Adhyāropāpavāda : Revisiting the Interpretations of Svāmi Saccidānandendra Sarasvatī and The Post-Śaṅkarādvaitins

Abstract: A fundamental difference in Svāmi Saccidānandendra Sarasvatī’s (SSS) and the Post-Śaṅkarādvaitins’ (PSA) exegeses of Advaita Vedānta lies in the pedagogic method of adhyāropa-apavāda (deliberate attribution of characteristics to the attribute-less brahman and its corresponding/complementary contradiction). For SSS, adhyāropāpavāda is the sole method to negate avidyā (ignorance); other Upaniṣadic methods— lakṣaṇā and netivāda —are subsumed under it. For the PSA, on the other hand, adhyāropāpavāda plays a subsidiary, less consequential role in engendering gnosis; the primary role is that of mahāvākyas (the “great” Vedāntic statements). SSS denounces the PSA—with the sole exception of Sureśvarācārya —for their (purportedly incorrect) interpretation of the method; he contends that it has led to the lamentable reification of concepts in Advaita Vedānta and ultimately undermined its basic tenets. In this article, I articulate SSS’ position.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophy East and West
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1353/pew.2025.a949589
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Indian and Buddhist Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
42.40
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Adhyāropāpavāda : Revisiting the Interpretations of Svāmi Saccidānandendra Sarasvatī and The Post-Śaṅkarādvaitins

Manjushree Hegde
1 citations
Philosophy East and West
Indian and Buddhist Studies
42.40
article

Adhyāropāpavāda : Revisiting the Interpretations of Svāmi Saccidānandendra Sarasvatī and The Post-Śaṅkarādvaitins

Manjushree Hegde
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract: A fundamental difference in Svāmi Saccidānandendra Sarasvatī’s (SSS) and the Post-Śaṅkarādvaitins’ (PSA) exegeses of Advaita Vedānta lies in the pedagogic method of adhyāropa-apavāda (deliberate attribution of characteristics to the attribute-less brahman and its corresponding/complementary contradiction). For SSS, adhyāropāpavāda is the sole method to negate avidyā (ignorance); other Upaniṣadic methods— lakṣaṇā and netivāda —are subsumed under it. For the PSA, on the other hand, adhyāropāpavāda plays a subsidiary, less consequential role in engendering gnosis; the primary role is that of mahāvākyas (the “great” Vedāntic statements). SSS denounces the PSA—with the sole exception of Sureśvarācārya —for their (purportedly incorrect) interpretation of the method; he contends that it has led to the lamentable reification of concepts in Advaita Vedānta and ultimately undermined its basic tenets. In this article, I articulate SSS’ position.

Philosophy East and WestVol. 75(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Indian and Buddhist Studies
42.40
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.