UNIT 2 – MULTIDISCIPLINARY IKS

Aditi Misra Tyagi

The term ‘Indic Knowledge Systems’(IKS) is associated with the entire gamut of Indic thought
and education and spans across formal and informal traditions. The formal traditions are often
classified into 14 Vidyas and 64 Kalas and are mostly pursued in the traditional schools. The
corresponding subject matter in Contemporary Knowledge Systems (CKS) covers a variety of
areas that are today classified as Science, Engineering, Technology, Medicine, Performing Arts,
Creative Arts, Humanities, Management and Social Sciences. Today we have a large human
resource trained in the CKS University in various subjects but interested in applying it in the area
of IKS. In this chapter we will see a comparative exploration in the taxonomy of IKS and CKS.

2.1 Introduction

The taxonomy of Indic knowledge systems has evolved over millennia to accommodate a wide
variety of subjects with some broad equivalents to those we see in the contemporary university
system. However, the taxonomy of IKS exhibits notable differences from the current division we
are familiar with. The tree of IKS provides vital clues to the design philosophy of IKS and the
value system ensconced within it.

2.2 Taxonomy of IKS: Vidya & Kala

At its core there were only two kinds of subjects - the parā and aparā. The former is experiential
and leads to a direct experience of the highest states of bliss - Brahman. The latter devolves this
bliss into the material world and allows one to lead a life of material prosperity and happiness
while still keeping the experience of Brahman at the core. Quite often IKS explicitly mentions
only the aparā, while the parā is implicit. This aparā vidyā is further classified into the four Vedas
and the six vedāngas and four upāngas which we have already studied. Sometimes 4 upavedas or
auxiliary disciplines, 1 each for each of the 4 Vedas are also added to make the count eighteen.
The āyurveda from the ṛgveda, dhanurveda from the Yajur Veda, Gandharva Veda from
SāmaVeda, and Arthaśāstra from the Atharva Veda.

The kalās are largely skill-based, as against the oral nature of vidyas. The kalās are popularly
known to be 16 or 64 in number. The list of 64 Kalās varies from text to text. The most commonly
seen lists occur in the commentary of Srimadbhagavatam and śukranîti.

While the list of kalās themselves differ, they overlap significantly in their broad domains. The
commonly found topics in this list may be grouped under the following heads. It may be noticed
that many groups mirror the categories of vidyas.

● pākādi or āyurvedīya kalās – Culinary arts, Food and nutrition, preparation of medicinal
herbs. Under the sukraniti scheme, they are identified as part of the cluster of Ayurvedic
kalas

● dhanurvedīya kalās – Political / Military arts, strategies, physical training

● gāndharva kalās or Performing Arts: Music, Dance, instruments and their making

● Ālekhyādi / śilpādi kalās or Fine arts: Drawing, painting, sculpture, colouring, dyeing
● deśabhāṣā - kāvyādi kalās – Language, poetry and Word Play

● Gṛhālaṅkārādi kalās or Home decor: interior design and aesthetics (decoration of living
rooms, bedsteads, doorways and the like)

● Śarīrālaṅkārādi kalās or personal fashion: cosmetics and accessories (scents, garlands,

dyes, colours, embroidery), those related to jewellery(gems and ornamentation)

● abhiyāntrikī kalās - The Engineering disciplines

 yantra mātṛkā – creating tools, machines, manufacturing a wide variety of

implements from household goods to vehicles like boats and chariots
 takṣaṇa – Carpentry
 tarku - Spinning, weaving, textiles
 vāstu – Architecture, construction, town planning
 maṇi ratnādi – Gemology
 dhātu – Chemistry & Metallurgy
 bālaka krīdanīyaka - the art of toy making (designing games, playing them,
mimicry and the like) and childcare.

The difference between Vidyas and Kalas is that while Vidyas are predominantly knowledge
systems with oral transmission, the Kalas are skill-based. Although this distinction seems very
similar to the European concepts of techne and episteme, the Indic notions of Vidya and Kala are
different in that they are verbal and non-verbal expressions of the same experiential knowledge.

This unity of purpose in Kala and Vidya is seen in the notion of the 64th Kala - the last and best
one on the list is nothing but ātma vidyā or the art of finding the highest happiness within. This is
identical to the parā vidya. It may also be noticed that some items like music and dance are listed
under both vidyas and kalas. Several items listed under kalas go by the term vidyas.

2.3 Knowledge and Knowledge Systems

It is essential to understand the meaning of the term ‘Knowledge’. It is not easy to define the term
since there have been ongoing debates for centuries to define its nature, characteristics and
functions. For our understanding of the word here, it can be said that every human being is
curious about knowing about things and activities happening within and without. Knowledge is
the answer to that curiosity. The experiences and information gained are Knowledge.

Based on the object of knowing, knowledge can broadly be categorized into two categories: Eternal
Knowledge i.e., the knowledge that is universal, constant, or devoid of change and the other is the
one that keeps changing and evolving with space and time. For example, the understanding of the
term ‘health’ has significantly changed over the years. For a long time, the term was linked to only
physical illnesses, but the current popular definition of the term as given by the World Health
Organization (WHO) has included the mental and social components. The WHO Constitution
(1948) defined health as a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely
the absence of disease or infirmity. The research community still doesn’t seem content with the
current understanding and hence, further modifications over time are bound to occur. (Svalastog
et al., 2017) The same applies to all other disciplines.

Plants and animals inherently possess this knowledge that governs their behaviour and survival
instincts, a trait often lacking in humans. For instance, animals instinctively treat themselves when
ill, displaying a natural understanding of remedies. Similarly, plants demonstrate remarkable
capabilities such as converting sunlight, water, and nutrients into chlorophyll for energy. Birds
exhibit an innate ability to select appropriate materials and construct intricate nests, showcasing
their inherent knowledge of architecture. In contrast, humans possess a unique capacity for
reasoning and curiosity, driving the exploration of various domains of knowledge. This innate
curiosity fuels scientific inquiry into the natural world, leading to advancements in fields like
biology and ecology. Additionally, human curiosity extends to understanding the complexities of
human behavior, giving rise to the development of social sciences aimed at unraveling societal
dynamics and individual interactions. Thus, while plants and animals rely on inherent knowledge
for survival, humans leverage their capacity for questioning and exploration to expand the
boundaries of knowledge across diverse disciplines. This exploration gives rise to the creation of
knowledge systems.

Each knowledge system follows a unique methodology for generating, validating, categorizing
and elucidating knowledge.

For instance, in the field of chemistry, elements are systematically arranged in the periodic table
according to their atomic numbers, which dictate their fundamental properties. This arrangement
organizes elements into periods and groups, facilitating a structured understanding of their
characteristics and behaviors. Elements with similar properties are grouped together, simplifying
the study of their compounds and interactions within the table's framework.

Likewise, Āyurvedic texts employ a distinct organizational structure, categorized based on

different areas of study (disciplines) and sthāna (sections based on important principles). This dual
classification system serves to systematically arrange and present the vast body of knowledge
contained within Āyurveda. By organizing texts according to disciplines and sthāna (sections),
Āyurvedic literature offers a comprehensive framework for understanding the principles, practices,
and applications of traditional Indian medicine.

In summary, each knowledge system employs its own unique approach to organization and
classification, tailored to its respective field's principles and objectives. Whether it be the
systematic arrangement of elements in chemistry's periodic table or the categorization in
Āyurvedic texts, these organizational frameworks serve to streamline the acquisition and
dissemination of knowledge within their respective domains.

Any Knowledge System becomes a knowledge system when it is agreed upon by communities of
people. Throughout history, various schools of philosophy have emerged and gained prominence
because their philosophical theories found acceptance within certain communities. Similarly, the
application and adaptation of knowledge also follow a similar trajectory. Thus, for any random
information to become a knowledge system three conditions are mandatory which are:
1. Style of organization
2. Explanation of the concept
3. Acceptance by a community of people

Only when information can be developed at these three levels can it be called a knowledge system.
Similarly, if someone today says that one can get power to time travel by dancing in a particular
way and calls it the science of dance telepathy. It will only remain an arbitrary statement until
someone can prove it through experimentation, validate it and until a community accepts it. Only
then will the knowledge system of dance telepathy be accepted as authentic/bonafide knowledge.
In essence, the evolution of any Knowledge System entails not only the generation and
dissemination of information but also its critical evaluation and validation by communities, thereby
transforming it into recognized and accepted knowledge.

2.3.1 Why do Knowledge Systems differ from each other?

The divergence of Knowledge Systems arises from a multitude of factors, each contributing to the
unique perspective and interpretation of shared phenomena. Despite focusing on the same object
of study, disparate knowledge systems emerge due to variances in Ontology, Epistemology, and
Prakṛti (constitution/nature) of individual, society, region, and time.

2.4 Ontology and Epistemology:

Ontology and Epistemology are fundamental concepts in the realm of philosophy, shaping our
understanding of reality and knowledge. “Ontology” is a philosophical discipline, a branch of
philosophy that deals with the nature and the organization of being. (Maedche, 2002) In the
regional language, ontology is called Padārthvijñānam. In simple terms, how a thing or action or
an area is seen, is defined as ontology. It caters to questions like, ‘What is reality?’, and ‘What are
the features of reality?’ For instance, the concept of "health" varies across different cultures and
regions, leading to diverse ontologies and subsequently creation of various knowledge systems.
Table below shows the variations in the ontology of ‘health’ in modern medical science and
Āyurveda.
Ontology

Levels Western Medical Science Ayurveda

Body Made of Elements Made of Pañca Mahābhūtas
Disease A disorder of structure or Imbalance of doshas, agni dhatus
function in a human, animal or etc.
plant, especially one that has
known
Cure Elements Ādhibhautika, Ādhidaivika,
Ādhyatmika

Table 1 - Variations in the ontology of ‘health’

This diversity is akin to the maxim of the blind men and the elephant, where each individual's
perception is limited by their unique perspective. As per this maxim, a group of blind men are
asked to define the elephant. These men are blind since birth and have never seen or heard about
the form of the elephant. The one who touches the tail of the elephant defines it as a snake. The
one who touches the stomach thinks of it to be a wall. The other one describes it as a pillar that
touches just one leg of the elephant. Just as the blind men's descriptions of the elephant varied
based on what they touched, knowledge systems are shaped by the perspectives and interpretations
of those who define them. Therefore, the complexity and extent of knowledge is so vast that it
cannot be described in a singular definition.

Epistemology, on the other hand, investigates nature, scope and sources of knowledge. (DeRose,
2005) It explores questions like "What can be known?" and "How can we acquire knowledge about
reality?" and delves into the methods and processes through which we come to understand the
world around us, forming the epistemological foundation of a knowledge system.

There are two ways of knowing something primarily – first is through direct understanding or
experience of the object of knowing (or the world). Most of the ancient texts have developed in
this manner as knowledge was newly being created. The second and the more popular way of
knowing in contemporary times is through the study and understanding of the already existing
knowledge systems. Both the methods lead to the creation of new knowledge in different ways,
but the combination of both together helps in the evolution of knowledge with changing times.

Together, ontology and epistemology provide the philosophical framework through which we
comprehend existence and acquire knowledge. They offer insights into the intricacies of reality
and the ways in which we navigate the complexities of human understanding.

Beyond ontology and epistemology, another significant factor in the development of knowledge
systems is Prakṛti (normally translated as nature). The literal translation of the term even though
not possible can be taken as ‘constitution’. Any knowledge system develops based on the
understanding of the constituents or nature of the following:

a. Individual - The individual forms the fundamental unit of all the sciences. From the natural
sciences to the social sciences, the understanding of the nature of the individual guides the
developments. For example, the entire system of Āyurveda considers the pañca mahābhūtas as the
constituents of the entire creation, and hence the entire system of Āyurveda is based on the
understanding of the nature of these five elements. This is reflected not just in the diagnosis but
also in the treatment methodologies adopted by the system. Similarly, the entire Western medical
sciences have developed from the lens of physics and chemistry, where human anatomy is studied
as a sophisticated machine working through the transmission of different chemicals following
particular principles.

Both lenses are just two different ways of studying the same object (the human body) based on the
constituents but offer completely different knowledge systems. Similar is the case with different
indigenous methods adopted by different cultures and societies around the world. The inventions
and discoveries in different disciplines to the laws formed are all based on the diverse
understanding of the nature of the individual around the world.
b. Society - The second significant factor in the creation of the knowledge system is the Prakṛti of
a society. The knowledge systems developed for Indians in India will be different from the ones
suitable for the French, British, Chinese, or Americans respectively. A popular example of this is
the field of psychology which has been developed mostly through research on the western
population. It was only when the findings of these researches were applied to different populations,
across the globe, it was found how significant a role culture plays in the understanding of an
individual. Similarly, the laws and policies developed in America for the issues of the American
population may not necessarily do justice or lead to the growth of the Indian, Chinese, or Japanese
populations. Therefore, it is essential to understand the cultural values, traditions, belief systems
and societal structures that shape the lives of individuals within the society.

c. Region - The third factor whose nature impacts the creation of the knowledge system is the
geographical location of a place. Some classic examples of this can be seen in the medical sciences
that develop in different regions around the world, the food habits and also the clothing of people
in that region. For example, the treatments used by the tribes of the Amazon rainforest might not
be suitable for the treatment of indigenous tribes in the Thar desert. Similarly, food suitable for the
people of Switzerland might not be suitable for the people of Kenya. The clothes developed as per
the needs of the people of Cherrapunji might not be suitable for the people living in Japan. The
houses built in Japan are based on their geography and might not be suitable for Venice or Italy.
Therefore, the geography of a region plays a crucial role in the development of any knowledge
system.

As an exception, Āyurveda is a medical science that has been developed in India and has still found
significant success in application around the world. This is because India has a rich diversity
geographically ranging from snow-clad Himalayas to the hot humid beaches, from the hot Thar
desert to the wetlands and dense forests of Cherrapunji in Meghalaya - India has it all. From
extreme to moderate to mild, all temperatures, almost all weathers across the year. This has allowed
for the development of disciplines in a holistic manner. The science of Āyurveda has not developed
as a rigid science with a one size-fits-all approach but has always been open to flexibility by taking
into consideration all the external changing factors that make it applicable across diverse
populations around the globe.

d. Time - The last but the most important factor in the creation of a knowledge system is time.
From a micro-second to an epoch, everything has an impact on the knowledge and understanding
of individuals at a particular time. On a day-to-day basis one can easily notice how at different
times of the day, one’s nature varies. For example, one feels hungry at a particular time, sleepy at
some other time, feels like doing physical activity at a particular time, and similarly understands
better at some other time. The ratios and time at which one feels like doing what varies from
individual to individual. Similarly, the weather on a particular day, a particular season, generates
different feelings and moods in individuals. For example, in extreme winter, individuals often find
it difficult to get out of their quilts even for basic daily activities, similarly, the monsoon has a
different impact on different people. Likewise, different years, centuries and ages, are represented
by particular characteristics. In the Indian tradition, for example, there are different Yugas, which
have different characteristics. Similarly, a clear change in knowledge can be seen from the Stone
Age to the modern era. The understanding of the world around and awareness of oneself both
change over time both positively and negatively. Mental illness at some time was considered evil
but mental health today forms an integral component of overall health and wellbeing. Similarly,
the understanding of the world is also evolving.

Even though universal laws remain the same over time, the refinement in understanding them
evolves with time. Time therefore plays a very crucial role in the development of knowledge
systems. In essence, by embracing these principles, knowledge systems can become more relevant,
responsive, and sustainable, fostering positive outcomes for the communities they serve. Also, it
is evident that knowledge systems worldwide exhibit significant variation and cannot be uniformly
applied to diverse populations. Instead, they must be tailored to meet the specific needs a nd
contexts of different communities. While fostering unity, it's equally crucial for knowledge
systems to embrace and honour the richness of diversity. For instance, dietary preferences suitable
for individuals in colder climates may not align with those living near the equator due to distinct
environmental conditions and cultural practices.

Various cultures worldwide have developed their knowledge systems rooted in unique
observations, perspectives and methodologies, shaped by their respective ontologies and
epistemologies. Examples include Western, Indian, Chinese and Islamic knowledge systems, each
offering distinctive insights and methodologies tailored to the specific cultural and societal
contexts in which they evolved. This recognition helps in not just realizing and respecting diversity
but also helps in creation. This ensures that all communities benefit from the richness of human
intellectual heritage.

2.5 The purpose of creating knowledge in the Indian tradition

For centuries, individuals in the Bhārataiya culture have exhibited a profound curiosity and
earnestness in unravelling the mysteries of existence and the self. Hence, self-knowledge has
always been the ultimate purpose of any action or knowledge in India. Curiosity about the
fundamental nature of being, the purpose of life, and the quest of knowing the self, have been at
the forefront of their intellectual pursuits. Questions such as "who am I?", "what is the essence of
our existence?", "what lies beyond death?", "how does one transcend the cycle of birth and
rebirth?" have deeply been pursued in India. In the process of finding answers to these questions
several disciplines emerged.

To make this concept clear, the story of Amṛta Manthana can be helpful. The main goal of the
devas and asuras was to get amṛta by churning the ocean but during that process of attaining amṛta
they also got 14 precious things. Similarly, even though self-knowledge was the primary aim of
attaining knowledge in the Indian tradition, the development of society, civilizing the society and
in-depth knowledge of various sciences automatically developed and perhaps with much more
refinement than in other parts of the world, given that time and space. Even though self-knowledge
formed the foundation, Indians always thrived to excel and evolve in all domains of life. The
statement ‘Yat piṇḍe, tat brahmāṇḍe’ means ‘everything that is outside you, is within you (your
body)’. More simply, it means that one has in oneself the entire universe and hence, by knowing
the world within, one automatically gets an understanding of the world outside. This is the route
that was taken in education in India.
2.5.1 Unique Aspects of IKS

a. Understanding the Self - Since ancient times, the people of India realized that it is
impossible to achieve growth, refinement and evolution at any level without achieving it
at an individual level. Therefore, the primary purpose of life and knowledge in life was
knowing and understanding the Self. All the fundamental texts of the Indian tradition
therefore lay immense emphasis on the refinement of the body-mind complex which in
turn helps in a refined understanding of the world outside. This science has been reiterated
in major important texts of IKS again and again.

For example, the entire Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad is the answer to the question, ““What is that,
by knowing which, everything can be known?” The whole Upaniṣad is an answer to that
question, what is that by which we can know all things.” It is the knowledge and experience
of the Self that is the answer to this question.

b. Unity in Diversity - If the entire knowledge of the Indian tradition has to be described in
one statement, it would be ‘Vasdhaiva Kutumbakam’ (Mahopaniṣad, Chapter 6, Verse 71)
which translates as ‘the world is one community’. Since epochs, the Indian tradition has
stood by this statement, accepting the oneness among all (the entire creation) along with
respecting the diversity within everything and everyone. Acceptance of the entire humanity
as a whole with love and compassion forms the foundation of the Bhāratīya paramparā.

c. Customization - Respect for uniqueness and diversity gives rise to another salient
characteristic of the IKS i.e., customization. In current times when the concept of one size
fits all is being applied to everything from healthcare to fashion and the uniqueness is not
being appreciated, IKS provides progressive solutions. In India, since ancient times,
everything has been custom-made for every individual. The entire science of Āyurveda
(Indian science of medicine) is based on the fact that every individual is different and
hence, diagnosis, treatment, lifestyle and food everything has to be customized individual
wise. Not just that, aesthetics has been an important part of Indian culture. Customization
is visible in everything from the availability of food options, to how the meals are served,
to the clothes and also art and architecture.

d. Sustainability - Customization leads to production based on needs. Because everything is

done with thought, sustainability becomes a natural consequence. This is again inherent in
the Indian tradition. The reverence for everything within and without is a salient feature of
IKS. Because everything is considered sacred, any form of exploitation is an action that is
beyond one’s dharma. The emphasis is on making the most out of the use of minimum
resources. The purpose of creation even if to serve the mankind, is to not cause burden on
mother nature. This formed an important part of teaching in the Gurukulas. The knowledge
of the self, played a crucial role in alignment with the Dharma. And every conflict with the
nature is indicative of deviation from this natural alignment.

e. Health Sciences - The medical science developed in India offers a different perspective of
looking at a human which is completely different from the current systems right from the
 foundational level. The focus is not just on curing a disease and bringing an individual to
a state of normalcy but to help an individual to attain their full potential.

