1. Panchadashi MA-Thesis-Pahlajrai

The Authorship of the Pañcadaśī and the Textual Context of its Trptidīpa-prakarana

Prem Pahlajrai

A thesis

submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts

University of Washington

2005

Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Department of Asian Languages and Literature

University of Washington Graduate School

This is to certify that I have examined this copy of a master's thesis by

Prem Pahlajrai

and have found that it is complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the final examining committee have been made.

Committee Members:

Richard Salomon сот рСР

Collett Cox

611/2005 Date:

In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a master's degree at the University of Washington, I agree that the Library shall make its copies freely available for inspection. I further agree that extensive copying of this thesis is allowable only for scholarly purposes, consistent with "fair use" as prescribed in the U. S. Copyright Law, Any other reproductions for any purposes or by any means shall not be allowed without my written permission.

Signature

06/or/00s- Date

University of Washington

Abstract

The Authorship of the Pañcadaśi and

the Textual Context of its Trptidīpa-prakarana

Prem Pahlajrai

Chair of the Supervisory Committee:

Professor Richard Salomon

Department of Asian Languages and Literature

The Trptidīpa-prakarana- of the Pañcadaśī presents an overview of fourteenth-century

Advaita Vedänta. This thesis explores the various theories of authorship regarding the

Pañcadaśī. In doing so, the identities of Mādhava, Vidyāranya and Bhāratītīrtha are

examined, along with the various texts ascribed to each. A new hypothesis in support of

joint authorship of the Pañcadaśī by Vidyāranya and Bhāratītīrtha is proposed.

A chapter-by-chapter synopsis of the Pañcadaśī as well as a detailed look at the

Trptidīpa-prakarana are presented along with the prakarana's extra-textual context in

the Brhadāranyaka Upanisad and its primary and secondary commentaries.

Vidyāranya's innovations and contributions to Advaita Vedānta are presented in brief.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page List of Tables. iii Abbreviations iv 1. Introduction. 1 2. The Significance of PD7, Trptidīpa-prakaraņa 4 3. Who were Vidyāranya and Bhāratītīrtha? .8 3.1 Theories of Authorship of the PD. 8 3.2 Many Mādhavas. 9 3.3 Historical facts about Mādhava, Vidyāranya, Srngerī and Vijayanagara 12 3.4 Works ascribed to Mādhava-Vidyāraņya. 14 3.5 Works ascribed to Bhāratītīrtha .. 21 3.6 Bharatītīrtha, Vidyaranya and the PD 23 3.7 Textual parallels between the AP and the PD. 29 3.8 Impact of AP-PD parallels on joint-authorship theory (A2). 31 3.9 Revised ascription of works to Vidyāraņya and Bhāratītīrtha 33 4. A Synopsis of the Pañcadaśī .. 37 4.1 Tattvavivekah - Discrimination of Reality 37 4.2 Pañcamahābhūtavivekah - Discrimination of the Five Elements 38 4.3 Pañcakośavivekah - Discrimination of the Five Sheaths 38 4.4 Dvaitavivekah - Discrimination of Duality 39 4.5 Mahāvākyavivekaḥ - Discrimination of the Great Utterances 40 4.6 Citradīpah - Light of the Picture 40 4.7 Trptidīpaḥ - Light of Contentment 41 4.8 Kūtasthadīpah - Light of the Kūtastha 42 4.9 Dhyānadīpaḥ - Light of Meditation. 42 4.10 Nätakadīpah - Light of the Theatre 43 4.1 Yoganandah - Bliss of Yoga 44 4.12 Ātmānandah - Bliss of the Self 45 4.13 Advaitanandah - Bliss of Non-duality 46 4.14 Vidyānandaḥ - Bliss of Knowledge 47 4.15 Vişayānanda - Bliss of Objects 48 5. A Closer Look at Trptidīpa-Prakarana, PD7 50 6. Extra-textual Context of PD7 56 6.1 The context of BU 4.4.12 within the Brhadāranyaka Upanisad 56

6.2 Śankarācārya's bhāsya (BUŚBh) on BU 4.4.12 60

6.3 Vidyāraņya's Brhadāraņyaka-vārtika-sāra (BVS) on BU 4.4.12. 63

7. Comparison of the various discourses on BU 4.4.12 .67 7.1 The PD7's treatment of BU 4.4.12 67 7.2 Comparison and consistency of the three treatments of BU 4.4.12 69

8. Vidyāranya's Contributions to and Innovations in Advaita Vedānta .71 9. Conclusion 75 Bibliography. 79 Primary sources & indices (including translations): 79 Secondary sources. 85 Appendix 1: PD7 Citations. .93 Appendix 2: Passages in Sanskrit .95 A. Šankarācārya's bhāsya on BU 4.4.12: 95 B. Vidyāraņya's Brhadāranyaka-vārtikasāra (BVS) on BU 4.4.12: 95 C. Maheśvaratīrtha's țīkā on BVS 4.4.272-6: 96 Index .97

ii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Number Page

1. Śrngerī matha's guru succession 12 2. Texts and persons honored therein by Mādhava/Vidyāraņya. 19 3. Texts and persons honored therein by Bhāratītīrtha 23 4. Works by Vidyāraņya and Bhāratītīrtha. 34 5. Texts Cited by PD7, Frequency 93 6. Citations in PD7, sorted by Source 94

iii

Abbreviations

ABORI Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona

AiU Aitareya-Upanişad AiUD Aitareya-Upanişad-Dīpikā AP Anubhūti-prakāśa

BG Bhagavad Gītā

BS Brahma Sūtra

BU Brhadāranyaka Upanișad BUŚBh Śankara-bhāșya on Brhadāranyaka Upanișad BVS Bṛhadāranyaka-vārtika-sāra ChU Chāndogya Upanișad DDV Drg-drśya-viveka DV Dhātu-vṛtti JMV Jīvan-mukti-viveka

JNM Jaiminīya-nyāya-mālā

KM Kāla-mādhavīya KauU Kauşītaki Upanisad MU Mundaka Upanişad MāU Māņdūkya Upanisad Nais. Naişkarmya-siddhi NUTU Nrsimha-uttara-tāpanīya-upanișad NUTUD Nrsimha-uttara-tāpanīya-upanişad-dīpikā PaM Parāśara-mādhavīya

PD Pañcadaśī

PrM Praņava-mīmāmsā

RV Rg Veda ŚBh Śankara-bhāșya SDS Sarva-darśana-sangraha ŚDV Śankara-digvijaya SLS Siddhānta-leśa-sangraha

iv

TU Taittirīya Upanisad

US Upadeśa-sāhasrī

VNM Vaiyāsika-nyāya-mālā VPS Vivarana-prameya-sangraha

V

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to gratefully acknowledge the encouragement, support and understanding of the two most important women in his life - his wife, Theresa Pahlajrai and his mother, Usha Pahlajrai - without which this thesis would never have been completed. The author also appreciates the rich and fertile learning environment and culture nurtured and sustained by the faculty and staff of the Department of Asian Languages and Literature, and of the Jackson School of International Studies; they make learning a joyous and rewarding experience.

vi

DEDICATION

To all my teachers:

विद्यया तारिता: स्मो यैर्जन्ममृत्युमहोदधिम्।

सर्वज्ञेभ्यो नमस्तेभ्यो गुरुभ्योऽज्ञानसंकुलम्॥

Salutations to the all-knowing teachers by whom we have been led by means of knowledge across the great ignorance-filled ocean of birth and death US 1.17.88

शिष्य वर्ग विद्यारण्य स्वामी शिष्यवर्ग.

Frontispiece, Anubhūtiprakāśa, Nirnaya Sagara Press edition, 1902.

vii

1 1. Introduction

The Pañcadaśī (PD) is considered a prakarana grantha, an independent

introductory text on Advaita Vedānta. It comprises fifteen chapters and is further

subdivided into three sections, each containing five prakaranas, chapters. The first

section, viveka-pañcaka, considers the discrimination of the real from the unreal. The

dīpa-pañcaka describes the nature of atman as pure illuminating consciousness. The last

section, ananda-pañcaka, elaborates on the ultimate, blissful nature of atman. Some2

hold that each of these three sections elucidate respectively the attributes sat, cit and

ananda (existence, consciousness and bliss) of brahman. This is a superficial

correspondence, however, as it will be observed in the synopsis to follow (in chapter 4)

that almost every prakarana deals with one or more of these three aspects to varying

degrees.

The authorship of the Pañcadasī is usually ascribed to Swāmī Vidyāranya, the

Śankarācārya of the Srngerī matha or monastery. Tradition also holds that the authorship

of the text changes with the seventh chapter, the Trptidipa-prakarana, and that

Bhāratītīrtha, Vidyāranya's guru also had a hand in authorship. Vidyāranya is typically

associated with helping the Sangama kings Harihara I, Bukka I and Harihara II to

establish the city of Vijayanagara, near present day Hampi in Karnataka. Prior to

becoming a renunciate (sannyāsin) his name was Mädhava, and he is said to have been a

1 Mahadevan (1969), p. xiii: "The characteristic feature of a prakarana is that it selects a few topics falling within the scope of a philosophical tradition and deals with them in a clear and concise manner. śāstraikadeśa-sambandham śāstrakāryāntare sthitam | āhuḥ prakaraņam nāma grantha-bhedam vipaścitah ||" The source of this verse is not provided. 2 For example, Punjani, p. 22; Swahananda, p.ix.

2 minister of these kings. But the identities of Mādhava, Vidyāranya and Bhāratītīrtha are

shrouded in conflicting opinions and historical controversies. This thesis takes a closer

look at the identity of these individuals, and their connection to Vijayanagara.

There are various works ascribed either to Mādhava-Vidyāraņya, or to Bhāratītīrtha

or to both. These works shall be examined with a view to sorting out their authorship,

with the greatest attention being paid to determining who really wrote the Pañcadaśi.

Was it exclusively authored by Vidyāranya, by Bhāratītīrtha, or by both? If authored by

both, what, if anything, can be determined regarding which sections were written by

whom? The Trptidipa-prakarana is of particular interest in connection with these

questions; tradition holds that the transition in the authorship of the Pañcadasi occurred

at this chapter. An comparison of the writing style and contents of the Trptidīpa-

prakarana to the that of the rest of the Pañcadasī will help shed light on these questions.

The Trptidīpa-prakarana also happens to be the longest chapter of the Pañcadaśi,

and as such it affords us a unique view of key Advaita Vedānta concepts and their inter-

relationship. It is structured as an exposition of a śruti-vākya, a scriptural statement from

the Brhadāranyaka Upanisad (BU) with which it opens (BU 4.4.12). In order to gain an

understanding of Vidyaranya's thought and an appreciation for his masterful exposition

of Advaita Vedānta in the Trptidīpa, this chapter is examined in great detail and its

content is compared with: 1. the context of BU 4.4.12 within the Yājñavalkya kānda of

the Brhadāranyaka Upanişad itself, 2. the bhāsya or commentary by Šankarācārya, the

de facto "founder"3 of Advaita Vedānta on BU 4.4.12, and 3. a sub-commentary on the

3 While there were earlier thinkers on Advaita Vedānta (cf. Nakamura), very little of their work is extant in entirety. Sankara's thought has had the greatest influence not only on Advaita Vedänta, but on the many

3 BU passage, also attributed to Vidyāraņya, called the Brhadāranyaka-vārtika-sāra. This

may provide us a glimpse into the evolution of Advaita Vedānta thought over time as

well as any innovations that Vidyāranya may have contributed in the process to Advaita

thought.

other varieties of Vedänta too, which often differentiate themselves from Advaita in terms of how they differ from Sankara.

4 2. The Significance of PD7, Trptidīpa-prakaraņa

Though the Pañcadaśī is ascribed to Vidyāranya, tradition holds that there was a

change in authorship at the seventh prakarana. For example, according to Swami

Abhedananda, "the first six chapters of Panchadasi was [sic] written by Bharati Tirtha,

but his sudden and unexpected death left the work to be completed by his disciple

[Vidyāranya] who wrote the remaining nine chapters." Acyutarāya Modaka indicates a

similar transition in authorship in his sub-commentary on the PD, Pūrnānandendu-

kaumudī, though he has the direction of the handoff reversed: "Now Srī Bhāratītīrtha, ...

with great compassion, thoroughly examined the six prakaranas ending with Citradīpa.

[These six prakarana-s] were a part of the fifteen extremely simple prakaranas, uniquely

helpful to the most eminent and intense seekers of liberation, conforming to the Advaita

śastras. [The six prakarana-s] had been begun by his own disciple, Srī Vidyāranya-

ācārya, who was known as the omniscient Mādhavācārya in his pūrvaśrama.

[Bhäratītīrtha] was pleased [with it], and in order to explore the meaning of the last

section, particularly the last śloka [of the sixth prakarana], for the sake of diversion

alone, himself commenced the remaining nine prakaranas. He began with this very

seventh prakarana, called trptidīpa on account of the generation of the satisfaction [by its

mere] mention, ... by reading the mantra from the BU [4.4.12]."5

4 Abhedananda, p. 266 5 Tripāțhī, p. 273: atha bhagavān bhāratītīrtha-munivarah {sarvadā vaksyamāņa-vaicārika-yaugikānyatar- ādvaitātmatattva-nisthaika-parāyanah} paramakarunayā śrīmad-vidyāranyācāryākhya-pūrvāśrama- prakhyāta-sarvajña-mādhavācāryābhidha-svaśisya-samārabdhādvaita-śāstrīya-tīvratara-mumuksu- varaikopakāraka-parama-sarala-pañcadaśa-prakaraņīgata-citradīpāntasatprakaranīm sampūrņām samavalokya santustas tadantyaśloka-viśista-carama-caranārtham anusandhāya līlayaivāvaśista- navaprakaraņīm svayameva samārambhamāņas tatrādāv ukta-trptimātra-janyatvāt trptidīpākhyam idam saptama-prakaraņam eva {vaksyamāņa-vaicārika-saptamabhūmy-ekanivistatvena kurvāņas

5 In the introduction to his Marathi work, Sārtha Pañcadaśī, D. V. Jog goes one step

further and claims that Vidyāranya took sannyasa at the hands of the then pontiff of

Śrngerī Matha, Sankarānanda in 1380 CE at the age of eighty-five. At this time he

undertook to write the Pañcadaśī but passed away (lit. became samādhi-stha) in 1386 CE

after completing only six prakarana-s and therefore his guru Bhāratītīrtha completed the

text. He further posits that this Bharatītīrtha was none other than Vidyāranya's younger

brother, named Bhoganātha prior to sannyāsa,° who was well versed in Vedānta himself.7

Venimadhava Shastri presents yet another plausible theory: namely, that only the

Trptidīpa-prakarana was written by Bhāratītīrtha, and the remaining fourteen chapters by

Vidyāranya. He does not provide any evidence or sources to back up this claim,8 but this

is no doubt based on the fact that Ramakrsna's commentary to PD7 opens, "Beginning

the prakarana called Trptidīpa, since it is an explanation of the śruti, guru Bhāratītīrtha

first states the śruti [passage] which is to be explained in detail."9 Nowhere else in his

commentary does Ramakrsna refer only to Bharatītīrtha; the invocations in all the

mangala-śloka-s at the beginning of each prakarana or chapter are to both Vidyāraņya

tadvişayādyapy āvişkurvāņaḥ prathita-pramāņādi-mangalam apy ākalayan} kāņvopanișanmantram eva pațhati - {ātmānam ced iti} | - Text enclosed within { } has not been translated above. 6 We'll explore this aspect further in Section 3.5, p. 21. 7 Jog, pp. 4-5 (of the prastāvanā, in Marathi): ... śrīśamkarānanda he tyā veļes śrngerī mațhāvar jagadguru mhaņūn hote. tyāmce pāsūn šake 1302 (1380 CE) madhye samnyās gheūn śrīmādhavācārya he śrīvidyāranya banūn gādīvar basle. tyāveļes tyāmce vay 85 varsāmce hote. ... evdhyā vrddhāvasyemt śrīvidyāranyāmnī 'pañcadaśī' yā nāvācā gramtha lihāvayās ghetlā. paņ sahā prakaraņe lihūn jhālyāvar śake 1308 (1386 CE) madhye te samādhistha jhāle, va rahilelā gramtha śrīmādhavācāryāmce (vidyāranyāmce) guru śrībhāratītīrtha yāmnī purā kelā. mājhā asā tarka āhe kī to gramtha tyāmcyā dhāktyā bamdhūnī śrībhāratītīrtha (bhoganātha) yāmnī purā kelā asāvā. kāraņ te vedāntaśāstrāmt pravīņ hote 8 Shastri (1986), p. 115. 9 trptidīpākhyam prakaraņam ārabhamāņah śrī-bhāratītīrtha-gurus tasya śruti-vyākhyāna-rūpatvāt tad- vyākhyeyām śrutim ādau pațhati. Ācārya, p. 188.

6 and Bhäratītīrtha.1We shall keep this scenario in mind as we proceed with the

investigation.

Yet another dual-authorship scenario is attributed to a Niścalānanda or Niścaladāsa

Svämin, author of the Vrtti-prabhākara, namely that the first ten chapters were written by

Vidyāranya and the remaining five by Bhāratītīrtha.11 Mahadevan also mentions

Niścaladāsa's scenario, but states that it "cannot be relied upon" since Niścaladāsa (1800-

1900 CE)12 is so much later than Vidyāranya, Bhāratītīrtha and even Appayya Dīkșita

(ca. 1585 CE).13 The Vrtti-prabhākara is said to be a commentary on the PD published

in 1911,14 but this may be incorrect. I was able to locate a reprint of this text15 and it is

an independent work on pramāna-s or means of knowledge, written in a Brajbhāsā-like

dialect of Hindi.16 This work does refer to the PD, in connection with the absence of the

ānandamaya kośa, the sheath of bliss, in the state of being iśvara, the lord. But the

reference to the dual-authorship theory is more to the effect that "even if differing works

are examined, even though tradition says that the five viveka [prakarana-s] and the five

dīpa [prakaraņa-s] are written by Vidyāraņya and the five ānanda [prakaraņa-s] by

Bhāratītīrtha, even so it is not at all possible that in one and the same text, there can be a

10 For example, at the beginning of his work, he states: natvā śrī-bhāratītīrtha-vidyāranya-munīśvarau pratyak-tattvavivekasya kriyate pada-dīpikā || The concluding (third) verse of the opening to the commentary on PD7 states: natvā śrī-bhāratītīrtha-vidyāraņya-munīśvarau | kriyate trptidīpasya vyākhyānam gurv-anugrahāt | 11 Kripacharyulu, p. 128. Ibid., pp. 1,188. See also the discussion infra, p. 25.

12 Thangaswami, p. 359. 13 Mahadevan (1938), p. 7. Appayya Dīksita's date per Potter (2005). 14 Dasgupta, v. 2, p. 216, n. 1; Thangaswami, p. 127; Potter (2005). 15 Niścaladāsa (1984). 16 Thangaswami, p. 263, however, quotes Niścaladāsa in Sanskrit: prāthamikādaśa paricch[e]dā eva vidyāraņya-nirmitāḥ.

7 contradiction of what was stated earlier [in that text]."7 From the context of the quoted

passage it is actually clear that Niścaladāsa thinks that the citradīpa-prakarana (PD6) and

the brahmānanda-pañcaka (PD11-15) were written by Vidyāranya, and that there is

agreement among the ideas presented in the two places.

Perhaps it is due to the alleged handoff, either from Bharatītīrtha, the teacher to

Vidyāranya, his student (per Abhedananda) or from student to teacher (per Acyutarāya

Modaka and Jog), that PD7 is the longest of the fifteen chapters of this text. Or perhaps it

is because this was the only prakarana that Bharatītīrtha wrote. The incoming author

might have felt it necessary to review all that had been mentioned thus far and then

introduce the matter to be treated in the chapters that are to follow. In any case, PD7

serves as a comprehensive overview of general Advaita principles and can be studied by

itself. At the same time, it does not appear to be discontinuous with the earlier six

chapters of the text and is in fact well integrated with the subject matter of the text as a

whole. In order to explore the connection of PD7 to the rest of the Pañcadasi, I shall

provide a synopsis of the remaining chapters (chapter 4, "A Synopsis of the Pañcadaśī,"

p. 37) followed by a detailed look at PD7 itself and how it relates to the rest of the text

(chapter 5, "A Closer Look at Trptidīpa-Prakarana, PD7," p. 50). But first we shall look

at the issue of authorship more closely.

17 Niścaladāsa, p.355, infra Vrtti-prabhākara 8.19: yadyapi vilakaņ lekh dekhikai au [sic] paramparā- vacan-maim paramparā-taim yah kahaim haim; pāmc viveka au pāmc dīp tau vidyāranya-krt haim, aur pāmc ānand bhāratītīrtha-krt haim, tathāpi ek-hī granth-maim pūrva uttar-kā virodh sambhavai nahīm; yataim pañcadaśī-granth-maim ānandamay-kūm īśvartā vivaksit nahīm, ...

8 3. Who were Vidyāraņya and Bhāratītīrtha?

3.1 Theories of Authorship of the PD

From the previous section, it is evident that the identity of the author(s) of the

Pañcadasī is not certain. In brief, there are three theories of authorship prevailing:

A1. The PD was written solely by Vidyāranya, who was named Mādhavācārya

before sannyāsa, i.e. during his pūrvāśrama.

A2. The PD was a collaboration between Vidyāranya (of A1) and Bhāratītīrtha,

who was Vidyaranya's guru.18

A3. The PD was written exclusively by Bhāratītīrtha-Vidyāranya, the latter name

being an appellation "Forest of Learning."19

Based on the discussion in the preceding section, the joint-authorship theory, A2,

itself has four branches:

A2.6V: Vidyāranya wrote the first six prakarana-s and Bhāratītīrtha, the

remaining nine;

A2.6B: Bhāratītīrtha wrote the first six prakarana-s and Vidyāranya, the remaining

nine;

A2.10V: Vidyāranya wrote the first ten prakarana-s and Bhāratītīrtha, the

remaining five (the scenario incorrectly attributed to Niścaladāsa);

A2.B1: Bhāratītīrtha wrote only PD7 and Vidyāranya wrote the rest of the PD.

18 As seen in chapter 2, "The Significance of PD7, Trptidīpa-prakarana," p. 4. 19 Mahadevan (1969), p. xxi.

9 3.2 Many Mādhavas

Then there is the city of Vijayanagara, "City of Victory," located on the banks of

the Tungabhadra river near the present-day village of Hampi in Karnataka. An alternate

name for this city is Vidyānagara, "City of Learning" after Vidyāraņya, because it is

traditionally held that it was upon Vidyäranya's sage advice that the brothers Bukka and

Harihara founded the city at its location. There were four Madhavas associated with

Vijayanagara during the time period of interest to us:

M1. Mādhavācārya, kulaguru and minister of the kings Bukka I (1354-1377 CE)

and Harihara II (1376-1404 CE),21

M2. Mädhavamantrin, a minister of the kings Harihara I (1336-1354 CE), Bukka I,

and Harihara II,

M3. Mādhava, a possibly Sanskritized version of Māyaņa, son of Sāyaņa and

possibly the author of Sarva-darśana-sangraha (SDS),22 and

M4. Madhava, the older brother of Sayana, the famous commentator of the Vedas;

their younger brother Bhoganatha may have taken sannyāsa earlier, becoming

Bhāratītīrtha.23

Mādhavamantrin (M2) is accepted as being different from Mādhavācārya (M1). A

great warrior and governor of the Banavasi near Goa, Madhavamantrin had different

20 See Sewell, pp. 20-22 and Saletore, v. 1, pp. 83-87 for an enumeration of the various founding myths. 21 Dates for the kings' reigns are based on Rāma Sharma, pp. xvii-xviii. 22 Punjani, p. 9 suggests Mādhava is a "corrupt form" of Māyana. See n. 26. infra for more details on SDS authorship. 23 In the Parāśara-mādhavīya, authored by Mādhava, śloka-s 1.6-7 state: śrīmatī jananī yasya sukīrtir māyaņah pitā | sāyano bhoganāthaś ca manobuddhi sahodarau yasya baudhāyanam sūtram śākhā yasya ca yājusī | bhāradvājam kulam yasya sarvajñah sa hi mādhavah | In Kane (1975), p. 785, n. 1173, Mahadevan (1938), p. 1 and Ācārya (1994), p.20 (introd.) have a slightly variant version for v. 7 (variations in bold) : baudhāyanam yasya sūtram šākhā yasya ca yājușī | bhāradvājam yasya gotram sarvajñah sa hi mādhavah ||

10 parents and teachers and belonged to the Angirasa gotra.24 He has however been

mistakenly identified with Vidyaranya in the past and a commentary on the Sūta-samhita

written by him (Mādhava-mantrin) called Tātparya-dīpikā has often been incorrectly

attributed to Vidyaranya, due to the conflation of the two ministers, M1 and M2.25

Very little is known about Mädhava (M3), but according to Kripacharyulu "this

Mādhava is different from Mādhavācārya," he is Mādhava's (M1) nephew and the author

of the Sarva-darśana-sangraha (SDS).26 Some also credit him with writing the Sankara-

digvijaya (ŚDV), also often mistakenly ascribed to Vidyāranya. It is safe to conclude

that he too is not connected to the author of the PD.

This leaves us with M1 and M4. The generally accepted view is that they are one

and the same person, who took the name Vidyāranya after sannyāsa (A1 above). As

mentioned earlier, he is said to have influenced Harihara I's choice of the site for the

capital city of Vijayanagara.8 It is often said that the city was originally named

Vidyānagara in honor of Vidyāranya's role in its establishment in 1336 CE29 but this is

24 In an inscription dated to 1368-69 by Filliozat, pp. 93,98: v. 6: ... asti svastimatām udārayaśasām ēkāśrayaḥ śrēyasām ... śrī bukkanāmā nrupaḥ [sic] ... v. 7: ... mādhavay [sic] ity amātyah | ... v. 8: gōtrē yomgirasām pracamdatapasaś cāümdapruthvīsura praśthād udbhavam ... See also Kane, p. 791; Kulke, p. 129; Kripacharyulu, pp. 74-6. 25 According to Jagannadham et al, pp. 79-84; Mishra, p. iii; Kripacharyulu, p. 76. Also cf. n. 156 infra. 26 Kripacharyulu, pp. 96-7. This is based on śloka 1.3 of the SDS - śrīmat-sāyana-dugdhābdhi- kaustubhena mahaujasā | k | kriyate mādhavāryeņa sarvadarśanasangrahaḥ || Cowell & Gough, in their translation of SDS want to emend the reading of śrīmat-sāyana to śriman-māyana to make it conform to M4! (p. 1, n. 1). Upādhyāya, in his Hindi work on Sāyana and Mādhava, says that Sāyana had three sons. Māyana being the second, who wrote SDS (pp. 61-2). 27 Venkataraman (1976), p.20. Upādhyāya, pp. 153-5, provides evidence proving that the SDV is definitely not a work by Mādhava-Vidyāranya. But he makes no mention of Mādhava's nephew in this context. Cf. n. 26 supra and n. 155 infra .. 28 For example, Verghese, p. 421 and Michell, pp. 41-2 both tell of myths whereby the city was established through Vidyāranya's advice. 29 See various stories enumerated by Saletore, v. 1, pp. 83-90. Jog (among others) also gives this date in his prastāvanā, p. 5.

11 held to be an erroneous view by Sewell, Saletore and others.5 Heras questioned the

authenticity of the inscriptional evidence linking Vidyāranya with Vijayanagara,

considering it a fabrication by the sixteenth century Srngerī pontiff Rāmacandra

Bharati.31 This was verified by Saletore32 and "tacitly" assented to by Kane.33 The best

that can be said reliably about Vijayanagara's founding is that it came into existence

gradually between 1346 and 1368 CE34 and that Mādhavācārya (M1) "played no

significant role" in its foundation." However, up until the present time, people persist in

associating Vijayanagara's foundation with Vidyaranya.56 The issue is made more

sensitive by the confluence of at least three ideological conflicts: 1) the perceived

historical importance of Srngerī to the Sankarācārya tradition, 2) the struggle for the

revival of Hindu religion and culture in face of Muslim invaders, allegedly intent on

converting Hindus to Islam, and 3) the conflicting claims of regional affiliation, regarding

whether the rulers of Vijayanagara were kannada or andhra. However, this should in no

way detract from Vidyāranya's importance to Advaita Vedānta. In fact, Hacker suggests

that the establishment of the Advaita monastaries (matha-s) all over India, typically

credited to Sankara, was really the work of Vidyāranya;5 his scholarship and facility

with Advaita doctrine, which we are about to explore next, would certainly be a

considerable asset in carrying out such a monumental task.

30 Sewell, p. 19, n. 2, p. 300, n. 1; Saletore, v. 1, pp. 93-101. See also Kulke (1985). 31 Heras, pp. 33-5. 32 pp. 93-101. 33 Though with protestations - Kane, pp. 782,789; Kulke, p. 123. 34 Kulke, p. 126. 35 Ibid., p. 129. 36 See, for example, the essay "Birth of Vijayanagar" in Jagannadham et al (1990), pp. 12-23. Also cf. Wagoner, pp. 300-305 (I am grateful to Robert Goodding for bringing this article to my attention). 37 In "On Śankara and Advaitism" in Halbfass (1995), p. 31.

12 3.3 Historical facts about Mādhava, Vidyāranya, Srngerī and Vijayanagara

What do we know about Vidyäranya in connection with the Śrngerī matha?

According to the mathāmnāya-s, texts describing institutional history, we have the

following dates for Vidyāranya and his gurus:38

Table 1: Srngerī matha's guru succession

Head Consecrated Died Vidyātīrtha 1228 CE 1333 CE (or Vidyāśankara/ Vidyāśankaratīrtha) Bhāratītīrtha (or Bhāratīkrsnatīrtha) 1328 CE 1380 CE Vidyāraņya 1331 CE 1386 CE

There are many issues with these dates. Vidyātīrtha's longevity could perhaps be

ascribed to yogic practices." The overlaps between Vidyātīrtha and Bhāratītīrtha's

reigns (1328-1333 CE) and Bhāratītīrtha and Vidyāranya's reigns (1331-1380 CE) may

be explained by interpreting the consecration date to refer to the date each took

sannyāsa." The more likely explanation, proposed by Heras,4 is that the mathāmnāya

was later falsified to allow for Vidyäranya to already be the head of Srngerī by the time

Vijayanagara was "established" in 1336 CE42 Kulke's examination of the non-spurious

epigraphical evidence confirms that Vidyāranya is first mentioned only in 1375 CE, as

38 Based on Nanjundayya, v. 2, p. 458 and Srikantaya, p.138, n. 470. Venkataraman (1967), p. 23 and Shastry, p. 121 have the same end dates, but the start dates for Bhāratītīrtha (1333) and Vidyāranya (1380) do not have the overlap discussed below. 39 According to Srikantaya, p. 158, Vidyatīrtha entered lambika yoga in 1333 and the Vidyāśankara temple was built at the site. (Srikantaya does not elaborate on the nature of lambika yoga). Also Venkataraman (1976), p. 1: "There was nothing strange about this long period, considering his mastery over the siddhis that enabled him to prolong his life as long as he liked." 40 Upādhyāya suggests this approach. Then Bhāratītīrtha became the Sankarācārya of the matha in 1333 CE (1255 śaka, p. 66) and Vidyāranya in 1380 CE (1437 Vikrama-samvat., p. 141), upon the deaths of their respective predecessors. 41 n. 31 supra. 42 Also Upādhyāya, p. 140, n. 1; also Kripacharyulu, pp. 31-2, though he goes on to (rather unconvincingly) defend the mathāmnāya view, pp. 30-37.

13 the head of Srngeri.43 An inscription commemorating King Bukka's visit to Srngerī in

1356 CE has Vidyätīrtha as the receiver of Bukka's largess and does not mention

Vidyāraņya at all.44 Thus Vidyāranya must have been consecrated sometime during the

interval 1356-1375 CE45 There then follow several inscriptions70 reflecting the

importance of Vidyaranya as Srngerī's mahant and the high regard he was held in by the

kings Bukka I and Harihara II through his death in 1386 CE.47

That the Madhavas M1 and M4 are one and the same is not contested by anyone.48

Both Sāyaņa and Mādhavācārya seem to have been politically active in the courts of the

Vijayanagara kings," and their younger brother Bhoganātha was the narmasaciva, sport

or pleasure companion of King Sangama II." The identity of Mādhavācārya (M1, M4)

with Vidyāranya (A1), on the other hand, is not as uncontested."2 The works of

Mādhavācārya do not mention the name Vidyāranya and later references to Vidyāranya

do not link him with his pūrvāśrama name, Mādhava. Some would say that this is but

natural - in one's pūrvāśrama one typically does not know whether one will take

sannyāsa, much less the name one will be assigned at that time. On assuming sannyāsa,

43 Kudupu Stone Inscription, Uttankita Epigraphs, pp. 84-86; Filliozat, Appendix, no. 25, p. 145 44 Filliozat, no. 43, pp. 30-32. 45 Kulke, p. 130. 46 For example, the Belagula copper plates of 1384, Uttankita Epigraphs, pp. 104-9; the Vidyāranyapura copper plate of Harihara II in 1386, Uttankita Epigraphs, pp. 112-117. 47 Kulke, pp. 130-32 48 See, for example, Kane, pp. 785-787; Kripacharyulu, pp. 77-81; Kulke, p. 136. 49 See, among others, Kane, p. 786; Srikantaya, p. 104. 50 Kane, p. 785, n. 1174: "To translate the word 'Narmasaciva' as simply jester is not quite accurate. ... The idea is this: the very learned brothers Sayana and Mädhava (both ministers) were far above playfulness or the cracking of jokes with the king, but Bhoganätha, a poet, being young and less learned than the other two, could be intimate with the king." 51 Kane, ibid .; Upādhyāya, p. 58; Punjani, p. 10. 52 Kripacharyulu, pp. 54-72 lists seven objections to the "identity theory" and then refutes them point-by- point. I do not agree with all the issues raised and their treatment. For the sake of brevity, I have dealt with only the issues I consider most relevant.

14 a renunciant in effect dies to his previous identity53 and therefore would no longer refer to

himself by his pūrvāśrama identity.54

3.4 Works ascribed to Madhava-Vidyāranya

The identity of Vidyāranya with Mādhavācārya can be established through textual

sources. For example, Vidyāranya's Jīvan-mukti-viveka (JMV), an Advaita Vedānta

work on the doctrine of liberation, refers to Mādhava's commentary on Parāśara-smrti,

commonly known as the Parāśara-mādhavīya (PaM), as being written by himself.55 This

clearly indicates that Vidyäranya, the author of the JMV, is the same as Mädhava, the

author of the PaM. The identity of Mādhava and Vidyāranya is confirmed if we observe

the parallels in the persons being paid homage to in the two works. In the JMV,

Vidyāranya pays homage to his guru Vidyātīrtha at the beginning and end of the text.56

In the PaM, a dharma-sastra "digest of civil and religious law"," in the opening stanza,

Mādhava pays homage to Lord Ganesa, and in the next stanza lauds his three teachers,

Bhāratītīrtha, Vidyatīrtha and Srikantha." Madhava also goes on to pay homage to King

53 Olivelle (1993), p. 207, speaks of renunciation as a ritual and civil death of the renouncer. 54 Upādhyāya, p. 134: samnyās āśram svīkār kar lene par koī bhī yati apne prapañc mem phamse rahnevāle pūrva āśram ke nām kā ullekh karnā acchā nahīm samajhtā ... 55 JMV 1.0.11: etesām tu samācārāh proktāh parasarasmrteh vyākhyāne 'smābhir atrāyam parahamso vivicyate || (Goodding, pp. 298-9). 56 JMV 1.0.1: yasya nihśvasitam vedā yo vedebhyo 'khilam jagat | nirmame tam aham vande vidyātīrtha- maheśvaram || JMV 5.4.48: jīvan-mukti-vivekena bandham hārdam nivārayan | pumārtham akhilam deyād vidyātīrthamaheśvarah || JMV 1.0.1 is identical to the opening verse of Sāyana's commentary to the Rgveda. Cf. n. 58 infra regarding Sāyaņa. 57 Kane, p. 779. 58 PaM 1.1: vāgīšādyāh sumanasaḥ sarvārthānām upakrame | yam natvā krta-krtyāh syus tam namāmi gajānanam || This verse also occurs as v.2 of the opening of Sayana's commentary to the Rgveda. Some scholars have suggested that Sayana's works were jointly authored with Mādhava, e.g. Kripacharyulu, pp. 182-3. Exploration of the works of Säyana is sadly outside the scope of the present analysis. 59 PaM 1.2: so 'ham prāpya viveka-tīrtha-padavīm āmnāya-tīrthe param majjan sajjana-tīrtha-sanga- nipuņaḥ sadvrtta-tīrtham śrayan | labdhāmākalayan prabhāva-laharīm śrībhāratītīrthato vidyātīrtham upāśrayan hrdi bhaje śrīkantham avyāhatam || Srikantaya, p. 102 considers Śrīkantha to be Vidyātīrtha's

15 Bukka0 and his own parents; he also mentions his brothers Sāyana and Bhoganātha, and

clearly indicates that he himself is the author.6 We see that Vidyaranya of the JMV and

Madhava of the PaM both honor Vidyatīrtha as guru. The others honored by Madhava in

the PaM, Bhāratītīrtha, Srīkantha and Bukka are not mentioned by Vidyāranya in the

JMV. But we can say with greatest confidence that Mādhava-Vidyāranya is the author of

the PaM and the JMV.

Another work that is universally attributed to the same author is the Kāla-

mādhavīya (KM), also referred to as the Kāla-nirņaya, a dharma-śāstra treatise on the

proper times for the performance of religious rites.°2 The first three stanzas are

identical63 to PaM 1.1-3: homage is paid to Lord Ganeśa, Bhāratītīrtha, Vidyātīrtha,

Srīkantha, and King Bukka.4 The KM was written after the PaM as v. 5 of the KM

mentions the PaM explicitly.65

The Jaiminīya-nyāya-mālā (JNM) is yet another work universally ascribed to

Mādhava,66 whose first verse is identical to the PaM 1.1 and KM 1 already cited.67 The

pūrvāśrama-nāman but that raises the question as to why Mādhavācārya would mention him by both names in this context. Srīkantha may have been the guru of Sāyana, Mādhava and Bhoganātha in their early years (Upādhyāya, pp. 67-9; Kripacharyulu, pp. 6-7). According to Rāma Sharma, pp.19,25, n. 9, Šrīkaņthanātha was their guru in Känchi and a Saiva philosopher. 60 PaM 1.3d: smārttocchrāya dhurandharo vijayate śrī-bukkaņa-ksmā-patih || 61 For the verse mentioning his parents and brothers, see n. 23 supra. PaM 1.9: parāśara-smrtih pūrvair na vyākhyātā nibandhrbhiḥ | mayā 'to mādhavāryyeņa tad vyākhyāyām prayatyate || 62 For example, by Kane, p. 788; Mahadevan (1938), p. 2; Kripacharyulu, pp. 114-6; Upādhyāya, pp. 147-8. 63 Except for v. 2b - where PaM has sajjana-tīrtha-sanga-nipunah, KM 2b has sajjana-sanga-tīrtha- nipuņah. 64 See nn. 58, 59, 60 supra. 65 KM 5: vyākhyāya mādhavācāryo dharmān pārāśarān atha | tad anusthāna-kālasya nirņayam vaktum udyataḥ 66 For example, by Kane, p. 788; Mahadevan (1938), p. 2; Upādhyāya, pp. 148-9; Venimadhava Shastri, p. 113; Kripācharyulu, pp. 116-120. 67 See n. 58 supra.

16 next verse offers homage to King Bukka,8 and the following verse to King Bukka and

Vidyātīrtha.69 Bhāratītīrtha is mentioned in v. 7,0 and Mādhava names himself as the

author in v. 8.71

In the PD, however, the opening verse offers salutations to Sankarānanda.72

Ramakrsna's commentary to the PD (ca. 1375 CE)73 interprets Sankarānanda as

paramātman, who alone is the guru.4 Thus Sankarānanda can possibly be interpreted as

standing in for any or all of Vidyaranya's teachers and is definitely treated as such by

subsequent commentators. Sankarānanda is also invoked in the opening benediction to

Vivarana-prameya-sangraha (VPS),a commentary on Prakāśātman's (10th or 13th c.

CE)76 Pañca-pādikā-vivaraņa." The VPS, like the PD, is also ascribed to either

Vidyāranya, Bharatītīrtha or both.8 The closing verse to the VPS, however, mentions

Vidyatīrtha as the author's guru,strengthening the argument that Sankarānanda implies

68 JNM 1.2cd: nitya-sphūrty-adhikāravān gata-sadābādhah svatantreśvaro, jāgarti śrutimat-prasanga- caritaḥ śrī-bukkaņa-kșmāpatiḥ || Cf. PaM 1.3d (also KM 3d), n. 61 above. 69 JNM 1.3: yad brahma pratipādyate praguņayat tat pañca-mūrti-prathām, tatrāyam sthiti-mūrtim ākalayati śrī-bukkaņa-ksmāpatiḥ | vidyātīrtha-munis tad ātmani lasan mūrtis tvanugrāhikā, tenāsya svaguņair akhandita-padam sārvajñam udyotate || 70 JNM 1.7: sa bhavyād bhāratītīrtha-yatīndra-caturānanāt | krpām avyāhatām labdhvā parārthya-pratimo 'bhavat | 71 JNM 1.8: nirmāya mādhavācāryo vidvad-ānanda-dāyinīm | jaiminīya-nyāya-mālām vyācaste

72 PD 1.1: namaḥ śrīśankarānanda-guru-pādāmbu-janmane | savilāsa-mahāmoha-grāha-grāsaika- bālabuddhaye |

karmaņe | 73 Per Potter (2005). Cf. n. 133, p. 26 infra. 74 PD 1.1 s.v .: śankarānandaḥ pratyag-abhinnah paramātmā | sa eva guruh ... 75 VPS 1: svamātrayā "nanda yad atra jantūn sarvātma-bhāvena tathā paratra | yac chankarānandapadam hrdabje vibhrājate tad yatayo viśanti || 76 Potter (2005) gives 975 CE, while Dasgupta, v. 2, p. 52 and Venimadhava Shastri, p. 115 place him in the thirteenth century. 77 The Pañca-pādikā-vivaraņa itself is a commentary on Padmapāda's Pañca-pādikā (8th century), dealing with the first four sūtras of the Brahmasūtras and Sankara's bhāsya. 78 Two of the three editions consulted ascribe it to Vidyāranya, one to Bhāratītīrtha. Venkataraman (1976) suggests it could be a joint work (along with PD, JMV and DDV)! 79 yad vidyātīrthagurave šuśrūsā 'nyā na rocate tasmāt | astv eșā bhaktiyutā śrīvidyātīrtha-pādayoh sevā |

17 Vidyatīrtha. This would then indicate that at the very least, the author of the PD, if not

the same as the author Vidyaranya of the JMV and Madhava of the PaM, has the same

guru Vidyātīrtha. There is also the closing verse of the PD, where the reference to

Harihara can be interpreted as a clever pun on the word referring to the deities Visnu and

Siva as well as Bhāratītīrtha and Mādhavācārya/Vidyāranya's royal patrons, Harihara I

(1336-54 CE) & Harihara II (1376-1404 CE).81 Based on the evidence presented thus far,

either Vidyaranya or Bharatītīrtha or both could be the author of the PD.

There is yet another text ascribed to Vidyāranya, the Brhadāranyaka-vārtika-sāra

(BVS), a sub-commentary on Sureśvara's Vārttika (8tn century) on the BU.82 We will

look at a portion of this work in greater detail in section 6.3, "Vidyāranya's

Brhadāraņyaka-vārtika-sāra (BVS) on BU 4.4.12," p. 63 infra when considering the

extra-textual context of the PD. As far as opening and closing verses are concerned, this

text is not very helpful as no specific teachers are named, but the opening verse is

identical to the first verse of both the PaM and the KM.83

80 Venkataraman (1976), however, says that Sankarānanda was a student of Vidyātīrtha who collaborated with Vidyāranya in founding several small matha-s (p. 18). No sources are provided. There is also a Sankarānanda Bhāratī listed in the Srngerī māthāmnāya (Nanjundayya, p. 458) for the period 1428-1454, which puts him out of consideration for our discussion. Thangaswami, pp. 257-261 presents three possibilities: 1. Sankarānanda was an alternate name for Vidyātīrtha, 2. he was Vidyātīrtha's guru, 3. he was not Vidyatīrtha's guru but along with him (Vidyātīrtha), he was a guru of Vidyāranya. 81 A similar argument is presented in Kripacharyulu, pp. 66-7. Dates for the kings' reigns based on Rāma Sharma, pp. xvii-xviii 82 Marcaurelle, p.189; Upādhyāya, p. 153; Kripacharyulu, pp. 140-44. 83 The opening śloka, BVS 1.0.1: vāgīšādyāh sumanasah sarvārthānām upakrame | yan natvā krtakrtyāḥ syus tam namāmi gajānanam || Cf. n. 58 supra. (There is a possibility that this opening verse has been inserted later, since the next verse again is numbered "1" and seems to be the beginning of the work proper, with homage paid to Sureśvara and his Värttika. In the Dwivedī edition, the opening verse is unnumbered). The final two ślokas of this work don't mention any teachers - 6.6.1-2: upasamhrtya tām vidyām kāņdavamšo 'tha varņyate | sa vyākhyātah pūrvameva brahmāptyaih japyatām iti || navaty adhika- samkhyātāḥ ślokā navaśatāni ca | santi vārtikasare 'smin sastādhyāyasya sangrahe ||

18 The Anubhūti-prakāśa (AP), yet another work attributed to Vidyāraņya, is a

metrical work interpreting selections from twelve upanisads in twenty chapters. While

there is no opening invocation, the concluding verse of every chapter honors

Vidyātīrtha.8 The AP seems to be composed after the BVS, since its section on the BU,

chapters AP13-18, shares many verses with the BVS.86

Vidyāranya is also said to have written commentaries called Dīpikā-s on the

Aitareya and the Nrsimhottara-tāpanīya Upanisads (AiU, NUTU).8 The opening and

closing śloka-s of the AiU-Dīpika are virtually identical to those of the JMV, wherein

Vidyātīrtha is invoked.88 Thus we can confidently ascribe this work to Mādhava-

Vidyāranya too. The NUTUD is entirely a prose commentary, with the exception of the

opening and closing verses, neither of which resemble any of the invocations seen so

far." For the purpose of the present analysis, I conclude that this work was most likely

not authored by Mādhava-Vidyāranya.91

84 Venimadhava Shastri, p. 115; Kripacharyulu, pp. 149-157; Upādhyāya, pp. 152-3 calls it the Anupama- prakāśa. 85 For example, AP 12.120: antaḥ pravitaḥ śāsteti yo 'ntaryāmī śrutīritaḥ | so 'smān mukhyaguruḥ pātu vidyātīrtha-maheśvaraḥ || AP 20.156: śrī-smrtītihāsānām abhiprāyavid-avyayah | śruti-vyākhyānatas tusyād vidyātīrtha-maheśvarah | 86 For example AP13.3 = BVS 4.1.5; AP 13.4 = BVS 4.1.10; AP 13.5-10 = BVS 4.2.1-2,8-11 u.s.w. 87 Upādhyāya, p. 153; Venimadhava Shastri, p. 116; Kripacharyulu, pp. 123-4. 88 AiUD opening śloka is the same as that of the JMV (cf. n. 56 supra): yasya nihśvasitam vedā yo vedebhyo 'khilam jagat | nirmame tam aham vande vidyātīrtha-maheśvaram || AiUD closing śloka: vedārthasya prakāśena tamo hārdam nivārayan | pumārtham akhilam deyād vidyātīrthamaheśvaraḥ || Cf. JMV closing śloka in n. 56 supra where the text in bold is instead jīvan-mukti-vivekena bandham. 89 All the other works considered so far have been metrical. 90 NUTUD opening vv .: om namo bhagavate śrī-divyalaksmī-nrsimkāya namah | nirasta-nikhilānartha-paramānanda-rūpiņe | nrsimhāya namaskurmaḥ sarvadhī-vrtti-sāksiņe ||1| caraņābja-rajoleśa-samparkāt sahsā 'sakrt | sarva-samsāra-hīno 'ham tānnato'smi gurūn sadā ||2| tāpanīya-rahasyārtha-vivrtir leśato mayā | kriyate 'lpadhiyā tasmāt ksantavyam ksatam uttamaih ||3||, Closing vv .: tāpanīya-rahasyārtha-dīpikā timirāpahā | gurv-anugraha-labdhaișā satāmas tu sukāptaye ||1| saccidānanda-sampūrņa-pratyag-ekarasātmane | tejase mahate bhūyān namah pumsimha-rūpiņe ||2| yeşām samsmrti-mātreņa taranti bhavasāgaram | tān nato 'smi gurūn bhaktyā dhiyā vācā ca karmaņā ||3| 91 In the context of the commentary to NUTU 1.1, the Dīpikā cites ślokas from texts referred to as Mantra- rāja-kalpa and Sāra-sangraha. I was unable to locate the Mantra-rāja-kalpa text in either Potter (2005) or

19 Lastly, there is a text of Vidyaranya's which was recently discovered by Olivelle

(1981), the Pranava-mīmāmsā (PrM), on the syllable om. The text begins with homage

to Lord Ganeśa," and a few verses later there occurs what Olivelle terms "the signature

verse of both Vidyāranya and his brother Sāyana","3 offering homage to Vidyātīrtha.94

For the present analysis, I have deliberately not taken the colophons of texts into account,

since these can be later scribal additions. But this text can be considered an exception

owing to its uniqueness," and its colophon also pays homage to Vidyätīrtha and King

Bukka.

The evidence presented can now be summed up tabularly:

Table 2: Texts and persons honored therein by Mādhava/Vidyāranya

Text Abbr. Author Homage paid to: 1. Parāśara-mādhavīya PaM Madhava Gajānana, Vidyātīrtha, Bhāratītīrtha, Śrīkaņtha, Bukkaņa 2. Kāla-mādhavīya KM Mādhava Gajānana, Vidyātīrtha, Bhāratītīrtha, Śrīkantha, Bukkana 3. Jaiminīya-nyāya- JNM Madhava Bukkana, Vidyātīrtha, mālā Bhāratītīrtha 4. Jīvan-mukti-viveka JMV Vidyāraņya Vidyātīrtha

Thangaswami. There are many works titled Sāra-sangraha. Potter (2005) lists four titles, three of which can be ruled out by virtue of their being Jain, Viśistādvaita (and Tamil) or Acintya-bhedābheda (ca. 1770 CE) texts. The Sāra-sangraha by Vedānta Deśika or Venkațanātha (1268-1369 CE) is of a period contemporaneous with Mādhava-Vidyāranya and is also unlikely to be cited profusely by him (26 consecutive ślokas). Thangaswami mentions two Advaita texts by the same name, one a secondary commentary on the Sārīrika-nyāya-manimāla (itself a commentary on the BS SBh) is by an Anantānandagiri (1900 CE) and the other, a commentary on Sarvajñātman's Samksepa-śārīraka by Madhusūdana Sarasvati (1565-1665 CE), post-dating Vidyāranya. If it be argued that Sāra-sangraha is an abbreviation for the Sarva-vedānta-siddhānta-sāra-sangraha ascribed to Sankara (falsely according to Belvalkar, pp. 228-9), the verses cited in the NUTUD do not occur therein. 92 PrM 1: śrī-ganeśāya namah || 93 p. 82 (1981). 94 PrM 4: yasya niśvasitam vedā yo vedebhyo 'khilam jagat | nirmame tam aham vande vidyātīrtha- maheśvaram || This is virtually identical to JMV 1.0.1 except that the text in bold is instead nihśvasitam - cf. n. 56 supra. 95 Only one manuscript is extant. Olivelle (1981), pp.77-8.

