[Advaita-l] Shankara's opinion about Sannyasa for a Kshatriya

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Sudhanshu Shekhar prabhuji
Hare Krishna

Indeed you have summarized very well if I have understood exactly what you actually meant. Vartika is definitely differing with bhashya


  *   I read somewhere one of the lakshaNa-s of vArtika is ‘durukta chiNtA’  that which is not clearly and categorically  explained in mUla which will be elaborated and explained in accordance with the intentions of mUla graNthakAra.  Instead of concluding sUreshwara differed from bhagavatpAda, it would be appropriate to say he elaborated the topic which is crisply said in mUla.  BTW, justification like this cannot be said in the case of vyAkhyAnakAra-s works  as they have differed drastically from mUla bhAshya.


I am not sure what vidvat-sanyasa actually signifies. Bhashyakara has not explained it. But it is neither sanyasa-with-linga not karma-sanyasa..


Ø     Yes there is no clear explanation about vidvat sannyasa in shankara bhAshya.  But traditionally accepted example for this type of sannyasa is that of yAjnAvalkya in bruhadAraNyaka.  yAjnAvalkyO vijahAra, whether he went with linga or without linga (with yajnOpaveeta without yajnOpaveeta etc. ) is not clear in this episode.  But according to some, all jnAni-s subject to their respective prArabdha karma phala and they would act accordingly.  Here yAjnAvalkya due to his prArabdha gone away from his samsara (wife) though he is jnana nishTa / brahma jnAni.

It can be either sarva-karma-sanyasa or sanyasa-post-Moksha


  *   Post mOksha sannyasa or sannyasa – post – mOksha needs some elaboration.  Does this mean sannyasa (without any particular vidhi-didhAna) that needs to be followed after the mOksha (post mOksha??)

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
Bhaskar