Search:
Bhakti List Archives

Re: Self Intro & a question about Bodhayanavritti

From the Bhakti List Archives

Lakshmi Narasimhan • December 26, 2002 


Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

Dear Shri Swamin,
Adiyenudaya Pranams. I read your mail and was very much curious to find out
more about this subject and questioned my thirutthagappanar Shri
Venkatapathy swamy. Following is his explanation based on what he has learnt
from great scholars, accompanied by my flavors and opinions:
First of all, according to me, one should keep in mind whom they are talking
about before making a statement like "Sri Ramanujacharya did not have access
to Bodhayana's work in it's original form and quotes like, from Ramanuja's
commentary on first sUtra: "....pUrvAcharya Sankshiptuhu...TanmatAnusarena..
". One should remember they are talking about the great Shri Bhashyakarar
who is one amongst those handful who attempted to write a Bharshyam for the
Brahmasutras and succeed in giving a convicing explanation thus supporting
popular philosophies. Hence, if he has used a word, he would definitely mean
something and it is more appropriate to find out what Shri Bhasyakarar meant
by that word, from his followers. But, looks like, the person who made those
statements had attempted to interpret the same on his own. My sympathies for
him.

Shri Venkatapathy Swamy:

The following are based on the purvacharya granthams and are not of my own 
self introduced" explanations. "pUrvAcharya Sankshiptuhu...TanmatAnusarena"

What is Bodhayana Vritti?
I would like to give a small introduction on Bodhayana Vritti before I begin
the explanation on the subject of the argument. Vedas have been classified
into two, one being the Karma Kandam(aka purva kandam) and the other is
known as Brahma Kandam. Karma Kandam, due to its vastness needed a
briefing(gist). Shri Jaimini wrote suthras(aphorisms) for the same. It was
called as Purva Mimamsa. Similarly Brahma Kandam(upanishads), due to its
complexity that might lead to misinterpretations needed a briefing. Shri
Veda Vyasar wrote suthras(aphorisms) for the same. This was called as Brahma
Sutra. Both Purva Mimamsa and Brahma Sutra(aka utthara Mimamsa) needed
further explanations and thus came the Vritti(explanation) from Bodhayanar
for the Purva Mimamsa and the Bhashyams(explanation) from Shri Shankarar,
Shri Ramanujar and other great scholars. So, Bodhayana Vritti is the
explanation and opinions of Bodhayanar and the tradition that followed him.

What was Shri Ramanujar's attempt?
Bodhayana Vritti had been referred by advaitins. In order to put forth a
valid argument against the same or may be in order to understand more about
these references, Shri Ramanujar wanted to know about Bodhayana Vritti. He
went upto Kashmir where after lots of attempts he finally managed to get the
original script of Bodhayana Vritti for one night. It was that night when
Shri Kooratthazhwan completely memorized the Bodhayana Vritti and based on
this knowledge Shri Ramanujar was able to completely understand the same and
complete the Shri Bhashyam with the appropriate replies to other
philosophies including advaita.

What is "tadanusarena"?
Tad-Anusarena:Based on that, or to be even more precise - "According to the
script". This would mean 2 things: 1) the Bhasyakarar(the one who explains)
has read it based on his vyakarana nyana(knowledge of the language) which
would lead to 2) Vishwamithra Shrushti aka misinterpretation i.e self
introduced explanations and thoughts - this would mean, not based on "munnor
mozhindha murai" i.e lack of authenticity, to be more clear, this is not
according to the author but this is according to what I think the author
would have meant. Advaitis, including Shri Sankarar use the term 
tadanusarena" by which, the Bhashyakarar(Shri Sankarar in this case), means,
"according to the vritti" - that is - "according to what I understand from
the script".

What is "tanmatanusarena"?
Tanmata-anusarena: Based on the author's opinion - pUrvAcharya Sankshiptuhu.
.TanmatAnusarena - that is, based on what I learnt(blessed with) the
purvacharyas explanations and based on their opinions and traditions
followed, I attempt to explain the Sutras ("suthraksharani vyakyasyanthe").
By this the Bhasyakarar(Shri Ramanujar in this case) means that, "I have the
knowledge gained from the great scholars(i.e the authors) of the past and
the followers of their tradition" and hence the information that I use is 
AS IS" and not according to what I interpreted - which shows 1) "Munnor
mozhindha murai thappamar kettu" 2) Authenticity i.e no vishwamitra shrushti
i.e no self introduced explanations. This is why Shri Ramanujar has
carefully chosed the word "tanmatanusarena" instead of "tadanusarena". Shri
Ramanujar did not try to interpret Bodhayana Vritti on his own. He used the
text to understand it, but he got the author's views and opinions from those
who followed the Bodhayana Vritti. So, the text was used to know the finer
details while the actual understanding was gathered from the right people.

And hence, it is more appropriate to say "Tanmatanusarena" which means based
on their opinion rather than saying "Tadanusarena" which means "this is what
it says which actually means this is my understanding of what it says".

According to Shri Vaishnava tradition, Shri Manavala Mamunigal (jeeyar) is
the re-incarnation of Shri Ramanujar. One of the qualities that proves this
belief is the title that Shri Manavala Mamunigal achieved - "Vikasawak
Shikamani" i.e "Poyyilladha Manavala Mamuni" i.e the person whose statements
contain no lies. He was given this title only because he never told his own
interpretations or explanations and always quoted only those from any of the
purvacharya granthams. All his kalakshepams and granthams contain excellent
and accurate references to the purvacharya granthams. Doesn't it obviously
follow that Shri Ramanujar's "Tanmatanusarena" and Shri Manavala Mamunigal's
title "Vikasavak Shikamani" go hand in hand?;)

Thanks to my thirutthagappanar Shri Venkatapathy Swamy.

My humble apologies for all mistakes, for they are solely mine and all
credits goes only to my thirutthagappanar Shri Venkatapathy Narasimhan swamy
 

Jeeyar Thiruvadigale Saranam

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,
Lakshmi Narasimhan
 
-------Original Message-------
 
From: bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, December 26, 2002 07:47:09
To: bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Self Intro & a question about Bodhayanavritti
 
Recently, I happened to come across a Telugu translation of BrahmasUtra
BhAshyA of Sri SankarabhagavatpAdA with commentary by Mahamahopadhyaya Dr.
Pullela Sriramachandrudu, a learned scholar in Sanskrit literature and
Advaita philosophy, with number of works to his credit. In the introducary
portion of the book Dr.Ramachandrudu discussed about BodhAyanavritti. He is
of the opinion that Sri Ramanujacharya did not have access to Bodhayana's
work in it's original form. To support this argument, he quotes from
Ramanuja's commentary on first sUtra: "....pUrvAcharya Sankshiptuhu..
TanmatAnusarena...". His logic is that he would have written "tadanusArena"
instead of "tanmatanusarena" if he was actually following vritti grantha.

....
Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan

Srinivasadasa

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



--------------------------------------------------------------
           - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Group Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bhakti-list
Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/
 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/