[Advaita-l] Regarding the Pancharatra, Shankara is one with Purvamimamsa

[V Subrahmanian]

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 12:14 PM, Kalyan <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com> wrote:

> //Now it is clear with no ambiguity that Shankara specifies Badrayana as
> the Brahma sutra author://
>
> No one is contesting that sutra author is Badarayana. I could not see any
> evidence in Shankara bhashya that this person is same as Vyasa.
>

The evidence was shown already.  It is subjective to accept it or not.

>
>
>
> On Wednesday, July 18, 2018, 12:08:22 AM GMT+5:30, V Subrahmanian <
> v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Now it is clear with no ambiguity that Shankara specifies Badrayana as the
> Brahma sutra author:
>
> The very last of the BS is introduced by Shankara as - Bhagavan Badarayana
> Acharya is giving (a) reply in this sutra:
>
> सातिशयत्वादन्तवत्त्वम् ऐश्वर्यस्य स्यात् ; ततश्च एषामावृत्तिः प्रसज्येत —
> इत्यतः उत्तरं भगवान्बादरायण आचार्यः पठति —………
>
> अनावृत्तिः शब्दादनावृत्तिः शब्दात् ॥ २२ ॥
>
> I had seen the line several times in the Advaita Sharada search but not in
> conjunction with the sutra and just passed over. It was only due to an
> external intervention that my attention was drawn to this line again, with
> the sutra.  In the close to a dozen places where 'Badarayana' occurs in the
> BS, Shankara invariably adds 'Bhagavan', 'Acharya' to the name. In all the
> cases the sutra itself has that name and while commenting Shankara gives
> that honorific.  But in this last sutra, the sutra does not have that name
> and yet Shankara says '...Badarayana..reads (the sutra).
>
> Thus, we have an indirect reference to Vyasa as the sutrakara and a direct
> reference to Badarayana as the sutrakara. Padmapada salutes 'Badarayana' as
> Vedanta acharya.  Bhaskara has also said Badarayana as sutrakara.
> Anandagiri 13CE commenting on the above bhashya says:  Shankara is saluting
> the sutrakara.  Ratnaprabha too says it is a puja of the sutrakara.
>
> Om Tat Sat
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:57 PM, Kalyan <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I am not speculating anything. I am trying to see if there is any evidence
> supporting Vyasa-Badarayana identity. Your definition of Acharyas does not
> include Shankara, Bhaskara, Ramanuja.
>
>
> On Tuesday, July 17, 2018, 8:49:48 PM GMT+5:30, V Subrahmanian <
> v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:04 PM, Kalyan <kalyan_kg at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> //Unless there was a need felt for it.  For them there was no confusion
> about this. //
>
> This is pure speculation.
>
>
> Actually a Vyasa-Badrayana divide as author of the BS  is what amounts to
> speculation. We have possibly the earliest Acharyas/authors using these
> names to denote the author of the BS.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>