^1 CHAPTER - IV !

Contemporary Relevance of Mimamsa

 Mimamsa is a systematic and thorough investigation on Vedic
passages. It has discussed a number of problems of language from
many levels of human psychology. According to Mimamsa, language
is not a mere way of communicating ideas through articulated
sounds. Sound is the only powerful weapon to compel us in different
activities. Mimamsa defined dhanna as the process of activating.^
Accordingly sound or sabda is of the nature of Preranasvarupa or
provocation. Language makes some urge in us to do as directed.
There will be no communication and understanding without an
intention on the part of the speaker to influence the practical
behaviour of the hearer. In Kavyaprakasa, Mammata refers to the
Vedic passages which are like the orders of the master.^
Mimamsakas know this power of language from the early times
and they accepted Sabda as the only valid means in understanding
dhanna. Most of our knowledge is derived from reading and
listening, hence we can say that it is linguistically communicated.
 223

Jaimini had noted this idea while discussing the nature of the means

of real knowledge (pramanas). Thus the theory of bhavana presented

by Mimamsa with its two fold nature such as Sabdi the power of

language in human activities in a psychic way. Hence Dr. K.K.

Raja^ and other modem writers consider Mimamsa as a system

which considers language from the psychological standpoint, while

grammarians and logicians from the linguistic one.

Modem linguistics considers language as a very facinating and

remarkable functioning and even says that language is power.

Semiotics of 20* centuary origin discusses the scope and

development of language and other sign studies to the fields of

cultural anthropology.

Both Mimamsa and modem linguistics admit the all pervading

nature of language. A world without language is not possible for

men. Hence Bhartrhari in Vakyapadiya says that.

3T5f%Sf^ HPT ^ 7 ^ "^^ I I"*

 224
Dandin, one of the renowned poet and poetician of the 6th

centuary AD also holds the same view, He says;

Saussure, the modem linguist says thought is a shapeless mass;

which is only ordered by language. One of the questions,

philosophers have puzzled over centuries is whether ideas can exist

at all without language. According to Saussure, no idea preexist

language; language gives shape to ideas and makes them expressible.

According to Saussure, the value of Sabdas is determined

through their position in the sentence. Thus there is a linear tendency

in every spoken and written language. We can't say two words at a

time. Indian linguists also present threefold factor which is

considered as the causes of proper understanding through verbal

apprehension. In Manameyodaya, Narayana Bhatta says the same

thing as:
 225

Means, Here expectancy, compatibiligy and proximity - these

three have been assumed by all as causes in understanding the sense

of a sentence.

The meaning of a word in a sentence is determined by the

context only. This modem view is somewhat similar to the idea

presented by Prabhakara and others in Indian thought.

Mimamsa's contribution to Indian epistemology and semantics

makes this school relevent even today. In addition to pratyaksa,

anumana, and sabdapramana. Mimamsa has envisaged a fifth

pramana, ie., arthapattiJ This pramana is utilized to establish the

category of apurva. This pramana is accepted by both Bhatta and

Prabhakara. The Bhatta envisaged one more pramana viz.

Anupalabdhi the absence of cognition. By this pramana the absence

of the object is cognized.

Mimamsa principles for interpreting a sentence could be appUed

for interpreting the vyavahara portions of the smrtis which contained

civil and criminal laws. Leading smrtikaras and commentators of

the smrtis fully utilized the fundamental rules of Mimamsa laid

 226

down by Jaimini for clarifying and expounding the several

complicated provisions of law.^ Therefore, Mimamsa, though
originated for interpreting the rules governing performance of
religious acts, came to occupy an important position in the ancient
legal system of this country.

Mr. Colebrooke, who recognised the importance of Mimamsa

in the interpretation of Hindu law, observed: A case is proposed
either specified in Jaimini's text or supplied by his scholiast. Upon
this a doubt or question is raised, a solution of it is suggested which
refuted, and arightconclusion established in its stead. So Mimama
bear a certain resemblence to judicial questions. The logic of the
Mimamsa is the logic of the law the rule of interpretation of civil
and reUgious ordinance. Each case is examined and determined upon
general principles; and from the cases decided, the principles may
be collected. A well ordered arrangement of them would constitute
the philosophy of the law and this is in truth, what has been
attempted in the Mimamsa.^

Unfortunately, for modem Hindus, the examples that Jaimini

choose for illustrating his rules of interpretation were all from

 227
sacrificial rituals. Naturally during his time, every Brahmana was

familiar with these rituals, and hence they were regarded as

providing most suitable, illustrative examples. Later rituals

disappeared from the life of Hindus and this led to the neglect of

Mimamsa. Sastra. Even so, it continues to be recognised that the

rules that Jaimini evolved are still found useful in the interpretation

of law texts and they have been so widely used that there is no

important legal digest which does not draw upon the Nyayas of

Jaimini.

The prescription of Mimamsa as a quaUfication forjudges spells

out its importance in the interpretation of civil and criminal laws.^

At this stage it should be mentioned that Mimamsa is a vast and

independent subject and therefore, in the nature of things it

constitutes an independent subject for study.*^ However as indicated

above, in view of its importance to the branch of law, legal history

would be incomplete without any reference to the rules of Mimamsa.

The Mimamsa certainly deserves greater attention than it has

hither to received. It has indeed one of the attractions which the

 228
Other darsanas derive from the speculative character of their content,

its scope is limited and the native of investigation in which it is

engaged leaves no room for high flights of imagination. But it

possesses counter balancing advantages. Its subject matter is of a

positive nature, its method is sound and its reasoning in most cases

convincing.

The Mimamsa principles of interpretation werefirstlaid down

by Jaimini in his siitras about 500 B.C. They are referred in many

smrtis which are very old. This indicates they are ancient. Since

Jamini's siitras are in very terse and concise form it become

necessary to explain many other ancient texts like Apasthambha

sutra. Many commentaries were written on them by Upavarsa,

Sahara etc. Sahara bhasya commented by Kumarila, Prabhakara etc.

Many scholars like Parthasarathimisra, Salikanatha, Apadeva,

Laugakshi Bhaskara were wrote texts based on Mimamsa. All these

interpreters have gone much deeper into the topic than Maxwell.

While the westerners have been doing interpretation only for about

200 years.^^ We have been doing interpetation for 2500 years or so.
 229

The Mimamsa principles of interpretation were created for

religious purposes to enable correct performance of the yagas.

However, since these principles were extremely rational and logical

they began to be subsequently used in other branches of Sanskrit

literature, eg: in philosophy, law, grammar etc., that is to say they

became of universal application.

However, the Mimamsa system also contains principles of

interpretation, which are very rational and logical, and this should

be promoted and used in our law courts. We must make our literature

and tradition connected with practical life, otherwise it will remain

sterile. One way to do this is to start using mimamsa principles in

our law courts, because the system of Purvamimamsa is relevant

even today.
 230

References

1. "T^lciHM?Fit5?ff ^ " - Mimamsasutras of Jaimini 1.1.2.

2. "jnpif^ 5TQ?5rsiR ^?flf^TR#^' -Mainm3itta,Kavyaprakasa.p.l9.

3. Dr. K. Kunjunni Raja - Mimamsa Contribution to Language

Studies. PP.14-16.

4. Vakyapadiya quoted in Manameyodaya, P. 19.

5. Mammatta - Kavyaprakasa, 1.2.

6. Narayanbhatta - Manameyodaya. F.100.

7. Sabarabhasya, P.76.

8. M. Rama Jois - The Mimamsa rules of interpretation.

9. Colebrooke, Miscelleneous Essays, Vol.1, P.342.

10. Quoted by M. Rama Jois in his paper The Mimamsa rules of

interpretation. From the Qualification of Judges, Part VII. Ch.
I. of L&C.H.

11. Sahara Bhasya Translated into English by Dr. Ganganath Jha

in 3 vols, 24,29 pages.

12. Maxwells book was written in 1875.