of the rival schools are referred to in so brief a manner that those only who know the views can catch them.  To add to these difficulties the Sanskrit style of most of the commentaries is so condensed and different from literary Sanskrit, and aims so much at precision and brevity, leading to the use of technical words current in the diverse systems, that a study of these becomes often impossible without the aid of an expert preceptor; it is difficult therefore for all who are not widely read in all the different systems to follow any advanced

67

work of any particular system, as the deliberations of that particular system are expressed in such close interconnection with the views of other systems that these can hardly be understood without them.  Each system of India has grown (at least in particular epochs) in relation to and in opposition to the growth of other systems of thought, and to be a thorough student of Indian philosophy one should study all the systems in their mutual opposition and relation from the earliest times to a period at which they ceased to grow and came to a stop—­a purpose for which a work like the present one may only be regarded as forming a preliminary introduction.

Besides the sutras and their commentaries there are also independent treatises on the systems in verse called karikas, which try to summarize the important topics of any system in a succinct manner; the Sa@mkhya karika may be mentioned as a work of this kind.  In addition to these there were also long dissertations, commentaries, or general observations on any system written in verses called the varttikas; the S’lokavarttika, of Kumarila or the Varttika of Sures’vara may be mentioned as examples.  All these of course had their commentaries to explain them.  In addition to these there were also advanced treatises on the systems in prose in which the writers either nominally followed some selected sutras or proceeded independently of them.  Of the former class the Nyayamanjari of Jayanta may be mentioned as an example and of the latter the Pras’astapada bha@sya, the Advaitasiddhi of Madhusudana Sarasvati or the Vedanta-paribha@sa of Dharmarajadhvarindra.  The more remarkable of these treatises were of a masterly nature in which the writers represented the systems they adhered to in a highly forcible and logical manner by dint of their own great mental powers and genius.  These also had their commentaries to explain and elaborate them.  The period of the growth of the philosophic literatures of India begins from about 500 B.C. (about the time of the Buddha) and practically ends in the later half of the seventeenth century, though even now some minor publications are seen to come out.

The Indian Systems of Philosophy.

The Hindus classify the systems of philosophy into two classes, namely, the nastika and the astika.  The nastika (na asti “it is not”) views are those which neither regard the Vedas as infallible