[Advaita-l] Re: The 6 darshana-s

[Prem Pahlajrai]

KshhamyatAm, my apologies for the delay in following up on these questions.

In v27.11, Ramesh Murthy <rkmurthy at gmail.com> wrote:

> [Sri Prem wrote:]
>> I explored this question in a paper I wrote titled "Doxographies - Why
>> six darshanas? Which six?" for the 2004 Graduate Student Colloquium at
>> the University of Washington. The paper is available at:
>>   http://students.washington.edu/prem/Colloquium04-Doxographies.pdf
> 
> So it is evident that the classification of the 6 darshana-s does have
> a traditional basis. From your paper, the first text to have the
> currently accepted system of classification of the Astika darshana-s
> appears to be the sarvasiddhAntasangraha. Any idea of the date of this
> text? And why is it "falsely attributed to sankara" as your paper
> quotes?

The quote is from Wilhelm Halbfass' India and Europe: An Essay in
Understanding. "The chronology of Shankara continues to be problematic.
... The doxography SarvasiddhAntasaMgraha, which has been ascribed to
Shankara, is not authentic" (p. 535, n.7).  S. K. Belvalkar also
considers the SarvasiddhAntasaMgraha to be "almost without hesitation
... non-genuine". (1929, pp. 228-9, Shri Gopal Basu Mallik Lectures on
Vedanta Philosophy, delivered Dec 1925. Poona, Bilvaku~nja Publishing
House). Govind Chandra Pande, in his Life and Thought of ShanharAchArya
  (1994, Motilal Banarsidass) also accepts this. The Vani Vilas Press
edition as well as the Samata version of Shankara's collected works also
exclude this work.

> The detailed classification on page-6 of your paper is particularly
> interesting. Could you explain the usage of the following terms:
> 
> tArkika vs shrauta - my elementary knowledge of sanskrit suggests this
> would be "derived through logic" vs "heard", but am not clear why this
> distinction should appear here.
>
> Also,
> KarmAnapeksheshvaravAdin vs KarmasApekshheshvaravAdin ?
> VAkyArthavedin vs Padarthavedin?

Yes, Agarwal's classification of the various darshanas in
SarvadarshanasaMgraha is very provocative and probably reflects some
biases, whether of the original author or the present editor, I'm not
sure. Shrauta is presumably the schools "closest to" shruti, since it
includes mImAMsaka and shA^Nkara-vedAnta, but the inclusion there of
VaiyAkaraNa too under the shrauta category is puzzling. tArkika,
presumably, is his category for the speculative philosophical schools,
since it includes the traditional NyAya, Vaisheshhika, sAMkhya, Yoga,
Shaiva, VishishhTAdvaita & dvaita and some others. I must confess, I
haven't examined this text too closely, and would love to hear from
others more familiar with it.


Prem.