Vakyapadiya of Bhartrihari
by K. A. Subramania Iyer | 1965 | 391,768 words
The English translation of the Vakyapadiya by Bhartrihari including commentary extracts and notes. The Vakyapadiya is an ancient Sanskrit text dealing with the philosophy of language. Bhartrhari authored this book in three parts and propounds his theory of Sphotavada (sphota-vada) which understands language as consisting of bursts of sounds conveyi...
This book contains Sanskrit text which you should never take for granted as transcription mistakes are always possible. Always confer with the final source and/or manuscript.
Verse 1.2
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 1.2:
एकमेव यदाम्नातं भिन्नशक्तिव्यपाश्रयात् ।
अपृथक्त्वेऽपि शक्तिभ्यः पृथक्त्वेनेव वर्तते ॥ २ ॥ekameva yadāmnātaṃ bhinnaśaktivyapāśrayāt |
apṛthaktve'pi śaktibhyaḥ pṛthaktveneva vartate || 2 ||2. Who has been taught as the One appearing as many due to the multiplicity of his powers, who, though not different from his powers, seems to be so,1
Commentary
It has been revealed that the diversity of the transformations and the unity of what is transformed do not go beyond the unity of the Ultimate (prakṛtyekatva).2 As has been said—‘It is like Water, the Seer, One without a second.’3 Similarly: ‘O gentle One!, in the beginning, Being alone was, One without a second’.4 Then again—‘The one Praṇava was divided into three’. Similarly, ‘In the beginning, there was non-being. What was that non-being? It is the Ṛṣis who were non-being at the beginning, the Ṛṣis who were the prāṇas.’5 What is meant by ‘due to the multiplicity of his powers’ is—Appearing as many, the powers which are mutually opposed and are identical with Brahman accumulate in it which is essentially the Word. In a cognition in which many objects figure, the different objects which figure such as earth, people, etc., do not affect the unity of the cognition. There is no contradiction between the multiplicity of the things like trees which are cognised and the unity of the cognition. The form of the cognition does not really differ from that of the object, because different forms of the objects are not beyond the unity of the cognitions. Similarly, the powers which appear to be different from one another are not really so. The text ‘though not different from his powers’ means: the powers are not different from Brahman as the universal and the particular are from each other. But it appears to be different when it assumes the form of the different objects which figure in it6
Notes
1. Bhinnaṃ śaktivyapāśrayāt’ would perhaps be a better reading but all the mss and the Paddhati have the text as printed.
2. prakṛtyekatvānatikrameṇa. By ‘oneness’ of Brahman, only absence of all differentiation is meant and not association with the number one. As Vṛṣabha says—na tvekatvasaṃkhyāyogena. ‘Oneness’ due to association with the number one belongs to manifestations and not to the ultimate. There are two kinds of oneness, says Vṛṣabha: dvidham ekatvaṃ prākṛtaṃ vaikṛṭaṃ ca (Vṛ on Vāk. I. 1. (p. 15, 1. 2).
3. Cf. Bṛ. Up. 4.3.32 where the text is—salila eko draṣṭā'dvaito bhavati.
4. Ch. Up. 6.2.1.
5. Ś. Br. 6.1.1.1.
6. The word śakti is used twice in this verse. Vṛṣabha explains it—ghaṭādayaḥ padārthāḥ yogyatāvā (Vāk. I. 2. (p. 14, 1. 20). In other words, both the power to bring about appearances and the appearances themselves can be called śakti.