This is a good article. Click here for more information.
Page semi-protected

Adi Shankara

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Adi Shankara
Raja Ravi Varma - Sankaracharya.jpg
Painting of Adi Shankara, exponent of Advaita Vedanta with his disciples by Raja Ravi Varma
Personal
Born
Shankara

c. 700 CE (disputed)[1]
Diedc. 750 CE (disputed)[1]
ReligionHinduism
Known forExpounded Advaita Vedanta
Founder ofDashanami Sampradaya
PhilosophyAdvaita Vedanta
Religious career
GuruGovinda Bhagavatpada
HonorsJagadguru
Kanchi Kamakoti Pithadhipati
Preceded byCreated
Succeeded bySuresvaracharya

Adi Shankara (8th cent. CE),[note 1] also called Adi Shankaracharya (Sanskrit: आदि शङ्कराचार्य; IAST: Ādi Śaṅkarācāryaḥ, [aːdɪ ɕɐŋkɐraːtɕaːrjɐh]),[note 2] was an Indian Vedic scholar and teacher (acharya),[4] whose works focus on liberating knowledge of the self, synthesizing Advaita Vedanta teachings of his time.[5][web 1]

Due to his later fame, over 300 texts are attributed to his name, including commentaries (Bhāṣya), original philosophical expositions (Prakaraṇa grantha) and poetry (Stotra).[6][7] However most of these are not authentic works of Shankara and are likely to be by his admirers or scholars whose name was also Shankaracharya.[8][9] Authentic are the Brahmasutrabhasya,[6] his commentaries on ten Mukhya (principal) Upanishads,[6][8] his commentary on the Bhagavad Gita,[10] and the Upadesasahasri.[11][12] The authenticity of Shankara being the author of Vivekacūḍāmaṇi has been questioned.[13][14]

The central concern of Shankara's writings is the identity of the Self (Ātman) and Brahman,[12][15] and defending the liberating knowledge of the Self, and the Upanishads as an independent means of knowledge, against the ritually-oriented Mīmāṃsā school of Hinduism.[16][2][note 3][note 4] Shankara's Advaita shows influences from Mahayana Buddhism, despite Shankara's critiques;[17][18] and Hindu Vaishnavist opponents have even accused Shankara of being a "crypto-Buddhist,"[19][20][21][note 5] a qualification which is rejected by the Advaita Vedanta tradition, highlighting their respective views on Atman, Anatta and Brahman.[22][note 6]

Shankara has an unparallelled status in the tradition of Advaita Vedanta.[23][2] Yet, while some state that the main currents of modern Indian thought have been derived from his doctrines,[24][25][note 7] his influence on Hindu intellectual thought has been questioned,[26][27][28] and the historical fame and cultural influence of Shankara grew only centuries after his death.[29][30][31] Hagiographies dating from the 14th-17th centuries present him as a folk-hero travelling across the Indian subcontinent to propagate his philosophy, defeating his opponents in theological debates.[32][33] According to tradition, he founded four mathas ("monasteries"), which are believed to have helped in the historical development, revival and propagation of Advaita Vedanta.[34] The factual correctness of his foundership is doubtfull, and the mathas may have been established as late as the 14th century. Adi Shankara is also believed to be the organiser of the Dashanami monastic order and unified the Shanmata tradition of worship.

Dating

The birthplace of Adi Shankara at Kalady

Eeliable information on Shankara's actual life is scanty.[35] The Sringeri records state that Shankara was born in the 14th year of the reign of "Vikramaditya", but it is unclear as to which king this name refers.[36] Though some researchers identify the name with Chandragupta II (4th century CE), modern scholarship accepts the Vikramaditya as being from the Chalukya dynasty of Badami, most likely Vikramaditya II (733–746 CE),[36]

Several different dates have been proposed for Shankara:[37]

  • 509–477 BCE: This dating, is based on records of the heads of the Shankara's cardinal institutions Maṭhas at Dvaraka Pitha, the Govardhana matha and Badri and the Kanchi Peetham. According to their records, these monasteries were founded in Kali 2593 (509 BCE) by a person named Adi Shankara.[38] The successive heads of the Kanchi and all other major Hindu Advaita tradition monasteries have been called Shankaracharya leading to some confusion, discrepancies and scholarly disputes. The chronology stated in Kanchi matha texts recognizes five major Shankaras: Adi, Kripa, Ujjvala, Muka and Abhinava. According to the Kanchi matha tradition, it is "Abhinava Shankara" that western scholarship recognizes as the Advaita scholar Shankara, while the monastery continues to recognize its 509 BCE chronology.[38][39] The exact dates of birth of Adi Shankaracharya believed by four monasteries are Dwaraka at 491 BCE, Jyotirmath at 485 BCE, Puri at 484 BCE and Sringeri at 483 BCE.[40] Also, as per astronomical details given in books Shankara Satpatha, Shankara Vijaya, Brihat Shakara Vijaya and Prachina Shankara Vijaya, it is believed that Shankaracharya was born in 509 BCE.[citation needed] The Kashmiri king named Gopaditya built temples of Jyeteshwara and Shankaracharya, thus implying that the Shankaracharya must have visited Kashmir before his birth.[40]
  • 44–12 BCE: the commentator Anandagiri believed he was born at Chidambaram in 44 BCE and died in 12 BCE.[3]
  • 6th century CE: Telang placed him in this century. Sir R.G. Bhandarkar believed he was born in 680 CE.[3]
  • c. 700 – c. 750 CE: Late 20th-century and early 21st-century scholarship tends to place Shankara's life of 32 years in the first half of the 8th century.[41][42] According to the Indologist and Asian Religions scholar John Koller, there is considerable controversy regarding the dates of Shankara – widely regarded as one of India's greatest thinkers, and "the best recent scholarship argues that he was born in 700 and died in 750 CE".[1]
  • 788–820 CE: This was proposed by early 20th scholars and was customarily accepted by scholars such as Max Müller, Macdonnel, Pathok, Deussen and Radhakrishna.[3][43][44] The date 788–820 is also among those considered acceptable by Swami Tapasyananda, though he raises a number of questions.[45] Though the 788–820 CE dates are widespread in 20th-century publications, recent scholarship has questioned the 788–820 CE dates.[41]
  • 805–897 CE: Venkiteswara not only places Shankara later than most, but also had the opinion that it would not have been possible for him to have achieved all the works apportioned to him, and has him live ninety-two years.[3]

The popularly-accepted dating places Shankara to be a scholar from the first half of the 8th century CE.[2][46]

Works

Adi Shankara's works are the foundation of Advaita Vedanta school of Hinduism, and his doctrine, states Sengaku Mayeda, "has been the source from which the main currents of modern Indian thought are derived".[6] Over 300 texts are attributed to his name, including commentaries (Bhāṣya), original philosophical expositions (Prakaraṇa grantha) and poetry (Stotra).[6][7] However most of these are not authentic works of Shankara and are likely to be by his admirers or scholars whose name was also Shankaracharya.[8][9] Piantelli has published a complete list of works attributed to Adi Sankara, along with issues of authenticity for most.[47]

Authentic works

Shankara is most known for his systematic reviews and commentaries (Bhasyas) on ancient Indian texts. Shankara's masterpiece of commentary is the Brahmasutrabhasya (literally, commentary on Brahma Sutra), a fundamental text of the Vedanta school of Hinduism.[6]

His commentaries on ten Mukhya (principal) Upanishads are also considered authentic by scholars,[6][8] and these are: Bhasya on the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, the Chandogya Upanishad, the Aitareya Upanishad, the Taittiriya Upanishad, the Kena Upanishad,[48] the Isha Upanishad, the Katha Upanishad, the Mundaka Upanishad, the Prashna Upanishad, and the Mandukya Upanishad.[49][50] Of these, the commentary on Mandukya, is actually a commentary on Madukya-Karikas by Gaudapada.[50]

Other authentic works of Shankara include commentaries on the Bhagavad Gita (part of his Prasthana Trayi Bhasya).[10] His Vivarana (tertiary notes) on the commentary by Vedavyasa on Yogasutras as well as those on Apastamba Dharma-sũtras (Adhyatama-patala-bhasya) are accepted by scholars as authentic works of Shankara.[49][11] Among the Stotra (poetic works), the Daksinamurti Stotra, the Bhajagovinda Stotra, the Sivanandalahari, the Carpata-panjarika, the Visnu-satpadi, the Harimide, the Dasa-shloki, and the Krishna-staka are likely to be authentic.[49][51]

Shankara also authored Upadesasahasri, his most important original philosophical work.[11][12] Of other original Prakaranas (प्रकरण, monographs, treatise), seventy-six works are attributed to Shankara. Modern era Indian scholars such as Belvalkar as well as Upadhyaya accept five and thirty-nine works respectively as authentic.[52]

Shankara's stotras considered authentic include those dedicated to Krishna (Vaishnavism) and one to Shiva (Shaivism) – often considered two different sects within Hinduism. Scholars suggest that these stotra are not sectarian, but essentially Advaitic and reach for a unified universal view of Vedanta.[51]

Shankara's commentary on the Brahma Sutras is the oldest surviving. However, in that commentary, he mentions older commentaries like those of Dravida, Bhartrprapancha and others which are either lost or yet to be found.[53]

Works of doubtful authenticity or not authentic

Commentaries on Nrisimha-Purvatatapaniya and Shveshvatara Upanishads are attributed to Shankara, but their authenticity is highly doubtful.[8][50][54] Similarly, commentaries on several early and later Upanishads attributed to Shankara are rejected by scholars[55] to be his works, and are likely works of later scholars; these include: Kaushitaki Upanishad, Maitri Upanishad, Kaivalya Upanishad, Paramahamsa Upanishad, Sakatayana Upanishad, Mandala Brahmana Upanishad, Maha Narayana Upanishad, Gopalatapaniya Upanishad. However, in Brahmasutra-Bhasya, Shankara cites some of these Upanishads as he develops his arguments, but the historical notes left by his companions and disciples, along with major differences in style and the content of the commentaries on later Upanishad have led scholars to conclude that the commentaries on later Upanishads were not Shankara's work.[50]

The authenticity of Shankara being the author of Vivekacūḍāmaṇi[56] has been questioned,[13][14] though it is "so closely interwoven into the spiritual heritage of Shankara that any analysis of his perspective which fails to consider [this work] would be incomplete."[14][note 8] According to Grimes, "modern scholars tend to reject its authenticity as a work by Shankara," while "traditionalists tend to accept it."[57] Nevertheless, does Grimes argue that "there is still a likelihood that Śaṅkara is the author of the Vivekacūḍāmaṇi," [57] noting that "it differs in certain respects from his other works in that it addresses itself to a different audience and has a different emphasis and purpose."[58]

The Aparokshanubhuti and Atma bodha are also attributed to Shankara, as his original philosophical treatises, but this is doubtful. Paul Hacker has also expressed some reservations that the compendium Sarva-darsana-siddhanta Sangraha was completely authored by Shankara, because of difference in style and thematic inconsistencies in parts.[55] Similarly, Gayatri-bhasya is doubtful to be Shankara's work.[50] Other commentaries that are highly unlikely to be Shankara's work include those on Uttaragita, Siva-gita, Brahma-gita, Lalita-shasranama, Suta-samhita and Sandhya-bhasya. The commentary on the Tantric work Lalita-trisati-bhasya attributed to Shankara is also unauthentic.[50]

Shankara is widely credited with commentaries on other scriptural works, such as the Vishnu sahasranāma and the Sānatsujātiya,[59] but both these are considered apocryphal by scholars who have expressed doubts.[50] Hastamalakiya-bhasya is also widely believed in India to be Shankara's work and it is included in Samata-edition of Shankara's works, but some scholars consider it to be the work of Shankara's student.[50]

Philosophy and practice

Atma Shatkam (The song of the Self):

I am Consciousness, I am Bliss, I am Shiva, I am Shiva.[note 9]

Without hate, without infatuation, without craving, without greed;
Neither arrogance, nor conceit, never jealous I am;
Neither dharma, nor artha, neither kama, nor moksha am I;
I am Consciousness, I am Bliss, I am Shiva, I am Shiva.

Without sins, without merits, without elation, without sorrow;
Neither mantra, nor rituals, neither pilgrimage, nor Vedas;
Neither the experiencer, nor experienced, nor the experience am I,
I am Consciousness, I am Bliss, I am Shiva, I am Shiva.

Without fear, without death, without discrimination, without caste;
Neither father, nor mother, never born I am;
Neither kith, nor kin, neither teacher, nor student am I;
I am Consciousness, I am Bliss, I am Shiva, I am Shiva.

Without form, without figure, without resemblance am I;
Vitality of all senses, in everything I am;
Neither attached, nor released am I;
I am Consciousness, I am Bliss, I am Shiva, I am Shiva.

—Adi Shankara, Nirvana Shatakam, Hymns 3–6[61]

Shankara was not an original thinker, but systematised the works of preceding philosophers.[62] The central theme of Shankara's writings is the liberating knowledge of the identity of the Self (Ātman) and Brahman.[12][15] Moksha is attained in this life by recognizing the identity of Atman and Brahman,[12] as mediated by the Mahavykas, especially Tat Tvam Asi, "That you are."

Systematizer of Advaita

According to Nakamura, comparison of the known teachings of the early Vedantins and Shankara's thought shows that most of the characteristics of Shankara's thought "were advocated by someone before Śankara".[63] Shankara "was the person who synthesized the Advaita-vāda which had previously existed before him".[63] According to Nakamura, after the growing influence of Buddhism on Vedānta, culminating in the works of Gauḍapāda, Adi Shankara gave a Vedantic character to the Buddhistic elements in these works,[64] synthesising and rejuvenating the doctrine of Advaita.[65]

According to Koller, using ideas in ancient Indian texts, Shankara systematized the foundation for Advaita Vedānta in the 8th century, reforming Badarayana's Vedānta tradition.[12] According to Mayeda, Shankara represents a turning point in the development of Vedānta,[64] yet he also notices that it is only since Deussens's praise that Shankara "has usually been regarded as the greatest philosopher of India."[66] Mayeda further notes that Shankara was primarily concerned with moksha, "and not with the establishment of a complete system of philosophy or theology,"[66] following Potter, who qualifies Shankara as a "speculative philosopher."[67] Lipner notes that Shankara's "main literary approach was commentarial and hence perforce disjointed rather than procedurally systematic [...] though a systematic philosophy can be derived from Samkara's thought."[68]

Shankara has been described as influenced by Shaivism and Shaktism, but his works and philosophy suggest greater overlap with Vaishnavism, influence of Yoga school of Hinduism, but most distinctly express his Advaitin convictions with a monistic view of spirituality,[46][12][69] and his commentaries mark a turn from realism to idealism.[70][71]

Moksha - liberating knowledge of Brahman

The central theme of Shankara's writings is the identity of the Self (Ātman) and Brahman,[12][15][note 10] One of Shankara's main concerns was explaining the liberating knowledge of the Self, and defending the Upanishads as an independent means of knowledge against the ritually-oriented Mīmāṃsā school of Hinduism.[16][2][note 3][note 4]

According to Shankara, the one unchanging entity (Brahman) alone is real, while changing entities do not have absolute existence. Shankara's primary objective was to explain how moksha is attained in this life by recognizing the identity of Atman and Brahman,[12] as mediated by the Mahavykas, especially Tat Tvam Asi, "That you are." Correct knowledge of Atman and Brahman is the attainment of Brahman, immortality,[72] and leads to moksha (liberation) from suffering[note 11] and samsara, the cycle of rebirth[73] This is stated by Shankara as follows:

I am other than name, form and action.
My nature is ever free!
I am Self, the supreme unconditioned Brahman.
I am pure Awareness, always non-dual.

— Adi Shankara, Upadesasahasri 11.7, [73]

Pramanas - means of knowledge

Shankara recognized the means of knowledge,[74][note 12] but his thematic focus was upon metaphysics and soteriology, and he took for granted the pramanas,[77] that is epistemology or "means to gain knowledge, reasoning methods that empower one to gain reliable knowledge".[citation needed] According to Sengaku Mayeda, "in no place in his works [...] does he give any systematic account of them,"[77] taking Atman-Brahman to be self-evident (svapramanaka) and self-established (svatahsiddha), and "an investigation of the means of knowledge is of no use for the attainment of final release."[77] Mayeda notes that Shankara's arguments are "strikingly realistic and not idealistic," arguing that jnana is based on existing things (vastutantra), and "not upon Vedic injunction (codanatantra) nor upon man (purusatantra).[77]

According to Michael Comans (aka Vasudevacharya), Shankara considered perception and inference as a primary most reliable epistemic means, and where these means to knowledge help one gain "what is beneficial and to avoid what is harmful", there is no need for or wisdom in referring to the scriptures.[78] In certain matters related to metaphysics and ethics, says Shankara, the testimony and wisdom in scriptures such as the Vedas and the Upanishads become important.[79]

Merrell-Wolff states that Shankara accepts Vedas and Upanishads as a source of knowledge as he develops his philosophical theses, yet he never rests his case on the ancient texts, rather proves each thesis, point by point using the pramanas (means of knowledge) of reason and experience.[80][81] Hacker and Phillips note that his insight into rules of reasoning and hierarchical emphasis on epistemic steps is "doubtlessly the suggestion" of Shankara in Brahma-sutra-bhasya, an insight that flowers in the works of his companion and disciple Padmapada.[82]

Logic versus revelation

Stcherbatsky in 1927 criticized Shankara for demanding the use of logic from Madhyamika Buddhists, while himself resorting to revelation as a source of knowledge.[17][note 13] Sircar in 1933 offered a different perspective and stated, "Sankara recognizes the value of the law of contrariety and self-alienation from the standpoint of idealistic logic; and it has consequently been possible for him to integrate appearance with reality."[83]

Recent scholarship states that Shankara's arguments on revelation are about apta vacana (Sanskrit: आप्तवचन, sayings of the wise, relying on word, testimony of past or present reliable experts).[84][85] It is part of his and Advaita Vedanta's epistemological foundation.[84] The Advaita Vedanta tradition considers such testimony epistemically valid, asserting that a human being needs to know numerous facts, and with the limited time and energy available, he can learn only a fraction of those facts and truths directly.[86] Shankara considered the teachings in the Vedas and Upanishads as apta vacana and a valid source of knowledge.[84] He suggests the importance of teacher-disciple relationship on combining logic and revelation to attain moksha in his text Upadeshasahasri.[87] Anantanand Rambachan and others state that Shankara did not rely exclusively on Vedic statements, but also used a range of logical methods and reasoning methodology and other pramanas.[88][89]

Anubhava

Anantanand Rambachan summarizes the widely held view on the role of anubhava in Shankara's epistemology as follows, before critiquing it:

According to these [widely represented contemporary] studies, Shankara only accorded a provisional validity to the knowledge gained by inquiry into the words of the Śruti (Vedas) and did not see the latter as the unique source (pramana) of Brahmajnana. The affirmations of the Śruti, it is argued, need to be verified and confirmed by the knowledge gained through direct experience (anubhava) and the authority of the Śruti, therefore, is only secondary.[10]

Yoga and contemplative exercises

Shankara considered the purity and steadiness of mind achieved in Yoga as an aid to gaining moksha knowledge, but such yogic state of mind cannot in itself give rise to such knowledge.[90] To Shankara, that knowledge of Brahman springs only from inquiry into the teachings of the Upanishads.[91] The method of yoga, encouraged in Shankara's teachings notes Comans, includes withdrawal of mind from sense objects as in Patanjali's system, but it is not complete thought suppression, instead it is a "meditative exercise of withdrawal from the particular and identification with the universal, leading to contemplation of oneself as the most universal, namely, Consciousness".[92] Describing Shankara's style of yogic practice, Comans writes:

the type of yoga which Sankara presents here is a method of merging, as it were, the particular (visesa) into the general (samanya). For example, diverse sounds are merged in the sense of hearing, which has greater generality insofar as the sense of hearing is the locus of all sounds. The sense of hearing is merged into the mind, whose nature consists of thinking about things, and the mind is in turn merged into the intellect, which Sankara then says is made into 'mere cognition' (vijnanamatra); that is, all particular cognitions resolve into their universal, which is cognition as such, thought without any particular object. And that in turn is merged into its universal, mere Consciousness (prajnafnaghana), upon which everything previously referred to ultimately depends.[92]

Shankara rejected those yoga system variations that suggest complete thought suppression leads to liberation, as well the view that the Shrutis teach liberation as something apart from the knowledge of the oneness of the Self. Knowledge alone and insights relating to true nature of things, taught Shankara, is what liberates. He placed great emphasis on the study of the Upanisads, emphasizing them as necessary and sufficient means to gain Self-liberating knowledge. Sankara also emphasized the need for and the role of Guru (Acharya, teacher) for such knowledge.[92]

Samanvayat Tatparya Linga

Shankara cautioned against cherrypicking a phrase or verse out of context from Vedic literature, and remarks in the opening chapter of his Brahmasutra-Bhasya that the Anvaya (theme or purport) of any treatise can only be correctly understood if one attends to the Samanvayat Tatparya Linga, that is six characteristics of the text under consideration: (1) the common in Upakrama (introductory statement) and Upasamhara (conclusions); (2) Abhyasa (message repeated); (3) Apurvata (unique proposition or novelty); (4) Phala (fruit or result derived); (5) Arthavada (explained meaning, praised point) and (6) Yukti (verifiable reasoning).[93][94] While this methodology has roots in the theoretical works of Nyaya school of Hinduism, Shankara consolidated and applied it with his unique exegetical method called Anvaya-Vyatireka, which states that for proper understanding one must "accept only meanings that are compatible with all characteristics" and "exclude meanings that are incompatible with any".[95][96]

The Mahavyakas - the identity of Ātman and Brahman

Moksha, liberation from suffering and rebirth and attaining immortality, is attained by disidentification from the body-mind complex and gaining self-knowledge as being in essence Atman, and attaining knowledge of the identity of Atman and Brahman.[73][72] According to Shankara, the individual Ātman and Brahman seem different at the empirical level of reality, but this difference is only an illusion, and at the highest level of reality they are really identical.[97] The real self is Sat, "the Existent," that is, Atman-Brahman.[98][99][note 14] Whereas the difference between Atman and non-Atman is deemed self-evident, knowledge of the identity of Atman and Brahman is revealed by the shruti, especially the Upanishadic statement tat tvam asi.

Mahavyakas

According to Shankara, a large number of Upanishadic statements reveal the identity of Atman and Brahman. In the Advaita Vedanta tradition, four of those statements, the Mahavakyas, which are taken literal, in contrast to other statements, have a special importance in revealing this identity.[100][101] They are:

That you are

The longest chapter of Shankara's Upadesasahasri, chapter 18, "That Art Thou," is devoted to considerations on the insight "I am ever-free, the existent" (sat), and the identity expressed in Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 in the mahavakya (great sentence) "tat tvam asi", "that thou art."[114][115] In this statement, according to Shankara, tat refers to 'Sat,[116] "the Existent"[105][106][117][118] Existence, Being,[119] or Brahman,[120] the Real, the "Root of the world,"[116][note 17] the true essence or root or origin of everything that exists.[106][117][119] "Tvam" refers to one's real I, pratyagatman or inner Self,[121] the "direct Witness within everything,"[122] "free from caste, family, and purifying ceremonies,"[123] the essence, Atman, which the individual at the core is.[124][125] As Shankara states in the Upadesasahasri:

Up.I.174: "Through such sentences as "Thou art That" one knows one's own Atman, the Witness of all the internal organs." Up.I.18.190: "Through such sentences as "[Thou art] the Existent" [...] right knowledge concerning the inner Atman will become clearer." Up.I.18.193-194: "In the sentence "Thou art That" [...] [t]he word "That" means inner Atman."[126]

The statement "tat tvam asi" sheds the false notion that Atman is different from Brahman.[127] According toNakamura, the non-duality of atman and Brahman "is a famous characteristic of Sankara's thought, but it was already taught by Sundarapandya"[128] (c.600 CE or earlier).[15] Shankara cites Sundarapandya in his comments to Brahma Sutra verse I.1.4:

When the metaphorical or false atman is non-existent, [the ideas of my] child, [my] body are sublated. Therefore, when it is realized that 'I am the existent Brahman, atman', how can anyduty exist?[129]

From this, and a large number of other accordances, Nakamura concludes that Shankar was not an original thinker, but "a synthesizer of existing Advaita and the rejuvenator, as well as a defender, of ancient learning."[130]

Meditation on the Mahavyaka

In the Upadesasahasri Shankara, Shankara is ambivalent on the need for meditation on the Upanishadic mahavyaka. He states that "right knowledge arises at the moment of hearing,"[131] and rejects prasamcaksa or prasamkhyana meditation, that is, meditation on the meaning of the sentences, and in Up.II.3 recommends parisamkhyana,[132] separating Atman from everything that is not Atman, that is, the sense-objects and sense-organs, and the pleasant and unpleasant things and merit and demerit connected with them.[133] Yet, Shankara then concludes with declaring that only Atman exists, stating that "all the sentences of the Upanishads concerning non-duality of Atman should be fully contemplated, should be contemplated."[134] As Mayeda states, "how they [prasamcaksa or prasamkhyana versus parisamkhyana] differ from each other in not known."[135]

Prasamkhyana was advocated by Mandana Misra,[136] the older contemporary of Shankara who was the most influential Advaitin until the 10th century.[137][138][note 18] "According to Mandana, the mahavakyas are incapable, by themselves, of bringing about brahmajnana. The Vedanta-vakyas convey an indirect knowledge which is made direct only by deep meditation (prasamkhyana). The latter is a continuous contemplation of the purport of the mahavakyas.[139] Vācaspati Miśra, a student of Mandana Misra, agreed with Mandana Misra, and their stance is defended by the Bhamati-school, founded by Vācaspati Miśra.[140] In contrast, the Vivarana school founded by Prakasatman (c. 1200–1300)[141] follows Shankara closely, arguing that the mahavakyas are the direct cause of gaining knowledge.[142]

Renouncement of ritualism

Shankara, in his text Upadesasahasri, discourages ritual worship such as oblations to Deva (God), because that assumes the Self within is different from the Brahman.[note 3][note 4] The "doctrine of difference" is wrong, asserts Shankara, because, "he who knows the Brahman is one and he is another, does not know Brahman".[143][144] The false notion that Atman is different from Brahman[127] is connected with the novice's conviction that (Upadesasaharsi II.1.25)

...I am one [and] He is another; I am ignorant, experience pleasure and pain, am bound and a transmigrator [whereas] he is essentially different from me, the god not subject to transmigration. By worshipping Him with oblation, offerings, homage and the like through the [performance of] the actions prescribed for [my] class and stage of life, I wish to get out of the ocean of transmigratory existence. How am I he? [145]

Recognizing oneself as "the Existent-Brahman," which is mediated by scriptural teachings, is contrasted with the notion of "I act," which is mediated by relying on sense-perception and the like.[146] According to Shankara, the statement "Thou art That" "remove[s] the delusion of a hearer,"[147] "so through sentences as "Thou art That" one knows one's own Atman, the witness of all internal organs,"[148] and not from any actions.[149][note 19] With this realization, the performance of rituals is prohibited, "since [the use of] rituals and their requisites is contradictory to the realization of the identity [of Atman] with the highest Atman."[151]

However, Shankara also asserts that Self-knowledge is realized when one's mind is purified by an ethical life that observes Yamas such as Ahimsa (non-injury, non-violence to others in body, mind and thoughts) and Niyamas. Rituals and rites such as yajna (a fire ritual), asserts Shankara, can help draw and prepare the mind for the journey to Self-knowledge.[152] He emphasizes the need for ethics such as Akrodha and Yamas during Brahmacharya, stating the lack of ethics as causes that prevent students from attaining knowledge.[152][153]

Influences of Mahayana Buddhism

Shankara's Vedanta shows similarities with Mahayana Buddhism; opponents have even accused Shankara of being a "crypto-Buddhist,"[20][19][21][note 5] a qualification which is rejected by the Advaita Vedanta tradition, given the differences between these two schools. According to Shankara, a major difference between Advaita and Mahayana Buddhism are their views on Atman and Brahman.[22] According to both Loy and Jayatilleke, more differences can be discerned.[154][155]

Similarities and influences

Despite Shankara's criticism of certain schools of Mahayana Buddhism, Shankara's philosophy shows strong similarities with the Mahayana Buddhist philosophy which he attacks.[17] According to S.N. Dasgupta,

Shankara and his followers borrowed much of their dialectic form of criticism from the Buddhists. His Brahman was very much like the sunya of Nagarjuna [...] The debts of Shankara to the self-luminosity of the Vijnanavada Buddhism can hardly be overestimated. There seems to be much truth in the accusations against Shankara by Vijnana Bhiksu and others that he was a hidden Buddhist himself. I am led to think that Shankara's philosophy is largely a compound of Vijnanavada and Sunyavada Buddhism with the Upanisad notion of the permanence of self superadded.[18]

According to Mudgal, Shankara's Advaita and the Buddhist Madhyamaka view of ultimate reality are compatible because they are both transcendental, indescribable, non-dual and only arrived at through a via negativa (neti neti). Mudgal concludes therefore that

... the difference between Sunyavada (Mahayana) philosophy of Buddhism and Advaita philosophy of Hinduism may be a matter of emphasis, not of kind.[156]

Some Hindu scholars criticized Advaita for its Maya and non-theistic doctrinal similarities with Buddhism.[157][158] Ramanuja, the founder of Vishishtadvaita Vedānta, accused Adi Shankara of being a Prachanna Bauddha, that is, a "crypto-Buddhist",[19][20] and someone who was undermining theistic Bhakti devotionalism.[158] The non-Advaita scholar Bhaskara of the Bhedabheda Vedānta tradition, similarly around 800 CE, accused Shankara's Advaita as "this despicable broken down Mayavada that has been chanted by the Mahayana Buddhists", and a school that is undermining the ritual duties set in Vedic orthodoxy.[158]

Differences

The qualification of "crypto-Buddhist" is rejected by the Advaita Vedanta tradition, highlighting their respective views on Atman, Anatta and Brahman.[22][note 6] There are also differences in the understanding of what "liberation" means. Nirvana, a term more often used in Buddhism, is the liberating realization and acceptance that there is no Self (anatman). Moksha, a term more common in Hinduism, is liberating realization and acceptance of Self and Universal Soul, the consciousness of one's Oneness with all existence and understanding the whole universe as the Self.[154][159]

Historical and cultural impact

Adi Sankara Keerthi Sthampa Mandapam, Kalady, Kochi

Historical context

Shankara lived in the time of the great "Late classical Hinduism",[160] which lasted from 650 till 1100 CE.[160] This era was one of political instability that followed the Gupta dynasty and King Harsha of the 7th century CE.[161] power became decentralised in India. Several larger kingdoms emerged, with "countless vasal states".[162][note 20] The kingdoms were ruled via a feudal system. Smaller kingdoms were dependent on the protection of the larger kingdoms. "The great king was remote, was exalted and deified",[162] as reflected in the Tantric Mandala, which could also depict the king as the centre of the mandala.[163]

The disintegration of central power also lead to regionalisation of religiosity, and religious rivalry.[164][note 21] Local cults and languages were enhanced, and the influence of "Brahmanic ritualistic Hinduism"[164] was diminished.[164] Rural and devotional movements arose, along with Shaivism, Vaisnavism, Bhakti and Tantra,[164] though "sectarian groupings were only at the beginning of their development".[164] Religious movements had to compete for recognition by the local lords,[164] and Buddhism, Jainism, Islam and various traditions within Hinduism were competing for members.[165][166][167] Buddhism in particular had emerged as a powerful influence in India's spiritual traditions in the first 700 years of the 1st millennium CE,[161][168] but lost its position after the 8th century, and began to disappear in India.[164] This was reflected in the change of puja-ceremonies at the courts in the 8th century, where Hindu gods replaced the Buddha as the "supreme, imperial deity".[note 22]

Influence on Hinduism

Traditional view

Shankara has an unparallelled status in the tradition of Advaita Vedanta. He is believed to have travelled all over India to help restore the study of the Vedas[169] According to Frank Whaling, ""Hindus of the Advaita persuasion (and others too) have seen in Sankara the one who restored the Hindu dharma against the attacks of the Buddhists (and Jains) and in the process helped to drive Buddhism out of India."[170] His teachings and tradition form the basis of Smartism and have influenced Sant Mat lineages.[171] According to tradition, he reconciled the various sects (Vaishnavism, Shaivism, and Saktism) with the introduction of the Pañcāyatana form of worship, the simultaneous worship of five deities – Ganesha, Surya, Vishnu, Shiva and Devi, arguing that all deities were but different forms of the one Brahman, the invisible Supreme Being,[172] implying that Advaita Vedanta stoos above all other traditions.[173]

Shankara also had a strong influence on the Vedanta-tradition in general. According to Koller, Shankara, and his contemporaries, made a significant contribution in understanding Buddhism and the ancient Vedic traditions, then transforming the extant ideas, particularly reforming the Vedanta tradition of Hinduism, making it India's most important "spiritual tradition" for more than a thousand years.[174][note 23] Benedict Ashley credits Adi Shankara for unifying two seemingly disparate philosophical doctrines in Hinduism, namely Atman and Brahman.[175] Hajime Nakamura states that prior to Shankara, views similar to his already existed, but did not occupy a dominant position within the Vedanta.[176] The early Vedanta scholars were from the upper classes of society, well-educated in traditional culture. They formed a social elite, "sharply distinguished from the general practitioners and theologians of Hinduism."[177] Their teachings were "transmitted among a small number of selected intellectuals".[177] Works of the early Vedanta schools do not contain references to Vishnu or Shiva.[178] It was only after Shankara that "the theologians of the various sects of Hinduism utilized Vedanta philosophy to a greater or lesser degree to form the basis of their doctrines,"[179] for example the Nath-tradition,[180] whereby "its theoretical influence upon the whole of Indian society became final and definitive."[177]

Critical assessment

While the main currents of modern Hindu thoughtmay have been derived from his doctrines,[24][25][note 7] some scholars doubt Shankara's early influence in India.[29] The Buddhist scholar Richard E. King states,

Although it is common to find Western scholars and Hindus arguing that Sankaracarya was the most influential and important figure in the history of Hindu intellectual thought, this does not seem to be justified by the historical evidence.[27]

Prominence of Maṇḍana Miśra (until 10th century)

According to King and Roodurmun, until the 10th century Shankara was overshadowed by his older contemporary Mandana-Misra, the latter considered to be the major representative of Advaita.[27][31] Maṇḍana Miśra, an older contemporary of Shankara,[181] was a Mimamsa scholar and a follower of Kumarila, but also wrote a seminal text on Advaita that has survived into the modern era, the Brahma-siddhi.[182][183] The "theory of error" set forth in the Brahma-siddhi became the normative Advaita Vedanta theory of error,[184] and for a couple of centuries he was the most influential Vedantin.[137][138][note 24] His student Vachaspati Miśra, who is believed to have been an incarnation of Shankara to popularize the Advaita view,[185] wrote the Bhamati, a commentary on Shankara's Brahma Sutra Bhashya, and the Brahmatattva-samiksa, a commentary on Mandana Mishra's Brahma-siddhi. His thought was mainly inspired by Mandana Miśra, and harmonises Shankara's thought with that of Mandana Miśra.[186][web 3] The Bhamati school takes an ontological approach. It sees the Jiva as the source of avidya.[web 3] It sees yogic practice and contemplation as the main factor in the acquirement of liberation, while the study of the Vedas and reflection are additional factors.[187][188] The later Advaita Vedanta tradition incorporated Maṇḍana Miśra into the Shankara-fold, by identifying him with Sureśvara (9th century),[189] believing that Maṇḍana Miśra became a disciple of Shankara after a public debate which Shankara won.[190][191]

Vijayanagara Empire and Vidyaranya (14th century)

Several scholars argue that the historical fame and cultural influence of Shankara grew centuries later, particularly during the era of the Muslim invasions and consequent devastation of India.[192][193] Many of Shankara's biographies were created and published in and after the 14th century, such as Vidyaranya's widely cited Śankara-vijaya. Vidyaranya, also known as Madhava, who was the 12th Jagadguru of the Śringeri Śarada Pītham from 1380 to 1386[194] and a minister in the Vijayanagara Empire,[195] inspired the re-creation of the Hindu Vijayanagara Empire of South India in response to the devastation caused by the Islamic Delhi Sultanate.[193][195] He and his brothers, suggest Paul Hacker and other scholars,[192][193] wrote extensive Advaitic commentaries on the Vedas and Dharma to make "the authoritative literature of the Aryan religion" more accessible.[196] Vidyaranya was a follower of Shankara, and he created legends to turn Shankara, whose elevated philosophy had no appeal to gain widespread popularity, into a "divine folk-hero who spread his teaching through his digvijaya ("universal conquest") all over India like a victorious conqueror."[196][197] In his Savadarsanasamgraha ("Summary of all views") Vidyaranya presented Shankara's teachings as the summit of all darsanas, presenting the other darsanas as partial truths which converged in Shankara's teachings.[196] And he founded a matha, proclaiming that it was established by Shankara himself.[196][197] Vidyaranya enjoyed royal support,[195] and his sponsorship and methodical efforts helped establish Shankara as a rallying symbol of values, spread historical and cultural influence of Shankara's Vedānta philosophies, and establish monasteries (mathas) to expand the cultural influence of Shankara and Advaita Vedānta.[192]

Neo-Vedanta (19-20th century)

Shankara's position was further established in the 19th an 20th century, when neo-Vedantins and western Orientalists elevated Advaita Vedanta "as the connecting theological thread that united Hinduism into a single religious tradition."[198] Shankara became "an iconic representation of Hindu religion and culture," despite the fact that most Hi dus do not adhere to Advaita Vedanta.[199]

Hagiography

Sources

There are at least fourteen different known hagiographies of Adi Shankara's life.[46] Many of these are called the Śankara Vijaya ('The conquests of Shankara'), while some are called Guruvijaya, Sankarabhyudaya and Shankaracaryacarita. Of these, the Brhat-Sankara-Vijaya by Citsukha is the oldest hagiography but only available in excerpts, while Sankaradigvijaya by Vidyaranya and Sankaravijaya by Anandagiri are the most cited.[46][35] Other significant hagiographies are the Mādhavīya Śaṅkara Vijayaṃ (of Mādhava, c. 14th century), the Cidvilāsīya Śaṅkara Vijayaṃ (of Cidvilāsa, c. between the 15th and 17th centuries), and the Keraļīya Śaṅkara Vijayaṃ (of the Kerala region, extant from c. the 17th century).[200][201] These, as well as other hagiographical works on Shankara, were written many centuries to a thousand years after Shankara's death,[202] in Sanskrit and non-Sanskrit languages, and the hagiographies are filled with legends and fiction, often mutually contradictory.[46][note 25]

Scholars note that one of the most cited Shankara hagiographies, Anandagiri's, includes stories and legends about historically different people, but all bearing the same name of Sri Shankaracarya or also referred to as Shankara but likely meaning more ancient scholars with names such as Vidya-sankara, Sankara-misra and Sankara-nanda.[35] Some hagiographies are probably written by those who sought to create a historical basis for their rituals or theories.[35][202]

Life

Idol of Shankara at his Samadhi Mandir, behind Kedarnath Temple, in Kedarnath, India
Murti of Shankara at the SAT Temple in Santa Cruz, California

According to the oldest hagiographies, Shankara was born in the southern Indian state of Kerala, in a village named Kaladi[203][46] sometimes spelled as Kalati or Karati.[204][205] He was born to Nambudiri Brahmin parents.[206][207] His parents were an aged, childless, couple who led a devout life of service to the poor. They named their child Shankara, meaning "giver of prosperity".[208] His father died while Shankara was very young.[46] Shankara's upanayanam, the initiation into student-life, had to be delayed due to the death of his father, and was then performed by his mother.[209]

Shankara's hagiography describe him as someone who was attracted to the life of Sannyasa (hermit) from early childhood. His mother disapproved. A story, found in all hagiographies, describe Shankara at age eight going to a river with his mother, Sivataraka, to bathe, and where he is caught by a crocodile.[210] Shankara called out to his mother to give him permission to become a Sannyasin or else the crocodile will kill him. The mother agrees, Shankara is freed and leaves his home for education. He reaches a Saivite sanctuary along a river in a north-central state of India, and becomes the disciple of a teacher named Govinda Bhagavatpada.[210][211] The stories in various hagiographies diverge in details about the first meeting between Shankara and his Guru, where they met, as well as what happened later.[210] Several texts suggest Shankara schooling with Govindapada happened along the river Narmada in Omkareshwar, a few place it along river Ganges in Kashi (Varanasi) as well as Badari (Badrinath in the Himalayas).[211]

