doxographies - why six darśanas which six

8/10/2019 Doxographies - Why Six Daranas Which Six

1/14

Doxographies - Why six dar anas ? Which six?

2004 ASIAN STUDIES GRADUATE STUDENT COLLOQUIUM

Prem PahlajraiAsian Languages and Literature

University of WashingtonThese days it is commonly held that there are six dar anas or systems of orthodox or stika Hindu

philosophy. These are usually enumerated as three pairs: Ny ya and Vai eika, S khya and Yoga,

M ms and Ved nta. The heterodox or n stika systems are typically enumerated separately: the

Jaina, Buddhist and the Materialists (the Lok yatas/C rvkas). This paper explores why traditional

doxographies are often preoccupied with enumerating only six systems and which systems they choose

to enumerate.

According to Richard King, the use of the term dar ana to denote a school of philosophy

does not occur until the fifth century of the Common Era where it is used by the Buddhist Bh vaviveka

in his Verses on the Heart of the Middle Way (Madhyamaka H daya K rik ).1 Possibly through the

association with the six dar anas , the term dar ana by itself has also come to mean philosophy in

contemporary Sanskrit. Through its derivation from the verbal root d , to see, dar ana in connection

with these systems also implies vision, view, and even insight or realization. In the opening

verse to the Jaina doxography, a dar anasamuccaya, Haribhadra S ri indicates two contrasting

meanings of dar ana : the true insight, s a dar ana of the Jina Mah v ra and all the other philosophical

views, sarva-dar ana. 2

But there are other Sanskrit terms used to refer to philosophical systems. For example, in akaras

works, the following are noted: tantra, siddh nta, stra, pak a, mata, samaya, v da . But these tend to

usually occur in compounds and/or in reference to the philosophical systems of others. Halbfass

suggests that dar ana without any qualifiers has the doxographic, neutral or sometimes even pejorative

1 King (1999), pp.44-52 adar anasamuccaya 1: saddar ana jina natv v ra sydvdade akam | sarvadar anav cyortha sak epeanigadyate ||


2/14

2

sense of (mere) view, theory, or speculation as distinguished from true insight samyagdar ana

or tattvadar ana. The combination and merger of these two meanings, or the interpretation of the

doxographic usage in the normative sense of right vision, realization, is a symptomatic innovation of

Neo-Hinduism. 3

Among certain European and European-worldview-influenced scholars, Indian or Eastern

philosophy is held to be an oxymoron, mainly due to the preoccupation of the Indian systems with

liberation (and thus their practical motivations) and due to the inextricability of theology and tradition

from these systems. Philosophy, according to such scholars, is supposed to be pure and uncoupled to

theology and tradition, along the lines of what is found in the west. Halbfass suggests that in the Indiancontext, the commitment to tradition is not a mere habitual continuation of past ways of thinking. It is

something actively asserted and pursued, something questioned, justified and rationalized. [The]

spirit of critical argumentation is also reflected in the idea of nv k ik .4 Scholars such as Hermann

Jacobi proposed that this term nv k ik , investigation through reasoning better captured the

association of the Indian systems with pure theory. However, nv k ik s significance as an indicator

of rational and methodological attitudes and programs has been ambiguous and temporary. As far as its

overall historical role is concerned, it can hardly be considered an equivalent to philosophy. 5

Both Halbfass and King argue that Indian philosophy does not reflect the European Enlightenment

split between religion and philosophy because there was no equivalent antagonism towards religion in

the culture. While dar ana or nv k ik do not exactly correspond to European philosophy, this does

not imply the absence of concern with metaphysics, epistemology, ontology and linguistic analysis. In

fact there is found in these dar anas a level of sophistication comparable to that found in European

thought and worthy of study. 6

3 Halbfass (1988), pp.265-6.4 Ibid., p.281.5 Ibid., p.285.6 Ibid., pp.263-86; King (1999), pp.24-41.


3/14

3

According to Qvarnstrm , Bh vavivekas MHK 7 (fifth cent. CE) is not only the earliest

doxographical work which we possess, but also one of the most valuable sources for the study of the

history of Indian philosophy. 8 There are moments when [Bh vaviveka] gives the impression of being

the Indian traditions earliest and most diligent collector of philosophical trivia. 9 It covers six schools

(in addition to its own Madhyamaka philosophy), two of which are Buddhist:

1. r vakay na or H nay na 4. S khya2. Yog cra 5. Ved nta3. Vai eika 6. M ms

The Tamil Buddhist verse epic by C ttan r/ ttan r, Maimekhalai from around 500A.D. also lists

six systems:10

1. Lok yata 4. Ny ya2. Buddhism 5. Vai eika3. Skhya 6. M ms

The Jaina Haribhadra S ri (end of eight century CE) in his a dar anasamuccaya reinforces the

six schools idea and describes: 11

1. Buddhists 4. Jaina

2.

Nyya 5. Vai

eika3. Skhya 6. M ms

The Buddhists are represented by a single school and no mention is made of Yoga and Ved nta, which

are presumably subsumed by S khya and M ms respectively.

Other Jaina doxographies either typically indicate that they are a survey of six systems by

including the number six in their title, as Merutu gas a dar ananir aya, 12 or they claim to offer a

7 Madhyamaka-h daya-k rik . 8 Qvarnstrm (1989), p.159 Eckel, p.3.10 von Glasenapp, p.140; Halbfass (1988), p.560, n.10,13.11 adar anasamuccaya 3: bauddha naiy yika skhya jaina vai eika tath | jaimin ya ca n mnidar an nm am ny aho || 12 Halbfass (1988), pp.351-2.


4/14

4

survey of all systems but are approximately six, as in Sarvasiddh ntaprave aka by an anonymous

Jain author, which includes a seventh section on the Lok yata or Materialist school. 13

In the ninth century, the naiy yika Jayanta Bha a in his Ny yamajar also discusses six schools.

The list is similar to Haribhadra S ris in that it also omits Yoga and Ved nta, but it swaps out Vai eika

with the C rvkas. 14

a dar an siddh ntasa graha by R mabhadra D k ita et. al. (seventeenth or eighteenth century

CE), 15 a doxography aligned with Advaita Ved nta, describes the following schools: 16

1. Ny ya 4. S khya2. Vai eika 5. Yoga

3.

M

ms

(Kum

rila & 6. Advaita Ved

ntaPrabh kara)

A closing chapter deals with vykara a, grammar, and no mention is made of any Buddhist system whatsoeve

Halbfass says that the number six also serves as a guideline even when a greater number of

systems are actually treated. 17 For example, the Sarvamatasa graha, written possibly by

R ghav nanda, sometime in the second millennium, not very old, 18 is also aligned with Advaita

Vednta. At first, it considers the systems in two groups of three (before expanding them further):

Heterodox avaidka, n stika : Orthodox, vaidika, stika :1. Buddhists 4. Tarka2. Jaina 5. S khya3. Materialists 6. M ms

Similarly, M dhava Sarasvat s Sarvadar anakaumud (1500 CE 19) has an initial bipartite

grouping (which is subsequently elaborated):

Heterodox avaidka, n stika Orthodox, vaidika, stika :

1.

Buddhists 4. Skhya2. Jaina 5. Tarka

3. Materialists 6. Tantra (M ms)

13 Halbfass (1988), pp.351-2.14 King (1999), p.45.15 Dasgupta, v.2, p.431.16 Halbfass (1988), p.352.17 p.352.18 Halbfass (1988), p.350; Dasgupta, v.2, p.115.19 Dasgupta, v.2, p.225.


5/14

5

Both these doxographies further expand the heterodox schools to six by sub-dividing Buddhism

into four schools. The orthodox schools similarly are made to constitute six by further sub-dividing

Tarka into Nyya and Vai

eika, S

khya into Kapilas S

khya and P

tajalis Yoga, and M

m

s

into P rva- and Uttara- m ms.20

The Sarvasiddh ntasa graha, falsely ascribed to akara 21 also has a similar organization:

Avaidika systems Vaidika systems1. Lok yata 7. Vai eika2. Jaina ( arhata ) 8. M mms (Bha a & Prabh kara)3. Mdhyamika 9. S khya4. Yog cra 10. P tajali Yoga

5.

Sautr ntika 11. Mah

bh

rata (Vedavy

sa)6. Vaibh ika 12. Ved nta

Instead of Ny ya here we have Vedavy sas Mah bhrata treated as a separate system!

Interestingly, the Sarvadar anasa graha of M dhava-Vidy raya (ca. 1350 CE) does not follow

a six-fold division, or for that matter any other scheme that could be reduced to six. The sixteen dar anas

treated therein are:

1.

Crv

ka 9. Rase

vara

aivism2. Buddhist 10. Vai eika

3. Jaina 11. Ny ya4. R manujas Vi itdvaita 12. Jaimin ya M ms 5. Madhvas Dvaita 13. P in ya abd dvaita/ uddh dvaita6. Nakul as P upata 14. S khya7. aiva 15. P tajala Yoga8. Pratyabhij ( spanda or 16. kara Ved nta

trika K m ra aiva)

The systems are listed in hierarchical order, starting with the materialists and the other heterodox

systems. Notice how kara Ved nta is listed as the final system, implying that it the culmination of all

the other systems.

20 Halbfass (1988), pp.352-3.21 Ibid., pp.350, 535 n.7.


6/14

6

Agrawal 22 organizes these Sarvadar anasa graha schools by category in the following manner:

Nstika, heterodoxo dhyak ika: 1. C rvkao Trkika

K anikav din: 2. Bauddha Sydvdin: 3. Jaina stika, orthodox

o Sagutmav din Trkika

Pracchannao Pracchanna-dvaita: 4. R mnuj ya Vi idvaitao Spaa-dvaita: 5. Madhva Dvaita

Spaao Bhogas dhan davdin

Videhamuktiv din tmabhedav din

o Karm napek evarav din: 6. Nakul a-P upatao Karmas pek evarav din: 7. aiva

tmaikyav din: 8. Pratyabhij dar in J vanmuktiv din 9. Rase vara

o Utpattis dhan davdin abd nag k ra: 10. Vai eika abd g k ra: 11. Naiy yika

rauta Vkyrthavedin: 12. M msaka Padarthavedin: 13. Vaiy karaa

o Nirgu tmav din Trkika Nir vara: 14. S khya Sevara: 15. P tajala Yoga

rauta: 16. kara-Ved nta

As mentioned in the beginning, nowadays it is customary to group the six orthodox vaidika, stika

schools as schools of Hindu philosophy, paired as follows:

1. Ny ya, logic & 2. Vai eika, atomism3. S khya, dualistic discrimination & 4. Yoga, praxis based on the S khya view5. M ms, Vedic exegesis & 6. Ved nta, based on the end of the Vedas,

the Upani ads.

There is an hierarchy implied in the ordering of these systems, with Ved nta representing the apex in

soteriological efficacy. 23

22 pp.xvi-xvii.


7/14

7

According to von Glasenapp, it is difficult to establish when it first came to be established that the

six dar anas were all Hindu and Vedic. The expression dar ana- a ka is first supported in fairly late

brahmanical works ( Vet lapacavi shat and Kul rnavatantra ), according to the Petersburg dictionary.

Since V caspatimi r had commented on the principal works of all these systems (with the exception of

Vai eika) by 850 C.E., the view that these systems constitute a closely related whole had at least one

supporter by then. In the eleventh century drama Prabodhacandrodaya by K ami ra, one clearly

encounters the opinion that ultimate ends of the six dar anas have a common foundation. 24 By the

advaitin R mabhadra D k itas time (seventeenth or eighteenth century CE) this Hindu-centric view

seems fairly entrenched.

There is certainly a natural division between the n stika, heterodox and stika , orthodox systems.

Halbfass suggests that Buddhism in particular has been included, assimilated, superseded and at the

same time excluded and disregarded by Hindu thought. 25 The omission of the heterodox systems from

the six dar anas can thus be considered a reflection of this tendency to focus on Hindu dar anas . The

neo-Hinduism movement, beginning with Rammohan Roy in the early nineteenth century can be

considered neo-Ved nta, 26 and thus inherits the inclusivist Vedic and Ved ntic view which subsumes the

heterodox systems. For example, Vivekananda (1900) desired to return the Indian world to its pristine

purity based on its Vedic origins. 27 He held Buddhism responsible for the degeneration of Hinduism

and at the same time used Buddhism to demonstrate the universal reach and inclusivist power of

23

Halbfass (1988), p.368.24 von Glasenapp, p.141: Wann die Theorie, da diese sechs Lehren gleichberechtigte Ausdrucksformen der auf die vedischeOffenbarung gegrndeten Weisheit sind, zuerst ausgekommen ist, lt sich schwer feststellen. Der Ausdruck dar ana-akaist in brahmanischen Schriften erst in ziemlich spten Werken belegt. [fn.20: Das groe Petersburger Wrterbuch fhrtStellen aus der Vet la-panca-vinshat und dem Kul rnavatantra an.]. Da V caspatimishra die Hauptwerke aller Systeme(mit Ausnahme desjenigen des Vaisheshika) um 850 n.Chr. kommentierte, hat die Auffassung , da sie einzusammengehriges Ganzes bilden, damals jedenfalls schon in praxi einen Anhnger gehabt. In dem im 11. Jahrhundertgeschriebenen Drama Der Mondaufgang der Erkenntnis (Prabodhacandrodaya) von Krishnamishra tritt die Meinung, dadie sechs Darshanas letzten Endes eine gemeinsame Grundlage haben, schon deutlich hervor.25 Halbfass (1988), p.191.26 Ibid., p.222.27 Ibid., pp.234-5.


8/14

8

Hinduism. 28 It would only be natural that the exclusively orthodox a dar ana enumeration gets

reinforced by the proponents of neo-Hinduism.

In Buddhism too, we have the six heretical teachers whose arguments the Buddha refutes, for

example in the r ma yaphala S tra :

1. Maskar Go liputra 4. Ajita Ke akambala2. Nirgrantha J tiputra 5. Kakuda K tyyana3. Pr a K yapa 6. Sajay Vaira putra

The number six has played a role since ancient times in the enumeration of metaphysical systems.

There are the six ved gas, limbs of the Veda, grouped in pairs: 29

For correct recitation:1. ik , the science of proper articulation, pronunciation and phonetics2. chandas or chandoviciti , metre and prosody

For proper understanding:3. vykara a, linguistic analysis or grammar4. nirukta , explanation of difficult Vedic words

For proper employment during sacrifices:5. jyotia, astronomy pertaining to determining the most auspicious days for sacrifices6. kalpa , ceremonial or ritual code

Vedic sciences also occur in Kau ilyas list of sciences in his Artha stra (I.1) 30 (c. 400 BCE):

nv k ik , investigative science. 31 tray , the threefold science of the Vedas: reciting hymns, performing sacrifices, and

chanting. 32 v rtt , science of trade and agriculture. da an ti, science of government and politics.

If one were to count the tray as three separate sciences, once again that brings the count to six.

(Interestingly however, the three sciences of the tray dont directly correspond to the ved gas unless

28 Ibid., p.235.29 MW, s.v. veda ga. 30 Halbfass (1988), p.274: nv k ik tray v rtt da an ti ca-iti vidy . 31 This term has been considered equivalent to philosophy, as seen earlier in context of the discussion of what dar ana means.32 MW, s.v. traya


9/14

9

one differentiates either the chanting or reciting of the tray to involve the vykara a and nirukta of the

ved gas ).

Madhus dana Saraswati (early sixteenth century), in his Prasth nabheda, lists eighteen (six times

three!) traditional sciences, vidy :33

the four Vedas, the six ved gas, four additional limbs, up gas :

o m m s o ny yao pur ao sm ti

four additional Vedas, upavedas : o yurveda, the science of medicine, o dhanurveda, the science of archery, o g ndharvaveda, the science of music, o either astra stra , the science of arms or sth patyaveda , the science of architecture and

ilpa stra, the knowledge of arts.

Earlier, Bh sarvaja (ca. 900 CE) had also proposed augmenting the list of fourteen vidy s (above list

minus the upavedas ) with medicine, vaidya stra and the aivasiddh nta sectarian tradition for a total of

sixteen. 34 By counting astra stra , sth patyaveda and ilpa stra individually instead of collectively,

the list can be made to consist of eighteen members.

An somewhat similar, older list of seventeen vidy s was enumerated in Ch ndogya Up. 7.1.2 (sixth

to fifth cent. BCE): 35

1-4. the four Vedas, 5. itih sapur na, the corpus of histories and ancient tales, 5. pitrya, ancestral rites, 7. r si, mathematics,

8. daivam, soothsaying, 9. nidhi, the art of locating treasures, 10. vkovkya, dialogue, 11. ek yana, monologues, 36 12. devavidy , the science of the gods, 13. brahmavidy , the science of ritual,

33 Halbfass (1988), pp.353-4.34 Halbfass (1991), pp.54-5.35 Olivelle, pp.258-9.36 Or possibly worldly wisdom per MW, s.v.


10/14

10

14. bhtavidy , the science of spirits, 15. k atravidy , the science of government (or military order per MW), 16. nak atravidy , the science of heavenly bodies (astronomy) 17. sarpadevajanavidy , the science of serpent beings

One could possibly make this enumeration conform to our expectations of some multiple of six by

breaking up itih sapur a into two separate vidy s but it would be hard to defend the existence of a field

of pur ic study in the early upani adic times. But one of the other sciences could be subdivided to make

the count of eighteen, for example k atravidy into dhanurveda and n t stra or the like. These last two

examples merely serve to illustrate that when working with numbers, it is easy to tweak these towards

where one can come up with a neater pattern. (More on this towards the end of this paper).

Does the g Veda hold any clues to the significance of the number six? An inspection of the

occurrence of a , a and other variations in a word-index to the RV 37 shows mention of the six

seasons, 38 the six directions, 39 six burdens, 40 a six-spoked wheel, 41 Indras six horses, 42 etc. There is

nothing that can be directly linked with the occurrence of the number six in connection with dar anas

in later times. However, we do find in RV 1.164.46 the significant utterance, eka sad vipr bahud

vadanti , which is cited by the proponents of orthodoxy to justify the inclusion of the heterodox systems.

While it is not possible to draw any definite conclusions regarding the significance of the

prevalence of the number six (or multiples of six) in various enumerations, certain observations can be

made:

1. When six systems are considered, their makeup varies and is not always exclusive to Hindu

dar anas . e.g. Buddhist Bh vavivekas MHK naturally includes r vakay na and Yog cra,

M ms and Ved nta are counted separately; C ttan rs Maimekhalai counts Lok yata and

Buddhism among the six systems considered, Ny ya and Vai eika are counted separately; the Jaina

37 Shastri (1963).38 RV 1.23.15.39 RV 1.164.6, 2.13.10, 6.47.3, 10.14.16, 10.128.5.40 bh ra, RV 3.56.2.41 RV 1.164.12.


11/14

11

Haribhadra S ris a dar anasamuccaya also treats Ny ya and Vai eika separately, in addition to

the Buddhist and the Jaina systems. Further, Yoga and Ved nta are often considered to be part of the

Skhya and M ms systems respectively, for example in C ttan rs Maimekhalai ,

Haribhadras a dar anasamuccaya and Jayanta Bha as Ny yamajar .

2. Some doxographies such as R ghav nandas Sarvamatasa graha , M dhava Sarasvat s

Sarvadar anakaumud and pseudo- akaras Sarvasiddh ntasa graha treat more than six systems,

first dividing them into heterodox and orthodox groups each containing three systems, and then

expanding each sub-group to six systems.

3. One notable exception to multiple-of-six rule is M dhava-Vidy rayas Sarvadar anasa graha

which covers sixteen systems, treating Buddhism as a single system which is one of the usual three

heterodox systems. The usual six orthodox systems are also present, but besides Advaita Ved nta,

the variants Vi itdvaita, Dvaita and abd dvaita are also covered. In addition four Saivite systems,

Pupata, aiva, K m ra and Rase vara are also included.

4. The authors of the doxographies are predominantly either Jain (Haribhadra, Merutu ga) or Advaitin

(Mdhava-Vidy raya, M dhava Sarasvati, pseudo- akara, R mabhadra D k ita, R ghav nanda).

We have two Buddhist compilations, Bh vavivekas MHK and C ttan rs Maimekhalai in Tamil. 43

Whereas the Jaina doxograhies do not follow any recognizable schema in their presentation of the

six systems, the Advaita Ved nta doxographic texts are usually based upon a hierarchical

classification at whose apex stands the Ved nta and at the nadir is either materialism

(Crv

ka/Lok

yata) or, when only orthodox vaidika teachings are considered, the

42 RV 2.18.4.43 There is also ntarak itas Tattvasa graha with a commentary, Pajik by Kamala la, both eight century CE.Tattvasa graha is a series of 26 critiques of the realities, i.e. supposed ultimate realities, first causes, categories and thelike as variously conceived by practically all the schools of philosophy, leaving unscathed only conditioned origination asunderstood by N grjuna, along with Dharmak rt s epistemology. (Warder, p.205). This text contains a richness ofdoxographic information (Halbfass, 1988, p.355).


12/14

12

Ny ya-Vai eika. 44 The hierarchical arrangement of the systems implies a soteriological gradation

which assigns the followers of the lower (i.e. heterodox) doctrines an ethically and socially inferior

status. 45 Halbfass says that it is no accident that the doxographic literature developed within

Jainism and Advaita Ved nta. The two traditions claim to include and fulfill other doctrines as a

perspectivistic or hierarchically subsuming inclusivism [respectively]. 46 The Jaina doxologies,

however, typically do not present their own system last in Haribhadras a dar anasamuccaya ,

Jainism is the fourth of the six systems treated. Only Merutu ga in his a dar ananir aya closes

with his own system, Jainism. 47

5.

As seen earlier, certainly by the eighteenth century , a dar

ana comes to be associated exclusively

with Hindu orthodox systems. The tradition of inclusivism or perspectivism (seen even in the

Buddhist context) 48 is widely prevalent in Hinduism. In fact the purpose of the Advaita Ved nta

doxographies is to demonstrate how its view encompasses and transcends the teachings of the other,

lesser systems. The neo-Hinduism movement from the early nineteenth century onwards further

reinforces the focus on Hindu systems to the exclusion of the heterodox systems since it conveniently

supports the modern nationalist assumptions about the underlying unity of Indian history. 49

6. As to the significance of the number six, while it is tempting to see a recurring pattern in its frequent

occurrence or of its multiple in various enumerations, one should desist from doing so. This present

examination, while no means comprehensive, 50 can only prove to be a self-fulfilling one when one

is only looking at enumerations comprising of six members (or multiples thereof) it is very tempting

to numerically fudge the data to make other lists neatly fit this pattern (as I demonstrated above in

44 Halbfass (1988), p.351.45 Ibid., p.368.46 Ibid., p.356.47 Ibid., p.352.48 The three turnings of the wheel by the Buddha to explain and reconcile H nay na, Madhyamaka and Yog cra;Bhvavivekas comment in the MHK 4.56, ved nte ca hi yat s kta tat sarvam Buddhabh itam | d t ntany nat tasm t

sandigdha v par k yat m || (Gokhale, p.271).49 King, p.46.


13/14

13

the cases of the Bh sarvaja and Ch ndogya Upani ad lists of vidy s). If one were to do the same for

enumerations of lists comprising four or five or seven members, one will probably come up with

equally large sets of data. In the context of the dar anas , one can speculate that perhaps at an earlier

point, doxographers felt that covering six systems demonstrated a thoroughness, a certain breadth of

perspective and familiarity with other views. But why not five or seven instead, one cant say.

Perhaps doxographers could not resist a pun, intentionally taking advantage of the phonological

similarity between ad, six and sad, true. We do see treatments such as the Buddhist MHK, the

Sarvasiddh ntaprave aka (by an anonymous Jain author) and R mabhadra D k itas

a dar

an siddh

ntasa graha that effectively deal with seven systems,

51

and

Mdhava-Vidy rayas Sarvadar anasa graha treats sixteen if six is comprehensive, seven,

twelve or sixteen is even more so! Over time perhaps this recurrence of six systems in the

doxographical context takes on an aspect of historical convention, which isnt hurt by the

(coincidental?) fact that both the heterodox and the orthodox systems can be further expanded out to

six systems each.

Thus the a dar ana classification can be thought of as a convenient starting point into the study of

Indian philosophy, a picture painted as it were in very broad strokes. But one needs to be aware of its

limitations and to pay attention to what is being included, what isnt and why. One must not assume that

the stika a dar ana developed independent of the n stika systems or that Hindu equals Indian. 52

To get a fuller picture, one has to fill in details pertaining to additional dar anas and relate them to what

one started with. This, I suppose, is how books on Indian philosophy come to be written!

50 For example, I could have also looked at the lists of six items in the Buddhist sa g ti suttas , in the Bhagavad G t, inPur ic literature, etc.51 The seventh in MHK is Bh vavivekas own Madhyamaka system; in the Sarvasiddh ntaprave aka , it is the Lok yata ; and in a dar an siddh ntasa graha, grammar or vykara a. 52 King, p.33.


14/14

14

Works Cited

Agrawal, Madan Mohan (2002), The Sarva-Dar ana-Sa graha of M dhav c rya with English

Translation, Transliteration and Indices. Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratishthan.

Dasgupta, Surendranath (1922), A History of Indian Philosophy, v1-5. Reprinted 1997, Delhi: MotilalBanarsidass.

Eckel, Malcolm D. (1992), To See the Buddha: A Philosophers Quest for the Meaning of Emptiness.

Princeton University Press.

Gokhale, V. V. (1962), Masters of Buddhism adore the Brahman through Non-adoration (Bhavya

Madhyamakah daya, III Indo-Iranian Journal 5:271-5.

Halbfass, Wilhelm (1988), India and Europe: An Essay in Understanding. Albany: State University of

New York Press.

Halbfass, Wilhelm (1991), Tradition and Reflection: Explorations in Indian Thought. Albany: State

University of New York Press.

King, Richard (1999), Indian Philosophy: An Introduction to Hindu and Buddhist Thought. Washington

D.C: Georgetown University Press.

Monier-Williams, M. (1899), A Sanskrit-English Dictionary. Oxford University Press.

Olivelle, Patrick (1998), The Early Upani ads: Annotated Text and Translation. Oxford University

Press.

Qvarnstrm, Olle (1989), Hindu Philosophy in Buddhist Perspective: The Ved ntatattvani caya

Chapter of Bhavyas Madhyamakah dayak rik . (Lund Studies in African and Asian religions v.

4) Lund Plus Ultra.

astr , Gosw m Dmodara ed. (1957), a dar anasamuccaya by r Haribhadrasuri with the

Laghuv tti Commentary by r Maibhadra. Banaras: Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series.

Shastri, Vishva Bandhu (1963), Rgveda-vaiyakarana-padasuci A Grammatical Word-index to Rgveda .

Hoshiarpur: Vishveshvaranand Vedic Research Institute.

von Glasenapp, Helmuth (1958), Die Philosophie der Inder: Eine Einfhrung in ihre Geschichte undihre Lehren. Stuttgart: Alfred Kroner Verlag.

Warder, A. K. (1998), A Course in Indian Philosophy. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

doxographies - why six darśanas which six

Documents