Adi Sankara's enmity with reason and realism

by Guest Mon Jun 04, 2012 1:25 am

Adi Sankara's enmity with reason and realism

In my search for opinions and information that help in dispelling the many misapprehensions about the numerous rigidities and dogmas of ancient Hindu/Vedic religious philosophy, I came across many posts by a very active and prolific blogger who goes by the name or pseudonym of Rashmun.

He has carried out many vigorous arguments and debates on this blog pulpit of his choice on varied topics of ancient Indian philosophy and thought. He has critically analyzed many eminent philosophers and theologians of ancient India, like Nagarjuna of the Buddhist Mahayana/Sunyavada school of thought, Kumarilla Bhatta of Mimamsakas thought system, Madhava of Dvaita Vedanta system, the Charavakas and his favorite object of bitter denunciation, Adi Sankara of the Avdaita Vedanta school. He makes many interesting comparisons between the arguments of these various schools of theological thought.

Of the greatest interest to me is his very intense and thorough-going critique of the legacy of Adi Sankara and its deleterious impact on the progress of science and the spirit of inquiry in the post-Sankara medieval India. Even the few critics of Sankara have not paid much thought and analysis to the social and political consequences of the Sankara's style and method of Vedic revivalism.

Rashmun concludes and in my opinion very correctly too, that Adi Sankara ended up as being the veritable enemy of reason and inquiry.

Rashmun provides many citations and references to works and arguments of proponents opposed to Sankara's style of Vedantism.

In Rashmun's opinion, Sankara comes across as a very poor and mediocre philosopher in the sense that much of his central philosophy regarding the primacy and unitary nature of Brahman and the transience of the phenomenal world (Mayavada) is nothing more than a borrowing, with some terminological and superficial epistemic alteration, of the major tenets of Buddhist Madhyamika/Sunyavada theology.

But Sankara apparently makes up for this by his shrewd concealment of this plagiarism and aggressive debating and brow-beating skills (like condemning and dismissing his Madhyamika critics and making at times pompous declarations of the futility of debating with them), organizational skills like monastery and mutt-building and vigorous evangelizing of the Advaita dogmas.

Among other things Rashmun severely denounces Sankara on his
crypto-buddhist leanings
contempt of shudras (dalits), and
his running theme of discrediting valid sources (pramana) of knowledge in his desperation to establish the absolute truth of Brahman.

He also throws light on the many myths and anecdotal concoctions that the acolytes, supporters and advaita descendants of Sankara have made from time to time to build and sustain the awe-inspiring reputation of Sankara.

Since it is difficult to doubt that Adi Sankara's commentaries on the Brahma Sutras, Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita (Prasthana trayi ) and their continuing popularity long after his demise, were almost surely the inspiration for emulation by later day leading religious figures like Ramanuja, Madhava and Vallabha, the contribution of the Sankara legacy in sustaining the mood of religiosity and social obscurantism is hard to dismiss.

Rashmun's posts are an important and valuable addition to the very limited material available in refuting the many irrational themes of ancient and medieval Indian tradition and philosophy.

With that foreword, I will attempt in subsequent posts to reproduce some of his more important criticisms and analyses on these fascinating topics and try to highlight and embellish them with additional notes, citations, reference and comments.

Adi Sankara's enmity with reason and realism

************

one clarification: Adi Sankara was denounced very severely by Ramanuja and particularly by Madhva. Madhva in fact went on to claim that Adi Sankara was none other than the demon Manimat from the Mahabharata. This may sound very strange but it is true. Philosophical differences often resulted in destructive debating in the Indian philosophical tradition. Adi Sankar himself speculated (in his commentary on the Brahma sutra) that the founder of his rival Sankhya philosophy, Kapila, may have been a demon since there is a story in the Puranas about a demon called Kapila.

Vallabhacharya, the founder of shudh-advaita, claimed that Adi Sankara had polluted the Vedanta philosophy by defining the term maya in his own way, and then introducing it into Vedanta.

------
The denunciation of Adi Sankara by the other Vedanta acharyas (i.e. those who do not accept Adi Sankara's Advaita Vedanta) was based on both ontological and epistemological reasons. Among other things, all the other Vedanta acharyas attack Adi Sankara's definition of maya, and his definition of Brahman(God). The Vedanta acharyas also attack Adi Sankara's articulation of the concepts of 'three levels of reality' and 'theory of two truths'--which were first formulated by the Mahayana Budhists and then conveniently plagiarized (without any acknowledgement) by Sankara.

by Petrichor Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:17 am

Rashmun, what is your opinion on AAR and AAR- or British Indologists' theories in general?

by Kayalvizhi Mon Jun 04, 2012 12:04 pm

Rashmun

Read these articles and give your opinion on them. I am asking you because lot of people here seem to respect your views.

Give a detailed review

http://www.tamiltribune.com/07/0801.html
Hinduism and Tamil Nationalism

http://www.tamiltribune.com/07/11f1.html
I am a Devote Hindu and a Tamil Nationalist

http://www.tamiltribune.com/09/1001
Hinduism, Indian Unity and Tamil Nadu Independence

http://www.tamiltribune.com/12/0601.html
Indian Government to Demolish Ancient Hindu Saivaite Sivan Temple in Tamil Nadu

by Sponsored content

Adi Sankara's enmity with reason and realism

Adi Sankara's enmity with reason and realism

Re: Adi Sankara's enmity with reason and realism

Re: Adi Sankara's enmity with reason and realism

Re: Adi Sankara's enmity with reason and realism