Malkovsky on the Personhood of Sankara's para brahman

Sankara's possibile antecedents: Patanjala yoga (Hacker); bhedabheda(Hajime Nakamura), perhaps under the influence of the Gaudapadiya-karika (Ingalls). Vaisnavism (Hacker; Nakamura; W.G. Neevel; Jacqueline Hirst; Malkovsky; Sengaku Mayeda). (542-544)

The distinction between a higher and lower brahman is central of Sankara. (545)

The majority of scholars - both nondualists and theists - believe that his para brahman is impersonal. The implication is that the God of the theists - whether Hindu or not - is an inferior deity. The bhaktas could never accept this. Georges Thibaut much preferred Ramanuja's conception. (546)

A small group regards the para brahman as personal - concluding either from philosophical considerations of 'person' (chiefly De Smet) or from exegesis (chiefly Hacker). (547)

Of course, Sankara does not - could not - take up the question of brahman's personhood. (547)

Hacker holds that Sankara is an illusionist, but also shows that most often S identifies isvara with para brahman. (553-555) A proper understanding of the Absolute need not exclude its being personal. (555)

D.M. Datta: one of the strongest affirmations of realism in Sankara. (555) See also Saccidanandendra Sarasvati as cited by Karl Potter. (556n51)

Julius Lipner: The Advaitic absolute is trans-personal rather than impersonal. (561)

De Smet on the Trinity: see "Light from the Christian Jnana-Karma-Bhakti-Samuccaya" in Religious Consciousness and Life-Worlds, ed. T.S. Rukmani (New Delhi: Indus Publ. Co., 1988) 81. (561n75)

Mahadevan. (562)

Malkovsky on De Smet

"The subtleties of De Smet's interpretation of Samkara are at times nearly as challenging as those of the great acarya himself." B.J. Malkovsky, "Introduction," The Role of Divine Grace in the Soteriology of Samkaracarya (Leiden, etc.: Brill, 2001) xvi.

"It is a tribute to the high regard that De Smet enjoyed in India that in the planning stage of the volume [New Perspectives in Advaita Vedanta] on well-known Hindu philosopher suggested to me that all the essays ought perhaps to deal with the contribution of De Smet himself to Advaita studies." Malkovsky xvi n 5.