Posts Tagged ‘Vedic’
Monday, June 28th, 2010
Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies (contd.):
Swaminarayan philosophy – Moksha
Atyantik Kalyān or Moksha Part I
3. Atyantik Kalyān or Moksha (Final redemption, Liberation, or Salvation) in Swaminarayan philosophy is considered as the liberation or complete detachment of the soul from its causal body (karan sharir) in this very same birth and after the death, to attain spiritually enlightened brahmanized or “brahmrup” state, and to stay in the company of other liberated souls (Akshar-muktas) and Aksharbrahm humbly serving Parabrahm Purushottam Narayan (God) in His abode (Akshardham). A truly brahmrup or brahmanized state always accompany the utmost servitude towards God, realizing His greatness and supremacy. A true brahmrup person is the one who worships Parabrahm (God) in the master-servant manner (swāmi-sevak bhāv). A mere brahmanized state, leveling of oneself with God without showing devotion (bhakti) to Him is not considered as a Moksh. Secondly, just to believe or to show-off to be brahmrup is one thing and to be actually brahmrup is totally different thing. If one believes oneself as brahmrup and stops there and never progresses higher to achieve a brahmrup state, then, one is taking a risk of deviating or skewing from spiritualism by forthcoming hurdles. Mere self-realization or atma-realization (ātmanishthā), known as (ātma-gnān) just provides stabilization of mind in the extreme situations of pain and pleasure, happiness and sorrow, but does not give the guarantee of peace of mind, gratification, and moksh at the time of death. To cultivate Brahmgnān (transcendental knowledge) that Parabrahm Purushottam Narayan (God) is distinct, cause, supporter, and inspirer of Brahm and then to worship Parabrahm in the master-servant manner after uniting one’s soul with the Brahm is the safest (nirvighna) and the best (shreshtha) path towards the transcendental enlightenment (param-pad) and the ultimate liberation (moksh). Only such a brahmanized person knows the true glory and power of the God, as it is, in real sense, others can just describe God as per their own intelligence but cannot enjoy and share enjoyment of the bliss of God. The incomplete realization or the flaw in understanding the nature of God is the worst loss of all losses. By incomplete realization of Brahm and Parabrahm one cannot experience the true bliss of Purushottam Bhagwan (God) and one cannot become an ekantik bhakta (true devotee). Only by profoundly associating with an ekantik bhakta of God one can truly understand the nature of God.
After a long period since Mahabharat, in worshiping the Supreme Being, during Buddha’s and Mahavira’s period ethics and vairagya was dominated, after fall of Maurya Empire and beginning of Pandyan Empire (King Pandyovijaya) or Sunga Empire (2nd century BCE) through the beginning of the common era and during early centuries, dharma and karma-kānd (Vedic rituals) became dominant, in Shankaracharya’s period gnan dominated, and after Ramanujacharya’s period bhakti became dominated. When Shri Swaminarayan came, he reestablished Bhagwat Dharma or Ekantik Dharma by rebalancing all four: Dharma (religious and social vows), Gnan (atma-gnan), Vairagya (worldly dispassion), and Bhakti (devotion or navadhā bhakti) with Mahimā or Mahātmya (true understanding of the glory and greatness of God) in worshiping Purushottam – the Supreme Being. He explained that only by strictly observing Dharma, only by achieving Atma-gnan, only by cultivating Vairagya, or only by doing Bhakti, such as, kirtan bhakti, seva bhakti, dāsya bhakti (servitude), or Navadhā bhakti, one cannot get liberation unless and until one gets rid of one’s svabhāv (habits), prakruti (nature or temperament of a person), dosh (flaws or vices), and vāsanā (infatuation). Only after getting rid of habits, bad temperament, attitude, vices, infatuation, and other flaws, one can be brahmrup or brahm-like and only after becoming brahm-like one can achieve or earn the true and the highest status of worshiping and pleasing God for His bliss.
Tags:abode, akshar-muktas, Aksharbrahm, Akshardhām, ātma-gnān, Atma-realization, ātmanishthā, attitude, Ātyantik, bad temperament, Being, Bhagwan, Bhagwat, bhakta, bhakti, bhāv, bliss, body, Brahm, Brahm-like, brahmanized, brahmgnan, brahmrup, causal, cause, Darshan, dāsya bhakti, detachment, devotee, devotion, dharma, dispassion, distinct, dosh, Ekāntik, Empire, enlightened, enlightenment, Final redemption, flaws, glory, Gnān, God, Greatness, habits, infatuation, inspirer, intelligence, Kalyan, kāran, karma-kānd, king, Kirtan-bhakti, liberated souls, liberation, Mahābhārat, Mahātmya, Mahimā, master-servant, Maurya, moksh, moksha, Narayan, Nature, Navadhā, nirvighna, Pandyan, Pandyovijaya, Parabrahm, param-pad, Philosophy, power, Prakruti, Purushottam, realization, religious, rituals, salvation, self-realization, servitude, Seva Bhakti, Shad Darshan, sharir, shreshtha, Shri, social, soul, spiritualism, spiritually, Sunga, supporter, Supreme, svabhāv, swāmi-sevak, Swaminarayan, transcendental, true, ultimate, Vairagya, vāsanā, Vedānta, Vedic, vices, vows, worldly
Posted in Hinduism - Philosophies, Moksha - Part I, Navya Vishishtadvaita, Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies | Comments Closed
Wednesday, June 9th, 2010
Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies (contd.):
Dvaita philosophy (contd.)
Shuddha Dvait philosophy of Madhavacharya (contd.):
Madhavacharya categorizes unreleased or non-liberated souls into three more or less fixed categories (intrinsic or inherent gradation called “jiva-traividhya”) depending upon their knowledge, power, and bliss. They are: Mukti-yogya (qualified for liberation), Nitya-sansāri (not qualified for the liberation and forever remain in the cycle of rebirth), and Tamo-yogya (condemned to Hell and never get liberated). The idea was to explain plurality of souls and the co-existence of good and evil living entities in the world. Madhavacharya describes the same kinds of intrinsic differences among the liberated souls also, namely, devas (sarva-prakāsh), rishis (antah-prakāsh), and naras (bahir-prakāsh). This kind of ideology (swarup-tāratamya) was unique and not fully supported by the basic Vedic Hindu philosophy of Prasthan Trayi.
It was different than the special titles assigned to some souls by Ramanujacharya, and was not accepted by traditional Hindu philosophers. All souls deserve salvation or liberation limited to their knowledge, behavior, and efforts. Another understanding of Dvaita philosophy which did not get wide acceptance in the mainstream Hinduism was ill-defined or poorly understood “Tāratamya” or “devatā-tārātamya”, meaning, hierarchy among subordinate or minor gods (devatās). According to Madhavacharya’s philosophy, as it is in Ramanujacharya’s philosophy, Vishnu is considered as the Supreme God and Laxmi (the female deity) as His eternal consort. Vishnu is considered as the cause of all Avatars or incarnations of God. Thus, Vaishnavism is also continued in Madhavacharya’s philosophy. In Madhavacharya’s philosophy, Vishnu and Laxmi are placed at the higher level than the level of Brahmā, Shiv, and Vayu god but, with that, other demigods, such as, Surya, Chandra, Indra, Varun, etc. were also placed at different hierarchically lower levels. This was also less acceptable for the Hinduism of that period. According to Madhavacharya all souls, although ontologically identical, are different in potential. Demigods or devas are not of God category so they are of jiv category but according to devata-taratamya they are of different hierarchical levels – higher than ordinary souls of all living beings. One important concept introduced by Madhavacharya was, to maintain the supremacy of God and to maintain the hierarchy; Vishnu was paced at the highest level being completely divine having no worldly body. Vishnu as Shri Hari is considered as sarvottama (the Supreme Being). Laxmi was placed at just a little lower level categorizing her as akshar (imperishable) having indestructible (aprākrut) body as against the mundane (prākrut) bodies of other entities like Brahmā, demigods or devas, and jivas that are destructible or kshar (perishable). This was the indirect or unintentional beginning of separation of Akshar, the penultimate element from God, the ultimate element, but no one could realize it at that time.
Basically, except some minor differences, Madhavacharya accepts the basic understanding of Vaishnava philosophy of Ramanujacharya and also stresses more on Bhakti (devotion) or worshiping. The followers of Ramanujacharya worship Vishnu as Narayan, Sriman Narayan, or Shri Lakshmi-Narayan (it is a one word used for Narayan Himself only, with Lakshmi residing in His heart), whereas the followers of Madhavacharya worship Vishnu as Krishna, Bāla-Gopāla (young Krishna), Bāl-Gopāl-Krishna, Venugopala Krishna or Radha-Krishna (it is also a one word used for Krishna Himself only, with Radha residing in His heart). Until Madhavacharya’s period God was worshiped alone. Shiv, Vishnu, Pārvati (Devi), and Lakshmi were worshiped by themselves alone. Madhavacharya started worshiping Krishna alone and later on worshiping Krishna with his choicest bhakta Arjun was started. Initially, during the Madhavacharya’s period conjugal love (premlakshanā bhakti) in worshiping Krishna with Radha was not fully developed, it was added later on and by the time of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu it had reached to a higher level. Thus, Vishnu’s worship as a young innocent Krishna was turned into fully Krishna’s worship with Radha by a devotee showing an utmost love that only spouse can show towards her partner by Chaitanya’s period.
In Madhavacharya’s period Karmis (those who believe more in Karmas), Gnānis (those who just believe more in tattva-gnan or just philosophy), and Māyāvādis (those who believed in impersonal God) were all freely respected along with truly devotees who as well believe in utmost devotion (bhakti). In Hinduism, devotion (bhakti) is always placed higher than the philosophical knowledge only. Knowing philosophy only without having the devotion attached to it has no value. Also merely blind devotion without knowing whom one worships is also of no value. Hinduism believes in both, the philosophical knowledge of the Truth and the utmost devotion (bhakti) to the Supreme God. Madhavacharya’s period also marks the beginning of worshiping Krishna (the latest and greatest form or incarnation of Purushottam – God) as the principal object of worship from worshiping Vishnu (Narayan) as the principal object of worship in Ramanujacharya’s period.
Madhavacharya maintains that Brahm referred to God (Vishnu) by saying “Brahmashabdashcha vaishnaveva”, thus identifying Brahm with God. That period was unifying Brahm with God or unifying Shaivism with Vaishnavism or rather tending towards replacing Brahm with God. One can see that in the story of Lord “Ananteshwara.” Lord Vishnu, during the period of incarnation as Parashurāma, stayed and enshrined in the Shivalinga and being known as Ananteshwara. The place is known as Shivarupya or Shivalli (Udupi). Although Madhavacharya’s philosophy (Dvaita) was strongly against or exactly opposite of Shankaracharya’s philosophy (Advaita), he himself worshiped Shivalinga as Vishnu in the form of Ananteshwara. Also he respected or rather highly regarded Brāhmins irrespective of their worship to Lord Shiva or Lord Vishnu. At the same time, Madhavacharya goes one step further in separating Vishnu from other deities, establishing further the monotheistic nature of Hinduism. According to him Vishnu is the Supreme God and the primary object of worship, whereas, other deities are subordinate to him. Thus, he translates Hinduism from polytheism to monotheism and adds one more distinction between deities (Devas) or so-called demigods and God proper reestablishing or revitalizing the supremacy of God. The important contribution of Dvaita philosophy of Madhavacharya to Hinduism is that Atma and Brahm (also known as Vishnu or God) are eternally and ontologically two different realities, one is subordinate to the supreme other, respectively – a big and daring separation, at that time, from the Advaita philosophy of Shankaracharya and still maintain unity between Shaivism and Vaishnavism. This is the beauty of Hinduism. Brahm and Parabrahm (God) were still considered a one and the same reality in that period. Brahm was tried to be concealed away by promoting Parabrahm (God). In essence, according to Dvaita philosophy of Madhavacharya, there exist three clear-cut fundamental eternal realities, soul, Nature (universe), and God quite distinct from each other and not the part and parcel (ansh-anshi) of each other. The distinction between God and Brahm was still left-off for the future. Both were used synonymously.
