Comparative Study of Indian Science

Author(s): Harisatya Bhattacharya
Publisher: C S Mallinath

Page 59

51
a true one. Why? Because, as the Jainas point out, there is no necessary connection between 'B's sonhood' and 'green-black complexion.' The Buddhists, however, point out that the given Hetu is not valid as it does not fulfil the third requirement, Vipakshasatta. There is no reason why a person who is not greenblack cannot be B's son. The Jainas contend that this is but a circuitous way of admitting that 'B's son-hood' is not the proper Mark here because there is no necessary connection between it and 'green-blackness.' The Naiyayikas, on the contrary, show that the given Hetu is not valid as it does not show the fifth characteristic. Is 'B's son-hood' such a fact that it leaves out of question all possibilities of a complexion other than green-black? The Naiyayikas point out that in ́order that this test may be fulfilled there must be Anaupadhika Sambandha or unconditional relationship between the Mark and the Proven. The Jaina logicians contend that Anaupadhika Sambandha means just Nischitanyathanupapatti or necessary connection which is the only characteristic of a valid Mark according to them.