Talk:Nyaya

message: "Wherever there is fire, there is smoke"
Shouldn't that read "Wherever there is smoke, there is fire"? The above wording does not rule out the possibility of there being smoke without fire, and therefore does not prove the Pratijñā. Pedantic, I know, but isn't that the point? --- Anon
:Seems like we're missing something here. You could easily replace fire with 'acid' and end up proving 'there is acid on the hill' with the same logic. Besides, it violates Modus ponens. Surely the ancient Indians and the ancient Greeks didn't have different meanings for 'truth' [:)]. This article needs more solid examples. — Rohit Dasari
::There is no violation of modus ponens. The example seems okay. The assertion simply says that "If fire then smoke". It does not exclude the possibility of smoke being there due to other factors. The assertion does not say "Only if fire, then smoke.. it says whenever there is fire.." And it also does not say what should be the truth value of "smoke" if there is no fire. I don't see how we could replace "fire" with "acid" and prove "there is acid on the hill". --- Sri  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.164.104.166 (talk) 08:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Correction. I stand corrected as the set of five assertions collectively does indeed violate modus ponens. The example is of abductive reasoning, not deductive reasoning. It needs correction. -- Sri  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.164.104.166 (talk) 08:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Inference example

message: has a nice overview of the  system of reasoning inside Nyaya, and could be used as a basis for completing this article. --- Charles Stewart 20:11, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Resource

message: ""No one can estimate the opulence of Kṛṣṇa. That is unlimited. However, just as one sees the moon through the branches of a tree, I wish to give a little indication."
PURPORT
First a child is shown the branches of a tree, and then he is shown the moon through the branches. This is called śākhā-candra-nyāya. The idea is that first one must be given a simpler example. Then the more difficult background is explained."
"In this way Kṛṣṇa's transcendental forms are expanded unlimitedly. No one can count them. Whatever I have explained is simply a little glimpse. It is like showing the moon through the branches of a tree."
"Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 20.248
ananta avatāra kṛṣṇera, nāhika gaṇana
śākhā-candra-nyāya kari dig-daraśana
SYNONYMS
ananta — unlimited; avatāra — incarnations; kṛṣṇera — of Lord Kṛṣṇa; nāhika gaṇana — there is no possibility of counting; śākhā-candra-nyāya — by the analogy of the moon and the branches of a tree; kari — I make; dik-daraśana — a slight indication.
TRANSLATION
"There are innumerable incarnations of Kṛṣṇa, and there is no possibility of counting them. We can simply indicate them by giving the example of the moon and the branches of a tree.
PURPORT
Although the moon appears to be located in the branches of a tree, it is actually situated very far away. Similarly, none of the avatāras, or incarnations, of Lord Kṛṣṇa are within this material world, but they are visible by the causeless mercy of the Lord. We should not consider them to belong to this material world. As stated by Lord Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad-gītā (Bg. 9.11):
avajānanti māḿ mūḍhā mānuṣīḿ tanum āśritam
paraḿ bhāvam ajānanto mama bhūta-maheśvaram
"Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature as the Supreme Lord of all that be."
Avatāras descend of their own free will, and although they may act like ordinary human beings, they do not belong to this material world. Lord Kṛṣṇa and His avatāras can be understood only by the grace of the Lord.
nāyam ātmā pravacanena labhyo
na medhayā na bahunā śrutena
yam evaiṣa vṛṇute tena labhyas
tasyaiṣa ātmā vivṛṇute tanūḿ svām
(Kaṭha Upaniṣad 1.2.23)
"The Supreme Lord is not obtained by means of expert explanations, vast intelligence or even much hearing. He is obtained only by one whom He Himself chooses. To such a person, He manifests His own form."
athāpi te deva padāmbuja-dvaya-
prasāda-leśānugṛhīta eva hi
jānāti tattvaḿ bhagavan-mahimno
na cānya eko 'pi ciraḿ vicinvan
(Bhāg. 10.14.29)
"My Lord, if one is favored by even a slight trace of the mercy of Your lotus feet, he can understand the greatness of Your personality. But those who speculate to understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead are unable to know You, even though they continue studying the Vedas for many years.""  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.128.162 (talk) 08:26, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: śākhā-candra-nyāya - the analogy of the moon and the branches of a tree

message: "Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 5.176
ekete viśvāsa, anye nā kara sammāna
"ardha-kukkuṭī-nyāya" tomāra pramāṇa
SYNONYMS
ekete viśvāsa — faith in one; anye — in the other; nā — not; kara — do; sammāna — respect; ardha-kukkuṭī-nyāya — the logic of accepting half of a hen; tomāra — your; pramāṇa — evidence.
TRANSLATION
"If you have faith in one but disrespect the other, your logic is like the logic of accepting half a hen."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.132.128.162 (talk) 08:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: ardha-kukkuṭī-nyāya — the logic of accepting half of a hen

message: Also see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Indic) Wakari07 (talk) 23:19, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Article titles are selected by a criteria which includes WP:COMMONNAME. Indic naming conventions are not applicable for selecting article titles. However, articles titles can use diacritics etc. if such usage is more common in English language sources. That doesn't seem to be the case here. You can, of course, submit comparison, references etc. to prove your point. Correct Knowledge«৳alk» 05:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Where is the "established usage" here? Wouldn't you consider the closest/best/oldest sources as the most preferable? Wasn't the usage established in India/nāgarī/..., without ambiguity, for centuries? Why would Wikipedia introduce ambiguity? Wikipedia is not here only for English readers, but is set to be a reference point overall (in time as well as in space). The only point i would consider is the use or not of a capital letter for the first letter of the article title. Wakari07 (talk) 19:25, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

text: WP-ref: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and Wikipedia:Article titles#Foreign names and anglicization. Wakari07 (talk) 19:27, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  WP:COMMONNAME is the most relevant policy here. Diacritics are not used in Indian English. This the established anglicization. Thus, as per Wikipedia:Article titles#Foreign names and anglicization, Nyaya without diacritics should be used.--Redtigerxyz  Talk  05:51, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Redtigerxyz. Wakari please note, if you want to change most of the Sanskrit titles and terminology in English Wikpedia (this is what you are doing in lot of articles: ,,,), please take it up at a larger forum like WT:IN. Otherwise, we'll end up with lot of duplicated discussions on many talk pages. Correct Knowledge«৳alk» 13:00, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nyāya