Vādagrantha as Genre: The Systematisation of a Commentarial Tradition

It is true that works of commentary (*bhāṣya*s) ‘pervade the history of Sanskrit thought’.[i] However, while much scholarly effort has been dedicated to this set of literature, an equally vibrant, valuable, and voluminous corpus of texts exists beyond the *bhāṣya*. These are the lesser-explored works that concern themselves first and foremost with ideas, as opposed to the shastric texts alone. The period of time in a school’s history after its commentaries have been written, i.e., its principles (*siddhānta*) have been established, sees an extension of the *bhāṣya*. Its ideas continue to engage with rival schools and its arguments expand through interaction with interlocutors, after which they manifest in various ways, one being through the production of new literature. In this paper, I seek to engage with the following questions: What kinds of texts can be produced after the principles of a school are established in and through the *bhāṣya*s, and how do they both formalise the commentarial system and systematise theology? What is the need for, and who is the intended audience of, such texts? Why does a religion need to be systematised at a certain point in time, in view of both its historical and theological context?

Such treatises based on ideas, often classified as *vādagrantha*s or *prakaraṇagrantha*s, have often been studied in isolation or within the context of a specific philosophical problem. This paper explores *vādagrantha* as a genre in itself and the broader role that it plays in the systematising of a commentarial tradition, and thereby the systematisation of its theology in a classical register, focusing on the *Svāminārāyaṇa-Siddhānta-Sudhā* (henceforth *Sudhā*). Authored by Bhadreshdas Swami (b. 1966), the *Sudhā* is a *vādagrantha* that systematises the principles of Akṣara-Puruṣottama Darśana, a theistic school of Vedānta that was established at the turn of the nineteenth century by Swaminarayan (1781-1830). Published in 2017, it comes five years after the final instalment of the *Svāminārāyaṇa-bhāṣya*, the set of commentaries on the *Brahmasūtra*s, *Upaniṣad*s, and *Bhagavadgītā*, also authored by Bhadreshdas, that legitimise Akṣara-Puruṣottama Darśana as a school of Vedānta and formally introduce it to Indian and Western academic institutions.

While Akṣara-Puruṣottama Darśana is now recognised as a distinct school of Vedānta, the wider Svāminārāyaṇa tradition has historically been understood among religious and intellectual circles as an offshoot of Rāmānuja’s Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta. This connection can be seen in the early literature of the tradition. The *Śikṣāpatrī*, a letter of teachings claimed to have been authored by Swaminarayan himself, indicates an adoption of Rāmānuja’s position. Arun Brahmbhatt’s work highlights how older commentaries within the tradition locate their philosophy on a continuum between Rāmānuja and Swaminarayan in an attempt to gain scholastic legitimacy through recourse to a Vedānta scholastic public. He demonstrates how Bhadreshdas’ *bhāṣya*s, however, argue for the legitimacy of Akṣara-Puruṣottama Darśana within a new formation of the scholastic public, and thus for the complete independence of the system.[ii] The *Sudhā*, by nature of its genre, formalises this independence.

Unlike definitions of other genres of literature that can be found in dictionaries like the *Nyāyakośa*, the parameters of a *vādagrantha* are not well defined in Sanskrit literature, despite the genre being used in traditions including Nyāya, Vedānta, Mīmāṃsā, and Buddhism. In attempting a definition of a *vādagrantha*, it is helpful to consider the style of *vāda* as defined in Gautama’s *Nyāyasutra* 1.2.1. *Vāda* is a philosophical discussion based on reasoned argumentation, one of three types of formal debate (*kathā*), distinguished from *jalpa*, which aims at fault-finding and establishing a counter-thesis for the sake of victory, and *vitaṇḍā*, which serves merely to destroy the opposing side. *Vāda* is intended to be a truth-seeking debate, but it is not simply a presentation of ideas. It employs the hermeneutical practice of presenting the *pūrvapakṣa* (former view) and *uttarapakṣa* (rejoinder) before the *siddhāntapakṣa* (logically correct view according to the author). This being said, there are many treatises written in the style of *jalpa* or *vitaṇḍā* that are nevertheless categorised within the intellectual milieu as *vādagrantha*s. Thus, there are arguably no congealed conventions strictly prescribing a structure or style for the *vādagrantha*, allowing for the genre to be tailored to the specific concerns of a particular historical moment and more generally for authorial creativity.

The *Sudhā* introduces a subtler *vāda* style to shape the new school and defend it against actual and possible responses without unduly attacking rival viewpoints. There is no explicit harsh refutation (*khaṇḍana*) of, or hostile conflict (*virodha*) with, other thinkers or positions; the *pūrvapakṣa* is utilised not for the sake of polemics, despite the increase in polemical writing within the field of Vedānta, but as a useful device to steelman the *siddhāntapakṣa*. Both by writing in this classical style of *vāda* and in Sanskrit—although the majority of the school’s literature is in the vernacular—the *Sudhā* is self-consciously situating itself both among the classical Vedānta tradition (not Neo-Vedānta, despite the time of the school's emergence) and within an intellectual tradition with an acute grasp of literary style. The choice of the Sanskrit language indicates that the arguments of the *Sudhā* are being played out in front of and within a specific intellectual community. As a new system, Akṣara-Puruṣottama Darśana needs to enter and maintain its position within an already well-established context.

By looking at the broader role of the capacious genre of *vādagrantha*s in the making of this specific religious tradition, I seek to examine why its principles needed to be systematised, especially since it has been alive for over two centuries with hundreds of thousands of transglobal adherents, thus exploring the larger question of when, how, and why religions are systematised within their socio-historical and religious contexts.

[i] Gary A. Tubb and Emery R. Boose, *Scholastic Sanskrit: A Handbook for Students*. New York: American Institute of Buddhist Studies, 2007.

[ii] Arun Brahmbhatt, *Scholastic Publics: Sanskrit Textual Practices in Gujarat, 1800-Present*, PhD Dissertation. University of Toronto, 2018.