Various vAda-s in advaita (was Re: A few questions)

[Giri]

On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian wrote:

> views of Western scholars on gauDapAda and buddhism. The sub-commentary to
> vyAsa's commentary on the pata.njali sutra-s attributed to sha.nkara is
> considered a genuine work, even by the ever-doubting Western scholars. In this
> sha.nkara _openly_ disagrees with both pata.njali and vyAsa on some points.
[..]

        The key word here is "some points"

>
> Misunderstandings of the sort like "subtle modification" etc is what happens
> if one has the "either in or out mentality" (criticism of Western scholars by
 a
> Japanese Indologist, thanks to Giri for the quote).

        I was quoting from Prof. Nakamura of Japan. He has investigated
and written about the authencity of Shankara's vivarana of the yoga suutra
bhashya (ysb) and on the adhyatma patala of the apastamba sutra. As he
correctly notes, just because Shankara disagrees from the Samkhya
philosophy in his brahma suutra bhashya (bsb), it does not mean Shankara
disagrees with all of samkhya philosophy. Trevor Leggett points out some
research papers by western scholars who were shocked that Shankara
actually practiced some yoga, and was not just a philosopher. Any
advaitin from India will know that Shankara was not *just* a philosopher.

> The Japanese scholar also
> recognizes, no doubt because he is from the East, that what is said is with
 the
> disciple's capability in mind.

        And this is again obvious to anyone who has studied under a Guru
in India.

Namaste.