365bet娱乐

1 This seems to be the currently accepted approximation of the period of Samkara's life, though we must keep in mind the tradition that he lived for a mere 32 years. In 1950 H. Nakamura argued for the dates 700-750; he was followed by L. Renou and D. H. H. Ingalls. P. Hacker in 1959 proposed a slightly earlier period beginning ca. 650, and in 1981 Potter concluded, "No firm evidence forces us to date Samkara any later than mid-seventh century. See Karl H. Potter, ed., Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Vol. III: Advaita Vedanta up to Samkara and His Pupils (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981), p. 116; Hardy, Viraha-Bhakti, p. 488, note 23; Sengaku Mayeda, A Thousand Teachings: The Upadesasahasri of Samkara (Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1979), p. 3, "The Authenticity of the Bhagavadgitabhasya ascribed to Samkara,' " Wiener Zeitschrift, IX (1965), p. 155, note 1. Prior to Nakamura's research, however, the dates 788-820 were standard. The difference of one century is not crucial for the present discussion. 2 Adya Prasad Mishra, The development and Place of Bhakti in Samkara Vedanta (Allahabad: The University of Allahabad, 1967), p. ii. 3 Sri Ramakrishna was a great bhakta, but nevertheless taught that Advaita was the highest truth and the aim of all spiritual disciplines. His leading disciple, Swami Vivekananda, seemed publicly to be more of a jnanin, but had profound devotional experiences in his private life. Vivekananda once stated: "He [Sri Ramakrishna] was all bhakti without, but within he was all jnana; I am all jnana without; but within my heart it is all bhakti" (The Life of Swami Vivekananda By His Eastern and Western Disciples [Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1955], p. 115). 4 Smarananda, pp. 300-309. 鈥� 5 s. Radhakrishnan, The Brahma Sutra: The Philosophy of the Spiritual Life (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1960), p. 37. 6 One possible exception is Sridhara Svamin (ca. 1350-1450), who wrote valuable commentaries on the Visnu and 389

390 Bhagavata Puranas and the Bhagavad Gita A member of the Purf order of Sankara samnyasins, he was nominally an Advaitin. His devotional leanings were so strong, however, that the authoritativeness of his commentaries was questioned by orthodox non-dualists. Although he held along with Samkara that the world is a false appearance, he was sufficiently influenced by Vaisnava thought to adopt certain teachings that were incompatible with Advaita. Most notable of these was the notion, typical of theistic Vedanta, of a plurality of souls that emanate from God like sparks from a fire. This in itself was enough to disqualify him from consideration as a strict non-dualist. Madhusudana, in spite of his advocacy of bhakti, would never have accepted such a notion. Sridhara also interpreted the concept of Sakti more realistically than did Samkara or Madhusudana. Like the Bhagavata-purana and the Krsna-devotionalists (and Madhusudana in the Bhakti-rasayana), he taught that bhakti was a goal superior to moksa, being possible even after liberation. See Jadunath Sinha, The Philosophy & Religion of Chaitanya and His Followers (Calcutta: Sinha Publishing House Private Limited, 1976), 1-11; also Elkman, p. 30, note 15. pp. Other, more orthodox writers of post-samkara Advaita prior to Madhusudana saw no need to diverge from the emphatic subordination of bhakti to jnana envisioned by their great master. This is understandable, since during this period they were often engaged in the process of defending their system against the vigorous attacks of devotionalists such as Ramanuja and Madhva. On this, see Mishra, pp. iv, 154-155. Appaya Diksita, a younger contemporary of Madhusudana, was a prolific South-Indian writer on Advaita who also had devotional leanings, in this case toward Siva and the Saiva teachings of Srikantha (ca. elevenththirteenth century). To satisfy his devotional bent, it seems, Appaya produced a number of works in which he adopted the point of view of that author, the most important of these writings being his Sivarkamanidipika, a commentary on Srikantha's Saiva interpretation of the Brahmasutras In his introduction to this work, he states that, while Sankara's understanding of the Brahmasutras is ultimately the most correct, the desire for the final Advaitic intuition can only come through the grace of Siva. Therefore, he argues, it is worthwhile writing a commentary that proclaims the supremacy of the saguna Brahman. In this devotional mood, Appaya, like Sridhara, presents a realistic interpretation of sakti without denying the Advaitin's notion that the world is an illusion. According to Prof. K. Sivaraman: "In his Siva rkamanidlpika and other works such as the Sivadvaitanirnaya and the Sivanandalahari, Appaya advocates the view of the identity of the universe with Brahman through citsakti [the supreme Consciousness-energy' of the Absolute]. The only

391 viable way of understanding citsakti parinama [the `transformation' of Consciousness-energy) is by treating the world thus 'evolved' as really speaking a vivarta [appearance] in Samkara's sense. Thus Srikantha's position, according to Appaya, culminates in vivartavada. If Srikantha still employs the language of visista [real qualification], 鈥� it is because, says Appaya, his task was the creation of faith in devotion to saguna brahman" (personal communication, December 1986). For a discussion of Appaya's theistically oriented concept of sarvamukti, see chap. 8.3. 7 See T. M. P. Mahadevan, The Hymns of Samkara & Co. Private Ltd., 1970). (Madras: Ganesh 8 See Radhakrishnan, Brahma Sutra, pp. 37-38. " 9 Even as orthodox a Hindu scholar as the highly respected Mahamahopadhyaya Gopi Nath Kaviraj writes regarding the hymns: "No doubt, most of these stotras must have been written by the later Samkaracaryas but all of them have been attributed to the first Samkaracarya. In reference to the treatises he says, "It is difficult to decide about the authorship and genuineness of these works" (translated from the Hindi by Mishra, p. 128). Of the prakaranas, Hacker, Ingalls, and Mayeda recognize only the Upadesasahasri as genuine, rejecting even the Atmabodha and Vivekacudamani, which are held in high esteem by the Advaita tradition (Potter, Advaita, pp. 116, 320). 10 Note that Jiva Gosvamin, a contemporary of Madhusudana and a bitter opponent of Samkara, still accepts the traditional attribution to the great non-dualist of several devotional poems on Krsna (Tattvasandarbha 23; Elkman, p. 188; see intro., note 12). While strict Advaitins do not accept devotion as part of their own spirituality, they have no difficulty in recommending it to others, as we shall see. To what extent the inclusion of bhakti in the form of stotras, puja, etc., in the discipline of the Samkara mathas ("monasteries") themselves is a legitimate expression of the Advaitic path, and to what extent it is a mere concession to the "weakness" of the available aspirants, is not clear. Swami Vivekananda's Advaita Ashrama at Mayavati in the Himalayan foothills provides an instructive example in this respect. It was established as center for strictly non-dualistic spiritual practice. For this reason images, puja, kirtan, and so on, were forbidden. This policy, however, proved almost impossible to enforce. Vivekananda discovered, while visiting the ashrama on one occasion, that certain residents had begun daily worship of a picture of Sri Ramakrishna. After returning to Calcutta, he remarked: "I thought of having one centre at least from which the external worship of Sri Ramakrishna would be excluded. But I found that the

