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

[Srivathsa Rao]

this is for sure :
there was no vedanta which said the difference between jeevathma and
paramathma before shankara

On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
>>
>
>