Jump to content

Hindu philosophy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Hindu Philosophy)

Part of a series on
Hindu philosophy
Orthodox
Heterodox
Sub-schools
Smartist
Vaishnavite
Shaivite
Neo-Vedanta
Teachers (Acharyas)
Nyaya
Mīmāṃsā
Advaita (Mayavada)
Vishishtadvaita
Dvaita (Tattvavada)
Shuddhadvaita
Achintya Bheda Abheda
Svabhavika Bhedabheda
Mahanubhava
Ekasarana Dharma
Akshar Purushottam Darshan
Neo-Vedanta
Others
Samkhya
Yoga
Vaisheshika
Secular
Major texts
Vedas
Upanishads
Other scriptures
Shastras and Sutras
Secular ethics
Part of a series on
Philosophy
Philosophies
By period
By region
By religion
Branches
Philosophers

Hindu philosophy or Vedic philosophy is the set of Indian philosophical systems that developed in tandem with the religion of Hinduism during the iron and classical ages of India. In Indian tradition, the word used for philosophy is Darshana (Sanskrit: दर्शन; meaning: "viewpoint or perspective"), from the Sanskrit root 'दृश' (drish) meaning 'to see, to experience'.[1]

The schools of thought or Darshanas within Hindu philosophy largely equate to the six ancient orthodox schools: the āstika (Sanskrit : आस्तिक) schools, defined by their acceptance of the Vedas, the oldest collection of Sanskrit texts, as an authoritative source of knowledge.[2][note 1][note 2] Of these six, Samkhya (सांख्य) is the earliest school of dualism; Yoga (योग) combines the metaphysics of Samkhya with meditation and breath techniques; Nyaya (न्याय) is a school of logic emphasising direct realism; Vaisheshika (वैषेशिक) is an offshoot of Nyaya concerned with atomism and naturalism; Mimamsa (मीमांसा) is a school justifying ritual, faith, and religious obligations; and Vedanta (वेदान्त) contains various traditions that mostly embrace nondualism.[5][6][7][8][9]

Indian philosophy during the ancient and medieval periods also yielded philosophical systems that share concepts with the āstika traditions but reject the Vedas. These have been called nāstika (heterodox or non-orthodox) philosophies,[6][2] and they include: Buddhism, Jainism, Charvaka, Ajivika, and others,[10] which are thus broadly classified under Indian but not Hindu philosophy. Western scholars have debated the relationship and differences within āstika philosophies and with the nāstika philosophies, starting with the writings of Indologists and Orientalists of the 18th and 19th centuries, based on limited availability of Indian literature and medieval doxographies.[6] The various sibling traditions included in Indian philosophies are diverse and are united by: shared history and concepts, textual resources, ontological and soteriological focus, and cosmology.[11][12] Some heterodox (nāstika) traditions such as Charvaka are often considered as distinct schools within Hindu philosophy because the word Hindu is an exonym historically used as a geographical and cultural identifier for people living in the Indian subcontinent.[13][14][15][16]

Hindu philosophy also includes several sub-schools of theistic philosophies that integrate ideas from two or more of the six orthodox philosophies. Examples of such schools include: Pāśupata Śaiva, Śaiva siddhānta, Pratyabhijña, Raseśvara and Vaiṣṇava.[7][8] Some sub-schools share Tantric ideas with those found in some Buddhist traditions,[17] which are nevertheless found in the Puranas and the Āgamas.[18][19][20] Each school of Hindu philosophy has extensive epistemological literature called Pramana,[21][22] as well as theories on metaphysics, axiology, and other topics.[23]

Classifications

[edit]
Further information: Āstika and nāstika

In the history of India, the six orthodox schools had emerged before the start of the Common Era, and some schools emerged possibly even before the Buddha.[24] Some scholars have questioned whether the orthodox and heterodox schools classification is sufficient or accurate, given the diversity and evolution of views within each major school of Indian philosophy, with some sub-schools combining heterodox and orthodox views.[25]

Since ancient times, Indian philosophy has been categorised into āstika and nāstika schools of thought.[26] The orthodox schools of Indian philosophy have been called ṣaḍdarśana ('six systems'). This schema was created between the 12th and 16th centuries by Vedantins.[27]: 2–3  It was then adopted by the early Western Indologists, and pervades modern understandings of Indian philosophy.[27]: 4–5 

Āstika

[edit]

There are six āstika (orthodox) schools of thought.[note 3] Each is called a darśana, and each darśana accepts the Vedas as authority. Each āstika darśana also accepts the premise that Atman (eternal Self) exists.[2][28] The āstika schools of philosophy are:

  1. Samkhya – A strongly dualist theoretical exposition of consciousness (purusha) and matter (prakriti). Agnostic with respect to God or the gods.[29]
  2. Yoga – A monotheistic school which emerged from Samkhya and emphasises practical use of Samkhya theory: meditation, contemplation and liberation[citation needed].
  3. Nyaya or logic – The school of epistemology which explores sources of knowledge[citation needed].
  4. Vaisheshika – An empiricist school of atomism[citation needed].
  5. Mīmāṃsā – An anti-ascetic and anti-mysticist school of orthopraxy[citation needed]. This tradition is also known as Pūrva-Mīmāṁsā because of its focus on the earlier (pūrva) Vedic texts dealing with ritual actions, and similarly also known as Karma-Mīmāṁsā due to its focus on ritual action (karma).[30]
  6. Vedanta – They focus on the last segment of knowledge in the Vedas, or jñānakāṇḍa ('section of knowledge'). Vedanta is also referred to as Uttara-Mimamsa. Vedānta came to be the dominant current of Hinduism in the post-medieval period[citation needed]. This school considers the Upanishads, the Brahma Sutras, and the Bhagvad Gita as authoritative texts.[31]

Nāstika

[edit]
See also: Buddhist philosophy and Jain philosophy

Schools that do not accept the authority of the Vedas are nāstika philosophies, of which four nāstika (heterodox) schools are prominent:[10]

  1. Charvaka, a materialism school that accepted the existence of free will.[32][33]
  2. Ājīvika, a materialism school that denied the existence of free will.[34][35]
  3. Buddhism, a philosophy that denies existence of ātman (Self)[36] and is based on the teachings and enlightenment of Gautama Buddha.
  4. Jainism, a philosophy that accepts the existence of the ātman (Self), and is based on the teachings and enlightenment of twenty-four teachers known as tirthankaras, with Rishabha as the first and Mahavira as the twenty-fourth.[37]

Other schools

[edit]

Besides the major orthodox and non-orthodox schools, there have existed syncretic sub-schools that have combined ideas and introduced new ones of their own. The medieval scholar Madhavacharya, identified by some as Vidyaranya, in his book 'Sarva-Darsana-Sangraha', includes 16 philosophical systems current as of 14th century. Along with some of the major orthodox and non-orthodox schools and sub-schools, it includes the following sub-schools:

The above sub-schools introduced their own ideas while adopting concepts from orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy such as realism of the Nyāya, naturalism of Vaiśeṣika, monism and knowledge of Self (Atman) as essential to liberation of Advaita, self-discipline of Yoga, asceticism and elements of theistic ideas.[7] Some sub-schools share Tantric ideas with those found in some Buddhist traditions.[17]

Characteristics

[edit]
School Sankhya Yoga Nyāya Vaiśeṣika Mīmāṃsā Advaita Vedanta[N 1] Vishishtadvaita Vedanta[N 1] Dvaita Vedanta[N 1] Shuddhadvaita Achintya Bheda Abheda Akshar-Purushottam Darśana Pashupata Shaiva Siddhanta Kashmir Shaivism Raseśvara Pāṇini Darśana
Classification rationalism,[45][46] dualism dualism, spiritual practice realism,[47] logic, analytic philosophy naturalism,[48] atomism exegesis, philology, ritualism non-dualism, pantheism qualified non-dualism, panentheism dualism, theology pure non-dualism simultaneous non-dualism and dualism qualified non-dualism, panentheism theism, spiritual practice dualism theistic non-dualism, idealism alchemy linguistics, philosophy of language
Philosophers Kapila, Iśvarakṛṣṇa, Vācaspati Miśra, Guṇaratna more.. Patañjali, Yajnavalkya, Vyasa[N 2] Aksapada Gautama, Vātsyāyana, Udayana, Jayanta Bhatta more.. Kanada, Praśastapāda, Śridhara's Nyāyakandalī more.. Jaimini, Kumārila Bhaṭṭa, Prabhākara more.. Gaudapada, Adi Shankara, Madhusudana Saraswati, Vidyaranya more.. Yamunacharya, Ramanuja more.. Madhvacharya, Jayatirtha, Vyasatirtha, Raghavendra Swami Vallabhacharya Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, Six Goswamis of Vrindavana, Visvanatha Chakravarti, Krishnadasa Kaviraja, Baladeva Vidyabhushana, Rupa Goswami, more.. Bhagwan Swaminarayan, Shastriji Maharaj, Bhadreshdas Swami Haradattacharya, Lakulish Tirumular, Meikandadevar, Appayya Dikshita, Sadyojyoti, Aghorasiva Vasugupta, Abhinavagupta, Jayaratha Govinda Bhagavat, Sarvajña Rāmeśvara Pāṇini, Bhartṛhari, Kātyāyana
Texts Samkhyapravachana Sutra, Samkhyakarika, Sāṁkhya tattvakaumudī more.. Yoga Sutras, Yoga Yajnavalkya, Samkhya pravacana bhasya Nyāya Sūtras, Nyāya Bhāṣya, Nyāya Vārttika more.. Vaiśeṣika Sūtra, Padārtha dharma saṁgraha, Daśapadārtha śāstra more.. Purva Mimamsa Sutras, Mimamsasutra bhāshyam more.. Brahma Sutras, Prasthanatrayi, Avadhuta Gita, Ashtavakra Gita, Pañcadaśī more.. Siddhitrayam, Sri Bhasya, Vedartha Sangraha AnuVyakhana, Brahma Sutra Bahshya, Sarva Shāstrārtha Sangraha, Tattva prakashika, Nyaya Sudha, Nyayamruta, Tarka Tandava, DwaitaDyumani Brahmasutra Anubhashya, Tattvartha Dipa Nibandha, Subodhiniji, Shodasha Grantha Bhagavata Purana, Bhagavad Gita, Sat Sandarbhas, Govinda Bhashya, Chaitanya Charitamrita, Swaminarayan Bhashyam, Swaminarayan-Siddhanta-Sudha Gaṇakārikā, Pañchārtha bhāshyadipikā, Rāśikara bhāshya Sivagamas, Tirumurais, Meikanda Sastras Shiva Sutras of Vasugupta, Tantraloka Rasārṇava, Rasahṛidaya, Raseśvara siddhānta Vākyapadīya, Mahabhashya, Vārttikakāra
Concepts Originated Purusha, Prakṛti, Guṇa, Satkāryavāda Yama, Niyama, Asana, Pranayama, Pratyahara, Dhāraṇā, Dhyana, Samadhi Pratyakṣa, Anumāna, Upamāna, Anyathakyati vada, Niḥśreyasa more.. Padārtha, Dravya, Sāmānya, Viśeṣa, Samavāya, Paramāṇu Apauruṣeyātva, Arthāpatti, Anuapalabdhi, Satahprāmāṇya vāda Jivanmukta, Mahāvākyas, Sādhana Chatuṣṭaya, three orders of reality, Vivartavada Hita, Antarvyāpi, Bahuvyāpi more.. Prapacha, Mukti-yogyas, Nitya-samsarins, Tamo-yogyas Pushtimarg, Brahmavada, Brahma Sambandha Sambandha, Abhidheya, Prayojana (Relationship, Process, Ultimate Goal) Akshar Purushottam Upasana Pashupati, eight pentads Charya, Mantramārga, Rodha Śakti Citi, Mala, Upaya, Anuttara, Aham, Svatantrya Pārada, three modes of mercury Sphoṭa, Ashtadhyayi
  1. ^ a b c Advaita, Vishishtadvaita and Dvaita have evolved from an older Vedanta school and all of them accept Upanishads and Brahma Sutras as standard texts.
  2. ^ Vyasa wrote a commentary on the Yoga Sutras called Samkhyapravacanabhasya.(Radhankrishnan, Indian Philosophy, London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1971 edition, Volume II, p. 344.)

Overview

[edit]

Epistemology

[edit]
Main article: Pramana

Epistemology is called pramana.[49] It has been a key, much debated field of study in Hinduism since ancient times. Pramāṇa is a Hindu theory of knowledge and discusses the valid means by which human beings can gain accurate knowledge.[49] The focus of pramāṇa is how correct knowledge can be acquired, how one knows, how one does not, and to what extent knowledge pertinent about someone or something can be acquired.[21]

Ancient and medieval Hindu texts identify six pramāṇas as correct means of accurate knowledge and truths:

  1. Pratyakṣa – Direct perception
  2. Anumāṇa – Inference or indirect perception
  3. Upamāṇa – Comparison and analogy
  4. Arthāpatti – Postulation, derivation from circumstances
  5. Anupalabdi – Non-perception, absence of proof
  6. Shabda – Word, testimony of past or present reliable experts[50]

Each of these are further categorised in terms of conditionality, completeness, confidence and possibility of error, by the different schools. The schools vary on how many of these six are valid paths of knowledge.[22] For example, the Cārvāka nāstika philosophy holds that only one (perception) is an epistemically reliable means of knowledge,[51] the Samkhya school holds that three are (perception, inference and testimony),[51] while the Mīmāṃsā and Advaita schools hold that all six are epistemically useful and reliable means to knowledge.[51][52]

Sāmkhya

[edit]
Main article: Samkhya

Sāmkhya(Sanskrit: सांख्य) is the oldest of the orthodox philosophical systems in Hinduism,[53] with origins in the 1st millennium BCE.[29] It is a rationalist school of Indian philosophy,[45] and had a strong influence on other schools of Indian philosophies.[54] Sāmkhya is an enumerationist philosophy whose epistemology accepted three of six pramāṇas as the only reliable means of gaining knowledge. These were pratyakṣa (perception), anumāṇa (inference) and sabda (Āptavacana, word/testimony of reliable sources).[55][51]

Samkhya school espouses dualism between witness-consciousness and 'nature' (mind, perception, matter).[56] It regards the universe as consisting of two realities: Puruṣa (witness-consciousness) and prakriti ('nature'). Jiva (a living being) is that state in which puruṣa is bonded to prakriti in some form.[57] This fusion, state the Samkhya scholars, led to the emergence of buddhi (awareness, intellect) and ahankara (individualised ego consciousness, "I-maker"). The universe is described by this school as one created by Purusa-Prakriti entities infused with various permutations and combinations of variously enumerated elements, senses, feelings, activity and mind.[57]

Samkhya philosophy includes a theory of gunas (qualities, innate tendencies, psyche).[58] Guna, it states, are of three types: Sattva being good, compassionate, illuminating, positive, and constructive; Rajas guna is one of activity, chaotic, passion, impulsive, potentially good or bad; and Tamas being the quality of darkness, ignorance, destructive, lethargic, negative. Everything, all life forms and human beings, state Samkhya scholars, have these three gunas, but in different proportions.[59] The interplay of these gunas defines the character of someone or something, of nature and determines the progress of life.[60][61] Samkhya theorises a pluralism of Selfs (Jeevatmas) who possess consciousness.[62] Samkhya has historically been theistic or non-theistic, and there has been debate about its specific view on God.[63][64][65][66]

The Samkhya karika, one of the key texts of this school of Hindu philosophy, opens by stating its goal to be "three[67] kinds of human suffering" and means to prevent them.[68] The text then presents a distillation of its theories on epistemology, metaphysics, axiology and soteriology. For example, it states,

From the triad of suffering, arises this inquiry into the means of preventing it.
That is useless – if you say so, I say: No, because suffering is not absolute and final. – Verse 1

The Guṇas (qualities) respectively consist in pleasure, pain and dullness, are adapted to manifestation, activity and restraint; mutually domineer, rest on each other, produce each other, consort together, and are reciprocally present. – Verse 12
Goodness is considered to be alleviating and enlightening; foulness, urgent and persisting; darkness, heavy and enveloping. Like a lamp, they cooperate for a purpose by union of contraries. – Verse 13

There is a general cause, which is diffuse. It operates by means of the three qualities, by mixture, by modification; for different objects are diversified by influence of the several qualities respectively. – Verse 16
Since the assemblage of perceivable objects is for use (by man); Since the converse of that which has the three qualities with other properties must exist (in man); Since there must be superintendence (within man); Since there must be some entity that enjoys (within man); Since there is a tendency to abstraction (in man), therefore soul is. – Verse 17

— Samkhya karika, [68][69]

The soteriology in Samkhya aims at the realisation of Puruṣa as distinct from Prakriti; this knowledge of the Self is held to end transmigration and lead to absolute freedom (kaivalya).[70]

Yōga

[edit]
Main article: Yoga (philosophy)

In Indian philosophy, Yōga(Sanskrit: योग) is, among other things, the name of one of the six āstika philosophical schools.[71] The Yoga philosophical system aligns closely with the dualist premises of the Samkhya school.[72][73] The Yoga school accepts Samkhya psychology and metaphysics, but is considered theistic because it accepts the concept of personal god (Ishvara, unlike Samkhya.[74][75][76] The epistemology of the Yoga school, like the Sāmkhya school, relies on three of six prāmaṇas as the means of gaining reliable knowledge:[51] pratyakṣa (perception), anumāṇa (inference) and śabda (āptavacana, word/testimony of reliable sources).[52][51]

The universe is conceptualised as a duality in Yoga school: puruṣa (witness-consciousness) and prakṛti (mind, perception, matter); however, the Yoga school discusses this concept more generically as "seer, experiencer" and "seen, experienced" than the Samkhya school.[77]

A key text of the Yoga school is the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. Patanjali may have been, as Max Müller explains, "the author or representative of the Yoga-philosophy without being necessarily the author of the Sutras."[78] Hindu philosophy recognises many types of Yoga, such as rāja yoga, jñāna yoga,[79] karma yoga, bhakti yoga, tantra yoga, mantra yoga, laya yoga, and hatha yoga.[80]

The Yoga school builds on the Samkhya school theory that jñāna (knowledge) is a sufficient means to moksha. It suggests that systematic techniques/practice (personal experimentation) combined with Samkhya's approach to knowledge is the path to moksha.[72] Yoga shares several central ideas with Advaita Vedanta, with the difference that Yoga is a form of experimental mysticism while Advaita Vedanta is a form of monistic personalism.[81][82][83] Like Advaita Vedanta, the Yoga school of Hindu philosophy holds that liberation/freedom in this life is achievable, and that this occurs when an individual fully understands and realises the equivalence of Atman (Self) and Brahman.[84][85]

Vaiśeṣika

[edit]
Main article: Vaisheshika

The Vaiśeṣika(Sanskrit: वैशेसिक) philosophy is a naturalist school.[48] It is a form of atomism in natural philosophy.[86] It postulates that all objects in the physical universe are reducible to paramāṇu (atoms), and that one's experiences are derived from the interplay of substance (a function of atoms, their number and their spatial arrangements), quality, activity, commonness, particularity and inherence.[87] Knowledge and liberation are achievable by complete understanding of the world of experience, according to Vaiśeṣika school.[87] The Vaiśeṣika darśana is credited to Kaṇāda Kaśyapa from the second half of the first millennium BCE.[87][88] The foundational text, the Vaiśeṣika Sūtra, opens as follows:

Dharma is that from which results the accomplishment of Exaltation and of the Supreme Good. The authoritativeness of the Veda arises from its being an exposition of dharma. The Supreme Good results from knowledge, produced from a particular dharma, of the essence of the Predicables, Substance, Attribute, Action, Genus, Species and Combination, by means of their resemblances and differences.

— Vaiśeṣika Sūtra 1.1.1–1.1.4, [89]

The Vaiśeṣika school is related to the Nyāya school but features differences in its epistemology, metaphysics and ontology.[90] The epistemology of the Vaiśeṣika school, like Buddhism, accepted only two means to knowledge as reliable – perception and inference.[52][91] The Vaiśeṣika school and Buddhism both consider their respective scriptures as indisputable and valid means to knowledge, the difference being that the scriptures held to be a valid and reliable source by Vaiśeṣikas were the Vedas.[52][92]

Vaiśeṣika metaphysical premises are founded on a form of atomism, that reality is composed of four substances (earth, water, air, and fire). Each of these four are of two types:[86] atomic (paramāṇu) and composite. An atom is, according to Vaiśeṣika scholars, that which is indestructible (anitya), indivisible, and has a special kind of dimension, called "small" (aṇu). A composite, in this philosophy, is defined to be anything which is divisible into atoms. Whatever human beings perceive is composite, while atoms are invisible.[86] The Vaiśeṣikas stated that size, form, truths and everything that human beings experience as a whole is a function of atoms, their number and their spatial arrangements, their guṇa (quality), karma (activity), sāmānya (commonness), viśeṣa (particularity) and amavāya (inherence, inseparable connectedness of everything).[87][93]

Nyāya

[edit]
Main article: Nyaya

The Nyāya(Sanskrit: न्याय) school is a realist āstika philosophy.[94][95] The school's most significant contributions to Indian philosophy were its systematic development of the theory of logic, methodology, and its treatises on epistemology.[96][97] The foundational text of the Nyāya school is the Nyāya Sūtras of the first millennium BCE. The text is credited to Aksapada Gautama and its composition is variously dated between the sixth and second centuries BCE.[98][88]

Nyāya epistemology accepts four out of six prāmaṇas as reliable means of gaining knowledge – pratyakṣa (perception), anumāṇa (inference), upamāṇa (comparison and analogy) and śabda (word, testimony of past or present reliable experts).[51][99][50]

In its metaphysics, the Nyāya school is closer to the Vaiśeṣika school than the others.[94] It holds that human suffering results from mistakes/defects produced by activity under wrong knowledge (notions and ignorance).[100] Moksha (liberation), it states, is gained through right knowledge. This premise led Nyāya to concern itself with epistemology, that is, the reliable means to gain correct knowledge and to remove wrong notions. False knowledge is not merely ignorance to Naiyayikas; it includes delusion. Correct knowledge is discovering and overcoming one's delusions, and understanding the true nature of the soul, self and reality.[101] The Nyāya Sūtras begin:

Perception, Inference, Comparison and Word – these are the means of right knowledge.
Perception is that knowledge which arises from the contact of a sense with its object and which is determinate, unnameable and non-erratic.
Inference is knowledge which is preceded by perception, and is of three kinds: a priori, a posteriori, and commonly seen.
Comparison is the knowledge of a thing through its similarity to another thing previously well known.
Word is the instructive assertion of a reliable person.
It [knowledge] is of two kinds: that which is seen, and that which is not seen.
Soul, body, senses, objects of senses, intellect, mind, activity, fault, transmigration, fruit, suffering and release – are the objects of right knowledge.

— Nyāya Sūtras 1.1.3–1.1.9, [102]

The Nyāya school uses a three-fold procedure: enumeration, definition, and examination. This procedure of enumeration, definition, and examination is recurrent in Navya-Nyāya texts like The Manual of Reason (Tarka-Sangraha).[86]

Mīmāṃsā

[edit]
Main article: Mīmāṃsā

The Mīmāṃsā(Sanskrit: मीमांसा) school emphasises religious hermeneutics and exegesis.[103][104] It is a form of philosophical realism.[105] Key texts of the Mīmāṃsā school are the Purva Mimamsa Sutras of Jaimini.[30][106] The classical Mīmāṃsā school is sometimes referred to as pūrvamīmāṃsā or Karmamīmāṃsā in reference to the first part of the Vedas.[30]

The Mīmāṃsā school has several sub-schools defined by epistemology. The Prābhākara subschool of Mīmāṃsā accepted five means to gaining knowledge as epistimetically reliable: pratyakṣa (perception), anumāṇa (inference), upamāṇa (comparison and analogy), arthāpatti (postulation, derivation from circumstances), and śabda (word, testimony of past or present reliable experts).[99][50] The Kumārila Bhaṭṭa sub-school of Mīmāṃsā added a sixth way of knowing to its canon of reliable epistemology: anupalabdi (non-perception, negative/cognitive proof).[51]

The metaphysics of the Mīmāṃsā school consists of both atheistic and theistic doctrines, and the school showed little interest in systematic examination of the existence of God. Rather, it held that the Self (Atma) is an eternal, omnipresent, inherently active spiritual essence, then focussed on the epistemology and metaphysics of dharma.[30][107][108] To them, dharma meant rituals and duties, not devas (gods), because devas existed only in name.[30] The Mīmāṃsākas held that the Vedas are "eternal authorless infallible", that Vedic vidhi (injunctions) and mantras in rituals are prescriptive karya (actions), and that the rituals are of primary importance and merit. They considered the Upanishads and other texts related to self-knowledge and spirituality to be of secondary importance, a philosophical view that the Vedanta school disagreed with.[103][30]

Mīmāṃsā gave rise to the study of philology and the philosophy of language.[109] While their deep analysis of language and linguistics influenced other schools,[110] their views were not shared by others. Mīmāṃsākas considered the purpose and power of language was to clearly prescribe the proper, correct and right. In contrast, Vedantins extended the scope and value of language as a tool to also describe, develop and derive.[30] Mīmāṃsākas considered orderly, law-driven, procedural life as the central purpose and noblest necessity of dharma and society, and divine (theistic) sustenance means to that end. The Mimamsa school was influential and foundational to the Vedanta school, with the difference that Mīmāṃsā developed and emphasises karmakāṇḍa (the portion of the śruti which relates to ceremonial acts and sacrificial rites, the early parts of the Vedas), while the Vedanta school developed and emphasises jñānakāṇḍa (the portion of the Vedas that relates to knowledge of monism, the latter parts of the Vedas).[103]

Vedānta

[edit]

The Vedānta(Sanskrit: वेदान्त) school built upon the teachings of the Upanishads and Brahma Sutras from the first millennium BCE[88][111] and is the most developed[citation needed] and best-known of the Hindu schools. The epistemology of the Vedantins included, depending on the sub-school, five or six methods as proper and reliable means of gaining any form of knowledge:[92] pratyakṣa (perception), anumāṇa (inference), upamāṇa (comparison and analogy), arthāpatti (postulation, derivation from circumstances), anupalabdi (non-perception, negative/cognitive proof) and śabda (word, testimony of past or present reliable experts).[52][51][50] All of these have been further categorised by each sub-school of Vedanta in terms of conditionality, completeness, confidence and possibility of error.[92]

The emergence of the Vedanta school represented a period in which a more knowledge-centered understanding began to emerge, focusing on jnana (knowledge) driven aspects of the Vedic religion and the Upanishads. These included metaphysical concepts such as ātman and Brahman, and an emphasis on meditation, self-discipline, self-knowledge and abstract spirituality, rather than ritualism. The Upanishads were variously interpreted by ancient- and medieval-era Vedanta scholars. Consequently, the Vedanta separated into many sub-schools, ranging from theistic dualism to non-theistic monism, each interpreting the texts in its own way and producing its own series of sub-commentaries.[112][113]

Advaita

[edit]
Main article: Advaita Vedanta

Advaita literally means "not two, sole, unity". It is a sub-school of Vedanta, and asserts spiritual and universal non-dualism.[114][115] Its metaphysics is a form of absolute monism, that is all ultimate reality is interconnected oneness.[116][117] This is the oldest and most widely acknowledged Vedantic school. The foundational texts of this school are the Brahma Sutras and the early Upanishads from the 1st millennium BCE.[116] Its first great consolidator was the 8th century scholar Adi Shankara, who continued the line of thought of the Upanishadic teachers, and that of his teacher's teacher Gaudapada. He wrote extensive commentaries on the major Vedantic scriptures and is celebrated as one of the major Hindu philosophers from whose doctrines the main currents of modern Indian thought are derived.[118]

According to this school of Vedanta, all reality is Brahman, and there exists nothing whatsoever which is not Brahman.[119] Its metaphysics includes the concept of māyā and ātman. Māyā connotes "that which exists, but is constantly changing and thus is spiritually unreal".[120] The empirical reality is considered as always changing and therefore "transitory, incomplete, misleading and not what it appears to be".[121][122][123] The concept of ātman is of one Atman, with the light of Atman reflected within each person as jivatman. Advaita Vedantins assert that ātman is same as Brahman, and this Brahman is reflected within each human being and all life, all living beings are spiritually interconnected, and there is oneness in all of existence.[124][125] They hold that dualities and misunderstanding of māyā as the spiritual reality that matters is caused by ignorance, and are the cause of sorrow, suffering. Jīvanmukti (liberation during life) can be achieved through Self-knowledge, the understanding that ātman within is same as ātman in another person and all of Brahman – the eternal, unchanging, entirety of cosmic principles and true reality.[126][125]

Some believe that Shankara is a "closet Buddhist," suggesting as evidence his positions that selfhood is illusory and an experience of it disappears after one attains enlightenment. However, Shankara does believe that there is an enduring reality that is ultimately real. He specifically rejects Buddhist propositions in his commentary on Brahma Sutras 2.2.18, 2.2.19, 2.2.20, 2.2.25, among others.[31]: 156–160 

Viśiṣṭādvaita

[edit]
Main article: Vishishtadvaita

Ramanuja (c. 1037–1137) was the foremost proponent of the philosophy of Viśiṣṭādvaita or qualified non-dualism. Viśiṣṭādvaita advocated the concept of a Supreme Being with essential qualities or attributes. Viśiṣṭādvaitins argued against the Advaitin conception of Brahman as an impersonal empty oneness. They saw Brahman as an eternal oneness, but also as the source of all creation, which was omnipresent and actively involved in existence. To them the sense of subject-object perception was illusory and a sign of ignorance. However, the individual's sense of self was not a complete illusion since it was derived from the universal beingness that is Brahman.[127] Ramanuja saw Vishnu as a personification of Brahman.

The Viśiṣṭādvaita sub-school also disagrees with the Advaita claim that misconception (avidyā) is indescribable as either real or unreal (anirvacanīya). It sees this as a contradiction, and argues that avidyā must either be non-different from Brahman or different from Brahman. If it is different from Brahman, the non-dualist position of Shankara is given up, but if it is non-different, it must exist ultimately as Brahman. Ramanuja claims that avidyā cannot be identical with Brahman because Brahman is pure knowledge, and avidyā is absence of knowledge.[31]: 173  Ramanuja also argues that the Advaita position cannot coherently maintain that Brahman is non-intentional consciousness (consciousness that does not have an object), because all cognitions are necessarily about something.[31]: 174 

Dvaita

[edit]

Dvaita refers to a theistic sub-school in Vedanta tradition of Hindu philosophy.[128][129] Also called Tattvavāda and Bimbapratibimbavāda, the Dvaita sub-school was founded by the 13th-century scholar Madhvacharya.[128] The Dvaita Vedanta school believes that God (Vishnu, Paramatman) and the individual Selfs (Atman) (jīvātman) exist as independent realities, and these are distinct.[130][131]

Dvaita Vedanta is a dualistic interpretation of the Vedas; it espouses dualism by theorising the existence of two separate realities.[128] The first and the only independent reality, states the Dvaita school, is that of Vishnu or Brahman.[128] Vishnu is the Paramatman, in a manner similar to monotheistic God in other major religions.[132] The distinguishing factor of Dvaita philosophy, as opposed to monistic Advaita Vedanta, is that God takes on a personal role and is seen as a real eternal entity that governs and controls the universe.[133] Like Vishishtadvaita Vedanta sub-school, Dvaita philosophy also embraced Vaishnavism, with the metaphysical concept of Brahman in the Vedas identified with Vishnu and the one and only Supreme Being.[134][135] However, unlike Vishishtadvaita which envisions ultimate qualified nondualism, the dualism of Dvaita was permanent.[131][130] Dvaita sub-school disagrees with the Vishishtadvaita claim that Brahman is linked with the individual self and the world in the way that a soul is with its body. Madhvacharya argues that Brahman cannot be the material cause of the world.[31]: 186–187 

Salvation, in Dvaita, is achievable only through the grace of God Vishnu.[128][136][137]

Dvaitādvaita (Bhedabheda)

[edit]

Dvaitādvaita was proposed by Nimbarkacharya, a 7th-century Vaishnava philosopher from the Andhra region which was further propounded by his disciple Srinivasacharya. According to this philosophy there are three categories of existence: Brahman, Self, and matter. Self and matter are different from Brahman in that they have attributes and capacities different from Brahman. Brahman exists independently, while Self and matter are dependent. Thus Self and matter have an existence that is separate yet dependent. Further, Brahman is a controller, the Self is the enjoyer, and matter the thing enjoyed. Also, the highest object of worship is Krishna and his consort Radha, attended by thousands of gopis; of the Vrindavan; and devotion consists in self-surrender.

Śuddhādvaita

[edit]

Śuddhādvaita is the "purely non-dual" philosophy propounded by Vallabha Acharya (1479–1531). The founding philosopher was also the guru of the Vallabhā sampradāya ("tradition of Vallabh") or Puṣṭimārga, a Vaishnava tradition focused on the worship of Krishna. Vallabhacharya enunciates that Brahman has created the world without connection with any external agency such as Māyā (which itself is His power) and manifests Himself through the world.[138] That is why Shuddhadvaita is known as "Unmodified transformation" or "Avikṛta Pariṇāmavāda". Brahman or Ishvara desired to become many, and he became the multitude of individual Selfs and the world. The Jagat or Maya is not false or illusionary, the physical material world is. Vallabha recognises Brahman as the whole and the individual as a "part" (but devoid of bliss) like sparks and fire.[139] This sub-school thus denies the Advaita conception of Maya because the world is considered to be real insofar as it is non-different from Brahman, who is believed to be Krishna.[140]

Acintya Bheda Abheda

[edit]
Main article: Achintya Bheda Abheda

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (1486–1534), stated that the Self or energy of God is both distinct and non-distinct from God, whom he identified as Krishna, Govinda, and that this, although unthinkable, may be experienced through a process of loving devotion (bhakti). He followed the Dvaita concept of Madhvacharya.[141][142][143] In accordance with the Vishnu Purana, this sub-school ascribes six virtues to God (Bhagavan): power (aishvarya), potency (virya), fame (yasha), prosperity (shri), knowledge (jnana), and renunciation (vairagya). The potency of Bhagavan, which is transcendental, is not conceivable to humans and its relationship to Bhagwan is characterised as one in which there is "inconceivable difference in non-difference" (acintya-bhedabheda). This potency has divisions that are described within Jiva Gosvami's Bhagavat Sandarbha, which comments on the internal potency, and Paramatma Sandarbha, which elaborates the marginal and external potencies of Bhagavan. Maya, which is central to advaita, is the external potency of Bhagavan, which is controlled by Paramatma, an expansion of Bhagavan. And, Brahman is included within Bhagavan, who is the object of meditation and realisation for bhakti-yogis.[144]

Akshar-Purushottam Darshan

[edit]
Main article: Akshar-Purushottam Darshan

Cārvāka

[edit]
Main article: Charvaka

The Cārvāka(Sanskrit: चार्वाक) school is one of the nāstika or "heterodox" philosophies .[145][15][146] It rejects supernaturalism, emphasises materialism and philosophical skepticism, holding empiricism, perception and conditional inference as the proper source of knowledge[147][148] Cārvāka is an atheistic school of thought.[149] It holds that there is neither afterlife nor rebirth, all existence is mere combination of atoms and substances, feelings and mind are an epiphenomenon, and free will exists.[32][33]

Bṛhaspati is sometimes referred to as the founder of Cārvāka (also called Lokayata) philosophy. Much of the primary literature of Carvaka, the Barhaspatya sutras (ca. 600 BCE), however, are missing or lost.[149][150] Its theories and development has been compiled from historic secondary literature such as those found in the shastras, sutras and the Indian epic poetry as well as from the texts of Buddhism and from Jain literature.[149][151][152] The Tattvôpaplava-siṁha by the skeptic philosopher Jayarāśi Bhaṭṭa has been considered by many scholars to be an unorthodox Cārvāka text.[153]

One of the widely studied principles of Cārvāka philosophy was its rejection of inference as a means to establish valid, universal knowledge, and metaphysical truths.[154] In other words, the Cārvāka epistemology states that whenever one infers a truth from a set of observations or truths, one must acknowledge doubt; inferred knowledge is conditional.[155]

Shaivism

[edit]
Main article: Shaivism

Early history of Shaivism is difficult to determine.[156] However, the Śvetāśvatara Upanishad (400 – 200 BCE)[157] is considered to be the earliest textual exposition of a systematic philosophy of Shaivism.[158] Shaivism is represented by various philosophical schools, including non-dualist (abheda), dualist (bheda), and non-dualist-with-dualist (bhedābheda) perspectives. Vidyaranya in his works mentions three major schools of Shaiva thought: Pashupata Shaivism, Shaiva Siddhanta and Pratyabhijña (Kashmir Shaivism).[159]

Pāśupata Shaivism

[edit]

Pāśupata Shaivism (Pāśupata, 'of Paśupati') is the oldest of the major Shaiva schools.[160] The philosophy of Pashupata sect was systematised by Lakulish in the 2nd century CE. Paśu in Paśupati refers to the effect (or created world), the word designates that which is dependent on something ulterior. Whereas, Pati means the cause (or principium), the word designates the Lord, who is the cause of the universe, the pati, or the ruler.[161] Pashupatas disapproved of Vaishnava theology, known for its doctrine servitude of Selfs to the Supreme Being, on the grounds that dependence upon anything could not be the means of cessation of pain and other desired ends. They recognised that those depending upon another and longing for independence will not be emancipated because they still depend upon something other than themselves. According to Pāśupatas, Self possesses the attributes of the Supreme Deity when it becomes liberated from the 'germ of every pain'.[162]

Pāśupatas divided the created world into the insentient and the sentient. The insentient was the unconscious and thus dependent on the sentient or conscious. The insentient was further divided into effects and causes. The effects were of ten kinds, the earth, four elements and their qualities, colour etc. The causes were of thirteen kinds, the five organs of cognition, the five organs of action, the three internal organs, intellect, the ego principle and the cognising principle. These insentient causes were held responsible for the illusive identification of Self with non-Self. Salvation in Pāśupata involved the union of the Self with God through the intellect.[163]

Shaiva Siddhanta

[edit]

Considered normative Tantric Shaivism, Shaiva Siddhanta[164][165] provides the normative rites, cosmology and theological categories of Tantric Shaivism.[166] Being a dualistic philosophy, the goal of Shaiva Siddhanta is to become an ontologically distinct Shiva (through Shiva's grace).[167] This tradition later merged with the Tamil Saiva movement and expression of concepts of Shaiva Siddhanta can be seen in the bhakti poetry of the Nayanars.[168]

Kashmir Shaivism

[edit]

Kashmir Shaivism arose during the eighth[169] or ninth century CE[170] in Kashmir and made significant strides, both philosophical and theological, until the end of the twelfth century CE.[171] It is categorised by various scholars as monistic[172] idealism (absolute idealism, theistic monism, realistic idealism,[173] transcendental physicalism or concrete monism[173]). It is a school of Śaivism consisting of Trika and its philosophical articulation Pratyabhijña.[174]

Even though, both Kashmir Shaivism and Advaita Vedanta are non-dual philosophies which give primacy to Universal Consciousness (Chit or Brahman),[175] in Kashmir Shavisim, as opposed to Advaita, all things are a manifestation of this Consciousness.[176] This implies that from the point of view of Kashmir Shavisim, the phenomenal world (Śakti) is real, and it exists and has its being in Consciousness (Chit).[177] However, Advaita holds that Brahman is the reality (pure consciousness) and it is inactive (niṣkriya) and the phenomenal world is an appearance (māyā).[178] The objective of human life, according to Kashmir Shaivism, is to merge in Shiva or Universal Consciousness, or to realise one's already existing identity with Shiva, by means of wisdom, yoga and grace.[179]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ M Chadha (2015), in The Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy of Religion, states that Vedas were knowledge source but interpreted differently by different schools of Hindu philosophy: "The sacred texts of the Hindus, the Vedas, are variously interpreted by the six traditional Hindu philosophical schools. Even within a single school, philosophers disagree on the import of Vedic statements. (...) Hindu intellectual traditions must be understood as standing for the collection of philosophical views that share a textual connection. There is no single, comprehensive philosophical doctrine shared by all intellectual traditions in Hinduism that distinguishes their view from other Indian religions such as Buddhism or Jainism on issues of epistemology, metaphysics, logic, ethics or cosmology. The Vedas are regarded as Apauruseya, but, by the same token, they are not the Word of God either.[3]
  2. ^ Elisa Freschi (2012): The Vedas are not deontic authorities in absolute sense and may be disobeyed, but are recognized as an epistemic authority by an orthodox school of Hindu philosophy;[4] (Note: This differentiation between epistemic and deontic authority is true for all Indian religions)
  3. ^ For an overview of the six orthodox schools, with detail on the grouping of schools, see: Radhakrishnan and Moore, "Contents", and pp. 453–487.

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "Meaning of word Darshana". Archived from the original on 19 September 2020. Retrieved 19 March 2020.
  2. ^ a b c Klaus Klostermaier (2007), Hinduism: A Beginner's Guide, ISBN 978-1851685387, Chapter 2, page 26
  3. ^ M Chadha (2015), The Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy of Religion (Editor: Graham Oppy), Routledge, ISBN 978-1844658312, pages 127–128
  4. ^ Elisa Freschi (2012), Duty, Language and Exegesis in Prabhakara Mimamsa, BRILL, ISBN 978-9004222601, page 62
  5. ^ Grayling, A. C. (20 June 2019). The History of Philosophy. Penguin UK. p. 521-9. ISBN 978-0-241-98086-6.
  6. ^ a b c Andrew Nicholson (2013), Unifying Hinduism: Philosophy and Identity in Indian Intellectual History, Columbia University Press, ISBN 978-0231149877, pages 2–5
  7. ^ a b c Klaus K. Klostermaier (1984), Mythologies and Philosophies of Salvation in the Theistic Traditions of India, Wilfrid Laurier University Press, ISBN 978-0889201583, pages 124–134, 164–173, 242–265
  8. ^ a b Flood 1996, pp. 132–136, 162–169, 231–232.
  9. ^ Teun Goudriaan and Sanjukta Gupta (1981), Hindu Tantric and Śākta Literature, A History of Indian Literature, Volume 2, Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, ISBN 978-3447020916, pages 7–14
  10. ^ a b P Bilimoria (2000), Indian Philosophy (Editor: Roy Perrett), Routledge, ISBN 978-1135703226, page 88
  11. ^ Frazier, Jessica (2011). The Continuum companion to Hindu studies. London: Continuum. pp. 1–15. ISBN 978-0-8264-9966-0.
  12. ^ Carl Olson (2007), The Many Colors of Hinduism: A Thematic-historical Introduction, Rutgers University Press, ISBN 978-0813540689, pages 101-119
  13. ^ Pennington, Brian K. (2005). Was Hinduism Invented?: Britons, Indians, and the Colonial Construction of Religion. Oxford university press. pp. 111–118. ISBN 978-0-19-803729-3.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  14. ^ R Thomas (2014), Hindu Perspectives on Evolution: Darwin, Dharma, and Design. Sociology of Religion, Vol. 75, No. 1, pages 164–165, Quote: "some of the ancient Hindu traditions like Carvaka have a rich tradition of materialism, in general, other schools..."
  15. ^ a b KN Tiwari (1998), Classical Indian Ethical Thought, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120816077, page 67; Quote: "Of the three heterodox systems, the remaining one, the Cārvāka system, is a Hindu system.";
  16. ^ V.V. Raman (2012), Hinduism and Science: Some Reflections, Zygon – Journal of Religion and Science, 47(3): 549–574, Quote (page 557): "Aside from nontheistic schools like the Samkhya, there have also been explicitly atheistic schools in the Hindu tradition. One virulently anti-supernatural system is/was the so-called Carvaka school.", doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01274.x
    Bill Cooke (2005), Dictionary of Atheism, Skepticism, and Humanism, ISBN 978-1591022992, page 84;
    For a general discussion of Cārvāka and other atheistic traditions within Hindu philosophy, see Jessica Frazier (2014), Hinduism in The Oxford Handbook of Atheism (Editors: Stephen Bullivant, Michael Ruse), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199644650, pages 367–378
  17. ^ a b Klaus K. Klostermaier (1984), Mythologies and Philosophies of Salvation in the Theistic Traditions of India, Wilfrid Laurier University Press, ISBN 978-0889201583, pages 219–223
  18. ^ Klaus K. Klostermaier (1984), Mythologies and Philosophies of Salvation in the Theistic Traditions of India, Wilfrid Laurier University Press, ISBN 978-0889201583, pages 28–35
  19. ^ Jayandra Soni (1990), Philosophical Anthropology in Śaiva Siddhānta, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, ISBN 978-8120806320, pages vii–xii
  20. ^ Hilko Schomerus and Humphrey Palme (2000), Śaiva Siddhānta: An Indian School of Mystical Thought, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, ISBN 978-8120815698, pages 13–19
  21. ^ a b Potter 1991, p. 172.
  22. ^ a b Guttorm Fløistad 1993, p. 137-154.
  23. ^ Karl H. Potter (1961), A Fresh Classification of India's Philosophical Systems Archived 14 April 2016 at the Wayback Machine, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 21, No. 1, pages 25–32
  24. ^ Students' Britannica India (2000), Volume 4, Encyclopædia Britannica, ISBN 978-0852297605, page 316
  25. ^ Potter 1991, p. 98-102.
  26. ^ Nicholson 2010.
  27. ^ a b Nicholson, Andrew J. (2014). Unifying Hinduism: philosophy and identity in Indian intellectual history. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 9780231149877.
  28. ^ John Plott, James Dolin and Russell Hatton (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Axial Age, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120801585, pages 60–62
  29. ^ a b Sharma, C. (1997). A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 81-208-0365-5, p.138-149
  30. ^ a b c d e f g Chris Bartley (2013), Purva Mimamsa, in Encyclopaedia of Asian Philosophy (Editor: Oliver Leaman), Routledge, 978-0415862530, page 443-445
  31. ^ a b c d e Bartley, C. J. (2011). An introduction to Indian philosophy. London: Continuum. ISBN 978-1-84706-448-6.
  32. ^ a b R Bhattacharya (2011), Studies on the Carvaka/Lokayata, Anthem, ISBN 978-0857284334, pages 53, 94, 141–142
  33. ^ a b >Johannes Bronkhorst (2012), Free will and Indian philosophy, Antiqvorvm Philosophia: An International Journal, Roma Italy, Volume 6, pages 19–30
  34. ^ James Lochtefeld, "Ajivika", The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism, Vol. 1: A–M, Rosen Publishing. ISBN 978-0823931798, page 22
  35. ^ AL Basham (2009), History and Doctrines of the Ajivikas – a Vanished Indian Religion, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120812048, Chapter 1
  36. ^ Steven Collins (1994), Religion and Practical Reason (Editors: Frank Reynolds, David Tracy), State Univ of New York Press, ISBN 978-0791422175, page 64; Quote: "Central to Buddhist soteriology is the doctrine of not-self (Pali: anattā, Sanskrit: anātman, the opposed doctrine of ātman is central to Brahmanical thought). Put very briefly, this is the [Buddhist] doctrine that human beings have no soul, no self, no unchanging essence.";
    John C. Plott et al (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Axial Age, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120801585, page 63, Quote: "The Buddhist schools reject any Ātman concept. As we have already observed, this is the basic and ineradicable distinction between Hinduism and Buddhism"
    KN Jayatilleke (2010), Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, ISBN 978-8120806191, pages 246–249, from note 385 onwards;
    Katie Javanaud (2013), Is The Buddhist 'No-Self' Doctrine Compatible With Pursuing Nirvana? Archived 13 September 2017 at the Wayback Machine, Philosophy Now (2013, Subscription Required);
  37. ^ Paul Dundas (2002), The Jains, 2nd Edition, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415266055, pages 1–19, 40–44
  38. ^ Cowell and Gough (1882, Translators), The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy by Madhva Acharya, Trubner's Oriental Series, pages 103–111
  39. ^ Cowell and Gough (1882, Translators), The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy by Madhva Acharya, Trubner's Oriental Series, pages 112–127
  40. ^ King 2007, p. 45.
  41. ^ Cowell and Gough (1882, Translators), The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy by Madhva Acharya, Trubner's Oriental Series, pages 128–136
  42. ^ Carl Olson, The Many Colors of Hinduism Archived 13 May 2023 at the Wayback Machine, Rutgers University Press, 2007, page 237
  43. ^ Cowell and Gough (1882, Translators), The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy by Madhva Acharya, Trubner's Oriental Series, pages 137–144
  44. ^ Cowell and Gough (1882, Translators), The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy by Madhva Acharya, Trubner's Oriental Series, pages 203–220
  45. ^ a b Mikel Burley (2012), Classical Samkhya and Yoga – An Indian Metaphysics of Experience, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415648875, pages 43–46
  46. ^ Tom Flynn and Richard Dawkins (2007), The New Encyclopedia of Unbelief, Prometheus, ISBN 978-1591023913, pages 420–421
  47. ^ Nyaya Realism Archived 5 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine, in Perceptual Experience and Concepts in Classical Indian Philosophy, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2015)
  48. ^ a b Dale Riepe (1996), Naturalistic Tradition in Indian Thought, ISBN 978-8120812932, pages 227–246
  49. ^ a b Lochtefeld 2002, p. 520-521.
  50. ^ a b c d Flood 1996, p. 225.
  51. ^ a b c d e f g h i Grimes 1989, p. 238.
  52. ^ a b c d e Perrett 2000, pp. 245–248.
  53. ^ Flood 1996, pp. 232.
  54. ^ Roy Perrett, Indian Ethics: Classical traditions and contemporary challenges, Volume 1 (Editor: P Bilimoria et al), Ashgate, ISBN 978-0754633013, pages 149–158
  55. ^ Eliott Deutsche (2000), in Philosophy of Religion : Indian Philosophy Vol 4 (Editor: Roy Perrett), Routledge, ISBN 978-0815336112, pages 245–248
  56. ^ Michaels, Axel (2004), Hinduism: Past and Present, Princeton University Press, p. 264, ISBN 0-691-08953-1
  57. ^ a b Samkhya – Hinduism Archived 4 May 2015 at the Wayback Machine Encyclopædia Britannica (2014)
  58. ^ Gerald James Larson (2011), Classical Sāṃkhya: An Interpretation of Its History and Meaning, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120805033, pages 154–206
  59. ^ James G. Lochtefeld, Guna, in The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism: A-M, Vol. 1, Rosen Publishing, ISBN 9780823931798, page 265
  60. ^ T Bernard (1999), Hindu Philosophy, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-81-208-1373-1, pages 74–76
  61. ^ Haney, William S., Culture and Consciousness: Literature Regained, Bucknell University Press (1 August 2002). P. 42. ISBN 1611481724.
  62. ^ Dasgupta, Surendranath (1992). A history of Indian philosophy, Volume 1. Motilal Banarsidass Publ. p. 258. ISBN 978-81-208-0412-8.
  63. ^ Mikel Burley (2012), Classical Samkhya and Yoga - An Indian Metaphysics of Experience, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415648875, page 39
  64. ^ Lloyd Pflueger (2008), Person Purity and Power in Yogasutra, in Theory and Practice of Yoga (Editor: Knut Jacobsen), Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120832329, pages 38–39
  65. ^ John C. Plott et al (1984), Global History of Philosophy: The period of scholasticism, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-0895816788, page 367
  66. ^ Andrew J. Nicholson (2013), Unifying Hinduism: Philosophy and Identity in Indian Intellectual History, Columbia University Press, ISBN 978-0231149877, Chapter 4, pg. 77
  67. ^ adhyatmika, adhibhautika and adhidaivika – that is, suffering caused internally by self, cause by other human beings, caused by acts of nature
  68. ^ a b Samkhya karika Archived 4 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine by Iswara Krishna, Henry Colebrooke (Translator), Oxford University Press
  69. ^ Original Sanskrit: Samkhya karika Archived 23 February 2012 at the Wayback Machine Compiled and indexed by Ferenc Ruzsa (2015), Sanskrit Documents Archives;
    Second Translation (Verse 1): Ferenc Ruzsa (1997), [The triple suffering – A note on the Samkhya karika, Xth World Sanskrit Conference: Bangalore, University of Hungary, Budapest;
    Third Translation (all Verses): Samkhyakarika of Iswara Krishna John Davis (Translator), Trubner, London, University of Toronto Archives
  70. ^ Larson, Gerald James. Classical Sāṃkhya: An Interpretation of Its History and Meaning. Motilal Banarasidass, 1998. P. 13. ISBN 81-208-0503-8.
  71. ^ For a brief overview of the Yoga school of philosophy see: Chatterjee & Datta 1984, p. 43.
  72. ^ a b Edwin Bryant (2011, Rutgers University), The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali Archived 18 May 2019 at the Wayback Machine IEP
  73. ^ Chatterjee & Datta 1984, p. 43.
  74. ^ Radhakrishnan, S.; Moore, CA (1967). A Sourcebook in Indian Philosophy. Princeton. p. 453. ISBN 0-691-01958-4.
  75. ^ Müller (1899), Chapter 7, "Yoga Philosophy", p. 104.
  76. ^ Zimmer, Heinrich (1951). Philosophies of India. New York City: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-01758-1. Bollingen Series XXVI; Edited by Joseph Campbell, page 280
  77. ^ Mikel Burley (2012), Classical Samkhya and Yoga – An Indian Metaphysics of Experience, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415648875, pages x–xi, 101–107, 142 and Introduction chapter
  78. ^ Max Müeller, The six systems of Indian philosophy, Longmans, page 410
  79. ^ The Encyclopedia of Yoga and Tantra by Georg Feuerstein
  80. ^ The Encyclopedia of Yoga and Tantra, Georg Feuerstein
  81. ^ Phillips, Stephen H. (1995). Classical Indian Metaphysics: Refutations of Realism and the Emergence of "New Logic". Open Court Publishing. pp. 12–13. ISBN 9780812692983.
  82. ^ Personalism Archived 23 April 2013 at the Wayback Machine Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2013)
  83. ^ Northrop Frye (2006), Educated Imagination and Other Writings on Critical Theory, 1933–1962, University of Toronto Press, ISBN 978-0802092090, page 291
  84. ^ Mike McNamee and William J. Morgan (2015), Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415829809, pages 135–136, Quote: "As a dualistic philosophy largely congruent with Samkhya's metaphysics, Yoga seeks liberation through the realization that Atman equals Brahman; it involves a cosmogonic dualism: purusha an absolute consciousness, and prakriti original and primeval matter."
  85. ^ Mikel Burley (2012), Classical Samkhya and Yoga – An Indian Metaphysics of Experience, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415648875, pages 141–142
  86. ^ a b c d Ganeri, Jonardon (2023), "Analytic Philosophy in Early Modern India", in Zalta, Edward N.; Nodelman, Uri (eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2023 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 23 January 2024
  87. ^ a b c d Oliver Leaman, Key Concepts in Eastern Philosophy. Routledge, ISBN 978-0415173629, 1999, page 269.
  88. ^ a b c Michael Brannigan (2009), Striking a Balance: A Primer in Traditional Asian Values, Rowman & Littlefield, ISBN 978-0739138465, page 7
  89. ^ Original Sanskrit and Translation: The Vaisheshika Sutra of Kanada with the Commentary of Sankara Misra BD Basu (Translator), The Sacred Books of the Hindus, Volume 6, University of Toronto Archives;
    For modern translations and a history of the Vaiśeṣika Sūtra in the 1st millennium BCE, see: Stephen H. Phillips (1998), Classical Indian Metaphysics, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120814899, pages 38–54
  90. ^ DPS Bhawuk (2011), Spirituality and Indian Psychology (Editor: Anthony Marsella), Springer, ISBN 978-1-4419-8109-7, pages 172–175
  91. ^ Grimes 1989, p. 225.
  92. ^ a b c P Bilimoria (1993), Pramāṇa epistemology: Some recent developments, in Asian philosophy – Volume 7 (Editor: G Floistad), Springer, ISBN 978-94-010-5107-1, pages 137–154
  93. ^ M Hiriyanna (1993), Outlines of Indian Philosophy, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120810860, pages 228–237
  94. ^ a b Nyaya: Indian Philosophy Archived 10 May 2015 at the Wayback Machine Encyclopædia Britannica (2014)
  95. ^ Flood 1996, pp. 221–227.
  96. ^ B Gupta (2012), An Introduction to Indian Philosophy: Perspectives on Reality, Knowledge and Freedom, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415800037, pages 171–189
  97. ^ PT Raju (1985), Structural Depths of Indian Thought: Toward a Constructive Postmodern Ethics, State University of New York Press, ISBN 978-0887061394, page 223
  98. ^ B. K. Matilal "Perception. An Essay on Classical Indian Theories of Knowledge" (Oxford University Press, 1986), p. xiv.
  99. ^ a b DPS Bhawuk (2011), Spirituality and Indian Psychology (Editor: Anthony Marsella), Springer, ISBN 978-1-4419-8109-7, page 172
  100. ^ Vassilis Vitsaxis (2009), Thought and Faith, Somerset Hall Press, ISBN 978-1935244042, page 131
  101. ^ BK Matilal (1997), Logic, Language and Reality: Indian Philosophy and Contemporary Issues, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120807174, pages 353–357
  102. ^ Original Sanskrit and Translation: The Nyaya Sutras of Gotama SC Vidyabhusana (Translator), The Bhuvaneswari Ashrama, University of Toronto Archives; A 1990 print is available from Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, ISBN 978-8120807488 (Editor: N Sinha)
  103. ^ a b c Oliver Leaman (2006), Shruti, in Encyclopaedia of Asian Philosophy, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415862530, page 503
  104. ^ Mimamsa Archived 17 May 2015 at the Wayback Machine Encyclopædia Britannica (2014)
  105. ^ M. Hiriyanna (1993), Outlines of Indian Philosophy, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120810860, page 323-325
  106. ^ M. Hiriyanna (1993), Outlines of Indian Philosophy, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120810860, page 298-335
  107. ^ Neville, Robert (2001). Religious truth. SUNY Press.
  108. ^ Worthington, Vivian (1982). A history of yoga. Routledge. p. 66. ISBN 9780710092588.
  109. ^ Peter M. Scharf, The Denotation of Generic Terms in Ancient Indian Philosophy (1996), Chapter 3
  110. ^ Annette Wilke and Oliver Moebus (2011), Sound and Communication: An Aesthetic Cultural History of Sanskrit Hinduism, Walter de Gruyter GmbH (Berlin), ISBN 978-3110181593, pages 23–24, 551–663
  111. ^ Oliver Leaman (1999), Key Concepts in Eastern Philosophy, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415173636, page xiv
  112. ^ Knut Jacobsen (2008), Theory and Practice of Yoga : 'Essays in Honour of Gerald James Larson, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120832329, page 77;
    JN Mohanty (2001), Explorations in Philosophy, Vol 1 (Editor: Bina Gupta), Oxford University Press, page 107-108
  113. ^ Oliver Leaman (2000), Eastern Philosophy: Key Readings, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415173582, page 251;
    R Prasad (2009), A Historical-developmental Study of Classical Indian Philosophy of Morals, Concept Publishing, ISBN 978-8180695957, pages 345–347
  114. ^ Advaita Vedanta Archived 26 June 2015 at the Wayback Machine Sangeetha Menon (2012), IEP
  115. ^ Nakamura, Hajime (1990), A History of Early Vedanta Philosophy. Part One, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, pp. 110–114
  116. ^ a b Flood 1996, pp. 239–244.
  117. ^ Eliot Deutsch, Advaita Vedanta: A Philosophical Reconstruction, University of Hawaii Press, ISBN 978-0824802714, pages 10–14
  118. ^ Adi Shankara Archived 1 May 2015 at the Wayback Machine, Sengaku Mayeda, Encyclopædia Britannica (2013)
  119. ^ Richard Brooks (1969), The Meaning of 'Real' in Advaita Vedānta, Philosophy East and West, Vol. 19, No. 4, pages 385–398
  120. ^ AC Das (1952), Brahman and Māyā in Advaita Metaphysics, Philosophy East and West, Vol. 2, No. 2, pages 144–154
  121. ^ H.M. Vroom (1996), No Other Gods, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, ISBN 978-0802840974, page 57
  122. ^ Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty (1986), Dreams, Illusion, and Other Realities, University of Chicago Press, ISBN 978-0226618555, page 119
  123. ^ Lynn Foulston and Stuart Abbott (2009), Hindu Goddesses: Beliefs and Practices, Sussex Academic Press, ISBN 978-1902210438, pages 14–16
  124. ^ John Koller (2007), in Chad Meister and Paul Copan (Editors): The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Religion, Routledge, ISBN 978-1-134-18001-1, pages 98–106
  125. ^ a b Arvind Sharma (2007), Advaita Vedānta: An Introduction, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120820272, pages 19–40, 53–58, 79–86
  126. ^ Michael Comans (1993), The question of the importance of Samadhi in modern and classical Advaita Vedanta, Philosophy East & West. Vol. 43, Issue 1, pages 19–38
  127. ^ Christopher Etter (30 April 2006). A Study of Qualitative Non-Pluralism. iUniverse. pp. 62–63. ISBN 978-0-595-39312-1.
  128. ^ a b c d e Jeaneane D. Fowler (2002). Perspectives of Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Hinduism. Sussex Academic Press. pp. 340–344. ISBN 978-1-898723-94-3.
  129. ^ Hindu Philosophy Archived 14 April 2013 at the Wayback Machine, IEP, Quote: "Dvaita: Madhva is one of the principal theistic exponents of Vedānta. On his account, Brahman is a personal God, and specifically He is the Hindu deity Viṣṇu."
  130. ^ a b Jeaneane D. Fowler (2002). Perspectives of Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Hinduism. Sussex Academic Press. pp. 238–243, 288–293, 340–343. ISBN 978-1-898723-94-3.
  131. ^ a b James Lochtefeld (2002), The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism, Volume 1 & 2, Rosen Publishing, ISBN 0-8239-2287-1, pages 12-13, 213-214, 758-759
  132. ^ Michael Myers (2000), Brahman: A Comparative Theology, Routledge, ISBN 978-0700712571, pages 124–127
  133. ^ Christopher Etter (2006), A Study of Qualitative Non-Pluralism, iUniverse, pp. 59–60, ISBN 0-595-39312-8.
  134. ^ Bryant, Edwin (2007). Krishna : A Sourcebook (Chapter 15 by Deepak Sarma). Oxford University Press. p. 358. ISBN 978-0195148923.
  135. ^ Stoker, Valerie (2011). "Madhva (1238-1317)". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Archived from the original on 12 October 2016. Retrieved 29 February 2016.
  136. ^ Sharma, B. N. Krishnamurti (1962). Philosophy of Śrī Madhvācārya. Motilal Banarsidass (2014 Reprint). pp. 417–424. ISBN 978-8120800687.
  137. ^ Sharma, Chandradhar (1994). A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 373. ISBN 81-208-0365-5.
  138. ^ Devarshi Ramanath Shastri, “Shuddhadvaita Darshan (Vol.2)”, Published by Mota Mandir, Bhoiwada, Mumbai, India, 1917.
  139. ^ “Brahmavād Saṅgraha”, Pub. Vaishnava Mitra Mandal Sarvajanik Nyasa, Indore, India, 2014.
  140. ^ "Śuddhādvaita". Oxford Reference. Archived from the original on 2 June 2023. Retrieved 2 June 2023.
  141. ^ Lord Chaitanya Archived 7 June 2002 at the Wayback Machine (krishna.com) "This is called acintya-bheda-abheda-tattva, inconceivable, simultaneous oneness and difference."
  142. ^ "Who Is Lord Chaitanya? | Krishna.com". www.krishna.com. Archived from the original on 7 June 2002. Retrieved 7 April 2021.
  143. ^ "Who is Lord Chaitanya? | Krishna.com". www.krishna.com. Archived from the original on 13 April 2021. Retrieved 7 April 2021.
  144. ^ Dasa, Satyanarayana (2007). "The Six Sandarbhas of Jiva Gosvami". In Bryant, Edwin (ed.). Krishna: a sourcebook. Oxford: Oxford university press. p. 378. ISBN 978-0-19-514891-6.
  145. ^ R Thomas (2014), Hindu Perspectives on Evolution: Darwin, Dharma, and Design, Sociology of Religion, Vol. 75, No. 1, pages 164–165, Quote: "some of the ancient Hindu traditions like Carvaka have a rich tradition of materialism, in general, other schools..."
  146. ^ Jessica Frazier (2014), Hinduism in The Oxford Handbook of Atheism (Editors: Stephen Bullivant, Michael Ruse), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199644650, pages 367–378;
    Bill Cooke (2005), Dictionary of Atheism, Skepticism, and Humanism, ISBN 978-1591022992, page 84
  147. ^ KN Tiwari (1998), Classical Indian Ethical Thought, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120816077, page 67;
    Roy W Perrett (1984), The problem of induction in Indian philosophy Archived 14 December 2020 at the Wayback Machine, Philosophy East and West, 34(2): 161–174
  148. ^ V.V. Raman (2012), Hinduism and Science: Some Reflections, Zygon – Journal of Religion and Science, 47(3): 549–574, Quote (page 557): "Aside from nontheistic schools like the Samkhya, there have also been explicitly atheistic schools in the Hindu tradition. One virulently anti-supernatural system is/was the so-called Carvaka school.", doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01274.x
  149. ^ a b c Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli and Moore, Charles (1957). A Source Book in Indian Philosophy. Princeton University Press. pp. 227–249. ISBN 0-691-01958-4.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  150. ^ Ramkrishna Bhattacharya (2013), The base text and its commentaries: Problem of representing and understanding the Carvaka / Lokayata, Argument: Biannual Philosophical Journal, Issue 1, Volume 3, pages 133–150
  151. ^ Bhattacharya, Ramakrishna (2002). "Cārvāka Fragments: A New Collection". Journal of Indian Philosophy. 30 (6): 597–640. doi:10.1023/A:1023569009490. S2CID 169948463.
  152. ^ Dale Riepe (1996), Naturalistic Tradition in Indian Thought, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120812932, pages 53–58
  153. ^ Balcerowicz, Piotr (2016), "Jayarāśi", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2016 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, archived from the original on 8 July 2020, retrieved 8 July 2020
  154. ^ Cowell, E. B.; Gough, A. E. (1882). The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy. pp. 5–7.
  155. ^ MM Kamal (1998), The Epistemology of the Carvaka Philosophy, Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies, 46(2): 13–16
  156. ^ Tattwananda, Swami (1984), Vaisnava Sects, Saiva Sects, Mother Worship (First Revised ed.), Calcutta: Firma KLM Private Ltd., p. 45.
  157. ^ Flood 1996, p. 86.
  158. ^ Chakravarti, Mahadev (1994), The Concept of Rudra-Śiva Through The Ages (Second Revised ed.), Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, p. 9, ISBN 81-208-0053-2.
  159. ^ Cowell and Gough (1882), p. xii.
  160. ^ Flood (2003), p. 206.
  161. ^ Cowell and Gough (1882), p. 104-105.
  162. ^ Cowell and Gough (1882), p. 103
  163. ^ Cowell and Gough (1882), p. 107
  164. ^ Xavier Irudayaraj, "Saiva Siddanta", in the St. Thomas Christian Encyclopaedia of India, Ed. George Menachery, Vol.III, 2010, pp.10 ff.
  165. ^ Xavier Irudayaraj, "Self Understanding of Saiva Siddanta Scriptures" in the St. Thomas Christian Encyclopaedia of India, Ed. George Menachery, Vol.III, 2010, pp.14 ff.
  166. ^ Flood (2006), p. 120.
  167. ^ Flood (2006), p. 122.
  168. ^ Flood 1996, p. 168.
  169. ^ Kashmir Shaivism: The Secret Supreme, By Lakshman Jee
  170. ^ Dyczkowski 1987, p. 4.
  171. ^ The Trika Śaivism of Kashmir, Moti Lal Pandit, pp. 1
  172. ^ Kashmir Shaivism: The Secret Supreme, Swami Lakshman Jee, pp. 103
  173. ^ a b Dyczkowski 1987, p. 51.
  174. ^ Flood (2005), pp. 56–68
  175. ^ Singh, Jaideva. Pratyãbhijñahṛdayam. Moltilal Banarsidass, 2008. PP. 24–26.
  176. ^ Dyczkowski 1987, p. 44.
  177. ^ Ksemaraja, trans. by Jaidev Singh, Spanda Karikas: The Divine Creative Pulsation, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, p.119
  178. ^ Shankarananda, (Swami). Consciousness is Everything, The Yoga of Kashmir Shaivism. PP. 56–59
  179. ^ Mishra, K. Kashmir Saivism, The Central Philosophy of Tantrism. PP. 330–334.

Bibliography

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindu_philosophy&oldid=1246333449"