IS THERE INDIAN PHILOSOPHY?

Two senses of “Philosophy”

● Non-technical Sense - a complete world-view that could be regarded
as providing a fully coherent explanation of everything. Loose.
● Technical Sense - occurs when we begin to reflect critically on the
traditional explanatory world-view. Critical view.

Two Levels of “Philosophy”

● Descriptive - description. Philosophy vis a vis Mere world-view
● Evaluative - good philosophy vis a vis mere philosophy

Conditions of Good Philosophy

1. Secularity condition - critical to religion.
2. Argumentation condition - philosophy is concerned with analyzing
and evaluating arguments for and against competing positions.
Associated with the growth of the tradition of critical reflection.
Philosophical arguments can be presented more or less explicitly or
formally or if we are willing to tough it out and insist on construing the
argumentation condition so austerely.
3. Historicist condition - Naka-ugat sa kasaysayan. Halimbawa, sabi ni
Jacques Derrida, parang di raw ma-e-explain yung chinese culture and
thought without first introducing yung european model. Pero can we
also conclude na walang indian music dahil linked ang music sa some
sort of european history and language?
4. Lexical Equivalence condition - katumbas na salita. In Indian
language wala raw traditional word sa term na “philosophy”. If there is
a relative term then it is darsana (view) - philosophical schools and
anivksiki (investigation through reasoning) -may methodological
implications.

One promising positive strategy for locating Indian philosophy as philosophy

is to proceed recursively: that is, begin with some paradigms of philosophy,
then count anything as philosophy that resembles these paradigms (at
least as closely as they resemble each other).

The term ‘philosophy’ does not need, then, to refer to an unchanging,

ahistorical essence in order to be intelligible, and the obvious dissimilarities
between some of the things that can be claimed as instances of philosophy
should not be allowed to obscure the existence of a network of relevant
similarities that unify the resemblance class.
 INDIAN PHILOSOPHY: A BRIEF HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

1 The Ancient Period (900 B C E –200 C E ) - composition of Vedas and

Upanisads and growth of anti-vedic movements.
2 The Classical Period (200 C E –1300 C E ) - rise of darsanas
3 The Medieval Period (1300 C E –1800 C E ) - great commentaries on the
sutra
4 The Modern Period (1800 C E –present) - contact of inheritors sa west.

Yung third period tinatrato raw ng ibang philosophers as the continuous ng

classical period, thus “classical Indian philosophy” refers to the work of both
second and third periods. Unless otherwise indicated, we too shall follow this
practice of using ‘classical Indian philosophy’ to refer indiscriminately to
Indian philosophy of what is, according to the periodization above.

1 ANCIENT PERIOD OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

● Vedas - earliest Indian religious texts

- include hymns to the gods and manuals of sacrificial ritual
- also the beginnings of Indian philosophy proper.
- Early Vedic texts - speculations about the origins of existence
and prefigurements of important later concepts like karma and
moral order (rṭa).
- Late Vedic texts - Upanisads - set of dialogues on philosophical
themes.
- Earlier Vedic literature emphasizes ritual action towards a focus
on self-realization and the attainment of liberation from
suffering and rebirth.
- Dharma - an earlier ideal of the householder embedded in
society and committed to the performance of social duties
(dharma).
- Activism (pravrtti) - exemplified in the early Vedic ritualistic
tradition , ito yung activism dahil it focuses on the performance
ng dharma.
● Upanisads - later Vedic texts
- Main philosophical themes : nature of the Absolute (Brahman)
as the ground of being and the importance of knowledge of
Brahman as the key to liberation. Correct understanding of the
nature of the Self (ātman) - identical daw kay Brahman ang
atman.
- Moksa - a later ideal of the renunciant who has withdrawn from
the world to pursue liberation (mokṣa).
 - Quietism (nivrtti) - exemplified in later Upanisadic renunciant
tradition, ito naman ay quietism kasi napofocus siya sa self at sa
liberation or moksa.
- Better represented as proto philosophy than Indian philosophy
because of two reasons: (1) although these texts are
philosophically suggestive, they are nowhere near as systematic
or rigorously argumentative as classical Indian philosophical
works, (2)mayroong rival anti-vedic philosophies.

To be clear lang yung dharma at moksa ay tro competing ideals sa Vedic

literature. Yung activism at quietism naman ay two competing strands in
Brahmanical thought.

● Heterodox Schools : Buddhism, Jainism, and Carvaka

- Associated with the influence of sramana or ascetic movement.
- Vedic orthodox believes in: the authority of the Vedas, belief in a
world creator, the path of ritualism, and a social structure based
upon a hereditary hierarchy of caste.
- While heterodox schools or sramanas rejected all of these in
favor of the path of asceticism.
- Two most important heterodox schools:
- Buddhism
- Founder - Prince Gautama Siddhartha
- the path to freedom from suffering that he preached
was called the ‘middle way’ between the extremes
of sensuality and asceticism.
- Rejected the views of: atman or the self,
Brahmanical beliefs in a world creator, and the
caste system.
- Jainism
- Founder - Mahavira, Not born of the priest brahmin
class, but of ksatriya or warrior class.
- He was also unimpressed by Brahmanical
commitments to sacrificial rituals, a world creator
and a social order based on caste.
- Before he was 30 years old he had renounced the
householder life and become a mendicant, leading a
life of severe austerities before achieving
enlightenment and being recognized by his
followers as a tīrthaṅkara or ‘ford crosser’, and
establishing a large Jaina community of both
monastics and laypersons
Buddhism and Liberalism were still committed to the pursuit of
liberation (moksa)
 - Carvaka materialists
- were anti-Vedic atheists who rejected the goal of
liberation and all of the ascetic practices said to be
required to achieve it.

2 CLASSICAL PERIOD OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

- Rise of philosophical schools or darsanas.

- Orthodox (astika) - Brahmanical schools that accepted the Vedas
- Heterodox (nastika) - schools that did not accept the authority of
Vedas
- Sutra - the characteristic textual genre adopted by a darśana,
systematic arrangement of memorizable aphorisms organized
systematically around reasons and arguments so as to present a
world-view.
- Bhasya - second genre or more extended commentary on the gnomic
original sūtra.

● Orthodox philosophical schools are six in number, arranged in three

pairs: Sāṃkhya– Yoga, Nyāya–Vaiśeṣika, Mīmāṃsā–Vedānta.

- Samkhya - Yoga
- Sāṃkhya is the oldest of these six schools, but its classical
redaction is to be found in Īśvarakṛṣṇa's Sāṃkhyakārikā
(second century). Dualistic metaphysics.
- Yoga - Practical psychology. Presented in Patañjali's
Yogasūtra (third century). Bhasya - Vyāsa's Yogabhāṣya
(fourth century)

- Nyaya - Vaisesika
- Nyāya is the school of logic and argument. Root sūtras -
Gautama's Nyāyasūtra (second century). Bhasya -
Vātsyāyana's Nyāyabhāṣya (fifth century).
- Vaiśeṣika is the atomistic tradition. Root sutras - Kaṇāda's
Vaiśeṣikasūtra (second century). Bhasya - Praśastapada's
Padārthadharmasamgraha (fifth century).
- Two separate schools then they soon come to be regarded
as a single syncretic school (Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika) specializing
in logic, epistemology and metaphysics.

- Mimamsa-Vedanta
- Mīmāṃsā is the school of scriptural exegesis, focusing on
the earlier Vedic texts. Root sutra - Jaimini's
 Mīmāṃsāsūtra (first century). Bhasya - Śabara's
Śābarabhāṣya (sixth century) .
- Vedānta, in contrast, focuses on the later Upaniṣadic texts.
Root sutra - Bādarāyaṇa's Brahmasūtra (second century
B C E ). Bhasya - Śaṃkara's Brahmasūtrabhāṣya (eighth
century)

● Heterodox Schools

- Buddhist doxographical tradition - Four major schools of Indian

Buddhist philosophy: Sarvāstivāda, Sautrāntika, Madhyamaka
and Yogācāra.
- Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośa (fourth century) - Most
important extant source for knowledge about the
Sarvāstivāda. Reviews both Sarvāstivāda doctrines and
arguments and Sautrāntika criticisms of them.
- Hinayana (Lesser Vehicle) schools - Sarvastivada and
Sautrantika
- Mahayana (Greater Vehicle) schools - emphasizes on
universal compassion - Madhyamaka and Yogacara
- Metaphysically, Sarvastivada and Sautrantika affirm
varieties of reductionism realism. Epistemologically,
Sarvastivada - direct realism, and Sautrantika -
representationalism.
- Madhyamaka (the middle school)
- Founder - Nagarjuna (second century), author of the
Mūlamadhyamakākarikā
- Seeks to maintain a dialectical middle way between
the extremes of eternalism and nihilism.
- Writings of Candrakīrti (seventh century) and
Śāntideva (eighth century) began to revive some
interest in the school after it became marginal to
indian philo since Nagarjuna’s death.
- Yogacara
- Founder - brothers Asaṅga and Vasubandhu (fourth
century)
- Advocating a variety of metaphysical idealism
- Associates with the rise of a sophisticated school of
Buddhist logic and epistemology through the
influence of Dignāga's Pramāṇasammucaya (fifth
century) and Dharmakīrti's Pramāṇavārtikka
(seventh century).
- The appearance of Buddhist philosophers like Śāntarakṣita
(eighth century), who tried to synthesize the dialectical
 approach of Nāgārjuna with the logical and
epistemological innovations of Dignāga and Dharmakīrti.

- Jainism
- Advocates a distinctive metaphilosophy of non-absolutism
(anekāntavāda) - no metaphysical view is unconditionally
true.
- Also advocates ethic of non-injury (ahiṃsā).
- Impartial doxographers of the Indian views.

3 MEDIEVAL PERIOD OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

● Period of the great commentaries on the sūtras of the various

systems.
● Disappearance of Buddhism (14th century) dahil sa Muslim invasion
(mula 11th century).
● Buddhism was centred in large monastic universities, which were easy
targets for looting and destruction by Muslim armies.
● Hindi convertible and Hinduism at Buddhism.
● Pag-arise ng Hindu theistic devotionalism (bhakti)
- Development of theistic forms of Vedanta - Viśiṣtādvaita
qualified nondualism and Dvaita, dualism.
- Leading figures of Visistadvaita: Ramanuja, author of Sribashya;
and Venkatanath, successor ni Ramanuja.
- Leading figures of Dvaita: Madhva (thirteenth century),
Jayatīrtha (fourteenth century) and the dialectician Vyāsatīrtha
(sixteenth century).
- Both Visistadvaita and Dvaita are polemics against non-theistic
school of Advaita Vedanta.
● Post-Śaṃkara Advaita begins with a division into the Vivaraṇa and
Bhāmatī subschools, who disagree as to whether Brahman or the
individual self is the locus of ignorance.
- Vivarana position is associated with Padmapada > direct disciple
of Samkara. Further developed by Prakasatman and Vidyaranya.
- Bhamati position is associated with Vacaspati.
● Samkhya and Yoga
- Lost much of their status as distinct schools and was getting
“Vedanticized” by Vedāntin commentators like Vācaspati (tenth
century) and Vijñāna Bhikṣu (sixteenth century).
● Nyaya-Vaisesika
- Fully retains its independence and develops into a single
syncretic school.
 - Growth of Navya-Nyaya (New Logic). The most influential work
of this school is certainly Gaṅgeśa's prodigious Tattvacintāmaṇi
(fourteenth century).
- The next most eminent Navya-Naiyāyika is Raghunātha Śiromaṇi
(sixteenth century), who further refined the analytical tools of
Navya-Nyāya and introduced a number of ontological
innovations.
- Developed a powerful technical language, an intentional
logic of cognitions increasingly construed by most Indian
philosophers as being independent of the realist
metaphysics of Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika.
● Scholastic - the style of writing of the medieval period. Assuming the
reader’s familiarity with a specialized technical vocabulary and range
of allusions.
● Appearance of scholastic manuals in the late medieval period for
various philosophical schools that summarize and systematize the
essentials of the systems.
● By the end of the late medieval period the ancient texts are no longer
thought of as authorities to which one must defer, but are regarded as
the source of insight in the company of which one pursues the quest
for truth (see further Ganeri 2011).

4 MODERN PERIOD OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

● The nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were the age of the
British Raj.
● The British transformed matters by in 1835 introducing English
education into India with the explicit intention of revolutionizing
traditional Indian modes of thought.
● Intention of colonialism ay “educate to perpetuate”
● Growth of Indian nationalism was inadvertently encouraged by the
education of an Indian elite in the liberal ideals of Western thought,
ultimately subverting the very colonial authority that education was
supposed to support.
● The spirit of nationalism manifested itself in the rediscovery and
reinterpretation of India's indigenous intellectual traditions, presented
anew in relation to Western thought.
● India ay may native tradition sa pilosopiya - philosophical literatures
are written in Sanskrit.
● After 1857, yung western philosophy ang nagform ng basis ng
curriculum ng mga Indian universities, at yung Indian philosophy ay
ignored or despised.
● Pero naggrow din yung Indian philosophy at the same time kasi
mayroong mga indian philosophers na naging equipped para maisalin
sa English and Sanskritic tradition, particularly yung relasyon nito sa
Western philosophy.
5 WESTERN CONCEPTIONS OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

● Sa part na ito mga approaches sa Idian philosophy and tatalakayin.

● The original neglect of traditional Indian philosophy in the
philosophy curriculum of Indian English-language universities was
obviously a consequence of Macaulay's own exaggeratedly low
opinion of Indian literature
● Macaulay was influenced by great Hindu reformer Rammohun Roy,
who in 1823 had written (in his superb English) a letter of appeal
against British plans to found and support a new college for Sanskrit
studies in Calcutta.
- Sabi ni Roy ay yung pagaaral ng Sanskrit ay hindi
makakatulong sa pagunlad ng India. Mananatili sa dilim
ang India.
● (1) Magisterial Conception
- Mababa o inferior and tingin sa sariling native tradition
and strongly relate to the exercise of the imperial power of
guardianship.
- Makikita ito sa attitude ni Rammohun Roy.
- Makikita rin ang magisterialism kila Macaulay, James at
John Stuart Mill.
- Basta naniniwala sila na dapat we are guided by
Westerners para masmagdevelop or improve.
- Overly dismissive of the very real intellectual achievements
of Indian philosophy.
- Tinitignan ang mga claims as False.
● (2) Exoticist approach
- Concentrate on the wondrous aspects of India
- Positive value of India’s supposed differences from the
West.
- Ginamit ng mga Westerners tulad nila Herder, the
Schlegels, Schelling, Schopenhauer and others.
- these writers constructed an image of India as an ‘Other’
that exemplified those valuable qualities that Europe
lacked: in particular, various forms of spirituality,
transcendentalism and anti-materialism.
- Valorizes the non-rationalist parts of the Indian
philosophical tradition.
 - Misrepresents the analytical achievements of Indian
philosophy. Parang tungkol lang sa spiritual at mysticism
and India, kaysa sa logic at epistemology.
- TInitignan ang mga claims as True.
● (3) Curatorial approach
- More catholic
- Classify and exhibit diverse aspects of Indian culture.
- Nakikita and India bilang isang special at fascinating
object
- Hindi committed sa pagbavalorize ng kaibahan ng India sa
West;
- At hindi rin dinadala ang sense of superiority at
guardianhood ng mga mananakop.
- Dominate contemporary Indological treatments of Indian
philosophy.
- Indological approaches to Indian philosophy are focused
on philological-cum-historical-cum-grammatical
analyses of the Sanskrit texts
- It refuses to try to rationally assess the theories and
arguments of the texts it studies, to ask whether the
theses affirmed there are true and the arguments offered
in support of them are good ones.
- Hindi chinachallenge and Indian philosophy, inaaral lang,
hindi crinicriticize and truth values ng mga claims.
- Fails to do justice and to take Indian philosophy seriously.
● (4) Interlocutory approach
- Binalik ang pagchachallenge sa Indian philosophy.
- Like their Indian counterparts, Western philosophers have
typically aspired to the truth, whatever their differing views
about the nature and criterion of truth.
- May claim tapos may papasok na interlocutors na
magiisscrutinize ng claim.
- Truth of our claim increases kapag nagsurvive siya sa mga
scrutinies ng mga interlocutors na gusto ring malaman
ang katotohanan.
- Purvapaksin - new opponents
- Siddhanta - new view
- Parang Thesis > Anti - Thesis > Conclusion
- It gives proper weight to cultural diversity – indeed
requires it – but eschews any kind of relativism that would
prohibit cross-cultural criticism.

Other info:
*Orientalism - which takes the idea of the ‘Orient’ to be a construct of the
Western imagination (Said 1978).

*Caste System
 THE BASIC FEATURES OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

I. THE NATURE OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

● Man struggles for existence. Man uses the superior gift of his intellect to
understand the conditions and meaning of the struggle and to devise
plans and instruments to ensure success.
● Desire for knowledge springs, therefore, from the rational nature of
man. Philosophy is an attempt to satisfy this very reasonable desire.
● ‘Men live in accordance with their philosophy of life, their conception of
the world.” The choice that is given us is not between some kind of
metaphysic and no metaphysic; it is always between a good
metaphysic and a bad metaphysic.' 1
● Philosophy aims at the knowledge of truth > it is termed in Indian
literature, 'the vision Every Indian school holds, in its own way, that
there can be a direct realisation of truth (tattvadarśana).
● Western Philosophy views that it is impossible for the same man to
know and study everything, thus, specialization and division of labors
arose.
- Yung specialization consequently causes the
establishment of different special sciences.
- The detailed study of many of the particular problems with
which philosophical speculation originally started became
thus the subject-matter of the special sciences.
● General nature of universe - man, nature, and God.
● In Indian Philosophy, they discuss the different problems of the various
branches (Metaphysics, Ethics, Epistemology, Logic, and Psychology)
but they were not discussed separately. It is holistic (connected and
sama-sama ang mga branches or fields na pinag aaralan)
- It is termed as synthetic outlook of Indian philosophy by
Sir B.N. Seal.
- Problems are approached in different ways and through
different fields.

II. THE MEANING and SCOPE OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

● Includes the speculation of all Indian thinkers, ancient or modern,
Hindus or non-Hindus, theist or atheists.
● Regarded as “Hindu Philosophy” but only in geographical sense
because in India it is not only Hindus that philosophize.
● Sarva-darśana-saṅgraha of Mādhavācārya which tries to present in
one place the views of all (sarva) schools of philosophy, we find in the
list of philosophies (darśanas) the views of atheists and materialists
like the Cārvākas, and unorthodox thinkers like the Bauddhas and the
Jainas, along with those of the orthodox Hindu thinkers.
 ● Philosophical schools (darsanas) take into consideration the other
schools' thoughts in their teachings.

Method of Philosophical Discussion:

1. A philosopher had first to state the views of his opponent's case which
came to be known as the prior view (pūrvapakṣa).
2. Then followed the refutation (khaṇḍana) of this view.
3. Last of all came the statement and proof of the philosopher's own
position, which, therefore, was known as the subsequent view
(uttarapakṣa) or the conclusion (siddhānta).

Indian Philosophy can be revived and continued by taking into consideration

the new ideas of life and reality.

III. THE SCHOOLS OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

Can be classified into orthodox and heterodox.

1. Orthodox schools (astika)

- Sad-darsana - Mīmāṁsā, Vedānta, Sāṅkhya, Yoga, Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika
- Accepts the authority of the Vedas (does not mean they believe in
God). There are orthodox schools that do not believe in God.
2. Heterodox schools (nastika)
- Does not accept the authority of the Vedas.
- Cārvākas, the Bauddhas and the Jainas.

● Vedas - earliest available records of Indian literature

● Vedas affect Indian philosophy positively (Orthodox schools) and
negatively (heterodox schools).
● Mimamsa and Vedanta are said to be the two direct continuators of
Vedic culture.
● Mimamsa and Vedanta are directly based on the Vedas, while the
other heterodox schools are based on their independent grounds yet
follow the Vedas.
Vedic Tradition has two sides.
● Ritualistic (Karma)
○ Early vedic
○ Mimamsa school
○ emphasised the ritualistic aspect and evolved a philosophy to
justify and help the continuation of the Vedic rites and rituals.
● Speculative (Jñānaa)
○ The Upanisads
○ Vedanta school
 ○ emphasised the speculative aspect of the Vedas and developed
an elaborate philosophy out of Vedic speculations.

● Sankhya, Yoga, Nyaya and Vaisesika (Other heterodox schools)

○ Does not base their teachings on the Vedas but they agree or
did not challenge the authority of the Vedas.
○ Sāṅkhya, Yoga, Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika based their theories on
ordinary human experience and reasoning, they did not
challenge the authority of the Vedas, but tried to show that the
testimony of the Vedas was quite in harmony with their
rationally established theories.

IV. THE PLACES OF AUTHORITY AND REASONING IN INDIAN PHILOSOPHY

The foundation of Philosophy is experience, and the chief tool used to

analyze is reason. But what and whose experience?
- Indian thinkers are not unanimous in this.

● Some hold that philosophy should be based on ordinary, normal

experience. Truth we discover and accept. Nyaya, Vaisesika, Sankhya,
Carvaka, Bauddha, and Jaina.
● Some hold that we need guidance. Philosophy must depend on the
experience of those few saints, seers or prophets who have direct
realisation of such things. Mimamsa and Vedanta, using the Vedas and
Upanisads as the basis of their teachings.
● Reasoning is used to understand and justify the knowledge given.
○ The former reasoning is always made to follow the lead of
ordinary experience.
○ The latter reasoning is made to follow in some matters the lead
of authority as well.
The charge is against Indian Philosophy that its theories are not based on
independent reasoning but on authority and, therefore, they are dogmatic,
rather than critical.
- This charge is clearly not true of the majority of Indian systems which
are as much based on free thinking.
- The charge is for the Mimamsa and Vedanta, that are based and
started on authority. Though these systems start from authority, the
theories they develop are supported also by such strong independent
arguments that even if we withdraw the support of authority, the
theories can stand well and compare favourably with any theory
established elsewhere on independent reasoning alone.

V. HOW THE INDIAN SYSTEMS GRADUALLY DEVELOPED

 ● Western Philosophy's existence is by succession. Pag may nawala may
papalit.
● In India, they do not originate and arise simultaneously, but they
flourish together. They started in different times but they all co-exist.
Though, some philosophies die over time like Buddhism.
● The reason is that in India, Philosophy is a part of life; it is part of the
lifestyle of the people.
● It is by constant mutual criticism that the huge philosophical literature
has come into existence. Mutual criticism further makes Indian
philosophy its own best critic.
● Bearing this fact of mutual influence in mind we may try to
understand the general process by which the systems originated and
developed.
The Vedas, we have said, are directly or indirectly responsible for most of the
philosophical speculations.
● In the orthodox schools, next to the Vedas and the Upaniṣads, we find
the sūtra literature marking the definite beginning of systematic
philosophical thinking. (A sūtra-work consists of a collection of many
sūtras or aphorisms of this kind).
○ Example: Brahmasūtra of Bādarāyana
● The sūtras were brief and, therefore, their meanings were not always
clear. There arose thus the necessity for elaborate explanation and
interpretation through commentaries. (Bhāṣyas- commentaries on
sutras),
● As time went on, commentaries on commentaries arose and
sometimes independent works also were written to supply handbooks
or to justify, elaborate or criticise existing doctrines.
● The history of the development of the heterodox schools is more or
less the same.
- They do not start, however, from any sūtra-work of the above
kind. They do not start from existing works.
● Though the different schools were opposed to one another in their
teachings, a sort of harmony among them was also conceived by the
Indian thinkers.
- They believed that all persons have differences and recognized
consequent distinctions of natural aptitudes (adhikārabheda).
- The different philosophical disciplines in India are different ways
of shaping practical lives. Since they are part of the lifestyle or life
of people.
VI. COMMON CHARACTERS OF THE INDIAN SYSTEMS