Hindu temples , Mahans, Mahaperiyava ,Paramacharya , Ramana : The Chandrasekhara of Kanchi and The Chandrasekhara of Sringeri -PART -1 -- http://www.kamakoti.org/souv/5-59.html

The Chandrasekhara of Kanchi and The Chandrasekhara of Sringeri

Ra. Ganapati

At this point of time, (October 25, 1992) when we are preparing for the centenary celebration of Sri Kanchi Maha Svamigal, though He would be completing 100 years only in May 1994, we deem ourselves doubly blessed by paying homage to another great saint who has actually completed 100 years three days back. It is a strange coincidence that the monastic name of that sage is also Chandrasekhara.

He is none other than Chandrasekhara Bharati Svamigal of the Sringeri Sankara Math, who held the holy office of Sankaracharya for 42 years during the same period when Sri Chandrasekhara Indira-Sarasvathi was presiding over the Kanchi Sankara Math.

Instead of repeating the conventional term that the two personages were like 'the sun and the moon', we should say that they were like two sun-cum-moons! They were like the sun in full blaze radiating Jnana, and the rigorous Sastric Dharma in a most unique fashion, from 1912 to 1954. Upadesa (teaching) in their case was not merely by words but it was by showing the living examples of what they preached. Hence their words carried the power of the mantras. Both were exalted as great sages, verily as divine personalities.

But their very name has the moon in it. The name 'Chandrasekhara' is very appropriate for these two sages, who carried on their heads the burden of showing the correct path to the world, which was increasingly following sinful ways, in as much as the name originally denotes Siva who is His infinite mercy, pardoned the sinning Moon, reduced to a crescent and stationed him on His matted locks.

It is of note that among the many names adopted by the two lines of the heads of these two Maths the name 'Chandrasekhara' alone is found in both. The Kanchi Maha Periyaval is the seventh among Gurus of the of the Math bearing the name Chandrasekhara; the Sringeri Acharya was the fourth in that Math to bear that name. In Kanchi the names Mahadeva and Chandrasekhara alternate from the 61st to 67th heads. So there is nothing unique in Periyaval, the 68th in the line, having that name. what is significant is that the Peethadhipati of Sringeri who ascended the Peetha five years later also inherited the same name, after 450 years from the seventeenth predecessor in the lineage of his Math! In the divine scheme of things of Parasakti (Mother-Power Supreme), this coincidence occurred as if to show that these two Peethas are but two eyes focused on the same object.

There is another similarly too, of the 'Dasanaama' (ten titles in Sankara's monastic order) Kanchi Peetha has adopted (Indra) Sarasvati. Sringeri Acharya adopt different titles like Tirtha and Aranya. Of these, the title of the Sringeri Acharya we are talking of is 'Bharati' which too is a synonym of Sarasvati, the Goddess of Learning. Sarasvati has yet another name, Sarada. The Math of the Kanchi Svami is named after Sarada and the Peetha of the Sringeri Svami carries the same name. The season of 'Sarad' is famous for the beauty of its full-moon. These two sages, like the moon, converted the blazing bright sunlight of Advaita-Knowledge into the cool moonlight of upadesa to benefit the entire world! The blaze arising out of their austerities was cooled in their Bhakti to the Godhead and was converted into compassion and comforted the devotees like the moonlight.

Both are 'incomparable'; also facto they are comparable to each other! They were steeped in Advaitic realisation even while apparently engaged in day-to-day activities. They had authentic divine powers to truly bless humanity. They were intellectually brilliant enough to astound the scholars but at the same time were adopts in expounding great Vedantic truths to the ordinary people in their own language. They were humble the way only the really great are. They loved the entire creation. In the present day of so-called reforms and change they followed strictly and boldly the traditional ways of life, facilely swimming against the current. Far from being puffed up by the greatness of the title Jagadguru, `the world-teacher', they who in their spiritual heights were apart from the world and as real renunciates had no craving to teach anybody, just endured that title, because it came to them unasked and sensing the divine ordination in it, they carried the yoke in utter sincerity and serenity.

In all these aspects they were comparable to each other - anyonya Sadrasa.

There is another similarity. The mother-tongue of the Head of the Kanchi Math in Tamil Nadu is Kannada and the mother-tongue of the Head of the Sringeri Math of Karnataka was Telugu.

Both these sages had no Guru in the physical form to initiate them into Sannyasa. But both stressed in one voice the need for a physical Guru for the world at large.

But in the divine drama of parasakti, two characters cannot be totally identical, as it would not suit Her variety-reveling! So she played her game, manifesting diversities too in the two. In fact the very diversity provided the backdrop to heighten the unity.

(This diversity' is definitely not `mutual difference of opinion': even to think like that is sacrilege.)

Deep within, both Acharyas were the same; but what the world perceived as their external behaviors and activities. In this respect, there was a significant divergence between the two. The Chandrasekhara of Kanchi, though a person of Self-realisation (Brahma-Jnani), paid meticulous attention to the activities of the world outside, and dedicated his life to convert these activities to be in tune with the Sastras; he was always devising one or other scheme to achieve the objective. The Chandrasekhara of Sringeri, though deeply interested in directing the people to the Sastric ways, generally kept himself aloof, immersed in meditation.

Another difference which can be called an offshoot of the above is that though Bharathi Svamigal could have achieved proficiency in any field of knowledge if he so desired, was not inclined to turn his attention to areas other than religion and spirituality. He did not encourage his disciples too in pursuing mere academic research. He absolutely declined to lend his ears to discussions on historic/literary basis for resolving purely religious issues and matters touching the great men of religion. To questions such as the age of Adi Sankara, or his authorship of certain books, or whether Vidyaranya had more than one Guru, his stock reply would be, "Is there any connection at all between finding out the truth in these and your own spiritual development?" The Sage of Kanchi, on the other hand, would encourage research in all fields and himself dive deep into the ocean of the various knowledges including modern Science and bring out myriads of pearls, corals, conchs and shells helping to solve academic problems. It is his conviction that research in any field will sharpen the intellect, and ultimately purify it, to make it fit to imbibe spiritual knowledge.

People held different views on this difference between the two. Some said that only the Sage of Kanchi, thorough with the latest trends and theories of the world, could perform the duties of the Jagadguru perfectly. Others said that it was only the Sage of Sringeri who deserved to be called a Jivanmukta - one liberated even while living in the body. Some also made fruitless efforts to change the ways of the Sringeri Acharya so as to make him gain more popularity, because they feared that the Kanchi Acharya was becoming more popular! When he was immersed in the divine intoxication of Bakthi or the spiritual afflatus of Jnana, some called him mad. The two sages, never bothered about these comments and played beautifully the role assigned to each by parasakti. One was like the lotus flower intent on rising above the waters around and laying itself bare to the skies - setting an example in spiritual ardour, transcending the material aspects of life. The other was like the lotus-leaf which though carrying water-drops, does not allow them to stick on to it, setting an example of Nishkama Karma (disinterested action) for the welfare of the world.

Both these Chandrasekharas were born in families closely connected with the respective Maths.

Some previous Peethadhipatis of Kanchi are the ancestors of Maha Periyaval.

The father and grant father of Bharathi Svamigal were scholars attached to the Sringeri Math. The pre-monastic name which he was given at birth was Narasimha. That name was selected because the previous two Acharyas were called Sacchidananda Sivabhinava Nrisimha Bharati and Nrisimha Bharati. He may be said to have been given in adoption to the Math as soon as he was born. He was the fourteenth child of his parents, who lost all the preceding thirteen children when they were very young. The distraught parents, wishing that at least this child be untouched by their ill-luck, gave over the child to Sri Kantha Sastri, the chief Functionary of the Math. Thus he came under the benign care of the previous Acharya Sri Sivabhinava Nrismha Svami, while very young.

Narasimhan studied in a school for a few years and always stood first in the class. At the behest of the Guru, his secular education was stopped at a stage and he was asked to join the pathasala in the Math to study the Vedic and allied subjects. After studying the scriptures there, he studied advanced courses in the school in Bangalore, run by the Math itself, obtained extensive and intensive proficiency in the Sastras and emerged as scholar. In 1912, at the age of 20 he was appointed as the next heir to Peetha. Even then he excelled in the knowledge of the Sastras and the observance of the rituals, and had also gained sufficient equipment in Bhakti, Jnana and Vairagya (non-attachment).