Brahma Sutras and Their Principal Commentaries (Hardcover)

by B.N. Sharma (Author), B. N. K. SHARMA (Author)

Editorial Reviews

Product Description
3 VOL. SET.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 1848 pages
• Publisher: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers; Reprinted edition edition (May 1, 1986)
• ISBN-10: 812150032X
• ISBN-13: 978-8121500326
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,187,390 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

8 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Comparative analysis of Madhva, Sankara, and Ramanuja, May 2, 2000

By	Shrisha Rao (Iowa, U.S.A.) - See all my reviews

Many monographs and articles discuss the Brahmasutras, the ancient aphorisms of Badarayana that are held to be canonical in defining Vedanta. There however is no agreement on what they say, and all possible opinions exist. The living individual may be held to be completely different from the Supreme Being, or to be identical to Him, or to be identical but with specialty, or to be identical-AND-non-identical. The schools of thought that hold these views are respectively called Dvaita, Advaita, Vishishtadvaita, and Dvaitadvaita (or Bhedabheda). The chief exponents of the first three, most prominent schools, are Madhva, Sankara, and Ramanuja. The theory of difference-and-identity is logically fallacious in several ways, and has not produced a commentator of sufficient stature to rank with these three.

To the extent that Sankara and Ramanuja are the best known extant commentators on the Brahmasutras, it is but natural that much literature exists that discusses their contributions and work. However, most scholars of present date are but ill-informed of Madhva's commentaries (for instance, most do not know that he wrote TWO major, full-length commentaries, the study of both being essential to grasp the finer points of his system). Their treatment of his work is thus often factually inaccurate, and often takes recourse to special pleadings and non-sequiturs to justify preconceptions arrived at from considering rival views as completely canonical. What has been lacking is a clear and detailed analysis of the three major commentators' works to compare their interpretations of the Sutras side-by-side, as it were.

The present work of B.N.K. Sharma, the distinguished historian and litterateur, thus fills a gap much in need of filling, and is sure to be warmly received by scholars for much time to come.

Although some may be inclined to argue that Dr. Sharma's agendas of vigorous defense of Madhva, and of equally vigorous criticisms of others, in particular Sankara, make him a biased narrator, from a strictly neutral perspective it is but fair to observe that the opposite bias is all too prevalent elsewhere, so this is not an accusation totally unique to Dr. Sharma. Our author also presents his evidence in sufficient detail that a competent observer may well draw his own conclusions based upon them. If, after careful examination, these conclusions happen to differ from those of Dr. Sharma, the value of the work as a source of information is undiminished. It is however the considered opinion of this reviewer that few, if any, will care to cross swords with Dr. Sharma in his treatment of the material, and of those who do, none will emerge, even in his own mind, as the victor.