The 6 Schools of Hindu metaphysics

[Bhaktajan II]

Selected passages by Bhaktajan on the subject of:
​

The six Philosophical Schools of esoteric Hindu metaphysics​

Commentaries by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami:​

“After studying the six philosophical theses, Vyasadeva completely summarized them all in the aphorisms of Vedanta philosophy.

According to Vedanta philosophy, the Absolute Truth is a person. When the word ‘nirguna’ [‘without qualities’] is used, it is to be understood that the Lord has attributes that are totally spiritual.”

COMMENTARY by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami:

According to Lord Shri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, Shripada Shankaracarya preached the Mayavada philosophy for a particular purpose. Such a philosophy was necessary to defeat the Buddhist philosophy of the nonexistence of the spirit soul, but it was never meant for perpetual acceptance. It was an emergency.

Thus Lord Krishna was accepted by Shankaracarya as the Supreme Personality of Godhead in his commentation on Bhagavad-gita. Since he was a great devotee of Lord Krishna, he did not dare write any commentary on Shrimad-Bhagavatam because that would have been a direct offense at the lotus feet of the Lord.

But later speculators, in the name of Mayavada philosophy, unnecessarily make their commentary on the catuù-shloki Bhagavatam without any bona fide intent.

The monistic dry speculators have no business in the Shrimad-Bhagavatam because this particular Vedic literature is forbidden for them by the great author himself. Shrila Vyasadeva has definitely forbidden persons engaged in religiosity, economic development, sense gratification and, finally, salvation, from trying to understand Shrimad-Bhagavatam, which is not meant for them (Bhag. 1.1.2).

Shripada Shridhara Svami, the great commentator on Shrimad-Bhagavatam, has definitely forbidden the salvationists or monists to deal in Shrimad-Bhagavatam. It is not for them. Yet such unauthorized persons perversely try to understand Shrimad-Bhagavatam, and thus they commit offenses at the feet of the Lord, which even Shripada Shankaracarya dared not do.

VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

COMMENTARY by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami:

The six philosophical theses are
(1) Vaiseñika, propounded by Kanada Åñi,
(2) Nyaya, propounded by Gautama Åñi,
(3) Yoga, or mysticism, propounded by Patanjali Åñi,
(4) the philosophy of Sankhya, propounded by Kapila Åñi,
(5) the philosophy of Karma-mimaàsa, propounded by Jaimini Åñi, and
(6) the philosophy of Brahma-mimaàsa, or Vedanta, the ultimate conclusion of the Absolute Truth (janmady asya yataù [SB 1.1.1]), propounded by Vedavyasa.


MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

“By studying the six philosophical theories, one cannot reach the Absolute Truth. It is therefore our duty to follow the path of the mahajanas, the authorities. Whatever they say should be accepted as the supreme truth.”

In his Amåta-pravaha-bhañya, Shrila Bhaktivinoda Öhakura gives the following summary of the six philosophical processes. Prakashananda admitted that Shripada Shankaracarya, being very eager to establish his philosophy of monism, took shelter of the Vedanta philosophy and tried to explain it in his own way.

The fact is, however, that if one accepts the existence of God, one certainly cannot establish the theory of monism. For this reason Shankaracarya refuted all kinds of Vedic literature that establishes the supremacy of the Personality of Godhead. In various ways, Shankaracarya has tried to refute the Vedic literature.

Throughout the world, ninety-nine percent of the philosophers following in the footsteps of Shankaracarya refuse to accept the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Instead they try to establish their own opinions. It is typical of mundane philosophers to want to establish their own opinions and refute those of others.

Therefore:

(1) The Mimaàsaka philosophers, following the principles of Jaimini, stress fruitive activity and say that if there is a God, He must be under the laws of fruitive activity. In other words, if one performs his duties very nicely in the material world, God is obliged to give one the desired result.

According to these philosophers, there is no need to become a devotee of God. If one strictly follows moral principles, one will be recognized by the Lord, who will give the desired reward.

Such philosophers do not accept the Vedic principle of bhakti-yoga. Instead, they give stress to following one’s prescribed duty.

(2) Atheistic Sankhya philosophers like Kapila analyze the material elements very scrutinizingly and thereby come to the conclusion that material nature is the cause of everything. They do not accept the Supreme Personality of Godhead as the cause of all causes.

(3) Nyaya philosophers like Gautama and Kanada have accepted a combination of atoms as the original cause of the creation.

(4) Mayavadi philosophers say that everything is an illusion. Headed by philosophers like Añöavakra, they stress the impersonal Brahman effulgence as the cause of everything.

(5) Philosophers following the precepts of Patanjali practice raja-yoga. They imagine a form of the Absolute Truth within many forms. That is their process of self-realization.

