Sanskrit Scientific Literature
century system probably author existence called doctrine panini school self
SANSKRIT SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE - I. LAW (Dharina). - Among the technical treatises of the later Vedic period, certain portions of the lialpa-stitras, or manuals of ceremonial, peculiar to particular schools, were referred to as the earliest attempts at a systematic treatment of law subjects. These are the Dharma-siltras, or "rules of (religious) law," also called Samaijacliarika-stltras, or "rules of conventional usage (samayaachara)." It is doubtful whether such treatises were at any time quite as numerous as the Grihyasdtras, or rules of domestic or family rites, to which they are closely allied, and of which indeed they may originally have been an outgrowth. That the number of those actually extant is comparatively small is, however, chiefly due to the fact that this class of works was supplanted by another of a more popular kind, which covered the same ground. The Dharmasdtras consist chiefly of strings of terse rules, containing the essentials of the science, and intended to be committed to memory, and to be expounded orally by the teacher - thus forming, as it were, epitomes of class lectures. These rules are interspersed with couplets or "gitlias," in various metres, either composed by the author himself or quoted from elsewhere, which generally give the substance of the preceding rules. One can well understand why such couplets should gradually have become more popular, and should ultimately have led to the appearance of works entirely composed in verse. Such metrical law-books did spring up in large numbers, not all at once, but over a long period of time, extending probably from about the beginning of our era, or even earlier, down to well-nigh the Mohammedan conquest ; and, as at the time of their first appearance the epic impulse was particularly strong, other metres were entirely discarded for the epic Aloka. These works are the metrical Dharrna-Seistras, or, as they are usually called, the Smriti, "recollection, tradition " - a term which, as we havg seen, belonged to the whole body of Sfitras (as opposed to the Sruti, or revelation), but which has become the almost exclusive title of the versified institutes of law (and the few Dharmasfitras still extant). Of metrical Smritis about forty are hitherto known to exist, but their total number probably. amounted to at least double that figure, though some of these, it is true, are but short and insignificant tracts, while others are only different recensions of one and the same work.
With the exception of a few of these works - such as the Agni-, Yama-, and Vishnu-Sinritis--which are ascribed to the respective gods, the authorship of the Smritis is attributed to old rishis, such as Atri, Kanva, Vyfisa, garylilya, Bharadvaja. It is, however, extremely doubtful whether in most cases this attribution is not altogether fanciful, or whether, as a rule, there really existed a traditional connexion between these works and their alleged authors or schools named after them. The idea, which early suggested itself to Sanskrit scholars, that Smritis which passed by the names of old Vedic teachers and their schools might simply be metrical recasts of the Dharma- (or Grihya-) Atm of these schools, was a very natural one, and, indeed, is still a very probable one, though the loss of the original Satras, and the modifications and additions which the Smritis doubtless underwent in course of time, make it very difficult to prove this point. One could, however, scarcely account for the disappearance of the Dharmasfltras of some of the most important schools except on the ground that they were given up in favour of other works; and is it likely that this should have been done, unless there was some guarantee that the new works, upon the whole, embodied the doctrines of the old authorities of the respective schools? Thus, as regards the most important of the Smritis, the illeinava-Dharmagelstra,1 there exist both a grauta- and a Grihya-sfitra of the Manava school of the Black Yajus, but no such Dharmasfttra has hitherto been discovered, though the former existence of such a work has been made all but certain by Prof. Biihler's discovery of quotations from a Manavam, consisting partly of prose rules, and partly of couplets, some of which occur literally in the 31anusmriti, whilst others have been slightly altered there to suit later doctrines, or have been changed from the original trislitubh into the epic metre. The idea of an old law-giver Mann Sviiyambhuva, - "sprung from the self-existent (svayam-bhil)" god Braliman, - reaches far back into Vedic antiquity: he is mentioned as such in early texts ; and in Yaska's Wirukta a filoka occurs giving his opinion on a point of inheritance. But whether or not the 31anava-Dharmasfltra embodied what were supposed to be the authoritative precepts of this sage on questions of sacred law we do not know ; nor can it as yet be shown that the Manusinriti, which seems itself to have undergone considerable modifications, is the lineal descendant of that Dharmasiltra. It is, however, worthy of note that a very close connexion exists between the Manusmriti and the Vishnuastra • and, as the latter is most likely a modern, only partially remodelled, edition of the Satras of the Black Yajus school of the Kathas, the close relation between the two works would be easily understood, if it could be shown that the Manusmriti is a modern development of the Siltras of another school of the Charaka division of the Black Yajurveda.
The 3Ianava Dharmafiastra consists of twelve books, the first and last of which, treating of creation, transmigration, and final beatitude, aro, however, generally regarded as later additions. In them the legendary sage Bhrigu, here called a 3ffinava, is introduced as 3Ianu's disciple, through whom the great teacher has his work promulgated. Why this intermediate agent should have been considered necessary is by no means clear. Except in these two books the work shows no special relation to Mann, for, though he is occasionally referred to in it, the same is done in other Smritis. The question as to the probable date of the final redaction of the work cannot as yet be answered. Dr Burnell has tried to show that it was probably composed under the Chalukya king Pulake4i, about 500 A.D., but his argumentation is anything but convincing. From several Alokas quOted from Mann by Yarnamihira, in the 6th century, it would appear that the text which the great astronomer had before him differed very considerably from our Manusmriti. It is, however, possible that he referred either to the Miliat-Manu (Great M.) or the Vriddha dllanu (Old M.), who are often found quoted, and apparently represent one, if not two, larger recensions of the Smriti. The oldest existing commentary on the Manara-DharntaSastra is by Medhatithi, who is first quoted in 1200, and is usually supposed to have lived in the 9th or 10th century. He had, however, several predecessors to whom he refers as p4rve, "the former ones."
