[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Animal-killing and Soul-merging condemned
Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian wrote:
>
> >vijaypai@mandolin.rice.edu (Vijay Sadananda Pai)
> >
{deleted]
>
> >on Sankara, although I know of one that mentions him momentarily.
> >
> >As far as Srila Prabhupada's purports stating that Sankara worked to
> >defeat Buddhism, that is also part of the Advaita tradition. For
> >example, see Vidya's Advaita home page at
> >
> >http://www.cco.caltech.edu:80/~vidya/advaita/sankara-life.html
> >
> >I quote directly from it "Thus Sankara debated with Buddhist
> >philosophers, with followers of sAm.khya and with pUrva mImAm.sakas,
> >the followers of vedic ritualism, and proved more than capable in
> >defeating all his opponents in debate. Sankara then sought out
> >kumArila bhaTTa, the foremost proponent of the pUrva mImAm.sA in his
> >age, but bhaTTa was on his deathbed and directed Sankara to viSwarUpa,
> >his disciple."
>
> I have great respect for Vidya's knowledge and the effort he has taken in
> putting together the Advaita page. However his opinions are by no means the
> last word on Advaita and it's history. Vidya himself has given references on
> various DigVijayas and why the Madhaviya-DigVijaya is considered the most
> authentic. It clearly says that Kumarila and to a slightly lesser extent Bhatta
> Bhaskara converted back huge numbers of Brahmins who had embraced Buddhism.
Since I am being referenced here, I think it is appropriate to clarify
this somewhat. What I have written in the advaita home page is meant in
a general sense only. The tradition of philosophical debate in Sankara's
times required him to debate with adherents of other doctrines, either
in person, or in the course of his own writings. That is all that is
meant by my statement that Sankara debated with buddhists, sAm.khyans
and others. If you think about it, there are no sAm.khyans of any great
importance, in the time period that Sankara lived in. But Sankara's
bhAshyas present objections raised from the viewpoints of all of these
schools, and these objections are answered in masterly fashion. There is
nothing very special about Sankara defeating Buddhism - he also defeats
nyAya, sAm.khya and pUrva mImAmsA - all very orthodox Brahminical
schools, in his writings. Actually, the bulk of Sankara's arguments in
the brahmasUtra bhAshya is directed more against the pUrva mImAmsA than
any other school.
Traditions, both Brahminical and Buddhist, mention the name of Kumarila
Bhatta as widely influential in the decline of Buddhism in India.
Sankara is also popularly associated with this, although that does not
prevent some vaishNava schools of vedAnta from calling Sankara a
Buddhist in disguise. It is a moot point which of the two, Kumarila and
Sankara was actually responsible for converting Buddhists. From textual
evidence, this much is clear - there was a large-scale effort on the
part of the Brahminical schools to win over Buddhists to their way of
thinking. The gauDapAdIya kArikas have been viewed as an effort on the
part of a vedAntin to effect either a rapprochement or a conversion of
mahAyAna Buddhists. Sankara's major contribution was probably in the
setting up of monastic institutions that must have helped wean away the
influence of Buddhist monasteries.
As far as the Sankara-digvijayams are concerned, I have specifically
stated that they are hagiographical, not biographical. They can be
relied upon for broad traditions, but not for chronological arguments.
Bhatta Bhaskara is much later than Sankara, and so is Abhinavagupta.
There is no way the historical Sankara could have met these people and
debated with them. Our Indian authors, true to form, have not bothered
themselves much about dates. What is a few centuries, here or there,
when you are talking eternal doctrine? :-) Of the various personalities
that are mentioned as having debated with Sankara in the various
Sankara-digvijayams, only the contemporaneity of Kumarila and Viswarupa
(Mandana Misra) with Sankara can be believed, because of internal
evidence from their works that suggests a common period for all three of
them. Also, the tradition preserved in the Sankara-digvijaya that
Kumarila was already on his death-bed when Sankara sought him out seems
to be substantially correct, again because of internal evidence which
suggests that Kumarila is the eldest contemporary in this set.
S. Vidyasankar
