ASTRAD

- TARKA PADA)

INTRODUCTION ( S
IPIK
A
by R.Mani Dravid Sastri & Sharda Narayanan
The word "Mmam
. sa" literally means "analysis" or "enquiry". It is derived from
the verb "mana" meaning "to enquire" or "to guage" by adding San suffix. It refers
to "reasoned conclusion in matters of religious enquiry".1 Mmam
. sa is the science
of systematically and logically interpreting Vedic passages, both philosophical
and practical in the context of ritual worship. It is a very ancient school of thought,
with beginnings well over two millenia ago. The earliest rules or tenets to be
followed were known as Nyayas, which indicate that this school may have its
origins in a time when the Nyaya school was yet to be officially known by that
name.
The Vedas are held to be self-revealing, eternal, perfect, complete, and sacred.
As per tradition, the earliest Seers intuitively "saw" the Vedas and spontaneously
uttered them. They understood their meaning perfectly. But as time wore on,
subsequent generations of seers and scholars had to be taught the meaning as they
were unable to grasp it spontaneously. The six Vedangas
2 were composed to assist
in systematic study of the Vedas. There is an account of these events given by
Patanjali in the Vyakaran.a Mahabha.sya,3 explaining the origins of Vyakarana.
To aid in this exercise and to ensure that corruptions and distortions did not set
astra was formulated, the highest emphasis being on language
in, Mmam
. sa S
analysis and interpretative logic, the chief purpose being to resolve any doubt in
the interpretation of Vedic passages. "mi6V|||V|||mV|||MV|||sV|||V|| d|sRV|||nV|| k||V|| muV|||K|yV|| u||e|syV|| |hE |sV|||iiV|||ind|gDV||
i
|veV|||d vV|||V|||ky||V|||eMV|| k||V|| tV|||V|||tpV|||yRV|| |pV|||i8V|||=|sV|||eV|||DV|||nV|| |ke d|V|||=|V|| vV|||V|||ky||V|||V|||TRV|| k||V|| |iV|||nV|||nRV|||yV|| k||=|nV|||V|| yV|||h d|sRV|||nV|| sV|||b|d
ki||V|| dr|iV|||s |seV|| tV|||TV|||V|| a|TRV|||ki||V|| gV|||i8V|||=|mV|||V|| |seV|| a|tyV|||ntV|| |iV|||vV|||sV|||V|||l |hE " 4 As a staunch advocate of
Vedas, Mmam
. sa has also come down heavily on heretic schools of philosophy
that criticize Vedic tenets, using logical debate to establish its views.
1 Swami

Madhavananda, Mm
am
a Paribh
a.s
a, Advaita Ashrama, Kolkata
. s
Vy
a
karan
a,
Nirukta,
Jyotis
a,
Kalpa
and Chandas
.
.
.
3 Paspa
s
ahnika
4 Pt. Subrahmanya Sastri, Introduction to S
astradpik
a p 12 Swami Ramtirth Mission, Dehra
Dun, 1996
2 Siks

a,

The bedrock of Mmam

utras
. sa are the Aphorisms of Jaimini, the Jaimini S
that number more than three thousand, arranged in sixteen chapters. Jaimini,
now considered the sole authority on the subject, in all likelihood, recorded with
painstaking detail adding his own improvisations, the tenets current in his time.

His references to earlier stalwarts such as Atreya,

Kars.najini, Badar, Asmarathya,
Kamukayana, Labukayana and others show that this science of interpretation was
fully developed and well known.
The sixteen chapters (or twelve according to some who exclude the last four chapters called Sankars
. an.akan.d.a) are dedicated to the methodology of understanding
the import of Vedic texts and their usage in rituals. He sets forth the central theme
of the work as "Dharma". In the very first chapter, we are informed that Dharma
consists of that which the Vedas have ordained as most conducive to ones welfare. And amongst all the means to know the true nature of Dharma, the revealed Scriptures or Vedas are the sole and infallible sources. The first chapter
is thus an elucidation of epistemological means - praman.as and the subsequent
eleven chapters deal with bheda (differences between various aspects of dharma),
angatva

(auxillary nature), prayojya-prayojaka-bhava ( means towards the end),

krama (sequence), adhikara (eligibility criteria of the sacrificer), atidesa (application based on similarity, u
ha (assimilation based on archetype), badha (factors of non-applicability), tantra (methodology) and prasanga
(context). The
Sankars
. an.akan.d.a deals with various other topics, parises.a.
The earliest known commentaries of Jaiminis
utras were written by Upavarsa and
Bhavadasa, the works of whom are no longer available. But by the reverential references found in the works of later authors, there is no doubt that their works
were of high order of scholarly merit. The earliest extant commentary is Sabarasvamins Bh
as.ya on the 12 chapters which explains these S
utras in detail and
establish the principles of Mmam
. sa. The Vr
. tti of Upavars.a is only available in
small fragments today. There were many great scholars and writers of Mmam
. sa
in the early centuries and there emerged divergent views on several epistemological issues. While there is concurrence in general on the conclusions reached in
Vedic interpretation, there is discordance in the methodology adopted, semantics

and ontological standpoints. Three main schools are understood to have developed, represented by their chief advocates, viz. Kum
arila Bhat..ta, Mur
ari
Mi
sra and Prabh
akara Mi
sra. Of them, we do not have any works of Murari
Misra that have survived to our times.
Prabhakara Misra, after whom the Prabhakara School gets its name, wrote two
abara Bha.sya: the Laghv, also known as Vivaran.a and
commentaries on the S
the Br.hat, also called Nibandhana. Of these, only the latter has survived in part
alikanatha who wrote the Prakaran.a pa
into our times. S
ncika, R
. juvimala and
Bha.syadpa, was a great writer of this school, bringing the genius of Prabhakara
to the fore and answering the objections of Kumarila Bhatta.
Kumarila Bhatta, considered one of the greatest writers of our country, was the
proponent of the Bha.t.ta school; he wrote a voluminous commentary on all twelve

chapters of Mmam
artika, in verse, Tantravartika,
. sa consisting of three parts, the Slokav
in prose and T
. upt.ka which has a terse style. His works display great acumen, logical clarity and precision; the language is witty, fast-paced and fluid. These works
were extensively commented upon by later scholars such as Umveka, Sucarita
Mishra, Parthasarathi Mishra, Paritosa Mishra, Somesvara Bhatta and others.
Among other luminaries of Mmam
. sa such as Bhartrmitra, Devasvamin, Sucarita
Mishra, Appayya Dikshita, Narayana Bhatta and Narayana Pandita, special mention must be made of Mandana Mishra. His Vidhiviveka and Bhavanaviveka
expound the various aspects of sabdbhavana and arth-bhavana. His Vibhramaviveka deals with the five Khyativadas. In his Sphot.asiddhi, he defends the
sphot.avada of Bhartrhari against the criticism of even his teacher Kumarila. In
his Mmamsanukraman.ika, Mandana has provided a descriptive index of all the
adhikaran.as of Mmamsas
utras in verse format.
Special mention may also be made of Vacaspati Mishra who is hailed as Sarvatantrasvatantra due to his scholarly and authoritative commentaries on works
of all six schools of Indian Philosophy. His contribution to Mmam
. sa is in form
of Nyayakan.ika a commentary on Vidhiviveka of Mandana Mishra and an independent treatise called Tattvabindu.
3

Parthasarathi Misra is known to have lived between 1050 - 1120 A.D. and learnt

the Sastras
from his father Yajnatman, by his own account in Nyayaratnamala.

His four works known to us are 1) Nyayaratnakara - a commentary on the Slokav

artika
considered indispensable even today; 2)Nyayaratnamala - an independent teatise
which deals with the important aspects of mmam
. sasastra; 3)Tantraratna - a

commentary on T
. upt.ka and 4) Sastradpika which covers all the twelve chapters.
astradpika enjoys a prominent position in the scheme of Adhikaran.a
Of the four, S
prasthana, wherein all the adhikaran.as are diligently explained with their six-fold
limbs namely - vis.aya (the proposition under study), visaya (point of contention),
p
urvapaks.a (the prima facie objection), siddhanta (subject established), prayojana (the benefit of the discussion) and sangati

(co-relation of the subject matter

in that adhikarana with the previous). This work set a trend which was followed
by later works such as Jaiminya-nyaya-mala, Bha.t.tadipika, Bha.t.tasangraha,

etc. Written in prose interspersed with a small number of verses, the Tarka Pada,

the first portion of the First Chapter, closely follows the topics of Slokav
artika
in abridged form. The language is lofty and yet straightforward, representing a
astra were very high.
period in Indian history when standards in S
The main objective of the Tarka Pada is to establish the Vedas as the only valid
source to understand dharma, the surest means to happiness and salvation. To
achieve this, all the different means of valid cognition are analyzed. Our mental
picture of the world around us is formed through our different means of cognition,
(Praman.as), such as direct perception, inference, analogy, verbal testimony, presumption and cognizance of absence. These discussions form the epistemological
astradpika. In showing Vedas as the true authority on spiritual matportion of S
ters, sabda, (language) is analyzed for its efficacy in conveying truth. This presents
the semantics of Mmam
. sa Philosophy. The purpose of dharma, the goals of
life, the nature of spirit and emancipation from the sorrows of the world form
the ontological and spiritual discourses. Thus the Tarka Pada represents much
of Mmam
. sa philosophy as a whole, studying both, Praman.as (the processes of
cognition) and Prameyas (the objects of cognition), as they are classified.

The Tarka Pada discusses a great many differences between Bha.t.ta and Prabhakara
views; a few may be mentioned here.5 1) While Bha.t.tas consider yaga and other
prescribed activities as dharma, Prabhakaras take it as the merit, ap
urva that is
generated upon performance of such religious duties. To them, Vedic injunction
is of the nature of karya, the activity that a respondent feels impelled to do, not
just information on what has to be done for a particular result. 2) There is no
erroneous cognition in Prabhakara school; mistaking a lustrous piece of motherof-pearl shell to be precious silver is explained as akhyati - lack of discerning, due
to haste, between the perception of the shiny object and the memory of polished
silver seen earlier. This failure to distinguish between the two cognitions leads
to the confusion, although each cognition is valid by itself. Bha.t.tas simply term
this as erroneous cognition which is contrary to fact, viparta khyati. 3) Bha.t.tas

consider Vedas as authority by Sabda

Praman.a, or verbal testimony, as also language of normal life. Prabhakaras consider only Vedas as intrinsically valid by

Sabda
praman.a and hold normal language of daily life as operating through inference, the words acting as symbols to infer the meaning. 4) Bha.t.tas consider
non-cognizance or Anupalabdhi as a valid means to cognize absence of an object
whereas Prabhakaras do not admit absence as a distinct entity. Bha.t.tas regard six
praman.as while Prabhakaras take only five. 5) In sentence analysis, Bha.t.tas explain that the words convey their individual meanings which then together convey
the sentence-meaning by secondary implication or laks.an.a; but Prabhakaras hold
that the words directly convey syntactically related meanings so that the sentencemeaning is obtained at one shot. This difference between the Abhihitanvaya and
Anvitabhidhana routes leads to much discussion in semantics. 6) Regarding the
relation between an object and its quality, gun. and gun.a, Bha.t.tas formulate the
identity-in-difference relation bhedabheda, also known as tadatmya; Prabhakaras
accept inherence, samavaya as enunciated by Nyaya-Vaises.ika.
In addition to several other sects, Indian tradition recognizes six main schools
of philosophy as orthodox, i.e., coming within the fold of the Vedas: Nyaya,
Vaises.ika, Sankhya,

Yoga, Vedanta ( Advaita, Dvaita, Visis..ta-dvaita) and

5 Please

see "Critical Essays on Purvamimamsa", Vidyadhisha Research Institute, Banga-

lore,2013

Mmam
. sa. Among others who are considered heterodox as they do not recognize
the sanctity of the Vedas are Carvaka, Jaina and Bauddha. Every treatise on
Indian Philosophy presents not only the tenets of its own school, but also those
of rivals or opponents, in order to refute them. Often, the opponent is not clearly
named, as more importance is given to the concepts than to who said them. Owing to the intricate arguments and debate with other schools of philosophy notably
astradpika is considVais.esika, Nyaya, Sankhya,

Advaita and Bauddhas, the S

ered a difficult text to understand.
This book is based on transcription and editing of recorded lectures in Sanskrit
to a group of senior students and represents the continuous tradition of Sanskrit
astradpika has been divided into
studies of the past centuries. The Text of the S
chapters based on topic in order to present in modern book format. The Text and
Vivr.ti have been further divided into sections with corresponding numbers for the
readers convenience; the original text is marked with numerals in Devanagar
while the commentary Vivr.ti uses Indo-Arabic.
Many aspects of Indian Philosophy such as Semantics, Epistemology, Monism
as well as Spirituality have been widely written about in English; secondary literature, as it is called, is well represented in the Library of any good Sanskrit
Department or Research Institute and greatly helps in comparative studies.6 . This
book has been put together to help promote the cause of Sanskrit studies; it is
aimed at assisting serious students of the subject and also the modern reader with
a basic knowledge of Sanskrit to appreciate the beauty and richness of the text in
full. The notes in English provide a gist of the issues involved and briefly present
the line of argument. They are not intended as a translation verbatim which might
make for dull reading and not really serve the student. Literally translated, a simple sentence such as Vyaktis.u jatervr.ttih. kartsnyena va 0vayavaso va? loses
much of its essence.

********
6 Please

see:"P
urvamm
am
a from an Interdisciplinary Point of View", ed.
. s
K.T.Pandurangi, PHISPC, New Delhi, 2006

by