the rest become causeless; yet soul remains a while invested with body, as the potter's wheel continues whirling from the effect of the impulse previously given to it.

LXVIII.-When separation of the informed soul from its corporeal frame at length takes place, and nature in respect of it ceases, then is absolute and final deliverance accomplished.

LXIX. This abstruse knowledge, adapted to the liberation of soul, wherein the origin, duration, and termination of beings are considered, has been thoroughly expounded by the mighty saint.

LXX. This great purifying (doctrine) the sage compassionately imparted to Asuri, Asuri taught it to Panchaśikha, by whom it was extensively propagated.

LXXI.-Received by tradition of pupils, it has been compendiously written in Aryá metre by the piously-disposed Iswara-krishna, having thoroughly investigated demonstrated

truth.

LXXII.-The subjects which are treated in seventy couplets are those of the whole science, comprising sixty topics, exclusive of illustrative tales, and omitting controversial questions.

280

VIII.

ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE HINDUS.

PART II.1

[From the Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society,
vol. i. pp. 92-118.]

2

[261] IN the preceding essay, the Sankhya, theistical as well as atheistical, was examined. The subject of the present essay will be the dialectic philosophy of Gotama, and atomical of Kanáda,3 respectively called Nyáya "reasoning," and Vaiseshika "particular." The first, as its title implies, is chiefly occupied with the metaphysics of logic; the second with physics: that is, with "particulars" or sensible objects; and hence its name.5 They may be taken generally as parts

1 Read at a public meeting of the Royal Asiatic Society, Feb. 21, 1824.

2 [Gotama (or, as the name is often written, Gautama) is sometimes called the son of Utathya (Manu, iii. 16), but in Mahábh. i. 4194 he is said to have been the son of Dirghatamas and the grandson of Utathya. He is also called Akshapáda, or Akshacharana; hence Madhava speaks of his system as the Akshapádadarsana (Sarva-dars.-sang. xi.), and his followers are called Akshapádáḥ.]

3 [Another name for Kanada is Kasyapa (see S'ankara-miśra's Upaskára, pp. 160, 161; cf. also St. Petersb. Dict. sub. v.). He is also called Kanabhaksha or Kaṇabhuj, see infra, p. [329]; in the Sarva-darśana-sangraha his system is spoken of as the Aulúkyadarśana, and his followers are called Aulúkyáḥ in Hemachandra's Abhidhánachintamani.]

[Nydya is derived from ni + i, “that by which we enter into a thing and draw conclusions," cf. Siddh. Kaum. ii. 457.]

5 [Or rather from the peculiar category viśesha.]

of one system, supplying each other's deficiencies; commonly agreeing upon such points as are treated by both, yet on some differing, and therefore giving origin to two schools, the Naiyáyika and Vaiseshika.

From these have branched various subordinate schools of philosophy; which, in the ardour of scholastic disputation, have disagreed on matters of doctrine or of interpretation. The ordinary distinction between them is that of ancients and moderns; besides appellations derived from the names of their favourite authors, as will be more particularly noticed in another place.

The text of Gotama is a collection of sutras or succinct aphorisms, in five books or "lectures," each divided [262] into two "days" or diurnal lessons; and these again subdivided into sections or articles, termed prakaraņas, as relating to distinct topics. It is a maxim, that a section is not to consist of so little as a single sútra; and to make good the rule, some stress is occasionally put upon the text, either splitting an aphorism or associating it incongruously.

Kanáda's collection of sútras is comprised in ten lectures, similarly divided into two daily lessons, and these into prakaranas, or sections, containing two or more sútras relative to the same topic.3

[Thus the Bháshá-parichheda, the great modern text-book of logic in India, is founded on both systems, though the Vais'eshika preponderates. Vátsyáyana, in his ancient Nyaya-bháshya, i. 9, after discussing the twelve "matters to be proven " in the Nyaya, adds: "There is also another set of matters to be proven, substance, quality, action, community, difference, and intimate relation; and the former division is not to be considered as exhaustive by itself. From the right knowledge of this arises supreme bliss, and from the false knowledge thereof arises mundane existence, thus has it been declared by the Vaiseshika school." The Comm. on the Bháshá-parichh. remarks that "these categories are received among the Vaiseshikáḥ, and not opposed to those of the followers of the Nyáya." It is not always easy to discriminate accurately between the exact tenets of the Nyaya and the Vaiseshika, especially in the later schools.]

2 [The Nyaya Sútras were printed at Calcutta in 1828 with Viswanatha-bhaṭṭácharya's Commentary, and a translation of the first four books by Ballantyne, with extracts from the Comm., was published at Benares in 1850-54.]

