Topic: Comparison (Upamāna) in Nyāya Philosophy
1. Introduction to Upamāna:
● Upamāna means comparison.
● It is the third means of valid knowledge (pramāṇa) accepted by the Nyāya school of
Indian philosophy
The explanation of Upamāna is found in the Nyāya tradition.
● Modern scholars like those of K.M.D.R. (a modern Nyāya text) have discussed it.
● The views of different modern Nyāyikas (Nyāya philosophers) are presented.
● defend these views by:
4. Example to Explain Upamāna:
● Suppose a forest-dweller tells a villager:
"A gavaya (wild animal) is like a cow."
● When the villager sees a gavaya in the forest and recognizes it as being similar to a cow,
the knowledge gained is through comparison.
● So, here Upamāna works by using similarity to know something new.
Nyāya Philosophy of Language
Topic: Upamāna (Comparison) — Continued
1. First Explanation of Upamāna (Comparison):
● Key Idea: Knowledge from comparison comes from recognizing similarity
(gosādṛśyajñānam).
● Instrumental Cause: The forest-dweller’s sentence helps the listener remember the
similarity.
● Example: When the villager remembers the sentence and understands that the word
gavaya means an animal like a cow, he gains knowledge through Upamāna.
2. Second Explanation (Old Naiyāyikas):
● View: The verbal knowledge (from the sentence) is the main cause.
● Similarity is Auxiliary Cause: The perception of similarity (seeing an animal like a cow)
is considered a supporting or auxiliary cause.
● Criticism: The authors of K.M.D.R. reject this view.
○ They say: If similarity is needed, then it should be accepted as the main
instrumental cause, not just auxiliary.
3. Third Explanation (A Particular Naiyāyika – Naiyāyikaikadeśin):
● View: Knowledge of similarity is the main cause, and other things (like understanding
the sentence and seeing the animal) are just operations.
● Operations:
○ Understanding the meaning of the sentence.
○ Perceiving the qualified animal.
● Even if these are not directly produced by similarity, they are still results of the similarity
knowledge.
● Criticism by K.M.D.R.: They also reject this view.
Nyāya Philosophy of Language
Topic: Upamāna (Comparison)
4. Why Perception is Important for Upamiti:
● Main Point: To understand upamiti (knowledge by comparison), it's necessary to
perceive the animal (like a gavaya) as similar to a cow.
● Instrumental Cause: The perception of similarity (not just verbal knowledge) is the
main cause.
● Operation: Recalling the meaning of the sentence that expresses similarity.
5. Exact Form of Upamiti:
● Author M's View:
○ Upamiti means knowledge that "this animal is called a gavaya."
○ Not just knowing the animal is similar to a cow, but identifying it by the name
gavaya.
● Why it matters: If similarity alone were the basis, then every similar animal would be
called gavaya, which is incorrect.
6. Difference Between Upamiti and Verbal Knowledge:
● Verbal knowledge from similarity-based sentences (like gosadṛśo gavayaḥ) only tells
us:
○ gosadṛśa (similar to a cow) is the qualificand.
○ gavayapadavācayatva (denoted by the word gavaya) is the qualifier.
● Upamiti, however, shows the individual animal (gavaya) as the main subject.
7. Objection and Its Rejection:
● Objection: When the villager sees the animal, he sees both gavayatva (gavaya-ness)
and gosādṛśya (similarity to cow), so both can define the meaning of gavaya.
● Rejection: Though both are seen, gosādṛśya is not suitable as a defining feature.
○ It is too complex and logically heavy to be used as the meaning.
○ It involves many conditions and is not straightforward.
Nyāya Philosophy of Language
Topic: Upamiti (Knowledge by Comparison)
8. What is the Correct Form of Upamiti?
● Correct Form: Upamiti does not arise in the form –
“gosadṛśo gavayapadavācyaḥ” (something like a cow is called gavaya).
● Right Form: It comes in the form –
“gavayo gavayapadavācyaḥ” (this is gavaya and called by the word gavaya).
9. Why the Other Form is Rejected:
● Reason: From experience, we know the word gavaya gives us knowledge where
gavayatva (gavaya-ness) is the qualifier.
● Problem: If upamiti was in the rejected form, this clear verbal knowledge would not be
possible.
10. Objection and Response:
● Objection: Sometimes, one might recognize something as similar to a cow due to a
certain configuration of parts (like horns, tail, etc.).
● Response: This type of upamiti is incorrect because:
○ Recognizing similarity based on body parts is a complex and burdensome
process.
○ It cannot define the word gavaya clearly and logically.
Nyāya Philosophy of Language
Topic: Verbal Knowledge and Denotative Function – Page 6 Summary
1. Importance of Denotative Function
● To understand word meanings, we must first know the denotative function (how a word
stands for something).
● Without it, recollection of meaning is impossible.
● The final goal is verbal knowledge, which is the understanding of the relation between
words and their meanings.
2. Two Ways of Getting Verbal Knowledge
● (i) Words are heard: We understand meanings directly by hearing.
● (ii) Words are seen or remembered: Even if not spoken (e.g., written), we understand
by recognizing them from memory or visual cues.
3. Instrumental Cause of Verbal Knowledge
● The real cause of verbal knowledge is the recollection (smaraṇam) of word meanings.
● This recollection happens only if we already know the meaning of the words.
4. Rejected View: Only Knowledge is the Cause
● If someone says that just hearing a word and recognizing an object (like hearing "jar"
and seeing a jar) gives knowledge, it’s only perceptual knowledge, not verbal
knowledge.
● Verbal knowledge needs memory of word meanings, not just direct perception.
5. Accepted View: Recollection as the Cause
● The correct view is that padajanyapadārthasmaraṇam (recollection of meaning caused
by the word) is the operation.
● Not just padajanyapadārthajñānam (mere knowledge of the meaning).
Nyāya Philosophy of Language
Significatory Function and Denotative Meaning
1. Role of Significatory Function in Verbal Knowledge
● When we hear words like "jar", we should only recall the object (jar), not other things
(like ether).
● This is possible only when we understand words using their significatory function (how
a word points to its meaning).
● Verbal knowledge arises only when the meaning of a word is recalled through its correct
relation with that word.
2. Nature of Significatory Function (Vṛtti)
● Significatory function explains how words express meanings.
● It is of two types:
○ Denotative Function (Śakti) – direct meaning
○ Implication (Lakṣaṇā) – implied meaning
● These are based on a relation between word and meaning.
3. Nature of Denotative Function (Śakti)
● Denotative function = relation between a word and its literal meaning.
● Two views within the Nyāya school:
○ Old (Ancient) View: Meaning comes from the will of God (divine origin).
Example: "From this word, this meaning is to be understood".
○ Modern View: Meaning is based on human will (not necessarily God's will).
Words like nadī (river), vṛddhi (growth) show this.
1. Will of God as the Basis of Word Meaning
● Both old and modern Naiyāyikas agree:
○ Words like jar, cloth have meaning based on God’s will.
● Example: Even the word gargarī (from Apabhraṃśa) can give knowledge of jar if there's
belief in the meaning, even if it's incorrect.
2. A Problem with This View
● If the will of God is outside words, how can it explain the denotative function
(word-to-meaning relation)?
● Solution: The will of God is present in words, through a relation called
qualificandness (viśeṣyatā).
3. What is Qualificandness?
● Example phrase: Ghaṭapadāt ghaṭo boddhavyaḥ
(“From the word 'jar', jar must be understood”)
● Here:
○ Jar is the qualificand.
○ The will of God exists in the word through this relation of qualificandness.
4. Logical Issue and Solution
● If every word has a different denotative function, it would mean many different wills of
God – which is illogical.
● Nyāya solution: Will of God is one, and it works through a conjunct form
(samūhālambanātmakecchā).
5. Further Objection and Answer
● Objection: If God’s will is one, then jar and cloth should have the same meaning.
● Answer: Each meaning has specificity (viśeṣyatā), indicated by a specific qualifier
(prakāratā).
○ This keeps meanings distinct, even though God’s will is one.
Implication and Ways to Know Word Meaning
1. Role of Implication in Understanding Meaning
● Example: The word Gaṅgā (Ganges) often brings the idea of a riverbank.
● But Gaṅgā means the river, not directly the bank.
● So, the meaning of bank is understood through implication (lakṣaṇā).
● The specific quality (prakāratā) helps decide this implied meaning.
● Therefore, implication is accepted in Nyāya to understand indirect meanings.
2. Means of Knowing Denotative Function
There are eight ways to understand the denotative (direct) meaning of words:
(1) Grammar (Vyākaraṇa)
● Grammar helps identify the root, stem (prātipadika), suffixes, etc.
● Example:
○ Bhū = to be
○ Laṭ = present tense
● Even Naiyāyikas accept these grammatical rules.
Disagreement in Grammar
● Some rules have different interpretations.
● Example:
○ According to Pāṇini’s Sūtra (3.4.69):
Laṭ karmaṇi ca bhāve cākarmakebhyaḥ
○ Here, the suffix refers to the doer (kartā) or effort (kṛti).
○ Kartṛvāṁ (the one who has effort) is taken as the meaning.
Naiyāyikas' View
● Naiyāyikas believe:
○ The effort (kṛti) is the basis for meaning.
○ Many efforts (kṛtayaḥ) can be seen as producing meaning.
○ So, they accept kṛti as the key factor in understanding denotative function.
1. What is Causal Verbal Knowledge?
● It means: How do we understand the meaning of a word when we hear it?
2. Old Nyāyikas’ View (Classical Nyāya)
● They believed that words naturally cause the knowledge of their meaning.
● When you hear a word, it automatically makes you know what it means.
● Example: Just like fire naturally gives heat, the word “cow” naturally makes you think of a
cow.
● So, the connection between word and meaning is natural and direct.
● This is why they said verbal knowledge is a special and valid way to know things.
3. New Nyāyikas’ View (Later Nyāya)
● They disagreed and said words and meanings are connected by social agreement or
convention, not naturally.
● Hearing a word does not automatically make you know its meaning.
● You must learn and recognize the meaning through social use.
● Example: The word “cow” means cow only because people agreed on it, not because it
naturally causes the thought.
● So, verbal knowledge happens through memory, learning, and recognition.
4. Why is this Debate Important?
● It shows two ideas about language:
○ Old Nyāyikas: Language is natural, words have natural power.
○ New Nyāyikas: Language is based on social convention and mental recognition.
● It helps understand how language and knowledge work.
5. Simple Example
● Hearing the word “cow”:
○ Old Nyāyikas: The word itself causes you to know the cow.
○ New Nyāyikas: You know the meaning because you learned that people use the
word “cow” for that animal.
Nature of Causal Verbal Knowledge (Sabda Pramana) according to Nyaya
Siddhanta Muktavali:
1. Sabda (Verbal Knowledge) as a Valid Means of Knowledge (Pramana):
Sabda is recognized as a direct and independent means of obtaining valid knowledge. It
refers to knowledge gained through words, especially those spoken or written by a
trustworthy source (like a reliable person or the Vedas).
2. Causal Relation Between Words and Meaning:
According to Nyaya Siddhanta Muktavali, verbal knowledge arises causally from the
interaction of words (sound) and their meaning. Words are not just arbitrary sounds but
have an inherent connection to their meanings, which causes knowledge in the hearer or
reader.
3. Nature of the Causal Connection:
The text explains that verbal knowledge is caused by the combination of two factors: the
external word (Sabda) and the internal meaning (Artha). The union of these two
produces a cognition (jnana) in the mind, i.e., the knowledge of what the word signifies.
4. Types of Verbal Knowledge:
Verbal knowledge can be:
○ Intrinsic (Svarupa) knowledge of words and meanings, and
○ Instrumental (Karya) knowledge which is the resulting cognition produced by
the word-meaning complex.
5. Trustworthiness and Authority:
Verbal knowledge is valid when it comes from a reliable and truthful source (e.g., a
trustworthy person or the Vedas). Such knowledge is considered authoritative and
foundational, especially when other means are inadequate.
6. Distinction from Other Knowledge:
Unlike perception or inference, verbal knowledge is indirect because it relies on the
testimony of others but is still immediate in cognition once the word and meaning are
combined.
In Nyaya philosophy, "Sakthi" refers to the denotive function or the power by which words or
signs indicate or denote their meanings. Understanding this denotative power is essential to
explain how verbal knowledge (Sabda Pramana) arises.
Means of Knowing the Denotive Function (Sakthi) in Nyaya:
Nyaya recognizes several ways by which the denotive function (Sakthi) of words can be
known or established:
1. Direct Perception (Pratyaksha):
When we hear a word repeatedly associated with a particular object or concept, the
power of that word to denote that object is directly perceived. For example, hearing the
word "cow" repeatedly in the presence of a cow creates a perceptual connection
between the word and the object.
2. Inference (Anumana):
Sometimes, the denotative function is established through logical inference. For
example, if a word is used consistently in contexts where a certain object or concept is
present, one infers that the word has the power to denote that object.
3. Testimony (Shabda or Agama):
Nyaya holds that authoritative verbal testimony, especially from reliable and
knowledgeable sources (like grammarians, elders, or scriptures), is a key means of
knowing the denotative power of words. The tradition and usage established by these
sources confirm the Sakthi of words.
4. Conventional Usage (Sampradaya):
The conventional and customary use of words in society plays a major role. Words gain
their denotative power through socially accepted usage and customs, which are learned
through interaction and communication.
5. Memory (Smriti):
The repeated association of a word with its meaning, stored in memory, helps in
knowing its denotative function. This means the mind recalls the relation between the
word and the object from past experiences.
Lakshana (Implication) in Nyaya Siddhanta Muktavali
1. What is Lakshana?
Lakshana means the implied or indirect meaning of a word, different from its direct,
obvious meaning. It is understood from context or by inference, not just from the literal
word.
2. Why is Lakshana Important?
● It helps us understand what is meant beyond just the exact words.
● It clears up confusion when words have multiple meanings or are vague.
● It explains figurative speech, like metaphors or indirect expressions.
3. How Does Lakshana Work in Communication?
● When someone says something indirectly, Lakshana helps us get the real meaning.
● It depends on the situation, speaker’s intention, and common usage to find the correct
sense.
4. Nyaya’s View on Lakshana:
● Nyaya accepts Lakshana as an important way to get knowledge from words.
● It supports direct verbal knowledge (Sabda) by filling gaps when literal meaning isn’t
enough.
5. Types of Lakshana:
● Tatpurusha Lakshana: Meaning related through a connection or relation.
● Bhaga Lakshana: Meaning from a part indicating the whole or vice versa.
● Aropa Lakshana: Meaning by attributing qualities indirectly.
6. Why It Matters Philosophically:
● Lakshana broadens how language conveys meaning.
● It shows that understanding words isn’t just about literal meanings but also about implied
ideas.
● This helps in precise and effective communication.