As I discuss in this question, by far the most popular school of Hindu philosophy is the Vedanta school, which bases its tenets on the doctrines laid out in the Brahma Sutras, a work by the sage Vyasa that summarizes and systematizes the philosophical teachings of the Upanishads. But before the time of Adi Shankaracharya the dominant school of Hindu philosophy was the Purva Mimamsa school, which I discuss here. In contrast to the Vedanta school which is devoted to analyzing the Jnana Kanda of the Vedas, i.e. the Upanishads, Purva Mimamsa focuses on analyzing the Karma Kanda of the Vedas, i.e. the Samhitas and Brahmanas.

Now as I discuss in this answer, the Purva Mimamsa school was often borderline agnostic/atheist. But some Mimamsakas, most notably Kumarila Bhatta, acknowledged the existence of a supreme being, although they did not believe that this being was responsible for creating the Universe. (They thought the Universe was uncreated and eternal.). But this excerpt from Kumarila Bhatta's Tantra Vartika sheds light on one role he did envision Brahman as playing:

As for the knowledge of Self; both by Conjunction and Disjunction it is found to help the sacrifice as well as the Person; because unless are knows his self (to be something other than the body that perishes) he would never undertake the sacrifices whose results are said to accrue to the man in another birth. And then again, such passages as - "the Self free from all evil...is to be sought after, etc.," "one should worship the Self" - lay down the knowledge of Self as accomplished by a process accompanied by due reflection, etc.; and then from such knowledge, we find that there accrues to the agents both kinds of result - Happiness as well as final Deliverance, as is shown by the following passages: - "He obtains all worlds and all desires, passes beyond all sorrow, etc., etc.," - which speaks of all the eight perfections of Yoga accruing to the person knowing the self; and the passage - "passing his life thus he, after death, reaches the regions of Brahma, and from there he never returns" - which points to the attainment of the Supreme Self (Final Deliverance) also as following from a due knowledge of the Self.

As you can see, Kumarila Bhatta at least relates Moksha to the Jivatma attaining Paramatma. But my question is, what is the relationship between Jivatma and Paramatma according to Kumarila Bhatta? And which Vedantic philosophy is his view of the Jivatma-Paramatma closest to?

Now as a Mimamsaka, Kumarila Bhatta diagreed with the Vedanta school on many subjects. As I discuss in this question, he believed in a theory of multiple omnipresent Jivatmas, in contrast to most Vedantic philosophies which see the Jivatma as atomic in size. So there's clearly disagreement about the nature of the Jivatma, but are his beliefs concerning the relationship between the Jivatma and Paramatma similar to any Vedantic philosophy? I don't think his beliefs had much in common with Advaita, since he believed in a multiplicity of Jivatmas. But did he believe that Jivatma and Paramatma are absolutely different as Dvaita says, or that they have a body-soul relationship as Visistadvaita says, or what?

  • 4
    There should be a tag for kumarila-bhatta, see this! – iammilind Jul 10 '17 at 8:59
  • @iammilind Good point. Let me see if I can add Kumarila Bhatta tags to my questions without eliminating other useful tags. – Keshav Srinivasan Jul 11 '17 at 17:55

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .