Parallelism is not just about opposing the mainstream. In parallel, the text contains more method names than place names. It refers to the intellectual state where established knowledge is respectfully examined, neglected sources are discovered, the same critical criteria apply to both, and the conclusions themselves are open to revision. 72.1 Starting with a question not ending with a question The first chapter of the text considered darsanas to be a self-conscious act of asking for reasons rather than a collection of answers. Even in the last chapter, this does not change. The difference is that now the detailed geography of the question has been looked at: science and reality, Indian philosophy and Mithila, Western philosophy and society, state and religion, modernity and the digital world, artificial intelligence and environment and history. This journey leads to a conclusion: the question is not only of doubt. it is also of responsibility. If I question authority, I will question the authority of my party. If you ask for proof of tradition, then so be it on the claim of modernity. If you look for silences in official histories, so do the fact- checks in Hashiya 's stories. Parallelism is the discipline of symmetric criticism. 72.2 Mithila: Not the Centre: The Methodological Basis The text does not aim to make Mithila a new center of world philosophy. Such a claim would be against the polycentric spirit of parallel philosophy. Mithila is here a place of systematic recollection, a place of dialogue with the Upanishadic questions of jurisprudence, the logic and discipline of jurisprudence, the nuances of word and evidence, the traditions of scripture, the experiences of public life, and modern social questions. Mithali 's contribution may be a matter of pride but pride is not a substitute for proof. For this reason, acknowledging uncertainties in historical claims as uncertainties has been part of the text 's method of not writing down traditional stories as historical facts and not forcing modern concepts onto the past. 72.3 The Plural of Indian Philosophy Studies of Indian philosophy show that these Indian schools of thought are not uniform traditions. Sāṅkhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Mīmāṃsā, Vedanta, Buddhism, Jainism, and the Lokayatas have serious disagreements on jñāna, ātman, Ishvara, matter, language, karma, moksha, and pramana. In this disagreement, intellectual life is not the weakness of Indian philosophy. The Upanishads teach questions. the discipline of just proof. the subtleties of Mīmāṃsā language and method. Buddhist philosophy. the critique of suffering and impermanence and self-imagination. the discipline of the Jain philosophical approach. the challenge of locative doubt. Parallel philosophies do not dissolve these in an artificial Indian belief system. 72.4 Western philosophy: Dialogue and not imitation The Greek question, medieval logic, modern rationalism-empiricism, Kant 's criticism, Hegel 's history-view, Marx 's structure-analysis, the individual responsibility of existentialism, the clarity of analytic philosophy, the exploration of pragmatism and the methodology of science-philosophy are all independent voices in parallel discourse. The purpose of the comparison is not to prove that an Indian philosopher had already stated modern Western theories or that all Western ideas are repetitions of Indian sources. Such a triumphalistic comparison destroys the historical distinctiveness of both traditions. Meaningful comparison occurs at the level of the problem, argument, and objection. 72.5 Questions of Society Not an External Subject of Philosophy Caste, class, gender, language, region, state, liberty, equality, justice and democracy are not merely subjects of sociology. Within these questions are the core philosophical questions of human value, rights and legality, responsibility and identity, and institutional propriety. Gandhi raises the ethical questions of non-violence and Swaraj, the relationship between means. Ambedkar brings out the inseparable relationship between caste, dignity, representation, constitutionality and liberty-equality-bondage. Parallel philosophy does not eliminate the differences between the two, but rather puts them into concrete moral testing. 72.6 Religion: Both Respect and Criticism The philosophy section acknowledges that faith can be a profound source of human meaning, community, hope, discipline, and self-awareness. It also holds that religious claims are not immune from criticism. The question of God, the problem of evil, karma, reincarnation, moksha, religiosity and the Dharma-rajya relationship are different levels of proof and justification in these texts. The rational pluralism concludes: individuals may profess or change their religion; communities may carry on their traditions but must not destroy the dignity and rights of members; the state must not become the arbiter of the spiritual truths of any one religion but must preserve equal civil liberties. 72.7 Modernity: The Duality of Science and Technology Modernity has opened up new possibilities for freedom, science, communication, democracy and rights, as well as new forms of colonialism, bureaucracy, market-centredness, industrial dehumanisation and surveillance. So tradition versus modernity is not a simple moral dichotomy. The great strength of science lies in its public testability, revisionism, and evidence-discipline. But science does not set out to set ethical standards by itself. Artificial intelligence and other new technologies sharpen these distinctions: machines can provide decision-making support, but the question of accountability involves humans, organization design, data, and governance. Technical ability is not a moral license. 72.8 Detailed Ethics of Environment and Time The environmental question pushes the ethical community beyond present-day humans. Future generations enter into decisions about rivers, forests, species, ecosystems and long-term risks. Coexistential realism assumes particular importance here, as humans are not independent atoms but lie within a web of biological, social, historical, and ecological relationships. 72.9 Independent identification of parallel philosophies The independent identity of the parallel philosophy proposed in this text can be seen in some of the original propositions. Multidimensional rationalism says that sufficient evidence is not too much arbitrary evidence. Coexistential realism says that the universe has resistance independent of the mind, but the experience is relational. Dignity-based ethics centre on the core values that every person shares. Multicentric democracies resist the over-concentration of power, knowledge, and culture. The rational plurality of religions desires freedom of conscience, on a par with faith and non-belief. The parallel historiography places both the central and the neglected sources at critical crossroads. An essential principle underlying all of this is self-reflection. Without introspection, pluralism, anarchy, realism, rigidity, dignity, sentimentality, democracy, institutional self-satisfaction, religiosity, indifferent relativism, and parallel histories can become new prejudices. 72.10 Crossing the Main Stream and Hashia Sometimes the mainstream is closer to the truth. Sometimes, it can be very painful. Sometimes, both of these are incomplete. A philosopher 's loyalty must precede any pursuit of truth, justice and human dignity. For this reason, parallel philosophies are not a permanent opposition to the mainstream. If the established theory is stronger than the evidence, accept it. If neglected sources reveal new facts, add them. If both are wrong, try to find a third way. Parallelism is a state of critical motion rather than a static camp of identity. The Life Conduct of the 72.11 Philosophy The ultimate promise of this text is not a closed list of doctrines but an intellectual pursuit. It is okay to ask questions. In the search for evidence. Listen to the other side as well. Let us make amends for our mistakes. Asking for a reason from the authorities. Listen to the voice of the one who is suffering. And don 't consider the truth to be the private property of a single center. This behavior requires both logic and compassion. Only compassion can be confused. only reason is merciless. Only tradition is the root, only novelty is the ego. Only individual separation or only social oppression. Only the center is incomplete. also only the margins. Parallel philosophy does not seek an average between these dichotomies but attempts to explain the proper truths and limits of each aspect. Pūrvapakṣa (Prima Facie View): Wouldn 't such open-mindedness be without judgment? Observing introspection and pluralism may lead to the objection that parallel philosophies leave every question open-ended. If everyone is inventive, how can one make strong ethical decisions? Uttarapakṣa (Response): Openness and Moral Boundaries Are Simultaneously Possible Modification does not have to make everything uncertain. Some moral boundaries may be clear enough: birth is not a moral qualification. a person is not just a means. unnecessary suffering is not appropriate. the state is not the master of the citizen. religious freedom is also a freedom of conscience. majority is not proof of truth. technical competence is not a moral sanction. The application of these limitations may be controversial, but the controversy is not without moral ambiguities. The Final Conclusion Parallel philosophy is not an end in itself. If this text declares itself complete on its last page, it would violate its last aphorism. The future of philosophy lies not in closed systems, but in better questions, new evidence, more inclusive dialogue, and a more just life. In this sense, to be parallel is not to be marginalized. one is not enslaved to a single center in the search for truth. The combined exercise of freedom of question, the discipline of proof, the ethics of dignity, the critique of authority, the wisdom of pluralism, and the courage of introspection are the living embodiments of a parallel philosophy. Chapter Bibliography Bimal Krishna Matilal — Logic, Language and Reality; The Character of Logic in India. Jonardon Ganeri — Philosophy in Classical India; The Lost Age of Reason. Amartya Sen — The Idea of Justice. B. R. Ambedkar — Annihilation of Caste; Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches. John Dewey — Experience and Nature; Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. John Rawls — A Theory of Justice; Political Liberalism. Miranda Fricker — Epistemic Injustice. The terminology of the term Existential philosophy is the philosophical study of what things really are. Metaphysics is the study of the fundamental nature of reality. Epistemology is the study of knowledge, evidence, belief, truth and justification. Proof is the accepted means or process of producing true knowledge. Direct is direct perception or sense-related knowledge. Inference is knowledge of other facts from a known basis. Word-proofing is knowledge obtained from reliable linguistic statements. An analogy is knowledge based on similarity. Scope is the regular relationship of cause and effect in inference. Ethics is the study of right and wrong actions and character. Political philosophy is the study of power, state authority, justice, and freedom. Philosophy of religion is the study of faith, God, religion, religious experience and reason. Multidimensional rationalism: A parallel theory of critical knowledge acquisition through various appropriate evidence. Coexistential realism Coexistential realism is a theory that recognizes the multiplicity of relational experiences while accepting reality as independent of the human mind. Dignity-based ethics is the principle that everyone has the same basic human values as the center of moral judgment. Multicentre democracy is a democratic vision of sharing power and decision-making at various legitimate socio-political levels. Parallel historiography is the practice of re-reading history by placing neglected sources and voices on the same critical pedestal as established sources. The rational plurality of religions accepts the same freedom of belief, disbelief, and proselytization as the principle of common cause and common citizenship for public obligation. Introspection is the discipline of basing one 's claims on evidence, selection, silence, and even conclusions on critical criteria that are applied to other ideas. The selected original bibliography Indian philosophy Rigveda. The Upanishads of the Brihadaranyas. Chandogya Upanishad. Gautama wrote the Nyaya Sutras. Kanada is a part of the Vaisheshika Sutra. Ishvara Krishna is also known as Samkhya Karika. Patanjali wrote the Yoga Sutras. Jaimini is a metaphysical figure. The Badayana is the Brahma Sutras. Kumarila Bhatta is the author of the Shlokavatara. Udayanacharya is Nyayakusumanjali, Atmatattvaviveka. Vachaspati Mishra is a prominent figure in the field of jurisprudence. Gangesh Upadhyay Tattvachintamani. Nagarjuna is the creator of the Moolamadhyamaka. The dingnag is a set of credentials. Dharmakirti is the author of the Pramaanavartika. Umasvati is the essence of the sutra. The philosophy of the Western The Republic of Plato. Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics.Politics.Metaphysics. René Descartes wrote Meditations on First Philosophy. Baruch Spinoza Ethics. The G. The W. Leibniz. Monadology. John Locke: An Essay Concerning Human Understanding.Two Treatises of Government. George Berkeley A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge. David Hume A Treatise of Human Nature.An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Immanuel Kant The Critique of Pure Reason.Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. The G. The W. F. Hegel The Phenomenology of the Spirit. Karl Marx and Capital.Marx and Engels and the German Ideology. Søren Kierkegaard in Fear and Trembling. Friedrich Nietzsche in On the Genealogy of Morality. Ideas of Edmund Husserl. Martin Heidegger in Being and Time. Jean-Paul Sartre on Being and Nothingness. Ludwig Wittgenstein in his Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.Philosophical Investigations. John Dewey in Experience and Nature. John Rawls wrote A Theory of Justice. Indian modern socio-political thought Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi: Hind Swaraj Satyagraha in South Africa Constructive Programme: Its Meaning and Place. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar on Annihilation of Caste.States and Minorities.The Buddha and His Dhamma.Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches. A selection of the study-books Surendranath Dasgupta: A History of Indian Philosophy. M. Hiriyanna in The Outlines of Indian Philosophy. S. Radhakrishnan and Indian philosophy. Bimal Krishna Matilal is the author of Perception.Logic Language and Reality.The Character of Logic in India. Jonardon Ganeri: Philosophy in Classical India.The Lost Age of Reason. Stephen H. Phillips on Classical Indian Metaphysics. studies on Ganges and Indian epistemology. In the words of Karl H. Potter in the Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies series. Dinesh Chandra Bhattacharya History of Navya-Nyāya in Mithilā. Ganganatha Jha translated and studied many original texts of Nyaya, Mīmāṃsā and Indian philosophy. Final Statement Gajendra Thakur’s parallel philosophy is not a mere “mixture of East and West.” Its distinct identity lies in six fundamental principles: Multi-pramāṇa rationalism — a plurality of appropriate means of knowledge in the pursuit of truth. Coexistential realism — acceptance of both the objective world and relational experience. Dignity-based ethics — the equal fundamental worth of every human being. Polycentric democracy — resistance to the excessive concentration of power, knowledge, and culture. The rational plurality of religion — equal freedom of conscience for belief, non-belief, and religious conversion, together with shared justification for public obligations. A parallel view of history — subjecting both central and neglected sources to the same critical standards of evidence. To these six fundamental principles is added a seventh, indispensable regulative principle: self-critique. A philosophy that refuses criticism of itself moves away from philosophy toward dogmatism. The future of parallel philosophy therefore lies not in a closed system, but in its open question.