Sankara

[Guest guest]

dear sumeet -

 

hare krishna. please accept my humble obeisances. all glories to sri

guru and sri govinda.

 

if mayavada means that lord is illusory or covered by illusion, this

is not sankara's opinion. so he cannot be called a mayavadi. if you

insist on calling sankara a mayavadi, please define mayavada. if you

are advocating that vaishnava acharyas be accepted on blind faith,

why not accept sankara on blind faith ? by merely asking questions

or stating our understanding, we can not reduce an acharya's

greatness.

 

1. the padma purana verse has not been quoted by any previous

acharyas of any school and the reason has to be explained.

2. the difference in the narration of sarvabhauma incidence between

caitanya bhagavatha and caitanya caritamrta has to be explained.

3. why did none of the previous acharyas or those in the time of

sankara quote padma purana verses ? do you have direct reference to

the same before CC ?

 

in bg 2.12, eternality of the soul is established. the plurality is

not categorically establsihed. the lord is talking in conventional

terms because just as janadipah is a designation of the body and not

the soul, plurality is for the body not the soul. this can also be

confirmed by verbatim analysis of other verses in the chapter. all

2.12 and the rest of chapter 2 establishes is that vasudeva, the

Self of all, is eternal. A jivatma cannot be said to be eternal also

because it is subject to creation and annihilation(bg 7.6).

 

when i read bg 7.6, i think of srila prabhupada as a great advaitin

acharya albeit covered. that he should deliver sankara's teaching

thorugh criticism is amazing.

 

your servant

rajaram v.