[Advaita-l] Re: yoga and vedanta
anandhudli at hotmail.com
Fri Jul 22 21:44:49 CDT 2005
On 7/20/05, bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:
>prabhuji your observation that *certain individual points* of shankara &
>surEshvara is really interesting. Kindly clarify whether shankara
>propagated anywhere his own *individual points* without taking care of
>shruti siddhAnta prabhuji. If shankara's individual points are completely
>in order with shruti...how can then madhusUdana a true representative of
>advaita differs from it??
>Kindly, prabhuji, if possible give the detailed account of those
>differences between shankara & madhusUdana & madhusUdana's justification
When an AchArya writes a work, his points may be elaborated on by subsequent
AchAryas. Further, a subsequent AchArya may write on points that were not
addressed by the previous AchArya. In doing this, if there is an appearance
of contradiction or difference between the AchAryas, it is probably only an
appearance, but not real.
madhusUdana has defended classical theories of advaita in the
advaita-siddhi. Nowhere has he put forth a brand new theory. In the
siddhAnta-bindu, he has shown how various views in advaita, such as those of
the vArtika, saMkShepa-shArIraka, avachchheda-vAda, pratibiMbavAda,
AbhAsa-vAda, and ekajIva-vAda or dR^iShTi-sR^iShTi-vAda, can all be
reconciled. He cites the vArtikakAra:
yayA yayA bhavetpuMso vyutpattiH pratyagAtmani |
sA sAiva prakriyA GYeyA sAdhvI sA chAnavasthitA |
By whatever (approach) one attains the knowledge of the Inner Self, that
itself is to be understood as *a* (not *the*) right method. It is not fixed
(to a particular approach).
Going by this definition, we can talk about *a* right method but not *the*
Perhaps, the only so-called "difference" between Madhusudana and Shankara is
the emphasis of the former on bhakti, as described in the gUDhArtha-dIpikA.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list