Introduction

“The Indian knowledge system is like the Gañgā which remains connected to both the Himalayas and the ocean. ”— Pañdita. Bhagavat Śāstrī Jī

 

"Our past was very beautiful"—this sentence often escapes our tongue. But is it true to say this? Not at all. We all are part of Indian culture and it is ancient, modern, time-relative, and timeless. And so it should be; continuity and coordination are the soul of any tradition. As a result of these characteristics, Indian culture is regarded as one of the few ancient civilizations that continues to exist in a living and dynamic form even today.

The primary element or pillar of any culture is its knowledge tradition, which consists the Āchārya Paramparā, Grantha Paramaparā and also their vastness and depth. The more extensive the subject and scope of its knowledge tradition, the more extensive the age and influence of that culture will be. The vast scope existing in the Indian knowledge tradition, continuity in the Ācārya tradition, and continuity in the thought tradition are indicative of this.

 

Sources, Subjects, and Scope of the Indian Knowledge Systems

Indian culture is a knowledge-based culture. Basically, it has two sources: Vaidika and Avaidika; however, the 'Nañ' compound used in "Avaidika" is not in the sense of prohibition. The entire Veda is considered the source of all areas of the Indian knowledge tradition. And in the Avaidika or Āgama, the Tantra tradition, Buddhist, Jain, Cārvāka, etc., come. Many fields have emerged from these two sources, few of them are as follows:

Linguistic Tradition:  The extensive study of linguistics as has happened here is rare elsewhere. For the pure pronunciation of Vedic mantras and knowledge of meaning, the Six Vedāñgas were composed, and rules of Padapāṭha, Nirukta, and Grammar were created. Nirukta is also the world's first dictionary/encyclopedia where the meaning-analysis of Vedic words has happened

Varṇāgamo varṇaviparyayaśca, cāparo varṇavikāranāśau | Dhātostadarthātiśayena yogaḥ, taduccyate pañcavidhaṃ niruktam || 

The subtle analysis of word pronunciation (Phonetics and Phonology) that has occurred in Pāṇinīya Śikṣā, Yājñavalkya Śikṣā, Ṛk-Prātiśākhya, and Grammar texts has not happened in any other culture. In the West, this concept arrived in the 18th century when people came in contact with Indian culture.

Literary Tradition:  The narratives and dialogues presented in the Veda, later developed into the Itihāsa, Purāṇa, Mahākāvya, Rūpaka, etc., and commentaries and Bhāṣyas on them are obtained in every period. For example, the gradual and continuous development of the fifth Veda, Nāṭyaśāstra.

Philosophical Tradition: Its root is also present in the Saṃhitā (Nāsadīya Sūkta RV 10.129, Puruṣa Sūkta RV 10.90, Asya Vāmasya Sūkta RV 1.164). In the course of time, these develop into the Upanishads and then in the form of many philosophies. Although it has more than 32+ schools of darśana, yet general people know about nine main philosophies (Theist/Astika = 6, Atheist/Nastika = 3). [The Nāstika-Āstika classification seems to be incorrect]. Mādhvācārya has discussed sixteen philosophies in Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha. The continuously obtained Ṭīkā, Vṛtti, Vārtika, and Bhāṣya are indicators of their gradual development and social acceptance.

Social and Political Tradition: In the texts of the Indian knowledge tradition, discussions on the art of living, the Āśrama system, sixteen Saṃskāras, Puruṣārtha Catuṣṭaya, three debts (Ṛṇas), etc., are present; also, changes and development are also visible in these principles. For example, accepting Bhakti as the fifth Puruṣārtha. In our knowledge tradition, political descriptions of the King are not obtained in the form found in the Western world. Here, more emphasis is placed on the personality of the King and his human values so that subsequent kings and subjects can learn from it. Examples: Mahābhārata, Rāmāyaṇa, Purāṇa, Rājatarangiṇī, etc.

Folk Tradition (Loka Paramparā): In the Indian knowledge tradition, there has been complementarity between Loka (Folk/Common) and Śāstra (Scripture). The terminology of the Śāstras is quoted from the Loka and is also pervasive in the Loka. For example, in Grammar—Guṇa, Vṛddhi, etc.; similarly, in musicology (Sañgīta Śāstra), both the classical (Śāstrīya) and non-classical (Aśāstrīya) forms of the same music are obtained. It has been said by Bhāmaha that poetic defects are opposed by  Āgamas, and Loka both. A poetic defect committed due to ignorance and persistence is an unpardonable crime.

Scientific Tradition: A continuity is obtained in the field of science as well. The first text of Āyurveda is Caraka Saṃhitā, after that Suśruta Saṃhitā, Vāgbhaṭa’s Aṣṭāñga Hṛdaya, Mādhava’s Mādhavanidāna, Nāgārjuna’s Rasakalāgara, etc. Similarly in Astronomy (Jyotiṣa Śāstra): Vedāñga Jyotiṣa (Lagadha), Āryabhaṭīya, many texts of Varāhamihira, Brahmagupta’s Brahmasphuṭa Siddhānta, Bhāskarācārya’s Siddhāntaśiromaṇi.

 

Characteristics of the Indian Knowledge Tradition

India is a knowledge-centred Culture: We have discussed this before.

Indian Knowledge Tradition is rooted in Nigama and Āgama: This has also been discussed.

Idolatrous and Bibliolatrous Culture: Indian culture is an idol-worshipping culture where thought is presented in the form of an idol (Ideas-as-Idol). We call this Pagan Culture. Whereas Western culture is a Bibliolatrous (book-rooted) culture where there is Ideas-as-word. And for this reason, a different class/category was created there in which the poet is in the form of God. All versions of the Bible were destroyed and only one version was kept, which resulted in the creation of a one-sided society. Whereas in the Indian knowledge tradition, there is reader-centric freedom! Here many versions of even the Vedas are obtained:

“Catvāro vedāḥ sāñgāḥ sarahasyā bahudhā bhinnā — ekaśatamadhvaryu śākhāḥ sahasravartmā sāmavedaḥ, ekaviṃśatidhā bāhvṛcyam, navadhātharvaṇo vedaḥ”

  • Yajurveda → 100/101 (Currently 6)
  • Ṛgveda → 21 (Only 1 is obtained in complete form today)
  • Sāmaveda → 1000 (Currently 3)
  • Atharvaveda → 9 (Currently 2)

No Dark Age: There is no Dark Age of the Indian knowledge tradition. There is a concept of Renaissance in the West, and it is true as well, but it is not so in India. Although India remained under foreign rule for many centuries and many foreign invasions happened, still the tradition of scripture composition and Ācāryas continued continuously.

India was never fragmented, and nor was its knowledge tradition. Present society has misconceptions of this type: Indian culture is shown in a fragmented form.

Geographical: North India vs South India

Race (Arya vs Dravid) (Aryan Invasion over Dravid)

Language form: Sanskrit vs Tamil (which one is oldest)

The concept of fragment is correct up to physical geography, but not in demographic form, in the form of language, or in the form of one race. In reality, this is the fruit of the British 'Divide and Rule' and the mentality that "all good things have come from Europe only".

Divine (Daivī) and Human (Mānuṣī) Paramparā: In every field of the Indian knowledge system, you will see a human tradition and a divine tradition. For example:

Grammar (Vyākaraṇa):

Divine: “Nṛttāvasāne naṭarājarājo nanāda ḍhakkāṃ navapañcavāram | Uddhartukāmaḥ sanakādisiddhānetadvimarśe śivasūtrajālam ||”

Human: Pāṇini himself mentions 10 ancient grammarians—Śākalya, Śākaṭāyana, etc., and we also get information of various types of ancient grammar—Aindra, Cāndra, etc.

Transcending Difference: In every field of the Indian knowledge system the description of Non-dualism (Advaitavāda) is obtained. Such as:

  • Grammar → Śabdādvaita
  • Bhavabhūti (Poetry) → Rasādvaita
  • Yogācāra → Vijñānādvaita
  • Music → Nāda Brahma
  • Vedānta → Brahmādvaita (Concept of Brahman) 

But here the meaning of Advaitavāda is not Monism, rather it is Non-Dualism, where while accepting the difference, we transcend the difference.

Complementarity in Folk and Scripture: We have discussed this earlier.

No Proclamation of Originality: In the Indian knowledge system, no creator considers their composition as new or original; they always express gratitude to previous Ācāryas. But it is not that there is no originality or novelty in it, they just don't proclaim it. This principle is found in both Indian scripture and folk-society. Example:

Athavā kṛtavāgdvāre vaṃśe'sminpūrvasūribhiḥ | Maṇau vajrasamutkīrṇe sūtrasyevāsti me gatiḥ || — Raghuvaṃśam 1.4 (by Kālidāsa) 

Many creators have not even written their names.

Similarity of Conceptual Terminology: There are not many technical terminologies in the Indian knowledge system. Study of all Sanskrit scriptures is possible with the knowledge of roughly 500 words. And all these words are also used in folk behavior. But be aware that conceptual words can have different meanings in each scripture. Example: Dharma ≠ Religion

Mīmāṃsā → Yāgāditva dharma

Sāñkhya → For the sake of Abhyudaya-Niḥśreyasa

Jain → In the form of cause of motion [Division of Ajīva]

Potter (Kumbhakāra) is Considered the Ideal Creator: Reality (Sattā) is immeasurable, indivisible, nothing is a new form (Satkāryavāda). Look at the potter's creation, how he creates innumerable invisible creations on the wheel in wood. Who would be the first sculptor? A common person cannot have such capacity. He will definitely be a perfected yogi (Siddha Yogī).

Vedas are not ‘Holy Books’ and the Problem of Translation: While studying the Indian knowledge systems, often readers take inappropriate or narrow meanings by reading English translations. While translating most of the conceptual terminology of Sanskrit, we do not get words holding that meaning in other English etc. Western languages. Therefore, it seems an inappropriate practice for readers and writers to translate and present them. Example: Dharma ≠ Religion Religion is made from religare which means 'to bind'. There are three parts in this:

  • God: Monotheistic God (is outside the world, created the creation in 6 days)
  • Holy Book: (Question cannot be asked)
  • Prophets While the Indian God is present in every element of the world. 

These should be used in the same form, along with their meanings (according to Indian culture) should be in footnotes or explained there. In this way, the Veda is not a 'Holy Book'; on a 'Holy Book' you cannot question, but such a thing does not apply to the Veda.

Classifying the Philosophical Systems into Atheist-Theist (Nāstika-Āstika) is not correct: Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan  made this attempt which seems inappropriate. These are all just translations of Orthodox and Heterodox.

  • Orthodox: One who believes in the Bible.
  • Heterodox: One who does not believe in the Bible. 

Is it right to believe in Āstika or Vināstika in this sense? In Indian culture, the meaning of Āstika is one who has faith in God, and the meaning of Nāstika is one who does not have faith in God. Even if we consider 'Veda-reviler' as its meaning then also all sixteen philosophies cannot be included in this.

Conclusion

From the above study, the following conclusions are drawn:

  • Continuity and coordination are extremely necessary in a Paramparā.
  • The India Knowledge  is ancient, new, and eternal (Sanātana).
  • The source of the India knowledge  is the Veda and Āgama.
  • The study of the characteristics of the Indian knowledge system is necessary for every reader, regardless of the culture they belong to. From this, they can get the correct understanding of the words, meanings, and their implications inherent in Indian texts.
  • The above discussion also describes the reasons for the "eternity" of Indian culture. Certainly, this will help in understanding Indian culture, society, and its philosophy.

 

 

Note: This article was originally a part of exam notes prepared for the Paper: [SK 401] Text and Indian Intellectual Tradition at JNU.

 

#IndianKnowledgeSystems #IKS #IndianIntellectualTradition #KashmiriShaivism #Abhinavagupta #Pratyabhijna #SanskritStudies #VedicWisdom #Advaita #NonDualism #AncientIndia #IndicStudies #DharmaNotReligion #DecolonizingTheMind #SanatanaDharma #AcharyaParampara