[Advaita-l] No non- advaita schools before Shankara

[Srivathsa Rao]

Sir,

That day I said ,there was a time when vedanta means advaita vedanta
only....


here what I means to say is that...there was no vedanta which said the
difference between jeevathma and paramathma at time...

there may be some vedanthis before shankara,who din't accept jagath
mithyathva of advaita ...but all vedanthis before shankara have accepted
jiva brahma aikhya...which is advaita...

that is what I mean to say...

On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 5:41 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Namaste Sri Srivathsa
> >
> >
> > Bodhayana lived before Adi Sankara. He was a Vedanti because he wrote
> > Brahma Sutra Vrutti. He did not teach Advaita Vedanta but a different
> > theory. If he is also Advaiti like Adi Sankara why should Raamaanuja
> follow
> > him? There were some other old Vedanti Acharyas like Tanka and Dravida
> > also.
> >
>
> Not anything is known to anyone about a 'Bodhāyana vṛtti'.  Shankara has
> refuted a vṛttikāra in the BSB and elsewhere.  But this author is an
> advaitin with differences at a different level.  In the BSB 2.2.42, etc.
> Shankara has taken up the Bhāgavata school, which includes the pāñcarātra
> (with which Viśiṣṭādvaitins identify) for refutation.  That section is on
> smṛtis and hence for Bādarāyaṇa, according to Shankara these schools are
> not Vedāntic ones. The pāncarātra has been stated to be unvedic,  a product
> of 'veda nindā' by Shankara in that adhikaraṇa.
>
> As to Ṭanka (also known as Brahmanandī) and Dravi(mi)ḍa, these two also are
> admitted to be in agreement with Shankara's interpretation of the 6th
> chapter of the Chandogya upanishad (vācārambhaṇam....).  One can find
> details of this in the Sanskrit book 'vācārambhaṇa śrutyartha vicāraḥ'
> published very recently by Sringeri Peeṭham.  On p.37 of this small but
> very important book is the title:
> 'vākyakārabrahmanandi-bhāṣyakāradraviḍācārya-bhagavatpādaikamatyam'.  The
> section also quotes the Sankṣepaṣārīraka and the commentaries thereon by
> Madhusudana, etc. to substantiate the fact that the above mentioned authors
> are not saying anything different from Advaita.
>
> regards
> subrahmanian.v
>
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Sir,
> > > 1) even when upanishads say brahman as nirguna,vishistadvaita changes
> it
> > > to no bad guna.....so ,when upanishad say NETI-NETI  as "NOT THIS NOT
> > THIS"
> > > ....vishistadvaiti without any authorization change it to "NOT ONLY
> THIS
> > > MUCH  NOT ONLY THIS MUCH"
> > > 2)similarly when upanishad say brahman as nishkala or without
> > > parts....vishistadvaithi say brahman with parts like "Jada- chetana"
> > > meaning living and non-living....
> > >
> > >
> > > what you say for this?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Sir,
> > >> How do you prove that krishna is paripurna in vishistaadvaita?.....
> > >> because krishna only said that he is paripurna in bhagavath geetha...
> > >>
> > >> but ,according to vishistaadvaita...we are brahman,at the same time
> ,we
> > >> are not paripurna...similar case applies to krishna...so,how is
> krishna
> > >> paripurna in vishistaadvaita
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> But Venkatesh Murthy sir ,
> > >>> brahman is nirvikaara....or one who never change...how can this never
> > >>> changing thing can  transformed  to this world?
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Venkatesh Murthy via Advaita-l <
> > >>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Namaste
> > >>>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 4:58 PM, subhanu via Advaita-l <
> > >>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> > V Subramanian wrote:
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> > "This shows that prior to Shankara there were no vedantic schools
> > that
> > >>>> > were non-advaitic"
> > >>>> >
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Now the Visistadvaitis will stand up and object to this.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> भगवद् बोधायनकृतां विस्तीर्णां ब्रह्मसूत्रवृत्तिं पूर्वाचार्याः
> > >>>> संचिक्षिपुः
> > >>>> तन्मतानुसारेण सूत्राक्षराणि व्याख्यास्यन्ते ।
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Because in the opening statement itself the Sri Bhashyakaara
> > Raamaanuja
> > >>>> has
> > >>>> said he is following the very big book Brahma Sutra Vrutti written
> by
> > >>>> Bodhayana. That Bodhayana Vrutti was condensed by other Acharyas and
> > >>>> Raamaanuja is following that and writing his Sri Bhashya on the
> Brahma
> > >>>> Sutras.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Bodhayana Vrutti was not available to Raamaanuja. It was lost but
> some
> > >>>> other condensed books were available. But Bodhayana was not Advaiti.
> > He
> > >>>> was
> > >>>> closer to Raamaanuja. He did not accept Maayaa theory. He accepted
> > >>>> Parinama
> > >>>> Vada saying Brahman is transformed to world.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> What do you say to this?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> > Namaste to all. I changed the heading of the thread.  You may be
> > >>>> aware of
> > >>>> > the following verse near the end of Srimad Bhāgavatam also which
> > many
> > >>>> > scholars date post Shankara:
> > >>>> > Sarva-vedānta-sāram yat
> > >>>> > Brahmātmaikatva-lakshanam ।
> > >>>> > Vastv-advitīyam tan nishtham
> > >>>> > Kaivalyaka prayojanam ।।
> > >>>> > (Srimad Bhāgavatam 12.13.12)
> > >>>> > We see in such a grantha of Bhakti yoga the above statement that
> the
> > >>>> > Bhāgavatam is the essence of all vedanta explaining the unity of
> > >>>> brahman
> > >>>> > and ātman, and that the final teaching is non-dual.
> > >>>> > If you take Bhāgavatam as written before Shankara then it supports
> > >>>> > Shankara's bhashya statement also.
> > >>>> > Regards
> > >>>> > Subhanu
> > >>>> > _______________________________________________
> > >>>> > 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
> > >>>> >
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Regards
> > >>>>
> > >>>> -Venkatesh
> > >>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>> 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
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards
> >
> > -Venkatesh
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>