Vol. VI, No. 6.J The Pramdnas of Hindu Logic. 291 



[N.S.] 



a third way. The interpretation of Varadardja in his Tdrki- 

 karaksd and of the nzo-naiydyikas generally (e.g. , of Vigvandtha 

 and Rddhdmohana) who identify purvavat with kevaldnvayi, 

 gesavat with kevala-vyatireki, and sdmdnyato-drista with anvaya- 

 vyatireki, is due to their lack of the historical sense, and is 

 manifestly absurd. First, these are neither the derivative nor 

 the ordinary meanings of these words, and we have no right to 

 suppose that Gotama used them in these technical senses. If he 

 did, he must have indicated it in some part of his work. 

 Secondly, if such a neat interpretation were available, Vdtsd- 

 yana and Gaudapdda would not have omitted to notice it. 

 Thirdly, Gotama did not probably know what is called vydpti, 

 and without it there could be no division of anumdnas into 

 kevaldnvayi, Kevalavyatireki and anvaya-vyatireki. The whole 

 of modern Hindu Deductive Logic hinges on the doctrine of 

 vydpti, and it would be startling to many to be told that the 

 celebrated founder of Indian Logic did not know what it was. 

 Still such seems to be the truth. 



Vydpti is the relation that exists between the middle term 

 (hetu, reason) and the major term (called sddhya by the neo- 

 logicians) of a syllogism, justifying the inference. It corres- 

 ponds to the universal major (called the sumption or ground 

 proposition) of the perfect figure in Aristotelian Logic. 



The word vydpti is a very old one. It occurs in the Vedas 

 and the Purdnas. Its cognates such as vydpyamdna, vydptimat, 

 etc. f are found in such ancient treatises as the sutras of Pdnini 



* • 



and the code of Manu. But in none of these cases does it 



bear the technical sense. In Gotama' s Nyaya sutras the word 



does not occur at all. The word vydpti is found in the sdnkhya 



sutras (v. 29), and in a discussion about its nature, the opinion 



of Pancaqikha has been cited (sdnkhya, sutras v. 32). But it ifi 



notorious that the antiquity of the sdnkhya sutras is extremely 



loubtful, 



The word pratibandha ( ^f?r*a| ) might have been an older 



term for vydpti in its technical sense. The sdnkhya sutras and 

 the Nydyamanjari, besides other books, contain the word 

 pratibandha. 



The detailed treatment of the subject of jdti ( ^rrf^T ) tends 

 to indicate that the true theory of the syllogism based on 

 vydpti was unknown to the author of tl nydya-sutras. The 

 masters of the neo-logical school have amplified every logical 

 topic treated in the original sutras, but they have completely 

 ignored the subject of jdti. This was so, because the treat- 

 ment of jdti was found to be superfluous after the discovery oi 



the vydpti. 



It may be said that the chapter on jati w. not written 

 by Gotama, and that he had simply incorporated into his 



sutras an already existing chapter of some older logician, who 

 was unacquainted with the vydpti. Quite p<» ihle. But it 



