[Advaita-l] vedAntins at the time of shankara
Praveen R. Bhat
bhatpraveen at gmail.com
Sun Sep 17 12:11:25 EDT 2017
>From our own list webpage:
To be sure, there were also pre-Sankaran representatives of non-advaita
vedAnta traditions, many of whom seem to have been *bhedAbheda-vAdins* of
one kind or the other - proponents of a doctrine of identity-in-difference.
Chief among them are the names of auDulomi, Asmarathya (both mentioned in
the brahmasUtras), bhartRprapanca, brahmadatta, bhartRmitra and bodhAyana.
With that in the background, what is important to note though is that just
as Bhashyakara dismisses the non-Vedanta traditions as they end in duality,
he also dismisses some Advaita-ending schools of thought since jnAnena
muktiH is compromised in them. samucchaya- or upAsana-prApyamuktiH is
anityA and so, siddAntaviruddhaH.
However, jnAnena avidyAnivRttiH and thereby advaitamuktiH is not
compromised by any sub-commentators of bhAShya, and therefore, they are
mere prakriyAbhedas and not tattvabhedas. This fact cannot be stressed
--Praveen R. Bhat
/* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
> Namaste Subbuji,
> On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 3:19 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> There is a difference. Shankara has not claimed that he is refuting
>> pre-existing Bhāṣyas on the Brahmasutra as others have done. All that he
>> claiming is that the monist is the only representative of the Upanishadic
>> mata and all his opponents are dualists. We find the proof of this in his
>> refutation of the various schools such as the sankhya, yoga, vaisheshika,
>> bauddha, jaina, pancharatra, pashupata, mimamsa, charvaka.. That gives us
>> an idea that there were no Vedantic schools that Shankara was opposed to.
> Bhashyakara was not opposed to the final conclusion of Vrttikara's
> Bhedabheda that Atman is brahman, but that upAsana is needed for the same
> even after jnAnotpatti. This is elaborately dismissed in the bhAShya under
> tattu samanvayAt, considering all possible upAsanA options.
> Kind rgds,
> --Praveen R. Bhat
> /* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know
> That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list