392 Old Man had already established himself even there" (Swami Nikhilananda, Vivekananda: A Biography [3 rd ed.; Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1975], p. 316; see also pp. 282-283, 315- 316). Cp. note 44 below. 11 Sankara's authorship of the Bhagavadgitabhasya, convincingly demonstrated by Mayeda in 1965, has been accepted by Ingalls, Ragahvan, and Hacker. See Mayeda, "The Authenticity of the Bhagavadgitabhasya"; P. Hacker, "Relations of Early Advaitins to Vaisnavism," Wiener Zeitschrift, 1965, IX, 152; Potter, Advaita, pp. 294-295. In addition to the Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya, the Samkara-gita-bhasya, the commentaries on the 10 major Upanisads, the commentary on Gaudapada's Karikas on the Mandukya Upanisad, and the Upadesasahasri, Mayeda accepts as authentic works of Samkara (1) the Yogasutrabhasyavivarana, an exposition of Vyasa's commentary on the Yoga Sutras, and (2) the commentary on the Adhyatmapatala of the Apastambadarmasutra (A Thousand Teachings, p. 6). 12 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.1.11; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 61-62. 13 See his commentary on Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.5.1 (Swami Madhvananda, trans., The Brhadaranyaka Upanisad, with the Commentary of Samkaracarya, [5 th ed.; Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1975], p. 332-333; Potter, Advaita, p. 197). See also Eliot Deutsch, Advaita Vedanta: A Philosophical Reconstruction (Honolulu: East-West Center Press, 1969), chap. 3. 14 SBSB 2.2.28-32. In the post-Ssankara Advaita, a kind of subjective idealism called drstisstivada ("the doctrine of creation through perception") was put forward by Prakasananda (twelfth century), but there is no doubt that this view would have been rejected by Samkara. 15 Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 324. 16 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 2.2.14, Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 330. 17 Rudolph Otto, Mysticism East and West (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1970), p. 123. Later on the same page, Otto speaks of the "apara vidya Samkara" as a 'passionate theist." In view of what will be said about Samkara's views below, I think this latter statement is something of an misrepresentation. I do, however, agree with Otto's observation that the great Advaitin stands sympathetically on the inside of the theistic tradition. transcends it by moving "deeper, so to say, "from within." See the next note. 18 Hacker's study of Samkara's authentic works demonstrates that his thinking on conventional religious He

393 matters, as well as that of his disciples, is consistently Vaisnava in tone and language (Hacker, "Relations of Early Advaitins to Vaisnavism, pp. 147-154). In this article Hacker further suggests that the wide-spread notion that Samkara's religious background and sympathy was Saiva was originated by the much later writer Madhava-Vidyarana, "who on the basis of the mere name Sankara constructed the legend of the bhasyakara having been an incorporation of the divine Samkara or Siva" (p. 148). Cf. also Mayeda, A Thousand Teachings, p. 8, note 13. 19 pratyaksam eva jivasyesvaraviparitadharmatvam, Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 3.2.5; Brahmasutra Samnkarabhasya II, 705 (Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) II, 139). 20 viseso hi bhavati sariraparamesvarayoh / ekah karta bhokta dharmadharmasadhanah sukhaduhkhadimams ca, ekas tadviparito 'napahatapapmatvadigunah, Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.2.8; Brahmasutra Samnkarabhasya I, 155. 21 satyam / [Isvarah] sarire bhavati, na tu sarira eva bhavati / "jyayan prthivya jyayan antariksat, akasavat sarvagatas ca nityah" iti ca vyaptitvasravanat / jivas tu sarira eva bhavati, Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.2.3; Brahmasutra Samnkarabhasya I, 150. p. 22 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 3.2.9: "The soul which rises cannot be the Lord, who is everlastingly free from Nescience" (Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) II, 149). Samkara-gita-bhasya, intro., describes Isvara as "eternally pure, enlightened, and liberated" (nityasuddhabuddhamukta, see note 34). 23 "Omniscient, the source of scripture" (Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.1.3; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 20); "all knowing, all perceiving" (Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.2.21; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 136); "absolute ruler of past and the future" (Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.3.24; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 196). 24 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.3.30; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 215. 25 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 2.2.33; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 357. 26 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 4.4.17; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) II, 415-416. 27 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 2.1.14; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 329. 28 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 2.3.41; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) II, 59. 29 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 2.3.41; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) II, 58-59. 30 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 2.1.35-36; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 359-361. 31 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.1.5; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 50.

394 32 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 2.2.1 (Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 365-367); 2.1.34 (Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 357- 359); 3.2.38-41 (Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 180-183). See Otto, pp. 124-126. 33 syat paramesvarasyapicchavasan mayamayan rupam sadhakanugrahartham, Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.1.20; Brahmasutra Samnkarabhasya I, 112. 34 sa ca bhagavan jnanaisvaryasaktibalaviryatejobhih sada sampannas trigunatmikam vaisnavim svam mayam mulaprakrtin vasikrtyajo 'vayo bhutanam isvaro nityasuddhabuddhamuktasvabhavo 'pi san svamayaya dehavan iva jata iva lokanugrahan kurvan laksyate, Samkara-gita-bhasya, intro; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, 4-5. 35 yat tavad ucyate yo 'sau Narayanah paro 'vyaktat prasiddhah paramatma sarvatma sa atmanatmanam anekadha vyuhyavasthita iti, tan na nirakriyate yad api tasya bhagavato 'bhigamanadi-laksanam aradhanam ajasram ananyacittatayabhipreyate, tad api na pratisidhyate, quoted and translated by Hacker, "Relations of Early Advaitins," p. 151. 鈥� 鈥� 361 svaras tatra hrdayapundarike nicayyo drastavya upadisyate yatha salagrame Harih. tatrasya buddhi-vijnanam grahakam. sarvagato 'pisvaras tatropasyamanah prasidati, quoted and translated by Hacker, "Relations of Early Advaitins, p. 149. See Hacker's comments on this and the previous quotation, pp. 149-152. " " 37 See G. A. Jacob, ed., The Vedantasara of Sadananda (Bombay: Tukaram Javaji, 1894), pp. vii-ix; Hacker, "Relations of Early Advaitins, p. 151; Otto, p. 127; Mayeda, "The Authenticity of the Bhagavadgitabhasya, PP. 183-185; Panikkar, Unknown Christ, pp. 112, 114. Mayeda, for example, lists some 15 instances of this kind of usage in the Samkara-gita-bhasya alone. " 38 In this connection it is interesting that Sankara's frequent use of the word isvara, in comparison with that of later Advaitins, including his disciples, is one of the criteria proposed by Hacker and Mayeda to identify which of the many works attributed to him are genuine (Mayeda, "Authenticity of the Bhagavadgitabhasya, p. 183; Potter, Advaita, p. 115). Text: tadevam 1 39 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 2.1.14; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, pp. 329-330. avidyatmakopadiparicchedapeksam evesvarasyesvaratvam sarvajnatvam sarvasaktitvam ca na paramarthato vidyaya pastasarvopadhisvarupe atmanisitrisitavyasarvajnatvadivyavahara upapadyate / . evan paramarthavasthayam sarvavyavaharabhavan vadanti vedantah sarve, Brahmasutra Samnkarabhasya I, 405. 40 Sankara develops this analogy at Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 2.1.14; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, p. 329.

