This is the Book KhandanaKhandanaKhadya with translation and commentary.

If you are not able to view the Devanagari, please download sanskrit99 font. And Devanagari is not done completely for the entire book, the first word of the paragraph beginning will be given, follow it with a book.

I have not done the proof-reading too 🙂


KhandanaKhandaKhadya is the highest order of text studied in the philosophy of non-dualism. It forms the triad of AdvaitaSiddhi by Sri Madhusudana Saradwati, Chitsukhi by Sri Chitsukha Muni and finally the text at hand. This is one of the finest treatises which can be given as an example for the logical thinking. Though this may not be the original idea in this line of thought, there were other texts like the tattva-upaplava-simha of Charvaka system, or some texts in the Buddhists school. Nevertheless this is conceived in a proper way and the logic is mind boggling, the least to say.

The Author : the author of this text is Sri SriHarsha (the second Sri is part of his name, distinguished form the first which is for respect), was born to Sri SriHira and Srimati Mamalla Devi. It is important to know the parents, atleast in this case, to better understand the man behind this text. Sri SriHira was a great man of unsurpassed knowledge, when he was visiting some King and there was a debate between a minister of the kingdom and Sri SriHira, in which Sri SriHira was defeated very badly. He wanted a son to take revenge for his loss, and was blessed with Sri SriHarsha. But still, the defeat was not taken lightly by Sri SriHira, and thus his health was affected. In deathbed he took promise from the child Sri SriHarsha to take necessary action to defeat the minister. Thus after the death of his father, Sri SriHarsha left the responsibility of managing the family to the relatives and went to Kashi (Varanasi) for studies, vowing not to return to the homeland before defeating the minister.

He was initiated in the mantra called “Chintamani”, which he meditated upon for five years. There is another story relating to the initiation – his mother wanting the son to fulfill the promise, initiated the boy in “chintamani” mantra (in tantra it is accepted if the mantra pertaining to a female deity is initiated by the mother will bear fruit (siddhi – accomplishment) very soon), after initiating the boy, she made him to sit on her body and slit her throat (some mantras are accepted to produce result if it is chanted sitting upon a corpse). Whatever may be the truth about the initiation, the final truth is he was blessed by the vision of the Goddess Chintamani Devi, who blessed Sri SriHarsha with unlimited knowledge. After this studying the different schools of philosophy was a child’s play, in a very short span of time he acquired mastery over almost all the philosophy.

There is no need to say, he defeated the minister, and it was easy too. He presented himself in front of the King and Minister and sang a song on each one of them, seeing the mastery in the poetry, the minister immediately accepted defeat even before entering into a debate.

But still, the logic he used was beyond the grasp of the common learned men, so his knowledge became a obstacle to gain the desired result. Therefore as per the advice of the deity, he practiced a penance of taking cold shower in the night and eating buffalo’s curd (yogurt). Thus he was able to write a book this simple!

Though there are many other texts written by the same other, this and another poetical text called Naishadiya-Charita still stands the test of time. Naishadiya charita is a text on the story of the king Nishada, written on the request of the King of KanyaKubja, the patron of the author. Though superfluously may sound like a poetical story, is a vedantic treatice written in the style called “dwi-sandna or dwi-arthaka” (double meaning) literature.

This text is called Khandana-Khanda-Khadya because, 1. It negates the different substances accepted by the logic school and which is easily understandable (bhakshya – eatable), 2. Because it negates the kha (space) etc. substance, 3. But the important meaning of the name is, there is medicine called khanda-khadya accepted in the ayurvedic text which improves the immune system and gives good health, destroying any type of disease.

This is also called as Anirvacaniyata-Sarvasva. Nirvacaniya means explicable, anirvacaniya means in-explicable and Sarvasva means everything. Thus it means, everything here is inexplicable, which is the basic principle of advaita Vedanta, anirvacaniya-vada.

The text is written in keeping with the cannon of the nyaya school, “maana-adhina meya  siddhi, maana siddhi ca lakshanaat” (the object is dependent upon the means of right knowledge, which in turn is dependent on the definition). This is accepted by the logicians to negate the Buddhists, who negate everything from the standpoint of (shunyavada” (voidism – the basic tenet of madhyamika buddhusts). They say “na pratignaa maatrena vastusiddhi” (just by naming the object cannot be established, but by the definition and means of right knowledge). Though the logic school in general is negated, since the minister one who defeated the author’s father is Sri Udayana who is a follower of Sri Udhayanacharya’s Vaisheshika school, the author negates them both. It may also be interpreted as the anger for the very name.

Therefore, Sri SriHarsha, rattled their basic idea by negating the base for all this “lakshana” (definition). Without a definition nothing can be established. And he declares, whoever desires to win a debate if he follows this process of logic explained in this book or repeats the same lines given here, will win the debate.

This book is written in four parts, and like advaitasiddhi or other famous Vedanta text does not follow the naming convention of Brahma Sutra, which is Samanvaya, Avirodha, Saadhana and Phala (corroborating. non-contadictory, practice and result). Some opine this is loosely based on the logical school text with three chapters. But the acharya has a style of his own, which he follows-up here in the case of the chapters too. Each chapter condemns different aspect 1. Pramaana-Tadaabhasa, 2. Nigraha-Sthaana, 3. Sarvanaama-Artha and 4. Avashesha-Lakshana.

  1. Pramaana-Tada-Aabhasa-Anirukti – this is the biggest of the chapters, here he condemns the pramaanas (in this case as in mimamsa, 6 pramaanas only) and things related to it.
  2. Nigraha-sthaana-anirukti – there are different nigra-sthaanas, place which the opponent falters. Like, when he gives a wrong reply, not following his philosophy, taking a lot of time etc, if pointed out by the other causes the defeat of the opponent.
  3. Sarvanaama-artha-anirukti – the meaning of the pronoun, here only ‘kim’ is discussed.
  4. Avashesha-lakshana-anirukti – the rest of the definition is negated.

We include the Devanagari version of the Text, along with the translation in Italics and commentary in plain text.


Categories: KhandanaKhandanaKhadya, Vedanta | Comments Off on KhandanaKhandanaKhadya-1

Guru Poornima 2016

This year the Guru poornima celebrations was held at chennai, in the same venue as the previous three occasions, Villivakkam Sri Kamakoti hall.

The main event started as usual with the chant of Totakashtakam and Guru Stotra, followed by Vyasa Puja and Guru Puja.

But, above all the main part I was waiting, for so long, happened right after a small lecture by Swami Tatpurushananda Puri ji, that is the unveiling of the Statue of Shri Shankaracharya. The statue is made-up of Gypsum material, roughly 4.5 inch statue, in white colour (as opposed to the colour statue which was decided earlier), with a separable staff (danda) for Acharya. The statue prepared by Guru and Co, chennai (please visit Sri Ganesh Iyer at a very reasonable cost of Rs. 100 per statue (though i charge them a hefty price, chanting of Totakashtakam slokas daily, which is distributed along with the statue). And Sri Ganesh Iyer has consented to take-up small orders too, as part of his Seva.

This I mention here because, instead of this becoming an one time event, want it to be a viral event, for the people to carry forward. One can contact Mr. Ganesh Iyer directly (Cell number – +91 98 41 92 57 98), and place the orders and distribute it to the devotees, remember I am not saying, if you do it so and so and not do it so and so :).

Why this Murthy and why should one do this? We should be thankful to our indian Democracy (i am not saying democrazy), to read, write and speak anything and everything without any fear, even the fear of  “the nation wants to know” :). This is and was the freedom even in our earlier days, which has given us multiple theologies and philosophies. This in spite of the “so called” secular brigade, which was always there. We owe this freedom to Bhagavan Bhashyakara Shri Shankaracharya. Otherwise, we probably would have lost our tradition long ago, and would have been converted to Buddhism or whatever. When asked do you know, Shankaracharya, many don’t know and few people point out to the photo of Sri Chandrashekaredra Saraswati or the likes who sat in the Peetha of Shankaracharya.  This is our pitiable condition, who call ourselves Hindus.

Who should do this? Any Hindu Asthika, irrespective of the form or cult he / she follows. Because, as we said, we are shaiva, shakta, vaishnava, madhva etc, is all because of the humongous task of Bhagavan Bhashyakara. Only because there was a vaidic tradition, one had the freedom to debate the philosophy and thereby come with the new form of system of philosophy.


Acharya Murthy

Acharya Murthy


This was followed by the releasing of the Sticker and Totakashtakam book.

Totakashtakam Book

Totakashtakam Book


English Sticker

English Sticker


Tamil Sticker

Tamil Sticker





Categories: General | Comments Off on Guru Poornima 2016

AdvaitaSiddhi – Lecture 13 – Part 2

Na cha asatiativyapti,

Just because, the eternal non-existence of something is being discussed, one should not levy a charge of ativyapti against the Advaitin. Why? The revered author clarifies this:


It is not  that here the knowledge takes place without any corresponding cognition(pratite) of existence.  In the definition we have to accept “sattwenpratitiarhatwa” as an adjective. Mithya objects unlike asat objects appear to be existent though they are actually adjuncts of absolute non-existence in their locus of appearance.

The dualist now raises a new objection:

Na chatadaiyke ahu asatevamidamagreasititishrutyaasatasattwapratitetatraativyaptidushpariharaitivachyam.

According to the follower of the Madhwa School, even addition of “satwenpartitiarhatwang”-that which appears to be existent, to the definition of revered Chitsulkhacharya does not solve the problem of a too broad definition (ativyapti). This is because shruti itself says “asatamidamagreasit”- prior to creation there was only non-existence (and that was cognizable). So even absolute non-existence can be cognized as existence and thus it cannot be meaning fully distinguished from mihyatwa. However,MadhusudanaSaraswatiji says- na cha vachyam-don’t say like this as it is not logical.

“sadevasouymyaidamagreasit” ityasyaarthasyaabhavaevananjpratipadiyatenatuasatasatyamvirodhat,

The shruti says itself that whatever exists is nothing but existence. So if the interpretation of the dualist is accepted then shruti would become contradictory. Thus “asat” in the first sentence quoted above does not imply absolute non-existecne but only apparent absence of Existence, and is thus equivalent to mithyatwa.

atonaativyaptisarvam cha nyatpurvauktamevaanusandhyemitiuparamyate.

Thus there is no ativyaptidosha. All other remaining doubts has been clarified in the second definition of falsity.[1]


Here ends the discussion on the fourth definition of falsity.

Sadviviktamvamithyatwam. Sattwang cha pramanasiddhatwam.Pramang cha doshasahakritajnankaranatwam,  tenswapnadivatpramanasiddhabhinatwammithyatwamsidhyati.

This is the fifth and the final definition of falsity.Sadviviktatwam-that which is different from sat is what is mithya. Here sat means that which is having sattwa(existence ness) and that is which is –pramanasiddhatwam. Nyayamritakara had given various definitions of sat in this context, and had refuted them. MadhusudanaSaraswatiji , does not accept any of those definitions and says that which is sat is –pramanasiddhatwam- that which is proved through pramanas. Pramana cha doshaasahakritamjnanakaranatwam- Pramana is that which is the means of knowledge and does not have any fault in them. So, that which is associated with error, like nidradoshha, cannot be a pramana, like the knowledge gained through dreams. So mithyatwa is doshasahakrita jnana karanatwam.

Pramanasiddhyatwam cha avadhyavypyamitianyat.

Moreover pramanasiddhyatwa is avadhyatwavapyam. Whatever is known by means of right knowledge  that has avadhyatwa- non-negtability.

Atrapiasatinirdharmakabrahmani cha ativyaptivaranayasattwenpratiyamanatwamvisheshanamdeyam, tayosattwaprkarakpratitivishyatwaabhavat.

Now Brahman does not have existence as attribute, but is nirdharmaka-without any attributes. So in that sense it is also satviviktwam and hence becomes mithya. Moreover asat-absolute non existence is also different from existence and thus would get incorporated within the category of mithyatwa. To remove Brahman and ast from the category of mithya, an adjective of “sattwenpratitiarhatwang” should be added to the definition  “sat viviktwam”. This is because there is no sattwapratitiprakara in Brahman and asat as they never appear to be sattwa.


Nyaymritakara asks in His text, that whetehr it has sattajati in the adhikarana that is being discussed, or  issatta that which is non-negatable, or is satta identical to Brahman.[2]

Adoughatadouavidyakjatiabhiyupagamenasambhava, dwitiyevadyatwarupamithyatwaparyavasanamtriteyesiddhasadhanamitinirastam

In pot etc it is accepted, that the class that exists is avidyaka-jati-a class characterised by avidya. So here sattwajati cannot be there. However, this argument is not correct. It is not because of the pot existence is there, but it is on Existence the pot has been superimposed[3]. The second point was avadytwa-If one accepts satwa to be avadytwa, then finally it will be reduced to vadytwa, as jagat is mithya and hence vadya. If the third poition is accepted then there is siddhasadhanadosha as Brahman is already accepted to be different from jagat.


So all these three positions are not accepted by Advaitins but pramnasiddhatwam is accepted to be definition of the falsity.


All the discussions that took place while analysing the first definition of falsity, sad-asadvilakshanatwam (not beng the locus of existence and non-existence) can be incorporated here to answer the relevant doubts raised by Nyayamritakara. If some doubt still persists, those will be clarified (MadhusudanaSaraswatiji says) on the chapter on drishtanta-the example.

Here ends the discussion on the fifth definition of falsity.

In the text called Shatadushani, seven definitions for falsity/mithyatwa was chosen and all of them were condemned. Among them only five definitions of falsity that have been discussed above are considered to be error free by the knowers of tradition.



[1] Since these definitions are very similar.

[2]Because Brahman is often referred as sat-chid-ananda.

[3] In advaita Vedanta existence is not simply an attribute.



PancaMithyatve (the five definitions of Mithya-ness) my Dream / Pet project written by Shri Rajit Biswas  who wrote these  after listening the Lectures comes to an end.



Categories: AdvaitaSiddhi, Vedanta | Comments Off on AdvaitaSiddhi – Lecture 13 – Part 2