Hindu Philosophy - Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia

8/19/2019 Hindu Philosophy - Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/hindu-philosophy-wikipedia-the-free-encyclopedia 1/6

Hindu philosophyFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hindu philosophy refers to a group of dar!anas (philosophies, world views, teachings)[1] that emerged in ancient India. The mainstream Hindu philosophy includes six systems ("a# dar!ana) – Samkhya, Yoga, Nyaya,

Vaisheshika, Mimamsa and Vedanta.[2] These are also called the Astika (orthodox) philosophical traditions and are those that accept the Vedas as authoritative, important source of knowledge.[3][note 1][note 2] Ancient and

medieval India was also the source of philosophies that share philosophical concepts but rejected the Vedas, and these have been called n$ stika (heterodox or non-orthodox) Indian philosophies.[2][3] N!stika Indian

philosophies include Buddhism, Jainism, C!rv!ka, " j # vika, and others.[6]

Scholars have debated the relationship and differences within !stika philosophies and with n!stika philosophies, starting with the writings of Indologists and Orientalists of the 18th and 19th centuries, which were

themselves derived from limited availability of Indian literature and medieval doxographies.[2] The various sibling traditions included in Hindu philosophies are diverse, and they are united by shared history and concepts,

same textual resources, similar ontological and soteriological focus, and cosmology.[7][8] While Buddhism and Jainism are considered distinct philosophies and religions, some heterodox traditions such as C!rv!ka are often

considered as distinct schools within Hindu philosophy.[9][10][11]

Hindu philosophy also includes several sub-schools of theistic philosophies that integrate ideas from two or more of the six orthodox philosophies, such as the realism of the Ny!ya, the naturalism of the Vai$e%ika, the

dualism of the S!&khya, the monism and knowledge of Self as essential to liberation of Advaita, the self-discipline of yoga and the asceticism and elements of theistic ideas.[12][13][14] Examples of such schools include

P!$upata 'aiva, 'aiva siddh!nta, Pratyabhijña, Rase$vara and Vai%(ava.[12][13] Some sub-schools share Tantric ideas with those found in some Buddhist traditions.[15] The ideas of these sub-schools are found in the Puranas

and "gamas.[16][17][18]

Each school of Hindu philosophy has extensive epistemological literature called pram$%a!$ stras,[19][20] as well as theories on metaphysics, axiology and other topics.[21]

Contents

1 Classifications

1.1 "stika

1.2 N!stika

1.3 Other schools

2 Characteristics

3 Overview

3.1 Epistemology

4 Samkhya

5 Yoga

6 Vai$e%ika

7 Ny!ya

8 M # m!)s!9 Ved!nta

9.1 Advaita

9 .2 Vi$i%*!dvaita

9.3 Dvaita

9.4 Dvait!dvaita (Bhedabheda)

9.5 'uddh!dvaita

9.6 Acintya Bheda Abheda

10 C!rv!ka

11 Shaivism

11 .1 P!$upata Shaivism

11.2 Shaiva Siddhanta

11.3 Kashmir Shaivism

12 See also

13 Notes

14 References

14.1 Bibliography

15 Further reading

16 External links

Classifications

Since medieval times Indian philosophy is divided by Brahmins into !stika and n!stika schools of thought.[22] In the history of Hinduism, the six orthodox schools were in existence by sometime between the start of the

Common Era and the Gupta Empire, or about the fourth century.[23] Some scholars have questioned whether the orthodox and heterodox schools classification is sufficient or accurate, given the diversity and evolution of

views within each major school of Hindu philosophy, with some sub-schools combining heterodox and orthodox views.[24]

!stika

There are six !stika (orthodox) schools of thought.[note 3] Each is called a dar$ana, and each dar$ana accepts the Vedas as authoritative and the premise that $ tman (soul, eternal self) exists.[3][25] The !stika schools are:

Samkhya, an atheistic and strongly dualist theoretical exposition of consciousness and matter.1.

Yoga, a school emphasising meditation, contemplation and liberation.2.

Ny!ya or logic, explores sources of knowledge. Ny$ ya S &tras.3.

Vai$e%ika, an empiricist school of atomism4.

M # m!)s!, an anti-ascetic and anti-mysticist school of orthopraxy5.

Ved!nta, the last segment of knowledge in the Vedas, or jñ$ nak $%# a. Ved!nta came to be the dominant current of Hinduism in the post-medieval period.6.

N"stika

Schools that do not accept the authority of the Vedas are n!stika philosophies, of which four n!stika (heterodox) schools are prominent:[6]

C!rv!ka, a materialism school that accepted free will exists[26][27]1.

" j # vika, a materialism school that denied free will exists[28][29]2.

Buddhism, a philosophy that denies existence of !tman (soul, self)[30] and is based on the teachings and enlightenment of Gautama Buddha3.Jainism, a philosophy that accepts the existence of the !tman (soul, self), and is based on the teachings and enlightenment of twenty-four teachers known as tirthankaras, with Rishabha as the first and Mahavira as the

twenty-fourth[31]

4.

Other schools

Besides the major orthodox and non-orthodox schools, there have existed syncretic sub-schools that have combined ideas and introduced new ones of their own. The medieval scholar Madhva Acharya includes the

following, along with Buddhism[32] and Jainism,[33] as sub-schools of Hindu philosophy:

Pashupata Shaivism developed by Nakulisa[34]

Shaiva Siddhanta, the theistic Sankhya school[35][36]

Pratyabhijña, the recognitive school of Kashmir Shaivism[37]

Rase$vara, a Shaiva school that advocated the use of mercury to reach immortality [38]

The Ramanuja school[39]

The P+r(apr! jña (Madhv!c!rya) school[40]

Hindu philosophy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_philos

of 6 2/26/16, 2:50



The P!(in # ya[41]

The above sub-schools introduced their own ideas while adopting concepts from orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy such as realism of the Ny!ya, naturalism of Vai$e%ika, monism and knowledge of Self (Atman) as

essential to liberation of Advaita, sel- discipline of Yoga, asceticism and elements of theistic ideas.[12] Some sub-schools share Tantric ideas with those found in some Buddhist traditions.[15]

Characteristics

School Samkhya Yoga Ny"ya Vai#e$ika M % m"&s" Advaita[N 1] Vishishtadvaita[N 1] Dvaita[N 1]Achintya

BhedaAbheda

Pashupata Shaiva

SiddhantaKashmirShaivism

Rase#vara P"'ini

Dar#ana

Classification rationalism,[42][43]

dualism, atheism

dualism,spiritualpractice

realism,[44]

logic,analytic

philosophy

naturalism,[45]

atomism

exegesis,philology,ritualism

monism,non-dualism

qualified monism,panentheism

dualism,theology

simultaneousmonism and

dualism

theism, spiritualpractice

theistic dualismtheistic

monism,idealism

alchemylinguistics,

philosophy of language

PhilosophersKapila, I$varak,%(a,

V!caspati Mi$ra,Gu(aratna more..

Patañjali,Yajnavalkya,

Vyasa[N 2]

AksapadaGautama,

V!tsy!yana,Udayana,JayantaBhattamore..

Kanada,Pra$astap!da,'ridhara's

Ny!yakandal # more..

Jaimini,Kum!rilaBha**a,

Prabh!karamore..

Gaudapada,Adi Shankara,Madhusudana

Saraswati,Vidyaranya

more..

Yamunacharya,Ramanuja more..

Madhvacharya,Jayatirtha,

Vyasatirtha,Raghavendra

Swami

ChaitanyaMahaprabhu,Six Goswamisof Vrindavana,

VisvanathaChakravarti,Krishnadasa

Kaviraja,Baladeva

Vidyabhushana,Rupa

Goswami,more..

Haradattacharya,Lakulish

Tirumular,Meikandadevar,

AppayyaDikshita,

Sadyojyoti,Aghorasiva

Vasugupta,Abhinavagupta,

Jayaratha

GovindaBhagavat,Sarvajña

R!me$vara

P!(ini,Bhart,hari,K!ty!yana

Texts

SamkhyapravachanaSutra,

Samkhyakarika,S!-khya

tattvakaumud # more..

Yoga Sutras,Yoga

Yajnavalkya,Samkhyapravacana

bhasya

Ny!yaS+tras,Ny!ya

Bh!%ya,Ny!ya

V!rttikamore..

Vai$e%ikaS+tra,

Pad!rthadharma

sa-graha,Da$apad!rtha$!stra more..

PurvaMimamsa

Sutras,Mimamsasutra

bh!shyammore..

Brahma Sutras,Prasthanatrayi,Avadhuta Gita,

AshtavakraGita, Pañcada$#

more..

Siddhitrayam, SriBhasya, Vedartha

Sangraha

AnuVyakhana,Brahma Sutra

Bahshya, SarvaSh!str!rthaSangraha,

Tattvaprakashika,

Nyaya Sudha,Nyayamruta,

Tarka Tandava,DwaitaDyumani

BhagavataPurana,

Bhagavad Gita,Sat Sandarbhas,

GovindaBhashya,Chaitanya

Charitamrita,

Ga(ak!rik!,Pañch!rtha

bh!shyadipik!,R!$ikarabh!shya

Sivagamas,Tirumurais,Meikanda

Sastras

Shiva Sutras of Vasugupta,Tantraloka

Ras!r(ava,Rasah,idaya,

Rase$varasiddh!nta

V!kyapad # ya,Mahabhashya,V!rttikak!ra

ConceptsOriginated

Purusha, Prak,ti,Gu(a, Satk!ryav!da

Yama,Niyama,Asana,

Pranayama,Pratyahara,

Dh!ra(!,Dhyana,Samadhi

Pratyak%a,Anum!na,Upam!na,

Anyathakyativada,

Ni.$reyasamore..

Pad!rtha,Dravya,

S!m!nya,Vi$e%a,

Samav!ya,Param!(u

Apauru%ey!tva,Arth!patti,

Anuapalabdhi,Satahpr!m!(ya

v!da

Jivanmukta,Mah!v!kyas,

S!dhanaChatu%*aya,

three orders of reality,

Vivartavada

Hita, Antarvy!pi,Bahuvy!pi more..

Prapacha,Mukti-yogyas,

Nitya-samsarins,

Tamo-yogyas

Sambandha,Abhidheya,Prayojana

(Relationship,

Process,Ultimate Goal)

Pashupati, eightpentads

Charya,Mantram!rga,Rodha 'akti

Citi, Mala,Upaya,

Anuttara,Aham,

Svatantrya

P!rada, threemodes of mercury

Spho*a,Ashtadhyayi

Advaita, Vishishtadvaita and Dvaita have evolved from an older Vedanta school and all of them accept Upanishads and Brahma Sutras as standard t exts.1.Vyasa wrote a commentary on the Yoga Sutras called Samkhyapravacanabhasya.(Radhankrishnan, Indian Philosophy, London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1971 edition, Volume II, p. 344.)2.

Overview

Epistemology

Epistemology is called pram!(a.[46] It is a key, much debated field of study in Hinduism since ancient times. Pram!(a is a Hindu theory of knowledge and discusses means by which human beings gain accurate

knowledge.[46] The focus of pram!(a is how correct knowledge can be acquired, how one knows, how one doesn't, and to what extent knowledge pertinent about someone or something can be acquired.[19]

Ancient and medieval Hindu texts identify six pram!(as as correct means of accurate knowledge and truths: pratyak "a (perception), anum$%a (inference), upam$%a (comparison and analogy), arth$ patti (postulation,

derivation from circumstances), anupalabdi (non-perception, negative/cognitive proof) and !abda (word, testimony of past or present reliable experts)[47] Each of these are further categorized in terms of conditionality,

completeness, confidence and possibility of error, by each school . The various schools vary on how many of these six are valid paths of knowledge.[20] For example, the C!rv!ka n!stika philosophy holds that only one

(perception) is an epistemically reliable means of knowledge,[48] the Samkhya school holds three are (perception, inference and testimony),[48] while the M # m!)s! and Advaita schools hold all six are epistemically useful

and reliable means to knowledge.[48][49]

Samkhya

Samkhya is the oldest of the orthodox philosophical systems in Hinduism,[50]

with origins in the 1st millennium BCE.[51]

It is a rationalist school of Indian philosophy,[42]

and had a strong influence on other schools of Indian philosophies.[52] S!mkhya is an enumerationist philosophy whose epistemology accepted three of six Pramanas as the only reliable means of gaining knowledge. These included Pratyak "a (perception), Anum$%a

(inference) and Sabda ( ' ptavacana, word/testimony of reliable sources).[53][48]

Samkhya school espouses dualism between consciousness and matter.[54] It regards the universe as consisting of two realities; Puru"a (consciousness) and prakriti (matter). Jiva (a living being) is that state in which puru"ais bonded to prakriti in some form.[55] This fusion, state the Samkhya scholars, led to the emergence of buddhi (awareness, intellect) and ahankara (individualized ego consciousness, “I-maker”). The universe is described

by this school as one created by Purusa-Prakriti entities infused with various permutations and combinations of variously enumerated elements, senses, feelings, activity and mind.[55]

Samkhya philosophy includes a theory of gunas (qualities, innate tendencies, psyche).[56] Guna, it states, are of three types: Sattva being good, compassionate, illuminating, positive, and constructive; Rajas guna is one of

activity, chaotic, passion, impulsive, potentially good or bad; and Tamas being the quality of darkness, ignorance, destructive, lethargic, negative. Everything, all life forms and human beings, state Samkhya scholars, have

these three gunas, but in different proportions.[57] The interplay of these gunas defines the character of s omeone or something, of nature and determines the progress of life.[58][59] Samkhya theorises a pluralism of souls

( Jeevatmas) who possess consciousness, but denies the existence of Ishvara (God).[60] Classical Samkhya is considered an atheist / non-theistic Hindu philosophy.[61][62][63]

Samkhya karika, one of the key texts of this school of Hindu philosophy, opens by stating its goal to be "three[64] kinds of human suffering" and means to prevent it.[65] The text then presents a distillation of its theories on

epistemology, metaphysics, axiology and soteriology. For example, it states,

From the triad of s uffering, arises this inquiry into the means of preventing it.

That is useless - if you say so, I say: No, because suffering is not absolute and final. – Verse 1

The Gu(as (qualities) respectively consist in pleasure, pain and dullness, are adapted to manifestation, activity and restraint; mutually domineer, rest on each other, produce each other, consort together, and are

reciprocally present. – Verse 12

Goodness is considered to be alleviating and enlightening; foulness, urgent and persisting; darkness, heavy and enveloping. Like a lamp, they cooperate for a purpose by union of contraries. – Verse 13

There is a general cause, which is diffuse. It operates by means of the three qualities, by mixture, by modification; for different objects are diversified by influence of the several qualities respectively. – Verse 16

Since the assemblage of perceivable objects is for use (by man); Since the converse of that which has the three qualities with other properties must exist (in man); Since there must be superintendence (within

man); Since there must be some entity that enjoys (within man); Since there is a tendency to abstraction (in man), therefore soul is. – Verse 17

—!Samkhya karika, [65][66]

The soteriology in Samkhya aims at the realization of Puru%a as distinct from Prakriti, this knowledge of the Self is held to end transmigration and lead to absolute freedom (kaivalya).[67]

Yoga

In Indian philosophy, Yoga is among other things, the name of one of the six !stika philosophical schools.[68] The Yoga philosophical system is closely allied with the dualism premises of Samkhya school. [69][70] The Yoga

school accepts the Samkhya psychology and metaphysics, but is considered theistic because it accepts the concept of "personal god", unlike Samkhya.[71][72][73] The epistemology of the Yoga school, like the S!mkhya

school, relies on three of six pr!ma(as as the means of gaining reliable knowledge:[48] pratyak "a (perception), anum$%a (inference) and !abda ($ ptavacana, word/testimony of reliable sources).[49][48]


of 6 2/26/16, 2:50



The universe is conceptualized as a duality in Yoga school: puru%a (consciousness) and prak,ti (matter); however, the Yoga school discusses this concept more generically as "seer, experiencer" and "seen, experienced" than

the Samkhya school.[74]

A key text of the Yoga school is the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. Patanjali may have been, as Max Müller explains, "the author or representative of the Yoga-philosophy without being necessarily the author of the Sutras."[75]

Hindu philosophy recognizes many types of Yoga, such as r! ja yoga, jnana yoga,[76] karma yoga, bhakti yoga, tantra yoga, mantra yoga, laya yoga, and hatha yoga. [77]

The Yoga school builds on the Samkhya school theory that jñ!na (knowledge) is a sufficient means to moksha. It suggests that systematic techniques/practice (personal experimentation) combined with Samkhya's approach

to knowledge is the path to moksha.[69] Yoga shares several central ideas with Advaita Vedanta, with the difference that Yoga is a form of experimental mysticism while Advaita Vedanta is a form of monistic personalism.[78][79][80] Like Advaita Vedanta, the Yoga school of Hindu philosophy states that liberation/freedom in this life is achievable, and this occurs when an individual fully understands and realizes the equivalence of Atman

(soul, self) and Brahman.[81][82]

Vai#e$ika

The Vai$e%ika philosophy is a naturalist school;[45]

it is a form of atomism in natural philosophy.[83]

It postulated that all objects in the physical universe are reducible to param$%u (atoms), and one's experiences are derivedfrom the interplay of substance (a function of atoms, their number and their spatial arrangements), quality, activity, commonness, particularity and inherence.[84] Knowledge and liberation was achievable by complete

understanding of the world of experience, according to Vai$e%ika school .[84] The Vai$e%ika dar$ana is credited to Ka(!da Ka$yapa from the second half of the first millennium BCE.[84][85] The foundational text, the

Vai!e"ika S &tra, opens as follows,

Dharma is that from which results the accomplishment of Exaltation and of the Supreme Good. The authoritativeness of the Veda arises from its being an exposition of dharma. The Supreme Good results from

knowledge, produced from a particular dharma, of the essence of the Predicables, Substance, Attribute, Action, Genus, Species and Combination, by means of their resemblances and differences.

—!Vai$e%ika S+tra 1.1.1-1.1.4, [86]

The Vai$e%ika school is related to the Ny!ya school but features differences in its epistemology, metaphysics and ontology.[87] The epistemology of the Vai$e%ika school, like Buddhism, accepted only two reliable means to

knowledge - perception and inference.[49][88] The Vai$e%ika school and Buddhism both consider their respective scriptures as indisputable and valid means to knowledge, the difference being that the scriptures held to be a

valid and reliable source by Vai$e%ikas were the Vedas.[49][89]

Vai$e%ika metaphysical premises are founded on a form of atomism, that the reality is composed of four substances (earth, water, air, fire). Each of these four are of two types:[83] atomic (param!(u) and composite. An atom

is, according to Vai$e%ika scholars, that which is indestructible (anitya), indivisible, and has a special kind of dimension, called “small” (a(u). A composite, in this philosophy, is defined to be anything which is divisible into

atoms. Whatever human beings perceive is composite, while atoms are invisible.[83] The Vai$e%ikas stated that size, form, truths and everything that human beings experience as a whole is a function of atoms, their number

and their spatial arrangements, their gu(a (quality), karma (activity), s$ m$ nya (commonness), vi!e"a (particularity) and amav$ ya (inherence, inseparable connectedness of everything).[84][90]

Ny"ya

The Ny!ya school is a realist !stika philosophy.[91][92] This school's most s ignificant contributions to Indian philosophy was systematic development of the theory of logic, methodology, and its treatises on epistemology.[93][94] The foundational text of Ny!ya school is the Ny!ya S+tras of the first millennium BCE. It is credited to Aksapada Gautama and variously dated to have been composed somewhere from the sixth century to the

second century BCE.[95][85]

Ny!ya epistemology accepts four out of six pr$ ma%as as reliable means of gaining knowledge – pratyak "a (perception), anum$%a (inference), upam$%a (comparison and analogy) and !abda (word, testimony of past or

present reliable experts).[48][96][47]

In its metaphysics, Ny!ya school is closer to the Vai$e%ika school than others.[91] It holds that human suffering results from mistakes/defects produced by activity under wrong knowledge (notions and ignorance).[97] Moksha

(liberation), it states, is gained through right knowledge. This premise led Ny!ya to concern itself with epistemology, that is the reliable means to gain correct knowledge and to remove wrong notions. False knowledge is not

merely ignorance to Naiyayikas, it includes delusion. Correct knowledge is discovering and overcoming one's delusions, and understanding true nature of soul, self and reality.[98] The Ny!ya S+tras begin:

Perception, Inference, Comparison and Word – these are the means of right knowledge.

Perception is that knowledge which arises from the contact of a sense with its object and which is determinate, unnameable and non-erratic.

Inference is knowledge which is preceded by perception, and is of three kinds: a priori, a posteriori, and commonly seen.

Comparison is the knowledge of a thing through its similarity to another thing previously well known.

Word is the instructive assertion of a reliable person.

It [knowledge] is of two kinds: that which is seen, and that which is not seen.

Soul, body, senses, objects of senses, intellect, mind, activity, fault, transmigration, fruit, suffering and release – are the objects of right knowledge.

—!Ny!ya S+tras 1.1.3-1.1.9, [99]

M % m"&s"The M # m!)s! school emphasized hermeneutics and exegesis.[100][101] It is a form of philosophical realism.[102] Key texts of the M # m!)s! school are the Purva Mimamsa Sutras of Jaimini.[103][104] The classical M # m!)s!school is sometimes referred to as p&rvam( m$)s$ or Karmam( m$)s$ in reference to the first part of the Vedas.[103]

The M # m!)s! school has several subschools defined by epistemology. The Pr!bh!kara subschool of M # m!)s! considered five epistemically reliable means to gaining knowledge: pratyak "a (perception), anum$%a

(inference), upam$%a (comparison and analogy), arth$ patti (postulation, derivation from circumstances), and !abda (word, testimony of past or present reliable experts).[96][47] The Kum!rila Bha**a sub-school of M # m!)s!added sixth to its canon of reliable epistemology - anupalabdi (non-perception, negative/cognitive proof).[48]

The metaphysics in M # m!)s! school consists of both atheistic and theistic doctrines and the school showed little interest in systematic examination of the existence of God. Rather, it held that the soul is eternal omnipresent,

inherently active spiritual essence, then focussed on the epistemology and metaphysics of dharma.[103][105][106] To them, dharma meant rituals and duties, not devas (gods), because devas existed only in name. [103] The

M # m!)s!kas held that the Vedas are "eternal authorless infallible", that Vedic vidhi (injunctions) and mantras in rituals are prescriptive karya (actions), and the rituals are of primary importance and merit. They considered

the Upanishads and other self-knowledge, spirituality-related texts to be of secondary importance, a philosophical view that the Vedanta school disagreed with.[100][103]

M # m!)s! gave rise to the study of philology and the philosophy of language.[107] While their deep analysis of language and linguistics influenced other schools,[108] their views were not shared by others. M # m!)s!kas

considered the purpose and power of language was to clearly prescribe the proper, correct and right. In contrast, Vedantins extended the scope and value of language as a tool to also describe , develop and derive.[103]

M # m!)s!kas considered orderly, law-driven, procedural life as central purpose and noblest necessity of dharma and s ociety, and divine (theistic) sustenance means to that end. The Mimamsa school was influential and

foundational to the Vedanta school, with the difference that M # m!)s! school developed and emphasized karmak $%# a (that part of the $ruti which relates to ceremonial acts and sacrificial rites, the early parts of the Vedas),

while the Vedanta school developed and emphasized jñ$ nak $%# a (that portion of the Vedas which relates to knowledge of monism, the latter parts of the Vedas).[100]

Ved"nta

The Ved!nta school built upon the teachings of the Upanishads and Brahma Sutras from the first millennium BCE[85][109] and is the most developed and well-known of the Hindu schools. The epistemology of the Vedantins

included, depending on the sub-school, five or six methods as proper and reliable means of gaining any form of knowledge:[89] pratyak "a (perception), anum$%a (inference), upam$%a (comparison and analogy), arth$ patti

(postulation, derivation from circumstances),anupalabdi (non-perception, negative/cognitive proof) and !abda (word, testimony of past or present reliable experts).[49][48][47] Each of these have been further categorized in

terms of conditionality, completeness, confidence and possibility of error, by each sub-school of Vedanta.[89]

The emergence of Vedanta school represented a period when a more knowledge-centered understanding began to emerge. These focussed on jnana (knowledge) driven aspects of the Vedic religion and the Upanishads. This

included metaphysical concepts such as !tman and Brahman, and emphasized meditation, self-discipline, self-knowledge and abstract spirituality, rather than ritualism. The Upanishads were variously interpreted by ancient

and medieval era Vedanta scholars. Consequently, the Vedanta separated into many sub-schools, ranging from theistic dualism to non-theistic monism, each interpreting the texts in its own way and producing its own series

of s ub-commentaries.[110][111]

Advaita

Advaita literally means "not two, sole, unity". It is a sub-school of Vedanta, and asserts spiritual and universal non-dualism.[112][113] Its metaphysics is a form of absolute monism, that is all ultimate reality is interconnected

oneness.[114][115] This is the oldest and most widely acknowledged Vedantic school. The foundational texts of this school are the Brahma Sutras and the early Upanishads from the 1st millennium BCE.[114] Its first great


of 6 2/26/16, 2:50



consolidator was the 8th century scholar Adi Shankara, who continued the line of thought of the Upanishadic teachers, and that of his teacher's teacher Gaudapada. He wrote extensive commentaries on the major Vedantic

scriptures and is celebrated as one of the major Hindu philosophers from whose doctrines the main currents of modern Indian thought are derived.[116]

According to this school of Vedanta, all reality is Brahman, and there exists nothing whatsoever which is not Brahman.[117] Its metaphysics includes the concept of m!y! and !tman. M!y! connotes "that which exists, but is

constantly changing and thus is spiritually unreal".[118] The empirical reality is considered as always changing and therefore "transitory, incomplete, misleading and not what it appears to be".[119][120][121] The concept of

!tman is of soul, self within each person, each living being. Advaita Vedantins assert that !tman is same as Brahman, and this Brahman is within each human being and all life, all living beings are spiritually interconnected,

and there is oneness in all of existence.[122][123] They hold that dualities and misunderstanding of m$ y$ as the spiritual reality that matters is caused by ignorance, and are the cause of sorrow, suffering. J # vanmukti (liberation

during life) can be achieved through Self-knowledge, the understanding that !tman within is same as !tman in another person and all of Brahman – the eternal, unchanging, entirety of cosmic principles and true reality.[124][123]

Vi#i$("dvaita

Ramanuja(c. 1037–1137) was the foremost proponent of the philosophy of Vi$i%*!dvaita or qualified non-dualism. Vi$i%*!dvaita advocated the concept of a Supreme Being with essential qualities or attributes. Vi$i%*!dvaitins

argued against the Advaitin conception of Brahman as an impersonal empty oneness. They saw Brahman as an eternal oneness, but also as the source of all creation, which was omnipresent and actively involved in

existence. To them the sense of subject-object perception was illusory and a sign of ignorance. However, the individual's sense of self was not a complete illusion since it was derived from the universal beingness that is

Brahman.[125] Ramanuja saw Vishnu as a personification of Brahman.

Dvaita

Dvaita Vedanta (dualistic conclusions of the Vedas) was founded by Madhvacharya (c. 1238–1317 CE). It espouses dualism by theorising the existence of two separate realities. The first and the more important reality is that

of Brahman (as Vishnu, Shiva, Shakti, or any henotheistic equivalent deity). Vishnu is the supreme Self, God, the absolute truth of the universe, the independent reality. The second reality is that of dependent but equally real

universe that exists with its own separate essence. Everything that is composed of the second reality, such as individual soul (Jiva), matter, etc. exist with their own separate reality. The distinguishing factor of this

philosophy as opposed to Advaita Vedanta (a monistic conclusion of Vedas) is that God in Dvaita school is distinct and separate, takes on a role and is seen as a real eternal entity that governs and controls the universe.[126]

Five further distinctions are made— (1) Brahman is distinct from souls; (2) Brahman is distinct from matter; (3) Souls are distinct from matter; (4) A soul is distinct from another soul, and (5) Matter is distinct from other

matter. Souls are eternal and are dependent upon the will of Brahman. This theology attempts to address the problem of evil with the idea that souls are not created. Because the existence of individuals is grounded in the

divine, they are depicted as reflections, images or even shadows of the divine, but never in any way identical with the divine. Salvation therefore is described as the realisation that all finite reality is essentially dependent on

the Supreme.[127]

Dvait"dvaita (Bhedabheda)

Dvait!dvaita was proposed by Nimbarka, a 13th-century Vaishnava Philosopher from the Andhra region. According to this philosophy there are three categories of existence: Brahman, soul, and matter. Soul and matter are

different from Brahman in that they have attributes and capacities different from Brahman. Brahman exists independently, while soul and matter are dependent. Thus soul and matter have an existence that is separate yet

dependent. Further, Brahman is a controller, the soul is the enjoyer, and matter the thing enjoyed. Also, the highest object of worship is Krishna and his consort Radha, attended by thousands of gopis; of the Vrindavan; and

devotion consists in self-surrender.

)uddh"dvaita

'uddh!dvaita is the "purely non-dual" philosophy propounded by Vallabha Acharya (1479–1531). The founding philosopher was also the guru of the Vallabh! samprad!ya ("tradition of Vallabh") or Pu"* im$ rga, a Vaishnava

tradition focused on the worship of Krishna.

Acintya Bheda Abheda

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (1486–1534), stated that the soul or energy of God is both distinct and non-distinct from God, whom he identified as Krishna, Govinda, and that this, although unthinkable, may be experienced

through a process of loving devotion (bhakti). He followed the Dvaita concept of Madhvacharya.[128] This philosophy of "inconceivable oneness and difference".

C"rv"ka

The C!rv!ka school is one of the n!stika or "heterodox" philosophies .[129][10][130] It rejects supernaturalism, emphasizes materialism and philosophical skepticism, holding empiricism, perception and conditional inference

as the proper source of knowledge[131][132] C!rv!ka is an atheistic school of thought.[133] It holds that there is neither afterlife nor rebirth, all existence is mere combination of atoms and substances, feelings and mind are an

epiphenomenon, and free will exists.[26]<[27]

B,haspati is sometimes referred to as the founder of C!rv!ka (also called Lokayata) philosophy. Much of the primary literature of Carvaka, the Barhaspatya sutras (ca. 600 BCE), however, are missing or lost.[133][134] Its

theories and development has been compiled from historic secondary literature such as those found in the shastras, sutras and the Indian epic poetry as well as from the texts of Buddhism and from Jain literature.[133][135][136]

One of the widely studied principles of C!rv!ka philosophy was its rejection of inference as a means to establish valid, universal knowledge, and metaphysical truths.[137] In other words, the C!rv!ka epistemology states that

whenever one infers a truth from a set of observations or truths, one must acknowledge doubt; inferred knowledge is conditional.[138]

Shaivism

Early history of Shaivism is difficult to determine.[139] However, the 'vet!$vatara Upanishad (400 – 200 BCE)[140] is considered to be the earliest textual exposition of a systematic philosophy of Shaivism.[141] Shaivism is

represented by various philosophical schools, including non-dualist (abheda), dualist (bheda), and non-dualist-with-dualist (bhed $ bheda) perspectives. Vidyaranya in his works mentions three major schools of Shaiva

thought— Pashupata Shaivism, Shaiva Siddhanta and Pratyabhijña (Kashmir Shaivism).[142]

P"#upata Shaivism

P!$upata Shaivism (P$!upata, "of Pa$upati") is the oldest of the major Shaiva schools.[143] The philosophy of Pashupata sect was systematized by Lakulish in the 2nd century CE. Pa!u in Pa$upati refers to the effect (or

created world), the word designates that which is dependent on something ulterior. Whereas, Pati means the cause (or principium), the word designates the Lord, who is the cause of the universe, the pati, or the ruler.[144]

Pashupatas disapproved of Vaishnava theology, known for its doctrine servitude of souls to the Supreme Being, on the grounds that dependence upon anything could not be the means of cessation of pain and other desired

ends. They recognised that those depending upon another and longing for independence will not be emancipated because they still depend upon something other than themselves. According to P!$upatas, soul possesses the

attributes of the Supreme Deity when it becomes liberated from the 'germ of every pain'.[145]

P!$upatas divided the created world into the insentient and the sentient. The insentient was the unconscious and thus dependent on the sentient or conscious. The insentient was further divided into effects and causes. The

effects were of ten kinds, the earth, four elements and their qualities, colour etc. The causes were of thirteen kinds, the five organs of cognition, the five organs of action, the three internal organs, intellect, the ego principle

and the cognising principle. These insentient causes were held responsible for the illusive identification of Self with non-Self. Salvation in P!$upata involved the union of the soul with God through the intellect.[146]

Shaiva Siddhanta

Considered normative Tantric Shaivism, Shaiva Siddhanta[147][148] provides the normative rites, cosmology and theological categories of Tantric Shaivism.[149] Being a dualistic philosophy, the goal of Shaiva Siddhanta isto become an ontologically distinct Shiva (through Shiva's grace).[150] This tradition later merged with the Tamil Saiva movement and expression of concepts of Shaiva Siddhanta can be seen in the bhakti poetry of the

Nayanars.[151]

Kashmir Shaivism

Kashmir Shaivism arose during the eighth[152] or ninth century CE[153] in Kashmir and made significant strides, both philosophical and theological, until the end of the twelfth century CE.[154] It is categorised by various

scholars as monistic[155] idealism (absolute idealism, theistic monism, realistic idealism,[156] transcendental physicalism or concrete monism[156]). It is a school of 'aivism consisting of Trika and its philosophical

articulation Pratyabhijña.[157]

Even though, both Kashmir Shaivism and Advaita Vedanta are non-dual philosophies which give primacy to Universal Consciousness (Chit or Brahman),[158] in Kashmir Shavisim, as opposed to Advaita, all things are a

manifestation of this Consciousness.[159] This implies that from the point of view of Kashmir Shavisim, the phenomenal world (+ akti) is real, and it exists and has its being in Consciousness (Chit ).[160] Whereas, Advaita

holds that Brahman is inactive (ni"kriya) and the phenomenal world is an illusion (m$ y$ ).[161] The objective of human life, according to Kashmir Shaivism, is to merge in Shiva or Universal Consciousness, or to realize

one's already existing identity with Shiva, by means of wisdom, yoga and grace.[162]


of 6 2/26/16, 2:50



See also

"stika and n!stika

Buddhism and Hinduism

Buddhist philosophy

Hindu idealism

Pramana

Indian philosophy

Kashmir Shaivism

Metaphilosophy

Dharma

Asrama

Vedas

Notes

M Chadha (2015), in The Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Phil osophy of Religion, states that Vedas were knowledge source but interpreted differently by different schools of Hindu philosophy: "The sacred texts of the Hindus, theVedas, are variously interpreted by the six traditional Hindu philosophical schools. Even within a single school, philosophers disagree on the import of Vedic statements. (...) Hindu intellectual traditions must be understood as standing f or thecollection of philosophical views that share a textual connection. There is no single, comprehensive philosophical doctrine shared by all i ntellectual traditions in Hinduism that distinguishes their view from other Indian religions such as

Buddhism or Jainism on issues of epistemology, metaphysics, logic, ethics or cosmology. The Vedas are regarded as Apauruseya, but by the same token, they are not the Word of God either.[4]

1.

Elisa Freschi (2012): The Vedas are not deontic authorities in absolute sense and may be disobeyed, but are recognized as an epistemic authority by an orthodox school of Hindu philosophy;[5] (Note: This differentiation between epistemicand deontic authority is true for all Indian religions)

2.

For an overview of the six orthodox schools, with detail on the grouping of schools, see: Radhakrishnan and Moore, "Contents", and pp. 453–487.3.

References

Soken Sanskrit, darzana (http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?tinput=darzana&direction=SE&script=HK&link=yes&beginning=0)

1.

Andrew Nicholson (2013), Unifying Hinduism: Philosophy and Identit yin Indian Intellectual History, Columbia University Pr ess, ISBN978-0231149877, pages 2-5

2.

Klaus Klostermaier (2007), Hinduism: A Beginner's Guide, ISBN978-1851685387, Chapter 2, page 26

3.

M Chadha (2015), The Routledge Handbook of ContemporaryPhilosophy of Religion (Editor: Graham Oppy), Routledge, ISBN978-1844658312, pages 127-128

4.

Elisa Freschi (2012), Duty, Language and Exegesis in PrabhakaraMimamsa, BRILL, ISBN 978-9004222601, page 62

5.

P Bilimoria (2000), Indian Philosophy (Editor: Roy Perrett), Routledge,ISBN 978-1135703226, page 88

6.

Frazier, Jessica (2011). The Continuum companion to Hindu studies.London: Continuum. pp. 1–15. ISBN 978-0-8264-9966-0.

7.

Carl Olson (2007), The Many Colors of Hinduism: A Thematic-historicalIntroduction, Rutgers University Press, ISBN 978-0813540689, pages

101-119

8.

R Thomas (2014), Hindu Perspectives on Evolution: Darwin, Dharma,and Design. Sociology of Religion, Vol. 75, No. 1, pages 164-165,Quote: "some of the ancient Hindu traditions like Carvaka have a richtradition of materialism, in general, other schools..."

9.

KN Tiwari (1998), Classical Indian Ethical Thought, Motilal Banarsidass,ISBN 978-8120816077, page 67; Quote: "Of the three heterodoxsystems, the remaining one, the C!rv!ka system, is a Hindu system.";

10.

V.V. Raman (2012), Hinduism and Science: Some Reflections, Zygon -Journal of Religion and Science, 47(3): 549–574, Quote (page 557):"Aside from nontheistic schools like the Samkhya, there have also beenexplicitly atheistic schools in the Hindu tradition. One virulentlyanti-supernatural system is/was the so-called Carvaka school.",doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01274.x ( https://dx.doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1467-9744.2012.01274.x)Bill Cooke (2005), Dictionary of Atheism, Skepticism, and Humanism,ISBN 978-1591022992, page 84;For a general discussion of C!rv!ka and other atheistic traditions withinHindu philosophy, see Jessica Frazier (2014), Hinduism in The OxfordHandbook of Atheism (Editors: Stephen Bullivant, Michael Ruse),Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199644650, pages 367-378

11.

Klaus K. Klostermaier (1984), Mythologies and Philosophies of Salvationin the Theistic Traditions of India, Wilfrid Laurier University Press, ISBN978-0889201583, pages 124-134, 164-173, 242-265

12.

Flood 1996, pp. 132-136, 162-169, 231-232.13.Teun Goudriaan and Sanjukta Gupta (1981), Hindu Tantric and '!ktaLiterature, A History of Indian Literature, Volume 2, Otto Harrassowitz

Verlag, ISBN 978-3447020916, pages 7-14

14.

Klaus K. Klostermaier (1984), Mythologies and Philosophies of Salvationin the Theistic Traditions of India, Wilfrid Laurier University Press, ISBN978-0889201583, pages 219-223

15.

Klaus K. Klostermaier (1984), Mythologies and Philosophies of Salvationin the Theistic Traditions of India, Wilfrid Laurier University Press, ISBN978-0889201583, pages 28-35

16.

Jayandra Soni (1990), Philosophical Anthropology in 'aiva Siddh!nta,Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, ISBN 978-8120806320, pages vii-xii

17.

Hilko Schomerus and Humphrey Palme (2000), 'aiva Siddh!nta: AnIndian School of Mystical Thought, Motil al Banarsidass Publishers,ISBN 978-8120815698, pages 13-19

18.

Potter 1991, p. 172.19.Guttorm Fløistad 1993, p. 137-154.20.Karl H. Potter ( 1961), A Fresh Classification of India's PhilosophicalSystems (http://www.jstor.org/stable/2050985), The Journal of AsianStudies, Vol. 21, No. 1, pages 25-32

21.

Nicholson 2010.22.Students' Britannica India (2000), Volume 4, Encyclopedia Britannica,ISBN 978-0852297605, page 316

23.

Potter 1991, p. 98-102.24.John Plott, James Dolin and Russell Hatton (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Axial Age, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN978-8120801585, pages 60-62

25.

R Bhattacharya (2011), Studies on the Carvaka/Lokayata, Anthem, ISBN978-0857284334, pages 53, 94, 141-142

26.

>Johannes Bronkhorst (2012), Free will and Indian philosophy,

Antiqvorvm Philosophia: An International Journal, Roma I taly, Volume 6,pages 19-30

27.

James Lochtefeld, "Ajivika", The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hi nduism,Vol. 1: A–M, Rosen Publishing. ISBN 978-0823931798, page 22

28.

AL Basham (2009), History and Doctrines of the Ajivikas - a VanishedIndian Religion, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120812048, Chapter 1

29.

Steven Collins (1994), Religion and Practical Reason (Editor s: FrankReynolds, David Tracy), State Univ of New York Press, ISBN978-0791422175, page 64; Quote: "Central to Buddhist soteriology is thedoctrine of not-self (Pali: anatt!, Sanskrit: an!tman, the opposed doctrineof !tman is central to Brahmanical t hought). Put very briefly, this is the[Buddhist] doctrine that human beings have no soul, no self, nounchanging essence.";John C. Plott et al (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Axial Age,Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120801585, page 63, Quote:"The Buddhist schools reject any "tman concept. As we have alreadyobserved, this is the basic and ineradicable distinction between Hinduismand Buddhism"KN Jayatilleke (2010), Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, ISBN978-8120806191, pages 246–249, from note 385 onwards;Katie Javanaud (2013), Is The Buddhist 'No-Self' Doctrine CompatibleWith Pursuing Nir vana? (https://philosophynow.org/issues/97/Is_The_Buddhist_No-Self_Doctrine_Compatible_With_Pursuing_Nirvana), Philosophy Now(2013, Subscription Required);

30.

Paul Dundas (2002), The Jains, 2nd Edition, Routledge, ISBN978-0415266055, pages 1-19, 40-44

31.

Cowell and Gough (1882, Translators), The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha orReview of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy (https://archive.org/stream/Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha.by.Madhavacharya-Vidyaranya.tr.by.E.B.Cowell#page/n21/mode/2up) by Madhva Acharya,Trubner's Oriental Series, pages 12-35

32.


33.


34.


35.

King 2007, p. 45.36.Cowell and Gough (1882, Translators), The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha orReview of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy (https://archive.org/stream/Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha.by.Madhavacharya-Vidyaranya.tr.by.E.B.Cowell#page/n137/mode/2up) by Madhva Acharya,

Trubner's Oriental Series, pages 128-136

37.


38.


39.


40.


41.

Mike Burley (2012), Classical Samkhya and Yoga - An IndianMetaphysics of Experience, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415648875, pages43-46

42.

Tom Flynn and Richard Dawkins (2007), The New Encyclopedia of Unbelief, Prometheus, ISBN 978-1591023913, pages 420-421

43.

Nyaya Realism (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/perception-india/), in

Perceptual Experience and Concepts in Cl assical Indian Philosophy,Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2015)

44.

Dale Riepe (1996), Naturalistic Tradition in Indian Thought, ISBN978-8120812932, pages 227-246

45.

Lochtefeld 2002, p. 520-521.46.Flood 1996, p. 225.47.Grimes 1989, p. 238.48.Perrett 2000, pp. 245-248.49.Flood 1996, pp. 232.50.Sharma, C. (1997). A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, Delhi: MotilalBanarsidass, ISBN 81-208-0365-5, p.149

51.

Roy Perrett, Indian Ethics: Classical t raditions and contemporarychallenges, Volume 1 (Editor: P Bilimoria et al), Ashgate, ISBN978-0754633013, pages 149-158

52.

Eliott Deutsche (2000), in Philosophy of Religion : Indian Philosophy Vol4 (Editor: Roy Perrett), Routledge, ISBN 978-0815336112, pages245-248

53.

Michaels, Axel (2004), Hinduism: Past and Present , Princeton UniversityPress, p. 264, ISBN 0-691-08953-1

54.

Samkhya - Hinduism (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/520526/Samkhya) Encyclopedia Britannica (2014)

55.

Gerald James Larson (2011), Classical S!)khya: An Interpretation of ItsHistory and Meaning, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120805033, pages154-206

56.

James G. Lochtefeld, Guna, in The Il lustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism:A-M, Vol. 1, Rosen Publishing, ISBN 9780823931798, page 265

57.

T Bernard (1999), Hindu Philosophy, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN978-81-208-1373-1, pages 74–76

58.

Haney, William S., Culture and Consciousness: Literature Regained,Bucknell University Press (1 August 2002). P. 42. ISBN 1611481724.

59.

Dasgupta, Surendranath (1992). A history of Indian philosophy, Volume 1.Motilal Banarsidass Publ. p. 258. ISBN 978-81-208-0412-8.

60.

Mike Burley (2012), Classical Samkhya and Yoga - An IndianMetaphysics of Experience, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415648875, page 39

61.

Lloyd Pflueger (2008), Person Purity and Power i n Yogasutra, in Theoryand Practice of Yoga (Editor: Knut Jacobsen), Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN

978-8120832329, pages 38-39

62.

John C. Plott et al (1984), Global History of Philosophy: The period of scholasticism, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-0895816788, page 367

63.

adhyatmika, adhibhautika and adhidaivika - that is, suffering causedinternally by self, cause by other human beings, caused by acts of nature

64.

Samkhya karika (http://www.kouroo.info/kouroo/transclusions/18/37/1837_SankhyaKarikaHTColebrook.pdf) by Iswara Krishna, HenryColebrooke (Translator), Oxford University Press

65.

Original Sanskrit: Samkhya karika (http:// sanskritdocuments.org/doc_z_misc_major_works/IshvarakRiShNasAnkyakArikA.pdf)Compiled and indexed by Ferenc Ruzsa (2015), Sanskrit DocumentsArchives;Second Translation (Verse 1): Ferenc Ruzsa (1997), [The triple suffering -A note on the Samkhya karika, Xth World Sanskrit Conference:Bangalore, University of Hungary, Budapest;Third Translation (all Verses): Samkhyakarika of Iswara Krishna(https://archive.org/stream/hinduphilosophys00davi#page/12/mode/2up)John Davis (Translator), Trubner, London, University of TorontoArchives

66.

Larson, Gerald James. Classical S!)khya: An Interpretation of ItsHistory and Meaning. Motilal Banarasidass, 1998. P. 13. ISBN81-208-0503-8.

67.

For a brief overview of the Yoga school of philosophy see: Chatterjee andDatta, p. 43.

68.

Edwin Bryant (2011, Rutgers University), The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali(http://www.iep.utm.edu/yoga/) IEP

69.

Chatterjee and Datta, p. 43.70.

Radhakrishnan, S.; Moore, CA (1967). A Sourcebook in IndianPhilosophy. Princeton. p. 453. ISBN 0-691-01958-4.

71.

Müller (1899), Chapter 7, "Yoga Philosophy", p. 104.72.Zimmer, Heinrich (1951). Philosophies of India. New York City:Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-01758-1. Bollingen SeriesXXVI; Edited by Joseph Campbell, page 280

73.

Mike Burley (2012), Classical Samkhya and Yoga - An IndianMetaphysics of Experience, Routledge, I SBN 978-0415648875, pagesx-xi, 101-107, 142 and Introduction chapter

74.

Max Müeller, The six systems of Indian phil osophy (https://archive.org/stream/sixsystemsofindi00mulliala#page/410/mode/2up), Longmans,page 410

75.

The Encyclopedia of Yoga and Tantra by Georg Feuerstein76.The Encyclopedia of Yoga and Tantra, Georg Feuerstein77.Phillips, Stephen H. (1995). Classical Indian Metaphysics: Refutations of Realism and the Emergence of "New Logic". Open Court Publishing.pp. 12–13.

78.

Personalism (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/personalism/) StanfordEncyclopedia of Philosophy (2013)

79.

Northrop Frye (2006), Educated Imagination and Other Writings onCritical Theory, 1933-1962, University of Toronto Press, ISBN978-0802092090, page 291

80.

Mike McNamee and William J. Morgan (2015), Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415829809, pages 135-136,Quote: "As a dualistic philosophy largely congruent with Samkhya'smetaphysics, Yoga seeks liberation through the realization that Atmanequals Brahman; it involves a cosmogonic dualism: purusha an absolute

consciousness, and prakriti original and primeval matter."

81.

Mike Burley (2012), Classical Samkhya and Yoga - An IndianMetaphysics of Experience, Routledge, I SBN 978-0415648875, pages141-142

82.

Analytical philosophy in early modern India (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/early-modern-india/#VaiAto) J Ganeri, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

83.

Oliver Leaman, Key Concepts in Eastern Philosophy. Routledge, ISBN978-0415173629, 1999, page 269.

84.

Michael Brannigan (2009), Striking a Balance: A Primer in TraditionalAsian Values, Rowman & Littlefield, ISBN 978-0739138465, page 7

85.


of 6 2/26/16, 2:50



Wikimedia Commons has

media related to Hindu

philosophy.

Original Sanskrit and Translation: The Vaisheshika Sutra of Kanada withthe Commentary of Sankara Misra (htt ps://archive.org/stream/thevaiasesikasut00kanauoft#page/4/mode/2up) BD Basu (Translator),The Sacred Books of the Hindus, Volume 6, University of TorontoArchives;For modern translations and a history of the Vai$e%ika S+tra in the 1stmillennium BCE, see: Stephen H. Phillips (1998), Classical IndianMetaphysics, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120814899, pages 38-54

86.

DPS Bhawuk (2011), Spirituality and Indian Psychology (Editor:Anthony Marsella), Springer, ISBN 978-1-4419-8109-7, pages 172-175

87.

Grimes 1989, p. 225.88.P Bilimoria (1993), Pram!(a epistemology: Some recent developments,in Asian philosophy - Volume 7 (Editor: G Floistad), Springer, ISBN978-94-010-5107-1, pages 137-154

89.

M Hiriyanna (1993), Outlines of Indian Philosophy, Motilal Banarsidass,ISBN 978-8120810860, pages 228-237

90.

Nyaya: Indian Philosophy (http:// www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic

/423058/Nyaya) Encyclopedia Britannica (2014)

91.

Flood 1996, pp. 221-227.92.B Gupta (2012), An Intr oduction to Indian Philosophy: Perspectives onReality, Knowledge and Freedom, Routledge, I SBN 978-0415800037,pages 171-189

93.

PT Raju (1985), Structural Depths of Indian Thought: Toward aConstructive Postmodern Ethics, State University of New York Press,ISBN 978-0887061394, page 223

94.

B. K. Matilal "Perception. An Essay on Classical Indian Theories of Knowledge" (Oxford University Press, 1986), p. xiv.

95.

DPS Bhawuk (2011), Spirituality and Indian Psychology (Editor:Anthony Marsella), Springer, ISBN 978-1-4419-8109-7, page 172

96.

Vassilis Vitsaxis (2009), Thought and Faith, Somerset Hall Press, ISBN978-1935244042, page 131

97.

BK Matilal (1997), Logic, Language and Reality: Indian Philosophy andContemporary Issues, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120807174, pages353-357

98.

Original Sanskrit and Translation: The Nyaya Sutras of Gotama(https://archive.org/stream/NyayaSutra/nyaya_sutras_of_gautama#page/n25/mode/2up) SC Vidyabhusana (Translator), The BhuvaneswariAshrama, University of Toronto Archives; A 1990 print is available fromMotilal Banarsidass Publishers, ISBN 978-8120807488 (Editor: N Si nha)

99.

Oliver Leaman (2006), Shruti, in Encyclopaedia of Asian Philosophy,Routledge, ISBN 978-0415862530, page 503

100.

Mimamsa (http:/ /www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/383181/Mimamsa) Encyclopedia Britannica (2014)

101.

M. Hiriyanna (1993), Outlines of Indian Philosophy, Motilal Banarsidass,

ISBN 978-8120810860, page 323-325

102.

Chris Bartley (2013), Purva Mimamsa, in Encyclopaedia of AsianPhilosophy (Editor: Oliver Leaman), Routledge, 978-0415862530, page443-445

103.

M. Hiriyanna (1993), Outlines of Indian Philosophy, Motilal Banarsidass,ISBN 978-8120810860, page 298-335

104.

Neville, Robert (2001). Religious truth. SUNY Press.105.Worthington, Vivian (1982). A history of yoga. Routledge. p. 66.106.Peter M. Scharf, The Denotation of Generic Terms in Ancient IndianPhilosophy (1996), Chapter 3

107.

Annette Wilke and Oliver Moebus (2011), Sound and Communication:An Aesthetic Cultural History of Sanskrit Hinduism, Walter de GruyterGmbH (Berlin), ISBN 978-3110181593, pages 23-24, 551-663

108.

Oliver Leaman (1999), Key Concepts in Eastern Phil osophy, Routledge,ISBN 978-0415173636, page xiv

109.

Knut Jacobsen (2008), Theory and Practice of Yoga : 'Essays in Honourof Gerald James Larson, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120832329,page 77;JN Mohanty (2001), Explorations in Philosophy, Vol 1 (Editor: BinaGupta), Oxford University Press, page 107-108

110.

Oliver Leaman (2000), Eastern Philosophy: Key Readings, Routledge,ISBN 978-0415173582, page 251;R Prasad (2009), A Historical-developmental Study of Classical IndianPhilosophy of Morals, Concept Publishing, ISBN 978-8180695957, pages345-347

111.

Advaita Vedanta (http://www.iep.utm.edu/adv-veda/) Sangeetha Menon(2012), IEP

112.

Nakamura, Hajime (1990), A History of Early Vedanta Philosophy. Part One, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, pp. 110–114

113.

Flood 1996, pp. 239-244.114.Eliot Deutsch, Advaita Vedanta: A Phil osophical Reconstruction,University of Hawaii Press, ISBN 978-0824802714, pages 10-14

115.

Adi Shankara (htt p://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/522509/Shankara), Sengaku Mayeda, Encyclopedia Britannica (2013)

116.

Richard Brooks (1969), The Meaning of 'Real' in Advaita Ved!nta,Philosophy East and West, Vol. 19, No. 4, pages 385-398

117.

AC Das (1952), Brahman and M!y! in Advaita Metaphysics, PhilosophyEast and West, Vol. 2, No. 2, pages 144-154

118.

H.M. Vroom (1996), No Other Gods, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing,ISBN 978-0802840974, page 57

119.

Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty (1986), Dreams, Illusion, and Other Realities,University of Chicago Press, ISBN 978-0226618555, page 119

120.

Lynn Foulston and Stuart Abbott (2009), Hindu Goddesses: Beliefs andPractices, Sussex Academic Press, ISBN 978-1902210438, pages 14-16

121.

John Koller (2007), in Chad Meister and Paul Copan (Editors): TheRoutledge Companion to Philosophy of Religion, Routledge, ISBN978-1-134-18001-1, pages 98-106

122.

Arvind Sharma (2007), Advaita Ved!nta: An Introduction, MotilalBanarsidass, ISBN 978-8120820272, pages 19-40, 53-58, 79-86

123.

Michael Comans (1993), The question of the import ance of Samadhi inmodern and classical Advaita Vedanta, Philosophy East & West. Vol. 43,Issue 1, pages 19-38

124.

Christopher Etter (30 April 2006). A Study of Qualitative Non-Pluralism.iUniverse. pp. 62–63. ISBN 978-0-595-39312-1.

125.

Etter, Christopher. A Study of Qualitative Non-Pluralism(https://books.google.com/books?id=jW2pcWpXY8wC&pg=PA59&dq=dualism+dvaita+vedanta&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VoXnT_6RH8qtrAeO3qmJCQ&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=dualism%20dvaita%20vedanta&

f=false). iUniverse Inc. P. 59-60. ISBN 0-595-39312-8.

126.

Fowler, Jeaneane D. Perspectives of Reality: An Introduction to thePhilosophy of Hinduism (htt ps://books.google.com/books?id=8dRZ4E-qgz8C&pg=PA340&dq=dualism+dvaita+vedanta&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VoXnT_6RH8qtrAeO3qmJCQ&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=dualism%20dvaita%20vedanta&f=false). Sussex Academic Press. P. 340-344. ISBN 1-898723-93-1.

127.

Lord Chaitanya (http://www.krishna.com/printarticles/Lord_Chaitanya.html) (krishna.com) "This is called acintya-bheda-abheda-tattva, inconceivable, simultaneous oneness and difference."

128.

R Thomas (2014), Hindu Perspectives on Evolution: Darwin, Dharma,and Design, Sociology of Religion, Vol. 75, No. 1, pages 164-165,Quote: "some of the ancient Hindu traditions like Carvaka have a richtradition of materialism, in general, other schools..."

129.

Jessica Frazier (2014), Hinduism in The Oxford Handbook of Atheism(Editors: Stephen Bullivant, Michael Ruse), Oxford University Press,ISBN 978-0199644650, pages 367-378;Bill Cooke (2005), Dictionary of Atheism, Skepticism, and Humanism,ISBN 978-1591022992, page 84

130.

KN Tiwari (1998), Classical Indian Ethical Thought, Motilal Banarsidass,ISBN 978-8120816077, page 67;Roy W Perrett (1984), The problem of induction in Indian philosophy(http://www.jstor.org/stable/1398916), Philosophy East and West, 34(2):161-174

131.

V.V. Raman (2012), Hinduism and Science: Some Reflections, Zygon -Journal of Religion and Science, 47(3): 549–574, Quote (page 557):"Aside from nontheistic schools like the Samkhya, there have also beenexplicitly atheistic schools in the Hindu tradition. One virulentlyanti-supernatural system is/was the so-called Carvaka school.",doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01274.x ( https://dx.doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1467-9744.2012.01274.x)

132.

Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli and Moore, Charles (1957). A Source Book in Indian Philosophy. Princeton University Press. pp. 227–249.ISBN 0-691-01958-4.

133.

Ramkrishna Bhattacharya (2013), The base text and its commentaries:Problem of representing and understanding the Carvaka / Lokayata,

Argument: Biannual Philosophical Journal, Issue 1, Volume 3, pages133-150

134.

Bhattacharya, Ramakrishna (2002). "C!rv!ka Fragments: A NewCollection". Journal of Indian Philosophy 30 (=6): 597–640.

135.

Dale Riepe (1996), Naturalistic Tradition in Indian Thought, MotilalBanarsidass, ISBN 978-8120812932, pages 53-58

136.

Cowell, E. B.; Gough, A. E. (1882). The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy. pp. 5–7.

137.

MM Kamal (1998), The Epistemology of the Carvaka Philosophy,Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies, 46(2): 13-16

138.

Tattwananda, Swami (1984), Vaisnava Sects, Saiva Sects, MotherWorship (First Revised ed.), Calcutta: Firma KLM Private Ltd., p. 45.

139.

Flood 1996, p. 86.140.Chakravarti, Mahadev (1994), The Concept of Rudra-+ iva Through The Ages (Second Revised ed.), Delhi: Motil al Banarsidass, p. 9,ISBN 81-208-0053-2.

141.

Cowell and Gough (1882), p. xii.142.Flood (2003), p. 206.143.Cowell and Gough (1882), p. 104-105.144.Cowell and Gough (1882), p. 103145.Cowell and Gough (1882), p. 107146.Xavier Irudayaraj,"Saiva Siddanta," in the St. Thomas ChristianEncyclopaedia of India, Ed. George Menachery, Vol.III, 2010, pp.10 ff.

147.

Xavier Irudayaraj, "Self Understanding of Saiva Siddanta Scriptures" inthe St. Thomas Christian Encyclopaedia of India, Ed. George Menachery,Vol.III, 2010, pp.14 ff.

148.

Flood (2006), p. 120.149.

Flood (2006), p. 122.150.Flood 1996, p. 168.151.Kashmir Shaivism: The Secret Supreme, By Lakshman Jee152.Dyczkowski, p. 4.153.The Trika 'aivism of Kashmir, Moti Lal Pandit, pp. 1154.Kashmir Shaivism: The Secret Supreme, Swami Lakshman Jee, pp. 103155.Dyczkowski, p. 51.156.Flood (2005), pp. 56–68157.Singh, Jaideva. Pratyãbhijñah,dayam. Moltilal Banarsidass, 2008. PP.24–26.

158.

Dyczkowski, p. 44.159.Ksemaraja, trans. by Jaidev Singh, Spanda Karikas: The Divine CreativePulsation, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, p.119

160.

Shankarananda, (Swami). Consciousness is Everything, The Yoga of Kashmir Shaivism. PP. 56–59

161.

Mishra, K. Kashmir Saivism, The Central Philosophy of Tantrism. PP.330–334.

162.

Bibliography

Chatterjee, Satischandra; Datta, Dhirendramohan (1984). An Introduction to Indian Philosophy (Eighth Reprint ed.). Calcutta: University of Calcutta.Cowell, E. B.; Gough, A. E. (1882). The Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha or Review of the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy: Trubner's Oriental Series. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-415-24517-3.Dyczkowski, Mark S. G. (1987). The Doctrine of Vibration: An Analysis of the Doctrines and Practices of Kashmir Shaivism. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press. ISBN 0-88706-432-9.Guttorm Fløistad (28 February 1993). Philosophie asiatique/Asian philosophy. Springer Netherlands. ISBN 978-0-7923-1762-3.Flood, Gavin (1996). An Introduction to Hinduism. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-43878-0.Flood, Gavin (Editor) (2003). The Blackwell Companion to Hinduism. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. ISBN 1-4051-3251-5.Flood, Gavin (2005). The Tantric Body: The Secret Tradition of Hindu Religion. I. B. Tauris. ISBN 1845110110.Grimes, John A. (1989). A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy: Sanskrit Terms Defined in English. SUNY Press. ISBN 978-0-7914-0100-2.King, Richard (2007), Indian Philosophy. An Introduction to Hindu and Buddhist Thought , Georgetown University PressLochtefeld, James G. (2002). The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism: N-Z . The Rosen Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-8239-3180-4.Müeller, Max (1899). Six Systems of Indian Philosophy; Samkhya and Yoga, Naya and Vaiseshika. Calcutta: Susil Gupta (India) Ltd. ISBN 0-7661-4296-5. Reprint edition; Originally published under the title of The Six Systems of IndianPhilosophy.Nicholson, Andrew J. (2010), Unifying Hinduism: Philosophy and Identity in Indian Intellectual History, Columbia University PressPerrett, Roy W. (2000). Philosophy of Religion. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-8153-3611-2.Potter, Karl H. (1991). Presuppositions of India's Philosophies. Motilal Banarsidass Publishe. ISBN 978-81-208-0779-2.Radhakrishnan, S.; Moore, CA (1967). A Sourcebook in Indian Philosophy. Princeton. ISBN 0-691-01958-4.

Further reading

Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli; and Moore, Charles A. A Source Book in Indian Philosophy. Princeton University Press; 1957. Princeton paperback 12th edition, 1989. ISBN

0-691-01958-4.

Rambachan, Anantanand. "The Advaita Worldview: God, World and Humanity." 2006.

Zilberman, David B., The Birth of Meaning in Hindu Thought . D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland, 1988. ISBN 90-277-2497-0. Chapter 1. "Hindu Systems of

Thought as Epistemic Disciplines".

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindu_philosophy&oldid=703784088"

Categories: Indian philosophy Hindu philosophical concepts Metaphilosophy

This page was last modified on 7 February 2016, at 16:57.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark

of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.


of 6 2/26/16, 2:50