[Advaita-l] Gaudapada and Madhusudhana.

[Srikanta Narayanaswami]

On Fri, 29 Jul 2011, Srikanta Narayanaswami wrote:

> It is clear that the the writer of the above Email has not understood the "Moksha-Sastra",which he has brought Academic Research to show that Gaudapada has brought Bauddha concepts to prove the Vdantic point of view.This is clearly absurd.Why shoudl gaudapada bring Bauddha concepts to prove Vedanta?Can we say that Gaudapada is Nonsampradayic(NS) for short,which is a an absurd hypothesis.

It's an open and shut case.  Gaudapadacharya uses terminology and imagery no other Advaitin uses (including the term buddha!) but which is very common in Madhyamaka Buddhist works.  Why did he do this?  Perhaps as was suggested his principle opposition was from Buddhists and he wanted to write in the language they would understand.  I don't think one needs to worry that it is a sign of being non-sampradayic.  The origin may be Buddhist but the use it is put to is thoroughly Vedantic.  Nowadays people use imagery from, say, quantum physics to illustrate Vedantic concepts. But they are still Advaitins not scientists right?

-- Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
_______________________________________________
With reference to the above Email by Jaldhar Vyas,says that" Gaudapada uses the terminology which no Advaitin uses.He also says that Buddhist terminology is used by Gaudapada  because as was suggested his principle opposition was from Buddhists and he wanted to write in the language they understood.He  also says that 
he doesnot think that one needs to worry that it is a sign of being non-sampradayic."The origin may be Buddhist ,
bu the use  it is put to is throughly Vedantic.Now a days people use imagery from say,quantum physics  to illustrate Vedantic concepts.But they are still Advaitins not scientists right?"
 
This is somehow not discernible from the point of view of careful study.when scholar uses the same set of arguments
and terminology,and writes a book which assumes importance,then now a days,let alone in the period when Gaudapada lived,this will be branded as Plagiarism.No brilliant scholar even less bright than Gaudapada will earn this dubious distinction.
Let me give you an example.In his "Brahmasutra Bhashya under the adhikarana where he examines the different schools of "siddhanta',under the section titled"Abhavadhikarana",even Shankara has quoted from Buddhist scriptures.Can we now say that "the origin may be Buddhist but the use it is put to is throughly Vedantic."?
In a through "Rigorous"siddhanta as presented by Gaudapada and Shankara,any borrowing from the schools can be easily discernible,and puts the "Siddhanta"in a bad light,just like any of the scientific theories presented today!
It is like the "Devil quoting the bible".
 
I have been doing extensive research on this and now  myTheses is complete.
N.Srikanta.