[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: Interesting comment by Udayanacharya

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Bhaskar ji,

In fact, someone mentioned that Udayanacharya wrote a commentary to a nyAya
work by Vachaspati Mishra.

In addition to the Kanchi Paramacharya's talk, which I had read several
years ago, I also recall the reference to various anumAna-s for Ishvara's
existence in the janmAdyadhikaraNam of the brahmasUtra - however, the
bhAshyakAra, as is his usual style, does not specify the names of the
tArkika-s who had made such anumAna-s.

As Udayanacharya is well known as the tArkika who had provided several
anumAna-s for Ishvara's existence in the nyAyakusumAnjali and other works,
I had put two and two together and assumed that the bhAShyakAra was in fact
referring to Udayana there.

Because I had thought the Paramacharya had so, it didnt occur to me to have
checked the prevalent views on the historicity of Udayana before posting.
It is possible that I may have erred in my inference, and for that, I do
apologise.

However, the point remains that an eminent ancient tArkika holds that
advaita is the veda-naya and jaganmithyAtva is not a concept borrowed from
Buddhism, rather it is revealed in the Vedas themselves.

Kind regards,
Venkatraghavan

On Tue, 20 Feb 2024, 18:05 'Bhaskar YR' via advaitin, <
advaitin at googlegroups.com> wrote:

> praNAms
>
> Hare Krishna
>
>
>
> If I am right there is drastic difference between kAnchi and Srinigeri
> mutt with regard to shankara’s time.  kAnchi I think is of the opinion that
> bhAshyakAra (Adishankara) belongs to 5th century whereas 8th Century as
> per Sringeri.  And if Udayanacharya is prior to shankara, why shankara not
> mentioned his name but mentioned the advaitins like audulomi, ashmaraatya,
> kAshakrutsna etc.  And kAnchi mutt believes in 5 different shankara-s at
> different periods and Adi shankara is oldest among them 😊
>
>
>
> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
>
> bhaskar
>
>
>
> *From:* advaitin at googlegroups.com <advaitin at googlegroups.com> *On Behalf
> Of *Venkatraghavan S
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 18, 2024 2:54 PM
> *To:* Advaitin <advaitin at googlegroups.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [advaitin] Re: Interesting comment by Udayanacharya
>
>
>
> *Warning*
>
>
>
> This email comes from outside of Hitachi Energy. Make sure you *verify
> the sender* before clicking any links or downloading/opening attachments.
> If this email looks suspicious, *report it* by clicking 'Report Phishing'
> button in Outlook.
> See the SecureWay group in Yammer for more security information.
>
> Namaste Kalyan ji,
>
>
>
> I based it on a speech by Mahaperiyava, HH Sri Chandrasekharendra
> Saraswati Mahaswamigal, as memorialised in Deivathin Kural wherein he said
> that Udayanacharya and Kumarila Bhatta had come before Shankara.
>
>
>
> He had said - "Thus, Udayanacharya’s
>
> attack on the atheistic aspect of Buddhism and Kumarila’s con-
>
> demnation of the negation of Vedic rituals by Buddhism were
>
> largely instrumental in preventing Buddhism in making any head-
>
> way. *Sankara who came later *had therefore no need to deal with
>
> the negative aspects of Buddhism in great depth. He confined
>
> himself to exposing the faults which were also found in the beliefs
>
> the Buddhists propagated."
>
>
>
> I haven't independently verified the respective timelines of the two
> Acharyas.
>
>
>
> Source -
>
>
> https://archive.org/stream/the-vedas-sri-chandra-shekharendra-saraswati-compressed-optimized/the%20vedas%20sri%20chandra%20shekharendra%20saraswati%20compressed_Optimized_djvu.txt
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Venkatraghavan
>
>
>
> On Sun, 18 Feb 2024, 16:10 Kalyan, <kalyanchakravarthy2021 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Dear Sri Venkatraghavan gaaru,  Namaskaaram
>
>
>
> An internet search shows that Udayanacharya belongs to 10th - 11th Century
> CE, which would be post-Shankaran.
>
>
>
> Do you have a reason to say he is pre-Shankaran? Kindly clarify.
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> On Sunday 18 February, 2024 at 1:07:55 pm UTC+5:30 agni... at gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> Namaste,
>
>
>
> In the Atmatattvaviveka, Udayanacharya, a pre Shankara naiyyAyika, says
> this, while arguing against the Buddhist -
>
>
>
> न ग्राह्यभेदमवधूय धियोऽस्ति वृत्तिस्तद्बाधने बलिनि वेदनये जयश्रीः ।
>
> नोचेदनित्यमिदमीदृशमेव विश्वं तथ्यं तथागतमतस्य तु कोऽवकाशः ॥
>
>
>
> The difference that is cognised between objects is not possible without
> there being differences in the objects themselves. Without objects, there
> can be no subject-object relationship between cognitions and objects. If
> that difference is sublated, it is a victory for Vedic system (which holds
> that all that exists is Brahman alone, via statements such as
> ekamevAdvitIyam etc), not the Buddhists'.
>
>
>
> If it is held that those Vedic statements have a different meaning, then
> this world, being non permanent, is real, and has to be accepted as-is. In
> either scenario, what scope is there for the Buddha's view?
>
>
>
> Here we have a pre Shankaran, non advaitin, who argues that the position
> of the world being mithyA, there being no difference whatsoever, etc is the
> true import of the Veda (veda-naya).
>
>
>
> That this is the true Upanishadic system, and not something that
> Shankaracharya invented, can be discerned by statements such as these -
> made by philosophers that predate him, belonging to non-advaita schools,
> and having no bias towards advaita.
>
>
>
> Secondly, Udayanacharya is saying that if the Buddhist holds the world to
> be mithyA, and the upaniShad holds the world to be mithyA, it is the
> Buddhist who has borrowed from the Veda, and not the other way around.
> Sometimes, we see a charge leveled against advaita that in arguing for the
> world's mithyAtva, we are veering into vijnAnavAda territory. Not so, says
> Udayanacharya - if the advaitin holds the world to be mithyA and it turns
> out to be correct, it is a victory for his vedic system, and not the
> Buddhist.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Venkatraghavan
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "advaitin" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/2f93f3c1-43c1-4638-b723-3813cce1d107n%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/2f93f3c1-43c1-4638-b723-3813cce1d107n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "advaitin" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAL34aEnpMQDvex0M9OR3ee%3DSfxgbRSD6eEnUU9oLQMiXR7zN4A%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAL34aEnpMQDvex0M9OR3ee%3DSfxgbRSD6eEnUU9oLQMiXR7zN4A%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "advaitin" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581AEFC72ECAEEAEB7EBD5584502%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/AM7PR06MB6581AEFC72ECAEEAEB7EBD5584502%40AM7PR06MB6581.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>