Drsandeepjhaliver: Article updated with improved flow

2026-03-03T20:35:34Z

Article updated with improved flow

CleanupBot II: Removed empty portal template using script

2023-08-14T09:24:35Z

Removed empty portal template using script

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:54, 14 August 2023
Line 114:		Line 114:
	* http://www.ourkarnataka.com/books/saartha_book_review.htm		* http://www.ourkarnataka.com/books/saartha_book_review.htm

	~~{{Portal bar\|Hinduism\|Religion}}~~
	{{Hindudharma}}		{{Hindudharma}}
	{{Indian Philosophy}}		{{Indian Philosophy}}

>JJMC89 bot III: Merging :Category:Hindu philosophers to :Category:Hindu philosophers and theologians per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 June 6#Category:Hindu theologians

2021-06-16T01:25:47Z

Merging Category:Hindu philosophers to Category:Hindu philosophers and theologians per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 June 6#Category:Hindu theologians

New page

{{short description|Hindu philosopher and scholar}}
{{EngvarB|date=August 2014}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=August 2014}}
{{Infobox philosopher
|name = Kumārila Bhaṭṭa
|image =
|caption =
|birth_date =est. 700 AD
|known =
|philosophy = [[Mimansa]]
|honors =
|quote =
|footnotes = [[Hindu]] [[Indian philosophy|philosopher]]
}}
{{Hindu philosophy}}
'''{{IAST|Kumārila Bhaṭṭa}}''' ([[floruit|fl.]] roughly 700) was a [[Hindu]] philosopher and a scholar of [[Mimamsa]] school of philosophy from early [[medieval India]]. He is famous for many of his various theses on Mimamsa, such as ''Mimamsaslokavarttika''. Bhaṭṭa was a staunch believer in the supreme validity of Vedic injunction, a great champion of Pūrva-Mīmāṃsā and a confirmed ritualist.<ref name="sharma56">Sharma, pp. 5–6.</ref> The ''Varttika'' is mainly written as a subcommentary of Sabara's commentary on Jaimini's [[Purva Mimamsa Sutras]]. His philosophy is classified by some scholars as existential realism.<ref>Bhatt, p. 6.</ref>

Scholars differ as regards Kumārila Bhaṭṭa's views on a [[personal God]]. For example, Manikka Vachakar believed that Bhaṭṭa promoted a personal God<ref>''A History of Indian Philosophy'' By Surendranath Dasgupta. p. 156.</ref> ([[saguna brahman]]), which conflicts with the Mīmāṃsā school. In his ''Varttika'', Kumārila Bhaṭṭa goes to great lengths to argue against the theory of a creator God<ref>Bales, p. 198.</ref> and held that the actions enjoined in the Veda had definite results without an external interference of Deity.

Kumārila is also credited with the logical formulation of the Mimamsic belief that the Vedas are unauthored ([[apauruṣeyā]]). In particular, his defence against medieval [[Buddhism|Buddhist]] positions on Vedic rituals is noteworthy. This contributed to the [[decline of Buddhism in India]],<ref>Sheridan, p. 198-201</ref> because his lifetime coincides with the period in which Buddhism began to decline.<ref name="sharma56"/> Indeed, his dialectical success against Buddhists is confirmed by Buddhist historian [[Taranatha]], who reports that Kumārila defeated disciples of [[Buddhapālita]], [[Bhāviveka]], Dharmadasa, [[Dignāga]] and others.<ref>Arnold, p. 4.</ref> His work strongly influenced other schools of Indian philosophy,<ref>Bhatt, p. 3.</ref> with the exception that while Mimamsa considers the Upanishads to be subservient to the Vedas, the Vedanta school does not think so.

== Early life ==

The birthplace of Kumārila Bhatta is uncertain. According to the 16th-century Buddhist scholar [[Taranatha]], Kumārila was a native of [[South India]]. However, Anandagiri's ''[[Shankara Vijayam|Shankara-Vijaya]]'' states that Kumarila came from "the North" (''udagdeśāt''), and persecuted the Buddhists and the Jains in the South.<ref>{{cite book |author1=Kumārila Bhaṭṭa |author2=Peri Sarveswara Sharma |title=Anthology of Kumārilabhaṭṭa's Works |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xW5weaXy2jUC&pg=PA11 |year=1980 |publisher=Motilal Banarsidass |isbn=978-81-208-2084-5 |page=11 }}</ref>

Another theory is that he came from eastern India, specifically [[Kamarupa]] (present-day [[Assam]]). Sesa's ''Sarvasiddhanta-rahasya'' uses the eastern title [[Bhattacharya (surname)|Bhattacharya]] for him. His writings indicate that he was familiar with the production of [[Assam silk|silk]], which was common in present-day Assam.<ref>{{cite book |author=Biswanarayan Shastri |title=Mīmāṁsā philosophy & Kumārila Bhaṭṭa |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=K6TWAAAAMAAJ |year=1995 |publisher=Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan |page=76 }}</ref> Yet another theory is that he comes from [[Mithila (region)|Mithila]], which has similar culture to Bengal and Assam, and produced another scholar on the subject [[Mandana Misra]].

==Linguistics views==
Kumārila Bhaṭṭa and his followers in the Mīmāṃsā tradition known as ''{{IAST|Bhāṭṭas}}'' argued for a strongly [[Principle of compositionality|Compositional]] view of semantics called ''abhihitānvaya'' or "designation of what has been denoted." In this view, the meaning of a sentence was understood only after understanding first the meanings of individual words. Word referents were independent, complete objects, a view that is close to the [[Jerry Fodor|Fodor]]ian view of language, according to philosopher Daniel Arnold.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Arnold |first1=Daniel |title=Buddhists, Brahmins, and Belief: Epistemology in South Asian Philosophy of Religion |date=2005 |publisher=Columbia University Press |location=New York}}</ref> He also used several [[Tamil language|Tamil]] words in his works, including one of the earliest mention of the name ''Dravida'' in North Indian sources, found in his ''Tantravārttika''.<ref>[http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/samples/cam041/2003282070.pdf]</ref>

The above-mentioned view of sentence meaning was debated over some seven or eight centuries by the followers of [[Prabhākara]] school within Mīmāṃsā, who argued that words do not directly designate meaning. Rather, word meanings are understood as already connected with other words (''anvitābhidhāna'', anvita = connected; abhidhāna = denotation). This view was influenced by the [[holism|holistic]] arguments of [[Bhartṛhari]]'s {{IAST|[[sphoṭa]]}} theory.{{Citation needed|reason=this is not common knowledge and needs support|date=November 2018}} Essentially the Prābhākaras argued that sentence meanings are grasped directly, from perceptual and contextual cues, skipping the stage of grasping singly the individual word meanings,<ref name=Matilal>Matilal, p. 108.</ref> similar to the modern view of linguistic [[underspecification]], which relates to the [[Semantics#Dynamic turn in semantics|Dynamic Turn in Semantics]], that also opposes purely compositional approaches to sentence meaning.

==Criticism of Buddhism==
With the aim to prove the superiority of Vedic scripture, Kumārila Bhaṭṭa presented several novel arguments:

1. ''"Buddhist (or Jain) scripture could not be correct because it had several grammatical lapses."'' He specifically takes the Buddhist verse: ''''ime samkhada dhamma sambhavanti sakarana akarana vinassanti'''' (These phenomena arise when the cause is present and perish when the cause is absent). Thus he presents his argument:<ref name=Pollock>Pollock, p. 55.</ref>
<blockquote>
The scriptures of Buddhists and Jains are composed in overwhelmingly incorrect (asadhu) language, words of the Magadha or Dakshinatya languages, or even their dialects (tadopabhramsa). Therefore false compositions (asannibandhana), they cannot possibly be true knowledge (shastra) ... By contrast, the very form itself (the well-assembled language) of the Veda proves its authority to be independent and absolute.
</blockquote>2. Every extant school held some scripture to be correct. To show that the Veda was the only correct scripture, Kumārila ingeniously said that ''"the absence of an author would safeguard the Veda against all reproach"'' ([[apaurusheya]]).<ref name=Varttika>Jha, p. 31.</ref> There was ''"no way to prove any of the contents of Buddhist scriptures directly as wrong in spirit..."'', unless one challenges the legitimacy and eternal nature of the scripture itself. It is well known that the [[Pali Canon]] was composed after the [[Buddha]]'s [[parinirvana]]. Further, even if they were the Buddha's words, they were not eternal or unauthored like the Vedas.

