Various vAda-s in advaita (was Re: A few questions)
ahudli at APPN.CI.IN.AMERITECH.COM
Wed Jan 29 12:20:29 CST 1997
Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian wrote:
Thanks for the interesting article and welcome back. I have one question
regaring maanasollaasa and gauDapaada kaarikaas. I have other questions
too, but that will have to wait for some time.
> The vAda-s given by gauDapAda are nothing other than dR^ishTi-sR^ishTi vAda.
> The vAda-s given in the mAnasollasa vArtika are again the same. Of course one
> may doubt the authorship of sureshvarAchArya in the latter case, but it has
> been quoted by vidyAraNya himself as being authored by sureshvarAchArya in his
> paJNcha dashii. I am not sure if the author you mention follows the books I
> quote exactly, but the vAdas given in the two books I quote are commonly
> dR^ishTi-sR^ishTi vAda. Oh, another text is of course the yoga vAsishhTha.
I have only an introductory understanding of Kashmir Shaivism, so
my comments below are to be understood with that in mind.
A reading of the maanasollaasa shows that the author accepts that
kriyaa (activity) is in Brahman. From what little I know of Kashmir
Shaivism, kriyaa is said to be in Shiva (Brahman). But this is not
the position of advaita according to which Brahman is nishhkriya,
actionless. In fact, Shankara goes to great lengths to deny _any_
semblance of activity in Brahman in his major works. So on this point
alone, one could argue that the author of maanasollaasa was not
Sureshvara or if he was, he probably wrote it under the influence of
Again, this point of Brahman being nishhkriya in advaita vis a vis
Brahman being with activity in Kashmir Shaivism distinguishes the
maanasollaasa from GauDapaada kaarikas, where we do not find activity
attributed to Brahman.
I am not suggesting that Kashmir Shaivism is completely different from
advaita. I think they have a lot more in common than a few differences.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list