Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 171

Thread: Paradvaita Doctrine of Kashmiri Shaivism

  1. #21
    Join Date
    April 2006
    Location
    Chennai
    Age
    48
    Posts
    61
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga
    Shri Shankaracarya lived in the 8th century, and his Advaita philosophy came directly from Shri Gaudapada, whose Karikas date from the 4th or 5th century!
    Shri Gaudapada is supposed to live near by 8th Century CE, where in he taught Shri Govinda who in turn taught Shri Adi Sankara Bhagavatpada. (Assuming that Shri Gaudapada lived near 4/5 th Century will end with ideas that indicate Shri Gaudapada and Shri Govinda both lived for almost 200 Years each to teach Shri Adi Sankara Bhagavatpada in 8th Century)

    Shri Gaudapada's Gaudapadeeya Karika is also dated as 8CE

    However, having seen his lineage, Saarasvata Brahmanas, we can say origination is some where around 4/5 th century.

    However, my reservation here in is split in saarasvata Brahmana group in tracing their lineage through Gaudapada without referring Adi Sankara and second group of citrapura matha tracing their lineage via Adi Sankara are acceptable. However, other saaravata group are Dualist. This shows the entire group had different ideas and opinions and exclusion of Adi Sankara from one group (Kavale Matha, Saarasvatas of Goa and northern coastal karnataka) indicates they are purely Advaiti as such

    Hence, probably Ajaativada (Maaya concept) can be said to be originated from Shri Gaudapada but not whole Advaita as such
    Last edited by Jalasayanan; 16 May 2006 at 01:00 PM.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Guru-mandala
    Age
    44
    Posts
    742
    Rep Power
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Jalasayanan
    Hence, probably Ajaativada (Maaya concept) can be said to be originated from Shri Gaudapada but not whole Advaita as such
    Advaita as such was the original philosophy of the Vedic and Agamic religion; its developments as Kashmiri Monism (Shaiva, Shakta and Vaishnava), Shankara's Vedanta, Vallabha's Shuddhadvaita etc. are historical developments of the initial concept of Shruti.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    April 2006
    Location
    Chennai
    Age
    48
    Posts
    61
    Rep Power
    0

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Arjuna
    Advaita as such was the original philosophy of the Vedic and Agamic religion; its developments as Kashmiri Monism (Shaiva, Shakta and Vaishnava), Shankara's Vedanta, Vallabha's Shuddhadvaita etc. are historical developments of the initial concept of Shruti.
    Which Advaita you refer as original philosphy and how Sankara Vedanta & Kashmiri Monistic Shaiva is different from it?

    How did Vaishanava became part of Kashmiri Monism?

  4. #24
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    191

    Post

    Namaste Jalasayanan,

    A brief Guru Paramapara for Shri Shankaracarya is traditionally given as:

    Parashara ~ Vyasa ~ Shukadeva ~ Gaudapada ~ Govindapada ~ Shankaracarya

    Dashanami tradition places Parashara in the Treta-yuga; with Vyasa and his son Shuka in the Dvapara-yuga; and with Gauda, Govinda, and Shankara, in the Kali-yuga.

    Historical investigation places Parashara about 900 BC, Vyasa about 700 BC, Gaudapada about 500 AD, and Shankara about 700 AD.

    And both chronologies reveal that the stated Paramapara must be an abbreviation of the full historical lineage, which only indicates certain key figures in the long sequence.

    Vidyaranya (c. 1100 AD) noted that there were five Acaryas between Gaudapada and Shankara.

    Shantiraksita (c. 700 AD) quoted directly from Gaudapada’s Karikas.

    Bhavaviveka (c. 500 AD) quoted some passages very similar to the Karikas.

    And the Karikas of Gaudapada are quite similar to those of Nagarjuna (c. 300 AD).

    And so, it can reasonably be suggested that Gaudapada’s teaching was widely known before 700 AD, and he was perhaps a contemporary of Bhavaviveka, or even of Nagarjuna.

    Given five Acaryas between Gaudapada and Shankara, an interval of more than 200 years is well justified. And even with only the directly stated succession from Gauda to Govinda to Shankara (and remembering that Govindapada was an old man when Shankara met him, and that Gaudapada also lived for a long time) the suggested dates are reasonable.


    What do you mean by “Sarasvata Brahmana” ?

