Tarkashastra (तर्कशास्त्रम्)

This article needs editing. Add and improvise the content from reliable sources.

Tarkashastra (Samskrit: तर्कशास्त्रम्) refers to logic, reasoning, and discussion in general sense. Many philosophies of India speak about Atman, Karma, Punarjanma - cycle of the birth and death, Paramaatma/Brahman – the supreme power and Moksha; Tarka or Nyaya-Vaisheshika is not an exception to this. These schools propagate that; until we understand the matter/substance properly we cannot gain the knowledge about the Atman, Paramatman, without which attaining moksha is not possible. Tarka, as the Indian system of logic is also called, is a fine and precise tool for the philosopher who probes to discover the Ultimate Truth. All Indian philosophy is characterized by the application of a rigorous logic that has enabled the different metaphysical systems to stand the test of time.

Introduction

In India, the philosophy of the Upanishads was the precursor of the rationalistic metaphysics of both Maharshi Kanada and the logic of Gautama Maharshi as per many scholars. The transition from philosophy to logic and reasoning is the direct outcome of the tendency of the human mind to revert back to rationality as a reaction from an extreme faith in intuition, presupposed by philosophy. Philosophy of the Upanishads always made an appeal to intuition. No amount of reasoning, no skepticism, no logic could reveal the truth to the seeker, नैषा तर्केण मतिरापनेया। This knowledge (the knowledge of God) cannot be obtained by logic, nor can it be removed by logic (once firmly obtained through a proper preceptor) as expounded in Katha Upanishad. We see in Brhdaranyaka Upanishad Gargi is snubbed by Yajnavalkya saying that the head will fall off if you ask any more questions (do not debate further). Intuition and ecstasy are the privilege of a few only, majority of people tend towards logic and metaphysics. Nyaya and Vaiseshika systems originally attempted to bring about a harmony between the Upanishadic philosophy and extreme materialism (of Charvakas). Both Nyaya-Vaiseshika accepted reasoning as a valuable means to knowledge but differed in the relative value they attached to it; they differed from Shruti where it conflicted with reason and adhered to it where its doctrines did not clash with reason. Vedanta, on the other hand, does recognize the validity of reasoning, but favours Shruti when in conflict between Shruti and Tarka.

Defining Tarka

Knowledge is of two types:

प्रत्यक्ष ज्ञान - Pratyaksha or Direct knowledge is that through which we can directly gain an understanding of the object. This In our eyes, nose, ears, skin and tongue etc. It is of two types - External Direct Knowledge (Bahya) and Internal Direct Knowledge (Antarangika). By external it means that we get the direct knowledge of the objects around us perceived through our sense organs. By internal it means that we get the direct knowledge by the internal experience of our thoughts, emotions, perspectives, desires, likes and dislikes and such mental processes involved in our daily activities and scientific scope.

अप्रत्यक्ष ज्ञान - Apratyaksha or Indirect knowledge. There is a need for Tarka or logic in this field of knowledge because here knowledge is not obtained through direct contact with objects, events or living beings. Indirect knowledge is that knowledge which does not come from direct contact with things but gained from some other (cognitive) process. It occurs in the two following ways.

• अनुमान या तके (Inference or reasoning): In order to reach from the known to the unknown, the help of inference is taken. The process of inference is in two forms: आगमनात्मक or Inductive and निगमनात्मक or Deductive. In the first form, the unknown general is reached from the knowledge of particulars. For example, when by seeing fire with smoke at many places, we arrive at the inference that, in general, wherever there is fire there is smoke. On the other hand, in deductive knowledge inferences are made about unknown specific facts from known general principles. For example, if we know that where there is smoke there is fire, after seeing smoke rising from the top of a mountain, one can use deductive reasoning, to know that there is fire on the top of the mountain.
• साक्ष्य (Evidence): Evidence is the knowledge that is obtained from other persons, those whose experience we consider trustworthy. For example, for this, parents and gurus are considered to be the trustworthy people. Books written by scholars, contains references and hence they are considered trustworthy. Man cannot acquire knowledge in every field on the basis of his own experience. Therefore, for knowledge in these areas, he should consult the experts of these areas. For this reason religious the articles of religious books are considered authentic and in science, scientific literature is considered authentic. People thus rely on the evidence given by trustworthy scholars when they do not have the knowledge by themselves and since this is not in the direct experience of the person, it is termed as Apratyaksha or Indirect knowledge.

Thus, Tarka is founded on the अप्रत्यक्ष ज्ञान (Apratyaksha Jnana) or Indirect knowledge as a person seeking knowledge in a particular field considers that scholar

Often, when there is a debate going about a term, we see why the debaters take that term in different ways, arguing in vain. So, first of all from the point of view of tarka it is necessary that we define the problem to be considered so that there is no pointless debate. For example, different people have different meanings of the word Ishvar and any debate about it is useless and unending. Now if the meaning of the word Ishvara is defined, any further debate made around this definition renders the subject matter useful. Thus, tarka is that exploration of truth in knowledge. It discriminates between the truth and untruth in an investigation.

Etymology

Amarakosha mentions that Tarka is अध्याहारस्तर्क ऊहो विचिकित्सा तु संशयः । सन्देहद्वापरौ चाथ समौ निर्णयनिश्चयौ ॥ ( १.५.४)