Philosophy of Mimamsa
Mimamsa is one of six orthodox schools of Hindu Philosophy founded by Sage Jaimini. The goal of Mimamsa is to
provide insight into “Dharma”. Mimamsa is a Sanskrit word that means
"reflection" or "critical investigation" and thus refers to
a tradition of contemplation which reflects on the meanings of certain Vedic
texts. This tradition is also known as Purva-Mimaṁsa because of its focus on
the earlier (Purva) Vedic texts dealing with the ritualistic portions. It is
also known as Karma-Mimamsa due to its emphasis on ritual action (karma). This
particular school is known for its philosophical theories on the nature of
dharma, based on the hermeneutics of the Vedas, especially the Braḥmanas and
Saṃhitas. The Mimaṃsa school was foundational and influential for the Vedantic
schools, which were also known as Uttara-Mimamsa for their focus on the
"later" (Uttara) portions of the Vedas and the Upaniṣads. While both
"earlier" and "later" Mimaṃsa explore the aim of human
action, they do so with different attitudes towards the necessity of ritual
praxis. Mimamsa has two sub-schools one is Sage
Kumarila Bhaṭṭa, who lived in the seventh century CE and another is Sage Prabhakara who lived in the
eighth-century CE.
Mimamsa advocates the philosophy of action. Ethical action,
according to this school, is the supreme governing force of this universe. The
central concept of Mimamsa is the concept of “Dharma” which controls and
regulates the universe. It is providing the agent of action with what he
desires and what his action deserves. In other words, the dharma of Mimamsa is
to uphold ethical action and it attaches so much importance to action. It
recognizes every human individual as a moral agent of action. Being a
philosophy of action, Mimamsa admits that the reality of the agent, i.eThe
individual and his actions, therefore, builds its epistemology in support of
realism. It accepted specific sources of knowledge called “Pramanas' '. These
are valid sources of knowledge to reveal the world in its real form. Rumours
are not valid and it does not provide any forms of knowledge. Mimamsa accepts
six valid sources of knowledge. They are Perception (Pratyaksha), Inference (Anumana),
Comparison (Upamana), Verbal testimony and language (Sabda), Presupposition or
Postulation (Arthapathi) and Non-Cognition (Anupalabda). Sage Kumarila
Bhaṭṭa accepts all these six sources of knowledge while Sage Prabhakara accepts
only five and avoided the part of Non-cognition (Anupalabda).
1. Perception (“Pratyaksha”):
This is accepted by all Indian schools of thought. It is the
direct source of knowledge obtained through the senses and the mind. The senses
come into contact with objects, the mind with senses and the mind with Atman. When the
mind and senses come into contact the knowledge arises. Atman is pure and
ultimate consciousness. The distinction between Indeterminate (Nirvikalpa) and
Determinate (Savikalpa) forms of perception is also accepted by Mimamsa. In the
case of Indeterminate (Nirvikalpa) the object perceived is not conceptualized
therefore its identity is not revealed. But in the case of Determinate
(Savikalpa), the object perceived is conceptualised therefore its identity is
revealed to the perceiver. In other words, in the indeterminate (Nirvikalpa) the knowledge of the universe is not involved whereas in the Determinate
(Savikalpa) the knowledge of the universe is involved. This is the
fundamental difference between Determinate (Savikalpa) and Indeterminate
(Nirvikalpa). These are similar to the Philosophy of Vaisheshika.
2. Inference (“Anumana”):
The kind of inference in Mimamsa is similar to that of the
philosophy put forward by Greek Philosopher Aristotle. In Hindu epistemology,
inference deals with only the part of syllogistic reasoning but not the thought
process. In Hindu epistemology in general the major premise has to be
accompanied by an example. The major premise is that a universal proposition is
a true induction. The universal relationship between the middle and major terms
is cause and effect, whole and part, substance and quality and class and
individual. In the first case, there is no need to state all the premises.
