interesting views from Dr. SMS Chari's Sribhasya class

[Guest guest]

Shreemathe Srivan Satagopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatheendra Maha Desikaya Namaha:

Shreemathe Lakshmi Nrisimha Divya paaduka Sevaka Srivan Satagopa Sri

Narayana Yatheendra Maha Desikaya Namaha

Asmad Gurubyo Namha, Sri Lakshmi Nrisimha parabramhane Namaha.

 

For the last few days I am attending classes from Dr. CHari regarding

SriBhasya. These ideas were very informative. There is no doubt that the

very birth of Sribhasya is to establish a system of vedanta different from

advaita and the rest. The approach taken by Sri Ramanuja is unique and very

thorough. Let us examine some aspects here:

 

The first sutra establishes the context of sutras: Atha Atho Bramha

Jijnasa. Then, therefore enquiry into bramhan.

 

What is this bramhan? How can it ever mean - Nirvishesha bramhan ( ie. an

Entity without any attributes??) Let us look into the etymological meaning

of the word bramhan - brihatvaat brimhanatvaat cha bramha ityucchate.

Brihatvaat - because it is big (in every sense - shape, size, attributes

etc.) brimhanatvaat - that which makes the rest to grow big (Bramhan-

creates this prakriti or universe which is huge---sort of infinite in size

and also it helps the jeevatma's knowledge to grow - as indicated by the

sruthi sentence - sa cha aaananthyaya kalpate (Jeevan though infinitesimal

then expands to infinity ie. is the jnanam of jeeva.). Hence the term

bramha - etymologically means that which is big and makes others big! how

can this be an entity without attributes? The very term bramha means it has

attributes. So the very subject of bramha sutras cannot be nirvishesha bramhan.

 

This is further confirmed by the next sutra - janmaadyasya yathaha - from

whom this universe is created, protected, in whom all this gets destroyed,

etc. - is bramhan. So the action of creation, destruction, protection

become attributes of this bramhan - they are tatastha lakshanas - ie.

incidental attributes not attributes of form of bramhan (they are satyam

jnanam anantham). Since action is indicated in creation etc., then bramhan

is definitely not nirvishesha here. Even Sri Sankaracharya accepts that

bramhan here means ishwara - who is Saguna who is ultimately not real -

only relatively real as per advaita. Then where in the sutras is the

nirvishesha aspects discussed??? we will come to this in a different sutra

and see whether it is really mentioned there. sribhasya's view is that this

issue is never discussed in bramhasutras. the only sutra which talks close

to identity is the avibhagena drishtatvaat. this aspect will be examined in

another mail.

 

 

NOTE: As per advaita, major importance is not given to Bramha sutras and

Bhagawadgita - since they are both paurusheya - ie. they are not unauthored

like the Vedas or Upanishads. Visisitadvaitins strongly uphold all the

three canons - prasthana traya - ie. upanishads, bramhasutras, bhagawadgita.

The sutras are definitely non-descriptive and hence offer possibilitiies for

different interpretations. Atleast Sri Ramanuja's and Sri Shankara's

commentaries are comparable since they atleast agree with the vishaya vakyas

- upanishadic statement references. In fact the interesting issue is the

striking similarity between these bhasyas - except the maya issue, and

nirvishesha issues!. It is quite difficult to compare Sri Madhva bhasya and

Sribhasya since their reference vedanta vakyas - are different and they have

a number of areas of disagreement regarding the very topic of the sutras.

 

 

Krishna P. Kalale