[Advaita-l] Encounter between Madhvacharya and a Sringeri Pontiff

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 3:44 PM, D Gayatri via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> //Sringeri maTh records show these dates of each Acharya:
> http://www.sringeri.net/jagadgurus. Those would then be what... random
> numbers?! :) //
>
>
> A record is as good or as bad as its source. Can you please tell me what is
> the source for these dates? Is it a manuscript? Is it an inscription? Are
> there any old manuscripts or inscriptions before 14th century CE, which
> talk of the Sringeri Matha? Are there any external independent accounts
> before 14th century CE that testify to the existence of Sringeri Matha?
> Surely, it must have received grants from kings.


How do you assume so?Why can't it be that grants from kings started only
from the time of Vidyaranya due to his association with the kingdom?


> Are there records of such
> grants before 14th century CE to the Sringeri matha? Does Shankara say
> anywhere in his authentic bhAshyas that he established mathas? Or do his
> disciples say so?
>

Why should he say so in the bhashyas which were for the purpose of
expounding the Vedanta? What are 'authentic' to you need not be so for
others. How do you conclude that Shankara is incapable of establishing
mathas or could not have, and composing other works of devotion?

What 'external evidence' is there for the stories in the Mahabharata and
the Puranas? Where is the proof of Veda Vyasa's authorship of the MB? How
about the '1 lakh verses' theory? Why did not Hacker question these?  If
MB, in spite of these unanswered questions, can be a working proof for
seekers, what is the problem in taking the belief about Sringeri?

Shankara at the beginning of the Taittiriya bhashya pays obeisance to his
purvacharyas:

यैरिमे गुरुभिः पूर्वं पदवाक्यप्रमाणतः ।
व्याख्याताः सर्ववेदान्तास्तान्नित्यं प्रणतोऽस्म्यहम् ॥ २ ॥
I bow down ever before those adorable Teachers by whom was explained all
these Upaniṣads in the past, by taking into consideration the words
(व्याकरणम्) the sentences (पूर्वमीमांसा), and the means of valid knowledge
(न्याय)

Where is the proof of such explanations that Shankara claims  to have been
made by his predecessors? Is Shankara bound to answer? Who has given anyone
the authority to question Shankara on this?  Do genuine seekers of the
Vedantic truth require any answer from Shankara on this?

>
>
>
>
>