Pre-Sankara
Advaita
17.11.2019
The metaphor of dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants (Latin: nanos gigantum
humeris insidentes) expresses the meaning of
"discovering truth by building on previous discoveries". This concept
has been traced to the 12th century, attributed to Bernard of Chartres.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_giants
This picture is derived
from Greek mythology: the blind giant Orion carried his
servant Cedalion on his
shoulders to act as the giant's eyes.
Isaac Newton said he had seen farther by
standing on the shoulders of giants[1],
The idea
of knowledge as cumulative - a ladder, or a tower of stones, rising higher and
higher - existed only as one possibility among many. For several hundred years,
scholars of scholarship had considered that they might be like dwarves seeing
farther by standing on the shoulders of giants, but they tended to believe more
in rediscovery than in progress. - Issac Newton
What
Des-Cartes did was a good step. You have added many several ways, and
especially in taking the colours of thin plates into philosophical
consideration. If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of
Giants.
Pre-Sankara
Advaita
1. Bādari
2. Auḍulomi
3. Kāsakṛtsna
4. Āśmarathya
5. Ātreya
6. Kārṣṇājini
7. Bādarāyaṇa
(400 BCE)
8. Upavarṣa
(50-400 BCE)
9. Bodhāyana
(5th century CE) Jñāna-karma-samuccaya-vāda
10. Taṅka (550 CE) Jñāna-karma-samuccaya-vāda
11.
Brahmadatta Jñāna-karma-samuccaya-vāda
12.
Bharuch (9th century CE) Jñāna-karma-samuccaya-vāda
13. Draviḍa (aka Dramiḍa)
14.
Guhadeva
15.
Kapardin
1. Bādari
- an Advaita-Ācārya
is referred to four times in Brahmasūtra[2]
-
1.2.30, 3.1.11, 4.3.7, 4.4.10, and seven times in the Jaimini-sūtra 3.1.3.,
4.1.27, 5.3.6, 6.1.27, 8.3.6, 9.2.23, 9.2.30. Thus, it is proved that he wrote on
both Karma-Mīmāṃsā and Brahma-Mīmāṃsā.
He opined that everyone has right to
perform the Vaidika Karma. Conversely, Jaimini
refuted this and said - the śudras do not have right to perform Vaidika Karma.
2. Auḍulomi - an
Advaita-Ācārya,
is referred to in Brahmasūtra 1.3.21,
3.4.45, 4.4.6.
3. Kāsakṛtsna
- an Advaita-Ācārya,
is referred to in Brahmasūtra 1.4.22
4. Āśmarathya - an Advaita-Ācārya, is referred to in Brahmasūtra 1.2.29, 1.4.20[3] and Jaimini-sūtra 6.5.16.
As
per Āśmarathya, the
statement ātmani vijñāte sarvam-idaṃ vijñātaṃ bhavati
shows Bhedābheda. This Bhedābheda was later confirmed by Yādavaprakāśa
5.
Ātreya - an
Advaita-Ācārya,
is referred to in Brahmasūtra 3.4.44, Jaiminisūtra 4.3.18
and 6.1.26 and in the Mahābhārata 13I.137.3[4].
He
has written about the aṅgāśrita upāsanā
which is
i) yajamāna-kartṛka and
ii) ṛtvik-kartṛka.
Now, doubt can be raised as to whom the result will go. Ātreya's
contention is - the result will go to the yajamāna/kartā.
6. Kārṣṇājini - Referred
to in Brahmasūtra 3.1.9.
7. Bādarāyaṇa (400 BCE)[5]
wrote Brahmasūtra which is considered the Nyāya-prasthāna of the Prasthānatrayī. It has 535 sūtras
as per Śaṅkara, 545 as per Rāmānuja and 564 as per Madhva.
8. Upavarṣa (350-400 BCE) an Advaita-Ācārya
(brother of Varṣa, Pānini’s guru). The
vṛttikāra in Brahmasūtra-bhāṣyam.
