Adishankara---the saint non-pareil

[Guest guest]

Dear Advaita vaadins,

 

Modern day youngsters do not appreciate the greatness of adi shankaracharya

 

Sankara follows the equally ancient Siva tradition, although accepting and adoring all the other gods of the Indian pantheon in a graded, critical, and comparative manner. The Vaishnavite Gurus were theologically minded, while Sankara gave primacy to wisdom (jnana), discrediting ritual and totally averse to treating action and wisdom as both important to adopt in spiritual life.

SANKARA’S UNIQUE POSITION

Sankara, therefore, although himself recognized as a Guru of the Smartha sect in South India at the present time, was more of a philosopher than a religious leader. This is not to say, however, that he did not himself influence spiritual life. Indeed, Sankara's is the greatest single philosophical influence prevailing to the present day in India as a whole. He was undoubtedly the greatest of the interpreters of the ancient wisdom of India, and the respect that he enjoys in India and among thinkers in the world outside India acquainted with Vedanta is very considerable and in many respects unrivalled. The difference between him and the other two Gurus who have commented on the Gita is one of methodological and epistemological outlook. Vedanta in the hands of Ramanuja and Madhva has a more theistically religious complexion, while Sankara, like his predecessor Gaudapada, of the same rational tradition, remains more purely philosophic. Sankara thus

occupies a key position in regard to the prevailing spiritual pattern of Indian life as a whole. Sankara is equally well recognized in the North of India and in the South. Although he was himself mistrusted in his own time as being a “Buddhist in disguise”, because of the great importance he gave to Reason, yet, when it comes to naming a single personality who may be said to represent the best philosophic tradition which has survived and is still in vogue among the intelligent section of the people of India to the present day, Sankara's name has undoubtedly to be given all primacy.About the period when the Guptas ruled, when Buddhism was in decline in India, largely owing to political reasons, there was a spiritual vacuum in the land. The monastic life of the Buddhists had to give way to a revalued and readjusted

form of spiritual life. The heterodox rationalism of the Buddhists had come to be discredited and there was no valid philosophy to displace it. In its latest form, the Gita was itself a fulfillment of the spiritual need of the times and Sankara's commentary on the Gita came just at that period when there was a certain anarchy and confusion of spiritual values in the mind of the ordinary people. Vedic ritualism also tended to be discredited among the masses and the regulating influence so necessary to keep people from falling into an era of decadence of norms and standards of a just or truthful life was absent . By his comments Sankara was able to give stability and continuity to the flow of righteous teaching down through the succeeding generations. His importance as a commentator of the Gita is thus unique, representative and comprehensive. In our own commentary Sankara's position is the only one we have treated with any seriousness, whether to

agree with or to differ from.

SANKARA’S CONFLICTING ATTITUDES WITH RESPECT TO BHAGAVD GEETHA.

Even with this single representative we have not found much need to enter into any strikingly different point of view. When they concern philosophical doctrines, Sankara's conclusions are, on the whole, acceptable to us. However, when he tends to look on the Gita as a book laying down religious obligations, or rules of life and conduct, treating it as a dharma shastra (textbook on right ways of life) or a smriti (wisdom teachings applied to the practical life, incorporating dharma shastra), and not as a purely contemplative text, we tend to differ from him.How the Gita is far from coming under the category of Smartha (obligatory religious) literature, will be evident both from our former remarks on this subject and what we have to say below, as also from the remarks that we have made by way of comment when such aspects of spirituality come to be treated in the text. That Sankara himself does not treat the Gita seriously as a Smriti or book of

obligatory conduct, should be evident from his definite remark in commenting on Chapter II, 10, as follows:" The conclusion therefore, of the Bhagavad Gita is that salvation is attained by knowledge alone and not by knowledge conjoined by works. That such is the teaching of the Gita we shall show here and there in the following sections according to the context".

That knowing cannot be considered an obligation or an action should be clear to anyone. That action belongs to one plane and knowing belongs to another is stated in the beginning of Sankara's Vivekachudamani in very unequivocal terms. Although some scholars on the basis of certain references such as “Moreover it is so stated in Smriti” (Brahma Sutras, II, iii, 45) and "(These details are recorded by Smriti with reference to the Yogins; and both (Samkhya and Yoga) are Smriti (only)", (Brahma Sutras, IV, ii, 21), found in Sankara's comments on the Brahma Sutras, where the word Smriti is used by Badarayana, still persist in thinking that the Gita is a Smriti (work of obligatory religious tradition), and though Sankara as commentator is only indirectly responsible for so treating the Gita, we can only say here that any text teaching Brahma-Vidya (the Science of the Absolute) as the Gita itself avowedly claims to be (as stated at the end of

every chapter), cannot be a Smriti, more especially in the light of the very conclusive statement of Sankara himself which we have quoted above. Leaving the controversy for the moment, we can state here that we take the Gita to be a book devoted to the wisdom of the Absolute with no mandatory reference to obligatory action, or traditional conduct in it. We have the support of the greatest commentator on the Gita in this appraisal of the nature of the Gita.So far we have been able to see from the spontaneous appreciation of the Gita in India and outside, from scholars, from the commentaries of founders of religious groups and from philosophers, that the Gita is a highly treasured book of ancient wisdom of a contemplative, intuitive and mystical order. In the Gita, closed and static tendencies have been subjected to a dialectical revaluation, making them open, universal and dynamic. It cannot be said to be the scripture

merely of any one particular religious expression, whether of Hinduism, the Bhagavata cult or of Vaishnavism of a later date. Its outlook is universal and fully philosophical in the best sense of the term.

Aadi shankara Bhagavad Paada sharanam Mama,

Subodhosmi!

 

 

 

 

Purity, Powers, Parabrahmam...

 

 

 

 

Click to join Rajarajeshwari_Kalpataru

Discover Find restaurants, movies, travel more fun for the weekend. Check it out!