Quelques Axiomes Du Vaisesika - Book Summary

Here is a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Jain text, "Quelques Axiomes Du Vaisesika" by Johannes Bronkhorst:

This article, "Quelques Axiomes Du Vaisesika" by Johannes Bronkhorst, focuses on identifying and explaining four fundamental axiomatic ideas that underpin the Vaisheshika school of Indian philosophy. The author emphasizes that these axioms do not allow for a purely deductive derivation of the entire system, but rather strongly shape its details and development.

The classical exposition of Vaisheshika is attributed to Prasastapada's Padarthadharmasangraha (Pdhs), written around the sixth century CE. This text builds upon earlier, less understood developments, primarily represented by the Vaiseșika Sūtra, a collection of concise nominal phrases that are difficult to interpret due to their brevity and lack of textual homogeneity.

Bronkhorst outlines four key axioms of Vaisheshika:

The Axiom of Complete Enumeration: The Vaisheshika system offers an exhaustive classification of all existing things into six fundamental categories: substance (dravya), quality (guna), movement (karman), universal (sāmanyā), particularity (viśeṣa), and inherence (samavāya). Each category, except inherence (which has only one instance), is further subdivided. For example, there are nine types of substances (earth, water, fire, air, ether, time, space, soul, and internal sense) and twenty-four types of qualities.
The Axiom of the Independence of Wholes: This axiom addresses the common observation that objects are composed of parts. The Vaisheshika asserts that composite wholes are distinct entities, separate from their constituent parts. For instance, a pot is a different entity from its two halves. These wholes and their parts are linked by inherence. This axiom challenges the system's first axiom (complete enumeration) because it requires classifying these composite wholes. The Padarthadharmasangraha addresses this by stating that composite bodies are classified according to their primary constituent substance (e.g., the human body is considered "earth"). Elements within the body that are not earth, such as water or fire, are explained as being in contact with the body, not inhering in it. The concept of "variegated" (citra) color for a multi-colored pot exemplifies this axiom, where the whole pot has a distinct color from its parts.
The Axiom of Correspondence between Words and Things: This axiom posits a direct relationship between words and existing entities. The very existence of names for things implies the existence of those things and the perception of them by beings with superior faculties, as exemplified by Sanskrit. In the Pdhs, this is expressed by stating that all six categories are namable and knowable. The existence of entities is seen as the cause for the use of certain words. For example, the quality of "number" causes the use of words like "one" or "two." Similarly, substance "time" explains terms referring to durations like "day" or "year." The argument can also run in reverse: the notion of "here" leads to inferring the existence of inherence. This correspondence is not perfect, as not all Sanskrit words correspond to existing entities (e.g., "also"). The system strives for an ideal language where each word maps to a real entity, often resorting to the concept of universals to explain the commonality in our understanding of multiple instances of a word (e.g., the universal "pot" justifies the use of the word "pot" for any pot). Exceptions like single substances (ether, time, space) or abstract categories (universal, particularity, inherence) require special explanations for their namability. Synonyms and cases where multiple words refer to a single entity (like "enter" and "exit" for a single movement) are also addressed to maintain the principle of correspondence.
The Axiom of Spatial and Temporal Atomism:
- Spatial Atomism: All substances, except the omnipresent ones (ether, time, space, and souls), are composed of indivisible atoms. Atoms of earth, water, fire, and air combine only with atoms of the same type. All atoms are inherently invisible; visibility arises from certain combinations.
- Temporal Atomism: Vaisheshika does not hold that all existing things are momentary, unlike many Buddhists. However, the concept of the "moment" (kāla) as the minimal unit of time is significant. This temporal atomism is evident in the analysis of mental processes and qualities like "distance" (paratva) and "proximity" (aparatva), which are described as unfolding sequentially in discrete moments. The duration of a moment is estimated to be around 0.05 seconds.

Bronkhorst concludes by suggesting that these four axioms are deeply ingrained in the Vaisheshika system and likely present from its early stages, as evidenced in the Vaiseșika Sūtra. He posits that Vaisheshika may have emerged as a reaction to the highly systematized Buddhist Sarvāstivāda school, particularly its doctrines regarding the exhaustive enumeration of dharmas, the rejection of composite entities, the nominal nature of composite objects, and its strong emphasis on momentariness. The Vaisheshika axioms can be seen as a Brahmanical counter-response, adopting or reacting against these Buddhist ideas. While Vaisheshika is a Brahmanical system, Bronkhorst notes potential historical links with Jainism.