Over the last fifteen years, studies on Sanskrit intellectual history between the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries have produced a body of scholarship that has fundamentally reshaped our understanding of the period. Yet, despite significant advances in the understanding of the social-historical circumstances of authors and disciplines as well as success in elucidating major features of intellectual thought, a main point of difficultly has been in combining both the intellectuality and sociality of Sanskrit scholars. By examining a debate within the discipline (...) of nyāya during the seventeenth century about how one cognizes the universal property ‘Brahman-ness ’ and by connecting it with a social debate that is found in available historical documents of the period, this essay attempts to combine the sociality of the Brahman scholarly community in Vārāṇasī with their intellectuality and offer a larger analysis of nyāya intellectual history for this period. The essay concludes by considering the ways in which the social world impinged upon nyāya argumentation and nyāya argumentation upon the social world. (shrink)

The seventeenth century author Nīlakaṇṭha Caturdhara wrote several works criticising the Vedāntic theology of the sixteenth century author, Appayya Dīkṣita. In one of these works, the Vedāntakataka, Nīlakaṇṭha picks out two doctrines for criticism: that the liberated soul becomes the Lord, and that souls thus liberated remain the Lord until all other souls are liberated. These doctrines appear both in Appayya’s Advaitin and in his Śivādvaitin writings. They appear to be ones to which Appayya was committed. They raise theological and (...) conceptual problems, however, both in themselves as doctrines, and as part of nondual Vedāntic teaching. A study of the Vedāntakataka reveals those features of Appayya’s Vedānta that Advaitins in Banaras in the century after his life considered to be anomalous, and illuminates aspects of the context in which his ideas developed and circulated. (shrink)

The ninth chapter of the Haṃsavilāsa of the Gujarati Śaiva author Haṃsamiṭṭhu (born 1738 ad) argues that Pātañjalayoga, conceived of as a conflation of Aṣṭāṅgayoga and Haṭhayoga, cannot be valid soteriology. Pātañjalayoga is presented as a paradoxical and painful attempt to achieve quiescence by forcibly eliminating karma. Haṃsamiṭṭhu, conversely, views ‘euphoria’ (ullāsa) as a prerequisite for liberation, and therefore advocates a painless method of Rājayoga. This is taught as a Śaiva form of the Rāsalīlā involving transgressive substances and behaviour. A (...) frame story establishes Haṃsamiṭṭhu’s authority to teach such practices by revealing his secret identity as Haṃsa, a favored companion of Śiva who incarnates for a single life to promulgate esoteric teachings. The purity of this Rāsalīlā is defended by challenging the validity of a conventional morality that seeks to portray it as abhorrent. (shrink)

In a doxography of views called the Ṣaṭtantrīsāra, a seventeenth century commentator and Advaitin, Nīlakaṇṭha Caturdhara, describes the doctrines of a group he calls the Miśras. Nīlakaṇṭha represents the doctrines of the Miśras as in most ways distinct from those of the canonical positions that usually appear in such doxographies, both āstika and nāstika. And indeed, some of the doctrines he describes resemble those of the Abrahamic faiths, concerning the creator, a permanent afterlife in heaven or hell, and the unique (...) births of souls. Other doctriness are difficult to associate with any known South Asian religion, for example the emphasis placed on astrological determinism in the moral economy of the creation. As the Ṣaṭtantrīsāra is unpublished to date, a preliminary edition of those portions that concern the Miśras is presented here, together with a translation, notes, and some further discussion. Though the identification is not certain, it seems most likely that the views Nīlakaṇṭha describes in this text belonged to Vanamālī Miśra, a North Indian Mādhva who had lived in the Ganges-Yamuna doab in the mid to late seventeenth century. Even if that identification turns out to be correct, many questions remain. (shrink)