, but also by other teachers (ref 8.3(15)). For example: 1. brahman is the ground of the Universe (by upavarsha) 1. Atman is (mediately) known by perception as it is the (mediate) object of I-notion (by upavarsha) 2. Means of acquiring-validating knowledge (by upavarsha) 3. Absolute Knowledge requires additional means (methods) such as su perposition-negation (by sundarapANDya) 4. Relative knowledge is a process, and absolute Knowledge is a relation between the processes of superimposition and sublation (by sundara- pANDya) 5. Creation is inexplicable (by brahmAnandin) 6. All worldly objects are unreal; they are mere appearances (by brah mAnandin) 7. Negation is an affirmation of positive reality; process of negation es- tablishes Self-realization (by dravida) 8. Ignorance is the cause of finiteness and plurality of jIva-s (by bhar- tRRiprapa.ncha) 9. Doctrine of mAyA (by brahmadatta).

Among the extant works of this period, following texts are important for their historical and philosophical perspective: (1) MK/GK of gauDapAda; (2) Some important purANa-s[323] such as viShNu, vAyu, kUrma, nAradlya, and nArAyaNa which deal with incidental philosophical issues mainly while describing creation and dissolution. Though sha.nkara did not quote from them, Vedantins like rAmAnuja, madhva, and vallabha quoted them in support of their views; (3) yoga-vAsiShTha [YOV],[324] a paurANika text that advanced a radical idealist monism; (4) vAkyapadlya [VKY] of bhartRRihari, a linguistic and philosophical work of considerable

importance. [325] Among all these works, Advaita tradition accords pioneering and authoritative status only to GK. It can be seen as a Vedanta discourse that shares the terminology and ideas of Buddhism. At least one Indian scholar (V. S. Bhattacharya) has suggested that GK could be a collaborative effort between Buddhist yogAchAra (viGYAnavAda) and gauDa school of Vedanta in the then newly established Nalanda University near Bodhagaya (c.400-500). The cultural ecosystem to carry out this project was in place for a considerable time. Classical yoga and Buddhism had shared common ethical principles long ago[3261, MU had deprecated sacrifices by holding them utterly inadequate for the lofty goal of moxa, and BG had deprecated mindless ritualism of desire-ridden people. The golden age of Gupta Empire[3271 had created the right environs to undertake the philosophical synthesis of Vedanta and Buddhism. Though gauDapAda took a major step towards such a synthesis, YOV made a parallel attempt to achieve the same through allegorical and nested stories while yogAchAra-mAdhyamaka lead to the same destination via different routes. What GK and VKY did at the scholarly level; YOV did it at the popular (paurANika) level - that is Vedantization[328] of certain Buddhist ideas whose roots can be traced to UP and Veda. Buddhism's decline and assimilation into Hinduism was hastened by the popular bhakti movement which originated in South India (c.500-600) and was lead by 63 Shaiva saints (Nayanars) and 12 Vaishnava saints (Alwars). Famous among them was Appar (c.600-700). He is said to have defeated many Buddhists and Jains monks in the learned discussions. Harsha's golden age[3291 came to end by c.650 and with it came the inevitable decline of Buddhism in India. Harsha was the last major king who offered patronage to Buddhism though Pala dynasty in east continued with their patronage till c.1050. Other than common cultural ecosystem there is metaphysical equivalence between mahAyAna schools and aupaniShad non-dualism. Buddhism's tathatA, mAdhyamika, and viGYAnavAda (yogAchAra) schools which teach the principles of shUnyatA and tathAgatagarbha are non-dualist schools. Jikido Takasaki, the leading scholar of tathAgatagarbha line says (ref 8.3(22)): "When Buddhism developed itself into mahAyAna Buddhism, it could not but take the appearance of Monism as a result of Absolutization of the Buddha, and approach the Upanishadic thinking. For explaining the possibility of anyone's acquiring the Buddhahood, the Monistic philosophy was used as the background. In this last point lies the significance of the tathAgatagarbha theory of this text

(ratnagotravibhAga). This theory is in one sense an inevitable result of the development of mahAyAna Monism in its religious expression." Similarly, Obermiller considers:[330] "On the foundation of the praGYA-pAramitA he (asa.nga) has composed the abhisamaya-alaMkAra, giving up his extreme yogAchAra views and drawing near to the monistic conception of the mAdhyamika-s ... Finally in the uttarata.ntra he may be considered to have attained the highest point of development in adopting a theory of purest, extreme monism ... It demonstr-ates the teaching of Absolute as the unique undifferentiated principle, being the negation of separate reality of elements in their plurality, in accordance with the praGYA-pAramitA and tathAgatagarbha sUtra-s."

(A) yogAchAra [rTaR]: It is a non-dualist bauddha school which analyzes mind and consciousness as the basis of its 'meditative (yogika) practices' (and hence the name). It is based on sandhinirmochana sUtra (c.100-200) and la.nkA-vatAra sUtra (c.100-400). It is also known as viGYAnavAda (doctrine of Consciousness). yogAchAra school is said to be founded by maitreya (c.270-350). It evolved in four sub-schools viz. (1) chittamAtra: of asa.nga (c.300-370); (2) viGYaptimAtra: of vasubandhu (c.310-380), sthiramati (c.500), dharmapAla (d.561); (3) sautrAntika-yogAchAra: of dignAga (480-540), dharmakIrti (c.600-665); (4) yogAchAra of buddhabhUmi- upadesha (c.650). The chittamAtra sub-school conceives "storehouse conscious-ness" or Alaya-viGYAna[331] as the source of all our ideation. It conceives 'one only' (non-dual) Mind which is the same as the Dharma Body (dharmakAya) of the Buddha Himself. This absolute Consciousness sometimes was even called Great Self or Pure Self (mahAtman; shuddhAtman). This tendency which lead to the concept of tathAgatagarbha[332] is seen in such works as ratnagotravibhAga (uttara-tantra) [RGV] and sUtralankAra-shAstra attributed to maitreya- asa.nga school by Tibetan tradition. RGV explains the statement "All sentient beings possess the tathAgatagarbha." in a 3-fold manner: The dharmakAya of the Buddha penetrates everywhere The tathAgata, being tathatA is the undifferentiated whole There exists the tathAgatagotra in all living beings The kAyA, tathatA, and gotra of tathAgata are termed as three svabhAva-s; RGV interprets tathAgatagarbha in terms of these svabhAva-s not as an empty entity but as a non-differentiable absolute entity.

Earlier theorization of tathAgatagarbha had found its most eloquent expression in "shraddhotpAda shAstra" attributed to ashvaghoSha. In asa.nga's other known works ("yogAchAra bhUmi shAstra", "mahAyAna saMgraha shAstra" etc.) asa.nga's position is not much different than that of his half-brother vasubandhu. The viGYaptimAtra sub-school of yogAchAra presented by vasubandhu tries to avoid ontological arguments and confines itself to the frame of phenomenology. vasubabdhu discusses the concept of "alaya viGYAna" and teaches about three levels of reality (trisvabhAva). He tells nothing about Absolute, or the 'One Only Mind' keeping away from discussion about the essence, or nature of consciousness examining only its phenomena (laxaNa). Nevertheless, vasubabdhu's disciples - sthiramati and dharmapAla - transcended the limitations of the pure empiricism and proclaimed non-existence of the world outside consciousness; this position was accepted by Chinese Yogacharins Xuan zang and Kuaiji. The viGYapti (viGYapti-mAtratA) was later equated with shUnya (shUnyatA) and assumed an absolutist connotation. The sautrAntika-yogAchAra school of dignAga (c.480-540) and dharmakIrti (c.7thC) was called by this name because its followers together with the sautrantika-s held that the sense data contained an element of the 'real' knowledge. Their epistemology suggests that only the fleeting sense data of episodic perceptions are real without any implication of the underlying self. Self for these thinkers is a kind of 'notional whole' or abstraction which has no substantial reality. But this position did not prevent some later representatives of this sub- school (praGYAkaragupta, ratnakIrti) to be proponents of the extreme solipsist illusionism. Sometimes this school is treated more as a branch of sautrAntika than of yogAchAra. The buddhabhUmi yogAchAra[333] is based on buddhabhUmi-upadesha [BUP] (c.649), a compendium compiled in the East Asian Japanese canon on buddhabhUmi-sUtra. It is better seen as a synopsis and scholastic exposition of the important facets[334] of yogAchAra rather than as a school. Like other traditions it conceives eight types of consciousness viz: (1-5) sensory perception, (6) cognition and thinking (manoviGYAna), (7) ego (manas), and (8) warehouse consciousness (Alaya-viGYAna). The last one is also known as "all-seeds consci- ousness" (sarva-bIjaka-viGYAna), "karmic maturation consci-ousness" (vipAka-viGYAna), and "foundational consciousness" (mUla-viGYAna); because it holds the contaminated as well as uncontaminated seeds, bringing them to karmic maturity and fruition. The aspirant of enlightenment, during the purification of mind, has to transform these eight consciousness into four cognitions (GYAna-s): Starting with the eighth, (1) the ware-house consciousness becomes the "great mirror

cognition" (mahAdarshana-GYAna); (2) manas becomes the "equalization cognition" (samatA-GYAna); (3) mental awareness becomes the "attentive cognition" (pratyavexaNA-GYAna); and (4) five sensory consciousnesses become the "accomplishing activity cognition" (kRRityAnuShThAna-GYAna). While the 'warehouse consciousness' superimposes habitual tendencies into perception, the 'great mirror cognition' contains the images of all things, equally, without attachment. While manas views the world in terms of 'me' and 'others', valuing 'myself above 'them', 'equalization cognition' sees all as the same. Mental-consciousness is easily distracted, but 'attentive cognition' remains effortlessly focused. The 'accomplishing activity cognitions' perceive things just as they are. When all contaminations and obstructions have been removed from the consciousnesses and when the uncontaminated seeds reach fruition, the 'four cognitions' replace the 'eight-conscious-nesses' - that is the enlightened perception. BUP is important for following reasons: 1. BUP discusses pramANa-samuchchaya, [335] and AlaMbana- parIxA[3361 of dignAga and gives us insight into the way perception was conceived prior to c.600 in Indic traditions. 2. It offers theory of 'enlightened perception' not offered by any other text prior to BUP in specific details. 3. BUP tells us that all yogAchAra traditions offer a kind of 'correspondence theory'. 4. BUP argues that consciousness can make both itself and other objects known; that is, consciousness can be a cognitive object for itself. 5. It presents a unique theory partitioning consciousness into four components: (1) a content or an image part (nimitta-bhAga); (2) a "seeing part" (darshana-bhAga); (3) a "self-reflective part" (svasaMvitti-bhAga); (4) a "being conscious of one's own consciousness part" (svasaMveda-saMveda-bhAga). (The last part disappeared from later traditions). 1. BUP probably is the earliest text that argues for sAkAra (imagistic) cognition during the state of enlightenment. After arguing that consciousness can know itself, BUP turns to the four components theory and attempts to show how consciousness can know itself without incurring an infinite regress. This particular theoretical aspect might have given stimulus to mind-control techniques which became prominent in vajrayAna traditions in the last phase of Buddhism in Indic regions, and some of which were also part of yoga traditions later adopted by Vedanta.

shAntaraxita (c.700-800) attempted to fuse yogAchAra and mAdhyamaka positions by holding yogAchAra's autonomous view and approached shUnyatA by prAsa.ngika method. His school is known as yogAchAra-svAtantrika-mAdhyamaka. In general, yogAchAra offered a rich framework of perceptional theories. In comparison, contemporaneous Vedic schools lagg-ed behind; they were preoccupied with the textual exegesis and made important contribution to the linguistic theories. It took couple of centuries before elements of perceptional theories appeared in sha.nkara's US (8thC) and in padma-pAda's PP (early 9thC) bringing with them the novel concept of 'Witness-Consciousness (sAxi-chetA). We then get two streams of absolutist traditions by the times of gauDapAda. Vedanta took the route of prasthAnatraya while Mahayana Buddhism flowed through mAdhyamaka, yogAchAra, and tathatA. By the times of sha.nkara both the streams converged to the same limit- positions.[337]

(B) yoga-vAsiShTha[3381 [YOV] says that only GYAna-karma- samuchchaya (Knowledge and Action together) can lead to the supreme goal of liberation (YOV 1.1.7). There is no power greater than right action. One should take resource to self-effort, 'grinding one's teeth'. One can and one should overcome fate [daiva] by present efforts. In fact, YOV calls fate as fictitious; the fate is nothing more than the results of one's past efforts. The (so called adverse) fate can be overcome by 'properly guided self-efforts' (paurush) (YOV 2.4-5). Austerity or penance is the self-inflicted pain - of what value is the charity performed with wealth earned by deceiving others - asks YOV. Religious observances (made with pride), add to one's vanity (YOV 3.5.6). YOV describes seven states of aGYAna: (1) seed-state of wakefulness [bIja-jAgRRit], (2) wakefulness [jAgRRit], (3) great wakefulness [mahA-jAgRRit], (4) wakeful dream [jAgRRit svapna], (5) dream [svapna], (6) dream wakefulness [svapna jAgRRit], and (7) 'deep sleep' [suShuptakam] (YOV 3.117.12). It also describes seven states in increasing order of GYAna: (1) 'spiritual longing' [shubhechChA], (2) enquiry [vichAraNA], (3) subtle thinking [tanumAnasA], (4) 'established in the path of truth' [sattvApattiSh], (5) 'freedom from bondage' [saMsaktin -anAmikA], (6) 'cessation of objectivity' [padArthAbhAvanI], (7) transcendental state [tUrya]. (YOV 3.118.50, 3.118.6). The last stage is the state of one who is Liberated while living here. Beyond this is the state of one who has transcended even the body (turlyAtIta). It is neti neti - beyond comprehension of empirical mind (YOV 3.119.21). Later, YOV (6.(1).126) maps these seven states and the beyond (turlyAtIta) onto seven yoga states where

the 6th state (tUrya) is 'liberation while one is alive' and the 7th state is that of the 'disembodied liberated being'. In YOV, turlya state is a kind of 'deep sleep in wakefulness' (YOV 5.70.26). It is the 'cessation of all root desires' (vAsanA-xaya), the dawning of 'right knowledge' (tattva-GYAna), and the 'destruction of manas' [manonAsha]. A later text jIvana-mukti-viveka ascribed to vidyAraNya (c.1350) adopts this view with a comment that appearance of passions and attachment cannot affect (the state of) jIvanmukta, just as the bite of a snake whose fangs have been drawn cannot do any harm. YOV discusses prANa and its control extensively. In it, prANa or vAyu (main prANa with its auxiliaries - apAna, vyAna, udAna, samAna) is that entity which vibrates; it is a kind of energy. It is through its power that there is a movement of the eyes, the operation of the tactual senses, breathing through the nose, digestion of food, and power of speech. In a way, prANa-s are responsible for all the body functions including empirical cognition. YOV thinks that by controlling mind the prANa-s can be controlled and vise-versa. In fact prANa is nothing but the movement of mind (chitta). Ope-rationally, prANa stands for exhalation (rechaka), apAna for inhalation (pUraka); and the gap between these two is called kuMbhaka. If we suspend 'rechaka and pUraka' (breathing), kuMbhaka can have unbroken continuity with the help of 'stilled' mind. This 'stilled' mind is nothing but samAdhi and is usually seen as a very advanced stage in Self realization. In the popular imagination, the breathing can be suspended indefinitely in certain kind of samAdhi. Further, control of prANa is supposed to give a better longevity in terms of life-span. It is significant that a venerable old crow who was enjoying an exceptionally long life gives the discourse on prANa to the sage vasiShTha. In the relative-logical ontology of Advaita, objects have indeter-minate reality independent of subjective perception, a kind of sRRiShTi- dRRiShTi vAda. Most of the times YOV grants only perceptual existence to world objects, in a kind of dRRiShTi-sRRiShTi vAda, though occasionally it says that the world is mithyA - neither real nor unreal, which is the standard Advaita position. Both accept ajAta vAda (theory of non-origination) and pa.nchIkaraNa (theory of quintuplication). YOV meta-physics[339] has parallels in: (1) GK which propounds illusionistic Vedanta, (2) bauddha text la.nkAvatAra- sUtra which propounds viGYAna vAda, (3) later Vedanta text siddhAnta-muktAvalii that propounds dRRiShTi-sRRiShTi vAda, and (4) shAnkar Advaita, particularly that of upadesha-sAhasrI.

(C) Other Advaita Literature: Several texts are popular within Advaita tradition; their antiquity or authorship is not known though.

Most of the scriptures were probably compiled during c.200-1000, and might had been redacted even there-after in a form in which we see them today. Among these scriptures there are UP. A number of UP listed in 'muktika Up.' may belong to this period. Ref 8.3(2b) gives a translation of all the 108 listed UP, while ref 8.3(2a) gives a subset of so called 30-minor UP including 14-Vedanta UP: muktika (SYV), sarvasAra (KYV), nirAlaMba (SYV), maitreya (SV), kaivalya (KYV), amRRitabindu (KYV), Atmabodha (RV), skanda (KYV), pai.ngala (SYV), adhyAtma (SYV), subAla (SYV), tejo-bindu (KYV), brahma (KYV), and vajrasUchi (SV). sha.nkara does not refer these UP in his commentaries; they were either not canonized by his times or the principal canonized UP were more than adequate for his purpose. There are few tens of gItA-s which are known to Advaita and other Agamika traditions. Some of them appear as passages or chapters of purANa-s. For example, uddhava, bhramara, gopikA, shruti gItA-s appear in SB; brahma, sUta, guru gItA-s appear in ska.nda purANa; vyAsa, Ishvara gItA-s appear in kUrma purANa; yama gItA appears in nRRisiMha, agni, and viShNu purANa-s. Also, YOV contains brahma gItA; adhyAtma rAmAyaNa contains rAma gItA; gaNesha purANa contains gaNesha gItA etc. Some of these works may be posterior to sha.nkara. Other than BG, there are five gItA-s[3401 which are quite popular among Vedantins: aShTAavakra gItA, avadhUta gItA, uttara gItA, RRibhu gItA, and uddhava gItA. There is a vast Agamika-tAntrika literature belonging to the vaiShNava, shaiva, shAkta, and bauddha traditions and their respective tantra cults. The pa.ncharAtra Agama is the basis of most of the vaiShNava sects; monist shaiva-shAkta tradition is typically represented by Trika Agama such as mAliniivijaya, svachChanda, vigYAna-bhairava, mRRigendra; and bauddha-tantra tradition is represented by vajrAyana texts. The vajra- yAna tradition may be treated as subset of or consequent to mahAyAna Buddhism. The shAkta and tantra traditions are closely related to each other; the former is concerned with both transcendent and immanent aspects of energy (shakti) while; the later concentrates on the immanent energy and its material manifestation. shAkta-tantra is typically represented by tripurA-rahasya.[3411 According to Gopinath Kaviraj; the shAkta-tantra philosophy is not yet properly systematized, though its literature is quite old.[3421 This philosophy, in whatever form it may exist, is essentially monistic in nature and hence is equivalent to Advaita. The shaiva-shAkta-tantra systems are summarized in appendix (A), (B), (C) of the next section.

(D) HVC outside India: The advent of HVC [Hindu-Vedic culture] outside India in this period is evident from various inscriptions found

in South East Asia. The earliest such Sanskrit inscription has been recorded in Eastern Borneo (Indonesia) c.400. From these inscriptions and the records in Chinese and Buddhist annals it appears that this spread was achieved peacefully, without any military conquest, and hence is a unique phenomenon of historical importance. The modus- operandi of this spread is explained by (a) trade contacts, and (b) theory of legitimization. The trade contacts acted as facilitators, providing transmission belt and facilitating the ecosystem for cultural influences. Early Indonesian inscriptions show that there was a considerable development of agriculture, craftsmanship, regional trade and social differentiation before the transmission of the Indic culture. However, indigenous tribal organization needed a kind of legitimization and expertise of centralized administration for its growth in terms of territorial power and stature. From the earliest inscriptions of Eastern Borneo and other places it is clear that the Brahmanas from India went there for performing Vedic coronation of the kings, stayed here and participated in the administration.[343] Over the period, the successful Kings who had acquired the bounty of 'tributes' (tax) from the conquered rulers might have been involved in the temple construction activity which was observed during c.800-1300. The early phase of this spread must be essentially similar to that which took place in South and Central India in the first millennium, and much earlier in Western Asia, in the second millennium BC.[344] In the later case, however; there is no record of constructions of temples or monuments (Ref 8.3 (19)) which is the common feature of post Vedic HVC.[345]

5.2.4 Period of Establishment (c.700-1000): This is the period of Advaita-Vedanta's eminence and growth initiated by sha.nkara's epoch making commentaries (c.700-750)[346] on BS, BG, and 10-UP. Through these commentaries sha.nkara estab-lished link with the old tradition. At the same time he rejected or reoriented some of the traditional positions: 1. bhedAbheda: 'Identity-cum-difference' between soul and brahman 2. aikabhavika: Liberation thro' performance of obligatory duties avoid ing wishful and prohibited actions 3. GYAna-karma-samuchchaya: Liberation through 'combi-nation of Knowledge and Action' 4. dhyAna-niyoga: Injunction to meditate for Knowledge 5. prasa.nkhyAna: Knowledge through repeated affirmation Contemporaneous to sha.nkara, maNDana mishra propounded and

systematized doctrines of Advaita in brahmasiddhi.[347] He accepted the theory of sphoTa and tried to reconcile shabd-Advaita advocated by bhartRRihari and others with mainstream brahmAdvaita. He held that Ignorance, which obscures the true nature of brahman, has for its support (Ashraya) the individual souls. This standpoint was adopted by vAchaspati who tried to harmonize maNDana's views with those of sha.nkara. maNDana held that both rites and meditation are necessary for Liberation and that real Liberation is possible only after death of the body. Ironically, these positions were rejected by sureshvara with whom maNDana is traditionally identified. sha.nkara distinguished GYAna-mArga from karma-mArga. The former is to be followed for moxa (Liberation) while the later is to be followed for dharma (duties), kAma (desires), and artha (means). According to him, sacrificial rites may be useful means for attaining heavenly pleasures; but they bind the jIva to saMsAra, and thus are impediment in the path of moxa - the highest goal of a man. The material interest of the priests in sacrificial rituals was acknowledged right in the oldest of UP.[348] There was however, a socially equitable side to it such as dAna (charity), dayA (compassion) (BU 5.2.1-3) and yaGYa-shiShTa (distribution of sacrificial remnant to the partakers) (BG 3.13). sha.nkara's subordination of karma to GYAna (Knowledge) was a via media which did not disrupt the social order and at the same time discouraged the excessive ritualism of karmakANDa without challenging its authority in the worldly affairs. sha.nkara reinvented the terminology of AbhAsa (semblance of brahma-chaitanya), adhyAsa (superimposition) and avyAkRRita nAmarUpa (unmanifested name and forms). He established the concept of Ignorance which was not directly propounded in GK. He equated Ignorance with superim-position. His absolutist interpretation of Atman=brahman and separation of GYAna from karma had profound implications for Vedanta tradition. There are many traditional Advaita texts; large number of them are ascribed to sha.nkara (sha.nkarAchArya).[349] Some of the ascriptions could relate to one or more heads of the Vedanta monasteries like shRRi.ngerl since they are some times referred to by the honorific title of sha.nkarAchArya.[350] Amongst such works advaitAnubhUti, aparoxAnubhUti, Atma-bodha, Atma -anAtma-viveka, daxiNAmUrti stotra, dasha-shlokI, shatashlokI, yati-pa.nchaka, pa.nchIkaraNa, prapa.nchasAra, saun-daryalaharI, svAtmanirupaNa, tattvabodha, vAkyavRRitti, vivekachUDA-maNi, sarva(vedAnta)- siddhAnta(sAra)sa.ngraha etc. are respected in the tradition. Notable among them are the texts like prapa.nchasAra and saundaryalaharl which bear tAntrika influence.

The issue of "locus of Ignorance" gave rise to bhAmatI and vivaraNa traditions. Ignorance became an all-in-one concept assuming both ontological and epistemological purport due to its indeterminate reality grade. It subsumed the role of avyakta or avyAkRRita which was propounded by sha.nkara as the indeterminate material cause of the universe. Ignorance was split into primary component (mUlAvidyA), as the material cause of the universe and secondary components (tUlAvidyA) as its individuated emergent derivative. sha.nkara's teaching was furthered by his direct disciples[351] - sureshvara[352] and padmapAda,[353] and later by other followers such as vAchaspati, [354] vimuktAtman,[355] prakAshAtman, sarva- GYAtman[3561 etc. They expounded Advaita and elaborated or reoriented some of sha.nkara's positions such as:

1. saMnyAsa: Renunciation is necessary for Knowledge 2. adhikAra: Only Brahmanas are eligible for renunciation 3. aparoxatva: UP can impart immediate Knowledge 4. jagatkAraNa: Unmanifested is the seed of Universe 5. avidyA-nivRRitti: Cessation of Ignorance is brahman. Almost all the distinct features of post-sha.nkara (traditional) Advaita that we see today were established by c.1000.

(A) Kashmir Shaivism: In this period an alternative Indic monism called Kashmir Shavism aka pratyabhiGYA [49FT]or Trika[a+] System,[357] was established in Kashmir. Most of the shaiva-shAkta traditions have Agamika-tAntrika base and Trika is no exception. Further, it can claim inheritance to similar ancient cults that might have existed in the adjacent Indus (Sindhu) valley regions. Alongside Advaita, Trika offers a broader and synchretic representation of Indic theosophies by combining shaiva, shAkta, and tantra traditions. Trika is a triad (3-way division) of literature (shAstra) into (1) Agama, (2) spanda, and (3) pratyabhiGYA.[358] Agama literature correspond to tantra traditions called kula and krama (c.300 or earlier), and to later shaiva traditions of spanda and pratya-bhiGYA. The later two traditions are based on shiva-sUtra-s which are the most important part of Agama-s, and which are said to be revealed to vasugupta (c.800). Trika's meditation methods are based on the older tantra Agama-s like mAlini, svachChanda, vijaya, and viGYAnabhairava. A kula means a family or a spiritual group. They sought spiritual experience thro' kuNDalini yoga. Some kula traditions are known to aim for Self-realization through rituals involving pa.nchamakAra (five m's): madya (wine), mA.ns (meat), mIna (fish), mudrA (parched grain), maithuna (sexual union)[359]. The word krama means stages and gradation; this school believed that Self-realization comes in stages. They spoke of 12 Kalis (goddesses) that governed each moment of our experience and the shaktichakra, the concentric layers of the pulsating energies (shakti-s)[3601. The basic idea underlying the spanda-shAstra, founded by bhatta kallata (c.850) is that shiva's spanda (pulsating energy) out of its own nature manifests on the back-ground of its own pure self, into the whole universe comprising the thirty-six tattva-s (elements or categories of reality) from the earth up to parama shiva. According to this doctrine, the world is a play of pulsating energy or vibration and is not an illusion or the result of error in perception (avidyA) as the Vedantin supposes. The spanda is that vibrant power of consciousness which infuses life into the physical senses. The pratyabhiGYA school commenced by somAnanda (c.900) and formulated by utpaladeva (c.950) in his pratyabhiGYA kArikA, is a philosophical system of the shaiva theology. The tantraloka written by abhinavagupta (c.1000).[361] includes the content of all the three branches of Trika (Agama, spanda, pratyabhiGYA). It is composed in verse, and forms a kind of encyclopedia of the Trika. abhinavagupta also wrote on other Agamika sources such as: 1) tantrasAra, 2) mAliniivijaya, 3) viGYAnabhairava, 4) sva-chChanda tantra, 5)

pratyabhiGYA-vimarshinI, 6) pratyabhiGYA-vivRRiti-vimarshinI. He synthesized all four traditions (kula, krama, spanda, pratyabhiGYA) into an integrated pratyabhiGYA school. His disciple xemarAja (c.1050) wrote the important texts like spanda-nirNaya, pratyabhiGYA- hradayam, shivasUtra vimarshinI. According to Dr. R. K. Kaw and Pt. Madhusudana Kaul, pratyabhiGYA is the philosophy proper of Trika, while other two shAastra-s (Agama, spanda) are more of a theology. [362] Trika includes following doctrines: (1) five activities of shiva: creation, preservation, destruction, concealing, revealing; (2) three categories: pati (God), pashu (soul), pAsha (bond); (3) three bonds: karma (action), mAyA (limitation), and ANava (material); (4) five-fold powers (shakti- s): chit (Self-awareness), Ananda (Bliss, independence), ichChA (sovereign will), GYAna (omniscience) and kriyA (omnipotence); (5) thirty-six elements (tattva-s): the twenty-five elements of sA.nkhya- Vedanta, six 'reducing powers' of (and including) mAyA, and five absolute (infinite) powers of parama-shiva;[3631 (6) the need for satguru and initiation; (7) power of mantra; (8) four pAda-s (sections): charyA (routine), kriyA (methods), yoga (mind control), GYAna (knowledge); (9) jIva=shiva is the main identity of Trika, similar to Atman = brahman of Vedanta. In Trika, paramashiva or parAsaMvit - the ultimate Reality, is the changeless principle of all changing experience. The paramashiva abounds in bliss and consciousness and is endowed with sovereignty of will, omniscience and omni-potence. He is both immanent [vishvamaya] and transcendent [vishvottIrNa]. Time, cause and space do not limit him. The creative power of the Lord is two-fold, comprising 'prakAsha' and 'vimarsha', viz. (a) the power of manifestation and (b) the power of perception or concretization. These powers function respectively as Universal Consciousness (Psychical Power) and Universal Energy (Physical Power or Objective Reality), technically called 'shiva' and 'shakti' respectively. The former, i.e. Universal Consciousness assumes three forms: Power of Remembrance [smRRiti-shakti], Power of Knowledge [GYAna-shakti] and Power of Differentiation [Apohana-shakti]. The latter. i.e. Universal Energy functions as Power of Action (kriyA-shakti) of the Lord. This is governed by three universal laws of Nature - the law of Division (bhedAbheda), the law of Perception (mana-tat-phala-meya), and the law of Causation (kAraNa-kArya). Transcendental Lord (vishvottIrNa) concretizes or materializes Himself into this created world (becomes vishvamaya, the cosmos) by evolving thirty-six 'tattva-s' or primary realities from the One Objective Reality, the primordial natural force principle or Prima Materia of all things.

The whole creation of the 'bonded soul' [pashu] and the World is thus explained as the manifestation of shiva [pati] through His dynamic aspect called shakti, and its impulse called spanda. He performs through his shakti the five actions of creation, preservation, destruction, revealing and concealing'. pashu (a living thing) being the fragment of the inter-related whole is no other than shiva [pati] Himself, but is in a state of limitation and self-forgetfulness due to bondage [pAsha]. Recognition [pratyabhiGYA] of the state of divinity [shiva-hood] by breaking this bondage leads to Liberation [moxa]. The pashu has taken on three impurities [mala-s] which are responsible for obscuring the divine within him. Trika sees them as related to three limiting ka.nchuka-s (kalA, vidyA, rAga).[364] The limitations imposed by them (i.e. of karma, knowledge, desire) can be lessened or eliminated by three methods of: right action (ANavopAya), contemplation (shAkto-pAya), and Self realization (shAMbhavopAya). These methods act respectively on the physical body (sthUla sharIra), the subtle body (sUxma sharIra), and the causal body (kAraNa sharIra). They are analogous to niShkAma-karma, shravaNa-manana- nididhyAsa, and dhyAna-dhAraNA-samAdhi of yoga & Vedanta. When the three impurities get dissolved, the spiritual aspirant realizes the divine within. Trika texts and meditation methods are available to all aspirants irrespective of class, gender, caste or race. Trika's eclectic approach is best illustrated by following meditation approaches recommended by viGYAnabhairava text towards Self-realization (dhAraNA 73, 74, 75, 51): dhAraNA 73: Having observed a desire that has sprung up, the aspirant should put an end to it immediately. It will be ab-sorbed in that very place in which it arose. (yoga approach). dhAraNA 74: When desire or knowledge (or activity) has not arisen in me, then what am I in that condition? In verity, I am (in that condition) that Reality Itself (i.e. Consciousness-bliss). (Therefore the aspirant should always contemplate 'I am Consciousness-bliss'). Thus he will be absorbed in that Reality and will become identified with it. (Vedanta approach). dhAraNA 75: When a desire appears, the aspirant should, with the mind withdrawn from all objects (of desire, knowledge, action etc.) fix the mind on it (desire, knowledge, action etc.) as the very Self, then he will have the realization of the essential Reality. (tantra approach). dhAraNA 51: Wherever the mind finds satisfaction, let it be concentrated on that. In every such case the true nature of the highest bliss will shine forth. (Trika approach of anupAya). The anupAya approach is further elaborated by abhinavgupta, the

author of ta.ntraloka: "There is no need here for spiritual progress or of contemplation, neither of discourses nor of discussion, neither of meditation nor of concentration, nor recitation of mantra, no practicing anything. What is then, tell me, the supreme Reality which is absolutely certain? Listen: neither reject nor accept (anything), share joyfully in every-thing, being as you are". Trika's revival in the late 20thC has received attention from scholars and aspirants alike due its eclectic approach and its intellectually satisfying pratyabhiGYA philosophy.

(B) Trika and Vedanta: The comparison between the meta-physics of Advaita and Trika can be summarized thus: (1) In Vedanta, sat (brahman) is Knowledge and Infinity. In Trika, sat (parAsaMvit or paramashiva) is Knowledge, Action and Infinity. Thus, in addition to chit (Awareness) and Ananda (Bliss); Trika is endowed with infinite power (of action), omni-science (of knowledge), omnipotence (of energy), and sovereignty (of will).[3651 (2) Since the sat in Trika is endowed with both GYAtRRitva (knower- ship) and kartRRitva (doer-ship); It is also responsible for the accrual of merit and demerit, or vice and virtue, which arises due to Its activity. In Vedanta, brahman is free from all these liabilities. (3) In Vedanta, mAyA's reality and belongingness to brahman is indeter- minate; while in Trika, mAyA is the real aspect of paramashiva which 'reduces' infinite shiva to finite one (jIva) on Its own volition. mAyA and other ka.nchuka-s map infinite transcendentals into the finite world; hence they may be seen as semi-transcendentals or acosmic-cosmic principles. (4) In Vedanta, mAyA projects as well as conceals Reality (of brahman) from the jlva (soul). Reality is realized by the soul (Self-realization) after chitta-shuddhi (mind-purification), which happens by 'chance' (Divine Grace). In Trika, such functions are performed by shiva-shakti. Thus, (a) origination-emanation (utpatti-sRRijana), (b) maintenance (sthiti), (c) withdrawal (laya or saMhAra), (d) concealment of Reality (vilaya), (e) the divine grace (anugraha) are functions of chit-shakti. (5) The universe in Vedanta is mithyA (undefinable). Manifestation is only nAmarUpa which is not real; in Trika it is real. It is shivarUpa or the divine manifestation. Universe is an AbhAsa; it is an external projections of the ideation of parA-saMvit, like a reflection in a mirror. Though the mirror-images appear to be separate from each other and from the mirror; they are not different from the mirror. Similarly, the manifold world of objects is the variegated complex of images which are not different from parAsaMvit. Here the images, mirror, and the viewer (free-will), everything is within parama-shiva without any external agency or materials (which any way do not exist). Like a yogin; He creates image of external reality within himself according to his own will. Here the similarity with later day ekajIva-dRRiShTi- sRRiShTi-vAda, the origins of which however, are in the earliest UP, can be noticed. (6) In Trika, shiva or self-illumination (prakAsha) is the static (changeless) aspect while shakti (vimarsha or spanda) is the kinetic (changing) aspect of sat or parama-shiva. According to abhinavagupta, Vibration (spanda) is a somewhat (ki.nchit) of a movement. Here immovable appears 'as if moving'. The immovable appears as if it has

variety of manifestation.[366] The spanda (movement in Consciousness) has no distinction of space-time (deshakAla- avisheShinI).[367] Nothing really appears or disappears; only the spandashakti of paramashiva, which though free of succession, appears differently as if aris-ing and subsiding. This vibration or pulsation of shakti creates (utpatti or unmeSha), maintains (sthiti), and dissolves (pralaya or nimeSha) the Universe. Although, parama-shiva is change- less and motionless (nistara.nga), He tends towards manifest-ation through spanda. The spanda simultaneously operates every where, and so is the cosmic multiplicity.[368] Whatever manifests in the cosmos is a direct product of the vibration of the shakti. In Vedanta, the vibration aspect is mentioned though not elaborated as in Trika. GK holds that the world appearance is due to vibration of prANa (ref GK 1.6) or chitta (GK 4.72) or viGYAna (GK 4.51). shabda-brahman (Mai 6.22) which is a synonym for mUla-prakRRiti or mAyA implies the concept of vibration as the origin of the world. In BU 3.7.1 brahman is conceptualized as sUtrAtman where the Universe is vibration of the single string (sUtra), the Self of which is brahman. BS traces the manifestation (vyakta) of the unmanifest (avyakta or mAyA) to the origination of prANa (BS 1.1. 23) and its subsequent vibrations (kaMpana) (BS 1.1.39).[3691 (7) It is possible to demonstrate equivalence of Vedanta and Trika. In Vedanta, acosmic (nirguNa, niShprapa.ncha) brahman is the substratum of cosmic (saguNa) brahman. In Trika, cosmic (saguNa) and acosmic (nirguNa) are the two aspects of the same paramashiva making It a panenthestic principle. In Vedanta, mAyA takes the role of shakti as well as of ka.nchuka-s with an indeterminate relationship with brahman; in Trika shakti is firmly identified with shiva and delegates the role of delimiting (reducing) agency to mAyA. The Vedanta can be interpreted in panentheistic terms; on the other hand AbhAsa vAda of Trika has an illusory aspect; spanda occurs in platonic space and not in real space-time. [3701 All in all, the metaphysical difference between Vedanta and Trika is reconcilable, both being 'absolutely' monistic schools. However, they differ in their meditation methods. Advaita uses classical yoga and smArta karma, while Trika falls back on Agama-s. Trika is much more flexible and colorful due to its tantra base, while Vedanta is sedate and canonical. (C) Tripura tantra [fag da]: In shAkta tantra, the shakti is variously named as tripurA, sundarii, lalitA, Shodashii, shrii-vidyA, kAmeshvarii, kAlii, durgA etc.[371] Tripura is one line of shAkta tantra which has extensive literature. It is called Tri-pura because it has three operative modes: brahma (creation), vaishNavI (sustenance) and raudri

(withdrawl). The extant book is in the form of a discourse delivered by haritAyana to nArada. This discourse claims to be the reproduction of the teachings of dattAtreya to parashurAma, based on personal realization and reason. The appearance of world-objects is known as bAhyAvabhAsa, because such appearance implies the manifestation of what may be described as empty space which is (apparently) other than the Self. The world is thus a partial appearance of Self which subsumes all the world- objects. Since chaitanya is all-embracing and can have nothing outside it - for if there were any such thing it would not shine out and would therefore be non-existent - what is popularly called the 'external' is indeed only a reflection on chaitanya as on a mirror. When the universe comes into being it does so as only an image within the unique Self. The universe as such is varied but underlying it is the pure and simple unity of chaitanya revealing itself to the eye of diligent search (anusandhAna). The manifestation of the universe, due to Free-Will [svAtantrya] of the Absolute, is thus a process of AbhAsa, - and for the initiation of this process nothing beyond the play of the Will is needed. The material and efficient causes, supposed to be necessary for every product, are held unnecessary. The peculiar metaphysical position of the tantra consists in this theory of AbhAsa. It counter-posits itself against the vivartavAda of Vedanta. The world is not originally a false appearance due to Error. It is real in the same way as an image is real, but it has no existence apart from the medium in which it is manifested. Its existence is only the existence of the medium. According to Vedanta, the world appears as such due to Ignorance and in the last analysis it is resolved into avyakta or mAya which is not identical with Brahman and is material; but to a tAnrika the world is real and is expression of the chit-shakti or Free Will of the Lord and is really spiritual in essence like the Lord Himself. In the last resort it turns back into the chit-shakti which is never withdrawn, for the Will (svAta.ntrya) remains, even after the world has disappeared. The Vedanta system has to fall back on the doctrine of vivarta, because it denies, in a sense, svAta.ntrya to pure chaitanya.[3721 The first stadium of creation is thus an AbhAsa. The second stage which represents the subsequent condition shows how the chit-shakti, appearing (AbhAsamAna) in the pure chaitanya, further progresses; mAya emerges on the scene now and the "vivarta" is the logical outcome. The third stage marks how mAya becomes productive. This is the "pariNAma" or evolution which gets on till the bhUta-s spring into manifestation. The fourth stage that represents creation out of the bhuta-s is known as 'AraMbha' or physico-chemical process of genesis. From the highest view of tantra, however, the entire Creation is an AbhAsa.

The system teaches that the Supreme Reality [saMvit] is of the nature of pure self-luminous Intelligence, which is unaffect-ed by the limitations of time, space and causality. It has absolute freedom (pUrNa svAta.ntrya) inasmuch as its Power or Will (sa.nkalpa) is unrestricted. This Power is identical with the essence of chaitanya and remains either involved in it or expresses itself as its inalienable property. In the technical terms, it is known as vimarsha or kRRipA, and is an eternal attribute of chaitanya. The freedom referred to above implies that the Consciousness is free from vikalpa-s and is basically distinct from the matter. The chaitanya is free, as it does not depend on anything else for its own revelation of matter. The Power exists in a two-fold condition. What is generally known as creation or dissolution is in reality the manifestation of this Power or its abeyance. It always functions, but its function is sometimes (for example, during the creative period) expressed as the manifestation of the Universe till now abso-rbed in and identified with the Essence Reality and at other times expressed as self-manifestation. [373] The supreme reality (saMvit) of the Agama-s would thus seem to differ in a sense from the brahman of Vedanta. Though both are essentially of the nature of Intelligence there is a fundamental distinction between the two. The Absolute of the tantra is endowed with Power which is held to be identical with Itself and by virtue of which It is described as the Free Agent (svatantra-kartA). Freedom to act forms the essence of chaitanya. In other words, according to the tAntrika viewpoint, shiva and shakti are aspects of one and the same Reality. But in orthodox school of Advaita-Vedanta, brahman, which as in this tantra is described as of the nature of pure Aware-ness, is no better than an 'actionless locus' (adhikaraNa), [374] on which the Power, which is attached to It mysteriously and is neither identical with nor distinct from It, plays. It is conce-ived as a passive background in relation to the active power operating on It. The shakti (mAyA) in the Vedanta school, is not thus of the nature of brahman but is of indeterminate (anirvachanlya) material, though it is held to be, of course mysteriously, subservient to it. But in tantra, shakti or pure Freedom is absolutely non-material. The term chitshakti implies its spiritual essence. What in the tantra-s is known as vAhyAbhAsa or the mani-festation of a non-ego (anahaMbhAva) within the pure Ego (shuddhAtma) but appearing as external to it is the radical Nescience (mUlAvidyA) of Vedanta. This non-ego is the so called avyakta (Unmanifested) or jaDa shakti (Matter). But the Freedom or the Spiritual Power (chit shakti) of the Lord, as described in the tantra-s, is beyond the Nescience referred to above, and to this Power the Advaita Vedanta seems to be a

stranger according to Dr. Kaviraj.[375] In as much as the avidyA itself or the Material Power is a product of the Spiritual Power which is the ultimate source of all existence; there is no discrepancy in the statement, often found in tAntrika Literature, that this Power has three distinct states of its existence: 1. During the universal dissolution when the Self is free from all vikalpa-s the shakti exists as pure chit shakti or chit prakRRiti; 2. When the vikalpa-s are on the point of merging - when though there is no vikalpa as such, there is yet a tendency in the direction of vikalpa - the shakti is called mAyA shakti or jaDa prakRRiti; 3. But when the vikalpa-s are fully developed and the materiality becomes dense the shakti appears as avidyA. It has already been observed that the appearance of the universe follows upon the self-expression of the Divine Power and the Cosmic End follows from the withdrawal of the self-same Power. After the period of Cosmic Night is over; the Will of the Lord, in co-operation with the mature adRRiShTa of jIva-s (karma-phala), manifests only partially, as it were, the Essence of the Self, whereby the Self is revealed as 'limited'. The appearance of limitation is thus the emergence of not-self, known as avidyA or jaDa shakti, called also by the name of Void (shUnya), or prakRRiti or Absolute Negation or Dark-ness (tamaH) or AkAsha. This is the first stage in the order of creation and represents the first limitation imposed on the Limitless. The erroneous belief generated through the Freedom of the Lord - the Self - that the Ego is partial (ekadeshika) and not full and universal (pUrNa), is responsible for the appearance of this Something which being a portion of the Self is yet outside of it and free from self-consciousness and is described as not- self or by any other name as shown above. Thus the Supreme Reality splits itself spontaneously, as it were, into two sections - one appearing as the subject and the other as the object. The object as thus making its appearance is the Unmanifested (avyakta) Nature from which the entire Creation emanates and which is perceived by the subject as distinct from itself. It has been observed that chaitanya is of the nature of self-luminous Light (sphurataH prakAsha), which may shine on itself (svAtmA), in which case it is known as ahaMtA, or I-ness may rest on the Non-ego (anAtmA) and express itself as idaMtA (This-ness). The essence of chaitanya consists in the fact that the light (prakAsha) is always confined to itself. This universal Ego or 'I' stands, behind all dualism. The Supreme Ego is universal, as there is nothing to limit

(parichCheda) or to differentiate (vyAvRRitti) it, and the entire visible universe exists in identity with it. But this characteristic by its very nature is absent from Matter (jaDa), which is not self-manifest. Just as light and heat co-exist in fire, in the same way universal ahaMtA and Freedom or shakti co-exist in chaitanya. This freedom is mAyA which though essentially identical with chaitanya (chidekarUpa) brings out varieties of an infinite kind, but in bringing out this variety it does not in the least swerve from the Essence. The appearance of the Universe in pure chaitanya is the action of avidyA, which has three distinct stages: Stage-1: This is the germinal state (bIjAvasthA), when the material power, which is still in its earliest phase of manife-station, is pure. Matter does not assert itself at this stage and consequently there is no differentiation in experience. In other words, it does not yet appear as distinct from chaitanya, though potentially it exists. This stage is represented by the five pure tattva-s (acosmic principles), viz. (a) shiva, (b) shakti (c) sadAshiva, (d) Ishvara and (e) shuddha vidyA. (a) The avidyA, which has been described above as being the chaitanya in its limited appearance as an object external to the subject, is called shiva. In pure chaitanya, owing to the play of Its own Will, an infinite number of limited aspects (svAMsha) arise. These are mutually distinct. From this point of view to every limited aspect of chit there is a corresponding object external to it (bAhyA-bhAsa), but to the unlimited chit or pure Self (parAshiva) there is no externalities. The universal element common to all the pure and limited chit aspects referred to above is called shiva tattva. This tattva is thus a universal (sAmAnya) holding within it all the particulars (visheSha-s) but parAshiva or pure Self is transcendental and above both sAmAnya and visheSha. Hence shiva tattva may be more properly described as pure chaitanya in its general but conditioned form, free from all vikalpa-s (alternatives) and is to be distinguished from the Absolute proper. (b) The appearance of shiva (parichChinna nirvikalpa chit) as ahaM is called shakti. Although this self-presentative char-acter (ahaMbhAsana) is in the essence of chit, so that there can be in fact no differentiation between shiva and shakti as such, the chit is nevertheless known as shiva insofar as it is free from all differentiators (visheSha-s), and as shakti by virtue of its characteristic self-awareness (ahaMbhAsana). (c) When the self-presentation (ahaMbhAsana) is no longer confined to the Self but is extended to the not-self or 'object external to the Self (mahAshUnya), it is known as sadAshiva. This

state marks the identification of Self with the not-self in the form "ahameva idaM" and indicates predominance of spirit over matter. (d) When matter prevails and the consciousess assumes the form "idaM ahaM" the state is technically called Ishvara. (e) The term shuddha vidyA is reserved for the state which represents an equality in the presentation of the objective and subjective elements in consciousness. Stage-2: This stage in the evolution of avidyA, described as a.nkurAvasthA, represents a further development of difference or materiality, when the subtle products of matter and spirit make their appearance. In this mixed condition both spirit and matter are equally predominant and the three groups of seven mixed (mishra) tattva-s, viz. (a) mAyA, (b) kalA, vidyA, rAga, kAla, niyati, and (c) puruSha reveal themselves. (a) The confirmation of difference due to the Free Will of the Supreme, which characterizes the second stage, has the effect of reversing the normal relation between spirit and matter. Thus while in the first stage described above Spirit or chit-shakti dominates matter or jada-shakti which exists in a rudimentary state, merged in spirit or Self, the second stage shows preponderance of matter over spirit. Consciousness losing its supremacy becomes a quality inherent in the material subject. All this is due to the emergence and the development of bhedasa.nkalpa in chaitanya. This material subject, which is the matter prev-ailing over spirit and related to it as a substance to its quality, is called mAyA. (b) The five aspects of mAyA are the so-called ka.nchuka-s which are the five eternal shakti-s of parAshiva in a limited form. The obscuring power of mAya acts as a veil as it were upon the Omnipotence, Omniscience, Content-ment, Eternity, and Freedom of the Supreme Self and, thus acting, it is known as kalA, vidyA, rAga, kAla, and niyati respectively. (c) The pure Self as obscured by mAyA and its five-fold activities appear as puruSha[376] with its limitation in action, knowledge, contentment, eternity and freedom. Stage-3: This is the grossest stage in the evolution of avidyA, which is represented by the dense products of the mixed tattva-s, where matter is overwhelmingly strong. This stands for the group of the twenty four tattva-s, from the Primary prakRRiti down to pRRithvi, constituting the material order. These elements are more or less common to sA.nkhya, Vedanta, and pratyabhiGYA systems (ibid); their interpretation in the scheme of their evolution may differ, particularly in respect of mind

elements. prakRRiti, with which the lower creation begins, is indeed the assemblage (samaShTi) of vAsanA-s of all persons with various and beginningless karman: it may be describ-ed as the body of the karman saMskAra-s of the jIva-s, considered as inhering in chit shakti or Self. This karma vAsanA or prakRRiti is three-fold according as the experi-ence, which is the moral outcome of vAsanA is pleasant or painful or of the nature of a comatose condition in which neither pleasure nor pain is felt. [377] The vAsanA-s exist in a two-fold condition, as avyakta when they lie unmanifested in dreamless sleep or as chitta when they manifest themselves in dreams and wakeful states. In the dreamless state there can be no experience of pleasure and pain, because the mature karman-s having been worked off through experience; the others which are not yet ripe are not ready for fruition. It is a fact that karman-s, when they are matured by time, cause the GYAna shakti of the Conscious Self to move outwards and have contact with the objective world. In a state of sleep such movement is naturally absent. But the process of time during which the sleep continues, acts on the karman-s and matures some of them, so that the GYAna shakti is allowed to come in touch with the external objects or with their semblances and sleep is over. The shakti as thus qualified by the body of karma vAsanA-s leading to contact with the objects and consequent enjoyment (bhoga) is known as chitta. The chitta differs according to the difference of puruSha, but it is one with prakRRiti in dreamless sleep. Thus the chitta may be viewed as puruSha or as prakRRiti accord-ing as conscious (chitti) or unconscious (avyakta) element prevails in it. It is not therefore a distinct category, but falls either under puruSha or under prakRRiti. Mind in the tantra Tradition: Similar to supreme saMvit, mind has vimarsha and prakAsha aspects. These correspond to idamaMsha (objective part) and unidamaMsha (non-objctive part) of mind in Vedanta. The prakAsha manifests as the bare (undifferentited) awareness of the object which then is differ-entiated by the vimarsha. Deep-sleep according to shAkta-tantra, comes under the prakAsha - awareness of sleep. It is 'undifferentiated knowledge' (nirvikalpa GYAna) and at the same time it is called 'state of insentience' (mUDha- dashA) due to lack of vimarsha. Thus, pure prakAsha is another name for insentience in this particular context. In waking state there is quick succession of prakAsha-vimarsha interplay that acquires continuity due

to rapidity of succession. Here, tantra seems to be in the company of vedAnta-kaumudii and bauddha yogAchAra (ibid.) The vimarsha-less pure prakAsha (insentience-cum-awareness) is common in one way or the other in all living states; while the states themselves are differentiated from each other by the subsequent vimarsha. In other words; while vimarsha is the conative and qualitative aspect of experience; it is possible to conceive prakAsha as the substratum experience in the role of sAxi-chetA. Though this is similar to Vedanta's peception; prakAsha and vimarsha are real aspects of mind as well as saMvit, while according to Vedanta; mind itself is superimposed on the Self and hence is mithyA. The equivalence between shaiva and shAkta-tanra philosophies can be easily established. They emphasize different aspects of the same principle. In a way, both of them philosophically represent the shaiva- shAkta-tantra compositae.

(D) The Advaita-Vedanta Monasteries:[378] It i traditionally believed that sha.nkara founded four monasteries (maTha-s) in India : (1) shRRi.ngerl in South (shRRi.ngerI maTha), (2) purii in East (govardhana maTha), (3) dvArakA in West (shAradA maTha), (4) badarInAtha in North (jyotirmaTha). These four are known as the AmnAya maTha-s. sha.nkara is said to have assigned one Veda to each of them: RV to purii, YV to shRRi.ngerl, SV to dvArakA, and AV to badarI. Along with maTha-s sha.nkara is also credited with organizing dashanAmI saMpradAya of Vedantin sa.nnyAsI-s. The dasha-nAmI order is so called because of the ten (dasha) name (nAma) suffixes which these sa.nnyAsI-s adopt. These names are (1) bhAratI, (2) sarasvatI, (3) sAgara, (4) tIrtha, (5) purii, (6) Ashrama, (7) girii, (8) parvata, (9) araNya and (10) vana. The names are supposed to be distributed and affiliated among the four maTha-s: purii, bhAratI and sarasvatI with shRRi.ngerI maTha; tIrtha and Ashrama with shAradA maTha; sAgara, parvata and girii with jyotirmaTha, and vana and araNya with govardhana maTha; though in practice no rigid monastery based titles are followed. Many notable post-sha.nkara commentators-authors, including sureshvara, GYAnaghana, GYAnottama, Anandagiri, bhAratii-tiirtha, vidyAraNya and others, can be found among the heads of these maTha- s. However, in general, dashanAmI affiliation to maTha-s is nominal at best. These sa.nnyAsI-s do not have to be ordained at one of the maTha-s. They are supposed to be peripatetic (parivrAjaka, monks who constantly travel), with no fixed home, except for the period of chAtur- mAsya in the rainy season, when they stay put at one place. The heads

of the maTha-s are also supposed to travel around the country for the better part of the year. In a later period (probably, post c.1200) in northern India, the dashanAmI-s were organized into number of akhADA-s: jUnA, nira.njanI, mahAnirvANI, aTala, AvAhana, Ananda and agni. Except for the agni akhADA which is for brahmachArl initiates, membership of all other akhADA-s is made up of dashanAmI monks. These akhADA-s have leaders known as mahA-maNDaleshvara-s, who are usually elected during a kuMbha melA.[379] The kuMbha melA also offers an opportunity for an akhADA to initiate new sa.nnyAsI-s. Though dashanAmI-s have only nominal affiliation with their maTha-s, most maintain a closer relationship with their akhADA. All dashanAmI monks belong to the tradition of eka-daNDI saMnyAsa.[3801 They carry a staff consisting of a single wooden stick, symbolizing the essential identity of brahman and Atman. The major following of the teachers of the Advaita tradition has been mostly among the smArta-s, who combine domestic Vedic rituals with devotional aspects of Hinduism. They offer traditional worship to shiva [शिव],viShNu[विष्णु], shakti [शक्ति], gaNesha [गणेश], sUrya [सूर्य], as aspects of saguNa brahman. Sometimes skanda [h-] is added, particularly in the south India, as the sixth important deity.

(E) bhakti Movement[381] of this period in South, which was lead by 75 Apostles (sixty-three shaiva Nayanars and twelve vaiShNava Alwars), and which was out side the pale of Brahmana orthodoxy, was no less important in retaining the so called lower substrata of Hinduism within its fold. The shaiva and vaiShNava movements created spiritual ecology that stemmed the rising tide of Jainism and Buddhism in south India and at the same time brought certain cults who used to indulge in orgies and violent acts, into the sober main-stream HVC. The early bhakti mystics rejected ritual sacrifices in which lower classes could not afford to participate. They rejected or played down caste system. The writings of famous saints Appar, Sambandar, and Manikavasagar (c.600-900) were compiled as 'Holy Scriptures' (Tirumurai) and are called Tamil Veda. The 12th Book Periya Puranam was added later to the canon (c.1100-1150) by the poet Shekkilar at the behest of Chola king Kulottunga-1. The post-1000 Brahmana protagonists like rAmAnuja and madhva connected vaiShNava bhakti movement in the South India to Vedanta tradition by writing commentarie on BS, though Vedanta itself had connected with syncretic HVC tradition earlier through BG.

Temple Cities like Chidambaram (Nataraja -- shiva), Madurai (Minakshi -- shakti), Kanchi (Kamakshi -- shakti), Tirupati (Venkate- shwara -- viShNu), Shrirangam (Ranganatha -- viShNu) in the South; Pandharpur (Viththal -- viShNu), Kolhapur (Mahalakshmi -- shakti) in the West, and Puri (Jagannatha -- viShNu) in the East emerged in this period. Their cults and Vedantization of these cults by relating them to shiva, viShNu as cosmic deities and to the cosmic creative power (Adi shakti or Adi mAyA) are interesting case studies. The Sanskrit literature associated with respective deity, most of it in the form of eulogy (mahAtmya and stuti), was an important instrument of Vedantization; while the concept of 'pilgrimage' [yAtrA] that links the local, regional, and national level 'holy places' [tIrtha-s] was a vital part of bhakti tradition.

Temples Outside India: Magnificent temples such as those at Angkor (Kambodia c.889-1300), Borobudur (Java c.800-850) and Paga (Burma c.1044-1287) came up even out side Indic regions stimulated by the temple cults in India - particularly of South India. The regions surrounding these temples could not reach and retain the same level of Sanskritization and Vedantization as they could in India, still they attest the spread of HVC out side India, particularly in South-East Asia in the first and early second millennium. Parallel to the bhakti movement another similar movement (Sufism)

was shaping out-side Indic regions in West Asia during c.800-1000. Sufism was to enter Indian subcontinent post-1000 and establish itself in the spiritual landscape of the region.

(F) The Advent of Sufism[382]: The origin and initial development of Sufi tradition took place out side Indian sub-continent, but it has many parallels in the Bhakti and Vedanta tradition. It played an important role in the Indian sub-continent, particularly post-1000. The evolution of the Sufi theosophy can be summarized thus: Since the earliest times sufis had 'absolute faith in God' [tawakkul] like any other faithful Muslim. Rabe'ah al- Adawiyah (d.801), a woman from Basra, first formulated the Sufi ideal of unconditional devotion to God, without hope for paradise and without fear of hell. This trend of 'divine love' and the 'absolute trust in God' became two main themes of Sufism in the decades after Rabe'ah Basri. Direct communion with the 'divine reality' [haqiqat] has been an aspiration of every Sufi. This necessitated the evolution of a meditation methodology [murqaba] or spiritual itinerary [tariqah] designed to help the Sufi reach his goal. The Egyptian Sufi Abul Fayz Zun Nun (d.859) is believed to have been the first to map out the Sufi itinerary consisting of 'stages or stations' [maqamat] and states [ahwal]. The ahwal are said to be gifts from God while the maqamat are acquired. Because of their fleeting nature, the ahwal, though gift from God, are no guarantee for the attainment of the Sufi goal. Maqamat are of greater value and the seeker is required to traverse them in a progressive order fulfilling the obligations of one station before proceeding to the next. Before setting out on the long and arduous 'spiritual journey' [Suluk] the Sufi traveler, called salik, (also, murid, talib, or khadim denoting disciple, student, or servitor) is required to place himself under the care of a spiritual guide [Shaykh, Pir, or Murshid]. Observation of all religious prescriptions was the first consti-tuent of this schedule, followed the by 'Remembrance of God' [zikr]. Regarded by the Sufis as the nuclear tool of their methodology, zikr began as simple recitation of the Qur'an. By the turn of the eighthC, however, zikr had developed into an elaborate congregational ritual consisting of diverse religious formulas and litanies. A simpler formula was the invocation of the word Allah. The Qur'an and the Prophet also ordained zikr for the faithful. According to Sufis, Prophet equated zikr with the polish of the heart. Sufi sees zikr as the cleanser of the heart and the primary medium of reaching God. A popular form of zikr, which exercised a powerful influence on Sufis from the ninthC onwards, is 'sama". Literally meaning 'listening', sama was a kind of concert characterized by the playing of musical instruments and chanting of poems. The verve and vigor of the singers often matched the passion of the listener. Rending of clothes and ecstatic dancing was a common phenomenon. The 'sama' is the only

Sufi practice of significance for which no Quranic sanction is available. Notwithstanding the claim of many Sufis that the 'sama' was a source of 'spiritual ecstasy' [wajid], and that it was a divine inspiration which ignited the spark of celestial love in the heart of the participant and lead man to God, the theologians condemned 'sama' as a gross violation of the Shari'a.[383] Rabi'a al-Basri (c.739-801) was the first female saint of Sufi tradition. She is known in the world of Islam for her unbound-ed and unselfish love for God. Love of God for the sake of God not for fear of hell or desire for paradise was her motto. Egyptian Sufi - Abul Faiz Sauban, better known as Zun Nun al-Misri (d.859) gave Rabia's concept of pure love for God the power of doctrine. He identified the love for God with the mystical Knowledge of God. This knowledge (of God) according to him was the true knowledge, which he called 'gnosis' [ma'arifat]. Ma'arifat is the knowledge of the attributes of Divine Unity which belongs to saints of God, those who behold God in such way that He reveals unto them what He reveals not unto any one else in the world. No amount of trial and travail, Zun Nun taught, was sufficient for the attainment of ma'arifat, which dawns by the grace of God alone. He believed that in its truest sense, gnosis was God's providential communication of the spiritual light to the seekers inmost heart. The receiver of such knowledge then subsists through God. He sees through the eyes of God. He walks only for the sake of God, and he speaks nothing but the word of God. This knowledge is then the ultimate goal of the Sufi when s/he is alive. Sufism of the 9th and 10th centuries, had outstanding figures such as Abu Yazid al-Bastami (d.874), Junayd al-Baghdadi (d.910), and others, later became known retrospectively as the central organizers of the Sufi movement. The two regions: One of Baghdad (capital of the 'Abbasid caliphate) and another of northeastern Iran (or Khurasan) were the two most active centers of Sufism out side India. Abu Yazid bin Ibrahim or Bayazid Bastami, a native of Bastam in Iran, went a step ahead of Zun Nun. He said - Divine Love requires not only the attainment of the knowledge of God but also proper utilization of this knowledge as an instrument for the achievement of unity with God. Bayazid stated that unification with God depended only on the purification of heart. The best mode of the purification of heart is expulsion of every thing from the heart other than God. This leads to the annihilation of (or the merger of) individual self into God. This doctrine of Fana first propounded by Bayazid had a profound influence on the future Sufi tradition. Husain bin Mansur al-Hallaj[3841 (d.922) took the next step that

proved fetal for him. His mystic statement Ana'l Haqq [I am the Truth] was taken as his claim to Divinity. Accused of heresy, Mansur was thrown into prison. After a prolonged trial, he was executed with great cruelty. The highly publicized trial of Mansur on the charge of heresy not only widened the gulf between Sufism and the exoteric civil authority but also caused to Sufism much of its hard earned prestige and popularity. Mansur's ideas provided the basis for the develop-ment of the doctrines of 'insan-i-kamil' (the Perfect Man) and Wahdat al-wujud (Unity of Being). The next step in this direct-ion however, had to wait for couple of centuries. Similarities between Sufi practices developed by 12thC and contemporaneous Hindu traditions are noticeable: (1) murqaba and meditation practices of haTha-yoga and classical yoga; (2) tariqah and Vedanta saMpradAya; (3) zikr and japa; (4) 'sama' and bhajana-kIrtana; (5) Shaykh or Pir and Guru; (6) require-ment of purified mind for communion with haqiqat, and chitta-shuddhi for Self realization; (7) ma'arifat and brahma-GYAna; (8) fana and samAdhi etc. There were cultural exchanges among Sufism, bhakti tradition, and ascetic sects like Natha Pantha and Hatha-Yogis after Sufism entered in the Indic region c.1100. Before that, Sufism and bahkti-yoga traditions seem to have evolved independent of each other.

5.2.5 Period of Dialectic (c.1000-1400): In this period shrIharSha (KKK)[385], Ananadabodha (NM),[386] chitsukha (TP), [387] and Ananadagirl (aka AnandaGYAna) (TS and TL)[388] wrote dialectical-polemical texts to refute the objections and counter-points of the competing schools. In c.1250-1350, there was significant contribution to the theory of perception by the writers such as anubhUtisvarUpAchArya (prakaTArtha-vivaraNa), AnandaGYAna aka Anandagiri (tarka- sa.ngraha), and rAmA-dvaya (vedAnta-kaumudI). [3891 In the same period bhAmatl and vivaraNa sub-schools were consolidated. During c.1200-1300, (vedAnta-kalpataru) [VK] of amalAnanda was the earliest important commentary on bhAmatl followed by bhAmatI-tilaka of allAla sUri. VK was later commented by appaya dIxita in his parimala. During c.1300-1400, akhaNDAnanda (tattvadIpana) and AnandapUrNa (vivaraNa-tIkA), expounded the vivaraNa line. vidyAraNya wrote vivaraNa-prameya-sa.ngraha and pa.nchadashI on AbhAsa line. With regards to points like release (mukti), efficacy of karma, and capacity of shabda; vivaraNa accepted sureshvara line. sAyaNa (c.1315-1387), the younger brother of vidyAraNya, and a teacher as well as advisor of Vijayanagar empire of South India, wrote his oft-quoted seminal work vedArtha-prakAsha, [3901 a commentary on RV; which is considered by many to be the most authoritative traditional scholarship on RV. This work was translated and commented by Max Mueller (w.1849-1865). This was also the period when Advaita tradition was fragment-ed into multiple schools[3911. The Vedanta dialectic was not only directed against the non-Vedanta schools such as nyAya and mImAMsA, but also against the competing sister Vedanta schools such as vishiShThAdvaita. The qualified non-dualism's polemical work shatadUShaNI by ve.nkatanAtha was written in 14thC. Much of the dialectic of Advaita in the subsequent period was engaged in countering the arguments of this work as well as of such works as nyAyAmRRita of vyAsatIrtha, nyAyAmRRita-tara.nginii of rAmachArya (dvaita schools), para-paxa-girii-vajra of mAdhava mukunda (dvaita- advaita) etc. Sometimes these arguments and counter-arguments become overstretched, tedious, and at times even acrimonious.[3921 This polemical process discusses issues and occasionally arrives at interesting philosophical positions and concepts, e.g. definition of metaphysical indeterminism (mithyAva), falsity (mithyAtva), denial of the law of excluded middle (sadasadvilaxaNa), future sublation

(satyatva-anumAna-bha.nga), cognizability as cause (dRRishyatva hetu), limitedness as cause (parichChinnatva hetu), self-luminous (svaprakAsha), provability of the non-real (asat sAdhakatvam), perceptual creation (dRRiShTi sRRiShTi), single-soul creation (ekajlva sRRiShTi) etc. A counterbalancing 'devotional trend' (bhakti movement) was consolidated by end of this period. The purANa-s like shrImad bhAgavatam [SB] gave strength to this consolidation. The roots of bhakti movement of this period (bhAgavata dharma) are traced in the ancient texts of RRigveda, shata-patha brAhmaNa, taittirlya AraNyaka, mahAbhArata, and bhagavadgItA representing tradition of devotion to viShNu, vAsudeva, hari, nArAyaNa, and kRRiShNa.[3931 SB in that sense is a representation of the ancient devotional faiths known variously as ekAntin dharma, [3941 sAtvata and pa.ncharAtra. [3951 Protagonists of dvaita (madhva), shuddhAdvaita (vallabha) & achintya bhed-Abheda (jIva gosvAmI) were all indebted to SB and wrote their commentaries on it. Though the common theme of SB is theistic and devotional; SB can be interpreted in the absolutist manner of Advaita. [396] How did Vedanta tradition proceed on the backdrop of political and social situation at that time? This was the period of Turkish-Islamic conquest[397] which was marked by desecration of temples, subjugation of Non-Muslims, and ravaging of monasteries and universities. These tumultuous happenings may not have any direct impact on the output of Vedanta texts written in this period barring 15thC when not many texts came up. The wave of invasions had not fully reached the interiors of peninsular India where the base of Vedanta had shifted. The Hindu kingdom of Ganga-Gajapati dynasties (c.1112-1568) in eastern coast of Orissa and the Vijayanagar Empire (c.1346-1565) in South India stood their ground and even flourished. [398] Certain trends and events of this period stand out on the back ground of Muslim ascendancy in the Indic regions. Inter-action between 'spiritual-mystical side of Islam' (Sufism) and Hinduism is explored in appendix (A) and (B) of this section. Other events are seen as outcome of the social processes that were influenced by the changing political situation. On the other hand, at least some of the trends could be following their own internal dynamics. 1. Vedanta tradition was fragmented in various schools which competed with each other for occupying the prime space. The type of dialectics earlier used by mAdhyamaka was adapted by Advaita dialecticians against their opponents. 2. After the brief period (c.1000-1100) of creative and

systematizing work by abhinavagupta and xemarAja, spiritual tradition of Kashmir Shaivism was almost eradicated from Kashmir when Islamic conquerors overran Kashmir. Its pratya-bhiGYA philosophy and its systematizer abhinavagupta how-ever, left an indelible imprint on the spiritual and cultural map of India.[399] Trika was revived by Sw. Laxmanjoo (1907-1991) and Sw. Muktananda (1908-1982) in the 20thC.

3. Reformist sects such as vIrashaiva-s who denounced the caste system,[4001 and Warkaris who sought to unify various castes by means of bhakti, were established. These sects operated within Vedanta frame work as much as they follow prasthAnatraya or preach some kind of monism within yoga or shaiva-shAkta-vaiShNava traditions. For example, vIrashaiva-s have shrIkara-bhAShya (on BS) of shrIpati paNDita, while Warkaris have GYAneshvarl (c.1290), a commentary on BG in Marathi, which expresses concern for universal well-being similar to that of Buddhism.[401] 4. Indic IA languages such as Hindi, Bengali, Oriya, Marathi, and Assamese took a firm regional identity of their own (c. 1000-1300). In Marathi, for example viveka-sindhu (1188) by mukundarAja (c.1128-1200), GYAneshvarl by GYAnadeva (c. 1275-1296), and gAthA (collections of the spiritual poems) of nAmadeva (c.1270-1350) are the prominent earliest texts that shaped Marathi spiritual-cultural tradition. These works had Advaita as their base.[402] 5. In large part of Indian subcontinent Buddhism could not survive as a practicing religion due to desertion by its royal patronage,[403] destruction of its monasteries, and deaths of its monks in the hands of invaders. Buddhism was assumed to be a nihilist creed antithetical to Islam[4041 - a possible apology for its travails in spite of it being inclusive and peaceful. Hinduism had absorbed Buddhist ethical values and Vedanta assimilated its philosophical content. In India it lived within Hinduism and remained an important philosophical discipline of historical importance. Outside India, in South East Asia in the same period, it not only survived but had a regional growth in Shri Lanka, Tibet, Burma etc. where it had taken roots since the days of Ashoka. The South Indian kingdoms particularly that of Chola, and Eastern kingdoms like that of Palas had created Indic cultural ecosystem in South-East Asia through their trade contacts and expeditions. Indian merchants' guilds operating across countries added to this cultural transmission. The kingdoms like Shrivijaya (Sumatra), Angkor (Cambodia), and Pagan (Burma) had already been introduced to Buddhism before the advent of Islam in that part of Asia. Buddhist monks were responsible for the establishment of Buddhism in

Southeast Asia. After destruction of Nalanda, many of them came in search of a safe homeland to Burma (Pagan) and to Buddhist centers in Tibet. 6. Immediately after this period, by end of 15thC, intensely devotional sects of shrii vallabha, and shrii chaitanya came up and became popular. Their protagonists wrote commentaries on BS and gave them a Vedanta base. Radha, the mythical female devotee of Krishna became the universal principle of bhakti. She communicates her love to Krishna, the 'cosmic consciousness', and begets his grace. Mirabai (c.1498-1547), a Rajput Princess is a typical case of the bhakta who was ravaged by the happenings of those times - her husband, father, and father-in-law all were killed while battling the invaders. She declared her love for Krishna even after her marriage and wrote beautiful songs and sung them across the country. Sometimes this bhakti, no doubt, had sexual under-tones and poet like jayadeva did bring them out in his famous composition gIta-govinda (c.1200). Krishna-bhakti cults originated mostly in Orissa, Bengal, Rajasthan, Gujarat and then spread outside. Post-1500, Bengal and Orissa saw the spread of bhakti tradition mainly through gauDIya vaiShNava cult of shrii chaitanya, while in Gujarat and Rajasthan it was mainly due to puShTimArga sect of shrii vallabha.

(A) Sufism in India played an instrumental role in spreading Islam in the Indian subcontinent. The establishment of Turkish-Islamic rule in Northern India in 12thC-13thC stimu-lated large-scale migration of Sufis from Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and Central Asia to the Indic subcontinent and played a crucial role in its social and political developments. Sufis tended to integrate beliefs and practices from the cultures on which Islam had been transplanted. This made Sufism more appealing to indigenous people converting to Islam, particularly to the lower castes which were neglected by the upper classes. Sufis were effectively Muslim missionaries, presenting to new people the moderate side of Islam compared to the oppressive regimes of the Islamic rulers. They were seen as defenders of the lower classes against corrupt rulers. Over the period, many Sufis acquainted them- selves with different religious systems and philosophies of the region, and sometimes involved themselves in the political administration. Though generally Sufis adapted local practices, there always remained a section of them which was deeply rooted in the Qur'an, Hadith, and teachings of the righteous caliphs and those of Ali ibn Abu Talib. Shi'ite Muslim beliefs had a lot of influence on Sufism, but mostly in the early days when Shi'a was more a school of thought than a distinct branch with its own ideology.[4051 One important idea which was transmitted from the Shi'a to Sufism is that of the Mahdi, a messianic figure which will come to save Muslims from corrupt worldly rulers. For the Shi'a, the Mahdi is the Twelfth Imam, who is currently hidden. For the Sufi, however, the Mahdi won't necessarily be a descendant of 'Ali, but will instead be a divinely guided leader who will appear at the End of Time to restore justice and truth over the forces of the infidels. Although this has never been a formal doctrine in Sunni Islam, it gained a foothold in the imaginations of many Muslims, thanks to the Sufis. (ref About.com: Sufi Islam; a.4.10.2009) Sufi orders represent one of the most important forms of personal piety and social organization in the Islamic world. In most areas, an order is called a tariqah (pl. turuq), which is the Arabic word for 'path' or 'way'. The term tariqah is used for both the social organization and the special devotional exercises that are the basis of the order's ritual and structure. By 12thC, these orders emerged as major social organizations in the Islamic community and took variety of forms throughout the Islamic world. They were characterized by prescribed rituals, which involved regular meetings for recitations of prayers, poems, and selections from the Qur'an. These meetings were usually described as acts of "remembering God" [dhikr or zikr]. In addition,

daily devotional exercises for the followers were also set, as were other activities of special meditation, asceticism, and devotion. The founder of the tariqah was the spiritual guide for all followers in the order, who would swear a special oath of obedience to him as their Shaykh or teacher. As orders continued, the record of the transmission of the ritual would be preserved in a formal chain of spiritual descent, called a silsilah, which stated that the person took the order from a Shaykh who took it from another Shaykh and so on in a line extending back to the founder, and then usually beyond the founder to the Prophet Muhammad. As orders became firmly established, leadership would pass from one Shaykh to the next, sometimes within a family line and sometimes on the basis of spiritual seniority or mastery within the tariqah. Each of these orders rallied around a few of its prominent adherents who carved out their own 'spiritual territories' [walayats] and established an elaborate network of hospices [khanqahs], 'spiritual heads' [khalifas], and 'disciples or servitors' [khadims] in the Subcontinent. In the 12th and 13th centuries, some major figures emerged as the organizers of orders that were to become the largest in the Islamic world. The most frequently noted of these early orders is the Qadiriyah, organized around the teachings of 'Abdul al-Qadir al-Jilani (d.1166) of Baghdad; it grew rapidly and became the most widespread of the orders. Two other major orders originating in this era are the Suhrawardiyah, based on the teachings and organization of Abu al- Najib al-Suhrawardi (d.1168) and his nephew, Shihab al-Din al-Suhra- wardi (d.1234); and the Rifa'iyah, representing the tariqah of 'Ahmad al-Rifa'i (d.1182). By 13thC, increasing numbers of tariqahs were being organized in the traditions of great teachers. Among the most important of these tariqahs are the Shadhiliyah (established by Abu al- Hasan al-Shadhili, d.1258) in Egypt and North Africa, and the Chishtiyah (Mu'in al-Din Chishti, d.1142) in Central and South Asia. Within these broad traditions over the centuries, later teachers would arise and create their own particular variants. Four Sufi orders - the Chishtis, the Suhrawardis, the Qadiris, and the Naqshbandis - came to India at different times. They were prominent in the subcontinent, though they differed in their attitudes towards the rulers and the politics of their time. Almost all saints of the Chishti order refrained from visiting the kings of the Mongols. Khwajah Qutb al-Din Bakhtiyar (d.1235) was offered the post of Shaykh al-Islam in the court of Sultan Shams al-Din Iltutmish (r.1211-1236) in Delhi, but he refused to accept it. Similarly, Shaykh Nizamuddin Auliya (d.1325) declined the offer of a grant [idrar] and 'government service' [shughl] made by Sultan Ala al-Din Khalji (r.1296-1316). Shaykh Farid al-Din Ganj-i Shakar (1175-1265) warned his disciples against consorting

with kings and princes. The policy of maintaining deference and distance from the world of monarchy was not always easy to follow. Admittedly, there were other levels where a constant exchange of symbol and material took place between the khanqah and the imperial court. Notwithstanding the Chishti order's aversion to the state, the Mughal emperors from Akbar (r.1556-1605) to the end of the dynasty in 1857 were devoted to the Chishti khanqahs at various levels of affiliation. In sharp contrast to the Chishti attitude towards the state, the saints of the Suhrawardi order did not mind maintaining an association with the rulers. The Suhrawardi silsilah was a major order of the Sultanate period. Its founder in India was Shaykh Bahauddin Zakariya (1182-1262). He made Multan and Sind the centres of his activity. One af the oldest khanqahs in India was established by him at Multan. Iltutmish was the Sultan of Delhi at that time, but Multan was under the control of his rival Qubacha. Zakariya critical of Qubacha's admin- istration and openly sided with Iltumish in his conflict against the Multan ruler's overthrow. Bahauddin Zakariya received from lltutmish the title of Shaikh-ul Islam (Leader of Islam) and endowment. Contrary to the Chishti order of his time, he followed a worldly policy and built up a large fortune. He accepted State patronage and maintained links with the ruling class. One important saint of this order, Shaykh Rukn al-Din (d.1334) of Multan, was revered by all monarchs of the Delhi sultanate, from Sultan Alauddin Khalji to Sultan Muhammad ibn Tughlaq (r.1325-1351). People filled the saint's palanquin with petitions on his way to the sultan's court in the belief that by establishing personal contact with the rulers they could bring about a change in their outlook. Another Suhrawardi Shaykh Jalaluddin Tabrizi, after his initial stay in Delhi, went to Bengal and made many disciples. He is said to have played an important role in the process of Islamization in Bengal. During the Sultanate period, Punjab, Sind and Bengal became three important centres of the Suhrawardi activity. Scholars are generally of the opinion that the Suhrawardi Sufis converted Hindus to Islam and in this task they were helped by their affluence and conne his Advaita rendering ctions with the ruling class. In this connection, a sharp contrast is drawn between their attitude and that of the Chishti Sufis whose teachings did not aim at conversion.

(B) Sufi Theosophy:[4061 The Sufi mystical experience is intro- verted, devotional, as well as extroverted. Sufi introverted experience is based on Quran's proclamation of the nearness and intimacy of God to man (e.g. Sura 1.6, 2.186, 3.5; 6.60), which could imply God's immanence and experience of ittihad (oneness). Sufi's devotional

experience may well indicate the need of the human mind to conceive the Divine in terms familiar to man, so that he can establish a personal relation with Him. Sufi extroverted mystic experience is supported by a rare passages of Quran which tell us, "Wherever ye turn, there is the face of Allah" (2.115) and "He is the hearing the seeing" (42.11). For the Sufi mystic this becomes a self-evident truth, verified by his innermost experience. It was left for Ibn Arabi to develop a monistic world view of a unique combination of the testimony of mystical experience and certain texts of the Quran. But before that Hamid al-Ghazali (1058-1111) through his greatest work, "Ihya al-ulum al-din" (The Revival of the Religious Sciences"), established moderate Sufism against the growing theosophical trends, which tended to compare God and the world and thus shaped the thought of millions of Muslims. This work provided a probing commentary on the ritual and social duties of the Muslims, the inner vices of the human beings and their remedies. It also incorporated a theory of knowledge and of mystical virtues. According to Ghazali the acquisition of these virtues depends as much on the elimination of the inner vices as on the grace of God. The acquisition is thus a process through which the true nature of God is realized and man attains the ultimate goal. Hamid al-Ghazali's younger brother, Ahmad al-Ghazali, wrote the subtle treatise (Sawanih; 'Occurrences' (stray thoughts)) on mystical love, a subject that then became the main subject of Persian poetry. Wahdat al-Wujud: This doctrine is expressed in various derivative forms. Though popular amongst Sufis; it was never acceptable to ulama[407] and orthodox Sufis. The four forms of Wahadat-al-wujud are usually stated as: Al-Hulool: Divine Indwelling Hama U'st: All is He. Al-It'tihaad: Mystical Union (with God). Wahdat al-Wujood[408]: Unity of Being. Muhiuddin Ibn Arabi, aka 'Shaykh-i Akbar' [The Greater Saint] (1165-1240)[409] is said to be the greatest Sufi philosopher of all time. The principle of Wahdat al-wujud is attributed to him. This controversial concept, philosophical more than theological, was destined to have a profound influence upon Sufis all over the world. Wahdat al-wujud, or Unity of Being, envisaged the identity of the Being [zat] and attributes [sifat] of God. According to Ibn Arabi, Being is one. There is no divinity except the (One) Divinity. Everything else is His manifestation. The universe is nothing but the manifest-ation of God's attributes. The universe in other words is a

mode of God, apart from God it has no existence. The universe is an illusion insofar as it is imagined as other than God; at the same time it is real because it is the self-revelation of God. Ibn Arabi claimed that God's attributes are also manifested in man. God created man in His own Image. God and man, Haq[410] and khalq, are therefore identical. "Man is the microcosm khalq in which all attributes are united and in him the Absolute becomes conscious of Itself." Arabi, makes distinction between absolute Divinity and the God "bound by the beliefs"[4111; the later conceptualization needs to be transcended if one wants to intuit Divinity -- the Real God or Allah. Though all existence stems from One; the Divine Essence (al-Haq, al- Ilahiyyah, al-Dhat) is undefinable; it can be described only apophatically. Inspite of the conceptual inaccessibility of the Divine, all relative (modal and attibutive) beings pertains to Divine Essence, the totality being only One. The wahdat al-wujud doctrine can be viewed as a natural outcome of monotheism and man's longing for the unity with the God beloved. The experience of ittihad can be explained either existentially- experientially or ontologically; that is, either as a reliable report of what the Sufi felt in his unison state, or as implying the ontological oneness of the soul and God. Whatever language the Sufi chooses to speak, so long as he is true to his inner experience, the purport of all his utter-ances may he summed up as: (a) God's presence within the soul, (b) a certain affinity between the soul and the God (variously experienced and expressed) and (c) God's being the very Essence or ground of man's being. There is a close relation between one's being and the Cause or Ground of one's being, that without which we would become naught. This inevitably leads to aupaniShad and Agamika paths explored by Vedanta, shaiva and vaiShNava traditions. The doctrine of wahdat al-wujud as aspirational unity as well as ontological identity, then becomes the ultimate converging ground which a sufi, a yogi, or a bhakta strive to reach. The Sufism in India and bhakti-yoga traditions of Hinduism share striking similarities. When we study devotional Sufism, we find this similarity of approach and emotional tone between Sufi and Yogi - Bhakti mysticism. The same inner logic of mystical experience seems to be at work here, leading the mystic from the rational affirmation of the otherness and transcendence of God to the experience of final unity in the state of fana.[412] Fana is a passing state of supreme bliss and bestowal; that is to say, it is usually marked by its return to the phenomenal world and it happens by divine grace. Like Vedanta, Wajud [Being] is said to find the Real in Bliss.[413]

Ulama continued to show the disapproval of the Sufis despite various attempts made by al-Ghazzali to effect a reconciliation. The attitude of mutual distrust continued during the Sultanate period, though orthodox Sufi orders such as Suhrawardi, and Qadiri etc. accepted the line of ulama. Ulama were particularly hostile to early Chishti and their practices. They pronounced against the Chishti practice of Sama and objected to the Chishti quest for religious synthesis. However, Chishti Sufis such as Shaykh Nasiruddin (Chiragh-i Delhi) and Gesudaraz themselves gave an orthodox orientation to the Chishti order possibly to mitigate the hostility of the ulama. Chishtis then began to involve themselves in court politics and accept state endowments. Particularly, after Timur's invasion Chishti-s dispersed to stable kingdoms of Deccan. Bahamani kings gave them land grants to secure their political loyalties. For example, Muhammad Banda Nawaz (c.1321-1422) received village grants from Bahamani sultan Feroz Shah (r.1397-1422). The proximity of some of the Sufi shykhs to the ruling Muslim establishment increased after c.1500, which was the period of syncretism for Vedanta. Though this period saw pragmatic and tolerant ruler like Akbar and still quite later (in 19thC), the popular Sufi Sai-Baba of Shiradi;[414] in the same period some of the Sufi shykhs became active Islamists with the aim to keep Islam pure and free of extraneous (Hindu) influences, as we shall see later on.

5.2.6 Period of Syncretism[4151 (c.1500-1700 & thereafter): sadAnanda yogindra, [4161 nRRisihMAshrama, [417] madhusUdana sarasvatI,[4181 appaya dIxita, [4191 dharmarAjAdhvarIndra, sadAnada kAshmIraka[420] et alwrote syncretic texts. The trend seems to be to record diverse views as 'various aspects of the same reality'. Each aspect is like 'looking at the reality from a different standpoint'. The reconciliation of conflicting views was attempted wherever possible. The concept of modal Ignorance which brought vivaraNa and bhAmatI closer, is an example of such syncretism. In the later half of the 16thC, appaya dIxit wrote his sub-commentary in bhAmatI line viz his parimala on amalAnanda's kalpataru. In c.1650-1700, three commentaries in the bhAmatl line came up viz RRijuprakAshikA of akhaNDAnanda-sarasvat, bhAvadIpikA of kRRiShNAnanda, and Abhoga of laxmInRRi-siMha indicating the growing popularity of bhAmatl tradition during this period. The general post-1500 trend in Advaita Vedanta tradition takes a unified view of all the three sub-schools - vArtika, vivaraNa, and bhAmatl. They are seen as emphasizing and propounding different aspects of the same reality. In this view, vivaraNa emphasizes epistemology; bhAmatI emphasizes ontology, while vArtika sticks to AbhAsa line originally expounded by sha.kara. In a more general syncretic form, major Indic philosophies like sA.nkhya, yoga, and nyAya are seen as dealing and emphasizing different aspects of the same reality. These philosophies seek to be consistent in their chosen framework but ultimately they lead to Advaita's universal monist view when the frame-work is expanded. The general expression of such a view was found in the works of viGYAnabhixu.

viGYAnabhixu: One 16thC BS commentator viGYAnabhixurepresents the typical syncretic trend of this period which views allAstika (Vedic) philosophies as description of the many aspects of the same Reality ultimately leading to the ultimate reality of brahman of Advaita. Like vAchaspati, he was said to be expert on all Astika (Vedic) darshana-s. [421] Following are salient features of his philosophy: 1. brahman cannot be the Bliss and still experiencer of the Bliss. When it is said that Self is of the nature of Bliss (Ananda) it means it is negation of sorrow. 2. bhixu admits hierarchical gradation of realities; one is more stable and hence more real than the other. In Advaita Vedanta, Reality was graded but not hierarchically generalized. 3. The yogi can ward off the the necessity of experiencing the prArabdha-karma by entering into seedless absorption (asaMpraGYAta samAdhi). 4. kAla [time] is brought into picture in association with puruSha and prakRRiti. It is the dynamic aspect of God and is manifested when puruSha and prakRRiti are connected to produce the movement of the prakRRiti. At the time of dissolution kAla does not exist because at that event there is no connection between puruSha and prakRRiti. In Mai; kAla is conceptualized as akAla [time-less]. The timeless time is the primordial time which is only the pure energy unmeasured and unmeasurable because it has not produced the movement with which the time and itself can be measured. 5. bhixu advocates loving devotion as the way to Self realization. He refers SB and proposes that true bhakti is emotional; it should bring tears to the eyes and melt one's heart. According to him, through the emotions of bhakti the devotee can merge himself in the God, like a river merges into sea. 6. bhixu does not see any purpose in the God's activity. He also does not see creation as the 'playful act of the God' (liilA MIMTOT). 7. bhixu thinks that since BS does not give any account of empirical knowledge process, Vedanta should accept the sA.nkhya theory of experiential knowledge. 8. bhixu takes the position that sA.nkhya-yoga (and even nyAya- vaisheShika, and pa.ncha-rAtra) are complementary to Advaita- Vedanta. If there is any seeming antagonism; it needs to be reconciled. He bases his system not only on UP, and BS, but also on purANa-s and smRRiti-s. The result is that he teaches a kind of theistic bhedAbheda vAda which was earlier propounded by commentators like bhartRRiprapa.ncha, bhAskara, yAdavaprakAsha,

niMbArka, and others. This reconciles diverse views - duality as well as non-duality of Atman=brahman, personal God as well as impersonal Being, reality of the manifest universe as well as that of brahman, distinctness of individual souls and at the same time their being common essence of the manifestation, immanence of brahman and at the same time It being stainless, advocacy of path of Knowledge as well as that of intense emotional devotion etc. Each of periods (5.2.1) to (5.2.6) is denoted by a dominant trend which distinguishes that particular period in relation to Vedanta. The dogmatic, dialectical, and syncretic trends are generally present in all periods, though the dialectic is more visible in post-BS era. BG itself is a text which syncretizes Vedanta, sA.nkhya, and yoga and blends Knowledge, Action, and Devotion in the path of Self realization. In sha.nkara's work all the three traits are visible. He uses dialectic while refuting the opponents' arguments, subordinates the reason to the metaphysics of shruti, and syncretizes the diversity of aupaniShad opinions by using the concepts of mAyA and 'reality levels' etc. Similarly, madhusUdana uses dialectic to refute vyAsatIrtha's arguments and at the same time supports some of the conflicting theories separately and independently implying that any of them can be used to explain the Reality. In the same spirit, kAshmIraka sadAnanda approaches the individual theory dialectically but upholds syncretism when he says that the difference between 'theory of reflection' and 'theory of delimitation' does not bother Vedantins. There were however, cross currents against the post-1500 syncretic trend within Vedanta tradition itself. The emerging as well as established vaiShNava schools vigorously competed against Advaita. These schools were strongly theistic unlike some other Indic schools[422]. Their differences with Advaita were axiological as well as metaphysical. The feud between followers of vishiShTha-advaita and dvaita on one end and Advaita on the other, continued for a long time and entered into 20thC. The scholarship of Advaita too entered and continued in 20thC by scholars like vAsudevendra sarasvatl and nArAyaNa sarasvatI (early 18thC), rAma (rAya) kavi (late 19thC), anantakRRiShNa shAstrI, and sachchidAnandendra sarasvatl (20thC). [423] Modern Vedanta proponents who wanted to pose a unified philosophical front in the Indic regions tried to syncretize the competing schools of Vedanta and proje[424]cted Advaita Vedanta as the apex philosophy of Hinduism. Important Developments of this period: (1) Devotional sects of vallabha (puShTimArga) and of chaitanya (bhaktiyoga) completed the progression of theist Vedanta schools. (2) The devotional bhakti

tradition saw another influential work in the form of "rAma-charita- mAnasa" (रामचरितमानस), composed by Goswami Tulasidasa in the local dialects of Hindi - mainly in Awadhi, interspersed with Bhojapuri, Braja etc.[4251 (3) First sign of a kind of synthesis of Vedanta and Sufism, at the start of this period, appeared in the poems of Kabir (c.1440-1518); (4) Sufi literature of this period represents the syncretic phase of various Sufi orders; (5) Sikhism was founded by Guru Nanak (c.1469-1539) and culminated in Panth Khalsa of Guru Gobind Singh (c.1666-1708)[426]; (6) Advent of Maratha kingdom under the leadership of Shivaji (c.1630-1680) which was supported by sa.nnyAsI-Vedantin Samarth Ramdas; (7) The Naqshbandi order of Sufism, which wielded significant political influence, became active in India in the closing years of the 16thC; (8) Naga sect of martial sa.nnyAsin-s was organized at the initiative of Vedantin madhusUdana sarasvatl. The initiative is said to be at the behest of Emperor Akbar[427], (9) UP were translated in another language (c.1656) for the first time. A collection of 52 UP was translated from Sanskrit into Persian at the instance of Mughal Prince Dara Shikoh (c.1615-1659) [428], and (10) In an asynchronous 20thC political phase of this period, Indic region, particularly the ancient land of Rigveda was partitioned along religious lines.

(A) shuddhAdvaita:[4291 This school founded by vallabha (1473-1531), along with its contemporary bhaktiyoga school of achintya bhedAbheda (inconceivable dualism-cum-non-dualism, popularly known as Gaudiya Vaishnavism), completes the progression of theist Vedanta schools, which started with rAmAnuja's vishiShThAdvaita (qualified non-dualism). It defines the term shuddha- advaita [JsTaa] [SA] in two ways: (1) "It is the non-dualism which is pure"; or (2) "It is the non-dualism of the pure". Both these definitions are suggestive of SA's attempts to erase the distinction between the Absolute and the relative which Advaita propounds in the name and form of inexplicable mAyA. SA accepts four-fold foundation - Veda, BG, BS, and SB[430] in that order with the assumption that each scripture explains the unexplained of the previous work. Thus SB is described as the "ripe fruit of the wish-fulfilling tree, namely the Veda which have their root in gAyatrI verse (RV 3.62.10). Based on these scriptures vallabha strives to show that Advaita of UP is unalloyed with mAyA; both the cause (i.e. brahman) and the effect (i.e. universe and souls) are essentially pure and one. Amongst all other theist Vedanta schools, ontologically, SA qualifies for the term pure monism since it assumes the universe to be material transformation of brahman and each soul to be small part (aMsha) of brahman.[431] brahman is the supreme entity, which is of the nature of sat (Existence), chit (Knowledge), Ananda (bliss), and rasa (sentiment); the last one gives Him (brahman: God or Lord) the 'personal' (but not limited) character. He is omnipresent and eternal. He is pUrNa (complete) and puruShottama (best of beings). He has created the universe out of Himself for His liilA (sports), of which He is the kartA (doer) as well as the bhoktA (enjoyer). He is thus both the efficient and material cause of the universe which is naturally sustained by Him and absorbed in Him at the end, in a cyclic manner. He is absolved of the charge of evil, cruelty, inequality etc since He has created the world out of Himself as a play in which He himself is Doer and Enjoyer.[432] The negation of qualities in nirguNa-brahman mentioned in UP refers absence of material qualities in Him. He possesses many divine qualities of which GYAna (Know-ledge) and kriyA (activity) are the prominent ones. Being sovereign, He does not undergo change though He transforms Himself into this world -- a doctrine known as avikRRita pariNAma (unchanged transformation).[433] His kriyA-shakti is described in pUrva (karma) kANDa while his GYAna-shakti is described in uttara (GYAna) kANDa of Veda. brahman at the immediately lower level manifests as axara (immutable), kAla (time), karma (action), svabhAva (nature), and at still lower level appears as twenty-eight phenomenal

elements derived from axara viz puruSha, prkRRiti, sattva, rajas, tamas, mahat, ahaMkAra, manas, five sUxma-bhUta-s (subtle elements), five mahAbhUta-s (gross elements), five karmendriya-s, and five GYAnendriya-s. These later twenty-eight tattva-s represent the causal or changeable domain of Lord. Their categorization reminds of similar categorization in sA.nkhya, kevala Advaita, and Trika-Tantra schools. If we take 28 prAkRRitika (causal) elements, add another four attributes of the lower brahman (axara, kAla, karma, svabhAva) and four natures of supreme brahman (sat, chit, Ananda, rasa) we get 36 elements. It is instructive to compare them with 36 elements of Trika since both Trika and SA are panentheist in nature wherein 'supreme principle' is 'transformed' into the world process by 'a kind of pariNAma-vAda, unique to the respective school. Souls are derived from 'axara' brahman like sparks from fire. In special cases they emanate directly from the Lord Himself. The Ananda (bliss) element in them is suppressed so that they are subject to bondage and ignorance. As a aMsha (small elemental derivative) of brahman they are not really pariNAma 'created' nor do they die; it is only the body which is created and destroyed while all bodily characteristics like birth, age, death etc are predicated to the soul insofar as it is associated with the body. Soul is atomic in size and experiences the world by pervading the body through its quality of chaitanya or GYAna (intelligence, awareness). Souls are classified as (1) pravAha: those who primarily engage themselves in worldly activities, (2) maryAdA: those who follow the path of Veda, and (3) puShTi: those who worship Lord out of pure love engendered only through divine grace. Universe is the real and essentially non-different effect of brahman. it is the material form of brahman in which sat is manifest and other characteristics like chit, Ananda, rasa are latent. The world (jagat) as created by Lord as a sport is different than the one (saMsAra) experienced individually by souls. This difference is due to Ignorance or Nescience (avidyA) which is the root cause of soul's ego and his consequent experience of saMsAra. Nescience is the power of the Lord to which He subject jIva-s (souls) as a part of his sport. Soul's ignorance made of ahaMtA (I-ness, egoism) and mamatA (My-ness or idea of possession) has to be destroyed by Action, Knowledge, and Devotion which earns the soul its Liberation. SA accepts paths of Vedic karma, GYAna, and puShTi (by devotion and divine grace) with clear preference for the puShTimArga over the first two paths which together are known as maryAdAmArga. SA sees the best example of pushTi in gopI-s, the cowherd women of vRRidAvana, who loved kRRiShNa and were graced by Him. This divine love is

called sarvAtmabhAva -- seeing everything in Lord (all-in-One) which is distinguished from the sarvAtmabhAva of the GYAni who sees Lord in everything (One-in-all). The former one, according to vallabha, is superior and leads to the highest conception of moxa. In puShTimArga, Lord is said to be full of rasa (love, heroism, fury, humor, wonder, terror, pathos, and horror), in which shRRi.gAra (Love) is the most prominent rasa that is cherished by SA. This love has two aspects viz saMyoga (union) and viyoga (separation). In the saMyoga state of the mind, devotees are supposed to enjoy the happi-ness of the union with the Lord while in the viyoga state they are said to suffer the misery of separation and think of Him all the time; so much so that like the lovelorn gopl-s they cannot think or long for anything else but the union with kRRiShNa the Lord. This path of love through divine grace was open to all irrespective of class, caste or gender while the Vedic maryAdamArga based on the pUrvakANDa (karma-mArga) and uttarakANDa (GYAnamArga) was available only to the males of the first three dvija classes (brAhamaNa, xatriya, and vaishya). In maryAdAmArga there was a place for bhakti or devotion but it was of the nature of intense longing for Knowledge or for the union with God (Ishavara or saguNa brahman) without any element of shRRin.gAra - love of the type that was bestowed by gopI-s on Lord kRRiShNa due to His divine grace. The gopI-s are the model of the divine love in puShTimArga. In SA axiology, the Lord is known as gopii-jana-vallabha (the beloved of the gopI-s). One who follows this path aspires to be a gopI and worship the Lord with the same loving devotion. puShTi- mArga believes that all souls have a feminine principle in them which when stirred by the divine grace can follow the path of devotional love. In such a path Lord is the spiritual husband or the beloved (vallabha) of the soul. SA is the last stop in the Indian non-dualist systemic tradition which started with Advaita. SA's conception of brahman full of rasa, though had aupaniShad reference, received systematic attention for the first time in Vedanta framework. The concept of axara brahman had a shrauta as well as smArta reference, but it received a systemic treatment in SA. Metaphysically and axiologically, SA can establish equivalence with Trika more easily than with Advaita Vedanta, but culturally all the three monist schools differ from each other. SA distinguished itself more as the axiological puShTimArga than as the metap-hysical shuddhAdvaita. SA sublimed the concept of love in the Vedanta framework. It gave an axiological context to the popular folklore of kRRiShNa in relation with gopI-s. Both puShTimArga and its eastern sibling gauDIya-vaiShNava sect brought emotions, playfulness and color in the sober-austere Vedanta tradition in the form of kRRiShNa-bhakti.[434] The true devotee of puShTimArga however, is

said to be a renunciate devoid of the notion of ownership. His love is supposed to be platonic and not illicit.

(B) Kabir (1440-1518) was a mystic composer and seer who represents, in the popular belief, the synthesis of bhakti cult of Vedanta and Sufism.[435] His greatest work is named "bIjaka [seedling]". This collection of poems demonstrates Kabir's own universal view of spirituality. His poems project Vedantic ideas of Atman, brahman, and karma. He often advocated leaving aside the Qur'an and Veda and to simply follow sahaja patha, or the Simple/ Natural Way to the Oneness of God. He believed in the doctrine of Atman= brahman, but unlike earlier orthodox Vedantins, he followed this philosophy to its logical end by spurning and questioning the Hindu caste system and icon-worship. The major part of Kabir's work as a 'bhagat' was collected by the fifth Sikh Guru - Arjan Dev that forms a part of the Sikh scripture. (C) Sufi Literature:[436] Sufi literature of the post-Timur period shows a significant change in thought content. It is monistic in spirit. After the fall of Muslim orthodoxy from power at the center of India for about a century due to the invasion of Timur; Sufism became free from the control of the Muslim orthodoxy and consorted with Hindu saints, who influenced them to considerable extent. The Sufi adopted monism, bhakti and yoga practices from the vaiShNava and shaiva sects. By that time, the popularity of the Vedantic pantheism among the Sufis had reached its zenith. Eminent Sufi saints expressed their ideas generally in Persian poetry and prose, but what made Sufism a household word and a mass movement in the Indian subcontinent was the poetry in its regional (local) languages. The Chishtis, both the eminent leaders in cities and village Sufis, were pioneers in the movement, writing mainly in Hindawi or Hindi; later, Sufis in other parts of the country began to give expression to their emotions in touching Hindi poetry. The Shatotoariyyah wrote both Hindi and Rajasthani poetry. Hindi mathnawi - Madhu-Malati, which Shah Manjhan Shatotoari composed (c.1545), reiterates in a most artistic and lyrical style the Sufi and Hindu (Vedanta) theory of the self-manifestation of Absolute. The Kashmiri poetry of Shaykh Nur al-Din Rishi (1378-1439) saw the cross-fertilization of Sufi beliefs with those expressed by Lal Ded aka Lalla, a Kashmiri Shaivite woman who's supreme Reality, identified as shiva, was eternal, all-pervading and all-transcending. Some of Shaykh Nur al-Din's verses are almost identical to those written by Lalla, but those which are attributed only to the Shaykh exhibit him as an ardent devotee of the Absolute, trying to reach the Unknowable in the heart by lighting the lamp of love. To him, the repetition of the

Islamic profession of faith was incomplete without a realization of the reality of the Self. In Panjabi Sufi poetry, God is the Beloved and the Sufi or the human soul, is the woman separated from her lover by illusion or mAyA. The Sufi soul at times wails, then cries and yearns for union with the Beloved. The Sufi poet in the Panjab generally refers to three stories of perfect love in his poetry. They are the love tales of Hir-Ranjha, Sassi- Punnu, and Sohni-Mahival, these tales of perfect love which end tragically are popular with Panjabis. For a Sufi it acquires the spiritual meaning. Around c.1766, Warith Shah, a famous Chishti Sufi re- versified the Hir-Ranza story in which Yogi Bhilnath exercises his spiritual power in collaboration with five Pirs. This mathnwai repeatedly portrays the unio mysitica. The greatest Sufi poet of the Punjabi language however, is said to be Mir Bullhe Shah, a Qadiri- Shatotoari (c.1680-1752), whose imageries are in strict adherence to the shari'a. In Bengal, Housayn Shahi sultans (1494-1538) gave consider-able encouragement to Bengali literature, but a real flourishing of Bengali Sufi poetry took place mainly from the 16thC on in the Chittagong region and at the Arakanese court. Some works translate the Natha Panthi literature from Sanskrit into Bengali and try to reconcile them with Sufi maqamat (stages) and teachings. Sayyid Sultan of Chittagong region (c.1550-1648) wrote mystical poems Gnan-Chautisa and Gnan-Pradipa; he attempted to harmonize haTha-yoga with Sufism. As was the case in other regions of India, the 'sama' gatherings of Sindh reverberated with Sufi music in the Sindhi language. The foremost Sufi poet of Sindh was Shah Abdul al-Latif (1690-1752). The melodies of his poetic works called Risalo (The Book) embodying the folk ballads of Sindh are very emotive and stirring. The 18thC also saw the crystallization of the poetic form of Urdu, spoken both by Hindus and Muslims. Mirza Ghalib (1797-1869), though not a conventional pious Muslim, wrote Urdu poetry with deep spiritual sensitivity. (D) Sikhism of Nanak took a break from Hindu traditions of rituals, caste system, and icon worship - Nanak was against fasts, penance, pilgrimages, and renunciation of the world. Sikhism's spiritual base however, is Vedanta[437] in which sat (God, Supreme Being) is to be realized by the Nam (God's praise), Dan (charity), Ashnan (purity), Seva (service), and Simran (prayers). Some sects like Udasi founded by Guru Nanak's son Shri Chand, and Nirmals founded at the behest of Guru Gobind Singh share traditions of Hinduism and blend Vedanta with Sikhism. Many Hindus revered Sikh Gurus who

fought against Mughal oppression and acted as their savior. The pacifist Sikhism of Nanak increasingly became militant while defending itself and others, and in the process emulated the political theocracy of Islam. Traditionally, Hindus have viewed Sikhism as a reformed and militant sect of Hinduism, while many Sikhs today consider their sect as a separate religion. The initial phase of Sikhism is seen by many as an attempt to synthesize Hinduism and Islam. There was a synergy between advent of Sikhism in Punjab and the Maratha rule in the western and central India. This synergy, though mainly confined to the spiritual exchanges,[438] sometimes extended indirectly over the battle-fields. After the decline of Mughal Empire and during the regime of Bajirao Balaji, Marathas consolidated their power in Deccan and expanded northwards. The period between c.1740-1761 saw tussle between Afghans and Marathas for the supremacy of northern India. Marathas under the leadership of Raghunath Bajirao surged into Punjab and removed its Muslim ruler in c.1756; then marched triumphantly beyond Punjab to reach Attock in Paktoonistan. But Maratha rule in Punjab was short lived; in a decisive battle of 1761, Abdali defeated them. This third battle of Panipat however, weakened both Afghans and Marathas, and the Sikhs stepped in to fill this power vacuum in Punjab. They established their hold on part of it through the efforts of Jassa Singh Ahaluwalia and others in spite of their early loss in the battle of Wadda Ghalughara against Abdali in 1762. Meanwhile, Marathas recouped and Mahadji Shinde, their lieutenant occupied Delhi and installed the (powerless) Great Mughal there (1771) which in turn appointed Mahadji as his general administrator (1785). After the death of Mahadji (1795), there was nobody to bid for the supremacy in northern India. Sikhs stepped in again to fill this vacuum, this time under the great Ranjit Singh and his general Hari Singh Nalwa. They extended the frontiers of the Sikh rule into Afghanistan right up to Kabul. Ranjit Singh's was the only independent kingdom of his time in India which otherwise was under the control of British East India Company. Ranjit Singh died in 1839. After two Anglo-Sikh wars (1845, 1849); British Company gained full control of the Sikh territory.

(E) Samarth Ramdas (1608-1681) was a Vedantin and a sa.nnyAsI with a difference. His Dasbodh[4391 (Discourse of the Servant) bears testimony to this difference. To understand the significance of his work, the political context of his times needs to be understood. After the abrupt downfall of Vijayanagar Empire (c.1565) and of Gajapatis of Orissa (c.1568), the Islamic political domination of India was at its zenith. Aurangzeb's rein (r.1658-1707) extended it to its maximum limit. In this period, the Maratha king Shivaji (c.1630-1680) challenged Mughal domination and performed the Vedic coronation ceremony (c.1674) in a manner befitting a Hindu king. Shivaji's kingdom was small in size, barely some districts of western India, but its significance goes much beyond its size. Shivaji consciously emphasized the religious aspect of his kingdom and claimed to fight for the Hindus against the Muslim rule. Aurangzeb exacerbated the religious confrontation by destroying sacred Hindu temples and forcing the hated 'jizya' (poll tax) on Hindus though he sought the cooperation of Hindu chieftains. On the other hand, Shivaji never discriminated amongst his subjects on the basis of religion and did not mind allying with Deccan's Muslim sultanates to fight Mughals.[4401 Ramdas, established temples[4411 and monasteries and actively supported Shivaji's vision. In his Dasbodh, Ramdas not only propounds Advaita Vedanta, but also advises the ordinary man how to conduct his vyavahAra (day to day activities) of kAma (wants) and artha (means) within the framework of dharma (duties) leading to moxa (Liberation). As we shall see next, philosophical and religious syncretism was resisted by the politics of identities causing further anta-gonism, particularly after c.1600, between Hindus and Muslims.

(F) Naqshbandi Tariqah and Sufi Thinkers:[442] Naqsh- bandi order played an important and decisive role in socio-political development of the Indian subcontinent. Khwajah Baqi Billah was a well known Naqshbandi saint who established the order in India in the closing years of 16thC. Steeped in the Naqshbandi principles of organization and communication, he was able to disseminate the message to commoner and Mughal noble with equal facility. In five years he managed to build up a network of adherents to the Naqshbandi order whose social base included diverse constituents: the ulama, Sufis, landowners [maliks], and the officials [mansabdars]. Shaykh Ahmad of Sirhind (Sirhindi) in Punjab (b.1563), one of the distinguished disciples of Khwajah Baqi Billah, reorganized the doctrinal basis of the order. Like the preceding Naqsh-bandi saints of Central Asia, he demanded from his disciples a strict adherence to the Qur'an and the Sunnah. He was critical of Akbar, the third Mughal emperor of India. He felt that the attitude of Akbar "sullied the purity of Islam and the political social and cultural life of Muslims". His viewpoint influenced the fourth Mughal emperor, Jahangir, who promised to defend the law of Islam. However, later enraged with Shaykh's too much interference in administration, Jehangir imprisoned him in Gwalier but released him after one year. Under the influence of Sirhindi whose belief that Islam is a complete way of life stirred the Muslims to retrieve the medieval glory of the faith in this sub continent. The sixth Mughal emperor Aurangzeb, who received his religious and spiritual training from the sons and grandsons of Shaykh Ahmad, had a decisive influence of the Naqshbandi order in his religious views and policies towards other religions. Shaykh's illustrious descendants include Shah Wali Ullah (d.1762), Shah 'Abd al-'Aziz (d.1824), and Sayyid Ahmad Barelavi (d.1831). This part of its spiritual lineage brought the Naqshbandi order into direct confrontation with the colonial authorities as it did in other parts of the world. Shah Waliullah, a prominent Muslim thinker of 18thC who shaped the destiny of Indian Muslims was also a Sufi of Naqshbandi order. He invited Ahmad Shah Abdali, the Afghan ruler to invade India to stop what he thought as subjugation of Muslims in the hands of Hindus. While formulating the contours of his mystical ideology, he transformed the Islamic mysticism to a theopolitical concept for supremacy of Islam and for political power to the Sunnis. His doctrine for internal unity of Muslims through complete adherence to pure Islam was only to fight against the infidels and for reestablishment of assertive Islamic political power. His ideology had no scope to

accommodate any order of non-Islamic mysticism, which he regarded unhealthy. He tried to comb out all the foreign influences, such as neo-Platonism and Vedantism from Islamic mysticism. Carving out a new path for Sufism he became an active Islamist with a sole objective for resurgent Sunni political power in Delhi. Waliullah synthesized the three major Sufi orders namely Qadari, Chisti and Naqshbandi to unite the Muslim society against the Hindus. Like Shaykh Ahmad Sirhind; he was also against the presence of Hindu (non-Muslim) employees in the administration of Muslim rulers. Sayyid Ahmad Barelavi (1786-1831), a disciple of Abd al Aziz, (the son of Shah Waliullah) continued the tradition of Waliullah by synthesizing the three major Sufi orders. He launched armed jehad against the non-Muslims but was killed in the battle of Balkot against Sikh leader Ranjit Singh. Karamat Ali, a disciple of Sayyid Ahmad Barelavi further developed the ideology for purifying Islam from the influences of Hindu customs and traditions. His work largely paved the way for the establishment of the organization which was later developed under the name of Ahl-al-Hadith.[443] Sufi Thinkers in British India: Sir Sayed Ahmad Khan (1817-1898), who in his youth was a follower of the Sufi cult of Shah Waliullah, gave modern face to Muslim aspirations. He wanted to transform Waliullah's militant mystic ideology to revitalize the past Islamic glory through western education. He prefered British rule than the prospects of Hindu dominated Indian democracy. Aligarh movement was part of his vision. Muhammad (Allama) Iqbal (1877-1938), a strong proponent of political and spiritual revival of Islamic civilization was a follower of the Sufi Qadiriyya order. He was idelogue for the formation of modern Muslim state within the contours of Indian subcontinent.[444] In his intellectual exploration of Sufism; he gradually turned to be an anti- Sufi philosopher and appealed to Muslim youth to cast off the Sufi noose from their neck, it being contrary to the purity and activity of Islam in his view.

6. NEW VEDANTA

During the British rule (c.1818-1947), Vedanta philosophy was adopted by many movements and their protagonists[445] aiming to reform and revive the religious and philosophical traditions of India. Nationalist leader like Tilak and the spiritual leader like Vivekananda adopted this oldest native philosophy by emphasizing the action oriented karmayoga of gItA. Here 'righteous conduct' and 'selfless service' were equated with renunciation. This active outward looking realization rather than passive inward looking meditation was considered to be the true message of Advaita Vedanta.[446] Vivekananda (1863-1902) propounded this message at the World Parliament of Religions in Chicago, USA (1894) and thereafter in India. In it, personal interest transcends into increasingly bigger spheres of familial, communal, societal, and national interest. Ideologically, self becomes universal in the aupaniShad spirit of "vasudhaiva kuTuMbakam" (universal brotherhood). In its enlightened final stage, individual self identifies with the cosmic consciousness to realize the Self [Atman] and to become selfless in the absolute sense of Advaita. This action oriented sublimation of self had a long Indic tradition.[447] BG's karmayoga has a message - "fight for the right" as a part of one's duty without favor or fervor. On the other hand, MB in which BG is embedded, posits the principle - "ahiMsA paramo dharmaH" [अहिंसा परमो ef:] [non-violence is the highest religion]. These apparently contradictory principles of 'righteous war' [dharma yuddha] and 'nonviolence' [ahiMsA] are made to stand side-by-side in BG and MB. The karmayoga enshrining these principles gave impetus to the Indian freedom struggle in two ways. The dharmayuddha as a nonviolent movement to assert the right of freedom was articulated by Gandhi as satyAgraha [firm demand for the truth]. On the other hand, for revolutionary freedom fighters, espousal of the righteousness did not exclude use of violent means against the distant colonist rulers and their representatives. In karmayoga, righteousness (dharma) is extremely important. Hindu shAstra tried to define the dharma time and again (see f. n. of section 4.3). In modern times perhaps no other Indian politician took dharma as seriously as Gandhi. However, he reserved the right to interpret the scriptures and to understand the spirit behind their words in light of his own conscience which, by his own admission, was framed by gItA and yama traditions of yoga. Yet, Gandhi was only following Hindu code in its true spirit. His conscience or the 'inner voice' as he called it, was the expression of viveka, the foremost virtue in Vedanta'. For

him it was a moral force that reveals the truth and elicits the Divine in us.[448] If we synthesize the 'inclusive universality' of Vivekananda, 'active realization' of Tilak, and ' moral conscience' of Gandhi with the orthodox Vedanta; we get the essential elements of the so called 'New Vedanta' [NV], though its features were always present in one or the other Indic tradition:

1. Knowledge is Liberation. At the empirical level, it is Self- realization - the ultimate goal of "seeing the Self-in-All". It is the empirical manifestation of Atman=brahman. From a practical side, it means: (a) freedom from bondage, (b) freedom from fear, and (c) freedom of action to achieve insight and self- determination.

2. UP and BG are the source-books of NV, which are open to ALL irrspective of caste, class, gender or race. The seeker may follow sha.kara's commentaries for their meta-physical insight, while he may follow BG's activist axiology of combining Knowledge and Action.[449] Seeker may follow alternative source and supplementary texts in sofar as they teach the absolute Reality of Advaita. 3. Seeker, using mind-control (Yoga) and under the guidance of Guru, develops Viveka. It is the faculty of discrimination between truth and falsity, and between right and wrong. In its highest form; it is the Self, which manifests itself as the conscience and reveals the truth. Viveka helps the seeker to develop other means of Liberation.

3. Self-realization process is both active and contemplative. 'Selfless work' is performed along with reflection. It is a proactive realization where karma never ceases to be. The seeker performs his activity concentr-ating on its work and not on its reward. This is conducive to the purification of mind which is necessary for the Realization.

4. In exogenic realization, the Seeker expands the sphere of self- interest, gradually (or otherwise) from 'me and mine' to 'we and ours' by transcending the notions of clan, caste, class, community etc. and finally encompassing all beings to identify with the cosmic Self and realize the 'Self-in-All'. Realized person will continue with the karma of his own volition. He will be the embodiment of ethics.[450]

5. Seeker may borrow techniques or practices from other traditions, Indic or otherwise, without violating the Yoga

commands; particularly of truth and non-violence. [4511 7. Even so, Seeker will insist on the truth and fight for the justice. [4521 8. Seeker may pursue secular disciplines insofar as they help him in the path of Liberation. [4531

At the operational level New Vedanta distinguishes itself from the traditional Vedanta by being open, universal, and exogenic. Its universality and open-ness is reflected in its Satsang - the group meditation. Satsang literally means "company of the wise" or the meeting of like-minded people for spiritual practice and advancement. Among other things, it includes silent meditation, guiding instructions, devotional music, group discussions, and lectures or readings of the Yoga or Vedanta philosophy. Satsang does not discriminate between castes and genders; and it is open to members of all faiths, creeds, beliefs, and religions.

6.1 New-Advaita and Science: The hypothesis of Advaita can be summed up in the language of metaphysics: There is one immeasurable[454], irreducible[455], and independent[456] entity [X], without which Physical-Phenomenal Universe [PhU] including among other things the Body-Mind- Intellects [BMIs] of Intelligent Beings [IBs][457] cannot exist. X does not come under the purview of science, though we have the metaphysical pointer: total dependence of PhU on X. We then can postulate two corollary hypotheses: (a) PhU is relational and hence indeterminate[458] in itself; (b) IBs lose their IB-ness (awareness) causing the subjective collapse of PhU. X is postulated to hold the totality of PhU irrespective of this subjective collapse; and awareness [Xa] is postulated to be its individuated 'appearance' as expressed by the identity X=Xa. This identity concludes the analog of traditional triadic maxim - (1) X is Absolute; (2) PhU is indeterminate; (3) X=Xa[4591.

Indeterminacy of PhU is known to science inasmuch as all reference frames within PhU are 'relative'[460] and all current major scientific theories are valid only within invariant limit positions. For example, there is maximum finite speed in 'Special Relativity', minimum non- zero action in 'Quantum Theory', minimum non-zero entropy in 'Thermodynamics', and maximum finite force in 'General Relativity'. These fundamental bounds result in minimum and maximum limits for all phenomenal observables leading to indeterminacy (uncertainity) in terms of space-time and energy-momentum. At the extremal scale, phenomenal entities cannot be distinguished from each other and we cannot make any definitive statement about their existence. Astrophysical 'Black Hole singularity' is a typical and popular example of ontologogical indeterminacy. As a result, quasi-concept of PhU becomes undefinable.[461] Indeterminacy of Experience: Not only we cannot make any definitive statement about the PhU beyond limit positions; even within observable limits, it is not possible to make precise and definitive statements about our phenomenal experience. We cannot quantify and explain the perceptual properties of objects except outlining the processes behind their occurrences. We may identify brain or nervous system as the basis of our experience; still, we cannot explain the subjective quality of our experience (qualia) such as green- Nounness of the grass, pain of a pinch, fragrance of a flower, or sadness of separation from our beloved. Even the human memory storage and retrieval, whose electronic computational analog is well understood and established, is resisting our understanding in terms its reducibility to underlying physics. Irreducubility of Awareness: Currently the most formidable problem for the cognitive scientist is the "Hard Problem of Awareness" - How a qualitative experience whose conceptual basis is Awareness[462] can be explained in terms of its neuro-logical and material basis. If a neural state N is the neural basis of the sensation of red, why is N the basis of that experience rather than some other experience or none at all? (Nagel 1974, Levine 1983, Block 1995, Chalmers 1996, Searle 1998). The so called hard problem sees an epistemological (explanatory) gap between neural correlates of the experience and the experience itself. This gap is characterized by the subjective 'qualia' (quality of the experience). Reductionists try to bridge this gap through conceptualization and modeling, while non-reductionists acknow-ledge the irreducible nature of this gap. The non-reductionists generally propose: (1) empirical awareness is a fundamental feature of PhU, like space-time and mass-energy, entailing that phenomenal properties themselves are fundamental; or (2) empirical awareness in itself is not fundamental, but is necessitated by some more primitive

proto-phenomenal entity X which is located at the fundamental level of the physical reality.[4631 (ref Russell 1926, Feigl 1958/67, Maxwell 1929, Chalmers 1996, Griffin 1998 etc). This proto- phenomenal entity X is labeled as Awareness. Godelian Indeterminacy: Phenomenal reality has three interconnected aspects: material-mental-mathematical [m-m-m] or physical-psychical-platonic [p-p-p].[4641 Can these aspects be 'described' by science, in the language of logic? For example, can there be logical 'theory of everything' (TOE)? The answer seems to be in the negative for Turing computable logic to which the science is accustomed. Kurt Godel (1931) in his first Incompleteness Theorem showed that no 'logical system' can prove all the true arithmetical propositions.[465] For a non-trivial formal system F (with a formal language, set of axioms, and inference rules), it is possible to construct a sentence G(F) with following properties: G(F) is a sentence of F but cannot be proved within F If F is consistent, then G(F) is true. In analogous way, based on the Cantor's 'diagonalization' argument, Godel-Turing theorem[4661 informally states that no Turing Machine [TM][467] can ever prove the computability of all the mathematical- logical propositions. This is usually formulated in terms of the "Halting Problem". Halting Problem: Will the execution of an algorithm (computation) eventually halt 'successfully' or will it run for ever? Turing-Church proved that for any algorithm H that purports to solve halting problem; there will always be a computation C whose halt for a given input 'n' cannot be predicted by H. One informal version of their argument runs like this: [468] 1. Let Cq(n) be the family of all computations running on a universal TM [UTM] for q = 1, 2, 3, .. and n =1,2,3, .. Let H(q, n) be the algorithm entwined with Cq(n), which stops when Cq(n) is tested as non-halting for some q, n. 2. For q=n; if H(n, n) stops then Cn(n) does not halt. Since H(n, n) here is essentially dependent on only one input n, H(n) must be one of the computations of the Cq family which enlist all computations on 'n'. 3. Let, the particular computation of (2) be Ck. So, H(n, n) = Ck(n). We are now free to choose our 'n' for Ck; 4. For n=k, we have from (3), H(k, k) = Ck(k), so that If H(k, k) stops, Ck(k) does not halt. 5. From (4), if Ck(k) halts, then Ck(k) does not stop.

6. To avoid contradiction in (4) and (5), Ck (= H(k, k)) cannot halt. 7. Thus, H(q, n) cannot ascertain the halting of Cq(n). Do Halting problem and Godel-Turing theorems suggest some thing more than what they state explicitly? Do they suggest that the human intuition is not computable? To start with, one conclusion is inescapable: No consistent model can express the total reality of the the world. A model will have true statement(s) representing empirical observations which can not be proved within that model and to that extent the total reality remains unexplained.[469] One may also argue that since true statement(s) conforming to any Logical Model [LM] will be known to us as such (as true), and since they will not be ascertained by LM, our intuition (based on our consciousness) can not be simulated (computed) by LM's logic. [4701 WC, BMI, and Substantial Monism of UNF: In Advaita, knowledge comes only as experience. This experience can be roughly divided into (a) sensory perception; (b) experience of self; (c) memory; and (d) abstraction (intellect). The later three categories are exclusively associated with what we call as mind-intellect (MI) while the first one (sensory perception) has both mind (internal) part and sense organs (external interface) that collect sense data which, at least in human beings, have five main perceptual properties. This entire experience is available through the complex of BMI to the IB. In Vedanta, IB can be conceptually mapped onto five-sheaths; the first two outer sheaths are gross body and its processual functions (related to B part of BMI), the interior two sheaths roughly correspond to Mind and Intellect (MI part of BMI), and the fifth inner sheath corresponds to bliss which, for our purpose; we will take as Witness-Consciousness as will be explained later. This BMI as well as the whole PhU is made of five basic and subtle evolutes, each of which is evolved from, and having perceptual properties of its predecessor, in addition to having perceptual property of its own.[471] The original element, if it can be called as such, is unmanifested, from which other perceptual elements evolve and devolve into. In the cosmic evolution-devolution cycle this protomental entity "unevolved, unseparated name and forms" [UNF] is the origin of PhU. The subtle elements combine in various ways to form gross objects of PhU including BMI.[472] Since everything evolves from UNF, it is the basic stuff of which the PhU is made of in the reductionist sense. UNF's relationship with X is undefinable. On one hand, being unmanifested, UNF does not have any property distinguishing it from X other than it being the basic cause (seed) of the PhU. The ontological status of UNF is indeterminate insofar it is

not manifested, making the PhU indeterminate in the reductive sense. Certain schools of Vedanta term the causality or potency of UNF as 'Primal Ignorance' [PI] or Maya, an entity of a 'positive kind' insofar as it notionally projects itself into the plurality of phenomenal objects. Others see it as basic cognitive error which they term as Ignorance and which for them is nothing but lack of Knowledge wherein X is confused with something else. The advocates of primal Ignorance often formulate 'auxiliary ignorance' [ai] which is an "error within an error" wherein an Object 01 or its properties are confused with Object O2 or its properties such as a "rope in semi-darkness is seen as a snake" or a "clear crystal is seen as colored one" etc. When the primal Ignorance is removed the auxiliary ignorance is automatically removed; but it is not the other way round. In the evolutionary cycle, protomentality of UNF is manifest in certain biological-cellular systems in the form of MI[4731 within the framework of subject-object duality. In general, KA is careful to distinguish between the B part and MI part of BMI apparatus; they are arranged into distinct layers separated by the intermediate processual layer.[4741 Interestingly, this keeps Advaita open to the possibility that bi-directional interaction between MI and B parts takes place through a processual interface, a position which is compatible with today's meta-physical process centric trend. Ontological unity of B and MI layers dissolves the problem of mind-body interaction, which otherwise has troubled many post-Descartes metaphysicists due to their Cartesian beliefs. Since MI itself can be experienced in terms of phenomenal attributes such as emotions, thinking etc, and in that sense can be objectified; the pure subject is said to be devoid of phenomenal content and is known as Witness-Consciousness [WC]. It is the combination of WC+MI that knows, feels, and wills. It is the WC which imparts quality (qualia) and integrity (I-ness) to IB's experience;[475] and bridges the epistemic gap, so to say, between subjective experience and objective (quan-tifiable) reality. Advaita uses the simile of light for X as well for WC. X is the source of light common to all IBs while WC is like a light reflected in individual BMI; light of X and of WC are not different, though its applicability in WC appears to be limited to particular IB. The notion of WC plays a unique role in Advaita's meta-physics. Though WC remains a 'passive observer', it has a peculiar type of effect on BMI. WC's mere presence makes the BMI sentient and transform it into IB. According to Advaita WC is present all the times in IB, even in deep sleep.[476] It is the basis of IB's experience as the sentient (intelligent) being. WC's manifestation is an 'illusion' or

'reflection' of X in MI depending on a particular line of Advaita that one would follow. Advaita does not ascribe doer-ship (causality) to X or to WC thereby ensuring a causal closure of the material world for all practical purpose. It dissolves the mind-body causality problem by bringing them on the same ontological platform as we have seen earlier. However, aware actions - whether cognitive, affective or conative are possible only when BMI exists as a particular type of processual complex and is 'in touch' with X.[477] In KA's theory of perception, mind is like an insentient non-metric topological space which goes out of senses, pervades the external object which is being proximally perceived and acquires its phenomenal qualities in reflected light of WC. The perceptuality of proximal objects causes experiential immediacy which otherwise is missing from the inferential or memorative experience. This immediacy is possible due to the proximity of objects as also due to one basic stuff (UNF) of which the universe is made has the potential to manifest both physically and as conscious experience, basking in the light of X. This particular theory of Perceptual Projection [PPr] holds even if preceived object is a "virtual object" [VO]. In such cases, VO is 'measurable' in terms of its distance from the observer suggesting that the mind-space still spreads out and takes the objective form though the object itself is virtual. The objective formation of the mind in this case is guided by the Virtual Reality apparatus. The theory tries to answer the question which modern mind-theorists are grappling with: Given that the proximal neural causes and correlates of experiences are inside the brain, how can we explain the fact that most of our visual experience seems to take place outside the brain? Holograms provide another analogy for the PPr phenomenon. Hologram encodes a three-dimensional [3-d] image on a 2-d surface. This image is perceived to be out in space, in front of its 2-d surface provided that it is viewed from an appro-priate (frontal) position and it is illuminated by an appropriate (frontal) source of light. Viewed from any other perspective the only information one can detect about the object is in the complex interference patterns encoded on the holographic plate. In analogous fashion, the information in the "neural hologram" is displayed as a visual, 3-d object out in space only when it is viewed from the appropriate first-person perspective of the perceiving subject. This happens only when the necessary and sufficient conditions for consciousness are satisfied (when there is 'illumination by an appropriate source of light'). Viewed from any other third-person perspective the information in IB's hologram appears to be nothing more than neural correlates in the brain (similar to interference patterns on the plate).[478]

This analogy can be extended to 4-d universe of space-time and even to supra-dimensional models of modern physics.[4791 In Holographic Conjecture [HC], the states of a Quantum Field Theory [QFT] defined over a space-time manifold of (N+1) dimensions are projected (one- to-one mapped) onto the states of another QFT defined over space- time manifold of 'N' dimensions. In hologram, the 2-d projection of a 3-d object, when properly illumined by light, is accessible again in 3-d space. Similarly the 3-d projection of a 4-d world-reality is accessible in 4-d space-time to an observer (IB) which has access to fourth dimension of time in the light of supra-dimensional X. IB's body is in the 3-d space while what we call as mind is the fourth dimensional, time-like aspect of the individual IB which becomes sentient only when IB's mind 'reflects' X.[480] WC and CWC as Reducing Agents: In Advaita, relation between X on one side, and IB and PhU on the other side is existential rather than causal. This relationship can be explored within the framework of science by following the pointers available in Quantum Physics. The quantum wave function representing the physical reality evolves in two ways: Unitary evolution [U] in superposed states, and nonlinear Reduction [R] which reduces U to non-superposed physical reality. Here, U is deterministic ongoing process, while R is non-deterministic 'measurement' process. Since the physical measuring apparatus including Observer's body has propensity to be part of the U process, WC as the pure non-physical subject ultimately reduces U to its objective reality and enables IB to experience the PhU. This reduction by WC however, cannot be attributed to normal causality of physics where basic forces and their particle interactions form the basis of causality. The concept of localized reduction can be extended to cosmic reduction where "cosmic WC" [CWC] ensures that the PhU is not a quantum-entangled soup of particles, and objects retain their separate identity by initiating non-local (cosmic) reduction. The rationale for postulating CWC can also be explained within Vedanta's pan-experiential framework. PhU ultimately has to be cognized in its entirety to comply with Vedanta's epistemic hypothesis - "experience is existence". Awareness that provides foundation to this experience has to be eternal and limitless because cosmic experience cannot brook limitations inasmuch as they contradict the totality of PhU which is also the totality of space-time-causality. Further, the experience of PhU has to be direct and correct (non-contradicted) because; mediate knowledge and cognitive error are limitations of some kind which violate the totality of PhU. Such a Cosmic subject for whom the entire PhU is an object is CWC. The relation between CWC and PhU is similar to that between WC and BMI. WC with individual mind knows, feels, and wills in the respective anthropocentric slice of

the Cosmos, while CWC with cosmic mind is hypothesized to be omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent. PhU's manifest existence depends on CWC which is nothing but X reflected in cosmic mind. Ultimately; PhU, WC, and CWC are IB's notions which last till IB reflects X. What remains permanent and unaltered is X, whose manifestation in the form of PhU is subjectively experienced by IB. [481] X-realization: Every moment when IB is perceiving some thing; it is mediately experiencing X.[4821 When IB 'realizes' that its whole experience is a manifestation of X; it becomes liber-ated; its ego is dissolved.[483] This liberation of IB is paradigm-atic (axiological) and epistemic inasmuch as IB is associated with BMI. IB's ontological Liberation happens when its link with the BMI is finally snapped; when BMI is said to be dead. Panentheism: Advaita doctrine can be interpreted in various alternative ways resorting neither to illusionist non-dualism which is Advaita's mainstream interpretation nor to qualified non-dualism which has been adopted by other Vedanta sub-schools. For example, Advaita can be expressed as a substantial monism - Everything is (made of) X. This is approached in more than one ways from the relative position, viz. (1) UNF and X are non-differentiable within themselves and from each other; (2) PhU is the manifestation of X; (3) Everything emanates from and is pervaded by X etc. Advaita can be interpreted in a panenthestic[484] manner where 'infinitude X' subsumes 'infinitude PhU' without any change in X.[4851 X is the sovereign transcendent and immanent principle. This shows equivalence between Advaita and other pan-enthesist Indic schools like Trika and shuddhAdvaita. Mathematical Platonism: Infinity being an indicator of absolute Reality in Advaita-Vedanta; its experience is the supreme goal for the Advaitin. His infinity is supra-conceptual and supra-sensual on one hand, and on the other hand it is readily available as the ubiquitous immediate experience - a finite expression of infinite reality. Mathematicians have their own reasons to pursue infinities; they study and conceptualize infinities.[486] Mathematicians however, have to use the language of logic to conceptualize their 'notion' of infinity. They aim to use this language as the foundation of other mathematics. [487] A mathematical model constitutes axioms and all the derivable results therefrom. Platonists think that infinite sets such as set of real numbers, rational numbers, or their power sets which are derivable within axiomatized model, exist in some platonic universe. A given model with a particular axiom set (say, ZFC which stands for Zermelo

Fraenkel with the axiom of Choice) expresses truths of such an ideal universe. A different model with another axiom set (say, NFU which stands for New Foundation with axiom of Universal set), derives a different set of truths which the model may or may not share with ZFC. For example, if ZFC rules out the universal 'set of all sets' that does not mean that such a set does not exist. Universal set is axiomatized in NFU within a selfconsistent model. Similarly, a particular hypothesis (say, CH: Continuum Hypothesis) is not provable in ZFC, will only mean that ZFC cannot deduce all the truths of the ideal universe. In mathematical Platonism, objects are pure concepts which are supposed to remain eternally unchanged. Numbers and other abstract entities including infinities exist independent of subjective cognition. A consistent mathematical model has its own reality irrespective of whether and how this reality relates to psycho-physical world. Since consistent models have their own reality, a Platonist ideally believes in a kind of platonic multiverse or omniverse (omnium) in which composite reality of all models exists. Platonists are said to discover this reality rather than inventing or creating a new one because platonic reality exists independent of Platonists and the universe they inhabit. In certain proposals, with a sufficiently broad definition of mathematics; PhU is a mathematical-computational structure in itself. [488] The convergence of the physical and the platonic is already known to science in Einstein's General Relativity in which gravity is nothing but the geometry of spacetime. In Advaita, there is only one undifferentiated all pervasive space (X) within which mathematical, mental, and material worlds are held. These objective universes do not have X-independent existence. Platonism grants independent status to mathematical objects, while Advaita postulates independent X wherein there is no plurality even of mathematical objects. Platonists discover (develop) abstract models while Advaitins discover (realize) the absolute X in which model entities are held along with other phenomenal objects. One can assign a higher reality to this platonic universe populated by platonic objects vis-a-vis 'material' and 'mental' universes.[4891 This grade however, has to be penultimate or lower inasmuch as platonic objects are part of subject-object duality at the empirical level. For realists-finitists, only finite objects and hence finite sets are true because they correspond to finite reality of the observable world, while infinities and infinite sets do not exist. Finitists' universe is finite and they would like their models to reflect this reality. Finitists accept syntactic development of formal logical systems and models; however, that part of models or theories which deal with infinities or infinite

sets are for them meaningless. Further, they may reject the binary logic and the Law of Excluded Middle[490] in accordance with their realist dispositions. They may go for alternative logics which according to them reflect the fuzzy, multivalued, or dynamic aspect of the real world.[4911 The formalists adopt a professional attitude. They concern themselves only with the consistency of the model and set aside their ontological beliefs (if any) while formalizing existing models or constructing new ones. On the other hand, both the Platonists and the finitists are concerned not only about the consistency of model but also about its compatibility with their own ontological positions. Their motivation in studying or developing a particular model will be decided by its conform-ance with their own beliefs unlike a formalist who is neutral while developing a model. Traditional student (Mumuxu) is required to have firm faith in his Guru. It is possible to study Vedanta like any academic discipline from the relative-logical position. Mumuxu however, aspires for the release from transmigration by Self-realization whatever that may mean to him at the time of initiation. Thus, epistemological positions of a mathematician-logician are analogous to the positions of an Advaitin. The (1) absolute (pAramArthika), (2) relative (vyAvahArika), (3) logical-inferential (yauktika) viewpoints of Advaita correspond to (1)' platonism- idealism, (2)' realism-finitism, (3)' formalism-constructionalism of the philosophy of logic. All the three viewpoints however, are articulated from positions (2)-(2)' and (3)-(3)' because mathe-maticians and Advaitins live in real (finite) world with finite means. Exegetes for example, build their arguments using a particular language with a quasi-formal structure and rules of exegesis, based on their beliefs (ontological or otherwise) in the scripturs. They have to use finite vocabulary and finite set of rules. An exegete Advaitin thus has attitudinal role of an idealist, exegetical role of a logician, and involuntary role of a realist. Similarly, a mathematician may assume a formalist role to construct finite models within the limitations of logic. The mathematician then performs attitudinal role of a Platonist, professional role of a formalist, and involuntary role of a realist. In doing so, the mathematician's belief in infinity is not much different than the Advaitin's belief in brahman though axiological difference remains. Holistic Interdependence: Madhyamaka approach of 'inter- dependent origination' is acceptable to KA; both agree that no object in PhU is independent - all empirical objects are inter-dependent. They differ when KA insists that it is the X due to which PhU is sustained,

while Madhyamaka nominalizes X. Madhyamaka's 'holistic interdependence' is reflected in the famous "Mach Conjecture" which is sometimes stated as follows: Object's inertia is the property of its matter as well distribution of matter in the rest of PhU. The argument leading to this hypothesis runs something like this: A single body in an otherwise empty PhU will experience no external force since there is nothing external to the object. It would have indeterminate motion since there is no concept of distance. This situation leads to the conclusion that mass of an object which is the measure of its inertia would reduce to zero in an otherwise empty PhU.[4921 Thus, a 'single' body would have no independent and materially objective existence! Mach conjecture, which sees inertia of a body as the result of its interaction with rest of PhU, is the articulation of this line of thinking. Particle's mass then is not entirely an intrinsic property, but linked to the matter distribution of PhU, thus giving expression to the holistic nature of PhU. There are gravitational and cosmological models directly incorporating Mach Conjecture.[4931 These models are not as popular as the so called Standard Cosmological Models [SCM][494] though they claim to provide some important insights into the gray areas of SCM. This approach of 'holistic interdependence' works insofar as it is observable and verifiable. It however, does not solve the 'hard problem' of Awareness and to that extent does not prevent yielding the ultimate ground to X. Evolution: Various discrimination schemas that are discussed within the Advaita tradition - quantuplication process, quintuple sheaths, triad of experiential states, triad of cosmic states etc. - are pedogogical devices to illustrate the ultimate truth. They can be interpreted in a metaphysical framework without any conflict with the scientific theories of the day. Schemas hold provisional truths; they are sublated when the Self is realized. Scientific theories too hold only provisional truths in absence of the contrary data. Evolution is the science of change and processes[495] which occur over many generations of species inhabitating the phenomenal world; Advaita is the philosophy of essence, which supports and transcends the same pheno-menal world. Even if Advaita as an orthodox tradition may not take cognizance of the evolution theory, individual Advaitin may accept it applying the epistemological means.[496] He may find the evolutionary 'common descent' hypothesis to be conducive to teach the unity of all living beings[497] ala vasudhaiva kuTuMbakam (whole world is one family). Science as Discrimination Process: Todays world of science is populated by many theories and models.[498] Reductionists hope to

reduce them to a single self-consistent theory that would encompass all the 'measurable' reality. New-Vedanta [NV] is non-committal to any particular scientific theory. It is open towards all the models or theories insofar as they are internally consistent and experimentally verifiable. NV may use method of science, that is cyclic "observation, postulation, experimentation, analysis, and verification", as an open ended discrimination schema (vivekaprakriyA). Since knowledge does not accumulate karmaphala; acquisition of pure "knowledge qua knowledge" of any discipline in which egoless states are manifest, should lead to the purification of mind. Objective (scientific) knowledge, at some level, should lead to the understanding of fundamental unity in nature. This essential unity of objective world is postulated both by science (physics) and Vedanta. Pursuit of objective truth can be part of the pursuit of ultimate truth if accompanied with equanimity and austerity.[4991 For an orthodox Advaitin, however science or any other excurrent method cannot replace the traditional ways of Self-realization where scriptures and Guru play the central role. The final reality for Advaitin, traditional or otherwise is X= Xa[500] that axiomatically remains beyond any scientific theory. In the foregoing discussion we can roughly identify: finite ~ real ~ relativeव्यावहारिक;formal ~ inferential ~ logical यौक्तिक; platonic ~ noumenal absolute पारमार्थिक;student मुमुक्षु;subtle elementsतन्मात्र; UNFअव्यक्त, अव्याकृत PI मूलाविद्या ~ अविद्या ~ माया ~ PhUजगत्, विश्;undefinable, inexplicable अनिर्वचनीय, अद्भत ontologically indeterminateमिथ्या;BMIअन्नमय+प्राणमय+मनोमय+विज्ञानमय कोश; MI मनोमय+विज्ञानमय कोश; Xa ~ WCसाक्षिचैतन्य; IB~ WC+BMI ~व्यक्ती, पंचकोश;WC+MI जीव;WC+(UNF) कारण शरी;science ~ knowledge processविवेक प्रक्रिया; CWCसर्वसाक्षि, ईश्वर;axiological liberation ~जीवन्मुक्ति; ontological liberation विदेहमुक्ति; X=Xaब्रह्मन्=आत्मन्.

7. conclusion

The astronomical data in RV and the archaeologically attested continuity of the human settlements at some of the SSC sites suggest that proto-HVC practices were prevalent since neo-lithic, chalcolithic periods. Their canonization must have started after 4000BC, over the anterior periods of mature SSC. If meditation and self inquiry are the first step towards Self realization, their footprints appeared in SSC in the 3rd millenn-ium BC. The archaeological artifacts of 'meditating pashupati', ubiquitous 'mother Goddess', and 'Yogic Asana-s' suggest that this meditation practice and exercises could be part of shaiva, shAkta like cults of prehistoric times. Origins of Vedanta: The notion of 'mantra power' and 'dehi me dadAmi te' (give and take) principle of Vedic sacrifices had its origin in SSC. The fire altars, adjacent public baths, and archaeological finds of perforated pottery for sprinkling (of soma juice) suggest existence of sacrificial practices in mature SSC. RV indicates canonization of certain crematory practices (urn burial) and ashvamedha yaGYa (Horse sacrifice); the former is attested by the Cemetery-H finds of late SSC. This suggests that the monistic ideas of RV such as nAsadlya sUkta and puruSha sUkta originated in late SSC. The earliest eloquent expression of the main idea of sacrifice - praising and pleasing the gods by words and deeds in anticipation of 'blessings' - was found in RV. It's most elaborate expression was found in the subsequent brAhamaNa texts. Teachers' lists of BU indicate that the aupaniShad principle of Atman= brahman was known in the period of late or final phase of SSC, possibly as a result of inquiry into the bodiless self to whom the sacrificial credit would accrue. This principle surfaced in RV, AV and in certain passages of brAhmaNa texts, though its compilation in UP took shape later during 800BC-500BC. Beliefs in soul's transmigration existed in many tribes and cultures since prehistoric times; their traces are seen in brahmaNa texts and their clear expression is available in BU and CU which were composed primarily in G-Y region. Indic regions offered fertile ground and the longest continuity to the main ideas of RV mantra viz. (1) nature worship, (2) sacrifice (yaGYa), (3) universal order (RRita), and (4) monism (ekatva). The first two ideas found their cultural expressions in popular Hinduism and Brahmanism respectively; the third idea merged into the kArmika axiology common to most of the Indic schools, while monism[501] became the central idea of Advaita-Vedanta. Bauddha Advaita: Ironically, the empirical nothingness of Atman (CU 6.12) and neti-neti absoluteness of brahman (BU 4.2.4 etc.) found its

echo in anAtmA and shUnyatA of Buddhism that rejected Self. The followers of Buddha such as mahAkAshyapa, maitreya, ashvaghoSha, nAgarjuna, asa.nga-vasubandhu etc. who shaped early Buddhism and founded Mahayana schools were Brahmana converts. They brought in the knowledge of Veda and Vedanta which directly (by way of adaption) or indirectly (by way of rejection) influenced the Buddhist thinking.[502] This influence was mutual; it established two main Indic traditions during c.300BC-700: an essence (Atman) based aupaniShad tradition and process (pratItya-samutpAda) based bauddha tradition - both having universal purport.[503] Their metaphysical axioms are mutually orthogonal but their structural development is isomorphically equivalent and converges into similar positions. For example, the non-dualistic bauddha concepts like advaya (non-dualism of subject and object), ajAta (non-origination), tathAgatagarbha (origin of becoming), saMvRRiti & paramArtha (phenomenal & absolute), shUnyatA (attributelessness), and karma (moral action) connect with similar Vedanta positions.[504] Buddhism rejects efficacy of sacrifices in general and disapproves animal sacrifices in particular. Vedanta deprecates 'selfish' sacrifices in the path of Self-realization and accepts them in vyavahAra simply because Veda sanction them. Both share the axiological concepts of meditation, renunciation, moral actions, rebirth, and Liberation. These five soterial concepts along with five ethical doctrines of yama (Yoga), vrata (Jainism), and shiila (Buddhism) have a common Hindu (Sindhu) heritage[505]. HVC however, supports the idea of 'righteous-war' (dharma-yuddha) which is absent in Bauddha and Jain religious traditions. New Buddhism in India: Indic Buddhism of first millennium was mostly established in urban centers with the patronage of kings, landlords and merchants' guilds. It evolved and grew into absolutism of Mahayana Buddhism. Its spread in East Asia and elsewhere was achieved without any force. In Indic regions over the times, Bauddha monasteries with their influential patronage and elite scholarship became islands of comfortable life. After c.1000, devoid of patronage and mass-base, it succumbed to the Brahmanic assimilation and Muslim aggression and almost disappeared from the Indic regions. Buddhism was revived in India through the efforts of the likes of Jyothee Thass (1845-1914) in Tamilnadu, Kripasaran Maha-sthavir (1865-1926), Bodhanand Mahasthavir (1874-1962), Isvar -datt Medharthi (1900-1971) in Uttar Pradesh, Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (1891-1956) in Maharashtra. This new Buddhism is different from the old one in its spread, social structure, and leadership as seen at the start of 21stC.[506] Ambedkar converted to Buddhism along with his numerous followers

in a public ceremony just couple of months before his death in 1956. Due to his impressive educational profile and his tireless espousal of the cause of socially deprived, Ambedkar became the icon of the 'backward castes' and the modern face of neo Buddhism.[507] He was the first law minister of free India and the chairman of the Constitution Drafting Committee. This was seen as poetic justice for the so called low borne Shudras.[508] Sociology of Vedanta: Social theories such as "creativity through conflicts",[509] and "intellectual law of small numbers"[510] have been applied by sociologist such as Randall Collins (2000) to the development of Indian[5111 and other regional philosophies. The role of argumentation and debate has been acknowledged in the Indian philosophical traditions,[512] where competitive discourses under the auspices of kings are known to have taken place since the days of oldest UP. The post-sha.nkara Vedanta literature is replete with the dialectical arguments spanned over several generations among followers of the competing schools. Still, the 'dynamics of conflict' does not explain the full story.[513] All Indian axiologies are based on the concepts of karma, rebirth, meditation, renunciation, and Liberation. These notions were ubiquitous since prehistoric times. Their continuity as a belief system is unique to Indian traditions which are sedentary in nature. The expression of monism in the form of Atman=brahman too is unique to Vedanta; its varied manifestation indicates a particular cultural or social identity leading to intellectual conflict rather than conflict leading to a particular manifestation. Collins suggests that domination of anti-conceptual monism of Advaita is the result of Muslim and European conquest of India which put Hinduism into united front (ref 8.3(21)-p 271). This is only partially true. Advaita as a philosophy was already on the forefront in the Indic regions before Turko-Mongol invaders penetrated India. Qasim's 7thC aggressive excursion was repulsed and confined to some packets of North-West region; fresh surges occurred only after c.1000. Though UP are the repository of multiple views; neti-neti (via-negativa) monism of Advaita is the dominant view of the UP. This view was delineated and systematized by sha.nkara, thereby establishing the monist tradition emanating from UP and flowing through BS, BG and GK till his own times and thereafter. It continues even today after its proactive rejuvenation in the 20thC. Theology of Vedanta: Advaita-Vedanta can be interpreted to support various theological positions. Its absolutism can be interpreted as absolute theism or as an inexplicable, agnostic indeterminism. At times, it seems to be precariously close to the nominalism of atheist Buddhism. At the empirical level it endorses polytheism by allowing many deities in its devotional practices. Skeptic may argue that

Advaita offers recipes depending on the dispositions of its followers without showing any firm commitment to any particular path. They may deride the concept of Maya as Advaita's inability to logically answer the inherent paradoxes of non-dualism. Advaita's detractors may level the charge of plagiarism from other ancient Indic traditions - not only from Vedic (orthodox) Sankhya and Yoga, but also from non-Vedic (heterodox) Buddhism and Jainism. They may also point out Vedanta's origins in the prehistoric tribal animism. Advaita-Vedanta can accept all these charges. They indicate Vedanta's strength rather than its weakness. It has offered variety of paths to suit the capability and aptitude of individual seekers within the broad framework of prasthAnatraya. It makes full use of logic and intellect in the analysis and postulation in relative domain, but accepts their limitations in metaphysical domain. It has both competed and judiciously adapted synergistic concepts from rival schools. Vedanta has evolved from its so called prehistoric tribal origins to offer a rich canonical system satisfying both intellectual and devotional needs of its followers.[514] Indic Advaita Schools: Post-Buddha Indic tradition displays five major cultural streams in the non-dualist (Advaita) & monist (ekatva) thought: [515] Kevala Advaita: Advaita Vedanta and its sub-schools Bauddha Advaita: tathatA, mAdhyamaka, and yogAchara Shaiva Advaita: Trika and spanda-pratybhiGYA system Vaishnava Advaita: shuddhAdvaita and puShTimArga Shakta Advaita: Tripura tantra as a shAkta-tantra tradition Other than the cultural-sectarian basis, non-dualist schools can be classified in other ways, such as based on: (1) type of monism, for example, attributive, substantial, absolute; (2) type of theism, for example, theist, agnostic, nominalist; (3) scheme of origination, for example, ajAta (no-originatin), vivarta (illusory appearance), pariNAma (transformation) etc. Advaita Vedanta and mAdhyamaka offer two view points, viz. vyAvahArika (V) and pAramArthika (P), according to which they can be classified in two ways. For example Advaita is: (1) substantially monist at V and 'absolute' (One) at P, (2) agnostic at V and 'absolute' (substratum) at P, (3) vivarta at V and ajAta at P; while mAdhyamaka is: (1) interdependently holistic at V and 'absolute' (void) at P, (2) nominalist at V and 'absolute' (nominalist) at P, (3) dependently originated at V and ajAta at P. Trika and shuddhAdvaita on the other hand offer unified onto-logy. Both are substantially monist-panentheist where original substance

undergoes transformation (pariNama) peculiar to its own school. sha.nkara and his followers canonized the GK line, which became the main line of general monistic thought in India in the name of Advaita Vedanta. This Vedanta rejected any combination of Knowledge and actions and propounded total renunciation of actions. It allowed actions only for purification of mind. More 'active' version of Vedanta was propounded occasionally, but it came into its own in New Vedanta [NV]. Here, actions regained their rightful place, but in the process lost their self. The self was mapped onto much bigger domain to make the actions selfless. The other Indian monist schools were represented by Trika 5161 (spanda-pratyabhiGYA). It flourished till the 13thC and there-after 'went underground' to surface again in the 20thC. The ethical concerns of Buddhism and Jainism were internalized by Advaita by adopting classical pAta.njala yoga, while the vaiShNava, shaiva and shAkta schools fulfilled the devotional aspirations of their respective followers. All these schools had yoga and tantra as their axiological- meditational base'. As seen earlier, Vedanta adopted the classical yoga; Buddhism (vajrAyana) had their own hybrid model of tantra; while Trika adopted the model of yogika upAya-s and tAntrika kriyA-s (methods). Post c.1200, Indian Sufi orders[517] and some of the bhakti, yoga and shaiva traditions showed some mutual affinity and developed similar devotional practices and monist positions.

Other Non-dualist Traditions:[518] Indian Advaita schools are not the only non-dualist traditions. There are non-dualist traditions in various religions and cultures all over the world. For example, the monist principle has been contemplated and meditated in following traditions:

1. Dzogchen: 'Intrinsic Awareness' of Tibetan Buddhism 2. Yab-Yum: 'Primordial Union' of Tibetan Vajrayana 3. T'i-yung: 'Absolute-relative' of East Asian Mahayana 4. Mom-momjit: 'Absolute-relative' of Korean Buddhism 5. Zazen: 'Silent Illumination' of Japanese Soto Zen 6. Dainichi: 'Cosmic Buddha' of Japanese Shingon 7. Wu wei: 'Egoless action' of Chinese Taoism (Daoism) 8. Taijitu: 'Supreme Ultimate' of Chinese Taoism (Daoism) 9. Zohar: 'Radiance' of Kabbalah and Hasidic traditions 10. The One: 'Primeval Source of Being' of Neoplatonism 11. Wahdat al-Wujud: 'Unity of Being' of Sufism

The first eight traditions of East Asia were directly or indirectly influenced by Buddhism, which originated in India and later spread in East Asia in the first or early second millennium. Taijitu uses yin-yang symbolism, while all of them make use of regional languages and are part of local cultures. Last three universal traditions are associated with Abrahamic religions[519] which originated in the West Asia and spread all over the world. The scholastic traditions of these non-dualist streams though culturally different, have many correlate points. It is possible that some of the prehistoric tribal traditions were monist- animist in nature, but were erased without leaving any trace in the annals of history or were swamped by the expanding monotheist religions. A non-dualistic assertion of a tradition however, does not necessarily make the tradition congruent with other non-dualist traditions. Though all non-dualist traditions converge on the same inexpressible and supra-conceptual reality; there are differences in their approach. These differences are aspectual as well as linguistic-cultural. A non- dualist tradition expounds particular aspect(s) of non-dualism in its own language within the framework of its own culture. Manifestation of plurality, origination-creation and its purpose, summum bonum and its realization, life after death, nature of sentience, mind-body and its

relation to the Self etc. are some of the aspects that are typically expounded by a non-dualistic tradition to establish its systemic identity. Since all absolutist traditions see only one reality, all followers of such traditions, atleast in principle, come close to each other spiritually when they approach their 'final monist destination'. The principle of "Self-in-All" manifested in post-1700 western philosophy in various forms such as 'mystic idealism' of Berkeley, 'noumenal platonism', 'universal law', and 'kingdom of ends' of Kant, 'universal Will' of Schopenhauer, 'universal Spirit' of Hegel, 'eternal Consciousness' of Green etc.[520] One may find contemporary expression of "Self-in-All" in the juris-prudential ideas of Rawls, Nozic, Dworkin, Sen et al. Vedanta will not identify itself with any one idea, but will see them as particularized expressions of the "Self-in-All". [521] The same principle will address the concerns of animal rightists, environ-mentalists feminists, and such other groups from the local as well as universal perspective on the basis of Atman= brahman. Consciousness and Advaita: After first few decades of the 20thC paradigm-shift in physics, "unification of forces" (euphe-mistically known as 'Theory of Everything') was seen as a possibility that can be realized sooner than later. Physics however, has not been able to reduce 'consciousness' to its fundamental laws. As things stand today, consciousness has put a spanner in the reductionist ambitions of some of the physicists-scientists. We may have to settle for some kind of computational-representational [C-R] model of consciousness.[522] If we can validate such a model and generate consciousness through 'computational simulation'; we would have decoded the secret of Nature. It will not necessarily mean that conscious-ness is 'reducible'; it would only mean that consciousness is 'computational'. The epistemic gap between the computation and the ultimate reality would remain and we will be free to call such a simulation as "spiritual technology" or "magic of Maya" depending on our dispositions.[523] "Consciousness Is All There Is" is the new age expression of non- dualism. Vedanta as a non-dualist tradition has attracted attention due to its continuity and teacher-pupil tradition. Along with classical yoga, which it has integrated well within; Vedanta offers a spiritual culture that aims to eliminate baseness and ennoble the minds. It has shown promise to reinvent itself as New Vedanta to satisfy the quest for the Unity and Knowledge of the new world citizen.

7.1 Advaita Vedanta Summary: Advaita[3Tad] teachings can be summarized under the heads of (a) Ontology; (b) Metapsychology; (c) Epistemology; and (d) Axiology[524] taking into account the preceding sections and considering traditional positions which have survived the test of times. Ontology: (1) brahman [s&1] is the ultimate reality. It is one only without dual. It is without any attributes, quality or distinction. It is beyond time, space, causality. brahman is described by the triad of "Being, Awareness, Peace" [sat, chit, Ananda = सत्, चित्, आनंद]. It is also described by the triad of "Existence, Knowledge, Infinity" [satyam, GYAnam, anantam=सत्यं, ज्ञानं, अनंतं]. These two triads do not describe the attributes or properties of brahman. They are only indicative of its essential nature. They represent the 'transcending unity' of three empi- rically manifested principles viz. (a) ontological principle (Being, Existence), (b) epistemological principle (Knowledge, Aware-ness), and (c) axiological principle (bliss of ethical sovereignty or peace of infinitude - that of total independence). The terms in the triads are to be understood co-referentially to direct one's mind towards brahman. The brahman is also described by "not this, not this" [neti neti, नेति नेति] - by negating the conceived and experienced objects of the cosmos - that is by negating the totality of cosmos itself. It is beyond everything that is thinkable or conceivable. (2) The cosmos [jagat,rTa] of duality, change, and process is less than real because brahman is the only non-dual reality. It is the product of and is constituted by the creative illusion called mAyA [HRJT]. mAyA is beginningless and indeterminate in terms of its relation to brahman. Cosmos is only an 'apparent transformation' [vivarta, faad] of brahman as experienced by sentient beings who fail to perceive the underlying reality of brahman due to (the 'concealing' power of) mAyA. They 'see' the cosmos instead of brahman like a snake erroneously seen in the rope. This superimposition [adhyAsa, 3&R] of seeing the cosmos instead of brahman is (due to the 'projecting' power of) mAyA. On the subjective side or at the epistemo-logical plane, mAyA is Ignorance [avidyA, 3ffadT]. It is sublated or canceled by the Knowledge [GYAna, ₹-] of reality to reach the absolute plane. In the Absolute, mAyA does not exist. (3) As stated earlier the cosmos is less than real; but it is not completely unreal because it is experienced at the subjective level. It is distinguished from the absolute reality (sat) [parama artha, 4HTef] and from the complete falsity or non-reality (asat) and said to have a relative reality [vyavahAra, d6R]. Thus, at the pure subjective level

cosmos is real; at the Absolute, it is unreal[525] and at the relative level it is neither real nor unreal; it is mithyA [fgT]. Everything other than brahman including mAyA and Ignorance is mithyA. The cosmos is mere 'names and forms' [nAmarUpa-s,Hyffor] projected by mAyA whose reality at the logical [yauktika, Madc] plane is indeterminate - neither real nor unreal [anirvachanlya, अनिर्वचनीय]. (4) Empirically or subjectively Cosmos can be seen as a creation. Since it can be seen as a creation it can also be seen as created from brahman, it being the non-dual Absolute (Reality). The brahman however, cannot be actual material cause of the creation since it is acausal. It can only be transfigurative (apparent) material cause and the 'substratum of the cosmos' [adhiShThAna, अधिष्ठान]. The mAyA is the transformative material cause. It superimposes the names and forms on substratum brahman and instills empirical con-sciousness in sentient beings. The brahman associated with 'mAyA' (sometimes equated with 'primal Ignorance' or mUlAvidyA = मूलाविद्या) is the efficient cause of the 'creation' (= cosmos inhabited by sentient beings). This efficient cause is known as God[$R, Ishvara] or 'brahman with attributes' [saguNa brahman, सगुण ब्रह्मन्]. (5) The acosmic and independent nature of brahman is guarded by (a) A special cause-effect relationship where the effect always preexists in the (material) cause. Thus effect does not bring into existence any thing radically new or different from its source, rather it is becoming of that which is preexistent. (b) Advaita envisages a 'seed potency [bIja shakti,बीजशक्ति]or unmanifested [avyakta, अव्यक्त] as the source of cosmos. (c) Cosmos is manifestation of Ishvara [$] via the medium of mAyA which is brought forth and reabsorbed in recurring cycles in a beginningless manner. The cosmos is without any beginning in time and space since both time and space are supposed to dissolve in the Unmanifest and then evolve in a cycle of creation. (d) Point a, b, c above are from the relative stand-point. From the stand point of Absolute however, there is no creation and no creator (that is no mAyA and no Ishvara); only brahman exists. This theory of non- creation is known as [ajAti vAda, अजाति वाद]which is said to be the main theory of creation of Advaita. Metapsychology: (1) Self [Atman, आत्मन्] is self-luminous [svayaMprakAsha,स्वयंप्रकाश]; It cannot be established by any basis other than immediate experience. It is timeless, spaceless and is of the nature of undifferentiated Awareness. (2) Self is one with brahman. That is Atman=brahman [आत्मन्= ब्रह्मन्]. This is the most important axiomatic identity in Advaita, an expression of fundamental unity of Existence.

(3) The 'sentient being'[jIva, sfa] does not realize its essential nature of being one with the brahman due to Ignorance and due to the adjuncts [upAdhi-s] conjured by Ignorance and constituting 'body and mind' [sharIra, &RR]. The upAdhi [3yTfer] is 'superimposed' [adhyAsita, Aropita,अध्यासित, आरोपित] on Self and vise versa. This 'superimposition' [adhyAsa, अध्यास; Aropa, आरोप] is (due to) Ignorance. On the subjective epistemic side; mAyA is the Ignorance that is sublated [apavAdita, 3yaifad] by Knowledge to reach the absolute plane. At the absolute plane Ignorance does not exist; only brahman exists. (4) Whether; (a) Individual jIva is said to have an illusion of secondary (empirical) consciousness as the manifestation of brahman- consciousness (AbhAsavAda,आभास वाद); OR (b) the brahman- consciousness itself is said to be 'reflected' in the individual intellect (pratibiMba vAda,प्रतिबिम्ब वाद); OR (c) the brahman-consciousness itself is said to be delimited by the individual intellect due to which It appears as the empirical consciousness (avacCheda vAda,अवच्छेद वाद); in all such cases there is this 'false notion' [adhyAsa, 3eR] on part of jIva-s that they are limited individuals different from brahman. (5) jIva is constituted as (a) 'gross body' [sthUla sharIra, Rc शरीर]comprising 'physical organs' [annamaya kosha,अन्नमय कोश], (b) 'subtle body' [sUxma sharIra,सूक्ष्म शरीर] comprising vitality [prANamaya kosha,प्राणमय कोश], mind [manomaya kosha,मनोमय कोश], intellect [viGYAnamaya kosha, विज्ञानमय कोश]; (c) 'causal body' [kAraNa sharIra,कारण शरीर] comprising peace [Anandamaya kosha,आनन्दमय कोश]. (6) jIva is constituted by various levels of consciousness arising by way of either illusion, or reflection, or delimitation as: (a) waking [jAgRRita, vra] consciousness - the awareness of the relative world of duality where the Self is identified with gross body; (b) dream [svapna, ] consciousness - the consciousness of subconscious impressions and intentions where the Self is identified with subtle body; and (c) deep sleep [suShupti, yfa]- the undifferentiated consciousness or bliss where all duality is held in abeyance and where the Self is identified with causal body. When 'delimiting (or reflecting or animated) adjunct [upAdhi, 31fer] is permanently dissociated' [videha mukta, विदेह मुक्त]in the Fourth [turlya,तुरीय] state what remains is Atman=brahman. The names of appearance[526] of consciousness in individuated and cosmic forms are given in the Table-5:

Table-5: Types of Consciousness

State Waking Dreaming Sleep Fourth (avasthA) (jAgRRita) (svapna) (suShupti) (turIya)

Consciousness vaishva taijasa praGYA Atman

Adjunct: sthUla sUxma kAraNa Atman sharIra

Adjunct: kosha anna prANa, manas, Ananda Atman viGYAna

Cosmic Deity vaishvAnara hiraNyagarbha Ishvara brahman

Epistemology: (1) brahman is not knowable by means of sensory perception and reason. It is however, the highest form of Knowledge [parA vidyA, URT faur. What can be known at the relative level of empirical world [saMsAra,संसार: prapa.ncha, प्रपंच] is called 'relative knowledge' [aparA vidyA,अपरा विद्या]. (2) All relative knowledge involves a three-fold distinction between the knower [pramAtA,प्रमाता], the object (to be) known [prameya, प्रमेय], and 'means of knowledge' [pramANa,yHTUT]. The 'experience of knowledge' [pramA,प्रमा] is through the cognition [pramiti,प्रमिति] and its validation [prAmANya,प्रामाण्य]. (3) At the relative level, Advaita acknowledges six means of valid knowledge [pramANa-s]: (a) perception [pratyaxa,प्रत्यक्ष, aparoxa, अपरोक्ष]; (b) testimony [shabda, शब्द: Agama, आगम]; (c) inference [anumAna,अनुमान]; (d) comparison [upamAna,उपमान]; (e) postulation [arthApatti, 3Tefyfa];and (f) "non-cognition" or "cognition of absence [अभाव]" [anupa-labdhi, अनुपलब्धि]. (4) At the subjective epistemological plane Ignorance means failure to discriminate between Self and not-Self which are superimposed on each other by a natural process caused by Ignorance. Equivalently, this superimposition(composition of Self and not-Self) itself is considered to be Ignorance or Nescience[अविद्या, मूलाविद्या] and separating (realizing) the Self from the superimposed not-Self is called Knowledge[faaT]. All other derivative ignorances are sometimes referred to just as that - 'derivative or auxiliary ignorances' (tULAvidyA,तूलाविद्या). (5) brahman is known immediately, and this 'Knowledge of brahman' [brahma-GYAna,ब्रह्मज्ञान] is 'self-certifying' [svataH pramANa,स्वतःप्रमाण], it has a unique ultimacy. No criterion that otherwise is applicable to the relative knowledge is applicable to it. For parA vidyA - transcendental Knowledge of Atman= brahman, authority of shruti [gfa] is taken as (equivalent to) pratyaxa pramANa at the relative level. (6) Relative knowledge at the subjective level [vRRitti-GYAna,वृत्ति ज्ञान] is distinguished by following three conditions: (a) The relative consciousness undergoes a modification or assume a mode [vRRitti, qfa] to appropriate the form of the object to be known; metaphorically or otherwise it envelopes the object to be perceived. (b) It must synthesize the sense data into meaningful concept through the activity of 'intellect' [buddhi, fl, and (c) The relative consciousness of the subject through the instrumentality of 'the internal subtle organ' [antaHkaraNa,अन्तःकरण] illumines the object.

(7) Pure consciousness or the Self as Witness [sAxin, 1f&] cannot be an object of knowledge. It is present though in every act of knowing by the soul; every process of knowledge presupposes it. It is the homogeneous (undifferentiated), eter-nal (unbreakable), and pure (uncontaminated) inmost core or substratum of all of our living experience. It is 'self-luminous[4T8T] inasmuch as it imparts quality to our experience without itself possessing any quality or attribute and without being known as an object of any empirical cognition. (8) Perception is accorded the highest priority when knowledge is to be validated. In the metaphysical domain of brahman, shruti (UP) has the status of perception which is 'immediate [aparoxa,341&r] knowledge' while other means are of 'mediate [paroxa, परोक्ष]knowledge'. smRRiti [स्मृति](scriptures like gItA) has the status of testimony, while nyAya [RR] (BS) has the status of postulation. (9) All knowledge is intrinsically valid. It can be falsified by experience which is contrary [apavAda, 31yql4] to it; but it can not be completely validated by external or mediate means. All knowledge acquired by various means is valid in its 'own proper sphere' [kAryaxetra, rf&], but insofar as it is subject to contradiction by another qualitatively different kind of expe-rience, it is necessarily a relative knowledge. Knowledge of brahman once realized cannot be contradicted.

Axiology: (1) The ultimate goal of human kind should be Liberation [moxa, H1&, nirvANa, fafur] release from the recurring cycle of birth, death, and rebirth. From a more positive side, moxa means 'liberation from (bonded) action' [(baddha) karma-mukti,(बद्ध) कर्म-मुक्ती] and 'freedom from fear' [abhayatva, 3T94rd]to achieve insight and self-determination. (2) Knowledge is the way to Liberation [GYAnamArga, ज्ञान मार्ग]; rites & rituals [karmakANDa, dHøis] are neither sufficient nor necessary for its attainment. Even so the 'right actions' [kartavya, ddar]and inculcation of moral values [saMskAra, GR] - by deploying classical Yoga or by any other means - helps in purifying the mind. 'Purified mind' [shuddha antaH-karaNa,शुद्ध अन्तःकरण]is necessary (but not sufficient) condition for Liberation. Indicators of the purified mind are (a) ability to discriminate bertween the real (permanent, true, right) and the unreal (transient, false, wrong): [viveka, faac]; (b) dispassion about enjoyment of fruits of actions in this world and here-after: [vairAgya, वैराग्य]; (c) 'the six-fold treasure' [ShaTsaMpatti, षट्संपत्ति]: calmness [shama,शम], restraint [dama,दम], withdrawal [uparati,उपरति], endurance [titixA, तितिक्षा], concentration [samA-dhAna, समाधान],

conviction [shraddhA,श्रद्धा]; (d) 'desire to Know' [mumuxutva,मुमुक्षुत्व]. In the ultimate end however, Knowledge and Knowledge alone is the means of final release. Once Self is realized there is nothing more to be gained on the individual basis. (3) Liberation is not something that is attained, rather it is already existing state of one's being that needs to be realized. Knowledge removes the obstructions to realization. Liberation can be realized in one's life; when so realized one is known as 'enlightened being' [jIvanmukta, vhq-yad]. All the accumulated action which has not yet borne fruit [sa.nchita-karma, संचित-कर्म] and all action which would otherwise take place in future [AgAmI-karma,3TTHcHf] is obliterated. Action of the past that has already begun to bear fruit [:prArabdha- karma, yRc&cHf]must however be carried out. Liberated person does not perform 'wishful action' [kAmya-karma,$[R]cHf]. That is to say, he carries out actions without attachment - without associating himself with the result of action there by not creat-ing bondage due to karma. He does not accumulate demerit [pApa,y1y] or merit [puNya, yuy] irrespective of his acting within the purview of Vedic injunctions. He transcends the law of karma. (4) For the jIvanmukta, complete Liberation is obtained on death of the body; he becomes free of the (limitations of the) body: [videhamukta,विदेहमुक्त]; he is not reborn. He realizes the 'ontologic- epistemic-ethic' unity of sat (Being, Existence), chit (Knowledge, Awareness), and Ananda (peace, infinitude). (5) The Bondage and Liberation exist only at the relative (vyAvahArika, व्यावहारिक) level. In Reality there is no end (anta, अंत), no beginning (utpatti, 3rufa); no one is in the bondage (baddha, ds); there is no aspirant (sAdhaka, HT9c); no one is seeking Liberation (mumuxu,मुमुक्षु), and no one is free (mukta, मुक्त). This is the ultimate Truth (paramArtha, परमार्थ).

8. bibliography 8.1 Source books[527] 1. Eight Upanishads with Commentary of sha.nkarAchArya (vol-1 & 2): Translated by Swami Gambhirananda (1989)

9. The bRRihadAraNyaka Upanishad with Commentary of sha.nkarAchArya: Tr. by Swami Madhavananda (1965) 3. The ChAndogya upaniShad with Commentary of sha.nkarAchArya: Tr. by Sw. Gambhirananda (1983) 4. Principal Upanishds: English Tr., Intro., and notes by S. Radhakrishnan; HarperCollins (1994) 5. The shvetAshvatara upaniShad with Bhaskareshwarananda Elucidation: Translated by Swami Vedananda. (2002) 6. The bhagavadgItA bhAShya of sha.nkarAchArya: Tr. by Dr. Krishna Warrier (1983) 7. gUdhArthadIpikA of madhusUdana sarasvatl: Tr by Sw. Gambhirananda (1998) 8. brahmasUtra bhAShya of sha.nkarAchArya: Translation and annotation Sw. Gambhirananda (1965) 9. ब्रह्मसूत्रशांकरभाष्य: गोविंदानंद-वाचस्पति-आनंदगिरिप्रणीत (रत्नप्रभा-भामती- न्यायनिर्णय उपेत), महादेवशास्त्रीबाक्रेपरिष्कृत, वासुदेवशास्त्रीपणशीकरसंशोधित, पांडुरंगजावजी (निर्णयसागर)प्रकाशित; (ख्रिस्ताब्द १९३४) 10. Srimad Bhagavad Gita: word-for-word Tr. & notes by Sw. Swarupananda (1909) 11. gauDapAdakArikA: Tr. Ed. R. D. Karmakar; BORI (1973) 12. Complete Works of Sri Sankaracarya in the original Sanskrit, vol 1-20, Samata Books, Vani Vilas Press (1910) 13. sureshvara's vArtika on the bRRihadAraNyakabhAShya of sha.nkara : 12-vol set edited, translated, and annotated by K. P. Jog & Shoun Hino; MLBD (1991+) 14. Shankara Source-book, Complete Set (6-vol): Ed. & Tr. A. J. Alston; Shanti Sadan, U. K. (1989, 2004) 15. (a) 108-UP with Upanishad Brahma Yogin commentary in 8 Vol. (v.1-2: 10-UP; v.3: sAmAnya; v.4-6: shaiva, shAkta, vaiShNava; v.7-8: saMnyAsa, yoga); Ed. Adyar Lib .; Pub. Theosophical So. (in Sanskrit) (1935); (b) 120-UP printed by Nirnayasagar Press (in Sanskrit), Bombay (1948) 16. The Sixty Upanishads of the Veda (Vol-1&2): by Deussen (in German); Tr. by Bedekar & Palsule; MLBD (1997)

17. URLs for Sanskrit texts, English translations & related info. a) http://sanskritdocuments.org b) http://is1.mum.edu/vedicreserve c) http://www.vedamu.org d) http://www.sacred-texts.com e) http://www.celextel.org f) htttp://www.srimadbhagavatam.org g) http://www.mahabharata-resources.org h) http://www.advaita-vedanta.org i) http://www.shivashakti.com j) http://www.muktabodha.org k) http://www.buddhanet.net 1) http://www.buddhism.org m) http://www.accesstoinsight.org n) http://www.kheper.net

8.2 Students' Texts[528]

1. upadesha sAhasrI [US][529] of sha.nkarAchArya: annotated by Sw. Jagadananda (1941) 2. vedAntaparibhAshA [VP][530] of dharmarAjAvadhIndra: annotated by Sw. Madhavananda. (1972)

2. vedAntasAra [VS][531] of sadAnanda yogindra: annotated by Sw. Nikhilananda (1949)

3. pa.nchadashI [PD][532] of Swami vidyAraNya: annotated by Sw. Swahananda (1967) 5. vivekachUDAmaNi [VC][533]: annot. Sw. Madhavananda (1921)

4. dRRikdRRishyaviveka [DDV][534]: annot. by Sw. Nikhilananda (1931) 7. aparoxAnubhUti [AA][535]: annot. Sw. Vimuktananda (1938)

5. jIvanmuktiviveka [JMV][536] of Sw. vidyAraNya: Tr. by Sw. Mokshadananda (1996) 9. tattvabodhaH [TB][537]: notes by Sw. Tejomayananda; Central Chinmaya Mission Trust (2000) 10. Atmabodha [AB][538]: notes by Sw. Nikhilananda (1947)

6. श्रीमत्सुरेश्वराचार्यवर्यविरचिता नैष्कर्म्यसिद्धि: [539] [NS]पं. प्रेमवल्लभत्रिपाठीशास्त्रीकृत (हिंदी)- भाषानुवाद; अच्युतग्रंथमाला प्रकाशन, काशी (संवत् २००७). 12. सर्ववेदान्तसिद्धान्तसारसंग्रह [540]: सं. रामस्वरूप शर्मा, सनातन धर्म यन्त्रालय (1933) 13. siddhAntabindu [SBN][541] of madhusUdana: annotated by S. N. Sastri; Advaita Research Center, Chennai (2006) 14. saMxepa-shArItaka of sarvaGYAtmana [SS][542]: Ed. and Tr. with notes by N. Veezhinathan; Univ. of Madras (1972) 15. siddhAntaleshasaMgraha [SLS][543] of appaya dIxita: Ed. Tr. Intro by S S Suryanarayana Sastri, Univ of Madras (1935) 16. Brahma-Sutras:[544] (a) Sw. Vireshwarananda; AdvaitAshrama (1936); (b) Sw Shivananda; Divine Life Society (1949) 17. URLs for general reference-search: a) http://www.new.dli.ernet.in b) http://www.archive.org c) http://www.iep.utm.edu

d) http://philpapers.org e) http://plato.stanford.edu

8.3 Other References[545]

1. The Philosophy of the Upanishads:[546] Paul Deussen (Tr. A. S. Geden) (1908) 2. (a) Samnyasa Upanishads; (b) Upanishads:[547] Tr. + Intro. + notes by Patrick Olivelle; OUP (1992, 1996) 3. Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies [548]: Ed. Karl Potter 4. Indian Philosophy[5491- vol 1 & 2: S. Radhakrishnan, OUP (1929) 5. A History of Indian Philosophy,[550] vol. 1-5: S. N. Dasgupta, CUP (1957) 6. Outlines of Indian Philosophy:[551] M. Hiriyanna (1932) 7. Philology and Confrontation:[552] Paul Hacker, Ed. Paul Halbfass, SUNY Press (1995) 8. The Essential Vedanta:[553] Deutsch & Dalvi, New Age (2004) 9. The Doctrine of mAyA:[554] P. D. Shastri, Luzac & Co (1911) 10. The Method of Vedanta:[555] Sw. Satchidanandendra, Tr. by A. J. Alston (1989) 11. The Method of Early Advaita Vedanta:[556] Comans (2000) 12. A History of Early Vedanta Philosophy:[557] Hajime Nakamura, Sengeku Mayeda and others; MLBD (1983) 13. The Seven Great Untenables:[558] by John Grimes (1990) 14. Methods of Knowledge:[559] Sw Satprakashananda, Advaita Ashrama (1964) 15. Pre-sha.nkara Advaita Philosophy:[5601 S. L. Pandey (1974) 16. A Thousand Teachings; The upadeshasAhasrI of sha.nkara[561] Tr. & Ed. Sengaku Mayeda (2006) 17. Aspects of Vedanta[562]: Pub by R. K. Mission, Kolkata (1995) 18. The Life Divine[563]: Sri Aurobindo; Aurobindo Ashram (2005) 19. History of India: Kulke & Rothermund,[564] Rupa & Co. (1991) 20. A Global History: L. Stavrianos[565] Prentice Hall (1983) 21. The Sociology of Philosophy: Randall Collins, HUP (2000) [566] 22. A Study of the ratnagotravibhAga (uttaratantra) [RGV]: Jikido Takasaki,[567] in Serie Orientale Roma (XXXIII) (1964)

23. The Jaiminiya or Talavakara Upanishad Brahmana: Ed. Hanns Oertel; Journal of American Oriental Society, Vol-16 (1896)[568] 24. The System Of Vedanta[569]: Paul Deussen; OpenCourt (1912) 25. The Vibrating Universe[570]: N. C. Panda (1995) 26. Shadows of The Mind[571]: Roger Penrose; OUP (1994) 27. Road to Reality[572]: Roger Penrose; Jonathan Cape (2004) 28. Motion Mountain: Christoph Schiller (2009)[5731 29. Artificial Intelligence[574]: Russell & Norvig; Pearson (2003) 30. Introduction to: (a) Relativity (2010); (b) Cosmology (2003) [575]: J. V. Narlikar; CUP 31. (a) The Complete Works of Sw. Vivekananda [CWSV] (set of 9-volumes); Advaita Ashrama(2003); (b)स्वामी विवेकानन्द ग्रन्थावली संचयन [SVGS] (in Marathi): रामकृष्ण मठ, नागपुर (१९८७) 32. सार्थ ज्ञानेश्वरी: संपादक प्रिं. शं. वा. दाण्डेकर, प्रसाद प्रकाशन, पुणे (१९५१) [576] 33. सार्थ श्रीमत् दासबोध (श्री समर्थ रामदास स्वामी विरचित)[577]: संपादक- अनुवादक प्रा. के. वि. बेलसरे; प्रकाशक: श्री समर्थ सेवा मंडळ, सातारा (१९७५, २००७) 34. श्रीमद्भगवद्गीतारहस्य अथवा कर्मयोगशास्त्र [BGR]: बाळ गंगाधर टिळक;[578] प्रकाशक: टिळक बंधु; पुणे २ (२००६, प्रथमावृत्ति १९१५) 35. महाराष्ट्राचा भागवत धर्म [579]: १) वैदिक वाङ्मयातील भागवत धर्माचा विकास, २) पौराणिक भागवत धर्म, ३) ज्ञानदेव आणि नामदेव, ४) संत एकनाथ, ५) संत तुकाराम, ६) समर्थ रामदास: लेखक: डॉ. श. दा. पेंडसे, कॉन्टीनेन्टल प्रकाशन (१९४१-१९७४) 36. The taittiriyopaniShadbhAShyavArtika of sureshvara: Ed. & Tr. By R. Balasubramanian; University of Madras (rev.) 1984 37. सुरेश्वराचार्यकृतं बृहदारण्यकोपनिषद्धाष्यवार्तिकं आनंदगिरिटीकासंवलितं श्री. एस्० सुब्रमण्यशास्त्रिणा महेश-अनुसंधान-निदेशकेन संपादितं (खंड १ व २). ख्रि. १९८२-९० 38. The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi [CWMG] (e-Book), Publication of GOI, 98-vol, 1999, <www.gandhiserve.org> 39. A History of Ancient & Early Medieval India:[580] Upinder Singh; Pearson Education, 2009 40. Evolution of the Brain: Creation of the Self:[581] John C. Eccles; Routledge 1989, 1991 41. अद्वैतग्रंथ कोष: Ed. P. N. Pattabhiram Shastri; Deva-Vani (1958)

Further Reading

42. sUrya-siddhAnta [SUS]: Tr and notes by Rev. Ebenezer Burgess; Ameri can Oriental Society, 1858 (archive.org) 43. Original Sanskrit Texts [OST]; vol.1-5: John Muir; 1858-72 44. sarvadarshanasaMgraha: Tr. Cowell & Gough; 1882 (archive.org) 45. (a) The Metaphysics of Upanishads (Vicharsagar): Tr. + Notes by Lala पीतांबरकृतटीकासहित, Sreeram (1885); (b)विचारसागर (साधु निश्चलदासकृत, पंडित पंचम संस्करण (हिंदी) (1917): (archive.org) 46. अलबेरुणीका भारत (भाग १-३): अंग्रेजी अनुवाद (एडवर्ड सचौ १८८८) का सन्तराम कृत हिंदी अनुवाद, प्रयाग प्रेस १९१७-१९२८ 47. (a)श्रीमद्वाल्मीकिमहर्षिप्रणीत: योगवासिष्ठः (तात्पर्यप्रकाशाख्यव्याख्यासहित: पणशीकर उपाह्वलक्ष्मणशर्मतनुजनुषा वासुदेवशर्मणा निर्णयसागराख्यमुद्रणालये प्रकाशितम्); (b) योग- वासिष्ठ महारामायण (भाग १-४, आनंदबोधेन्द्र सरस्वतीप्रणीत, तात्पर्यप्रकाशाख्य-व्याख्या- सहित हिन्दी अनुवाद, प्रकाशक: आसारामजी आश्रम) 48. Laghu Yoga Vasistha [LYV]: Tr. K. Narayanaswamy Aiyer; Thomson & Co, 1896 49. tattvakaumudii of vAchaspati: Tr. G. N. Jha 1896 (archive.org) 50. aShTAdhyAyI of pANinl: Srisa Chandra Vasu 1897 (archive) 51. श्रीविद्यारण्यविरचितः श्रीमच्छंकरदिग्विजयः पुण्याख्यपत्तने आनंदाश्रम मुद्रणालये प्रकाशितं, ख्रिस्ताब्दा: १८९१ (arcive.org) 52. Dakshinamurti Stotra w/ Manasollasa: Alladi Mahadeva Sastri 1899, 1999 (archive.org) 53. Vedic Metre: Edward Arnold; CUP 1905 (archive.org) 54. The naiShkarmyasiddhi of sureshvara with commentary of GYAnottama: Ed. by G. A. Jacob; BORI 1905, 1925, 1980 55. श्रीमदानन्दबोधभट्टाचार्यसङ्ग्रहीतः | आचार्यचित्सुखमुनिविरचितव्याख्योपेतः | प्रमाणमाला - न्यायदीपावली च । श्रीमदानन्दबोधभट्टारकाचार्यनिर्मिते: Ed. by N. S. N. Swami Baalaraama; Chowkhamba Sanskrit Book Depot 1907 56. अप्पय्यदीक्षितकृत सिद्धांतलेशसंग्रह (मूलशंकरव्यासकृतहिंदीअनुवाद) (1924) (archive) 57. वेदांत विचार (मराठी): ह. भ. प. विष्णु नरसिंह जोग; चित्रशाळा १९१५ 58. advaitasddhi (of madhusUdana sarasvatl): Tr. by M. M. Ganganatha Jha, Belvedere Steam Press, Allahabad 1917 59. (a)छांदोग्योपनिषद् (सटीक हिंदी भाषांतर); (b) बृहदारण्यकोपनिषद् (सटीक हिंदी भाषांतर): बाबू जालिमसिंह; नवलकिशोर प्रे. १९१७, १९२३ (archive.org) 60. The sA.nkhya System: A. B. Keith; 1919 (archive.org) 61. श्रीयुक्त अनंतकृष्णशास्त्रिणा संगृहिता प्रकाशिता च "अद्वैतदीपिका"; ख्रि. १९२२ (archive.org)

62. अद्वैतवाद (हिंदी): लेखक पं० गंगाप्रसाद उपाध्याय; कला कार्यालय, प्रयाग, ख्रि. १९२८ 63. Heart of Shri Shankara: Tr. of mUlAvidyAnirAsa (1929) of Sw. Satchi tanandendra by A. J. Alston; Pub Shanti Sadan 64. The Sivadvaita of Srikantha: S. S. Suryanarayana Sastri; Univ. Of Madras 1930

63. Vedanta, Or The Science of Reality: K. A. Krishnaswamy Iyer; Ganesha & Co. 1930 66. bhAmatI (of vAchaspati) (chatuHsUtrI) [BH]: Ed. and Tr. By S. N. Sastri & Kunhan Raja, Univ. of Madras 1933 (archive.org) 67. गंगाधरेन्द्र सरस्वतीप्रणीत स्वाराज्य सिद्धि (सरलान्वय पद्य काशिका भाषा टीकाकर्ता स्वामी मंगलहरि मुनि); प्रकाशक: वेदान्तकेसरी कार्यालय, १९३४ (archive.org) 68. धर्मशास्त्रविचार: पां. वा. काणे; प्रकाशक: पां. म. भागवत; मौज, मुंबई (१९३५) (archive.org) 69. Studies in Post-Shankara Dialectics: Ashutosh Bhattacharya Shastri; Uni versity of Calcutta 1936 (archive.org). 70. Rgveda Pratisakhya (1-3): M. D. Shastri; MLBD 1937 (archive.org) 71. The Philosophy of Advaita: T. M. P. Mahadevan; University of Madras 1937 (archive.org) 72. tattvasaMgraha of shAntaraxita: G. N. Jha; BOI 1937 (archive.org) 73. विवरण प्रमेय संग्रह (डबराल कृत हिंदीभाषानुवाद): अच्युत ग्रन्थमाला, काशी १९३९ (archive) 74. Paippalada-Samhita of the Atharva-Veda (Books 1-20): Ed. Raghuvira; Sata-Pitaka Series 1940, 2008 75. The pa.nchapAdikA of padmapAda [PP]: Tr. Venkataramiah; Baroda Ori ental Institute 1948 (archive.org) 76. Sacrifice in RRigveda: K. R. Potdar; BVB 1953 77. Patanjali Yoga Sutras [PY]: Sw. Prabhavananda 1953 (archive.org) 78. The Philosophy of Jnanadeva: B. P. Bahirat; MLBD 1956 79. The Nature of Man According to The Vedanta: John Levy; Routledge & Kegan Paul 1956 80. naiShkarmyasiddhi [NS] of shrI sureshvara (Realization of the Absolute): A. J. Alston; Shanti Sadan 1959 81. A Critique on Vivarana School: B. K. Sengupta, 1959 (archive) 82. lokAyata: D. P. Chattopadhyaya; PPH 1959 (archive.org) 83. mImAMsA: The Vakya-Shastra :: G. V. Devasthali 1959 (archive) 84. Lights on Vedanta: V. P. Upadhyaya; Chowkhamba 1959 (arch.)

85. gauDapAda: A Study in Early Advaita :: T. M. P. Mahadevan: University of Madras 1960 86. श्रीहर्षप्रणीतं खण्डनखण्डखाद्य: श्रीचण्डीप्रसादविरचितहिंदीभाषानुवाद; अच्युतग्रन्थ १९६१ 87. vedAnta-kalpa-latikA of madhusUdana: Ed. and Tr. by R. D. Karmarkar; BORI 1962 (archive.org) 88. vAkyapadlya of bhartRRiharl: Abhyankar & Limaye; DES 1965 89. धर्मरहस्य: केशव लक्ष्मण दप्तरी; महाराष्ट्र राज्य साहित्य-संस्कृति मंडळ १९६५ 90. Nighantu & Nirukta: Ed. & Tr. Lakshman Sarup, MLBD 1967 91. Preceptors of Advaita: Kanchi Kamakoti Sankara Mandir 1968 92. पातञ्जलयोगदर्शनम्: वाचस्पतिमिश्रविरचित तत्त्ववैशारदी :: विज्ञानभिक्षुकृत योगवार्तिक- विभूषित व्यासभाष्यसमेतम् श्रीनारायणमिश्रेण संपादितम् भारतीय विद्या प्रकाशन १९७१ 93. The Vakyapadiya, Critical Text of Cantos I and II: K. Raghavan Pillai; MLBD 1971 94. Advaita Vedanta: a philosophical reconstruction: Eliot Deutsch; Universi ty of Hawaii Press [UHP] 1973 95. Srimad Bhagavatam (vol.1-4) [SB]: Sw. Tapasyananda; Rama Krishna Math, Chennai 1980 96. Karma & Rebirth In Classical Indian Traditions: Ed. Wendy Doniger; University of California Press [UCP] 1980 97. The Central Philosophy of Jainism: B. K. Matilal; LDII 1981 98. brahmasUtra-sha.nkarabhAShya (with bhAmatI, kalpataru,& parimala): Ed. Ananta Krishna Shastri, Chawkhamba 1982 99. Yoga Philosophy of Patanjali: Sw. Hariharananda; SUNY 1983 100. Sankara on the Yoga Sutras: Tr. Trevor Legett; MLBD 1983 101. Brahmasiddhi of Acharya Mandana Misra: Kuppuswami Sastri; Satguru 1984 102. ऋग्वेदका सुबोध भाष्य (10-Vols): पं. श्री. दा. सातवळेकर, स्वाध्याय मण्डल 1985 103. The Khandanakhandakhadya of Sri Harsha, 2 Vol (Bibliotheca Indo Bud dhica Series): Tr. Ganganath Jha 1986 104. The Vedic Origins of Karma: Herman Tull; SUNY 1989 105. Agamashastra of Gaudapada: V. S. Bhattacharya; MLBD 1989 106. Logic, Language & Reality: B. K. Matilal; MLBD 1990 107. Vedanta: Heart of Hinduism: Hans Torwesten; Grove 1991 108. pa.nchapAdikA with prakAshAtman's vivaraNa, akhaNDAnanda's tattva- dIpana, and sarvaGYaviShNubhatta's RRiju-vivaraNa: Ed. Subramanya Sastri; Mahesanusandhan 1992

109. Shankara and Indian Philosophy: Natalia Isayeva; SUNY 1993 110. "अमृतानुभव" अधिक "चांगदेव पासष्ठी" (मराठी): विष्णुबुवा जोग; वरदा प्रकाशन १९९३ 111. Life & Thought of Shankaracharya: G. C. Pande; MLBD 1994 112. From Early Vedanta to Kashmir Shaivism: Isayeva; SUNY 1995 113. Atmatattvaviveka by Udanacharya: Translation, Explanation, & Survey by N. Dravid; Indian Institute of Advanced Studies 1995

110. Perceiving in Advaita Vedanta: Bina Gupta, MLBD 1995 115. Complete Works of Sri Aurobindo [CWSA]: Essays on the Gita :: Sri Au robindo Ashrama Publication 1997 116. Panchapadika Vivaranam [PPV]: rendered into English by P. S. Sastri; Sadhana Grantha Mandali Tenali; 1997 117. Two Sources of Indian Asceticism: J. Bronkhorst; MLBD 1998 118. Perceptual Error: The Indian Theories :: S. Rao; UHP 1998 119. ब्रह्मसूत्रशांकरभाष्य हिंदीअनुवाद - रत्नप्रभाभाष्यानुवादसहित (भाग १-५) :: अनुवादक: यतिवर श्रीभोलेबाबा, भारतीय विद्या प्रकाशन १९९८, २००४. 120. The Disinterested Witness: Bina Gupta; N-W Univ Press 1998 121. Introduction to: (a) Electrodynamics (PH 1999); (b) Quantum Mechanics (PH 2005); (c) Elementary Particles (Wiley-VCH 2008) :: David Griffiths. 122. Dharmasutras: Annot. & Trans. by Patrick Olivelle: MLBD 2000 123. Philosophy of Sankar's Advaita Vedanta: S. K. Chattopadhyaya; Sarup & Sons 2000 124. The Astadhyayi of Panini (vol 1-6): R. N. Sharma; MLBD 2001 125. bhAmatI and vivaraNa Schools of Advaita Vdanta: Roodurmum; MLBD 2002 126. The Bijak of Kabir: Essay & Notes by Linda Hess, Tr. By Linda Hess and Sukhdeo Singh; OUP 2002 127. Imagining Karma: Gananath Obeyesekere; UCP 2002 128. The Supreme Yoga: Sw. Venkateshananda; MLBD 2003 129. Cit: Consciousness :: Bina Gupta; OUP 2003 130. gItArthasaMgraha of abhinavagupta: (Sanskrit-English) Tr. and Ed. by Boris Marjanovic, Indica Books, 2002, 2004 131. मधुसूदनसरस्वतीप्रणीता अद्वैतसिद्धि: श्रीरामेश्वरदत्तकृत हिंदी व्याख्या, चौखंबा २००४ 132. Advaita Vedanta, An Introduction: Arvind Sharma; MLBD 2004 133. asparsha yoga: Collin Cole; MLBD 2004 134. Sleep As a State of Consciousness in Advaita Vedanta: Arvind

Sharma; SUNY 2004

135. shrii giita govinda of jayadeva gosvaamii: Tr. and commentary by Nara yana Maharaj; Gaudiya Vaishnava Publ. 2005 136. Manu's Code of Law: Patrick Olivelle; OUP 2005 137. Advaita World View: Anantanand Ramabachan; SUNY 2006

136. IshTasiddhi vivaraNam: by anubhUtisvarUpAchArya :: R. Krishnamurthy Sastrigal; Adi Sankara Advaita Research 2006 139. A Survey of Hinduism: Klaus Klostermaier; SUNY 2007 140. Mimamsa and Vedanta: Ed. J. Bronkhorst; MLBD 2007 141. The Philosophy of Religion and Advaita Vedanta: by Arvind Sharma; MLBD 2008 142. The Bhagavad Gita: Tr. Winthrop Sargeant, Ed. Christopher Chappel (w/ preface), Foreword. Huston Smith; SUNY 2009

<Vedic History, Protohistory and Prehistory >

143. The Rigveda: by Adolf Kaegi, Tr. by Arrowsmith; (archive.org) 144. Rig Veda and the Vedic Religion: A. C. Clayton; 1913 (arch.) 145. A Peep Into Early History of India: R. G. Bhandarkar; Taraporwala & Sons 1920 146. History of Dharmashastra (vols 1, 2.1, 2.2, 3, 4, 5.1, 5.2): P. V. Kane; BORI 1930-62 147. Political History of Ancient India: Rauchaudhuri; (1931) 148. The History & Culture of the Indian People (vol-1 to 11): Ed. Majumdar & Pusalkar; Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan 1951 149. History of Philosophy, Eastern & Western (vol-1&2): Ed. S. Radhakrish nan et al; George Allen & Unwin (1952-53) 150. The wonder that was India: A. L. Basham; Sidgwick & Jackson 1954, 2000

144. History of South India: Nilakantha Shastri; OUP 1955 152. State & Government in Ancient India: A. S. Altekar; MLBD 1958 153. Cult of the Mother Goddess: E. O. James; Thames & Hudson 1959 154. Indo-Aryan: Jules Bloch, Librairie Adrien Maisonneuve. 1965 155. India In The Vedic Age: P. L. Bhargava (1971), MLBD 2001 156. History of Indian Literature (vol-1): Ed. Jan Gonda; Otto Harrasowitz 1975

145. A Cultural History of India: Ed. A. L. Basham; OUP 1975 158. Shramana Tradition: G. C. Pande; LDII 1978 159. Zoroaster's time and homeland: Gnoli; Instituto Universitario Orientale 1980

146. History of Indian Literature (vol-1, 2, 3): by Maurice Winternitz; MLBD 1981

147. Vedanga Jyotisha of Lagadha: by Kuppanna Sastri and Sarma; Indian Na- tional Science Academy 1984 162. The kauTiliiya arthashAstra (Part I, II, III): R. P. Kangle; BORI reprint 1986

148. Harappan Civilization: A Recent Perspective :: G. Possehl; American Insti- tute of Indian Studies, Oxford, & IBH 1993 164. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: F. R. Allchin w/ contribu tion from Erdosy et al; CUP 1995 165. The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia: Ed. George Erdosy; De Grutyter 1995

166. History of Indian Philosophy: Frauwallner, Bedekar; MLBD 1997 167. Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley Civilization: Jonathan Mark Kenoyer; OUP 1998 168. Rig Veda, a Historical Analysis: Shrikant. Talgeri; Aditya 2000 169. The Quest For The Origins of Vedic Culture: Edwin Bryant; OUP 2001

167. (a) The Saraswati Flows On (2002); (b) The Homeland of the Aryans (2005) :: B. B. Lal; Aryan Books. 171. Saraswati: The River That Disappeared :: K. S. Valdiya; University Press (India); 2002 172. The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective :: Gregory Possehl; Rowman Altamira 2002 173. (a) Akhenaten, Surya, and Rig Veda; (b) Vedic Elements in the Ancient Iranian Religion of Zarathushtra; (c) Mahabharata & Sindhu-Sarasvati :: Subhash Kaka; www.ece.lsu.edu/kak/; in the files: /akhena, /zoro, and /MahabharataII; 2003. 174. Ancient South Asian World: Kenoyer & Heuston; OUP 2005 175. Indo-Aryan Controversy: Ed. Bryant & Patton; Routledge 2005 176. Greater Magadha: Johannes Bronkhorst; BRILL 2007 177. The Rigveda and The Avesta, The Final Evidence: by Talgeri; Aditya Pra- kashan 2008 178. Ancient Indus Valley: Jane Mcintosh; ABC-CLIO Inc 2008 179. Discovering the Vedas: Frits Stall; Penguin Books 2008 180. Indo-Aryan Origins and Other Vedic Issues: Nicholas Kazanas; Aditya Prakashan 2009

181. Pashupata Sutras with Kaudinya's Commentary: Ed. Ananta- krishna Shas- tri; University of Travancore 1940 182. सौन्दर्यलहरी (श्रीलक्ष्मीधरव्याख्यासमलङ्कृता भावनोपनिषत् श्रीभास्करराजभाष्यसहिता देवीपञ्चस्तवी च): Ed. N. N. Swami Ghanapathi (1896), Rev.S. Narayanaswami Sastry; Mysore ORI 1953 183. (a) Principles of Tantra; (b) shakti and shAkta; (c) The World As Power: Ed. Sir John Woodroffe (Arthur Avalon); Ganesh and Co; (a) 1912, 1952, (b) 1927, 2001, (c) 1957, 2001 184. Tripura Rahasya: Ed. Kaviraj and Khiste; GS College 1933 185. अभिनवगुप्त प्रणीता ईश्वरप्रत्यभिज्ञा विमर्शिनी (भास्करी संवलिता): Doctrine of Divine Recognition as expounded by abhinavagupta (vol. I & II): Ed. Iyer & Pandey; MLBD 1950, 1986 186. Tripura Rahasya: Tr. Sw. Ramananda Saraswati; Raman-ashrama 1956 187. saundaryalaharl: Tr. + notes by Anantakrishna Shastri; Ganesh & Co. 1957 188. Philosophy of Gorakshanath: Kaviraj & A. K. Banerjea; Digvijai Nath Trust 1961 189. Abhinavagupta: K. C. Pandey; Cowkhamba 1963 190. The Doctrine of Recognition: R. K. Kaw; Vishveshwarananda Inst. 1967 191. तांत्रिक साहित्य (विवरणात्मक ग्रंथसूची): पं गोपीनाथ कविराज; भार्गव भूषण १९७२ 192. shiva sUtra-s: text with vimarshinI of xemarAja translated with notes and exposition by Jaideva Singh; MLBD 1979 193. Hindu Tantric & Shakta Literature in Sanskrit: Goudriaan & Sanjukta Gupta; Otto Harassowitz.Wiesbaden 1981 194. pratyabhiGYAhradayam of xemarAja: Tr. & notes by Jaideva Singh; MLBD 1982 195. Kasmir Shaivism: J. C. Chatterji; SUNY Press 1986

संस्कृत 196. अभिनवगुप्तकृत तन्त्रसार: (संस्कृत-हिन्दी रूपांतरण) हेमेन्द्रनाथ चक्रवर्ती; वाराणसेय संस्थान १९८६ 197. saundryalaharl: Tr. + notes by Tapasyananda; Ramakrishna Math, Madras 1987 198. (a) The Doctrine of Vibration; (b) Stanzas on Vibration; (c) Aphorisms of Shiva: Mark Dyczkowski; SUNY 1987-92-92 199. Kashmir Shaivism: Sw. Laxman-ji; SUNY 1988

200. Shiva Sutras: Dr. Jaideva Singh; MLBD 1988 201. parAtrishikA vivaraNa (of Abhinavagupta): Jaideva Singh, Baumer; MLBD 1988

201. The Triadic Heart of Shiva: Kaula Tantricism :: Muller-Ortega; SUNY 1989

202. The Secret of the Three Cities: D. R. Brooks; University of Chicago [UChP] 1990 204. Selected Writings of Gopinath Kaviraj: Indica Books 1990 205. The Yoga of Vibration and Divine Pulsation: Dr Jaideva Singh; MLBD 1992

203. (a) Shakti Sadhana -- Tripura Rahasya; (b) Shakti -- The Power in Tantra; (c) Tantra Unveiled: Pt. Rajamani Tigunait; Himalayan Press 1993-1998- 1999

204. Spanda Karikas: The Divine Creative Pulsation :: by Jaideva Singh; MLBD 1994

205. Kashmir Shaivism: The Central Philosophy of Tantrism :: Kamalakar Mishra; Sri Satguru 1999 209. Laxmi Tantra (Pancharatra Text): Sanjukta Gupta; MLBD 2000 210. उत्पलदेवविरचिता शिवस्तोत्रावली, क्षेमराज विरचित विवृति समेत, लक्ष्मणजी विरचित हिन्दी व्याख्योपेता; ईश्वराश्रम ट्रस्ट २००० 211. Vijnanabhairava: Dr Jaideva Singh; MLBD 2002 212. Yoga of Kashmir Shaivism: Sw. Shankarananda; MLBD 2003 213. A Journey in the World of the Tantras: Mark Dyczkowski; Indica Books 2004 214. श्री: काश्मीर-शैव-दर्शन (हिन्दी): बलजिन्नाथ पण्डित; राष्ट्रिय संस्कृत संस्थान २००५ 215. paramArthasAra of abhinavagupta: SenSharma, Muktibodh 2007

<Non-Dualism: Mahayana & Other Traditions >

216. Dialogues of the Buddha (Part I, II, III): Tr. from Pali Canon by T. W. and C. A. F. Rhys Davids OUP 1899-1921 217. Philosophy, Qabbala and Vedanta: Maurice Fluegel 1902 218. Mahayana Buddhism: D. T. Suzuki; Luzac & Co. 1907 219. Literary History of Sanskrit Buddhism: G. K. Nariman; Taraporevala & Sons 1920 (archive.org) 220. The Central Conception of Buddhism: Th. Stcherbatsky; Asian Educa- tional Services 1923, 2003 221. Studies in the Lankavatara Sutra: D T Suzuki; Munshiram Manoharlal 1930, 1998 222. Japanese Buddhism: by Sir Charles Eliot; Curzon Press, 1935 223. Philosophy of Plotinus: Joseph Katz; Appleton Century 1950 224. 2500 years of Buddhism: Gen. Ed. P. V. Bapat; GOI 1956 225. तांत्रिक बौद्ध साधना और साहित्य: नागेंद्रनाथ उपाध्याय; नागरीप्रचारिणी सभा १९५८ 226. Philosoph of Ibna Arabi: Rom Landay; Gerge Allen 1959 227. Central Philosophy of Buddhism: T. R. V. Murty; Unwin 1960 228. Mohemmedanism An Historical Survey: H. A. R. Gibb; Galaxy Book 1962 (archive) 229. mahAyAna shraddhotpAda shAstra: Y. S. Hakeda; Columbia University Press 1967 230. The Story of Chinese Zen: Nan Huai-Chin; Tuttle Library 1968 231. Buddhism in China: Kenneth Chen; Princeton Univ. 1969 232. Indian Buddhism: A. K. Warder; 1970, 1980, 2000 (MLBD) 233. Whoso Knoweth Himeself ... (from "Risale-t-ul-wujudiyyah" of Ibn Arabi) Beshara Publications 1971 234. Early Buddhism & Bhagavadgita: K. N. Upadhyaya; MLBD 1971 235. Early Buddhism & Its Origins: V P Varma; MMPPL 1971 236. The Sufi Orders in Islam: J. Spencer Trimingham; OUP 1971 237. Mystical Dimensions of Islam: Annemarie Schimmel; University of North Carolina Press 1975 238. The Significance of Neoplatonism: Ed. and Preface by John Anton; SUNY, Albany 1976 239. Indian Islam: Murray Titus; Munshiram Manoharlal 1979 240. A Manual of Buddhist Monism: Tr. & Ed. by E. Obermiller from Tibetan text; E. J. Brill, Lugduni Batavorum 1981

241. Neoplatonism & Indian Thought: Ed. R. B. Harris; Old Dominion Univ; International Society for Neoplatonic Studies 1982 242. Buddhist Insight: Alex Wayman; MLBD 1984 243. Sufi Doctrine of the Perfect Man: R. Nicholson & S. Rahman; Holmes Publishing 1984 244. Causality: The Central Philosophy of Buddhism: by D. J. Kalupahana; UHP 1986

242. Origins of the Kabbala: Gershom Scholem; Trans. by Jewish Publication 1987 246. Indian Buddhism; A Survey with Bibliographical Notes: Hajime Nakamu ra; MLBD 1987 247. The Three Pillars of Zen: Philip Kapleau; Anchor Books 1989 248. The Great Vehicle: Three Mahayana Buddhist Texts :: Ed. Luis Gomez & Jonathan Silk; University of Michigan 1989 249. The Sufi Path of Knowledge: William C. Chittick; SUNY 1989 250. Mahayana Buddhism: Paul Williams; Routledge 1989, 2009 251. The Ontology of the Middle Way: Peter Fenner; Kluwer 1991 252. The Continuity of Madhyamaka and Yogachara in Indian Mahayana Bud- dhism: Ian Charles Harris; E. J. Brill 1991 253. Madhyamika and Yogacara: G. M. Nagao; SUNY 1991 254. Uttara Tantra of Maitreya: Ed. H. S. Prasad with Translation, Introduction and Notes by E. Obermiller; Satguru Publ 1991 255. Neoplatonism and Gnosticism: Ed. Richard Wallis; SUNY1992 256. Fundamental Wisdom of The Middle Way: J. Garfield; OUP 1995 257. Basic Ideas of Yogachara Buddhism: Robert Zim; SUNY1995 258. Master of Wisdom: Christian Lindtner; Dharma Pub. 1997 259. Untying the Knots in Buddhism: Alex Wayman; MLBD 1997 260. History of Sufism in India, vol-I (Early Sufism), vol-II (from 16thC): Dr. S. A. A. Rizvi; Munshilal Manoharlal 1997, 2003 261. Sufis and Anti-Sufies: Elizabeth Sirryeh; Routledge 1998 262. Pudgalavaada Buddhism: Leonard Priestley; Center for South Asian Stud- ies, University of Toronto 1999 263. Sufism: A Short Introduction :: William C. Chittick; OUP 2000 264. Personal Identity and Buddhist Philosophy: Mark Siderits; Ashgate Publ. Co. 2003 265. Gotama Buddha (v1&2): Hajime Nakamura; Kosei 2001-2005 266. Daoism; A Beginner's Guide: James Miller; Oneworld 2003

267. Taoism; The Enduring Tradition: Kirkland; Routledge 2004 268. Neoplatonic Philosophy: Dillon & Gerson; Hackett Publ. 2004 269. The Adornment of the Middle Way: Shantarakshita's Madhyam- alankara :: commented by Jamgom Mipham; Shambhala 2005 270. Kabbalah: The Mystic Quest in Judaism: David Ariel; Rowman & Little field 2006

268. How Buddhism Began: Richard Gombrich; Routledge 2006 272. Paths to Transcendence: Shah-Kazemi; World Wisdom 2006 273. The Naqshbandiyya: Itzchak Weisman; Routledge 2007 274. Neoplatonism: by Pailina Remes; UCP 2008 275. Introduction to Sufi Doctrine: Titus Burckhardt, Foreward W. C. Chittick; World-Wisdom 2008 276. Kabbalah for The Student: Michael Laitman; Kabbalah Pub 2008 277. Buddhist Philosophy: Essential Readings :: Ed. Edelglass & Garfield; OUP 2009 278. One Korean's Approach to Buddhism: S B Park; SUNY 2009 279. Daoism: An Introduction: R Littlejohn; Pub. I. B. Tauris 2009

<Philosophy: of Mind, Moral, and General> 280. An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals: David Hume <WWW. gutenberg.org/ebooks/4320> 1777, 1912, 2010 281. The Critique of Pure Reason (of Imannuel Kant): Tr. by J. M. D. Meikl- ejohn; Blackmaskonline (2000) 1781 282. The Critique of Practical Reason (of Imannuel Kant): Tr. By J. M. D. Meiklejohn; Blackmaskonline (2000) 1788 283. The Data of Ethics: Herbert Spencer (1879) (www.archive.org) 284. Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Ethics (of Kant) tr. from German original by T. K. Abbott; Longmans 1934 285. History of Western Philosophy: Bertrand Russell; Routledge 2004, 1945 (original) 286. The Theory of Justice: John Rawls; HUP; 1971, 1999 287. Anarchy, State and Utopia: Robert Nozick; Basic Books 1974 288. Studies in the Philosophy of Biology: Ed. Ayala & Dobzhansky; UCP 1974 289. Emperor's New Mind: Roger Penrose; Vintage 1990 290. Philosophy of Science: Ed. Boyd, Gasper & Trout; MIT 1991 291. The Blind Watchmaker: Richard Dawkins; W. W. Norton 1996 292. The Conscious Mind by David Chalmers; OUP 1996 293. The Mystery of Consciousness: John Searle; NYREV 1997 294. The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and the Measurement Process: Peter Mittelstaedt; CUP 1998 295. Rocks of Ages: Stephen Jay Gould; Ballentine Books 1999 296. Towards a Science of Consciousness II and III (2-volumes): Ed. Hameroff, S. R. et al; MIT Press 1998, 1999 297. Information Theory & Quantum Physics: Green; Springer 2000 298. Sovereign Virtue: Ronald Dworkin; HUP 2002 299. Intensive Science and Virtual Philosophy: Manual Delanda; Continuum 2002 300. Consciousness and Language: John Searle; CUP 2002 301. Causality, Emergence, Self-organization: Ed. Arshinov & Fuchs;results of INTAS Project @ www.self-organization.org 2003 302. Living Philosophy: Ray Bellington; Routledge 2003 303. Neural Basis of Consciousness: Ed. Naoyuki Osaka; John Benjamins Pub 2003

304. Philosophy of Mind: John Heil; OUP 2004 305. Evolution: Mark Ridley; Blackwell 2004 306. Evolution: Douglas Futuyma; Sinauer Associates 2005 307. Mind: Paul Thagard; MIT Press 2006 308. The God Delusion: Richard Dawkins; Black Swan 2006 309. The Emerging Physics of Consciousness: Ed. Jack Tuszynski; Springer 2006 310. The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness; Ed. Velmans & Schneider 2007 311. General Philosophy of Science: Kuipers et al; N-H 2007 312. Cognition, Brain, & Consciousness: Baars & Cage; AP 2007 313. Entangled Systems: Jurgen Audretsch; Wiley-VCH 2007 314. The Case for Qualia: Ed. Edmond Wright; MIT Press 2008 315. Difference and Givenness: Levi Bryant; N-W Univ Press 2008 316. World As Active Power: Ed. Pietarinen & Viljanen; BRILL 2009 317. Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals: Critical Guide :: Ed. Jens Timmermann; CUP 2009 318. Process Approaches to Consciousness: Ed. Weber & Weekes; SUNY 2009 319. The Idea of Justice: Amartya Sen; HUP 2009 320. Philosophies of the Sciences: A Guide :: Ed. Fritz Allhoff; Wiley- Blackwell 2010 321. Cycles of Time: Roger Penrose; The Bodley Head 2010 322. The Character of Consciousness: David Chalmers; OUP 2010

<Mathematical Platonism / Mathematical Logic>

323. Introduction to Metamathematics: S. C. Kleene; N-H 1952 324. Set Theory: Intro. to Independence Proofs :: Kunen; N-H 1980 325. Godel's Incompleteness Theorems: R. M. Smullyan; OUP1992 326. Computability, Complexity & Languages: Davis et al; AP 1994 327. Set Theory, Logic & Their Limitations: Machover; CUP 1996 328. (a) The Limits of Mathematics; (b) The Unknowable; (c) Exploring Ran- domness: G. J. Chaitin; Springer 1997-1999-2001

324. Elementary Set Theory with a Universal Set: M. Randall Holmes; Cash- iers d Centre 1998 (on-line version available) 330. Platonism & Anti-platonism in Mathematics: Balaguer; OUP 2001 331. Computability & Complexity: Neil Jones; MIT press 1997 332. The Higher Infinite: Akihiro Kanamori; Springer 2003 333. Inexhaustibility: Torkel Franzen; ASL 2004 334. Philosophy of Mathematics & Logic: Ed. Shapiro; OUP 2005 335. Godel's Theorem: An Incomplete Guide to Its Use and Abuse :: by Torkel Franzen; Pub. A. K. Peters 2005 336. Philosophical Perspectives on Infinity: Graham Oopy; CUP 2006 337. Set Theory: Thomas Jech; Springer 2006 338. Introduction to Godel's Theorems: Peter Smith; CUP 2007 339. Computability and Logic: Boolos, Burgess, Jeffrey; CUP 2007 340. Thinking About Godel & Turing: Gregory Chaitin, Fwd by Paul Da vis; World Scientific 2007 341. Logic in Reality by Joseph Brenner; Springer 2008 342. Introduction to Non-classical Logic: Graham Priest; CUP 2008 343. Philosophy of Mathematics: Ed. Andrew Irvine; Elsevier 2009 344. Algorithmic Randomness: Downey & Hirschfeldt; Springer 2010 345. Roads to Infinity: John Stillwell; A. K. Peters 2010

8.4 Classical Advaita-Vedanta Literature[582]

no Author circa Work AD

1 gaudApAdAchArya 500 mANDUkya-kArikA, shrI vidyA-sUtra

2 maNDana mishra 690 brahmasiddhi; vibhramaviveka

3 sha.nkara 710 BSBh, BGBh, dashopaniShad bhagavatpAda bhAShya-s, US, Attributed: advaitAnubhUti, aparoxAnubhUti, Atmabodha, bAlabodhini, daxinamUrtistotra, dashashlokI, hastamAlakIya-Bh, tattvabodha, pa.nchIkaraNa, manISha- pa.nchaka, yati-pa.nchaka, sarva- siddhAnta-sAra-sa.ngraha, SUBh, dRRik-dRRiShya-viveka, vAkyavRRitti, vivekachUDAmaNi.

4 sureshvara 740 BUBhV, TUBhV, NS

5 padmapAda 740 pa.nchapAdikA [PP] (on preamble + 1.1.1-4 of BSBh)

6 GYAnaghana 900 tattva shuddhi

7 vimuktAtman 950 IShTasiddhi [IS]

8 vAchaspati mishra 960 bhAmatI [BH] (on BSBh), tattva- parIxA (on brahmasiddhi)

9 prakAshAtman 975 pa.nchapAdikA-vivaraNa [PPV] (on PP), shArIraka nyAya sa.ngraha (on BSBh), shabda-nirNaya 10 GYAnottama mishra 980 chandrikA (on NS)

11 sarvaGYAtmamuni 1027 sa.nxepashArIraka [SS], pramANalaxaNA, pa.nchaprakrlyA 12 shrIharSha 1140 khaNDana-khaNDa-khAdya [KKK] 13 Anandabodha 1150 nyAya makaranda [NM], bhattAraka nyAyaratnadIpAvali [ND], pramANamAlA [PM] 14 bodhanidhi 1150 kaivalyadIpikA [KD], commentary on US (metrical part) 15 vedottama bhattAraka 1150 advaitasAdhanA, bRRihatvAkyavRRitti 16 ga.ngAdhara 1167 advaitashataka

17 AnandAnubhava 1190 IS-vivaraNa, nyAyaratnadIpAvalii, padArthatattvanirNaya [PTN], tarkadIpikA, vedAntacha.ndra 18 GYAnottama 1190 vidyAshrI on BSBh bhattAraka

19 lamalAnanda 1255 vedAntakalpataru [VK] (on bhAmatI) 20 GYAnottama- 1265 GYAna-siddhi, nyAya-sudhA, IS- gauDeshvara vyAkhyA 21 anubhUtisvarUpAchAryd 270 NM-sa.ngraha, ND-chandrikA, PM- nibandha, IS-vivaraNa, prakaTArtha vivaraNa (on BSBh)

22 GYAneshvara 1290 AmRRitAnubhava, bhAvArthadIpikA (in Marathi) 23 ga.ngApUra 1290 tatparyadIpikA (on PTN) bhattAraka

24 |sha.nkarAnanda 1290 gItAtAtparyabodhini, upaniShadratna, dIpikA-s on: (10-1) UP + GK + some 17 other UP incl. SU, Kau + BS.

25 durgAprasAda yati 1290 advaitaprakAsha, sudhA on KD 26 chitsukha 1295 tattvapradIpikA [TP], bhAva prakAshikA (on BSBh), NM-vyAkhyA, bhAvadIpikA (on KKK), tAtparyadIpikA (on PPV). 27 AnandaGYAna 1300 vedAnta-tarka-saMgraha [TS], (Ananda girii or tattvaloka [TL], notes on: BSBh, janArdana) BGBh, (10-2) UPBh, CU, GKBh, BUBhV, TUBhV, US, AB, PTN dashaslokI, shatashlokI, panchIkaraNa etc.

28 allAla sUri 1300 bhAmatI-tilaka

29 advayAraNya 1300 tarkavyAkhyA 30 advayagirl 1300 viGYAnachandrikA

31 akhaNDAnanda 1320 tattvadIpana (on PPV) 32 sukhaprakAsha 1325 adhikaraNaratnamAlA, tIkA- NDvyAkhyA, vivechanI-NM, 33 amRRitAnanda 1330 nyAyaviveka (on ND) 34 praGYAnanda 1330 tattvaprakAshikA (on TL)

35 rAmAdvaya 1340 VedAntakaumudI, vedAntakaumudIvyAkhyAna 36 anandapUrNa 1350 nyAyachandrikA, vidyAsAgarl (on vidyAsAgara KKK), PPV-tIkA 37 paramAnandatIrtha 1350 brahmavidyAsudhArNava, khaNDana- maNDana (on KKK) 38 vidyAraNya (mAdhava 1350 pa.nchadashI, vivaraNa prameya or bhAratI tIrtha) sa.ngraha [VPS], jIvanmukti-viveka, sarvadarshanasa.ngraha, vArtika-sAra 39 rAmakRRiShNa 1375 advaitaviveka, tAtparyaprabodhini 40 nRRisiMha bhAratI 1380 vivekamukura, advaitaparishkAra 41 laxmIdhara 1440 advaitamakaranda [AM] 42 mallanArAdhya 1490 advaitaratna

43 vasudeva sArvabhouma 1490 satchidAnandAnubhava pradIpikA, AM-tIkA 44 jagannAtha sarasvatI 1500 advaitAmRRita, tarangini, siddhAntarahasya 45 sadAnanda yogindra 1500 vedAntasAra, bhAvaprakAshikA (on BG), tAtparya-prakAsha (on BS), vedantasiddhAntasArasa.ngraha 46 vishvadeva 1500 siddhAnta-dIpa (on SS), vArtika on BSBh

47 balabhadra 1505 advaitachintAmaNi

48 prakAshAnanda 1505 vedAntasiddhAntamuktAvalii [VSM] 49 rangarAja dIxita 1505 advaitavidyAmukura 50 girvanendra sarasvatI 1530 prapa. nchasArasa. ngraha Atmabodha 51 (dhIra) godAvara 1535 advaitadarpaNa mishra

52 brammAnanda tIrtha 1550 advaitasa.ngraha (on BSBh) 53 nRRisiMha sarasvatI 1550 vedAntaDiNDima

54 nRRisiMhAshrama 1555 advaitadIpikA [AD], tattvabodhini (on SS), tattvaviveka, vivaraNa- prakAshikA (on PPV), bheda- dhikkAra [BD] 55 bodhendrayatI 1560 advaitabhUshaNa [ABH] (sa.nnyAsin)

56 devendra sarasvatl 1560 svAnubhUtiprakAshikA

57 madhus Udana 1570 advaitasiddhi [AS], siddhAntabindu, sarasvatI VedantakalpalatikA, gUdhArthadIpikA [GD] (on BG), SS-sArasa.ngraha etc. 58 viGYAnabhixu 1575 upadesharatnamAlA, viGYAnAmRRita, Aloka on MU-PU

59 AtmasvarUpa 1585 prabodhanaparishodhini (on PP) 60 appaya dIxita 1585 advaitanirNaya, tattvamuktAvalii, nyAyaraxAmaNi on BS, vedAnta- kalpataru-parimala on VK-BH, siddhAntalesha-sa.ngraha [SLS], vedAnta-ratnakosha on PPV

61 bhAskara dIxita 1585 AtmatattvaparIxA, kaustubhadUshaNa

62 brahmendra sarasvatI 1590 advaitAmRRita, vedAntaparibhAshA

63 nAnA dIxita 1590 siddhAntadIpa (on VSM) 64 rAmAshrama 1590 vRRitti on BS, tattva chandrikA

65 bhattoji dIxita 1590 tattva-kaustubha, advaita-kaustubha

66 nArAyanAshrama 1595 tattva-viveka-dIpana, BD-satkriyA, AD-vivaraNa

67 yaGYeshvara dIxita 1600 ujjIvini (on PPV), advaitachandrikA (on SLS) 68 puruShottama 1600 sAdhaka (on AS), subodhinI (on SS) sarasvatI

69 ratnakheta srInivAsa 1605 advaitakaustubha, vedAntavAdAvalii dIxita

70 dAsopanta 1606 advaitashrutisAra, upaniShadarthaprakAsha 71 ra.ngoji bhatta (dIxita) |1610 advaita-chintAmaNi, advaita-shAstra- sAroddhAra

72 rAmatIrtha 1610 anvayArtha-prakAshikA (on SS), padayojanikA (on US) 73 balabhadra 1610 vyAkhyA on AS 74 kumArabhAva svAmin 1610 advaitachintAmaNi

75 svayaMprakAshAnanda 1610 vedAnta-nyAya-bhUShaNa (on BS) 76 dharmarAjAdhvarIndra 1615 vedAntaparibhAShA [VP], padayojana (on PP)

77 raghavAnanda 1620 tattvArthachandrikA (on BG), sarasvatI vidyAmRRitavarshini (on SS) 78 gopAlAnandAshrama 1620 brahmatattvasubodhini

79 samarapungavada 1620 advaitavidyAtilaka dIxita

80 maheshvarAnanda 1630 AtmAnAtmavivechana, saras. GYAnopadeshasAra 81 govindAnanda 1640 ratnaprabhA [RP] (on BSBh) sarasvatI

82 vidyendra sarasvatI 1640 vedAntatattvasAra

83 mukunda muni 1640 advaitaGYAnasarvasva, Atmabodha, tattvabodha

84 syayaMprakAsha muni 1640 AtmAnAtmA viveka, rasAbhivyajika (on AM), dvaita-khaNDana, vedAntasa.ngraha, guNatrayaviveka 85 ananta bhatta 1641 advaitachandrikA, advaitaratnAkara 86 mahAdev sarasvatl 1645 tAtparyadIpikA, advaitachintAkaustubha 87 brahmAnanda 1645 nyAyaratnAvali on dashashlokI sarasvatI

88 kRRiShNabhatta 1650 advaitasAra, (shAstrIya) prashna hoshinga (siddhanta) mAlA 89 rAmAnanda tIrtha 1650 advaitanirNayasa.ngraha, adhyAtmabindu, advaitarahasya 90 ramakRRiShNAdhvarin 1650 shikhAmaNi (on VP), VS-tIkA 91 sadAnanda 1650 advaitabrahmasiddhi kAshmIraka

92 raghunAtha 1661 siddhAntarNava, bhUShamaNi bhattAchArya 93 laxmaNa paNDita 1663 advaitasudhA 94 kRshNAnanda 1665 siddhAntasiddhA.njana [SA], sarasvatI mAnassaMbodhana 95 akhaNDAnanda 1670 RRijuprakAshikA (on BH), sarasvatl bhAvaprakAshikA 96 ramAnanda sarasvatl 1670 vedAntasiddhAntachandrikA [VSC], vivaraNopanyAsa 97 bAlakRRiShNAnanda 1670 nyAyamoda, On (AUBh, CU, IU, KU, sarasvatI KEU, PU + BSBh) 98 (achuta) 1670 bhAvadIpikA (on BH), kRRiShNAnanda adhikaraNAnukramaNikA (on BS) 99 kaivalyAnanda tIrtha 1680 praNavArthaprakAshikA

100 laxmiinRRisiMhan 1680 Abhoga (on VK-BH), jijnAsadhikaraNa 101 shivendra sarasvatI 1690 svarUpasamAdhAna, dahara vidyA prakAshikA 102 nandarAma 1690 AtmatattvaprakAshikA tarkavAgIsha 103 gopAlendra sarasvatI 1690 shrtui-sa.ngrahita-vedAnta 104 tippa dIxita 1693 bhedadhikkAropanyAsa 105 prakAshAnanda 1695 adhiShThAna viveka, pUrNAdi (on sarasvatI RP) 106 gauDa brahmAnanda 1700 guruchandrikA and sarasvatl gauDabrahmAnandI (on AS), muktAvalii (on BS), nyAyaratnAvalii (on siddhAntabindu) 107 vAsudevashrama 1700 yatidharnmaprakAsha 108 bhAskara rAya dIxita 1710 ratnatUlikA (on SA), on (10 UP + GK)

109 vAsudevendra yogin 1710 AnandadIpikA (on ABH), Atmabodha, tattvabodha, aparoxAnubhava, AtmAnAtmAviveka, vedAntaprakaraNa 110 nArAyaNa sarasvatI 1710 advaitasudhA, dIpikA-s on about 35 minor UP, and tIka-s on BUBh, CUBh, KUBh, KeUBh; vArtika on BSBh

111 shankukavI 1710 kaivalyadIpikA and prabhA, (kRRiShNa) dRshyonmarjanikaprakaraNa 112 sadAshiva brahmendra 1720 AtmavidyAvilAsa, advaitarasamanjarI, advaitaratnAvalii 113 ekojIrAjA 1735 parabrahmanirupaNa 114 shAshvatAnanda tIrtha 1740 bhAvArthaprakAshikA, brahmAnandavilAsa 115 ramachandrendra 1740 Commentaries on all 108 UP of sarasvatI muktika upaniShad. 116 narasiMha munI 1750 advaitapa.ncharatna, tattvavivechana (on BD) 117 ga.ngAdharendra 1755 sAmrAjyasiddhi and sarasvatI kaivalyakalpadrum (on VSC)

118 advaitAnanda tIrtha 1762 adhyAtmachandrikA, tAtparyadIpikA (on BSBh) 119 abhinava brahmendra 1770 advaitAnusandhAna, aparoxAnubhavadarpaNa 120 sadAnanda vyAsa 1780 siddhAntasAra (on AS), pratyaktattvachintAmaNi 121 rAma nArAyaNa 1780 Anumiti-nirupaNa, tattvabodha, tIkA on PD

122 GYAnAmRRita or 1800 vidyAsurabhi on NS; On CU, IU, GYAnAnanda AUBh, TUBh 123 keshavAnanda yatl 1800 anubhavAnanda laharI, tIkA on ratnaprabhA 124 (vellinki) 1800 uttaramImAMsAsArArthasudhA, sItArAmashAstrin vedAntasArachintAmaNi

125 AnandAshrama 1810 AnandarasasAgara, vishveshvarI sannyAsapaddhatI 126 tryaMbaka (bhatta) 1825 advaitavAkyArtha, shAstrI advaitasiddhantavaijayantI, tIkA-US 127 AchArya rAya modaka 1825 advaitAmRRitamanjari and vyAkhyA, Advaita nirNaya 128 pANDura.nga 1827 advaitajalajatA in collaboration with acutarAya modaka 129 dayAsha.nkara 1830 AtmaGYAnarahasya, subodhini on VS 130 amareshvara shAstrI 1850 advaitaratnaprakAsha, biMba dRRiShTi vicAra, AtmatIrtha 131 achutashrama bhixu 1855 svaprakAshatvadIpikA 132 bAlashAstrI garde 1860 AtmAnubhava 133 somanAtha vyAsa 1869 advaitapadyabhAshya, advaitaprakAshikA 134 govindAnanda 1885 advaitabrhamasudhAkArikA sarasvatI 135 (bellan koNDA) rAma 1889 vimarsha (on BSBh), arthaprakAshikA (rAya) kavI (on BGBh), moxa-prasAda, advaitanavanIta, advaitAnubhava, advaitavijaya, siddhAnta-sindhu, advaitAmRRita, vedAntadinakara, etc 136 harihara 1890 anubhava-vilAsa paramahaMsa

137 brahmAnanda tIrtha 1892 advaitamArtaNDa, tArkikamohaprakAsha 138 sundaramUrti 1893 advaitasAra 139 govindaparivrAjaka 1899 advaitAnubhava

140 amardAsa 1900 maNiprabhA (on shikhA-maNi), advaitaratnAkara 141 hemachandra 1901 advaita-siddhAnta 142 vAsudeva brahmendra 1902 vichAra sa.ngraha, tAtparya sa.ngraha 143 AtmAnanda sarasvatI 1910 vedAntashAstramakaranda 144 rAma subramaNya 1927 anantAryavAda, tAtparyasa.ngraha (on BSBh) 145 vasudeva abhyankara 1929 advaitAmoda 146 hariharAnanda 1935 advaitabodhadIpikA, samanvaya sarasvatI sAmrAjya samarthana 147 P. subramaNya 1938 vivaraNa (on BH), ratnamAlA (on shAstrin BSBh) 148 N. S. anantakRRiShNa 1946 advaitamArtaNDa, shAstrI advaitatattvasudhA, pradIpa (on BSBh), vedAntaraxAmaNi, shArIrakanyAyasa.ngrahadIpikA, advaitadIpa, chaturgranthI (on AS), prakAshikA (on VP) 149 chandrashekhara 1954 vivekachUDAmaNi bhAshhya bhAratI

150 sachchidAnandendra 1959 mUlAvidyAnirAsa, vedAnta prakriyA sarasvatI (Y. pratyabhiGYA, artha-tattvavivechanI subramaNya sharman) (on BSBh), gItAshAstraviveka, vishuddhivedAnta-sAra, shuddhasha.nkaraprakriyAbhAskara, 151 yogindrAnanda 1960 vyAkhyA-s on BSBh, AS; commentary sarasvatI on GD.

152 jayama. ngalAchArya 1967 vedAntasiddhAntakusumA.njalii, or vedAntamaNDana-maNDala, kAshikAnanda svAml vedAntasiddhAntapiyuShabindu 153 svAmi chinmayAnanda 1967 Commentary on BGBh 154 yogendranAtha bAgchi 1971 balabodhini on AS 155 kevalAnanda sarasvatI 1976 advaitasiddhyaviShkAra 156 N. subramanya shAstrI 1976 Notes on Anandagiri's US-tikA, & pan. chIkaraNavivaraNa

157 ve.nkaTanAtha 1982 bhAvaprakAsha on VC

158 abhedAnanda 1994 advaita-tattva-mImAMsA

Index

A

a.ngirasa · 14, 150, 151 AA · 131, 142, 308, 339 AB · 340 Abdali, Ahmad Shah · 285, 290, 373 Abdul al-Quadir · 263, 283, 373 AbhAsa · 71, 102, 107, 108, 112, 113, 116, 117, 224, 234, 236, 237, 254, 271,331 abhAva · 15, 81 abhaya · 319 abhayatva · 335 abhinavagupta · 229, 235, 236, 255, 259, 351, 355, 356 Abhoga . 271, 370 Abul Fayz Zun Nun · 250 Action Text . 34 adhvaryu . 3 adhyAropa-apavAda · 30, 39, 85, 86, 88, 102, 274, 343 adhyAsa · 30, 33, 80, 82, 84, 95, 96, 104, 109, 122, 126, 128, 225, 307, 328, 330, 331 adhyAtma-paTala · 20 aditi · 20, 21, 36, 147 Aditya · 20, 64, 147, 354 adjunct · 36, 101, 107, 108, 114, 118, 121, 124, 132, 305, 332 adRRiShTa . 136, 239 advaita-brahmasiddhi · 271 advaitAnubhUti · 225, 364 advaita-siddhi · 270, 340 Agama · 10, 14, 15, 25, 32, 210, 221, 228, 229, 236, 238, 247, 255, 256,333 agastya · 150, 151, 157 agni · 12, 32, 147, 168, 220, 245 agrahaNa · 82 agreement-contrariety · 39 aGYAna · 2, 105, 122, 127, 218, 254 aGYeyavAda · 33, 186 ahaM . 120, 241 ahaMbhAsana . 241 ahetuvAda . 186 ahiMsA · 140, 141, 293 Ahmad al-Ghazali, al-Rifa'i · 264, 266, 289, 290, 373 AI, weak . 302, 345

aikabhavika · 223 aiLa · 152 AIT . 159, 167 aitareya AraNyaka, brAhmaNa, shAkhA · x, 6, 9, 12, 19, 23, 61, 146, 148, 157,182 ajahat-laxaNA · 39, 90, 91 ajara · 319 ajAtashatru · 182, 184 ajAta-vAda · 219, 260, 286, 318, 323 ajAti-vAda · 76, 94, 330 AjIvaka · 33, 159, 186, 319 AjIvikA . 187 akAryakAraNa · 93, 111 AkAsha ghaTa-, mahA-, of tantra · 54, 88, 184, 219, 240 Akbar · 264, 266, 268, 270, 276, 289 akhADA jUnA-, nira.njanI, mahAnirvANI, aTala, AvAhana, Ananda, agni · 245, 246 akhaNDAnanda -sarasvatI · 254, 271, 350, 366, 369 akhaNDArtha · 39, 90 akhyAti · 81 akriya · 71, 117 al Dhat . 267 al Haq · 267 Alans . 153, 162 Alaya-viGYAna . 213, 215 Ali · 262, 263, 290 al-Ilahiyyah . 267 Alwars . 211, 247 amalAnanda . 120, 121, 253, 254, 271, 365 amara . 319 amatam . 40 amRRita . 102, 319 amRRitabindu . 25, 76, 220 amRRitAnubhava · 259, 260 AMT . 159, 163, 167, 171 anahaMbhAva . 239 Ananda · 16, 55, 74, 78, 85, 97, 98, 210, 230, 234, 245, 268, 272, 278, 279, 280, 328, 332, 336, 366 Anandabodha · 88, 253, 365 Anandagiri · 245, 253, 372

AnandaGYAna · 69, 253, 343, 366 AnandapUrNa . 254 anAtmA . 117, 192, 199, 240, 318 ANavopAya · 228, 232 Andhra . 157 anekAntavAda . 311 Angkor · 248, 261 anirvachanIya · 81, 95, 99, 103, 105, 110, 122, 123, 130, 239, 253, 329 antaHkaraNa · 71, 90, 97, 112, 121, 254, 303, 334 anu . 152, 153, 162, 165, 221 aNubhAShya . 278 anubhava · 254, 297, 371 anubhUti . 15,74 anubhUtisvarUpAchArya . 253, 351, 365 anukramaNi . 149 anumAna . 14, 256, 333 anupalabdhi · 14, 15 anupAya . 232, 233 anusandhAna . 237 aNuvAda . 186 anvaya-vyatireka · 39, 88, 91, 93 anyathA-khyAti . 81 ApaH . 147 apAM napAt . 147 aparigraha · 140 aparoxa · 14, 15, 16, 131, 333, 334 aparoxAnubhUti · 225, 339, 364 ApastaMba · 10, 11, 12, 14, 183 Apaya · 154 Apohana-shakti · 231 apophatic . 297 Appar . 211, 247 appaya dIxita · 120, 254, 256, 270, 340, 368 Apri, sUkta · 147, 150 apUrva . 136, 137 AraMbha . 77, 238 AraNyaka · 4, 5, 9, 12, 21, 146, 169, 186, 236, 257, 344 Arjan Dev · 275, 282 arNa . 163 Arrian · 159 ArSheya brA .. Up. · 7, 8, 21, 25 artha · 91, 184, 224, 260, 287, 329, 372

arthApatti · 14, 135, 333 arthashAstra · 8, 158, 184, 222, 353 arundhatI-nyAya . 38, 274 Arya Samaj · 292 Aryabhata · 12, 13, 170, 211 Aryaman . 147 Aryasatya · 187, 188, 189, 193, 319 asa.nga · 212, 213, 214, 318 asaMbhUti · 65 asat-khyAti · 81 Asava . 189 Ashmaka . 185 Ashmarathya . 184 Ashoka . 194, 211, 261 Ashrama · 52, 143, 156, 220, 245, 337, 339, 343, 345, 350 aShTA.nga yoga, mArga · 139, 188, 193 aShTAdhyAyI . 18, 183, 184, 257, 347 ashvaghoSha · 196, 214, 318 AshvalAyana · 6, 10, 11, 183 ashvin . 147 asteya · 140 astronomy · 12, 211 atharva-veda . x, 3, 21 atheism . 174 Atmabodha · 340, 364, 367, 369, 370 Atman · 1 Atman= brahman · 1, 43, 47, 52, 72, 78, 90, 92, 93, 101, 111, 126, 182, 187, 200, 208, 209, 225, 231, 255, 273, 281, 293, 294, 296, 315, 317, 318, 321, 326, 330, 332 atmospheric dities . 147 Atreya . 184 atri · 14, 147, 150, 151, 169 attribution-retraction · 30 auDulomi . 184 aulUkya · 230 Aurangzeb · 287, 289 Aurobindo · 254, 323, 344, 350 avachCheda-vAda · 107, 108, 121, 128, 339 AvaraNa-shakti · 95, 104, 111, 119, 125 avatAra · 133 Avesta · 153, 154, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 354 avidyA · 2, 17, 21, 57, 65, 80, 82, 95, 98, 103, 107, 108, 120, 122, 125, 127, 128, 130, 189, 190, 226, 227, 229, 239, 240, 241, 242,

253, 280, 329 aviGYAtam · 40 avijjA · 190 avyAkRRita · 76, 95, 98, 99, 103, 109, 188, 225 avyakta · 29, 67, 76, 77, 93, 94, 95, 97, 98, 99, 101, 109, 110, 129, 225, 235, 237, 239, 240, 243, 330 axapAda . 230 axara · 96, 279, 281 Ayurveda · 8

B

Babur · 270 Bactrian · 194 bAdarAyaNa · 32, 184, 194 badarInAtha . 245 bAdha · 75 Bahauddin Zakariya · 264 bAhyAvabhAsa . 237 Bajirao Balaji · 284, 287 bAlAki gArgya . 184 Baluchis . 153 bAShkala · 6, 23, 146 bAShkalamantra · 21 baudhAyana-sUtra . 10, 11, 12, 183 Bayazid Bastami · 252 Becoming . 205 BGR · 28, 29, 32, 42, 292, 294, 295, 345 bhaga · 147 bhagavadgItA · x, 1, 14, 27, 32, 257, 337 bhAgavata · 28, 32, 162, 255, 257, 258, 260, 284, 293 bhakti · xii, 18, 141, 142, 143, 144, 211, 247, 248, 252, 255, 257, 259, 260, 261, 268, 272, 275, 281, 282, 286, 324, 346 bhAmatI . xi, 15, 73, 107, 108, 117, 118, 119, 120, 123, 125, 128, 129, 224, 225, 226, 254, 271, 348, 349, 351, 365, 366 bhAradvAja · 10, 11, 150, 182 bharata · 150, 151, 152, 162 bhAratI · 147, 229, 245, 366, 372 bhartRRiharI . 324, 349 bhartRRiprapa.ncha . 273 bhatta, kumArila · 81, 82, 136, 229, 368, 369, 371 bhavachakra · 66, 189, 192 bhAvadIpikA . 271, 366, 369 bhAvarUpa-avidyA · 83, 103, 128, 129 bheda · 1, 209, 367

bhedAbheda . 223, 231, 255, 273, 278 bhixu-sUtra . 32 bhoktRRi . 74 bhRRigu . 150, 151, 153, 162 bhUta-yaGYa . 140 biMba · 108, 124, 371 BMAC . 156, 161, 164, 171, 172 BMI · 101, 102, 297, 302, 304, 305, 308, 316 Bodhanand Mahasthavir . 320 bodhanidhi · 69, 343, 365 bodhAyana · 209 bodhisattva · 199 Boghaz Kuei . 163, 172 brahma · 3, 4, 17, 19, 21, 24, 29, 32, 55, 59, 66, 67, 72, 113, 116, 119, 125, 126, 132, 134, 140, 143, 190, 210, 220, 224, 236, 252, 333,340 brahmachakra · 66 brahmacharya . 140 brahmadatta · 209, 210 brahmaGYAna · 1 brahman · 1 Brahmana · 4, 25, 84, 133, 184, 185, 190, 194, 196, 223, 226, 247, 318, 344 brahmAnandin · 209 brAhmaNaspati · 20 brahmasiddhi · 72, 94, 103, 117, 123, 224, 364, 365 brahmasUtra · x, 1, 337, 349 Brenner, Joseph . 311, 362 Bronkhorst, Johannes · 157, 159, 173, 184, 186, 187, 350, 351, 354 bRRihadAraNyakaUp. · 24, 47 bRRihaspati . 14, 142, 147 bRRihatsaMhitA . 12, 13 buddhabhUmi . 213, 215 buddhi . 68, 69, 73, 108, 110, 112, 121, 124, 334

C

C4, metaphysical criteria · 40, 41, 75, 101, 311 Cantor, George · 301 celestial deities · 147, 250 Cemetery-H . 317 ChAgaleya · 21, 24, 25 chaitanya · 70, 99, 112, 113, 126, 219, 224, 237, 238, 240, 241, 242, 254, 255, 261, 275, 280 Chandas · 4, 9, 12, 184

ChAndogya Up. · 7, 24 charaNa . 5 chArvAka · 33, 230 charyA . 221, 231 ChAyA . 112 chAyamAna . 153, 165 Chedis . 194 Cheras . 194 chidAbhAsa . 71, 107, 112, 117 chidvilAsavAda · 260 Chishti . 264, 268, 283 Chishtiyah . 264 chit · 16, 55, 71, 74, 78, 85, 97, 116, 219, 230, 234, 237, 239, 241, 242, 243, 268, 278, 280, 328, 336 chitraratha . 163 chitsukha . 88, 253, 342, 366 chittamAtra · 204, 213 chitti . 243 chodanA-tantra · 71 Chola . 247, 261 Church, Alonzo . 301 completeness · 3, 33, 40, 78 Conformal Cyclic Cosmology . 313 conservation, of Being · 28, 76, 94 constancy · 40, 69, 75, 88, 94, 208, 286 continuity-discontinuity · 17 cow-protection · 168 C-R, model of consciousness · 327 creativity through conflict . 320, 321 criteria exegetica, metaphysical · 35, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 69, 75, 78, 88, 94, 101, 225, 311 CWC . 307, 308, 316

D

Dainichi · 325 daiva-yaGYa · 140 dama · 3, 335 dAna · 199, 224 dAnta · 16 Daoism · 325, 359 Dara Shikoh · 22, 276 Darwinian Evolution · 304, 314, 346

Dasbodh · 286, 287 dashanAmI · 245 dAsharAGYa . 162, 163, 165 dattAtreya · 221, 237 Dawkins · 316, 360, 361 daxiNA · 147, 224 daxiNAmUrti . 225, 236 Dayananda Saraswati · 292 DDV . 339 delimitation · 108, 112, 118, 128, 267, 271, 273, 331 devApi · 170, 178 dharma · 9, 11, 14, 78, 105, 141, 143, 190, 192, 195, 213, 224, 255, 257, 260, 284, 287, 293, 319 dharmakAya · 193, 199, 200, 201, 213, 214 dharmakIrti . 213, 214 dharmapAla · 213, 214 dharmarAjAdhvarIndra · 226, 270, 368 Dholavira . 154, 175, 176 dhyAna · 140, 144, 188, 223, 232 dignAga · 213, 214, 216 discrimination · 2, 40, 83, 121, 286, 292, 295, 296, 314, 315, 320 divodAsa · 152 dravida · 159, 209, 210 dream · 62, 64, 71, 76, 98, 99, 117, 218, 305, 331 dRRishadvatI . 154 dRRiShTi-sRRiShTi-vAda . 72, 94, 125, 219, 220, 224, 235, 271, 286 druhyu . 152, 153, 162, 165 Duperron, Anquetil . 276 durgA · 221, 236 dvaita · 3, 81, 255, 256, 257, 274, 342, 369 dvaitAdvaita · 255, 342 dvArakA · 158, 245 dvAyA · 170 Dworkin, Ronald · 326, 360 Dzogchen · 325

E

E6, exegetical criteria · 40, 41 East India Company . 285 Eccles, John · 300, 346 ego · 70, 72, 73, 74, 96, 97, 105, 111, 112, 113, 115, 122, 128, 130, 131, 188, 189, 213, 215, 219, 231, 239, 240, 280, 295, 305, 308, 315 Einstein . 306, 310

ekadeshika · 240 ekadhA . 50 ekAgryam · 140 ekajlva · 72, 125, 235, 256, 271, 286 ekAntin · 257 Elst, Koenraad . 159, 160, 161, 163 epics · 15, 27, 32, 166, 211 Erdosy . 173, 354 Excluded Middle . 311

F

fana · 252, 268 Farid al-Din Ganj · 264 fatalism · 33 fiqh · 249, 251 Fourth · 42, 47, 62, 332 Freedom · 238, 239, 240, 242 free-will . 137, 235 Friedmann · 313, 345

G

ga.ngA · 148, 152, 162, 179 ga.ngesha · 253 gAndhAra · 157, 162, 163, 164, 165, 185 Gandhi · 168, 275, 293, 294, 346 gaNesha . 220, 246 Ganga · 90, 244, 246, 258 garbha · 24, 199, 201, 204, 213 gArgI · 41, 48, 49 gauDabrahmAnandI · 370 gauDapAda · 1, 19, 20, 62, 71, 195, 209, 210, 211, 217, 221, 349, 364 gauDIya-vaiShNava . 261, 281 gaurI . 236 gAyatrI . 24, 52, 148, 236, 278 Ghaggar-Hakra · 154, 155, 172, 177 gItA · 168, 220, 221, 247, 270, 272, 276, 292, 293, 334 gIta-govinda · 261 Gnan-Chautisa · 283 Gobind Singh · 275, 284 Godavari · 155, 246 Godel, Kurt · 300, 301, 302, 362 Goto, Toshifumi · 319

Gould, Stephen Gould · 314, 360 govardhana maTha · 245 govinda · 209, 351, 364 GR, General Relativity · 307, 313, 315 Granth Sahib · 275, 283, 284 Gravity linguistic . 160, 315 guNa · 38, 66, 77, 103, 110, 243, 258, 286 Gupta · 157, 195, 211, 350, 351, 355, 356 G-Y . 148, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 160, 161, 162, 164, 172, 173, 183, 185, 190, 194, 246, 317, 319 GYAna . 2, 16, 17, 18, 28, 42, 70, 71, 74, 86, 103, 122, 141, 142, 144, 186, 215, 217, 218, 221, 223, 224, 225, 230, 231, 243, 244, 252, 279, 280, 329, 333, 334, 335, 365 GYAnadeva · 260, 346 GYAnayoga . 27

H

Hacker, Paul · 19, 223, 342 Halting Problem, Probability · 301, 302 Hama U'st . 266 Hamid al-Ghazali . 265 Hanbali · 251 Hanifi · 251 haqiqat . 249, 252 Harappa . 154, 175, 176, 177 Hard Problem, of Awareness · 299 Hari Singh Nalwa · 285 hariyUplya · 152, 165 Harsha, the king · 211, 212, 350 Hasidism . 325 hastamalaka · 226, 342 haThayoga . 256 hInayAna · 191, 205, 207 Hindu Hinduism · v, 154, 158, 168, 190, 194, 195, 222, 252, 258, 269, 270, 276, 282, 283, 287, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 319, 321, 355 hiraNyagarbha · 21, 23, 98, 332 Hir-Ranjha · 283 Hittite . 160, 163, 172 HN, Machian Model · 313 Hologram . 306 Holographic Conjecture · 307

hotRRi . 3 Housayn Shahi, Sultans · 283 Hoyle, Fred . 313 Hume, David · 296, 360 HVC · xii, 154, 155, 157, 158, 159, 166, 167, 172, 173, 185, 190, 222, 223, 236, 247, 248, 258, 313, 317, 319

I

IB, Intelligent Being · 297, 298, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 316 Ibn al-Haytham . 265 Ibn Arabi, Muhiuddin . 265, 266, 267, 268, 357 ichChA · 230 ID, Intelligent Design · 316 iDA · 147 idamaMsha · 122, 243 idaMtA · 240 Ignorance . 103 ihsan · 249 ijma · 262 illusion . 2, 95, 99, 101, 102, 103, 105, 106, 108, 112, 113, 117, 123, 126, 196, 202, 229, 267, 283, 305, 328, 331 iman . 249 immeasurable · 16, 75, 199, 297, 303 incompleteness · 297 independence · 16, 69, 78, 111, 208, 230, 328 Indeterminacy · 299, 300 indeterminate · 38, 72, 95, 96, 99, 101, 103, 104, 105, 110, 123, 128, 130, 208, 225, 226, 234, 236, 239, 253, 297, 303, 313, 316, 328, 329, 345 Indo-Greek, Scythian · 324 indra · 147 indrIyajanya · 105 indrlyAjanya · 105 inertia · 44, 73, 103, 110, 312 I-ness · 123, 240, 280, 297, 304 Infinitude · 69 Infinity · 16, 34, 43, 55, 69, 85, 86, 234, 309, 328, 362, 363 inner organ · 90, 97, 112 I-notion . 71, 117, 209 intellectual law, of small numbers · 320 interdependence · 93, 192, 205, 206, 312 Iqbal, Muhammad (Allama) · 291 irreducible · v, 297, 300 IshaUp. · 7, 24

iShTApUrta · 133 Ishvara · viii, 92, 94, 98, 99, 107, 108, 115, 116, 118, 119, 121, 124, 126, 128, 130, 136, 137, 138, 140, 141, 144, 220, 230, 235, 239, 241, 257, 272, 286, 329, 330, 332, 343 Islam · 249, 251, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265, 269, 276, 284, 289, 290, 291, 325, 357, 358 IxvAku . 152

J

jAbAla · 19, 24, 27, 182 jaDa · 239, 240 jagat · 2, 3, 208, 280, 328 jahat-laxaNA · 90 jaimini · 184, 193 jaiminlya mImAMsA · 21, 24, 142, 164, 230, 278 Jain · 33, 100, 153, 159, 169, 185, 186, 192, 193, 194, 230, 296, 311, 319 jaivali, pravAhaNa · 182, 184 Jalaluddin Tabrizi . 265 janaka · 41, 182 janapada · 157, 185 jAti · 76, 156, 159, 189 jina · 186 jIva · 2, 17, 34, 64, 68, 70, 72, 92, 96, 97, 99, 102, 104, 105, 107, 119, 121, 128, 188, 210, 224, 228, 230, 231, 234, 239, 242, 243, 257, 280, 297, 330, 331 jIva gosvAmI · 257 jIvanmukta · 35, 78, 123, 131, 132, 133, 218, 294, 295, 336 jIvanmukti · 74, 78, 103, 131, 132, 142, 144, 197, 340, 366 JMV . 340 Judaism · 325, 359 Junayd al-Baghdadi · 251 Justice . 360, 361 jyotirmaTha · 245 jyotiSha · 9, 12, 166, 183

K

ka.nchuka · 110, 230, 232, 234, 236, 242 Kabbalah · 325, 359 Kabir · xii, 275, 281, 351 kachchAyanagotta-sutta · 191 kahola · 70

kaikeya, ashvapati · 182, 184 kaivalya · 8, 25, 220 kAka-tAliiya-nyAya · 220 kalA ka.nchuka · 64, 230, 232, 242 kAla sUkta, ka.nchuka · 24, 219, 230, 232, 242, 272, 279 kalam · 249 Kalibangan . 154, 175, 177, 178 kAlii . 221, 236 kallata, bhatta · 229, 255 kalpa · 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 29, 183, 349 kAma · 17, 188, 224, 287 Kant · 208, 296, 326, 360, 361 kaNTakadvaya nyAya · 102 kaNva · 150, 151 kanyAkumArI · 236 karAlii · 236 kArikA · x, 19, 62, 76, 192, 228, 229, 235, 236, 255, 343, 364 karma · vii, xi, 14, 16, 18, 27, 28, 42, 59, 60, 65, 66, 74, 92, 95, 97, 99, 102, 123, 128, 129, 130, 131, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 143, 144, 168, 186, 187, 189, 190, 192, 198, 204, 217, 219, 223, 224, 225, 228, 230, 232, 236, 239, 243, 254,272, 279, 280, 281, 295, 318, 319, 321, 335, 336 karmakANDa · 182, 224 karmaphala · 74, 130, 131, 133, 137, 138, 139, 315 karmayoga · 27, 65, 292, 293, 295, 322 karmendriya · 231, 279 kArShNAjini . 184 kartavya . 335 kartRRitva . 17, 108, 234 karuNA . 188 kAshakRRiShNa . 13, 184 Kashmir · xii, 157, 169, 220, 228, 244, 256, 259, 324, 350, 356 kAshmIraka, sadAnanda · 72, 94, 271, 273, 369 kashyapa · 150, 151 kassapa, purANa · 186 kaTha Up. · 23 kAThaka-shAkhA · 7, 11, 23, 152 kaTha-shixA Up. . 21, 22 kAtyAyanI · 236 kauNDiNya . 255 kavasha · 153 Kaviraj, Gopinath · 221, 222, 236, 239, 355, 356

Kazanas · 160, 167, 354 Keith . 133, 348 kena Up. · 24 khadim · 250 khalifa · 262 khalq · 267 khaNDana-khaNDa-khAdya . 253, 365 khanqahs . 263, 264 khilAni . 6, 146 Khwajah Qutb al Din · 264, 289 khyAti · 81, 105, 123, 253 Kikkuli · 163 kiraNAvalii . 274 Klostermaier, Klaus . 157, 160, 351 Knowledge . 1 Knowledge Text · 20, 23, 34 kosha annamaya, prANamaya, manomaya, viGYAnamaya, Anandamaya · 304, 331, 332 Kripasaran Mahasthavir · 319 kRRiShNa · 4, 28, 221, 257, 280, 281, 370 Kshipra . 246 KT [Knowledge Text] . 16 kuMbha . 170, 246 kuMbhaka . 219 kuMbhI . 170 kuNDalini-yoga · 139, 228 Kunen . 309, 362 kUTastha · 71

L

la.nkAvatAra-sUtra · 220 lagadha . 12, 13, 166, 183 lakuliisha . 255 Lal Ded (Lalla) · 282 lalitA · 221, 236 Lalitaditya · 244 laukika · 38 laxaNA · 30, 39, 85, 86, 90, 91 laxmii . 221 lAxyArtha . 90 laya · 119, 234 Legitimization, theory · 222 Liberation · xi, 1, 18, 27, 30, 33, 35, 74, 99, 103, 120, 125, 130,

131, 132, 135, 138, 139, 141, 143, 144, 145, 193, 223, 224, 231, 280, 284, 286, 287, 294, 295, 296, 308, 319, 321, 323, 335, 336 liilA . 272, 278 lokAyata · 33, 159, 184, 186, 274, 342, 349

M

ma'arifat . 251, 252 Mach Conjecture · 300, 312, 313, 345 mAdhava . 230, 256, 258, 259, 366 Madhu-Malati (Mathwai) . 282 madhusUdana-sarasvatI · 31, 130, 143, 226, 270, 273, 276, 337, 340, 348, 349, 367 madhva · 81, 82, 210, 247, 255, 257 mAdhyamaka · xii, 33, 76, 81, 82, 85, 107, 201, 203, 204, 205, 207, 208, 211, 217, 253, 259, 274, 279, 323 mAdhyandina . 7, 16 Magadha · 157, 159, 170, 172, 173, 186, 190, 194, 354 Magadhi · 153 mahA . 19, 47, 61, 118, 185, 194, 218, 245 mahAbhArata · x, 1, 27, 32, 211, 257 mahAbhUta · 68, 110, 231, 279 mahAdarshana . 215 mahAjanapada · 185 mahat . 58, 110, 279 mahAtman . 213 mahAvAkya · 43, 52, 62, 73, 90, 125, 144 mahAvidyA . 253 mahAyAna · 191, 196, 199, 205, 206, 207, 212, 214, 221, 318, 344, 357 Mahdi · 262, 270 maho.apaniShad . 25 maitrAyaNI . 19, 24 maitrAyaNI Up. · 24 maitreya · 213, 214, 220, 318 maitreyI . 41, 47, 113 Majma ul-Bahrain · 276 makkhali gosAla . 186 Maliki · 251 mAliniivijaya-tatra · 221, 229 manana · 17, 121, 138, 143, 232 manas · 68, 69, 73, 128, 147, 213, 215, 218, 219, 279, 332 mAnava, sUtra · 10, 11, 12 mANDUkya Up. . 25 Manikavasagar · 247

manonAsha . 70, 142, 218 manoviGYAna . 213, 215 Mansur al-Hallaj . 252 mantra · 4, 5, 6, 7, 32, 43, 47, 50, 52, 55, 57, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 142, 146, 148, 231, 233, 236, 317 manu-saMhitA . 142, 294 manu-smRRiti . 29, 143 maqamat . 250, 283 Mauryas Chandragupta · 270 mawjud . 266 Max Mueller . 18, 80, 223, 255 mAyA · 21, 38, 44, 48, 60, 66, 67, 70, 95, 97, 99, 101, 103, 104, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 116, 118, 119, 120, 124, 125, 126, 128, 135, 137, 138, 197, 207, 210, 226, 230, 234, 235, 236, 238, 239, 240, 242, 247, 258, 260, 273, 278, 283, 286, 311, 328, 329,330, 343 Mayeda, Sengeku · 19, 111, 194, 223, 343 measurement · v, 299, 307, 345 Medharthi, Isvaradatta · 320 Megasthenes · 211 Mehrgarh · 154, 175 meykaNDadeva · 255 mImAMsA · 15, 32, 33, 39, 81, 84, 135, 136, 138, 184, 187, 209, 224, 256, 271, 274, 349, 372 Minakshi . 247 mind-purification · 18, 31, 87, 141, 234, 295, 296 Mir Bullhe Shah . 283 Mirza Ghalib . 283 mishra maNDana, vAchaspati, prabhAkara · 117, 120, 123, 132, 224, 226, 242, 342, 364, 365, 367 Mitanni . 147, 163, 166, 172 mithyA . 3, 38, 75, 76, 81, 83, 93, 94, 103, 104, 113, 116, 119, 121, 122, 124, 128, 130, 208, 219, 234, 239, 244, 329 m-m-m . 300 Mohenjo-Daro · 155, 170 Mom-momjit . 325 monism · 20, 36, 43, 46, 71, 146, 148, 169, 173, 210, 212, 228, 255, 259, 278, 282, 286, 300, 306, 309, 318, 321, 323 moxa · 17, 29, 103, 130, 131, 132, 134, 142, 190, 211, 224, 232, 280, 287, 294, 335, 371 muditA . 188 MUH . 310

Mujavat . 148 muktikaUp. · 18, 220 mUla -mAyA, -prakRRiti, -viGYAna · 82, 110, 127, 215, 235, 286 mUlAvidyA · 71, 98, 104, 119, 121, 128, 129, 225, 239, 286, 329 multiverse · 310 mumuxu . 3, 16, 199, 217, 336 muNDakaUp. . 24 murqaba · 250, 252 Muztagh Ata, Mt · 148

N

nadistuti sUkta · 148 Naga Sanyasis . 276 nagArjuna · 205 naiShkarmyasiddhi · x, 347, 349 naiShkarmya-siddhi · 17 Nakamura, Hajime · 194, 223, 343, 359 nAnA . 50, 94, 368 Nanak Dev . 275 nanda, mahApadma · 170 nandikeshvara-kAshikA · 255 nandinAtha . 255 Naqshbandi, tariqah · xii, 275, 289, 290 nara · 92 nArAyaNa · 19, 92, 210, 257, 274, 364, 370, 371 Narlikar, Jayant · 313, 345 Narmada · 155 nAsadIya-sUkta · 21, 23, 43, 44, 46, 149, 317 Nashik . 157, 246 nAtha-pantha . 221, 256 navya-nyAya · 253 Nayanars . 211, 247 Neoplatonism · 185, 324, 325, 357, 358, 359 neti neti · 39, 62, 197, 208, 218, 284, 286, 328 NFU · 310 nibandha, of Vallabha · 278, 365 nididhyAsana · 18 nigantha nAthaputta . 186 nighaNTu . 13 niMbArka · 36, 255, 273 nimitta-kAraNa · 93 nirguNa-brahman · 279 nirukta · 9, 13, 183, 184

nirupAdhika -brahman, -chidvAda · 57, 59, 118, 124 nirvANa . 188, 190, 192, 193, 197, 198, 200, 201, 202, 217, 335 niShkAma-karma . 143 nivRRitti-mArga . 27 niyama · 139, 140, 142, 228, 294 niyati · 230, 232, 242 NOMA . 314 non-origination · 76, 219, 318 non-Self · 80, 96, 115, 128 noumenal · vii, 38, 206, 208, 297, 316, 318, 326 nRRisiMhAshrama . 226, 270, 367 nRRi-yaGYa . 140 NS . 340 Nur . 262, 282 NV, New Vedanta · vi, 294, 295, 296, 314, 315, 322, 324 nyAya · 33, 38, 39, 81, 82, 86, 100, 101, 102, 230, 253, 256, 271, 273, 274, 334, 365, 368 nyAyaratnAvali · 369

O

Olivelle, Patrick · 185, 342, 351 Omar Khayyam . 265 omnipotence omnipotent · 118, 136, 230, 234, 239 omniscience omniscient · 90, 108, 109, 118, 121, 136, 230, 231, 239 omnium . 310, 311 omniverse . 310 Oupnek'hat . 22, 25, 276

P

pa.nchadashI · 254, 339, 366 pa.nchAgni · 47, 52, 133, 134 pa.nchakosha · 55, 97, 305 pa.nchamakAra · 228 pa.nchapAdikA · x, 121, 122, 124, 348, 350, 364, 365 pa.nchArtha-bhAShya . 255 pa.ncha-shiila . 193 pa.ncha-siddhAnta · 193, 204, 205 pa.ncha-skandha · 192, 200 pa.ncha-vrata · 193 pa.ncha-yaGYa · 135, 140, 169

pa.ncha-yama · 193 pa.nchIkaraNa · 94, 128, 219, 225, 364 padapATha . 12, 183 Pagan · 261 pai.ngala Up. · 25 Pakhtoons . 162, 163 pakudha, kachchAyana · 186 Pali · 153, 187, 190, 191, 357 panentheism . 29 pANini · 13, 183, 257 pApa · 130, 136, 336 paramahaMsa · 143, 371 paramArtha · 1, 206, 207, 318, 336 pAramArthika · 2, 38, 104, 118, 201, 206, 312, 323 pAramitA · 199, 205, 207, 212 para-paxa-girii-vajra · 256 parAshiva · 241, 242 parashurAma . 237 parA-vairAgya . 145 parichCheda · 240 parimala · 120, 254, 271, 349, 368 pariNama · 323 parIxita . 152, 170 paroxa · 15, 131, 334 parshu . 153, 162, 164 PD . 339 Penrose, Roger · 300, 301, 313, 327, 344, 345, 360, 361 permeation · 198 phonetics · 4, 184 PhU . 297, 298, 299, 300, 303, 307, 308, 309, 310, 312, 313, 315, 316 phylogeny . 314 PIE . 159, 160, 165 Pir · 250, 252 Platonism · 290, 309, 310, 311, 362 Pliny . 159 Potter, Karl · 136, 223, 342 p-p-p · 297, 300, 311 praGYapti · 192 prajApati · 21, 41, 52, 64, 98, 147 prakAsha · 231, 235, 240, 243, 244, 254, 367 prakAshAnanda · 72, 94, 224, 367, 370 prakAshAtman · 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 226, 350, 365 prakRRiti · 29, 66, 68, 70, 76, 95, 99, 107, 109, 110, 124, 125, 230,

235, 239, 240, 242, 243, 272 pramA · 14, 75, 253, 254, 333 pramANa · 14, 16, 32, 92, 184, 216, 253, 333, 334 prAmANya . 14, 333 pramAtA · 14, 15, 333 prameya · 14, 15, 253, 254, 333, 366 pramiti · 14, 333 prANa · 24, 44, 54, 64, 137, 219, 235, 332 praNava · 24, 64 prANAyAma · 139 prapa.nchasAra · 225 Prarthana Samaj · 292 prasa.nkhyAna · 223 prasthAnatraya · 1, 182, 209, 217, 255, 259, 322 prAtibhAsika . 2, 38, 104, 126 pratibiMba · 71, 107, 108, 112, 125, 331 pratItya-samutpAda · xii, 76, 93, 189, 191, 208, 318 pratyabhiGYA · 228, 229, 230, 231, 233, 235, 236, 242, 255, 259, 324, 343, 372 pratyagAtmA · 119, 305 pratyAhAra . 140 pratyaxa · 14, 16, 333, 334 pratyaya · 105, 122 Prayag · 246 pRRithu, pArthava . 153, 162 pudgala · 192, 193 pulinda . 157 puNDalika · 260 puNDra . 157 puNya · 130, 136, 336 pUraka · 219 purANa · 12, 15, 28, 29, 32, 149, 152, 157, 158, 161, 162, 167, 190, 210, 211, 220, 221, 247, 255, 257, 272, 273, 342 pUrNapraGYA · 230 pUru . 151, 152, 165 pururavas . 146 puruSha · 20, 21, 23, 30, 42, 52, 57, 59, 60, 64, 67, 68, 71, 76, 92, 147, 148, 187, 229, 230, 242, 243, 257, 272, 279, 317

Q

Qadiris · 264 QED . 315 QFT . 307 QSSC · 313

QT . 315 qualia · 71, 104, 299, 300, 304, 305, 308

R

Rabe'ah, al-Adawiyah · 249 rAga · 230, 232, 242 Raghunath Bajirao · 284 rajas · 68, 73, 97, 103, 110, 243, 279 rAja-yoga · 139 rajju-sarpa · 101 rAma (rAya) kavi · 274 rAma-charita-mAnasa . 275 rAmAdvaya . 366 Ramamohan Roy . 292 rAmAnuja · 36, 81, 82, 210, 230, 247, 255, 257, 278 rAmatIrtha . 339, 343, 368 randomness · 302, 310, 311 Ranjit Singh · 285, 290 Rashtrakutas · 244 ratnakIrti · 215 Rawls, John . 296, 326, 360 reality grades · 104, 130 rechaka · 219 reducing agent · 315 Reduction · 307 reductionist · 303, 327 reflection . 17, 34, 40, 71, 99, 108, 112, 113, 117, 119, 121, 123, 124, 125, 126, 128, 133, 138, 234, 237, 271, 273, 295, 305, 331, 340 relational · 38, 39, 78, 90, 101, 266, 297 relative · 2, 15, 17, 35, 38, 39, 40, 47, 69, 74, 76, 88, 92, 93, 94, 95, 98, 103, 104, 106, 107, 111, 112, 115, 116, 119, 123, 125, 131, 134, 138, 141, 161, 200, 202, 219, 253, 266, 267, 278, 299, 309, 311, 312, 316, 322, 325, 329, 330, 331, 333, 334, 335, 336 Relativity Special, Genaral · 299, 306, 310, 313, 315, 345 release · 34, 35, 70, 83, 97, 130, 132, 134, 254, 312, 335 renunciation · 17, 18, 30, 31, 42, 59, 139, 143, 187, 190, 199, 227, 283, 292, 295, 319, 321, 323 RRigveda · x, xii, 3, 20, 44, 46, 59, 146, 153, 257, 348 RRijrAshva . 163 RRik . 3 RRita . 133, 141, 168, 318 rUpa · 76, 96, 99, 111, 133, 192

S

sa.nghAta · 192 sa.nGYA . 192 sa.njaya, belatthaputta · 186 sA.nkhya · 28, 33, 34, 66, 73, 76, 81, 82, 99, 109, 110, 184, 186, 192, 230, 239, 242, 271, 273, 274, 279, 342, 348 sa.nxepa-shArIraka · 72, 226 sachchidAnandendra · 274, 372 sadasatviveka · 145 sAdhana-chatuShTaya . 16 Sai-Baba, of Shiradi · 268, 269 sama · 250, 252, 268, 283 samAdhAna · 3, 129, 140 samAdhi · 16, 128, 129, 131, 138, 140, 142, 143, 144, 188, 219, 232, 252, 272 samAhita . 16 samanta · 100 sAmAnya · 23, 241, 338 sAmAnyAdhikaraNa · 39, 90, 91, 101 Samarth Ramdas · xii, 260, 275, 286 samaShTi · 92, 243 samatA . 204, 215 sAmaveda · 3, 59 sAma-veda · x, 3 sAma-veda · 7 Sambandar . 247 saMbhUti . 65 saMnyAsa · 17, 23, 25, 27, 129, 142, 143, 226, 246, 338, 342 saMskAra · 87, 105, 128, 189, 192, 243, 335 saMyama · 144 sandhyA-vandana · 135 Sanskrit · vi, vii, xiii, 3, 12, 13, 23, 122, 139, 149, 153, 159, 160, 161, 163, 166, 171, 172, 183, 187, 196, 204, 211, 221, 222, 223, 228, 247, 253, 255, 259, 276, 283, 337, 338, 339, 343, 347, 351, 355,357 sarasvatI · 25, 96, 147, 148, 152, 154, 155, 164, 166, 171, 172, 245, 270, 271, 274, 276, 337, 348, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371, 372 sarva-bIjaka-viGYAna . 215 sarvadarshanasaMgraha · 347 sarva-dRRik · 99 sarvaGYAtman · 72, 105, 130 sarva-sAxi · 99 sarvAstivAda · 191

Sassi-Punnu · 283 sat · 16, 20, 52, 55, 74, 78, 81, 85, 97, 145, 148, 173, 234, 235, 268, 278, 280, 283, 318, 328, 329, 336 sattA · 38, 201, 206 sAttvika · 73, 142 satya · 38, 86, 115, 140, 201, 206 satyAgraha · 293, 294 saundaryalaharI · 225, 236, 355 sautrAntika · 33, 205, 213, 214 sAxin · 69, 70, 71, 96, 97, 98, 99, 111, 133, 334 sAyaNa · 254, 258 Sayyid · 249, 282, 283, 289, 290 SBN · 340 Schopenhauer · 276, 326 Scytho-Parthians · 194 Searle, John · 300, 302, 327, 360, 361 Seleucus Nicator · 211 self-certifying · 334 self-established · 78 self-evident · 14, 69, 78, 265 self-luminous · 78, 80, 238, 240, 253, 256, 330, 334 Self-realization · vi, 2, 6, 15, 17, 57, 73, 74, 85, 87, 121, 128, 129, 131, 141, 142, 210, 228, 232, 234, 286, 294, 295, 312, 315, 319, 339 Sethana (Amal Kiran) · 167 sha.nkara · 1, 7, 9, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 42, 43, 52, 55, 71, 76, 78, 80, 82, 85, 86, 88, 93, 95, 96, 99, 102, 103, 104, 107, 109, 111, 112, 113, 117, 121, 122, 129, 130, 131, 132, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 142, 144, 182, 195, 209,210, 217, 220, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 236, 239, 244, 245, 255, 256, 257, 258, 260, 273, 274, 295, 307, 321, 323, 338, 339, 340, 342, 343, 364 sha.nkarAnanda · 25, 366 shabara · 157 shabda · 14, 15, 128, 210, 235, 254, 333, 365 Shadhiliyah · 264 Shafi'i · 251 Shah Manjhan · 282 Shah Wali Ullah · 289 shaiva · 23, 32, 195, 221, 228, 229, 230, 244, 247, 255, 256, 257, 259, 260, 268, 282, 317, 324, 337, 338, 342, 355 Shaka . 194 shAkta · 23, 25, 33, 102, 221, 222, 228, 236, 244, 256, 259, 317, 323, 324, 337, 338, 355

shakti · 23, 33, 44, 93, 95, 110, 111, 118, 122, 125, 158, 221, 228, 229, 230, 231, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 246, 247, 279, 330, 355, 364 shAktopAya · 228 shama · 3, 335 shAMbhavopAya · 228, 232 shANDilya · 52, 182 shAnta . 16, 218 shAntam, nirvANam . 189, 193, 217 shAntaraxita · 217, 348 shAradA, maTha . 245 shari'a . 266, 283 sharIra · 188, 232, 330, 331, 332 shArIraka-sUtra · 32, 84, 365 shAstra · 8, 12, 14, 32, 59, 102, 124, 141, 184, 195, 196, 214, 228, 229, 255, 260, 293, 357, 368 shatabhUShaNI · 89 shatadUShaNI . 256 Shatavahanas . 194 ShaTsaMpatti . 16, 335 shaunaka · 21, 24, 25, 183 Shaykh · 250, 252, 263, 264, 266, 268, 282, 289, 290 Shi'a · 262 shiila · 188, 319 shikhAmaNi · 270, 339, 369 shimyu . 153, 162 Shinde · 285, 287 shiva · 12, 23, 32, 33, 66, 92, 147, 153, 162, 228, 229, 230, 231, 234, 235, 236, 238, 240, 241, 246, 247, 256, 282, 355 shivaGYAnabodha · 255 Shivaji · 275, 287 shixA · 4, 9, 12 shramaNa · 158, 186, 187, 319 shrIharSha . 88, 103, 253, 365 shrIkaNTha . 255 shrIkara-bhAShya · 259 shrIpati paNDita · 255, 259 Shrivijaya . 261 shRRi.ngerl · 225, 244, 245, 258 shruti · 4, 9, 14, 15, 16, 19, 32, 42, 121, 124, 131, 135, 183, 220, 226, 273, 334 shuddhavidyA ·230 shUdra · 27, 156, 257 shulba (shulva) · 9, 166, 183

shunaHshepa . 157 Shunga · 194 shUnya · 85, 93, 107, 193, 197, 208, 214, 217, 240 shutudrI . 148 shvetaketu · 41 shvetAshvatara Up. · 24, 66 sindhu · 148, 152, 154, 155, 156, 162, 164, 185, 260, 371 skanda · 32, 220, 246 sleep, deep · 2, 47, 62, 64, 70, 97, 98, 99, 101, 104, 117, 128, 131, 139, 218, 243, 244, 305, 331 SLS · 340 smaraNa . 105 smRRiti · xi, 14, 15, 27, 32, 78, 124, 135, 140, 141, 142, 149, 183, 187, 196, 231, 257, 273, 320, 334 soma · 64, 147, 148, 317 somAnanda · 229, 255 spanda · 44, 169, 219, 228, 229, 231, 235, 236, 255, 260, 323, 324 sRRi.njaya . 152, 165 SS · 340 S-S, Sindhu-Saraswati · 152, 153, 154, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 172, 173, 183, 185, 194, 319 SSC, Sapta Sindhava Civilization · xii, xiii, 44, 148, 149, 152, 153, 154, 155, 157, 158, 159, 161, 163, 164, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 177, 178, 179, 185, 190, 236, 255, 317, 319 Staal, Fritz . 133, 148, 159, 163, 172, 173, 185, 319 Standard Model · 315 sthiramati · 213, 214 sthitapraGYa · 145 Suchness · 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 213 sudAsa · 152, 162 sufi · 249, 252, 268 sufism · 282 Suhrawardis · 264 Suluk · 250 Sunni · 262, 263, 290 superimposition · 73, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 86, 92, 93, 96, 108, 109, 115, 117, 119, 120, 122, 128, 138, 209, 225, 226, 238, 328, 330, 333 sureshvara . 17, 18, 27, 69, 72, 88, 103, 111, 115, 116, 117, 129, 138, 141, 143, 224, 226, 245, 254, 274, 338, 342, 346, 347, 349, 364 sUrya · 13, 29, 147, 246, 347 svabhAva · 105, 137, 214, 279 svachChanda-tantra · 221, 228

svalaxaNam · 189, 193 svAMsha . 241 svatantra-kartA · 238

T

tadekam · 21, 46 Taijitu · 325 Takasaki, Jikado · 204, 212, 344 tamas · 68, 73, 97, 99, 103, 110, 243, 279 tantra · 32, 71, 102, 214, 221, 222, 228, 229, 232, 236, 237, 238, 239, 243, 244, 257, 323, 324, 337, 355 tantraloka · 229 tantrasAra · 229 tanzih . 266 Taoism · 325, 359 tapas · 140 tariqah · 250, 252, 263, 264 tarkaloka · 253 Tarski, Alfred · 300, 301 tashbih · 266 tathAgata · 191, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 213, 214 tathAgatagarbha · 193, 197, 201, 202, 212, 213, 214, 217, 318, 344 tathatA · xii, 193, 196, 199, 203, 204, 205, 212, 213, 214, 217, 323 tattvapradIpikA · 88, 366 tawakkul · 249 TB . 340 Tegh Bahadur · 275 tenth man · 132 terrestrial deities · 147 Thass, Jyothee . 319 Thatness . 196 Tilak, B. G. · 292, 294, 345 Tirumurai · 247 Ti-yung . 325 toTaka · 226, 342 transmigration · vii, 34, 35, 99, 107, 133, 135, 170, 184, 196, 312, 317 trika · 110, 293 trikANDI · 210 tRRixi . 152 Tulasi-Ramayana · 275 Turing, Alan · 300, 301, 302, 362 turlya · 62, 99, 217, 218, 332 turlyAtIta . 143, 218

turvasha . 152, 165

U

uddAlaka, AruNi · 41, 182, 184 udgAtA · 3 ulama · 262, 266, 268, 276, 289 Umar . 262 Uncomputability · 301 Undefinability · 301 UNF · 109, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 309, 316 unidamAMsha . 216 unmeSha . 235 UP [upaniShad] · 1 upAdAna · 75, 93, 111, 118, 124, 189 upadesha sAhasrI . x, 339 upadesha-sAhasrI · 19, 220 upAdhi · 102, 109, 111, 128, 330, 332 upamAna . 14, 333 upaniShad · x, 1, 5, 6, 18, 23, 24, 52, 55, 57, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 146, 169, 337, 370 upAsanA . 36, 296 upAya . 324 Urheimat · 159, 160, 161, 163, 165 UrvashI · 146 US · 339 ushasta · 41, 70 UTM · 301, 302 utpaladeva · 229

V

vAch . 147 vAchyArtha · 86, 90 vAhyAbhAsa · 239 vaibhAShika · 205, 274 vaikhAnasa · 10, 11 vairAgya · 2, 143, 217, 286, 335 vaisheShika · 33, 77, 100, 136, 230, 253, 273, 274 vaiShNava · 23, 33, 195, 221, 235, 246, 247, 255, 256, 257, 259, 260, 261, 268, 273, 281, 282, 324, 338 vaishya · 129, 156, 280 vajrayAna · 191, 216 Vakatakas · 194 vAkyapadlya · 209, 210, 349

vAlakhilya . 146 vallabha · 210, 255, 257, 261, 275, 278, 280, 281 vAmadeva . 148 varAhamihira · 12, 13, 170 varNa · 149, 156, 159, 190 varNAshrama . 141, 294 vArShAgirA . 152, 163, 165 vArtika · x, xi, 17, 32, 107, 115, 116, 129, 209, 271, 338, 366, 367, 370 vAsanA · 105, 137, 142, 144, 196, 218, 243 vAsanAxaya . 144 vasubandhu · 213, 214, 318 vAsudevendra · 274, 370 vasugupta · 228, 255 VC . 339 ve.nkatanAtha · 256 veda · 1, 3, 8, 18, 154 vedA.nga · 3, 12, 183 vedanA · 189, 192 vedAnta, kevala advaita Vedanta · 1 vedAnta-kaumudI · 254 vedAnta-sUtra · 195 via-negativa · 16, 34, 39, 297, 322 vibhramaviveka · 224, 364 viGYapti · 193, 214 Vijayanagar · 244, 254, 258, 287 vimarsha · 231, 234, 235, 238, 243, 244, 371 vimuktAtman · 81, 104, 123, 130, 226, 311, 364 vipAka-viGYAna · 215 viparIta-grahaNa . 82 Vipassana . 296 virati · 188 viShANina . 153, 162 vishtAspa · 153, 163 vishvamaya · 231 vishvottIrNa . 231 vivaraNa · xi, 19, 71, 73, 95, 107, 108, 117, 121, 122, 123, 124, 126, 128, 129, 225, 253, 254, 270, 271, 339, 350, 351, 356, 365, 366, 367, 368, 372 Vivekananda · 274, 292, 294, 295, 345 viveka-prakriyA · 39 VP · 339 VS · 339

vya.ngyArtha · 90 vyAkaraNa · 9, 271 vyAsa · 14, 19, 32, 137, 220, 364, 371 vyAsatIrtha . 256, 273 vyaShTi . 92 vyAvahArika · 2, 3, 38, 104, 115, 201, 206, 312, 323, 336 vyAvRRitti . 240

W

Wahdat al-Wujud . 252, 266, 267, 325 walayats · 263 Warith Shah . 283 WC · 302, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 316 Witzel, M. . 22, 148, 166 W-J-D . 268

X

xaNikam · 189, 193 xatriya · 129, 156, 280 xemarAja · 229, 259, 355 xetra · 30 xetraGYa · 30 xetrapati . 147, 167

Y

Yab-Yum . 325 yadu . 151 yaGYa · 21, 59, 140, 169, 173, 185, 224, 317, 318 yAGYavalkya · xi, 14, 41, 49, 113, 133, 140, 141, 142, 182 yajurveda · xi, 3, 4, 59 yamunA . 148, 152, 154, 155, 179, 185 yAtrA . 248 yauktika · 3, 38, 312, 329 yoga · 139 yogAchAra · xii, 33, 82, 204, 205, 210, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 244, 274 yogasUtra · x, 19, 136 yoga-sUtra · 139 yoga-vAsiShTha · 32, 133, 210, 217, 276, 294, 342 yudhiShThira . 170

Z

Zarathushtra · 163, 354 Zazen · 325 ZFC . 310 zikr · 250, 252, 263 Zohar · 325 zombie · 308 Zun Nun al-Misri . 250, 251, 252

अ

अंत [anta] · 336 अजाति वाद [ajAti-vAda] ·94,330 अद्वैत [Advaita] ·1,328,346 अधिष्ठान [adhiShThAna].329

अध्यासित, आरोपित [adhyAsita, Aropita] ·330 अनिर्वचनीय [anirvachanlya].82,316,329 अनुपलब्धि [anupalabdhi] ·333 अनुमान [anumAna] . 333 अन्तःकरण [antaHkaraNa] ·334,335 अन्नमय कोश [annamaya kosha] •331 अपरा विद्या [aparA vidyA] -333 अपरोक्ष [aparoxa] · 333, 334 अपवादित [apavAdita]·331 अभयत्व [abhayatva] ·78,335 अभाव [abhAva] 333 अर्थापत्ति [arthApatti]·333 अवच्छेद वाद [avachCheda vAda] ·108, 331 अविद्या [avidyA] ·57, 316, 329,333 अव्यक्त [avyakta] · 110, 316,330

आ

आगम [Agama] . 333 आगामीकर्म [AgAml-karma] 336 आत्मन् [Atman] · 2, 97, 316,330 आत्मन्=ब्रह्मनO . 2 आनन्दमय कोश [Anandamaya kosha] ·331 आभास वाद [AbhAsa vAda] ·107, 331 आरोप [Aropa] · 330

ई

ईश्वर [Ishvara] 94,316,329,330

उ

उत्पत्ति [utpatti] .94,336 उपमान [upamAna] ·333 उपरति [uparati] ·335 उपाधि [upAdhi] .330,332

क

कर्तव्य [kartavya] •335 कर्मकांड [karmakANDa] .335 कर्म-मुक्ती [karma-mukti]·335 काम्यकर्म [kAmya-karma] ·336 कारणशरीर . 97 कार्यक्षेत्र [kAryaxetra]•335

ज

जगत् [jagat] · 65,67,316,328 जागृत [jAgRRita]-331 जीव [jIva] ·316,330 जीवन्मुक्त [jIvanmukta]·336 ज्ञान [GYAna] •29,329,334,335

त

तन्मात्र - 109 तितिक्षा [titixA] • 335 तुरीय [turlya]•332 तूलाविद्या [tUlAvidyA] •333 त्रिवृत्करण · 109

द

दम [dama]•335

न

नामरूपाणि[nAmarUpa-s]· 329 निर्गुण ब्रह्मन· 39 निर्वाण [nirvANa] ·188, 335 नेति नेति [net neti] · 43, 47,328 न्याय [nyAya] .33, 101, 102,334

प

पंचीकरण · 109

परमार्थ[paramArtha].329,336 परा विद्या [parA-vidyA] ·333 परोक्ष [paroxa] · 334 पाप [pApa] · 336 पुण्य [puNya] .336 प्रकृतधि · 29,76,97 प्रतिबिम्ब वाद [pratibiMba-vAda]·331 प्रपंच [prapa.ncha]-333 प्रमा [pramA] . 333 प्रमाता [pramAtA]·333 प्रमिति [pramiti]·333 प्रमेय [prameya] ·40,333,348 प्राणमय कोश [prANamaya kosha].331 प्रामाण्य [prAmANya].333 प्रारब्धकर्म [prArabdha-karma] .336

ब

बद्ध [baddha] -335,336 बीजशक्ति [bljashakti] ·330 बुद्धि [buddhi] .97,334 ब्रह्मज्ञान [brahmaGYAna] .333 ब्रह्मन[brahman] -316,328,329,330

भ

भामती संप्रदाय · 117

म

मनोमय कोश [manomaya kosha] ·331 महाभूत · 110 माया[mAyA] .95,316,328 मिथ्या [mithyA] ·75,316,329 मुक्त [mukta] ·336 मुमुक्षु [mumuxu] - 316,336 मुमुक्षुत्व [mumuxutva] •335 मूलाविद्या [mUlAvidyA] .316,329,333 मोक्ष [moxa] • 335

य

यौक्तिक [yauktika] ·316,329

व

वार्तिक संप्रदाय . 115 विज्ञानमय कोश [viGYAnamaya kosha] .316,331 विदेह मुक्त [videha mukta]·332 विदेहमुक्त [videha-mukta]·336 विवरण संप्रदाय . 121 विवर्त [vivarta] ·75,328 विवेक [vivaka] · 40, 92, 94, 95, 97, 98, 100, 145, 316, 335 वृत्ति [vRRitti] ·334 वैराग्य [vairAgya] •335 व्यवहार [vyavahAra]·329 व्यावहारिक [vyAvahArika] ·316,336

श

शब्द [shabda] · 286, 333 शम [shama] .335 शरीर [sharIra] ·316,330,331 श्रुति [shruti] · 334

ष

षट्संपत्ति [ShaTsaMpatti] •335

स

संचित-कर्म [sa.nchita-karma] ·336 संसार [saMsAra]·333 संस्कार [saMskAra] .335 सगुण ब्रह्मन · 38 सत्, चित्, आनंद [sat, chit, Ananda]·328 सत्यं, ज्ञानं, अनंतं [satyam, GYAnam, anantam].328 समाधान [samAdhAna] .335 साक्षिन् [sAxin] ·70, 98, 334 साधक [sAdhaka].336 सुषुप्ति [suShupti]·332 सूक्ष्मभूत · 109 सूक्ष्मशरीर · 97 स्थूलशरीर . 97 स्मृति [smRRiti] · xi, 334 स्वतःप्रमाण [svataHpramANa] .334 स्वप्न [svapna] 331 स्वयंप्रकाश [svayaMprakAsha] .330,334

[1] Also, termed as 'vedAnta' [Vedanta], 'advaita' [Advaita], 'kevala' advaita [KA] ('only' Advaita). It teaches non-dualism [advaita] - "There is 'only one non-dual' (ekamevAdvitlyam) Reality". This non-dualism is primarily based on the 'conclusions of veda' [vedAnta], hence the name. [2] Veda [veda or veda-s] are ancient Indic literature with an oral tradition. UP were compiled as the last and philosophically the most significant part of Veda, termed as Vedanta (Veda + anta = 'end' or 'conclusion' of Veda). The philosophy based on them too is known as Vedanta. [3] The word prasthAna stands for 'source' or 'start of the journey'. The prasthAnatraya means "traya [triad] of the sources (of Knowledge)" or "triple starting points of the journey (towards Liberation)". [4] Without any kind of difference (bheda) such as: (a) 'within itself (sva-gata), as between branches, leaves etc. of a tree; (b) 'within same species' (sajAtlya), as between two trees; and (c) 'between different species' (vijAtlya), as between a tree and a cow. [5] Self resides in the sentient as well non-sentient beings. Soul in its 'five-layer cover' (ibid.) is the general elemental and sentient form of Being whose acosmic inmost Self (Atman) is identified here with brahman. [6] Capital letters K and I are used in the spellings of metaphysical Knowledge, Knower, and Ignorance to separate them from empirical knowledge, knower and ignorance. The terms Ignorance, Nescience, avidyA are used interchange-ably. The word GYAna [knowledge] is also used in metaphysical context for brevity, and hence aGYAna [absence of know-ledge] too assumes metaphysical purport. Whether the words GYAna & aGYAna are used in the relative way or in their absolute-metaphysical sense, will be generally clear from the context. [7] KA also admits 'empirical illusion' [prAtibhAsika], dreams [svapna], and deep-sleep [suShupti] etc, but in relation to the Absolute these are all secondary or relative states. [8] According to tradition, sAdhaka needs 'four-means' [sAdhana-chatuShTaya] to realize the Knowledge: (1) discrimination between the Real and the unreal [viveka]; (2) aversion to the enjoyment of fruits of action in this world and hereafter [vairAgya]; (3) six treasures: [ShaT-saMpatti]: (3a) calmness [shama], (3b) restraint [dama], (3c) withdrawal [uparati],

(3d) forbearance [titixA], (3e) concentration [samAdhAna], (3f) conviction [shraddhA]; (4) 'yearning for Knowledge' [mumuxutva]. [9] Tradition assumes that Veda are authorless (apauruSheya); they are given with the dawn of a new world as universe goes through the cycle of origination, sustenance and dissolution. Their revelation reappears to the vision of the seers for their onward transmission through ages of the cosmic cycle. God (or Divine Person) is not brought into the picture lest Veda's authority is diluted or impugned. [10] Association of AV with brahma priests was not there in the initial phase; AV was canonized late compared to other three Veda, though some of its practices and rites could be as old (or even older) than those of RV. [11] This word for the liturgical texts is differentiated from the similar word Brahmana (priestly class) by the transliteration or the context. [12] AraNyaka (forest book) was so called because of its esoteric nature; it was meant to be contemplated in seclusion (away from the hustle and bustle of worldly affairs, like in the forest). [13] These techniques became part of the Vedic science of phonetics and phonology [shixA] and of metrical composition [Chandas] which were developed as two of the six 'auxiliaries of Veda' [Vedanga]. Their main purpose is to correctly pronounce or sing and memorize the Veda. The insistence on faithful memorization and correct pronunciation of the text is related not only to the belief in the sacredness of Veda (shruti) but also to the belief that potency of mantra lies in its correct pronunciation. [14] This word has a canonization flavor; kalpa means 'proper, able or well formed' based on the root kLLip that means to put in order or to regulate. The word sUtra (thread) suggests systemization. [15] Ref "Vedic Samhitas and Brahmanas: A popular, brief introduction" at <www. dharmicscriptures.org>. For list of English Translations of Vedic texts; refer Bibliographic Guide at http://www.easterntradition.org [16] See Table-3 (section 1.1) for more exhaustive branch wise distribution of KT/UP. For comprehensive lists of Vedic texts and scriptures check following Internet resources (URLs might have changed; but data are generally cross referenced and stable): (1) <http: is1.mum.edu/vedic reserve/> and <http:// www. dharmic scriptures.org/> [17] Shares AshvalAyana kalpasUtra with AshvalAyana

shAkhA. [18] bAShkala saMhitA has appendix of 98 apocryphal hymns called khilAni. The bAShkala-mantra Up. is part of the saMhitA portion. [19] The sha.nkhAyana (A13-14); offers "aham brahmAsmi" mantra and the "way to Self-realization". However, sha.nkhAyana is not known to have extant oral or commentarial tradition. [20] Both kANva & mAdhyandin shAkhA-s have their own respective version of SYV [vAjasaneya] saMhitA and other divisions. Isha Up. is placed in vjasaneya saMhitA. sha.nkara's commentary on bRRihadAraNyaka is on its kANva version. [21] ballavI brAhmaNa and vAdhUla brAhmaNa also belong to KYV. [22] These are: (1) tANDya (pa.nchaviMsha + shaDviMsha), (2) talavakAra, (3) ArSheya, (4) vaMsha, (5) daivatAdhyAya, (6) ChAndogya, (7) sAma vidhAna, (8) saMhito.apaniShad. [23] Sections-1 and 2 of ChAndogya brAhmaNa are known as the mantra brAhmaNa; while sections-3 to 10 of ChAndogya brAhmaNa are known as ChAndogya Up. [24] AV-shaunakIya is arranged in 20 kANDa-s (books) in four divisions not follo-wing the pattern of other Veda. It deals with rites, healing, magic, warfare and other assorted topics. AV- paippalAda is similar but said to be older. Philosophi-cal excursions are in the Books 8-12. UP with unknown shAkhA (s. a. kaivalya, mANDUkya) have been traditionally placed in AV. Ayurveda (science of life) is said to have its origins in AV. It is an upaveda (applied veda) among other upaveda-s: archery (dhanurveda), music & dance (gAndharvaveda), governa-nce (arthashAstra), military science (shastrashAstra), architecture (sthApatya-shAstra). [25] Table-2 is based on the relevant Wikipedia data. [26] vaikhAnasa sUtra-s are about the rituals of the worship of vishNu - one of the Vedic Gods, which assumed importance in post-Vedic Hinduism. Many of todays vishNu worshipers accept the canonization of another set of texts: pa.ncharAtra which is classified as Agama (ibid). [27] The oldest shixA texts are known as prAtisAkhya-s which were evolved from ancient oral padapATha-s (Vedic chants). Moreover, there are more than 40 other shixA texts. Many of them are attached to specific shAkhA; others are late texts. Most of them are in metrical form, while few are in sUtra (aphorism) form. [28] Later works: (1) Chandas-sUtra commentary by halayudha, (2) agni-purANa: Ch 328-336, (3) nAtya-shAstra: Ch-15,

(4) bRRihatsaMhitA: Ch-104, (5) vRRitta-ratnAkara of kedArabhaTTa. The last work is about prosodic meters in general and does not discuss Vedic meters. [29] Later works: (1) Aryabhatlya by Aryabhata, (2) pa.ncha-siddhAntika aka bRRihat-saMhitA by varAhamihira, (3) brahmasphuTa-siddhAnta, & khaNDa-khAdyaka by brahmagupta, (4) mahAbhAskarlya, and laghu-bhAskarlya by bhAskara-1, (5) grahAdhyAya, and golAdhyAya by lallA, (6) siddhAnta shekhara by shrIpati, and (7) siddhAnta shiromaNi by bhAskara-2. There is a huge time-gap between lagadha (c.1200BC) & Aryabhata (c. 500) in which sUrya-siddhAnta (c.300BC-200) based on the solar calendar came up. varAhamihira's bRRihatsaMhitA refers to parAshara, garga, vRRiddhagarga, asita, and devala whose works are not extant but they are probably anterior to Buddha (ibid.) [30] Application of the means of knowledge and the resultant changes in cognitive states are associated with actions and motion; hence here knowledge is described as process. However, in Advaita, knowledge in itself is not action (karma). This fact has soteriological and metaphysical significance (ibid.). [31] Canonical texts which deal with the code of conduct and are based on shruti [Veda] are known as [smRRiti]. They include (A) bhagavadgItA [BG]; (B) About 18 smRRiti-s viz. (1) a.ngirasa, (2) vyAsa, (3) daxa, (4) parAshara, (5) ApastaMba, (6) yAGYavalkya, (7) viShNu, (8) atri, (9) likhita, (10) saMvarta, (11) sha.nkha, (12) bRRihaspati, (13) kAtyAyana, (14) manu, (15) aushanasa (16) gautama, (17) hArita, (18) yama; & (C) as many supplementary smRRiti texts. Their applicability depends on the place, time, & context. These texts & dharma-sUtra-s (Vedanga) are collectively known as dharma-shAstra. Some times smRRiti-s are said to include Vedanga, epics, purANa-s (ibid.), and Agama-s (ibid.) [32] The word shruti (hearing) implies perception that is aparoxa though it is shabda (verbal testimony); whereas smRRiti (memory) implies indirect (paroxa) know-ledge. The smRRiti is valid insofar as it does not contradict shruti; in case of contradiction shruti prevails (mImAMsA sUtra 1.3.3). [33] Ability of shruti (Veda) to impart immediate Knowledge is not uniformly accepted; bhAmatl school holds that the knowledge gained by hearing a salient shruti sentence is mediate; Self-realization is possible thereafter only by sustained meditation (ibid.) [34] Experiencing the absence of plurality as Atman at the

empirical level is a point of debate. Atman appearing as a "pure subject" in the embodied soul is not knowable by noetic-empirical means due to infinite regress. The traditional Seeker however, aspires to realize Atman by an esoteric experience of non-duality called aparoxa-anubhUti or samAdhi. Later (see 2.3) we will see that the immediate perception itself has Atman as substratum; however, we fail to 'realize' it due to Ignorance. [35] The terms Existence, and Consciousness are used synonymously and respect-ively for Being, and Awareness. Infinity usually means being endless [ananta] and (hence) beginningless [anAdi]. More specifically it means something phys-ically and conceptually immeasurable and uncountable suggesting a transcend-ence beyond space-time-causality. [36] Sometimes experiencing anantatva (infinitude) is equated with "joy of pure being - of unlimited sovereignty or total independence" [Ananda], and triad of sat-chit-Ananda [sachchidAnanda] is taken as coreference of brahman. Exist-ence, Awareness, Infinity however, are not attributes of brahman; they are only pointers for negation of their opposites in brahman, which can be described only as via-negativa. [37] Ref BSBh 1.1.1, VS 2.15-26, VC 17-27 etc. Five of the six-treasures viz shAnta, dAnta, uparata, titixu, samAhita are mentioned in BU 4.4.23 (kANva recension) as auxiliaries (a.nga) of Knowledge. The sixth one (shraddhA) is mentioned in BU 4.4.23 (mAdhyandina recension). This sextet of treasures (ShaTsaMpatti) constitutes one of the means of sAdhana-chatuShTaya. [38] Knowledge occurs when the inmost core (Atman) of the soul decides to reveal Itself. Since Atman is nothing but brahman which has no doer-ship (kartRRitva), this realization has certain chance element. Further, the six means which are applicable in the relative domain, are not directly applicable to Absolute (Knowledge). Vedanta tradition suggests some methods like 'super-position-negation', 'continuity-discontinuity' etc for (teaching) Self realization (ibid. 2.5-2.8 and 4). [39] sureshvara is said to be the direct disciple of sha.nkara. He is credited with the vArtika school due to his vArtika- S (sub-commentaries) on sha.nkara's comme-ntaries on bRRihadAraNyaka and taittirlya UP. He also wrote an independent work - naiShkarmya siddhi (NS). [401 Exegetes do not accept this distinction between AT and KT. For them whole Veda is AT; and KT is just a part of that whole. Vedantins reject this notion. They argue that KT differs from AT in respect of all the four anubandha-s applicable to a text viz. (a) subject, (b) its treatment, (c) its goal, and (d) qualifications

of the follower. The anubandha-s for KT are: Knowledge, its exposition, Realization, and the purified mind; while the anubandha-s for AT are: actions, their discussions, results, and qualifying injunctions. KT & AT operate in different spheres with different goals; according to sha.nkara they cannot be operationally combined. [41] Knowledge [brahma-GYAna] and moxa are closely related. Realization of Self invariably leads to moxa which is the cessation of 'transmigratory cycle of the jIva. [42] Probably sha.nkara had in his mind only male student of Vedanta when he taught saMnyAsa. However, in Advaita, Self is a genderless. [43] "Incompatibility between Knowledge & action" is a problematic thesis. Vedanta tradition responds to it in various ways: (a) accept the thesis and renunciate all actions, (b) reject the thesis and combine action and Knowledge, (c) modify the thesis to renounce only selfish actions. BG supports these 3-ways typically and respectively in 18.66, 3.20 & 18.2. sha.nkara proposes total renunciation as in (a), though he does not contradict BG verses which teach (b) and (c). He seems to allow certain actions for the purification of mind (BG 3.19-20, US 17.22). KA tradition assumes that there exists pure mind-states which result in, and can be consolidated by the selfless work. Selfless work (niShkAma-karma), devotional work (bhakti), mind- control (yoga) etc are all included in the path of Liberation; these are but means of mind-purification. In the 'pure persisting' mind (nididhyAsa); Knowledge reveals by itself. Knowledge is the only 'sine qua non' for Liberation in Advaita (see Ch-2.3, Ch-4). Traditional view that sees obligatory duties (nitya- naimittika karma) as a mind -purifier, as an 'indirect cause' of Knowledge is articulated by sureshvara (NS 1.45-52) though he rejects combination of Knowledge and karma in the same person at the same time (NS 1.55-68). [44] According to Max Mueller, a German philologist and pioneer Indologist, upaniShad literally means "sit down near" (upa = near, ni = down, sad = sit) which meant that the spiritual aspirant had to sit near the teacher, with devotion, to learn the doctrine. Vedanta tradition treats UP as an esoteric secret knowledge as evident from assertions like 'guhyAdesha' (ChAndogya 3.5.2), 'paramam guhyam' (kaTha 1.3.17), 'veda-guhya-upaniShatsu gUDham' (shvetAsvatara 5.6) etc. In US 2.1.26 sha.nkara gives another definition. The word upaniShat is derived from the root sad (to mitigate, or to destroy, or to go) prefixed by upa (near) and ni (completely, certainly), and followed by suffix kwip (which

disappears according to aShTAdhyAyI 3.2.61). Thus, the upaniShat is that which mitigates bondage of birth, old age etc. It enables the man to approach brahman. sha.nkara explains in his UP commentaries: upaniShad-s are so named because they destroy inborn Ignorance (ref BUBh), and they 'conduct' to brahman (ref KUBh). Modern scholarship however, is una-nimous in accepting UP's historical secret, esoteric aspect. UP become the primary source of all vaidika (Astika) philosophies as they are the philosophical conclusions of Veda. <In the Note, Up. abbreviates single upaniShad; UP stands for its plural> [45] We can find out number of quotes for each Up. in BSBh: CU (809), BU (565), TU (142), MU (129), KU (103), Kau (88), SU (53), (agnirahasya (40)), PU (38), AU (22), jAbAla (13), (mahA)nArAyaNa (9), IU (8), pai.ngI (6), KEU (5), (GK(2)). (ref 8.3(9)). [46] Many more works are traditionally attributed to sha.nkara. The modern scholarship of Hacker, Mayeda, and Ingalls etc. is of the opinion that among all these works, commentaries on BS, BG, GK, and the ten-UP, along with the non-commentarial collection called upadeshasAhasrI [US] are sha.nkara's definitive Vedanta works which conform to the criterion of his BS authorship. He might have written few other works such as vivaraNa on yogasUtra-bhAShya of vyAsa, & bhAShya on adhyAtma-paTala (a chapter of Apastamba dharmasUtra related to the inner Self). There is a possibility that GK itself was a text of already existing school of Vedanta paralleling the viGYAnavAda (ref "AgamashAstra of gauDapAda" by V. S. Bhattacharya) or paralleling and influencing the mAdhyamaka (ref "Central Philosophy of Buddhism" by TRV Murti). In such a case, gauDapAda could be GK's editor, and not necessarily its original author. As the paramaguru (GKBh 4.100.2) and the gurorgarlya (US 18.2) of sha.nkara, he is assigned to the 7thC, though from the cross references he could be placed between c.400-600 to conform to GK's original authorship. The terms paramaguru and gurorgarlya would then mean 'supreme preceptor' and not 'teacher's teacher' in a literal sense. Whether gauDapAda's GK-authorship is nominal or substantial, GK is the pioneering treatise of Advaita. [47] Such as ArSheya, ChAgaleya, shaunaka, bAShkalamantra, and kaThashixA. The texts of first four UP were published for the first time in 1958, along with the prime-13 UP and the jaiminlya Up. by Limaye & Wadekar for the Vedic Sam- shodhan Mandal, Poona. The kaThashixA was reconstructed by M. Witzel in the Journal of Nepal Research Centre (vol-1) in 1977.

[48] (a) There are many such preferred UP lists (Refer. "Sixty Upanishads of the Veda": Paul Deussen's work in German translated by Bedekar and Palsule & published by MLBD, 1980). (b) Muktika list contains 108 UP. According to Deussen, complete text of the '108 UP' was published in 1883 in Telugu. Later it was found that the text was with commentaries by Upanishad Brahmayogin aka Shri Ramachandrendra belonging to Kanchi Math. (c) Oupnek'hat collect-ion in Persian is the first known collection of about 50 UP translated in a non-Indic language. It was done at the behest of Mughal prince Dara Shikoh in 1656-57. (d) Nirnayasagar Press listed and printed the 120 UP (5th Edn. 1948; Bombay) [491 In Table-3, UP are classified according to their shAkhA. They can also be classified according to their purport: sAmAnya (general); saMnyAsa (renun-ciation); yoga (mind control); shaiva (eulogy of shiva), shAkta (eulogy of shakti), vaiShNava (eulogy of viShNu). (ref 8.1:15(a)) The source of English translation is given in angular brackets. Where- ever English translation is not 'separately' available (mainly for sUkta-s), reference within original (Sanskrit) corpus is given in round brackets. Refer 8.1(4) and 8.3(2b) for rigorous translations of 13- prime UP; refer 8.1 (1-7); 8.1(15), 8.1(17a-d), 8.3(23), 8.3(37) etc. for Sanskrit Texts. [50] A feature based selection: (56) pai.ngala [Pai] is in Muktika List [ML], and Oupnek'hat List [OL]. Pai 2.18 supports adhyAropApavAda method (ibid.); (57) maho.apaniShad[Mah] is in ML and OL. It gives the famous maxim -वसुधैव कुटुंबकं(Mah 6.72-73) (world is one family). Its earliest ref is in the nArAyaNIya section of shAntiparva (MB 12.325.2, & 12.326.100) suggesting its BC lineage from pa.ncharAtra Agama. sha.nkarAnanda (c.1290) wrote commentary on it; (58) vajrasUchi [Vjr] is included in ML. Vjr's idea of 'true Brahmana' has parallel in Bauddha canon (e.g. Digha Nikaya 4: Sonadanda Sutta) suggesting a shared BC antiquity. Vjr (58) and ChAgaleya (19) [Chg] can be interpreted to undermine birth based distinctions; (59) AruNi [Aru] is one of the oldest saMnyAsa UP which is included in both OL, ML; (60) ML places sarasvatI rahasya [SR] in KYV; it is a shAkta Up. SR 13-31 (w/o 14, 21, 28) correspond to DDV 52-66 (ref 8.2(6)), suggesting a possible post-1300 date to SR and ML. [51] In the opinion of sha.nkara and sureshvara, while action and devotion are useful for 'purification of mind' - an intermediate stage in the path of Liberation; Knowledge is the only necessary and sufficient condition for Liberation. In post- sha.nkaratradition, devotion itself was equated with "seeking Self

realization" (स्वस्वरूपानुसंधान) and "inquiry into the Truth"(तत्त्व जिज्ञासOा) (VC 31-32). [52] Unlike Veda, BG is available to all. Veda were not available to women and shUdra (ref BSBh 1.3.34-38). One may now argue that sha.nkara could have used his stature to remove these prohibitions and made Vedic study available to all, particularly when: (a) the story of jAbAla (CU 4.4) was open for correct interpretation with scriptural support from SYV 26.2, Vjr, Chg, BG, MB etc; (b) RV & UP had women participation; (c) Knowledge is not bound by karma or Vedic commands. sha.nkara however, demanded tough prerequisites - total detachment from the world and commitment to the life of austerity and endurence. Knowledge for him was only for spiritual liberation and not for material advancement. This in itself was not likely to be attractive to those of worldly disposition irrespective of their class or gender. [53] MB is one of the two major epics of India; the other one is rAmAyaNa. Both epics are part of itihAsa, the (mythical) history of India. MB is a multilayered work composed-compiled over many centuries. It has 18-sections (parva-s); BG is placed in 6th section (bhIShma-parva). The harivaMsha-purANa (16.3k verses), which gives genealogy and hagio-graphy of kRRiShNa is considered as khila (supplement) to MB. [54] BG's antiquity and its relationship with MB, UP, BS, bhAgavata tradition and bauddha texts is discussed in BGR:4Rf&rg प्रकरण(ref 8.3(34)). [55] sUrya-siddhAnta [SUS] that originated during 300BC-200 gives the kalpa (brahmA's day) as 1 x 360 x 12000 x 1000 = 4.32 billion human yrs. (1 human yr = 1 divine 'day+night', 360 divine 'day + nights' = 1 divine yr, 12000 divine yrs = 1 great-epoch, 1000 great-epochs = 1 brahmA day = 1 brahma night. The great- epoch is divided in four epochs viz. kRRita, tretA, dvApara, kali in 4:3:2:1 ratio. The kalpa cycles are infinite in number). Ref: (a) SUS Ch 1.11-23; (b) viShNu-purANa Bk-1.3; (c) manu-smRRiti 1.69-73, 1.79; (d) MB 12.231.18-31; (e) 8.3(34): BGR Ch 8. [56] This is an attributive panentheistic position in relation to the ultimate supra-conceptual reality of Ch-13. [57] brahman is beyond the terminology of being or non- being, which are merely attributive words. Ultimate reality is supra-conceptual, beyond words and conceptualization. [58] BS authorship is ascribed to bAdarAyaNa. BGR

(p.320-324) opines that bAdarAyaNa & vyAsa - the author of MB could be one and the same person (ref 8.3(34)). In general 'vyAsa' may be an honorific title for the compiler-composer of scriptures, assigned to more than one person. [59] shAstra-s are normally classified as: 1) shruti (Veda), 2) smRRiti (code of conduct), 3) itihAsa (historical epics), 4) purANa (collection of various topics such as but not confined to: 4a) history (itihAsa), 4b) creation (sarga), 4c) recreation (pratisarga), 4d) genealogy of kings (vaMsha), 4e) reigns of manu-s (manvantara)), 5) Agama (theology), 6) darshana (philosophy). Generally, 3)-6) are treated as tertiary sources, though Agama-s acquire foundational status for their respective followers. There are about 21 major purANa-s: 1/ skanda (81.1k), 2/ padma (55k), 3/ yoga-vAsiShTha (32k), 4/ nArada (25k), 5/ varAha (24k), 6/ vAyu (24k), 7/ shiva (24k), 8/ vishNu (23k), 9/ garuDa (19k), 10/ bhAgavata (18k), 11/ kUrma (17k), 12/ brahmavaivarta, (17k), 13/ harivaMsha (16.3k), 14/ agni (15.4k), 15/ bhaviShya (14.5k), 16/ matsya (14k), 17/ brahmANDa (12k), 18/ li.nga (11k), 19/ brahma (10k), 20/ vAmana (10k), 21/ mArkaNDeya (9k). (Totaling over 470k verses, parenthesized figures being number of verses). There are many small purANa-s too. The Agama-s are compendium of divine worship. They include tantra (techniques), mantra (revealed words) and yantra (conception of respi-ratory system). They also give details about metaphysics & cosmology, liberation, devotion, meditation, philosophy of mantra, mystic diagrams, charms & spells, temple- building, image-making, domestic observance, social rules, public festivals, etc. Agama-s do not derive their authority from Veda and hence are said to be sectarian though they could be universal in purport. They are broadly divided into three sectors: shaiva, vaiShNava, & shAkta representing the three main sects of Hinduism. shaiva Agama-s glorify God as shiva; vaiShNava Agama-s glorify God as viShNu; shAkta Agama-s glorify God as the Mother of the Universe - as shakti or devii. Agama-s are considered as Vedic in the sense that they are not antagonistic to Veda. Many Jain and bauddha texts have Agamika character, though they do not accept Vedic authority. There are six vaidika or Astika darshana-s (orthodox schools): vedAnta (non-dualism), mImAMsA (exegesis), sA.nkhya (dualism), yoga (mind-control), nyAya (logic), and vaisheShika (atomism). It is now customary to counterpoise six avaidika or nAstika darshana-s (heterodox schools): mAdhyamaka (holistic non- dualism), yogAchAra aka viGYAnavAda (processual idealism),

vaibhAshika (particularists), sautrAntika (sutra-followers), Jain (ethical pluralism), lokAyata (materialism). First four are bauddha schools, while lokAyata could be a loose term originally used for schools of materialism (chArvAka), agnosticism (aGYeyavAda), fatalism (AjIvaka) etc. [60] nyAya = Logic and dialectics; hence nyAyaprasthAna stands for source of Knowledge which is open to logic and dialectics for the systemization and realization (leading to Liberation). [61] brahman is described here by incidental pointers (taTastha laxaNa), & not by Its essential nature (svarUpa laxaNa), which is Truth-Knowledge-Infinity. It is described via-negativa later in BS 3.2.17, 3.2.22 etc. [62] Systemic guidelines used by sha.nkara for extracting consistency from scriptures are summarized in (2.0) along with their metaphysical criteria in (2.1a) and exegetical criteria in (2.1b). These are explained in rest of the section-2 and illustrated in (2.8). [63] (3.2.11) demonstrates interpretative flexibility of BS. If we assume ' to be applicable only toRdisufo(as rAmAnuja, niMbArkadid) & not to the whole of स्थानतोऽपि परस्य उभयलिङ्गू' (as sha.nkara did); we can interpret the aphorism differently; brahmanwill then have two-fold nature rather than unitary nature. (However,सर्वत्र हि seems to go in sha.nkara's favor). [64] See Ch 0.0 (Intro.). These metaphysical levels are essentially epistemic positions; however, in KA they converge onto the ontological grades viz pAramArthika (aka adhyAtmika, adhibhautika, pAraloukika, or parA) as 'absol-utely real' (satya), vyAvahArika (aka prApa.nchika, bhautika, laukika, aparA) as indeterminate (mithyA). Here, 'cosmic' means worldly or empirical, while acosmic means other worldly or transcendental. Sometime 'cosmic' also means universal. Whether 'cosmic' points to a 'world process' or to the 'all pervading universal' will be clear from the context. Other view-points such as yauktika (inferential), illusory (prAtibhAsika) etc. are included in the relative fold. The 'relative reality' can also be termed as 'relational reality'; it is always defined in relation to something else. As an aggregate totality, it is defined in relation with brahman; its very existence is dependent on brahman, though brahman is relationless (BU 3.8.8, 3.9.26, 4.2.4 etc) & independent (see 2.1, 2.3). [65] The laxaNA means secondary meaning that may exclude (jahat) or not exclude (ajahat) the primary meaning. This method is usually a part of general way to find the 'common relational base' [sAmAnyAdhikaraNa] or the 'impartite meaning'

[akhaNDArtha] of supra-relational sentences. All such methods are used in the 'posterior exegesis' [uttara mImAMsA] in respect of KT's salient sentences. Applicability of maxims of 'anterior exegesis' [pUrva mImAMsA] like apachCheda nyAya - principle of the subsequent sub-lating the earlier - etc. are not discussed in this Note. [66] We may call them C4 criteria of reality - 'constancy' and 'completeness' are criteria of absolute Reality, while the other two are of relative reality. Interrelated concepts of 'identity' and 'dependency' are implicit in C4. Advaita assumes Identity ('inmost Self or Atman) as the basis of reality which is nothing but totally independent brahman, the substratum of all beings. According to KA, something is Real or True, if: (1) It is cognition independent [amatam, aviGYAtam], because Truth is not subjective; (2) It is constant [nitya] because Identity can not change; (3) It is acausal & acosmic [nishprapa.ncha] because Reality is independent of space- time -causality; (4) It is complete in itself, without attributes or parts [nirguNa, niravayava] because parts etc inject dependency. KA postulates such independent Reality in the name of brahman, and identifies it with Self [Atman]. Total dependence implies 'illusory appearance' [vivarta] like a reflection, a shadow, or an imaginary snake in a rope. Universe, which is said to be totally dependent on brahman is mere appearance. Only brahman is complete per se and transcends the relativity of empirical cognition and causality. <C4 are further discussed in 2.3> [67] उपक्रमोपसंहारावभ्यासोऽपूर्वताफलं | अर्थावादोपपत्ती च लिंगं तात्पर्यनिर्णये Il (Prologue and epilogue consistency, reiteration, originality, result, eulogy, and reason are the (six) exegetical criteria (ref 8.2(3): VS V.184). (E6 criteria) [68] The theme should have a novelty, and not mere contextual variation; abhyAsa is necessary before the theme is categorized, but apUrvatva needs to be maintained amongst the categories. [69] It should have a metaphysical purport and its utility should be universal. [70] Metaphysical queries are based on C4-criteria. Consistency between C4 & E6 criteria is to be maintained when they are applied to the text. If there is conflict; it is resolved by the methods described in 2.5-8. These criteria and methods are applications of the means of knowledge. [71] For example, BGRapplies criterion ofउपक्रम-उपसंहार ऐक्य to discern BG's teaching as a way of GYAna-karma- samuchchaya(ब्रह्मविद्यांतर्गत कर्मयोग) (ref 8.3 (34): Ch-1). sha.nkara however, teaches the path of total renunciation(सर्वकर्म-संन्यास) based

on KT and interprets BG accordingly (ref 8.1(6)). Equanimity (H4dd) is common to both paths. It is reflected in verses like BG 13.27-28, BG 6.29-30 etc. [72] Ref US 17.4, US 17.9. Socially, this is a radical egalitarian view. In the Indic regions, right from Buddha's times such a view was always associated with the enlightend person, but it could never reflect into social order of the day. Probably sha.nkaratoo never intended any radical social reforms. A 14thC hagiography (419dr शंकरदिग्विजय) describes him as a divine personality and a renunciate cum prodigious scholar who established the supremacy of Vedanta theology all over India in a short life-span of 32 years. [73] This hymn also appears in taittirlya brAhmaNa(2.8.9). The name of the hymn is derived from the hymn's first combined wordRGTHldQ (nAsad AsIt). The exploratory nature of ideas expressed therein and synchro-nism of RV Bk-10 with MB and late SSC etc could place the hymn in the 14th-15thCBC (see 5.1.4); however, the novelty & depth of its ideas could as well place it in any other later times. The first verse indicates the inadequacy of the concepts of 'being' and 'non-being' for expressing 'That One'. Verses (2, 3, 4) are the origin of the multiplicity of ideas:तदेकं (That One),स्वधा (~mAyA, prANa, spanda sphUrti),HHQ(~Ignorance, darkness, inertia),45(~low order, illusory flux, chaos),3T99 (potent, void),तपस (~shakti, heat, light),काम (~desire to produce), रेत (~seed potency). Verse 5 can be interpreted as the scenario of "primal production". Verses (6, 7) register an open, agnostic position which is the origin of doctrinal "inexplicableness" and "indeterminism" (anirvachanlyatva and mithyAtva) of Advaita (ibid.). It is possible to trace the origins of all major Indic monist schools to this hymn due to its polysemy. [74] The metrical rendering in English is by John Muir; OST vol-5 (1872). The hymn avoids personification & theist coloring to reach the threshold of absolute monism of UP. The ultimate principle is addressed as "That One" [tadekam] to suggest nothing beyond its positive unitary nature. In the end the hymn registers an open position about manifest universe, though its semantic field offers multiple possibilities. [75] BU (of SYV) is most conducive to KA philosophy. It is one of the biggest (6 chapters, 47 sections, 435 mantra-s) and oldest UP. Stanza (3.8.8-9) and 'neti-neti' description (4.2.4) etc

offer scriptural support to acosmic (nirguNa) brahman. mantra-s (1.4.10, 2.5.1-14, 3.4.1-2, 3.5.1, 3.7.3-23, 4.4.5) promulgate the axiom of transcendental identity Atman=brahman including mahA- vAkya "I am brahman" [अहं ब्रह्मास्म] (1.4.10). BU 4.4.19 denies the multiplicity of relative world. BU 2.4.14 and 3.8.11 explain appearance of 'pure subject' - the unseen Seer, the unthought Thinker, the unknown Knower. Vedanta tradition of hearing, pondering, and sustained meditation is based on (2.4.5). BU refers meditation methods (vidyA) like antarAditya (5.52), pa.nchAgni (6.2), prANAgni-hotra (5.9) & udgItha (5.8.1). BU 4.3 discusses three-states (avasthA-traya) of wake-fulness, dreaming, and sleep to conclude that in deep sleep soul attains the supreme bliss, the Ignorance being at rest & the self (jIvAtmA) is said to be in unity with Self (Atman); there is no mention of the transcendental Fourth. BU offers two famous invocations:असतो मा सद्गमय .. (1.3.37), andपूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं .. (5.1). [76] "Not this, Not this" is also repeated in BU 3.9.26, 4.2.4, 4.4.22, 4.5.15. [77] CU (of SV) is one of the two biggest & oldest UP quoted most frequen-tly by sha.nkara in his commentaries. It has 8 chapters, 154 sections, and 628 mantra-s. It begins with meditation on OM, sung by udgAtRRi priests. Ch-2 recommends various meditations (vidyA-s) with sAman-s (mantra-s of SV) including reference to four Ashrama-s (life-stages) and the Knower (of brahman) attaining immortality. In the ensuing chapters; vidyA-s like madhu (3.1-11), gAyatrI (3.12), shANDilya (3.14), puruSha (3.16-17), saMvarga (4.3), upakosala (4.10-15), axipuruSha (4.15.1), pa.nchAgni (5.3-10), vaishvAnara (5.10-17), sat (6.1-2), bhUmA (7.23-25) and dahara (8.1) are referred. The pa.nchAgni (which also appears in BU) delineates the process by which the dead returns to this world. It sees sacrificial fire as the metaphor for Universe (heaven, earth, rain-god, man, woman) and sees the sacrifice as the cosmic process. Ch-6 is philosophically the most important chapter in which Vedanta's version of satkAryavAda (cause and effect relation) is explained using various similes to assert that all forms are only names based on words and that only material (cause) of which these forms are made is true. It also asserts Atman= brahman identity in the 'great sentence' (mahAvAkya) - Thou Art That [drqyfo] which is repeated nine times (6.8-16) in CU. In Ch-7 sanatkumAra guides nArada; and in Ch-8 prajApati leads Indra, in stages, to the Knowledge of Self. [78] TU (of KYV) has 3 chapters & 31 mantra-s. Ch-2 (brahmAnanda vallii) opens with the declaration "Knower of brahman attains the highest". It offers the most authentic

description of brahman viz Truth-Knowledge-Infinity (2.1.1). It then outlines the concept of five sheaths of personality with increasing interiority, which is adopted & termed by sha.nkara as pa.nchakosha. TU separately identifies brahman with Truth (2.6.1), with Knowledge (3.5.1), and with Bliss (2.4.1, 2.4.9, 2.7.1, 2.9.1, 3.6.1). Advaita tradition interpreted Bliss (peace) as the experience of Infinity & described brahman as "Existence-Awareness-Bliss" [sat- chit-Ananda]. TU brings forth the Ananda [bliss] aspect of the brahman saliently. [791 KU (of KYV) has 6 chapters & 120 mantra-s. It is built around the story of nachiketA who saw his father gifting away use- less cows. He offered himself to make good this imperfect sacrifice. His father in a fit of rage cursed his son 'I give you to death'. In obedience nachiketA approached yama, the God of death, & in the process acquired Knowledge, which is worded in the Up. (1.2.1 -2) talks about two choices before humans, one of preyas (short term 'pleasure') & another of shreyas (long term 'goodness'). It declares Knowledge (of Self) as the highest aspect of shreyas; while preyas is said to be the path of Ignorance (avidyA). KU declares Atman to be unborn, eternal & acausal (1.2.18). Self reveals Itself on Its own (1.2.23), and on the other hand Self-realization is not possible without self-control (1.2.24). KU uses metaphor of chariot (1.3.3-9) in which self or soul (here called Atman) is the master of chariot; intellect is the charioteer; and final destination (param padam) is the abode of God, which is described as puruSha (1.3.11), & "That" (acosmic brahman) (1.3.15). Absolute idealism [nirupAdhika chidvAda] of KU is expressed in (2.2.15). KU is multi-faceted with absolutist, theist, kArmika, and yogika strands. [80] MU (of AV) comprises 3 chapters, 6 sections & 64 mantra-s. To start with MU declares that brahman is the basis of all knowledge (1.1.1). It divides the knowledge as "upper Knowledge" (para vidyA) of brahman & "lower know-ledge" (apara vidyA) of empirical shAstra including Veda (1.1.4). MU points out limitations of sacrificial rituals (yaGYa). It advises the Seeker to eschew them like a fragile raft (1.2.7), to take to the life of renunciation, and approach Guru for Knowledge [brahma-vidyA] (1.2.12 -13). MU 1.2.7 is the strongest possible statement of Vedanta against the sacrificial rituals. MU teaches the panentheistic principle named puruSha (2.1.2), knowing which the knot of Ignorance is dissolved (2.1.10) and actions are dissipated (2.2.8). The absolute idealism [nirupAdhika chidvAda] of KU is declared here in the same words (2.2.10) as also with the same belief that Self reveals Itself on Its own (3.2.3). The metaphor of "two birds perching on the same tree" appears in (3.1.1) while the well known declaration that

"Truth alone wins and not untruth" [सत्यमेव जयते नानृतम्] appears in (3.1.6). [81] AU (of RV) has 3 chapters, 5 sections, and 33 mantra- s. In Ch-1 it says "in the beginning the Atman was one alone and thought "let Me create the worlds" (1.1.1). It then gives rather elaborate account of "creation" with His entry into the soul (1.3.12). AU distinguishes between the mind and the Consciousness in the last chapter and gives important "Consciousness is brahman" प्रज्ञानं ब्रह्म. mahA-vAkya:

[82] MAU (of AV) is the smallest (12 mantra), but one of the most important UP because: (a) it uses every day experience of three states (avasthA -traya) of wakefulness (jAgrutl), dream (svapna), and sleep (sushuptl) to derive its truth of the Fourth (turlya), the ultimate Reality; and (b) a commentary (kArikA) based on this Up. and attributed to gauDapAda is the earliest extant record of Advaita as a system. MAU's second mantra gives the 'great sentence' (mahAvAkya): "This Self is brahman" [अयमात्मा ब्रहम], while mantra-7 describes Self (brahman) as turlya in the manner of neti neti, to express Its acosmic nature. [83] KEU (of SV), also known as talavakAra Up. has 4 chapters and 35 mantra-s. Its first half is metrical and the second half is prose. In Ch-1 brahman is described as Atman which cannot be known or perceived as an object, it being a pure subject and the support of all our sense organs and mind (1.2-8). When this pure subject - the Seer, the Knower etc is realized; that person becomes immortal (1.9). Ch-2 describes the inscrutable nature of brahman. Ch-4 describes brahman by secondary adjectives such as adorable (vanam) (4.6) & ananta svargaloka (bound-less bliss), and the Knower is said to remain firmly seated (there) (4.9). [84] PU (of AV) has 6 chapters each dealing with one of the 6 questions asked by 6 sages to seer pippalAda. The discourse is described in 67 mantra-s. The last three questions, according to Anandagirl's gloss, pertain to MU 2.1.1, 2.2.4, and 2.1.3 respectively. In Ch-1 prajApati (the Lord of All) is said to create the universe through the combination of rayi (soma or matter) and prANa (fire or Aditya or spirit). Ch-2 describes main prANa (life- force) as the support of the body while, Ch-3 traces it to the Self. Ch-4 discusses dream and deep sleep. In the later, jIva is said to merge with supreme Self (Atman). PU 4.8 describes subtle & gross elements. The next chapter delineates the meditation on praNava(3: OM) to attain brahmaloka, while in last chapter, shodaSha-kalA-puruSha (person with 16 parts), after destruction of

the parts, becomes puruSha (Atman) like flowing rivers get absorbed in Sea and are called Sea only (6.6). [85] IU (of SYV) with 17 mantra-s is one of the smallest and the only one of 10-UP coming in saMhitAportion. It is also one of the earliest & clearest pantheist expressions. It teaches that the whole universe is pervaded by $&T (Godhead). IU encourages the human beings to live full life by performing karma (duties) (2). After describing the nature of Atman, IU declares that one who has realized Self sees the same in others and transcends sorrow and delusion. It prefers avidyA (here, karma as duty) over vidyA (here, meditation without faith) (9). It also prefers asaMbhUti (meditation of unmanifest) over saMbhUti (meditation of manifest) (12). IU can be seen as the harbinger of BG's karmayoga. [86] SU (of KYV) with 113 mantra-s is divided into six chapters. SU captures the flow, motion, and cyclic nature of the world process (saMsAra or brahma-chakra) (1.4-6), akin to bhavachakra of Buddhism. SU how-ever, brings out the difference between the two by refuting naturalism & confirming brahman as the impeller of this brahmachakra 'appearance' (6.1). SU is aware of the reality of impersonal and absolute brahman beyond existence and non-existence (4.18), beyond space and time (3.14, 5.13, 6.5), only as Witness (sAxi chetA) and w/o any qualities (nirguNa) (6.11). At the same time, SU displays its theist inclination by naming the highest reality as hara, rudra, shiva (1.10, 3.4&7, 4.10&12), demanding Its attention (3.5), declaring It to be the Lord of all - their cause and refuge (3.17), the beneficent (4.11), the creator of time and director of karma (6.2) etc. SU equates mAyA with prakRRiti as the very nature (and power) of God (4.10). SU alludes to vivarta (appearance) where the word vivartate is used for the first time in UP (6.2). SU describes cyclic dissolution and reproduction of Universe (3.2, 5.3, 6.3). Allusion to 3-fold guNa is there (4.5); karma theory comes explicitly in (5.7, 5.12) & implicitly in famous 'two birds' metaphor (4.6-7). Luminosity of ultimate reality is repeated here in (6.14), after KU 2.2.15 and MU 2.2.10. Most of these ideas are there in BG too which were picked up by later theist schools. The origin of sA.nkhya can be traced in (4.5), & in 'alternatively interpreted' (1.6). [87] sureshvara in BUBh-sv (919-922) distinguishes between (a) perception which reveals objects without differentiating them, and (b) cognition which differen-tiates perceived objects mediately. This perception (a) or direct experience is the basis of cognition; It is the undifferentiated

Awareness or Self [Atman]. In US 5.5, pure Experience, the residual cognition after removal of 'objective' part (idam aMsha) from it, is taken as Self. The commentators of US like rAma-tiirtha, bodhanidhi, and AnandaGYAna equate this pure Experience with sAxin (ref 8.3(16)). [88] In TUBhV 2.651 sureshvara argues: to know that 'consciousness' had a begin-ing at a point of time, the absence of consciousness prior to that point of time (prAgabhAva) needed to be known. The knower has to be a conscious entity because unconscious (insentient) entity can never be credited with the knowledge. In such a case consciousness has no prior non- existence; it is beginningless. Similarly, to know that consciousness ended at a point of time, the absence of consciousness posterior to that point of time (pradhvaMs-AbhAva) will have to be known. For any such knowledge, consciousness will be required posterior, making it endless. Therefore, consciousness is eternal. Also, consciousness is not limited by space-time since space-time is its product. Similar arguments can show that 'existence' too is eternal and unlimited. This undifferentiated limitless consciousness and pure being can be approached from the criteria of constancy and independence as well. Taking into account the eternal and unlimited nature (Infinitude) of Existence and Awareness; the triad of Existence-Awareness-Infinityis postulated. It is customary to state it as Truth-Knowledge-Infinity [सत्यं ज्ञानं अनंतं] as in TU or Being-Awareness-Bliss[सच्चिदानंद] as in later texts. (ref8.3(1): p.126-128 for genesis of the term सच्चिदानंद). [89] ushasta's and kahola's question (BU 3.4.1-2, BU 3.5.1) implicitly equates brahman with immediate and direct experience. Experience or cognition (vRRitti) in itself is unconscious. It becomes self-conscious & acquires quality (form, color, smell, intensity etc), due to Atman (pure Conscious-ness or chit) (US 18.65, 68). Here Atman is actionless (akriya), change-less (kUTastha), and constant (nitya); still It becomes the enabler of perception not by intention, but by Its mere existence. Mind pervades the object to 'situate' it (in itself) & is pervaded by reflection (pratibiMba) of pure Consciousness leading to perception, just like a jar (situated in space) is illumined by the light. Self here is mere witness (US 5.4, 14.3, 18.53-56, 94). There is integrity to the percept-ual experience because Self (sAxin) is able to see antaHkaraNa in its entirety which gives rise to the 'notion' of perceiver. In reality there is only perception without any perceiver (US-Prose 2.75, 77, 79). Reflection which pervades the mind, & the notional perceiver of integrated experience; both are appearance (AbhAsa) of one and the same entity - the Atman. (In post-sha.nkara vivaraNa tradition

however, the reflection is real). The false notion of perceiver-ship created in the mind is known as I-notion (aham). When qualitative component (qualia) is removed from the perception, what remains is substratum - immediate & direct experience, which is nothing but Awareness (Atman) appearing as chidAbhAsa (Also, see 3.3). [90] Though Advaita's overall position is idealistic; sha.nkara at times moves to realistic monism. In BSBh 1.1.4, he states that knowledge (GYAna) intrinsic-ally depends on the 'thing as it is' (vastu-tantra); and not 'on the injunction' (chodanA-tantra) or 'on the cognizer' (puruSha-tantra). Here sha.nkara accepts objective reality independent of subjective cognition. He refutes the yoga-chAra position that sees no difference between the knowledge and the object of knowledge (BSBh 2.2.28-29). Here too he asserts the cognition independent existence of objects by distinguishing between the dream & the waking state to stress the empirical reality of objects perceived in the waking state. However, elsewhere sha.nkara & gauDapAda claim the world to be unreal as a foam, as a mirage, as a dream, or as a magic show. In GKBh 3.29-31 the equivalence between the waking & the dream state is sought to be established by noting that duality exists only in the mind in both the states. US (16.34) equates 'external' objects with dream objects. This dichotomy of views arises due to two different standpoints from which sha.nkara argues. [91] According to sureshvara (NS 2.44-45), the objects of Awareness cannot be shown to exist independent of Awareness nor are they identical to Awareness, for then they would not be perceived at all. The ontological status of the world from ego onwards is indeterminable. Duality is not real; it is only an appearance (mithy Asiddha). [92] The earliest extant treatise to which this view is traced is brahma-siddhi of maNDana (ref S. N. Dasgupta, vol 2, p.84), though it can be traced to GK too. The brahmasiddhi says, it is the individual persons (jIvAH in plural) who by their 'own Ignorance' (sva-avidyayA) create for them-selves, on the changeless brahman, the false world appearance. [93] sarvaGYAtman, in his sa.nxepa-shArIraka [SS] maintains that the whole phenol-menal world is created by the Ignorance of one soul. To the pupil's question as to how can there be a distinction between bound souls & liberated souls, SS answers that Veda's purpose is not to expound this distinction but to expound the identity Atman=brahman. Further it says that one should not contradict the hypothesis simply because it contradicts experience. According to SS, experience of duality does not contradict ekajlva hypothesis, since this experience itself is

contradicted by the realization that 'all is Self (SS 2.128-219, 8.3(10): p.938-943). This view (ekajIvavAda) was expounded by GYAnottama bhattAraka (ref 8.3(5): p.82f) & later by prakAshAnanda and kAshmIraka sadAnanda (ref 8.3(17): p.118, 121). [94] bhAmat view: (a) manas is an internal sense-organ; (b) immediate cognition requires functioning of the external or internal sense-organs in direct contact with the object; (c) indirect means of knowledge cannot produce immediacy; (d) verbal testimony (of mahavAkya) gives mediate knowledge; thereafter Self can be realized by the sustained meditation. (SLS III. 4-5) vivaraNa view: (a) manas is not a sense-organ; (b) immediate know-ledge is produced by the inherent nature of object that is in the locus of the mind, and by the quality (state) of the mind; (c) indirect means of knowledge may produce immediacy; (d) testimony (mahAvAkya)can produce immediacy in the receptive (pure) mind. (VP:"दशमस्त्वमसि" इत्यादौ सन्निकृष्टविषये शब्दादप्यपरोक्षज्ञानाभ्युपगमात्). [95] Advaita identifies these dispositions as sAttvika vRRitti-s by adapting the sA.nkhya categories sattva (purity), rajas (activity), & tamas (inertia) according to their decreasing moral order and increasingly deformed subjectivity viz. knower-ship, doer-ship, and consumer-ship. In general; sattva, rajas, tamas have ethic as well as epistemic & ontologic content in matrix with the perceptual elements (tanmAtra-s) constituting the Ignorance (VS 34:अज्ञानं तु सदसद्भ्याम् अनिर्वचनीयं 'त्रिगुणात्मक' ज्ञानविरोधि भावरूपं). sAttvika vRRitti is egoless in a processual sense - it does not add to ego and is conducive to Knowledge. In BG this egoless knowledge manifests itself as sattva (serenity) in Ch-14, as daivI-saMpat (divine attributes) in Ch-16, as sAttvika shraddhA (pure conviction) in Ch-17, & as samatva(equanimity) in other Chapters. It leads to the ultimate Knowledge which is 'auspicious'(f21q4) (MaU-7) and 'supreme purifier-ennobler'(परं पावनं, पवित्रं परमं) (US 16.71, 17.85). The purifying content of this egoless knowledge (GYAna, anubhUti) - its ennobling ability to be conducive to Self-realization & Liberationis celebrated in BG 4.38: "Nothing exists here as purifying as Knowledge"(न हि ज्ञानेन सदृशं पवित्रमिह विद्यते). [961 Buddhists and mImAMsaka-s consider knowledge to be an 'activity'. In KA, knowledge is not an activity and hence does not create bondage (karmaphala). However, egocentric knowledge (vRRitti that is related to desire, lust, avarice etc.), though not in itself an activity, leads to karma and associated bondage (see 4.2, 4.3); this bondage does not exist in egoless knowledge. So, egoless knowledge though vRitti-GYAna, can transcend into absolute

Knowledge. Meditation is the process of mind- purification in which egoless states are firmed up and sustained. [97] TUBh 2.1.1, GK 2.6, GK 4.31. [98] The term mithyA [fye] is used for sublatable (secondary) reality. The sublation - negation and replacement of one cognition by another more valid cognition (pramA) - like imaginary snake is negated by the know-ledge of the rope - is technically known as bAdha [qT&]. Here the rope is upAdAna [उपादान] & the snake is vivarta [विवर्त], which is mithyA(विवर्तोनाम उपादानविषमसत्ताक-कार्यापत्ति: VP). In general, 'something' is mithyAif it is sublated(बाधित), perish-able(दृष्टनष्टस्वरूप), limited by the space-time- causality(परिच्छिन्न), objectifiable(विषयस्वरूप, नामरूप, इन्द्रियसंवेद्य), unconscious-material(जड, भौतिक), dependent(परतंत्र), purportless(असार), incomplete(अपूर्ण) etc. All such characteristics are explained in the frame-work of C4 criteria. [991 BU 3.8.8, KU 1.3.15, Ma 7. [100] sA.nkhya [Hi&] is an old Indic dualist school in which primal principles of (a) transcendental puruSha [y54], and (b) material prakRRiti [ufa] combine to produce the phenomenal world. [101] GK 2.31-32 are similar to (7.34, 25.1-2) of nAgArjuna's mUlamAdhya-maka-kArikA [MMK]. Collaborative spirit between KA and mAdhyamaka of that time is clear when GK 4.5 approves bauddha ajAtivAda (non-origination). GK 4.22 echoes MMK (21.13, 1.1, 1.7). If jAti is interpreted as the 'generic attributes or class (of names & forms)' and not as 'origin' then the ajAti is akin to sha.nkara's 'unseparated, unevolved name and form' (avyakta, avyAkRRita) of US (prose 1.18), which is a figment of Ignorance and is the 'germinal power' [bIjashakti] of universe (BSBh 2.14.1). GK has some commonality with language & ideas of bauddha texts. GK however, does not leave the thread of Atman as impartite Awareness and as the ground of all the changing world phenomenon. MMK's ajAtivAda is based on 'pratItya-samutpAda' (inter-dependent origination), while GK's ajAtivAda is based on Atman. That, ajAti-vAda was part of mainstream is clear from its reference in amRRitabindu 10, VC 574, PD 6.235, BG 2.16(-kdT विद्यते भावो नाभावो विद्यते सतः), and its echo in US 19.8(सतो ह्यनाशादसतोऽप्यजन्मतो) as 'law of conservation of Being'. [102] In vaisheShika School, new creation (AraMbha) is made of atoms (aNu-s) of earth, water, fire, air comprising undivisible, eternal point-particles (parama-aNu-s). In AraMbha vAda, production happens by conjunction & aggregation of aNu-s; while in satkArya vAda it happens by transform-ation (pariNAma)

of guNa-s. Point-like nature of paramANu-s suggests avyakta (Unmanifest) or void as the origin of creation. [103] Effect is not a manifestation of the cause but a conditional (dependent) occurrence of the consequent event. (See 5.2.1: appx. (B)) [104] BU 1.4.9: Through the Knowledge of brahman we shall become all (brahman); BU 2.4.5: By knowing This (Self) everything is known; BU 2.4.6: This all is this Self; BU 2.4.14: That because of which all this is known; CU 3.14.1: Verily, all this is brahman; BG 7.2: Knowing which nothing more here remains to be known; BG 7.7: Beyond Me there is naught; BG 7.19: all this is vAsudeva; BG 8.21: They call Him supreme Goal; MU 1.1.1: brahman is basis of all knowledge. MU 3.2.9: Any one who Knows brahman becomes brahman indeed; KU 1.3.11: He is the highest goal; KU 2.3.9: Those who Know Him become immortal; KU 2.3.8: Any one who becomes Knower thus of indwell-ing Self attains brahman; TU 2.1.1: Knower of brahman attains brahman. [105] Pai 1.2: 'complete in all respect' [yRyuf]; Mai 2.4: Independent, standing on his own power[स्वतंत्र, स्वे महिम्नि तिष्ठत्य]; CU 6.2.1:'one only, non-dual' [एकमेव-अद्वितीयं]; CU 7.24.1: living by its own power[स्वे महिम्नि प्रतिष्ठित:]; BUBh 4.3.23: self-luminous [स्वयंज्योति]; US 11.11: self-effulgent[स्वयंप्रभा]; US 18.203: self- evident [स्वतः प्रमाणक]; US (prose) 2.93: self-established,[स्वतः सिद्ध]; BU (4.3.15, 4.4.22, 4.5.15 etc.): non-relational [3RT]; BUBh 5.1.1: complete[संपूर्ण],unconditioned[निरुपाधिक]. VP (Ch-7, p.155): 'substratum of the superimpo-sition of Universe' [जगदध्यासाधिष्ठानत्वं]; All these aspects are part of brahman's completeness (yRyufrd) and independence (स्वातंत्र्य) which manifest as fearless-ness(अभयत्व) of the Knower (BU 4.4.25). [106] In US 17.4 sha.nkara says "There is no other attainment higher than that of Atman for the sake of which exist words of the Veda, smRRiti-s, as well as Actions". In US 17.9 he says, "The sole purpose of Veda is to Know (brahman) & understand the oneness of Atman (and brahman)as contained in one sentence (such as"तत्त्वमसि" or"अहम् ब्रह्मास्मि"etc.) [107] Translated by George Thibaut, in The Sacred Books of the East, vol. 34 edited by Max Mueller (Clarendon Press, 1890, 1896). Also, Ref 8.1(8). [108] Object: non-Self or matter [bhoutika vastu], Subject: Self (sAxi chetA or Consciousness) [109] Subject is characterized by sentience or qualitative experience while object is bound by space-time-cause and is deemed to be non-sentient.

[110] Simple (undifferentiated) Consciousness. [111] Such as when a nacre (Mother-of-Pearl) is mistaken for silver, the nacre is mentally connected with the image of silver memorized in the mind due to error in cognition in the form of supernormal connection with silver (anyathA-khyAti of nyAya school) or in the form of false ext-ernalization of subjective idea (Atma-khyAti of viGYAnavAda). In both these cases the superimposed object is said to be real, however, in madhva's dvaita, which otherwise follows the lead of nyAya, the super-imposed object is said to be unreal (abhinava-anyathA khyAti). This is then posited against Advaita's sadasavilaxaNa anirvachanIya khyAti by equating mithyA with asat and holding that asat (unreal) can be experienced; madhva holds that 'cognition of the unreal' (asat- pratIti), 'cognition of the illusory' (mithyA-pratIti), and 'cognition of the absent or non-existent' (abhAva-pratIti) are one and the same. [112] Such as the akhyAti of prabhAkara mishrA, which holds that the nacre-silver type of error is essentially a sequence of two cognitions: partial perception of nacre immediately followed by the memory of silver. prabhAkara refuses to call any of them as erroneous cognition & holds that confusion arises due to inability to discriminate between two types of cognition (asaMsargAgraha). As against this bhatta mImAMsA holds that confusion is because of 'wrong synthesis' (saMsargagraha). This view is known as viparIta- khyAti. (ref 8.3(6): p315-317). [113] Such as asat-khyAti view of mAdhyamaka where unreal silver appears in place of unreal nacre. [114] Along with this general position, some Vedantins subscribe to anir-vachanlya-khyAti (ref: IShTa-siddhi of vimuktAtman) where erroneous cognition is said to be indescribable or indeterminable. sA.nkhya view known as sadasat- khyAti however, sees the same thing as real and unreal in two different conditions (view of kapila) or sees united cognition of real and unreal object (view of aniruddha); while sat-khyAti or yathArtha khyAti of rAmAnuja treats both nacre and silver as real because silver has cognate elements of nacre. Falsity of perception, according to rAmAnuja lies not in the unreality of the object but in its failure to serve any practical purpose. The various theories of perceptual error are classified in four groups: (1) theories where the superimposed object is real [सत्ख्याति] such as nyAya's अन्यथा-ख्याति, yogAchAra's आत्म-ख्याति, kumArila bhatta'sविपरीत-ख्याति, rAmAnuja'sयथार्थ-ख्याति; (2) theories where the superimposed object prabhAkara's अख्याति, and

is both real and unreal(सदसत्ख्याति) such as sA.nkhya view of both

kapila and aniruddha; (3) error theories in which the superimposed object is unreal(असत्ख्याति) such as mAdhyamaka असत्ख्याति and madhva's अभिनव-अन्यथा-ख्याति;(4) super-imposed object is neither real nor unreal(सदसद्विलक्षण ख्याति) such asअनिर्वचनीय-ख्यातिof Advaita- Vedanta. [115] Objectification of Self due to which 'superimposition [adhyAsa] occurs is 'inexplicable'. Superimposition seems paradoxical due to reciprocal dependence & infinite regress involved in the process. Here sha.nkara seems to take adhyAsa as an axiomatic supposition. He calls adhyAsa as natural process (naisargika lokavyavahAra). [116] Here Ignorance [avidyA] itself is defined as superimposition [adhyAsa]. There is another view in the tradition, which extrapolates sha.nkara's other works and sees superimposition as the product of Ignorance. In this view Ignorance is of three types viz (1) non-cognition [agrahaNa], (2) wrong-cognition [viparIta-grahaNa], and (3) uncertain-cognition [saMshaya]. Non-cognition is said to be the root (mUla) of the other two types, which are 'variously' defined as the superimposition. In this causal sense root-Ignorance is said to be substantial (bhAvarUpa), though only 'relatively existent' [mithyA]. [117] The method can be traced to BGBh 13.13, BUBh 4.4.25, BUBh 2.3.6, CUBh 3.14.2-4, CUBh 6.2.1, GK 3.26. Pai 2.12 denotes adhyAropa-apavAda as a method capable of (teaching) Self-realization (अध्यारोप अपवादतः स्वरूपं निश्चयी-कर्तुम शक्यते ... जीवभावजगद्भावबाधे प्रत्यगभिन्नं ब्रह्मैवावशिष्यत इति). [118] Ref 8.2(3): vedAntasAra 2.33. [119] BSBh 3.2.22. This argument is based on the assumption that there has to be unchanging acosmic substratum (BU 3.8.9), which can (also) be seen as the material and the efficient cause of the Universe (BS 1.1.2). [120] US (metrical) 2.1

[121] VS (31) mentions adhyAropa-apavAda-nyAyaas a (standard) method that is part of teacher's instruction:H : परमकृपयाध्यारोपापवादन्यायेनैनउपदिशति। VS(32-136) imparts instructions as adhyAropa (superimpositions) and then VS (137-180) gives methods of apavAda (de-superimpositions), followed by steps to Self-realization (VS 181-215). [122] Such as khaNDanakhaNDakhAdya of shrIharSha, nyAyamakaranda of Anandabodha, tattvapradIpikA of chitsukha, advaitasiddhi of madhu-sUdana, gaudabrahmAnandI of brahmAnanda. The polemic continued in the 19thC (e.g. bhAShyavimarsha of

rAmarAya) and the 20thC (e.g. shatabhUShaNI of anantakRRiShNa shAstrI). [123] This scheme has been discussed in the linguistic framework of supra-relational sentences of 'impartite meaning' (akhaNDArtha) by many Advaitins. In general, exegetical methods analyzing the 'salient senten-ces' can be described in any of the frameworks of adhyAropApavAda, anvaya-vyatireka, jahat-ajahat laxaNA, sAmAnyAdhikaraNa, akhaNDa-artha or combination thereof.

[124] Refer 8.3(6): M. Hiriyanna (1932) (Chapter 2: pages 55-60) for possible evol-ution of the identity Atman=brahman by correspondence between the indivi-dual and the World. Also, refer 'Vedic origins of karma' by Herman Tull, 1989. Here, anthropomorphic microcosmic-cosmic transference is discussed while discerning the evolution of concept of karma. [125] For example, PD 6.236 and VC 244 negates both jIva and Ishvara. [126] See CU 6.1.4-6, 6.4, 6.2.1, BU 1.2.1, BSBh 2.1.14. The term vivarta and its implied illusoriness however, is not expounded in pramANa UP. [127] Ref. 8.3(10): Ch 11.10; BUBhV 1.4.1452 [128] brahman is akAryakAraNa (neither effect, nor cause); hence acosmic & independent. In contrast Buddhism's pratItyasamutpAda principle does not envisage any independent entity. In a certain sense; causality and anvaya-vyatireka as described here can be seen as method (prakriyA) validating pratItya-samutpAda at the relative level and negating it to reach the substratum Atman= brahman = shUnya. [129] Dependencies can be traced and examined using the laws of science. Though these laws are mithyA; they can be useful as indirect means of knowledge like inference, postulation etc. [130] KU 1.3.11. The avyakta is not independent; brahman is the only totally independent reality. [131] TU 2.7, MU 2.2.12, BG 7.3-7, BG 8.16-19, BS 1.1.2. The processes of trivRRitkaraNa (triplication) & pa.nchIkaraNa (quintuplication) are part of cosmic creation-dissolution. The tradition assumes that this process is a cyclic continuum where one cycle is of billions of years (ibid.). [132] This is the corollary of "law of conservation of Being" - (BG 2.16): Being never ceases to exist and non-Being never comes into existence; and (US 19.8): Reality is never destroyed and unreality is never born. [133] This view was prominently promoted by

prakAshAnanda and later by nAnA dIxita, and kAshmIraka sadAnanda. Its origin may be traced to brahmasiddhi. (ref. 8.3(5&17)). [134] sha.nkara is sometimes accused of borrowing this concept from bauddha philosophies; however its conception in its varied hues is as old as RV. This word occurs in 75 RV hymns. In UP, the word mAyA appears in BU (2.5.19), PU (1.16), SU (1.10, 4.9-10), Mai (4.2), and Pai (1.12). In GK mAyA plays a prominent role (ref 1.16-17, 2.12, 2.19, 2.31, 3.19, 3.27-29, 4.58-59. 4.61-62). Earlier in BG, mAyA occurs in (4.6, 7.14, 18.61) and in BS only in 3.2.3; but in BSBh it occurs more frequently (1.1.17, 1.13.19, 1.4.3, 2.1.1, 2.1.9, 2.1.21, 2.1.28 etc). In all such cases the meaning of mAyA is magic, veiling or projecting power, appearance or illusion in addition to its archaic meaning as mental power and deception. The word is derived from root mA = 'to measure' (mlyate anayA iti, i.e. by which is measured). Root mAalso means 'to know'(मिमीते जानिते कर्म मीयते अनयेति), i.e. by which the rituals etc are known or realized); and 'to show'(माति (स्वात्मानं) दर्शयति इति माया) i.e. that which shows itself- that which appears (without any real existence)). Another popular etymology is mAyA = mA + yA; i.e. that which is not (but still appears to be). In post- sha.nkara Vedanta mAyA is contextually equated with avidyA, avyakta, prakRRiti, sRRiShTi, karma, nAmarUpa avyAkRRita etc. For the evolution of concept of mAyA, refer 8.3(9). [135] General basis: BUBh 2.4.14, BUBh 3.8.11, & BUBh 4.5.15. At least in two other places - (1) adhyAsa-bhAShya of BSBh, (2) First chapter of IShTasiddhi - the subject-object analysis is undertaken. In the later case the subject-object duality and its worldly manifestation is sought to be proved as 'indeterminate' by a dialectical method. [136] If Self is not object of cognition how does it become an object of super-imposition? Who makes this superimposition? Both these questions evoked intense debate & varied response. sha.nkara says, superimpo-sition or mixing of Self and non-Self is a natural procedure on part of man. He further says, Self is not a non-object in absolute sense (that is, one has to live with this paradox!) and that learned men consider superimposition as Ignorance (2.3). Here he merges ontology of super-imposition with epistemology of Ignorance. Later Advaita postulated ontologically indeterminate root-Ignorance [mUlA-vidyA] as the cause of the superimposition that appears as manifest universe, and auxiliary- ignorance [tUlAvidyA] as its individuated epistemic derivative. [137] US (prose): 2.75, 77, 79, and 81. [138] Ref 8.2(6): DDV (~ sarasvatI rahasya Up.), verses

20-21; and 8.2(2): VP, Ch 7 (page 156). [139] The concept of pa.nchakosha[quintuple sheaths] [QTS] has a basis in TU (ref TUBh 2.2.1-2.8.5). Sheath-1 is the 'gross body'[R] that perishes after the 'release' and returns to the source(प्रकृति); sheaths-2,3,4form the 'subtle body[सूक्ष्मशरीर] which partly transmigrates (ref BSBh 3.1: intro); sheath-5 is the 'causal body'[$RUTRR] which is a relatively permanent self that persists through successive rebirths as determined by the 'law of karma' (ibid.). This causal self is also known as Ananda [311-4], the bliss experienced in the deep sleep. Beyond this bliss is the 'inmost Self [आत्मन्]. Sheath-1 [अन्नमयकोश] has external 'sense- organs' [श्रोत्रत्वक्चक्षुर्जिह्वाघ्राण] to see, hear, smell, taste, touch. It performs physical actions of speech, hand & foot movements, excretion, reproduction [वाक्पाणिपादपायूपस्थ]. Sheath-2 [प्राणमयकोश] has five 'conative drivers' [कर्मेन्द्रियाणि] for physical actions, and biomotor functions like expiration, inspiration, suspension, exit, and digestion through 'vital airs'[प्राणापानव्यानोदानसमाना:] Sheath-3 [मनोमयकोश] has five 'cognitive drivers' [ज्ञानेन्द्रियाणि] for receiving sense data through external sense organs. Sheath-3 also has mind[H] to process the sense data and to configure the states of ego [3160] with the help of intellect[qfs] and memory[fad], the later two faculties being part of sheath-4 [विज्ञानमयकोश]. Sheath-3&4 together form the inner organ (antaHkaraNa). The subtle bodies are made of subtle elements while gross bodies are made of gross elements formed by 'quintuplication' [QTP] in matrix with sattva, rajas, tamas (ibid.). There is preponderance of tamas in sheath-1; rajas in sheath-2, and sattva in sheaths-3&4 particularly when jIva is in the pure state of knowledge. In sheath-5; sAxin appears as sattva or Ananda when (in sleep), inner organ is neutralized (avyakta). QTS and QTP are intended to illustrate KA's central principles rather than to offer a verifiable scientific theory. (Gen. Ref. VS 2.61-97). [140] Ref MAU, GK, and (MAU+GK) Bh. The Self 'appearing' in (1) waking, (2) dream, (3) sleep, (4) tUrya, is variously and respectively termed as (1)' vishva, virAta (vaishvAnara, virAja); (2)' taijasa (hiraNyagarbha, prajApati); (3) prAGYa, avyAkRRita (Ishvara); (4)' Atman (brahman), from individual (and cosmic) view point.

[141] In Advaita tradition, this non-perception itself is sAxin's experience of 'primal Ignorance' - 'avyakta' in which mind merges. Alternatively, it is interpreted as sAxin experiencing itself as 'bliss' (Ananda). The paradox of avidyA's presence (absence) in deep sleep reflects in shA.nkara bhAShya which was sought to be resolved in SS (3.120-126). [142] There is pointer to the Single-Soul theory - three individual experiential states can be mapped onto aggregate experiential states of the Single-Soul: non-manifestness (His sleep), subjective multi-soul experiences (His dream or secondary illusion), and integrated world experience (His waking state or primary illusion). US (prose 1.18-20, verse 17.26-28) and similar comments from other works of sha.nkara, such as (KUBh 1.3.11; CUBh 8.14.1; BUBh 2.4.10; BUBh 1.4.7; BSBh 1.2.22; BSBh 1.4.2,3,7,9; BSBh 2.1.14; and BUBh 3.5.1) offer the basis for later commentators to equate Ignorance with mAyA, avyAkRRita, avyakta, avyAkRRita-nAmarUpa, nAma-rUpa, and prakRRiti (by borrowing the last term from sA.nkhya), and call it indeterminate (anirvachanIya). [143] Ref BU 2.4.7-12, CU 3.14.1-14, BG 3.12-14, KU 1.3.13-15. There are three views of the universal [samanta] in Indic philosophies: (1) nyAya-vaisheShika: This is a realist view in which the universal is a real entity which is distinct from, but inheres in, many individuals. (2) bauddha: This is a nominalist view according to which universal is a mere name; it has no objective existence. Only the particular at a point of time is ultimately real. Two particulars though different from each other are identified together due to their more pronounced contrast with the third object. For example, the so called sameness of cows is exclusion of non-cows. (3) Jain and Advaita: This is a conceptual view. Both reject concept of universal as a real (sensate or objective) and independent entity. It is only a concept in our mind constituted by the essential common attributes of individuals that are present in the object of our experience (ref 8.3 (16), page 201). [144] 'Pot-space simile' is often used from the ontological perspective, while the 'rope-snake simile' (rajju-sarpa nyAya) - the rope is mistaken as snake in the darkness but is 'known' after proper inquiry - is often used from the epistemological view-point. Though perceptual space is a good analog of the attributeless Self; it can be differentiated from the Self by a counter analogy: If 'perceptual space' is avyakta (unmanifest), then 'absolute space' is Self (Atman). Perceptual space is relational; it is

cognized in relation to objects - as absence of psycho-physical objects (tables, chairs, moods etc) or with reference to platonic objects (coordinates, metrics, models etc). Either way, objects are superimposed. In sleep or in death etc when there are no objects, the 'cognitive difference' between this 'relational space' and the 'absolute space' (Atman=brahman) collapses. Advaita then differentiates the objectless 'subtle' (avyakta) space of sleep, death etc from Atman on the basis of mediate means of knowledge. These means may use appropriate C4 criteria, methods, and illustrations as a part of their pedogogical resources. [145] The simile can be seen as method of adhyAropa- apavAda. Its contem-porary reference is available in RK Math diaries volume 5; however its roots may be in tantra or shAkta literature. IU verse-11 and amRRita-bindu Up. verse-18 can be interpreted on the line of this simile. [146] Pai 2.12 [147] The word 'avidyA' occurs in IU (11), KU (1.2.5) and MU (1.2.8-9), not necessarily in the technical sense in which it is used in BSBh and later commentaries. In BSBh it mainly comes with epistemological purport while in post-sha.nkara Advaita it is posited as ontologically indeter-minate causal power that projects the universe while concealing the Absolute (brahman). This was further elevated to the principle of metaphysical agnosticism. shrIharSha in khaNDanakhaNDa-khAdya states: "everything other than the Self is indeterminable". (One may decide to call that 'other' as Ignorance or mAyA). [148] The total and permanent cessation of Ignorance is neither observable nor experiential in the relative domain and as such Ignorance is limit-less (both anAdi as well as ananta) in space-time-causality. [149] There is diversity of opinions about "termination of Ignorance" (avidyA nivRRitti) (See 4.0) leading to concepts of (a) Liberation in space-time-causality which is normally associated with the term jIvanmukti and; (b) Liberation beyond space-time- causality which is normally associated with the term videha mukti. [150] It is made of three-guNa-s viz. sattva (purity), rajas (activity), tamas (inertia) (VS 34; VC 108, 110-120; VP p.159-161). These guNa-s can be treated as subtle elemnts like tanmAtra-s (ibid.). [151] sha.nkara uses this term (anirvachanIya) for avyAkRRita nAmarUpa (unmani-fest name and forms) and not for avidyA, though later Vedantins subsumed the concept of avyAkRRita by the concept of indeterminate Ignorance. In extant

Vedanta literature, the adjective anirvachanlya was first used with avidyA in brahmasiddhi. Post-sha.nkara Vedantins with the exceptions like sureshvara associated the term with avidyA. [152] At the relative level Advaita is open to multiple reality grades (e.g. ref IShTa-siddhi by vimuktAtman). All such realities other than brahman are mithyA; that is, they are 'other than Absolue'.

[153] sarvaGYAtman introduced these two terms in SS 1.31-33. [154] In 10-UP and BG the illusion (delusion) of duality is only implicit as in BU 4.4.19, 2.5.19; BG 7.13-15, 13.16 and is inferred by the denial of manifest duality in UP. Illusion is more explicit in BS 3.2.3. However, it is in UP like Mai and Pai, then in BSBh, and particularly in GK this aspect comes out clearly. [155] These three traditions differ in: (a) metaphoric & metaphysical relationship between brahman on one hand and jIva and Ishvara on the other; (b) locus of avidyA; (c) immediacy of Knowledge; (d) causality and types of Ignorances; & (e) ways of 'realization'. Further, these traditions are overlapping and hold multiple views. Ref. 8.2(14), 8.2(15) [156] It is possible to view the God (Ishvara) as reflection of brahman in mAyA (avidyA) to make God the cosmic analog of the soul (SS 3.277-8). The difference between soul and God is then in relation to mAyA, which deludes the soul but not the God, the later being the wielder of mAyA (SU 4.10). brahmAnanda in nyAyaranAvali suggests that Isvara can be both biMba and pratibiMba, He being omniscient and Self-realized. [157] BSBh 1.4.2-3, BSBh 1.4.9, BUBh 1.4.7; also see KU 1.3.11, MU 2.1.2, SU 4.5, SU 4.10 ('Know mAyA to be prakRRiti and maheshvara, the God to be mAyin, the master of mAyA). [158] In US, sha.nkara follows the the 5-element evolution based on TU 2.1. However, the oldest reference to evolution- formation of matter is the trivRRit-karaNa [aqUT] theory of CU 6.3.2-3 that assumes 3-subtle elements viz. fire, water, food that are mingled to form gross elements of the world. BS (2.4.20-22) mentions this '3-element theory' to suggest tri-partite creation of names and forms using the termaqddo: (by Him who does the tripartite creation). BS (2.3.5-14) mentions the '5-element evolution-dissolution' - ether, air, fire, water, earth evolving (dissolving) from (into) one another. BG (7.4, 13.5) alludes to similar scheme which is closer to sA.nkhya. The oldest reference to '5-element evolution' is found in TU 2.1, and the oldest reference to '5-element theory' calledyddUT is found in MB 12.9089 and

12.244.2 (Poona Critical Ed). The basic perceptual character of tanmAtra can be tenuously inferred from TU 2.1, PU 4.8; though its clear reference comes from yogavAsiShTha (YOV 3.12-13, 6.2.87-92). sha.nkaracomments onfaqsddw/o contradicting BS or CUBh, however in US (prose 1.18-20), he propounds five subtle elements to support his idea of creation and alludes to their perceptual nature as in US 16.2 (metrical). This gave impetus to the theory ofydcUT as detailed later in the texts like PD, VS, and VP. पंचीकरण [quintuplication] [QTP]:Natural elements are of two kinds (PU 4.8) - "subtle, uncompounded element" [tanmAtra, तन्मात्र; sUxmabhUta,सूक्ष्मभूत] & "gross, compounded element" [mahAbhUta, H&T9d]. The word tanmAtra could mean tan- mAtra:'(subsisting) from this alone'. There are fivedfor and fiveमहाभूतानि. In Generalतन्मात्राणhave five percept-ual attributes related to five cognitive senses; dufoare evolved forth from one another, each preserving the attributes of the preceding one and adding one more attribute. 'Unmanifest' [avyakta, 3qd] has no perceptual attributes; ether[3TT&T] which comes from 'unmanifest' has sound as attribute; air[qR] which comes from ether has sound and touch as attributes; fire[aoR] which comes from air has sound, touch, and vision as attributes; water[3y] which comes from fire has sound, touch, vision, and taste as attributes; earth["f]which comes from water has sound, touch, vision, taste, and smell as attributes. EachH&T9d is formed by taking (1/2) of its respectiveतन्मात्र and adding to it (1/8) of rest ofतन्मात्राणि. For example, grossआकाश= subtle (1/2आकाश+ 1/8 वाय+ 1/8 तेज + 1/8 आप + 1/8 भूमि). (द्विधाविधाय चैकैकं चतुर्धा प्रथमंपुनः । स्वस्वेतरद्वितीयांशैर्योजनात्पंच पंचते | (PD 1.27). Gross objects are formed by mixing gross elements in various propo-rtions. Multiplicy is caused by the varying degrees of tri-guNa - sattva (purity), rajas (activity), tamas (inertia). QTS is formed by the further mixing of 11 subtle organs: 5 conative + 5 cognitive + 1 mind (ibid.). In the primal creation we may conceive 25-elements synthesizing the sA.nkhya-Vedanta schemes: 9 basic (1 avyakta + 3 prakRRiti-s + 5 tanmAtra-s) & 16 derived (5 gross + 5 conative + 5 cognitive + 1 mind). mUla-prakRRiti / mAyA, buddhi / mahat, aham account for 3 prakRRiti-s. Some schools add another 11 elements: (a) trika: 5 omni-powers (shakti-s), 1 mAyA with 5 delimiters (ka.nchuka-s); (b) shuddhAdvaita: 4 natures of supreme brahman, 4 natures of lower brahman, 3 guNa-s. Obviously, QTP-QTS (evolution based on it), doesn't fit in the frame-work of modern science. It however, offers few important

concepts: (1) unmanifest (avyakta): a multivalent neuter, which is indeterminate in its relation to brahman, (2) 'perceptual element' or 'monad' (tanmAtra), (3) Evolution from the avyakta due to three-elements (tri-guNa) of dynamic moral, motional, and material propensities. The triguNa-s can also be taken as three prakRRiti-s producing the plurality in matrix with tanmAtra-s. [159] TU 2.6.1, BU 1.4.7, BG 5.13, 13.2 [160] brahman is akAryakAraNa (neither cause nor effect), a description frequently used by sureshvara in his vArtik-s in respect of brahman. This causal closure is necessary for brahman's axiomatic purity, integrity, and independence. [161] Ref. 8.3(16): page 36-37 [162] US 5.4: pratibiMba; BUBh 4.3.7: pratichChAyA; US12.6, 14.33: ChAyA [163] TUBhV 2.140, 142, 143, 144, 375, BUBhV Vol 1- 2.1.385, 2.4.244. [164] TUBhV 2.407, 408, 416, 417, 418, NS 2.45. [165] BUBh-sv [saMbandha-vArtika] is introduction to BUBhV of sureshvara comprising about 1136 paras in first 200 pages of vol-1 (ref 8.3(37)). [166] BUBh-sv (176) [167] Atman remains absolutely unchanged; it has no desire or intentionality, doership, or consumership and in that sense It is acausal (akriya) and akArya-kAraNa (neither cause nor effect). [168] A versatile commentator who wrote texts on other Astika schools too. [169] bhAmatI is said to be the name of author's childless and devoted wife. [170] The concept of "Plurality of Ignorances" needs reconciliation to prevent it from sliding into multi-soul solipsism (anekajIva dRRiShTi sRRiShTi vAda). This was done by syncretist Vedantins with explanation that a single Ignorance can operate in a particular mode (avasthAGYAna) in each soul; only that particular mode subsides after the Liberation of the respective soul. Others souls remain in bondage due to their respective modal Ignorance. SLS (1.2.3111, 1.2.3221, 1.5.132) (Ref 8.2(15)) [171] His pa.nchapAdikA-vivaraNa summarized the Advaita thought of his times and culminated in the vivaraNa sub- school. [172] In Sanskrit, the combining vowel "A" can be split as "A+a" in joining (sandhi) or in splitting (vigraha) of the two words.

[173] The primal nature of Ignorance as a 'creative power' has been a matter of some serious arguments in the past. See satchidAnandendra (1929, 1989), Comans (2000). [174] Such as that of brahmasiddhi of maNDana mishra and IShTasiddhi [IS] of vimuktAtman. The former's influence on bhAmatI is well known. IS expounds the "indeterminate nature of Ignorance" and the "theory of indefinable (error)" [anirvachanlya khyAti]. It posits the view that there remains a 'residuum Ignorance' [avidyAlesha] in jIvanmukta in the form of prArabdha- karma, which sustains the continuance of his body. IS views had considerable influence on vivaraNa school. [175] Ref 8.2(15): SLS 1.5.132 [176] This label is only in relation to absolute reality of brahman and 'totality' of ekajlva's relative experience. Multisoul subjective experience seems like a paradox in the ekajIva-dRRiShTi- sRRiShTi view. [177] Here, vivaraNa perforce accepts the gap between what is seen (reflection) and what is real (actual face).

[178] Roodurmum (2002) summarizes positions of vivaraNa and bhAmatl schools; and gives details of their respective error-theories. [179] The difference between 'avidyAsaMskAra' and 'avidyAlesha' vanishes when one accepts that both are a kind of Ignorance. The body persists with these traces of Ignorance till prArabdha karma is not exhausted. [180] The other four reality grades of avidyA are: 1) not real, 2) not unreal, 3) both real and unreal, 4) neither real nor unreal. Ultimately these grades and the fifth kind are all denoted as indeterminate (mithyA, anirvachanIya). [181] Views (3)-(5) equate avidyAnivRRitti with the state of mind as the direct experience of brahman. SLS records another view: individual release (avidyA-nivRRitti) until the "final release of all" (sarvamukti) is the attain-ment of the state of Ishvara. Ishvaratva is due to Nescience of others. Ishvara is released on sarvamukti (SLS 4.22, 4.221). [182] Any egoless (selfless) work is niShkAma-karma. When there is no ego, there is no bondage. Egoless states of knowledge are possible even in the realm of Ignorance (see 2.3.1). [183] See gUDhArtha dIpikA (Invocation) in which wishful [kAmya] karma and prohibited [niShiddha] karma are to be avoided; however this in itself does not lead to Liberation. (ref BUBh-sv 47-101, NS 80-84).

[184] jIvanmukta retains his essential body-mind functions which can be attri-buted to Ignorance. jIvanmukti then becomes an axiological concept rather than absolute epistemological- ontological unity with brahman. Knowledge is realized only at the Absolute, which is beyond all relative means of body and mind. Hence multiplicity is eliminated only when empirical cognition which is the basis of duality is not operative. This can happen in states like sleep, swoon, coma, death, anesthetization, or samAdhi. These states are different-iated from moxa on the basis of axiology. In Advaita literature, idea of jIvan-mukti resulted in diversity of views including rejection of the concept itself as figurative or as an eulogy (ref 8.2(15): SLS, Ch-4). Sometimes the charge of antinomianism is leveled against jIvanmukta as he is not bound by any action; however, his idealized egolessness should dispel such a charge. He is the embodiment of morality. [185] CUBh 6.14.2, BGBh 4.37, BSBh 4.1.15 etc. [186] VC 453-464, and AA 90-92, 98-99 [187] BSBh 4.1.2. sha.nkara repeats this view in US 18.104. This Knowledge of nirguNa brahman leads to immediate moxa (sadyomukti), while after the knowledge of saguNa brahman, post-death soul travels to brahma-loka thro' devayAna and acquires Knowledge to get moxa (kramamukti). [188] BUBh 1.4.10. This type of Liberation during the lifetime of sAdhaka is known as jIvanmukti, and the one after the 'permanent release from the body' is known as videha-mukti. Sustainability of jIvanmukti - just as butter raised from the milk and thrown into it does not get mixed with it again - is stated in US 17.61 [189] US 18.190-2: It tells the story of ten pilgrims. Each of them counted only nine men when they knew that they were ten at the start of the pilgrimage. They could not find the tenth missing man. Ultimately a bystander lined them up and after the count of nine told the counting man that he was the "tenth man". Immediately the man understood that he indeed was the tenth man. [190] BUBh 4.4.6, BUBh 4.4.8, BSBh 4.1.15 [191] In Absolute, knower-ship does not exist. It is pure Knowledge. [192] MUBh 1.1.6, US 1.2, 1.4, 1.5, 1.44 [193] BSBh 1.1.4, BUBh 4.4.7, CUBh 8.12.1. Also, 8.2(8): JMV quotes laghu yoga-vAsiShTha [LYV]: 5.90-97 to describe the characteristic of jIvan-mukta, and 5.98-100 to describe videhamukti.

[194] It is possible to trace the origin of the concept of rebirth in shatapatha brAhamaNa (Deussen 1899, Tull 1989, Staal 2008) & trace the moral order that is implicit in the concept of karma to RRita (Dixit 1964) & to iShTApUrta in RV 10.14.8 (Keith 1925, Hiriyanna 1932). The concept of avatAra & transmigration can be seen in RV 4.26.1-4. The metaphor of "Two birds" in RV 1.164.20 (which is repeated in AV, MU, & SU) is interpreted in kArmika way: the first bird represents the individual soul while the second represents the sAxin (brahman). Soul is essentially a 'reflection' of brahman. The tree represents the body. Soul identifies itself with the body, reaps the 'fruits of its actions' (karmaphala), and undergoes rebirth. The sAxin alone stands as an inactive (unchanging) witness to the actions. [195] This is interpreted to mean that man's karma in the previous birth(s) decides his tendencies and dispositions in the subsequent birth(s). This is only one path of the close 'loop'. The 'return path' of the loop in the form of compensation-retribution is described in pa.nchAgni vidyA (BU 6.2.9-16 & CU 5.4-10). [196] Here, desire itself is identified with action, at least as the original and the most important component (initiator) of action. This leads to the concept of 'desire-less action' [niShkAma- karma] which minimizes the karma bondage. [197] This simple idea is common to all Indic religions. For example, in the Bauddha canon (SN: 11.10; verse 859); it is stated that: Whatever sort of seed is sown | That is the sort of fruit one reaps: | The doer of good reaps good | The doer of evil, evil By you, dear. has the seed been sown | Thus you'll experience the fruit | [198] In this vidyA, world process including procreation is seen as an act of sacrifice. The world including the sun, moon, and the earth with its seasons, man-woman etc are analogized to sacrificial fire. [199] Many times the terms karma [Action] and karma- phala [result of Action] are used interchangeably. [200] Such as sandhyA-vandana and pa.ncha-yaGYa as prescribed by the shruti-smRRiti. According to Vedanta, but contrary to the mImAMsA opinion, their non-performance does not produce a new sin. They are however, useful for chitta-shuddhi. [201] karma cycle has: (a) deterministic aspect that exhausts the previous karma-phala, (b) non-deterministic or free- willed aspect that generates new karma-phala; both are 'play' of mAyA. [202] For example, meditation in CU 3.15 is meant for the

longevity of a son, which is necessary for the welfare of the father in 'after-life'. A son who has long life can acquire vast Vedic knowledge and perform duties prescribed therein for the benefit of himself and his forefathers. This very idea and the implicit concept of "merit transfer" comes from the brAhamaNa texts. [203] "Karma and Rebirth in Classical Indian Traditions" [KRCIT]: Ed. Wendy Doniger, 1980 [204] BG (4.17) declares that karma'sways are hard to understand(गहना कर्मणो गतिः). Complexity problem is not unique to karma. Mathematical theories of 'chaos', 'dynamic systems', 'quantum mechanics' etc attempt to tackle the complexity of 'physical' actions and processes. [205] Any unseen and unexplained force that establishes link between cause and effect is known as adRRiShTa in vaisheShika school of kaNAda. In mImAMsA (exegesis), adRRiShTa becomes the metaphysical link between karma prescribed by Vedic commands, and its results (phala, vipAka). There it is known as apUrva. One of the mImAMsA schools - that of kumArila bhatta (7thC) dispensed with Ishvara (God) in prefer-ence to apUrva and the authority of Veda. [206] Karl Potter in KRCIT thinks that 'karma and rebirth' discourse in texts like pata. njalii's yogasUtra, vyAsa's yogabhAshya, vAchaspati's tattva-vaishAradI along with sha.nkara's commentaries offer all the elements required for a sustainable karma theory. [207] Analogy: Physical universe is deterministic at the macro-level but is 'random' (probabilistic) at the quantum (micro- level) level.

[208] sureshvara refutes mImAMsA doctrine, that Knowledge can be realized by mere performance of nitya-naimittika karma and by avoidance of kAmya and niShiddha-karma. (BUBhV- sv: 1.1.47-101, NS 80-84). [209] Post-sha.nkara tradition added the 4th fold of 'absorption' [samAdhi] to the 3-fold way of hearing, reflection, and meditation. This 4-fold way is propounded in the popular text like vedAntasAra (VS 181). Absorption is attended with (savikalpa) or without (nirvikalpa) self-awareness (VS 193). The later is distinguished from the sleep (VS 199), but not from death. The text describes 8-fold practice (of yoga) to realize savikalpa samAdhi as its 8th and final step before realizing nirvikalpa samAdhi (VS 200-209). In VC 353-375 & VC 407-411, too samAdhi is both the final means as well as the end of path of Realization. [210] US 1.4 (prose), US 17.22-24: sha.nkara's proposal for karma (17.22), be it nityakarma (ref. Bodhanidhi's gloss) or

niyama (ref. RamatIrtha's gloss) is an apparent contradiction on the backdrop of his earlier (1.4) insistence on total renunciation of karma. sha.nkara however allows only those actions which are conducive to Knowledge, not as part of the injunctions, but as (ethical) means of chittashuddhi. Knowledge as such is the supreme purification (US 16.71, US 17.85). Knowledge not being action (BSBh 1.1.4), chitta-shuddhi is not activity - chitta-shuddhi becomes a moral concept not bound by karmaphala, whether achieved through yama-niyama or through nityakarma. [211] The word yoga is derived from the Sanskrit root yuj, which variously means yoking, harnessing, achieving, connecting, concentrating etc .. In BG yoga means: equanimity (2.48), skill in the action (2.50), steady concentration (6.3, 12, 19) etc. In KU (3.4) & Mai (2.6) it means sense control; in SU it is 'connection' (with brahman) (2.5), path of realization (of Self) (2.11). In PY it means "cessation of fluctuations of mind" (1.2). Classical yoga is assumed to be pata.njalii yoga [PY] as presented in yoga-sUtra which is the earliest extant text of yoga (c.200BC). Yoga practices are advocated in prime UP (Mai, SU, KU, TU) & many others of the Muktika list, which are classified as 'Yoga UP'; but it is PY which is the pivotal text of classical Yoga. It emphasizes the moral code and provides the 8-fold framework for yoga practices like rAja-yoga, haTha-yoga, and kuNDalini-yoga, which are used by all major Indic traditions including Vedanta, in one way or the other. PY has one chapter each on 'aims, practices, powers, and liberation'. It has eight auxiliaries (aShTA.nga): (1) abstentions [yama], (2) observ-ances [niyama], (3) posture [Asana], (4) breath control [prANAyAma], (5) abstraction [pratyAhAra], (6) concentration [dhAraNA], (7) meditation [dhyAna], and (8) absorption [samAdhi] (PY 2.29). yama-niyama form the ethical system; while remaining auxiliaries are methods directed towards mind control. The yama denotes commands of non-violence [ahiMsA], truth [satya], non- stealing [asteya], chastity [brahmacharya], detachment to possessions [aparigraha](PY 2.30). These are sovereign under- taking independent of caste-class-gender, place, time, context[yd जातिदेशकाल-समयानवच्छिन्ना: सार्वभौमा महाव्रतम्] (PY 2.31). niyama is observance of purity [shaucha], contentment [sa.ntoSha], austerity [tapas], scriptural study [svAdhyAya], and devotion to God [Ishvara praNidhAna] (2.32). PY also advises to cultivate the virtues of friendliness, compassion, happiness, & tolerance (1.33). It warns about ignorance, egoism, attachment, aversion, & desire to cling to life (2.3). yAGYavalkya smRRiti has ten yama-s: chastity,

compassion, patience, charity, truthfulness, honesty, non-violence, non-stealing, congeniality, restraint [ब्रह्मचर्यं दया क्षांतिर्दानं सत्यमकल्कता । अहिंसास्तेय माधुर्र्ये दमः चेति यमा: स्मृता:] (YS 3.312); and ten niyama-s: bathing, silence, fasting, sacrifice, study, sexual restraint, obedi- to teacher, मौनोपवासेज्यास्वाध्यायोपस्थ-निग्रहाः । नियमा गुरुशुश्रुषा शौचाक्रोधाप्रमादता](YS ence purity, non-anger, attentiveness [स्नानं

3.313). [212] Five metaphorical sacrifices: (1) study or teaching of Veda (brahma-yaGYa), (2) oblation to ancestors (pitRRi-yaGYa), (3) oblation to gods (daiva-yaGYa), (4) feeding of animals (bhUta- yaGYa), (5) feeding of humans (nRRi-yaGYa). These are explained as: (a) way of discharging man's duties to the various beings in the universe, or (b) as atonement for the injury to various beings that might be caused as part of house-hold activities. Together they are known as pa.ncha-mahAyaGYa. (ref. History of Dharmashastra, vol-1 by P. V. Kane). [213] sureshvarasuggests that whichever method brings Realization; that method is good(यया यया भवेत्पुंसां व्युत्पतिः प्रत्यगात्मनि। सा सैव प्रक्रियेह स्यात् साध्वी सा चानवस्थिता) (BUBhV 1.4.402). [214] BG 2.48, 2.71, 5.7, 5.18, 6.29-32, 7.19, 12.13, 13.27-28, 18.20, 18.53-54: samatva is the principle of "Self-in-All". "Equanimity of mind", & "equibility of reason" are its epistemic aspects. [215] shAstra connotes dharma in various ways: In RV (1.24.8, 4.23.9 etc), the concept of RRita [Fd] implies natural justice and harmony implicit in the world order - the universal dharma, which binds all the beings. RV (10.133.6) requests God: Lead us beyond all pain & grief along path of the holy Law(d नः पथा नयाऽति विश्वानि दुरिता नभंतामन्यकेषां ज्याका अधि). In BU (1.4.14) dharmais truth(यो वै स धर्मः सत्यम् वै तत्). In AV (18.3.1) it means "old order"(धर्मं पुराणं अनुपालयन्ति). BG seems to use the word with the same meaning - that of traditional duties (of the varNAshrama). In MB (12.110.11) Krishna defines dharmaas 'the one that gives sustenance'(धारणाद धर्म). Again in MB (13.115.1) ahiMsA [non- violence] is said to be the highest dharma(अहिंसा परमो धर्मः). According to jaiminIya-sutra (1.1.2) dharmais that good which is determinable by the (Vedic) commands(चोदना लक्षणोऽर्थोधर्मः). manu- saMhitA (II.1) makes this definition less rigid by defining dharmaas that which is followed by the learned who are devoid of attachment & antipathy, and that to which the heart assents(fdal: सेवितः सद्विर्नित्यम् अद्वेशरागिभिः | ह्रदयेनाभ्यानु ज्ञातो यो धर्मस्त निबोधत); while the vasiShTha (1.1) declares dharmato be for the highest good of the man(पुरुषनिःश्रेयसाय धर्मजिज्ञासा). smRRiti-s like bRRihaspati, viShNu, parAshara, yAGYavalkya (e.g. YS 1.5.122) extend the notion of

dharma to include moral virtues of BG (daiva saMpat, sAttvika shraddhA) and PY (yama-niyama). It is further made compatible with Vedanta: Self-knowledge thro' yoga-अयं तु परमो धर्मो यद्योगेन आत्मदर्शन(ref YS 1.1.8) and thro' bhakti(ref SB1.1.2,1.2.6-12).SB (1.2.9-10) summarizes thus: dharma is for moxa and not for wealth; wealth is for dharmaand not for pleasure; pleasure is for living and not for sense gratification; and living is for Self-inquiry and not for hedonism(धर्मस्य ह्यापवर्ग्यस्य नार्थोऽर्थायोपकल्पते। नार्थस्य धर्मैकान्तस्य कामो लाभाय हि स्मृतः ॥ कामस्य नेन्द्रियप्रीतिर्लाभो जीवेत यावता। जीवस्य तत्त्व-जिज्ञासा नार्थो यश्चेह कर्मभिः ॥) [216] For example, refer 'aparoxAnubhuti' [AA] (ref. 8.2(7)). AA shloka-s 102 to 136, 140, 142 and tejobindu Up. mantra-s I:15-51 contain an identical practice of Self-realization. Also refer VS 200-215, and VC 353-375, 407-411 where samAdhi is both the means and the end. [217] Ref 8.2(8): JMV proposes three-fold method of jIvanmukti: (a) Hearing etc; (b) yoga;(c) production of contrary impressions(तत्वज्ञानस्य श्रवणादिकं, मनो-नाशस्य योगः, वासनाक्षयस्य प्रतिकूलवासनोत्पादनमिति). Vedanta explores (c) within saMnyAsa tradition, which being a male-centric tradition tries to produce antipathy towards one's own body, as also towards women, treating them to be the source of desires and attachments. Here, yoga, and saMnyAsa try to cultivate detachment and purity of mind in their own ways (also, ref 8.3(2a)). [218] It emphasizes devotion (to God), samAdhi, and makes full use of (pAta.njala) yoga. (Ref 8.1(7)). sureshvara suggests a similar process with no special emphasis on 'devotion to God' (bhakti) or absorption (samAdhi) though he ack-nowledges the role of nitya-naimittika karma and yogAbhyAsa (NS 1.52). [219] This word has different connotation in dharmashAstra where it means last of the four 'stages of life' [Ashrama-s] of a man: student [brahma-chArI], house-holder [gRRihastha], forest-dweller [vanastha], & monk [sa.nnyAsin]. There are four groups of monks: kutichaka (who stays in uninhabited house), bahUdaka (who wander from place to place), haMsa (from whom all actions have fallen off like a swan who does not get wet and sticky even though swimming in the water), paramahaMsa (a monk of the highest order, a Knower who regards all as Atman and begs alms from all castes). nArada parivrAjaka Up. and saMnyAsa Up. identify two more types of monks viz turlyAtIta and avadhUta. There are three opinions about these stages: (a) gautama dharma- sUtra (3.1, 3.35) holds that there is only one stage, that of

householder and other stages are auxiliary stages. (b) manu- smRRiti (4.1, 5.1, 6.33-37, 6.81-83) holds that a man should pass through all these stages sequentially w/o omitting any of them. (c) jAbAlopanishd (verse 4) says that immediately after finishing the stage of the student or of a house-holder a man can become a wandering monk (parivrAjaka). [220] According to sha.nkara, jIvanmukti sustains on its own. [221] "अत्ता हि अत्तनो नाथो अत्ता हि अत्तनो गति, तस्मा संयमयऽत्ताणं अस्सं भद्दं व वाणिजो" (DiN 16:महापरिनिब्बाणसुत्त(2.33-35) of the same purport from the bauddha canon). [222] It is generally agreed that RV predates other Veda: (a) SV was for the chanting & singing Rk mantra in particular ways (sAman), (b) complex codification of brAhamaNa was formulated posterior to RV mantra that invoked and eulogized Gods, (c) many sections of brAhmaNa explain the passages in RV. For example, aitareya 7.13.33 narrates shunaH-shepa story alluded to in RV 1.24.12-13 & 5.2.7, and shatapatha brA. 11.5.1, comments on the pururavas & UrvashI love story of RV 10.95. Such exegesis is generally applicable only when the texts are canoniz-ed, (d) RV shares large number of mantra-s with YV (581), SV (1800), & AV (1260). Veda amongst themselves, may have contemporaneous & layered sections, & their chronology is difficult to determine. Relative chronology of saMhitA, brAhamaNa, AraNyaka, upaniShad & sUtra in that order for a given Veda is generally accepted, while the RV mantra is said to be the oldest. [223] RV deities to whom one or more hymns are dedicated, are: indra (289 hymns), agni (218), soma (123), vishvadeva-s (70), ashvin twin (56), varuNa (46), marut-s (38), mitra (28), Ushas (21), vAyu (12), savitRRi (11), RRibhU-s (11), pushANa (10), Apri-s (9), pRRithvi (7), bRRihaspati (6), sUrya (6), dyau (6), Apa (6), Aditya-s (6), viShNu (6), brAhma-Naspati (6), rudra (5), dadhikrA-s (4), sarasvatI (3), yama (3), parjanya (3), vAch (2), vAstoshpati (2), vishva-karman (2), manyu (2), kapi.njala (2), manas (1), daxiNA (1), GYAnam (1), puruSha (1). Some of the deities with no dedicated hymn are: aditi, bhaga, vasukra, atri, apAM-napAt, xetrapati, ghRRita, nirrti, asamati, vena, Urvashi, pUruravas, araNyAni, mayabheda, tArxya-ariShTanemi, tvaShtru, saraNyU. Abrahamic Gods Yehweh and El are there too! This semitic link could be through Mitanni (of Syria) - refer (Kak 2003): (a) http://www.ece.isu.edu/ kak/akhena.pdf; and (b) http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0301078 [224] Ref "Vibrating Universe" by Panda 1999. Many 3-

way classifications exist. The 3-way (113) idea is in RV 1.139.11: "Ye Gods, who are eleven in the sky, who are eleven on earth, and who in your glory are eleven dwellers in the (atmospheric) water, do ye welcome this our offering". The number 113=33 of principle deities is also mentioned in RV 1.34.11 and RV 8.30.2. In RV 3.9.9 and RV 10.2.6, deities are stated to be many more than 33; there they number 3339. [225] Purified soma, a sacred drink to be consumed during the rituals. It was made from a juice pressed from stalk of the plants growing in mountains. Its botanical identity is unclear, though many options have been proposed including the 'fly-agaric' mushroom Amanita muscaria. RV 10.119 suggests that soma could be a stimulant. Best soma is said to come from Mt. Mujavat (RV 10.34.1 and BSS 6.14:172.14). According to Witzel, this could be today's Mt. Muztagh Ata on the Tajikistan-China border (Staal 2001, 2008). [226] The numbering of other Books does not go with their chronological order. Books are numbered according to increasing order of their size (no. of verses) with the exception of Bk-1 which, because of its chronological spread anterior to some family Books, is numbered one. There is a discrepancy between Bk-3 & Bk-4 which is explained in aitareya brA. (6.18). The hymns 21, 30, 34, 36, 38, 39 (68 verses) in Bk-3 were compiled by vishvAmitra-s at a later date to compensate for certain of their other hymns appropriated by the vAmadeva-s. [227] RV 10.75.5 lists: (1) ga.ngA, (2) yamunA, (3) sarasvatI, (4) shutudri [Satlej], (5) paruShNi [Ravi], (6) asiknI [Chenab], (7) marudvRRidhA [Maruvardvan], (8) vitastA [Jhelum], (9) ArjIkIyA [Haro], (10) suShomA [Sohan] in that order from east to north-west fixing sarasvatI to river Ghaggar. RV 3.33.1 identified shutudrI [Satalej] and vipAsha [Beas] together; while 10.75.6 lists sindhu and its western rivers. RV 10.75 takes an integrated view, at least from the rivers' point of view, of G-Y doab and Sapta-Sindhu Eastern region. This suggests that this sUkta and possibly Bk-10 itself, could have been composed post-1900BC, in the periods of late or final SSC, when deurbanization of SSC and its integration with G-Y doab and other Indic regions started taking place. This tallies with the archaeological evidence of cremation practices alluded to in the same Bk-10 and recent marine excavation of Bet Dwaraka which dates the site to late or final SSC. Bk-10 and last days of Dwaraka are said to be contemporaneous to MB war within a span of century or so. (See Maps-2, 3 & 4). [228] RV does not support the later day custom and

glorification of burning the widow on the pyre of the dead husband: RV 10.18.7 says, "The women here, still happy wives, not widowed, shall come and bring rich oil and precious ointment; and tearless, blooming, richly adorned, may they first approach the resting-place of the departed." (Kaigi's Rig Veda p.77). The words "may they first approach the place" is the translation of 'Arohantu yonim agre'. This phrase was altered at later times to 'Arohantu yonim agne.aH' (let them enter the place of fire), and by this terrible falsification the widow-burning was justified. The exact opposite was the fact. Among the early Aryans the widow might marry again. The very next verse of the same hymn calls on the widow to rise from beside the bier or pyre and take the hand of her new husband, 'doubt-less', says Prof. Macdonnell (Sanskrit Literature p.126) 'a brother of the deceased, in accordance with the ancient marriage custom of which a trace remained among the Hebrews. His translation of the next verse (RV 10.18.8) is: "Rise up, come to the world of life, O woman; Thou liest here by one whose soul has left him. Come: Thou hast now entered upon wife- hood. Of this thy lord who takes thy hand and woos thee". In a much later period (c.650-1200), the custom got established gradually. The garuDa purANa glorified the widow burning by calling the burnt woman as satl (honorific title of a goddess) and the support was inserted in the smRRiti (viShNu 25.13): 'If the woman's husband dies, let her lead the life of chastity or mount his pyre'. (ref 'Rig Veda and the Vedic Religion': A. C. Clayton 1913). [229] There is no unanimity on these 'seven names' in other scriptures and now they remain a philological curiosity than anything else. [230] Wherever compiler's family name is not explicitly available in indexes; other information needs to be extrapolated (Talgeri 2000). [231] It is the clan of king bharata (RV 6.14.4) in which devavAta was the dominant kings' dynasty: devavAta, sRRi.njaya, vadhRRiyashva, divo-dAsa, pratardana, pijavana, devashravas, sudAsa, sahadeva, somaka. Other saMhitA-s identify few more pUru kings like bhImasena of kAshI (KYV, kaTha saMhitA 7.1.8), parIxita- I (AV 20.127.7-10), pratIpa (AV 20.129.2), vichitravIrya (kAThaka 10.6) and dhRRitarAShTra (kAThaka 10.6) whose names are attested by purANa-s. (Talgeri 2000). [232] RV identifies the kings mandhAtA, purukutsa, trasadasyu, & trAsadasyava with mandhAtRRi clan of tRRixi-s. In RV this clan appears to be closely related to pUru-s. In fact later three kings are sometimes considered as pUru kings. IxvAku tribe to which tRRixi-s belonged, is eulogized in purANa-s, and in epic

rAmAyaNa. RV 10.93.14 mentions rAma; but he is jAmadagnya and not dAsharathI. RV's synchronism with MB seems to be through shantanu (RV 10.98) who was bhIShma's father. There have been several attempts to reconcile the genealogies of kings and priests in Vedic and paurANika texts to arrive at Indic chronology. [233] Indo-European [IE] languages with their syntactic & semantic similarity suggest an interaction among many tribes of common linguistic origin over a large part of Eurasia through nomadic movements. Extant IE groups: 1. Anatolian, 2. Hellenic, 3. Indo-Aryan [IA], 4. Italic, 5. Celtic, 6. Germanic, 7. Armenian, 8. Tocharian, 9. Balto-Slavic, 10. Albanian. Sanskrit of Veda, Pali of Buddhist Tripitaka, & Magadhi of Jain Agamas are all IA/IE languages with common linguistic ancestry. [234] Ethnic diversity in RVC+SSC is reflected in today's caste composition in India. For example, 'Aryan Tribes in RRigveda' by B. S. Dahia (1992) relates over 80 Jat clans (Gotras) to RV. This relation may be part of folklore; but its underlying hypothesis cannot be rejected outright. [235] It is an ancient civilization which is known to us only through archaeo-logical finds, which are spread over large part of present day Pakistan and adjacent and extended areas in India. (See Map-1, 2). [236] The term Hindu is related to 'Sindhu' of SSC(+RVC). It appeared in Vedidad, Fargard-1 of Avesta which mentions 16-ancient lands created by Ahur Mazda in conflict with Angra Mainyu (Angiras Manu). There the 15th land is Hapta Hindu (Sapta Sindhu) (S=H). Sometimes the term Sanatana (ancient) is prefered in place of the term Hindu. [237] In RV, sarasvat is the: 'best mother, best river, best Goddess ... ' (RV 2.41.16), swollen by many rivers ... (RV 6.52.6), chief and purest flowing from the mountains to the ocean ... (RV 7.95.2), endless, swift, roaring, most dear, nourishing the Aryan tribes across ... (6.61.8-13). Its refer-ences in RV far outnumber those of any other river. Overall, there is no doubt that sarasvatI is the main RV river and though there is its name-sake in Afghanistan; sarasvatI is uniquely identified by RV 10.75.5 and RV 3.23.4. (See Maps-2, 4). [238] The survey of sarasvatI (Ghaggar-Hakra-Nara river bed) was under-taken by many individuals - C. F. Oldham and R. D. Oldham (1872) to J. R. Sharma (2006). CAZRI mapped the defunct course of the river through LANDSAT satellite imagery, aerial photos and field studies (1997, 1998). ISRO and RRSSC

analyzed satellite images of IRS-1C and RADAR imagery from ERS-1/2, and mapped the entire course of sarasvatl from Himalayas to Gujarat (1999, 2006). (See Maps-2, 4). Raikes (1968), Allchins (1997), Rao (1991) think c.1900BC is the date by which sarasvatI almost dried. It lost tributaries to sindhu in the west, & to yamunA in the east in previous years. Possehl (1998, 2002) thinks that it could have flowed full way to ocean before c.3200BC latest, probably before 3800 BC. Francfort (1992), using imagery of the French satellite SPOT and other data, estimate full flow to be in c.3800BC-3600 BC; while Shridhar, Merth et al (1999) infer it to be around c.3700BC. Kalyanaraman & Goel (1999) think that sarasvatl's flow was continuous (from origins to ocean) before 3000BC. The reasons of its desiccation could be - tectonic changes, earthquakes, environmental changes, and river migration. [239] These are events such as desiccation, floods, aridity, and earthquakes. Multiple layers of archaeological excavations at Mohenjo-Daro suggest that rising of the groundwater levels could be one of the reasons for its decline - the original excavated foundations itself is now about 24-ft below the groundwater level. The LANDSAT imagery shows that the Indus [sindhu] river has a wide flood plain on either side of its course up to a width of 100-120 km in the east and south-east. To have such a wide flood plain on only one side shows that the Indus River has migrated towards the north-west in the northern parts and towards the west in the central and southern parts. (Ramasamy, Bakliwal, Verma, 1991). Geologists have also pointed out tectonic changes which might have thrown up a kind of dam in the lower Indus valley, thus inundating a large part of the plains. This would explain the existence of thick layers of silt in the upper strata of Mohenjo-Daro which are now about 39-feet above the level of the river. The palaeobotanical research in Rajasthan suggests epochal variation in rainfall in the S-S region which was at peak about 2500BC and went down significantly after 1900BC till 1500BC. During 1500BC-1000BC it improved slightly, & again went down to its lowest in c.400BC. It improved thereafter but never reached peak levels of 2500BC epoch (ref 8.3 (19)). The displacement and deurbanization was also possible due to the overuse of resources, internal strifes or simply due to the civilizational exhaustion - the law of entropy as applicable to civilizations. Increase in entropy need not always be seen as a decay of the culture but as decentralization or stratified integration over a larger area in a gradual manner. One may also note that during 2200BC-1700BC many new sites came up in

Gujarat and western G-Y planes. The population shift could have taken place to these areas as also to other hospitable areas north- west of Sindhu (such as BMAC; ibid.) during this period. [240] Social divisions however, were not rigid in RVC or even in later Vedic period. The inclusion of deviant or heterodox elements (vrAtya-s) within the Vedic fold by vrAtya-stoma etc shows this flexibility. RV (8.35) terms like brahman (language), xtram (power) and vish (people) had not acquired their post-Vedic class & caste reference, while varNa (color) was not a class notifier. RV 10.90 is the only hymn of RV where the term shUdra has been mentioned alluding to the four-fold division. [241] RV 9.112.3: I am a 'poet', my father is a 'doctor'; and my mother a 'grinder'. The post-Vedic system of birth-based class (varNa) and caste (jAti) with its implied hierarchies and prohibitions seems to be foreign to RVC. [242] The old Tamil (Sangam) literature (c.500BC-300) has shared reference with MB, purANa-s and local folklore. Some members of agastya family which composed RV hymns are said to have migrated to South. Such references are linked to disparate regions like Maharashtra (Nashik), Karnataka (Badami), and Tamilnadu (Pothiyil); even in Indonesia, Siam, and Cambodia. The non-Indic references may have originated in Common Era; and pre-Buddha antiquity of other references is not clear. Reference in aitareya brA. (7.18) when sage vishvAmitra exiled his fifty sons to stay with Andhra, puNDra, shabara, pulinda, and matibA tribes however, suggests a prehistoric interaction of the so called Aryans and non-Aryans in the southern Indic regions. This exile relates to shunaHshepa story alluded to in RV 1.24.12-13 & RV 5.2.7. [243] Bronkhorst (2007) brings into question the reach, rapidity & linearity of this HVC spread by positing the Magadha culture before Common Era to be non-Vedic (uninfluenced by Brahmanism). His hypothesis delinks Vedic culture from the spread of IA languages. [244] Generally, this non-invasionist view is supported by Gupta & Lal 1984; Shaffer 1984; Shaffer & Lichtenstein 1999; Rao 1991; Allchins 1997; Kenoyer 1998; McIntosh 2001; Possehl 2002/3; Klostermaier 2007; Singh 2008. It is also supported by anthropologists like Hemphill et al (1991), and Kennedy (1995) who see no break in biological continuity in NW India from 4500BC to around 800BC. Skeletal remains do not support the theory of invasion. Add to it the increasing evidence from Genetics which declares that no substantial flow of genes occurred from Europe or the north-western adjacent areas into S-S regions before 600BC. (Oppenheimer 2003, Sahoo et al 2006). 'Internal strifes'

could be one of the reasons of the 'dislocation' or vice versa, but it needs to be differentiated from the invasion of aliens who wanted to impose their lifestyle and ideology by force or by coercion. [245] Examples: (1) fire-altars & baths; (2) terracotta li.nga-cum-yoni (phallic worship); (3) yogika Asana-s; (4) greeting with folded hands (namaste); (5) pots-pictures at Lothal depicting pa.nchata.ntra-like stories e.g. of 'cunning fox' or of 'wise crow'; (6) use of vermilion in the partition line of the hair; (7) proto-Shiva (pashupati) in meditating stance; (8) worship of banyan tree; (9) mother Goddess (shakti); (10) Harappan artifacts includes motifs that could very well represent the goddess imagery (Goddess riding on a tiger) of the purANa-s; (11) use of swastika; (12) styling of ornaments; (13) conformance of standard weights of later day arthashAstra to those excavated in Lothal; (14) 'Tandur' for cooking; (15) grid pattern of plowed fields; (16) similarity of SSC fortification with later day Kausambi fortification; (17) cremation of the dead & burying their ashes in burial urns (cemetery H culture); (18) Marine excavation at beta dvArakA, a township, which according to MB was submerged in sea water, shows late SSC artifacts & structures. - All these examples indicate unmistakable cultural proximity between SSC and the later day HVC. (Ref Shaffer, Kenoyer, Lal, Dani, Sergent, Ghosa et al). [246] Ascetic avaidika traditions like Jain, AjIvaka, bauddha, lokAyata (ibid.) [247] Two of the earliest historical references are given by Greek historians: (1) Pliny in Naturalis Historia, 6.59-60, (2) Arrian in Indica, 9.9; both alluding to antiquity of c.6776BC, for gubernatorial chain of 154 or 153 number of kings coming up to the times of Chandragupta Maurya (c.314BC) or of Alexander the Great (c.325BC). (Kak, ICPR, 2000). For a conservative '20 yrs per king' norm, antiquity goes to 3500BC. Thus, Magadha region may have played an important role in the formation of HVC, as corroborated by the linage of paurANika kings from MB era to the early Maurya period. (Also, ref "Greater Magadha" by Bronkhorst). [248] For example, Vedanta's core word Atman (root meaning: 'essence') has cognate words in IE languages like Greek, German, old English etc. Even for the alternative etymology (root: 'breath') Latin cognate exists. [249] The modified AMT may mean a "trickled down collaborative migration of IA language speakers" ('Vedas' by Frits Staal 2008). Also, Ref: (1) Online text 'Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate' by Elst (1999); (2) 'Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture':

Ed. Bryant (2004); (3) 'The Indo-Aryan Controversy' Ed. by Bryant and Patton, (2005); (4) Horse and the Aryan Debate" by Michel Danino in Journal of IHC (Sept. 2006); (5) A Survey of Hinduism by Klostermaier (2007). [250] Transformation of velars (k, kh, g,.) of a 'kentum' language into palatals (ch, Ch, j,.) of a 'satem' language is said to be a 'one-way' process. [251] These are few consonents in the 'reconstructed' PIE that are believed to be there in Hittite language, and now absent in all the current IEs. [252] Elst (1999) argues that the most conservative forms are found on the outskirts than in the metropolis. [253] Indus script, which could have shed more light on the antiquity of Vedic Sanskrit within SSC, is not yet deciphered. [254] BMAC (c.2200BC-1700BC), centered on upper Amu Darya (Oxus) was a protohistoric civilization spanning modern south Turkmenistan, north Afghan- istan, and adjacent areas of Iran, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. It had trade and cultural contacts with SSC. It is generally seen as a buffer zone in ancient mi gratory movements to/from SSC to remote areas. [255] These pointers from RV and purANa-s, which are not history-books as we understand them today, need corroboration from other disciplines. Ref: (a) 'A History of Rigveda' (2000) and 'Rigveda and Avesta' (2008) by Talageri; (b) 'Update on Aryan Invasion Debate' (1999) by Elst. [256] "Your ancient home, your auspicious friendship, O Heroes, your wealth is on (banks of) jahnAvI (=ga.ngA)" (RV 3.58.6). [257] These tribes could be: (1) pRRithu or pArthava (RV 7.83.1): Parthians; (2) parshu (RV 7.83.1): Persians; (3) paktha (RV 7.18.7): Pakhtoons; (4) bhalAna (RV 7.18.7): Baluchi; (5) shiva (RV 7.18.7): Khivas; (6) viShANina (RV 7.18.7): Pishachas (Dards); (7) matsya, madra? (RV 17.18.6): Mede (Madai)? (8) shimyu (RV 7.18.5): Sarmatians (Sairimas in Avesta) (Illyrians, Albanians) ?; (9) alina (RV 7.18.7): Alans (Hellenes or Greek); (10) bhRRigu (RV 7.18.6): Thraco-Phrygians (Armenian). [258] (a) Hittite horse training text c.1400BC written by a Mitannian named Kikkuli has Sanskrit loanwords; (b) Mitanni kings 15thCBC, connected with Pharohas by matrimonial alliances, bear Vedic names; (c) Boghaz Kuei inscription c.1400BC of a treaty between Mitanni king Mativaja & Hittite king Suppiluliuma invokes Vedic gods like Mitra, Varuna, Indra ..

Mitanni loanwords and names etc are closer to Indic RV than to Iranian Avesta (ibid) contravening their respective geographical positions. This is explained in the AMT by the 'Iranian Wedge' (Staal, 2008); while in IUT it is explained by temporally separated "Out of India Movements" over a larger time- frame (Elst 1999, Kak 2003). [259] The Avesta contains five groups of texts: (1) Yasna: Sacred liturgy with Gathas of Zarathushtra, and Hom Yasht; (2) Khordah Avesta (Book of Common Prayer) including Yasht (Hymns to sacred Beings), & other prayers, litanies & ceremonial blessings; (3) Vendidad: Mainly purity laws, myths, and some medical texts; (4) Visperad: Extensions to the liturgy - chants of rituals; (5) Fragments. Gathas and some Yashts form the oldest portions. Dialect of the Gathas & some part of Yasna is older than the Pahlavi dialect of the later Zend Avesta. [260] RV 1.133 is frequently interpreted to project a ruined or deserted city. The word armaka in it variously means 'narrow' or 'of narrow width' or 'rubbish', or 'heap of rubbish, or ruin'. In RV 1.133.3, Indra is requested to cast off the unfriendly demons and she-fiends to deep, 'narrow' pit (Griffith 1896) w/o any allusion to ruins of a deserted city. Even if we assume that the hymn allegorically alludes to the ruins of a deserted city; it may only mean that RV was redacted in late SSC. The Bk-10, which is the final and latest book of RV is rather subdued in its praise of sarasvatl in comparison to its praise of sindhu. This is in contrast with the trend of most the other RV books and may point to the possible shift of settlements to sindhu or G-Y basin. Even here, one needs to be cautious while drawing such an inference because RV 10.64.9 calls upon sarasvatI (and sharayu and sindhu) as "great" and "nourishing". Later, SV brAhamaNa texts such as tANDya or pa.ncha-viMsha (25.10.16), jaiminIya (2.297), jaiminlya Up. (4.26.12) and SYV shatapatha (1.4.1.10-15) mention sarasvatl's desiccation. One reference indicating population shift is in the baudhAyaya shrauta sUtra (BSS 18.44): "ayu went eastwards. His (people) are the kuru-pA.nchAla and kAshI-videha. This is Ayava (migration). amAvasu went west-wards. His (people) are the gAndhArI, parshu, and Aratta. This is amAvasu (migration)". This seems to be a fork movement from some place between gAndhAra and kuruxetra to the east as well as to the west. This could be an allusion to the population shift in late SSC. [261] Gnoli (Ref Zoroster's Time and Homeland, 1980) lists: (2) Sogdiana, (3) Margiana, (4) Bactria, (5) Nisaya (between Margiana & Bactria), (6) Areia, (7) Kabul, (8) Gazni, (9) Xnanta,

(10) Archosia, (11) Drangiana (12) Rai (territory between Zamin- davar and Qal'at-i-Gilzay), (13) Lugar Valley, (14) Buner, (15) Sapta Sindhu, (16) Rahna (between Kabul and Kurram); the first land Airyan Vaejah seems mythical. [262] Here, one has to be careful about dating the textual layers of ancient scriptures with a possibility of their mixing the past and the present. [263] According to M. Witzel: Since RV does not know large cities like those of SSC but only of ruins (armaka, Falk 1981) and of pur (Rao 1976), it must be later than c.1900BC. According to him, a good date would be that of Mitanni document (c.1400BC) of northern Iraq and Syria, which has IA loan words of slightly older IA forms than those found in the RV. (Indo-Aryan Controversy Ed. Bryant & Patton 2005). [264] In his paper on the origin of mathematics, in Archive for History of Exact Sciences. Vol. 18, 301-342, Seidenberg (1978) concluded: "Old-Babylonia (c.1700 BC) got the theorem of Pythagoras from India or that both Old-Babylonia & India got it from a third source. Now the Sanskrit scholars do not give me a date so far back as 1700BC. Therefore I postulate a pre- Old-Babylonian (i.e. pre-1700 B.C.) source of the kind of geometric rituals we see preserved in the shulvasUtra-s, or at least for the mathematics involved in them." [265] This trend is seen in pre-2000 SSC. This can be attributed to the pre-historic tribal origins of Hinduism which had elements of mysticism and animism-pantheism resulting in the nature-worship and the beneficent gratitude towards animals. This last trait, which was captured by post-Vedic Hinduism, was cherished by its 20thC proponents like Gandhi for whom cow- protection was the most important outward manifestation of Hinduism. Hindu theology's affinity for animals can be seen from the facts that first four of the ten avatars of viShNu are in the animal form; and vehicles of many Hindu gods are animals. [266] These offerings can be material or verbal. The later can be in the form of praise and eulogies, either associated with, or in place of material offerings. The importance of stuti (praise) and mahAtmya (eulogy) in the spiritual traditions and social habits of Indians may be rooted here. [267] Major sacrifices like agnichayana, ashvamedha, rAjasUya, vAjapeya involved killing of sacrificial animals. For example RV (1.162-163), and the later texts (KYV 7.1-5, SYV 22-25, shatapatha 13.1-5) describe the horse sacrifice and its ribald ritualism (SYV 23.20-31). This sacrifice has an allogorical significance in BU 1.1, BU 1.2.7.

[268] (A) Sage atri observed near total solar eclipse 3 days before autumnal equinox (RV 5.40.5-9 and kauShItakI brA 24.4). Sengupta (1947) dates this event as 3928BC while Balakrishna (2005) gives many dates with his preference to 4647BC; (B) shatapatha brA 2.1.2.2-3 declares that kRRittikA (Pleiades) do not swerve from the east; Dixit (1889), Kak (1994), Achar (1999) give date of 2950BC-3000BC for this observation. (C) In taittirlya brA 1.5.2.7; the 13.5 (out of 27) naxatra-s starting with kRRittikA at the spring equinox & ending with vishAkhA are situated in the northern hemisphere. This suggests c.2300BC (Kuppanna Shastri in Vedang Jyotish introduction, 1984). RV's antiquity is sometimes linked to MB by (a) synchronizing the latest portions of RV book-10 to the times of shantanu (& his brother devApi) of MB, (b) going into past from the times of king yudhiShThira through genealogy of kings and priests. The paurANika premises of "1500 yrs (viShNu), 1050 yrs (vAyu), 1015 yrs (matsya), 1115 or 1150 yrs (SB) of span between the birth of MB king parIxita & accession of Magadha king mahApadma nanda" lead to MB war date c.1924BC or c.1500BC-1400BC. These are pushed back by about 1500-2000 yrs to account for the anterior genealogy of kings & events in Vedic texts. There are two traditional MB war dates: (1) varAhamihira's bRRihat-saMhitA-13.3 (c.500) refers much earlier vRRiddhagarga to quote 2449 BC. (2) According to Aihole inscription of pulakeshin II (c.634), & based on Aryabhata's calculation (c.500); it is 3137BC. There are other recent (2003) proposals: Balakrishna (3129BC and 1397BC among six possible dates); Iyengar (1478BC) and Achar (3067BC). Each interprets the asterismal data differently. Kak favours 3137BC or 1924BC amongst the four possible dates considered by him. MB war date is thus a hypothetical mark that can be placed anywhere from the 31stCBC to 14thCBC depending on the interpretation of asterismal and proto-historical data and synchronicity of cultural strands. [269] (1) Fire-altars; (2) Fire-temple at Mohenjo-Daro; (3) Round bottomed perforated pots were found at Harappan site. shatapatha brA. mentions a 9-hole vessel (navavitRRiNNa kuMbha) (5.5.4.27), a 100-hole vessel (shatavitRRiNNa kuMbha) (5.5.4.27), & a similar one (shata-tRRiNNA kuMbhI) (12.7.2.13). SYV 19.87 also mentions 100-hole pitcher. Such vessels were used for ritual sprinkling; (4) Libation vessels made of the conch shell turbine pyrum have been found at Mohenjo-Daro. One of these has vermilion filled incised lines. Such conch vessels were used in the Vedic ritual and for administering sacred water or medicine to

patients; (5) The seal with inscription of two headed animal that was found in Mohenjodaro excavation finds parallel in two headed cattle (dvAyA) of AV (ref AV 5.19.7); (6) While the burial of the dead seems common in earlier phases of SSC, in later phases, particularly in the late SSC (cemetery H), the dead were also cremated and their ashes were buried in urns. The 'urn burial' and 'grave skeletons' were nearly contemporaneous. The allusion to this transition is in RV (10.15.14), where both cremated (agnidagdha) and uncremated (anAgnidagdha) forefathers are invoked. The practice of cremation itself may suggect firming up of belief in the transmigration. Historicity projected by the aforementioned portions of SYV, KYV and AV converges into mature SSC or late SSC. The 'urn- burial' practice suggests that RV Bk-10 ideas germinated and firmed up by end of the mature SSC (c.1900BC) towards its final stages (c.1500BC-1400BC) while canonizing the then existing practices. [270] Levitt, Stephan H. 2003: The dating of the Indian tradition. Anthropos 98(2) :341-359. <Here, one may have to distinguish between "historicity of hymns" and "the historicity as projected by the hymns"> [271] Ref. (1) "La religion des Hourrites: etat actuel de nos connaissances" by Marie-Claude Tremouille, and (2) "Imperial Mitanni: An Attempt at Historical Reconstruction" by Cord Kuhne, in the "Studies on the Civilization and Culture of Nuzi and the Hurrian", vol. 10. Kak however, sees a deep ideational relation between Egyptian mono-theism, Mitanni culture and Indic RVC; he sees the flow of ideas from SSC/RVC to Mitanni culture (ref Akhenaten, Surya, & Rigveda 2003). [272] Frits Staal has tried to reconstruct a possible scenario of early nomadic movements in the period 2100BC-1400BC over a large part of Eurasia in relation to the timeframe and autochthony of RV. However, few facts stand out: (1) large number of early SSC sites in the basin of Ghaggar-Hakra river which dried by 1900BC and which is identified as the river sarasvatI - the main river of RVC; (2) numerous archaeological foot-prints of SSC in the HVC; (3) RV's internal structure projects a possible westward movement from G-Y to S-S; (4) non-Vedic polity & localized IA dialects of Magadha in 1st millennium BC, and its influence in HVC. Staal's hypothesis of post-1900BC collaboration and assimilation of migrated Aryans with and within the local Indic groups can be examined against above facts (ref: Discovering

Veda, 2008). That being said, Indian subcontinent provided the most fertile ground for the main ideas of HVC, viz. (a) nature worship, (b) karmic order, (c) yaGYa, and (d) monism. Not the ideas per se, but continuity and longevity of the tradition based on these ideas is unique to HVC. Once we accept this HVC compositae to be the result of cultural osmosis, RV autochthony issue becomes irrelevant. [273] In 1st millennium BC two major Indic IA regions, one Vedic (G-Y doab) and another non-Vedic (Magadha), stood side-by-side (Bronkhorst 2007). This suggests: (1) Vedic Aryans [VA] were not the carriers of IA languages in the Indic regions; (2) VA were multi-ethnic; (3) VA had a set of ideas; these ideas and not VA per se, spread over the subcontinent; (4) VA were indigenous to South Asia (Allchin, Erdosy 1995); and (5) VA ideas (Vedic deities, rituals etc) synthesized with local strata (local gods, customs, beliefs etc) in a checkered way to evolve into the HVC compositae with Vedanta as its 'concluding' philosophy. [274] This may be seen as the monotheist principle, though calling it as "sat" (Being) depersonalizes it and underlines its basic monist character. [275] Vedanta (= Veda+ anta) is taken here in a more general sense: (1) last part of Veda, (2) conclusion of Veda, (3) literal end of Veda (of its karmakANDa or action part), (4) tUrya (fourth) meaning: limit of Veda (=knowledge) suggesting knowledge of the transcendental (brahman). [276] Central doctrine of KA is identified in the oldest UP. sha.nkara in BSBh 3.2.27 quotes: CU 6.8.7, BU 1.4.10, BU 3.4.1, BU 3.7.3; and in US prose 1.6 he quotes: CU 3.14.1, CU 6.2.1, CU 7.24.1, CU 7.25.2, AU 1.1.1 to show Atman=brahman. Also, TU 2.1.1, AU 3.1.2, and BU 3.8.8-9 alongside, leads to the same Absolute. [277] kalpa is one of the six disciplines of Vedanga. Sacrificial practice gave rise to large number of systemic sUtra-s known as kalpasUtra-s for the several classes of priests. They are of two kinds: (a) shrauta-sUtra-s, which are based on the shruti, and teach performance of the great sacrifices, requiring three or five sacrificial fires; and (b) smArtasUtra-s, or rules based on the smRRiti or tradition. The latter class includes: (1) gRRihyasUtra-s, or domestic rules, treating the rites of passage, such as marriage, birth, name giving etc, connected with simple offerings into the domestic fire; and (2) dharmasUtra-s, which treat customs and social duties, and have formed the chief sources of the later law- books.

The shrautasUtra-s of the YV include a set of so-called shulbasUtra-s, i.e. rules of cord for geometrical construction of altars. The shatapatha brAhmaNa and the taittirlya saMhitA are also aware of these rules including Pythagoras theorem. <Hence it is argued that either "Old Babylonia got these rules from India or both got them from third source predating 1700BC" (Ref: Seidenberg 1978, 1983)>. [278] VJ is the earliest Vedanga text, dated as 1370BC (earliest) & 1150BC (latest) from the asterismal data within the text. The redaction may belong to last centuries BC. (Ed. Kuppanna Sastri & Sarma 1984). [279] Ref 8.3(12) for pre-Buddha antiquity of UP. Some redaction might have continued till 1st-2ndCBC (Bronkhorst 2007). Their geography is speculated as: BU, AU, IU, KU (koshala, videha); CU, TU, Kau (kuru, pA.nchAla); KeU (chedi) etc. (8.3(2b) & Map-5). [280] Olivelle (1992) however, thinks that Brahmana proponents of these doctrines must have found it advantageous to align them with noblity and kings. He sees in it a rural-urban divide where urban Brahmanas aligned with the king to distinguish themselves and their doctrines from the rural Vedic Brahmanas and their old ritual tradition (ref 8.3(2a)). [281] During 1300BC-500BC about 18 'major kingdoms' (mahAjanapada-s) with urban centers emerged in S-S, G-Y, and other Indic regions where HVC had been established (see Maps-5, 6): (1) gAndhAra (taxashiilA), (2) kAMboja (rAja-vAsa), (3) madra (shAkala), (4) trigarta (prasthala), (5) kuru (hastinApura, Indraprastha), (6) shUrasena (mathurA), (7) pA.nchAla (ahiChatra, kAmpilya, kAnyakubja), (8) vatsa (kausaMbii, prayAga), (9) koshala (shravastii, sAketa), (10) kAshii (vArANashii), (11) malla (kushinara, pava), (12) vRRija-videha (vaishAlii, mithilA), (13) magadha (rAjagRRiha, pATaliputra, gayA), (14) a.nga (chaMpA-mAlinii), (15) chedii (shuktivatii, vishvapurii), (16) kuntii (bhojapurii), (17) avanti- mAlava (ujjayinii), (18) va.nga (pauNDra, navadviipa).

Mahajanapadas (1-4) were in sindhu tributaries; while others were in G-Y region. (15-17) were south-west of yamunA, between yamunA and narmadA in central India. Bauddha texts identify one more kingdom called Ashmaka, south of vindhya-s on the banks of godAvarii. [282] These renunciate currents were discernible earlier (c.800BC), but they were consolidated by Mahavira, Buddha & their followers. Their origins may be traced in eastern Gangetic planes where historical Jainism and Buddhism originated. They may also be traced in SSC to prototypes of orthoprax Yogic or heterodox Jain traditions thro' archaeological finds. [283] Ref: "Advaita and Neoplatonism:" by J. F. Staal, University of Madras (1961); online reading ref. <www.dbnl.org>, access Nov 2008. [284] This view was promulgated by MU 1.2.6-10; which later lead to the separation of GYAna and karma. [285] For example: 1) pUraNa kassapa denied activity to the soul (akriyA-vAda); 2) makkhali gosAla denied free will (ahetuvAda); 3) ajiita kesha-kambala denied ꞌpost-death continuation of soul' (uchChedavAda); 4) pakudha kachchAyana rejected 'extra-elemental soul' (aNuvAda); and 5) sa.njaya belatthaputta was agnostic (aGYeyavAda). Jain canon identifies fig. 1, 2, 5, while bauddha canon identifies all the five and the 6th one nigantha nAtaputta who is said to be the jina (protagonist of Jainism). These cult teachers were either contemporary or anterior to Buddha. They were of the ascetic shramaNa tradition. Motivations of the first five sects, variously known as Ajlvaka (1-2), lokAyata (3-5) are not very clear. Probably reducing the physical requirement (asceticism) was their notion of freedom; or perhaps they wanted liberation from the involuntary, deterministc kArmika cycle by renouncing karma. Bronkhorst (2007) suggests that shramaNa traditions of Magadha were autochthonous. They had their own notions about karma and liberation, some of which they shared with Brahmanism. They also shared the notion of "inert self" with BU (compare BU 3.8.8 with the early Jain AyAraMga sutta 176). However, they did not equate self with the sub-stratum Universal (brahman); their early notion of the self was similar to sA.nkhya puruSha rather than to Atman= brahman of Vedanta. According to Bronkhorst, important concepts of classical Hinduism like rebirth, karma, inactive untainted self, renunciation, liberation, & cyclic Universe are tracable to the earliest known shramaNa traditions of the mahAmagadha (magadha, videha, part- koshala etc; see Map-5).

[286] Some historians revise this date to 490BC-410BC, while some others advocate the birth date of 624BC. Early bauddha literature is in Pali, a language closely related to Sanskrit and having roots in vernacular prAkRRita. The canonical texts are said to be compiled more than a century after Buddha's death. Tripitaka (three baskets) of Pali canon are: (1) Sutta, related to doctrines; (2) Vinaya, related to the disciplines of monks and nuns; (3) Abhidhamma, or the scholastic treatises. Sutta is divided into five discourses (Nikaya): (a) Digha (long)], (b) Majjhima (medium), (c) Samyutta (connected), (d) Anguttara (numbered), and (f) Khuddaka (miscellaneous) [DiN, MN, SN, AN, KN]. [287] One of the Aryasatya recursively includes these eight auxiliaries. [288] Buddha advised against the trading of weapons, butchery etc. [289] These questions and the 'arrow parable' are mentioned in Majjhima Nikaaya (vol II, sutta 63: Advice to Malunkhyanputta). Though Buddha declares that the 'gone one' is destroyed 'here and now' he does not deny efficacy of action and sutta's positivist moral purport is quite clear. [290] Buddhism acknowledged varNa and their duties but rejected the birth based supremacy of Brahmanas. Buddha told Ambattha: the Kshatriya is the best of those among the fold 'who put their trust in lineage'. Thereafter he took an enlightened stand - whosoever are bondage to the notions of birth or lineage, or to the pride of social position, or of connection by marriage, are far from the best wisdom and righteousness. (Ambattha Sutta; DiN-3). The very next sutta called Sonadanda, asserts that true Brahmanahood is not a matter of birth or Vedic learning, but of wisdom (Panna ~praGYA), and knowledge (Vigga ~vidyA). Here Buddhism and Vedanta hold similar positions. It is noteworthy that vajrasUchi Up. of smilar purport is attributed to Buddhist Ashvaghosha. Both Buddhism and Brahmanism did not oppose popular beliefs - nature wor- ship, gods, anti-gods, ghosts, spirits etc. which were common to many cul- tures. These popular common strata were conducive to the later (c.700-1000) assimilation of Indic Buddhism in HVC. Stereotype of obedient and submissive woman of Pali canon is not uniformly shared by Vedic culture of RV and MB. Eight special rules (garu-dhammas) in Vinaya Pitaka: (II.74-75) for the ordination of a nun (bhikkhuni) shows gender bias in a stark manner.

[291] These concepts may be traced to SSC inasmuch as yoga (meditation) and renunciation are attested by the archaeological artifacts; but they were also likely to be present in other Indic regions. Their earliest text-ual expression is notably in the G-Y & Magadha regions. The karmika retribution, rebirth, and liberation are not explicitly mentioned in RV and brahmaNa texts; they are introduced in UP. Thus, BG and UP are the meeting points of the ancient Hindu and Vedic axiological traditions. AV had already given place to certain other popular practices like magic, charms and medicinal methods. This HVC synthesis including all its anterior Indic traditions is known as sanAtana dharma; its signs are seen in Epics and purANa-s as well. [292] This term is frowned upon by some Buddhists; they point out that it was coined only because mahAyAna came into being, suggesting that the so called hInayAna is the orthodox canon or theravAda. [293] "Whoever sees dependent co-arising sees the dhamma; whoever sees the dhamma sees dependent co-arising" (ref MN 28; Nagao 1991). [294] The 'pudgala' concept as a category of matter is in Jain schools too. In bauddha sammatlya School, pudgala is something more than the sum of its component parts, a position similar to KA. [295] A complex of hierarchical aggregates or as a body- mind complex. The word with similar meaning is also used in sA.nkhya (kArikA 17). [296] If pudgala is self-less or essence-less, then what remains constant or continuous between death and subsequent rebirth? Who bears fruits of karma? Who attains nirvANa? To answer these questions Buddhists use the notion of a fictitious person (self) in the name of pudgala, which is neither the same nor different than pa.ncha-skandha. It is praGYapti - a multivalent term which many Buddhist schools used in variety of ways. Literally praGYapti means 'leading to knowledge'. It may mean a teaching device, a designation, an instruction, a heuristic, a name or label for a complex of conditions, and so on. (It is as good as accepting the notional self; for Buddhism, this is a linguistic as well as ontological and soterial problem). [297] In some Buddhist schools; svalaxaNa assumes absolutist purport and converges on Atman. For example, in some of the Mahayana schools svalaxaNa is conceptualized as the Absolute and named substantially (rather than vacuously) as tathAgatagarbha, dharmakAya, tathatA, etc. or nominally as

viGYapti, shUnya, shUnyatA etc. In Both these cases Absolute remains anti-conceptual like the Atman (ibid.). [298] The pudgala concept, which is based on pa.nchaskandha and svalaxaNa doctrine of pa.ncha-siddhAnta attracts diverse epistemological and metaphysical interpretations. [299] The ancient Indian empires and states like those of: (1) Great Ashoka (c.268BC-233BC), (2) Indo Greek (Bactrian) kings including Menander (Milinda), Demetrius etc; (3) Scytho- Parthians (Shaka-Pahalvas) such as Moga, Vonones, Azes-I&II etc (c.200BC-50BC), (4) Kuei-shang (Kushana) rulers including Kadphises, emperor Kanishka etc (c.50BC-150) were patrons of Buddhism. Even (5) Brahmana Shunga dynasty of Magadha (c.187BC-75BC) sponsored construction of stupas and renovated bauddha monasteries. Similarly almost all regional kingdoms outside S-S/G-Y belt such as: (6) Chedis (c.100BC-200) to which powerful Jain king Kharavela belonged, on Eastern coast in todays Orissa; (7) Shatavahans (c.150BC-300) in Deccan with their capital in Pratisthan (Paithana) in Maharashtra, (8) Shatavahans' adversaries: Shaka Kshatrapas like Kshaharatas and Kardamakas in the Western India provided patronage to Buddhism. There are records of Brahmana Shatavahanas, and their successors Vakatakas and Ikshvakus, making donations to bauddha monasteries. In Deep South there were Hindu Kings: (9) Cholas, (10) Pandyas (both in Tamil Nadu), and (11) Cheras (in Kerala) (c.300BC-300), who were friendly with Buddhism. Historically, Ashoka remains the greatest patron as well as promoter of Buddhism; he sent missionaries to western Asia, Greece, central Asia, Shri Lanka, & Burma. After demise of Maurya empire foreign dynasties fought with each other for the supremacy of N-W India. Most of them found Buddhism more accessible than orthodox Hinduism and gave it a royal patronage. However, over the period, probably due to the idea of divine kingship; they sought further legitimacy by identifying themselves with popular shaiva and vaiShNava cults of Hinduism. [300] This school is seen as forerunner of KA. It expounds UP metaphysics with Buddhist terminology & ideas. The discourse is based on English Translations of "(mahAyAna) shraddhotpAda shAstra": (a) by Yoshito S. Hakeda, publ. Columbia University, 1967; & (b) by Daisetz T. Suzuki (named "awakening of faith", and as referred by S. N. Dasgupta (ref. 8.3(5)). Both translations are from Chinese versions. The original Sanskrit text is not extant. It is attributed to Buddhist Brahmana ashva-ghoSha (c.80-150?) who wrote buddhacharitakAvya (epic on Buddha's life) & other texts acclaimed for their poetical excellence & ornateness. vajrasUchi

Up. too is attributed to ashvaghosha. Today's historians are however, surer about ashvaghoSha's profile as a poet-scholar than as a tathatA protagonist. (ref. "Literary History of Sanskrit Buddhism": by G. K. Nariman, Taraporewala & Sons (1920)). [301] Dasgupta interprets smRRiti as vAsanA - as incipient and unconscious memory of past experiences including previous births rather than as illusion (Hakeda) or as 'confused subjectivity' (Suzuki). [302] Here, shUnya is nirguNa brahman, and ashUnya is saguNa brahman. [303] Being Buddhist, the protagonist needs to conform to the terminology of 'emptiness' (shUnyatA); however, here he is propounding absolutism in the name of emptiness. [304] It seems, the author is equating Suchness with 'original-enlightenment', and nirvANa with enlightenment (ibid.); the later is analogous to jIvan-mukti while the former is akin to videhamukti (brahman) of Advaita. [305] Author does not equate Suchness with Atman to conform to bauddha dogma of anAtmA. This is the slender thread by which tathatA school connects itself metaphysically with Buddhism. [306] It is not known here what is the 'original' word used for Self. The author is talking about ashUnya tathatA analogous to saguNa brahman. Here he appears to be a monotheist like a later day vaishNava Vedantin. In the same discourse; he later clarifies that Suchness in its tathAgata-garbha aspect is non-personal. [307] According to the Mahayana tradition, besides the historical Siddhartha Gotama (Buddha) there had been number of Buddhas in the remote past, and there will be number of Buddhas in the distant future. [308] bodhisattva aspires and strives for enlightenment (similar to mumuxu). [309] It is a mahAyAna term meaning "perfections": 1. dAna (generosity), 2. siila (morality), 3. nekkhamma (renunciation), 4. pannA (insight), 5. vIriya (energy), 6. khAnti (forbearance), 7. sachcha (honesty), 8. mettA (friendship), 9. adhitthAna (resolution), 10. upexa (equanimity). [310] This is the echo of "eSha ta AtmA sarvAntaraH" (BU 3.4.1, 3.5.1). Here Suchness is applicable to all sentient beings. Considering that Suchness is also the ground of all the states of existence, Atman=brahman principle is propounded here in the bauddha terminology. [311] This sUtra could be the non-extant shraddhotpAda

itself or one of the tathAgatagarbha sUtra-s. [312] This bipolar view is similar to saMvRRiti satya and nirvRRiti satya of mAdhyamaka, and vyAvahArika satta and pAramArthika sattA of KA. [313] This inexplicableness of tathatA is shared by mAdhyamaka as well as by Advaita Vedanta. [314] RGV is a Sanskrit text of which Chinese and Tibetan translations were available beforehand. It has been researched by Jikido Takasaki (ref Serie Orientale Roma, vol XXXIII, 1966) and others. Though RGV is attributed to chittamAtra (yogAchAra) school; it propounds tathAgata-garbha theory similar to tathatA. Its Tibetan title (Uttaratantra) suggests that RGV's teaching is the completion of shUnyatA teaching. Buddhism is said to have reached its final absolutist position in RGV. [315] There were realist schools like vaibhAShika and sautrAntika whose followers were known as sarvAstivAdin-s. These two schools are part of what is known as the 'small vehicle' (hInayAna). Other important schools include viGYAnavAda (aka yogAchAra), mAdhyamaka, and tathatA that belong to the 'big way' (mahAyAna).

[316] This and previous two paragraphs are based on "Buddhist Philosophy :: Essential Readings: Ch-2", OUP 2009. [317] These are obviously similar to vyAvahArika and pAramArthika sattA of KA where they play crucial role. Their connection with the immanent and the transcendent is more explicit in KA. [318] This is a mahAyAna-sUtra that expounds mahAyAna as opposed to hInayAna teachings. It is a polemical text portraying Buddhist arhats as having incorrect understanding of the bauddha teachings. It teaches supra-conceptual non-duality culminating in the teaching of silence. [319] A well known sUtra, which is popular among mahAyAna followers for its brevity and depth. [320] For example, KA deploys the concept of mAyA to explain the diversity of manifest world. There is a magic element in mAyA to resolve the contradictory demands made on its ontological status. Alternatively, mAyA is interpreted as 'multi- valued logic' (against 'binary logic') or as a 'fuzzy logic' (against 'crisp logic'). Here, Advaita and mAdhyamaka have similar positions of vyavahAra. [321] In general, 'isomorphism' (axiomatic complementarity and structural or formative similarity) is likely to

exist between platonic & process philosophy. For example, Kant's 'noumenal idealism' (18thC) and Deleuze's 'virtual empiricism' (20thC) together offer many reference points for their comparison and critique. In KA and MMK this relationship is more evident not only due to their axiomatic or metaphysical complementarity, but also because of their axiological and cultural proximity (see 8.3: References for Further Reading: Kant 1781, Delanda 2002, Byrant 2008, and Murty 1960, Bhattacharya 1989). Examples of isomorphism exist in mathematical theories and models. For example, there are geometries such as Euclidean, Eliptical, Hyperbolic, Spherical etc. which are isomorphic to each other and which offer insight into the relation between the platonic space and the physical space in various cosmological models (ref. 8.3(27)). <The term itself is defined in Logic: "Two sets are isomorphic to each other iff there is an order preserving bijection between them". Isomorphism between two models is defined analogously (Jech 2006)>. [322] This leads to the formation of at least half a dozen Vedanta schools during the later period (c.1000-1500). Some schools, such as bhedA-bheda (identity cum difference) and illusionist Vedanta seem to be present during this period of recovery, while BS itself suggest that they could be there during the period of BS collation or earlier. [323] Core purANa-s must have been compiled earlier. AV 11.7.24 mentions purANa-s along with the three other Veda. shatapatha brA. (11.5.6.8) & (13.4.3.13) refer to them. (ref Kak, ICPR 2000, pp. 1-24). [324] Dasgupta (vol-2: History of Philosophy) places YOV in the 7thC, while some historians place its oldest manuscript (moxopAya) in the 10thC (ref. Wikipedia) [325] aka trikANDI having three books within. It is a 5thC treatise about the nature of language & its relation with Universe. The first book (brahma-kANDa) deals with 'word' (shabda) which is claimed to be brahman as well as the principle means to attain it. The second book deals with the semantics of sentence, while the third book deals with philosophical issues including ontology of substance (padArtha). It shows that differ-ent doctrines elucidate different aspects of one and the same entity. VKY tries to unite them in its linguistic philosophy. bhartRRihari quotes from unnamed Agama-s, which suggests that his linguistic Advaita had earlier tradition parallel to aupanishad Advaita and bauddha Advaya schools. (Ref (1) Online Indopedia; (2) Excerpts by Ananda Wood on advaitin.net blog); (3) "The Vakyapadiya: Critical Text of

Cantos I & II" by K. Raghavan Pillai, MLBD, 1971) [326] Megasthenes, the emissary of Syrian King Seleucus Nicator to India (c.300 BC) had observed that austerities were taught and respected in the Indian society and non-violence was highly valued. [327] During c.300-550, the Gupta dynasty (Chandragupta-I, Samudragupta, Chandragupta-II, Kumargupta, Skandagupta, Budhagupta etc.) ruled over large part of the subcontinent with support of friendly Wakatakas of the Deccan, matching the empires of Ashoka, Kanishka, and later day Mughals in size at their respective heights. Apart from its military spread, the Gupta Empire was prosperous and well managed. The compilation of the ancient epics like mahAbhArata, rAmAyaNa and of purANa-s in the form as they exist today, were carried out during this period. Classical Sanskrit literature flourished with the stimulus of royal patronage. Famous poet Kalidas is said to be in the court of Chandra-gupta-II. There was considerable progress in astronomy and maths. Outstanding mathematician Aryabhata stayed in kusumpura during the last decade(s) of the fifth century. [328] YOV's Vedantization excludes the renunciatory aspect of Vedanta. It is an active Advaita combining action and knowledge. Ontologically, it tunes well with illusory aspect of Advaita of GK. [329] Harsha, the King of Kanauj (c.606-647) established his empire almost as large as that of Gupta. The Sanskrit literature flourished in his times too. His biography was written by the famous Sanskrit poet Bana. His ambitions in south however, were thwarted by Pulkeshin-II of Chalukya dynasty of Badami in Karnataka. [330] ref (a) "The Sublime Science of the Great Vehicle to Salvation, Being a Manual of Buddhist Monism" by Obermiller in Acta Orientalia-IX (1930) & (b) "Prajnaparamita in Tibetan Buddhism" by Obermiller with Preface by Dr. H. S. Sobti; Paljor- Wisdom Books (1998). [331] Alaya-viGYAna is one of the central concepts of yogAchAra. Early Buddhism taught the existence of six-fold consciousness - five types of sensory perception & mind (manoviGYAna). The yogAchAra adds two more: klistamanoviGYana or manas that is the ego-centre of empirical personality, & Alaya- viGYAna, which is the source of empirical aware-ness. Alaya- viGYAna is above subject-object duality but it is moment-ary. Every sentient being has its 'own' Alaya-viGYAna; and hence in classical yogAchAra there exist many Alaya-s. It is a receptacle- cum-container of the so-called 'seeds' (bIja), or elementary units of

the past experiences. The blja-s project themselves as an illusionary world of subjects-objects dualism. All other seven types of consciousness are transformation (pariNAma) of Alaya-viGYAna. In the course of its yoga practice a yogAchArin must empty Alaya- viGYAna of its contents to put an end to the tendency of its external projections, thereby changing it into non-dual wisdom of enlightened mind. [332] Combination of: (a) tathAgata - "Thus Coming One" is one of the titles of Buddha; & (b) garbha - "embryo, fetus" or "womb, matrix". It is one of the important terms of Mahayana Buddhism. It means: (i) embryo or sprout of the Buddha-nature in every living being, its "precious nature" (ratna-gotra); (ii) the name for absolute reality of One Mind (eka-chitta) of Buddha, identical to Buddha's elemental body (dharmakAya) and Suchness (tathatA). As One Mind, tathAgatagarbha is the substratum of every being (dharma). It is endowed with innumerable good qualities like eternity (nityatva), bliss (sukha), essence or Self (Atman) & purity (shubha). In the doctrine of tathAgatagarbha, alaya-viGYAna can be understood as defiled garbha. (ref. www. kheper.net a. 9/2009) [333] Ref "Buddhist Philosophy: Essential Reading" (Ed. William Edelglass & Jay L. Garfield; OUP 2009). [334] Such as perception of the enlightened person is discussed here more extensively than other texts. [335] It is compendium of the 'Means of True Knowledge' and is known as one of the greatest works on Buddhist logic. dignAga gives a definition of "perception": a knowledge that is free from all conceptual constructs, including name and class concepts. Compare it with 'unidamAMsha' - the non-objective part of cognition in padmpAda's theory of perception. [336] It is an 'examination of objects of knowledge': dignAga contends that objects do not support (unique) representation and cannot be 'known' other than their sensory cognition. [337] For example in US 17.74, sha.nkara says -- The Truthful man who has renounc-ed everything unreal does not get bound again when he Knows that he is always the eternal Self devoid-empty (shUnya)of everything like a sky(अहमेव सदात्मज्ञः शून्यस्त्वन्यैर्यथाम्बरम् । इत्येवं सत्यसंधत्वादसद्धाता न बध्यते ॥ (US 17.74)). This position is similar to that of mAdhyamaka, but in KA; this shUnya (2R) or emptiness is the substratum Reality. It is equated with undeniable Self that remains after negating everything conceiv- able. Buddhists like Chandrakirti are impatient with this type of argu-ment; for them it is similar to the quibble of a man, who,

when he is told that he will be given 'nothing', demands that he must now get that 'nothing'. The tathatA-tathAgatagarbha theory of yogAchaAra however, holds position similar to that of Advaita. The subtle difference between the two is provided by MAU-7: among all the negations, two adjectives of turlya [brahman] stand out viz. shAntam (serene, calm) and shivam (noble, auspice-ous). Though the former can be interpreted as negation; the later is undoubtedly positive. Both are aspects of the same axio-logical principle which is immanent in the absolutist bauddha systems and both immanent and transcendent in KA. [338] YOV has 6 chapters (prakaraNa-s): vairAgya (dispassion), mumuxu-vyavahAra (behavior of the Seeker), utpatti (origin), sthiti (preservation), upashama (quiescence), and nirvANa (absorption). YOV philosophy does not come in a systematic manner but needs to be constructed from allegorical stories. The Ultimate is acosmic, neti neti type - a pure cessation (shAnta), indescribable and unmanifest (anAkhyam, anabhivyaktam), and pure extinction (nirvanamAtra). (Ref (1) The Supreme Yoga by Sw. Shankarananda, Pub MLBD, 2003; (2) A History of Indian Philosophy-Ch 12/Vol 2, by S. N. Dasgupta 1922). [339] YOV says: The universe as such never existed in the past, nor exists now, nor will exist hereafter; so there is no creation and destruction in real sense (ajAta vAda) (YOV 3.10.29, 3.11.13, 3.61.31). Yet there is a world appearance and its explanation is called for. In the Ultimate Entity there is the first ripple (spanda) by 'pure chance' (kAka-tAliiya- yoga), like a self- reflecting thought of undefined objectivity. This gives rise to chit (consciousness) in which every thing else is reflected. From chit arises first objectivity of space (AkAsha), time (kAla), seed (blja) of ego (ahaMtA) and mind-energy (chitta, manas, karma chaitanya). The appearance of world objects is explained as such: accumulation of mind-energy is called ghana which is statical aspect of the dynamical energy (spanda) & its consequent action (karma). This ghana-spanda-karma triad leads the formation of five- subtle perceptual elements (tanmAtra-s) in a 'recursive sequence'. All the basic elements continue to act upon one another - as experiencer and experience - and the entire creation comes into being like ripples on the surface of the ocean by accident (kAka- tAliiya-nyAya) without any inherent motive & has no reality (YOV 3.12-13). YOV shares the terminology of spanda with Trika (Kashmir Shaivism); its variation 'Sphurti' later appeared in Jnadeva's Amrutanubhava. [340] (1) aShTAvakra saMhitA: Tr. by Sw. Nityaswarupananda, 1969, intro by Satkari Mookharjee, 1940;

Publ. by Advaita Ashrama Kolakata. It has 20 chapters and about 300 verses. This work is said to be quite popular in the Advaita tradition among monks; (2) avadhUta gItA: Tr. Hari Prasad Shastri (London: Shanti Sadan, 1968). This Advaita work is popular in avadhUta (ascetic) sect of which nAtha saMpradAya is one form. In the traditional view, the dattAtreya, the first avadhUta, was the guru of sage pata.njalii. There are supporting UP like tUriyAtIta (SYV) & avadhUta (KYV) of Muktika List; (3) uttara gItA: English Tr. & notes by B. K. Laheri, Publ. (1933) by Theosophical Society, Madras. It is the discourse subsequent to BG. gauDapAda is said to have written a commentary on uttara-gItA. Interestingly, there is also an anu -gItA, the essential purport of original BG as retold by krishNa to arjuna in MB; (4) RRibhu gItA: Tr. by Dr. H. Ramamoorthy and Master Nome, Publ. by Society of Abidance in Truth, 1994. This is the translation of sixth chapter of the Sanskrit work shivarahasya. There is also a short work Publ. by Ramanashrama, 1995; (5) uddhava gItA: Tr. by Sw. Madhavananda, Advaita Ashrama (1997). It consists of Ch 7.19 to Ch 29.34 of 11th Book of SB (total 1030 verses). It is the last discourse of kRRiShNa to his disciple & companion uddhava. [341] The work was written by one sumedha of the harita family; hence it is also known as haritAyana. It is said to consist of three sections - mahAtmya (Eulogy), GYAna (Wisdom), charyA (Conduct); the last one is lost. The Eulogy contains the prelude and later treats mostly the manifestations of the Supreme Being as durgA, kAlii, laxmii, lalitA, kumArii, sundarii etc. and their exploits which are also found in some other purANa-s and tantra-s. Ref. (1) Tripura Rahasya, Trans. Sw. Ramanananda Saraswathi. (Shri Ramanasramam, 2006); (2) <WWW. astrojyoti.com/ tripurarahasya>; (3) bahvRRicha (RV), tripurA (RV), and tripurA- tApini (AV) of Muktika list. [342] Dr Gopinath Kaviraj (1887-1976) was a philosopher and Sanskrit scholar who contributed in systematizing the shAkta- tantra philosophy. He was the posthumous son of Vaikunthnath, a Bengali philosopher. Kaviraj was born in Village Dhamrai, in the district of Dacca (Bangladesh). His family name was Bagchi and Kaviraj was an honorific attached to him. [343] It is possible that the Brahamanas were invited with a two-fold purpose: (a) Legitimization through Vedic coronation according dharmashAstra; (b) Political counselling and advice according to arthashAstra. The well known treatise kauTilya's arthashAstra (political management of kauTilya) had reached its most mature form by 4thC.

[344] Though it is agreed that some South East Asian rulers, at a certain stage of their establishment, initiated and participated in the growth of Vedic cult; the direct contribution of missionary Brahmanas in few cases is not ruled out. In the Chinese annals it is recorded that 'on divine inspiration' certain Brahmana called Kaundinya arrived at P'an-p'an, the people of the Funan approached him; the whole kingdom rose up with joy, went before him and chose him as a king! - Kaundinya had obviously stayed for sometime in P'an-p'an at the Isthumus of Siam, then under the control of Funan, and he was later invited by the notables of the court of Funan to ascend the throne at the time of political unrest. (ref 8.3(19): Ch-3: India's Impact in SE Asia). The administrative aspect of the HVC spread in SE Asia might be less dominant or absent in the earlier case in West Asia. One can however, note the Sanskrit words in a horse training manual of that time (ibid.). [345] The "temple-cult" itself is a much later post-Vedic development in India, which stimulated similar but localized development in SE Asia (ibid.) [346] This date was suggested by Nakamura (1950) and is more or less accepted by such scholars as Renou, Ingalls, Mayeda, Potter, and Hacker. Earlier, Bhandarkar (1882) had proposed c.680 as birth date of sha.nkara. However, both these dates are not universally accepted. An alternative and more widely known date (b.788-d.820) was suggested by K. B. Pathak (1882) and accepted by Max Mueller and MacDonell. K. K. Raja (1960) too places sha.nkara's work by close of 8thC. [347] In addition to brahmasiddhi, maNDana wrote works on mImAMsA, on the philosophy of language (sphotasiddhi), & on the theory of cognitive error (vibhramaviveka). He greatly influenced KA tradition in general, & bhAmatI school in particular. Sw. vidyAraNya in the vivaraNaprameya- saMgraha holds maNDana to be the originator of dRRiShTi-sRRiShTi vAda, commonly attributed to prakAshAnanda (8.3(17)). [348] BU 3.9.21: On what does the sacrifice rest? - On daxiNA (remuneration of the priests). [349] Works traditionally attributed to sha.nkara have been compiled in many 20thC publications. A collection from Samata Books published in 1910 by Vani Vilas Press has 118 works: 65-prayers (stotra-s), 30-epitomes (prakaraNa-s), 3- teachings (upadesha), 5-short commentaries (laghu-bhAShya-s), 14- comment-aries (bhAShya-s); & 1-manual (prapa.ncha-sAra) (Ref. Bibliographic Guides of David and Nancy Reigle on wwW. easterntradition.org) (2005-6).

[350] sha.nkara's followers-commentators, in their colophons, referred to him as bhagavat, bhagavat-pAda, or bhagavat-pUjya-pAda as the author of BSBh. This fact and the philology of BSBh are used as criteria to identify other works of sha.nkara. [351] (1) sureshvara, (2) padmapAda, (3) hastamalaka, and (4) toTaka are said to be sha.nkara's direct disciples. [352] sureshvara is seen by many as the proponent of the most authentic line of sha.nkara. He however, differs from sha.nkara's preferred view, that saMnyAsa is enjoined by shruti & that only Brahmana can take saMnyAsa (BUBh 1.4.15, 3.5.1). He says: saMnyAsa is open to all dvija-s (BUBhV (vol-1) 1.4.1642), and though saMnyAsa is an aid to Knowledge; it is not enjoined by shruti (BUBhV vol-1: 2.4.6-7). Tadition assumes sureshvara to be (post-saMnyAsa) maNDan mishra - a senior contemporary of sha.nkara. [353] He propounded Ignorance as the causal power of Universe. His theory of perception had its basis in US. It was later expounded by prakAsh-Atman in PPV and still later by dharmarAjAdhvarIndra in VP. [354] His impartial scholarship of all Astika schools earned him the epithet sarvatantra-svatantra. The bhAmatI school of Vedanta of which he is the protagonist, holds that Veda impart only mediate knowledge. [355] He wrote IS, which is known for its subject-object analysis, & its theory of cognitive error. IS holds that Awareness is self-revealing and that It is both the locus and object of Ignorance. IS considers Ignorance to be indeterminate and equates it with mAyA. It acknowledges four grades of reality while discussing 'cessation of Ignorance' [avidyA-nivRRitti] & holds avidyA-nivRRitti to be of 'fifth kind'. In the last chapter however, IS calls avidyA- nivRRitti to be as indeterminable as Ignorance itself. [356] He wrote sa.nxepa-shArIraka [SS], which along with US and NS forms basic triad of non-commentarial works of Advaita. SS differentiates between adhiShThAna (Self as the final substratum and the locus of Ignorance), and AdhAra (auxiliary support & object of superimposition) in the empirical cognitive process. It uses exegetical method of jahad-ajahallaxaNA to interpret tattvamasi by a three-fold transfer (lAxaNika vRRitti). SS's position that "avidyAnivRRitti is a state of mind" is expounded by later Vedantins. It is equated with the experience of brahman (by nRRisiMhAshrama), and with the superimposed relation on brahman (by madhusUdana).

[357] Ref (1) "Kashmiri Shaivism", Publ. by Kashmir Newsnetwork, 2002; (2) "The Yoga of Kashmir Shaivism" by Sw. Shankarananda, Pub. MLBD, 2003; (3a) shiva sUtra-s; (3b) pratyabhiGYA-rhadayam, (3c) spanda-kArikA: all the three are translated & commented by Jaideva Singh 1979-86. The original Sanskrit Texts are available in "Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies" [KSTS] which were published (1911-1947-1960) by Research Department of Kashmir State. [358] In addition to Agama-spanda-pratyabhiGYA there are other triads such as: (1) pati-pashu-pAsha, (2) para (acosmic)-apara (cosmic)-parApara (acosmic-cosmic), (3) shiva-shakti-jIva, (4) shiva- shakti-aNu, (5) shiva-jIva-sAdhana, & (6) shAMbhavopAya- shAktopAya-ANavopAya, [359] Vedanta tradition preferred asexual nitya-karma and yama-niyama for chitta-shuddhi in the path of Self-realization. BU 6.4.3, CU 5.8.1 etc. sublimate sexual union within a sacrificial metaphor. [360] These shakti-s from inner to outer layers are: (1) vAmeshvarl: Creator of the universe, (2) khecharl: subject or puruSha, (3) gocharl: mind power, (4) dikcharl: perception, (5) bhUcharl: governing externals. [361] Abhinavagupta (c.1050-1120): A polymath - philosopher, theologian, poet, musician, dramatist, and logician all rolled into one. Amongst more than 35 works attributed to him, tantraloka, and abhinava-bhAratI (on dramatics - nATyashAstra of bharatamunI) are his two most important definitive works. In the later work he expounds his famous rasa theory - the theory of aesthetics. [362] pratyabhiGYA was among the 15 schools outlined in sarvadarshana-sa.ngraha of mAdhava (c.1350): (1) chArvAka, (2) bauddha, (3) Arhata (Jain), (4) rAmAnuja, (5) pUrNapraGYA, (6) pAshupata, (7) shaiva, (8) pratya-bhiGYA, (9) raseshvara, (10) aulUkya (vaisheShika), (11) axapAda (nyAya), (12) jaiminlya, (13) pANinlya, (14) sA.nkhya, (15) yoga (pAta.njala). (+ (16) Advaita, which was expounded elsewhere). [363] Trika holds that there is only one substance in the universe; each of the 36 tattva-s (elements) is nothing but the one Awareness vibrating at particular frequencies and behaving in specific ways. Trika identifies 5 transcendental, 6 quasi- transcendental, and 25 physical elements. All of them are manifestation of the 'parama shiva' (analog: brahman of KA). The 5 transcendentals are: (1) shiva (chit-shakti, Awareness), (2) shakti (Ananda, Bliss), (3) sadAshiva (ichChA-shakti, Will), (4) Ishvara

(GYAna-shakti, Omniscience), & (5) shuddhavidyA (kriyA-shakti, Omni-potence). The 6 quasi-transcendentals are: mAyA, the projecting and limiting (reducing) agency, and her five delimiting powers (ka.nchuka) viz kalA, vidyA, rAga, kAla, niyati. They reduce shiva-shakti to saMsArI jIva (bonded soul or subject), and to prakRRiti (objective world) -- (a) kalA reduces Omnipotence to limited ability; (b) vidyA reduces Omni-science to limited knowledge; (c) rAga reduces sovereign Will to desire (bondage); (d) kAla reduces the eternity to the time; (e) niyati reduces Omnipresence to space and causality. These quasi-transcendentals (mAyA & her ka.nchuka-s) are numbered (6-11) in the list. Other 25 physical elements are essentially same as those of sA.nkhya-Vedanta: 2 primal elements puruSha, prakRRiti; 3 elements of antaH-karaNa (intellect, ego, mind); 5 tanmAtra-s or sUxmabhUta-s (sound, touch, form, taste, smell); 5 GYAnendriya-s (hearing, touching, seeing, tasting, smelling); 5 karmendriya-s (speaking, grasping, locomotion, excretion, procreation); & 5 mahAbhUta-s (space, air, fire, water, earth) are respectively numbered (12-36). [364] The limitations imposed by kAla (time) and niyati (inevitability of space, time, & causality) are not treated as impurities due to their near trans-cendental nature. These notional limitations are permanently removed only when the liberated soul is disembodied (videhamukta). [365] The vimarsha (Will, potency) aspect of brahmanis indicated in CU 6.2.1-3:सदैव सौम्य इदमग्र आसीदेकमेवाद्वितीयम् ... तदैक्षत बहुस्याम प्रजयेत इतछि - (At first there was only sat, one only without a second ... He gazed & bethought to Himself, may I be many, may I procreate!). But instead of developing it on Trika line, Vedanta relegated it to the lower order (Jaideva Singh on pratyabhiGYAhradayam, 1982). [366] Ishvara-pratyabhiGYA-vimarshinI by abhinavagupta 1.5.14 [367] Ishvara-pratyabhiGYA-kArikA [IPK] of utpala, 1.5.14 [368] Spanda pradIpikA by utpala vaiShNava, p. 84 [369] Ref "The Vibrating Universe" by N. C. Panda, Pub. MLBD 1999.

[370] Dr. K. C. Pandey ("abhinavagupta": Choukhanba Series, 1935), points out similarities between the verses of daxiNAmUrti [DM] and those of utpala's pratyabhiGYA-kArikA. He also points out that the concept of ultimate Reality and important terms used in DM & in saundaryalaharl, the two famous stotra-s (eulogies) attributed to sha.nkara, are the same as those in the

pratyabhiGYA. [371] shakti worship in the form of 'fertility power' or 'mother goddess' can be traced to protohistoric times of SSC. In HVC: (a) taittirlya AraNyaka (durgA gAyatrI mantra) mentions kAtyAyanl, kanyAkumArl, and durgA; (b) maitrAyaNii saMhitA mentions gaurl, (c) MU mentions kAlii, karAlii - these and many such female deities are worshiped as shakti. Appx-(C) is based on: (a) www.shivashakti.com/ philtan.htm; article by Dr. Gopinath Kaviraj, a.20.10.2009; (b) "Selected Writings of Gopinath Kaviraj" (Ch-2: Shakta Philosophy) :: Indica Books (2006). [372] In Vedanta, brahman has no 'desire' to 'exercise' Its svAta.ntrya'. [373] Power exists only as potentiality without its 'external' manifestation. [374] It is "substratum of the superimpositionof Universe" [जगदध्यासाधिष्ठानत्वं] [375] In KA, Ishvara wields the power of will and knowledge (omnipotence & omniscience). sha.nkara refutes sA.nkhya school because pradhAna & prkRRiti are insentient; they are incapable of 'Intelligent Design' (BSBh 2.2.1-6). However, on the absolute basis Ishvara is mithyA; Creation and Intelligent Design is an appearance; and intelligence is immanent. [376] This is the jIva of Vedanta. [377] The analogy with three guNa-s: sattva, rajas, tamas may be noted. [378] This can be viewed as consolidation of Hinduism on the background of the great Islamic conquests of Byzantines (c.636), Iraq (c.637), Persia (c.651), Spain (c.711), and Sindh (c.715) - the last one in the ancient heartland of Vedic civilization. Arabs captured not only Sindh but also a part of Punjab, and by c.725 had extended their sway to Kathiawar, Gujarat, and part of southern Rajasthan. They were defeated and pushed back by Chalukyas and Rashtrakutas from Western India; by Gurjar Pratihars from Northern India, and by Lalitaditya of Kashmir in Punjab. This wave of invasion then receded, but such waves were to come again stronger after c.1000 under Turko-Mongols to sweep India and to profoundly change its political & social map. During that period the investment made in this spiritual infrastructure stood in good stead. For example, Vijayanagar Empire, founded by two brothers - Harihara and Bukka, rose against the invasion and resisted Islamic influence in South India. It drew its inspiration & sustenance from the readily avail-able

cultural and ideological base created with the active support of shRRi.ngerl monastery. Similar base was available to Ganga- Gajapatis in Orissa (purii monastery) in the East. (N.B. appx (D) is based on 8.3(19) and Internet resources). [379] Mythology of kuMbha: In the 12-years' fight between gods and demons over the pitcher (kuMbha) of elixir, Lord viShNu flew away with pitcher when drops of elixir fell at the following four places: (1) Prayag (Allaha-bad) at the G-Y confluence, (2) Haridwar on Ganga, (3) Ujjaina on river Kshipra, (4) Nashik on Godavari. The kuMbha melA (gathering) is held every 12-yrs at one of these four places in rotation. The ardha kuMbha melA is celebrated every 6-yrs at Haridwar and Prayag. After every 12 kuMbha (144 yrs) mahAkuMbha is held at Prayag. [380] There is also tridaNDI saMnyAsa that is popular among vaiShNava-s. The tridanDI renunciate carries three staff as the symbol of his 3-fold devotion to the Lord through body, mind, and speech. [381] SU and BG are the oldest non-sectarian bhakti scriptures; however, it is the Vedanta school of vishiShThAdvaita of rAmAnuja (1056-1137), which gave the systemic philosophical base to the vaiShNava bhakti movement for the first time. It is based on Veda, BG, BS, pa.ncharAtra Agama, viShNu purANa, and Tamil writings of Alwars. Ramanuja's shrI bhAShya (on BS), gItA- bhAShya and vedAnta-saMgraha (resume on Vedanta) are the de facto foundation of vishiShThAdvaita. Ramanuja and his followers vigorously contested KA doctrines through polemic in which they were joined by later vaiShNava schools. These schools added SB (shrImad bhAgavatam) to their canon. [382] The word Sufi is said to be derivative of the word suf (wool); and Sufi were so called because of their coarse garments which were seen as the decorum and badge of piety. In general, Sufis have looked upon themselves as Muslims who take seriously God's call to perceive his presence in the world and the self. They generally stress inwardness over outwardness, contemplation over action, spiritual development over legalism, and cultivation of the soul over social interaction. Theo-logically, Șufis speak of God's mercy, gentleness & beauty more than of the wrath, severity, and majesty that play defining roles in both 'juris- prudence' [fiqh] and 'apologetic theology' [kalam]. Sufism has been associated with specific institutions and individuals as well as with an enormously rich literature, not least poetry. As a Qur'anic name for the phenomenon that often came to be called Sufism, some authors have chosen the term 'ihsan', "doing what is beautiful," a quality about which the Qur'an says a

good deal particularly, that God loves those who possess it. In the famous hadith of Gabriel, the Prophet describes 'ihsan' as the innermost dimension of Islam, after islam ("submission" or correct activity) and 'iman' ("faith" or correct understanding). Ihsan is the deep understanding & perception that, in the words of this hadith, allows you "to worship God as if you see him." This means that Sufis strive to be aware of God's presence in both the world and themselves and to act appropriately. Historically Islam became manifest through shari'ah and jurisprudence, whereas iman became institutionalized through kalam & other forms of doctrinal teachings, & ihsan revealed its presence mainly through Sufi teachings and practices. N.B. In general, the information about Sufism is this Note is based on following sources unless stated otherwise: (1) Oxford Islamic Studies Online; a.6.9.2009: "Sufism" by William Chittick, John O Voll, Kazuo Ohtsuka, J. E. Johansen, Mohammad Talib; source: Oxford Encyclo-pedia of the Islamic World; (2) "Sufism in the Indian Subcontinent" by Sayyid Athar Abbas Rizvi (c.1921-1994), Source: "History of Sufism volume I&II" by S. A. Rizvi; (3) IGNOU course material Unit-15 (Sufism) and Unit 30 (Socio-religious Sufi Movement). [383] Shari'a is the Islamic Law - for both civil & criminal justice as well as for regulating individual conduct. In Muslim theocratic states religious texts (Quran and Sunnah/Hadith) are the immutable primary source of law, though their interpretation (fiqh) based on consensus (Ijma), analogy (Kiyas), opinions (Ijtihad), and juristic preferences (Istihsan) is possible. Fiqh has following five major schools: 1) Hanbali: classical Sharia used in Saudi Arabia, Gulf and 11 northern Nigerian states; 2) Hanifi: a school relatively open to modern ideas; 3) Maliki: is based on practices of the people of Medina during Prophet's life time; 4) Shafi'i: is based on the opinions of Prophet's companions; 5) Jafari: the school of most Shia Muslims. Shari'a always remained in force as an ideal and final court of appeal. By its unity and comprehensiveness it formed the main unifying force in the Islamic culture. Its very lack of flexibility contributed to this result by preventing divergences and disintegration into purely local systems. It permeated almost every side of social life and every branch of Islamic literature. According to one of the most penetrating modern students of Islam, it became the epitome of true Islamic spirit, the most decisive expression of Islamic thought, and the kernel of Islam. ("Mohammedanism, An Historical Survey" by H.A.R. Gibb, OUP 1950 (p.72-84)).

[384] A native of Wasit in Iran and a wool carder by profession, Mansur was a widely traveled man. He is known to have visited India where he supposedly acquainted himself with Hindu-Buddhist thought. [385] In khaNDana-khaNDa-khAdya [KKK] shrIharSha seeks to establish the reality of self-luminous Consciousness by refuting all arguments of naiyyAyika-s and vaisheShika-s which support the reality of pramANa-s (means) and of prameya-s (objects) of pramA (valid knowledge). He proves that all empirical experience is only a relative truth without any ultimate reality in itself. He rejects the law of excluded middle to prove that everything other than Consciousness is indeterminate. His method of refutation which destroys the very basis of opponent's arguments is akin to the one employed by mAdhyamaka philosophers. In addition to KKK, shrIharSha wrote the court epic naiShadha-charita, well known to the Pundits of Sanskrit literature. By 11thC, formalism called mahAvidyA was formulated within Advaita circles. It finds reference in KKK and some other writings (of chitsukha, amalAnanda, AnandaGYAna etc). Later on nyAya school reorganized itself by the 13thC as navya-nyAya, and came up with its own formalism thro' ga.ngesha upAdhyAya & others (raghunAtha, bhaTTAchArya-s etc) based on the earlier lead provided by vAchaspati and the great udayana in 9th-10thC (ref 8.3(5): v2, p.118-125). [386] Anandabodha, another dialectician of this time was more in line with IS. In nyAya-makaranda [NM], he uses dialectics to refute opponents' arguments and supports KA concepts. As had become customary by then; he discusses cognitive error theories of competing schools and supports anirvachanlya khyAti (theory of inexplicable error). [387] In tattva-pradIpikA [TP], shrIharSha's successor chitsukha adapted shrI-harSha's method of refutation and supplemented it with his own interpretation of concepts such as self-revelation (svaprakAsha), Self as the Awareness (AtmanaH saMvid-rUpatva), nature of Nescience (avidyA), and nature of falsity (mithyAtva) etc. [388] Anandagirl refuted the vaisheShika doctrines in tarkasa.ngraha [TS], and the others in tarkaloka [TL]. [389] vedAnta-kaumudI suggests: (1) there is an infinite number of aGYAna-veils; as soon as there is vRRitti-object contact, the veil is removed and the object is illuminated; the next moment there is again an aGYAna-veil and the veil is removed by the repeat process. Thus there is quick succession of veils and their removals. Due to rapidity of succession, it is not possible to notice

the breaks in the illumination, & the perception continues smoothly; (2) pramA is defined as cognition that corresponds to the true nature (yathArtha anubhava) rather than as uncontradicted cognition; (3) In the process of 'perception from objective point of view' (viShayagata-pratyaxatva) the object is distinct from the 'subjective consciousness' (antaHkaraNa-avachChinna chaitanya). VP differs from kaumudI in respect of these three points (ref 8.2(2), 8.3(5)). [390] Shri Aurobindo however, deprecates sAyaNa's tendency to obliterate all nuances between words and give them their vaguest generality. Among the more curious & astonishing details about this commentary is the fact that sAyaNa seems to have stated a near- accurate figure of the speed of light: "O Sun! You see all, create brightness, & travel very fast. You brighten the whole sky." (RV 1:50:4). sAyaNa comments: "(O Sun,) bow to you, you who traverse 2,202 yojana-s in half a nimesha"(तथा च स्मर्यते, योजनानां सहसे द्वे द्वे शते द्वे च योजने एकेन निमिषार्धेन क्रममाण नमोऽस्तु त इति). With some calculations (and taking Sun = light), this figure, converts to c.299,000 km/s, very close to the established value of speed of light! (Subhash Kak, IJHC, vol-33, 1998, pp.32-36). [391] There are six major Advaita schools each offering its own interpretation of Atman=brahman: (1) kevalAdvaita [KA] (non-dualism) of sha.nkara (c.700-750), (2) vishiShThAdvaita (qualified non-dualism) of rAmAnuja (c. 1056-1137), (3) dvaitAdvaita (dualism-non-dualism) of niMbArka (c. 1062-1162), (4) dvaita (dualism) of madhva (c.1190-1278), (5) shuddh-Advaita (pure non-dualism) of vallabha (c.1481-1533), (6) achintya bhedAbheda (inexplicable dualism-non-dualism) of chaitanya (c.1485-1533). Amongst these Vedanta schools, KA is considered to be non-sectarian. It has acquired such a dominant status that the term Vedanta is almost synonymous with KA. Other Vedanta schools can be called vaiShNava or bhAgavata schools. They are monotheist and give prominence to bhakti. All vaiShNava schools accept authority of viShNu, & bhAgavata purANa, and MB. They are considered as a part of Vedanta tradition - their avowed basis includes prasthAnatraya on which their teachers wrote commentaries. In comparison shaiva traditions have far fewer commentaries on prasthAnatraya. Some regional bhAgavata sects like Warkaris have both vaiShNava and shaiva followers. They may follow KA's absolutist philosophy, but have their own axiology (dharma). Counterpoising vaiShNava sects there are six major shaiva

sects: (1) pAshupata is the oldest shaiva sect, whose origins are speculated to be in SSC, scriptures: pAshupata-sUtra ascribed to lakuliisha (c.200BC), pa.nchArtha-bhAShya of kauNDiNya (c.500); (2) shaiva siddhAnta (~ bhedAbheda), is the oldest shaiva school, scriptures: nandikeshvara -kAshIkA of nandinAtha (250BC), 'teachings of the 28 shaiva Agama-s' (Tirumantiram by Tirumular) in Tamil (c.50), shivaGYAnabodha by meykaNDadeva in Sanskrit (c.1200); (3) vIrashaiva (vishiShThAdvaita) was founded by Basavanna (c.1150), BS comment of shrIpati paNDita (c.1450); (4) pratyabhiGYA ( realistic monism), scriptures: shivasUtra by vasugupta (c.800), spanda kArikA by kallata (c.850), shivadRRiShti by somAnanda (c.900), pratyabhiGYA shAstra by utpala deva (c.950), later elucidations by abhinavagupta (c.1000): this is a system almost in parallel to and as comprehensive as KA; (5) shivAdvaita (~vishiShTha, ~shuddhAdvaita), BS commentary by shrIkaNTha (c.1122), and sub-commentary by appaya dlxita; (6) siddha siddhAnta (~bhedAbheda), scriptures: siddha-siddhAnta paddhati by gorakhanAtha (c.950). He and his teacher matsyendranAtha are said to be in the linage of pAshupata nAtha-s (AdinAtha). They (siddha-s) practice haThayoga - an extreme ascetic method of meditation. shaiva philosophy is generally based on the respective Agama-s, shiva mahApurANa (its vAyavlya saMhitA) and SU. Shaiva sects are theist in the name of shiva, rudra, hara, maheshvara, pashupati etc. and exhibit various categories of non-dualism. Not only Kashmir Shaivism, but the earliest prototype of shaiva- siddhAnta which is said to have origins in Kashmir was probably monist in nature. Sects (2), (3), & (5) are now mainly seen in south India while the rest are mainly in North India. The shaiva-shAkta and vaiShNava traditions can be seen as amalgamation of Vedic and local deities and customs in the late Vedic period. [392] sha.nkara too on few occasions used coarse language: (1) he admoni-shed viGYAnavAdin - "you speak because you do not have curb on your mouth" (BSBh 2.2.28), (2) he criticized Buddha for incoherence & malevolence towards all creatures. (BSBh 2.2.32), (3) he berated the naiyyAyika-s as "bulls who lack only a tail and horns"; they were called first-rate heretics and liars (BUBh 2.1.20). sha.nkara advised to condemn the rival schools and to point out their faults hundreds and thousands of times when they contradict scriptures (US 16.65), showing his zeal in defending the scriptures. [393] The word bhagavat is used in RV (1.164.40, 7.61.4, 10.60.12) and AV (2.10.2, 5.31.11) as blissful and happy. In MB,

bhAgavata seems to denote religious sect which identified viShNu, hari and kRRiShNa with nArAyaNa or vAsudeva as their supreme God. The name of viShNu, as a God appears in RV many times and gradually grows in stature. shatapatha brAhmaNa (14.3.4) identifies puruSha (supreme being) as nArAyaNa. taittirlya AraNyaka (10.1.6) identifies nArAyaNa with vAsu-deva and viShNu. In MB, vAsudeva is identified with kRRiShNa (6.65-66), with nArAyaNa, and implicitly with viShNu and kRRiShNa (MB 12.341.41, BG 10.21). BG identifies vAsudeva as the Supreme Being (7.19), as viShNu (10.21), and as hari (kRRiShNa) (11.9). (ref 8.3(5)). The earliest (c.500BC) social reference of vAsudeva in the extant literature is aShTAdhyAyI (4.3.98) of pANini where "vAsudevaka" is explained as devotee (bhakta) of vAsudeva. The bhAgavata sect drew both vaiShNava and shaiva devotees in Maharashtra. [394] MB 12.336.075 associates BG with nArANayIya, ekAntin, pa.ncha-rAtra, or sAtvata dharma, which is also known as ekAyana, or 'Path of One' (Ishvara saMhitA 1.18). It is described as being itself a Veda (shrIprashna saMhitA 2.38-39). CU 7.1.2 refers to study of ekAyana, which significantly suggests the study of ethics. [395] pa.ncharAtra doctrine is associated with puruSha- sUkta (of RV 10.90). shata-patha brAhmaNa (13.6.1) says, nArAyaNa became the Supreme Being by performing pa.ncharAtra sacrifice. The tradition associates bhAgavata & sAtvata with pa.ncharAtra (ref padma tantra 4.2.88). Curiously, pa.ncharAtrin-s do not have uniform approval of smRRiti-s and purANa-s. This could be because they admitted women & shUdra-s into their fold. In BS 2.2.42-45, sha.nkara refutes only those aspects of pa.ncharAtra, which according to him do not conform to Vedanta. Others like rAmAnuja accept pa.ncharAtra (ref 8.3(5)). [396] In SB 11.13 it is held that the ultimate reality is One; all differences are mere names and forms. There is nothing else but Self; everything else is illusory or false, a manifestation of mAyA. Even in the first adoration verse (SB1.1.1) and later in SB 6.4.29-32, it is said that brahman is the only reality and 'creation' through guNa-s is false. As a result of such monist interpretation of SB (& BG) regional variations of bhAgavata cult could adopt Advaita metaphysics and combine it with more devotional, proactive and equitable axiology (ref 8.3(35)). [397] Mahmud Ghazani's devastating 21 raids on Sourashtra and Somanath Temple (c.1000-1027); Muhammad Ghur's capture of northern and part of central India with the help of his slave lieutenant Qutubuddin Aibak (c.1171-1193);

Muhammad Khilaji's capture of Bihar and Bengal (c. 1200-1206); and Iltutmish being declared as Sultan of Delhi by Abbasid kaliph of Bagadad after he subdued the Rajput resistance (c.1210-1236), was part of Muslim ascendancy. After Muhammad Khilaji there continued incessant struggle for the Delhi throne. After short lived rules of Razziyat (Iltutmish's daughter), Balban (Iltutmish's slave), and Jalal-uddin Khilaji (of Turkish clan); came Alauddin Khilaji who spread his ruthless control over a large part of India (c.1296-1316). After his death Tughluq dynasty ruled till c.1398, the year in which Timur descended on India and savaged Delhi, plundering properties and exterminating the whole Hindu population therein. [398] Head of shRRi.ngerl maTha, vidyAraNya (mAdhava) blessed formation of Vijayanagar Empire (c.1346-1565). He promoted Advaita as the unified ideology of Hinduism and projected monasteries supposedly founded by sha.nkara as the guardians of Hindu faith. VidyAraNya, and his brother sAyaNa reputed for his commentary on RV, revived and reformed HVC in South India after the impact of Islamic invasion. [399] Trika-pratyabhiGYA was listed by mAdhava (14thC) as one of the leading Indic philosophies. Trika's influence on syncretic regional text like amRRitAnubhava is discernible. The abhinavagupta's contribution to philosophy & arts, particularly his systematization of pratyabhiGYA school and his theory of aesthetics is acknowledged by the savants. [400] Ironically, vIrashaiva became another caste over the course of time. [401] GYAneshvarI [ज्ञानेश्वरी] [GYA] aka bhAvArthadlpikA [भावार्थदीपिका] is a commen-tary on BG. It has 1810 verses (ovi-s) in the old Marathi. Its valedictory verses (पसायदान) expresse sentiments for universal well-being similar to the Buddhist metta: सब्बे सत्त सुखी होन्तु सब्बे होन्तु च खेमिनो, सब्बे भद्राणि पस्संतु मा किंची पापमागमा, मा किंची दुक्ख मागमा, मा किंची सोकमागमा . GYA expresses this universality with a poetic flourish, which is the hallmark of the entire text. It extolls pAta.njala kuNDalinI yoga as the best of paths. GYA's philosophy includes UP's brahmAdvaita, GK's ajAta vAda, and sha.nkara's mAyA vAda; however, its axiology is more egalitarian than that of sha.nkara. (ref8.3(35):2). GYA is the earliest extant commentary on BG in a local language. It was written in the last heydays of Yadava dynasty of Devagiri (present day Daulatabada) before Allauddin Khilaji invaded the local Kingdom (c.1296). It mentions Sri Ramachandra (King Ramadevarava of Yadav dynasty) as a just ruler who

supported all arts and sciences (ovi 1803). GYAnadeva [Ga] wrote another short philosophical work in Marathi of pure Advaita - amRRitAnubhava [3ya]. His Advaita rendering, according to some scholars, is closer to Trika than to the shA.nkara Advaita. Ranade (1932) terms it as sphUrtivAda paralleling the spanda-vAda of Trika. It may also be termed as chidvilAsavAda (Bahirat 1961). [402] Mukundaraj wrote viveka-sindhu - the earliest extant local rendering of Advaita while Jnanadeva and Namadeva are founders of bhAgavata dharma in Maharastra and part Karnataka. The spiritual lineage of this cult is traced to two sources: Nath cult (shaiva), and Warkari cult (vaiShNava). Foundation of the later cult is attributed to puNDalika - the high-priest of God of Pandharpur c.8th-9thC. Ekanathi Bhagavata (on 11th canto of SB) by Ekanath (c.1533-1599) & Gatha (collection of spiritual poems called abha.nga) of Tukaram (c.1598-1650) are other important bhgAgavata works that have adherents from all sections of the society. Samarth Ramdas (c.1608-1681) also taught bhAgavata bhakti and Advaita, however; his practical approach and proactive Brahmanism differentiated him from his predecessors. [403] Buddhist approach based on 'dhamma' was probably less attractive to royalty compared to Brahmanical pragmatism of the 'artha'-shAstra. [404] Popular Buddhism also had image making, icon worshipping stratum - another apology for their persecution as idolators. [405] Shi'a / Shi'ites: Ali is the central figure at the origin of the Shi'a / Sunni split which occurred in the decades immediately following the death of the Prophet in d.632. Sunnis regard Ali as the fourth and last of the "rightly guided caliphs" (successors to Muhammad as leader of the Muslims) following on from Abu Bakr (r.632-634), Umar (r.634-644) and Uthman (r.644-656). Shi'as feel that 'Ali should have been the first caliph. After the Muhammad, Shi'a accepts only the authority of 'Ali (fourth Calipha) and his descendants from Prophet's daughter Fatima. Further, Shi'a repudiates the validity of the traditions (Hadith) collected by those who opposed 'Ali, proclaiming the validity only of traditions derived from 'Ali and his supporters. Whereas the Sunni believes that Muslims are to be governed by consensus [ijma] amongst ulama for an elected 'head of state' [khalifa]; the Shi'a believe that the leader of Islam (Imam) must be a sayyid, a descendant of the Prophet. Shi'a, believe in first six Imams starting with 'Ali. The Imami Shi'ites (mainly in Persia, India, Iraq, and Syria) posited a succession of six more Imams,

totaling twelve infallible Imams as incarnations of the 'Divine Light' [Nur] who were representatives of Islamic esotericism. The last one disappeared in 873 and his return is still awaited; he is Mahdi, the Guided, who is concealed now, but is to reveal himself at the Last Day. (Ref "Islam & Sufism" by Timothy Conway, 1991). [406] The early & productive period of Sufi theosophy roughly coincided with what is known as the golden age of Islamic civilization: 1) Al-Khwarizmi (c.780-850): mathematician who adopted the Indian number system; he is known as the founder of modern Algebra; 2) Ibn al-Haytham (c. 965-1039): scientist who wrote Book of Optics; 3) Al-Biruni (973-1048): polymath & Indologist; 4) Ibn-Sina (980-1037): scientist & physician; 5) Omar Khayyam (1048-1131): poet & mathematician - these were some of the prominent personalities who graced the golden age. Like early Sufism, this age happened out side India mostly in the regions of old Persia & Mesopotamia but generally outside Arabia - the original land of Islam. (The issue of Islamic civilization being a misnomer has been raised by number of recent scholars (ref wiki)). [407] In a general sense, the term ulama denotes the body of Muslim clergy & scholars who have exhaustive training of Islamic sciences. They are the arbiters of shari'a. The utilization and significance of their expertise is contextual and vary from tradition to tradition. Properly: ulama is the plural of alim, one possessed of 'ilm' (religious knowledge). [408] 'Wujud' as the absolute Being is distinguished from 'mawjud' as relative being. This relational aspect between the absolute and the relative is known as 'tashbih', while the essential and the acosmic aspect of the Divinity is known as 'tanzih'; both aspects form the panentheistic unity. [4091 Ibn Arabi was a native of Murcia (Spain). He was educated in Seville where a vision is said to have brought about a metamorphosis in his way of life and thought obliging him to set out in quest of the truth. After a brief sojourn in Tunis, he traveled to the East from where he never returned home. He performed the pilgrimage to Makka twice and wrote some of his major works during his stay there. He lived in several cities of Iraq and Asia Minor before settling in Damascus in c.1228. [410] The synonym for Divine Essence and for the name Allah itself. In meta-physical sense, it is the Absolute other than which there is no reality. [411] The Arabic word for the belief 'aquidah' stems from the root meaning "to bind"; it assumes various shades of meaning in Arabi's discource indicating delimitation, delineation, and

conceptualization. Arabi many a times uses it for his antinomian pronouncements (Kazemi 2006). [412] "The shared beauties of Sufi and yogi vision" by Rehman Muhaiyaddeen <www.bmirs.org> (a.14.10.2009). [413] Ibn Arabi uses the triune W-J-D, which is common to the three words: wujud-wijdan-wajd meaning sat-chit-Ananda to describe this supreme state. Ref "Path To Transcendence" by Reza Shah-Kazemi, 2006. [414] Shirdi is a town in Ahamadnagar district in Maharshtra where Sai-Baba (c.1838-1918) stayed most of his life. It is said that Sai-Baba preached a syncretic Advaita Vedanta and promoted harmony among religions. [415] Syncretism of Vedanta tradition of this period found parallels in socio-political reconciliation of Emperor Akbar (1542-1605). Akbar was third in line of the Mughal dynasty, which was founded by Babur, a Turko-Mongol from central Asia, who defeated the then Sultan of Delhi, an Afghan, Ibrahim Lodi at Panipat (1526). Humayun (r.1530-40, 1555-56), Salim (Jahangir) (r.1605-28), Khurram (Shah Jahan) (r.1628-58), Aura-ngzeb (Alamgir) (r.1658-1707) were other members of this dynasty. In between (1540-45), Afghan Sher Shah Suri, famous for his revenue administration, ruled from Delhi. Akbar's army lead by Bairamkhan defeated the Hindu king Hemu in the 2nd battle of Panipat (1556). Akbar laid the solid foundation of Mughal Empire that was to be as large as ancient Indic empires of Mauryas and Guptas. He followed the policy of religious tolerance & prudent alliances. His ideal of just ruler, had parallels in the Muslim concept of Mahdi as well as in the Hindu legend of King Rama. He tried to create a new religion 'Belief in God' (Din-i-Illahi) by synthesizing all religious ideas that appealed to him. He wanted to become its 'supreme arbitrator' - an idea which was similar to the Hindu ideal of king which is both immanence and transcendence of the divine spirit - to prevent sectarian strife. Akbar's ideas and his eclectic style died with him. Some of the greatest syncretist Vedanta scholars such as madhusUdana sarasvatl, appaya dIxita, viGYAna bhixu, nRRisimhAshrama were contemporary to Akbar's era. [416] sadAnanda yogindra wrote the popular text vedAntasAra. He is also said to have written bhAvaprakAshikA (on BG), tAtparyaprakAsha (on BS), and vedAnta-siddhAnta- sArasa.ngraha. [417] nRRisiMhAshrama was an influential vivaraNa teacher. In addition to polemical bhedadhikkAra, he wrote advaitadIpikA, tattvaviveka, tattva-bodhinI on SS, and

bhAvaprakAshikA on PPV. He & his disciples are credited with many texts addressing the epistemological concerns of Advaita. One of his disciples dharmarAjAdhvarIndra wrote VP which was commented by rAmakRRiShNa in shikhAmaNi. Both these works consolidate Vedanta theory of perception. [418] madhusUdana wrote 'advaita-siddhi', a polemical work which is highly regarded within the scholastic Advaita tradition. His gItA commentary (gUdhArthadIpikA), and his other works like vedAntakalpalatikA dealing with axiological issues, sArasa.ngraha on SS, and siddhAntabindu on dashashlokI discussing cognitive-epistemic issues are well known to Advaita tradition. He was a kRRishNabhakta as well as a polymath. [419] In this period, number of south Indian householders, surnamed dIxita, rose to prominence. Chief among them was appaya dIxita, the reputed polymath who wrote his survey siddhAntalesha-sa.ngraha of kevala-advaita. His works on Vedanta, shivAdvaita, mImAMsA, vyAkaraNa, & devotional poetry established his scholarship & versatility. According to him there is no fundamental differences between vivaraNa & bhAmatl schools; the difference is related only to the technique and emphasis - vivaraNa's on epistemology while bhAmatl on ontology. [420] kAshmIraka sadAnanda in advaita-brahmasiddhi supported reflection theory as well as delimitation theory and advocated ekajIva-dRRiShTi-sRRiShTi vAda as the final Vedanta theory (ref 8.3(17)). [421] bhixu's extant works include yoga-sArasa.ngraha, viGYAnAmRRita-bhAShya (on BS), upadesharatnamAlA (Vedanta), commentaries on UP and Ishvara-gItA (first 11-chapters of the 2nd part of kUrma-purANa), sAnkhyasAra, and sA.nkhyapravachanabhAShya. [422] (a) Among the six non-sectarian "Indic schools which claim allegiance to Veda" [Astika schools]; sA.nkhya, vaisheShika, and mImAMsA, in their original forms, are atheist; Vedanta is absolutist; yoga believes in God as the 'controller' (niyantA) and not as the creator (nirmAtA); only nyAya can be termed as theist in its full sense (ref. kiraNAvalii of udayana) - there the God is benevolent controller as well as intelligent creator. (b) All the six "non-sectarian schools which do not accept the authority of Veda" [nAstika schools] viz. mAdhyamaka, yogAchAra, vaibhAShika, sautrantika, jaina, lokAyata), are atheist. [423] sachchidAnandendra [STA] argued that the only authoritative method of Vedanta is adhyAropa-apavAda, and that the post-sha.nkara comm-entators with the exception of sureshvara,

deviated from it, and in the process distorted the concept of Ignorance. His stand resulted in the critical sudy of Advaita & added to its overall scholarship to which STA himself made significant contribution. However, the trend of 'one only method' is not in the eclectic spirit of Advaita. Knowledge has no injun- ctions; sureshvara suggests that any method - exegetical, pedagogical or otherwise, that helps to usher Knowledge is good enough. [424] Vivekananda (b.1863-d.1902) was the proponent of synchretic Vedanta. He saw Advaita as a graduation through intermediate stages of dualism and qualified non-dualism to reach its most advanced stage of absolute non-dualism. According to him, the (oldest) UP first teach dualism by way meditation on external deities etc; then proceed to teach the qualified brahman controlling the universe from within; and finally teach the ultimate reality of the supra-conceptual brahman. UP follow the principle of arundhatI nyAya (i.e. first show the gross object and then with its reference show the subtle object). As such intermediate stages are not be rejected as untrue. (ref 8.3(31b): SVGS (p.178-208) :: His speech at Lahore on 12.11.1897). [425] This poetic classic held sway over large part of India, particularly in the Hindi belt. It gives occasional Advaita rendering though the text itself is not directly related to Vedanta (8.3(41):4ld9-I). Its modern admirers included Gandhi - for him, the spiritual experience of Tulasi-Ramayana (popular name of Rama-Charit-Manas) was unrivaled. Nothing elates me so much as the music of Gita or Tulasi Ramayana; he once said. [426] The Guru tradition of Sikhism: (1) Nanak Dev: The founder of Sikhism and the composer of Japji Sahib, (2) Angad Dev: Lande Mahajani script was modified into Gurumukhi in his times, (3) Amardass: Divided the territory of his followers into 22 segments with a spiritual admin-istrator for each segment. Gurudom became hereditary from his time onward, (4) Ramdass: A temple (Harimandir) near Lahor was built in his times which was later called as Harminder Saheb or Darbar Saheb Gurudwara and became the seat of spiritual authority of the Guru. The township was later known as Amritsar by the name of the lake (Amrit Sarovar) dug by his devotees for taking bath before the spiritual offerings, (5) Arjan Dev: He declared collection of 1/10th of individual's income from 22-segments towards the Sikh treasury making Sikhism a theocratic state. Guru Grantha Sahib was compiled (c.1604) during his times. He was tortured and killed by Mughal Emperor Jahangir (c. 1605). He instructed his followers to take arms, (6) Har Gobind: Akal Takhta (God's Throne) was

constructed, (7) Har Rai, (8) Har Kishen, & (9) Tegh Bahadur: He fought for the Kashmiri and Punjabi Hindus. He was killed by Auranzeb (c.1675), (10) Gobind Singh: He continued the struggle against the Mughals. Under him Sikhism was radically trans- formed into militant Khalsa Panth, which was borne at a congregation held at Anandpur (c.1699). After Guru Gobind, the text Granth Sahib is considered as the permanent Guru. [427] Prof J. N. Farquhar records: One of the notorious practices of Muslim priests 'as good Muslims', was to frequently attack and kill the Hindus, lay and monastic, especially at the pilgrim centers such as Benares. Those priests were protected by faulty law that exempted them from any legal punishment. So the hapless Hindus approached madhu-sUdana to do something to stop this injustice. Since he was well known at the court of Emperor Akbar, he met the emperor through Raja Birbal, and narrated to him religious atrocities at Benares, etc. As a solution the Emperor suggested that madhusUdana should organize a militant band of sa.nnyAsin-s to defend themselves and other Hindus. At the same time he promulgated a law that thenceforth Hindu sa.nnyAsin-s too, like the Muslim priests, were outside the purview of legal action. Thus was born at the hands of madhusUdana the much respected and feared nAgA sect of Vedantic sa.nnyAsin-s. The recruits into it were from the warrior castes. They lived in monasteries called AkhADA-s (lit. gymnasiums), and were trained in the martial arts. Ref 8.1(7) p.15 with the cross ref 'The Organization of Sannyasis of Vedanta', in the Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, July 1925, pp. 479-86. Also, see 'A History of Dasanami Naga Sanyasis' by Sir Jadunath Sarkar (Pub. Shri Panchayati Akhara, Maha-nirvani, Daraganj, Allahabad). [428] Dara Shikoh, was the eldest son of Emperor Shah Jahan. He was a learned man and knew Sanskrit and Vedanta. For him, the UP was the book to which Koran refers as "a book that is hidden" [Kitab al-Maknun] (sura 56:78). He was executed by his brother Auranzeb during the war of succession to the Delhi throne, after ulama declared him heretic. The collection of UP which he got translated into Persian was called "The Greatest Secret" [Sirr-i- Akbar]. It was later translated into Latin from Persian in 1801-1802 under the name Oupnek'hat by the French scholar Anquetil Duperron. This collection was used by German philo- sopher Schopenhauer to build his philosophical kernel. Dara Shikoh wrote an independent book called Majma ul-Bahrain [The Mingling of Two Oceans] which discovered the affinities between Vedanta and Sufism. He is said to have initiated the Persian

translation of other two Sanskrit spiritual texts viz gItA and yoga- vAsiShTha. (References: (1) 8.3(1); (2) "Mystical Dimension of Islam": Annemarie Schimmel; North Carolina University Press, 1975; (3) Internet resources). [429] Based on article by G. H. Bhatt (ref 8.3(17)) [430] vallabha wrote commentaries on jaiminlya sUtra [JS], BS, and SB and some other works, all of which is available in fragmented form. His BS commentary is known as aNubhAShya; it is available up to BS 3.2.33. His JS commentary covers JS 1.1.1, JS 2.1 and includes his preamble of 42 verses. His SB commentary covers SB books 1, 2, 3, 4 (part), 11 (part); it is known as subodhini. He wrote tattvArthadIpa (nibandha) which discusses BG, SB, and UP philosophy.

[431] Monism is generally classified as (1) substance monism, (2) category monism, (3) absolute monism (one substance, one category). SA may be classified under 'substance monism' due to its pariNAma-vAda. [432] Here, the "God of SA" faces the charge of 'nominal morality' because sufferance and enjoyment are part of His sport. The same charge is applicable to Trika, but not to KA; its brahman is no doer or consumer - It is acausal and actionless. This moves KA closer to mAdhyamaka. [433] Unlike vivarta-vAda;here the world 'transformation' is real(परिणामो नाम उपादान-समसत्ताककार्यापत्ति: VP), which makes SA panentheistic. However, the meta-physical difference between the vivarta & the avikRRita pariNAma becomes more of a terminology, because the brahman of SA remains unchanged, untainted after the creation. [434] vallabha is said to be of a South Indian (Telugu) descent; however, the spread of puShTimArga is more in parts of Rajasthan, Gujarat & Uttar Pradesh of India than in the South. [435] To call Kabir as an iconoclastic Advaitin will be nearer to the truth. [436] Based on "Sufism in the Indian Subcontinent" by Sayyid Athar Abbas Rizvi (c.1921-1994); Source: History of Sufism vol.1&2 by S. A. Rizvi from <www. sunnirazvi.org/sufism/india/ subcontinent > (a.9.9.2009) [437] According to Guru Granth Sahib [G], the supreme Being is: beginning-less (G.1351), primordial Being (G.129), complete or integral (G.705), eternally true (G.1, 119), without birth (G.1, 99), transcendent as well as immanent (G.79, 102 etc), antarjAmi (G.13, 43, 454 etc.), nirvairu or sans enmity (G.1, 99), fearless (G.1, 199, etc.), supremely resplendent (G.13, 277 etc.), supreme bliss (G.814), untainted or nira.njana (G.119, 597, 1353), and both sarguNa and nirguNa (G.128, 862). These are all indicators of brahman. Guru Nanak has sung the glory of Om (G.929-930) as the creator of the Vedas, etc. The "Ek Om" of G is conceptually very similar to the Om of UP. Japji's God is akin to neti neti brahman (Ref Tr. By K. S. Duggal); Also, 'neta neta kathanti beda' (Guru Arjuna, G.1359) points to neti neti brahman. These are all echoes of UP. The philosophical concepts in G, such as indestructibility of soul, the cycle of birth-rebirth, maya, brahamgiani, importance of guru, recitation & meditation of Hari or Ramanama, realization of soham for Liberation, jeevana mukti, the merger of the individual soul with the supreme soul, the two categories - the

manamukha & the gurumukha, the immanence of the Supreme, and It being a bliss etc are all aupaniShad Concepts. The rejection of Vedic rituals and icon worship, and insistence on inner realization of God is not inconsistent with the teachings of Advaita. [438] Marathi Sant Namdev (c.1270-1350) had visited Punjab and spent his last 20 years there preaching bhAgavata dharma. Some of his Hindi/ Punjabi verses totaling 61, are included in Granth Sahib. Guru Gobind Singh's last year (1708) was spent in Nanded (Maharashtra) where he met his legendary disciple Madho Das aka Banda Bairagi & named him as Gurubaksha. In Nanded, Guru Gobind was fatally wounded by two mercenaries sent by Wazir Khan, Nawab of Sirhind. [4391 Dasbodh [DB] [दासबोध] (c.1654) is an Advaita Vedanta work with a good dose of practical teaching. It is written in Marathi. It comprises of 7751 stanzas(3ndt) distributed in 20 'chapters'(दशक), each consisting of 10 sub-chapters(समास). DB1.1 succinctly states the purpose and scope of the text. It teaches absolute monism similar to that of GK. Interestingly though, DB (5.6.8-9) defines tUryAvasthA (4th stage) as sarvasAxatva and rejects it because sAxatva has duality. When sarvasAxatva is negated, what remains is pure Knowledge. Here DB follows the lead of YOV. DB 7.3 discusses 14-types of brahman: (1)& (word repres-entation), (2)ॐ: ओम(letter representation),(3)ख (space like), (4)सर्व (ALL That is), (5)चैतन्य (energy, animating principle, consciousness), (6)सत्ता (reality, existence), (7)साक्ष (witness), (8)सगुण (with properties and attributes), (9)निर्गुण (w/o properties and attributes), (10)वाच्य (express-ible), (11)अनुभव (immediate experience), (12)आनन्द (bliss, peace), (13) तदाकार(unity),(14)अनिर्वाच्य (inexpressible). DB rejects these brahman-s on criterion of constancy (&TTudcd) delineating the 'neti neti' process. Interestingly, DB rejects nirguNa brahman too saying that it is mere name, which denotes an idea defined in terms of (absence of) guNa-s. Reality is beyond ideas because ideas are fallible, being no more than our mental states [vRRitti]. DB 9.1 gives 42 negative indicators of brahman to firm up "neti neti". DB outlines the path of Liberation [sAyujya mukti] through devotion and Knowledge. In dashaka-4, it describes 9-fold 'devotion'[नवविधा भक्ति] of SB 7.5.23:श्रवणं कीर्तनं विष्णोः स्मरणं पादसेवनं । अर्चनं वन्दनं दास्यं सख्यं आत्म-निवेदनं ।। (1) hearing, (2) narration of God's stories, (3) repeating the God's name (4) attending to the Guru, (5) worshiping the God, (6) salutation to God, Guru, and saints, (7) devotional service, (8) love and friendship to God and ALL, (9) Self-realization. First eight folds are saguNa bhakti leading to

'identification with God' [sarUpatA mukti] [सरूपता मुक्ति], while the last one is nirguNa bhakti leading to sAyujya mukti[सायुज्य मुक्ति]. DB 6.10-36-38 states ekajIva-dRRiShTi-sRRiShTi vAda as metaphor. DB 8.2.2 alludes to vivarta vAda while DB 8.3.1 alludes to ajAta vAda. DB 8.3 talks about mUla-purUsha [Ishvara], mUla- mAyA [mUlAvidyA], and nirguNa brahman. DB 8.9 gives indicators of 'Self-realized person' [siddha] [fg]. DB explains the significance of 'discrimination' (viveka) at many places, as to how viveka- vairAgya leads to Atma-nivedana & sAyujya-mukti. (ref "Sarth Shrimat Dasbodh": Belsare, 1991). [4401 After Shivaji's death, Aurangzeb shifted his base to mid-south (Maha-rashtra) to subdue Marathas. He captured Shivaji's son Sambhaji and tortured him to death. Marathas fought back relentlessly and after Aurangzeb's death came back strongly under the leadership of their minister (peshwa) Balaji Vishwanath Bhat & his descendants, particularly peshwa Bajirao Balaji (1701-1740) & his commanders like Shinde & Holkar who established the Maratha supremacy in Northern regions. [441] He was a devotee of Lord Ram and worshiped Ram's divinely strong servant Lord Hanuman as a symbol of physical and moral strength. He advocated physical exercises in the daily regimen of students as well householders. Among the temples which he established are eleven principal seats of Maruti (Hanuman) in Maharashtra. [442] Based on "Sufism In India: Its origin, history and politics" by Upadhyay; C SAAG, 16.2.2004 (paper no. 924) with citations from: (a) "A History of Sufism in India", Vol. II, by S. A. Rizvi; (b) "The Sufi orders in Islam" by Spencer Trimingham, Oxford, 1971; (c) "Indian Islam" by Murray Titus, 1979; (d) "Sufis and Anti-Sufis" by Elizabeth Syrriyeh, 1999. [443] Ahl-aI-Hadith [People of Hadith] was a reform movement in India in the 19thC. It acknowledged only Hadith for interpreting Qur'an. [444] His idea was realized when Pakistan was formed in 1947 partitioning the Indic region along with its ancient Vedic heartland. [445] Such as (1) Brahmo Samaj (c.1828) of Ramamohan Roy (1772-1833) in Bengal; (2) Prarthana Samaj (c.1867) founded- guided by Atmaram Pandurang, R. G. Bhandarkar, M. G. Ranade et al in Maharashtra; (3) Arya Samaj (c.1875) of Dayananda Saraswati (1824-83) in Punjab. Rammohan Roy is said to be the pioneer of Bengal renaissance. He gave a sense of direction to the course of India's

future social develop-ment by introducing Western ideas of liberal democracy and affirming his faith in Vedanta. It was as a result of his persistent campaign that the cruel custom of Sati was declared illegal in 1829 by Lord Bentinck. He advocated widow remarriage and property rights for women. He studied Veda, Upanishads and Sutras. In 1817, he set up the Hindu College, the first college of post medieval India, in collaboration with David Hare and Alexander Duff. He also setup Vedanta College that offered courses as a synthesis of Western and Indian learning. Dayananda Saraswati was a reformer with difference. He condemned idol-worship, animal sacrifices, ancestor worship, pilgrimages, priest-craft, offerings made in temples, the caste system, untouchability, child marriages and discrimination against the women, on the grounds that all these lacked Vedic sanction. He discouraged dogma and symbolism and encouraged skepticism in beliefs that run contrary to common sense and logic. He was the first to proclaim "India for Indians". Among his disciples were Shyamji Krishan Verma (founder of India House in London, which guided the revolutionaries), Sw. Shraddhanada, and Lala Lajapatrai et al who were inspired by his 'Satyartha Prakash'. Though Dayananda gave the call "back to Veda", he was not enthused by Vedanta; he took it to be an escapist and other worldly outlook. [446] Vivekananda termed it as Practical Vedanta (CWSV: vol-2); while Tilak advo cated similar view in hisभगवद्गीतारहस्य[BGR]. According to Tilak; BG teaches ʼway of action', which is rooted in Knowledge and in which devotion is domi- nant(ज्ञानमूलक भक्तिप्रधान कर्मयोग). BGR quotes IU 11-14, KU 6.18, CU 8.15.1, TU 1.9.1, BS 3.4.15 and suggests thatप्रस्थानत्रय supports both कर्मसंन्यास and निष्कामकर्मयोग(ref 8.3(34)). [447] Atman= brahman can be approached in two ways: (a) contemplative (inward focussed) realization of Atman; (b) proactive (outward looking) realization of brahman. (VC 338-339). The etymology of brahman has exogenic flavor; root bRRih means to swell, enlarge. In both the cases, Realized state sees 'Self-in-All' (IU 6, BG 6.29-30, and BG 13.27-28). Sublimation of self by seeking 'universal well-being' and 'eradiction of sufferance of all beings' is expressed in bauddha traditions. It is also part of classical yoga and Agamika traditions like bhAgavata and trika. [448] Gandhi proclaimed himself to be an orthodox [sanAtanI] Hindu. He believed in Hindu scriptures, yama-niyama,

varNAshrama, Atman and brahman unity, karmic law, rebirth, and moxa. 'Cow protection' for him was the most important outward manifestation of Hinduism. Gandhi's conscience was mainly shaped by Gita & yama- niyama which manifested into his two main ideas - satyAgraha and trusteeship. The sovereignty of his conscience was similar to that of jIvanmukta. Gandhi said, "My belief in the Hindu scriptures does not require me to accept every word of it as divinely inspired. I decline to be bound by any interpretation, however learned it may be, if it is repugnant to reason or moral sense". (ref CWMG: <www.gandhi serve.org>). This rational expression of conscience conforms to: (a) manu-saMhitA 2.1: "Learn that Dharma which is assented to in their hearts by the virtuous"; (b) yoga-vAsiShTha (YOV 2.18.3): "Though human in origin, the exposition of the truth is to be accepted; otherwise even what is regarded as divine revelation is to be rejected". [449] In light of: (a) CWSV (ref 8.3(31)): "Practical Vedanta" (vol-2); "Karma Yoga" (vol-1); Thoughts on Gita (vol-4); (b) BGR(ref 8.3(34)):भगवद्गीता-रहस्य; (c) CWMG (ref 8.3(38): Discourses on Gita (vol-37). BGR is the earliest 20thC BG commentary in which activist axiology (pravRRitti mArga) is juxtaposed against renunciatory path (nivRRitti mArga). The former is 'renunciation in action', while the later is 'renun-ciation of action'. BGR asserts that BG teaches Vedanta with this pro-active renunciation, which is the yoga of selfless action. Vivekananda saw humanity as the 'living God' and selfless service as the meditation. Selfless action seems paradoxical due to causal relation between self (desires) and action. NV assumes that there exist 'pure' mind states which initiate work and which, when properly guided and consolidated, lead to mind-purification. These states can be devotional, aesthetical, meditative, yogic etc. leading to selfless actions. All these mind states are pure inasmuch as they do not consolidate the ego; karmayoga originated in them is said to be rooted in Knowledge. According to NV, thisज्ञानमूलक कर्मयोग is the main teaching of BG. This Yoga never ceases both for the seeker and the Knower. Thus, NVrevives a kind ofज्ञानकर्म-समुच्चय वाद that existed even before sha.nkara's times. [450] The 'realized person' (jIvanmukta) is a normative ideal. NV adopts a volitional duty-bound model such as BGR's 'Siddha'. However, realized person may as well be Arabi's Perfect Man or Kant's Rational Being of the 'Kingdom of Ends' etc. All such normative ideals will hold on the basis of "Self in All" (Atman = brahman).

[451] NV will accept any method such as Yogic Samyama, Smarta Karma, Vaishnava Bhakti, Shaiva-Shakta Upaya, Bauddha Vipassana, Sufi Murqaba etc. that will lead to 'mind-purification'. In general, any desire-less action, such as contemplation on e= mc^2 or engagement in an aesthetical pursuit etc. can be part of chitta-shuddhi; though traditional meditation is ordinarily seen as more accessible. [452] In karmic and renunciatory axiology of orthodox Vedanta, man-made justice does not get explicit attention. NV, in its activist exogenic mode will attend to individual and social justice 'here and now' and empathize with egalitarian models in tune with Atman=brahman. Self will be the platform on which 'idea of justice' will stand and play its role. This idea can be from the Indic sources (including Jain, bauddha and Agamika traditions) or from elsewhere (such as post-1700 moralists like Hume and Kant or the 20thC rationalists like Rawls & Sen). NV however, will not be tied to any particular theopolitical or social model. The absolutist identity of Atman= brahman will be the sovereign prin ciple in light of which all ideas and models will be evaluated in the context of 'time, place, and applicability' (ref 8.3: < of Mind, Moral, and General >). [453] Exogenic realization needs objective knowledge (vastutantra) for which seek- er may pursue science and other desciplines. Selfless pursuit of vastutantra, can serve both as a meditation (upAsanA, vidyA), and as a discrimination pro- cess (viveka-prakriyA) leading to Knowledge. [454] X cannot be measured or quantified (objectified). The terms 'measure-ment' & 'object' assume extended meanings in Advaita's subject-object framework. That which can be subjectively experienced (~measured) is objective. So, that which can not be objectified is transempirical (~non-phenomenal, 1 noumenal). Alternatively, X is postulated to be 'immediate experience', wherein there is no subject (I-ness). This later postulation ascribes fundamental status to immediate experience (anubhava) and brings Advaita closer to other 'panentheist' schools. [455] X cannot be reduced to the physical laws and mathematical models. [456] X is non-relational. It is a strong apophatic term that also includes two previous negatives (immeasurability and irreducibility) of X, implying X to be via-negativa - Absolute. [457] IB is a BMI, which is capable of 'qualitative' experience. That is to say, IB is a sentient being. BMI represents the individuated and intertwined physical-psychical-platonic [p-p-

p] aspects of PhU. BMI itself is experienced in the subject-object framework of duality. [458] PhU is subjectively experienced but no definitive ontological assertion can be made about it. Indeterminism of PhU is of relativity, uncertainity, undefinability, and incompleteness of knowledge. It is about ignorance. It is different than the absolute via-negativa of X. [459] X is labeled as Awareness due to its appearance as Xa. The maxim of ब्रह्म सत्यं, जगन्मिथ्या, जीवो ब्रह्मैव नापर:' identifies X with (the inmost core of) jIva. Though X is non-relational, its particular interpretation in relation to IB and PhU represented by 'X=Xa' gives Advaita its systemic character. [460] There is no universal or unique 'Inertial Reference Frame' [IRF] within PhU that can certify its measurement as the only correct measurement. The physical laws and their constants are however, invariant of IRFs. KA does not grant them the absolute status because they are held by X. Even otherwise, applicability of physical laws is not guranteed at the extremal scale and their parametric manifestation in each aeon may not be identical, if cyclic universe or some such theory prevails (ibid.) [461] 8.3(28): Motion Mountain, vol-6 (Ch-5). [462] In Advaita, Awareness is equated with substratum experience without any phenolmenal content. This is rather different than its normal usage in contemporary philosophy where it is often equated with an ability to experience or the experience itself. [463] Ref "Consciousness & its Place in Nature" by D. Chalmers (Blackwell, 2003). Postulation of proto-phenomenal X which is a neuter (hence the name "neutral monism") is credited to Bertrand Russell (1872-1970), though its earlier proponents like Mach, Petzoldt, James, Perry etc are sometimes cited. Eccles (1989) sees the self as a supernaural creation since material solutions fail to account for it. [464] In general, phenomenal reality can be discussed within a framework of m-m-m or p-p-p triangles proposed by Karl Popper (1978) and Penrose (1994). Hut, Alford and Tegmark (2005) discuss the three critiques viz. 'fundamentalist', 'secular', 'mystic' views of Penrose traingle (arxiv.org). In possible interpretations of mystic view, (a) X is the ground of m-m-m world (Vedanta); (b) m-m-m worlds arise codependently (Buddhism). [465] Kurt Godel was an Austrian-Hungerian logician (1906-1978). A Polish logician Alfred Tarski (1901-83) proved an analogous theorem: the set of numbers which encode true sentences of number theory, is not definable in number theory.

Interrelated Theorems of Cantor (Uncount-ability), Tarski (Undefinability), Godel (Incompleteness) & Godel-Turing (Uncomputability) together tell us that the Truth cannot be completely and consistently coded in any 'formal' model. Godel's second Incompleteness Theorem states that a formal system cannot prove its own consistency. [466] Alan Turing, was an English Logician (1912-54) who contributed to the Theory of Computability with his senior American contemporary Alonzo Church (1903-95) and others. Diagonalization argument was by Georg Cantor, a Russian-German mathematician (b.1845 -1918) to show that 'The set of all sets of natural numbers is not countable' (a set is count-able if each of its members can be listed down in principle). (ref Boolos et al 2007). It is used in Incompleteness & Computability Theorems. [467] TM is a hypothetical machine conceived by Turing. For our purpose we can take it as general purpose computer with 'large enough' memory. A UTM is TM that executes all 'computably countable' functions (Cq(n)) [468] Ref "Shadows of the Mind" by Penrose (1994). Similar arguments are given in many modern texts on computability theory (Davis et al 1994; Neil Jones 1997 etc). [469] Chaitin (2007) uses 'algorithmic randomness' to support his argument that reality not only remains unexplained; it is random & unknowable in the "computational Universe". The halting of UTMcannot be predicted; only the "halting probability" (0 < [2(-|q|)] <1 that is summed up over the 'self- delimiting' Cq(n) programs of length |q|, can be predicted. [470] Searle (1997) differentiates process from its simulation (computation). He argues that intuition & consciousness are not normative (theorematic) computations. It may be possible to simulate them on computer, but that will not produce consciousness. <weak AI; ref 8.3(26, 29)> [471] In 'quintuplication theory' [QTP]; space (sound), air (sound, touch), fire (sound, touch, vision), water (sound, touch, vision, taste), & earth (sound, touch, vision, taste, smell) are five subtle elements with their respective perceptual qualities that originate from the unmanifest and form the gross objects of PhU. This theory does not come under the direct purview of science due to its immeasurable-perceptual nature; however its metaphysical purport should not be missed. Being a meta-theory, QTP has no quarrel with Darwin's evolution or any such theory insofar as it is consistent with observations. [472] One may call all gross objects which evolve from UNF as psycho-physical, to bring out their dual aspect - that of

'protomentality' and of 'perceptual physicality'. One may also call such objects as phenomenal - whether they have perceivable (perceptual) properties or conceivable (conceptual) properties they remain phenomenal; they are cognized by the individual internal psychic apparatus (antaHkaraNa). [473] This is the evolutionary process of QTP (ibid.) within the cosmic cycle, though it may as well include Darwinian evolution or its variants/exten-sions. It is reasonable to assume that subtle elements inherit proto-mentality from UNF which manifests as MI in the BMI complex. Even in insentient objects this protomentality can be seen. For example, motion of an object in space-time follows "least action principle" - objects move in a manner that minimizes change. This demands a kind of holistic intelligence on parts of object and its surroundings to chart out object's motion. Similarly, at the quantum level particles show certain proto-mentality in their behavior. However, this mentality in all probability is not sentient - it does not have 'self and qualia. Garbha Up. says; humans acquire their self (soul) in the 7th month in mother's womb. Within the Darwinian framework ensoulment happens some time between the conception and the birth (ref 8.3(40)). [474] The prANamaya-kosha which is responsible for biomotor functions. [475] WC is equated here with the "inmost core or the essential nature of IB [pratyagAtmA, प्रत्यगात्मा]". Empirically- rationally (and yet paradoxically) WC exists amidst Ignorance - like a Bliss in the deep sleep or Bliss of the inmost core of pa.nchakosha (BMI + reflected Awareness), beyond which; It is the Self (Atman). Cognition-perception-qualia is an enigma to science, where WC can play a postulatory role. [476] Continuity of IB's total experience in the form of memory and ego is attributed to continued presence of WC in all the living states, even in deep sleep. WC experiences itself inasmuch as it experiences Bliss of the deep sleep and at the same time experiences Ignorance because it is unable to illumine the mind which has merged into its cause - in UNF. The complex of WC+UNF individu-ated in IB is the radical adjunct which is the origin of other two states (waking, dream). It transfers the experience of deep sleep as a reminiscence in the wakeful state of IB, sustaining the essential BMI processes during the deep sleep. [477] Here, BMI includes "neural (brain) processes" in addition to traditionally conceived biomotor processes. How and when a human morphogenetic process acquires consciousness - develops uniqueness of experience, is an enigma to the science.

This "touch of X" (creation of self) happens in a womb and is sustained throughout individual life-span (ref: 8.3(40)). [478] 'A new synthesis: reflexive monism' in 'Understanding Consciousness', Editor and Author - Max Vellmans, (Routledge 2009). [4791 Space-time continuum of 3-spatial dimensions and 1-time dimension is conceptualized in Einstein's General Relativity [GR]. There are however, other models in which space-time (or whatever one may call it) have 10-11 dimensions or even more of them. [4801 In 4-d universe, 3-d space is the surface on which supra-dimensional reality is projected. In Advaita the metaphor of "World being painted on a canvas or wall (fresco)" is often used. Its first reference in the extant texts comes in sha.nkara's US 15.2; then prominently in vimukt-Atman's IS 1.1, and vidyAraNya's PD (Ch-6). There Awareness is the canvas on which the world phenomenon is superimposed. In Advaita's experiential framework, 'perceptual projection' is analagous to 'objecti-vised mind' & 'holographic projection' is analogous to adhyAsa. [481] X is said to 'pervade' the entire BMI and the whole PhU inasmuch as IB is holistically sentient and CWC is omniscient. [482] This may be called (1) mediate experience, it being hidden behind the appearance of something; or (2) immediate perception, it being result of the first undifferentiated sense contact with the 'object'. [483] Subjectivity persists till WC/X is reflected in IB to maintain the quality and integrity of experience. According to few traditional texts (VC 462-463, AA 90-99); Realization leads to 'total cessation' of subject-object duality by complete dissolution of ego. In such case, if the BMI is still capable of qualitative experience, then that experience itself assumes fundamental status leading to the 'qualified non-dualism'. Otherwise, it leads to the concept of "philosophical-zombie" i.e. "IB without qualia" (Nagel 1970, Kirk 74), which remains unobserved in the physical world. [484] X transforms itself into PhU without consuming itself. X is then both the transcendent and the immanent principle. [485] BU 5.1 can be taken as an example. We can use the concept of infinity as simile: 'infinitude X' (cardinality of infinite superset X) is not affected by adding or subtracting the 'infinitude PhU' (cardinality of the infinite proper subset of X), according to the arithmetic of infinite cardinals. Further, even if PhU is finite as in CU 7.24.1; infinitude of X is not affected in any case. (Kunen 1980, Jech 2006). Here, physically PhU is limitless (edgeless), whether infinite or not, like a sphere etc.

Along with BU 5.1; RV 10.90, BU 5.14, MU 2.1.2, BG 8.20-22, BG 9.4-6, BG 9.19, BG 15.12-15 etc can be interpreted panentheistically. [486] Basic concept of mathematical infinity is "limit ordinal" (w) that has no predecessor; all other ordinals have predecessors. A transitive set well ordered by its membership is called an 'ordinal'. Jech (2006) includes '0' in the definition of limit ordinal, while Kunen (1980) does not do so. It is noteworthy that 0 (empty set) is the foundation concept of set theory & hence of whole of mathematics from a 'constructive' view-point. [487] "Mathematical logic" comprising set theory, proof theory, model theory and recursion theory can be used as the foundation of mathematics (Kleene 1950; Fraenkel et al 1973; see 8.3 for more references). [488] Mathematical Universe Hypothesis (MUH) has been proposed by Max Tegmark of MIT: (http://arxiv.org/ abs/0704.0646; 8 Oct 2007), while G. J. Chaitin / Paul Davis (2007) propose a computational model for PhU where natural laws play the role of software, and where finiteness of PhU imposes cosmological bounds on their fidelity. In this finitist view, laws embed indeterminacy - randomness, uncertainty etc. [489] Multiple realities are not new to Indic philosophies. Jain anekAntavAda postulates seven types of realities out of 'is', 'not is' and 'unpredictable' while in KA tradition, vimuktAtman postulated five types of empirical realities; he assigned the '5th kind' to the 'cessation of Ignorance'. It is possible to assign a higher ontological grade to platonic universe populated by mathematical objects on the basis of 'C4 criteria'. Maths then can be elevated to the status of Veda as a repository of platonic knowledge. It will however, still be in the realm of relativity because: (a) p-p-p omnium is grounded in X; and platonic objects are conceived as a result of X-enabled intellection; (b) maths is all about the conceivable truths including its own limitations; (c) Maths is not free of randomness as can be seen in the algorithmic framework (maths references in 8.3). [490] Analogously, mAyA as the finite (relative) manifestation of the ultimate transfinite reality, is not bound by the binary logic. Its fuzzy or multi-valued aspect becomes more pronounced in the extremal scales. [491] For one such approach, see "Logic in Reality" by Brenner (2008). For other positivist and non-classical notions refer "Introduction to Non-classical Logic" by Graham Priest (2008). For other aspects of Mathematical Reality see "Further Reading" in Ch 8.3.

[492] Since "force = mass x acceleration"; acceleration here is indeterminate. [493] One such theory by Hoyle and Narlikar (HN) goes along with the line of 'action at a distance' and 'conformally invariant' electromagnetic theory. This theory was seen to be relativistically consistent by Schwarzschild, Tetrode and Fokker (1930) and was used by Wheeler-Feynman in their radiation absorption theory (1945). HN derives General Relativity [GR] equations as a special case of the 'scale-invariant' equations starting with Machian mass and action integrals. A Quasi Steady State Cosmo-logy [QSSC] based on this approach avoids singularities by bouncing from the high density state through the agency of a negative energy field. It supports possibility of creation of new matter from time to time. QSSC is a cyclic PhU model with a longterm expansion, driven by the minicreation events. (ref 8.3(30)). [494] These are GR models based on Friedmann equations (1922-24), with singularities & diverse geometries. Cyclic models are possible in SCM as well as in other (Machian) frameworks; they are gaining ground in the 21stC. . Conformal Cyclic Cosmology [CCC] of Penrose is one of the latest entrants in this arena. According to CCC, the history of PhU consists of infinite succession of aeons (each ~10^100 yrs), where expanding remote end of an aeon is joined smoothly as a conformal manifold to the 'big bang' for successor aeon. It deploys an unconventional idea of "reduction in entropy due to information loss" to match the entropy at the aeon crossover. This loss of information and entropy reduction is supposed to occur in blackhole evaporation. ("Cycles of Time", 2010). [495] Evolution principles: 1. lineage change, 2. common descent, 3. gradu-alism, 4. populational change, 5. natural selection. (Darwinian Theory). Darwinian Theory has now been synthesized, supported and extended by genetics and molecular biology (Futuyma 2005, Ridley 2004). Evolution is ubiquitous; Advaita can be seen as a philosophy as well as tradition evolved over many generations and centuries (see Ch-5). [496] Stephen J Gould (1999) suggests NOMA [NonOverlapping MAgisteria]. According to NOMA, science & religion operate in two non-overlapping domains: science is concerned with how universe works; while religion is concerned with the ultimate meaning and moral values. Alternatively NV can

treat science as its own open ended process of 'discrimination'. In such case, there is a domain overlap; but boundary between Advaita & Science itself is almost dissolved. Science acts as the objective truth finder as well as mind-purifier with the concurrence of Vedanta (ibid.). [497] In this 'unity' hypothesis, all living beings on the earth are evolved from a primal cell. Their family-tree spanning over billion(s) of yrs is known as 'tree of life' or 'phylogenetic tree', though due to 'lateral gene trans-fers', phylogeny becomes an anastomizing nework rather than a tree. It entails that all living things ultimately belong to one single family due to their common descent (Ridley 2004, Futuyma 2005). This can be taken as a directive not only to the essential unity of life but also to shed the human ego - a prerequisite for the liberation. [4981 Standard Model of 20thC is the most successful of them. By year 1950, four fundamental forces (Gravity, Electromagnetic, Strong, and Weak) were conceived. General Relativity [GR] & Quantum Electro-Dynamics [QED/QT] explained the first two forces respectively while later two nuclear forces were not well formulated by that time. By year 1975, Standard Model was evolved to explain all the four forces. The present model however, is dominated by two rather incompatible theories - GR of the large & Quantum Theory [QT] of the small. Efforts are on to formulate new quantum theory of gravity which will unify all forces and explain the world phenomena in a single framework. [499] Today's physics & metaphysics provide pointers to the Unity by way of (a) matter-energy equivalence; (b) intertwined nature of space-time & energy-momentum; (c) role of 'Aware Observer' as the 'reducing agent' of the experiential reality, thereby indicating the fundamental nature of Awareness that holds the essential unity of PhU. Both NV and science are concerned with the truth. NV being a meta-framework, can accept all scientific theories of the day as provisional truths in relation to the absolute truth of Atman= brahman. [500] X=Xa can be interpreted as the intelligent principle, which resists the ubiquitous law of 'entropy'. It may be called the 'principle of life' or of 'intelligent design' [ID]. In the absolute view however, X is non-doer. ID emerges immanently with X as its acosmic 'substratum'. Evolutionists like Dawkins (2006) propose 'natural selection' to be the methodology of ID. Whether ID and the 'life' emerges 'naturally' or otherwise; the substratum Reality according Advaita, is "X=Xa".

[501] Indic monism (ekatva, ekatattva-vAda), non-dualism (advaita, advaya-vAda) and their equivalents like absolutism, noumenal platonism etc. converge on the same principle named variously as the sat, brahman, tathAgatagarbha, Awareness, Absolute, Noumenon etc. Though there are differences in the process of convergence; the terms like 'monism', 'non-dualism', and 'absolutism' are congruent-convergent & hence are used interchangeably in this note. [502] Vedanta in this particular sense can be interpreted in the tertiary way - the break from earlier Vedic (liturgical- Brahmanical) traditions implying the literal end (denial) of the authority of Veda. [503] Buddhism is one of the earliest traditions that offered the concept of 'universal wellbeing' & 'brotherhood'. The vaishNava 'vasudhaiva kuTuMbkam' and yoga's ethical universalism appeared side by side. RV's principles of "RRita" and "ekam sat .. ", and "Atman=brahman" of UP however, are the oldest Indic expressions of universalism. [504] Toshifumi Goto sees correspondence between ajara (ageless), amara (deathless), amRRita (immortal) and abhaya (fearless) Atman of BU on one hand, & four Aryasatya of Buddha on the other. This may suggest the possibility that compilation- redaction of BU, & Buddha's enlightenment happened in the same Indic region of Magadh (Bihar); they came from the same cultural- spiritual milieu (ref Goto 2005, Staal 2008). [505] According to Buddhist scholars like Dr. Peter Santina, Buddhist soterial tradition can be traced to mature SSC through the concepts of "karma, rebirth, meditation, renunciation, & Liberation" (ref "The Tree of Enlight-enment" at buddhanet.net, 2008). Others like Herman Tull see origins of karma soteriology in brAhamaNa texts and see continuity between shatapatha brA & BU in this respect. (ref "The Vedic Origins of Karma", 1989). These principles could be part of ancient proto-shramaNa and brAhmaNa traditions of G-Y/S-S region dating back to SSC. shramaNa tradition included believers in the retributive karmic law (bauddha, jain) and others (such as Ajlvaka) though historical data are unclear. [506] According to 2001 Indian census, new Buddhists are 7.95 million (less than 1% of the total population of India); 5.83 million of them (about 73% of their total population and 6% of the population of Maharashtra) are in Maharashtra, and rest are mostly in Uttar Pradesh. The lea dership and social base of New-Buddhism [NB]

that started as protest movement against caste Hindus, come mainly from 'scheduled castes and tribes'. As is to be expected, NB is more protestant than it is catholic (ref "22-vows given by Ambedkar to new converts" and his reading of "Buddha and His Dhamma"; check Internet resources). [507] He earned multiple degrees & doctorates; in law, economics & political science from well known universities (Bombay, Columbia, London). He selected Buddhism as a path for himself & his followers after studying various religions and their histories in South Asia. [508] Ambedkar was borne in Mahar caste that was considered as Shudra - the lowest labor class as entailed by smRRiti. He was posthumously awarded India's highest civilian honour, Bharat Ratna in 1990, though in his life-time he was exposed to 'untouchability' and discrimination. [509] Creative persons are typically linked to one another in a chain and appear as contemporary rivals. Creativity increases by the conflict with- in or related to the network. Conflicts are the lifeblood of the intellectual world. Creativity occurs both as intellectual space opens up and as it closes down, by opposition and by synthesis. Randall's idea of conflict encompasses political and social strifes which constrain or enhance intellectual resources of the intellectual network; hence it is more general in its scope than mere intellectual argumentation. [510] The number of active schools of thoughts, which sustain themselves through multiple generations in an argumentative community are of the order of three to six. This law holds amid the flux. Strong positions sub-divide into factions while weak positions disappear or amalgamate into others by syncretism or by synthesis. As a corollary, positions become weak because intellectual space becomes overcrowded violating the upper-limit of the law of small numbers. This then provides necessary stimulus to reduce the positions by synthesis or syncretism. [511] Ref 8.3(21): According to Collins; Advaita's linkup with Upanishads is an imposition of c.700 revolution on a very different situation 1000 to 1500 years earlier (p.195). In post-1500 Vedanta traditions, creative conflicts sublimated into sentimentalized nativism (p.270). Among other things, anti- intellectual devotionalism; just when Hindu scholars (mainly of Advaita) were in synchretizing and scholasticizing mode in defense against alien conquerors, gave India a (false) sedentary-static- mystic image (p.177). [512] वादे वादे जायते तत्त्वबोधः (knowledge through argumentation) has been a traditional maxim.

[513] Ideas have certain chance element; conflict may add to the probability of their occurrence. Synthesis in intellectual space can occur by coop-eration. For example, scientific theories of 20thC were ushered more by the collaborative quest for knowledge than by the conflict. Today's open-source movement is based on sharing of ideas & collaboration in the intellectual space though it originated in the background of conflict. Occurrence of abstract ideas without immediate utility (as in certain branches of Mathematics) is not bound by conflict dynamics though appreciation and reward can be its stimuli. Collins' heavy emphasis on the role of conflict in the social-intellectual space ignores, in a way, the basic human traits of creativity, curiosity, and the quest for identity. [514] A charge is often leveled against Vedanta of being too introverted to care about the ethical and social concerns. Vedanta addresses these issues by: (1) adopting BG's niShkAma karmayoga and lokasaMgraha; (2) adopting pAta.njala yoga; (3) transcending birth-based social order. NV expands the ambit of self by seeing humanity as the living God to be worshipped with selfless service. In its expanded ambit, NV seeks a holistically harmonious existence by way of Self realization. [515] All these schools are equivalent insofar as they are non-dualist and set Liberation as their goal. Aurobindo's efforts to integrate existing non-dualist schools in light of inputs from Science etc resulted in the so called "Whole (integrated) Advaita"(yuifad) school. It can be seen as a synthesis of Vedanta and correlate ideas from other schools (Ref "Life Divine", 1936). [516] If absolutist schools of Vedanta and Mahayana are put together, the remaining monotheist schools are metaphysically represented by Trika pratybhiGYA school. For relationship between Vedanta and Trika through bhartRRiharl, ref 'Early Vedanta to Kashmir Shaivism' by Isaeva, 1995. [517] Sufism is covered in this note as it is closely related to Indic regions & traditions. However, earlier assimilation of Indo- Greek-Scythian cultural strands in the Hinduism-Buddhism of Gandhara and other Indic regions is beyond the scope of this note. Neoplatonism too is not covered here; its contact with Indic regions and Vedanta was peripheral. [518] Refer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondualism [519] 1) Judaism (Kabbalah: 12thC, Hasidism: 18thC); 2) Judeo-Christianity (Neoplatonism: 3rdC); 3) Islam (Sufism: 8thC). These three Abrahmic religions are monotheist &

intertwined with each other. Judaism is said to be more than 3000 yr old. Christianity & Islam originated in the Common Era with an expansionist history as reflected in today's demographics. Judeo- Christian and Islamic traditions claim Abraham as their common ancestor, respectively thro' his sons Isaac and Ishmael borne to Abraham's two wives Sarah and Hagar. [520] (a) 'History of Western Philosophy' by Bertrand Russell (1945, 2004). (b) 'The World As Active Power'; ed. Pietarinen and Viljanen (2009); (c) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://plato.stanford.edu [521] Ref 8.3: Further references in Philosophy: of Mind, Moral, and General. [522] See 8.3 (Further Reading) for the titles on Mind and Consciousness. [523] We are not even sure if computational simulation of consciousness is possible. Ref Penrose (1994), Searle (1997), Russell & Norvig (2003) for the philosophical issues of Artificial Intelligence. [524] Ref 8.3(8)

[525] Ontological views are not valid at the absolute level. Ontology can be discussed only from the relative-logical position which is nothing but a constructional view of the reality from-within the relative position. The ultimate Reality (brahman) is anti-conceptual. [526] These are empirical appearances of absolute Consciousness which is nothing but Atman= brahman= turIya. [527] Source-Books (1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 10) are published by Advaita Ashrama at Mayavati, and (5, 6) are published by Ramakrishna Math at Nagpur & Chennai respectively. Other Sanskrit resources may be checked at www.archive.org or in (17). In (17), URL 'muktabodha.org' is mainly for shaiva-shAkta-tantra works; 'kheper' is for the gnostic metaphysics; & 'accesstoinsight.org' is for Tripitaka. Other URLs are indicative of their resource. URLs' validity needs to be checked (as always). [528] Ref (2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8) are published by Advaita Ashrama, Mayavati; (1, 4, 10) are published by Ramakrishna Math, Chennai. They are traditional texts written in Sanskrit and translated-annotated in English or Hindi. In (17) URLs are given for general reference-search. [529] US is the universally acknowledged non- commentarial work of sha.nkara and hence uniquely important. The translation and footnotes follow rAmatIrtha's gloss. [530] VP together with shikhAmaNi, expounds the

epistemological position of Advaita Vedanta, particularly of vivaraNa sub-school; it is important for its theory of perception. [531] VS seems to be the standard texts of its times. Though supposed to be a prakaraNa grantha; it admirably elucidates Advaita's overall position in a concise manner. [532] PD consists of 15-chapters of 3-quintads. This is an authoritative and popular guide of Vedanta. [533] VC is traditionally attributed to sha.nkara (bhAShyakAra). The text is quite respected in the tradition both for its content and style. [534] DDV is a small prakaraNa grantha written (probably) by bhAratitIrtha, Guru of vidyAraNya. It propounds avachCheda vAda as the main line. [535] AA is a small guide for Self-realization. Like VC; AA refutes prArabdha and its effects for GYAnI - a position which is not uniformly accepted. [536] JMV is prakaraNa grantha on jIvanmukti - a difficult topic. vidyAraNya defends his position by quoting passages not only from UP and BG but also from LYV, SB, MB and other texts. [537] TB introduces terms and concepts of Vedanta through its question answer styled exposition. It is attributed to sha.nkara. [538] AB is a short text attributed to sha.nkara; it ably pronounces the core Advaita message. [539] NS is one of the four influential siddhi books (others being brahma-siddhii, IShTa-siddhi, and advaita-siddhi). According to many Advaitins, NS follows the most authentic line of shA.nkara Advaita. [540] This is a Hindi translation of 1006-verse text attributed to sha.nkara. True to its name, all essential doctrines of Advaita are explained. [541] SBN is a commentary on dashashlokI. madhusUdana explains the theories of reflection, semblance, and limitation, and other doctrines using dialectic. [542] SS is noatable for its style and content. It has 1240 stanzas divided in 4 chapters corresponding to 4 adhyAya-s of BS. (US, NS, and SS form a triad of advanced texts for the students of Advaita Vedanta). [543] SLS is a survey across the Advaita spectrum till 16thC. The survey and its introduction will be of interest to the students of philosophy. [544] Both can be treated as Vedanta texts as well as BS commentaries.

[545] Ref (1, 5, 9, 18, 24, 28, 31, 32, 34, and 38) can be checked on the Internet for their on-line availability. Motilal Banarsidass (MLBD) are the publishers for ref (3, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 25), while (15) is published by Darshan Peeth, Allahabad. [546] This classic work is one of the earliest treatise on UP from the Western (Kantian) point of view. [547] Faithful translation of (a) 20 saMnyAsa; (b) 12 out of 13 prime UP (w/o Mai) with insightful introduction and notes. [548] Vol-III (1981): Part-1 contains exposition of the concepts of gauDa-pAda, sha.nkara, and maNDana mishra. Part-2 contains summaries of all the known authentic works of these authors together with those of sureshvara, padmapAda, toTaka, and hastamalaka. Vol-XI (2006): It is about KA works during c.800-1200 (from vAchaspati to chitsukha). [549] Vol-1: Veda, Upanishads, and heterodox schools; Vol- 2: Vedanta and other orthodox systems. [550] Vol-1: major Indic philosophies; vol-2: Advaita, yoga-vAsiShTha, and BG; vol-3: vishiShThAdvaita, dvaitAdvaita, viGYAnabhixu, purANa-s, and lokAyata; vol-4: SB, dvaita, shuddhAdvaita, achintya bedAbheda and polemic between Advaita and others; vol 5: shaiva cults. [551] Outlines Indic schools and reconstruction of Advaita starting with UP and later with sA.nkhya. [552] This collection discusses Hacker's philological views of sha.nkara's authorship in particular and Vedanta in general. [553] This is a resource book facilitating study of Advaita in its classical form. [554] Explains mAyA doctrine complete with exhaustive philology. [555] This book is translation of author's original Sanskrit work viz vedAnta prakriyA pratyabhiGYA. It describes adhyAropa- apavAda as the main method of Vedanta and discusses what the author thinks as 'deviation' to the original sha.nkara line in the writings of later Vedantins. [556] Gives good exposure to mANDUkya kArikA with incisive discussions on sha.nkara's conception of Ishvara and the Vedanta method. [557] Vedanta's pre-BS and post-BS (but pre-sha.nkara) history is traced or reconstructed in 2 volumes from the cross- references as available from competing schools and from other classical literature. [558] The text discusses the polemic between Advaita and the 'qualified Advaita' of Ramanuja.

[559] Epistemological position of Advaita is explained in a definitive manner. [5601 Gives positions of pre-sha.nkara prashtAnatraya commentators. [561] Excellent anterior essay and richly informative notes with reference to commentaries of rAmatIrtha, bodhanidhi and AnandaGYAna. [562] Collection of articles written by well-known scholars: culled from pages of 'Cultural Heritage of India' (vol. 1-6) published by RMIC 1937-86. [563] Sri Aurobindo's magnum opus in which he reconstructs Vedanta. [564] This is a text-book by two Indologists who had the benefit of working together and discussing the problems of Indian history for many years. Though section on Indus Civilization is rather dated, the other sections offer an insightful presentation. [565] World History text, aiming to connect the past with present. It believes that the humans' story has basic unity right from the beginning. [566] A sociological survey of philosophy with a global perspective. It covers three of the oldest philosophical traditions of the world - Greek, Indian, and Chinese; and encompass a geographical and social spread that spans multiple civilizations, religions, and social groups. [567] RGV is a work based on Takasaki's PhD dissertation submitted to the Pune University on tathAgatagarbha theory of mahAyAna Buddhism. [568] An AraNyaka of SV (talavakAra shAkhA), part of which is KEU [569] One of the astute and definitive scholarships on Vedanta which is based on BSBh and which is congruent with the Kantian view. [570] It tries to search relationship between Vedanta and Trika on one side and Science on the other. In doing so it not only covers the principles of Advaita-Vedanta and Trika, but also discusses and surveys various physical theories and concepts juxtaposing them with Vedanta and Trika. He is also the author of "Maya in Physics" (1991) [571] This book by a reputed mathematician is about mind, consciousness and computability; it is supposedly for the general readership. [572] A complete guide to the Laws of the Universe. It is an ambitious survey of modern physics through the lens of a

mathematician. It's Ch-29 discusses the 'measurement paradox'. Penrose foresees a radically new unified theory of physics. He also presents his own perspective -- "Twistor Theory", as one of the possible approaches to Reality. [573] On-line Physics book; vol-6 discusses: (1) 'indeterminate' and 'anti-conceptual' nature of the Physical Universe; (2) 'Unification of Physics'. Schiller intersperses his content with witty comments and observations. [574] A good intro to AI; last chapter discusses the philosophical issues. [575] Alternative cosmologies based on Mach conjecture, including author's own Quasi Steady State Theory [QSST] and cosmology based thereon are discussed and compared with standard Friedmann models. [576] This 13thC Marathi magnum opus has 148-pg preface discussing the philological and philosophical issues followed by an authoritative trans-lation in modern Marathi. [577] A philosophical teaching as well as practical manual of Vedanta. [578] BGR is Tilak's action oriented magnum opus on BG in Marathi. It gives: (a) philosophical exposition of Vedanta (p.1-306), (b) philological appx. (p.307-355), (c) BG text with its translation and comments (p.364-545). BGR's English translation (2-vol) is available on <www.archive.org>. [579] Pendse finds the origin of Bhagavata Dharma in Vedic bhakti; traces its course from BG to SB, and dissertates its independent growth in Maharashtra 1200-1700. Pendse claims that protagonist GYAnadeva taught Vedanta philosophy combining devotional Bhagavata axiology. [580] A macro-history of Indian subcontinent from the Stone Age to 1200CE. [581] Nobel Prize winner neuroscientist Eccles discusses evolution of human brain and mind within the extended Darwinian framework. [582] Ref. http://faculty.washington.edu/kpotter/ (31/3/2008): Bibliographical index of Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies. The authors are of guru-shishya (teacher-pupil) tradition of Advaita and are listed here to show the continuous tradition till the 20thC. It is said to be a living tradition. Though the list here starts from gauDapAda, the tradition is said to go back to hoary antiquity. This is reflected in the traditional salutation of students and teachers when they undertake the study of sha.nkara- bhAShya of BS, and pay homage to teachers starting from

nArAyaNa (viShNu) and pass through the names of brahmA, vAsiShTha, shakti, parAshara, vyAsa, shuka, gauDapAda, govinda, sha.nkara and then through the linage of sha.nkara's students to the present times.