🦚Indian Philosophy Unit 6 – Indian Philosophy: Epistemology & Pramanas

What's This All About?

• Indian philosophy has a rich tradition of epistemology, the study of knowledge and how we acquire it
• Epistemology explores questions like: What is knowledge? How do we gain knowledge? What are valid sources of knowledge?
• Indian thinkers developed sophisticated theories and methods for acquiring valid knowledge called pramanas
• The pramanas include perception, inference, comparison, testimony, postulation, and non-apprehension
• Different schools of Indian philosophy (Nyaya, Mimamsa, Buddhist, etc.) debated the nature and scope of the pramanas
  • For example, some schools accepted all six pramanas while others only accepted a subset
• The ultimate goal was to use the pramanas to gain liberating knowledge and escape the cycle of rebirth (samsara)
• Indian epistemology influenced and interacted with other branches of philosophy like metaphysics, ethics, and soteriology

Key Players and Schools

• The Nyaya school, founded by Gautama, emphasized logic and reasoning
  • They accepted four pramanas: perception, inference, comparison, and testimony
• The Mimamsa school, associated with Jaimini, focused on Vedic exegesis and ritual interpretation
  • They accepted six pramanas, adding postulation and non-apprehension to the Nyaya four
• Buddhist philosophers like Dignaga and Dharmakirti developed a sophisticated theory of perception and inference
  • They only accepted two pramanas: perception and inference
• The Samkhya school, attributed to Kapila, was a dualist tradition that influenced Yoga
• Advaita Vedanta, associated with Shankara, was a non-dualist school that saw the ultimate reality (Brahman) as identical to the individual self (Atman)
• Bhatta Mimamsa thinkers like Kumarila Bhatta defended the authority of the Vedas against Buddhist and Jain critiques
• Jain philosophers developed a theory of "many-sidedness" (anekantavada) to reconcile conflicting viewpoints

Core Concepts Explained

• Prama refers to valid knowledge, while aprama is invalid knowledge or error
• A pramana is a means or instrument of valid knowledge, like perception or inference
• Prameya is the object of knowledge, what the pramanas reveal or make known
  • This could be external objects like pots or internal states like emotions
• Pramata is the knowing subject or cognizer who gains knowledge through the pramanas
• Pratyaksha, direct perception, is considered the most basic and reliable pramana
  • It involves the sense organs coming into direct contact with an object (sannikarsha)
• Anumana, inference, allows us to gain knowledge of unperceived objects based on perceived evidence and logical reasoning
  • For example, inferring the presence of fire from the perception of smoke
• Upamana, comparison, is knowledge gained by noting similarities between things
  • A classic example is learning what a "gavaya" (wild cow) is by comparing it to a domesticated cow
• Shabda, verbal testimony, is knowledge gained from reliable speakers or authoritative texts like the Vedas
• Arthapatti, postulation, is assuming an explanation to resolve an apparent contradiction
  • For instance, postulating that Devadatta eats at night to explain his being fat despite not eating during the day
• Anupalabdhi, non-apprehension, is knowing an absence through the failure to perceive something
  • Like knowing there is no jar in a room by failing to see one

The Pramanas: How We Know Stuff

• Pratyaksha (perception) is the bedrock of knowledge, but has limitations
  • It only reveals objects in the present moment that are in contact with the senses
  • Some schools debated whether perception can reveal universal properties (samanyas) or only particular instances (svalakshanas)
• Anumana (inference) extends our knowledge beyond the limits of perception
  • It has three essential parts: the thesis (pratijna), reason (hetu), and examples (drishtanta)
  • Inference relies on universal concomitance (vyapti) between the reason and what is to be proved
    • For example, wherever there is smoke, there is fire
• Upamana (comparison) allows knowledge by noting similarities
  • It is especially useful for learning about things we haven't directly experienced through analogy
• Shabda (testimony) enables knowledge transmission from experts or reliable sources
  • Mimamsa philosophers argued extensively for the validity of the Vedas as a source of knowledge
• Arthapatti (postulation) and anupalabdhi (non-apprehension) were not accepted by all schools
  • Some saw them as reducible to or dependent on other pramanas like inference
• The schools debated issues like the number of pramanas, their scope, and relative importance
  • For instance, whether upamana is a distinct pramana or a type of inference

Debates and Disagreements

• A major debate was over the Mimamsa view that the Vedas are apaurusheya, authorless and beginningless
  • Buddhists argued the Vedas are unreliable because they contain contradictions and are composed by fallible humans
• The Nyaya school developed a theory of extrinsic validity (paratah pramanya) for beliefs
  • They held that a belief is valid until defeated by contradictory knowledge
• The Mimamsa school defended intrinsic validity (svatah pramanya)
  • They argued that beliefs are inherently valid unless undermined by defeaters
• Buddhist philosophers like Dharmakirti developed a complex theory of "exclusion" (apoha) to explain concept formation
  • They held that words refer to objects by excluding what they are not, rather than by pointing to real universals
• Another debate was over the nature of perceptual objects
  • Buddhists argued only unique, momentary particulars (svalakshanas) are real
  • Nyaya realists held that perception can reveal enduring substances (dravyas), universals (samanyas), and relations
• The Jain theory of "many-sidedness" (anekantavada) aimed to reconcile the partial truths of different standpoints
  • They used the parable of blind men feeling different parts of an elephant to illustrate this perspectivism

Real-World Applications

• The pramanas provide a toolbox for acquiring knowledge in various domains
  • Pratyaksha (perception) is crucial for empirical investigation in fields like medicine or astronomy
  • Anumana (inference) is the basis for logical reasoning and scientific theorizing
• The emphasis on debating and defending one's views promoted critical thinking and intellectual rigor
  • This spirit of debate and dialogue continues to influence Indian intellectual life
• Theories of concept formation like apoha have parallels in modern psychology and cognitive science
  • They offer insights into how we categorize and understand the world
• The Jain theory of anekantavada has inspired modern thinkers in their efforts to reconcile diverse religious and philosophical perspectives
  • It provides a model for intellectual pluralism and tolerance
• Ideas from Indian epistemology have been applied in fields like comparative philosophy and cross-cultural studies
  • They offer a valuable non-Western perspective on perennial questions about knowledge and truth

Mind-Bending Questions

• Can we ever achieve certain knowledge, or is doubt always possible?
  • The Buddhist thinker Nagarjuna argued all knowledge claims are ultimately groundless and lead to infinite regress
• Are the pramanas fundamentally different or can they be reduced to one underlying principle?
  • Some thinkers have seen perception as the basis for all knowledge, with other pramanas like inference and testimony reducible to it
• How do we account for knowledge of abstract entities like numbers and universals?
  • Realists argue such objects are mind-independent and can be known, while nominalists deny their existence
• Is language a pramana in itself or merely a vehicle for transmitting knowledge?
  • The Mimamsa school saw the Vedas as an irreducible source of knowledge, while others saw testimony as derivative
• Can contradictory standpoints be reconciled, as Jain philosophers argued, or are some views simply incompatible?
  • The law of non-contradiction would seem to prohibit accepting mutually exclusive claims
• Are the pramanas culture-relative or universal?
  • While the pramana theory was developed in a specifically Indian context, thinkers have drawn cross-cultural parallels

Further Exploration

• For an accessible overview of Indian epistemology, see B.K. Matilal's "Perception: An Essay on Classical Indian Theories of Knowledge"
• For a comprehensive treatment of the pramanas in the Nyaya tradition, see Bimal Krishna Matilal's "The Character of Logic in India"
• For the Buddhist epistemological tradition, see Dignaga's "Collection on the Sources for the Knowledge of Validity" and Dharmakirti's "Commentary on Validity"
• On the Mimamsa school, see Shabara's "Mimamsa Sutra Bhashya" and Kumarila Bhatta's "Slokavarttika"
• For Jain perspectivism, see Yasovijaya's "Jnanabindu Prakarana" and Mallisena's "Syadvadamanjari"
• To explore Indian epistemology in a comparative context, see Jonardon Ganeri's "Semantic Powers: Meaning and the Means of Knowing in Classical Indian Philosophy"
• For connections to modern thought, see Mark Siderits' "Indian Philosophy as a Means to Knowledge" and Bina Gupta's "An Introduction to Indian Philosophy: Perspectives on Reality, Knowledge, and Freedom"