Who would win the debate between Sri Sankara and Sri Madhvacharya? - Hindus Only

[Gohelwan alien Vega 17b]

My idea on who would win this debate either Sri Sankara or Sri Madhvacharya follows. Ahh no. There would be no ultimate winner. Both these greatest of thinkers or realized individuals would both appear just as they have done and both their philosophies or conceptualizations would also appear just as they have done. These then would leave some aftermath or wake just as they have done. This would happen again in some thousands years later also because just as it's said in Bhagavad Gita to Arjuna. There was never a time when I did not exist nor you nor any of these Kings... Like that. Radha-Krishna's will or Radha-Krishna's intrinsic internal potentcies.

 

[Stormcry]

Hinduism is not just Vedas, but then Vedas have their own importance. When people reject Vedas or make it the sole source of Hinduism, I have problems with both the stances. Why can't people find a middle way?

RigVedic Gods and Goddess: Indra 289, Agni 218, Soma 123 (most of them in Book IX), Vishvadevas 70, the Asvins 56, Varuna 46, Maruts 38, Mitra 28, Ushas 21.

याज्ञवल्क्य says that there are infinite number of Gods. It's our humble request to you that you should not dictate what is vedic or what is not. We accept the authenticity of scriptures and the words of ancient vedic scholars. That's what matter to us.

 

[Stormcry]

Hello Onkarmantra, i'm glad i came across this post of yours as i was looking for an alternate explanation of this particular verse and you explained it quite beautifully. I hope you're still active in the forums since you posted this quite a few years back. If you are, then great.

Now, could you please be kind enough and tell me from which English translation of Gita you've quoted this verse? by which author or translator? ... Currently i own the Prabhupada's Gita and i believe it's not the best translated edition. So i was hoping to buy another Gita (from an advaita point of view) which would have word to word translations in both Sanskrit and English. So far i've only found Chidbha-nanda's Gita to have word to word translations. But the English used by him is a bit too hard for a guy like me who's new to these topics. So may i know which Gita you used to explain that verse? Thanks

DNYANESHWARI

This is the best commentary on Bhagavad Geeta I could find. It was written by 13th century Yogi and philospher Dnyaneshwar (16-year-old).

 

[Aupmanyav]

याज्ञवल्क्य says that there are infinite number of Gods. It's our humble request to you that you should not dictate what is vedic or what is not. We accept the authenticity of scriptures and the words of ancient vedic scholars. That's what matter to us.

That applies to you too. Don't dictate what I should believe based on saying of just one Rishi. Vayjanavlkya did not follow his own guru, Vaishampayana, who had different views. Similarly, Rishi Uddalak Aruni says in Chhandogya Upanishad - 'Tat twam asi'. I follow him and so many like him who said So Aham, Ayamatma Brahma, Shivoham, etc. Various views are ingrained in Hinduism, and that is its strength, that is why there are five varieties of 'Advaita'.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Hello Onkarmantra, i'm glad i came across this post of yours as i was looking for an alternate explanation of this particular verse and you explained it quite beautifully. I hope you're still active in the forums since you posted this quite a few years back. If you are, then great.

Now, could you please be kind enough and tell me from which English translation of Gita you've quoted this verse? by which author or translator? ... Currently i own the Prabhupada's Gita and i believe it's not the best translated edition. So i was hoping to buy another Gita (from an advaita point of view) which would have word to word translations in both Sanskrit and English. So far i've only found Chidbha-nanda's Gita to have word to word translations. But the English used by him is a bit too hard for a guy like me who's new to these topics. So may i know which Gita you used to explain that verse? Thanks

My humble homage to Saint Dyaneshwar, who it is sid made even a buffalo recite Gita. However, you might be interested in a modern critique of Gita by Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak, a very important leader of independence movement, a scholar, educationist, etc.; who has written "Gita Rahasya" (the Secret of Gita). You can either buy the book or download a copy for free in PDF form from https://archive.org/download/Srimad...d2/SrimadBhagavadGitaRahasya-BgTilak-Vol1.pdf and https://archive.org/download/Srimad...d2/SrimadBhagavadGitaRahasya-BgTilak-Vol2.pdf.

 

[Aupmanyav]

My idea on who would win this debate either Sri Sankara or Sri Madhvacharya follows. Ahh no. There would be no ultimate winner. Both these greatest of thinkers or realized individuals would both appear just as they have done and both their philosophies or conceptualizations would also appear just as they have done. These then would leave some aftermath or wake just as they have done.

You are correct, Gohelwan alien Vega, we do not think in terms of who wins or who looses. These are two views, some people will go by one, some will go with the other. Hinduism leaves it to individual choice depending upon the person's inclination. It does not force one philosophy for all.

 

[Red_Drag0n]

Thanks onkarmantra and aupmanyav for suggesting me the Gita translations of Dnyaneshwari and Mr.Tilak.
@Aupmanyav, since you spoke of 5 varieties of advaita in your above post , may i know what are those 5 varities? Are they sub sects of Advaita? Can you please name them and tell how each differs from the other in their beliefs. I'm new to advaita and it will help me greatly. Thanks.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Easy, for a first good read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedanta#Schools_propounding_Non-dualism, and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedanta#Schools_propounding_Bhedabheda.
The latter being bit different than the first.

 

[Red_Drag0n]

Here is the original translation:

"The great Lord is the witness, the consenter, sustainer and enjoyer. This Supreme person (Jiva) in the body is also styled as the Supreme Self." (Gita 13.23)


Bhagavan Vishnu, in previous verse, states purusha(Bramhan) who's resided in Prakruti acquires bondage due to attachment her.

Now in this verse, lord confirms that though brahman appears united with prakruti, it's actually beyond prakruti. It's the onlooker and lord of prakruti. He says though that purusha/brahman (Jiva who's been united with prakruti) lives in body, he is actually beyond that(prakruti) and it is also known by another name - Paramatma...

(Bhokta - experiencer of bondage), word indicates that jiva, who is bhokta of prakriti, is supreme self ( paramAtmA) as it's been alternatively called as paramatma.

Hello again Onkarmantra, a certain question popped up in my mind while going thru this above Gita verse, where the soul has been explained as the witness and also the experiencer of bondage.
You explained above, that even though Brahman resides in prakriti, it is not being controlled by Prakriti but infact it's the Lord of Prakriti.
Now my question is ... how exactly the same embodied soul (jivatman) remain the Lord of Prakriti as the witness ... and at same time be the bhokta (experiencer of bondage). I mean if it comes in contact with Prakriti (become ignorant and experience suffering) then how come it remains Lord of Prakriti or in other words, how exactly then it stays unaffected by Prakriti.

I mean, the same soul under maya, cannot be both non ignorant as Ishwara (lord of Prakriti) and at the same time ignorant or bhokta (as jivatman). This implies there are actually two souls as the dualists claim. This is my opinion. I might be wrong, so feel free to correct me and help me understand what the advaitins believe in. Thnx.

 

[iam1me]

Ah! Certainly it would since both philosophies are polar opposites.

Or is this too an illusion? Ommmm