the doctrine of four in the early upanisads some connected problems

DIPAK BHATTACHARYA

T H E D O C T R I N E O F F O U R I N T H E E A R L Y U P A N I S A D S

A N D S O M E C O N N E C T E D P R O B L E M S

AA AGV AK AVP

BS BU CU GKK HIL HIP HSL IA ISHL MK MU MUK OCD PMK PU Rv SB Sradd~ S~trg~ SVD TPM TPU ~ a VGA

ABBREVIATIONS

(Capital letters indicate modern studies and translations)

Abhi~may~la~r~loka of Haribhadra on Maitreyanfitha's AK. THE A GAMASASTRA OF GA UD. APADA (Bhattacharya, V). Abhisamay~lahk~rak~rik~ of Maitreyan~tha, ed. with AA (See Bibliography). Atharvaveda (Paippal~da). Atharvaveda (Saunak[ya). Brahmas~tra. Br.had~tran.yaka Upanis.ad. Ch~ndogya_ Upanisad. GA UD. APADAKARIKfl (Karmarkar). A HISTORY OF INDIAN LITERA TURE (What ernitz). A HISTORY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY (Dasgupta). A HISTORY OF SANSKRIT LITERATURE (Macdonell). 1NDIAN ANTIQ UAR Y. INDIAN STUDIES IN HONOR OF C R. LANMAN. M~n. d. fikyakg~il~g Mllnd. r~kyopani~ad. MU + MK. ORIGIN OF THE CA TU~KA YA_DOCTRINE (.Bhattaeharya, D). THE PHILOSOPHY OF MAN.DUKYA KARIKA (Conio). THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE UPANI.SADS (Deussen). .Rgveda. Satapatha Br~hma.na. Mah~y~nMraddhotp~da~stra. Mah~yana~tr~lahk~ra. THE SYSTEM OF THE VED,2tNTA (Deussen). THEORY AND PRACTICE OF THE MAN. ~ALA (Tucci). THE THIRTEEN PRINCIPAL UPANI.SADS (Hume). -l~didMopa_ni~dah. (.Motilal Ba_narsidass). GAU.DAPADIYAMAGAMASASTRAM (Bhattacharya, V.).

1. INTRODUCTION

The doctrine o f four is quite well known in Indian philosophical speculation

and mysticism. It first appeared in the Vedic S .arythit[s I as the doctrine of the

four quarters o f the universal divine being. The same doctrine was used and

Journal o f lndian Philosophy 6 (1978) 1-34. All Rights Reserved. Copyright © 1978 by D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland

2 DIPAK BHATTACHARYA

further developed in the early Upanisads. The scheme of four continued

to enjoy a high degree o f popularity not only in speculative thought but also

in secular use during the few centuries before Christ. This is evidenced by the

division of each chapter of P[.nini's As..t#dhyfty~ into four pFldas; the Yogasfttra and the Brahmas~tra, too, are each divided into four p&tas. This handy scheme

eventually won for it a very wide range o f application in various branches o f

Indian philosophy, namely, Buddhism (Catus.kaya Buddha), 2 Vedanta

(Catus.p~d .4tman), Vyg.kara.na (Catus.padr Vak), Tantra etc. The common

feature of these doctrines and secular uses is the adoption of a fourfold

division of things. A treatise may have four sections, the universe four quarters,

the soul four states, the Buddha four bodies, evolution four stages etc. This

was termed 'quaternary series' by Tucci. s This expression as well as terms like

'doctrine of four', 'series o f four' etc. are often used synonymously below.

The facts at our disposal, thus, point to the great importance of the idea

of quaternity in early Indian thought. An idea o f the symbolic value o f num-

bers may be had from Gonda's observation on some o f them. In Triads in the Veda 4 (1976) Gonda shows 'three' to be the number of completeness and

perfection. What Gonda says of ' three' equally applies to 'four' . One may

compare Jung's observations on the idea of quaternity:

"The quaternity is an archetype of almost universal occurrence. It forms the logical basis for any whole judgment. If one wishes to pass such a judgment, it must have this fourfold aspect . . . . This is so because the fourfold aspect is the minimum requirement for a complete judgment. The ideal of completeness is the circle or sphere, but its natural minimal division is a quaternity. ''5

This observation, as the discussion in the following pages will show, holds

good for early Indian thought too.

A part o f the history of the idea - its genesis, and development in the

major Upanis.ads - has been dealt with here with comments on the date o f

the M~.n.df~kyopani.sad apropos of the said development.

2. THE OLDEST FORM OF THE DOCTRINE IN THE SA .MHIT,~S

AND ITS SUBSEQUENT REVERSION

Gonda 6 traces the origin o f the 'use of three as the number o f perfection' to

the actual existence of important triads around us, e.g., earth, air and sky and

secondarily, to the ancient tendency o f adding an extra element to an already

existing important number just to enhance its value. Though the secondary

THE DOCTRINE OF FOUR IN THE UPANI.SADS 3

cause must have worked also for the development of the importance o f

quaternity, we cannot look to the cosmos for a fourfold model. The most

familiar example o f completeness in four is furnished by the quadruped.

Hence, the idea of quaternity seems to be rooted in zoomorphism, in the

conception o f the primeval substratum of creation as a four-footed being, viz.,

as a cow, and of the first-evolved-being as her calf. Archetypal Speech is

imagined as a calf in RV.I.164.28:

"The cow lowed for the calf which opened its eyes; she sniffed in order to low. Desiring the (milk sucking) heated mouth of the calf, she emits sound . . . . ,,7

The four feet of the same Speech is mentioned in I. 164.45,

"Speech is measured in four feet (= quarters), priests who are wise know them. Set down in secret three (of them) do not move. The fourth (quarter) of Speech men speak".

Vir~j, as the primeval substratum of creation, is imagined as a cow in

Atharvaveda (S~aunakTya) VIII.9. Her calf, the first evolved being, is four-

fold in verses 2 - 3 c d of the same hymn:

"He who made the fluid to resound in greatness after having made it the origin (of everything) while lying threefold; he (as) the calf of the desire yielding Virhj, made (his) forms secret afar. The three great ones that are there, the fourth of which (man) distinguishes by employing as (human) speech . . . . "

Apart from the importance o f the bovine imagery, the examples also show

the tendency to add an extra element to a triad. The formula o f four is

always expressed as three-and-one. Of the four quarters three are hidden and

the fourth one (caturtha or turrya) belongs to man. It has been so set out

also in the Puru.sa-hymn, RV.X.90.3cd - 4 a b : "One of Its quarters is all beings,

three of Its feet are immortal i ty in heaven. Puru.sa with three feet arose

upwards, one foot again became this (world)". In R V.X.85.40 S~ry~-Sffvitrf

is said to have been owned by four types of beings, the fourth (turFya) being

man.

A different presentation is found in A VS.II.1.2:

"May gandharva, who knows the immortal, proclaim that abode which is the highest secret. Of these three feet are laid in secret. He who knows them is the father's father."

Apart from the three that are laid in secret there is also one highest secret

here. This unique presentation seems to be a transitional link between the

idea o f the highest station of Vis..nu in the empyrean - one o f his three

footsteps (R V.I.22.18, 20, 21, I. 154. 5 - 6 ) and that o f the three secret

quarters with a mortal ' fourth ' .


The secret quarters of Speech and the human quarter are explained in the Satapatha-Brahma.na IV. 1.3.16:

" . . . only that fourth part of speech is intelligible which men speak; but that fourth part of speech which beasts speak is unintelligible; and that fourth part of speech which birds speak is unintelligible; and that fourth part of speech which the small vermin here speaks is unintelligible. ''8

But it is more probable that in the Sa~hita formulations the three types of Vedic composition (yk, sffman, .ra/us.) are understood as divine while the language of man is the fourth quarter.

Excepting in A V~.II. 1.2 (A VP.II.6.2) 9 which seems to mark an inter-

mediate stage of development, the characteristic feature of these presen- tations is that the enumeration is always made from above so that the lowest quarter belonging to man is termed fourth (turrya or caturtha).

The scheme is fully utilised in the early Upanis.ads. Brahman is defined as fourfold from various angles of vision and, in conformity with Vedic panthe-

ism, the whole universe is conceived as such. Much of this appear to carry

only historical value, but there is a perceptible trend in the Br.had~ra.nyaka and the Ch~ndogya to re-interpret the old three-and-one formula of the

S .arghit~s. The concept of one highest quarter as opposed to that of three

hidden ones tends to rise. Finally, in the Maitrr, among the older Upani.sads,

the scheme is consciously reversed. The reversion of the scheme means that

unlike in the Sa .mhitEs the enumeration is made from below and hence the

fourth quarter is placed not below but above the other three (table below).

SCHEME OF FOUR QUARTERS

SAM. nlrAS z~arM

1ST DIVINE METAPHYSICAL=4TH (TUR~t'A) 2ND 3RD QUARTERS QUARTER

3RD 4TH (TURIYA) = HUMAN PHYSICAL 2ND QUARTER QUARTERS 1ST

It is in this reversed form given in the Maitrrthat the doctrine of four penetrates into almost all branches of Indian mystic speculation and practice.

A more developed and detailed account than the one of the Maitrr is available in the M~.nql.~kya which concerns itself solely with the four states of the soul, still termed quarters (pada) in deference to older terminology.

THE DOCTRINE OF FOUR IN THE UPANIS.ADS 5

But the quarters are transformed into states in both the MaitrF and the

Ma.n.d~kya. Deussen narrates the Ma.n(l.~kya-doctrine as follows:

"As the ~tman, 'becoming incarnate in bodily form' in space occupies the body as the aggregate of the organs 'right up to the finger-tips', so also in time it passes in this its individual condition through a series of states, in which its real metaphysical nature becomes gradually more and more plainly visible. These states are: - 1) waking, 2) dream sleep, 3) deep sleep (sus.uptl), i.e. deep, dreamless sleep in which the soul becomes temporarily one with Brahman and enjoys a corresponding unsurpassable bliss, and 4) the 'fourth' state (caturtha, turya, tur~ya), usually called tur~ya, in which that disappearance of the manifold universe and the union with Brahman on which the bliss of deep sleep depends takes place not as before unconsciously, but with continued and perfect consciousness."l°

This formula distinguishes itself from the one found in the Sa .mhitas mainly

in three ways. First, it reverses the old formula. Secondly, the spatial division

of the objective universe is replaced here by the gradation o f subjective

experience; the first three quarters are qualitatively graded in terms o f human

conditions. Thirdly, the subject and the object are one in the Turgya.

