A Reconstruction of the Third School of Purvamimamsa (An Old Book)

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

In this Book, for the First time an attempt is made to reconstruct the doctrine of the Third School of Purvamimamsa of Murari Misra. Very little is known about it. What is available is only a few fragments of his commentary on Jaiminisutras & reference to his views in other Indian Logico—philophica1 Texts, in the form of Purvapaksa. The Author has attempted the reconstruction on the basis of these data. This is how the book is to be treated as a unique contribution to the field of Parvamimamsa.

The Book is published under the famous Sri Garib Dass Oriental Series No. 90.

Dr. Ujjwala Panse is MA., Ph.D, from the Poona University. She did her M.A. in Vedic group & Ph.D. in Mimamsa. The Present book is her Ph.D. thesis.

Dr. Panse has been working as Research Associate in the Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, University of Poona, since 1987.

Her fields of interest are Veda, Mimamsa, Nyaya & Dharmasastra.

Purvamimamsa is called the Vakyasastra or the science of interpreting a sentence. Any philosophical analysis requires the tool of sentence—interpretation, more so if such an analysis is based on sentences. As it is well—known, almost all system, y of Indian Philosophy require, for some reason or the other, quotation from the Vedas as authority to substantiate their view-point. Therefore, it is but natural that all they system, have freely made use of the Purvami-mamsa-principles of sentence-analysis,

Although Jaimini and Sabara gave us a consolidated single system of philosophical Analysis, the interpretation of Sabara’s text resulted into so much variations that led to the formation of different schools to thought. In the beginning there were two great philosopher interpreters such as Kumarila Bhatta and Prabhakara Misra. Because of their basic difference, of opinions regarding Philosophical, metaphysical and ontological issues, their interpretations differred very much; so much so that the interpretations of the same text of Sahara assumed the form of basic text books on two distinct schools of Purvamimamsa. A third school of Purvamimamsa came into existence due to another attempt to interpret Jaimini by a very distinguished thinker of the 12th century A.D. He was Murari Misra. He seems to have commented upon the entire Jaimini-sutras. Unfortunately, very few fragments have been discovered so far under his name. Murari held a distinct view regarding various philosophical issues——distinct from both the Bhattas and the Prabhakaras,—which earned him the saying Murares trtiyah panthah. It seems that he did not have followers. Not only that his views became object of criticisms. But the very fact that almost all prominent philosophers have taken note of Murari’s views—be it for criticism—— implies that Murari must have had a very prominent place among academic circles and that he was not an insignificant entity who would be easily ignored.

It is indeed a very said state of affairs that we do not have today the entire work of Murari with us. What we are left with are merely references to the views of Murari Misra here and there scattered in various philosophical and logical texts. Therefore, to reconstruct the whole school on the basis of a few fragments. of Murari and the references to Murari’s views scattered in the various philosophical Sanskrit texts was not an easy task. This needed profound maturity on the part of the researcher and I am very glad to state that Dr. Ujjwala Pause has shown the courage and that kind of maturity in handling this topic. After a very long time i.e. after eighty years I find such a serious study in the field of Purvamimamsa. When very few texts in Purvamimamsa were available in Print, MM Ganganatha Jha used to work on the MSS and his first work on the Prabhakara School of Purvamimamsa is a testimony of this hard-labour. Dr. Panse too has taken very hard-labour in identifying the views of Murari from a very wide range of scientific literature s and then in analysing them to show their distinction from the other two schools of Kumarila and Prabhakara and her hard labour is rejected in each and every line of this work. This is only work of its kind that gives us a clear picture of the philosophical, epistemological and ontological stand of Murari at one place in a single Volume.

I am confident that the world of scientific and philosophical I Sanskrit literature and particularly the students and scholars of Purvamimamsa literature will welcome this volume. I am also confident that many more serious students will come forward to f take up such ventures to undertake the study of Purvamimamsa the most neglected branch of Sanskrit research, which has, as a matter of fact, a very high digree of research potentiality.

I am hopeful that Dr. Pause continues her works in this field and makes available the remaining fragments of Murari to all of us with English translation and notes like the present Artharvadadhi-karana. I wish her all success in such endeavour.