[Advaita-l] Madhusudana Saraswati

[Rajaram Venkataramani]

I am very selfish in the sense that I discuss only when I learn something.
So, please dont be disappointed if I dont respond. I will briefly answer
your points (nothing new). I leave you to draw your conclusions.

On Sunday, February 19, 2012, Sunil Bhattacharjya wrote:


>  Before taking the role of a policeman you have to establish that there
> was no Vaishnavism in Bengal in those days if you insist that the Bengli
> boy Kamalajanayana was not influence by the Viasnavism
>

Rajaram: I dont think Madhusudana is from Bengal. That conclusion by
scholars is primarily based on stories - not any literary evidence. There
is one scholar (apart from me - just kidding :)) who concluded likewise.


>   Secondly,  you forgot about Nelson this time. What about your false
> claim that I quoted what you quoted earlier.
>

Rajaram: Please tell me what works of Nelson you have read on Madhusudana.
Your post on Nelson is a ditto copy of mine on Jan 29 - the opening post of
the thread titled "Did Madhusudana reconcile ...?".

>  Thirdly let us sort out one by one. Your statement that "So, even if you
> can prove that Advaita Siddhi was later than BhR, it will not serve any
> purpose." is a clear indication that your pride is preventing you from
> admitting that Advaita-siddhi was written after Bhagavad-bhakti-rasayana.
>

Rajaram: According to Dr. Sanjukta Advaita Siddhi is most probably before
BhR and she has given reasons for that. My point is totally misunderstood
by you. Even if you can prove Advaita Siddhi was later than BhR, you cannot
prove Gudartha Dipika is later than BhR. Gudartha Dipika says clearly
establishes the position of bhakti and BhR.

>
> All people are not adamant not to change their views. There has been
> examples in the past. Even much before Adi Sankarcharya Vasubandhu did
> that. That is quite natural for honest people to do when they come to
> understand their mistakes. I consider Madhusudana Saraswati to be an honest
> man with an open mind  unless you can prove otherwise.
>

Rajaram: You say that he stole ideas from gaudiya vaishnavism without
giving credit to the latter. If you are right, then I have to say he was
not an honest person. Needless to say, I think he was honest :)

>
>