Vol. I, No. 8.] History of Nydyasastra. 177 
[ENETS,| 
23. History of Ny@yasdstra from Japanese Sources.—By 
-MAHAMAHOPADHYAYA HarAPRASAD SHASTRI. 
The bibliography of Nyayasastra of the Orthodox Hindus is a 
yery short one. It consists of :— 
(1) The Sitras attributed to Gautama or Akgapada. 
(2) Bhasya attributed to Vatsyayana. 
(3) Vartika by Uddyotakara. 
(4) Tatparyatika by Vacaspati. 
(5) Parisuddhi by Udayana. 
But the bibliography of the Buddhist Nyayasastra, as known 
in China and Japan, is a long lst. It attributes the first inception 
of the Nyayasastra to Shok-mok or Mok-shok which, transliterat- 
ed into Sanskrit would be Aksapada. 
The second author who treated of Nyaya is said to be Buddha 
himself. The third is Ryuju, who is said to have preached the 
Mahayana doctrines of Buddhism with great success. His Hoh- 
ben-shin-ron is one of the polemical works against heretics. Itcon- 
tains one volume on logic. The fourth is Mirok (Maitreya). 
The fifth Muchak (Asanga), Mirok’s disciple. Muchak’s younger 
brother Seish (Vasubandhu) wrote three books on Logic—Ronki, 
Ron-shi-ki, and Ron-shin. After Vasubandhu, came Maha Din- 
naga and his disciple Sankarasvami, whose works were translated 
into Chinese, by the great Hienth Sang. Huienth Sang had two 
great disciples—Kwei-ke in China, and Doh-Soh in Japan. 
Kwei-ke’s “‘ Great commentary ” is the standard work on Nyaya in 
China and Doh-Soh is the first promulgator of Buddhist doctrines 
and Nyaya Sastra in Japan. Since then there had been many dis- 
tinguished teachers of Nyaya both in China and in Japan, and up 
to the present day Din-naga has a firm hold on the learned people 
both in China and Japan. The EHuropean system of logic is 
a very recent introduction in Japan, where Din-naga is still 
studied. 
In the two paragraphs given above, I have tried to give the 
bibliography of Brahmanic and Buddhistic logic of ancient India. 
Both attribute the invention of the science to one person, namely, 
Aksapada. ‘The only clue given about this personage’s chronology 
is that it was before Buddha. But no clue of his time can be 
found in Brahminical works. Mr. Justice Pargiter tells me that 
there is no such person as Aksapada mentioned in the Mahabha- 
rata, which was in a nascent condition about the time of Buddha’s 
birth, The Chinese attribute to him two things, namely, “ Nine 
Reasons” and ‘‘ Fourteen Fallacies,” while the Hindus attribute to 
him the entire body of Sitras divided into five Adhyayas, ten 
lectures, eighty-four topics, five hundred and twenty-eight sitras, 
seventeen hundred and ninety-six words, eight thousand three 
hundred and eighty-five letters. It maybe said, in passing, that 
the Chinese people are doubtful about the ‘ Nine-Reasons”’ being 
attributed to Akgapada. It may also be remarked that in the 
