Page:A History of Indian Philosophy Vol 1.djvu/298

 282 The Nyaya-Vaifeika Philosophy [CH. systems that we have can we trace any upholding of this ancient view}. These considerations as well as the general style of the work and the methods of discussion lead me to think that these siitras are probably the oldest that we have and in all probability are pre-Buddhistic. The Vaz"seika szUra begins with the statement that its object is to explain virtue, "dharma." This is we know the manifest duty of Mlmarpsa and we know that unlike any other system J aimini begins his .lVlimiil!lSii szttras by defining" dharma." This at first seems irrelevant to the main purpose of V aiseika, viz., the de- scription of the nature of padartha 2. He then defines dharma as that which gives prosperity and ultimate good (lliljsreyasa) and says that the Veda must be regarded as valid, since it can dictate this. He ends his book with the remarks that those injunctions ( of Vedic deeds) which are performed for ordinary human motives bestow prosperity even though their efficacy is not known to us through our ordinary experience, and in this matter the Veda must be regarded as the authority which dictates those acts 3 . The fact that the Vaiseika begins with a promise to describe dharma and after describing the nature of substances, qualities and actions and also the adN!a (unknown virtue) due to dharma (merit accruing from the performance of Vedic deeds) by which many of our unexplained experiences may be explained, ends his book by saying that those Vedic works which are not seen to produce any direct effect, will produce prosperity through adr!?ta, shows that Ka1)ada's method of explaining dharma has been by showing that physical phenomena involving substances, qualities, and actions can only be explained up to a certain extent while a good number cannot be eXplained at all except on the as- sumption of adrta (unseen virtue) produced by dharma. The } Svetasvatara ]. i. '2. 2 I rememher a verse quoted in an old commentary of the KaMPa vyiikarala, in which it is said that the description of the six categories by Kal)ada in his Vaifqika sutras, after having proposed to describe the nature of dharma, is as irrelevant as to proceed towards the sea while intending to go to the mountain IIimavat (I-limalaya). .. Dha17Ila1!1 vyiikhyt"itukiimasya !a{padt"il.thopavarlal1l11!1 Himavadgmztukizmasya siiga- ragama1Zopamam. "
 * 1 The sutra .. Tadvacalliid iilll1uJyas..va priillll/1.zyam (I. i. 3 and x. ii. 9) has been

explained by LTpaskt"ira as meaning" The Veda being the word of Isvara (God) must he regarded as valid," but since there is no mention of .. Isvara " anywhere in the text this is simply reading the latcr Nyiiya ideas into the Vaiseika. Slltra x. ii. 8 is only a repetition of VI. ii. I.