gaudapaada and buddha (was Re: brahman by ...)

[Kim Poulsen]

----------
> From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vidya at CCO.CALTECH.EDU>
> To: Multiple recipients of list ADVAITA-L <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU>


> Finally, I believe there can be a difference between what a text actually
> says, and what it can be made to say. I prefer the former, without going
> to either the one extreme preferred by Nikhilananda or the other extreme
> preferred by Vidhusekhara Bhattacharya, and possibly you.

Well, first I do not perceive my views as extreme, secondly I'm not aware
of the second view (it may be a view that practically makes a buddhist of
Gaudapada.) It seems to be that there are only a few possible solutions
as to why Gaudapada chose to let half his karika be influenced by buddhist
thought.

(Maybe Gaudapda decided to reconcile not only Advaita and
> > Buddhism, but Yogacharya and Madhyamika?)
>
> If so, why do it in a text allied to an upanishad, which is alien to both
> yogAcAra and madhyamaka?

There is, it seems to me, only two alternatives. Either Gaudapda had the
intention to translate something from one system to the other,  or to
reconcile something (or both.)
These seems the only reasonable alternatives. There are no attempt at
refuting,
only the use of terms known especially from Nagarjuna.


> Also, I think we have to distinguish between historical reconstructions
of
> similarity/contrast based on textual evidence, and a religious assertion
> of oneness/reconciliation. The latter is independent of texts, but is
> liable to be read into the texts, something that might be far from the
> intentions of the authors of the texts themselves.

Only as far as the researcher is mistaken. A great amount of information
can be conveyed by the philosophical system itself. I'm afraid these
ancient texts are
intentionally kept vague, so that the investigator must exercise his
understanding to make much progress.
  It may (and has) given a far more distorted picture to ignore these
attempts at something within this text. There is nothing wrong (and this is
 actually preferable)
to make several working hypotheses and test them on the text.


Thank you,

Kim