Presuppositions of India's Philosophies

1. It was interesting finally to see a book on Indian philosophy beginning with Bhagvat Gita and four Purushaarthas for a change. These are the hallmarks of Indian philosophy, especially Hindu thought. I particularly liked his notion of attitudes about the Purushaarthas. That was a new approach towards Dharma, Artha, Kaama and Moksha. However, his sequence is different. He places Artha, Kaama, Dharma and then Moksha which is different from the traditinal sequence. Also, his description of Artha and Kaama was little inadequate. Artha and Kaama have been regarded as two powers in Hindu thought. Artha (Wealth) is deemed necessary so that all the economic resources can be spent for charities, donations and other spiritual/social works. Similarly, Kaama is treated as God's creation also in BhagwatGita Chapter 4, only if it is according to prescribed Dharam/scriptures. This information is missing from pages 5-10 (chapter 1).2. In the same chapter, page 15 - 19, he talks about Renunciation and Resignation. I found it very very bold defence of Krishna's advise to Arjuna to fight. It is indeed a controversial topic and I am glad that Potter did support Krishna's advocacy for freedom and performing one's duty without attachment to results. And here, Potter has defined Karma Yoga so beautifully.3. But in the very next chapter, page 40 in the section for Paths for freedom, while describing Karma Yoga, he misses the important points he just mentioned in the previous chapter pages 15 - 19 (as above). He confuses Karma - Kaanda(rituals) of Vedas with Karma Yoga, how sad!

Like one of the previous reviewers I was lucky enough to have been taught by Professor Potter himself, though I met him at a latter stage in his career while attending the University of Washington. His book, especially the first four chapters, presents the foundations upon which the Indian philosophical mind turns better than any other book I know. I strongly believe that this is the best place to begin one's studies of Indian thought, not because it provides the best systematic account of the history of Indian philosophy but because it provides the clearest articulation of its most basic presuppostions. Highly recommended reading for both its insights and quality of writing.

This book is a must-read for those interested in Indian philosophies. Like ancient/medieval Western philosophies, Indian philosophy is hard to grasp unless one has a clear sense as to what sorts of problems the philosophers are trying to answer. In this work Potter does a very good job at this-- he lays out the fundamental problem that all (speculative) Indian philosophies attempt to solve: How is complete freedom possible? As explained very clearly by Potter, complete freedom is understood by classical Indian philosophers as BOTH freedom-to (i.e. we can effect changes in the world so that we can be free from bondage by karma) and freedom-from (i.e. the world leaves us with sufficient room that we don't HAVE to stay bounded or become free). Put under this fundamental understanding, Potter was able to provide a clear survey of a myriad of ~20 most significant philosphers' views-- their logics, ontologies and epistemologies-- under a very handy framework of classification. Potter's classification is philosophically-oriented and is infinitely more useful than the standard scheme (Materialists, Buddhism, Jainism and the 6 Hindu 'Orthodox' schools). This classification is both very insightful and original. As someone who is fairly well-acquainted with the different strands of classical Chinese philosophy (which asks a slightly different question: 'how is becoming a possible?' where the interpretation of the sage as end-goal is more diversely understood than in the Indian tradition), I feel that Potter's framework gives me a powerful tool to help me acquire a much deeper philosophical understanding of the Chinese traditions. As a clear thinker, Potter writes with sharp clarity and is able to express difficult ideas in fairly accessible terms. In fact, it's a real accomplishment to complete such an ambitious survey of major Indian philosophies in a manuscript of less than 300 pages. I only wish that Potter had revised this work after his editing of the encyclopedia of Indian philosophies! (This work was originally published in 1963, and does show his lack of a good first-hand understanding of Buddhist philosophies. If Potter had revised this after his editing of the Encyclopedia, I'm sure this book will be longer and with more thorough analysis on the Abhidharma philosophies.)