As I discuss in the this question, by far the most popular school of Hindu philosophy is the Vedanta school, which bases its tenets on the doctrines laid out in the Brahma Sutras, a work by the sage Vyasa which summarizes and systematizes the philosophical teachings of the Upanishads. You can read the Brahma Sutras here. In any case, in Adhyaya 4 Pada 3 of the Brahma Sutras, one of the topics discussed is the journey of souls described in this passage from the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad:
Those who thus know this, and those who in the forest worship faith and the True, go to light (arkis), from light to day, from day to the increasing half, from the increasing half to the six months when the sun goes to the north, from those six months to the world of the Devas (Devaloka), from the world of the Devas to the sun, from the sun to the place of lightning. When they have thus reached the place of lightning a spirit comes near them, and leads them to the worlds of ... Brahman. In these worlds of Brahman they dwell exalted for ages. There is no returning for them.
The ancient thinker Badari believed that the passage is about souls who meditate upon the god Hiranyagarbha, i.e. Brahma, and thereby go to Brahma's world, known as Satyaloka or Brahmaloka. The ancient thinker Jaimini, on the other hand, believed that the passage is about souls who meditate upon the supreme Brahman and thereby attain the supreme Brahman, i.e. attain Moksha. In Ramanujacharya's commentary on the Brahma Sutras, he argues that Vyasa favors a middle view, where both those who meditate on the supreme Brahman and those who meditate upon their own soul as having Brahman as its inner Self (in the Visihtadvaita view) will attain Moksha using the path described in the text.
But before Ramanujacharya discusses his own view, he first spends time presenting the views of Badari. Badari argued that the reason the passage says "There is no returning for them." is that the inhabitants of Brahmaloka attain Moksha when he dies. In support of Badari's view, Ramanujacharya cites a passage from the Mundaka Upanishad:
This is known from the texts declaring that he who proceeds on the path of light reaches immortality and does not return; and is further confirmed by the text, 'They all, reaching the highest immortality, become free in the world of Brahman (Brahmâ) at the time of the great end ' (Mu. Up. III, 2, 6).
And he cites some Smriti text:
This follows from Smriti also, which declares 'when the pralaya has come and the end of the Highest, they all together with Brahman enter the highest place.'--For all these reasons Bâdari holds that the troop of the conducting deities, beginning with Light, leads the souls of those only who meditate on the effected Brahman, i e. Hiranyagarbha.
But my question is, does Ramanujacharya agree with Badari's view that inhabitants of Brahmaloka attain Moksha when they die? The reason I ask is because Ramanujacharya says this:
But, if the soul advancing on the path of the Gods reaches Hiranyagarbha only, texts such as 'This is the path of the Gods, the path of Brahman; those who proceed on that path do not return to the life of man' (Kh. Up. IV, 15, 6), and 'moving upwards by that a man reaches immortality' (VIII, 6, 6), are wrong in asserting that that soul attains to immortality and does not return; for the holy books teach that Hiranyagarbha, as a created being, passes away at the end of a dviparârdha-period; and the text 'Up to the world of Brahman the worlds return again' (Bha. Gî. VIII, 16) shows that those who have gone to Hiranyagarbha necessarily return also.
In this passage, is Ramanujacharya presenting his own view, or someone else's? If he's advancing his own view, then it seems he believes that the inhabitants of Brahmaloka are reborn rather than attain Moksha. If so, how does he reconcile his view with the scriptural quotes he cited earlier?
And these aren't the only such scriptural quotes; Srimad Bhagavatam seems to also say that inhabitants of Brahmaloka attain Moksha, as I discuss in this answer. So what's going on here?
Do any later Sri Vaishnava Acharyas shed light on this?