Philosophy of Nyaya
Nyaya (in Sanskrit), means argumentation and science of reasoning (Tarkasastra). It is one of the six orthodox schools of Indian philosophy. It is epistemological, intellectual, analytical and logical. The prehistoric Mithila University of India was well-known for Nyaya science education.
Sage Gautama is the founder of Nyaya philosophy who systematically compiled the text in the 2nd century BCE. The profound script “Nyaya sutra”
contains sutras of 521 and is divided into five chapters (Adhyayas) and each
chapter contains two sections (Ahnikas). It is comprehensively studied in four
dimensions and they are
A. The theory of
knowledge
B. The theory
of the physical world
C. The theory of
individual self and universe
D. The theory of
God
Also called the science of logic or Pramana Shastra and is the
science of causes (Hetuvidya) and science of debate (Vedavidya). The other
important source of this school is sage Valsyayana’s Nyaya Bhasya, Sage
Udayotkara’s Nyaya Vartika, Sage Vachaspati’s Tatparya tika, Sage Udayana’s
Nyaya kusumanjali, Sage Jayanta’s Nyaya manjari and sage Gangesha’s
Tattvachintamani.
Nyaya philosophy is identical to Vaisheshika philosophy in some
aspects. Nyaya philosophy is focused on logic and epistemology and deals with the right knowledge of reality, while Vaisheshika develops Metaphysics and ontology
and takes up the exposition of reality. Nyaya embraces atomic pluralism and
logical realism while Vaisheshika's philosophy states that this life is full of
suffering and liberation and cessation is possible only through eradicating
ignorance and achieving the right knowledge of reality. Correct understanding
of the information is true only if it matches reality (Parathah
pramanya). It is the manifestation and revelation of knowledge as it is and
supports realism. Apprehender and recognizable objects are different and
knowledge discloses both of them. Knowledge is the attribute of “self” and
knowledge is not possible without the “self” or “knower”. Jnana or knowledge is
cognition or buddhi and it is also known as apprehension or upalabdhi. The conscious experience of knowledge (anubhava) reveals both subject and object
and disclosure of manifestation of objects (arthaprakasha) is needed to eliminate
illusion.
Doubt (Samsaya) is
not valid because it is uncertain cognition.
Error (Bram) is a misapprehension
of an object not corresponding with a real object.
Tarka is a hypothetical
argument involving supposition devoid of certainty.
Perception (Pratyaksa)
This is a three-way process between sense organs and objects.
There are three components involved namely self, mind and sense organs. At
first contact of our “self” with the mind (manas) second is the contact of the mind
with sense organ (indriya) third is the contact of sense organs with the object.
Perception has two stages namely indeterminate (nirvikalpa) and determinate
(savikalpa).
Indeterminate (nirvikalpa):
It is the perception not only presents the bare object without any
characterization but is also psychological and not logical. Confined to feeling
and sensation and devoid of conception, it immediately passes into determinate
perception which is logical, cognitive and judgmental.
Determinate (savikalpa):
It is the cognition of objects with names and attributes. E.g.
seeing an elephant as an elephant, cat as a cat with definite knowledge. It involves
assimilation, discrimination, analysis and synthesis which is differentiated,
rational, conceptual and articulated knowledge. Seeing a white moving object at
a distance and when it comes near seeing it as a white coloured bus. Here there
are two stages of perception, one is indeterminate when it is moving at a
distance the second is when it comes near. When it was moving it was
indeterminate and when it came near it was determinate. So two stages of
perception are separated only in thought and not in reality.
There are two kinds of Perceptions namely ordinary (laukika)
and extraordinary (alaukika).
Ordinary Perception (laukika): It takes place when sense organs come in contact with objects in
a usual way or ordinary way. Internal perception and external
perception are the divisions of ordinary perception (laukika).
Internal perception:
It is the perception when the mind comes in contact with physical
states and processes such as cognition, affection, conation, desire, pleasure
and pain.
External perception:
External perception is possible when five sense organs come in
contact with their respective external objects. This perception is divided into
five kinds namely visual, auditory, tactual, gustatory and olfactory. Sense
organs are composed of atoms and molecules of earth, water, air, fire and
ether. Sense organs of the eye, nose, ear, tongue and skin perceive qualities
of vision, smell, sound, taste and touch correspondingly specific to
them.
Extraordinary perception (alaukika):
It is the contact of sense organs with objects in an unusual
way called samanya lakshana. When we watch a particular dog in an extra kind of
perception we see the universal similarities of a dog inheriting from all pet
animals.
Second is the perception through association or jnana lakshana.
Here the object is not directly presented to the sense organs, but it is
received in the memory through the past cognition and recollection of past
memory. Another is intuitive perception or yogajalakshana of all objects of
past, present and future is not rational knowledge and is based on memory. This
supra-rational and sensuous knowledge is possessed by yoga practitioners
(yogins) through the power of meditation.
