Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The University of Nalanda c7: Chapter I. The Ideal of a University

The University of Nālandā c7

Language
English

Chapter I. The Ideal of a University

c7.2

THE idea of a University, it would be thought, was foreign to India. It might therefore be asked, "How could it be applied to an institution which was purely Indian?" Therefore, before we use it with reference to the educational institutions that flourished at Nālandā, we must, first, needs, know what is meant by a University and then see how far, with propriety, we could apply it to Nālandā.

c7.3

The word 'University' originally had the sense of a number or aggregate of persons. In this sense, it was applied to a scholastic body of teachers or scholars, but never to a place, where such a body was established, or even to its collective schools.¹

c7.4

¹ See Rashdall, *Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages*, 1, p. 6.

c7.5

In course of time, it was used with reference to an institution which embraced all the arts and sciences,² whereas Newman called that a University which held out invitation to students of every kind.³

c7.6

² Mosheim, *Hist.* Vol. II, p. 529, referred to by Newman; *The Idea of a University*, p. 20.

c7.7

³ Newman, o. c., p. 20. Rashdall however says that this interpretation is nothing but the appropriation of the word "*studium generale*".

c7.8

The word 'University' then, has a definite meaning and significance. It stands first, for a place which imparts knowledge in all the arts and sciences secondly, for a place which holds out invitation to students of every kind from all over the world.

c7.9

But a University, besides this, has definite views with regard to the students it admits to its portals and also with regard to the education it imparts. As regards the former, it admitted only those students who possessed the requisite qualifications and no other. As to the latter, it sought to give the right type of education, which is defined by Newman as one that acts upon our mental nature and the formation of character. "It is," says he, "something individual and permanent, and is commonly spoken of in connection with religion and virtue."¹ The aim of education, thus, was the spiritual advancement of the student, and not any material gain—"some art, or business, or profession or work as resulting from it and as its complete and real end."²

c7.10

¹ Newman, o. c., p. 108. We may as well compare what Emperor Julian said of education, "Right education, I consider to be not the gracefulness that resides in words and on tongue, but a healthy disposition of an intelligent mind and true opinion about the good and the bad, the noble and the base." from Walden, Universities of Ancient Greece, p. 110-n.

c7.11

Right type of education² as Newman further tells us, is that which makes one a 'gentleman,' whom he characterises as one who has a cultivated intellect, a delicate taste, a candid, equitable, dispassionate mind and a noble or courteous bearing in the conduct of life.³ These qualities are the results of large knowledge. And this knowledge, according to Newman, comprises not only subjects such as Grammar, Logic, and Astronomy, but also important and abstruse ones, such as Philosophy and Theology.⁴

c7.12

² Newman, o. c., p. 165.

c7.13

³ Ibid., pp. 120-121.

c7.14

⁴ Perhaps those at the helm of our British Indian Universities will wonder at the inclusion of Theology. "What has Theology to do", they might ask, "with the University or Liberal Education?", and paradoxical as it would seem, our Universities have no such subject as Theology, when we find that all the ancient Universities of India and Europe, Takṣaśila, Nālandā, Paris and Oxford respectively, had a special chair for Theology. Even up to this day, in Oxford, Theology continues to occupy the same high position as it did, when the University was first founded. The Universities of Benares and Aligarh have done well to fill up this long-felt want in the equipment of the students' educa-

c7.15

Theology should be included in the curriculum, because, as Newman says, it is not a mere acquaintance with the scriptures, but is the Science of God, or truths we know about God put into a system.¹ Religious training, so defined, would not narrow the outlook of the student (as it would possibly do in the Hindu and the Moslem University), but would instil in him a catholicity of outlook and would teach him to place reason above emotion rather than be a victim of the latter.

c7.16

¹ Newman, o. c., p. 61.

c7.17

Having thus known what, in short, was the ideal of a University in Europe, let us see whether there was an institution or even a word in India, which connoted an idea similar to a University, before we discuss, in the chapters that follow, how far the educational institutions at Nālandā could be called a University.

c7.18

For an educational institution like a University, we have to go back far into the history of education in ancient India. Here the word ‘Upaniṣad’ itself seems to serve our need. Literally, it means “to approach for instruction”. Nevertheless, it presupposes a teacher or group of teachers whom the student or students approached for knowledge. This knowledge, as we learn from the *Upaniṣadas* themselves² and from the interpretation of the word ‘Upaniṣad’, was not divulged to an unworthy student.³ A student, thus, was required to have the necessary qualification before he could approach for higher knowledge. This knowledge as we learn from Nārada, embraced all the then known arts and sciences.⁴ Lastly, instruction in this knowledge was not confined to a

c7.19

² The word ‘Upaniṣad’ is interpreted to mean secret doctrine. See for instance *Nṛsiṃha uttara tāpani upaniṣad*, where we meet with the phrase “*iti rahasyam*” no less than four times.

c7.20

³ The best known instance is that of Naciketas in *Kaṭha Upaniṣad*, who realised the secret of death by persistent effort, while Virocana, as we learn from *Chāndogya*, V, 11, returned empty-handed.

c7.21

⁴ *Chāndogya Upaniṣad*, VII, 2. For a fuller reference, see Chap. II, p. 8.

c7.22

tion by making Theology, be it Hinduism or Islam, compulsory for their students.

c7.23

class or sect or students, but to all, provided they were well-equipped.¹

c7.24

¹ *Cf.* for instance the case of Satyakāma Jābāla, Chāndogya, IV, 4 ff.

