On zankara's date - 2

[Swantham]

Ample evidence has already been presented in the discussions as regards the
date of Sankara. Study of Vedas and performance of sacrifices were  the
tradition of the Brahmins.For this Vedanta was not necessary.It was Sankara
who took to sannyasa against the tradition.He faced the repurcussions
too.The Brahmins boyctted his mother's funeral.It was after Sankara that
Vedanta came to be taught in the Sabhamadhams.
Maheswaran Nair

----------
> From: Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan <Palaniappa at AOL.COM>
> To: INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK
> Subject: On zankara's date - 2
> Date: Tuesday, December 28, 1999 5:46 AM
>
> In the period between the founding of the pArttivacEkarapuram college in
the
> second half of the 9th century and the grant to the eNNAyiram college in
the
> first half of 11th century, vedAnta has come to be included as a subject
of
> study in the Sanskrit Colleges in Tamilnadu/Kerala. I think the change
was
> probably due to zankara's influence.
>
> According to the advaita web site, "The Sringeri maTha's record states
that
> Sankara was born in the 14th year of the reign of vikramAditya. The
record
> does not give any clue about the identity of this king." On the basis of
the
> identification of this vikramAditya with one of the two Chalukya kings,
> vikramAditya I and vikramAditya II, some scholars seem to have argued for
a
> 700 AD date. (But we find later vikramAdityas  V and VI of the  Chalukyas
of
> Kalyani in the 11th century. This means there were probably two other
> vikramAdityas in the intervening centuries.) But if we suppose that  the
> Sringeri tradition is based on information related to kings in Kerala and
not
> Karnataka, we get some interesting results.
>
> The south Kerala/Tamilnadu Ay king karunantaTakkan2's successor was
called
> vikramAditya varaguNa.  It is not known when exactly he began his rule.
The
> name suggests that he must have been a contemporary of his Pandyan
overlord
> varaguNa II who ruled between 862-880 AD. This means that if we place
zankara
> in the second half of the 9th century, then we can explain the absence of
> vedAntic studies at the colleges at kAntalUrccAlai and
pArttivacekarapuram.
> It will also explain  the king's name vikramAditya. It will make zankara
a
> contemporary of mANikkavAcakar. Then mANikkavAcakar's reference to
"mAyAvAda,
> the hurricane that blew and roared" might refer to zankara's efforts.
> mANikkavAcakar might have outlived zankara.
>
> If there are any confirmed absolute dates for post-zankaran scholars that
> will conflict with this analysis, then this may have to be revised.
>
> By the way, why was the study of vedAnta less popular than the study of
> mImAMsA among the Tamilnadu/Kerala brahmins? Did buddhism dominate the
> tradition of philosophical speculation in the Tamil region?
>
> Regards
> S. Palaniappan