11 CE Tamil Translation of Soundarya Lahari
An article on the above topic is available here:
Om Tat Sat
Posted by: adbhutam | November 18, 2016
11CE TAMIL TRANSLATION OF SOUNDARYA LAHARI
Posted in Advaita | Tags: adi-shankara, kaviraja panditar, Soundaryalahari
Responses
Leave a Reply
Categories
- Advaita
- Advaita & Science
- advaita and dvaita vedanta
- Advaita and Vishishtadvaita
- Ashtottaram
- संस्कृतलेखनम्
- Bheda-Abheda
- brahmavAda
- Buddhism
- kannada
- mAyAvAda
- mimamsa
- nyaya
- nyAya-shAstra
- Perfection in life
- pūrva mīmāmsā
- ramayanam
- Relative and Absolute
- sadhana
- sanatana dharma
- sanskrit
- sanskrit-blog
- shaivam
- Shiva-Vishnu-abheda
- shāktam
- Sri Appayya Dikshita
- Sri Narasimha
- Sri Vidyaranya
- Sri Vijayendra Tirtha
- srImadbhAgavatam
- stotrasahitya
- Tamil
- Telugu
- Uncategorized
- vardhanti
- Vedanta
- vyakarana
- Wellness
Adbhutam's Blog 
This piece of information is a death knell to the theories that Soundarya Lahiri is a later day ‘interpolation’ of 15th century AD.
Kind Regards
Arun
By: Arun Subramaniyan on November 18, 2016
at 12:53 pm
Yes, Arun, you are right. Actually there are other works that are attributed to Shankaracharya which have been confirmed to be his own in much later times, for example, in the Yatidharma sangraha of Viśveśvara Saraswati, the works ‘Vākyavṛtti’ and ‘Brahmānuchintanam’ are paraphrased. Before him, Swami Vidyaranya has paraphrased the former work in the Panchadashi, by even naming it. Madhusudana Saraswati has written a whole commentary ‘Siddhānta bindu’ on Shankara’s ‘Daśaśloki’. The commentary has been extensively commented by more than two Advaitins. Amalananda, for example, has authenticated the Prapanchasāra as that of Shankara.
regards
By: adbhutam on November 18, 2016
at 5:18 pm
Very nice sir. Do an article on shivananda Lahari and dakshinamurti stotram
By: Kaushik on July 13, 2020
at 12:55 pm
Thanks for your response. You get a lot of good articles on the two works you mention.
By: adbhutam on July 14, 2020
at 5:44 am
Some argue that Soundarya lahari cannot be Shankara’s work because it seems to endorse Parinamavada of Tantra contrary to his core philosophy of Kevaladvaita which is based on Vivartavada.
What are your thoughts on this?
By: Deepak on December 29, 2021
at 3:45 pm
ओन्नमश्शिवाय। 🙏🏼 Ārya।
Even I’d like to know the blogger’s thoughts on this. Also, I’d like to opine.
Ārya, what I feel is that, the साङ्ख्यम् (sāṅkhyam) is परिणामवादः। कस्य परिणामवादः इत्युक्ते प्रकृतेः। प्रकृतेः परिणामवादः एव साङ्ख्यम्। And in vedāntaḥ, this entire “pariṇāmaḥ” itself is a विवर्तः।
व्यावहारिकसत्तादृष्ट्या (i.e., from the perspective of this vyāvahārika प्रपञ्चः) आचार्यः does accept pariṇāmaḥ isn’t it. So what happens if आचार्यः has discussed तन्त्रः।
We also see an “AUTHENTIC WORK” of आदिशङ्कराचार्यः which is प्रपञ्चसारतन्त्रः। It’s a text on tantraḥ isn’t it.
By: विवेकः (Vivēkaḥ) on December 29, 2021
at 7:08 pm
Yes, parinama prakriya is admitted in Advaita in Vyavaharika. In the Brahmasutra bhashya, Shankara says Brahmasutra bhashya 2.1.14. ……… अभ्युपगम्य चेमं व्यावहारिकं भोक्तृभोग्यलक्षणं विभागम् ‘ स्याल्लोकवत्’ इति परिहारोऽभिहितः ; न त्वयं विभागः परमार्थतोऽस्ति, यस्मात्तयोः कार्यकारणयोरनन्यत्वमवगम्यते……… In Paramarthika, however, it is vivartavada.
By: adbhutam on December 31, 2021
at 7:56 am