Ancient Vidya

Vpmanohar Vp says:

Govinda Govinda Govinda. Shree Bannanje Govindacharya.

Vishal Mahuli says:

Firstly, I appreciate the Fantastic work done by Acharya in terms of bringing the age-old manuscripts to light and giving the spiritual world an all-new dimension of understanding.
However, I have a query about what he says at 00:25 – If I understand it correctly, he meant: Sri Jayateertha himself has acknowledged that he didn't have access to the moola-paatha which is why his commentaries are on 'prachalita paatha', he further goes on to quote the line "गंगासंगेन नैर्मल्यं…" as evidence.
1. The line "गंगासंगेन नैर्मल्यं…" is from Tattvaprakashika and not Vishnutattvanirnaya as he mentions.
2. The line he probably was looking for is – "“तथापि गंगाजलानुप्रविष्टक्षुद्रनदीजलस्येव तस्यापि उपादेयत्वात्….”" which is from Vishnutattvanirnaya and says that Sri Jayateertha here is commenting on a line that is not from the actual text in his own words.
3. However, If we look a little prior to this line, in fact, the one right before this one is – "इत: परं ‘प्रत्यक्षानुमानसिद्धत्वे च’ इत्यत: पूर्वं वाक्यद्वयं मूलकोशेषु अदर्शनात् प्रक्षिप्तं इत्याहु: |", Wherein Sri Jayateertha clearly acknowledges that the lines are not available in the 'Moola Kosha' (Moola paatha) and yet he will write a commentary to them just like how normal water attains divinity by joining the holy Ganga, even these lines have some value. So this clearly means that Sri Jayateertha had access to the Moola Paatha and always validated every line of the 'Prachalita Paatha' against the 'Moola Paatha' before writing his commentaries.

So, there is no doubt about Sri Hrishikesha Teertha having blessed mankind with these manuscripts, like acharya himself said that the unavailability of these manuscripts until recently might have resulted in not a lot of commentators referring to them but at the same time one cannot claim that it is ONLY moola-paatha of Sarvamoolas out there. Hunting for discrepancies and inconsistencies will always yield fruits given the antiquity of all these manuscripts. This is why I feel it is important to be inclusive of these different versions of the actual texts instead of being divisive which only results in loss of precious wisdom.

After listening to this, I just got a little curious and tried to dig some with my very limited capabilities and found the line from Vishnutattvanirnaya. Would always appreciate a different dimension of understanding of the same lines if acharya or anyone else has got to contribute.