1

Vedanta-sutra is the original work of Vyasadeva, which contains the summary of four Vedas, 108 Upanisads, 18 Puranas. As stated in Garuda Purana, Srimad Bhagavatham is the natural commentary of Brahma Sutras written by Vedavyasa himself.

artho 'yaṁ brahma-sūtrāṇāṁ bhāratārtha-vinirṇayaḥ
gāyatrī-bhāṣya-rūpo 'sau vedārtha-paribṛṁhitaḥ
purāṇānāṁ sāma-rūpaḥ sākṣād-bhagavatoditaḥ
vādaśa-skandha-yukto 'yaṁ śata-viccheda-saṁyutaḥ
grantho 'ṣṭādaśa-sāhasraḥ śrīmad-bhāgavatābhidhaḥ

The meaning of the Vedānta-sūtra is present in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The full purport of the Mahābhārata is also there. The commentary of the Brahma-gāyatrī is also there and fully expanded with all Vedic knowledge. Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is the supreme Purāṇa, and it was compiled by the Supreme Personality of Godhead in His incarnation as Vyāsadeva. There are twelve cantos, 335 chapters and eighteen thousand verses.

Is there any other Purana or Vedic scripture that claims to the commentary of Vedanta Sutras?

Srimad Bhagavatham

2

Hare Krishna, please accept my humble obeisances.

First, let's see how authentic is the verse you quoted. This quote is found in the composition named Bhāgavata-tātparya-nirṇaya authored by Śrī Madhvācārya. In that composition, he attributes this quote to the Garuḍa-purāṇa. The complete verse is also quoted by Srila Krishnadas Kaviraj Goswami in Caitanya-caritāmṛta Madhya 25.143.

An edition of the Bhāgavata-tātparya-nirṇaya published by the Uttarādi-maṭha can be downloaded from: https://archive.org/details/bhagavatatatparya

The quote is located on the second page of the PDF. The quotation's authenticity is beyond question. (Based on Harishad Prabhus research.)

Now coming to the main question, the source of the quotation is Garuda Purana. Garuda Purana 3.1.50-68 Sings the glories of Srimad Bhagavatam, it clearly says it's in the satvika purana's list, devoted to Vishnu, and any other conclusion apart from Vishnu's supremacy in other non Satvika Puranas should be rejected. It in the same range of quotations mentioned above, Garuda Purana mentions Devi Bhagavata in the list of an Upa-Purana and Tamas- Rajas inherited scripture.

Thus we understand, even if any other scripture or work (Devi Bhagavata is famous for it) claims to fit in the description of Bhagavatam's glories by replacing it with the original Bhagavatam, it doesn't matter because Garuda Purana the very source of the quotation nowhere leaves any doubt that it supports and hints to Krishna's Bhagavatam alone.

And as far we know there's no other commentary of Vyasdev on the Vedanta Sutra.

Hare Krishna, Your aspiring Servant.

| improve this answer | |
  • That doesn't answer the question. Please read the Q and try to answer it. – brahma jijnasa Jul 8 at 6:45
  • I have updated the answer, you may read the last lines. – Joy Das Jul 9 at 7:04
  • Alright. Now it looks a bit better. But it still doesn't give an answer to the Q asked, except for the last sentence which you posted as an update. On this HiSE website we are supposed to answer questions in such a manner that our A really answers the Q. I suggest you to read Help at hinduism.stackexchange.com/help to get familiar with HiSE. There learn how to use "@" sign when you address someone in the comment, such as @brahmajijnasa I have updated the ans... -- for otherwise I am not notified that you posted a comment to me. ... – brahma jijnasa Jul 12 at 23:13
  • ... Sometimes there is no need to write @*name* in your comment. For eg this comment I didn't start with @JoyDas (no blank between Joy and Das!) nor with @Joy (exceptionally first three letters of the name are enough) only because this comm is posted below your A and all such comm are sent to the user who posted that answer (or a Q), that is to say it's you in this case. Learn about those things and many other stuff in the Help. Welcome to HiSE. – brahma jijnasa Jul 12 at 23:15

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .