Madhva and textual sources (was Re: Advaita-Chandran)

[Ramadas]

-----Original Message-----
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <ramakris at EROLS.COM>
Date: Wednesday, 10 March 1999 10:30
Subject: Madhva and textual sources (was Re: Advaita-Chandran)


>Shrisha Rao <shrao at IA.NET> wrote:
[..]
>
>Why use phrases like "calling your bluff"? I do not know Ramadas from
>Adam and I have no need or desire to mislead him. The question of

[..]

I was told that Adam is a long distant relative of mine ;-)

[..]

>authorities" (preface to vishhNupurANa, page 30). Now Wilson may be
>wrong, but if my recollection is right I told Ramadas that some of my
>sources were secondary and unverified.  If Wilson is completely
>incorrect, I am willing to update my knowledge.


As far as some of your queries are concerned:
* Is not the Parama Samhitaa a part of the Pancaraatra? Also, I have read
that the Parama Samhitaa is/was published in the Gaekwad Oriental Series.

* According to Dr B.N.K. Sharma. ''C.R. Krishna Rao has done a useful
service in piecing together all the quotations from the Brahmatarka (a
non-extant source) running to nearly 700 verses occurring in the various
works of Madhva and arranging them under a few leading topics, and arguing a
case for accepting the genuineness of the work.'' So, it would seem that if
the Brahmatarka was not genuine, then why would Madhva go to the trouble of
writing a work of at least 700 verses? Also, Trivikrama cited a pasage from
the Brahmatarka in his Tattvapradiipa which is not quoted by Madhva in any
of his works. Also, from reading History of Dvaita School of Vedanta, I read
where Advaitaananda has quoted a verse from Brahmatarka in attempting to
refute Madhva.

* It is also hard to imagine Madhva going to all the trouble to write some
700+ verses to a work when he quotes from some 290 other works, as well as
including Rg Veda, Upanishads, Mbh, smR^itis and so on, to back up his
philosophy.

Kindest regards
Ramadas
dasa at ozemail.com.au