THE BASIC FEATURES OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

The Nature of Philosophy

• Man, unlike lower beings, utilizes intellect to understand and plan for the struggle for existence.
• Philosophy arises from the rational nature of man, aiming to satisfy the desire for knowledge.
• Philosophy encompasses the search for knowledge about oneself, the world, and God.
• As knowledge grew, specialization became necessary, leading to the emergence of various sciences.
• Philosophy relies on the investigations of sciences to understand the general nature of the universe.
• Main branches of Western philosophy include Metaphysics, Epistemology, Logic, Ethics, Aesthetics, and Axiology.
• Social Philosophy is considered a branch of philosophy, often discussed alongside Ethics.
• Psychology, once integral to philosophy, is now treated as a separate science.
• Eastern and Western philosophies share similar fundamental problems and solutions but differ in methods and development processes.
• Indian philosophy tends to approach problems synthetically, addressing them from multiple angles simultaneously.

The Meaning and Scope of Indian Philosophy

• Indian philosophy encompasses the speculations of all Indian thinkers, regardless of religious affiliation.
• It includes the views of both Hindus and non-Hindus, theists, and atheists.
• The breadth of outlook in Indian philosophy demonstrates its dedication to the pursuit of truth.
• Philosophical discussion in Indian tradition involves presenting opponents’ views (prior view), refuting them, and asserting one’s own position (subsequent view or conclusion).
• Indian philosophical systems exhibit encyclopedic knowledge, discussing and weighing the views of rival schools thoroughly.
• Many contemporary Western philosophical problems are also discussed within Indian philosophical systems.
• Scholars trained exclusively in Indian philosophy demonstrate proficiency in dealing with complex Western philosophical problems.
• The openness of mind and willingness to consider diverse perspectives have contributed to the richness and greatness of Indian philosophy.
• For Indian philosophy to thrive in the future, it must incorporate new ideas from both Western and Eastern sources.

The Schools of Indian Philosophy

• Indian philosophical systems are traditionally classified into orthodox (āstika) and heterodox (nāstika).
• Orthodox systems accept the authority of the Vedas, while heterodox systems reject it.
• Orthodox systems include Mīmāṁsā, Vedānta, Sāṅkhya, Yoga, Nyāya, and Vaiśeṣika.
• Mīmāṁsā and Sāṅkhya are considered orthodox despite not believing in God as the creator, due to their acceptance of Vedic authority.
• The Vedic tradition influenced subsequent Indian thought, with some systems continuing and justifying Vedic rituals (Mīmāṁsā), while others emphasizing Vedic speculation (Vedānta).
• The schools of Materialists (Cārvākas), Buddhists (Bauddhas), and Jains (Jainas) are heterodox due to their rejection of Vedic authority.
• Sāṅkhya, Yoga, Nyāya, and Vaiśeṣika, while based on human experience and reasoning, still align with Vedic testimony.
• Orthodox systems may also include less prominent schools like the Grammarian and Medical schools.
• The relationship with the Vedas distinguishes orthodox and heterodox systems in Indian philosophy.

The Places of Authority and Reasoning in Indian Philosophy

• Solutions to philosophical problems involve imagination and reasoning, moving from the known to the unknown.
• Philosophy’s foundation is experience, and reason is its chief tool.
• Indian thinkers disagree on whether philosophy should be based on ordinary experience or the experience of saints, seers, or prophets.
• Schools like Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika, Sāṅkhya, Cārvāka, Bauddha, and Jaina rely on ordinary experience.
• Mīmāṁsā and Vedānta schools base their theories on the authority of scriptures and the experiences of saints.
• Reasoning is crucial for both groups of philosophers, but their reliance on authority differs.
• Some criticize Indian philosophy for being dogmatic due to reliance on authority, but many Indian systems are based on free thinking and independent reasoning.
• Mīmāṁsā and Vedānta, while starting from authority, provide strong independent arguments to support their theories.

How the Indian Systems Gradually Developed

• In Western philosophy, schools emerge successively and replace each other, while in India, multiple schools coexist and develop simultaneously.
• Philosophy in India is deeply integrated into life, with each system adopted by followers who live and transmit its teachings through generations.
• Despite differences, Indian philosophical systems mutually influenced one another through constant criticism and debate.
• Systematic philosophical thinking in India began with the sūtra literature, consisting of brief mnemonic statements that summarized philosophical teachings and addressed objections.
• Each school had its own sūtras and major commentaries (Bhāṣyas), interpreted by different authors to justify their standpoints.
• Commentaries on commentaries and independent works further developed the philosophical literature of both orthodox and heterodox schools.
• Indian thinkers recognized the importance of recognizing differences in natural aptitudes (adhikārabheda) and believed in harmonizing conflicting teachings to offer different paths for individuals with varying qualifications and temperaments.
• Despite apparent opposition, Indian philosophical schools share positive points of agreement, reflecting common marks of Indian culture.

