[Advaita-l] Purva Mimamsa Sutra Bhashya

S Jayanarayanan sjayana at yahoo.com
Wed Jun 4 17:39:40 CDT 2003

--- venkata  subramanian
<venkat_advaita at rediffmail.com> wrote:
> Dear All,
> Could anyone of you clarify as to - is it necessary
> that one 
> should go through the Purva Mimamsa Sutra Bhashya of
> Bhagavan 
> Shabaracharya ( may be in the English Translation by
> Sri Ganganath 
> Jha) to have a better understanding of the Prasthana
> Treya Bhashya 
> ?!

I don't believe any of the AchAryas have said so, and
IMHO, it may actually be the wrong way to go. The only
interest in pUrva-mImAmsA (PM) is in understanding the
chief pUrvapaksha position in advaita VedAnta. 

According to most scholars, by about 700 AD or so, the
PM school of thought prevailed over others, and if it
were not for Shankara's great debates with the
proponents of that school, his powerful criticism of
and conclusive victory over their doctrine, they
would've remained the single most influential school
in India. It's obvious that without Shankara, there
would practically be no VedAnta at all, and we would
all be learning PM now. 

>   of course, there are many things common like
> Pramana Lakshana 
> etc.  but, still, practically, have anyone who has
> studied them, 
> felt a better understanding of the latter, by
> reading the former 
> ?!!

I feel I have better understood the pUrvapaksha in
Shankara's works after reading Jaimini and KumArila,
but that's not saying much. Most of PM is opposed to
VedAnta, and should be studied only academically,


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list