c7.25

The ideal of this knowledge was not in the least material. Not only was it spiritual, but it was transcendental. For “Not the knowledge of the *Vedas*, etc.”, said the Upaniṣadic philosopher, “is true knowledge. That alone is true knowledge which ends in the realization of Brahma, of Akṣara ”.²

c7.26

² *Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad* 1, 5. *Cf.* also Sā vidyā yā vimuktaye.

c7.27

Thus, even as early as the Upaniṣadic times, India had evolved a system of education which, in spite of its extreme simplicity, would stand comparison, so far as the essentials are concerned, with similar organisations of the Occident known as ‘City schools’, ‘*Studium generale*’, ‘University’ etc. In course of time this system came to be introduced or was prevalent in the *āśramas*, *mathas*, and *vihāras*. Nālandā was one of such *vihāras*. Let us see how far it embodied the aims and ideals of educational institutions of the East and the West.

c7.28

CHAPTER II

c7.29

PART I

c7.30

THE BACKGROUND OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NĀLANDĀ

c7.31

FOR the formation of a state, a territory and the people who would inhabit that territory are necessary. For framing the laws of a constitution, there must exist first the constitution *de facto*. In fact, for all human institutions the first requisite is matter. This matter may vary according to the needs of institutions. For the laws of a constitution, as we said above, we require the constitution itself. For an institution like the University of Nālandā what we require is matter in the shape of literature, using the word literature in a loose sense so as to comprise religion, philosophy, science, art and so forth.

c7.32

So before a great University like Nālandā comes into being, there must be in existence a great and vast literature which the University may take upon itself to teach and to expound. This does not mean that the University confines itself to the work already done, and that it creates nothing new.¹ We shall see in the following chapters how Nālandā professors turned their activities into new channels like *Nyāya*, *Tantra*, etc., and wrote stupendous volumes on these subjects. The Nālandā University, in this respect, was very fortunate. Unlike the Mediæval European Universities of Salerno, Bologna and Paris,² the period that preceded the rise of the Nālandā University was characterised by an intellectual fervour unknown to the history of any country. India had not known anything like “Dark Ages” in her intellectual history, before the invasion of the Moslems in the 12th century A.D. This is true, notwithstanding the fact that India was overrun more than once by foreigners,—once by the Greeks under Alexander and then by the various hordes of the Huns, and (in spite of the fact) that India was at no period of her history completely free from internal wars of aggrandisement between her different political chiefs. Nālandā had, therefore, a very rich heritage to fall back upon.

c7.33

¹ According to Newman, however, this is never the aim of a University. Its sole aim is the diffusion and extension of knowledge rather than the advancement. o. c., Preface, p. IX.

c7.34

² See Rashdall. o. c., I, p. 26.

c7.35

This heritage we may divide into two parts—Buddhist and non-Buddhist. The non-Buddhist part, to give only a bare outline, would include *Vēdas*, *Vēdānta*, works on such philosophical systems, as the *Sāmkhya*, *Vaiśeṣika* and other branches of knowledge that will be enumerated hereafter. The Buddhist division would include the various teachings of Buddha contained in the Vinaya Pitaka, Dhammapada, Abhidhamma Pitaka, Majjihima Nikāya, Sutta Pitaka and others.

c7.36

But more than these, there were works which were of greater importance, works which tried to expound the inner teachings of Buddha, such as *Prajñāpāramitā* and commentaries thereon composed by Nāgārjuna, Maitreya, Āsaṅga, Vasubandhu and others, who had given Buddhism its philosophy.

c7.37

We see, therefore, that the ground was already prepared for the foundation of a great University, a University that would attract students from many a foreign land.

c7.38

Another thing that must draw our attention is the curriculum that was prevalent, prior to the foundation of the University. As this curriculum consisted of various curricula, we shall have a rapid survey of them, and see how these varying items of education came to be consolidated into one harmonious whole. This survey may well be called a survey of the various landmarks in the history of education in ancient India. For a distinct addition and alteration was made in the curriculum at each period.

c7.39

The age of Pāṇini, 600-700 B. C., we take as our first landmark.¹ For he immediately succeeds the latest compilers of the Upaniṣads and the author of Nighantu,—Yāska. Pāṇini, moreover, represents the Sūtra-period in the development of various kinds of Indian literature.²

c7.40

¹ Belvalkar, *Systems of Sanskrit Grammar*, p. 16. Keith, (*A History of Sanskrit Literature*, p. 426), however, opposes this view, and assigns 400 B.C., as the earliest date to Pāṇini. He however agrees with our two subsequent statements.

c7.41

² Cf. Keith, o. c., p. 425. He, however, places him in about 350 B.C.

c7.42

The curriculum in the time of Pāṇini, then, was approximately as follows:

c7.43

Besides the four *Vedas*, we find that several other subjects of study were taught in those days. They were:—

c7.44

(1) *Anuśāsana*, which according to Sāyaṇa, is the name given to the six *Vedāṅgas*, viz.:
(a) *Śikṣā* (Phonetics), (b) *Kalpa* (Ritualistic knowledge), (c) *Vyākaraṇa* (Grammar), (d) *Nirukta* (Exegetics), (e) *Chandas* (Metrics) and (f) *Jyotiṣa* (Astronomy).

c7.45

(2) *Vidyā*, meaning *Sarpavidyā* or *Viśvavidyā*.

c7.46

(3) *Vākovākyam*, explained by Śaṅkara as the art of disputation.

c7.47

(4) *Itihāsa-Purāṇa*.

c7.48

(5) *Ākhyāna*.

c7.49

(6) *Anvākhyāna*.

c7.50

(7) *Anuyākhyāna*, interpreted by Śaṅkara as explanation of Mantras.

c7.51

(8) *Vyākhyāna*.

c7.52

(9) *Gāthā*.

c7.53

(10) *Nārāśaṃsī*.

c7.54

(11) *Brāhmaṇa*.

c7.55

(12) *Kṣātra Vidyā*, explained by Śaṅkara as the science of the bows.

c7.56

(13) *Rāśi*; Śaṅkara explains it as the science of numbers or arithmetic.

c7.57

(14) Nakṣatra Vidyā.
(15) Bhūta Vidyā, interpreted differently by Macdonell, Śaṅkara, and Raṅga Rāmānuja, as demonology, the science of life, and the art of controlling, respectively.
(16) Nidhi, probably some sort of divination.
(17) Sarpa-Vidyā.¹
(18) Atharvāṅgirasa.
(19) Daiva, explained by Śaṅkara as the science of portents.
(20) Pitrya, the science of manes.
(21) Sūtra, in the sense of a book of rules for the guidance of sacrifices, and other rituals.
(22) The Vēdās of Vēdās. (Vēdānām Vēdam), explained by Śaṅkara to mean "Grammar of old Sanskrit".
(23) Ekayāna, literally "the only correct path", explained by Śaṅkara as the science of conduct.
(24) Dēva vidyā, explained by Śaṅkara and Raṅga Rāmānuja as Nirukta or Exegetics and the science of the worship of gods respectively.
(25) Dēvajñāna-Vidyā, explained by Śaṅkara as the arts affected by the lesser gods, such as, the making of perfumes, dancing, singing, playing on musical instruments and other fine arts.

c7.58

¹ Perhaps the same as (2) p. 7.

c7.59

The above is rather an exhaustive list of subjects collected by Dr. Radhamukund Mookerji,² from various Brāhmaṇas and Upaniṣads. Chāndogya Upaniṣad alone gives a fairly good number of subjects. Says Nārada³ to Sanatkumāra: "I have studied, most Reverend Sir, the Ṛigvēda, the Yajurvēda, the Sāmavēda, the Atharvavēda as fourth, the epic and the mythological poems as the fifth vēda, grammar, arithmetic, divination, chronology, dialectics, politics, theology, necromancy, the art of war, astronomy, snake-charming, and the fine arts.”

c7.60

² Ancient Hindu Education, as evidenced by the Brāhmaṇas and Upaniṣads, Sir Asutosh Mookerji Silver Jubilee, III, Orientalia, part I, pp. 217-251.

c7.61

³ Chāndogya Upaniṣad, VII, 1.

c7.62

It need not be imagined that all students were as versatile as Nārada. There can be no greater misconception than that. The inference that we draw from these curricula is that ancient Hindus studied many other subjects besides the four Vēdas, the Brāhmaṇas and the Upaniṣads. It is difficult to say, however, whether these different subjects were taught at one place as at Nālandā¹, or at different places noted for their specialisation in particular branches of knowledge.

c7.63

¹ Shaman Hwiu Li, The life of Hiuen Tsiang. Tr. Beal, p. 112.

c7.64

Repeated references to Takṣaśilā² as an academy for medical studies show that it took a long time before educational centres like Nālandā came to be founded where Philosophy, Theology, Science and even Medicine were taught,³ and that, before their rise these subjects were taught not at one place but at different places famed in particular branches of knowledge.

c7.65

² For instance, See Mahāvagga, VIII, 1, 6. where we are told that Jivaka Komarabhakka went to Takṣaśilā to study medicine.

c7.66

³ Hwui Li, o.c., p. 112.

c7.67

But the subjects, that we most commonly come across in the old curriculum before Pāṇini and even after him are summarized below even at the cost of repetition. For it was this curriculum that underwent a change from time to time.

c7.68

There were the Vēdas, Ṛg, Yajur, Sāma and Atharva. The student specialised in any one of the four; if he was a student above the average and had the requisite energy, means and leisure he mastered more than one Vēda.

c7.69

The various Brāhmaṇas such as Aitarēa, Taittirīya, Tāṇḍya, Śatapatha, as appendices to each Vēda, come next.

c7.70

Upaniṣads, the philosophical treatises, however, formed the most interesting, though abstruse, part of the students' curriculum. Here they came across that which did not require mere memory work but great meditation.

c7.71

After the Upaniṣads comes, the Sūtra literature. This was divided into three parts. There were the Śrauta sūtras, dealing with the details of the ceremonial relating to Vedic rituals. Next come the Dharma sūtras, which prescribed the duties of a man in all the spheres of his life. His duties as a Brahmacārin, that is when he is a student, his duties when he is a householder, his duties when he retires to a forest as a Vānaprasthāśramī, and as a Sanyāsī are enumerated with meticulous precision, by these sūtras. These sūtras also deal with the duties of a king and many other things. They, in short, tell us of the religious, social and legal duties of an individual. Gṛhya sūtras dealing with the domestic life of a person form the last part of this Sūtra literature. Another branch of study that a student before Pāṇini or in his times used to take up was the Science of Pronunciation called Śikṣa or Phonetics. Mention may be made of Chandas or Metre as a branch of science studied by the student. Nirukta or Etymology was also a widely known science at that time, and continued to be so even in the centuries that followed. Lastly comes Jyotiṣa or Astrology.

c7.72

Despite so many other subjects besides the Vēdas, the Vēdas constituted the principal part of student's education. Consequently education in India was primarily religious and continued to be such till the advent of Western education.

c7.73

The Sāṃkhya system may be taken as forming a second landmark in the history of education. Its founder Kapila flourished somewhere about the 7th century B.C.,¹ i.e., about a century or two before Buddha. It was he, who for the first time put purely athejstic ideas before a people steeped in ritualism and who believed in a host of gods and goddesses. He propounded a theory of the Universe in which God had no place. He instead put forward a duality; Nature (Prakṛti) and Spirit (Puruṣa). The whole Universe except the Puruṣa originated from this Prakṛti; and the Puruṣa was only linked with the Prakṛti. Moreover, he said that the Puruṣa was different in every individual, and had separate existence after its emancipation—from the bonds of Prakṛti. Kapila, thus, ran counter in his views to the Upaniṣadic ones, both in his theory of the creation of the Universe and in his theory of the Spirit. This new philosophy drew many students. Some were attracted by it because they found in it an escape from the Vedic ritualism; some, because they could not be convinced by the Upaniṣadic doctrines about the existence of God and the creation and destruction of the Universe; some, because of its close reasoning; others, because they wanted to study the new philosophy in order to compare and criticise it. That the new philosophy was the centre of attraction for the types of students aforesaid, can be seen from the number of champions and opponents the Sāṃkhya system had, from its very inception till the end of the 14th century. If Īśwara Kṛṣṇa and Vārṣagaṇya wrote works in favour of it, in the fifth century A.D., Vasubandhu and other prominent Buddhist scholars wrote its refutation in the same century (A.D. 400).¹ Even it had its share of attack from the Chinese traveller Hiuen Tsiang, who according to the biographer² silenced and converted the opponent. Śaṅkara’s, Rāmānuja’s and Vallabha’s refutations of the system are too well-known even to need a mention.

c7.74

¹ Keith, o.c., p. 488, opposes this view. To him, views, believing in the existence of Kapila and the antiquity of the Sāṃkhya system, appear, groundless, though he does not assign any definite period to that system.

c7.75

¹ See Takakusu, Paramatha's Life of Vasubandhu, J. R. A. S. 1905, p. 47.

c7.76

² Hwui Li, o.c., pp. 161-164.

c7.77

Sāṃkhya-system, thus, made a splendid contribution to the old curriculum of the Pāṇini age. But another surprise was in store for the orthodox Brahmanism which was already assailed by the atheistic Sāṃkhya. Yet another doctrine, this time agnostic, made its appearance on this philosophy-fed land. Buddhism, like Sāṃkhya, did not categorically deny the existence of God. And instead of entering upon discussions about the existence of God and creation of the Universe, it confined itself to its object, viz., to afford humanity relief from the suffering and pain to which all living beings are subject at sometime or other. Here we do not propose to deal with Buddhism as a religion. Suffice it to mention the various works which contained the tenets and preachings of its founder.

c7.78

Buddhism, when originally propounded, say, between the period 522 B.C. and 477 B.C.,—the period when Buddha first became Enlightened, and the years in which he preached his doctrine¹ had no regular books containing the doctrine of Buddha. Nay, even after his death, his teachings were transmitted from generation to generation only orally. It was in the last century of the pre-Christian period or in the beginning of the New Era that they were reduced to writing. The writings being collected together are metaphorically called Pitakas (Baskets or Boxes). They are Sutta Pitaka, Vinaya Pitaka and Abhidhamma Pitaka. The above is merely a sketch of the primitive Buddhism, which was essentially ethical. We shall deal with the history of schism in the Buddhist camp into various schools, the development of Buddhist philosophy with the discovery of Prajñāpāramitā, and philosophical commentaries on it by Nāgārjuna and others, in their respective places. Now, before we revert to the Buddhist philosophy we have to take into account the rise of new systems that originated during the interval when Buddhism was making a steady progress, and their contribution to the curriculum.

c7.79

¹ Buddha was born in 563 B. C. and died in 483. See Coomaraswami, Buddha and the Gospel of Buddhism, p. 9.

c7.80

The modification that primitive Buddhism had made in the curriculum of the Kapila-age² was very little, because the preachings and doctrines of Buddha were primarily studied in the Buddhist vihāras, by those who had embraced Buddhism. These students, who were generally Bhikkhus, never troubled themselves about other studies, of the Vēdas, etc. Hindu institutions—gurukulas and the like, similarly, did not introduce the study of Buddhist doctrines, as it was feared that it might divert the students to Buddhism. Whatever modifications were effected by Buddhism in the curriculum, were effected by it, when philosophy entered it, and these modifications we will study in the pages that follow.

c7.81

² We should better say Sāmkhya-age, for the very existence of Kapila is doubted. See Keith, o.c., p. 488.

c7.82

The new systems that came into existence in the transition period, during which Buddhism was slowly developing, were Yoga, Nyāya, and Vaiśeṣika.

c7.83

The Yoga philosophy supplied what the Sāmkhya lacked. Its author Pātañjali¹ lived somewhere about the 2nd century B.C. The Sāmkhya believed in no god, "the Yoga advocated faith in a Supreme Deity, as well as some mystic practices and meditation by which beatitude could be obtained."² Here was something for those who were not satisfied with the Sāmkhya, to pin their faith to, believing all the while in the Sāmkhya dialectics also. Moreover, the very reasons which drew students to the Sāmkhya system, also drew students to this new system. This Yoga system caused some wonderful changes. The atheistic Sāmkhya-system it almost converted into theistic;³ it made itself acceptable on account of some of its practices even to the Vēdāntins,⁴ while its influence on Buddhism was so great that one of its schools was called Yogācāra.

