________________
zelens. ] Nyāya-Kusumānjali reason proving the negation of what is to be established.
Paksha is the place where the thing to be proved exists, as a “mountain", when smokiness is the reason, Sapaksha is the place where the Sadhana and the Sadhya are known to abide in some already familiar instance as a “ kitchen” in the same inforence. Vipaksha embraces all other places where the very possibility of the existence of the Sadhya is counter-indicated as a “ lake" in the same inference. From the following examples it will be clear that even a false Hetu may satisfy the three or the five characteristics put forth by other logicians, whereas a true Hetu may fail to do so.
The child in the embryonic condition, of X must be of a dark complexion because it is a child of X as is the case with other children of X. In this inference, the lletu, viz., that it is a child of X is present in the Paksha ( the child in the embry. onic condition of X'), and in the Sapaksha ( children of X ), and is absent in the Vipaksha (the children of others ). Thus it is clear that though this Hetu obviously satisfies the conditions laid down by the Buddhist logicians, it is not the right Hetu, for, there is no inseparable connection between a child in the embryonic condition of X and dark complexion; it is not the order of nature that whoever is a child of X must be dark-complexioned. The same considerations apply to the view of the Naiyayikas, for, the
127
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
