[Advaita-l] Interesting article.

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Fri Aug 17 20:49:44 CDT 2012

A fine example of the ideal attitude in this respect is available here:

In the benedictory discourse delivered, in Kannada, at Mysore on 15.4.1988
by His Holiness Jagaduru Sri Abhinava Vidyatirtha Swamigal, 35th Pontiff of
Sri Sharada Peetham Sringeri said:


In our Holy land, Bharath, persons in the Government, Advaitic
Sannyasins,devotees and people interested in the Shastras have been
celebrating , since the start of the current year, the twelfth centenary of
the advent of Bhagavatpada, the preceptor. Historically, 1200-1300 years
have passed since Bhagavatpada was born. If, following deliberation as on
other issues, a consensus had arisen about the year of Bhagavatpada’s
advent, be it 1200 years ago or earlier or later, there would have been no
occasion for dispute. Historians have so far not determined the year of
Buddha’s Nirvana with exactitude and certainty.  Yet, in 1956, the
2500thanniversary of Buddha’s Nirvana was commemorated in various
parts of the
globe.  Research has not established that Jesus Christ was born precisely
in 1 A.D. on December 25.  Nevertheless, the world over, Christmas is
observed on December 25 and the Christian era commences from 1 A.D.  Thus,
there are precedents for the anniversaries of events relating to personages
being celebrated even in the absence of historical definiteness about the
dates of those occurrences. So, the mere reason that 788 A.D. may actually
not be the year of Bhagavatpada’s advent cannot debar or render censurable
the current twelfth birth centenary celebrations.

However, be that as it may, it is intensely gratifying that the twelfth
birth centenary of that holy one is being celebrated. The present
celebrations provide us a special opportunity to think of and express our
gratitude to Bhagavatpada, who has done so very much good to all.


A similar question came up with respect to the Ramar Sethu.  While the
protagonists believe it is indeed the remains of the sethu built by the
vanara-s during Ramayana, the scientists tried to prove that what is seen
under the oceanic surface is a natural formation of things like



On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 1:11 AM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <
svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:

> >
> > Namaskar,
> >
> > One doubt keeps lurking in my mind when this topic comes up. Suppose
> > we accept the dates proposed by Sringeri Sharada peetham, what
> > explanation could be given to the guru parampara of the other 3 amnaya
> > peethams which date before 788AD? Is it really possible that all those
> > acharyas before 788AD are fake or "created"?
> > On the other hand, if we accept 509BC as the date, as proposed by the
> > other 3 mutts, what explanation could be given to the huge gap of over
> > 1000 years that would be generated within the Sringeri Guru parampara?
> > What happened to all the gurus in between this huge time gap?
> >
> Neither of the above. The true answer is that dates are shaky. In general,
> record
> keeping about these matters and preserving them over time has not been a
> strong
> point in the history of any of the Mathas or for that matter, in any
> traditional Indian
> institution. The dates attached to the paramparAs have largely been
> derived in the
> 19th century and the discrepancies are because the various Mathas have all
> done
> this exercise independent of one another. One should keep an open mind
> about the
> dates currently being given out, without reading too much into their
> differences.
> Vidyasankar
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list