3. The [[Sautrantika]] Buddhist school believed that the universe was momentary (kshanika). Kumārila said that this was absurd, given that the universe does not disappear every moment. No matter how small one would define the duration of a moment, one could divide the moment into infinitely further parts. Kumārila argues: ''"if the universe does not exist between moments, then in which of these moments does it exist?"'' Because a moment could be infinitesimally small, Bhaṭṭa argued that the Buddhist was claiming that the universe was non-existent.

4. The Determination of perception (pratyaksha pariccheda).<ref name=Taber>Taber, p??</ref>

Some scholars believe that Kumārila's understanding of [[Buddhist philosophy]] was far greater than that of any other non-Buddhist philosopher of his time.<ref name=Rani>Rani, p??</ref> However, see Taber 2010 for an alternate view.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Taber |first1=John |title=Kumārila's Buddhist |journal=Journal of Indian Philosophy |date=2010 |volume=38 |issue=3 |pages=279–296|doi=10.1007/s10781-010-9093-9 }}</ref>

According to [[Buton Rinchen Drub]], Kumārila spoke abusively towards his nephew, [[Dharmakīrti]], as he was taking his brahminical garments. This drove Dharmakīrti away, and resolving to vanquish all non-Buddhist heretics he took the robes of the Buddhist order instead.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Buton|first1=Rinchen drub|title=The History of Buddhism in India and Tibet|date=1931|translator=E. Obermiller|publisher=Harrossowitz|location=Heidelberg|page=152}}</ref>

==Legendary life==
{{More citations needed section|date=May 2012}}
According to legend, Kumārila went to study [[Buddhism]] at [[Nalanda]] (the largest 4th-century university in the world), with the aim of refuting Buddhist doctrine in favour of [[Historical Vedic religion|Vedic religion]]. He was expelled from the university when he protested against his teacher ([[Dharmakirti]]) ridiculing the Vedic rituals. Legend has it that even though he was thrown off of the university's tower, he survived with an eye injury. (Modern Mimamsa scholars and followers of Vedanta believe that this was because he imposed a condition on the infallibility of the Vedas thus encouraging the Hindu belief that one should not even doubt the infallibility of the Vedas.)

{{tone|date=January 2019}}

One medieval work on the life of [[Adi Sankara|Sankara]] (considered most accurate) claims that Sankara challenged Bhaṭṭa to a debate on his deathbed.<ref>'Madhaviya Sankara Digvijayam' by medieval Vijayanagara biographer Madhava, Sringeri Sharada Press</ref> Kumārila Bhaṭṭa could not debate Sankara and instead directed him to argue with his student [[Mandana Misra]] in [[Mahishmati|Mahiṣmati]]. He said:

:"You will find a home at whose gates there are a number of caged parrots discussing abstract topics like — 'Do the Vedas have self-validity or do they depend on some external authority for their validity? Are karmas capable of yielding their fruits directly, or do they require the intervention of God to do so? Is the world eternal, or is it a mere appearance?' Where you find the caged parrots discussing such abstruse philosophical problems, you will know that you have reached Maṇḍana's place."

Another work on Sankara's life, however, claims that Sankara implored Kumārila not to commit suicide. Another contradictory legend, however, says that Kumārila continued to live on with two wives and several students, one of whom was [[Prabhākara]]. According to this legend, Kumārila died in Varanasi at the age of 80.

==Works==
* ''Shlokavartika'' ("Exposition on the Verses", commentary on [[Shabara]]'s ''Commentary on Jaimini's ''Mimamsa Sutras, Bk. 1, Ch. 1) [https://archive.org/details/Shlokavartika.of.Kumaril.Bhatt]
* ''Tantravartika'' ("Exposition on the Sacred Sciences", commentary on Shabara's ''Commentary on Jaimini's ''Mimamsa Sutras, Bk. 1, Ch. 2–4 and Bks. 2–3) [https://archive.org/details/Tantra.Vartika.of.Kumarila.Bhatta]
* ''Tuptika'' ("Full Exposition" commentary on Shabara's ''Commentary on Jaimini's ''Mimamsa Sutras, Bks. 4–9) [https://archive.org/details/Tuptika.of.Kumaril.Bhatt]
* Kataoka, Kei, ''Kumarila on Truth, Omniscience and Killing. Part 1: A Critical Edition of Mimamasa-Slokavarttika ad 1.1.2 (Codanasutra). Part 2: An Annotated Translation of Mimamsa-Slokavarttika ad 1.1.2 (Codanasutra)'' (Wien, 2011) (Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-historischen Klasse, 814; Beiträge zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Asiens, 68).

