Page:A History of Indian Philosophy Vol 1.djvu/378

3 62 The Nyiiya - V aiseika Philosophy [CH. Prasastapada counts the fallacies of the example. Diimaga also counted fallacies of example (e.g. sound is eternal, because it is incorporeal, that which is incorporeal is eternal as the atoms; but atoms are not incorporeal) and Dharmakjrtti counted also the fallacies of the paka (minor); but Nyaya rightly considers that the fallacies of the middle if avoided will completely safeguard inference and that these are mere repetitions. Chala means the intentional misinterpretation of the opponent's arguments for the purpose of defeating him. J ati consists in the drawing of contra- dictory conclusions, the rai£ing of false issues or the like with the deliberate intention of defeating an opponent. Nigrahasthana means the exposure of the opponent's argument as involving self-contradiction, inconsistency or the like, by which his defeat is conclusively proved before the people to the glory of the victorious opponent. As to the utility of the description of so many debating tricks by which an opponent might be defeated in a metaphysical work, the aim of which ought to be to direct the ways that lead to emancipation, it is said by J ayanta in his ..lVyayamaiijari that these had to be resorted to as a protective measure against arrogant disputants who often tried to humiliate a teacher before his pupils. If the teacher could not silence the opponent, the faith of the pupils in him would be shaken and great disorder would follow, and it was therefore deemed necessary that he who was plodding onward for the attainment of mok!?a should acquire these devices for the protection of his own faith and that of his pupils. A know- ledge of these has therefore been enjoined in the Nya)'a szUra as being necessary for the attainment of salvation 1. The doctrine of Soul. Dhurtta Carvakas denied the existence of soul and regarded consciousness and life as products of bodily changes; there were other Carvakas called Susikita Carvakas who admitted the existence of soul but thought that it was destroyed at death. The Buddhists also denied the existence of any permanent self. The naiyayikas ascertained all the categories of metaphysics mainly by such inference as was corroborated by experience. They argued that since consciousness, pleasures, pains, willing, etc. could not belong to our body or the senses, there must be 1 See Ny'-iyamaiijari, pp. 86-659, and Tiirkikarak.[ii of Varadaraja and Ni!- kal!akll of allinatha, pro I 5 ff.