Fundamentals of Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika - An Introduction through the Works of JC Chatterjee and Chittaranjan Naik - Part 1

The Nyāya system is the most systematic application of logic in the acquisition of knowledge (epistemology). Vaiśeṣika is an explanation of the reality around us (ontology), beginning with the description of the indestructible atoms as the basis of all reality. Though arising independently, gradually they merged for common study. Gautama founded the Nyāya school in the 3rd century BCE; later modifications resulted in the modern school of Navya Nyāya in 1200 CE. Nyāya, or Indian logic, is an instrument for the understanding and discovery of reality quite unlike Western logic — a formal structural inquiry unrelated to the world. The aim of Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika is liberation of the Self from the bondage and suffering due to its association with the body. No such purpose exists in Western traditions discussing either ontology or epistemology.

It is an unfortunate tragedy of Indian educational systems that Indian darśanas, especially Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika, have been completely obliterated from the secular education policies of modern India.

A most fascinating domain dating back thousands of years, and developed by the Indian ṛṣis to explain the world around us; they deeply discuss logic or the means of acquiring knowledge, yet simply disappeared from the public perception. This became one of the reasons for the derooting and deracination we today see in educated Indians.

Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika form the backbone of our Indian Knowledge Systems, which have a prodigal output in both worldly (aparā) and otherworldly (parā) domains. This was not only in Saṃskṛta but in many vernacular languages. It is sad that most Indians are deeply unaware of the fantastic knowledge generation of Indian culture in mathematics, astronomy, logic, metallurgy, physics, shipbuilding, medicine, agriculture, town planning, sanitation, architecture, literature, poetry, linguistics, drama, to name a few. The paradigm of understanding the world differs from the modern scientific materialistic perspective, but that did not prevent Indian knowledge systems from generating a copious amount of literature in varied domains. Our educational policies hardly stress this aspect of our past.

This series of essays is a summary and abridgement of a wonderful book, ‘The Hindu Realism’, by a great scholar, Śrī Jagadish Chandra Chatterjee, written way back in 1912. The summary is followed by some of the key ideas of Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika, as discussed by eminent philosopher Śrī Chittaranjan Naik in his essays and books: ‘Natural Realism and The Contact Theory of Perception’, and ‘On the Existence of the Self’.

The author of this series is not an authority but rather a student who is exploring the richness of Indian culture and aims to introduce the uninitiated to the remarkable depth of these great philosophical systems. It is an invitation for the readers to explore fully the above-mentioned works and other texts of Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika, the most comprehensive and elaborate systems to explain the world around us. Western traditions curiously still struggle with coming to the final ideas regarding reality and knowledge that Indian ṛṣis had sorted out, wrapped up, and kept intact - without the need to change for at least two thousand years. This is indeed a remarkable achievement of Indian civilization, but sadly, most people are ignorant about it.

Basics of Indian Philosophical Traditions or Darśanas

Indian systems are classified into two groups: orthodox (āstika) and non-orthodox (nāstika) depending on whether they accept or reject the Vedas as a trusted source of knowledge. Interestingly, āstika (theism) and nāstika (atheism) are not terms to denote the belief or its absence, respectively, in the notion of God. Most Indian darśanas have no real need to invoke God in their philosophical explanations. The non-orthodox systems are the Cārvāka, Bauddha, and Jaina darśanas. The orthodox systems include the six systems called Sāṃkhya, Yoga, Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika, Mīmāṃsa, and Vedānta. The orthodox schools come in pairs: Yoga-Sāṃkhya, Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika, and Mīmāṃsa-Vedānta. JC Chatterjee, in his book, combines the last two into a single group called Vedānta.

Apart from only materialism, both non-orthodox and orthodox schools have certain core common ideas and some of these are distinct from Western philosophical traditions:

1. An explanation of reality should not sacrifice reasoning and experience.
2. Philosophy in Indian systems, never a dry intellectual exercise, carries a soteriological power — the power of intense individual transformation from ignorance to wisdom and from bondage to freedom.
3. There is no original sin but original ignorance.
4. In all systems (except Cārvāka), karma is a central doctrine of cause and effect at the levels of body, mind, and intellect.
5. Karma intricately links to the idea of reincarnation or rebirth in all systems.
6. Mokṣa, a common theme for all, is the final state of enlightenment with no further births, in stark contrast to the western focus on eternal life.
7. Almost all Indian philosophies accept perfect happiness as a state of no further births.
8. Despite the perception of Buddhism as non-orthodox, scholars such as Śrī Aurobindo and Ananda Coomaraswamy demonstrate the subtle differences. Though the Vedas were “rejected,” Buddhism has close parallels with the Upaniṣadic philosophy.
9. The final state in Vedānta is a mokṣa with no further births, after realizing a positive state of Brahman or the Self. The final state in Buddhism is nirvāṇa, with again no further births, but the world, mind, and soul end in a nothingness. This difference is hardly a reason in the traditional culture of Bhārata, where debates always existed to give credence to the colonial story of a violent “driving” out of Buddhism by Hinduism.
10. The practical aspects of Yoga and meditation are acceptable routes in all systems to reach the state of liberation.
11. All focus on individual effort, if necessary, across many births to liberate from ignorance. The role of a teacher or book is only as a guide on the path; finally, the individual’s effort is responsible for one’s own mokṣa, achievable in the present life.

The goal of human life in Indic philosophies firmly remains mokṣa or enlightenment. The journey starts with an intellectual apprehension of this goal — to finally attain mokṣa through various routes. This is the basic framework of Indian darśanas. The differences mainly are in the description of the routes to mokṣa and the nature of the individual soul, the universal soul, their relationship, and the state of final mokṣa.

Indian darśanas are not something derived from basic principles to finally arrive at a conclusion. As Naik says:

A darśana is a Single Vision in which all its elements, including epistemology, ontology, metaphysics, the practice, and the fruits of sadhana, are like various organs that form a single integral whole. Darśana strictly is not synonymous with philosophy.

However, to avoid confusion, one can broadly consider them as equivalent terms.

Vaiśeṣika on the World Around Us

Ṛṣi Kaṇāda (somewhere between the 6th century BCE and the 2nd century BCE) was the founder of the Vaiśeṣika system, and later authors like Praśastapāda (5th century CE) and Śrīdhara (9th century CE) wrote commentaries. It is important to recognise that Indian Knowledge Systems had the Self as the basis of both its ontology and epistemology. The perception and knowledge of the reality of the world around us is an inside-to-outside process. In the Western traditions, these are an outside-to-inside process. In the Indian view, the ultimate building block of the world is the Self, also known as Brahman or the Primary Consciousness. Everything in the material world proceeds from the Self.

In Western traditions, the ultimate building block of the matter began with the atoms and has progressed to subatomic matter (quarks and electrons). Contemporary physics, albeit a bit argued, speaks about “strings” as the most basic of building blocks. Of course, matter, as we presently know, constitutes only 5% of the universe. The rest is dark matter and dark energy, roughly 25% and 70% respectively, the nature of which remains unknown to us at present. In Western scientific traditions, science builds up everything from the finest aspects of matter to increasing orders of complexity to finally generate consciousness.

Thus, in Indian traditions, everything begins from Consciousness and in Western traditions, everything begins from matter. The fundamental belief in explaining the world may differ in both, but in terms of doing science or in developing technology in the gross physical world, there is no handicap. The two paradigms share an understanding of matter and physical forces. It is a hegemonical pushing of Indian philosophies to the realm of religion (which actually started in the German universities of the 18th century) that prevents us from imagining that Indian philosophies or darśanas are equally capable of explaining matters of the external world.

The Vaiśeṣika system is the best example of this. It is also known as the ‘atomistic school’ because of its elaborate atomic theory to explain the universe. The Vaiśeṣika school has important contributions in the fields of the theory of metals, the theory of motion, the physiology of dreams, the nature of sound, the theory of numbers, and many other scientific areas. Kaṇāda also distinguishes between mind and consciousness. Kaṇāda theorised that gurutva (gravity) was responsible for falling objects on Earth. There was an exhaustive study of motion by the Vaiśeṣika school, and most impressive perhaps would be the three sutras proposed 1800 years before Newton’s laws.

• वेगःनिमित्तविशेषातकर्मणोजायते | Change of motion is due to impressed force
• वेगःनिमित्तापेक्षात कर्मणोजायते नियतदिकक्रिया प्रबन्धहेतु | Change of motion is proportional to the impressed force and is in the direction of the force.
• वेगःसंयोगविशेषविरोधी | Action and reaction are equal and opposite.

The practical and scientific ideas of the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika school have led scholars like James Ballantyne to believe that it offers a foundation for introducing modern Western science.

The Hindu Realism by Jagadish Chadra Chatterjee: A Summary

Hindu philosophy, or darśanas, means the branch of learning that demonstrates by reasoning propositions in regard to:

1. What a person ought to do to gain true happiness in specific circumstances and existence.
2. What he ought to realise by direct experience - the absolute freedom and independence from suffering, as already proposed, reasoned, and established by qualified authorities.

The Saṃskṛta name for philosophy is darśana śāstra (synonyms: vicāra śāstra, manana śāstra) — the science of views with regards to the above two propositions. The first relates to the duties (karma and dharma) of what a person ought to do. The second relates to the truths of the essential nature of things — tattva — which enables absolute freedom and independence.

Thus, Indian philosophy would correspond to the Western idea of philosophy only when the latter talks about the above two propositions. There are two broad divisions of Hindu philosophy for rational demonstrations:

1. Dharma-mīmāṃsa (or karma-mīmāṃsa) relates to the duties of the person to gain happiness.
2. Tattva-mīmāṃsa (mokṣa-darśana or Metaphysical Philosophy).

They are not exclusive because dharma-mīmāṃsa also has a metaphysical basis. Several schools of metaphysical philosophy exist, but five are considered fundamental. These are:

1. Vaiśeṣika
2. Nyāya
3. Sāṃkhya
4. Yoga
5. Vedānta (JC Chatterjee collapses Mīmāṃsa and Vedānta into a single group)

They are grouped into three pairs: Vaiśeṣika-Nyāya, Sāṃkhya-Yoga, and Vedānta.

Dharma-mīmāṃsa has a metaphysical basis of its own, and in this regard, it is considered a part of the Vaiśeṣika-Nyāya group. Again, the three systems are not mutually contradictory. They form a graduated series that caters to different grades of minds, both intellectual and temperamental. The branch of Hindu philosophy basically tries to address the various types of human minds.

Contrasting Pre-Suppositions of Hindu And Western Philosophy

There are certain preconceptions and presuppositions of Hindu philosophy that stand in contrast to the presuppositions of western philosophy while addressing certain issues of life and reality.

Western Philosophy	Hindu Philosophy
Metaphysical truths, especially of Eastern traditions, are only a matter of speculation or inferences based on faith. Metaphysical truths are never known to be directly experienced.	Metaphysical truths can be known by direct experience.
Even if direct experience is possible, there is no person known who has claimed this.	Ṛṣis or perfected seers know this truth and they existed in the past, exist in the present, and will exist in the future too.
Views Hindu philosophy as mutually contradictory since it involves speculation.	These ṛṣis, by knowing directly, have taught them to disciples. These truths are not matters of speculation, inference, or faith. With few variations, the ṛṣis have known the truth as the same for all.
Philosophy is a rational exercise occupying a place between religion and science. It conforms to science.	Ṛṣis have taught them not as dogmas but through rational demonstration. Philosophy functions not to discover, but in explaining and understanding the truths already realised by experience.
Philosophy has no grand purpose towards humans reaching a greater ideal.	They all lead to the same end, absolute freedom and independence of a human.
There is no idea regarding categories of minds to explain the philosophical ideas.	Ṛṣis have taught the same truth, by three standard grades, to suit different minds and temperaments.
	These different methods of teaching constitute the three categories. They are not contradictory and together form a single and gradually advancing series. They may not be even chronological in order.

The Three Standards or Categories (Prasthāna) Of Teaching

These are:

1. The Creationist or Realistic standard
2. The Psycho-dynamic standard
3. The Polyonomic standard

The Creationist or Realistic Standard

The first standard or category is for beginners interested in the practical truths of the metaphysical philosophy. Here, the universe exists as it appears to the mind, extending in space and changing in time. It embodies realism in its purest and most basic form. This standard reduces the infinite variety of existing and experienced things to nine classes or ultimate realities. This is the Analytic Aspect of the universe.

The Synthetic Aspect of the universe explains how everything in the universe arises from these nine classes of ultimate realities. These secondary things are absolutely new creations out of eternally existing things. This is Ārambha-vāda or Asat-kārya-vāda, the doctrine of absolute non-existence of the produced before their actual production. Three main schools are concerned with dealing with this category of teaching:

1. Dharma-mīmāṃsa regarding human duties
2. Nyāya consisting of reasoning and logic to arrive at the metaphysical truths
3. Vaiśeṣika dealing with the theoretical metaphysical doctrines

The Psycho-Dynamic standard

The nine realities are reduced to only two ultimate principles forming the Analytic Aspect of the universe. The Synthetic Aspect explains how the entire universe is derived from these two ultimate Realities. One of the two classes remains forever unaffected and unchanged. The other class produces the mental (psychical), which manifests as thoughts, ideas, and feelings. The mental produces all material. Although the material appears to originate from the mind (like the equivalent “idealism” in western traditions), it is more appropriate to refer to it as psycho-dynamism.

The second reality originates both psychical (feelings, thoughts, and ideas) as well as dynamic (the nature of forces or powers). It discards the creationist notion of Vaiśeṣika, but things are already existing as a potential in the original psycho-dynamic principle. Similar to how a tree grows from a seed, things also evolve from their potential state. Thus, Pariṇāma Vāda asserts that things do not originate but rather evolve from a potential state. This is Sat-kārya-vāda. This is in contrast to the Asat-kārya-vāda of the previous category, where there is the creation of absolutely new things from an eternally existing substance.

Two schools belong to this standard.

1. Sāṃkhya
2. Yoga

Sāṃkhya explains the doctrines, and yoga shows the practical method for realising these truths.

The Polyonymic Standard

This takes off from where the previous standard stops. The two realities merge into a single reality. It does not contradict the former, but shows how one of the realities shown by the second standard cannot be absolutely real; and from a point of view, it is non-existent. This is the Analytic Aspect. The Synthetic Aspect describes how the rest of the universe is derived. The doctrine essentially holds that what is experienced as a universe is a single, uniform reality of the nature of “Pure intelligence” or “Experiencing Principle.” The single Reality is experienced as a multiplicity of names and forms (nāma and rūpa).

The creation principle here is Vivarta-vāda or Sat-kāraṇa-vāda. The names and forms are absolutely no different from the underlying single reality. The originating source is the basis of all things. Vedānta represents this standard.

Read Part 2 here.