Book Review Encyclopedia Of Indian Philosophies

This text is a book review by Johannes Bronkhorst of "Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Vol. V: The Philosophy of the Grammarians," edited by Harold G. Coward and K. Kunjunni Raja. The review is critical of the volume's execution, particularly concerning its presentation of Bhartrhari's philosophy, but also notes some positive aspects and areas for improvement in the study of Indian grammar.

Here's a comprehensive summary of the key points:

Central Focus: Bhartrhari's Philosophy

• The Problem: While traditional Sanskrit grammar is technical, Bhartrhari (5th century CE) developed a philosophical system that claimed to be "grammatical." This philosophy, particularly the concept of vac (speech) and its levels, became influential and was included in later works like Sarvadarśanasangraha. However, Bronkhorst argues that the Encyclopedia fails to present Bhartrhari's complex thought clearly or accurately to an outsider.
• Criticism of the Encyclopedia's Summary of Bhartrhari:
  • Lack of Clarity and Justification: The "Brief analysis" of Bhartrhari's ideas is criticized for being "apodictic" (making pronouncements without evidence), lacking justifications and references, and not acknowledging scholarly disagreements (e.g., the exact number of vac levels Bhartrhari accepted).
  • Indexing Issues: The index is flawed, with incorrect page numbering, leading to difficulty in locating specific information within the summaries.
  • Ambiguous Presentation of Key Concepts: The summary of Bhartrhari's ontology (what truly exists) presents conflicting interpretations within different sections of the Encyclopedia, leaving the non-specialist reader confused about which view to accept.
  • Ignoring Scholarly Debate: The volume fails to acknowledge significant scholarly disputes and uncertainties surrounding Bhartrhari's philosophy, presenting a simplified and potentially misleading picture.
  • Neglect of the Best Critical Edition: The Encyclopedia overlooks Wilhelm Rau's critical edition of the Vākyapadiya, instead relying on less accurate editions, which can lead to misinterpretations.

Broader Criticisms of the Volume:

• Structural Issues and Empty Pages: The book is structured with each author receiving a section, starting on a right-hand page. This leads to a significant number of empty or near-empty pages, especially in Part Two, due to the uneven distribution of significant philosophical authors in the field. This also impacts page numbering and the practical use of the index.
• Bibliography Shortcomings: The bibliography, compiled by Karl H. Potter, is criticized for its lack of recent entries (up to 1983), its failure to be systematically used by the authors of Part Two, and its own inaccuracies and omissions (e.g., missing major translations, incorrect descriptions of editions, inconsistent dating of authors, and lack of connection to the main text).
• Lack of References: A significant flaw throughout the book is the frequent absence of references to primary sources or secondary literature, severely diminishing the volume's value for those seeking to delve deeper.
• Misleading Information: The review highlights instances where information provided is misleading or factually incorrect (e.g., regarding Patanjali's Mahābhāsya and the concept of moksha).
• Target Audience Mismatch: The reviewer questions the preface's claim that the summaries are intended for philosophers, arguing that the lack of clarity, references, and acknowledgment of scholarly debate makes it unsuitable for non-specialists.

Positive Aspects and Suggestions:

• Laudable Aim: The stated goal of providing summaries of primary sources to make them accessible to those unable to read Sanskrit or navigate translations is praised as laudable.
• Summaries of Later Grammarians: Later grammatical philosophers like Konda Bhatta and Nāgesa Bhatta are considered easier to present, and the summary of Konda Bhatta's work is appreciated.
• Coverage of Related Traditions: The volume's inclusion of discussions on other Indian philosophical schools (Mimāmsakas, Naiyāyikas, Buddhist Logicians, Literary Critics) is noted.
• Potential for Improvement: Despite its flaws, Bronkhorst hopes the volume will inspire others to improve upon its content and contribute to the exploration of Bhartrhari's philosophy and the role of language in Indian thought.

Key Jain Connection (Implicit):

While the review itself doesn't explicitly discuss Jainism, the context of the "Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies" implies an interest in understanding the diverse philosophical landscape of India, within which Jainism is a significant tradition. However, this specific review focuses on the philosophy of the grammarians, and its critique of the Encyclopedia's presentation. The Jain Education International catalog link suggests that this text might be of interest to those studying the philosophical underpinnings of language within broader Indian intellectual history, where Jain philosophical discourse on language also exists, though not directly addressed in this particular book review.

In essence, Bronkhorst's review is a strong critique of the "Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Vol. V," finding it to be a disappointing and often misleading resource, particularly regarding the complex philosophical contributions of Bhartrhari, due to issues with clarity, scholarly rigor, and practical usability.