ebook img

Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism: The Mahayana Context of the Gaudapadiya-Karika PDF

178 Pages·1995·42.8 MB·English
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism: The Mahayana Context of the Gaudapadiya-Karika

Sri Garib Das Oriental Series No. 234 Early Advaita Vedanta II. and Buddhism i The Mahayana Context of the ~ Gau4apadiya-karika ~ l Richard King ~ Sri Satguru Publications A Division of Indian Books Centre Delhi, India i_il~ r~}: 1 ,.,·.·. For my mother, Lillian Richardson, ~:.. .t ···:· and Juli Published by : Sri Satguru Publications A Division of: Indian Books Centre Indological and Oriental Publishers 40/5, Shakti Nagar, Deihi-1l0007 (INDIA) © 1995 State University of New York All rights reserved. No part of this work covered by the Copy-rights hereon may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means Graphics, Electronics or Mechanical including photocopying, m i'cro fiche reading without written permission from the publishers. ISBN 81-7030-558-6 ~. First Indian Edition: Delhi, 1997 ..... The publication of this book in India is made by permission of State University of New York Press. Published by Sunil Gupta for Sri Satguru Publications a division of Indian Books Centre, 40/S, Shakti Nagar, Delhi-110 007, India and printed at Mudran Bharti, Delhi-110 009 Contents xi Acknowledgments xii Abbreviations 1 Introduction Recent Work on the Gau<Japildiya-karika 3 Outline of the Monograph 11 1. The Date .and Authorship of the Gau4apiidiya-karika 15 15 The Identity and Date of Gauc,lapada 21 Authoi:ship of the Gau4apadlya,-kari#til The Relationship Between Ilk First and Second 21 PrakaraQ.as 31 The Relationship of GK JI~ Ill, and IV The GautJapadfya-karikii artd Bhavaviveka 35 The Author of the Fourth Pr'akara'fJa and Buddhist 43 Scholasticism 45 Conclusion t 2. The Vedantic Heritage of the Gau4apadlya-karika 51 The Three Foundations (Prasthanatraya) of the 51 Vedanta-Darsana The Upan~adic Heritage of the Gau4apiidfya-karikii 52 Cosmogonic Speculation in the Upani~ads 56 58 Psychology in the Upani~ads 61 The Four States of Experience 65 The MaQ.c;liikya Upani~ad The Bbagavadgltii and the Gau4apiidiya-karika 68 70 The Yogacara Phenomenology of Perception 158 The Brahmasutra Doctrines of the Brahmasutra 72 EThxep eNrioenn-cVeesr iidni ctahlei tGy K(V aitathya) of Waking and Dream 168 3. The Abhidharma Context of Non-Origination (Ajativada) 87 Maya in the Gauc;lapadiya-karika 175 The Non-Origination of Dharmas-Absolutism and the The Meaning of the Term 'Asparfoyoga' 179 Svabhava Debate in Buddhism 87 The Sarvastivada Abhidharma 91 6. Gau<,lapadian Inclusivism and the Mahaya::ia 183 Buddhist Tradition The Nature of Sarp.skrta and Asarp.skrta Dharmas 98 The Sautrantika Position: Asarriskrta-Nairarmya 104 The GauQapadian Conception of Buddhism 184 The Unique Particularity of Dharmas-A Mahayana Critique 108 The Theory of Non-Conflict (Avirodhavada) in the GK 194 The Non-arising (Anutpada) and Immutability of Dharmas 110 Inclusivism in the Gau<,lapadiya-karika 196 The Bhavavivekan Response to the Vedantic 4. Non-Origination in the Gau<tapadfya-karika: Early Inclusivism of the GK 199 Vedantic Ontology and Madhyamaka Buddhism 119 Mahayana Buddhism and the Fourth PrafwrarJa of the GK 119 7. Athbes oTlautthisamga tiang tahreb hGa KT eaxntsd the Mahayana: 205 The Two Truths in the Mahayana Tradition: The Nature of Sarp.vrti 120 The Tathagatagarbha Texts 206 The Two Truths in the Gaw,iapadiy-akarika 124 The Systematization of Indian Tathagatagarbha: Foundations of Non-Origination: The Paradox of Change 126 The Ratnagotravibhagasastra 217 Nagarjuna's Refutation of Absolutism (Svabhavavada) A Question of Hermeneutics: Is There a 222 and the Gau<tapildian Response 131 Mahayana Absolutism? Emptiness (Sunyata) and Non-dualism (Advaita) 133 TTaibtheatagnat aMgaarhbahyaa annad Two Types of Emptiness in 227 ANdovna-iOtar iPgeinrsaptieocnti vaensd Emptiness: The Madhyarnaka and 137 The Gau<f,apadfya-kllrika and Tathagatagarbha Buddhism 231 235 5. Asparfa-yoga in the Gau<tapadfya-karika 141 Conclusions Aspar5ayoga as a Meditative Technique 144 -;~ Appendix: A Runmng Translation of the Gaut/apadfya-karika 243 259 The Four States of Experience in the Notes Agama-Prakarat).a (GK I) 146 Bibliography 317 Meditation on the Phoneme OM 147 Index 331 Aspar5ayoga as a Description of the Ultimate State 148 Index of Verses 339 The Attainment of Gnosis Ofiana) in the GK 149 Asparsayoga: The GauQapadian Phenomenology 153 of Perception Non-contact (Asparfa) and Representation-Only (Vijfiapti-matra) 154 Acknowledgments 3-" This monograph is a revised version of my Ph.D. thesis, The Gauqapadfyakarika: A Philosophical Analysis of the Mahayana Buddhist Context of Early Advaita Vedanta (University of Lancaster, England, 1992). I would like to take this opportunity to thank a number of people who have helped, both directly and indirectly, in the production of this book. First, Dr. David Smith of the University of Lancaster for his many helpful comments, particularly on the Vedanta tradition and the translation of the kilrikas; Dr. Andrew Rawlinson for early encouragement whenfitst2ttempting to make sense ofNagarjuna and the Prajiiaparamita, and tt> Dr. Daniel M2.riau of the University of Hull for first introducing me to the world of Indian philosophy as an undergraduate. I would also like to thank Jeremy Carrette for his close friendship, support, and intellectual stimulation. These acknowledg ments would not be complete without mentioning my partner, Juli Stewart, for her constant love and encouragement. Not only did this involve financially supporting me for a year while researching in London, but also for showing me the importance of grounding philo sophical insights in the world of everyday experience. This work is a testimony to her continued love and support. Chapter I will appear as "Early Advaita Vedanta: The Date and Authorship of the Gauqapadiyakilrika" in the lndo-lranian]ournal (forthcoming). Chapter 5 is a revised and expanded version of material originally published as ''Asparsayoga: Meditation and Epistemology in the Gauef,apadiyakilrikil" in the journal of Indian Philosophy 20 (March 1992), pp. 89-131. Most of the discussion pertaining to the Yogacara school, however, has not been published before. Chapters 4 and 6 contain some revised material ~hich was originally publislfed as '' Sunyatil and Ajiiti: Absolutism and the Philosophies of Nagarjuna and Gau<,tapada" in]ournal of Indian Philosophy 17 (Dec 1989), pp. 385-405. Abbreviations Introduction BBBBCGGMMKMMNRTSSUUUKSGKSoAUH MB N Vf V B Kahk h BBBBCGGAMMMNMRTriirhaabraaa;;aai:ahhuu;iiaithhddnhsl1anaccnma<ihhvmdd;,,adad-Ik.fyyaaaigMasa:huoarraba.poipaakasrgmmhaaittmtayir;;yrdidatdma11aaatyahirv riyykk-yay aUaayavaaaaUasa -kakknihpkvipkbbmoaadiaiaaaha r h;dfnrtanddraUUaaihaiikk~iap1pd gkriayaoy~;a aaaaaab-aoaannf , -dk h oks idif oVaaaa a~ f~Srt1fs raaaitC tu;ikrsdSdyrkiaruaa aabadns bV,n u vdaokotaaarnefartfard dttr kBatraNh ii lcthkubraoaaat ug irv V tayoaeraafvdj usi Svuntouebak ra Sdana vdlah'lrkuaa racarya atoSifpbtthhda tniSidhefparhonrtuaodiai xsan has SsntacmtincttkTt pi ~v .act daklvl arwlayhinaaionoaaieTrdpnstakencsriyoertulsht"a raoeiayesbsreiaet'r e, flkp.s eu al a yn y awir ihid.OnIsot osnaef nte nhe Medroaugtetna r,ede lchxnr , el mai uoinwokttegxhmtaanhscan ns i aani yaih.Gsksmedtsiys s g Lta pn eoD d sewoewauuvn htm mem,Tteonftc i oiiuvhst eul lohjdesutolrpio"ewpahiwd eailes iss tfhperdbtte uar oyhreigSaho ile roopp s ad sdoalal tknmeyhtapdefehsinn ir ,nee beryekfr te"ihromrhdrrmaa m ati astosspgwt a-"rr poempaaiomtaktoueod o pmondasvnfai i =eetnsrd iidbctebdmht nesdhi edio tteid e eeko'ehhoraflu 'te ndatfnte odhedestlahev-c, e i onaeet"wireewrsbevontlccee tlh ,veha tntouh o faaaaylroainotdnap uu i~nc rocfrdntydmptiyha et foh eh t aIhhti ra"eshosuastoni toal piynsf seifadrattasolf sp t u i dittseino ntnrrahreaidceiasd omosnf n"nehmierd san l t os bselt icthnacapi-h elgnohntoathuaeohteshriotogoums t cttie hhaBht u ut lt e' iotwpadheit'lgfrac msivhsoeiSeonah onntnoweevnsauithotr g c ipi ne tkatnoamnctuf ishhlkiufstrdco ioototoeaek awstiur elpsnhrttrr ssmisdmiiiyo,amm.seutcn nt y h r.snuTdt pao c seka ritsdFi teohtcnfon aioe ehy oo ce'ftdfd aad'if e r f t commentary on the Brahmasutra. The GK's commentator is either ignorant of Buddhist terminology and doctrines, or naively careless in his aOttfe mcoputrss et,o t"hceosve etrw uop c" otnhceeipr taiopnpse aorfa nScaen kinar ath aisr eV ceadraicnatitcu rteesx.t .N o scholar of any repute would actually purport to follow either as I have othuattl iins ecdlo tsheerm to. tHhoew aecvtuear,l hinis tmoyri coapli sniitounat,i oitn .is O thnee wmoonrdee lrisb esroaml emtiomdeesl teox pwoshiatito ne xotfe natn Ithnde iavne rpsehsi lopsaospshede r door wmne retoly uas c oalrlee ctthioen soyfs tseamyiantgics frreodmac tdoirfsf,e erednitto rpse, rcioodmsp iolef rtsh, ea nadu tthhoinr'kse rtse ahcahvien gb eceanre ienrv. oHlvoewd imn atnhye transmission of a text from its original author(s) to us today? This poses 3 Introduction 2 Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism Consequently, there has been a lack of interest in the Gaut/,apadiya a further problem for the scholar dealing with an ancient religious text, karika, a text which remains the only major example of a pre-Sailkarite i.e. to what extent do scholars impose a level of doctrinal unanimity formulation of Advaita. and systematization upon what may be composite material? Such hermeneutical problems in the final aaalysis tend to be unresolvable in the absence of any substantial historical information. Consequently, Recent Work on the Gaut!-apildiya-kilrikil we cannot know for sure what historical and personal circumstances lead to the composition of the Gaut/,apadfya-karika or its commentary. There have been little more than a handful of works exclusively An awareness of this fact, however, should temper any over-confident devoted to an appraisal of Gam;lapadian thought. Surendranath Dasgupta conclusions on these issues. I devotes a mere nine pages to the GK, despite spending over three In our enthusiasm to understand and label the doctrines of various I hundred pages on the Saitkarite school of Vedanta in his five volume philosophers it is easy to fall into overly ~implistic categories. No system work, The Hisfory of Indian Philosophy.1 In 1981, volume III of the of thought can be completely autonomous and it is important to Encyclopaedia of Indian Philosophies, a 635 page study devoted to recognize that in India, as much as anywhere else, the dynamic interplay ''Advaita Vedanta up to Sarilkara and his pupils;' was published with between differing religious and philosophical traditions is a major factor only twelve pages devoted to an examination of "Gauc;lapada."2 Until in the development of any given system of thought. the 1980s, only four books and one unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, In the early stages of any new movement, there must be some had been written in the West which dealt specifically with the interaction with what may later become an opposing tradition. This GaucJapluliya-karika as its central topic. 3 More recently there have been much is clear from an analysis of the major texts of Indian philosophy. signs that this situation is being rectified with a number of new works This reflects the fact that darsanas are structured in opposition to rival appearing on the subject. points of view or perspectives. It is a common feature of phiiosophical The first work to incorporate a critical edition (in roman script), silstras to find the views of an opponent put forward first, the purva · an English translation, and a brief commentary on the text was pak~in, and then refuted on the way to one's final position (siddhanta). Vidhushekara Bhattacharya's (1943), 1be Agama5astra of Gauef,apada In the early stages of a developing philosophy there is little or no option (University of Calcutta Press). Bhattacharya's thesis is that the text of but to adopt some of the concepts and linguistic forms current at the the GK is composite in nature, comprising of four separate works, all time. This combined with the "new insight" forms the basis for the of which have been heavily influenced by Buddhism, especially the new religious or philosophical movement. It should not be surprising fourth prakaratJa. Bhattacharya's commentary is not so much an then to find much evidence of Buddhist influence upon the Gau4a explanation of the karikas as a collection of mainly Buddhist references, padiya-karika, which is an example of a philosophica~ school (i.e. cited to support his thesis of Buddhist influence on the karikas. The Advaita Vedanta) in an eady stage of formation. What has surprised sheer weight of evidence provided by Bhattacharya should be enough many, however, is the extent of the Buddhist influence upon what is to convince even the most partisan reader of the GK's reliance upon clearly a Vedantic text. Buddhist philosophical texts. Little time is spent, however, discussing As the only available example of an uncompromising Advafta-vada . the complexity of the Buddhist and Vedantic philosophical traditions. before the Sankara school, the Gauc/apadiya-karika is of unparalleled The book lacks any attempt at a critical appraisal of the GK in its own importance for an understanding of the roots of Advaita Vedanta, the terms and from within the Vedantic tradition with which it aligns itself, school which since Sankara's time has been the predominant orthodox despite the Buddhist· terminology. There is no detailed exposition or interpretation of sruti. Surprisingly, little work has been carried out discussion of the philosophy of the text itself, nor is any attempt made on the Gau4apadiya-karika. Most scholars who have looked at the to place the GK in historical perspective. Nevertheless, Bhattacharya's text have done so as a means to an end, that is in order to gain a better work is a pioneering and innovative study. understanding of the thought of Sankara, considered the major figure, It was only a matter of time before Bhattacharya's view of the if not the "founding father," of Advaita Vedanta. In general, there Buddhist content of the GK came under attack. This-situation occurred appears to have been an undue emphasis placed upon the works of with the appearance of T. M. P. Mahadevan's (1952). Gauqapada: A Sankara as representative of the ''quintessence of Advaita philosophy.'' 4 Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism Introduction 5 Study in Early Advaita (University of Madras Press). Mahadevan' s study "Doctrinally there is no difference whatsoever between what is taught is written largely as a response to the arguments of Bhattacharya. Thus, by Gau<;lapida in the Karika and what is expounded by Sankara in his Mahadevan argues on behalf of the Vedanta tradition that the GK is in extensive works."5 fact a unitary text written by Gau<;lapada, identified as Sankara's para R. D. Karmarkar's (1953), The Gauqapildakarika (Govt. Oriental maguru. Much of the text is devoted to refuting Bhattacharya's claim Series Class B, No. 9, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona), of the Buddhist content of the GK. Of course, Mahadevan does not deny was also written to counter Bhattacharya's thesis of Buddhist influence that the GK is influenced by Buddhist arguments; his point, however, upon the karikas. His study provides a Sanskrit edition, translation, is that Gam;lapada's ideas are firmly established within the Upani$ads and explanatory commentary on the text. Karmarkar's entire thesis is themselves and are a rebuttal of Buddhist views. Thus, Mahadevan written as a response to Bhattacharya and involves the citation of argues, one need not look toward Buddhist texts to find the fundamental Vedintic and Brahmanical sources to counter the Buddhist citations sources of Gau<;lapadian thought. In general, Mahadevan has provided found in Bhattacharya's study. Gauc;lapada, Karmarkar suggests, is the us with a good, balanced summary of the traditional Vedantic concep author of the entire text; he is a thorough-going Vedantin with an tion of the Gau4apadfya-karika. The book also contains a reasonably interest in Buddhist ideas. The GK, however, is written with the accurate exposition of the philosophical views contained within the intention of establishing Ved:lntic ideas and constrasting them with text. The problem with Mahadevan's study, however, is that it is too prevailing (mostly Buddhist) views. Karmarkar, like Mahadevan, is an concerned with supporting the traditional Vedantic view, at times to upholder of Vcdantic orthodoxy. His work is useful as something of the detriment of objective scholarly acumen. Mahadevan denies that a corrective to the exclusively Buddhist interests of Bhattacharya. No the GK is substantially influenced by Buddhism (although he accepts attempt is made, however, to confront the underlying philosophical that the form of the GK's arguments are often taken from Buddhist problem involved in an examination of Gau<;lapadian thought, namely sources), but Mahadevan's own conception of Buddhism is ill-informed the question of the actual nature of Buddhist and Vedantic philosophy. and today appears rather dated. Virtually no time is spent discussing What do the cardinal philosophical texts of the two traditions actually and explaining Buddhist philosophical ideas on their own terms, and say and how are we to understand their relationship in the light of their when Buddhism is mentioned, it is invariably misunderstood and mutual occurrence in the GK? Throwing rival citations at one another, dismissed out of hand. For instance, in a discussion of the Buddha's while useful in establishing something of the philosophical and textual silence Mahadevan suggests that: sources of the GK, will not answer these fundamental questions. In more recent times a number of studies have been written which Two ways of understanding their [Buddhist] statements are possible, the attempt to deal with these issues more fully. Caterina Conio's (1971), absolutistic and the nihilistic. The absolutistic interpretation is that silence The Philosophy of the MiltJ.c/U.kya Karika (Arun Press, Varanasi), is an is the genuine teaching about the ultimate Reality, because the Absolute attempt to provide a systematic analysis of Gauc,iap:ldian thought, but is beyond the scope of speech and thought. This is indistinguishable from again no real time is devoted to a consideration of the philosophical the Upanisadic conception; and Mahayanism received from the Upanisads. heritage on which the GK is dependent. Conio provides some inter The other interpretation is that since nothing is real, the Buddha and what esting discussion of the authenticity of the Sankara bha~ya on the GK, he said are also unreal. This is the logic of nihilism carried to its con that she seems to accept as authentic, 6 and incorporates the interpre clusion. Nihilism itself is sunya. 4 tations of other commentaries on the text (Kiiranarayaoa, Madhva, Puru~ottama). In general, however, the study fails to be wide-ranging This statement shows no awareness of the subtlety of Buddhist enough to make any real impact and makes no substantial improvement thought, the complexity of Buddhist discussion of the Buddha's silence, in our understanding of tP.e nature of the GK's philosophy and its or of the Buddhist claim to be following a_ middle path between relationship to Buddhism. absolutism and nihilism. Mahadevan is also guilty of interpreting the Sangamlal Pandey's (1974), Pre-Samkara Advaita Philosophy GK through Sankarite eyes, thus detracting from the originality of the (Allahabad: Darshan Pith), provides a further example of an Indian text and over-simplifying the relationship between Sankara and the scholar thoroughly versed in the Brahmanical background of the GK author(s) of the GK. As a result, we find the author suggesting that: but sadly deficient in his understanding of the B11ddhist tradition. Introduction 7 6 Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism Pandey provides some useful and insightful discussion of the argues, is that the discussion of the non-origination of the atman in Brahmanical sources of early Advaita and the Vedantic precursors of GK I, II, and III presupposes the development of this doctrine with Gauc;lapada. His discussion, however, shows no real grasp of the regard to the dharmas which are the focus of discussion in GK IV (p. questions of multiple authorship and his polemical attitude towards 105). He points to the philosophical and hermeneutical problems which the Buddhist schools and their potential influence on the GK marrs the Sailkarite commentator has with the term "dharma" and suggests an already ill-informed discussion about the nature of Buddhism and that the author of the GK was initially interested in Mahayana Buddhist its relationship to the GK. ideas but then gradually became more Vedantic in orientation. The With Alexander Hixon's (1976), Mahayana Buddhist influence on development of Gam;lapada's thought, therefore, can be chronologically the Gauqa school of Advaya Vedanta (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, seen in the composition of the third, second, and first prakaratJas. University of Columbia), one finds the first real attempt to discuss the Our discussion of the date and authorship of the GK occurs in the first relationship of the GK with Mahayana Buddhist philosophy. Hixon chapter and so we shall consider Vetter's views more fully therein. suggests that the GK is a composite text (with GK IV being the earliest Vetter, howevei; has presumed too much. His argument merely points of the four prakaranas), representing a number of historical stages of to the Gauc;lapadian reliance upon the Mahayana non-origination of development of a Bengali school of Advaya Vedanta in existence before dharmas. This in itself does not entail that the fourth prakaratJ,a, the time of Sailkara. The author.has something of a piecemeal approach which discusses this doctrine, was necessarily the earliest composition. to the text, dividing it up into eleven fragments. 7 This is textual criticism Despite the detailed discussion of the text, there are many aspects taken to an extreme degree. Such an analysis is dependent not only upon and features of Gam;lapadian thought that Vetter does not consider. His a shrewd understanding of the differences between Vedantic and discussion of the Mahayana Buddhist background of the GK is minimal Mahayana Buddhist philosophy, but also upon the somewhat shaky and it is not made clear to what extent the author is indebted to methodological premise that the use of a different technical term points Mahayana doctrines other than ajativada, nor on what grounds to separate authorship. 8 Hixon also differentiates between many Gam;lapada and his Buddhist sources can be philosophically differ fragments on the basis of the degree to which they display "Vedantic" entiated. It is perhaps asking too much for this to be achieved in a single or. "Buddhist" orientation. This differentation requires a thorough article. Nevertheless, Vetter does not follow up his textual analysis with going analysis of both traditions-something that Hixon neither carries further studies of Gam;lapadian thought and philosophical sources. out nor displays in his own discussion of the karikas. Consequently Vetter does, however, progress from his philological analysis of the GK the discussion of Mahayana influence upon the GK is superficial, overly to a study of the influence of the Gauqapadiya-karika on the ' .1.rly simplistic, and far too definitive in its conclusions. Hixon does, however, thought of Sailkara (1979, Studien zur Lehre und Entwicklung Sankaras, provide a useful review of the major scholarly work on the GK up to Wien, esp. pp. 27-74). Sadly though, further consideration of the that point, aligning himself with what he calls the "liberal" tradition sources and origins of the GK itself are not forthcoming. of interpretation represented by Surendranath Dasgupta, Vidhuskekhara Colin Cole's (1982), Aspariayoga: The MiltJ4ukya-Karika of Bhattacharya, and T. R. V. Murti. Hixon's own work, however, is rather Gautf,apada, aims at providing a definitive exposition of Gam;lapadian too dependent upon the work of Bhattacharya and provides little in i thought. No discussion is made of textual questions concerning the date the way of an improvement of our understanding of the nature of the , I and authorship of the text, which Cole treats as a single text. Cole's GK. A running discussion is provided of each karikas, but the author I exposition of Gauc;lapadian philosophy, however, is hampered by an does not deal with Mahayana Buddhist ideas in sufficient dept_h to inadequate and insufficient consideration of Buddhist philosophy. Thus, establish the precise philosophical relationship of the GK to them. Tilmann Vetter's article "Die Gam;lapadiya-karikas: Zur Entstehung The arguments which Gauc;lapada uses in his explanation are reminiscent und zur Bedeutung Von (A )dvaita'' in Wiener Zeitschrift .fur die Kunde I of Buddhist Vijiianavada theory. But he is not a ''subjective idealist.'' Rather Sud-Und Ostasiens 22 (1978, pp. 95-131), remains the best textual study he is an ''.Absolute Idealist" in that he posits a·basis for all experience.9 of the GK to date. Vetter suggests, in agreement with Hixon, that historically the GK was composed in reverse order, GK IV being the Vijiianavada, at least in the form .that the author(s) of the GK earliest of the prakaranas and GK I the latest. The reason for this, Vetter would have been aware of it, was not a form of subjective idealism as Introduction 9 8 Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism where the anta/1karaYJ.a projects itself outward, thereby tabJng on the Cole implies, nor is it wholly unproblematic to describe Gauc;lapada form (V1:tti) of the object, but it is debatable as to how far this has as an "Absolute Idealist." This will become clearer in chapter 5, where improved our understanding of Gauc;lapadian thought (although it may I shall argue that neither the Yogacara school which preceded the GK, help the westerner, interested in modem holographic theory, to nor the Vedantic text itself, can be simplistically described as "ideal appreciate the text more). Kaplan, however, consistently fails to note istic.'' Failure to discuss the nature of (what Cole calls) '' Vijiianaviida'' that the traditional Indian epistemology of the outward-going thought leaves the GK floating in a philosophical vacuum, giving the antal!karaYJ.a is a realist view of perception. This is not the view of reader no conception of the text's place in the history oflndian thought. perception outlined in the GK, although it is the theory which Cole's work also shows little awareness of the differences between the predominated in the Sailkarite school of Vedanta. Indeed the realist doctrines of the GK and those of the later Advaita tradition.10 No attempt epistemologies of the classical Advaita Vedanta school ignore the is made to place the GK in historical or philosophical context. The fundamental features of Gam;lapadian epistemology, which do not tend reader, therefore, is left floundering if he or she wishes to grasp the towards epistemological realism. relevance of the GK and its place in Indian philosophical thought. Andrew 0. Fort (1990), The Self and its States: A States of Con Stephen Kaplan's (1987) Hermeneutics, Holography, and Indian sciousness Doctrine in Advaita Vedanta (Motilal Banarsidass) pro Idealism provides us with the first work to acknowledge the inherent vides us with a good literal translation of the Mar_u;/:ukya Upani$ad, limitations of the use of the Western philosophical term "idealism" chapter one of the Gat«fapadiya-karikil, and Sankara's(?) commentary when discussing Indian philosophical texts such as the GK. Recent work upon both (with Sanskrit text).13 The scope of Fort's book is not the in Yogacara studies in the West has drawn attention to this particularly Gauqapildfya-karikil as such, but an analysis of the development of the Vedantic doctrine of the four states of experience (catw;pad) from knotty problem,11 and it was only a matter of time before such . the early Upani$ads to the thought of contemporary Advaitins in India. considerations would carry over into the philosophical analysis of The study also includes a brief comparison of the doctrine with the Hindu philosophical schools. Karl Potter first expressed reservations modern western movement known as "transpersonal psychology." about the validity of describing the philosophy expounded in the GK Fort's work is an example of sound textual analysis characterized by as "idealistic,''12 and Kaplan continues this reappraisal of the GK by a careful delineation and explanation of Advaita terms coupled with providing what he describes as a "phenomenological interpretation" a keen awareness of their historical context. Fort rightly emphasizes of the text. Kaplan, to his credit, does not deny that the GK upholds the importance of the notion of an unchanging substratum as the a non-dualistic ontological position. He does, however, suggest that subjacent ground for the fluctuating states of mind of waking, dreaming, many of the karikas expound a "phenomenological" theory of and deep sleep. Turiya, as such, is the pure consciousness which perception. Thus, when the GK states that the mind "does not touch simultaneously supports and transcends the other three states. an external object" (GK IV.26) it is not putting forward an idealistic From the point of view of an analysis of Gam;lapadian thought, doctrine (that the world is the creation of the mind), rather it is stating however, a number of criticisms must be noted. Fort, while acknow the fact that the mind deals with the experience or appearance of ledging the differences between Gam;lapada and Sankara with regard objects and not objn"ts in themselves. Such an analysis is innovative to the relationship of the waking and dream states, fails to discuss the and agrees in many respects with my own analysis of the text, which underlying reasons for this. Like Kaplan, there is an insufficient also draws attention to the problem of "idealism" (see chapter 5). acknowledgment of the underlying epistemological differences between Kaplan, however, spends no time considering the Buddhist the two thinkers. The book provides a good historical discussion of philosophical background to Gauc;lapadian thought, and much of the the notion of tun)'a, but token gestures to the place of the Yoga and discussion is taken up with a comparison of the Gauc;Iapadian theory Buddhist schools in the development of this concept provide no real of perception with modern holographic theories of mind. The insight into their possible influences upon the notion of turfya. It commonalities between these two widely disparate fields seem to center should be noted, however, that Fort does not intend to provide a around an epistemology where the mind projects itself outward in definitive examination of the GK and as such there is no discussion perception. In this sense, holographic epistemological theory certainly of the second, third or fourth prakaraYJ.aS, all of which ignore the has some sort of similarity with certain Indian theories of projection

Description:
This book provides an in-depth analysis of the doctrines of early Advaita and Buddhism that has important implications for the question of the relationship between Hindu and Buddhist thought. The author examines the central doctrines of the Gaudapadiya-karikain a series of chapters that discuss earl
See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.