Śāriraka-Mīmāṃsā-Vṛtti - a
sub-commentary on the Brahmasūtra. He also wrote a commentary
on Jaimini-sūtra. Upavarṣa is referred to by Śaṅkara in his BSSB 3.3.53.
Upavarṣa has
referred to the six pramānas in his vṛtti. Referred to in Sābarabhāṣya
(Mimāṃsāsūtra 1.1.5)
9. Bodhāyana (5th century CE) (Jñāna-Karma-samuccaya).
popularly known as the vṛttikāra is an
Advaita-Ācārya who
wrote a concise vṛtti[7] (Bodhāyana-Vṛtti (or
Kṛtakoṭi)
on Brahmasūtra
dated around 400 BCE. Only one person had memorized. The text is not extant
afterward.
10.Taṅka (550 CE) (Jñāna-karma-samuccaya-vāda)
Taṅka (aka Brahmānandin or Nandin), an Advaita Ācārya was known as vākyakāra in the Vaiṣṇava
tradition. He is described as Ātreya or Atrivaṃsīya (descendant of Sage Atri).
Taṅka, well-versed in the field of Vedanta, is
said to have written commentaries on the Chāndogya Upaniṣad. His
commentary on Chāndogya Upaniṣad in
the form of brief statements was referred to as sūtras by Madhusudana
Saraswati, they being similar to Brahmasūtras. All his works are lost. But his sayings are quoted by the later
scholars. His time is estimated to be around 550 CE; which is, after Bodhāyana, but before Dramiḍa, Bhartṛprapañca and Śaṅkara.
The Viśiṣṭādvaitins consider Taṅka and Brahmānandin or Nandin as
one person.
Hence, Taṅka emphasized the union
of knowledge and action, which later came to be known as Jñāna-karma-samuccaya-vāda. He was opposed to the notion of instantaneous enlightenment.
In Taṅka’s work, the
relationship between Brahman and the phenomenal world is likened to that
between the ocean and its foam. Rāmānuja states that Taṅka puts forth Pariṇāma-vāda and explains the
phenomenal world arising out of Brahman like dadhi (coagulated
milk) from milk.
If we can try to
summarize Taṅka’s views :
Brahman is the Ātmā of all and everything is pervaded by
Brahman; That which exists in the space within the heart, the golden person
seen in the eye and so on which are discussed in the Upaniṣads refer to Brahman. Its essence is pure consciousness Prajñā. It is eternal and has a form which is beyond the senses; yet, it
resides in everything and controls the desires of all the deities and beings.
Thus, Taṅka, it seems, held that each of the individual selves corresponds to the
body of Brahman.
Rāmānuja has referred the name of at least six ācāryas who had written about
Vedanta. And they were not nirviśeṣa brahmavādins. They were Bodhāyana,
Taṅka, Dramida, Guhadeva, Kapardika, and Bharuchi.
Amongst these, the contentions of Taṅka (aka Brahmānandi) is non-different from
the contentions of the Vaiṣṇavas.
11. Brahmadatta (Jñāna-Karma-samuccaya-vāda)
He was a senior
contemporary to Śaṅkara.
Brahmadatta
was an upholder of jñāna-karma-samuccaya-vāda[10]
and Dhyāna-niyoga. He propounded videha-mukti[11]
and rejected jivan-mukti.
12. Bharuchi (Viśiṣṭādvaita) 9th century CE - (Jñāna-karma-samuccaya-vāda)
Bharuchi (aka Baruchi) said to be an
ancient scholar on Vedanta. Traditionally, he is placed before Dramiḍa.
Bharuchi, it seems, also advocated the combination
of knowledge (Jñāna) and action (Karma)
- Jñāna-karma-samuccaya-vāda. He is said to have held the view that Sāṃkhya and Yoga as two
systems that complement each other. Rāmānuja held Bharuchi
in high esteem, but does not explicitly quote any of his views.
Bharuchi is also recognized as an author or a
commentator on Dharmaśāstra. He is said to
have written a commentary on certain chapters of Manusmṛti [12]. He is also credited
with commentary (Tīkā) on Viṣṇu-dharmasūtra. Bharuchi is mentioned as an
authority in Vijñāneśvara’s Mitākṣara[13] on Yājñavalkya-smṛti and, in
Mādhava's Tīkā on Parāśara-saṃhitā[14] and Saraswatīvilāśa[15] One of his quotations
also occurs in the commentary composed on the Āpastamba Gṛhyasūtra by Sudarshana Suri, a teacher of Viśiṣṭādvaita.
However, none of his
works on Vedanta has survived. Vishal Agarwal, a noted scholar, has attempted to
reconstruct Bharuchi’s views on Vedanta issues as gleamed from the
comments on certain verses of Manusmṛti. According to
that:
(a) Bharuchi appeared to have
believed in the combination of action and knowledge as essential for salvation (Jñāna-karma-samuccaya-vāda). Bharuchi says - in all the stages of life, combination of
knowledge and action is to be known as the means of attaining Brahmaloka. Performing rites such as
Agnihotra regularly all through one’s life is obligatory, no matter whether one
takes sannyāsa or not.
(b) He seemed to believe in a
distinction between Jīvas and Brahman. Bharuchi
supports the Sāṃkhya doctrine of duality of Puruṣa and Pradhāna.
(c) He appears to believe that the soul
is nirguṇa in the sense that it does not have guṇas such as: sattva, rajas and tamas.
However, he believes in the duality of souls and matter in the effected world.
(d) He refers to the distinction between
dualists and non-dualists amongst Vedantins.
In summary, it appears
that Bharuchi’s Vedantic views resembled those of Rāmānuja, Bhāskara
Bhaṭṭa and other
non-Advaitins, more than they resembled the views of Advaita Vedanta.
13. Draviḍa/ aka Dramiḍa
Draviḍa[16] was an ancient Vedantin/ Advaita-Acārya. He has written an elaborate commentary
on Chāndogya
Upaniṣad. He has also commented on Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad,[17]
Chāndogya-vākyas
of Taṅka, Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad, as well as on Brahmasūtra.
Draviḍa is respectfully
referred to as Dramiḍācārya, the bhāṣyakāra or bhāṣyakṛt, the commentator par excellence. His
views are often cited by Rāmānuja in his Sribhāṣya and in Vedārtha-saṅgraha.
Śaṅkara has referred to him
as āgamavit in Mānḍūkya
Upaniṣad bhāṣyam 2.32, 2.20. Śaṅkara also cites Draviḍa as an authority at the beginning of his commentary on Chāndogya Upaniṣad (3.10). In Bṛhadāraṇyaka-Upaniṣad-bhāṣyam, Śaṅkara calls him sampradāyavit. Śaṅkara has not refuted the contentions of Draviḍa, which shows that his contentions were not against Śaṅkara 's.
Draviḍa was later than Taṅka, as Dramiḍa is said to have written a bhāṣya on the vākyas of Taṅka[18].
It is said, Draviḍa explained Brahman as the absolute principle, creator of the universe (viśva-sṛj); as the Supreme Divinity (parā-devatā) having internal
attributes (antarguṇa); and as Lord of the world (lokeśvara) who creates the phenomenal world and regulates all the worlds.
Draviḍa did not seem to make
a distinction between Brahman and Īśvara. Brahman or Īśvara’s relation to the
universe is compared to that of a king with his kingdom. The theistic doctrine
of liberation is presented on the basis of the relation between the Lord and the individual self.
According to Draviḍa, the Highest Self and individual self belong to the same genus (jāti) just as the sparks coming out of the fire
but are not identical.
The individual self
purified from all taints by performing meditation is liberated by the grace of
the Lord; and then attains union with the Lord. The liberation according to Draviḍa is that the individual self residing in peace with the Highest Self, and that is granted by the grace of the Lord.