The Common Characters of the Indian Systems

• In Western philosophy, schools emerge successively and replace each other, while in India, multiple schools coexist and develop simultaneously.
• Philosophy in India is deeply integrated into life, with each system adopted by followers who live and transmit its teachings through generations.
• Despite differences, Indian philosophical systems mutually influenced one another through constant criticism and debate.
• Systematic philosophical thinking in India began with the sūtra literature, consisting of brief mnemonic statements that summarized philosophical teachings and addressed objections.
• Each school had its own sūtras and major commentaries (Bhāṣyas), interpreted by different authors to justify their standpoints.
• Commentaries on commentaries and independent works further developed the philosophical literature of both orthodox and heterodox schools.
• Indian thinkers recognized the importance of recognizing differences in natural aptitudes (adhikārabheda) and believed in harmonizing conflicting teachings to offer different paths for individuals with varying qualifications and temperaments.
• Despite apparent opposition, Indian philosophical schools share positive points of agreement, reflecting common marks of Indian culture.

The Space-Time Background

• Indian thought emphasizes the vastness of the space-time universe, influencing its moral and metaphysical outlook.
• Unlike the Western belief in a young Earth created for man’s purpose, Indian thought perceives the universe as vast and ancient.
• Scientific discoveries and Puranic descriptions both highlight the immense scale of the cosmos.
• Time is measured in cosmic units, with each day of the creator Brahmā equaling 1,000 yugas or 432 million years of human time.
• The concept of creation and destruction forms an endless cycle, with no absolute beginning.
• Indian philosophy emphasizes the transitory nature of earthly existence and the insignificance of worldly possessions.
• The idea of cyclical creation and dissolution influences metaphysical thinking, encouraging the search for the eternal.
• Ethically and religiously, it promotes detachment from the fleeting and a focus on lasting values, recognizing the eternal nature of the human spirit.

A BRIEF SKETCH OF THE SYSTEMS 

The Cārvāka System

• Cārvākas are materialists in Indian philosophy, who uphold perception as the only valid source of knowledge.
• They reject non-perceptual sources of knowledge like inference and testimony as unreliable.
• Perception reveals only the material world composed of the four elements: air, fire, water, and earth.
• Cārvākas deny the existence of an immaterial soul and assert that consciousness is a quality of the living body, which is wholly material.
• They argue that consciousness arises from the combination of material elements, and ceases with the death of the body.
• Cārvākas refute the existence of God, claiming that the world is created automatically by the combination of material elements.
• They reject religious rites, Vedas, and priests, advocating for the pursuit of pleasure as the highest end of life.
• Cārvākas encourage enjoying life to the fullest and minimizing pain, rather than forgoing pleasures due to their association with pain.

The Jaina System

• Jaina faith traces its origin back to prehistoric times and is propagated by twenty-four Tīrthaṅkaras, with Vardhamāna (Mahāvīra) being the last.
• Rejecting the Cārvāka view, Jaina philosophy accepts perception, inference, and testimony as valid sources of knowledge.
• Jaina view of the universe includes material substances, space, time, dharma, adharma, and souls in living bodies, known through perception and inference.
• Consciousness is inherent in the nature of the soul, not a product of matter, and the existence of souls is inferred based on the systematic functioning of living bodies.
• Every living being, including animals, plants, and even particles of dust, possesses a soul, with varying degrees of consciousness.
• Liberation from bondage is achievable through perfect faith, right knowledge, and right conduct, leading to infinite faith, knowledge, power, and bliss.
• The Tīrthaṅkaras are revered as ideals of life, possessing godly powers, but Jainas do not believe in a single God.
• Sympathy for all living beings and respect for all opinions are fundamental aspects of Jaina philosophy.
• Jaina philosophy is characterized as realism due to its belief in the reality of the external world and pluralism for acknowledging multiple ultimate realities, while rejecting the existence of God.

The Bauddha System

• The Bauddha (Buddhist) system of philosophy originated from the teachings of Gautama Buddha, who addressed human suffering through the “four noble truths.”
• The first noble truth acknowledges the existence of suffering, while the second truth identifies the cause of suffering as desire and ignorance.
• The third truth suggests that suffering can cease by removing its causes, and the fourth truth outlines the path to cessation, known as the eight-fold noble path.
• Buddha focused on practical solutions to alleviate human suffering rather than engaging in metaphysical discussions.
• Some key philosophical teachings of Buddha include the conditional nature of all things, the impermanence of existence, the absence of a permanent soul or God, and the concept of karma leading to rebirth.
• Various philosophical schools emerged from Buddha’s teachings, including the Mādhyamika (Śūnyavāda), Yogācāra (Vijñānavāda), Sautrāntika, and Vaibhāṣika schools, each offering different perspectives on reality and perception.
• Buddhism is divided into Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna traditions, with differences in their understanding of nirvāṇa and the purpose of liberation.

The Nyāya System

• The Nyāya system, attributed to the sage Gautama, is a realistic philosophy grounded in logic and reason.
• It recognizes four sources of true knowledge: perception, inference, comparison, and testimony.
• Perception includes both external and internal senses, while inference relies on identifying invariable relations between observed phenomena.
• Comparison involves recognizing similarities between objects based on descriptions.
• Testimony derives knowledge from authoritative statements.
• Nyāya identifies various objects of knowledge, including the self, body, senses, cognition, mind, activity, rebirth, pleasure, pain, suffering, and freedom from suffering.
• It aims to liberate the self from bondage to the body, senses, and their objects.
• According to Nyāya, the self is distinct from the body and mind, with consciousness as an adventitious quality.
• Liberation (apavarga) entails the cessation of suffering through right knowledge of reality.
• Naiyāyikas argue for the existence of God as the ultimate cause of creation, maintenance, and destruction of the world.
• God is believed to have created the world from eternal elements for the well-being of all living beings.
• Arguments for God’s existence include the presence of effects in the world requiring a maker with unlimited power and wisdom.
• The purpose of creation is not solely for God’s end but for the eventual attainment of right knowledge and liberation for all individuals under divine guidance.

The Vaiśeṣika System

• The Vaiśeṣika system, founded by the sage Kaṇāda (Ulūka), shares similarities with the Nyāya system and aims at the liberation of the individual self.
• It classifies all objects of knowledge into seven categories: substance (dravya), quality (guna), action (karma), generality (sāmānya), particularity (viśeṣa), relation of inherence (sāmavāya), and non-existence (abhāva).
• Substance serves as the substratum of qualities and actions and includes nine kinds: earth, water, fire, air, ether (ākāśa), time, space, soul, and mind (manas).
• The physical elements (bhūtas) comprise earth, water, fire, and air, each with specific qualities, while ether, time, and space are imperceptible and all-pervading.
• Mind is an eternal, indivisible substance involved in cognition, feeling, and willing, while the soul is the substratum of consciousness and all-pervading.
• God is inferred as the creator of the world from eternal atoms, directing their operations according to the law of karma.
• Qualities exist in substances and include twenty-four kinds, such as color, taste, smell, number, and cognition.
• Actions are movements belonging only to substances and encompass five types, including throwing upward, throwing downward, contraction, expansion, and going.
• Generality (sāmānya) refers to universal essence common to all individuals of a class, while particularity (viśeṣa) denotes the ultimate differences among entities.
• Inherence (samavāya) is the permanent relation by which wholes are in their parts, qualities or actions are in substances, and universals are in particulars.
• Non-existence (abhāva) encompasses negative facts and is classified into four kinds: prior non-existence, destruction, absolute non-existence, and mutual non-existence.
• The Vaiśeṣika theory regarding God and liberation aligns with that of Nyāya, emphasizing the individual soul’s release from bondage and the role of divine agency in creation and moral dispensation.

