Negative Flashes of Neti Neti and Realisation of Brahman

The M≈´rtƒÅm≈´rtabrƒÅhma·πáa (II.3) of the B·πõhadƒÅra·πáyakopani·π£ad introduces the néti néti formula and explains it. From Sanskrit commentaries we can gather that this formula was traditionally interpreted in two ways. The second of them, the one adopted by ≈öa·πÖkara, has become the favourite of most of the modern translations; the first interpretation has not attracted the attention of a modern scholar.

On the other hand, a very competent scholar like Geldner (1928) has made an exception and interpreted the formula in an extra-ingenious way, as double negation, which was never considered in the tradition. This interpretation has now been revived in Slaje 2009. This asks us to re-examine the issue, and I will do so in my lecture by rereading the related portions of the Bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣad.

Diwakar Acharya (b. 1969) studied Sanskrit with traditional teachers, beginning with his father, and at universities in Nepal and India (MA from Sampurnananda Sanskrit University, Varanasi), before starting his teaching career as a Lecturer at Mahendra Sanskrit University. He has also worked for the Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project, and for the Nepalese-German Manuscript Cataloguing Project. In 2004 he was awarded a Ph.D. by the University of Hamburg for a thesis on VƒÅcaspati Mi≈õra’s Tattvasamƒ´k·π£ƒÅ. A revised version of this was published in 2006. Since April 2006 he has been a Visiting Foreign Lecturer at Kyoto University. His research covers a wide range of topics in Sanskrit literature, Sanskritic religious and philosophical traditions, and Nepalese history. He is currently working on what appears to be the only surviving Solar (Saura) tantra, and on two unpublished early PañcarƒÅtra (Vai·π£·πáava tantric) scriptures—all of these works he discovered in early Nepalese palm-leaf manuscripts. He is also a contributor to the TƒÅntrikƒÅbhidhƒÅnako≈õa.