Inference (Anumana):
Inference (Anumana) is the second kind of valid knowledge (Prama)
which is inferential or relational knowledge. The inference is presupposing some
other knowledge and is not immediate. Unless I have the knowledge of something
else, I cannot have the knowledge of the presence of an object. It is indirect,
mediated and arises through significant reason or Hetu. This is mediated
knowledge which is mediated by some other facts. This hetu is called the middle
term or linga and contains a minor term (pakshadharmata) and an invariable
associated with a major term called Sadhya. The invariable connection of the middle term
with the major term is invariable concomitance is Vyapti (avinabhava niyama)
between them. Invariable connection is the root of inferential knowledge
(“mana”) which arises after (“anu”) other knowledge (paramarsha). It usually arises
through the understanding of the presence of a major term in the minor term
through the middle term which resides in the minor term. This can be
illustrated by an example. If we see smoke rising from a factory, we conclude
or infer that there may be a fire in the factory. Here factory is the minor term
(paksha) smoke is the middle term (hetu) and fire is the major term (sadhya). Nyaya
syllogism consists of five limbs or parts (avayavas). The first part is the
proposition (pratijna) and the second is the reason (hetu). The third is the
universal concomitance of facts with an example (udaharana). The fourth is the
application of universal concomitance to the present case (upanayana) and at
last, come to the conclusion (nigamana) that there is a fire in the factory.
The syllogistic argument of inference can be briefed as follows;
1. This factory has fire (proposition or pratijna)
2. Because it has smoke (reason or hetu)
3. Whatever has smoke has fire (concomitance)
4. This factory has smoke which is invariably associated with fire.
5. Therefore this factory has smoke (conclusion or nigamana). This
is the crux of inference.
There are two kinds of inference, one is for oneself (svartha) and the second is for others (parartha). Svartha
anumana (inference for oneself) does not require formal statements related
to me and internal. Parartha anumana
(inference for others) is for convincing others and is required to be presented in
language and is external.
There are three types of inference:
First inferring the unperceived effect from the perceived cause
is called “purvavath”.
The second is inferring the unperceived cause from a perceived effect
is called “Seshavat”.
The third is an inference based on uniformity of co-existence called “samanyatha drishta”.
If we see clouds in the sky, imagine that there may be rain. In
the morning if we see wet on the ground imagine that it might have rained the night.
Inference further can be divided into three namely kevalanvyaki,
kevalanvyatireki and anvayavyatireki.
Kevalanvyaki:
This is happening when the middle term is positively related to
the major term. By seeing an object, we must be able to name the object and if
you are not able to name the object and differentiate it from other objects,
you do not know the object.
Kevalanvyatireki:
This is happening when the middle term is always negatively
related to the major term. Unlike other elements, it has no odour, and metals
have no odour, so this metal is different from other elements.
Anvayavyatireki:
This is happening when the middle term is both positively and negatively
related to the major term. In respect of both presence and absence, the
concomitance between the middle term and the major term is there. e.g., All things
which have smoke have a fire, the factory has smoke, therefore this factory has fire.
Here the middle term and major term also agree with each other even in the
absence or in the negative instances.
Comparison (Upamana):
It is the cognition derived using a comparison between the two
objects and produced by the knowledge of similarity and resemblance of the
object. If you see some similarity between two objects, then you come to the
knowledge of the object which you have not seen earlier. It is also defined as
the knowledge of the relation between a word and its denotation. E.g., recognizing
a wild cat in the forest as lynx depends on its similarity to the domestic
cat which I have seen in my village. One who has never seen a lynx does not
know what it is and recognizes it as a wild cat or lynx. Even though I have not
seen a wild cat, my parents have told me that the wild cat is one foot bigger
than the domestic cat. So the comparison is the knowledge of relation produced by
the knowledge of similarity between the objects.
Testimony (Sabda):
It is the verbal testimony defined as a statement of a trustworthy or authoritative person “apthavakhya” or an authentic statement. It may be family
members, texts of sacred value or ordinary value, reliable medium and reliable
persons. Words and sentences have the power to convey knowledge through trustworthy
statements.
There are two kinds of testimony, the first is the Vedic testimony the other is secular testimony.
Vedic testimony:
It is the testimony of ancient scripts of Vedas and Upanishads. This
Vedic testimony is an authentic and believable source of knowledge and people
are not misguided by this knowledge. It is the testimony of saints, sages and
rishis and is flawless, faultless and impeccable knowledge.
Secular testimony:
It is the testimony given by people and books written by
unscholarly citizens. It is not error-free and unfailing because human beings
are susceptible to error and failure. The majority of the people are not far-sighted, even if some knowledge is true today may become proved false
tomorrow.