civilizational ardour

[george9252]

Oops! Forgot to identify myself.

Dr. George Cronk
Chair, Dept. of Philosophy & Religion
Bergen Community College
Paramus, New Jersey (USA)

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: george9252 
  To: INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 7:39 PM
  Subject: Re: civilizational ardour


  As a mere "auditor" on the List, I am a bit reluctant to add anything here; but I thought that this might be relevant to the discussion, so here goes:
   
  In his Commentary on the Vedanta Sutras, Adhyaya II, Pada 2, 12-15, Shamkara (Shankara) argues that the Vaisheshikas cannot account for the motion of the atoms or even show that such motion is possible, and in doing so Shamkara seems to see Vaisheshika atomism as non-theistic. Apparently, Shamkara's criticisms are directed at the Vaisheshika Sutras of Kanada (c. 3rd century AD) and perhaps at some of the early commentators on Kanada such as Shamkara Misra and Candrakanta (4th century AD?). "Kanada . . . does not mention God, but later commentators [perhaps in response to criticisms like Shamkara's] felt that the immutable atoms could not by themselves produce an ordered universe unless a presiding God regulated their activities" (Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan and Charles A. Moore [eds.], A Sourcebook in Indian Philosophy [Princeton, NJ:  Princeton University Press, 1957], p. 386). In the later Vaisheshika (and Nyaya) commentaries (such as those of Shridara and Udayana [10th century AD]), God [Brahman, Brahma, Ishvara, etc.] is the original source or first cause from which arises the adrishta ("unseen principle") that initiates the motion of the atoms, which, in turn, leads to the creation, sustenance, and dissolution of worlds, all in accordance with the will of God.


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: nanda chandran <vpcnk at HOTMAIL.COM>
  To: <INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK>
  Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 11:56 AM
  Subject: Re: civilizational ardour


  > Vidhya writes :
  > 
  > >Both early NyAya and the Vaiseshika had no place for a creator God >and for
  > >them too, it's the knowledge of the Self which is the >liberator.
  > 
  > >>Nyaya without a creator God??? Textual sources?
  > 
  > Maybe I'm mistaken.
  > 
  > Early Vaiseshika definitely didn't support a creator, till it found that it
  > needed one to mobilize its atoms for world creation.
  > 
  > NyAya is much later than Vaiseshika. So it may be that NyAya did have a God
  > in its scheme of things even in the beginning.
  > 
  > My text on NyAya has the SUtrAs together with the bhAshyam and vArtikam.
  > Having read the Vaiseshika first I was of the opinion the same followed with
  > NyAya. Let me check it up. Or if you can clarify, all the better.
  > 
  > ______________________________________________________
  > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/19990915/753d66de/attachment.htm>