________________
CLASSIFICATION OF INFERENCE
297
the middle term. This knowledge is based on the vyāpti or the universal relation between the presence of the middle and the presence of the major term. When one infers fire from smoke he depends on the knowledge of vyāpti, not between the absence of fire and the absence of smoke, but between the presence of smoke and the presence of fire. There being no such thing as vyatirekı inference, we cannot admit the possibility of an vaya-vyatireki inference wbich is but a synthesis of the anvayi and vyatireki forms of inference. ? According to the Naiyāyikas, however, arthāpattı is not a separate method. of knowledge, but a form of inference. We shall have to consider this question more fully hereafter.
4. The logical form of inference All the systems of Indian philosophy agree in holding that the syllogism represents the typical form of an inferential reasoning In inference we arrive at a truth through the medium of some other truths Like the conclusion of a syllogism, inferential knowledge is a deduction from certain propositions. There is however some controversy among the different systems as to the number of the constituent parts or propositions entering into an inference (avayava).
According to some old Naiyāyıkas, there are ten members or constituent parts of au inference. These are (1) jijñāsā or the desire to know the truth, (2) samśaya or doubt about the real nature of a thing, (3) śakyaprāpti or the capacity of the pramāṇas to lead to true knowledge, (4) prayojana or the purpose of making an inference, (5) samsaya-vyudāsa or the removal of all doubts about the truth of an inference, (6) pratijñā or the first proposition, (7) hetu or the reason, (8) udāharana or the example, (9) upanaya or the application of the example, and (10) nigamana or the final conclusion. ?
1 Vide VP , Ch II 9 NB, 1.1 32.
38-(1117B)
