[Advaita-l] Fw: [USBrahmins] Re: Fw: [hc] Reinterpreting Dwaita versus Adwaita by sanjay rao

[V Subrahmanian]

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Sunil Bhattacharjya <
sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> ----- Forwarded Message -----
> From: Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com>
> To: "USBrahmins at yahoogroups.com" <USBrahmins at yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 8:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [USBrahmins] Re: Fw: [hc] Reinterpreting Dwaita versus
> Adwaita by sanjay rao
>
>
> Dear friends,
>
> In order to create a great image for himself Madhvacharya called Adi
> Sankaracharya a demon, without any basis. One who has read the chapter 22
> of Madhvacharya's  Mahabharata Tatparya Nirnaya, knows about it and the
> hostility of Madhvacharya against the great Adi Sankaracharya.
> Madhvacharya's disciple Narayana Panditacharya wrote baseless things about
> Adi Sankaracharya and his mother, in the sixth chapter of the Mani-Manjari.
> He wrote  the Mani-Manjari  to predispose the people against Adi
> Sankaracharya. The Narayana went on to write the biography of Madhvacharya.
> No civilized person can write the extermely dirty language used by Narayana
> Panditacharya for character assassination of Adi Sankaracharya and his
> family. If the Moderatorji permits I can reproduce some portions of the
> Mani-Manjari so that the esteemed members can see for themselves what type
> of man  Narayana Panditacharya was. He at first pointed out about the
> disagreements of the Sankara
>  Vijayas and then went on to write his imaginary things about Adi
> Sankaracharya. Of course one can admire the extremely shrewd  tactics of
> Narayana Panditacharya.
>

I am reproducing here an old post of mine to this forum:

The problem with some traditions is the criticism is done at personal level
- The very implication is they do not have substance in the criticism of
the contents.

In the introduction to the book 'UpaniShadbhAShyam' published by the Mahesh
Research Institute, Varanasi, the editor Vidwan S.Subrahmanya Sastri has
presented three sample passages from the works of Shankara, Ramanuja and
Madhwa that indicate the kind of language these Acharyas used while
attacking their opponents:

परमतनिराकरणप्रधानं पादमारभमाणश्च भगवत्पादाः ’ननु मुमुक्षूणां मोक्षसाधनत्वेन
सम्यग्दर्शननिरूपणाय स्वपक्षस्थापनमेव केवलं कर्तुं युक्तं, किं
परपक्षनिराकरणेन परविद्वेषकारणेन’ इति परमतनिराकरणे स्वस्यानाग्रहं
प्रदर्शयन्ति ।
रामानुचार्यास्तु औपनिषदं भगवत्पादमतं दूषयिष्यन्तः पूर्वपक्षान्ते -
तदिदमौपनिषदपरमपुरुषवरणीयताहेु
गुणविशेषविरहिणां अनादिपापवासनादूषिताशेषशेमुषीकाणां
अनधिगतपदवाक्यस्वरूपतदर्थयाथात्-म्यप्रत्यक्षादिसकलप्रमाणवृत्त-तदितिकर्तव्यतारूपसमीचीनन्यायमार्गाणां
विकल्पासहविविधकुतर्ककल्ककल्पितमिति
न्यायानुगृहीतप्रत्यक्षादिसकलप्रमणवृत्तयाथात्म्यविद्भिः अनादरणीयम् । इति
वदन्तः केवलं अचिकित्स्यं मत्सराख्यं पित्तं प्रदर्शयन्ति । एतादृशानि
परदूषणप्रकाराणि श्रीशांकरेषु ग्रन्थेषु दुर्लभानि । ....

मध्वाचार्यास्तु इतोऽपि कटुतरभाषिणः यत एते स्वीयगीताभाष्यान्ते -
सङ्कराख्यस्य दुर्योनेर्निस्सृतेन रजस्वला। गीतानारी समीरेण शोधिता
हंसरूपिणा।।1।।
इति बहु असम्बद्धं वदन्तः ।

[Someone told me that the Madhwas were themselves piqued by the above
language of Sri Madhwacharya that in a recent publication of the Gita
bhashya a Madhva institution has deleted the above verse.]

I am not translating the above passages here.


>
> I am proud to say that in spite of such grave provocations, the Advaitins
> did not loose their cool and they behaved majestically all these centuries.
>

One Raghunatha Suri wrote a book in retaliation 'mANikya manjari'
describing the 'birth' of Sri Madhwacharya, which has been refuted by a
scholar of the Madhwa school.

Regards,
subrahmanian.v

>
>