Next in importance among Smritis ranks the YeijilavIlkya. Dharmakistra.1 Its origin and date are not less uncertain, - except that, in the opinion of Prof. Stenzler, which has never been questioned, it is based on the Mannsmriti, and represents a more advanced stage of legal theory and definition than that work. Yajaavalkya, as we have seen, is looked upon as the founder of the Vajasaneyius or White Yajus, and the author of the gatapathabrahmana. In the latter work he is represented as having passed some time at the court of King Janaka of Videlia (Tirhut); and in accordance therewith lie is stated, in the introductory couplets of the Dliarma4astra, to have propounded his legal doctrines to the sages, while staying at Mithila (the capital of Videha). Hence, if the connexion between the metrical Smritis and the old Vedic schools be areal one and not one of name merely, we should expect to find in the y aPavalk ya-smriti special coincidences of doctrine with the Katiyasutra, the principal &Ara of the Vajasaneyins. Now, some sufficiently striking coincidences between this Smriti and Paraskara's KdifyaGrihyasalra have indeed been pointed out ; and if there ever existed a Dharmasfitra belonging to the same school, of which no trace has hitherto been found, the points of agreement between this and the Dharmafiastra might be expected to be even more numerous. As in the case of Mann, gloka.s are quoted in various works from a Brihal- and a Vriddha-Yeipiavallega. The Yfijaavalkya-smriti consists of three books, corresponding to the throe great divisions of the Indian theory of law rule of conduct (social and caste duties); vgaraltdra, civil and criminal law ; andpreiyaichilla, penance or expiation. There are two important commentaries on the work : - the famous Afitdkshard,3 by Vijfianefivara, who lived under the Chalukya king Vikrainaditya of Kalyana (1076-1127); and another by Apararka or Aparaditya, a petty Silara prince of the latter half of the 12th century.
The Parellara-smriti contains no chapter on jurisprudence, but treats only of religious duties and expiations in 12 adhyayas. The deficiency was, however, supplied by the famous exegete Madhava (in the latter half of the 14th century), who made use of Paraliara's text for the compilation of a large digest of religious law, usually called Pardgara-madhavlyani, to which he added a third chapter on vyavahant,4 or law proper. Besides the ordinary text of the Parafiara-smriti, consisting of rather less than 600 couplets, there is also extant a Brilat-Paraarasmriti, probably an amplification of the former, containing not less than 29S0 (according to others even 3300) filokas. The Ndradiya-Dharnurgd,stra, or Naradasmyiti, is a work of a more practical kind ; indeed, it is probably the most systematic and business-like of all the Smritis. It does not concern itself with religious and moral precepts, but is strictly confined to law. Of this work again there are at least two different recensions. Besides the text translated by Dr Jolly, a portion of a larger recension has come to light in India. This version has been commented upon by Asahaya, "the peerless " - a very esteemed writer on law who is supposed to have lived before Medhatithi (? 9th century) - and it may therefore be considered as the older recension of the two. But, as it has been found to contain the word dInara, an adaptation of the Roman denarius, it cannot, at any rate, bo older than the 2d century; indeed, its date is probably several centuries later.
Whether any of the Dharmaastras were ever used in India as actual "codes of law" for the practical administration of justice is very doubtful ; indeed, so far as the most prominent works of this class are concerned, it is highly improbable.5 No doubt these works were held to bo of the highest authority as laying down the principles of religious and civil duty; but it was not so much any single text as the whole body of the Smriti that was looked upon as the embodiment of the divine law. Hence, the moment the actual work of codification begins in the 11th century, we find the jurists engaged in practically showing how the Smritis confirm and supplement each other, and in reconciling seeming contradictions between them. This new phase of Indian jurisprudence commences with Vijfifinefivara's Mitashard, which, though primarily a commentary on Yajilaralkya, is so rich in original matter and illustrations from other Smritis that it is far more adapted to serve as a code of law than the work it professes to explain. This treatise is held in high esteem all over India, with the exception of the Bengal or Gaudiya school of law, which recognizes as its chief authority the digest of its founder, Jimfitavahana, especially the chapter on succession, entitled Dligahheiga.8 Based on the Mitakshara are the Smpiti-ehandrikel,1 a work of great common-sense, written by Devanda. Bhatta, in the 13th century, and highly esteemed in Soutfiern India ; and the Viramitrodaya, a compilation consisting of two chapters, on achara and vyavahara, made in the first half of the 17th century by Mitramifra, for Raja Virasiraba, or Birsinh Deo of Orchba, who murdered Abul Fazl, the minister of the emperor Alsbar, and author of the Ain i Akbari. There is no need here to enumerate any more of the vast number of treatises on special points of law, of greater or less merit, the more important of which will be found mentioned in English digests!of Hindu law.
II. PHILOSOPHY. - The Indian mind shows at all times a strong disposition for metaphysical speculation. In the old religious lyrics this may be detected from the very first. Not to speak of the abstract nature of some even of the oldest Vedic deities, this propensity betrays itself in a certain mystic symbolism, tending to refine and spiritualize the original purely physical character and activity of some of the more prominent gods, and to impart a deep and subtle import to the rites of the sacrifice. The primitive worship of more or less isolated elementary forces and phenomena had evidently ceased to satisfy the religious wants of the more thoughtful minds. Various syncretist tendencies show the drift of religious thought to be towards some kind of unity of the divine powers, be it in the direction of the pantheistic idea, or in that of an organized polytheism, or even towards monotheism. In the latter age of the hymns the pantheistic idea is rapidly gainineground, and finds vent in various cosmogonic speculations ; and in the Brahmana period we see it fully developed. The fundamental conception of this doctrine finds its expression in the two synonymous terms brahman (neutr.), originally "power of growtgrowth," then "devotional impulse, prayer," and dtman (masc.), h," self, soul." The recognition of the essential sameness of the individual souls, emanating all alike (whether really or imaginarily) from the ultimate spiritual essence (parama-brahman) " as sparks issue from the fire," and destined to return thither, involved some important problems. Considering the infinite diversity of individual souls of the animal and vegetable world, exhibiting various degrees of perfection, is it conceivable that each of them is the immediate efflux of the Supreme Being, the All-perfect, and that each, from the lowest to the highest, could re-nnite therewith directly at the close of its mundane existence ? The difficulty implied in the latter question was at first met by the assumption of an intermediate state of expiation and purification, a kind of purgatory ; but the whole problem found at last a more comprehensive solution in the doctrine of rr (samsdra). Some scholars have suggested 2 that metempsychosis may have been the prevalent belief among the aboriginal tribes of India, and may have been taken over from them by the Indo-Aryans. This no doubt is quite possible ; but even in that case we can only assume that speculative minds seized upon it as offering the most satisfactory (if not the only possible) explanation of the great problem of phenomenal existence. It is certainly a significant fact that, once established in Indian thought, the doctrine of metempsychosis is never again called in question, - that, like the fundamental idea on which it rests, viz., the essential sameness of the immaterial element of all sentient beings, the notion of samsdra has become an axiom, a universally conceded principle of Indian philosophy. Thus the latter has never quite risen to the heights of pure thought ; its object is indeed jijrceisd, the search for knowledge ; but it is an inquiry (minzdipsa) into the nature of things undertaken not solely for the attainment of the truth, but with a view to a specific object, - the discontinuance of sainsara, the cessation of mundane existence after the present life. Every sentient being, through ignorance, being liable to sin, and destined after each existence to be born again in some new form, dependent on the actions committed during the immediately preceding life, all mundane existence thus is the source of ever-renewed suffering ; and the task of the philosopher is to discover the means of attaining moksha, " release " from the bondage of material existence, and yoga, "union" with the Supreme Self, - in fact, salvation. It is with a view to this, and this only, that the Indian metaphysician takes up the great problems of life, - the origin of man and the universe, and the relation between mind and matter.
It is not likely that these speculations were viewed with much favour by the great body of Brahmans engaged in ritualistic practices. Not that the metaphysicians actually discountenanced the ceremonial worship of the old mythological gods as vain and nugatory. On the contrary, they expressly admitted the propriety of sacrifices, and commended them as the most meritorious of human acts, by which man could raise himself to the highest degrees of mundane existence, to the worlds of the Fathers and the Devas. Nevertheless, the fact that these were only higher grades from which the individual self would still be liable to relapse into the vortex of material existence, - that the final goal lay beyond even those worlds, unattainable through aught but a perfect knowledge of the soul's nature and its identity with the Supreme Self, - this fact of itself was sufficient to depreciate the merit of the sacrificial cult, and to undermine the authority of the sacred rituals. "Know yo that Self," exhorts one of those old idealists,3 "and have done with other words ; for that (knowledge) is the bridge to immortality " Intense self-contemplation being, moreover, the only way of attaining the all-important knowledge, this doctrine left little or no room for those mediatorial offices of the priest, so indispensable in ceremonial worship ; and indeed we actually read of Brahman sages resorting to Kshatriya princes to hear them expound this, the true doctrine of salvation. But, in spite of their anti-hierarchical tendency, these speculations continued to gain ground ; and in the end the body of treatises propounding the pantheistic doctrine, the Upanishads, were admitted into the sacred canon, as appendages to the ceremonial writings, the Brahinanas. The Upanishads thus form literally "the end of the Veda," the Veddnta ; but their adherents claim this title for their doctrines in a metaphorical rather than in a material sense, as "the ultimate aim and consummation of the Veda." In later times the radical distinction between these speculative appendages and the bulk of the Vedic writings was strongly accentuated in a new classification of the sacred scriptures. According to this scheme they were supposed to consist of two great divisions, - the Karma-IA.4a, i.e., "the work-section," or practical ceremonial (exoteric) part, consisting of the Samhitas and Brahmanas (including the ritual portions of the Aranyakas), and the Jfidnakattela, " the knowledge-section," or speculative (esoteric) part. These two divisions are also called respectively the Parra(" former") and Uttara- ("latter," or higher 4) ; and when the speculative tenets of the Upanishads came to be formulated into a regular system it was deemed desirable that there should also be a special system corresponding to the older and largerportion of the Vedic writings. Thus arose the two systems - the Fdrva- (or Karma-) mtmeinistl, or "former (practical) speculation," and the Uttara- (or Brahma-) mEmelmsd, usually called the Vedanta philosophy.
It is not yet possible to determine, even approximately, the time when the so-called Dardancts (literally "demonstrations"), or systems of philosophy, were first formulated. And, though ; they have certainly developed from the tenets enunciated in the Upanishads, there is considerable doubt as to the exact order in which these systems succeeded each other. The authoritative exposés of the systems have apparently passed through several redactions ; and, in their present form, these sfitra-works5 evidently belong to a comparatively recent period, being probably not older than the early centuries of our era. By far the ablest general review of the philosophical systems (except the Vedanta) produced by a native scholar is the Sarva-daraana-sangrahe (" summary of all the Darianas "), composed in the 14th century, from a Vedantist point of view, by the great exegete Madhava Acharya. Among the different systems, six are generally recognized as orthodox, as being (either wholly or for the most part) consistent with the Vedic religion, - two and two of which are again more closely related to each other than to the rest, viz. : - (1) Parva-mamdipsd (0.11mthrtsel), and (2) Uttara-nztrAnsa (Yeddnta) ; (3) Sdnkhya, and (4) Yoga (5) Wykyes, and (6) Vaideshika.
(1) The (Parrs-) Mimdmsa is not a system of philosophy in the proper sense of the word, but rather a system of dogmatic criticism and scriptural interpretation. It maintains the eternal existence of the Veda, the different parts of which are minutely classified. Its principal object, however, is to ascertain the religious (chiefly ceremonial) duties enjoined in the Veda, and to show how these duties 'must be performed, and what are the special merits and rewards attached to them. Hence arises the necessity of determining the principles for rightly interpreting the Vedic texts, as also of what forms its only claim to being classed among speculative systems, viz., aphilosophical examination of the means of, and the proper method for arriving at, accurate knowledge. The foundation of this school, as well as the composition of the Satins or aphorisms which constitute its chief doctrinal authority, is ascribed to Jaimini. The Sfitras were commented on by Sabara Svamin ; and further annotations (vdrttika) thereon were supplied by the great theologian Kumarila Bhatta, who is supposed to have lived in the (6th or) 7th century, and to have worked hard for the reestablishment of Brahmanism. According to a popular tradition his self-immolation was witnessed by Sankaracharya. The most approved general introduction to the study of the Mimarnsa is the metrical Jaintintya-11ytiya-trullti-vistara,1 with a prose commentary, both by Madhava Acharya. This distinguished writer, who has already been mentioned several times, was formerly supposed, from frequent statements iu MSS., to have been the brother of Sayana, the well-known interpreter of the Vedas. The late Dr Burnall2 has, however, made it very probable that these two are one and the same person, Sayana being his Telugu, and Madhavilcharya his Brahmanical min& In 1331 ho became the jayailgurn, or spiritual head, of the Smartas (a Vedantist sect founded by Sankarticharya) at the Math of gringeri, where, under the patronage of Bukka, king of Vidyanagara, he composed his numerous works. He sometimes passes under a third name, Vidyaranya-svamin, adopted by him on becoming a sannydsin, or religious mendicant.
(2) The Vedditta philosophyin the comparatively primitive form in which it presents itself in most of the Upanishads, constitutes the earliest phase of systematic metaphysical speculation. In its essential features it remains to this day the prevalent belief of Indian thinkers, and enters largely into the religious life and convictions of the people. It is an idealistic monism, which derives the universe from an ultimate conscious spiritual principle, the one and only existent from eternity - the _erbium, the Self, or the Purusha, the Person, the Brahman. It is this primordial essence or Self that pervades all things, and gives life and light to them, "without being sullied by the visible outward impurities or the miseries of the world, being itself apart," - and into which all things will, through knowledge, ultimately resolve themselves. "The wise who perceive him as being within their own Self, to them belongs eternal peace, not to others."3 But, while the commentators never hesitate to interpret the Upanishads as being in perfect agreement with the Vedantic system, as elaborated in later times, there is often considerable difficulty in accepting their explanations. In these treatises only the leading features of the pantheistic theory find utterance, generally in vague and mystic though often in singularly powerful and poetical language, from which it is not always possible to extract the author's real idea on fundamental points, such as the relation between the Supreme Spirit and the phenomenal world, - whether tho latter was actually evolved from the former by a power inherent in him, or whether the process is altogether a fiction, an illusion of the individual self. Thus the Katha-upanishad4 offers the following summary : - " Beyond the senses [there are the objects ; beyond the objects] there is the mind (mauas) ; beyond the mind there is the intellect (buddhi) ; beyond the intellect there is the Great Self. Beyond the Great One there is the Highest Undeveloped (avyaktam); beyond the Undeveloped there is the Person (purusha), the all-pervading, characterless (alinga). Whatsoever knows him is liberated, and attains immortality." Here the Vedantist commentator assures us that the Great Undeveloped, which the Sankhyas would claim as their own primary material principle (pradhana, pmkriti), is in reality Metyd, illusion (otherwise called Avidya, ignorance, or Sakti, power), the fictitious energy which in conjunction with the Highest Self (Atman, Purusha) produces or constitutes the 24vara, the Lord, or Cosmic Soul, the first emanation of the Atman, and himself the (fictitious) cause of all that seems to exist. It must remain doubtful, however, whether the author of the Upanishad really meant this, or whether be regarded the Great Undeveloped as an actual material principle or substratum evolved from out of the Purusha, though not, as the Sankhyas hold, coexisting with him from eternity. Besides passages such as these which seem to indicate realistic or materialistic tendencies of thought, which may well have developed into the dualistic Sankliya and kindred systems, there are others which indicate the existence even of nihilist theories, such as the Bauddhas - the 44nya-vd-clins, or affirmers of a void or primordial nothingness - profess. Thus we read in the Chhandogya-upanishad : - " The existent alone, my son, was here in the beginning, one only, without a second. Others say, there was the non-existent alone here in the beginning, one only, without a second, - and from the nonexistent the existent was born. But how could this be, my son ? How could the existent be born from the non-existent ? No my son, only the existent was here in the beginning, one only, without a second."
The foundation of the Vedanta system, as "the completion of the Veda," is naturally ascribed to Vya.sa, tho mythic arranger of the Vedas, who is said to be identical with Badarayana, the reputed anthor of the Brahma- (or StirSraka-)seltra, the authoritative, though highly obscure, summary of the system. The most distinguished interpreter of these aphorisms is the famous Malabar theologian gankara Acharya (7th or 8th century), who also commented on the principal Upanishads and the Bhagavadgitil, and is said to have spent the greater part of his life in wandering all over India, as far as Kashmir, and engaging in disputations with teachers - whether of the gaiva, or Vaishnava, or less orthodox persuasions - with the view of rooting out heresy and re-establishing the doctrine of the Upanishads. Ilis controversial triumphs (doubtless largely mythical) arc related in a number of treatises current in South India, the two most important of which are tho A'anicara-dig-vijaya ("Sankara's world-conquest"), ascribed to his own disciple Anandagiri, and the Sankara-vijaya, by Madhavacharya. In gankara's philosophy the theory that the material world has no real existence, but is,a mere illusion of the individual soul wrapt in ignorance, - that, therefore, it has only a practical or conventional (trydvah4riA:a) but not a transcendental or true (ydrattitirthika) reality, - is strictly enforced. To the question why the Supreme Self (or rather his fictitious development, the Highest Lord, or cosmic soul) should have sent forth this phantasmagory this great thinker (with the author of the Siltras7) can return no better answer than that it must have been done for sport (Ma), without any special motive - since to ascribe such a motive to the Supreme Lord would be limiting his solf-sufficiency, - and that the pyocess of creation has been going on from all eternity. gankara's Sartraka-nilmantsd-bhdshya has given rise to a largo number of exegetic treatises, of which Vachaspati-miAra's s exposition, entitled Bliamcdt,s is the most esteemed. Of numerous other commentaries on the Brahma-sfitras, the Srt-bhdshya, by Ramanuja, the founder of the Sri-Vaishnava sect, is the most noteworthy. This religious teacher, who prObably flourished during the first half of the 12th century, caused a schism in the Vedanta school. Instead of adhering to gankara's orthodox advaita, or non-duality doctrine, he put forth the theory of vigsh.p2dvaita, i.e., non-duality of the (two) distinct (principles), or, as it is more commonly explained, non-duality of that which is qualified. (by attributes). According to this theory the Brahman (which is identical with Vishnu) is neither devoid of form and quality, nor is it all things ; but it is endowed with all good qualities, and matter is distinct from it ; bodies consist of souls (chit) and matter (aehit) ; and God is the soul. With this theory is combined the ordinary Vaishnava doctrine of periodical descents (avatdra) of the deity, in various forms, for the benefit of creatures. In Ramanuja's system con- siderable play is also allowed to the doctrine of faith (bhakti). This phase of Indian religions belief, which has attached itself to the Vedanta theory more closely than to any other, and the origin of which sonic scholars are inclined to attribute to Christian influence, seems first to make its appearance very prominently in the Bhagavadgltti, the episode of the Mandbhdrata, already referred to, and is even more fully developed in some of the Puranas, especially the Bhagavata. In'the Sdluglya- (Bhakti-) sittra,4°.the author and date of which are unknown, the doctrine is systematically propounded in one hundred aphorisms. According to this doctrine mundane existence is due to want of faith, not to ignorance; and the final liberation of the individual soul can only be effected by faith. Knowledge only contributes to this end by removing the mind's foulness, unbelief. Its highest phase of development this doctrine probably reached in the religious creed of the Bhaktas, a Vaishnava sect founded, towards the end of the 15th century, by Chaitanya, whose followers subsequently grafted the Vedanta speculations on his doctrine. A popular summary of tho Vedanta doctrine is the Vedanta-sdra by Sadananda, which has been frequently printed and translated.]' (3) The Sdnkhya,u or " ennmerative " system, probably derives its name from its systematic enumeration of the twenty-five principles (tattva) it recognizes, - consisting of twenty-four material and an independent immaterial principle. In opposition to the Vedanta school, which maintains the eternal coexistence of a spiritual principle of reality and an unspiritual principle of unreality, the Sankhya assumes the eternal coexistence of a material first cause, which it calls either mfila-Prakriti (fem.), "chief Originant " (Nature), or Pradhdna, "the principal" causo, and a plurality of spiritual elements or Selves, Purusha. Tho system recognizes no intelligent creator (such as the favara, or demiurgus, of the Vedanta) - whenco it is called nirlSrara, godless ; but it conceives the Material First Cause, itself unintelligent, to have become developed, by a gradual process of evolution, into all the actual forms of the phenomenal universe, excepting the souls. Its first emanation is buddlii, intelligence ; whence springs ahanak.dra consciousness ; thence five elementary particles (tannuitra) and eleven organs of sense ; and finally, from the elementary particles' five elements. The souls have fronr all eternity been connected with Nature, - having in the first place become invested with a subtile frame (linga-, or sashma-, tartra), consisting of seventeen principles, viz., intelligence, consciousness, elementary particles, and organs of sense and action, including mind. Invested with this subtile frame, they, for the sake of fruition, connect themselves ever anew with Nature, thus, as it were, creating for themselves ever new forms of material existence ; and it is only on his attaining perfect knowledge, whereby the ever-changing modes of intelligence cease to be reflected on him, that the Purusha is liberated from the miseries of Sarpsara.
The reputed founder of this school is the sage Kapila, to whom tradition ascribes the composition of the fundamental text-book, the (Sdnkhya-s4tra, or) Silokitya-pravachana,1 as well as the Tattva-samdsa, a mere catalogue of the principles. That the Siitras have undergone subsequent modifications might be inferred from the fact that they twice refer to the opinion of Panchaiikha, who elsewhere is stated to have received his instruction from Asuri, the disciple of Kapila, as well as from the sage himself. Of the commentaries on the Siltras, that by Vijiiana Bhikshu,2 a writer probably of the 16th century, is the most approved. An independent treatise by the same author, the Sdnkhya-sdra,2 consisting of a prose and a verse part, is probably the most valuable compendium of Sankhya doctrines. Another admirable and highly-esteemed treatise is Igvara-krishna's Sdnkhya-kariled,3 which gives, in the narrow compass of seventy-five glokas, a lucid and complete sketch of the system. Though nothing certain is known regarding its author,4 this work must be of tolerable antiquity, considering that it was commented upon by Gaudapada,° the preceptor of Govinda, who, on his part, is said to have been the teacher of Sankaracharya.
The Yoga system is merely a schismatic branch of the preceding school, holding the same opinions on most points treated in common in their Sutras, with the exception of one important point, the existence of God. To the twenty-five principles (tattoo) of the Nirigvara Sinkhya, the last of which was the Purusha, the Yoga adds, as the twenty-sixth, the Nirguya Purusha, or Self devoid of qualities, the Supreme God of the system. Hence the Yoga is called the Seivara (theistical) Sdnkhya. But over and above the purely speculative part of its doctrine, which it shares with the sister school, the theistic Sankhya has developed a complete system of mortification of the senses - by means of prolonged apathy and abstraction, protracted rigidity of posture, and similar practices, - many of which are already alluded to in the Upanishads, - with the view of attaining to an ecstatic vision of, and reunion (yoga) with, the Supreme Spirit. It is from this portion of the system that the school derives the name by which it is more generally known. The authoritative Sfitras of the Yoga, bearing the same title as those of the sister school, viz., Sdnich,ya-pravachana, but more commonly called Yoga-Alstra, are ascribed to Patatjali, who is perhaps identical with the author of the "great commentary" on Panini. The oldest commentary on the Skras, the Pdtaiyala-bhlishya, is attributed to no other than Vyasa, the mythic arranger of the Veda and founder of the Vedanta. Both works have again been commented upon by Vachaspati-migra, Vijfiana-bhikshu, and other writers.
(6) The Nydya 6 and Vaikshika are but separate branches of one and the same school, which supplement each other and the doctrines of which have virtually become amalgamated into a single system of philosophy. The special part taken by each of the two branches in the elaboration of the'system may be briefly stated in Dr Ither's words : - " To the Nyaya belong the logical doctrines of the forms of syllogisms, terms, and propositions; to the Vaileshikas tho systematical explanation of the categories (the simplest metaphysical ideas) of the metaphysical, physical, and psychical notions, - which notions are ha'rdly touched upon in the Nyaya-skras. They differ in their statement of the several modes of proof, - the Nyaya asserting four modes of proof (from perception, inference, analogy, and verbal, communication), the VaLgeshikas admitting only the two first ones." The term Nyaya (ni-dya, " in-going," entering), though properly meaning "analytical investigation," as applied to philosophical inquiry generally, has come to be taken more commonly in the narrower sense of "logic," because this school has entered more thoroughly than any other into the laws and processes of thought, and has worked out a formal system of reasoning which forms the Hindu standard of logic.
The followers of these schools generally recognize seven categories (pacliirtha): - substance (dravya), quality (gulta), action (karma), generality (sdniOnya), particularity (vigeslia), intimate relation (samavilya), and non-existence or negation (ablitiva). Substances, forming the substrata of qualities and actions, are of two kinds :eternal (without a cause), viz., space, time, ether, soul, and the atoms of mind, earth, water, fire, and air ; and non-eternal, comprising all compounds, or the things we perceive, and which must have a cause of their existence. Causality is of three kinds :that of intimate relation (material cause); that of non-intimate relation (between parts of a compound); and instrumental causality (effecting the union of component parts). Material things are thus composed of atoms (anu), i.e., ultimate simple substances, or units of space, eternal, unchangeable, and without dimension, characterized only by "particularity (viksha)." It is from this predication of ultimate " particulars " that the Vaikshikas, the originators of the atomistic doctrine, 'derive their name. The Nyaya draws a clear line between matter and spirit, and has worked out a careful and ingenious system of psychology. It distinguishes between individual or living souls (jiodtman), which are numerous, infinite, and eternal, and the Supreme Soul (Parameitnion), which is one only, the seat of eternal knowledge, and the maker and ruler (.tivara) of all things. It is by his will and agency that the unconscious living souls (soul-atoms, in fact) enter into union with the (material) atoms of mind, &c., and thus partake of the pleasures and sufferings of mundane existence. On the Hindu syllogism compare Prof. Cowell's notes to Colebrooke's Essays, i. p. 314.
The original collection of Nyetya-sttras is ascribed to Gotama, and that of the Voiie,shika-m2tras to Kanada. The etymological meaning of the latter name seems to be "little-eater, particle-eater," whence in works of hostile critics the synonymous terms Kaya-bhAi or liana-bhaksha are sometimes derisively applied to him, doubtless in allusion to his theory of atoms. He is also occasionally referred to under the name of Kagyapa. Both si'ttra-works have been interpreted and supplemented by a number of writers, the commentary of Vigvanatha on the Nyaya and that of Sankara-migra on the Vaiieshika Skras being most generally 'used. There are, moreover, a vast number of separate works on the doctrines of these schools, especially on logic. Of favourite elementary treatises on the subject may be mentioned Kansamigra's Tarka-bhOsiud, the Tarka-sangraha,7 and the Blidishdpctriehheda.8 A large and important book on logic is Gangeia's Ch,inteimani, which formed the text-book of the celebrated Nuddea school of Bengal, founded by Raghunatha-gromani about the beginning of the 16th century. An interesting little treatise is the Kusumdiyali,9 in which the author, Udayaua Acharya (about the 12th century, according to Prof. Cowell) attempts, iu 72 couplets, to prove the existence of a Supreme Being on the principles of the Nyaya system.
As regards the different heretical systems of Hindu philosophy, 1 there is no occasion, in a sketch of Sanskrit literature, to enter into s the tenets of the two great anti-Brahmanical sects, the Jainas and Buddhists. While the original works of the former are written entirely in a popular (the Ardha-magadhi) dialect, the northern Buddhists, it is true, have produced a considerable body of literature,1° composed in a kind of hybrid Sanskrit, but only a few of their sacred books have as yet been published; 11 and it is, moreover, admitted on all hands that for the pure and authentic Bauddha doctrines we have rather to look to the Pali scriptures of the southern branch. Nor can we do more here than briefly allude to the theories of a few of the less prominent heterodox systems, however interesting they may be for a history of human thought.
The Chdrvdkas, an ancient sect of undisguised materialism, who deny the existence of the soul, and consider the human person (purusha) to be an organic body endowed with sensibility and with thought, resulting from a modification of the component material elements, ascribe their origin to Brihaspati; but their authoritative text-book, the BOrhaspatya-sittra, is only known so far from a few quotations.
The Pachardtras, or BhOgavatas, are an early Vaishnava sect, in which the doctrine of faith, already alluded to, is strongly developed. Hence their tenets are defended by liamanuja, though they are partly condemned as heretical in the Brahma-satras. Their recognized text-book is the Ndraolo-Paiichardtra.12 According to their theory the Supreme Being (Bhagavat, Vasudeva, Vishnu) became four separate persons by successive production. While the Supreme Being himself is indeed with the six qualities of knowledge, power, strength, absolute sway, vigour, and energy, the three divine persons successively emanating from him and from one another represent the living soul, mind, and consciousness respectively.
The Pilupatas, one of several Saiva (Mahegvara) sects, hold the Supreme Being (tivara), whom they identify with Siva, to be the creator and ruler of the world, but not its material cause. With the Sankhyas they admit the notion of a plastic material cause, the PradhOna; while they follow Patafijali in maintaining the existence of a Supreme God.
III. GalantAn ( Yydkarana). - We found this subject enumerated as one of the six " limbs of the Veda," or auxiliary sciences, the study of which was deemed necessary for a correct interpretation of the sacred Mantras, and the proper performance of Vedic rites. Linguistic inquiry, phonetic as well as grammatical, was indeed early resorted to both for the purpose of elucidating the meaning of the Veda, and with the view of settling its textual form. The particular work which came ultimately to bo looked upon as the vedang,a" representative of grammatical science, and has ever since remained the standard authority for Sanskrit grammar in India, is Panini's Ash.retdhydyi,1 so called from its "consisting of eight lectures (aclhydya)," of four paclas each. For a comprehensive grasp of linguistic facts, and a penetrating insight into the structure of the vernacular language, this work stands probably unrivalled in the literature of any nation, - though few other languages, it is true, afford such facilities as the Sanskrit for a scientific analysis. Panini's system of arrangement differs entirely from that usually adopted in our grammars, viz., according to the so-called parts of speech. As the work is composed in aphorisms intended to be learnt by heart, economy of memory-matter was the author's paramount consideration. His object was chiefly attained by the grouping together of all cases exhibiting the same phonetic or formative feature, no matter whether or not they belonged to the same part of speech. For this purpose he also makes use of a highly artificial and ingenious system of algebraic symbols, consisting of technical letters (anubanclha), used chiefly with suffixes, and indicative of the changes which the roots or stems have to under,go in word-formation.
It is self-evident that so complicated and complete a system of linguistic analysis and nomenclature could not have sprung up all at once and in the infancy of grammatical science, but that many generations of scholars must have helped to bring it to that degree of perfection which it exhibits in Panini s work. Accordingly we find Panini himself making reference in various places to ten dif- ferent grammarians, besides two schools, which ho calls the "eastern (prelitclurs)" and "northern (udafichas)" grammarians. Perhaps the most important of his predecessors was Sakatayana,2 also mentioned by Yaska - the author of the Nirukta, who is likewise supposed to have preceded Panini - as the only grammarian (vaiydkarana) who held with the etymologists (nairukta) that all nouns are derived from verbal roots. Unfortunately there is little hope of the recovery of Isis grammar, which would probably have enabled us to determine somewhat more exactly to what extent Panini was indebted to the labours of his predecessors, There exists indeed a grammar in South Indian MSS., entitled SabdknuMsaluc, which is ascribed to one Sakatayana ; 3 but this has been proved 4 to be the production of a modern Jaina writer, which, however, seems to be partly based on the original work, and partly on Panini and others. Panini is also called Dakshtputra, after his mother Dakshi. As his birthplace the village Salatura is mentioned, which was situated some few miles north-west of the Indus, in the country of the Gandharas, whence later writers also call him Salaturiya, the formation of which name he himself explains in his grammar. Another name sometimes applied to him is Salanki. In the Kathetsaritsecgara, a modern collection of popular tales mentioned above, Panini is said to have been the pupil of Varsha, a teacher at Patelipntm, under the reign of Nanda, the father (l) of Chandragupta (315-291 n.c.). The real date of the great grammarian is, however, still a matter of uncertainty. While Goldstiicker 5 attempted to put his date back to ante-Buddhist times (about the 7th century s.c.), Prof. Weber holds that Ptinini's grammar cannot have been composed till some time after the invasion of Alexander the Great. This opinion is chiefly based on the occurrence in one of the Siltras of the word yavandnf, in the sense of "the writing of the Yavanas (Ionians)," thus implying, it would seem, such an acquaintance with the Greek alphabet as it would be impossible to assume for any period prior to Alexander's Indian campaign (326 n.c.). But, as it is by no means certain6 that this term really applies to the Greek alphabet, it is scarcely expedient to make the word the corner-stone of the argument regarding Panini's age. If Patalijali's "great commentary" was written, as seems highly probable, about the middle of the 2nd century B. c.' it is hardly possible to assign to Panini a later date than about 400 n.c. Though this grammarian registers numerous words and formations as peculiar to the Vedic hymns, his chief concern is with the ordinary speech (bluishci) of his period and its literature ; and it is noteworthy, in this respect, that the rules he lays down on some important points of syntax (as pointed out by Profs. Bhandarkar and Kielhorn) are in accord with the practice of the Brahmanas rather than with that of the later classical literature.
Panini's Sfitras continued for ages after to form the centre of grammatical activity. But, as his own work bad superseded those of his predecessors, so many of the scholars who devoted themselves to the task of perfecting his system have sunk into oblivion. The earliest of his successors whose work has come down to us (though perhaps not in a separate form), is Katyilyana, the author of a large collection of concise critical notes, called Vttrttika, intended to supplement and correct the Satras, or give them greater precision. The exact date of this writer is likewise unknown ; but there can be little doubt that he lived at least a century after Panini. During the interval a new body of literature seems to have spiting np,7 - accompanied with considerable changes of language, - and the geographical knowledge of India extended over large tracts towards the south. 1Vhether this is the same Katyayana to whom the Vajasaneyi-prati.4akbya (as well as the Sarvanukmma) is attributed, is still doubted by some scholars.8 Katyayana being properly a family or tribal name, meaning "the descendant of katya," later works usually assign a second name Vararuchi to the writers (for there are at least two) who bear it. The Kathasaritsagara snakes the author of the Varttikas a fellow-student of Panini, and afterwards the minister of King Nanda ; but, though this date might have fitted Kfityllyana well enough, it is impossible to place any reliance on the statements derived from such a source. Eatyayana was succeeded again, doubtless after a considerable interval, by Patafijali, the author of the ( Vyakaralta-) Mand-bheishya,9 or Great Commentary. For the great variety of information it incidentally supplies regarding the literature and manners of the period, this is, from an historical and antiquarian point of view, one of the most important works of the classical Sanskrit literature. Fortunately the author's date has been settled by synchronisms implied in two passages of his work. In one of them the use of the imperfect - as the tense referring to an event, known to people generally, not witnessed by the speaker, and yet capable of being witnessed by him - is illustrated by the statement, " The Yavana besieged Meta," which there is reason to believe can only refer to the Indo-Bactrian king Menander (144-c. 124 n.o.), who, according to Strabo, extended his rule as far as the Yamuna.." In the other passage the use of the present is illustrated by the sentence, "We are sacrificing for Pushpamitra," - this prince (178-c. 142 n.c.), the founder of the Sunga dynasty, being known to have fought against the Greeks." We thus get the years 144-142 n.c. as the probable time when the work, or part of it, was composed. Although Pataiijali probably gives not a few traditional grammatical examples mechanically repeated from his predecessors, those hero mentioned are fortunately such as, from the very nature of the case, must have been made by himself. The Mahabhashya is not a continuous commentary on Panini's grammar, but deals only with those Sfitras (some 1720 out of a total of nearly 4000) on which Katyayana had proposed any Varttikas, the critical discussion of which, in connexion with the respective Sfitras, and with the views of other grammarians expressed thereon, is the sole object of Patabjali's commentatorial remarks. Though doubts have been raised. as to the textual condition of the work, Prof. Kielhorn has clearly shown that it has probably been handed down in as good a state of preservation as any other classical Sanskrit work. Patailjali is also called Gonardiya, - which name Prof. Bhandarkar takes to mean "a native of Gonarda," a place, according to the same scholar, probably identical with Gonda, a town some 20 miles north-west of Oudh, - and Gonikaputra, or son of Gonika. Whether there is any connexion between this writer and the reputed author of the Yoga.4astra is doubtful. The Mahabhashya has been commented upon by Kaiyata, in his Bhashyapradtpa, and the latter again by Nagojibhatta, a distinguished grammarian of the earlier part of the last century, in his Bhetshya-praciipoddysta.
Of running commentaries on Panini's Satras, the oldest extant and most important is the Ketaikei Vritti,11 or "comment of Mk (Benares)," the joint production of two Jaina writers of probably the first half of the 7th century, viz., Jayaditya and Varnana, each of whom composed one half (four adhyayas) of the work. The chief commentaries on this work are Haradatta MiAra's Padamaiijart, which also embodies the substance of the Mahabhashya, and Jinendra-buddhi's 1Vydsa.12 Educational requirements in course of time led to the appearance of grammars, chiefly of an elementary character, constructed on al more practical system of arrangement - the principal heads under which the grammatical matter was distributed usually being - rules of euphony (sandhi) ; inflexion of nouns (nclman), generally including composition and secondary derivatives ; the verb (dkh,yata); and primary (krid-antot) derivatives. In this way a number of grammatical schools ] sprang up at different times, each recognizing a special set of Siltras, round which gradually gathered a more or less numerous body Of commentatorial and subsidiary treatises. As regards the grammatical material itself, these later grammars supply comparatively little that is not already contained in the older works, - the difference being mainly one of method; and partly of terminology, including modifications of the system of technical letters (anubandha). Of the grammars of this description hitherto known the Chdndra-vyakarana is probably the oldest, - its author Chandra Acharya having flourished under King Abhimanyu of Kashmir, who is usually supposed to have lived towards the end of the 2d century,2 and in whose reign that grammarian is stated, along with others, to have revived the study of the Maliabhashya in Kashmir. Only portions of this grammar, with a commentary by Anandadatta, have as yet been recovered.
The Kcitantra,3 or Kdldpa, is ascribed to Kumara, the god of war, whence this school is also sometimes called Kaitmeira. The real author probably was Sarva-varman, who also wrote the original commentary (vritti), which was afterwards recast by Durgasirpha, and again commented upon by the same writer, and subsequently by Trilochana-dasa. The date of the Katantra is unknown, but it will probably have to be assigned to about the 6th or 7th century. It is still used in many parts of India, especially in Bengal and Kashmir. Other grammars are - the Sdrasvatt Prakriyd, by Anubhati Svarapacharya ; the Sankshipta-sdra, composed by Kramadigvara, and corrected by Jumara-nandin, whence it is also called Ja-umara ; the Haima-vyakarazta,4 by the Jaina writer Hemachandra (1088-1172, according to Dr Bhao MP) ; the Mitgdha-bodha,5 composed, in the latter part of the 13th century, by Vopadeva, the court pandit of King Mahadeva (Ramanaja) of Devagiri (or Deoghar) ; the Siddhthita-kaumudi, the favourite text-book of Indian students, by Bhattojt Dikshita (17th century) ; and a clever abridgment of it, the Laghu- (Siddhdnta-) kaamudi,6 by Varadaraja.
Several subsidiary grammatical treatises remain to be noticed. The Pariblashas are general maxims of interpretation presupposed by the Sutras. Those handed down as applicable to Panini's system have been interpreted most ably by Nagojibhatta, in his Paribdshendukkhara.7 In the case of rules applying–to whole groups of words, the complete lists (papa) of these words are given in the Ganapatha, and only referred to in the Sutras. Vardhamana's Gauctratna-mahodadhi,8 a comparatively modern recension of these lists (1140 A.D. ), is valuable as offering the only available commentary on the Ganas which contain many words of unknown meaning. The DhdtupOtas are complete lists of the roots (dhdtu) of the language, with their general meanings. The lists handed down under this title,9 as arranged by Panini himself, have been commented upon, amongst others, by Madhava. The U7.zddi-sdtras are rules on the formation of irregular derivatives. The oldest work of this kind, commented upon by Ujjvaladatta," is by some writers ascribed to Katyayana Vararuchi, by others even to S5,katayana. The oldest known treatise on the philosophy of grammar and syntax is the Vakya-padiya,11 composed in verse, by Bhartrihari (17th century), whence it is also called Harilcdrika. Of later works on this subject, the Vaiydkarana-bhdshana, by Kondabliatta, and the Vaiydkarana-sioldhdata-maiilashd, by NitiOjibhaita, are the most important.
IV. LEXICOGRAPHY. - Sanskrit dictionaries (kasha), invariably composed in verse, are either homonymous or synonymous, or partly the one and partly the other. Of those hitherto published, Slivata's Anekdrtha-samuchchaya," or "collection of homonyms," is probably the oldest. While in the later homonymic vocabularies the words are usually arranged according to the alphabetical order of the final (or sometimes the initial) letter, and then according to the number of syllables, Sa4vata's principle of arrangement - viz., the number of meanings assignable to a word - seems to be more primitive. The work probably next in time is the famous Ainctra-kosha 13 ("immortal treasury ") by Amara-sirpha, one of " the nine gems" at the court of King Vikrarnaditya (c. 550 A.D.). This dictionary consists of a synonymous and a short homonymous part ; whilst in the former the words are distributed in sections according to subjects, as heaven and the gods, time and seasons, &c., in the latter they are arranged according to their final letter, without regard to the number of syllables. This Kosha has found many commentators, the oldest of those known being Kshirasvamin.14 Among the works quoted by commentators as Amara's sources are the Trikauqa and Utpalini-kosh,as, and the glossaries of Rabhasa, Vylcli, Katyayana, and Vararuchi. A Rosha ascribed to Vararuchh - whom tradition makes one of the nine literary "gems," and hence the contemporary of Amara-simha, - consisting of ninety short sections, has been printed at Benares (1865) in a collection of twelve Koshas. The Abhidhana-ratnamaid," by Halayudha ; the Vigvaprakdga, by Maheivara (1111) ; and the Abhicadna-chintdmanira (or Ilaima-kosha), by the Jaina Hemachandra, seem all three to belong to the 12th century. Somewhat earlier than these probably is Ajaya Pala, the author of the (homonymous) 11rdnartha-sangraha, being quoted by Vardhamana (1140 A.D.). Of more uncertain date is Purnshottama Deva, who wrote the Triled?zda-gesha, a supplement to the Amarakosha, besides the IldravaU, a collection of uncommon words, and two other short glossaries. Of numerous other works of this class the most important is the a dictionary of homonyms, arranged in the first place according to the finals and the syllabic length, and then alphabetically. Two important dictionaries, compiled by native scholars of the present century, are the Sabdakalpadruma by Rildhakanta Deva, and the Vdchaspatya, by Taranatha Tarka-vachaspati. A full account of Sanskrit dictionaries is contained in the preface to the first edition of H. H. Wilson's Dictionary, reprinted in his Essays on Sanskrit Literature, vol. iii.