365bet娱乐

The various systems of philosophy flourished and grew simultaneously in India. These teachings from the 峁涐梗颈蝉, 腻肠腻谤测补蝉, and 补惫补迟腻谤补蝉 founded the base to emerge the branches of different 诲腻谤艣补苍墨肠 tradition. In the eighteenth century, Parabrahman 笔耻谤耻峁�o迟迟补尘补 叠丑补驳补惫腻苍 厂惫腻尘颈苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺 incarnated on earth. Through his revelation, he provided a unique, unprecedented contribution to Vedic knowledge. His teachings were compiled in his presence at that time. This compilation is called the 痴补肠补苍腻尘峁泃补. The 痴补肠补苍腻尘峁泃补 is consisted of all principles of the 厂惫腻尘颈苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺 顿补谤艣补苍补. When a particular teacher delivered a message, it was studied and teachings were put into practice by a group of people whom it suited. Thus, was formed a School of Philosophy. Each system continued to coexist because it provided a theoretical and practical philosophy to meet the students' intellectual and emotional needs at different levels of realization. In the 厂惫腻尘颈苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺 厂补尘辫谤补诲腻测补, production of canon in the text form has been prolific practically since the 厂补尘辫谤补诲腻测补 inception, with the bulk consisting devotional hymns, sacred biographies, and theological treatises composed in Gujarati.

厂惫腻尘颈苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺 saw this textual production as essential to the growth of his 厂补尘辫谤补诲腻测补, and encouraged his disciples to compose texts tirelessly, since:

鈥淥nly the scriptures of one鈥檚 own 厂补尘辫谤补诲腻测补 will foster the 厂补尘辫谤补诲腻测补鈥� (痴补肠补苍腻尘峁泃补 Gadhad膩 II/58).

While scholarly attention on 厂惫腻尘颈苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺 texts has focused primarily on devotional hymns and sacred biographies^[1], the genre of 叠丑腻峁�y补, or commentary on 贬颈苍诲奴 sacred text, especially that covers the philosophy of 厂惫腻尘颈苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺 and identified as an authentic text was unavailable for two hundred years. Since it became the tradition that without 笔谤补蝉迟丑腻苍补迟谤补测墨 叠丑腻峁�y补 (commentary on the three basic scriptures of Hinduism-the 鲍辫补苍颈峁�a诲蝉, the 叠丑补驳补惫补诲-骋墨迟腻, and the 叠谤补丑尘补蝉奴迟谤补) the 厂补峁僷谤补诲腻测补 is not considered as a Vedic 厂补峁僷谤补诲腻测补. School of Vedanta, as Francis X. Clooney observes, are at once systems of philosophy-with attendant conceptualizations of metaphysics, epistemology, soteriology, and so on鈥揳s well as systems of commentary and exegesis, in that they attempt to read revealed texts faithfully and then to read reality out of the texts.

While there are freestanding treatises found within various schools articulating philosophical and theological positions, each school also takes seriously the imperative to develop these positions based on a careful verse by verse interpretations of the three canonical texts of the 笔谤补蝉迟丑腻苍补迟谤补测墨 mentioned above.^[2] Finally, after two hundred years of 厂惫腻尘颈苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺鈥檚 time, 厂腻诲丑耻 Bhadre艣ad膩sa, the 叠丑腻峁�y补k膩ra, an ascetic in the tradition, authored commentaries on ten principal 鲍辫补苍颈峁�a诲蝉, the 叠谤补丑尘补蝉奴迟谤补 and the 骋墨迟腻. The 笔谤补蝉迟丑腻苍补迟谤补测墨 叠丑腻峁�y补k膩ra claims that these commentaries are according to 厂惫腻尘颈苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺鈥檚 original teachings and doctrines. However, the period of two hundred years is enough to change the phenomenon of social, religious, and moral aspects. So, in this chapter, we will examine the analysis of the 厂惫腻尘颈苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺 叠丑腻峁�y补 in light of 厂惫腻尘颈苍腻谤腻测补峁嘺鈥檚 痴补肠补苍腻尘峁泃补 on the basis of epistemology.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

Mun艣墨 Kanhaiy膩l膩l, Gujarat and its Literature from Early Times to 1852, Bh膩rat墨ya 痴颈诲测腻 Bhavana, Bombay, 1967 49

[2]:

鈥楤inding the text: Vedanta as philosophy and commentary鈥�. In Texts in context: Traditional Hermeneutics in South Asia, Ed., Jeffrey R. Timm, State University of New York press.1999, pp.47-68.