questions (fwd) Vidyasankar Sundaresan vidya at CCO.CALTECH.EDU Tue Sep 3 21:50:33 CDT 1996
Previous message: The need for action. (Was Re: Spiritual Erudition) Next message: EXPERIENCES ---------------------------------- > Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 15:46:55 +0200 (MET DST) > From: Gerald Penn <gpenn at sfs.nphil.uni-tuebingen.de> > To: msr at tamu.edu > Subject: questions > > First, I have heard that the current senior Shankaracarya of Jyoshimath > happens to be the Shankaracarya of the Dwarka Math. How did this happen? I Please see http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~vidya/advaita/ad-today.html. This site discusses the recent history of the maths established by Sankara. Here are some more details. Till 1984, the Sankaracharya of Dwaraka was Sri Abhinava Saccidananda Tirtha. He passed away leaving a will nominating some people in order of preference to succeed him at the seat. Sri Swaroopananda Saraswati, who was then the Sankaracharya of Jyotirmath was the third or fourth on this list. However, the people before him on the list politely declined in his favor. Sri Swaroopananda Saraswati then took over charge at Dwaraka. I know this first-hand, because one of those who declined was a close friend of my father's. If I remember right, Sri Swaroopananda was the only sannyasi on the list. Any of the others would have been required to become sannyasis before taking charge of the Dwaraka math. There are always reasons why one is not prepared/qualified to become a sannyasi at a particular juncture in one's life. At that time, some surprise was expressed by many people, that the same person was now in charge of two maths. But there is no rule against such a situation, either in the tradition or in modern Hindu law. The previous Sankaracharya of Dwaraka had nominated him in his will, and Sri Swaroopananda seems to have had little choice in the matter. Usually, one does what one's guru wishes, and Swaroopananda considers Sri Abhinava Saccidananda Tirtha as one of his gurus. The consecration ceremonies for Sri Swaroopananda at Dwaraka were performed by Sri Abhinava Vidyatirtha of Sringeri, and I don't think he saw anything wrong in the situation. As for the Jyotirmath, it had been vacant for a long time because of adverse circumstances. In 1940, some concerned people in Varanasi got together and formed a committee to revive the math. Sri Brahmananda Saraswati, who was well-known in the north, was requested to fill the post. His guru, Sri Krishnananda Saraswati, was a disciple of the then Sankaracharya of Sringeri, and he was also well-known as a highly accomplished guru in the north. Brahmananda Saraswati lived till 1953. After his demise, Sri Santananda Saraswati succeeded him. For some reason, I don't know what, the committee which nominated Sri Brahmananda was not happy with Sri Santananda. I guess the people on this committee still held some power over how these succession issues are decided. This led to another litigation, and Sri Abhinava Saccidananda Tirtha of Dwaraka was requested to help resolve the dispute. After a period of some confusion, Sri Swaroopananda was proposed as a compromise candidate. Sri Santananda has since stepped down from the Jyotirmath, but continues to be associated with one school of that math in Haridwar, and another in London, I believe. Dennis Waite, another list member, may want to clarify this. In any case, one recently published book of Santananda's describes him as the ex-Sankaracharya of Jyotirmath. However, Swaroopananda's claim to the Jyotirmath title is disputed by some other disciples of Sri Brahmananda, mainly one named Sri Vishnudevananda Saraswati. There are still cases in the Indian courts regarding the matter. Meanwhile, the other Sankaracharyas in India have recognized Sri Swaroopananda as the head of the Jyotirmath, most probably because he was nominated through the intercession of the Sankaracharya of Dwaraka. The situation in the Jyotirmath is further complicated by the fact that Mahesh Yogi of TM fame supports Vishnudevananda over Swaroopananda. Vishnudevananda also has connections with the VHP (Vishwa Hindu Parishad) whereas Swaroopananda seems to have been involved with the Congress since his student days, when India was still under British rule. The VHP calls Swaroopananda a "Sarkari Sadhu" (governmental monk) because he does not hesitate to differ publicly with the VHP stances on religious issues. In my opinion, this is a good thing, because I do not think the VHP leaders are qualified to dictate religious matters to the rest of the country. One is better off with honest dissent in public life, as compared to the coerced assent that the VHP seems to command. Of course, involvement in politics is nothing new to the Sankaracharyas. And