So far as the first aspect is concerned it is probable that the logical necessity

of presenting the perfect ideal as unity, that is not as threefold as in the

Sa .mhitas, worked behind the reversion of the scheme. The Sa .mhit~ under-

standing could be tolerated so long as one was in the realm of mythology, and

soteriology and idealism were less important than cosmology. The former ones

demand unity in the ideal. The continuation of the Sa .mhit~ formulation

would have meant the acceptance o f an unnecessary plurality in the meta-

physical sphere and unity in the physical.

3. B .RHADARANYAKA V. 14.

This legacy of the mythological past was first sought to be forsaken in the

Ch~ndogya and the Brhadara.nyaka. Thus a new colouring is added to the

old scheme in BU. V. 14. which is given in translation below:

1. bhf~-mir (earth), an.ta-ri-k.sa (interspace), dy-aur (sky) - eight syllables. Of eight syllables, verily, is one line of the G~yatrL And that [series], indeed, is that [line] of it . . . . 2..r-cas (verses), ya-j6m-s.i (sacrificial formulas), s~-m6-ni (chants) - eight syllables. Of eight syllables, verily, is one line of the G~yatrf. And that [series], indeed, is that [line] of it . . . . 3. pr~-.na (in-breath), apftna (out-breath), vya-na (diffused breath) - eight syllables. Of eight syllables, verily, is one line of the G~yatrL And that [series], indeed, is that [line]


of it. As much breathing as there is here, so much indeed does he win who knows thus that line of it.

That is its fourth, the sightly foot, namely the one above-the-darksome who glows yonder. The fourth is the same as the Turiya. It is called the 'sightly (dar~atam) foot', because it has come into sight (dadr~e), as it were. And he is called 'above-the-darksome' (paro-rajas), because he glows yonder far above everything darksome. Thus he glows with luster and glory who knows thus that foot of it. 4. This G[yatrl is based upon that fourth, sightly foot, the one above-the-darksome. That is based upon truth (satya) . . . . ,11

While elaborating the fourfold nature of the Gayatrfthe Upanis.ad places the

fourth quarter beyond the darksome. The three worlds, the three Vedas and

the three vital breaths contribute to the formation of the first three quarters

while the fourth quarter remains in the highest region. The entire sphere of

knowledge is intended to be identified with the Gayatri'and conceived as

fourfold with the material world forming the three lower strata and truth

shining above those.

Here there is one of the earliest attempts to reverse the Sam. hit[ scheme

of three heavenly quarters and one earthly quarter. However, other features

remain more or less the same as before. The quaternary division is still spatial and the Tur~ya is symbolised by the sun. 12 The apparent cosmological charac-

ter of the scheme, thus, still persists and no attempt is made to speak in terms

of subjective experience or to introduce the idea of the progressive unveiling

of the metaphysical nature of the Absolute. Though the historical value of the B.rhadara.nyaka passage cannot be denied,

it marked a temporary phase and made just a step towards the classical

Ved[ntic comprehension of the doctrine. But, perhaps, sometimes its intrinsic value has been overestimated by reading in it what it only foreshadows. We

may view Deussen's observation that here the "three feet of the G~yatrf appear under a material form as the worlds, the Vedas and the vital breaths,

while only the fourth ( turrya) is transcendental "la in that light. For, whether

transcendency is really meant is doubtful. Tucci might have taken the cue from this passage when he said that the

.Rgvedic "ternary division was quickly transformed into a quaternary series,

since beyond the sky (svarga) is the luminous space in which, at times, appears

the celestial eye, the Sun". 14 This amounts to saying that the observation of

the sun shining beyond the heaven was responsible for the growth of the idea

that there is a fourth region beyond the third region of heaven. But the B~.hadara.nyaka passage cannot be held responsible for introducing the


quaternary series in Vedic speculation. A quaternary series appears also in

.RV, A 1/, SB ~s etc., where the Turrya is the human quarter and hence unworthy

of being explained by the "celestial eye". The reversion of the formula, too,

cannot be explained by the same. The Turfya is the sun in this passage, no

doubt. But the cosmological analogy is presented by way of explaining the

idea of truth shining uniquely above its opposite. The priority, thus, is to be

given to philosophical necessity than to cosmology.16

4. CH,4NDOGYA III. 12.

Chandogya III. 12 also shows signs of departure from the Sa .mhitff.scheme,

but insists on the identity of its new formulation with the ancient one. The

passage runs as follows:

"1. Verily, the G~yatr~ meter is everything here that has come to be, whatsoever there is here. Verily, the G~yatr~ is speech . . . . 2. Verily, what this G~yatr~ is - that is the same as what this earth is . . . . 3. Verily what this earth is - that is the same as what the body in man here is; for in it these vital breaths are established . . . . 4; Verily what the body in man is - that is the same as what the heart within man here is . . . . 5. This is the four-quartered sixfold G~iyatrL With reference to it a Rig verse s t a t e s : - 6. His greatness is o f such extent , Yet Puru.sa is greater still. All beings are one-four th o f him; Three-fourths, the immortal in the sky. 7. Verily, what is called Brahma - that is the same as what the space outside of a person is. Verily, what the space outside of a person is- 8. that is the same as what the space within a person is. Verily, what the space within a person is- 9. that is the same as what the space here within the heart is. That is the Full, the Non- active . . . . "

The passage is quite abstruse. There has been a lot of discussion in modern and

ancient times on what it means. Deussen 17 among modern scholars under-

stands the four-quartered sixfold Gayatr~ as follows. The six items of III. 12.

1 - 4 (emphasised by the present author in the citation), viz., the text of the

Vedas, all created beings, the earth, the body, the heart and the vital-breaths

make for the material fourth quarter while the three items of III. 1 2 . 7 - 9 , viz.,

space outside the body, space inside the body and space in the heart make for

the three divine quarters of G~yatr~

But this is not deducible from the passage. Two of the three items of III.

12 .7 -9 , viz., space in the heart and in the body are not really excluded from


the six items mentioned in the first four sections, viz., III.12. 1 - 4 which

include the heart and the body. Hence it is difficult to accept that the two

sets o f items make for the immortal and the mortal quarters.

Deussen says:

" . . . how, in our passage the four feet are to be understood, must be deduced from the verse (R V.X.90.3) quoted on this occasion:

'However gIeat is Nature's majesty, The spirit is yet higher raised by far, Of it, but one foot do all beings make, Three feet are immortality in heaven.'

It would be simple to conclude that, for the author of the Chdndogya-passage, the three immortal feet or quarters of Purusha are represented by the three real feet of the G~yatr[, the beingless phenomenal world, on the contrary, by its imaginary foot".18

But there is nothing of 'beinglessness of the phenomenal world' or o f the 'real

feet of the G~yatri ' in the Ch#ndogya-passage. ~aflkara's explanation ~9 is different. The six-items of 111.12.1-4 make the

G~yatrf sixfold. And as a metre the G~yatrf is both~sixfold and four-quartered

because the twenty-four syllables when divided into four quarters consist of

six syllables in each pffda. As to the three aspects mentioned in 111.12.7-9,

~afikara sees the three physical states of the new quaternary series of MU, viz., waking, dream and deep sleep in them.

The abstruseness of the passage resulted in quite a good deal o f freedom

being exercised by some of the modern translators 2° in contravention of the

traditional punctuation.

In view of so much controversy there should not be any objection against

yet another opinion being expressed.

I I1 .12.1-4 mention the four quarters; that i s to say the six items are to be

classified into four groups as done in the four paragraphs of the text. Thus"

we get the four-quartered sixfold G~yatrf on the basis of what is directly

available in the text without adding any external or supposedly implied idea

to ,it. But how the comprehension becomes the same as that o f R V.X.90.3

as claimed in the passage is difficult to guess. Probably it does not become.

For, there is a new concept here of one highest quarter as distinguished from

that of the three highest quarters in the ancient formula. This is indicated in

a paragraph of the next section of the text, viz., CU.III.13.7: "The light which shines higher than this heaven . . . . in the highest worlds" is called "this light

which is here within a person". Later commentators 2~ vigorously argue - quite reasonably so - that here Brahman is meant by light (iron.h). Hence we get

THE DOCTRINE OF FOUR IN THE UPANIS.ADS 9

internal light (Ili.13.7) and the 'full' 'non-active' space within the heart

(III.12.9) as the highest quarter. From this it is inferable that the highest of the four quarters of III. 12.1-4 is that of 'the heart within man' (III. 12.4).

The concept of the highest quarter here is an unmistakable departure - perhaps unconscious - from the ancient presentation of three divine quarters.

This highest one remains in the 'highest worlds' which seem to be the three

heavenly regions where Puru.sa's immortal three-fourths in the heaven reign.

Now, "the light which shines higher than this heaven" seems to be very near

to the Brhad?tranyaka's (see Section 3 above) "sightly foot, namely the one- above-the-darksome who glows yonder" which is the fourth quarter and

called Turfya. But unlike in the Brhadara.nyaka there is no attempt made in the Ch~ndogya to reverse the old scheme.

The presentation of the highest light as one is done not by reversing the enumeration but by contracting the three heavenly quarters into one in

111.13.7. The 'highest light' which remains in the 'highest worlds' - obviously

the three heavenly quarters - is not threefold. This seems to have been a

deliberate moulding. The commentators ~2 on Brahmas~tra I. 1.24 who main- tain that the three heavenly quarters are meant by the highest light also imply the said contraction. This partially effects the reversion since we are nearer to the MU-scheme. But one is left in confusion by this as to the final form of the scheme, which seems to have resulted in the variety of interpretations. The process is completed in Maitrr VII.11.8 which not only contracts the old three heavenly quarters into the highest one but also expands the old one human quarter into the lower three of the new scheme and thus explains the identity of the two schemes (section 8 below).

The second departure in the Ch~ndogya, it appears, is made by the intro-

duction of quite a new theme in the last three paragraphs of the section concerned, viz., in I l i .12.7-9. Here the heart stands in the same relation to the body as that which exists between the body and external nature, and all

this is said to be Brahman. In a far later age the process of the emergence and

resorption of the individual along the stream of the all-encompassing K~lacakra or the ~iva-Sakti complex was made to be reflected in the passage of the

individual's own seed through his body. 23 This required the comprehension of the body as the microcosm where the seed stands in the same relation to it as the one in which the body stands to the universe. Ch~dogya 111.12.7-9

give an example of an early anticipation of the theory. But how this macro- micro symmetry is related to the doctrine of four is not clear in the Ch~dogya.


5. MACRO-MICRO SYMMETRY AS A PRELUDE TO THE

TRANSFORMATION OF DIVISIONS INTO STATES

That brings us to another distinguishing feature of the new doctrine, that of

the conversion of the quaternary division of the cosmos and cosmic being

into the gradation of subjective experience. Like the phenomenon of

reversion this also grew in direct proportion to the replacement of cosmology

by theology and philosophy proper. The cosmic character of the highest being faded away under the urge to comprehend him not only as a being but

as truth that is to be understood as such and that concerns the individual who understands, and also as the highest state of being or the state of release

from the bond of physical existence. This is perceptible in the introduction of

the individual subject in the scheme, in the idea that Brahman resides in the

heart. But certain evidences suggest that the above comprehension was closely

related to the theory of macro-micro symmetry stated above.

Apart from in Chandogya III.12.7-9 the latter doctrine is found also in

Chdndogya IV.5-8 and III.18.1-8.

Chdndogya IV.5-8 descr~e Brahman as sixteenfold, the four quarters

east, west, south and north forming one fourth of it, the earth, atmosphere, sky and ocean forming another, the four luminous objects fire, moon, sun

and lightning forming the third fourth and breath, eyes, ears and mind

forming the fourth quarter. The microcosmic theory is not explicitly stated.

Three-fourths of Brahman are cosmic and one-fourth belongs to the human

body - this makes the theory somehow .Rgvedic. But the parallel quaternary

division of the cosmic and bodily quarters of Brahman at least is similar to

the Tantric doctrine according to which everything of the universe exists in the body. 24

Ch~ndogya 111.18.1 is as follows:

"One should reverence the mind as Brahma. - Thus with reference to the self. Now with reference to the divinities - One should reverence space as Brahma. -

This is the twofold instruction with reference to the self and with reference to the divinities."

The suggestion of this passage is not quite different from that of CU.III.12.7

where Brahman is equated to the great space and to the space within one's

heart, or, of CU.III. 1 3.7 where "the light which shines higher than this heaven . . . . is the same as the light which is here within a person." Such presentation foreshadows the imminent understanding of Brahman as a

matter of subjective realisation; but 111.12.7 also implies the doctrine of


microcosm. And as the theory is further worked out in the subsequent para-

graphs of the Upanis.adic passage partially cited above, that is in CU.III.18.2-8,

the formulation of III. 18.1, though itself suggestive of a new understanding of the quaternary series, is reduced to a narration of the Upanis.adic theory of

macro-micro symmetry:

"That Brahma has four quarters. One quarter is speech. One quarter is breath. One quarter is the eyes. One quarter is the ear. - Thus with reference to the self.

Now with reference to the divinities. - One quarter is Agni (Fire). One quarter is V~yu (Wind). One quarter is ,~ditya (the Sun). One quarter is the quarters of heaven.

This is the twofold instruction with reference to the self and with reference to the divinities. ''2s

In these formulations two trends are perceptible. First, Brahman is said to

reside in the heart (III.12.7-9), or, is the mind (111.18.1) or is within oneself

(III. 13.7). But, at the same time, the microcosmic theory inevitably creeps

in as an integral part of the theme. The discovery of Brahman in the heart definitely suggests the trend to present Brahman as truth to be realised, which

ultimately resulted in the transformation of the quaternary division of the cosmic being into the gradation of subjective experience. The microcosmic theory, on the other hand, does not have any immediate significant develop-

ment in the Upanis.ads. But it certainly continued to exist beneath the surface so that it could reappear in the Tantras in a far more refined form. It is obvious that in the Tantric understanding of the microcosmic theory, the cosmic and microcosmic division (instead of gradation)which persists in the cited Upanis.adic passages would be replaced by that of the gradual perfection of the individual in four stages.

Though the doctrine of macro-micro symmetry was not always encouraged in the Vedanta philosophy, its historical importance cannot be denied. The separate treatment of the subject and the object could not be

made in the Chandogya without first taking help from this doctrine. A close

relation between the microcosmic theory and the determination of subject-

object relation is suggested also by the following historical coincidences.

There is no certain evidence for any wide popularity of the microcosmic

theory in the post-Upani.sadic period. At the same time in the M~t.nql. akya, which seems to have been much later than the older Upanis.ads, (see Section 9 f f below) little is said about the state of the objective world in the lower three stages, 26 though the distinction between the subject and the object is

said to disappear in the Turi-ya. But the eventual popularity of the doctrine


in the late medieval period through the Tantras also precedes the fact that in the Vedantasara 27 the subjective and the objective aspects of the three

lower stages reappear as the particulars and the universals of those stages. These might not be only coincidences without any significance.

In the Vedantasara 2a the distinction between the particular and the

universal disappears in the Tur[ya as a result of which its scheme of four assumes a partly pyramidal structure. If all the passages of the Chdndogya as discussed here are taken into account such a structure can be worked out even from it. But the crude macro-micro symmetry of Chandogya I II.18 as well as the absence of the idea of the gradation of conscioumess in the way of realisation in this section of the Upani~ad prevent the concept of unity in the highest stage. It becomes evident from this that the problem of subject- object unity also worked behind the subsequent presentation of the scheme as gradation. This is not contradicted by that, in the M~n.d~kya, which knows the said gradation, the objective aspect in the lower three quarters is rather ignored. 29 For, the subject-object unity in the fourth quarter is, after all,

mentioned (MU 7). However, it may be said that the main reason for the transformation of the cosmic division into mental gradation seems to have been the other necessity pointed to above - the mystic urge to see Brahman in the conscious mind, that is as something to be realised.

6. THE THREE STATES IN CH/tNDOGYA VIII.7-13

When Brahman is viewed as something to be realised or experienced, it is natural that the normal state of the mind in which it cognises the material world is to be rejected as unfit for understanding Brahman "which shines . . . in the highest worlds, than which nothing is higher" (CU.III.13.7). Hume marks "how the dominant realistic monism of the Upani.sads is frequently overridden by the idealistic tendency which rejects the worm of the waking consciousness as the real worm and which adopts the state of dreamless sleep or of ecstatic meditation as grasping absolute unity and reality. ''3° It happens not without a religious or philosophical basis. First, Brahman is recognised as the perfect being, the negation of all evils. It is "free from evil, ageless, deathless, sorrowless, hungefless, thirstless" (CU.VIII.7.1). These evils are always present in the state of waking, whence Indra declined to accept PrajApati's first instruction that the body that moves when one is awake is the real self (VIII.9.1). According to Praj~pati's second instruction: "He who


moves about happy in a dream - he is the self." But, though "even if this

body is blind, that one is not blind", yet even in dreams, "as it were, they kill

him; as it were, they unclothe him; as it were, he comes to experience what is

unpleasant; as it were, he even weeps". Hence Indra saw nothing enjoyable in

this (VIII. 10). A more perfect state is spoken of in the third teaching which

tells that "when one is sound asleep, composed, serene and knows no dream

- that is the Sell". (VIII.11.1) The story of Indra and Praj~pati does not go much farther in the Chdndogy~

But Indra is not satisfied even with the state of deep sleep as the condition in

which the true nature of the individual as Brahman is revealed. For, it is true

that no evils are experienced in that state. But the aim was one of attaining the perfect state. And in doing so, though all evils are removed with those even the common condition for the experience of evil and bliss, namely, consciousness, is denied to the self. This poses a new problem. A state of bliss stipulates feeling which is now no more present. Hence Indra says: "Assuredly indeed, this one does not exactly know himself with the thought 'I am he', nor indeed the things here. He becomes one who has gone to destruction. I see nothing enjoyable in this." (VIII.11.1). It is noteworthy how the presentation of those psychical states in the context of understanding

Brahman is closely related to the conception of Brahman not only as the Absolute but also as the most perfect being. Hence the standpoint from which the deep-sleep state is rejected as unable to reveal the true nature of Brahman

is partly religious in that Indra feels no enjoyment in the deep-sleep state, which is implied to be an integral feature of Brahman. Moreover since the

'enjoyment' of Brahman has been opposed to the experience of worldly evils

throughout the story, it is possible to infer that what Indra is demanding is

physical feeling and objective knowledge in the highest state. This is against

the tenets of India's monistic idealism. But there is no unawareness of the metaphysical aspect of the problem in

the passage. For, Indra sees not only the absence of bliss in the deep-sleep

state; among other things he also envisages the highest state as that of unity

with Brahman and the disappearance of subject-object distinction which

exists in the physical world. This is evident from his complaint that in the deep dreamless state the self "does not exactly know himself with the thought 'I am he', nor indeed the thingshere" (CU.VIII.11.1). Any physically conscious state involves the consciousness of objects and consequently also the problem of duality. Hence the postulation of the deep dreamless state where no such


knowledge exists. But this state is unconscious. The solution lies in the

attainment of a condition which is conscious and yet not conscious of objects as different from the subject. This sense of unity is not achieved in

the deep-sleep state. The problem of duality which is intended to be avoided

by the proposition of an unconscious state, then, finds no satisfactory answer

in the deep dreamless state.

There lies a certain line of distinction between the religious and the meta-

physical sides of the problem which have been sifted in the above paragraphs.

Just as the devotional mystic will not remain satisfied with the absence of evil - he will also demand the presence of eternal bliss, so also the philosopher

will not find the final answer to the problem of duality by the mere removal

of objective knowledge - he will envisage higher consciousness which is

cognisant of the unity of the subject and objects in Brahman. Indra was

worried by both the problems.

7. THE SAME IN THE B.RHAD~tRA.NYAKA

Attempts to find out the true nature of the self are made also in B.rhadaranyaka IV.3.9-34 where Y[jfiavalkya speaks on the conditions of the soul in answer to certain questions of king Janaka. From these accounts in the Chandogya and the Br.hadara.nyaka it is apparent that those were not at first related to the doctrine of the fourfold nature of Brahman as shown in the previous sections (3-5) , but were independent speculations on the conditions of the soul. Much of these were based on the actual observation of human psychical states. For this reason BU.IV.3.9-13 look more like a secular account than like theological speculation. The general observations of those psychical states and their effects upon the physique were utilised in the speculations about the conditions of the soul.