The hagiographies vary in their description of where he went, who he met and debated and many other details of his life. Most mention Shankara studying the Vedas, Upanishads and Brahmasutra with Govindapada, and Shankara authoring several key works in his youth, while he was studying with his teacher.[212] It is with his teacher Govinda, that Shankara studied Gaudapadiya Karika, as Govinda was himself taught by Gaudapada.[46] Most also mention a meeting with scholars of the Mimamsa school of Hinduism namely Kumarila and Prabhakara, as well as Mandana and various Buddhists, in Shastrarth (an Indian tradition of public philosophical debates attended by large number of people, sometimes with royalty).[211] Thereafter, the hagiographies about Shankara vary significantly. Different and widely inconsistent accounts of his life include diverse journeys, pilgrimages, public debates, installation of yantras and lingas, as well as the founding of monastic centers in north, east, west and south India.[35][211]

Philosophical tour and disciples

While the details and chronology vary, most hagiographies mention that Shankara traveled widely within India, Gujarat to Bengal, and participating in public philosophical debates with different orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy, as well as heterodox traditions such as Buddhists, Jains, Arhatas, Saugatas, and Carvakas.[213][214][page needed][215][page needed] During his tours, he is credited with starting several Matha (monasteries), however this is uncertain.[213] Ten monastic orders in different parts of India are generally attributed to Shankara's travel-inspired Sannyasin schools, each with Advaita notions, of which four have continued in his tradition: Bharati (Sringeri), Sarasvati (Kanchi), Tirtha and Asramin (Dvaraka).[216] Other monasteries that record Shankara's visit include Giri, Puri, Vana, Aranya, Parvata and Sagara – all names traceable to Ashrama system in Hinduism and Vedic literature.[216]

Shankara had a number of disciple scholars during his travels, including Padmapadacharya (also called Sanandana, associated with the text Atma-bodha), Sureśvaracharya, Totakacharya, Hastamalakacharya, Citsukha, Prthividhara, Cidvilasayati, Bodhendra, Brahmendra, Sadananda and others, who authored their own literature on Shankara and Advaita Vedanta.[213][217]

Death

Adi Sankara is believed to have died aged 32, at Kedarnath in the northern Indian state of Uttarakhand, a Hindu pilgrimage site in the Himalayas.[216][6] Texts say that he was last seen by his disciples behind the Kedarnath temple, walking in the Himalayas until he was not traced. Some texts locate his death in alternate locations such as Kanchipuram (Tamil Nadu) and somewhere in the state of Kerala.[211]

Mathas and Smarta tradition

Vidyashankara temple at Sringeri Sharada Peetham, Shringeri

Shankara is regarded as the founder of the Daśanāmi Sampradāya of Hindu monasticism, and the Panchayatana puja and Ṣaṇmata of the Smarta tradition.

Dashanami Sampradaya and mathas

Advaita Vedanta is, at least in the west, primarily known as a philosophical system. But it is also a tradition of renunciation. Philosophy and renunciation are closely related:[web 4]

Most of the notable authors in the advaita tradition were members of the sannyasa tradition, and both sides of the tradition share the same values, attitudes and metaphysics.[web 4]

Shankara, who is himself considered to be an incarnation of Shiva,[web 4][relevant?] is believed to have established the Dashanami Sampradaya, organizing a section of the Ekadandi monks under an umbrella grouping of ten names.[web 4] Several other Hindu monastic and Ekadandi traditions remained outside the organisation of the Dasanāmis.[218][219]

According to tradition, Adi Sankara organised the Hindu monks of these ten sects or names under four Maṭhas (Sanskrit: मठ) (monasteries), with the headquarters at Dvārakā in the West, Jagannatha Puri in the East, Sringeri in the South and Badrikashrama in the North.[web 4] Each math was headed by one of his four main disciples, who each continues the Vedanta Sampradaya.

Yet, according to paul Hacker, the system may have been iitiated by Vidyaranya (14th c.), who may have founded a matha, proclaiming that it was established by Shankara himself, as part of his campaign to propagate Shankara's Advaita Vedanta.[196][197] Vidyaranya enjoyed royal support,[195] and his sponsorship and methodical efforts helped establish Shankara as a rallying symbol of values, spread historical and cultural influence of Shankara's Vedānta philosophies, and establish monasteries (mathas) to expand the cultural influence of Shankara and Advaita Vedānta.[192]

According to Pandey, these Mathas were not established by Shankara himself, but were originally ashrams established by Vibhāņdaka and his son Ŗșyaśŗnga.[220] Shankara inherited the ashrams at Dvārakā and Sringeri, and shifted the ashram at Śŗngaverapura to Badarikāśrama, and the ashram at Angadeśa to Jagannātha Purī.[221]

Smarta Tradition

Traditionally, Shankara is regarded as the greatest teacher[222][223] and reformer of the Smartism sampradaya, which is one of four major sampradaya of Hinduism..[224][223] According to Alf Hiltebeitel, Shankara established the nondualist interpretation of the Upanishads as the touchstone of a revived smarta tradition:

Practically, Shankara fostered a rapprochement between Advaita and smarta orthodoxy, which by his time had not only continued to defend the varnasramadharma theory as defining the path of karman, but had developed the practice of pancayatanapuja ("five-shrine worship") as a solution to varied and conflicting devotional practices. Thus one could worship any one of five deities (Vishnu, Siva, Durga, Surya, Ganesa) as one's istadevata ("deity of choice").[225]

Panchayatana puja (IAST Pañcāyatana pūjā) is a system of puja (worship) in the Smarta tradition.[226] It consists of the worship of five deities set in a quincunx pattern,[227] the five deities being Shiva, Vishnu, Devi, Surya, and an Ishta Devata such as Kartikeya, or Ganesha or any personal god of devotee's preference.[228][229] Sometimes the Ishta Devata is the sixth deity in the mandala.[226] while in the Shanmata system,[230] Skanda, also known as Kartikeya and Murugan, is added. Panchayatana puja is a practice that became popular in medieval India,[226] and has been attributed to Adi Shankara.[231] However, archaeological evidence suggests that this practice long predates the birth of Adi Shankara.[note 26]

Films

See also

Notes

  1. ^ Modern scholarship places Shankara in the earlier part of the 8th century CE (c. 700–750).[2] Earlier generations of scholars proposed 788–820 CE.[2] Other proposals are 686–718 CE,[citation needed] 44 BCE,[3] or as early as 509–477 BCE.
  2. ^ He is also known as Shankara Bhagavatpada (Śaṅkara Bhagavatpāda) or Shankara Bhagavatpadacharya (Śaṅkara Bhagavatpādācārya) or simply Shankaracharya, sometimes spelled Sankaracharya.
  3. ^ a b c Shankara, himself, had renounced all religious ritual acts; see Karl Potter (2008), Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies Vol. III, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-81-208-0310-7, p. 16;
    For an example of Shankara's reasoning "why rites and ritual actions should be given up", see Karl Potter on p. 220;
    Elsewhere, Shankara's Bhasya on various Upanishads repeat "give up rituals and rites", see for example Shankara's Bhasya on Brihadaranyaka Upanishad pp. 348–350, 754–757</ref>
  4. ^ a b c Compare Mookerji 2011 on Svādhyāya (Vedic larning). Mookerji (2011, pp. 29–31) notes that the Rigveda, and Sayana's commentary, contain passages criticizing as fruitless mere recitation of the Ŗik (words) without understanding their inner meaning or essence, the knowledge of dharma and Parabrahman. Mookerji (2011, pp. 29, 34) concludes that in the Rigvedic education of the mantras "the contemplation and comprehension of their meaning was considered as more important and vital to education than their mere mechanical repetition and correct pronunciation." Mookerji (2011, p. 35) refers to Sayana as stating that "the mastery of texts, akshara-praptī, is followed by artha-bodha, perception of their meaning." (Artha may also mean "goal, purpose or essence," depending on the context. See: Sanskrit English Dictionary University of Kloen, Germany (2009); Karl Potter (1998), Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Volume 4, ISBN 81-208-0310-8, Motilal Banarsidass, pp 610 (note 17).) According to Mookerji (2011, p. 36), "the realization of Truth" and the knowledge of paramatman as revealed to the rishis is the real aim of Vedic learning, and not the mere recitation of texts.
  5. ^ a b King (1995, p. 183): "It is well-known that Sankara was criticized by later (rival) Vedantins as a crypto-Buddhist (pracchana bauddha).
  6. ^ a b Atman versus anatman:
    • (Isaeva 1993, pp. 60, 145–154)
    • KN Jayatilleke (2010), Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, ISBN 978-81-208-0619-1, p. 246–249, from note 385 onwards
    • Steven Collins (1994), Religion and Practical Reason (Editors: Frank Reynolds, David Tracy), State Univ of New York Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-2217-5, p. 64: "Central to Buddhist soteriology is the doctrine of not-self (Pali: anattā, Sanskrit: anātman, the opposed doctrine of Ātman is central to Brahmanical thought). Put very briefly, this is the [Buddhist] doctrine that human beings have no soul, no self, no unchanging essence."
    • Edward Roer (Translator), Shankara's Introduction at Google Books
    • Katie Javanaud (2013), Is The Buddhist 'No-Self' Doctrine Compatible With Pursuing Nirvana?, Philosophy Now
    • John C. Plott et al. (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Axial Age, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-81-208-0158-5, p. 63: "The Buddhist schools reject any Ātman concept. As we have already observed, this is the basic and ineradicable distinction between Hinduism and Buddhism".
  7. ^ a b Main currents of modern Hindu thought:
    • EB (2000, p. 379): "Shankaracharya, philosopher and theologian, most renowned exponent of the Advaita Vedanta school of philosophy, from whose doctrines the main currents of modern Indian thought are derived."
    • Crystal (2004, p. 1353), Quote: "[Shankara] is the most famous exponent of Advaita Vedanta school of Hindu philosophy and the source of the main currents of modern Hindu thought."
  8. ^ See also IndiaDivine.org, Authorship of Vivekachudamani and arshabodha.org, Sri Sankara's Vivekachudamani, pp. 3–4, The Question of Authorship of Vivekachudamani
  9. ^ Swami Vivekananda translates Shivoham, Shivoham as "I am he, I am he".[60]
  10. ^ Brahman is not to be confused with the personalised godhead Brahma.
  11. ^ The suffering created by the workings of the mind entangled with physical reality
  12. ^ Mayeda refers to statements from Shankara regarding epistemology (pramana-janya) in section 1.18.133 of Upadesasahasri, and section 1.1.4 of Brahmasutra-bhasya.[75][76] NB: some manuscripts list Upadesasahasri verse 1.18.133 as 2.18.133, while Mayeda lists it as 1.18.133, because of interchanged chapter numbering. See Upadesa Sahasri: A Thousand Teachings, S Jagadananda (Translator, 1949), ISBN 978-81-7120-059-7, Verse 2.8.133, p. 258; Karl H Potter (2014), The Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Volume 3, Princeton University Press, ISBN 978-0-691-61486-1, p. 249
  13. ^ Shcherbatsky: "Shankara accuses them of disregarding all logic and refuses to enter in a controversy with them. The position of Shankara is interesting because, at heart, he is in full agreement with the Madhyamikas, at least in the main lines, since both maintain the reality of the One-without-a-second, and the mirage of the manifold. But Shankara, as an ardent hater of Buddhism, would never confess that. He therefore treats the Madhyamika with great contempt [...] on the charge that the Madhyamika denies the possibility of cognizing the Absolute by logical methods (pramana). Vachaspati Mishra in the Bhamati rightly interprets this point as referring to the opinion of the Madhyamikas that logic is incapable to solve the question about what existence or non-existence really are. This opinion Shankara himself, as is well known, shares. He does not accept the authority of logic as a means of cognizing the Absolute, but he deems it a privilege of the Vedantin to fare without logic, since he has Revelation to fall back upon. From all his opponents, he requires strict logical methods."[17]
  14. ^ Highest self:
    • Shankara, Upadesasahasri I.18.3: "I am ever-free, the existent" (Sat). I.18.6: "The two [contradictory] notions "I am the Existent-Brahman" and "I act," have Atman as their witness. It is considered more reasonable to give up only [that one] of the two [notions] which arises from ignorance. I.18.7: "The notion, "I am the Existent," arises from right means of knowledge [while] the other notion has its origin in fallacious means of knowledge." (Mayeda 1992, p. 172)
    • Sivananda1993, p. 219: "Brahman (the Absolute) is alone real; this world is unreal; and the Jiva or individual soul is non-different from Brahman."
    • Deutsch 1973, p. 54: "[the] essential status [of the individual human person] is that of unqualified reality, of identity with the Absolute [...] the self (jiva) is only misperceived: the self is really Brahman."
    • Koller 2013, pp. 100–101: "Atman, which is identical to Brahman, is ultimately the only reality and [...] the appearance of plurality is entirely the work of ignorance [...] the self is ultimately of the nature of Atman/Brahman [...] Brahman alone is ultimately real."
    • Bowker 2000: "There is only Brahman, which is necessarily undifferentiated. It follows that there cannot even be a difference, or duality, between the human subject, or self, and Brahman, for Brahman must be that very self (since Brahman is the reality underlying all appearance). The goal of human life and wisdom must, therefore, be the realization that the self (ātman) is Brahman."
    • Menon 2012: "The experiencing self (jīva) and the transcendental self of the Universe (ātman) are in reality identical (both are Brahman), though the individual self seems different as space within a container seems different from space as such. These cardinal doctrines are represented in the anonymous verse "brahma satyam jagan mithya; jīvo brahmaiva na aparah" (Brahman is alone True, and this world of plurality is an error; the individual self is not different from Brahman)."
    Hacker (1995, p. 88) notes that Shankara uses two groups of words to denote 'atman': "One group - principally jiva, vijnanatman, and sarira - expresses the illusory aspect of the soul [...] But in addition there are the two expressions atman and pratyagatman. These also designate the individual soul, but in its real aspect." Mayeda (1992, pp. 11, 14) uses the word pratyagatman; Sivananda1993, p. 219), Deutsch (1973, p. 54), and Menon (2012) use the term jiva when referring to the indentity of atman and Brahman.
  15. ^ "Consciousness",[112][web 2] "intelligence",[113][111] "wisdom"
  16. ^ "the Absolute",[112][web 2] "infinite",[web 2] "the Highest truth"[web 2]
  17. ^ While the Vedanta tradition equates sat ("the Existent") with Brahman, the Chandogya Upanishad itself does not refer to Brahman.[106][104] Deutsch & Dalvi (2004, p. 8): "Although the text does not use the term brahman, the Vedanta tradition is that the Existent (sat) referred to is no other than Brahman."
  18. ^ King 2002, p. 128: "Although it is common to find Western scholars and Hindus arguing that Sankaracarya was the most influential and important figure in the history of Hindu intellectual thought, this does not seem to be justified by the historical evidence."
  19. ^ Up.I.18.219: "The renunciation of all actions becomes the means for discriminating the meaning of the word "Thou" since there is an [Upanisadic] teaching, "Having become calm, self-controlled [..., one sees Atman there in oneself]" (Bhr. Up. IV, 4, 23)."[150]
  20. ^ Michaels (2004, p. 41):
  21. ^ McRae (2003): This resembles the development of Chinese Chán during the An Lu-shan rebellion and the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms Period (907–960/979), during which power became decentralised end new Chán-schools emerged.
  22. ^ Inden (1998, p. 67): "Before the eighth century, the Buddha was accorded the position of universal deity and ceremonies by which a king attained to imperial status were elaborate donative ceremonies entailing gifts to Buddhist monks and the installation of a symbolic Buddha in a stupa ... This pattern changed in the eighth century. The Buddha was replaced as the supreme, imperial deity by one of the Hindu gods (except under the Palas of eastern India, the Buddha's homeland) ... Previously the Buddha had been accorded imperial-style worship (puja). Now as one of the Hindu gods replaced the Buddha at the imperial centre and pinnacle of the cosmo-political system, the image or symbol of the Hindu god comes to be housed in a monumental temple and given increasingly elaborate imperial-style puja worship."
  23. ^ This includes also the dualistic Vaishna bhakti traditions, which have also commented on the Upanishads and the Brahma Sutras, but take a different stance.
  24. ^ King 2002, p. 128: "Although it is common to find Western scholars and Hindus arguing that Sankaracarya was the most influential and important figure in the history of Hindu intellectual thought, this does not seem to be justified by the historical evidence."[137]
  25. ^ The hagiographies of Shankara mirror the pattern of synthesizing facts, fiction and legends as with other ancient and medieval era Indian scholars. Some hagiographic poems depict Shankara as a reincarnation of deity Shiva, much like other Indian scholars are revered as reincarnation of other deities; for example, Mandana-misra is depicted as an embodiment of deity Brahma, Citsukha of deity Varuna, Anandagiri of Agni, among others. See Isaeva (1993, pp. 69–72).
  26. ^ Many Panchayatana mandalas and temples have been uncovered that are from the Gupta Empire period, and one Panchayatana set from the village of Nand (about 24 kilometers from Ajmer) has been dated to belong to the Kushan Empire era (pre-300 CE).[232] The Kushan period set includes Shiva, Vishnu, Surya, Brahma and one deity whose identity is unclear.[232] According to James Harle, major Hindu temples from 1st millennium CE embed the pancayatana architecture very commonly, from Odisha to Karnataka to Kashmir; and the temples containing fusion deities such as Harihara (half Shiva, half Vishnu) are set in Panchayatana worship style.[227]

References

  1. ^ a b c Koller 2013, p. 99
  2. ^ a b c d e f Comans 2000, p. 163.
  3. ^ a b c d e Y. Keshava Menon, The Mind of Adi Shankaracharya 1976 pp. 108
  4. ^ Suthren Hirst 1995, p. 1.
  5. ^ Nakamura, 1950 & p-678-679.
  6. ^ a b c d e f g h Mayeda 2006, pp. 6–7.
  7. ^ a b Isaeva 1993, pp. 2–3.
  8. ^ a b c d e Paul Hacker, Philology and Confrontation: Paul Hacker on Traditional and Modern Vedanta (Editor: Wilhelm Halbfass), State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-2582-4, pp. 30–31
  9. ^ a b W Halbfass (1983), Studies in Kumarila and Sankara, Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik, Monographic 9, Reinbeck
  10. ^ a b c A Rambachan (1991), Accomplishing the Accomplished: Vedas as a Source of Valid Knowledge in Sankara, University of Hawaii Press, ISBN 978-0-8248-1358-1, pp. xii–xiii
  11. ^ a b c Wilhelm Halbfass (1990), Tradition and Reflection: Explorations in Indian Thought, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-0362-4, pp. 205–208
  12. ^ a b c d e f g h i John Koller (2007), in Chad Meister and Paul Copan (Editors): The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Religion, Routledge, ISBN 978-1-134-18001-1, pp. 98–106
  13. ^ a b Grimes 2004.
  14. ^ a b c Shah-Kazemi 2006, p. 4.
  15. ^ a b c d Nakamura 1999, p. 176.
  16. ^ a b Shyama Kumar Chattopadhyaya (2000) The Philosophy of Sankar's Advaita Vedanta, Sarup & Sons, New Delhi ISBN 81-7625-222-0, 978-81-7625-222-5
  17. ^ a b c d Fyodor Shcherbatsky (1927). The Conception of Buddhist Nirvana. pp. 44–45. ISBN 9788120805293.
  18. ^ a b Dasgupta 1997, p. 494.
  19. ^ a b c Biderman 1978, pp. 405–413.
  20. ^ a b c N.V. Isaeva (1993), Shankara and Indian Philosophy, SUNY Press, pp.14
  21. ^ a b King 1995, p. 183.
  22. ^ a b c Isaeva 1993, pp. 60, 145–154.
  23. ^ Sharma 1962, p. vi.
  24. ^ a b EB 2000, p. 379.
  25. ^ a b Crystal 2004, p. 1353.
  26. ^ Roodurmun 2002, p. 29.
  27. ^ a b c King 2001, p. 128.
  28. ^ Tola 1989.
  29. ^ a b Paul Hacker, Philology and Confrontation: Paul Hacker on Traditional and Modern Vedanta (Editor: Wilhelm Halbfass), State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-2582-4, pp. 29–30
  30. ^ R. Blake Michael (1992), The Origins of Vīraśaiva Sects, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-81-208-0776-1, pp. 60–62 with notes 6, 7 and 8
  31. ^ a b Roodurmun 2002, p. 33–34.
  32. ^ Raju, P. T. (1 January 1985). Structural Depths of Indian Thought. SUNY Press. p. 383. ISBN 978-0-88706-139-4. Until then Buddhism and Jainism particularly the former were in the ascendant... Sankara defeated their leaders
  33. ^ Allen, Charles (2 November 2017). Coromandel: A Personal History of South India. Little, Brown Book Group. ISBN 978-1-4087-0540-7.
  34. ^ a b c d e Isaeva 1993, pp. 69–82.
  35. ^ a b K.A. Nilakantha Sastry, A History of South India, 4th ed., Oxford University Press, Madras, 1976.
  36. ^ Isaeva 1993, pp. 83–87.
  37. ^ a b Roshen Dalal (2010). Hinduism: An Alphabetical Guide. Penguin. p. 376. ISBN 978-0-14-341421-6.
  38. ^ T.S. Narayana Sastry (1916, republished 1971), The Age of Sankara
  39. ^ a b "Dating Adi Shankara". IndiaDivine.org. Retrieved 20 August 2020.
  40. ^ a b Adi Shankara, Encyclopedia Britannica (2015)
  41. ^ N.V. Isaeva (1993). Shankara and Indian Philosophy. State University of New York Press. pp. 84–87 with footnotes. ISBN 978-0-7914-1281-7.
  42. ^ The dating of 788–820 is accepted in Keay, p. 194.
  43. ^ Madhava-Vidyaranya. Sankara Digvijaya – The traditional life of Sri Sankaracharya, Sri Ramakrishna Math. ISBN 81-7823-342-8. Source: [1] (accessed: 14 Sep 2016), p. 20
  44. ^ Tapasyananda, Swami (2002). Shankara-Dig-Vijaya. pp. xv–xxiv.
  45. ^ a b c d e f g h Mayeda 2006, pp. 3–5.
  46. ^ M Piantelly, Sankara e la Renascita del Brahmanesimo, Indian Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Apr. 1977), pp. 429–435
  47. ^ Kena Upanishad has two commentaries that are attributed to Shankara – Kenopnishad Vakyabhasya and Kenopnishad Padabhasya; scholars contest whether both are authentic, several suggesting that the Vakyabhasya is unlikely to be authentic; see Pande (2011, p. 107).
  48. ^ a b c Isaeva 1993, pp. 93–97.
  49. ^ a b c d e f g h Pande 2011, pp. 105–113.
  50. ^ a b Pande 2011, pp. 351–352.
  51. ^ Pande 2011, pp. 113–115.
  52. ^ Mishra, Godavarisha. "A Journey through Vedantic History – Advaita in the Pre-Sankara, Sankara and Post-Sankara Periods" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 June 2006. Retrieved 24 July 2006.
  53. ^ Vidyasankar, S. "Sankaracarya". Archived from the original on 16 June 2006. Retrieved 24 July 2006.
  54. ^ a b Paul Hacker, Sankaracarya and Sankarabhagavatpada: Preliminary Remarks Concerning the Authorship Problem', in Philology and Confrontation: Paul Hacker on Traditional and Modern Vedanta (Editor: Wilhelm Halbfass), State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-2582-4, pp. 41–56
  55. ^ Adi Shankaracharya, Vivekacūḍāmaṇi S Madhavananda (Translator), Advaita Ashrama (1921)
  56. ^ a b Grimes 2004, p. 23.
  57. ^ Grimes 2004, p. 13.
  58. ^ Johannes Buitenen (1978). The Mahābhārata (vol. 3). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-84665-1
  59. ^ Swami Vivekananda (2015). The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. Manonmani Publishers (Reprint). p. 1786.
  60. ^
    • Original Sanskrit: Nirvanashtakam Sringeri Vidya Bharati Foundation (2012);
    • English Translation 1: K Parappaḷḷi and CNN Nair (2002), Saankarasaagaram, Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan, ISBN 978-81-7276-268-1, pp. 58–59;
    • English Translation 2: Igor Kononenko (2010), Teachers of Wisdom, ISBN 978-1-4349-9898-9, p. 148;
    • English Translation 3: Nirvana Shatakam Isha Foundation (2011); Includes translation, transliteration and audio.
  61. ^ Nakamura 2004, p. 680.
  62. ^ a b Nakamura 1950, p. 678.
  63. ^ a b Mayeda 2006, p. 13.
  64. ^ Nakamura 1950, p. 679.
  65. ^ a b Mayeda 1992, p. XV.
  66. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. XVIII, note 3.
  67. ^ Lipner 2000, p. 56, incl. note 12.
  68. ^ Isaeva 1993, pp. 3, 29–30.
  69. ^ Sharma 2000, p. 64.
  70. ^ Scheepers 2000, p. 123.
  71. ^ a b Rambacharan 2006, p. 26.
  72. ^ a b c Comans 2000, p. 183.
  73. ^ Mayeda 2006, pp. 46.
  74. ^ Mayeda 2006, pp. 46–47.
  75. ^ Brahmasutra-bhasya 1.1.4, S Vireswarananda (Translator), p. 35
  76. ^ a b c d Mayeda 2006, pp. 47.
  77. ^ Comans 2000, p. 168.
  78. ^ Comans 2000, pp. 167–169.
  79. ^ Franklin Merrell-Wolff (1995), Transformations in Consciousness: The Metaphysics and Epistemology, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-2675-3, pp. 242–260
  80. ^ Will Durant (1976), Our Oriental Heritage: The Story of Civilization, Simon & Schuster, ISBN 978-0-671-54800-1, Chapter XIX, Section VI
  81. ^ Stephen Phillips (2000) in Roy W. Perrett (Editor), Epistemology: Indian Philosophy, Volume 1, Routledge, ISBN 978-0-8153-3609-9, pp. 224–228 with notes 8, 13 and 63
  82. ^ Mahendranath Sircar (1933), Reality in Indian Thought, The Philosophical Review, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 249–271
  83. ^ a b c Arvind Sharma (2008), The Philosophy of Religion and Advaita Vedanta, Penn State Press, ISBN 978-0-271-02832-3, pp. 70–71
  84. ^ Aptavacana Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Cologne University, Germany
  85. ^ M. Hiriyanna (2000), The Essentials of Indian Philosophy, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-81-208-1330-4, pp. 42–44
  86. ^ Isaeva 1993, pp. 219–223 with footnote 34.
  87. ^ Isaeva 1993, pp. 210–221.
  88. ^ Anantanand Rambachan (1991), Accomplishing the Accomplished: The Vedas as a Source of Valid Knowledge in Sankara, University of Hawaii Press, ISBN 978-0-8248-1358-1, Chapters 2–4
  89. ^ Anantanand Rambachan, The limits of scripture: Vivekananda's reinterpretation of the Vedas. University of Hawaii Press, 1994, pp. 124–125: [2].
  90. ^ Isaeva 1993, pp. 57–58. Quote: "Shankara directly identifies this awakened atman with Brahman and the higher knowledge. And Brahman, reminds the Advaitist, is known only from the Upanishadic sayings".
  91. ^ a b c Michael Comans (1993), The question of the importance of Samādhi in modern and classical Advaita Vedānta, Philosophy East & West. Vol. 43, Issue 1, pp. 19–38
  92. ^ George Thibaut (Translator), Brahma Sutras: With Commentary of Shankara, Reprinted as ISBN 978-1-60506-634-9, pp. 31–33 verse 1.1.4
  93. ^ Mayeda 2006, pp. 46–53.
  94. ^ Mayeda & Tanizawa (1991), Studies on Indian Philosophy in Japan, 1963–1987, Philosophy East and West, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 529–535
  95. ^ Michael Comans (1996), Śankara and the Prasankhyanavada, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 49–71
  96. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 14.
  97. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 12, 172.
  98. ^ Deutsch 1973, p. 49.
  99. ^ Long, Jeffery D. (15 April 2020). Historical Dictionary of Hinduism. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-1-5381-2294-5.
  100. ^ Braue 1984, p. 81.
  101. ^ a b c Brereton 1986.
  102. ^ Olivelle 2008, p. 349 note 8.7-16.3.
  103. ^ a b c Black 2012, p. 36.
  104. ^ a b Lipner 2000, p. 55 note 9; 57.
  105. ^ a b c d Deutsch & Dalvi 2004, p. 8.
  106. ^ Olivelle 2008, p. 151-152; p.349 note 8.7-16.3.
  107. ^ Olivelle 1998, p. 152.
  108. ^ Bhatawadekar 2013, p. 203, note 14.
  109. ^ Brereton 1986, p. 107.
  110. ^ a b Braue 1984, p. 80.
  111. ^ a b Grimes 1996, p. 234.
  112. ^ Sivaraman 1973, p. 146.
  113. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 50, 172.
  114. ^ Lipnber 2000, p. 57.
  115. ^ a b Lipner 2000, p. 57.
  116. ^ a b Olivelle 2008, p. 151-152.
  117. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 172, Up.18.3, 18.6, 18.7.
  118. ^ a b Shankara, Chandogya Upanishad Bhasya - Chapter 6 (Tat Tvam Asi)
  119. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 172, Up.18.6.
  120. ^ Lipner 2000, p. 60, 62.
  121. ^ Lipner 2000, p. 60.
  122. ^ Mayeda 1922, p. 218 (up.II.1.24).
  123. ^ Max Muller, Chandogya Upanishad 6.1-6.16, The Upanishads, Part I, Oxford University Press, pages 92-109 with footnotes
  124. ^ Dominic Goodall (1996), Hindu Scriptures, University of California Press, ISBN 978-0520207783, pages 136-137
  125. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 190-192.
  126. ^ a b Mayeda 1992, p. 91; 219 (Up.II.1.28).
  127. ^ Nakamura 1999, p. 675.
  128. ^ Nakamura 1999, p. 178.
  129. ^ Nakamura 1999, p. 679.
  130. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 182 (Up.I.18.103-104).
  131. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 173-174 (Up.I.18.9-19); p.196 note 13.
  132. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 251-253 (Up.II.3).
  133. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 253 (Up.II.3).
  134. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 196 note 13.
  135. ^ Rambacharan 1991, p. 155.
  136. ^ a b c King 2002, p. 128.
  137. ^ a b Roodurmun 2002, p. 33-34.
  138. ^ Rambacharan 1991, p. 155-156.
  139. ^ Rambacharan 1991, p. 156.
  140. ^ Roodurmum 2002, p. 40.
  141. ^ Cenkner 1995, p. 95.
  142. ^ Sanskrit:Upadesha sahasri
    English Translation: S Jagadananda (Translator, 1949), Upadeshasahasri, Vedanta Press, ISBN 978-81-7120-059-7, pp. 16–17; OCLC 218363449
  143. ^ Karl Potter (2008), Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies Vol. III, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-81-208-0310-7, pp. 219–221
  144. ^ Mayeda 1002, p. 91, 218.
  145. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 172-173 (Up.I.18.3-8).
  146. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 183 (Up.I.18.99-100).
  147. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 190 (Up.I.18.174).
  148. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 192 (Up.I.18.196-197); p.195 (Up.I.18.2019).
  149. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 195 (Up.I.18.2019).
  150. ^ Mayeda 1992, p. 85, 220 (Up.II.1.30).
  151. ^ a b Mayeda 2006, pp. 92–93.
  152. ^ Karl Potter (2008), Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies Vol. III, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-81-208-0310-7, pp. 218–219
  153. ^ a b David Loy (1982), Enlightenment in Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta: Are Nirvana and Moksha the Same?, International Philosophical Quarterly, 23(1), pp. 65–74
  154. ^ KN Jayatilleke (2010), Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, ISBN 978-81-208-0619-1, pp. 246–249, from note 385 onwards
  155. ^ Mudgal, S.G. (1975), Advaita of Shankara: A Reappraisal, New Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass, p. 4
  156. ^ Julius Lipner (1986), The Face of Truth: A Study of Meaning and Metaphysics in the Vedantic Theology of Rāmānuja, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0887060397, pp. 120–123
  157. ^ a b c Whaling 1979, pp. 1–42.
  158. ^ Thomas McFaul (2006), The Future of Peace and Justice in the Global Village: The Role of the World Religions in the Twenty-first Century, Praeger, ISBN 978-0-275-99313-9, p. 39
  159. ^ a b Michaels 2004, p. 41–43.
  160. ^ a b Koller 2012, p. 99–108.
  161. ^ a b Michaels 2004, p. 41.
  162. ^ White 2000, pp. 25–28.
  163. ^ a b c d e f g Michaels 2004, p. 42.
  164. ^ Doniger, Wendy. (March 2014). On Hinduism. Oxford. ISBN 9780199360079. OCLC 858660095.
  165. ^ TMP Mahadevan (1968), Shankaracharya, National Book Trust, pp. 283–285, OCLC 254278306
  166. ^ Frank Whaling (1979), Śankara and Buddhism, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 1–42
  167. ^ Karl Potter (1998), Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies: Advaita Vedānta up to Śaṃkara and his pupils, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-81-208-0310-7, p. 1–21, 103–119
  168. ^ Per Durst-Andersen and Elsebeth F. Lange (2010), Mentality and Thought: North, South, East and West, CBS Press, ISBN 978-87-630-0231-8, p. 68
  169. ^ Frank Whaling (1979), Sankara and Buddhism, Journal of Indian Philosophy Vol. 7, No. 1 (MARCH 1979), pp. 1-42: "Hindus of the Advaita persuasion (and others too) have seen in Sankara the one who restored the Hindu dharma against the attacks of the Buddhists (and Jains) and in the process helped to drive Buddhism out of India."
  170. ^ Ron Geaves (March 2002). From Totapuri to Maharaji: Reflections on a Lineage (Parampara). 27th Spalding Symposium on Indian Religions, Oxford.
  171. ^ Klaus Klostermaier (2007), A Survey of Hinduism, Third Edition, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-7082-4, p. 40
  172. ^ Kruijf & Sahoo 2014, p. 105.
  173. ^ Koller 2012, p. 99.
  174. ^ Benedict Ashley, O.P. (2006). The Way toward Wisdom. p. 395. ISBN 978-0-268-02028-6. OCLC 609421317.
  175. ^ Nakamura 2004, p. 690.
  176. ^ a b c Nakamura 2004, p. 693.
  177. ^ Nakamura 2004, p. 692.
  178. ^ Nakamura 2004, p. 691.
  179. ^ Feuerstein 1978.
  180. ^ Roodurmum 2002, p. 29.
  181. ^ Roodurmum 2002, p. 31.
  182. ^ Allen Wright Thrasher (1993). The Advaita Vedānta of Brahma-siddhi. Motilal Banarsidass. pp. vii–x. ISBN 978-81-208-0982-6.
  183. ^ Roodurmun 2002, p. 32.
  184. ^ Roodurmun 2002, p. 34.
  185. ^ Roodurmun 2002, p. 35.
  186. ^ King 1999, p. 56.
  187. ^ Roodurmum 2002, p. 37.
  188. ^ Karl Potter (2008), Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies: Advaita Vedānta up to Śaṃkara and his pupils, Vol 3, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-81-208-0310-7, pp. 346–347, 420–423, Quote: "There is little firm historical information about Suresvara; tradition holds Suresvara is same as Mandana Misra".
  189. ^ Roodurmun 2002, p. 31.
  190. ^ Sharma 1997, p. 290–291.
  191. ^ a b c d Hacker 1995, p. 29–30.
  192. ^ a b c Blake Michael 1992, p. 60–62 with notes 6, 7 and 8.
  193. ^ Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Mādhava Āchārya". Encyclopædia Britannica.
  194. ^ a b c d Cynthia Talbot (2001), Precolonial India in Practice: Society, Region, and Identity in Medieval Andhra, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-513661-6, pp. 185–187, 199–201
  195. ^ a b c d e Hacker 1995, p. 29.
  196. ^ a b c Kulke & Rothermund 1998, p. 177.
  197. ^ King 2001, p. 129.
  198. ^ King 2001, p. 129-130.
  199. ^ Vidyasankar, S. "The Sankaravijaya literature". Retrieved 23 August 2006.
  200. ^ Tapasyananda, Swami (2002). Sankara-Dig-Vijaya. viii.
  201. ^ a b Pande 2011, p. 35.
  202. ^ Students' Britannica India. Popular Prakashan. 2000. pp. 379–. ISBN 978-0-85229-760-5.
  203. ^ Narasingha Prosad Sil (1997). Swami Vivekananda: A Reassessment. Susquehanna University Press. p. 192. ISBN 978-0-945636-97-7.
  204. ^ this may be the present day Kalady in central Kerala.The house he was born is still maintained as Melpazhur Mana
  205. ^ Joël André-Michel Dubois (2014). The Hidden Lives of Brahman: Sankara's Vedanta Through His Upanisad Commentaries, in Light of Contemporary Practice. SUNY Press.
  206. ^ Roshen Dalal (2010). The Religions of India: A Concise Guide to Nine Major Faiths. Penguin Books India.
  207. ^ Adago, John (2018). East Meets West. UK: Program Publishing; 2 edition. ISBN 978-0692124215.
  208. ^ Menon, Y. Keshava (1976). The Mind of Adi Shankara. Jaico. p. 109. ISBN 978-8172242145.
  209. ^ a b c Isaeva 1993, pp. 74–75.
  210. ^ a b c d e Pande 2011, pp. 31–32, also 6–7, 67–68.
  211. ^ Isaeva 1993, pp. 76–77.
  212. ^ a b c Pande 2011, pp. 5–36.
  213. ^ Hovey, Sally Wriggins. Xuanzang: A Buddhist Pilgrim on the Silk Road. Westview Press, 1998.
  214. ^ Pandey, Vraj Kumar (2007). Encyclopaedia of Indian Philosophy. Anmol Publications. ISBN 978-81-261-3112-9.
  215. ^ a b c Isaeva 1993, pp. 82–91.
  216. ^ Isaeva 1993, pp. 71–82, 93–94.
  217. ^ Karigoudar Ishwaran, Ascetic Culture
  218. ^ Wendy Sinclair-Brull, Female Ascetics
  219. ^ Pandey 2000, p. 4–5.
  220. ^ Pandey 2000, p. 5.
  221. ^ Doniger 1999, p. 1017.
  222. ^ a b Popular Prakashan 2000, p. 52.
  223. ^ Rosen 2006, p. 166.
  224. ^ Hiltebeitel 2002, p. 29.
  225. ^ a b c Bühnemann, Gudrun (2003). Mandalas and Yantras in the Hindu Traditions. BRILL Academic. p. 60. ISBN 978-9004129023 – via Google Books.
  226. ^ a b Harle, James C. (1994). The Art and Architecture of the Indian Subcontinent. Yale University Press. pp. 140–142, 191, 201–203. ISBN 978-0-300-06217-5 – via archive.org.
  227. ^ Flood, Gavin D. (1996). An Introduction to Hinduism. Cambridge University Press. p. 17. ISBN 978-0-521-43878-0 – via archive.org.
  228. ^ Eck, Diana L. (1998). Darśan: Seeing the divine image in India. Columbia University Press. p. 49. ISBN 978-0-231-11265-9 – via Google Books.
  229. ^ Various Papers: Śaṅkarācārya, Conference on Sankara and Shanmata (1969), Madras, OCLC 644426018, Reprinted by HathiTrust Digital Library
  230. ^ Cite error: The named reference lexicon was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  231. ^ a b Asher, Frederick (1981). Joanna Gottfried Williams (ed.). Kalādarśana: American studies in the art of India. Brill Academic. pp. 1–4. ISBN 90-04-06498-2 – via Google Books.
  232. ^ a b c Ashish Rajadhyaksha; Paul Willemen (10 July 2014). Encyclopedia of Indian Cinema. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-135-94325-7.
  233. ^ Adi Shankaracharya at IMDb
  234. ^ "31st National Film Awards". India International Film Festival, iffi.nic.in. Archived from the original on 12 November 2013.
  235. ^ "31st National Film Awards (PDF)" (PDF). Directorate of Film Festivals, dff.nic.in.

Sources

Printed sources
Web citations

Further reading

External links

Religious titles
Preceded by Jagadguru of Sringeri Sharada Peetham
?–820 (videha-mukti)
Succeeded by
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article: Adi Shankara. Articles is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license; additional terms may apply.