Comparative analysis of logical thought process within various Hindu sects

Sri:
Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:

Prior to foreign invasions, Hinduism was not a singular religion. A well evolved thought process, guided by healthy debates was the norm. Dharma Shastras provided the guidelines for practice. The Upanishads provided the theoretical background behind the practices. Yet, based on their acceptance of the scriptures or non-acceptance, the various schools of thoughts were classified into two broad categories - Vedic and non-vedic. There were 17 recognised schools of thought. Each had sound  rationale to support its ideology.

Given below is the common questions each of the 17 tried to answer using various evidences.

1. Who/What is the cause of this Universe, and Intelligent Life that it sustains?
2. Is the Cause Intelligent or merely a physical phenomenon? If it were a physical phenomenon, how did we acquire intelligence?
3. What is the concept of liberation/moksha? How does it relate with Life in this Universe?

In the analysis about the Cause, they all sought to establish the three types of causes:

1. Material Cause/Raw Material (Upadana Cause) - i.e the raw material from which the Universe was made. What was the state of the raw material prior to the start of creation? What was its source prior to start of creation? What was the order in which creation propagated?
2. Nimitta Cause (Doer) - The intelligence behind the creation. Was there intelligence or was it merely a physical phenomenon? If there was intelligence, who did the intelligence belong to?
3. Sahakari (aiding) cause - what the various aids used in creation? Did the intelligence use any tools/equipment to aid in the creation?

The 17 religious thinkers agreed to a common example that established the need to identify three causes:

1. The example is the "process of making clay pots"
2. The raw material used to make a clay pot is Clay (or a ball of wet clay, to be precise). This is the material cause.
3. The potter lends his intelligence/knowhow in making the pot. He is the doer. He is the Nimitta Cause.  In this example, intelligence is involved in creation.
4. The wheel on which the ball of clay is placed and rotated, and the stick the potter uses to guide the clay into pot shape are the tools or sahakari (aiding) cause.

Tools of Analysis - Admissible Evidences

1. The theories should not compromise on the observed Physical laws of existence. This was called the Pratyaksha Pramanam (Physical Evidence)
2. Thinkers were allowed to extrapolate physical evidences to arrive at logical conclusions. This was accepted as "Anumana Pramanam" (Logical Evidence). They all agreed that there has to be an underlying physical evidence to support the logical evidence.
3. Here is a commonly accepted example of logical evidence:
1. Traveling along a mountainous path, some travelers saw smoke on a distant summit. They concluded that there was fire at that location, even though the fire was not visible. The logic here is that they have seen smoke together with fire when burning firewood. They knew that moisture content in the firewood caused smoke. Therefore, upon seeing smoke, they could determine that there was fire.
4. Parts of Logical Evidence - Hetu (Determinant) and Paksham (Determined). There are two parts to a logical evidence. Smoke is the hetu/determinant using which, the paksham (determined) is derived logically.
5. Scriptures were admitted as evidence as long as they did not contradict the aforesaid Physical and Logical evidences. They were called Shabda Pramanam (Literary Evidence)
6. In this publication, we will call these three evidences together as Fundamental Evidences.
7. Evidences other than these three may be admissible based on the theories proposed. For the purpose of this article, we will call them as Derived Evidences. Various religious thinkers sought to use derived evidences, that some others grouped under one of the three fundamental evidences. More about this when the respective derived evidences are referenced.