Bibliographic record
Abstract
What is the central philosophy of the Upanishads? Is it theistic, monistic, polytheistic, panpsychistic, or something else? Are the world and God real or unreal? Such questions have been a riddle for ancient sages and modern scholars of the Vedāntic tradition, alike. Interestingly, if any thinker has made this discourse more puzzling, it is none other than Śaṅkarācārya (c. 7th–9th centuries CE); through his famous dictum, Brahma satyam jagat-mithya jivo brahmaiva naparah (“Brahman alone is real, the world is unreal. Jiva is not other than Brahman”), he almost changed the entire Vedāntic paradigm, akin to Nietzsche in Western thought with his “God is Dead” dictum. Now, before any thinker embarks on the Vedāntic path, they must first encounter Śaṅkarācārya’s thesis in one way or another, as only then can one engage with notions including ethics, aesthetics, bhakti, karma, and others. Following the same line of inquiry, this review article investigates Professor K. Satchidananda Murty’s distinctive discourse on Vedānta and his engagement with Śaṅkarācārya’s philosophy, as portrayed in a recent edition of some of his works, titled Vedānta and Bhagavadgītā: The Unpublished Writings of K. Satchidananda Murty, proficiently compiled by Professor Ashok Vohra and Kotta Ramesh.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".