Our Glorious Philosophic and scientific heritage
तत्त्वविद्या (tattvavidyā – study of suchness
/ philosophy) has always been the foundation on which religion has flourished,
particularly in the ancient time-tested civilizations of the Indian
subcontinent viz. हिन्दुधर्म (hindudharma - Hinduism), बौद्धधर्म (bauddhadharma -
Buddhism), जैनधर्म (jainadharma - Jainism) etc., just as pure
science is the back bone of applied science (engineering).
The English term ‘philosophy’ is
epistemologically derived from the Latin roots ‘philos - love’ & ‘sophia -wisdom”. In words, ‘philosophy’ means “love of wisdom”. Technically
speaking, तत्त्वविद्या (tattvavidyā – study of suchness / philosophy), is generally
categorized in हिन्दुधर्म (hindudharma - Hinduism), under the ज्ञानमार्ग (jñānamārga – gnostic-path), which in
turn, is one among the चतुर्विधयोगमार्गाः
मोक्षस्य (caturvidhayogamārgāḥ mokṣasya
– fourfold unitive paths of liberation) viz. कर्मयोगमार्ग (karmayogamārga – servitude-union-path), भक्तियोगमार्ग (bhaktiyogamārga – devotional
union path), ध्यानयोगमार्ग (dhyānayogamārga
– meditative union path) & ज्ञानयोगमार्ग (jñānayogamārga – gnostic union
path).
These are the four
pillars of religion – all equally important and powerful. One is no way
inferior to the other and based one’s aptitude and attitude, one can always
choose one or more of these paths, in order to effectively accomplish his or
her ultimate पुरुषार्थ (puruṣārtha – soul-pursuit). In fact, the more the merrier
as we would get a more holistic picture of reality. Again, please remember
these four channels are not water tight compartments as deep diving in one will
eventually lead to the other. Just as among the चतुर्विधपुरुषार्थाः (caturvidhapuruṣārthāḥ –
fourfold soul-goals) viz. அறம் /धर्म (aṛam / dharma – ethics) which serves
as the foundational governing framework for righteously
streamlining/prioritizing the intermediate goals of இன்பம் /काम (inbam / kāma - desire) and பொருள் /अर्थ (poruḻ / artha - wealth) towards the
final realization of வீடு / मोक्ष (vīḍu / mokśa – liberation), which is the
ultimate soteriological goal. To this end, the ज्ञानयोगमार्ग (jñānayogamārga – gnostic union
path) helps effective use of other three योगमार्गाः मोक्षस्य (yogamārgāḥ
mokṣasya – unitive paths of liberation). Please
remember the age-old adage “Knowledge is power”..
Philosophical knowledge
provides a very strong foundational platform for erecting the building blocks
of one’s religious (spiritual) conviction. As in any building, the stronger its
foundation, the stronger becomes stays the constructed structure. If the
foundation is not strong, the building becomes weak and is more vulnerable to
structural damage and collapse. The same analogy applies to
religious convictions as well. That is why, highest importance was always given
to philosophy in time many tested religions.
For instance, let’s take हिन्दुधर्म (hindudharma - Hinduism). It has got one of the richest corpus of philosophical wealth backing its sacred theological heritage - a very holistic framework spanning both deep as well as a wide spectrum of interdisciplinary domains of wisdom viz. metaphysics, psychology, mysticism, logic, syllogism, ontology, epistemology, cosmology, theology, soteriology, ethics, eschatology, hermeneutics, mathematics, astrology, astronomy, philology, etymology etc. Again, from a theistic perspective, भारतीय तत्त्ववाद (bhāratīya tattvavāda - Indian philosophy) seamlessly absorbs (encompasses) a wide range of theological belief systems as part of its philosophical tradition atheism, agnosticism, monotheism, polytheism, henotheism, pantheism, panentheism etc., into its all-embracing holistic framework. For example, the following table highlights various theological philosophies and some aspects of their presence in the world and Indian scenarios
|
# |
Belief System |
Description |
Examples from हिन्दुधर्म (hindudharma - Hinduism) |
Examples from other religions |
|
1 |
Polytheism |
The term ‘Polytheism’ is
derived from the Greek words, ‘poly’ meaning ‘many’ and ‘theos’ meaning ‘God’
or ‘Deity’. Historically
speaking, most of the ancient religions across the globe were essentially
polytheistic. Polytheistic religions
believe in multiple Gods & Goddesses as
illustrated by the following religions |
हिन्दुधर्म (hindudharma - Hinduism) believes
in the existence variety of देवाः (devāḥ - gods) &
देव्यः (devyaḥ - goddesses), as
testified in the वेदशास्त्रसंहिता (vedaśāstrasaṃhitā – vedic scriptural
corpus), पुराणशास्त्रसंहिता
(purāṇaśāstrasaṃhitā – puranic scriptural corpus) as
well as the आगमशास्त्रसंहिता (āgamaśāstrasaṃhitā – agama scriptural
corpus) |
Persian theology Greek theology Egyptian Gods
|
|
2 |
Monotheism |
The term ‘Monotheism’ is
derived from the Greek words, ‘mono’
meaning ‘single’ and
‘theos’
meaning ‘God’. Monotheistic religions
strongly believe that there is one and only one God, responsible for the
creation, sustenance and dissolution of the world. Every other principle is
subordinate to this Supreme Divinity. |
हिन्दुधर्म (hindudharma - Hinduism)
also believes in the परमकैवल्यम्
देवत्वस्य (paramakaivalyam devatvasya- absolute singularity of godhead)
called परब्रह्मन् (parabrahman – absolute divinity)
|
Judaism Islam Christianity
|
|
3 |
Monism |
While monotheism
believes in absolute singularity of Godhead, monism
goes a step further and extends the singularity to
the whole of existence itself. In other words, it believes in the absolute
singularity in existence is the ultimate reality beyond
all multiplicities. Man, world and God are all fundamentally one and the
same. |
केवलाद्वैतदर्शन (kevalādtvaita darśana – absolute nondualstc
philosophy), शुद्धाद्वैत दर्शन (śuddhādvaita darśana – pure nondualstic
philosophy)
|
Ancient Greek philosophies
of Thales, Anaxaminder,
Stoics
|
|
4 |
Dualism |
The term ‘dualism’ is derived from the Latin word ‘duo’,
which means ‘dual’ or ‘double’.
Thus, duality as
a philosophy believes in the existence of two different fundamental entities
namely God and World, or Mind and Matter, Body and soul etc. |
Sankhya philosophy founded by महर्इषि कपिल (Kapila mahariṣi) Dvaitham philosophy founded by श्री मद्वचार्य (śrī madvacārya)
|
Taosim, Greek Platonism
Judaism Christianity Islam
|
|
5 |
Pantheism |
Etymologically the term is
derived from the Greek roots ‘pan’
meaning ‘all’
and ‘theos’
meaning ‘God’.
Thus, pantheism
literally means ‘All are God’ |
केवलाद्वैतदर्शन (kevalādtvaita darśana – absolute nondualstc
philosophy), शुद्धाद्वैत दर्शन (śuddhādvaita darśana – pure nondualstic
philosophy) |
Taosim |
|
6 |
Panentheism |
Etymologically the term is
derived from the Greek roots ‘pan’
meaning ‘all’,
‘en’ meaning ‘in’ and
‘theos’
meaning ‘God’.
Thus, panentheism
literally means ‘All in God’. In
simple terms panentheism
believes that the ‘the
whole is greater than sum of its parts |
विशिष्टाद्वैतदर्शन (viśiṣṭādvaita darśana – qualified
nondualistic philosophy) विशेषाद्वैत
/ शक्तिविशिष्टाद्वैत दर्शन
(viśeṣādvaita darśana – special nondualistic/ shakti qualified
nondualstic philosophy) |
Hasidic
school of Judaism |
|
7 |
Atheism |
Etymologically atheism is
the negation of theism ‘a’ + ‘theos’, in
other words, it is a belief system which does not believe in the existence of
a super natural personality called God, governing the world. |
न्यायदर्शन (nyāyadarśana – logic philosophy) |
बौद्धधर्म (bauddhadharma –buddhism) |
|
8 |
Agnosticsm |
While the above theological
categorizations are based on the belief or non-belief in the existence of God
and its relationship with the world, agnosticism is
based on the knowability of God. Agnosticism believes that the existence or non-existence
of ‘God’ is
not only unknown but is also unknowable. Etymologically speaking, agnosticism is
the negation of knowledge (‘a’
+ ‘gnosis’) |
सांख्यदर्शन (sāṁkhyadarśana – enumeration philosophy): This
system can be considered to be ‘agnostic’ in the sense that it strongly
believes that even though the concept of ईश्वर (īśvara - god) exists, his
existence cannot be proved.
|
जैनधरम (jainadharama
- jainism) माध्यमकदर्शन बौद्धधर्मस्य (mādhyamakadarśana bauddhadharmasya –
middle-way philosophy of buddhism) |
|
9 |
Henotheism |
Etymologically, the term was
derived from the roots ‘heis’
which means ‘single’ and
‘theos’
meaning ‘God’. In
simple words, this school believes in one absolutely supreme Divinity,
supported by other gods. The term was originally used by
Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling. |
Vedic and Puranic Deities |
Hellenistic Greek
religion |
Besides, unlike
many of its occidental counterparts, the oriental philosophical tradition aims
to provide an optimum golden balance or harmony between all the three
dimensions of spiritual wisdom viz. युक्ति (yukti - reason), अनुभव (anubhava – experience) & श्रद्धा (shraddhā - faith) wherein each of them mutually
synergizes to complement and supplement holistically.
Moreover, philosophy was the back bone of not only religious and theological domains but was also the mother of scientific quest. In fact, historically speaking, philosophical quest has always been the common link between religion and science. Again, take Hinduism for example, science and spirituality were always (even now) two sides of the same coin – mathematics including geometry, cosmology, logic & syllogism, ontology, epistemology, biology, physiology, psychology, medicine, alchemy etc., were always an integral part of Hindu religious philosophy. न्याय दर्शन (nyāya darśana) for example deals at length with logic & syllogism, वैषेशिक दर्शन (vaiṣeśika darśana) with atomic physics, सांख्य दर्शन (sāṁkhya darśana) with ontology. Besides केवलाद्वैतदर्शन (kevalādtvaita darśana – absolute nondualstc philosophy), for example, deals at concepts of relativistic physics – holographic black hole singularity etc. पराद्वैत त्रिकशैव दर्शन (parādvaita trikaśaiva darśana – transcendent nonduality of auspicious triad philosophy) with quantum loop gravity, super strings etc.; योग दर्शन (yoga darśana) with psychology, neuroscience etc., consciousness, physiology etc., so on goes the huge list of overlapping. In fact, these are only random example including but not limited to the following
|
# |
Domain |
Sub-Domains |
|
1 |
Earth sciences |
geology, soil mechanics |
|
2 |
Atomic Physics |
molecular & nuclear physics,
string /quantum loop theory |
|
3 |
Chemistry |
chemical compounds, alchemy,
biochemistry, metallurgy |
|
4 |
Physiology |
Neuroscience, heredity/genetics,
sympathetic spinal system, respiratory system, reproductive system, excretory
system, vascular system
|
|
5 |
Engineering & technology |
Kinetics / Mechanics, acoustics,
architecture & building technology, Iron and steel, ship building,
agriculture, transport, mining, irrigation |
|
6 |
Acoustics |
pitch, musicology |
|
7 |
Mathematics |
Decimal number system, Boolean
logic, Fibonacci, ruler measurements, geometry, algebra, arithmetic,
infinity, zero, calculus, coordinate geometry, Vedic mathematics,
trigonometry |
|
8 |
Astronomy |
cosmology, Planetary systems, solar
science, atmosphere, aeronautics, weather forecasts etc. |
|
9 |
Zoology |
taxonomy of species, medicine,
animal husbandry, dairy farming |
|
10 |
Botany |
Plant taxonomy, herbal sciences,
cryptogamy |
|
11 |
Medicine |
Naturopathy, Surgery, general
medicine, dentistry, paediatrics, psychiatry, regenerative medicine |
|
12 |
Psychology |
Perception, cognition, attention,
emotion, intelligence etc. |
|
13 |
Occult / Esoteric sciences |
biomagnetism, Extra Sensory
Perceptions, astrology |
Just as ancient Greek philosophical tradition of Aristotle, Plato, Pythagoras, Euclid etc. formed the basis for today’s western modern science and mathematics, Indian philosophical tradition was the mother of many sciences. In fact, metaphysics was the mother of physics, astrology was the mother of astronomy.
Again, in the recent decades, thanks to phenomenal advancements in relativistic and quantum physics, lots synergies between physics and philosophy is beginning to get recognized. Originally, in ancient religions tradition particularly in the Indian tradition including हिन्दुधर्म (hindudharma - Hinduism), बौद्धधर्म (bauddhadharma - Buddhism), जैनधर्म (jainadharma - Jainism), etc., for example, the disparity never existed in principle.
बहुलत्व हिन्दुतत्त्ववादसंप्रदायानाम् (bahulatva hindutattvavādasaṃpradāyānām – richness of the Hindu philosophical traditions)
Moreover, unlike many other religions, it has always encouraged a healthy synergy of multiple interpretations and ideological schools of philosophies including a very diverse range of orthodox, heterodox and hybrid doctrinal Point of Views (PoVs), technically called तत्त्ववाददर्शनाः (tattvavādaaraśanāḥ -philosophical perspectives) including षट्विधवैदिकदर्शनाः (ṣaṭvidhavaidikadarśanāḥ – six-fold vedic philosophies) viz. न्यायदर्शन (nyāyadarśana – logic-philosophy), वैशेषिकदर्शन (vaiśeṣikadarśana - distinguished philosophy), योगदर्शन (yogadarśana - unitive philosophy), सांख्यदर्शन (sāṃkhyadarśana - enumerable philosophy), पूर्वमीमांसदर्शन (pūrvamīmāṃsa darśana - prior inquiry philosophy) & उत्तरमीमांस / वेदान्त दर्शन (uttaramīmāṃsa/vedānta darśana - posterior inquiry / final wisdom philosophy)
Now, each of these schools in-turn have several sub-schools. For example, उत्तरमीमांसवेदान्त दर्शन (uttaramīmāṃsavedānta darśana - posterior inquiry final wisdom philosophy) is again branching into various schools like the following
|
# |
दर्शनस्य नाम (darśanasya nāma –
name of philosophy) |
प्रवार्तक परमाचार्य (pravārtaka
paramācārya – primary foounding preceptor) |
|
A |
केवलाद्वैतदर्शन (kevalādtvaita darśana – absolute nondualstc philosophy) |
श्री आदिशंकराचार्य भगवद्पाद (śrī ādiśaṁkarācārya bhagavadpāda) |
|
B |
विशिष्टाद्वैतदर्शन (viśiṣṭādvaita darśana – qualified nondualistic
philosophy) |
श्री रामानुजाचार्य (śrī rāmānujācārya) |
|
C |
द्वैत दर्शन (dvaita darśana –
dualsitic philosophy) |
श्री मद्वचार्य (śrī madvacārya) |
|
D |
औपाधिक भेदाभेद दर्शन (aupādhika bhedābheda darśana – different yet non-different
philosophy) |
श्री भास्कराचार्य (śrī
bhāskarācārya) |
|
E |
अचिन्त्य भेद अभेद दर्शन (acintya bheda abheda darśana) |
श्रील रूपा गोस्वामि (śrīla rūpā gosvāmi) |
|
F |
शुद्धाद्वैत दर्शन (śuddhādvaita darśana – pure nondualstic philosophy) |
श्री वल्लभाचार्य (śrī vallabhācārya) |
|
G |
स्वभाविक द्वैताद्वैत दर्शन (svabhāvika dvaitādvaita darśana –
dual yet nondualistic philosophy) |
श्री निम्बार्काचार्य (śrī
nimbārkācārya) |
Thus, as indicated in the following chart, the उत्तरमीमांसवेदान्त दर्शन (uttaramīmāṃsavedānta darśana - posterior inquiry / final wisdom philosophy) is one important petal in the six-petalled flower called षट्विधवैदिकदर्शनाः (ṣaṭvidhavaidikadarśanāḥ – six-fold vedic philosophies) which in turn blossoms into a seven-petalled flower
Subsequently in some cases, these philosophies further branch into sub-branches as well based on alternate interpretations on some specific doctrines of the school, which are provided by the respective संप्रदाय आचार्याः (saṃpradāya ācāryāḥ - traditional preceptors) belonging to the same lineage. Interestingly, the केवलाद्वैतवेदान्त दर्शन (kevalādvaitavedānta darśana – absolute non-dualistic final wisdom philosophy) is further classified as follows:
# | दर्शनस्य नाम (darśanasya nāma – name of philosophy) | प्रवार्तक परमाचार्य (pravārtaka paramācārya – primary founding preceptor) |
A | केवलाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (kevalādtvaitavedāntadarśana – absolute non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) | श्री आदिशंकराचार्य भगवद्पाद (śrī ādiśaṁkarācārya bhagavadpāda) |
B | विशिष्टाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (viśiṣṭādvaitavedāntadarśana – qualified non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) | श्री रामानुजाचार्य (śrī rāmānujācārya) |
C | द्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (dvaitavedāntadarśana – dualsitic final-wisdom philosophy) | श्री मद्वचार्य (śrī madvacārya) |
D | औपाधिकभेदाभेदवेदान्त दर्शन (aupādhikabhedābhedavedāntadarśana – different yet non-different final-wisdom philosophy) | श्री भास्कराचार्य (śrī bhāskarācārya) |
E | अचिन्त्यभेदाभेदवेदान्तदर्शन (acintyabhedābhedavedāntadarśana – inconceivable different yet non-different final-wisdom philosophy) | श्रील रूपागोस्वामि (śrīla rūpāgosvāmi) |
F | शुद्धाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (śuddhādvaitavedāntadarśana – pure non-dualstic final-wisdom philosophy) | श्री वल्लभाचार्य (śrī vallabhācārya) |
G | स्वभाविक द्वैताद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (svabhāvika dvaitādvaitavedāntadarśana – dual yet non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) | श्री निम्बार्काचार्य (śrī nimbārkācārya) |
H | विशिष्टशिवाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (viśiṣṭaśivādvaitavedāntadarśana – qualified auspicious non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) | श्री श्रीकण्ठाचार्य (śrī śrīkaṇṭhācārya) |
I | विशेषाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (viśeṣādvaitavedāntadarśana - special non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) also known as the शक्तिविशिष्टाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (śaktiviśiṣṭādvaitavedāntadarśana – energy qualified non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) | श्री श्रीपति (śrī śrīpati) |
J | अविभागाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (avibhāgādvaitavedāntadarśana – undivided non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) | श्री विज्ञानभिक्षु (śrī vijñānabhikṣu) |
Thus, we can see as to how tree of वैदिक संप्रदाय (vaidika saṃpradāya – vedic tradition) branches into षट्विधवैदिकदर्शनाः (ṣaṭvidhavaidikadarśanāḥ –six-fold vedic philosophies) and among them, the उत्तरमीमांसवेदान्त दर्शन (uttaramīmāṃsavedānta darśana - posterior-inquiry final wisdom philosophy), for example branches itself into various sub-schools like केवलाद्वैतदर्शन (kevalādtvaita darśana – absolute nondualstc philosophy) etc., which further branches into many sub-sub schools like केवलाद्वैत प्रतिबिंबवाद (kevalādvaita pratibiṃbavāda - absolute nondualistic reflection doctrine) more popularly known as विवरण प्रस्थान (vivaraṇa prasthāna) etc. This point is visually depicted in the following chart
Of course, even this is only an indicative and not an exhaustive list, as in the recent centuries various branches of customized schools mushroomed which were generally grouped under नव्यवेदान्त (navyavedānta - neo-vedanta) which includes the ones from monastic order established by Sri Ramakrishna, Smt Sarada Devi & Swami Vivekananda, the Integral non-dualistic model of Sri Aurobindho & The Mother, The non-dualistic model of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharishi, The non-dualistic monastry established by Swami Chinmaya Mission, Swami Sivananda, Sri Dayananda Sarasvati etc.
Alternatively,
there are सर्वविधान्ताः (sarvavidhāntāḥ – multiple kinds of conclusions): वेदान्त (vedānta – final wisdom), सिद्धान्त (siddhānta – final
accomplishment), नादन्त (nādanta – final logos), कलान्त (kalānta – final
manifestation), योगान्त (yogānta – final union) & भोगान् (bhogānta – final experience) etc.
According to
subject matter experts, the theological tenets of सिद्धान्तवाद (siddhāntavāda – final accomplishment
doctrine) can broadly be classified based on the शिवशासन (śivaśāsana
– benign command) flowing into पञ्चविधस्रोतांसि (pañcavidhasrotāṃsi - five-fold
streams) viz. लौकिकमार्ग (laukikamārga – mundane path), वैदिकमार्ग (vaidikamārga – vedic path), आद्यात्मिकमार्ग (ādyātmikamārga – soul
oriented path), अतिमार्ग (atimārga – extreme path)
& मन्त्रमार्ग (mantramārga – mantra path). According to some
scriptures, these schools are said to have manifested from the पञ्चब्रह्ममुखाः शिवस्य (pañcabrahmamukhāḥ
śivasya – five divine faces of shiva).
In addition to these,
the कुल/कौलमार्ग (kula/kaulamārga – clan path) is sometimes considered to be
the षाष्ठस्रोतस् (ṣāṣṭhasrotas - sixth stream) corresponding
to the अधोमुख शिवस्य (adhomukha
śivasya – downward face of Shiva) and परमशिव (paramaśiva), with all
these षण्मुखाः /அறுமுகங்கள் (ṣaṇmukhāḥ / arumugaṅgaḻ - six faces) is referred as षण्मुखशिव / ஆறுமுகச்சிவன் (ṣaṇmukhaśiva
/ ārumugaccivan – six-faced shiva) theologized in
the कौमारमतसंप्रदाय (kaumāramatasaṃpradāya – kaumara theological tradition) as the famous “शिवसुब्रमणि /சிவசுப்பிரமணி (śivasubramaṇi / sivasubbiramaṇi)”.
The next important point to understand is that some of the these schools further branch out into various sub-schools. For example, within मन्त्रमार्ग (mantramārga – mantra path) the following are the main sub-schools
- शुद्धाद्वैतशैवसिद्धान्तदर्शन (śuddhādvaitaśaivasiddhāntadarśana – purenondualistic final accomplishment auspicious philosophy) more popularly known as சித்தாந்த சைவம் (siddānta saivam), தமிழ் சைவம் (tamiḻ śaivam – tamil saivism) etc.
- पराद्वैत त्रिकशैव दर्शन (parādvaita trikaśaiva darśana – transcendent nonduality of auspicious triad philosophy) more popularly known as काश्मीर्शैवम् (kāśmīrśaivam – Kashmir shaivism)
- शिवाद्वैत दर्शन (śivādvaita darśana – auspicious nondual philosophy) more popularly known as वीरशैव (vīraśaiva)
- विशेषाद्वैत / शक्तिविशिष्टाद्वैत दर्शन (viśeṣādvaita darśana – special
nondualistic/ shakti qualified nondualstic philosophy) formally founded by आचार्य श्रीपति (ācārya
śrīpati)
The following chart would summarize the hierarchical relationship between these षट्विधस्रोताम्सि (ṣaṭvidhasrotāmsi - six-fold streams) and its sub-schools
Even more interestingly, some of the schools are atheistic, and some are theistic, while some are even agnostic. While these are mainstream philosophical schools, there are philosophical doctrines encapsulated within other scriptural texts including वैयाकरण शास्त्राणि (vyākaraṇa -grammar scriptures), आगम शास्त्राणि (āgama śāstrāṇi – agama scriptures), पुराण - इतिहास (purāṇa - itihāsa śāstrāṇi – mythology-history scriptures), तन्त्र शास्त्राणि (tantra śāstrāṇi – tantric scriptures). Thus, you find that there is a very rich philosophical tradition serving as the foundational building blocks on which the religious frameworks have evolved.
Take उत्तरमीमांसवेदान्त दर्शन (uttaramīmāṃsavedānta darśana
- posterior inquiry / final wisdom philosophy) alone for
example. The term वेदान्त (vedānta) literally means “final
wisdom”. Yes, the philosophical doctrines in the प्रस्थानत्रयी (prasthānatrayī – important three) which forms the
crux or grand finale called “वेदान्त (vedānta - ultimate / final wisdom)”, as revealed in the sacred वेदश्रुति (vedaśruti - vedic revelation). Traditionally, प्रस्थानत्रयी (prasthānatrayī – important three) comprises the following:
|
# |
प्रस्थान शास्त्र (prasthāna
śāstra- source scripture) |
Focus |
|
1 |
मुख्योपनिषदः (mukhyopaniṣadaḥ
- important upanishads) |
श्रुति
प्रस्थान (śruti prasthāna – scriptural source) |
|
2 |
श्रीमद्
भगवद्गीता (śrīmad bhagavadgītā) |
युक्ति
प्रस्थान (yukti prasthāna – logical source) |
|
3 |
ब्रह्म सूत्र / शारीरक सूत्र (brahma sūtra / śārīraka sūtra) |
साधन प्रस्थान (sādhana
prasthāna – instrumental source) |
Based on the प्रस्थान त्रयी (prasthāna trayī – triple sources) and a huge corpus of commentarial texts associated to them, there are various अनेकान्यवेदान्तप्रकरणग्रन्थाः (anekānyavedāntaprakaraṇagranthāḥ - multiple other vedanta monographic treatises) independently written by various आचार्याः वेदान्तदर्शनानाम् (ācāryāḥ vedāntadarśanānām - preceptors of vedanta philosophies), evolved over the years advocating the respective schools. The following chart summarizes the same
Interestingly, the philosophical doctrines in the प्रस्थानत्रयी (prasthānatrayī – important three) viz. उपनिषद् (upaniṣad), श्रीमद् भगवत्गीता (śrīmad bhagavatgītā) & ब्रह्मसूत्र (brahma sūtra) forms the crux or grand finale called “वेदान्त (vedānta - ultimate / final wisdom)”, as revealed in the sacred वेद श्रुति (veda śruti). Actually, वेदान्तशास्त्र (vedāntaśāstra – vedantic scriptures) form the backbone for all the sub-schools of उत्तर मीमांसा (uttara mīmāṁsā) which in turn are the basis for the main theological schools of Hinduism viz. स्मार्त (smārta), ब्रह्म (brahma), श्री वैष्णव (śrī vaiṣṇava) respectively.
|
# |
वैष्णवमत संप्रदाय (vaiṣṇavamata
saṃpradāya – vaishnava theological tradition) |
दर्शनस्य नाम (darśanasya nāma – name of philosophy) |
प्रवार्तक परमाचार्य (pravārtaka
paramācārya – primary founding preceptor) |
|
A |
स्मार्तमतसंप्रदाय / षण्मतसंप्रदाय (smārtamatasaṃpradāya / ṣaṇmatasaṃpradāya – smriti
theological tradition / sixfold theological tradition) |
केवलाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (kevalādtvaitavedāntadarśana –
absolute non-dualstc final-wisdom philosophy) |
श्री आदिशंकराचार्य भगवद्पाद (śrī ādiśaṁkarācārya bhagavadpāda) |
|
B |
श्रीवैष्णवमत संप्रदाय (śrīvaiṣṇavamata saṃpradāya – sri
vaishnava theological tradition) |
विशिष्टाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (viśiṣṭādvaitavedāntadarśana – qualified
non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) |
श्री रामानुजाचार्य (śrī rāmānujācārya) |
|
C |
ब्रह्मवैष्णवमत संप्रदाय (brahmavaiṣṇavamata
saṃpradāya - brahma-vaishnava theological tradition) |
द्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (dvaitavedānta darśana – dualsitic final-wisdom philosophy) |
श्री मद्वचार्य (śrī madvacārya) |
|
D |
|
औपाधिकभेदाभेदवेदान्तदर्शन (aupādhikabhedābhedavedāntadarśana – different yet
non-different final-wisdom philosophy) |
श्री भास्कराचार्य (śrī bhāskarācārya) |
|
E |
गौडियवैष्णवमत संप्रदाय (gauḍiya vaiṣṇavamata saṃpradāya – gaudiya
vaishnava theological tradition) |
अचिन्त्यभेदाभेदवेदान्तदर्शन (acintyabhedābhedavedāntadarśana – incomprehensibly different yet non-different final-wisdom philosophy) |
श्रील रूपा गोस्वामि (śrīla rūpā gosvāmi) |
|
F |
रुद्रवैष्णवमत
संप्रदाय /पुष्टिमार्ग (rudravaiṣṇavamata saṃpradāya /puṣṭimārga –
rudra-vaishnava theological tradition) |
शुद्धाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (śuddhādvaitavedāntadarśana – pure
nondualstic final-wisdom philosophy) |
श्री वल्लभाचार्य (śrī vallabhācārya) |
|
G |
कुमारवैष्णवमत
संप्रदाय (kumāravaiṣṇavamata saṃpradāya – kumara-vaishnava theological tradition) |
स्वभाविकद्वैताद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (svabhāvikadvaitādvaitavedāntadarśana –
dual yet non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) |
श्री
निम्बार्काचार्य (śrī nimbārkācārya) |
Moreover, almost every परमाचार्य (paramācārya – chief preceptor) including the likes of the noble श्री आदिशंकराचर्य (śrīādiśaṁkarācarya), श्री मद्वाचार्य (śrīmadvācārya) or श्री रामानुजाचार्य (śrī rāmānujācārya) would not have indulged in detailed philosophical
articulations and debating. They would not have spent their valuable time and energy
in writing massive भाष्याणि (bhāṣyāṇi- commentaries) on
the प्रस्थानत्रयी (prasthānatrayī – important three). In fact, following them, there are huge corpuses of भाष्याणि (bhāṣyāṇi- commentaries) running multiple nested levels. For a important commentary (we
can tag that as at level 1), there is sub-commentary (at level 2) on that
commentary and further a sub-sub-commentary (level 3) on that sub-commentary
(level 3) and even a sub-sub-sub-commentary (level 4) on the sub-sub-commentary
etc.
Take बाद्रायण ब्रह्म सूत्र (bādrayāṅa
brahma sutra), alone for examples has detailed
commentaries by almost all the leading वेदान्त परमाचार्य (vedānta
paramācārya – chief preceptor)’s
including श्री आदि शंकराचर्य (śrī ādi śaṁkarācarya), श्री मद्वाचार्य (śrī madvācārya) or श्री रामानुजाचार्य (śrī
rāmānujācārya). Each of their commentaries were further commented by their
disciples which in turn were commented by the next level disciples and so on.
Again,
take श्री आदि शंकराचर्य (śrī ādi śaṁkarācarya) major commentary
called शारीरक भाष्य (śārīraka bhāṣya) was
further expanded by श्री वाचस्पति मिश्र (śri vācaspati miśra) & श्री पद्मपाद
(śri padmapāda)
independently wrote separate commentaries on the same titled भामति (bhāmati)
& पञ्चपादिका (pañcapādikā)
respectively. श्री अमलानन्द (śri amalānanda) in turn wrote independent भाष्याणि
(bhāṣyāṇi- commentaries) called वेदान्तकल्पतरु (vedāntakalpataru) & पञ्चपादिकादर्पण (pañcapādikādarpaṇa) on the भामति (bhāmati)
& पञ्चपादिका (pañcapādikā)
respectively. The former was further commented by श्री अप्पयदीक्षित (śri appayadīkṣita) in
his परिमल (parimala) while
the श्री प्रकाशात्मन् (śrī prakāśātman) wrote
a विवरण (vivaraṇa-gloss) on पञ्चपादिका (pañcapādikā) and so
on goes the rich tradition of philosophical commentaries.
Now, let us look at the
मुख्य भाष्याणि अचार्याः (mukhya bhāṣyāṇi acāryāḥ - important commentaries of
preceptors) on the मुख्य उपनिषद्
(mukhya
upaniṣad – principal upanishads). Please recollect that the उपनिषदः (upaniṣadaḥ - upanishads) constitute the अन्त भागाः (anta bhāgāḥ - end portions) of the sacred वेद शृतिनाम ज्ञान /उत्तर
खाण्ड (veda śṛtināma jñāna/uttara khāṇḍa – wisdom / posterior
section of vedic revelations) along with ब्राह्मण (brāhmaṇa) & आरण्यक (āraṇyaka) known as the कर्म /पूर्व खाण्ड
(karma/pūrva
khāṇḍa – action/prior section) and the actual अपौरुषेय वेद
मन्त्राः
(apauruṣeya veda mantrāḥ – super-human vedic hymns) that were निदेनेन दर्शित ऋषि कवीन् (nidenena darśita ṛṣi kavīn – originally revealed
to seer-poets).
While not many परमचार्याः वेदान्त दर्शनानाम्
(paramacāryāḥ vedānta darśanānām - chief
perectrors of vedanta philosophies) have directly commented
on these texts, it was श्री आदि शंकराचार्य (śrī ādi śaṃkarācārya) & श्री मध्वाचार्य (śrī madhvācārya)
who have blessed us with a fine commentarial explanation specifically for the अधिकतम मुख्य उपनिषदः (adhikatama mukhya upaniṣadaḥ - most important upanishads).
Now, let us look at the
मुख्य भाष्याणि
अचार्याः (mukhya bhāṣyāṇi acāryāḥ
- important commentaries of preceptors) on the श्रीमद् भगवद्गीता (śrīmad bhagavadgītā). One can
find very rich literature written by various आचार्याः वेदान्तदर्शनानाम्
(ācāryāḥ
vedāntadarśanānām - preceptors of vedanta philosophies) belonging to
different schools.
In fact, just as from a theological perspective Hinduism’s erstwhile सनातन धर्म (sanātana dharma – eternal righteousness) which encompasses multiple varieties of deities viz. वेद देवत (vedadevata – vedic deities), पुराण देवत (purāṇa devata – mythological deities), ग्राम देवत (grāma devata – village deities) etc. integrally consolidated broadly under षण्मत संप्रदाय (ṣaṇmata saṁpradāya – six fold theological traditions), all the varieties of philosophical traditions can broadly be grouped under the above mentioned schools. Again, all these seemingly different deities are always considered as सविकल्प उपकाश सगुण ब्रह्मन् (savikalpa upakāśa saguṇa brahman – differentiated aspect of qualified divinity), each manifesting relatively specific कल्याण गुण (kalyāṇa guṇa – auspicious characteristics) of the underlying absolute singularity - कैवल्य परब्रह्म (kaivalya parabrahma – absolute transcendent divinity). Similarly, all the seemingly contradictory philosophies are different perspectives of the infinitely multidimensional singularity. Hinduism very clearly recognizes that branches could always be many, yet holistically the tree is one. Different philosophies are different branches of the same tree.
बहुलत्व बौद्धतत्त्ववादसंप्रदायानाम् (bahulatva bauddhatattvavādasaṃpradāyānām – richness of the Buddhist philosophical traditions)
Again when it comes to बौद्ध समय (bauddha samaya – buddhist religion), one of the most popular religions in the world, originating from Indian soil. In fact, it is considered to be the fourth largest religion in the world and has spread across different parts of the globe, more particularly its spread is prominent across the south east Asian countries - Sri Lanka, Malasya, Singapore, Indonesia, Cambodia, Burma, Nepal, China, Tibet etc.
Currently there are three main branches in the बौद्ध समय (bauddha samaya – buddhist religion) viz. स्थविरवाद / हीनयान बौद्धधर्म (sthaviravāda / hīnayāna bauddhadharma – elderly-doctrine / lesser-vehicle buddhism) from which branched out the महायान बौद्धधर्म (mahāyāna bauddhadharma – larger vehicle buddhism) from which there was a further branching of वज्रायानतान्त्रिक बौद्धधर्म (vajrāyānatāntrika bauddhadharma – diamond-vehicle tantric buddhism). Let’s not, for now. deep dive into the actual philosophical similarities and differences between these schools, since will be dicussing the same separately later. For now, I am just trying to provide a basic context setting for understanding the different scriptures within बौद्ध समय (bauddha samaya – buddhist religion).
Of course, over the years, the footprint of बौद्ध समय (bauddha samaya – buddhist religion) considerably reduced but has been exported across other parts of south-east Asia as already indicated in the map. Now philosophically also, these त्रिवेधप्रधान शाकाः बौद्धधर्मस्य (trivedhapradhāna śākāḥ bauddhadharmasya – three-fold branches of Buddhism) over the years, in the process of spreading, these branches underwent multiple mutative transformations by synthesizing with different local philosophies and belief systems thar were already present in those geographies. Thus today, बौद्ध समय (bauddha samaya – buddhist religion) has evolved into a महन्वृक्ष (mahanvṛkṣa – huge tree) with multiple levels of शाकाः (śākāḥ - branches), as beautifully visualized by James Kenndy Beiging in the mind-map chart below
Continuing legacy of the dark middle-ages
While this has always been true for several
centuries, yet in the recent decades, there has been gross neglect of studying
and contemplating the philosophical wisdom underlying religious customs and
traditions. In fact, I strongly feel that post-industrial revolution, there has
been a gradual neglect researching on pure sciences like physics, chemistry
etc., in general and almost a complete neglect of philosophical studies across
the globe.
Particularly,
if one goes through the history of modern science, it would clear that in last
500+ years, there has been an artificial dichotomy rather trichotomy created
between religion, philosophy and science. In western medieval world, certain
religious fundamentalists out of vested interest dogmatically created the first
dichotomy between theology, science and philosophy. They even went to extent of
persecuting scientists and philosophers in the name of such religious
fanaticism; while this was from the religious side, science also very soon
started boycotting philosophy and religions as mere dogma. Thus, on the whole,
it was a double-edged self- damage, which continues for almost 300 years now…
In India for example, we are still
predominantly following British designed curriculum not only in school
education but also higher education including the Indian
Administrative Services (IAS) etc., tweaked anti-Hindu versions of history is taught even today. There
is a complete neglect of moral science, humanities and religious studies in
school syllabus. We Indians, both individually as well as collectively have a
constructive role in safeguarding and enriching सनातनहिन्दुधर्म (sanātanahindudharma
- eternal Hindu spirituality) by proactive social role participation in
whatever capacity possible. Our ancient astronomy, astrology, sociology,
economics metaphysics, ontology, mathematics etc., from the shores of भारतीयसनातनधरम (bhāratīyasanātanadharama – Indian eternal spirituality) particularly from the ancient schools of हिन्दुधर्म (hindudharma - Hinduism), बौद्धधर्म (bauddhadharma -
Buddhism), जैनधर्म (jainadharma - Jainism)
are so advanced that many
leading western universities across globe are openly acknowledging and researching
for decades. But in Indian curriculum, formal mainstream academic researches on
the native Indic researches are completely neglected.
All we teach our kids is how to make money,
manage money, multiply money etc. The main message we pass on to the next
generation is: “educate yourself only for remunerative jobs”. I think brain drain wave is hitting the millennial
generation by storm. Atleast, earlier the craze for overseas was either for more
remunerative professional career or pursuing post-doctoral academic research (PhDs)
from premium universities where the domain specialization on the specific
subject is advanced there. Subsequently, the fever spread to pursuit of regular
Post Graduation (PG) degree courses like MS etc., but now the fever has
penetrated even for the Under Graduation courses.
We can observe this pattern among average
middle class family's children all around us - for example, this pattern can be
observed as a typical trend all around us – including many cases with our millennial-generations
from our relatives, neighbours, colleagues, friends etc. Tomorrow even my children or your children
etc. may also do the same as it is
becoming a factor of peer pressure as well... Simply stated, the brain drain is
happening as we speak. And the fact is that the percentage of people who return
back is very less. Indians typically learn, earn and settle there for the prime
of their life there.
So, who is the real black sheep here? We are following many religious festivals and customs but
we hardly try to explain its spiritual and scientific basis and reasons to the
younger generation. Because of the failure in knowledge transition...the
younger generation lose hold of its foundational wisdom and soon become viable
for easy brainwashing...In the name of பகுத்தறிவு (pakuttaṟivu - rationalism).
Earlier, during the
ancient times, the पारम्परिक शिक्षण (pāramparika
śikṣaṇa – traditional education) formally provided at the वेदपाठशालाः (vedapāṭhaśālāḥ –
vedic-learning centres), गुरुकुलाः (gurukulāḥ – guru-hermits), बौद्धधर्म विश्वविद्यालयाः (bauddhadharma viśvavidyālayāḥ
- buddhist universities) etc., focused
precisely on such foundational spiritual education. For example, काशी (kāśī - Benares), काञ्चीपुरम् (kāñcīpuram - Kanchipuram), तक्षशिला (takṣaśilā - Taxela),
नालन्द (nālanda - Nalanda), विक्रमशिला (vikramaśilā - Vikramashila),
ओदंतपुरी (odaṃtapurī - Odumtapuri) etc., were some of the oldest learning centres in the world and in fact
some of them provided something similar to our modern universities.
However, now we
have failed to inculcate பகுத்தறியும்
மெய்யியல் (paguttaṟiyum
meyyiyal – rationalistic spirituality). We no longer are ready to invest
time, money or energy in giving it to our kids.
Ask any student
(school, grad, post grad) his main purpose of education is to build a career
only which is directly related to maximizing the द्विजलौकिकपुरुषार्थौ (dvijalaukikapuruṣārthau – two mundane soul-objectives) viz. பொருள் /अर्थ
(poruḻ / artha
- wealth) & இன்பம் /काम (inbam / kāma – desire).
Today, unfortunately almost all of us, are
only trying to excel in रज्यशास्त्र (rajyaśāstra - politics), अर्धशास्त्र / वणिग्वृत्तिशास्त्र (ardhaśāstra / vaṇigvṛttiśāstra – economics / business studies) which are the focus areas
of क्षत्रियवर्ण (kṣatriyavarṇa – royal class) & वैश्यवर्ण (vaiśyavarṇa – business class) but not the remaining
two viz. ब्राह्मनवर्ण (brahmanavarṇa – spiritual class) & शूद्रवर्ण (śūdravarṇa – labour class). Forget the शूद्रवर्ण (śūdravarṇa – labour class), not many wants
to focus on learning specializing in ब्राह्मनवर्ण (brahmanavarṇa – spiritual class),
although it is considered to be the highest वर्ण (varṇa –
class). Please note that here we are talking only
about वर्णभेद (varṇabheda –
class difference) and not जातिभेद (jātibheda – caste difference)
Take the संस्कृतभाषा (saṃskṛtabhāṣā
– Sanskrit language) for example, which although rightfully being the pride of India, yet it
is the most neglected subject, by almost all stakeholders in India – including students,
school teachers, college professors, parents, scholars, government etc. the
संस्कृत (Saṃskṛta –
Sanskrit) has always been the pre-requisite for formal learning in the पारम्परिक शिक्षण (pāramparika śikṣaṇa – traditional
education) and every student was supposed to be proficient in it
and was integral to his learning. But how many of us, Indian’s are proficient
in संस्कृत (Saṃskṛta –
Sanskrit)?
Indians over the
years have been so calculative that we would invest time in learning only those
subjects which help us in building a remunerative career. We are not prepared
to learn for knowledge’s sake. Even in the case of western sciences, there is a
rat-race only for MBBS, BE and CA courses and not for pure science – Physics, Chemistry etc.
However, In Europe, the demand for learning Sanskrit is growing year on year.
Major universities across the globe are investing huge funds for learning
Sanskrit as a language leverage the same in unravelling the sciences in our
scriptures – in the domains of physics, mathematics, medicine, defence
engineering etc.
Again, in India,
many of us, even those who claim to be very religious and pious, do not care to
learn the fundamental philosophical postulates underlying their belief systems.
How many of us even make an attempt to learn the प्रस्थानत्रयी (prasthānatrayī – important three) viz. मुख्योपनिषदः (mukhyopaniṣadaḥ - important upanishads), श्रीमद् भगवद्गीता (śrīmad bhagavadgītā) & ब्रह्मसूत्र (brahma sūtra). Many of us
proudly claim to belong to a specific मतसंप्रदाय (mata saṁpradāya – theological tradition) viz. स्मार्तमतसंप्रदाय (smārtamatasaṃpradāya
– smriti theological tradition), श्रीवैष्णवमत संप्रदाय (śrīvaiṣṇavamata saṃpradāya – sri vaishnava theological
tradition) or ब्रह्मवैष्णवमत संप्रदाय (brahmavaiṣṇavamata saṃpradāya
- brahma-vaishnava theological tradition) etc., but how many of us even make a
sincere attempt to understand the underlying philosophy of केवलाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (kevalādtvaitavedāntadarśana –
absolute non-dualstc final-wisdom philosophy), विशिष्टाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (viśiṣṭādvaitavedāntadarśana – qualified non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) & द्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (dvaitavedānta darśana – dualsitic final-wisdom philosophy) respectively.
Worse still, some of us even consider it as a waste of time or even foolish to spend energies in trying to understand or comprehend the philosophies explained in our scriptures; they feel just following the rituals, or performing meditation is always better than these intellectual gymnastics. The situation is very pathetic because, one group does not respect other group’s interpretations or view-points. Each group considers it has solely patented the copy rights of its philosophy. That is very unfortunate. To all these people, I would like to quote the fantastic explanation given by श्री अभिनवगुप्त (śrī abhinavagupta) - the revered saint multi-faceted scholar and परमाचार्य (paramācārya – chief preceptor) of the पराद्वैतवाद (parādvaitavāda – supreme nondualistic doctrine) of the परमाद्वैतत्रिकशैवदर्शन (paramādvaitatrikaśaivadarśana – supreme nondualsitic auspiscious triad philosophy):
Let’s be honest and
ask ourselves. But how many of us bother to learn it. How many of us who
claim to be द्वैतिन् (dvaitin – dualist), विशिष्ठाद्वैतिन् (viśiṣṭādvaitin – qualified non
dualist), अद्वैतिन् (advaitin
– non dualist), शैवसिद्धान्तिन् (śaiva
siddhāntin) etc., what exactly is meant by these philosophies. Some of us are
so ignorant when it comes to identifying which of these दर्शन (darśana - philosophy) belongs to their
respective faith. For example, get confused whether श्रीवैष्णवमत संप्रदाय (śrīvaiṣṇavamata
saṃpradāya – sri vaishnava theological tradition) preaches द्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (dvaitavedānta darśana
– dualsitic final-wisdom philosophy) or विशिष्टाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (viśiṣṭādvaitavedāntadarśana
– qualified non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) etc.
Even worse, many
times, without even knowing our own philosophical doctrines we blindly ridicule
or look down other schools. In fact, this ignorance is the principal root cause
of religious intolerance at all levels. Even without understanding what केवलाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (kevalādtvaitavedāntadarśana – absolute non-dualstc
final-wisdom philosophy) preaches we
blindly feel it is superior to say द्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (dvaitavedānta darśana – dualsitic final-wisdom philosophy) or विशिष्टाद्वैतवेदान्तदर्शन (viśiṣṭādvaitavedāntadarśana –
qualified non-dualistic final-wisdom philosophy) and vice
versa. Unfortunately, they fail to realize that all these philosophies are
relativistic interpretation of the same scriptural texts viz. प्रस्थानत्रयी (prasthānatrayī) from
different frames of references.
Need for reviving the synthetic revival
Many eminent saint & scholars like व्यास महऋषि (vyāsa mahaṛṣi), श्री आदि शङ्करभगवत्पाद (śrī ādi śaṅkarabhagavatpāda). திருமூலர் (thirumUlar), திரு
அருட்பிரகாச இராமகலிங்க வள்ளலார் (tiru aruṭpirakāca irāmakaliṅka vaḷḷalār), Theosophical society etc. at different periods in Indian
history have made unparalleled contributions in re-establishing the
cross-philosophical synthesis. திரு அருட்பிரகாச இராமகலிங்க வள்ளலார் (tiru
aruṭpirakāca irāmakaliṅka vaḷḷalār) in the lines of many of his पूर्वागम आचार्याः (pūrvāgama
ācāryāḥ – predecessor preceptors) like திருமூலர் (tirumūlar) & தாயுமானவர் (tāyumānavar) also
emphasized that such சத்விசாரம் / सत्विचारम् (satvicāram –truth inquiry) should
be an holistic inquiry synthesizing not only between वेदान्त (vedānta – final
wisdom) & सिद्धान्त (siddhānta –
final accomplishment) but extended
it to a much broader scope of षडान्तसमरस (ṣaḍāntasamarasa – six-edged harmony) viz. वेदान्त / வேதாந்தம் (vedānta /
vedāntam – final wisdom), सिद्धान्त / சித்தாந்தம் (siddhānta /
siddhāntam – final accomplishment), भोगान्त / போகாந்தம் (bhogānta / bōgaantam – final
experience), नादान्त / நாதாந்தம் (nādānta /
naadhaantham – final logos), योगान्त /யோகாந்தம் (yogānta / yōgaantham – final
union) & कलान्त / கலாந்தம் (kalāntam /
kalāntam – final expression / manifestation). For example, in
the following verse from the மகாதேவ மாலை (makātēva mālai – garland
to supreme divinity), the noble saint sings
thus:
Again, இராமலிங்க வள்ளலார் (irāmaliṅga vaḻḻalār) in the அருட்பெருஞ்சோதி அகவல் (aruṭperuñjōti agaval) further explains thus:
Again, இராமலிங்க வள்ளலார் (irāmaliṅga vaḻḻalār) in the நடராஜபதி மாலை (naṭarājapati mālai) further explains thus:
In the following verse from his தனித் திருஅலங்கல் (tiru aruṭpā: taṉit tirualaṅkal) also the noble saint sings thus:
Finally, I would like to quote the following verse from the அருள்விளக்க மாலை (aruḷviḷakka mālai – garland of grace explanation)
Moreover, almost every परमाचार्य (paramācārya – chief preceptor) including the likes of the noble श्री आदि शंकराचर्य (śrī ādi śaṁkarācarya), श्री मद्वाचार्य (śrīmadvācārya) or श्री रामानुजाचार्य (śrī rāmānujācārya) would not have indulged in
detailed philosophical articulations and debating. They would not have spent
their valuable time and energy in writing massive भाष्याणि (bhāṣyāṇi- commentaries) on
the प्रस्थानत्रयी (prasthānatrayī
– important three). In fact, following them, there
are huge corpus of commentaries, commentary on commentaries etc. for each of
these schools written by their next level revered disciples and subject matter
experts.
Take बाद्रायण ब्रह्मसूत्र (bādrayāṅa brahma sutra), alone for examples has detailed commentaries by almost all the leading वेदान्त परमाचार्य (vedānta paramācārya – chief preceptor)’s including श्री आदि शंकराचर्य (śrī ādi śaṁkarācarya), श्री मद्वाचार्य (śrī madvācārya) or श्री रामानुजाचार्य (śrī rāmānujācārya). Each of their commentaries were further commented by their disciples which in turn were commented by the next level disciples and so on.
Again, take श्री आदिशंकराचर्य (śrī ādiśaṁkarācarya) major commentary called शरीरकभाषय (śarīrakabhāṣya) was further expanded by श्री वाचस्पतिमिश्र (śri vācaspatimiśra) & श्री पद्मपाद (śri padmapāda) independently wrote separate commentaries on the same titled भामति (bhāmati) & पच्ञपादिक (pañcapādika) respectively. श्री अमलानन्द (śri amalānanda) in turn wrote independent भाष्याणि (bhāṣyāṇi- commentaries) called वेदान्तकल्पतरु (vedāntakalpataru) & पच्ञपादिकदर्पण (pañcapādikadarpaṇa) on the भामति (bhāmati) & पच्ञपादिक (pañcapādika) respectively. The former was further commented by श्री अप्पयदीक्षित (śri
appayadIkṣita) in his परिमल (parimala) while the श्री प्रकाशात्मन् (śrī prakāśātman) wrote a विवरण (vivaraṇa - gloss) on the पच्ञपादिक (pañcapādika) and so on goes the rich tradition of philosophical
commentaries.
Let us take another similar example, In the case of न्याय दर्शन (nyāya
darśana - philosophy of logic), its founding
fatherश्री अक्षपाद / गौतम महऋषि (śrī akṣapāda
/ gautama mahaṛṣi) summarized its
philosophy through his famous aphorism called न्याय सूत्र (nyāya sūtra), for which श्री वात्स्यायन (śrī vātsyāyana) wrote a famous भाष्य (bhāṣya - commentary) called न्याय भाष्य (nyāya bhāṣya - commentary on logic). This text was in turn commented
by आचार्य श्री उद्योत्कार (ācārya śrī udyotkāra) in his न्याय वार्तिक (nyāya vārtika) which in turn was commented by श्री वाचस्पति मिश्र (śrī vācaspati miśra) through his famous न्याय वार्तिक तात्पर्य टीका (nyāya vārtika tātparya ṭīkā). Again, न्याय वार्तिक तात्पर्य परशुद्दि (nyāya vārtika tātparya paraśuddi) was a commentary on the above by आचार्य श्री उदायन (ācārya śrī udāyana).
The interesting aspect to note is that in these commentaries there is a highly professional standard विचार युक्ति (vicāra yukti – modes of deliberation) governed by the best practices laid down by the highly evolved principles in the तर्क शास्त्र (tarka śāstra – dialectic science) employing different ज्ञानवाद प्रमाण (jñānavāda pramāṇa - epistemological channels) of knowledge acquisitions viz. प्रत्यक्ष (pratyakṣa - perception), अनुमान (anumāna – inference), शब्द (śabda – authority / testimony) etc. and generously supported by various explanation techniques viz. उपमा & व्यतिरेक (upamā & vyatireka – comparison & contrast), उदाहरण / उपमान (udāharaṇa / upamāna – example / analogy) etc. The even more beautiful point is that the debate is well articulated by documenting very detailed विवेचन परीक्षा (vivecana parīkṣā – critical examination) of his पक्ष (pakṣa – proposition) in terms of the पूर्वपक्ष वादिनस्य (pūrvapakṣa vādinasya – prior proposition of the accuser) with a logical खण्डन प्रतिवादिनस्य (khaṇḍana prativādinasya – refutation of the respondent) articulated in the form of a उत्तर पक्ष (uttara pakṣa – posterior proposition) and the final स्थापन सिद्धान्तस्य (sthāpana siddhāntasya – proof / establishment of the thesis). Here, the modus operandi of proving the point of view would typically involve a fair share of different युक्त्यः (yuktyaḥ -techniques) of logical reasoning, based on the specific needs of the context in the grand narrative. These युक्त्यः (yuktyaḥ -techniques) including prudent choices of one or more of
[
विभङ्गभागानाम्युक्ति (vibhaṅgabhāgānāmyukti– analysis of the parts
technique) by
segregating the whole
(OR)
संयोगपुरणस्ययुक्ति (saṃyogapuraṇasyayukti – synthesis of the
whole technique) by
aggregating the parts, on the one hand
]
(AND)
[
अपवहन विशिष्टसमपानस्य (apavahana
viśiṣṭasamapānasya – deduction of specific conclusion) from a set of सामान्यपक्षत्वानि (sāmānyapakṣatvāni - general premises)
(OR)
उन्नयन सामान्यसमपानस्य (unnayana sāmānyasamapānasya – induction of
general conclusion) which
is based on विशिष्टपक्षत्वानि (viśiṣṭapakṣatvāni
- specific premises)
]
Conclusion
In modern computer programmer’s jargon, it is referred as multiple dimensions (views) of the same fact table (document/model) - technically called as document-view/model view architectural paradigm. The Indian philosophically tradition as dealt in depth on this subject. For example, in Jain philosophy, it is called as अनेक अन्त वाद (aneka anta vāda – doctrine of multiple endpoints). twin doctrines of अनेक अन्त वाद (aneka anta vāda – doctrine of multiple endpoints) & स्याद् वाद (syād vāda – doctrine of relative postulates) to mankind. Etymologically, the term is derived from अनेक (aneka - ‘multiple’), अन्त (anta - ‘final’ / ‘conclusion’) & वाद (vāda - ‘doctrine’). Thus, the doctrine reiterates that varieties of spiritual conclusions are equally probably, true and valid. In fact, according to this school, from an epistemological perspective, each of these दरशन (darśana -philosophy) is a kind of स्याद (syād –predication or probability event) that one may or may not experience as part of their spiritual journey. The term स्याद् (syād) literally means “may be” or “perhaps”. Moreover, every such experience is only a नय (naya – relative aspect) of truth or a specific viewpoint of reality which can be interpreted under the following scenarios as postulated by the revered Jain monk आचार्य बद्रबहुर (ācārya badrabahur), in his conceptual framework called सप्तभन्गिनय (saptabhanginaya – seven dimensional aspects)
- स्याद् अस्ति (syād asti – May be it is)
- स्याद् नास्ति (syād nāsti – May be it is not)
- स्याद् अस्ति नास्ति (syād asti nāsti – May be it is and it is not)
- स्याद् अस्ति अवक्तव्यः (syād asti avaktavyaḥ - May be it is but not determinable)
- स्याद् अवक्तव्यः (syād avaktavyaḥ - May be it is not determinable)
- स्याद् नास्ति अवक्तव्यः (syād nāsti avaktavyaḥ - May be it is not and not determinable)
- स्याद् अस्ति नास्ति अवक्तव्यः (syād asti nāsti avaktavyaḥ - May be it is, it is not, and is indeterminate)
I would like to refer here the following verses of the आचार्य कुन्दकुन्द (ācārya kundakunda) concisely explaining the whole concept of अनेकान्त वाद (anekāntavāda) in a nutshell.
“Philosophy and history all make us aware of the great collective achievements of mankind. It would be well if every civilized human being had a sense of these achievements and a realization of the possibility of greater things to come, with the indifference which must result as regards the petty squabbles upon which the passions of individuals and nations are wastefully squandered. Philosophy should make us know the ends of life, and the elements in life that have value on their own account. However, our freedom may be limited in the causal sphere, we need admit no limitations to our freedom in the sphere of values: what we judge good on its own account we may continue to judge good, without regard to anything but our own feeling. Philosophy cannot itself determine the ends of life, but it can free us from the tyranny of prejudice and from distortions due to a narrow view. Love, beauty, knowledge, and joy of life: these things retain their luster however wide our purview. And if philosophy can help us to feel the value of these things, it will have played its part in man’s collective work of bringing light into a world of darkness”
