Page:A History of Indian Philosophy Vol 1.djvu/449

xJ Brahma-siitra 433 of the existence of prakrti. That these were actual textual in- terpretations of the Brahma-siUras is proved by the fact that Satikara in some places tries to show that these textual con- structions were faultyl. In one place he says that others (re- ferring according to Vacaspati to the Mimarpsa) and some of us (referring probably to those who interpreted the siitras and the Upaniads from the Vedanta point of view) think that the soul is permanent. It is to refute all those who were opposed to the right doctrine of perceiving everything as the unity of the self (iitmaikatva) that this Sarlraka commentary of mine is being attempted 2 . Ramanuja, in the introductory por- tion of his bhaya on the Bra/mza-siUra, says that the views of Bodhayana who wrote an elaborate commentary on the Brahma- sutra were summarized by previous teachers, and that he was following this Bodhayana bhaya in writing his commentary. In the Vediirthasa1!lgralla of Ramanuja mention is made of Bodha- yana, Tatika, Guhadeva, Kapardin, Bharuci as Vedantic authorities, and Dravi<;lacaryya is referred to as the "bha!?yakara" commen- tator. In Chandogya III. x. 4, where the U paniad cosmology appeared to be different from the Vi?lUpurii?la cosmology, Sati- kara refers to an explanation offered on the point by one whom he calls" acaryya" (atrokta!l parilliira!l iiairyyai!l) and A.nandagiri says that "acaryya" there refers to Dravic;1acaryya. This Dravi<;l- acaryya is known to us from Ramanuja's statement as being a commentator of the dualistic school, and we have evidence here that he had written a commentary on the Chandogya U pani!?ad. A study of the extant commentaries on the Bralzllla-siUras of BadarayaI)a by the adherents of different schools of thought leaves us convinced that these siitras were regarded by all as condensations of the teachings of the U paniads. The differences of opinion were with regard to the meaning of these siitras and the Upani!?ad texts to which references were made by them in each particular case. The Bralzma-siitra is divided into four adhyayas or books, and each of these is divided into four chapters or padas. Each of these contains a number of topics of discussion (adhikaratz,a) which are composed of a number of siitras, which raise the point at issue, the points that lead to doubt and un- certainty, and the considerations that should lead one to favour 1 See note on p. 432. 2 Sankara's bha!iiya on the Brahma-sidras, I. iii. 19.