Journal of Indian Philosophy

, Volume 39, Issue 4–5, pp 503–520 | Cite as

Hypothesis-Generating Logic in Udayana’s Rational Theology

Article
  • 129 Downloads

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to clarify Udayana’s logic in his theistic monograph Nyāyakusumāñjali, especially in the second chapter where he postulates as conclusion the existence of God. In the course of this postulation, Udayana gives as its reason such Nyāya theories as the extrinsic validity of cognition (*parataḥprāmāṇya) and the creation and dissolution of the world (*sargapralaya). The present paper first focuses on the argument over the creation and dissolution of the world, clarifying whether Udayana asserts its necessary occurrence or just its possibility. It then analyzes the precise logic of Udayana that generates the theistic hypothesis, comparing it with a logic called abduction which is put forward by Charles Peirce.

Keywords

Nyāyakusumāñjali Udayana Creation and dissolution of the world Abduction C. S. Peirce 

Abbreviations

NKus (C)

Nyāyakusumāñjali of Udayanācārya with Four Commentaries, Pt. Śrī Padmaprasāda Upādhyāya & Pt. Śrī Dhuṇḍhirāja Śāstrī (ed.), Kashi Sanskrit Series 30, Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office, Varanasi, 1957

(D)

NKus with the Commentaries Āmoda, Viveka, Bodhanī and Parimala, Dr. Mahaprabhulal Goswami (ed.), Mithila Institute Series, Mithila Research Institute, Darbhanga, 1972

NkusBo

Bodhanī of Varadarāja, see NKus(D)

NkusViv

Viveka of Guṇānanda, see NKus(D)

SDS

Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha of Sāyaṇa Mādhava, Mahāmahopādhyāya Vasudev Shastri Abhyankar (ed.), Government Oriental Series Class A No. 1, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, 1978

CP

see Peirce (1931–1958)

Prop. Eleg.

see Propertius (1857)

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bhattacharya, D. C. (1958). History of Navya-Nyāya in Mithilā. Darbhanga: Mithilā Institute of Post-Graduate Studies and Research in Sanskrit Learning.Google Scholar
  2. Butler, H. E. (1912). Propertius: With an English translation. The Loeb Classical Library No. 18. London/New York: William Heinemann/The Macmillan Co.Google Scholar
  3. Chemparathy G. (1972) An Indian rational theology: An introduction to Udayana’s Nyāyakusumāñjali. Publications of the De Nobili Research Library, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  4. Cowell E.B. (1864) The Kusumanjali: Hindu proof of the existence of a supreme being. Baptist Mission Press, CalcuttaGoogle Scholar
  5. Delaney C.F. (1992) Peirce on the hypothesis of god. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 28(4): 725–739Google Scholar
  6. Fann K.T. (1970) Peirce’s theory of abduction. Martinus Nijhoff, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  7. Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of discovery: An inquiry into the conceptual foundations of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Hanson, N. R. (1959). Is there a logic of scientific discovery?” In H. Feigl & G. Maxwell (Eds.), Current issues in the philosophy of science (pp. 20–35). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  9. Kataoka, K. (片岡 啓) (1999). Virodha in arthāpatti. Studies of Buddhist Culture, 3, 47–67 (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  10. Kaviraj, G. (1923). Nyāya Kusumāñjali. The Princess of Wales Sarasvati Bhavana Studies, II, 159–191 (English translation).Google Scholar
  11. Kessler, G. E. (1998). A neglected argument. In Proceedings of the XX world congress of philosophy. http://as111.http.sasm3.net/wcp/Papers/Reli/ReliKess.ht.
  12. Kuppuswami, S. (1932). A primer of Indian logic: According to Annaṃbhaṭṭa’s Tarkasaṃgraha. Madras: Kuppuswami Sastri Research Institute (1951, 2nd ed.).Google Scholar
  13. Paavola S. (2006) Hansonian and Harmanian abduction as models of discovery. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 20(1): 93–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Peirce, C. S. (1931–1958). In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.) (Vols. 1–6); A. W. Burks (Ed.) (Vols.7–8), Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Propertius, S. (1857). In H. Keil (Ed.), Elegiae. Lipsiae: Sumptibus et typis B.G. Teubneri.Google Scholar
  16. Shida, T. (2006). On the causal factor for validity at the origination of cognition: What are the guṇa and the general cause of cognition in Naiyāyikas’ parataḥprāmāṇyavāda? Journal of Indological Studies, 18, 115–136.Google Scholar
  17. Shida T. (2007) Udayana’s critique of the intrinsic theory of validity: With respect to the origination of validity. Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 55(3): 28–33Google Scholar
  18. Sinha, B. (1999). Nyāyakusumāñjali, Hindu rational enquiry into the existence of god: Interpretative exposition of Udayanācārya’s auto-commentary with translation of kārikās. New Delhi: Aryan Books International.Google Scholar
  19. Taber, J. (1992). What did Kumārila Bhaṭṭa mean by Svataḥ Prāmāṇya? Journal of the American Oriental Society, 112(2), 204–221.Google Scholar
  20. Thakur, A. (1974). Udayanācārya and his contribution. In S. K. Chatterji, et al. (Ed.), Charudeva Shastri felicitation volume (pp. 400–406). Delhi: Amar Printing Press.Google Scholar
  21. Ueyama, S. (上山 春平) (1978). Peirce’s theory of abduction. The Zinbun Gakuhō, Journal of Humanistic Studies, Studies of the History of European Logical Thoughts, 45, 103–155 (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  22. Yonemori, Y. (米盛 裕二) (2007). *Abduction: Logic of hypothesis and discovery. Tokyo: Keisō Shobō (in Japanese).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Young Researcher Development Center (The Hakubi Center)Kyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations