The other variety of
Praman is Paroksa.
consists of varieties Smriti,
Anumana and Agama and is caused by
III.3. Remembrance (Samiti)
is of the form "it is that" produced by the raising up of previous
III.4. As for example,
"This is Devadatta".
Pratyabhijnana is the deduction following from
Darsana and Smriti
e.g. this is verily that, this is like that, this is different from that,
this is opposite to that etc.
III.6. As for example,
this is that Devadatta.
A Gavaya is like a
III.8. A buffalo is
different from a cow.
This is far from this.
This is a tree etc.
The knowledge of universal concomitance arising
from finding and not finding, is Uha (or
III.12. Such as, this exists when that exists and this does not exist when
that does not exist.
III.13. For example,
smoke exists only in fire and when there is no fire, there is no smoke.
Anumana (inference) is the knowledge of
Sadhya (the major term) from
Sadhna (the middle term).
Hetu (or Sadhana
or Linga) is that which is fixed in
concomitance with Sadhya.
Avinabhava (or Vyapti
i.e. universal concomitance) is the rule of co-existence or the existence
of one following the other (being related as cause and effect).
Sahabhava exists in objects co-existent or in
objects Vyapya and
exists in cases when one follows the other or in the case of cause and
This is ascertained by
Tarka (Universal concomitance).
Sadhya is what is desired and what
is Abadhita (i.e.
opposed to Pratyaksa etc.) and what is not
Siddha (already established).
The word "Asiddha"
has been used in defining Sadhya so that the
doubtful, the false and the not understood may become
III.22. The words "Ista"
and "Abadhita" have been used so that what is
not desired and what is opposed to Pratyaksa
etc. might not be (included in the definition of)
III.23. In the case
of an adversary, "Ista" is not required like "Asiddha".
The intention to explain exists only in the
Sadhya is a Dharma and sometimes it is
Dharmi in which there is the abode of the
This is also known as
Paksa (the minor term).
Dharmi is well known.
III.28. When it (Dharmi)
is established by Vikalpa, the
Sadhya consists of existence and
The omniscient exists. Horns of the ass do not
III.30. When (a
Dharmi) is established by
Pramana or by both (i.e. by Praman and
Vikalpa), it is
characterised by having the Dharma as Sadhya.
III.31. As for
example, this place has fire; sound is transient.
universal concomitance, the Sadhya is only
Dharma (and not Dharmi).
it (i.e. universal concomitance) cannot happen.
The Paksa (minor
term) is used though it is understood (from Pratyaksa)
to dispel doubts regarding the abode of Sadhya
(major term) when it is a Dharma.
III.35. As for
example, Upanaya is used to explain the Dharma
of Sadhana (the middle term, sign or mark) in
the Dharmi containing
Is there any one who does not use a
Paksa to substantiate after mentioning the
three kinds of Hetu (Middle term)?
These two only are the limbs of
Anumana (inference) and not the
III.38. That (Udaharana)
is not the cause of understanding the Sadhya
because, the aforesaid Hetu works there (as
Udaharana) also is (not necessary) for
establishing the universal concomitance (with the
Sadhya). That (universal concomitance) is established from the
opposition to its adverse (character).
A Udharana deals
only with particular but Vyapti deals with
universal concomitance. If that is not understood, the fault of
Anavastha will arise, as recourse to another
example will have to be made.
Udaharana) cannot remind the universal
concomitance, because such a reminiscence arises from the use of
Hetu of that kind (which is connected with
previously understood knowledge of the connection between smoke and fire.
III.42. This (Udaharna)
only raises a doubt in establishing Sadhya
(e.g. fire) in the Dharmi (e.g. mountain)
containing Sadhya (e.g. fire).
why should there be Upanaya (application) and
III.44. These (Upanaya
and Nigamana) are not parts of that (Anumana)
because by mentioning the Sadhya and the
Hetu in the Dharmi
containing the Sadhya, no doubt exists.
establishment e.g. fire) is got from the support of the limb of
Anumana named Hetu
(e.g. smoke) as this (Hetu e.g. smoke) is
connected with the Sadhya (e.g. fire).
III.46. These (Dristanta
or illustration) etc. may be for understanding of those who have little
knowledge and for this purpose may be discussed only in the
Sastra, but these are quite unfit to be used
in logical discussions.
The Dristanta is of
two kinds, being with Anvaya and
Commentary: It has
been mentioned that Dristanta,
Upanaya and Nigamana
are not parts of Anumana. But in the previous
aphorism it was stated that these may be discussed in the
Sastra for teaching students. So in this and
the next two aphorisms the two kinds of
and in aphorisms 50 and 51 Upanaya and
Nigamana are explained.
III.48. Where the
Sadhana is shown as always concomitant with
Sadhya, that is (an example) of
III.49. Where the
absence of Sadhana is mentioned through the
absence of Sadhya, that is (an example) of
Upanaya is the application (asserting the
existence) of the Hetu (in the
Dharmi after a knowledge of concomitance).
Nigamana is the (conclusion) of the
Anumana is of two kinds:
III.53. Svartha and
has already been defined.
arises from words touching that (Svarthanumana).
Anumana is of two kinds,
Svarthanumana and Pararthanumana. The
former variety has been defined in aphorism 14 of the third
samuddesa (Section) of this work viz. "the
knowledge of Sadhya (the major term e.g. fire)
from Sadhana or
Hetu (the middle term e.g. smoke) is
arises through words of another.
The words expressing this (Parathanumana)
is also Pararthanumana as these (words) are
the cause of that (knowledge arising in
Hetu is of two kinds:
Upalabdhi and Anupalabdhi.
Commentary: We have
already mentioned that universal concomitance can be expressed in two ways
viz. affirmatively called Anvaya e.g.
'wherever there is smoke there is fire' or negatively called
Vyatreka e.g. where there is no fire there is
no smoke.' The first kind of Hetu is known as
Upalabdhi and the second
Upalabdhi is subdivided into
Vidhi and Pratisedha.
Anupalabdhi also (is subdivided into the same
the Sadhya may be of two kinds
Vidhi and Pratisedha.
These two kinds of Sadhya also
can exist in Anupalabdhi
Hetu. It should not be said that in
Upalabdhi the Sadhya
is only in the form of Vidhi and in
Anupalabdhi, it is in the form of
Upalabdhi and Anupalabdhi
Hetus are subdivided into two kinds each:
those which prove the existence of a fact (Vidhi)
and those that prove the non-existence of a fact (Nesedha).
Hetu may also be of
Viruddha (contradictory) nature implying existence of a fact which
is incompatible with the Sadhya e.g. there is
no fire in this pitcher, because it is full of water; or it may be of
Aviruddha (non-contradictory) nature such as
argument which is not based on any fact
incompatible with the existence of Sadhya e.g.
there is fire in this hill, because there is smoke on it.
is of six kinds in Vidhi (existence of fact)
viz. Vyapya, Karya
(effect), Karana (cause),
Purvachara, Uttarachara and
Upalabdhi in Vidhi
will be explained in Aphorisms 65, 66, 67, 68, 69 and 70 respectively.
From Rasa (juice), one thing is inferred and
from that, Rupa (form) is inferred. Those who
accept this, accept also some Karana as
Hetu where there is no other
Karana to obstruct the potency of (the
Karana or cause).