The Vedas were interpreted as teaching two basic philosophies, the philosophy of a life of unceasing activity and that of contemplative life, although in the tradition of philosophical ideas created by the Vedas, a number of other interpretations sprang up, some of which became strong while the others were either absorbed in the stronger currents or discarded as false.
Activism is the name of all philosophies that teach that activity, process, movement, energy or force is the ultimate reality and all that we see and experience in this world consists of the forms which such a reality takes. But the Indian philosophers who have propounded such a doctrine have each his own conception of what activity is; and so there are different types of activism. The first type belongs to the school of the Nairuktas or Lexiconists. Nirukta is the name of the first Sanskrit lexicon, explaining mainly some difficult Vedic words, and this school of thought derived its name from that book. The Nairuktas maintained, as did some of the Vedantins, that the Atman is the sole reality and everything else is only its form. But they differed from the Vedantins, and said that the nature of the Atman was pure activity, a continual, uninterrupted process. They maintained also that the Vedic language was the only language that exactly corresponded to the nature of reality, and further that any language, in order to be true, must exactly correspond to the nature of reality. Therefore since the Atman alone is real, and since the Atman is pure activity, the verb, which expresses activity in any sentence, is the primary part of the sentence. And just as everything else in the universe is only a mode of the Atman, which is activity itself, all the other parts of the sentence - the subject, the object, etc. — are only modes of the verb. So in interpreting the Vedas, the Nairuktas say, we should take the words denoting activity as primary and the rest as secondary, and give importance to sentences asking us to act, and treat the other sentences as subsidiary to them. The aim of such teaching is two-fold: first, it confers on activity (Karma) the role of the creator and the controller of the universe; and secondly, it exhorts man to lead a life of endless activity, if he is to realize his true nature, which is the Atman.
The second type of activism is that of the Mimamsakas. They did not go the whole way with the Nairuktas in equating the Atman with activity. They retained the idea of Activity as the controller of the universe, but not as its creator. Activity can modify only what already exists, but cannot create it. And what exists need not necessarily be process, but may also be the substance to which the process belongs. Yet since the Vedas teach only a life of action, only those sentences meaning action are primary, and the rest have only subsidiary importance. The atmans also are many, because they are the agents of action, and each performs action with its own motives and has, therefore, to enjoy the fruit of its own actions. The attmn is not activity itself, but the initiator or agent of activity. We have to accept the existence of a single universal Activity as the controller of the universe, which co-ordinates the activities of the various atmans and enables the actions to produce their fruit without conflict.
Now the texts are not interpreted merely to get their verbal meaning, but to expound a system of philosophy. The conditions of a true philosophy are that it should be self-consistent and that it should be in accord with reality. Thus every school of philosophy discusses the sources of knowledge including logic, metaphysics, and certain rules for the guidance of life towards approved goals.
The Mimamsa as a school of critical inquiry or discussion divided itself into two schools of thought: that Mimamsa which interpreted the first two parts of the Veda is called Purva Mimamsa or Prior Mimamsa, and that which interpreted the other two parts the Uttara Mimamsa or Posterior Mimamsa. But when the word Mimamsa is used without any adjective, it means only the Prior Mimamsa, that teaches a philosophy of the life of action. Posterior Mimamsa is generally called the Vedanta.
The founder of the Mimamsa School was called Jaimini, who composed the Mimamsa Aphorisms {Mimamsa- sutras) about 400 B c. His aphorisms were first commented upon by Sahara about AD 400. The aphorisms and their commentary form the basic literature. Then Sahara's commentary was explained by Kumarila Bhatta (or simply Bhatta) and Prabhakara (also called Guru), both of about the same period, early eighth century. Each differed from the other on many points,and founded two sub-schools. There were others also, but not considered to be equally important. Of the two, Kumarila and Prabhakara, Kumarila is the more popular. Part of what Prabhakara wrote has been lost, and part is still unpublished.
There are six sources of knowledge according to the Mimamsa: Perception, inference, comparison, verbal testimony, postulation, and non-cognition. On the number of these sources Kumarila and Prabhakara differ from each other, because Prabhakara does not admit that non-cognition or absence of cognition can be a source of knowledge at all.
Knowledge (buddhi) belongs to the atman and is obtained when mind (manas) comes into contact with it. The atman by itself does not have any knowledge without contact with mind (manas), and it is not even conscious of itself. Kumarila says that the atman, although not by itself conscious, has, even without contact with mind, the potency or power to become conscious and know objects; but Prabhakara does not accept this view.
The Mimamsakas maintain that knowledge has three factors - the object known, the knowing subject, and knowledge. This doctrine is called the three-factor theory (triputi-vada).
Source: Philosophical Traditions of India, P. T. Raju |
|
|
