[Advaita-l] Brief Comparison of Three Great Acharyas
vathsa108 at gmail.com
Tue Apr 7 23:07:47 CDT 2015
Making a asthika (one who believe in vedas) to follow dvaitha,advaitha or
vishistadvaitha is easy....
Because he believe in vedas,so...we can tell the meaing of vedas ,its
interpretation and make that asthika to accept dvaita,vishistadvaita or
But making a nasthika (one who don't believe vedas) like jaina and bhudha
to accept asthika school like advaitha is very difficult.
Because he won't believe in vedas ,and its interpretation.....So, telling
him advaitha is correct through vedas,won't give any fruit...
because he won't accept that....he says vedas itself is wrong.
For that we have to convenes nasthikas through the fault in their
philosophy.The fault in their philosophy has to be shown through logic.
For that there should be sound knowledge of that nasthika school.for that
person who tries to convenes nasthika school scholar to asthika school like
This is what shankara did,in his early ages,itself.You may not know
shankara wrote vivekachudamani in age 12.Now that vivekachudamani is
learning material for great great scholars.
Even krishna was not able to convenes duryodana and stop mahabharatha
war.But shankara convenes advaitha to both asthikas and nasthikas.So, adi
shankara is right to call jagath guru.
That is why we say adi shankara is adi shankara,No body can compete with
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 6:13 PM, SHIVPRASAD DINKAR <harivayus at bellsouth.net>
> You have not refuted any of the points I wrote as to how Shankara himself
> did not follow or could not follow his own Tatthwam when he was
> confronted. We say that, these incidents happened precisely to indicate
> that untenable nature of his Tatthwam.
> Your new line of thinking must be a joke, is it not? Is there anything
> written (or unwritten) that anything and everything has to pass through
> Kashmir's school to be able to be accepted as valid Tatthwam? Don't come
> up with dubious logic.
> Haan, one more important incident in Shankara's life. Shankara said that
> experiences belong to the Anthakarana (body, mind, intellect) and not the
> JivaAatma!!! See, how Vaadiraja Tirtha has destroyed this stupid nonsense
> in his Nyayarathnavalli. At any rate, when Ubhayabharathi asked Shankara a
> question about Stree/ Purush Sambandham, he supposedly left his body and
> did transmigration of his soul into a Kalinga Desha Raja's body and, lived
> as married man and, did reverse transmigration of soul and, was able to
> answer the question. So, will claim the Adwaitins about this victory.
> Little do they understand that in claiming so, he has proven that the
> experiences belong to the JivaAatma and, not the so called Anthakarana.
> This is one other example of Shankara not be able to put to practice what
> he preached.
> On Saturday, April 4, 2015 11:56 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com>
> Ok Shivaprasad Sir,
> Everything is Ok,But what you say for "It is only
> shankaracharya among all three acharyas who sat on sarvagna peetham " of
> You may be knowing it,At that time kashmir is known for noble persons,
> Most of the brahmin pandiths in kashmir at that time were great pandith
> .They are pandith's not only in asthika school,but also nasthika schools
> like jaina and bhudha.That is why we call Godess saraswathi as "KASMIRA
> PURA VASINI". This kashmir pandiths would have not accepted shankara's
> logic of advaita,if it was non-sense as they are all big big pandiths .The
> story says that they asked questions from all shat -asthika dharshana and
> also nasthika dharshana like jaina , bhudha.But shankara answered all of
> them correctly ,and sat of sarvagna peetham.The very proof for shankara
> made all kashmir pandith to accept advaitha and sat on sarvagna peetham is
> there is shankara giri next to that sanrvagna peetham ,where there is
> shankaracharya temple there.
> Even they say ramanujacharya went to kashmir sarvagna peetham,but there is
> no proof for his going to kasmir sarvagna peetham and even most of
> vishistadvaithi's say he went to kashmir sarvagna peetham ,but they won't
> say he sat of sarvagna peetham by convensing vishistadvaitha to all
> kashmir pandiths .
> But coming to madhvacharya,no one says he went to kashmir sarvagna
> peetham. History says kashmir sarvagna peetham got destroyed in 14 th
> century by muslim invaders .But madhvacharya's time was 12 th century
> ,where as ramanuja's it is 11 th century.
> So,you can't claim that at these acharya's time kashmir sarvagna peetham
> got distroyed ,so they din't go there.
> One who sat on kashmir sarvagna peetham,must be a great brahma
> jgnani.Because it is the very place of godess saraswathi,godess of jgnana.
> what you say for this?
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 2:04 AM, SHIVPRASAD DINKAR <harivayus at bellsouth.net
> > wrote:
> Oh, I see, so you want examples. Will you change your mind after that or
> you are just wasting my time and, will still continue to write stupid posts
> as usual?
> At any rate, these are the discrepancies in his own life:
> 1. Adwaitins don't believe even real life experiences and call it all a
> dream and, further they don't believe in dreams. But as far as Jananam of
> Shankara is concerned they will say that Shivaguru and Aryamba went to
> Shiva temple in Tiruchur and prayed for a son. Lord Shiva came in the dram
> and asked them if they want a son who is dull and long lived or bright and
> short lived. They supposedly chose the 2nd option!! How can one choose an
> option in dream? Let us overlook that for the time being. Then supposedly
> Shankara was born. And, the Adwaitins will claim that Shiva himself was
> born as Shankara while some will claim that Subramanya was born as
> Shankara. And, they will use the above dream as the proof. Should we
> laugh at their double standards?
> 2. Shankara who propounded that we are verily the Brahman itself defeated
> one Abhinava in debate. And, that scholar in anger put black magic on
> Shankara!!! How can anyone put black magic on Brahman??? How can the so
> called Jivan Mukhta be subjected to black magic??? Then he supposedly went
> to Tiruchendur and composed Subramanya Bhujangam and, relieved himself from
> black magic? So, a person who claimed that he is not different than
> Brahman needed the help of Subramanya to relieve himself from black
> magic??? Strange logic indeed of Adwaitins.
> 3. Shankara was captured by a Kaapalika who wanted to offer him as
> sacrifice - i.e., human sacrifice. So, what did Shankara do? He called
> out for Narasimha and composed a Stotram and, supposedly Narasimha saved
> him. Hmm, a person who claimed that he is not different than Brahman,
> needs help from Narasimha??? Strange indeed, is it not?
> 4. Shankara was walking in the morning and, sees a Chandala with four
> dogs in his way. He asks him to move away and, supposedly the Chandala
> asks - who should move - this body which is going to become ash when I am
> dead or this soul - which is same as your soul and, all of which is
> Brahman?!!! And, at that time Shankara realizes his folly and, the
> Chandala is none other than Shiva and, the four dogs are the four Vedas. As
> you see - the Acharya who propounded that ALL Aatmas are the same could not
> put to practice what he preached when he was confronted with a situation!!!
> 5. Sanyasis do not have Agni Kaaryam but supposedly Shankara had promised
> his mother that he will come and do Agni/Anthim Kaaryam for her. He came
> and, the villagers refused to give him fire wood for the Agni Kaaryam
> because a Sanyasi cannot perform Agni Kaaryam. So, he supposedly took
> barks of banana plant and used that as fire wood. And, then he supposedly
> cursed those villagers to become Paraya and, these folks belong to a caste
> known as Maadhyanika Paraya or people who become Parayas until
> mid-afternoon. Even now, not many people will keep Vivaha Sambandham with
> these Madyanika Parayas. An Acharya who propouned that ALL Aatmas are
> verily that Brahman, curses them!!! Strange indeed, is it not?
> 6. Shankara goes to Bhiksha and, a poor lady comes out and, gives him
> Amlaki fruit. He is moved and, invokes Lakshmi and, composes Kanakadara
> Stotram and, there is rain of gold coins. Hmm, an Acharya who propounds
> that he is verily that Brahman, needs the assistance of Lakshmi to create
> gold?? Strange, is it not.
> The Adwaitins cannot answer these and, will claim that these are all
> Vyavaharika Sathyas and, other ad infinitum nonsense. In the first place,
> there is absolutely NO scriptural proof for three grades of truth. That is
> why Acharya Madhwa asked, OK, the fact that there are three grades of truth
> is also a form of truth, is it not? And, what kind of truth is that?
> Which ever answer you choose, you will end up in an absurd situation. Try
> it yourselves. This is absolute stupidity to claim three grades of truth
> etc. For something to be true, it just has to be true at time t = t and,
> at a place not from t = minus infinity to t = t and t = plus infinity.
> But long and short, first read Sri Vaadiraja Tirtha's Nyayarathnavalli.
> In about 440 shlokas each of 2 lines, he has destroyed the various stupid
> theories of Adwaitham. Well, if you can understand that, then, that is
> good. But reading your posts, I really doubt you have the ability to
> understand the penetrating logic and sarcasm of Sri Vaadiraja Tirtha.
> Then, read his magnum opus, Yukhtimallika.
> On Saturday, April 4, 2015 1:12 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com>
> Yes,give me examples...
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 10:27 PM, SHIVPRASAD DINKAR <
> harivayus at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Since you belong to Sode Vaadiraja Muttam, first, please read
> Nyayarathavalli of Sri Vaadiraja Tirtha and, see how he torn apart
> Adwaitham and, its central tenets. See his humor and sarcasm and, how he
> tears apart the illogic of Adwaitham. Then read Yukthimallika of Sri
> Vaadiraja Tirtha and, see how he has torn Adwaitham and, its central tenets
> I won't go into what Shankara did as to the Muttam etc. but, it is
> sufficient to know that he himself did not practice what he preached or was
> unable to practice what he preached. Not once, but many many many times in
> his life. Do you want examples?
> Please learn your own Tatthwam correctly and, then post various threads.
> On Saturday, April 4, 2015 11:18 AM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com>
> Yes,Shivaprasad sir,
> Before shankara there was no mathas
> or matha concept in india.It is shankara stared matha in india.Sringeri
> sharada peetha is the world's first matha.
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 8:16 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com> wrote:
> You may not be knowing I am madhva,A follower of sode vadiraja matha....
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Santhosh ,shivaprasad dinakar ,swami sarvabhutananada sir,
> Sorry for my harsh words,I won't repeat the same here again.....
> But at last I want to say some thing...madhva lived for 69 years,ramunuja
> lived for 120 years...still they were not able to come to the level of work
> what adi shankara had done in only 32 years.
> Some are good in some field and may not be good in other field.For
> example,Even though madhva was good in his dvaita sidhanta,he did not know
> how to spread his philosophy through out the country.That is why dvaitha
> can be seen only mainly in karnataka.
> Shiva prasad sir said,Vyasa raja spread the dvaitha to some extent,but it
> is vyasa thirtha not madhvacharya.
> Madhva just copied the matha concept what shankara has previously
> started.Before shankara sanyasi were restricted from making house (matha),
> and staying there for years.But shankara started matha concept just to save
> and spread sanathana dharma.He thinks it is better to keep sanyasi as head
> of amnaya peetham so that he won't have greedy over someone or some thing.
> Coming to shankara's point,He had good command over his philosophy and
> also he knew how to spread his philosophy,that cam be easily seen from his
> matha concept and his four amnaya peetha in four corners of the country.
> Even great darshanikas think shankara lived for more than 32 years,because
> they think it is very difficult for a person who lived only 32 years to
> spread and save sanathana vaidika dharma in 700 A.D time ,when there was no
> proper facility for any thing.
> Now we have every facility still we are not able to convenes even a single
> person.But that time without any facility shankara convenced about advaitha
> to asthika's as well as nasthika people like jaina ,boudha.Which is very
> very difficult.Because of him sanathana dharma is still alive
> That is even today shankaracharya is called as jagath guru,An avathar of
> Lord shiva.
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 7:23 PM, Santosh Rao <itswhateva at gmail.com> wrote:
> Shiva is worshipped at Madhva's sode mutt in udupi as part of one
> particular tradition, it isn't fair to paint his philosophy with so broad a
> I accept one should not accept his guru's teachings blindly.But here
> the question comes how intellectually brilliant your teacher is to answer
> your question.Coming to shankara,he could have taken sanyasa from a local
> sanyasi in kaladi ,kerala.But he wanted to take sanyasa from Govidha
> bhagavath pada,a well known brahma jgnani at that time.That is why he went
> from kaladi to madhya pradesh by walking, to take sanyasa dheeksha.Just
> like nowdays engineering students want to study from IIT ,not from local
> engineering college.
> But in case of madhva and ramanuja,their teacher are local teacher of their
> area.Who may have less intellect to answer answer madhva's or ramanuja's
> question, that doesn't mean that philosophy is wrong.
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 5:30 PM, SHIVPRASAD DINKAR <harivayus at bellsouth.net
> > You say three great Acharyas and, pelt stones on two of them!!! What
> > confused thinking to start with.
> > When the norm itself is in-correct then, it has to be corrected. That is
> > what Acharya Madhwa did. This has got nothing to do with Guru Droham.
> > confused persons and, people with less logical power/ less intellect who
> > will nod their head like a sheep to what their teacher says and, will
> > repeat like parrot what they heard cannot understand these things. You
> > seem fit in that category of nodding their head like a sheep and
> > like a parrot what they heard. Acharya Madhwa corrected the in-correct
> > norm existing which was Adwaitham. We are very proud that he did that.
> > Subramanyam Chandrashekar the Nobel laureate corrected and, went against
> > his teacher Eddington. Eventually Chandra was proved right and, he won a
> > Nobel prize in 1983 but, for less intelligent men like you, this would
> > constituted Guru Droham. So, you may wallow in your ignorance known as
> > Adwaitham.
> > Dwaitham is not confined to Karnataka alone. There are Telugu Madhwas,
> > there are Marathi Madhwas, there are Konkani Madhwas. There are Dwaitins
> > in Bengal, Orissa - ISKCON all of whom trace their Guru Parampara to Sri
> > Vyasa Tirtha. There are Dwaitins in Gujarat, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh,
> > Utter Pradesh. Why, even so many Iyers and Iyengars couples get Mudra
> > Dharanam and, become Dwaitins.
> > Do some serious study on Dwaitham and Adwaitham polemics instead of
> > writing ill thought out postings which are copy and pasted from other
> > scholarly books.
> > By the way, I am an Adwaithi by birth - born in Iyer family and, became a
> > Dwaithi after finding Adwaitham to be utterly illogical and foolish.
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list