Introduction to the Purvamimamsa of Jaimini

Performers of Vedic rites found themselves in need of rules of interpretation (nyayas) to guide them through the maze of texts The Sutra of the school of Jaimini essentially aims at laying down principles regarding interpretation of texts in their connexion with carrying out the sacrificial ritual Man's duty is the performance of sacrifice in due manner, and the Veda is the one authority. The Sutra develops a method, according to which "the subject is posed; the doubt is raised; the prima facie view is set out; then the correct decision is developed, and the matter brought into connexion with other relevant doctrines." This method of reasoning was adopted by Medhitithi and others in deciding legal difficulties, such as arose from the recognition in the law schools of many conflicting texts as all having authority, just as the Vedic texts. The twelve books of Sutra were commented on by Upavarsha and later by Sabarasvamin, both of whom wrote also on the Brahmasutra of the Ve lanta. Sabarasvimin seems to have known the nihilistic school of Buddhism, perhaps also the idealistic, and he has a definite theory of the soul which seems to regard it as produced from the absolute Brahman, but as thereafter existing independently for ever. This view recurs in Ramanuja. On the Savara Bhashya two different systems were founded. The Brihati of Prabhikara is assigned 1 Reference is made in the Sutra to Atreya, Badari and Badarayana. Jaimini may not be the originator of this school but he is no doubt one of the authorities who expounde? qe system as a whole.

to 600 A.D. Kumarila wrote about 700 A.D. in three parts the Slokavartika, the Tantravartika, and the Tuptika. Prabhakara and Kumarila differ considerably, but both agree with Sabarasvamin in holding that the individual soul in some sense is immortal'. Kumarila complains bitterly that the 'Buddhist are the chief enemies of the Veda'; he deri les the doctrine of Buddha as the omnisient and also the followers of the Buddha He declares regarding the Lokayatas that the empirical means of knowledge is worth'ess and illustrates by sayig that 'if right be julgel by causing pleasure to others, then the violation of the chastity of the wife of the teacher as giving her pleasure would be right instead of a heinous crime.' A pupil of Kumarila, Mandana Misra, wrote the Minihsanukramini and Vidhiviveka. On the latter Vachaspati Misra (0) wrote a comment, Nyavakanika; he also sets forth Kumarila's views in his Tattvabindu. The later commentaries include the Nyayamata-vistira of Maihava (14 th century), the Mimasanvaya-prakis of Apadeva, and the an the Arthasamgraha of Laughakshi Bhaskara. In the Mameyodaya (160) of Narayana Bhatta the epistimology and metaphysics of Kumarila are interestingly summarized. Uttara-mimamsi or Vedanta of Badarayana Vyasa is known as the Brahma-sutra of Bidarayana, the Uttara inimamsa, or Sariraka-mimasi, and the Vedanta. The last, Vedanta, is the most popular title, because the systein represents the compilation of the philosophical doctrines of the Upanishads which form the last (outer) portion of the Brihmana, the commentary of the Veda. The doctrine of Badarayana appears strongly against the Samikhya system and the atonism of Vaise-hika. Badarayana was not a believer in the illusion (maya) doctrine of Sankara's school. He held that individual souls, if derived from the absolute, remaine i distinct from it and real, ard that matter derived also from the absolute had a distinct reality of its own The verbal explanations which originally accompanied the text cannot be recovered and so permitted the rise of different interpretations. Thus for a clear exposision of the system the commentaries became more important and popular. " The Gaud piliya Karika of 215 memorial verses written by Gaudapada of Bongal (700) holds the view 10

