engleski

Śaṅkara and the authorship of the Śvetāśvatara- Upaniṣad-Bhāṣya

Traditionally, the Śvetāśvatara-Upaniṣad-Bhāṣya is regarded as the genuine work of Śaṅkara. However, by the 19th century, some authors (P. Regnaud, G. A. Jacob and editors of ĀSS edition) had already expressed their doubt in Śaṅkara’s authorship. M. Narayanaswami Aiyer in 1900–1901 and Hauschild (1927) also rejected Śaṅkara’s authorship. On the other hand, manuscript colophons attribute the work to Śaṅkara-bhagavat(pāda), which conforms to Śaṅkara’s authorship according to Paul Hacker’s criteria, by which non-genuine works are usually ascribed in colophons to Śaṅkara- ācārya. Hacker, however, also doubted the attribution to Śaṅkara, and called for a special investigation of the content of the work. This paper will attempt to implement Hacker’s other set of criteria, through which the terminological peculiarities typical of Śaṅkara’s BSBh will be compared to ŚvUBh. This methodology has already been successfully employed and refined by Sengaku Mayeda, who argued for Śaṅkara's authorship of the Upadeśasāhasrī and commentaries on the Bhagavad-Gītā, Gauḍapādīya-Kārikās, and Kena- Upaniṣad. The results of this research will be somewhat opposite, as some of the terms in ŚvUBh reflect later developments in Advaita thought. As further evidence against Śaṅkara’s authorship, this paper will present quotations from the Prakīrṇādhikāra, a much more recent Vaikhānasa text attributed to the sage Bhṛgu, which possibly places ŚvUBh a few centuries after Śaṅkara.

Śaṅkara ; Advaita ; Vedānta ; Upaniṣad ; Śvetāśvatara ; authorship ; Upaniṣads

nije evidentirano