There are two forms of inference: the first is for oneself (“Svartha”) and the
second is for others (“Parartha'').
3. Comparison (“Upamana”):
Comparison (Upamana) is a very important source of knowledge in
Mimamsa. One does not deliberately compare two objects and it is not allowed in
Mimamsa. It is a spontaneous cognitive process in which one observes
similarities between two objects. When a person watches a jackal for the first
time he makes an effort to see the similarity between it and a dog and this
makes him remember the dog. Hence, the comparison is not a deliberate act of
perception. We compare objects in the process of perception. Comparison is
possible by an element of the present with the past. Such a memory is neither
voluntary nor involuntary. The observed similarity takes one back to his memory
to show a relation between two objects namely, one that is being perceived and
the second that one which was perceived in the past. Thus, we always try to
show the link between the present and the past through comparison. The similarity is
not an object of inference for it does not involve any kind of syllogism.
Therefore, the cognition of similarity is a special kind of cognitive process
in which our mind has the innate ability to identify similarities between two objects.
4. Verbal testimony and language (“Sabda”):
This is the knowledge obtained through words and sentences. Verbal
knowledge is a well-defined way of knowing. This does not come under the
category of inference. For instance, one cannot understand the meaning of the
word “eagle” through inference for there is no major premise here. On the other
hand, the availability of an invariable perceivable link between the word “eagle”
and the object “eagle” is absent. Accordingly, for the first time when we
understand the meaning of a word through a human being and not through
inference. Nevertheless, verbal knowledge can be untrue like any other form of
knowledge admitted by the philosophy of Mimamsa. The connotations and
philosophy of language are vital and do not consider all the words everlasting. Further conventional words originate from eternal words and are
not eternal like words of Vedic origin. There is no special word pattern apart
from the word and it consists of letters and every word is made up of
alphabets. Every word is directly referring to a universal called “Jati” and
the particular can be referred to this word only through the universal.
5. Presupposition or Postulation (“Arthapathi”):
We posit something to make a particular unit of cognition
complete. Our understanding of a given fact that becomes incomplete without
accepting the truth of something unobserved means that something unobserved is
postulated or presupposed. This is also a spontaneous cognitive process of the
human mind. For instance, if we observed in the morning that the roads are
flooded with water then we presume that it might have heavily rained in the
night. So postulation is a distinct kind of cognition by way of how we are
getting the information going around the world.
6. Non-Cognition
(“Anupalabda”):
Non-Cognition (“Anupalabda)” does not provide us with the absence
of knowledge but rather provides us with knowledge of absence. There is a
difference between knowledge of absence and absence of knowledge. For example,
if a house owner says that there is no dog in this house it means that he is
obviously referring to an object which is not present there. It is called
knowledge of absence and not the absence of knowledge. The source of knowledge
is known as non-apprehension or non-cognition. It should not be interpreted as
the absence of knowledge, nevertheless, it is the cognition of the absence or
negation of an object. Knowledge of absence becomes part of our scheme of
knowledge or our epistemological framework. Nonetheless, Sage Prabhakara does
not accept and argues on the basis that absence is not a positive entity. For
that reason, one cannot have cognition that does not exist. Alternatively, he
places this under the category of Inference (Anumana).
Valid forms of knowledge:
Knowing is a form of consciousness and the kinds of knowledge and
its nature in the true sense is realized through it. We know only the
conscious object and accept its reality as they appear. There is a need to
determine what forms of process of consciousness are valid whether it is an immediate form or a mediate form. The method of determining the different valid forms
of knowledge is called the doctrine of "Pramanas".
According to Sage Kumarila Bhatta, the means of cognition and its results are
two different matters on the other hand Sage Prabhakara's view means of cognition and
its outcome are alike and have absolutely no distinction. Sage Kumarila Batta contends
that if the result is the same as the process, then there is no difference
between inference and perception. Even though different in their view both accept
the self-validity of knowledge called “Svata Pramanyavada”. The doctrine of
invalidity is called invalidity due to other things called “Paratah
Apramanyavada”. Hence the truth of any cognition is revealed by cognition
itself. The untruth of any cognition is revealed by some other cognition. True cognition is never made true by any other cognition nevertheless only
confirmed by subsequent cognition. The falsehood of any cognition is revealed
through the second cognition that contradicts it but not by itself. This is the
fundamental dissimilarity between “Svata Pramanyavada” and “Paratah
Apramanyavada”.
Metaphysics:
The metaphysics of Mimamsa fundamentally is the ethical action of
individuals and gives more emphasis on ethics. Mimamsa is qualitatively and
qualitatively pluralistic and its attentiveness is the effectiveness of
morality of the individual as well as the ethicality of the society. The
effectiveness of ethical action is the power that produces the formation of the
world. More precisely ethical action leads to activity and leads the way to
physical forms furthermore it regulates and systematizes the world as real. The
plurality of “Atman” is real and every individual creates and shapes their
destiny through their own actions. The central teaching of Mimamsa is “Dharma”
and it is the foundation of this universe and it binds and supports together.
Sage Jaimini in his “Mimamsa sutra” defines that “Dharma” holds plurality
together and motivates human beings to execute the desired action. “Dharma” is
the potential force (“Sakthi”) and all fruitful results are accompanied by
ethical action. When “Dharma” leads to unethical actions or “Adharma” it
results in tragedy and pain and it must be avoided. “Dharma” as potency is the
unseen force (“Adrishta”) that resides in every “Atman” of the agent and
regulates and determines the future life of “Atman”. Consequently, for Mimamsa,
the concept of karma is the doctrine of Dharma and both are associated with
commandments. Mimamsa defines actions into three categories.
First, the mandatory actions are to be performed by every individual
to others as a responsibility. A human being has to compensate for the dues as
an individual.
Second, every human being discharges his compulsory actions
towards the other man, society and the universe and may not gain any particular
merit. Forbidden actions result in demerits and at the same time, underperformance does not produce any excellence.
Third, there are some types of activities that are completely
optional. It has to be performed when a person seeks certain rewards. But the
performance of these acts to show something special cannot
be considered unethical.
Atman:
Mimamsa acknowledges the reality of “Atman” as something different
from the Mind (“Manas”), the sense organs and the physical body. Furthermore,
“Atman” is distinguished as “I” consciousness (“Ahmadhi”) which is known as
“Brahman” according to Hindu Upanishads. A plurality of “Atman” is present and
each individual is responsible for their own actions rather than ethical
actions. Even though Atman is individual and infinite, it can exist together.
Consciousness is not a necessary nature of Atman even though consciousness
emerges in Atman when it comes into contact with Manas or Mind. According to
the philosophy of Mimamsa, even though consciousness is an adventitious quality
of Atman yet it is treated as seer, doer and enjoyer. We can’t attribute the
qualities of seeing, doing and enjoying to mind, senses or physical body.
Mimamsa supports that Atman, being the subject, knows the object which is
independent of it. There is knowledge of objects which is possessed by Atman
alone and this reveals the existence of Atman. According to the philosophy of
Mimamsa, one of the distinguishable characteristics of consciousness is not the
vital feature of Atman and it is adventitious.
Liberation (“Mukti”):
Liberation (“Mukti”) is the most important soteriological
aspect of Mimamsa. Mimamsa disowns the role of “God” in liberation and is not
essential as a supervisor on the earth. The world neither has a beginning nor end
and the role of God as a creator is absent in this philosophy. According to
Sage Jaimini, there are three values of human life. They are Virtuous moral life
(“Dharma”), Material and prosperity (“Artha”), and Sensual pleasure (“Kama”). The
fourth human value of Moksha was incorporated by Sage Kumarilla Bhatta and Sage
Prabhakara. Later philosophers of Mimamsa admitted the reality of “God”. One
has to follow the injunction of “Vedas” for the right ethical action.