Talk:Adi Shankara

Adi Shankaracharya cast

Jagad Guru Adi Shankaracharya is a Mushari Brahmin of Vishwa Brahmin sect. It is mentioned in a book written in 1904 about the series of Vishwakarma that during the times when Jagad Guru Adi Shankaracharya lived, the titles of Brahmashree and Jagad Guru were entitled to the Vishwa Brahmin category which means that only technical wise Brahmins were chosen for such things. .Wikipedia checked the historical documents written since 2001 and made him a Namboothiri Brahmin. All such histories were written in India where he was intended to be a Namboothiri Brahmin and all of them belonged to the Brahmin community in India. But Alfred Edward Robert wrote this history in a country outside India in 1904. . I believe Wikipedia will correct this error. Adi Shankaracharya is a person who lived before Christ. None of the Namboothiri Brahmins of Kerala ever accept him as a Namboothiri Brahmin. Vipin Babu lumia (talk) 15:31, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Jagatguru aadi Shankaracharya surname

Jagad Guru Adi Shankaracharya's full name is Jagadguru Adi Shankaracharya During the times when Jagadguru Adi Shankaracharya lived, only Vishwa Brahmins were entitled to use the title of Jagad Guru or Brahmashree in Maharajya India. But modern historians have corrected it and made him a Nambutiri Brahmin, that's why Wikipedia doesn't add Jagadguru in front of his name? In India, the Vishwa Brahmin community addresses him as Jagad Guru Athyana Shankaracharya. Vipin Babu lumia (talk) 14:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

See WP:HONORIFICS, and WP:RS, and please stop spamming this talkpage with trivia. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 16:05, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I read your reply. The history written in the royal period which you say is obsolete is the true history. But all the histories written in the modern period are made by distorting the history written in the royal period. Does Wikipedia say that all the writings in the royal periods are wrong? 2409:4073:114:CAD4:EE0B:E647:C8D0:DCA2 (talk) 09:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

The articles written about the Ashari community in the Wikipedia pages are all written in the Emperor period, why they were accepted by Wikipedia and rejected by me as writings from the Emperor period. 2409:4073:114:CAD4:EE0B:E647:C8D0:DCA2 (talk) 09:12, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 March 2025

Under the section "Early life" the birth place is cited as Kaladi, which is not correct. Shankara was born at Veliyanad, in Ernakulam district. He has born in his mother's ancestral home called "Melpazhur Mana". It is also said that he had his vidyarambha(initiation to formal education) and upanayana(thread ceremenony)

Change required in birth place from Kaladi to Veliyanad. Ponoth (talk) 09:47, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. PianoDan (talk) 22:59, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 March 2025

आचार्यः शंकरो नाम त्वष्टा पुत्रो न संशयः । विप्र कुले गुरु दीक्षा विश्वकर्मन्तु ब्राह्मण ॥

(शंकरा विजया)

अर्थात - " मेरा नाम शंकर आचार्य है और मै एक त्वस्टा (विश्वकर्मा) का पुत्र हू, मै विप्र अर्थात ब्राह्मण कुल को पुरोहित के रुप मे सभी संस्कारो के साथ गुरु की दिक्षा देता हूँ और मै विश्वकर्मा कुल में जन्मा एक ब्राह्मण हूँ। " जिन्हें अब के भारत में विश्वकर्मा वैदिक ब्राह्मण / विश्व-ब्राह्मण / विश्वकर्मा वैदिक शिल्पी ब्राह्मण / अथर्ववेदीय विश्वकर्मा ब्राह्मण कहा जाता है। प्रमाण क्या कहते है इसके लिये रॉयल एशियाटिक सोसाइटी (श्रीलंका) के सिलोन शाखा के सदस्य, सिलोन द्वीप के सुप्रीम कोर्ट के प्रोक्टर अल्फ्रेड एडवर्ड रॉबर्ट्स (Alfred Edward Roberts) की लिखी पुस्तक ' Vishwakarma and his descendant ' जो 1909 में छपी थी जिसके पृष्ठ 28 ( नया संस्करण) में आदि शंकराचार्य के विश्वकर्मा वैदिक ब्राह्मण त्वष्टा कुल के होने की पुष्टि की है।

Source Link: https://archive.org/details/vishvakarma-and-his-descendents/page/n1/mode/1up 106.222.159.124 (talk) 17:08, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: As this is the English language Wikipedia, edit requests need to be made in English. PianoDan (talk) 17:21, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2025

Under dasanami sampradaya, we found a great error -"Sankaracharya was a Vaishnavite." , This is not true. Vaishnavites are those who follow the Pancharatra Agama text and write commentary based on this. But this is clearly not seen in Sanaracharya's work. In his commentary, he even said Pancharatra as "Ved virudha" (against the Vedas)but accepted Narayan as supreme being (as he is both material and efficient cause according sankara vishnu sahasranama commentary, Bhagvad geeta commentary, some pancharatic text and Mahabharata ) He also didn't accept Pasupata Agama (he gave the reason that in this agama, Brahman is not both a material and efficient cause, but didn't even raise the question against the supremacy of deity in this agama, which is normal for Vaishanava ). He even mentions worship of jabalas in his text and says how it is superior to the worship of the image of Vishnu. Well, here he tries to show how worship of nirguna brahman is very much higher than any saguna worship. We find it very interesting that he even mentions the Upanishad, which mentions avimukta residing in Varanasi as the supreme being, but according to his commentary, this avimukta is vaishvanara. Sankara many times uses Ishvara or Parameshvara for lord shiva. We can see such a thing in his Kena Vakya Bhasya and Kena Pada Bhasya, which have Sri Anadagiri Tika too. Here, Sankara equates Yaksha with Shiva and Vidya Maya with Uma Haimavati. His devotion to Uma Haimavati is seen in even the Upanishad Bhasya. He equates nirguna brahman with Shiva in Mandukya Karika 1.29. Even his commentary on text like vishnu sahasranama shows equal devotion to shiva and vishnu (He even proves how every name of vishnu is of shiva too by quoting Mahabharata, which is not accepted by vaishnava ), While explaining the term Rudra in vishnu sahasranama he quotes linga purana (the shloka equates Rudra with shiva and calls shiva as supreme cause ), Now, some advaitins have shown conclusion that in some pancharatra text Brahman is both material and efficient cause, so partially sankaracharya accepted that. In the same way, the Mahabharata also supports the singularity of the self and refutes the plurality of the soul, which is favourable smriti for Sankara. Sankara students like Sri Sureshvaracharya wrote a commentary called Manasollasa for Sankara's Dakshinamurti stotram, another student, Padmapadacharya commentary on Panchakshari of Sankara, and most importantly, Prapanchasara tantra proves the authenticity of hymns written for all 5 deities or panchadeva. I wrote all this because many Western scholars' conclusions are against the traditional Sankarite. So these are very basic refutations for them. Rajhoou (talk) 11:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

What thd text says is "Shankara was a Vaishnavite who came to be presented as an incarnation of Shiva in the 14th century." The sources given are:

• Clark, Matthew (2006), The Daśanāmī-saṃnyāsīs. The Integration Of Ascetic Lineages Into An Order, BRILL, p.218, 220, 224
• "Sankara Acarya Biography – Monastic Tradition". Archived from the original on 8 May 2012.

That seems to solidly sourced. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 12:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)