Miss Buddha (100 page)

Take, for example, ceremonies celebrating
birth, marriage, and death. They are (and still—in orthodox
society—sometimes are) performed with recitations of Vedic verses
(mantras). Later in classical Indian philosophy, different
(non-orthodox) social practices developed. Thus, the orthodox
classical schools of thought are often distinguished from
non-orthodox classical schools by their allegiance to established
forms of social practice rather than to the doctrines of the
Veda.

Buddhism, on the other hand, constitutes
much more of a break with Vedic practices than with the ideas
developed in Vedic traditions of thought. In fact, the
Upanishads—the mystical treatises continuous with the
Vedas—foretell many Buddhist teachings. In ancient India, religion
did not entail dogma so much as a way of life that permitted
individual spiritual inquiry.

Mysticism—the claim that ultimate truth is
only obtainable through spiritual experience—dominates much ancient
Indian philosophy. Such experiences are thought to reveal a supreme
and transmundane (beyond ordinary experience) reality and to
provide (through first-hand experience) the meaning of life.

Mysticism shapes much classical and modern
Indian thought as well; and it is commonly held that through
meditation and the meditative techniques of yoga one can discover
one’s true self (atman), or God (Brahman), or one can reach
enlightenment (Nirvana).

The presumed indications of mystical
experiences, such as the personal seeing of atman or God, were at
the center of debate during the ancient period and went on to
influence much subsequent Indian philosophy.

However, in some schools of classical Indian
philosophy, such as Nyaya (Logic), neither religion nor mysticism
is central. Rather, the questions of how it is that humans know
what they know—and how they can truly mean what they say—are given
priority.

History

When it comes to Indian thought, we can find
it in the world’s oldest literature: The Veda.

The Veda is a collection of
poems and hymns composed over several generations beginning around
1500 BCE. This collection is composed in Sanskrit, the
intellectual
language of
both ancient and classical Indian civilizations—the Indian language
of thought.

Four such Vedic collections were written and
compiled, so we say—more for convenience than to reflect historical
truth—that there are four Vedas, and these four, as a group, have
since been considered as sacred Hindu texts.

Almost all of the Vedic poems are religious
in nature and tend to concern the fates and tribulations of various
gods. That said, many Vedic hymns and poems also address
philosophic themes that grew more important in later periods, such
as the henotheism that is now key to much Hindu theology.

Henotheism is the idea that one God,
remaining one, takes on many different guises and forms, and that
although individuals may worship several different manifestations
of gods and goddesses, they really revere only the one Supreme
Being through one of his (or her) many faces.

However, while the Vedic
hymns mostly related the lives and adventures of Gods and
Goddesses, to find out more about early Indian philosophy we turn
to the Upanishads (secret doctrines—dating back to as early as the
7
^th
century BCE).

Among other things, it was the early
Upanishads that gave birth to the view of Brahman—the Absolute, or
God—as in truth being the same as Atman—one’s true self.

Buddhism, now a major world
religion, also emerged during this ancient period of Indian
philosophy. As far as is currently known, Gotama Siddhattha, the
Buddha and founder of Buddhism, lived during the
6
^th
century BCE.

The Buddha held the supreme personal goal to
be enlightenment or Nirvana, a state (or dimension) that may be
compared to the later mystical so-called Brahman-knowledge of the
Upanishads.

In the
3
^rd
century BCE, during the reign of the Buddhist emperor Ashoka,
a great canon of literature—now known as the Pali Canon—was
compiled from the long remembered and recited (verbally passed on
from generation to generation of Buddhist monks) discourses of the
Buddha.

Other Buddhist scriptures, that would
eventually become the Canon for the Mahayana tradition, were
composed later.

The great classical schools of Indian
philosophy—some number them at seven or eight—were first recorded
in texts dating from as early as 100 BCE.

The founders of these schools are largely
unknown except by traditional names—such as Aksapada Gautama,
generally viewed as the founder of the Logic (Nyaya) school, and
Badarayana, with Vedanta.

Early classical Indian philosophy is
normally expressed in aphoristic (Sutra) texts complete with
elaborate commentaries. The Sanskrit word Sutra means thread and,
by extension, an “aphorism” that captures a philosophic tenet in a
succinct statement.

The Sutra texts, usually accompanied with
commentaries made by a second great thinker of a tradition, express
world views, or philosophies, organized around reasons and
arguments.

Outstanding thinkers in
subsequent classical Indian philosophical writing include Buddhist
Idealist Dhammakirti, who lived in the 7
^th
century; Advaita Vedantin
Samkara, of the 8
^th
century; and Logic philosopher Gangesa, of the
14
^th
century.

The writings of these men represented a
gradual but steady advance in persuasiveness over previous
arguments. As a whole, Indian philosophic reasoning and reflection
advanced—both in overall sophistication of argument and in the
volume and scope of new texts—by the gradual effort of numerous
authors, one building upon the thought efforts of his predecessors,
ever refining and improving arguments of existing views and
conclusions, much to the detriment (some hold) of fresh
investigation into the perennial questions.

Indian Thought

Exegesis

The Mimamsa-Sutra of the Exegesis school
appears to be the oldest text (100 BCE) of the philosophic sastra
(holy writing) emerging at that time.

Exegesis as a school, is (to this day)
primarily concerned with Vedic interpretation. Broad, philosophic
questions such as “Why is the Veda sacred?” are addressed, and a
generally realist view of nature (the belief that a world exists
independent of the mind) and a common-sense view of knowledge
(human beings know things by directly perceiving them or by
deducing from other known things) grew to form the basis of this
philosophic system.

Most efforts over the many centuries of this
school have focused on “the right way to live.” Of late, however,
the Exegesis philosophy focuses less on Dharma and more on
technical issues in the philosophy of language.

This school continues into the modern
period.

Vedanta

Vedanta is another school with a long and
distinguished history, as well as a bewildering number of
sub-schools.

Modeling itself after the Upanishads,
Vedantic philosophy may be said to fall into two large sub-schools:
(1) Advaita (monistic or non-dual) Vedanta, and (2) theistic
Vedanta.

The main bone of contention between the two
schools is the reality of God along with the reality of the world
that God has created, or emanated. Advaita Vedanta holds that
Ultimate Reality (Brahman) is identical with one’s true self
(Atman) and transcends all forms. Thus, God and the world are but
illusions.

Theistic Vedantins hold that God and the
world exist separately from one’s self.

Since its inception, Vedanta has held an
important place in Indian philosophy and is still the subject of
serious study among present-day philosophers in India, as well as
among Hindus throughout contemporary society.

Buddhism

Like Vedanta, Buddhism is also concerned
with mystical experience.

Buddhist thinkers tend to compare the
enlightenment (Nirvana) experience to awakening from a dream—of
course, the Sanskrit word “buddha” means awakened. Buddhist
thinkers have contributed significantly to Indian epistemology and
metaphysics, and have had a complex influence on its overall
history.

Analysis and Yoga

Comparatively speaking,
Analysis (Samkhya) and Yoga are relatively minor philosophies. Both
emerged before the 2
^nd
century BCE, but neither spawned a continuing
philosophy comparable to that of the schools above, neither did
they participate significantly in later classical
debates.

The Analysis school subscribes to a
metaphysical dualism and claims that two types of things ultimately
exist—individual souls and nature. This school devoted itself to
analyzing nature in order to better view oneself as liberated from
karma and rebirth: as pure and blissful, self-conscious, and aloof
from nature.

The school of Yoga takes a similar
metaphysical stance, though it also—and primarily, especially these
days—pursues a psychological and yogic-practice dimension that the
Analysis school lacks.

Logic and Atomism

Two other schools, Logic (Nyaya) and Atomism
(Vaisesika), specialize in questions of epistemology (“nyaya” means
critical inquiry) and of the types of objects and generalities we
experience every day.

Both schools have extensive literatures, and
later Logic (after 1400 CE) is known for its professional
techniques of cognitive analysis.

Founded in the early classical period, both
schools base their approach upon early Sutra texts, and from their
inception, Logic speculated about knowledge itself, while Atomism
speculated about the things known.

For the next 1,000 or so
years, their literatures remained distinct; however, the schools
were combined by the great 11
^th
-century innovator Udayana and
after that have been known simply as Logic.

Carvaka

The Carvaka school, a classical school of
materialism and skepticism, is primarily known for its sometimes
ridiculing attacks on religious practices, but does, at least from
a Western perspective, certainly evince that not all classical
Indian philosophy is religiously or mystically oriented.

While the Logic school also rejects the
influence of religious beliefs, Carvaka, unlike Logic, goes beyond
advocating knowledge based on natural experience by ridiculing what
it sees as superstition, including the widely held Indian belief in
rebirth.

Philosophical Perspectives

Most of the classical Indian schools present
developed and distinct world views, and have formed comprehensive
philosophies by fusing the positions of its metaphysics,
epistemology, and ethics.

While it is true that systematic
philosophies should stand on their own feet as whole bodies of
thought, it sometimes provides a better view of them to separate
and delineate the metaphysical, the epistemological, and the
ethical issues within them, particularly in study and debate.

And when it comes to Indian philosophy,
compartmentalizing its various branches also facilitates a
comparison with Western philosophy.

That said, here goes:

Metaphysics

Spiritual metaphysics—a field that currently
receives little attention among philosophers in academia here in
the West—ponders the nature of a Supreme Being and its relation to
the world.

Indian Buddhism, Advaita Vedanta, and
theistic Vedanta all have contributed to this debate.

And when it comes to spiritual metaphysics,
the almost uniform view that only one spiritual being—if “being” is
even the right word—ultimately exists, is likely the most important
consideration that Indian thought upholds, though with
variations:

Buddhist philosophy promotes the
interdependence of everything; theistic Vedanta finds no gap
between the world and God—the world, in other words, is God’s body;
and Advaita Vedanta holds that everyone’s true self is nothing
other than Brahman, the Absolute.

The field of analytic metaphysics—as opposed
to spiritual metaphysics— which examines not the spirit and
ultimate truth, but everyday experience and language, is currently
more prominent among Western philosophers.

Epistemology

Being one of the more active branches of
philosophy in the West, epistemology attempts to answer questions
involving the nature and limits of knowledge itself.

When it comes to epistemology, the Indian
Logic school does have much to offer for contemporary analysis, as
does the school of Buddhist Idealism (Yogacara).

The Logic school lays out, with detailed
elaboration, four methods of personal knowledge: perception;
inference; analogical acquisition of vocabulary; and authoritative
testimony.

Logic then goes on to challenges
skepticism—the view that true knowledge is an impossibility.
According to Logic, even though humans are fallible, they should
assume that they are justified in their beliefs, and that any doubt
of those beliefs should be reasonable or should have its own
grounds for consideration.

Much Western reflection (especially in the
last two hundred years) assumes that any form of doubt undermines
claims of knowledge.

Buddhist Idealism, meanwhile, takes a
pragmatic middle ground between skepticism and Logic’s defense of
everyday beliefs. For the Buddhist Idealist, the test of truth is
whether or not humans actually get what they want—and manage to
avoid what they do not want.