12

When was Adi-Sankarāchārya born? Specifically, why is there so much of a variation in the dates given by Kānci, Dwāraka, Joshī Mutts and Śringerī Mutts?

ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤ
  • 15,752
  • 3
  • 63
  • 117
vidyarthi
  • 783
  • 1
  • 4
  • 15

5 Answers5

4

Let's see whether he lived in 1st century BC(44 BC to 12 BC):

Sringeri mutt:

Sringeri mutt established by Shankara, records Shankara was born in 14th year from the era of Vikramadhitya. It is concluded that Vikram era started in 57 BC, so Adi Shankara born somewhere 13-14 years after 57 BC. But this mutt is in the south, Vikramaditya of Ujjain never ruled southern India, even if he was a historical figure. So, Karnataka was ruled by 2 Vikramadhityas of Chalukhyas. One of them lived in 7th century AD and another king ruled in 8th century AD. So,there is a huge possibility that Sringeri mutt might have recorded Chalukhya dynasty Vikramadhityas.

Kanchi Mutt:

It is the only mutt claiming that Shankara born in 509 BC and died in 477 BC. But it was established after 1820 AD. It has nothing to do with ADI Shankara. SO, the claims of this mutt are irrelevant. This mutt is lying in the name of god.

Dharmakirti

This is the most important point. Hsuan Tsang, a Chinese traveler who visited India in the 7th century AD, said Dharmakirti was his contemporary. As he was a traveler, his antiquity cannot be shifted before 7th century AD. He also said Dharmakirti contributed a lot for Buddhism and praised him for this. He also mentions Bhartrhari, but not Shankara. As Adi Shankara defeated Buddhism in India, Hsuan Tsang definitely mentioned Shankara if he lived before him. This itself gives the clue that Shankara is post Dharmakirti and post Hsuan Tsang.

Mandana Mishra

Adi Shankara is debated with Mandana Mishra which is confirmed by Shankara Digvijaya. This record is maintained by Sringeri mutt. We can fully trust Sringeri mutt, as it is the only one which has not experienced any destruction from Islamic rulers like other mutts. Mandana Mishra's historicity has been fixed as 8th century AD. In this debate, Adi Shankara mentioned Dharmakirti's work on Vijnanavada. As Dharmakirti' date has been fixed as 7th century AD by foreign accounts, Adi Shankara lived after 7th century AD.

So, the conclusion is, Adi Shankara lived somewhere between 750 to 850 CE.

  • Mahavatar Babaji was one of the guru of Adi Shankaracharya. And birthdate of babaji is 30th November,203 AD.( can be found on Autobiography of a yogi, by swami yogodananda). So definitely can't be BC. – Santanu Debnath Jun 01 '17 at 03:57
  • @SantanuDebnath Babaji was a Guru of Adi Shankara? –  Jun 01 '17 at 04:01
  • Yes you can confirm this at the footnote of the page no. 298 of Autobiography of a Yogi, by Swami Yogadananda. It sates that Shankaracharya received initiation in Kriya yoga from Babaji. – Santanu Debnath Jun 01 '17 at 04:11
  • @SantanuDebnath could you give me link? I also want to establish the date of Adi Shankara. –  Jun 01 '17 at 04:16
  • Link of what Ajay? Whether babaji was a guru of shankaracharya or not? Then just read the footnote of the said page of said book. If you say I can take a screenshot of the page and attach. – Santanu Debnath Jun 01 '17 at 04:47
  • Please share. I am trying to establish date of birth of Adi Shankara. What If he was another Shankara, not Adi Shankara? –  Jun 01 '17 at 04:51
  • This is indeed an answer to Ajay. Here it can be confirmed that shankaracharya received initiation from babaji. And babaji's birthdate is 30th November,203 AD which can also be confirmed from some links of Wikipedia see image from footnote of page no. 298 of autobiography of a Yogi. – Santanu Debnath Jun 01 '17 at 05:28
  • @SantanuDebnath Mahavatar Babaji's birthdate is NOT 203 AD, I don't remember the name of the yogi but I believe it was Yogananda who said that no one knows the birth date of Babaji. – Pinakin Sep 07 '17 at 16:53
  • Yes, in the Autobiography of a Yogi, Babaji's birthdate is not given. It is in the wikipedia where I found that Babaji's birthdate is 203 AD – Santanu Debnath Sep 08 '17 at 04:22
  • @SantanuDebnath its not true .. – Rakesh Joshi Sep 08 '17 at 06:29
  • @Ajay he is not asking approximate era but birth date .. – Rakesh Joshi Sep 08 '17 at 06:31
  • @SantanuDebnath Yeah that date is said by some other person but it's incorrect as Babaji's direct disciples like Maheshwarnath Babaji, Lahiri Mahasaya etc.. have not mentioned about his birth date. – Pinakin Sep 08 '17 at 10:14
  • @Rakesh Joshi checkout the question description –  Sep 29 '17 at 18:59
  • @Ajay Do you have the birth nakshatra thithi maasa of adi shankara. – Rama27 Oct 29 '17 at 08:39
  • @SantanuDebnath Madhaviya Sankara Vijaya is the authentic biography of Sankara. Mahavatar Babaji being a guru is Adi Sankaracharya is a fanciful account not sanctioned by the sankara vijayam or any of the muThas. –  Nov 12 '17 at 05:59
  • "Kanchi Mutt:

    It is the only mutt claiming that Shankara born in 509 BC and died in 477 BC. But it was established after 1820 AD. It has nothing to do with ADI Shankara. SO, the claims of this mutt are irrelevant. This mutt is lying in the name of god" this is disrespectful language.

     – S K Jan 22 '18 at 18:54
  • By the way, I like Kanchi mutt because they are doing excellent job for Brahmin welfare. But how should I tell if this is not established by Adi Shankara? @SK –  Jan 23 '18 at 06:39
  • 2
    @parikshita "This mutt is lying in the name of god" is disrespectful. please edit your language. – S K Jan 23 '18 at 13:19
  • @SK Then edit it how you like –  Jan 24 '18 at 05:52
2

This is from wikipedia- "509–477 BCE: This dating, is based on records of the heads of the Shankara's cardinal institutions Maṭhas at Dvaraka Pitha, the Govardhana matha and Badri and the Kanchi Peetham.[24] This conforms to the chronology calculated based off the Hindu Puranas.[5][25]"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi_Shankara

The timeline of 500 bc is not only based on kanchi mutt but the North indian mutts established by shankaracharya too, four places and purans wouldn't lie about the same thing simultaneously after all, the leaders of the mutts have said that historians can calculate the number of past mutt leaders of the four mutts and the 1st mutt leader would have timeline at some time of 500-400 bc. Which was the time they were established.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/government-wrong-on-adi-shankaras-birth-year-kanchi-seer/article7908827.ece

Anubhav Jha
  • 2,693
  • 15
  • 34
1

You may refer to the hyper link provided in my answer to another similar question.

The hyperlink gives you a document of the controversy behind Acharya's birth year and why Sankara Vijayam's give a more reliable data. The rest of the answer attempts to plot his horoscope based on shakara vijayams and validate his life events against the horoscope so as to show that sankara Vijayams are more reliable based on the data they provided.

Vishwanath N
  • 1,335
  • 1
  • 9
  • 22
1

I am aghast at the claim above that the Kanchi Mutt was established in 1820 AD. Nothing can be further from truth. The Mutt not only has proven repeatedly that the Mutt was established by Adi Sankara in 482BCE but also has traced the adhishtanams (places where the head of the Mutt on attaining samadhi is buried) of each of his successor from 482 BCE till date and the entire list is prominently displayed in the Mutt. This onerous task was undertaken and completed during the reign of the holiest of saints who lived during recent times, His Holiness Sri Chandrasekarendra Saraswathi Swami, the 68th pontiff of the Kanchi Mutt, who has using various historical, religious and anthropological evidences repeatedly reiterated and established the birth year of Adi Sankara to be 509BCE.

Ashok M.S.
  • 11
  • 1
0

The time of adi Shankara is generally given as 788 to 820 AD, As per Archaeological Survey of India first Hindu temple came up in Badami in 6th century AD, had no idle inside. First temple with Idle came up first in 7th century AD in Nagarjuna. Adi Shankara did is analysis of reason for decline of Hinduism sitting on to of a hillock in Srinagar, set up all the four Mats and his grand plan of revival of Hinduism in Badrinath. If you go there, you can read the division of responsibility is spelled out for all the mathadicaries,. Kedarnath temple is suspected to be Buddhist Monistry. There is enough evidence to conclude he died there. THe rest of the speculation id left to the Knowledgeable experts and historians, defiantly not religious experts.

V.S.Amarnath
  • 1
  • 1