Avidya, the Bhävädvaita and the special value of meditation
(Upāsanā) in transmuting the Brahman-knowledge arising from
the maha-vakyas into Brahman-realisation. Professor Hiriyanna
referred also in this article to a tradition preserved at Sringeri,
and embodied in a poem called Guru-vamsa-kavya, according to
which Mandana should be differentiated from Sureśvara. The.
least that may be said about the valuable evidence adduced by
Professor Hiriyanna in this article is that it is sufficient to compel
a careful investigation of the Mandana-Sureśvara equation. A
careful study of Mandanamiśra's Brahmasiddhi in comparison with
his other known works, all of which are now available in print,
and with the known works of Sureśvara and Samkara and in the
light of the works of Vacaspatimiśra, Vimuktatman, Prakaśatman,
Anandabodha, Prakaṭarthakara, Citsukha, Amalananda, Anandagiri, Vidyaranya, Madhusudanasarasvati, Brahmanandasarasvati
and several others representing the Advaita system and a careful
consideration of the references to Mandana contained in certain
important works of the Mimamsa, Nyaya, Dvaita-vědanta and
other systems have made it possible to assemble here several data
of overwhelming cumulative weight, which would be quite sufficient to kill the common belief in the Mandana-Sureśvara equation,
and to exhibit Mandana and Sureśvara as two different individuals, maintaining strikingly divergent views within the purview
of Advaitism. These data are set forth below:
I. Mandana maintains the Sphōtavada and Sabdadvaita of Bhartrhari, in an elaborate manner, in his Sphota-siddhi ¹9 and easily reads it into the Advaita-siddhanta in his amplification of the word 'akşaram' in the opening verses of the Brahmasiddhi. Mandana's attitude towards Sabdadvaita is much more than favoable; it is respectful. But Samkara completely differs from Mandana in this respect, and criticises, and entirely discards the Sphota doctrine of Bhartrhari. Sureśvara, who closely follows Samkara, completely ignores the Sphöta-doctrine. While Mandana maintains, in his Brahmasiddhi", that the Upanisadic texts "Om iti Brahma, om it idamsarvam" should be understood as establishing the identity of Pranava with Brahman and as supporting the Sabdadvaita doctrine, Sureśvara, following Samkara, interprets the same text as teaching the meditation on Pranava as Brahman and as merely commending Pranava. Advaitins like Vimuktatman, who follow Sureśvara in many respects, assume
Sph, S-M.U.S.S. No. 6-1931-See verse 36 and the concluding portion of the commentary Gopalika on that verse. Br, Sid., Part I, p. 17, lines 8 to 20. Tai-Värt, pp. 31-32, verses 37 to 42.
