bAdarAyaNa

[Guest guest]

Dear Mani:

 

Thanks very much for your prompt response. I wish to ask something more

specific, with respect to the statements below... If you say

 

[a] That Vyasa is NOT part of our AchArya paramparA, and

That bAdarAyaNa IS identified with Vyasa, and

[c] That bodhAyana is a shishya of bAdarAyaNa,

 

then at least one of the following must be true:

 

[1] That bodhAyana does NOT belong to SriVaishnava guru-paramparA,

[2] That Vyasa IS part of this paramparA, or

[3] That bAdarAyaNa is actually different from Vyasa.

 

If [3] is true, then who really was bAdarAyaNa?

> > What I do understand is that

> > the guru-paramparA begins with PerumAL and the Vedic rishi vyAsar is his

> > immediate disciple.

>

> No, the guru-paramparA begins with PerumaaL and Thaayaar,

> goes through Vishvaksena who gave upadesam to Nammalvar,

> who in turn gave upadesam to Nathamuni while the latter

> was engaged in yoga. Vyasa does not come in our acharya

> paramparA.

>

> > Next, I think (correction?) that the AchArya budhAyana

> > belonged to the Upanishadic period.

>

> Bodhayana is considered by tradition to be a sishya of

> Badarayana, the author of the Brahma Sutras. Badarayana

> is identified with Veda Vyasa.

 

Best wishes.

aDiyEn,

-SrInAth chakravarty

email: xsrinath

[Guest guest]

Srikanth,

 

Badarayana is traditionally identified by all Vedantins

as Veda Vyasa. Modern scholars, however, differ on this

issue. It really doesn't matter -- Badarayana is accepted

as an authority on the Vedanta irrespective of his true

identity.

 

It is also established that Badarayana/Vyasa is not in

the Sri Vaishnava acharya parampara. [The Guru Parampara

Prabhavam of Pinpazhagiya Perumaal Jiyar says that

Nammalvar gave Nathamuni the meanings of the three

rahasyas, the Divya Prabandham, and all the sampradAyic

expositions as well the secret of ashTAnga-yoga.]

 

Now, the question remains as to whether Badarayana

was a Sri Vaishnava. What do you mean by 'Sri Vaishnava'?

If you mean someone who espoused the philosophy of the

Vedas as expounded by Ramanuja, and someone who believed

that Sriman Narayana was the supreme reality, yes, of course

I think Badarayana was a Sri Vaishnava.

 

Please understand that just because Badarayana/Vyasa is

not in the official acharya parampara does not mean that

he is not an important teacher to Sri Vaishnavas. Badarayana

is important to all Vedic schools. If we are to believe

that Sri Vaishnavism is the authentic interpretation of the

Vedanta, Badarayana has to be a rishi of utmost importance

to us. After paying reverence to God, Ramanuja pays homage

to "pArASArya" or Vyasa in the Sribhashya. But in the theistic

revival of Vedanta spearheaded by Nathamuni in the 9th century,

the significant teachers are the Alvars (probably because they

were more recent in time, as well as because of the uniqueness

of the Prabandham), represented by Nammalvar. The acharya

parampara finds completion ultimately in God Himself. This is

the origin of the Ubhaya Vedanta tradition. So this is the

acharya parampara we revere today. I hope this is straightforward.

 

Mani

[Guest guest]

>

>We belong to Badarayana ( Sage VyAs is known as Badarayanar ) gotram

 

Just one question to the learned members of the list. Is the author

of Brahmasuutra, Sage Badaraayana the same as Vyaasa Bhagavaan? I

know most of the bhaashyakaara-s equate the two as one. But as one

finds it in the Brahmasuutra the criticism of not only saankhya and

yoga but also Bouddha and Jaina matams which puts the time of

suutrakaara to post-Buddha period. In fact the dialectic arguments

in Buddhism did not start till around Naagarjuna period. When we

think of Vyaasa Bhagavaan we think of pre-historic at least 5000

years ago. The equation of Sage Baadaraayana with Vyaasa Bhagavaan -

is it done to uplift the status of Brahmasuutra to the

prasthaanatrayam- If not how can one account for the criticism of the

post-Buddha philosophies. I am aware of the Giita sloka in 13th

Ch.-that has some reference to bharmasuutra - There the

interpretation could be also something other than the Baadaraayana

suutra-s. Any thoughts on this?

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda

--

K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623