Abstract
This paper argues that Śrī Swāminārāyaṇ espoused a position on the pramāṇa-s (means of knowing), and his theory was that among these it is śabdapramāṇa that is the important and authoritative pramāṇa. However, in delineating the precise sources and textual authority that fall within the ambit of śabdapramāṇa, he privileged mostly the Smṛti texts, along with Vedānta and Bhagavadgītā commentaries, to which was added later his own Gujarati text Vachanāmrut, as canonical texts of the particular Sampradāya. In so doing, he would be seen to be departing somewhat from classical positions on authoritative scriptures, in particular of Śaṅkara and, to an extent, Rāmānuja, for whom Śruti (‘revealed’) and Smṛti (‘recollected’) scriptures respectively denote quite different genre of texts, and with graded degree (rather kind) of authority; the former could even be apauruṣeya, authorless scriptures. The paper analyses the precise reasons for Swāminārāyaṇ arriving at this qualified position and the arguments he garnishes towards this doctrinal hermeneutic, concluding with comments on his slight departure from the classically accepted understanding of śabdapramāṇa where scriptural sources are the preeminent concern with a somewhat different epistemological trajectory.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
This was pointed out to me by Chirayu Thakkar and stated expressly with detailed attention to the commentaries by Prof George Cardona at the panel where Bhadreshdas Swami made a plenary presentation on the massive work that he completed in 2007. The 17th World Sanskrit Conference, Vancouver, Canada, 9th July 2018.
The Vedānta position is presented in the Vedānta Paribhāṣā of Dharmarāja Adhvarīndra, who lived around mid-seventeenth century, and incorporated much of the epistemologies of Mīmāṃsā and Nyāya, along with their respective criticisms also, into Advaita-Vedānta epistemology. (Edited by S. S. Suryanarayana Shastri, Adyar Research Library series, Madras, 1964.)
Śaṅkara accepts the role of inference and argumentation, which he says even the scriptures make use of, and they lead to greater understanding of Śruti, and are an authentic means of knowing provided inference does not contradict scripture. BSB I.i.2 (Thibaut trans. p 15–16); he also brings in intuition here. See also Jayanta Bhaṭṭa 1936.
It may be mentioned that the materialists (Cārvāka-s) and the Buddhists—much like Immanuel Kant does much later in Western philosophical theology—raised doubts about the soundness of this argument, in as much as we have not seen the universe to have been “caused” (as distinct from things within the universe that are admittedly governed by the law of causality), and the example (premise #7), if proper and appropriate, would need to be about other universes having a grand causal agent (not just for pots and cloths or things within our world); the Mīmāṃsaka-s for their part argued that there is no reason why the universe could not be eternally self-propelled, or alternatively be constructed by a consortium of extremely intelligent super-beings who may have since vanished. (See, Bilimoria 2011b)
The official BAPS Swāminārāyaṇ Sanstha website has this to say about Vachanāmrut: “The Holy Scripture of the Swāminārāyaṇ Sampraday. A historical collection of 262 spiritual discourses delivered by Lord Swāminārāyaṇ in the Gujarati language. It is a catechism, filled with infallible logic, startling metaphors and analogies, and divine revelations that provide philosophical and practical answers to the mysteries and questions of life.” http://www.Swāminārāyaṇ.org/scriptures/vachanamrut/. Citation is from http://www.anirdesh.com/vachanamrut/index.php?format=en&vachno=39; Vachanāmrut 68.
Though a passing mention is made in the context of vindicating the truth regarding god Vishnu’s nature about which the detractors had seemingly raised some doubt. Ibid.
Bhartṛhari traces four stages through which vāc or śabda manifests itself—viz., parā, the most subtle, paśyantī, a little less subtle level of manifestation, madhyamā, the middle range to which gods and yogis have access, and vaikharī, the most explicit forms used in verbal transactions, i.e., in language of the common man =person] . Our linguistic behaviour occurs at the vaikharī level, where we grasp meanings in “flashes” (pratibhā) of semantic wholes (akhaṇḍārtha) or gestalt-senses (sphoṭa). Thus, śabda, in this sense, applies at all levels, right up to the unmanifest (avyakta) primodial principle of its origin, the absolute itself, Śabda Brahman.
Vākyapadīya I.I.: anādinidhanaṃ brahma śabdatattvaṃ yadakṣaram vivaratate’rthabhāvena prakriyā jagato yataḥ.
The Brahman who is without beginning or end, whose very essence is the Word, who is the cause of the manifest phonemes, who appears as the objects, from whom the creation of the world proceeds (Iyer trans 1965).
1.143Vaikharya madhyamayas ca paśyantyas caitad adbhūtam, anekatirthabhedayas—trayya vācaḥ paraṃ padam.
The parā or highest source of speech (vāc) has threefold stages through which it manifests many forms — viz., vaikharī, madhyamā, paśyantī.
For a lengthy discussion on this issue with the various readings of Rāmānuja, Yamuna and others, see the Introduction by J. A. B. van Buitenen in Yamuna’s Āgama Prāmāṇyam (=AP). Also in the same book the preface by R. Rāmānujachari is quite interesting in this regard. And Yamuna’s own argument is the same from, at p 95ff. Madhvācārya, in commenting on Brahmasūtra I. i. 3 also stated that the Pāñcarātra is on a par with the Vedas.
This is reinforced by a contemporary commentary that has been issued on the Brahma-sūtra-s from the Sampradāya, Brahmasūtra-Swaminārāyaṇa-bhāṣyam, it would not surprise one to note that it is modeled on Rāmānuja’s Śrībhāṣya.
I use Sampradāya (as Sampradāyakartā) with capital S when referring to the named lineage or parampara of the originary Swāminārāyaṇ order that he established; and sampradaya with lower case “s” when indicating the generic sense of lineage without singling out any particular order or parampara.
References
Primary Sources
Bādarāyaṇa. (1938). Brahmasūtras. Trans. S.K. Balvalkar. Poona: The Bilvakunja Publishing House.
Bhartṛhari. (1965). Vākyapadīya with the Vṛtti, Kāṇḍa I. Trans. K. A, Subramaniya Iyer. Poona: Deccan College Postgraduate Research Institute.
Jayanta, Bhaṭṭa. (1936). Nyāyamañjarī. Ed. Pt Surya Narayan Shukla, Kashi Sanskrit series 106. Varanasi: Chowkhamba Sanskrit Office.
Nārāyaṇa Bhaṭṭa. 1975. Mānameyodaya (treatise in Mīmāṃsā). Trans. C. Kunhan Raja and S. S. Suryanarayan Sastri. Madras: Adyar Library and Research Centre, No 105.
Rāmānuja. (1976). Vedāntasūtra-Bhāṣya (VSB), also known as Śrībhāṣya, (Sacred Books of the East series, Vol XLVIII part III, trans. by George Thibaut). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Rāmānuja. (1974). Gītābhāṣya, commentary on the Bhagavadgītā, issued as Rāmānuja on the Bhagavadgītā. In J. A. B. van Buitenen (Ed.), Trans. Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.
Śabara. 1973. Śabara-bhāṣya (on Jaimini Mīmāṃsāsūtra), Gaekwad oriental series. No. 66. (esp. Vol. I. Adyaya I. III 2, 3, 10; I, i.6, 7, 8) Baroda: Oriental Institute.
Śaṅkara (Śrī Śaṁkarācārya). (1941). Brahmasūtra-Śaṅkara-bhāṣya, (BSB), with five commentaries, Ed with trans. Anantakṛṣṇa Śāstri, Calcutta: Metropolitan Printing & Publishing Co. Other editions consulted are: Brahmasūtras, with text and translation, by Swami Vireswarananda. Calcutta: Advaita Ashram, 1970. (See also under Ghate); The Brahma-sūtras of Bādarāyaṇa with the Commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, Chapter II Quarter II. Original Sanskrit and English trans. by S. K. Belvalkar, Poona: Oriental Books and Supplying Agency.
Srīnivāsadāsa. Yatīndramatadīpikā. (1967). Trans. Swami Ādidevānanda. Mylapore: Sri Ramakrishna Math.
Swāminārāyaṇ, Śrī (also known as Bochasanvasi Śrī Sahajānanda Swami). Śikṣāpatri. 1974 (1882). In H. T. Dave, Life and philosophy of Shree Swāminārāyaṇ, UK: George, Allen and Unwin, pp. 236—259. Also consulted: Gujarati version: https://www.Swāminārāyaṇ.nu/sampraday/shiksha.shtml; English rendition. https://www.Swāminārāyaṇ.nu/sampraday/shiksha.shtml. Accessed 30 July 2016.
Swāminārāyaṇ, Śrī (1819). Vachanāmrut (in Gujarati). The Vachanāmrut: spiritual discourses of Bhagwān Swāminārāyan (in English). Ahmedabad: Swāminārāyaṇ Aksharpith. Translation Website http://ravchandbapa.blogspot.com/2016/03/vartal-1-to-20.html; also http://www.anirdesh.com/vachanamrut/index.php?format=trans&vachno=218. Accessed 1 July 2018.
Van Buitenen. (1971). See next entry.
Yamuna, Āgama Prāmāṇyam (=AP). (1971). Translation with notes, by A. B. van Buitenen. Madras: Rāmānuja Research Society.
Secondary Sources
Bilimoria, P. (1978a). ‘Schools of Vedānta — a plea from a Vedic point of view’, Darshana International (Moradabad), January, Vol. XVIII, No. 1.
Bilimoria, P. (1978b). ‘Śruti and Smriti — the Un-vedic demarcation (a Viśiṣtādvaita point of view), Journal of Dharma (Bangalore) July—Sept, Vol III. No 3.
Bilimoria, P. (1980a). ‘Perception (pratyakṣa) in Advaita Vedānta’, Philosophy East and West, January, Vol. xxx, No. 1, pp. 35–44 .
Bilimoria, P. (1980b). ‘Pramāṇavāda — towards an Indian theory of knowledge’, Darshana International, April.
Bilimoria, P. (1989). ‘The Idea of Authorless Revelation (Apauruṣeya) in the Mīmāṃsā’. In: R. Perrett (Ed.), Indian Philosophy of Religion (pp. 143–166). Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff/Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Bilimoria, P. (1994). ‘Autpattika: the originary signifier-signified relation in Mīmāṃsā and deconstructive semiology.’ In R. R. Diwedhi (Ed.), Mandan Mishra felicitation (pp. 187–203). Delhi: L.B.S. Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapitha.
Bilimoria, P. (1997). ‘Liberating language: Pārthasārathi Miśra on the sentence and its meaning’. In: D. van der Meij (Ed.),India and Beyond: Aspects of Literature, Meaning, Ritual and Thought, Essays in Honour of Frits Staal (pp. 27–49). Whitelackington: Kegan Paul
Bilimoria, P. (2008). Śabdapramāṇa: Word & Knowledge: Testimony in Indian Philosophy, New Delhi: DK PrintWorld, 2011; expanded reprint of 1988 edition with Kluwer Publishers, Dordrecht.
Bilimoria, P. (2014). ‘Mantric effect, noetics of supplication, and the Apūrva in the Mīmāṃsā’. In: S. Kumar (Ed.), Sanskrit Studies Volume III (Sanskrit Studies Series of JNU) (pp. 222–247). New Delhi: DKPrintWorld.
Bilimoria, P. (2018). Pramāṇa Epistemology: its origins and development’. In: P. Bilimoria (Ed.), Routledge History of Indian Philosophy with Amy Rayner (pp. 27–39). UK: Routledge.
Black, B. (2018), 'Upaniṣads'. In: P. Bilimoria (Ed.), Routledge History of Indian Philosophy Amy Rayner,(pp. 122–130). UK: Routledge.
Dave, Ramesh, & M. (2000). Navya-Viśiṣṭādvaita The Vedānta Philosophy of Śrī Swāminārāyaṇ. Ahmedabad: Akṣara Prakāśana.
Ghate, V. S. (1960). The Vedānta A study of the Brahma-sūtras with the Bhāṣyas of Śaṁkara, Rāmānuja, Nimbārka, Madhva, Vallabha. Pune: The Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.
Jha, G. (1978). Pūrva-Mīmāṃsā In its sources, Varanasi: Banaras Hindu University, 1964.
Mahadevan, T. M. P. (1976). The Philosophy of Advaita. New Delhi: Arnold Heinemann.
Panikkar, Raimon. (1977). The Vedic experience: Mantramañjarī — a mythology of the Vedas for modern man and contemporary celebration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Srinivasachari, P. N. (1967). Foreword to Srīnivāsadas̄a 1967 (see under Primary Texts).
Srinivasa Chari, S. M. (1976). Advaita and Viśiṣtādvaita. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas.
Srinivasa Chari, S. M. (1999). Philosophy of Vedāntasūtra: study on the evaluation of the commentaries of Saṁkara. In Rāmānuja and Madhva. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.
Yajnik, J.A. 1972. The Philosophy of Shri Swaminarayan. Ahmedabad: L D Institute of Indology.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
A study of the pramāa-s Is an indispensable prolegomena to all metaphysical investigation (pramāṇādhīna prameya sthitiḥ)—S M Śrīnivasa Chari (1976:19)
A much earlier version of this paper was published as “Swāminārāyaṇ and Shabda-Pramāṇa”, In New Dimensions in Vedānta Philosophy: Bhagawan Swāminārāyaṇ Bicentenary Commemoration Volume, 1781–1981, ed. by Sahajānanda, Ahmedabad: Bochasanwasi Śrī Aksharpurushottam Sansthsa, 1981, pp. 150–159. I am grateful to three anonymous reviewers nominated by JDS, and to Chirayu Thakkar, for their respective comments that have helped me greatly to improve, update, and sharpen the arguments and analysis in this paper.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bilimoria, P. Śrī Swāminārāyaṇ’s Position on Śabdapramāṇa and Śruti: Questions of Epistemic and Theological Validity. DHARM 1, 45–67 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42240-018-0014-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42240-018-0014-4