MACHINE ASR ACCESSIBILITY AID

Bhamati_Part1_Preface_and_Study.mp3

Not an editorially verified transcript. This text was generated automatically from the preserved recording and may contain recognition, language-detection, spelling, segmentation or name errors. Consult the source recording for authoritative content.

Collection: Part 11 · VIDEHA MITHILA MAITHILI DISCUSSION CRITICISM SERIES PART 11
Status: asr-draft
Human verified: No
Editorial review: not-reviewed
ASR model: small
Detected language: en (0.996657)
Duration: 36:18
Source: Open preserved recording

Timestamped machine output

0:00–0:03Chapter 1. Preface and Philosophical Study.
0:03–0:07Chapter 1. Preface, Philosophical Study and Source References.
0:07–0:14Vachuse Bhati Misra's Bhatma M. U. H. D. Chatur Suhtri and Gajendra Thakas Mithaile translation,
0:14–0:18a detailed philosophical and literary study.
0:18–0:22Preface Within the long tradition of Indian philosophy,
0:22–0:30Adviwayita Vedanta occupies a preeminent place, the magnificent edifice of Adviwayita Vedanta
0:30–0:35the Tacharya Shankar built upon the Prasthana Krayi the U. P. U. H. Nishads, the Bhagavad
0:35–0:41Geeta, and the Brahmasutras rests upon the Shari Yirakabhashya as its foundation stone
0:41–0:47one. Many commentaries were composed on this Shari Yirakabhashya but the commentary Bharmu
0:47–0:53HD, written in the 9th century by the great philosopher of Amiti Hyla, Vachu's Bhatimis
0:53–0:59Ra came to be established as an independent school of a V. Vaita Vedanta, the Bharmu
0:59–1:05HD school because of its distinctive originality, philosophical depth, and subtle method
1:05–1:10of reasoning three. For more than a thousand years this great work remained confined within
1:10–1:17the sphere of Sanskrit literature. The faithful translation of Vachu's Bhatimisraspa Muhd
1:17–1:24Chattusu Tri from the original Sanskrit interpurmitha li by Geyjendra Thacker, editor of the Roman
1:24–1:3016a Y Hy E Journal and a distinguished writer, is therefore a historic achievement three.
1:30–1:37translation is not merely a transfer from one language to another. It is a successful intellectual
1:37–1:44undertaking that presents some of the most difficult problems of Advaita philosophy such as Atyasa
1:44–1:50Kaya Tivada, the immutable eternity of liberation, and the independent validity of Vedantic statements
1:50–1:58with the natural ease of Mithaili speech, published first in 2004 and in an enlarged edition in
1:58–2:10This work is in 2229-547x establishes a standard for philosophical prose in Mayfelly III.
2:10–2:15The book appears within Romans 6 De They Why Hus book series where the original Sanskrit
2:15–2:21work is treated with respect as a classical heritage of the Indian philosophical tradition
2:21–2:26and as part of the public intellectual inheritance III.
2:26–2:32Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra,
2:32–2:37the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus
2:37–2:40Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay
2:40–2:41of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra,
2:41–2:42the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus
2:42–2:43Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the
2:43–2:49the end of his Naya work, Naya Sathranibandha Phutjus Bhatimisra gives its date of composition
2:49–2:57as Vikramasanvat 898, that is, 841 C Naya Sathranibandha Savakari Sadya Mude.
2:57–3:03Shri Bhatjus Bhatimisrina Vasan Kavasu Vatser, which makes the historical dating of his
3:03–3:09life clear one, with the exception of Vaisheshika, authoritative commentaries by him are available
3:09–3:15are nearly at all the orthodox systems of Indian philosophy, and for this reason he was honoured
3:15–3:22with the epithet Sarvati U.N. Trisvatantra 12. In Naya he wrote the Naya Vartika Tattbaryataka
3:22–3:27because of which he became known in the Naya tradition as Tattbaryat Chayat in Sankhya.
3:27–3:32The Sankhya Tattbaryataka Mudhya Nisha Rakhreshan Sankhya Kharka in Yoga. The Tattbaryataka
3:32–3:36Vashradhi on the Baya Sambarsha in Perva Menansa. The Naya Kannika and Tattbaryataka
3:36–3:42by doing connection with Mananamisra's Vidya Bhavika and a Mananamisra's Brahmasiddhi,
3:42–3:47the Brahmatat the Samhichan now unavailable. After composing such major works, his final
3:47–3:53and greatest work, the Bahamuhd, appeared ten, written at the summit of his philosophical
3:53–4:01maturity. The Bahamuhd is not merely an explanation of the Shari-Iraka-Bhashat, it is an independent
4:01–4:07and systematic formulation of the doctrines of Advaita Vedanta V.
4:07–4:12Many ideas from Mandana Misra's Brahma Siddhya echoed in the Bharamuhi D.
4:12–4:17For which reason Vachu's Bhati Misra has also been described as Vachu's Bhati,
4:17–4:19follower in the footsteps of Mandana 4.
4:19–4:25The subtle influence of Mandana Misra's discipline of meditation and his discussion
4:25–4:29of Niyoga can be seen in Vachu's Bhati's philosophical outlook,
4:29–4:37although he know where departs from the fundamental Advaitic spirit of the Shari Yirakabashya 17.
4:37–4:44The schools within Aviv-Yita Vedantak Bharmu HD and Roman 6th IUH Na in the history of
4:44–4:50Aviv-Yita Vedantak two principal streams of interpretation of the Shari Yirakabashya
4:50–4:56emerged the Bharmu HD School of Vachos Bhartimis Ra and the Roman 6th IUH Na School which
4:56–5:03arose from Prekshatmiyatis Panchapadikaraman 6th IUH-NOT, a commentary on Padma Padacharya's
5:03–5:08Panchapadika-1. The doctrinal differences between these two schools are indispensable
5:08–5:15for understanding the subtleties of Advayita philosophy, and Gajendra Thakkar's translation
5:15–5:21preserves them with complete fidelity 3. In the Bahram UHD, the Jiva is regarded as
5:21–5:28agent, enjoyer and locus of Avedia. This doctrine that Avedia has the Jiva as its locus is a
5:28–5:34fundamental characteristic of the Bamaati 3. According to Vachu's Batimis Ral, Avedia
5:34–5:40is in fact indefinable and may be divided into two aspects, concealment and projection,
5:40–5:46Mueller Avedia and Chular Avedia slash impression one. This entire background naturally reverberates
5:46–5:52through Gaijendra Thakkar's translation where the translator remains faithful to the text
5:52–5:59and clarifies the purport of the Bha'amu HD without adding external commentary 3.
5:59–6:05The tradition of commentaries on Bha'amu HD and its sub-schools, Thuchu's Bhatimisra's
6:05–6:11Bha'amu HD is so mature and profound that numerous commentaries were themselves composed
6:11–6:18on the Bahamuhd in order to understand it. In the 13th century, Amal Ananda Sarasvati
6:18–6:24whose teacher was Anupavananda wrote the famous commentary Vedanta-Hilpata on the Bahamuhd,
6:24–6:30through which the Bahamuhd school gained extraordinary prestige in the field of Advaita Vedanta
6:30–6:34One. In the 16th century, Api Adhikshita wrote
6:34–6:39Kalpataru Paramala on Amal Ananda's K. U. L. Pati U. H. Ru and Lachman Rishima wrote
6:39–6:45the commentary of Hoga 4. In addition, many other commentaries on the Bahamuhd are available,
6:45–6:52such as Valala, Siris Bama, Titlaka, Akhandanabhuti, Atis, Rijaprak, Shikha, Etuta, Krishna, Tufas,
6:52–6:59Bahamuhd, Bhavadipika and Subramanya, Shastri's Bahamuhd, Roman, 6th Ayu, Nau, Wan. At places,
6:59–7:04subtle differences of doctrine between the Bahamuhd and the Kul, Pati, Uah, Thru are
7:04–7:11visible in these commentaries. Wherever Api Yiddikshita in his Parayamu-Hla found Vachu's
7:11–7:17Bhati and Amal Ananda to differ from the Shari-Iwaka Bharsha. He refuted them and supported the
7:17–7:23Shari-Iwaka Bharsha. Lakshmin Rishimha author of the Bhogha. However, sharply criticised
7:23–7:29this procedure of the Parayamu-Hla and defended the authors of the Bahramu-HD and the Kul
7:29–7:36Pati Ueshru. Thus, two sub-schools also developed within the Baham-UHD tradition for. This
7:36–7:42entire body that of commentarial literature demonstrates the intellectual authority that
7:42–7:46of Vachu's Bhattimisra's original work.
7:46–7:52Structure and philosophical depth of Gajendra Thakur's Mithaili translation, Gajendra
7:52–8:00Thacker's work under review. Bar MUHD Chattu Sutri extends from page 1 to page 491 in
8:00–8:07the cumulative edition and ends with the colfin. Here ends the Chattu Sutri Bar MUHD 3. It
8:07–8:14contains the invocation of the work, the Advaahsa Barsha introduction and a complete, faithful
8:14–8:19translation of the entire commentary on the first four sutras of the Brahma Satra Atvato
8:19–8:29Brahmajigwaya hsr 1.1.1, Janmadyasya Yata 1.1.2, Shastra Wayanitvat 1.1.3, and Tiyuti
8:29–8:36Tussamaan Vayut 1.1.4.3. The structure of the translation is as follows
8:36–8:421. Cover and publication pages. 2. Amithaile rendering of the original text
8:42–8:49of Shankara's Udvaiya Hsabhasha. 3. Translation of Vachu's Bhatimis Raa 7 invocatory
8:49–8:53verses. 4. A complete prose translation of the Bahram
8:53–9:01UHD commentary on the Udvaiya Hsabhash. 5. A Mithaili rendering of the detailed debate
9:01–9:06and exposition from the first sutra through the fourth. Nearly one third of the work
9:06–9:13is devoted solely to the explanation of the Sutra Tyti Samam Vayut, the Saman Veya Tikarana,
9:13–9:19which contains some of the subtlest discussions of a Vyita epistemology and the nature of
9:19–9:25liberation and is evidence of the translator's patience and fidelity to the original work
9:25–9:263.
9:26–9:33Linguistic butyl of V in vocation, the gateway to the Bhātamu HD is formed by its seven
9:33–9:40in vocatory verses. In translating a philosophical work, Gajendra Thakkar gives priority to preserving
9:40–9:46meaning rather than preserving meter, and therefore renders these verses in prose 3.
9:46–9:51In the first verse, Brahman is saluted as of immeasurable bliss and the nature of knowledge
9:51–9:56and as the maker of the false manifestation of the five elements, having made the two
9:56–10:02forms of indefinable avidya his ministers. The use of the word minister brings the
10:02–10:08The political metaphor of the original Sanskrit vividly into Mithaili and points toward the
10:08–10:13twofold avidya of a V.Y.E. Tuck and Seelman and residual Impression One.
10:13–10:19The translation of the second verse displays extraordinary beauty in its worldly and native
10:19–10:20idiom.
10:20–10:21The Vedas are his breath.
10:21–10:24The five great elements are his sight.
10:24–10:29The moving and a moving world is his smile and his sleep is the great dissolution.
10:29–10:35Near the use of the Mithai Leeward Musky Smile gives the cosmic play an intimate, domestic
10:35–10:41quality three, the humble declaration of the seventh first just as water from a royal road
10:41–10:46becomes pure when it falls into the current of the Ganges, so the insignificant words
10:46–10:51of people like me become sanctified when joined to the Lacharya's composition embodies
10:51–10:57the classical decorum with which the commentator positions himself three.
10:57–11:04analysis of the Udhsabhasha, that Chuzhbati Mishra's commentary on Shankaracharya's
11:04–11:10Udhsabhasha begins with an elaborate pervapaksha. The argument of the opponent is that the
11:10–11:16ahdmun cannot be the object of inquiry, because inquiry into that about which there is no
11:16–11:23doubt and knowledge of which serves no purpose is meaningless three.
11:23–11:29of the poor Vaputcha and its logical refutation. The Laponant argues that the experience of
11:29–11:35I'aham is undisputed in all beings, from worms and insects to gods and sages, to establish
11:35–11:42both the absence of doubt in this experience and the uselessness of inquiring into it.
11:42–11:47The Laponant gives Witty examples, a pot present in bright light and in contact with
11:47–11:51the visual organ attended by the mind or the teeth of a crow three.
11:51–11:56Gajendra Thakkar's translation preserves the sharpness of these everyday examples in
11:56–12:02my thaili, through recognition extending from childhood to old age I, who in childhood took
12:02–12:04delight with my parents.
12:04–12:08Now in old age take delight with my grandchildren."
12:08–12:13The opponent argues for the self-evident existence of an AHT Mun distinct from the
12:13–12:14body three.
12:14–12:19The opponent's strongest declaration is, even a thousand scriptures together cannot turn
12:19–12:21a pot into cloth three.
12:21–12:28That is, Truti that contradicts direct experience should be taken in a secondary sense.
12:28–12:33This famous Naya Maxim has been translated in a distinctly Mithaeli cadence, preserving
12:33–12:37the aggressiveness of the philosophical debate.
12:37–12:42On the Sedanta side, Vachu's Bhatimis Ra establishes Truti's presentation of the
12:42–12:48Unconditioned, A.H.D. Munn on the basis of indicators of purports such as beginning, conclusion,
12:48–12:54and repetition. Knowledge born of Shruti does not destroy the practical validity of perception,
12:54–13:00it negates only its ultimate validity. Through analysis of figurative usage such as Durgha
13:00–13:05is crying, and through examples involving the Agnya Hattra of the Khandapayin on my
13:05–13:10armour, the lion and the pupil, and oil and mustard oil, it is established that secondary
13:10–13:16usage occurs after cognition of difference but because in the use of I there is no cognition
13:16–13:23of difference from the body, that use is not secondary but false that is, Adhyasa 3.
13:23–13:30Discussion of kaya-tive-vijta and establishment of anovachainiya kaya-ti. What is the nature
13:30–13:35of erroneous cognition? Indian philosophy contains an extensive debate over theories
13:35–13:41of error in response to this question. In Gajendra Thakkar's translation, this philosophical
13:41–13:45controversy appears without any loss of argument.
13:45–13:511. Atma Khyati Buddhist Sautranthika slash Vainanavada, denying the reality of an external
13:51–13:56object and projecting the internal form of cognition outward.
13:56–14:023. 2. A Khyati Mimamsaka prapakaarap failure to apprehend the distinction between memory
14:02–14:06and perception. The memorial character of memory is lost three.
14:06–14:12Three. Any athekilati naya, cognition of one existing object in the form of another, as
14:12–14:18when market silver is cognized in a shell three. Thuchus butimis rarshapli refutes
14:18–14:23all these positions. Refuting the naeika theory of any athekilati,
14:23–14:29he remarks sarcastically, are what extraordinary good fortune poor cognition possesses, that
14:29–14:35it can attain certainty even through falsity. 3. This irony is fully matched by the expressive
14:35–14:41power of Mithyli. The examples of a banana stalk arising from sugarcane seeds scorched
14:41–14:47in a forest fire and the digestive fire of a sufferer from Bismarck disease are used
14:47–14:53to analyse with precision how a defect can give a cause the capacity to produce a different
14:53–14:59effect. 3. Vuchu's Batimis Raa's self-references. I have already answered this objection in
14:59–15:04the Nyak and Ika and its detailed discussion should be seen in the Brahmatatha Samhachya
15:04–15:09are preserved in the translation, revealing the breadth of his literary corpus 3.
15:09–15:15As the Siddhanta, Vachu's Bhatimisraha establishes any Avakaniya Kiati.
15:15–15:21Water superimposed upon Reys in a mirage is neither real nor unreal nor both real and
15:21–15:25unreal because the last alternative is self-contradictory 3.
15:25–15:30establishment of what is different from both beading and non-beading lies at the heart
15:30–15:37of Advayita epistemology 4. If the superimposed water were real, the cognition would be in
15:37–15:41the form rays or water of the Ganga, but the cognition is water here.
15:41–15:47Mirror appearance is not reality if it were, a thirsty man could descend to the Mandikini
15:47–15:52with its rising and falling waves seen in the mirage and drink its water. This doctrine
15:52–15:59is present intact in the Mithai lead translation with its full pictorial force 3.
15:59–16:04The Self-Luminosity of the A.H.D. Mun and the State of J.E.D. Vahood.
16:04–16:08A doubt is raised concerning the possibility of a Teasa.
16:08–16:13How can the non-self be superimposed upon the A.H.D. Mun, which is not an object and
16:13–16:15is self-luminous?
16:15–16:21Vachyus Bhatimis Ra argues that if the A.H.D Mun were regarded as inert, a situation
16:21–16:27would arise like one blind man holding another blind man's hand and falling at every step
16:27–16:32the fault of an endless chain of the blind three. The postulation of another cognition
16:32–16:38leads to infinite regress. The vain and avidin doctrine that the object itself shines forth
16:38–16:45is rejected on the ground that the object appears as limited and gross, whereas illumination appears
16:45–16:53as internal and unrestricted. After establishing the self-luminosity of the A.H.D. Munn, he the answers
16:53–16:59in the manner of a mature argument that even upon imperceptible space and undiscriminating
16:59–17:05child superimposes stain or a huge inverted bowl made of sapphire three. Just as space appears
17:05–17:11divided because of the limiting adjuncts of pot, jar and vessel, so the condition of being a jiva
17:11–17:17arises upon the non-objectifiable A.H.D. Munn through the limiting adjuncts of intellect,
17:17–17:24mind, and body three. The animal analogy for a Teasa fleeing on seeing a man with a raised stick
17:24–17:30approaching on seeing green grass is so vivid in the Mythaili prose that a clear picture of
17:30–17:36rural life stands before the reader three. Along with the subtle analysis of superimposed
17:36–17:42attributes I am mute, one-eyed, deaf and superimposition of the substrate. The introduction to the
17:42–17:48Luddh-YAH Sabharsha concludes with the commitment that through repeated practice of true knowledge,
17:48–17:57the impressions of error are eradicated three. 1st Sutra, Athartha Brahma Jig-YAH Sar, therefore,
17:57–18:03now the desire to know Brahman, the explanation of the first sutra, contains an extensive analysis
18:03–18:10of atha sequence slash immediacy at a reason and brahma jenasa the compound three one
18:10–18:16analysis of the word atha the meanings of auspiciousness commencement and entitlement are rejected
18:16–18:22and the meaning of sequence is established the auspicious sound is illustrated by the sound
18:22–18:28of a drum or conch and the sight of a water filled picture brought for some other purpose three
18:28–18:342. Refutation of the sequence of ritual action and knowledge. The Mimamsaka Purva Paksha that
18:34–18:41inquiry into Brahman must follow inquiry into Dharma is vigorously refuted. Liberation is not
18:41–18:47something produced like a lump of dope, modified like curd, purified by ritual preparation like
18:47–18:53sprinkling a mortar or attained like obtaining milk by milking three. Action is only the remote
18:53–18:57aid to dispassion and purification of the intellect.
18:57–19:023. The Fourfold Discipline, Discrimination between the Eternal and Non-Eternal
19:02–19:05Dispassion toward Enjoyment Here and Hereafter
19:05–19:09The Sixfold Wealth beginning with Tranquility and Restraint
19:09–19:12and the Desire for Liberation. In this section,
19:12–19:18livelier examples are used against arguments opposed to dispassions such as bringing a fish with
19:18–19:24bones and taking the edible portion. Grain with husk. Not abandoning seed for fear of
19:24–19:30wild animals. And not abandoning food for fear of beggars making the Mithaili pros an extraordinary
19:30–19:36celebration of lived imagery three. Even the finest cook cannot separate poison from
19:36–19:41food in which poison has been mixed with honey and eat only the honey this example
19:41–19:45links ordinary practical intelligence to Vedanta three.
19:45–19:52Or the compound in Brahmajanasa, the interpretation inquiry for Brahman as a dative compound is
19:52–19:57rejected and inquiry into Brahman as a genitive tapyrusha is established.
19:57–20:03It is demonstrated by Katiayana's rule as in wood for the sacrificial post.
20:03–20:08This is historically important because Vachyus Bhati here refutes the pre-Shankaran tradition
20:08–20:12of commentators 3.
20:12–20:18Sutra Jamma Gyaseya Yatta, from which the birth and so forth of this world proceed.
20:18–20:24The opponent asks how Brahman can be defined by the characteristics of a limited, inert,
20:24–20:30and perishable world. As Siddhanta, an indirect defining mark is established, just as reaching
20:30–20:35different places is a mark of the sun's movement three. The new to gender in Gemmadi is a
20:35–20:37The matter of grammatical economy.
20:37–20:44Yask is six modifications of being birth, existence, growth, transformation, decline
20:44–20:50and destruction are subsumed under origination, continuance and destruction dissolution with
20:50–20:54growth included in origination and decline in destruction three.
20:54–21:00To establish an omniscient and omnipotent cause, striking natural examples are given
21:00–21:05of the world's fixed order, the birth of the black buck in a particular region, the
21:05–21:09who's call at a particular season, and the impregnation of the crane through thunder
21:09–21:13at the beginning of the rains for a particular cause.
21:13–21:18This nature image has been translated into Maithaile with its native fragrance in tact
21:18–21:193.
21:19–21:25In this sutra it is established that the sutra is not an independent inferential proof,
21:25–21:30but points to the Brijvaruna Dialg in the Teitiri Yashruti and to Upanishadic Statements
21:30–21:313.
21:31–21:37analogy of the rope serving as the material basis for the snake together with avadiya.
21:37–21:43Brahman together with avadiya is established as the material cause three.
21:43–21:45Third Sutra, Shastra, Wyonitvaat.
21:45–21:51Because it is the source of scripture, two scripturally accepted interpretations of
21:51–21:53this sutra are presented.
21:53–21:55One Brahman as the cause of scripture.
21:55–22:00Brahman is the womb or source of the vast body of scripture, filled with countless branches
22:00–22:06of knowledge such as the Rig Veda and illuminating all things like a torch. Just as Panini's
22:06–22:11knowledge is more extensive than his grammatical treatise what then can be said of the knowledge
22:11–22:17of the creator of the universe, the example of the ineffable differences among the sweetness
22:17–22:23of sugarcane juice, milk and jaggery indicates the superiority of the speaker's knowledge
22:23–22:29to what can be expressed. The Mithaili saying Bali pudding is not salty is used to indicate
22:29–22:35very little effort three. Two, scripture as the proof of Brahman, scripture is the source,
22:35–22:40that is, the means of knowledge of Brahman. Brahman is known only through scripture, not
22:40–22:47through independent inference three. The reconciliation between the J. Y. E. Myne tradition
22:47–22:52and the followers of Vyasa in the discussion of the itinality of the Vedda is remarkable.
22:52–22:58A mimamsaka who holds phonemes to be eternal must still accept the non-itinality of words
22:58–23:04and sentences in their specific sequence. The order of Vedic recitation in the teacher-pupil
23:04–23:10tradition is clarified through the example of a dance teacher and the pupil's movements.
23:10–23:16In no creation does Braumaniaside become a cause of merit, nor an ash-emd her a cause
23:16–23:21of sin, just as fire never wets and water never burns. This subtle discussion of fixed
23:21–23:27natural properties is made readily intelligible in Mayfelly III.
23:27–23:34Sutra T. Utti to Samman Vayut. The Samanvayad Hikharana occupies nearly one-third of the
23:34–23:40entire work and contains its most concentrated philosophical debate three. The Purva Paksha
23:40–23:46takes the injunction-oriented character of Purva Mimamsa as its basis. The purpose of scripture
23:46–23:52is to teach action. The Mimamsaka attempts to regard Vedantic statements as an injunction to
23:52–23:58meditate on Brahman for one who desires immortality Pratapattvidhai is presented.
23:58–24:04Statements about already existing things such as there is fruit on the riverbank are treated
24:04–24:08as redundant in an attempt to dismiss their independent purpose three.
24:09–24:16Siddhantatsa Mahanvayya and intrinsic validity. The Siddhanta side establishes by beginning
24:16–24:21conclusion and other indicators of purport including recollection of the Upamshayaja
24:21–24:27principle that all Vedantic statements converge upon Brahman with a single purport. In Adhvī
24:27–24:35Vaita philosophy, knowledge is object determined, not person determined as action is three.
24:35–24:41The immutable eternity of liberation and the rejection of bhīgayi dhābhīgayi dhābhīgayi
24:41–24:47āchtā, liberation is not produced by action. If it were produced by action, it would be
24:47–24:54non-eternal, not-producible, liberation is not a newly produced object like curd or a pot.
24:54–24:59Not something to be attained through the beautiful analogy of the boatman and boat leaving the
24:59–25:05changing bank, foam and waves and reaching the quiet middle the ever-attained nature
25:05–25:10of Brahman is established. Not something to be purified or perfected, both the addition
25:10–25:16of a quality hibiscus flower dyed with lack-juice and the removal of a defector mirror rubbed
25:16–25:22with Brick powder are impossible in Brahman. The A. H. D. Mun is denied to be a locus of
25:22–25:28Action 3. Purity through bathing and sipping water belongs to the empirical Jeeva, just
25:28–25:33as the heroine's fragrance is superimposed upon her companion 3. The conclusion is,
25:33–25:39apart from these 4 modes there is no fifth way, not even the shadow of Action can end
25:39–25:45to liberation apart from knowledge. This line in Gage and Drathakar's translation brings the
25:45–25:51essence of Adviyaita to completion 3. In this context there is a distinction between immutable
25:51–25:58eternity and changing continuity. Along with an extended refutation of Beda Padavada, a pot is not
25:58–26:04said to be a jujube contained in it, and even though Chaitra and Maitra sit on the same seat,
26:04–26:10Chaitra is not said to be Maitra. One may know from afar that an ornament is gold while not
26:10–26:16knowing that it is an earing, and the argument exposing the mutual dependence involved in
26:16–26:22difference and non-difference has been translated without leaving any not unresolved three.
26:22–26:29The fruitfulness of statements about established reality and philosophy of language, the objection
26:29–26:34of the perver-pacture was that statements about established realities are fruitless.
26:34–26:39To refute this, Vachu's Bhati gives an ornate description of Mount Sumeru and the
26:39–26:45famous story of a Dravidian who did not know the Arya language. When the messenger tells
26:45–26:51the father, Dvadahtha may your prosperity increase, a son has been born to you. The Dravidian
26:51–26:56infers the understanding of the sentence from Dvadahtha's horribilation and his face blooming
26:56–27:02like a fully-opened lotus. This establishes that the power of words can also be learned
27:02–27:08in relation to established realities. This making argument in the philosophy of language
27:08–27:14which later became a foundation of Vedantic discussions of verbal cognition flows like
27:14–27:18a story in Maitre 3.
27:18–27:22Analysis of negation and Jivan Mukti, a Brahmana should not be killed the negative
27:22–27:28particles capacity to express absence. The Paryudasa construction in the Prajapati
27:28–27:33vow do not look at the rising sun, and the analysis of cessation and non-engagement
27:33–27:39are translated through striking analogies such as, when armour is removed, if no arrow
27:39–27:42attacks. The warrior's life is not destroyed at once
27:42–27:483. Finally, the distinction between figurative and false eager cognition is drawn the primary
27:48–27:53meaning of lion in an animal with a mane, and its secondary meaning when applied to
27:53–27:59a brave man. And Jivamukti is established one who has given up wealth and is free
27:59–28:04Three from identification with wealth has no fear of theft, just as a snake's discarded
28:04–28:09slough lies dead and cast off upon an antel, so this body lies there three.
28:09–28:14The analogy of a chain of the blind for the beginningless relation with the body and
28:14–28:15the final doctrine.
28:15–28:20I am Brahman in this knowledge all injunctions and all other means of knowledge come to
28:20–28:24an end conclude the philosophical debate three.
28:24–28:29The conclusion also connects the justification for commencing a separate treat is back to
28:29–28:37the first sutra producing from the standpoint of composition, a ring structure 3.
28:37–28:40Translation Theory, Language Strategy and Native Idiom.
28:40–28:46Gage and Drothaka's translation is based on the principle faithful to meaning but independent
28:46–28:48in expression 3.
28:48–28:54It does not devilate in the slightest from the original sequence of arguments, examples
28:54–29:00and Proofs, but the sentence structure is entirely natural to Maithaile. The language strategy
29:00–29:05of the translation works on three levels. 1. Terminological Precision
29:05–29:12Technical term such as Adhyasa, Anirvakiniya, Samanad, Karana, Pratyaabhaina, Arthapatti,
29:12–29:18Kutastha and Upadana are retained but a Maithaile explanation is supplied at their first occurrence
29:18–29:25This has successfully created a mythile technical vocabulary for mimamsa and vedaanta with far-reaching
29:25–29:26significance.
29:26–29:272.
29:27–29:30Mephalization and sentence structure.
29:30–29:35The long compound laden sentences of Sanskrit are broken into forms such as the point is
29:35–29:37suppose.
29:37–29:42What his being said is, and he answers this by the rendering of Sanskrit Narnu as suppose
29:42–29:48is so consistent that the reader never loses track of the movement between Purvapaksha
29:48–29:54and Sedanta 3. 3. Native Idiom and Proverb Transforming Sanskrit Logical Maxims Into My
29:54–29:59Thighly Folk Speech Is The Finest Feature Of The Translation
29:59–30:05One blind man holds another blind man's hand and falls at every step the defect of a chain
30:05–30:11of the blind three. Barley Pudding is not salty indicating very little effort three. Even
30:11–30:16a thousand scriptures together cannot turn a pot into cloth rejection of shruti contrary
30:16–30:23to experience three. Even a thousand craftsmen cannot make cloth out of a pot three. Inquiry
30:23–30:29into something meaningless. Like examining the teeth of an arrow three. The native flavour
30:29–30:35of word choice terms corresponding to light. Darkness, smile. Carp. Ring, slough. Antel.
30:35–30:40Twilight. Chippard. Husk. Mortar. Weaver. And Potter gives philosophical prose the
30:40–30:45the scent of lived life. Yet its seriousness is nowhere weakened by excessive rusticity
30:45–30:513, disciplined agreement of gender and number, the consistent use of the respectful verbal
30:51–30:57form for Brahman, the A.H. T. Munn, and the Lecharya as against the ordinary form, and
30:57–31:02the consistent restriction of the nuctet to only the two specified dotted retroflex letters
31:02–31:07attest to the editorial labour of the Audit corrected Edition 3.
31:07–31:14references, including locations in the Brihadaiyuenyaka and the Bhagavad Gita, increased the book's
31:14–31:17usefulness for readers.
31:17–31:23The contribution of Roman 16a Whiteheart and Gajendra Thakur to Mithaili literature.
31:23–31:28Vachu's Bhatimisra was a faithful, this proud statement is repeated again and again in
31:28–31:31Mithaili, yet his works were not in Mithaili.
31:31–31:38Magendrafaco's translation fills that historical absence and turns that pride into a body of
31:38–31:39accessible text.
31:39–31:503 Roman 6 DAY HE journal established 2000, is in 2229-547X and its book series are building
31:50–31:54a Maithaeli bridge to classical Sanskrit works.
