[Advaita-l] Two 'declarations' by Sri Vedanta Desika
sanjivendra at gmail.com
Thu Apr 9 13:33:33 CDT 2015
I am a small jignasu, and appreciate such postings, esp of Sri Subrahmanium-ji, Sri Sadananda-ji and many others who keep giving us the fundamentals and advanced teaching of Advaita.
> On Apr 9, 2015, at 12:40 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 9:09 PM, sreenivasa murthy <narayana145 at yahoo.co.in>
>> From : H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy
>> Pranams to all.
>> Dear Friends,
>> When one sees the spate of postings on subjects like "Two
>> 'declarations' by Sri Vedanta Desika" and similar ones that are
>> flooding, one fails to understand the purpose of the appearance of such
>> postings. In what way it is useful to a jijnasu who is not burdened by such
>> useless information and who is eager to know advaita Vedanta as taught by
>> Sri Shankara in his commentaries? Why pollute the minds of jijnasus?
> Respected Sir,
> I fully agree with you that we should not pollute the minds of jijnāsus.
> It is with this precise objective that such posts are made here. Not all
> jijnāsus have the rare privilege of access to the pristine pure bhāṣyas of
> the Achārya and others in the sampradāya. Many jijnāsus owing to several
> reasons depend on material available on the internet. It is very difficult
> to know the genuine from the polluted material that is on the internet.
> There are sites/blogs that distort the bhāṣyas of Shankaracharya and
> present in such a way that an unwary reader is very likely drawn to it and
> develop appreciation for those writings and obviously led astray. It is in
> order to prevent such a loss that there arises a need for posts that reveal
> the true colors of such imposters and save the unwary jijnāsus.
> Definitely no malice is meant by such posts to any party. Such an endeavor
> will not be disapproved by Acharya Shankara who has always stressed the
> need for the unpolluted teaching to be given out.
> warm regards
>> Please ponder over.
>> The members have the freedom to post any matter of their liking . But that
>> freedom should be judiciously used so that the reader will acquire some
>> These thoughts have come from the heart of a vedantin who has been
>> nurtured by Srutimata and blessed by Sri Shankara's teachings pertaining
>> to one' true svarUpa from past four decades.
>> With warm and respectful regards,
>> Sreenivasa Murthy
>> *From:* V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
>> *Sent:* Thursday, 9 April 2015 3:33 PM
>> *Subject:* [Advaita-l] Two 'declarations' by Sri Vedanta Desika
>> The following comment is found in this URL:
>> //Yamuna muni clearly states that all vaidikas admitted vishNu alone as
>> Parabrahman.This fact is further reteirated by vedAnta Desika who declares
>> that adi Shankara was a vaishnava. Yes, the same vedanta desikan who also
>> declared that advaita is Buddhism in disguise.//
>> We see two 'declarations' reported to have been made by Sri Vedanta
>> If Shankara is a (genuine) vaiṣṇava, would he be teaching a system that is
>> buddhism in disguise, misleading people? A vaiṣṇava would be upholding
>> vaiṣṇavism and certainly not buddhism, that too, in disguise. The vaiṣṇava
>> credentials of Shankara are actually being called into question by Vedanta
>> Desika by terming advaita is buddhism in disguise. If we take it that
>> Desika is genuinely certifying Shankara to be a vaiṣṇava, the question
>> would be what is the basis for such a declaration? Obviously, the writings
>> of Shankara and they are the prasthānatraya bhāṣya. He must have gathered
>> from these that Shankara is indeed a vaiṣnava But it is based on these
>> alone Desikan must have also concluded that his system is only buddhism in
>> Add to this the fact that from the reported Yamunamuni's stand the
>> implication is Shankara is a vaidika. It is everybody's knowledge that
>> buddhism is not vaidika; only avaidika. So, the presenting of buddhism in
>> the disguise of vaidika system actually calls into question the genuineness
>> of the 'vaidika' epithet admitted to Shankara. The equation is:
>> Shankara, a vaidika, a vaiṣṇava, is also a crypto buddhist. Let us merge
>> the two epithets 'vaidika' and 'vaiṣṇava', into one, for one substitutes
>> the other in this context and retain also the 'pracchanna bauddha' epithet.
>> So the contradictions are quite obvious: the two declarations cannot go
>> hand in hand. One has to be sacrificed in order to retain the other. If
>> Shankara has to be on the 'vaiṣṇava (vaidika)' list, he must be divested of
>> the 'pracchanna bauddha' epithet. If the latter epithet is to be retained
>> then the 'vaiṣnava (vaidika)' epithet will have to be slightly altered to
>> 'kapaṭa vaiṣṇava (vaidika)' (pseudo vaiṣṇava (vaidika)). Which one to
>> sacrifice poses the proverbial hobson's choice (
>> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hobson%27s%20choice ) My guess
>> is that in order to save the 'punch', the 'vaiṣṇava (vaidika)' epithet will
>> be given up. Only if the crypto buddhist/buddhism epithet is retained
>> there will be something to criticize.
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> 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