[Advaita-l] On Naishkarmya siddhi reference

[Srikanta Narayanaswami]

One is really surprised by the strong feelings that are being expressed
about SSS.

Since many commentators differ in their interpretation of Sankara
giving rise to the Bhamati, Vivarana etc., prasthanas, SSS can have
his own prasthana. Trouble will arise only if there is a claim that only
one prasthana interprets Bhagavatpada correctly and others do not.
It should be left to the readers to choose who according to them
is the closest to the original.

Here I may point out that there are schools which consider Sankara
himself is not sufficiently radical enough in his presentation of advaita.
Some people consider Gaudapada to be more radical than Sankara.

Another exposition of advaita which is more nascent is that of Ribhu Gita.

regards,
Sarma.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
As one who has studyed,SriSachidanandendra sarasawathijis books,he doesnot have a separate prasthana as it is being pointed out above.What he has done is to bring out all the prasthanas and the difference between them.It is the duty of the seeker in Advaita that he must study carefully them to understand them.
It is not true that Shankara is not radical enough in his presentation of Advaita.Infact,Shankara follows Gowdapada very closely as we study carefully both the karikas and  Bhashya of shankara.The error lies only in our proper understanding.They are truely correct representations of Advaita.
when there is no understanding on the performance of karmas,and if some say that only perfromance of karmas are the only importance,how they can move to Jnana,which is represented by Shankara and Gowdapada?
N.Srikanta;