Monks who loved combat

Saints, we believe, surpass earthly rivalries and egos, leaving them without the desire to compete or dominate. Yet, their followers, who pen hagiographies (overblown life stories), often prove this notion incorrect. In these texts, the authors hail their gurus with miraculous feats to elevate their prestige. For instance, in Shankara's hagiographies, it's told that during his well-known debate with Mandan Mishra, competitors wore garlands – the winner was the one whose garland remained fresh at the debate's end. Allegedly, Shankara's garland stayed fresh. However, in 16th century Dharmakirti's Buddhist 'history' work, it's proclaimed that Shankara was defeated by Dharmakirti, and subsequently reincarnated thrice for rematch debates. Ultimately, Shankara acknowledges Buddhism as the true faith. So, what's the authentic version? Shankara's followers' account making him victorious, or the Buddhist's account naming him the loser? Also, in Odisha's Puri, as per temple history, Ramanuja tried altering temple rituals and woke up the next day in far-off Seemandhra's Srikurmam. People claimed a rock formation there was either Shiva linga or Vishnu kurma. As per a Sri Vaishnava tradition account, when Ramanuja placed Vishnu symbols in front of the deity and his opponents placed Shiva symbols, the deity adorned itself with the Vishnu symbols upon opening the temple doors. This reputed miracle confirmed the deity's Vaishnava identity within the Sri Vaishnava tale. Similarly, spiritual duels asserting one faith's supremacy over another, using miracles, become history for believers but fail to convince those adhering to scientific historiography.