Historical Survey of 狈测腻测补 System

Nyaya-Vaisheshika categories (Study)

by Diptimani Goswami | 2014 | 61,072 words

This page relates 鈥楬istorical Survey of Nyaya System鈥� of the study on the Nyaya-Vaisheshika categories with special reference to the Tarkasangraha by Annambhatta. Both Nyaya and Vaisesika are schools of ancient Indian Philosophy, and accepted in their system various padarthas or objects of valid knowledge. This study investigates how the Tarkasamgraha reflects these categories in the combined Nyayavaisesika school.

Go directly to: Footnotes.

Historical Survey of 狈测腻测补 System

< Previous

Next >

The 狈测腻测补 System is one of the six orthodox systems of Indian Philosophy. The oldest name of 狈测腻测补 is 膧nvik峁k墨. 膧nvik峁k墨 means the science of inquiry. It comprises 膧迟尘补-惫颈诲测腻 and the theory of reasons. Manu has used the term 膧nvik峁k墨 to mean 膧迟尘补惫颈诲测腻 and his followers also called 膧苍惫墨办峁办墨 as a branch of the Vedas.^[1] 碍补耻峁璱濒测补 has accepted 膧苍惫墨办峁办墨 as a separate branch of study over and above, Trayi (the Vedas), 痴腻谤迟迟腻 (commerce) and 顿补峁囜笉补苍墨迟颈 (polity).^[2] 碍补耻峁璱濒测补 has included the 厂腻峁僰丑测补, Yoga and 尝辞办腻测补迟补 in the 膧nvik峁k墨.^[3] The time of the formation of 膧nvik峁k墨 as a distinct branch of learning was about 650 B.C.^[4] 膧苍惫墨办峁办墨 was called 贬别迟耻-艣腻蝉迟谤补 or Hetu 痴颈诲测腻 as it dealt predominantly with the science of reasoning. This meaning of 膧苍惫墨办峁办墨 is found in the 惭补苍耻蝉补峁僪颈迟腻^[5], 惭补丑腻产丑腻谤补迟补^[6] etc. It is also known as 罢补谤办补惫颈诲测腻, the art of debate or 痴腻诲补-惫颈诲测腻, the art of discussion. In later times 膧nvik峁k墨 has come to be denoted as 狈测腻测补-艣腻蝉迟谤补 (the science of true reasoning).

The authorship of 膧苍惫墨办峁办墨 is ascribed to Gotama or Gautama. It is stated in the 驰腻箩帽补惫补濒办测补蝉尘峁泃颈 that 狈测腻测补 is included in the fourteen principal branches of learning.^[7] In the 惭补迟蝉测补-笔耻谤腻峁嘺 it is pointed out that 狈测腻测补 vidy膩 along with the Vedas, proceed from the mouth of 叠谤补丑尘腻.^[8] Many tenets of 狈测腻测补 are found in the 艢腻苍迟颈-parva of the 惭补丑腻产丑腻谤补迟补.^[9]

However, there were many teachers who propounded 狈测腻测补 philosophy. It is said in the 膧诲颈辫补谤惫补 of the 惭补丑腻产丑腻谤补迟补 that there were a number of sages in the hermitage of 碍腻艣测补辫补 who knew true meanings of demonstration, refutation and conclusion.^[10] These sages were the early teachers of the 狈测腻测补-艣腻蝉迟谤补. But nothing is known about these early teachers.

The 狈测腻测补 system, formulated by Gautama, is also known as 础办峁辫腻诲补顿补谤艣补苍补 because another name of Gautama is 础办峁辫腻诲补. M膩dhav膩c膩rya designates the 狈测腻测补 system as 础办峁辫腻诲补 system in his 厂补谤惫补诲补谤艣补苍补蝉补峁僩谤补丑补. The 狈测腻测补 system is atomistic, pluralistic and realistic. The meaning of the term 狈测腻测补 is right or justice.^[11] Etymologically this word means 鈥榯hat by which man is guided鈥� (n墨yate aneneti 苍测腻测补岣�). 鈥�狈测腻测补艣腻蝉迟谤补 is therefore the science of right judgement or true reasoning鈥�^[12]

Vatsy膩yana defines 狈测腻测补 as an examination of objects by evidences.^[13] He also points Out that the distinctive characteristic of 狈测腻测补 is its critical treatment of metaphysical problems. 痴腻肠补蝉辫补迟颈 points out that 狈测腻测补 signifies the critical examination of the objects of knowledge by means of the canons of logical proof.^[14]

鈥淭丑别 word 狈测腻测补 derived from the root 鈭� ni is sometimes explained as that by which sentences and words could be interpreted as having one particular meaning and not another and on the strength of this even Vedic accents of words (which indicate the meaning of compound words by pointing out the particular kind of compound in which the words entered into combination) were called 狈测腻测补.鈥�^[15] Another name of 狈测腻测补 system is 笔谤补尘腻峁嘺艣腻蝉迟谤补 because in this we find discussion in details regarding 辫谤补尘腻峁嘺. The valid knowledge is called 辫谤补尘腻 and the means by which this 辫谤补尘腻 is achieved is known as 辫谤补尘腻峁嘺. 痴腻迟蝉测腻测补苍补 states in his work that 辫谤补尘腻峁嘺 is the tool of knowledge.^[16] Uddyotakara defines 辫谤补尘腻峁嘺 as the 鈥�耻辫补濒补产诲丑颈丑别迟耻岣�鈥� cause of knowledge.^[17] He also argues that this definition may be said to be over-pervasive since the cogniser and the object cognized are also known as the cause of knowledge. He rejects this argument by saying that it is the 辫谤补尘腻峁嘺 by which the cogniser and the object cognized are known and hence 辫谤补尘腻峁嘺 is regarded as the real cause of knowledge.^[18] According to 艢iv膩ditya 辫谤补尘腻峁嘺 is that which produces 辫谤补尘腻 or right knowledge.^[19]

The history of the 狈测腻测补 system extends over many centuries. At the earliest stage it has not developed as a system but a means of arriving at the real meanings of Vedic words. There were disputations and debates among scholars to find out real meanings of the Vedic texts in earlier times. When disputations began among the supporters of different schools of thought; they tried to defeat one another by using it. Such disputations happened in the time of 鲍辫补苍颈峁诲蝉 and the art of disputation was then recognized as a subject of study which is regarded to as V膩kov膩kya.^[20] This is the earliest mention of 狈测腻测补 system.

The first systematic work of the 狈测腻测补 system is the 狈测腻测补s奴tra of Gautama or 础办峁辫腻诲补. A large number of works were written after 狈测腻测补s奴tra for the development of this system. The accurate date of the 狈测腻测补s奴tra is difficult to ascertain. According to D.N. Shastri, the date of 狈测腻测补s奴tra may be put in the middle or at the close of the second century A.D.^[21] This is the primary text of the Pr膩cina 狈测腻测补 school. This work is divided into five chapters, each of which is again divided in to two sections called 膧丑苍颈办补蝉. There are a large number of Sutras.

The main subjects dealt in the 狈测腻测补s奴tra are:

笔谤补尘腻峁嘺 (the means of knowledge);
Prameya (the object of knowledge),
痴腻诲补 (discussion),
Avayava (members of a syllogism) and
Anyamata-辫补谤墨办峁Ｄ� (the examination of the doctrines of other systems of philosophy).

This works contains an examination of various philosophical doctrines. For example, in book III, chapter II, there is a criticism of the 厂腻峁僰丑测补 doctrine of knowledge (buddhi) and the Bauddha doctrine of momentariness; in book IV, chapter I, there is a review of Buddhist doctrine of 厂耻苍测补迟腻 and also the Ved膩ntic view of 叠谤补丑尘补辫补谤颈峁嚹乵补惫腻诲补 etc.

The first commentator of the 狈测腻测补s奴tra is 痴腻迟蝉测腻测补苍补 and the name of his work is 狈测腻测补bh膩峁a. He is also known as Pak峁lasv膩min who mentioned in his work the views of the earlier 狈补颈测腻测颈办补蝉. According to S.N. Dasgupta, his date is about 4^th century A.D.^[22] R膩dh膩krishnan also accepts the same date.^[23]

According to Karl H. Potter,

鈥淭丑别 狈测腻测补bh膩峁a is not only the first commentary on the 狈测腻测补s奴tra that is still extant, it is also the first to which we find any reference鈥�.^[24] There are many commentaries on 狈测腻测补bh膩峁a.

狈测腻测补-惫腻谤迟颈办补 is a sub-commentary on 狈测腻测补s奴tra written by Uddyotakara. The date of Uddyotakara is about 635 A.D.^[25] In this commentary, the author develops many new arguments and sometimes presents new or alternative explanations for the same 厂奴迟谤补. 鈥淭丑别 main object which prompted Uddyotakara to write his sub-commentary was to oppose Dign膩ga, 狈腻驳腻谤箩耻苍补 and other Buddhist logicians that preceded him.鈥�^[26]

Dharmak墨rti in his 狈测腻测补bindu defended Dign膩ga and refuted the views of Uddyotakara. Towards the first half of the ninth century, 痴腻肠补蝉辫补迟颈惭颈艣谤补 tried to re-establish the 狈测腻测补 doctrines propounded by Gautama, 痴腻迟蝉测腻测补苍补, and Uddyotakara. He wrote 狈测腻测补惫腻谤迟颈办补t膩tparyat墨k膩. 痴腻肠补蝉辫补迟颈 was a versatile, genius and prolific writer. He wrote commentaries on the works of other philosophical schools like 厂腻峁僰丑测补, Vedanta and M墨m膩峁冡梗膩. In his work, 痴腻肠补蝉辫补迟颈 has established the supremacy of 狈测腻测补 on other systems by refuting the opposite views. 痴腻肠补蝉辫补迟颈 does not always followed 痴腻迟蝉测腻测补苍补 or Uddyotakara for interpreting different 厂奴迟谤补s of 狈测腻测补s奴tra.

狈测腻测补ma帽jar墨 of Jayanta 叠丑补峁弓补 is an independent work on the 狈测腻测补s奴tra. According to Radhakrishnan, the time of Jayanta 叠丑补峁弓补 is 10^th century A.D.^[27] The author鈥檚 interpretation of 狈测腻测补 doctrine is quite independent. The author has referred to many schools of Indian Philosophy like, Buddhism, Jainism, M墨m膩峁冡梗膩, 厂腻峁僰丑测补, 痴别诲腻苍迟补, 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘 etc.

狈测腻测补s膩ra of Bh膩sarvaj帽a is another important treatise. This treatise was written in about 10^th century A.D.^[28] In this treatise, author mentions the three 辫谤补尘腻峁嘺s, 辫谤补迟测补办峁, 补苍耻尘腻苍补 and 艣补产诲补.^[29] The author himself wrote a commentary on his work called 狈测腻测补bh膩峁a.

鲍诲补测补苍腻肠腻谤测补, also known as Udayakara was one of the greatest 狈补颈测腻测颈办补蝉. He flourished after 痴腻肠补蝉辫补迟颈惭颈艣谤补. He was the last of 狈补颈测腻测颈办补蝉 who belong to the old school of 狈测腻测补 (笔谤腻肠墨苍补苍测腻测补). After that he flourished the Navya狈测腻测补 school. It is also said that Udayana prepared the way for emergence of Navya狈测腻测补. He wrote a sub-commentary named 狈测腻测补惫腻谤迟颈办补t膩tparyapari艣奴ddhi on 痴腻肠补蝉辫补迟颈鈥檚 狈测腻测补惫腻谤迟颈办补t膩tparya峁玨膩. He refuted the criticisms of the Buddhist logicians against 痴腻肠补蝉辫补迟颈惭颈艣谤补 in this work. Udayana also wrote some independent works on 狈测腻测补 system. In his 狈测腻测补-kusum膩帽jal墨, he has forwarded arguments to prove the existence of God. Another important 狈测腻测补 work of Udayana is 膧迟尘补迟补迟迟惫补惫颈惫别办补. In this work he tries to establish the 狈测腻测补-doctrine of Soul against the attack of Buddhists. The time of Udayana is supposed to be the latter half of the11th century A.D.^[30] 痴补谤补诲补谤腻箩补 wrote an important commentary named 叠辞诲丑颈苍墨 on Udayana鈥檚 狈测腻测补-kusum膩帽jal墨.^[31] 痴补谤诲丑补尘腻苍补 wrote a commentary named 笔谤补办腻艣补 on Udayana鈥檚 罢腻迟辫补谤测补辫补谤颈艣耻诲诲丑颈.

The 罢腻谤办颈办补谤补办峁Ｄ� of 痴补谤补诲补谤腻箩补 is another important treatise on 狈测腻测补 system. Trilocana, a brilliant 狈补颈测腻测颈办补 wrote 狈测腻测补ma帽jar墨. His time is speculated as about 900 A.D.^[32] Though the title 狈测腻测补ma帽jar墨 is identical with the title of Jayanta 叠丑补峁弓补鈥檚 great work on 狈测腻测补, the work is different in nature. However, it has given rise to some confusion also.

Ma峁噄ka峁囜弓ha 惭颈艣谤补 wrote a work, named 狈测腻测补ratna.It is a logical text on the argumentative aspects of 狈测腻测补. Visvan膩tha鈥檚 狈测腻测补s奴trav峁泃ti (17^th century A.D.) is another important work of this system.^[33] In this work, the author discusses the essential structure of the 狈测腻测补 syllogism.

The above mentioned treatises of 狈测腻测补 system follow the 厂奴迟谤补s of Gautama and maintain the spirit of these 厂奴迟谤补s. Thus, these works discuss religion and metaphysic together with purely logical problems. Hence, in these works we find discussions on the concept of the self and its rebirth, God and the world as also the logical problems, concerning the nature and means of knowledge etc. But later on the 狈测腻测补 works started to give stress on pure logic and dialectics. As a result there developed a new trend among the 狈测腻测补 scholars which is termed as Navya-狈测腻测补 (Neo Logic) and the former works are regarded as 笔谤腻肠墨苍补狈测腻测补 (Old 狈测腻测补).