[Advaita-l] Difference in the approaghes of Madhacharya and Shankaracharya

Venkatesh Murthy vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Sat Aug 20 10:08:43 CDT 2016

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Srinath Vedagarbha via Advaita-l
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> It may be so for advaitins. But for others they are going by the very
> definition of 'Agama' as given by texts themselves and consider purANas as
> quite valid in this context;
> RigAdyA bhArataM chaiva paJNcharAtramathAkhilam.h |
> mUlarAmAyaNaM chaiva purANaM chaitadAtmakam.h ||
> ye cha anuyAyinastveshhAM sarve te cha sadAgamAH |
> durAgamastadanye ye tairna j~neyo janArdanaH ||
> (vEda-s starting from Rg, and the pancharAtra in their entirety, the mUla
> rAmAyaNa in its entirety, and those purAaNa-s that follows the previous.
> These, and others that follow these, are all sadAgamA-s; others are
> durAgama-s, and from these janArdana (Brahman) is not known)

This is big joke. Madhva is first saying Brahman is Vishnu alone with
Kutarka. Then he is saying only Puranas glorifying Vishnu are
Sadagamas. Others are Duragamas. There cannot be a bigger joke on
Agamas than this. There is no place for narrow mindedness in Advaita.
Why not Siva gita? Why not Ganesha Gita? Sringeri Swamiji has written
Bhashya on Siva Gita. According to Madhva the Sringeri Swamiji has
written Bhashya on Duraagama. Another joke.



More information about the Advaita-l mailing list