[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Works of Sri Vidyashankara
sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com
Wed Dec 28 13:28:56 CST 2016
The guruparampara of the Kudali-Shringeri (on the bank of the river Tungabhadra), published from Tirupati, writes that Sri Vidyashankara was the Mathadhipati of that math from 1118 to 1198 CE and after that there was a gap till the Bharatitirtha became the mathadhipati there and he was succeeded by Sri Vidyaranya. Historically 1198 CE was around the time when Malik Kafur ravaged Karnataka and it is logical to realize that Sri Vidyashankara escaped to Kachipuram in 1198 CE as the Hindu kings, the Pandyas, were ruling Kanchipuram at that time. This also means that later on (after a gap of few decades) Bharatitirtha became the mathadhipaptis of the Shringeri as well as of the Kudali-Sringeri matha simultaneously and later on Sri Vidyaranya became the successor mathadhipati of the two maths. Sri Vidyaranya was also a third matha, the Virupaksha matha under him. at some later date the Kudali-shringeri and Sringeri math separated.
The Kanchi Kamakoti math also shows that after arrival of Sri Vidyashankara in Kanchipuram, there were two mathadhipatis there and one of them was Sri Vidyashankara. That makes it obvious that the Kanchi Kamakoti matha gave the rare honor of the mathadhipati to the most honorable guest Sri Vidyashankara, while the mathadhipati of their own guru-parampara was still ruling that matha. I would like to state here that the Shringeri math was in a safer place in the 12th century CE, but that matha too was ravaged a few centuries later by the dacoit groups, ostensibly supported by some foreign power, who were active in the western coast around that time, and the mathadhipati there too had to escape to Pune / Satara.
On Wed, 12/28/16, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <svidyasankar at gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Works of Sri Vidyashankara
To: "Sunil Bhattacharjya" <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com>, "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Cc: "Venkatraghavan S" <agnimile at gmail.com>, "V Subrahmanian" <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, December 28, 2016, 2:44 AM
Please, once again,
my entreaty to you is this - if you want to ask historical
questions, you must be prepared to evaluate historical
sources with critical care.
"I feel that as Sri Vedantadeshika
himself was a disciple of Sri Vidyashankara in Kanchipuram,
he would have certainly valued Sri Vidyashankara's
bhashya on the Bhagavadgita,"
is based on two unsubstantiated
and extraordinary assumptions, on top of which you have
added your own suppositions. This is no way to approach such
problems, if you want to get any sort of clarity on the past
of our tradition.
That SrI vedAntadeSika was a
disciple of SrI vidyASankara is the first unsubstantiated
and extraordinary assumption.That SrI vidyASankara was teaching
at Kanchipuram is the second.
That Sri vidyASankara must have
written the bhagavadgItA bhAshya is your own unsubstantiated
and extraordinary supposition.
Proof by assertion, proof by
repetition and conclusions by speculation are the surest
ways to lead yourself astray in such questions. I am sorry,
but this is an almost cavalier attitude towards the subject
and is basically Sruta-hAni plus
What exactly is the problem with
accepting that the gItAbhAshya was written by Adi Sankara?
Just because one or two quite recent scholars, writing in
the English language, have raised unnecessary doubts? What
about the many other recent scholars, also writing in the
English language, who have laid all those doubts to rest,
with their more detailed analyses of the texts from our
tradition? Why don't you examine those studies in some
detail? If you need references, please see Hajime
Nakamura's two volume History of Early Vedanta, or
Sengaku Mayeda's introduction to his translation of the
upadeSasAhasrI. All the necessary journal articles that
touch upon the authorship of the gItAbhAshya are referenced
in those books.
On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at
1:36 AM, Sunil Bhattacharjya via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
I feel that as Sri Vedantadeshika himself was a disciple of
Sri Vidyashankara in Kanchipuram, he would have certainly
valued Sri Vidyashankara's bhashya on the
Bhagavadgita, even though he might have shafted later on to
Sri Ramanujacharya's camp, Secondly had Sri
Vidyashankara not composed an advaitic version of the
Bhagavad Gita bhashya, we would certainly have had a bhasya
by the eminent Sri Vidyaranya.
Secondly the order given by Vedantadeeshika as follows need
not necessarily have been in the quoted chronological order.
The chronological order could have been पिशाच
- रन्तिदेव - गुप्त -
यादवप्रकाश - शङ्कर -
भास्कर - नारायणार्य -
प्रभृतिभि:, If Adi Shankara would have
composed the Bhagavadgita bhashya there was no need of Sri
Yadavaprakasha to write another bhashya on the Bhagavad Gita
Would you kindly help us by quoting the exact words /
concepts in the Ramanuja-bhashya, which can prove that
the Shankara's bhaṣya preceded Ramanuja's
bhāṣya and that Ramanuja-bhashya indeed refuted
Shankara-bhashya of the Bhagavad gita specifically and that
what Sri Ranujacharya wrote was not a general refutation of
Adi Shankara's advaitic views.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list