'that all reality, as we know it, is a mere illusion'. This is known as the doctrine of Maya which is illustrated by numerous popular examples such as the phenomena of dreams, the reflection in the mirror, the rope mistaken in the dark for a srale, so forth. The manifestation of unreal phenomena from the real absolute is beautifully illustrated in the last section (Alatasanti) by the brilliant picture of the circle of sparks which a boy makes when he swings a torch without altering the glowing end of the torch. For the source of the doctrine Mandukya and Maitrayaniya are specially mentioned This view is found in the nihilistic school of Buddhism, and the brilliant dialectic of Nagarjuna. In the Sankara Bhashya (788-S 20) on the Brahmasutra is found "the full defence and the exposition of the illusion (maya) theory with its insistence on Advaita, absence of any quality. Sankara's system is more popularly known as the doctrine of non-duality (Advaita). This doctrine is alluded to in the commentaries of Sankara on the Bhagavadgita, in his Upadesa-sahasri comprising shorter works including lyrics (like the Dakshinamurti-stotra and Mohamudgara) and his Atmabodha in 67 stanzas, and his Hastamalaka which asserts 'that the self as the form of eternal apprehension is all in all' His logic starts by denying the truth of the proposition A is either B or not B. His dialectical skill is great. He misrepresents Badarayana but he does more justice to the Upanishads in holding 'that at death the soul when released is merged in the absolute and does not continue to be distinct from it.' Further expositions of Sankara's Advaita system (non-qualified dualism) is attributed to his pupils. Padmapada wrote the Panchapadika on the first five books, which was commented on by Prakasatman. Sure svara in prose and verses to prove 'that knowledge alone achieves release', and the Manasollasa to paraphrase Sankara's Dakshinamurti-stotra, and Sarvajratman the Samkshepa- sariraka as a summary of the Sankara-bhashya. Vachaspati Misra (830) wrote the Bhamtai 'which is invaluable for its knowledge of Euddhist views inter alia. Madhava in his Panchadasi, which was written in part with Eherati-intl a. and Jivaran ukti-vivel a' definitely supports Sankara's vicw Sri arsha, the pect, wrote the Khanda na-khanda-khadya and sought to prove the doctrine of Sankara by proving that all other views are wrote the Naishkarma-siddhi

contradictory and that all knowledge is vain. Of the other innumerable treatises the Vedantasara of Sadinanda (1500) shows the elaborate confusion of Samkhya tenets with the Vedanta. The Vedanta. paribhasha of Dharmaraja is a manual of the modern school of Vedanta. Ramanuja 1100) of Kanchi, who studied under the Advaita philosopher Yadavaprakasa and was the head of a Vaishnav sect, held a different view of the Upanishads and of the Brahmasutra of Badarayana. He wrote his Sribhasyha on the Brahmasutra, Gitabhashya, Vedaartha-samgraha where the theory of illusion (Maya) was criticised, and Vedantadipa which contains a summary of his own loctrine. His views were defended against those of Sankara in the Vedanta-tattva-sara of Sudarsana Suri, and expounded in the Yatindra-matadipika of Srinivasa. Ramanuja himself cites the Vakyakara, the Vartikakara Baudhayana and relies on the Sandilya sutra for the true doctrine of the Brahmasutra. Differing from Sankara in essentials Ramanuja holds the view "that if in a sense there is an absolute whence all is derived, the individual souls and matter still have a reality of their own, and the end of life is not the merger in the absolute but continued blissful existence". This blissful existence can be attained not through the true knowledge (Jnana marga) of the absolute as Sankara held but through faith in and devotion to God (Bhakti-marga) which is the true Vaishnava principle. Thus the system of Ramanuja is known as the Visishtadvaita (qualified non-dualism). Nimbarka, a pupil of Ramanuja, wrote the Vedantaparijata saurabha commenting on the Brahma-sutra, and the Siddhanta-ratna in 10 Slokas summing up his syste.n. Vallabha (1376-1430) wrote the Anubhashya on the Bidarayna- sutra, in which Vishnusvamin's new aspect of theory was developed, and a doctrine of Bhakti, in which the teacher on earth is regarded as divine and receives divine honours, is propounded. 'More distinctive is the dualism of Madhava or Anandatirtha who commented on seven of the important Upanishads, the Bhagavad-giti, the Brahma-sutra, and the Bhagavata Purina His principles are briefly set out in the Tattva-samkhyana and a number of independent tracts He insists on the existence of five points of fundamental dualism (dvaita) whence his system

derives its name, as opposed to Advaita of Sankara and Visishtidvaita of Ramanuja. Srinivasa summarizes the view of Rimanuja, Vishnu Svamin Nimbarka and Madhava in a Sangraha work.