Studies in Indian Philosophy

SR No.: 001580
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Dalsukh Malvania, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1981
Total Pages: 352
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Philosophy, Epistemology, & Religion
File Size: 21 MB

Page 96

Negation: Some Indian theories
relation of contact. So the Nyaya technique for drawing the distinction between different negations is in terms of the mode of presentation of the negatum.
69
Now let us discuss the question whether the counterpositiveness which is a self-linking relation is to be identified with the counterpositive or something else.
First of all, it cannot be identified with the limitor or the limitors of the counterpositiveness. If it is identified with its limitor, then there cannot be any distinction between the entity limited and the entity limitor. Since a limitor is a mode of presentation of an entity limited, there is a funda-mental epistemic distinction between these two entities. Hence the counterpositiveness which is limited by a limitor cannot be identified with its limitor.
Secondly, the counterpositiveness cannot be identified with the negation of t which is the seccnd term of the relation called 'counterpositiveness'. The relation of t to the negation of t would be the converse of the relation of counterpositiveness. In the case of the converse of the relation of counterpositiveness the first term is the negation of t and the second term is t. Moreover, the converse of the relation of counterpositiveness is said to be a self-linking relation. So it is to be identified with a term. If both the relation of counterpositiveness and its converse are identified with the negation of t, then we ignore the direction of a relation, which is very important for the Nyaya concept of relation. So this move is not tenable. On the same ground the rela tion of counterpositiveness cannot be identified with both the negation of t and t.
Thirdly, if the counterpositiveness which relates the negation of t to t is considered as a separate entity, then we require another relation to relate counterpositiveness to ton the one hand, and to relate counterpositiveness to negation of t on the other. In order to avoid all these problems it is claimed that the counterpositiveness is to be identified with