[Advaita-l] Is there any evidence for this claim?
v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Tue Mar 24 05:51:01 EDT 2020
Sri Bannanje, in his Kannada translation of the Madhva Vijaya of Narayana
Pandita for the verse 1.54, has said: ....since he (Shankaracharya)
confused the dull witted did he not become popular as 'sankara'?
[This is an indignation (among many in that book), of Shankaracharya.]
This is the verse of Narayana Pandita. See image.
Has anyone who has criticized / refuted Shankara during and after his time,
referred to him as 'sankara'? If anyone has seen such a reference, the same
may be presented.
For the word 'kila' in the shloka there is the meaning 'popular' among
Vachaspatyam अव्य० किल—क । १ वार्त्तायाम् २ अनुशयार्थे, ३ निश्चये, ४
संभाव्ये ५ *प्रसिद्धार्थद्योतने* ६ हेतौ ७ अरुचौ ८ अलीके ९ तिरस्कारे च ।
It is surprising that Sri Bannanje Acharya, a well known and widely read
scholar for whom research is a forte, has not cared to question/verify this
claim of the author. If the matter pertains to an event of a distant kalpa
or yuga, it would not trigger anyone's enthusiasm to probe into such a
claim. However, the question on hand is not of that category; it is of a
period about which we have a literary stock pertaining to various
sampradayas to verify the claim.
That which comes with the name of Purana is of no relevance here. The works
of Bhaskara, Ramanuja, Yadava Prakasha, etc.and those of disciplines such
as Nyaya (which too has critiqued Advaita) and kaavya literature and
historical records are the ones that could contain the evidence to
prove/disprove the claim of Narayana Pandita. One can expect at least more
than one reference to 'sankara' in order to justify the force of the word
'kila' (popular/well known.).
Comments without any basis, triggered by raaga-dvesha, are unwelcome. Only
evidence supporting the claim would be of interest. So, please desist from
trading charges on this or that Acharya/author.
Om Tat Sat
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list