B

132

N8M27

A

:

4 ;

9 :

:

4 :

1 :

8 \

1-

MAHESACHANDRANYAYARATNA

BR lEF NOTES ON THE

MODERN NYAYA SYSTEM

OF PHILOSOPHY AND ITS

TECHNICAL TERMS

THE LIBRARYOF

THE UNIVERSITYOF CALIFORNIALOS ANGELES

I

1/

BRIEF NOTES ON THE MODERN NYAYASYSTEM OF PHILOSOPHY AND ITS

TECHNICAL TERMS.

BY

MAHAMAHOPADHYAY MAHESA CHANDRA NYAYARATNA, C. 1. E.

Hare Press : Calcutta.

i

The Library

University of California, Los Angeles

The gift of Mrs. Cummings, 1 963

f/*- s

Brief Notes on the Modern Nya'ya System of

Philosophy and its Technical Terms.

'T^HE term Nyaya is composed of f^ (with certainty\ i or

^?T (to go) and ^ (^by which), and means literally the

method of coming with certainty [to a conclusion]. As used

in Hindu Philosophy it means the syllogism. Gotama is the

earliest writer who treats of the syllogism ; and his work, the

Gautama-Sutra (aphorisms of Gotama), and those of writers

who discuss philosophical questions according to his method,

whether they discuss the syllogism or not, make up the Nyaya

system of philosophy.

Nyaya philosophy may be divided into ancient and modern.

Ancient Nyaya treats not only of the syllogism, but discusses

all sorts of questions, physical and metaphysical, applying,

where necessary, the syllogistic method. Modern Nyaya, as

regards the subjects of discussion, makes no departure from

the ancient. Rather, it restricts itself to fewer subjects;

209'^592

[ ^ I

but those it discusses, it discusses wiih a nicety and a minute

precision unknown to ancient Nyaya. It lays particular stress

on a strict definition of term:s, and it aims at ascertaining

precisely even the meanings of expressions in common use

and so intelligible to all. For example, Gotama, in putting

forth his aphorism, "^r^fT^'^ai: ifrcTtfr" (I. 1-2-3.) does not think

it necessary that he should attempt any elucidation of the

meaning of the term ufcT^r 1 His earlier commentators too-,

Pakshila Svamin and others, make no such attempt. Gangesa

Upadhyaya, the founder of the uTodern school of Nyaya,

enters upon a lengthy discussion about the meaning

of Hf^T'sTT, remarking that ?jr'^f*T'i"si is inadequate as a

characteristic of TTf?{=WT, for, ^i^^TrT^^at might be understood

as simply meaning,—naming the sgiw. He notices also other

points. He puts forth the following as the characteristit

of MTm^] —

Raghunatha Siromani improves upon the above thus :

—

XfgFicI5?n^n^^ ^f^ !TiicTTgf*lfciq'^f^9I'ssT^^lficTTgfflfcT^T^IT^R^-

Then follows Gadadhara, who discusses the question at

greater length than his predecessors, bringing out several nice

points, and comes at last to the following conclusion :

—

13]

H^TTcn^q^cTT^^"^^T^f^^fq-arBJIcTrfH^fqcT^T>2IcTT^^'?^«?^«jiff^^-

An old Nyiya wo-ik lays down "^jsqfvr'gRfTig or "^ir^sTTWT^

(invariable connection) as the characteristic attribute of ^ifff i

Gangesa Upadhyaya thinks this characterisation insufti-

cient, and so he delivers himself as follov/s :

—

Raghunatha Siromani improves upon Gangesa's elucida-

tion thus ;

—

He is followed by Bhavananda, Mathunlnatha, J^gadisa

a'nd Gadadhara, each with some improvement of his own.

]agadisa's conclusion is as follows:

—

A hair-splitting subtlety in the discussion of meanings

of terms is, thus, the distinguishing characteristic of modern

Nyaya. Poverty of matter is its great drawback. Notwith-

standing this drawback, however, it is aa exccll-cnt training

[ 4 I

for the intellect, which, under its disciphne, acquires a power

of precise thinking that is beyond all price. Without a

study of modern Nyaya it is impossible, again, to thoroughly

understand certain Sanskrit works on Philosophy, Law,

Rhetoric and even Grammar ; for example, the Chitsttkhi^

a commentary by Chitsukhachdryya on Nydyamakarajida (

a

treatise on the Vedanta philosophy by A'nandabodha), the

DdyabhdgaprabodJiim^ a commentary by Srikrishna Tarkd-

lanka'ra on Ddyabhdga ( a treatise on the Hindu Law of

Inheritance), the Kdvyaprakdsddarsa, a commentary by

Mahesvara Nya'ylanka'ra on Kdiynprakdsa ( a work on

Rhetoric), and Paribhdsendusekhara and Maiijusa ( works on

Grammar) by Na'gesa Bhatta.

The Sutras of Gotama, the Bhdshya of Pakshila Sva'min,

the Vartika of Udyotaka'ra A'cha'ryya, the Tdtparyya-tikd

of Va'chaspati Misra, the Tdtparyya-tikd-Prastiddhi of Udayana

A'cha'ryya fall under the head of ancient Nya'ya. The works

on Vaiseshika philosophy, with the exception of a few, such

as Miiktdvali, may also be included under the same head.

All the works on Nyaya from Gangesa's, who lived probably

in the 14th century, down to Gada'dhara's, who lived in

the latter end of the 17th century, come under the head of

modern Nya'ya.

Gangesa Upa'dhya'ya was a native of Mithila' (north-eastern

Beha'r;. He founded the modern school of Nya'ya. His great

work is the Tattva-Chmtdmani of which the subject is iWTir

(proof), one of the sixteen categories laid down by Gotama"'

in his Sutras. The system introduced by him received further

development at the hands of his disciples, among whom was

[ 5 ]

his own son Vardhama'na Upa'dhya'ya, up to tlie time of

Pakshadhara Misra, who flourished in the middle of the 15th

century. He was the writer of a commentary called Aloka

on Gangesa's Tattva-Chhifdmani. Down to the time of Paksha-

dhara the study of modern Nya'ya was almost exclusively

confined to Mithila, which became the resort of pupils from

all parts of India. The literary activity of the IMithila' school

began to decline after the time of Pakshadhara, whose work

called Aloka is the last standard work on modern Nya'ya. The

school, however, continued to flourish, and it is not yet extinct

in Mithila'. It may be noticed here incidentally that the works

of Gangesa and his followers effected a revolution in the study

of Nya'ya and completely superseded the ancient Nya'ya

works, such as the Bhdshya, the Vartika, &c., so much so that

very few Pandits of the present day possess even copies of

these works.

From Mithila' the study of modern Nya'ya spread to Nava-

dvipa (Nadiya', the same as Nuddea), and the students who

had studied the subject in IMithila began to teach it to their

pupils in the latter place. The name of the Pandit who first

introduced the study of modern Nya'ya into Navadvipa can

not be ascertained. Ra'mabhadra Siddha'ntava'gisa is the earli-

est Nadiya' writer on Nya'ya of whom we have any certain

knowledge. He wrote a commentary on the Kusurmx'njah

of Udayana A'cha'ryya. The image of the goddess Ka'li,

known as "Poda'-Ma"' (burnt mother) in consequence of its

having been burnt once, and to which offerings are made by

students on the eve of their departure from Navadvipa after

the completion of their studies there, is said to have been set

up for worship by Ra'mabhadra. After Ra mabhadra came

[ 6 ]

Basudeva Sa'rvabhauma. He was the writer of a work on

Nya'ya whicli is now missing but is referred to in other works

on Nya'ya. Raghuna'tha Siromani, the writer of the celebrated

Didhiti which, though calhng itself a commentary on the

chapters on Aniandna ( inference ) in the Tattva-Chintdmani,

contains a great deal of valuable original matter, was a pupil

of Ba'sudeva Sa'rvabhauma, and, according to tradition, a con-

temporary of Chaitanya, the celebrated Vaishnava reformer.

In his hands the system of Gangesa received its fullest

development, and from his time the fame of the Nadiya school

began to increase until at last the Mithila school was com-

pletely thrown into the shade, yielding thus to its rival the

place which it formerly occupied. The Naiya'yikas of Nadiya

have ever since maintained this position—a postion recognised

by Pandits all over India. After Raghuna'tha came in succes-

sion Bhava'nanda Siddha'ntava'gisa, Mathura'na'th Tarkava'gisa,

Ja'ga'disa Tarka'lanka'ra and Gada'dhara Bhatta'cha'ryya. The

descendants of the last have been distinguished Naiya'yikas,

and the greatest living Professor of Nya'ya at Nadiya', Maha'-

mahopa'dhya'ya Bhuvana Mohana Vidya'ratna, is the sixth in

descent from Gada'dhara. Another Bengali Naiya'yika,

Krishnada'sa Sa'rvabhauma but whether of Nadiya' or not is

not known, wrote a commentary on the Didhiti, named the

Didhiii Prasdrini of which a MS. copy written in Samvat

1672, corresponding to the year 1615 of the Christian era,

exists in the Government Sanskrit College in Calcutta.

All these Nadiya writers wrote commentaries on the Didhiii,

Mathura'na'tha writing a full commentary on the Chinfdmani

besides, and they enlarged the technical terminology of modern

Nyaya. To give an example. The terms f? and fw<^^'7 both

[ 7 ]

imply duality, but while the former can never he predicated ot'

a single individual, the latter can. We cannot say. " ^ ^j,"

but can say ""^ig ffcgwT*T," so that ft and ff^^jt cannot have

the same meaning. A distinction between the two meanings is

made thus :—The idea of duality, as expressed by ff, requires

for its completion (q?lrrfH) an aggregate of two objects. There-

fore f% cannot be predicated of a single object ^?f I But the

idea of duality, as expressed by ft-^^TST and meaning, 'belonging

to an aggregate of two', and therefore not requiring for its

completion the aggregate of two objects but requiring only one

of them, can be predicated of a single object =?i«i. The former

class of predication is based on what is called qQjtffre«^^

(relation of completion}, and the latter on ^5ft^?i^j^»?

( ordinary relation between object and attribute).

The technicalities of modern Nydya have hitherto repelled

students of Sanskrit from its study. The immemorial practice

has been for Naiyayikas to explain verbally to their pupils

the meaning of each term as it turns up in the course of their

teaching, and the explanations are after certain set formula;. Ahook called the Nyaya-kosha was brought out in Bombay by

Ehimacharyya Jhalakikar in 1875, and this book is a Dictionary

of the Technical terms used in Nyaya. The explanations it

gives are, however, not full enough, and the work itself has not

yet come to be generally known. I purpose, therefore, in this

paper to explain some of these technicalities, and this in

simple Sanskrit, as I cannot hope to be able to make matters

equally clear through the medium of English. My method

of interpretation is not the orthodox one usually followed by

Pandits, which I have thought proper to abandon as it

is not one calculated to make matters quite intelligible.

[ 8 ]

1 liave had very little time to spare for writing tliis piper,

Dr. Leitner's request to me for a paper having come to

me only on the 30th June last. With more time at my

disposal I would have made my paper fuller. I have not

been able even to look over the proof-sheets carefully, owing

to the serious and, as it has now proved, fatal illness of my

eminent and revered friends Dr. Rajendralala Mitra and

Pandit Iswara Chandra Vidyasagara.

fT'?T "Sf'JT: I ^^\ ?^ ^Tf^Tlir^wfir fcTS'fftfcf ^TTfcTIII-'^'JITf^r ?^*5T

^mv. ; %^J^ ^^^ ^Z]T^ ^^^fk ^5^ ftr^cftfcT ?^?lfq qZTf^ U^Tf^'fi: I

5Tm f^fvr^t^Jrr: t^^t: Wvf^^T^q^^^rT^T ^fq ^i^jit ^rg^sETc^gTTsjT

Bqrf^Tfq HiT; €?i'ifrqTf'ir-T^#tqTfV%f?T f?ft«r: 1 ^^t N^jt)

TT^ T^ fRr ^?ciif : ; ^g ^aicft f^vrm ar^^ ^ ^?cr#tqrf'?w'?i ^frf

^TWff I ?T2rr q^^ ; crfV ^^r^wTi^^rr^Tr 1 cTct^ ci^ ^I'jt^ti'^t^^: '^aiT

^q*?i '^q^sTif^: "^ir^^i^rcT ^aif^frftr 1

fg^# 5T 3r^%, ^ai^ffrTcW^^ ?T*?r ^^q*T#trffi?T^ ^ ^^^T'Ul'qTf^: I ?T^T

L 9 ]

