Nyayavatara and Nayakarnika

Author(s): Siddhasena Divakar, Vinayvijay, A N Upadhye
Publisher: Jain Sahitya Vikas Mandal

Page 123

Nyāyāvatāra: 18, 19.
smoke", the smoke (middle term) could not have existed if there had been no fire (major term).
12
साध्यसाधनयोर्व्याप्तिर्यत्र निश्चीयतेतराम् ।
साधर्म्येण स दृष्टान्तः संबन्धस्मरणान्मतः ॥ १८ ॥
18. Where the inseparable connection of the major term (sādhya) and the middle term (sādhana or hetu) is shown by homogeneousness (sādharmya), the example is called a homogeneous one, on account of the connection (between those terms) being recollected. An example (dṛṣṭānta) is a familiar case which reassures the inseparable connection (vyāpti) between the major term (sādhya) and the middle term (hetu). It is of two kinds: 1) homogeneous (sādharmya), and 2) heterogeneous (vaidharmya). The homogeneous example is that which reassures the connection (vyāpti) by homogeneousness (sādharmya), thus:
1) This hill is full of fire (major term):
2) because it is full of smoke (middle term); 3) just as the kitchen (homogeneous example). Here the fire and smoke abide homogeneously in the kitchen.
साध्ये निवर्तमाने तु साधनस्याप्यसंभवः ।
ख्याप्यते यत्र दृष्टान्ते वैधर्म्येणेति स स्मृतः ॥ १९ ॥
19. The heterogeneous example is that which shows that the absence of the major term (sādhya) is followed by the absence of the middle term.
The heterogeneous example reassures the connection (vyāpti) by contrariety, that is, by showing that the absence of the major term (sādhya) is attended by