[Advaita-l] 20, 21 and 22

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

>  
> Down the line from generations, some of the historical facts are either lost 
> or not recorded properly.  
>  
....
> //
> This is the neat theory of 20, 21 and 22.  Any comments?
>  
> //
>  
> These are just the gimmicks of so-called numerlogists !!! 
>  

Indeed. Between Sankara and Ramanuja, we have a commentary by Bhaskara,
written from a Bhedabheda viewpoint. Between Ramanuja and Madhva, or maybe
contemporaneously with Ramanuja, there is a commentary by Srikantha, from a
Saiva viewpoint. So, even if we assume that there were 19 earlier commentaries
and that of Sankara bhagavatpAda is the 20th, Ramanuja's commentary is by
no means the 21st and Madhva's is by no means the 22nd.
 
Thus, it is not even loss of improper record of history. It is a wilful neglect of well-
recorded history, just to indulge in supposedly numerological gimmicks!

Regards,
Vidyasankar