This paper argues that Śrī Swāminārāyaṇ espoused a position on the pramāṇa-s (means of knowing), and his theory was that among these it is śabdapramāṇa that is the important and authoritative pramāṇa. However, in delineating the precise sources and textual authority that fall within the ambit of śabdapramāṇa, he privileged mostly the Smṛti texts, along with Vedānta and Bhagavadgītā commentaries, to which was added later his own Gujarati text Vachanāmrut, as canonical texts of the particular Sampradāya. In so doing, he (...) would be seen to be departing somewhat from classical positions on authoritative scriptures, in particular of Śaṅkara and, to an extent, Rāmānuja, for whom Śruti (‘revealed’) and Smṛti (‘recollected’) scriptures respectively denote quite different genre of texts, and with graded degree (rather kind) of authority; the former could even be apauruṣeya, authorless scriptures. The paper analyses the precise reasons for Swāminārāyaṇ arriving at this qualified position and the arguments he garnishes towards this doctrinal hermeneutic, concluding with comments on his slight departure from the classically accepted understanding of śabdapramāṇa where scriptural sources are the preeminent concern with a somewhat different epistemological trajectory. (shrink)

Dr PurusQttama Bilimoria's book on sabdapramaIJa is an important one, and so is likely to arouse much controversy. I am pleased to be able to write a Foreword to this book, at a stage in my philosophical thinking when my own interests have been turning towards the thesis of sabdapramaIJa as the basis of Hindu religious and philosophical tradition. Dr Bilimoria offers many novel interpretations of classical Hindu theories about language, meaning, understanding and knowing. These interpretations draw upon the conceptual (...) resources of contemporary analytic and phenomenological philosophies, without sacrificing the authentIcity that can arise only out of philologically grounded scholarship. He raises many issues, and claims to have resolved some of them. Certainly, he advances the overall discussion, and this is the best one could hope for in writing on a topic to which the best minds of antiquity and modern times have applied themselves. In this Foreword, I wish to focus on one of the issues which I have raised on earlier occasions, and on which Dr Bilimoria has several important things to say. The issue is: is sabdabodha eo ipso a linguistic knowing, i. e., sabdapramll, or does Sabdabodha amount to knowing only when certain specifiable conditions are satisfied. It the second alternative be accepted, these additional conditions could not be the same as the familiar Ilsatti (contiguity), yogyata (semantic fitness), dka;,k~ll (expectancy) and tlltparya (intention), for these are, on the theory, conditions of sabdabodha itself. (shrink)

This is an enquiry based on the Vivekacūḍāmaṇi, the primary focus of which is to present viveka along with its three catalysts, namely, śruti, tarka, and anubhava as the unique pramāṇa of Ultimate Knowledge. This paper discusses the significance of the six popular pramāṇas of Advaita Vedānta and reiterates that as far as AV is concerned epistemologically those pramāṇas have merely a provisional value. In accordance with the purport of VC this paper argues that śruti and tarka, culminating in anubhava (...) are blind in themselves and are enthusiastically carried forward by viveka for the attainment of the final realisation. This paper concludes that viveka, along with its three catalysts namely, śruti, tarka, and anubhava is the sole pramāṇa of the trans-empirical experiential knowledge of Brahman. (shrink)

The Bhagavad-Gītā is the most important text in the smrti literature of India, as distinct from the śruti literature which is traditionally regarded as ultimately authoritative. The Bhagavad-Gītā has been assigned a date ranging from the fifth century B.C. to the second century B.C. The Indian religious tradition places the Gītā at the end of the third age of the present cycle of the universe and the beginning of the fourth, namely the Kali Yuga to which we belong.

The great Advaita Vedāntin Śaṅkara puts forth a mystic parallelism thesis that is identified and examined here: mystical and sensory experiences are epistemically parallel. Among the conclusions drawn are that the Advaita metaphysics precludes successful defense of a Brahman-centered philosophy on the basis of such a thesis because Advaita precludes a story about how the experience of its Brahman could arise. Thus Śaṅkara needs "scripture" (śruti) to secure important parts of his view. A truly mystical Vedānta, in contrast, would not.

This is a philological and critical analysis of two crucial philosophical concepts, viz., reaso and experienceâ. The study shows that, though there is no word in Sanskrit which may be taken as equivalent of Western reason and thought, such terms as tarka, yukti, nyaya, anumana, buddhi, etc., clearly capture parts or aspects of what is meant by reason and thought (Denken). Moreover, it is misleading to trans- late sruti as revelation. Construing sruti as revelation surreptitiously imports a Semitic (...) theological concept into the Vedic tradition. The case of experience is more promising because we have such Sanskrit words as anubhava or anubhuti that do translate into experience. However, experience in Western thought has acquired many shades of meaning, and the study determines in what sense the Indian anubhava captures the Western experience. Finally, the book demonstrates that Indian philosophy provides an account of the cognitive process that begins with perception and culminates in wisdom (highest experience). This whole process may be called reason, at both ends of which we can talk of experience, which places experience not in an external opposition to reason, but rather as something that belongs to it internally. Thus, the modern Western opposition between reason and experience collapses and the two toge-ther yield an integrated process of acquisition, validation, and practical application of knowledge. (shrink)

It is commonly taken for granted that in Vedānta, as also in Indian philosophy in general, yukti, anumāna, and tarka, translate into “reason” (of Western thought) while śruti is rendered as “revelation.” I reject this translation-interpretation; it is a good example of theway in which Sanskrit philosophical discourse is often misconstrued. The term śruti does not refer to revelation, nor do yukti, anumāna, or tarka to reason. Reason, I argue, comprehends all the pramānas; these are all means of legitimizing beliefs. (...) I distinguish between different levels of the application of “reason,” and I maintain that the mere reasoner (tārkika) has not grasped the true nature of “reason.” In effect, I maintain that śabda, both lauika and alukika, is a component of reason, and so is perception. There is no concept of “revelation” in Indian philosophy, and no opposition between reason and experience. (shrink)

Machine generated contents note: 1 A Plea for a New History of Philosophy in India -- 2 Towards a Field Theory of Indian Philosophy: -- Suggestions for a New Way of Looking at Indian Philosophy -- II -- 3 Indian Philosophy in the First Millennium A.D.: -- Fact and Fiction -- 4 Where are the Vedas in the First Millennium AD.? -- 5 Vedinta in the First Millennium A.D.: The Case Study -- of a Retrospective Illusion Imposed by th Historiography (...) -- of Indian Philosophy -- III -- 6 Prltftyasamutpada-Does it Say Anything New? -- 7 ilow Anekantika is Anekanta? Some Reflections on the -- Jain Theory of Anekfntavada -- IV -- 8 MTmamsa before JaiminT: Some Problems in the -- Interpretation of Rule in the Indian Tradition -- 9 The MTmamsaka versus Yajfiika: Some Further Problem in -- the Interpretation of Sruti in the Indian Tradition -- 10 Syena yaga: The Achilles Heel of Sruti in Indian Tradition -- 11 Is the Doctrine of Arthavada Compatible with the -- Idea of Srut? -- V -- 12 The Myth of the Prasthana TrayF -- 13 Is "Tattvam asi" The Same Type of Identity Statement as -- "The Morning Star is the Evening Star"? -- 14 Can the Analysis of Adhyasa ever Lead to an -- Advaitic Conclusion? -- 15 Was Acarya Samkara Responsible for the Disappearance -- of Buddhist Philosophy from India? -- VI -- 16 Is Nyaya Realist or Idealist? -- 17 Can Navya Nyaya Analysis Make a Distinction -- between Sense and Reference? -- VII -- 18 Did the GopTs Really Love Krsna?: Some Reflections -- on Bhakti as a Purusartha in the Indian Tradition -- 19 The Vamasrama Syndrome of Indian Sociology -- 20 'Shock-proof, 'Evidence-proof, 'Argument-proof -- World of Sampradayika Scholarship of Indian Philosophy -- 21 Nyaya; Realist or Idealist: Is the Debate Ended, the -- Argument Completed? -- Appendix. (shrink)

Hermeneutyka Ramanudży (1075-1140?), indyjskiego filozofa i teologa, głównego teoretyka odłamu wedanty wiśisztadwajta, opiera się na intrygującym splocie interpretacji języka i rzeczywistości przezeń przedstawionej. W tym splocie kategorie ontologiczne wspierają interpretację treści indyjskiego objawienia (śruti), a samo objawienie jest jedynym nośnikiem prawdy o strukturze rzeczywistości transcendentnej oraz jej relacji do świata. Ramanudża jest hermeneutą, lecz jego hermeneutyka ma określony cel, to jest rozumienie i rozumiejącą interpretację objawienia, które pozwala urzeczywistnić najważniejszy cel ludzkiego życia, a mianowicie duchowe wyzwolenie. W odkrywaniu sensus spiritualis (...) indyjskiego objawienia Ramanudża operuje swoistą „ontologią rozumienia”, sterującą antycypacją i odkrywaniem tego sensu. (shrink)

The article analyzes the aspect of the subject-predicative relationship, the actualization of which is superficially associated with the development of analytical philosophy in the West. This question has an important philosophical deepening (from grammar through logic to ontology) also in the history of Indian thought. In particular, the Sanskrit term sāmānādhikaraṇya, which is commonly translated as ‘correlative predication’, has be­come an important ontological principle in one of the vedānta schools (viśiṣṭādvaita of Rāmānuja). Previously, this term is found in the grammar (...) of Panini and in the related philosophy of the Bhartirhari language In viśiṣṭādvaita, this term denotes (a) a logical and grammatical method of interpreting the sacred texts, according to which all texts of śruti, despite their inconsistency, should be considered by the interpreter as equally authori­tative; (b) the principle justifying and explaining the viśiṣṭādvaitic model of ontology; (c) and the resulting only possible paradigm of liberation of the soul (bhakti, or devo­tional love of God, which is based on karma and jñāna, as a way of salvation). The analy­sis of the material of Indian philosophy is carried out in the context of the developments of Western European philosophy, in particular, Porphyry and a number of analytical philosophers (Frege, Russell, Wittshenstein). Using the example of sāmānādhikaraṇya, a different logical model of the structure of the world is presented, which makes the on­tology proposed in viśiṣṭādvaita understandable and convincing. (shrink)

The BRAHMASUTRA of BADARAYANA represents the fundamental text of exegesis of Vedanta. The intent of Badarayana - the sage that for authority and realization of consciousness has been identified with Vyasa, the Rsi who ordered the texts of the Vedas - is that of providing the right perspective in the interpretation of the most profound and meaningful contents of the Upanisads. This had proven necessary in order to rectify some unilateral aspects propounded by several schools of thought, both orthodox and (...) non-orthodox. The Brahmasutra presents, in their simplicity and incisiveness, the assertions of the Sruti and of the Smrti, showing their concordance in the recognition of the Nirguna Brahman as the ultimate Realty. In his notes, RAPHAEL underlines the fact that Badarayana does not oppose the various philosophical schools, but the Rsi allows us to comprehend that their postulates cannot represent the ultimate Truth as expounded in the Vedas and in the Upanisads. Moreover, at times Raphael focuses on certain aspects of the Advaita Doctrine with references to the Western Tradition, and - making the relevant parallels to the philosophy of Parmenides, Plato, Plotinus, and so on - highlights the unity of the sole universal Tradition at the metaphysical level. (shrink)

A Brilliant Introduction To The Essence Of Living Hinduism The Thirteen Principal Upanisads, Sanskrit Texts In The Religious Traditions Of The Vedas, Lie At The Heart Of Hinduism. Devoted To Understanding The Inner Meaning Of The Religion, They Explicate Its Crucial Doctrines Rebirth, The Law Of Karma, The Means Of Conquering Death And Of Achieving Detachment, Equilibrium And Spiritual Bliss. They Emphasize The Perennial Search For True Knowledge Especially That Of The Connection Between The Self And The Transcendental Absolute. In (...) This Translation, Marked By Empathy And Erudition, Valerie Roebuck Approaches The Upanisads As Belonging To The Tradition Of 'Sruti', Literature Which Is Heard, As Distinct From 'Smriti', Which Is Remembered. Seeking To Reveal The Intent Of The Authors, She Attempts To Represent What, In Fact, Constitutes The Original Text. Care Is Taken To Exclude Later Accretions Of Commentaries. The Invocations Included Underline The Traditional Recitation Of These Texts, And The Literary Devices Repetitions, Dialogue And Word Combat, Riddles, Paradoxes And Word Play Used By The Sages To Express Their Teachings. This Accurate And Exceptional Rendering, While Making Accessible To The Modern Reader Something Of The Beauty And Variety Of The Original Language, Reaffirms The Place Of The Upanishads As One Of The Most Profound Works Of World Literature. This Authentic And Nuanced Rendering Makes Accessible To The Modern Reader Something Of The Beauty And Variety Of These Ancient And Rich Texts Of Hinduism. The Upanisads Belong To The Tradition Of Literature That Is Heard Rather Than Remembered , And In Her Translation Roebuck Seeks To Reveal The Intent Of The Authors And Arrive At 'The Original' Text. (shrink)

The Īśvara Gītā, translated by Andrew J. Nicholson in Lord Śiva’s Song: The Īśvara Gītā, is a quintessentially Hindu post-Vedic devotional text. Extolling Lord Śiva as the highest Truth, it sets out to establish its credentials in ways typical of the devotional traditions: it is located in one of the Purāṇas, already considered to be the fifth Veda by the time of the Chandogya Upaniṣad, thereby appropriating the paramount sacrosanctity of the Śruti tradition. It adopts the setting of Sūta’s address (...) to the sages of Naimiṣāraṇya, made famous by the Bhāgavata Purāṇa for its own outer narrative frame. It engages the great sage Vyāsa as its primary narrator, thereby invoking the cachet of the foremost authority.. (shrink)

The Book Presents An Understanding Of The Nature And Meaning Of Hinduism As Revealed In Its Sruti And Smrti Traditions, Examining Certain Essential Aspects Of The Hindu Philosophical Thinking, Such As The Meaning Of Dharma And Religion, Man S Understanding Of His Own Existence And Reality And The Hindu Conception Of The Divine.

The Vedānta philosophy has its roots in scriptural sources, specifically, in three canonical texts, viz. the Brahmasūtra-s by Bādarāyaṇa, which is called nyāya-prasthāna or tarka-prasthāna; the Upaniṣad-s, which are called the śruti-prasthāna; and the Bhagavadgītā, which is regarded as the smṛti-prasthāna. Thus, like the first two constituents of this trio, the third one has a tangible legacy of commentarial tradition; as almost all well-known advocates of the Vedānta schools have commented on these three sourcebooks. In this paper, an attempt has (...) been made to give a brief sketch of such commentarial tradition of the Bhagavadgītā, starting with its commentary by Śaṃkara to the other major commentaries available up to the 15th–16th centuries. While each of these commentaries finds support in the text for their respective philosophical doctrines, an impartial evaluation, with support of modern scholars, shows that none of the commentaries can claim to represent faithfully the true intent of the text, and that the true import of it can only be had if the text is judged from its literary and historical point of view. (shrink)

Vaisnavism in Bengal is justifiably renowned for its remarkable elaboration of the philosophy and cult of Divine Love as the essential expression of the nature of the God, Visnu-Krsna. This text, the first of six constituent parts expounding the philosophy of Bengal Vaisnavism, critically analyses the eight traditional bases of knowledge as a means of discovering the nature of Ultimate Reality. The author rejects most of the traditional pramänas as inadequate and false in providing "right cognition" of Ultimate Reality: namely, (...) perception inference, comparison, postulation, quantitative reasoning and tradition. Like both Mïmämsäka and Vedänta, he declares that, in the final analysis, only Sruti or Scripture serves as an infallible source of knowledge. But against the Vedänta of Sankara he rejects the notion that Bhagavat-Krsna, the Creator, Sustainer and Destroyer of the universe, can be fully apprehended through mystical intuition and claims that the non-phenomenal or spiritual nature of God is accessible only through devotional love and personal surrender. The devotional path to God encompasses but transcends both the paths of mystical knowledge and ascetic mortification. The highest aspect of the "power of essential selfhood" is personified in Krsna's eternally youthful consort, Rädhä. It is through the mystical realization of Ultimate Reality as the Divine Duality-in-Union as Rädhä-Krsna, that one experiences absolute Being, Consciousness and Bliss which is Brahman of the Upanisads and Vedänta. Sanskrists and students of Indian religion and philosophy will welcome the publication of this most valuable text which attempts for the first time to present the entire philosophy and theology of Gaudiya Vaisnavism of Bengal in systematic form and comprehensive manner.--J. B. L. (shrink)