Nyayavatara

Author(s): Satish Chandra Vidyabhushan
Publisher: ZZZ Unknown

Page 29

NYAYAVATARA.
21
(3) The uncertain (anailcántila) such as: "all things are momentary, because they aro existent." Here the reason alleged is uncertain, because 'existenco' may or may not be a proof of momentariness, for, an opponent might equally argue : "all things are eternal, because they are existent."
साधम्म्यणात्र दृष्टान्तदोषा न्यायविदीरिताः । अपलक्षणहेतूत्थाः साध्यादिविकलादयः ॥२४॥
24. Logicians have declared that fallacies of the example (drstântâbhâsa) in the homogeneous form, arise here from an imperfect middle term or from a defect in the major term, etc.
Fallacies of the homogeneous example (sâdharmya drstântabhásct) arise from a dofect in the major term (skidhyu) or middle term (hetu) or both, or from doubt abont them, thus :
(1) Inferenco is invalid (major term), because it is a source of knowledge (midale term), like perception (homogeneous examplo),
Here the example involves a defect in the major term (sadhya), for perception is not invalid.
(2) Perception is invalid (major term), because it is a source of truc lenowledge (middle term), like a dream (homogeneous example).
Here the example involves 3 defect in the middle term (betu), for a dream is not a source of true knowledge.
(3) The omniscient being is not existent (major term), because he is not apprehended by the senses (middle term), like a jar (homogeneous example).
Here the example involves a defect in both the major and middle terms (sidhya and lietu), for the jar is both existent and apprehended by the senses.
(4) This person is devoid of passions (major term), because he is mortal (middle term), like the man in the street (homogencois example),
Ilere the example involves doubt as to the validity of the