Real History of The Kanchi Math
Real History of The Kanchi Math
Real History of The Kanchi Math
> must not have been established by Adi Sankaracharya. Please check
the
> dates and the real history of the kanchi matt. Is there any one in
the
> network that has better information about the Kanchi peetam?
Sadananda
Both this post and a previous one by Bon Giovanni have raised
questions of
historicity of Adi Sankaracharya and the Kanchi math. This is not a
new
question. It is generally accepted as tradition that Adi
Sankaracharya,
the famous Advaita philosopher, founded four maths (monasteries) at
Sringeri, Puri, Dwaraka and Badrinath; that he ascended the famous
sarvagna-pitha in Kashmir, and finally passed away near Kedarnath.
None of
the four recognized mathas claims jurisdiction over the other three.
However,
the Kanchi math claims that Sankaracharya established a fifth math in
Kanchi, with jurisdiction over the recognized four mathas; that
Sankaracharya ascended a sarvagna-pitha not in Kashmir, but at Kanchi,
and
that he passed away not in Kedarnath, but at Kanchi. These and other
such
claims have been widely publicized by the followers of the Kanchi math
with the direct participation of and encouragement from the heads of
the
Kanchi math, including the recently departed centenarian Sri
Chandrasekharendra Saraswati (C.S., for short) and his successor Sri
Jayendra Saraswati (J.S.).
In Tamil, we have a saying "Do not question the origins of rivers
(nadimoolam) and rishis (rishimoolam)." Still, in terms of answering
some
basic questions regarding dates in Indian history, one has to perforce
look at these. C.S. had a commanding personality. He impressed people
of
such wide interests as Mahatma Gandhi, Arthur Koestler, Paul Brunton,
Milton Singer etc. Some of his more ardent followers have gone to the
extent of deifying him as "Nadamadum deivam" - the deity who walks.
People
compose and sing songs in his praise, and dancers stage dance-dramas
on his
life - all of which are widely advertised and reviewed in the south
Indian
press. However, while some people might respect the recently departed
acharya of Kanchi as a rishi or as a deity, there is no reason why a
frank
discussion cannot be held regarding the origins of the Kanchi math,
and
C.S.'s involvement in propagating a thoroughly revised history of that
math - so thoroughly revised as to be almost wholly falsified. I would
like to clarify at the outset that no disrespect is meant to the
Kanchi
math or its heads, but while talking of some aspects of history, one
has
to call a spade a spade.
..............
"It was only in the 20th century works, all compiled after
Chandrasekharendra Saraswati, the present Paramacharya ascended the
peetha, that the history of the Kanchipuram math has been rewritten.
Accordingly, it was established (by whom, may I ask?) that Adi
Sankaracharya had spent the last days of his life in Kanchipuram where
he
attained samadhi, and not in the Himalayas as is generally believed. A
mandapam named after the father of the school of advaita philosophy,
seen
in the Kamakshi temple premises, is cited as his samadhi. (The said
mandapam has been constructed very recently. It was originally called
`Sankaracharya samadhi', but when it was pointed out there could not
be a
samadhi inside a Devi temple, the mandapam was renamed `Sankaracharya
sannidhi' - sanctum, not a tomb.)
"The twentieth century chronicles explain that before his
demise,
Sankaracharya established a fifth math at Kanchi which he intended to
be a
controlling centre of all the other maths. Sri Sureswaracharya,
Sankara's
prime disciple was placed in charge of it. Interestingly, the Sringeri
math also claims Sureswaracharya as their first pontiff. (As an aside,
the
tale of Sureswaracharya being in charge of the Kanchi math is pure
fiction. If Sankaracharya did not establish the Kanchi math at all,
where was the need to appoint a successor there?!! It is the Kanchi
math
that "claims" Sureswara. The Sringeri math does not "claim" so. In
fact, a
very old structure that is reputed to be Sureswara's samadhi is still
preserved outside the Sarada temple at Sringeri.)
"According to the Kanchi chronicles, the math in Kanchipuram
had
to be shifted in the 18th century AD, in the face of opposition from
local
kings and hence the shift to Kumbhakonam. (One does not know of any
Hindu-hating king near Kanchipuram from the 18th century.)
"Historians, however, hold that the Kumbhakonam math was in
verity
a branch of the Sringeri math established in 1821 AD by the famous
monarch
of Tanjore, Serfoji. (Mr. Sunil has a fact wrong here. The monarch of
Tanjore in 1821 was not Serfoji, but Pratap Singh Tuljaji. The
date 1821 is correct - it is the date of the oldest inscription found
in
the Kumbhakonam math building.) Later, when a war broke out between
the
kings of Tanjore and Mysore, the Kumbhakonam math proclaimed
independence
from Sringeri and established itself as the Kamakoti peetham." (There
is
no war documented between the Maratha rulers of Tanjore and the
Wodeyars
of Mysore after 1821. By this time, both were more or less puppets of
the
British. That the Kumbhakonam math proclaimed independence from
Sringeri
however, is a fact. One does not have to explain it as a consequence
of an
prominence.
4. This propaganda campaign to disseminate disinformation received a
major
fillip from the activites of C.S. As Mr. Sunil puts it, it is only in
the
20th century, after C.S. took over as the head of the disintegrating
math
at Kumbhakonam, that the accounts have been totally rewritten. Part of
this
propaganda campaign includes a guru parampara that dates back to 477
BC.
One can go into great details to show that this guru parampara is
false.
Suffice it to say however, that it is full of holes and is correct
only in
the details given for the post-1820 period. Thus J.S. who is said to
be
the 69th in direct succession from Adi Sankaracharya himself is
actually
only the 6th or the 7th head of the Kumbhakonam/Kanchi math. C.S. and
J.S. have been extremely fortunate in favourably impressing people
like
Dr. T. M. P. Mahadevan, the famous philosopher, and Sri S.
Ramakrishnan,
the executive secretary of the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, not to speak of
influential journalists like Arun Shourie and Ram Nath Goenka, and
politicians like President R. Venkatraman. As an example, in recent
years,
there has not been a single issue of the Bhavan's Journal without some
feature or the other on either C.S. or J.S. For example, when the
Berlin wall
fell, the well-known guru, Sri Chinmoy, sent a piece of the rubble to
the
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan as a souvenir. Sri Ramakrishnan immediately saw
a
photo opportunity, took the rock to Kanchipuram, and featured a
picture of
J.S. holding the rock on the cover of the Bhavan's Journal. Thus, Sri
Chinmoy
sends a souvenir to the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan and J.S. of Kanchi
Kamakoti
Peetham gets photo credit! Sri Ramakrishnan apparently has no qualms
in
converting a prestigious magazine like the Bhavan's Journal into yet
another
propaganda pamphlet of the Kanchi math.
If I sound like I am fulminating unjustifiably against the propaganda
that
the Kanchi math engages in, I assure readers here that I am in fact
perfectly justified. I can cite innumerable instances where the most
blatant lies have been made without any compunction. All with an eye
at
enhancing the apparent prestige of the Kanchi math. What the Kanchi
math
doen't realize however, is that such stories only weaken its own
credibility and the respect which people may have for its acharyas.
Thus a
simple PTI news item about the 60th birthday celebrations of J.S.