Sankara was a Vedanti. Mandana was a Mimansaka. Vedanta is also called “Later Mimansa” while Mimansa itself if referred as the “Former Mimansa.” These are two of the six schools of philosophy from the Sanatana tradition. Other four being Samkhya, Yoga, Nyaya and Vaisheshika. Sankara and Mandana were prominent figures of their respective schools of Hindu philosophy. And since they were contemporary, it was almost inevitable that they would cross paths.
Sankara had embarked upon a journey to stake claims for the superiority of his Adwaita-Vedenta (non-dualistic) philosophy. But it wasn’t possible without defeating Mandana in an open debate (Shastrartha). Originally from Mahismati, Mandana was then situated in Kashi. Sankara went all the way to Benaras to debate him.
Mandana was disciple of Kumarila Bhatta. Kumarila was a stanuch Mimansaka, one who originated the Bhatta-mata of Mimansa school of philosophy. He had already defeated Buddhists in Shastrartha. Thus in a way he had made the work of Sankara easier. The dualist Madhva too was a follower of Kumarila. Thus a streak of philosophical conflicts can be traced between Sankara and the disciples-followers of Kumarila.
The Sankara-Mandana debate if one of the most celebrated ones of Indian philosophy. It has become a part of legends now. The debate began in Kashi. Some say it kept going for 21 days, some other claim that it was actually for 42 days. Finally Sankara defeated Mandana. As Sankara was about to rise from his Gaadi, Mandana’s wife Devi Bharti came forth and said : “I am the better half of Mandana. Your victory over Mandana can’t be complete until you also defeat me in the debate.” So it began all over again. Eventually Sanakar also defeated Bharti in debate. Then Bharti played a trump card.
She said : “How about carnal knowledge? Let’s have some debate on that too.”
Sankara was taken aback. He was a celibate and knew nothing about carnal pleasures. Bharti, emboldened by the sight of a faltering Sankara, now insisted that until you don’t debate me on the sexual experiences, you can’t be rendered victorious.
Sankara said, I need some time. Let me revert back to you few days later. Mandana and Bharti agreed. Sankara knew the art of mutation. As the legend goes, he entered the body of a king and 24 Karmashraya, 20 Dyutashraya, 16 Shayanopacharika and 4 Uttar-kala, thus practiced all 64 tricks of carnal pleasure and returned a pro. Then he defeated Bharti even in the discourse on sexuality. Mandana and Bharti both became disciples of Sankara.
This legned has an underlying metaphor to it. That it’s not possible to see through carnal pleasures until we don’t know how to mutate. That whosoever will identify himself of herself with sexual sensation will be doomed. And that Sankara was too wise to not know the art of transformations and transitions. He gained knowledge of sex through a body which was not his own but analyzed the experice with his own wisdom keeping his celibacy intact. Thus the circle completed. The great ascetic and sage defeated a woman in a debate, which was not about Vedanta philosophy, but about the secret joys of sexual intercourse.
The name of Bharthari can be evoked in this context. Bharthari had composed three Shatakas. When he was a ruler, he wrote Neeti Shataka, a doctrine on statesmanship. When he was a lover, he wrote Shringar Shataka, a doctrine on love. And eventually when he became an ascetic, he wrote Vairagya Shataka, a doctrine on abstinence. The Shatratha with Mandana was a Bharthari moment for Sankara, during the course of which he made his journey from abstinence to carnal pleasure and then back to where he begun from.
Sanakra has written the most authentic commentary on “Ishavasya Upnisada”, but only after the Mandana debate he would have understood the real meaning of “Ten Tyakten Bhunjitha”, which says, one who renounce is the one who really indulge in pleasures, which also implies that only he can renounce, who had it in the first place.