Navigating Indian Philosophy
(i.e., getting oriented with the gurus)
Motivation
Indian philosophy remains largely inscrutable to the Western world. While elements of Yoga and Buddhism have been absorbed into the vernacular, they often don’t stretch beyond superficial interaction with the underlying concepts. Prominent public figures, from Richard Dawkins to Jordan Peterson, routinely misconstrue the basic grammar of the subcontinental systems. The expanse is understandably daunting; countless deities, interconnected religions, myriad gurus - all enmeshed in a 4000+ year old cultural substrate that has continuously blended together philosophy, ritual, and mythology.
Despite growing up Hindu, I was similarly perplexed. My parents had dutifully exposed me to a rich cross-section of traditions, rituals, and stories - providing me with an orientation that seems common among children of Indian immigrants. I could talk about the major religious festivals; retell famous excerpts from the cornerstone myths; and talk somewhat abstractly about the driving crux of the faith. But if you’d asked me to properly synthesize how the various myths and rituals tied in with Hindu philosophy, or asked me to contextualize Hindu philosophy within the broader tapestry of Indian (Dharmic) philosophy, I would’ve struggled.
Roughly since the COVID-19 quarantine began, I’ve been trying to take a measured approach to 1.) mapping the Dharmic terrain and 2.) beginning to traverse through the key schools of thought in a structured manner. Unlike with Western philosophy, there isn’t a widely-accepted chronology, or a heralded guide to start with. In order to distill a starting “schema” for Indian philosophy, I ended up synthesizing the categorical arrangements from a few different sources:
Dr. Satya Sundar Sethy’s curricula from the Indian Institute of Technology
Jay Lakhani’s works as part of the Hindu Academy initiative
The classifications delineated in The Encyclopedia Britannica
The result, while by no means complete, attempts to capture the primary progressions of thought that have coalesced into formal schools. Each of the individual schools contain fractal divisions within them - sometimes led by a single rishi (sage); and even cursory online research will reveal ongoing debate about where and how the discursive lines should be drawn. I don’t expect that my starting schema will remain sufficient, and I don’t expect that it will be immune from criticism. Thus far, however, it has proven useful.
The Vedas
Whether accordant or discordant, every major strain of Indian philosophy has some association with The Vedas: the four ancient compendiums that constitute the foundation of Hinduism. The oldest of the four, The Rigveda, contains writings that date back 3500 years; though legend maintains that the oral tradition, which is still considered the authentic method of Vedic transmission, stretches back another millennium. The history of Sanskrit, the liturgical language of most Indian philosophies, is inextricably linked with Vedic development.
Structurally, each of the four Vedas consists of four sections. The first section, known collectively as The Samhitas, consists of hymns and benedictions - which contain the oldest references to Hindu devas (gods), such as Indra (King of Heaven; god of lightning and storm), Agni (god of fire), and Varuna (god of the seas). The central deities of modern Hinduism, such as Shiva and Vishnu, are notably not given similar prominence in The Vedas - though they are mentioned by ancient names, or depicted in narrower aspects that would later be synthesized into more holistic forms. The mantras contained in The Samhitas remain the holiest across all Hindu traditions.
I was surprised to learn that many entities in The Vedas, such as the elemental devas, have analogues in Zoroastrianism, the Avestan religion of Ancient Persia. Evidence of a primordial connection can be seen in the Sanskrit word that encompasses cosmic righteousness, order, and divine truth, Ṛta (arguably the essential concept in all of Vedic thought) and in its Avestan analogue, known as Aṣ̌a. It’s said that both words descend from the Proto-Indo-Iranian root, Hr̥tás - though the specific nature of the cultural crossover remains shrouded in mystery. In any case, there’s never been a shortage of speculation about the history and authorship of The Vedas, which remain the oldest liturgical texts still in broad use.
The Aranyakas are the second section of each Veda, and contain the instructions for rituals. These encompass a wide range of material, from daily religious protocol, to instruction for priests performing elaborate rituals for individual gods, to metaphysical commentary on the utility of rituals. Deeper explanations are found in the third section of each Veda, known as The Brahmanas. They contain comprehensive perspectives on reasoning behind individual rituals and sacrifices, extending into cosmology, observational astronomy, and mystical geometry.
The philosophical heart of The Vedas is found in the fourth section, known collectively as The Upanishads. The 108 Upanishadic hymns abstract the vast array of Vedic deities and rituals into a largely panentheistic metaphysics. Each text is a deep, cryptic, and personal exploration; written from the perspective of a sage that believes they have pushed past the realm of idols and material glimmers, and grasped the true nature of reality. While each Upanishad asserts its own claims about the nature of the individual soul, Atman, and the ultimate divine reality, Brahman, they all speak in terms of eternal and pervasive essences, whether monist or dualist in nature - and all convey limited interest (if not active disinterest) in specific deities or rituals. The Upanishads make for a striking contrast to the earlier sections in The Vedas; though when taken together, Hinduism’s incredible diversity begins to make sense.
“It has been the solace of my life, it will be the solace of my death.”
-Arthur Schopenhauer on The Upanishads
The Primary Bifurcation
Throughout the Vedic Period that spanned the first millennium BCE, a multitude of philosophical strains formed throughout India that synthesized The Vedas with regional mythologies and practices - generating the contours of modern Hinduism. This coincided with the rise of more structured kingdoms, and the complex social stratification that is still, in some ways, distinctive to the subcontinent. The invasion of Darius I in the 516 BCE marked the beginning of a brutal recurring theme throughout India’s history; foreign incursions would serve as the crucible for key developments in the cultural composition of the nation. As the Vedic Period waned, the evolution of Hinduism was complemented by a set of major movements that explicitly denied the authority of The Vedas; among them, Jainism and Buddhism.
The need for more rigorous distinction emerged, as each movement spread. The primary fulcrum of separation was, and remains, relatively simple: does the philosophical system accept the authority of The Vedas? This is a broad classification, given the heterogeneous contents of the ancient texts; but if the answer can be construed as “yes”, then the system is labeled āstika (i.e., orthodox). If the answer is “no”, then the term is nāstika (i.e., heterodox). It’s important to note that nāstika systems are often still authentically Dharmic - containing different formulations of the primitives found in Vedic/Hindu philosophy, such as divine duty and conduct (dharma), the laws of causation (karma), the ethics of material prosperity (artha), and the conditions for ultimate enlightenment or emancipation (moksha).
The Six Āstika Schools
A disclaimer that is hopefully obvious by this point: the six schools described here are by no means the only valid systems within Hinduism. They are simply considered the key schools of philosophical thought - which exist alongside less popular schools, myriad disciplines of meditation and ritual, and countless local amalgamations throughout India. The āstika schools, to varying degrees, intersect with major Hindu mythologies, festivals, and rituals; but this section will focus on brief descriptions of the philosophical systems themselves.
Samkhya and Yoga
The Samkhya School is the oldest the six, founded in the first millennium BCE by the sage Kapila. It is often described as a rationalist tradition, delineating three specific pramanas (epistemologically valid sources of knowledge): direct perception, inferential claim (both inductive and deductive), and verbal testimony from reliable sources. Samkhya extends Vedic thinking in a very dualist direction, asserting that the universe consists of two intertwining realities, purusha (consciousness) and prakrti (matter). Any given life is infused with a soul (jiva), which is a consequence of the fusion of purusha and prakrti. Interestingly, Samkhya refrains from affixing any personal or active qualities to Brahman (the divine substrate, or Godhead) - leading to debate about whether it is truly Vedic in structure. However, its placement in the Bhagavad Gita, a primary Hindu text, has ensured its place among the key traditions. I’m planning on diving into the Samkhya school first, in my trek through āstika philosophy.
The Yoga school developed as the practical analogue to Samkhya’s theoretical focus. This duality is formally established in the Bhagavad Gita, as Krishna (incarnation of Vishnu, the preserving aspect of Brahman) describes the nature of reality, and the contextual imperatives found in one’s personal dharma and karma, to the warrior-prince Arjuna. Patanjali is the legendary author of the Yoga Sutras (a sutra is a collection of theological or philosophical aphorisms), which outline the stages of evolution that an individual consciousness must develop through in order to reach moksha (ultimate liberation). The eightfold path, or Astanga, begins with control of one’s mind and speech, and progresses through complete control of one’s physical and mental activity - culminating in samadhi, a state that unlocks moksha. The Western notion of physical yoga is nominally one of the eight steps, asana - which Patanjali asserts is contingent on control of physical impulses and near-ascetic conduct.
Nyaya-Vaisheshika
The Nyaya school is the primary realist tradition among āstika philosophies, literally meaning '“rules” or “judgment” in Sanskrit. Nyaya thinkers are credited with the most significant contributions to the theories of logic, methodology, and epistemology that occurred during the Vedic Period. The system’s structural requirements for valid knowledge, and the interplay of its constituent mechanics, were initially delineated in Akṣapāda Gautama’s Nyaya Sutras. In addition to the pramanas outlined above (direct perception, inferential claim, verbal testimony), the school accepts upamana - or knowledge gained via analogical reasoning. Nyaya practitioners believe that suffering is the direct result of incorrect knowledge; to eradicate suffering and achieve moksha, one must relentlessly purge ignorance in favor of valid knowledge. While Nyaya thinkers have written extensively on how to develop the extraordinary perception required to perceive Brahman (in accordance with valid epistemological methods), the tradition has relatively little to say about the underlying mechanics or qualities of the divine itself.
The Vaisheshika school is often considered in tandem with the Nyaya school, though there are some clear lines separating the two. With regard to epistemology, Vaisheshika adherents recognize only two valid sources of knowledge: direct perception and inferential claim. Through syllogistic reasoning, a set of naturalist claims were collectively assembled into a systematic ontology - considered among the earliest naturalist ontologies in recorded history. The school’s founder, Kaṇāda Kashyapa, precisely articulated an atomic structure underpinning all of creation; describing five discrete elemental primitives, which can be aggregated together in accordance with six categorical principles. As with Nyaya, Vaisheshika thinkers unambiguously accepted The Vedas - but were often criticized by other schools for their relatively weak assertions regarding the details of the divine substrate, Brahman.
Mimamsa and Vedanta
The Mimamsa school focuses on the epistemology and metaphysics of dharma, or human imperative and worthy action. In contrast the the aforementioned schools, Mimamsa revolves around rigorous textual analysis of The Vedas; specifically the hymns that comprise The Samhitas and The Brahmanas. Its hermeneutical tradition was forged by Jaimini, a discipline of Vyasa, the legendary sage who first compiled The Vedas. Mimamsa asserts that how one ought to act (encapsulated in their dharma) cannot be deduced through discursive thinking; it must instead flow from divine revelation. Thus, the proper focus of philosophy is translating Vedic prescriptions into the axioms of proper individual and social behavior. Mimamsa is considered resoundingly anti-ascetic and anti-mystic; the material world is our collective testing ground, and moksha cannot be achieved without righteous conduct.
Vedanta is arguably the most renowned of the six traditions; its thinkers are singularly focused on interpretation of The Upanishads - which as aforementioned, contain the core metaphysical expositions found within The Vedas. Certain strains (Advaita Vedanta) draw exactingly monistic conclusions about the nature of Brahman; the Godhead and all of creation are ultimately the same divine substrate. Other strains posit “qualified” monism (Vishishtadvaita); there exists real separation between individual soul (Atman) and the omnipotent Godhead (Brahman) - but the common essence between them can be realized through achieving moksha. Others still are entirely dualistic (Dvaita); individual souls are divine, but are ontologically separate from the infinite generative divinity of Brahman. Vedanta’s towering philosopher-sages, such as Shankara and Ramanuja, engaged in vigorous and continuous debate with the various orthodox and heterodox schools - iteratively developing the normative structure for Vedic adherence. Without them, the fundamental definitions of āstika and nāstika might have been very different.
The Nāstika Traditions
A similar disclaimer: there are many schools of Indian philosophy that break with or explicitly deny the authority of The Vedas. The three traditions mentioned here are among the most influential; and when taken individually, each contains a sprawling diversity of thoughts and practices. My plan is work my way through these, before exploring any other nāstika traditions.