Since these speculations are not originally related to Brahman's fourfold nature, there is also no sign of schematic rigidity in them as found in the Ch~ndogya speculations on the fourfold nature of Brahman (Section 5 above). At first the inferred states of the soul are alone made to account for where and how to be one with Brahman. The story of Indra and Praj~pati proceeds from the supposition that of the states the one in which the soul is least conscious of the phenomenal world - a condition fulfilled in the state of deep sleep - is the true one. This is the third state only. The fourth state - if we call it a state - where the subject is conscious yet not conscious of the object and


where the subject-object differentiation does not exist, appears first not

schematically but as a logical necessity to solve Indra's problem. It is perhaps

eventual that a poss~ility o f fusing the already existing doctrine o f four

quarters and the new theory o f the four states of the soul into one arises.

The tendency to reverse the old doctrine already arose on grounds o f other necessities (Sections 3, 4 above). But when the logical necessity o f a fourth

state o f the soul as shown here rises, the existing doctrine o f four is reinterpre-

ted. For, at this stage o f development it is not difficult to merge the doctrine

o f four into the theory of the soul by (1) completing the already started

process o f reversion o f the old doctrine, (2) terming the lower quarters after

the first three conditions o f the soul and the highest one Tur~ya, (3) thereby

totally replacing the cosmic division by qualitative gradation.

A part o f this development is found in Chdndogya VII I .7 -13 which end

up halfway with an unsatisfactory solution. A more advanced step is made

in B?/had~anyaka IV.3 .7-9 in that it speaks of the imperishability of the

conscious being in the body. This is the real subject that smells, sees, tastes,

speaks, hears, thinks, touches and knows and exists even in that state where

objects do not remain (W.3 .23-30) . The nature of consciousness in this state

can be known from what is stated in BU.IV.5.13-15. In IV.5.13 it is first

stated that "the soul is entirely a mass o f knowledge (pra/a~naghana)" and

then it is averred that "after death there is no consciousness (saa/ad)." This

consciousness is obviously objective knowledge which does not exist in the

highest state according to IV.5.15. But, then, pra/a~na should mean higher

knowledge or pure consciousness existing independent of objects.

In BU.IV.5.15 it has been elaborately stated why objective knowledge does not remain in the highest state:

"For where there is a duality, as it were, there one sees another; there one smells another; there one tastes another; there one speaks to another; there one hears another; there one thinks of another; there one touches another; there one understands another. But where everything has become just one's own self, then whereby and whom would one see? then whereby and whom would one smell? then whereby and whom would one taste? then whereby and to whom would one speak? then whereby and whom would one hear? then whereby and of whom would one think? then whereby and whom would one touch? then whereby and whom would one understand? whereby would one understand him by means of whom one understands this All?"

This pure subjectivity is non-phenomenal and cannot be the object o f intellect. "Lo, whereby would one understand the understander?" (ibicO.

Apparently this state is achieved, though temporarily, in sleep. But


B.rhad~a.nyaka W.4 speaks o f urtreleased and released souls after death. In

the case o f the latter the highest state is achieved permanently.

8. MAITRiVII.1 1.7.

The answer to Indra 's question is given as well as the theoretical ground for

the Tur~ya as a realisation is prepared in the Brhadaranyaka. But the explicit

statement of the fused theory o f four quarters is found in the Maitrrwlfich also first speaks o f the highest state being realised even in life through the

powers of yoga. 31 Its approach to the problem o f consciousness is not

different from that o f the l~.had~ra.nyakcL Maitrr VI.7 avers the unknowabil i ty

o f the ult imate reality in the same way:

"Now, where knowledge is of a dual nature, there, indeed, one hears, sees, smells, tastes, and also touches, the soul knows everything. Where knowledge is not of a dual nature, being devoid of action, cause or effect, unspeakable, incomprehensible, indescribable - what is that? It is impossible to say."

The ultimate is, thus, not unconscious which solves Indra's problem. The four

states are spoken of in Maitrr VII. 1 1.7:

"He who sees with the eye, and he who moves in dreams, He who is deep asleep and he who is beyond the deep sleeper - These are a person's four distinct conditions. Of these the fourth (turya) is greater [than the rest]"

The state "beyond the deep sleeper" is not a natural at tainment by death as

understood in the B.rhad~ra.nyaka. On the contrary, according to Maitrr VI.18,

the state of non-dual consciousness is produced by the powers o f yoga in

oneself. 32 Hence not only are the early cosmic divisions transformed into

stages, but the Tuffya is attained even in life.

Both the Mrt.n.df~kya and the MaitH give this new formulat ion o f the

quaternary series. While the Maitrr gives a gist o f the theory in the penultimate

verse of the Upan~ad, the M~.nd. rakya narrates it more elaborately. It is

necessary to decide which o f the two formulations is earlier. An earlier date

has been proposed for the Maitrr on other grounds. 3 3 But even a comparison

of the t reatment o f the doctrine of four in the two Upan~ads may be decisive.

One of the ways of ascertaining their relative dates is to see which of the

two formulations is nearer the Sa .mhit~-scheme, that is to say which one

exhibits freshness in its formulation. This test is likely go in favour of the

Maitr[ For, in the M~.nql. fdcya no reference is made to the old formulat ion -


implicit or explicit. But in its f'mal verse the Maitr[ clearly defines the relation of its new formulation as made in its penultimate verse to the old one of the

Sa .mhit~s. The final stanza of the MaitrF (VII.11.8) says:

"In the three a quarter Brahman moves; A three quarter, in the last"

This is like a riddle - a quarter Brahman exists in three quarters while three quarters exist in one. This can be understood only as a statement of the relation

of the two schemes, old and new, and is, then, the only instance o/ the recog-

nition of the difference between the two ways o/applying the scheme o f four in the Sa .mhit~s and later Vedanta. 'In the three a quarter Brahman moves'

means that in the lower three states of the new scheme the material quarter

of Brahman of the old scheme exists, or, in other words, the one material

quarter of the old scheme has been expanded into the lower three states of the new scheme. 'A three quarter in the last' on the other hand, means that the

three heavenly quarters of the old scheme are now the Turfya of the new

scheme, that is to say, the three quarters in heaven have been contracted into one quarter. The relation is shown in the table below:

TABLE FOR MAITRI VII.11.8

OLD SCHEME NEW SCHEME

1 H E A V E N L Y ~ . _ 2 HIDDEN ~ TURIYA (METAPHYSICAL) 3 QUARTERS

/ 3 LOWER TURI-YA (HUMAN) ~ 2 THREE

~ 1 QUARTERS

The contraction of the three heavenly quarters into one highest quarter had

already been done in the Ch~ndogya (p. 9 above). The remaining one is expanded into three in the Maitrr here and the resulting reversion is thus

explained as a new mode of understanding the old truth. But that a reversion is actually effected is visible in that while the Turfya was material in the old formulation (.R V.I. 164.45d, X.85.40d, X.90.3, 4 etc.), it is the

highest quarter according to the new one. The apology advanced by the MaitrF shows that it consciously reverses


without intending to undermine the old mode of thinking which it still

regards as authentic. This means that the Maitrr is still living in the age when

the Upani.sadic upheaval of thought is going on. The easy doctrinal narration of the Ma.ngl. ftkya, on the other hand, carries the air of an advanced age when

the old formulation has no living influence upon contemporary thought.

9. CATU.SPAT IN THE MA.ND(JKYOPANIS.AD AND THE GROUND FOR AN ENQUIRY

The development of the Catu.spit-doctrine is on the whole understandable upto its reversion in the MaitrL But its further history poses certain problems. First, the date of the Ma.n.df~kya is still debated. Secondly, during the few centuries before and after Christ the Vedfinta philosophy seems to have taken little interest in the new Catus.p§t-doctrine, though the scheme of four was generally popular during this period. Among Vedintic texts such as the Grt~t and the Brahrnasfttra it is only the old Catus.pit doctrine which has been sometimes referred to. v* This is a strange fact. It is also strange how the

interest could be revived in the medieval age to such an extent as to make the

influence of the new doctrine being felt in almost all branches of mysticism.

The two different problemsare not unrelated. There has been a lot of

discussion about the date of the Ma.ml.~kya, generally with reference to its

ontology as interpreted in the M~.ml. ftkyak~rik~, the use of technical terms

exhibiting the influence of Mahiy~na idealism etc. 3s But the Mdn.dOkya's treatment of the Catu.spit doctrine may also be taken as an additional evidence for the Upanis.ad's late origin.

In a previous paper 36 it was noted by the present author that the doctrine

of four bodies of the Buddha as developed by Maitreyanitha in the Abhisa- mayalahk~rakarika and as understood by Haribhadra in his commentary

(Aloka) brings with it also the problem of its relation to the Catus.p~t doctrine of the Ma.ngl. Okyopanis.ad. So far this has not drawn attention of scholars. The present enquiry concerns this aspect of the problem - the possibility of any relation between the Catus.k~ya doctrine and the Catus.p~t doctrine.

Since Deussen's account of the Ma.ncl. ftkya doctrine cited earlier (Section 2) gives only the general point of view it will conduce to clarity if the full theory of the Upani~ad is first stated.

Like Ch~ndogya III. 12.1 which identifies the G~yatr~ as "everything here that has come to be, whatsoever there is here", MU begins with the syllable

THE DOCTRINE OF FOUR IN THE UPANISADS 19

OM but works it out in more details identifying the syllable as everything

past, present and future as well as "whatever else that transcends threefold

time. ''37 This is the same as Brahman and the self also is Brahman. That self

is stated to be four-quartered, as

The term quarter (p~da) is used by the Upanis.ad for the sake of convenience

and in deference to older terminology. 39 But as in the MaitrFhere also the

quarters are no spatial divisions. In the Mai t r~ ° all the four quarters are states

of the soul. But M U is more advanced in idealistic monism. Here the fourth

quarter is not even a state but, if we are to follow the exposit ion o f

Gau.dap~da, 41 it is the real nature o f the Absolute. It may be noted that,

according to Haribhadra, 42 the Sva-bh~vikakAya also is not a state o f becoming.

The first quarter belongs to the waking state and is called Vaigvanara, the

second is Taijasa and is active in dreams, the third - Prfijfia - belongs to the

state o f deep-sleep and is also called the Lord-of-all (Sarvegvara). 43

The most significant aspect o f the scheme in M U is that it is devised out

perfectly to suit absolute monism. The reversion o f the old scheme has been

utilised in it to express the idea that the Absolute is non-phenomenal and

cannot be produced in oneself as a state:

"Not inwardly cognitive (anta.h-praffta), not outwardly cognitive (bahi.h-praj~a), not bothwise cognitive (ubhayata.h-praj~a), not a cognition-mass (pra]~na-ghana), not cognitive (pr~gut), not non-cognitive (a-praffta), unseen (a-drs.t.a), with which there can be no dealing (a-vyavah~rya), ungraspable (a-gr~hya), having no distinctive mark (a-lak.sana), not-thinkable (a-cintya), that cannot be designated (a-vyapade~ya), the essence of the assurance of which is the state of being one with the Self (ek~tma-pratyaya- sara) the cessation of development (prapaacopa~ama), tranquil (~nta), benign (~iva), without a second (a-dvaita) - [such] they think is the fourth. He is the Self (Atman). He should be discerned. ''4.

Since one cannot become the fourth quarter it should be known as such.

The first three quarters o f OM are its three moras (a, u, m) which are

likened to the three states o f the soul. The fourth quarter is no mora. It is

"without an element, with which there can be no dealing, the cessation o f

development, benign, without a second. ' '4s Obviously this is consubstantial

with the Tur~ya described above. Again, there are three divisions o f t ime

(past, present and future) apart from "whatever else that transcends three-

fold t ime," which is obviously the Turiya. ~6

It cannot be doubted that the Catus.pAt doctrine o f M U strongly resembles

the Catu.skaya doctrine of A K , not only in ontology but also in scheme. In both

it is the fourth which is understood as the Absolute. M U says that with the


fourth there cannot be any dealing and that it can only be known. Accord- ing to Haribhadra, on the other hand, the fourth kava, namely the Sv~bha-

vikak~ya also cannot be produced, but "is realised in its unproducedness

through the understanding of all consciousnesses and all laws as being like

magic. ''47 The 'fourth' is distinguished in both from the highest state of

becoming in the third - Dharmakiya or Pr~jfia-Sarvegvara, both of which may be understood as God. The three states are, again, unreal according to both.

This overall similarity compels one to examine whether there had been any

historical connection between the M~.ml. ftkya doctrine and the Catu.skAya doctrine of AK.

10. EXISTING OPINIONS ON MU

The Ma.nd. akya has already drawn attention from scholars as a problem text. There is a controversy about its date. Scholars have also discussed the possibility of Buddhist influence on the Upani~ad as well as on the K~rik~ of Gau.dapfida on the Upan~ad. A voluminous literature has grown up much of which goes to the credit of so great authorities as Vidhusekhar Bhattacharya, S. N. Dasgupta, T. M. P. Mahadevan, R. D. Karmarkar, Max Walleser etc. "a

Some of the major points of view are given below. The controversy over MU seems to be very ancient. The following sentence

occurs in the commentary on MU which is extant under the name of Safikara: ved?mtarthas~rasahgrahabhfaam ida.m prakara.nacatus.tayam om ity etad ask saram ityady ~rabhyate. 49 "This treatise consisting of four chapters, the

collection of the quintessence of the import of Ved[nta begins with 'This

syllable OM' etc." Deussen cited this sentence maintaining that it proves that,

according to the commentator, MUK (including the M~n.(lfikya and the

Karik~s) was a single literary composition and "in no sense an Upanis.ad", and

also noted that "with this would agree the fact that the M~.rglfikya is not quoted either in the Brahma-s~tras or in Safikara's commentary on them. . . , , so Venkatasubbiah s~ further elaborated this thesis.

It should be noted that there were even other traditions. The M[dhvas, for instance, regarded MU as well as the first chapter of the K~ik~s to have formed the Upani.sad. s2

Max Walleser sa believed that MU depended upon the K?trik~s which, he thought, were composed in the sixth century A.D. Walleser as well as Poussin s4 also believed that the K#rikds were influenced by M~dhyamika ontology.


Vidhusekhar Bhattacharya ss also held that MU depended upon the K~rik~s. He strongly argued in favour of the view that MU was not originally regarded

as an Upanis.ad, that the first chapter of the K~rikas was meant to be a commentary on BU IV.2-3 and that the four chapters of the K~rik~s were originally independent works. He placed Gau.dap~da not before the sixth century of the ~aka Era.

S. N. Dasgupta held that "it is so obvious that these doctrines (of Gau.da- p~da) are borrowed from the M[dhyamika doctrines, as found in the

N~g~una's K~rik~s and the V~fi~nav~da doctrines, as found in the Larik~- vatgra, that it is needless to attempt to prove it. ''s6 Dasgupta also said that the

Buddhists were first to use the words prapaacopaYamam. ~ivam apparently

implying that N[g~quna preceded MU which also uses the words, s7 C. Conio

explicitly states this, "This proves at least that the MU cannot be a very old text and must have undergone some linguistic Buddhist influence. ' 'sa

In spite of these arguments for Buddhist influence upon MU and MK and

their relatively recent origin, many Indian scholars do not see it that way. The most vigorous arguments in this regard were produced by T. M. P. Mahadevan, s9

R. D. Karmarkar, 6° Swami Nikhilananda 61 etc. None of these scholars saw any

influence of Buddhism on MK or MU. Radhakrishnan did not enter into the

controversy but implicitly said MU to be a pre-Buddhist text. He noted the

clear line of distinction made in MU between the Absolute and God with the

following words, "It is the first time in the hi~tory of thought that the

distinction between Absolute and God, Brahman and Igvara, turfya and prdjaa is elaborated.'. '62

But attempts to draw the same line of distinction were made in the Mah~ry~- na~raddhotp~xlM~stra, in the Mah~y?mas~tralahkdra and most successfuUy in the Abhisamay6la~kffrakffrik~. 63 Unless one is certain that Maitreyan~tha, the author of the Abhisamay~lahk~trak~rik~ was later than MU, the credit for first elaborating the said line of distinction cannot be given to MU. But even Conio who thinks MU to be a post-N~gffrjuna treatise denies any ontological (not to speak of schematic) influence of Mah~y~-aa Buddhism on it. Conio speaks of linguistic influence by which she means the choice of technical terms like prapa~copa~ama found in N~g~0una's Kdrikds as told above. Otherwise MU is said to be free from Buddhist influence, "Though the MU is a comparatively later Upanis.ad, we do not think it necessary to relate it to sources other than the older upanis.adic texts. ' '6.


11. CATUSPAT IN THE BRAHMASOTRA AND GITA

It is unfortunate that almost the entire course of discussion has so far ranged between ontology and the choice of technical terms. None of the scholars, not even those who regarded MU to be a post-Nagarjuna work, paid any attention to the close schematic similarity between the Catu.skaya doctrine and the Catus.pat doctrine in AK and MU respectively. Hence, although the modern controversy over MU is already about eighty years old, a discussion of the date of the Upani.sad and its possible relation to AK apropos of their doctrines of four may not be superfluous here.

The most significant evidence for a late date of MU is that the early authors of Vedanta were mostly unacquainted with the reversed Catu~pat doctrine. Evidence for this comes from the two pillars of post-Upanis.adic Vedanta - the Grt~t and the Brahmasfttra. The fact that BS never cites from MU was noted by Deussen, "Two Upanis.ads of the Atharvan are of special significance for the Vedanta, the Mun..daka- and the Pragna-Upanis.ad, both of which are frequently quoted by Badaraya.na and ~afikara, while we strangely find no certain quotation from the Man..df~kya-Upanisad which is so abundantly used in the Fedantas~a. ''rs What is even more noteworthy is that BS and the GRa certainly knew the Catus.pat doctrine; but they knew it from the Sa .mhitas and the early Upanis.ads where the Tuffya is placed below the other three quarters.

Krs.na says in Grta X.42: vis.t.abhyaham ida.m k.rtsnam ek~tm~ena sthito /agat. Both ~afikara and ,~nandagiri understood the ekarn.~a as the fourth phenomenal quarter of Purus.a as mentioned in R V.X.90.3,4. 66

The satras in BS where the old doctrine is alluded to run as follows:

1.1.24./yoti~, caran~hidh~n& 25. chandobhidh~n~m neti cen, na, tatha hi darganam. 26. bh~ttgdip?tdavyapadegopapatte~ caivam. 27. upadeiabhedan neti cen, nobhayasrninn apy avirodh?tt.

In these sStras some of the metaphorical designations of Brahman in the Upan~ads are defended. Brahman is called 'light' (I. 1.24). Safikara and Ram~nuja see here a reference to Ch~ndogya 111.13.7 where Brahman is called the light that shines beyond the heaven. 67 The s~tra may be rendered into English as, "(The word) light (means Brahman) - on account of the mention of the feet ( = quarters)." The commentators point out that the s~tra empha- rises that the light mentioned in the Upani.sad is not the physical light of the sun. The arguments are as follows. According to CU.III.13.7 the light shines


beyond heaven (paro divo jyotir dfpyate) and in a preceding passage (CU.III. 12.6) the three immortal heavenly quarters of Purus.a are mentioned. Hence those three immortal quarters of Purus.a Should be meant by the 'light beyond heaven' in CU.III.13.7. ~afikara's own words are, tatra yac catus.pado brahma. .nas trip&t am.rtam, dyusambandhir~pa.m nirdis.t.arn, tad eveha dyusambandhan nirdis.t.am iti pmtyabhi j~ate . The idea is that since both the three quarters and the light are heavenly, they must be identically understood. This is of

course true. But ~ahkara does not explain how what is threefold in CU.III.12.6 becomes one in CU.III.13.7. As pointed out earlier (pp. 5, 9) this took place by way of contraction compelled by the necessity of unity in the perfect ideal and foreshadowing the reversion of the old scheme. The sStra shows the familiarity of BS with this fluid state of the doctrine - the old Catus.p~t doctrine and the attempt made in the Ch~ndogya to comprehend the three heavenly quarters as one. But the sStra does not speak for any acquaintance of BS with the subsequent reversion of the scheme in the MaitrF or MU.