==Notes==
{{reflist}}

==References==
*Arnold, Daniel Anderson. ''Buddhists, Brahmins, and Belief: Epistemology in South Asian Philosophy of Religion''. Columbia University Press, 2005. {{ISBN|978-0-231-13281-7}}.
*{{cite book|last=Bales|first=Eugene|title=A Ready Reference to Philosophy East and West|year=1987|publisher=University Press of America|url=https://archive.org/details/readyreferenceto0000bale|url-access=registration|page=[https://archive.org/details/readyreferenceto0000bale/page/201 201]|quote=Buddhist philosophy as presented in Mimamsa Sloka Vartika.|isbn=9780819166401}}
*Bhatt, Govardhan P. ''The Basic Ways of Knowing: An In-depth Study of Kumārila's Contribution to Indian Epistemology''. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass, 1989. {{ISBN|81-208-0580-1}}.
*{{cite book
| author = Kumarila Bhatta, Translated by Ganganatha Jha
| title = Slokavarttika
| publisher = The Asiatic Society, Calcutta
| year = 1985
}}
*{{cite book
| author = Bimal Krishna Matilal
| title = The word and the world: India's contribution to the study of language
| publisher = Oxford
| year = 1990
| author-link = Bimal Krishna Matilal
}}
*{{cite book
| author = Vijaya Rani
| title = Buddhist Philosophy as Presented in Mimamsa Sloka Varttika. 1st Ed
| publisher = Parimal Publications, Delhi ASIN B0006ECAEO
| year = 1982
}}
*{{cite book
| author = Sheldon Pollock
| title = The Language of the Gods in the World of Men – Sanskrit, Culture and Power in Premodern India
| publisher = University of California Press
| year = 2006
| author-link = Sheldon Pollock
}}
*{{cite book|last= Sharma |first=Peri Sarveswara |year=1980 |title=Anthology of Kumārilabhaṭṭa's Works |publisher=Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass}}
*Sheridan, Daniel P. "Kumarila Bhatta", in ''Great Thinkers of the Eastern World'', ed. Ian McGready, New York: Harper Collins, 1995. {{ISBN|0-06-270085-5}}
*{{cite book
| author = Translated and commentary by John Taber
| title = A Hindu Critique of Buddhist Epistemology
| publisher = Routledge
| ISBN = 978-0-415-33602-4
| year = Jan 2005
}}

==External links==
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20110517222149/http://www.sub.uni-goettingen.de/ebene_1/fiindolo/gretil/1_sanskr/6_sastra/3_phil/mimamsa/mimslovu.htm Text of Mimamsalokavarttika by Kumarila Bhatta] (in transliterated Sanskrit)
* https://web.archive.org/web/20070509144740/http://www.crvp.org/book/Series03/IIIB-4/introduction.htm
* http://www.ourkarnataka.com/books/saartha_book_review.htm

{{Portal bar|Hinduism|Religion}}
{{Hindudharma}}
{{Indian Philosophy}}
{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Kumarila Bhatta}}
[[Category:8th-century Indian philosophers]]
[[Category:Atheist philosophers]]
[[Category:Critics of Buddhism]]
[[Category:Hindu philosophers and theologians]]
[[Category:Indian Medieval linguists]]
[[Category:Indian Sanskrit scholars]]
[[Category:Medieval Sanskrit grammarians]]
[[Category:Scholars from Assam]]

Kumārila Bhaṭṭa - Revision history

Drsandeepjhaliver: Article updated with improved flow

CleanupBot II: Removed empty portal template using script

>JJMC89 bot III: Merging :Category:Hindu philosophers to :Category:Hindu philosophers and theologians per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 June 6#Category:Hindu theologians