The Upaniṣads, the basis for later Vedānta philosophy, are a string of profound sayings and insights into the nature of reality. They suggest that our ultimate destiny depends on finding out the truth about the world and ourselves.
Not satisfied with the aphoristic wisdom of these sources, and keen to construct an all-embracing world-view, Hindu thinkers developed a number of philosophical systems, called
darśanas
, “theories,” in the original Greek sense of this word.
2
Already in the Upaniṣads we find a great number of different worldviews side by side. In later times regular schools developed that became known under specific names. The older sources refer to a very large number of such schools, many of them no longer existent. In the early (Indian) middle-ages Hindus began to differentiate between
āstika
, “orthodox,” and
nāstika
, “heterodox,” schools:
3
among the latter were listed Buddhism, Jainism, and Carvaka (an early Indian form of materialistic philosophy). The orthodox systems were classified in a stereotypical six,
4
paired into three groups: Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika, Sāṁkhya-Yoga, Pūrva and Uttara Mīmāṃsā.
Hindus took their philosophy very seriously indeed: they believed that to gain a true understanding of reality was the most important task of a human being. As Śaṅkara has it: “There are many different opinions, partly based on sound arguments and scripture, partly based on fallacious arguments and scriptural texts misunderstood. If one would embrace any of these opinions without previous examination, one would bar oneself from the highest beatitude and incur grievous loss.”
5
Hinduism has always shown great respect for scholarship. A brahmin, according to traditional Hindu law, had to devote the first part of his life to study, and
svādhyāya
, study on his own, was one of the permanent duties imposed upon him for his whole life. Study, according to Manu, was enjoined by the creator himself “in order to protect the universe” and it was also the most effective means to subdue sensual desires and obtain self-control. The true centers of Hinduism were always centers of study: be it the
āśramas
of classical India or the
pāthaśālas
of later times, the private libraries of individual scholars or the large university-like centers of major denominations.
6
A common characteristic of all
darśanas
is that at some time their basic teachings were condensed into
sūtras
, “leading threads” which helped to express precisely the content of the systems in a technical terminology and also served as texts for students to memorize. Instruction would largely consist of commenting upon the pithy
sūtras
and expanding on the meaning of the terms used in them, pointing out differences between one’s own system and others and providing proof for the truth of the
sūtra
. Since many of the
sūtras
are (almost) unintelligible without a commentary and explanation, often the commentary
(bhāṣya)
has become the most important exposition of a system. These
bhāṣyas
in turn have become the object of sub-commentaries
(vṛttis
and
tīkas)
and further glosses
(tippaṇis)
which constitute the material which an expert in that particular branch of learning has to study. Hindu scholars have invented most peculiar names for their subcommentaries and glosses.
7
The
sūtras
which we possess today are not always the oldest texts of the schools and they are not always the work of the authors to whom they are ascribed. But they can be relied upon as containing the gist of the teaching of the systems, and they provide the technical terminology for each.
NYĀYA-VAIŚEṢIKA
The
Vaiśeṣika Sūtras
, ascribed to Kaṇāda, are, in the words of Dasgupta, “probably the oldest that we have and in all probability are pre-Buddhistic”.
8
That does not entitle us, however, to make any statement about the age of the system itself, which is known particularly for its interesting early atomistic theory and its classification of categories. Vaiśeṣika may initially have been a school of Vedic thought, as its emphasis on
dharma
and its traditional opinion on
adṛṣṭa
as its fruit would suggest.
9
The book which besides the
sūtras
contains the most complete representation of the system, the
Daśa-Padārtha Śāstra
, is no older than the sixth century C.E.
10
The beginnings of the
Nyāya
systems may go back to the disputations of Vedic scholars; already in the times of the Upaniṣads, debate was cultivated as an art, following certain rules in which the basic elements of logical proofs were contained.”