All five of these philosophies completely reject the predominance of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and strive to establish their own philosophical theories. However, Shrila Vyasadeva wrote the Vedanta-sutra and, taking the essence of all Vedic literature, established the supremacy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

All five kinds of philosophers mentioned above understand that impersonal Brahman is without material qualities, and they believe that when the Personality of Godhead appears, He is contaminated and covered by the material qualities. The technical term used is saguna.

They speak of saguna Brahman and nirguna Brahman. For them, nirguna Brahman means “the impersonal Absolute Truth without any material qualities” and saguna Brahman means “the Absolute Truth that accepts the contamination of material qualities.”

More or less, this kind of philosophical speculation is called Mayavada philosophy. The fact is, however, that the Absolute Truth never has anything to do with material qualities because He is transcendental. He is always complete with full spiritual qualities.

The five philosophers mentioned above do not accept Lord Viñnu as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but they are very busy refuting the philosophies of other schools. There are six kinds of philosophical processes in India.

Because Vyasadeva is the Vedic authority, he is known as Vedavyasa. His philosophical explanation of the Vedanta-sutra is accepted by the devotees.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

aphorisms of Vedanta philosophy.

“By studying the six philosophical theories, one cannot reach the Absolute Truth. It is therefore our duty to follow the path of the mahajanas, the authorities. Whatever they say should be accepted as the supreme truth.”`

Bhagavata-purana 1.1.8:
“Being the eldest learned Vedantist, O Suta Gosvami, you are acquainted with the knowledge of Vyasadeva, who is the incarnation of Godhead, and you also know other sages who are fully versed in all kinds of physical and metaphysical knowledge.”

COMMENTARY by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami:

The Bhagavata-Purana is a natural commentation on the Brahma-sutra, or the Badarayani Vedanta-sutras. It is called natural because Vyasadeva is author of both the Vedanta-sutras and Shrimad-Bhagavatam, or the essence of all Vedic literatures. Besides Vyasadeva, there are other sages who are the authors of six different philosophical systems, namely Gautama, Kanada, Kapila, Patanjali, Jaimini and Añöavakra.

Theism is explained completely in the Vedanta-sutra, whereas in other systems of philosophical speculations, practically no mention is given to the ultimate cause of all causes. One can sit on the vyasasana only after being conversant in all systems of philosophy so that one can present fully the theistic views of the Bhagavatam in defiance of all other systems.

Shrila Suta Gosvami was the proper teacher, and therefore the sages at Naimiñaranya elevated him to the vyasasana. Shrila Vyasadeva is designated herein as the Personality of Godhead because he is the authorized empowered incarnation.

LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
COMMENTARY by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami:

Shrila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Öhakura comments in this connection, “Mayavadi sannyasis accept that the commentary by Shri Shankaracarya known as Shariraka-bhañya gives the real meaning of the Vedanta-sutra. In other words, Mayavadi sannyasis accept the meanings expressed in the explanations of the Vedanta-sutra by Shankaracarya, which are based on monism.

Thus they explain the Vedanta-sutra, the Upaniñads and all such Vedic literatures in their own impersonal way.” The great Mayavadi sannyasi Sadananda Yogindra has written a book known as Vedanta-sara, in which he writes, vedanto nama upaniñat-pramanam. tad-upakarini shariraka-sutradini ca.

According to Sadananda Yogindra, the Vedanta-sutra and Upaniñads, as presented by Shri Shankaracarya in his Shariraka-bhañya commentary, are the only sources of Vedic evidence. Actually, however, Vedanta refers to the essence of Vedic knowledge, and it is not a fact that there is nothing more than Shankaracarya’s Shariraka-bhañya.

There are other Vedanta commentaries, written by Vaiñnava acaryas, none of whom follow Shri Shankaracarya or accept the imaginative commentary of his school. Their commentaries are based on the philosophy of duality.

Monist philosophers like Shankaracarya and his followers want to establish that God and the living entity are one, and instead of worshiping the Supreme Personality of Godhead they present themselves as God.

They want to be worshiped as God by others. Such persons do not accept the philosophies of the Vaiñnava acaryas, which are known as
shuddhadvaita (purified monism),
shuddha-dvaita (purified dualism),
vishiñöadvaita (specific monism),
dvaitadvaita (monism and dualism) and
acintya-bhedabheda (inconceivable oneness and difference).

Mayavadis do not discuss these philosophies, for they are firmly convinced of their own philosophy of kevaladvaita, exclusive monism. Accepting this system of philosophy as the pure understanding of the Vedanta-sutra, they believe that Krishna has a body made of material elements and that the activities of loving service to Krishna are sentimentality.