20 Text Abbr. Author Homage paid to: 5. Vivarana-prameya- VPS Vidyāraņya and/or Śankarānanda, sańgraha Bhāratītīrtha Vidyātīrtha 6. Pañcadaśī PD Vidyāraņya and/or Śankarānanda, Bhāratītīrtha Harihara 7. Brhadāranyaka- BVS Vidyāraņya Gajānana vārtika-sāra 8. Anubhūti-prakāśa AP Vidyāraņya Vidyātīrtha 9. Aitareyopanişada- AiUD Vidyāraņya Vidyātīrtha dīpikā 10. Pranava-mīmāmsā PrM Vidyāraņya Ganeśa, Vidyātīrtha, Bukka

The first three entries are definitively associated with Mādhava without any

question. The fact that Bhāratītīrtha is recognized in these texts as a guru means that he

is not in contention for authorship. Further, through the clear reference to the PaM in

Vidyaranya's JMV as the author's own work, this Madhava is Vidyaranya and thus the

first four texts of Table 2 are by the same author, Mādhava-Vidyāranya. Since the same

"signature verse"6 occurs in JMV, AiUD and PrM, we can presume these works were

written by the same author, allowing us to group together entries 1-4 and 9-10. Due to

the extensive reuse of verses from the BVS in the AP without attribution to another

author," we can group these two (7 & 8) as being the works of the same author. If we

take the opening śloka of the BVS as genuine, it being identical to the first śloka of the

PaM and the KM," we can make the case that the BVS and AP were also written by

Mādhava-Vidyāranya, extending the list of works that can be ascribed to him to consist

% yasya nihśvasitam vedā yo vedebhyo'khilam jagat | nirmame tam aham vande vidyātīrtha-maheśvaram || Cf. nn. 56, 88, 94 supra. 97 As attested to in n. 86 supra. 98 vāgīšādyāh sumanasah sarvārthānām upakrame | yam natvā krta-krtyāh syus tam namāmi gajānanam || Cf. nn. 58, 63-64, 83 supra.

21 of entries 1-4 and 7-10. Next, due to the shared and unique feature of homage paid to

Sankarānanda," we can group the VPS and PD together as being authored by the same

individual, or in case the PD has two authors, begun by the same author who wrote the

VPS. Both works pay homage to Sankaränanda in the beginning, so the author who

wrote the VPS began the PD. In order to definitively ascribe authorship of the PD to

Mādhava-Vidyāranya based on this evidence we would need to show a stronger link

between any of the texts in the first group (entries 1-4 and 7-10) with either of the texts in

the second group (entries 5 and 6). I believe this can be done, but first we need to

examine the facts known about Bhāratītīrtha.

3.5 Works ascribed to Bhāratītīrtha

What do we know about Bhäratītīrtha? As seen in the discussion in this chapter so

far, there is sufficient evidence to confirm that he was one of Mādhavācārya/

Vidyaranya's gurus and his predecessor as the head of the Srngerī matha. Mādhavācārya

is said to have obtained sannyāsa from Bhāratītīrtha. Both of them may also have

counted Vidyatīrtha as their guru. The earliest known inscription mentioning the Srngerī

matha (as a tīrtha, a place of pilgrimage)1 is dated to 1346 CE and mentions donations

by King Harihara I to support Bhāratītīrtha-Srīpāda and his disciples. Earlier, we saw

Jog's opinion that Bhāratītīrtha was Vidyāranya's younger brother Bhoganātha, who took

sannyāsa earlier.12 This opinion is also put forth by Venkataraman (1967)103 but is not

99 Cf. nn. 72, 75 supra. 100 Upādhyāya, p. 66. 101 Filliozat, no. 14, pp. 8-10; Uttankita Epigraphs, pp. 69-73. 102 See chapter 2, "The Significance of PD7, Trptidīpa-prakarana," p. 4 supra.

22 accepted by Srikantaya, because it is apparently based on Srngerī kadita or "account"

books of the matha, whose accuracy is doubted.104 Most other sources do not report any

connection between Bhoganatha and Bhāratītīrtha.10 105

Besides the PD and VPS seen earlier, there are two more works that are attributed

to Bhāratītīrtha - the Drg-drśya-viveka (DDV) and the Vaiyāsika-nyāya-mālā (VNM).106

These texts are also often attributed to Vidyaranya instead of, or in addition to,

Bharatītīrtha, on the basis of Madhava-Vidyāranya's authorship of the Jaiminīya-nyāya-

mālā (JNM). The DDV is a brief work consisting of only 46 śloka-s and has no

opening and closing mangala-śloka-s. It is also known as the Vākya-sudha.18 It is an

inquiry into the discrimination of the Self from the not-Self, and is often mistakenly

attributed to Sankara (8th c. CE).109 The VNM is a summary of the Brahmasūtras and it

opens with salutations to Vidyatīrtha.1There is no closing salutation. The brevity of

the opening salutation and the absence of a closing salutation may be dictated by the

103 p. 23. This is most likely based on the account of the guru-vamśa-kāvya (ca. 1735 CE, per Shastry, p. 8), whose historical accuracy is in doubt. See, for example, Kulke pp.130-1, 135; Srikantaya, pp. 110,138- 9. 104 Srikantaya, pp. 127,137-8; Kulke, p. 140, n. 53. 105 For example, Kane, pp. 785-6,789; Kripacharyulu, Thangaswami pp. 260-61. 106 Mahadevan (1938), p. 7; Upādhyāya, pp 66-7; Nikhilānanda, p. vi (in his tr. of the DDV), Thangaswami, pp. 259-60. Upādhyāya says that some commentators suggest that Vidyāranya may have helped his guru in the composition of one or both of these texts. 107 For example, Venimadhava Shastri, pp. 113-6 attributes both texts to Vidyāranya. Venkatarama Iyer ascribes joint authorship (in Venkataraman (1976), pt. 2, p.p. 4-5) for both texts. In the preface to his commentary on the BS and the VNM, the Brahma-sūtra-rahasyam, Ramanuja Tatacharya credits Vidyāranya with the authorship of the VNM. So does Kane, p. 788. Niścaladāsa, p. 355, attributes the DDV to Vidyāraņya. 108 Venimadhava Shastri, p. 116; Thangaswami, p.259. However, Nikhilānanda, p. vi (in his tr.), suggests that Vākya-sudhā is the name of the commentary on the DDV by Brahmānanda Bhāratī. Thangaswami, p. 260 confirms this. 109 For example, Raphael's translation of the DDV is titled Self and Non-self: The Drigdriśyaviveka Attributed to Samkara. 110 VNM 1.1: praņamya paramātmānam śrī-vidyātīrtha-rūpiņam | vaiyāsika-nyāya-māla ślokai sangṛhyate sphutam |

23 format - for each adhikarana1of the Brahmasūtra, there are two śloka-s. The first

śloka states the vişaya, sandeha and pūrvapaksa (subject, doubt, and prima facie view)

for the adhikarana, while the second śloka states the siddhānta or conclusion. The last

member of the adhikarana, sangati or consistency is considered self-evident.112 The

evidence regarding texts attributed to Bhāratītīrtha can be tabularly summarized:

Table 3: Texts and persons honored therein by Bhāratītīrtha

Text Abbr. Author Homage paid to: 1. Drg-drśya-viveka DDV Bharatītīrtha and/or Vidyāraņya 2. Vaiyāsika-nyāya-mālā VNM Bharatītīrtha and/or Vidyatīrtha Vidyāranya

3.6 Bharatītīrtha, Vidyaranya and the PD

The theory that Bharatītīrtha was the author of the PD (A3 in Section 3.1, p. 8

supra) is propounded primarily by T.M.P. Mahadevan. According to Mahadevan, while

it is probable that Mādhava may have been Vidyāranya (M1 above), the PD is not

authored by him (ruling out M1, M2, M3 and M4) but by his guru, Bhāratītīrtha, who

also possessed as an appellation the title "Vidyaranya" or "Forest of Learning",113 and

who was also connected with the early kings of Vijayanagara.14 Mahadevan based this

view primarily on Appayya Dīksita's attribution of the PD to Bhāratītīrtha in his

111 Each adhikarana of the Brahma-Sūtras consists of six parts: 1. vișaya, subject. 2. samśaya, doubt. 3. pūrvapaksa, prima facie view. 4. uttarapaksa, opposite view. 5. siddhānta, conclusion and 6. sangati, consistency with other parts of the work. 112 VNM 1.2: eko vişaya-sandeha-pūrvapaksāvabhāsakah | śloko 'paras tu siddhāntavādī sangatayaḥ sphuțāḥ 113 Mahadevan (1969), p. xxi. 114 Mahadevan (1938), p. 8.

24 Siddhānta-leśa-sangraha (SLS, ca. 1585 CE),115 supported by other textual citations

occurring even later.116 Mahadevan holds that Mädhava-Vidyāranya is the author of the

JMV, where the PD is quoted as though it is authored by someone else, whom he calls

Bhāratītīrtha-Vidyāranya. To the objection that tīrtha and aranya are distinct sannyāsī-

surnames and cannot occur in the same individual's name, he counters that the

Vidyāranya is not a surname as such but only "an appellation meaning 'Forest of

Learning' applied to [Bhāratītīrtha]."8 Let us examine Mahadevan's arguments more

closely.

Appayya Dīksita's SLS mentions Bhāratītīrtha as the author of the VPS.119 He

mentions the DDV in connection with the Citradipa-prakarana, PD6.120 Slightly earlier

he also refers to the Brahmānanda-pañcaka, PD11-15.11 In an earlier section there is a

reference to "Bharatītīrtha and others" in connection with the views expressed in PD6.122

In a later section, Bharatītīrtha is mentioned as the author of the Dhyānadīpa, PD9.123 Is

there any significance to the fact that the name appears in the nominative plural?124 One

115 Potter (2005). 116 Mahadevan (1938), pp. 6-7; (1969), pp. xiv-xxi. 117 The sannyāsins are often referred to as daśanāmins on account of their using one of ten surnames derived from the academic titles of ten disciples of Sankara's immediate pupils. The names are 1. Sarasvati, 2. Bhārati, 3. Pūri, 4. Tīrtha, 5. Sāgara, 6. Vana, 7. Araņya, 8. Giri, 9. Parvata and 10. Sāgara (again) Of these, Sāgara, Aranya and Parvata are no longer used, according to Nanjundayya, v. 2, p. 455. 118 Mahadevan (1969), pp. xx-xxi. 119 SLS II.3.5421 (Suryanarayana Sastri, v. 2, p. 93): vivaranopanyāse bhāratītīrtha-vacanam iti. Vivaranopanyāsa is Appayya Dīkșit's name for VPS. 120 SLS I.2.3117 (Ibid., p. 22): drg-drśya-viveke tu citradīpa-vyutpāditam kūtastham jīva-koțāv antarbhāvya cit-trai-vidhya-prakriyaivāvalambiteti viśesah 121 SLS I.2.3116 (Ibid., p. 20): brahmānande tu ... 22 SLS I.4.1 (Ibid., p. 31): ... iti bhāratītīrthādi-paksah prāg eva darsitah. Suryanarayana Sastri, v. 2, notes p. vi, n. 137: "Cp. Pañcadaśī 6.153-163." 123 SLS III.3.0 (Ibid., p. 131): evam ... bhāratītīrthāh dhyānadīpe ... āhuh 124 i.e. bhāratītīrthāh ... āhuh instead of bhāratītīrthah ... āha.

25 possibility is that the plural is used to indicate respect,125 but there may be another

explanation. Vidyāranya is mentioned ambiguously as "Vidyāranya-guru"126 - the

compound can be interpreted as either "Guru Vidyāranya" or "the guru of Vidyāraņya,

i.e. Bhāratītīrtha." I suggest that Appayya Dīksita's references to Bhāratītīrtha and

Vidyāranya can also be taken as indicative of his awareness of the joint-authorship theory

(A2), that the PD was authored by both Bhāratītīrtha and Vidyāranya. That is why

Appayya Dīksita says "Bhāratītīrtha and others," and uses the plural form

"Bharatītīrthah." The reference "Vidyāranya-guru" could either be deliberately

ambiguous, or simply indicative of the respect that Vidyāranya has come to be held in by

the Advaita tradition in the two hundred years that have elapsed since his death 1386 CE.

Furthermore, Mahadevan's view that the PD is solely authored by Bhāratītīrtha-

Vidyāranya is also based on deliberately deprecating an important source of evidence.

Mahadevan writes, "That Ramakrsna Pandita at the beginning of his commentary on the

Trpti-dīpa mentions12 Bhāratītīrtha as the author is no ground for stating that the earlier

chapters are the work of Mādhava-Vidyaranya. The mention of Bharatītīrtha in the

Trptidīpa may indicate his authorship not of that chapter alone, nor of that and the

succeeding chapters alone but of the whole book. Rāmakrsna Pandita no doubt pays

obeisance to both Vidyāranya and Bhāratītīrtha. But this would at best prove that

125 pūjāyām bahuvacanam 126 SLS II.3.4112 (Ibid., p. 83): trividhā-jīva-vādinām vidyāranya-guruprabhrtīnām ... 127 SLS Suryanarayana Sastri, v. 2, notes p. x, n. 50: "The reference seems clearly to be to vv. 36-46 of the DDV, attributed to Bhäratītīrtha. It is an open question therefore whether Appayya means the preceptor of Vidyāraņya or the preceptor, Vidyāranya, identifying him with Bhāratītīrtha." In the translation, v. 1, p. 276, he chooses the latter, "Preceptor Vidyāranya." 128 Rāmakrsna's commentary to PD7 starts: trptidīpākhyam prakaranam ārabhamānah śrī-bhāratītīrtha- gurus tasya śruti-vyākhyāna-rūpatvāt tad-vyākhyeyām śrutim ādau pațhati. Ācārya, p. 188.

26 Rāmakrsna was probably the disciple of both and not that the Pañcadasi was the work of

both."2 Rāmakrsna was indeed a disciple of Vidyāranya according to Thangaswami's

bibliographical survey of Advaita Vedānta literature.150 Potter dates Rāmakrsna to 1375

CE.131 According to Thangaswami, Bhāratītīrtha had two other disciples besides

Vidyāraņya: Brahmānanda-bhāratī who wrote the Vākya-sudhā commentary on the DDV,

and Krsnānanda-bhāratī, who wrote a work called the Mahāvākya-darpana.132 He shows

Vidyāranya, on the other hand, as having three disciples - Krsnānanda-bhāratī,

Brahmānanda-bhāratī, and Rāmakrsna.13 Rāmakrsna is the only disciple of the three

who does not also have Bhāratītīrtha as a guru. His commentary to the PD only mentions

Bharatītīrtha the one time.154 Everywhere else, he refers to the author of the PD as

ācārya.135 If anything, this serves to draw greater attention to his mention of

Bharatītīrtha at the start of his commentary to PD7. This would suggest that Rāmakrsna

was aware that PD7 was authored by Bharatītīrtha, while his guru Vidyaranya wrote the

rest of the PD. There would be no other reason for Ramakrsna to share his guru's

authorship credit with Bhāratītīrtha and every reason to ascribe complete authorship to

Vidyāranya, if he wished to do so. Based on the contemporaneity of Rāmakrsna with

Vidyaranya and Bharatītīrtha, and his direct association with Vidyaranya, I am inclined to

129 Mahadevan (1938), p. 7. 30 pp. 260-61 131 Potter (2005). 32 p. 259: brahmānanda-bhārty-ākhy apara-śișyo'pi bhāratītīrthasya | brahmānanda-bhārtyā drg-drśya- vivekasya vyākhyā krtā | mahāvākya-darpaņa-kārah krsnānanda-bhāratī ca bhāratītīrtha-śişyah | 133 p. 260: vidyāranyah ... krsnānanda-bhāratī-brahmānanda-bhārati-rāmakrsnānām guruh ... See also: guru-śişya-pramparā-vrksah on p. 261. 134 See n. 128 supra. 135 See, for example, the introduction to PD3 and PD8, in Ācārya, pp. 63,283.

27 attach greater significance to the implications of his mention of Bhāratītīrtha at the start

of PD7 than Mahadevan does.

Mahadevan also draws attention to the fact that when, in the JMV, the author refers

to his prior work, the PM, he does so unambiguously, 136 ° whereas when he cites the PD, it

is done neutrally without any allusion to whether the PD too was authored by him. In the

JMV, the author says " ... have been explained in the fourth chapter of the Brahmānanda

[pañcaka, i.e. PD14]."37 There are certainly no metrical constraints inhibiting the author

from inserting "by us" if he so desired. Mahadevan also points out that in the PD itself, a

similar neutral statement is made, " ... have been explained,"158 but the context makes it

clear that what is being referred to is the preceding verse.159 But in the very next verse

we have " ... have been set forth by us in the Trptidīpa [prakarana] (emphasis mine),"140

and the remainder of the chapter is a repetition of verses from PD7.141 Mahadevan

himself suggests that one should not read too much into the use of the phrase "have been

explained" versus "have been explained by us," and he says that "the evidence is

inconclusive ... It is true that such an expression is sometimes used to refer to one's own

earlier work; but it may also be used to refer to a work other than one's own - the work

136 (1969), p. xix. See also n. 55 and the relevant discussion on p. 14 supra. 137 JMV 4.4.1-2: duhkha-nāśa-sukhāvirbhāva-rūpa-caturtha-pañcama-rūpe prayojane vidyānandātmakena brahmānanda-gatena caturthādhyāyena nirūpite | tad ubhayam atra samksipyocyate: This is followed by a citation of BU 4.4.12/PD 7.1/PD 14.5. Dasgupta, v. 2, p. 251, n. 2 also revises his earlier opinion (that the same Vidyaranya wrote the PD and JMV) based on this reference to brahmananda in JMV. 138 PD 14.38: duhkhābhāvaś ca kāmāptir ubhe nirūpite | krta-krtyatvam anyac ca prāpta-prāpyatvam īkșatām || 139 Mahadevan (1969), p. xx. 140 PD 14.39: ubhayam trptidīpe hi samyag asmābhir īritam | ta evātrānusandheyāh ślokā buddhi- viśuddhaye || 141 PD 14.40-64 = PD 7.253-270,291-297.

28 of one's preceptor which is well-known, or of one with whom one is closely

connected."142

There is another possible explanation for such usage. If the dual-authorship theory

of the PD (A2, p. 8) is true, then Mädhava-Vidyäranya, the author of the JMV might have

deliberately chosen to say "have been explained" in order to refer to the portion of the PD

written by his guru, Bhāratītīrtha.143 Whereas, if the second portion of the PD (chapters

7-15) were indeed written by Bharatītīrtha, in PD 14.39144 it would be but natural for him

(Bhäratītīrtha) to refer to his own passages in PD7 by saying " ... have been set forth by

us." Or, if Bhāratītīrtha did indeed write only PD7, as suggested by the evidence in

Rāmakrsna's commentary, then perhaps Vidyāranya is referring in PD 14.39 to both

Bharatītīrtha and himself when he says "by us." Once again, this is merely conjecture

and by no means conclusive evidence, but it does help, in my opinion, to strengthen the

case for the possibility of Mādhava-Vidyāranya's joint authorship of the PD with

Bhāratītīrtha.

142 Mahadevan (1969), p. xix. 143 The PD is cited in four more places in the JMV: 1) JMV 2.3.26 cites PD 7.156, using "ahuh, they said." 2) JMV 2.10.10 cites PD 7.139 (also MB 13.15.3971-2 per Goodding, p. 181, n. 66) using "iti." 3) JMV 2.10.27-29 cites PD 12.65-67, prefaced by "putraviveko brahmānande darśitah, discernement regarding sons is described in the Brahmānanda [pañcaka, PD 11-15]." 4) JMV 5.1.25 cites PD 4.68 (also Muktika Upanișad 2.64, per Goodding, p. 443), prefaced by "tathā ca smaryate, similary, it is mentioned in the Smrti." All four mentions are impersonal, with the exception of the fourth, all the references are within PD 7-15, the section thought to have been authored by the second author of the PD, who would have to be Bhäratītīrtha by my current reasoning. The impersonal reference to the fourth citation, though it falls outside this section, is a smrti reference and thus would not merit "asmābhir uktam/īritam, it was said/set- forth by us." 144 See n. 140 supra.

29 3.7 Textual parallels between the AP and the PD

There is one final piece of evidence to consider. There is the suggestion of

Mādhava-Vidyāranya's authorship of the PD based on inter-textual sharing between the

AP and the PD. Through a by no means complete examination14> of the śloka indices to

both the PD and the AP, I have found a few instances of sharing between these two texts.

Here is a list of the parallels found (the variations are in bold type):

1. PD 2.2: śabda-sparśau rūpa-rasau gandho bhūta-guņā ime eka-dvi-tri-catuh-pañca-gunā vyomādișu kramāt || AP 11.62: śabda-sparśau rūpa-rasau gandho bhūta-guņā ime eka-dvi-tri-catuh-pañca-gunā vyomādayaḥ kramāt

2. PD 2.20: vrksasya svagato bhedah patra-puspa-phalādibhih | vrksāntarāt sajātīyo vijātīyaś śilāditah || AP 3.32: vṛksasya svagato bhedah śākhādy avayavais tathā | vrksāntarāt sajātīyo vijātīyaḥ śilādita ||

3. PD 8.73: yayā yayā bhavet pumsām vyutpattih pratyagātmani sa saiva prakriyeha syāt sādhvīty ācārya-bhāșitam AP 13.108: yayā yayā bhavet pumsām vyutpattih pratyagātmani sa saiva prakriyeha syāt sādhvī sā cānavasthitā | [cf. Sureśvara's works146]

4. PD 11.7: bhidyate hrdaya-granthiś chidyante sarva-samśayāh ksīyante cāsya karmāņi tasmin drste parāvare AP 6.65: bhidyate hrdaya-granthiś chidyante sarva-samśayah ksīyante cāsya karmāņi tasmin drste parāvare || [MU 2.2.8]

5. PD 11.18: sa purāņān pañca vedāñ chāstrāņi vividhāni ca jñātvāpy anātmavittvena nārado 'ti-śuśoca ha | AP 4.2: purāņa-pañcamān vedān śāstrāni vividhāni ca jñātvāpy anātmavittvena nāradāh śokamāptavān || [cf. ChU 7.1.2]

145 The indices on which I base my analysis only provided the beginnings of the ślokas, i.e., pāda-a of a four-part śloka. If the comparison were done on the basis of comparing each pāda of the śloka, more matches might presumably be found. 146 The verse is not in Nais, though.

30 6. PD 11.19: vedābhyāsāt purā tāpa-traya-mātreņa śokitā paścāt tv abhyāsa-vismāra-bhanga-garvaiś ca śokitā || AP 4.3: vedābhyāsāt purā tāpa-traya-mātreņa śokitā| paścāt tv abhyāsa-vismāra-bhanga-garvaiś ca śokitā || [cf. ChU 7.1.3]

7. PD 12.60: vittāt putrah priyah putrāt pindah pindāt tathendriyam | indriyāc ca priyaḥ prāņah prāņād ātmā priyah paraḥ | AP 13.201: vittāt putraḥ priyah putrāt pindah pindāt tathendriyam | indriyebhyah priyah prāņah ātmā priyatamas tataḥ || [cf. BU 1.4.8]

There are also some partial pāda matches:

8. PD 4.7 visphulingā yathā vahner jāyante 'kșaratas tathā vividhāś cij-jadā bhāvā ity ātharvaņikī śruti || AP 14.58 visphulingā yathā cāgner jāyante 'gni-svabhāvataḥ tathā suptātmanau jīvā vijñānamaya-nāmakāh | [cf. MU 2.1.1]

9. PD 11.47 śakunih sūtra-baddhaḥ san diksu vyāprtya viśramam alabdhvā bandhana-sthānam hasta-stambhādy upāśrayet || AP 11.62 śakunih sūtra-baddho yah sa gacchan vividhā disah alabdhvādhāram ākāśe bandhana-sthānam āvrajet || [cf. ChU 6.8.2]

10. PD 2.11ab vāk-pāņi-pāda-pāyūpasthair aksais tat-kriyā-jani | AP 1.75ab vāk-pāņi-pāda-pāyūpasthāh karmendriya-pañcakam |

11. PD 4.4ab kham vāyv-agni-jalor vyosadhy anna-dehāh kramād amī AP 2.32ab kham vāyv-agni-jalor vyosadhy anna-dehesu kāraņam | [cf 2.1.1]

12. PD 6.181ab etasya vā aksarasya praśāsana iti śrutiḥ | AP 13.172ab etasya vā akșarasya śasane saty ado jagat | [BU 3.8.9]

However, these parallels cannot be considered as incontrovertible evidence of

common authorship for two reasons. First, with the exception of three instances, the rest

are all references to śruti passages, and two (nos. 4 and 12) are outright quotations. It is

31 feasible that these passages are standard formulaic references that were commonly

known. Even the three remaining cases might be references to texts that I am not familiar

with, either minor upanisads or secondary literature. Second, even if these were not

commonly occurring passages, it could be argued that two distinct, talented individuals

composing works in the same anustubh metre, referring to the same textual passage or

doctrinal concept, might come up with virtually identical śloka-s, particularly if they

shared the same teaching lineage (as Bhāratītīrtha and Vidyāranya did). 147

Tempering any conjecture with these two counter-explanations, if we were to

persist in supposing that the author of the PD and the AP were the same, how does it

affect the dual-authorship theory (A2, p. 8)?

3.8 Impact of AP-PD parallels on joint-authorship theory (A2)

Even though we have squarely assigned authorship of the AP to Mādhava-

Vidyāranya, we have no idea of the relative chronology of composition, i.e., whether the

PD was composed later than the AP or not. Tradition holds that the PD was composed in

the last few years of Vidyaranya's life, even though no evidence has been offered to

support this.148 Setting aside for the moment the lack of evidence, the AP, being simply a

synopsis of select upanisads, could have been composed earlier than the PD. The PD

may have been composed later to present Vidyāranya's comprehensive overview of

Advaita Vedānta.

147 Both acknowledge Vidyatīrtha as their guru. Vidyātīrtha was also their predecessor as head of Śrngerī Matha. Cf. Table 1, p. 12; nn. 56, 59, 64, 69 et passim and Table 2, p. 19 for Vidyāranya and n. 110 and Table 3, p. 23 for Bhāratītīrtha. Also Thangaswami, p. 261. for a vamśa-vrksah. 148 See for example, the discussion of Jog's opinion on p. 5 supra and also n. 7.

32 Some even hold that the JMV was Vidyāranya's penultimate work and a

supplement to the PD, perhaps intended to be its sixteenth chapter.149 That could make

the PD his last work, which was interrupted by his death and then completed by

Bharatītīrtha (supporting theories A2.6V and A2.10V in section 3.1 supra). There is,

however, a problem with this scenario which puts the JMV's authorship as occuring

before the PD: there are multiple instances where the JMV refers to the PD, specifically

sections from PD chapters 4, 7, 12 and 14.0 This would either require the opposite, that

the PD was written before the JMV, or that at the very least PD7 and PD12 were written

(by either Bhāratītīrtha or Vidyāranya) before the JMV,and that Vidyāranya, as author

of JMV was already planning to organize the PD into three pañcaka-s, and was intending

to name the last pañcaka the brahmānanda pañcaka.152 This would suggest that perhaps

Vidyāranya sketched out an outline for the organization of his PD, wrote at least a couple

of possibly non-sequential chapters for the PD, then setting the unfinished PD aside,

wrote the JMV, after which he resumed the PD, and passed away before completing it.

This seems highly contrived and improbable. The simpler possibility, that the PD was

written before the JMV, is more likely.

Do the shared references between the AP and the PD support the hypothesis that

Bhāratītīrtha completed the PD after Vidyaranya's death? Parallels to the AP are found

149 Kripacaryulu reports this opinion without any references, p. 131: "Scholars already considered [that] the JMV[,] the penultimate work of the same author[,] is a supplement to this work PD as its sixteenth chapter." 150 Cf. nn. 137, 143 supra. 151 The verses referred to from PD4 and PD14 also occur in the Muktika Upanisad and the BU respectively, and thus arguably need not necessarily be PD references. Cf. n 143 supra. 152 JMV 4.4.1 very specifically references the fourth chapter of the Brahmānanda pañcaka, i.e., PD14, before citing BU 4.4.12 which is also PD 14.5 and PD 7.1. Cf. n. 137 supra.

33 in the following prakarana-s of the PD: 2, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12. This would contradict the

theories that Vidyaranya only wrote PD1-6 (theory A2.6V) or PD1-10 (theory A2.10V,

improperly attributed to Niścaladāsa). It is still possible that Bhāratītīrtha wrote only

PD7 (theory A2.B1). There is also the other, more remote possibility, that Bhāratītīrtha

did write either PD1-6 or PD7-15 (theories A2.6B and A2.6V respectively) but was

familiar enough with Vidyāranya's AP to quote from it. Of course, all of the preceding

discussion in this paragraph has been conjecture based upon conjecture. The most we

can say with certainty regarding the data presented by the parallels between the PD and

the AP is that it strengthens the likelihood the same author, Mādhava-Vidyāranya wrote

both the AP and the PD (theory A1) or portions of the PD (particularly theory A2.B1).

3.9 Revised ascription of works to Vidyāraņya and Bhāratītīrtha

Thus, if one were to take Rāmakrsna's references to Bhāratītīrtha at the start of

PD7 more seriously than Mahadevan does, for the reasons discussed above, it would

strengthen the case that Bhäratītīrtha wrote only PD7. The evidence reviewed regarding

the JMV's references to the PD also supports joint authorship of the PD, either that

Bharatītīrtha wrote only PD7 or that he wrote PD7-15, which is far less likely. The

evidence, albeit incomplete, of parallels between Mādhava-Vidyāranya's AP and the PD

examined earlier in section 3.8, p. 31 strongly favors the theory that only the PD7 was

written by Bhāratītīrtha, while Vidyāranya wrote the rest of the prakarana-s. Thus I

would like to propose that we revise our opinion of authorship regarding the PD

accordingly. The assignment of the various texts between Bhāratītīrtha and Vidyāranya

can be revised as follows:

34 Table 4: Works by Vidyāraņya and Bhāratītīrtha

Text Abbr. Author Homage paid to: 1. Parāśara-mādhavīya PaM Mādhava Gajānana, Vidyātīrtha, Bhāratītīrtha, Śrīkantha, Bukkana 2. Kāla-mādhavīya KM Mādhava Gajānana, Vidyātīrtha, Bhāratītīrtha, Śrīkantha, Bukkana 3. Jaiminīya-nyāya-mālā JNM Mādhava Bukkaņa, Vidyātīrtha, Bhāratītīrtha 4. Jīvan-mukti-viveka JMV Vidyāraņya Vidyātīrtha 5. Vivarana-prameya- VPS Bhāratītīrtha* Šankarānanda, sangraha Vidyātīrtha 6. Pañcadaśī PD Vidyāraņya and Śankarānanda, Harihara Bhāratītīrtha (PD7 only) 7. Brhadāranyaka- BVS Vidyāraņya Gajānana vārtika-sāra 8. Anubhūti-prakāśa AP Vidyāraņya Vidyātīrtha 9. Aitareyopanişada- AiUD Vidyāraņya Vidyātīrtha dīpikā 10. Praņava-mīmāmsā PrM Vidyāraņya Gaņeśa, Vidyātīrtha, Bukka 11. Drg-drśya-viveka DDV Bhāratītīrtha* 12. Vaiyāsika-nyāya-mālā VNM Bhāratītīrtha Vidyātīrtha

Authorship marked by * is assigned provisionally.

The VPS and the DDV are provisionally assigned to Bhāratītīrtha, the VPS

primarily on the basis of Appayya Dīksita's explicit attribution of the work to

Bharatītīrtha,153 and the DDV mainly because there is no convincing evidence to counter

its traditional ascription to Bharatītīrtha, and possibly also on stylistic parallel to VPS

153 See n. 119 supra. 154 Venimadhava Shastri, p. 116 makes a case for attributing the DDV to Vidyāranya based on Appaya Dīkșita's reference to the DDV in SLS 2.3.4112: advaita-vidyā-krtas tu pratibimbasya mithyātvam abhyupagacchatām trividha-jīva-vādinām vidyāranya-guru-prabhrtinām ... Venimadhava Shastri says, "And the three types of self is the thesis found in DDV only." He is referring to DDV 32: avacchinnaś cidābhāsas trtīyah svapna-kalpitaḥ | vijñeyas tri-vidho jīvas tatrādyaḥ pāramārthikah || This is a tenuous argument, because a) this concept is not exclusive to Vidyāranya and b) there is no reason why Vidyāranya could not refer to ideas in Bhāratītīrtha's work (the DDV).

35 with regard to brevity. More work is needed to definitively settle issues of authorship

regarding these texts.

In the preceding analysis, I have restricted myself primarily to analyzing the

opening and closing invocations, purposefully choosing not to consider the evidence of

the colophons, as their authenticity is often tenuous - perhaps inserted by scribes at some

later point in time rather than by the authors themselves. A more thorough analysis

would, of course, have to consider the coherency of the content of these various texts. I

have attempted to do so, albeit to a very limited extent, in section 3.7 supra, where the

parallels between the PD and the AP were explored, and in chapter 6, "Extra-textual

Context of PD7" infra, where I shall compare the context of PD7 to the context of BU

4.4.12, its commentary BUSBh and the corresponding section in the BVS.

Lastly, there are five texts often ascribed to Mādhava-Vidyāranya which I have not

considered in this discussion. One is the Sankara-digvijaya (SDV), which is almost

certainly a later text.15 The commentary Tātparya-dīpikā on the Sūta-samhita is also not

by our Mādhava-Vidyāranya but instead by Mādhavamantrin (M2).156 Then there is the

Dhātu-vrtti (DV), whose authorship by Mādhava is also uncertain.157 The Sangīta-sāra is

155 For example, Upādhyāya, pp. 153-5. Thangaswami, p. 263: grantho'yam na vidyāranya-krtih | parantu abhinava-kālidāsa-krtir iti siddhāntah | Also cf. n. 27 supra. 156 See, for example, S. S. Janaki's "Madhava, the Commentator on Suta Samhita" in Jagannadham et al, pp. 79-84; Srikantaya, pp. 152-5. Cf. n. 25 supra. 157 For example, Srikantaya, pp. 147-8. The opening invocatory verse to this text actually is the same as seen earlier in the PaM, KM and BVS (nn. 58, 83): DV 1: vāgīšādyāh sumanasaḥ sarvārthānām upakrame yam natvā krta-krtyāh syus tam namāmi gajānanam || Further along, there is a verse (v. 7) mentioning Māyaņa-sāyana, minister of King Sangama. In vv. 12-13 the text is named the mādhavīya-dhātu-vrtti and the author is given as Sāyana, son of Māyana. Kripacharyulu, pp. 85-9 also assigns the authorship to Sāyana. The issue of shared authorship of works by Sāyana and Mādhava is also a complex issue and one that I've deliberately side-stepped in this present work. Cf. nn. 56, 58 supra.

36 a work on music attributed to Vidyāranya, but is not extant.158 There is also a

commentary or dīpikā on an Advaita text reputedly by Sankara himself, the

Aparokşānubhūti. It is a non-metrical work and its attribution to Vidyāraņya is in

doubt. 159

We now have a clearer understanding of the authorship issues as well as some

evidence in favor of joint authorship of the Pañcadasi, suggesting that Vidyāranya may

have written all of it except for the Trptidipa- prakarana, (PD7). I have suggested that

PD7 was authored by Bhāratītīrtha, Vidyāranya's guru and predecessor at Srngeri. Is this

conclusion supported by the text itself? Can we detect any divergence either in literary

style or in doctrinal content between PD7 and the rest of the text? In order to explore this

facet of the issue, I shall first present a chapter-by-chapter overview of the ideas treated

by the Pañcadaśī in chapter 4, "A Synopsis of the Pañcadaśī." This will set the stage for

chapter 5, "A Closer Look at Trptidīpa-Prakarana, PD7."

158 Kripacharyulu, pp. 157-8; Upādhyāya, pp. 158-9; P. S. Sundaram Iyer, "Sri Vidyaranya and Music" in Karmarkar et al., pp. 333-342 159 Belvalkar, p. 226, n. 1: "The editor [of Sankara's Misc. Works, Mysore, 1898] is not sure about the ascription of the com. to Vidyāranya. Even the original work [the Aparoksānubhūti] does not rise above the common place, and may have been an early work of the Ācārya [Śankara]."

37 4. A Synopsis of the Pañcadaśī

4.1 Tattvavivekah - Discrimination of Reality

This chapter introduces the subject matter of this text, namely reality, tattva which

is brahman. The nature of one's experience in the waking, dreaming and deep-sleep

states is examined, showing that consciousness is common to all three states. This

consciousness is our true Self, ätman, of the nature of sat-cit-ānanda, existence-

consciousness-bliss, which is identical to brahman, as taught in the upanisads. Yet one

does not live with this awareness of atman/brahman and is instead attracted to objects

and experiences duality. The cause of this contrary experience is beginningless

ignorance, avidyā. Avidyā, māyā (illusion),160 īśvara (the creator) and jīva (the

individual) are analyzed in terms of prakrti and its constituent gunas, namely sattva,

goodness, rajas, passion and tamas, inertia.161 The jiva is also described as consisting of

three bodies, śarīras or five sheaths, kośas (PD3). By differentiating the Self from the

three bodies or the five sheaths, one is able to recognize the identity of the jīva with

brahman through reasoning, yukti. Sravana is defined as the investigation of this identity

through the mahāvākyas, upanișadic utterances and manana, exploring the validity of this

identity by means of logical reasoning. Through śravana and manana, one can then

achieve nididhyāsana, unbroken meditation, described as single-pointedly dwelling on

brahman without any doubts.162 This then leads to samadhi, a state of the mind where

one's identity as meditator, the effort of meditation and the object being meditated on all

160 "Illusion" for māyā is a provisional translation. The term māyā also connotes unreality, falseness, magic, mysterious power. Henceforth, the Sanskrit term will be used.

162 PD 1.52-53 161 The translation of these terms is limited and the original Sanskrit terms will be used instead.

38 merge. This neutralizes obstacles and leads to direct realization of self-knowledge,

aparoksātma-vijñāna, which leads to immediate freedom from bondage. In effect, this

chapter serves to introduce the aspects of self-realization that will be elaborated in detail

in the remaining fourteen chapters.

4.2 Pañcamahābhūtavivekah - Discrimination of the Five Elements

To know the non-dual reality brahman, one must know what it is not. To that end

the five elements, their properties and relationship to the senses, the mind, and organs of

action are considered here. Sat, being is other than all these and is relationless, without

any svagata, sajātīya and vijātīya bheda-s, differences within itself, between members of

the same species, and with members from other species. Nor is sat non-existent, śūnya

(as claimed by the Buddhists). The world as we empirically see it is a creation of māyā,

which is neither sat nor śūnya.163 Māyā is a power that is mithyā, apparent and creates

illusory modifications with brahman as its basis. The one who understands that the

appearance of duality is due to māyā and is illusory and unreal, knows that reality is non-

dual. When one is firmly rooted in this understanding of non-duality, one becomes

jīvanmukta, liberated while still alive.

4.3 Pañcakośavivekah - Discrimination of the Five Sheaths

The five-sheath model of the human body presented by the TU is taken up with a

view to differentiating these from brahman/atman. Each kośa, sheath, envelops the next

one, proceeding from the gross to subtler versions. The annamayakośa is the physical

163 PD 2.49

39 body constituted by food. Within it is the prānamayakośa, the sheath composed of the

vital airs. Next are the manomayakośa and the vijñānamayakośa, the mental and

intellectual sheaths respectively. Innermost is the ānandamayakośa, the sheath of bliss.

None of these are the ätman, since they are either devoid of consciousness (the first two

kośas), or changing (the next two) or temporary (ānandamayakośa), whereas the ātman is

eternal and the source of all joy.164 Having concluded that none of these kośas is ātman,

the nature of atman is taken up by the rest of the chapter. Atman is brahman, not limited

by space, time or objects. Iśvara, the creator is the superimposition on brahman due to

māyā; jīva, the individual is the superimposition on brahman due to avidya.165 Knowing

brahman to be thus, one becomes brahman and is free from rebirth.

4.4 Dvaitavivekah - Discrimination of Duality

This chapter explores the extent of duality created by īśvara and jīva so that it may

be understood and overcome. Māya is the creative power of īśvara. The world and jīva-s

are created by īśvara, as affirmed by various Upanișads. Māyā also has the power to

delude the jīva into forgetting that its true nature is brahman; the jīva instead identifies

with the body and therefore is subject to grief. Objects are created by īśvara, but jīva

also creates, by converting these into objects of enjoyment. Different jīva-s relate to the

same object differently as conditioned by their respective mental states. There is a

mentally modified version of the material object to which the jīva relates - it is this

version that causes the jīva pleasure and pain. Thus the duality created by the jīva is

binding, whereas īśvara's duality simply is the substratum on which jīva's duality is

164 PD 3.10 165 PD 3.37

40 projected. The tendency to mentally dwell on objects can be overcome by meditation on

brahman. By gaining control of the mind through understanding of the nature of

brahman, one knows that the objects are not real and is freed from the modifications of

the mind such as attachment, desire, anger, etc. Then one knows oneself to be brahman.

4.5 Mahāvākyavivekaḥ - Discrimination of the Great Utterances

This brief chapter (8 verses) explains the meaning of the four mahāvākyas of the

Upanișads: prajñānam brahma, consciousness is brahman (AiU 3.1.1), aham

brahmāsmi, I am brahman (BU 1.4.10), tat tvam asi, you are that (ChU 6.8.7) and ayam

ātmā brahma, this Self is brahman (MāU 2). All express the identity of ātman and

brahman.

4.6 Citradīpah - Light of the Picture166

This chapter starts by drawing an analogy between the superimposition of empirical

reality on brahman and a painting on a canvas. Atman/brahman is at various times

referred to as kūtastha, īśvara, cidātmā, jīva, and the different terms and their

interrelationship, as well as the superimposition of jīva on kūtastha is explained. Various

opposing theories from other philosophical schools regarding where ātman resides as

well as the nature of īśvara and jīva-s are presented and refuted. According to śruti,

ātman is infinite, without parts and all-pervading; īśvara is the lord of māyā, prakrti and

the guna-s, and the antaryamin, the inner controller. Jiva-s are only bound on account of

166 In the dīpa-pañcakam, the nature of the chapter title samāsa is ambiguous; it can be treated as either a șasthī tatpurușa, "Lamp/light of ... " or a saptamī tatpurușa, "Light on ... ". I've chosen the former in keeping with the analysis of the remaining pañcakas as sasthī tatpurusas as well, viveka-pañcaka = "Discrimination of ... " and ānanda-pañcaka = "Bliss of ... ".

41 their ignorance. Māyā is neither sat nor asat, but inexplicable, anirvācya. Yet from a

worldly standpoint, it is quite real. Without affecting brahman, māyā transforms it into

īśvara, the jīva-s and the creation, like a magician putting on a convincing show.

Inconceivable entities like māyā cannot be dealt with by logic.16 Māyā as a reflection of

ātman appears as īśvara and the jīva-s. However, īśvara controls māyā whereas the jīva

is but a fraction of īśvara and is controlled by māyā. Instead of being distracted by the

relative natures of īśvara and jīva, it is most important to understand brahman. Even

bondage and release are ultimately illusory, being caused by māyā. Kūtastha and

brahman differ in name alone." 168 Duality is caused by māya; by the negation of duality,

one is left with non-duality, free from all ills. The unreality of duality cannot be arrived

at by logic alone, it has to be directly perceived. Once one disidentifies with the I-notion,

ahankāra, desires and diseases cease to bind. The knot of ignorance is cut and one no

longer mistakes the ahankāra to be ātman. Knowledge of reality is the direct cause of

liberation. Detachment, vairāgya and withdrawal from action, uparama assist in the

arising of knowledge. Sravana, manana and nididhyāsana (PD1) are the cause of the

knowledge of reality. The nature of this knowledge is the discrimination between the real

and the unreal, and prevents the knot of ignorance from ever arising again.

4.7 Trptidipah - Light of Contentment

This prakarana begins by quoting Brhadāraņyaka Upanișad (BU) 4.4.12, which is

then analyzed in detail in the remainder of the prakarana with the goal of explaining the

167 PD 6.150 168 PD 6.237

42 contentment, trpti of one who is liberated while living, jīvanmukta.169 This prakarana is

the focus of this thesis and will be explored in greater detail shortly in chapter 5, "A

Closer Look at Trptidīpa-Prakarana, PD7."

4.8 Kutasthadīpah - Light of the Kūțastha

The relationship between the kūtastha, the unchangeable (brahman) and the

cidābhāsa, reflected consciousness is explained here. Their roles in cognition are

analyzed and the difference between the two is explained. Kūtastha brahman is not the

cidābhāsa but rather the basis for it. The relationship between the kūtastha, cidābhāsa

and the locus (of cidābhāsa, i.e., the mind, antahkarana) is compared to the relationship

between the face, its reflection and the mirror. The association between an embodied,

limited and changing jīva and immutable brahman is explained to be one of

superimposition based on avidya; actually they are identical. From the perspective of the

kūtastha, there is no creation or destruction, bondage or liberation. The śruti conveys this

reality, which is beyond words and the mind, in terms of jīva, īśvara and jagat, the world

4.9 Dhyānadīpah - Light of Meditation

In earlier chapters (PD1, PD6, PD7), śravana, manana, and nididhyāsana were

presented as the means to knowing brahman. For those who are not capable of these, the

method of dhyāna, meditation is offered here as a subordinate means. Even though one

is ignorant of the true nature of brahman and worships it in the form of deities, this can

still lead to proper knowledge via paroksa, indirect or mediate knowledge. Such paroksa

169 PD 7.2: asyāḥ śruter abhiprāyah samyag atra vicāryate | jīvanmuktasya yā trptih sā tena višadāyate || 170 PD 8.26

43 knowledge is gained through study of the śāstras, scriptures. Direct, aparoksa

knowledge of brahman is only achieved through vicāra, enquiry. There are three kinds

of obstructions to vicāra - past, present and future, which are described. But no vicāra is

in vain - either in the present birth or in some future birth, all impediments will be

removed through vicara and one will eventually gain aparoksa knowledge. For those not

able to practice vicāra due to such obstacles, upāsana, meditation on brahman, saguna or

nirguna, with or without attributes, is prescribed. Nirgūna upāsana is held to be superior

since it is closest to the goal, brahman. The relationship between meditation and

knowledge is discussed at length. Meditation, bhāvanā should be engaged in constantly

since it results in the meditator feeling identity with brahman. This feeling however

ceases when meditation, dhyana ceases. The attitude towards the world of one who is

one-pointed in meditation and the states of samādhi and nirodha are described. "The one

who sees enquiry (sāmkhya) and meditation (yoga) as one, he truly knows."171

Ultimately, meditation helps one to overcome one's doubts, to dissociate from the body,

to see the difference between ātman and anātman and to realize brahman directly.

4.10 Nāțakadīpah - Light of the Theatre

Here ätman or consciousness, cit is presented as the witness, sāksin to the agent, the

action and the various objects. It is likened to a lamp in a theatre which equally reveals

the patron (ego, ahankāra), the audience (sense objects, visaya), the dancer (intellect, he musicians (sense mati) and the musicians (sense organs). Even when these are not present, the lamp

(consciousness) continues to shine. Divisions of "internal" and "external," "object" and

171 PD 9.134, also BG 5.5

44 "perceiver" are only possible with reference to the mind and the body, but the witness

consciousness is neither internal nor external - it is all-pervading, beyond words, the

mind, and means of knowledge. It is self-luminous, and to know it one must study the

śruti from a teacher (śravana), reflect on the teachings intellectually (manana) and

understand (through nididhyāsana) the internal and external creations to be based on the

witness-consciousness.

4.11 Yogānandah - Bliss of Yoga

The remaining five chapters describe the ananda, bliss resulting from the

knowledge of brahman. Ananda is said to be of three kinds - 1. brahmānanda, the bliss

of brahman, 2. the bliss born of knowledge, vidyāsukha and 3. the bliss created by sense

objects, vişayānanda. This chapter and the next two describe brahmānanda. Deep sleep

is presented as an example of the ananda directly experienced as arising from non-

duality. The ignorance prevailing in this state, the ānandamaya kośa, is discussed. The

mind and intellect are latent during deep sleep. The bliss known in the absence of objects

is an impression, vāsanā of brahmānanda. 2 So we have yet another three-way

classification of ānanda - 1. brahmānanda, 2. vāsanānanda, the bliss arising due to

impressions of brahmānanda, and 3. visayānanda, the bliss from objects. The latter two

are dependent on the first. Vasanānanda is also experienced via the ego during the

waking state during detached intervals between pleasure and pain. Through practice of

yoga, concentration, one forgets the ego and increasingly experiences non-dual

brahmānanda while not asleep. Yoga is defined as the dissociation from connection with

172 PD 11.85

45 suffering.173 Such practice is likened to baling out the ocean drop by drop with a blade of

grass, and to starving a fire of fuel. But even a brief glimpse of brahmānanda motivates

one to strive for it ceaselessly. Once attained, one is ever present in brahmānanda, even

while engaged in worldly tasks. One is able to enjoy both brahmānanda and worldly

ānanda like a person who knows two languages. One is no longer affected by suffering.

And since one dreams of what one experiences while awake, even in one's dreams there

is brahmānanda. Thus there is brahmānanda in waking, dream and deep sleep.

4.12 Atmānandaḥ - Bliss of the Self

In contrast to the previous chapter which dealt with brahmananda with regard to

those capable of concentration, the present chapter concerns the experience of ānanda by

ignorant, mūdha and (spiritually) dull, mandaprajña persons. Such persons are to be

shown that one does not love other persons or objects for their sake but for one's own

sake. Therefore the atman alone is the real goal of one's love. This love is other than

rāga, passionate love, śraddhā, pious faith, bhakti, devotion to deities and icchā, desire.

The love of ätman is independent of all these emotions and their objects. Then what is

one to make of śruti statements which equate ātman to the son (KauU 2.11, BU 1.5.17

etc)? These are figurative, gauna statements. The term ätman can be mentioned in either

the figurative, illusory (mithyā) or primary (mukhya) sense. The love for atman is always

greatest with regard to the primary sense; towards that which is dependent, the love is

moderate and towards what is not ätman, there is either disregard or hatred. Through

discrimination, one learns to see the witness as ätman and not anything else. One who

173 PD 11.85, also BG 6.23ab: tam vidyād duhkha-samyoga-viyogam yogasamjñitam |

46 loves something other than atman only experiences suffering. But the ātman is

indestructible, the source of highest bliss - as the love for ātman increases, ānanda

increases. So long as one arrives at this knowledge, whether one does so through

concentration, yoga or discrimination, viveka is immaterial.

4.13 Advaitanandaḥ - Bliss of Non-duality

The previous two chapters dealt with brahmānanda (attained through yoga) and

ātmānanda (attained through viveka). This chapter presents the non-duality of brahman

and equates the earlier two types of ananda. The world is mere appearance of change,

vivarta in the non-dual ānanda brought about by māyā, the indescribable power of

brahman. This power does not exist apart from brahman, yet is not identical to it. If it

were identical to brahman, in the absence of māyā, there would be no brahman either.

The power of māya is different from its effect and also from its substratum, it is beyond

thought and description. As an analogy, a pot (the effect) and clay (its substratum) are

both other than the power that created the pot. Yet the pot is not different from the clay,

nor is it identical to clay - it is not visible in the clay state, but its potential to be is

implicit in the clay, and it cannot be separated from clay once formed. The pot as a

product of power when not perceptible is indescribable; when perceptible, it is a pot.

Similarly, products of māyā are considered unreal; reality is only possible for that which

is the substrate of māyā, brahman, just like clay for the pot. The substrate and its

manifest effect exist by turns, while the unmanifest power persists at all times. The

substrate is real, unchanged and indestructible at all times while the manifest effect has a

name and form. Name and form are both unreal as they are subject to creation and

47 destruction. Liberation is achieved by knowledge of the unreality of the world, which is

a manifest effect superimposed on the substrate, brahman. By knowing one lump of

clay, one effectively knows the nature of all objects made of clay; similarly by knowing

brahman, one knows the nature of the entire phenomenal world. In the steady natural

bliss of the Self, there is no duality, no name and form, nor creation and destruction.

Through the continuous practice, abhyasa of brahman, one is liberated even while living.

When the worldly objects are disregarded, the mind is freed of obstacles and abides in

brahman, no longer affected by the worldly effects.

4.14 Vidyānandaḥ - Bliss of Knowledge

The bliss arising from knowledge of brahman is a modification of the intellect, dhī.

It has four aspects: the absence of sorrow, the fulfillment of all desires, the feeling that all

that is to be done has been done, and the feeling that all that is to be obtained has been

obtained. BU 4.4.12, with which PD7 began, is restated here, and its insights are

reiterated. Suffering persists as long as one identifies with the body and the jīva; the

atman does not suffer. Desire too is only for one who considers objects of enjoyment to

be real, but the knower of non-duality has no desire for or attachment to anything. Even

worries regarding the future cease as the store of all future actions, sañcita-karman ceases

to exist with knowledge of brahman, and there is no further rebirth. The bliss of ātman is

unsurpassed and beyond the bliss of all other stations or attainments, worldly or

otherwise. Until one knows oneself to be the witness, sāksin, one doesn't experience any

satisfaction. The chapter concludes by repeating twenty-five verses from chapter 7 (vv.

48 253-270, 291-297) describing the nature of the perfect satisfaction of one who knows

brahman.

4.15 Vişayānandah - Bliss of Objects

Lastly the bliss experienced through sense objects is described. Though it is only a

reflection of a fraction of the bliss of brahman, the visayānanda functions as a door into

brahmānanda. Atman, though non-dual, exists in every being. If there is a prevalence of

rājasika and tamasika vrtti-s of the mind, the bliss of brahman is obscured while the

consciousness, cit aspect is reflected. When sāttvika vrtti-s predominate, both

consciousness and bliss are manifested. Desires when fulfilled usually provide

happiness; however, when thwarted, there is grief, anger and hatred. This is due to rajas

and tamas. However, the greatest happiness results when one is dispassionate, virakta, as

seen in previous chapter. There is a continuum of manifestation of brahman's sat, cit and

ānanda: objects only possess sat, existence, while rājasika and tāmasika vrtti-s manifest

sat and cit, and sāttivika vrtti-s manifest all three attributes, guņa-s. Māyā manifests

objects and takes three forms: 1. non-existence or absence of sat, 2. inertness or absence

of cit, and 3. sorrow or absence of ananda. To get to know brahman, one must ignore

non-existent objects and contemplate the inert objects by rejecting their name and form

(PD13) and focusing on their sat-aspect. Similarly, one must contemplate the rājasika

and tāmasika vrtti-s by rejecting the sorrow associated with them and instead focusing on

their sat and cit aspects. The most superior contemplation is on sāttvika vrtti-s where one

focuses on all three aspects of brahman. These three forms of contemplation are

intended for those who are dull, manda, and engaged in worldly affairs. Eventually,

49 through the development of indifference to objects, an even higher form of contemplation

arises focusing on the bliss of impressions, vāsanānanda (discussed in PD11). These

four types of meditation involve both yoga and knowledge, jñāna, and thus provide

knowledge of brahman itself. Through one-pointed meditation, this knowledge becomes

steady and one knows sat, cit, and ānanda not individually but as a single indivisible

essence. In fact, the knower-known-knowledge distinctions cease and there is an

abundance of bliss, bhumānanda.

50 5. A Closer Look at Trptidīpa-Prakaraņa, PD7

Now that we've examined the rest of the PD, let us take a detailed look at PD7, the

Trptidīpa-prakarana, paying attention to concepts also treated in other chapters. PD7 is

composed of 298 anustubh śloka-s, making it the longest of the fifteen chapters in the

PD. As mentioned earlier, the goal of PD7 is to elucidate the contentment, trpti of one

who is liberated while living, jīvanmukta, by analyzing BU 4.4.12 in detail.174 BU 4.4.12

states: ātmānam ced vijānīyād ayam asmīti pūrusah | kim icchan kasya kāmāya śarīram

anusamjvaret || "If a person truly knows the self, ātman, as 'I am this,' desiring what,

and for the love of whom (or what) would (s)he suffer on account of the body?"

PD 7.3-6 present the meaning of pūrusa, followed by vv. 7-18 discussing the

meaning of aham asmi, and 19-22 the meaning of ayam in the śruti-vākya PD 7.1/BU

4.4.12. In the process the terms cidābhāsa, "reflected consciousness" and kūtastha,

"immutable consciousness" or brahman, are both introduced as secondary senses of the

word aham. Paroksa- and aparoksa-jñāna, "indirect" and "direct knowledge" are also

introduced. Vv. 23-27 introduce the "tenth man" allegory to illustrate how, despite the

potential for direct knowledge of the self being ever-present, one can still have a

mistaken sense regarding oneself. The indirect knowledge of brahman which is signified

by ayam alleviates suffering, but with direct knowledge the cause for suffering itself is

eliminated. This section briefly alludes to portions of PD1 (māya's relationship with

īśvara and jīva), PD2 (the nature of creation, srsti), PD6 and PD8 (kūtastha and

cidābhāsa) and PD12 (three senses of the term ātman).

174 PD 7.2: asyāḥ śruter abhiprāya samyag atra vicāryate | jīvanmuktasya yā trptih sā tena višadāyate |

51 In vv. 28-84, the seven stages of self-knowledge are discussed: 1. ajñāna,

ignorance, 2. āvrti, covering, 3. viksepa, superimposition, 4. paroksa-jñāna, indirect

knowledge, 5. aparoksa-jñāna, direct knowledge, 6. śoka-apagama, the cessation of

affliction, and 7. trpti, contentment. The first three are considered the cause of bondage

and the remaining four are causes of liberation. BU 4.4.12 refers to two of these stages,

direct knowledge as in "I am this (brahman)" and the cessation of affliction. The

difference between paroksa and aparoksa knowledge is discussed (48-84, and features of

the tenth-man allegory are used to illustrate the distinction between the two (57-60.

Paroksa and aparoksa knowledge are also discussed in PD9. In PD2, māyā's ability to

obscure non-dual reality is examined through the analysis of the five elements.

In vv. 83-96, the differences between jīva and brahman are discussed along with the

nature of direct knowledge produced. Vv. 97-135 consider the need for repeated study,

abhyāsa to be performed by means of śravana, listening, manana, reflection and

nididhyāsana, deep meditation for the sake of strengthening the direct knowledge

produced by the mahāvākyas. These topics were also introduced in PD1 and again

alluded to in PD6. The entire (albeit short, 8 vv.) PD5, mahāvākyaviveka is devoted to

the four mahāvākyas. PD9, dhyānadīpa is devoted to the practice of meditation. The

practice of yoga, concentration on atman is also treated in PD11, yogānanda while

viveka, discrimination is treated in PD12, ātmānanda.

There is a fourth process to be performed after śravana, manana and nididhyāsana

have been perfected: samädhi, where the meditator-meditation difference dissolves.175

175 PD 1.55: dhyātr-dhyāne parityajya kramād dhyeyakagocaram abhidhīyate | nivāta-dīpavac-cittam samādhir

52 Though samādhi is not explicitly mentioned as a practice in PD7, one can infer its utility

in attaining aparoksa-jnāna.176 PD1 and PD9 refer to samādhi explicitly.

Then in vv. 136-142, the meaning of kim icchan, "desiring what" is considered. On

realizing the deficiency in objects of pleasure, one's desire for pleasure goes away. Vv.

143-191 discuss desires arising due to prārabdha karman which is of three varieties:

1. icchā-, causing enjoyments with desire, 2. anicchā-, causing enjoyments without

desire, and 3. parecchā-prārabdha, causing enjoyments through the desire of others.

The wise person spontaneously enjoys the fruits of such karman without being bound by

their karmic results. Even desires that arise for such an individual are like roasted seeds

that are nourishing but do not have the potential to bear fruit anymore. The wise

recognize duality in order to teach in much the way one derives enjoyment from a magic

show while still knowing it to be an illusion. Due to self-knowledge, any desires that

arise for the wise are non-binding. The nature of objects and desire is also discussed in

PD4 and PD6, and treated at length in PD15, visayānandah. PD10 presents ātman as a

sāksin, witness to a play, tranquilly relating to all objects without being affected by them.

Next, vv. 192-221 elaborate on the meaning of kasya kāmāya, regarding

enjoyership in light of the falsity, mithyātva of the world. The self as cidābhāsa is

subject to change, but as kūtastha is neither a doer nor an enjoyer. The afflictions

produced due to desire for pleasure have no effect. Thus one is exhorted to devote

oneself to gaining this self-knowledge and to strengthening it. Vv. 222-251 then go on to

176 For instance, PD 7.265: viksepo nāsti yasmān me samādhis tato mama | vikșepo vā samādhir vā manasaḥ syād vikārinah |

kārya-kṛt || 177 PD 7.164: bharjitāni tu bījāni santy akārya-karāņi ca | vidvad-icchā tathestavyā 'sattva-bodhān na

53 consider the absence of bodily afflictions for a knower of brahman by way of examining

the nature of afflictions in the three śarīras, bodies, namely sthūla-, gross physical,

sūkma-, subtle and kārana-, causal. Once again, by means of the tenth-man story, the

nature of affliction is illustrated. Though the understanding of one's self-nature may

occur instantaneously, overcoming one's prārabdha karman and the habit of identifying

with one's body might take a while (247,50), but one does eventually "heal," i.e.,

suffering/affliction ceases when identification with the body ceases. The nature of the

body was also treated in PD1 (in terms of the sthūla, sūksma and kāraņa śarīras) and in

terms of the pañca kośas in PD3.

Once released from suffering, one enters the final of the seven stages, trpti,

satisfaction. Vv. 251-298 describe the state of unlimited satisfaction for a knower of

brahman and his/her conduct in the midst of those who are still ignorant of their true

nature. All that was to be achieved has already been achieved, nothing more remains to

be done, not even śravana, manana, nididhyāsana or samādhi, since one already

knows oneself to be brahman. The wise one can act or remain actionless - one's firm,

unshakeable self-knowledge is not affected or obstructed by this - one is ever free from

suffering. The body will persist as long as there are prrabdha karma-s to be exhausted,

but their results do not affect the limitless self, brahman (262-3). The ānanda-pañcaka,

PD11-15 also exhaustively describes the nature of bliss resulting from the knowledge of

brahman. In fact, PD 14.40-67 are identical to PD 7.253-270, 7.291-297.

178 PD 7.247: śirovranas tu māsena śanaih śāmyati ... 179 PD 7.252: ... krtam krtyam prāpanīyam prāptam ity eva trpyati ||

54 Thus we can see that in the process of expanding on the śruti-vākya BU 4.4.12, PD7

touched upon topics covered throughout the rest of the PD in varying degrees of detail.

While there is no apparent divergence in content between the PD7 and the rest of the text

to suggest a change in authorship, this does not necessarily mean that there was no

change in authorship. The two authors could very well have been in agreement regarding

their doctrinal views. Bhāratītīrtha was after all, one of Vidyāranya's gurus and they both

share Vidyātīrtha as a teacher as well.

The PD7 serves as an overarching review of the entire text, outlining the entire

trajectory of an individual from ignorance through contentment resulting from

enlightenment through the intervening five stages (āvrti, viksepa, paroksa-jñāna,

aparoksa-jñāna and śoka-apagama). Also woven in are the means for attaining this

knowledge of one's true advaita nature, assurances that there is no backsliding and

descriptions of what it is like to function in the world after liberation.

PD7 in effect provides us a condensed representation of the life cycle of a mumuksu

(seeker of liberation), within which we can examine select Advaita issues to understand

the interaction between the epistemological, metaphysical and praxeological aspects of

the system. It provides us a microcosm within which we can explore aspects of Advaita

praxis such as the means advocated for knowing brahman and achieving jīvanmukti.

(Such aspects are generally implicit to any given text and not typically treated

independently. I plan to research this in a future work). We are also afforded a forum for

investigating innovations made by Vidyāraņya and Bhāratītīrtha on Sankara's system of

Advaita, if any. Before that task is undertaken in chapter 8, "Vidyāranya's Contributions

55 to and Innovations in Advaita Vedānta," we need to complete our contextual analysis of

PD7 by comparing its context to the context of BU 4.4.12, its BUŚBh and the

corresponding section in the BVS. We now turn to the analysis of the PD7's extra-

textual context.

56 6. Extra-textual Context of PD7

In chapter 5, "A Closer Look at Trptidīpa-Prakarana, PD7," we saw how

Bhāratītīrtha's Trptidīpa-prakarana-, the seventh chapter of the Pañcadasī (PD) starts

with the śruti-vākya, BU 4.4.12. Now, let's take a look at:

1. The context of BU 4.4.12 within the Brhadāranyaka Upanisad (BU),

2. Sankarācārya's bhāsya (BUŠBh) on BU 4.4.12, and

3. Vidyāraņya's Brhadāranyaka-vārtika-sāra (BVS) on BU 4.4.12 accompanied väranya" by Maheśvaratīrtha's Laghusangraha on the same.

This will then enable us to examine the similarities and differences, if any, among

Sankara, Vidyāranya in the BVS, Vidyāranya and Bhāratītīrtha in the PD and the

author(s) of the BU.

6.1 The context of BU 4.4.12 within the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad

The BU is considered the oldest of the Upanisads, based on linguistic evidence. It

is divided into three kāndas, sections. The first, Madhu-kānda "conveys the main

teaching of the Advaita doctrine and is of the nature of upadeśa", instruction. The

second, Yājñavalkya- or Muni-kānda, wherein BU 4.4.12 occurs, "embodies the logical

argument and explanation showing the soundness of the upadesa." The third, Khila-

kāņda "deals with certain upāsanas or modes of meditation." It is the Yājñavalkya-

kānda's context which is primarily relevant for this discussion. It comprises two

adhyāyas, chapters (3-4), each further subdivided into brāhmaņas. In the third adhyāya,

180 Mādhavānanda (1988), p. xii.

57 the jalpa style of argumentation181 is employed by Yājñavalkya to gain victory over

various opponents and to elucidate the nature of brahman and atman in the process.

In the fourth adhyaya, King Janaka, in whose assembly the debates of the third

adhyāya had taken place, is asked by Yājñavalkya to tell him what he has learned from

various teachers. Yajñavalkya dismisses the teachings of each teacher that Janaka relates

as obvious182 and incomplete, and is then asked by Janaka to complete the picture.

Eventually Janaka explicitly asks Yājñavalkya to teach him (4.2.1) and Yājñavalkya's

response culminates in the famous statement by Yājñavalkya that all one can say about

this atman is "neti, neti."184

In 4.3, Yājñavalkya doesn't wish to say anything, but Janaka calls in a boon granted

him earlier by Yājñavalkya to ask him any question he (Janaka) wished. Janaka asks,

"What is the (source of) light for a person here?"1> Yājñavalkya's answer is that it is the

self, ätman (4.3.6). He goes on to discuss how the self "travels" between the realms of

dream and wakefulness (4.3.9-18). Deep sleep is the state where the self has no desires

and sees no dreams (4.3.19). "The person embraced by the self consisting of knowledge

is oblivious to everything within or without."186 ... "There isn't a second (reality) here

that he could see as something distinct and separate from himself."187 "This, O King,

is the world of brahman."1 After the glory of brahman has been extolled, Janaka still

181 jalpa - "a kind of disputation (overbearing reply and disputed rejoinder)", MW, s.v. 182 BU 4.1.2: Yathā mātrmān pitrmān ācāryavān brūyāt tathā ... 183 BU 4.1.2: eka-pād vā etat ... 184 See n. 197. 185 BU 4.3.2: kimjyotir ayam purusa iti | 186 BU 4.3.21: ... ayam purusah prājñenātmanā samparisvakto na bāhyam kimcana veda nāntaram | 187 BU 4.3.23: ... na tu tad dvitīyam asti tato 'nyad vibhaktam yat paśyet 188 BU 4.3.32: ... eșa brahmalokah samrāt |

58 wants to know more, much to Yājñavalkya's chagrin.189 He then launches into a

description of transmigration (4.3.34-38) which is continued in the next brāhmana (4.4).

The deterioration of the vital breath, prana is described, leading to the withdrawal

of the atman from the old body to a new one. "This non-corporeal and immortal prāna is

nothing but brahman, nothing but light."190 Next a series of śloka-s are cited (4.4.8-21),

which includes 4.4.12, the śruti-vākya of particular interest to us. Vv. 8-9 describe the

path by which the knowers of brahman, brahmavid-s go to the heavenly world on release.

Vv. 10-11 describe the progressively darker worlds of blind darkness, andham tamah,

entered by worshippers of ignorance and by worshippers of learning.191 In contrast, a

person who truly knows atman wants for nothing and is not afflicted by his body; on the

contrary the atman is the maker of everything, indeed he is the world (12-13).192 Those

who know this become immortal, while others only have suffering to look forward to

(14). The ätman is to be sought out; it is venerated as life immortal. Atman is the

immortal brahman (15-17). Brahman is behind breathing, sight, hearing, thinking; it is

non-diverse, realized through the mind alone, singular, immeasurable, immovable,

taintless, beyond space, unborn, immense (18-20). It should be known though intuitive

knowledge, prajñā and not through words (21).193

The prose section then resumes. Atman is the goal of all, brahmins and ascetics

alike. Knowing atman, they give up desire for sons, wealth and worlds. Atman is

189 BU 4.3.33: ... yājñavalkyo bibhyāmcakāra medhāvī rājā sarvebhyo mā'ntebhya udarautsīd iti | This is an interesting situation and certainly raises questions as to why Yājñavalkya would be afraid. Fodder for a future exploration ... 190 BU 4.4.7: ... ayam aśarīro 'mrtaḥ prāņo brahmaiva teja eva | 191 BU 4.4.10: andham tamah praviśanti ye 'vidyām upāsate | tato bhūya iva te tamo ya u vidyāyām ratāh || 192 BU 4.4.13: ... sa viśvakrt sa hi sarvasya kartā tasya loka sa u loka eva || 193 BU 4.4.21: tam eva dhīro vijñāya prajñām kurvīta brāhmaņaḥ | nānudhyāyād bahuñ chabdān vāco viglāpanam hi tad iti ||

59 ungraspable, undecaying, unbound, not subject to fear or injury, beyond good and bad,

not subject to that which is done or undone. One who knows this becomes

ātman/brahman (22-25). Thus the fourth brāhmana concludes.

The fifth brāhmana repeats the Maitreyī-Yājñavalkya dialogue of 2.4 in the Madhu-

kānda. The sixth and final brāhmana provides the lineage of the teachers. This is

followed by the two adhyāyas of the Khila-kānda, whose contents are not relevant to this

discussion.

Thus BU 4.4.12 occurs in the midst of Yājñavalkya's teachings on brahma-tattva to

Janaka. The transmigration of the ätman upon death to a new body is described and the

nature of this new body depends on the nature of one's desires and actions in the past

body (4.3.35-38, 4.4.1-6). On the other hand, one who is without desire becomes

immortal and attains brahman right here, in this life (7). Then deprecating both

ignorance and learning (10-11), 4.4.12 rhetorically suggests that the body and its ills are

of no consequence when compared to what is gained by the knowledge of atman. The

remainder of the fourth brahmana then adds greater detail to this suggestive proposition,

explicitly stating that what is gained by this knowledge is the awareness that one is "the

maker of all," viśvakrt (13), immortal, amrta (14), brahman (17). In contrast, those who

do not know this face suffering, duhkha and great destruction, mahatī vinasti (14). The

implicit message of BU 4.4.12 is the desirability of the knowledge of ātman/brahman.

When known, nothing else is needed and nothing can adversely affect one.

60 6.2 Śankarācārya's bhāșya (BUŚBh) on BU 4.4.12

Śankara's commentary on this verse is short enough that a complete translation can

be provided here. English words in italics are from BU 4.4.12 itself. (The footnotes

provide the relevant Sanskrit passages in the sequence corresponding to the English

translation, see Appendix 2A, p. 95 for the entire Sanskrit passage):

"If (a person), one in thousands1 truly knows the self, atman, his own (which is

also) the highest which knows the desires of all sentient beings, (which is) situated in the

heart, (which is) beyond hunger and other characteristics:195 (The qualification) "if"

shows the rarity of self-knowledge, ātma-vidyā. How (does one know)? "I am this"

supreme self, the witness to the notions of all sentient beings,0 196 described by

(statements) such as "neti, neti", (and) other than which (there is) no one who sees,

hears, thinks, or knows, constant, situated in all beings, whose nature is eternal, pure,

awake and liberated.199 That person, what other object could he possibly desire as a

result that is other than his own nature?200 And for the love of whom (or what) other than

himself, for what motive?202 Because there is no result to be desired by him, (since he

is) the self. Nor is there anyone other than the self, for whose sake he desires, since he is

194 sahasreşu kaścit 195 svam param sarva-prāņi-manīsita-jñam hrtstham aśanāyādi-dharmātītam 196 sarva-prāņi-pratyaya-sāksī 197 Olivelle, p.67, pp.501-2 n.3.6, suggests "neti, neti" be rendered as "not-, not-" instead of the commonly held "not this, not this" which would require "iti na" instead. While this is syntactically valid, "not this" seems a friendlier translation than "not-" without causing any significant violation to the import of the text. 198 yasmān nānyo 'sti drastā śrotā mantā vijñātā 199 samah sarva-bhūta-stho nitya-śuddha-buddha-mukta-svabhāvo 200 tat-svarūpa-vyatiriktam anyad vastu phala-bhūtam 201 1 anyasya ātmano vyatiriktasya kāmāya 202 [kasya] prayojanāya

61 the self of all. 203 Therefore, desiring what and for whose sake would he suffer, be

ruined,204 on account of the body, i.e., (why) would he be afflicted on account of the

suffering caused by bodily limitations,205 (why) would he suffer on account of bodily

affliction?206 Because (this happens) only to one who does not know the atman,27 (and

therefore is) striving to obtain some object other than it (atman).208 Desiring209 (that)

"this should be mine, this (other) for my son, this (third thing) for my wife,"20 mounted

on (the samsāra-cakra's) uninterrupted sequence of birth and death,2 (he) suffers the

disease(s) of the body.212 But this could not happen to one who sees the whole self: this

is what is said (here)."213

It appears that Sankara is reinforcing what we've already gathered from our

analysis of the Yājñavalkya-kanda. The limitations of the body and its attendant ills such

as hunger are reinforced particularly in contrast to the ultimacy of the knowledge of the

self. The all-pervasiveness of the self is also highlighted, as is the rarity of achieving

self-knowledge. In effect, Sankara is saying that according to the śruti, given that

knowing atman means knowing one's true nature, which is eternal, pure, awake,

liberated, all-pervasive, all-knowing, it is absurd to persist in identifying with the body,

203 na hi tasya ātmana estavyam phalam, na cāpy ātmano 'nyo 'sti, yasya kāmāyecchati, sarvasyātma- bhūtatvāt 204 bhramśet 205 śarīropādhikrta-duhkham-anu duḥkhī syāt 206 śarīra-tāpam-anutapyeta 207 208 tad-vyatirikta-vastv-antarepsoh - I've taken antara in this compound as "different from", strengthening anātma-darśino hi

the force of vyatirikta. 209 īhamānaḥ 210 mamedam syāt putrasyedam bhāryāyā idam ity evam 211 punah punar janana-marana-prabandha-rūdhaḥ 212 śarīra-rogam anu rujyate 213 sarvātma-darśinas tu tad asambhava ity etad āha

62 enduring the ills it undergoes, viewing oneself as limited and pursuing limited desires,

thereby committing to samsara. In fact, one who knows the self has no truck with

limited desires - firstly, being all-pervasive there is nothing other than one's self that can

be desired and secondly, limited desires only reinforce the identifying with the body and

its ills.

Further, while at first glance it may seem odd that Sankara is situating the all-

pervasive atman in the heart, he is not adding a new inconsistency, but is being informed

by the BU itself. For example, 4.3.7: "the inner light within the heart, hrdyantar jyotih",

4.4.1: "(the ātman) descends back into the heart, hrdayam evānvavakrāmati." Later, we

have 4.4.20: "(The self is) beyond space, para ākāśād." 4.1.7 unequivocally states: "The

highest brahman is the heart, hrdayam vai samrāt paramam brahma." This last occurs

after successive declarative statements in the first brāhmana that brahman has as its

abode speech, breath, sight, hearing and the mind, but ultimately it is the heart that is the

foundation of all beings. Thus it is clear from the BU context that a statement locating

atman/brahman in a specific place in the body is not to be taken literally. It is intended

as a metaphor, perhaps suggesting at the same time the "nearness" of brahman - in fact

nothing could be nearer as one is brahman, because that is one's true nature - as well as

its "dearness," that which is most desirable to know, upon knowing which all suffering,

let alone that associated with the body, ceases.

63 6.3 Vidyāranya's Brhadāranyaka-vārtika-sāra (BVS) on BU 4.4.12

The Brhadāranyaka-vārtika-sāra, a sub-commentary on Sureśvara's Vārttika214 on

the BU,215 is a relatively lesser known work of Vidyāranya. For example, there is no

mention of it in Dasgupta's A History of Indian Philosophy (1922), or by other works

dealing with Vidyāranya, such as Mahadevan (1938, 69), Punjani (1985), and Goodding

(2002). Potter's bibliography has three editions listed, the earliest by Vajhe (1915-19)

which includes Maheśvaratīrtha's țīkā, a recent edition by Dwivedī (1999) which is

accompanied by a Hindi translation and commentary, and another dating to 1941 which I

was unable to examine.210 Based on my analysis in section 3.4, "Works ascribed to

Mādhava-Vidyāranya," particularly pp. 17,20, I have concluded that the ascription of the

authorship of BVS to Mādhava-Vidyāranya is genuine and thus it will be of great interest

to compare Vidyāranya's treatment of BU 4.4.12 here with that in PD7.

The BVS is a metrical text, mostly in anustubh meter, like the PD. The fourth

brāhmana of the BVS's fourth adhyāya has a total of 491 śloka-s, among which BU

4.4.12 receives just five, 4.4.272-276. This section is brief enough to be translated in its

entirety. English words in italics are from BU 4.4.12, (the corresponding Sanskrit

appears in boldface in the footnotes; see Appendix 2B, p. 95 for the entire Sanskrit

214 I wished to consult this as well, but sadly, I was unable to locate the section containing BU 4.4.12. 215 Marcaurelle, p.189. 216 Potter (2005): "809.5.1 Edited, with Uttamaślokatīrtha's Laghuvārttikavyākhyā and Maheśvara Tīrtha's Laghusamgraha, by Bhau Sastri Vajhe. ChSS 46, 1915, 1919; 809.5.2 Edited by Chandiprasada Sukla Sastri and Krsna Pant. AG 10, 1941; 809.5.3 Edited by Vacaspati Dwivedi. Varanasi 1999" 217 As far as I am aware, there are no published English translations of the BVS.