c7.84

But it was the Nyāya system⁵ that wielded greater influence on the curriculum of the students than either the Yoga or

c7.85

(1) This Pātañjali is not be confused with the Patañjali of the Mahābhāṣya, See Keith, o.c., p. 490. Keith says that the germs of yoga practices, meditation, etc., can be found in all religions, even in Buddhism and Jainism, though it is closely allied with Sāmkhya.
(2) Dutt., Ancient India, p. 320.
(3) Cf. Keith, o.c., p. 400, who calls Yoga "theistic Sāmkhya."
(4) Cf. Śaṅkara, Brahma Sūtra Bhāṣya, adhyāya II, pāda, 1, sūtra 3: "Yēna tu amśēna na virudhyētē, tēnēṣṭamēva sāmkhyayoga smṛtyoḥ-sāvakāśtvam." "And we quite acknowledge that the Sāmkhyayoga smṛtis, in that portion where they do not contradict the Vēda, to have a claim to authoritativeness."
(5) We have purposely refrained from ascribing the authorship of the system to Gotama or Aksapāda as done by Dutt (o.c.. p. 324) as their very existence is doubted by modern scholars, though even Chinese and Japanese sources attribute the inception of it to Aksapāda. See the Vaiśeṣika. That the Nyāya had had a great hold upon the students' mind can be seen from the fact that "Nyāya is still a favourite study in India, and we have students from Kashmere and Rajputana and Northern India attending the celebrated Nyāya Schools in Navadvīpa in Bengal, living in the houses of their teacher and pursuing their studies for years together, in the very same way, in which students among the Magadhas and Aṅgas and Kosalas and Videhas pursued their studies when Gautama, the logician lived and taught."¹ Even up to this day, the Benares Hindu University awards a special prize to a student, who shows proficiency in Nyāya.

c7.86

We do not propose to go into the system itself, but will content ourselves with the changes it wrought upon the existing curriculum.

c7.87

The religious side of the original system was not much cared for, but its technical side which deals with the subjects to be discussed, namely, the various Pramāṇas, etc., was greatly exploited by the Buddhist, Jain and Hindu pandits. Diṅnāga, and Dharmakīrti among the Buddhist made various improvements in Logic.² Diṅnāga, for instance, reduced the number of Pramāṇas to only two.³ Siddhasena Divākara⁴ composed many manuals in Logic, in which he sought to refute the Buddhist logicians. Nyāya, more properly Tarka, was used by propounders and propagandists of different religious philosophies,—the Buddhist, Jain and Hindu, to attack their opponents' system.

c7.88

Logic has always attracted the student-world not only in India but even in Europe of the 10th and 11th centuries. "The one stimulating and interesting morsel," writes Rashdall,⁵

c7.89

Keith, o.c., p. 482; M. M. H. P. Sastri, J. A. S. B. N. S. I., 1905, p. 177. This much, however, is certain that the Nyāya Sūtra representing earlier thoughts probably developed in the 1st century A.D., Keith, o.c., p. 483.
(1) Dutt, o.c., p. 324.
(2) I-Tsing, o.c., p. 180
(3) See Sastri, J. R. A. S. N. S. I, 1905.
(4) Siddha Sena Divākara, Nyāyāvatāra.

c7.90

"which the monastic teacher could place before the hungry intellect of the inquiring student was a morsel of Logic." Logic, however, was not studied for its own sake. The student had some higher ideal before him, and that ideal was the realisation of the truth or true knowledge. Here we find that the Indian student had something in common with his European brother. Let us see by what imperceptible steps, the student, who embarked upon the study of Logic, gained his ideal. "Yet no sooner does he approach it", continues the same author,¹ "than the student finds himself led by imperceptible steps from Logic into Physics and from Physics into Metaphysics and from Metaphysics into Theology." *Nyāya* system had no other object than this. For among other things, in the list of things to be Proved, we find such things as Soul and Emancipation.² This, in fact, was the ultimate goal of all systems of Logic that sprung after Gotama. The Jain³ manuals of Logic set forth the same aim, the goal to be realised.

c7.91

¹ Rashdall. o.c., p. 38.

c7.92

² *See* Abhyankar, *Sarvadarśana Saṁgraha*, lines 30-33, p. 237.

c7.93

³ Siddhasena Divākara, o.c., Kārikas, 27-28.

c7.94

*Nyāya* thus completely revolutionised the old curricula of the previous ages. It became an integral part of the new curriculum of the students.

c7.95

The other system, *Vaiśeṣika* was propounded by Kaṇāda.⁴ His date is not known, but he flourished in, as Dutt calls, the "Rationalistic Period."⁵ The creation and destruction of the Universe were here explained in a more or less scientific way. In later times *Nyāya* and *Vaiśeṣika* went hand in hand as *Sāṁkhya* and Yoga. The influence of this system can be measured from the fact that since its advent in the field of philosophies, it drew attention of sympathetic as well as hostile students. It became a target of attack both for the Buddhists as well as the *Vēdāntins*. All the Buddhist philosophers of the succeeding age, beginning with Nāgārjuna, even including Hiuen Tsiang,¹ thought it worth their while to refute it, while it met with the most severe and crushing criticism at the hands of Śaṅkara, the great Vēdāntin.²

c7.96

⁴ Keith thinks that Kaṇāda is a nickname; he thinks that the rise of the *Sūtras* is contemporaneous with that of the *Nyāya*. o.c., p. 483.

c7.97

⁵ Dutt, o.c., p. 310.

c7.98

¹ Hwui Li, o.c., pp. 161-164.

c7.99

² Śaṅkara, o.c., adhyāya II, pāda 2, sūtras 11-17.

c7.100

A system of philosophy, therefore, which aroused so much interest among the philosophers must have found a place in the curriculum of the then student.

c7.101

Surveying, thus, the neo-Brāhmanic systems and their contributions to the old curricula, let us now revert to the consideration of Buddhist philosophy and its contribution to the student's curriculum.

c7.102

In the opening centuries of the Christian era a revival had set in Buddhism, revival if we may use that term. For up till now the energy of the Buddhist monks was directed only to the propagation of the new faith. They were content to inculcate the obvious meaning of what Buddha said. But, in this period, in the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.D., we come across such distinguished writers as Nāgārjuna and Āryadēva, who discerned some deeper meaning in Buddha's preachings and founded or popularised a new form of Buddhism called Mahāyāna, and gave it a philosophy named Mādhyamika. The seeds of Mahāyāna may have been sown by the Mahāsaṃghika School in the 3rd century B. C., but the terms Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna gained currency in the times of Nāgārjuna, that is to say, in the later half of the 2nd and beginning of the 3rd centuries A.D.³

c7.103

³ Kimura, *Mahāyāna and Hinayāna and Origin of Mahāyāna*, p. 11.

c7.104

The causes of the inculcation of a new interpretation of Buddhism were some inherent defects in the old Buddhism, now called Hīnayāna, by the champions of new faith, perhaps, in contempt.

c7.105

These defects according to its greatest expounder—Nāgārjuna—were not only philosophical but also religious.

c7.106

Though, he says that "the aim of Buddhism is only one, the destruction of suffering and attainment of Nirvāṇa, the Salvation, is of two kinds; one is for the self, the other not only for the self but for all creatures. Therefore, though both are equally claiming Nirvāṇa as their ideal, yet there is this difference that one claims it for the self and the other for all creatures. This makes difference in Buddhism."¹ At another page we read a similar statement about the aims of Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna. There we are told that "the doctrine of Mahāyāna is full of mercy, while that of Hinayāna is without mercy. Because the doctrine of Mahāyāna is for all creatures but that of Hinayāna for the benefit of self only."² The philosophical difference according to him was that "the doctrine of Hīnayāna preaches much of impermanence, while the doctrine of Mahāyāna preaches much of Śūnyatā of existence."³ Mahāyāna threw open the doors of Salvation to all. This it did in the words of Waddell, "By developing the supernatural side of Buddhism and its objective symbolism, by rendering its salvation more accessible and universal and by substituting good words for the good deeds of the earlier Bodhisats;" also by "Mahāyāna's idealisation of Buddha and his attributes which led to the creation of metaphysical Buddhas and celestial Bodhisats, actively willing and able to save, and to the introduction of innumerable demons and deities as objects of worship, with their attendant idolatry and sacerdotalism, both of which departures Buddha had expressly condemned."⁴ Buddhism, thus, in its new guise fell in a line with other contemporary religions by the introduction of gods, goddesses and demons, though its "Buddha Theology was the greatest possible contradiction to the Agnostic Atheism."⁵ In the work so often referred to above and in his other works, for instance, Daśabhūmivibhāṣaśāstra, Nāgārjuna, besides popularising his doctrines, attacks Brahmanical and Brahmanised systems such as Sāṃkhya and Yoga.¹ Buddhism, thus resuscitated, in the sense that it was endowed with a philosophy which it formerly lacked, carried on the fight against the aforesaid systems and many others. Numerous works, refuting the Hīnayāna doctrines were written.

c7.107

¹ *Prajñāpāramitāśāstra*. Wang Bundle, Vol. V., pp. 105 ab. referred to by Kimura, o.c., p. 164.

c7.108

² 79th Fasciculi, o.c., *ibid*., Vol. 4., p. 107b. Kimura, o.c., p. 163.

c7.109

³ 69th Fasciculi. o.c., *ibid*., Vol. 4., p, 46-a.

c7.110

⁴ Waddell, *Lamaism*, pp. 11-12.

c7.111

⁵ Coomaraswami, o.c., p. 227.

c7.112

¹ Nāgārjuna's Vigrahavyāvartanī has been recently published by Tucci. See Pre-Diṅnāga Buddhist Texts on Logic from Chinese Sources, G. O. S., XLIX. In it, "Nāgārjuna explains the fundamental tenets of the Śūnyavada refuting the objections raised against him by his opponents, heretics as well as Hīnayānists."

c7.113

Āryadeva, another exponent of Mādhyamika philosophy and illustrious follower of Nāgārjuna, assailed Sāṃkhya, Vaiśeṣika and 20 other heretical schools in a work called "the explanation of Nirvāṇa by heretical and Hīnayāna Schools, mentioned in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra."² Another of his works, Śataśāstra has been recently published by Tucci. In his introduction Tucci says,³ "It is a polemical work, the scope of which is to establish the exact doctrine of the Śūnya after refuting their views. The criticism is not only directed against Vaiśeṣika and the Sāṃkhyas but also against the various Hīnayāna Schools. Together with the works of Nāgārjuna this is one of the most important texts for the study of the mādhyamika doctrine. And in fact in China and Japan it was considered as one of the fundamental authorities by the school of the "three śāstras", so called because it based its teachings upon the Mūlamādhyamikakārikā, the Dvādaśanikāyaśāstra and our têxt".

c7.114

² Su. Bundle, Vol. 5, p. 58b, of Chinese Tripitaka; Kimura, o.c., p. 24.

c7.115

³ See Tucci, o.c., p. XIV.

c7.116

Yet another doctrine was propounded in Buddhism by Maitreyanātha. While calling himself a Mahāyānist, he still disagreed from Nāgārjuna. Whereas the latter was a Nihilist out and out, believer in All-Void; the former maintained that objects had no real existence but in our mind; that only our ideas were real, everything else unreal. This doctrine is often called *Ālayavijñāna*, and popularly known as Yogācāra. Scholars were doubtful about the historicity of Maitreyanātha, but it is now proved from the colophon of *Abhisamayālaṃkāra-kārikā*, a commentary on *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā-sūtra* which is ascribed to Maitreyanātha.¹

c7.117

¹ Kimura, o.c., p, 170.

c7.118

The doctrine, however, found its complete evolution in the hands of Asaṅga. In fact, he is regarded by many scholars as the author of the doctrine. It is possible, as Waddell thinks, that the pantheistic cult of Yoga, or the ecstatic union of the individual with the Universal spirit, and practices of abstract meditation and other mystical practices were grafted on the theistic Māhāyāna by Asaṅga.² The principal works composed by him are:

c7.119

² Waddell, o.c., pp. 13-14.

c7.120

(1) *The Sapta-daśa-bhūmi śāstra*.
(2) *The Mahāyāna-sūtra-upadeśa*.
(3) *The Mahāyāna-saṃparigraha-śāstra*.

c7.121

While Buddhism was thus developing on its philosophical side, the followers of other philosophical systems were not sitting idle. Vārṣagaṇya, Īśvarakṛṣṇa and Vindhyavāsa,³ restated the Sāṃkhya doctrine, while Vātsyāyana wrote commentaries on the Nyāya Sūtras. But in opposition to the Sāṃkhya-Saptati of Īśvarakṛṣṇa, Vasubandhu composed the *Parmārtha Saptati*, and destroyed his tenets and thus re-converted King Bālāditya (Narasimhagupta) from Sāṃkhya to Buddhism. Vasubandhu lived in A.D. 420-500.⁵ Besides the work last mentioned he commented on the following Mahāyāna Sūtras :—

c7.122

³ Vindhyavāsa was perhaps the same as Īśvarakṛṣṇa, the former being called so as he stayed in the Vindhya mountains. See Takakusu, Paramārtha's Life of Vasubandhu, J. R. A. S., 1905, p. 47; also Keith, o.c., p. 488.

c7.123

⁴ *Ibid.*, p. 47.

c7.124

⁵ *Ibid.*, p. 47. Scholars are divided on Vasubandhu's date. Bhattacharyya, (*Tattvasaṅgraha*, G.O.S., XXX, foreword, p. LXVI), would like to place him in A.D., 280-360. Whereas Winternitz (*I. H., Q.*, March 1933, p, 5, n.) seems to be inclined to place him with Prof. Ui in A.D., 320-400.

c7.125

(1) The *Avataṃsaka*.

c7.126

(2) The *Nirvāṇa*. (Nanjio's, 1206, 1207, 1209.)

c7.127

(3) The *Saddharma Puṇḍarika*. (Nanjio's No. 1236, 1237.)

c7.128

(4) The *Prajñāpāramitā*. (Nanjio's No. 1231, 1168.)

c7.129

Whereas the under-mentioned were compiled by him :—

c7.130

(1) The *Vijñāna-mātra-siddhi*. (Nanjio's Nos. 1215, 1238, 1168.)

c7.131

(2) The *Mahāyānasamparigraha-vyākhyā*.

c7.132

(3) The *Nature of the Ratna Traya*.

c7.133

(4) The *Gate to the Nectar*.

c7.134

His *Abhidharma-kośa*, represents his views on Mahāyāna. Vasubandhu's contribution to Buddhist Logic, we shall speak of afterwards.

c7.135

Aṣaṅga and Vasubandhu, thus, made invaluable contribution to the development of Buddhist philosophy. They, it is possible, did all this, while residing at Nālandā. Both Āsaṅga and Vasubandhu, as Taranath tells us were great paṇḍits of Nālandā.¹ We have mentioned them here in connection with the rise of the University of Nālandā, simply because they flourished in such a period, 420-500 A.D. that it is possible that they may have been doing all their work just when the University was being recognised officially, by King Śakrāditya (Kumāragupta I) who provided new *saṅghārāmas* for the lodging of students;² and that they went to Nālandā, when it had just come into existence.

c7.136

¹ Taranath, *History of Buddhism*, p. 120.

c7.137

² Hiuen Tsiang, *Buddhist Records of the Western World*. Tr. by Beal, II., p. 168.

c7.138

These works, produced by Nāgārjuna, Āsaṅga, Vasubandhu and other lesser luminaries of Buddhism were primarily concerned with theology though tinged to no less a degree with philosophy.

