Chapter 5.9 - Reciprocity between the Philosophies of Nagarjuna and Gaudapada

The Sunyata of the Madhyamika is the necessary implication of his dialectic. The Buddhist Mahayana traditions of the later schools and their teachers like Nagarjuna, Aryadeva, Asanga and Vasubandhu etc. have profoundly influenced Gaudapada. But his teaching is distinguished from Buddhism.

“He (Gaudapada) takes his stand on the Mandukyopanishad, and it is there that we find the ultimate source of his inspiration, in the teaching of the Absolute self as pure awareness”^[1]

Madhyamika Philosophy is an analytical Philosophy, where analysis is confined only to concepts and language. It is neither Absolutist nor dialectical. So, it is analytical. “The Madhyamika System is called dialectical Absolutism by its modern interpreters. Dialectic understood in the Hegelian sense is a Synthetic thought process but the Madhyamika would be the best person to subscribe to any Synthetic approach. Madhyamika Buddhism is an analytical system with a negative function. One word for to express this idea and therefore, it should be analytic Zeroism-sunya-Madhyamarga.”^[2]

The Central Philosophical conceptions of Gaudapada’s thought (as represented by the four prakaranas) are the non-origination of Atman (ajativada) and asparshayoga. Both of these concepts reflect influence from the Madhyamika and Yogacara schools of thought, of Mahayana Buddhism.

It is understood that in an in-depth analysis of the G.K.,

Buddhist Philosophy became increasingly ‘Brahamnized’ and incorporated into the Vedanta tradition. Thus G.K. fourth prakarana would represent the early thought of the Buddhist inspired Gaudapada, while Gaudapadiya-karika II, III and I (Probably composed in that order given their relative Brahmanical content) would represent later stages in the Vedanticization of Gaudapada’s thought.”^{[3] [4]}

Alathashanthi Prakarana, more than any other Prakaranas, adopts Buddhist terminology and arguments clearly re-molding into an Advaitic way. Thus the Prakarana represents a polished Madhyamika form.

Later Advaitin Madhusudana Saraswati, in his Prasthanabheda, explains this inclusive acceptance of all views on the grounds that Atman appears according to the qualifications of the seeker (Adhikaribheda). However as we shall see it is likely that the author of the G.K. developed their view by way of an adaptation of Mahayana ideas of chapter twenty six of Mula-Madhyamika-karika Richard King says, “Advaita Vedanta is really a form of crypto Buddhism.” And he adds: Gaudapadakarika, especially the Alatha Shanthi Prakarana, has given the earliest formulation of Advaita Vedanta in great propensity for Buddhist ideas. Many important terms are really reproduced in an Advaitic approach. Pointing out the acquaintance with Buddhist philosophy of Gaudapada.^[5] And many similarities between the doctrines espoused in the G.K and Mahayana Buddhist tradition (Central Philosophical themes of Gaudapada’s doctrine of non-origination) shows evidence of Mahayana (Madhyamika) influence in so far as the Prajnaparamita-sutras and Madhyamika-sutras themselves expound the non-arising (amutpada) nature of all dharmas.

The Shloka goes on:

adi Santha hi anutpannah Prakritaivah Sunivrtah!
sarve dharma samabhinna Ajam Samyam Visaradam. (Gaudapadiya-karika 4:93.)

“All souls are, from the very beginning, tranquil, unborn and, by nature, entirely detached, equal, and non-different, and in as much as reality is thus unborn, unique, and pure (therefore there is no need of tranquility to be brought into the self.”

It is inconceivable that verses such as the above could have been composed without some acquaintance with this central Mahayana theme.^[6]

No system of thought can be completely autonomous and it is important to recognize that in India, as much as anywhere else the dynamic interplay between differing religious and philosophical traditions is a major factor in the development of any given system of thought.^[7] In his introductory remarks Richard King says that the Philosophical sequence must be a characteristic of continuous systems of various schools and reforms. The Indian Philosophy also is not exempt from these criticism, and remark. In the Madhyamika system Sunyata or Nisvabhava nature is a verily accepted concept and philosophically re-affirmed theory. Nagarjuna made a new discussion on the atman-anatman into Svabhava and Nisvabhava nature. The forth Prakarana has references to its Buddhist tone of reasoning and dialectics.

The philosophy of the Gaudapada as idealistic is inappropriate in so far as the text posits a substantial reality (Brahman) wholly independent of the mind and its constructions. Nevertheless, the text also suggests that the world as we know it in mundane and unenlightened experience is largely an idealistic construction. The world as experienced by the enlightened one (Buddha), however is not one of ideality (vikalpita). So from the Gaudapada’s point of view all enlightened individuals are idealists, in practice if not in theory, in that they experience a realm of ideality constructed by their own minds. In contrast to this all enlightened individuals’ experience reality is not ideality.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Michael Comens, The Method of Early Advaita Vedanta, p. 114.

[2]:

R.C Pandeya, “The Madhyamika Philosophy, A New approach”, Philosophy East and West. A Journal of Oriental and Comparative Thought, XIX, Hawaii, April 1964, p. 20.

[3]:

Richard King, Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism, Satguru Publications, Delhi, 1997, p.

[4]:

[???]

[5]:

Ibid., 88.

[6]:

Ibid., 89.

[7]:

Ibid., 2.