* i P

i r t r w

r :

The SAMVITPRAKA^A
BY

VAMANADATTA

Edited with English Introduction

by
Mark S. G. Dyczkowski

This edition and introduction was produced as part of a

project for Sampurnananda Sanskrit University, Varanasi to
edit Tantric Texts financed by the University Grants
Commission. The editor was also financially assisted by the
Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage
(INTACH).

 Author

Price:

Year of Publication : 1990

'Printed at the
R atna P rinliflg W orks
(Photo-Offset Section)
Kamachha, Varanasi.

I N T R O D U C T IO N

The Text and its Name

The Sanskrit text edited and published here for the first time of
the Samvitprakasa by Vamanadatta is a philosophical tract of
medium length the first section of which is framed in the form of a
prayej addressed to Visnu who is also variously called Hari,
Madhava, Viisudeva and Acyuta. What makes this text particularly
interesting and important is not only the fine style in which it is
written and the depth of its contents but the fact that it appears to
represent a genre of Vaisnava monism the existence of which has
been virtually unknown. Although a Vaisnava text, the idealist
monism it presents is in many respects parallel to its Kashmiri
>Saiva equivalents. One could go so far as to say that just as we
refer to the Saiva monism that developed in Kashmir between the
9th and 11th centuries as Kashmiri Saivism, we can analogously
refer to the system expounded in this text, which was written in
Kashmir probably sometime during the same period, as a form of
Kashmiri Vaisnavism. The similarities in style and conception
between the Samvitprakasa and Kashmiri Saiva literature in
general makes this work an object of study for the modem scholar
of Kashmiri Saivism just as it was for Kashmiri Saivites in the
past. Thus, prior to its recovery in manuscript, we knew of the
existence of the Samvitprakasa almost exclusively through
quotation in Kashmiri Saiva sources,1 where references appear
alongside those drawn from Saiva works with no incongruity.2
We have called our text Samvitprakasa and this is the name by
which it was generally known to Kashmiri Saivites, although it is
also occasionally referred to by other names. Thus Bhagavad-

1. Dvivcdi notes that Vamanadatta's Satnvitgrakasa is mentioned by Devaraja,

a commentator on the Nighaniu. L.A.S., II p. 73 with reference to
Aufirechi, I p. 681.
2. The quotations drawn from the Samvitprakasa found in Kashmiri Saiva
sources are listed below, p. 34-5.

utpala calls it the 'Stuti\l 'Atmasaptati'2and 'Samvitprakarana** in

three single instances. These names seem to be derived from those
of the sections into which the text is divided. In the two
manuscripts used for this edition ( see below ), there are seven
sections callcd p rakarana. In one of the manuscripts, the length
of each section is noted by the scribe at the end of each one. They
are:
Reported length Actual length
1) Samvitprakasa
160
137 V2
2) Atmasaptati
59
59
3)Vikalpaviplava
61
59
4) Vidyaviveka
98
5) Varnavikara
52
52
6) Parmdrthaprakdsa
22
27
7)
?
?
As the colophons do not mention the name of the text and
neither does the author who refers to it simply as the work (krti),
one might be tempted to suggest that 'Samvitprakasa is not the
real title of all the text but just of the first chapter. That this may be
the case seems to be supported by the name 'Samvitprakarana'
given as that of the source of a quote drawn from out text. As this
reference is drawn from the first section it appears that in this case
the name of the section of the text from which the reference is
drawn is presented as if it were that of the whole text. That this
happens is confirmed by the introduction of one reference as being
from the 'Atmasaptati' which is, in fact, drawn from the second
section which goes by this name. But that this principle is not
uniformly applied is evidenced by the existence of one reference
drawn from the first section that is said to be from the Stuti.
Although the first section is indeed written in the style of a
philosophical hymn addressed to Visnu, the word 'stuti' appears
1. Sp. Pra., p. 97.
2.

Ibid., p. 88. The printed edition introduces this quote from the Samvitprakasa as
belonging to the Atmasaptati. Bhagavadutpala quotes from a Svatmasaptati ( Ibid.,
p. 112), btil this reference cannot be traced in thi nanuscripts of the Samvitprakasa
indicating either that this was a different text or that this verse was drawn from a
missing portion of bur text.

3. Ibid., p. 112.

in the title of the second section. Anyway, that 'Samvitprakasa' is

not just the name of the first section but of all the text is confirmed
by the fact that this is how the source is named even when other
sections apart from the first are quoted. Even so, in so far as by
far the greater majority of references are drawn from the first
section, the name Samvitprakasa frequently refers equally to both
the text as a whole and a section of it.
Manuscripts and State of the Text
Only two manuscripts were used for this edition, namely :
A) Manuscript number 1371 deposited in the library of the of the
Research Department, Jammu and Kashmir, Srinagar. It consists
of twentyone oblong sheets of paper numbered one to twelve. It is
written in fairly clear Dcvanagari, indicating, assuming its
Kashmiri origin, that it is not very old. The text breaks off
abruptly at the beginning of the seventh section. The sudden
interruption of the text before the end of the page may be either
bccause the scribe did not finish copying the entire text or else that
this was the condition of the text in the manuscript from which he
was copying. I am grateful to Professor R. Gnoli for having given
me a copy of this manuscript.
B) The second manuscipt is deposited in the central library of
Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi and is numbered C4003. It is
sixteen folios long, the sheets folding together as do those of a
European book. Written in Sarada characters, this manuscript is
distinctly older than A. It breaks off at verse 90 of the fourth
section and concludes with verses 23 to 27 of the sixth. The scribe
writes at the end :
'STcT:

ERT

cTc

f^FjfcT^TTcJ

q T O P f f t f a te d H ||

||
A third possible manuscript is deposited in the Bhandarkar
Oriental Institute, Poona, number 472 ( 1875-6 ), it is written in
Devanagari script. .Although the catalogue describes it as
complete, it is just two folios long. Named Samvitprakasa, it is
attributed to Harsadattasunu.
Although manuscript A generally contains better readings than
B, they not infrequently agree in readings that require emendation,

indicating that they are derived from closely related sources which
bear the defective text of an original common source. The main
evidence to support this view is the condition of the first section of
our text. Thus, whereas the length of the succeeding sections
corresponds to that stated in the colophons, the first section which
Vamanadatta himself says is 160 verses long, runs into not more
than 138. This discrcpcncy can be partially, at least, accounted for
by the loss of the initial portion of the text. Thus,the beginning
lacks the usual benedictory verse and starts very abruptly so that
even though both manuscripts agree, there can be little doubt that
the original text did not begin this way. Further evidence to
suggest this is found in the Laksmitantra. The fourteenth chapter
of this Tantra quotes extensively from the first section of our text.1
As it happens, these reference are all drawn in serial order from
the Samvitprakasa. The first of these verses, known to be from the
Samvitprakasa independently from references, is not found in the
manuscripts. It seems quite reasonable to suppose that it comes
from the initial, lost portion of our text. Apart from this omission,
it appears from internal evidence that the text of the first section
has suffered losses within it as well as additions. The edition of
the text has therefore entailed the following emendations in its
basic form s:
1) The second line of verse 10 is not found in either manuscripts
as found in Spandapradipika (p. 112) where this verse is quoted.
That the text has suffered a loss is supported by the 'yatha' in the
first line which requires a 'latha' in the second and so this line has
been added in the critical edition. Similarly, the 'yatha' is the
second line of verse 1/35 suggests the existance of another line
containing 'latha' or the like. Possibly L.T., 14/22 contains a
modified version of this line but as its original form is uncertain
the critical text has not been altered.
3) Line l/37ab is not found in the manuscripts but has been added
on the basis of a quote in Spandapradipika (p. I l l ) where this
line ip found. Conversely, although an extra line appears in verse

1. See below, p. 30*4.

1/57 which is missing in the quote found in Spandapradipika (p.

97), it has not been omitted in the critical edition.
Vamanadatta, the Author of the Samvitprakasa
Kashm iri Saiva authors refer to the w riter o f the
Samvitprakasa as Vamanadatta.1 He himself confirms that this is
his name in ihc concluding verses of each section.2 He also says
that he was bom a brahmin in Kashmir and that he belonged to the
Ekayana.3In this way he lells us that he was a Pancaratrin for it is
to the Ekayana that the Pancaratra affiliates itself. Thus
Ramanuja's teacher, Yamunacarya, who lived in South India
about the middle of the tenth century wrote a work, now lost,
called the Kasmlrdgamapramdnya. There he is said to have sought
to establish the revealed character ( apauruseyatva ) of the
Ekayana branch of the white Yajurveda which Piincaratrins claim
is the original source of their Agamic literature.4 The Pancaratra
tradition considers the Ekayanaveda to be a 'secret tradition'
{rahasydm naya)} But even so, the dominant feature o f the
Ekayana is traditionally said by Pancaratrins to be its Vedic
character which thus establishes the authority of the Pancaratra
and its sacred literature. Revealed, according to the Isvarasamhita,
to Sandilya at the beginning o f Kaliyuga by Samkarsana, it is
described as the Ekayana Veda, being the one path to liberation.
The word 'Ekayana' appears already in the Chdndogyopanisad as
the name of a 'fifth Veda' thus indicating the antiquity of early,
possibly Vaisnava, groups that referred to their scriptures in these
term s.6 At any rate, the point is that the term Ekayana' is
1. Jayaraiha, for example, commenting on T.A., 5/154 cd-5ab writes:
2. $fcl4l*H4TTW
VWIN*1I
S.P., 1/138.
Cf. ibid. 2/61, 3/60,4/98 and 5/52.
3.
ibid.. 1/137.
4. Vedanta Desika writes:
Pancaralt araksd, Vedantadesika granthamala edited by Annangaracarya, p.
95, Vedantadesika repeates this statement in his Nyayaparisuddhi, p. 168.
See M. Narasimhacharya Contributions o f Yamuna to Visistddvaita,
Madras: M. Rangacharya Memorial Trust, 1971 p. 12.
5.
^
|
Isvarasamhita, 21/531.
Chandogyopanisad, 7/1/2.

extensively found in Pancaratra literature as a way of referring to

the Pancaratra and its scriptures as affiliated to the Veda. Indeed,
according to these sources, the Ekayana is not just a part of the
Veda but the 'very root of the tree of the Veda',1 that 'stands at the
head of the Vedas'.2 Ouite in keeping with Vamanadatta's
affirmation of his Ekayana affiliations, the text confirms his
thoroughgoing Vaisnavism and his incorporation of Pancaratra
concepts in places confirms his Pancaratra associations.3
All we know about Vamanadatta is what he himself tells us in
this, his only recovered work. He says that his mother was called
Ratnadevi and that his father was Devadatta, the son of
Ratradatti.4 He also refers to his daughter Vamadevi who, he tells
us, wrote a hymn to Visnu, possibly called Haristuti.5 We must
therefore distinguish our Vamanadatta from the Vamananatha, also
known as Srivamana and Hrasvanatha, who wrote the (A).
Dvayasampatti, in so far as the latter was not the son of Devadatta
but o f Harsadatta.6 Anyway, this text, which seems to have

1. anf^rs? w n n

cpfrM

Pdramesvaraxamiiita, janiiapada, 1/32-3.

P rasnasam hila, 2/38-9. For this and other references, see V. Krishnamachary's
Sanskrit introduction to the Laksmllanlra, Adyar Library Series no.87, Adyar,
M adras 1975, p. 4-7. Also the Sanskrit introduction to the P a ra m a sa m h ild ,
Gaekwads Oriental Series no. 86 Baroda, 1940, p. 29-33.
3. S ee b elo w , p . 29.
4.
I

2.

eTir

||

S.P., l/135cd-6ab.
5.

cWT^RT

41^41

II

S.P., 4/78cd.
'Haristuti' may be the proper name of the text or simply a generic
expression.
6. Sivopadhyaya writes:
__V.B., p. 78 and:
......... ibid., p. 90.
Abhinava confirms the authorship of this work in the P.T.V., p. 198:

These references do not allow us to determine whether the name of this

text was 'Dvayasampatti' or A dyavasam patti'It may be tlte case that
Abhinava's reference is to a second text which was a commentary - vartika
- of the (A) Dvayasatnpatli, but it seems more likely to me that was the

originally been a commentary on the Vijnanabhairava or, at any

rate dedicates space to commenting on a verse from it, is entirely
Saiva. Similar considerations cast doubt on the identity of our
Vamanadatta with the author of the Svabodhodayamanjarl, The
author of this short but interesting yogic tract, cast in the style of
the Vijnanabhairava,1 identifies himself as Vamanadatta, the son of
Harsadatta.2 Thus, there can be no doubt that there were at least
two Vamanadatta's known to Kashmiri Saiva authors by
Abhinavagupta's time.
Again, Yogaraja quotes a verse as being by Viravamaka
which translated reads : "We worship ( the deity ) incessandy by
means of the transcendental fire sacrifice in which the fuel is the
forest of duality and death itself the human victim ( mahapasu )."3
Although this verse cannot be traced in the manuscripts of the
Samvitprakasa, they are incomplete and it could, anyway, have
been drawn from another work by our Vamanadatta. However,
this does not seem very likely in so far as the form of the
'transcendental fire sacrifice' is drawn from a model that is clearly
more Saiva then Vaisnava. The word 'vira' in the authors name
original title of this work and thal it was indeed a commentary. The lengthy
quote in V.B., p. 78-9 certainly reads like a commentary on verse 90 of
the Vijnanabhairava. Rodhavildsa seems to have been another name for
this work. One manuscript ( no. C 4719 ) is deposited in the Central
Libraiyin Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi and is listed as being by the
son of Harsadatta. Rastogi, ( the Krama Tartiricism o f Kashmir. Motilal
Banarasidass, Delhi 1979, p. 182 ) notes the existence of a Sarada
manuscript in Poona ( BORI no. 472 of 1875-6 ) of the same work going
by the name 'Bodhavilasa' The colophon reads :

^TrrfcT

qsflfXtf frfcT: ||

1. The Svabodhodayamanjarl is quoted in Sp. Pra. p. 126 and in T.A., vol.

II, p. 4. A number of manuscripts of this text are available under various
names including 'SvabodhamanjarV and Subodham anjarV. Two
manuscripts are deposited in the Central Library in B.H.U. numbered C
42$5 and CIOO. This text, which is well work editing, is typical of a class
of short tracts dealing with monistic Yoga of the type found in the
V jjfianabhairava. Another such text is the Nirvanayogotlara quoted by
Yogaraja in his commentary or> the Paramdrthasdra ( p. 160), a manuscript
of which is deposited in ihe Central Library in B.H.jJ ( no. C 4246 ).
2. The colophon of B.H.U. manuscript no. C 4255 reads :

(w )

f*TT
U
3. P.S., p. 146. Quoted below, p. 36.

lends further weight to the view that this verse is drawn from a
work written by a Saiva, rather than Vaisnava, author. Thus, it is
not at all certain whether Viravamanaka and our Vamanadatta were
the same person. The same uncertainty prevails concerning
Abhinavagupta's reference to a Vamanaka as one of his teachers in
the T a n t r a l o k c i Although Abhinavagupta does refer to
Vamanadatta with respect in one place as guru he may simply
mean that he was one of his venerable predecessors or elder
contemporaries rather than literally his teacher. However, even
though Abhinavagupta was averse to Vaisnavas, as are Saivites in
general, he was prepared lo concede that the views of others were
valuable even if they taught what he considered to be lower
doctrines. Thus he wrote that : "I myself, for this very reason,
have frequented, moved by curiosity for lower doctrines and
scriptures, masters o f all sorts, logicians, Vedic scholars,
Buddhists, Jainas and Vaisnavas etc.."2Perhaps Vamanadatta was
one of these Vaisnava teachers to whom Abhinava refers. If so,
Vamanadatta was his elder contemporary thus placing him in the
beginning of the eleventh century. Again, Bhagavadutpala quotes
Vamanadatta frequently and, although his date is uncertain, we
can be sure that he was not prior to Utpaladeva, Abhinavas
grand-teacher, as he also quotes from his Jsvarapratyabhijnakdrikd
in a number of places.3 But although we can thus be sure that
Vamanadatta was not later than Abhinavagupta there is no certain
evidence available at present to establish a minimum date for him.
Even so, it seems to me that Vamanadatta was probably either an
elder contemporary o f Abhinavagupta or belonged to the
generation just preceding him. At any rate, there seems no reason
to doubt that he lived and wrote in Kashmir sometime between the
9th and 12th ccntury, that is, during the period of Kashmiri
Saivism's most vigourous growth. This was a period during
which such a large number of Kashmiri scholars and religious
men turned Iheir attention to writing and teaching that in many

2. T.A., 13/345 b-346a.

3. The Isvarapratyabhijfta is quoted in Sp. Pra., p. 84, 87 and 124.

cases it is hard to decidc who preceded whom and, indeed, many

were contemporaries of different ages. The style and content of
Vam anadatta's work is in itself eloquent testim ony to his
belonging to this rich period of India's religious history.
The Vaisnava Monism of the Samvitprakasa
Samvitprakasa, the title of the first chapter, coincides, as we
have seen, with the name of the entire text and, in fact, the
symbolic notion of consciousness as luminous is indeed one of
the major themes of the text as a whole and o f the first chapter in
particular. Vamanadatta, like the Pratyabhijnii philosopher,
Utpaladeva, makes extensive use of this analogy thus imparting a
Pratyabhijna-like tone to his mode o f discourse. This feature
m arkedly distinguishes V am anadattas work from another
monistic Vaisnava tract that has come down to us and that we
know was studied in 10th century Kashm ir, nam ely, the
P aram drthasara, also known as the Adharakarika written by
Patanjali, alias Sesa, traditionally identified ( certainly mistakenly)
with the author (s) of the Mahabhdsya commentary on Panini's
grammar and the Aphorisms on Yoga. Thus, although the latter
work is monistic, conceiving the one ultimate reality to be Visnu
who is pure consciousness, just as V am anadatta does, light
analogies are virtually absent.1 This divergence is emblematic of
the divergent approach the two authors adopt to establish their
monism and the aspect of the unity o f reality which they have
choosen to fix their attention upon. Adisesa's work reads much
like a shon treatise an Advaita Vedanta, indeed the author is
represented as one who 'knows the Veda and its limbs' and as
\h a v in g seen all the Vedantasastra,' on the basis of which he
wrote his work.2 Instead of the neuter Brahman, however, we find
1. The only verse in the Adharakarika. in which ultimate reality is clearly
understood as being light is the following:
fW rorfa:
R a w vrfcr Pnfrfr ussp
R B W <TOT frMTtfts ftw ftr: H
A.K.*60. Cf. Ibid., 23.
In another place the Self.is compared to the Sun:

T? dlpf '*>Cllet

d<^<;ir*iiR H

Ibid., 13.
2.

-......

ibid., 4, also:

find Visnu who is represented as the supreme soul (paramatman),

but even though he is characterised as the 'cause of creation,
persistence and destruction2 the universe is Visnu's Maya which
is unreal.3 Clearly, there is a palpable contradiction here but even
so, Adisesa remains true to his Vaisnava creed and so refuses to
take recourse to Advaita Vedanta's solution to this problem by
making a distinction between the pure absolute - Brahman - which
is eternally just as it is, unrelated to diversity in any way except as
the reality behind an illusion, and the personal God - Vsvara - Who
creates, sustains and destroys all things that, like the world he
seemingly crcates, is real only^to the extent that he is the Brahman
that appears to be him. Thus Adisesa makes free use of the entire
gamout o f standard analogies to explain in what sense Visnu's
Maya is just an unreal illusion : it is like the water in a mirage
(imrgatrsnika), the silver seen in nacre, the snake in the rope, the
two moons mistakenly perceived by someone with an eye
disease.4The specific character of individual things that appear to
exist in the illusory world o f Maya is similarly explained by taking
recourse to the standard Advaita notion of limiting adjuncts
(u p a d h i) produced by ignorance. The analogy is also the well
known Advaita one of the sun that shines reflected in different
pools of water-just so the Supreme Self appears diversified in the
things of the world, established as it is in all the limiting

WTO mthhJui

1. Tt STWT:
srafatf

***T 35Tg I
R T 5 F l t | |

Ibid., 1.

2. TO W PIR WTWT

Ibid., 67.
3.

|
Ibid., 74.

4.

VRT PtftRt
Ibid., 22.

|T

Ibid. 87.

conditions that delineate apparently existing o b je c ts.1

Consequently, even thoughVisnu is said to be the creator, Adisesa
declares that : "Just as there is no cause of the creation and
destruction of the snake ( mistakenly perceived ) in the rope, so
too there is no cause here of the arising and destruction of the
universe."2 Thus, just as at the cosmic level the ultimate principle
does nothing, so too at the individual level, the Self, like the
Samkhyan Purusa, is perfectly inactive. We can contrast this view
with that presented by Abhinava in his Saiva adaptation of this
text.3 Abhinava agrees with Adisesa that the individual soul
merges into the Brahman when he overcomes Maya and that it
consists essentially of thought constructs centred on duality.4
Adisesa says that this takes place when the soul realises that
Visnu's Maya is insubstantial like the snow, foam or bubbles
formed from water or the smoke that issues from a fire.5 The
practicioner must contantly refresh this awareness ( bha\ana ),
through it he is liberated by becoming one with the Brahman.
A ccording to Abhinava, however, contem plative insight
{bhavana) into the nature of the principles of existence is the result
of realising one's own universal "I" consciousness that is
experienced not just as the one universal consciousness which is
the passive ground of Being but as supremely active, thus he
w rites:

Ibid., 23.

2.

snreflrmfr cmr ^

Ibid.. 50.
3. Abhinavagupta adapted the Vaisnava Paramarthasara to express the Saiva
position. For details sec K.C. Pandey 'Abhinavagupta' Chowkhamba,
Varanasi 1963, p. 63-7.
4.

j& t

P.S., 51.
Note that in order to distinguish Abhinavas Paramarthasara from that of
Adisesa, I call the latter Adhdrakarikd.

5.

35^ snrr^jcrr
A.K., 56.

|
stflf&ii fawit: 11

"I am the Lord who playfully propels the machine of the

wheel of energies. My nature is pure and I hold the position of the
Lord of the great wheel of energies. It is in me alone that all things
m anifest as do jars and other ( objects ) in a clean mirror.
Everything extends out of me as does the wonderful diversity of
dreams from one who sleeps. I myself am all things ( and they are
related to m e ) like hands, feet and other ( limbs are related to th e )
body. I alone manifest in all this like the light ( that shines) in (all)
existing things."1
While Abhinava affirms the activity of the Self which he
understands to be not just a knower but also an agent, Adisesa
categorically denies that the Self is active. Present in the body the
Self is the embodied soul ( d e h l), his presence stimulates the
activity of the body, mind and senses, but he does nothing, just as
the magnet that attracts iron to itself is inactive.2Thus :
"The embodied soul sees, hears, smells, touches, tastes and
perceives but in so far as he ( as the Self is really ) devoid of
intellect, senses and body, he does nothing."3
Abhinava modifies this verse to fit his own view and places it
at the conclusion of his previous statement concerning the
experience of the Selfs authentic nature as the agent of creation
etc., thus his version reads :
"Even though the one who sees, hears and smells, being
devoid of the senses and body does nothing, it is I alone who
1. ifcT

*nfcT ftvar sfW jh fajft

!
iTrT: 5THTfcr
^cTT^ ||
tpff&Hgite FfTTfa

VlWWfol ||

P.S., 47-9.

2. HHJiwflswr^ciT ^uh<u|4|ui; sfrdfo

dsft6ldl

&

5T 2fTdfcT

VRfrT rfl^l
fV<f^cT %%
||
A. K., 11-12.
3. S^T *sftcn WTcTT Wlrtfodl Uiftldl

WNfr
Ibid., 62.

ii

deploy the various reasonings of the philosophies and

scriptures."1
According to Adisesa there is no agent because there is
nothing in reality for him to act upon. Abhinava and Adisesa agree
that the Lord is not affected by the troubles of the world, it is the
deluded who are peaceful, happy or sad according to their state of
mind.2 The Self seems to act due to the activity of the mind etc.,
just as the sun reflected in running water seems to move. Again,
although the Self is omnipresent, it is manifest in the intellect just
as Rahu becomcs visible when he devours the moon during an
eclipse.3 Thus Adisesa's system tends towards a monism of the
Advaita Vedanta type and develops the Samkhya theme of
Purusa's passivity with rcspect to Prakrti, here identified with
Maya. The embodied soul does nothing, it is Maya that acts. The
Self seems to be an agent and enjoyer only because of its
association with the body.
Now, even though Vamanadatta agrees with Adisesa that
there is only one reality and that it is pure consciousness which he
praises devoutly as Visnu, he sets off on a different tack to present
and establish his monism. Like alf monists, Vamanadatta stresses
in various ways the indeterminate nature of the one reality : it is
not exclusively one or other of possible prototypical categories
that characterize things such as subject and object, inner and outer

1.

^RTT tfldl

P.S., 50.
2. VTRT

ararsratfr ^

911*rl

qTTmfcr

A.K. 34.
Cf.
9TT^f VTRT

Hlcl

'reftr

*[?: I

* TO: *TT*TI*5d: H cT*TT|

P.S., 38.
3.

HfefrT f^TT^rsf

farfef mfcT|

TOT VTfM^RTPT: smVTcf 5FrfcT|

H^Tcfrsf^r
A.K., 17-8 Cf.. P.S. 7-8.

etc., and it is beyond conceptualization and hence speech.1 This

implies, according to Vamanadatta, that the duality verbal
expression necessitates is not real but is merely a conceived idea2
thus distinctions such as that between subject and object are false.3
However, this does not mean that the world and those that
perceive it arc unreal illusions. The world of things cannot be
based on their non-existence.4 Vamanadatta stresses that the
appearancc of an illusory snake would not be possible if there
were no rope.5 Maya is not the illusory world, it is the false
knowledge of ignorancc which pcrceives duality in Visnu who is
one and non-dual. When this Maya is destroyed one perceives
ultimate reality as it is.6The world is not unreal, on the contrary it
is as real as Visnu himself who making it as he pleases, is one
with it.7 Thus, according to Vamanadatta, the world is actually
created, sustained and destroyed by Visnu who, in doing so,
forms himself into the universe thus assuming his external form to
then revert to his own internal, undifferentiated nature when it is
destroyed. Vamanadatta thus develops a peculiar position of his
own here. According to him, it is possible to explain the
generation of the world both in tenns of real and apparent change.
The Advaita view maintains that the world is a product of a
seeming change in the Brahman, like the apparent change that
takes place when we perceive a rope mistakenly to be a snake.
This view is sharply contrasted with the one that asserts that the
Brahman changes into the universe by altering itself, like milk that
becomes curd. Vamanadatta accepts both as equally possible
explanations:
"He whose unique nature is supremely pure consciousness
alone assumes physical form. This can be explained both in tenns
of real and apparent change. ( Explained as merely ) apparent
change, it is You, O Acyuta ( Who persist unchanged although) it
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

S.P.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,

1/1-3.
1/8.
1/28.
1/1 lib .
1/100a.
l/!02b-3.
1/99.

appears to be otherwise. ( And as a ) real transformation, it is

always You ( who, although essentially the same, assume many
form s) just as gold ( fashioned into a n ) earring (remains gold)."1
Even so, Vamanadatta stresses that subject/object distinctions
are not ultimately real. It is the notion based on duality
0bhedasamkalpa ) that splits up the unity of consciousness into
subject and object, inner and outer.2 Both the condition of the
subject and that the of object are states of Visnu who is the one,
pure consciousness and so they are ultimately false in themselves.3
It is only the foolish who, seeing the world of subjects and
objects, believe that that is the way things are also within Visnu4
whereas he iS really beyond all phenomenal being and hence
contamination by such relative distinctions. As Visnu is the
universal nature of all things - like the gold of gold ornaments there can be no distinction within him.5 There can be no time or
space within him who is the one support of all, ancMtonsists of all
things while at the same time transcending all particulars.6
Thus, Maya is the ignorance or false knowledge of duality.
The way this false knowledge operates is through language for
that which is undivided within one's own consciousness appears
to be fragmented when it reaches the plane of speech.7 Duality is
just the way we talk about things and hence think about them. The
primary form of this duality is that between subject and object.
But if we reflect upon this relation and what it entails we discover
that it is not as it initially appears to be. Objectivity ( meyatva ),
Vamanadatta argues, amounts to a state.of limitation and the
exclusion of elements one from another ( paricchedu ), and this
doesnt take place within consciousness ( jndna )8 which is not an
object of knowledge but the prerequisite condition o f all
knowledge. Indeed it is this, the ultimate nature of the perceiving

1.
2.
3.
4.

Ibid* 1/104b-6a.
Ibid., 1/1.
Ibid., 1/28.
Ibid., 1/51.

5.
6.

Ibid., 1/109-11.
Ibid., 1/62.

7. Ibid.. 2/19.
8. Ibid.. 2/21.

consciousness ( graha) of both subject and object, that is real and

persists when they cease : all else is false.1The notions that 'this is
other than me' and 'I am different from that' run contrary to
oneness and cannot persist even for an instant2 and they do not in
fact do so for all thought is momentary. In reality cognitive
consciousness ( jnana ) shines by itself, it does not require any
object.3 The status of things as objects of knowledge is not due to
some inherent attribute they possess of themselves, but is due to
their relation to a perceiving subject, while the subjectivity
(matrtva) in the perceiving subject has no existence apart from the
object.4The establishment ( s id d h i) of truly existing things is
independent (anapeksa ). There is neither subjectivity nor
objectivity in those things that are independent.5 Similarly, if it is
impossible to conceive of knowledge with no field of application
(visaya), it is also impossible for this Held to exist without content
( visayin ).6 The same argument holds good with relation to action
( karma ) and the agent. Action pertains to that which is made
manifest by consciousness (prakasya ) but this can have no
existence in the absence of an agent,7 but as nothing is manifest
but consciousness itself there can be no question of action or
agency.
At the same time, however, Vamanadatta affirms that Visnu,
the consciousness which is the one ultimate reality, is genuinely
creative. The entire universe arises out of him8 and he precedes
and supports all the business of daily life ( vyavahara), be it that
of the body, speech or mind.9 As consciousness, Visnu is the
unique cause of all things,10 and nothing can act apart from him11
for all that is impel ed to action in any way is ultimately impel ed

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Ibid., 2/26.
Ibid., 2/29.
Ibid.,2/33.
Ibid.. 2/51.
Ibid.. 2/52.
Ibid.. 3/33.
Ibid.. 2/54.
Ibid.. 1/73.

9. Ibid .. 1/93.
10. Ib id .. 1/71.
11. Ib id ., 1/74.

by consciousncss, the one reality.1Thus what Vamanadatta means

when he says that "creation has no being ( scuta): being pertains to
consciousncss" is not just that all this world of the fettered
( samsara ) is merely an imaginary notion ( vikalpa ) , 2 but that,
unlike consciousness which requires nothing, there is no
phenomenal entity which just exists and is known as such in itself
independently of consciousness.3 It is this seeming independence
which is false.4
Vamanadatta thus accepts that the one reality is varied (vicitra)',
unity is different from relative distinctions and duality ( bheda ), it
is the whole of reality which is involved in it, not just one reality
or existing thing contrasted with another independent reality.
Vamanadatta explains all this by taking recourse to a common
Pancaratra notion which understands Visnu as four-fold
(icaturatman) as himself and his emanations ( vyuha). These four
are equated with various quatcmities of m utually/dependent
elements that represent phases or levels within the entire range of
reality. These arc variously defined in different contexts as :
1) Reality ( vastu ), phenomenal being ( bhava ), determinate
particulars ( artha) ard action ( kriya)?
2) The four levels of speech: Santa, Pasyanti, Madhyama and
Vaikhari,6
3) Subject ( pramatr ), object ( meya ), means of knowledge
(mana) mid veridical cognitive consciousness ( m iti)?
This way of understanding causality leaves Vamanadatta free
to talk about Visnu's cosmically creative activity in terms which
often remind us of Kashmiri Saivism and that fits with a world
view that generally characterized the monisms of Tantric systems
as a whole as distinct from those developed from the Upanisads.
This form of monism is formed by an identification of the
opposites which thus simultaneously involves their transcendence.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Ibid.,
Ibid..
Ibid.,
Ibid..
Ibid..
Ibid.,
Ibid.,

1/75.
3/2.
2/21.
2/22.
1/87.
1/89.
2/59.

Reality is one because it includes everything, thus it is free of

duality. Oneness is not achieved merely by denying multiplicity as
unreal from the perspective of a higher transcendental reality. In
this way Visnu is completely established in himself at all times
and yet generates and destroys the universe that arises from him
and falls back into him like the ocean that is in ib elf waveless and
yet generates waves.1Thus, requiring nothing outside himself,
Visnu is endowed with perfect creative freedom ( svatantrya and
so he unfolds everywhere,3 while the arising and falling away of
all things takes place in the Lord who is the centre of all the daily
dealings o f life.4 Thus although Visnu is pure, uninterrupted
consciousncss, free of subject and object and the source from
which consciousness arises,5 the passivity of knowledge does not
contradict the activity of action: they are ultimately one.6 Visnu is
equally cause, effect and instrument for he is all things7
Oneness is thus established by establishing the ultimate
identity of seemingly contrasting categories in Visnu who is pure
consciousness. Thus the abscnce of subject-object distinctions
within Visnu is due to their identity, it is not attributed to their
ficticious character. Once the object is known as it truly is, it is
realised to be consciousness.8 Again, just as the object can never
be independent of the knowledge of it,9 so this knowledge is not
different from the perceiving subjectivity.10 Thus, everything is
pervaded by consciousness and consumed by it just as fire bums
and pervades fuel11 and so, as Visnu is pure consciousness, he is
all things.12 But although Visnu contains everything and is in

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid..
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,

1,73.
1/84.
1/81.
1/92.
1/25.
l / l 19.
1/112-3.
1/24.
1/22.
1/17.
1/10.
1/22.

everything,1he is not conditioned by the things conditioned by

time, space and form because he is internal consciousness.
Now all this can be expressed simply and directly, as
Vamanadatta docs, by representing Visnu-consciousness, the one
reality, as light. Although this is a metaphor in a sense, in another,
absolute divine consciousness and the world manifested in and
th ro u g h it are literally the light of consciousness and this is the
way it is experienced. This presentation of the one, absolute
reality as light is well know to Indian thought from very early
times. It finds its classic expression in the following verse which
appears in a number of Upanisads:
"The sun shines not there, nor moon and stars;
These lightnings shine not, much less this ( earthly ) fire!
After Him, as He shines, doth everything shine.
This whole world is illumined by His light."2
From this point of view all things can be classified into two
basic types, namely, those things which illuminate ( prakdsaka )
and those which arc illuminated ( prakasya). The illuminators are
both the perceiving subjects and their activity through which the
objects of illumination are known, made know and hence, from
this idealist point of view, created. All these illuminating lights
shine by virtue of Visnu, the one light.3 In this sense, Visnu is
always immediately apparent as all things, in the act of knowing
them and as the knower. As the immediate appearance of things
just as they arc, that is, as the shining of the universal light, they
reveal Visnu's nature which is thus directly apparent ( prakata).
The light of the sun illumines an object and so makes it apparent
(prakata ), whereas before it was obscure ( aprakata ) and hence
unknown. But Visnu is always apparent as all things, there is no
need to find ways to make him evident, nor is there any need of
proofs to establish his existence.4 Thus, the light which is the
illuminator ( prakdsaka ) is at the same time the object of
1.
^
i
34.

Ibid., 1/14.
^.v^ tlf ^ ' at(lroPam?ad 6/14, ihe same verse is also found in Mundakopanisad
on
^ l^c Kothopanisad 5/15; cf. also BhagavadgUa, 15/6.
S.P., 1/37-g.
Ibid., 1/12-3.

illuminaiion without ihis compromising its essentially luminous

nature as the pure presentation of things just as they are in the
immediacy of their direct experience. Thus Vamanadatta writes:
"None dispute that You ( 0 Lord ) are the essential nature of
( a ll) things; it is not darkness ( aprakasa) that shines when ( the
light of consciousncss) becomes the object of illumination."1
In this way Vamanadatta accounts for unity as the identity of
opposites understood as aspccts of the same noumcnous reality,
namely, the shining of the light of consciousness. But while the
illuminator as light manifests the object and thus presents itself as
the objects manifest appearance, it also transcends it:
"Just as these things arc separate from the light of the sun and
it is undivided, so arc You separate from all these objects of Your
illumination."2
This verse illustrates Vamanadatta's second approach to
oneness, nam ely, what m ight be called the logic of
transcendence' in which the unity of the absolute is established as
being beyond diversity. Visnu, the one reality is unaffected by the
diversity of things - he is unconditioned. Although present in that
which has form and is determined by time and space, he is free of
them.3 But this is not because they are unreal or less then real in
respect to Visnu's reality: Visnu is free of time, space and form
because he encompasses everything; the universe is full of Visnu
and there is no state in which he is absent.4 Thus Vamanadatta's
transcendental logic is soon transformed into a 'logic of
immanence' in which the absolute is understood as one because it
excludes nothing rather than because it stands beyond the many
phenomena subject to a conditioned, contingent state of existence.
But if all this is true and Visnu is that same consciousness
which is in every perceiving conscious being as its most essential
nature why arc we not aware of this fact directly and so, being
conscious of our ultimate identity with Visnu, be in his same
state? The answer, Vamanadatta affirms, is to be found in the
1.
2.
3.
4.

Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,

1/12.
1/36, cf. 1/69.
1/14.
1/70.

negative, privative character of thought ( vika lp a ). This is a theme

Vamanadatta develops extensively throughout the third prakarana
where he discusses the nature of thought and its formation
through the |xnvcr of speech. The world of daily life is perceived
through a veil of thought constructs which represent what is
presented by the shining of the light of consciousness in
conceptual terms. Those who cannot penetrate through this veil of
conceptual representation and be conscious of the immediacy of
things and themclves just as they are, that is, as clearly evident
manifestations of the light of consciousness, arc cut off both from
the outer reality of the object and the inner reality of the subject.
Thus removed from themselves and, by the same token, from the
world around them, they are helplessly caught up in the trammels
of conditioned existence. Thus Vamanadatta pertinendy quotes the
dictum : "all thought
is samsdra."1
o

Like all Hindu monists Vamanadatta preaches that liberation

comes by identifying ourselves with the true Self, namely, Visnu
and by freeing ourselves of false identification with the body and
all else that is not Self ( anatman ). For while the Self is bliss
itself, non-Self - its very opposite - is suffering.2 But while the
Self must be known, it cannot be known as an object. If the Self
where to be an object the subject who perceives it would be
superior to it. Thus there would be something higher then the Self
and therefore another higher than that would be required in order
to know ii. Ultimate Being cannot be known like a sense object,
for all sense objects are limited, conditioned entities.3 This does
not mean that the Self is never known objectively, rather that it is
not known in itself as it is in this way. When consciousness is
perceived as an object it becomes the things of the world that are
'other' than the Self. As Vamanadatta says:
"Just as one perceives the external form of that which is in the
field of vision, just so consciousness, established in the act of
perception, perceives its own nature as the object of knowledge.4
1.
2.
3.
4.

Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid..

3/2.
2/3.
2/4-6.
1/9.

In order 10 know the Self, we must find another made of

knowledge:
"Transcending all things, how can anyone describe Your
nature ( 0 Lord )? Description applies only to that which is
divided while the Self of none is such and that ( S e lf) is You,
Who are the Self of All, and so for this reason also You cannot be
described. The nature of the Supreme Self, free o f alterations and
divisions is the only means to know You: You can never be
conceived."1
Words, the vehicle of thought, seemingly break up the unity
of reality for the ignorant. We distinguish between one thing and
another labelling one and then the other according to their
functions - this division is a purely menial construct, although
useful, indeed essential, for daily life, it is not real.2 If some
existing thing where to stand contradicted by another, this
contradiction would necessarily extend to its essential nature. The
being of entities cannot in itself oppose itself; difference,
distinction and contradiction are all notions, they are not qualities
inherent in the being of things.3 Similarly, if Visnu is everything
and he is disccmablc in both subject and. object, this distinction
too is false - it is just a notion.4 Visnu must be known directly and
not as the subject knows his object and that is only possible if he
is the Self:
"Everyone knows one's own nature ( svarupa ), none can
know that of another and ones own omnipresent nature is You (0
Lord). Thus the universe is full of You."5
Vamanadatta seeks to establish that this awareness of Self is
the basis of all knowledge, even the most mundane. He builds up
his epistemology on the basis of an idealism that accounts for the
possibility of knowledge by positing it not as the product of
cognitive acitivity but as its a prior ontological and epistemological
ground which cognitive activity simply reveals. Veridical

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,

1/33-34.
1/8.
2/47.
1/27-8.
1/5

cognitive consciousness ( manata )! is in every case one's own

self-awareness alone ( svasamvedana) which is understood to be
the very Being ( satta ) of consciousness free of thought
constructs.2 The three sources of right knowledge ( prama ) are
direct perception, inference and scripture.3 All means of
knowledge ( pram ana) are each individually associated with their
specific object and so do not allow the subject to experience pure
awareness directly4 unless- he makes a special effort to do so. Thus
Vamanadatta writes:
"You transcend all thought constructs and so, although
directly apparent, are forgotten, as happens with something in
front of a man whose mind if full of desire for something else."5
But although Visnu is worshipped as consciousness and this
consciousness manifests as the objects of the world in and
through the act of perception, Vamanadatta does not go as far as
his Kasnmlri Saiva counterparts who, perceiving reality in much
the same way, conclude that the world - order and all that
transcends it are encompassed in the self-reflective awareness of a
universal "I" consciousness. Thus, while Vam anadatta's
phenomenology coincides with that of Utpaladeva and of later
Kashmiri Saivites in general as far as the phenomenon of
presentation is concerned, there is divergence in the
characterization of the representational aspect, that is, the
judgement of what is presented by the shining of the light of
consciousness. A Kashmiri Saivite would say that Vamanadatta
does not tackle this problem thoroughly. Implicit in his view is
that not all representation is conceptual and that this nonconcvptual representation is essentially an awareness of the Self as
all things and as beyond them and that it is the basis of all
knowledge, but he doesnt lake the next step and posit that this
awareness is inherent in consciousness, in the sense that
consciousness is self-awareness through which the world of

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,
Ibid.,

2/39.
2/48.
2/35.
2/34.
1/35.

conceptual representation is generated and hence the play of

objectivity. 1 am not referring here to a mere absence of a technical
term - such as 'vimarsa' - more to the point is that Vamanadatta
categorically rejects any form of egoic projection onto absolute
consciousncss. All sense of self m ust be eradicated. As
Vamanadatta says:
" 0 Madhava, only You remain when one free of ego ( reflects
t h a t ) You perform this action and ( that it accords with ) Your
nature. Now if this separation ( from You ) which corresponds to
this ( false) presumption of egoic existence dissolves into the Self
by devotion to You, separation is destroyed and oneness is
established."1
The sense of oneness as "1" is never an independent selfsubsisting awareness; according to Vamanadatta it is always the
subject of predication as when one thinks: "this is different from
me and I am different from that."2 It is thus essentially a thought
construct like all relativizing analytic notions. Instead of being a
notion centred on the object it is a notion concerning oneself
(asmadvikalpa ) and so must, like its objective counterpart, be
rejected as snort of ultimacy. .Vamanadatta equates the ego with
the notion of personal existence as individual, appropriating or
acquisitive consciousness. It consists of an intent ( samkalpa ) to
make the object one's own. Thus, rather than the sense of "I" it is
better described as the sense of "mine". This sense of "mine"
( mamau'i ) expresses itself each moment as an intention which
leads to another, thus maintaining its existence. Vamanadatta thus
describes it as a transitory ( anitya) product of the pulsing activity
o f consciousness ( spanda ). Just as death is the inevitable result
o f its persistence, so death ceases when it comes to an end.3
Here we notice a radical departure from the Saiva
phenomenology of Utpaladcva. This need not surprise us. The
1. Ibid., l/I00b-2a.
2. Ibid., 2/29.
3. Ibid., 4/42-3. Worth noting in passing is lhai while Vamanadatta states
expressly in this passage that the pulsation of consciousness -Spanda- is
free of thought constructs he does not equate it with the dynamics of the
absolute ego as most Kashmiri Saivites do, but treates the ego as an
cpiphenomenon of its uctivity.

ego is understood in mosi schools of Indian thought as relative, a

product of thought constructs which serves as a provisional
subjective refereni for a consciousness that wrongly identifies
itself as the tx)dy and mind. At best it is understand as part of the
inner mental organ operating there as the factor which personalizes
or appropriaies the perceptions reflected and made known in the
intellect.1 It is Utpaladcva, who formulates for the first time in his
Isvarapratyahhijndkdrikd a notion of the absolute as a pure ego
consciousncss and makes full use of it in a completely developed
system thus extending the universal Hindu doctrine of Self into a
higher metaphysics of the Self as a Fichtian-like superego.2 That
Vamanadatta's views are compatible with this ulterior develop
ment is exemplified by the extensive quotation of his work in the
fourteenth chapter of the Uiksmltantra3 lor in this work Laksmi,
Visnu's spouse and power, is characterized as his "Iness" (<ahanta)
while he is eternal and perfect "I consciousness. Thus Laksmi
proclaims in the Laksnutantra:
"He, Hari being"!" ( the S e lf ) is regarded as the self in all
beings. I am the eternal I-hood of all living beings."4 And:
"Therefore Brahman, the eternal, is called Laksmi - Narayana
because the I-entity is always inherent in I-hood. The I-entity is
always recognised as the source of I-hood; for one cannot exist
without the other and each is invariably linked to the other."5
The Laksmltantra, which is certainly later than Utpaladeva,
makes use here, as in much of the rest of its metaphysics, of
notions that are typically Kashmiri Saiva.6 If an original Pancaratra
1. For an excellent study of the concept of the ego in the major schools of
Indian philosophy and Kashmiri Saivism the reader is referred to Michel
Hulins txxik: 'Lc Principe de L' Ego dans La Pensee Indicnne Classique.
La Notion d' Ahamkara' publications de 1* institut de civilisation indienne,
scrie in - 8 fascicule 44, Paris, 1978.
*)
See my paper 'Self-awareness, Own Being and Egoity, Varanasi, 1990
where 1 prove this assertion.
3. Sec below, p. 31-4.
4. .L.T., 2/13, translation by Sanyukta Gupta.
5. Ibid., 2/16-17.
6. The Lakshutanira contains citations from the Svacchandabhairavatarura and
the Vijnanabhairava both Tantric texts well known and respected by
Kashmiri Saivites. It also cites Ksemaraja, Utpaladeva and Abhinavagupta
in a number of places. According to Sanderson the Laksmltantra and the

Samhita is Irec to do this, ihcrc is no reason lo be surprised if

Vamanadatta, who was a Kashmiri living in Kashmir during the
period of Kashmiri Saivism's most encrgclic period of growth,
drew inspiration from the Saiva monism current in his day. The
close affinity between Vamanadatta's views and monistic Saivism
is clearly evidenced by Abhinavagupta addressing him respectfully
as 'teacher,1 even though throughout his works he consistently
relegates Vaisnavism to a lower level than Saivism as a whole and
particularly that of his own Saiva traditions.2 In short,
Vamanadatta's work, despite its divergence in certain respects
from Saiva monism - particularly with regard to the ultimacy of the
ego-sense - still remains, nonetheless, highly compatible with it.
The extensive use Bhagavadutpala makes of the Samvitprakasa as
a source of references in his commentary on the Spandakarika
clearly exemplifies how Vamanadatta's work can serve to bridge
the gap between Saivism and Vaisnavism in the Kashmiri Saiva
context. Bhagavadutpala, as his ancestry and traditional
appellation - Utpala Vaisnava - suggest, had strong ties with the

AhirbudhiyasamhUd quoted by Natatur AmmaJ (= Vaisya Varadacarya )

must have been composed between 1100 and 1200 in South Lidia because
the mantras of the Yajurveda quoted in them belong to the Taiuiriya
recension peculiar to the Southern tradition after the 10th century.
1. T.A., 5/155a, see above, p. 5 n.l.
2. I will deal with the relationship between Kashmiri Saivism and Vaisnavism
in the introduction to my forthcoming book of translations from the
Spanda tradition of Kashmiri Saivism lo be published by the State
University of New York Press, Albany. One or two remarks will suffice .
here. Abhinavagupta devotes the 35lh chapter of his Taniraloka to the
relationship he believes exists between the various scriptural traditions as
taught him by Sambhunaiha. his Trika teacher ( T.A., 35/44b ). There he
uncompromisingly declares that:
order to achieve the various fruits more or less perfect of duty
(dharma), profit (a r t h ), sexual pleasure (k&ma) and liberation {moksa\
there is only one means, namely, the Saivigama" (ibid., 3S/24). Abhinava
agrees ,Kai teachings are diverse but they also yield different fruits at
differing levels so that those at a lower level cannot yield the fruits o f a
higher one: "The various forms such as Visnu etc. which God assumes are '
due to his self-differentiation and, as such, that is, due to this
differentiation, are on the plane o f M ayi. The 'descents o f power'
(sakiip&ta) which do undoubt ably occur as associated with these limited
forms therefore bestow only the fruits proper to them but not, ultimately,
identification with Siva." {ibid., 13/2681 -70a, cf. ibid., 35/29).

Vaisnava communily allhough he was undoubtedly a Saivite when

he wrote his com m entary.1 Vamanadatta's work served his
purpose admirably, for here was a text that he could freely quote
that would find approval by both groups and so link together more
closely ihc Pancaratra and Saiva sources that he freely quotes
without deference to one or the other in an attempt to establish that
the doctrine of the Spandakarika is taught in both.
Apart from these general, pervasive Saiva influences that can
be discerned in Vamanadatta's work, we find more specific
references which show that Vamanadatta accepted the more
esoteric, strongly Sakia oriented Saiva traditions prevalent in
Kashmir, namely, those of the Krama school. Thus, for example,
we can disccm d e a r traces of Krama notions in the following
passage :
"O Lord, the abiding condition of all things is that of Your
own immutable nature simultaneously ( manifest everywhere ), it
can be known by means of its progressively mutating nature
(kramasvarilpa ) ( that is such without thereby ) running contrary
to the simultaneity ( of the immediacy of B eing). Simi aaneity is
possible in the absence of progressive change ( krama ) which m
its turn ( is possible only ) in the absence of the former. Thus, as
they are mutually contradictory, they cannot arise from one
another. So, in this way, those who have realised the ultimate
truth know that You manifest Your self-luminous conscious
nature as the state of mutual dependence ( between these polarities
and all things )."2
This way of understanding the fundamental polarities of
existence as progression-fc/Yvra -versus simultaneity - yaugapadya,
is typical of Krama absolutism which views the absolute as
dynamic consciousness that, forming itself into all things, is the
entire process of creation, persistence and destruction while
standing beyond them in a fourth ineffable - andkhya - state in
which consciousness is at once all of them simultaneously. From
this point of view, the ineffability and absolute nature of
1. The reader is again referred lo the introduction of my forthcoming book for
further details and references.
2. S.P., 1/66-8.

consciousncss, the one reality, lies in its being this progression

without, even so, changing. This position is summed up by
Abhinava when he says: "the pure principle of consciousness
transcends all talk of succession (krama ) or its absence
(akrama
There is one place in Vamanadattas work where his Krama
leanings arc made lully explicit. In the beginning of the fourth
section he makes a plea for tolcrancc, insisting that, although
Visnu's energy assumes various names and forms according to
different schools of thought, one cannot say that these differences
correspond to separate principles or, for that matter, that they do
not. This is, anyway, of no importance, that which one should
abandon is not a view but karma which is binding and that which
is to be taken up is the pure consciousncss of the subject. He
concludes that this power is:
"One and abides in many states as both m obile and
motionless. She rests on the foundation of time which is the
twelve - petal lotus and by her progressive differentiation (kalana),
She, Kalakarsini, makes her ( etern al) Time manifest as having
assumed the form of ( tem poral) time by means of the generation
and destructionof(-all ) existing things."2
Kalakarsini, also called Kalasamkarsim, is well known as a
form of Kali venerated in the Krama school. Her association with
the twclve-petclled 'wius described as the foundation of time is
possibly a reference to the cycle of twelve Kalis that lies at the
core of Krama mysticism.
Important also as indicative of Vamanadattas non-Vaisnava
influences is his representation of the arising and falling away of
images within consciousness as a discontinuous process: there is a
gap between the arising of one form and the falling away of
another. The attentive soul who can catch this moment and the
centre between one perception and the next, no longer feels the
bondage of the illusory play of Maya through the activity of
thought but experiences it all as the pure expansion o f

1. T.A.. 4/irtOab.
2. S.P.. 4/1.2-3.

consciousness.'W c can compare this view with Ksemaraja who

says:
"This supreme plane of awareness consists of ull the powers
( of consciousness ) pulsing in unity.Alihough actually manifest lo
all constantly, on the plane of Maya it docs not sustain a firm
realisation ol consciousness wiihin oneself. Even there, however,
it is clearly manifest at every junction ( between cognitions )."2
In the centre between perceptions the attentive soul can
experience me pure indeterminate awareness ( nirvikalpa ) that
serves as the basis of detenuinaic perception as its source, resting
place and end. In the ccntre abides what Vamanadatta calls 'pure
expcricncc' i siuUihCinubhava ) \ that is, the fundamental selfawareness ( svasamvedana ) through which consciousness is
perceived and is the basis o f all knowledge which Kashmiri
Saivites identify, as wc have already noted, with absolute "I"
consciousncss.
Finally, it is important to stress that despite the powerful
influence Saiva monism apparently exerted on Vamanadatta he
remains thoroughly Vaisnava throughout his work. Visnu is his
sole objcct of devotion which he also worships as his incarnations
that he understands as hyposihcscs or aspects of consciousncss
and its manifestations.4 His Pancaratra associations arc also clearly
evident from his presentation of the four vyuhas - Vasudeva,
Samkarsana, Pradyunina and Aniruddha, to which he assigns
mystic centres in the body as part of a developing praxis in which
their association with their energies plays a prominent role.5
Indeed, despite the space Vamanadatta dedicates in his work to
establishing, even as he praises Visnu, that consciousness alone,
free of all diversity and subject - objcct distinctions, is ultimately
real, his primary conccm is with practice. Thus not only does he
dedicate space to a description of the yogic centres and channels in
the body viewed from the perspective o f his sophisticated
1. Ibid., 1/4 and 1/41 -44.
2. Sp. Sam., p. 6, see P.T.V., p. 106 ff. where Abhinava deals with this
practice extensively.
3. S.P., 1/41.
4. Ibid., 1/125 ff.
5. Ibid., 4/64ff.

idealism, he also devotes the entire fifth chapter to an analysis of

the phonemes as vital components of Mantra and vehicles of the
sound ( nada ) or word ( sabda ) energy of consciousness which
he identifies with the syllable Om and that make Mantras powerful
and cosmically significant as incorporating within themselves the
energies of all manifestation and what lies in the transcendent
beyond it. This concern fils naturally with Vamanadatta's
recurrent references to Speech (vac), its levels, forms and nature.
Here he deals with a common concern of both Saivites and
Vaisnavas discusscd not only in their secondary sastric traditions
but also in the primary scriptures of both groups.
To conclude wc can say that ihe discovery and edition of
Vamanadatta's work may well serve as a stimulus for further
research into the interaction between Saivism and Vaisnavism in
general and, more specifically, between their monistic forms.
Thus a work like Bhaskara's Kaksyastotra evidences, in the
passages quoted from it, signs of the author's attempts to integrate
certain basic Pancaratra notions into his Saiva monism.1 Other
works, like ihc Cicchaktisamstuti,2 that wc know of only from
quotations, exhibit a sort of intermediary character. This text,
focusing on sakti, draws from both Saiva and Vaisnava ideas to
support its Sakta monism. Again, although the Paramarthasara
draws its inspiration from other sources to develop its monism, its
existence is a further indication that, although less extensive than
their Saiva equivalents, Vaisnava monisms deserve to be carefully
researched and not only in the works of known authors but, more
especially, in the original Pnncaratra scriptures amongst which
some, particularly the Ahirbudhnyasamhita and the Laksmitantra,
exhibit marked Saiva influences.

List of Abbreviations
A.K.
T.A.
P.S.

Adharakarika
Tantraloka
Paramarthasara

1. I am thinking here particularly of the verses from the Kaksyastotra quoted

in Sp. Pr:.. p. 103.
2. Quoted ibid., p., 87 and p., 113.

P.T.V.
M.M.
L.T.
L.A .S.
V.B.
S .P.
Sp.Nir.
Sp.Pra.
Sp.Sam .

Paratrisikavivarana
Maharthamanjari
Laksmitantra
Luptagamasamgraha
Vijnanabhairava
Samvitprakasa
Spandanimaya
Spandapradipika
Spandasamdoha

Appendix
77*j Laksmitantra and the Samviqjrakasa
Listed below arc ihe verses in chapter fourteen of the
Laksmitantra that are related to those of the Samvitprakasa.
1) L.T. 14/8ab reads:
i

S.P. quoted in T.A., 5/154 cd reads

in the place of
this verse quoted in Sp. Pra., p. 96, agrees with the
L.T. exactly.
2) L.T. 14/9-10:
^
I
5T

cT^ T U {
*T

cTOT

|
||

Cf. S.P., 1/1-2. Although these verses are substantially

different in the L.T their common form with the S.P. is still
clearly discemable.
3) L.T., 14/11 corresponds lo S.P., 1/3, only the fourth pada
contains variants, L.T. reads :
........... .^ t cT^faRTT TTcT^

and S.P.:
............/ftfa

cT^ <W.<*

||

4)L.r., 14/12:
ffrPTTFTFT

Cf., S.P., 1/4.

cTCT ||

5) L.T., 14/13:
cmr jTHf&lci
c f., s . p ., i/y.
6) L.T., 14/14:
m \

Tf^r ^ w f r w c t

SFTO c T ^ t ^ -

II

cmr
%o?j
II
Cf. S.P.. 1/9 ah:
wPHHI HHlfqVi f l t c T ^ P f r ^
||
The second line is noi found in the exiant manuscripts of the
Samvitprakasa, when Bhagavadutpala quotes this verse in Sp.
Pra., p. 112 he supplies ihe sccond line which reads there:
cPTT
cf^nftWcTTR;
||
7) L.T., 14/15.
fercTt
CRT ^TT Pi ^^rT
|
c^T

m t 5RTOT

||

Cf. S.P., 1/24:

F^McIT ^fTc^T W ^TRTfcT
|
cTCpft ^IcTT FT FTT^
3T %^TcTT <TTT ||
Note thai the manuscripts of the Samvitprakasa read tat>di
instead ol ^TcTT, the latter reading is found in Sp. Pra., p. 89
and is decidedly better and so has been adopted.
8) L.T., 14/1 Sab:
Cf. S.P., 1/26 ab:
9) L.T., 14/19:
m f^W TFTT ^ T ^ c T f ^RT:
TT^rt JTrFf^RWr JTT

|
||

dllR<^h^MW

Cf. S.P., 1/28

Note that MSs A, D, E and G of the L.T. read R^b in the

place o f f r f te T h is reading is clearly closer to the S.P.
10) L.T., 14/20ab:
9TFrTT ilf^dl 'lift)
W^Md: I

Cf. S.P., 1/28 cd:

^
11)

Trf^r cR - w

L.T., 14/21:

11

5TT^r f ^ e ^ H T 5

y W ^ 'I'c q f^ H

R l^ d l

cf. S.P., 1/34 cd - 35 ab:

<rfViTt>Rmi?K frm^r *

II

11

|cj't>eMlcfldt?'Mcqld ycMSTTS^ftf R i t ^ d : |

12) L.T., 14/22ab:

j i : f^rcfr w
This line corresponds lo S.P., 1/35 cd.
13) L.T., 14/25:
RTT 'JiirMI f%?T
<tc1 TT^PT
5^:

T F T R ft

S.P., 1/40

|
||

The first line is identical; the second reads:

c T c ^ T ^ R p F R ^ ^T T TPTR TT

||

14) L.T., 14/27:

d ^ 'i l ^11

<^I+M

z f e irsir ^

ii

S.P., 1/43
3T*T5^TT*J^ 3T^T ejvita
m ^ r^ r ^

|
^ te c q f^ r

ii

15) L.T., 14/28

^gr

q ^ rd ru fM

^ W T iW ^ R J

^ c T

v n rq ^

i
||

S.P., 1/44 reads Rifa^cm in the place of wci^iRl and fcPssfcT

for
!6) L .J. 14/29 coincides with S.P., 1/45 L.T. reads:

s. p.:
17) L.T., 14/30:
to r

f^ rtt

Z T ^xR T ^ < q c l c T ^

II

ffcnrr

f^ t

cT^ ^q- cR-

II

S.P., 1/46:
^n^R T

18) L.T., 14/35:

H l^ T T *TOT VTT^: H^fcT
*T
ST^Tct

I
II

^ fc T W

S.P., 1/52:

t o
t iw {

V r fcfr^T:

ii

19) L.T., 14/36:

STTT^fr

^ ul

||

S.P., 1/53:
'iicM 'ni'^tq^icrqiq>
*T4T
w
fW r^ n ^ r

I
II

f ^ T ^ T T fa^TT ^ elW

20) L.T., 14/38:

S.P., l/57ab:
^ te r^ v T T ^ :

FHT ferfcT:

l/56cd:
W IT

^ cPflffcr cTTCcTT ||

21) L.T., 14/39:

t e n - f^ js r ^
H 4H V ^K T^ I *PT

f^rfcT:

i
II

S.P., 1/57:
^

t e r r f^RT

^ r |.- ^ i % E R T ^ i

cR f l f ^ W

f^rfcT:

II

22) L.T., 14/45:

^M^FTT J ^ Slf^T W it
^
cR *TT f^ S P T T ^ Hg^RTgqRTcT

|
II

S.P., 1/70:
^RT^PTT ^T ct HT% ^TFTT
I
cPT
c^t qtf*R: q^TRTcT
|l
Now that the Laksmitantra has been established to be of South
Indian origin and as not being older than rhe 12th century (see
above, p. 27 n. 6) there can be no doubi that it has borrowed from
the Samvitprakasa and not the other way round. This fact serves
to indicate that even though Vam anadattas work was not
generally well known outside Kashmir it did travel to the South of

its citation in Mahesvarananda's Maharthamanjari, composed in

South India in the 13th century, further confirms. Moreover, the
compatibility of the views of the Samvitprakasa with those of the
Laksmitantra, despite certain important differences, indicates how
this kind of monistic Vaisnavism found substantial acceptance
amongst some Pancaratrins.
The Samvitprakasa Ouoted in Other Sources
Listed below are the verses which are quoted from the
Samvitprakasa in other texts:
Chapter I
Verse
Source
Sp. Pra., p. 112.
10
12
Sp. Pra., p. 111.
13
V.B., p. 109, St. Ci., p. 83.
20
Sp. Pra., p. 120.
24
Sp. Pra., p. 89.
30-31
Sp. Pra., p. 111.
37-38ab
Sp. Pra., p. 111.
41-42
Sp. Pra., p. 96.
44
Sp. Pra., p. 96.
48-49
Sp. Pra., p. 96.
52
Sp. Pra., p. 97.
53-5
Sp. Pra., p. 95-6.
56-57
Sp. Pra., p. 97.
70
Sp. P m ., p. 104.
76-8
Sp. Pra., p. 87.
93
Sp. Pra., p. 90,114.
100cd-102ab
Sp. Pra., p. 100.
104cd-106ab
Sp. Pra., p. 85.
109 cd-11 lab
Sp. Pra., p. 93.
Chapter 2
18cd-19ab
30
45
58

Sp. Wd., p. 89.

P.T.V., p. 83.
Sp. Pra., p. 114.
Sp. Pra., p. 88.

-36

SAMVri'PRAKASAIl

Chapter 3
2
27

M.M., p. 25.
M.M., p. 25.

Chapter 5
26
Other possible quotes:
1) Sp. Nir., p. 48:
-

Sp. Pra., p. 89, 125.

*TFTTc*T%% * FnTRcT: |
d w ictifefccf y4ftfct
^
||
2) M.M., p. 109, P.S., p. 146, in the latter we read: - T O
q ^ P T tcRR-

I
q^TR% II

3) T.A., 5/154cd-5ab:
<Sfr

5 .%
dw i^m ^'5 faR ndi

|
.11

Jayaratha comments:
ejim<it1W|2iur mf^TftfcT
The verse is found omplete in Sp. Pra., p. 96:
f t 5 :%
1

ll

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Tantraloka by Abhinavagupta (12 vol.) with viveka by
Jayartha. Part 1 edited by M.R. Sastri. Parts 2-12 edited by
M.S. Kaul, K.S.T.S., no. 23,1918; 28,1921; 30,1921; 36,
1922; 35, 1922; 29, 1921; 41, 1924; 47, 1926; 59, 1933; 57,
1936 and 57, 1938.
Paramarthasara by Abhinavagupta with vivrti by
Yogaraja. K.S.T.S., no. 7,1916. Edited by J.C. Chatteqee.
Paramarthasara by Adiea with vivarana by
Raghavananda. Acyutagranthamala vol. 9. Vidyavilasa
Press, Varanasi, 1989. Edited by Surya Narayana Sukla.
Paratnsikdvivarana by Abhinavagupta. K.S.T.S., no.
18,1918. Edited by M.S. Kaul.
Maharthamanjari and parimala by MaheSvarananda.
Yogatantragranthamala, no. 5. Benares, 1972. Edited by
Vrajavallabha Dviveda.
Laksmitantra. The Adyar Library Series vol. 87, 1975,
the Vasanta Press, Adyar. Edited with Sanskrit gloss and
introduction by V. Krishnamacharya.
Luptdgamasamgraha. Part 1 collected and edited by
Gopinatha Kaviraja. Yogatantragranthamala no. 2,
Varanasi, 1970; part 2 collected and edited by
Vrajavallabha Dviveda. Yogatantragranthamala no.
Varanasi, 1983.
Vijndnabhairava with commentaries by Ksemaraja
(incomplete) and Sivopadhyaya. K.S.T.S., no. 1918.
Edited by M.R. Sastri.
Spandakarika with vrtti by Kallatabhatta. K.S.T.S.,
no. 5,1916. Edited by J.C. Chatteijee.
Spandanirnaya by Ksemaraja. K.S.T.S., no. 43,1923.
Edited with English translation by M.S. Kaul.

Spandapradipika by Bhagavadutpala. Published in the

Tantrasamgraha vol. 1. Yogatantragranthamala no. 3 pp.
83-128. Edited by G. Kaviraja,.Benares, 1970.
Spandasamdoha by Ksemaraja. K.S.T.S., no. 43,
1925. Edited by M.R. Sastri.

^ P P R rT f^ d k cT :

3p t w t y + w j

^ g v r rcn re ft f^C T fcr cm ^ r

r c k ^ < ^ i 5 ^ tr

ll ?
^

^ r r t ^ ^ n^rsftr
q fe + ^H l* W
MJJlfaftKMW
^ ^

I
ii

I
jr <t^

^ w ij^ c i3
F T W ^TFTlfcr T f r f f a t ^

1. * fwnq-

tm- FT wfa&cT

^ : | # n ? n M ^-.| &

1 AB: T nftff
3. AB: -HTtft4. AB:T
5. A : - f ^
6. B : ^ t
7. A:^H: B : W :

|| vs

iR t ^
I
^ <m?^:6 ii <:
^ W faScT

<TOT *TFffkcTT

ll ^

^RgNfcT *<W<MVirc{

II K
I

sffw + t:

^ rm g tszr
W TT^r: R r ^fcT ^
cmr w i^ P r

ll v
I

W ^
^ c^ c^^T ^ftcT >J14I^
y+isii+'Rt ^
u+iv*k*r *r

f^ to fc T ^

ii

TTTWTt ffrPTTFTRT ff 'RciTfliSHd:

zrd^nfxR W ^r

|| ^

*m & fttfr ^rofcrn

tifaswm:
w f ^ T T fffflft^ ff# c T ^ W f 1

cTCT i T F f W f ^ - ff#

II ? 0 II

35 R T ^ n n % ^ ffs re w re ^ q c r

^ff^TcT: gw ^r4

ii ? ? 11

ckmhi

ffM fft

ff

T O T T O T 6w t ffTC^TCT: 5T^RTcT

ll H

3n^rr

s#ff: ^

^W TT: 5Rpcr% 5T

fktr
ff

cT

^l+ ld fo > ^leh l\< q R ^ 3

f f # ff#c%

STfft0

HffPMg^c! ? p

cf ff ^TffcT

fflffc^T^ ^Tfcrf^ffj ff PW^h

cff

|| ? v ii

ff^fff^ f^cTT;7 I

ffR 37?ff c^.TffT ff#ffT '5T7TcT: Vnft

H l<^ ^

II ? 3 II
I

F it% W R f % ^ f f :

^TT f f # f ^ oETFff

II

cT^ ^ ^ s r t t W

|| ?K ||
I
II

II

|
II ?V9 II

9^ H W W ff^PJff10 q ^ R l P m V l * 11 I
ff% r

to

fsMCRT<r

ll

ff#?r^ffff: ffKff 3cT: O T t ffff:

'4wio4fcl>l

II

ff#?T: t i ^ q

1.
2.

AB:
AB : W itfrttffRd

3.

A B : -*WT-

4.

ArSWlTII'di B: 5T+IHIWi

5.

AB: f^K f^T

6.

B: T O

7.

A B : f^TfcT:

8.

BzWsfxFlWr

9.

AB: tHlvm

10. A :

11. A B : - f ^ t e :

ff#ffT

ff

ll
II

SWT ffWpj

II ^0 II
f^Wq; c^ ztrM l^lclPsi^: I

*Tff:
^

ftfa^fcT

frtf

iptt ^

cfcj ^ R T c ^ W T ^ ||

srfS^ct i^ s f a 2 f t ^

i%W
cTcf: p

ii

f^ W ^ S T cT

q j ^ t e r W 3 f%
%^r w^Mdi % 3T

to

h i Ri

%^ff^

^ ^
TO

^ ^ M l ^ c l 6 f ^ ^ S t w f r f t 7 ff*T:
H^T^TCTffTCift^8 3iiHt;icHp1
^oq^QaRr:
^TT^ ^T

ll

TO II ^

^% ^W T T ^T t

ii

ll

^T 3T

w ^ rt

^IcTT ^T
cfcf

^rat

t e l ^

II

'II

|
||

||

I
|| ^

II

^ r e n ^ S ^ T T o R f^ : || ^v9 ||

ffT*r ft#ET *RT^t ^ T f ^ T P T ^ T :

|| R6 II

ff SIM ^R d ffTfr ^

w
^

w ^

W ff

10

fefecT f^9ff
^TFTt

^Rf<^ c^^lrHl

1.

B:F**r

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

A:f*
A B :T ftl^ T W
AB : %T^cTT
A rc^sS T
AB: -^T,AB: -WTf^fr
AB:-*T
AB:WlfnT
B

Rr T ^
ffPT

ll w i
|

%<T^ ^f%: || ^ 0 ||

tlcM cTfe c^R T ^ 4iq |

^TT

II 3 ? I
fa t:

c T c ^T

q ^ i : <faf cHTft- clc^TT

^fatcR cT :
ftW T T ^
*r ^

II ^

cR XW Pl^UcT
|
fa t
^ +H lRi^ || 33
^ f ^ r 2 cT?ftsf^r ^ P i w ? r

^ 5 f fa w ^ l

q<l<rHHI3

W l ?T f ^ q ^ T

||

t o ^ q T ^ c T W ^ S R q ^ z jf tf f^RJcT:
$*: f^TcTt W

^ |^ v ^ V s - M Ifa d Ifa^l: || ^

53 jfaR s^ lft Tf%m ^TT^mT: ^

11 ^

s re ra ^ g fa f^ m frs fa arfcri^a^r

w m ^ Prfr+W 5R>RFF: I
MfclRTt):
^ W ^ T g+W+'F:6 || ^V9 I
-r

: y+i^rfi

to

g ^ m r w ^ r ^ ts c T : s f s ^ r

73 W ^ l l *T

S ^ M m u q ri^ c ^ '10 ^ F T ^ F T N T to ^
3 T ^ ft^ P d HT?pf <f 12*T*T

1.

AB:*T
A B : -<*Pfl

3.

AB : MUcM?l:

4.
5.

AB : -rtc T ^ w n
A B : faftnlift

6.

AB :
M*lrt>ilf^d
AB : areP J:

7.
8

AB : *ft

9.

A B : WHTfiT

10

AB : ^ 1

11.

A B : h tl

12.
13.

A B : 1R:
AB :^ c T

11 ^
|

ii

t o ^ r 8H N ^l^cr I

*r# ^ r tw m iP d 9 fW M i^ ftc t

2.

^ T 1 3 || VO

^fT ^Ic^l f%cT

d H llft

II V?

<Tt) <1^1ul 'h'lR l^

5?TT XFTRTt2

II ^
I

*T

^ R K I^ P l

s j s r R *R m ^

3 *k i + i ( I m < i M

d f ^ H IN U H IT ^

fc P ^ frT

I
II VY

< d ^ d U H K P l < t e l l $ H ^ lf> *R T :

^ F M ^ R w tr ^ tr : y+i^mfci cr

II

fa m ^ *H ld 4

f^ T ^ T f ^ f t4

i l l ' l l 5 t o c f cT^ W tR
c^^ctc^)wlftldlrHrll
^TS^R-: ^ ts v m m ^ r ^ k :6

I
II * *
I
II VV9

^TTPtsft- SJ^goT ^ c^xTRW SPfr

q f t ^ q - f r s f ^ q - u f a < W l l 'f < r : T ^

II

3 T W F ^ cf^jt *T%^ W ^RT^TT

cT^TT f t ^ ^ T c f +1 ^IWif^T

II *%

*g$ f%7n W k ^ 7 ^

f W r 8^ ^ r

t n r 9 ?TTcT ^ t d M p U t l :

mH^rTHTcTt rNFTT^r

1.
2.

II * 3

AB : <T <T^ STH^T

A B : 5^XPTRft

3.

AB : R iffle'll

4.
5.

B:?nft?T
A:

6.

B: 'iiRo

7.
8.

A B :AB : *icft

9.

B:<l$

10.

AB : 5TMT^tfCPTf^<T:|

B : *llRfl,

II HO

cTCT

TRTcTi

II K? II
I

f^ R W F J

^ T Ic T to :

II

II

ll

ll

^ q q r d q r ^ r f^ f^ m tw T c r
w f k t r ^ 2 33:

cmr
ic?r^nfeR R T
N

^T^TR ^T
t a

?R 3T f ^ T T

^ Ic T to n F T
^

11 K* ll

M q^n^r

^ I d N d lS #
W

W TT

II KK II

f^TT4 f^rtcf: |
*T ^

d ^lR d

cTR?TT II

M ^ d ^ d '^':5 M +W FT*f f^dcT:

6^

f ^ T f^RT ^ T

^ T ^ 7 T # W <R U 9\*\$l f^TfcT:

II ^V9 ||

P lR ^ lW y ^ l ^ d ^ 8

^ N t f M N i g ^ T ^ t ^ f* r w
P iR M

ll
^ rp j; s f c

f ^ ^ n w r f M Fnq;
^ r ^TFT

o t t

^ c ^ R ^ r10

11 ^0 11

^TRTt11 TO^TT^12!

B: *R?T|
B:-n^r

3.
4.
5.

-AB: TpraRtT
AB: fa*
A :-J ^ rft

6.

B:X^t

7.
8.

AB:-Pl^HIH,
A :W fa H , B:xxW,

9.

B :f^ff xx<T*W x x W H ^ :

12. B :

f^ T 1
crat

1.
2.

10. A B: -*TCT
11. AB: WTcf

ll

w i w f r fk c f:9 11 k s ll

Snfofer qnr*r ^
r

II

w jf1 ^

ii %? ii

^ 4 d ^ ilc i\R > P i

T O t ^ t P f t e r r ^ r 11

^ rs ^ n -:2 ^
^T

'weitq ^?Tt ^STW ^T ^T:

O T r f T ^ f r R ^ H rfc if^ t ^
^

|| ^

* ^ q w ^ c T ^ mM m^ ^ cT
c rf^ f R f 4 ^ ^ |: 5

||

I
||

II

s r a ^ w i c r -+-HKii1 =r % 6

|| w

||

cRTW PW TW Tgpi^ 4 R^(cl:

tr^TT 8sET O ~^

||

et>lsilRti'Hi:

# N 3 lfadRlHI

w w m k 9* T W ^ n % 5 ^ t 5 =T:

F T T ^ ftro n R :
^

f l m m f t t f i o m T: w

\\

(| ^
i

tfr ^

sralr ^ ^

l> B: '*+>Kul't|
2. B: *iJlud^|:|
3. A B :^ T
4. B : ^rrftcri
5. . B : 'TTftcT
6. AB: F|
7.

AB:^T-

9. A: # M ,
10. B:-*W
11. B:?nffer,

12. B:?nfk,
13. B : *1%,

||

|| \% ||

n ^ M ^ q i ^12 ^13^tRcT 3 W

cPT

II

3T # R t ^r

||

R w w f r w cR cTx^f^r fag:
^ M f ^ c f t^ r

8.

ii

c^t

q^qR T cr

^cT |

II V90 II

R x ? r fo p * T T T R T a fr

^ q p w f^ c t:

2^ T ^ r t t S fr q fW T ^ P T 3T J T :

W ^\ ^

s R -| fV < f^

S H W

II vs? II
I
II vs^ II

a f ^ l d l + I X K i + W ll B i^ M ^ f t ^ c t : 3

^ r fr m w r im

H Vs 3 II

^ T tS F F ^ J # :6 t i w

tf# 4 5 R ^ r
: 7 R c T t8 %

^ c fftrf) ^iRpTcT c^rTcTt

93 p tR S R * R F M

Mld(\'Mcl |

W : TC II VS* ||

F T T ^ S T O t^ H ^

M<5<WHrtkJ cTFTTt^T ^ <p^ f^TfcT: || Vs^ ||

^ l f a l R K F n ^ WtJ&Ht

s ftc W

* n r< ;'ig 5 ^ r M

e ^ T ii

i w fc i

sra ^ r
* tt f o r r t f c r a r

j t w a t W m fir s w j;
TTT W CRT ^FTT^T
fM W rr f ^ M ^ w
HT

f ^

1.

A B : sK B : TFtRT:

4.

AB : f l f ,

5.

AB: ^

6.
7.

AB: J jt
AB t

t 10 cTR :

|| V s^ ||
II ^ 0

8.

A: Fl^t B: 'iiRfl
B :3 R f

10.

A B : fas^ T

11.

AB.-T5fo

STRTT O T

W kM ^

9.

12. B :

ii vsvs 11
|

B: -^it^yr-

3.

<TW # 12^ E # RFFfRTT

^ f ^ F [ tfP^T

2.

ii v s^ 11

ll vs<

T H :W ^ m T ^ ftn W I T
R W H Jc T T

II

ii

W^[

^ lf^ ^ c K H d !<

< ^ ii

'R W T I ^
f^ N p t

s js

ST^TcT2 5 m

ii

?TFT 3^

4| ^ T X P ^ t 5
R ld ^ q t o P i W dr
dV w 4 ^
R^cT
^nM ^W TFTT: ^
3T5m ^T: ^ 5

c * ii

W fRqcT:
RxT: iJTrfr:

II

*1H M I*Jt1^!n4 ^R bH t^l d^lfld l 6

R^m T: ^R T T ^
^

\ II

ddt *TR: qsMlcrfWtf: f^TT

d*TT8

cT^ + ^ 'R l d ^

f ^ R t tr* N ^

W:

9^ 3 ^ H I R ^ S c T : ^ T l f ^ T fcPSfa
^ iw ^ q m w r ^ f r
q^m

I ^V9 II

w ttt

II

^ w t t cmr

qirF) 3 W % 10 l l lhi^:

I < ^ II

qWHTT ^T7!^ Rl <}*|q PRT^FTT

dm

*r4urai<ui w 12

I.

B:-a[j

B:arar^r

3.

AB:*TC^-

4.
5.

B : % c^r cRA B: -T ^ ij

6.

A:^ft^B:HTftcT

7.
8.

B :^
A:cTOT

9.

B : ^rJTC-

10. AB:^nfk
II . AB:3^^5:
12. B :

h M mfcf

^rRt sra?Rr

I \0

II

f3

iZ

l ?ooii

c^pt*Ft*rm

q f y ^ i^ r

||
II ^

I
u
CZ
T

IC/

vr
;r

RcfKt11

f^rr iot ^5 ^ ^rhrr w

^IT ^PT W J ^
^

cRTftr

fafW

faW

Ov*
O
Ow**

tr

&

i
TT
&
CQ CQ CQ

..........................................O
C ' c ^ T j - r > ' O t ~ - o o o \ '-

J ^ :a

-6
8
'L

-ja y - : e

-9

J& -= 8 V

i>fejy:a &h-V

fr

: a bnulij : v

1
^ l k : a 2ak =V

| k fc h

W i n II

hh k

M i ) p k JJiaiye H f e h y i ^ l h y
I g lk M l^
'h
^ ih l

un

II
|

J^hJS :piSfrlfrlh$

hlh

h& tefe^Piajl*

Ik k

ol P h ^ K p f e

110 U II

i^m ) Iktelgafr] : j ; t | tehaPJ^jlt Ihfc

lPh^.fefe^) ] lk ]rth^-fr>)jhte

11^01 ||
ll? 0 i

k fe y h lE *

: S ^ j trtEfrfilE IriEi y t A ^ l g h

II

k lP fe lfc fth g lb . h k

:S y ^

lls\0 * ||
11.^0

4| Iki2

|
I

* ||

k y t e lk ^

\P h ^ J

s ijtk ite *

:&kk IlialPfc lik]> Ifrflftft

k

i } k ^

lrthlln\)h

k ^ k ^ j

EfrJjnEfi k> kil ^illn^h

I M $ II

P ^ k ^ J^ lh lfeP* h ^ lb PfoSj>k^e

^ h t& h lte U S .U*,lhlln\jhf

||

:M y h ^

11*0 i

:k E

h ^ y tb ) h

ll^o H I

fcll^l>friPlfclEfr rtolb^PfrfrMhlh

tt^ to h P 4 S M ^

11^0 H I

I IP^ hfrj

ll

h. h>N>

P^j SP %

k k S j> frJM t* lfrh J J M tt

J^aki

lk ^ j ^

1R

'I

3n$cK ft
^ fc r#

* cr t o t f t r o c r
ttt

n ? ? 3 ii
etfcr: I

13T g fM ^ cT W q *TFT

|| ? ?Y||

tf< fH llft f% m ^ F T c f^ g

^tfcr^r qrs^g * p t^ ; w f t

11 m i l

c ^ r H c ^ r^ r PiSr

to r w : f^ n i

# T T T ^TRT

^fcr

^ V ^T

^ T ^ rs^ T ^ r

q te :

II m

i
ll m i l

F#cT: ^R T IW T
2^

*T ^

B ^ T ^ " TR":

c^TrfT

3 c * R fo ^ c ^ l l m

^ r4

srreqt'fcpr ,i i ,^i^ H><n*&

tf R f t r t * * ! '

il

FT t o ^ l c l : || m

il

f ^ W l M ^ P T c^t

s ^ T T ^ t f t ? W : 5h4RhT4

|| ? ^ 0 ||

cT ^ r & fo f^TcTT: ^ T S f
to w

^ r ftr
^ w tx fa ^

T O P l# c W W lft c ^ f ic T f ^ W T :

I
II ? ^ ? ll
I

f ls rc firu f 7*^m > i msw*\%

c W R ^ 5 ^ f t- q t f t v i-w 'fo :

II ? ^ l l
I

TO T O - 8^ T :
^ T rf^ T ^ k f <W P

II H 3 II
cT^

H R W ^ W ^9
1.

A: a r j f p r f t o w , B : < H ifttfa w w

B:?ntni

3.
4.

il

B : 3 *T W

5.

B : W lW tii

6.

B:TtT

7.

A: HSWHi

8.

A B : ^TTit

9.

B : - ^ jr tV ;

I
II ? V * II

sm srcrw*
^ llrB ^ R T : ^

ct

c T ^ T f^ rm it f ^

w ^ h $\

3tf*r

13
I
rf w {

i^sf i n t o r R w ^

I .

sm c* w j
3tf*r R t w
c ^ |^ |^ ^ U |

3wfTF^TcRT^m

ll ? ^ l l

33:

3tf*r

1
f a f ts w j; 11 ? ^ l l
1

11 n<^ll

cr

f^ :fm ^ rW iw ^ 4

33:

1
II ? ^ 1 1

a r ^ p ^ ^ a 'a i ^ M ^ d ^
^

w trw

5^ t ^ ;

5 T # 5 ^

cT

^T :

ii H M I

^ r rs * g H * fR r ^mts*g cr

1
|| n o i l

1
11 u ? l l

q ^ p rf3 + q R i t o m i *t?t
t r ^ w r 5R t q p ^ f
^ n f i r c^t 6 t 7

I
^ M ^ r 8 m ft fafa: 11 ? ^ n

WRm^tcT ^ t c f % ^ |% : ^ M ^ f :

9cT ^n^T T 3T 3 R : +R lfa"H ^*flftdl: || ? ^ l l

w v r a i ^ g *r i m d i ^ i ^ <tt:

|| ?V*II

OTT

N*lft[dl

q q cRTT H # ? ^ H#FT W irt ft T>fr

T T ^ r f e ^ d t T ^ il^ ii

1.
2.

B:W
B: -anw

3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

AB: fTCF*B :-+'ihsi<<4>

AB:^TT^Tf
AB: <^T*T
AB:^T%
AB: WRT
B : ?Rqtr-

|
II ?3KII

Wm^xTTW d c k j^ l tffacf i f t :
W^TtxTt ^ < R T d f o t

f ^ n fa IT:

1^ F ^ to T X t r 2 9TOTT 3*ftef ST ^tjfcT

S^cTFT ^ f f t 5
ffM iro x T F T M ^ T ^ p s rm
TfrT

1.

AB:

2.

A :- 5fM - Bi-FfiW r-

3.

B :*fa

TRT SPHT

II m i l
I
II *VU

w ^ x ^ te n r

i ^

P lrt gH^n^EcT :1
am
^TR*R: <TT 3TFP^r %* w

^ :

3T W R : q f^ M K lc tR : yifafW cT
S R W m ^P T t ^ N W Irtft^ l ^TRI^r
^
f%3 ^ T ^ : SRPxft:

3TT?RT ^ ^PT:

d<-M^MM^cT

i^$tek*H>
'3TToRT q f t

*r
'^ W W ^TRTT

f*r:
<TT:

qXPWTT4 cTCpft FJIcT

R^qiRt)4
u H i ^ K d ^ i m sifafe*r*ft m :
^ rfr
S cf^ S T cf 5 ^:
STfaS
^

R w if^

^ tR f cRT^R fW frfrfi: W RlV>dlH8

HrllH^HlfcT WWrf^TcT^T

q p t d< T ^ft fTPt 9WFTRTWKgRm^

1.
2.
3.
4.

B
B i(^si v*ty
B :f r
B:qT3TcRT B: M'^lcMI

5- B: cTtff6. A: -*jtn$T
7.

B : <TC^

8.

B: ^jgftrecrrn

9.

B : WVHWW-

i^ d W l4 d l^ d ^
%^T ^

^ ts 7 o ^ 2

3? TT^ t ^

^ ttJ lflfc T R R T T ^

^ r ^ h "

II ? ? II
I

q^cT

|| ^

^ iq rH r^ l '5 6f^ n ft ^ f a s # f ^ ^ r f t ^

II

^d\d<41^H dq><^ cR fM cl :

II ? 3 II

^F*TcT ^ g

^ # T

ftw ft:

d|WJW4<ttlrtb:
d < lc* H < 3 H T ^

d ^ l^

9 ^ P n d |R|^>,u|10 ^ T
^ r

f k ic T :8

u ^ t ^ a q t 12 ^ R h l ^ f :
f

W T M ^ T 14 <::15

f :

*TFR T^

WTcT T O ^ J 16 tTX^rw%iTcT:
WtiftTft ddR W q^vafcT

AB: ^

B: IR^TW

cTCtT-

3.

A:

4.

B : FTC-

5.

AB:-HTCT

6.

A: f^VT, B: f^ V

7.

B : *P?T

8.

B: ^f^rfcT:

9.

B:

10. AB:-arfcT^
11. A : ^
12 . b :
13.

B : ^R T

14.

B : -*KT'T

15.

B : f tl^

16.

AB: ^rf

= n t ^ rflu K fr *fir ^rifer

II ? H II
I

T ffrT c f:

c F m ft 13WT5T ^

1.

c l" ft f c T

H ^ T : f t o M f ^ T Wu W

2.

|| ? * ||

II

II

I
II ?V9 II

I
II ?< II

cPST Praft^PTTfcT

PTCRH5fT *T

H fc l^ '

|| \% ||

Pnw*i4><m5 g 3

II ^0 II

ft q f t ^ : f

*T ^T TO": SW?T: ^

W: 4*<lRf4 ^fRT: II

HW W ^

ft^lPTH H d':

||

3id%nw di$4U gi34N *ikq:

T c R W T W H l

T^TR TO cT6

^#lcTW ^ H f i h ^ ^ s f l r qeJcT:
W t
^T
^ *TFRTT

|R 3 ||

% T RfaW dl ^ f 8 q |^ H M ^ c|[^ R i:

|| ^Y ||

srfciRxt)' % ^xTTcfr9 ^

W ^ i o clft^ f t w *T ^ r d M ^ r ^

II

||

! 2^ t o M | 13W d c flW ftd V ^ I

II ^

II

*iv ^ i f c i i

^ ^

1.
2.

AB: Tfl^t
B:

3.
4.

AB:-n^J
B:

5.

AB: T O f :

6.

B:

7.

B :fc f

8.

B: V ^

9.

B : *rar %

10. B:*nW{
11. B:-qfcf^T
12 . b :
13.

AB: $

14.

B : 5^f

fa P ftw S

f tfa ir

14 # N f^ r# tq t

ll^ii

T O W W

to ff^cr

w . T & sq ^ fcR rn ^ ts# T fcT

II

II

w ft *ft:

^ r ^ T t ^ T FTT^ 1 w f ^ STRT
T ^ R F ?n fa 2

iJM ^Ictfi^d :3 qT:

d l< ^ W JcT F<J q?ft

qT: T C

30 II

aqq^K'HI'U
cqRiRTnw

^ ^

3? II

W tk llH M d ^ P U W : ^ M T :
5m t : f ^ W T O # t ^PT ^m cW f^TT:

II

fa ^ rw n f^ ;
Wcf: ST^RTrT W*t f^ ra t ^ fa sT c T

I 33 II

W W t^ T ^
^ rq ; f ^ w r t w

c r^ fc r

cf ^tfHHl'HW IgftJcl7 HRTCTHI^W:

I 1 * II
I^

II

II

I^

||

II

W u iw R *THHT SlfcPHNI<J|cl^c!
srfcmr

^n fcH + T

ftn fer ^RTT

u4?idN i: ^TT 4ta^si<i4 d<RjRocl:8
^nqcr W r %fcr m i ^ T f^ n ji

1.

B: WIcT

2.

B -.-a^rwfft-

3.

B : -R*rfr-

4.

B: 5S^

5.

B : U lt:

6.

B :- ? r t-

7.

AB: -TJp-

8.

B:ft^T

9.

A : F F W T 5 , B : HW1cH

*TRcfT
^

f% 2J=IRMt: ^ p f 3^ T K p K I $ t :

3T$H

f% W ^

t^ q ^ T ^ T 5

II
I

J| YO ||

^ + ^ m 6 M m *iRi<;4 y+mcir

^f% iT H I^fn^T ^ s t f : V l F ^
to

II Y* ||

7 ^N W qf^i" <i^Jd:

$ ft S^i t l :yfq
w

w fts n ft R > ^ d i^

W iy R l ^ ' f^TFT HtTTW irracT Jcf:

^ F r^ rm f^ T trs fe r

II

ll

ii y

^ h

q q p ft ^ T O 9% r t s ^ r s f t - ^TTOcTm I

^ r
F r c r f t # i i a a p f e r < ^ fe r
^ 2r
Igm ^NftH^lT :10
cR - c ^ W f T m f ^ r 11 q t q t d ^ W T O :12
s n n c f t cZT^rET^n- m r r
^f^T cT :
m % sfa
am ^ t ^ # ra -

11 y ^ h

*rfc

R i^ d

w m % s fa fo t n ft s w

1.

AB:- S i t *

2.

AB: HPirati:

3.

AB: *H?m -

4.

B :*T H

r-

B:*H??T

6.

A :- R ^ t , B :-W tT

7.

B :- H f tw w

8.

AB: 3TOT-

9.

AB: ftcfT

10. B : -PlM 'l:

11.

B : -nanf^r

12. BPRfa-

ll y y h
II Y K II

m fta : ll

yvs h

<T 3

'<*#T^r f t w qSG '-Sdlfo^

* ra t ^r R R i ^ h
P re ^ i
T i l l 'd < P W ^ ^ I f lR B T ^IMcIISeTcT:
3 M

3 f^ T

^cT

II * 6 ||
I

II

||

I
I K 0 II

*tef 'TFT ^r <*wRd

ttt^ tw

4t o # t r * t t ^ t * r * t ^ p T H ^ m r ^

II K? II

t^tt Bert

t % ^ f M d ^ r ^Rfcrr^

^ t %5 *t t t t ^ ^ t * r? m r
mm5^ f r s W r s f e r ^ t R t ^ W r k t t
f ^ f r ^ T f c i r 6 T O T ^ f c T *TFTT ^T f S ^ c T

II

5 ^.rict sift V *t c r w t l 7

TO ^- ^ ^

cT^T ^

f^TT W ] ;

^ ^r H x t r t t :
8^ x P T ^ f f c T ^
^ r H r^ T H c T t q f t ^ T c T
5 HxTFTT ^T
'<3x1 m i ^
W T tT T 10 f a f ^ R T ^
w ^ T ii ^ c h
^TTfer m srfcr

1.

A:-*J5 FT

2.

AB:

3.

A : s r f^ F F T W

4.

B:

5.

Bj Hr TTt f r^

6.

A: H^fll

7.

B : tlW R Il

8.

B i" ^ fi^ "

9.

B : fefo * *

10.

AB: W ft

II

I
II K3 II
II V* II
I
II KK II
I
II

II

I
II Kvs II

4I4IVI

< CQ CO

<

TOT

fasMU'fejIcl:

13 T W fl^ ^ T W m ic lf ? m ^ : 2
3*Rf f% ^T : tfflTT ^ T b ^ H W W :

^ r .*4

II ? II
I

y g m \:

11

?iWi<JyRig^i5 ^T f%

^ n

s m w y f t ^ c i m m f ^ r f c if e T T 6 || 3 II
ST^f

TOT 3 T ^ :

w * i^ x

t f a w m f i- q ft: ^

|
^

W&T&X f^WTT^T W m * {
3 ? ta m ftw

d -H d rf

ll v 11
I
II H II

d < 4 w H I^I^Rd yRlRilcl:7

*T =4V^*KtU1lft

TO w

^=K^* ^ R c f ^ w i ^ l \ s w ^ w i f c r 8

T O T : < T * r f w *TcTT:
HT m cR t q^TOT cP
f^ W ^ t

^T ^ a ^ T T

le fts fa

1 . B:-ft^^t
2 . B;5W:
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

A :* f
A: - tM ^d:
B :-y to
B: sftfe?fr
B: s f c t o :
AB: -TOfcT

q ft

1
II V9 II

I
II <i ||

^aicT <Ss*KRi q fc ^ r s ^ - M c l
[^^QM^Kcei

|| ^ ||

|
|| ^ ||

5T ^^ I

*T m ^ R T : ^ t e f

II ? 0 II

^ S ^ T fc T

f^R Tfe^ JfWMi fir+Wml 3cTf TTcf:1

f ^ g c q # f^T T 2^

fa fira r? r f t w f r s f a

crt ^

FTW

1h

II

I ^

II

ftffro r

f ^ S c t f ^ r o r e r ajmi<RqRuj*w:
F T ^ f %fxf5 % ^ q t ^
q r^
^

11

% fo *trftc T T :

yfcRrTR:3 ftTO Jt
f^ ro fe t ^

Iu

I ?Y ||

^ z ^ f f 3T 5 f M ^ WT

T O p W r f ^ q ^ r ^r 6 c t t W i w t ^ ;
ftr ^ r

I ?K II

? rp t *r c f ^ r f ^ r o r d i 7

^ iR d

R tn s r^ l ^

w :

I \ \ II

*nr% c l i ^ i \ ^ t o m r a faftf:
f ^ f i w u 5 g f t e T T ^ t f r r tffcT 8
* jt ^ t e

^ # ^ q f

I ?V9 ||

^n f^R f:9

cTFT^ f i r f lw io 'TFT T O T fT ^r P p ^ fe :

I U II

cTFT W T o M IM K ^ R ^ jrl:11
W &

1.

cT^TT% 5 12 TO T TO TIc[ t f g ^ T :

AB: ^

2 . AB:?TT^r
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

B :sftaT :
B:
A:^fcT
B: 'TR'B:
B:gfa
B-.mfa:

10. B:fa$TC*r
1 1 . AB=-*fctff
12 . B :-^ r

I ^

II

^ m U \ 2m w w w w j

IR o

3 p } f ^ q r a H 4 ^ l ^ ^ u |^ l f e 3 ^ :

q ^ to l+ lfl

II

*T <T^

H f^ r

^ H fc T

S T F T R f a m ^ 3 7f 4 ^ n ^ ^ ] - s

cqim ksn f ^ F T F r

ii ^

w iw P i <rfefa m

m f^ R F n i a tsP r f ^ r ^ H % ^

T O T c R T F F ^ fr ^ m r o ^ T W : 7

II

a r n R : F llc q p l ^T ^ 8

^rft 10

m%5 W
^

R T ^ T cPT9 f ^ |

w m ^w r^i

*TfcT*ft M l f ^ T
T O i ^ 11

^Tsq^R T^f M

^cT tf% rdt 12

cTFTT^ f t ^ T : 14

||
;

^?lH N llclfl^|cl

^d^lRnRR-qdlRti^Pil^-qcl

1 . B:<5?THTcr
2 . B:^cW3.

B :-ftw t^ T

4.

B :J q ^ -

5.

B :-H ^ r

6.

B: - ? r % TTcj;?fcT *rfkr

7.

A:-*TcT, B:-*T<r-

8.

B: * ^ ?f?r ?nffcr

9.

b:

^riffer

1 0 . B: differ
1 1 . B: qtR *r
1 2 . B: *TCf
1 3 . B: *T
1 4 . A: t e q -

w i ^ m ^ 13 cpnfW : 11 ^

P l f e M t s q f ^ F T : WIcMpl f^Tcf:
f^ c T

ii ? y

f^ q % :

|| ^Vs
I

||

R to t:

RRt^icI
f^TTcM

ii ^

11

*T ^ sW y^ llsf^ T fTFTTcRpf ^ T o ^ T

II 3 0 ||

q w d ^ 5 T f t ^ c T O t : fkfcr:

v * m m m : *ra> * ftSm fog

i n ? ||

Jc|frr\oT

(V+leRII

<M<T? 3cTt ^ r # ^ : 15
3TCT

II

?TFT ^ 16SPT

RcratsPr

q fc

w : f t t J f^ R n n t o r

T O T rf^ T T ^ ^

3T TfcrtFOTt:
^ R o f 2<fft*qcl

c T ^ f) W :

T O R H ^T T ^

WtTT f t w

f t o R f^r RjfiWW 17
R^TeMTrHPl H ^T 19

ic fr:

II

11 ^

11

I
|| ^V ||

f t ^ f% f:is j| ^

20^rf^TcTT f ^ T : I

RTOTFT f^ F R W 21 fit d ^ H llc l\R >

||

j%^TTW fcj+c^ ^ 22

||

RTOTW

^ f^ftiTcf

|| ^V9 ||

W f e w T f a w ri

qfcpgcrrp3

24c tT ^ fM 3 w i cT^fj

15. AB:
16. B:
17. B: fafrctflSW
18. B: <r*nfafa:
19. B: ^
20. B:
21. B: R+wd
22. A: f t o W r t .B : * ^ *
2 3 ..B:

|| ^

||

||

26

SRTTWJ
M

?r ^m?TT

i^ R T T

fc T t ^

SRtqcfT fa+c*}

^ T ft5lH'>i*^dl

2^RFifcl(^cl:

% KFT
^

n II

^ f t W T c ^ P r fts fiT T

I v o ||

^^T W T cT

f^ ^ r

WTc% f t ^ f t TC
f^ T R t o

IV ? ||
I'*'* ||

Irq ^ t r # ^ tiferfcT: f% f^TT *TcTT3

43 # f ^ r ^ 5 R ?ihi^s

1*3 II

^ t t o
tW ^

wm\<{

7d ^ + d l'W M I< cf^TPt feW T qcT:

^ # 58
^F*U lR d 9 f^RTT

| W ||
I

II

^r fM ^ rr
^ rf^ T cr ^ 10

fM ^ rr

^HFT ^

W fcT^

d fe lfe rtftfc l W ^ W d l ^
^TFTW W

A:
A:
B:
A:

5.

AB=ftii<ir<v

6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

B:
B:
B:
B:
B:
B:
B:
B:

ir^cTT
*mr*<IT
3lfM^T 3 , B: srf^ifTV:
-ft*do4l<
pJ*T$5
^IffW ^T
.
W-

I VV9 ||

f t :12 13W ^ 5 iH W ^ d ^

SfHKlft a m ^.{W H IrtR K U ^dl

1.
2.
3.
4.

\ * \ II

i*<: ll

flf'teRrnrr:
d W lS ^ c l

VW fcf:

cT U c ^ l l

27
|
||

f^TT^r f^WRTT:

||

2^ % ^ r s ^ i T t e r r ^ if^ r t w : 11 <\o 11
cFT3 f^TFTf%fmr 4^T ^F T ^ ^ T f c f :

c T W ^ T lW ^ R T W T O ^ 5cTfcT

||

W folP d^ldW 6WT|xTt

5 :^ r

T7

cpr

sircfW r 11 ^

^T cT^ 8m # T TOcT

d^+"drqf

^ rtrs fc i^ n iT

n^

|
|| K ^ll
I

^ R T ^ T C F i r 9 ^ W H R 'f *)10 f k f a :

II

i^ w rf^ F t ^ r

^cr

3^ r:

W^FT ^W rT

B:
B:
AB-cT^r
A&M^A: 5 f M , B: rf 5^r
A: T O (rf
A:
AB:
B: - a W r t

10 . Bi^WHIHR
11. A: *c?WT:
12. AB: ftw w i:

II11

II ^

II

12f a ^ w i i w
3Tfr M I M f

11

ST^kTT f^TdT f t m % ^ f q t r f f t
5 lM ^ M n ^ H llR ^ ^ d l ^ T T T W ^
tTcr
S r fc r f^ TOfcTT

c f^ r W t frfRT d < ^ c ^ F R ^ H

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

||

^FT terftcT :

|| kvs n
|
|| V

||

i^ r tfrft:

rw

^TPKiqi a m js ^ f a r r e s n m

h v<^ h

^fcr y r n w rH f ^ q t s q ^ : f a :

q ^ T W T T ^ r mEq^T cT

|| ^0 II
^cffq

1.
2.
3.

B: ^=T
B: ftH *:
A: WcfnPT:^?

cTfarcT <WIHW

|| ? ||

T O t ^cTHt crrf^r

s t f^ rr

ll ^ II
VlldM^I pRTffcf :4

M K d -^ ^ c H lf^ K lftft

|| ^ ||

cTcfrs^rf^T ftrm 5 ^ n f ^ n g ^ w jc T

*T f t PlA+^M W lPlrt

II V II

^ fts* WTcT

I
m m W T ^T ^T cT

3TFTT

^ T P f^ lT :

f W lte illd ^ W i
cnr

*T

I
|| ^ ||

fa ffo f ^ w :
STRT c m ^ t

eff^iW

|| K ||

i
|| V9 II

^cTTi^ fa# q c l

^ * r f t c W T T ^ 8T O T T ^R |'^cI

|| ||

a j ^ q c r i TO^OTt: q ftm x a:

9t o e W d q i ^ '^ W
^

>

W W&fc || ^ ||

TOT12 ^ f e f T g q r M r r ^ft*T:

1.
2.

A: a
B: ^

?T*fr TO, B: <>

3.

B:-TC-

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

AB: PMI$cl:
AB:-fWtfilT
B: w?ii
AB:
B: *iici <.
A: PlW W ,B : fR ^iH TFT
AB: M f f :
AB: ^
AB:

l ^:2 m

^ f^ R F T T ^%:

^T
w

ST

=3<Wd<JI f^TT

II ? ?
|

m q^t ^ M H iq i^ lfa d l

II n

3 T ^ r +<HHI^ cTW: ^TeT: ^Mc^TFTcf:4 |

^ T K S T W K TRRt ^ IW W

|| ? 3

f t *T: TOT: f& ^ W + H lfa d :5 |

^ T ^ W W I :6 SH^II^pT % fcT^fcT || ?V
? rfx ^ m te T r f ^ i ^ q t
|
cTc^TT ^qrfM t T t tfT

|| ^

m ^ f w d ^ T 5R3WTFFTRSFT:7

|-

^ i*K ifa d *j

s q to fc r

11

d WTCI <cfflTWHKp| tfa HTOTcj; cmT

^W P ^m X M P T t 8 ^ c T

|| ? V9

3 cTFTT irdfen'l
ckt

qermcT

cTcTM^ ^

^ F iftsF id :

n ?<^

'frH 'l W ^T^TT

F f^ ftf^ rW d ^ ll^ d :

|| ? ^

*?T f t f W f t ^FT W d^W W f^ c T : I

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

*TTM W ^FTltcT cTrFTFT ft^ F F J

|| ^0

^S*T FTl^+ t <TT cTx^RW ?r *gzfc

q ^ ^ n f^ rl

i i ^?

ctw

tc i^ r

AB: ^
AB: ^5
AB: ^ rAB:JT?rr:
AB: -^facTT
AB: -ffPT
A: -ITWR-, B:- ?RIc*TT:
B: -nr

II ^

II

II U

II

I
|| H \ \

||

II
|

II

||

|| ^

mm* :a '9
-v
ktihytt jv *e
'I

-UjihkbA :a

'l

:V

ia p -^ ^ f f e \ j h fr lE fe lh ft ^

k%

4JnJj$ k H im

:hP*kY

k ^ L lh i y i i g

ikh h : fStii

Jgxiife

: |P3PhkbJ

&&kk
iM lja h

9411^
-.frflfthEp
i M ^ f e : ^J2 i k i i l

I
<jl 0 ^ ||
I k iiM
II ^

||

II

I
I
||

II

|
II

i^ B

M M

iM

k i z M E i ^ h i ^ ^ 41kM

M
^$t

j^ifefe k i t e i i Jjzh^J i i
k ^ ^ k ^ B M b J ^ fek h k h k i
:^Jh^J

kfc h h

l^ f c lk flfrP
A *
:Jbd
k
tjJIfrP
:P fr |lh h 5 fro |h * it ik l^ht^j Ik S it e
1ft Jah

1R

II e ltP h ^ j

iP lfi> * fr lb lk lf th fr j
ii

jk & fc ^ b lil

I
ki
II fcfc. I lk lD iB ^ j J ^ I M i i * S 4
Qb k i M t
I
k n t6 y :j^ n M i k ^ L m z
II ^ II k P lL^feSjhJ& te 12l> in M hm hlk
I
:itlSfeKfe^llfelft A lfc)-fl ^ h 3 t e

32

y*PRi^

O T lW N f^ T ^ W f ^ H T 1
. cf f% 'W'R'Wil <(V ?M ftm i W :
cR r f^ "

II

||

I
II

II

c T ^ I^ T ^5 ?RTt

^ < ^ 6R ^ R l :

II ^

II

cf^ f% R ftf^ T c T fl^ W ^

cRTt T M tR T 5W T T f ^ a f t ^ tffvffa:
STW ^W rcR pl 6
^ qtfafcp fcf:
3TTt^7 FT T O ^flfrf>: ^ t f l f l d ^ l fkcTT
^TTc*RT ^ r^^jfa d i* i i ^ q iR n :
cR ft ^ K ^ I f f T 8
^ ^ HT f&cTT
d ^ ti|R iP l^ il,ll Hlftd ^ eheM^'Hcl :
cT^r ^

II ^

II

I
II \ 6 II
I
II ^

II

I
II v o ||
I

^ 5^ : H ^ T ^ P ^ T 9 Pif5<=t><?^ i l ^ t f l
II Y? II
J ^ io ^
TT^rfcf cTC^T*T:
I
S R ^ W R T cT fW t f c f : ^fcT :11
II
||
W TT^T ^ flTOT:
I
tPT: F T ^ T t t e t F F P ^ t *T f^TOPT: II * 3 II
*T ^ !J%9Tt JSTITOM M

1 . AB=5cTWTr
2.
3.
4.
5.

AB: ^cT
B:
B: jWHH.
A: 5 ^ ,B : ^

6.

B: - M t

7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

AB:
AB: ftqu.iy+iAB:-T*fr
AB:
A: J ^ f c ! :

*rn3r

YY ||

tH viiftsw H H iR i^
aw

tow

*H ||

aw r

q tsit s i ^ i ^ 'R i d :

TOTT:

fasfRfT:

^ W

||

SiWfcT: W ^ T m i f f i m fa cTT^T ST
fcrf-|]J3tfHtlWM'

VV9 ||

faqft^fcT

^R M iW
cHTT

Y<i ||.