c7.139

But we are told that Nālandā University was famous for the distinguished logicians that it possessed¹. Consequently, before we speak of Nālandā as a centre of pure Logic, let us pass through that transitional period, during which Logic was still mixed up with philosophy. This whole period has been admirably reviewed by Dr. Vidyabhusana, who says, "Buddhism spread as a faith about the 6th century B.C. But for a long time it remained a pure and simple religion. It was only in the 1st century A.D. that it had its first philosophy. By the time we come to the 4th century A.D. we find Buddhism expanding into four distinct philosophical Schools."² With philosophy had come Logic, but it lay dormant and played no prominent part.

c7.140

¹ See Vidyabhusana, o.c., Introduction, p. XXI.

c7.141

² See Vidyabhusana, o.c., p. 78; cf. also History of Indian Logic, p. 270.

c7.142

Let us trace, then, the rise and growth of Logic, which in 500 A.D. was completely differentiated from general philosophy.

c7.143

The real founders of the Mediaeval Logic were the Buddhists.³

c7.144

³ Ibid, Introduction, p. XIX.

c7.145

The earliest reference to Logic and an explicit one, is to be found in Milindapañha, also known as the Bhikṣusūtra whose date is fixed at about 100 A.D.⁴ Next to this work, we have to start with the works of Nāgārjuna, as we did in our survey of Buddhist Philosophy. In his Mādhyamika-kārikā, which is the first work of the Mādhyamika Philosophy, he occasionally refers to certain technicalities of Logic, such as, the fallacy of the Sādhyasama (petitio principii) in Chapter IV.⁵ Other works : Yukli-ṣastika-kārikā, Vigrahavyāvartanī-kārikā, as their very names connote, establish with the help of Logic abstruse and subtle principles of Mādhyamika Philosophy.⁶

c7.146

⁴ Ibid, p. 61; History of Indian Logic, p. 240.

c7.147

⁵ Vidyabhusana, o.c., p. 70; History of Indian Logic, p. 256.

c7.148

⁶ Nāgārjuna's Vigrahavyāvartanī has been recently published by Tucci. See Pre-Diṅnāga Buddhist Texts on Logic from Chinese Sources,

c7.149

In point of time, next to Nāgārjuna, comes Āryadeva. His works, too, show that the writer though a philosopher, was greatly influenced by Logic. His works are : *Śata-śāstra*, *Bhramapramathana-yukti-hetu-siddhi*, etc.¹

c7.150

¹ See above, p. 18. Tucci has published a *Tarkaśāstra* (*see Ibid*) and he says, "This text has been attributed by some authors of the Chinese canon to Vasubandhu", and though "there are many similarities between this text and *Vādavidhi*", "still there is no definite argument to support the view."

c7.151

We have already referred to the philosophical works of Āsaṅga and Vasubandhu. Among the works composed by these eminent Buddhists Vasubandhus' *Tarka-śāstra* was, perhaps the first regular Buddhist work on Logic. In one of his works called *Ronki* in the Chinese language, he maintained that a thesis could be proved by two propositions only, *viz.*, a proposition and a reason, and that, therefore, the necessary terms in a syllogistic inference are only three (*i.e.*, minor, major and the middle term).² Unfortunately, these works are lost, otherwise it would have been very instructive and interesting to compare the Buddhist syllogism, as formulated by Vasubandhu, with that of Aristotle. Because, as noted above, the syllogism as formulated by Vasubandhu is similar in many respects to that of Aristotle.

c7.152

² Vidyabhusana, o.c., p. 73-77; also *H. I. L.*, p. 268.

c7.153

This brings us to Diṅnāga, the first systematic writer on Buddhist Logic, "the Father of Mediaeval Logic" as Dr. Vidyabhusana calls him.³ Of his contribution to this part of learning, we shall speak in the succeeding Chapters. For, according to one view, he lived at a time when the Nālandā University was already founded;⁴ and consequently his work must be viewed as of one of the pandits of Nālandā.

c7.154

³ *Ibid.*, p. 78; *Ibid.*, p. 270.

c7.155

⁴ According to Vidyabhusana, *History of Indian Logic*, p. 273 Diṅnāga lived in 500 A.D., Keith, o.c., p. 484, says that he lived probably before 400 A.D.

c7.156

. O. S., XLIX. Tucci says, "*Vigrahavyāvartanī* has a great bearing upon the history of Indian Logic, since it embodies the criticism of Āgārjuna relating to the theory of Pramāṇas." *Ibid.*, Preface, II.

c7.157

It would be, therefore, right to say that Buddhist Logic and Philosophy wonderfully enriched the old curriculum of the early Christian era. Instead of the Vēdas, etc., the student could find something totally new in this revised curriculum. Probably it was because of this reason that students in later times flocked in great numbers to the Buddhist institutions.

c7.158

Having, thus, surveyed the landmarks in the history of Indian education, we can say that the time was quite ripe for the rise of a University. And it was just at this opportune moment that the University of Nālandā was founded. For, as we have already seen, Indian thought had then reached its culminating point. Almost all the most important and greatest religions and philosophies of India, which really formed the backbone of the ancient Indian education had been propounded and popularised. And no Indian religion and philosophy worth the name have been preached after the rise of Nālandā save perhaps the Kevalādvaita of Śaṅkara, Suddhādvaita of Vallabha and Viśiṣṭādvaita of Rāmānuja and others. Even these philosophies drew their inspiration from the Upaniṣads and the Brahma Sūtras which are, in fact, a critical survey of the then existing philosophies.

c7.159

The University of Nālandā, then, had inherited a very rich legacy from the past. The Chapters that follow will show us how it enriched and bestowed this wonderful legacy upon the future.

Linked texts (30)