THE SOUNDARYA LAHARI : 2. Jagad Guru Swami Sri Adi Sankaraacharya’s Immortal Creation :

17/11/2018
2.

The second point is that the unbroken line of teachers of the four amnayas have handed this work down the generations as flowing from Sri Sankara himself. This cannot be brushed aside lightly. Does not nyaya or the science of logic accept the words of an apta (trustworthy individual) as a mode of proof ?

A critical reader will do well to eschew the illogical debate of authorship along the lines set out above and instead concentrate on the puzzle of the Saundaryalahari with it’s two parts which are distinct in terms of content and style (shailee). It is true that the Ananda Lahari dealing with saktism has a degree of poetic elegance and felicity of language and phrase somewhat lacking in the latter half of the work.

The fifty one verses dealing with the divine beauty of the Universal Mother from the top of her gem studded crown to her sacred feet is couched in a style that is comparatively forced with only the occasional word or phrase or line reminiscent of the earlier style. The many metaphors contained inm them seem repetitive and certainly do not always appeal to modern taste.

This clear and self evident dichotomy is explained traditionally : that the work was a divine composition, brought to Sankara’s notice, during his sojourn in Mount Kailasa or alternatively from Mount Meru through the agency of Guru Gaudapada. Indeed this divine or quasi divine authorship bestows on the work the virtues of a mantra shastra. Each verse in fact is reputed to achieve certain specific purusharthas when chanted with absolute devotion. The appendix to this book summarizes this orthodox view point. This has been done in special deference to the wishes of His Holiness, the Sankaracharya of Kanchi.

To continue. The story is that the work was partially destroyed, perhaps by a natural disaster leaving the master with only forty one of the original verses, compelling him to complete the rest. In this task he was helped surely by what must have been an eidetic memory along with some inputs perhaps from his pupils. Hence there is certainly some merit to the argument that the entire work may not be Sankara’s.

To be continued ..