Hetvabhasa (हेत्वाभासः)

From Dharmawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
This article needs appropriate citations and references.

Improvise this article by introducing references to reliable sources.

They are of five types:

  1. Savyabhichara (सव्यभिचारः) ॥ Inconclusive hetvabhasa is that which is tainted by indecision. Start from Nidarshana till vriddhiranitya cheti. Full english. अनैकान्तिकः सव्यभिचारः ॥५॥ {सव्यभिचारलक्षणम्}
  2. Viruddha (विरुद्धः) ॥ Contradictory hetvabhasa is when a certain doctrine after having been accepted, the hetu that is contradictory to it is called Viruddha. सिद्धान्तं अभ्युपेत्य तद्विरोधी विरुद्धः ॥६॥ {विरुद्धलक्षणम्} Full english only
  3. Prakaranasama (प्रकरणसमः) ॥ Neutralized hetu is that which is put forward to establish a definite conclusion but only gives rise to suspense in regard to the point at issue. यस्मात्प्रकरणचिन्ता सः निर्णयार्थमपदिष्टः प्रकरणसमः ॥७॥ {प्रकरणसमलक्षणम्} Prajnapanam ..... till end of bhshya.
  4. Sadhyasama (साध्यसमः) ॥ Unknown hetu is that which is yet to be proved and is not different from the object. साध्याविशिष्टः साध्यत्वात्साध्यसमः ॥८॥ {साध्यसमलक्षणम्} Full bhashya.
  5. Kalaateeta (कालातीतः) ॥ Mis-timed or delayed hetu. कालात्ययापदिष्टः कालातीतः ॥ ९॥ {कालातीतलक्षणम्} start from nidarshana. till samyoga nimitta bhavati.

Five-types of Pseudo-reasoning.

Since there can be fire without smoke (as in a red-hot iron ring), if somebody wants to infer presence of smoke in the kitchen on the basis of the presence of fire there, his evidence would be pseudo-evidence called the "deviating." Where the evidence (say a pool of water) is usually the sign for the absence of fire, rather than its presence, it is called the contradictory. An evidence-reason must itself be established or proven to exist, if it has to establish something else. Hence, an "unestablished" evidence-reason is a pseudo-evidence or a pseudo-sign. A purported evidence-reason may be countered by a purported counter-evidence showing the opposite possibility. This will be a case of the "counter-balanced." An "untimely" is one where the thesis itself precludes the possibility of adducing some sign as being the evidence-reason by virtue of its incompatibility with the thesis in question. The "untimely" is so-called because as soon as the thesis is stated, the evidence will no longer be an evidence.[1]


  1. Bimal Krishna Matilal, Jonardon Ganeri & Heeraman Tiwari (1998), The Character of Logic in India, SUNY Press, p. 31.