[Advaita-l] Two 'declarations' by Sri Vedanta Desika

V Subrahmanian v.subrahmanian at gmail.com
Thu Apr 9 12:40:16 CDT 2015

On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 9:09 PM, sreenivasa murthy <narayana145 at yahoo.co.in>

> From : H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy
> Pranams to all.
> Dear Friends,
>     When one sees the spate of postings on subjects like "Two
> 'declarations' by Sri Vedanta Desika" and   similar ones  that are
> flooding, one fails to understand the purpose of the appearance of such
> postings. In what way it is useful to a jijnasu who is not burdened by such
> useless information and who is eager to know advaita Vedanta as taught by
> Sri Shankara in his commentaries? Why pollute the minds of jijnasus?

Respected Sir,

I fully agree with you that we should not pollute the minds of jijnāsus.
It is with this precise objective that such posts are made here.  Not all
jijnāsus have the rare privilege of access to the pristine pure bhāṣyas of
the Achārya and others in the sampradāya. Many jijnāsus owing to several
reasons depend on material available on the internet.  It is very difficult
to know the genuine from the polluted material that is on the internet.
There are sites/blogs that distort the bhāṣyas of Shankaracharya and
present in such a way that an unwary reader is very likely drawn to it and
develop appreciation for those writings and obviously led astray.  It is in
order to prevent such a loss that there arises a need for posts that reveal
the true colors of such imposters and save the unwary jijnāsus.

Definitely no malice is meant by such posts to any party. Such an endeavor
will not be disapproved by Acharya Shankara who has always stressed the
need for the unpolluted teaching to be given out.

warm regards

> Please ponder over.
> The members have the freedom to post any matter of their liking . But that
> freedom should be judiciously used so that the reader will acquire some
> purushartha.
>    These thoughts have come from the heart of a vedantin who has been
> nurtured by Srutimata and blessed by Sri Shankara's  teachings pertaining
> to one' true svarUpa from past four decades.
> With warm and respectful regards,
> Sreenivasa Murthy
>  ------------------------------
>  *From:* V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
> >
> *To:*
> *Sent:* Thursday, 9 April 2015 3:33 PM
> *Subject:* [Advaita-l] Two 'declarations' by Sri Vedanta Desika
> The following comment is found in this URL:
> http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/2012/03/keshi-suktam-and-sharabha-narasimha.html
> //Yamuna muni clearly states that all vaidikas admitted vishNu alone as
> Parabrahman.This fact is further reteirated by vedAnta Desika who declares
> that adi Shankara was a vaishnava. Yes, the same vedanta desikan who also
> declared that advaita is Buddhism in disguise.//
> We see two 'declarations' reported to have been made by Sri Vedanta
> Desika.
> If Shankara is a (genuine) vaiṣṇava, would he be teaching a system that is
> buddhism in disguise, misleading people? A vaiṣṇava would be upholding
> vaiṣṇavism and certainly not buddhism, that too, in disguise.  The vaiṣṇava
> credentials of Shankara are actually being called into question by Vedanta
> Desika by terming advaita is buddhism in disguise.  If we take it that
> Desika is genuinely certifying Shankara to be a vaiṣṇava, the question
> would be what is the basis for such a declaration?  Obviously, the writings
> of Shankara and they are the prasthānatraya bhāṣya. He must have gathered
> from these that Shankara is indeed a vaiṣnava  But it is based on these
> alone Desikan must have also concluded that his system is only  buddhism in
> disguise.
> Add to this the fact that from the reported Yamunamuni's stand the
> implication is Shankara is a vaidika.  It is everybody's knowledge that
> buddhism is not vaidika; only avaidika.  So, the presenting of buddhism in
> the disguise of vaidika system actually calls into question the genuineness
> of the 'vaidika' epithet admitted to Shankara.    The equation is:
> Shankara, a vaidika, a vaiṣṇava, is also a crypto buddhist.  Let us merge
> the two epithets 'vaidika' and 'vaiṣṇava', into one, for one substitutes
> the other in this context and retain also the 'pracchanna bauddha' epithet.
> So the contradictions are quite obvious: the two declarations cannot go
> hand in hand.  One has to be sacrificed in order to retain the other.  If
> Shankara has to be on the 'vaiṣṇava (vaidika)' list, he must be divested of
> the 'pracchanna bauddha' epithet.  If the latter epithet is to be retained
> then the 'vaiṣnava (vaidika)' epithet will have to be slightly altered to
> 'kapaṭa vaiṣṇava (vaidika)' (pseudo vaiṣṇava (vaidika)). Which one to
> sacrifice poses the proverbial hobson's choice (
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hobson%27s%20choice )  My guess
> is that in order to save the 'punch', the 'vaiṣṇava (vaidika)' epithet will
> be given up.  Only if the crypto buddhist/buddhism epithet is retained
> there will be something to criticize.
> regards
> subrahmanian.v
> _______________________________________________
> 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