[Advaita-l] 20, 21 and 22
bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com
Wed Apr 13 23:24:43 CDT 2011
Indeed. Between Sankara and Ramanuja, we have a commentary by Bhaskara,
written from a Bhedabheda viewpoint. Between Ramanuja and Madhva, or maybe
contemporaneously with Ramanuja, there is a commentary by Srikantha, from
Saiva viewpoint. So, even if we assume that there were 19 earlier
and that of Sankara bhagavatpAda is the 20th, Ramanuja's commentary is by
no means the 21st and Madhva's is by no means the 22nd.
Perhaps, this numerologist taken the 'popularly' discussed bhAshya-s &
arrived to this conclusion. But one thing is clear from this, though one
of the sUtra lakshaNa-s should be 'asangdhigdhaM', these sUtra-s by no
means meet this criteria due to its 'alpAkshara' :-)). Hence, even today,
after hundreds of bhAshya-s, vyAkhyAna-s, upa vyAkhyAna-s etc. sUtra-s are
being interpreted in a different way by different schools of thought. And
unfortunately, due to this 'sUtra saNdhigdhata' there is drastic
deviation in interpretation of the same sUtra bhAshya within the same
school of thought !!
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list