ABSTRACT
After presenting the activist tradition of the Mīmāmsā, which built up its philosophy on the earliest philosophical ideas about life contained in the Vedas, the heterodox traditions of the Cārvākas, Jainism and Buddhism, which rose as reactions, though in different forms, against the excesses and extravagances of the Mīmāmsā philosophy and the religion, or the way of life it represented, were given; because they represent the counterparts of the Mīmāmsā in active opposition. Following the general practice the Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika, Sāṅkhya, and Yoga traditions, which, though independent, claimed allegiance to the Vedas, were next given. The Vedānta did not rise in conscious, active opposition to the Mīmāmsā. As the philosophy based upon the Upaniṣads, which were the last part of the Veda, the Vedānta originally considered itself to be a completion of the Mīmāmsā, and the Vedāntic philosophy of life a completion and perfection of the Mīmāmsā philosophy of life. The life of the renouncer of the world (sannyāsin, ascetic, monk) belonged to the last of the four stages, and was regarded as the culmination of the life of every man. But when the two philosophies of life developed their metaphysical systems, they found themselves to be at opposite poles to each other. The propagation of monastic life by Jainism and Buddhism, and the popularity and respect it obtained made the Vedānta incline more towards the ideal of renunciation than towards that of active life. The gap between the Mīmāmsā and the Vedānta widened. Several attempts were made to reconcile them. The Mīmāmsā in its latest form, accepted the Vedānta, saying that renunciation was only surrender of all our actions to God, but not giving up active life. The Bhagavadgītā also made an earnest attempt by asking Arjuna to adopt egoless action. Some of the Vedāntins also made such attempts, as we shall see. But the truth remains that the metaphysics of the Mīmāmsā and that of the Vedānta could not be reconciled.
