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)
