Why do we speak of Indian philosophy when the subject of philosophy should be universal?

It started first in India. Only in contemporary China was there something vaguely akin to this sort of questioning. Nowhere else in the world was there any such development in this field at that particular point of time.

Thus Indian philosophy grew in isolation. Indians went outside to teach but nobody from outside coming here could give anything new. Even China too came to be greatly influenced by Buddhism, which was exported from India.

In ancient times the Indian sub-continent consisted of a vast land which included parts of the Middle East near and about what is known as Afghanistan today. There were different political set ups but the cultural and linguistic unity was one. Sanskrit was the language throughout the length and breadth of the land. Even today the unity of language continues but unfortunately only in all the temples of the country.

Indian culture came to be influenced say for example by the Greeks, but not so Indian philosophy. So here there is a sharp distinction between culture and philosophy.

Why do we study philosophy?

We study medicine to understand the body. We study engineering to make roads and bridges. But the case of philosophy is different from other subjects. To study it one has to have an exceptionally keen and sensitive intellect matched with a love for knowledge without a trace for motives related to bread and butter requirements. Knowledge and knowledge alone is to be the driving force for the teacher and the taught the guru and the sishya. Secondly the guru has to lead the life he instructs. Thirdly we study it to clarify certain concepts about myself and the world how to overcome death and human suffering and the like.

The goal of philosophy is liberation.

Liberation from what?

From suffering for all times to come and not just temporarily.

What did The Buddha say? He said that there is suffering. Accept this fact. Secondly suffering must have certain causes. Thirdly suffering has to cease because cause and suffering cannot be eternally co-related and lastly there is a way out for human suffering.(We cannot penetrate the cosmic world.)

What is the state which is devoid of suffering?

It is the real state of existence.

Before going further let me put in a word about what is absolute and what is relative.

In general everything around us is related to something else nothing stands on its own. Man is related to woman. The tree is not a bird. The bird is not the tiger. Without relating one object to another we cannot make sense. But Reality should be absolute. It should need no introduction. It should stand on its own.

To answer these questions many other queries arise. Different schools of Indian philosophy have given different answers.

What is the number of reality? Monism or Dualism or Pluralism?

What is the nature of reality? In matter the selves are sleeping. In the animal the selves are conscious. But man alone is self-conscious.

What is matter?

It may be a bundle of qualities. For example the table is a combination of brown colour, shape, hardness and some sort of odour also.

What is the source of knowledge perception or reason?

The problems are the same all over the world but the approach is different. The West says that India relies solely on the scriptures subservient to the texts. Hence it is no philosophy at all.

Each philosophical school in India has its own interpretation of the Vedic texts and these are invariably conflicting. But all are based on rational arguments. There is no dogma. The Vedas are the nominal starting point. The interpretations are different.

What is the purpose of life? There is no one unanimous answer.

Is it dharma or the development of ones own nature?

Is it artha or the search for wealth?

Is it kama or the rush after mundane desires?

Or is it moksha the release from all desires into the joy and safety of devotion and bliss?