3 3 [The Vaiseshika Sútras were edited in the Bibl. Ind. (Calcutta, 1861) with

Like the text of other sciences among the Hindus, the sútras of Gotama and of Kanáda have been explained and annotated by a triple set of commentaries, under the usual titles of Bhashya, Várttika and Tiká. These (the Bhashya especially) are repeatedly cited by modern commentators, as well as by writers of separate treatises; but (so far as has come under my immediate notice) without naming the authors; and I cannot adventure, having no present opportunity of consulting the original scholia in a collective form, to assign them to their proper authors, from recollection of former researches.1

They are of high authority, and probably of great antiquity; and it frequently becomes a question with the later commenta

S'ankara-misra's Comm. and a gloss by the editor, Pandit Jayanarayana-tarkapanchanana. Prof. Max Müller wrote a paper on the system in the Zeitschrift d. D. Morgenl. Gesell. vi. pp. 1-34 (cf. also his appendix on 'Indian Logic' in Archbishop Thomson's 'Laws of Thought,' 1853); and Röer gave a German translation of the Sútras with extracts from the Comm. ibid. xxi. pp. 309-420, xxii. pp. 383-442. Mr. Gough has published an English translation with similar extracts in 'The Pandit,' Benares, 1869-72.]

1 [We are now enabled to fill up this blank. The original commentary on the Nyaya Sútras, the Nydya-bhashya, was written by Pakshila-swamin, also called Vatsyayana; this was edited in the Bibl. Ind. by Pandit Jayanarayaṇa-tarkapanchánana (Calcutta, 1865). We have next the Nyáya-várttika, a Commentary on the Bhashya, which was written by Uddyotakara-áchárya, to clear away the erroneous interpretations of Dinnaga and others (cf. Weber, Zeitschr. d. D. M. G. xxii. 727). I have never seen more than the first three sútras, entitled Nyayatrisútrí-várttika, but it is quoted on ii. 33 by Viswanatha. Uddyotakara is mentioned in Subandhu's Vásavadattá (p. 235, Calc. ed.), which Dr. Hall has proved, in the preface to his edition of that work, to be fully 1200 years old. Váchaspatimiśra wrote a commentary on the Várttika in his Nydya-várttika-tátparya-ṭíká, and this in its turn has been commented upon by Udayana--áchárya in his Nyayavárttika-tátparya-pariśuddhi. I have endeavoured to prove, in the preface to my translation of the Kusumánjali, that Váchaspati-misra probably lived in the tenth, and Udayana in the twelfth, century. The Vaiseshika Sútras were annotated by Prasastapáda in the Prasastapáda-bháshya or Dravya-bhashya, first mentioned by Dr. Hall in his Bibliographical Index (S'ankara-misra cites him as Prásastadeváchárya); and the same writer (p. 65) mentions three glosses on this work, two anonymous, and one, the Kiranávali, by Udayana-áchárya, of which only two books were completed by the author. The Kiranávalí in its turn has been commented upon by Vardhamána-upádhyaya in his Kiranávalí-prakáśa. S'ankaramiśra also often mentions a Vṛittikára (as p. 161, 411, etc.) as an ancient authority. But this Vaiseshika series has not obtained the same universal acceptance as the Naiyayika. S'ankara-misra, the author of the printed Commentary, is a very recent author, as he quotes Jagadísa's Anumána-mayúkha, pp. 154, 392.]

tors, whether a particular passage is to be taken for a sútra and part of the text, or for a gloss of the ancient scholiast.

Commentaries which are now at hand, and which have been consulted in the course of preparing the present treatise, are the Várttika-tátparya-pariśuddhi of the celebrated Udayanaáchárya, and the Várttika-tátparya-tiká of the no less celebrated Váchaspati-miśra. The more modern scholia of Viswanatha upon Gotama's text, and Sankara-miśra upon Kanáda's, are those to which most frequent reference has been made for the present purpose.

[263] Separate treatises of distinguished authors teach, and amply discuss, the elements of the science. Such are the Nyáya-lilávati of Ballabha-áchárya,' following chiefly Kanada's system.

An easier, and more concise introduction than these abstruse and voluminous works afford, is found requisite to the initiatory study of the science. One of the most approved elementary treatises is the Tarka-bháshá of Keśava-miśra, author of many other tracts. Though adapted to the comprehension of the learner without the aid of a gloss, it has nevertheless employed the labour of many commentators, expounding and illustrating it. Among others may be named, in order of seniority, Govardhana-miśra in the Tarka-bháshá-prakása; Gauríkánta (author likewise of the Sadyukti-muktávali) in the Bhávárthadipiká; Mádhavadeva (author of the Nyáyasára) in the Tarka-bháshá-sára-manjari; besides Rámalinga-kriti in the Nyáya-sangraha, whose relative antiquity is less certain; and Balibhadra,3 who is known to me only from Gauríkánta's citations.

Another compendious introduction to the study of Indian

1 [Mentioned in Dr. Hall's Bibl. Index "as an elementary treatise on the Vaiseshika philosophy by Vallabha-nyáyáchárya," and as containing 2700 slokas.] 2 [Dr. Hall calls him Gauríkánta-sárvabhauma-bhaṭṭáchárya (Bibl. Index, p. 23).]

[Dr. Hall (Bibl. Index, p. 23) considers this to be Balabhadra-mis'ra, the author of the Tarka-bháshá-prakásiká. He was the father of Govardhana-misra, and "the father and son, it appears, went over precisely the same ground.”"]