2,062
edits
Changes
→Terms for debate
<div style="text-align:justify;">
<div style="text-align:justify;">
These terms are worth-knowing for acquaintance of the course of discussion among physicians such as – ''vada, dravya, guna, karma, samanya, vishesha, samavaya, pratijna, sthapana, pratishthapana, hetu, drishtanta, upanaya, nigamana, uttara, siddhanta, shabda, pratyaksha, anumana, aitihya, aupamya, samshaya, prayojana, savyabhichara, jijnasa, vyavasaya, arthaprapti, sambhava, anuyojya, ananuyojya, anuyoga, pratyanuyoga, vakyadosha, vakyaprashamsa, chhala, ahetu, atitakala, upalambha, parihara, pratijnahani, abhyanujna, hetvantara, arthantara, nigrahasthana.'' [27]
These terms are worth-knowing for acquaintance of the course of discussion among physicians such as – ''vada, [[dravya]], [[guna]], [[karma]], [[samanya]], [[vishesha]], [[samavaya]], pratijna, sthapana, pratishthapana, [[hetu]], drishtanta, upanaya, nigamana, uttara, siddhanta, [[shabda]], pratyaksha, anumana, aitihya, aupamya, samshaya, prayojana, savyabhichara, jijnasa, vyavasaya, arthaprapti, sambhava, anuyojya, ananuyojya, anuyoga, pratyanuyoga, vakyadosha, vakyaprashamsa, chhala, ahetu, atitakala, upalambha, parihara, pratijnahani, abhyanujna, hetvantara, arthantara, nigrahasthana.'' [27]
</div>
</div>
==== 1. ''Vada'' (debate) ====
==== 1. ''Vada'' (debate) ====
''Vitanda'' is opposite to ''jalpa''. For instance, one holds the view that rebirth exist while the other holds the view just against it. During such discussion (''vada''), they (participants) advance arguments in support of their own views and contradict the opponent’s view, this is ''jalpa''. ''Vitanda'' is opposite to ''jalpa'' in which the speaker without having any positive approach only finds faults in the opponent’s view point. [28]
''Vitanda'' is opposite to ''jalpa''. For instance, one holds the view that rebirth exist while the other holds the view just against it. During such discussion (''vada''), they (participants) advance arguments in support of their own views and contradict the opponent’s view, this is ''jalpa''. ''Vitanda'' is opposite to ''jalpa'' in which the speaker without having any positive approach only finds faults in the opponent’s view point. [28]
</div>
</div>
==== 2-7: ''Dravya'' to ''Samavaya'' ====
==== 2-7: ''[[Dravya]]'' to ''[[Samavaya]]'' ====
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
</div></div>
</div></div>
''Dravya, guna, karma, samanya, vishesha and samavaya''– these are mentioned earlier along with their definitions in ''shloka sthana'' ([[Sutra Sthana]] chapters). [29]
''[[Dravya]], [[guna]], [[karma]], [[samanya]], [[vishesha]] and [[samavaya]]''– these are mentioned earlier along with their definitions in ''shloka sthana'' ([[Sutra Sthana]] chapters). [29]
==== 8. ''Pratijna'' (proposition) ====
==== 8. ''Pratijna'' (proposition) ====
These are four types of doctrines. [37]
These are four types of doctrines. [37]
==== 17. ''Shabda'' (word/correct expression) ====
==== 17. ''[[Shabda]]'' (word/correct expression) ====
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
<div style="text-align:justify;">
<div style="text-align:justify;">
''Shabda'' is an aggregate of letters. This is of four types – ''drishtartha, adrishtartha, satya,'' and ''anrita''.
''[[Shabda]]'' is an aggregate of letters. This is of four types – ''drishtartha, adrishtartha, satya,'' and ''anrita''.
''Drishtartha'' is that which connotes observable meanings; such as [[dosha]] are aggravated by three etiological factors; they are pacified by six therapeutic measures; the sense objects are perceived through the sense organs.
''Drishtartha'' is that which connotes observable meanings; such as [[dosha]] are aggravated by three etiological factors; they are pacified by six therapeutic measures; the sense objects are perceived through the sense organs.
''Samshayasama ahetu'' the reason similar to doubt is that which though being cause of doubt is used as cause of eliminating the same such as, if someone says only a part of [[Ayurveda]] , it creates doubt as to whether he is a physician or not; On this opponent says – ‘as he has said a part of [[Ayurveda]], he is a physician.’ The doubt can not be the cause of removing the same.
''Samshayasama ahetu'' the reason similar to doubt is that which though being cause of doubt is used as cause of eliminating the same such as, if someone says only a part of [[Ayurveda]] , it creates doubt as to whether he is a physician or not; On this opponent says – ‘as he has said a part of [[Ayurveda]], he is a physician.’ The doubt can not be the cause of removing the same.
''Varnyasam ahetu''- the reason ([[hetu]]) given is similar to object and not different from the object, such as somebody says – [[buddhi]] (intellect) is non-eternal because of the absence of touch like ''shabda'' (sound). Here both [[buddhi]] (intellect) and ''shabda'' (sound)are objects; hence because of the absence of difference between them, the reason is similar to object and as such is fallacious.[57]
''Varnyasam ahetu''- the reason ([[hetu]]) given is similar to object and not different from the object, such as somebody says – [[buddhi]] (intellect) is non-eternal because of the absence of touch like ''shabda'' (sound). Here both [[buddhi]] (intellect) and ''shabda'' (sound) are objects; hence because of the absence of difference between them, the reason is similar to object and as such is fallacious.[57]
</div>
</div>