Production Of Philosophical Literature In South Asia During Pre Colonial Period

SR No.: 269575
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Karin Preisendanz
Publisher: Karin Preisendanz
Total Pages: 40
Language: English
Classification: Article
File Size: 5 MB

Page 4

58
KARIN PREISENDANZ
Except for some fragments, however, these works have been lost. Only a few independent treatises belonging to the classical and early medieval periods have been preserved or are known to have existed; the major ones among them which have come down to us, such as the Nyāyamañjarī and the Nyāyabhūsaņa, frequently refer to the Nyāyasūtra, together with the earliest commentary, the Nyāyabhāsya, to its only preserved classical sub-commentary, the Nyāyavārttika, and to other lost commentarial literature, and therefore can be considered to partake to a certain degree of the nature of a commentary. From the point of view of our contemporary analysis of the situation, owing to their conciseness and resulting ambiguity the roughly five hundred ancient sūtra-s of the Nyāyasūtra were suitable to serve as directives for the discussion with rival philosophers even half a millennium after their composition, just as ancient landmarks may provide guiding points of reference even for the pilots of modern vehicles.
However, as has been observed by others with respect to Sanskritic commentarial literature in general, according to the - mostly only implicit - understanding of the authors of these commentarial works the individual aphorisms already contain the opinions and positions explicated by themselves in the light of the contemporary state of philosophical discussion; the doctrinal edifice which has been sketched in the Nyāyasūtra, including the rival critiques and positions, thus anticipates - as we would express it - the later developments or can harmoniously accommodate them. No express claim is made to personal intellectual originality or innovation on the part of the individual thinkers; it is rather explicitly denied in some cases. A further explicit authorial attitude to be encountered is that the commentarial activity serves the re-establishment of doctrinal positions expressed in the foundational work which have been misunderstood by opponents and therefore attacked or dismissed, with the result that their real meaning has become concealed. Uddyotakara, the sixth-century author of the Nyāyavārttika on the Nyāyabhāsya, states in the auspicious invocatory verse (mangalaśloka) of his work:
• For a survey of this lost commentarial literature with references to the relevant secondary literature, cf. Steinkellner (1961), to be updated with the help of more recent contributions by himself (cf. Steinkellner, 1977) and scholars such as Solomon (1970, 1971, 1973, 1974, 1976, 1977-1978, 1980, 1986), Shah (1972), Thakur (1970, 1981, 2000: 110-111) and Wezler (1975). ? Cf. Frauwallner (1936), Gupta (1963: 24-25, 9711), Schmithausen (1965: 162ff, 248ff.), Shah (1972: 5-9) and Wezler (1975). 8 A notable exception to this is the Nyāyasāra by Bhäsarvajña.