Chapter 2 of Ramanujacharya's Sri Bhashya, which is his commentary on the Brahma Sutars, attempts to refute all other opposing philosophical schools that don't adhere to Vishishtadvaita Vedanta, such as Buddhism, Jainism, Advaita Vedanta, Shaivism, Shaktism, Sankhya, and Vaisheshika.

But how come he doesn't mention Islam, since Islam had entered India by the 1100s?

  • 1
    @SuryaKantaBoseChowdhury Yes, as Ikshvaku says Ramanujacharya went to the Sultan of Delhi to retrieve the processional idol of the Cheluva Narayana temple in Melkote, Karnataka, which the Muslims had stolen. – Keshav Srinivasan Oct 25 '17 at 21:47
  • 2
    @Ikshvaku Well, Ramanujacharya, like other commentators on the Brahma Sutras, mainly focuses on refuting the rival philosophical schools that existed in Vyasa's time, since the point is to elaborate on Vyasa's refutations. There are some exceptions to that, like Adi Shankaracharya refuting Bhatrihari's philosophy of Sphotavada, and all commentators refuting rival Vedantic philosophies, but I don't know of any commentary on the Brahma Sutras which refutes Mleccha religions. They're focused on refuting Astika and Nastika philosophies, i.e. philosophies indigenous to India. – Keshav Srinivasan Oct 25 '17 at 22:00
  • 3
    @Ikshvaku One possible reason for that is that Mlecchas may not have been involved in the intellectual debate in ancient/medieval India. I'm of course aware of violent conflicts between Hindus and Muslims, but I'm not aware of any philosophical debates between Hindus and Mlecchas earlier than a century or two ago. – Keshav Srinivasan Oct 25 '17 at 22:05
  • 1
    I can ask the same question for post-Ramanujacharya's commentaries as well. – Sarvabhouma Oct 26 '17 at 4:48
  • 1
    I just posted a follow-up to your question: hinduism.stackexchange.com/q/21951/36 – Keshav Srinivasan Nov 4 '17 at 8:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .