[Advaita-l] vedAntins at the time of shankara

Ravi Kiran ravikiranm108 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 15 06:53:30 EDT 2017

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> praNAms
> Hare Krishna
> In the bruhadaaraNyaka Upanishad mantra bhAshya (2-1-20) , bhagavatpAda
> observes that there is no disagreement among the followers of the vedAnta /
> Upanishads with regard to the 'ikyamatya' uniformity  of vedAnta siddhAnta
> pertaining to the identity of the jeevaatma and the paramAtma.  I am not
> giving the bhAshya vAkya Sanskrit transliteration here so that one can
> refer the originals in the books what they have.  And in the
> vilakshaNatvAdhikaraNa sUtra bhAshya again bhAshyakAra observes that all
> the siddhAnti-s of mOksha shAstra will advocate that correct knowledge
> alone would drives us to the mOksha or release from baNdhana.  Here in this
> adhikaraNa, bhAshyakAra  answering the sAnkhya-s pUrva paxa with regard to
> jagat kAraNa.
> From the above it is evident that if at all there was a school which
> propagates permanent bheda between jeevaatma and paramAtma ( like
> tattvavAda of today which also claims that they follow upanishadic
> teaching), bhAshyakAra would have not asserted with such a clarity that
> there was an unanimous agreement among vedAntins with regard to the
> jeeva-paramAtma ikya.  Nor he would have been declared that final mOksha is
> through jnana only if at all there would have been the existence of schools
> which advocates, prapatti, sharaNaagati, bhagavanta krupe, bhakti or
> something of that order as an alternative means to svarUpa jnana.
> And Sri SSS, somewhere (vedAnta vichArada itihAsa ?? don't remember)
> observes that whenever 'pradhAna malla' sAnkhya talks about pUrva paxa from
> the vedAnta school, it invariably talks about ONLY Advaita vedAntins since
> they presumed that Advaita alone is the vedAnta siddhAnta.  The only
> dualists that bhAshyakAra refers in his writings are the followers of other
> darshana-s or school of thought like the sAnkhya-s, the vaisheshika-s, the
> Buddhists, the jains and the pashupata-s.  The dvaita schools that he takes
> as his pUrpa paxi are all obviously avaidika mata-s.

wasn't Nyaya / Vaisheshika Vedic ? any reason why you categorized as
avaidika mata ?

> And again, as said earlier, in the vAkyAnvayAdhikaraNa, bAdarAyaNa talks
> about three different advaitins namely ashmarAtya, audulOmi and
> kAshakrutsna.  Shankara while commenting on these Acharya-s too, any
> mentioning of any school other than Advaita is conspicuous  by its
> absence.  And among these three Advaita Acharya-s, shankara endorses the
> views expressed by kAshakrutsna and clarifies his (kAshakrutsna) views are
> in line with upanishadic siddhAnta.
> While on the subject, It is noteworthy that in shanakara's stand :
> "methodology differs, goal is ONE..so go-ahead" green signal not there
> though all were vedAntic advaitins !!
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> bhaskar
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list