a Introduction : 1 Gaudapada : His Date, Life, Works etc. ix This raises the question whether the Uttaragitã was written by Gaudapāda himself, along with the commentary. It is not unlikely that Gaudapāda who seems to be indebted to the Bhagavadgitā for many ideas in his Kärikäs, may have thought of emphasising the Yoga element in the Gitā, by writing a supplement to it. The Uttaragitā, besides describing the nature of Brahman, Jivanmukti etc, gives a detailed description of the Nādis, Kundalini etc. (3) सुभगोदयस्तुति-- This is a small Tantric or Sakta work of the Stotra type, containing 52 verses. It begins thus :- भवानि त्वां वन्दे भवमहिषि सञ्चित्सुखवपुः पराकारां देवीममृतलहरीमैन्दवकलाम् | महाकालातीतां कलितसरणीकल्पिततनुं सुधासिन्धोरन्तर्वसतिमनिशं वासरमयीम् ।। It refers to the two schools, समय and कौल of the sāktas and con demns the कौल in no uncertain terms ( तदेतत्कौलानां प्रतिदिनमनुष्टेयमुदितं भवत्या वामाख्यं मलमपि परित्याज्यम्नुभयम् । ४२; ... अतो बाह्या पूजा भवति भगरूपेण च ततो निषिद्धाचारोऽयं निगमविदहोऽनिन्धचरिते । 43). As can be expected, it refers to the पिङ्गला , इडा,चक्र,बिन्दु etc. Verse 31 ककाराकाराभ्यां स्वरगणमवष्टभ्य निखिलं etc. is similar to काकीमुखककारान्त उकारश्चेतनाकृतिः 1 अकारस्य च लुप्तस्य कोऽर्थः संप्रतिपद्यते ।। ( Uttaragita ). On the whole, this small work reveals poetic talents of a high order. It is argued by some that the author of this Tantric or Sakra work must be some other Gaudapāda. We do not think that there is any reasonable ground for such a supposition. As the author of the Karikas had interested himself in the Sänklya and Bauddha philosophical works, he could have been equally interested in the Sakta school which attached so much importance to Yoga in its practical aspect. (4) श्रीविद्यारण्यसूत्र is another Tantric work attributed to Gauda- pāda, as also commentaries on (s) Durgāsaprašati, ( 6 ) Anugită and on (7) Nrsimhottarattapaniyopanişad. The Mandukyopanişad has much in common with the Nrsimhot- taratâpaniyopanişad, and as Gaudapāda had used the Māņdükya as a basis for his Kārikās, tradition seems to have regarded him as the author of the commentary on the Nrsimha as well, 2
