Pancapadika and Pancapadika Vivaranam with Two Commentaries (A Rare Book)

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

The Pancapadika of Padmapadacarya also known as Sanandana, is a famous commentary on the Brahmasutrabhasya of Sankara Bhagavatpada. There is an equally scholarly commentary on the Pancapadika called Pancapadikavivarana by Sri Prakasatman. This is the nucleus for the development of Advaitic thought known as Vivarana Prasthana as different from the Bhamati Prasthana. The Pancapadika has got two other commentaries, Prabodhaparisodinin by Atmasvarupa and Tatparyarthadyotini by Vijnanatman. The Pancapadika-vivarana itself has been commented upon by Citsukha and Nrsimhas’rama and the commentaries are known as Tatparyadipika and Bhavaprakasika.

It was intended to publish only the commentaries on the Pancapadika and the Vivarana as they have not seen the light of the day till now. Since these commentaries will not be of much use to the public without the original works which are now out of print, they too have been printed in this volume in two parts. The first part contains the Pancapadika and its two commentaries along with Catussutri portion of Brahmasutra-Sankarabhasya as an appendix. In the Sutrabhasya, the portions which have been commented upon by Sri Padmapadacarya have been printed in Antique type. The second part contains the Vivarana and its two commentaries, with references to the pages and lines of the Pancapadika given in the margin.

The available portion of the Pancapadika covers only up to the end of Catussutri portion of the Sutrabhasya. There are reasons to infer that Sri Padmapada should have written the commentary on the entire Sutrabhasya.

1.On page 130 of part I, it is stated by Padmapada. ‘Let us stop with this discussion for the present as this topic will be dealt with fully in its respective place, viz., while dealing with the doctrine of Gautama Buddha in the second Pada of the second chapter.

2.On page 148 of part I, it is stated by Padmapada ‘It will be dealt with during the discussion of the Sutra in the 30th Sutra of the 3rd Pada of the 3rd Adhaya’.
3.Vacaspatimisra, in his Bhamati, discards the views of Padmapada in the interpretation of Vais’vanaradhikarana (1-2-7) and Daharadhikarana (1-3-5)
4.The beginning of Iksatyadhikarana (1-1-5) of the Pancapadika along with an anonimous commentary is found in a manuscript of the Govt. Oriental Manuscripts Library bearing R. No. 3224.
5.On page 293 of Part I in the 4th Varnaka, Padmapada says ‘other reasonings will be proved as fallacious in the respective context and Adhikaranas’.

From the above, it is clear that Padmapada had commented upon the entire Sutrabhasya of Sankara and not only on Catussutri.

There is, however, the view that Padmapada did not comment on the entire Bhasya and that he wrote his commentary only on the first five Pada as evident from the name of the work Pancapadika. This argument is fallacious.

If it was the intention of the author to write a commentary only on five Padas, the name of the Commentary should have been Pancapadikatika and not Pancapadika, which will have a reference only to the Sutrabhasya for five Padas.

The name Pancapadika as applied to the complete commentary can be justified in two ways. Pancapadika literally may mean five ways which have been hinted at by the author himself in the stanza

Refers to the five modes, .viz. (1) the splitting to the words (2) giving the meaning of the words (3) Vigrahavakya (4) explaining the meaning of the words in the proper context of the sentence and (5) objections and reply. The Vigraha of the word Pancapadika is. The same principle has been adopted by Padmapada in his commentary upon the second Sutra, viz.,

The second way of the justification of the name is a follows:- Panca means broad from the root as in the case of Pancanana, Pancapatra etc. The word Pada is derived from the root, the meaning of which is similar to that of the root used in the sense of knowing. Hence Pancapada means an elaborate commentary on the entire Sutrabhasya and not on five Pada only.

The Vivaranakara Prakasatman, however, has written his commentary Vivarana only for the Catussutri portion of the Pancapadika thought he makes the Pratijna verse 7 page 9 of part II. But this has been justified by his commentator (Tattvadipanakara) Akhandananda by the usage which may refer to the burning of a portion only of a village.

The author of the Vivarana has expounded the most important tenets of the Advaita Philosophy in his commentary on the Catussutri portion of the Pancapadika and has also written an independent work called Sarirakanyayasangraha covering the entire field of Advaita. Probably he has not commented on the rest of the Pancapadika as he has expressed what all he had to say in the above two works. The following topics among others are dealt with in the Pancapadika and Vivarana.

1.(Anadi-Bhavarupa-Mulavidya). Mulavidya which is of positive nature and without beginning.

2.(Bhramasthale Anirvacaniy-padarthotpatti.) The production of an indescribable object in the case of Bhrama.

3.(Jnanadhyasarthadhyasatmaka- adhyasadvitayam) The twin Adhyasas, viz., the Super imposition of Jnana and object.

4.In the case of the Adhyasas of Avidya, Antahkarana, Sarira etc., the super-imposition of the above in the reverse order on the Atman which itself is super-imposed upon by the above in the same order.

He also establishes that the above are the views of Sankara Bhagavatpada. This view is accepted by almost all the later writers on Advaita. When such is the case, Nages’abhatta, the famous grammarian, has expressed in his Laghu siddhanta manjusa the following views on Bhrama. The object super-imposed in the case of Bhrama exists in the mind only and not outside. He also refutes Mulavidya, Anirvacaniyapadarthotpatti etc., which are the strong holds of the Advaitins. Strange enough, he goes further to quote Badarayana, Sankarabhagavatpada and Vacaspatimisra in support of his views.

This is, however, not at all correct. The acceptance of Mulavidya and Anirvacaniyapadarthotpatti by Bhagavatpada and his Commentators like Vacaspatimisra and also of the Vartikakara Suresvaracarya has been proved after elaborate discussion in the Sanskrit Introduction by refuting g the views of Nagesa. Even Abhinava Dravidacarya, who was a pupil of both Nages’a Bhatta and, Gauda Brahmananda Sarasvati, accepts Mulavidya.

Following the views of Nages’a, a certain recent author, who wrote Mulavidyanirasa and Sugama a Commentary on Adhaysabhasya before and after taking the order of Sannyasa, has refuted Mulavidya as if he is expressing his own views. Hence they are not dealt with separately.