Fw: [Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002

January 17, 2010

--- On Sun, 1/17/10, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjyaRe: [Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002"A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-lSunday, January 17, 2010, 7:17 AMShri Varadaraja Sharma,Om Namo Bhagavate VasudevayaAs regards the Jinavijaya did you take any trouble to find out when was it mentioned in the earliest available extant literature? I am sure you

didn't. That was expected of an armchair critic like you. There are references to Jinavijaya in the extant literature during the Pre-AIT period ie. before the AIT was concocted by Max Muller, the same person who insisted that Adi Sankaracharya was born in the 8th century CE. Jinavijaya contradicted what Max Muller expounded and what was thereafter supported by the colonial historians. The British historians obviously saw to it that the Jinavijaya is destroyed as that was the biggest hardle in their pet theory of AIT. The AIT showed Lord Buddha and Lord Mahavira to be contemporaries by reducing the

antiquity of Lord Buddha by about 13 centuries. The Jains obviously had little to complain and some of the Jains even claimed Lord Buddha to be a disciple of Lord Mahavira. Was that not a reason to believe that the Jains too were not interested in proving the AIT wrong through the Jinavijaya as that would have giiven higher antiquity to Lord Buddha.As regards king Sudhanva's copper inscription your sweeping statements have no value. However if you are interested in having a look at the Copper inscription then you may contact the Dwarka Math and they will give all the information to you. May be they will ask you to visit them to have a look at the relevant materials.As regards Adi Sankaracharya's childhood friend can you say with the specifics as to what you want to say instead of making a clever evasive allegation.If you have accepted Max Muller's date of Adi

Sankaracharya and the AIT as the Vedavakya I have nothing to say. Om Namo Bhagavate Vasuevaya.--- On Sun, 1/17/10, Varadaraja Sharma <rishyasrunga wrote:Varadaraja Sharma <rishyasrunga[Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002advaita-lDate: Sunday, January 17, 2010, 2:13 AMRadhe KrishnaI did not intend ridicule; still had it been felt so, my apologies; neverthless, the information i read = manuscript - pujabox - lot of time gap - sincerely, unless substantiated it is just another stuff like jina vijaya; Adya acharyal's childhood friend et al.I

was spell bound after reading about adya acharyal's date from the brilliantly made verse from jina vijaya. But latter when i came to know that this stuff is another castle in the air, the fog cleared.Same with Sudanva's inscription. i do not have any pre conceived notions. i am not a historian myself. but wish to go through presentation of well analysed facts and patient enough to wait till the facts unfold.regardsRadhe Krishna_____________Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaitaTo or change your options:http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-lFor assistance, contact:listmaster

January 18, 2010

--- On Mon, 1/18/10, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjyaRe: [Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002"A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-lMonday, January 18, 2010, 3:49 AM

Dear Jaldharji,

Kindly permit me to disagree with your statement, that the controversy on the date of Adi Sankaracharya has nothing to do with AIT. This is because Max Muller did not only say that the Aryans came to India in the 15th century BCE but he also went on to draw a time-line for the ancient Indian History according to which the Vedas were composed subsequent to the Aryan Invasion in the 15th century and he gave the dates of the Brahmanas etc. subsequent to the date of composition of the Vedas. The he went on to give the date of Lord Buddha in the 6th century BCE to fit in with his timeline. Once you take the date of Lord Buddha in the 6th century BCE you have to take the date Vasubandhu as 1000 years after the demise of Lord Buddha, in conformity with the statement of Hiuen Tsang that Vasubandhu lived one thousand years after the demise of Lord Buddha. Then you have to take the date of his disciple Dignaga after the date of

Vasubandhu. The date of Dharmakirti comes after that of Dignaga and as Adi Sankaracharya's work shows that Adi Sankaracharya was subsequent to Dignaga and Dharmakiriti it ibecomes obvious what the date of Adi Sankaracharya will appear to be in this case. A layman may not be able to comprehend this but a big scholar like you may not have difficulty in understanding this.

Regards,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Sun, 1/17/10, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar wrote:

Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldharRe: [Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002"A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-lSunday, January 17, 2010, 1:19 PM

On Sun, 17 Jan 2010, Sunil Bhattacharjya wrote:> If you have accepted Max Muller's date of Adi Sankaracharya and the AIT as the VedavakyaThe controversy on the date of Shankaracharya has nothing to do with Max Muller or the Aryan Invasion Theory and is in fact mostly a conversation between _Indian_ scholars some of which were quite traditionalist in their beliefs.> I have nothing to say. tathA.astu!!!-- Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_____________Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaitaTo or change your options:http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-lFor assistance, contact:listmaster

January 18, 2010

Dear Bhattacharjya Ji:

I have no issue with Max Mueller's time line with respect to Buddha's birth and subsequent analysis and neither do I have issue with AIT.

But I do have issue with hi timeline with respect to Aryans coming to India in the 15th century B.C.

It has been clearly proven that horses were not present in the Indus valley civiliizaton which extended much of the north west and lasted upto 2500 B.C. For the Aryans who performed aswametha yagam, horses were integral part of their life.Max Mueller can be excused since much of the light on the Indus Valley have comequite recently. There is a big gap and the dots cannot be connected.

Regards,

anantha krishnan

rom: Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya Fw: Re: [Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002WAVES-Vedic , USBrahmins , indiaarchaeology , vedic_research_institute , Date: Monday, January 18, 2010, 7:17 AM

--- On Mon, 1/18/10, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @> wrote:

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @>Re: [Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002"A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l (AT) lists (DOT) advaita-vedanta. org>Monday, January 18, 2010, 3:49 AM

Dear Jaldharji,

Kindly permit me to disagree with your statement, that the controversy on the date of Adi Sankaracharya has nothing to do with AIT. This is because Max Muller did not only say that the Aryans came to India in the 15th century BCE but he also went on to draw a time-line for the ancient Indian History according to which the Vedas were composed subsequent to the Aryan Invasion in the 15th century and he gave the dates of the Brahmanas etc. subsequent to the date of composition of the Vedas. The he went on to give the date of Lord Buddha in the 6th century BCE to fit in with his timeline. Once you take the date of Lord Buddha in the 6th century BCE you have to take the date Vasubandhu as 1000 years after the demise of Lord Buddha, in conformity with the statement of Hiuen Tsang that Vasubandhu lived one thousand years after the demise of Lord Buddha. Then you have to take the date of his disciple Dignaga after the date of

Vasubandhu. The date of Dharmakirti comes after that of Dignaga and as Adi Sankaracharya' s work shows that Adi Sankaracharya was subsequent to Dignaga and Dharmakiriti it ibecomes obvious what the date of Adi Sankaracharya will appear to be in this case. A layman may not be able to comprehend this but a big scholar like you may not have difficulty in understanding this.

Regards,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Sun, 1/17/10, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar (AT) braincells (DOT) com> wrote:

Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar (AT) braincells (DOT) com>Re: [Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002"A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l (AT) lists (DOT) advaita-vedanta. org>Sunday, January 17, 2010, 1:19 PM

On Sun, 17 Jan 2010, Sunil Bhattacharjya wrote:> If you have accepted Max Muller's date of Adi Sankaracharya and the AIT as the VedavakyaThe controversy on the date of Shankaracharya has nothing to do with Max Muller or the Aryan Invasion Theory and is in fact mostly a conversation between _Indian_ scholars some of which were quite traditionalist in their beliefs.> I have nothing to say. tathA.astu!! !-- Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar (AT) braincells (DOT) com>-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

____________ _________ _________ _________ ________Archives: http://lists. advaita-vedanta. org/archives/ advaita-l/http://blog. gmane.org/ gmane.culture. religion. advaitaTo or change your options:http://lists. advaita-vedanta. org/cgi-bin/ listinfo/ advaita-lFor assistance, contact:listmaster@advaita- vedanta.org

January 19, 2010

Dear Anantha Krishnanji,

Yes, much work has been done in the post- Max Muller times and I have also presented my work on the Dotted record in the WAVES conference in Florida in 2008, which throws some light on the problems in ancient Indian History. Everything about AIT and the related subjects cannot be discussed here.