The Sāṅkhya System

• Sāṅkhya philosophy, attributed to sage Kapila, posits dualistic realism with two ultimate realities: puruṣa (intelligent principle) and prakṛti (unconscious principle).
• Puruṣa is the essence of consciousness, distinct from the body, senses, and mind, and serves as the witness to worldly changes without participating in them.
• Prakṛti is the ultimate cause of the world, an eternal unconscious principle comprising three constituents: sattva, rajas, and tamas, which maintain equilibrium.
• Evolution begins with the association of puruṣa and prakṛti, leading to the emergence of mahat (great germ), representing the awakening of nature, and ahaṅkāra (ego), signifying the feeling of ‘I and mine.’
• The subsequent evolution produces the five organs of knowledge, five organs of action, mind, and the five subtle elements, culminating in the five gross elements.
• Prakṛti serves as the uncaused cause of all objects, while puruṣa remains distinct and unaffected, though ignorance leads it to identify with the body and mind.
• Liberation (mukti) entails realizing the distinction between the self and the not-self, leading to freedom from suffering either during life (jīvanmukti) or after death (videhamukti).
• Spiritual training and deep meditation on the eternal consciousness of the self are essential for self-realization and liberation.
• Sāṅkhya tends to reject theistic beliefs, asserting that prakṛti alone is the adequate cause of the world, and the existence of God cannot be proven.
• While some Sāṅkhya commentators entertain the idea of God as the supreme witness, they maintain that God is not the creator of the world.

The Yoga System

• Yoga philosophy founded by sage Patañjali is closely related to Sāṅkhya but incorporates the concept of God alongside Sāṅkhya’s epistemology and metaphysics.
• Yoga focuses on the practice of yoga as a means to attain discriminative knowledge (vivekajñāna) necessary for liberation.
• Yoga advocates the cessation of all mental functions (cittavṛttinirodha), comprising five levels of mental functions (cittabhūmi).
• The fourth and fifth levels, ekāgra and niruddha, are conducive to yoga, involving concentration on an object of contemplation and the cessation of contemplative functions, respectively.
• Two types of yoga or samādhi are saṁprajñāta and asaṁprajñāta, involving concentration with clear apprehension of the object and the complete absence of mental modifications, respectively.
• The eight steps of yoga practice (yogāṅga) include yama (restraint), niyama (moral culture), āsana (posture), prāṇāyāma (breath-control), pratyāhāra (sense withdrawal), dhāraṇā (attention), dhyāna (meditation), and samādhi (concentration).
• Yoga is considered theistic (seśvara) Sāṅkhya, in contrast to the atheistic (nirīśvara) Kapila Sāṅkhya, advocating God as the highest object of contemplation for self-realization.
• God in Yoga philosophy is described as the perfect, eternal, all-pervading, omniscient Being, free from all defects, and is argued for existence based on the concept of degrees and the association of puruṣa with prakṛti.

The Mīmāṁsā System

• Mīmāṁsā, or Pūrva-Mīmāṁsā, founded by Jaimini, aims to defend and justify Vedic ritualism.
• It posits the Vedas as eternal and error-free, not authored by any person but manifesting temporarily through seers.
• The validity of Vedic knowledge is self-evident and unquestionable, supported by Mīmāṁsā arguments.
• Duty, according to Mīmāṁsā, entails performing rituals as prescribed by the Vedas without expectation of reward, leading to liberation.
• Liberation is initially conceived as unalloyed bliss or heaven, later as the cessation of birth and all pains.
• The soul is considered immortal, essential for interpreting Vedic injunctions regarding heaven.
• Mīmāṁsā admits independent arguments to prove the existence of the soul, refuting materialistic views.
• Different schools within Mīmāṁsā recognize various sources of knowledge, including perception, inference, comparison, testimony, postulation, and non-cognition.
• Mīmāṁsā is realistic, affirming the reality of the physical world and souls but denying the existence of a supreme soul or God.
• The world is believed to be eternal, with objects formed according to the karmas of souls, governed by the autonomous law of karma.
• Ritual performance generates a potency (apūrva) in the soul, leading to the fruition of actions in the future.

The Vedānta System

• Vedānta arises from the Upaniṣads, culminating Vedic speculation and known as the “end of the Vedas.”
• Śaṅkara interprets Vedānta to advocate pure monism, asserting God as the sole Reality without plurality even within God.
• Creation is seen as an appearance conjured by God’s inscrutable power, Māyā, akin to illusions like a rope appearing as a snake.
• Māyā is interpreted as ignorance concealing the true Brahman, making it appear as the diverse world.
• Śaṅkara distinguishes between the empirical and transcendental viewpoints, wherein God is regarded as qualified (saguṇa) or unqualified (nirguṇa) Brahman, respectively.
• Liberation entails removing ignorance through Vedāntic knowledge, realizing the identity with Brahman and transcending attachment to the world.
• Rāmānuja interprets Vedānta differently, advocating a qualified monism (viśiṣṭādvaita) where God exists alongside conscious souls and unconscious matter.
• Creation is considered real within God, and liberation involves becoming similar to God but not identical, maintaining the finite nature of the individual soul.