Some observations about Shankara....from and within acdemic circles

[Guest guest]

I have several discrete thoughts on him. Here they are:

 

1) HINDU REVIVER: Can Shankara be thought of at par with the

Buddhism reviver Nagarjuna? Both saved their ancient knowledge,

restored it and propogated to the masses.

 

2)NON-SECTARIAN HINDU: Shankara is sometimes categorized into

Shaivite or Vaishnavite. Why is it forgotten or overlooked that he

was the one who started the PANCHAAYATAN POOJA, to unite all the

different sects of Hinduism in which the deities of Shiva, Vishnu,

Gauri, Ganapati and Sun are all worshipped together. This was one of

the greatest reformation of Hinduism. Unfortunately, in some books,

it is still debated whether to put Shankara into Shaivite or

Vaishnavite sect. I think was a universalist, a true Sanaatani,

beyond all sects.

 

3)HOLISTIC PHILOSOPHY: It is sometimes debated whether he believed

in Karma Yoga or Gyaan Yoga or Bhakti Yoga. Also, in our reading for

this week: Sengaku Mayeda, A Thousand Teachings:

The "Upadesasahasri" of Shankara, page 88, Karma Yoga is once again

mixed with Karma Kaanda. This confusion occurred in the Karl Potter

book also. Karma Yoga is completely different from Karma Kaanda (the

rituals). Buddha, Mahaveera and Shankara himself were the greatest

Karma Yogis of their times. Their entire lives were full of

spiritual activism and still the scholars love to put them either in

Gyaan Yoga(the knowledge path) or Raaja Yoga(the meditation or

psychology path). Once again, Shankara took a holistic approach, he

combined all the different strands of Vedic philosophies: Gyaan

(knowledge), Karma (Action) and Bhakti (Devotion). He wrote great

devotional hymns: Bhaja Govindam (what we saw in the movie too),

Krishnashtakam etc. Vedic philosophy never made water-tight

compartments of knowledge / action or devotion, it is a holistic

system and that's what Shankara propounded.

 

4)PAUL RICOEUR APPROACH: In chapter 18, pg 172 of the Sengaku Mayeda

book on Upadesh Sahastri, Shankara has criticized the heterodox

systems of Buddhism, Jainism etc. I wonder how would he have

approached the rival philosophies if he took Paul Ricoeur inter-

subjective approach. This applies to the other side as well. Jains

and Buddhists have also rarely took the PR approach. All the sides

have criticized each other in the toughest words. And this goes on

even today. Of course, there are few exceptions like Gaudapada and

Yoga Vasishtha which combined many different philosophies without

attaching any side.

 

4)INFLUENCE ON INDIA'S POLITICS/ECONOMICS: After the times of

Shankara, India was devasted and defeated in the hands of several

Islamic invaders and later the European ones. Can India's downfall

be attributed to Shankara and his so-called pseudo(Prachhana)

Buddhist philosophies? Did his followers misinterpret his teachings?

Although Shankara revived and combined all the different strands of

Vedic philosohphy, he could not revive the political and economic

sides of Vedic culture. This applies loosely on Jains and Buddhists

too. This one-sided emphasis led to the downfall?

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

Before we call Sankara a Hindu reviver and non-sectarian Hindu, we

have to first of all ascertain if there was a thing called Hinduism

then as understood today. Hinduism is a much later coinage not found

in any early works including those of Sankara.

 

As discussed earlier on this forum, there are only two paths

(dvividha prokta – in BG) – karma yoga and sanyAsa. Both have no

validity without jnAna and bhakti. Sankara knew this well as he

interpreted BG, the Upanishads etc. and composed many devotional

hymns.

 

It is definitely mixing two things if we discuss India's political

and economic climate here apropos Sankara. However, part of the

credit for our not waging wars in the name of religion and having had

a Gandhi amidst us (and not his antitheses as currently circulating

elsewhere) should go to Sankara, although the first benefit might

have resulted in increasing the population of the country and added

to our economic woes.

 

Pranams.

 

Madathil Nair

___

 

advaitin, "bhaaratiya" <indialover@s...> wrote:

> I have several discrete thoughts on him. Here they are:

>

> 1) HINDU REVIVER: >

> 2)NON-SECTARIAN HINDU:

> 3)HOLISTIC PHILOSOPHY>

> 4)INFLUENCE ON INDIA'S POLITICS/ECONOMICS: