English
The Brhad-aranyakopanisad-bhasya has a commentary by Anandajfiana and a big independent work on it by Suregvara, called Brhad-aranyakopanisad-bhasya-varttika, or simply Varttika, which has also a number of commentaries ; these have been noticed in the section on Suregvara. His Aparoksanubhava has four commen- taries, by Sankara Acarya, by Balagopala, by Candegvara Varman (Anubhava-dipika), and by Vidyaranya. His commentary on Gauda- pada’s Mandikya-karika, called Gaudapadiya-bhasya or Agama- Sastra-vivarana, has two commentaries, one by Suddhananda and one by Anandajfiana. His Atma-jfanopadesa has two commentaries, by Anandajfiana and by Pirnananda Tirtha; the Eka-sloka has a x1] Sankara and lis School 79 commentary called Tattva-dipana, by Svayamprakaga Yati ; no com- mentary however is attributed to the Viveka-ciidamant, which seems to be genuinely attributed to Sankara; the Atma-bodha has at least five commentaries, by Advayananda, Bhasurananda, Bodhendra (Bhava-prakasika), Madhusiidana Sarasvatiand RamanandaTirtha; The Atmanatma-viveka has at least four commentaries, by Padma- pada, Piirnananda Tirtha, Sayana and Svayamprakaga Yati. The Atmopadesa-vidhi is said to have a commentary by Ananda- jfiana; the Ananda-lahari has about twenty-four commentaries, by Appaya Diksita, Kaviraja, Krsna Acarya (Mafiju-bhasini), KeSava- bhatta, Kaivalyasrama (Saubhagya-vardhini), Gangahari (Tattva- dipika), Gangadhara, Gopirama, Gopikanta Sarvabhauma (Ananda- lahari-tari), Jagadisa?, Jagannatha Paficanana, Narasimha, Brahma- nanda (Bhavartha-dipika), Malla Bhatta, Mahadeva Vidyavagisa, Mahadeva Vaidya, Ramacandra, Ramabhadra, Ramananda Tirtha, Laksmidhara Desgika and Vigvambhara and Srikantha Bhatta and another called Vidvan-manorama. 'The Upadesa-sahasri has at least four commentaries, by Anandajfiana, by Rama Tirtha (Pada- yojanika), Bodha-vidhi by a pupil of Vidyadhaman, and by Sankara- carya. His Cid-ananda-stava-raja, called also Cid-ananda-dasasloki or simply Dasa-sloki, has also a number of commentaries and sub- commentaries, such as the Siddhanta-tattva-bindu by Madhusi- dana Sarasvati; Madhusiidana’s commentary was commented on by a number of persons, such as Narayana Yati (Laghu-tika), Purusottama Sarasvati (Siddhdanta-bindu-sandipana), Piirnananda Sarasvati (Tattva-viveka), Gauda Brahmananda Sarasvati (Sid- dhanta-bindu-nyaya-ratnavali), by Saccidananda and Sivalala Sar- man. Gauda Brahmananda’s commentary , Siddhanta-bindu-nyaya- ratnavali, was further commented on by Krsnakanta (Szddhanta- nyaya-ratna-pradipika). Sankara’s Drg-drsya-prakarana was com- mented on by Ramacandra Tirtha; his Paficikarana-prakriya has again a number of commentaries—that by Suresvara is Pafici- karana-varttika, and this has a further commentary, called Pafici- karana-varttikabharana, by Abhinavanarayanendra Sarasvati, pupil of Jfianendra Sarasvati. Other commentaries on the Pafcikarana- prakriya are Paricikarana-bhava-prakasika, Paftctkarana-tika- tattva-candrika, Paficikarana-tatparya-candrika and Pancikarana- vivarana by Anandajfiana, Paficikarana-vivarana by Svayam- prakaga Yati and by Prajfianananda, and a sub-commentary called Tattva-candrika. Sankara also commented on the Bhagavad- 80 The Sankara School of Vedanta [cH. gita; this commentary has been examined in the chapter on the Bhagavad-gita in the present volume. His Laghu-vakya-vortit has a commentary called Puspafjali, and another, called Laghu- vakya-vrtti-prakasika, by Ramananda Sarasvati; his Vakya-vrtit has a commentary by Anandajfiana, and another commentary, called Vakya-urtti-prakasika, by Visvesvara Pandita. He starts his Vakya-vrtti in the same manner as Isvarakrsna starts his Samkhya- karika, namely by stating that, suffering from the threefold sorrows of life, the pupil approaches a good teacher for instruction regarding the ways in which he may be liberated from them. Suresvara in his Naiskarmya-siddhi also starts in the same manner and thus gives a practical turn to the study of philosophy, a procedure which one does not find in his Brahma-sitra-bhasya. The answer, of course, is the same as that given in so many other places, that one is liberated only by the proper realization of the Upanisad texts that declare the unity of the self with Brahman. He then goes on to show that all external things and all that is called mind or mental or psychical is extraneous to self, which is of the nature of pure consciousness ; he also declares here that the effects of one’s deeds are disposed by God (Isvara), the superior illusory form of Brahman, and not by the mysterious power of apirva admitted by the Mimamsists. He concludes this short work of fifty-three verses by insisting on the fact that, though the unity texts (advaita-sruti) of the Upanisads, such as ‘‘ that (Brahman) art thou,”’ may have a verbal construction that implies some kind of duality, yet their main force is in the direct and immediate apperception of the pure self without any intel- lectual process as implied by relations of identity. The Vakya-vrtti is thus conceived differently from the Aparoksanubhiiti, where yoga processes of posture and breath-regulations are described, as being helpful for the realization of the true nature of self. This may, of course, give rise to some doubts regarding the true authorship of the Aparoksanubhiiti, though it may be explained as being due to the different stages of the development of Sankara’s own mind; divergences of attitude are also noticeable in his thoroughgoing idealism in his commentary on Gaudapada’s Karika, where the waking life is regarded as being exactly the same as dream life, and external objects are deemed to have no existence whatsoever, being absolutely like dream-perceptions—as contrasted with his Sariraka-mimamsa-bhasya, where external objects are considered to have an indescribable existence, very different from dream- xt] Sankara and his School 81 creations. The Upadesa-sahasri, which in its nineteen chapters contains only six hundred and seventy-five stanzas, is more in a line with the Vakya-vrtti, and, though the well-known Vedanta topics are all slightly touched upon, greater emphasis is laid on the proper realization of the Vedantic unity texts, such as “‘that art thou,” as means to the attainment of Brahmahood. There are also a number of short poems and hymns attributed to Sankaracarya, such as the Advaitanubhati, Atma-bodha, Tattvopadesa, Praudhanubhiiti, etc., some of which are undoubtedly his, while there are many others which may not be so; but in the absence of further evidence it is difficult to come to any decisive conclusion!. These hymns do not contain any additional philosophical materials, but are intended to stir up a religious fervour and emotion in favour of the monistic faith. In some cases, however, the commentators have found an excuse for extracting from them Vedantic doctrines which cannot be said to follow directly from them. As an illustra- tion of this, it may be pointed out that out of the ten slokas of Sankara Madhusiidana made a big commentary, and Brahmananda Sarasvati wrote another big commentary on that of Madhusiidana and elaborated many of the complex doctrines of the Vedanta which have but little direct bearing upon the verses themselves. But Sankara’s most important work is the Brahma-sitra-bhasya, which was commented on by Vacaspati Misra in the ninth century, Anandajfiana in the thirteenth, and Govindananda in the. four- teenth century. Commentaries on Vacaspati’s commentary will be noticed in the section on Vacaspati Misra. Subrahmanya wrote a verse summary of Sankara’s commentary which he calls Bhasyartha- nyaya-mala; and Bharati Tirtha wrote also the Vatyastka-nyaya- mala, in which he tried to deal with the general arguments of the Brahma-siitra on the lines of Sankara’s commentary. Many other persons, such as Vaidyanatha Diksita, Devarama Bhatta, etc., also wrote topical summaries of the main lines of the general arguments of the Brahma-siitra on the lines of Sankara’s com- mentary, called Nyadya-mala or Adhikarana-mala. But many other persons were inspired by Sankara’s commentary (or by the com- mentaries of Vacaspati Misra and other great writers of the Sankara school) and under the name of independent commentaries on the Brahma-sitra merely repeated what was contained in these. Thus . 1 The Atma-bodha was commented upon by Padmapada in his commentary Atma-bodha-vyakhyana, called also Vedanta-sara. DII 6 82 The Sankara School of Vedanta [cH. Amalananda wrote his Sastra-darpana imitating the main lines of Vacaspati’s commentary on Sankara’s commentary; and Svayam- prakaga also wrote his Vedanta-naya-bhiisana, in which for the most part he summarized the views of Vacaspati’s Bhamati commentary. Hari Diksita wrote his Brahma-sitra-vrtti, Sankarananda his Brahma-sitra-dipika and Brahmananda his Vedanta-siitra-mukta- vali as independent interpretations of the Brahma-sitra, but these were all written mainly on the lines of Sankara’s own commentary, supplementing it with additional Vedantic ideas that had been developed after Sankara by the philosophers of his school of thought or explaining Sankara’s Bhasya!. Mandana, SureSvara and ViSvaripa. General tradition has always identified Mandana with Suresvara and Visgvartipa; and Col. G. A. Jacob in his introduction to the second edition of the Naiskarmya-siddhi seems willing to believe this tradition. The tradition probably started from Vidyaranya’s Sankara-dig-vijaya, where Mandana is spoken of as being named not only Umbeka, but also Visvariipa (viII. 63). He further says in X. 4 of the same work that, when Mandana became a follower of Sankara, he received from him the name Suregvara.