Ātma (Soul)

Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika which belong to the theistic group of thinking, differ from the other four theistic darśanas namely Yoga, Sāṅkhya, Pūrvamīmāṃsa and Uttaramīmāṃsa. It is mainly because the approach of Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika scholars to the subject differs highly from others. The subject matter dealt with in each darśana is almost the same. The difference comes only in the opinion of scholars regarding certain subjects. It is interesting to note that the other schools refute some of the conclusions of Naiyāyikas on certain things, do follow the method of Nyāya itself to achieve their aim. It is Gautama who wrote the first book on Nyāya namely the “Nyāya sūtras” which furnished a frame for later scholars to contact their debates in a successful way. Anumāna is the frame so furnished by Gautama which played a major role almost in all darśanas except in Carvāka’s which believed only in Pratyakṣa. All the preachers of the darśanas agree in the fact that the observation should be real so as to reach to a conclusion. So pramāṇas, means of valid knowledge, came to the scene to help the philosophers to derive their conclusions.

Pramāṇas are considered the means of valid knowledge which are totally eight in number. Pratyakṣa, Anumāna, Upamāna, Śabda, Arthāpatti, Anupalabthi, Sambhava and Aithihya are the eight means of valid knowledge¹ accepted to reach to a conclusion. Among these Naiyāyikas accept the first four namely Pratyakṣa (Perception), Anumāna (Inference), Upamāna (Comparison) and Śabda (Verbal testimony). Vaiśeṣikas though counted as a system of similar way of thoughts, accepted only two pramāṇas namely Pratyakṣa and Anumāna. So Anumāna becomes an inevitable means of real knowledge for both.

Pramāṇas become useful when they are used to know about certain valuable objects. Thus the subject to be known becomes equally important since the aim of pramāṇas is achieved only when the matter is known. Thus the subject matter known with the help of pramāṇas becomes important and that is called prameya. The meaning of the word prameya is that which is worth to be known. Naiyāyikas introduced twelve prameyas beginning with Ātma. Ātma, Śarīra, Indriya, Artha, Buddhi, Manas, Pravṛtti, Doṣa, Pretyabhāva, Phala, Dukkha and Apavarga are the twelve Prameyas accepted by Naiyayikas^[1]. Vaiśeṣikas also do not differ since they also tried to prove the same prameyas though in a different way. Vedāntiṃs consider Ātma as the only prameya since they think that the knowledge of Ātma alone can end in emancipation. But both Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika, though they agree with the opinion regarding the importance of Ātma, they say that alone is not enough for reaching the aim. So the Naiyāyikas have included Ātma as one among the twelve subject matters.

The Vaiśeṣika philosophy divides the categories as Dravya, Guṇa, Karma, Sāmānya, Viśeṣa, Samavāya and Abhāva. But these outward objects, though powerful, cannot bind the soul with the world. But at the same time, the false knowledge regarding certain things result in the rebirth of soul. Hence the real knowledge of twelve prameyas is inevitable for the emancipation of the soul.

Among the twelve objects of knowledge, Ātma or Soul is considered the most important. He enjoys pleasure and pain. According to Vaiśeṣika philosophy soul alone can enjoy pleasure or pain. He experiences the pleasure and pain. At the same time, he alone can give up these two feelings since he is the receiver of both. Since he is such a powerful one he (soul) has been counted first among the objects of knowledge.

Ātma which is considered the most important among the objects of knowledge is one that cannot be seen. So naturally the doubt arises regarding the existence of soul. Though Vedāntiṃs are ready to accept the existence of soul merely by the advice of the Vedas, Naiyayikas want to prove its existence by anumāna. The tenth sutra of Gautama which reads as icchādveṣa prayatnasukhaduhkhaṃjanāni ātmano lingam^[2] reveals this fact. Almost all theists agree with the fact that Ātma or soul is the object of the feeling “I”. But when people think of themselves, they think their body, white or black, as Ātma. Nobody has a different knowledge of soul beyond body. So when one thinks of himself, he feels as having several thoughts including desire or hatred. Tātparyatīka gives the above commentary. The knowledge of soul as well as that of body exists in the same region. So in the opinion of the great Udayanacārya, the object in the form of soul different from body cannot be recognized until the existence of soul is proved by some other means of knowledge.Any how the knowledge of soul first arises from the Vedas only. Naiyāyikas want to prove it by the inference. One is tempted to receive some object from which he has already got some pleasure. This desire of the particular object or several objects arises from his previous acquaintances with those. This desire works as a reason to prove the existence of soul. Seeing an object from which he has already enjoyed pleasure, he is forced to get vyāpti (invariable concomitance) in the form of “when there is this object then there is pleasure.” Then he desires to get it again. This natural phenomenon leads Naiyāyikas to think that there is a soul beyond body only by which one can remember or enjoy the old feelings. So the enjoyer, the remembered and the inferred all are the same person.

Baudhas, on the other hand, do not accept the existence of soul. According to them, remembering something takes place due to the power of Buddhi or intellect. The flow of intellect, though momentary, can produce the thought of an object already seen or enjoyed. According to Bauddhas, Ātma or Soul is not eternal. It is also momentary^[3]. Naiyāyikas do not agree with this. Denying the opinion of Bauddhas, they say that buddhi or intellect is confined to each object which comes on its way. So, though there is a flow of intellect, the remembrance of an object seen before is not possible since each part of intellect is covered with each kind of object. Thus Naiyāyikas succeed in proving that Ātma or Soul is the abode of desire. Not only desire but hatred towards some object also is a proof of the existence of Soul. Any means, thorns etc, create hatred in us at the second sight. It also can happen only if there exists a soul who has enjoyed the above, before. Thus desire and hatred are two feelings which play as instruments to prove the existence of soul.

Next, the Naiyāyikas consider Prayatna (effort) as a symbol to prove the existence of soul. Effort is a special quality which arises to achieve the desired one or to give up the hated one. All the living beings have a tendency to like things which give pleasure. If a man tries to achieve something he should have the knowledge that the desired object would give him pleasure. This knowledge cannot be born if he has not enjoyed it. So an effort also proves the fact that there should be something else to remind that previous experience so as to make him active. At the same time, one cannot remember a thing which is seen by other^[4]. A man cannot remember something which is not at all seen by him. He can remember only that which is seen or experienced by him. Vedāntiṃs, Sāṅkhyas, Naiyāyikas and Vaiśeṣikas have the same view in this regard.

Bauddhas alone have a different view on this. In saying that all things are momentary and there is no permanent soul, they cannot give a clear explanation for the phenomenon of remembering. When the soul itself changes in a body how a second soul can remember the object seen by the previous soul. When this becomes impossible, the Bauddhas soul cannot take an effort either to achieve or to neglect. Thus effort also plays an important role in proving the existence of Ātma.

Bauddhas may say that there is no permanent soul and the flow of thoughts can bring out the previous matters to mind. But these momentary thoughts can bring out mere figures which are seen but not the feelings of pleasures or pain which are experienced by the previous mind. All these can happen only if there is a permanent soul beyond the perishable body. The qualities like desire, hatred, effort etc., cannot be the qualities of body. The qualities of a body will always be all pervading throughout the body. As the qualities like desire, hatred etc., do not spread everywhere on the object, it is not the abode of these qualities. Thus these qualities are decided to be of soul by seeking the help of pariśeṣānumāna. (Inference derived from what is left behind). Śarīra (Body)

According to the Nyāya Philosophy, body is the abode of soul since it enoys pleasure or pain depending on it. Soul needs some instruments to get pleasure or pain. Indriyas or sense organs, play here the part of the instruments. The obects for enjoyment are called arthas. Ātma (Soul) alone does the deeds and enjoys the fruit of these. It is a commonly accepted fact that the result comes in the form of pleasure or pain in continuation of one’s virtues or sins. Though Ātma or Soul enjoys the result of these, he cannot experience it without an instrument. That instrument for enjoyment is body. Body is the abode of actions, sensual organs and object.^[5]

Always man tries to get a sweet one and to neglect a bitter one. When this desire towards an object arises he begins to act accordingly. This action is called ceṣṭa in Sanskrit. Body is the abode of this action.

Body is the abode of sensual organs. These sensual organs are called indriyas. It is the habit of the sensual organs to get engaged with things, both good and bad. Great scholarly works like Upaniṣads and Bhagavad Gīta are written to make a soul aware of this fact and to teach him to control his mind from going behind the needs of organs^[6]. The Nyāya Sūtras say that the body is the abode of these sensual organs and if the body gets diseased or hurt, the organs would also lose their power. Thus body becomes the support of the sensual organs also.

Arthas or Objects also find the Body as their support. Man gets fear, pleasure or sorrow due to the interaction of sensual organs and objects. This happens in the Body. So the Body is considered by Naiyāyikas as the support of objects also.

According to the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika philosophy, the human Body is made of earth^[7]. All the five great elements namely Earth, Water, Fire, Air and Ether bear the responsibility for the existence of the five sensual organs called Nose, Tongue, Eye, Skin and Ear. The Vedāntiṃs consider the human body as Pāñcabhautika-made of five elements. But the Naiyāyikas do not accept this view of the Vedāntiṃs. In spite of having all features, the human body possesses odour as its special quality. This is the main reason for accepting the earthly bodies as Pārthiva (made up of earth) by Naiyāyikas. In these bodies, the odour exists by the relation, Samavāya (inherence). Samavāya is a permanent relation which exists between the organs and the body, the quality and the qualified, the action and the active body, jāti (genus) and the being^[8]. The human body would have some kind of odour. The odour is a special quality which exists in earth alone. The other four elements like Water, Fire, Air and Ether have no odour as their quality. If it is argued that the manly body is made up of other elements other than earth, it could be odorless.

Among the objects gandha (odour), rasa (taste), rūpa (colour), sparśa (touch) and śabda (sound) the first four exist in earth. In water there are three qualities namely-taste, colour and touch. In light or fire, there are colour and touch. Air possesses a single quality called touch. Sound exists in ether^{[9] [10]}.

A doubt can be raised regarding the above said division of qualities. When the earth is said to have four qualities beginning with odour, the specified organ of earth called nose should receive all the four. This should be the case with other elements also. The organ of water namely tongue does not receive the color. Similarly, the eye which is said to be the specified organ of light, receives only colour but not touch. When an organ is said belonging to a special element, naturally it should receive all the qualities of the said element.

In reply, it is said that the five elements namely-earth, water, light, air and ether have only one quality as their own. That is why the nose which is the special organ of earth does not receive colour, taste and touch. In the same way the tongue receives only taste but not the other. The organ of light called eye receives the colour alone.

There is another problem in accepting this. If each element has only one quality as its own, how can it be said that the elements like earth are having more than one quality. Several qualities are felt in an element because of its relationship with other elements. Since water is related with earth, one gets the experience of taste in it. But if it is accepted, the assumption that earth is having four qualities, water three, and light two and air only one would go wrong. There will be breach of law in accepting so.

Among the five elements, each one is connected with the next one. That is why; the colour, taste and touch are experienced in earth along with odour. This fact is severally shown in puraṇās when they try to describe the creation.

This argument is also found not correct. The earthly and watery objects become visible due to their quantity (parimāṇa), bodily richness (sāvayavatva) and clear form (udbhūtarūpa). Any object having these three qualities will be visible. Among the five elements, light alone is having colour. The earthly and watery objects which do not have a colour of their own will not be visible. But from their visibility, it can be assumed that the relation in between these elements has nothing to do with their possessing several qualities. If it is argued that the visibility of earthly and watery objects is due to their relation with the light objects, there will be no cause for the invisibility of air which has relation with light. After a long discussion, the author of the Nyāyasūtras comes to the conclusion by presenting the sutra, “pūrvapūrvaguṇotkarṣāttattatpradhānam^[11]. The sensual organs like nose, tongue, eye, skin and ear are abundantly having odour, taste, color, touch and sound respectively. Due to the ability these sensual organs receive the said objects very easily. That is why the other objects, though dwelling in the elements like earth, water, etc, are not received by the organs concerned.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Ātmaśarīrendriyārdhabuddhimanapravṛtidoṣapretyabhāvaphaladuhkhaapavargāatu prameyam.1.1.9, Nyāyadaśana, p.19

[2]:

nyāyadarśana 1-1-10, p.20

[3]:

A critical survey of Indian Philosophy, p.77

[4]:

Na anyadrṣtamsmaratianyaha.Nyāyasūtra, p.46

[5]:

Ceṣṭtendriyārthāśrayahaśariram. Nyāya sūtra P.47

[6]:

śarīram ayatvāpnoti yacchāpyutkrāmatīśvaraha gṛhītvaitāni samyāti vāyurgandhānivārāyat. 15.8, Bhagavadgīta, p. 98

[7]:

mānuṣamśarīrampārthivam, 3.1.23,Nyāya Bhāṣya, 245.

[8]:

Avayavāyavayaviprasngaiścaivamāpralayāt, 4.2.15, Nyāya Sūtra, p. 560

[9]:

Gandharasarūpasparśaśabdānamsparśaparyantāha prthivyah 3.1.62, āpteovāyūnām pūrvam pūrvamapohyākāśasyottarah

[10]:

.1.63, Nyāya Darśana, P.365

[11]:

Nyāya Sūtra, 1.1.68, p. 321