Siddhi Vinischay Tika Part 01

SR No.: 004038
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Anantviryacharya
Publisher: Bharatiya Gyanpith
Publication Year: 1944
Total Pages: 686
Language: Hindi, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari
File Size: 15 MB

Page 130

3. A CRITICAL STUDY OF SV, SVV AND SVT 1 09 occasions when het opposition is so strong that one is not able to defend his theory by fair means with the result that his simple-minded followers may reject the theory and accept the opposite and may thus be misled. Only to avoid such occasions one is to resort to unfair means.1
In ancient Buddhist logical works the position of Naiyāyikas with regard to debates seem to have been accepted. But seeing that such unfair means are not consistent with the fundamental moral tenets of Budddhism, Dharmakirti denounced the employment of unfair means in debates3.
Akalanka has also accepted this position and upholds the theory of employing fair means for right aims4. Most of the Jaina authors after Akalanka follow him with the exception of Yaśovijaya, who like old Buddhists, accepted the use of unfair means in exceptional cases. When there was no place for unfair means in debates, the difference between vāda and jalpa was reduced to nothing and as regards vitanda, Akalanka has clearly stated that it is the fallacy of vāda ; 6 so for Akalanka, there remains one type of debate, viz. vāda,? which is also termed as jalpas.
7. Jaya-parājaya : When unfair means were allowed by the Naiyāyikas and old Buddhists, such unfair means also were thought proper for the victory of one and defeat of the other, hence elaborate exposition and training weree mployed which can be seen in their respective works'.
Dharmakirti10 was the first person to criticise such unfair means and established that the vādi should not employ such words which are not tantamount to establish (asādhanangavacana) the proposition and if he does not expose the drawbacks of the opponent (adośodbhāvana), he is defeated. The prativādi is defeated if he is blaming the opponent wrongly and is not able to find the faults of the opponent. Though we see that Dharmakīrti reduced the great number of nigrahasthānas into two viz. Asādhanāngavacana and ado sodbhāvana, but he was himself entangled in various explanations of
1 Nyāyamañjari, p. 11. 2 Vide Upāyahrdaya and Tarkaśāstra. 3 Vādanyāya, p. 71. • SVV. V. 2. 5 Vada-dvātrimfatika, VIII. 6. . NV, II. 384. ? Pramanasamgraha, v. 51. 8 SV. V. 2. • NS. Ch. V. 10 Vadanyāya. v. 1.