The Philosophy of the Vedantasutra: A Book Review

[Guest guest]

Greetings Advaitins:

 

This excellent book review on Brahmastutra was published in The Hindu Newspaper.

As the review points out, this book discusses all aspects of Brahmasutra from

the point of view of Advaita, Vishishtadvaita and Dvaita. The discussions are

scholarly and the book is well written for easy reading,

 

Ram Chandran

 

=========================================================

The Philosophy of the Vedantasutra: S. M. Srinivasachari; Munshiram Manoharlal

Publishers Pvt. Ltd., 54, Rani Jhansi Road, New Delhi-110055. Rs. 300.

 

The Vedantasutra, also called as Brahmasutra and by other names as well, was

composed by Badarayana, popularly known as Vyasa. Westerners place the Sutra

period as 2nd Century B.C., perhaps to glorify the Greek philosophy as more

ancient; but traditionally and historically, the Sutra period is reckoned as

earlier than 3000 B.C. The Vedantasutras are primarily intended to elucidate

and clarify difficult and complicated truths of the Upanishads and to

synthesise the apparently conflicting doctrines found in the Vedic literature.

 

The Brahmasutra consists of four chapters and each chapter consists of four

parts. The first two chapters discuss the nature of Brahman, the third chapter

the means for obtaining Brahman and the fourth talks of the end-result or the

supreme goal. The Sutras, being short and cryptic, have been interpreted in

diverse ways by various scholars, to accord with their own philosophy, the

most notable among them being Sankara, Ramanuja and Madhwa. Although some

Sutras are capable of many different interpretations because of their seemingly

ambiguous character, many are capable of straightforward interpretation, per

se. The Vedanta system of philosophy is concerned with five major issues

viz., the nature of Brahman, nature of Jivatma and its relation to Brahman,

nature of the universe and its relation to Brahman, nature of the supreme goal

and the means of attaining the same.

 

The book under review contains a critical study of the Brahmasutra to determine

the stand it takes on various controversial issues of philosophy. The author,

who is a reputed scholar in Sanskrit and Vedanta philosophy, begins with the

definition and nature of Brahman. While traversing the Sutras contained in

chapter 1-1, on the interpretation of which there is not much variation among

the three major systems of philosophy viz., Advaita, Vishishtadvaita and

Dvaita, except that Sankara interprets these as pertaining to the lower (Apara)

Brahman, the author discusses the two definitions of Brahman, contained in the

Upanishads. One of them defining Brahman as the source of the universe etc.,

(Taittiriya Upanishad 3-1-1) has been adopted in the Vedantasutras (1-1-2)

which can refer only to Brahman with attributes (Saguna). So the Advaitins

prefer the other definitions of Brahman as Reality, Knowledge and Infinite.

(Taittiriya Upanishad 2-1-1) which is interpreted by them as referring to

Brahman

The earlier definition is called by Advaitins as accidental only (Upalakshana

or Tatastha lakshana) and hence the latter definition is claimed as

authoritative. After discussing these aspects, the author goes on to chapter

1-2 of the Sutras which postulate the various special characteristics of

Brahman like being the imperishable Reality, inner controller of all and ruler

of all souls, all of which apply to Savisesha Brahman only, i.e., with

attributes. He analyses in detail the commentaries on these of the three great

Acharyas - Sankara, Ramanuja and Madhwa - on these and the similarities and

variations inter se. The theory of two Brahmans advocated by the Advaitins

viz. one without attributes (Nirguna and Nirvisesha) who is higher (Para) and

the other inferior (Apara) one with attributes (Saguna and Savisesha) is next

taken up for discussion. There is no explicit or implicit reference to two

Brahmans in Vedantasutras. Sankara, however, interprets Sutra 3-2- 11 as

referring to two Brahman

The essential points of difference on the nature of the universe are next taken

up for discussion. Whereas Sankara holds the universe is only illusory and not

real, the other two Acharyas hold it as real only. The doctrine of ``maya'' or

``avidya'' preached by Sankara and the theory of illusoriness of the universe

are not indicated or hinted in the Vedantasutras. Again Sankara and Ramanuja

accept Brahman as the material cause also (Upadana Karana) of the universe,

which is disputed by Madhwa who holds Brahman as only the instrumental cause

(Nimitta Karana) of the universe. Discussing the commentaries of all the three

Acharyas, the author concludes that Ramanuja's interpretation is faithful to

the original Sutras. Another major point of difference is about the nature of

the Jivatma. Sankara preaches the identity of Jivatma and Paramatma, which is

contested by the other two Acharyas. There is no Sutra which declares the

identity of Jivatma and Paramatma while there are several Sutras emphasisi

Some modern scholars, including the noted western scholar, Thibaut, contend

that there is a divergence of views between the Upanishads and the Brahmasutra;

while the Upanishads support the Advaita view, the Vedantasutra supports the

Visishtadvaita theory. But none of the orthodox schools of philosophy accepts

any differences between the two texts and in fact, these two, together with the

Bhagavad Gita constitute a trio, called the Prasthana Traya or the three bases

of Vedanta philosophy. As a fitting rejoinder to the modern thesis mentioned

supra, the author, in a scholarly analysis, takes up each major issue like the

nature of Brahman, the nature of universe etc., and establishes that there is

really no variation in the philosophy of the Upanishads and the Vedantasutra.

The genesis of the three major systems of Vedanta philosophy and the logical

and historical transformation in philosophical doctrines from the Madhyamika

(Buddhist) system of absolute nihilism to Advaita and then on to Vis

Book Review Author: V. N. Gopala Desikan, The Hindu: 27-10-1998 :: Pg:

28 :: Col: d

Source: An Article from the Religious Section of The Hindu taken with

permission: "Copyrights 2000 The Hindu & Tribeca Internet Initiatives Inc."