________________
11
scholar had written all study Nyāya with enthusiasm and also write alse books on this system but only few can understand the secrets of this system.
Here the question arises : What is the difference between the Prācina and Navya Nyāya ? Regarding this there are so many different views of the scholars. Some say that this is the type of discourse by using in abundance the words avacchedaka, avacchinna (अवच्छेदक, अवच्छिन्न) etc. what matters most in Navya Nyāya. But this is not correct. In the definition of God in Samadhipada (समाधिपाद) of Patanjalisutras (पतंजलि सूत्र) as sa pūrveṣāmapi guruh kālenāvacchedāt. (A danufa Té: CHI TIGIT) Here also the word avaccheda is used. But this text is not even related to Navya Nyāya.
Then some other scholars say that Maharshi Gautama etc. to refute nairātmyavāda, vijñānavāda (tretag, fasllwait) of Cārvāka (alaido), tenets of Bauddha etc. established existence self by inference. The aspects of inference for other's sake which are accepted in Nyāya were described in Sutra, Bhaśya, Vārtika and Tātparya-ikā (FE, 94704, alac, dicefalcot) etc. and this should be considered to be Prācina Nyāya. And the treatises like Tattvacintāmani, its commentaries and sub-commentaries which discuss only the components of pramāns for the valid knowledge of categories should be considered to be Navya Nyāya. But such an approach also is not proper. If only due to the discussion of pramāņs some texts would be considered to be belonging to Navya Nyāya then the treaties of Jain Nyāya and Bauddha Nyāya where pramāņs are discussed also would be considered to be belonging to Navya Nyāya.
