________________
60
NYAYA AND JAINA EPISTEMOLOGY
last two which are same essentially. Then, if we compare it with Aristotlean syllogism, we find that it corresponds to the Barbara mood of the first figure, e. g. the syllogism will take the form :
All things which have smoke have fire.
The hill has smoke.
Therefore, the hill has fire.
In this way, for parārthānumāna syllogism of tis kind is necessary but for Svarthānumāna or inference for oneself no verbal statement is required in the form of syllogism. For domestication of the truth, however, five-membered syllogism is considered both psychologically and logically necessary.
In Western logic, the syllogism is generally sated in the form of three propositions. There is a structural difference between Indian and western syllogism. But five members of Nyaya syllogism has three terms. Conclusion repeats the first proposition and the fourth member is the repetition of the second. So strictly speaking, every syllogism consists of only three members. Out of the five propositions two seem to be redundant, e. g. we may leave out either the first two or the last two which re same essentially. Then, if we compare it with Aristotlean syllogism, we find that it corresponds to the Barbara mood of the first figure, e. g. the syllogism will take the form :
All things which have smoke have fire.
The hill has smoke.
Therefor, the hill has fire.
In view of this similarity, some thinkers think that the