395 41 Regarding developments in post-Sankara Advaita, Panikkar observes: "His followers were so keen to preserve the absolute purity and transcendence of Brahman and its total uncontamination by the World that they placed Isvara in the realm of maya, since it is he who is concerned with the creation of the world and hence gets involved in the cosmic play. This leads either to a practical dualism (between a para and apara brahman, between paramarthika and vyavaharika) or to an illusionistic conception of Isvara" (Unknown Christ, p. 151). Again, and this criticism might apply to Samkara himself as well as his scholastic successors: "The Isvara of the Samkara school is in fact almost completely turned towards the phenomenal order. The divergence between Brahman and Isvara is overstressed in order to save the Absolute purity of the former" (Unknown Christ, pp. 158-159). 42" As long as it [Brahman] is the object of Nescience, there are applied to it the categories of devotion, object of devotion, and the like" (Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.1.11; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 62). Text: tatravidyavastayan brahmana upasyopasaka- 'dilaksanah sarvo vyavaharah, Brahmasutra Samnkarabhasya I, 923. 43 See Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 3.4.26: "Works serve to remove impurity, but knowledge is the highest way. When the impurities have been removed by works, then knowledge emerges" (kasayapaktih karmani jnanan tu parama gatih / kasaye karmabhih pakve tato jnanam pravartate, Brahmasutra Samnkarabhasya II, 923. 44 nirvisesam param brahma saksatkartum anisvarah / ye mandas te nukampyante savisesanirupanaih // vasikrte manasy esam sagunabrahmasilanat / tad evavirbhavet saksad apetopadhikalpanam, quoted by Gupta, p. 80, note 14 (my trans.). Madhusudana quotes this verse approvingly at Gudhartha-dipika 12.13; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 512. Appaya Diksita (see note 6 above) seems willing to identify himself as one of the "weak-minded": "O Lord, for purposes of meditation I have given a name and form to You though You do not have them; by means of hymns I have sought to describe You though you are indescribable; I have journeyed to sacred places to be in your presence, though you are omnipresent. I have committed these three sins in my ignorance for which I crave your pardon" (rupan rupavivarjitasya bhavato dhyanena yat kalpitan stutya anirvacaniyata durikrta yan maya / vyapitvam ca nirakrtam bhagavatah yat tirthayatradina ksantavyam jagadisa tad vikalata dosatrayam matkrtam, quoted by M. K. Venkatarama Iyer, "Bhakti from the Advaitic Standpoint," Vedanta Kesari, LII [1966], 483 [my trans.]).

396 45 The orthodox Vedic tradition and the bhakti tradition are not, as modern Hindus frequently assume, historically the same. We have already noted that the Vedas and early Upanisads know next to nothing of bhakti in the forms in which later Hindus experienced it. Bhakti, as we have seen, begins to emerge in the Sanskrit tradition in the so called "theistic" Upanisads and the Bhagavad Gita But even some nine centuries later, at the time of Samkara, it is still not completely accepted by the orthodox. In this case, the "orthodox" are the Smarta Brahmins who followed the Vedic way of life and ritual as preserved and interpreted in the smrti literature, especially the srauta-, grhya-, and dharma-sutras (i.e., the texts of the various Vedic schools on public sacrifice, household ritual, and social institutions). This community, to which it must be remembered Sankara belonged, had no defining theistic commitment and no allegiance to any scripture other than the sruti and smrti (J. A. B. van Buitenen, "On the Archaism of the Bhagavata Purana," in Milton Singer, p. 217, note 42). It tended to regard those who worshipped according to the style of the Tantras or Puranas as unorthodox. The mind-set of at least the more conservative members of the orthodox camp can be inferred from the fact that the author of the Mimansasutra, Jaimini (ca. 400-200 B.C.E.), remains silent regarding the existence of a supreme Being though he accepts the existence of the Vedic gods. Although some later Mimansakas admit the reality of God, Kumarila, the most influential of them, and others deny it vigorously and reduce even the Vedic gods to mere verbal accessories of the sacrifice. Hence the oft-quoted Mimamsaka dictum, "The deva is essentially the mantra" (mantratmako devah). See Slokavartika 16.41-87, trans. Gananatha Jha, in Radhakrishnan and Moore, pp. 498-503). Manu In the smrti literature, the term devalaka ("deity worshipper") is consistently used as a pejorative designation for temple priests who made a living offering puja according to the prescriptions of the Tantras. 3.152, for example, classifies them along with physicians, butchers, and shopkeepers as persons to be avoided, and Mahabharata 12.77.8 (crit. ed.) calls them "outcaste Brahmins" (brahmanacandala). (See van Buitenen, "Archaism," p. 28-29, for these and other references). While the Smartas showed an increasing readiness to interact with the bhakti traditions as time passed and the latter continued to gain in popularity, their attitude was much more rigid in the seventh century. Sankara, as we have seen already, seems to have had a certain sympathy for extra-Vedic theism, considerably more than some of his orthodox vaidika brethren. Nevertheless, he was first and last an adherent of the Smarta path. Mayeda notes that "he made enthusiastic efforts to restore the orthodox Brahmanical tradition,

397 without paying attention to the bhakti (devotional) movement, which had made a deep impression on ordinary Hindus in his age" (A Thousand Teachings, p. 5). Regarding the centrality of the Vedic revelation in the process of salvation and certain other important religious and social questions, he was extremely conservative, as we shall see in the reminder of this chapter. Cf. Venkateswaran, pp. 144- 146; van Buitenen, "Archaism," pp. 26-29; and Hardy, Viraha-Bhakti, pp. 489-494. 46 The independence of bhakti as a path to liberation would have been a threat to the centrality of the Vedic revelation and the position of its Brahmin custodians. The devotional movements had their own scriptures and, as we shall see, a distinctly egalitarian outlook. On both counts, the orthodox were suspicious. Compare dates: Samkara (seventh-eighth century), Bhagavata Purana (ninthtenth century), Ramanuja (eleventh century). The first great proponent of theistic Vedanta, Ramanuja, thus came some four centuries after Sankara. There were, of course, widespread devotional movements prior to the time of Ramanuja. The point is that these movements did not have the status of Vedic orthodoxy. Van Buitenen identifies three stages in the "Brahminization" or "Sanskritization" of the Vaisnava tradition in the South, beginning roughly two centuries after Samkara: (1) the acceptance of the Tamil prabandham in traditional temple worship through the efforts Nathamuni (ninth century), (2) the acceptance of the Pancaratra literature as a result of the work of Yamuna (tenth century), and (3) the "Vedanticization" of Vaisnava devotionalism under Ramanuja. The "acceptance" referred to here, however, was not universal, especially among the Smartas. See van Buitenen, "Archaism, p. 30, and next note. 11 47 yamuna's Agamapramanyam is largely a defence of the orthodoxy of the Pancaratra-Bhagavata school to which he belonged. After quoting extensively from this work, van Buitenen (p. 29) sums up the socio-religious situation it was seeking to address, as follows: "The Bhagavatas laid claim to being Brahmans; it is also clear that those who made the claim were the priests among the Bhagavatas. The Smartas vehemently disputed their claim, because Bhagavatas/Satvatas were traditionally (i.e. by smrti) known to be a very low class: the issue in fact . . of a Vaisya Vratya [ a member of the merchant class who does not observe his religious duties, Manu 10.20, 23]. And not only does the Bhagavata stand condemned by his heredity but his lowliness is compounded by his sacerdotal occupation; priest to his idol he lives off his priesthood, and, whatever his social pretentions, he is a common pujari. 11

