The Vedanta-Sutras with the Commentary by Sankaracarya - Sacred Books of the East, Volume 1 by Unknown
page 12 of 653 (01%)
page 12 of 653 (01%)
|
not unfrequently deserves to be called brilliant even. And in addition
to all this it shows evident traces of being not the mere outcome of Râmânuja's individual views, but of resting on an old and weighty tradition. This latter point is clearly of the greatest importance. If it could be demonstrated or even rendered probable only that the oldest bhâshya which we possess, i.e. the /S/a@nkara-bhâshya, represents an uninterrupted and uniform tradition bridging over the interval between Bâdarâya/n/a, the reputed author of the Sûtras, and /S/a@nkara; and if, on the other hand, it could be shown that the more modern bhâshyas are not supported by old tradition, but are nothing more than bold attempts of clever sectarians to force an old work of generally recognised authority into the service of their individual tenets; there would certainly be no reason for us to raise the question whether the later bhâshyas can help us in making out the true meaning of the Sûtras. All we should have to do in that case would be to accept /S/a@nkara's interpretations as they stand, or at the utmost to attempt to make out, if at all possible, by a careful comparison of /S/a@nkara's bhâshya with the text of the Sûtras, whether the former in all cases faithfully represents the purport of the latter. In the most recent book of note which at all enters into the question as to how far we have to accept /S/a@nkara as a guide to the right understanding of the Sûtras (Mr. A. Gough's Philosophy of the Upanishads) the view is maintained (pp. 239 ff.) that /S/a@nkara is the generally recognised expositor of true Vedânta doctrine, that that doctrine was handed down by an unbroken series of teachers intervening between him and the Sûtrakâra, and that there existed from the beginning only one Vedânta doctrine, agreeing in all essential points with the |
|