They are known as Mayavadis because according to their opinion Krishna has a body made of maya and the loving service of the Lord executed by devotees is also maya. They consider such devotional service to be an aspect of fruitive activ ities (karma-kanòa). According to their view, bhakti consists of mental speculation or sometimes meditation. This is the difference between the Mayavadi and Vaiñnava philosophies.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

6 Schools Hindu metaphysics

Maharaja Parikñit said [to Sukadeva, son of Vyasa]:
“O great sage, representative of the Lord, kindly satisfy my inquisitiveness in all that I have inquired from you and all that I may not have inquired from you from the very beginning of my questionings. Since I am a soul surrendered unto you, please impart full knowledge in this connection.

O great sage, you are as good as Brahma, the original living being. Others follow custom only, as followed by the previous philosophical speculators.”

COMMENTARY by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami:
It may be argued that Shukadeva Gosvami is not the only authority of perfect knowledge in transcendence because there are many other sages and their followers.

Contemporary to Vyasadeva or even prior to him there were many other great sages, such as Gautama, Kanada, Jaimini, Kapila and Añöavakra, and all of them have presented a philosophical path by themselves. Patanjali is also one of them, and all these six great rishis have their own way of thinking, exactly like the modern philosophers and mental speculators.

The difference between the six philosophical paths put forward by the renowned sages above mentioned and that of Shukadeva Gosvami, as presented in the Shrimad-Bhagavatam, is that all the six sages mentioned above speak the facts according to their own thinking, but Shukadeva Gosvami presents the knowledge which comes down directly from Brahmaji, who is known as atma-bhuù, or born of and educated by the Almighty Personality of Godhead.

Vedic transcendental knowledge descends directly from the Personality of Godhead. By His mercy, Brahma, the first living being in the universe, was enlightened, and from Brahmaji, Narada was enlightened, and from Narada, Vyasa was enlightened. Shukadeva Gosvami received such transcendental knowledge directly from his father, Vyasadeva.

Thus the knowledge, being received from the chain of disciplic succession, is perfect. One cannot be a spiritual master in perfection unless and until one has received the same by disciplic succession.

That is the secret of receiving transcendental knowledge. The six great sages mentioned above may be great thinkers, but their knowledge by mental speculation is not perfect. However perfect an empiric philosopher may be in presenting a philosophical thesis, such knowledge is never perfect because it is produced by an imperfect mind.

Such great sages also have their disciplic successions, but they are not authorized because such knowledge does not come directly from the independent Supreme Personality of Godhead, Narayana.

No one can be independent except Narayana; therefore no one’s knowledge can be perfect, for everyone’s knowledge is dependent on the flickering mind. Mind is material and thus knowledge presented by material speculators is never transcendental and can never become perfect.

Mundane philosophers, being imperfect in themselves, disagree with other philosophers because a mundane philosopher is not a philosopher at all unless he presents his own theory.

Intelligent persons like Maharaja Parikñit do not recognize such mental speculators, however great they may be, but hear from the authorities like Shukadeva Gosvami, who is nondifferent from the Supreme Personality of Godhead by the parampara system, as is specially stressed in the Bhagavad-gita.

TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

COMMENTARY by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami:

It is said in Bhagavad-gita that after many, many lives of philosophical research the wise man ultimately comes to the point of knowing that Vasudeva, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is everything, and therefore he surrenders unto Him. Such serious students in philosophical research are rare because they are very great souls.

If by philosophical research one cannot come to the point of understanding the Supreme Person, then his task is not finished. His search in knowledge is still to be continued until he comes to the point of understanding the Supreme Lord in devotional service.

The opportunity for direct touch with the Personality of Godhead is given in Bhagavad-gita, where it is also said that those who take to other processes, namely the processes of philosophical speculation and mystic yoga practice, have much trouble. After many, many years of much trouble, a yogi or wise philosopher may come to Him, but his path is very troublesome, whereas the path of devotional service is easy for everyone.

One can achieve the result of wise philosophical speculation simply by discharging devotional service, and unless one reaches the point of understanding the Personality of Godhead by his mental speculation, all his research work is said to be simply a labor of love. The ultimate destination of the wise philosopher is to merge in the impersonal Brahman, but that Brahman is the effulgence of the Supreme Person.

The Lord says in Bhagavad-gita (14.27), brahmano hi pratiñöhaham amåtasyavyayasya ca: “I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman, which is indestructible and is the supreme bliss.” The Lord is the supreme reservoir of all pleasure, including Brahman pleasure; therefore, one who has unflinching faith in the Supreme Personality of Godhead is said to be already realized in impersonal Brahman and Paramatma.