Brahma Sutras - Knowledge

2039: 1723: 7101: 2583: 2632: 8407: 2874:) literature, such as the epics, lyric poetry, drama and so forth. What is especially worthy of attention is that the Hindu religious sects, the common faith of the Indian populace, looked to Vedanta philosophy for the theoretical foundations for their theology. The influence of Vedanta is prominent in the sacred literatures of Hinduism, such as the various Puranas, Samhitas, Agamas and Tantras. Many commentaries on the fundamental scripture of Vedanta, the 2127: 8417: 8396: 2402: 6847: 8427: 1591:: non-conflict, non-contradiction): discusses and refutes the possible objections to Vedānta philosophy, and states that the central themes of Vedanta are consistent across the various Vedic texts. The Brahma Sūtra states, examines and dismisses the refutations raised by other schools of thought, those now classified under Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism. The second chapter consists of 157 sutras, with thirteen 868:-perspective, arguing, as John Koller states: "that Brahman and Atman are, in some respects, different, but, at the deepest level, non-different (advaita), being identical." The first chapter unifies the different views of Brahman or Absolute Reality found in the Upanishads. The second chapter reviews and addresses the objections raised by the ideas of competing orthodox schools of Hindu philosophies such as 2533: 6839: 53: 2836:, states Paul Deussen, "stands to the Upanishad's in the same relation as the Christian Dogmatics to the New Testament: it investigates their teaching about God, the world, the soul, in its conditions of wandering and of deliverance, removes apparent contradictions of the doctrines, binds them systematically together, and is specially concerned to defend them against the attacks of the opponents". 2490: 2449: 2360: 2319: 2277: 2230: 2197: 2169: 2083: 1005:, the latter credited with authoring Mimamsa Sutras of the Mimamsa school of Hindu philosophy. This is likely, given that both Badarayana and Jaimini quote each other as they analyze each other's theories, Badarayana emphasizing knowledge while Jaimini emphasizes rituals, sometimes agreeing with each other, sometimes disagreeing, often anti-thesis of the other. 1907:

3.4.28 to 3.4.31 whether there are restrictions on food (meat) one can ingest, during the spiritual journey. The sutras, translates Thibaut, derive from the Vedic texts that there is "a prohibition of doing harm to any living creature", however, the scriptures state, "only in danger of life, in cases of highest need, food of any kind is permitted to be eaten".

2878:, were written by the founders or leading scholars of the various sects of Hinduism, and they are transmitted to this day as documents indispensable in the respective sectarian traditions. The majority of the traditional and conservative scholars in India today, called Pandits, are students of Vedanta, and an overwhelming number belong to the lineage of 3085:

philosophical issue within Advaita thought. Advaita need not explain why a perfect deity was motivated to create the world, nor why an all-loving God created a world with evil. Ultimately, for Advaita, there is no creation, nor any God who creates the world. The highest truth is Brahman, one without a second, the true self, atman."

2843:, sacrifices and ceremonies like the Old Testament, and a Part of Knowledge (jnana-kanda) which focuses on metaphysical questions about the world, creator, soul, theology, morals and virtues like the New Testament. The respective influence of the two documents, of the New Testament on Christianity, and the 1534:

and its fruits". Shankara takes it as referencing the "acquisition of the four requisite" qualities: "discrimination between eternal and non-eternal things, aversion to the enjoyment of the objects of sense here and in the next world, possession of self-restraint, tranquillity etc., and the desire to

3084:

Stephen Kaplan writes (abridged): "Avidya is the fundamental existential problem and the fundamental philosophical/theological problem within Advaita Vedanta. It is the cause of the evil that exists within the world. Remove ignorance and one will realize that atman is Brahman. It is also the crucial

2679:

The sutras in the text can be, and have been read in different ways. Some commentators read each line separately, while others sometimes read two as one treating some sutras as contextually connected. Creative readers have read the last word of a sutra as the starting word for the next, some treat a

1339:

Sutras were meant to assist the memory of the student who had gone through long discussions with his guru, as memory aids or clues and maximum thoughts were compressed in a few words which were unambiguous, giving the essence of the arguments on the topic. The Sutras of the text, states Adi Shankara

2750:

is used, which would mean both "without" and "in the midst". Shankara, Ramanuja, and Nimbarka agree that the word means "in the midst", but Madhva argues that the word must mean "without". It is very likely that the interpretations given by Shankara, Ramanuja, Nimbarka, and Madhva did not originate

