________________
xi] Philosophy of Bādarāyaṇa and Bhartyprapañca 43 world through His powers, transcended it at the same time, and remained as its controller, and punished or rewarded the created mundane souls in accordance with their bad and good deeds.
The doctrine of bhedābheda-rāda is certainly prior to Sankara, as it is the dominant view of most of the purāņas. It seems probable also that Bhartsprapañca refers to Bodhāyana, who is referred to as vrttikāra by Rāmānuja, and as vrttikāra and Upavarşa by Sankara, and to Dramiņācārya, referred to by Sankara and Rāmānuja; all held some form of bhedābheda doctrine?. Bhartạprapañca has been referred to by Sankara in his commentary on the Byhadāraṇyaka Upanişad; and Anandajñāna, in his commentary on Sankara's commentary, gives a number of extracts from Bhartsprapanca's Bhāsya on the Brhadāranyaka Upanişad. Prof. M. Hiriyanna collected these fragments in a paper read before the Third Oriental Congress in Madras, 1924, and there he describes Bhartrprapanca's philosophy as follows. The doctrine of Bhartrprapanca is monism, and it is of the bhedābheda type. The relation between Brahman and the jīva, as that between Brahman and the world, is one of identity in difference. An implication of this view is that both the jīva and the physical world evolve out of Brahman, so that the doctrine may be described as Brahma-pariņāma-vāda. On the spiritual side Brahman is transformed into the antaryāmin and the jiva; on the physical side into avyakta, sūtra, virāj and devatā, which are all cosmic; and jāti and pinda, which are not
1 Prof. S. Kuppusvāmi Sāstri, in an article read before the Third Oriental Conference, quotes a passage from Venkata's Tattva-tīkā on Ramanuja's commentary on the Brahma-sutras, in which he says that Upavarşa is a name of Bodhāyana-yrttikārasya Bodhāyanasyaita hi Upavarsa iti syān näma-Proceedings of the Third Oriental Conference, Madras, 1924. The commentators on Sankara's Bhāsya say that, when he refers to Vịttikāra in 1. i. 9, 1. i. 23, 1. ii. 23 and 11. ii. 53, he refers to Upavarşa by name. From the views of Upavarşa referred to in these sūtras it appears that Upavarşa believed in the theory of jñāna-karma-samuccaya, held also by Bhāskara (an adherent of the bhedabheda theory), Rāmānuja and others, but vehemently opposed by Sankara, who wanted to repudiate the idea of his opponents that the performance of sacrificial and Vedic duties could be conceived as a preliminary preparation for making oneself fit for Brahma-knowledge.
References to Dramidācārya's commentary on the Chāndogya Upanişad are made by Anandagiri in his commentary on Sankara's commentary on the Chāndogya Upanişad. In the commentary of Sarvajñātma Muni's Samksepa-śāriraka, 1!1. 217-227, by Nșsimhāśrama, the Vākyakāra referred to by Sarvajñātma Muni as Atreya has been identified with Brahmanandin or Tanka and the bhāsyakāra (a quotation from whose Bhāsy'a appears in Samkşepa-śārīraka, III. 221, "antargunā bhagavati paradevateti," is referred to as a quotation from Dramidācārva in Rāmānuja's Vedārtha-samgraha, p. 138, Pandit edition) is identified with Draniidācārya, who wrote a commentary on Brahmanandin's Chandogyopani şad-vārttika.