-^*^, ^n3?!ilT?T§<5 5T crm rT?? ^^q^^sQsf ^T^^T,— ???jiT?rr: ^^iw^^i: i

cm cT<fr: IT^tf^Tfq ^nf^^ ( f^aHTmR^fcTTfrTcrT ) V^fh I ?T^T

Bfw%cTf*ifci cT^fhTfiT gwra^r q?^^^ vfi^c^^^ =^ ^T^f^^T it^ct: i

^cm^ " "?igf^^?IT^-3TTf??^^'^qT^fcTfKWq^raf'Tt f^TTf^^WTT

^«i^: I ^^^^wk=^TT -^^^ f^sTT '^'ifr H^^:' ^'^ f^.^^-

^ff^^: I '^q^*T3^q:' 'qit ^^'^f'?r' 'jzf q^t *TTt%' fsjttt 3^ 'sq^

^ ^T^ror, Tt '^ qJWT^*^ ^HJT^^T" ^?T^T?T^'JtT-^'?^q^T*TTST:

«R*r ; ^(Ttrfq ^sTrnKit^ift: (^i?ij*iq^'t:) ^^int^qT?i^«^R( 1 'Er'^ftir^

^iiT<1'?[T»i^f^3jq: I ^v(Tc|,T^: ^^^•. ^^q^i^^:^ ^m 'ijcrt qzt

[ >o ]

Tj^ 7T ^"?tff?fg' 5T^^I ^^mS^'2;^T5[fq q^Tmqi:*qTW^i§5I ^*^¥T

r'^^^i,—'^S'^l ?JJTfvnf SJ ?!*? q^KlTre^^i^^TTn^;, ^f*jtg qsr^^T^t,

^Hjf^f^rir: qi5?i^, ?i^ '»i;cTt ^j:'; ^T§t =^ ^g^T^^r: qs??n: vr^fsTT,

TTf%' TsiTf^q?ff»n?r I ^^'j^qiH^T %cf5fr?i»T?ft: ^^"^rfq ^ ^f^-

* ^^ cTsg^q^ ^T^wt fT*g:i

fT<^ ^*Ttcr: v(z^ i

t ^<rt: ^'^^*T'5^: ^?rt»ft (^T^?i:) H^«rq: ;f^^ *fg^fjT (^r??!;)

[ >• ]

* »TTr^T^?cr'^qn^^^/Ti<TTTT^5rqf: '^Tf^^Tqrfq'&q'iifTT'-^Tfr^: ^f^<T

^w^m: ; fTf%^'q:'!i?jqnf^Tr'!irT^^q-q^*qTre<q'^5T cT^^^^^^sf

^q^ir:, cT^q ^^ qT^^TTfr^q^i; ^ffifi[fsT^mqr:, fifi?TTqT=qli5T am^f^q^e

[ '^ ]

^: ^T^: crf^r^i ^Tt H^^sfq ^"^.n ?i% ^T^?T^T^Tf^ci<^^»^sq t ( ^«i

^'ST^: I ^^r^^Tf*T^ ^^iTTIimr ^^^^^ffl^JT "^Th q5jtfH«»^=^S#-

fiwrfq ^^if^f^ €'^5^T ^f^t^ li^r^t^ f?T3f^ ; ?mT ^?fr5^*T ^^^^

»JfT^f*TffT I ^^ ^T^'S^rrg -5Ef*^ft(<l^ Hf?T?ftf^, ^qT^Tg^ftf'T VJ^f?T I

^^^Vi "sqg^tfT vr^f^T, g*T €'^^^ cT^ T)fH?ftfJT ftrsffT I ?TSIT ifw-

[ >3 ]

^^^, »?% qst ^'rfn ?fci ^^T qjg ^m., gi?^' ?i^g ^t'-^k ?f?i i

qg ^RT '*IT§^' <Tfw*i; cTf^^fq^n grfflflT fHsfcT, qw JT^ ?T^ ?lf<ir^^'!!?^

IflFfsTlfqfn irfTTcTI ^^% ^^fff^fqcTT "^ "^TT^^TfTI q? W=n?r I ^^«f

^frifTTJfT'^ ^^TM ^f^^n;WfTT '5i^?ir'vrTf^sft, q^g q=iT^ ^fy^'ciicn^Tfl

^q^^ ff%cTT f*T?IcJT I ^ciq^ ffTfrnf^WT.<!IcI?f1: qT*qTf*iqtl^l'^rarl?n

f^^qrn§??cTT^f^ ^^*l' ^^^: ^cft?T?t I q^ '^^^^^ gi<!^fi;' fsi^r

q?fl7T^ 'litj" ^^'^^qcTTf^^iTIIcn^' ?;ffT, fsR^T 'fn?' ^^^fsT^jfTtfll-

f*TlfqclTfW^n7!IcTT^' ^s}^; qjg^#t?T^ |

^j^^^^^-sivTR^irq q^ qfcTTtfiT, ^qT^ ^gq^f^ •?!%i ?t:

T?^i^ "?(?T*{vnTi ^z^fc\ ^zT>i^\^m ^z: nfiT<ft'ft, ^tttw^^ ^q qfrr^frfir i

g2Tf^?q?T«r; sji'TTvrT^'^ i qffi?f(f«Tf*T qf?l?rtf»T?n, ^5^'^f»Tf*T '^

gm ^f^fTT 4Tqq;, ^T§^^ f^'n ^«?T ^f^WT^rlT Wf rT ? cTcT^

TpfTcn '^if^^iTW'Tq'g^, '^f^^T^m ^ ^srr^qfjrfri i ?tw ?j^q^?r,

'»JcT% ^3^ iffrrTl' ?i^Tf^1I fH^ran—

'»ffT%' «fg^*T ff rPrTcTT

^?3ltf^ f5T^i<T% ( ftJiqcTTS^^TSiJH ) I "^ci: *JfIf?*Tfy^nit ^7^

2ffTrcrTf*T^q^f«TffT i qciT?J?f> g^r ^ftr^^'UfTT -^iT^^fsf^fqciT asjc^xtt i

'5pra^ "^ ^fmwwjT qfT^cn^TTWcT^ft: ^f 3g?TTff^qfrq^: qT^q^fliq^gt:

v(»jjgT: 'ti^qi'^ t^TiTsit fsT^igr'T^q^wrfs^fl^; i

I 14 J

xj^^ q^iT ^^«!I g^JTT^Wrf^ ^qi^T'!! '^VTTTr VRfff, ?THIT ^S^^^fcT it

W=fT% ; ^ it ^^^ qj^ ^Sfq ^fZ^T^nt*! ^Z^Z\V{^Wf^[T^

^VTT^^ IffcT?ftf'TcJT ^^rf^rf ^»W^ '^^=^fT WW '^l^'Nf^T VT^ftf,

^'T t^f^i^sT f]5T ^ \^»i['ijj '?f^f^^ VTTfcT, SET 'EI»^^: € =^ ^"jt: ct^t:

5fTl%' '?75?T^'t ^27VrT^r^ qfcT^fff'TcTT ^RTT^^ ^Tf^sf ^jc^ir =g ^'nj

'^i^r^^T I tTcT^ ci??tt: ifffT^ftRcTRrr: ^Tqm: ^*^^: ^tc^^ ^^: ^^-

irmfq ^R3i: ^vrrfr ^nf^ ; ^^ct: ^Tf^^^j^j^^T ^^^ ^^-^ f^^^[^-

( f^^^fcT ) I =?s7Tq^^q^ ^'^j^: ct^t: ^^'^^^'^ vrqfcr, Trfcr^fff^cn

^WTr?T'e»^^: »Jct% ^ztvtr^ TrfcT^ftfiicTt f^^^cftfcT ^r:wn^

'^?^: I rT^TT'^ ^»^5^^ ^^=#^^^ f^arq^-^^qfjffc^ qif^fT*T :

[ '5 ]

^zJTcTT TiffT'TifncTT ^^ n^ ^=^'^, fici ^^ ^^ ^ ^'h^ f ?ftT ti^??vi=?i?:-

( g^+ c^ ) fJTWt "^I (^^ct ^Tf?T:) gj^im TTffT^tf^rTT^TT: ^=)^<?*:

"^iiff^kh ft^: ^m I ff^cTT^fi: ^ffT?frf^fTTfq '^i^fit^ fH^fq^n vr^fTT,

-^i^n^ iff<TinfJTfTT?iT: f^m^: ; 'i^ ^^^^^ctt nftTqtf7m?ft^fq

[ -6 ]

'q^=?r 5T^.?T»m fcT^^rT ^ g fTTTt' ?S1^ ^^^" ?T^¥f^cIT^: T»T^f^:

^^^^^ ^T^TVTT^^ ifTfcTmt fjTfrut^i: ^q''^^^: I '?n?rrw§frTrfT?TT:

•^iT^^^RT'^^Rt JTHT^: ^^*ft ^srffT I ^rsf\ '^^ ^w. ^fq^^ffift ^ ^'

wsn "^T^^ ^qwT^: ; "^t^i ^qivji^ q^ife ^r g '^qf^rftr i

[ 17 ]

^vrr^^ g^ffY^^: "^*?ft*?Twr?; ^^ifvu^'j i cttst^t' < cTrT^^fqciT

H^TRfn^Ctft >?'JfTcTT-^T^'^^'JIT: ^*Tf^^'w %*ff^5 ^M=^ST "^^f^^T

[ >8 J

^^^i^^rTT^^cf^fTTfsT^^r^^T I fTrI?T '^'ift STTf'rf' ^^Vf ^^^[^^^V^[^]^]^

^»^^^ I ?Tm '^^^ ^1%?ttt; >|^t<t' ifSjT^TgTT^ ^7^^ q% ^^^r f.-j^fr

[ 19 J

^^^ if?T, qt =^=f :Tf?fr^R^T<fT iTHT^ q?:c?Pi Tfr% -511% crwt ff^^T

wr^ '^?i q?:' ?ffi q^r^f^fai'g'^r^'^fti 1

?fcT ^T% i^^Tif^fai^fii ^^.^f^ tfsi^iT ( 'j^jy; ) *Tf q^?T^ I

^q^pj ^f^ftj: q<ft?T^, ^T^T '^4 g?::,' 'g'^^ *tk:' ^^t^^T ^ ^^^^^ T^

[ 20 ]

TTftr TjftfT5^'Er*?Tf *T^f^' ?^TTf f'T^T f^^^ ^affr^T Wr^^ f^^<ii?r,

q^ TT^r^fTT ftst^fsrifqcIT vr^1%, f^siiejcTT ^ R^r^fTlfqcTr vr^ I qrT?T

'^TSI'^I' fw^Tif *fcrffl' ???J%T ^ ^5-:^ ^I^ WT^'HT f%?i^vr^f%'TfcT ft^?T^,

[ => 1

WtS?i TT*T: ij^:' ^'^'^ iJ5?Tc^qf^§?Tl%CT iT^TTcTT *J'STT ; ftf^'^fq^l^ =^

^cT^ cff^'^fqcTT ?:mf%^T 1%^5IfTTfq 'T g*ajT I

*?m q^w*f f^vM "q^n^ w^^t"-^ ft?qT w^f^i fqitqwifsr qcft??^^'^,

[ " ]

^^Tfq ^tf2:^?r^r2T i q?:^ 'vrr? ^1% ^f^w^fcT ^r ^t' j.f^ ^ai^

Calcutta "|

[ Mahes'achandra Nya'yaratna.Dated the \st August, 1891. J

[Note.— I have just learnt from an eminent Pandit of Nava-

dwipa that Rdmabhadra SiddhAntavagisa, the commentator on

Kustcmdnjali was not the person who set up the image of Podamd

alluded to in p. 5., but that it was done by another person bearing

the same name. There is no time now to ascertain the truth of

the matter.]

M. N.

PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY JADU NATH SEAL

HARE PRESS : 23 I, BECHU CHATTERJEE'S STREET, CALCUTTA.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY

Los Angeles

This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.

PSD 2343 9/77

LIBRARY rftCILITY

AA 000 490 418 1