    Where is “Citrapura Matha” ?

    Who are the “other Dualist Sarasvata group” ?

    Who are the “Kavale Matha Sarasvatas of Goa” ?

    None of this makes sense to me.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    April 2006
    Location
    Chennai
    Age
    48
    Posts
    61
    Rep Power
    0
    What do you mean by “Sarasvata Brahmana” ?
    Group of Brahmins in Goa and northern coastal Karnataka are identified as Saarasvata Brahmins

    Where is “Citrapura Matha” ?
    Is a sub sect amongst that group

    Who are the “other Dualist Sarasvata group” ?
    Most of the existing Saarasvata Brahmins are disciples of Madhavacharya now. They easily accepted Dvaita doctrine, for the history of Dvaita reveals they had another dualist philosophy which was corrected on certain counts by Shri Madhavacharya. Has I had read very few books on Dvaita doctrine, and those books did not reveal what was that earlier Dualist philosophy. It just indicated that they were earlier Shaivist

    Who are the “Kavale Matha Sarasvatas of Goa”
    This is another sub sect of Saarasvata Brahmins

  6. #26
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    191

    Post

    Namaste Jalasayanan,

    Shri Gaudapada taught Ajativada as the Ultimate Truth of Advaita; and Shri Shankaracarya developed and propagated his teaching.

    Shankara (not Gaudapada) established the Dashanami tradition, which defined (for the first time) ten groups of Sannyasins with the following names: Aranya, Vana, Sagara, Parvata, Giri, Ashrama, Tirtha, Puri, Bharati, and Sarasvati.

    Initially, all of these Sannyasins were Ekadandi Svamis; but as the Akhadas were established (after 850 AD) the Vanas, Giris, Puris, and some Bharatis, renounced the Dandi and became Avadhuta Nagas.

    The remaining Ekadandis are only Aranya, Sagara, Parvata, Ashrama, Tirtha, Bharati, or Sarasvati.

    If the Parampara of the “Sarasvata Brahmana group” are followers of Madhvacarya, then they have either adopted the “Sarasvata” title in imitation of Shankara’s “Sarasvati”, or at some stage they have somehow been “converted” from Shaiva Advaitins into Vaishnava Dvaitins. And such a conversion would involve renouncing the very knowledge that entitles a Sannyasin to be known as Sarasvati in the first place!

    I assume that the Dvaitin group that excludes Shankara from their lineage would be followers of Madhvacarya (12th century) ; and that the Vishishtadvatin group that includes Shankaracarya would be followers of Caitanya Mahaprabhu (15th century).

    The Madhvagaudiya Sampradaya is an amalgamation of the Caitanya and Madhva Sampradayas ~ the “Madhva” and the “Gauda” (i.e. Bengali, after the origin of their founder). And the “Gaudapada” of Madhvagaudiyas could be the Paramaguru of Shri Caitanya ~ in which case the only similarity with Shankaracarya’s Paramaguru is their common Bengali heritage.

    Caitanya’s philosophy was developed from that of Shri Ramnujacarya (11th century); although Madhvacarya revived the orthodox teachings of Kumarilla Bhatta (7th century), and he condemned and ridiculed the teachings of Ramanuja as just as ruthlessly as he did those of Shankaracarya.

    In his drive to rid Dharma of “non-vedic” influences, Kumarilla Bhatta had offended his own Gurus and was about to immolate himself when Shankara arrived to debate, so Shankara went on to find Kumarilla Bhatta’s student Mandan Mishra.

    Mandan Mishra was defeated by Shankara (as Kumarilla Bhatta had planned) and he was named Sureshvara and appointed as the first Acarya of the southern Sringeri Matha (the ultimate source of all Sarasvati Sannyasins).

    So Madhvacarya’s claim to the Parampara of Gaudapada is only by virtue of his attachment to the earlier teachings of Kumarilla Bhatta that were argued by Mandan Mishra (i.e. Sureshvaracarya) and his wife, but already defeated by Shri Shankaracarya. And Mandan Mishra’s Dvaita philosophy was absolutely opposed to Gaudapada’s Ajativada, so to claim descent from Gaudapada only because of some vicarious connexion with Sureshvaracarya, and all the while preaching a philoshophy that was not only denounced and abandoned by Sureshvara but also in direct opposition to Gaudapada’s teaching, is quite absurd!

    None of this has any bearing on Kashmiri Shaivism or Paradvaita.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Guru-mandala
    Age
    44
    Posts
    742
    Rep Power
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Jalasayanan
    Which Advaita you refer as original philosphy and how Sankara Vedanta & Kashmiri Monistic Shaiva is different from it?
    How did Vaishanava became part of Kashmiri Monism?
    Advaita is expressed in early Upanishads, that may be referred to as "original philosophy" in a historical sense.

    Kashmiri Monism is textually based on divinely revealed Shiva-sutras and Shiva-drishti of Somananda (which belong to 8th century), as well as Bhairavagamas (exact date of which is not set, but the fact is that the whole corpus of Bhairavagama existed before 10th century).
    There existed a monistic Ekayana (Vaishnava) tradition in Kashmir, to which Vamanadatta (pre-10th century), the author of Samvit-prakasha, belonged.

    Shankara's tradition historically can be traced to Gaudapada, who is also an author of Tantric Shrividyaratna-sutras.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga
    Caitanya’s philosophy was developed from that of Shri Ramnujacarya (11th century); although Madhvacarya revived the orthodox teachings of Kumarilla Bhatta (7th century), and he condemned and ridiculed the teachings of Ramanuja as just as ruthlessly as he did those of Shankaracarya.
    I wouldn't think that Shri Madhvacharya was just as ruthless with Shri Ramanujacharya. Madhvacharya would not accept any view that would even connect the jiva and the jagat with Brahman. And to a system that beleives in jiva svarupa and colossal differences between them, Sri Ramanuja's equating jiva with Brahman except in matters of universal governance must have been a blasphemy of sorts.

    Vishishtadvaitins felt uneasy with the emergence of Dvata that they also followed their lead in pushing jiva as far away from the Brahman as possible. Thus, the glorious position of the jiva which enjoys equality with God in most matters was reduced to a master-servant relationship. Dvaita was satisfied with this development and did not make so many assaults on VA as it did on advaita.

    This can be seen very clearly in the later school of Thenkalai which is very much like Dvaita. Thenkalais also beleiive in some kind of gradations of jivas (kaivalya and moxa) and also beleive in nityasamsarins(people who are never liberated), though they dont agree with the eternal damnation of Dvaita.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    April 2006
    Location
    Chennai
    Age
    48
    Posts
    61
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Arjuna
    Advaita is expressed in early Upanishads, that may be referred to as "original philosophy" in a historical sense.

    Kashmiri Monism is textually based on divinely revealed Shiva-sutras and Shiva-drishti of Somananda (which belong to 8th century), as well as Bhairavagamas (exact date of which is not set, but the fact is that the whole corpus of Bhairavagama existed before 10th century).
    There existed a monistic Ekayana (Vaishnava) tradition in Kashmir, to which Vamanadatta (pre-10th century), the author of Samvit-prakasha, belonged.

    Shankara's tradition historically can be traced to Gaudapada, who is also an author of Tantric Shrividyaratna-sutras.
    There existed a monistic Ekayana (Vaishnava) tradition in Kashmir, to which Vamanadatta (pre-10th century), the author of Samvit-prakasha, belonged.
    Vamadatta's work is dated as 10th century. It cannot be pre-10th century. Date given approximately as 980 AD. At this time, Ekayana Shaka was missing in toto. I am not sure how Vamadatta became part of Ekayana at this time when the whole text is missing.

    Of course, Monistic Vaishnav exist. Practically, kevala advaita of sankaracharya can also serve for vaishnav though many do not follow it.

    Gaudapada, who is also an author of Tantric Shrividyaratna-sutras.
    Request Arujuna to post lines of Shrividyaratna sutras which indicates Gaudapada as the author of this text. Normally, authors make some lines indicating this work is done by so and so

  10. #30
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Guru-mandala
    Age
    44
    Posts
    742
    Rep Power
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Jalasayanan
    Request Arujuna to post lines of Shrividyaratna sutras which indicates Gaudapada as the author of this text. Normally, authors make some lines indicating this work is done by so and so
    It is traditionally accepted to be by Gaudapada, similarly to Saundarya-lahari which is traditionally believed to have been written by Adi Shankara.
    As i know, Shankara maths accept this (in South India they verily do).

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •