Introduction To Purvamimamsa System

INTRODUCTION TO
PURVAMIMAMSA SYSTEM
Shripad Bhat
Published by
Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, Tirupati.
2018
ii
INTRODUCTION TO PURVAMIMAMSA SYSTEM FOREWORD

Indian culture is one of the richest and most diverse
Shripad Bhat
of its kind in the world as it has stimulated the growth
and development of several philosophical systems and
religious thoughts. This culture has exercised
T.T.D. Religious Publications Series No. 1287 considerable influence over the spiritual life of the
©All Rights Reserved people all over the world.
The most ancient literature available are the Four
Vedas - Rig, Yajur, Sama and Atharva Veda. They are
First Edition - 2018 noted as 'Apaurusheya', i.e., they were not written by
man. It is not known when and where they were made.
VedaVyasa later divided them into four Vedas. The
Copies : 4000 origin of it may be an unknown factor, but the known
factor is its essence. The Vedas are rich in principles
that guide the beings towards happiness and prosperity,
Published by
which is a contribution to the Indian wisdom.
Sri Anil Kumar Singhal, I.A.S., The school of Mimamsa has a definite place in
Executive Officer, Indian philosophy. It is one of the important sources
Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, of knowledge. Mimamsa is a science of interpretation
Tirupati. of the sacrificial portion of the Veda. The whole
purpose of Vedas is to engage human beings in rituals
D.T.P: for creating good karma. The Purvamimamsa school
Publications Division
was systematised by Jaimini.
T.T.D, Tirupati.
Jaimini in Mimamsa Sutra, presents material activity
Printed at : and it's results as the whole of reality. His interpretations
Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams Press provide Philosophical justifications for the observance
Tirupati of Vedic rituals, to attain Moksha.
iv
This book entitiled ‘Introduction to Purvamimamsa Preface

system’, is a good book to be read and enjoyed. It It gives me a great pleasure to publish a book on
provides many facts about the Mimamsa system and Purvamimasa which is in the form of an introduction.
it's history. Hope that this book be of great use to This system is one of the major systems in orthodox
both the elderly and students. systems of Indian philosophy and contributed a lot to
different branches of Indian wisdom. The main object
of the Purvamimasa system is an investigation of the
In the Service of Lord Venkateswara Dharma. Therefore it accepts the authority of the
Vedas. According to Mimamsa, Veda is apaurusheya
(non-human origin) and it is self authoritative. The sutras
of Jaimini are considered as the tool of interpretation
Executive Officer, of Vedic sentences. Shabarabhashya, the commentary
Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, on the Jaimini sutras, became very popular since it
Tirupati. does not explain merely the sutras but it gives full picture
about the Mimamsa system. Kumarila, Prabhakara,
Shalikanatha, Parthasarathi, Mandana Misra, Khanda
Deva and so on have written a number of treatises
which expands the horizon of this system. Many
research works have been carried out and translations
of several works came into existence in the twentieth
century.
Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam has proposed to
publish various books under 'Ancient Indian Culture
Series' and Prof. Shrihari approached me to write a
book on 'Purvamimamsa Darshana' with certain
limitations. As per the requirement, an attempt is made
here to write in simple language which may help to the
common reader in understanding the subject. This
consists of origin and development, a brief history,
vi
differences between Kumarila and Prabhakara schools, Contents Page No.

contents, pramanas and some prameya topics.
I am thankful to Prof. Shrihari who assigned this Chapter 1 Origin and Development 1
work to me and gave guidance for the same. I am also
thankful to Prof. P.G. Lalye who suggested my name Chapter 2 Brief History of Mimamsa 5
for this work and encouraged me to complete the task.
I also thank Mr. Rohit Karande who helped me in Chapter 3 Difference between Kumarila and
computerising the work. Finally, I express my thanks
to those who helped me directly or indirectly to Prabhakara schools 24
complete the book.
Chapter 4 Contents of Mimamsa 27
Shripad Bhat
Chapter 5 Pramanas 56
Chapter 6 Main principles of Mimamsa 62
Bibliography 77
Chapter 1
Origin and Development
The Mimamsa school of Indian philosophy got
the unique place in the development of orthodox
systems. Mimamsa is closely related to Veda. This is
the only school of philosophy which strongly upholds
the authority of the Vedas while the authority of the
Vedas came into attack by heterodox systems.
Mimamsakas claim that Veda is apaurusheya (non-
human origin) and it is self authoritative. It provides
the principles of Vedic Interpretation which are held in
high esteem even in the present period. Since it
discusses the Vedic sentences, it came to be known as
Vakyashastra. While interpreting the Vedic sentences,
it has explained ritualistic acts, developed its own
philosophy, logic, psychology, linguistics and so on.
Thus it has contributed a lot to the Indian wisdom. It
also offers many maxims which serve as rules of
guidance to the other branches of philosophy as well
as to the all walks of Indian life even in the modern
age. The Hindu law literature does not go beyond the
limitations of maxims fixed by Mimamsa.
The Mimamsa school has definite place not only
in Indian philosophy, but, it is considered as one of
the important source of fourteen sources of vidyas
(knowledge). The Yagnavalkya Smrti provides as -
 
 
2 Introduction to Purvamimamsa System Introduction to Purvamimamsa System 3
[Purana, Nyaya, Mimamsa, Dharmashastra, Angas combined sense of desire for knowledge and of
(six) and the Vedas (four)]. discussion. In the Taittiriya Samhita (VII 5.7.1) it is said
It is one of the six orthodox systems of Indian ‘the expounders of Brahma discuss, whether (a day)
philosophy which accept the authority of the Vedas. should be omitted or not; on this, (they) say that it
They are said in groups like, Nyaya-Vaishesika; must be left out. Here, the word ‘Mimamsante’ is used
Sankhya-Yoga; Purvamimamsa and Uttaramimamsa. in the sense of investigating a doubtful point and arriving
The Purvamimamsa school with which we have to deal at a conclusion thereon. In many other places similar
was systematised by Jaimini and Uttaramimamsa which doubtful points introduced by the words ‘the
expounders of Brahma say’ are put forward without
is popularly known as Vedanta by Badarayana. Among
employing the word ‘mimamsante’ (T.S. 2.5.3.7). In the
these the Purvamimamsa is also called Karmamimamsa
Tandyamahabrahmana (6.5.9) we read one should not
or in short Mimamsa. (Since the object of desire to
discuss the merits of a Brahmana. In another passage
know, enquiry or investigation here is dharma or
of the same text, the form ‘mimamseran’ occurs (23.4.2).
religious duty, it is also called Dharmamimamsa).
In the Kausitaki Brahmana the form ‘mimamsante’
Mimamsa is a science of interpretation of the sacrificial
occurs very frequently. For example, in one place (2.9)
portion (karmakanda) of the Veda just as Vedanta is
it is said, they investigate (the question) whether
that of Gnanakanda. It is completely different from
oblation should be offered to fire when the Sun rises
Kalpasutras which purely deal with the complicated
or before the Sun rises’. After making remarks on each
procedure of the sacrificial rites and ceremonies and
of the two alternatives, the conclusion is established
on the other hand from Nirukta which explains the Vedic
that the oblation is to be offered before Sunrise. The
words and their bearing on the Vedic texts. The word ‘Mimamsa’ occurs in the Kausitaki Brahmana
Mimamsa, therefore, partakes the nature of both of (18.4) ‘now begins the discussion of the paridhana
them as it undertakes to interpret the Vedic words and (conclusion) itself’. In the Upanishads we frequently
describe the ceremonies in connection with them. meet with the verb. In the Chandogya (5.11.1) it is said
The word Mimamsa is derived from the root man, that several learned students like Prachinasala
to know with the desiderative suffix san and means Aupamanyava came together and discussed the
desire to know or an enquiry or investigation. The word question, ‘who is the self; what is Brahma?’ In the
Mimamsa goes very far into antiquity. Right from the Taittiriya Upanishad (2.8.1) occur the words ‘this is
Vedic period, the sannanta (ending with san) root the (result of) discussion over bliss'. From all these, it
Mimamsa is used either as a noun or a verb in the is clear that the verb ‘Mimamsante’ and the word
4 Introduction to Purvamimamsa System
‘Mimamsa’ had from the ancient times to the times of Chapter 2

Upanishads been employed to designate discussions
of doubtful points in ritual or philosophy. Brief History of Mimamsa
In the Nirukta (chap. 7), there is an interesting Jaimini

discussion regarding the form of deities invoked at The Mimamsa Sutras of Jaimini is the earliest
sacrifices and in mantras various views are put forward. available text of the Mimamsa school. However, the
This very subject is discussed in Purvamimamsa (9.1.6- scattered references to the earlier Acaryas and their
10) where the authoritative conclusion seems to be that views taken by Jaimini are either for the support of his
the deity in a sacrifice has no corporeal form. Panini views or for refutation. It shows an evidence that many
(3.1.6) preserves a special sutra to explain such form teachers of Mimamsa in different circles held divergent
as Mimamsante, bibhatsate etc. In the Baudhayana views on several topics of Mimamsa and several
(1.4.10) and Vasistha (22.2) Dharmasutras we meet with interpretations of Vedic sentences. Having seen all
the verb ‘Mimamsante’. Some of the Dharmasutras efforts of his predecessors Jaimini gave the final shape
contain purely Mimamsa rules and principles. The to the Mimamsa doctrine with the contribution of his
Gautama Dharma Sutra says (1.5) ‘where there is a own.
conflict of two texts of equal potency, there is an
option’. Apastamba Dharmasutra (1.1.4.8) says, ‘a Regarding the personal history of Jaimini, we do
positive Vedic text is more cogent than usage that leads not have any authentic source of information about his
to the inference (of the existence of Vedic text). This date and place of birth etc. Hardly anything is known
resembles the Jaimini Sutra (1.3.3) which says, ‘when about him beyond his name and the legend is that he
there is contradiction it is not to be accepted; when was crushed to death by an elephant. In an account of
there is none, then there is inference'. In another place semimythical nature, Jaimini is mentioned as a disciple
Apastamba (1.4.12.11) says, where an action is due to of Parasara Vyasa. In another account of the same type
the finding of pleasure therefrom there is no Sastra. it is stated that Vyasa son of Parasara, had four
This is the same as Jaimini’s teaching (4.12) which disciples, and Jaimini was one of them. He divided the
states, Purusartha is that in which there is a love of a Vedas into four and gave instructions in the Samaveda
man and that love is indicated by a certain object which to Jaimini. Puranas declare that Vyasa, Parasara, also
is inseparably connected with it. called Krsnadvaipayana, arranged the one Veda into
four and imparted the Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samaveda,
and Atharvaveda respectively to Paila, Vaisampayana,
* * *
Jaimini and Sumantu. In the great epic Mahabharata, only to the North-West, nor as an intermixture of
Sumantu, Jaimini, Vaisampayana and Paila are stated Mleccha so improbable in the language of any other
along with Suka (the son of Vyasa) to be the pupils of province farther to the east or south as to rule out the
Vyasa. The name of Jaimini interestingly occurs in the possibility of an acquaintance with Mleccha words on
passage of Asvalayanagrhasutra, such as “Sumantu- the part of its inhabitants.
Jaimini-Paila- Sutra-Bhashya-Bharata-Mahabharata-
Date of Jaimini
Dharmacharyah” P.V. Kane opines that above passages
make clear that several centuries before the Christian As regards the date of Jaimini, we are still in
era Jaimini’s name was an honoured name and confusion. According to Dasgupta, Jaimini Sutras were
connected with the Samaveda. Hopkins, however, probably written about 200 B.C. Radhakrishnan opines
observes that the Mahabharata refers to Jaimini only that the fourth century B.C. is the earliest period we
as an ancient sage and not as a philosopher. can assign for Jaimini’s work. Prof. Jacobi places the
There are a number of Vedic works associated Mimamsa Sutras of Jaimini between 300-200 B.C. on
with the name of Jaimini in ancient literature, viz. the the assumption and the belief that Jaimini is post
Jaimini Samhita, Jaiminiya Brahmana and the Jaiminiya Paninian, a contemporary to Katyayana and prior to
Upanishad all belonging to the Samaveda. He is also Patanjali. Mm. Kane, however, concludes that the
credited with a Srauta and a Grhyasutra and the name lowest limit to which the extent PM. Sutra can be
occurs in lists of doubtful authenticity in the Asvalayana brought down is about 100 A.D. and the highest limit is
and Sankhayana Grhyasutras. According to Kumarila, about 300 B.C. But the same author has fixed the date
Jaimini, the author of the extent Sutras, wrote another of Purvamimamsa Sutras about 400 B.C. to 200 B.C.
work called Chandogyanuvada. Garge came across with many evidences which prove
that the extant JS falls into the earlier part of the
Garge opines that the two Sutras of Jaimini (1.3.19.;
Srautasutra literature i.e., circa 500 B.C.
1.3.21) can only furnish with a remote hint that he was
familiar with the country of Mathura either as an The arrangement of Jaimini Sutras is as follows:
inhabitant or neighbour, remote or adjacent. Further, Sutras are divided into 12 chapters, each chapter
he says, quoting Sabara Bhashya on JS 1.3.10 Jaimini is containing four padas except the third, sixth and tenth
familiar with Mleccha words and next rejects this view which contain eight padas each. Each pada contains
by saying that this does not carry us very far as Mleccha several Adhikaranas (topics for discussion). There are
speaking tribes cannot be definitely located as confined roughly speaking 2745 sutras, 907 adhikaranas and 60
padas according to Madhava’s reckoning. The word Chart B

sutra means a thread or string. It is so called because Adhikarana-s and the pada-s
Ch.
the words are tied together as in a string to express the First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Eighth Total
meaning. It helps one to remember easily. A pada 1 8 4 10 20 42

2 18 13 14 2 47
originally means a part of anything. There is a rule, a
3 15 19 20 21 20 16 23 23 157
chapter is divided into four parts, each part is called
4 17 11 13 20 12 62
as pada. An adhikarana is a thesis or subject which
5 18 12 15 9 54
forms part of its discussion. It consists of five parts 6 13 11 21 14 21 7 13 9 109
viz., vishaya (the subject), vishaya (the doubt), 7 5 1 14 3 23
purvapaksha (the prima facie view), uttarapaksha (the 8 19 6 6 4 35
reply) and nirnaya (the decision). 9 18 20 14 15 67
10 21 34 20 27 26 22 20 19 179
The following charts show the details of the
11 11 16 16 21 64
Jaimini Sutras
12 21 15 16 16 68
Chart A 907
Adhikarana-s and the pada-s

Ch. First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Eighth Total
It seems that the Sankarsakanda is very much
1 32 53 35 30 150
neglected from early times. There is a conflict of views
2 49 29 29 32 139 about its authorship. Nyayaparishuddhi of
3 27 43 46 57 53 47 51 44 368 Venkatanatha states that Kasakrtsna was the author of
4 48 30 41 41 160 the Sankarsakanda. It seems from Sabarabhashya that
5 35 23 44 26 128 Sankarsakanda was looked upon by him as Jaimini’s
6 52 31 41 47 56 39 40 42 348
work. Sankaracharya quotes a sutra from Sankarsha,
7 23 21 36 20 100
it holds that the Sankarsha was well known to
8 43 32 35 28 139
Vedantasutra and it appears to convey that it was the
9 58 61 43 60 222
10 58 74 75 59 88 79 73 70 576
work of Jaimini. Ramanuja also holds that Jaimini was
11 70 66 54 57 247 the author of 16 chapters (comprising twelve called
12 46 37 38 47 168 Purvamimamsa and the remaining four forming the
2745 Sankarsha).
In some works like the Bhashya of Ramanuja the instruction (upadesa) from Krishnadvaipayana,
onVedantasutra and the Prapanchahridaya the composed in his treatise.
Mimamsastra is stated to be one whole containing Pre-Jaimini Mimamsakas
twenty chapters and there was commentary called
1. Badarayana - Jaimini refers to Badarayana in five
Krtakoti by Bodhayana on the whole of it. These twenty
places in 1.1.5; 5.2.19; 6.1.8; 10.8.4; 11.1.65 in connection
chapters are made up as 12 chapters ascribed to Jaimini,
with the views on purely Mimamsa topics. Jaimini
4 chapters of Sankarshaka a, 4 chapters constituting
agrees with Badarayana in all these places except only
the Vedantasutra. Sankaracarya refers to extent
in one place (JS 10.8.44). The name of Badarayana is
Purvamimamsa as Dvadashalaksani in his Bhasya on
more familiar to us as the author of the Brahmasutras.
Vedantasutra 3.3.26. Many writers have mentioned the
But it is difficult to say on the basis of evidence of the
extant Purvamimamsa as Dvadashalaksani.
views quoted in the JS that the author of the
Predecessors of Jaimini Brahmasutras and the other one referred to in JS is the
Although Purvamimamsa sutras of Jaimini is the same and one or both are different Acharyas. It may
earliest work available, there were several Acharyas of be said that the author of the Brahmasutras also may
Purvamimamsa. Jaimini refers to eight Acharyas in his have been the teacher of Purvamimamsa.
Sutras by name and refers to others by ‘eke’ (JS 9.3.4). 2. Badari - Jaimini refers to him at four places (JS
These Acharyas, whether they had composed any work 3.1.3;6.1.27; 8.3.6; 9.2.33), mostly to refute his views
on the subject or not, but were undoubtedly great except one place (JS 9.2.33) where he agrees with him.
teachers of Mimamsa and held their views Badari refuted the view of Jaimini that the Sudra is not
independently on the subject. entitled to perform Vedic sacrifices. He argues that the
Vedic text viz. ‘Vasante Brahmano’ etc., is only
Divine origin
nimittartha (untingent); therefore all the castes should
There is an unbroken tradition of teacher - disciple be entitled to perform sacrifices. (JS 6.1.27)
lineage which shows the divine origin of the Mimamsa.
3. Atreya - Jaimini refers to him thrice (JS 4.3.18; 5.2.18;
Brahma instructed the Mimamsa to Prajapati, 6.1.26 ) and agrees with his views. Baudhayana
Prajapati to Indra, Indra to Agni, Agni to Vasistha, Grhyasutra also refers one Atreya as a padakara.
Vasistha to Parasara, Parasara to Krishnadvaipayana Mahabharata (13.173.3) refers to a sage of that name
and Krishnadvaipayana to Jaimini; Jaimini having got who was a teacher of Nirgunabrahmavidya.
4. Aitisayana - Jaimini refers to him thrice (JS 3.2.43; complete work on the Jaimini Sutras. He had preceded
3.4.24; 6.1.6). He is of the opinion (JS 6.1.6) that in order Sankara who referred to him in his commentary on the
to use of the particular gender (i.e., masculine) on the Vedanta ( 3.3.53 ). He has divided the book into
injunction - ‘Svargakamo Yajeta’ only men are entitled adhikaranas. He has explained each adhikarana in a
to perform the sacrifice. Jaimini rejected it, but in logical way. He has discussed the pros and cons and
other two places (JS 3.2.43; 3.4.24) both Jaimini and the author’s view. Thus he has made his commentary
Aitisayana agree with each other. perfect. Regarding his personal history, we are still in
5. Karsnajini - Jaimini refers to him twice (JS 4.3.17; dark. It is learnt that his original name was Adityadeva
6.7.35). He holds that ‘Sahasrasamvatsara’ should be which he changed to Sabara when he disguised himself
regarded as a functions for generations as it is as a forester for fear of Jaina persecution. The tradition
impossible for a non identical with the author of the of scholars says that he had six sons - the great Indian
present Sutras. This view, however, may be accepted Astronomer Varahamihira from Brahmana wife, Raja
till to get sufficient evidences. It is also possible to say Bhartrhari and the king Vikrama from the Kshatriya
that he who was a Mimamsaka might have been a
wife, the great Vaidya Harichandra and Sanku from his
Vedantin too. It is corroborated by the references of
the various Acharyas in both systems. Vaisya wife and from the Sudra wife he had Amaru.
Apart from these, there were many more Acharyas Sabarasvamin is well-known among scholars as a
of the Mimamsa, who lived and taught before the period senior contemporary of the great ‘Vikramaditya’, the
of Jaimini and who have been mentioned in earlier founder of the ‘Samvat’ era and therefore believed that
works, although Jaimini does not make any reference he flourished in 57 B.C. Scholars, however, having seen
to them. The name of Kasakrtsna and Apisali as his relation with Varahamihira, opine that he might have
teachers and perhaps founders of independent schools lived before 400 A.D. which is the probable date of
of Purvamimamsa are found in the Vyakarana Varahamihira. Quite a few facts gleaned from his
Mahabhashya of Patanjali and in the Sutras of Panini. bhasya may infer that he might have lived in Northern
In fact these two teachers must have been very old India. Nothing can be said regarding his personal history
and perhaps, were Grammarians too. and other works.
Post-Jaimini Mimamsakas Kumarila (7th century A.D.) - Kumarila Bhaa is known
Sabara - As the scholars know, Sabara is the great as Kumarila Svamin or Tutata Bhaa, one of the greatest
Bhashyakara of Jaimini Sutras. His bhashya is the first scholars, particularly Mimamsakas that India has
produced. At the time of Kumarila, Buddhism had like (Vide Sankaradigvijaya VII). According to tradition,
spread its influence all over the country as a great enemy he is an avatara of Kumara or Kartikeya. He is often
of the Vedic ritualistic culture. Buddhist scholars were referred to as Bhaapada or simply Bhaa by later writers
attacking Hindu religion, philosophy and culture and his followers are called as Bhaas. His views are
vehemently. Therefore it was the need to refute their known as Bhaamata. Kumarila became so famous for
views for bringing about the downfall of Buddhism. his scholarship that he founded a school of his own
This was an opportunity for Kumarila to write mainly and that is known as Bhaa school. He got large number
against the different schools of Buddhism which of followers.
existed during his time. His main object was to save Prabhakara Mishra - Prabhakara Mishra (7th century
the orthodox religion from the attack of the heterodox A.D. ) wrote two commentaries on the Bhashya of
systems and to keep the old rituals of the Vedas alive. Sabara, one a large one called ‘Brhati’ and the other a
He wrote Slokavarttika, Tantravarttika, Tuptika, more concise one called ‘Laghvi’, Brhati is a
Brhattika and Madhyamaika. The Slokavarttika, which commentary, in which Prabhakara simply explained
is a commentary to the end of third chapter. The Tuptika bhasya and nowhere criticized it as Kumarila done it in
which is a short commentary on remaining chapters. several places. Prabhakara became very famous and
The Brhattika and Madhyamaika are unfortunately not founded a school of his own in the system. His school
available to us. Slokavarttika of Kumarila occupies a came to be recognized as the Prabhakara school or
unique place, not only in the history of Purvamimamsa, the Guru school. He was according to ancient tradition,
but in the whole Indian philosophy. This treatise is the the pupil of Kumarila. Once there was a problem before
most important part of Mimamsa, since it brought the Kumarila, like ‘ 
status of independent system of philosophy. Kumarila, as per the tradition, faced difficulties in
The tradition says that Kumarila in disguise, learnt solving this problem. Prabhakara, however, did not
all the secrets of Buddhism from Buddhist monks and find any difficulty. He solved as ‘ , 
then defeated them in open challenge. He also defeated  Having seen this, Kumarila became
his own guru and committed a sin. For the expiation very happy and praised Prabhakara by heart as ‘Guru’.
of this sin he came over to Prayaga where he burnt From this event, Prabhakara came to be recognized as
himself alive on the banks of Triveni. Sankaracarya ‘Guru’ and his views are called as Gurumata. Both
met him when he was half-burnt and expressed his these two Mimamsakas became very prominent that
desire to bring Kumarila back to life which he did not they elipsed name and fame even of the Jaimini and
Sabara. Infact, these two became the founders of the 5) Sphotasiddhi - It is learnt that it has been written in
two different schools of Purvamimamsa system in defence of the theory sphota against the Varnavadins.
much more systematized system. Almost all the later
As a Vedantin, he wrote Brahmasiddhi,
Mimamsa literature came to be based on these two
Naiskarmyasiddhi and Varttikas on Sankarabhashya
scholars, as well as entire system became monopolized
by these two schools. on the Brhadaranyaka and Taittiriya Upanishads.
The Brhati of Prabhakara, which is also known as Umbeka ( 700-750 A.D. ) - Umbeka was a great
‘Nibandhana’ and Laghvi is also called as ‘Vivarana’. Mimamsaka. He has been identified with Mandana
Mandana Mishra - Mandana Mishra was great scholar Mishra and also with Bhavabhuti. However, there is
of Purvamimamsa. According to Sankaradigvijaya, he no sufficient evidence to establish any equation between
had his traditional debate (sastrartha) with the great these two Mimamsakas. Umbeka wrote a commentary,
Sankaracharya who defeated and converted him to his namely Tatparyatika, on the Slokavarttika of Kumarila,
own faith and renamed him as Suresvaracharya, the extending upto the Sphotavada. He also wrote a
famous author of Varttikas. He was the follower of commentary on the Bhavanaviveka of Mandana Misra.
Bhatta school. He was also recognized as a profound
scholar of the Advaita school of Vedanta. Salikanatha Mishra ( 710-770 A.D. ) - Salikanatha
Mishra was one of the great Mimamsakas and is
His works on Mimamsa are :-
generally believed to be the direct disciple of
1) Vidhiviveka, where he discusses the import of the Prabhakara. He wrote two commentaries on the works
Vidhi-lin. It has a commentary called Nyayakanika written of Prabhakara, viz., Rjuvimala - panchika on Brhati
by Vachaspati Mishra I. and Dipasikha on Laghvi. His third work is
2) Bhavanaviveka - Here, the author discusses the topic Prakaranapanchika. Among these Prakaranapanchika
of bhavana which is very important in Mimamsa. is a very important work on Prabhakara school. It gives
3) Vibhramaviveka - It deals with the five types of the views of the school on almost every topic.
khyatis. Parthasarathi Mishra (circa 900 to 1100 A.D.) - He
4) Mimamsanukramanika - Adhikarana-wise this is was the most important writer on Mimamsa after
written. This is very useful book for recapitulating all Kumarila and Prabhakara. He was very much devoted
the topics of adhikaranas of Purvamimamsa. to Kumarila and explained entire Mimamsa Sastra as
per the views of Kumarila. He has written several Bhavanatha Mishra (circa 11 th cent. A.D. ) -
important works. They are: Bhavanatha Mishra also known as Bhavadeva Misra
1. Nyayaratnamala - This is an independent treatise on
was a great advocate of the Prabhakara school. His
certain important topics of Mimamsa, like only work Nyayaviveka is an independent commentary
on Jaimini sutras.
adhyayanavidhi, svatah pramanya, vidhinirnaya, vyapti,
nitya and kamya acts and various acts of angatva etc. Bhavadeva Bhatta (11th cent. A.D.) - Bhavadeva
Bhatta alias Balavalabhibhujanga was a follower of
2. Tantraratna - This is although a commentary on
Bhatta school. He wrote several treatises on
Tuptika of Kumarila but it explains mostly the lines of
Dharmasastra. He wrote a commentary on
Sabarabhashya.
Tantravarttika, called Tautatitamatatilaka.
3. Sastradipika - It is the most important work of
Somesvara Bhatta alias Ranaka (11th cent. A.D.) -
Parthasarathi. This is written as adhikarana wise on Somesvara Bhatta was regarded as a rival of
Jaimini sutra which elucidates the views of Kumarila Parthasarathi Mishra. His only work Ranaka is a very
and criticized the view of Prabhakara from time to time. important work on Tantravarttika. Another work
4. Nyayaratnakara - This is the famous commentary Tantrasara is ascribed on him.
on the Slokavarttika of Kumarila. It explains the views Paritosa Mishra (12th cent. A.D.) - Paritosa Mishra
of the orthodox and heterodox schools very clearly is the author of a commentary, named Ajita or
before giving the authors criticism. Tantravarttikanibandhana on Tantravarttika.
Murari Mishra II (circa 11-12th cent. A.D.) - Murari Vedanta Desika (13th cent. A.D.) - Vedanta Desika
Mishra is well known for his distinct views and therefore was a follower of Visishtadvaita school. His works on
 has become a proverb in Sanskrit. He Mimamsa are:
was one of the greatest Mimamsakas who held different
1) Mimamsa-paduka which is written in verse and
views on several topics of Mimamsa. He founded the
extends upto the end of the Tarkapada.
third school of Mimamsa. He wrote two commentaries
on Jaimini sutras viz: 1) Tripadanitinayanam: This is 2) Sesvara-mimamsa is a commentary in prose beyond
adhikarama wise commentary on adhyaya 1 padas 2 to the Tarkapada.
4. 2) Ekadasadyadhikaranam: It deals with the Tantra Madhavacharya (1297-1386 A.D.) - Madhavacharya
and Avapa which form the part of the first adhikarama occupies a unique place in the history of the revival of
of 11th adhyaya of the Jaimini sutras. the Vedic culture in Medieval Period. He was the most
important figure of this period. He contributed to 3) Vadanaksatravali, which is also called

Mimamsa by writing Nyayamala in verse along with Vadanaksatramala, 4) Mayukhavali, a commentary on
the Vistara in prose. This work is the gist of the the Sastradipika, 5) Chitrapata and, 6)
adhikaranas in very easy language. This book came to Dharmamimamsaparibhasha.
be recognized as a standard book for beginners. He Narayana Bhatta (16th cent. A.D.) - Narayana was
gives the views of both the schools of Mimamsa. His the great Mimamsaka. He was the follower of Bhatta
patron was Bukka Raya of Vijayanagaram. school and had two works to his credit on Mimamsa;
Ramakrishna Bhatta (16th cent. A.D.) - Ramakrishna 1) Tantravarttikanibandhana, a commentary on the
Bhatta was a great scholar of name and fame. He has Tantravarttika 2) Manameyodaya.
given every detail of himself in the beginning of his Laugaksi Bhaskara (16th cent. A.D.) - Bhaskara of
commentary on the Sastradipika. His only work on Laugaksi family flourished at the end of the 16th
Mimamsa is the Siddhantachandrika, a commentary century. There is a difference of opinion regarding the
on Sastradipika. priority and posteriority of Bhaskara and Apadeva, the
Annam Bhatta (17th cent. A.D.) - Annam Bhatta is author of Nyayaprakasa. The only work of Bhaskara
well known for his small primer on Nyaya-Vaisesika, on Mimamsa is Arthasangraha. This is very useful
named Tarkasangraha and its dipika. On Mimamsa he treatise for the beginners. It became very popular among
the Sanskritists.
wrote 1) Subodhini, a commentary on Tantravarttika.
2) Ranakaphakkikavyakhya, a commentary on the Visvesvara Bhatta alias Gagabhatta (17th cent.
Nyayasudha of Somesvara also known as Ranakojjivini. A.D.) - Gagabhatta was the son of Dinakara Bhatta and
3) Ranakabhavanakarikavivarana in 54 verses. grandson of Ramakrishna Bhatta. Gaga was the pet
name given by his father. He was the leading
Appayya Dixita (16th cent. A.D.) - Appayya Dixita
Mimamsaka of his time. He was the protege of great
was well known scholar of all branches of Sanskrit
Maratha king Chhatrapati Shivaji. He wrote an
literature. He did not neglect any branch. He had been independent work on Mimamsa sutras, named
ascribed the authorship of over hundred works. His Bhattachintamani. His second work is Vrtti, called
works on Mimamsa are: Kusumanjali, a commentary on the Jaimini Sutras. The
1) Vidhirasayana, in verse with a commentary in prose, third work which has great historical importance of
called Vivekasukhopayojani. This was written according Chhatrapati Shivaji. This work is in continuation of the
o the views of Kumarila, 2) Upakrama-parakrama, Slokavarttika in verse.
Apadeva II (17th cent. A.D.) - Apadeva was the son Saraswati who prepared Mimamsakosa, P.V. Kane who
of Anantadeva I, grandson of Apadeva I, and great wrote, History of Dharmasastra, D.V. Garge who wrote
grandson of Maharashtra Saint Ekanatha. He wrote citations in Sabarabhashya and so on.
Mimamsa Nyaya-Prakasa popularly known as Apadevi.
This is a very popular text for the beginners. This book
is quite interesting and helpful for understanding the
* * *
topics of Mimamsa. Another work of Apadeva is
Adhikaranachandrika which summarises the
adhikaranas of Mimamsa.
Khandadeva Misra alias Shridharendra ( 17th
cent. A.D. ) - Khandadeva is illustrious writer on
Mimamsa. His works are:
1) Mimamsakaustubha: It extends up to
Balabaladhikara (3.3.7) only. It is very elaborate and its
style appears to have been influenced by Navya-Nyaya,
2) Bhattadipika: This is the magnum opus of
Khandadeva. It occupies the same place among the
Sanskritists in the South which the Sastradipika does
in the North. It is not so elaborate as the Kaustubha. 3)
Bhattarahasya: It discusses the Sabdabodhaprakriya
according to the Mimamsakas.
Krishna Yajva (18th cent. A.D.) - Krishna Yajva was
the celebrated author of the Mimamsaparibhasha. This
is an elementary primer which gives in short the entire
contents of Mimamsa. Beside these, there are several
other Mimamsakas flourished in twentieth century, viz.,
Panditaraja Pattabhiram Shastri, Swami Kevalanand
Introduction to Purvamimamsa System 25
Chapter 3 6. Kumarila rejects inherence as an independent category

Difference between Kumarila and Prabhakara and regards it as identity. Prabhakara recognizes
schools inherence as an independent category but he does not
accept as one and eternal. Inherence is eternal in eternal
The Kumarila school and Prabhakara school hold substances and non-eternal in non eternal substances.
different views on many philosophical problems in There are many inherences.
which principle differences are noted here.
7. Kumarila considers non-apprehension as an
1. Kumarila recognizes six means of cognitions independent category and recognizes four kinds of
(pramanas) viz., perception, inference, verbal testimony, non-apprehension viz., prior non-apprehension,
comparison, presumption and non-apprehension. posterior non-apprehension, mutual non-apprehension
Prabhakara accepts only five and rejects the sixth means and absolute non-apprehension. Prabhakara rejects
of cognition i.e. non-apprehension. non-apprehension and identifies it with locus.
2. Kumarila recognizes five categories, viz., substance, 8. Kumarila rejects the categories of potency, number,
quality, action, community, and non-apprehension. and similarity recognized by Prabhakara.
Prabhakara recognizes eight categories, viz., substance,
9. Both accept the reality of permanent self (atman)
quality, action, community, inherence, number potency
different from the body, the sense organs manas and
and similarity.
fleeting cognitions. Kumarila regards the self a
3. Kumarila admits eleven substances, viz., earth, water, selfilluminated or perceptible through manas, while
light, air, ether, time, space, self, manas, darkness and Prabhakara does not accept it is an object of mental
sound (varna). Prabhakara admits nine substances and perception but as manifested as the knower in every
regards sound as a quality of ether and darkness as the act of perception of an object.
absence of light. 10. Kumarila states a cognition as an act of the self
4. Kumarila accepts action or movement as perceptible which is inferred from cognizedness (jnatata) produced
while Prabhakara regards it as inferable. by it in an object while Prabhakara says a cognition as
5. Kumarila admits higher and lower communities but an act of the self which manifests itself, its substrate,
Prabhakara admits the communities of substance, the self and an object (triputi pratyaksha).
quality and action. He rejects the highest genus or 11. Kumarila regards validity of knowledge as intrinsic
beinghood (satta). (svatah pramanya) and invalidity of knowledge as
extrinsic (paratah pramanya), due to the knowledge of Chapter 4

defects in its cause or that of a contradicting knowledge. Contents of Mimamsa
Prabhakara states all knowledge is valid.
The following is the brief resume of the contents of
12. Kumarila regards the cognition of an object which
twelve chapters.
was not apprehended before, which was free from
contradiction and whose cause is free from defects as I. The first chapter deals with the purpose of sastra
a means of valid knowledge (pramana). But Prabhakara which is the enquiry into what is dharma; dharma is
regards apprehension (anubhuti) as a pramana which defined as connection between the word and its sense
is different from recollection. is eternal; the authoritativeness of vidhi and arthavada,
13. Kumarila regards an illusion as the apprehension of the latter forming part of a connected whole and
an object as different from it (viparitakhyati) while therefore being authoritative only as expatiating upon
Prabhakara regards it as non-discrimination the injunctive passages; the meaning of the mantras
(vivekakhyati, akhyati) of the element of perception employed in the ritual is intended to be conveyed; the
(e.g., ‘this’) and the element of recollection (e.g., smrti rules like those on Asakasraddha are authoritative;
‘silver’) due to lapse of memory (smrtipramosa). in a conflict between sruti and smrti, the latter is to be
discarded, but if there is no conflict then smrti may be
14. Kumarila advocates the doctrine of Abhihitanvaya
as to the meaning of sentence, while Prabhakara inferred to be based on a lost sruti; meaning of certain
advocates the doctrine of Anvitabhidhana. words borrowed from Mlecchas is the same as is
conventional among the latter; usages like the Holaka
15. Kumarila advocates the doctrine of Bhavana, a festival are authoritative; grammatically correct words
mental activity to produce a desired effect. But are to be employed not apabhramsas like gavi for a
Prabhakara advocates the doctrine of Niyoga, a cow; identity of words used in the Vedas and in popular
categorical imperative or an unconditional command
language; the primary meaning of a word is akrti or
which impels a person to act without any motive or
generality; certain words like ‘udbhid’, ‘agnihotra’, and
thought of consequences.
‘syena’ are names (namadheya) of certain rites; such
sentences as ‘the sacrificer is the prastara or yupa’ are
arthavadas and not gunavidhis; when there is a doubt
* * * as to the meaning of a word, the rest of the context
should be employed for determining the meaning.
II. The second chapter deals with the principal word in falsehood in Darsapurnmasa is a vidhi and not an
an injunction is the verb, which declares the results to anuvada; the prohibitions against killing or injuring a
be brought about; the performance of the acts enjoined Brahmana are general and not restricted to the time of
in the Veda gives rise to an unseen potency (apurva); Darsapurnamasa; several examples of Vedic rules that
actions are either principal or subordinate actions; are addressed to the agent and have no relation to the
illustrations of subordinate and principal acts; the verbs sacrificial act (such as wearing gold); the procedure to
occurring in mantras do not lay down injunctions as be followed for the substitute also; the hiring of rtviks
those in the brahmanas do; definition of Mantra and is to be done by the sacrificer and not by adhvaryu
Brahmana; definition of Rk, Sama, Yajus; Nigadas are and the samskaras such as shaving, paring the nails
Yajus; how to determine what portion of a Yajus are also to be performed on him; only he who is learned
constitutes one sentence; each different verb (like in the Vedas is authorized to perform sacrifices.
juhoti), yajeta, dadati) denotes a distinct act, having a IV. The fourth chapter deals with an enquiry into what
separate unseen potency; difference of acts on the is ‘Kratvartha’ (what is enjoined for the sacrificial act,
ground of number, appellation (sanjañ), difference in is therefore obligatory and if unperformed or badly
deity; Agnihotra is prescribed as a life-long duty; performed will cause defect in the sacrifice, if not
Agnihotra and other rites prescribed in the several obeyed); definition of purusartha; illustrations of both;
sakhas of the Veda are not so many distinct rites in the Prajapati vow ‘one should not see the sun rising or
each sakha. setting’ is purusartha; discussion of which out of two
substances or actions is the prayojaka; illustrations of
III. The third chapter consists of the meaning of sesa; arthakarma and pratipatti karma; the sruti texts declaring
Sesa is that which subserves the purpose of the another; the time, place and agent of certain actions are not
not only substances, guna and samskaras are sesa but arthavadas but niyamas (restrictive injunctions); what
even rites are also sesa to the result, the result to the is the principal as opposed to the sesa so far described;
agent and the agent to certain acts; in such sentences the description of rewards with reference to substances,
as ‘he cleanses the cup’ the singular stands for the samskaras and subsidiary acts are merely arthavadas;
plural; illustrations of sesa and sesa in (subordinate the axim of Visvajit, viz., that all such rites as Visvajit
and principal); the primary meaning of a word is to be for which no reward is proclaimed by the texts have
taken; means of linga, vakya, prakarana, sthana, heaven as their reward; Kamya rites have as their reward
samakhya; rule of decision in case of conflict between the object desired and not svarga; Vaisvanaresti
two of these principles; the prohibition of speaking performed on the birth of a son is for the benefit of the
son and not for the father and is to be performed after according to ability; there is no substitute in the case
jatakarma on the full moon or new moon; the of the deity, the fire, the subsidiary acts, the mantras,
pindapitryajña is not an anga of the new moon ritual. nor for the sacrificer; in the case of sattras a substitute
V. The fifth deals with krama; whether the order of the
for acrificer is allowed; prayaschitas in case of total or
partial breaking or spilling out or burning of substances;
things mentioned in the texts as regards a rite is to be
sattras can be performed only by Brahmanas; in the
followed or there is a choice; the rule is that the order
Visvajit one cannot give away one’s parents, wife etc.
of he text is to be followed; various determining
but only that over which one has absolute ownership;
elements as to the order of doing things, such as sruti, a sovereign cannot give away the land, as it is common
artha, patha, sthana, mukhya and pravrtti; decision in to all, nor horses nor sudra who servers as a duty; the
case of the conflict of these. word ‘samvatsara’ means a day in the case of sacrifices
VI. The sixth chapter deals with Adhikara, Svarga is rescribed for a thousand samvatsaras; the oblations to
not a dravya but is a state of bliss and is principal, be offered by the brahmacharin are offered in domestic
while sacrifice is subsidiary to it and is a means of fire and not in consecrated fire; the same is the case
attaining it; he is authorized to perform sacrifice who with the sacrifice of the chief who is a nisada; Daiva
desires svarga; only men (not deities nor lower animals) rites are to be performed in udagayana, bright fortnight
are authorized to perform sacrifice; both males and and on auspicious days.
females can perform yaga; husband and wife are VII. This chapter discusses the principle of Atidesa
together authorized to perform yaga; but the wife has (extended application). The details of the
only a limited part in the yaga; sudra is not capable of Darsapurnamasa are to be extended to all sacrifices
performing yaga; persons devoid of a limb or suffereing such as Aindragna according to requirements; Atidesa
from incurable disease cannot perform yaga; the may be brought into play by express words or by
rathakara, though not of the three castes, can consecrate implication and inference; examples of the first, such
fire on account of a special text and so the Nisada can as the extension of the procedure and details of Syena
perform the Raudra yaga; in a sacrificial session yaga to Isu yaga; Atidesa is indicated by the
extending over a long period each person engaged in employment of the same technical term (nama) in other
the sattra secures the reward; the rules about following sacrifices, such as the employment of the word
and saluting the teacher apply only after upanayana Agnihotra in Kundapayinamayana.
and not before; the paying of the three debts is VIII. This chapter deals with the application of principle
obligatory duties they are to be performed by all but Atidesa to individual cases. The rule of guidance is
that those details and that part of the primary (prakrti) technical appellations, the purificatory acts and
sacrifices such as Darsapurnamasa are to be extended, materials (of the model yaga) may have to be omitted
of which an indication (by words or sense) is conveyed in the modifications if there is no purpose to be served
by the injunctive passage of the modificatory (vikrti) by employing them; examples; the Arambhaniya isti is
sacrifices and by other passages subsidiary to them; not to be performed in the Diksaniya rites, though
the reward, the agent (desiring heaven), the restrictive performed in the model yaga; in the sattras such as
rules (such as agnihotra for life) and the definite Dvadasaha there is no choosing rtviks as in the
collocation of actions (such as Darsapurnamasa) are Jyotistoma, nor is there engagement of services for a
not extended by Atidesa; if there is doubt on account reward; the word ‘sveta’ in the passage ‘Vayavyam
of different items, then it is the identity of havis that svetamalabheta’ conveys a white goat and not any other
decides the matter; Darvihoma is an appellation and white animal; the cows that are the daksina in the
not a gunavidhi and is an appellation of both smarta Jyotistoma should be divided among the priests by
rites like the Astakas and of Vedic rites. the sacrificer himself; instances of addition
IX. This chapter deals with the subject of uha; when
(samuccaya); the diety must be addressed in the yaga
applying the principle of Atidesa, certain alterations and by the appellation contained in the injunctive passage
adaptations are necessary in the case of mantras, and not by a synonym (such as pavaka for agni); of
samans and samskaras; the various details of the several items mentioned in order, if only some are to
Agnihotra have Apurva as the motive of their be employed then those in the beginning are to be taken
performance; it is the result (apurva) of the sacrificial and not those mentioned last; in sattras (such as
dvadasaha) there are many yajamanas and not one; the
act that is principal and not the deity and therefore it is
yajamanas themselves are the priests (rtviks) in sattras;
not the deity that is the moving spring of the details of
difference between sattra and ahina, the former being
a yaga; examples of uha; examples of the non-
enjoined in such words as ‘asate’, ‘upayanti’ and
application of uha, for instance in the Jyotistoma, the
having many yajamanas, while in the latter the injunction
Subrahmanya nigada has the words ‘Hariva agaccha’,
is in the form ‘yajeta’ and the sacrificers are not many;
which should not be modified by uha, when the same
it is not the whole animal that is one offering (havis),
nigada is repeated in the Agnistut.
but its various limbs are the havis; discussion of
X. This chapter discusses badha and abhyuccaya; pratisedha and paryudasa; meaning of the negative
everything pertaining to the model (prakrti) yaga is not ‘nan’ it is either paryudasa, or it may be mere arthavada,
to be done in the modifications of it (vikrti), but the or it may be a pratisedha.
XI. This chapter deals with tantra and avapa. That which Agnisomiyapasu, a pasupuro dasa is laid down, with
is useful to many, though itself performed once, is called reference to which a doubt arises whether the several
tantra, that which is useful to many only when repeated angas of the pasuyaga are to be repeated with the
many times is called avapa; the principal items such as purodasa also; the answer is no; when there is an
agneya etc. in the Darsapurnamasa have svarga as the aggregate of several contradictory dharmas, the
fruit in their entirety and there is no separate reward majority is to be followed; if there are several things,
for each; the different angas of a sacrifice serve a single each serving the same purpose (as rice and yava), then
purpose (viz., helping on the principal act) and hence there is an option; there is an option as to the
have a single fruit; Kamya rites may be repeated as prayaschitas to be performed for doing something
often as desired; those actions that are prescribed (such through mistake or heedlessness, but all prayaschitas
as pressing or beating the grains of rice) and have a prescribed on an occasion other than the above are to
seen result are to be repeated and continued until the be performed together; the rules about not reciting the
result is accomplished, while those actions that have Vedas (anadhyaya) apply to the study of the Vedas
only an unseen result are not to be repeated; such angas and not to the repeating of Vedic texts in sacrifices;
as prayajas are to be performed only once; the Kapiñjala actions are to be performed after the mantras
maxim viz., the plural stands for three in the absence appropriate to them are repeated (as in ‘ise tva’ iti
of anything to the contrary; the time, place and the chinatti); there is no option as to hautra mantras; mere
priests are to be the same in case of principal rites, japa mantras not connected with any rite, mantras
Agneya and others; examples of arthakarma and containing praises, blessings and applications or
pratipatti karma; adhana (consecration of fires in spring, invocations are to be added up (there is no samucchaya
summer, autumn according to caste) is to be done only and not vikalpa); in a sattra such purificatory acts as
once and not repeated with each isti, pasuyaga, añjana are to be done by all sacrificers; only Brahmanas
somayaga etc.; the utensils of sacrifice are to be kept can officiate as priests.
till the death of sacrificer, as the sacrificer is to be
cremated with them (so this is the pratipattikarma of Veda and its Classification
the utensils). Mimamsakas declared that the Veda is apauruseya
XII. This chapter deals with topic prasanga which (nonhuman origin). The definition of such is ‘
means (the undesirable) possibility of certain items . Both the words in the definition are significant.
belonging to one act having to be employed or The word apauruseya excludes from the province of
performed in another act. In the chapter about the Veda such a work as the Mahabharata, which is
known to be the work of a human being viz. Vyasa.  ’. Therefore, the injunction in ‘   ’ is
The word Vakya is also necessary in the definition. understood to prescribe only the curds with reference
Otherwise entities like the Soul, which are apauruseya to the sacrifice which is enjoined in ‘ ’.
would be the Veda. This Veda is of five kinds owing to The sentence ‘’ then yields the sense 
its division into injunction (vidhi) sacrificial formula 
(mantra), name (namadheya), prohibition (nisedha) and Visishtavidhi (Qualified injunction) - Where both
explanatory passage (arthavada). sacrificial action and subsidiary matter are not
Vidhi (injunction) - This is that portion of the Veda, established by any other means of proof there the
which makes known a matter unknown by any other injunction lays down something which is qualified. For
means or injunction and that has a definite purpose. example, the sentence . One should sacrifice
For example, the sentence ‘. This with Soma. Here the sacrifice and Soma have not been
sentence conveys the performance of the Agnihotra established by any other means of proof. However, a
with a view to attain heaven. The said Agnihotra is a sacrifice qualified by Soma (material) is enjoined.
matter not known before. Neither perception, nor Therefore the injunction in this sentence is known as
inference nor any other means of cognition, nor any Visishtavidhi. The meaning conveyed by this injunction
injunction can give us any information about the is, ‘One should accomplish one’s desired object by
Agnihotra. It is known only from this sentence from means of a sacrifice possessing Soma for its material.
the Veda. This is understood by applying matvarthalaksana
(indication of possession).
Guna Vidhi (secondary injunction) - Where a rite is
established by some other means of proof, there, an Four-fold Injunction - This Vidhi is again divided
injunction enjoins mearly accessary matter with into four categories viz., utpatti vidhi (originative
reference to that sacrificial rite. Some times it so injunction), viniyogavidhi (applicatory injunction),
happens that an injunction lays down only the material adhikaravidhi (injunction of qualification) and lastly,
with which a sacrifice is performed, the sacrifice itself prayogavidhi (injunction of performance).
having been enjoined by some other sentence. For 1) Utpatti vidhi (injunction of origination) - The
example, the sentence ‘         . Here, only a injunction of origination is the injunction which indicates
secondary matter, i.e., the material (curd) with which merely the nature of action. For example, 
the sacrifice is to be performed is laid down. The ‘He offers the Agnihotra’. However, this action is laid
sacrifice is enjoined by another sentence, viz., ‘ down with a view to the attainment of some desired
object. Therefore in interpreting this sentence the action means is Sruti. It is directly heard and as soon as it is
is construed as the means or instrument of attaining heard, a hearer understands its sense. It is of three
the desired object. Thus             ‘means kinds, viz., a) vidhatri (injunctive), b) abhidhatri
‘. (denotative) and c) viniyoktri (applicatory). The first
2) Viniyogavidhi (injunction of application) - This is indicated by the verb in the form of optative. The
injunction conveys the connection of a subsidiary with second, abhidhatri is the scriptural passage that refers
the principal action. It declares which is subordinate to rice-grains etc. while the third viniyoktri is one on
to which. For example, the sentence,  . He hearing which you at once see the connection of the
sacrifices with curds. Here, the injunction lays down subsidiary and the principal. This is also further sub-
the relation of curds whose subsidiary character is divided into three kinds, viz., 1) Vibhaktikrupa (form
understood by the instrumental case. Thus, the sense of a case), 2) Ekabhidhanarupa (form of one denotative
of the sentence is ‘One should effect the sacrifice with element) and 3) Ekapadarupa (form of one word).
curds’. Among these, the first is indicated by an affix of a
declension, as for instance,  ‘One should
There are six means of proof which have become perform a sacrifice with rice-grains’. Here, the
helpers of this injunction. They are : sruti (direct instrument case shows that the rice-grains are part of
statement), linga (mark or word-meaning), vakya the sacrifice. In the same one can apply the same
(sentence or syntactical connection), prakarana principle in other cases. The ekabhidhanarupa is
(context or interdependence), sthana (position or order) denoted by one word, for instance,   ‘One
and samakhya (name). This injunction assisted by these should perform a sacrifice by an animal’. Here, 
intimates the subsidiaries or the subsidiary relation with shows that male animal will form a part of the sacrifice.
principle factor which takes the form of accomplished This word shows gender and the number of the material
activity of the sacrificer who is engaged in the pursuit used in the sacrifice. The word yajeta shows the
of highest goal and the other synonym of which is bhavana (mental activity). The ekapadarupa is indicated
existence for the purpose of another. In all these means by one pada (word) or sentence. The whole sentence,
of proofs Sruti is the strongest which is not depending above cited, shows that the animal as described above
on any other means of proof. is subsidiary in relation to the sacrifice which is the
1) Sruti (direct statement) - It is an independent sound. principal object as indicated by the verb.
It is said to be its primary sense. Primary sense 2) Linga (power of words) - It is the power of words
conveyed by a word without the help of any other to point out something. It is said that the power of all
words is said to be the mark. The power is convention case of pre-sacrifices (prayajas). For instance, ‘
itself. Therefore it is distinguished from samakhya , ‘He sacrifices the sacrificial-sticks’. Here, fruit
(name). In other words, it is the suggestive or the is not mentioned. The fruit of the action in performing
secondary sense of a word which can be inferred from a sacrifice with aid of  can be known from the
another word or a sentence. For instance, ‘ context in which it occurs. Since after the sense ‘One
, ‘I cut grass, the seat of gods’. It becomes part to should effect by means of the offering to the sacrificial
the cutting of Kusa-grass, though barhi is the generic sticks is apprehend, the expectancy as to what is to be
term meaning grass, but not to cutting of the ulapa- helped (upakarya) in the form ‘What?’ In the sentence,
grass and other kinds. It is of two kinds, viz., when the ‘  , ‘One who is desirous of
inferential sense can be inferred without the help of heaven should perform the new and full moon
any other and secondly, when it is so inferred.
sacrifices’, the expectancy is apprehend as to what
3) Vakya (sentence) - When the meaning of a word or would help in the form of ‘How?’ Thus, on account
a collection of words is gathered from the sentence in of the expectancy of both, the pre-sacrifices and others
which it is used, the principle which governs it is called become subservient to new and full moon sacrifices.
vakya (sentence). For instance, ‘ This prakarana is of two kinds, viz. mahaprakarana
, ‘One whose Ladle is made of Parna (great context) and avantara prakarana (intermediate
does not hear evil things’. Here ‘(made of wood) context). When the context relates to the principal
and  (ladle) are two words used in their usual sense bhavana (creative energy), it is called as mahaprakarana.
and it also appears that ‘made of Parna wood’ is
For instance, the pre-sacrifices and others are the parts
subsidiary to the ladle. It follows, therefore, that the
of Darsapurnamasa sacrifices. In the avantara prakarna
ladle can be made of any wood, then arises the question,
why should there be a condition as to the ladle being the context relates to the bhavana of the subordinate
made of a particular wood? The answer for this parts. For instance, abhikramana (right of stepping near)
question is that one cannot achieve the invisible result is a subordinate part of pre sacrifices and others.
of not hearing evil things without having the ladle made 5) Sthana (position) - Position is commonness of place.
of parna wood. Thus, when the meaning of a word or That is of two kinds, viz.,  (commonness of
a sentence is gathered from a whole sentence, it is called place in the text) and  (commonness of
the principle of vakya (sentence). place in performance). Commonness of place in the
4) Prakarana (context) - It means inter-dependence text is also of two kinds, viz.,    (text
or mutual expectancy for compliment, just as in the according to number) and  (text in proximity).
Pathasadesya is the equality of place according to Two kinds of subsidiaries - The subsidiaries which are
the text and is governed by the order given in a text. made subservient by the Viniyogavidhi (applicatory
For instance, , ‘One should offer injunction) are of two kinds, viz., siddharupa (the form
cakes baked in eleven potsherds in honour of Indra of accomplished things) and kriyarupa (the form of
and Agni.’ ‘, ‘One should offer actions). The former consists of class, material,
the cakes baked in twelve potsherds in honour of number etc. It has a visible effect. The second is of
Vaisvanara’ etc., Accordingly under the principle of the form of action. It is of two kinds, it is either primary
Pathasadesya, the first mantra will be recited with the or secondary. These are called  (indirectly
first offer of the cake and second mantra will be helping) and  (directly helping). The former
repeated with the second offer and so on. But the conduces to the general result of the sacrifice through
reading in the modified sacrifice falling within two another intermediate step and the latter contributes to
injunctions though governed by the model sacrifice, is the general results immediately.
regulated according to the principle of (text in
proximity), i.e. by the text which is near to it, like Sannipatyopakaraka (indirectly helping) - Indirectly
amanasacrifices. Anusthanasadesya is the commonness helping actions which are enjoined with respect to the
of place according the performance. For instance, the substance as the thrashing of the rice and sprinkling of
details of the animal sacrifice are given in connection water on it etc. They produce visible, invisible or both
with the ceremonies to be performed on the day of kinds of effects, viz., removal of husk, sprinkling of
fasting (aupavasathya). On that day the animal in honour water has an invisible effect. While the offering of animal
of Agni and Soma is sacrificed. The principle of or cakes produces both kinds of effect, because, as
anusthanasadesya, therefore, governs it. far as the offering is concerned it has an invisible effect
and as far as certain divinity to whom the offering is
6) Samakhya (name) - Samakhya is a word understood
made is concerned it has a visible effect, i.e. the
in its literal or etymological sense. It is of two kinds, remembrance of the god.
viz., Vaidiki (Vedic or belonging to the language of the
Veda) and Laukiki (worldly or belonging to the language Aradupakaraka (directly helping) - It consists of those
of the world). The hotr becomes subservient to the actions which are enjoined without any reference to
eating of the contents of the cup owing to the Vedic any substance or divinity. It leads directly to the ultimate
name in the word hotr camasa. The adhvaryu becomes result of the sacrifice. It is the essence of the sacrifice
subsidiary to the various things owing to worldly name in, as much as it produces the transcendental result
in the word adhvaryava. produced by the main sacrificial action in its totality.
3) Prayogavidhi (injunction of performance) - The 2) Arthakrama (order by sense) - This is the order
injunction which conveys the speediness is the determined by the object. For instance, ‘
injunction of performance. It consists of the    ‘He performs an Agnihotra and cooks
performance of the main action with all its subordinate yavagu. Though yavagu happens to be last in the above
details without causing any delay. For this purpose text, yet as its cooking is indispensable for the
there is an order of details that constitute the performance of Agnihotra, it will be cooked first.
performance of the main action. When the two things 3) Pahakrama (order by text) - When the order of the
are being performed with delay, there can be no use of execution of things is governed by their order in the
the expression of their having been performed together text, it is called Pahakrama. It is of two kinds. It is
in the form. The absence of delay results when a fixed either governed by the text of the mantras or by the
order is resorted. Thus the injunction that lays down text of brahmanas. For instance, the offerings to Agni
the order of subsidiaries is the injunction of and Agnisoma are governed by the order of their
performance. Here, the order means a particular kind respective presenting (yajya) and invoking (anuvakya)
which takes the form of state of one thing being first verses. The mantrapatha predominates over the
and the other later or the relation of prior and posterior. brahmana texts.
It is of six kinds, viz., 4) Sthanakrama (order of position) - Position means
presentation. When a thing is transposed from its
1) Sruti (direct statement) - It is the order determined
proper place by reasons of its being preceded by
by a direct text. It is of two kinds, viz., kevalakramapara another thing which is followed by another, this
(intimating mere order) and kramavisistapadarthapara transposition of the order is called Sthanakrama. In
(intimating things particularized by that order). Here, the Jyotistoma there are three animal sacrifices, viz.,
the example ‘   ‘Having prepared the Agnisomiya, Savaniya and Anubandhya in their order.
grassbrush (vedah), he prepare alter (vedih) intimates But in the Sadyaskra which is the modified sacrifice of
the mere order. But the text, ‘ , ‘The the Jyotistoma the Savaniya, Agnisomiya and
first draught is for the vasat maker’ intimates a matter Anubandhya animal sacrifices are performed, because
qualified by order. This direct statement is strong after drinking of the Asvina cup the Savaniya animal
consideration of other means of proof, since they sacrifice presents itself first.
obtain the status of authority to determine the order 5) Mukhyakrama (order by principal) - It is the
through the supposition of a direct statement. sequence of subordinate parts according to the order
in the principal. In this, the order of details in the action on an occasion (nimitta) like the burning by fire,
subordinate parts is governed by that of the principal states that ownership of the fruit in the form of the
of which the subsidiaries are the subordinate parts. destruction of sin to be produced from that action.
For instance, when ghee is left after the prayaja (pre- Similarly in the case of obligatory (nitya) rite, like ‘
sacrifice) offering, it will be first offered to Agni and , ‘Day by day one should wait upon the
then to Indra, because the agneya is prior to aindra twilight’, this intimates that the avoidance of sin to be
oblations. produced from the waiting upon of the twilight, belongs
6) Pravrttikrama (order by procedure) - This is the to him who is pure and leads his life at the times
order of a procedure which once begun will apply to enjoined.
others as well. For instance, in the Prajapatya sacrifice The ownership or right of the fruit which belongs
several animals are sacrificed. One can choose one to him who is particularized by the qualification and
animal at random and perform certain ceremonies on that qualification which is found in injunctory sentences
it. The order in which the ceremonies are performed as a distinguishing attribute of the man. For instance,
on the first animal will govern the order of ceremonies in the case of a rite is under taken with some specific
on the rest of the animals.
desire, desire of the fruit is qualification. In the same
4) Adhikaravidhi (injunction of qualification) - This is way, in the case of an occasional rite, the determination
the injunction which intimates the right of the fruit to of the occasion and in the case of an obligatory such
be produced by the action. For instance, ‘, as the waiting upon twilight, leading a life, pure and the
‘One who desirous of heaven should perform a times enjoined.
sacrifice’. This injunction creates a right in every person
to perform a sacrifice, provided, he is desirous of Mantra (sacred formula) - Sacred formulae are those,
heaven. This injunction lays down a sacrifice with a that call to memory, matters connected with sacrificial
view to heaven, conveys that he is desirous of heaven performance and their authority arises from their
becomes the enjoyer of the fruit to be produced by character of being the reminders of matters of that
the sacrifice. In occasional condition, for instance, nature. Therefore their recitation should not be
‘ ‘The considered for the purpose of an unseen result. It should
keeper of the fire (ahitagnih), whose house fire might not be said that recitation of formulae is useless, because
burn, should offer a cake prepared in eight potsherds the visible fruit i.e., the recollection of matters is
to the devouring (ksamavat) fire’, this lays down an possible in other way also. For this, we have resort to
an injunction of restriction, viz., the reminding should or the injunction which establishes a matter, which is
be affected by sacred formulae alone. not established in the alternative is an injunction of
There is a well known verse which gives another restrictive. For instance, ‘, He thrashes the
rice-grains. Rice-grains thrashed by a pestle in a mortar
division of injunction
to remove its husk. Husk can be removed from the
  rice-grains by many other means, for instance, by
  peeling it off from the rice-grains, but the particular
“A new injunction takes place in the case of mode, that of thrashing has been laid down by the text
something absolutely non-established. An injunction out of many other modes. This kind of restrictive text
of restriction is found when a matter is not established is called as niyama.
as an alternative. When the establishment is there and 3) Parisankhyavidhi (injunction of exclusion) - When
elsewhere simultaneously it is declared to be an both alternatives are simultaneously established, the
injunction of exclusion.” injunction which aims at another one (para) excluding
one of them (itara) is the injunction of exclusion. For
1) Apurvavidhi (a new injunction) - When a text lays
instance, ‘, ‘Five five-nailed animals should
down a new injunction for the attainment object which
be eaten’. This sentence does not aim that laying down
one cannot know by any other means, it is said as
the eating of five five-nailed animals, because such
Apurvavidhi. For instance, ‘ , ‘One who eating is established by natural appetite. This injunction
is desirous of heaven, should perform sacrifice’. Here, does not aim at restriction, because of the simultaneous
in this injunction a new thing is laid down, viz., the obtainment and there is non-obtainment in alternative.
attainment of heaven which is to be obtained by Hence this injunction aims at laying down an abstention
performing a sacrifice and it is known the this text from the eating of animals other than the five five-nailed
only, not by any other means. It should be noted that animals. Thus it becomes an injunction of exclusion.
the apurvavidhi mentioned here is the same as the vidhi
or pradhanavidhi, because it enjoins a matter which It is of two kinds, viz., srauti (directly expressed)
and laksaniki (implied). The first is directly stated by
was not known before. It enjoins a matter for the first
some text  , ‘Here only they insert new
time.
words’. Here we have directly expressed of laudatory
2) Niyamavidhi (restrictive injunction) - When an stanzas other than the Pavamana. The, ‘Five five-nailed
injunction lays down one of the modes for doing a animals to be eaten’ is an example of implied injunction
thing out of many it is said to be a restrictive injunction of exclusion.
This Parisankhya has three defects as is said in the . One who desirous of cattle should sacrifice
following verse with Udbhid. Here, Udbhid is the name of particular
  sacrifice and is, therefore, proper noun. If we resort to
  an indication of possession () then the text
should be read as Udbhidvata instead of Udbhida and
On account of abandonment of the eating of five five
nailed animals which is directly stated (srutahani), on interpret as a sacrifice in which the Udbhid is used. It
account of the supposition of the absention from the will be an attempt to convert a simple sentence into
eating of animals other than five nailed animals which two compound sentences or one complex sentence.
is not directly stated (asrutarthaprakalpana) and on Then it will be a mistake which is called as Vakyabheda
account of the annulement of the eating of animals other or split of sentence which is serious.
than five nailed, which eating is established. Thus The second class of a noun arises from the fear of
Parisankhya has three defects by reason of losing sight split of sentence. For instance, ‘ ‘One
of the direct sense and putting an inferred interpretation who is desirous of cattle should perform Chitra
of its own and rejecting that which is assumed. Among sacrifice. It does not indicate the material used in the
these first two are stationed in word and last one is
sacrifice as there is a passage.  
stationed in sense.
 ‘curd, honey, milk, ghee, parched
Namadheya (name) - Namadheya is a proper noun grain, water, rice are the mixed offering consecrated
but has a purpose in defining the matter enjoined by it. of Prajapati’. If one takes chitraya to mean as a
For instance, ‘One who is desirous of cattle should subordinate action, then it would lead the mistake of
sacrifice with Udbhid’. Here the word Udbhid is the split of sentence which should always be avoided.
name of sacrifice and by it defining of the matter to be Therefore, the Chitra is, the name of the sacrifice and
enjoined is effected. It is four kinds or it is understood
cannot be considered to be the subordinate materials
from four reasons: 1) from the fear of an indication of
used, for the fear of split of sentence.
possession (), 2) from the fear of split
of sentence (), 3) from a scriptural passage Tatprakhya is the third class of noun. It is a
declaratory of it () and 4) from comparison conventional name given to a particular sacrifice, the
or representation with it (). description of which is given elsewhere in a separate
The first is a proper noun arising from the fear of treatise. For instance, “  “He performs
an indication of possession. For instance, ‘ Agnihotra”. Agnihotra is a name given to sacrifice
conventionally, the description of which is given opposite of instigation, that forms the sense of optative.
elsewhere. Thus, on hearing a prohibitory sentence one apprehends
Tadvyapadesa is the name given to a sacrifice by determent of the form of an activity favourable to
reason of its comparison to another from which it abstention from prohibited actions in the form, “This
derives it’s name. For instance, “  removes me away”. Therefore, in the place of a
sentence of prohibition determent alone is the sense of
“One who desirous of practicing hostile magic should
the sentence.
sacrifice with the Syena or falcon”. Syena is the name
of the sacrifice and it does not denote the material of It is of two kinds, viz., Paryudasa and
the sacrifice. It is performed to destroy one’s enemy Pratisedha. There is a famous verse, showing the
is called after a hawk, because a sacrificer kills his difference between these two -
enemy like a hawk which pounces upon the birds and 
kills them.   
“When the negative participle is connected with the
Nishedha (prohibition) - It is a negative precept just
purvapada (previous clause i.e. meaning of the root),
as vidhi (injunction) is a positive or affirmative precept.
it is Paryudasa and when negative participle is
Prohibitory sentences have definite purpose, just connected with the uttarapada (the last clause i.e. the
because they effect men’s turning away from actions verb) it is Pratisedha. For instance, 
which are cause of evils or undesirable effects. For 
instance, “        “One should not eat
poisoned meat”. Thus, it is preventing a man from “One should not see the rising Sun… This is a vow”.
doing a thing which is injurious or disadvantageous to When a man has taken a vow, then he is bound to
him. This is the nature of negative that it conveys the observe the negative rule. This is the example of
opposite of the sense of the word which is used along Paryudasa. This Paryudasa is of two kinds, viz., 1)
with it. For instance, ‘a jar exists not’, the negative Where a meaning of root is construed with negative
which is used along with the word i.e., ‘exists’ conveys participle as in just cited example.
the non-existence of the jar, which is opposite to the 2) Where a noun is construed with negative participle
existence of the jar. Similarly, the negative, used along as in     “He utters ‘ye
with the optative, conveys the determent which is the yajamahe’ in all sacrifices but not in after sacrifices”.
Pratisedha is the negative precept of general On contradiction there is a state of quality and on
applicability. For instance,   , “One comprehension it would be a repetition. When there is
should not eat poisoned flesh”. Thus it can be said absence of both then the real state of affairs.
that when the negative precept is of general applicability, When the statement of the text is contradictory to
it is Pratisedha, but when it is of special applicability it the existing state of affair and means proof, then it is
is Paryudasa. gunavada. For instance,   “The sun is
Arthavada (explanatory passage) - An arthavada is a the sacrificial post”. Here, the Sun cannot be a sacrificial
sentence which aims at either the praise or blame. It post as it contradicts the sense of perception and against
ultimately leads to a matter with a purpose by indication. the real state of facts.
It has no purpose or usefulness of its own sense and When the statement of the text which is keeping
therefore, it conveys by indication the praise or blame with the existing state of facts, then it is anuavada. For
of a matter to be enjoined. It is of two kinds, viz., example,  “Fire is an antidote of cold”
complementary to injunction and complimentary to Here, the fire is said to be a protector from cold. It is a
prohibition. For instance,  “Vayu fact that one can verify this by his senses. Therefore it
is the swiftest deity” is complimentary to injunction is anuavada.
   “One who is desirous of When a statement of a text which is neither against
prosperity, should immolate a white animal in honour the state of facts nor is it in conformity with it is
of Vayu”. similarly, in the case of prohibition,  bhutarthavada. For example,  
 “silver should not be given on the grass”, “Indra uplifted his thunderbolt against the existing facts
he howled, since he howled, there to Rudra belongs nor is it provable by any means proof. Thus, it is a
the character of howler” which is complimentary to statement of facts which happened in the past and is
the prohibition, . Again called bhutarthavada.
it is classified into three divisions, viz., Gunavada,
Anuvada and Bhutarthavada. The following verse
explains the three divisions of Arthavada.
* * *
  
  
Chapter 5 abstract, which is undefined, similar to the cognition

Pramanas of the infant or the dumb, arising purely out of the
(Means of valid cognitions) object by itself and that time neither any specialization
nor a generalization is recognized; what is cognized is
Valid cognition has been classified by Mimamsakas only theobject, the substratum. The determinate
into six, viz., pratyaksa (perception), anumana cognition is such, if non-determination cognition is
(inference), sabda (verbal cognition), upamana followed by fuller perception of the thing as having
(analogy), arthapatti (presumption) and abhava certain qualifications, such as; belonging to a certain
(nonexistence). community or universal bearing a certain name and so
Pratyaksa (sense-perception) - According to Jaimini, forth.
sense-perception is that cognition when there is a Anumana (inference) - As far as the inference is
contact of the sense organs with their respective concerned, Mimamsakas say that when perception of
objectives. But Sabara says, that cognition by a person one factor of a well recognized relationship leads to
which appears when there is a contact of the sense the cognition of other factor of that relationship, the
organs is senseperception. latter is not in contact with the persons sense organs;
this second cognition is what is called as anumana
Sense-perception is not the means of knowing
(inference). This is of two kinds, viz., based upon a
Dharma, because it is that cognition which arises when
directly perceived relationship and based upon a
sense organs are in contact with the object cognized. generalized relationship.
Dharma, however, is something that is yet to come
and it does not exist at the time of cognition. The Among these, an example of former is that
perception is apprehending of an object that actually cognition of fire follows from the cognition of smoke.
present and not one what is not present at the time of This is based upon the invariable concomitance of
smoke and fire, directly perceived in kitchen. Next, an
cognition. Therefore sense-perception is not a means
example of latter kind of inference is that when the
of knowing Dharma.
Sun changes his position, we infer on the ground of
Sense-perception is of two kinds, viz., nirvikalpaka, our experience, that ‘the sun is moving’ in the case of
the non-determinate and savikalpaka, the determinate. Devadatta, it is only after the move that he changes his
Non-determinate is as follows - first of all, there is a position. This experience leads to the generalized
cognition in the shape of mere observation in the premises that ‘whenever an object changes its position,
it moves’ and it is on this generalized premise that the a cow’ then it is commonly known as ‘analogy’. This
inference of the Sun’s movement is based. is to say that the observer already knows a certain
Sabda (verbal cognition) - Sabara defines as Sastra object (the cow) then on going to the forest he sees
which means cognizing the object not in contact with another animal already known to him and afterwards
the senses which follows from the verbal cognition. there is a recall of formerly perceived cow which he
cognizes now as similar to the before his eyes. Then,
According to Kumarila, here in the definition, ‘Sabda’
it forms the objective of analogical cognition is the
stands for the Vedic or scriptural word and ‘artha’ for
similarity as qualified by the previously known animal.
Dharma and Adharma which forms the subject matter
Here, similarity is perceived while the cow is
of scripture. Kumarila divides this into two classes,
remembered, yet the two together, i.e. the cow and
viz., paurusheya (human origin) and apaurusheya (non-
similar to the seen animal are not cognized either by
human origin). Under the first category, words are
perception or by remembrance. Therefore, for the
included all words uttered by trustworthy persons while
cognition of two together, there is a need of analogy
in the Second category, words are included of the Veda.
as distinct means of cognition.
Both of them are valid, since only ground of the
invalidity of a word lies in the fact of its emanating Arthapatti (presumption) - It consists in presuming
from an untrust worthy source and this ground is as of something not seen on the ground that a fact already
absent in the words of the trustworthy persons and in perceived or heard would not be possible without that
that of the words of the Veda. It is a distinct means of presumption. For instance, it is found that Devadatta
cognition. Bauddhas and Vaisesikas have included the who is alive is not in the house and this absence in the
verbal cognition under inference. But Mimamsakas do house leads to the presumption that he is somewhere
not accept it, since it does not fulfill three conditions outside the house, as without this the fact of he is
which are essential in inferential process and hence it being alive and not in the house could not be explained.
is distinct from inference, like sense-perception. Kumarila classifies this presumption into six. They are
as follows:
Upamana (analogy) - Analogy also brings about the
1) Presumption based on perception, e.g., burning
cognition of things not in contact with the senses. For
capacity in fire, which is based upon the perceived
instance, the sight of the gayal brings about the
fact that it burns.
remembrance of the cow as being similar to the gayal.
To explain, being asked by the town people, like, ‘what 2) Presumption based on inference, e.g., we have in
is gayal’? The forester answers that ‘a gayal is just like the presuming of the moving capacity in the Sun, which
is based upon an inferred fact that the Sun moves from non-existence of certain thing. This ascertainment of
place to place. the non-existence of an object is got at is called abhava.
3) Presumption based on the verbal cognition, e.g., This non-apprehension is of four kinds, viz.,
when one hears the assertion, ‘Devadatta is fat and yet 1) Pragabhava (previous absence) e.g. the absence of
he eats not during the day’, he is led to the presumption the curd in the milk.
that the man eats at night.
4) Presumption based on the analogy, e.g., we have 2) Pradhvansabhava (absence after destruction) for e.g.
in the presuming of the cognisability of the cow by the the absence of milk in the curd.
cognition born of the similarity between the cow and
3) Anyonyabhava (mutual absence) e.g. the absence
the gayal.
of cow in the horse.
5) Presumption based on the presumption: It is found
4) Atyantabhava (absolute absence) e.g. the absence
in the cognition of the denotative potency of the word
of horns on the head of hare.
through presumption. The well known fact that it
denotes certain things and on the basis said presumed
denotative potency which cannot be otherwise
explained, we presume the eternality of word.
* * *
6) Presumption based on non-apprehension: In the
case, where the non-apprehension of Devadatta leads
to the presumption of his being outside.
Abhava (non-apprehension) - According to Sabara
abhava stands for the non-operation of the five means
of the cognition and it is what brings about the cognition
that ‘it does not exist’ in regard to the things not in
contact with the senses. This is explained by Kumarila
that in the case of an object where the other means of
cognition do not function towards the comprehension
of the existence of that object we have the notion of
Chapter 6 forgotten as the result of the disappearance of the

Main principles of Mimamsa builder etc. either due to the disruption of his country
or the extinction of his family. However, in the case of
1) Sabdanityatva (eternality of word) - According to words and their meanings, there is no total
Mimamsakas word is eternal, the relation between word disappearance of persons making use of them. If there
and its meaning is also eternal. Jaimini says that the
is a person who created the relation and started its
relation of the word and its denotation is inborn,
use, he would have been remembered at the time of its
instruction is the means of knowing it (Dharma), and it
using the word. A certain usage becomes possible only
is infallible regarding all that is imperceptible, it is valid
when there is an agreement between the creator and
means of knowledge as it is independent. Sabara asserts
adopter of the usage. For instance, Panini is the
that the relation between the word and its meaning does
not originate from any human being. The notion derived originator of the relation between the technical term
from Vedic injunction must be right. However, the and the letters at-aic denoted by it. A person making
notion derived from the words of human beings, there use of words independently of Panini as authoritative,
might be doubts regarding its validity since the assertion could never apprehend the word Vrddhi standing for
is dependent for its validity upon things extraneous to those respective letters. One who is able to understand
itself. In the case of notion derived from the injunction the relation between the words and their usager in Panini
is not of a doubtful character, such as, ‘this may or and Pingala and so on, would surely remember the
may not be so’, despite any other time or place or any creator of those works. If there is a creator of the
other circumstance. relation between the words and their denotations in the
Veda, persons making use of them would surely
This relation could never have been created by a
remember him. However, it is not so. Thus it follows
human being, because it follows from the fact that there
that no person has created the relations of words and
could not have been any person to create the relations.
then for the purpose of making use of them, composed
He cannot be admitted, otherwise he would have been
the Vedas.
cognized by sense-perception and the rest. Even if he
had existed a long back, it would not be impossible to 2) Vedapaurusheyatva (being the status of non-human
remember him. In the case of such things as the origin of the Veda) - The main thesis of the
Himalaya mountain and like it would not be possible Mimamsakas is that the Veda is a reliable source of
to forget the creator. In the cases, such as, the builder knowing Dharma and that it is not the creation of a
of a wall or a creator of a garden etc., the creator is human being. If there existed any author or the
composer of the Veda, he should certainly have been If it be said that in the same way, the Bharata etc.
remembered through the long tradition. There is an can be shown to be of non-human origin, no; because
unbroken tradition of the text among the students of there is very firm of tradition of authorship. Again, in
the Veda and there is no such presumption of an author some Vedic passages the human origin of the Vedas is
of the Veda justifiable. People might call a text by the declared, like,
name of one who is not the author at all. The names
like, Kathaka, Kalapaka etc. cited indicate not the  
authorship but they are mere expounders of those    etc.
sections of the Veda. As a matter of fact, we do not ‘From his face the Vedas proceeded’, ‘The Rigveda
know of any author of the Veda, if there had been any was born from the fire’, ‘the Yajurveda from the wind’,
author, he would have been surely known. There is a the Samaveda from the Sun’, ‘From that sacrifice of
syllogism regarding the human origin of the Veda, like,
all oblation the Rks and the Samans were born’ and so
    ‘The Vedic
sentences are of human origin, because they are on. The assertion of the Mimamsakas is indeed these
sentences, like the sentences of the Bharata etc’. To passages are contradictory to one another and their
this, answer is that ‘because there are extraneous content sublated by other means of valid knowledge
adjuncts, because there is opposition to the articular as in the case of ‘The sun is sacrificial post’, etc. these
and to counter probans, being sentences’ is not are accepted as praises. So long as explanatory
instrumental to the establishment of the human origin passages continue to exist in the Veda, there can be no
of the Vedas. It is said by Kumarila, assumption of any other ground. Thus, the Veda is
not a work of any personal author and being thus, they

