[Advaita-l] vedAntins at the time of shankara

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Sat Sep 16 23:56:38 EDT 2017

On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 10:19 PM, Kalyan <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 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.

Here is a study on the Bodhayana-Upavarsha topic:


Nothing final arises from the study.

Another article:
 which is however missing now.

> //The schools that  Shankara refutes in the second chapter of BSB are all
>  non-Vedantic//
> 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.

In BSB 2.1.14 a certain bhedābheda vāda is refuted. The identity of
jiva-Brahman is admitted by that vādin in the mokṣa state but not in the
bandha state. In that school both bheda in bandha and abheda in moksha are
absolute. In the 2.2 of BSB however, the schools refuted are all
non-vedantic. I have cited a Taittiriya Bhashya passage of Shankara where
he declares that he, the monist, is the lone representative of the Vedanata
and is faced with a number of non-monists who are outside the Vedanta.  The
subcommentator in the Br.Up.bhasya (if I remember right) has identified a
purvapaksha as Bhartruprapanchamatam.

In the Thangaswami research work on Advaita Vedanta literature, on p.191,
on Upavarsha it is stated that the view of the Vishistadvaitins identifying
Upavarsha with Bodhayana is incorrect. He considers Upavarsha as a
vrittikara that Shankara alludes to. In this book Bhartrpraoancha is stated
to be a bhedābhedavādin but not as an author of a vritti on the
Brahmasutra. He is believed to have written commentaries on Br.up. and
Kathopanishat. Shankara alludes to him as 'aupanishadmmanyaḥ', a derogatory
term to mean: one who thinks he is a follower of the Upanishad.


> Regards
> Kalyan

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list