it is not as if it is necessarily bad for them to be involved in politics. From the 14th century, there is the instance of Sri Vidyaranya of Sringeri who was closely connected with the founding of the Vijaynagar empire. In this century, Sri Bharati Krishna Tirtha of Puri was prosecuted by the British government for his involvement in the Khilafat movement after World War I. This was a famous case, judged by one Sir Courtney Terrell, but it made things rather uncomfortable for the British, because here was a bona-fide Hindu religious leader actually supporting a Muslim cause. In any case, Sri Swaroopananda faces quite a formidable challenge at Jyotirmath. He seems to have genuine problems with accepting Vishnudevananda. The ex-TM literature is very aware of Jyotirmath politics, and there are quite a few websites discussing Swaroopananda, Vishnudevananda and Mahesh Yogi. I can give the interested reader the URL's if necessary. A simple Alta-Vista search should pull up the relevant documnents. Anyway, if Swaroopananda nominates someone to take over charge at that math, he will only end up transferring the problem from himself to his successor. Of course, he will have to find a suitable successor in the first place. > was under the impression that in all of the Shankaracarya Mathas, there were > three heads, older, middle, and younger, so that if anything unfortunate should > happen to one of them, there were always two more to pick up and carry on. Actually, three heads at the same time is more the exception than the rule. Other than the Kanchi math's example recently, there have rarely been even two Sankaracharyas at the same institution simultaneously. For example, at Sringeri, from 1878 to 1912, there was only Sri Narasimha Bharati (his full name was Saccidananda Sivabhinava Narasimha Bharati), from 1912 to 1931, there was only Sri Candrasekhara Bharati, from 1954 to 1974, there was only Sri Abhinava Vidyatirtha, and since 1989, there has been only Sri Bharati Tirtha in charge. In the intermediate periods, between 1931 and 1954, and between 1974 and 1989, there were two heads at the Sringeri math. Usually, only the senior guru is the head of the math, both legally, and in public perception. The junior guru is the chosen successor, but he does not take charge till circumstances dictate so. This occurs either on the demise of the senior guru, or if the senior guru withdraws from administration activities. Sri Abhinava Vidyatirtha did not formally take over charge till 1954, although he had been practically in charge of for a long time. This was because his guru, Sri Chandrasekhara Bharati, did not care at all for such work, but asked him to do the administrative work on his behalf. It is only in south India that it has become a tradition for a successor to a math being chosen well in advance by the existing head. In the north,there have been repeated instances of successors being named in wills, which naturally enough, leads to disputes. Sri Brahmananda Saraswati of Jyotirmath (in 1953), Sri Bharati Krishna Tirtha of Puri (in 1960), and Sri Abhinava Saccidananda Tirtha of Dwaraka (in 1984), left wills nominating a list of successors, in order of preference. Finding and appointing a worthy successor takes time, and none of the Sankaracharyas seem very keen to appoint just anybody for the only purpose of continuing the line of succession. As an example, in 1912, when Sri Narasimha Bharati of Sringeri knew he was going to pass away soon, he sent for his chosen student who was then at the math's school in Bangalore. The administrator of the math, thinking that it might take some time for the student to come to Sringeri, requested Sri Narasimha Bharati to appoint somebody else from Sringeri itself. Sri Narasimha Bharati reportedly answered that he would rather see the Sringeri title vacant than appoint somebody else, just for the appearance of continuity. Of course, Sri Narasimha Bharati was right, for his chosen student was Sri Chandrasekhara Bharati. It is difficult to think of anybody more eminent than him among the Sankaracharyas of recent memory. > My second question concerns the math at Kanchipuram. The Shankaracarya from > this Math who recently passed away was very well respected by many people. But > how is it that Kanchipuram came to have a matha in the first place? I thought > Sri Shankara established only four, at the two sites mentioned above, Puri and > Sringeri. Is this a spin-off from one of those? In general, the tradition mentions only the four maths at Sringeri, Puri, Dwaraka and Jyotirmath as having been established by Sri Sankara. Over the centuries, maths have been established at many places all over India, either as independent institutions or as branches of the original four. Succession disputes like the current one in Jyotirmath also lead to the establishment of new mathas. If a sannyasi is worthy of respect, he generally receives it from everybody. Whether he is the head of a math or not is secondary. In my opinion, even the math and its history are secondary. What matters is the guru. Of course, for the sake of writing history, one must look at evidence for and against everything, but history does not dictate one's choice of a guru. If a math is fortunate enough, and if its gurus are vigilant enough, all the people who succeed to the title will be accomplished. Many of the most revered gurus of advaita, including Madhusudana Saraswati, Sankarananda, Nrsimhasrama, Sadasiva Brahmendra and most recently, Sri Ramana, have not been heads of maths. That said, it is not clear when the math at Kanchipuram was actually established. However, it is obvious that the math must be close to two centuries old now. This math functioned from Kumbhakonam in the last century, and moved to Kanchipuram after 1842 AD. There is evidence for the existence of the Kumbhakonam Math from 1821 AD onwards. According to many people, the Kumbhakonam math was originally a branch of the Sringeri math. However, this has been denied by the authorities of the Kumbhakonam/Kanchi math, according to whom theirs is the fifth math established by Sankara himself. This controversy regarding the history of this math has gone on for quite some time now, and quite a few books have been published examining both sides of the controversy. If anybody is interested, I could give some references from both sides, so that they can decide about the pros and cons of the issue for themselves. I hesitate to bring up these references on this mailing list without a specific need for them. In 1993, in connection with the Ramjanmabhoomi/Babri Masjid dispute, Sri Jayendra Saraswati of Kanchipuram participated in a joint meeting at Sringeri and co-signed the resolution calling for a peaceful solution to the dispute. The Sankaracharyas were quite frank in admitting that they did not agree on many historical issues, but did not think that these differences were relevant to the then existing tensions between Hindus and Muslims in India. If the heads of the maths can find ways to work with each other, there is little reason for their followers to fight. To a large extent, I think that such disputes arise because of a seemingly fundamental contradiction between being a sannyasi and being a mathadhipati. Not everybody seems to be able to handle the fact of being a sannyasi first, and a mathadhipati only secondarily. This is part of the reason why the Sankaracharyas of Sringeri have not been overly eager to nominate some successor. (I can presume to speak only about the Sringeri Sankaracharyas here; I have not talked to any of the others.) Historical circumstances have given this math a lot of wealth and influence. Hence, the Sankaracharyas want to be convinced that their chosen candidate can remember that to be a true sannyasi, he needs to remain detached from the name and fame of the math that he is associated with. Renouncing the entire world, only to grow attached to the wealth of one's own math, defeats the purpose of sannyasa. Thus, an ideal mathadhipati is the one who least desires the job, although he might be the best qualified for it. Such people are rare, and a guru is indeed fortunate if he can find one such person among his disciples. Indeed, a math is fortunate if its heads have consistently been such ideal gurus. Regards, S. Vidyasankar >From ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU Tue Sep 10 20:32:00 1996 Message-Id: <TUE.10.SEP.1996.203200.0400.ADVAITAL at TAMU.EDU> Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 20:32:00 -0400 Reply-To: "Advaita (non-duality) with reverence" <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU> To: "Advaita (non-duality) with reverence" <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU> From: Chelluri Nageswar Rao <Chelluri at AOL.COM> Subject: EXPERIENCES Comments: To: ADVAITA-L at tamu.edu NAMASTE: LET NOBLE THOUGHTS COME TO US FROM ALL SIDES-Rigveda My computer was down for awhile and ma back again online. Before bringing my querry to the group I asked couple of my friends members of the group whether it is appropriate to post spiritual experiences. One said No and the other said Yes. Well I am asking all of you to advise whether I should or not post. The experiences I had defy logical explanations as far as I know. May be you can shed some light. Regards Rao ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Previous message: The need for action. (Was Re: Spiritual Erudition) Next message: EXPERIENCES Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- More information about the Advaita-l mailing list