CBSE Book Class 11 Philosophy Buddhist Formal Logic

Buddhist Formal Logic

AnumÈna as Pramȇa

In Indian context logic, used for the theory of anumÈna, has been a part of epistemology as it is one of the modes of knowing. The epistemological thinkers in India have generally adopted a casual approach to knowledge. Knowledge is taken to be an occurrence, an outcome of a particular causal complex (kÈra‡a sÈmagrÏ) in which the casual condition acting as an instrumental cause (kÈra‡a) is known as Pramȇa. Pramȇa is the mode of knowing. In Indian epistemology there are two broad traditions, viz., NyÈya and Buddhist. Unlike the NyÈya thinkers the Buddhist thinkers do not entertain demarcation between pramȇa and its outcome (pramȇa phala = pramÈ) mainly because this demarcation is not needed in their epistemological set up. Moreover, they maintain that no rigid separation is possible between the act of cognizing and the cognition of an object. Only rough distinction can be drawn.

AnumÈna as Mode of Knowing and Reasoning

In the Buddhist epistemology there are two modes of knowing, viz., pratyak–a (perception) and anumÈna (inference). The theory of anumÈna can be regarded as logic, as a science of reasoning. It is logic in Indian context. AnumÈna is at once a mode of knowing and a way of reasoning. Thus, it has an epistemic as well as a logical aspect both of which are inseparably coalesced into one. Study of anumÈna is therefore called as Pramȇa/NyÈya „Èstra as well has Hetu vidyÈ. Nature and Structure of AnumÈna

The word anumÈna (anu+mÈna) literally means 'a knowledge which follows'. This means that inferential knowledge is necessarily a knowledge which is to be preceded by some other knowledge. In other words, anumÈna consists of two stages, one pertaining to the preceding which constitutes the causal complex and the other to the particular type of relationship known as li×ga-li×gÏ-bhÈva which implies that the succeeding one should necessarily come from the preceding. The preceding knowledge has to be in the form of li×ga. A li×ga is defined as that which is a necessary mark of something other than itself. 'Li×gin' stands for that which is necessarily marked by li×ga. Between li×ga and the li×gin there is always a gamaka-gamya-bhÈva which can roughly be regarded as the relation of entailment such that every case of the presence of li×ga is necessarily a case of the presence of li×gin and every case of absence of li×gin is the case of the absence of li×ga. This entailment relation is the basis of inference. Between any two concepts there will be gamaka-gamya-bhÈva if and only if they have avinÈbhÈva/svabhÈva pratibandha, i.e., necessary connection or existential tie. It is the presence of the necessary connection which is the basis for the passage from the one to the other. This relationship of avinÈbhÈva is also known as vyÈpti. VyÈpti, therefore, constitutes the very basis of the inferential process. It will be discussed in detail later on. The term 'hetu' is used for li×ga and the term 'sÈdhya' is used for li×gin. Either of these terms can be used as they are synonyms. Since they are synonyms meaning remains the same. But they are to be used in pairs of hetu-sÈdhya or li×ga-li×gin depending upon requirements of the situation. To avoid confusion they are used here in togetherness using a stroke. There is no definite convention for their usage but generally for vÈda (debate) hetu-sÈdhya pair is used.

In the Buddhist tradition hetu/li×ga and sÈdhya/li×gin are in the form of concepts (vikalpas). They are not objects or events or meta-physical reals as they are taken in the NyÈya tradition. This makes the Buddhist theory formal. Here entire thought process operates at the conceptual level only and therefore the Buddhist logicians could conceive of one concept being subsumed under or necessarily connected with another concept by the relation of analyticity. In this way they could develop a formal system of logic, of course, keeping ontology at the back. For them anumÈna is a sort of analytical entailment.

Please refer to the link below -CBSE Class 11 Philosophy Buddhist Formal Logic