M < ^ ld a ^ cT^ ^r^fcT

a ^ lrtP l P l^ R d ^ 3

^ ^ trj;
cPT

r% *tt ^

jq js s ft

\*% II

t f i ^ f t w f e : ^ R r f ^ r 5 f& ftrrre ^ t

ftf^ tw

q q^rt ^rgqW% STftr> ^ P m

I HO ||
-:

FT6 j|<Mi^'i*(

cT^T W q H N l(d

* T f t H^Tcf ^ f r f ^ q ^ t

I H ? II
I H ^ II

3H PW W m M ^ R f e d M g t tfcfr
fa rw ^ r

stt

^ f:

w H ite ^ i R w r

I H 3 II

ST5TT:

^ r f ^ R W R ^ r W H^TT:

I H * II

^ i^ c ii^ ^ iif to t ix h lr t P i 3 $ SPfr:

rpsm

1.

A B:-lft?

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

B: ITOW
B: faftftldH
B : - ^ tR
B:-fafir
AB: 'iiRfl
B: 3Rnhn^r
B: sr*?r

5 ^ ferar

I H H II

U T ^ ? ttW Z M FTC ^ w n f t c T ^

II W

3Tc*RTCFTfcTOr ^ d^lcHPl

II

W d ^ ' WFTT: M fcf^T ^H M d ^ II K^9 ||

^T T ^f

I
||

snxnf^xT ^ t f t t ? n ^ r t o t srg ^ 3

3F R H J it 4^7cTFIT ^T eHT% ^ T ^ T

II ^

c ix it^ k r ^
3 T ^ t6 ^ p n itf c r w

ftm w

\
II

3Tm[fcr7 ^Tcr 8 *rnr^ ^ t ^ t t o ^ t t

^cT

ii ^

cT^TSTOTCt^r ^RcT^T^RFfr^T:

eHTcT q t **TFT9 ^

||

II

II ^0 II

M <N <W ^tTOT *T8 T*TT TTtq-qW:

cTFTT ?T:

||

^ T O T f ^ r W ^fcT f f t

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

\6

cPT clT

^ f r ^r tf^cT:

W f l 10^ H I ^ 'f lld :

<f f^RTttW j;

II
ii
||

|
|| %? ||

s H rf^ fW r ^ % 12 fb m w w w ^

iT P n f ^ tr ^ m ^ W ^ r o t f ^ t f ^ p ;

h\\ h

B: <t*TTB:
A:
A: TST, B:
B: <n#5A: 3F*$
AB: 3Tnftf*T
B: ^ c t
B: Hipf
B: -^WTHW^HldB: ?prf-

12 . Ar-ftttf^*

^M5Txb<RlVldl1
sSftT: 'rfwfr
^ 1% W ^^Z P T :

I
|| ^

^ f t c T T ^ P ? foqW xK ft 5Tg:

s r ^ r ^tft ^

||

at f 2

|| ^V9 ||

y ^ r < ^ f3 P i

^m tsPr^g:

11 ^

m?r

11

'+U(5iviM'3
cEWHpTOcT
SHRtsq sTO t o 3TFJRTtsq^RT: TT:

I
'#
|| ^ ||

srf^ g ts fa

$h y i p t

mfcT W ?4 P R T ^ M I ^ f ^ p ;
^ n ^ T T f^ S H 5

II vso II
I

% 6F^Z T7 W

II

5mrfcT
W IT O I

.I

ftm r ^ r ^ H n f ^ r g ^ ;
H3 k*HI

T^fcT
^TeT: ^ T

9m? c%fcT TOT ^

cf^RT W M

*T ^

II

II ^

ll

|
||

||

iffi f f t ffcjfcT: |

12^ r t H t S ^ W cTW ^ : FH^T f ^ T O : || VS* ||

cfcT: y ^ d l m m : gfcimf^T cf*R ^
I

1 . B:f*TCraT
2.

AB: if

3.

B:-^TT%*

4.
5.

B:
AB:-if^neR

6.

AB: ^T fk

7.

B: tf+cW

8.

AB:

9.
10.
11.
12.

AB: y ^ fc f
A:-*J
B:
B:-R*T?TT

^ r i 25iR|crg-<if
iR r ^ T c T T ^ r 3 t f # : W ^ f f e
fa^T:

qVq~dl^T:

^ ^ r .-4 ^ ff ^ 5 $ e ^ A s ? w
< rq r fo f t * r ^ r m * n P ife & : ^

II VSK II
I
II V9* II
I

II V9V9 ||
I
II

II

3W Tftw *Trat 10W ^TO F fP W ^

^Tt
^T *T^TT ^ T f^ T ^ T
gqi|pw*fl'
% R ^ w 3 fc c l:

usTFTirsft-

11^0 II

jt

: ghi>

II V* II
I
I

^PT *PT e T ^ t TFT: ?TT^CT^cf:

ii a

W ^ T : W yi^W T l^^N lild:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

II ^

cmr t o j tjayir 3 t r ^ _4 sr# d c r 13

3Tl?WETT^nwf WrT*4
3TFFTT:
3tm \ ^
%% 3T^T: qfr TRf:

II

AB: 5^T
B: SrfcTT^"
B:-?T<t
AB: *RT3T
AB:
AB: 5TW(
AB:-??R-

8. AB:-^j
9.

JgST12 3TTcH%* Sl^fcfci

A: -$f|*T

10 . Ai-lOTft1 1 . B:'3mir
12. B: 3RT
13. B:
14. B: ipT?r

II
II
II

iJW W fmTW

cT

y i^ fc i2 q t ^

|| C * II
^ wm:

tfrs ft^ : y^ffci:

cnr STIWT ^frfcT ^TRcr

ik ii+ ifto P iw f%

\
11

<iK

11

I
q iA te r:

MfcT 5R*TOI<5 tew

cT^rq-:

ll

ii

4 cMlrHH *T ^HlfcT F ft ?TTWTt *7cT: || V9 ||

cT^ %fxf

^if^TcTT HcfT^ |

q<5t^Rd % ^

5<TrT^T STOrT

II ^

q m ^ f^ rr f%^T ft?mT ^ n fc f:6

faw dTi-^^i ^ gpftr

ii

^ w R f o T p rf M ^ r ^ R te rip

tnw g fafa: ^
ITcTR x
X
X

X
X

||
ii

i
ii

^o

ii

^Hk*HI' y+d^'WpKl^cH8

II

II

9^ ^ t d ^ f f f x T ^ r FRTT^
^

f^FT

^ f^cW^M

FT c f ^ lf ir t e r ^ e F n f^ T ):

|| %R ||

f^ ^ fc T T O fo rtfte ^
% ^t

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

AB:-JTOT*!B: ST ^er
AB:-ft*
AB: *
AB: flcj
AB:-t^ cT
AB: ftfe*k= 3RT: Tt W
A:-ftTfcfr
A: W m -

^ fa s te r f M o ^ i

*?faiT:

9 #?T|

38

sraw i

f q ^ ^ M R q f ^ a p q r i^ R i:

f^ T x l^ : II M ||
W

^ fcT
^ r ^ t 23 ^ P r cT^T^ncR'fwr i

^ W *TW ft

gfcl^lfcl
ot

cTW W

B jr o t e w i:

ii

ii

f ^ g ff r T :
T fer ^ f l f :

3 f T O T W M *Krl(%FW:
W 4 WT^ffcT f t cRT q f t ^ g f f e : ||

||

rilft<J||cl f ^ T ^T ^ W JJh Y : |
cTCT ^ fc T

*T FT^cT f^TF^Tpf 8 TTSTH^T

STTCT
ff^ r^ T c T F T ^
^fcT

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

A:
A:
A:
A:
A:
A:
A:
A:
A:
A:

^
WPg^rf ^ r^ c tr
^
WN
^
<TOfa
O T
ffc^TT:

||

J O T 5[ || ^vs ||

^T^fcT

y^cTW ^ ^ 5

II ^

f^TTc^T:10

f^ m m p sm r
^TRT ^?J*f W

|
|| %C ||
I^

tiftcU'+WI:

39

w w r
A

u & w R ro ^

ii ? ii

c ^ P R m ^ rr^ q ifM ^ :

^ T : H W T T ^ m T f^ rc t:
u f y d 'j u i + i ^ F S c l -^qcT g ^ T c^WTcTT
^

f% ^

v rffa j ^

I
II ^ II

cTc[

f^ W k l%

W I< * H : S T J ^ S R wm:
^ n r n t e R : * p ? fa :

ll 3 ll

^ T frW f^ R ^ W 2
*T: f^TT

^TSTcf 3 f R t T f ^ T T
^ f tr cf ' r w

efu6^H^7Tj||^f vd^Md^

11 v n
|

3s n ^ r s m w ^ t e f r
^ fiP rv n jR ^ g fe '^ ^ <:

ii k ll

wy+reras**:

H K ^ iR b R ^ R rw fH '< i^
^ < M fa R iiR ^ ii
s r R ^ rfS
l * w R b < R W W H k ll
1.

A :3 im -

2.
3.

A :-fTOT
A:HTO^

I
II ^ II

OO Nl O

^ U) to _-

*o

(\

X
1
X.
5C

42

qo*nt y + m H

s rfa te r ^

Jrr
II

to T
SPFT
d W I^ IId r:

^T
II 1% I

f^ ^ T :
^T cT t

3cfcT

^fOTT f r f a w f^fcRTT
r
s lc m r w t e r ^

|| ^0
I
||
i

7T c l^ fcr ^ T c T f
^ w t h ^ r T O R t w i;

ll ^

d<?w4
f^ f

cetstri;

^ ^ i-4 ^

fo ft
cPT?f ^ iR ld ^ ftd ^ i 1-

1.

A :^

il

fr

cl
7T
XT

jr
Jr

XT'

z
cZ

TT

s>

O'

tr
IX
it
o
-Js

I'll
I?

&
\X

\)
fV

O'

If i l l I 1

1 1

<<<<<<<<!<<

.....................................................o '

-el
a.

a,
JC

> > > >

:& :h klisliu^
klflllM

rik y ih

hK h

^ F if^ T ^ frT fW

KlRf>f>S ^ f E w r

II ^

II

^5-

-qf
^ ^ ^ rd c r

W IT ^ JcT*p

^~

-W tAIcI cF j^ H ^ d l^

II ^

^PT 3d<W>KU'fad*i

5ROTcT

||

II

cffe ^ T W :
||

^TRTcT FTC W ^ : s W t
6^ R f ^ fcT cTcS^T^
|| VO ||

3 cfcT y+ d ^R lR ^R l:

c lf |z h W * T tfcraf

^TFTcT f^f%vr<^i^xt)dl
3

^ ^ I 'i i l+ U 4 u f f o f c ^

snfcf

^^wti'Rid
d ^ + K ^ P r yfcife'd^

a r^ w ife t
A :W T

A:+KII^H
B : <KI<tKA i^nrat jrtrt
A :^TRJ:

A:5HRf

||v? II
|

ii v ^ ii

SW ^nfcT ^

cl^ T O - 1

tH^cl d R ^ acy^lR id
fts ifa s N ^ I d<M :

II * 3 II

S W ^ M s fo jc f T O

1
13T T f ^ ^ R 'c j^ ^ -d^<Rt
# T O $ c lR s M c ! T O

II Y * II

d<il

1
tfT s p ^ l nR R lV & Jdl
II *K ||
<MS + K : *fl S*lft f tx | R ^ | :2
rla^iT l^(a*i)-^cl

<*Jek ^ 'l'i ti 4 ew ^f 5 ^)Tfti:

II V ^ II
i*dM<^: TORT:
^11:

4 ) ^ 1 f td l :4 <*TT W #
II VV9 ||

TOTOFtfll
fl& p fq ftq ffid iKI
s^R r

^ T : qf^r

^<i*i 'n q ^
tixb^r *rafcT d ^ c R cl?X
^ | | fq'HlcticI

1.
2.

A:
A:-fr?ftwr

3. A:-*TTtft
4. A:fl<fT

II VC ||

II ^
^fcT ^FTOrPT

cM ftPlW T:

i p r y ^ R i 5iM K ^ r f r ^
^ ^ fr-

4^^h<k^

ll k o ll

w ^ tl: i

S T f^ F T c m ^ ' ^ F fH t
w ra ftrc M r
ir ^ r 3g^T FT

f^ F R R :

ffM iro x T w M
^ ffW ^ T

1.

A:-5ffo

2.

A :- ftt

3.

A :5I^j3W

4.

A:TO?PT:K^

vR><ui*i;i|4

11

II

I
ii

ii

(\

JOi

4^-

2C
4

00

cmr ^ ^R T :
3^TT ^

^ M fc T ^

f^ T

|| ? ? ||

5 ^ r ^ W f r m : lf M h j W ^ f c r I

3HTel^r cfT: ^rat: 2*TCn^sfaWKil:

II H II

ST^TWTRt f t T m TRT

farer:

<WMI'WW

II ? 3 II

cFTT f t TRT *fr

R lft^ ^
^

dcUlRfclUC

I
II ?Y ||

1 (1 <1 < P w TT ^ c n ^ l^ T I:

cTT <TT ^ f ^ T W T ^TFT FTCT^fel:

|| ?K II

V^ef ^ Ftm r*r%SW cTT: JfT:

3RT^T SntfdW 3

II ? ^ II

?TT^

^ f t *TT3R 5TR?T ^T ft fr?n*t I

^cTT: || ?V9 ||

STWT FPT* SPft:

snftFT: 5 l M #
*nfo:
W ^ X M W M 7f q^-4 ^ TOTCT:
*R Fj; ^ q c |'|T ^ R i crcrr ftH^^lf^Pl

I
|| ?<i ||
I
|| ^

3P TW rm f^T cKT ^cT: SI^cT

ftW c l Ttfj ^TFt f e M ^ l R i f t :

IROII

||

cf*JT ^ Mcl^fel-H PlR^il tfRUflftH:7 I

vtenm ft

^rrqrcT

3 T ? fe 5T ^% W a im ^ R w .

1. A :to ^ r
2.
3.
4.
5#
6.
7.

A: W^nfW
A: SPffiW
A: ^?IT
A*
A:
A: VIW*I;

::

||

II ^

II

'Z

'

:V

: V I

e/l W>feK <&h h l h ltl<fcKjlh>h

II 6\fc. II
I
I' \> i II
|

: M M lh M h lb :ik L fe ^ 2 r.5 l h \ $
blHE > ^ lk > h ^Ut>Uhlt3
:P H ^

ii

j*b<fa

||
|| k in k liU S
r ^ ^ ] j ? ia K i S
| :^Jt^Jl^Jlfe H i lif e ^ l k
:^ -k
II x l II k fe ^ ji? h h m '
k
I
II

II
I

r^ l ^ l N ^ h :k M M 9

kkM H
i ^ ^ e i ^ p ^ i k > h ig lte

kM n

ItlnllMSsih

OS

W T 5 ^ 1 ^
m:

5T5TFT% ^imiJi

v fa fr z

mf^T

II S II

1^ i!M

te g

^crf^w ^aJcf
a n ro ^

ii ^ ll
w 4^: I

^TRrT3 5m# TrfrfT: <RMHJ f ^ + K ^

|| 3 ||

y^MicHi iiiuiJgRfli^i

l
II Y II

+r; ^

ifw w r: g w ^ l : HT ^ R T ^TeRtfkfrT: |
f t w *TT5 ^Ff ^ m f ^ T : II K II

?TCTT:
4>hm4<wi2m

W ^ M I^ lfc lfl^

HW ^

KVWWMI6 ^TRT:
U < 5 t^ l: 7W W ^I: ^
# s f a gR?TW n^
f^ T

1.

A: mnifr

2.
3.

A : a rfW m < t
A : srar

4.
5.

A : tM d ft
A : *T

6.

A : -^TWraT

7.

A: ^SfT^r:

II ^ II
I

cT^W :

II V9 ||

^ ^ n ^ tto ^ T c f: I
II 6 II