The Madhaviya Sankara-digvijaya is not included in the canonical works of Sri Vidyaranya. This book was published with Sri Vidyaranya’s name in the Anandashram edition, Series no.22, Poona, only in 1891.

The author of this recent work is decidedly not Vidyaranya for the following reasons :-

1. The epithet Navakalidasa (Canto I, 9 & 10), assumed by the author, is not found in any of Vidyaranya’s works.

2. Navakalidasa Madhava, author of Bhagavatacampu, and Navakalidasa Madhava, author of Sankaradigvijaya, have been identified as one and the same person by scholars.

3. Many verses have been quoted in this work from the biographies written by Vyasacala, Tirumala Dikshita and Rajacudamani Dikshita – all posterior to Vidyaranya.

4. References to Sankaracarya’s meeting Udayana, Dandin, Mayura, Abinavagupta and Sriharsha, (made in this work), is historically wrong.

5. Vidyaranya’s style is generally simple, and his verses are in Anushtup metre (Pancadasi- all 1571 verses and Anubhuti- prakasa — all 2809 verses) are only in Anushtup.

6. Style of Sankaradigvijaya is akin to that of Bhagavata Campu.

7. Sankaradigvijaya is not noted in any recognised list of Vidyaranya’s works.

8.Guruvamsa Kavya and Madhaviya Sankaravijaya, the two most authoritative texts of the Sringeri matha give different versions of incidents of the life of Sankaracarya.

9. During the Tatanka Pratishta case, the Court asked the two parties to furnish evidence in support of their claim. Only the Kanchi Matha (defendant) placed ancient works like Sivarahasyam, Anandagiriyam Markandeya Samhita etc. as evidence. The plaintiffs did not produce any Sankaravijaya including Madhaviya before the Court. Hence, few eminent scholars opine that this work could have been prepared and produced after 1844, by using the name of Sri Vidyaranya muni.