Position of Veda vyasa

[Bharatram Das]

Dear all,

Pranams to all the vidvajjana. I seek to know the true position of Veda Vyasa as held by the Shankara school and the Ramanuja school. Is he considered lord Narayana himself? Or is he considered an advanced Rshi? What role does he have to play in their anushthana etc.

I personally am of the opinion that in these schools there is no such specific gratitude to the person of VedaVyasa as can be found in the Madhva school, wherein he is irrevocably accepted as Lord Narayana himself. Not a Deva or a Rshi. And worship of Veda Vyasa is common place in the Madhva mathas. I have not found this in the Shankara or Ramanuja mathas. The Ramanuja school seems to derive their knowledge mainly from the Alvars and commenting on the Vedanta sutras of Vedavyasa was done merely out of social necessity, to confront the advaita school and ground the teachings of the Alvars in the more widely accepted Vedic literature.

May the learned kindly enlighten me in this regard.

Thank you.

Vidvajjana vidheya,

Bharath Raj Urs.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: sunil bhattacharjya <skbhatt...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, May 11, 2013 at 9:37 PM
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Position of Veda vyasa
To: bharat...@gmail.com

Dear friends,

May be, it could appear that the Madhva school shows a lot of respects to Vedavyasa. However one thing baffles the scholars.  Vedavyasa wrote the Mahabharata with the express desire to convey the vedic knowledge to the lay persons, who had no access to the Vedas but in the beginning of the Bhagavatam the sage Vedavyasa was shown as a very sad person and he tells Devarshi Narada that he wrote the Mahabharata for the lay persons but he failed in his objective. He was referring to the fact that for the lay persons the Mahabharata is not easy to understand. Then Narada advised him to write the Bhagavatam so that it would be understood by the lay persons. That means the Bhagavatam verses have straightforward meaning and is not difficult to understand. But Shri Madhvacharya thought that  the sage Vedavyasa failed once again and that the verses in Bhagavatm are not at all easy to understand and that the verses have more than one meaning. Shri Madhvacharya says this in his Bhagavata Tatparya Nirnaya. To me it appears that Shri madhvacharya was pointing out the incompetence of Vedavyasa as a teacher.

Regards,

Sunil KB

--
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
to subscribe go to the link below and put a request
https://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat/subscribe
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bvparishat?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[V Subrahmanian]

Namaste



In the shAnkara sampradAya VedavyAsa is held to be one in the AchArya paramparA.  The shloka goes:

नारायणं पद्मभुवं वसिष्ठं शक्तिं च तत्पुत्रपराशरं च
व्यासं शुकं गौडपदं महान्तं गोविन्दयोगीन्द्रमथास्य शिष्यम् ||
 श्रीशंकराचार्यमथास्य पद्मपादं च हस्तामलकं च शिष्यम् |
तं तोटकं वातिर्ककारमन्यानस्मद्गुरून् सन्ततमानतोऽस्मि ॥

VedavyAsa is worshiped at the time of the vyAsapoorNimA when the chAturmAsyavrata is commenced by sannyasins.  Others also perform the pUjA.  There is vedavyAsa aShTottara shata nAmAvaLI too that is in vogue in Advaita sampradaya.  There is an exclusive temple for VedavyAsa in Sringeri.

In the Brahmasutra bhashya Shankara has said:

अपान्तरतमो नाम मुनिः कलिद्वापरसन्धौ व्यासत्वेन संबभूव ।

In the Bh.gitA the Lord says 'मुनीनामप्यहं व्यासः...(११.३७)

For this the shAnkara bhAShyam is: मुनीनां मननशीलानां सर्वपदार्थज्ञानिनाम् अपि अहं व्यासः..

In the Advaita tradition, the brahmasUtrakAraH is bAdarAyaNa who is also held to be VedavyAsa. 

शंकरं शंकराचार्यं केशवं बादरायणम् । सूत्रभाष्यकृतौ बन्दे भगवन्तौ पुनः पुनः ॥ [Obeisance to Shiva and Keshava who incarnated as Shankaracharya and Badarayana (Vyasa) and composed the commentary and the Brahma Sutras respectively.] ...

In this verse which is chanted daily by devout Advaitins, bAdarAyaNa is said to be Keshava, Vishnu Himself. 

regards
subrahmanian.v




 

--

[V Subrahmanian]

In the smArtha sampradAya the daily brahmayajna ritual consists of ऋषितर्पणम् that commences with a tarpaNam offering : कृष्णद्वैपायनादयो ये ऋषयः तान् ऋषींस्तर्पयामि..

Here RShi kRShNadavipAyana is held to be VedavyAsa.

subrahmanian.v

[Hnbhat B.R.]

Anyhow, the statement of भगवद्गीता "मुनीनामहं व्यासः" .(११.३७) quoted by Subrahmanyam is enough for the believers to believe and worship him as नारायण or sixth अवतार of him according to some पुराण-s. Whether the followers of certain schools worship him in temples or not is a matter of convention and tradition and has nothing to do with the philosophical schools represented by their आचार्य-s.​ It is in द्वापर both were considered as the incarnations कृष्णद्वैपायन and कृष्ण of नारायण according to the पुराण-s. In each मन्वन्तर and कल्प the व्यास-s are different according to लिङ्गपुराण.

[Dvaita Philosophy Resource Centre - Manipal University]

Namamsi,

Yes in the school of Madhva, As Prof HN Bhat stated, it is said that in each manvantara and kalpa, Vedvyasa-s are different. The Vedavyasa who streamlined the school of Vedic system and composed the Brahmasutras, Mahabharata and 18 Puranas in 28 Dvaparayuga of Vaivasvatamanvantara is the lord Narayana himself (refer to Sutrabhashya, Mahabharata and Bhagavata Tatparyanirnaya of Sri Madhva). In the forthcoming 29 Dvaparayuga of the Vaivasvata, the Drauni (Ashvatthama) will become the Vyasamaharshi.

Vedavyasa, the son of Parashara and Satyavati, the father of Dhrtarashtra, Pandu and Vidura, and the Guru of Shuka, Jaimini, Vaishampayana, Paila, Suta and others, is also known as Vasishtha-krishna, Krishna-dvaipayana and Badarayana, an incarnation of Narayana to empower the Vedic schools. An avatara for Jnanakarya.

Some other schools say that Vedavyasa is an Amshavatara of Narayana.

I came to know that also the school of Sri Shankara says that Vyasa is lord Narayana. Many said that they describe him only as a Muni/Rshi according to Shankarasutrabhashya.

Thank you,

Srinivasan Acharya

On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Hnbhat B.R. <hnbh...@gmail.com> wrote:

Anyhow, the statement of भगवद्गीता "मुनीनामहं व्यासः" .(११.३७) quoted by Subrahmanyam is enough for the believers to believe and worship him as नारायण or sixth अवतार of him according to some पुराण-s. Whether the followers of certain schools worship him in temples or not is a matter of convention and tradition and has nothing to do with the philosophical schools represented by their आचार्य-s.​ It is in द्वापर both were considered as the incarnations कृष्णद्वैपायन and कृष्ण of नारायण according to the पुराण-s. In each मन्वन्तर and कल्प the व्यास-s are different according to लिङ्गपुराण.

--

[Bharatram Das]

Thank you all for writing.

In the Bhagavata Tatparya, it is said that the Bhagavata is pregnant with meaning. The verse 'artho'yam brahmasutranam......' is a quotation from Garuda Purana. And moreover I read the Chapter 5 and 6 of the first skandha of the Bhagavata again and again but could not see the point that Sunil Bhattacharyaji is making regarding the point that Bhagavatam is meant for the laymen. In fact in the mangalacarana itself Vedavyasa seems to be suggesting that this is not for the laymen. 'paramo nirmatsaranam satam' and '..krtibhih tat kshanat'. Narada is saying that the Lords activities should be further described and there should be a whole work dedicated to that cause.

Yes Vedavyasa is a muni. Lord Narayana takes birth among humans, sages, animals, devatas and all species of life. But we cannot ascribe him on that basis to that species.

I had not noticed the temple of Vedavyasa in Sringeri. Will make it a point to see it the next time i visit. Still in the daily anushtana, still I feel that Vedavyasa is more a part of it in the Madhva lineage.

Again thank you all very much for caring to write.

Bharath Raj Urs.

 

[sunil bhattacharjya]

The following is from the beginning of Bhagavatam itself. Hope this helps in continuing your research on this. :

ta eva vedA durmedhairdhAryante puruShairyathA /

evaM chakAra bhagavAnvyAsaH kR^ipaNavatsalaH //

strIshUdradvijabandhUnAM trayI na shrutigocharA /

karmashreyasi mUDhAnAM shreya evaM bhavediha //

iti bhAratamAkhyAnaM kR^ipayA muninA kR^itam //

evaM pravR^ittasya sadA bhUtAnAM shreyasi dvijAH /

sarvAtmakenApi yadA nAtuShyaddhR^idayaM tataH //

nAtiprasIdaddhR^idayaH sarasvatyAstaTe shuchau /

vitarkayanviviktastha idaM chovAcha dharmavit //

dhR^itavratena hi mayA ChandAMsi guravo.agnayaH /

mAnitA nirvyalIkena gR^ihItaM chAnushAsanam //

bhAratavyapadeshena hyAmnAyArthashcha pradarshitaH /

dR^ishyate yatra dharmAdi strIshUdrAdibhirapyuta //

tathApi bata me daihyo hyAtmA chaivAtmanA vibhuH /

asampanna ivAbhAti brahmavarchasya sattamaH //

Sunil KB

[Bharatram Das]

Dear Sunil,

Thank you for your letter.

But no where in this passage from the Bhagavata purana do we see what you said. You had told that Vedavyasa wrote the Bhagavata for the less intelligent.

In this passage we see stri-shudra-dvija-bandhunam... which is a description of the Mahabharata. Please see carefully ... iti bharatam akhyanam..(line 5 in the above passage) in that same verse. Also line 12 ...bharata-vyapadeshena... Here bharata does not refer to the Bhagavata. It refers to the Mahabharata. And there also it is not stated that Mahabharata is only meant for the Stri shudra etc. What it says is that the genius of the work of Mahabharata is such that even the less intelligent can understand. Please do away with your misunderstanding.

Here in this passage what Sri Veda Vyasa is saying is that although he has written Mahabharata in such a way that even the stri, shudra etc. can benefit he still feels there is more that he wants to do.

Regards,

Bharath Raj Urs.