THERE IS ONLY ONE DHARMA SANATANA IN THE WORLD WHICH ALLOWED AND ALLOWS
THE QUESTIONING AND THEN BELIEVING , TO GO OUT FREELY AND COME BACK FREELY
AS YOU LIKE IT . MIMAMSA NYAYA WAS ALLOWED AND MAINTAINED TILL DATE.
MĪMĀṂSA The Study of Hindu Exegesis — the Interpretation of Sacred Texts
Vedas do not enforce acceptance simply though does not deny also, hence
says in many places, YAYEVAM VEDA, YES THIS IS THAT VEDAM. At the same
time, reasonably querying across the right, is not denied also, which is
MIMAMSA, DIVIDED AS POORVA (AADHI) AND UTTARA (FINAL) MIMAMSAS DIVIDED BY
CERTAIN PERIODS; ALSO, PURVA WAS DEBATING AS ATREATISE AS SUCH THE VEDAS;
WHEREAS, UTTARA WAS IN THE STYLE OF QUESTION AND ANSWER, WHICH MODALITY WAS
ALSO FOLLOWED BY ADHI SHANKARA IN HIS TREATISES. In that process, a natural
doubt might arise, whether the Veda is apaurusheya (without any author,
spontaneous) or only Rishis composed all of them and out of modesty placed
all of them on that TAT? MIMAMSA through the MUTT answered them from the
treatise of JAIMINI – “PURVA MIMAMSA SUTRAS-AS TRANSLATED BY GANGANATH JHA
AVAILABLE EVERYWHERE. Now.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Among the Hindus, there is no clear distinction between philosophy and
theology as in the west. The study of the basic ideas about knowledge,
truth, right and wrong, religion, and the nature and meaning of life-IS
PHILOSOPHY. Theology is the study of religious belief from a religious
perspective, with a focus on the nature of divinity. It is taught as an
academic discipline, typically in universities and seminaries. SDo west has
founded religions which is absent in India. There is no religion; Hinduism
is a coined word only by the British in 1800 AD and thus thrusted on us as
a religion. Thus, a theology was floated. But Hinduism is never taught but
each individual has only to learn by following various paths @ Yogas.
Therefore, there is only a philosophy named as SANATHANA DHARMA, a way of
life. And that too, with lots of freedom to enter and exit, take it or
leave it or adopt and moderate within the four walls of the sanatana
dharmic Vedas.
In the west theology is based upon the revelations of the Bible and
the teaching of the doctors of the Church whereas philosophy is
investigation into life and the pursuit of happiness based upon pure reason
— both approaches being more in conflict than in harmony. The Vedanta
which is the major school of Hindu philosophy is based primarily upon
revealed texts — the Upaṇiṣads, which are the revelations of enlightened
sages or mystics called Rishis, but the teachings derived from them and the
theological and philosophical systems grounded on these ‘revelations’ are
subjected to rigorous semantic analysis and reasoned debate. (MIMAMSA) So
the Hindu approach is one in which revelation is subjected to rigorous
logical analysis to produce the doctrines upon which practice is then based.
Thus all Hindu philosophers IN WHICH ARE INCLUDED THE WORD THE theologians,
are required to study logic (Nyaya) and exegesis (Mimaamsa) prior to their
excursion into the Vedanta. The 3 major schools of Vedanta differ in their
interpretation of teachings of the Vedic Rishis, and all of them argue and
debate with one another and among themselves over the subtleties of
exegesis and interpretation of the texts and arrive at nuanced
understandings and insight into the nature of the Ultimate Reality. ( the
surprise aspect is that though appeared to differ within, virtually all
those differences are purely within the Vedic conceptualisations only and
never denied the Veda or jumped outside the Veda} The theological
differences are sometimes quite radical but they almost all agree in the
implementation of the teaching and its application in daily life. It is
important to remember that in Hinduism (sanatana dharma or Vedic culture) there
is no thought crime. Freedom of thought and expression are paramount and
are vigorously encouraged. It is not adherence to dogma or subscription
to a particular theory or membership of an elect group which is the cause
of Liberation but rather one’s personal practice and conduct.
According to Ramanujacharya the study of exegesis is an essential
pre-requisite to the study of Vedanta. In their commentaries on the
Brahma-sutras both Ramanujacharya and Shankaracharya engage in vigorous and
witty polemics with the opposing schools of thought. All their reasoning is
based upon the principles of Mimamsa and for modern readers it is for the
most part extremely confusing and recondite.
Introduction:
In the complexity of our daily lives here are two paths of possible
pursuit:—
Preyas —that which is ‘pleasant’, or Śreyas — that which is ‘good’.
Preyas is our default biological instinct of personal survival and
self-propagation which we share with all lower life forms. It is the
materialistic path of self-referent action. We are naturally inclined to
that which affords us maximum pleasure in the fulfilment of our basic
appetites for food, sex, security and comfort. It is a seeking of happiness
which is primarily personal, and only incidentally concerns the others of
our extended sphere of care — spouse, children, relatives, family etc. It
is the path that leads to samsara — rebirth and suffering.
Śreyas is the universal good. Dharma. It is the spiritual path which
leads to liberation — moksha and non-rebirth — nirvana. It is sometimes
pleasant but usually not. It is that which ultimately benefits the many,
sometimes at the expense of a few individuals. It is that which is good for
all people collectively and includes the welfare of all other sentient
beings and the environment in which we are sustained. It is that which is
termed loka-sangraha in the Gita. loka saṅgraham-evāpi saṃpaśyan kartum
arhasi || Gītā 3:20 || “You should act with the welfare of the entire
universe in view”. YOGA SHEMAM VAHAAMYAAHAM.
We often find ourselves on the horns of a dilemma. What is good? What
should I do now? How should I act? What would be the right course of action
in this particular circumstance? These questions are called Dharma Saṅkaṭa
— Dilemmas of Dharma.
According to Manu there are four sources of Dharma:—
vedaḥ smṛtiḥ sadācāraḥ svasya ca priyamātmanaḥ | etaccaturvidhaṃ prāhuḥ
sākṣād dharmasya lakṣaṇam || 1The Veda (śruti),2 tradition (Smṛtis),3 the
conduct of virtuous people and 4 one's own conscience, these are declared
to be the distinct four-fold sources of Dharma. (Manu 2:12)
The primary source of Dharma is the Veda and when we seek spiritual
guidance from the Veda we are totally confused by the immensity, obscurity
and complexity of the teachings!! How do we deal this vast resource of
material? What is significant and what is not? What do I accept and what do
I reject? It is in this context that one has recourse to the study of
Mimamsa or hermeneutics. Hermeneutics is the study of theories of the
interpretation and understanding of texts, particularly Sacred texts. A
hermeneutic is defined as a specific system or methodology for
interpretation of texts. The hermeneutic approach holds that the most basic
fact of social life is the meaning of an action. Social life is constituted
by social actions, and actions are meaningful to the actors and to the
other social participants.
(Mimamsa) Exegesis is the application; it involves an extensive and
critical interpretation of a sacred text using an hermeneutic. The word
exegesis means "to draw the meaning out of" a given text. Exegesis may be
contrasted with *eisegesis* which means to read one's own interpretation
into a given text. In general, exegesis presumes an attempt to view the
text objectively, while eisegesis implies more subjectivity.
One may encounter the terms exegesis and hermeneutic used
interchangeably; however, there remains a distinction. Exegesis is the
practical application of hermeneutics, which is the interpretation and
understanding of a text on the basis of the text itself. Traditional
exegesis requires the following: —
• analysis of significant words in the text in regard to translation
1 • examination of the general historical and cultural context of the
passage,
• confirmation of the limits of the passage,
• examination of the context within the text itself.
Hindu hermeneutics is based on the methodology propounded by Mimamsa. The
term Mimamsa is derived from the Sanskrit root "man" — "to think,
consider, examine, or investigate." Here the term, etymologically means: —
"desire to cogitate" {Descartes COGITO ERGO SUM ARROSSE OUT OF THE INDIAN
MIMAAMSA A SINGLE WORD ETYMOLOGICALLY TOO.} and is used to signify a
thorough consideration, examination, or investigation of the meaning of
Vedic Texts. Mimamsa is “rational enquiry” which “attempts at rational
conclusions”. Kumarila called it “a conglomeration of arguments”
(yukti-kalāpa), very closely connected to the Veda. And Jaimini based it
on that Kumarila Bhattar treatise his book on Mimamsa. Origin of Mimamsa In
the Vedic period 3000- 6000 years ago, MAY BE MORE ALSO, the yajna or
sacrifice was the central motif of the Vedic religious experience, YAJNA IS
ACTION NOT ONLY INCLUDED HOMAAM ETC LAATER DESIGNED IN THE YAJUR VEDAM
KRISHNA AND THEN SUKLA.
This being so, two major issues arose: —
The Vedas are considered to be the utterances of individual perfected
sages (Rishis), they are not at all narrative or systematic, so there are
many apparently conflicting statements in them. In relation to the
sacrificial injunctions many controversies arose amongst the mimasakas
[Mimasakas are followers of the Mimamsa school of philosophy within
Hinduism. This school focuses on the interpretation of the Vedas and the
significance of rituals, particularly those described in the early portions
of the Vedas. Mimamsa is considered one of the six orthodox systems of
Indian philosophy, and it's known for its detailed analysis of language,
rituals, and the nature of knowledge, particularly in the context of the
Vedas.] to the correct method of celebrating the sacrifices.
The need arose for the systematic arrangement of the entire sacrificial
paradigm and the allocation of specific functions to the various priests
and other individuals involved. These two forces gave rise to the creation
of the body of literature known as the 'Brahmanas' which aimed at
systematizing the ritual and interpreting it in a cogent manner. When the
sacrificial paradigm had degenerated and the circumstances of time and
place had changed further — people had become more urban and societies had
become more complex, the need arose for a clearer and more comprehensive
explanation of the Vedic texts and the ritual and also the need to
contemporize it order to give it relevance. The focus shifted from Yajna to
Dharma. This gave rise to the compilation of the 'Smrti' literature — with
all its rules and regulations regarding the daily life of the people —
including social and criminal laws. [THE MEANING OF COMPILAATIONS IS SO
VAST AAND DIFFERENT AND SHALL NOT BE USED FOR COPY PASTE AND EDIT; IT IS
THE APPLICAATION OF THE MIND AND A THINKING PROCESS ] This brought about
the necessity also of regular study of these matters as bearing upon
'Dharma' or the duty of the people.[SO MANY INTERNAL DHARMA SUTRAS
ACCORDING TO THE REGIONS] It was at this junction that the Mimamsa
literature appeared with its 1000 odd rules of Hermeneutics for the
interpretation and correct understanding of what is stated in the Vedas as
regards Dharma. These rules were first formulated in a systematic manner by
the sage Jaimini in what is known as the Jaimini Sūtras (Mimāṃsa
Sūtras). Jaimini
did not invent the teachings, but for the first time reduced to writing the
traditional interpretations that had for centuries been handed down orally
through disciplic successions. [IT IS THE COMPILIATION OF JAIMINI] Very
little is known of his life aside from the tradition that he was a pupil of
Bādarāyaṇa, founder of the Vedanta System. (AS VAISAMPAYANAR) His actual
date is quite unknown; however, the style of his writings assigns him to
the Sutra period which extended from 600-200 CE AS PER British, however,
the period estimated wrt the Badarayana being 3000 BCE. [Thus, Mimaamsa
existed long ago and Vaishnavas pulling Adi shankara (500 BCE) as mimasakas
arguments wrt the advaitham is a farfetched experience.] Once the Vedic
yajnas had fallen into disuse and had become increasingly irrelevant in the
lives of the people, the Vedas gave way to the study of the Tantras. ‘And
there alone Adi shankara evolved the mimasakas principles where the
Kumarila batter entered in. But the principles of exegesis evolved by the
Mimamsa continued to influence all of the vast body of Tantric literature.
{MAY BE THE CAAUSE OF TANTRICAA SPREAD THROUGHKERALAA MAY HAVE NEXUS TO
SHANKARA BIRTH BASE ALSO) Whenever any dispute arose regarding the
interpretation of a certain text, the Mimamsa principles were always
applied.
The Scope of Mīmāṃsa
Mimamsa simply takes for granted the philosophical concepts of the other 5
systems; it does not enter into any analysis or debate on the nature of the
Ultimate Reality, the Self, and the Universe, or their mutual
relationship. Its entire methodology is dependent upon their acknowledged
existence. [FUNDEMENTALLY ACCEPTED AS THOSE DO EXIST] Its basic premise of
Right Action (Dharma) can be established and validated by the means of
knowledge taught by the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika (KANADA RISHI] school. And, on the
other hand all the declared effects of Dharma would be meaningless without
the analysis of the evolution of consciousness taught by the Sāṃkhya-Yoga
school. [WHEREAS THE CONSCIOUSNESS WAS FOUNDED BY KAPILA RISHI, MODERN
THINKERS ARE PROFUELY PLEADING AGAAINST IN DEDUCING IT WITHOUT ENDS TILL
DATE]
However, Mimamsa makes specific use only of those factors that are
needed for its own special problems. For example, it affirms that Verbal
testimony (śabda) is the only means of Right Knowledge that can be used to
know the nature of the invisible effects of action, and that all other
means of Right Knowledge are necessary only to refute opponents. { Main
connotations of the Mimamsa is the SABDA , WHICH ALONE WAS PASHYATI AND
HEARD BY THE RISHIS which was veda the knowledge transferred as shruti, WHO
MADE IT APAURUSHEYA AND NOT COMPOSED BY THEM AS PROOF; SABDA IS HENCE MOST
IMPORTANT} Mimamsa suggests that Liberation (moksha) cannot be achieved
by Right Knowledge alone, for the Self must first exhaust its negative and
positive potentialities gained through action (Karma), as a seed fulfils
itself through growth. No amount of contemplation (dhyāna) will enable one
to arrive at the ultimate goal of human destiny; therefore, the emphasis is
on the ethical aspect of life rather than on the rational. All arguments to
support this thesis are based on the premise that the Self by definition is
eternal. Where the premise is proved beyond doubt as different periods
rishis heard at different regions the only truth which synced, then the
word becomes the truth as from the shabda, and thus presumptions become Q E
D.
The actions to be done (karma) and the rewards (Phala) that follow
are enjoined in the Veda and interpreted by Mimamsa. The importance of
Mimamsa is testified by its present-day effect, for no part of the daily
life of the Hindu is without the influence of the teachings of Mimamsa. All
rituals and ceremonies depend upon it; all moral conduct is guided by it;
all Canon Law is interpreted by it. Mimamsa is the life of the
super-structure of Indian Civilisation.K RAJARAM IRS 13425
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZopn-pafd9QOtXVM2ZJEqr381vCaWPbXHYiiy-UJnJ6ZmQ%40mail.gmail.com.
