[Advaita-l] vedAntins at the time of shankara

Kalyan kalyan_kg at yahoo.com
Sat Sep 16 12:49:17 EDT 2017

Vishishthadvaitins hold that Bodhayana is the same as Upavarsha, that Shankara refers to. Both Shankara and Bhaskara hold Upavarsha in high esteem, even though their schools are different, so it cannot be claimed for certain that Upavarsha was an advaitin.

Narayana Panditacharya, the biographer of Madhva, refers to a vrittikAra as one of the commentators on BS. Bodhayana or Upavarsha (whether or not they are the same person) could be this vrittikAra.

//The schools that
 Shankara refutes in the second chapter of BSB are all

This does not prove anything. Bhartrprapancha, a bhedAbhedavAdin, has written a commentary on BS (according to Narayana Panditacharya) and I dont remember that he is refuted by Shankara in the second chapter.  Just because no other vedantic school was refuted by Shankara in the 2nd chapter, it does not mean that there was no other vedantic school at the time of Shankara.


On Sat, 9/16/17, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] vedAntins at the time of shankara
 To: "Kalyan" <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com>
 Cc: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 Date: Saturday, September 16, 2017, 3:45 PM
 On 16 Sep
 2017 20:44, "Kalyan" <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com>
 In the
 following blog of yours, you state that there was no
 non-advaitic vedanta school prior to Shankara -
 03/12/no-non-advaitic-vedanta- prior-to-shankara/amp/
 Is there any reason for the change of heart?
 There has been no change of heart. I
 only reported what those schools claim. Advaitins hold, for
 instance, if the Bodhayana vritti was really extant during
 Shankara's time, scholarly awareness would have been
 there. While Shankara has commented upon certain views in
 the bhashyas, this would also have found a place. But
 Shankara states that about the Upanishadvadins' common
 The schools that
 Shankara refutes in the second chapter of BSB are all
 ------------------------------ --------------
 On Sat, 9/16/17, V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
  Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] vedAntins at the time of
  To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta"
 <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
 vedanta.org>, "Kalyan" <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com>
  Date: Saturday, September 16, 2017, 11:17 AM
  On 16 Sep
  2017 11:54, "Kalyan via Advaita-l" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
  //Completely dualistic schools of
  Vedanta are a relatively recent
  development.  The
  only dualists in early times were Samkhyas.  It is
  that Shankaracharya is contrasting with
  "followers of the Upanishads."//
  I agree. Strict dualism in vedAnta is relatively new. One
  the views floating around here is that post-advaitic
  vedAntic schools were caused by the difference in the
  among the advaitins. I don't know how far this is
  The way I see it, the advent of these new rival
  schools is probably due to a theistic reaction to the
  perceived non-theism of advaita. Neither sAmkhya nor
  bhedAbheda were theistic. The new vedAntic schools came
  fill in the theistic gap.
  Both the adherents of the two rival
  schools clearly say that their Acharyas brought to the
  what was already in vogue. Madhwas trace their system
  Narayana, Brahma.. Ramanujas too say theirs is a firm
  preexistent system. Bodhayana vritti on the Brahmsutra
  the basis for the Sribhashya they say. Their system was
  practiced by the Azhwars they claim.
  Narayana pandita in Manimanjari even
  gives names of several Tirthas who preceded
  Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.
  To unsubscribe or change your options:
  For assistance, contact:
  listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list