uttara-mImAMsA???

[n.rao at rz.uni-sb.de]

The following may be of interest in this connection, even though it is not 
what is asked for. I am writing from my memory and now I am not having the 
relevant text available for consultation. Ramanuja in his BrahmasUtrabhAsya 
(in the very beginning) comments on the word  'athAto BrahmajijnAsA'. As 
against Shankara, he suggests that the word 'athah' means 'after completing 
the dharmamImAmsA' and fulfilling the relevant duties enjoined on the 
householder. That is, he clealy suggets that concerning with  'brahman'  is 
something that needs to be done after concerning oneself with the question 
of dharma. So, at least RAmAnuja appears to share the idea that Jaimini's 
dharmasUtras and brahmasUtras form a unity. But, from Ramanuja's polemics 
against Shankara, it appears that he was accusing Shankara for not sharing 
this opinion.  
>A question for those familiar with the literature of advaita vedAnta: Do 
>any of the classical advaitins refer to what they are doing, or to 
>themselves as a school of thought, as uttara-mImAMsA?  It is often 
>pointed out that the pUrva- and uttara-mImAMsAs are sister sytems, and 
>were perhaps originally a single system.  But I don't recall coming 
>across the term uttara-mImAMsA in any of the readings in advaita I've 
>done.  Has anyone?  How about the vedAntasUtras, a.k.a. brahmasUtras?  Has 
>anyone seen them being referred to as the uttaramImAMsAsUtras?
>
>I know the term zArIraka-mImAMsA, but that is something else.
>
>Thanks for your thoughts,
>
>LN
>---------------------------
>Lance Nelson
>Religious Studies    
>University of San Diego
>lnelson at pwa.acusd.edu
>---------------------------
>
>
> 
>
Dr. B. Narahari Rao
F.R. 5.1. Philosophie
Unversitaet des Saarlandes,
Postfach 15 11 50,
D-66041 Saarbrücken