3G

CHAPTER 11

GAUDAPADA AND HIS THEORY OF MYAVADA

Gaudapada is the foremost among the advaitavaains.

He is famous for his . It was not new to the

Indian philosophy. The reason is that the Upanisadas have thought over this topic. But Gaudapada has given deserving preference to it and developed this theory.

Though i t is true as Dr.R.D.Karm.arkar has pointed out in his book named as ' Gaudapada-Karika' that some philosophers who believe in a raal process of creation regard the creation as the manifestation of the Lord or as resembling the dream or magic phenomena or as due to the w ill of the Lord or as coming from Kala (timie), or as serving the purpose of enjoyment, or sport of the Lord, or as being the of the Lord. But a ll these thesis are wrong. I f the highest is known to be Aptakama, how could he be associated with creation in any capacity without 1 changing his own nature? Put the fact is that according to Gaudapada nothing is going to be bom hera The highest goal is one and the sam.e. It is Aptakama, so i t has no desire and therefore nothing happens. Theoretically it can be grasped by anybody.

1. See Gaudapada Karika - FP xi 37

Gaudapada used two different \vords in this connection one is and the other is samvrt i . This very usage of the term saiiivrti is complicated. For, Gaudapada is called as Budahist ana it was one of the reasons that he hias used the word samvr t i , which is the technical term of the

Eauddhas. There are pros and cons in this respect that whether Gaudapada was a Buddhist or not? Gaudapada appears to me to be a Brahmanical thinker boldly putting I'orth the

Upanisadic idea in the ligh t of the Madhyamika and the

Vijnanavada doctrine. One must remember here that the only technique is borrowed and not the tenets. The essential concern of Gaudapada is but it is only that he goes about demonstrating Brahman with the tools that the Buddhists had forged. As far as my topic is concerned I think that

I should not pay much attention towards it . At the sam.e time it can also be said that (aankara has borrowed these iaeas from Gaudapada. Not only this but, Sankara has accepted his ideas ana diluted for the common man. Of course,

[Sankara’ s the or}'" is also not much easy to follow, but on the empirical level, at least, he holds the world, on the other hana, Gaudapada aeclares that no creature whatever is born; no origination of it exists, this is 2 the highest truth where nothing whatever is born.

T^il^ I

OK 3•4^ j 4*71 uO Oc

He aoes not need to explain i t further, this is peculiarity of Gaudapada.

Ke has prepared his book v.dth four differen t chapters, among them the fir s t one is based on the Mandukyopanisad it s e lf , but the other three are his original contribution.

In the first chapter he has discussed the ^ and its three matras on the basis of which, waking state, dream state and the deep sleep state can be traced. In the second chapter the falsity of all objects has been stated. All other things are unreal except that highest Brahman, is declarea in the third chapter, and the last chapter is like the conclusion \ihere a ll these states and their falsity is tola, and of course, the real knowledge is also described.

In the whole of this book Gaudapada used the wora m.aya at 14 places with different shades in his mind"^

Nevertheless, in the same text he utilises the word samvrti with the specific sense of empirical level. His main thesis is that no origination exists and vvithout any hesitation he mentions i t . But the point is that Gaudapada,

3. See Gaudapada Karika - 1.7, I.I6, 1.17, 2.12, 2.19,

2.31, 3.10, 3 . 19, 3 .24, 3 .27, 3.2S, 3 .29,

4.44, 4.5^ 39

most of the times, thinks maya as unreality and oankara finus i t out as some obstacle between the union of the and the , or the . ■ I t might be a kind of development in the meaning of the word maya. The iriain poixit according to me is Gaudapada has not paid much attention tov/ards the word maya. I t is also possible that he does not accept the world at a ll, that is why, there is no problem of perceptible vrorld before him and so he rtas rather reluctant about the term maya.

Gaudapada is jankara’ s preceptor. Gaudapada's / - principles which are necessary for Sankara's philosophy; he must have borrowedthem. These are maya principle ana the samvrt i . The maya has helped Sankara a lot.

He thinks that there is no difference between the paramatman ana the atman on the ultim.ate le v e l, notwithstanding, it is the maya, which d iffe rs them from each-other. The man perceives this v/orld, which is true on the empirical level, i.e . by sainvrti and of course, because of the maya.

Both Gaudapada and oankara admit that the maya does not exist at all. In the G.K. Gaudapada clearly points out - - 4 ^ ~ tnat the maya does not exist. Sankara also vjhile

4. ^ 'rsrfc .... ^rr « i

. GK. 4.5^ 4 0

commenting on that declares that that which does not

exist is called as maya. So it is clear that there is no contra-iction between Gaudapada and Sankars. Another point is that though Sankara does not ex p licitely denote the word saiiivrt i , s t i l l he was fu lly aware of that term

ana his preface to the Brahmasutrabhasya is the best

example of it.

It is true that Gaudapada points out aifferent

meanings of the term miaya, nevertheless, his ajativada makes his intention clear. In the same way or same style

iankara also points out the different shades of the concept maya, s t i l l there is no confusion in his mind about the

idea of the maya, its capacity and limitations. So to my iiiind, the exact relation between Gaudapada and y /— — Sankara is very wisely declared by Vasudeosastri

Abhyankar as “H r G560

'^ii ^ w r r ^ : i

^ ^il ^Mi c,l -oil p4d ^ ^TciMI Pc^d^ I

^1 6MI c;i yPciiTr fc^d c ^ ^ f ^ T n T T ^ : ^Tffelc^^ 1

5. =TTR ^1 aff ^ Hnrr ^ .. i

GKBP <+.5^ Th- ( o 5 S 0 41

^ aFrfrofRTF criTrJJtiJ^^ i ^ ■^^qrsn"^: 3H OTHcifHlci trfTV~”c|c' I

"^fT^mxr^: 3PwP=c^^ vR'rn^r^: i X f3T^ glciMrs.^Tp^ %^irrgjqr qr-^^tTrnr f^^TTi^T: y{^?rr^T^ Ijprncf^: V ^ m ql'^T^:

w i t t c t t ^ =t glTnrreprrcn-^: ^

o ^{<^.Vq cic;<=b^>1 qT3^T o^-'^TTT^n~Rr§: flTWn-T'§:

6 . See Siddhantabindu (Introduction).