Mimamsa and Vedanta: Interaction and Continuity.

• Author: Clooney, Francis X.

Mimamsa and Vedanta: Interaction and Continuity. Edited by JOHANNES BRONKHORST. Papers of the 12th World Sanskrit Conference, vol. 10.3. Delhi: MOTILAL BANARSIDASS, 2007. Pp. 260 + xii. Rs 600.

This splendid volume is comprised of six papers from the Twelfth World Sanskrit Conference in Helsinki (2003): J. Bronkhorst, ''Vedanta as Mimamsa"; M. Schmucker, "Debates about the Object of Perception in the Traditions of Advaita and Visistadvaita"; W. Slaje, "Yajnavalkya-brahmanas and the Early Mimamsa"; J. Taber, "Kumarila the Vedantin?"; J. M. Verpoorten, "Mimamsa-and Vedanta-Sentences in Padmapada's Pancapadika Chapter 2"; and K. Yoshimizu, "Kumarila's Reevaluation of the Sacrifice and the Veda from a Vedanta Perspective." It takes on the formidable (and understudied) topic of the relationship between Mimamsa (ritual reflection on the Veda) and Vedanta (philosophical and theological analysis of the Upanisads) as this developed during 500-1000 C.E., an era wherein the Vedanta developed as an independent school of thought, while Mimamsa "underwent important modifications which brought it closer to certain Vedanta positions" (p. v). The preface highlights the cautious consensus underlying the volume: Kumarila Bhatta was of course a great Mimamsaka, but Vedantins such as Samkara and Mandana Misra were also Mimamsakes; "they did not however agree with one another. They differed on fundamental points, such as the role of, and need for ritual activity to reach the ultimate goal, liberation" (p. v).

Bronkhorst's long essay (seventy-eight pages and thirteen pages of notes) lays the groundwork for what follows. He updates and nuances the old debate about the relationship between the so-called Purva Mimamsa and (Vedanta as) the Uttara Mimamsa. Reviewing recent secondary literature on the topic, particularly essays by Asko Parpola, he considers the prospect of the original intellectual and possibly textual unity of the two Mimamsas. Bronkhorst's opinion, even early in the essay, is negative: "The testimony from later authors does not support the hypothesis that the Purva-and Uttara-Mimamsa originally were one system, even less that the Purva-and Uttar-Mimamsa [Sutras] were originally part of one work" (p. 23). In the bulk of the essay he supports rather a different thesis: "At least some Vedantins at some point in the history of this current of thought made an effort to turn themselves into, or become recognized as, some kind of Mimamsakas, different from the ritual Mimamsakas, but Mimamsakas none the less, this because these Vedantins, too, followed the same strict rules of Vedic...