[Advaita-l] Was Shankaracharya a Vaishnava??

[V Subrahmanian]

We can also note the following 'pramana' the Dvaitins have to 'prove' that
Shankara destroyed Bhagavata Dharma-s and sat-shaastras:  If Shankara was
really a  Vaishnava, why would he destroy Bhagavata dharmas?


http://dvaita.info/pipermail/dvaita-list_dvaita.info/2006-February/001378.html

1. kUrmapurANe shrImuShNamAhAtmye paJNchame.adhyAye |

shrI sUta uvAcha --

purA bhAgIrathItIre niminA pR^iShTavAnmuniH |
naShTA bhAgavatA dharmAH sachChAstrANi kalau yuge ||
iti shrutaM mayA pUrvaM tIrthayAtrAprasaN^gataH |
kathaM naShTA bhaviShyanti punaH sthAsyanti vai katham.h ||
vada vidvanmahAbAho kashchoddhAraM kariShyati |

shrI vAmadeva uvAcha --
*chatussahasre dvishate gate saugandhike vane |
nihatA bhImasenena dvAparAnte nR^ipottama |
saugandhikAkhye nihatA ye cha krodhavashAH khalAH |
rudreNa nihatA ye cha traipurAshcha kalau yuge |
chatussahasre.aShTashate maNimantAdayo.asurAH
janiShyanti brahmayonau daityAH saddharmadUShakAH |
mithyAvAdamasachChAstraM kariShyanti kalau yuge |
gopayiShyanti sachChAstraM sachChAstraparipanthinaH |*
evaM dharmeShu naShTeShu shAstreShu cha kalau yuge |

devairvij~nApito viShNurvAyumAj~nApayiShyati |
Madhvas also quote purported Garuda purāṇic verses in the same vein as the
above:
The complete text of the Garuda purANa is available here:
http://fiindolo.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil/1_sanskr/3_purana/garup3_u.htm
tena saṃkaranāmāsau bhaviṣyati khageśvara /

dharmānbhāgavatānsarvānvināśayati sarvathā // GarP_3,16.71 //
[Owing to this, sAnkarya karaNam, this person will be known as ‘samkara’, O
GaruDa. He will destroy the complete bhAgavata dharma totally.]
On the basis of the above lines of the purāṇa, is there any evidence within
Shānkara bhāṣyas or any other sources of the writings of other Acharyas
that Shankara:
1. Destroyed Bhāgavata dharmas
2. Sat dharmas
3. Criticized sat śāstra-s.
Also, based on the following verses cited from Garuda purāṇa:
maṇimānnāma daityastu sankarākhyo bhaviṣyati /

sarveṣāṃ saṃkaraṃ yastu kariṣyati na saṃśayaḥ // GarP_3,16.70 //


The full article can be read here:
https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/2017/01/11/did-shankaracharya-destroy-bhagavata-dharmas/

regards

subbu

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 1:29 PM V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear Sri Pradyumna,
>
> The question you have raised and the points you have listed are all well
> analyzed and answered. To put it succinctly, the names Vishnu, Vasudeva,
> Narayana, are for Shankara that Brahman which is non-different from other
> deities like Rudra, Brahmaa, etc. The fundamental reason is this: For
> Shankara, whether it is saguna or nirguna brahman, it is ananta. Anantatva
> is of three types: desha pariccheda rahita, kaala pariccheda rahita and
> vastu pariccheda rahita.  The first two are accepted by Dvaitins. The third
> is accepted by Advaitins and V.Advaitins, in different ways. For advaitins
> if Brahman is absolutely, taattvikavaagi, different from any entity whether
> it is a deity, human or rishi or any jaDa object, then such Brahman, being
> tainted by vastu paricchedatva, will lose its status of being Brahman, the
> jagatkaaraNam, the prapancha adhishthanam. That is why in Taittiriya
> Bhashya Shankara has said for ananta:
>
>  सर्वानन्यत्वात् । भिन्नं हि वस्तु वस्त्वन्तरस्य अन्तो भवति,
> वस्त्वन्तरबुद्धिर्हि प्रसक्ताद्वस्त्वन्तरान्निवर्तते । यतो यस्य
> बुद्धेर्निवृत्तिः, स तस्यान्तः । तद्यथा गोत्वबुद्धिरश्वत्वान्निवर्तत
> इत्यश्वत्वान्तं गोत्वमित्यन्तवदेव भवति । स चान्तो भिन्नेषु वस्तुषु दृष्टः ।
> नैवं ब्रह्मणो भेदः । अतो वस्तुतोऽप्यानन्त्यम् ।
>
> Vastu pariccheda is actually bheda which is anyonya abhava. A chair and
> table are different, chair is not in table and vice versa. If Brahman,
> named Narayana, is different from, say Rudra, then there is abhava of N in
> R and vice versa. That way R will limit N. This is not admitted by
> Shankara.  There is nothing in creation, past, present and future that is
> non-different from the Advaitic Brahman.
>
> If you are interested, here is an article that discusses the fundamental
> difference between the Vishnu of Shankara and Ramanuja:
>
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p9fGP6xpmPd5bio5Oqq3-sasMLa-JiUb/view?usp=sharing
>
> regards
> subbu
>
>
>
>>
>>