Changes

=== उदाहरणम् ॥ Udaharana : Statement of Instance ===

=== उदाहरणम् ॥ Udaharana : Statement of Instance ===

Statement of Instance (similar or opposite examples or illustrations) is based on Pratyaksha pramana. <blockquote>साध्यसाधर्म्यात्तद्धर्मभावी दृष्टान्तः उदाहरणम् ॥३६॥ {उदाहरणलक्षणम्} तद्विपर्ययात्वा विपरीतम्॥३७॥{उदाहरणलक्षणम्} (Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.36 and 37)<ref name=":4" /></blockquote>Udaharana is that illustration (दृष्टान्तः) about a property of a familiar instance which is common or concomitant (साधर्म्याम्) with what has to be proved in Sadhya (साध्यः).<blockquote>साध्येन साधर्म्यं समानधर्मता साध्यसाधर्म्य त्कारणात्तद्धर्मभावी दृष्टान्त इति । तस्य धर्मस्तद्धर्मः । तस्य साध्यस्य । साध्यं च द्विविधं धर्मिविशिष्टो वा धर्मः शब्दस्यानित्यत्वं धर्मिविशिष्टो वा धर्मि अनित्यः शब्द इति। ... तस्य धर्मस्तद्धर्मस्तस्य भावस्तद्धर्मभावः स यस्मिन् दृष्टान्ते वर्तते स दृष्टान्तः साध्यसाधर्म्यात्तद्धर्मभावी भवति स चोदाहरणमिष्यते तच्च यदुत्पद्यते तदुत्पत्तिधर्मकम् । (Vats. Bhas. Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.36 and 37) (PDF Pages 89 and 90 of Reference<ref name=":5" />)</blockquote>Similarity to what is proved consists in the presence of the same property in both; when by reason of this similarity, the familiar instance is found to be possessed of a character of that same i.e., tha character of what is to be proved. What is to be proved is of two kinds  

Udaharana is the Statement of Instance (similar or opposite examples or illustrations) and based on Pratyaksha pramana. <blockquote>साध्यसाधर्म्यात्तद्धर्मभावी दृष्टान्तः उदाहरणम् ॥३६॥ {उदाहरणलक्षणम्} तद्विपर्ययात्वा विपरीतम्॥३७॥{उदाहरणलक्षणम्} (Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.36 and 37)<ref name=":4" /></blockquote>Udaharana is that illustration (दृष्टान्तः) about a property of a familiar instance which is common or concomitant (साधर्म्याम्) with what has to be proved in Sadhya (साध्यः).<blockquote>साध्येन साधर्म्यं समानधर्मता साध्यसाधर्म्य त्कारणात्तद्धर्मभावी दृष्टान्त इति । तस्य धर्मस्तद्धर्मः । तस्य साध्यस्य । साध्यं च द्विविधं धर्मिविशिष्टो वा धर्मः शब्दस्यानित्यत्वं धर्मिविशिष्टो वा धर्मि अनित्यः शब्द इति। ... तस्य धर्मस्तद्धर्मस्तस्य भावस्तद्धर्मभावः स यस्मिन् दृष्टान्ते वर्तते स दृष्टान्तः साध्यसाधर्म्यात्तद्धर्मभावी भवति स चोदाहरणमिष्यते तच्च यदुत्पद्यते तदुत्पत्तिधर्मकम् । (Vats. Bhas. Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.36 and 37) (PDF Pages 89 and 90 of Reference<ref name=":5" />)</blockquote>Similarity to what is proved consists in the presence of the same property in both; when by reason of this similarity, the familiar instance is found to be possessed of a character of that same i.e., tha character of what is to be proved. What is to be proved is of two kinds  

# in some cases it is the property as qualified by (belonging to) the object; as when we assert the "non-eternality of sound".

# in some cases it is the property as qualified by (belonging to) the object; as when we assert the "non-eternality of sound".

# In others it is the object as qualified by the property,as when we assert that "sound is non eternal"; and it is this latter that is referred to by the pronoun "tat". (Page No 65 to 68 Reference <ref name=":6" />).

# In others it is the object as qualified by the property,as when we assert that "sound is non eternal"; and it is this latter that is referred to by the pronoun "tat". (Page No 65 to 68 Reference <ref name=":6" />).

=== उपनयः ॥ Upanaya : Statement of Reaafirmation  ===

=== उपनयः ॥ Upanaya : Statement of Reaafirmation  ===

Statement of Minor premise (a minor summary), a Re-affirmation is made with the support of the Udaharana and is thus based on Upamana pramana.<blockquote>उदाहरणापेक्षः तथा इति उपसंहारः न तथा इति वा साध्यस्य उपनयः ॥३८॥ {उपनयलक्षणम्} (Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.38)<ref name=":4" /></blockquote>The reaffirmation is that which, depending on the Udaharana, reasserts the subject as being "so" (i.e., as possessing the character which has been found in the Udaharana, to be concomitant with the Probandum) or as being "not so" (i.e., as not possessing the character which has been found in the Udaharana, to be concomitant with the negation of the Probandum). (Page No 69 of Reference <ref name=":6" />) <blockquote>साध्यासाधर्म्ययुक्ते उदाहरणे स्थाल्यादि द्रव्यमुत्यतिधर्मकत्वमुपसंह्रियते साध्यवैदर्म्ययुक्ते पुनरुदाहरणे आत्मादि द्रव्यमनुत्पत्तिधर्मकं नित्यं दृष्टं न च तथा शब्द इति अनुत्पत्तिधर्मकत्वस्योपसंहारप्रतिषेधेन उत्पत्तिधर्मकत्वमुपसंहियते । (Vats. Bhas. Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.38) (PDF Page 91 of Reference<ref name=":5" />)</blockquote>

Upanaya is the Statement of Minor premise (a minor summary), a Re-affirmation, made with the support of the Udaharana and is thus based on Upamana pramana.<blockquote>उदाहरणापेक्षः तथा इति उपसंहारः न तथा इति वा साध्यस्य उपनयः ॥३८॥ {उपनयलक्षणम्} (Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.38)<ref name=":4" /></blockquote>The reaffirmation is that which, depending on the Udaharana, reasserts the subject as being "so" (i.e., as possessing the character which has been found in the Udaharana, to be concomitant with the Probandum) or as being "not so" (i.e., as not possessing the character which has been found in the Udaharana, to be concomitant with the negation of the Probandum). (Page No 69 of Reference <ref name=":6" />) <blockquote>साध्यासाधर्म्ययुक्ते उदाहरणे स्थाल्यादि द्रव्यमुत्यतिधर्मकत्वमुपसंह्रियते साध्यवैदर्म्ययुक्ते पुनरुदाहरणे आत्मादि द्रव्यमनुत्पत्तिधर्मकं नित्यं दृष्टं न च तथा शब्द इति अनुत्पत्तिधर्मकत्वस्योपसंहारप्रतिषेधेन उत्पत्तिधर्मकत्वमुपसंहियते । (Vats. Bhas. Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.38) (PDF Page 91 of Reference<ref name=":5" />)</blockquote>

# When the Udaharana cited is the homogenous one, which is similar to the subject, - e.g. when the Dish (plate) is cited as the example to show, that it is a product and is non-eternal, we have the reaffirmation stated in the form, 'Sound is so' i.e., 'Sound is a product'; where the characteristic of being a product is affirmed of the subject Sound.

# When the Udaharana cited is the homogenous one, which is similar to the subject, - e.g. when the Dish (plate) is cited as the example to show, that it is a product and is non-eternal, we have the reaffirmation stated in the form, 'Sound is so' i.e., 'Sound is a product'; where the characteristic of being a product is affirmed of the subject Sound.

# When the Udaharana cited is the heterogeneous one, which is dissimilar to the Subject - e.g. when the Atma is cited as an example of the substance, which not being a product, is eternal, we have the reaffirmation stated in the form, 'Sound is not so' therefore, 'Sound is a product'; where the character of being a product is reasserted of the subject Sound, through the denial of the affirmation of the character of not being produced. Thus there are two kinds of reafffirmation based on the two kinds of Udaharana. (Page No 69 Reference <ref name=":6" />).

# When the Udaharana cited is the heterogeneous one, which is dissimilar to the Subject - e.g. when the Atma is cited as an example of the substance, which not being a product, is eternal, we have the reaffirmation stated in the form, 'Sound is not so' therefore, 'Sound is a product'; where the character of being a product is reasserted of the subject Sound, through the denial of the affirmation of the character of not being produced. Thus there are two kinds of reafffirmation based on the two kinds of Udaharana. (Page No 69 Reference <ref name=":6" />).

=== निगमनम् ॥ Nigamana : Statement of Conclusion ===

=== निगमनम् ॥ Nigamana : Statement of Conclusion ===

Nigamana is the Statement of the Final Conclusion. It is the indication of the capability of the aforesaid statements to arrive at a single conclusion pertaining to the same object or purpose.<blockquote>हेत्वपदेशात्प्रतिज्ञायाः पुनर्वचनं निगमनम्॥३९॥{निगमनलक्षणम्} (Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.39)<ref name=":4" /></blockquote>Nigamana is the Statement of the Final Conclusion which is the restatement of the Pratijna on the basis of Hetu.  <blockquote>साधर्म्योक्ते वा वैधर्म्योक्ते वा यथोदाहरणमुपसंह्रियते तस्मादुत्पत्तिधर्मकत्वादनित्यः शब्द इति निगमनम् । (Vats. Bhas. Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.39) (PDF Page 92 of Reference<ref name=":5" />)</blockquote>The Hetu having been stated either per similarity or per dissimilarity, we have a recapitulation (of the entire reasoning) in accordance with the Hetu; and this recapitulation constitutes the final conclusion; which is in the form "Therefore, having the character of product, Sound is non-eternal." This has been called "Nigamana (Final Conclusion)" because it serves to connect or string together (निगमयन्ते अनेन) the Pratijna (Proposition), Hetu (Reasoning), Udaharana (Example), and the Upanaya (Reaffirmation); the word nigamyante (निगमयन्ते) being synonymous with the samarthyante (समर्थन्यते) and sambadhyante (संबध्यन्ते).

Nigamana is the Statement of the Final Conclusion. It is the indication of the capability of the aforesaid statements to arrive at a single conclusion pertaining to the same object or purpose.<blockquote>हेत्वपदेशात्प्रतिज्ञायाः पुनर्वचनं निगमनम्॥३९॥{निगमनलक्षणम्} (Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.39)<ref name=":4" /></blockquote>Nigamana is the Statement of the Final Conclusion which is the restatement of the Pratijna on the basis of Hetu.  <blockquote>साधर्म्योक्ते वा वैधर्म्योक्ते वा यथोदाहरणमुपसंह्रियते तस्मादुत्पत्तिधर्मकत्वादनित्यः शब्द इति निगमनम् । (Vats. Bhas. Nyay. Sutr. 1.1.39) (PDF Page 92 of Reference<ref name=":5" />)</blockquote>The Hetu having been stated either per similarity or per dissimilarity, we have a recapitulation (of the entire reasoning) in accordance with the Hetu; and this recapitulation constitutes the final conclusion; which is in the form "Therefore, having the character of product, Sound is non-eternal." This has been called "Nigamana (Final Conclusion)" because it serves to connect or string together (निगमयन्ते अनेन) the Pratijna (Proposition), Hetu (Reasoning), Udaharana (Example), and the Upanaya (Reaffirmation); the word nigamyante (निगमयन्ते) being synonymous with the samarthyante (समर्थन्यते) and sambadhyante (संबध्यन्ते).

It is this five-fold declaration that constitutes the highest form of reasoning because only when thus stated that the Reasoning succeeds in convincing the nonbeliever.

It is this five-fold declaration that constitutes the highest form of reasoning because only when thus stated that the Reasoning succeeds in convincing the nonbeliever.

== References ==

== References ==