• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
History Of Kanchi Math
I was looking up the history of Kanchi math, as according to history, Sri Adi Shankaracharya established only four maths in Sringeri, Dwarka, Badrinath and Puri. I came across a site http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/alt_hindu_msg.html which says that Kanchi Math was a relatively recent math which started as a branch of Sringeri Math, and it appears convincing. Any thoughts?

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In article <31a8jt$21j@ucunix.san.uc.edu> sadananda@anvil.nrl.navy.mil (K. 
Sadananda) writes:
> In article <311hto$ni@ucunix.san.uc.edu>, editor.csm.uc.edu (digest 
> wrote:
> > * Former President Inaugurates Celebrations
> >      Kanchipuram, July 24 (PTI) The former President, Mr R
> > Venkataraman, today inaugurated the year long 60th centenary
> > celebrations of Sri Jayendra Saraswathi, the head of the 2,500
> > year old Kanchi mutt, amidst religious fervour.
> >      Sri Jayendra Saraswathi is the 69th pontiff of the mutt,
> > which was established here by Adi Sankara, who was the first
> > 'peedapathi' (head of the mutt) from 482 to 477 bc.

> May I bring to your attention that by all accounts Adi Sankara time was
> some where around 8th to 9th century AD.  And of the four Matts that he
> established Kanchi is not one of them.  Either the Mutt is less than
> 1100 years old or if it is 482 B.C. as is claimed in the news then it
> must not have been established by Adi Sankaracharya.  Please check the
> dates and the real history of the kanchi matt. Is there any one in the
> network that has better information about the Kanchi peetam?  Sadananda

Both this post and a previous one by Bon Giovanni have raised questions of 
historicity of Adi Sankaracharya and the Kanchi math. This is not a new 
question. It is generally accepted as tradition that Adi Sankaracharya, 
the famous Advaita philosopher, founded four maths (monasteries) at 
Sringeri, Puri, Dwaraka and Badrinath; that he ascended the famous 
sarvagna-pitha in Kashmir, and finally passed away near Kedarnath. None of 
the four recognized mathas claims jurisdiction over the other three. However, 
the Kanchi math claims that Sankaracharya established a fifth math in 
Kanchi, with jurisdiction over the recognized four mathas; that 
Sankaracharya ascended a sarvagna-pitha not in Kashmir, but at Kanchi, and 
that he passed away not in Kedarnath, but at Kanchi. These and other such 
claims have been widely publicized by the followers of the Kanchi math 
with the direct participation of and encouragement from the heads of the 
Kanchi math, including the recently departed centenarian Sri 
Chandrasekharendra Saraswati (C.S., for short) and his successor Sri 
Jayendra Saraswati (J.S.).

In Tamil, we have a saying "Do not question the origins of rivers 
(nadimoolam) and rishis (rishimoolam)." Still, in terms of answering some 
basic questions regarding dates in Indian history, one has to perforce 
look at these. C.S. had a commanding personality. He impressed people of 
such wide interests as Mahatma Gandhi, Arthur Koestler, Paul Brunton, 
Milton Singer etc. Some of his more ardent followers have gone to the 
extent of deifying him as "Nadamadum deivam" - the deity who walks. People 
compose and sing songs in his praise, and dancers stage dance-dramas on his 
life - all of which are widely advertised and reviewed in the south Indian 
press. However, while some people might respect the recently departed 
acharya of Kanchi as a rishi or as a deity, there is no reason why a frank 
discussion cannot be held regarding the origins of the Kanchi math, and 
C.S.'s involvement in propagating a thoroughly revised history of that 
math - so thoroughly revised as to be almost wholly falsified. I would 
like to clarify at the outset that no disrespect is meant to the Kanchi 
math or its heads, but while talking of some aspects of history, one has 
to call a spade a spade.

Seven years ago, on August 22, 1987, Sri Jayendra Saraswati disappeared 
from the Kanchi math. R. Venkatraman, an ardent devotee of the Kanchi math 
was President of India at that time. A frantic search was held, with the 
police of all four southern states, the CID and other agencies involved. 
What made the disappearance more shocking to the orthodox followers of the 
Kanchi math was that it was the period of chaturmasya, when a sannyasi was 
not supposed to travel from his camping station. Sri Jayendra Saraswati 
was finally traced to Talakaveri, the source of the Kaveri near Coorg in 
Karnataka. Whatever else it accomplished, this episode created major stories
in the Indian media. Tthe Kanchi math came under the spotlight once again,
and it obtained wide publicity in the national media. I quote a few excerpts
(without permission) from the Sept. 13, 1987 issue of The Illustrated Weekly
of India, from a feature written by well-known journalist, K. P. Sunil. [1]

Under a box titled "Disputed Lineage," K. P. Sunil writes, (My comments 
are in parantheses):

"On August 25, as speculation about the whereabouts of Jayendra 
Saraswati mounted, the Sankaracharya of Dwaraka, Swaroopananda Saraswati, 
camping at Pune for the Chaturmasya Vrata, while demanding a high level 
probe into the mystery, asserted: "Sri Jayendra Saraswati cannot be 
regarded as a Sankaracharya at all, because the Kanchi math is not one of 
the four peethas constituted by Adi Sankaracharya. It is only a shakha 
(branch) of the Sringeri peetham."
"Several years earlier, Sir C. P. Ramaswamy Iyer, who headed the 
central commission on Hindu religious and charitable endowments, had 
announced that `there is no such thing as the Kanchi Kamakoti peetham.'
"Yet the Kanchi math has emerged as one of the most powerful 
religious institutions in the country.
"Full credit for this should go to Chandrasekharendra Saraswati 
himself, who lifted a math disintegrating in Kumbhakonam and 
re-established it in Kanchipuram, according it a position of pre-eminence.
"Legend has it that Sankara, at the age of 32, after having toured 
most parts of India and after having established the four maths ........
"The turn of the present century saw a math claiming a lineage of 
over 67 pontiffs in Kumbhakonam in Tanjore district."
"It was only in the 20th century works, all compiled after 
Chandrasekharendra Saraswati, the present Paramacharya ascended the 
peetha, that the history of the Kanchipuram math has been rewritten. 
Accordingly, it was established (by whom, may I ask?) that Adi 
Sankaracharya had spent the last days of his life in Kanchipuram where he 
attained samadhi, and not in the Himalayas as is generally believed. A 
mandapam named after the father of the school of advaita philosophy, seen 
in the Kamakshi temple premises, is cited as his samadhi. (The said 
mandapam has been constructed very recently. It was originally called 
`Sankaracharya samadhi', but when it was pointed out there could not be a 
samadhi inside a Devi temple, the mandapam was renamed `Sankaracharya 
sannidhi' - sanctum, not a tomb.)
"The twentieth century chronicles explain that before his demise, 
Sankaracharya established a fifth math at Kanchi which he intended to be a 
controlling centre of all the other maths. Sri Sureswaracharya, Sankara's 
prime disciple was placed in charge of it. Interestingly, the Sringeri 
math also claims Sureswaracharya as their first pontiff. (As an aside, the 
tale of Sureswaracharya being in charge of the Kanchi math is pure 
fiction. If Sankaracharya did not establish the Kanchi math at all, 
where was the need to appoint a successor there?!! It is the Kanchi math 
that "claims" Sureswara. The Sringeri math does not "claim" so. In fact, a 
very old structure that is reputed to be Sureswara's samadhi is still 
preserved outside the Sarada temple at Sringeri.)
"According to the Kanchi chronicles, the math in Kanchipuram had 
to be shifted in the 18th century AD, in the face of opposition from local 
kings and hence the shift to Kumbhakonam. (One does not know of any 
Hindu-hating king near Kanchipuram from the 18th century.)
"Historians, however, hold that the Kumbhakonam math was in verity 
a branch of the Sringeri math established in 1821 AD by the famous monarch 
of Tanjore, Serfoji. (Mr. Sunil has a fact wrong here. The monarch of 
Tanjore in 1821 was not Serfoji, but Pratap Singh Tuljaji. The 
date 1821 is correct - it is the date of the oldest inscription found in 
the Kumbhakonam math building.) Later, when a war broke out between the 
kings of Tanjore and Mysore, the Kumbhakonam math proclaimed independence 
from Sringeri and established itself as the Kamakoti peetham." (There is 
no war documented between the Maratha rulers of Tanjore and the Wodeyars 
of Mysore after 1821. By this time, both were more or less puppets of the 
British. That the Kumbhakonam math proclaimed independence from Sringeri 
however, is a fact. One does not have to explain it as a consequence of an 
imaginary war that the maths had no connection with.)

Mr. Sunil captures the major facts regarding the Kanchi math correctly 
though. Briefly,

1. A branch of the Sringeri math was established in Kumbhakonam, the 
building for which was constructed in 1821 AD, with the help of the 
Tanjore king. The seal of this math is in Kannada language, and refers to 
it as a "Sarada math." Since Sarada is worshipped only at Sringeri, and 
the Goddess at Kanchipuram is Kamakshi, not Sarada, it is seen at once 
that the Kumbhakonam math did not originally come from Kanchipuram.

2. The Kumbhakonam math soon proclaimed independence from Sringeri. In 
fact, this math went one step further. In addition to denying the 
historical truth of its origin as a branch of the Sringeri math, the story 
propagated was that it was originally established by Adi Sankaracharya 
himself at Kanchipuram, with control over the recognized four maths. 
Worse, a wholly fictitious story that Adi Sankaracharya ascended a 
sarvagna-pitha at Kanchi and attained samadhi at Kanchi is propagated as 
"tradition." The real problem though was that in the course of this 
campaign, someone with more enthusiasm than scholarship, "fixed" the date 
of Adi Sankaracharya as 477 B.C. and wrote up a continuous list of gurus 
of the math from 477 B.C. to the present! This guru parampara is filled 
with names of sannyasis taken at random, with no thought to chronology.

3. The Kumbhakonam math shifted to Kanchipuram in accordance with its new 
story. In 1839 AD, the head of the Kumbhakonam math applied for permission 
to the English Collector to perform the kumbhabhishekam of the Kamakshi 
temple in Kanchipuram. In 1842 AD, he was appointed sole trustee of the 
Kamakshi temple by the English East India Company Government. This is well 
documented because the original priests of the Kamakshi temple, who were
thereby deprived of their rights, complained to whomever they could possibly
complain to. Numerous petitions, counter petitions, letters, and other such
documents are available from this period that allow us to piece together this
account. [2] Thus the Kanchi math as an institution dates from 1842 AD. The
headquarters continued to be at Kumbhakonam but the sannyasi head would
periodically visit Kanchipuram to assert his rights over the Kamakshi temple.
This math originally had a limited following in the Tanjore and Kanchipuram
areas, but soon embarked on a massive propaganda campaign that ensured it

4. This propaganda campaign to disseminate disinformation received a major 
fillip from the activites of C.S. As Mr. Sunil puts it, it is only in the 
20th century, after C.S. took over as the head of the disintegrating math 
at Kumbhakonam, that the accounts have been totally rewritten. Part of this 
propaganda campaign includes a guru parampara that dates back to 477 BC. 
One can go into great details to show that this guru parampara is false. 
Suffice it to say however, that it is full of holes and is correct only in 
the details given for the post-1820 period. Thus J.S. who is said to be 
the 69th in direct succession from Adi Sankaracharya himself is actually 
only the 6th or the 7th head  of the Kumbhakonam/Kanchi math. C.S. and  
J.S. have been extremely fortunate in favourably impressing people like 
Dr. T. M. P. Mahadevan, the famous philosopher, and Sri S. Ramakrishnan, 
the executive secretary of the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, not to speak of 
influential journalists like Arun Shourie and Ram Nath Goenka, and
politicians like President R. Venkatraman. As an example, in recent years,
there has not been a single issue of the Bhavan's Journal without some
feature or the other on either C.S. or J.S. For example, when the Berlin wall
fell, the well-known guru, Sri Chinmoy, sent a piece of the rubble to the
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan as a souvenir. Sri Ramakrishnan immediately saw a
photo opportunity, took the rock to Kanchipuram, and featured a picture of
J.S. holding the rock on the cover of the Bhavan's Journal. Thus, Sri Chinmoy
sends a souvenir to the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan and J.S. of Kanchi Kamakoti
Peetham gets photo credit! Sri Ramakrishnan apparently has no qualms in
converting a prestigious magazine like the Bhavan's Journal into yet another
propaganda pamphlet of the Kanchi math.

If I sound like I am fulminating unjustifiably against the propaganda that 
the Kanchi math engages in, I assure readers here that I am in fact 
perfectly justified. I can cite innumerable instances where the most 
blatant lies have been made without any compunction. All with an eye at 
enhancing the apparent prestige of the Kanchi math. What the Kanchi math 
doen't realize however, is that such stories only weaken its own 
credibility and the respect which people may have for its acharyas. Thus a 
simple PTI news item about the 60th birthday celebrations of J.S. 
necessarily has to state something about the "2500 year history" of the 
math. If the news item had been silent about it, I would not have felt the 
need to write this article debunking their myths. The following excerpt 
from the same article in the Illustrated Weekly should show readers the 
exact means which the Kanchi math propaganda adopts.

"The Vyasachaliya Sankara Vijayam, written by Maha Devendra 
Saraswati, the 53rd acharya of the Kumbhakonam math in the 15th century, 
makes no mention of the Kanchi math in his work. However, in a Tamil 
translation of the work by Acharya Krishna Sastri, it is mentioned that 
the then King of Nepal had accepted the acharya of Kanchi, located in 
Kumbhakonam, as his Rajguru and was making a payment to the math every 
year as guru dakshina.
"Researchers, who doubted the claim, referred the matter to the 
royal family of Nepal. the reply dated May 13. 1940 read `...Nepal has 
never recognized the head of the Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham as their guru. 
Nor do we annually contribute any portion of our income as alleged by 
Pandit Acharya Krishna Sastri.'"

Mr. Sunil who quotes this bit of history, seems to have overlooked one 
minor point though. If the Kumbhakonam math was only established as a 
branch math in 1821 AD, as he says in his article, the question of its 
existence in the 15th century does not arise. Much less a name of its head 
and a number to be attached to that name. Such "Pandits" as Acharya 
Krishna Sastri who do not hesitate to blatantly lie, have been routinely 
pressed into service by the Kanchi math for conducting its propaganda. 
After all, who in south India would have thought of verifying his story 
from such a distant place as Nepal? The technique of the Kanchi math has 
been to lie left and right, with such thoroughness, that invariably some 
part of its preposterous claims are accepted as truth by people. Exactly 
the same phenomenon has occured with Mr. Sunil. He does not question the
veracity of the claim that the Vyasachaliya Sankara Vijayam was written
by one "Maha Devendra Saraswati, the 53rd acharya of the Kumbhakonam
math in the 15th century." Nor does he particularly elaborate on the
strangeness of the fact that this fictitious author of this real book only
mentions the four traditionally accepted maths, and makes no mention of
"his own" math.

To sum up, the claims of the Kanchi math have been unprecedented in the 
history of Hinduism. We have never had an organized structure comparable 
to the Roman Catholic Church. In the event, a math in the remote south 
claiming to be the central math of the Advaita sampradaya makes no sense. 
Firstly, such centralized religious jurisdiction is alien to the spirit 
and history of our culture. Secondly, even if Adi Sankaracharya did 
establish a central math with jurisdiction over the recognized four, was 
he so ignorant of India's geography that he bypassed all holy cities with 
more central locations (Prayag/Kashi/Ujjain?) and chose instead Kanchi in 
the extreme south? Thus, the idea of a central math is clearly pure myth. 
The reality is that the Kanchi math is a relatively recent institution 
with tall claims. That it has a large following is an undeniable fact. 
Every saffron-robed person invariably attracts some following. Couple that 
with the tremendous charisma that C.S. had, and a famous temple like the 
Kamakshi temple in Kanchipuram - one has a ready-made formula for success 
in attracting a following. The sad part is that the sannyasis involved 
take advantage of the general reverence that people show them, for their 
own ulterior motives.

In India, among south Indian Brahmin circles especially, when this topic 
comes up for discussion, most people usually say something like, "The 
Kanchi math is also doing so much for the cause of dharma. Why rake up 
this issue?" My answer is that firstly it is the Kanchi math which forces 
one to rake up the issue by ceaselessly continuing its propaganda of 
disinformation. Secondly, and more importantly, an institution like the 
Kanchi math which supposedly is doing so much for dharma, should not 
forget the most basic dharma of all - satyam vada. People are free to choose 
their gurus, but when the guru sets such a perniciously wrong example, by 
not sticking to the truth, dharma itself is compromised.

S. Vidyasankar

1. The Illustrated Weekly of India, "The Weekly Cover Story" - K. P. 
Sunil, September 13, 1987.

2 a. The Truth about the Kumbhakonam Math, - Sri R. Krishnaswamy 
Aiyar and Sri K. R. Venkatraman, Sri Ramakrishna Press, Madurai, 

  b. Kanchi Kamakoti Math - a Myth - Sri Varanasi Raj Gopal Sarma, 
Ganga Tunga Prakashan, Varanasi, 1987.
     LC Call No.: BL1243.76.C62 K367 1987
I can attest that a few generations ago
my family followed Sringeri

We switched to Kanchi mutt for its social activism

It was widely known 2 generations back that the kanchi mutt was a sub-branch of Sringeri

As GS says, the Kanchi Math is indeed not an original Math. It was known as the Kumbhakonam Math. It would have been a non-descript Math with local influence had there not been Chandrashekharendra Sarasvati. He was an imposing personality attracted a large section of the Tamil Nad and Andhra Smarta communities towards it. CS himself was a definitely a learned scholar as can be seen from his works and I believe largely deserving of the respect he received.

The Shringeri Math is indeed socially far more conservative that Kanchi and I am sure not to GS's tastes. However, in terms of religious scholarship on the tantra and the recitational purity of the R^ig veda the Shringeri Math is perhaps superior. It is clear that this fellow Vidyashankar is a partisan of the Shringeri guys. While I do not dispute his statement, I do not see the need to be so scathing regarding Kanchi because I believe they have done a very good job in preserving the veda including the rare atharva veda tradition with which I have a special connection.

Amongst the Tamil Smartas too there are the svayamAchArya families (now a greatly dwindling population) who are self-sufficient authorities on Hindu law and religious issues. These lineages while respecting the Mathas did not really depend on them or their Acharyas for any religious authority. Often it was the other way around. I believe it is the decline of this group amongst the smartas that has greatly weakened their roots and exposed them to attacks from the Dravidian-Mullah-Missionary combine, like the current affair.
<b>It is clear that this fellow Vidyashankar is a partisan of the Shringeri guys.</b>

While i have crossed swords with Vidyasankar in one of my previous avatars either in Indic tradiions or in IC, he is generally factually accurate and his site on sringeri is no exception


Kanchi was not one of the maths established originally by Adi Sankara. That does not make the Kanchi Acharya a lesser individual. In fact he has been socially far more active as Hauma has remarked. One need not put down one math to establish the richness of the other. Each of the mathas caters to a different set of clientale and as in my case to a common subset. In any event this is not the time to bicker over who is the greater - they all have a role to play. Only a Hindu would cavil on the finer points of advaita, while fighting on the battlefield against a formdiable adversary. I have posted elsewhere excerpts from the dialogues with the guru who is one of the acharyas at sirngeri.

But as a daily reference i spend more timeat the Kanchi site which has lot more material
Hauma/ Kaushal,

From what i hear is that the Mutt was originally at Kanchi and was shifted to Kumbakonam during the muslim period before being re-established in Kanchi.

I also have read that initially Kamakshi amman at Kanchi was a Ugra swaroopa and the ambal was made into a Shanti Swaroopa by Adi Shankara. The Peetam was established then by Adi shankara, though it was not one of the four principal peetams that he established. Also I add a disclaimer that these are from what i have read/heard but may not have proof. But anyday i will trust Kanchi paramacharya's word about it than anybody else.
What do you think of the Kanchi Kamakoti History page? :-


Do you accept that Adi Sankara was born in 509 B.C.?
They have cited many references there.
The proof is not conclusive (and would not be admissible in a court today) but whatever evidence there is seems to suggest the later date. The namboodiris of Kerala should have the oral records to clinch the issue.
Ranjit Mathews, a Syrian Xtian on soc.culture.indian
whom I trust as an honest secular guy, says that Nambudiris reached kerala by about 400 AD from their earlier abode on the Godavari

next oral records date Adi-Sankara roughly to the time of the decline of buddhism
as a popular religion in India

So the date is probably after 400 AD

<!--QuoteBegin-mitradena+Nov 15 2004, 02:36 PM-->QUOTE(mitradena @ Nov 15 2004, 02:36 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> What do you think of the Kanchi Kamakoti History page? :-


Do you accept that Adi Sankara was born in 509 B.C.?
They have cited many references there. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Though Vidyashankar is partisan of the Shringeri Math, I generally agree that he is right. The historical list of Acharyas given by the Kanchi Math site is not entirely fictious, some Acharyas with those names are indeed real. But most of those are drawn ad hoc from other Mathas (see Kosla's Acharya lineage) and are not given real periods of tenure. The town of Kanchi is very old but definitely not as old as 425 BC or something like that. It is known that the founder of Eastern marital arts Bodhidharma was an Acharya from Kanchi who went to China. The ambassador to the Uighur Kha'Khan's court, Indrabodhi was also an Acharya from Kanchi. But this was in the period of 400-600 AD and before Shankaracharya. The Kamakshi temple at Kanchi may have also been old but may have again preceded Shankara. The Tantric guru Shri Muladeva from Kashmir, known in Tamil as the Tirumular, the composer of the Tirumantiram, appears to have been associated with the earlier version of the temple. He first brought Shrikula tantrism to the South and introduced the first wave of Kamakshi worship.

<b>Post Edited - Admin</b>
A question reg.Adi Shankarar

Did he install a lakshmi yantra in Tirupati ? Some time back i was told that the AdhiShankarar installed such yantras in many temples all over India and most of those temples are doing very good now. ?
How accurate is this? The Jyotirmath Sankaracharya Lineage in the 20th Century

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)