Arjunopākhyāna: An Idealist Non-dualistic Translation of the Bhagavadgītā
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper suggests that the narrative retelling of the Bhagavadgītā (BhG) dialogue that occurs in the sixth book of the Mokṣopāya (MU) (ca. 950 CE) known as the Arjunopākhyāna (AU) functions as a polemic style semantic translation that shifts the meaning of the original story with which it shares content, characters, elements and verses, illustrating a different doctrine in the process. Just over thirty quoted verses from the BhG are recontextualized and merged seamlessly with verses that are original to the MU, translating them into the non-dualistic, idealist conceptual language of the MU. The nonduality at the heart of Vasiṣṭha’s teaching in the MU is different from the theistic Sāṃkhya-influenced duality of Kṛṣṇa’s discourse in the BhG. Puruṣa and prakṛti are consistently replaced in the AU by an all-encompassing singular consciousness whose cosmic mind imagines everything, including Kṛṣṇa, all subjective agency, worship and liberation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".