Tags:Advaita, akshar, Ananteshwara, ansh-anshi, antah-prakāsh, ātmā, Avatars, bahir-prakāsh, Bāl-Gopāl-Krishna, Bāla-Gopāla, bhakti, body, Brahm, Brahmā, Brahmins, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, Chandra, consort, cycle of rebirth, Darshan, deities, deity, demigods, devas, devatā-tārātamya, devatās, Devi, devotion, divine, Dvait, Dvaita, element, eternal, Gnānis, God, Hari, Hell, hierarchy, Hindu, Hinduism, Imperishable, incarnations, Indra, jiva-traividhya, jivas, Karmas, Karmis, Krishna, kshar, Lakshmi, Lakshmi-Narayan, Laxmi, liberation, Madhavacharya, Māyāvādis, Monotheism, Mukti-yogya, naras, Narayan, Nitya-sansāri, Parashurāma, Pārvati, penultimate, perishable, philosophies, Philosophy, polytheism, Prasthan Trayi, premlakshanā bhakti, Rādhā, Radha-Krishna, Ramanujacharya, Rishis, sarva-prakāsh, sarvottama, Shad Darshan, Shaivism, Shankaracharya, Shiv, Shivalinga, Shivalli, Shivarupya, Shri, Shuddha, souls, Sriman Narayan, Supreme God, Surya, swarup-tāratamya, Tamo-yogya, Tāratamya, tattva-gnan, Truth, Udupi, ultimate, Vaishnava, Vaishnavism, Varun, Vāyu, Vedānta, Vedic, Venugopala Krishna, Vishnu, worldly, worshiping
Posted in Dvaita philosophy (contd.), Hinduism - Philosophies, Shad Darshan – Vedanta philosophies | Comments Closed
Monday, May 10th, 2010
Shad Darshan – Mimamsa and Vedanta:
Purva Mimamsa (Mimamsa):
Mimamsa is also known as Purva Mimamsa, as against Uttara Mimamsa. Mimamsa was developed by rishi Jaimini and was described in his text “Mimamsa Sutra.” Mimamsa means detail investigation or analysis of the subject. According to Mimamsa, the correct performance of the Vedic rites or rituals is the means of salvation. It discusses in detail the nature of ritual obligations (karma-kānda) and ethical and moral duties (dharma) based on correct interpretation of the scriptures. It deals with linguistic methods. It describes critical analysis and explanations of scriptural texts – words, sentences, and the language as whole. We can say that, like Nyaya (system of logical analysis) and Vaisheshika (system of particles and cosmic analysis), Mimamsa is a creditworthy ancient Hindu scientific system of linguistic analysis for the study of scriptural texts. When any ritualism over the time becomes monotonous and meaningless, that is, losing its original meaning, the further detailed study and reanalysis of it is surely warranted. The origin of Mimamsa was timely when the Vedic system of ritualism was marginalized by many religious, historical, and political factors. Mimamsa has tried to reestablish the validity of Vedic ritualism portion which had become monotonous and meaningless over the time. For that, Mimamsa has used the science of Nyaya system for its Vedic interpretation. Mimamsa believes not in proving the truth of the knowledge rather in disproving the falsity of the knowledge. Just take out the untruth from a system, and what remains is the truth.
Mimamsa has gone in every detail of the meanings of the words rather than sentences of the Vedic literature and the actions prescribed by them. In this manner it has emphasized more of the “yāgnic karmakānds”, leaving behind the essence of knowledge contained in Upanishads – the end parts of the Vedas for the Vedanta philosophy to be originated in future. Purva Mimamsa and Uttara Mimamsa never contradict with each other.
Uttara Mimamsa (Vedanta):
Vedanta marks the “trivenisangam” – meeting point of three understandings of the Vedic scriptures, namely, pantheistic understanding of Vedic Arya society, atheistic understanding of Buddhism and Jainism, and monotheistic understanding of mainstream Hinduism. It also marks the beginning of the separate identification of Brahm and Parabrahm. Vedanta means the end (“anta”) part of the Vedas. The philosophies based on the end part of Veda are known as Vedanta philosophies or in short “Vedanta”. Thus, Vedanta is not just one philosophy but the group of philosophies that include Advaita (Non-Dualism), Vishishtadvaita (Qualified Non-Dualism), Dvaita (Dualism), and other philosophies having the same common source. Vedanta is also called Uttara Mimamsa, because the term Vedanta had become almost synonymous to Advaita Vedanta philosophy of Shankaracharya. All Vedanta philosophies are developed around the teachings of Upanishads and Aranyakas rather than the hymns (mantras) and the ritual parts (karma kānds) of the Vedas. The texts “Vedanta Sutras” or “Brahm Sutras” were composed by rishi Bādarāyan, also known as Vyasa. According to some Vedanta there is one Absolute Reality called “Brahm.” According to other Vedanta the Absolute Reality is called “Parabrahm,” “Purushottam,” or “Narayan.” Other realities are merely an illusion, like a dream, meaning, not the permanent. The object of life is to realize that Truth by knowledge, intuition and experience. According to Vedanta, Brahm is all pervading, (sarva-vyāpak), omnipresent, the cause of all (sarva-kāran), supporter of all (sarvādhār), beyond any qualities or attributes (nirgun), non-dual (advaita), untainted or without any impurities of maya (niranjan), the all-doer (sarva-kartā) yet appear to be non-doer (akartā) (meaning, kartā thakā akartā), and without any worldly attributes but possessing divine attributes. By describing Brahm having no attributes the followers of some Vedanta (Vedantis or Vedantists), believe that Brahm is “nirākār” or formless. By describing Brahm having no worldly attribute doesn’t mean Brahm do not have any form. In the same scriptures Brahm is described to have divine attributes, “divya sākār” form. In fact the scriptures describe Brahm having two forms at the same time, one impersonal and the other personified. When Brahm is described as the abode of God and supporting brahmands it is described as impersonal. When Brahm is described as the consort, “shakti”, companion, best Bhakta, or humble servant of God, it is described to have personification.
This is, in short, about the six basic philosophical systems of Hinduism. They were developed on different bases of the same original authentic Vedic scriptures in such a way that they become complementary to each other. Sankhya took care of the psychological or thinking aspect of the Vedic knowledge while Yoga took care of the physiological or behavioral aspect of the Vedic knowledge; Nyaya took care of the logical aspect of the Vedic science while Vaisheshika took care of the physical aspect of the Vedic science; Purva Mimamsa took care of the ritual aspect of the Vedas while Uttar Mimamsa took care of the intellectual aspect of the Vedas. The beauty of Hinduism is that, any of its six systems never contradicted to each other instead they added to each other in understanding the “Truth” or “Absolute” of Hinduism. Even though having total diversity in understanding and in practice, Hinduism has remained one religion and has flourished under one umbrella of main stream Hinduism. This is probably, due to its inherent belief in tolerance and freedom – 1. Freedom of religion – freedom of both the aspects of religion: freedom of religious practice and freedom of philosophical thinking. 2. Freedom from worldly attachments – freedom from the cycle of birth and death. Hinduism has always remained open to the mankind. It has never tried to enforce its doctrine on others. On the contrarily it has remained rather more conservatively among the intellectual class, in well control practicing and in letting others learn its Sanskrit language. These could be the two main reasons of its major loss of its lots of wealthy information.
Tags:abode, Absolute, Advaita, akartā, all-doer, all-pervading, anta, Aranyakas, atheistic, Bādarāyan, best Bhakta, Brahm, Brahm Sutras, brahmands, Buddhism, companion, consort, cosmic, Darshan, dharma, divine attributes, divya sakar, dream, ethical, forgiveness, form, formless, freedom, God, Hindu, Hinduism, humble servant, hymns, illusion, impersonal, Jaimini, Jainism, kānds, Karma, karma-kānda, karmakānds, kartā thakā akartā, linguistic, mainstream Hinduism, mantras, maya, Mimamsa, Mimamsa Sutra, monotheistic, moral, Narayan, nirākār, niranjan, nirgun, non-doer, non-dual, Nyāya, omnipresent, pantheistic, Parabrahm, particles, permanent, personification, personified, philosophies, Philosophy, Purushottam, Purva, Purva Mimamsa, Reality, rishi, rites, ritual, rituals, salvation, Sankhya, sarva kartā, sarva vyāpak, sarva-kāran, sarvādhār, Scriptures, Shad Darshan, shakti, Shankaracharya, tolerance, trivenisangam, Truth, Upanishads, Uttar Mimamsa, Uttara, Uttara Mimamsa, Vaisheshika, Vedānta, Vedanta Sutras, Vedantis, Vedantists, Vedas, Vedic, Vedic Arya, Vyasa, worldly attributes, yāgnic, Yoga
Posted in Hinduism - Philosophies, Shad Darshan – Mimamsa and Vedanta | Comments Closed
Thursday, May 6th, 2010
Shad Darshan – Nyaya and Vaisheshika:
General
The other two philosophical systems of Hinduism, namely, Nyay (Nyaya) and Vaisheshik (Vaisheshika) are more or less scientific systems developed to understand God and His Creation simply because we cannot fully test or reproduce both of them in our laboratory systems. To understand all that we see, observe, feel, think, and experience with our five senses and four antahkarans (mind) the Vedic Hindu thinkers or philosophers had developed theses two alternative systems in ancient times. Nyay is a system of logic or rules whereas Vaisheshik is system of cosmology or particles (Kan or Kana), though the evolution of universe from Prakruti is elaborately discussed in Sankhya Shashtras. Historians of science have shown unawareness about the contribution of Hindu scriptures in the fields of logic, physics, mathematics, philosophy, language, sociology, psychology, cosmology, etc. or in science in general.
Nyaya:
Nyaya or the system of logic was developed by rishi Gautam. According to Nyaya, obtaining the valid knowledge through logic helps to attain liberation. Nyaya philosophy describes 16 systems or points of understanding, called “Padārtha,” to extract “basic meanings” of any entity. These are: 1. Pramāna (evidences), 2. Prameya (theorem or analysis), 3. Samshaya (doubt or questioning), 4. Prayojana (aim, goal, or purpose), 5. Drashtānta (examples), 6. Siddhānta (conclusion or abstract), 7. Avayava (subdivisions, part, or sections), 8. Tarka (logic or hypothetical reasoning), 9. Nirnaya (descision, final verdict, or settlement), 10. Vāda (doctrine, principle, or arguments), 11. Jalpa (debate, hot discussion), 12. Vitanda (quibble or caviling), 13. Hetavābhāsa (gross purpose), 14. Chhala (fallacy or tricking), 15. Jāti (kind or descent), and 16. Nigrahasthāna (point of defeat). All 16 padarthas are further explored. For example, Nyaya school describes four types of reasoning or evidences (pramāna): A. Evidences in favor of validity of the knowledge are: direct perception (pratyaksh pramana), inference or guess work (anumāna pramana), comparative evidence (upamāna pramana), and verbal or testimonial evidence (shabda pramana). B. Evidences in favor of invalidity of the knowledge are: memory (smruti), doubt (samshaya), errors, variability, or vicissitudes (viparyāya), and hypothetical reasoning (tarka). All kinds of the evidences are further explored. For example: direct perception. It can also be of two kinds: laukika or sādhārana (ordinary or sensory), and alaukika or asādhārana (extra ordinary or extra sensory). Both are further explored. For example, ordinary perceptions can be divided into six categories, namely, auditory, tactile, visual, gustatory, olfactory, and mental. Extra ordinary perceptions are further divided into three varieties: sāmanya-lakshana (common sense or intuition), gnān-lakshana (calculated or knowledge based from the previous experience), and yogaja (ESP). Perceptions are also divided into: savikalpa (relative) and nirvikalpa (absolute).
This is just to have its idea. Voluminous information can be found from the Nyaya texts.
Vaisheshika:
Vaisheshik system was developed by rishi Kanād, from whose name the particles got the name “Kan” or “Kana.” His teaching was that liberation can only be achieved or attained by thoroughly understanding the nature and our existence. Vaisheshika accepts the cosmology or the evolution of the Nature or Universe. Prakruti is considered to be the cause of cosmic evolution. Prakruti has three constituent qualities (guna), namely, sattva, rajas, and tamas in equilibrium. That is why it is also known as “trigunātmikā.” According to Vaisheshika, all objects in nature (Prakruti) are made of tiniest, indivisible, invisible, indestructible, and eternal particles that are neither created nor destroyed (meaning they were there at the beginning of the creation and they will be there at the end of dissolution) and are called “paramānu.” They are like elementary particles of modern physics. Paramanus make anu. Two paramanu make one dvyanuka. Two, three, four, and more dvyanuka make one tryanuka, chaturanuka, and so on. These anu possess continuous vibratory motion which can be regarded as the spin or wave function. These paramanus are distinct from the soul. Each atomic substances has individual (vishesha) characteristics which distinguishes them from other non-atomic substances (dravyas), such as time (kāl), three dimensional space (dig, dishā) (directions or dimensions), soul (ātmā or ātman), and mind (manas). Vaisheshika has definitions for, ākāsh, time, and space. They have no lower constituents, meaning they are elementary. (Vaisheshika Sutra: 2.1.27-31) The qualities of akash are: sound, number, dimension, distinctness (individuality or separateness), conjunction, and disjunction. (Vaisheshika Sutra: 7.1.22) Time marks past, present, and future; succession, lateness and earliness. (Vaisheshika Sutra: 2.2.6) Time marks beginning, persistence, and end. (Vaisheshika Sutra: 2.2.9) Space is the cause of directions and dimensions between two objects. Vaisheshika clearly defines and describes the principle of cause (kāran) and effect (kārya).
Time can flow at different rates for different observers. Time and space are not absolute. Space and time are relative. There exist countless universes with their own Brahmā, Vishnu, and Mahesh. The universal is taken to be timeless and ubiquitous. Whatever can be defines with respect to space and time cannot be a universal. The processes that mark the passage of time on an object would thus be relative. It is only the universals which are true for all time and space are absolute or transcendental. The only such universals are Brahm and Parabrahm. These ideas are elaborated in the Purans, Agama Shashtras, and in the books such as Yoga-Vashishtha.
Substances can be grouped according to their actions or activities, common characteristics, specific characteristics, and their relationships with the cause and effect. According to Vaisheshika, there are six basic categories (padārtha) associated with reality: dravya (substance), guna (quality or characteristic), karma (motion or actions), sāmānya (common or general), vishesha (specific), and samavāya (inherent or comparative).
Dravyas include 9 basic realities, namely, Pruthwi (earth or solid), Jal (water or liquid), Tej (light or fire), Vayu (air or gas), Akash (ether or void), Desh or Dishā (place or the three dimensional space), Kal (time), Mana (mind), and Atma (soul or spirit).
Seventeen kinds of gunas (qualities or characteristics) of objects are originally described. They are: Rupa (appearance or form), Rasa (taste), Gandh (smell), Sparsh (feel or touch), Sankyā (number), Parimāna (dimensions, size, or quantity), Pruthakatva (individuality, separateness, or isolation), Samyoga or sanjog (conjugation), Vibhāga (parts, divisions, or disjunctions), Paratva (remoteness, farness or superiority), Aparatva (nearness or inferiority), Buddhi (intelligence or judgment), Sukha (happiness or pleasure), Dukha (unhappiness or pain), Ichchhā (desire), Dvesha (aversion or animosity), Prayatna (effort – easy or hard).
Karma means action, activity, motion, or work done. It has four features: Akash (in space or in vacuum), Kāl (time), Dik or Dishā (direction), and Atman (inherent – size, magnitude, etc).
Tags:Agama Shashtras, Akash, alaukika, antahkarans, anu, Anumāna, Aparatva, asādhārana, ātmā, Atman, Avayava, Brahm, Brahmā, Buddhi, chaturanuka, Chhala, cosmic evolution, cosmology, Creation, Darshan, Desh, dig, Dik, Dishā, Drashtānta. Siddhānta, dravya, Dravyas, Dukha, Dvesha, dvyanuka, Gandh, Gautam, gnān-lakshana, God, guna, gunas, Hetavābhāsa, Hindu, Hinduism, Ichchhā, Jal, Jalpa, Jāti, Kal, Kan, Kana, Kanād, Karma, laukika, logic, Mahesh, Mana, manas, Nigrahasthāna, Nirnaya, Nirvikalpa, Nyay, Nyāya, Padārtha, padarthas, Parabrahm, paramānu, Paratva, Parimāna, particles, philosophers, Philosophy, Pramāna, Prameya, pratyaksh, Prayatna, Prayojana, Pruthakatva, Pruthwi, Purāns, rajas, Rasa, rishi, rules, Rupa, sādhārana, sāmānya, sāmanya-lakshana, samavāya, Samshaya, Samyoga, sanjog, Sankyā, sattva, Savikalpa, senses, shabda, Shad Darshan, smruti, soul, space, Sparsh, spirit, Sukha, tamas, Tarka, Tej, time, trigunātmikā, tryanuka, upamāna, Vāda, Vaisheshik, Vaisheshika, Vaisheshika Sutra, Vāyu, Vedic, Vibhāga, viparyāya, vishesha, Vishnu, Vitanda, Yoga-Vashishtha, yogaja
Posted in Hinduism - Philosophies, Shad Darshan – Nyaya and Vaisheshika | Comments Closed