64 passage), and Maheśvaratīrtha's relevant țīkā is provided within square brackets (see

Appendix 2C, p. 96 for the Sanskrit):

"The fifth śloka"1 here clearly sets forth the complete disappearance of suffering

for those who are possessed of the knowledge of brahman. [(The BU śloka) "ātmānam

... " is taken up].What suffering is there on account of the body for the fully satisfied

person who directly knows, 'I am this'? [Analyzing" the words of the (BU) śloka, the

nature of (self-)knowledge is brought forth (in this BVS śloka)].221 Someone who does

not know one's self, atman, would subsequently suffer on account of mistaking the self to

be the body, desiring pleasure for the sake of pleasure for oneself (as an) enjoyer. [To

present the cause of the cessation of affliction due to self-knowledge, the cause of the

affliction of that ignorance is stated. On account of mistaking oneself as an enjoyer, there

is desire (lit: desiring) (for) all sorts of (objects of) enjoyment (lit: what is to be enjoyed);

upon the destruction of (the objects of) enjoyment, (there is) suffering - i.e. one's body

would consequently suffer].2 The one who, on account of (realizing) the knowledge of

being the atman of all, would be excluded from (being the) enjoyer and from (the

experience of) enjoyment, what could he possibly desire, and for the love of whom (or

what) would he suffer on account of the body? [(This śloka) presents knowledge as the

218 BU 4.4.12 is fifth in the series of ślokas quoted starting at BU 4.4.8. 219 BVS 4.4.272: brahmāvabodha-yuktānām nihśeso duhkha-samksayah | ślokena pamcamenātra vispastam abhidhīyate || [ātmānam ity ady avatārayati brahmeti |] 220 vyākurvan literally means to separate from, to sever, divide; to explain. Hence my translation, "to

221 Ibid. 273: purușaḥ paripūrņo 'yam asmīti hy āparoksatah | ya ātmānam vijānāti śarīrānu jvaro 'sya analyze".

kaḥ || [ślokāksarāņi vyākurvan jñāna-prakāram abhinayati purusa iti |] 222 Ibid. 274: na vetti cet svam ātmānam dehātmatva-bhramād asau | bhoktus tasyaiva bhogāya bhogam icchann anujvaret || [ātmadhiyo jvara-nivrtti-hetutvam upapādayitum tad ajñānasya jvara-hetutvam āha neti | svasya bhoktrtva-bhramād bhogya-jātam icchan bhogya-nāśe jvaran tad deham anu jvaret tapyetety arthah | ]

65 cause of the cessation of that (suffering). When the knowledge of the enjoyer's

brahman-nature and (the knowledge of) the emptiness of enjoyment(s) (is there), desiring

what enjoyment for the love of which enjoyer, would one suffer on account of the

suffering created by the limitations of the body?]223 For this detached (person), there is

no association at all with the body, and hence there is no suffering on account of the

suffering related to the body, etc., for the individual self, pratyag-ātman. [(This śloka)

clarifies (what was) already stated, (that) there isn't any affliction (caused) for the self by

the affliction(s) of the body.]"22

It appears that Vidyāranya, and to an even greater extent, Maheśvaratīrtha is

interested in explicitly stating the connection between identification with the body,

desires for the enjoyment of pleasure, and the consequent suffering that arises when the

enjoyment ceases. This connection is implicitly and unknowingly made by those who do

not have the knowledge of ätman/brahman and who instead identify the self as the body,

the enjoyer, bhoktr in search of enjoyment, bhogya. However, enjoyments are limited

and can be destroyed, leading to suffering. The body too is subject to limitations and

afflictions and identification with the body leads to the consequent experience of

suffering. Therefore, the one who knows the self, atman to be brahman, the self of all

beings, knows (that) (s)he is not the body or the enjoyer and thus is not subject to their

desires and suffering. Vidyāranya is consistent with Sankara's commentary on this

223 Ibid., 275: yasya sārvātmyabodhena bādhah syād bhoktrbhogyayoh | kim iļc]chan kasya kāmāya śarīram anusamjvaret || [jñānasya tan nivrtti-hetutvam upapādayati yasyeti | bhoktur brahma-rūpatve bhogyasya tucchatve ca jñāne kim bhogyam kasya bhoktuh kāmāyecchan śarīropadhi-krta-duhkham anu duhkhī syad ity arthah | ] 224 Ibid., 276: nihsangasyābhisambandho dehenāsya na kaścana | nāto dehādi-duhkhena duhkhitvam prtyagātmanaḥ || [deha-tāpenātmanas tāpābhāvam uktam eva spastayati nihsangasyeti | ]

66 passage; the difference lies mainly in the seeming intensity of Vidyāranya's focus

regarding this passage. Vidyäranya doesn't say anything about the significance of the

cet, or elaborate on the nature of bodily afflictions, and desires leading to an

uninterrupted cycle of birth and death. Vidyāranya single-mindedly focuses on the

contrast between the individual who knows atman and the one who doesn't, as seen in

regards to being an enjoyer and sufferer of bodily afflictions. Maheśvaratīrtha, following

Vidyāranya's example, also restricts himself to the these aspects. However, this isn't

really a shortcoming on either Vidyāranya or Maheśvaratīrtha's part; they have dealt with

some of these issues a few verses earlier in the BVS, in connection with BU 4.4.10-11.

67 7. Comparison of the various discourses on BU 4.4.12

7.1 The PD7's treatment of BU 4.4.12

In chapter 5, "A Closer Look at Trptidīpa-Prakarana, PD7," we saw that

Bharatītīrtha covers a lot of ground in the process of explaining the śruti-vākya, BU

4.4.12. Perhaps the context of the source text placed constraints on the commentators in

the cases of the BUSBh and the BVS and restricted the range of their discursions.

Because the PD is an independent treatise, there are no such constraints and Bhāratītīrtha

is free to support his analysis with other śruti and smrti as well as worldly and accessible

similes and allegories. As Ramakrsna points out in his commentary to PD 7.2, there are

five attributes to an explanation, vyākhyāna: padaccheda, separation of (constituent)

words, padärthokti, stating the meaning of the words (glossing), vigraha, analysis,

vākyayojanā, syntax of the sentence, and āksepasya samādhāna, replying to

objections.225 In PD7, Bharatītīrtha certainly addresses all of these aspects in far greater

detail than in the other two versions we looked at, the BUSBh and the BVS.

Beyond explaining the constituent words and phrases of the passage, he also

presents other Advaita concepts to support the concepts he wishes to convey. Thus in

PD7 we have discussions on the difference between jīva and īśvara, cidābhāsa and

kūtastha (vv. 3-18) and jīva and brahman (vv. 83-96). The seven stages of knowledge

are considered in great detail, ranging from ignorance to perfect contentment (vv. 28-84),

with an embedded treatment on the difference between paroksa and aparoksa knowledge

and how the former leads to the latter (vv. 48-84). How the direct knowledge of brahman

225 Ācārya, pp.188-9: padacchedaḥ padārthoktir vigraho vākyayojanā | āksepasya samādhānam vyākhyānam pañcalakșaņam || (Paraśara Purāņa, Ch. 18).

68 is brought about is covered in vv. 87-129, including by means of śravana, manana and

nididhyāsana. In connection with desire, the concept of prārabdha karman is treated

thoroughly (vv. 143-191). With regard to bodily afflictions, the sthūla, sūksma and

kārana śarīras and their respective afflictions are discussed (vv. 222-251). Lastly, the

nature of liberation, jīvanmukti is described extensively. In connection with these topics,

objections are raised and resolved but the emphasis is not merely on demonstrating the

consistency, samādhāna of the Advaita metaphysics, but also on making the subject

accessible by means of parallels from daily life and by parables and similes,226 226 and

providing the reader with an introductory how-to manual on achieving self-knowledge.

Bhāratītīrtha cites śruti (BU, ChU, TU, Katha, Kaivalya and MU are cited multiple

times), smrti (BS, BG and others) and also the works of other Vedantins such as

Śankara's Brahmasūtra bhāsya and the Upadeśasāhasrī, Sureśvara's Naiskarmyasiddhi

and Mandana Miśra's Bhāmati among others. [See Appendix 1: PD7 Citations on pp.95-

94 for details].

While bringing all of this additional material into the picture, Bharatītīrtha still

remains true to the overall context of BU 4.4.12. Transmigration is the lot of one who

does not know the self and we've already reviewed the detailed discussions of the

consequences of prārabdha karman on jīvanmukti in chapter 5, "A Closer Look at

Trptidīpa-Prakaraņa, PD7."228 PD's jīvanmukti itself is corroborated by BU 4.4.7.229 As

226 See n. 251, p. 74 supra. 227 e.g. PD 7.103: bahu-janma-drdhābhyāsād dehādisv ātmadhīh ksanāt | punah punar udety evam jagat- satyatva-dhīr api | 228 Cf. the discussion concerning PD 7.143-191, 247, 250, 262-3 229 BU 4.4.7: yadā sarve pramucyante kāmā ye'sya hrdi śritāh | atha martyo'mrto bhavaty atra brahma samaśnuta iti |

69 in BU 4.4.10-11, the pursuit of worldly knowledge for its own sake is mocked.230 We

can see why the Pañcadasī is called a prakarana grantha, on account of the lucid and

comprehensive yet accessible treatment of Advaita fundamentals.

7.2 Comparison and consistency of the three treatments of BU 4.4.12

What can be said regarding the faithfulness of three separate discourses on BU

4.4.12 as compared to each other and to the source context itself in the BU? We've seen

that all the versions considered (BUSBh, BVS, PD7) are faithful to the context of BU

4.4.12. They differ in the manner in which the contrast between the ignorant and those

who know the self is presented. Sankara highlights the consequence of "uninterrupted,

repeated birth and death" resulting from identification with the body and seems to be

suggesting, "Why on earth would anyone persist with such a worldview, given that the

alternative is liberation ?! " The BVS seems more interested in explicitly spelling out the

connection between identification with the body and desires and the consequent suffering

resulting from lack of self-knowledge, contrasting it with the lack of suffering for one

who does not associate the self with the body, thereby implicitly suggesting the

attractiveness of the latter view. Both the BUSBh and BVS passages are constrained by

their formats, occurring within primary or secondary commentaries to the BU. Thus they

restrict themselves to elucidating the śruti at hand and do not elaborate at great length,

since the relevant context of the BU presents more appropriate opportunities for

elaboration elsewhere. PD7, on the other hand, being within an independent prakarana-

grantha has far more flexibility, and we see how Bhāratītīrtha avails himself of the

230 e.g. PD 7.206: kāvya-nāțaka-tarkādim abhyasyati nirantaram | vijigīsur yathā tadvan mumumksuḥ svam vicārayet ||

70 opportunity to make relevant Advaita concepts accessible and understood in the process

of exegesis. Not surprisingly, all three advaitin authors do not deviate from the basic

message of BU 4.4.12, that self-knowledge is the logical alternative to identifying with

the body, its desires and afflictions. The area of innovation then seems to be on what

aspect they each choose to emphasize, and in the case of PD7, the thoroughness with

which Bhāratītīrtha and Vidyāranya elaborate on the basics of Advaita Vedānta, using

BU 4.4.12 to provide a framework within which concepts are masterfully laid out.

Now that we've examined Bhāratītīrtha and Vidyāranya's innovation in the

framework of textual context, we can pull back further and look next at their

contributions to Advaita Vedanta as a whole as evidenced in the PD.

71 8. Vidyāranya's Contributions to and Innovations in Advaita Vedānta

Vidyāranya251 belongs to the Vivarana sub-school of Sankara's Advaita Vedānta, so

named after Prakāśātman's subcommentary, Pañca-pādikā-vivarana on Sankara's direct

disciple Padmapāda's Pañca-pādikā.232 This sub-school advocates study of Vedānta and

a direct apprehension of brahman for the attainment of liberation; it also holds brahman

to be the locus of avidya, ignorance.233 Vidyāranya is considered an important Advaita

scholar and is credited with strengthening the position of the Vivarana school through his

works. 234

Perhaps Vidyāranya's most significant contribution is his description of the

relationship between māyā and avidyā. For Sankara, these terms are used synonymously.

Vidyāraņya distinguishes between the two: he describes māyā as prakrti with only pure

sattva, whereas avidyā is prakti tainted by rajas and tamas.235 Ivara is the reflection of

brahman in māyā,236 while the jīva-s, the corresponding reflections of brahman in

231 In this section, for brevity sake, I speak only of Vidyāranya since these remarks apply to the PD as a whole. But in all likelihood, based on what we have seen of the concord between Bhäratītīrtha's thought in PD7 and that of Vidyäranya's in the rest of the PD, these innovations can be credited to Bhāratītīrtha as well. 232 Cf. n. 77, p. 16 supra. 233 In contrast, the other sub-school based on Sankara's exposition of Vedānta, the Bhāmatī school (named after Mandana Miśra's commentary on the first four sūtras of the SBh on the BS, 9th century CE) holds that yogic practices and mīmāmsaka activities are key to achieving liberation and also that the individual jīva-s are the locus of avidyā (King 1999, pp. 55-6). 234 Venkatarama Iyer in Venkataraman et al (1976), pt. 2, p. i: "It will not be an exaggeration if we say that [Bhāratītīrtha and Vidyāranya] occupy the topmost place among post-Sankara writers on Advaita Vedānta." S.P. Sharma, p. 85: "The credit of establishing the Vivarana School in the Post-Sankara-Vedanta goes to Vidyaranya only." 235 PD 1.16ab: sattvaśuddhyaviśuddhibhyām māyā 'vidye ca te mate 236 PD 1.16cd: māyābimbo vaśīkrtya tām syāt sarvajña īśvaraḥ ||

72 avidyā, are diverse because avidyā has differing degrees of rajas and tamas.257 But

fundamentally, īśvara and jīva-s are just two different superimpositions on brahman.238

Vidyāranya's fourfold categorization of consciousness, cit into kūtastha, brahman,

īśvara, and jīva is also novel;2 the conventional list is brahman, īśvara and jīva only.240

The concept of cidābhāsa in particular is also a distinctive contribution: cidābhāsa is

"the reflection of consciousness, which is illumined by brahman ... and "in turn appears

in and illumines the mind ... and its modifications."2 The kūtastha consciousness is

distinct from cidābhāsa; cidābhāsa is in effect when intellectual modifications (vrtti-s)

arise, but the kutastha is in effect in the intervals between the vrtti-s,"z it is the sāksin,

witness.243 The relationship between kūtastha, cidābhasa and the mind is like that

between a face, its reflection and the mirror 244

The concept of samvädi-bhrama, coinciding-error is also novel: even though the

idea of meditation on or worship of brahman is erroneous since it treats brahman as an

object, it still leads to liberation, the right end, hence the name "concurring- or

237 PD 1.17: avidyā-vaśa-gas tv-anyas tad-vaicitryād anekadhā | sā kāraņa-śarīram syāt prajñas

238 PD 3.37: satyam jñānam anantam yad brahma tad vastu tasya tat | īśvaratvam ca jīvatvam upādhi- tatrābhimānavān |

dvaya-kalpitam | 239 PD 6.18ab: kūtastho brahma jīvesāv ityevam cic caturvidhā | Cf. PD 6.1-5, PD 7.83-96. 240 S.P. Sharma, p. 89. 241 Fort (2000), p. 497. Also cf. PD 8.6-10. 242 PD 8.3: cidābhāsa-višistānām tathāneka-dhiyām asau | sandhim dhiyām abhāvam ca bhāsayan pravivicyatām || 243 PD 8.25: antaḥkarana-tad-vrtti-sāksīty-ādāv-anekadhā | kūțastha eva sarvatra pūrvācāryair viniścitah

244 PD 8.26: ātmābhāsāśrayāś caivam mukhābhāsāśrayā yathā | gamyante śāstra-yuktibhyām ity-ābhāsaś ca varnitah || Here Vidyāranya is quoting Sankara's US I.18.43abc, but while Sankara is talking about ātman, it's reflection and the mind, Vidyāranya is re-mapping the śloka to his own terms by context, particularly kūțastha and cidābhāsa.

73 coinciding-error."245 While such meditation is naturally second to meditation on the

attributeless brahman, it is still suited to those with manda-buddhi, dull intellects or those

otherwise incapable of śravana, manana and nididhyāsana,"*0 and yet it is better than

performing scripturally enjoined actions, and far superior to being engaged in worldly

activity, vyavahāra.247

The notion of the enjoyment of objects causing happiness through the reflection of

brahman is not novel, yet Vidyaranya presents such enjoyment as a door to brahmānanda

and dedicates an entire chapter to it (PD15). In his mind understanding the nature of such

enjoyments helps a seeker strengthen one's understanding effectively.248

Lastly, Vidyāranya and Bhāratītīrtha's use of easily accessible analogies and

metaphors get his ideas across effectively - the allegory of the tenth-man- is skillfully

developed to illustrate the progression through the seven stages of self-knowledge in

PD7.250 Such similes occur in virtually every chapter, with PD7 having the highest

245 PD 9.13: svayambhramo 'pi samvādī yathā samyakphalapradaḥ | brahmatattvopāsanāpi tathā muktiphalapradā || Also PD 9.123: yathā samvādi-vibhrāntih phala-kāle pramāyate | vidyāyate tathopāstir mukti-kāle 'tipākataḥ 246 PD 9.54: atyanta-buddhimāndyād vā sāmagryā vāpy-asambhavāt | yo vicāram na labhate brahmopāsīta so 'niśam | 247 PD 9. 121: pāmaraņām vyavahrter varam karmady-anusthitih | tato 'pi saguņopāstir nirgunopāsanā tatah 248 PD 15.19ab: yadyat sukham bhavet tattad brahmaiva pratibimbanāt | ... PD 15.34cd: vişayānanda etena dvārenāntah praviśyatām | 249 This allegory is by no means novel. Sankara also draws upon this story in US 1.12.3, 1.18.170- 4,187,190,199, and also in his ŚBh to BU 1.4.7, and to TU 2.1 (Mayeda 1979, p. 131, n. 2 et passim). The trope is also common in folk tales - see the entry Numskulls Unable to Count their own Number, Thompson & Roberts, pp. 135-6. The folk tales have a wide regional distribution, for example in Kashmir (Knowles 1893), the upper Indus area (Swynnerton 1892), Kumaon and Garwhal in the Himalayas (Upreti 1894), Mahakoshal in Central India (Elwin1944) and the Nilgiri Hills in South India (Rivers 1906). Animal versions of this tale also exist (Bødker 1957). 250 PD 7.23-27, 57-60, 80, 247-48, 250.

74 concentration.21 Such anecdotes give the reader a sense of the author's first-hand

experience with the subject matter and at the same time provide the reader with the

assurance that she, too, is capable of having similar experiences. At the same time, the

author does not shy away from dialectic analysis and refutation,252 but these are

subordinated to explaining and clarifying the primary concepts. This accounts for the

great popularity and importance that this work has enjoyed in the Advaita tradition and it

continues to do so in the present time as well.

251 Punjani, p. 246, n. 1 shows that the most similes in the text occur in PD7. Some of these (besides the tenth-man allegory) are: 7.114-117, a hungry man eats as he likes, without following any rules or injunctions; 134, two tired travelers on a journey, one knows the destination is near and perseveres, the other doesn't; 136, desire for a knower is like a lamp without oil; 164, desire is like roasted grain; 219, a dying man has no desire to marry; 228, the three bodies without any affliction are like cloth without thread or a blanket without wool; 237-8, the embarrassment of cidābhasa on knowing the truth is like that of a man doing repeated penance for sins, or of a "disfigured" courtesan; 240, cidābhāsa avoids associating with the body as a brahman avoids mlecchas; 259, a wise man not affected by worldly pleasure, like a bush with red berries is not really on fire; 279, if a living rat can't kill a cat, how can a dead one? Similarly for the perception of duality affecting the wise one's knowledge; 282, the corpses of ignorance only proclaim the conqueror's glory; 287-8 a wise man is towards ignorant ones like an indulgent father towards a disrespectful young child. 252 For example, PD 7.14-16 on the unreality of the cidābhāsa and kūtastha, v. 21 on the knowability of brahman, vv. 81-84 on direct knowledge through the śastra-s, vv. 88-89 on giving up the "I" notion, vv.

knowledge. 130-32, 276-278 regarding coexistance of knowledge and action, vv. 181-190 on the nature of direct

75 9. Conclusion

With a view to establishing the identity of the author(s) of the Pañcadaśi, this thesis

has reviewed the historical evidence regarding the connection of Vidyäranya with the

founding of Vijayanagara, with the Srngeri matha and also with the different Mādhava-s

contemporaneous in the mid-fourteenth century. We have very strong evidence that

Vidyāraņya, prior to his sannyāsa, was Mādhavācārya, minister of the kings Bukka I and

Harihara II, on the grounds that Vidyāranya in his Jīvan-mukti-viveka (JMV) mentions

Mādhavācārya's work, the Parāśara-mādhavīya (PaM), as being written by himself.253

But this Madhavacarya was not connected with the founding of Vijayanagara, and the

inscriptional evidence linking Vidyāranya with Vijayanagara had been proven by

scholars such as Kulke (1985) and Saletore (1934) to be the fabrication of the sixteenth

century Srngerī pontiff Rāmacandra Bhārati.254 This fact, however, does not detract from

the significance of Vidyāranya as a scholar and an important contributor to the Advaita

tradition.

Through the examination of the parallels in the opening and closing verses to

various works, an attempt has been made to identify works that are definitely authored by

Mādhava-Vidyāranya and by his guru and predecessor at Srngeri, Bhāratītīrtha.255 An

argument has been made for the joint authorship of the Pancadasī by Vidyaranya and

Bhäratītīrtha, on the basis of a re-examination of the evidence, primarily references to the

PD in the JMV, as well as Appayya Dīksita's references to the PD in his Siddhānta-leśa-

sangraha (SLS). This is further augmented by the attribution of the Trptidīpa-prakarana,

253 Cf. p. 14. 254 Cf. pp. 10-11. 255 Cf. Table 4: Works by Vidyāraņya and Bhāratītīrtha, p. 34.

76 PD7 to Bhāratītīrtha by Vidyāranya's disciple, Rāmakrsna in his commentary to the PD.

I suggest that we would be ill-advised to deprecate the testimony afforded by Rāmakrsna,

owing to his contemporaneity with Vidyāranya and Bhāratītīrtha as well as his direct

discipleship of Vidyāranya. If anything, the historical proximity ought to force us to

consider this evidence more significant relative to textual citations made approximately

two hundered years later (by Appayya Dīksita). The persistence of memory regarding

dual-authorship in traditional accounts may have some basis in fact, particularly when

there seems more prestige to be gained by attributing the entire work to Vidyāranya

alone. Taken altogether, it appears that Vidyaranya authored the PD with Bhāratītīrtha

authoring only PD7. The review of the parallel śloka-s and pada-s found between the PD

and the Anubhūti-prakāśa (AP),6 particularly the lack of any shared references to verses

in PD7, also supports this conclusion, though this aspect of the analysis is by no means

complete or definitive and presumably some hitherto undetected parallels may surface on

further exhaustive study.

I then turn to the Pañcadasi itself, in order to investigate whether there is any

evidence of sylistic or doctrinal discontinuity between PD7 and the rest of the text that

would corroborate the joint authorship hypothesis.2/ PD7 proves to be a comprehensive

overview of the entire text, structured as an exposition of the śruti-vākya BU 4.4.12. As

such, no evident discontinuity of doctrinal ideas or literary style between PD7 and the

whole text is observed. This is not altogether surprising, since Bhāratītīrtha, the proposed

author of PD7, was Vidyāranya's guru, and both of them also acknowledged Vidyātīrtha

256 Cf. sections 3.7 and 3.8, pp. 29-33. 257 Cf. chapters 4 and 5, pp. 37-55

77 as their guru; therefore their ideas of Advaita Vedanta doctrine, as evidenced in their

writings in the PD at the very least, would likely be in concord. PD7 proves to be a

masterful presentation of the stages that a seeker after liberation, moksa, passes through,

beginning with being ignorant of one's true, non-dual nature and culminating with

experiencing endless and absolute satisfaction, trpti during jīvanmukti, liberation while

still alive.

Next, in order to investigate whether Bhāratītīrtha and Vidyāranya present any

novel interpretations of Advaita Vedānta doctrine in the PD, the extra-textual context of

the śruti-vākya BU 4.4.12 was examined in three sources: the Brhadāranyaka Upanisad

(BU) itself, Sankara's bhāşya on this vākya (BUSBh), and its treatment in Vidyāraņya's

Brhadāranyaka-vārtika-sāra (BVS).258 We find that all the texts considered are faithful

to the context of BU 4.4.12. differing only in the presentation of the contrast between an

ignorant person and one who knows one's true nature. BUSBh and BVS are relatively

terse as they are constrained by the circumstance of occuring within a commentary to the

BU. The PD7, being part of an independent treatise, has far greater freedom to provide a

detailed exegesis and a thorough exposition of the fundamentals of Advaita doctrine.

Vidyāranya (and Bhāratītīrtha) can be credited with several innovations, which were

summarized in chapter 8.29 Without oversimplifying matters, the importance of

liberation and the means for achieving it are succintly presented in the Pañcadaśī, and

doubts are raised and resolved. Most importantly, "the view from the other side" - what

life looks like from the perspective of one who is enlightened - is dealt with at length.

258 Cf. chapter 6, Extra-textual Context of PD7," pp. 56-66; chapter 7, "Comparison of the various discourses on BU 4.4.12," pp. 67-70. 259 Cf. pp. 71-74.

78 The text is highly accessible owing to its use of delightful analogies and metaphors. It

makes the attainment of liberation seem not just the purview of a select, exalted few but

rather something that anybody can achieve with the proper preparation and effort. These

factors help explain why the Pañcadaśī is one of the more popular Advaita Vedānta texts

even today.

॥ ॐ तत् सत् ॥

79 Bibliography

Primary sources & indices (including translations):

Aitareyopanişad (AiU):

Author Unknown (1980) Ānandagiri-krta-țīkā-samvalita-śānkara-bhāsya-sametā aitareyopanişat | Vidyāranya-praņītā Aitareyopanisaddīpikā ca. Poona: Anandashrama.

Anubhūti-prakāśa (AP):

Mishra, Godabarisha, ed. & tr. (1992) The Anubhūtiprakāśa of Vidyāranya: The Philosophy of Upanisads: An Interpretive Exposition. Critically Edited with Introduction, English Translation, Notes and Indexes. University of Madras.

Mukerji, Bithika (1983) "The Translation of the Taittiriyaka-vidya-prakasah with an Introduction, Verse Analyses and Notes," in Neo-Vedanta and Modernity. Varanasi: Ashutosh Prakashan Sansthan.

Unknown (1902) Srī-vidyāraņya-viracita upanisat-tātparya-rūpo'nubhūti- prakāśaḥ. n.p .: Nirnaya Sagar Press.

Aparokșānubhūti:

Sarasvati, Svāmī Akhaņdānanda (1970) Śrimac-chankarācārya-krta- aparokşānubhūti, Šrī Vidyāranya-svāmī Krta 'Dīpikā' Vyākhyā Sahita. Bombay: Sat-sāhitya-prakāśan Trust.

Vimuktananda, Swami (1938) Aparokshānubhuti, or Self-realization of Sri Sankarāchārya: Text, with Word-for-word Translation, English Rendering and Comments. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama.

Bhagavad-gīta (BG):

Belvalkar, Shripad Krishna, ed. (1968) The Bhagavadgītā Being Reprint of Relevant Parts of Bhīsmaparvan from B.O.R. Institute's Edition of the Mahābhārata. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.

Van Buitenen, J.A.B., tr. (1981) The Bhagavadgītā in the Mahābhārata: Text and Translation. The University of Chicago Press.

80 Warrier, A.G. Krishna, tr. (1983) Srīmad Bhagavad Gītā Bhāsya of Sri Samkarācārya with Text in Devanagiri & English Rendering and Index of First Lines of Verses. Madras: Sri Ramakrishna Math.

Brahma-Sūtra (BS):

Apte, V. M. trans. (1960) Brahma-Sūtra Shānkara-Bhāshya: Bādarāyaņā's Brahma-Sūtras with Shankarāchāryā's Commentary. Bombay: Popular Book Depot.

Author Unknown (2005) Brahmasūtra. Online at http://www.brahmasutra.iitk.ac.in/, accessed Dec. 2004.

Date, V. H. (1973) Vedānta explained; Samkara's Commentary on the Brahma- sūtras, v.1 & 2. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal

Jayammal, K. (1998) A Glossary of Technical Terms in the Commentaries of Śankara, Rāmānuja, and Madhva on the Brahma-Sūtras, Parts One and Two. New Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research.

Mahadevan, T.M.P., ed. (1973) Word Index to the Brahma-Sūtra-Bhāsya of Śankara, Part Two. University of Madras.

Shastri, J. L., ed. (1980) Brahmasūtra-Šāmkarabhāsyam Šrī Govinda-krtayā Bhāyaratnaprabhayā, Šrī Vācaspatimiśra-viracitayā Bhāmatyā, Śrīmad Ānandagiri-pranītena Nyāyanirņayena samupetam. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Vireswarananda, Swami (1978) Brahma-Sutras with Text, Word-for-word Translation, English Rendering, Comments According to the Commentary of Śrī Sankara, and Index. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama.

Brhadāranyaka Upanisad (BU):

Author Unknown (1968) Brhadāranyakopanişad (sānuvāda Šānkarabhāsya sahita). Gorakhpur: Gita Press.

D'Sa, Francis X., ed. (1996) Word Index to Brhad-Āranyaka Upanişad. Pune: Institute for the Study of Religion.

Mādhavānanda, Swāmī, tr. (1988) The Brhadāranyaka Upanisad with the Commentary of Sankarācārya. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama.

Panoli, V. (1994) Upanishads in Sankara's Own Words (Brihadaranyaka), v.4. Calicut: Mathrubhumi Press.

81 Brhadāranyaka-vārtika-sāra (BVS):

Dwivedī, Vācaspati, (1999) Brhadāranyakavārtikasāra of Vidyāranya Svāmī, v.4. Varanasi: Sampurnanand Sanskrit University.

Vajhe, Bhau Sastri, ed. (1915-19) Brhadāranyakavārtikasāra by Vidyāranya Swami, with a Commentary called Laghusangraha by Maheshwar Tirth. Benares: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Series Office.

Dhātu-vṛtti (DV):

Phadake, Ananta Sāstri and Sada Siva Sarma Sastri, eds. (1934) The Mādgavīya- dhātu-vritti of Sayaņāchārya. Benares: Kashi Sanskrit Series no. 103.

Drg-drśya-viveka (DDV):

Nikhilānanda, Swāmī, tr. (1964) Drg-drśya-viveka: An Inquiry into the Nature of the 'Seer' and the 'Seen'. Mysore: Sri Ramakrishna Ashrama.

Raphael [pseud .? ] (1990) Self and Non-self: The Drigdriśyaviveka Attributed to Samkara. Translated from the Sanskrit with a Commentary. London: Kegan Paul International.

Jaiminīya-nyāya-mālā (JNM):

Dīkșitha, M. Rāmanātha, ed. (1983) Jaiminīya-nyāyamālā Šrī-mādhavāchāryeņa Viracitā Tad-viracita-vistārākhyayā Šrīmad-appayya-dīkșita-racita Pūrva-mīmāmsā-vișaya-sangraha-dīpikayā ca Samvalitā. Karnataka: Vidyāraņya Vidyāpītham.

Jīvan-mukti-viveka (JMV):

Goodding, Robert Alan (2002) The Treatise on Liberation-in-Life: Critical Edition and Annotated Translation of the Jīvanmuktiviveka of Vidyāranya. Ph.D. Dis., University of Texas at Austin.

Moksadānanda, Swāmī, tr. (1992) Jīvan-mukti-viveka of Swāmī Vidyāranya. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama.

Kāla-mādhavīya (KM):

Śankaraśāstri (1977) Śrī-mādhavācārya-pranītaḥ Kāla-mādhava-kārikāḥ Bhatta- vaidyanātha-sūri-krta-vivaraņa-sahitāḥ. Pune: Ānandāśrama.

82 Kațhopanișad:

Gambhīrānanda, Swāmī, tr. (1987) Katha Upanisad with the Commentary of Śankarācārya. Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama.

Māņdūkya Upanişad (MāU) & Kārikā:

Bhattacharya, Vidhushekhara (1943) The Āgamaśāstra of Gaudapāda. University of Calcutta.

Gambhīrānanda, Swāmī (1987) The Māndūkya-kārikā. Trichur: Sri Ramakrishna Math.

Karmarkar, Raghunath Damodar (1953) Gaudapāda-Kārikā. Reprint, 1973, Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.

Nikhilānanda, Swāmī (1936) The Māndūkyopanisad with Gaudapāda's Kārikā and Sankara's Commentary. Mysore: Sri Ramakrishna Ashrama.

Nāişkarmya-siddhi (Nais):

Alston, A. J., tr. (1959) The "Naiskarmya Siddhi" of Śrī Sureśvara. London: Shanti Sadan.

Jacob, G. A and M. Hiriyanna, eds. (1980) The Naişkarmya-siddhi of Sureśvarācārya with the Candrikā of Jñānottama, rev. 4th ed. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.

Nrsimha-uttara-tāpanīya-upanișad (NUTU):

Apte, Hari Nārāyaņa, ed. (1896) The Nrisimhatāpanīyopanishad (Pūrva and Uttara) with the Bhāshya of Srīmat Sankarāchārya on the Pūrva and the Dîpikâ of Srīmat Vidyāranya on the Uttara Tapanīya. Poona: Ānandāśrama Sanskrita Series No. 30.

Pañcadaśī (PD):

Ācārya, Nārāyan Rām, ed. (1987) Śrīmad Vidyāranyamuni Praņītā Pañcadaśī, Rāmakrsnakīta Vyākhyayā, Vișamsthala-țippaņīpāthāntara-śrutīkośa- śloka-vişayasūy-ādibhih, Šrimat Paramahamsa-parivrājakācārya Maheśvara-mahodayānām Bhūmikayā ca Samalamkrtā. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratishthan.

Jog, Dattātreya Vāsudeva (2004) Śrī Vidyāranya-Bhāratītīrtha Viracita Sārtha Pañcadaśī. Pune: A. D. Jog.

83 Pītāmbara, tr. & comm. (1965) Srī Pañcadasī Srīmat-paramhamsa- parivrājakācārya Šrī Vidyāranyamuni Viracitā, Brahmanistha-pandit Śrī Pītāmbarjī krta Tattvaprakāšikā Bhāsā-vyākhyayā Evam Țippaņa Sahita. Delhi: Ratan & Co., Booksellers.

Sāgar, Śrī Krsņānand, ed. (1984) Šrīmad Vidyāranyamuni viracitā Pañcadaśī, Rāmakrsna vyākhyayā samalankrtā, Sarvadarśanācārya Śrī Krsnāndasāgareņa svakrtayā Tattvarañjanī hindīvyākhyayā saha prakāśitā. Uttar Kashi: Shri Totakacharya Ashrama

Swāhānanda, Swāmī, tr. & comm. (1967) Pañcadaśī of Šrī Vidyāranya Swāmī, Madras: Sri Ramakrishna Math.

Tripāthī, Ācārya Karuņāpati, ed. (1989) Šrī Vidyāranyamuni viracitā Pañcadaśī, Śrī Rāmakrsna viracita Tattvadīpikā vyākhyayā, rī Acyutarāyamodaka viracita Pūrņāndendukaumudī vyākhyayā ca samalamkrtā. Lucknow: Uttar Pradesh Sanskrit Academy. ya (PaM): Parāšara-mādhavīya (PāM):

Tarkālankāra, Candrakānta (1893) Parāśara-smrtih śrīman mādhavācāry-krta- vyākhyā sahitā, 3 v. Reprint, 1974, Calcutta: The Asiatic Society.

Praņava-mīmāmsā (PrM):

Olivelle, Patrick (1981) "Pranavamīmāmsā: A Newly Discovered Work of Vidyaranya." ABORI 62:77-101

Śankara-digvijaya (ŚDV):

Tapasyananda, Swami, tr. (1978) Sankara-digvijaya: The Traditional Life of Sri Sankaracharya. Madras: Sri Ramakrishna Math.

Upādhyāya, Baladeva, tr. (1968) Šrī-śankara-digvijaya (mādhavācārya-viracita) [hindī anuvād, vistrt țippaņī tathā vivecanātmak bhūmikā ke sāth]. Haridvar: Śrī Šravaņanāth Jñān Mandir.

Sarva-darśana-sangraha (SDS):

Abhyankar, Vasudev Shastri ed. & comm. (1924) Sarva-darśana-samgraha of Sāyaņa-Mādhava. 3rd ed. repr. 1978 Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.

Agrawal, Madan Mohan (2002) The Sarva-Darśana-Samgraha of Mādhavācārya with English Translation, Transliteration and Indices. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratishthan.

84 Cowell, E. B. & A. E. Gough, trans. (1996) The Sarva-darśana-sangraha of Mādhavāchārya or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Sarva-vedānta-siddhānta-sāra-sangraha:

Śankara (1983) Śrī-śānkara-granthāvalih: Complete Works of Sri Sankaracharya in the original Sanskrit, v. 3. Upadeśa-racanāvalih. Chennai: Samata Books.

Tattwananda, Swami (1960) The Quintessence of Vedanta, being a translation of the Sarva-vedanta-siddhanta-sarasangraha of Acharya Sankara. Kalady, Kerala: Sri Ramakrishna Advaita Ashrama.

Siddhānta-leśa-sangraha (SLS):

Sāgara Krsnānanda (1996) Srīmad-appayya-dīksitendra-viracitah Sāstra- siddhānta-leşa-sangrahah Šrīmad-gangādharendra-sarasvatī-krta- vedānta-sūkti-mañjarī-sahitah Srīmad Acyuta-krsnānatīrtha-krta- krsnālankāra-vyākhyopetaḥ Sarva-darśanācārya-śrī-krsnānda-sāgareņa svakrtayā siddhānta-rañjanī-hindī-vyākhyayā Saha Sampadyam Prakāśitaḥ. Varanasi: By the author.

Suryanarayana Sastri, S. S., tr. (1935) The Siddhāntaleśasangraha of Appayya Dīkșita, 2 v. University of Madras.

Tattvabodha:

Author Unknown (1981) Tattvabodha of Sankaracharya, Bombay: Central Chinmaya Mission Trust.

Upadeśa-sāhasrī (US):

Mayeda, Sengaku (1973) Sankara's Upadeśasāhasrī: Critically Edited with Introduction and Indices. Tokyo: Hokuseido Press.

Mayeda, Sengaku (1979) A Thousand Teachings: The Upadeśasāhasrī of Sankara. Tokyo, repr. 1992, Albany: State University of New York Press.

Upanișads:

Author Unknown (1964) Ten Principal Upanişads with Sankarabhāşya. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass

Jacob, G. A. (1891, repr. 1963) Upanisadvākyakośaḥ: A Concordance to the Principal Upanishads and Bhagavadgītā. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

85 Olivelle, Patrick (1998) The Early Upanisads: Annotated Text and Translation. Oxford University Press.

Panoli, V. (1991) Upanishads in Sankara's Own Words (Isa, Kena, Katha and Mandukya with the Karika of Gaudapada), v.1. Calicut: Mathrubhumi Press. pp.149-296.

Vaiyāsika-nyāya-mālā (VNM):

Giri, Vidyānanda (1998) Śrī-bhāratītīrtha-muni-viracitā vāiyāsika-nyāya-mālā (with Hindi commentary, Lalitā). Rishikesh: Kailāsa-vidyā-prakāśanam.

Saccittīrtha, Svāmī (1986) Brahma-sūtra-rahasyam (Brahma-sūtrānām Vaiyāsika-nyāya-mālāyāś ca Vṛtti-rūpam) N. S. Ramanuja Tatacharya, ed. Tirupati: Kendriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha.

Saraswatī, Svāmi Satyānanda (1972) Paramahamsa-parivrājakācārya-śrī- bhāratītīrtha-muni-praņītā Tat-tad-adhikaraņa-pradarśaka-maharși- veda-vyāsa-praņīta-brahma-sūtrair Vibhūșitā Vaiyāsikanyāyamālā śrīmat-paramahamsa-parivrājakācārya-śrī-svāmi-satyānanda-sarasvatī- kṛta-bhāșānuvādena Țippaņyā ca Samalankrtā. Varanasi: By the author.

Vivarana-prameya-sangrahah (VPS):

Prasād, Lalitā (1999) Vivaranaprameyasangrahah Srīmat-paramahamsa- parivrājakācārya-vidyāranya-muni-viracitaḥ Sarala Bhāșānuvādena Sahitah. Varanasi: Amar Publications.

Suryanarayana Sastri, S. S. & Saileswar Sen, tr. (1941) The Vivarana- prameyasangraha of Bhāratītīrtha, 2 v. Kumbakonam: Sri Vidya Press

Tailanga, Rāmasāstrī, ed. (1893) Vivarana-prameya-sangrahah śrimat- pramahamsa-parivrajakācārya-varya-pūjyapāda-vidyāraņya-muni- pranītaḥ. Benares: E. J. Lazarus.

Secondary sources

Abhedananda, Swami (1967) "An Introduction to the Philosophy of Panchadasi." In Complete Works of Swami Abhedananda, v. 2, pp. 260-277. Calcutta: Ramkrishna Vedanta Math.

Agrawal, Madan Mohan (2002) The Sarva-Darśana-Samgraha of Mādhavācārya with English Translation, Transliteration and Indices. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratishthan.

86 Belvalkar, S. K. (1929) Shree Gopal Bāsu Mallik Lectures on Vedānta Philosophy. Part 1: Lectures 1-6. Poona: Bilvakuñja Publishing House.

Bødker, Laurits (1957) Indian Animal Tales:A preliminary Survey. Folklore Fellows Communications, 68, no. 170. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.

Cardona, George (1968) "Anvaya and Vyatireka in Indian Grammar." Adyar Library Bulletin, 31-32:313-352.

Cenkner, William (1983) A Tradition of Teachers: Sankara and the Jagadgurus Today. Missouri: South Asia Books.

Clear, Edeltraud Harzer (1990) "Mādhava (d. 1386)." In Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Ver. 1.0, London: Routledge. Electronic reproduction (2001), Boulder, CO: NetLibrary.

Comans, Michael (2000) The Method of Early Advaita Vedānta: A Study of Gaudapāda, Sankara, Sureśvara and Padmapāda. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Cronk, George (2003) On Shankara. Wadsworth Philosophy Series. n.p .: Thomson.

Dallapiccola, Anna L. & Anila Verghese (1998) Sculpture at Vijayanagara: Iconography and Style. New Delhi: American Institute of Indian Studies/Manohar.

Dasgupta, Surendranath (1922) A History of Indian Philosophy, v.1-5. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Deussen, Paul (1912) The System of the Vedanta, Authorized Translation by Charles Johnston. New York: Dover Publications.

Deutsch, Elliot (1973) Advaita Vedanta: A Philosophical Reconstruction. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Dikshit, G. S., ed. (1986) Early Vijayanagara: Studies in its History & Culture: Proceedings of S. Srikantaya Centenary Seminar. Bangalore: B.M.S. Memorial Foundation.

Elwin, Verrier (1944) Folk-tales of Mahakoshal. London: Oxford University Press.

Filliozat, Vasundhara (1973) L'Épigraphie de Vijayanagar du début à 1377. Paris: École Française d'Extrême-Orient.

Fort, Andrew O. (1988) "Beyond Pleasure: Śankara on Bliss." Journal of Indian Philosophy 16:177-189.

87 Fort, Andrew O. (2000) "Reflections on Reflections: Kūțastha, Cidābhāsa and Vrttis in the Pañcadasī." Journal of Indian Philosophy 28:497-510.

Fox, Douglas A. (1993) Shankara Dispelling Illusion: Gaudapāda's "Alātaśānti" with an Introduction. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Grimes, John (1989) A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy: Sanskrit Terms Defined in English. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Hacker, Paul (1969) "Sankara der Yogin und Sankara der Advaitin." Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- und Ostasiens, 12-13:119-148.

Hacker, Paul (1972) "Notes on the Māndūkyopanisad and Sankara's Agamaśāstravivaraņa." In Gaeffke, P. and Ensink, J, eds. India Maior: Congratulatory Volume Presented to J. Gonda, 115:132. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Halbfass, Wilhelm (1983) Studies in Kumārila and Sankara. Reinbek: Verlag für Orientalische Fachpublikationen.

Halbfass, Wilhelm (1988) India and Europe: An Essay in Understanding. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Halbfass, Wilhelm (1991) Tradition and Reflection: Explorations in Indian Thought. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Halbfass, Wilhelm, ed. (1995) Philology and Confrontation: Paul Hacker on Traditional and Modern Vedānta. Albany: SUNY Press.

Harshananda, Swami. (1990) A Dictionary of Advaita Vedānta (with two essays and ten charts). Bangalore: Sri Ramakrishna Ashrama.

Harzer, Edeltraud. See Clear.

Heras, Henry (1929) Beginnings of Vijayanagara History. Bombay: Indian Historical Research Institute.

Ingalls, Daniel H.H. (1953) "Samkara on the Question: Whose is Avidya?" Philosophy East and West, 3:69-72.

Ingalls, Daniel H.H. (1954) "Samkara's Arguments Against the Buddhists." Philosophy East and West, 3:291-306.

Isayeva, Natalia (1993) Shankara and Indian Philosophy. Albany: State University of New York Press.

88 Isayeva, Natalia (1995) From Early Vedanta to Kashmir Shaivism: Gaudapada, Bhartrhari and Abhinavagupta. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Jagannadham, Pervaram, B. Rukmini, K. Katyayani, and A. Bhoomiah (1990) Vidyaranya Bharati: Essays on Vidyaranya. Warangal (AP): Kakatiya University.

Janaki, S. S. (1990) "Madhava, the commentator on the Suta Samhita." In Jagannadham, Pervaram et al., Vidyaranya Bharati: Essays on Vidyaranya, pp. 79-84. Warangal (AP): Kakatiya University.

Kamble, M. T. (2000) Vijayanagara Temples. Varanasi: Ganga Kaveri Publishing House

Kane, Pandurang Vaman (1975) History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediæval Religious and Civil Law), v. 1, pt. 2. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental research Institute

Karmarkar, D. P. and S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar (1936) Vijayanagara Sexcentenary Commemoration Volume. Dharwar.

Karmarkar, Raghunath Damodar (1966) Sankara's Advaita. Dharwar: Karnatak University.

Kasulis, Thomas P. (1992) "Philosophy as Metapraxis." In Reynolds, Frank and David Tracy, eds., Discourse and Practice. Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 169-196.

King, Richard (1995) Early Advaita Vedānta and Buddhism: The Mahāyāna Context of the Gaudapādīya-kārikā. Albany: State University of New York Press.

King, Richard (1999) Indian Philosophy: An Introduction to Hindu and Buddhist Thought. Washington D.C: Georgetown University Press.

Knowles, J. Hinton (1893) Folk-tales of Kashmir. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner, & Co.

Kripacharyulu, Munuganti (1986) Sāyana and Mādhava-Vidyāranya: A Study of Their Lives and Letters. Guntur: Rajyalakshmi Publications.

Krishnaswami Ayyangar, S. (1919) Sources of Vijayanagar History. Indian repr. 1986. Delhi: Gian Publishing House.

Kulke, Hermann (1985) "Mahārājas, Mahants and Historians: Reflections on the Historiography of Early Vijayanagara and Sringeri." In Dallapiccola, A. & S. Z. Lallemant, eds. Vijayanagara - City and Empire: New Currents of Research. v.1, pp.120-143. Stuttgart: Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden.

89 Kunjunni Raja, K. (1990) "Parisamkhyāna versus Prasamkhyāna in Šamkara's Philosophy." Adyar Library Bulletin, 54:191-193.

Mahadevan, T.M.P. (1938) The Philosophy of Advaita, with Special Reference to Bhāratītīrtha-Vidyāranya, London: Luzac & Co., Fourth ed. (1976) Madras: Ganesh & Co.

Mahadevan, T.M.P (1952) Gaudapāda: A Study in Early Advaita. University of Madras.

Mahadevan, T.M.P. (1969) The Pañcadasī of Bhāratītīrtha-Vidyāranya; an interpretative exposition, University of Madras

Malkovsky, Bradley J. (2001) The Role of Divine Grace in the Soteriology of Šamkarācārya. Leiden: Brill

Marcaurelle, Roger (2000) Freedom through Inner Renunciation: Sankara's Philosophy in a New Light. Albany: SUNY Press.

Mayeda, Sengaku (1969) "The Advaita Theory of Perception." Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- und Ostasiens, 12-13:221-239.

Mayeda, Sengaku (1979) A Thousand Teachings: The Upadesasāhasrī of Sankara. Tokyo, repr. 1992, Albany: State University of New York Press.

Mayeda, Sengaku (2000) "Sankara and Buddhism." In Malkovsky, Bradley J. ed. New Perspectives on Advaita Vedanta: Essays in Commemoration of Professor Richard de Smet, S.J. 18:29. Leiden: Brill

Michell, George & Vasundhara Filliozat, guest eds. (1981) Splendours of the Vijayanagara Empire - Hampi. Bombay: Marg Publications.

Mukerji, Bithika (1983) Neo-Vedanta and Modernity. Varanasi: Ashutosh Prakashan Sansthan.

Nakamura, Hajime (1983) A History of Early Vedanta Philosophy, 2v. tr. Trevor Legett, Sengaku Mayeda, Taitetz Unno et al. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass

Nanjundayya, H. V. & L. K. Ananthakrishna Iyer (1928) The Mysore Tribes and Castes, v. 2. Mysore University.

Niścaladāsa, Sādhu (1984) Vrtti-prabhākara sādhu-śrī-niścaladāsa-jī-praņīta. Bombay: Kemrāj Šrīkrsnadās.

Olivelle, Patrick (1981) "Pranavamīmāmsā: A Newly Discovered Work of Vidyāraņya." In ABORI 62:77:101.

90 Olivelle, Patrick (1993) The Āśrama System: This History and Hermeneutics of a Religious Institution. London: Oxford University Press. 2004 repr. New Delhi: Mushiram Manoharlal

Potter, Karl H. (1979) "Was Gaudapāda an Idealist?" In M. Nagatomi, B.K. Matilal, J.M. Masson, E. Dimmock, eds. Sanskrit and Indian Studies: Essays in Honour of Daniel H.H. Ingalls, 183-199.

Potter, Karl H. (1981) Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, v.3: Advaita Vedānta up to Samkara and His Pupils. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Potter, Karl H. (2005) Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Bibliography. Online at http://faculty.washington.edu/kpotter/xhome.htm, accessed Apr. 2005.

Punjani, Shakuntala (1985) Pañcadaśī: A Critical Study. Delhi: Parimal Publications.

Ramanuja Tatacharya, N. S., ed. (1986) Brahmasūtrarahasyam (Vritti on Brahma-sutras and Vaiyasikanyayamala) by Shri Satcit Tirth Swamiji. Tirupati: Kendriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha.

Rāma Sharma, M. H. (1978) The History of the Vijayanagar Empire: Beginnings and Expansion (1308-1569). M. H. Gopal, ed. Bombay: Popular Prakashan.

Rambachan, Anantanand (1991) Accomplishing the Accomplished: The Vedas as a source of Knowledge in Sankara. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Rambachan, Anantanand (1994). The Limits of Scripture: Vivekananda's Reinterpretation of the Vedas. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Rivers, W. H. R. (1906) The Todas. London: Macmillan and Co.

Saletore, Bhaskar Anand (1934) Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346-A.D. 1646), 2 v. Madras: B. G. Paul & Co.

Sewell, Robert (1924) A Forgotten Empire (Vijayanagar): A Contribution to the History of India. London: Allen & Unwin.

Sharma, Arvind (1995) The Philosophy of Religion and Advaita Vedanta: A Comparative Study in Religion and Reason. Pennsylvania State University Press.

Sharma, S. P. (1990) "Contributions of Vidyaranya to Post-Sankara Vedanta." In Jagannadham, Pervaram et al., Vidyaranya Bharati: Essays on Vidyaranya, pp. 85-93. Warangal (AP): Kakatiya University.

91 Shastri, Venimadhava (1986) "Works of Vidyāranya." In Dikshit, G. S., ed., Early Vijayanagara: Studies in its History & Culture: Proceedings of S. Srikantaya Centenary Seminar, Bangalore: B.M.S. Memorial Foundation

Shastry, A. K. (1982) A History of Sringerī. Dharwad: Karnatak University.

Slaje, Walter (1998) "On Changing Others' Ideas: The Case of Vidyaranya and the Yogavasistha." Indo-Iranian Journal 41:103-124.

Speijer, J. S. (1886) Sanskrit Syntax. Reprint, 1998, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Srikantaya, S. (1938) Founders of Vijayanagara. Bangalore: The Mythic Society.

Sundaresan, Vidyasankar (1998) "On Prasamkhyāna and Parisamkhyāna: Meditation in Advaita Vedanta and Pre-Samkaran Vedanta." Adyar Library Bulletin, 62:51-89.

Sundaresan, Vidyasankar (2002) "What determines Sankara's Authorship? The Case of the Pañcīkarana." Philosophy East and West, 52:1-35.

Suthren Hirst, Jacqueline "Strategies of Interpretation: Samkara's Commentary on Brhadāranyakopanisad." Journal of the American Oriental Society, 116:58-75.

Swynnerton, Charles (1892) Indian Nights' Entertainment or Folk-tales from the Upper Indus. London: Elliot Stock.

Tedesco, P. (1960) "Notes to Mayrhofer's Etymological Sanskrit Dictionary." Journal of the American Oriental Society, 80:360-366.

Thangaswami, R. (1980) A Bibliographical Survey of Advaita Vedānta Literature. University of Madras.

Thompson, Stith & Warren E. Roberts (1960) "Types of Indic Oral Tales: India, Pakistan and Ceylon." Folklore Fellows Communications, 73, no. 180. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.

Upādhyāya, Baladeva (1984) Acārya Sāyaņa aur Mādhava. Prayāg: Hindī Sāhitya Sammelan.

Upreti, Pandit Ganga Dutt (1894) Proverbs and Folklore of Kumaun and Garhwal. 2003 ed: New Delhi: Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts.

Uttankita Vidya Aranya Trust (1985) Uttankita Sanskrit Vidya-aranya Epigraphs, v. 1: Vidyāranya. Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan.

92 Venkataraman, K. R. (1967) The Throne of Transcendental Wisdom: Sri Sankaracharya's Sarada Pitha in Sringeri. (2nd rev. ed.) Madras: Akhila Bharata Samkara Seva Samiti Publication.

Venkataraman, K. R. (1969) Samkara and his Sarada Pitha in Sringeri: A Study in Growth and Integration. Calcutta: Kalpa Printers and Publishers.

Venkataraman, K. R., M. K. Venkatarama Iyer & K. R. Srinivasan (1976) The Age of Vidyaranya. Calcutta: Kalpa Printers and Publishers Pvt. Ltd.

Verghese, Anila (2004) "Deities, Cults and Kings at Vijayanagara." World Archeology 36(3):416-431.

Vetter, Tillmann (1969) "Zur Bedeutung des Illusionismus bei Sankara." Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- und Ostasiens, 12-13:407-423.

Vetter, Tilmann (1979) Studien zur Lehre und Entwicklung Sankaras. Vienna: De Nobili Research Library.

Wagoner, Phillip B. (2000) "Harihara, Bukka, and the Sultan: The Delhi Sultanate in the Political Imagination of Vijayanagara." In Gilmartin, David and Bruce B. Lawrence, eds., Beyond Turk and Hindu: Rethinking Religious Identities in Islamicate South Asia. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, pp. 300-326.

Wood, Thomas E. (1990) The Māndūkya Upanișad and the Āgama Šāstra: An Investigation into the Meaning of Vedānta. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

93 Appendix 1: PD7 Citations

Table 5: Texts Cited by PD7, Frequency

Abbrev. Text Times Cited AiU Aitareya Upanisad 2 BU Brhadāranyaka Upanișad 19 BBU Brahma- (or Amrta-) Bindu 2 Upanisad BG Bhagavad Gītā 9 BhP Bhāgavata Purāņa 1 BS Brahmasūtra 2 BSBhā Brahmasūtra Bhāmati 1 ChU Chāndogya Upanisad 6 Īśa Īśa Upanisad 1 Ka Katha Upanisad 4

Kaiv Kaivalya Upanisad 4 MS Manu Samhita 1 MNā Mahānārāyana Upanisad 1 MU Mundaka Upanisad 4 NUTU Nrsimhottara-tāpanīya Upanisad 2 Nais Naiskarmyasiddhi of Sureśvara 2 PD Pañcadaśī 7 ŚBŁ Śankara Bhāśya 1 Śvet Śvetāśvatara Upanisad 1 TU Taittirīya Upanisad 3 US Upadeśasāhasrī 2 Vā Vākyavrtti (Śankara?) 5 VāRā UP Vāsistha Rāmāyaņa, Utpatti 1 Prakarana VāRā VP Vāsistha Rāmāyaņa, Vairāgya 1 Prakarana VisP Visnu Purāna 1 YS Yogasūtra 1 YV Yoga Vāsistha 1

94

Table 6: Citations in PD7, sorted by Source

Source PD7 v. Source PD7 v. AiU 1.1.1-1.3 68 Īśa 7 181 AiU 3.1.1 199 Ka 1.2.7+ 297 BU 1.4.8+ 202 Ka 2.1.4+ 171 BU 2.4.14+ 181 Ka 2.2.4,8 219 BU 2.4.5 193 Ka 4.11 95 BU 2.4.5 202 Kaiv 1.12-14 217 BU 2.4.5+ 97 Kaiv 1.17 or 20 213 BU 2.5.18+ 5 Kaiv 1.18 or 21 215 BU 4.1.4+ 198 Kaiv 42 286 BU 4.3.15-17 212 MNā 10.5 286 BU 4.3.23+ 219 MS 2.94 147 BU 4.4.12 1 MU 2.2.5 128 BU 4.4.12+ 18 MU 3.1.4 107 BU 4.4.21 107 MU 3.1.7 95 BU 4.4.21 128 MU 3.2.9 241 BU 4.4.6+ 183 NUTU 9 217 BU 4.4.9 95 NUTU 9 3

BU 4.5.13-15 183 Nais 2.77 195 BU 4.5.6 193 Nais 4.67 191 BU 4.5.6 97 PD 1.40+ 72 BU ŚBh 1.4.15-39 191 PD 1.44+ 72 BBU 11 214 PD 13.83 106 BBU 9 95 PD 14.40-57 253-270 BG 14.22 225 PD 14.5 BG 18.60 161 PD 14.58-64 291-297 BG 18.66 286 PD 6.213 4 BG 3.25-26 285 Śvet 4.9-10 217 BG 3.33 155 TU 2.1.5 66 BG 3.36 159 TU 3.1.1 63 BG 3.37 160 TU 3.6.1 64 BG 6.34 120 US 17.61+ 173 BG 9.22 108 US 4.5 20 BS 4.1.1+ 97 Vā 37-53+ 70 BS 4.4.16 183 Vā 38-41 75-78 BSBhā 4.1.16 17 Vā 44-46 71-73 BhP 11.23.17 139 Vā 48 74 ChU 6.2.1 61 Vā 49 97 ChU 6.8.1 183 VāRā UP 22.24 106 ChU 6.8.7 61 VāRā VP 21.1 140 ChU 7.24.1 181 VisP 1.20.19 203 ChU 8.11.1 226 YS 1.50+ 149 ChU 8.7.1-3 67 YV ? 121 The notation "XX nn+" indicates a paraphrase of or allusion to the specified section as opposed to an exact citation.

95 Appendix 2: Passages in Sanskrit

A. Śankarācārya's bhāșya on BU 4.4.12:260

ātmānam svam param sarva-prāni-manīsita-jñam hrtstham aśanāyādi-dharmātītam ced

yadi vijānīyāt sahasreșu kaścit | ced ity ātma-vidyāyā durlabhatavam darśayati | katham? ayam para ātmā sarva-prāņi-pratyaya-sāksī yo neti netītyādy ukto, yasmān nānyo 'sti drastā śrotā mantā vijñātā samah sarva-bhūta-stho nitya-śuddha-buddha-

mukta-svabhāvo'smi bhavāmīti, pūrusaḥ purusa | sa kim icchan tat-svarūpa-

vyatiriktam anyad vastu phala-bhūtam kim icchan kasya vā'nyasya ātmano vyatiriktasya

kāmāya prayojanāya | na hi tasyātmana estavyam phalam | na cāpy ātmano'nyo 'sti,

yasya kāmāyecchati, sarvasyātma-bhūtatvāt | atah kim icchan kasya kāmāya śarīram

anusamjvaret bhramśet | śarīropādhikrta-duhkham anuduhkhī syāt | śarīra-tāpam

anutapyeta | anātma-darśino hi tad-vyatirikta-vastv-antarepsoh | mamedam syāt

putrasyedam bhāryāyā idam ity evam īhamānah punah punar janana-maraņa-

prabandha-rūdhah śarīra-rogam anurujyate | sarvātma-darśinas tu tad asambhava ity

etad āha

B. Vidyāranya's Brhadāranyaka-vārtikasāra (BVS) on BU 4.4.12:261

BVS 4.4.272: brahmāvabodha-yuktānām niśeso duhkha-samksayah |

ślokena pamcamenātra vispastam abhidhīyate ||

273: purusah paripūrņo 'yam asmīti hy āparoksyatah | ya ātmānam vijānāti śarīranujvaro 'sya kah 274: na vetti cet svam ātmānam dehātmatva-bhramād asau

bhoktus tasyaiva bhogāya bhogam icchann anujvaret || 275: yasya sārvātmya-bodhena bādhah syād bhoktr-bhogyayoh | kim iļc]chan kasya kāmāya śarīram anusamjvaret ||

276: niḥsangasyābhisambandho dehenāsya na kaścana nāto dehādi-duhkhena duhkhitvam pratyag-ātmanah |

260 Upanisads, Author Unknown (1964), p.925. 261 Vajhe, p.928; Dwivedī, v.4, pp.2355-6.

96 C. Maheśvaratīrtha's țīkā on BVS 4.4.272-6:262

272: ātmānam ity ady avatārayati brahmeti

273: ślokāksarāņi vyākurvan jñāna-prakāram abhinayati purușa iti |

274: ātmadhiyo jvara-nivṛtti-hetutvam upapādayitum tad ajñānasya jvara-hetutvam āha

neti | svasya bhoktrtva-bhramād bhogya-jātam icchan bhogya-nāśe jvaran tad

deham anu jvaret tapyetety arthah

275: jñānasya tan nivrtti-hetutvam upapādayati yasyeti bhoktur brahma-rūpatve

bhogyasya tucchatve ca jñāne kim bhogyam kasya bhoktuh kāmāyecchan

śarīropadhi-krta-duhkham anu duhkhī syad ity arthah | 276: deha-tāpenātmanas tāpābhāvam uktam eva spastayati nihsangasyeti |

Image of Vidyāraņya in JNM, Dīkșita (1983), p. iii.

262 BVS: Vajhe, p.928.

97 Index

Entries are arranged in the order of the English alphabet. Sanskrit terms are in italics. Names of persons, places, works and other proper nouns are listed without italics, with the first letter capitalized. Though footnotes are also indexed, limitations of the indexing software do not allow for listing the footnote numbers wherein an entry occurs, only the page number where it occurs is provided.

Abhedananda 4,7,85 Beļaguļa copper plates 13 abhyāsa 30, 47,51 Belvalkar, S.K 19, 36, 79, 86 Ācārya ........... .5, 9, 25, 26, 67, 82, 83, 91 bhakti. 45 acintya-bhedābheda. 19 Bhāmati 68,93 Acyutarāya Modaka .4,7 Bhāratītīrtha ... iv, iii, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, adhikarana 23,85 12, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, adhyāya 56, 57, 63 25, 28, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 54, 56, 67, advaitānanda 46 68, 69, 70, 71, 73, 75, 76, 77, 82, 85, ahaṅkāra 41,43 89 Aitareya-Upanişad ... iv, 18, 40, 79, 93 bhāsya .... iv, 2, 16, 56, 60, 68, 77, 79, 95 ajñāna 51 bhāvanā See meditation ānanda Bhoganātha 5, 9, 13, 15,21 .... 1, 6, 16, 37, 40, 44, 45, 46, 48, 53 bhumānanda 49 ānanda-pañcaka 1, 40,53 brahman āndhra 11 ... 1, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 44, 46, 47, 48, anger. 40,48 50, 51, 53, 54, 57, 58, 59, 62, 64, 65, Āngīrasa gotra 10 67, 71, 72, 73, 74 anirvācya. 41 brāhmana 58, 59, 62, 63 antahkarana 42 brahmānanda ... 7, 24, 26, 27, 28, 32, 44, Anubhūti-prakāśa .. iv, 18, 20, 29, 30, 31, 45, 46, 48, 73 32, 33, 34, 35, 76, 79, 88, 90 Brahmānanda Bhāratī. 22,26 Anupama-prakāśa 18 Brahmasūtra. 23, 68, 80,93 anustubh 31,50, 63 Brajbhāsā. 6 aparoksa .. ... 43, 50, 51, 52, 54, 67 Brhadāranyaka Upanisad .... iv, 2, 17, 18, Aparoksānubhūti 36,79 27, 30, 32, 40, 41, 45, 56, 57, 62, 63, aparoksātma-vijñāna. 38 64, 66, 68, 69, 70, 73, 77, 80, 93 Appayya Dīksita. BU 4.3.2 57 6, 23, 24, 25, 34, 75, 84 BU 4.3.21 57 araņya 24 BU 4.3.23 57 ātman .... 1, 37, 38, 40, 43, 45, 47, 50, 51, BU 4.3.32 57 52, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 65, 72 BU 4.3.33 58 ātmānanda 45,46,51 BU 4.4.10 58 attachment 40 BU 4.4.122, 27, 32, 35, 41, 47, 50, 51, avidyā. 37, 39, 42, 71, 72 54, 55, 56, 59, 60, 63, 64, 67, 68, āvṛti 51,54 69, 76,77,95 Banavāsi 9 BU 4.4.13 58

98 BU 4.4.21 58 Hacker, P 11,87 BU 4.4.7. 68 Halbfass, W 11,87 BU 4.4.7 58 Hampi 1,9,89 Brhadāranyaka-vārtika-sāra Harihara I 1, 9, 10, 17,21 .... iv, 3, 17, 18, 20, 34, 35, 55, 56, 63, Harihara II 1, 9, 13, 17,75 64, 66, 67, 69, 77, 81, 95, 96 Heras, H 11, 12,87 Buddhist 38,88 hrdaya 62 Bukka I .... 1, 9, 13, 15, 16, 19, 20, 34, 75 icchā 45,52 Chāndogya Upanisad .. iv, 29, 30, 40, 68, Islam 11 93 īśvara ..... 6, 37, 39, 40, 42, 50, 67, 71, 72 cidābhāsa. 42, 50, 52, 67, 72, 74 Jagannadham, P ........... 10, 11, 35, 88, 90 cidātmā 40 jagat ....... ....... 14, 18, 19, 20, 30, 42, 68 cit ... 1, 24, 37, 43, 48, 72 Jaiminīya-Nyāya-Mālā. citradīpa 4, 7,24,40 .. iv, 15, 16, 19, 22, 34, 81, 96 colophon 19 Jain 19 Cowell & Gough 10 jalpa 57 daśanāmin 24 Janaka .... 57,59 Dasgupta, S. 6, 16, 27, 63,86 Janaki, S. S. 35,88 deep sleep. 44,57 jīva .. desire .. 40, 41, 45, 47, 52, 57, 58, 59, 60, 24, 25, 34, 37, 39, 40, 42, 47, 50, 51, 62, 64, 65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 74 67, 71,72 detachment See vairâgya jīvanmukta. 38, 42,50 dharma-śāstra 14,15 jīvanmukti 54, 68,77 Dhātu-vrtti . iv, 35,81 Jīvan-mukti-viveka . dhī 47 .. iv, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 27, dhyānadīpa. 24, 42,51 28, 32, 33, 34, 75, 81 dīpa 1, 6,40 JMV 2.10.10 28 dīpa-pañcaka JMV 2.10.27-29 28 dīpikā . iv, 6, 18, 20, 34, 36, 79 JMV 2.3.26 28 discrimination 1, 22, 41,45,51 JMV 5.1.25 28 dream. 45,57 jñāna 49, 50, 51, 54, 64, 96 Drg-drśya-viveka .. iv, 16, 22, 23, 24, 25, Jog, D.V 5, 7, 10, 21, 31, 82 26,34,81 Kāla-Mādhavīya .... iv, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, duality ....... 37, 38, 39, 41, 44, 46, 52, 74 34, 35,81 dvaitaviveka 39 Kāla-nirņaya .. See Kala-mādhavīya Dwivedī, V 17, 63, 81,95 Kānchi 15 elements, five .See Kane, P.V .... 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 22, 88 pañcamahābhūtaviveka kannada 11 Filliozat, V 10, 13, 21, 86,89 Karmarkar, D.P 36, 82,88 Ganeśa 14, 15, 19, 20, 34 Karnataka ,9,81 Goa 9 Khila-kānda 56,59 Goodding, R 11, 14, 28, 63, 81 kośa 37,38,53 guna .... 37, 40,48 guru-vamśa-kāvya 22

99 ānandamaya. 6,39,44 Mishra, G. 10,79 annamayakośa 38 mithyā. 38,45,52 manomaya. 39 moksa 77 prānamaya 39 mūdha 45 vijñānamaya 39 Muktika Upanisad 28,32 Kripacharyulu, M ... 6, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, mumuksu. 54 17, 18, 22, 35, 36, 88 Mundaka Upanisad ...... iv, 29, 30, 68, 93 Krsnānanda-bhāratī. 26 Muni-kānda ... See Yājñavalkya-kānda kulaguru 9 Naiskarmyasiddhi 58,93 Kulke, H 10, 11, 12, 13, 22, 75, 88 Nakamura, H .. 2,89 kūtastha Nanjundayya, H.V. 12, 17, 24, 89 40, 41, 42, 50, 52, 67, 72, 74, 87 narmasaciva. 13 Laghusangraha .. 56,63,81 nātakadīpa 43 Laghu-vārttika-vyākhyā 63 neti, neti. 57,60 Mādhava ..... iv, iii, 1, 2, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, 28, 29, nididhyāsana .. 37, 41, 42, 44, 51, 53, 68, 73 31, 33, 34, 35, 63, 75, 83, 86, 88, 91 Nikhilānanda, S. 22,81,82 Mādhavācārya.4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, nirguņa 43 17, 21, 75, 83, 85 Niścaladāsa 6, 7, 8, 22, 33,89 Mādhavamantrin 9,35 Niścalānanda See Niścaladāsa Mādhavānanda 56,80 non-duality 47 Madhu-kānda 56,59 Nrsimhottara-tāpanīya Upanișad 18,82 Madhusūdana Sarasvati 19 Dīpikā. 18 Mahadevan, T.M.P .. 1, 6, 8, 9, 15, 22, 23, Dīpika closing vv 1-2. 18 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 33, 63, 80, 89 Dīpikā opening vv 1-3 18 mahāvākya 26, 37, 40, 51 NUTU 1.1 18 Mahāvākya-darpaņa 26 Olivelle, P. ...... 14, 19, 60, 83, 85, 89, 90 Maheśvaratīrtha. 56, 63, 64, 65, 96 om 19 Maitreyī 59 pain. 39,44 manana ...... 37, 41, 42, 44, 51, 53, 68, 73 Pañcadaśī manda 48, 73 .i, iv, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 16, 17, 20, Mandana Miśra .68 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, mandaprajña 45 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 50, 53, 54, Māndūkya Upanisad iv, 40, 82 56, 63, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, mańgala-śloka 5,22 75, 76,77,82 Marcaurelle, R 17,63,89 PD 1.1 16 matha. . iii, 1, 11, 12, 17, 21, 75 PD 1.16 71 māyā .......... 37, 38, 39, 40, 46, 50, 51, 71 PD 1.17 72 Māyana 9, 10,35 PD 1.52-53 37 meditation 37, 40, 49, 51, 56, 72 PD 1.55 51 bhāvanā. 43 PD 11.85 44,45 dhyāna. 42,43 PD 12.65-67 28 upāsana 43,56 PD 14.38 27 Michell, G 10,89 PD 14.39 27

100 PD 14.40-64 27 prakarana ........ 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 33, 41, 69 PD 14.5 27,32 prakarana grantha 1,69 PD 15.19 73 Prakāśātman .. 16,71 PD 15.34 73 prakrti 37,40,71 PD 2.49 38 prāna 58 PD 3.10 39 Pranava-mīmāmsā. ....... iv, 19, 20, 34, 83 PD 3.37 39,72 prārabdha karman 52, 53, 68 PD 4.68 28 41 pratyag-ātman 65 PD 6.150 Punjani, S. 1, 9, 13, 63,74,90 PD 6.153-163 24 Pūrņānandendu-kaumudī 4 PD 6.18 72 pūrușa 50 PD 6.237 41 pūrvapakșa. 23 PD 7.1 27, 32, 50 pūrvāśrama 4, 8, 13,15 PD 7.103 68 rāga 45 PD 7.139 28 rajas 37, 48,71 PD 7.156 28 Rāma Sharma, M.H 9, 15, 17,90 PD 7.164 52 Rāmacandra Bhārati 11,75 PD 7.2 42,50 Rāmakrsna ... 5, 16, 25, 28, 33, 67, 76, 83 PD 7.206 69 Ramanuja Tatacharya 22 PD 7.247 53 Raphael 22,81 PD 7.252 53 rebirth. 39,47 PD 7.253-270 27 reflection .. 41, 42, 48, 51, 71, 72, 73 PD 7.265 52 14 PD 7.291-297 Rgveda . 27 43 PD 8.25 saguņa 72 Saiva ... 15 PD 8.26 42,72 sajātīya-bheda. 38 PD 8.3 72 sāksin ....... .. 43, 47, 52, 72 PD 9.121 73 PD 9.13 Saletore, B.A. 9, 10, 11,75,90 73 samādhāna .. PD 9.134 67,68 43 samādhi 5, 37, 43, 51, 52, 53 PD 9.54 73 samāsa .. 40 pañcaka 7,28,32 sāmkhya. 43 pañcakośaviveka 38 Samksepa-śārīraka .. 19 pañcamahābhūtaviveka 38 71 samsāra 18,61,62 Pañca-pādikā .. samvādi-bhrama 72 Pañca-pādikā-vivarana 16,71 sañcita-karman 47 Parāśara-mādhavīya. sandeha 23 .... iv, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 34, 35, 75,83 Sańgama 1, 13,35 sangati 23 Parāśara-smrti .. See Pārāśara-mādhavīya 35 paroksa . 42, 50, 51, 54, 67 Sangīta-sāra

pleasure ........... 13, 39, 44, 52, 64, 65, 74 Śańkara .... iv, 1, 2, 11, 16, 19, 22, 24, 36,

Potter, K. ........... 6, 16, 18, 24, 26, 63, 90 54, 56, 60, 61, 62, 65, 68, 69, 71, 72

prajñā 58 73, 77, 80, 82, 84, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93,95

101 Sankarācārya 11,12 Sureśvara ....... . 17, 29, 63, 68, 82, 86, 93 Sankara-digvijaya .. .... iv, 10, 35, 83 Suryanarayana Sastri, S.S. 24, 25, 84, 85 Śankarānanda ..... 5, 16, 17, 20, 21, 34 Sūta-samhita. 10,35 sannyāsa. 5, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 21, 75 svagata-bheda. .38 sannyāsin 1,24 Swahananda, S 1,83 Sara-sangraha 18 Taittirīya Upanisad .. v, 30, 38, 68, 73, 93 śarīra. 37, 53, 61, 68, 95 tamas .. 37, 48,71 Sārīrika-nyāya-manimāla. 19 tat tvam asi .. 40 Sarva-darśana-sangraha .. iv, 9, 10, 83, 84 Tātparya-dīpikā 10,35 Sarvajñātman. 19 tattvaviveka 37 Sarva-vedānta-siddhānta-sāra-sangraha tenth man .. .. 50, 51, 53, 73, 74 19,84 Thangaswami, R. ... 6, 17, 19, 22, 26, 31, śastra . 43,72,74 35,91

sat 1, 37, 38, 41,48 tīrtha 14, 15, 21, 24 sattva. 37, 48, 52, 71 Trptidīpa. 2, 5, 25, 27,41 Sāyana .. 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 19, 35, 83, 88, Trptidīpa-prakarana 91 ... i, iv, 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 36, 42, 50, 56, 67, self-realization 38 68,75 Sewell, R 9, 11,90 Tungabhadra Shastri, A.V 83 upadeśa 56 Shastri, J.L. 80 Upadeśa-sāhasrī v, 68, 84, 89 Shastri, V 5,34,91 US 1.12.3 73 Shastry, A.K. 12, 22,91 US 1.17.88 vii sheath See kośa US 1.18.170-4,187,190,199 !. 73 siddhānta .. 19, 23,84 Siddhānta-leśa-sangraha ... iv, 24, 25, 34, US 1.18.43 72 Upādhyāya, B .. 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 75,84 21, 22, 35, 36, 83, 91 Śiva .17,81 upanisad. 18, 31,37,39 smrti 28,67,68 Uttamaślokatīrtha 63 śoka-apagama 51,54 Uttankita Epigraphs 13,21 śraddhā 45 śravana ...... 37, 41, 42, 44, 51, 53, 68, 73 vairāgya . 41

Srikantaya, S ... 12, 13, 14, 22, 35, 86, 91 Vaiyāsika-nyāya-mālā ... v, 22, 23, 34, 85 Vākya-sudhā 22,26 Śrīkantha 14, 15, 19, 34 Śrńgerī. vamśa-vrksah 31 Vārttika ....... iii, 1, 5, 11, 12, 13, 17, 21, 31, 75 17,63 vāsanā 44 śruti ... 5, 18, 25, 30, 40, 42, 44, 45, 61, 68, vāsanānanda 44,49 Vedānta Deśika 69 ... See Venkatanātha Venimadhava Shastri ... 5, 15, 16, 18, 22, śruti-vākya ... 2, 50, 54, 56, 58, 67, 76, 77 34 substratum. 39,46 Venkatanatha. 19 Sundaram Iyer. .36 śūnya 38 Venkataraman, K.R .... 10, 12, 16, 17, 21,

superimposition. 39, 40, 42, 51 22, 71,92 Verghese, A 10

102 vicāra 43 Viśistādvaita 19 Vidyānagara 9,10 Visnu . 17,93 vidyānanda 47 Vivaraņa .. Vidyāranya. iv, iii, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, ......... v, 16, 20, 34, 71, 85 Vivarana-prameya-sangraha .... v, 16, 20, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 34, 85 21, 22, 23, 25, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, vivarta 46 34, 35, 36, 54, 56, 63, 65, 70, 71, 72, viveka . 1, 6, 7, 14, 19, 23, 34, 40, 46, 51, 73, 75, 76, 77, 79, 81, 82, 83, 88, 89, 75,81 91,95,96 viveka-pañcaka. 1,40 vidyāsukha. 44 vrtti 18, 35, 48,72 Vidyātīrtha. Vrtti-prabhākara. . 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 6,7,89 vyākhyāna 67 23, 31, 34, 54, 76 vyavahāra. 73 vijātīya-bheda 38 Wagoner, P. 11,92 Vijayanagara .. 1, 2, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 23, Yājñavalkya 2, 56, 57, 58,59 75, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92 Yājñavalkya-kānda 56,61 founding myths .. 9 yoga ... 12, 43, 44, 46, 49, 51, 93 viksepa 51,54 yogānanda 44,51 virakta 48 yukti ... 37 vișaya 23,43,81 vişayānanda . 44, 48, 52, 73