Examining Hindu Ethics: The Three Yogas in Bhāgavata Purāṇa Commentaries

IF 0.5 3区 哲学 0 RELIGION JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS Pub Date : 2022-05-26 DOI:10.1111/jore.12377
Jonathan Edelmann
{"title":"Examining Hindu Ethics: The Three Yogas in Bhāgavata Purāṇa Commentaries","authors":"Jonathan Edelmann","doi":"10.1111/jore.12377","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The object of this article is pre-colonial Hindu ways of distinguishing “the path of devotion” (<i>bhakti-yoga</i>) from “the path of knowledge” (<i>jñāna-yoga</i>) and “the path of work” (<i>karma-yoga</i>). It highlights how a developing religious group in early modern India explained and justified its path—its ethics, its ritual, its theology—while in conversation with the larger Brahminical tradition out of which it was emerging. I argue that early authors in the Chaitanya Vaishnava tradition such as Sanātana (c.1475–1554), Rūpa (c.1480–1554), Jīva (c.1510–1606), and Viśvanātha (fl. c.1650–1712) used the authority of the <i>Bhāgavata-Purāṇa</i> to elevate devotion to an ethical imperative by including and excluding the behaviors and the motives of the older and well-established paths like knowledge, works, and Patañjali’s yoga. Their ethics is connected to an ontology of god’s being in which the path of devotion is uniquely effective in revealing god’s being and uniquely salvific the among paths. I argue this discourse on the three paths is a type of Hindu ethics, but it is unclear how it might be reconstructed in rational terms to deal with contemporary issues and that its primary innovation for the time was the uncoupling of ethics from the caste system.</p>","PeriodicalId":45722,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jore.12377","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The object of this article is pre-colonial Hindu ways of distinguishing “the path of devotion” (bhakti-yoga) from “the path of knowledge” (jñāna-yoga) and “the path of work” (karma-yoga). It highlights how a developing religious group in early modern India explained and justified its path—its ethics, its ritual, its theology—while in conversation with the larger Brahminical tradition out of which it was emerging. I argue that early authors in the Chaitanya Vaishnava tradition such as Sanātana (c.1475–1554), Rūpa (c.1480–1554), Jīva (c.1510–1606), and Viśvanātha (fl. c.1650–1712) used the authority of the Bhāgavata-Purāṇa to elevate devotion to an ethical imperative by including and excluding the behaviors and the motives of the older and well-established paths like knowledge, works, and Patañjali’s yoga. Their ethics is connected to an ontology of god’s being in which the path of devotion is uniquely effective in revealing god’s being and uniquely salvific the among paths. I argue this discourse on the three paths is a type of Hindu ethics, but it is unclear how it might be reconstructed in rational terms to deal with contemporary issues and that its primary innovation for the time was the uncoupling of ethics from the caste system.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
印度教伦理考察:《薄伽梵传》中的三位瑜伽士ṇ评论
本文的对象是前殖民时期的印度人如何区分“奉献之路”(奉爱瑜伽)与“知识之路”(jñāna-yoga)和“工作之路”(业力瑜伽)。它强调了在早期现代印度,一个发展中的宗教团体是如何在与更大的婆罗门传统的对话中解释和证明自己的道路的——它的伦理、仪式和神学。我认为,柴坦尼亚毗瑟那瓦传统的早期作者,如Sanātana (c.1475-1554)、Rūpa (c.1480-1554)、jjvva (c.1510-1606)和Viśvanātha (l. c.1650-1712),利用Bhāgavata-Purāṇa的权威,通过包括和排除知识、工作和Patañjali的瑜伽等古老而成熟的道路的行为和动机,来提升对道德戒律的忠诚。他们的伦理学与上帝存在的本体论相联系,在这种本体论中,奉献的道路在揭示上帝的存在方面是唯一有效的,在其他道路中是唯一的救赎。我认为这种关于三条道路的论述是一种印度伦理,但尚不清楚它如何以理性的方式重建以应对当代问题,其当时的主要创新是将伦理与种姓制度脱钩。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
25.00%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Founded in 1973, the Journal of Religious Ethics is committed to publishing the very best scholarship in religious ethics, to fostering new work in neglected areas, and to stimulating exchange on significant issues. Emphasizing comparative religious ethics, foundational conceptual and methodological issues in religious ethics, and historical studies of influential figures and texts, each issue contains independent essays, commissioned articles, and a book review essay, as well as a Letters, Notes, and Comments section. Published primarily for scholars working in ethics, religious studies, history of religions, and theology, the journal is also of interest to scholars working in related fields such as philosophy, history, social and political theory, and literary studies.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Religion, Race, and the Limit of Ethics: Historical Considerations A Daoist Critique of Effort in Pierre Hadot's Philosophy Animism, Eco-Immanence, and Divine Transcendence: Toward an Integrated Religious Framework for Environmental Ethics Kierkegaard, Social Media, and Despair
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1