Nyaya-Vaisheshika (critical and historical study)

by Aruna Rani | 1973 | 97,110 words

This essay studies Nyaya-Vaisheshika—A combination of two of the six orthodox schools of Indian philosophy. The study also discusses in detail the authors of various works and critically analyzes key concepts of Nyaya-Vaisesika. Such Indian philosophies seek the direct realization of the Atman (the self) to attain ultimate freedom and bliss....

Warning! Page nr. 26 has not been proofread. Click the page link to verify the generated OCR text with the original PDF.

In the 'Nyaya Sutra' of Gautama, God has not been mentioned as one of the twelve promeyas. From this it has been concluded by some modern scholars that the Nyaya Sutra originally was not theistic. Garbe says that "The fundamental text books of the two schools, the Vaisesika and Wyaya Sutras, originally did not accept the existence of God; it was not till a subsequent period that the two systems changed to theism, although neither ever went so 1. givaditya, Saptapadarthi, Page 20

Warning! Page nr. 27 has not been proofread. Click the page link to verify the generated OCR text with the original PDF.

401 far as to assume a creator of matter. Muir is also of the same viev-"I am unable to say if the ancient doctrine of the Nyaya was theistic." But to this, Vrttikera Visvanath and others say that Atman as postulated among the pramoyas included both Jivatamana and Paramatamana. That is why no separate mention of Isvara has been made. There are three aphorisms in the Nyaya Sutre which 3 discuss God. While Vatsyayana, Uddyotakar and Vis vanatha regard it as the Nyaya view, Vacaspati, Udayana and Vardhamana interpret it as a criticism of the Vedanta view, that God is the constituent cause of the universe. To the objection that man does not often reap fruits proportionate to his acts, and so everything seems to depend on God's will and not on human effort, the Nyaya says that human acts produce their results under the control and with the co-operation of God. Vatsyayana supports theism when he declares that the self sees all, feels all and knows all. This description loses all meaning, if it is applied to the imperfect individual self. Later Naiyayikas are frankly theistic and enter into a discussion of the nature of God in considering the theory 1. Garbe, Philosophy of Amient India, Page 23. 2. Muir, Original Sanskrit Texts, Vol. III, Page 133. 3. Cautema, Nyaya Sutra, IV.1.19-21. Vatsyayana, Nyaya-Bhasya, 1.1.9; IV.1.21.

Warning! Page nr. 28 has not been proofread. Click the page link to verify the generated OCR text with the original PDF.

402 of tmen. Annem Bhatta classifies souls into two kinds, supreme and human. While the supreme is God, one, omniscient; the human souls are infinite in number, 1 different in each body. God is looked upon as a special soul by Uddyotakara when he proves the authority of the Vedas by the fact that they have been asserted by a special self (Purusa Visesa). The meaning of special self is clear since the Sanskrit word, chosen by 2 Uddyotakera, is taken from the classical definition of God in the Yoga-Sutras.

Let's grow together!

I humbly request your help to keep doing what I do best: provide the world with unbiased sources, definitions and images. Your donation direclty influences the quality and quantity of knowledge, wisdom and spiritual insight the world is exposed to.

Let's make the world a better place together!

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: