[Advaita-l] Is Badarayana same as Vyasa?

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 7:05 AM kuntimaddi sadananda via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

>
> The question that no one has addressed is - Do the Brahmasutras refute
> Buddhistic philosophies or not?


Yes they do so along with refuting all other vAdas.



> If so, what is the data of the Brahmasutras and do we bring the Bhagavan
> vyaasa's period to post Buddha?
>

Such thinking needs an assumption that Buddhistic thought started ONLY from
Buddha and it was not existed prior. For that matter sUtras also refutes
such ideas as Brahman avAchyatva. We know that Adavita holds avAchya.
Irrespective of you agree that or not, but can you conclude BS was written
post-Shankara?

Gita also refutes many wrong ideas in one instance (talking about
asUri-svabhAva) and enumerates nir-Ishawara vAda. From this can you
conclude Gita is also post bhuddhistic?



> Quoting Puranas etc does not answer this question, does it?
>
>
>
No it does not unless you affirm date for purANa-s as post-buddhistic.

For that matter shruti mention about sUtras in general sense in every
creation cycle;

Br.up 4th adhyAya :

sa yatHaadreidhAgnErabhyahitasya pruTHag dhUmA vinischaranti, Evam
vA arE asya mahatO bhUtasya niHshwasitamEvaitad yadrigvEdO yajurvEdaH
sAmavEdO athH vrAngIrasa itihAsaH purANAm
vidyA upanishadaH shlOkaH ****sUtrANyanu**** vyAkhyAnAni vykhyAnisTaM hutA
mAtisham pAyitamayam cha lOkaH parachaH lOkaH sarvANi cha
bhUtanyasaivaitAni sarvANi niHshwasitAna ||

(Just like how smoke and sparks emits from the raw firewood, similarly;
from the Great Being of `hayagrIva' rUpi parabrahman, all
these of Rig-yajur-sAma-atharvaNa vEda-s, itihAsa (mahAbharata, ramAyaNa,
pancharAtra), purANa, mUla vEda, Upanishads, brahma sUtra, vEda-vykhyAna-s,
yAga, hOma, annadAna, jaladAna, aids to achieve paralOka, all charAchara
creatures emits at the beginning of creation. )

Your argument also can be refuted on another grounds. Essentially your
argument is based on pure tarka (if a given text refutes a school , then
that text MUST be posterior to such school). Such tarka makes sense ONLY
when we do not have any other channel of knowledge about that text. But in
the case of BS, we do no know from unbroken tradition that BS was written
at the junction of dvApara and kali period. So, pure tarka is impotent in
this case.

/sv