Regards,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Mon, 1/18/10, Anantha Krishnan <anantha_krishnan_98 wrote:

Anantha Krishnan <anantha_krishnan_98Re: Fw: Re: [Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002 Date: Monday, January 18, 2010, 1:14 PM

Dear Bhattacharjya Ji:

I have no issue with Max Mueller's time line with respect to Buddha's birth and subsequent analysis and neither do I have issue with AIT.

But I do have issue with hi timeline with respect to Aryans coming to India in the 15th century B.C.

It has been clearly proven that horses were not present in the Indus valley civiliizaton which extended much of the north west and lasted upto 2500 B.C. For the Aryans who performed aswametha yagam, horses were integral part of their life.Max Mueller can be excused since much of the light on the Indus Valley have comequite recently. There is a big gap and the dots cannot be connected.

Regards,

anantha krishnan

rom: Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @>[ancient_indian_ astrology] Fw: Re: [Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002WAVES-Vedic, USBrahmins@gro ups.com, indiaarchaeology, vedic_research_ institute, ancient_indian_ astrologyMonday, January 18, 2010, 7:17 AM

--- On Mon, 1/18/10, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @> wrote:

Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya @>Re: [Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002"A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l (AT) lists (DOT) advaita-vedanta. org>Monday, January 18, 2010, 3:49 AM

Dear Jaldharji,

Kindly permit me to disagree with your statement, that the controversy on the date of Adi Sankaracharya has nothing to do with AIT. This is because Max Muller did not only say that the Aryans came to India in the 15th century BCE but he also went on to draw a time-line for the ancient Indian History according to which the Vedas were composed subsequent to the Aryan Invasion in the 15th century and he gave the dates of the Brahmanas etc. subsequent to the date of composition of the Vedas. The he went on to give the date of Lord Buddha in the 6th century BCE to fit in with his timeline. Once you take the date of Lord Buddha in the 6th century BCE you have to take the date Vasubandhu as 1000 years after the demise of Lord Buddha, in conformity with the statement of Hiuen Tsang that Vasubandhu lived one thousand years after the demise of Lord Buddha. Then you have to take the date of his disciple Dignaga after the date of

Vasubandhu. The date of Dharmakirti comes after that of Dignaga and as Adi Sankaracharya' s work shows that Adi Sankaracharya was subsequent to Dignaga and Dharmakiriti it ibecomes obvious what the date of Adi Sankaracharya will appear to be in this case. A layman may not be able to comprehend this but a big scholar like you may not have difficulty in understanding this.

Regards,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Sun, 1/17/10, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar (AT) braincells (DOT) com> wrote:

Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar (AT) braincells (DOT) com>Re: [Advaita-l] Conference on that Date of Adi Sankaracharya in October, 2002"A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l (AT) lists (DOT) advaita-vedanta. org>Sunday, January 17, 2010, 1:19 PM

On Sun, 17 Jan 2010, Sunil Bhattacharjya wrote:> If you have accepted Max Muller's date of Adi Sankaracharya and the AIT as the VedavakyaThe controversy on the date of Shankaracharya has nothing to do with Max Muller or the Aryan Invasion Theory and is in fact mostly a conversation between _Indian_ scholars some of which were quite traditionalist in their beliefs.> I have nothing to say. tathA.astu!! !-- Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar (AT) braincells (DOT) com>-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

____________ _________ _________ _________ ________Archives: http://lists. advaita-vedanta. org/archives/ advaita-l/http://blog. gmane.org/ gmane.culture. religion. advaitaTo or change your options:http://lists. advaita-vedanta. org/cgi-bin/ listinfo/ advaita-lFor assistance, contact:listmaster@advaita-

vedanta.org