later times Brahmasutra along with Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita became the The present attempt is not a commentary of Shri Madhva's Bhashya but only. Get this from a library! Śrīmadbrahmasūtrabhāṣyam = The Brahmasutra bhashya of Sri Madhvacharya. [Madhva; Jayatīrtha; Vyāsatīrtha; Rāghavendra, Swami;. BrahmaSuthra Bhashya of Acharya Madhwa (Moola Only) in Kannada and Sanskrit Script are attached in PDF Format. Sri Narayana Pandithacharya says " The.
|Language:||English, Spanish, German|
|ePub File Size:||15.36 MB|
|PDF File Size:||12.33 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Register to download]|
Brahmasutra Bhasya of Sri Madhvacharya with Glosses of Sri jayatirth, Sri Vyasatirtha and Sri Raghvendratirtha. The Vedanta Sutras with the commentary by Sri MadhvacharyaA Complete English Translation by Identifier: BrahmasutraMadhvaEnglish. book online. Brahma Sutra Bhashya (Sri Madhvacharya) Dvaita commentary on the Brahma Sutras. Madhva vijaya ronaldweinland.info Uploaded by.
You are on page 1of Search inside document This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project to make the worlds books discoverable online. It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge thats often difcult to discover. Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this le - a reminder of this books long journey from the publisher to a library and nally to you.
Quite frequently, the plural nature of the collection of sUtra-s is not made explicit, and one refers to the entire text as such-and-such a sUtra, as if it were in fact a single work. Quite naturally, then, the author of the sUtra-s for each school occupies the highest rank among the scholars of that school, and is regarded as its founder or progenitor, and as the primary guru of all others claiming loyalty to that scholarly tradition.
The authors of each school's sUtra, aptly called its sUtrakAra-s, are: gautama for the nyAya school, kaNAda for the vaisheshhika school, kapila for the sAMkhya school, patanjali for the yoga school, jaimini for the mImAmsa school, and bAdarAyaNa for the vedAnta school.
Each school has its unique aspects whereby it tries to satisfy the spiritual aspirations of its adherents.
Of these, the vedAnta school concerns itself with the understanding of brahman, the entity referred to in the veda-s and upanishhad-s, who is variously described as the Creator, the Supersoul, the Supreme Self, etc.
The brahma-sUtra is the authoritative exposition of vedAnta, but it is by no means the first, and is designed to provide an objective criticism of views held by others.
He also makes references to jaimini, the mImAmsa scholar, accepting the latter's views in a few instances and modifying them in others. He also refers to himself by name, apparently implying that he refers to some point he has expounded in another work. As such, it is clear that the brahma-sUtra was written at a time when the six schools in general, and vedAnta in particular, were already widely known, and discourse among their scholars had already developed to a very great degree.
There is a tradition of thought that says that all scholars named by bAdarAyaNa were in fact his own disciples and that he has immortalized them through the medium of his sUtra-s, by referring to their contributions in interpreting difficult propositions, while supporting or modifying their views in his final conclusions. After bAdarAyaNa, all scholars have accepted his authority in the final interpretation of vedAnta.
There are three kinds of vedAntic texts, called the prasthAna-traya, which are considered to be of prime importance: these are the veda-s and upanishhad-s, the brahma-sUtra, and the bhagavadgItA. It is possible to date the bhagavadgItA, and the mahAbhArata that it is part of, to a time before the advent of Buddhism.
Considering that there is a specific reference to the brahma-sUtra in the 'gItA, in verse XIII-5 of the latter work, it is possible to date the brahma-sUtra also to a time before Buddhism.
In fact, bodhAyana, a scholar dated to B. In his commentary upon the brahma-sUtra, rAmAnuja refers to a varttika explanatory text by bodhAyana in which the latter shows familiarity with both the mImAmsa-sUtra and the brahma-sUtra, and in fact considers them to be two parts of a complete exposition.
Unfortunately, no copies of this varttika survive to the present day, and it is also not quoted from by any other scholar. However, it may be presumed that the text did exist in rAmAnuja's time, and combined with the known familiarity of bodhAyana with the bhagavadgIta, goes to show that the brahma-sUtra was definitely already accepted as a canonical text by his time. This problem may be resolved if we consider that tradition identifies bAdarAyaNa, the author of the brahma-sUtra, with veda-vyAsa, the author of the mahAbhArata of which the bhagavadgItA is a part.
Although there seems to be little evidence apart from the word of tradition to back up this claim, it seems to make sense, since then the apparent paradox can be resolved; the same author could very well have written both works in any order; he could add a reference to an as-yet-unwritten text, knowing that he was going to write it, and also knowing what he was going to write in it.
It might be argued that at least one text has had spurious insertions made into it to apparently refer to the other, and that it is thus unnecessary to posit that the authors of the two are the same.
However, it is not found that the various rescensions of the brahma-sUtra are different, with some not having the questionable references; all copies of the brahma-sUtra as obtained from a variety of sources carry them. Moreover, considering the flow of the discourse in the bhagavadgItA and the brahma-sUtra, it seems very unlikely that the references are spurious insertions; they fit in well with the general background of the discussion, and do not stand out as later insertions presumably would.
Thus, the hypothesis that the author of the brahma-sUtra is also the author of the bhagavadgItA stands reaffirmed. Commentaries upon the brahma-sUtra Owing to its importance, the brahma-sUtra has spawned a rather large number of bhAshhya-s commentaries which seek to amplify bAdarAyaNa's very terse writing.
This is the longest chapter with sutras spread over 67 adhikaranas. The topics discussed are diverse. This is the shortest chapter with 78 sutras and 38 adhikaranas.
The main topic discussed is the journey of the jiva after death to Brahmaloka by the 'arciradimarga' or 'devayana', the path of light or of gods.
These sub-commentaries, in turn, inspired other derivative texts in the Advaita school. Ramanuja also wrote a commentary on the Brahma sutra, called Sri Bhasya , which lays the foundations of the Vishishtadvaita tradition. In this, he firmly refutes the Advaita view as proposed by Adi Shankara in his commentary. Ramanuja's commentary enjoys the status of being titled Sri Bhashya, unlike the other commentaries which are named after their respective authors.
It is said that Sharada herself titled the work of Ramanuja as the Sri Bhashyam. In the th century, Madhvacharya wrote commentaries on Brahma Sutras, which describe the supremacy of Lord Vishnu or Narayana.