to itself, and all I can do in this place is to give the merest outline of the conclusions maintained in each. Each of the Darsanas has that triple aspect which we found at the outset in the meaning of the word religion, and it will be convenient to state the several conclusions in that order. The Nyaya then is exclusively concerned with the nature of knowledge and the instruments of knowledge, and while discussing these it sets forth a system of logic not yet surpassed by any existing system in the West. The Vaiseshika is a complement of the Nyaya, and while the latter discusses the metaphysical aspect of the universe the former works out the atomic theory and resolves the whole of the nameable world into seven categories. So, then, physically the two Nyayas advocate the atomic theory of the universe. Ontologically they believe that these atoms move in accordance with the will of an extra-cosmic personal creature called Isvara. Every being has a soul called Jiva, whose attributes are desire, intelligence, pleasure, pain, merit, demerit, etc. Knowledge arises from the union of Jiva and mind, the atomic manas. The highest happiness lies in Jiva's becoming permanently free from its attribute of misery. This freedom can be obtained by the grace of Isvara, pleased with the complete devotion of the Jiva. The Veda and the Upanishadas are recognized as authority in so far as they are the word of this Iswara.
The Sankhyas differed entirely from the Naiyayikas in that they repudiated the idea of a personal creator of the universe. They argued that if the atoms were in themselves sufficiently capable of forming themselves into the universe, the idea of a God was quite superfluous. And as to intelligence the Sankhyas maintained that it is inherent in nature. These philosophers, therefore, hold that the whole universe is evolved by slow degrees, in a natural manner, from one primordial matter called mulaprakriti, and that putusa, the principle or intelligence, is always co-ordinate with, though ever apart from mulaprakriti. Like the Naiyayikas, they believe in the multiplicity of purusas—souls—but unlike them they deny the necessity as well as the existence of an extra-cosmic God. Whence, they have earned for themselves the name of atheistic Sankhyas. They resort to the Vedas and Upanishads for support so far as it may serve their purpose, and otherwise accept in general the logic of the ton Naiyayikas. The Sankhyas place the summum bonum in "life according to nature." They endow primordial matter with three attributes—passivity, restlessness, and crossness. Prakriti continuous in endless evolution under the influence of the second of these attributes, and the purusa falsely takes the action upon himself and feels happy or miserable. When a purusa has his prakriti brought to the state of passivity by analytical knowledge (which is the meaning of the word Sankhya), he ceases to feel himself happy or miserable and remains in native peace. This is the sense in which those philosophers understand the phrase, "life according to nature."