31:54–31:59The inclusion of a philosophical work such as the Ba'am'uht proves that Maithaeli it
31:59–32:05is not merely a vehicle for songs and stories, but is equally capable of carrying the most
32:05–32:11rigorous scholastic debate three. The inner connection of this translation with MIT
32:11–32:17Haile's Naya Mimamsa tradition in which Vachu's Bhati himself stands, followed later
32:17–32:23by the Tathva Sintimani tradition of Gangesha Upadhyaya is clear three. The Bhatamu HD's
32:23–32:29discussions of error and validity form part of the background to later Navya Naya, therefore
32:29–32:35the availability of the Bar-M-U-H-D in Mithai Lee represents a reclamation of Amity Hila's
32:35–32:42own intellectual history. At university level, this work is fit to serve as a foundational
32:42–32:47text for philosophy courses, research, and training in scholastic debate through the
32:47–32:51medium of Maitrely III.
32:51–32:56Editorial Reflections for a Future Edition Amid the overall accuracy revealed by the
32:56–33:02detailed review. A few subtle editorial points deserve attention in a future edition. The
33:02–33:07former parochia occurs seven times in the text whereas the correcto parochia occurs four
33:07–33:13times. It would be desirable to standardize this variation three. The copyright line prints
33:13–33:19Preety Thacker. The intended form appears to be Preety Thacker three in the enumeration
33:19–33:24of the three modes of transformation, where the sentence according to the characteristic
33:24–33:30of dharma three types are stated occurs. The numbered list does not follow immediately and
33:30–33:36the explanation begins in the next paragraph. A connecting sentence could make the flow
33:36–33:42easier three. For greater usefulness, a future edition could add a Mithaili Sanskrit glossary
33:42–33:49of technical terms, typographical differentiation among the sutra, basha and tika levels and
33:49–33:56and an index of Atikaran as 3. These are suggestions for refinement, not a catalogue of faults.
33:56–34:04In a vast text extending from page 1 to page 491, the small number of such slips is itself
34:04–34:08evidence of the success of the audit process 3.
34:08–34:14Overall evaluation, this pure Maithaile rendering of Ba Muhd Chattusutri by Gage
34:14–34:20and Drothaka is a standard setting work in the history of Mifaili prose. It accomplishes
34:20–34:27three tasks at once, it transfers Vachu's Bhattis edifice of reasoning intact into Mifaili,
34:27–34:33builds a Mifaili model of the technical vocabulary of Mimamsa, Naya and Vedanta, and brings
34:33–34:39Amiti Hila's own philosophical heritage back into Amiti Hila's own language three. From
34:39–34:45the sub-list debate on theories of error in the Udh-Yah sub-bhashya to the vast scholastic
34:45–34:51argument of the Saman Veyadhikarana, no link in the reasoning is broken and nowhere does
34:51–34:53the language become strained.
34:53–34:59Because the sequence of examples, pervapacture, reply, renewed objection, resolution, and
34:59–35:05conclusion is preserved, the reader sees not merely conclusions but the entire process
35:05–35:11of philosophical debate 3, measured by the standards of Indian poetics. This translation
35:11–35:17is an exemplar of the quality of Prasada clarity and ease of expression despite profundity
35:17–35:23of meaning and the evenness of classical prose. A consistent compositional style is one of its
35:23–35:29abiding qualities 3, just as water from a royal road becomes pure when it falls into the
35:29–35:34current of the Gang of Vachu's Bhatis humble declaration can be reversed and applied to
35:34–35:40this translation. The Otaria's stream of the Ganges has now reached the Royal Road of
35:40–35:46Amity Hila, where every traveller may bathe in it three. This work will remain a reference
35:46–35:51pillar for Mithaeli philosophical literature for a long time, and readers of this edition
35:51–35:58will naturally await the arrival in Mithaeli of the rest of the Ba'am-Uhd from the remaining
35:58–36:03portion of the first chapter through the fourth chapter three. It is a unique confluence
36:03–36:10of the living force of Advaita Vedanta and the intellectual capacity of the Mithaili language,
36:10–36:16providing rich material for comparative study to students of epistemology, semantics and
36:16–36:18philosophy of consciousness 3.

Plain text

Chapter 1. Preface and Philosophical Study. Chapter 1. Preface, Philosophical Study and Source References. Vachuse Bhati Misra's Bhatma M. U. H. D. Chatur Suhtri and Gajendra Thakas Mithaile translation, a detailed philosophical and literary study. Preface Within the long tradition of Indian philosophy, Adviwayita Vedanta occupies a preeminent place, the magnificent edifice of Adviwayita Vedanta the Tacharya Shankar built upon the Prasthana Krayi the U. P. U. H. Nishads, the Bhagavad Geeta, and the Brahmasutras rests upon the Shari Yirakabhashya as its foundation stone one. Many commentaries were composed on this Shari Yirakabhashya but the commentary Bharmu HD, written in the 9th century by the great philosopher of Amiti Hyla, Vachu's Bhatimis Ra came to be established as an independent school of a V. Vaita Vedanta, the Bharmu HD school because of its distinctive originality, philosophical depth, and subtle method of reasoning three. For more than a thousand years this great work remained confined within the sphere of Sanskrit literature. The faithful translation of Vachu's Bhatimisraspa Muhd Chattusu Tri from the original Sanskrit interpurmitha li by Geyjendra Thacker, editor of the Roman 16a Y Hy E Journal and a distinguished writer, is therefore a historic achievement three. translation is not merely a transfer from one language to another. It is a successful intellectual undertaking that presents some of the most difficult problems of Advaita philosophy such as Atyasa Kaya Tivada, the immutable eternity of liberation, and the independent validity of Vedantic statements with the natural ease of Mithaili speech, published first in 2004 and in an enlarged edition in This work is in 2229-547x establishes a standard for philosophical prose in Mayfelly III. The book appears within Romans 6 De They Why Hus book series where the original Sanskrit work is treated with respect as a classical heritage of the Indian philosophical tradition and as part of the public intellectual inheritance III. Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the essay of Thakchus Bhatimisra, the the end of his Naya work, Naya Sathranibandha Phutjus Bhatimisra gives its date of composition as Vikramasanvat 898, that is, 841 C Naya Sathranibandha Savakari Sadya Mude. Shri Bhatjus Bhatimisrina Vasan Kavasu Vatser, which makes the historical dating of his life clear one, with the exception of Vaisheshika, authoritative commentaries by him are available are nearly at all the orthodox systems of Indian philosophy, and for this reason he was honoured with the epithet Sarvati U.N. Trisvatantra 12. In Naya he wrote the Naya Vartika Tattbaryataka because of which he became known in the Naya tradition as Tattbaryat Chayat in Sankhya. The Sankhya Tattbaryataka Mudhya Nisha Rakhreshan Sankhya Kharka in Yoga. The Tattbaryataka Vashradhi on the Baya Sambarsha in Perva Menansa. The Naya Kannika and Tattbaryataka by doing connection with Mananamisra's Vidya Bhavika and a Mananamisra's Brahmasiddhi, the Brahmatat the Samhichan now unavailable. After composing such major works, his final and greatest work, the Bahamuhd, appeared ten, written at the summit of his philosophical maturity. The Bahamuhd is not merely an explanation of the Shari-Iraka-Bhashat, it is an independent and systematic formulation of the doctrines of Advaita Vedanta V. Many ideas from Mandana Misra's Brahma Siddhya echoed in the Bharamuhi D. For which reason Vachu's Bhati Misra has also been described as Vachu's Bhati, follower in the footsteps of Mandana 4. The subtle influence of Mandana Misra's discipline of meditation and his discussion of Niyoga can be seen in Vachu's Bhati's philosophical outlook, although he know where departs from the fundamental Advaitic spirit of the Shari Yirakabashya 17. The schools within Aviv-Yita Vedantak Bharmu HD and Roman 6th IUH Na in the history of Aviv-Yita Vedantak two principal streams of interpretation of the Shari Yirakabashya emerged the Bharmu HD School of Vachos Bhartimis Ra and the Roman 6th IUH Na School which arose from Prekshatmiyatis Panchapadikaraman 6th IUH-NOT, a commentary on Padma Padacharya's Panchapadika-1. The doctrinal differences between these two schools are indispensable for understanding the subtleties of Advayita philosophy, and Gajendra Thakkar's translation preserves them with complete fidelity 3. In the Bahram UHD, the Jiva is regarded as agent, enjoyer and locus of Avedia. This doctrine that Avedia has the Jiva as its locus is a fundamental characteristic of the Bamaati 3. According to Vachu's Batimis Ral, Avedia is in fact indefinable and may be divided into two aspects, concealment and projection, Mueller Avedia and Chular Avedia slash impression one. This entire background naturally reverberates through Gaijendra Thakkar's translation where the translator remains faithful to the text and clarifies the purport of the Bha'amu HD without adding external commentary 3. The tradition of commentaries on Bha'amu HD and its sub-schools, Thuchu's Bhatimisra's Bha'amu HD is so mature and profound that numerous commentaries were themselves composed on the Bahamuhd in order to understand it. In the 13th century, Amal Ananda Sarasvati whose teacher was Anupavananda wrote the famous commentary Vedanta-Hilpata on the Bahamuhd, through which the Bahamuhd school gained extraordinary prestige in the field of Advaita Vedanta One. In the 16th century, Api Adhikshita wrote Kalpataru Paramala on Amal Ananda's K. U. L. Pati U. H. Ru and Lachman Rishima wrote the commentary of Hoga 4. In addition, many other commentaries on the Bahamuhd are available, such as Valala, Siris Bama, Titlaka, Akhandanabhuti, Atis, Rijaprak, Shikha, Etuta, Krishna, Tufas, Bahamuhd, Bhavadipika and Subramanya, Shastri's Bahamuhd, Roman, 6th Ayu, Nau, Wan. At places, subtle differences of doctrine between the Bahamuhd and the Kul, Pati, Uah, Thru are visible in these commentaries. Wherever Api Yiddikshita in his Parayamu-Hla found Vachu's Bhati and Amal Ananda to differ from the Shari-Iwaka Bharsha. He refuted them and supported the Shari-Iwaka Bharsha. Lakshmin Rishimha author of the Bhogha. However, sharply criticised this procedure of the Parayamu-Hla and defended the authors of the Bahramu-HD and the Kul Pati Ueshru. Thus, two sub-schools also developed within the Baham-UHD tradition for. This entire body that of commentarial literature demonstrates the intellectual authority that of Vachu's Bhattimisra's original work. Structure and philosophical depth of Gajendra Thakur's Mithaili translation, Gajendra Thacker's work under review. Bar MUHD Chattu Sutri extends from page 1 to page 491 in the cumulative edition and ends with the colfin. Here ends the Chattu Sutri Bar MUHD 3. It contains the invocation of the work, the Advaahsa Barsha introduction and a complete, faithful translation of the entire commentary on the first four sutras of the Brahma Satra Atvato Brahmajigwaya hsr 1.1.1, Janmadyasya Yata 1.1.2, Shastra Wayanitvat 1.1.3, and Tiyuti Tussamaan Vayut 1.1.4.3. The structure of the translation is as follows 1. Cover and publication pages. 2. Amithaile rendering of the original text of Shankara's Udvaiya Hsabhasha. 3. Translation of Vachu's Bhatimis Raa 7 invocatory verses. 4. A complete prose translation of the Bahram UHD commentary on the Udvaiya Hsabhash. 5. A Mithaili rendering of the detailed debate and exposition from the first sutra through the fourth. Nearly one third of the work is devoted solely to the explanation of the Sutra Tyti Samam Vayut, the Saman Veya Tikarana, which contains some of the subtlest discussions of a Vyita epistemology and the nature of liberation and is evidence of the translator's patience and fidelity to the original work 3. Linguistic butyl of V in vocation, the gateway to the Bhātamu HD is formed by its seven in vocatory verses. In translating a philosophical work, Gajendra Thakkar gives priority to preserving meaning rather than preserving meter, and therefore renders these verses in prose 3. In the first verse, Brahman is saluted as of immeasurable bliss and the nature of knowledge and as the maker of the false manifestation of the five elements, having made the two forms of indefinable avidya his ministers. The use of the word minister brings the The political metaphor of the original Sanskrit vividly into Mithaili and points toward the twofold avidya of a V.Y.E. Tuck and Seelman and residual Impression One. The translation of the second verse displays extraordinary beauty in its worldly and native idiom. The Vedas are his breath. The five great elements are his sight. The moving and a moving world is his smile and his sleep is the great dissolution. Near the use of the Mithai Leeward Musky Smile gives the cosmic play an intimate, domestic quality three, the humble declaration of the seventh first just as water from a royal road becomes pure when it falls into the current of the Ganges, so the insignificant words of people like me become sanctified when joined to the Lacharya's composition embodies the classical decorum with which the commentator positions himself three. analysis of the Udhsabhasha, that Chuzhbati Mishra's commentary on Shankaracharya's Udhsabhasha begins with an elaborate pervapaksha. The argument of the opponent is that the ahdmun cannot be the object of inquiry, because inquiry into that about which there is no doubt and knowledge of which serves no purpose is meaningless three. of the poor Vaputcha and its logical refutation. The Laponant argues that the experience of I'aham is undisputed in all beings, from worms and insects to gods and sages, to establish both the absence of doubt in this experience and the uselessness of inquiring into it. The Laponant gives Witty examples, a pot present in bright light and in contact with the visual organ attended by the mind or the teeth of a crow three. Gajendra Thakkar's translation preserves the sharpness of these everyday examples in my thaili, through recognition extending from childhood to old age I, who in childhood took delight with my parents. Now in old age take delight with my grandchildren." The opponent argues for the self-evident existence of an AHT Mun distinct from the body three. The opponent's strongest declaration is, even a thousand scriptures together cannot turn a pot into cloth three. That is, Truti that contradicts direct experience should be taken in a secondary sense. This famous Naya Maxim has been translated in a distinctly Mithaeli cadence, preserving the aggressiveness of the philosophical debate. On the Sedanta side, Vachu's Bhatimis Ra establishes Truti's presentation of the Unconditioned, A.H.D. Munn on the basis of indicators of purports such as beginning, conclusion, and repetition. Knowledge born of Shruti does not destroy the practical validity of perception, it negates only its ultimate validity. Through analysis of figurative usage such as Durgha is crying, and through examples involving the Agnya Hattra of the Khandapayin on my armour, the lion and the pupil, and oil and mustard oil, it is established that secondary usage occurs after cognition of difference but because in the use of I there is no cognition of difference from the body, that use is not secondary but false that is, Adhyasa 3. Discussion of kaya-tive-vijta and establishment of anovachainiya kaya-ti. What is the nature of erroneous cognition? Indian philosophy contains an extensive debate over theories of error in response to this question. In Gajendra Thakkar's translation, this philosophical controversy appears without any loss of argument. 1. Atma Khyati Buddhist Sautranthika slash Vainanavada, denying the reality of an external object and projecting the internal form of cognition outward. 3. 2. A Khyati Mimamsaka prapakaarap failure to apprehend the distinction between memory and perception. The memorial character of memory is lost three. Three. Any athekilati naya, cognition of one existing object in the form of another, as when market silver is cognized in a shell three. Thuchus butimis rarshapli refutes all these positions. Refuting the naeika theory of any athekilati, he remarks sarcastically, are what extraordinary good fortune poor cognition possesses, that it can attain certainty even through falsity. 3. This irony is fully matched by the expressive power of Mithyli. The examples of a banana stalk arising from sugarcane seeds scorched in a forest fire and the digestive fire of a sufferer from Bismarck disease are used to analyse with precision how a defect can give a cause the capacity to produce a different effect. 3. Vuchu's Batimis Raa's self-references. I have already answered this objection in the Nyak and Ika and its detailed discussion should be seen in the Brahmatatha Samhachya are preserved in the translation, revealing the breadth of his literary corpus 3. As the Siddhanta, Vachu's Bhatimisraha establishes any Avakaniya Kiati. Water superimposed upon Reys in a mirage is neither real nor unreal nor both real and unreal because the last alternative is self-contradictory 3. establishment of what is different from both beading and non-beading lies at the heart of Advayita epistemology 4. If the superimposed water were real, the cognition would be in the form rays or water of the Ganga, but the cognition is water here. Mirror appearance is not reality if it were, a thirsty man could descend to the Mandikini with its rising and falling waves seen in the mirage and drink its water. This doctrine is present intact in the Mithai lead translation with its full pictorial force 3. The Self-Luminosity of the A.H.D. Mun and the State of J.E.D. Vahood. A doubt is raised concerning the possibility of a Teasa. How can the non-self be superimposed upon the A.H.D. Mun, which is not an object and is self-luminous? Vachyus Bhatimis Ra argues that if the A.H.D Mun were regarded as inert, a situation would arise like one blind man holding another blind man's hand and falling at every step the fault of an endless chain of the blind three. The postulation of another cognition leads to infinite regress. The vain and avidin doctrine that the object itself shines forth is rejected on the ground that the object appears as limited and gross, whereas illumination appears as internal and unrestricted. After establishing the self-luminosity of the A.H.D. Munn, he the answers in the manner of a mature argument that even upon imperceptible space and undiscriminating child superimposes stain or a huge inverted bowl made of sapphire three. Just as space appears divided because of the limiting adjuncts of pot, jar and vessel, so the condition of being a jiva arises upon the non-objectifiable A.H.D. Munn through the limiting adjuncts of intellect, mind, and body three. The animal analogy for a Teasa fleeing on seeing a man with a raised stick approaching on seeing green grass is so vivid in the Mythaili prose that a clear picture of rural life stands before the reader three. Along with the subtle analysis of superimposed attributes I am mute, one-eyed, deaf and superimposition of the substrate. The introduction to the Luddh-YAH Sabharsha concludes with the commitment that through repeated practice of true knowledge, the impressions of error are eradicated three. 1st Sutra, Athartha Brahma Jig-YAH Sar, therefore, now the desire to know Brahman, the explanation of the first sutra, contains an extensive analysis of atha sequence slash immediacy at a reason and brahma jenasa the compound three one analysis of the word atha the meanings of auspiciousness commencement and entitlement are rejected and the meaning of sequence is established the auspicious sound is illustrated by the sound of a drum or conch and the sight of a water filled picture brought for some other purpose three 2. Refutation of the sequence of ritual action and knowledge. The Mimamsaka Purva Paksha that inquiry into Brahman must follow inquiry into Dharma is vigorously refuted. Liberation is not something produced like a lump of dope, modified like curd, purified by ritual preparation like sprinkling a mortar or attained like obtaining milk by milking three. Action is only the remote aid to dispassion and purification of the intellect. 3. The Fourfold Discipline, Discrimination between the Eternal and Non-Eternal Dispassion toward Enjoyment Here and Hereafter The Sixfold Wealth beginning with Tranquility and Restraint and the Desire for Liberation. In this section, livelier examples are used against arguments opposed to dispassions such as bringing a fish with bones and taking the edible portion. Grain with husk. Not abandoning seed for fear of wild animals. And not abandoning food for fear of beggars making the Mithaili pros an extraordinary celebration of lived imagery three. Even the finest cook cannot separate poison from food in which poison has been mixed with honey and eat only the honey this example links ordinary practical intelligence to Vedanta three. Or the compound in Brahmajanasa, the interpretation inquiry for Brahman as a dative compound is rejected and inquiry into Brahman as a genitive tapyrusha is established. It is demonstrated by Katiayana's rule as in wood for the sacrificial post. This is historically important because Vachyus Bhati here refutes the pre-Shankaran tradition of commentators 3. Sutra Jamma Gyaseya Yatta, from which the birth and so forth of this world proceed. The opponent asks how Brahman can be defined by the characteristics of a limited, inert, and perishable world. As Siddhanta, an indirect defining mark is established, just as reaching different places is a mark of the sun's movement three. The new to gender in Gemmadi is a The matter of grammatical economy. Yask is six modifications of being birth, existence, growth, transformation, decline and destruction are subsumed under origination, continuance and destruction dissolution with growth included in origination and decline in destruction three. To establish an omniscient and omnipotent cause, striking natural examples are given of the world's fixed order, the birth of the black buck in a particular region, the who's call at a particular season, and the impregnation of the crane through thunder at the beginning of the rains for a particular cause. This nature image has been translated into Maithaile with its native fragrance in tact 3. In this sutra it is established that the sutra is not an independent inferential proof, but points to the Brijvaruna Dialg in the Teitiri Yashruti and to Upanishadic Statements 3. analogy of the rope serving as the material basis for the snake together with avadiya. Brahman together with avadiya is established as the material cause three. Third Sutra, Shastra, Wyonitvaat. Because it is the source of scripture, two scripturally accepted interpretations of this sutra are presented. One Brahman as the cause of scripture. Brahman is the womb or source of the vast body of scripture, filled with countless branches of knowledge such as the Rig Veda and illuminating all things like a torch. Just as Panini's knowledge is more extensive than his grammatical treatise what then can be said of the knowledge of the creator of the universe, the example of the ineffable differences among the sweetness of sugarcane juice, milk and jaggery indicates the superiority of the speaker's knowledge to what can be expressed. The Mithaili saying Bali pudding is not salty is used to indicate very little effort three. Two, scripture as the proof of Brahman, scripture is the source, that is, the means of knowledge of Brahman. Brahman is known only through scripture, not through independent inference three. The reconciliation between the J. Y. E. Myne tradition and the followers of Vyasa in the discussion of the itinality of the Vedda is remarkable. A mimamsaka who holds phonemes to be eternal must still accept the non-itinality of words and sentences in their specific sequence. The order of Vedic recitation in the teacher-pupil tradition is clarified through the example of a dance teacher and the pupil's movements. In no creation does Braumaniaside become a cause of merit, nor an ash-emd her a cause of sin, just as fire never wets and water never burns. This subtle discussion of fixed natural properties is made readily intelligible in Mayfelly III. Sutra T. Utti to Samman Vayut. The Samanvayad Hikharana occupies nearly one-third of the entire work and contains its most concentrated philosophical debate three. The Purva Paksha takes the injunction-oriented character of Purva Mimamsa as its basis. The purpose of scripture is to teach action. The Mimamsaka attempts to regard Vedantic statements as an injunction to meditate on Brahman for one who desires immortality Pratapattvidhai is presented. Statements about already existing things such as there is fruit on the riverbank are treated as redundant in an attempt to dismiss their independent purpose three. Siddhantatsa Mahanvayya and intrinsic validity. The Siddhanta side establishes by beginning conclusion and other indicators of purport including recollection of the Upamshayaja principle that all Vedantic statements converge upon Brahman with a single purport. In Adhvī Vaita philosophy, knowledge is object determined, not person determined as action is three. The immutable eternity of liberation and the rejection of bhīgayi dhābhīgayi dhābhīgayi āchtā, liberation is not produced by action. If it were produced by action, it would be non-eternal, not-producible, liberation is not a newly produced object like curd or a pot. Not something to be attained through the beautiful analogy of the boatman and boat leaving the changing bank, foam and waves and reaching the quiet middle the ever-attained nature of Brahman is established. Not something to be purified or perfected, both the addition of a quality hibiscus flower dyed with lack-juice and the removal of a defector mirror rubbed with Brick powder are impossible in Brahman. The A. H. D. Mun is denied to be a locus of Action 3. Purity through bathing and sipping water belongs to the empirical Jeeva, just as the heroine's fragrance is superimposed upon her companion 3. The conclusion is, apart from these 4 modes there is no fifth way, not even the shadow of Action can end to liberation apart from knowledge. This line in Gage and Drathakar's translation brings the essence of Adviyaita to completion 3. In this context there is a distinction between immutable eternity and changing continuity. Along with an extended refutation of Beda Padavada, a pot is not said to be a jujube contained in it, and even though Chaitra and Maitra sit on the same seat, Chaitra is not said to be Maitra. One may know from afar that an ornament is gold while not knowing that it is an earing, and the argument exposing the mutual dependence involved in difference and non-difference has been translated without leaving any not unresolved three. The fruitfulness of statements about established reality and philosophy of language, the objection of the perver-pacture was that statements about established realities are fruitless. To refute this, Vachu's Bhati gives an ornate description of Mount Sumeru and the famous story of a Dravidian who did not know the Arya language. When the messenger tells the father, Dvadahtha may your prosperity increase, a son has been born to you. The Dravidian infers the understanding of the sentence from Dvadahtha's horribilation and his face blooming like a fully-opened lotus. This establishes that the power of words can also be learned in relation to established realities. This making argument in the philosophy of language which later became a foundation of Vedantic discussions of verbal cognition flows like a story in Maitre 3. Analysis of negation and Jivan Mukti, a Brahmana should not be killed the negative particles capacity to express absence. The Paryudasa construction in the Prajapati vow do not look at the rising sun, and the analysis of cessation and non-engagement are translated through striking analogies such as, when armour is removed, if no arrow attacks. The warrior's life is not destroyed at once 3. Finally, the distinction between figurative and false eager cognition is drawn the primary meaning of lion in an animal with a mane, and its secondary meaning when applied to a brave man. And Jivamukti is established one who has given up wealth and is free Three from identification with wealth has no fear of theft, just as a snake's discarded slough lies dead and cast off upon an antel, so this body lies there three. The analogy of a chain of the blind for the beginningless relation with the body and the final doctrine. I am Brahman in this knowledge all injunctions and all other means of knowledge come to an end conclude the philosophical debate three. The conclusion also connects the justification for commencing a separate treat is back to the first sutra producing from the standpoint of composition, a ring structure 3. Translation Theory, Language Strategy and Native Idiom. Gage and Drothaka's translation is based on the principle faithful to meaning but independent in expression 3. It does not devilate in the slightest from the original sequence of arguments, examples and Proofs, but the sentence structure is entirely natural to Maithaile. The language strategy of the translation works on three levels. 1. Terminological Precision Technical term such as Adhyasa, Anirvakiniya, Samanad, Karana, Pratyaabhaina, Arthapatti, Kutastha and Upadana are retained but a Maithaile explanation is supplied at their first occurrence This has successfully created a mythile technical vocabulary for mimamsa and vedaanta with far-reaching significance. 2. Mephalization and sentence structure. The long compound laden sentences of Sanskrit are broken into forms such as the point is suppose. What his being said is, and he answers this by the rendering of Sanskrit Narnu as suppose is so consistent that the reader never loses track of the movement between Purvapaksha and Sedanta 3. 3. Native Idiom and Proverb Transforming Sanskrit Logical Maxims Into My Thighly Folk Speech Is The Finest Feature Of The Translation One blind man holds another blind man's hand and falls at every step the defect of a chain of the blind three. Barley Pudding is not salty indicating very little effort three. Even a thousand scriptures together cannot turn a pot into cloth rejection of shruti contrary to experience three. Even a thousand craftsmen cannot make cloth out of a pot three. Inquiry into something meaningless. Like examining the teeth of an arrow three. The native flavour of word choice terms corresponding to light. Darkness, smile. Carp. Ring, slough. Antel. Twilight. Chippard. Husk. Mortar. Weaver. And Potter gives philosophical prose the the scent of lived life. Yet its seriousness is nowhere weakened by excessive rusticity 3, disciplined agreement of gender and number, the consistent use of the respectful verbal form for Brahman, the A.H. T. Munn, and the Lecharya as against the ordinary form, and the consistent restriction of the nuctet to only the two specified dotted retroflex letters attest to the editorial labour of the Audit corrected Edition 3. references, including locations in the Brihadaiyuenyaka and the Bhagavad Gita, increased the book's usefulness for readers. The contribution of Roman 16a Whiteheart and Gajendra Thakur to Mithaili literature. Vachu's Bhatimisra was a faithful, this proud statement is repeated again and again in Mithaili, yet his works were not in Mithaili. Magendrafaco's translation fills that historical absence and turns that pride into a body of accessible text. 3 Roman 6 DAY HE journal established 2000, is in 2229-547X and its book series are building a Maithaeli bridge to classical Sanskrit works. The inclusion of a philosophical work such as the Ba'am'uht proves that Maithaeli it is not merely a vehicle for songs and stories, but is equally capable of carrying the most rigorous scholastic debate three. The inner connection of this translation with MIT Haile's Naya Mimamsa tradition in which Vachu's Bhati himself stands, followed later by the Tathva Sintimani tradition of Gangesha Upadhyaya is clear three. The Bhatamu HD's discussions of error and validity form part of the background to later Navya Naya, therefore the availability of the Bar-M-U-H-D in Mithai Lee represents a reclamation of Amity Hila's own intellectual history. At university level, this work is fit to serve as a foundational text for philosophy courses, research, and training in scholastic debate through the medium of Maitrely III. Editorial Reflections for a Future Edition Amid the overall accuracy revealed by the detailed review. A few subtle editorial points deserve attention in a future edition. The former parochia occurs seven times in the text whereas the correcto parochia occurs four times. It would be desirable to standardize this variation three. The copyright line prints Preety Thacker. The intended form appears to be Preety Thacker three in the enumeration of the three modes of transformation, where the sentence according to the characteristic of dharma three types are stated occurs. The numbered list does not follow immediately and the explanation begins in the next paragraph. A connecting sentence could make the flow easier three. For greater usefulness, a future edition could add a Mithaili Sanskrit glossary of technical terms, typographical differentiation among the sutra, basha and tika levels and and an index of Atikaran as 3. These are suggestions for refinement, not a catalogue of faults. In a vast text extending from page 1 to page 491, the small number of such slips is itself evidence of the success of the audit process 3. Overall evaluation, this pure Maithaile rendering of Ba Muhd Chattusutri by Gage and Drothaka is a standard setting work in the history of Mifaili prose. It accomplishes three tasks at once, it transfers Vachu's Bhattis edifice of reasoning intact into Mifaili, builds a Mifaili model of the technical vocabulary of Mimamsa, Naya and Vedanta, and brings Amiti Hila's own philosophical heritage back into Amiti Hila's own language three. From the sub-list debate on theories of error in the Udh-Yah sub-bhashya to the vast scholastic argument of the Saman Veyadhikarana, no link in the reasoning is broken and nowhere does the language become strained. Because the sequence of examples, pervapacture, reply, renewed objection, resolution, and conclusion is preserved, the reader sees not merely conclusions but the entire process of philosophical debate 3, measured by the standards of Indian poetics. This translation is an exemplar of the quality of Prasada clarity and ease of expression despite profundity of meaning and the evenness of classical prose. A consistent compositional style is one of its abiding qualities 3, just as water from a royal road becomes pure when it falls into the current of the Gang of Vachu's Bhatis humble declaration can be reversed and applied to this translation. The Otaria's stream of the Ganges has now reached the Royal Road of Amity Hila, where every traveller may bathe in it three. This work will remain a reference pillar for Mithaeli philosophical literature for a long time, and readers of this edition will naturally await the arrival in Mithaeli of the rest of the Ba'am-Uhd from the remaining portion of the first chapter through the fourth chapter three. It is a unique confluence of the living force of Advaita Vedanta and the intellectual capacity of the Mithaili language, providing rich material for comparative study to students of epistemology, semantics and philosophy of consciousness 3.

← Transcript index