On the Authenticity of Prose Writings Attributed to Śaṅkara

• Authors: Ivan Andrijanić , Jacek Bąkowski

Abstracts

EN

Śaṅkara is traditionally considered the author of an exceptionally large number of works. Indological scholarship has attempted to filter out some of these works within traditional philological and historical frameworks. Many were, however, taken for granted to be authentic, and no serious research into their authenticity has been conducted. This paper attempts a computational stylometric approach to establish the authenticity of prose commentaries attributed to Śaṅkara. The General Imposters (GI) framework appears to be the most suitable existing method developed for the purpose of verifying authorship. The GI calculates the statistical distance between certain texts’ features and estimates whether the disputed text is closer to the candidate author than to a set of texts that may not have been composed by him. The paper also presents a machine-based method for separating the words and resolving the sandhi in the Sanskrit text, crucial for the procedure. The success rate in verifying authors of undisputed texts appears to be acceptable enough to proceed to the next step, where 18 prose commentaries traditionally attributed to Śaṅkara are subjected to the GI verification procedure. The result conforms to the most conservative assessments of Śaṅkara’s authorship; GI verified the authenticity of the commentaries on the principal Upaniṣads (with the exception of the commentary on the Śvetāśvataropaniṣad) and on the Bhagavadgītā. Besides these, commentaries on the Nṛsiṃha-(pūrva)-tāpanīyopaniṣad and the Adhyātmapaṭala were, rather unexpectedly, also successfully verified as genuine works of Śaṅkara.

Keywords

EN

authorship; stylometry; Advaita; Vedānta

• Publisher: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Kultur Śródziemnomorskich i Orientalnych PAN
• Journal: Acta Asiatica Varsoviensia
• Year: 2023
• Issue: 36
• Pages: 5-38

Dates

published

2023

Contributors

author

Ivan Andrijanić

• University of Zagreb, Croatia

author

Jacek Bąkowski

• Institute of Polish Language, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland

References

• Andrijanić, Ivan 2019. “Śaṅkara and the authorship of ŚvetāśvataropaniṣadBhāṣya”. The Journal of Hindu Studies 12(3): 273–291. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhs/hiy014
• Andrijanić, Ivan 2020a. “Śaṅkara and the Authorship of the Īśopaniṣadbhāṣya and the Kaṭhopaniṣadbhāṣya”. International Journal of Hindu Studies 24: 257–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11407-020-09279-z
• Andrijanić, Ivan 2020b. “The authorship of the Chāndogyopaniṣad-Bhāṣya: A stylometric approach”. [In:] Michalak-Pikulska, Barbara, Marek Piela and Tomasz Majtczak, eds, Oriental Languages and Civilizations. Cracow: Jagiellonian University Press, pp. 103–116.
• Bader, Jonathan 2000. Conquest of the Four Quarters. Traditional Accounts of the Life of Śaṅkara. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan.
• Belvalkar, S. K. 1929. Shree Gopal Basu Mallik Lectures on Vedānta Philosophy. Part one: Lectures 1–6. Poona: Bilvakuñja Publishing House.
• Belvalkar, S. K. 1930. “An Authentic but Unpublished Work of Śaṅkarācārya”. Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 6: 241–246.
• Burrows John 2002. “‘Delta’: a Measure of Stylistic Difference and a Guide to Likely Authorship”. Literary and Linguistic Computing 17(3): 267–287. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/17.3.267
• Daelemans, Walter 2013. “Explanation in Computational Stylometry”. [In:] Gelbukh, Alexander, ed., Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing. Vol. 2. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 451–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642
• David, Hugo 2017. “Towards a Critical Edition of Śaṅkara’s ‘Longer’ Aitareyopaniṣadbhāṣya: a Preliminary Report Based on Two Cambridge Manuscripts”. [In:] Vergiani, Vincenzo, Daniele Cuneo and Camillo A. Formigatti, eds, Indic Manuscript Cultures through the Ages: Material, Textual, and Historical Investigations. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, pp. 727–754. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110543100-022
• Eder, Maciej 2015. “Does size matter? Authorship attribution, small samples, big problem”. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 30(2): 167–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqt066
• Eder, Maciej 2018. “Authorship verification with the package stylo”. https://computationalstylistics.github.io/docs/imposters (accessed 18 January 2024).
• Eder, Maciej, Jan Rybicki and Mike Kestemont 2016. “Stylometry with R: a package for computational text analysis”. R Journal 8(1): 107–21. https://doi.org/10.32614/RJ-2016-007
• Evert, Stefan, Thomas Proisl, Fotis Jannidis, Isabella Reger, Steffen Pielström, Christof Schöch and Thorsten Vitt 2017. “Understanding and explaining Delta measures for authorship attribution”. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 32 (suppl. 2), ii4–ii16. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx023
• Hacker, Paul 1950. “Eigentümlichkeiten der Lehre und Terminologie Śaṅkaras: Avidyā, Nāmarūpa, Māyā, Īśvara”. Zeitschrift der Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 100: 246–286. Reprinted in Kleine Schriften, 1978, Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, pp. 69–109.
• Hacker, Paul 1951. Untersuchungen über Texte des frühen Advaitavāda. 1. Die Schüler Śaṅkara’s. Wiesbaden: Verlag der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur in Mainz: Franz Steiner Verlag.
• Hacker, Paul 1968–1969. “Śaṅkara der Yogin und Śaṅkara der Advaitin. Einige Beobachtungen”. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- und Ostasiens 12–13 (Festschrift für Erich Frauwallner): 119–148.
• Hacker, Paul 1972. “Notes on the Māṇḍūkyopaniṣad and Śaṅkara’s Āgamaśāstravivaraṇa”. [In:] Ensink, J. and P. Gaeffke, eds, India Maior. Congratulation Volume Presented to J. Gonda. Leiden: Brill, pp. 115–132.
• Hacker, Paul 1978. “Śaṅkarācārya and Śaṅkarabhagavatpāda. Preliminary remarks concerning the authorship problem” (Korrigierte Neufassung). [In:] Hacker, Paul, Kleine Schriften. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, pp. 41–59. Originally published in New Indian Antiquary 9 (1947): 175–186.
• Harimoto, Kengo 2006. “The date of Śaṅkara: Between the Cāḷukyas and the Rāṣṭrakūtas”. Journal of Indological Studies 18: 85–111.
• Harimoto, Kengo 2014. God, Reason, and Yoga: A Critical Edition and Translation of the Commentary Ascribed to Śaṅkara on Pātañjalayogaśāstra 1.23–28. Hamburg: Department of Indian and Tibetan Studies, University of Hamburg.
