The source book of the Nyaya, namely the Nyaya Sutra, is attributed to a certain Gotama (or Gautama). Nothing historical is known about Gotama and the actual dates of redaction of these sutras is purely conjectural. S.N. Dasgupta argues (History of Indian Philosophy, vol. 1, pg 279):

 

"Goldstucker says that Patanjali (140 BC) and Katyayana (4th century BC) knew the Nyaya Sutras. We know that Kautilya knew the Nyaya in some form in 300 B.C., and on the strength of this we may say that the Nyaya existed in some form as early as the fourth century B.C."

 

This seems to indicate that the original core of the philosophy may be quite ancient, though we do not know exactly how ancient it is. Nor do we know the date of its earliest codification.

 

The earliest known commentary to the Nyaya Sutra is by Vatsyayana (circa 4th century AD). But what is the time gap between the Nyaya Sutra and Vasyayana's Bhasya (commentary)? Frankly, we do not know. This much we know that for Nyaya Sutra i.1.5, which mentions three forms of inference, Vatsyayana offers two alternative interpretations for each of the terms. Would this indicate that by Vatsyayana's time, the meaning of some of the basic terms of the sutras had become doubtful? Further, in his commentary, while commenting on Nyaya Sutra (N.S.) i.2.9, Vatsyayana clearly wants to dissociate himself from some other tendency of interpreting the same sutra. Does this mean that there are other earlier commentaries of the Nyaya Sutra known to him, but which have now been lost ('devoured by time'). S.C. Vidyabhusan, a History of Indian Logic, pg 115) argues:

 

"there are references to previous logicians designated as eke (some), kecit (certain) or anye (others), who were perhaps authors of commentaries which have not come down to us."

 

If this is true, then the Nyaya Sutras are to be viewed as existing considerably earlier than Vatsyayana's commentary.

 

Subsequent to Vatsyayana's formulating his commentary on Nyaya Sutra, the (Mahayana) Budhist logician Dignaga severly criticised it. Against this attack, Uddyotakara (circa 7th century AD) wrote his Nyaya Vartika in defence of Vatsyayana. Subsequently, Uddyotakara's commentary was attacked by the (Mahayana) Budhist logician Dharmakirti. In response, Vachaspati Mishra (circa 9th century AD) and Udayana (circa 10th century AD) continued the defence of Nyaya. Another outstanding figure in the history of Nyaya is the great Jayanta Bhatta(circa 9th century AD) of Kashmir who wrote his brilliant Nyaya Manjari while in prison. (One claim is that Jayanta had embezzled some funds meant for temple construction, and hence his incarceration, but this may be pure speculation/gossip).

 

Udayana is considered to be by far the last great exponent of what is called the old or pracina phase of Nyaya. Its new or navya phase begins with Gangesa Upadhya of Mithila (circa 12th century AD) and reaches its zenith in the writings of Gadadhara of Bengal (circa 17th century AD).

 

One thing should be clear to all: the clash between Nyaya and Mahayana Budhism which spanned several centuries, and involved several figures (i have only mentioned a few of the people involved in this intellectual fight) resulted in an enrichment and development of both philosophies. Further, without some understanding of both philosophies, it is not possible to understand either Nyaya or Mahayana Budhism beyond a rudimentary level; the reason is that there is a curious interweaving between the two: Budhist attack on any perceived weakness in the Nyaya results in the Nyayaikas developing their position further, and vice-versa.

 

[To be continued]