[Advaita-l] The true purport of Shankara's 'censure' of Buddha in the BSB

[V Subrahmanian]

Shankara has said this in the Brahma Sutra Bhashya 2.2.32 while commenting
on the Buddhist related sutras:

*Sanskrit Text (from Śaṅkara):*

अपि च बाह्यार्थविज्ञानशून्यवादत्रयमितरेतरविरुद्धमुपदिशता सुगतेन
स्पष्टीकृतमात्मनोऽसम्बद्धप्रलापित्वम् ।
प्रद्वेषो वा प्रजासु — विरुद्धार्थप्रतिपत्त्या विमुह्येयुरिमाः प्रजा इति ।
सर्वथाप्यनादरणीयोऽयं सुगतसमयः श्रेयस्कामैरित्यभिप्रायः ॥ ३२ ॥

*English Rendering:*

Moreover, by teaching three mutually contradictory doctrines —
*bāhyārthavijñāna*, *śūnyavāda*, and their variants — the *Sugata* (Buddha)
has made clear *ātmano’sambaddha-pralāpitvam*, his incoherent babbling
(self-contradiction).
Or else, it may be that, out of *pradveṣaḥ prajāsu* — aversion towards
certain beings — he (the Buddha) promulgated such mutually conflicting
views so that *viruddhārthapratipattyā vimuhyeyur imāḥ prajāḥ* — these
creatures, deluded by the grasp of contradictory notions, might lose
discernment.
In any case, *sarvathāpy anādaraṇīyo’yaṃ sugatasamayaḥ śreyaskāmair ity
abhiprāyaḥ* — this doctrine of the Sugata (Buddha) is, in every way, to be
disregarded by those who desire the highest good. (32)
------------------------------

*Substance: *

In the Buddhist system, there are several mutually contradictory schools of
thought:

   1.

   Acceptance of external objects as real, through *pratyakṣa* (direct
   perception);
   2.

   Acceptance of the same through *anumāna* (inference);
   3.

   The *kṣaṇika-vijñānavāda* — which denies the existence of external
   objects altogether;
   4.

   The *śūnyavāda* — which asserts absolute voidness.

Thus, the Buddha, by propounding such inconsistent doctrines, has made
evident *his incoherent speech (asambaddha-pralāpitvam)*.
Or, it may also be that — in order that beings opposed to the Vedic path (
*vaidika-mārga-virodhinaḥ*) may become deluded — he taught such doctrines.
In either case, *this system is to be rejected.*
------------------------------

*Ānandagiri’s explanation in his Nyāyanirṇaya:*

सर्वज्ञस्य भगवतो
वासुदेवस्येतिहासपुराणयोर्बुद्धत्वप्रसिद्धेस्तस्यासम्बद्धप्रलापित्वमयुक्तमित्याशङ्क्याह
— प्रद्वेषो वेति । वैदिकपथविरुद्धजन्तूपलक्षणार्थं प्रजाग्रहणम् ॥

Since the *Itihāsa* and *Purāṇa* proclaim that Bhagavān Vāsudeva, the
Omniscient, incarnated as Buddha, it would be improper (*ayuktam*) to
attribute incoherent babbling (*asambaddha-pralāpitvam*) to him.
Anticipating this doubt, Śaṅkara himself offers the alternative
interpretation — *pradveṣo vā* — that “aversion” was towards beings opposed
to the Vedic path.
The term *prajāḥ* (creatures) is used here to refer to those opposed to the
*vaidika-mārga*.
------------------------------

*Summary meaning:*
Śaṅkara remarks that the Buddha’s teachings are mutually contradictory and
hence incoherent, or perhaps deliberately designed to confound those
antagonistic to the Vedic way. Ānandagiri clarifies that since the Buddha
is none other than Vāsudeva himself, the incoherence must be intentional —
a means to delude *vaidika-virodhins*, not a sign of ignorance.

In the Srimadbhagavatam is this reference:

ŚB 1.3.24
तत: कलौ सम्प्रवृत्ते सम्मोहाय सुरद्विषाम् ।
बुद्धो नामाजनसुत: कीकटेषु भविष्यति ॥ २४

Then, in the beginning of Kali-yuga, the Lord will appear as Lord Buddha,
the son of Ajan (Jina), in the province of Gayā, just for the purpose of
deluding those who are envious of the faithful theist.

warm regards

subbu