The question whether §ree Narayana Guru is to be regarded as a philosopher on his own accord or merely as a social reformer, poet and mystic with highest Vedantic wisdom, has puzzled many thinkers. The question itself is complicated in the sense that it reuses further questions such as 'who can be called a philosopher?', 'what is authentic social reformation?', etc. It also assumes that a social reformer, poet and mystic is not properly understood as a philosopher, despite his VedSntlc wisdom. But. according to Indian tradition, such a personality is a Brahmq0anin, whose status in India is even higher than that of a 'philosopher' in the strict sense of the term. And, nobody has ever doubted ^ree Narayana as a Brahmc^fiantn. This makes the question still more complicated because, before attempting to answer it, one has to determine the role of a Brohmq/nonin as a philosopher or more precisely as a metaphysician.