Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sfsup.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!mhuxm!sftig!sfsup!rajeev
From: rajeev@sfsup.UUCP (S.Rajeev)
Newsgroups: net.nlang.india,net.philosophy
Subject: Re: "Adi Sankara": life of the Hindu philospher
Message-ID: <182@sfsup.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 23-Mar-86 13:50:42 EST
Article-I.D.: sfsup.182
Posted: Sun Mar 23 13:50:42 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Mar-86 03:49:33 EST
References: <171@sfsup.UUCP> <57@crystal.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Information Systems, Summit N.J.
Lines: 64
Xref: watmath net.nlang.india:1190 net.philosophy:4615


In response to crystal!ravi:

> >Sanksrit, b) appear as coarse, ill-groomed peasants. This depiction of
> >Brahmins as a class apart is ironic considering Sankara's non-dualist
> >theme and also the incident where he meets an untouchable. 
> 
> However, the film is set in 8th century India:  a period when
acceptance of 
> the caste system was arguably at its heighest.  Not only did Brahmins 
> enjoy an exhalted social status, but other castes were certainly
denied 
> access both to knowledge and to any possibility of acquiring the sort of
> sophistication that comes with knowledge and awareness.  In this sense,
> it may be unfair to find fault with Iyer; the fault probably lies with
> the social context of 8th century India.  One has to be careful not to
> judge it by our present-day sensibilities.
> 
You have a good point there. But what irritated me was that it also
appeared blatantly racist: all the brahmins were light-skinned,
fine-featured, clean-cut, "Aryan" people, while the others were usually
dark-skinned and aboriginal-looking, in addition to being ill-groomed! 

> >final quibble is a long, unnecessary scene, where Sankara and his
> >disciples all pay tribute to a woman, for what appears to be no more
> >than the fact that she had just cooked them a good meal. I feel that
> 
> This scene appears to be a depiction of the legend of the goddess
> Annapoorna feeding Sankaracharya (and his followers).  Annapoorna is
the 
> aspect of Parvati as the provider; legend has it that she manifested
herself 
> out of regard for Sankaracharya's knowledge and devotion, and fed 
> Sankaracharya with her own hands (at Kashi, I think the legend says).
> There is a composition by Sankaracharya called the "Annapoornashtakam"

> ("eight hymns to Annapoorna") which is said to have been composed in 
> connection with the episode.
> 
I had been unaware of this legend; in the film, if I am not mistaken,
the scene is as follows: Sankara defeats a Varanasi philosopher in
debate; he and his wife join Sankara's entourage: he becomes one of
Sankara's principal disciples (I have forgotten his name). It is his
wife who receives homage from them all. 

> land.  That the mother-connection may be strong is evidenced by another
> legend:  When his mother dies, orthodox Brahmins refuse to participate
in
> her creamtion since technically she died sonless (Sankara is an
ascetic and 
> has no ties to his mother), Sankaracharya thereby having no right to 
> perform her last rites.  Sankaracharya defies this tradition and cremates
> her himself, and in his own backyard.  

This is in the film; Sankara is excommunicated for his defiance.

> 				I understand that this is still the
> tradition among some very orthodox Namboodiri families in Kerala.

Non-Namboodiris also do this in Kerala: people are often cremated in
their backyards and their children light the funeral pyres, usually
under the supervision of a priest (not necessarily a brahmin).

				Sri Rajeev.