Тлумачення поняття анумана в “Ньяя-сутрi”

Нanna Hnatovska

doi:10.15407/orientw2025.01.140

Interpretation of Anumāna in the Nyāya Sūtra

https://doi.org/10.15407/orientw2025.01.140

Нanna Hnatovska

PhD (Philosophy), Associate Professor, History of Philosophy Department, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Volodymyrska St., 60, Kyiv, 01601, Ukraine

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9699-1037

Abstract

Elucidating the way anumāna is interpreted in Nyāya Sūtra predictably demonstrates that texts of this genre specificity in the history of Indian philosophy are traditionally the basis of a holistic oral tradition, so they leave more questions than answers out of the context of commentatory literature. Separating the original foundations of Nyaya teachings from further layers of interpretation and explanation is not devoid of value and meaning, because it allows to more deeply reveal not only the foundations of discussions that took place between Indian thinkers, but also to take a critical view of interpretive clichés in the tradition of Western studies.

Anumāna is one of the pramāṇas that is only possible after pratyakṣa and based on it. In this context we define Pramāṇa as a cognitive situation, which can be a condition for obtaining reliable knowledge (jñāna). The priority, according to the discussion presented in Nyāya Sūtra between naiyayikas and their opponents, is to compare the definition of anumāna with other pramāṇas. Anumāna and pramāṇa śabda are the knowledge (jñāna) of what is available only indirectly, but the naiyayikas reject the offer of opponents to combine them into one. We can assume that one of the key reasons for anumāna’s rejection of śabda is the nonverbal nature of this pramāṇa. Anumāna is revealed verbally in avayavin, but their meaning should not be identified.

The first part of Nyāya Sūtra does not specify whether the involvement of manas and ātman in pratyakṣa and anumāna is attributable. However, based on etymological analysis and from the subsequent context of the development of Nyaya teaching and their polemics with opponents, we can assume that supporters of this Darshan postulated the need for their participation in cognition.

The first two of the three varieties of anumāna listed in Nyāya Sūtra are often interpreted by researchers as being based on the relationship between cause and effect, where the сognizant and the mediator of cognition are either cause or effect, respectively. However, such a guide, in the context of this study, seems vulnerable and imperfect. It is more justified to say that the three varieties of anumāna in the Nyāya Sūtra are defined according to the “temporal” location of the cognizable in relation to the “mediator” acquired in pratyakṣa: either before, or after, or at the same time.

Based on the analysis of Nyāya Sūtra, anumāna is defined as a situation where, through the mediation of what is directly known in pratyakṣa, the knowledge (jñāna) inaccessible to indriya occurs at the moment of the act of perception of a certain artha. Due to the openness of the question about the role of the word in anumāna, the translation of this pramāṇa with the Ukrainian term umovyvid (inference) seems vulnerable and incorrect. Instead, we can either recognize this Sanskrit term as untranslatable and use transcription, or translate it with the term “conclusion”.

How to Cite

Hnatovska Н. (2025). Interpretation of Anumāna in the Nyāya Sūtra. The World of the Orient, (1 (126), 140–154. https://doi.org/10.15407/orientw2025.01.140

Article views: 48 | PDF Downloads: 14

Keywords

References

Бурба Д. В. (2018), “Практична транскрипція санскритських власних назв та термінів в українській мові”, Східний світ, № 1, с. 104–122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/orientw2018.01.104

Гнатовська Г. (2021), Історії східних філософій: Вступ до індійської філософії. Навчальний посібник, Фрако Пак, Київ.

Гнатовська Г. В. (2022), «Тлумачення пратьякша у першому розділі першої частини “Nyāya sūtras”», Вісник Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка. Філософія, т. 2, № 7, с. 22–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2523-4064.2022/7-4/11

Завгородній Ю. & Луценко Д. (2006), “ ‘Вайшешика-сутри’ Канади (І.1–48): переклад й історико-філософський коментар”, Філософська думка, № 6, с. 90–124.

Конверський А. Є. (2004), Логіка: Підручник, Центр навчальної літератури, Київ.

Філософський енциклопедичний словник (2002), наук. ред.: Л. В. Озадовська, Н. П. Поліщук, Абрис, Київ.

Akamatsu A. (1999), “The Two Kinds of Anumana in Bhartrhari’s Vakyapadiya”, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 27, No. 1–2, pр. 17–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004348304666

Amin H., Sharma R., Vyas H. and Vyas M. (2014), “Concept of Manas: Insights from Nyāya Darśana and Āyurveda”, Yoga Mimamsa, Vol. 46, Issue 3–4, pр. 71–75. DOI: 10.4103/0044-0507.159741

Balcerowicz P. (2019), “Is There Anything Like Indian Logic? Anumāna, ‘Inference’ and Inference in the Critique of Jayarāśi Bhaṭṭa”, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 47, рp. 917–946. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-019-09400-6

Bhaskar J. (2015), “A Critical Study about the Nyaya Theory of Prama and Pramanas”, Journal Of Humanities And Social Science, Vol. I, pр. 30–32. DOI: 10.9790/0837-201113032

Chakrabarti K. (1975), “The Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika Theory of Universals”, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 3, рp. 363–382. DOI: 10.1007/bf02629152

Chakrabarti K. (2016), “The Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika Theory of Universals”, Journal of Indian Philosophy and Religion, Vol. 21: Collected Works of Kisor K. Chakrabarti, Pt. I, pр. 72–102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/jipr2016215

Chakravarty S. (2016), “Anumāna as Interpreted in Sāṁkhya-Yoga Philosophy: A Brief Study”, International Journal of Sanskrit Research, Vol. 2, No. 4, рp. 75–81.

Chatterjee S. (2016), The Nyaya Theory of Knowledge. A Critical Study of Some Problems of Logic and Metaphysics, First Edition, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi.

Chatterjee S. and Datta D. (1948), An Introduction to Indian Philosophy, University of Calcutta, Calcutta.

Chinchore M. R. (1989), Chinchore Dharmakirti’s Theory of Hetu-Centricity of Anumana, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi.

Dasti M. and Phillips S. (2017), The Nyaya-sutra: Selections with Early Commentaries, Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., Indianapolis and Cambridge.

Dasti M.-R. (2010), Rational Belief in Classical India: Nyāya’s Epistemology and Defense of Theism, Dissertation, University of Texas.

Dongol N. (2018), “Comparative Study on Anumana and Inference of Hindu and Western Philosophy”, Kathmandu School of Law Review, Vol. 6, Issue 1, pр. 187–191. DOI: 10.46985/jms.v6i1.954

Ghosh R. (2023), “The Concept of Anumāna in Navya-nyāya”, Studia Humana, Vol. 12, Issue 1–2, pp. 4–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sh-2023-0002

Gillon B. (2023), “Logic in Classical Indian Philosophy”, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2023 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds), available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2023/entries/logic-india/ (accessed October 23, 2023).

Lakra R. (2018), “Universals in Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika School”, International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT), Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 1378–1384.

Matilal B. K. (1997), Logic, Language and Reality. (Indian Philosophy and Contemporary Issues), Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi.

Monier-Williams M. (1899), A Sanskrit-English Dictionary: Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages, Oxford Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Nyāya Philosophy (1967), Literal Translation of Gautama’s Nyāya-Sūtra & Vātsyāyana’s Bhāṣya, Translated by Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya and Mrinalkanti Gangopadhyaya, Pt. 1, Indian Studies: Past & Present, [Calcutta].

Nyayadarsana of Gautama (2003), With Sanskrit Text, Vātsyāyana Bhāṣya, Sanskrit Commentary, English Summary and English Translation, New Bharatiya Book Corp., Delhi.

Perrett R. W. (1984), “Self-Refutation in Indian Philosophy”, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 12, No. 3, pр. 237–263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00186683

Potter K. (1975), “Some Thoughts on the Nyàya Conception of Meaning”, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 3, No. 1/2, рp. 209–216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00157334

Sarkar T. K. (2021), “Jaina Theory of “ANUMĀNA” [Inference]: Some Aspects”, in Sarukkai S. and Chakraborty M. K. (eds), Handbook of Logical Thought in India, Springer, New Delhi, pр. 437–487. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2577-5_37

Williams-Wyant M. D. (2017), “Nagarjuna’s No-Thesis View Revisited: The Significance of Classical Indian Debate Culture on Verse 29 of the Vigrahavyāvartanī”, Asian Philosophy, Vol. 27, Issue 3, pp. 1–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2017.1353210

न्यायसूत्र और न्याय-भाष्य (1921), [अनुवाद और टिप्पणियाँ राजाराम अनु], वनस्थली, available at: https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.343189/page/n1/mode/2up (accessed July 01, 2024).

REFERENCES

Burba D. (2018), “Praktychna transkryptsiia sanskrytskykh vlasnykh nazv ta terminiv v ukrainskii movi”, Shìdnij svìt, No. 1, pp. 104–122. (In Ukrainian) DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/orientw2018.01.104

Hnatovska H. (2021), Istorii skhidnykh filosofii: Vstup do indiiskoi filosofii. Navchalnyi posibnyk, Frako Pak, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).

Hnatovska H. V. (2022), “Tlumachennia pratyakṣa u pershomu rozdili pershoi chastyny ‘Nyāya sūtras’ ”, Visnyk Kyivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka. Filosofiia, Vol. 2, No. 7, pp. 22–25. (In Ukrainian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2523-4064.2022/7-4/11

Zavhorodnii Yu. and Lutsenko D. (2006), “ ‘Vaisheshyka-sutry’ Kanady (I.1–48): pereklad y istoryko-filosofskyi komentar”, Filosofska dumka, No. 6, pp. 90–124. (In Ukrainian).

Konverskyi A. Ye. (2004), Lohika: Pidruchnyk, Tsentr navchalnoi literatury, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).

Filosofskyi entsyklopedychnyi slovnyk (2002), L. V. Ozadovska and N. P. Polishchuk (eds), Abrys, Kyiv. (In Ukrainian).

Akamatsu A. (1999), “The Two Kinds of Anumana in Bhartrhari’s Vakyapadiya”, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 27, Issue 1–2, pр. 17–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004348304666

Amin H., Sharma R., Vyas H. and Vyas M. (2014), “Concept of Manas: Insights from Nyāya Darśana and Āyurveda”, Yoga Mimamsa, Vol. 46, Issue 3–4, р. 71–75. DOI: 10.4103/0044-0507.159741