11
The
Nyāya Sūtras
, ascribed to Gautama, the main text of the school, have received very important commentaries. The
sūtras
cannot be assigned to a definite date. All scholars agree that a considerable part of the
sūtras
consists of additions to an original work, additions that suggest early Buddhist interpolations and later Hindu insertions to invalidate the Buddhist arguments. From the probable identification of
nyāya
with the
anvīkṣikī
in Kautilīya’s
Artha-śāstra
12
we may assume that the
Nyāya
system already existed in some form in the fourth century B.C.E. Followers of the
Nyāya
system have produced a large amount of important works and of all the Hindu systems
Nyāya
enjoys the greatest respect on the part of Western philosophers, who are coming to discover the enormous subtleties and intricacies of Indian logic.
A Brief Summary of Vaiśe
ṣ
ika
“Now
an explanation of
dharma
...” so begins the Kaṇāda Sūtra. “The means to prosperity and salvation is
dharma.”
The attainment of salvation is the result of the cognition of the six categories of substance, quality, action, class concept, particularity and inherence.
13
The substances are: earth, water, fire, air, ether, time, space,
ātman
and mind. The qualities are: taste, color, odor, touch, number, measure, separation, contact, disjoining, prior and posterior, understanding, pleasure and pain, desire and aversion, and volitions.
Action
(karma)
is explained as upward movement, downward movement, contraction, expansion, horizontal movement. The feature common to substance, quality, and action is that they are existent, non-eternal, and substantive; they effect, cause, and possess generality and particularity. A major part of the
sūtra
consists in a further elucidation of the various terms just mentioned, much in the same way in which the early Greek philosophers of nature analyzed and described the elements, their qualities and the interrelations. In the third book the
sūtra
deals with the inference of the existence of the
ātman
, which is impervious to sense-perception, from the fact that there must be some substance in which knowledge, produced by the contact of the senses and their objects, inheres. Thus the
ātman’s
existence may be inferred from inhalation and exhalation, from the twinkling of the eyes, from life, from movements of the mind, from sense affections, from pleasure and pain, will, antipathy and effort. It can be proved that it is a substance and eternal. Eternal
(nitya)
is that which exists but has no cause for its existence. The non-eternal is
avidyā
, ignorance.
In the seventh book we are told that
dṛṣṭa
, insight based on observation and rationality, is able to explain even natural phenomena only up to a certain point. All the special phenomena of nature are caused by
adṛṣṭa
, an unknown invisible cause.
Adṛṣṭa
is also said to be the cause of the union of body and soul, of rebirth and of liberation. This “invisible fruit,” which is the cause of ultimate happiness, is produced by ablutions, fasting, continence, life in the
guru’s
family, life in the forest, sacrifice, gifts and alms, observation of the cosmic cycle, and the following of the rules of
dharma
. Thus
Vaiśeṣika
places itself quite explicitly in the tradition of Vedic orthodoxy. The
sūtra
also discusses at some length the means and instruments of valid knowledge, topics that are dealt with more thoroughly in the sister-system of
Nyāya
. The
Vaiśeṣika Sūtras
do not contain any polemics against the Buddhists, although they are opposed to some of their quite fundamental tenets: Buddhism denies the “thing in itself” and explains all phenomena merely as a chain of conditions that ultimately can be reduced to non-existence; the Vaiśeṣikas, on the contrary, hold fast to the real existence of things.
Later works of the school, the commentaries on the
Sutra
by Śaṅkara Miśra and Candrakānta, the
Padārtha-dharma-saṅgraha
by Praśasta-pāda and the
Daśa-padārthi
by Maticandra (preserved only in a Chinese version), also give a more detailed explanation of Indian atomism. What we hear, feel, see, etc. are not
continua
but
discrete (quanta
we would say today), and these again are not units but compounds of infinitely small indivisible parts
(aṇu)
which clearly differ from one another. Things are products, therefore, and not eternal.
The primordial elements, earth, water, fire and air, are partly eternal, partly temporal. Only ether is completely eternal. The first four elements have mass, number, weight, fluidity, viscosity, velocity, characteristic potential color, taste, smell, or touch.
Ākāśa
, space or ether, is absolutely inert and structureless, being only the substratum of
śabda
or sound, which is thought to travel like a wave in the medium of air. Atomic combinations are possible only with the four basic elements. Both in dissolution and before creation, the atoms exist singly; in creation they are always present in combination. Two atoms combine to form a
dvyanuka
, a molecule. Also
tryanukas, caturanukas
, etc., i.e., aggregates consisting of three or more molecules, are possible. Atoms are possessed of an inherent incessant vibratory motion; but they are also under the influence of the
adṛṣṭa
, the will of
īśvara
, who arranges them into a harmonic universe. Changes in substances, which are limited within the frame of possible atom combinations, are brought about by heat. Under the impact of heat-corpuscles a molecule may disintegrate and the characters of the atoms composing it may change. The heat particles which continue to impinge on the individually changed atoms also cause them to reunite in different forms so that definite changes are effected through heat. In many details the Vaiśeṣikas reveal a keen observation of nature and describe in their books a great number of phenomena, which they try to explain with the help of their atom-theory. Similar to modern physicists, the ancient Vaiśeṣikas explained heat and light rays as consisting of indefinitely small particles which dart forth or radiate in all directions rectilineally with inconceivable velocity. Heat also penetrates the inter-atomic space or impinges on the atoms and rebounds, thus explaining the conducting and reflecting of heat. All the
paramāṇus
are thought to be spherical. Attempts have been made to link the atomism of the Vaiśeṣika
darśana
with the teachings of Democritus – so far without any positive evidence.
Leaving out most of the technicalities of the system, a brief explanation of
viśeṣa
– the term that gave the name to the whole system – may give an idea of the specific approach taken by this school of classical Indian philosophy.
14
Praśāstapada writes:
Viśeṣas
are the ultimate specificatives or differentiatives of their substrates. They reside in such beginningless and indestructible eternal substances as the atoms,
ākāśa
, time, space,
ātman
and
manas
– inhering in their entirety in each of these, and serving as the basis of absolute differentiation of specification. Just as we have with regard to the bull as distinguished from the horse, certain distinct cognitions – such, for instance as (a) that it is a “bull”, which is a cognition based upon its having the shape of other bulls, (b) that it is “white”, which is based upon a quality, (c) that it is “running swiftly”, which is based upon action, (d) that it has a “fat hump”, which is based upon “constituent parts” and (e) that it carries a “large bell”, which is based upon conjunction; so have the Yogis, who are possessed of powers that we do not possess, distinct cognitions based upon similar shapes, similar qualities and similar actions – with regard to the eternal atoms, the liberated selves and minds; and as in this case no other cause is possible, those causes by reason whereof they have such distinct cognitions – as that “this is a peculiar substance”, “that a peculiar self” and so forth – and which also lead to the recognition of one atom as being the same that was perceived at a different time and place – are what we call the
viśeṣas.
15
According to the teaching of the Vaiśeṣikas, there are many different
ātmans
, distinguished by their relative and specific
viśeṣas
. The common man, however, is able to recognize their diversity only on account of externally perceptible actions, qualities and so on. Only the Yogi has the “insight into the essence of the soul itself and thus into the real cause of their diversity.” The
ātman
is eternal and not bound to space and time. But the actions of
ātman –
thought, will, emotions – are limited to the physical organism with which it is united at a given time.
Jñāna
, knowledge, is according to the Vaiśeṣikas only an accident of
ātman
, not his nature as such, since in dreamless sleep there is no cognition. Emotions and will are, likewise, mere accidents. The “spiritual” is not substantial but accidental.
Manas
, the mind given to every
ātman
, is merely its instrument and does not produce anything of itself. On the other hand, the cooperation of
manas
is necessary.