Male
Member Since Jun 26 2007
Nyaya-Vaisesika:Lip Service to the Vedas 4
Aug 30 2007 | Views 57 |
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment
It can be seen that the stand taken by the actual founders of the Nyaya-Vaisesika results in their philosophy appearing to be a strange amalgam of science and superstition; the superstition is evidently for the purpose of evading censorship. What Indian philosophical tradition gains from the compromise is not to be overlooked. In the political atmosphere created by the law-givers, it is difficult to imagine logic and atomism gaining any place for itself in the officially accepted philosophy without at least pretending to be sufficiently pious.
At the same time there is an obvious risk in adopting this technique of paying lip service to scripture. It is the risk of the element of superstition gradually assuming an importance of its own and of eventually appearing as an integral part of the philosophy. The scriptural authority of the Veda, once admitted, is likely to make an ever more pressing demand for itself from the later Nyaya-Vaisesikas; it may even become a part of their own makebelieve.
The presumption is that this actually takes place. Most of the later Nyaya-Vaisesikas give us the impression that they are as serious about the theology grafted on their philosophy as about its secular and scientific content. The result is a growing inconsistency of the Nyaya-Vaisesika as a philosophy.
The situation eventually becomes so absurd that that a predominantly theological treatise (Udayana's Nyaya Kusumanjali), which discusses proofs for the existence of God, wants to be passed as a genuine exposition of the Nyaya-Vaisesika which we know was originally meant to be a purely emperical study of nature, atomism, and logic.
In the early days of Gotama and Kanada, it seems even certain stray expression of veneration for the Veda and Vedic rituals was enough to placate the orthodoxy. With the sharpening of the clash of philosophical ideas, it seems the need is felt by the later Nyaya-Vaisesikas to make more and more concessions to the dominant philosophical trend of the Upanisads to meet the same purpose, however inconsistent these may be with their otherwise bold defence of rationalism.
And yet, the emphasis on reason remained. Even in Udayana's Kusumanjali, the approach towards God is a reason based approach (and not dependent on revelation). Udayana offers eight proofs for the existence of God. Some of his proofs are rather silly, and reveal a lack of modern scientific knowledge; others are more subtle. The important point being that Nyaya, despite the anomalies and discrepancies, continued to be a reason based philosophy, and continued to place supreme emphasis on reason and rational thinking.
In medieval Europe, St. Thomas Aquinas had come up with proofs for the existence of God; Aquinas's proofs have a very clear parallel in the proofs offered by Udayana. Initially, the Cathlolic church welcomed Aquinas's proofs, but later they criticised these proofs strongly. Why? Because reason should preferably not be introduced into faith; dependence on revelation is safer for the sustenance of faith. Why? Because reason is a double edged sword. Once you introduce reason into a faith, it can be used to attack that faith.
© Rashmun., all rights reserved.
In case you missed...
Some other recent posts by Rashmun
© 1998-2008 Copyright Sulekha.com Connecting Indians Worldwide, All Rights Reserved.
Recommend