[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : SBG, shruti and smR^iti
In article <ghenDwuyny.s9@netcom.com>,
Dhruba Chakravarti <dchakrav@netserv.unmc.edu> wrote:
[....]
>It can be argued that since both the brahma-sutra and the SBG are authored
>by the same person, it is to be expected that the two texts will naturally
>refer to each other (this idea has been proposed by Sri Tilak in his
>gitA-bhAsya).
The criticism of this opinion would be: in vyAsa's time,
>brahma-sutra is obviously the result of a far more widely accepted
>collection of texts, such that vyAsa wrote a sutra text instead of a
>shAstra text, unlike the SBG, that is the primary text.
>
my apologies for taking the scholarly discussion to some
tangential direction.
i find it difficult to believe that one individual in life
time can produce more than one *great* text. and so, i
find it impossible to think that one person can be considered
the author of so many books.
is it possible that certain names are actually some kind of
titles? we know, for example, shankaraachaarya is a generic name
given to mathadhipathis. but several of their write ups end
as "shri sankara virachita".
incidentally, i recollect a childhood interaction with an old man
about a "sahasra naama stotra" written in this century.
when there were some references, -- i dont remember exactly --
to maharshis or eeswara, i said "damn lies". and he told me
that it is *not* *inappropriate* to invoke the names of sages
since the aim is to avoid ego-centric self references. and
he said that the sahasranama has got the blessings of his guru.
(meaning, that it has his approval).
