[Advaita-l] Re: Pa~nchapAdikAchArya

Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian rama.balasubramanian at gmail.com
Sun Oct 22 17:23:48 CDT 2006

On 9/28/06, bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com <bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com> wrote:

> In that case, there is no need to drag SSS either here...because he too
> advocates *advaita's final result* without any ambiguity (ofcourse, within
> the traditional  line of shankara siddhAnta according to prasthAna
> traya)....For that matter it is evident from bhagavadpAda himself that

Actually it is only SSS who keeps dragging bhaamatii and vivaraNa, so
this is reply to that.

> there was no difference of opinion  in the ultimate siddhAnta of non
> duality by that time...inspite of that shankara has taken the task of
> writing the bhAshya why??  it is coz. he thought a systamatic & properly
> channelized procedure is lacking in propagation of upanishadic *same*
> siddhAnta.

This is utterly irrelevant, because he was talking about *other*
traditions. Sankara was clear  that he belonged to sampradaaya and
salutes his guru, who removed his ignorance and clearly that's who
shankara approached. He did not call his guru a blind man and
purported to correct his "wrong" views.

> Anyway, IMHO, as Sri Reddy prabhuji said, discussion about which saMpradAya
> SSS belong to?? with whom he studied shankara bhAshya??  whether he has
> taken saNyAsa within the traditional circle or not??   whethere he is
> reincarnation of shankara or not??  whether he is jnAnanishTa shrOtrIya or

That may be Sri Siddhrathas view. Shankara is unambiguous that
brahmaj~naana is to be had by approaching a brahmavit only. If you
consider that as of secondary importance, please feel free to do that,
but don't expect me to agree with you.

> not ?? etc. etc. are all have only secondary importance since doctrinal
> discrepancy is the main issue here l!!...for that matter which saMpradAya
> does bhagavaan ramaNa belong to?? which saMpradAya do Sri Ramakrishna
> paramahaMsa & nisargadatta maharaj belong to ??  what about modern day
> advaitins like Sri Ravishankar, Dayananda saraswati, chimayananda etc.etc.
> ??  When we hearing their teachings do we ask them *first you tell me which
> saMpradAya you are from??

Why drag XYZ into the picture here? They did not claim that they had
intellects superior to everyone who lived the last 1200 years, did

> First,  those who are vociferously questioing the credibility of SSS
> interpretation of shankarabhAshya, should prove that SSS is flawed in his
> interpretation by comparing the mUla bhAshya of shankara , vyAkhyAna kAra-s
> interpretation of the same & SSS's objections to that interpretation & his
> stand parallelly....I hope that would be useful for the neutral readers of
> this list.

That's a separate point. But an equally important question in the
advaita tradition is as follows: since brahma-j~naana is to be had
only from a brahmavit, who did SSS approach? Otherwise it is nonsense
to talk about Sankara being a brahmavit and belonging to sampradaaya
and that only SSS understood him after that.


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list