Archeology of Indian Logic- the Sumerian Roots
Dr K.Loganathan, 8-5-12
As far as I am aware only TWO nations in the world have developed Logic, the Indians and the Greeks and with a fundamental difference between them. While the Greeks with Aristotle as the main exponent developed Syllogistic Logic which was superseded only recently in the West by Mathematical Logic and so forth. The Indian Logic has been essentially Hermeneutic Logic also called the Circular Logic. This applies both to the Naiyaayikam of Nyaya Sutras and the EraNaviyam ( a term that I have begun to use) of Tolkaappiyam. Here while Naiyayikam is more widespread, EraNaviyam is confined to the Tamils alone where both the Saivas and Jainas have developed it further where many interesting texts have been written most of which are still available.
Logic in Tolkaappiyam
Here it appears to me that the Logic of Tolkaappiyam with its Three Limbs of Sutra( Proposition) Etu(reason) and edutuk kaaddu( demonstration) is earlier than Nyaya as this text proposes a Five member arguments suggesting a later development.
For more detailed discussions on this see:
https://sites.google.com/site/tolkaappiyam/nyaya-sutra-and-tol
But what interests me here is the beginnings of such a logical tradition where the technical terms Sutra(Pratignja) Etu and Edutukaadu (udaraNa) define it I see the beginnings of such a Logic as part of the Moral Aphorisms of Sumerian Surruppak where the language is clearly Archaic Tamil (as a I have shown in many places) The clue to this archeology of Indian Logic is to be located in the concept of Mutumozi as defined by Tolkaappiayar and where occurs the word Etu in isolation but essentially in the logical sense.
Mutumozi: Moral Aphorism
The crucial phrase is Etu Nutaliya Mutumozi, which means a moral aphorism supported with reasons. This is available in the following definition of Mutumozi in Tolkaappiyam
1433.
nuNamaiyum curukkumam oLiyudamaiyum
menmaiyum enRu ivai viLangkat toonRik
kuRitta poruLai mudittaRku varUum
etu nutaliya mutumozi enpa
Trans.
The scholars will say that mutomozi that comes with REASON (eetu) is One that comes to establish conclusively the intended meaning with the linguistic attributes of depth brevity clarity
and in a style of language that is sanguine
Mutumozi in Suruppak
In Sumerian there are many collections of what are called proverbs but where there seems to be an absence of the distinction between Mutumuzi(Moral Aphorisms) and Pazamozi( proverbs) that we find in Tolkaappiyam, The proverbs are simply maxims of a kind where reasons are not given for the recommendations. The Mutumozi or Moral Aphorisms are different in that the recommendations are supported with reasons and hence we see the birth of Logic as such in such moral aphorisms.
In the Sumerian Suruppak’s Nari(>Ta. NeRi) we find in addition to proverbs also Mutmozi as such. Interestingly enough the Su. Nari is Ta, NeRi where even to-day it stands for such Moral Aphorisms where there are books even with that title such as Nan-NeRi of Sivaprakasar (17th cent AD) and so forth.
The following is a sample of such a Mutumozi in Surruppak (c. 3000 BC)
>>>>
61&62
uru.tus lu-ka na-ab-ta-bal-e-de ( Do not transgress people's dwelling places;)
si-du-un si-du-un si-me--si-ib-be-e-ne ( Go away! Go away! -- they will say to you)
*Ta. uuru tunjcu aaLuakam naa av-at-tu paziyidee ( When among the people of the town who want to sleep , do not continue cursing)
celiduyen! celiduyen! ciimmee ceppinee ( they will tell you : Go away! Go away!)
( bal Ta. paal: to cross over as in "paal-am" : to bridge, that which helps to cross over. Also Ta.pazi: to speak, curse etc) )
For more such examples see:
https://sites.google.com/site/sumerutamiltex/mutumozi---sum---dra
Here the line 61 records the recommendation with line 62 providing the Etu, the reason and which concept remains only implicit.
The Developmental Stages
Collecting together all these texts from Sumerian to Tolkaappiyam where the Sumerian is recognizable as Archaic Tamil, we see a continuity of development in Logical Thinking that we can see as follows.
At first we have a Moral Aphorism such as in Sururppak where a certain recommendation is not given simply as his view but rather as something that has a REASON but where this notion is only implicit but where we can insert it without changing the meaning of the whole assertion
Sometime after this the Mutumozi as such with an explicit mention of Etu , the reason probably related Tamil interrogatives Etu. Yaatu(what) etc must have evolved and which knowledge is retained in Tolkaapiyam as shown above.
Now sometime after this there must have a further development where the three basic technical terms Sutra Etu and Eduttukkaaddu were available and a matured form of Hermeneutic Logic developed in the Indian soil. This is what we find in the following Sutra of Tol.
1602.
விட்டகல் வின்றி விரிவொடு பொருந்திச்
சுட்டிய சூத்திரம் முடித்தற் பொருட்டா
ஏது நடையினும் எடுத்துக்காட்டினும்
மேவாங்கு அமைந்த மெய்நெறித்து அதுவே
viddakal vinRi virivodu poruntic
cuddiya cuuttiram mudittaR poruddaa
eetu nadaiyum eduttuk kaaddinum
meevaangku amainta meyneRittu atuvee
Meaning
For this purpose the KaaNdikai type of logical demonstration stays strictly with the intent of the sutra but at the same time expounding the TRUTH of the sutra and for which purpose it brings the Etu(Reasons) and Eduttukkaaddu (Arguments)
We find this coming to a close in the following Sutra of Nyaya where Sutra is replaced with Pratinjaa and upanaya and nigamana are added but which are also implicit in the three member Logic of Tolkaappiyam.
2.
Pratijnaa hetu-uadharana-upanaye-nigamanna- avayavaah
We should note that the Nigamanam, the final conclusion is also the Pratinjaa, the asserted only that now it is a logically well established conclusion. It is for this reason such a kind of logic is essentially circular and hermeneutical. In the understanding the pratinjaa, the sutra remains a proposal and Nigamana, the TRUTH in the understanding and all because of the demonstration that precedes