Hetvabhas Savyabhichar

This document is the beginning of a commentary on a Jain text titled "Hetvabhas Savyabhichar" (हेत्वाभास सव्यभिचार), written by Gangadhar Pandit. The title itself indicates that the text deals with "fallacious reasonings" or "fallacies of inference," specifically focusing on Savyabhichara, which is a type of logical fallacy.

Here's a breakdown of the content, page by page, based on the provided text:

• Page 1:

  • Contains the book title: "Hetvabhas Savyabhichar" (हेत्वाभास सव्यभिचार).
  • Mentions the author: Gangadhar Pandit (गंगाधर पंडित).
  • Identifies the publisher: Gangadhar Pandit (गंगाधर पंडित).
  • Provides a catalog link to jainqq.org.
  • Includes a disclaimer: "JAIN EDUCATION INTERNATIONAL FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY."
  • Starts with invocations: "Shri Mahavir Jan Aradhana Kendra," "Acharya Shri Kalassagarsun Gyarmandir."
  • The title "Hetvabhas Savyabhichar" is also mentioned in Devanagari script.
  • The work is dedicated to "Shrimad Mahrajadhiraj Goswami Tilak Shri 108 Shri Govardhanlal" and refers to a larger work by Gangadhar Pandit titled "Govardhan Charan Kalpa Manjari."
  • Mentions printing details: "Shri Sudarshan Yantralaya" and "Kavikivar Ravidi Rana Sangodhya."

• Page 2:

  • Continues with the invocations and affiliations of Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra and Acharya Shri Kallassagarsuri Gyanmandir.
  • Reiterates the disclaimer: "For Private and Personal use only."

• Page 3:

  • Starts with "Shri Ganeshaya Namah" (श्रीगणेशायनमः) and "Ath Chintamani" (अथ चिंतामणिः), suggesting this is the commentary part.
  • The text immediately delves into the technicalities of logic. It defines Savyabhichara (सव्यभिचार) as having three types: Sadharana (साधारण), Asadharana (असाधारण), and Anupasamhari (अनुपसंहारी).
  • It states that a fallacy of inference (Hetvabhas) is that which is presented as a reason but leads to doubt about the conclusion.
  • It discusses the conditions for a logical argument and the characteristics of different fallacies, emphasizing that a fallacy is that which presents two possibilities for the conclusion and can lead to doubt.
  • It briefly mentions examples like "This pot is impermanent because of its divisibility" (Ayum ghat etattvatva), suggesting a discussion of specific fallacious arguments.
  • It argues against certain definitions of fallacies, highlighting why they are inadequate.

• Page 4:

  • Continues the debate on the precise definitions of logical fallacies.
  • It discusses the concept of "pervasion" (vyapti) and how its misapprehension leads to fallacies.
  • It refutes other attempts to define fallacies, such as "being present in the uncontradicted" (anushangika) or "being present in the contrary of the opposite" (prativyakta).
  • It mentions that the correct definition must avoid over-pervasion (ativyapti) and under-pervasion (avyapti).

• Page 5:

  • The author proposes a refined definition: "having the characteristic of presenting both sides of the proposition" (ubhayakoti-upasthapakata-avacchedaka-rupavatvam).
  • It asserts that this refined definition encompasses the essence of the fallacies and explains why each type is problematic.
  • It discusses the concept of "commonality" (sadharanya) and "uncommonality" (asadharanya).
  • It engages with different viewpoints on the classification and definition of fallacies, highlighting the subtleties involved.

• Page 6:

  • Continues the discussion on the definitions and classifications of logical fallacies, specifically addressing Sadharanya (common) and Viruddha (contradictory) fallacies.
  • It reiterates that the key lies in understanding what makes a reasoning fallacious, often related to its relationship with the subject of the inference.
  • It mentions that Anupasamhari (unlimited) is a specific type of fallacy.
  • The page concludes the commentary on Chintamani, likely a section within the larger work.

• Page 7:

  • Introduces a new section titled "Shiromanih" (शिरोमणिः), suggesting a further elaboration or another part of the commentary.
  • It discusses the logical necessity of presenting general characteristics before specific classifications.
  • It reiterates the main fallacy discussed: Savyabhichara.
  • It explains that Savyabhichara is understood as a fallacy that generates doubt about the conclusion by presenting two possibilities.
  • It delves into the nuances of how a reason can be fallacious, impacting the establishment of the truth or falsehood of the inferred proposition.

• Page 8:

  • Continues the detailed analysis of logical fallacies.
  • It discusses the role of "knowledge" (jnana) and "doubt" (samsaya) in forming inferences and identifying fallacies.
  • It engages with complex logical scenarios, distinguishing between different types of knowledge and their impact on inferential processes.