• Hellwig, Oliver 2016. “Detecting sentence boundaries in Sanskrit texts”. [In:] Matsumoto, Yuji and Rashmi Prasad, eds, Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers. Osaka: The COLING 2016 Organizing Committee, pp. 288–297. http://aclweb.org/anthology/C16-1028 (accessed 18 January 2024).
• Hellwig, Oliver and Sebastian Nehrdich 2018. “Sanskrit Word Segmentation Using Character-level Recurrent and Convolutional Neural Networks”. [In:] Riloff, Ellen, David Chiang, Julia Hockenmaier and Jun’ichi Tsujii, eds, Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Brussels: Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 2754–2763. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D18-1295
• Holmes, David I. 1994. “Authorship Attribution”. Computers and Humanities 28 (2): 87–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01830689
• Houvardas, John and Efstathios Stamatatos 2006. “N-Gram Feature Selection for Authorship Identification”. [In:] Euzenat, J. and J. Domingue, eds, Proceedings of Artificial Intelligence: Methodologies, Systems, and Applications (AIMSA 2006). Springer, pp. 77–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/11861461_10
• Jacob, George A. 1886. “The Nṛsiṃhatāpanīya-Upaniṣad”. The Indian Antiquary: A Journal of Oriental Research 15: 69–74.
• Jannidis, Fotis, Steffen Pielström, Christof Schöch and Thorsten Vitt 2015. “Improving Burrow’s Delta – An empirical evaluation of text distance measures”. [In:] Digital Humanities Conference. Sydney: University of Western Sydney.
• Juola, Patrick 2006. “Authorship Attribution”. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval 1(3): 233–334. https://doi.org/10.1561/1500000005
• Kestemont, Mike 2014. “Function Words in Authorship Attribution. From Black Magic to Theory?” [In:] Feldman, Anna, Anna Kazantseva and Stan Szpakowicz, eds, Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Literature (CLFL). Gothenburg, Sweden: Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 59–66. https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/W14-0908
• Kestemont, Mike, Walter Daelemans and Dominiek Sandra 2012. “Robust Rhymes? The Stability of Authorial Style in Medieval Narratives”. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 19(1): 54–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2012.638796
• Kestemont, Mike, Justin Stover, Moshe Koppel, Folgert Karsdorp and Walter Daelemans 2016. “Authenticating the Writings of Julius Caesar”. Expert Systems With Applications 63: 86–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.06.029
• Kitagawa, Yoshiaki and Mamoru Komachi 2017. “Long Short-Term Memory for Japanese Word Segmentation”. [In:] 32nd Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation Hong Kong, 1–3 December 2018. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1709.08011
• Koppel, Moshe, Jonathan Schler and Shlomo Argamon 2009. “Computational methods in authorship attribution”. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60 (1): 9–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20961
• Koppel, Moshe and Yaron Winter. 2014. “Determining if two documents are written by the same author”. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 65(1): 178–187. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22954
• Krishna, Amrith, Bishal Santra, Pavankumar Satuluri, Sasi Prasanth Bandaru, Bhumi Faldu, Yajuvendra Singh and Pawan Goyal 2016. “Word Segmentation in Sanskrit Using Path Constrained Random Walks”. [In:] Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers, Osaka: COLING 2016 Organizing Committee, pp. 494–504.
• Legget, Trevor 1978. The Chapter of the Self. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
• Love, Harold 2002. Attributing Authorship: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511483165
• Lutosławski, Wincenty 1898. “Principes de stylométrie appliqués à lachronologie des œuvres de Platon”. Revue des Études Grecques 11 (Fasc. 41): 61–81. https://doi.org/10.3406/reg.1898.5847
• Luyckx, Kim and Walter Daelemans 2011. “The effect of author set size and data size in authorship attribution”. Literary and Linguistic Computing 26(1): 35–55. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqq013
• Marschner, Käthe 1933. Zur Verfasserfrage des dem Śaṅkarācārya zugeschriebenen Bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣad-Bhāṣya. Berlin-Charlottenburg: Alfred Lindner Verlag.
• Mayeda, Sengaku 1965a. “The Authenticity of the Bhagavadgītābhāṣya ascribed to Śaṅkara”. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens und Archiv für indische Philosophie 9: 155–197.
• Mayeda, Sengaku 1965b. “The Authenticity of the Upadeśasāhasrī Ascribed to Śaṅkara”. Journal of the American Oriental Society 85(2): 178–196. https://doi.org/10.2307/597989
• Mayeda, Sengaku 1967. “On Śaṅkara’s Authorship of the Kenopaniṣadbhāṣya”. Indo-Iranian Journal, 10(1): 33–55. https://doi.org/10.1163/000000068792937937
• Mayeda, Sengaku 1967–1968. “On the author of the Māṇḍūkyopaniṣad and the Gauḍapādīyabhāṣya”. Adyar Library Bulletin 31–32: 73–94.
• Mayeda, Sengaku, ed. and trans. 2006. Śaṅkara’s Upadeśasāhasrī. Vols I and II. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
• Moisl, Hermann 2015. Cluster Analysis for Corpus Linguistics. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110363814
• Morrow, Daniel G. 1986. “Grammatical Morphemes and Conceptual Structure in Discourse Processing”. Cognitive Science 10(4): 423–455. https://doi .org/10.1207/s15516709cog1004_2
• Nakamura, Hajime 1983. A History of Early Vedānta Philosophy. Part One. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Palmer, David D. 2010. “Text Preprocessing”. [In:] Indurkhya, Nitin and Fred J. Damerau, eds, Handbook of Natural Language Processing. 2nd edition. A Chapman & Hall Book.
• Pande, G. C. 1994. Life and Thought of Śaṅkarācārya. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
• Peñas, Anselmo and Alvaro Rodrigo 2011. “A Simple Measure to Assess Nonresponse”. [In:] Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, vol. 1. Portland, Oregon: Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 1415– 1424.
• Potha, Nektaria and Efstathio Stamatatos 2017. “An Improved Impostors Method for Authorship Verification”. [In:] Jones, G. J. F., S. Lawless, J. Gonzalo, L. Kelly, L. Goeuriot, T. Mandl, L. Cappellato and N. Ferro, eds, Experimental IR Meets Multilinguality, Multimodality, and Interaction.CLEF 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10456. Springer, Cham, pp. 138–144. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-65813-1_14 (accessed 18 January 2024).
• Reigle, David and Nancy Reigle 2005. Śaṅkarācārya’s Collected Works: An Annotated Bibliography of Published Editions in Sanskrit. Cotopaxi, Colorado, U.S.A.: Eastern Tradition Research Institute.
• Rubin, D. 1995. Memory in Oral Traditions. The Cognitive Psychology of Epic, Ballads and Counting-out Rhymes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195082111.001.0001
• Ružička, M. 1958. “Anwendung mathematisch-statistischer Methoden in der Geobotanik (synthetische Bearbeitung von Aufnahmen)”. Biológia (Bratislava) 13: 647–661.
• Rybicki, Jan and Maciej Eder. 2011. “Deeper Delta across genres and languages: do we really need the most frequent words?”. Literary and Linguistic Computing 26(3): 315–321. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqr031
• Sanderson, Alexis, ed. and trans. 2017. The Smārta Śāktism of South India: Lalitātriśatīstotra: The Hymn of the Three Hundred Epithets of the Goddess Lalitā, edited with a brief introduction, an annotated English translation, and an appendix containing the Nāmāvalī. https://www.academia.edu/34452056/The_Sm%C4%81rta_%C5%9A%C4%81ktism_of_South_India_Lalit %C4%81tri%C5%9Bat%C4%ABstotra_edited_with_a_brief_introduction_an_annotated_English_translation_and_an_appendix_containing_the_N%C4%81m%C4%81val%C4%AB (accessed 18 January 2024).
• Sastry, R. Anantakrishna 1980. Viṣṇusahasranāma with the Bhāṣya of Śrī Śaṃkarācārya. Madras: The Adyar Library and Research Centre.
• Seidman, Shachar 2014. “Authorship Verification Using the Impostors Method Notebook for PAN at CLEF 2013”. [In:] Forner, P., R. Navigli, D. Tufis and N. Ferro, eds, CEUR Workshop Proceedings. Vol. 1179: Working Notes for CLEF 2013 Conference, Valencia, Spain, 23–26 September 2013.
• Stamatatos, Efstathios 2009. “A survey of modern authorship attribution methods”. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60(3): 538–556. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21001 TensorFlow. https://www.tensorflow.org/ (accessed 18 January 2024).
• Vetter, Tillman 1968–1969. “Zur Bedeutung des Illusionismus bei Śaṅkara”. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- und Ostasiens 12–13: 407–423.
• Zipf, George Kingsley 1935. The Psychobiology of Language: An Introduction to Dynamic Philology. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
• Zipf, George Kingsley 1949. Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort: An Introduction to Human Ecology. Cambridge, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.

Identifiers

DOI

10.60018/AcAsVa.npqm2712

Biblioteka Nauki

35031971