are free from defects that are likely to be caused due
   to the authorship. The Veda must be regarded as the
The study of the Veda is always preceded by its study only source of knowledge which is infallible in its self
by one’s teacher, because it is mentioned by the sufficient validity.
expression ‘Vedic study’ like Vedic study of the present
day’. Similarly, there are counter arguments, like 3) Moksha (Final deliverance) - The concept of
      ‘The Moksha cannot be found in the Jaimini Sutras or in the
time is not devoid of the Vedas, because it is time, like Sabara’s bhashya. This concept is developed by
the well-known time’. Kumarila and others. It is explained like,
  the expiatory rites; whose karmans that have begun to
 take effect are exhausted through the experience of
happiness and misery, who is endowed with
“When there is an absolute rooting out of misery, the brahmacharya and subsidiaries like calmness and
experience mentally of the happiness that already existed equanimity; who betakes himself a respectful inquiry
in the soul is said to be Moksha (mukti) by the followers into the soul along the path declared in the Vedanta, by
of Kumarila”. him is immediately accomplished final release which
Now, the question arises that if this bliss be manifests the eternal bliss.
certainly inherent in the soul even in the state of 4) Svatah-pramanya (self-validity) - Self-validity,
transmigration, then how it has not been experienced? according to Mimamsa philosophy is that the rise of
Answer for this is, that it is due to the non-existence of knowledge is never perceived by us to be dependent
the cause of its experience. Mind assisted by the of an object and all objective facts are dependent on it
absolute destruction of the body, the senses etc. is the for its revelation. This is known as self-validity of
means to the experience. Then what is the proof for knowledge in its production (utpatti). As soon as
the existence of such a bliss? It is the scripture itself. knowledge is produced, objects are revealed and there
 ‘Bliss is the nature is no link between the rise of knowledge and the
of Brahman and that is manifested at the stage of final revelation of objects on which knowledge depends for
deliverance’. It can be explained, like producing its action. Thus knowledge is not only
independent in its origin but in its own action.
 In some cases of illusory perception, a later
  perception or cognition carries with it the notion that
   our original knowledge is invalid. Thus the invalidity
  of knowledge may appear by later experience and then
we reject the first knowledge. This is what Mimamsa
  philosophy says that the invalidity may be derived from
   later experience.
“One who properly withdraws his mind from the Thus the validity of knowledge certified at moment
prohibited and optional rituals, whose sins are destroyed of its production need not be doubted unnecessarily
by the obligatory and the occasioned rituals and by even after enquiry. All knowledge except memory is
regarded as valid by itself, unless it is shown to be Thus established conclusion is; validity is inherent
invalid. Memory is excluded because the phenomenon and invalidity is extraneous.
of memory depends upon previous experience and
5) Atman (soul) - The Mimamsa philosophy
cannot be regarded as arising independently by itself.
emphasizes that the Veda speaks of the ‘Sacrificer’
The origin of the doctrine of self-validity can be going to heaven after death; the body perishes after
found in the definition of Dharma-Sabara, clearly refers death; hence the entity that is spoken of as ‘proceeding
to the self-validity of the Veda, such as, the idea brought to heaven’. It must be something other than the
about by the assertion, “Desiring heaven one should perishable body. This entity is the ‘soul’.
perform sacrifices” is not an uncertain one. Infact, the
idea is definitely certain that heaven should follow and This soul is distinct from the body, the sense organs
when it is cognized for certain, it cannot be false. It is and the buddhi. It is imperishable eternal, the real doer
never found to be checked by any other cognition at of action, agent of acts and the experiencer of their
anytime or in regard to any person or under any results and reactions. Soul is self-luminous and
circumstances or at any place. Therefore it follows omnipresent (all-pervading) since we find it functioning
that it is not false or wrong. everywhere. It is not qualified by any limitations of
That cognition alone is false which having appeared time and place. It is the soul that passes through the
becomes checked by the notion, ‘such is not the actual experience of pleasure, pain etc. without which
case’. In the assertion of ordinary men, if it emanates pleasure, pain etc. cannot become manifest in a body.
from a trustworthy person or if it pertains to something Such manifest requires mind-contact and the mind
that is directly perceived by the senses, it must be true. subsists the body. Even it is all-pervading, it cannot
On the contrary, if it pertains to something that cannot experience what is occurring in the body of another
be perceived directly by the senses, this is unreliable. personality, since experience is always due to Karma
However, in the case of the Veda, there is no room for of the particular personality. Therefore the experience
illusion or wrong knowledge as there is no human of one personality cannot from the experience of
agency involved, while in the case of human instructors, another. This soul is distinct from each body and is
there is always chance of mistakes, illusions and capable of ensouling several bodies.
ignorance. On the other hand, in the case of teachings
emanating from human sources is not always 6) Apurva (potency) - According to Mimamsa, there
compatible with truth. But in the case of Vedic assertion, is an apurva, since action is enjoined, in such injunctions
there is nothing to indicate its falsity. as ‘Desiring Heaven, one should perform sacrifice’.
In the absence of Apurva, such an injunction would be 4) Angapurva (Partial potency) - Each of these
meaningless since the sacrifice itself is perishable. If sacrifices is made up of a number of minor acts, each
the sacrifice is to perish without bringing something of which brings about an apurva of its own which helps
into existence then the result in the shape of heaven the main sacrifice in bringing about its result.
could never come about. Thus, established conclusion
In Kumarila’s view, Apurva means
is that there must be something which is called apurva
which continues to exist and operate till the final result. 
It must be said that the sacrifice brings about the final  
result through the agency of the power called apurva.
“Apurva is a potency in the Principal Action or in the
It is of four kinds, viz., The Phalapurva, the Agent which did not exist before the performance of
Samudayapurva, the Utpatyapurva and the Angapurva. that action and whose existence is proved by
1) The Phalapurva (Productive potency) - Which leads scriptures”. It means, before the performance, in the
to the result directly and as such is immediate cause of sacrifices there is an incapacity to lead any one to
the result. heaven, secondly, in Agent, there is an incapacity to
2) The Samudayapurva (Collective potency) - In the
lead the heaven, both these incapacities become set
Darsapurnamasa sacrifices, the three sacrifices are aside by the performance of sacrifice. The performance
performed on the moonless day from one group and produces a capacity or potency is named as Apurva.
the three are performed on full-moon day from another The proof for existence of such an apurva lies in
group. Each of these two groups occurring at different Presumption, since it is based upon the fact that without
point of times and therefore each group should have a which Vedic texts are inexplicable.
distinct apurva of its own, each of these two distinct The school of Prabhakara admits Niyoga
apurva is called Samudayapurva, which combine to (prompting) and considers it to be the import of a
produce Phalapurva. sentence. Injunctive sentence denotes is the Karya
3) The Utpatyapurva (Initial apurva) - The three apurvas (something to be effected). Niyogya (prompted person)
following from the each of three sacrifices constituting is directed to function that Karya or niyoga continues
the first group of Darsapurnamasa and the three to exist till the attainment of heaven from the sacrifice.
following from the three sacrifices constituting the 7) Svarga (Heaven) - According to Mimamsakas, svarga
second group. means, it stands for a form of happiness and it is only
in its figurative sense, it applies to thing or substance study comes into relation as the thing to be achieved
that causes happiness. This happiness is totally free and the knowledge of praiseworthiness conveyed by
from all touch of pain. It is described as happiness is the arthavadas comes into relation as itikartavyata.
not mere absence of pain since in the absence of pain
 is the activity of a person referring to an
we feel that there is no pain. Thus this feeling is negative
action engendered by the desire for some object and it
one. On the other hand, when we feel happy and feel
is expressed by the factor of verbality. It also requires
pleasure, we are conscious of something positive which
is belonging to soul. It is also said like -
and The fruit consisting of heaven
and others is construed as sadhya, sacrifice and others
  are construed as sadhana and the group of subsidiary
    acts as fore-sacrifices is construed as itikartavyata.
8) Bhavana (creative energy) - This bhavana is The Vedic hymns have a capacity to impose an
explained as  Bhavana action on the persons and the capacity of person which
means that activity of a productive agent (bhavayita) is reactive and internal. The former is called pravartana
which is favorable to the production of that which is and the latter is called pravrtti of a person to some
to come into existence. This is two fold, viz., action. Both are known by common term Bhavana,
Sabdibhavana (verbal creative energy) and arthibhavana because of their leading to the same result. Pravartana
(actual creative energy). Sabdibhavana is a particular leads to the pravrtti in a sacrifice and pravrtti in a
activity of a productive agent which is favorable to a sacrifice leads to the desired result from the sacrifice.
man’s exertion and it is expressed by the optative 9) Abhihitanvayavada - According to this theory,
element of the suffix. On hearing an optative form one words convey only the individual word meanings which
invariably understands. This impels me to an action; in their turn come to be mutually related. Even if the
this person possesses an activity which is favorable to meanings of individual words can be comprehended
my exertion. This verbal creative energy requires three separately, it results from the association of word
factors, viz.,  (what is to be achieved),  (by meanings constituting the sentence. It clearly says that
what instrument it is to be achieved) and  the meanings of all words are responsible for the total
(how it is to be achieved). The arthibhavana represented meaning of a sentence. When we hear a sentence first
by persons inclination comes into relation as the thing we understand the meanings of words one after another.
to be achieved; the optative suffix etc. known through Then by way of putting together all padarthas (word
meanings) in accordance with the three factors, viz., of the offerings. The deities are only Beings to whom
 (expectancy),  (compatibility) and  offerings are made. Either Jaimini or Sabara do not
(contiguity). We recognize the construed meaning of refer to god. Prabhakara and Kumarila deny the
the whole sentence. Parthasarathi Misra says that the creatorship of God. According to Mimamsa word is
meanings of the words convey the meaning of the eternal, meaning of it is also eternal. Jaimini had
sentence only by secondary implication. Bhaa school established the doctrine that the relation of word and
has established this theory. its meaning is eternal. Hence there is no creator of the
10) Anvitabhidhanavada - According to this theory a Vedas since they are called as apauruseya (non-human
word expresses its meaning as connected with some origin). If there is an author or the composer of the
acts to be done (karya). The words in a sentence Veda, he would have been remembered like Panini,
convey their meanings in relation to the meaning of Kalidasa and so on. In the same way, Mimamsakas
other words. Thus, it is well established in the school denied the God as creator of this world. According to
of Prabhakara that the words of a sentence have the Mimamsa, there is neither beginning nor an end to the
double function of giving their individual as well as the world. If god is a creator of the world, he must have a
construed meaning. It clearly says that a word has no body. He cannot have desire to create without a body,
separate existence and it always conveys a complete since desire is produced by the contact of soul with
meaning only in relation with other words. Every word manas and senseorgans. If God has no body he could
expresses its meaning as connected with an action not exert his will on the atoms. If he does not act on
which is denoted by other word and these cumulative the unconscious atoms, they could not follow his will.
expressions of all the words in a sentence are called The atoms cannot combine with one another and form
Anvitabhidhana. For example, in ‘gamanaya’ (bring the various substances under the guidance of will of God.
cow) does not mean properly ‘gotva’ (cowness). But Similarly they cannot separate from one another and
it does mean this cow is certainly to be brought, and bring about destruction of world under the guidance
bring is certainly related to the cow. of devine will.
11) God - Mimamsakas do not accept the god as Further, God has no motive for creating the world.
creator, preserver and destroyer of the world. Mimamsa Compassion for living creatures could not be his
teaches ritualistic morality and religion, and enjoins the motive, since there were no living beings before
performance of sacrifices to Gods. Gods are not creation, for whom he could feel compassion.
objects of worship and they do not give the rewards Moreover, if he moved by compassion to create the
world, he would have created only happy beings. But Bibliography

the world is full of suffering and misery. If he cannot
create a world free from evil, he is not omnipotent. If A. Original Texts
he is so, he would have certainly created a world free
1) Arthasangrahah, with the Sanskrit commentary
from evil. If he created the world without a motive,
Arthaloka by Panditaraja Pattabhiram Shastri,
then he is not intelligent. Even a fool does not act without
a motive. If God created the world or amusement Ed.Vachaspati Upadhaya, Chowkhamba Orientaliya,
(krida) he would not be happy and contended and Varanasi, 1977.
creation would involve him in wearisome toil. 2) Manameyodaya of Narayana, Ed. C.K. Raja and
Thus, earlier Mimamsakas did not believe in the S.S. Suryanarayana Sastri, The Adyar Library and
creatorship of God and regarded the world as self- Research Centre, Madras, 1975, Reprint.
existent and self evolving. However, later Mimamsakas 3) Mimamsa-sabara-bhasyam, with the commentary
like Laugakshi Bhaskara and Apadeva believe that he Arsamata vimarsini (Hindi), Ed. Yudhisthira
is the cause for final liberation. Narayana in Mimamsaka, vol. 1-6, Ramlal Kapur Trust, Bahalgarh,
Manameyodaya says that we accept the God who is 1987, 2nd edition.
said in the Veda. Even the Kumarila, who refuted the
creatorship of God in the Slovarttika, salute God in B. Modern Texts
the opening verse of the same. By all these, one may 1) Bhat Shripad, Position of Mimamsa in Pre-Jaimini
say that Mimamsakas accept God but not as creator, Period, Tilak Maharashtra Vidyapeeth, Pune, 2007.
preserver and destroyer.
2) Gajendragadkar A.B. amd Karmarkar R.D., The
Arthasangraha of Laugaksi Bhaskara, Motilal
Banarasidass, 1984 Reprint.
* * *
3) Garge D.V., Citations in Sabarabhasya Deccan
College Post-Graduate Research Institute, Poona, 1952.
4) Jha Ganganath, Purvamimamsa in its Sources,
Banaras Hindu University, Banaras, 1942.
5) Kane P.V., History of Dharmasastra Vol. V, Part
II, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune, 1962.
6) Musalgaonkar Gajanan Shastri, Mimamsadarsan

ka Vivecanatmaka Itihasa, Chowkhamba
Vidyabhavan, Varanasi, 1992.
7) Sinha Jadunath, A History of Indian Philosophy,
Vol. 1, Sinha Publishing House, Calcutta, 1956.
8) Sondal M.L., Mimamsa Sutras of Jaimini, Vol. 1-
2, Motilal Banarasidass, 1980 Reprint.
* * *

Introduction To Purvamimamsa System

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction To Purvamimamsa System

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction To Purvamimamsa System

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTRODUCTION TO

INTRODUCTION TO PURVAMIMAMSA SYSTEM FOREWORD

This book entitiled ‘Introduction to Purvamimamsa Preface

differences between Kumarila and Prabhakara schools, Contents Page No.

Chapter 6 Main principles of Mimamsa 62

‘Mimamsa’ had from the ancient times to the times of Chapter 2

In the Nirukta (chap. 7), there is an interesting Jaimini

padas according to Madhava’s reckoning. The word Chart B

meaning. It helps one to remember easily. A pada 1 8 4 10 20 42

Adhikarana-s and the pada-s

important figure of this period. He contributed to 3) Vadanaksatravali, which is also called

Chapter 3 6. Kumarila rejects inherence as an independent category

extrinsic (paratah pramanya), due to the knowledge of Chapter 4

Chapter 5 abstract, which is undefined, similar to the cognition

Chapter 6 forgotten as the result of the disappearance of the

world, he would have created only happy beings. But Bibliography

6) Musalgaonkar Gajanan Shastri, Mimamsadarsan

You might also like