________________
BHARTṚHARI'S VERSES
rnam par mi hgyur ma rig pas / chu rñog bshin du shugs pa ni / tha dad gzugs su rnam par hjug // 32
131
[Some noteworthy differences: skra sad kyis (keśondukaiḥ) instead of matrābhiḥ; hdir yan rnam ses ni (atrāpi vijñānam eva) instead of idam amṛtam (amalam) brahma.]
Those verses cited in Tibetan versions should be considered as having probably been ascribed to Bhartṛhari. Reasons: (1) Tibetan versions mention the name of the author of the verses as Bhadrahari, Bhadrihari, Bhatahari, Bharitehari or Bhandrihari. These names give ample testimony to the supposition that the original Sanskrit name of the author of those verses was a little difficult to transcribe with Tibetan characters, and so the name must have been Bhartṛhari which could easily corrupted into any one of them.
(2) We can find in the Vakyapadiya by Bhartṛhari the Sanskrit original texts of at least 10 of these verses. As for some of the other verses we find similar verses in the same work.
(3) Bhaṭṭa-Nārāyaṇakaṇṭha ascribed (fr. 11) to Bhartṛhari. Although some of the above-mentioned verses can not be traced in the Vakyapadiya, the Bhartṛharisataka or in collections of lyrical songs ascribed to him, it is possible that he might have composed 20 other works which are not extant now or that some of the verses might have been ascribed to him in later days.21
There are on the other hand some difficulties in identifying Bhadrahari etc. with Bhartṛhari. However these difficulties will be easily solved by the following considerations:
(1) It is a well-known fact that Bhartṛhari adopted the standpoint of emanation-theory (pariņāmavāda), whereas the standpoint made clear in (fr. 11) is, as Nārāyaṇa-kantha asserts, manifestation-theory (vivartavāda). These two standpoints were strictly distinguished from each other by later Vedāntins.22 It seems that the author of (fr. 11) would be different from Bhartṛhari, the author of the Vakyapadiya. However, in the days when these verses were composed these two philosophical standpoints were not strictly distinguished from each other. Bhartṛhari himself used the two terms (pariņāma and vivarta) as nearly the same meaning,23 just as the Brahma-sutras used many similes which
20 The Epigrams Attributed to Bhartṛhari, ed. by D. D. Kosambi (Singhi Jain Series, vol. No. 23). Bombay 1948. This work contains not only the famous three satakas, but also the Vitavṛtta, Vijñānasataka and many other poems ascribed to him.
21 Professor Louis Renou told the author that, according to the information by the late S. Dasgupta the editions of the Vakyapadiya published hithertofore do not contain all the verses of the work, and so it might be possible that those verses not identified by the author are found in unpublished MSS.
22 Paul Deussen: Allgemeine Geschichte der Philosophie I, 1, 4 Aufl., Leipzig 1920, S. 63 f.
23 The author discussed the problem in a Japanese work of his (E. p. 2390). Cf. Paul Hacker: Vivarta, Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur. Abhandlungen der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse, Jahrgang 1953 Nr. 5.
