Nyayavatara and Nayakarnika

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

Page 130

Nyāyāvatāra: 25.
“Whatever is adventitious, is non-eternal as a jar”, the example would involve the fallacy of contrary connection.
वैधयेणात्र दृष्टान्तदोषा न्यायविदीरिताः । साध्यसाधनयुग्मानामनिवृत्तेश्च संशयात् ॥ २५ ॥
25. Logicians have declared that fallacies of the example in the heterogeneous form arise when the absence of the major term (sādhya) or the middle term (sādhana or hetu) or both, is not shown, or when there is a doubt about them.
The fallacy of the heterogeneous example (vaidharmya-drstāntābhāsa) is of six kinds, thus:
1) Inference is invalid (major term), because it is a source of true knowledge (middle term); whatever is not invalid is not a source of true knowledge, as a dream (heterogeneous example).
Here the example involves in the heterogeneous form a defect in the major term (sādhya) for a dream is really invalid, though it has been cited as not invalid.
2) Perception is non-reflective or nirvikalpaka (major term), because it is a source of true knowledge (middle term); whatever is reflective or savikalpaka, is not a source of true knowledge, as inference (heterogeneous example).
Here the example involves in the heterogeneous form a defect in the middle term (sādhana), for inference is really a source of true knowledge, though it has been cited as not such.
3) Sound is eternal and non-eternal (major term), because it is an existence (middle term); whatever is not eternal and non-eternal is not an existence, as a jar (heterogeneous example).