Table Of ContentT h e Kubjika U panisad
G R O N I N G E N O R I E N T A L S T U D I E S
V O L U M E X
Edited by
H .T . Bakker • A.VV. Entwistle
H. Isaacson • K. R .van Kooij • G .J. Meulenbeld
Editorial Secretary
H .T . Bakker
Advisory Board
H.YV. Bodewitz, I A den • J. Ensink, Groningen
R. E. Emmerick, Hamburg • R. F. Gom brich, Oxford
J .C . Heesterman, Leiden • Ch. Vaudeville, Paris
The Kubjika Upanisad
Edited with a translation, introduction,
notes and appendices by
T eu n G oudriaan & Jan A . Schoterman^
E G B E R T F O R S T E N • G R O N IN G E N
! 9 9 4
Cover design: Françoise Berserik
Cover illustration: H ead o f Goddess C âm undâ,
Bhaktapur M useum , Bhaktapur;
from: Nepal, Runst aus dem Konigreich im Ilimalaja, 1967,
Verlag Aurei Bongers, Recklinghausen
Typesetting and layout: Adriaensen & Barkhuis
This book was printed with financial support from the
N etherlands O rganization for Scientific Research (n w o )
ISBN 9069800675
Copyright © 1994 Egbert I’orsten, G roningen, T h e N etherlands
All rights reserved. No part oj this publication may be reproduced, stored m a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permisson o f the publisher.
PREFACE
The edition and study of the Kubjikâ Upanisad was planned by my colleague Dr
Jan Schoterman. He had been working on it for some time, when untimely death
snatched him away on June 29, 1989. While looking through his documents, 1 be
came impressed by the originality of the Upanisad as a combination of Vedic and
Tantric traditions, but also by the meticulous attention with which Jan had collated
the manuscript sources, established a critical text, and collected a great number of
Vedic and other parallels. I therefore took upon me to finish the project by adding
an annotated translation (making use in many cases o f Jan’s notes) and an introduc
tion. 1 also redacted the critical notes to the text and added Appendixes 1, 2 and 4.
Appendix 3 is Jan’s work.
In the meantime, Jan’s general survey of the Kubjikâ Upanisad has been pub
lished by SUNY Press from Albany, U.S.A. (see the Bibliography: Schoterman
1992). The following Introduction is partly modelled after it, and largely based on
data collected by Jan; it endorses the conclusions reached by him.
The manuscript was prepared for publication by Rob Adriaensen. Harunaga
Isaacson corrected the English and very kindly supplied a number of most sensi
ble suggestions for improvement of details of the translation. On the organizational
level, Hans Bakker has given invaluable assistance.
Our sincere gratitude is due to the National Archives at Kathmandu, Nepal, and
the Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project for their kind permission to make
use of copies from their microfilm collections.
Utrecht, June 29, 1992 Teun Goudriaan
T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s
Abbreviations viii
Introduction 1
Text 15
Translation 71
Appendixes
I Parallels between the Kubjikâ Upanisad and other texts
II Codes for letters and BTjas 156
III A note on the Upanisadic status of the Gaudapâda-Kàrikàs
IV Additional manuscript material of the Kubjikâ Upanisad
Bibliography 167
Index 173
A b b r e v i a t i o n s
AKAV Astâvimsatikarmârcanavidhi, ms Nat. Arch. Nepal 1 -1130/s. 45
ASikhUp Atharvavedasikhâ Upanisad
Ath Atharvaveda-samhitâ (Saunaka recension)
AlhPaip Atharvaveda-samhitâ (Paippalâda recension)
AthPar Atharvaveda-parisista
BÀUp Brhad-âranyaka Upanisad
BhâUp Bhàvanà Upanisad
BraUp Brahmavidyâ Upanisad
ChUp Chândogya Upanisad
GBr Gopatha-brâhmana
HUp Hamsa Upanisad
KMT Kubjikâmatatantra (Kulàlikàmnâya)
KuUp Kubjikâ Upanisad
PraMabh Prakârântara-Mantrâbhidhâna
RV Rgveda-samhitâ
SSS Satsâhasra-samhitâ
S vet Up Svetâsvatara Upanisad
Up Upanisad
ms(s) manuscript(s)
om. omitted in
rep. repeated in
A ms 1-1696/929-338, microfilm, Nat. Archives Kathmandu
B ms H-1871, microfilm, Nat. Archives Kathmandu
C ms E-7329, microfilm, Nat. Archives Kathmandu
A i, Bj corrections in mss A and B
I n t r o d u c t i o n
The Kubjikâ Upanisad and the ‘Atharvanic U pan is ads’
Modem authorities on Indian literary history generally agree that the younger, over
whelmingly metrical and often sectarian Upanisads all belong to the Atharvaveda,
or at least are ascribed to the tradition beginning with that fourth Vedic Sarphita.
Thus, Weber ( 1876, 170), ‘Die Atharvan-Upanishad dagegen reichen bis in die Pu-
ranazeit hinab und treten in ihren Endpunkten direct für sectarische Zwecke in die
Schranken,’ Similarly Deussen (1921, 531), who adds a general characteristic of
this great mass of younger Upanisads: *... sind die Atharvaveda-Upanishad’s . .. der
Ausdruck der Anschauungen mannigfacher neuvedantischer, mystischer, asketis-
cher und sektarischer Gemeinschaften.. . ’
The reason for the inclusion of these later Upanisads in the Atharvavedic corpus
is not, says Deussen ( 1921, 532) that they have a special relation to it on the ground
of their contents, but that the fourth Veda, often considered to be of doubtful status
when compared with the other three Samhitas, did not or could not guard its literary
heritage against newcomers. A similar opinion had been expressed by Wintemitz
(1908, 206), although his suggestion that ‘Atharvavedic’ is equal in value to ‘not
orthodox-brahmanical’ is misleading. It is generally true that the relation between
the Atharvanic Upanisads and the Atharvaveda Samhitâ is purely theoretical (ex
cept perhaps for the relatively frequent mentioning of typically Atharvanic rsis),
with the exception of the Cfdikâ Upanisad, as noted by Bloomfield (1899, 19). As
we shall soon see, the Kubjikâ Upanisad forms another exception.
According to a different view which has to be associated with South India, not
all younger Upanisads belong to the Atharvaveda. In a Telugu edition, dated 1883,
of the 108 Upanisads mentioned by title in the M ukiika Upanisad, only 31 are as
cribed to the Atharvaveda; 32 are connected with the Black Yajurveda, 16 with the
Sümaveda and 10 with the Rgveda.1 In Deussen’s opinion, this division is made in
an entirely haphazard way, and it is indeed not maintained in the Bombay edition
of the 108 Upanisads by Tukàràm Tâtiâ (1895-96). Thus, the Hamsa Upanisad is
there reckoned to the Atharvaveda (earlier to the White Yajurveda). I* seems that
the santi or blessing given at the beginning of an Upanisad has traditionally served
as a criterion forjudging an Upanisad as Atharvanic; the typically Atharvanic santi
would be bhadram kam ebhih srnuyàma de.vâh etc. (Shende 1952, 226). Applying
1 Deussen 1921, 5,14; a list o t'ihe 108 Upanisads appears on p. 532.
