[Advaita-l] The Evolution of Advaita from Sankara till Date

Bhaskar YR bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
Thu May 15 05:09:08 CDT 2008

praNAms Sri Praveen prabhuji
Hare Krishna

> But prabhuji dont you think though there is no evolution in vEdAnta
> itself, there is a considerable evolutionery changes in interpretation of
> vEdAnta??

Sri praveen prabhuji :

(a) indicates both evolution in Vedanta as well as in interpretation
of Vedanta, inclusive of dvaita and vishishTa advaita, it does not
necessarily mean advaita alone.

bhaskar :

No prabhuji, I was only talking about *interpretation of vEdAnta* I think
evolution in shruti pramANa is not possible coz. it has been traditionally
preserved in that style..(barring some (proved) interpolations in the name
of upanishads especially in atharvaNa vEda)

 I think, the interpretations of vEdic scriptures have been
> drastically changed from the time of gaudapAda/shankara to

Sri praveen prabhuji :

(b) indicates interpretation of Vedic scriptures including karma kAnDa.

bhaskar :

Yes, dont you think so prabhuji?? pUrva mImAmsaka-s say karmakAnda is the
real practical teaching of vEda-s for some definite/guaranteed results
whereas jnAna pradhAna vAkya-s are mere arthavAda...OTOH, uttara
mImAmsaka-s/vEdAntins look at the same vEda/vEdAnta from a different
perspective & interpret its utility accordingly...

Sri Praveen prabhuji :

AFAIK, considering only advaita vedanta, I don't think it has changed
or even its interpretation, but only the elaboration.

bhaskar :

I am afraid, that might not be the case even within the circle of orthodox
advaita saMpradAya...If you see the works of post shankara Acharya-s
(including surEshwara, madhusUdana saraswati etc.) they not only
interpreted some (minor)prakriya-s/topics differently from Sankara (holding
the same shruti / smruti texts as pramANa) but openly say it by providing
elaborated notes from a different perspective..But this ofcourse, without
making any compromise on the ultimate siddhAnta of advaita vEdAnta.  For
that matter, shankara himself admits in his gIta bhAsya introduction that
even though there were different interpretations on gIta (though they were
teaching philosophy of non-duality ultimately) he wants to show the *right
way of interpreation* of the same text...

When it comes to other dualistic schools' interpretations, I dont think,
there is any need to mention their revolutionery contribution towards the
interpretation of some shruti vAkya-s such as *tattvamasi* to

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list