[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Works of Sri Vidyashankara

[Sunil Bhattacharjya]

Dear Vidyashankarji,

I have not trivialized anything nor exaggerated anything. Your allegations are baseless. You seem to be peeved as I brought to the surface many of the issues, people have dumped below the carpet.  As regards the bounced mails, I have seen my mails being bounced from the advaitagroup during the last few days and that is the fact and the bounced mails are still in my trash.  If you have no hand in that, may be any of your other moderators could have done that. Kindly check. 

As regards, Prof. Sukhtankar, he had done great damage to the Mahabharata. It could be possible that due to his interaction with occidental scholars, he started thinking that there are interpolations in the Mahabharata texts. The misguided work creates more danger to the society. That he has negated his own earlier views, was not promoted by me. The booklet containing the materials of his last four lectures have been published and you should have read that.

Nobody is against the Sringeri math and your expressions that the Kanchi Kamakoti math is telling lies, has no truth. Assigning 700 years without any guru in the  guru-paramapa list of Sringeri, at one time, itself shows that the math had lost a good portion of its past record for a number of centuries or someone had destroyed that portion of the past record  wilfully.

Regards,
Sunil KB  


--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 1/5/17, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <svidyasankar at gmail.com> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Works of Sri Vidyashankara
 To: "Sunil Bhattacharjya" <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com>
 Cc: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>, "Venkatraghavan S" <agnimile at gmail.com>
 Date: Thursday, January 5, 2017, 7:23 AM
 
 Dear
 Sunilji,
 The only person making any accusations here
 is you! None of your previous mails to the list on this
 topic have been blocked. As you are well aware, we do not
 actively block individual posts on our list. I was merely
 asking you not to let your imagination run wild.
 There is no reason for any of us to
 speculate about the health reasons for Prof Sukhtankar
 passing away on the morning of his fourth lecture. There is
 no reason to trivialize the painstaking effort of
 scholarship that went into the preparation of the critical
 edition of the Mahabharata and to call it a folly that ended
 in the cardiac arrest of its chief editor. That said, the
 core issues for us as vedAntins (at least for me,
 personally) are not about the critical edition but about the
 pATha of the gItA accepted traditionally. As much as you are
 convinced that there should be 45 more verses, the fact
 remains that the various vedAnta sampradAyas accept the 700
 Sloka gItA on which we have commentaries. In spite of
 variations in readings and interpretation among the various
 schools of vedAnta, the text of the gItA itself is quite
 standard across all the sampradAyas.
 I think we are at an impasse. It's
 curious how nowadays many of us think we know so much more
 than both the traditional repositories of our knowledge and
 also critical scholars who have spent years of careful study
 with original manuscripts. I also find it very curious how
 you seek to connect textual questions about the mahAbhArata,
 the gItA and the bhAshya on it in very unnecessarily
 complicated ways to abhinava Sankara, vidyASankara,
 Sringeri, Kudali and Kanchi Mathas. Sometimes, the simplest
 answer is the best fitting solution to such problems.
 Sometimes, the question itself is ill-posed and there is no
 need to look for complex solutions to fit a wholly imaginary
 problem! Most of us can see that the doubts about the
 authorship of the gItAbhAshya, raised by Dr. Karmarkar and
 revived by you, fall under the second category. They have
 been addressed in the subsequent scholarly literature
 and 
 I'll just conclude with reiterating
 that no one is trying to forcefully shut down your views.
 All I'm doing is to ask you to be objective, consider
 other evidence, reconsider your assumptions and to resist
 the tendency to run away to far conclusions on the basis of
 shaky evidence.
 Best regards,Vidyasankar
 
 
 On Jan 5, 2017 8:41 AM, "Sunil
 Bhattacharjya" <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com
 > wrote:
 
 >
 
 > Dear Dr. Vidyashankar,
 
 >
 
 > Your accusation is based on your imagination. Have you
 read the text of the four lectures Of Dr. Sukhtamkar and
 also the mention in that book that Dr. Sukhtankar passed
 away just before the fourth lectiure was to be delivered? 
 Have you alsp read what the editor had written?
 
 >
 
 > If you believe that the Critical edition is the correct
 edition all other editions are wrong, I have nothing to say.
 I am sure you will not allow my this mail to appear in the
 advaita forum, like you blocked my last few mails.
 
 >
 
 > Sincerely,
 
 > SKB
 
 > ------------------------------ --------------
 
 > On Wed, 1/4/17, Vidyasankar Sundaresan <svidyasankar at gmail.com>
 wrote:
 
 >
 
 >  Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] [advaitin] Works of Sri
 Vidyashankara
 
 >  To: "Sunil Bhattacharjya" <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com
 >
 
 >  Cc: "A discussion group for Advaita
 Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-
 vedanta.org>, "Venkatraghavan S" <agnimile at gmail.com>
 
 >  Date: Wednesday, January 4, 2017, 4:02 PM
 
 >
 
 >
 
 >
 
 >  On Jan 5, 2017 1:00 AM, "Sunil
 Bhattacharjya"
 
 >  <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.
 com>
 
 >  wrote:
 
 >
 
 >  >
 
 >
 
 >  > Dear friends,
 
 >
 
 >  >
 
 >
 
 >  > Mahabharata did say that  the Bhagavad gita had
 745
 
 >  verses and Lord Krishna was attributed 620 verses
 etc. I
 
 >  have  never changed my statement and only given the
 detail
 
 >  about the number of verses attributed to Lord Krishna
 in the
 
 >  second mail.
 
 >
 
 >  >
 
 >  The point is, this is not supported by all mss
 
 >  traditions. And as has been pointed out, we have the
 
 >  testimony of an older commentator that a verse giving
 the
 
 >  number of Slokas in the gItA is NOT present in a
 very
 
 >  important transmission of mahAbhArata manuscripts -
 gauDair
 
 >  na paThyante.