/lit/ - Literature

>>16904797
I don't have time to look through this whole thing right now, but I'd like to point out that Adi Śaṅkara doesn't refute Madhyamaka, just writing it off without making any arguments, yet both Śāntarakṣita and Kamalaśila consider the Vijñānavāda doctrine they espouse in Tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā to actually be provisional and the Madhyamaka position to be the definitive one. So even if Śaṅkara's arguments are good ones, they aren't aimed at the position that these opponents of his ultimately assent to at their highest level of analysis.

>>16904835
I have read the "section" on Madhyamaka in BSB. It is short, dismissive, and contains no actual argument. It is obvious that Madhyamaka was simply not popular at that time like Vijñānavāda was.

BSB contains the Advaita arguments against the particular strand of late Vijñānavāda espoused by people like Dignāga. Note that this strand differs from the earlier Vijñānavāda espoused by Vasubandhu and so forth in some ways.

As far as I know, Madhyamaka has only really received criticisms of Nyāya origin. For whatever reason, Madhyamaka did not receive much attention from other Indian religious groups, perhaps because of its contextualist epistemology that would have been anathema to the presupposition of late classical Indian philosophy that epistemology is "first philosophy."

Now from the Buddhist side, there is also a Madhyamaka discussion of Vedānta found in Tarkajvālā. The chapter has been translated Olle Qvarnström. I think that predates Adi Śaṅkara's specific Vedānta position, though, so it might not be that helpful.