And, while it is with
the Lord, the individual self still retains its identity as before. Though it
is in union with the Highest Self, it does not possess the powers of creation,
sustenance and dissolution. On this point, Taṅka and Draviḍa are one, and it is close to the doctrine of Rāmānuja.
14. Guhadeva
Guhadeva and Kapardin were said to be
ancient Vedanta teachers and authors. The two were referred to by Rāmānuja as śiṣṭa - wise and erudite.
But, nothing much is known these scholars, and Rāmānuja does not also seem to
quote from their works.
As regards Guhadeva,
some scholars surmise - if Guhadeva mentioned by Rāmānuja is the same as the
ancient scholar Guhasvāmin, then it is possible that he could be
the one who flourished during the first century BCE, and to whom the
commentaries on the Āpastamba- Śrautasutra and the Taittiraya-Āraṇyaka are attributed.
15. Kapardin
Kapardin is a peculiar name. It does not seem to
be the proper name of the person. It is a descriptive term. Kapardin[19]
indicates one who has matted, braided hair or hair twisted into a bun on top (Kaparda-kapardi) -
jaṭilo muṇḍaḥ smaśāna-gṛhasevakaḥ |
ugra vratadharo rudro
yogi tripuradāruṇaḥ ||
In the context of
Vedanta texts, Karpadi might refer to a sage who is said to have written
commentaries on the texts of the Taittiriya
(Āpastamba) śākhā of the Kṛṣṇa Yajurveda. We do not know if Rāmānuja was referring to this Kapardin. In any case, nothing much is
known about the commentator Kapardin.
[2]
aka Śārirakasūtra aka
Vedāntasūtra
[3] Śaṅkara in his Brahmasūtra-bhāshyam 1.4.22 has stated āsmarathyasya...
[4]
where he is teaching Nirguṇa
Brahman
[5]
almost all scholars agree to
this period
[7]
(a short gloss explaining the Sutras in a little more, extended
manner, but not as extensively as a Bhashya,
a full-blown commentary)
of
the greatest importance; fundamental.
"two cardinal points must be
borne in mind"
synonyms:
|
fundamental, basic, main, chief, primary, prime, principal, premier, first, leading, capital, paramount
, pre-eminent;
|
[9]
holding
an opinion at odds with what is generally accepted.
[11] Śaṅkara propounded jivanmukti on the basis of tat-tu samanvayāt. After jivanmukti, videhamukti is
superfluous.
[12]
first four chapters, parts of chapter
five, and verses of later chapters
[13]
1.18 and 2.124
[14]
2.3
[15]
Ch 133
[16] It was Draviḍa, who illustrated the famous story of
the huntsman and the prince in Chāndogya Upaniṣad wrt
tat-tvam-asi, adapted by Śaṅkara,
Sureśvara, Ānandagiri and Madhva.
[19] Rudra is often
addressed as Kapardin (imā rudrāya tavase kapardine - RV.1.114.1 -
Rudra with hair knotted like Kaparda, a cowry shell).
And, it seems during
the Vedic times some men and women sported braids or plaits of hair. For
instance; a woman having four plaits of hair was called chatuṣ-kapardin; and, the Vasithas wearing their hair
in a plait on the right side were known as Dakṣinatas – kaparda.[Ref: Vedic Index of Names and
Subjects, Volume 1; Volume 5 by Arthur Berriedale Keith]
It is also said; a
certain Kapardin (Ca. 800-25 CE) assisted a Rashtrakuta
Chieftain in extending his rule in the region due to which act the region came
to be known in his honour as Kapardika - Dvipa or Kavadi
- Dvipa. The term Kapardika Dvipa occurs
in the inscriptions of the Kadamba Kings who ruled over Goa and Banavasi region
of North Karnataka. Some surmise that the name of the strip along the west
coast – Konkan, may have derived from Kapardika.
No comments:
Post a Comment