Skip to main content

My Personal Journey into Vaisheshika Darshan - Third Question - Substance to Experience - Dravya

 I apologize as I start this post with a negative article on Vaiśeṣika from the online magazine The Wire. The article published in 2017 posits a question 'Were the 'Atoms' of Acharya Kanad a Product of Science or Speculative Metaphysics?' (Note: I haven't yet reached the sutras that discuss anu or atom)

The author concludes that "the positing of the idea of the atom by Kanada did not carry an explanatory burden; it was just a speculative thesis. It is outrageous to compare it with modern scientific atomic theories."

Yet the author fails to states that an inference is conclusion drawn based on observations and prior knowledge. And inference eventually leads to hypothesis which can be then proven via an experiment. So, it's the gradual evolution of observations. Here is an interesting article that discusses 'How did Einstein Think?'

Did Vaiśeṣika prove that atoms exist? No, during it's course of categorization it inferred that matter at some level becomes indivisible and natural phenomenon like fruit ripening is an example of changes at some atomic level. Kanada was a deep thinker and a theorist, some of the ideas were just categorization of natural phenomenon, like motion. To disregard and try to malign the entire philosophy by stating it as speculative is naïve by the author who claims to research in Indian philosophy. 

Also ignoring other aspects of Vaiśeṣika but just fixating on atoms exposes the prejudiced narrative that Mr. Arun Murthi is trying to push. Vaiśeṣika school accepted perception (pratyaksha) and inference (anumāna) as valid sources of knowledge, which were further augmented in Nyaya by additional methods (we will discuss about Nyaya later)

I'll give author of the article in the magazine, The Wire, S.K. Arun Murthi, a benefit of doubt that he isn't writing out of prejudice or malice but seriously believes that inference is purely speculative in nature, thereby entirely discarding it as a method to enhance knowledge. So as Paul McCartney would sing 'let it be'.

Coming back to Vaiśeṣika. In my second post we ended with listing the six Padārthas (or categories), the first of which is Dravya or substance. Instead of 'substance' some scholars use the translation as 'objects' as the nine Dravya are essentially objects of experience or entities.

Some of these are non-atomic, other atomic and rest all-pervasive. These Dravya are pṛthvī (earth), ap (water), tejas (fire), vāyu (air), ākaśa (ether), kāla (time), dik (space), ātman (self or soul) and manas (mind). 

    From here onwards I'll have to rely on the book Matter & Mind by Dr. Subhash Kak. He explains the first four dravya as the substances; pṛthivī, āpas, tejas, vāyu are respectively solidity, fluidity, light, and gaseousness. 

    Each material is composed of atoms of these four types. Solid matter also contains āpas since it will at high temperature become a liquid. The dravya ākāśa is ether, the substratum that makes it possible for fields to exist and interactions between substances to be possible. The dravya ātman is consciousness, and manas is the mind.

(Ref: Kak, Subhash. Matter and Mind: The Vaiśeṣika Sūtra of Kaṇāda (pp. 50-51). Mount Meru Publishing. Kindle Edition.)

Interesting thoughts to ponder on Dravya from Acharya Satyajit Ray's lecture on YouTube, dravya can be understood via their guna (qualities). 

  • Atman is also included as a dravya thereby making it eligible to be understood through it's guna. It helps to conceptualize it from something abstract to something (object or entity) that can be understood; thereby leading to Nishreyas or enlightenment(discussed in first post of this series). We all experience something beyond our body and Vaiśeṣika helps to categorize it and opens it for further study.
  • Including manas (mind) as an object or entity implies that it can be understood via its qualities. If it is an entity it is subject to some rules that can be understood and used for enlightenment. Same as a soul our mind also is now open to study as through its qualities we will understand our mind.
  • And as we experience solidity or gaseousness as natural phenomenon so do we experience other dravya like time, space, soul and mind. What a beautiful thought!
As Vaiśeṣika explores the metaphysical aspects of the world, we will continue our journey in the next post.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Scuba Diving 36 feet deep in Goa (Surreal but Nice!)

"Surreal but nice" that's what Hugh Grant's character managed to blurt out, mesmerized by the beauty of Julia Roberts (in the movie Notting Hill ). And this was the exact thought that was running in my mind as I was rising from a depth of over 35 feet under water in the Arabian Sea near Goa, India. I had just finished my first dive (rather second dive of my first dive) with grouper fish, tailor fish - and many more - knelt at the bottom of the ocean floor and touched a ship wreck that sunk more than sixty years ago! It was a surreal experience that has left me with a feeling of self-satisfaction as well as endless curiosity. The two feelings very rarely take a house together in my mind. Probably the last time they shacked up together was when I got an admit for my Master's from State University of New York . The feeling of gliding underwater among the fishes, water pressure trying to burst your ears drums, flying over huge boulders of rocks under sea; like an un...

How not to read History? Avoiding Sophistry, Deceitfulness, and Irrational Narratives

Introduction A few days ago I wrote on how a contemporary Dharmic mind is enslaved with various narratives meant to degrade the tradition of Dharmic spiritualism (or Hinduism) and relegate the spiritual path as non-sensical, patriarchal, and regressive (i.e. against modernity). I've three examples below that show the eagerness in contemporary conversations to push this narrative. Since free speech and vaad (Sanskrit: वाद, discussion) are two-way streets so it's well within my right to share my opinion based on sound reasoning and well-established examples. And my opinion doesn't rely on the play of words (Sanskrit: सामान्य छल, quibble)) or a mere attack on the opposition (Sanskrit: वितंडा, cavil/sophistry). Just a side note, these categorizations are based on the ancient  Nyaya philosophy composed by Akṣapāda Gautama between the 6th century BCE and the 2nd century CE. Example 1 -  वितंडा / Sophistry Buddhism and Sanatana Dharma have a long history of coexistence and assim...
The debate on Times Now Summit 2022 between Salman Khurshid, Dr. Vikram Sampath, Sai Deepak, and Pavan K Varma showed how disconnected the left, right, and the middle are from each other.  We all know these 'luminaries',  as Rahul Shivshankar, Editorial Director & Editor-in-Chief  @TimesNow introduces them.  How left and right  do not apply to Indian political viewpoints  is a matter for another time, therefore pardon my use of the western paradigm of left and right for the rest of this blog post. Times Now Debate, 2022 We all know Sai Deepak through his YouTube debate with  Asaduddin Owaisi  (Sai Deepak in fact moderated the debate) a few years back. And since then he has authored a couple of books on the historical context that surrounded the drafting of the constitution of India between 1946 to 1950. His first book on India, that is Bharat forced us to rethink colonialism and introduced an entirely distinct scholarly way to look at middle-e...