Facebook-Telegram - Youtube-: Dalal Technologies

• Facebook-https://www.facebook.com/dalal.
tech
• telegram - https://t.me/DalalTechnologies
• YouTube-https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCilEr1rW-SIrJlJ5_ioKQfw
DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)
Disclaimer/Note
These are just the sample of the answers/solution to some of the questions given in the assignments. Student should
read and refer the official study material provided by the university.
• Facebook-https://www.facebook.com/dalal.tech
Disclaimer/Note
SOLUTIONS
Answer1
Pratityasamutpada (Sanskrit: Pratityasamutpada; Pāli: paṭiccasamuppāda), commonly translated as dependent

origination or dependent arising, is the principle that all things arise in dependence upon multiple causes and
conditions–nothing exists as a singular, independent entity.
The term is used in the Buddhist teachings in two senses:
• On a general level, it refers to one of the doctrines that all things arise in dependence upon multiple causes and
conditions.
• On a specific level, the term is used to refer to a specific application of this general principle—namely the twelve
links of dependent origination.
The concept of pratityasamutpada is the basis for other key concepts in Buddhism, such as the four noble truths,
karma and rebirth. The general principle of pratityasamutpada is complementary to the concept of sunyata
(emptiness).
The principle of dependent origination is closely related to the Four Noble Truths. Contemporary scholar Peter
D. Santina explains:
What is it that the Four Noble Truths and dependent origination have in common? The principle that both have in common
is the principle of causality—the law of cause and effect, of action and consequence. ...we have mentioned that the Four
Noble Truths are divided into two groups. The first two—suffering and the causes of suffering, and the last two—the end
of suffering and the path to the end of suffering. In both of these groups, it is the law of cause and effect that governs the
relationship between the two. In other words, suffering is the effect of the cause of suffering; and similarly, the end of
suffering is the effect of the path to the end of suffering. Here too in regard to dependent origination, the fundamental
principle at work is that of cause and effect. In dependent origination, we have a more detailed description of what actually
takes place in the causal process.
Karma
The principle of dependent origination underpins the concept of karma, which is an application of this principle
to individual actions and their fruition. The Dalai Lama explains the relation between dependent origination and
karma as follows:
Disclaimer/Note
Karma is one particular instance of the natural causal laws that operate throughout the universe where, according
to Buddhism, things and events come into being purely as a result of the combination of causes and conditions.
Karma, then, is an instance of the general law of causality. What makes karma unique is that it involves intentional
action, and therefore an agent. The natural causal processes operating in the world cannot be termed karmic
where there is no agent involved. In order for a causal process to be a karmic one, it must involve an individual
whose intention would lead to a particular action. It is this specific type of causal mechanism which is known as
karma.
As in the principle of dependent origination, within the functioning of karma, every fruition is said to depend
upon multiple causes and conditions. Bhikkhu Thanissaro states:
...one of the many things the Buddha discovered in the course of his awakening was that causality is not linear.
The experience of the present is shaped both by actions in the present and by actions in the past. Actions in the
present shape both the present and the future. The results of past and present actions continually interact. Thus
there is always room for new input into the system, which gives scope for free will.
No-self (anatman)
The principle of dependent origination also applies to the concept of no-self (anatman). The concept of no-self or
anatman or emptiness of self is that it is not possible to identify an independent, inherently existing self; that the
self only exists in dependence upon causes and conditions. This theory can be broken down as follows:
• If you look for the self within the body, you cannot find it there, since the body itself is dependent upon its parts.
• If you look for the self within the mind, you cannot find it there, since the mind can only be said to exist in relation
to external objects; therefore, the mind is also dependent upon causes and conditions outside of itself.
• Hence, since the self cannot be said to exist within the body or mind, it is said to be "empty of inherent existence".
Emptiness (sunyata)
In the Mahayana tradition, the principle of pratītyasamutpāda is said to complement the concept of emptiness
(sunyata). It is said that because all things arise in dependence upon causes and conditions, they are empty of
inherent existence.
A classic expression of this relationship was provided by the Indian scholar Nagarjuna in the twenty-fourth
chapter of his Treatise on the Middle Way. Nagarjuna stated:
Whatever arises dependently

Is explained as empty.
Thus dependent attribution
Is the middle way.
Since there is nothing whatever

That is not dependently existent,
Disclaimer/Note
For that reason there is nothing

Whatsoever that is not empty.
"Here Nagarjuna states the Madhyamika or middle way position. Everything that exists does so dependently
and everything that is dependently existent necessarily lacks independent objective existence."
Answer2(a)
The Samkhya metaphysics, especially its doctrine of Prakrti, rests mainly on its theory of causation which is known
as satkarya-vada. It is a theory as to the relation of an effect to its material cause. The specific question discussed here
is this: Does an effect originally exist in the material cause prior to its production, i.e. appearance as an effect? The
Buddhists and the Nyaya-Vaisesikas answer this question in the negative. According to them, the effect cannot be said
to exist before it is produced by some cause. If the effect already existed in the material cause prior to its production,
there is no sense in our speaking of it as being caused or produced in any way. Further, we cannot explain why the
activity of any efficient cause is necessary for the production of the effect. If the pot already existed in the clay, why
should the potter exert himself and use his implements to produce it? Moreover, if the effect were already in its material
Disclaimer/Note
cause, it would logically follow that the effect is indistinguishable from the cause, and that we should use the same
name for both the pot and the clay, and also that the same purpose would be served by a pot and a lump of clay. It
cannot be said that there is a distinction of form between the effect and its material cause, for then we have to admit
that there is something in the effect which is not to be found in its cause and, therefore the effect does not really exist
in the cause. This theory that the effect does not exist in the material cause prior to its production is known as asatkarya-
vada (i.e. the view that the karya or the effect is asat or non-existent before its production. It is also called
arambhavada, i.e. the theory of the beginning of the effect anew.
The Samkhyas repudiate this theory of causation and establish their view of satkarya-vada, namely, that the effect
exists in the material cause even before it is produced. This view is based on the following grounds:
(1) if the affect were really non-existent in the material cause, then no amount of effort on the part of any agent could
bring it into existence. Can any man turn blue into red, or sugar into salt? Hence, when an effect is produced from
some material cause, we are to say that it pre-exists in the cause and is only manifested by certain favorable conditions,
as when oil is produced by pressing seeds. The activity of efficient causes like the potter and his tools is necessary to
manifest the effect, pot, which exists implicitly in the clay.
(2) There is an invariable relation between a material cause and its effect. A material cause can produce only that effect
with which it is causally related. It cannot produce an effect which is in no way related to it. But it cannot be related
to what does not exist. Hence the effect must exist in the material cause before it is actually produced.
(3) We see that only certain effects can be produced from certain causes. Curd can be got only out of milk and a cloth
only out of threads. This shows that the effect somehow exists in the cause. Had it not been so, any effect could be
produced from any cause; the potter would not have taken clay to produce pots, instead of taking milk or threads or
any other thing.
(4) The fact that only a potent cause can produce a desired effect goes to show that the effect must be potentially
contained in the cause. The potent cause of an effect is that which possesses some power that is definitely related to
the effect. But the power cannot be related to the effect, if the latter does not exist in some form. This means that effect
exists in the cause in an unmanifested form before its production or manifestation.
(5) If the effect be really non-existent in the cause, then we have to say that, when it is produced, the non-existent
comes into existence, i.e. something comes out of nothing, which is absurd.
(6) We see that the effect is not different from, but essentially identical with, the material cause. If, therefore, the cause
exists, the effect also must exist. In fact, the effect and the cause are the explicit and implicit states of the same
substance. A cloth is not really different from the threads, of which it is made; a statue is the same as its material cause,
stone, with new shape and form; the weight of a table is the same as that of the pieces of wood used in it. The conclusion
drawn by the Samkhya from all this is that the effect exists in the material cause even before its
production or appearance. This is the theory of satkarya-vada (i.e. the view that the effect is
existent before its appearance).
The theory of satkarya-vada has got two different forms, namely, parinama-vada and vivartavada. According to the
former, when an effect is produced, there is a real transformation (parinama) of the cause into the effect, e.g. the
production of a pot from clay, or of curd from milk. The Samkhya is in favour of this view as a further specification
Disclaimer/Note
of the theory of satkaryavada. The vivarta-vada which is accepted by the Advaita Vedantins, holds that the change of
the cause into the effect is merely apparent. When we see a snake in a rope, it is not the case that the rope is only
transformed into a snake; what happens is that the rope only appears as, but is not really a snake. So also, God or
Brahman does not become really transformed into the world produced by him, but remains identically the same, while
we may wrongly think that He undergoes change and becomes the world.
Answer2(b)
Moksha – liberation of Advaita Vedanta
The soteriological goal, in Advaita, is to gain self-knowledge and complete understanding of the identity of Atman
and Brahman. Correct knowledge of Atman and Brahman leads to dissolution of all dualistic tendencies and to
liberation, Moksha is attained by realizing one's true identity as Ātman, and the identity of Atman and Brahman,
the complete understanding of one's real nature as Brahman in this life. This is stated by Shankara as follows:
I am other than name, form and action.

My nature is ever free!
I am Self, the supreme unconditioned Brahman.
I am pure Awareness, always non-dual.
— Adi Shankara
According to Advaita Vedanta, liberation can be achieved while living, and is called Jivanmukti The Atman-
knowledge, that is the knowledge of true Self and its relationship to Brahman is central to this liberation in Advaita
thought. Atman-knowledge, to Advaitins, is that state of full awareness, liberation and freedom which overcomes
dualities at all levels, realizing the divine within oneself, the divine in others and all beings, the non-dual Oneness,
that Brahman is in everything, and everything is Brahman.
According to Rambachan, in Advaita, this state of liberating self-knowledge includes and leads to the
understanding that "the self is the self of all, the knower of self sees the self in all beings and all beings in the
self."
Liberation or mokṣa of Samkhya
The Supreme Good is mokṣa which consists in the permanent impossibility of the incidence of pain... in the realisation of
the Self as Self pure and simple.
—Samkhyakarika
Samkhya school considers moksha as a natural quest of every soul. The Samkhyakarika states,
Disclaimer/Note
As the unconscious milk functions for the sake of nourishment of the calf,
so the Prakriti functions for the sake of moksha of the spirit.
— Samkhya karika,
Samkhya regards ignorance (avidyā) as the root cause of suffering and bondage (Samsara). Samkhya states that
the way out of this suffering is through knowledge (viveka). Mokṣa (liberation), states Samkhya school, results
from knowing the difference between prakṛti (avyakta-vyakta) and puruṣa (jña).
Puruṣa, the eternal pure consciousness, due to ignorance, identifies itself with products of prakṛti such as intellect
(buddhi) and ego (ahamkara). This results in endless transmigration and suffering. However, once the realization
arises that puruṣa is distinct from prakṛti, is more than empirical ego, and that puruṣa is deepest conscious self
within, the Self gains isolation (kaivalya) and freedom (moksha).
Other forms of Samkhya teach that Mokṣa is attained by one's own development of the higher faculties of
discrimination achieved by meditation and other yogic practices. Moksha is described by Samkhya scholars as a
state of liberation, where Sattva guna predominates.
Answer3(a)
Vaiśeṣika Philosophy deals with Metaphysics and focuses chiefly on seven categories (Padārtha). It believes that
the world consists of these seven categories namely substance, quality, action, particular, universal, inherence
and non-being. Amongst these seven entities, substance is the material cause of the composite object.
Substances are of nine kinds such as earth, water, air, fire, ether, space, time, soul and mind. Thus, Vai śeṣika
system admits both material and spiritual substances. The first four substances and mind are atomic. In Vaiśeṣika
Philosophy, atom is the smallest, indivisible and eternal part of the composite thing.
The word ‗Vaiśeṣika ‘comes from the word ‗Viśeṣa‘, means distinction. Maharsi Kaṇāda developed this
philosophy in his famous treatise Vaiśeṣika‘Sūtra, which has much in common with modern physics. The
etymological meaning of the word ‗Kaṇād‘ is atomeater which characterized this system because one of the
central theories of the Vaiśeṣika philosophy is the theory of atom. There are ten chapters and three hundred
and sixty-eight aphorisms in the Vaiśeṣika Sutra.1 Book I deals with five categories namely substance (Dravya),
quality (Guṇa), action (Karma), universal (Sāmānya) and ultimate differentiator (Viśeṣa). Book II explores various
Disclaimer/Note
substances. The subject-matters of the book III are the objects of the senses and the nature of inference. Book
IV investigates the atomic structure of the universe whereas book V concentrates on the nature of action and
its types. Book VI discusses ethical problems. Book VII discusses the questions of quality, self and inherence. The
remaining three books highlight on the problems of perception, inference and causality.
As Vaiśeṣika‘philosophy considers that diversity is the root of the universe, it is known as pluralistic realism. It
deals with the categories at length and unfolds its atomistic pluralism. In Vaiśeṣika ‘philosophy, category refers
to Padārtha. The literal meaning of the word Padārtha is ‗the meaning of a word ‘or ‗the object signified by a
word ‘. In this system, Padārtha refers to an object which can be thought (Jňeya) and named (abhidheya). In its
view, the entire universe is divided into two main categories- being (bhāva) and non-being (abhāva). Being again
is divided into six categories. All knowledge necessarily points to an object beyond and independent of it. Thus,
according to this philosophy, all that is real comes under the object of knowledge and is called padārtha
which are seven in number. These seven categories are as follow:
1. Substance (Dravya)
2. Quality (Guṇa)
3. Action (Karma)
4. Universal (Sāmanya)
5. Particular (Viśeṣa)
6. Inherence (Samavāya) and
7. Non-Being. (Abhāva)
Answer3(c)
Jaina seven-valued logic is system of argumentation developed by Jaina philosophers and thinkers to support
and substantiate their theory of pluralism. This argumentation system has seven distinct semantic predicates which
may be thought of as seven different truth values. Traditionally, in the Jaina and other Indian literature dealing
with topics in Jain philosophy, this system of argumentation is referred to as Saptabhangivada or Syadvada. The
earliest reference to Syadvada occurs is the writings of Bhadrabahu (c. 433–357 BCE). There is mention of
Syadvada in the Nyayavatara of Siddhasena Divakara (about 480–550 CE). Samantabhadra (about 600 CE) gave
a full exposition of the seven parts of Syadvada or Saptabhanginyaya in his Aptamimamsa. The Syadvadamanjari
of Mallisena (1292 CE) is a separate treatise on the same theory. There are, of course, still later works and a large
number of modern commentaries. The interpretation of Saptabhangivada as a seven-valued logic was attempted
by Harvard University philosophy professor George Bosworth Burch (1902–1973) in a paper published in
International Philosophical Quarterly in the year 1964. P. C. Mahalanobis, an Indian applied statistician, has given
a probabilistic interpretation of the Saptabhangivada.
The Saptabhangivada, the seven predicate theory may be summarized as follows:
The seven predicate theory consists in the use of seven claims about sentences, each preceded by "arguably" or
"conditionally" (syat), concerning a single object and its particular properties, composed of assertions and denials,
either simultaneously or successively, and without contradiction. These seven claims are the following.
1. Arguably, it (that is, some object) exists (syad asty eva).

Disclaimer/Note
2. Arguably, it does not exist (syan nasty eva).

3. Arguably, it exists; arguably, it doesn't exist (syad asty eva syan nasty eva).
4. Arguably, it is non-assertible (syad avaktavyam eva).
5. Arguably, it exists; arguably, it is non-assertible (syad asty eva syad avaktavyam eva).
6. Arguably, it doesn't exist; arguably, it is non-assertible (syan nasty eva syad avaktavyam eva).
7. Arguably, it exists; arguably, it doesn't exist; arguably it is non-assertible (syad asty eva syan nasty eva syad
avaktavyam eva).
There are three basic truth values, namely, true (t), false (f) and unassertible (u). These are combined to produce
four more truth values, namely, tf, tu, fu, and tfu(Three-valued logic). Though, superficially, it appears that there
are only three distinct truth values a deeper analysis of the Jaina system reveals that the seven truth values are
indeed distinct. This is a consequence of the conditionalising operator "arguably" denoted in Sanskrit by the word
syat. This Sanskrit word has the literal meaning of "perhaps it is", and it is used to mean "from a certain
standpoint" or "within a particular philosophical perspective".
In this discussion the term "standpoint" has been used in a technical sense. Consider a situation in which a globally
inconsistent set of propositions, the totality of philosophical discourse, is divided into sub-sets, each of which is
internally consistent. Any proposition might be supported by others from within the same sub-set. At the same
time, the negation of that proposition might occur in a distinct, though possibly overlapping subset, and be
supported by other propositions within it. Each such consistent sub-set of a globally inconsistent discourse, is
what the Jainas call a "standpoint" (naya). A standpoint corresponds to a particular philosophical perspective.
In this terminology, it can be seen that the seven predicates get translated to the following seven possibilities.
Each proposition p has the following seven states:
1. p is a member of every standpoint in S.

2. Not-p is a member of every standpoint in S.
3. p is a member of some standpoints, and Not-p is a member of the rest.
4. p is a member of some standpoints, the rest being neutral.
5. Not-p is a member of some standpoints, the rest being neutral.
6. p is neutral with respect to every standpoint.
7. p is a member of some standpoints and Not-p is a member of some other standpoints, and the rest are neutral.
ANSWER4(a)
Rabindranath Tagore 's own individuality and personality was unique and many sided. It is not surprising therefore
that the theme of selfhood or individuality occupies a central place in his philosophy of life. Tagore's vision was
to lift man out of the stale air of common life to regions where man's ordinary existence is subsumed by a life of
passion and power. According to Tagore, the "divine nature"1 in every man elevates him above earthly things.
He believed that the Infinite Self, the Supreme Being, reveals Himself through the finite self who dwells in the
heart of man. This Being is the "Jïvan Debatet92 of Tagore where he focused on an intimate and personal
relationship between the finite and the Infinite Self. According to him, life for the individual as well as for
humanity as a whole is a process of progressive growth, in freedom, into the idea of the Supreme Man. The poet's
vision was to find a supreme cause to be shared by mankind in terms of sympathy and understanding, truth and
Disclaimer/Note
love. For Tagore, this supreme cause is the "religion of man", with a spiritual vision for a perfect ideal, to unite
with the entire reality (finite and Infinite). It is based on the purity of heart and harmony with the universe. For
him it is a principle for the liberation of man's individual personality in the Universal Person who is omnipresent
in all human beings. Tagore's idea of self-realization speaks of man's emancipation in the inner truth of all things,
where the endless "many" (Humanity as a whole) reveals the "One" (the Universal Man) - the Puma Mänus3. The
aim of this paper is to bring out Tagore's bifocal idea of the Self - the finite and the infinite, his idea of humanism,
Universal Man and his very own way of discovering the "religion of man".
Rabindranath Tagore's father, Debendranäth Tagore was an ardent searcher for the Ultimate Truth and lived a life
of intense spiritual hunger. He joined the Brähmo Samäj movement and carried forward RaJ ä Rämmohan Roy's
mission of socio-religious reforms resulting in spiritual renewal for man. The Brähmo Samäj preached the idea
of the "One Supreme Reality" that binds all together - a monotheistic ideal, based upon the philosophy of the
Upanishads. Rabindranath Tagore consciously or unconsciously learned much from his father. Brähmo Samäj
had a powerful influence on the poet's faith or attitude. Tagore's father introduced him to the Upanishads and
other Vedic and Sanskrit texts, which had an everlasting impression both on his life and on his creative instincts.
The central theme of the Upanishads is the search for the ultimate Truth. The Seers of Upanishads tried to lead
one to this central reality of the ultimate Truth, a central reality that is characterized by Infinite Existence sat),
Absolute Truth cit), and Pure Delight änanda). In the Brhadäranyaka Upanishads, it had been said that the prayer
of every human heart is "Asato mä sad gamaya, tamaso mä jyotir gamaya, mirtyor ma amirtamgamaya" which
means, "Lead me from the unreal to the real, Lead me from the Darkness to light, Lead me from death to
immortality". In solving the question of the nature of the ultimate reality, the aim of the Upanishadic thinkers was
to supplement the objective vision of the Vedic Seers by a subjective one. The highest conception reached in the
Vedic hymns was that of "One" reality (Ekam Sat) that realizes itself in the variety of existence. This conclusion
of the Vedas gained further strength in the Upanishads, where the problem was approached by way of a
philosophical analysis of the nature of the Self, or the ätmän. However, the etymology of the word ätmän is
obscure. In the Rig Veda, it meant breath or the vital essence.5 Gradually it acquired the meaning of soul or the
self. The soul of man is the key hole to the landscape of the whole universe, the sky within the heart, the limpid
lake that mirrors the "Truth". The altered outlook brought about a consequential change, which claimed that, not
the so-called "Gods" but the true "living god" - the ätmän has to be worshipped. …
ANSWER4(b)
Sunyata, in Buddhist philosophy, the voidness that constitutes ultimate reality; sunyata is seen not as a negation
of existence but rather as the undifferentiation out of which all apparent entities, distinctions, and dualities arise.
Although the concept is encountered occasionally in early Pāli texts, its full implications were developed by the
2nd-century Indian philosopher Nāgārjuna. The school of philosophy founded by him, the Mādhyamika (Middle
Way), is sometimes called the Śūnyavāda, or Doctrine That All Is Void.
The term sunyata may also be used as a recognition of anattā, or the absence of any self apart from the five
skandhas (mental and physical elements of existence).
Disclaimer/Note
The Sanskrit terms pratītyasamutpāda (“dependent arising” or “dependent origination”) and śūnyatā (emptiness)
are core teachings of the Buddha, and occur in the canons of all the schools of Buddhism. Two important sources
for understanding the relationship between these two Sanskrit terms – pratītyasamutpāda and śūnyatā – are the
sixth bhūmi of Daśabhūmiśvāro nāma Mahāyānasūtraṃ in the Avataṃsaka- sūtra and the Mādhyāntavibhāga-
bhāṣya. The Mādhyantavibhāga-bhāṣya was written by Vasubandhu and is associated with the Yogācāra School.
The text consists of 112 verses in five chapters, and describes the middle and extreme views.
A third source, the commentary, or ṭīkā on the Mādhyantavibhāga-bhāṣya, is also important.
The ṭīkā was composed by Sthiramati (a well-known 6th CE Indian Buddhist Scholar Monk). No complete version
of the ṭīkā has survived in the original Sanskrit, but the Tibetan translation of the ṭīkā (Dbus dang mtha’ rnam par
’byed pa’i ’grel bshad) has been preserved. The aim of this paper is to find out how the terms pratītyasamutpāda
and śūnyatā developed and changed over time and united into one truth and also I will reconstruct the missing
portions of the Sanskrit texts (Ṭīkā, chapter 2 Āvaraṇa pariccheda, Daśaśubhādiṣvāranam, saṣṭhyā) using the
Tibetan ṭīkā (Sgrib pa’i le’ur bcad pa, Dge ba la sogs pa rnam pa bcu la sgrib pa)], drug pa).
First, I will consider the pratītyasamutpāda in the sixth bhūmi of ]]Daśabhūmiśvāro nāma Mahāyānasūtraṃ)] in
the Avatamsakasūtra in order to understand the connection from pratītyasamutpāda to śūnyatā. Next, I will
consider the development from śūnyatā to pratītyasamutpāda in the Mādhyāntavibhāg Chapter 2 Āvaraṇa
pariccheda, Daśaśubhādiṣvāraṇam of Yogācāra. And finally I will consider the relationship between
pratītyasamutpāda and śūnyatā in the Mādhyāntavibhāga Chapter 1 Abhūta-parikalpa Stanza 1 in the Sad-asal-
lakṣaṇa. I From pratītyasamutpāda to śūnyatā in the sixth bhūmi of the Daśa- bhūmiśvāro nāma
Mahāyānasūtraṃin the Avatamsakasūtra.
ANSWER4(c)
Iqbal’s philosophy is often described as the philosophy of Khudi, or the ‘Self’. For him, the fundamental fact of
human life is the absolute and irrefutable consciousness of one’s own being. For Iqbal, the advent of humanity
on earth is a great and glorious event, not an event signifying human sinfulness and degradation. He points out
that according to the Qur’an, the earth is humanity’s ‘dwelling-place’ and ‘a source of profit’ to it. Iqbal does not
think that having been created by God, human beings were placed in a super-sensual paradise from which they
were expelled on account of an act of disobedience to God. Pointing out that the term ‘Adam’ functions as the
symbol of self-conscious humanity rather than as the name of an individual in the Qur’an, Iqbal describes the
‘Fall’ as a transition from: ‘a primitive state of instinctive appetite to the conscious possession of a free self,
capable of doubt and disobedience’ (Iqbal 1930: 85).
Disclaimer/Note
For Iqbal, Adam’s story is not the story of the ‘First Man’ but the ethical experience, in symbolic form, of every
human being. Following the Qur’anic teaching that though human beings come from the earth, God’s spirit has
been breathed into them, Iqbal holds on the one hand that human beings are divinely created, and on the other
hand that they have evolved from matter. Unlike dualists, Iqbal sees no impassable gulf between matter and spirit,
nor does he see human beings as a mere episode or accident in the huge evolutionary process. On the contrary,
the whole cosmos is there to serve as the basis and ground for the emergence and perfection of the ‘Ego’.
Humanity’s evolution has not come to an end, for the destiny of human beings lies ‘beyond the stars’.
The purpose of life is the development of the Self. In order that they may achieve the fullest possible development,
it is essential for human beings to possess knowledge. Following the Qur’an, Iqbal maintains that there are two
sources of knowledge: the inner consciousness of human beings and the outer world of nature. Starting with the
intuition of the Self, human beings become aware of the ‘Not-Self’, the confronting ‘other’ which provides a
constant challenge for them. Nature, however, does not confront God in the same way as it confronts humanity,
since it is a phase of God’s consciousness. God is immanent since God comprehends the whole universe, but also
transcendent since God is not identical with the created world. All life is individual. There is a gradually rising
scale of self-ness running from the almost inert to God, who is the Ultimate Ego. God is not immobile nor is the
universe a fixed product; God is constantly creative and dynamic and the process of Creation still goes on. The
Qur’anic saying, ‘Toward God is your limit’ (Surah 53: 42), gives Iqbal an infinite worldview, and he applies it
to every aspect of the life of humanity and the universe.
ANSWER4(e)
Vaishnavism vs Shaivism
Vaishnavism and Shaivism are two types of religious sects that prevail in India. These two sects show some
differences between them. The followers of Vaishnavism are called by the name Vaishnavaites. On the other
hand, the followers of Shaivism are called by the name Shaivaites.
Vaisshnavism believes in the supremacy of Lord Vishnu over all the other Gods. On the other hand, Shaivism
believes in the supreme power of Lord Shiva. This is one of the main differences between the two religious sects.
Disclaimer/Note
Vaishnavism was jointly founded by many great religious leaders, but the credit goes to Ramanujacharya who
lived in the southern part of India. He is said to have lived in the 12th century AD. He is said to be the founder of
the Visishtadvaita philosophy that explains the principles of Vaishnavism. In addition to him, there were several
other leaders and philosophers who propounded the religion of Vaishnavism. These leaders included
Yamunacharya and Vedanta Desika.
Shaivism on the other hand, was extolled in the philosophy of Advaita founded by Adi Sankara of the 8th century
AD. He gathered a few disciples and disproved some of the principles of Mimamsa to establish the Advaita
philosophy. Shaivism believed in the one-ness of living beings and it believed in the fact that the oneness was
brought about by the innate power of the supreme soul called the Brahma.
On the other hand, Vaishnavism believed in the principles of qualified monism. Sankara says that everything in
the universe is the element of the Supreme Brahma. He says that the human being is Brahman too. The body alone
perishes but the soul within the body has no death. It cannot be burnt, made wet or cut into pieces. He describes
the theory of Karma and Maya as well. He says that the dual appearance of nature is due to Maya or illusion. Man
fails to see the real nature of the Brahman due to the illusory aspect that prevails in his perception.
Just as a person sees a serpent in a rope, and later realizes the true nature of the rope, in the same way a man fails
to see the real nature of the Brahma in the beginning and sees the illusory aspect of nature and thinks that it is the
truth. This is the underlying principle of the religious sect of Shaivism. Hence, Shaivism is based on the
philosophy of Advaita. Lord Shiva is spoken of as the Supreme Brahman or the Supreme Self that gives birth to
many individual selves.
In the Vaishnavism sect of religion, Lord Vishnu is considered as the Supreme Brahman who gives birth to several
individual selves. Lord Vishnu is the supreme God according to the Vaishnavaites. He is the protector of the
universe. He sustains the universe. He sustains all the living beings in the universe. Lakshmi is his consort. She
lives in his heart. He stays in the Vaikuntha. He reclines on the serpent bed of Adi Sesha and is accompanied by
his consort. This is how Lord Vishnu is portrayed in the Vaishnavaite texts.
ANSWER5(a)
Rita, Sanskrit ṛta (“truth” or “order”), in Indian religion and philosophy, the cosmic order mentioned in the Vedas,
the ancient sacred scriptures of India. As Hinduism developed from the ancient Vedic religion, the concept of rita
led to the doctrines of dharma (duty) and karma (accumulated effects of good and bad actions). Rita is the physical
order of the universe, the order of the sacrifice, and the moral law of the world. Because of rita, the sun and moon
pursue their daily journeys across the sky, and the seasons proceed in regular movement. Vedic religion features
the belief that rita was guarded by Varuna, the god-sovereign, who was assisted by Mitra, the god of honour, and
that the proper performance of sacrifices to the gods was necessary to guarantee its continuance. Violation (anrita)
of the established order by incorrect or improper behaviour, even if unintentional, constituted sin and required
careful expiation.
Disclaimer/Note
ANSWER5(b)
Swami Vivekananda: His Universality of Religion
Swami Vivekananda views on universality of religion are one of the finest examples of gallic grace in intellectual
culture. The stunning revelation in this digital age is that religion is a matter for the future far more than for the
past. “Religion” for Vivekananda, is synonymous with “Universalism” of the spirit. For Vivekananda, religion
should be universal in spirit and it should be maintained. Some people say that religion or spiritual ideas are dying
out, but it is not true. On the contrary they have just begun to grow. In the past religion was confined into the
hands of priests, temples, churches, rituals and dogmas, but that is not true religion. To be true and universal
religion it should be free from these shackles. Only that religion is real and living which pervades our nature, our
life and our society. Such a religion will always do well to all. All religions must have understanding and should
in teach tolerance. On the other hand, religion should work as a cementing force to unite the mankind. It can be
done by a fair co-ordination of spiritual and materialistic thought, as in the present age science cannot be
neglected. The true essence of religion is really coming out, as now people have become more realistic and
reasonable. The true and universal religion is in the offering which is very natural, real and living. This will do
good not of the individual only but of the whole society. Swami Vivekananda quoted “To devote your life to the
good of all and to the happiness of all is religion. Whatever you do for your own sake is not religion.” Religion
was made to ask people to lead a virtuous life. It is also used to run the society in the right way where people
should use their rights and perform their duties. That is why religion had the concepts of praise and punishment.
Due to fear of God, people did their duties in the right direction. It went on smoothly for long but then it lost its
way. Due to materialist progress people lost faith in religious rituals and dogmas. Now the people have developed
better reasoning and they started asking questions about the existence of God and his creation. The paper aims
to depict about the universality of religion as preached by Swami Vivekananda and will enlighten the true concept
of religion and shed away many cobwebs that have been woven around it by those who misinterpret religion for
the narrow, short-term vested interests.
ANSWER5(e)
Arthapatti is a Sanskrit term meaning "presumption" or "implication." In the yogic philosophy of the Advaita
Vedanta system and the Bhatta school of Purva-Mimamsa, it is said to be one of the six pranamas, or means of
obtaining knowledge.
Arthapatti refers to the way in which knowledge is derived from a set of circumstances. It is analogous in
contemporary logic to the concept of circumstantial implication. It generally requires an observation of fact(s)
and postulation based on such fact(s) to arrive at the information.
Disclaimer/Note
Arthapatti recognizes not all information is immediately accessible; thus, to use postulation and presumption is
considered one method of gaining proper insight and knowledge. It supposes a fact in order to support a well-
established fact. However, some scholars consider this a weaker method of gaining knowledge than other
pranamas. Certain schools of philosophy do not accept information gained through arthapatti.
ANSWER5(f)
The early Buddhist thinkers emphasised the unitary nature of the mind. The Sarvastivadins in order to explain the
unity of the mind described the mind as a ground or base which they called Cittabhumi. They rejected the realm
of unconsciousness, alaya-vijnana, postulated by the Yogacarins of Mahayana Buddhism who believed that from
the realm of unconsciousness arose the conscious mind and the objects. But the Sarvastivadins recognised five
types of Cittabhumi from which psychological phenomenon arose.[1]
Citta i.e. the mind, that alongside Manas, Buddhi and Ahamkara is an internal organ, whose function is
recollection, constituted by three Gunas viz Sattva, Rajas and Tamas, reflects the self in accordance with any one
of its modified states, vritti, which are Pramāṇa with its three kinds of cognition – perception, inference and verbal
testimony, Vikalpa which is mere verbal idea caused by meaningless words, Viparyaya which is knowledge of
things as they are not, Nidra or dreamless sleep and Smrti or memory. These reflections result in the self being
afflicted by Klesas – Avidya (wrong or false knowledge), Asmita (false notion or perception), Raga (attachment),
Dvea (aversion), and Abhnivesha (fear of death). Thus, the mind may remain in five different levels which mental
levels or functions or stages, five in number, are known as Cittabhumi [2][3][4] These five stages of the mind, as
defined by Vyasa, are: -
• Ksipta or distracted. The distracted mind being overpowered by Rajas is extremely unsteady unable to
concentrate or decide, and is the source of pleasure or pain.
• Mudha or infatuated. The infatuated mind being overpowered by Tamas succumbs to commit unrighteous acts
influenced by violent emotions.
• Viksipta or occasionally steady. The occasionally steady mind, unsteady for most part, influenced by Sattva is
able to withdraw itself from painful objects and become fixed on pleasurable objects.
• Ekagra or one-pointed. The one-pointed mind influenced by pure Sattva is able to withdraw from all objects i.e.
totally introverted, to remain focussed on one object.
• Niruddha or restrained. The restrained mind also influenced by pure Sattva arrests all mental functions i.e. there
is complete suspension of all mental modes and sub-conscious dispositions.
ANSWER5(h)
Disclaimer/Note
Disclaimer/Note

Facebook-Telegram - Youtube-: Dalal Technologies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Facebook-Telegram - Youtube-: Dalal Technologies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

• Facebook-https://www.facebook.com/dalal.

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

Pratityasamutpada (Sanskrit: Pratityasamutpada; Pāli: paṭiccasamuppāda), commonly translated as dependent

The term is used in the Buddhist teachings in two senses:

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

Whatever arises dependently

Since there is nothing whatever

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

For that reason there is nothing

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

Moksha – liberation of Advaita Vedanta

I am other than name, form and action.

Liberation or mokṣa of Samkhya

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

The Saptabhangivada, the seven predicate theory may be summarized as follows:

1. Arguably, it (that is, some object) exists (syad asty eva).

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

2. Arguably, it does not exist (syan nasty eva).

1. p is a member of every standpoint in S.

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

Swami Vivekananda: His Universality of Religion

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

DALAL TECHNOLOGIES (+91 9654400726)

You might also like