Part III Purva-MimAmsA and Vedanta (Historical Perspective of Indian Religious Thoughts)

[Guest guest]

Part III Purva-MimAmsA and Vedanta (Historical Perspective of Indian

Religious Thoughts)

 

The main text of Purva-MimAmsA is the Purva-MimAmsA Sutra by Jaimini

(400 B.C.). It is a scholastic piece of work and confines itself almost

entirely to the interpretation of the Vedas. This school of philosophy

is interested mainly in inquiring into the nature of dharma (right

action), and since it accepts the Vedas to be both infallible and the

sole authority of dharma, one can call it a fairly orthodox school. Its

interest is more practical than speculative and its importance is less

as a school of philosophy than as a useful system of interpreting the

Vedas.

 

Perhaps the most influential system of philosophical systems

has been, and still is Vedanta. It springs from the Upanishads and its

central thesis is the Upanishadic doctrine of the Bhraman. Its founder

was BAdarayana, whose Brahma Sutra (also called the Uttar-MimAmsA) makes

up, along with the Upanishads and the Bhagavad-Gita, the foundation of

the Vedanta System.

 

The most famous exponent of the Vedanta was undoubtedly Sankara, who

lived in South India in the eighth century A.D. There are two main

divisions in the Vedanta school, one rigidly non-dualistic (advaita)in

its outlook and the other tolerating various degrees of dualism

(dwaita). Sankara was the champion of advaita.

 

Sankara was preceded by gaudapAda, a believer in a very strict form of

monism. He asserted categorically that the external world was unreal,

the only reality being the Brahman. Outer objects are purely subjective,

and dreams are hardly different from our experiences while we are awake.

The whole world is a vast illusion and nothing exists other than the

Brahman. Like the Buddhist spiritual absolutist NAgArjuna, GaudapAda

denies the possibility of change or the validity of causation. 'There is

no destruction, no creation, none in bondage, none endeavouring [for

release], none desirous of liberation, none liberated; this is the

absolute truth.

 

Sankara's position is less extreme. While asserting the identity of the

Brahman with the Atman, and denying that the world was outside the

Supreme, he did-not accept the description of the world as a pure

illusion. Waking experiences are different from dreams and external

objects are not merely forms of personal consciousness. Sankara explains

the appearance of the world with an analogy. A person may mistake a rope

for a snake. The snake is not there, but it is not entirely an illusion,

for there is the rope. The appearance of the snake lasts until the rope

is closely examined. The world can be compared with the snake and the

Brahman with the rope. When we acquire true knowledge, we recognize that

the world is only a manifestation of the Brahman. The world is neither

real nor quite unreal; it is an appearance based on the existence of the

Brahman. The precise relationship between the Brahman and the world is

inexpressible and is sometimes referred to as mAyA.

 

Statements about Brahman, to be intelligible, must use empirical forms.

The wise recognize these forms to be necessities of concrete thought,

but fools take them to be the real truth. One must also recognize that

the relationship between the Brahman and the world is not reversible.

There will be no world without the Brahman, but the existence of the

Brahman does not depend on the appearance of the world, just as the

appearance of the snake depends on the existence of the rope but not

vice versa.

 

The Jiva, or the individual soul, is a particular manifestation of the

Brahman. Because of avidyA (ignorance), the root of all troubles, the

ego-feeling exists. The end is liberation, and that is achieved through

a practical realization (not merely a theoretical acceptance) of the

oneness of the self with the Absolute. If a person reaches this state he

becomes jivan-mukta, i.e. liberated while alive. Realizing the oneness

of all, his life becomes one of unselfish service. At death his freedom

from bondage is complete. Casting off the physical body, the soul

becomes completely free.

 

Somewhat different interpretations of the Upanishads were

put forward by some later Vedantists. Two Vaishnava scholars Ramanuja

and Madhva, were prominent among the branch of-the Veddnta that is

sometimes called dualistic(dvaita). Ramanuja's philosophy was in fact a

different version of the advaita doctrine. To put it in a few words, he

claimed that the world, the Atman and God (Ishvara) are distinct though

not separate. The individual souls and the concrete world are like the

body of God, and Ishvara possessed of the two is the Brahman. Thus,

everything is within the Brahman, but still individual souls are

different from Ishvara. The thesis, as we shall see later, helped the

intellectual acceptance of the Bhakti movement, i.e. the approach to the

God through devotion rather than through knowledge.

 

Ramanuja belonged to the eleventh century. Madhva came in the

thirteenth. He believed in the dualism of the Brahman and the jiva (the

individual souls). His philosophy is, thus, called Dwaita. In fact he

also accepted the existence of the physical world, thereby introducing a

third entity. Brahman, or God (Vishnu), is of course complete, perfect,

and the highest reality, but the world too is real. The differences

between Sankara's philosophy and that of Madhva can be readily noticed.

The Vaishnava movement, as one might imagine, owed much to the

contribution of Madhva.

[ARJ 0]

I love audarya

[ranjeetmore 0]

Bhramn loses all importance when it comes to sadhana.

Talking about it is only nonsensical.

It doesn't even have a name.Not even Bhramn.

question to a mayavadi:What will you meditate on ?

Mayavadi : Yourself.

enquirer: Myself?The body?

Mayavadi: No.No.Meditate on Bhramn.

enquirer: What is Bhramn? a Point?

Mayavadi: No.No.Just meditate.

Tulsidas says,"Kahat kathin,samujhat kathin.Sadhan kathin vivek."

This Jnana marga is tough to even explain.Tougher to understand and sadhana...hehe...you think you can do it?

 

 

What sadhana will you do? Talk like parrots the whole day?

[ranjeetmore 0]

Srila Bhakti vinode Thakura has SMASHED,and I swear by the word,Jaimini's purva mimamsa in his treatise refuting any marga except bhakti.

[Deathless 0]

Ranjeet, surely you realize that the initial poster posted this in 1999. Who are you so angry with? Someone who isn't even on here anymore?

 

Om Shanti.