Charvaka
The Charvaka school is one of the oldest atheistic traditions in Indian philosophy, having developed contemporaneously with the most recent layers of The Vedas (~700 BCE). It abides by a strictly materialistic theory of reality - rejecting all ritualism and supernatural elements. Charvaka’s founder, Brihaspati, claimed that only one epistemological category is truly valid: direct perception. Apart from what you observe firsthand, there is no truly trustworthy knowledge; radical skepticism is applied to all attempts to draw generalizable conclusions from inductive testimony. (Charvaka thinkers are considered kindred spirits with David Hume.) While the school has historically drawn criticism for its apathy towards structured morality and its somewhat hedonistic subtext, it is considered seminal in the history of Indian rationalist traditions. Many of its epistemological critiques were leveraged and extended by Buddhist and Jain scholars, in particular.
Buddhism
Buddhism is the most globally pervasive of the nāstika traditions, with over 520 million adherents today. The life and legend of its founder, Siddhartha Gautama, is widely known throughout both the East and West: the Hindu prince, racked with suffering, who pierced through the illusions of the material world, transfigured into The Buddha - and managed to distill a self-contained path for anyone willing to follow in his footsteps. Buddhism explicitly rejects the core assumptions that are foundational to Hinduism: the notion of Atman or any individual soul, and the notion of Brahman or any divine Godhead that pervades reality. The starting point is instead diagnostic: Four Noble Truths are asserted about the nature of conscious existence, providing an almost clinical account of individual suffering - and framing the path than can provide liberation.
In ~450 BCE, The Buddha assembled The Eightfold Path as the prescription for individual suffering (a forerunner to the eightfold Astanga path put forth 200 years later by Yoga pioneer, Patanjali). The goal was simple: provide a middle path between self-indulgence and self-mortification, which would allow an adherent to gradually progress towards nirvana - total release from earthly suffering and attachment. Some Buddhist traditions believe that nirvana includes the metaphysical release from an individual’s cycle of reincarnation, while others firmly reject any supernatural connotations. Although Buddhism continues to share many common concepts with Hinduism - such as karma and dharma - their meanings have diverged and developed in entirely different ways, over 2000 years of scholastic separation.
Jainism
Jainism as a religion cohered together around the same time as Buddhism, though its legends claim an origin that traces back millions of years. Since the Vedic Period, the Jain and Hindu communities have lived alongside one another and engaged in robust dialogue - fostering a millennia-spanning theological tolerance that seems unique within human history. Jainism’s core metaphysics, assembled by the legendary Mahavira, rejects the notion of an eternal unchanging soul (atman), and instead posits an eternal changing soul (jiva). Each jiva is individually progressing through a bounded cycle of reincarnation, accumulating karmic “residue” and working towards evolutionary perfection - encapsulated in a different definition of moksha. Jainism provides elaborate theories about the different planes of the universe, and the general cosmic backdrop for transmigrating jivas; but it does not ascribe a theistic teleology to the universe itself, like Hinduism does through Brahman.
Jainism’s fundamental tenet is ahimsa, or non-violence. The prime directive for a Jain adherent is to refrain from violent activity, no matter the preexisting justification; in addition to physical violence, this includes violent intention in speech and thought. In the quest of a transmigrating jiva, the one cardinal sin is exercising violence on other jivas - each on their own journey to perfection. Ahimsa has transcended the formal boundaries of Jainism, and has pervaded the ethics of all strains of Indian philosophy - from Shankara’s Vedantic reforms in the 8th century, to Mahatma Gandhi’s 20th century philosophy of non-violent resistance (Satyagraha).
Onward
Thanks for reading all the way through; this piece ended up a little longer than I expected. Like with Western philosophy, the next step is to actually dive into the specifics of each tradition. I’ll be starting with the āstika schools (Samkhya first), and then working through the nāstika traditions listed above. I’m holding all of the definitions and dividing lines with a grain of salt, knowing that the interplay between the various philosophical systems is more complex than any single schema suggests. Piece by piece, hopefully what I learn can be useful in some capacity for others.