ajAti vAda

the supreme source of knowledge. The primacy concern of mImAm.sA is textual
exegesis, in addition to being a school of philosophy. Theology and religion are
inseparable from philosophy in the mImAm.sA schools. However, both pUrva and uttara
mImAm.sA schools maintain that Sruti exists only to reveal that which cannot be known
otherwise. Moreover, Sruti cannot deny a fact that is amenable to ordinary perception,
e.g. no amount of repetition by the vedas that fire is cold will make fire cold. Thus, if
there occurs a statement in Sruti that goes contrary to perception, it requires
interpretation in a metaphorical or allegorical sense. Hence, there is a place for logical
thinking based on perception and inference in these schools.
pUrva mImAm.sA interprets the vedas mainly as a set of injunctions (vidhi), with
adjoining recital (mantra) and commentary (arthavAda) portions. Thus, a statement, "he
who is desirous of heaven should perform the jyotishToma rite" is a vidhi, an injunction,
and the rite itself is to be performed with the relevant mantras. The knowledge conveyed
by this statement is not known by any other means, and its purpose is to impel the
listener to action. According to pUrva mImAm.sA, this heaven is the highest salvation
that is available to human beings, and thus the vedas are the sources of knowledge about
both dharma and moksha. The upanishads and brAhmaNas which relate to the said
jyotishToma rite are considered to be the arthavAda, the explanatory commentary. The
knowledge conveyed by the upanishads is also not known by any other means, but the
upanishads are considered to be subordinate to the statements which impel man to
action. Along with injunctions, there are also pratishedhas, statements which prohibit
certain actions. The tradition of such textual exegesisis codified in the mImAm.sA sUtras
of jaimini, with commentaries by Sabara, and sub-commentaries by kumArila
bhaTTa and prabhAkara. The mImAm.sA that is taught in traditional vaidIka
pAThaSAlAs in India today is based mainly upon the SAbara bhAshya and kumArila's
vArttikas. This school is called bhATTa mImAm.sA; the rival school called guru mata,
following prabhAkara's interpretation, is mostly extinct today.
uttara mImAm.sA, also called vedAnta, does not consider the upanishads and
brAhmaNas as arthavAda subservient to vidhis. Instead, they are seen to be sources of
brahman knowledge, addressed solely to those who seek moksha. The rituals enjoined in
the vedas are applicable to the realm of dharma, but the one who seeks liberation does
not merely desire a place in heaven; he is in search of ultimate Reality itself. The
upanishads are viewed as those portions of the Sruti that address philosophical questions
about Reality, here called brahman. This tradition of exegesis follows the brahmasUtras
of bAdarAyaNa. Within vedAnta, there is considerable difference of opinion on whether
the upanishads enjoin anything at all. The non-advaita schools consider some of the
statements in the upanishads to be injunctions. The most famous example is AtmA vA are
drashTavya: Srotavya: mantavya: nididhyAsitavya:. Most, if not all, non-advaita schools
would take this to be an injunction. In contrast, the advaitin approach to this statement is
to treat it as advice to the mumukshu, not as an injunction. This is because the AtmA is
an accomplished fact; it is not a result of any action and therefore meditation on the
innermost AtmA cannot be enjoined. In this respect, knowing the Atman contrasts with
the heaven which is attained as a result of the performance of the jyotishToma sacrifice.
According to advaita vedAnta, the veda addresses itself to two kinds of audiences - the