[Advaita-l] shankaracharya and mutts in india
msb357du at gmail.com
Fri Feb 26 12:17:33 EST 2021
Dear Aravind Mahodaya,
It's a pertinent question that many in the path of seeking ask.
The speculations that we as normal people are bound to have are endless. It
is valid knowledge to the devout seeker that both His Holiness
Chandrasekhara Bharathi Mahaswami of Sringeri and His Holiness
Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi Mahaswami of Kanchi were peerless and yet
each other's peers, as they held their pontifical seat during the same time
period. It is also a well-known fact amongst astikas of old generation,
like the revered T.K. Balasubramania Iyer, or Ramanuja Agnihotra
Tathachariyar, or Shri Tethiyur Shastrigal, or Shri Mannargudi Raju
Shastrigal, that both were representatives of Shankara and can be treated
no different. Additionally, also the respect and equal consideration each
Acharyal gave to the other, including their respective mathams, is
Similarly, If we consider in the same manner the respect Shri Satchidananda
Shivabhinava Narasimha Bharathi Mahaswamigal of Sringeri had on Shri
Chandrasekharendra Sarawathi Mahaswami the VI (Shri Chandrasekharendra
Saraswathi Mahaswami the VII's Paramaguru) of Kanchi including Shri
Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi Mahaswami the VII of Kanchi, and vice versa,
only Shri Kalidasa can capture such reverence and love.
If we go the other route of investigating into the words of devotees and
seers who came after them, it will be in vain. For you can see how Puri
Shankaracharya Nischalananda Saraswathi Mahaswami says that the Sringeri
Peetham had changed the date of Adi Shankaracharya's birth three times.
Then you can see some people and seers saying Kanchi is not a peetham
established by Adi Shankaracharya, while others go to the extent of saying
it's a sub-branch of Sringeri. You will find sparks flying from every side,
but no consensus dawning.
The only solution is to consider the path adopted by the Acharyas who were
born in the 19th century and who reigned the Peetham in the early part of
the first half of 20th century, find the resounding truth in their behavior
towards each other (ignore any reactions and writings of Matha Bhaktas or
the later seers). This is an undertaking beyond the medha and tapas shakti
of majority. If it took Shri Satchidananda Shivabhinava Nrsimha Bharathi
Mahaswami so much tapas to re-discover Kaladi, we can only imagine it is a
fruitless task for people like us.
Additionally, as Shri Sadashiva Brahmendral said "for a Jeevanmukta -- if
the sun becomes cool, the moon becomes hot, and fire burns downwards --
nothing surprises". We as Jignasus are aspiring for that state. Any kind of
politics is irrelevant in this current age when Dharma is becoming
ksheenam. In this time and age, know one important thing; towards the end
of Kali Yuga the holy rivers will disappear one by one, the Punya Kshetram
will dwindle to nothing in their Punyatva, and there will be not any mathas
to protect our Dharmas, except for a few Brahmanas who will be shielded
from the world where Kalki Bhagawan will be born. So having the larger
perspective in mind, we need to work towards that. Whomever one is
affiliated with, one must open and extend their arm to the other with love,
work to protect our Vaidika Sampradayam. This is of utmost importance. We
are all working to realize Paramarthika Sathyam. Let's not hold on to
Vyavaharika sathyam and ruin our janma. It is only needed for simple
loukika vishayas but should not hold our mind more than that.
Veda Satyam | Advaitam Satyam ||
Sarvam Shri Krishnarpanamastu!
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 1:12 AM Jaldhar H. Vyas via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Feb 2021, Aravind M via Advaita-l wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > Can someone mention about all the authentic shankara mutts in india other
> > than the 4 mutts established by shankara
> There is also a matha said to be founded by Gaudapadacharya in Goa.
> There is a big controversy about Kanchi. Was it founded by Shankaracharya
> or was it a branch of Shringeri that broke away?
> Personally I do not think it was based on the evidence as I've reviewed
> it but there are respectable people who believe otherwise. And in any
> case its' acharyas have shown themselves to be exemplars of of Vedic
> dharma and worthy of respect by anyone who claims to be a follower of the
> But this raises the question, by authentic do you mean historically
> authentic or doctrinally authentic?
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list