[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Encyclopaedia Britannica's entry on 'Vedanta'
-
Subject: Encyclopaedia Britannica's entry on 'Vedanta'
-
From: shrao@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Shrisha Rao)
-
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 95 03:03:05 MDT
-
Apparently-To: shrisha@lcl.cmu.edu
-
Apparently-To: alt-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Followup-To: alt.religion.vaisnava
-
From shrao@nyx10.cs.du.edu Sun Jun 4 04: 51:53 1995
-
Keywords: Vedanta, Shruti, Veda, Upanishad, miimaamsa, nyaaya, Advaita, Vishishtaadvaita, Tatvavaada.
-
Newsgroups: alt.religion.vaisnava
-
Organization: /o_.r-g*-n*-'za_--sh*n/ n. The act or process of organizing or of being organized; also, the condition or manner of being organized.
-
Sender: Shrisha.Rao@lambada.oit.unc.edu
-
Summary: Some comments on the 'Vedanta' entry in the online version of the E.B.
As before, I convey my thanks to Mani Varadarajan
<mani@srirangam.esd.sgi.com> for sending me the material from the E.B.
>Britannica Online Help
>
>Vedanta,
>
>[Index] one of the six orthodox systems (darshans) of Indian philosophy
>and the one that forms the basis of most modern schools of Hinduism. The
>term Vedanta means in Sanskrit the "conclusion" (anta) of the Vedas, the
>earliest sacred literature of India; it applies to the [Index]
>Upanishads, which were elaborations of the Vedas, and to the school that
>arose out of the "study" (mimamsa) of the Upanishads. Thus Vedanta is
>also referred to as Vedanta-Mimamsa ("Reflection on Vedanta"),
>Uttara-Mimamsa ("Reflection on the Latter Part of the Vedas"), and
>Brahma-Mimamsa ("Reflection on Brahma").
Unlike what is claimed here, Uttara-miimaamsa and Vedanta are not
usually considered synonymous, nor is Vedanta commonly understood to
be a homogeneous school; it itself has subdivisions, the best-known
being Advaita, Vishishtaadvaita, and Tatvavaada.
>The three fundamental Vedanta texts are: the Upanishads (the most
>favoured being the longer and older ones such as the Brhadaranyaka, the
>Chandogya, the Taittiriya, and the Katha); the [Index] Brahma-sutras
>(also called Vedanta-sutras), which are very brief, even one-word
>interpretations of the doctrine of the Upanishads; and the famous poetic
>dialogue, the [Index] Bhagavadgita ("Song of the Lord"), which, because
>of its immense popularity, was drawn upon for support of the doctrines
>found in the Upanishads.
The above paragraph is apparently referring to the prasthaana-traya of
texts, but it errs in saying that "the most favored" (by whom, we
ask?) of the Upanishads are the "longer and older ones." Vedanta does
not hold that there are older and newer Upanishads -- they are all
beginningless -- and it also does not hold that the worth of any text,
Upanishad or not, is necessarily in relation to its length. Also,
while there is only one Brahma-suutra and only one Bhagavad-Gita,
there are many Upanishads, which is why it is impermissible to call
the prasthaana-traya the "three fundamental Vedanta texts."
Vedanta also admits the validity of old texts like the
Muula-Raamaayana and the Pancha-raatra, which are unfortunately no
longer extant -- in fact, Vedanta Aachaaryas of all denominations have
also quoted from presently unavailable texts like the Mahaa Upanishad,
the Paingii Shruti, and the Brahma Tarka. Vedanta also considers the
whole of the Mahaabhaarata, of which the 'Gita is a part, and the
whole of the Shrutis, of which the Upanishads are a part, to be
scripture.
It is wrong to say the Bhagavad-Gita was "drawn upon for support"
because of "its immense popularity." The truth is just the reverse, in
a sense; the 'Gita is immensely popular because it has been so deeply
drawn upon, and because it contains a relatively easy-to-grasp
exposition of sophisticated concepts otherwise not presented
coherently in a simple format anywhere, and thus not as easily
understood.
>No single interpretation of the texts emerged, and several schools of
>Vedanta developed, differentiated by their conceptions of the nature of
>the relationship and the degree of identity between the individual self
>(atman) and the absolute (brahma). These range from the nondualism
>(Advaita; [Index] q.v.) of the 8th-century philosopher Shankara to the
>[Index] theism ( Vishistadvaita; q.v.) of the 11th-12th-century thinker
>Ramanuja and the [Index] dualism (Dvaita; q.v.) of the 13th-century
>thinker Madhva.
The complexities of the E.B.'s word-choices, and the nuances thus
conveyed, tend to be harder to grasp than the tenets of Vedanta, and
this is illustrated above by the choice of the adjective "philosopher"
with regard to Shankara, and the choice of "thinker" for both Ramanuja
and Madhva -- what is the point being made here?
In addition, the quoted paragraph is a slightly crude presentation; it
does not correctly convey, for example, that Tatvavaada totally denies
the existence of the nirguna Brahman, and that hence, it makes no
sense to speak of its (Tatvavaada's) conception of "the degree of
identity between the individual self and the absolute (brahma)." The
individual self, the universe, and the Lord, are all absolute, under
that school. And the use of 'brahma' for the nirguna or saguna
Brahman, is nonstandard and liable to cause confusion -- by
long-standing convention, the nirguna/saguna Brahman, or the
Paramaatman, are always denoted in English by the use of the
transliterated form of the Sanskrit root ('Brahman' with a trailing
'n,' rather than 'Brahma,' without one), but the chatur-mukha Brahma
is denoted another way.
>The Vedanta schools do, however, hold in common a number of beliefs;
>transmigration of the self (samsara) and the desirability of release
>from the cycle of rebirths; the authority of the Veda on the means of
>release; that Brahman is both the material (upadana) and the
>instrumental (nimitta) cause of the world; and that the self (atman) is
>the agent of its own acts (karma) and therefore the recipient of the
>fruits, or consequences, of action (phala). All the Vedanta schools
>unanimously reject both the heterodox (nastika) philosophies of Buddhism
>and Jainism and the conclusions of the other orthodox (astika) schools
>(Nyaya, Vaishesika, Samkhya, Yoga, and, to some extent, the
>Purva-Mimamsa).
Not all Vedanta schools hold that Brahman is the material cause of the
universe; in fact, the E.B.'s entry on 'Dvaita,' which I commented upon
in a previous posting, notes that Madhva rejects this view.
And all branches of Vedanta honor the Bhagavad Gita, which clearly says
that *five* different concurrect agents are needed to cause karma (refer
verses 13 thru 15 of Chapter XVIII), and that the rejection of
karma-phala, or the desire thereof, should be practised even while karma
is accepted.
I am not certain Jainism is considered naastika-vaada; it is certainly
outside the pale of Vedanta, because it relies on prophets rather than on
Shrutis, and because it does not honor Vishnu -- but it may not state the
absence of a Creator as Buddhism does.
The puurva-miimaamsa school of Kumaara-ela Bhatta is considered
appropriate in matters relating to the exegesis of aagama, specifically
Shruti; nyaaya is considered relevant in matters concerning debate and
reasoning, and so on. There is no wholesale rejection of nyaaya,
saankhya, etc., as has been implied.
>The influence of Vedanta on Indian thought has been profound, so that it
>may be said that, in one or another of its forms, Hindu philosophy has
>become Vedanta. Although the preponderance of texts by Advaita
>scholastics has in the West given rise to the erroneous impression that
>Vedanta means Advaita, the nondualistic Advaita is but one of many
>Vedanta schools.
I do quite agree about the "erroneous impression" some have that all
Vedanta is necessarily Advaita, but am a bit puzzled by the statement
"Hindu philosophy has become Vedanta." This tends to convey the
impression that there is "Hindu philosophy" that is not rooted in
Vedanta at some level, and that Vedanta has a beginning (obviously,
before "Hindu philosophy" became it, it could not have existed). I do
not see that either of these implications is unquestionably true.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
>
>Copyright (c) 1995 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. All Rights Reserved
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
>Related Propaedia Topics:
>
>The schools of Vedanta: the contribution of Shankara and Ramanuja and
>their followers; the schools of Nimbarka, Vallabha, and Caitanya
>
>Hindu philosophy: the integral relation of philosophy and religion in
>Hinduism