398 In light of the situation thus portrayed by Yamuna, 18 van Buitenen ("Archaism, p. 31) interprets the conscious but artificial adoption of archaic Vedic morphology and semantics that is a unique feature of the Bhagavata Purana as an attempt to suggest that "`I am not only orthodox in the Vedic tradition, I even sound like the Veda.'" He suggests further that it may well have been the same kind of anxiety to prove Vedic orthodoxy that prompted Madhva, as late as the thirteenth century, to write his Rgbhasya, a commentary on a number of hymns of the Rigveda A similar concern is reflected in the Bengal Vaisnava insistence that the Bhagavata-purana has an authority equal to that of the Veda (see chap. 4.3.1, note 26). Indeed, it may be observed even today in the strident efforts of the teachers of the International Society for Krsna Consciousness to make a simple equation of their sectarian Vaisnava traditions with an idealized "Vedic" culture. 48 Mayeda suggests that Sankara's preoccupation with the superiority of the monastic life to religious activism was due in part to the pedagogical situation in which he found himself: "It is highly probable that jnanakarmasamuccayavada [the "doctrine of (salvation through) a combination of knowledge and religious works] in many varieties was prevalent among Mimamsakas and Vedantins while Samkara was active. Samkara, therefore, seems to have taught his teachings to, or fought against, mostly thinkers holding various types of jnanakarmasamuccayavada" (A Thousand Teachings, p. 90). The Vedanta is also and more formally known as the Uttaramimamsa, the "subsequent study" or the "inquiry into the later (portion of the Veda). This indicates its character as being primarily an exegetical system aiming at an interpretation of the Upanisads, the final part or "end" (anta) of the Veda. As such Uttaramimamsa is a sister system to, and according to some presupposed study of, the Purvamimamsa, the "prior study" or the "inquiry into the prior (portion of the Veda, the ritual texts)." Thus, though the Uttaramimamsa de-emphasizes ritualism in favor of religious knowledge, the two systems are closely related expressions of the orthodox tradition. Cf. the saying: vyavahare bhattah paramarthe samkarah, note 117 below. 49 This interpretation is, of course, highly questionable. Krsna instructs Arjuna to remain in the battle and carry out his caste duty and personal calling (svadharma) as a warrior (chap. 2, passim; 3.30; 11,34; 18.45-48, etc.) and to rely on Krsna in loving devotion for his salvation (11.55, 18.58, 66). The teachings of karmayoga and bhaktiyoga are the great contributions of the

399 Gita to the tradition, and it may be that one of the primary intentions of its author was to counteract the widespread interest in renunciation and monasticism inspired by the then (ca. 200 B.C.E.) powerful Buddhist movement. But Sankara was writing at a different historical moment, and there is no doubt that he felt that the need of his time was for a champion of the path of the samnyasin. 50 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.1.4; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 28. The 51 samkara, of course, is not alone in this. Upanisads repeatedly emphasize the salvific power of knowledge: "One who knows Brahman, attains the supreme" (brahmavid apnoti param), Taittiriya Upanishad 2.1; "He who knows Brahman, becomes Brahman" (brahma veda brahmaiva bhavati), Mundaka Upanishad 3.2.9, and so on. Samhya-Yoga holds that release comes from the discriminative realization (vivekakhyati) of the self (purusa) and its separation from the not-self (prakrti). Manu (12.85) declares that knowledge of the Self is the most excellent means to the highest good, that it is the first of the sciences because it leads to liberation (G. Buhler, trans., The Laws of Manu [New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1959], p. 501). 52 kevalad eva tattvajnanan moksapraptih, Samkara-gita-bhasya 2.20; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 45. 53 atmajnanasya tu kevalasya nihsreyasahetutvam bhedapratyayanivartakatvena kaivalyaphalavasanatvat, Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.66; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 756. 54" tam eva viditvatimrtyum eti nanyah pantha vidyate 'yanaya" iti vidyaya anyah pantha moksaya na vidyate iti srutes carmavad akasavestanasambhavavad aviduso moksaTsambhavasruter jnanat kaivalyam apnotiti ca puranasmrteh, Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.66; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 758. 55 See note 48 above. 56 Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, 23. Text: "tattvam asi" iti brahmatmabhavasya sastram antarenanavagamyamanatvat, Brahmasutra Samnkarabhasya I, 40. Also: "Brahman, which is omniscient, omnipotent, and the cause of the manifestation, the maintenance, and the dissolution of the world, is known only from the Vedanta scripture" (brahma sarvajnam sarvasakti jagadutpattisthitilayakaranan vedantasastrad evavagamyate, Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.1.4; Brahmasutra Samnkarabhasya I, 39). 57 Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) II, 163.

400 58 There is a debate among Advaitins as to whether the mahavakya triggers enlightenment immediately or whether further meditation is needed to remove the obstacles to realization. Mandana holds the latter view but Suresvara, following his master, champions the former, with the qualification that the aspirant must be properly prepared. See Brhadaranyakopanisadbhasyavarttika, 4.891-935 and Naiskarmyasiddhi, 2.4-8, summarized by Potter, Advaita, pp. 516-517, 537-538. 59 At the beginning of their works, authors of all Hindu religious treatises are required by tradition to state, among other things, the adhikarin, the type of person qualified to study the work (cf. chap. 7, note 9). See Swami Vivekananda's remarks on "The Evils of Adhikaravada" (Complete Works, V, 262-265). 60 See chap. 7, note 112. 61 on the paramahamsaparivrajaka, see the quotation from Samkara-gita-bhasya 3.3, sec. 2.5.8 below (note 83), and especially chap. 7, note 111. follows: The passage from the Upadesasahasri reads as "The means to final release is knowledge [of Brahman]. It should be repeatedly related to the pupil until it is firmly grasped, if he is dispassionate towards all things non-eternal . ; if he has abandoned the 鈥� desire for sons, wealth, and worlds and reached the state of a paramahamsa wandering ascetic; if he is endowed with tranquility, self-control, compassion, and so forth; if he is possessed of the qualities of a pupil which are well known from the scriptures; if he is a Brahmin who is [internally and externally] pure; if he approaches his teacher in the prescribed manner; if his caste, profession, behavior, knowledge [of the Veda], and family have been examined" (trans. Mayeda, A Thousand Teachings, p. 211). On the requirement that the student be a Brahmin, see sec. 2.6 below. Mayeda makes an interesting attempt to reconstruct the social milieu in which Samkara carried on his teaching ministry: "Samkara would not teach his doctrine to city dwellers. In cities the power of Buddhism was still strong, though already declining, and Jainism prevailed among the merchants and manufacturers. Popular Hinduism occupied the minds of ordinary people while city dwellers pursued ease and pleasure. There were also hedonists in cities, and it was difficult for Samkara to communicate Vedanta philosophy to these people. Consequently he propagated

401 his teachings chiefly among samnyasins, who had renounced the world, and intellectuals in the villages, and he gradually won the respect of Brahmins and feudal lords" (A Thousand Teachings, p. 5). The requirements for the study of Advaita, even in Samkara's day, may not have been as strict in practice as the texts cited here suggest (see Mayeda, A Thousand Teachings, p. 97, note 17). Nevertheless, one might well ask how many of the "city dwellers" who have accepted the philosophical truth of Advaita over the centuries have been the type of person Samkara really had in mind when he described his ideal pupil. Indeed, considering the stringency of these qualifications, against the history of political maneuvering in and among the various Samkara mathas, one wonders how many of Sankara's renunciate followers actually possessed them. See Kane, vol. II, pt. 2, 948-950; also note 10 above. p. 106. 62 karmany evadhikaras te. 63 tava ca karmany evahikaro na jnananisthayam, Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, 64 yasmac carjunasyatyantam eva hitaisi bhagavams tasya samyagdarsanananvitam karmayogam bhedadrstimantam evopadisati, Samkara-gita-bhasya 12.12; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita 512. 65 There is a certain inconsistency in Sankara's simultaneous insistence that the Bhagavad Gita as a whole teaches renunciation, but that Arjuna, to whom Krsna's message is addressed, is disqualified by caste and aptitude from putting the teaching into practice. See Madhusudana's commentary on Bhagavad Gita 18.66 (quoted below, chap. 9, notes 28, 31). 66 yah pravrttilaksano dharmo varnasramans coddisya vihitah sa ca devadisthanapraptihetur api sann Isvararpanabuddhyanusthiyamanah sattvasuddhaye bhavati phalabhisandhivarjitah suddhasattvasya ca jnananisthayogyatapraptidvarena jnanotpattihetutvena ca nihsreyasahetutvam api pratipadyate, Samkara-gita-bhasya, Intro.; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, 7. 67 svakarmana bhagavato 'bhyarcanabhaktiyogasya siddhipraptih phalam jnananisthayogyata / yannimitta jnananistha moksaphalavasana sa bhagavadbhaktiyogo 'dhuna stuyate sastrarthopasamharaprakarane sastrarthaniscayadardhyaya, Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.56; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 744-745. 68 mayi cesvare 鈥� 鈥� bhaktir 鈥� sa ca jnanam jnanam iti proktam jnanarthatvat, Samkara-gita-bhasya 13.10- 11: Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, pp. 548-550.

402 69 See chap. 1.3. 70 For Sanskrit, see chap. 1.3, note 79. Cp. Samkara-gita-bhasya 12.3: "Upasana means approaching the object to be meditated upon by making it an object of awareness and remaining with it for a long time with an unbroken stream of steady thought like a flow of oil" (upasana nama yathasastran upasyasya 'rthasya visayikaranena samipyan upagamya tailadharavat samanapratyayapravahena dirghakalam yat asanam tat upasanam acaksate, Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 502. 71 aprthaksamadhina nanyo bhagavato vasudevat paro 'sty atah sa eva no gatir ity evam niscita 'vyabhicarini buddhir, Samkara-gita-bhasya 13.10; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 548. 72. 2 ananyaya 'prthagbhutaya bhagavato 'nyatra prthan na kadacid api ya bhavati sa tv ananya bhaktih, Samkara-gita-bhasya 11.54; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 496-497. 73 Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) II, 332. Vidyaranya Svamin (fourteenth century), perhaps feeling the influence of the Krsna-gopi paradigm, compares the concentration of upasana to the preoccupation of a married woman with her paramour (PD 9.84- 87). See Swami Swahananda, trans. Pancadasi (Madras: Sri Ramakrishna Math, 1975), pp. 402-403. 74 tany etani upasanani sattvasuddhikaratvena vastutattvavabhasakatvad, Samkara's commentary on the Chandogya Upanishad, intro.; quoted by Mishra, p. 19, note 2 (my trans.). I, p. 18. 75 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.1.4; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) I, p. 35. See also Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 1.1.2; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) 76 vastutantro bhaved bodhah kartrtantram upasanam, PD 9.74; Swahananda, p. 399. 77 "The state called moksa that is attained by the renunciate Samkhyas who follow the path of knowledge is also attained by the Yogins through the acquisition of samnyasa and knowledge of the supreme" (yat samkhyair jnananisthaih samnyasibhih prapyate sthanam moksakhyan tad yogair api 鈥� paramarthajnanasannyasapraptidvarena gamyate, Samkara-gita-bhasya 5.5; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 250. 78 Hopefully, as a male Brahmin. See the discussion of the social side of Samkara's thought, below. 79 Kramamukti is originally postulated as the state gained by those who are devoted to meditations on the conditioned Brahman through various symbols as described in the Upanisads. Samkara discusses it in detail in his

403 4.4.22, commentary on Brahmasutras 4.3-4. See also Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 4.3.10-11, and 1.3.13; Samkara-gita-bhasya 8.23-27; and Potter, Advaita, pp. 26-27. 80 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 3.4.20; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) II, 301. The terms comes from Chandogya Upanishad 3.23.1: "He who dwells in Brahman attains immortality" (brahmasamstho 'mrtatvam eti). 81 pratyagatmavisayapratyayasantanakaranabhinivesas ca jnananistha, Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.55; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 744. 82 kim u vaktavyam brahmacaryad eva samnyasya yavadjivan yo brahmany evavatisthate sa brahmanirvanam rcchatiti Samkara-gita-bhasya 2.72; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 133. 83 tatra jnanayogena jnanam eva yogas tena sankhyanam atmavisayavivekajnanavatam brahmacaryasramad eva krtasamnyasanam vedantavijnanasuniscitarthanam paramahamsaparivrajakanam brahmany evavatisthitanam nistha prokta, karmayogena karmaiva yogah, Samkara-gita-bhasya 3.3; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, pp. 141-142. the Paramahamsa, see chap. 7, note 111. On 84 For an outline of this discipline, see Vedantasara 182-192, summarized by Zimmer, pp. 431-432. See also Sankara's commentary on Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.2, 2.4.5, 2.5.1 (intro.), and 4.5.6 (Swami Madhavananda, The Brhadaranyaka Upanisad with the Commentary of Samkaracarya [5 th ed.; Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1975], pp. 68-69, 247-248, 262, and 569); also Cenkner, pp. 65-83. 85 jnanakarmanoh kartrtvakartrtvaikatvanekatvabuddhy- asrayayor ekapurusasambhavam, Samkara-gita-bhasya 2.10; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 42. 86 nisevavidyamatram idam sarvam bhedajatam idam jnanam, Samkara-gita-bhasya 2.69; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 128. 87 napramanabuddhya grhyamanayah karmahetutvopapattih, Samkara-gita-bhasya 2.69; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 128. 88 tadviparitasya mithyajnanamulakakartrtva- ''bhimanapurahsarasya sakriyatmasvarupavasthanarupasya karmayogasya . samyagjnanamithyajnanatatkaryavirodhad abhavah pratipadyate, Samkara-gita-bhasya 5.1; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 244. 89"naiva kimcit karomiti yukto manyeta tattvavit" ity anena ca sarirasthitimatraprayuktesv api darsana- sravanadikarmasv atmayathatmavidah karomiti pratyayasya samahitacetastaya sada 'kartavyatvopadesad atmatattvavidah samyagdarsanaviruddho mithyajnanahetukah karmayogah svapne `pi na sambhavayitum sakyate, Samkara-gita-bhasya 5.1; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 245. 90 avidyakamabfjam hi sarvam eva karma / tatha