As per Āyurveda, the body is made up of the Pañca Mahābhūtas (the gross elements) that
are: Ākaśa (Ether), Vāyu (Air), Agni (Fire), Āpah (Water), and Pruthvi (Earth). The body
type of an individual is based on the percentage of these elements. Even the cause of disease
is due imbalance of Tridoṣas, dhātus and Agni. Diseases can also occur due to the
suppression of urges like urination, defecation, hunger, etc. The treatment in Āyurveda is
based on this foundation and aim to restore the balance in the overall functioning. Also,
given the diversity in the geography of India, the Āyurvedic system has developed keeping
in mind all possible climatic conditions and therefore has the potential to be applied on
most populations across the world.

f. Nuanced Oral Traditions - The entire knowledge is to be transmitted orally and committed
to one’s memory. The non-tangible features are an important part of the knowledge system.
IKS is not only what is written or memorized, but it is a living tradition that can be seen in
the thoughts and actions of Indians even today. For this purpose, the oral tradition was
precise and concise but conveyed knowledge worth an ocean in small sentences.

g. Integration of different disciplines - A remarkable aspect of Indian Knowledge Systems

(IKS) is its ability to seamlessly integrate ideas from three distinct streams: Spiritual,
Scientific and Social thereby offering a holistic understanding of life and the universe. This
integration is not only evident within individual works but also permeates across various
disciplines, fostering a harmonious coexistence and contributing to the overall growth of
society. In IKS, knowledge transcends disciplinary boundaries, with diverse subjects
interlinked in a cohesive manner.

For instance, within a single literary or philosophical work, one can encounter discussions
on mathematical concepts alongside explorations of poetry and philosophical musings.
This interdisciplinary approach reflects the interconnectedness of knowledge and
underscores the holistic nature of learning within IKS. Similarly, the principles of itihāsa,
naṭyaśāstra (treatise on performing arts), and lifestyle are intricately woven into the fabric
of architectural design and construction. Architectural marvels such as temples, palaces,
and sacred monuments serve as tangible expressions of spiritual and religious beliefs, while
also incorporating practical considerations related to aesthetics and functionality. Thus,
architecture becomes a manifestation of transmitting cultural values and societal norms,
embodying the interconnectedness of various streams of knowledge within IKS.

This multi-dimensional approach to knowledge not only enriches individual disciplines but
also fosters a deeper understanding of the interconnectedness of all aspects of life. By
transcending disciplinary boundaries and embracing diverse perspectives, IKS encourages
a holistic worldview that encompasses spiritual, scientific and social dimensions,
ultimately contributing to the holistic development of individuals and society as a whole.
It is therefore, extremely essential to bring back IKS into the education system. As said by
Baba Dioum, Senegalese Forest Engineer (1968, New Delhi), “In the end, we will conserve
only what we love; we will love only what we understand, and we will understand only
 what we are taught.” (Becstersontheroad, 2016) Therefore, let us begin the journey of
conserving our culture, our tradition by teaching and implementing it in our lives and in
our upcoming generations.

2.6 Indian Knowledge Traditions: Philosophical Foundations

Philosophy may be defined as a critical examination of our most general and abstract
claims. It is the most meta-disciplinary study in which “…the concepts with which we
approach the world themselves become the topic of enquiry” (Blackburn 2008:275).
According to Bertrand Russell, the advantage of doing Philosophy is that “…it gives unity
and system to the body of the sciences...” (Russell 1918:239). In other words, Philosophy
gives us the “big picture” of Reality.

Given the nature of philosophical ideas, they tend to be at the foundation of all knowledge
systems. Hence, a small change in the philosophical assumptions (which could be
metaphysical, epistemological or ethical) can create a huge difference in the empirical
sciences. The relationship between Philosophy and (empirical) sciences may be captured
by the following figure:

More concrete More abstract

Sciences Philosophy

More specific More general

Fig. 1 – Relation between Philosophy and Sciences

Like other knowledge traditions, the Indian Knowledge Traditions (IKT) are also founded
on certain philosophical assumptions. The importance and influence of the philosophical
traditions is at once apparent when one remembers traditional sayings such as “kāṇādaṃ
pāṇinīyaṃ ca sarvaśāstropakārakam” (The science of Kanada and Panini are useful to all
sciences) or when we observe that in the 14 traditionally listed sciences (śāstras), we find
that two of them, Nyāya and Mīmāṃsā, are philosophical systems.

2.6.1 Philosophy in the Indian Context

The most common word we find for ‘Philosophy’ in the Sanskrit tradition is ‘darśana’,
which means a view or a perspective. Thus, when we say ‘nyāya darśana’ or ‘vedānta
darśana’ we may understand these as ‘nyāya perspective’ and ‘vedānta perspective.’ The
word ‘darśana’ derives from the root drś (to see) giving the etymological meaning
“instrument of seeing correctly or that which causes/allows us to see correctly.” However,
what is it that we want to see correctly? It is the true nature of everything. Hence, Tattva-
śāstra or Tattva-vidyā is another term proposed for ‘Philosophy’ since it aims at knowing
the true nature or essence (tattva) of everything.
Now, how do we want to find out the true nature of everything? The true nature of Reality,
Knowledge or Virtue is not something we can find out using a laboratory experiment or by
conducting surveys. The only tool available to the dārśānika is argumentation. However,
every argument can be countered with another argument and so the tradition of Darśana is
a tradition of arguments.

Dārśanikas critically assess each other’s argument. In Arthaśāstra of Kautilya, we find the
word Ānvīkṣikī being used to express this critical inquiry. We also find that it captures the
meta-disciplinary nature of Philosophy. Hence, another word for ‘Philosophy’ in the Indian
context is Ānvīkṣikī.

Lastly, the Indian thinkers believed that all knowledge should serve some purpose. Merely
satisfying one’s intellectual curiosity was not the ultimate end of knowledge. The same is
true for philosophical knowledge as well. In the Indian context, the purpose of
philosophising was to attain the state of ultimate happiness or the state of being completely
free from suffering. This state is called Mokṣa. Hence, another name for ‘Philosophy’ is
‘Mokṣa śāstra.’ The following figure (Figure 2) summarises the above discussion on the
different names for ‘Philosophy’ based on conceptual as well as textual sources.

Darśana

What do we want to see correctly?

Tattvasāstra Tattva – True nature of everything

How do we do that?

Ānvīkṣikī Critical Inquiry

Why should we do that?

Mokṣa
śāstra To end suffering

Fig. 2 - Different words for “Philosophy” in the Indian context

2.6.2 Common Features of Indian Philosophical Traditions

Given that, philosophical problems are the most abstract and general problems, it is
unlikely that there will be a single and universal solution. Philosophers focus on different
aspects of the problem, start from different points and hence come up with different
responses. The same is true of Indian philosophers as well. Some philosophers focused on
the object of inquiry (prameya), some focused on the subject of inquiry (pramātā) and
other focused on the legitimate modes of access (pramāṇa) by which the pramātā can study
the prameya. These three, most general components of any experience/inquiry are shown
in the below figure –

Mode of Inquiry
(pramāṇa)

Subject of Inquiry
Object of Inquiry
(pramātā)
(prameya)

Fig. 3 – The Knowledge Triangle

Despite these differences there are some common features, which allow us to label all these
philosophical traditions as ‘Indian.’ Some of these commonalities are listed below:

a. Practically oriented: As we saw in the previous section the purpose of Darśana śāstra
is to help the seeker get rid of suffering and attain the state of mokṣa. Hence, all
philosophical theorizing was directed towards this goal.

b. Spiritual Disquiet: Philosophy arouse out of a sense of disillusionment with the

empirical world which appears to be pervaded by suffering (duḥkha). Sāṃkhya
recognizes 3 types of suffering: ādhyātmika (suffering related to the inner self),
ādhibhautika (suffering due to the physical world), ādhidaivika (suffering due to divine
forces). All philosophies sought a permanent end to such suffering.

c. Faith in eternal moral order: The near obsession with suffering was countered by a
sincere faith in an eternal moral order which ensured that there would be ‘light at the
end of the tunnel.’ This order was called Ṛta in the Vedic period and gradually
developed into the law of karma. Such a faith prevented the Indian philosophers from
descending into absolute pessimism.

d. Ignorance as the cause and Knowledge as liberator: All philosophical systems

agreed that ignorance (avidyā), whether of the Self or the World, was the root cause of
all suffering and believed that only the true knowledge about the nature of these will
 liberate us from suffering. However, this knowledge was not merely of a theoretical
nature but was something to be experienced or continuously meditated upon to achieve
the final aim of liberation.

e. The practice of Yoga: All traditions recognise the role played by Yoga to inculcate a
sense of discipline in one’s life, which, in turn, would help one to detach gradually
from the mundane world. Thus, the theoretical knowledge about the nature of Reality
and Self was combined with the practical aspect of Yoga to set the inquirer firmly on
the path to liberation.

f. Liberation as the highest end: As we have mentioned, mokṣa (liberation) is the goal
of all darśanas. Negatively this means the end of all suffering and this much is agreed
upon by all the schools. However, some philosophers add a positive aspect to this state
by proposing that it is also one of infinite bliss (ānanda).

g. Importance of Teacher: The teacher (guru) holds a pre-eminent position in Indian

culture even today. It was taken for granted that the path to liberation cannot be
achieved without the proper guidance of a teacher. These teachers were believed to
have experienced the true nature of Reality and the Self and were hence greatly revered.
Thus, philosophical activity in India relied on a continued teacher-student tradition
(guru-śiṣya paramparā) via a reliant textual tradition aided by discussion/debate
(vāda).

2.7 Pramāṇa Śāstra (Epistemology) in the Indian Philosophical Traditions

Looking at the vast corpus of knowledge available in the IKT, one is bound to ask the
question “How did the Indian thinkers produce knowledge in different disciplines?” The
answer to this question lies in understanding one of the vertices of the Knowledge Triangle
(Figure 4), the mode of inquiry. The Indian philosophers gave a systematic account of
knowledge and the means of acquiring it. These theories and methods were adopted by the
other śāstras such as Āyurveda, Jyotiṣa, Arthaśāstra as well. Hence, the “Scientific
Method” was not something peculiar to the (natural) sciences but was integrated within the
Indian Epistemology, i.e. Pramāṇa Śāstra.

Pramāṇa The single most important feature, that separates knowledge from non-
knowledge, is Truth. If so, how can we ensure that our cognitions have this property? The
answer given by the darśanikas is that if our cognitions are acquired through reliable
processes then it is more likely that the output of the process will result in knowledge
(pramā). These reliable processes are called pramāṇa (literally, the instruments or means
of pramā).

Fig. 4 - Pramāṇas as causal process which generate knowledge

The Indian philosophers identified the following pramāṇas: Pratyakṣa (Perception),
Anumāna (Inference), Śabda (Testimony), Arthāpatti (Inference to best explanation),
Upamāna (Comparison), Anupalabdhi (Nonperception). However, not all of these were
acceptable to all the traditions. In addition, some traditions accepted a few more pramāṇas
not listed above. For instance, the Jainas accepted 3 more pramāṇas: avadhi (clairvoyence),
manaḥ paryaya (telepathy) and kevalajñāna (omniscience) which required special training
with the last two pramāṇas (manaḥ paryaya and kevalajñāna) being reserved for the
liberated souls alone.

The below table (Table 2) summarises which schools accepted each of the pramāṇas:

Table 2 - Pramāṇas accepted by different traditions

Of all the pramāṇas, the first three – Pratyakṣa, Anumāna and Śabda – have special
importance since they are the most common ones and appear in other śāstras like Āyurveda
and Arthaśāstra as well. Hence, we will discuss them separately in the subsequent sections.
Below is a very brief summary of the nature of each of the pramāṇas –

a. Pratyakṣa (Perception): This is the pramāṇa we use most often. Knowing an object
through its contact with one of the five indriyas (sense, not the physical sense organ like
the eye) is called pratyakṣa (for more details please refer to the below section on
pratyakṣa). It should be noted that the mind (manas) is also regarded as an internal sense
organ.

b. Anumāna (Inference): A cognition which follows another cognition is called anumiti.

The cause of such a cognition is called anumāna.19 For instance, if we observe a ball in
motion, we can infer that force has been imparted to it (in the past). Such a cognition
requires that the agent knows, in advance, the invariable relation between the two entities
cognition – in this case the motion of the ball (cognised via perception) and the application
of force (claimed to be inferred).

c. Śabda (Testimony): “Cognition of an entity based on a sentence uttered by a reliable

source…is testimony” (Chindambaran et. al. 2022:10) The testimony so offered could be
about empirical reality or about things beyond the empirical realm, such as soul, heaven,
God.

d. Upamāna (Comparison): “The means by which an agent cognises the relationship

between a word and its meaning based on a similarity relation is upamāna” (ibid.). For
 instance, suppose a person has never seen a zebra and is told that a zebra is like a horse but
with black and white strips. When this person goes to a zoo or to Africa and sees a zebra,
the cognition of similarity triggers the cognition ‘this is a zebra.’

e. Arthāpatti (Inference to the best explanation): “When we cognise two facts that are
incompatible with each other, we postulate a third fact that would explain and thus remove
the incompatibility” (ibid.). Such a process of arriving at knowledge is called arthāpatti.
For example, we know that when we went to sleep last night, the ground outside our home
was dry but when we woke up in the morning, it was completely wet. So, we postulate that
it must have rained last night.

f. Anupalabdhi: This is a peculiar pramāṇa reserved for cognising absences. “When all
the conditions for the perception of x are present, and yet x is not perceived, in that case
this nonperception would lead to a true cognition of the absence of x” (Mohanty 2000: 31).
For example, the cognition of the absence of a cow in my room is based on anupalabdhi
pramāṇa according to some Indian philosophers.

2.8 Indian Philosophical Systems – Development and Unique Features

Phrases such as ‘happiness’ require ‘individuals’ as the unit of analysis. Further, as one
inquires deep into this question, the focus shifts to the Universe, which provides the context
for the individual to make his inferences and choices in life. Inevitably, the notion of an
all-pervading Universal force (known as the Divinity or God) also becomes another
important dimension in this analysis. Therefore, the study of these facets invariably
happens in a context consisting of three aspects: an individual (Jīva), the Universe (Jagat)
and the God (Iśvara). The beginning of the philosophical inquiry in India can be traced to
the Vedic literature.

The philosophical systems provide a true worldview and a vision for life and help us
resolve the issues that we face in our life. The teachings of the Upanishads suggest that
attainment of the knowledge of Brahman is the highest goal of human life.

The philosophical inquiry continued in India further giving rise to several schools, each
one developing its own understanding of the world. Each of these schools presents its views
with rigorous intellectual exercise and uncompromised importance on the self-experience.
Unlike the Western counterpart, the Indian philosophical thought is closely intertwined
with religious thought. The religious schools draw from these systems and help in
configuring socio-cultural practices, norms of behavior, ethical standards and values that
shape one’s life. This religious dimension provides the operating principles for the
mundane life based on these configurations. The ultimate goal of the human life is clearly
spelt out and the path for attaining the same is also articulated in all the darśanas.

A popular way of classifying the various philosophical traditions is to label some of them
as ‘āstika’ and others as ‘nāstika.’ However, this has nothing to do with the belief in God
as may be understood from the popular meanings of these terms. The classification is based
on the extent to which the Vedic worldview is acceptable. Those who accept it completely
 are called āstika while those who reject it or accept it only to an extent are called nāstika.
A better terminology for classifying them may be ‘Vaidika’ and ‘Non-Vaidika.’ Following
this nomenclature, the most prominent dārśanika traditions are given below (Figure 5).

Fig. 5 – Prominent Darśanas

Table 3 – The systematisers and foundational texts of different darśanas

2.8.1 Vedic Philosophical Systems –

Sāṃkhya and Yoga Schools of Philosophy

The Sāṃkhya-Yoga philosophical system begins with the basic premise that Prakṛti, the
source of the physical Universe and the ‘self’ are sub-ordinate to a larger force called
Puruṣa and liberation of the ‘self’ involves getting to know the right knowledge of the
Puruṣa and Prakṛti and their relative role.

According to these schools of thought, Prakṛti is the cause of the Universe (of everything
except the spirit) and entirely accounts for whatever is physical, both matter and force.
Prakṛti is conceived as constituted of the tri-guṇas. The preponderance of the three Guṇas
 and their role in establishing the link between Puruṣa and Prakṛti is a common ground for
both the philosophical systems. Both the schools agree that the process of final liberation
involves the realization of the true nature of Prakṛti and Puruṣa.

The Sāṃkhya school does not acknowledge the existence of an ultimate God (Īśvara). On
the other hand, Yoga acknowledges the existence of a supreme being. It lays emphasis on
a more structured and practical methodology for cessation of all activities of the mind. To
facilitate this process. On the other hand, Sāṃkhya school emphasises more of
contemplation and analysis leading to experiential knowledge.

2.8.1.1 Sāṃkhya-darśana

Sage Kapila is supposed to be the author of the Sāṃkhya system. Sāṃkhya argues that the
root cause of all pains and sufferings is the lack of correct knowledge (Sāṃkhya). By a
proper understanding of the ontology of Sāṃkhya darśana, the causes of pain and the way
to end it can be explained.

According to the Sāṃkhya system, two basic elements constitute everything in this world,
matter (Prakṛti) and spirit (Puruṣa). Puruṣa is the pure consciousness, sentient, changeless,
eternal and passive. Prakṛti on the other hand is the root cause of all activities including the
entire creation. When the Prakṛti comes in association with the Puruṣa it assumes diverse
shapes and forms, gross and subtle and manifests as body, senses and the mind.

Prakṛti is made of the three basic constituents namely sattva, rajas and tamas. These are
also called guṇas and are known only through inference. Sattva is the faculty that is light
and causes knowledge and pleasure. Rajas is the one that causes movement and is the cause
of pain. Tamas is heavy, causes ignorance and indifference. Before the manifestation of
the Prakṛti its constituents sattva, rajas and tamas are in equilibrium.

2.8.1.2 Yoga-darśana

Yoga as a school of philosophy is said to have been founded by Patañjali through his yoga-
sūtras. Yoga serves as a methodology to the realisation of the difference of Prakṛti and
Puruṣa. It elaborately establishes the necessary practices and individual needs to go through
to have the realisation of this separation.

The unique thing that establishes Yoga as distinct among the other darśanas is its emphasis
on understanding the mind, its various states, its cognitive activities and methods to control
it. The other schools have a difference of opinion on the matters of epistemology and the
concept of mokṣa with Yoga. However, they accept methods prescribed in Yoga to gain
control over the mind.

The Yoga philosophy rests on the basic premise that if a person wants to understand his
true nature and experience bliss eventually, he must focus on the physical, psychological
and moral states of his being and make simultaneous progress on all the three. To achieve
this, the basic prescription is to develop the capacity for single-pointed concentration of
the mind. Therefore, Yoga- sūtras begin with the definition that’Yoga is the cessation of
mental modifications’.

While Sāṃkhya, prescribes the method of analysis and contemplation, Yoga argues for
mind control through sustained practices as prescribed. Yoga system provides an 8-step
process to gradually attain complete cessation of the activities of mind. The figure below
presents the 8 steps in a pictorial fashion –

Fig. 6 – Aṣtāṅga-yoga – Eight Step Process

 Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika Schools of Philosophy

The Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika school begins the analysis with the world that an individual
experiences. By experience it means all varieties of valid knowledge, whether perceptual
or non-perceptual. Hence, it starts with the assumption that whatever is obtained by
uncontradicted experience must necessarily be real. The Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika school proceeds
with an analysis of the experience to understand reality, also known as knowable. Both,
Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika set out in their journey of the ‘knowable’ and define various
categories to describe the same. Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika schools place a greater emphasis on
obtaining the ‘right’ knowledge for liberation.

2.8.1.3 Nyāya-darśana

The original theory of Nyāya school is found in the Nyāya-sūtra, a set of aphorisms
developed by Gautama. The aphorisms are organised into five chapters, each having two
sections. The Nyāya philosophy starts with the proposition that one attains liberation only
when he/she acquires the knowledge of the truth. The knowledge of the truth drives away
miseries and an individual escapes the cycle of birth-death leading to final liberation.

The Nyāya system, therefore, placed enormous emphasis on the means of obtaining ‘right
knowledge’. Therefore, the unique contribution of Nyāya School is its detailed inquiry of
knowledge (Pramā) and valid cognition and its means (Pramāṇa). The elucidation of the
correct way of thinking and arriving at the right conclusions, the art of debating, well laid
out rules for a debate to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion are the main contributions
of the Nyāya school. On account of this Nyāya is commonly understood as
‘argumentation’. Nyāya concepts and the art of debating to establish true knowledge
became a useful tool for all philosophical systems. It has over time assumed the de facto
methodology to establish valid knowledge.

The goal of a self is not to gain pleasure but to be liberated from all kinds of pains once for
all. This liberation according to the Nyāya school. Īśvara or the God is the creator of this
universe. An individual self must try to gain the correct knowledge of the self, i.e., he/she
is not the body, or the mind or the senses, which often people mistake ‘the self’ out of
delusion. Then he ceases to have attachment for the fruits of his/her actions, as all actions
an individual does are aimed at gaining worldly pleasure. When he/she gives up the desires
for the results of his/her actions, he/she no more accumulates the effects of his actions,
good or bad, which are the cause of the birth and death cycle. When an individual has
finished experiencing the effects of his/her past actions there is no reason for his/her birth
and he/she will be free from the birth-death cycle. Ultimately, he/she will be free from pain.

2.8.1.4 Vaiśeṣika-darśana

Vaiśeṣika was propounded by Kaṇāda and his work was organised into aphorisms in ten
chapters, each consisting of two sections. The word Vaiśeṣika is derived from the word
‘Viśeṣa’, meaning difference or unique attributes in a thing. According to this school,
diversity, not unity is fundamental to the Universe. Although the multitude of forms and
 shapes exists they can be reduced to certain types. It is by virtue of this that ‘knowables’
are divisible into three classes of dravya, guṇa, and karma, but also into sub-classes such
as cows, reeds, or moving. While there is some sense of ‘alikeness’ in the manner described
above, it must be remembered that if there are two things that resemble each other in every
aspect, there must be something distinctive since there are ‘two’ of them. This is the basic
concept of Viśeṣa. The Vaiśeṣika school proceeded along this line to systematically present
the ‘knowables’ that form all the ‘real’ entities in the universe using certain categories.

To summarise, Nyāya deals with ‘ways of knowing the reality’ and Vaiśeṣika with ‘objects
in the reality that is knowable’. The Vaiśeṣika school presents the ‘knowable’ that form all
the ‘real’ entities in the Universe using certain categories. Both Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika
schools place a greater emphasis on obtaining the ‘right’ knowledge for liberation,

Pūrvā-mīmāṁsā and Vedānta Schools of Philosophy

In unit 1 we discussed the details about the Vedic corpus where we remarked that the
Brāhmaṇas, the portion of the Vedic corpus, has details on the ritualistic aspects. This
portion is typically referred to as karma-kāṇḍa of the Vedic corpus. On the other hand, the
Upaniṣads, lay greater emphasis on the knowledge of the Brahman. This portion is known
as Jñāna-kāṇḍa.

The Pūrvā-mīmāṁsā school has established its tenets based on the karma-kāṇḍa and the
Vedānta school has established its tenets based on the Jñāna-kāṇḍa. This school is also
known as Uttara-mīmāṁsā on account of its reliance on the Jñāna-kāṇḍa, the later portion
of the Vedic corpus.

2.8.1.5 Pūrvā-mīmāṁsā-darśana

The word ‘Mīmāṁsā’ conveys different meanings: reflection, consideration, profound

thought, investigation, examination and discussion. In the context of the Pūrvā -mīmāṁsā
school of philosophy, Mīmāṁsā means ‘reflection’ or ‘critical investigation’ and is
primarily based on a tradition of deep contemplation on the meanings of Vedic texts which
it relies on as the authority for its principles.

The Pūrvā-mīmāṁsā school was established by Jaimini, who is said to be the student of
Veda Vyāsa. Jaimini presented his aphorisms numbering over 2500 in twelve chapters,
which are further divided into sixty sections. The text provides rules for the interpretation
of the Vedas and also provides philosophical justifications for the observance of Vedic
rituals, by offering meaning and significance of Vedic rituals to attain Mokṣa.

The laws of interpretation formulated by Jaimini and his successors are quite general and
applicable to literary works outside the Vedas too. Pūrvā-mīmāṁsā principles are widely
utilised for arriving at a right interpretation of all old texts, particularly legal treatises and
the legal fraternity could greatly benefit from the knowledge of Pūrvā-mīmāṁsā.
2.8.1.6 Vedānta (Uttara-mīmāṁsā-darśana)

All Vedānta schools of philosophy derive a considerable part of their material from the
Upaniṣads. The Vedānta schools of philosophy rely on three major texts, known as
Prasthāna-traya, for establishing their tenets. This includes the Brahma-sūtras, a
collection of about 550 aphorisms written by Bādarāyaṇa (Vyāsa), the Bhagavadgītā and
the Upaniṣads. In general, the Vedānta schools look upon Brahman as the absolute and are
predominantly philosophical in their approach. In this section, we shall briefly see the
salient aspects of Advaita, Viśiṣṭādvaita, and Dvaita schools of Vedānta.

2.8.1.6.1 Advaita-vedānta

Śaṅkara (688–720 CE) propounded a monistic philosophy, known as Advaita, with

the conception of the attribute-less God (Nirguna-brahman) as the ultimate reality.
The Upaniṣads describe Brahman as one without form, name, and attributes, known
as Nirguna-brahman. The other main aspects of his philosophy include the doctrine
of Māyā, the identity of the Jīva with the Brahman and the conception of mokṣa as
the merger of Jīva in Brahman. Śaṅkara has made immense contributions to Indian
philosophical thought through numerous commentaries and independent works
which run to several thousand pages. He also made robust institutional
arrangements in different parts of India to preserve and promote Advaita-vedānta.

2.8.1.6.2 Viśiṣṭādvaita-vedānta

Rāmānuja proposed the philosophy of Viśiṣṭādvaita, considering bhakti (devotion)

to a personal God, who has name, form and shape and who saves the devotees from
all miseries of the world and liberates them. The attribute-less Brahman as
conceived by Advaita school is rejected as metaphysical abstraction and Brahman
is conceived by Viśiṣṭādvaita as God with attributes like possessing a bodily form,
with infinite good qualities and glories. The ultimate is one, according to
Viśiṣṭādvaita, but is not the attributeless. Matter, Jīva and Īśvara are three entities
recognised in the Viśiṣṭādvaita school. According to Rāmānuja, the world is a
symbol of Īśvara and all names are his only. Every work and form is sustained by
Him and is eventually His only. According to Viśiṣṭādvaita school, the cycles of
birth and death and the assorted sorrows are due to the forgetfulness of an individual
of the relation between them and Nārāyaṇa.

