Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Nyaya Sutras. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Nyaya Sutras. Sort by date Show all posts

Hinduism - What IS The Nyaya Sutra?

 


The Nyaya school, one of the six schools of ancient Hindu philosophy, has a foundational book called the Nyaya Sutras.

The philosopher Gautama is said to have penned the Nyaya Sutras, although Vatsyayana wrote the most important commentary in the fourth century.

The Nyaya Sutras begin with an explanation of the reason of human bonding, which is presented as a five-part causal chain including pain, birth, activity, flaw, and erroneous belief.

Each of these components is caused by the one before it, and is removed when its cause is destroyed.

The core cause of enslavement and rebirth (samsara) is therefore incorrect beliefs, which must be changed in order to achieve complete soul emancipation (moksha).

The Nyaya Sutras pay special emphasis to the pramanas, or ways by which human beings might receive real and accurate knowledge, as well as the norms and processes for applying them, in their search for proper understanding.

Perception (pratyaksha), inference (anumana), analogy (upamana), and authoritative witness are four such pra manas described in the Nyaya Sutras (shabda).

The Nyayas' greatest contribution to Indian philosophy is their concepts, which are acknowledged by practically all Indian philosophical systems.

~Kiran Atma


You may also want to read more about Hinduism here.

Be sure to check out my writings on religion here.

Hinduism - What Is Nyaya In Hindu Philosophy?

 


(“method”) One of the six classic Hindu philosophical schools concerned with the investigation and valuation of knowledge items.

The Nyayas were the first to create and codify the concept of pramanas, or the ways by which humans may get real and exact knowledge.

Perception (pratyaksha), inference (anumana), analogy (upamana), and authoritative witness are four such pramanas accepted by the Nyayas (shabda).

The Nyayas' greatest contribution to Indian philosophy is their concepts, which are acknowledged by practically all Indian philosophical systems.

The Nyayas, like other Indian philosophical schools, embarked on a quest for knowledge not for the sake of speculation, but to discover a means to free the soul from the cycle of reincarnation (samsara).

The Nyaya Sutras, according to Gautama, are the school's historic foundation.

The sutras begin by claiming that knowledge and its aspects may provide ultimate bliss to a person.

The second sutra in the book outlines a five-part causal chain: pain, birth, action, flaw, and erroneous belief.

Each of these components is caused by the one before it, and is removed when its cause is destroyed.

The underlying reason of all of this is "misconception," which is why the Nyaya were interested in investigating the pramanas.

The Nyayas derive their metaphysics from the Vaisheshika school, with whom they merged in the early decades of the common period.

Their philosophical viewpoint is frequently referred to as the "common man's notion." The Nyayas and Vaisheshikas are philosophical realists, believing that the universe is made up of many separate objects that exist as experienced, with the exception of perceptual errors.

All things are made up of nine essential substances: the five elements, space, time, mind, and self, and everything that exists can be named.

The Nyayas believe in the asatkaryavada causal model, which states that when anything is generated, it becomes a new entity, distinct from its constituent components.

Because each act of creation creates a new object, this causal model tends to increase the number of things in the universe.

It also acknowledges that human efforts and acts are one of the factors determining these effects, implying that acting in a manner that leads to complete soul liberation is potentially feasible (moksha).

The Nyaya school's belief in inherence (samavaya), a weak relational force that connects many things: wholes and their parts, substances and their qualities, movements and the objects that move, and generic traits and their specific examples, is one of the school's distinguishing features.

The Self (atman) is the centre of all experience for the Nyayas.

All experiences—pleasure, pain, happiness, grief, and so on—are linked to the Self through inherence.

The Nyaya school struggled with philosophical issues surrounding inherence, specifically the assumption that it is a singular principle rather than a collection of objects.

The growth of the Navyanyaya school, which sought to explain these linkages in a more nuanced fashion, was largely due to these assumptions.

Indian Philosophical Analysis, edited by Karl H. Potter and Sibajiban Bhattacharyya, was published in 1992, and A Sourcebook in Indian Philosophy, edited by Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan and Charles A. Moore, was published in 1957.

~Kiran Atma


You may also want to read more about Hinduism here.

Be sure to check out my writings on religion here.

Hinduism - Who Was Vatsyayana?

 

Vatsyayana(4th c.) was a writer and commentator in the Nyaya school of ancient Hindu philosophy

The Nyaya school has been integrated with another of the six schools, the Vaisheshikas, from the early common period.

Vatsyayana is most known for his commentary on Gautama's Nyaya Sutras, which are the Nyaya school's fundamental literature.


~Kiran Atma


You may also want to read more about Hinduism here.

Be sure to check out my writings on religion here.




Hinduism - Who Is Gautama Of The Hindu Nyaya Philosophical School?

 

(third century B.C.E.) The Nyaya Sutras, the cornerstone of the Nyaya philosophical system, are typically credited to him as the author.

The Nyaya school is one of those that aims to explain the root of human bonding in the reincarnation cycle (samsara) and how to break free from it.


 


You may also want to read more about Hinduism here.

Be sure to check out my writings on religion here.



Hinduism - What Is Causation In Indian Philosophy?

 






Causal Chains is a term that refers to a series of events that lead to the ultimate goal of all Indian philosophical systems is to discover and comprehend the causal factors that keep humans trapped in samsara, or the endless cycle of rebirth. 



Indian thinkers tried to accomplish this in a variety of ways, including formulating different chains of cause and effect that detailed the process by which humans became bound by karma. 


They believe that by knowing this process, they would be able to control it, leading to the ultimate emancipation of the soul (moksha).



The Buddha and the Jains were the first to construct causal chains. 


The causal chain in each of these theories is started by avidya, or a lack of true knowledge. 

These causal linkages may be broken in the Buddhist and Jain traditions by a religious discipline that starts with moral action and progresses to meditation and knowledge at higher levels. 

Causal chains in Hindu philosophy have a lot in common with these ideas, especially the idea that avidya is the root of the issue. 



Gautama, a Nyaya philosopher, proposed a five-fold causal chain in the Nyaya Sutras: 

pain, 

birth, 

activity, 

flaw, 

and incorrect idea. 


Each of these components is caused by the one before it, and it is removed when the cause is destroyed. 




This paradigm was also utilized by the Vaisheshika school, which was historically associated with the Nyayas. 




The Samkhya philosophical school's causal chain, as articulated by its founder, Ishvarakrishna, ascribes bondage to the process of development, resulting from a misunderstanding between purusha (conscious soul) and prakrti (unconscious spirit) (primal matter). 


These two fundamental principles, according to Samkhya, are always distinct from one another, yet people may mix them up. 

This paradigm was also utilized by the Yoga school, which was historically associated with the Samkhya. 

The Vishishthadvaita Vedanta school's founder, Ramanuja, offers an evolutionary system similar to Samkhya's, except that instead of dualism, all things develop from a single source, Brahman. 




Advaita Vedanta is the only major Hindu philosophical system without a causal chain. 




The concept of parinamavada is used by all other schools to describe the connection between the Ultimate Reality (in most instances, Brahman) and the perceivable universe. 



This philosophical viewpoint accepts the universe as it is seen, as well as the assumption that changes in the material world entail actual transformation (parinama) of one item into another, which can be explained by cause and effect. 


The Advaita school adheres to a philosophical stance known as monism, which is the idea that all things are simply different manifestations of a single Ultimate Reality. 

This one reality, according to Advaitins, is the formless, unqualified Brahman. 

The appearance of variety and diversity in daily life is explained by Advaitins as an illusory rather than a real change of Brahman, a philosophical perspective known as vivartavada

This deceptive metamorphosis is produced by a human mind characteristic that causes the mental superimposition (adhyasa) of an erroneous understanding over the true one. 



The fundamental issue for Advaitins, like for all other schools, is avidya, or erroneous knowledge, which must be replaced with right understanding. 

Whereas all other systems place some emphasis on deeds, Advaitins believe that avidya is the only source of suffering and that removing it is the only cure. 



Karl H. Potter (ed. ), Presuppositions of India's Philosophies, 1972, has further information. 




Hinduism - Who Was Kanada?

 

(2nd century BCE?) Philosopher known as the author of the Vaisheshika Sutras and the founder of the Vaisheshika philosophical school, one of Hindu philosophy's six schools.

Kanada's exact year of birth is unknown, however he is thought to have lived sometime after the third century B.C.E.

The Vaisheshika school was founded on the atomism philosophy, which states that there are just a few building elements that come together to make complex things.

Objects are also linked to their attributes via this cohesiveness.

The Vaisheshikas eventually embraced the Nyaya notion of God as the regulatory force underlying these atomic interactions when Vaisheshika joined with the Nyaya school, another of the six schools.

 


You may also want to read more about Hinduism here.

Be sure to check out my writings on religion here.



Hinduism - What Is Vivartavada In Hindu Philosophy?

     


    What is the Hindu philosophy of Vivartavada?


    The world is described as an illusory transformation of the Ultimate Reality or Realities, according to this philosophical model.

    The Advaita Vedanta philosophical school is known for its vivartavada model.

    The Advaitins believe in a causal model known as satkaryavada, which assumes that effects already exist in their causes and that when they appear, they are simply transformations (parinama) of those causes.

    Milk is transformed into curds, butter, and clarified butter as a classic example.

    Each of these effects was already present in the cause, according to proponents of asatkarya, and emerges from it through a natural transformation of the cause.

    The Advaita school adheres to the philosophical position of monism, which holds that everything is merely different manifestations of a single Ultimate Reality.



    Despite the appearance of difference and diversity in the world, Advaita proponents claim that reality is nondual (advaita), that is, that all things are "actually" nothing but the formless, unqualified Brahman.

    The Advaitins' belief that an effect already exists in its cause is based on the principle that all things in the universe ultimately rely on Brahman as the first cause.

    Simultaneously, the Advaitins refuse to acknowledge that Brahman ever changes because this would negate its eternal and unchanging nature.

    As a result, they talk about a fictitious transmission (vivartavada).

    The Advaitins believe that Brahman never truly changes because it is eternal and thus unchanging; the apparent changes are only illusory, based on human ignorance through shifting superimposition patterns (adhyasa).

    Advaitins are able to maintain Brahman's transcendence while also accounting for (apparent) changes in the phenomenal world in this way.

    Proponents of a different approach, which portrays the perceivable world as an actual trans creation of this unified reality, argue against this stance.


    Proponents of the Samkhya, Vishishthadvaita Vedanta, and Bhedabhada philosophical traditions, who, like Advaitins, believe in satkaryavada, hold this position.




    Each of these three schools thinks that the world as we see it is real, that it is rooted in a single ultimate source, and that this fundamental principle undergoes a genuine metamorphosis through which the universe is born.

    This parinama connection permits these schools to explain the phenomenal world, but in a manner that undermines the transcendence of these initial principles by incorporating them within it.

    Philosophically, they struggle to explain how the sublime might become commonplace, then transcendent again.


    What is the vivartavada view of Advaita Vedanta?

    According to the post-Shankara Advaita advaitins' vivartavada view of Advaita Vedanta, the cosmos is only a "illusory mutation" of Brahman.


    What does Vivarta mean?

    The Sanskrit term vivarta denotes a change in form, a modification, or a changed circumstance. 

    The word vivarta is the root of the phrase vivartavada.

    The Satkaryavada thesis, which states that the cause precedes the consequence, is accepted by all Vedanta schools

    However, there are several points of view about how Brahman gave rise to the material universe. 




    The concept of parinamavada holds that the universe is a genuine (parinama) metamorphosis of Brahman. 


    • The concept of vivartavada holds that the universe is only a fictitious (vivarta) representation of Brahman. 
    • According to Vivartavada, despite the fact that Brahman seems to alter, nothing really changes. 
    • The multitude of creatures are false manifestations because Brahman, the ultimate truth that is unborn, unchanging, and utterly devoid of any parts, is the only true being.


    The Brahma Sutras, early Vedantins, the majority of Vedanta schools, and Samkhya all support parinamavada. 





    According to Nicholson, the Advaitins, who are devotees of Shankara, are the "most conspicuous champions of Vivartavada." 

    The Advaitins say that before the individual ego may be freed, all of Brahman's consequences must eventually be accepted as unreal, despite the fact that the universe can be represented as conventionally real, continues Nicholson.

    However, academics are divided on whether Adi Shankara and his Advaita theory used vivartavada or parinamavada to explain causation. 




    Adi Shankara did not support Vivartavada, according to scholars like Paul Hacker and Hajime Nakamura, and his justifications are "far from any connotation of illusion." They claim that the concept of Vivarta was given by the scholar Prakasatman, and it is Prakasatman's thesis that is sometimes mistaken for Adi Shankara's perspective. 


    According to Andrew Nicholson, who agrees with Hacker and other academics, Shankara's thoughts are more closely related to parinama-vada than the vivarta-vada, and the vivarta explanation most likely developed gradually in the Advaita sub-school later.


    Casual connection is depicted by Vijnanabhiksu as having three terms: effect, variable locus cause, and immutable locus cause. 

    The locus cause cannot be separated from the changing cause and effect and does not originate in them.


    By proposing the theory of Svatantryavada (the "Universal voluntarism"), which maintains that Effect develops from Cause due to the sovereignty of God's Will, the Pratyabhijna philosophy of Somananda disproves the Arambhvada (the "Realistic view" of the Nyaya-Vaisesika), the Parinamavada (the theory of Transformation of the Sankhya-Yoga), and the Vivart.

    Ramanuja recognizes Prakrti as the material cause, but Madhava disputes this claim since a material cause does not necessarily imply control or supervision. 


    Madhava also disagrees with the Vivartavada because it does not acknowledge the need to account for any effects. 


    In his pure non-dualism (Shuddhadvaita) philosophy, Vallabhacharya also opposes "vivartavada" and asserts that Maya (or the "Jagat") is real and is only a power of Brahman who manifests as Jiva and the world of his own volition. 



    In doing so, there is no transformation of Brahman; it still remains only gold. 

    As a result, Shuddhadvaita is also called as "Avikta Parimavda" (Unmodified transformation).


    Frequently Asked Questions



    What does Vivartavada mean?

    The concept of vivartavada holds that the universe is only a fictitious representation of Brahman. 

    According to Vivartavada, despite the fact that Brahman seems to alter, nothing really changes. The multitude of creatures are false manifestations because Brahman, the ultimate truth that is unborn, unchanging, and utterly devoid of any parts, is the only true being.

    What distinguishes Parinamavada from Vivartavada?

    The non-advaitin doctrine of real change is referred to as parinama-vada.

    Vivartavada, the advaita theory of seeming change, is distinct from this. The idea is that the cause really changes into the consequence.



    References And Further Reading:



    • Majumder, B. and Ray, S., 2022. Rajju Sarpa Bhranti-A Metaphysical Analysis of Visual Illusions in Light of Doctrine of Vivarta Vada. Journal of Ayurveda and Integrated Medical Sciences7(5), pp.80-90.
    • Sayanolibavan, M., 2022. The importance attributed to Mandukya Karika in the tradition of Advaida Vedanta.
    • Roodurmum, P.S., 2002. Bhåamatåi and Vivaraòna Schools of Advaita Vedåanta a Critical Approach.
    • Chari, S., 2011. Indian Philosophical Systems: A Critical Review Based on Vedānta Deśika's Paramata-Bhaṅga.
    • Majumder, B. and Ray, S., 2022. Doctrines of Different Philosophical Schools Regarding the Theory of Cause & Effect and Their Validation in Light of Charaka Samhita. Journal of Ayurvedic and Herbal Medicine8(2), pp.94-100.
    • Bhattacharyya, S.P., 2000. Sarvajñātmamuni's contribution to Advaita Vedānta.
    • Brooks, R.W., 1963. Śaṁkara: A Psychological Study.
    • Isaeva, N.V., 2009. Vivartavada.
    • Duquette, J., 2015. Is Sivadvaita Vedanta a Saiddhantika School? Parinamavada in the Brahmamimarrisabhasya. Journal of Hindu Studies8(1), pp.16-43.
    • Chaliha, A., 2017. ON SRIBHASYA-THE BASIC BOOK ON THE THEISTIC VEDANTA. The Philosophical Journal of JB College (Autonomous), Jorhat Assam, India, p.10.
    • Goswami, N., The concept of aventa philosophy of Sankaracharya.
    • Singh, P., 2021. The Problem of Causation: Nagarjuna Vs Hume. Journal Of International Buddhist Studies College (JIBSC)7(1), pp.66-75.
    • Gupta, A.S., 1958. Ramanuja on causality. Philosophy East and West8(3/4), pp.137-148.








    Hinduism - Who Was Ramanuja?


      Who Was Ramanuja?


      Ramanuja was a Southern Indian philosopher and the most important figure in the Shrivaishnava religious community in the 11th century.

      He was the greatest exponent of the philosophical position known as Vishishthadvaita ("qualified non-dualism") Vedanta, the core tenet of the Vedanta school of Hindu philosophy and the most important figure in the Shrivaishnava religious community.

      Ramanuja spent the most of his life at the temple town of Shrirangam in Tamil Nadu, where he served the temple's resident god, Ranganatha, a form of Vishnu.

      Ramanuja believed that Brahman, or Supreme Reality, was a personal god rather than an impersonal abstract concept, and that the most significant kind of religious activity one could perform was devotion (bhakti).

      His philosophical viewpoint, Vishishthadvaita Vedanta, emphasized both of these principles.

      God, according to Ramanuja, is entirely transcendent and without flaws in his basic essence.

      A notion taken from the Samkhya philosophical tradition is that the universe evolves from God via a process of evolution.

      The universe is therefore like God in that it comes from him, but it is also unlike him in that matter is unaware and insentient.

      Human beings, too, are comparable to God in nature since they have him as their source, yet they are susceptible to ignorance and suffering, unlike God.

      God, according to Ramanuja and his followers, is not the same as human beings or the earth, all of which are said to exist in their own right.

      Due to the differences in capability between God and humans, dedication is the most efficient way to achieve eventual soul liberation (moksha), which is defined as everlasting fellowship with God.


      What Is The Philosophy Of Ramanuja?


      A Brahmin initiate into the theistic and devotional South Indian Sri Vaisnava tradition, Ramanuja lived from from 1075 to 1140 AD. 

      Members of that tradition hold him in high regard as the theologian and scriptural interpreter who, in the tradition of Nathamuni (c. 900-950) and Yamuna (c. 966–1038), provided a strong and thorough theological and philosophical defense and articulation of their beliefs and practices in the system that would later become known as Visistsadvaita Vedanta. 


      What Is The Advaita Vedanta Tradition?

      The Advaita Vedanta tradition of scriptural exegesis, which maintains that the significance of those texts is the identity of the soul (atman) and the ground of being (Brahman), and that all experience of difference is the ultimately unreal result of ignorance or misunderstanding, was challenged in this (avidya). 

      Nothing in Vedanta, whether theistic or not, could ever be the same again as a result of his achievement in this area. 


      What Are The Beliefs Of The Vaisnava Sect?

      The Sri Vaisnava sect gets its identity from the fusion of traditional Vedantic components with sectarian Tantric (non-Vedic) Pancaratra temple ritual and theology, emotional devotionalism (bhakti) toward a personal god with characteristics (saguna), and Tamil Alvar poets. 

      The Pancaratra texts serve as a framework for the sect's liturgical activity (agama). 

      In the temple image, there is a focus on the immanent presence of the divine in creation (arcavatara). 


      Was The Alvar Worship Open To All Of Society?

      The Alvars' devotionalism is open to all social groups. Everyone is welcome to a relationship with God, regardless of caste or gender. 

      The songs portray a deep yearning for God, the "agony of separation" from him, and the joy of reestablished contact. 

      Vedanta, also known as the science of Brahman or the absolute reality, is the systematic exegesis and elucidation of those sections (the jnana-kanda) of the purportedly timeless and infallible Vedic sacred texts known as Upanisads that address in various ways such metaphysical issues as the nature of the absolute principle and summum bonum underlying the cosmos, the nature and destiny of the essential self (atman). 

      Its foundational text is the Brahmasutra, attributed to Badarayana in the second century A.D., which summarizes the major Upanisadic themes in a way that is easily remembered but inevitably highly ambiguous (given the aphoristic nature of the sutra genre), much like the Mimamsa sutras, attributed to Jaimini in the 100s A.D., which summarizes those sections of the Vedas (the karma- Vedanta is also known as Uttara Mimamsa (Later Exegesis). 

      Insofar as the road of ritual activity came to be viewed as antecedent and propaedeutic to the path of knowledge, the ritualist received the title Purva Mimamsa (Previous Enquiry). 


      Did Ramanuja Help Transform Non-Vedic Traditions To Vedic Traditions?

      Ramanuja is a key player in the non-Vedic tradition's transformation into a Vedic tradition. 

      The Upanishads, the Brahmasutras, and the Bhagavad Gita serve as the fundamental sources for the ancient Vedantic tradition, which he attempted to harmonize with the principles of his bhakti religion. 

      The most important of the criteria for Hindu Brahminical orthodoxy (smarta), which also include the acceptance of the Vedically derived social and religious obligations unique to hereditary caste members (varnashrama dharma) and the eternity of an essential principle in man (atman), is the Veda's authority. 


      What Is Vedanticization?

      Vedanticization is the process of articulating sectarian traditions' theory and practice in terms of a broadly accepted philosophy and code of conduct that has been upheld by the main Vedantic tradition. 

      Ramanuja argued for the Vedantic validity of his bhakti religion by writing commentary on the Brahmasutras and the Gita. 

      His theistic and dualistic readings of the Upanisads gave popular devotional religion a classical foundation. 

      Yamuna had created the groundwork for such an endeavor by using Tamil religious literature. 

      He aimed to show in his Siddhitraya that the fundamental self (atman) possesses a personal existence. 

      He promoted the idea of effects being the realm of material things. 

      He maintained that God is the right object of one's devotion since He has attributes of a personal kind. 

      In his Gitarthasamgraha, he argued that the Gita's fundamental goal is to instill bhakti as the only way to achieve liberation, which entails an intimate, loving connection with God in which the individual self is preserved. 

      Since the Upanisads are considered to be completely infallible with respect to the transcendent, synthesizing beliefs with the Vedantic worldview gives them the sanction of antiquity and ensures their reality. 

      The Vedantic language suggests that teachings have an unwavering, everlasting validity. 

      Vedanticization, or the notion that one's tradition has a foundation that is eternally and inherently legitimate, gives one a stronger base on which to develop their religious life. 


      How Was Ramanuja's Philosophy Pan-Indian?

      A theological system may have pan-Indian currency among the educated thanks to the usage of Sanskrit

      Nathamuni and Yamuna started the process, which Ramanuja reinforced. 

      We see a constant endeavor on their part to further the Sanskritization of the bhakti religion. 

      The worshipper's adoring contemplation of God in his heaven is equivalent to moksha (release from the cycle of births), and the acts of worship and veneration are on par with the rites outlined by scripture and tradition. 

      This is how the God of the bakhta is equated with the supreme principle of the Upanishads. 

      It has been claimed persuasively that Yamuna was a self-aware representative of a Pancaratrika Vedanta, who asserted that the sectarian Vaisnava Pancaratra writings are equivalent in authority to the Vedic texts. 

      Using literature that had never before been included in Vedanta or Uttara-Mimamsa, such as the Pancaratra Agamas, which was viewed as a "easily understood" divine revelation, he created a theistic Vedanta. 

      Ramanuja can't be stated to be the same. He is so preoccupied with proving Sri Vaisnavism's Vedantic validity that Pancaratra is left in the background. 

      Only while justifying the compatibility of that tradition with Vedic culture does he make reference to Pancaratra scriptures (SBh.2.2.40–43). 

      He makes no mention of the openly sectarian Vaisnava Bhagavata Purana for the same reason. 


      Ramanuja And The Tamil Veda.

      The Divya Prabandha, sometimes referred to as the Tamil version of the Veda, was compiled by Nathamuni from the passionate songs of the Alvars and utilized in temple worship. 

      Ramanuja doesn't mention the "Tamil Veda" at all. He views bhakti as an intellectual and philosophical phenomena rather than an emotional one. 

      In his conservative view, dedication must be placed within the framework of social and religious commitments. 

      However, there are clear parallels between his realistic and pluralistic metaphysics and the bhakti religion. 

      In the end, monistic Advaita-Vedanta is opposed to bhakti. 

      Ramanuja had to demonstrate that revealed scripture (shruti) and authoritative tradition (smruti), not the Advaitins' religion, was what was taught. 

      In order to do this, he critiqued the intellectual underpinnings of monism and offered theistic and dualistic readings of Upanisadic scriptures. 


      What Is Ramnuja's Visistsadvaita or Vedanta?

      The philosophy he developed, known as Visistsadvaita or Vedanta, is based on the premise that all conscious souls and material beings are one with and in God, who they are inextricably reliant upon since they make up the divine body. 

      Vedanta is the aphoristic summary of the Upanisads' significance found in the Brahmasutras and the systematic hermeneutic of the Upanisads. 

      The Vedantic theologian views himself as a scriptural exegete who draws theological conclusions from a body of scripture that is intrinsically valid (svatah pramanya), independent of God (although, according to Ramanuja, promulgated by the deity at the beginning of a cycle of cosmic emanation), and our only source of knowledge regarding the nature of whom it is (pramana). 

      The Vedic language is ageless, and its meaning is not dependent on any given situation, although it is acknowledged that it is difficult to grasp and requires interpretive clarification. 


      What Is The Significance Of Sampradaya In Vedanta?

      According to Vedanta, a prerequisite for a correct reading of the scriptures is adhering to an established religious tradition (sampradaya). 

      Tradition shouldn't breed damaging bias but rather awareness. Originality in theology is a flaw. 

      The theologian's endeavor, which entails the methodical explication of accepted concepts, is one of preservation. 

      The inherent (autpattika) and unchangeable (nitya) relationship between a Vedic term and the referent in which it participates metaphysically is the source of the infallible authority of text. 

      It was assumed that Sanskrit words were not only symbols for their objects, but also integral parts of them. 

      Neither supernatural intervention nor human convention have been able to mend the link. 


      The Vedas Are Considered A Revelation.

      Vedic speech is "non-personal" (apauruseya). 

      There is neither a divine nor a human author of the Vedas. 

      They are not a divine self-revelation, even yet they are the sole source of information about God. 

      The Purva-Mimamsaka theorists, whose primary religious concern was the clarification of those sections (the karma-kanda) of the intrinsically valid but frequently cryptic and ambiguous Vedic texts that are the only source of knowledge about those ritual performances which are an essential component of the cosmic order (dharma), developed these theories regarding the authority of the Vedas. 


      The Vedas Are Regarded As Infallible.

      The Vedas are regarded as being infallible in theory since all cognitions are taken for granted as true just by virtue of their occurrence and remain true unless refuted. 

      The Mimamsakas were atheists who believed that the universe's stability and human well-being in this world and the next (both covered by dharma) resulted from the disinterested conduct of Vedic rituals, whose proper execution would inevitably have beneficial effects. 

      While certain rituals (kamya) might be conducted with a particular goal in mind, the most important ones were to be carried out in a spirit of obligation for the sake of duty, independent of any particular benefits. 

      Those "twice-born" men (i.e., members of the higher three castes who have undergone the upanayana ceremony of initiation entitling them to participate in Vedic ritual) with the necessary qualification for legitimate access to the rituals (adhikara), according to the Prabhakara school of Mimamsa, are moved to action in the manner of categorical imperatives by the prescriptions enjoining them (vidhi or niyog Indicative, descriptive, or fact-asserting scriptural statements are to be construed as praising the sacrifice or explaining the mode of its performance, according to the Prabhakaras, who also held that only those scriptural statements that are injunctions bearing upon the essential rituals (karya — "things to be done") are an authoritative source of new knowledge (pramana). 


      Siddha And Sadhya.

      They are not authority for things that are already established (siddha) and do not need creation (sadhya), since they are the purview of knowledge-producing mechanisms like perception and inference. 

      As a result, the language of the scriptures cannot be considered authoritative in regards to Brahman. 

      They provide evidence for this by saying that all language has meaning when it is connected to an action. 

      They support a semantic theory known as "associated designation" (anvitabhidhana), which carries the weight that a word only has meaning when it is used in a sentence. 

      The Prabhakaras adopted an anti-realist stance, exemplified by their epistemically constrained definition of reality (satta), which they defined as anything that exists and is amenable to connection with valid cognition (pramana sambandha yogyata). 

      This definition is consistent with their view that reality is something that must be brought about in accordance with the dictates of Vedic injunction. 

      Insofar as it depends on following set rituals, the universe is truly of our creation. 


      A Theory Of Truth.

      A pragmatic theory of truth, which holds that knowledge is useful for directing action whereas mistake is worthless in that regard, complements this point of view. 

      In response, Ramanuja argues that effective action requires language with informational significance, which is often fact-assertive and descriptive. 

      Even if the Vedic jnana-kanda, the Upanisadic books, are taken as commandments that forbid meditation on Brahman, they can only do so if they have previously proven its existence. 

      According to Ramanuja, learning the meanings of words involves an ostensive defining process that results in the creation of an idea (buddhyutpatti) of the words' referents. 

      The young child learns that all words convey their intended meanings and that some word combinations signify various types of unforced linkages between basic items. 

      Thus, he holds to the kind of semantic theory (abhihitanvayavada) put out by the Mimamsaka direct realist Kumarila (c. 650 A.D.), which may be summarized as the idea that a phrase is made up of a string of word meanings that have previously been articulated singly. 

      The fundamental units of meaning are words as individual expressions of general characteristics. 

      A sentence is made up of a collection of distinct words, each of which, taken alone, designates a set of discrete objects, which serves as the main epistemological "given." 

      These words then each separately and serially express one of their proper senses, which are then combined to create a further syntactically connected whole, the purport (tatparya), of the sentence, which stands for a particular person or situation. 

      The grammar (anvaya) of the words' explicitly articulated (abhihita) meanings provides the purport. 

      The intent is particular even if the individual word meanings are universal. 

      It is important to note that they consider the Vedic commands as hypothetical imperatives that only apply to eligible individuals (high-caste men) who have an interest in the specific purposes they define. 

      The logic, epistemology, and metaphysics of the Nyaya-Vaisesika school acknowledged the inspiration of scripture as God's written word. 

      As a result, its validity is external. 

      They rejected the idea that the scriptures alone could answer questions concerning the nature of God and the soul and instead argued that inferential reasoning could be used to prove Isvara and atman's existence and characteristics. 

      They only sometimes used the scriptures to support a point that had previously been made by logical reasoning. 

      They were unable to make an argument for God's existence only based on the scriptures due to the danger of becoming circular. 


      Ramanuja As A Metaphysical And Epistemological Realist.


      Ramanuja is a realist in both metaphysics and epistemology.  Here, I briefly discuss some aspects of both realism and anti-realism in order to distinguish between them and how they restrict what is possible within the confines of language or human comprehension. 

      At its core, realism is the expression of a natural human desire to see beyond appearances that are caused by our limited human perspective on the universe and to get at a genuine perception of reality as it is in itself. 

      Any discussion of a reality that is incomprehensible to our cognitive abilities is questioned by the anti-realist. 

      As a result, "to be" is to be intelligible to us. 

      Such theories include idealism, which entails the mental nature of the ostensibly physical and the exhaustive reduction of everything to states of consciousness; phenomenalism, which holds that familiar physical objects can be reduced to human sensory stimulations; representationalism, which holds that what we are immediately aware of are sensory and mental impressions standing in causal relations to objects; and the type of semantic anti-realism propagated by the semantic anti-realism movement. 

      A realist philosophy, however, may include any or all of the following characteristics: There is an objective, mind-free world. 

      That is to say, even in the absence of occupied human subjective standpoints attesting to their existence, things proposed by an ontology as belonging to a domain exist, truths are true, and situations of events exist. 

      There may be more than we can comprehend or imagine. 

      In other words, certain facts are unreachable to humans. 

      While the degree of connection between our ideas and the outside world is decided independently of human cognitive activity, we are nonetheless capable of accurately imagining and understanding the human surroundings. 

      We often discuss actual objects rather than ideas, concepts, sensory data, or mental sensations. 

      Never are the objects of sense primarily cerebral and non-physical. 

      A universe of mindless physical things is seen as real until that view is refuted by another perception. 

      Similar to how they seem to humans, familiar macroscopic things would also appear the same to species with diverse sensory modalities. 

      (Epistemological realism or realistic common sense) Initially, consciousness is unformed, passive, and receptive. 

      Language and innate concepts do not significantly organize or perhaps even distort the sensory outputs. 

      According to facts about the mind-independent sphere, every proposition is categorically either true or false (realist empiricism). 

      Truth is some kind of relationship between ideas, words, and circumstances. 

      True thoughts and phrases have a representation that is structurally isomorphic to extra-mental reality. 

      Complex true cognitions depict complex situations of events and are causally connected to them. 

      True concept-laden cognition provides more information about the reality. 

      It does not alter or remove us from reality. 

      Certain sorts of property, like abstract universals, exist apart from the human mind and language. 

      (Platonism and the Naiyayika theory of universals, which Ramanuja does not agree with.) It is not possible to reduce claims about one domain (such as the mental) to statements about another kind of domain (e.g.  the physical).


      References And Further Reading:

      • A Sourcebook in Indian Philosophy, edited by Sarvepalli Radha Krishnan and Charles A. Moore, 1957.
      • John B. Carman, The Theology of Ramanuja, 1974.


      ~Kiran Atma