Hinduism, Nyaya-Vaisesika

The Nyaya-Vaisesika schools of thought founded by Maharshi Gautama and Kanada, respectively, advocate a plural, realistic worldview. These schools focus on the reality of time as vital to their total conceptual framework. Their philosophical outlook regarding the role of time is distinctly different from that of other schools of the Indian tradition.

Time, in the context of the Nyaya-Vaisesika philosophy, has been studied in its various aspects. The question of its existence and how it is related to different ontological issues like causality, motion, and space are all highlighted in the Nyaya-Vaisesika system. This system believes in the theory of Creation. Kala, or Time, is considered as the eternal, unique, all-pervading background of the creative process. All events derive their chronological order through time. But time possesses no specific physical quality like color and thus cannot be an object of external perception. Neither is it perceivable internally, as the mind has no control over external or internal objects independently of a physical sense organ. But the question of its existence is arrived at by a series of inferences. The notions of priority (paratva) and posteriority (aparatva), of simultaneity (yaugapadya) and succession (ayaugapadya), and of quickness (ksipratva) and slowness (ciratva) constitute the grounds of inference for the existence of time.

It is a recognized fact that priority and posteriority are related with the movement of the sun. When using the term now, it is natural to refer to the motion of the sun above or below the horizon by so many degrees. But a pertinent question is raised by the Nyaya-Vaisesika philosopher: How can any object be related at all with the motion of the sun? It is not possible to establish any direct relation of inherence, as the motion of the sun [Page 661]inheres in the sun alone, and not between the object in question and the sun, which are far apart. There must be a connecting medium that joins the two and that is capable of transmitting the quality of one to the other. This fact leads to the inference of time. Regarding the question of whether time is perceived or inferred, there is a philosophical debate among the Indian realists. The main voice in denouncing the view of the Nyaya-Vaisesika is the Bhatta-Mimamsaka school. In reply to the Nyaya-Vaisesika view that time cannot be said to be perceived as it has no sensible qualities such as color and form, the Bhatta-Mimamsakas maintain that sensible qualities are not the criteria of perceptibility. However, they do acknowledge that time as such is never an object of perception, though it is always perceived as a qualification of sensible objects. It is for this reason events are perceived as slow or quick, which involves a direct reference to time. The Nyaya-Vaisesika philosophers answer that a directly perceived time would point to only a limited, divided time, which is not absolute time but conventional temporal time. Sridhara in his Nyaya-Kandali and Jayata Bhatta in his Nyaya-Manjari take up the issue in a brilliant manner. According to them, time cannot be established as objects of ordinary perception, as time does not possess any finite dimension.

...