2.8.1.6.3 Dvaita-vedānta

Madhvācārya is the founder of the Dvaita-vedānta school. Madhvācārya

established Uḍupi as the center of the Dvaita-vedānta school. All jīvas are
dependent upon Īśvara, whereas the jīvas are different by nature. The jīvas are
independent and the Īśvara is independent. The world is real and there exists
difference between God and the jīvas. The Dvaita school of Vedānta aims at
devotion as the means of attaining mukti. The jīvas are dependent on Īśvara, and
the Īśvara has a supreme God, the Viṣṇu (Hari).
2.8.2 Non-Vedic Philosophical Systems –

There are other philosophical systems that lie outside of the realm of the Vedic corpus.
These philosophical systems did not consider the Vedas as an authoritative text and are
called Non-Vedic philosophical systems. These schools do not also accept the entity Īśvara.
Jaina, Bauddha, and Cārvāka schools are prominent among them.

2.8.2.1 Jaina School of Philosophy

The word ‘Jaina’ is derived from the Sanskrit root ‘ji’ to conquer, essentially indicating
someone who has successfully subdued his passions and obtained mastery. The Jaina
school considers twenty-four Tīrthaṅkaras, starting from Ṛṣabhadeva to Mahāvīra, as
prophets and the philosophy. Tīrthaṅkaras appear periodically in the world to educate and
lead people to cross over the ocean of rebirth. This is similar to the notion of avatāra-
puruṣas, who by their conduct and teaching help the human beings cross the ocean of
saṁsāra (endless birth-death cycle).

Jain philosophy refuses to acknowledge the authority of the Vedas and the notion of a
supreme God, however, several concepts in the Jaina school are in line with the Vedic
schools of philosophy. During the early part of the common era (during 4–5th century CE),
two sects of Jains, Śvetāmbaras (white-clad ascetics) and Digambaras (sky-clad ascetics)
emerged. There are some differences between the two sects in certain aspects such as
rituals, ascetic practices and monastic organisation. Despite this, on matters of
philosophical principles and concepts, they remain similar.

2.8.2.2 Bauddha School of Philosophy

The Bauddha (or Buddhist) philosophy is rooted in the teachings of Gautama Buddha, who
lived during the 6th–5th century BCE. Buddhism originated in ancient India but later
spread to several parts of Asia, including Nepal, Tibet, China, Korea, Vietnam, Thailand,
Singapore, and Japan. It also has a strong influence in Myanmar and Sri Lanka. The earliest
forms of Buddhism are known as Theravāda, which has great accounts in the northern
regions, and Mahāyāna, which is popular in the northern and eastern parts of Asia.

Buddhism is based on the Four Noble Truths, which were unknown to Gautama and his
followers, but he is supposed to have discovered them after enlightenment. Buddhist
philosophy focuses on the means of ending the suffering of individuals. It is elaborated as
follows:
 Fig. 7 – The Four Noble Truths of Buddhism

a. There is suffering – According to Gautama, ‘Birth is suffering, decay is suffering, illness

is suffering, death is suffering. The presence of objects we hate is suffering, not being able
to obtain what we desire is suffering. The Buddhist philosophy argues that the human being
is a compound of five aggregates and clinging to them leads to suffering.

b. There is the cause of suffering – In Gautama's words, "Thirst leads to rebirth accompanied
by pleasure and lust, thirst for pleasure, thirst for existence, thirst for prosperity."

c. The cessation of suffering – The cessation of suffering will be possible with the complete
cessation of thirst, which amounts to the absence of passion and complete destruction of
desire.

d. There is a path to end the suffering – Buddhist philosophy prescribes a holy eight-fold
path that enables one to lead a holy moral life and that will lead one to the final goal of
liberation. The eightfold path includes right views, right resolve, right speech, right
conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. The
ultimate goal in Buddhist philosophy is to reach Nirvāna. Nirvāna is not a state reached
after death, but something that is attainable in this very life. It is the sinless calm state of
mind attained due to freedom from desires and passions, a state of perfect peace, goodness,
and wisdom. Once a person reaches Nirvāna, the cycle of birth and death ends which is the
final goal leading to liberation.
 Fig. 8 – The Cycle of Suffering

2.8.2.3 Cārvāka School

Cārvāka school of thought closely maps to the trait of materialism, which emphasizes a life
of enjoyment based on certain principles and assumptions about life. The word Cārvāka
literally means ‘sweet-tongued’ (cāru-vāka), in a way signifying that the ideas appear
attractive at the outset. This is because the system only advocates two of the four
puruṣārthas, pleasure and wealth as objectives of living. This school is also called
Lokāyata. The Cārvāka school considers matter as the ultimate reality and rejects the idea
that there is a divine or a transcendental power behind the matter, called Prakṛti
conceptualized by the Sāṃkhya-Yoga school.

One of the major differences of the Cārvāka school with that of the Vedic schools of
philosophy pertains to what is the accepted means of valid knowledge. Unlike all other
schools, Cārvāka school considers only direct perception through senses as pramāṇa.
Essentially this implies that whatever is directly perceivable can only be accepted as valid
means of knowledge. This has significant implications for metaphysics. On account of this,
Cārvāka school considers matter as the only reality using which the world is made of.
Furthermore, the world is constituted of only four basic categories, namely, earth, water,
fire, and air, which are all physical and directly perceivable. Ether or space is not accepted
as the fifth element because it is not perceivable.
In the case of the Cārvāka system, we do not seem to have such extensive literature on the
school as compared to other schools of philosophy. No text of the Cārvāka school is
available to us today which discusses its tenets in totality. The absence of canonical texts
and a lineage of followers who were able to establish the tenets of the system by constantly
engaging in intellectual debates to establish their tenets were perhaps responsible for its
decay.

Fig. 9 – Salient Features of the Cārvāka School

Hence, we learned about the different facets of IKS, its ontology, epistemology and
philosophical systems briefly in the above chapter.
--------------

Bibliography

1. Mahadevan B., Bhat V.R., 2022. Indian Knowledge System – Concepts and
Applications
2. Bhat V.R., Semwal S., 2024. Exploring Indian Knowledge Systems: Debunking Myths
and Revealing Truths
3. Raghavan M., 2024. Multidisciplinary IKS & Heritage: Areas of Study in an IKS-
inspired academic system.
4. Venkata Raghavan R., 2024. Indian Knowledge Traditions: Philosophical Foundations