ajAti vAda

sArasvata brAhmaNas of Goa and northern (coastal) Karnataka, who are said to have
immigrated from north India, trace the lineage of the Kavale maTha to gauDapAda, but
not through SankarAcArya. However, one branch of the sArasvata brAhmaNa
community is affiliated to the citrapura maTha, the lineage of which is traced through
SankarAcArya, while yet other (gauDa) sArasvata groups are followers of the dvaita
school.
gauDapAda composed the gauDapAdIya kArikAs (GK), which constitute an expository
text on the mANDUkya upanishad. The GK is divided into four books (prakaraNas),
titled Agama-prakaraNa, vaitathya-prakaraNa, advaita-prakaraNa and alAtaSAntiprakaraNa
respectively. The kArikAs of the first book are traditionally found
interspersed with the prose passages of the mANDUkya upanishad, while the other three
books are separated from the body of the upanishad. Other works that are attributed to
gauDapAda are: sAm.khyakArikA bhAshya, uttaragItA bhAshya, nRsimhottaratApanI
upanishad bhAshya, and a couple of works on SrIvidyA upAsanA - subhAgodaya and
SrIvidyAratnasUtra.
There is a lot of controversy in modern critical scholarship about the identity and the
philosophy of the author(s) of the GK. Thus, there is one opinion that each book is
probably written by a different author. And there is another opinion that all books are
written by the same author. [1] One author traces connections between gauDapAda's
kArikAs and the later pratyabhijnA school of Kashmir Saivism. [2] From the various
vedAnta schools comes another kind of controversy. According to the advaita school, all
four prakaraNas are writings of a human author named gauDapAda, and are therefore
not regarded as Sruti, even though the first prakaraNa is found interspersed with the
sentences of the mANDUkya upanishad. According to the dvaita school, however, 27
kArikAs of the first prakaraNa are not compositions of a human author, and are therefore
as much Sruti as the prose passages of the mANDUkya upanishad.
The most notorious controversy about the GK is about the influence of mahAyAna
buddhism on its author. Curiously enough, even those rival vedAnta schools which
criticize advaita as pracanna-bauddham (buddhism in disguise) do not quote the GK to
substantiate their criticism. However, among modern scholars who are interested in
studying Eastern philosophies such as advaita vedAnta and mahAyAna buddhism, this
has been a hot topic for debate. [3]
It is clear that the GK has been written in the context of a vedAntic dialogue with
various schools of mahAyAna buddhism, more prominently the yogAcAra and
madhyamaka schools. GK IV (alAtaSAnti prakaraNa) refers to the mahAyAna school of
buddhism as agrAyana. Moreover, the very metaphor of the alAtacakra is a peculiarly
buddhist one. The alAtacakra is a burning firebrand that is waved in a circle, creating an
impression of a continuous circle of fire. It is interesting to note here that gauDapAda
characteristically inverts the use of the buddhist metaphor. The buddhist uses the
metaphor to insist that the impression of a continuous circle is an illusion, there being
nothing more than the momentary spatial positions of the burning brand. Hence, from
the buddhist prespective, it is plainly an error to see the burning circle as having any