• Page 9:

  • The discussion continues on the precise definitions and scope of various logical fallacies, including how to differentiate them and avoid over-application or under-application of the definitions.
  • It critiques definitions that might be too broad or too narrow.

• Page 10:

  • The commentary delves deeper into the characteristics of fallacious reasoning, focusing on aspects like "non-pervasion" (avyaptva) and "contradiction" (virodha).
  • It discusses the relationship between the reason and the proposition being inferred, and how a flawed connection leads to a fallacy.

• Page 11:

  • The author continues to refine the definitions, ensuring they accurately capture the essence of each fallacy without overlap or exclusion.
  • It addresses the scenario of "unconnected" (anupasamhari) fallacies and their specific application.

• Page 12:

  • The text meticulously analyzes the conditions under which a reason becomes fallacious, particularly focusing on the concept of "presence in both favourable and unfavourable instances" (sapaksha-vipaksha-gata).
  • It discusses how the absence or presence of a reason in specific instances determines its validity or fallacy.

• Page 13:

  • Continues the precise definition of fallacies, aiming for clarity and accuracy in logical reasoning.
  • It emphasizes the importance of understanding the subject and predicate of the propositions involved in an inference.

• Page 14:

  • The discussion focuses on the specific condition of "presence in the subject and absence in the contrary" (paksha-vritti satva, vipaksha-avritti satva).
  • It explains how the failure to meet these criteria renders a reason fallacious.

• Page 15:

  • The text engages in a critical examination of various definitions of fallacies presented by different schools of thought.
  • It highlights potential inconsistencies and proposes its own refined definitions.

• Page 16:

  • The author continues to present the logical framework for identifying fallacies.
  • It discusses the role of "co-presence" (sahacharya) and "co-absence" (sahacharyabhava) in valid inferences.

• Page 17:

  • The focus shifts to the concept of "contradiction" (virodha) as a logical fallacy.
  • It explains how a reason that contradicts the established facts or propositions leads to an invalid inference.

• Page 18:

  • The text continues to analyze the various types of fallacies, emphasizing their impact on the inferential process.
  • It reiterates the importance of precise definitions to avoid misclassification.

• Page 19:

  • The author elaborates on the nuances of "unconnected" (anupasamhari) fallacies, discussing how they arise from a reason that is not universally present or absent.
  • It contrasts this with other types of fallacies.

• Page 20:

  • The commentary on the fallacies continues with a focus on the "certainty" (nischaya) of the propositions involved.
  • It explains how a lack of certainty in the reasoning process can lead to fallacies.
  • The page concludes with a final statement on "Savyabhichara Shiromani" (सव्यभिचार शिरोमणिः), suggesting the end of a particular section.

• Page 21 onwards:

  • The subsequent pages continue the very detailed and intricate analysis of logical fallacies, particularly Savyabhichara.
  • The commentary seems to be highly technical, engaging with the subtle distinctions between different types of fallacies and their definitions, often critiquing existing definitions and proposing refinements.
  • It discusses concepts like:
    • Doubt (Samsaya): How doubt is generated and how it relates to fallacies.
    • Knowledge (Jnana): The role of different types of knowledge in valid inference and fallacy identification.
    • Inference (Anumiti): The process of drawing conclusions and how fallacies disrupt it.
    • Pervasion (Vyapti): The relationship of cause and effect or concomitance, and how its misinterpretation leads to fallacies.
    • Subject (Dharmi): The entity about which something is being inferred.
    • Predicate (Prakara): The attribute or quality being inferred.
    • Contradiction (Virodha): How a reason contradicting known facts is fallacious.
    • Absence of Pervasion (Avyapti): A fallacy where the reason does not fully pervade the subject.
    • Over-pervasion (Ativyapti): A fallacy where the definition is too broad.
    • Presence in both Favorable and Unfavorable Instances (Sapaksha-Vipaksha-gata): A key characteristic of Savyabhichara.
    • Presence in Favorable Instances and Absence in Unfavorable Instances (Sapaksha-vritti, Vipaksha-avrittti): Ideal conditions for a valid reason.

The text is deeply analytical and appears to be a rigorous examination of Indian logic (Nyaya) within the Jain philosophical framework, focusing specifically on the classification and definition of the fallacy of Savyabhichara. It delves into the technicalities of how a faulty reason (hetu) leads to incorrect conclusions (sadhyas). The commentary likely explores various arguments and counter-arguments, proposing precise definitions to distinguish between valid reasoning and fallacious ones.