[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Shankaracharya and the Bhagavat Purana
In article <ghenE18zIn.DFz@netcom.com>, shrao@nyx.net says...
It is of interest in this regard to
>note that a bogus text called `Tattva-muktavali' or
>`Mayavada-shata-dushani' is falsely attributed to Madhva by the
>Gaudiyas; this text contains so many egregious errors of fact and
>philosophy, that unlike with some of Shankara's works, etc., there is
>no question at all but that this is a hoaxed attribution, esp. since
>all of Madhva's works are available in full and studied by his
>tradition, and this attribution is only made and accepted by people
>outside his lineage and having no tradition of studying his works in
>depth.
It is interesting that the Tattva-muktavali never names
Sankaracarya, nor does the author explicitly identify himself.
At the book's conclusion there is mention of a Narayana Bhatta,
who composed a work called Bhati-bhusam. The author of the TM
says that he studied this and other books. The only significant
Narayana Bhatta in the Gaudiya line that I am aware of was in Vraja
(but from Tamil Nadu), in the sixteenth and seventeenth century. I
don't think it was the same person as this author though I may
be wrong. There was a discussion aboput this book (TM) on ARV
(or SRV) some time ago. There it was said by someone that the TM's
author was a Bengali, and this would certainly make sense, as it is
surely a Gaudiya work. At any rate, not all Gaudiyas will assert
that the TM is Madhva's work. I have become convinced that it isn't,
for reasons Srisha has stated as well as the fact that I haven't
seen any Gaudiya acaryas uphold this asssertion, especially Srila
Prabhupada Bhaktivedanta Swami. In fact, the only person I know
of who says that the TM is Madhva's work is an ISKCON Sanskritist
with a bad reputation for his scholarly recklessness.
It is possible that your man may have been misled by something
>said therein.
>
Again, if the author was from Bengal, this is less likely. But of
course, at this point we are only speculating anyway.
-m
