Vol. I, No. 8.] History of NyayaSastra. 179 
EVES. | 
Transitoriness, of Void, of Individuality, and so on. Savara, the 
Bhasyakara of Mimansa, was liberal enough to speak of refuting 
the Mahayanic theory that the whole is merely a collection of 
parts and not in any way different from them. But Vatsayana is 
not so liberal. He would not name the Buddhists. There is 
another Vatsyayana, however, who flourished about this time. He 
may be identical with or a relation of, or at least, have be- 
longed to the same gotra with the Nyaya Bhasyakara,” on the 
supposition that families and clans rise into importance under one 
political circumstance and then disappear from history, both Vat- 
sayanas may be said to have belonged to the same epoch. That 
Vatsyayana is the celebrated writer on Hratics. He mentions some 
scandals about the Satavahanas who flourished by the middle of 
the 2nd Century A.D. And the geographical information gleaned 
from his book cannot refer to a period later than the rise of the 
Gupta family. 
We glean one historical information from the Brahmanical 
sources, namely, that Din-naga severely criticised the Bhasyakara 
Vatsyayana, and that the Vartikakara, who comments upon the 
Bhasya, defends Vatsyayana’s work against Din-naga. 
The modern Hindu idea is that the Buddhists believed in two 
of the pramanas only, namely, Pratyaksa and anumana, 7.e., per- 
ception and inference. But this is not a fact, so far as early 
Buddhism and even early Mahayanism are concerned. For we know 
distinctly from Chinese and Japanese sources that Analogy and 
Authority were great polemical instruments in the hands of the 
early Buddhists, 7z.e., that all early Buddhists from Buddha to 
Vasubandhu were indebted to Aksapada for their pramaras or 
polemical instruments of right knowledge. Maitreya discarded 
Analogy, and Din-naga discarded Authority, and made Nyaya pure 
logic, in the English sense of the term......_. 
The followers of Aksapada are sometimes called Yogins, and 
Yaugas, and the Buddhist tradition is that Mirock (Maitreya) in- 
troduced Yoga in the system of discriminating true knowledge 
from false (7.e., the system of Aksapadda), some form of Yoga. 
And we find that at the second lecture, fourth chapter, of the Nyaya 
Sitras, there is a long section devoted to Yoga, and that Yoga is of 
a peculiar character. How the section on Yoga was adopted into 
the Nyayasastra, it is is difficult to say, because Yoga does not be- 
long to the sixteen topics which Aksapada, in the first stitra, pro- 
mises to expatiate upon. Whether properly or improperly intro- 
duced, it forms a part of Hindu Nyayasastra and also of Buddhist 
Nyayaésastra. The Buddhists say that Mirok introduced it, but 
the Hindus cannot say who introduced it. 
I reserve the result of my examination of the Nyayasitras 
for the second instalment of this paper; and I conclude this in- 
stalment with the remark that though Din-naga and the Buddhist 
system of Nyayasastra is almost completely lost in India, so 
much so, that the discovery of a Tibetan translation of one of Din- 
naga’s works, was regarded by scholars as a matter of congratula- 
tion, it is still studied and commented upon in China, Japan, Corea, 
