Guest guest Posted May 8, 2003 Report Share Posted May 8, 2003 Namaste Sri Sadananda! Thank you for your kind comment on my recent post on Hinduism. I'm glad you didn't find it too 'flowery'. Actually, I like flowers very much... Now, as for the Brahma Sutras. I know this month is on bhakti, but I am studying your notes and have a quick question. Please understand that I mean no disrespect to those scriptures, but it seems to me that those first few sutras which you analyze are very thin threads indeed to hang so much interpretation on. No wonder we have Advaita, Visistadvaita and Dvaita! I guess you already made some comments along these lines, but how do you really feel about the legitimacy of getting so much mileage out of such enigmatic statements? Frankly, I find it more fruitful to read the Upanishads themselves. I feel that there is no more error of misinterpretation when going directly to the Upanishads than in studying the Brahma Sutras. In fact, there may be less error of misinterpretation, despite the seeming inconsistency of some of the statements in the Upanishads. Do you disagree? Hari Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2003 Report Share Posted May 8, 2003 --- Benjamin Root <orion777ben wrote: > Frankly, I find it more fruitful to read the Upanishads > themselves. I feel that there is no more error of misinterpretation > when going directly to the Upanishads than in studying the Brahma > Sutras. In fact, there may be less error of misinterpretation, > despite the seeming inconsistency of some of the statements in the > Upanishads. Do you disagree? Benjamin - you are right - I do not disagree with you. Brahmasuutra-s are suppose to provide 'samanvaya' or self-consistency in the Vedanta statements - If there are 10 different bhaashya-s on it each commentator claiming that his philosophy is the one that is echoed in the suutra-s, there is some problem - is it not? If Upanishads made sense to you without the need of suutra-s then why bother reading the suutra-s. As I had mentioned in the introduction itself it is needed only for those who want to examine the apparent inconsistencies in the Vedantic statements- needed more so for teachers who want to teach others. The first suutra-s provide the essence - the rest is essentially further commentary on those. Emphasis is placed on the first four sutra-s. That is my opinion since you asked. Hari OM! Sadananda ===== What you have is His gift to you and what you do with what you have is your gift to Him - Swami Chinmayananda. The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.