Theos-Talk Archives (September 1998 Message tt00135)

Not having looked closely at the upanishad & Gaudapada's karika I have
part of it wrong below.  His commentary has 4 chapters.  So the 28 might
have applied to his comment in the second *chapter* -- not on verse 2 of
the Mandukya.  Actually the entire 12 verses are commented on in
Gaudapada's first chapter.

>Page 6 Vol. 1 has Mandukya Upanishad (2.28).  When I first read this I
>thought -- the Mandukya only has 12 verses, what can 2.28 mean?  Well,
>Gaudapada has famous commentary that is often bound together with the
>Upanishad, maybe 2.28 means the 28th verse of commentary on verse 2 of
>the Mandukya.  Nope. There is nothing like "supreme, and not supreme
>(paravara)" in that 28th verse or anywhere near.  However if one goes to
>the Mundaka Up. II, 2, 8 -- there it is.  Now I suppose one can build up
>much good merit with this detective work.  What why not just consider it
>a mistake in editing, proofing, writing etc. of the SD?
>
>By the way, Boris de Zirkoff's edition has it correct.
>
>Best,
>
>--
><> Nicholas Weeks <> am455@lafn.org <> Los Angeles
>	"Men must learn to love the truth before they thoroughly believe it."
>		Blavatsky
>
>
>
>

--
<> Nicholas Weeks <> am455@lafn.org <> Los Angeles
	"Men must learn to love the truth before they thoroughly believe it."
		Blavatsky