404 copapaditam / avidvadvisayam karma vidvadvisaya ca sarvakarmasamnyasapurvika jnananistha /. . . . dadami buddhiyogam tam yena mam upayanti te arthan na karminno 'jna upayanti., Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.66; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 761. 91 Remember that the devotionalists had not yet made a forceful claim for bhakti as an independent path to liberation. Even Ramanuja, some 400 years after Samkara, accepts that devotion is "a particular kind of knowledge" (jnanavisesa, Vedartha-samgraha 238; S. S. Ranghavachar, trans., Veda rthasangraha of Sri Ramanujacarya [Mysore: Sri Ramakrishna Ashrama, 1968], p. 184). 92 yuktatama, 12.2. 93 jnant tv atmaiva me matam iti hy uktam / na hi bhagavatsvarupanam satam yuktatamatvam ayuktatamatvam va vacyam, Samkara-gita-bhasya 12.4; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 505. 94 atra catmesvarabhedam asritya visvarupa Isvare cetahsamadhanalaksano yoga ukta isvarartham karmanusthanadi ca "athaitad apy asakto 'si" ity ajnanakaryasucanan nabhedadarsino 'ksaropasakasya karmayoga upapadyate iti darsayati / tatha karmayogino tatha karmayogino 'ksaropasananupapattin darsayati bhagavan "te prapnuvanti mam eva" iti iti / aksaropasakanam kaivalyapraptau svatantryam uktvetaresan paratanryam isvaradhinatam darsitavans tesam aham samuddharteti / yadi hisvarasyatmabhutas te mata abhedadarsitvad aksararupa eva ta iti samudaranakarmavacanam tan praty apesalam syat / yasmac carjunasyatyantam eva hitaisI bhagavams tasya samyagdarsanananvitam karmayogam bhedadrstimantam evopadisati / na ca atmanam isvaram pramanato budhva kasyacid gunabhavan jigamisati kascid virodhat, Samkara-gita-bhasya 12.12; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 511-512. 95 This seems to contradict But cp. Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 3.2.5: to contradict the passage of Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 2.3.41 quoted above in which Samkara asserts that both bondage and the knowledge which leads to final liberation arise from the grace of the Lord. "Because 'from him,' i.e. from the Lord there are the bondage and release of it, viz. the individual soul. That means, bondage is due to the absence of knowledge of the Lord's true nature; release is due to the presence of such knowledge" (Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) II, 139). Katha Upanishad 2.20 declares: "He beholds the majesty of the Self by the grace of the Creator (dhatuh prasadat). (The full text is, pasyati dhatuh prasadat mahimanam atmanah.) But Samkara prefers to read dhatuprasadat, "by the tranquillity of the senses," thus avoiding the theistic implications of the verse. A similar instance occurs at Katha Upanishad 2.23: "[The Self] can be obtained only by him whom He choses; to him alone this Self reveals His own form" (yam eva esa vrnnute tena labhyas, tasya esa 11 鈥� -

405 1 11 atma vivrnute tamum svam). Samkara tortures the syntax to make the aspirant the agent of choice and the Self the object of choice: "`whom' means 'his own Self'" (yam eva-svam atmanam); "`he' means 'the aspirant (esa--sadhakah). The translation thus becomes: "[The Self] can be known through the Self alone, which he [the aspirant] chooses, i.e., meditates on. This reversal effectively, but unconvincingly, removes the element of grace. See Mariasusai Dhavamony, Love of God According to Saiva Siddhata (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1971), pp. 63-66. 96 aham brahmasmi, Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10. 10 97 While describing the ideals of Advaita Ashrama, Swami Vivekananda declared: "Dependence is misery. Independence is happiness.' The Advaita is the only system which gives unto man complete possession of himself and takes off all dependence and its associated superstitions, thus making us brave to suffer, brave to do, and in the long run to attain to Absolute Freedom. "Hitherto it has not been possible to preach this Noble Truth entirely free of the settings of dualistic weakness; this alone, we are convinced, explains why it has not been more operative and useful to mankind at large" (Nikhilananda, Vivekananda, p. 283). But see note 10 above. 98 The bhasyas on the Mandukya Upanishad and the Taittiriya Upanishad, and a portion of the Upadesasahasri, begin with invocations to the neutral Brahman or atman. The Samkara-gita-bhasya begins with a verse in praise of Narayana, but it is a quotation and not an original composition. The rest of Samkara's authentic works do not have invocations (Hacker, "Relations of Early Advaitins," p. 152). 99 na hi svarajye 'bhiksito brahmatvam gamitah kamcana namitum icchati, quoted by Hacker, "Relations of Early Advaitins, p. 152 (my trans.). Again, cp. Vivekananda: 鈥� "What does the Advaitist preach? He dethrones all the gods that ever existed, or ever will exist in the universe and places on that throne the Self of man, the Atman, . No books, no scriptures, no science can ever imagine the glory of the Self that appears as man, the most glorious God that ever was, the only God that ever existed, exists, or ever will exist. I am to worship, therefore, none but myself. `I worship my Self,' says the Advaitist. To whom shall I bow down? I salute my Self. To whom shall I go for help?" (The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda [13 th ed.; Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1976], II, 250).

406 100, mam ca yo' vyabhicarena bhaktiyogena sevate / sa gunan samatiyaitan brahmabuyaya kalpate. 101 bhaktya mam abhijanati yavan yascasmi tattvatah / tato mam tattvato jnatva visate tadanantaram. 102 paramesvare bhaktin bhajanan param uttamam jnanalaksanam (Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.54; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 741); jnanalaksanaya bhaktya (Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.55; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 741). 103 vivekajnanatmakena bhaktiyogena, Samkara-gita-bhasya 14.26; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, pp. 605-606. 104 sastracaryopadesena jnanotpattiparipakahetum sahakarikaranam buddhivisuddyady amanitvadi capeksya janitasya ksetrajhaparamatmaikatvajnanasya kartradikarakabhedabuddhinibandhanasarvakarmasamnyasasahitasya svatmanubhavaniscayarupena yad avasthanam sa para jnananisthety ucyate / seyam jhananisthartadibhaktitrayapeksaya para caturthi bhaktir ity ukta taya paraya bhaktya bhagavantam tattvato 'bhijanati / yadanantaram evesvaraksetrajnabhedabuddhir asesato nirvartate ato jnananisthalaksanaya bhaktya mam abhijanatiti vacanam na virudhyate, Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.55; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, pp. 742-743. TE 105 This identification of devotion and the 鈥� 11 Advaitin's discipline of knowledge is found also at Vivekacudamani 32-33 a. There we are at first surprised to read: Among all causes of liberation, bhakti is the best.' We soon learn, however, that "bhakti is an earnest seeking to know one's own real nature the reality of one's own Self" (moksakaranasamagryam bhaktir eva garfyasi / svasvarupanusandhanam bhaktir ity abhidhiyate // svatmatattvanusandhanam bhaktir ity apare jaguh). See Swami Madhavananda, trans., Vivekacudamani of Sri Samkaracarya (Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, 1978), p. II. 106 mam ekam saranam vraja. 107 mam ekam sarvatmanam samam sarvabhutastham Isvaram acyutam garbhajanmajaramaranavivarjitam aham evety evam ekam saranam vraja na matto 'nyad astity avadharayety arthah, Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.66; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 753. 108" The Blessed Lord Narayana, having divided the enlightened Samkhyas from the unenlightened men of action, makes them take two paths" (bhagavan narayanah samkhyan viduso 'vidusas ca karminah pravibhajya dve nisthe grahayati, Samkara-gita-bhasya 2.21; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 73. 109 karmanisthaya jnananistha praptihetutvena purusarthahetutvam na svatantryena, jnananistha tu

