Brahma Sutras

Divisions Sama vedic Yajur vedic Atharva vedic Vaishnava puranas Shaiva puranas Shakta puranas The Brahma Sūtras (Sanskrit: ब्रह्मसूत्राणि), also known as the Vedanta Sūtra (Sanskrit: वेदान्त सूत्र),[1][note 1] Shariraka Sūtra,[note 2] and Bhikshu-sūtra,[note 3] are a Sanskrit text which criticizes the metaphysical dualism of the influential Samkhya philosophy,[5] and instead synthesizes and harmonizes divergent Upanishadic ideas and practices about the essence of existence, postulating God-like Brahman as the only origin and essence of everything.

It is attributed to the sages Bādarāyaṇa, who is also called Vyāsa (arranger), but probably an accumulation of incremental additions and changes by various authors to an earlier work, completed in its surviving form in approx.

The text attempts to synthesize and harmonize diverse and sometimes apparently conflicting vidyas ("knowledges") of, and upasanas (meditation, worship) of the essence of existence, stating they are actually synonyms for Brahman.

It does so from a bhedabheda-perspective,[1] arguing, as John Koller states: "that Brahman and Atman are, in some respects, different, but, at the deepest level, non-different (advaita), being identical.

"[12] The first chapter rejects Samkhya's view on pradhana, stating that an inert first principle cannot account for a universe which reflects purpose and intelligence.

[17] The Brahma Sūtras text is dated to centuries that followed Buddha and Mahavira, because it mentions and critiques the ideas of Buddhism and Jainism in Chapter 2.

[18] The text's relative chronology is also based on the fact that Badarayana quotes all major known orthodox Hindu schools of philosophy except Nyaya.

[6] The existence of earlier versions of the Brahma Sūtras, and multiple authors predating Badarayana, is supported by textual evidence.

[25][note 5] Nakamura states that the original version of Brahma Sūtras is likely very ancient and its inception coincides with the Kalpa Sutras period (1st-millennium BCE).

[29] He explains the mention of different philosophies and their criticism in the Brahma Sūtras as refutations of general ideas, which are eternal, and not of specific schools of thought like Buddhism etc.

[44] The sutras of the Brahma Sūtras are aphorisms, which Paul Deussen states to be "threads stretched out in weaving to form the basis of the web", and intelligible "when the woof is added" with a commentary.

This Brahma Sūtras chapter asserts that all the Upanishads primarily aim to and coherently describe the knowledge and meditation of Brahman, the ultimate reality.

[51] According to Mayeda, "the Brahmasutra made a special point of refuting the dualism of the then prevailing Samkhya school which posited Purusha (Spirit) and Prakriti (Matter) as the independent causes of the Universe.

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 be absolutely free".

Vallabha disagrees that one needs the four qualities before entering into an inquiry about Brahman, and interprets "atha" as merely initiating the beginning of a new topic.

[54] Second chapter (Avirodha: 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.

[10] The Brahma Sūtra states, examines and dismisses the refutations raised by other schools of thought, those now classified under Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism.

[51] 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.

[59] The Pada 2.1 opens with Adhikarana 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.

[73][74] The Brahma Sūtras states that the organs inside a living being are independent principles, in the seventh and eighth Adhikarana of the fourth Pada.

[51] Dissatisfaction with mundane life and strengthening the wish for liberation is invoked, treating the theory of death and rebirth,[80] karma and importance of conduct and free will,[81] and the connection between Atman (Self, Soul) and the Brahman are discussed in sections 3.1 and 3.2 of the text.

Sections 3.3 and 3.4 describe the need for self-study, reflection of texts read, meditation, etc.,[85] as steps while one makes progress and the role of sannyasa (monk, mendicant) in the pursuit of spiritual knowledge.

[51] The third pada, states George Thibaut, opens a new section and theme in chapter 3 of the Brahma Sūtras, describing how "the individual soul is enabled by meditation on Brahman to obtain final release," and harmonising the different Upanishadic views on this.

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 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".

[15] The diversity of Brahma Sūtras commentaries by various sub-schools of Hinduism (see table) attests to the central importance of the Upanishads, that the text summarizes.

Shankara argues that the description of the individual self (jiva) as atomic in size in these sutras marks the Purva-paksha, whereas Ramanuja takes it to be the Siddhanta.

It is very likely that the interpretations given by Shankara, Ramanuja, Nimbarka, and Madhva did not originate out of nowhere, and their key elements most probably existed even before the Brahma Sūtras 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 Brahma Sūtras did not have a philosophical system in mind that Shankara, Ramanuja, Nimbarka, Madhva, and their successors have expressed.

[129][page needed] The impact of Brahma Sūtras text on Vedanta, and in turn Hinduism, has been historic and central:[130][131] Many commentaries on the fundamental scripture of Vedanta, the Brahma Sūtras, 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.