BS.I.1.25-26 refer to CU.III.12 where the G~yatrfis said to be "everything that has come to be". According to Safikara it is not merely the metre G~yatr~ which is meant in the Upan~ad. The identity is justified by that through the G~yatff one meditates upon Brahman and also by the common fourfoldness of the G~yatff and Brahman. Cf., Safikara, "s~tks.~zd eva gayatrF- ~abdena brahma pratip&tyate, sahkhy~many~t, yath~ gffyatrF catus.pad6 .sa.daks.araih. p&tais tath~ brahma catuspat", (on BS.I.1.25). 6s "bhfttaprthivF garrrah.rday~ni hi nirdigygha - 'sai.~ catus.pada s.a.dvidhd ggyatrT' (= CU.III. 12.5) it~ na hi brahman~rayan, e kevalasya chandaso bhftt~tdaya.h p~l~ upapadyante," (on BS I. 1.26). These interpretations clearly indicate that Safikara understands the Upanis.adic quaternary series referred to in BS as not different from that in CU.III.12.5 where there is no idea of gradation as found in the new scheme. 69

~ahkara further states that the quaternary division was an expression of Brahman' s universality, "api ca brahm~n~s'rayane neyam .rk sambadhyeta - 't&~nasya' ( CU. III.12.6 = .R V.X.90.3) iti anayd hi rca svarasena brahmaiv& bhidh fyat~ 'p~clo 'sya sarv~t bh~tani trip?tcl asyamrta.m divi' (= CU.III. 12.6) iti sarv~tmatvopapatteh.," (on BS.I. 1.26). If sarv~tm~tvopapatti is the only import of the fourfoldness then we must say that the fourfoldness is still understood in its cosmic and spatial character, but not as comprising the three states of phenomenal consciousness as well as the fourth quarter of the Absolute. In support of the comprehension of the cosmic divisions of the supreme being ~afikara also refers to the Puru.sa-hymn (R V.X.90) and G~t~


X.42 as cited above (p. 22). It is clear that these satras also do not show any

acquaintance of BS with the new formulation of the Catus.p~t doctrine.

BS.I.1.27 strikes a different note. The sFltra speaks of the existence of

apparently different views (upade~abheda) in scriptural passages and asserts

that there are no really contradictory observations made in the scriptures. The commentators 7° take the difference referred to in the sF~tra to be that between the case-endings in divi in trip~cl asyRm.rtam divi (CU.III. 12.6) and in divah. inyadatah, paro divah. (CU.III.13.7). This is easily explained by the commentators. Now, in view of the fact that no mention has been made in the commentaries to that effect, it may be rather adventurous to suggest that the

difference between the old scheme and the new scheme has been alluded to in the sQtra. However, the following points should be considered in this connection. There is upade~abheda also in that while in CU.III.12.6 the non-

phenomenal side consists of three quarters, in CU.III.13.7 it is one; secondly

in CU.III.12.6 and the Sarphit~s the fourth quarter is below the other three while in BU.V.14.3,4,6,7 it glows far above everything darksome. 71 Is it poss-

ible that BS hints at those? Of course, in the absence of any such understand-

ing in the commentaries the point cannot be stressed upon. Moreover there

is no reason to suppose that MU is concerned in any way. Even if the Maitrf is concerned, which is only a vague possibility, for reasons stated below the

new formulation does not seem to have been viewed as a significant doctrine

in BS. Had the new formulation carried any importance BS could have found

occasion to refer to it in 1.3.42 and Ili .2.1-11 where the states of the soul

have been dealt with. BS.III.2.1-10 mention the states of waking, dream,

deep-sleep and also swoon. This is no schematic formulation but is based on BU.IV.3. 72 BS.III.2.1-6 examine the soul in dream, II1.2.7 that in deep-sleep,

111.2.8-9 that in waking and 1II.2.10 that in swoon. Two things come out from those satras. Unlike the Maitrf, BS does not recognise the highest state of the soul as the fourth quarter. Secondly, the integration of the doctrine of four cosmic divisions and that of the states of the soul is unknown to BS. The two ideas are as separate in BS as they are in BU.IV.3 and CU.VIII. 73

The position of ~afikara in this regard is certainly remarkable. He does not even once refer to the new doctrine of the Maitrf or MU in his commentary on the above-mentioned s~tras. He also frequently refers to the old scheme while dealing with BS.I. 1.24-27. But that does not mean that he is not acquainted with the new scheme. It is certain that Safikara knows the new


doctrine with the reversed scheme. A commentary uponMUK is extant under

his name though its authenticity has been questioned. 74 But we need not

depend on this, for ~afikara cites MK.I. 16 and III. 15 while commenting upon

BS.II.1.9 and 1.4.14. This speaks for ~afikara's acquaintance with the new

scheme which is elaborated from the point of view ofa]~tivftda in the first

chapter of MK. That he still ignores the new scheme while explaining the said sfitras of BS shows his scrupulous adherence to the sense of the sQtras taken up and admirable reluctance to read later developed ideologies and

schematic formulations in those. 7s

Like ~afikara, S~ya.na also defends the Turfya as the material quarter by

citing GTt~ X.42 while explaining R V.X.90.3. This does not mean that S~ya.na

does not know the new doctrine. His acquaintance with the doctrine of the

Vedantas~ra is evident in the commentary to A VS.II.1.2, where he refers to

the Ved~ntas?tra doctrine.

12. THE UPPER LIMIT OF MU'S DATE

The observations may be summed up as follows. The Sa .mhit~-Catus.p~t

doctrine is known to the Gft~ but not the reversed and integrated formulation. The old doctrine is known to BS, but barring a doubtful and unrecognised reference (BS.I. 1.27) to the new trend observed in BUN.14 and CU.III. 13.7, there is nothing in BS which can prove its acquaintance with the new doctrine. Moreover, in BS the gradation of subjective experience and the cosmic quaternary divisions are still two unconnected ideas.

Thus, MU with its new doctrine seems to have come into being after those texts. Now, no certain dates are known for the GTt~ 7~Equally controversial is the date of BS. 77 Hence no definite idea about the date of MU can be made

from the above observations. However, one thing becomes clear - there was

a long gap between the early Upani.sads and MU.

A few words require to be told here about the date of the MaitrT. It may be

asked how we can avoid a late date for the MaitrT if the GTtd and BS could

neglect the new Catus.p~t doctrine and how far the observations made or to be made on MU hold good for the MaitrL

Though a late date for the MaitrT does not go against the main point of observation here - a very late origin o f M U - still the matter should be viewed objectively. The MaitrT's priority to MU in age was noted earlier (p. 16 ff). There

are also certain points indicating that at least so far as its doctrine of four is


concerned the Upanis.ad is free from Mah~yAna influence. First, although

both the MaitrT and MU know the new Catus.p~t doctrine, the doctrine in

the Maitr~ is ontologically different from that in MU or AK's Catus.k~ya. The Maitrr states that the fourth state is greater than the rest (tebhyas turyam. mahattaram, VII. 11). The MaitrT is also frankly dualist; cf., satyan.rtopabho- g~rtha.h dvaitt-bh~vo mah~tmanaij, and also bhedFts" caite 'sya catv~rah. (ibid). These go against MAdhyamika nihilism and Yog~c~ra monism 7s according to which there is no real change in the Absolute and also against the doctrine of MU. For, MU.7 and 12 clearly term the fourth quarter as advait~ Secondly, the MaitrT is not yet psychologically free from l?,gvedic influence as it tries to establish the identity of its own reversed and integrated scheme with the cosmic divisions in the old scheme. 79 To place this after N~g~rjuna or

MaitreyanAtha would be quite unjustified.

The statement of the new scheme in the Maitrf may at first seem to be later than Grt~ and BS, for the scheme is not noted in these. Moreover, the

full statement of the scheme is given in the last two verses of the last Prap~- t.haka (VII) of the Upan~ad.B° This Prap~t.haka belongs to the Supplements (Khila) of the Upanis.ad. The new doctrine is implied also in Maitrr VI.19

which also belongs to the Supplements. Still it may not be necessary to place

these portions of the MaitK- not to speak ofMaitrr I - V which do not belong

to the Supplements - after the Grt~ and BS only because these do not take

note of the reversed formulation of the quaternary series. In the Maitrf the

scheme is only once fully stated in two verses without any elaboration like

the one inMU. Now, the Turfya as the highest quarter also finds mention in BU.V. 14.3,4,6,7. al But neither the Grta nor BS notes the implied reversion. We

cannot place the B.rhad~ranyaka after the GFt~ and BS for that. On the contrary,

this may indicate that the scheme of the Maitrfwas not widely cultured in

the contemporary religious practice and philosophical theory. It might not have been necessary for the Grt~ and BS to take note of such an insignificant doctrine. The new scheme gained philosophical significance only when it was elaborated from the point of view of absolute monism in MU. Hence later Vedfintists point not to the MaitKbut to MUwhile dealing with the new scheme. It is the failure to do that on the part of the Maitrr which prevents us from seeing any Mah~y~na influence on it and a very late date for its scheme. And it is precisely the success achieved in this respect which speaks for a far later date and Mah~yAna influence onMU.

Because of the uncertainty about the date of the Grta and BS, the evidences


given in the previous section only point to the relative date of MU and a long

gap of time between it and the early Upanis.ads. No definite idea about MU's date can be gathered from this. But Maitreyan~tha's date is more certain. It has been proposed to be about 350 A.D. s2 Hence the said uncertainty may be

somewhat removed if the development of the doctrine of the Ma.nd. ftkya so far traced may be viewed side by side with that of Maitreyan~tha's Catu.sk~ya doctrine.

It was shown earlier (OCD) that the formulation of the Catusk~ya doctrine by Maitreyan~tha in AK had been compelled by the necessities of absolute monism and that by all probabilities it was the philosopher's own

invention. The observations made in this regard may be summarised as follows. Even in Sraddha. and Sfftrd. there had been a marked tendency to harp on the Absolute termed tathata, dharmadhatu etc. ~raddha spoke of three bodies

with the Dharmak~ya as the highest one. But the Dharmak~ya comprised the Absolute and God. Maitreyanfftha first tried in Sfttr~. to sift the metaphysical aspect from the fused concept of the Absolute and God in the Dharmakffya by distinctly elaborating the Dharmadhfftu. Although he thus supplied the basis for a Catu.skffya doctrine, the Trik~ya was not forsaken but was somewhat reinterpreted. The explicit statement of a Catus.kffya doctrine was now only a matter of time for Maitreyanfftha who actually improved his own Trikffya theory by introducing a new convention of regarding the Absolute as the fourth k~ya in AK. s3

The entire course of the development of the doctrine of four bodies from an earlier doctrine of three bodies was, thus, determined by the ontological necessities felt by the authors of the doctrines. The credit for a large part of the development goes to a single historical personality, namely Maitreyanfftha, who does not show any special fascination for the doctrine of four. Hence there is little possibility of external, L e., non-Mahffy~nic influence having been exercised upon the formulation of the scheme of four by Maitreyanfftha.

It is quite a different case withMU. This Upani.sad does not invent but adopts the scheme from the Chandogya and B.rhad~ran.yaka via the Maitr~ and thoroughly reinterprets it, apparently after a long gap of time during which its culture seems to have remained either stinted or unnoticed so that the subsequent popularity of the scheme in Brahmanical speculation looks like a revival. There is certainly also an element of pedanticism in MU. MU brings together sundry items like OM, time and the soul in its scheme interpreting each as fourfold with an absolute aspect and three phenomenal


manifestations. There is an absolute time transcending the three normal divisions of time, an absolute aspect of OM which is 'moraless' and lastly an

absolute aspect o f the soul which is beyond normal experience. Again the

three moras o f OM are said to express certain concepts through words

beginning with a, u and m. ~ M U is thus quite frank in putting emphasis upon

a full.fledged scheme which it pedantically works out. This tendency can be far

more prominently marked in the Mantranaya ss which later tried to supersede

the scheme of the Upanis.ads with greater pedanticism. It is possible that it

was a similar case withMU. The fascination might speak for the existence of

a similar doctrine in a rival school of philos0PhY which it sought to compete with.

At least an overall examination of the available data produces this

impression. After the Vedantic philosophy had been first given a cosmo-

politan and integrated outlook in the G~t?t and was then systematised in BS

without calling for any aid from the new scheme of four ,MU suddenly

appeared with the new doctrine supplied with a form and an ontology closely

resembling those o f Maitreyanatha's Catus.k~ya in AK. How can we claim

that this suddenly revived doctrine, much of which consisted o f pedantic

reinterpretation, had preceded Maitreyan~tha's doctrine o f four bodies, the

steady and short growth whereof speaks against any concern of Maitreyan~tha for any already existing and popular scheme of four? It is more plausible that

the sudden Ved~ttic revival had been influenced.

Hoshiarpur

NOTES

1 See Section 2 infra. 2 For this idea see the present author's Origin of the Catus.k77ya Doctrine (OCD) and CatuskT~ya in the Mantranaya, Journal of Research, Visva-Bharati Vol. I, Part 1 and Vol. II, Part 1. 3 TPM, p. 116. 4 P. 6 and pass/re. s PsychologyandReligDn: ICestandEast, p. 167. 6 Triads in the Veda, p. 7 ft.

Sfiya.na takes the cow to be cloud; but see Kunhan R~ija's interpretation of the hymn in the Poet-Philosophers of the .Rgveda (p. 28) for a different point of view. The imagery of cow as language is too well-known in Sanskrit cf., R V.VIII.100.11, Nighant.u 1.11.4, K~vy~dar§a 1.6.

Eggeling's translation. 9 There is another obscure instance, viz., R V.VIII.8.23, trfn. i pad~ny a~vfnor fzv£h s~nti g•hit' pardh., 'three feet of the A~vins are visible near and secret afar'.

THE DOCTRINE OF FOUR IN THE UPANI~ADS 29

1o PU, 296 ff. i, TPU, p. 155. Translations of Upanisadic passages are taken from TPU in this paper. ,2 It cannot be the sun itself without the element of symbolism. See the sequel of the discussion and PU, p. 123. 13 PU, p. 123. 14 TPM, p. 116. is In SB.IV.1.3.16, all the quarters are called tur?ya, i.e., one-fourth. 1~ Tucci's remarks (see n.14 above) appear in a succinct account of the microcosmic representation theory of the Tantras, especially the Buddhist Tantras. Hence these only point to the necessity of reviewing earlier studies which must have been consulted by the author and in which the reversion of the formula is ignored. 1~ SVD., p. 168. , 8 / b / d .

19 Commentary on the Ch~ndogya III.12.5. But Sahkara gave a different explanation of CU. III. 12.5 while commenting upon BS. I. 1.26. Deussen noted Safikara's inconsistency. See n.68 below. 20 Hume, for example, punctuates CU.III.12.7-9 differently from Sahkara in TPU. He as well as Deussen (PU. p. 112) take the last part of III.12.7 and the first part of III.12.8 as one sentence, and the last part of III.12.8 and the first part of III.12.9 as another. Safikara, on the other hand, paraphrases each of the paragraphs separately. 21 Safikara and R~nfinuja on BS.I.1.24. 22 Cs. n.21. 23 See Catusk~ya in the Mantranaya (n.2 above) by the present author. 24 See S~ktanandatarahgin.~, 1.10. 25 CU. III.18.2. The remaining paragraphs further elaborate this. 26 In MU the states of the objective world are only indirectly mentioned. In the first state (MU.3) the subject is 'outwardly cognitive' (bahih.-pra]fta) and enjoys the gross (sth~labhul), in the second state it is 'inwardly cognitive' (antah.-prajaa) and enjoys the exquisite (prdvivikta-bhul); in the third state it is 'unified (ekTbhftta) but knows all (sarvajaa). The objects in these states, then, are gross-matter, subtle-matter and all things. These details are hardly comparable to the elaborate exposition of the Ved~ntas~ra or even to that in CU.IV.5-8 or III.18.1-9. 2~ Ved~mtas~ra, pp. 3-7 . 2s Ibid. pp. 2,3 etc. 29 See n.26 above. 3o TPU, Introd., p. 45. 3, Maitre, VI.18. 3~ This is worth noting. The solution of Indra's problem, that is to say the recognition of knowledge without subject-object differentiation, is a feature of Yogfic~ra idealism, too. Cf., Mah?ty~nas~tr~lahk~ra, VI. 6 - 9 where the realisation of truth - Dharmadhfitu - is concomitant with the removal of the sense of the object and the subject. The Dharmadhfitu, it may be mentioned, is proposed as the fourth body in the A K and AA, (See OCD, Sections 4-7) . This is idealistic monism. But the MaitrT's presentation of the fourth quarter is not an instance of this. The Turya is a state of becoming. Also see Section 12 infra for MaitrFs dualism.

What one cannot deny is that the fourt.h is the most perfect state according to the Maitre. Ascent thereto is the aim of it. The part played by soteriology and idealism in the new formulation is, thus, evident in the Maitri.


33 See HSL, pp. 203-204. 3, See Section 11. infra. as For the voluminous literature on MUK see Conio's PMK, pp. 233-238. The more important studies have been referred to here in course of discussion. Conio's list does not include G. N Kaviraj's observations in the BH.4RA TIYA S,4DHAN.7tR DH,4R.4, pp. 128-130, Venkatasubbiah's THE MtI.ND. UKYOPANI.SAD AND GA U.DAP.4DA in 1,4, Vol. 62, (Oct., 1933), 181 ff. Also see Section 10 infra. 36 O C D , p. 41. 37 MU. I. as MU. II. 39 Maitreyan~tha (AK.I.18, VIII. 1 ft.) also uses the term kT~ya in deference to older terminology. See OCD, p. 53. 4o VII. 11, see Section 8 above. 4~ Cf, MK. 1.1, eka eva tridh~ sm.rtah. ; also see MK. 1.17, etc. for aj~tiv~da. 42 See n.47 below. 43 MU. III-VI.

MU. VII. ,s MU.VIII-XII. 46 MU.I. 4~ ALl, 520 ft. See OCD, p. 55 for this and other references to A K in this paragraph. ,s VGA, Avatara.nik~ and A G V, Introduction; HIP, 1.425 ff; GA UDAP,4DA ; A STUD Y IN EARL Y AD VAITA; GKK, Introduction; DER ALTERE VEDANTA, respectively. 49 Introductory part of the comm. Upa, p. 424. so PU, p. 30; also see n.65 below. sl 1,4, vol. 62, 181 ff. sa See VGA (Avataza.nik~), pp. 17-18. 53 DER .4LTERE VEDt~NTA, 3 ft. s, LEBOUDDHISME, 189 if. and 391 ff. s s VGA (Avatara.rdk~), passim. s6 HIP I. p. 429. sT Ibid., p. 425, n. l . But on p. 39 Dasgupta says, "The earliest and most important Upani.sads are those that have been commented upon by Sahkara". A commentary to MU is ascribed to Saflkara. 5s PMK, p. 11. s9 GAU.DAPADA: A STUDY IN E A R L Y ADVAITA, Ch. I. 6o GKK, Introduction. 6: Preface to MUK's translation. 62 THE PRINCIPAL UPANI.SADS, p. 697. 43 See OCD. It may be noted that the idea is found in its rudiments in some Rgvedic and, specially, AtharvavecUc hymns (R V.IV. 1, X. 121.8, A VS.II. 1 = A VP.II.6, A V~.IV. 1 = AVP.V.2). InAVP.V.2.2 "Vena unclosed from the well-shining edge Brahman that was first born earlier". The omniscient Vena is distinguished from the original principle. In the 3rd verse Vena relates all the creation like the Buddha in the Lahkavatdrasatra (Suzuki's trans., p. 4). The idea of the Aehetype Seer and the original principle he knows is found anthropomorphised also in Prajapati chanting on the lotus to awaken Vis.nu. These might not be far away from ~vara and Brahman.

The reversed formulation of the doctrine of four was not known to the seers of the Vedic hymns noted above. Still, how far the said hymns could influence MU's elaboration o f " the distinction between Absolute and God" certainly deserves enquizy.


~4 PMK, p. 22. 6s SVD, p. l l . 66 See also Sankara on BS.I.I.26. 67 See Section 4 above for the Ch~ndogya passages referred to here. 68 As Deussen pointed out (SVD, p. 170) the word bhftt~di in BS.I.1.26 seems to refer to CU. III. 12.6cd, pddo 'sya sarv~t bhOt~mi trip~d asy?l 'm.rtam divi. This is almost identical to R V.X.90.3cd which reads vi~v~ for sarv~. In CU this is said of the G~yatr f while in R V this refers to Purusa. Hence the sense of the sfatra is that as beings (bh~t?mt) and the three heavenly quarters make Puru.sa (that is Brahman) fourfold in .R V. X.90.3, so the G~yatrf also is fourfold according.to CU.III. 12.6.

It may be noted that Safikara's understanding of the fourfoldness of the G~yatrf in BS.I.1.26 is different from that in the commentary to CU.III.12.5, sais.?t catuspad~ sad. aksarapad~ chandorftp?t sat~ bhavati g?tyatr~ sad. vidh~,, v?~gbh~ttaprthiv~iar~rahrdaya- pr~n.arkp~ sat[ s.a.dvidh~ bhavati (Upa. p. 173. Also cf., Safikara on BS.I.1.25, 'g~yatr[ vft ida.m sarvam' (CU. III.12.1) iti g~yatr[m upakramya tam eva bh~taprthiv[~ar[rahrdayav~- kpr?m.aprabhedair vy~khy~ya . . . . The confusion might have been the result of the extremely abstruse nature of the Ch~ndogya passage (see Section 4 above). 6 9 See Sections 3 -7 above. 7o Sankara and Rfim5nuja. 7~ See Section 3 above. 72 See Section 7 above. 73 See Sections 6,7 above. 74 VGA (Avatara.nik~), n.5; PMK, pp. 14-15. 7s This is not contradicted by the fact that Sankara mentions the unchanging Brahman as the witness of the three states of the soul while explaining BS.II.1.9. The sfitra (ha tu drst~ntabh~v~tt) speaks of the unchangeability of Brahman as cause in spite of the changes in the phenomenal world. While elucidating this Safikara speaks of the three states of the soul. Deussen understood the three states as those of waking, dream and sleep (SVD. 276). But, perhaps, this is not meant. The Brhad~ranyaka speaks of three states in IV.3.9, "Verily, there are just two conditions of this person: the condition of being in this world and the condition of being in the other world. There is an intermediate third condition, namely, that of being in sleep" (TPU, p. 134). It is far more probable that Safikara refers to these three conditions. This is strongly suggested by the fact that Saflkara does not distinguish between dream and deep-sleep in the commentary ot the sfatra. Cf., "yath~ ca svapnadrg ekah. svapnadar~anarr~yay~ na samspr~yate, prabodhasampras~dayor anan- v~gatatv~t, evam avasth~trayas~ksy eko 'vyabhic~try avasthT~traye.na vyabhic~rin~ na sa .mspr~yate. " 76 Dasgupta (HIP. I, p. 421) proposed the first half of the first century B.C. or the second half of the second century B.C. 7~ Deussen (SVD, p. 25) thought that in its persent form BS might be 200-300 years older than Sankara while Dasgupta (HIP. I, p. 418) thought that "it may not be far from truth in supposing_that the_y were _written some time in the 2nd century B.C." G. N. Kaviraj (BHARATIYA SADHANAR DHARA, pp. 114-115) proposed a pre-Pa.ninian date. Dasgupta also believed BS to be older than the G[tb- an opinion, perhaps, not commonly found. ~a See M'adhyamika~stra. Ch. I; also see OCD, Sections 5-7 . 79 See Section 8 above. ao See Cowell's first edition, p. iii; HIL. I, p. 207, n.4. 6~ However, the integrated reversed scheme is not found in BU. See Section 3 above.

32 DIPAK B H A T T A C H A R Y A

a~ See Tucci in ON SOME ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINES OF MAITREYA (N~4THA) AND ASA1VGA, p. 9, and H. Ui in ISHL, 95 ft. ~s See OCD Sections 5 - 7 for the matter described in the paragraph. a~ MU.IX~-XI. For the other references see Section 9 above. ~ See the present author's Catus.k~ya in the Mantranaya.

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

The Bibliography is divided into three sections - I. Sources: Texts and Translations. II. Modern studies in the form of books. III. Papers. In section 1 the arrangement is according to the title of the work while in the remaining sections it is according to the name of the author.

I. SOURCES

AbhisamayMahk~ra of Maitreyanhtha with the ,41oka commentary of Haribhadra. Ed. G. Tucci under the title Prajfi~p~ramitfis, Vol. I; Baroda, 1932 (Gaekwad's Oriental Series, 62).

Abhisamay~lahk~r~loka. See above. As.t.~dhy~yf of P~nini. Ed. with trans., S. C. Vasu, Delhi, 1962 (repr.). Atharvaved[y?7 Paippal-adasamhitT~, Kfindas 1-4, 2 Vols; Ed. D. M. Bhattacharyya,

Sanskrit College, Calcutta, 1964, 70. Atharvaveda (~aunak~ya) with the comm. of Sfiyana, Ed. Visva Bandhu, V.V.R.I.,

Hoshiarpur, 1960-64, 5 Vols. Brahmas~tra with the commentary of Sahkara, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1964. Brahraas~tra with the (Sr[bh~s.ya of Rfim~nuj~cfirya, Translated into English by G. Thibaut

in Sacred Books of the East, 48, Delhi, 1964 (rep.). (Sr[madbhagavad)-G[t~. With the comm. of Sahkara and .~nandagki and Bengali trans-

lation of the text and Sahkara's comm. P. N. Tarkabhushana, Calcutta, 1961. Gaudap~da. See M~n.dakyak~rikits. l~-adida~opani.sada.tL See Upani.sads. K~vyadar~a of Dandin. Ed. With Sans. Comm. of Premacandra Tarkavfigiffa and an English

translation by K. D. Roy, Calcutta, 1961. Lahk~vat~ras~tra. Ed. B. Nanjio, Kyoto, 1923. -Do- Trans. D. T. Suzuki, London, 1932. M~dhyamika~stra. See below and Stcherbatsky in Section II. M~lamadhyamakak~rik~s of NfigS.rjuna with the comm. Prasannapad?l of Candrakfrti.

Ed. L. de h ValiSe Poussin, St. Petersburg, 1903, B~liotheca Buddhica IV. MahT, y~nastraddhotp~cla~stra of A~vaghosha. Trans. D. T. Suzuki, under the title:

Discourse on the Awakening of Faith in the Mah~yima, Chicago, 1900. MahT, y~nas~ttrT~lahk~a. Ed. and Trans. S. Levi, Paris, 1907-11, 2 Vols. M~n.d~kyak~rik~s of Gau.dap~da-

i) Gau.da_p~tdiyam Agama~stram. Ed. V. Bhattacharya, Calcutta, 1950. ~) The Agama~stra of Gau.dap~da. Trans., V. Bhattaeharya, Calcutta, 1943.

THE DOCTRINE OF F O U R IN THE UPANIS. ADS 33

iii) Gau.dap~dak~rik~, R. D. Karmarkar, Poona, 1953. Also see Upani.sads below. Nfigfirjuna. See M~iamadhyamakak~trik~s Nighant.u. See below. Nirukta of Yfiska with the Nighant.u and Durg~cSxya's commentary. Venkateshwar

Steam Press, Bombay, 1982. (Vikram Era). .Rgveda with S~iyana's commentary. Ed. N. S. Sontakke and others, Vaidik Samshodhan

Mandal, Poona, 1935-51 (5 Vols.). R~mfinuja See Brahmasr~tra. Sankara See Brahmas[ttra and Upanisads. S~kt~nandatarahgin[ by Brahmfinanda Giri. Ed. Panehanan Shastri. Calcutta, 1349

Bengali Era. tSatapathabrglhma.na (M-adhyandina) with the comm. of S~yana. Venkateshwar Steam

Press, Bombay, 1940, 5 Vols. The Satapatha Br~hma.na. Trans. by J. Eggeling in Sacred Books o f the East. 12, 26, 41,

43, 44. Delhi, 1964 (rep.).

UPANI.SADS

i) Ig-adida~opani.sadah. Shhkarabh~s.yasamet~.h. Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1964. = Brhadfiranyaka, Chkndogya, Aitareya, Taittir[ya, i~a, Kena, Kat.ha, Pra§na, Mun..daka and Mdn.d~kya with K~rik~s.

l|) Maitrityan~ya with R~'natirtha's comm. Ed. with trans. E. B. Cowell, Calcutta, 1862. iii) M~n..d~yopani.sad with Gaud.ap~tda's K~rikas and Sahkara's Commentary. Trans.

Swami Nikhilananda, Mysore 1936. For other editions of this see 'Mdndftkyaka-rt'k~s of Gau.dapfida' above. iv) The Principal Upanisads. Trans. S. Radhakrishnan, London, 1953. v) The Thirteen Principal Upani.sadg Trans. R. E. Hume, Madras, 1954 (rep.). Ved~ntas~ra of Sadfinanda. Ed. with Trans. M. Hiriyanna, Poona, 1962. Yogas~tras of Patafijali with the commentary of Vyfisa. Ed. R. S. Bhattacharya, Varanasi,

1963,

II. MODERN STUDIES

C. Conio, The Philosophy o f M~n.d. hkya Kfirik~, Varanasi, 1971. S. N. Dasgupta, A History o f Indian Philosophy, Cambridge, 1922-55 (5 Vols.). P. Deussen,kThe Philosophy of the Upani.sad~ A. S. Geden's translation (1906) of Die

Philosophie der Upani.sads; New York, 1966 (rep.). The System of the Vedgmta. C. Johnston's translation (1912) of Das System des Vedanta

(1883, Leipzig); rep. Delhi, 1972. J. Gonda, Triads in the Veda. North Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, Oxford,

New York, 1976. Indian Studies in Honor of G R. Lanman. Harvard University Press, 1929, C. G. Jung, Psychology and Religion: West and East, Routledge and Kegan Paul,

London, 1958. Trans. R. F. C. Hull. G. N. Kaviraj, Bt~rat[ya S~ldhan~rDhkr~ (Bengali), Sanskrit College, Calcutta, 1965. C. Kunhan Raja, The Poet Philosophers of the .Rgveda, Ganesh & Co., Madras, 1963.

34 DIPAK B H A T T A C H A R Y A

A. A. Macdonell, A History o f Sanskrit Literature (1900), Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1962 (rep.).

T. M. P. Mahadevan, Gaud. ap~da - A Study in Early Advaita, Madras, 1960. M. de La VaUee Poussin, Le Boudhisme, Paris, 1909. Th. Stcherbatsky, The Conception o f Buddhist Nirvh.na, Leningrad, 1927; includes trans.

of Chapters I and XXV of the M-adhyamika-S~stra and Prasannapad~. Also see l~ulamadhyamakak~rikh in Sect. I.

G. Tucci, On Some Aspects o f the Doctrines o f Maitreya(N~tha) and Asahga, Calcutta University, 1930.

G. Tucci, The Theory and Practice o f the Man.d. ala, London, 1961. Max Walleser, DerAltere Vedhnta, Heidelberg, 1910. M. Winternitz, A History o f Indian Literature, Vol. l, Part I; trans, from German by

S. Ketkar, Calcutta University, 1962 (3rd ed.).

III. PAPERS IN J O U R N A L S AND COLLECTIONS

D. Bhattacharya, Origin o f the Catus.l~ya Doctrine, Journal of Research, Visva-Bharati, Vol. I, Part 1, 1976-77.

D. Bhattacharya, Catu.sk~ya in the Mantranaya, Journal of Research, Visva-Bharati, Vol. II, Paxt 1, 1977-78. (In Press).

H. Ui, Maitreya as an Historical Personage, ISHL, 95 ft. A, Venkatasubbiah, The M~.nd.~kyopani.sad and Gau.dapgtda, IA.62, Oct. 1933.

the doctrine of four in the early upanisads some connected problems

Documents