1759:

The third chapter focuses on the yearning for knowledge of Brahman, and the means to attain it. Dissatisfaction with mundane life and strengthening the wish for liberation is invoked, treating the theory of death and rebirth, karma and importance of conduct and free will, and the connection between

1542:

The sutras 1.1.5-11 address the Samkhya school's view that Brahman couldn't be the cause of the world, and that the Principle of the world is unconscious. The text refutes this claim by using scriptural references to establish that the Principle of the world is conscious and the Brahman itself. The

1635:

has been variously interpreted by various monist, theistic and other sub-schools of Vedanta. The Advaita school for example, states Francis Clooney, asserts that the "identity of Atman and Brahman" based Advaita system is the coherent system while other systems conflict with the Upanishads, or are

1574:

The first chapter in sutras 1.4.1-15 presents the Samkhya theories on Prakriti, and rejects its theories by demonstrating that they are inconsistent with and misinterpretations of the Katha, Brihadaranyaka, Shvetashvatara and Taittiriya Upanishad. Sutras 1.4.23-27 argue, according to many schools,

1356:

of Hinduism, summarizing, arranging, unifying and systematizing the Upanishadic theories, possibly "written from a Bhedābheda Vedāntic viewpoint." The Vedic literature had grown into an enormous collection of ideas and practices, ranging from practical rituals (karma-kanda) to abstract philosophy

1906:

In sutras 3.4.26 and 3.4.27, the text adds that rituals, however, can spiritually prepare a mind, remove impurities within, empower calmness and distractions from sensory pursuits, and therefore assist in its ability to meditate and gain the ultimate knowledge. The text also discusses, in sutras

1946:

The opening sutras of chapter 4 continue the discussion of meditation as means to knowledge, with sutra 4.1.3 summarizing it to be the state where the person accepts, "I am Brahman, not another being" (Adi Shankara), as "Thou indeed I am, O holy divinity, and I indeed thou art, O holy divinity"

3094:

The sutras 2.2.18 to 2.2.27 state and refute the 'persistence of subject and substance' theory, and sutras 2.2.28 to 2.2.32 state and refute the 'everything is void' theory of Buddhism. However, the arguments offered by monist and theistic sub-schools of Vedanta differ, particularly those of

1662:

The atomistic physico-theological theories of Vaisheshika and Samkhya school are the focus of the first seventeen sutras of Pada 2.2. The theories of Buddhism are refuted in sutras 2.2.18 through 2.2.32, while the theories of Jainism are analyzed by the text in sutras 2.2.33 through 2.2.36.

1678:

of chapter 2 discuss whether the world has an origin or not, whether the universe is co-eternal with Brahman or is an effect of Brahman (interpreted as dualistic God in theistic sub-schools of Vedanta), and whether the universe returns into Brahman periodically. The last nine

829:(arranger), but probably an accumulation of incremental additions and changes by various authors to an earlier work, completed in its surviving form in approx. 400–450 CE. The oldest version may be composed between 500 BCE and 200 BCE, with 200 BCE being the most likely date. 1666:

The theories of other orthodox traditions are discussed in 2.2.37 through 2.2.45. Ramanuja and Shankara disagree in their formulation as well as critique of then extant orthodox traditions, in their respective commentaries, but both agree that the theory on emergence of

1910:

The last three sutras of the chapter 3 assert that a person, pursuing means to spiritual knowledge, should seek a childlike state of innocence, a psychological state that is free of anger, self-centeredness, pride and arrogance. The text declares that according to the

3118:, as a practice of concentrating on an object of meditation, states Witz, a state of "absorption or immersion into essentially a single thought" and "concentrating on it, excluding conventional notions, till one if as completely identified with it as with one's body". 2038: 1647:

asserts in 2.1.13 through 2.1.20 that the subject and object are one in Brahman, which agrees with Samkhya that there is an identity in cause and effect, adding that the Brahman and the empirical world are therefore one. The sutras 2.1.21 through 2.1.36 present the

1636:

internally inconsistent, or incoherent with observed reality and cosmos. The theistic sub-schools interpret the text to be stating that Atman is different from Brahman, and thereafter each explains how other systems conflict with the Upanishads or are incoherent.

1415:

in several sutras. Additionally, it also mentions Upanishads that are now unknown and lost. The contents of the text also acknowledge and analyze the various Vedic schools, and mentions the existence of multiple, diverging versions of the same underlying text.

1024:. The exact century of its composition or completion in final form is unknown. 200 BCE seems to be the most likely date for its initial composition, with scholars such as Lochtefeld suggesting that the text was composed sometime between 500 and 200 BCE, while 1726:

The Vedanta texts, state sutras 3.1.1-4 and 3.3.5-19 of Brahmasutra, describe different forms of meditation. These should be combined, merged into one and practiced, because there is nondifference of their basic import, that of Self, mind, knowledge and a

1357:(jnana-kanda), with different and conflicting theories on metaphysical problems, diverse mutually contradicting unsystematized teachings on rituals and philosophies present in the Upanishads. Traditions of textual interpretation developed. While Jaimini's 2796:

in detail and has written the conclusion that Nimbarka's and Ramanuja's balanced commentaries give the closest meaning of the Brahma Sutras taking into account of both kinds of Sutras, those which speak of oneness and those which speak of difference.

1833:

of third and fourth pada, states Thibaut, assert that there is no contradiction in these teachings and that "the different Upanishads have to be viewed as teaching the same matter, and therefore the ideas must be combined in one meditation".

4824: 4787: 4757: 4701: 4664: 4651: 4626: 4549: 4478: 4453: 4440: 4427: 1652:, offering its own doctrine to address it, asserting that Brahman is neither unjust nor cruel, and that inequality and evil exists in the world because of will, choices and circumstances created by actions of living beings over time. 5484: 4345: 5478: 5490: 1020:, because it mentions and critiques the ideas of Buddhism and Jainism in Chapter 2. The text's relative chronology is also based on the fact that Badarayana quotes all major known orthodox Hindu schools of philosophy except 1611:

is wrong, and that the Upanishads substantiate the conscious Brahman as the cause of the world, the second chapter is engaged in responding to objections against the doctrine of Brahman raised in other schools. The first

2771:

has been translated into German by Paul Deussen, and in English by George Thibaut. The Thibaut translation is, state De Bary and Embree, "probably the best complete translation in English". Vinayak Sakaram Ghate of

1519:, the ultimate reality. Brahman is the source from which the world came into existence, in whom it inheres and to which it returns. The only source for the knowledge of this Brahman is the Sruti or the Upanishads. 5407: 1402:

philosophies which it holds in high regards. It recurrently refers to them in all its four chapters, adding in sutras 2.1.3 and 4.2.21 that Yoga and Samkhya are similar. The text cites and quotes from the ten

3148:

was possibly the earliest, and one who is revered by different and antagonistic sub-schools of Vedanta; he is mentioned by Shankara, Bhaskara and even by scholars of non-Vedanta schools of Hindu philosophies.

1543:

remaining sutras in Pada 1.1 and all sutras in Padas 1.2 and 1.3 assert that Brahman is the primary focus of the Upanishads, is various aspects of empirical reality, quoting various verses in support, from

3721:

Peter M Scharf (1996), The Denotation of Generic Terms in Ancient Indian Philosophy: Grammar, Nyāya, and Mīmāṃsā, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series, Vol. 86, No. 3, pages i-x

3041:; and the third stratum of the text was chronologically added last, defending the Vedanta philosophy from the new theories from opposing heterodox schools of Indian philosophies. About 15 sutras of the 2839:

The Vedas, according to Vedanta, consists of two parts, states Deussen, which show "far reaching analogy with the Old and New Testaments", a Part of Works (karma-kanda) which includes the benedictory

3712:

Francis X Clooney (1997), What's a God? The Quest for the Right Understanding of devatā in Brāhmaṇical Ritual Theory (Mīmāṃsā), International Journal of Hindu Studies, Vol. 1, No. 2, pages 337-385

3131:, along with those of Tanka, Dramida, Bhartriprapanca, Bhartrimitra, Bhartrihari (5th-century), Brahmadatta and Shrivatsanka are mentioned by 12th-century Ramanuja and 11th-century Yamunacharya's 2755:

themselves were written. It is extremely difficult to determine which of the commentators' interpretations are actually faithful to the original, and there is a possibility that the author of the

1575:

that Brahman is the efficient cause and the material cause of the world. The last sutra of the first chapter extends the arguments that refutes Samkhya theories to the atomists' theories (the

1786:

And as is the case of (physical) light and the like, there is the non-distinction (of two Selves), the light (Self) by its activity, on account of repeated declarations (in the Scripture).

1735:: the means): describes the process by which ultimate emancipation can be achieved. The topics discussed are diverse. The third chapter is the longest and consists of 186 sutras, with six 4198:

Stephen Kaplan (2007), Vidyā and Avidyā: Simultaneous and Coterminous?: A Holographic Model to Illuminate the Advaita Debate, Philosophy East and West, Volume 57, Number 2, pages 178-203

3110:) is defined by Shankara, states Klaus Witz, as "a continuous succession of comparable basic conceptions, beliefs, not interspersed with dissimilar ones, which proceeds according to the 1825:, describing how "the individual soul is enabled by meditation on Brahman to obtain final release," and harmonising the different Upanishadic views on this. The Upanishads describe many 1874:. The topic of meditation, state the Brahma-sutras, is the spiritual knowledge of Brahman; the object of this knowledge, states Thibaut, is "Brahman viewed as the inner Self of all". 3095:

Shankara, Madhva and Ramanuja, with the latter two also refuting the arguments of Shankara in this section. For a sutra by sutra analysis, by the three scholars, see Gregory Darling.

4069: 3979: 3816: 1885:

or sitting in meditation; it is a continuous practice of "constant remembrance" of Brahman or the Divine throughout the day, as the culmination of a life of spiritual development.

1973:, is of the nature of Brahman, with inner power and knowledge, free from evil, free from grief, free from suffering, one of bliss and "for such there is freedom in all worlds". 3756: 1056:

disagreed with Jacobi chronology in his 1954 paper, critiquing Jacobi's assumptions and interpretation of sutras 2.2.28-32 in dating the entire document, and stating that "the

1643:

on Samkhya and Vaisheshika schools argument that Smritis should be a basis for examining the concept of Brahman, and their objections to the Vedanta theory of reflection. The

1927:: the result): talks of the state that is achieved in final emancipation. This is the shortest chapter with 78 sutras and 38 adhikaranas. The last chapter contains fourteen 1075:

that have survived into the modern times may be the work of multiple authors but those who lived after Badarayana, and that these authors composed the currently surviving

900:

found in the Upanishads, deciding which are similar and can be combined, and which are different. The last chapter states why such a knowledge is an important human need.

1487:

If it be said that a contradiction will result in regard to Word (Vedas), we say that it is not so because the origination of everything is from perception and inference.

1655:

The sutras in Pada 2.1 are variously interpreted by Advaita, Dvaita, Vishishtadvaita and other sub-schools of Vedanta. The monist Advaita school holds that ignorance or

4386:

Michael Comans (1993), The question of the importance of Samadhi in modern and classical Advaita Vedanta, Philosophy East & West, Volume 43, Number 1, pages 19-38

2907:, and finally commented and explained by Shankara, is an invaluable key for discovering the deepest meaning of all the religious doctrines and for realizing that the 1394:

The text reviews and critiques most major orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy as well as all heterodox Indian philosophies such as Buddhism, with the exception of

1829:

on Brahman, with considerable similarities, but also with differences, due to the variations in transmission in the different Vedic schools. The Brahma-sutra, in

1687:

discuss the nature of soul, whether it is eternal, is soul an agent, soul's relationship to Brahman, and states its proof that the soul exists and is immortal.

1104:

as refutations of general ideas, which are eternal, and not of specific schools of thought like Buddhism etc. So, there is no necessity to assign a later date.

1530:

has occasioned different interpretations. Ramanuja and Nimbarka argue that it refers to the position of knowledge of Brahman as coming "after the knowledge of

1888:

The Brahma Sutras, in addition to recommending meditation, suggest that rituals and rites are unnecessary because it is knowledge that achieves the purpose.

782: 4303:

Paul Deussen (1993), The System of the Vedanta: According to Badarayana's Brahma-Sutras and Shankara's Commentary thereon, Translator: Charles Johnston,

3645:

Francis Clooney (1998), Scholasticism: Cross-Cultural and Comparative Perspectives (Editor: Jose Ignacio Cabezon), State University of New York Press,

2746:

Another aspect of the sutra text that leads to variance in exegeses is that words in the sutras can mean different things. In sutra 2.3.15, the word

1802:

Sections 3.3 and 3.4 describe the need for self-study, reflection of texts read, meditation, etc., as steps while one makes progress and the role of

3662:

Krishna Roy (2011), Phenomenology and Indian Philosophy (Editors: DP Chattopadhyaya, LE Embree and J Mohanty), State University of New York Press,

5141: