Nyaya & Mimaṃsa vs Aristotle: How Budhist Logic Surpassed Aristotle’s System (western logic)

Published on Nov 24, 2025 by Compute Labs

Nyaya & Mimaṃsa vs Aristotle: How Budhist Logic Surpassed Aristotle’s System (western logic)

When we talk about “logic,” most schoolbooks begin their story in Greece  with Aristotle. But, centuries before and after Aristotle, Indian thinkers built logical systems that were more comprehensive, more psychologically accurate, and closer to the scientific method we use today.

Let’s understand this comparison with simple examples

Aristotle’s Logic: Structure Over Reality

Time: 384–322 BCE
Place: Athens, Greece

Aristotle focused on validity of argument  if the structure is correct, the conclusion must follow.

Example

All fruits have seeds.
Mango is a fruit.
 Mango has seeds.

This logic powered:

  • Mathematics proofs

  • Computer science (Boolean logic)

  • Western scientific structure

 Strength: Strong formal reasoning
 Limitation: It doesn’t test truth of the premises or errors in perception.

If someone claims:

All swans are white
 This system cannot detect false assumptions.

Indian Logic: Science of Truth, Knowledge & Error

Developed across Northern India (especially Bihar + Gangetic region)

 

Nyāya — Logic of Finding Truth

Time: 150–200 CE
Place: Bihar/Bengal region

Nyāya asks:

How do we know something is true?

It accepts 4 means of valid knowledge:

  1. Perception → You see smoke

  2. Inference → Smoke implies fire

  3. Comparison → A zebra = like a horse

  4. Testimony → Reliable expert/doctor

It uses a 5-step inference:

Step Meaning Example
Claim Fire is on the hill Pratijñā
Reason There is smoke Hetu
Rule example Smoke from fire, like in kitchen Udāharaṇa
Apply rule Hill is similar case Upanaya
Conclusion Fire exists Nigamana

Result: You get verified knowledge
not just logical shape.

 

Mīmāṁsā — Logic of Meaning & Interpretation

Time: 600–200 BCE
Place: North India

Focus:

  • How to interpret rules or sentences correctly

  • Remove contradictions through context and intention

Example for beginners
Signboard says:

No vehicles allowed near school

Mīmāṁsā checks intention:

  • A bicycle? → Vehicle → Not allowed

  • Ambulance? → Protect students → Allowed ✔
    → Apply purpose, not blind rule

Side-by-Side Comparison

Feature Aristotle Nyāya Mīmāṁsā
Time 4th century BCE 2nd century CE 6th–2nd century BCE
Main goal Structural validity Truth through evidence Correct meaning
Handles perception errors ✔ (context conflict)
Real-life science use Formal proofs Hypothesis + testing Law, grammar

 

Western system:

“Is the reasoning form valid?”

Ganges region system:

“Is the knowledge itself correct, verified, and meaningful?”

That makes Indian logic superior for discovering truth  not just winning arguments.