407 karmanisthopayalabdhatmika sati svatantryena purusarthahetur anyanapeksa, Samkara-gita-bhasya 3.4; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 144. 110 sarvopanisatsv itihasapuranayogasastresu ca jnanangatvena mumuksoh sarvakarmasamnyasavidhanat, Samkara-gita-bhasya 3.1; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 136. - 111 pratyagatmavikriyasvarupanisthatvac ca moksasya, Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.55; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 744. 112 na hi purvasamudram jigamisoh pratilomyena pratyaksamudram jigamisnuna samanamargatvam sambhavati . . . sa [jnananistha] pratyaksamudragamanavat karmana sahabhavitvena virudyate / parvatasarspayor ivantaravan virodhah pramannavidam niscitah, Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.55; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 744. 113 tasmat sarvakarmasamnyasenaiva jnananistha 113 tasmat karyeti siddham, Samkara-gita-bhasya 18.55; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 744. On the necessity of renunciation many other passages could be quoted, e.g.: "The aim of this Gita-scripture, in short, is the supreme good which is characterized by the complete cessation of samsara along with its causes, and this arises from the religious practice in the form of the discipline of Selfknowledge, preceded by renunciation of all works" (tasyasya gitasastrasya samksepatah prayojanam param nihsreyasam sahetukasya samsarasyatyantoparamalaksanam, tac ca sarvakarmasanyasapurvakad atmajnananistharupad dharmad bhavati, Samkara-gita-bhasya, intro.; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 6); "The cessation of grief and delusion which are the seeds of samsara is from nothing other than knowledge of the Self preceded by renunciation of all action" (samsarabijabhutau sokamohau tayos ca sarvakarmasanyasapurvakad atmajnanad nanyato nivrttir iti, Samkara-gita-bhasya 2.10; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 40); "The cause of the cessation of this [cause of samsara] is well known in the Gita to be knowledge together with renunciation [undertaken] when there is indifference to the world" (asya [samsarakaranasya] nivrttikaranam jnanam vairagye sasannyasan gitasastre prasiddham, Samkara-gita-bhasya 13.21; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 568); and so on. 114 Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 3.4.20; Vedanta Sutras (Shamkaracharya commentary) II, 301-302. 115 See his commentary on Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.5.1 and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4.5.15. According to Upadesasahasri 2.1.2 (quoted above, note 61), the student of Advaita should be both a Brahmin and a paramahamsa. Farquhar believes that the early view that any educated male of the three upper castes could become a renunciate was replaced by the rule limiting eligibility for samnyasa to Brahmins about 300 C.E. (J. N. Farquhar, "The Organization of the Sannyasis of the Vedanta," "Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society [England], [July, 1925],p. 481).

408 This restriction was accepted by many authorities, notably Medatithi, the commentator on Manu. It finds support in such passages as Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.5.1, "Brahmanas, having known the Self and having risen above the desire for sons, the desire for wealth, and the desire for [heavenly] worlds, live as mendicants" (etam vai tam atmanam viditva brahmanah putraisanayas ca vittaisanayas ca lokaisanayas ca vyutthaya atha bhiksacaryam caranti), and Mundaka Upanishad 1.2.12, 'Having scrutinized the worlds that are the rewards of actions, a Brahmana should attain non-attachment" (pariksya lokan karmacitan brahmano nirvedam ayan). Manu's description of samnyasa at 6.38 begins: "A Brahmana may depart from his house (Buhler, p. 205). 11 A widely circulated verse from the Vaikhanasadharmaprasna reads: "Brahmins have four lifestages, Ksatriyas have the first three, and Vaisyas the first two; the four stages are that of the student, the householder, the retiree, and the renunciate" (brahmanasya- ''sramas catvarah, ksatriyasyadyas trayah, vaisyasyadyau, tadasraminas catvaro brahmacari grhasto vanaprastho bhiksur iti, quoted by Farquhar, pp. 480-481 [my trans.]). Samkara's order of renunciates, the dasanamis, followed this rule strictly until, interestingly enough, the time of Madhusudana (chap. 9, note 31). The issue did not remain without controversy, however, and there are texts which follow the earlier tradition of allowing male members of any of the dvija or "twice born" castes, i.e., all except the sudras, to take samnyasa. A number of writers accept this more liberal view, including Samkara's own disciple Suresvara, who in his Varttika on Samkara's commentary on Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.5.1 expresses his disagreement with his guru's position (P. V. Kane, The History of Dharmasastra [2 nd ed.; Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1974], vol. II, part 2, pp. 942-944; Farquhar, pp. 478-479). Vidyaranya Svamin (fourteenth century), referring in his Jivanmuktiviveka to such female sages as Sulabha, Gargi Vacaknavi, and MaitreyI, takes the liberal position that women are eligible for what he calls vividisa samnyasa ("the renunciation of the seeker"), thus: "For this renunciation, women also are qualified (asmims ca tyage striyo 'pi adhikriyante, Jivanmuktiviveka of Vidyaranya, ed. with an English translation by S. Subramanya Sastri and T. R. Srinivasa Ayyangar [Madras: The Adyar Library and Research Center, 1978], pp. 4, 182). (I am indebted to Swami Atmarupananda of the Vedanta Society of Southern California for this reference.). It has for long been commonly recognized that social factors are extremely important in Hinduism. The tradition prescribes different duties, religious practices, and observances for different persons according to their place in the social hierarchy, stage of life, and so on. A

409 person's spiritual options are commonly, especially in more orthodox circles, limited and channelled by the same criteria. Since the Hindu tradition provides an extremely wide, often bewildering, variety of spiritual alternatives, such limitations may be, from a practical point of view, necessary to prevent social and psychological confusion. Though a radical metaphysically speaking, Samkara was extremely conservative socially. For example: "The primal creator Visnu, called Narayana, was born in part as Krsna of Devaki and Vasudeva for the protection of the earthly Brahman [the Vedas and the sacrifice] and Brahminhood. By the protection of Brahmin-hood, the Vedic way of life is preserved, since the distinctions of castes and stages of life depend upon it [Brahmin-hood]" (sa adikarta narayanakhyo visnur bhaumasya brahmano brahmanasya raksanartham devakyam vasudevad amsena krsnah kila sambabhuva brahmanatvasya hi raksanena raksitah syad vaidiko dharmah tadadhinatvad varnasranabhedanam, Samkara-gita-bhasya, intro.; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 4). Most accounts of Samkara's life hold that his family belonged to the elite Nambudiri Brahmin caste of Kerala. Samkara's spiritual exclusivism is typical of the traditional hierarchical outlook of orthodox Brahmanical Hinduism. That the highest goal of life should be restricted to the highest caste is no scandal to this way of thinking. Everyone and indeed everything must find and accept his, her, or its place in the great hierarchy of being; tradition simply requires Brahmins to bear the responsibility of being at or near its peak. 116 sokamohabhyam hy abhibhutavivekavijnanah svata eva ksatradharme yuddhe pravrtto 'pi tasmad yuddhad upararama / paradharmam ca bhiksajivanadikam kartum pravavrte / tathaca sarvapraninam sokamohadidosavistacetasan svabhavata eva svadharmaparityagah pratisiddhaseva ca syat, Samkara-gita-bhasya 2.10; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 40. 鈥� nor 117 other writers, however, do. In the introduction to Bhaskara's commentary in the Gita, for example, we read: "The Blessed dharma is only for Brahmans a way to release. The Sudra, etc., cannot be elevated . can iron be made into gold by heating it some more Even the Ksatriya and the Vaisya do not have the same qualification for release as the Brahman. Therefore, only the Brahman has it" (van Buitenen, "Archaism," p. 32). The translator remarks (p. 33): 鈥� "In Bhaskara we have a spokesman for an old-fashioned Vedanta, in which the desire of knowing Brahman is compatible only with the performance of appropriate Vedic ritual, which excludes all but the Brahman

410 [caste]. This attitude was only partly reformed by Samkara. Although he relegated all ritual performances to the realm of vyavahara, or the provisional truth of process, he did not alter the spirit of exclusiveness associated with the Vedanta. Precisely this uncompromising dichotomy between the realms of supreme truth and relative process encouraged an attitude summed up in the well-known dictum: vyavahare Bhattah, paramarthe Samkarah `in vyavahara, a follower of Kumarilla phatta; in respect of the supreme truth, a follower of Samkara.' But to be a legitimate follower of Kumarila, the Mimansaka had in theory to be twice-born, in practice to be a Brahman. 1 "It would not be difficult to multiply quotations in line with Bhaskara's views. They are important inasmuch as they show, for the age with which we are concerned, the mentality of those who traditionally regarded themselves (and, however reluctantly, were regarded by others) as the final arbiters of dharma and moksa. Against their spirit of exclusiveness, in society as well as in soteriology, the rise of the bhakti movement placed a spirit of catholicity." 118 These exceptions appear to be only such as were necessitated by scriptural passages suggestive of the more liberal attitude of an earlier age, and which therefore called the later restrictions into question. Brahmasutra-samkara-bhasya 3.4.36 indicates that there is a possibility for knowledge even for one who is outside of the system of the four life-stages. In his comments, Samkara allows that certain persons mentioned in scripture were knowers of Brahman, such as Raikva [Chandogya Upanishad 6.1-3], a cart-puller who did not observe caste rules, and Gargi [Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 3.6, 8], a woman. Samkara-gita-bhasya 9.32 (Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 439) admits a chance of "attaining the highest goal" (paran gatim) for those of "sinful birth" (papayonayah) such as women, Vaisyas, and sudras. The Samkara-gita-bhasya twice discusses the case of Janaka, a King famed for his enlightenment (2.10 and 3.20; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, pp. 44-46, 158-160). In both cases, however, Sankara is noncommittal as to whether Janaka is a knower of Brahman or not, e.g.: "Therefore, `by action alone' wise Ksatriyas of old such as Janaka and Asvapati "came to," i.e., tried to attain, `perfection,' i.e., moksa. If they were persons who had attained right knowledge, they came to perfection by action alone, i.e., without renouncing action, because of the karma determining their lives, in order to foster the welfare of the world. But if Janaka and the others were persons who had not attained right knowledge, they came to perfection gradually by action which is the means of purifying the mind. Thus the verse should be explained" (karmanaiva hi tasmat purve ksatriya vidvamsah samsidhim moksam gantum asthitah pravrtta

411 janakadayo janakasvapatiprabhrtayah / yadi te praptasamyagdarsanas tato lokasamgraharthan prarabdhakarmatvat karmana sahaiva samnyasyaiva karma samsiddhim asthita ity arthah / athapraptasamyagdarsana janakadayas tada karmana sattvasuddhisadhanabhutena kramena samsiddhim asthita iti vyakhyeyah slokah, Samkara-gita-bhasya 3.20; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, p. 159). 119 That is, the states of jIvanmukti or sadyomukti. 120 See Bhagavad Gita 3.20-26, on which Sankara comments: "For Me [Krsna] or any other who, knowing the Self, desires to effect the welfare of the world, there is no action to be done but that which is for the welfare of the world. Therefore, for such a knower of the Self, the following is taught. . He should not create 鈥� confusion in the minds of the ignorant, the undiscriminating, who are attached to action. What, then, should he do? He should encourage them to enjoy, to do, all actions, the wise man himself performing in a disciplined way the very action [required] of the ignorant" (evam lokasamgraham cikirsor mamatmavido na kartavyam asti anyasya va lokasamgraham muktva tatas tasyatmavida idam upadisyate buddhibhedas tam na janayen notpadayed ajnanam avivekinam karmasanginam kimtu kuryaj josayet karayet sarvakarmani vidvan svayam tad evavidusan karma yukto 'bhiyuktah samacaran, Samkara-gita-bhasya 3.25-26; Shrimad-bhagavad-gita, pp. 162-163). Cf. also Samkara-gita-bhasya 2.11. It is clear that the Sankara tradition recognizes and celebrates the selfless action performed by realized samnyasins for the sake of lokasangraha. See Cenkner's S descriptions of "The ministry of the Sankaracaryas," "The Capacity of a Jagadguru, " and "The Teaching of the Samkaracaryas" (pp. 127-146). Peter Berger points out that the detached, "as if" observance of social and religious customs, "out of consideration for the weaker spirit of the masses that has a need of these," is a common feature of world-relativizing mystical religion (The Sacred Canopy [Garden City: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1969], p. 98). 1969], p. 98). By way of illustration, he cites a passage from the Theologia germanica that parallels the attitude of the Advaitin almost exactly: "Perfect men accept the law along with such ignorant men as understand and know nothing other or better, and practice it with them, to the intent that thereby they may be kept from evil ways, or if it be possible, brought to something higher" (J. Bernhart, ed., Theologia germanica [New York: Pantheon, 1949], p. 159; quoted by Berger, p. 98). The complexity of Advaitic thinking on devotional religion is suggested by the fact that Sankara is regarded,

412 not only as the originator of the Advaita system, but also as an important reformer of popular Hinduism whose distaste for action did not prevent him from traveling widely to spread his views and correct religious abuses. He is venerated as the founding teacher (sthapanacarya) of six schools of worship (sanmata) recognized by the Smarta Brahmins. These are the Saiva, the Vaisnava, the Sakta (worship of the Goddess), the Saura (worship of the sun), the Ganapatya (worship of the elephant-faced Ganapati), and the Kaumara (worship of Kumara or Skanda, the son of Siva). See Iyer, pp. 478-479; Venkateswaran, pp. 146-147; and Raymond Panikkar, "Advaita and Bhakti: Love and Identity in a Hindu-Christian Dialogue, Journal of Ecumenical Studies, VII (Spring, 1970), 301. 11 121 See chaps. 3.2, 4.3.2.