[Advaita-l] Is Badarayana same as Vyasa?

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 10:20 AM kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> PraNAms
> Some thoughts.
> 1. There is a strong assertion that Brahmasutras refutes the theories of
> Buddism particularly the vijnana vaada.
>
2. Buddism is around 500 BC but the philosophical foundations were laid out
> much later presumably after the first Sangham. Nagarjuna is supposed to be
> around 3rd Century AD. Apparently, there are four vaadas in Buddhism itself
> as is been discussed and refuted by Advaita Acharyas.
> 3. Many traditional Acharyas and Meemamsakas equate Badarayana with Vyaasa.
> 4. There were supposed to be other Brahmasutras but they did not survive
> and only the Badarayana's was ultimately accepted since many acharyas made
> commentaries on it.
> 5. There is a theory that the author of the survived Brahmasutras,
> Badarayana, around 3rd or 4th century after Nagarjuna since there was no
> record of Nagarjuna acknowledging the existence of Brahmasutra.
> 6. Importance of Brahma Sutra is given more by Dviata and Visishtadvaita,
> since the claim is that it is in tune more with these philosophical
> positions that with Advaita. This statement is always refuted by Advaitins.
> 7. In the final analysis, it helps in clarifying or resolving some of the
> apparent contradictions in the smRities and shruti statements for an
> earnest seeker.
> Hari Om!Sadananda
>
>
Above points are from those who are asampradayvit-s !

Do not think shUnyavAda or vijnyAnavAda are fresh from a particular school
in the history. I remember according to one shruti pramANa (I will get in a
while), all vAdas are eternal and coexist with correct tatvagnyAna.

Madva quotes skAnda purANa (in introduction to His sUtra bhAshya) about
definition and the background info on the condition which necessitates
creation of sUtra-s.

(In fact, Madhva is the first ever commentator (among prior 21
commentators) to quote Sri.vEdavyAsa in regards to the sUtra-definition and
history of Brahma sUtra-s.)

According to this skAnda purANa quote, in the Krta Yuga, Narayana alone was
known and worshipped as the Supreme, and no doubt about this existed in any
quarter. Some doubts arose in the trEta yuga, and in the dvApara, due to
the sage Gautama's curse upon the Vaidika-s, the knowledge was severely
dissipated and the Vedic traditions got mixed up. Thus, when Narayana
Himself was approached by chatur-mukha brahmAdi dEvata-s He incarnated in
Satyavati and Parashara, and arranged the Vedas four-fold, with the
divisions further having 21, etc., rescensions. Further, in order to settle
the purport of these shruti-s conclusively, He composed the sUtra-s, those
having the qualities of 'alpAxaramasandighamH' etc. These sUtra-s are the
decisive tool for deciding the meanings of all the Vedic literature, and
indeed of all text-based pramANa-s. In this manner, having established the
knowledge for the benefit of all including Brahma, Rudra, etc., the Lord
Narayana sports, etc.

Thus, the concept that Brahma sUtra-s are the ‘nirNayaka' or the texts by
whom meaning is decided, with all the other texts (vEdas) being `nirNeya'
or texts whose meaning is decided, is based on this.

Note that Skanda Puraana explicitly says about Satyavati and Parashara in
context of author who eventually wrote sUtra-s. This is a strong evidence
for identity between Vyasa and Baadarayana.

/sv