TheVivekacud.a ̄man.i(after 800 ce) is a work of 580 (mostly) two-line verses.^37
It is implicitly and sometimes explicitly structured according to the line of think-
ing evident in some key Upanis.adic texts; it subtly weaves together the tasks of
studying the texts, reflecting on their meaning, and drawing that meaning into
meditation leading to realization. The Vivekacud.a ̄man.iis explicitly religious and
critically reasonable all the way through, and likewise it subjects that religious
reasoning to critical reflection. In a more integral fashion than is the case with
theVe d a ̄nta Paribha ̄s.a, the Vivekacud.a ̄man.iis a coherent theological text from
beginning to end. We must also note, however, that there seem to be few pre-
modern commentaries on this work; perhaps it was not deemed weighty enough
to deserve commentary?
By contrast, Vimukta ̄tman’s Is.t.asiddhiis a formidable Advaita work which
treats in great detail an entire range of epistemological and ontological matters,
and even issues specific to the terminology of Veda ̄nta on Brahman, self, libera-
tion, etc. While there is no strong reason to exclude the Is.t.asiddhithe title of a
theological work, its strong interest in the logical and philosophical under-
pinnings of theological concerns suggests that it too, like the Tattvacinta ̄man.i,
might well be termed a philosophical treatise which addresses some theological
topics.^38
When we turn to a clearly theistic school of Veda ̄nta such as Ra ̄ma ̄nuja’s and
Veda ̄nta Des ́ika’s Vis ́is.t.a ̄dvaita, it will be no surprise that many of its works can
easily be counted as theological. Commentaries, such as Ra ̄ma ̄nuja’s S ́rı ̄bha ̄s.ya
and Gı ̄ta ̄bha ̄s.ya are richly theological, and so too treatises such as his
Ve d a ̄rthasam.graha, which expounds both right exegetical principles and right
ontology in support of theistic Veda ̄nta. But even in regarding theistic Veda ̄nta
it is illuminating to distinguish primary theological writings from those which
are either accessory or devotional. Ra ̄ma ̄nuja’s three more devotional writings,
collected in the Gadya Traya, are best taken as intelligent devotional masterpieces
intended to inspire the community of believers. But I suggest that they are not
theological works, even if the S ́rı ̄vais.n.ava tradition has rightly found in them a
wealth of theological meaning.
Veda ̄nta Des ́ika presents us with an array of works, some of which may merit
the title of “philosophy” or “philosophical theology,” some “devotional compo-
sitions,” and some “theology.” For example, a work such as the Paramatabhan.ga
aims at refuting the doctrines of other schools, as Des ́ika argues his views largely
on the basis of correct reasoning; this might be counted as philosophical or
apologetic theology.
More complicated is the case of the paired volumes, the Nya ̄ya Paris ́uddhiand
theNya ̄ya Siddha ̄ñjana. The Nya ̄ya Paris ́uddhioffers primarily philosophical
analysis in support of theology; in it Des ́ika meticulously considers Nya ̄ya posi-
tions and also corrects them wherever necessary. Throughout, his aim is to
review and clarify problematic and unclear aspects of the system of logic set
forth in the Nya ̄ya Su ̄trasof Gautama. It seems clear that this is a corrective work
which is preparatory for theology, and only indirectly theological itself. The cor-
rective work of the Nya ̄ya Paris ́uddhiis complemented in the Nya ̄ya Siddha ̄ñjana
restoring “hindu theology” as a category 467