Zend Avesta Part 01

SR No.: 007671
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: James Darmesteter
Publisher: Oxford
Publication Year: 1895
Total Pages: 2695
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 49 MB

Page 1886

INTRODUCTION.
31
specified. Now the discussion in previous Sätras has been about the soul; so we can have little difficulty in accepting the unanimous interpretation of the commentators, that the proposition here sought to be made out is that the individual soul is part of the Supreme Soul, which is the proposition laid down in the Gità in the passage referred to. The next Satra to refer to is IV, 1, 10. I shall not set forth the other relevant Sutras here as in the preceding case. I only state that the three commentators, Sankara, Ra. mányga, and Madhva, agree that the Gîtå is here referred to namely, chapter VI, stanza 11 seq. Vallabha, however, I am bound to add, does not agree with this, as he interprets the Sûtra in question and those which precede and follow as referring to an entirely different matter. If I may be permitted to say so, however, I consider his interpretation not so satisfactory as that of the three other and older commentators. Lastly, we come to Satra IV, 2-19. On this, again, all the four commentators are unanimous, and they say that Gita, chapter VIII, stanza 24 seq. (p. 80), is the authority referred to. And I think there can be very little doubt that they are right. These various picces of evidence render it, I think, historically certain, that the Gità must be considerably prior to the Vedanta-sâtras; and that the word Brahma-sútras, which occurs at Gita, chapter XIII, stanza 4 (p. 102), is correctly interpreted by the commentators as not referring to the Valanta-stras, which are also called Brahma-sâtras, but to a different subject altogether. When were the Vedantasutras composed? The question must at oncc be admitted to be a difficult one; but I think the following considera. tions will show that the date of those Sûtras must, at the latest, be considerably earlier than the period which we have alrcady reached in this part of our investigation. We may take it as fairly well settled, that Bhaita Kumarila, the celebrated commentator of the Parva Mimâmsa school, flourished not later than the end of the seventh century
- - -- 'Cl. Weber's Indian Literature, p. 343. See also Lassen's Prelact to his dation of schkogel's Glu, XXXV. kamânagu takus the other view.
Digitized by Google