[INDOLOGY] Mayavada (was Lines to an Advaitin)

Eltschinger, Vincent Vincent.Eltschinger at oeaw.ac.at
Thu Apr 9 00:32:27 UTC 2020

māyāvāda indeed does not to belong to the many vādas alluded to by Śaṅkara himself, and especially to those by which he refers to his own teaching (veda-, vedānta-, brahma-, ātma-vāda). As pointed out by Paul Hacker, Śaṅkara has no specific theory of māyā (at least in the Brahmasūtrabhāṣya), but mostly uses the term in similes (much like the Buddhists).
See Hacker’s short but illuminating remarks in his groundbreaking “Eigentümlichkeiten der Lehre und Terminologie Śaṅkaras: Avidyā, Nāmarūpa, Māyā, Īśvara” (Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 100, 1950, 246-286), pp. 268 ff.
With kind regards,

Vincent Eltschinger, korrespondierendes Mitglied der OeAW
Directeur d'études
École Pratique des Hautes Études, Section des sciences religieuses
Patios Saint-Jacques, 4-14 rue Ferrus - 75014 Paris
vincent.eltschinger at ephe.sorbonne.fr
0033 1 56 61 17 34 / 0033 7 85 86 84 05
Von: INDOLOGY <indology-bounces at list.indology.info> im Auftrag von Uskokov, Aleksandar via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 9. April 2020 02:00:48
An: Dean Michael Anderson; Indology List; Harsha Dehejia; Madhav Deshpande
Betreff: Re: [INDOLOGY] Mayavada (was Lines to an Advaitin)

Dear Dean,

The term was used first, for all we know, by Bhaskara, in a pejorative sense. Hajime Nakamura’s first volume of his History of Early Vedanta Philosophy is a good source on this.

Best wishes,

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
From: INDOLOGY <indology-bounces at list.indology.info> on behalf of Dean Michael Anderson via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info>
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 7:38:14 PM
To: Indology List <indology at list.indology.info>; Harsha Dehejia <harshadehejia at hotmail.com>; Madhav Deshpande <mmdesh at umich.edu>
Subject: [INDOLOGY] Mayavada (was Lines to an Advaitin)

I notice that this post uses the term 'mayavada' in referring to Advaitins. This is appropriate in this context I suppose because it is offering an alternative perspective to Advaita.

But some of the Advaitins I have spoken to say that that is a term coined by their opponents and that it is inaccurate, even if it has been adopted by some ill-informed Advaitins to refer to themselves and become part of the popular speech. These Advaitins say that the emphasis should be on 'avidya' or 'mithya' rather than 'maya'.

I wonder if anyone has any comments about this or could point me to some publications that discuss it.

Note: I am interested in the scholarly discussion of these terms and the associated concepts, not in a discussion about which is the supreme realization. :-)



Harsha Dehejia via INDOLOGY <indology at list.indology.info> wrote:

Friends:Inspired by Madhav Deshpande and with a long history of my polite confrontations with Advaitins I propose to write 100 lines.I am a staunch Krishna rasika. Writing in English deprives my lines of the majesty of Sanskrit. However what English lacks in the melody and rhythms of Sanskrit it will hopefully make up in its rasa.Wait O! Advaitin, before I accept your mayavadaLet me tarry a bit and enjoy the lotus face of Krishna.Kind regards,HarshaProf. Harsha V. Dehejia

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20200409/f8b12403/attachment.htm>

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list