Re: What is Neo Hinduism?
Omkara is correct.
But we know for a fact that there was no....Vishishtadvaita before Ramanuja
But we know for a fact that nAthamuni and yAmunAchAryA were indeed Vishishtadvaitins before rAmAnuja. Kapish?
nAthamuni's works are lost, but his yoga rahasya and nyAya tattva granthas, which expound the tattva traya and yathArtha khyAti vAda, two fundamental aspects of Vishishtadvaita, are quoted by vedAnta desika. YamunAchAryA's works are available even now. Sriman nAthamuni was present roughly during the time of Shankara and definitely during the time of his immediate sishyas.
Furthermore, rAmAnuja himself declares his sri bhAshya to be a vivarana of the bodhAyana vritti, which is a terse bhAshya on the brahma sutrA explaining vishishtadvaita.
And like it or not, the azhwars were indeed Vishishtadvaitins.
Lastly, the sangam works in tamil literature describe yatis with tridanda who worship mAl (name of Vishnu in tamil) and consider the worlds as his body. These works date prior to the time of Shankara. If this is not Vishishtadvaita, I do not know what is.
For a detailed proof, refer the tamil works of sri puttur swami known as 'sanga kaalam araaichi' where he provides evidence of Vishishtadvaita/Sri Vaishnavam in Tamil Nadu during the early ADs itself.
Originally Posted by
shiv.somashekhar
3. And if their schools already existed, why are they called founders?
The traditional vedAntins do not call themselves founders and neither do their followers.
If western scholars and those outside the tradition call them founders, that is not their fault. And we do not ask you to accept our views either.
If they existed earlier, then please explain why Shankara did not mention Vishishtadvaita or why Ramanuja did not mention Tattvavada.
However, Adi Shankara does mention the pAncarAtrikAs and agrees with some aspects of their philosophy. Both Dvaitins and Vishishtadvaitins are pAncharAtrikAs, and it is reasonable to assume that the pAncharAtrikAs held views of both schools. And during this time, the lack of prasthna traya bhAshya limited Shankara from declaring their philosophy clearly.
The reason why Vishishtadvaita was not directly refuted by Shankara is mentioned by YamunAchArya himself in his works, who sorrowed over the fact that Vishishtadvaita/Sri Vaishnavam did not yet have a clear cut work explaining all its distinctive aspects and hence, was not considered as a major school. Even bodhAyana vritti had become almost unknown and was languishing in a kashmir library. This void was filled by the Sri BhAshya of achArya rAmAnuja.
It should be noted that not every 'interpretation' needs to be picked up and refuted. Only those interpretations which are acknowledged by rivals as a formidable one will be given that honor. It is for this reason that even mAdhvas claim that their tradition was accepted among the sarvadarshana samgraha only after vedAnta desika judged that debate between Akshobhya Muni and VidyAranyA, for which the result is still disputed. Vishishtadvaita lacked a coherent presentation of its views with a prasthna traya bhAshya and hence was not refuted by Shankara. Same goes for Advaita itself, which during the time of Gaudapada lacked a coherent framework and was not referred to by any mimAmsaka for refutation. It was given its status by Shankara only.
A more newer example would be the Gaudiyas, who were not acknowledged as vedAntins until Baladeva VidyabhUshana's Govinda bhAshya on Brahma SutrAs. That itself does not disprove the existence of their philosophy before then.
Similarly, advaita and dvaita would have their own explanations. I suggest not to jump to conclusions before studying the schools properly.
Last edited by Sri Vaishnava; 24 May 2013 at 01:41 PM.
[CENTER][COLOR="Black"][COLOR="Red"][COLOR="DarkRed"]No holiness rules over my freedom
No commands from above I obey
I seek the ruin, I shake the worlds
Behold! I am blackest ov the black
Ov khaos I am, the disobediant one
Depraved son who hath dwelt in nothingness
Upon the ninth I fell, from grace up above
To taste this life ov sin, to give birth to the "I"[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]
[B]~ "Blackest Ov the Black" - Behemoth.[/B]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P-JdwtK1DY[/url] [/CENTER]
Bookmarks