Madhava, Vidyaranya, Sringeri, and Kulke

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

>I believe there is a running cotroversy between the Sringeri and the
>Kanchi maths in that that the Sringeri math does not "rfcognise"the Kanchi
>math.If both the were indeed established by Adi Sankara there should not
>have been this attitude between these two maths.Probably both the maths
>came into existence laterand being aware of the same leasing to the
>one-up-man-ship.

There are other reasons for all this, which I won't get into here. My paper
on the Sankaravijaya texts discusses this controversy in painful detail. Do
wait till the IJHS (International Journal of Hindu Studies) resumes
publication. And I would not second-guess attitudes either. Fights between
brothers or cousins are often more ferocious than those between mere
neighbours or strangers. And just for argument's sake, how about giving some
credit to the possibility that maybe one was established by Sankara, and
another came later?

>How about examining the genealogical records maintained by
>these maths?The acharya who passed away in 1994 is claimed to be the 68th
>mathadhipati.It is also probable that if the sankaracharyas could trace
>their lineage to Adi sankara the maths they head also should have similar
>claim.

Does not follow. One can distinguish between the official list of heads of a
matha and the actual Guru-Sishya lineage of its current mathadhipatis. See
my article on the Jyotirmath succession on the Indology website. This
becomes a rather emotional issue for most people, but the genealogical
records of the Kanchi matha are refuted by independent evidence even for the
17th and 18th centuries, i.e. less than 400 years ago. And of course, its
claim that Sankara lived in the 5th century BC can be easily rejected. But
that opens up a whole new can of worms in Indian history.

Vidyasankar
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com